Away restriction there, so they are not able to load even today because its tow away. Other times of day what were looking to do is now that we have fulltime parking on the other side of the street, were going to look at relocating loading spaces to the other side of the street or as close as possible. Part of the process will be working with merchants to identify loading needs. We have done our best job to identify relocated spaces for now, but we are going to be looking at merchant by merchant by merchant is this meeting your needs, and we rapidly get out there and find an alternative solution if we need it, including potentially even this might open the opportunity for Outdoor Dining and other things that wouldnt have been possible before because of the tow away restrictions. [indiscernible] Market Street was we looked at all of the cross streets and rearranged most of the parking for the first half block of the cross streets to make sure that there was adequate loading Space Available for every commercial business. Ensuring the Small Business on Mission Street is just as important to us as ensuring that muni was in place. Great. Are there any other additional questions, clarifying questions before we open it up to the public . I understand we have members of the public. Okay, great. Moderator, can you open up the lines . Operator thank you, madam chair. If anyone is watching from sfg tv, if you wish to address the board on this topic, please call the number so summon each question, press one, then zero. You have 13 questions remaining. All right, first speaker, please. Give us your name or Start Talking and we will set your two minutes. Go ahead. Hi, this is michael [indiscernible] thank you [indiscernible] in general, im bullish on trials. Through trials we really get to learn. Please share the metrics on the [indiscernible] particularly on its major alternative arterials. Engineers, im one of them, love to solve problems, but we all run the risk of unintended consequences. Masonic, to me its an artery which keeps the city flowing. I think of it like a body. When we choke it or eliminate it, we have problems. Traffic will find another way to go, side streets or arterials. [indiscernible] buses or bikes. People are going to get nifty, and thats going to need side roads or getting aggressive. In my neighborhood i already see cars moving aggressively in my neighborhood, and when traffic goes up, aggressiveness goes up, and pedestrian risks rise. Here are some alternatives. If the goal is to improve transit, turning masonic into a or a bus sign that has 12 [indiscernible] if this was a 5, 14 or 38, i could get on board. Consider making the line shorter ore breaking it up. Its currently 50 minutes long. 10 delay is a 5 minute delay in transit. As you are reporting 12 reduction, thats about 30 seconds on the stretch of masonic in question. Consider also making [indiscernible] a priority or just limiting it to peak hours only, which i think you said. Im in support of that. If the goal is issue focus on the issue of our neighborhood and thats masonic at oak and fell. 30 seconds. Pedestrian intersections to lower the risks. I fear that removing a lane and removing a [indiscernible] make risks like whack a mole. It will go some place else and into residential neighborhoods. The other general question is what is the equivalent passenger minute of a bus versus nonbus. The director said you wanted to have equity, so what is that equity in your tradeoff studies . Thats the general question i have. Thank you very much. In general im support of trying this. Its a different way of moving. Great, thank you so much. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 24 questions remaining. Next speaker . Can you hear me now . Hello. So i support this, but i would make three changes to the proposal. One, i would limit the lanes to not 24 7 but to either 7 a. M. To 7 p. M. Or 6 a. M. To 10 p. M. It seems to me that there really is no significant delay congestion traffic at 3 in the morning and theres no reason for the restriction to be in effect 24 7. Number two, i dont understand why the thing would expire 120 days after the end of the emergency. I would make that more like 30 or 60 days, unless theres such a subsequent legislation to retain all or some of these lanes. And three, in terms of the conditions that the city traffic engineer would have to abide by for the delegated authority, which im generally not crazy about, but i can live with here, i think the level of Transit Service on a particular corridor should be a factor. If were putting in all of this effort for temporary transit lanes, for routes that only operate every 15 or 20 minutes, thats only three or four transit vehicles an hour in each direction, and it seems like thats a pretty high costtobenefit calculation. For those corridors that have a higher level of service, where theres a higher level of service, i think it makes more sense, so i would perhaps limit it to those corridors where service is at least every 10 or 12 minutes or more frequent but not for those corridors where its every 15 or 20 minutes, or less frequent. So those are the three changes i would make to the program. Otherwise i am supportive. Thanks. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 24 questions remaining. Hi, martin calling from d5. I want to thank the board and the director on moving forward with transit lanes during this covid19 pandemic. Were going to see an increase in car usage. Thats going to adversely impact transit riders like myself to depend on muni to get around the city. Certainly i dont think that this plan goes even far enough. I looked at the original plan. It looked like there were many other lanes that were considered that were not in this final plan. I do encourage the Board Directors to consider expanding the emergency transit lanes to the original plan that was presented in a draft thats not in this version. Furthermore, id like to push back on the fact that on the comment that says that transit lanes will push traffic to other streets. The reality is that when people can use transit and when transit is fast, people dont actually move on to different streets. [indiscernible] is that side streets did not get more congested, so this is frankly false and we should not be considering the need of car drivers who have the possibility of going anywhere any time when were trying to be a transitfirst city that puts the kneads of muni riders, many of which are lowincome people, and sorry, many of which are lowincome people and people of color above the needs or desires of drivers. So again, thank you to the board of directors and to director tomlinson for bringing this plan up, and i hope that it expands rapidly. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 23 questions remaining. Hi, this is [indiscernible] San Francisco transit riders. I want to thank sfmta staff and board and members of the public for their [indiscernible] i want to reiterate our support for extending temporary emergency transitonly lanes [indiscernible] city. The lanes you would be approving today would make a transformative difference for riders across the city. They also demonstrate your commitment to truly making San Francisco a transit city. These transit lanes give muni riders the experience of benefiting from [indiscernible] while still having opportunity to weigh in [indiscernible] this process where the pilot supports outreach will only strengthen Community Engagement. That said, these lanes already have widespread support, including from many of our members who tried to [indiscernible] unable to stay for the entire length of the meeting. If we dont support dedicated transitonly lanes, muni will become increasingly inefficient to use, expensive to operate and more punitive to those without options. This will impact people of lower income, disability, class and communities of color throughout communities of San Francisco. [indiscernible] economic recovery, support Public Health and lay the groundwork for a new visionary Transit System that serves all san franciscans. In short, we really urge you to support the first set of emergency temporary transitonly lanes. 30 seconds. On additional corridors. We look forward to working with you to build the support and outreach to make this possible so that everyone in San Francisco can benefit from fast, reliable transit. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 22 questions remaining. Next speaker . Good afternoon, my name is dan fedderman. Im a transit rider and calling to urge to also presumptive the temporary transitonly lanes. Like more than 30 of san franciscans, i do not own a car. I rely on Public Transit and biking to meet my mobility needs. As we reopen, the mobility of many, many thousands of citizens will be limited if muni cannot run frequently enough to avoid crowding. Im hoping San Francisco can live up to its transitfirst values. [indiscernible] bus lanes at future public hearings. We really should be doing this faster. That will be all. Thanks. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 21 questions remaining. Im from north panhandle and i wanted to thank the staff for the work that theyve done. I wanted to support the all of the route improvements. I think its important. I see the masonic line as being a valuable northsouth route. I think its important to show that this city does prioritize transit over cars. We are basically transit delays regularly and where i do see that we have red lines. Id love to see the red lines the red lanes. But where we do have red lanes and where we have transit priority, there is an improved speed, and i think thats what we need to do in the city. Thank you, mta board for your support and thank you. I hope you do support it and thank you director tomlin for your work. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. You have 21 questions remaining. Hello, i live in district 7. Im also a member of San Francisco transit ride ers. Ill urge you to support this program for all the reasons the staff and members of the public have given. In the second round of transitonly lanes, i strongly urge you to include geneva and ocean avenue, especially in the area of balboa park station, 280 city college. That area experiences a significant amount of congestion that delays multiple, multiple lines including the 8, the 29, the 43, the 49, the 54 and in august i guess will be the kl li line. The transitonly improvements also have [indiscernible] improvements should also be considered for rapid implementation there. Thank you very much. You have 20 questions remaining. Next speaker, please. Im a district 7 resident and muni required for most of my life. Im also a member of the sf transit riders. I am in full support. In fact, i also believe that this doesnt go far enough. This is a small smidgen of the possible transit lanes that id love to see across our city. And i would love to see that if this is the first step, im fully support of it. I think there should be a rapid expansion of this network because in the end it is a network and reliability of the network is what brings people to the service. Many people use many different lines to get different parts of the city and i hope that that expansion comes soon on the heels of this. And thank you. Thank you to the board and to the director tomlin for pushing this along. Thanks. Thank you. Operator you have 19 questions remaining. Hi, im speaking on my own behalf today as a resident in opposition to the tet [indiscernible] either side of oshaughnessy boulevard. Due to a lack of understanding of the actual congestion causes along these segments. Specifically the westbound tetl on bosworth avenue is particularly ineffective. Oshaughnessy is a 7. 1 average grade uphill with the first segment reaching a 20 grade. Transit buses are simply incapable of making it up this grade as efficiently as smaller vehicles, and frankly allowing these slow vehicles to cut in front of others is rude and will cause the congestion that we are trying to avoid. I also think that some of the other comments have already addressed how this will redirect traffic on to neighboring streets. Its already faster at certain times of day to actually make a return on to elk and make a u turn to approach the intersection from the north. Operator you have 19 questions remaining. Im a resident of district three and also a member of the San Francisco transit riders. A four and a half hour session today and i, like the majority of the callers, are urging that the sfmta approve the temporary emergency transitonly lanes for the bus lines indicated. I am a rider of the no. 19 and i do believe this would be a marked improvement to service and safety of both riders and drivers. Also in agreement that the city traffic engineer be allowed to approve additional lanes that would support timely Emergency Response. One of the things i wanted to comment on was that when was passed in november, district 3 supervisor enthusiastically proclaimed that he was thrilled to see sfmta ready to act on this mandate which was supported overwhelmingly by the people to keep our city moving. And reviewing the data and improved performance safety which now includes the health of riders and drivers are unequivocal supports and will also be following that supervisor support to help another revenue stream as part of the deal for what happens with the muni passage discussed earlier. So very informative meeting. Thank you. Time yielded. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 19 questions remaining. Hi, i am a frequent muni rider and district 8 resident. Im calling to encourage the board to support the permanent expansion of the network of 24hour transit only lanes. They need to be far bolder than the small measures its done so far and needs to be bolder than the fairly minor proposal here. As our economy prematurely returns to normal, we need to make sure that in San Francisco, something which historically has not been proved. In addition, Climate Change has not gone anywhere. The arctic just recorded a temperature of 100 fahrenheit for the first time ever. Transit is an incredibly important part of mitigating kriech and we need to ensure that we continue to remove cars from the street. 24hour transitonly lanes are one of the only ways we can make sure the transit continues to function on time and that transit riders continue to use transit instead of going to other transit modes of transportation subsidized by capitalists and artificially low gas prices. If muni is stuck in worse traffic, it will be expensive to operate and more punitive for those without other options. We have to make changes now if transit and San Francisco as a whole is going to survive and thrive after covid. This is a good small start. I would like to voice my support for making transitonly lanes permanent. They should not be temporary. Before the covid19 crisis we have constantly seen how buses and surfacelevel trains were constantly delayed by traffic. That means that transitonly lanes 30 seconds. Should be a permanent change to our streets. I support restricting these lanes to Public Transportation only. I strongly oppose the commissioners comments asking to include priority shuttles in these lanes. We should not be subsidizing private transportation when they get free money from vulture capitalists to shove their substandard Transit Solutions down our throat. It should be for Public Infrastructure only. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 18 questions remaining. Go ahead. Hi, my name is robin and i live [indiscernible] im calling in support for this transit lane proposal presented. Its time this city made a tiny [indiscernible] prioritizing transit travel time is a privilege to prioritizing our essential workers, people of color and elderly folks who rely on muni more than others. There will be lots of callers in opposition today who are privileged and have other travel choices, like their cars, and they will worry that their car trips might be slowed down by muni priority. We should not cower to those demands. Transit lanes will return our local economy and Small Businesses faster, help us achieve our climate goals, help us reduce the number of cars on the road and achieve our vision zero goals. This is a pilot temporary program and we will find out from the data where it works. Im not going to pretend to be a transportation and give you suggestions. The data will tell us what works. Every multilane street in San Francisco that carries muni should have transit lanes and im sad the 24 was cut from this proposal. I would advocate that every transit lane, even parttime ones, should be painted red. I used to live on sutter street downtown, and it was abundantly clear that drivers did not know when it had a transit lane because its too confusing to read the dark roadway. Paint them red, please. Thank you for all your tireless work at this insane time. All of us transit riders are very grateful. Thank you. Thank you so much. Operator you have 17 questions remaining. Hi, my name is cliff barringer. I live in put relo hills. I have the 22 roll down my street. I want to express my strong support for the transitonly lane. I want to echo the comments made earlier by those who want to see this go further. Im really glad that mta wants to try this out and see what works and then evaluate the data and fix what doesnt work. I also want to express my support for the directors philosophy around what types of highcapacity vehicles should get to use transitonly lanes. I absolutely support putting muni first, but when theres extra capacity, i think we should allow other types of shuttles, especially shuttles like the ecsf shuttle, but even private ones that are high capacity and do have a large number of passengers. I think if they can use the transitonly lanes without slowing down muni, then they should be allowed to. And i hope that the m. T. A. Will record data on whether or not those sorts of shuttles do slow down muni. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Operator you have 17 questions remaining. Hello, i am a resident of district 4 and a rider of the 14 line calling in support of the emergency transitonly lanes. They even before the pandemi