One that had a lot of analyses and testing and contingency plans and vetting and support around it. But it went out without a hitch and were ahead of schedule in terms of the tunneling. It has been going well with no movement of buildings or the tunnel and its great news that its going, as well as it is, the second tunnel Boring Machine has launched and we now have two of them moving north throughout the city. We are stopping construction for the holiday or have stopped construction for the holiday moratorium and the public rightofway on stockton and columbus, et cetera. We will be working in the chinatown corridor to accommodate the Chinese New Year celebration, which somewhat spills out on the stockton street and continuing to work with the merchants and particularly union square, chinatown and north beach as we continue the work of the tunneling and the station contracts, which are underway. So Good Progress to report there. And that concludes my report. Thank you, director reiskin. Members of the board, questions or comments for the director . Director heinicke . [ inaudible ] oh, thank you. Thank you, bob, i appreciate that. [ laughter ] i will take you on the road with me. The last time we had one of these sessions, i pestered you about a plan for Market Street and closing it to private vehicles and you said maybe it would happen and this is our last meeting in december, so i think i at least expect that well be hearing something about the plans muchanticipated plans for Market Street and this boards direction maybe in january . That is correct. What i have for you i have it already, just not vetted and ready to present, is a list of kind of an array, a spectrum of options that we could do from things of signage and education and enforcement to a much larger auto restriction. So i wouldnt say its a plan that i will be bringing to you, but i will bring you the range of ideas and costs for your consideration in january. Very good. And then the other thing sort of ongoing item is at the last meeting, we sort of put one aspect of the taxi information contract on hold in the hopes that the information will be coming in from the cab companies. So that we wouldnt need to capture it ourselves. If at one of the january meetings, maybe the second one to give us an update in the directors report so we can address any issues before we hit that deadline would be great. Yes. Director rubke. I have a quick question about the Incentive Program or the pilot. First of all, it sounds really great. Are we going to get data that feeds into the recommendations that are coming forth in terms of proposal for the ramp cab program . We will have data based on this pilot, because were doing it through the debit card program. Well have very exact data. The kind of larger recommendations on how the reform for the ramp system are really already developed. There has been a number of town Hall Meetings with taxis. I think were planning to bring those forward january 7th. So we can tell you how the Incentive Program has been, but it will have been very new at that point. So i dont think that will meaningfully necessarily inform, but it will inform how we incentive going forward. To the extent that we have information about it during the ramp reform item well bring that. Do we have Public Comment on the directors report . No, mr. Chairman. Next item, please. Item 8, citizens advisory committee, i do not see mr. Weaver here. Moving on to Public Comment this is an opportunity for members of the public to address the board on matters within the jurisdiction of the sfmta, but not on todays agenda. We have two members of the public who wish to address you under this section, Eric Williams followed by vera hale. Mr. Williams may have left, i believe. All right. Is he out in the hall . Okay. Vera hale. Miss hale. Good afternoon, miss hale. Good afternoon. I wanted to say a couple of things at your last meeting, and i was so surprised president nolans move that i didnt and there is some information in here that i wanted to pass onto you. On the accessible parking recommendations, especially on disabled placards and the charging of fees at meters, charging of regular payments. I think you should know there are 60,000 people in San Francisco who have disabled placards. And most seniors who have them live on fixed incomes and the added expense of paying 2 5 an hour to park would work a great hardship and eliminate their ability of what they need to do or reduce it. I know its not appreciated very well around here, like if you have to go to the doctor, or you have to go to the Grocery Store or senior meals program, or if you want to go out with friends or relatives or volunteer for an agency. Many of us do volunteer work. Some of us get paid for it, some of us dont and now that you cant park in the city hall lot, even if you are commissioners, then you understand some of that. And my third point is the changing meter regs will not bring more parking. I complained during this committee about otis street there were so many disabled placards that you couldnt park. But when they changed it it was all city trucks and cars that parked there. So i dont think that that will increase parking in spite of your very nice video. There is nothing like that will increase the parking. It will make it harder for people with disabilities. I wanted you to know those things. Thank you, miss hale. Next item, then, consent calendar. Seeing no other person who wishes to address you on this matter, moving on to the citizen consent calendar. These items are considered routine and will be acted on one vote unless a member of the board or public wishs it severed. Item 10. 1 j, that item is now only an establishment of a towaway, no stopping time on mission on 16th on Mission Street on 24th. Motion on the consent calendar . Motion to approve. Second. All those in favor, signify by saying aye . Aye. Ayes have it. Next item. Next item on your agenda is item 11 a presentation and discussion regarding the transit effectiveness project. As we get into this, i just want to make sure you understand this is an informational presentation this afternoon. The board will not be making any decisions. Its not scheduled for that. It will come much later and well hear about that in the process. How many folks are here to speak about jackson . Thank you. Were glad to hear from you all, of course. Just wanted to reemphasize the transit effectiveness product is undering review so that if the board is not able to or planning to make any decisions with regard to any tep recommendations and what the Environmental Review does is clear an envelope of changes that the agency could consider from that following public outreach. We would subsequently bring recommendations to the mta board in the coming years, but we certainly have heard and seen a lot on the three jacks and maybe on the 8x. And that feedback is very helpful and well be engaging with the community to solicit that feedback before we make any recommendations to the mta board. Sean kennedy is project manager for the tep has a presentation, an informational presentation to give an update. Good afternoon, mr. Kennedy. Good afternoon directors. My name is sean kennedy and im the planning manager for the tep, the transit effectiveness project. And im here to offer an update on where we are with the program and then discuss our outreach efforts coming up over the next 68 months. You know, San Francisco is a wonderful city, and it deserves a worldclass transit system. Since 2006 we have been working with the community, as well as this board, transit operators, and other stakeholders to put a plan together to develop a system that will accomplish that. But we are faced with three big obstacles. One, we have an aging infrastructure. We have the oldest one of the oldest fleets in the country transit vehiclewise. Two, we have a dense and congested city, were the second densest city in the united states, besides new york city and we operate in a con strained rightofway. A lot of competing interest for space and roadway space and there is really no room for expansion. So there is a lot of different modes and options that want to vie for that space. These pictures on the slide here really represent how these obstacles are experienced by the customer. So two of the Major Concerns that we have heard from our customers over the years are that one, muni is unreliable and two, muni is crowded. And thankfully, were on our way with the help of the community and you on the board, were on our way to developing a program of enhancements, that we think will really improve the system dramatically in the shortterm. The tep at its base is First Comprehensive review of the system in over 30 years. Imagine San Francisco 30 years ago. The travel patterns, where people lived, where people were going is vastly different than what we see today. And we really need a system that relates to that dynamic change and addresses todays communitys needs. So that is really led us to a goal of two things with the tep one improving reliability and two, improving the user experience. Muni is the backbone of our community. We support a vast number of neighborhoods throughout the city, 95 of people within the city of San Francisco are close to muni service. We support trips to schools, to work, to cultural events, to basically just hanging out with friends and family. And if you are a choicerider, so somebody who has other Transportation Options and still picks to use transit or transitdependent person you still count on muni for specific thing, Reliable Service that allows you to get to work on time of and service that you can take to the doctor in a comfortable setting or a comfortable atmosphere. So what have we done or how are we trying to deliver such a system . We have delivered two major types of projects. One is our projects that are based on our major corridors, our highest ridership corridors. These are corridors that serve as the back [pwoefpbt ] system. Lines like the 14 mission and 5 fulton and 28 19th avenue and these lines basically accomplish 60 of our entire system. There are ten specific lines that were addressing currently in the tep. And through this Community Process over the last six years we have identified projects and proposals that we think will reduce travel time in these corridors by up to 20 . You know what does 20 mean . It sounds like a random number and to put it in prospective, i want to talk about the 5l project and related to travel time in general. We started the 5l project october 28th, so its been about a month. We have been looking at data during that month and its still preliminary, because you know, a month of data does not a success make. But we have noted that if you lived in say the Park Presidio area and going to market with the 5l, you are now making that trip five minutes faster. Five minutes twice a day, because you go down and back, that is 10 minutes. You have five days a week, you have almost saved an hour of time a week by the improvements that we have made on the 5 fulton service. The tradeoffs are focused on onstreet parking and that is a discussion that we need to have with the Community Going forward. The second type of project or major improvement bucket we have identified is Service Changes. One of the major tenets of the tep is increasing neighborhood service. So the 28l, our proposal for the 28l is a great example. It currently runs northsouth from the marina to daly city bart and operates during the school peaks. So a couple of hours in the morning and a couple of hours in the Late Afternoon and our proposal is to run that in the southern end, extend that service over to mission the mission corridor. And extend to van ness and north point and run that service all day. So were really connecting some of those outer neighborhoods together with allday, fast, reliable and frequent service. Also with the Service Proposals were also attempted to reducing and addressing crowding. Back to the 5l example, we had a lot of crowding issues in the inner portion of that line. The 5l is really we added 30 more capacity in the middle part of the segment there that is addressing crowding concerns and usability of the service for the people. So of course there have some tradeoffs. To make these improvements that were talking about, its roughly a 10 increase in service hours. So obviously, a major impact on our operating budget. And were talking about ways to kind of mitigate some of that need, and i will go into that in more detail in a minute on reconfiguring routes and the tradeoff there. I did want to notice note that no frequency direction to the evening or service are proposed as part of this process. So how do we move these benefits forward . How do we engage people and talk with where were going and how to implement . So work todate has been focused on our Environmental Impact report, eir. An eir evaluates, as director reiskin was saying, evaluates the maximum envelope of solutions that were going to consider in future as we try to roll out these projects. The Comment Period for our draft eir, we released the draft eir in july and the Comment Period for that is closing or has closed excuse me, closed september 17th and the Planning Department is no longer accepting further comments on the eir. And the final process for this eir should be coming to a head in the spring, early spring. But even before that process concludes, were really eager to get out and Start Talking with the public about these possibilities. You know, vetting with the community. What projects we are ready to go forward with . What solutions to the reliability problems that were facing . Can we go forward with now . Where do we need to go back to the drawing board and how do we balance the needs of all the stakeholders within the framework of improving reliability and improving the Customer Experience . So just to illustrate kind of how our outreach process is, i want to go back to the 5l for another minute. The 5l is a corridor that runs on fulton to the beach down to transbay. And its about 20,000 riders a day, a little less. Very crowded line, especially in the middle portion of the line. The average ontime performance systemwide average floats around 60 . So it makes a great line for studying and seeing how our proposals will work. I do want to point out that first and foremost, this was a project really created in concert with the community. I mean, in the summer of 2012, we held a number of meetings to design these projects and kind of finalize the planning level on projects that were going move forward with. And then as the project moved through the implementation process through preliminary design and detailed design, we held numerous workshops and hearings. And heard a number of competing interests, but also a lot of items of support and working together with the community to come to a final solution. I think the final bit in the outreach process loop is maybe the most important and that is that were continuing to seek feedback. We are evaluating the performance of the line on an ongoing basis and continuing to make tweaks and kind of improve the service to make sure that were offering the best that we can. Just a few specific examples on some of the input that we have changed we have mostly heard comments around the Service Changes in the parking impacts. So some of the changes that we made to the stop locations, for instance we added a stop based on Community Concerns closer to bart. So that we keep that connectivity going. We dropped several right turn pockets that were in our proposal. We changed our whole proposal around mcallister and central, based on transit operator feedback, as well as the communitys concerns around that stop. We kept a stop at 37th and fulton. Originally we had identified that stop to be eliminated, but talking with the Senior Center there and we came up with a great compromise that works for everyone in keeping that stop at 37th and folsom. And then we also to show some of our listening to the public, and continuing the evolutionary process, we had originally eliminated the stop at baker and mcallister and talking to the business interest and muni operators, we implemented that stop and its back up and running. On the parking side, as i mentioned there are parking tradeoffs with the 5l. We were sensitive to that. We had a lanewidening from stanyan, to central where we took 9 lanes and converted as a way to basically improve safety for everybody on the corridor. Buses cant fit in 9 lanes so were trying to improve the safety there. And basically Community Feedback on parking and other issues we expanded that lane widening two blocks to the east, central to baker and allowed 20 additional parking stalls to be installed in that twoblock segment. So todate, so far, the 5l is get something pretty good reviews. Riders seemed pleased with the process and the end product. Were excited to roll this process out for other lines in the tep as we continue to push for Better Service and involve the community. The 5l wouldnt have been the success it is had we not gotten some great feedback from people along the process, as well as our transit operators who have helped tremendously in making this project a success. So were really excited about our process and moving forward. Back to the tep in general, much like the 5l, we have heard two major categories of concerns todate, that relates to Service Changes and parking removal. These issues and this feedback that we have gotten has really helped to form our outr