|
|
|
|
  |
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
| SFMTA home > About Us > Meetings > SFMTA Citizens Advisory Council (CAC) > August 3, 2006, minutes | |||
|
City and County of San Francisco FINAL MINUTES Thursday, August 3, 2006 at 5:30 p.m. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call (Agenda Item 1). The regular meeting of the Municipal Transportation Agency Citizens’ Advisory Council (MTA CAC) was called to order at 5:37 p.m., Thursday, August 3, 2006. Daniel Murphy (chair) presided. A quorum was present including the following: MTA CAC Members Present at Roll Call: Daniel Murphy (Chair), Steve Ferrario (Vice Chair), Art Cimento, Emily Drennen, Griffith Humphrey, Cesar Perez, Norman Rolfe, and Dorris Vincent. MTA CAC Members absent at Roll Call: Mary Burns (arrived at 5:45 p.m.), Bruce Oka (arrived at 5:30 p.m.), and Daniel Weaver (arrived at 6:15 p.m.) MTA CAC Absent: None. MTA Staff (San Francisco Municipal Railway [MUNI] and Department of Parking and Traffic [DPT]) Present: Janet Michaelson (MTA CAC Liaison), Joe Speaks (MTA , Peter Straus (MTA Manager of Service Planning), and Debra Reed (MTA CAC Secretary). Community Representatives Present: Edward Mason, Jamison Wieser, and David Pilpel 2. Adopt the MTA CAC Minutes of July 6, 2006: Motion to adopt the MTA CAC minutes for July 2006 by Sue Cauthen with corrections. 2nd by Griffith Humphrey CAC passed unanimously (Ayes - Murphy (Chair), Ferrario (Vice Chair), Cimento, Downey, Drennen, Humphrey, Perez, Rolfe, and Vincent). 3. Public Comment – Concerning any issue within the jurisdiction of the Council and not noted on the agenda: Edward Mason reported his dissatisfaction with traffic reroute for the Carnival event. He also reported on various service delays he had personally experienced. David Pilpel felt that the past 3 derailments, poor lighting between subway stations along with other problems substantiated that the MTA’s maintenance department needed a deputy general manager. 4. Report of the Chair: Daniel Murphy (MTA CAC Chair) The MTA CAC’s current agenda item #6 will be continued at the September 7, 2006 full CAC meeting, because staff was still unprepared to talk about the $33 million in additional State funds. The MTA Board would be reviewing it merely as an informational item (no action) later this month on August 15, 2006. Public Comment David Pilpel wanted to remind the CAC that after much discussion, the CAC previously had an agreement with the Agency that staff would develop a list of items anticipated over the next 6 to 24 months for CAC agenda planning prior to MTA Board review. 5. Staff Report: ¨ Ms. Michaelson (MTA CAC Liaison) distributed and reviewed the staff report. ¨ Upon Emily Drennen’s request Ms. Michaelson also provided the CAC with copies of 2005 Collision Report dated July 19, 2006. ¨ Debra Reed (CAC Secretary) distributed staff responses to the CAC’s June and July 2006 recommendations along with staff responses to CAC June information requests. ¨ Peter Straus reviewed the Twin Peaks Tunnel derailment and MTA’s interim responding accommodations. Staff-Initiated Items6. Additional State Funds Will be continued. See Item #4. 7. Translink (Discussion/Action) Joe Speaks Mr. Speaks distributed copies of the brochure from the MTC marketing department and gave an overview of the program’s development. Translink would be the regional smart card program (a computer card with a chip) used to pay fares. Money could be pre-loaded to the card using a machine to process cash or a credit card transaction. Fast Passes could also be ordered using Translink. As an alternative, one could also go to the internet or call a 1-800 number to sign up for Auto Load, order a monthly fast pass, as well as other available options. Participating transit providers would include BART, Muni, AC Transit, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans, VTA, and Caltrain. Questions and Comments from the CAC Steve Ferrario: How would POP personnel verify fare payment? Response: POP personnel would use hand-held readers. Could Translink cards be used on Cable cars? Response: Cable cars would not be using Translink. Steve Ferrario: When one purchases a card one expects to be able to use the card on transit modes including Cable cars. There are also disabled patrons, such as blind disabilities, that would have problems with card readers. Mr. Ferrario suggested developing a Flash Card type arrangement. Response: Mr. Speaks agreed to research if such scenarios were being addressed. Art Cimento: What are the savings with Translink? Response: Operations costs such as printing costs, distribution costs, speed boarding time, cut in transfer abuse, etc. Have there been plans for Time-of-Day pricing or Congestion-Based pricing (already deployed in Hong Kong and London)? Response: There were no plans of this sort at the time. Daniel Murphy: Mr. Murphy felt that there were still fare policy issues, such as, POP, initial cost for the card, etc. He assigned the FAC to agendize the fare policy for discussion and recommendations. Public Comment: Jamison Wieser: Since there would be a $5 fee for the card, would there be a $5 discount such as applied when used to purchase a fast pass? Response: There would be a marketing budget where discount incentives may be offered at initial roll out, such as, if one signed up for Auto Load, etc. 8. Service Planning for the T line (Discussion/Action) Peter Straus Mr. Straus distributed and reviewed both the Muni Planning July 2006 map for 3rd Street Light rail and the map for 9x, 15, 54, J, and N. The 3rd Street Light rail would not be serving China Town, Visitation Valley nor Geneva Avenue, since these areas would be served by the 15 line. Enhancements to the 9x line have improved service in Visitation Valley area. The 9x would be replacing the map’s 15x line. The 9x service hours would be extended to Sundays and evenings. For cost savings purposes, the N Judah line would change by terminating at Embarcadero, whereas the J Church line would change by continuing on to 4th and King streets. The soft launch of the 3rd Street Light rail was planned for January 2007. Full revenue service and line changes would follow affective April 1, 2007. Mr. Murphy would like to review the new line configurations once service has been in operation for a few months. Public Comment David Pilpel: Mr. Pilpel felt that there was neither public outreach nor notices for public consideration on significant service changes. Response: Mr. Straus said that there was a lot of public outreach over the last 13 years. He felt that proposals presented by Mr. Pilpel were significantly at variance with the MTA’s commitments to the public and the community outreach process throughout the whole 3rd Street process. The 9x service with recommended expansions being the core of the bus service was in variance with Mr. Pilpel’s recommendations. After the T line startup on April 1, 2007, lines changes would be monitored with the APC capabilities and MTA assumptions revisited for warranted adjustments to make sure that the projected capacities were still adequate. Dorris Vincent (CAC) requested to review Mr. Pilpel’s suggested proposals. Council-Initiated Items9. Committee Reports None 10. Recommendation from a FAC Committee (Discussion/Action) Motion 071906.01: The MTA CAC recommends that the MTA instituting free transfers between cable car lines. The MTA CAC further recommends that the MTA keep cable car fares at or below current levels, even if other fare increases are considered and that the MTA consider normalizing cable care fares to regular Muni fares as cable car service is brought up to the minimum levels mandated by the charter. 2nd by Griffith Humphrey CAC passed unanimously (Ayes - Murphy (Chair), Ferrario (Vice Chair), Burns, Cimento, Downey, Drennen, Humphrey, Oka, Perez, Rolfe, Vincent, and Weaver). 11. Council Members’ Questions and Comments Dorris Vincent commented on the unreasonable traffic delays disrupting transit service on Ball Game days along 3rd street near the Ball Park. Steve Ferrario felt that the problem would be greatly alleviated upon the reopening of the 4th Street Bridge in September 2006 along the new route for the 3rd Street light rail in 2007. Mr. Murphy would like to review the associated line configurations once the T-line service has been in operation for a few months. Dan Weaver commented regarding the list of proposed NextBus locations attached to July’s information requests, that 4 out of 5 handicapped platforms along the K Ingleside line from Balboa BART station to the West Portal station would not be outfitted with NextBus. While it is true that these platforms have no electricity, they warrant NextBus since they are major Muni stops. Mr. Murphy assigned the concern to EMSC. Mary Burns expressed concern that the automated computer had been down for 3 consecutive days delaying railcars in and out of West Portal. (Possibly July 27-28) This appeared to be a reoccurring event. Also there was a letter forwarded as a “cc” to the CAC with several attached communiqués addressed to Mr. Ford from Rescue Muni involving similar complaints. Mr. Murphy assigned the concern to EMSC. Joan Downey: ¨ Ms. Downey commented regarding NextBus, that the response from Central Control to the information request number 060706-7 appears to contradict Deb Denison’s response to the recommendation number 061406.1. Debra Reed agreed to have the staff reconcile their responses. Mr. Murphy requested that Executive Director Nathaniel P. Ford, Sr. along with the new CIO should also be made aware of staff’s discord on the use of NextBus. ¨ Ms. Downey was still waiting for a response from DPT regarding several incidents involving an alleged Handicap Placard abuser. Janet Michaelson agreed to follow up on the response. ¨ A neighbor upon receiving his 2nd citation for Residential Parking Permit (RPP) violation pointed out to the citing parking control officer (PCO) his J permit displayed on his truck. However the PCO refused to void the citation, stating that he had already wrote the ticket. Ms. Downey wanted to know could PCOs void citations? Also, for PCOs issuing unusual amounts of erroneous citations would that information be noted in their personnel file? Janet Michaelson agreed to follow up on the responses. Public Comment David Pilpel: Mr. Pilpel’s comment regarding Ms. Burns statement was inaudible. Mr. Murphy recapped that there was a settlement between Muni and Alcatel regarding ATCS. Part of the settlement included a list of commitments for Alcatel to improve the system. Mr. Murphy assigned the concern to EMSC. 12. Regular Meeting Date for the MTA CAC (Discussion/Action) The result of the survey for CAC members regarding member availability for a date change for the regular full CAC meeting substantiated that the first Thursday of the month remained the best possible choice for the majority of the CAC members. Therefore the full MTA CAC would continue to meet on 1st Thursdays as the regular meeting date. 13. Agenda planning for the Next Regular Meeting Tentatively Scheduled: Thursday, September 7, 2006, 5:30 p.m., 1 South Van Ness Avenue, ¨ A guest speaker from the MTA Board 14. Adjournment: 8:00 p.m. Attachments: Agenda Item 2 – MTA CAC minutes for July 2006 Agenda Item 7 – Brochure – Introducing Translink (printed 6/06) Explore: |
|
|
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) manages transportation in San Francisco, California. Copyright © 2000-2010 SFMTA. All rights reserved. Updated February 25, 2010
|
|
