Bicycle Advisory Committee - May 18, 2015 - Minutes

Meeting Date: 
May 18, 2015 - 6:30pm
Location: 
City Hall, Room 408
San Francisco, CA 94124

BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Monday May 18, 2015

6:30 p.m.

City Hall, Room 408

Regular Meeting

MINUTES

 

1. Roll Call – Determination of Quorum

Present: District 3 - ­ Marc Brandt (6:57 arrival), District 4 -­ Ed Nicolson (6:57 arrival), District 5 ­- Morgan Fitzgibbons, District 6 -­ Richard May, District 7 -­ Bert Hill (Chair), District 8 - Diane Serafini, District 9 ­- Ilyse Magy

 

Absent: District 1 - Kevin Dole, District 2 - Winston Parsons, District 11 - Casey dos Santos-Allen

 

The meeting was called to order at 6:40 PM.

 

2. Announcements & Acknowledgments

                       

3. Approve Minutes ­ April 27th, 2015 BAC Meeting

  • Brandt: ammend to state unanimous approval of Item 9 Honoring Leah Schahum

                        ●  Motion to approve subject to change: Dole

                        ●  Second: May

 

The minutes were approved unanimously.

 

4. Public Comment

 

Adina Levin: status of adding 4th and King to agenda?

  • Fitzgibbons: someone hit near 4th and King recently

  • will be added once SFMTA knows more

 

Janice Li, SF Bike Coalition:

  • Updates:

    • Wiggle Approval decision postponed, frustrating because of Hit and Run

    • SFBC is continuing to work with SFMTA to approve full proposal ASAP

    • meeting to approve improvements at Palou went well

    • meeting approve to improvements until Octavia

    • Fell and Oak have been implemented, adding some things to it

    • Last week was Bike to Work Day!

      • Bicycles were 76% of commute traffic on Market street in the morning

      • Huge success, thanks to BAC, volunteers, community partners

    • Wednesday, 5/27 is Ride of Silence, meeting at Sports Basement at 5PM

      • remembering Charles Vinson, bicyclist killed at 14th and Folsom

Lisa Doherty:

  • Following up on March request for Broadway Tunnel Improvements

    • Reaching out to other cyclists she meets on route

  • Getting a lot of support! But difficulty in getting them to follow-up

    • Is she wasting her time?

    • What should she do?

  • Brandt: defer to SF Bike Coaltion as advocacy organization

  • Janice Li: getting it on priority list is a major first step, and difficult to do

    • no way to win support without community support

      • including drivers

    • not a lot of riders

  • Hill: set new standard with Caltrans for tunnels?

  • Doherty: sent a letter to BAC email

    • Hill will follow up with Dole to find it

  • Brandt: facilities need update:

    • “someone in tunnel” doesn’t always works

    • sharrows may actually increase bike ridership there which is bad

    • adding buzz strip?

      • used to be one there

  • Hill: this project could take 6-8 years to move forward

  • Doherty: there is a 14 inch curb near street level next to elevated walkway, could this be expanded to make room for cyclists?

 

 

5. Committee Member Reports

  • Chairman's Report–GG Bridge, No Report

  • Other initiatives-Committee Member Reports

  • Nicolson: Right Hooks

    • New design with arrows in addition to dashed line

 

6. Governmental Reports

  1. MTA Bicycle Program Report –Ben Jose

  2. Broadway tunnel:

    • Appreciate interest in making it better for bikers

    • identified as corridor in need of improvement for cyclists

    • exploring options, but complex

      • won’t add sharrows, too dangerous

      • want to create something anyone could ride bike through

      • example, could take one car lane to turn into two-way

        • would need extensive community support beyond just bikers, need people on other end of tunnel including North Beach merchants

  3. 4th & King/Townsend:

    • Nothing scheduled for next changes

    • issues brought on by traffic routing for central subway construction

    • New initiative to target congestion in city, could affect

    • Hill: this should be part of funding for Central Subway!

      • Jose: more parking enforcement could mitigate

    • Levin:

      • if parking enforcements are possible, how to make them happen?

      • Where can people direct their concerns and complaints? what are the follow ups?

        • Hill: the property belongs to so many agencies which makes it complicated

        • Jose: could be part of congestion mitigation funding

        • Jose: work with your supervisors, BAC member, SFBC to move forward

        • Brandt: if taxi community is the culprit, SFMTA could impact

        • Jose will check into enforcement

          • SFMTA and SFPD

  4. Project Status:

    • Fell and Oak

    • Euclid

    • Community meeting about Upper Market

      • sign up for email updates at sfmta.com/uppermarket

    • Wiggle:

      • why not painted green?

        • not enough funding

        • Fitzgibbons: how much did project cost as whole, how much would paint cost?

          • Jose: not paint; thermoplastic!

          • Fitzgibbons: why did we spend money painting it before instead of painting at the end?

  5. Engineers investigate collision site after fatality

    • Serafini: how long has SFMTA done this?

      • Jose: since before Vision Zero

    • May: are these studies standardized? Are videos included when captured?

      • Jose: these studies are robust; videos handled by SFPD

  6. Hill: May 30th, Review for Improvements near Teresita Blvd, will be out of town

    • Jose: will let Hill know who from SFMTA is there

    • wants to see more than just stop signs, but things like bioswales and bike lanes that slow traffic

 

 

b. BART Task Force –Dr. Shirley Johnson

  • No meeting this month

  • Working to improve ties with BART Disability Task Force

    • a lot in common: need larger fare gates, elevators

 

c. Report on PSAC Joint Initiatives – Morgan Fitzgibbons

 No Report

 

7. Resolution in support of the TDA (Transportation Development Act) request for FY2015/16

Action: Discussion & Approval of Resolution

Sponsor: Bert Hill, Chair

 

Speaking: Suzanne Wang, Principal Analyst at SFMTA Finance Division, working with grant applications

  • SFMTA getting TDA Article 3 (for pedestrian and bike safety projects) money from Metropolitan Transportation Commission a little over $1 million, 15% increase from last year based on sales tax across state

  • SFMTA and DPW split money 50/50, about $500k each

  • DPW will be using their money to leverage Prop K money to improve ADA ramp access, increasing total project value to $2.3 million

  • SFMTA will be using it for Vision Zero Bike Safety Spot Improvements and Bicycle Strategy Route Upgrades

  • TDA funds require BAC approval

  • Fitzgibbons: how are locations chosen?

    • Vision Zero determines High Injury Network (on visionzerosf.org)

      • go through environmental review so can’t identify immediately

    • Also wayfinding projects

    • SFMTA will follow up with which corridors they are choosing and why

    • Action steps: Timothy Papandreou will present current list soon to BAC

  • May: why is there a surplus?

    • Ben says sometimes projects come in under budget

  • Three years to spend this money:

    • Suzanne: she can come back and present on how money is being spent

    • SFMTA will be applying for additional grants in time period; this funding will be for projects they can’t get grant money for

  • Fitzgibbons: it is silly to have BAC obligation to approve spending when we don’t actually see what projects the money is being used for specifically and so can’t advise, can only approve or disprove

  • Motion: May

  • Second: Fitzgibbons

 

8. 2015 Applications from Public Works and SFMTA

Action: Discussion & Letter of Approval for Six Grant Applications

Sponsor: Bert Hill, Chair

 

Speaking: Suzanne Wang, Principal Analyst at SFMTA Finance Division, working with grant applications

  • $180 million available statewide and $30 million for region available to be spent statewide to promote active modes of transportation

  • Due to Caltrans June 1st

  • Handout of six specific projects:

    • Southeast SF Multimodal Safety and Transit Reliability Upgrades,

    • Geneva and San Bruno Corridors

    • Pedestrian Wayfinding Citywide

    • Vision Zero SF: Safe Intersections

      • slow vehicle traffic

      • increase time for pedestrians to cross streets

        • including leading pedestrian intervals

    • Lombard Street Improvements, Between Van Ness and Richardson

    • John Y Chin Safe Routes to School, near 350 Broadway

    • Market St Signal Retiming

  • Hill: is Environmental Review still bonded by LOS (Level of Service)?

    • Ben says not sure, will follow-up

  • Diane: is educational programs will be included because she was hit by driver making illegal left turn?

    • Wang says she believes media campaign will be involved

    • disseminated through community groups in different languages

    • Jose discusses “Safer Streets SF” campaign that highlighted in billboards that most vulnerable people are getting disproportionately hit

  • Hill: what about adding Bicycle Symbol to lead pedestrian intervals Walk Signs to prevent right hooks?

    • Jose will check

  • This is one of the few $ sources that will pay for infrastructure as well as outreach

  • Suzanne would like a resolution of support or support letter

    • Hill can write a support letter

    • Motion to approve Hill writing a letter: Brandt

    • Second: Fitzgibbons

 

9. Bicyclist Capacity on Electrified Caltrain System

Action: Discussion & Approval of Resolution

Sponsor: Marc Brandt, District 3

 

Presentation: Dr. Shirley Johnson, leads Bikes on Board project sponsored by SF Bike Coalition

Also in attendance Janice Li, community organizer with SF Bike

 

  • Bikes on Board program with Caltrain

  • Massive improvement from 1992

  • Now 48-80 capacity for each train

  • Still, not consistent so people often get bumped

  • Now with third car added to bombardier trains, capacity will be 72-80

  • Won’t push for increase until electrification and new design!

  • Data shows bumps decrease with added capacity and increase when service inconsistent

  • How many people will board with bicycles in 2021 with electrification?

    • bike boardings increasing even faster than walk on boarding since 2008

      • Walk ons: 5.5%

      • Bikes: 17.1%

        • this data is limited by capacity and bike bumps

        • data was taken in February which is low ridership month

          • proved by data taken both in Feb and Oct one year

    • Projection shows more than 20% of people will bring bikes on board in 2021

    • Was concerned 20% bike capacity would be enough, but survey shows that could be safe number since added bike parking options could affect numbers

      • what they don’t want is people seeing they can’t bring their bike on board and then choosing to drive

      • bike parking better financial option than shuttles etc.

    • Large increase in bike bumps in 2015 (over 3X)

      • forces cyclists back into cars

      • bike boardings decreased from linear growth pattern in conjunction with bike bumps, walk-ons did not drop

        • people are willing to stand on train, but not willing to be left behind on platform

      • expect latent demand for bikes on board

    • Parking lots are full at Caltrain and this could also drive away ridership

      • promotes mode shift from driving to biking

      • biking costs less than other station access modes so makes sense to promote

 

Questions:

  • Hill: do folding-bikes count as bicycles in passenger counts?

    • Johnson: unclear

  • Hill: electrified bicycles becoming more popular but are quite heavy. Can these go on trains or have to be left at station

    • Johnson: level boarding will make this easier

  • Nicolson: possible to consider reservation system for bikes on board?

    • Johnson: not sure, considered charging $ for bikes but illegal as long as they are admitting luggage for free

  • Fitzgibbons: do we want to invest more in bike capacity or storage on either end?

    • Johnson: both, prioritize bikes on board but want to honor that people state they are willing to explore other options on survey

 

PUBLIC COMMENT:

 

Adina Levin, Friends of Caltrain:

  • full disclosure, arrived to meeting with bike on Caltrain :-)

  • not comfortable with 20% bike on board capacity, too high

    • people are willing to stand on Caltrain, but at 150% capacity, need to have more seats

      • more people are willing to use off train facility and bike share

    • Friends of Caltrain does not feel comfortable insisting on maximum capacity for bikes if this means far more people have to stand

      • trips are too long

      • there are other options

      • increase offboard options!

  • Hill: with electrified cars will trips be shorter?

    • Caltrain electric will be able to accelerate quicker between stations so may be able to stop more frequently, especially as currently smaller stations increase ridership with TOD (transit-oriented development)

  • May: after a long day’s work, standing for long spans is even harder

  • Levin: level boarding is ultimate goal, won’t be implemented immediately

 

Janice Li, organizer at SF Bike Coalition

  • Right now Caltrain is still in early stages of design

  • SFBC feels 20% is important to start with:

    • can’t set goals without actual numbers (not just percentage)

    • Once there are numbers, they can work with Caltrain to see how to physically deal with these

 

Resolution:

  • Levin: recommends removing clause that says “bike lockers are underutilized” is because currently bike lockers are lock and key, meaning only one person can use each locker forever

    • Could switch to electronic system like BikeLink in East Bay able to be used by multiple people

    • qualify that by saying “current technology”

  • San Francisco has space for ~100 parked bikes, will be increasing to 235

    • with 1435 bike boardings at SF, this is only 10% of riders

  • Brandt: bike parking takes significant footprint at station, could get separated from bike if you board at different station that you got on at

  • Motion to approve: Brandt

  • Second: Fitzgibbons

  • Due July 3rd to Shirley

 

 

 

10. Adjournment

  • Motion: Brandt

  • Second: Fitzgibbons