tv [untitled] May 18, 2014 12:30pm-1:01pm PDT
the new streets is vancouver is 3 meters per lane less than 10 feet 3 meters per lane. octavia is a interesting to note the side access radios are 18 feet. we had a problem with that they're two feet two wide the traffic goods two faster on them. the minute i saw they builds them two feet two wide and i called the chief traffic person in vancouver where they were doing a multi way boulevard we had designed and he lowered it by 2 feet. there are - >> mr. jack's in terms of comparing to others cities you mentioned vancouver my
understanding is that new york city and boston have departments of 18 feet to 20 feet clear and seattle and portland are 80 feet clear. >> that's correct. >> if there's automatic sprinkling sprinkling in the building. >> there are more and more of them especially related to new developments going on. davis has such a up there north has such as oregon skinny streets program has these. the - it's worth noting that in san francisco the land area taken up by public right-of-way that's public right of ways is
well over 28 percent that's the largest single use of land in the city. there's a real housing connection to that. the could have a lot more housing and it's comfortable if those streets out in the way out in the west were narrower you'd have a lot more housing in this city. our experience by the way, in relationship to standards is about careful be very, very helpful someone also caves.
what that repeals let's say 26 feet in proportion to the public right-of-way is over 65 percent of typical street that's a lot of space. the terrible things happen not often we deal with them to make standards based on that the occasional terrible thing it's more than a little bit questionable >> thank you, mr. jacobs. >> gjdz and thank you for holding this hearing and accept chair wiener this is an important topic happy to be here
3 people are hit by cars everyday in san francisco had bicyclists died last year those are real families that would be our neighbors and in many cases are and those are system ethics issues that are due to the transportation system we know you're most dangerous streets are wide faster streets are where people are getting killed. so pedestrian safety our streets our streets that are built for speed are the ones that are at least safe so earlier this year we adapted vision zero and right now implement that vision zero to 40 miles of streets we can't
make the same mistakes in the past. as is t s strardz i shared the guidelines we've adapted as a guideline encouraged 11 maps for safeties we also know that the fire department cares about safety we know that loud and clear. to me what's evident we know that 75 percent of the fire departments emt responses are related to collisions let's figure out solutions we can work on to make sure our streets are safe for pedestrians for bicyclists and drivers so the fire department has what that he need we need to find beneficial solutions and implement vision zero thank you
>> thank you very much. >> thank you, supervisors i'm with the san francisco bicyclist coalition i want to rope something go to the data this will hopefully lead us to the issue we know that is different viewpoints this raises cradle issues to retrofiting the streets we're spending money and political capital on skining streets to look at 7th and 8th and of the united states and howard no office supervisor cowen you know your district has the majority of streets. those are not perfect examples particularly here but we're
michael important choices we've learned a lot of lessons and the data about one way streets and wider travel lanes clurdz collisions and more fatalities this is what the data shows. so, i say go to the data don't disregard our traffic engineer. i'd like to ask you as policymakers keep history and but focus on the data. talk to folks in new york city and portland and use the guidelines that's the national association of traffic officials we're fortunate we have enough resources from smart sources from other cities >> you know thank you. i neglected to call one person
mr. bonner i apologize. i meant to call you up and it got away so my apologies i'll give you an opportunity with the company that's creating that project >> thank you supervisor wiener thank you very much supervisors for holding this important hearing. i think the most important thing to us is that we get this right. this is an hugely important development we've been spending times with the community folks and others we believe in nodding we getting got it right as you know, we voted for an entitlement process which means we went to community meetings tens of meets, if you will, with the commissions and a variety of
department heads here and came up with plan that's a conceptual plan the blue print how to move forward. it was signed by the appropriate people and came up up to the board of supervisors and side board of supervisors gave it's blessing and it was signed into law. we went forward with the blue print. i'm not happy we're visiting 4 years later so things we thought was clear. i'm sure you're aware of once we gain our entitlements we dwlo a fairly extensive plan based on the fact we're entitled and approved per the laws and rules of the city. so the bad news is candidly
we're in the process and i must say i had a flashback i thought i was back in 2009 going 0 through the process of rethinking this. we can't afford to rethink this. the good news we have shown an ability to work closely with the city with the officials of the city and the department heads we've had to sit down with the various department headings heads and better understand what they're trying to seek from our plan. i can tell you that i would be thrilled to have the plan that was presented to the commission the ocii commissioners earlier this are i'd be thrilled the 25th street was grand plan i think it kept all the urban
design integrities that everyone fought for but it turns out we don't get the final say we have to go through the departments and as such we're directed to change certain things and the street width is one of the things we're required to revisit. so i would only say that sure this process is important it may have citywide ramifications but i would only again note that we believe we're moving forward on an approved process with the approved guidelines and, yes while interpretations that was approved in 2010 may differ from department to vice president it's truly imparamount that process is the time to determine
those kinds of issues is people can move from the point in time to move and build the project envisioned. i hope we can moved and again thrilled with the plan we put forward a few months ago we are in the business of complooimz and that's what we have today, the numz we have great relationships with the department heads and the chief take a look at at some of the plans and we could move the street width we did. where we couldn't he stated clearly we couldn't because we felt that will under might be the design integrity and the chief was willing to look at our
decisions so far but we're not happily tooicht because we've gone beyond this >> supervisor cowen. >> thank you for coming up i'm listening to the presentation charge will say impact be are are we talking about reducing the open space or roougdz the single-family homes what is the impact going to be and frankly, i think this community is the one that pays the costs. >> at this point, i, tell you supervisor cowen that we don't - we believe we've adjusted the plan to retain the number of single-family homes and your offeral entitlements we'll lose some space but will be able to
adjust to some stent we have some design work yet to do this is a 10 to 15 year process so as we go along we've been able to adjust along the way so fundamental feeling right now all the comments we've heard with respect to the number of homes and with respect to to the parking spaces and the number of homes we'll retain ma of the traffic calming measures and keep the the bulb outs and we've accommodated some plays but where we thought we couldn't and shouldn't we reduced the widths and made the recommendations he i believe dpw accepted the
recommendations. >> i understand had a i guess there's a vote that's happened at the dpw they've accepted the map? >> for alice griffith but not candle stick. >> okay. thank you. thank you >> my understanding is that on a number of streets not all of them to accommodate the increase in strth width the sidewalks are being reduced from 15 to 13. >> yes. we've frankly reduce the areas with the infliction areas and we're elongated them as opposed to to keeping the width. >> my office went through the
material that grifbt and ocii gave us, however, you want to describe it that there was some park space mann than bs been reduced that was described as four or five months ago but overall to 2010 that was some increase to the project and as a result of the square footage devoted to the streets there will be some loss of parking space. >> i speak that's true we only have socialization spaces so we have to lose something somewhere. >> thank you. >> i mean somewhere in this binder you have done an analysis some sort of study san francisco do you not have that in front of
proven of you. >> i did not. >> maybe we'll safe that for another hearing. i want to say not only it this is significant change to the project but this is some of the questions we had with dpw and mr. ram as well the question about whether 26 feet is the new adult space line 20 feet being the default babies without this hearing this decision would have been made with zero public process with no sunset on it conversations among the departments that would voluntary led to the presumption of widower streets whether or not right or wrong i respect people that disagree with me but the
public should be aware >> the only thing i want to acknowledge ocii has not take the opportunity to go over the analysis to see how the change impacts. open space, bikes lanes and more importantly my considerations are the public housing correct me if i am wrong i see the yes signs they have not had a chance >> i would say point to the fact it my sincere hope this is not yet the beginning of a new set of processes with respect to this particular development because all that meanings maples we have to stop and wait for the outcome maybe in the grand
scheme of things not necessarily front and back anyone here we were supposed be in a process to move forward by a plan that was adapted by the board and signed by mayor in 2010. so inadvertently stepping into a significant process who be belie everything that the first process was to set aside so this is critical for this hearing >> thank you, mr. booer. >> thank you supervisor wiener. this is a very important hearing not only because we get new community right but having the right strdz standards to reclaim the right streets from traffic
danger. you've heard the testimony the fastest roads kill and wide roads kill. there's a huge body count from bad streets designed. and it's probably the biggest safety problem we have as a city. it also makes the city less liveable for all of us we've turned our streets into bad things this is gentiles the elderly and the children that are the worse impacted by balanced designed roads. the top 3 reasons people leave is the insafe streets and housing costs. so making streets deadlyer there's got to be better ways in streets are bad during the
construction phase restrict the use but designing streets that are overly wide for decades to deal with an issue only happening during construction is stood up. we could look at fire trucks and so on. there are many, many miles of streets that are 20 feet or less clear hundred of thousands of people live on those streets their narrower than 20 feet so we can't fight fires here i think there's the best streets to live o on. we should be able to have fire safety but widening streets to 26 feet is bad policy >> thank you director.
>> thank you good afternoon, supervisors i'm sheryl brinkman ii happy service on the sfmta board of directors but i'm not here with that hat. thank you for this. i firmly believe we can build save streets and accommodate the emergency vehicles i know what calendared staff we have at sfmta we also have an amazing opportunity to build the neighborhoods that will be safe and welcome for all road users and help us to meet the vision zero and goals and an opportunity that a lot of cities would love to have thank you to your oversight 10 to 15 years from now the board of supervisors or sfmta is not trying to see how those streets would be safe they are will be.
in the hearing today we've heard a lot of good ideas to accommodate the fire department and the speakers have good ideas. i think that using the example of extreme conditions that are horrible didn't help the conversation it circulates the fear in people. i think we have more to fear from everyday poorly designed streets from the conscionable horrible concentration we see. i'm confident we can moved with compromises >> thank you. >> chairman and supervisors thank you for calling the hearing. san francisco beautiful director. san francisco beautiful spearheaded the upper plan that went into the complete streets designed for the streets for the
new development comply with that and the intent for the best designs we have for our country. we have we appreciate your careful attention to the changes so the publicity u public take the opportunity to talk about the public spaces. we looked to hamburger about those issues and looked forward to hearing from the department in communicating with the elective body and each other so we can have a process and street design that's liveable everyday. thank you >> thank you very much director ramos. >> good afternoon supervisor wiener and supervisor cowen. thank you very much for having this hearing today. you might recognition me from the sfmta board of directors, however, like my colleagues
director brinkman i'm not speak on behalf of sfmta but on behalf of the transform that's a nonprofit organization seeking to design for walkable community. frankly i've been working there 8 years making it a career of undoing what we're talking about doing making the streets less dangerous from the beginning and instead not design them to be more liveable and walkable and safe for everyone. i've almost made a career out to trying to make at a easier for the facilitytion of good growth and development within the cities. i understand the concern of the developers this has been vested mayor ed lee by the community and a process by which the fire department had a chance to review earlier we need to move
on and find other compromises. in addition the directors comments we could not put parking on the development on those streets that are under construction and with places you could put is jack to hold up fooikz but in a nutshell we appreciate the safety concerns the fire department but people get killed not only in jaywalking but get killed in krooksz from high-speed traffic >> thank you very much
(calling names) those are all the names i have so if you want to speak please come up and fill out a card. >> thank you supervisors for having this hearing. i'm with the citizen and disability action and the advisory committee. but i'm here to talk about as a i would call myself a citizen in training with a lot of experience in pedestrian safety. and part of being citizen in training the older i get the more confused i get you had a clear idea when i got here but there's a lot of miss
interpretations of rules and who knew what and when it soolz the fire department come and finally looked at what going to happen in the development and came up with a concern and solution which i feel is a simplistic way of coming with a simplistic ideas. the fire department and the development should look at how they're to build the buildings and the safety standards in building them and what kind of materials to prevent or reduce the probability of fires. and also look at other solutions
just then saying we need widower streets so one safety vs. another when it comes to pedestrian safety. so all those condominium conversion of who said what the bottom line is we really need to look at the solution that the fire department now is coming up with not just simply say widened the streets. thank you, thank you very much >> next speaker good afternoon supervisor wiener and supervisor cowen. i'm dr. verona honeycutt i'm with the citizens advisory committee that is working with the city to oversee the development of the shipyard. the shipyard is the communicated driven project and the cac is the longest community oversight body of any project in the history of san francisco. we support moving the shipyard
project forward we're already in the implementation stages of sfaes one housing development. fwraerng very surprised to see this project today. we at the cac has sat in meeting after meeting and some of our members have been involved with the project forfully to 20 years we've heard everything we need to hear about the shipyard where were the public works and the fire department why did they not work through the process earlier so we wouldn't be here he 11th hour to figure out one way or another what to do. we're at the cac are in agreement we know the firefighters jobs are not easy and we appreciate them.