tv TA Vision Zero Committee 121015 SFGTV January 10, 2016 1:15am-3:01am PST
commissioner farrell. >> present. >> farrell present, commissioner kim? >> here. >> kim you present. >> commissioner mar. >> mar present. >> commissioner yee, yee absent we have a quorum. >> thank you, i know supervisor yee is on his way to committee meeting. can we please call the calendar? >> calendar, items 2-4 comprise the consent calendar. these items are considered routine and staff is not planning to rent or prepared to present if desired and if a member objects any item can be removed and considered separately. >> thank you. is there any discussion on the consent calendar? seeing none, call public comment on this item? any members of the public who would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed on the consent calendar. mr. clerk, please take roll call. >> on the consent calendar, commissioner farrell? >> aye. >> farrell aye. >> commissioner kim? >> kim aye. >> commissioner mar? >> aye. >> mar a, commissioner yee, yee absent, the consent
calendar passes. >> thank you. can we please call item 5. >> update on use of parking control officers to support vision zero. this is an information item. >> thank you. and i do see sfmta here to present on this item. >> good afternoon, sfmta enforcement manager. today i would like to give youn update on our progress towards enhanced enforcement in support of vision zero i'd like to cover items such as citation trends, which respect to three key citation types. i'll talk about the top locations we're focusing on or have been focusing on and speak at some length about our deployment decisions, strategies, trade-offs and
challenges. this reflects the citations for the period of 2010 to november of 2015. and as you can see, 2015 compared to 2014 if you look at the intersection gridlock citations, we increased our issuance of citations of about 200% over last year. blocking the bike lane, 97% and double parking about 34% increase. the next slide represents the top-ten locations which we are focusing on intersections gridlock or blocking the box. >> do you have a copy of this, because i can't read this on the screen? >> yes.
i have maybe two. >> great. in the future, it would be great to always have hard copies for committee members. >> i apologize. >> because sometimes our screens are not very clear. >> let me get you that. >> thank you,. >> i apologize for that. as you can see we starts supervisor kim as you recall back in july/september of 2014, we initiated a pilot to focus on south of market and bay bridge approaches. and since -- well,, as early back as january 2014, you can see almost 19,000 citations have been issued at approximately 114 different
locations which represents about 2% of the total citywide intersections. we have moved -- we continue you to look at different intersections and move as necessary. we have actually moved some of our enforcement efforts downtown, market street corridor and also north of market this slide and the next couple of slides i would kind of like to talk a little bit about our assignment strategies decisions on how we deploy our officers? this slide represents our core enforcement assigns we also call them "details." the core details such as general enforcement, meters, disabled
placard enforcement, rpp, residential parking permit, boots, law, yellow zone, street cleaning and toll, transit-only line with front-facing forward cameras. abandoned autos, over 72 hours and tow and dispatch. as you can see, the core assignments tend to fall into the center or between the peak a.m. and p.m. commute times. 7-10 a.m. and 3-7 p.m. the second chart reflects what we call special assignments. these are assignments that are not -- they usually start out as pilots and they become either permanent or the duration is much longer.
one specifically to focus on would be the shuttles, tech shuttle programs. you can see that is the blue line there. that is on the -- managed on the a.m. peak and p.m. peak times. and there is not much enforcement in the middle or the core times. other programs that we have put into the special assignments include things such as muni forward, safer market street, powell street for the cable car, and central subway, and many more. it takes quite a few pcos for these different unique assignments and resource needs fall into the non-traditional out of the core times.
what this chart indicates is the total after non-productive time pcos assignment. so on the horizontal, the times, vertical are the number of pcos and reflects monday-friday, week days. typical week day we would have a maximum of 200, but on average after vacations, we end up with 150 pcos working beats monday through friday. this final slide is global positioning satellite with our
hand-held devices the devices we issue citations. the orange [tko-ts/]s being double parking citations for just one month. month of october of this year. and the blue dots are bike lane violations that we've issued citations for, again during the month of october. ultimately what we would like to do is monthly and even longer periods of time is use this chart in conjunction with incidents of accidents and look at where we can assist in redeploying our staff to address those areas which are of largest concern or have had numerous accidents. filling those gaps, in other words.additionally with gsp, we'll employee what we call "a geosensing tool." and actually be able to report-out better information by district.
and that wraps up -- any questions? >> thank you, cameron. we do have questions from supervisor -- commissioner mar. before that just really quickly back to the last slide and i'm sorry you missed when you said this, what are the orange dots and blue dots? >> orange dots are double parking city citations and blue dots are bike lane citations >> i'm glad we're citing cars for blocking the bike lanes of i it's really important and i get a lot of feedback on had a and i'm curious how many blocking bike lane citations were given in october? >> almost 300. >> 300? >> yes. >> is that like roughly the average? >> that is about the average, yes. >> great. thank you, commissioner mar. >> thank you. i know we have had the police department's data district by district, but is there a way to
use the gsp gps data to look at district-by-district enforcement? >> i could answer part of that question and let command maddox answer. to the degree that they have a hand held device with gps capabilitieses they could do that? >> if you have the gps data here, it could easily be separated into each district; right? . >> yes. >> with numbers, like the police have provided, >> oh, absolutely, i see what you are saying. yes, sure. >> and i know that police officers can issue similar citations. is there a way to get the data that combines the parking control officers with the police officers, and the total citations? >> yes. >> in the key enforcement areas like the intersections you mentioned, but also on a district-by-district level too?
>> if they cite using similar traffic violations such as double parking, they could be included as part of our data. >> i think what we found when looking at the police data is that some districts like the richmond district station was doing a really good job on fulton and key places where we're trying to slow speeds down you and make it safer, but i'm just curious if there is a district-by-district approach that involve the police and mta and others that is very well-coordinated is my suggestion. >> good suggestion and we're working towards at least getting the mta data, which is the majority of it is has gps coordinates as we cite as part of the hand-held device. so we are working towards developing that ability to geosense it, basically put the boundaries by any way we want, whether it's
district, zip code, however we like. so that is underway. >> i know that you are focused on the key dangerous areas by the data that you have. so i know it's not necessarily looking at areas that isn't as dangerous. but it still would be good to look at district-by-district data, i think. >> data i have shown is citywide and not focused on those current areas of dangerous incidents that occur, but what we want to achieve by using gps and that data on top of the incident data. and if with can get pd data theirs is gps-capable, we could do all three. >> am i right that police have the same authority with the parking citations as pcos or is there any difference with what police can cite versus what
pcos do? >> they have more authority than we do for these violations. ours is strickly strictly to parking ordinances. >> okay, commissioner wiener. >> thank you, madame chair. my apologies, i'm going back and forth between the rules committee today. so i apologize i missed your presentation, but i just wanted to come in and just ask a couple of specific things. thank you for continuing to work on traffic management including double parking and blocking the box. and again, if you mentioned any of these specific areas in your presentation, i apologize. so first i noticed for quite some time now that along market street at 3rd, 4th and 5th, the box blocking is terrible and sometimes it takes muni buses
multiple cycles to get through, even though it's only a few cars ahead of them, because the box blocking is so bad. or even for the 30 or 45 to make a right turn from market at the end of -- as it's going to southbound. and i have never seen a pco or any mta personnel or any police officer managing those intersections, not once. i'm not there 24 -hours a day, but i'm there as a pedestrian and muni rider on a fairly regular basis and just repeatedly seen this happen and never seen an mta personnel there. can you comment on those specific intersections? >> certainly with respect to market street, we are -- we djia a deploy a lot of pcos. part of is for blocking the box enforcement and primely focus
on that on market street. we'll have pcos there at a.m. peaks to do other things such as pedestrian safety, assisting muni through the intersections or across. but yes, we are not there all the time. i think with safer market street we have added more pcos to do that. withrispect y respect to the other line issues would have to look into that. >> it's my experience 3rd, 4th and 5th street along market and i understand there are times when you do something at certain times of day and you can't be there 24/7. but this is just an ongoing issue, i think with box-blocking and also double parking there is not enough and you have to do it more, or the behavior is never going to
change. and a few hours for a couple days a week doesn't cut it and these intersections are just examples and other ones south of market that also through the volume equally significant. but because market street is such an important transit spine, perhaps more so than any other street in the city. when you have ramped up box-blocking at major intersections along market street without any traffic management, it causes major problems, so i really encourage the agency, i don't think you have enough pcos doing this work. i think you need more and i would encourage you to do that. the other specific example is upper market delivery trucks. and i have seen it with my own eyes, but also regularly get photos that constituents send me with very large delivery trucks that are completely blocking the bike lane and half of the traffic lane.
and if you have ever been, which i'm sure you have been on upper market street, in the castro, especially during rush hour, going like morning rush hour eastbound, it's a sight to behold in terms of the sheer volume of traffic. and you have only two lanes of traffic and then the bike lane. so when you have delivery truck that is blocking the entire bike lane and half of one of the traffic lanes, it causes a big problem. so i'm just wondering what activity has been along upper market street in terms of double-parking enforcement? >> upper market, we have also focused not as consistent as we would like or as frequent as we would like. with respect to some of the larger trucks, as we have talked about in past, with respect to double-parking, or, well in a bike lane to the degree that the large vehicle is a commercial vehicle, that doesn't have anywhere else to
park, we allow some discretion and let's the driver know that they have to finish up quickly and move on. whereas others, if there is a place they could have pulled into, an available yellow zone and choose not to, then we cite it. so as far as frequency, it's true, we haven't done, as much as we could upper market. we've spent a lot of time on intersection gridlock, free entrances and south of market and more recently shifted some of our resources to support market. >> could you send the data to my office for double-parking citation over the last six months and along castro street, now that we have widened the
sidewalk, there has always two lanes, one northbound and one southbound, but weirdly wide and encouraged rampant double parking and we have seen a double hall parking problem continue and i would also like the data on castro street. >> thank you. >> >> r thank you, commissioner wiener, any other questions or comments? i had a question on the graphics that you showed on 5, 6, and 7. i was wondering why the peak of your staff deployment is actually in the middle of the day, between -- it looks like 10:30 and 3:00 versus rush-hour traffic. >> depending on the assignment such as meters. >> okay meters is obviously
the big ones >> meter time, yes. we build up the staff primarily for the meter times and locations, as well as rpp is the same. >> okay. so when we're looking at kind of don't block the box, and those types of enforcement, that is actually occurring during rush hour? >> that is correct. >> okay. great. it's really great to see the data in terms of what sfmta has been doing and i do appreciate it, because it's something had a we have asked sfmta is to dedicate resources to traffic management, which has certainly become a bigger and bigger concern for our residents as streets become more congested and i certainly want to concur with supervisor wiener our residents want to see this and we want to change behaviors so people are changing the are rules. so even if they are moving slowly, moving through the intersections. we certainly hear a lot about
cars block the bike lane, and i experienced it myself on the bike. forcing us out of a bike lane, which safer to be in and putting us into vehicular traffic. i think that it's really important that we create a culture where cars respect really the minimal space that we give to bikers, who are doing a lot for our city by being on think bikes and not in their cars. thank you for being here. >> you are welcome. >> i want to recognize commander maddox is here to answer questions if you have any on enforcement and i also wanted to open up public comment for this item. is there any public comment for item no. 5? see nothing public comment, public comment is closed [ gavel ] this is an informational item. thank you so much sfmta for
being here today, and for your work on this. we look forward to continuing to work with you on continuing this work in our district and throughout the city. thank you. mr. clerk, can you please call item no. 6? >> item 6, framework for identifying next generation of vision zero priority projects. this is an information item. >> the mayor and i announced the completion of 13 miles of improvement along the network with public works and sfmta, as well as the completion of the 24 vision zero projects three months ahead of schedule. and an additional six projects that will be completed by february 2016. tom maguire is here, manager of sustainable streets to identify priority projects moving fore,
initiatives to advance the goal of vision zero and [kph*-/] committee members and mr. maguire has a series that sfmta is looking at for feedback on. >> thank you, and thanks for acknowledging that great day we got to announce we both reached the 13-mile milestone and delivered on 24 and 24 ahead of schedule. so i'm going to give a quick overview of a couple of things we accomplished in in 2015 and informs the work that we do in 2016 and what we think the work program for 2016 looks like and how we want to frame that and how we want to talk to the public about the work we're doing and how we want to talk to you as our city leaders and policimakers for the reasons we're making the choices that we're making. to start with as supervisor kim
said, we're really happy with my we reached that goal at the end of november goal. we also of course finished the 13-miles of improvements along the high-injury corridors and it's important to take a moment to remember that the 24 and 24s with was a really important challenge we set for ourselves. but that was just a fraction of the overall vision zero work we're doing and just a fraction of what we're doing on high-injury network. the 13 miles' of improvements which span -- ran the gamete from complicated concrete like the oakland bikeway to simple painted safety zones and signal changes. 13 miles and we know we'll
reach that goal again next year. we also have a -- we're also doing safety work off the high-injury corridor with the safe routes to school and community members who are concerned about speeding in the neighborhoods and we're working in the city on projects like that and not missing opportunities to coordinate with agencies like public works to do things like paving program. when public works repaves streets with we look for opportunitiesment likewise 2015 we launched our large vehicle training video and the -- we're the only city in the country that has specific training materials aimed the drivers who drive our most dangerous vehicles, trucks and
large vehicles and telling them specifically how to operate in a complicated multi-modal city like san francisco. we have gotten great feedback [ inaudible ] on the enforcement side, from this month's quarterly update, sfpd is focused on the five goal and seeing really steady improvement in the percentage of citations for those five violations that cause the most collisions, most injuries, and fatalities. so what have we learned from accomplishments and successes and inform what we do in 2016? we have learn a lot about the challenges of accelerating project delivery and coordinating across departments in a way that i don't think has been true before, mta, police
department, transportation authority were all rolling together in the same direction and we're really -- we're more and more aware if we're going to reach vision zero, if we're going to have not just the output of all of our projects, education projects look good and out comes, with zero fatalities by 2024 and by attacking no. 1 cause is excessive speed. when we talk about our work program for 2016, the key framework to share and leave with you is we want make sure all of our actions are chipping away at excessive speeding on streets because of so many of these crashes and fatalities. i don't think anybody here will be unfamiliar with this. we all know that the likelihood of fatality from a motor vehicle collision increases dramatically when speeds increase. a person hit by a car at 20 miles per hour is 10%
chance of dying, a person hit by a car at 40 miles per hour has an 80% chance of dying and that difference between 20-40 and between obeying the laws -- that is how we want to move from that culture of speeding that we have, to the culture of safety. so starting with engineering projects that we'll be looking at in 2016. again commitment we have made through the mayor and to this board is to deliver at least 13 miles' of safety improvements on high-injury network every year and we know this year we want to focus again on speed reduction and excessive speed control. there is some general areas in which these programs fall and we'll give examples of each of them. the most complex are the transformative projects around safety and multi-modal goals
and collaboration with other projects that we're doing in the city to transform streets. i want to specifically note traffic signal timing this year and not forget the majority of streets that we touch, the way we incremental progress on the streets fastest is continuing go large with the walk first initiative and we'll be continuing in 2016. here is some examples: transforming corridors -- these are not projects that we're going begin or end this year. all of these projects are multi-year efforts and i think everyone on this committee is -- has at least one of these projects in their district and has been help using -- helping us get the word out about the importance of safety on the streets. building van ness brt, and
transforming streetscape at polk street we're trying to seize the once in a generation opportunity in the high-crash corridors when we spend money to reconstruct the streets we want to make sure we're building streets to address crash factors and that meets the community's expectations for high-qual ility streetscape. polk, masonic avenue and van ness and others in the planning stage, but all reach significant milestones during 2016. >> mr. maguire, can you go over each one's expected milestones for 2016? >> okay, i will tell you everything that i have on that. working from the bottom -- van ness avenue. >> this is for the brt project? >> yes, the brt, we call it van ness brt, but it's 14 extra
large bulbs and turn restrictions so that will be a much safer street. polk street, substantially completing a number of blocks of full-on streetscape reconstruction. raised bikeway, ped -- concrete bulb-outs and major reconstruction projects there. masonic avenue will also be in construction. for market street, the milestone in 2016 is to reach a locally preferred alternative for the environmental process. >> what does that mean? >> that is basically -- that is a planning goal. we're not going to achieve ceqa plan or let a construction contract, but going to in 2016 have an actual plan for what better market street will look like? >> okay. so you'll have selected a locally preferred
option/alternative for market street? >> that is the goal for 2016. >> okay. >> >> lombard street is completion of design to meet the caltrans paving schedule. caltrans will be repaving the street between 2017-2018 and the goal is it complete the design process. so we're ready for that. golden gate avenue is to launch the planning/design process. columbus avenue is to implement a number of short-term measures that will improve the muni flow, the bike lanes on columbus, as well as painted safety zones and some early construction opportunities to improve some of the tricky intersections of that street. >> and for 6th street? >> for 6th street, for 6th street, i'm actually going to ask one of my colleagues to
step up and give a bit more detail because it's such an important project. would you? >> good afternoon, luis montoya, livable streets. 6th street has been the environmental review process and supervisor kim, we worked with the community to come up with concept design to go through a likely lengthly multi-year environmental review process. >> is also concept and design? >> it's actually just environmental review in 2016. we have a concept. we'll be doing the environmental review, including traffic analysiss and working with the planning department and consultants. design won't be able to start until after that. >> okay. commissioner yee. >> these traffic corridor
transformation projects for this year, were these similar in nature? i thought -- it seems like the way you are describing these projects, they are at the design stage, or they are in the vision stage, or they could be in the community input stage. and next year you are go coming back with the same ones that is a we're moving to the next stage? is that sort of what we have thought of these projects would be described as? i'm a little confused with this? >> it's a good question and as i talk about some of the 13-mile commitments i can make that clearer, but to be sure that i'm clear about the fact these are the most ambitious street project we're doing in san francisco. these are not projects like i said that will begin or end in 2016. we're going to deliver 13 miles' of improvements on high-injury network, a combination of concrete, signal
timing, paint, road diet and all the tools that we have. these road corridors are highest-profile corridors and they will make up a subset of those projects. but i don't mean the biggest thing that we're bog going to look at this year, but maybe got a little lost in the 24 and 24 discussion. we want to make sure as advocates and policymakers have been reminding us, we just don't want to count 13 miles' of incremental improvement, but aiming a high bar and not taking our eye off the ball. so maybe within a couple of slides i could maybe answer your question a little bit better? so next set of opportunities are opportunities to coordinate with the muni forward program and again, there is just a few highlights on this map we expect as i said
to do some early implementation action on columbus avenue, as well as break ground on van ness brt. so streets with high priority for transit can be high priority for pedestrian/vehicular safety. we know traffic signals are a great tool for controlling vehicle speeds and managing the flow of vehicles along signalized corridors and lower speed limits and separate pedestrians and vehicles from places where chronic turning collisions are taking place. we'll be installing 40 pedestrian countdown signals in 2016 and i'm really excited to say that we just found out we got a grant from caltranss from their highways safety improvement program you that is going to allow us to do a signal retiming of the entire grid both in soma and the tend erloin. this is an opportunity to look at traffic signals. >> what does it mean to adjust signal timing? >> that means we can look at
entire streets and look at the progression of signals and looking at opportunities to slow the speed at which the signals allow traffic to pass through and allows us to look at pedestrian intervals at intersections where we haven't been able to because of congestion. but taking a network-wide approach to bring those into the signals. >> so allowing us to put more lead pedestrian intervals throughout these neighborhoods. i just have to say they make a huge difference on folsom and 7th, allowing pedestrians to cross before allowing cars to move in both direction and i notice that as both a driver and pedestrian. for an intersection like that, what is the process to get a lead pedestrian interval at the intersection? >> there is a few different ways that we implement them,
but it comes down to intersections where we can use the existing -- we can work within the existing timing and carve extra time for pedestrians by holding the traffic for a few seconds. there is intersections and i'm using golden gate as an example, where the intersections are closely spaced, the traffic volume is fairly high and there are things, like muni, that we would want to maintain a flow of traffic through the corridor. where we have to look at the entire corridor for van ness to market. so that we slow the traffic down in a corridor-wide way. we immediate to do -- we need to do that before we carve out the time for itas. >> not to be simplistic, but what is stopping us from putting ipl everywhere on every intersection and giving pedestrians opportunity to walk before cars in either direction? >> good question. many of our intersections have
60-second cycles. total amount of time allotted across the entire timing pattern, it's very hard to slice up. even those 3-6 seconds that we give to the pedestrian without short-changing another crosswalk or intersection. we don't want the situation that we create it on one or more legs on crosswalk, but don't have enough time for pedestrians, especially pedestrians who need a little extra time to cross to get from one curb to the other. >> doesn't lpi give pedestrians more time to cross? >> it does, but when you start taking away time from one approach to give it to another, you could run into the problem where you need to extend the entire cycle and maybe even by a few seconds and that is something that has to be done on a network-wide basis because if you don't you would be encouraging dangerous driver behavior. >> to use folsom and 7th
because we were just talking about and putting lead pedestrian interval into place, what happened to put that in the ground and changes in the neighborhood to make that a reality? >> i don't have the exact timing. >> i only ask because i don't understand at all what you said prior. >> i'm sorry. >> i was hoping an example would be helpful and i didn't understand your answer at all. >> so there are intersections where the signal timing pattern is such that we can do things like we did at 7th and folsom without making a difference to the way vehicles flow along a sequence of intersections, say from folsom, the length of folsom street and simply carve the time out of one intersection. there are other streets where the signal timing pattern is such that to change the timing at one intersection requires us to really change
the timing at every intersection along the corridor. that is really the difference. that is why the network-wide signal timing will be so great for pedestrian safety features. >> mr. maguire, can i say you only on slide 13 out of 23, but let me say that high-injury corridors like geary don't appear on the 2016 list, but i understand there is a couple of projects that have been funded to focus on corridors like geary as well. is that right? >> sure. yes. i can -- if you don't mind, i could go to my next slide. >> i would love to hear that in a moment, but i know it didn't appear earlier as you were talking about all districts being represented. i didn't see that. i also just wanted to say from the beginning, when we kicked off vision zero, it was really a grassroots community effort and i think any time we do presentations, i think you have wonderful staff, but i think it's really important to acknowledge the vision zero coalition, walk sf and all the
coalition members who have pushed for slowing speeds and changing the culture of death to a culture of safety and it's really important to acknowledge that. i wanted to say that even the slides you took from slide 11, i think walk sf at least for my office to bring the data from the uk and other places that we know if you slow it down, it saves lives and decreases the level of the injuries sometimes when people get hit as well. and lastly, i just wanted to say i think geary is critical because of the first death this year with alfred yee in 2015 and aurora benita and safe routes to school and looking at lights for self-help for elderly or 26th and geary in front of the richmond center
that we at least let them know it's going to be delayed. i guess tremendous frustration after the death of mr. yee and we have been told by the mta it will be in august, but now we're hearing it's going to be many months later. even the basic decency of contacting our office and senior centers around them that have been waiting is really important on the human side. i used the names of people who have been killed, so we don't can be so we have good data, but don't lose sense of the human element and grass roots and community efforts pushing us for vision zero in our city as well. >> i appreciate you sharing that and he can come we can come back with an answer. >> mr. maguire, i don't want to dwell on this lpis have been very effective and while it makes intuitive sense to
have a study to see how we can put them out to south of market and tenderloin and the fact that we put them in place at all, begs the question, why can't we just do it without a study; right? so i'm trying to understand -- i've seen it go into the ground and i want to see more of it and why do we need a study to do it if we have done it without a study? i'm trying to understand the difference between when we do it and when we don't? and maybe we don't have to go into in-depth right now, but that is the conversation i would like to have at a certain point. >> i would be happy to bring that material back. so we have talked about some of the more capital-intensive things that we're planning on doing in 2016, but it's important to remember that the majority of streets to be touched we're continuing to build on the foundation that goes back to the walk first efforts dating back to 2013. our goal again is to get to every single intersection on the highway-crash network by
2024. that walk first program has touched nearly 500 intersections to-date and that is the program through which we're bringing high-visibilities caremarks crosswalks, lpi, and other safety features and doing this kind of work all over the city. engineering and design side of thing we need to remember that a lot of what our success? san francisco is because linking engineering and design to education and enforcement and policy. again, to get education and enforcement and policy focused on speeds, in 2016, we're looking at continuing to build
on the success of the large-vehicle training by going to taxi drivers now. in the way that we told our truck drivers tips on how to drive safely in san francisco, we have a professional group of drivers running taxi and want to get to them and do multi-media campaigns targeted at our most vulnerable users and to link education and enforcement together. to build on the find ing last year, we found a greater-level of stop sign and red light compliance. what we want to do is bring some targeted neighborhood-level enforcement to corridors throughout the city, following on targeted corridor-level education. so again, educating drivers about making them aware about the behaviors that cause these collisions and fatalities and following that up with enforcement and continuing to evaluate our efforts to see are we driving down those behaviors?
are we driving down collisions and fatalities? so that map just shows you the span of the city. our goal is to do 48 combined enforcement and education events, four times per month, covering 11 high-injury corridors in the city. each of those would involve approximately 130 hours' of focused speed enforcement. so this is really getting our speed enforcement -- geting our traffic enforcement focused on speed and speed enforcement focused on places that we really think we can make a dent in speeding and make a difference in people's behavior. that is not just because of the results on those corridors burb , but it's asking through the mayor's legislative agenda and hoping that you in your role as vision zero committee supports
that. the controller came out with the report this month that shows some really impressive statisticks about the reductions in collisions, reductions in injuries and fatalities in jurisdictions like washington, d.c. and chicago and new york, which have automated safety enforcement. we want to make sure that when we get to the end of 2016, through the engineering work that we do, through the enforcement and education work, we can say honestly, we're using every tool we have at our disposal in san francisco to control excessive speeds. but we need more. we need more from the state. and we need something that works.
>> i think given how challenging that has been, i think barring that, what would be the three next most importantly tools to reducing speed in san francisco? ideally we should keep pushing, but in the meantime, what can we do to reduce speeds? >> it's the progress that we're talking about in our plan for 2016, the engineering, enforcement and education. and what is a little different about 2016 and the work that we did in 2014 and '15 is our education and enforcement message will be focused on speed. we focused on the five, but something that we're learning over last two years is that one of those five is more important than the others and that is the reason. >> i think e info graphic you had earlier with the likelihood of living/surviving versus having a resulting fatality, that is an amazing
graphic to show people. i think when you see that and you see how much your speed matters, and just pure terms of survivability, i think that is incredibly important. in terms of the engineering piece, so because we crafted vision zero together, i get that education and engineering and enforcement with the three major areas, but the top tool you would pursue that is specific to get to a reduction in speeds? >> we know within our engineering toolbox that certain tools are better at controlling speeds than others. so timing the traffic lights in a corridor. >> signal timing. >> signal timing i think is a huge -- >> ah-hah, i'm just trying to understand what we can support to get to vision zero. what is that the board should be pushing for?
you know, kind of given what you know? so signal timing? >> so signal timing within the engineering bucket. and within the education -- with the education realm we had some great findings with the stop sign research we did in that area, i think. campaigns targeted in a thoughtful way at the speeding problem. >> okay. i don't want to belabor the point. but you know, i think as we continue this dialogue, for me it's helpful to have as much specificity as possible. because i don't want to keep saying engineering, education and enforcement. i want to be able to deliver this to our residents and i know that is your goal, too. i'm not implying that it's not. but i want to know what i should be putting resources into? i want to know what i should be supporting, what i should be trying to secure funding for and how i can best
support our efforts to get to vision zero? so the specificity is really helpful. i know the speed enforcement cameras is a huge priority, but i also know it's going to be very difficult to accomplish especially in the near-term. so understanding that, i want to know what other things that our board can help sfmta push through? so we can get to reduce ing our traffic fatalities, thank you. >> thank you. >> are there any other comments? commissioner yee? >> i want to go back in terms of the 24 projects, how are we going to move forward in terms of identifying? are we going to able to identify another 24? the reason i ask, even though we all know that in the city we actually do more than 24 projects, including trying to
get some projects in my district done through participatory budgeting, which seem like it should have some priority. but what is helpful for me as i talk to the public is to say here is our goal. here is some concrete things we're going to be really focused on -- they aren't the only things, but i think it gives the public something to hang their hat on to, say oh, okay, i get it. we are serious about this. so are we going to move forward with identifying another 24 and what would be the criteria? i mean, maybe the first 24 that we identified were a little easier than the next 24. i would like to know how we're going to really make some choices? >> right. so we don't want
to just grab 24 projects out of the queue and be thoughtful and say we want to attack the excessive speeding issue and to make sure that all projects that we prioritized this year and come back to you every quarter and we're accountable every quarter are addressing that issue. i think it's also important that the 24 and 24 were all engineering projects. i think it's important that we're also talking about the education and the enforcement campaigns as campaigns as well. because i think they have been proven to be just as effective over the last two years as some of the engineering work. so what i laid out today was a framework. my hope is that take something of the really good feedback we're hearing today to come back with a more detailed list. >> i appreciate that. >> thank you. >> so seeing no further questions or comments at this time, i will open up for public comment on this item.
any members of the public that would like to speak? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm kathy deluca, the policy and program manager, thank you, with walk san francisco. and and i originally feel like i have so many things to say in response to the conversation that just happened. commissioner kim, i would like to say that walk san francisco would like to see leading pedestrian intervals at every intersection in the city and that is something had a we that we talk to mta as well and we see how effective they have at keeping people safe and commissioner mar to acknowledge you for you all the community groups that helped to push vision zero forevered. forward. and thank you, for those who attended the world day of remembrance events, which was a
really important time for us to focus on why we adopted vision zero in the first place. so thank you all for coming to that. but my original reason to come up was actually to thank mta staff for completing the 24 projects ahead of schedule. i know that there is a lot to do, and we certainly have a lot more work to do, but it's important to celebrate the success that we have had. how many times are things done early? not really that that common and walk sf appreciates and vision zero coalition appreciates all the hard work of the mta staff and look forward to future projects being done ahead of schedule too. thank you. >> thank you. any members. public who would like to speak on this item? just please come up to the mic. >> sylvia johnson.
we don't move very fast with bigger wheels and a lot of other issues that we're seeing -- i think sometimes we need a blue light to stop or slow down. so when it turns yellow they have a blue light in between to slow down and proceed because that way they could drive safeer and we're seeing with sidewalks, and more bigger
will close public comment. you don't need to speak at public comment. at this time i will close public comment. public comment is closed. [ gavel ] . director chang? >> thank you, chair kim. you just wanted to add my thanks and congratulations and acknowledgment to walk sf and the team here really does deserve a ton of credit and to acknowledge sfmta and all of the agency it's are part of the vision zero coalition and advocacy groups and committee members, who serve on the task force. the 24 milestone is a pause for success and tim and megan were co-chairs and want to thank them for their service and under the general direction and leadership of tom maguire, i think this feedback is important and the continuing back and forth and ability to
engage you all and the public and the community in setting the next generation of projects, establishing some of the supporting efforts that the board can also help with next year is very important as well. thank you, chair kim for your leadership, as well as the mayor's as well. just wanted to also draw folks' tension attention to within the project which was on the consent calendar. there is a set of six additional projects. the list is here. it's howard pedestrian and bicycle improvements between 6-10 streets and safety and street permits from mcallister to union and kerny and sacrament and ocean and geneva, as well as 20 locations where there are high-injuries related to broad-side crashes and
pedestrian improvements at persia triangle and let folks those are those as well we expect in the next few months. >> thank you, ms. chang. just wanted to really do look forward to working with the transportation authority staff and sfmta on the next set of vision zero projects. and having a specific list. it's great to see what is in the hopper naturally with especially the corridor transformations and i'm glad that a number of corridors are going to move through. i think really significant points in the design process. for me, this vision zero subcommittee is not about the work that i think is already happening at sfmta. it's really about how can we continue to accelerate and expedite projects that can go on the ground now and helping to identify within what is already going on, things that can move just a little bit faster and that we can actually deliver to the public in 2016?
that is the list that i really want to develop through this subcommittee. i think sfmta is doing a stellar job in general and kind of our long-term vision and plan and our voters have been very generous supporting the funding that is needed to ensure these projects move. i think just that is what the subcommittee is about is identifying what can be the near-term projects? what can get accelerated or expedited or whatever set of reasons so we can deliver certain aspects of projects to our residents? you know, faster, basically. that is just what i want to continue to push staff on and hopefully had in our subcommittee meetings throughout next year we can help identify this group of 24 projects within the kind of overall vision and long-term
planning at sfmta. thank you. mr. clerk, can we please call the next item. >> item 7, recommend supporting automated safety enforcement as san francisco's key legislative initiative in support of vision zero for the 2016 state legislative session . this is an action item. >> thank you. we actually spent a bit of time talking about this in the previous item. but it has been the priority of sfmta and certainly my office to help push through an automated safety enforcement at state legislature-level, something that we view as really key to slowing down speeds here in san francisco. and kate breen, government affairs director for sfmta and claire phillips performance analyst at the office of controller will be presenting on this issue. thank you. >> thank you. and thank you for the opportunity to be before you today. we're hoping for safe holidays here in san francisco. appreciate your commitment and leadership on this and partnership with the mta. so
per the information that is included there is a lot of detail in the vision zero quarterly progress report across all aspects of vision zero action strategy, but with regards to the policy priorities you'll see a deeper-dive, if you will on some of the work that we're doing as it relates to advancing policy changes in particular starting to build support in awareness for the commitment included in the action strategy to advance support for state authorization for automated safety enforcement and i do appreciate the comments of chair kim, with regards to the challenge that we faced to be successful in that regard. but we are 100% committed. and i think we're starting to see traction with some of our other city partners. including city likes the city of san josé, that have adopting advancing ase as their priority no. 1 for city transportation.
for the work that they have gone to take a deep-dive in-depth review of practices and lessons learned from other jurisdictions, so when we are asked how it has worked in other places and how to be confident in the initiative that we're advancing that we have prove across the country it's been effective and claire will go into detail on that. while the measures and results vary, i would recommend that you look at that report to see how different jurisdictions have approached this and they all do demonstrate consistently that ase is a proven and effective tool to manage excessive speed and improve road safety. we do have materials that we have developed as part of our ongoing outreach and these materials will be available -- they are now available on the vision zero sf website and we have a fact sheet and
frequently asked questions and this is the kind of material that will be useful to you all in working with your constituents as we work to build support for this initiative. today in fact, dph took the automated safety enforcement to the state legislation committee and it will be included in the mta's legislative program. we have asked organizers like mtc to include vision zero initiative such as this as well and we're building what i characterize as a campaign. with that as background, i will turn it over to claire phillips who has a loss of information a lot of information to share with you. good afternoon i'm claire phillips with the cellulars
office. as kate mentioned our office issued this report last month, november 12th and surveyed six jurisdictions and their implementation techniques on automated safety enforcement. which is the overview that i will be giving you today. the objectives were to identify how other jurisdictions around the country implemented automated safety enforcement and how to use that to support san francisco's advance of ase authorization to vision zero action strategy as kate mentioned? so we're all very familiar with this visual. again, speeding is a major factor in whether a person will survive a collision with a vehicle. so a person who is
struck by a car going 40 miles per hour has a 20% chance of surviving. while if going -- if they are 40 miles per hour has a 20% of surviving, whereas if a car is going 20 miles per hour, they have a 90% chance of surviving. so really significant factor in how fast a speeding car is moving in terms of if someone is going to survive a collision? as you can see, this issue is widespread throughout the city. this map shows between 2008 and 2012 all of the collisions where unsafe speed was a leading factor. and you can see a bit more density on major thoroughfares such as highway 1,19th avenue, van ness, market street, lombard, but overall, you can see this is widespread throughout the city and the speed is an issue everywhere.
so automated safety enforcement is the use of camera enforceable at a designated threshold, that camera will take a picture of the speeding vehicle, when it's going beyond that threshold and proven very effective at reducing speed and changing driver behavior to improve the safety for all road users. these cameras can be fixed on existing infrastructure, much like red light cameras are, or they can be mobile. so they would be placed on vans and those vans could be moved around jurisdictions. and that gives a bit more flexibility of where speed will be deterred with the use of these cameras. so there are many benefits to using automated speed enforcement and the ones that i wanted to highlight today are they are able to detect multiple speeders. so you will notice that when in traditional
enforcement a police officer has to pull somebody over off the road and they are with that person issuing that citation. but there may be other speeding cars behind that vehicle that continue to speed and are not necessarily being deterred by the presence of traditional enforcement. and so one of the main benefits of the camera is that it can identify multiple speeding drivers at a time. and those will be issued citations so people can identify that they were speeding at that area and they would be issued a citation. they can also be placed in locations that a police officer could not be for safety reasons. the street might be designed or certain thoroughfares it's not appropriate to atraditional enforcement because of unsafe conditions for the officer. so cameras can also be placed in those areas to deter speed in
an area that personnel may not be able to be. they enforce -- it's technology that will enforce at the speed threshold and these cameras are accurate within one mile plus or minus what they are set at with the national national highway traffic safety administration to be accurate within 1 miles per hour and effective to reducing speeds and speed-related collisions and proven to be a very effective tool i will talk with the jurisdictions and how effective that they would be. so this map shows the jurisdictions that we surveyed. you'll see overall across the country as of last month, 140 communities have speed camera programs. the states that are in green have both speed and red light
cameras. the states in blue have red light cameras. and then the darker pink/red colored states have neither cameras. portland, seattle, chicago, denver, washington, d.c., and new york city. so as i mentioned, and as kate also mentioned automated speed enforcement has been found to be very effective and the six jurisdictions surveyed measured their effectiveness in a variety of different ways. some look at speed and others look at collisions and crashes and others look at citations and fatalities and in all of these, no matter which organization was measured they looked at, they all found significant results with the use of speed cameras. so at least a 30% decline in speeding
vehicles were found in all jurisdictions and at least 30% decline in fatalities. so although proven to be very effective, there are a few legislative and administrative issues that when we asked the jurisdictions what their main concerns were from a legislative perspective, that we heard. so california is not unique in that currently speed cameras are not legal. the california vehicle code specifically bars the use of speed cameras, and that is why legislative changes would be necessary. all six jurisdictions that we surveyed after also had to pass legislative bills to authorize automated speed
enforcement and instead of a safe tool it was a revenue-generating technique. one lesson that was learned is to engage the public early and let the public know these are effective tools for improving safety and it's not about the revenue-generation. it's about changing driver behavior and detering speeding to improve safety for all road users. the other prevalent issue was the idea that the public has everybody speeds and it's an acceptable behavior. triple-a has been a safety index in 2013 and asked just under 400 californians if they would support automated speed enforcement and found 40% would support it in neighborhood areas, -- so the public
knows that speeding is a problem and we have seen the faster the cars go, less likely somebody is able to survive a collision. another main finding was that most ase programs are led by police departments. however, in two of the more recent jurisdictions that we looked at chicago and new york, they are run by the department of transportation and also programs are stacked with a combination of in-house. so that would be the department actually reviewing the footage and looking at the cameras, and verifying violations and also contractors [speaker not understood] all of the jurisdictions except for new york city provide notice to the public about speed camera.
you will find on new york's website they cite that speeding is illegal and it's illegal everywhere. so they don't think that it's necessary to tell people where the speed cameras are going, because it's illegal and people should not be speeding. we found half of the jurisdictions fine a reduced amount compared to traditional enforcement and that most of the survey respendents the responsibility is on the registered vehicle owner. so it's not the driver, but the registered vehicle owner who would receive the ticket. often times it means it's decriminalized and it would be treated more as a parking citation. the main revenue findings -- the main revenues that we looked at cover the cost of the program. in general most direct a portion to safety improvements and even those that we surveyed that do not do that and they
problem. and also, the ase enforcement area school zones is included in the majority of jurisdictions. and most jurisdictions alert the drivers to the camera location. >> through the chair kim, ms. phillips did you look at any other cities outside of the u.s.? i think when we did our budget analyst report in february of this year, we looked at 33 cities in the united kingdom, including london, where there is a 20-year study that really validates a number of points in the slides. but did you look at cities outside of u.s.? >> as part of this work, we did not look at any outside of u.s.. the reason for that, there were so many good examples in the united states that we choose locations and jurisdictions that we thought were a bit more comparable to san francisco and for those reasons we just stuck to the united states. >> besides the 20-year data in
london, what studis were done in the u.s. and i know ms. breen showed us challenges for us in february when we did this similar analysis before i think it was before our neighborhood safety committee. i'm wondering what studies we can draw from in the united states? >> there are white papers, academic papers and the longest-running program that we looked at was washington, d.c.. they have had their program going for 15-plus years and the effectiveness that we included in the report from washington, d.c. that would show kind of longest perof periods of time and other than there are academic articles that speak to the effectiveness. >> , as well as london and other cities as strategies you only looked at the speed camera
are the same as traditional tickets and three are citations. for enforcement is for the purposes of safety and not revenue-generating technique and to show how effective it has been in other areas not just within the united states, but elsewhere and that have been used for a very long time. also to direct revenues to safety improvements and include school zones in the designated enforcement area we found that the studies that we looked at stated that the public is much more likely to support esu1 in school zones and cameras in high-priority areas where there are issues of speeding,
encrypting data to ensure privacy and requiring reports of the metrics and evaluating the effectiveness is something that we have talked about here today. and in looking at these measures and seeing how effective they are. for example, new york is doing a five-year demonstration program and at the end of the five years
including meetings with members of our own delegation to bring that joined voice. we have met with each member of san francisco's legislative delegation and i would characterize our meetings at this point, prior to the city taking official action on legislative programs as building support, answering questions, looking for the kinds of issues that we and other cites are going to immediate to be mindful of as we develop draft legislation. san josé has -- you know, they have the chair of the senate transportation committee
from san josé. san josé has adopted vision zero. los angeles has adopted vision zero. so the conversations that we're having now are really trying to build capacity on this issue and how it fits in the context of those cities that have already committed to vision zero and recognizing this will not be the single tool, but it's a tool that we need to have the state give us so we can use something that is already proven. >> it sounds like a tremendous step forward. >> yes. >> and now with vision zero growing it sounds like there is a context of people really supporting this, hopefully. >> i want to believe that is true. i feel like there is reason to be at least optimistic, and we will need you all as leaders to be part of that. it's not going to be the staff; right? so it's going to be really important that we find ways to enlist you in that effort, too. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner yee. >> just wanted to say that i
want to add more evidence to the fact that there is more interest in pedestrian safety issues. last month i was at a board meeting of the league of california cities, and so they went through the three-priorities for next year. and i think only had to mention it once about pedestrian safety to be part of their -- one of the priorities, in which by itself, it did not make -- , but in terms of one of the priorities was actually talking about infrastructure. transportation infrastructure and so forth. and we'll be saying much more and other people saying what about pedestrian safety? and it's actually part of the language for the three priorities, which i don't think last year that would have happened. >> you mean with the league of cities? >> yes. >> that is great to know. i will tell that you megan i'm on the subcommittee of the league of california cities and
sometimes when i sit in that room and represent san francisco you get a reaction. and in this case, when megan weir presented last june to the league transportation committee, there was a city council member from the city of fremont who came up you and was so inspired. they have since adopted vision zero. so i really appreciate knowing that. thank you. >> if you can let us know how specifically each of us can be helpful? >> absolutely. >> making calls or visits? >> yes. >> i know each member of the committee wants to help make it a reality or looking through a list of legislators that we're trying to target, i'm sure everyone on this board is willing to pitch in. >> thank you, really appreciate that. >> yes. and i also want to thank the controller's office for their report as well. it's actually really helpful to see how this policy is implemented throughout the country and other cities.
you know it was interesting to see how low the fines were. and also how the citation was done, whether vehicle and driver? i didn't think about how the policies are implemented and there is a lot of flexibility in how the policy can get written you and hopefully helps us make progress in sacramento. there is a lot of different ways to implement this and still get drivers to move slower in san francisco. did you want to add to that?? >> no, just again where we're at being open to the very points what should the fine be? what should the threshold be? what is palatable? >> i like the speed zone idea with a lot of schools. >> i see some nodding from commissioners farrell and yee about liking the speed zones.
okay. so see nothing further comments from committee members, we'll know open this up for public comment. we would expect walk sf to speak on the item. >> hello again, chair kim and commissioners,age deluca, the policy director with walk san francisco and we have been working closely with the mta on the campaign. we're really excited that ase has been proven in reducing crashes and deaths and we feel in order to reach our ambitious goal of vision zero in the city we need every tool available and we really want this tool to help us reach that goal and walk sf has been doing different initiative and we have a petition on our website at walksan francisco and anyone in this room can go sign it now to help the cause. we also are getting our vision
zero coalition members, the organizations to pass resolutions in support of ace d also send letters of support to their state legislators and we're also very happy to help this committee in in way possible with the ace campaign, as well as individual commissioners. so please lean on us if you need us. we urge you today to support this resolution and get us this tool we need to reach this goal. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed [ gavel ] . colleagues can we take action on this item? we have a motion to move this forward with recommendation? >> we'll take a roll-call vote. >> with recommendation. so we'll take aroll-call vote on item no. 7. >> item 7 commissioner farrell. >> aye. >> farrell aye. >> commissioner kim? >> aim ky. commissioner mar, mar absent. commissioner eyre, yee aye. >> item rests. >> thank you, and thank you for all your work on this and look forward to moving this
forward. mr. clerk, can we please call item 8. >> introduction of new items, this is an information item. >> are had will any new items? i do have one. i want to take a moment to recognize an individual who has been a leader, an initiator and i will even say a "trouble-maker." he was just here -- he was sitting here the whole meeting. when did he get up and leave? tim? oh, he left. okay. well, [laughter ] he was here -- we did have a certificate to recognize tim for his work as the vision zero co-chair along with megan weir and i know he is stepping down
as co-chair, but we wanted to thank and recognize him for his leader and say it's been a real pleasure to work with tim, even if he isn't here to hear this, he has been a real pusher and believer and certainly given me and my office a lot of ideas on how to help move vision zero forward and it's so helpful, because i don't often understand the technical aspects of the engineer and even the education and enforcement side and he has been super helpful and what i appreciate the most, he really believes in this and expediting through bureaucracy and not coming up with the reasons why we can't get it done, but really pushing on how we can. so we had a commendation for him. you i will leave it from someone from sfmta to give to him later and he can listen to our remarks at another time. so seeing no further introductions of new items, mr. clerk, can we please call the net item. >> we'll take public comment on item 8. >> so at this time we're open
up for general public comment. >> yes. this is christmas season, ho ho, inside the church of jesus christ, parishioners worship and sing and the joyful christmas songs and holy cross bearing the heavy-duties of mission of works and for husband and wife, for father and son, social leaders and followers, all holy pathway and [speaker not understood] bible teaching and instruction the law about the holiness and virtues of humanity and we start our -- the only way to change all of that back to
security is to talk about holiness and discuss virtue of humanity [speaker not understood] joyfulness for christ to come to our world again, for meditation -- for establishment of good virtue and all realistic areas to provide open mercy and holy law -- holding true in principle. god all mighty bless us all for this christmas holiday, amen, hallelujah. >> hello, for the last time i'mage from walk san francisco and i just wanted to mention
something that is a big priority for walk sf and we want to make sure keeps moving forward. with all of the development in the city we're seeing more and more projects that are intensifying their usage, but aren't subject to the requirements of the better streets plan. so parcels that move from pdr to commercial have a lot more residents and people commuting to the site than they used to. but they are not required to have the same street improvements that other uses would have through the better streets plan process. so projects are falling through the cracks and i know chair kim you and your staff have been working on trying to maybe have a legislative amendment to sort of fill the gap. so we just want to encourage that, and let you know we're really looking forward to working on that. and making sure that we get ahead of the curve, before sort of new areas intensify. we don't want to see them become high-injury corridors. so i think if we get those improvements on the ground beforehand we could really make
[ music ] [ music ] >> thank you. thank you very much. is there any other public comment for general public comment? all right, public comment is now closed. i do want to thank all of the members of the public for coming to speak. it's a really important issue citywide and always important for the subcommittee to hear feedback from our residents on the issue. mr. clerk, are there any other
>> we all know a major earthquake will eventually hit san francisco are reproerl presented san francisco is making sure we are with the public safety buildings. >> this consists of 4 consultants the police headquarters with the from 850 with a brand new fire station number 4 to serve mission bay swimming pools at office of economic workforce development in the fire station thirty. >> is the the hall of justice on bryant the new home for 2 hundred and 50 uniform and
voiven compresses we all it was opened in 19 so sociothat is a 50-year improvement as far as structure and work environment had that will be a great place to work. >> when construction began in 2011 this was with an clear goal to make sure with the big one heights the resident will will have a function police department those are the highly seismic standards it is up to operate up to 96 hours from the police department perspective that building is self-sufficient for a main made arrest in all disastrous zake ever after we will run our operational from here no matter what happens this building and the people that serve the businesses will
continue to function building is designed to meet lead goal certification and also to art installations on the campus that was designed and constructed to better sense of ability so for example, we're using solar water heaters we're also urging gray water for reuse inform flush water and rainwater for the cooling and irrigation locked on third street and mission rock is it serves the motorbike neighborhood and motorbike i moiks is a growing neighborhood and the intent of the bond to have please and fire serves to serve the community. >> hemming helping to keep the building and the stay safe was the not the only opportunity it creates many jobs with 82 bleb
businesses overall san franciscans contributed one hundred and 87 thousand hours to help to complete the project it shows the city of san francisco the elected officials and police officers and more importantly the voters that paid for the building this is what we can do with when we wrorpt this is a beacon when we need to build new extra we can trust them with the money and the plan they did a good job the san francisco public is a reminder of the importance of being presented and will continue to serve the residents for decades to come >> tuesday, december 8, 2015, is now called to order ms. casco roll call. >> ms. fewer
mr. haney ms. mendoza-mcdonnell ms. norton mr. walton ms. wynns dr. murase and ms. chin and mr. totiano. >> please join me and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> if no objections from any colleagues there are many members of the public who are here for the mission press item i'd like to move just that item 1511 south park one so immediately