Skip to main content

tv   SFCTA Vision Zero Committee 4517  SFGTV  April 9, 2017 6:00am-8:31am PDT

6:00 am
>> okay. good afternoon. this is the meeting to come to order now. regular meeting of vision zero committee for wednesday april 4, 2017. i'm commissioner norman yee and joined by aaron peskin and believe commissioners safai will join shortly. the committee clerk is steve stamose and the committee would also like to acknowledge the staff at sfgtv who record our meetings and make the transcripts available to it public online and of course the staff are gym smith and jessie larsson. mr. clerk, you have announcements? >> there are no announcements. >> okay. um, could you please
6:01 am
call item number 1. >> item 1, roll call. >> peskin, present. safai, present. yee, present. we have quorum. >> alright. please call item number 2. >> approve the minutes of december 15, 2017 meeting. this is action item. >> okay. any comments? >> i have no comment. i was not on the vision committee at the time but i have read the minutes and in so far as commissioner safai was not on there either i will not abstain as i usually do so we can get them passed and subject to public comment and move the minutes. >> any other comments? seeing none, any public comment on the item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. is there a motion? >> so moved. >> any objection?
6:02 am
>> roll call vote. >> whatever you like. >> peskin, aye. safai, aye. yee, aye. the minutes are approved. >> okay. let me have-request to take item 4 out of order and if it's okay with the committee members we'll take item 4 first before item 3. mr. clerk can you call item 4. >> san francisco silty administrator office tellmatics on city fleet performance. this is information item. >> okay. mr. zeller. good afternoon. >> good afternoon. my name is bill zeller the fleet
6:03 am
management department for the city administrators office and city wide tellmatic system administrator and asked to come inl to give a overview the system that we operate and answer any questions you might have about in regards to the vision zero program. so, basically what i'm planning to do is give you a quick overview thofe tell metic system, describe how it works, talk about the hardware, installation status of the devices in the fleet, talk about data available, the ways we use the data or could use the data, talk about the limitation squz data and reports and have q & a. if there is any part you like me to skip over i'm happy to do so. >> i have a lot of time so don't have to skip anything. >> okay. thank you, supervisor. okay, so this is just a graphic that just
6:04 am
generally-can you hear me okay? generally illustrates the way the system works. tell metic devices are on board electronic devices that plug into the computer on the vehicle that most new vehicles have. the device contains a gps reserve that receives a signal that tells it where it in space and what direction it is moving from a gps satellight located in geosynchronous orbit arounds the world. the device also takes data from the on board computer hof vehicle and uploads that data plus the gps data to the web through a secure data link. um, and the devices are-or the data is processed by the vendor and we
6:05 am
have access >> student that through the web. the system provides real-time notification should users request that. things like speeding or leaving geofences i'll talk more about those in detail in a minute, or it can produce regular reports as requested by users. we use the data in fleet management to measure things like fleet utilization, replacement planning, look into idle times and fuel use analysis so we can make the fleet more efficient. we can also use the information for diagnostic twubl codes that come off the engine and
6:06 am
schedule maintenance thmpt device smogs the vehicles every 4 hours of operations so allows us-a number of the vehicles we have installed on, we don't have to bring in for small anymore which is considerable savings in resources for us. >> is there a estimate how much savings for that piece? y >> i can get that for you, i don't have it now. >> i'm really interested in any element that saves money. >> i'll get that for you, supervisor. i want to move to the hardware in the vehicle. there are three different devices we typically see mpt the black device at the top is the basic tellmatic device we plug into just about all our vehicles. this can be plugged into the diagnostic port the vehicle. we have a lot of older vehicles in the fleet that don't have computers believe it or not and those vehicles when you put that device in you just connect to
6:07 am
the electrical system and it powerathize device up. when the device can't read a computer signal it default tooz the gps which works just fine, so there is a back up plan for each of these. the gray box in the idamal is called a assert guard, a internal battery operated device we use on trailer and off-road equipment where we don't need to track the vehicle or know information a computer on the vehicle, it basically pings once a day to let us know where the vehicle is and when the vehicle is moved it pings when the vehicle starts moving and stops moving. ping is shorthand that says hello i'm here and this is where i am. typically the pings on the system go every two minutes. they can be pinged down to 15 seconds but the air time, the subscription fee is higher for the more
6:08 am
frequent pings. the bottom box is a module that the upper device, the tellmatic device plugs into when you operate in a area that doesn't have cell phone connectivity and it uses a satellight connection. it is more expensive and the pu c uses it in the hetch hetchy area when they are out of cell phone range and have vehicles that need to be tracked. that's totally voluntary as far as whether the department wants a higher ping rate or utilize the satellight. so, next slide-basically the installation status based on the legislation passed last year that modified the administrative code we installed tellmatic devices on 4162 vehicles and pieces of
6:09 am
equipment classified as needing tellmatic services. there is 1686 law enforcement and investigative vehicles that were exempt from tell matters. there is legislation i believe supervisor yee proposed to provide that or add that device to those vehicles. we have been in contact with the police department and those departments effected by this. we have-we are working on a solution that is acceptable, which is-and once we get that proposed and tested, we'll pass on that information but we are fairly confident we can install devices on those remaining 1700 vehicles. there is another 1800 pieces of equipment considered category exempt which is a trailer or lawn mowers and things like that that don't have a reason to put this device on it. they are not cheap and there isn't a lot of reason to track the
6:10 am
vehicles. the trailers we do track or not track but have the asset guard on have a very variable equipment in there and it is emergency equipment so we need toknow where that equipment is. not we but the departments need to know where that equipment is. um, we have four categories of information we collect. position, utilization, safety and maintenance. um, basically the safety um, is um, it was not initially a driver in our decision process. it's since become a bigger issue. one of the main values here is something called the hawthorn effect when a population is aware they are being monitored they tend to-everybody tends to do things more in line with
6:11 am
their legal requirements and improves behavior basically is what it comes down to. um, tell matters tellmatics is one of many tool tooz identify unsafe driving patterns but important only used by trained administrators. it requires training to interpret the data in a way that's accurate and fair at all parties. dhr is currently developing city-wide policies and work wg supervisor yee's office on this issue. just a couple general pieces of information, the system is accurate within a radius of about 8 feet, so we are pretty sure we know where the vehicles are pretty much with the width of a lane of traffic. times are shown down to seconds. there is items called
6:12 am
geofences, i mentioned that earlier, which a virtual boundary laid out by the department and set up for a number of uses but basically tells you when a vehicle entered or left a area it is supposed to or not supposed to be in. that will trigger an alert, instantaneous alert and i'll talk about those in a minute, or compiled into a monthly report or whatever report you want. utilization we track trips, which we consider those a key on key off events. you leave the yard, go to where you are going, turn the vehicle off and that's one trip or one days use and then the second trip would be turn the vehicle on and come back. so, that's how that's defined. we also track the miles, so we know how many times the vehicle is turned on and off and how
6:13 am
far it goes in a day. we also track the hours of operation, that's not as useful a iletm at the other two but we track that. we track idling. we know on average how often vehicles in the fleet idle. idle the engine is on but not moving. the big trucks that have a power take off we can tell when power take off is engaged so the engine is running but running the power take off so don't count azideling. speeding-sorry, i skipped over fuel consumed. we need access to a computer in the vehicle. on the older vehicles we can't do fuel consumption but on the newer ones we calculate fuel use, hard breaking and hard acceleration which are safety related and operate off
6:14 am
computer data, the engine speed and speed slowing up or slowing down. speeding, again we really strongly encourage to have a trained operator when you interpret the data. we do provide some support to departments occasionally when they ask us for support on this issue to understand what exactly they are looking at when they try to look into speeding issue. currently, the speeding set point tr the city is set at 80 miles per hour. there are other options but set it as we started the program and await any guidance as far as changing that. we have other options. we can set the speed at 5, 10 or 15 miles an hour above posted speed. we run reports that and to be honest if you set at 5 miles a hour over the speed limit you
6:15 am
get so many hits it isn't something you can deal with. if you set 15 miles a hour to the speed limit the number goes down but we are looking to try-call it deal wg the big rocks first when we have people tripping 80 miles a hour we want to deal with those first and we think we should be deal wg those first once we get through those we can start looking at different players. okay. so, in maintenance, i mention ed the smog check issue. position. is there any questions on what we are monitoring? >> you know, it is one thing to know what you are monitoring and that is good too. not sure you will get to it, i don't see it in the rest the presentation, but in monitoring some of these things, what have
6:16 am
you found out? do you have enough data to do analysis whether fuel consumption has gone down or whether or not there are fewer collisions and so forth? even with the older model where you may not have data, is there a way to yust look at the consumption of fuel from the pump itself where ever you get-in other words, we know how much fuel we using overall. have you seen any decline? that's what i'm interested in is really using the data to see as you get the positive results we were hoping for. >> at this point we are in fleet management our function is get the system up and running and provide the data to the departments. we
6:17 am
are-basically it departments it is up to them how they want to utilize the data. at this point there is actionable data. we are at a stable point in the data where we know what the baseline is and need >> student start issuing policies that allow us to manage in the positive direction improving fuel economy, reducing idling, things like that. i can say there is definitely room for improvement but it isn't our function to provide that at this opponent. point. >> what would it take to get that type of information? does it have to come from legislation to ask for it or can-can you actually provide some guidance to the departments knowing that that's what i would like to see?
6:18 am
>> i would say supervisor you are bit above my pay grade. i make the data and if i'm told how we want to approach it, probably that is something the city administrator level that would propagate that to the different departments. not a area i'm well versed in so sorry i can't help you there. >> would you let naome kelly know i'll be speaking to her and asking for that analysis. i know it is early in the game in regards to your implementing the program, but it is one thing to implement it , but if we don't-it was an assumption on my part and probably people that supported this that certain things would happen and we are not going know if it is happening if we don't do an analysis. things that we are
6:19 am
getting information from other locations utilized tellmatics and some of the reports we are getting indicates there are fewer collisions, fuel consumption has gone way down, the speeding piece i find less data, but probably correlated to collisions. that's the direction i like to take it. >> i would completely agree, supervisor. i'll put in a plug for tellmatics, the data i won't say limited but finite but what we can do with the data is limited to your imagination. we have yet to answer a question we couldn't answer with the data available. >> i want to thank you for the presentation and also just acknowledge the dogged determineness of supervisor yee to spread the gospel of
6:20 am
tellmatics and you are getting close supervisor, 1700 more vehicle tooz go. >> i probably should have made a couple statements that number one, this is implementation started not that long ago so i appreciate your effort and making this happen as quickly as it has. within a year timeframe. and then the piece that you talked about, which has exempt the 1700 vehicles, you indicated that we are working on hopefully unexempting them bun there are things we have to take into consideration for these particular vehicles that the other city vehicles are not as concerned about. >> we are open to your guidance, sir. >> are you finished with your
6:21 am
presentation? >> just have two more quick slides. >> okay. why dont you finish up. >> hope i'm not taking too much time. just the way the program administered is there is departmental administrators who have pretty much all the function yz do. i wont read through them, sure you can do that, but they can only see data for their own individual departments. i'm the only person who can see all the data for all the departments and data integrity is very important and very careful how the data is set up and made available and we work closely with the city administrator's office to make sure people understand how that's going out. um, i mentioned alert and reports. alerts are real-time. somebody just sped or crossed a geofence. if you supervise said the person and kidant want
6:22 am
them to do that, you can get a e-mail or text or vice mail on your phone saying this vehicle crossed this boundary and those are really important for different departments who actually manage people, but things like-those alerts and other data are compiled into reports that are published on a regular basis however you want, daily, weekly, monthly and we keep reports for city-wide applications back to the inception of the program and we can dig out data for quite a ways back. um, and that's kind of my function. i help departments come up with these. they have access to the same data we do within their department limitations, so they can utilize it in any way they want to use it. now, i won't go over it, you have a copy of
6:23 am
the monthly report for the month of may, it dated prl april 4. this is a report we put together at the request of the city administrators office. it is a report we can put together and add more data and take data out of it, but this is a city-wide report and undifferentiated by departments so get a sense how the key performance indicators are moving going forward. since we have been distributing this or there isn't guidance how to manage you are seeing a development of a baseline that we in the future will be able to push down. and that's really all i have. if you have any questions happy- >> any questions? >> i do mpt . >> sure. >> thank you for the presentation. i just have a few questions. so, um-are
6:24 am
there-first of all, how durable is the equipment in terms of this installation, how durable have you found it to be? j >> as durable as a car. they fail time to time but not often and usually when they fail they fail spectacular. it is matter pulling it out of the vehicle. >> how many have you had to replace, do you know? >> i have to look that up. >> that is good to know if this is durable equipment in term thofz investment but it sounds like you are saying it isn't that but it is good to know. the second question is, do you see cost savings in terms of once it is installed to the vehicles overall. >> cost savings. >> cost savings to the vehicle in general or to the city. we made the investment has it
6:25 am
created cost savings and something you are measuring? >> we are not at that point. again, we haven't taken any action mpt >> i heard that. just something i want to throw out there. i think it is helpful if we are making this investment is there a cost savings. and then has this-does it effect the insurance premiums for the city? >> i believe we--i don't know the answer to the question but think we are self insured so don't know. i don't think so. >> we are self insured. >> i imagine there is still a cost associated with that, so if we do something that will decrease the probability of speeding or decrease the possibility of accidents and all those things whether we are self insured or not and maybe there is a cost savings that is something dpood to look into. >> it would be. yes, sir. >> and the last question i had,
6:26 am
have you seen again going back to the savings, but this is specific regarding maintenance. has this helped with the overall maintenance cost of the fleet? and again you haven't measured that. that seems to be one that would be one i think we would all want to know about because if you install the equipment and people pr breaking less and speeding less than repair cost maybe are going down so maybe something to measure. i understand you haven't taken the data to really start to utilize it in that way but that would be the general thinking i had to add on to what supervisor yee said. >> the system doesn't measure that necessarily but if we put the data from this system with other systems like asset works that tracks maintenance cost and started actively managing
6:27 am
things like hard acceleration, hard breaking and speeding and things like that, i think that's a very good assumption that we have to check the data. >> okay. um, thank you for your presentation. i want to see if there are public comments on this item. come on up and- >> one thing which is years ago in 2003 i don't know if you were around mr. zeller >> i wasn't, sir. >> i put the fleet management and ordinance under the administrative service department and it was spread all over the city. at the time we identified a series of problemwise individuals taking city cars home and using them for personal business and we tried to crack down on that. relative to geofencing and
6:28 am
tellmatics have you seen improvement in curbing those kinds of abuses? >> um, i can tell you i can measure it. i can tell you which vehicles go where and actually there is a function in there that you can drive the vehicle home but can't move it once it is home so you can't drive it around. again, we haven't been told which vehicles can and can't go home so i'll say we can do it, just like the other supervisor asked a question. once we are told and that is probably a good sit-down to say these are the ing things we want to measure. >> that is department by department and you provide that services? we have the technology just haven't apply td. >> weef have the technology and know how to apply it, we just need to be told what the set point is. >> that's what i meant. >> thank you. >> okay. come on up. you have two minutes. >> hello commission ers.
6:29 am
[inaudible] on staff with san francisco bicycle coalition here to express our strong support for the tellmatics legislation and thank commissioner yee insuring the technology is used effectively and expands to include the entire city fleet of vehicles. it is simple, the black box technology is just another tool to keep the streets safe. it is clear we are not making urgent progress towards vision zero and need ever tool to get us there. the first annual evaluation of the report shows how much work is already taken place to approve and test this technology for city owned vehicle jz hope to see expan to include more vehicles including law enforcement. again we thank commissioner yee's commission to vision zero and know it takes street design to enforcement to legislation such as this to get thrus. thank you for your time.
6:30 am
>> good afternoon share yee, commissioners. cathy dulukea the prauls and program manager at walk san francisco and like [inaudible] walk sf is excited to see the tellmatics program moving forward. thank you chair yee for championing this pruben technology. as mr. zeller mentioned, just knowing this technology is in the vehicle changes driver behavior, so it is a fantastic tool that right off the bat is going make our streets safer. we are excite today see what it will do in termoffs speed information and see how we can reduce speed. we want this to go into all city vehicles so we strongly support including it in police vehicles. other cities that used tellmatics in the fleet, some started in the police vehicles so it can be done. obstacles have been worked around, so thank you for using this proven technology to
6:31 am
make our streets safer. >> good afternoon, commissioner. aaron goodwin on the bah e balboa park cac. one key concern is from the tellmatic system is are we able to implement in other ways. can we deal with the sf commuter shuttle program and shuttle bus said that are idling throughout the street in san francisco? a lot of times you go outside downtown and find shuttlebuses idling waiting to come back downtown to pick up riders. key concern of that is making sure we address this as part the heat inversion aspect of heat inversion in cities for gas emissions and having a lot of cars and vehicles idling and are a city under construction and have a lot of vehicles. might be a way to look at
6:32 am
addressing how construction trucks come to the city and when they are idling at construction sites as well as moving in and out of the city. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is now closed. again, just want to close this by saying that this is only the beginning and this actually this tool that we have, the main motivation behind it is to have our streets be safer for people and to reduce collisions. the secondary impact, which is not necessarily a lesser impact is potential of cost savings in this, so hopefully the next time we have this item we'll have a better analysis of the
6:33 am
data. so, is there a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair? >> excuse me, i wanted to ask one question. this is just general maybe to staff. hearing public comment and talking about the exemption for law enforcement and some of the other vehicles, can someone-i understand he is gone but maybe someone from the ta can speak about the reasoning bethined exemption and then do we have any-- >> commissioner yee knows all about that compromise. >> the second question is, do we have any data about frime bicycle coalition or folks from walk sf or or the others, has there been accidents involving
6:34 am
pedestrians and law enforcement? not to say there isn't, it is just a general question. >> i'll try. when the original legislation was enacted it had all the vehicles in san francisco and it had to go through meeting and confer with all the different departments and the issues that law enforcement agencies raised were not answered at the time and so what i did was i weighed all those just to get these other 4,000 vehicles to get going with the promise i would follow up after november to work on what's law enforcement folk tooz see what their real concerns and work out the details and we are in the process of doing that right now. we are going to schedule
6:35 am
meet and confer to see if we move forward with the rest the vehicles. in regards to law enforcement being involved in collisions, to my recollection i don't have all the data in my head but reading the newspaper, there are times they have hit vehicles, but the nice thing about having this information is you can actually do analysis and see who ran-who did what whether they went too fast or was there a emergency at the time and so forth, and i think a good example of how this could be used was when somebody a individual citizen or person stole a police vehicle and the police department didn't know where it was. these are some of the examples where it could be useful. >> okay. thank you. >> okay. so, is there a
6:36 am
motion? do we have a motion to continue the item to call of the chair? >> so movaled. >> motion passes without objection. let me have item 3. >> item 3, vision zero amendment thooz the san francisco zeneral plan. this is information item. >> so, lily langlois, who's a planning with the planning department. >> yes. hi. good afternoon commissioners. lily lang loy with planning department. here to provide a overview of the proposed vision zero general plan amendment. joined by mike
6:37 am
hunter who is cochair of the vision task force. as you may call the legislation was before the full board january of this year and rejected and the way general plan amendments work is they go back to the planning commission. over the last few #34u7ck9s we have briefed your offices and colleagues, gone back to vision zero task force and coalition and supervisor yee requested i come here today. i'll provide a brief overview and talk about broader about the work the planning department is doing helping to achieve the larger vision zero goal. so, i think everyone in the room knows vision zero is a city hch wide goal passed as official policy in 2014 and the goal here is to create a culture that prioritizes traffic safety to insure mistakes on the roadway don't result in serious injuries or
6:38 am
death. wurging through design of streets, campaigns enforcement and change to city paums policy. so, in june 2014 the planning commission adopted a resolution in support of vision zero and outlined specific actions the planning department could take to play a larger role in this effort. one of theose actions was update the general plan. since the resolution was passed by the planning department, there is a number of specific things we have been doing internally to help achieve this broader goal. this includes flagging the hire injury corridors in the personal information database so the map is available to the public and project sponsors and staff. we have a street advisory review team which reviews streetscape plans and doing this with a extra lens for road safety.
6:39 am
updated the check list to identify when a plan is rerequire eighty-two ired and reviewedment we held trainings on the changes and procedures and work wg supervisor kim #36s office on legislation to modify the fl threshold for when street squaip improvements are required. just a quick reminder why we are updating the general plan. the general plan is the city's guiding document to shape decisions, serves for a basis for all aspect of daily life where we live and work and move across the city. the language in the general plan is provides enough specificity to provide direction and guide decisions over time. implementitation decisions in the general plan can direct the allocation of public resources and shape private development. the general plan amendments have to be adapted by the planning commission and approved by the board but xant be modified by the board. we propose to up
6:40 am
hpidate the plan for three yeez reasons. there is no language in the plan to reflect vision zero and the city is doing tremendous work and feel appropriate to reflect that erft. when we review development applications or capital improvement plans we make consistency findings with the general plan, and the third reason is this a implementitation action the resolution i just mentioned. so, we are proposing to anend transportation and urban design element to reflect the city's vision zero policy. the department is working on a effort to update the entire transition element so this ordinance is just specific to vision zero and pedestrian and bike safety. the specific changes incorporated into the amendment include a new objective around vision zero working to acheev street safety
6:41 am
for all, new objective vg a multidisciplinary approach improving safety including e. updated objective to design streets for safe and convenient walking. related to pedestrian network and key walking streets and finally mining amendments consistent with vision zero. the general plan also has two outidated maps arounds the pedestrian network and propose to update those. i just want to provide a little context and history how we got to this point. 2010 the city receive adgrant for the walk first projectfunded by office of traffic safety and as parlt of the effort we developed a framework how the city prioritize pedestrian improvementsism at the time we drafted the plan policy squz did city-wide out preach. 2014
6:42 am
the commission passed the resolution saying we update the general plan. from january until june of last year we conducted outreach to the pedestrian safety advisory committee, vision zero taskfore, bike coalition, walk sf and work wg sfmta and public health. july of last year the planning commission initiated the amendments and october they were approved and recommend today the board. january the legislation was rejected and done additional outreach over the last few months. next thursday we will return to the planning commission to have them initiate the amendments and included language by request to supervisor peskin to make sure we engage communities in the design oef our-as we develop sfreet scape plans and require language when [inaudible] appropriate. we anticipate the legislation will return to the board probably in the summer. that concludes my
6:43 am
presentation and happy to answer any questions. >> thanks for your presentation and thanks for your patience with the board. not only this board but the board of sfr visors in looking at the issues that we were concerned about. colleagues do you have any questions? >> i do. >> commissioner safai t. >> thank you. i just have a one or two questions. i'm look at sth proposed map of key walking streets and you had your existing map on the slide. so those are intended to be different >> the two map ozthen laft are in the general plan and we propose to replace those with the one on the right. >> i'm curious because i'm looking at-particularly in my district it looks fairly similar, but there is one area
6:44 am
that is shared between myself and supervisor yee, which is hallow way avenue and wonder why that was taking out in termoffs a pedestrian walkway. you have a idea what the process was? i'm trying to understand that better and the impablth. >> the way the map on the right was developed is the policy-these are the streets we see people walking or would walk if the conditions were better and generated based on a number of factors. we have density of land use particularly school squz institutions. the neighborhood commercial corridors, locations where we see high transit ridership, locations adjacent to schools. but it is largely the commercial corridors. >> but i'm just wondering what was the criteria for taking things out because just that one-not to zero in and nit-pick but that is a main corridor for
6:45 am
a lot of people to walk to san francisco state and so it is constantly traveled by car squz pedestrians and also-there are speed bumps put in, traffic calming put in so just jumped out why that was taken out. is it too late to adjust that? you already presented to the planning commission? >> no we will be there thursday so can look at hollow way. >> i think that is a good idea. i see a constituent nodding his head. do you agree? it might be worthwhile to at it back. >> i'm glad we are having the hearing before it goes back to the planning commission, this is good. >> commissioner peskin do you have anything? >> no, i just appreciate that-i think we are reluctant when we rejected the general plan
6:46 am
amendment. i was on the land use committee that heard it and sent to full board with a little trepidation in my case because i heard from constituents particularly in chinatown relative to policy 25.5 and we kind of agreed we would let it move forward and we would fix it later, but then supervisor yee and 9 of my colleagues saw fit to reject it, so have you reached out to those folks who express- >> i talk today him after the hearing. >> have you shown them the new language because i haven't seen the new language. i want to make sure everyone going into this in so far this is the first general plan amendment the board rejected in a long time everybody goes in happy. >> so, the policy [inaudible] confirmed it represents the language that you had requested. >> perfect. >> so, i have gone over the
6:47 am
newest version and the piece that still feels like it could use some strengthening is policy 26.2, prioritize funding for pedestrian safety programs improvements and high injury locations. i guess i don't have a argument-i'm not say ing take away from that, but what i'm finding out in regard to that policy we have been utilizing in the last year or so is that it ignores certain other neighborhood corridors or other corridors that seem to be less dangerous and then when i looked at places like
6:48 am
monterey boulevard and valdez in the two or three months span one person was killed with one collision and another serious injured with head injuries in another collision. have you looked at-that seemed like a high priority corridor mainly because just a few people that are crossing the street. my argument has been that you can't just look at places where a thousand people crossing every hour and probably see more frequency of collisions. if you have a thousand persons crossing one intersection in a day and you have a certain number of collisions there, and then you take a intersection like valdez and monterey with 10 people crossing every day and yet in the few months
6:49 am
period you had two people being hit and he wouldn't show up. somehow we have to put language in there to take those things into consideration prioritizing some the funding to deal with those type of situations. so, i don't know if you have any language you could put in there? >> i think the-since vision zero was adopted as city policy the direction that the city has been moving in terms of implementitation is prioritizing safety improvements on the high injury network. i think that's not to say other improvements cannot happen city-wide so there are other policies in here that talk about prioritizing streetscape improvements and programs and imp lmentitation that will happen in other part of the city but will let marry
6:50 am
hupter from the sfmta speak directly to this. >> i want to say, maybe what i'm asking is we change the definition in how we define those high priorities because we are using frequency of incident where there are collisions without taking into consideration density. so, like anything in life with numbers you can approach it in very different ways and i'm indicating there is a flaw and just using one formula to figure what is high priority area. >> um, so it is one tool we use. it is a map we continuely show for prioritizing engineering and programs
6:51 am
education enforcement but it is just one tool. in the action strategy exstates that we the high injury network but also do improvements city-wide recognizing that the high injury network cap schred about 70 percent. to get to zero we need to cover the other 30 percent so that is articulated in the action strategy that we do improvements off the high injury network whether it is you know, city-wide enforcement or vision zero. we had been in touch with your office about modifying this particular policy and expanding it to read city-wide improvements, so we are happy to include that language to make clear why we are using the high injury network as a critical rule to prioritize resources we do safety improvements city-wide.
6:52 am
i also note while the policy is static it says high injury network, the map does change that every couple years when we have new data we can update the high injury network to reflect any changes in how the number of severe and fatal collisions are happening around the city. >> i appreciate that you're trying to include that language, i just want to look at-it just wasn't-i don't have any alternative language to give you, but looking at it it didn't feel that strong to me. i don't know how else to-how you would state it. i'm hoping that in the next few days you am up with other language, maybe could make a bigger statement about those type of situations. >> one other thing that i'll remind the group, that in the
6:53 am
action strategy we talked to your office about this is predictive modeling. you mentioned density, so something we are moving toward to incorporate more the predictive modeling opportunities to get at what and have been describing. >> i really appreciate because for the west side the city the one model that is being used is not really always the best. commissioner safai. >> thank you. through the chair, i had a question regarding specifically in this conversation with regard to the amendment to the general plan. i know the vision zero coalition members submitted letters with their recommendations to improve the plan with the amendments and one item in particular that's really important to us and know it is also important to supervisor yee based on his backgrown is the strategies to improve streets around schools.
6:54 am
we have a lot of pre-school, elementary school, high school, we have a tremendous amount of schools in our district in particular and being a apparent of young children at two different locations in the morning in potrero hill and mission and there is a constant conjugz of cars and pedestrians so want td know what type of work is being included in this or language is included in this to thinkset about the safety around schools or is there? >> in the general plan or-yeah >> is there a section or conversation about this? >> there isn't specific language around that, but it's sort of referenced in the map of key walking streets because of the map of key walking streets was developed and schools was a criteria so a lot of streets selected are adjacent to school and there is a policy saying priortaz safety
6:55 am
improvements on those corridors. >> thank you. >> okay. are there public comments on this item? come on up. take your time. >> so, i've got a few comments and spent about a year and a half fighting the situation what is going on with the drivers not yielding. i have been on the last 6 weeks of crushes. i had the same experience of driver slamming into me screaming and shouting telling me to get out of the way, driving around me and pointing and laughing. what you are doing isn't working. the media covered this as well
6:56 am
because they probably coming from within. i had 5 police officers in three cars in the past 6 months that haven't yielded to me. they thought it was okay to drive around me and thought they were completely fine by saying to me specifically, we are going to drive around you or we thought you were near the edge of the curb when i wasn't, i was 3 quarters a way in. i'm in the richmond, spoken to the police and scheduled to go on a ride along, also scheduled on a sting because if the police dont know what they areic looing out for because they don't know what they yield to, that means they believe they are above the law so that is big problem because you look at [inaudible] citations a month which is 102,000 citations per year and if the police are not looking out and doing their job and being retrained that you do not cross over the line when somebody is crossing the street, if you are in the car you do not move until the person crossed. sure those
6:57 am
citations would probably triple. you got to take into account the police are not yielding because they don't know the law, they create a bad example for drivers, you now got-i have spoken to [inaudible] completely agrees with along with captain [inaudible] and your office and have been conversation squz 50,000 more drivers on the road. [inaudible] uber. their drivers are wanting to get cash coming in so they drive fast. i have been in the car before and the speeding ahead. >> thank you very much. >> i have a big problem. can i say quickly thrrks is a solution. get san francisco to get vision zero to stop having all these meetings and maps, put billbords >> thank you very much. your time is up. next, please.
6:58 am
>> ma'am, your time is done. we have to give everyone the same time. >> is there somebody pressing the light back there. hold on. angela can you-and we're back. >> okay, continue. >> thank you. cac and sf tomorrow. i thank the supervisors for acknowledging the issue about transit safety in our dist rblths. the map does miss a lot of major streets and people would be walking more on the streets if they were safe and well lighted and access to public transtd that got them downtown in a significant short amount of time. some the corridors not highlighted, silver avenue, ocean avenue and extension, hollow way was mentioned but also other streets on the southwest and southeast
6:59 am
corridors where a lot of density will occur. how do we improve the safety in the areas not just in the downtown to incent vise walking and making sure it is safe? part of the principles are outlined about building bet squr safer street. that should include sidewalk squz traffic island making sure the sidewalks are safe and connect the places where people are try tog go and transfer. educate the public on traffic safety. there were great examples and can put this on the overhead for a second. it is from vision sf. i can show it or hands it. this is a flier given out. these can be easily put. this is a bicycle coalition flier. these can be put in muni clear channel stalls so people actually can see it. it is translated in the bike coalition, may may update it are for you in the
7:00 am
future so these thing cz be put--these things are improvements that can occur with the vision sf program. the last thing is adopting policy changes that save lives. once again that is making sure we have the connections even if from a platform to the sidewalk near a school and mentioned this with supervisor yee about different ideas done and implemented sump as painting or toning the sidewalk at platforms especially at transpor takez transfer points so people slow down significantly at the places where people try to board and cross. >> good afternoon again chair yee, commissionersism cathy dulukea policy and program director of walk s.. walk sf is pleased to see vision zero
7:01 am
incorporated into city policy documents. it is necessary for us to get to zero that if vision zero approach is woven through all the city's work so really excited to see thishaening. i'm excited marry talked about predictive modeling. walk sf is encouraging the silty to expands how it looks at and designate streets that need improvalments because crashs happen throughout the city and then we rush to fix a intersection where someone was hit and killed but not looking at it before so the city i think is getting better taking knowledge from community members. they will do predictive modeling and can keep work wg them to refine the methods for targeting locations. all of that is happening in the backgrounds but think moving forward with this change for the general plan is important and i think what is poncht which we'll talk about later is the vision zero action strategy because that document is what is really going to help us to get to
7:02 am
vision zero and have the specifics, so for now general plan amendments are great. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comments on the item? seeing none, public comment is closed. a motion to- >> it's a information item . >> okay. the item is closeed. let's go to item 5. >> item 5, recommend supporting a resolution urging the california state legislature to amend the california vehicle and public utilities codes to enable local jirs dictions to permit, conduct and enforcement and access trip data for transportation network companies. action item. >> good afternoon. i dopet know if chair peskin would like to introduce the item, and this is a belt and sus spender production. the board of supervisors passed something all most identical to this yesterday, but i thought it was also important that in our
7:03 am
other incarnation as the conte transportation authority that we do that as well. i'm very pleased that the mayor's administration is on board with this policy too and love to hear from our staff as well as kate torn from the sfmta. i think part of getting a handle on uber and lyft and transportation network companies starts with having data and i dont think anybody can be against that no matter how powerful uber may be and how many votes they might be able to rustal up in sacramento. with that i will turn it over to staff but want to thank my colleagues voting for this yesterday unanl msly at the full board. >> that is great flews. news. mta have been working
7:04 am
together with the deputy for technology data and analysis. understanding the first step is to quantify the impacts positive and negative on the streets in termoffs conjugz, safety, equity access and slew of policy areas. the first focus of the ruzlution requesting data from california pu c which receives monthly reports from lyft and urber so that is topic of the resolution. there are other asspects less reported in the news. want to highlight the request for the delegation of some of that authority from the state to the local governments who are interested in permitting and enforcing these services. let me go ahead with this introduction and introduce kate. >> good afternoon, kate 29 kreckter of taxi and accessible services with sfmta. thank you for inviting to provide context. i'll keep it brief
7:05 am
but happy to answer any questions. this is certainly an area of concern for the sfmta and certainly accessing the trip reports that are currently required by sth california public utilities commission would be very helpful to our role in managing the streets of san francisco and there are reports required on accessibility, on the number of drivers completing their training courses, the service by zip code, driver violation jz suspensions, annual report on hours and miles logged by drivers and this is very rich data and we can see in new york city where [inaudible] required to provide this type of data, the type of report that can be then generated and the understanding of the vehicle miles traveled on the streets. i think that's a really good model for san francisco. in
7:06 am
new york city there is one entity the taxi and limo zeen commission has taxi, limoes and tnc type service and with that they have similar requirements and they have data reporting requirements and if you have not read the bruce shaller report in new york sit a i rementd you read it. it is pretty eye opening and some of the data shows that there is 600 million miles of-600 million miles added to the streets in mew york city. again, this is not san francisco, but it gives us a idea the impact in another dense city. tnc tranlz ported 15 million passengers per month in new york city so with that type of data we can get a understanding of the impact on roadways, congestion and safety
7:07 am
and disability access. we know there has been a impact on the sfmta provided service through our paratransit program, the wheelchair accessible ramp taxi program has seen decline in the range of 40 to 50 percent in passengers so had a huge impact on one side of the street and like to see are the trips taken up by tnc's or not. are wheelchair users specifically not having access to the same level of on demand service as those without-who don't use wheelchairs so these are important areas we are looking at rks also in terms of vision zero, some the really important items we are looking at relate to the maximum drive time. we have seen a number of recent newspaper articles about uber and lyft drivers, one, driving
7:08 am
from long distances to work in san francisco and driving 18, 19 hours so we are concern td about that. there is a state law on the book regarding maximum drive time and like to see the cpu c enforcing that, or being able to enforce at the local level per the resolution and i have been looking at a audit of the cpu c and transportation enforcement branch and have 37 staff total for the number of permits they issue. i don't think they could ever adequately cover all the enforcement activities that would be needed so they may appreciate support from the local level. >> isn't that the same pu c that found that sharing this information that is provided to them-sharing this information with the public isn't in the
7:09 am
publics interest? >> thereat is the same pcu c so one would think support enforcement support at the local level would be appreciated. >> i realize you don't work the fr the state but how can a public agency not devulvpublic information to the public? this is a rhetorical question. it is mind-boggling. >> it has been certainly a area of frustration all around that here we are tasked with you know providing safe transportation in our streets safe and movement of goods and servicess through san francisco and yet this massive new transportation service that's operating on our streets and that has local impacts that we really don't have one-people say how many tnc drivers are operating now and how many trips or have a complaipt who
7:10 am
do i go to. it is always-i found channels but it is very challenging and ta received a number of complaint and pleev a number of constituent are very concern would the congestion and on street behaviors. >> i have a specific question since you are our local representative on that industry, have you had your attorneys try to do information requests? it doesn't make sense to me either. have you asked to try to sunshine that information? >> they are not under the same sunshine obligations so there is pu c-someone will throw me a lifeline with the citation but they are not obligated in the same way. we have a government agency in the state that can withhold public information? it is written into our constitution?
7:11 am
>> supervisor-in the resolution on page 21 of the packet page 1 out of 4 of the text the resolution, we sited some of the responses from the pu c staff. they cited denying the request from the sfmta and our agency cited required tnc to provide reports to safety and enforcement division documenting the operational data. the requirement is file the reports confidentially and are in phase two of a process of rule making set a few years ago. citeing that was the agreement at the time they say that the agreement is the reports are filed confidentialty to the pu c and further cite the pu c provisions of the california evidence code that authorize the commission to refuse to
7:12 am
disclose information if diz closure is against public interest andstaff memorandum stated the commissioned preserving confudinchality. >> my question is different that than going to commission and staff. my question is have you asked your city attorney to file and take them to court? >> no, woo haven't yet. >> that is my specific question. >> no. >> if they are citeing the code in the whauv you just said >> california evident code. >> the california evident code, it is the commission citeing the law they must have their attorney apine on their behalf, have we asked our city attorney who is very effective taking people to court-why are we not taking them to court? >> we have discussed that and we have a lot of discussions on various aspects of this and the
7:13 am
data piece is a topic of discussion and at this point there is pu c code that allows them to not make that information available. >> have you had discussions with your attorneys? >> correct. >> so they have given writ ten opinions saying it would be unsuccessful. >> verbal. not that we would be unsuccessful and challenging but that we discussed the topic generally and that there is-they pointed to the pu c code that allows them to do that. >> i dont know about my other commissioners but think that sound like it is ripe for a challenge. >> i guess the question i have is who-is it the pu c state commission that i guess codifys the codes or state legislators? >> we believe the commission is
7:14 am
considering closing the phase 2 of rule making and moving to stage 3 so the opportunity is advocate for different rules in phase 3. so the resolution says seek public hearing on the basing of the claim and in favor the tnc over local jurisdiction. in the phase two making and push for phase 3. >> commissioner peskin >> i appreciate commissioner safais notion mpt it is worth looking at for no other reason to get their attention. the other way going about it, the 31st of the resolution asking the state legislator to tell the pu c to cut this nonsense out and share what should be public information so we can make our streets safer and less congested. this is out of some kind of kafka novel. >> access to data is what we talked about la and oakland and
7:15 am
other cities we have engaged on this very topic and think there is certainly a lot of appetite to see the data and get a undering especially in the context of vision zero and congestion and environmental concerns. >> let's be clear, uber has a remarkable amount of power in sacramento. that is how we ended up with the pu c preemption we have to grapple with every day rendering us powerless as the scorj gets worse and worse. we can't cap the number of vehicles-i hear this every day in different ways and we just don't- >> you made that clear. let's go to public comment. any public comment on this? >> good afternoon
7:16 am
commissioners. charles decharge a community organize with san francisco bike coalitionism we support the resolution to amend california vehicle and public utilities code to enable to correct data from transportation network companies. issues with uber and lyft have risen to the top complaint from members. i especially hear every week or day about the many ways the tnc compromise the safety of people walking and biking. a few things as see agdriver pulling in a busy bike lane and seeing a uber or lyft sticker while biking. you have it support of 10 thousand plus members to regulate tnc and believe data collection is the first step. troubles showing lyft and uber add 45 thousand more car tooz the streets. we need afford ways to get around. if we get to zero we need to prioritize
7:17 am
biking walking to get around the city. look forwardwork wg the commissioners to work locally and get the taenz of the state legislators. wlaurfb the resolution we are in strong belief the impact needs to effect companies them sevl jz not individual drivers. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? >> hi again. just wanted to express walk sf strong support for the resolution. thank you commissioner peskin pushing this forward. we know the more vehicles on the streets the more dangerous it is for people walking on our streets. so, this information will help make the streets safer so thank you. >> okay. >> one other thing i like to mention is the accessibility component. when i see google buses and shuttle buses or the
7:18 am
bus systems blocking access, hand y cap accessibility becomes difficulty getting from a station to or on to the bus and i think a lot of the buses don't have adequate hanny cap and ada required accessibility to get into them. whether they are shuttle buses they need to conform or a scooter or walker they should have and provide such services. >> thank you. any other public comments on this. ? seeing none public comment is closed. commissioner peskin would you mike to make a motion? >> i would like to-this would serve-we are now a committee. this is the only remaining committee of the transportation authority so i would like to recommend this to the full transportation authority commission for hearing on april the 11th. >> okay. any objection? seeing none, the motion passes.
7:19 am
let's go to item number 6. >> item 6, overall vision zeer oaf progress report. this is information item. >> i want to say that in the-because we are getting behind in the schedule if you can highlight since we have a written report. just highlights. thank you. >> absolutely. my name is luis montoya at the mta. we oversee the bike and pudist pedestrian safety work. this is just a overview of the full report that was included in your packet. we will give the highlights today but want to take this out of order since ab 342 automated speed enforcement before the legislator is a timely matter and want to
7:20 am
invite kate vene up. >> kate, director of government affair. since the last meeting and talking about this overtwo years and beyaunds. it is a fundamental action item. february after a lot of work with stail stakeholders in the 6 months leading up assembly member chiu introduced. it is over 8 years since there is legislation that will allow automated speed enforcement. we have a huge battle. the bill is set in prifenacy and consumer protection on april 18 and assuming it passes out of committee it will go to assembly transportation on the 24th. certainly can talk btd the deep dive with many stakeholders. we would not bow here without the support the advocates with us and leading us and your leadership. it has been the difference maker and partners at public health. just the doimation and the fact
7:21 am
we are still fundamentally battling to make the case speed is a problem. we have not won the battle. happy to share anymore details off line or here but recognize thg time and other items i will stop. >> okay. thank you for the update and you know, i just want to make the public aware that the city leader ship the mayor, the board of supervisors and ta commissioners have strongly supported this effort of ab 342 and yp to also give a shout out to families for safe streets going up to sacramento and testifying. i'm sure their testimonys have a strong impact. >> yes, thank you for that. it is amazing to have their engagement. thank you. >> that you thank you. >> [inaudible] department of
7:22 am
public health. i'm filling in for leilani schwarcz who is out sick. just looking at the first slide we had 30 fatalities in 2016 compared to 31 in 2015, 31, 2014. so we are relatively flat since vision zero started. people walking are still most impacted so 50 percent of our fatalities were pedestrians. we have seen a slight reduction in the number of pedestrians killed in 2016, 4 lessism reduction in motorcycle, however we have seen increase in drivers and passengers killed. in particular we had a quigz cligz where three people were killed at once. taking the broad sense nation wide there is a 14 percent increase in fatalities.
7:23 am
the fact we are relatively flat we haven't made much progress number wise. the high injury network still accounts for a large percentage of fatalities. saw 63 percent of fatalities on the high injury network so predictive where the thengs are occurring, where the fatalities occurring. along with 30 percent of fatalities in a mtc concern. these are low income communities in san francisco. finally, seniors are disproportionately effected by fatalities, so 44 percent of all traffic fatalities in 2016 were people 65 and older and goes up to 80 percent age 60 and older. men are still vastly over represented so 77 percent of traffic fatalities
7:24 am
were men, which is what we see nation wide. and then primary collision factor in san francisco red light running recollect failure to yield to pedestrians and unsafe speed. any questions? >> what do you attribute the 77 percent of males to? are we dumber or what? >> i guess, i don't know. [laughter]. men typically engage in more risky behaviors which is my guess. more likely to ride motorcycle and more likely to die if you are in a collision in a motorcycle. thank you. >> uh-huh. >> so, what we are left is the key question is what are we doing about it? we are have a high number of people dying on our streets so vision zero was
7:25 am
adopted in 2014 shortly there after we came windup a two year action strategy we carried out and about to embark on the second two year action strategy. we work would 17 city departments to understand what was everybody doing. we had great participation from police department and public heth helt kwr planning and pubic public works and city an ad mip strairt. what we know is working is enforcement is up and that is improving safety on the streets. we had a tremendous effort to get the word out about vision zero, i'll talk about in a second item today and we have been making great strides redesigning the streets. we know we need to do more of all those things, but those are things we think are going well. challenges we tone to face though are as devon pointed out
7:26 am
that minority communities are senior citizens are disproportionately effected by the traffic violence. the demo graphics and where you live shouldn't affect how your safety on the street and we know we need to domore about that. that comes down to the corridors we select for implementing the safety measures which is already atomic of discussion and how we reach out to the communities to understand what they need are and their perceptions of what is a appropriate design for the street and how we focus our resources. all those things are going to be worked on moving forward. we also mentioned that san francisco is growing and that we have a booming economy. more people walking and biking so scr a challenge of more actavety on the streets and yet trying to get to zero for fatalities so know we have to harness that development to make sure those building sites and streets build in pedestrian safety and
7:27 am
safety infrastructure and also as others have pointed out we dopet just wait for collisions to happen before we make an investment and identify areas growing in the city where we know we will have more activity and proactively making change tooz the street design and our policies. so, moving on-another one of our initiatives undersition zero has been the priority projects. this is just a snapshop of our site where we track the project that range from education efforts, to safety improvements on the streets and will get a update on those today but want to point out to the public they are available on the website for tracking. in the past few months we had a number of key milestones for traffic signal projects. complete streets project on
7:28 am
palou and of course we did-making progress on automated speed enforcement. a list of upcoming milestones. it is great to note the pedestrian count down signals that will go in across town, but especially on a lot of high injury network corridors where we see people walk and get hit. impruchments at mission trumble and others on mission street. bulbouts on sutter street and completion of signals and curb design that will set the stage for [inaudible] this is just a overview of the mayor's executive director issued in august 2016 where the mayor issued some specific points for us-13 points to improval on how to deliver vision zireoism in
7:29 am
the packet there were update said for each. many touched on today by other presenters but i want to call attention to had fact we are approaching a mile stone set in the executive director for three bikeway projects in 9 months so that comes up in may and we have just about completed two the 3 and the third we plan to take to the board shortly and we do plan meeting that objective. that's all i have for this item. >> i realize this is at the end year 3 and i'm delighted that to the extent anybody can be delighted about death that we are flat, but you think we would start to see a little bit of a diminishing number of
7:30 am
pedestrian fatalities as these get rolled out. do you have any guesses why we are not seeing that? is it because we continue to add more cars and more congestion at the same time we add the improvement snz >> we do think it is that. nationally the nation is growing, the economy is growing and see so we see crashs up 10 perlt nationally and also up in the state of california so one can look at a stay flat in san francisco as somewhat a positive indicator. the other is we didn't get into a lot of detail the different modes of people dying on our streets and did actually have the motorcycle collision jz there were a couple of i think multiple died in single vehicle collisions. a car flipped in soma after a police chase so there are events that were driving the numbers there, but as we dive into the the numbers we hope to see severe
7:31 am
collisions especially with people walking going down. we haven't quite finish tracking the numbers for 2016 but hope to see progress there and will continue to report on that. >> thank you. any public comments on this issue? two minute deadlines. >> so, we have-[inaudible] there isn't anything about promoting the issue about drivers. i believe the [inaudible] about the fines that drivers will get which makes a severe warning. >> this isn't a back and forth situation here, so you want to make comments, go ahead. >> basically the rest the country is at 14 percent of citizen death from drivers not
7:32 am
yielding but san francisco it is 64 percent. we are 4 times higher than the rest the city so want to know specifically [inaudible] amazing maps when we should do billbords so drivers know if you see a sign you will get fined if you cros ovthe line. >> next. >> good afternoon commissioners. richard rothman and represent district 1 on the park and open space advisory committee. the planning commission finished a study about issues in the richmond and 76 percent of the richmond district residents walked to golden gate park and 74 percent feel unsafe walking to the park. with speed humps coming
7:33 am
in and proposed 15 miles a hour in golden gate park it will just make fulton street faster. i look on the chart, education combined with enforcement, i have never seen any education on fulton street and as far as enforcement, i all most goot hit by a car a few weeks ago and called richmond station and said where are the motorcycle cops? they are on other assignments. i mentioned this before, the only way to slow traffic is cops and if they are not there it wont happen. you should have a hearing about the controllers report dated 10-23-16. mta needs to make changes and i think have bin rosenfield make the changes. there are no appeals for stop signs and cross walks so mr. mcguires staff makes a decision and if
7:34 am
they say no there is no public comment. i dont know why they won't put cross walks on avenue block on fumenten street. cross walks make it safer and you can't appeal it, if the staff says no there is no appeal to it. the board of supervisors needs to take more control of sfmta like a did before. thank you. >> i want to support what the prior gentlemen said. walk first and complete design of intersection is what is critical. we submitted with supervisor norman yees budget that restripe and relook at all the different intersections especially at high corridor area, school crossings and that isn't implemented to my knowledge. i think they are still working on the final version of it for ocean avenue. i think there will be 10 to 12
7:35 am
intersections about this is about transit equity city wide. if we look at the ada implementitation on all cornings throughout the city it is just as simple how to do something low scale not always using technology, using advertisement whether on a bulletin board or use painting of cross walks making sure they are adequately striped when construction occurs and can so longer see the line and striping. the sign done by vision zero sf if you hit someone while driving 5 miles over the limit you are all most twice as likely to kill. stick to the limit. very simple slogan, simple signage implemented and placed throughout the city. if we really implement things we don't always have to wait for technology to save the day, i think we can look at low key, low technology solutions that will solve some of the high incident concerns. >> thank you. cathy, you want to come up?
7:36 am
>> good afternoon, chair yee. cathy deluke aand policy and program director of walk sf. here to talk about the vision zero action strategy which i'm surprised isn't higher up on the agenda. it is the main policy document that guides our vision zero work in the city. so, i want to talk about that. i want to recognize all the hard work the city put into vision zero, the heart and dedication. unfoch notly that isn't enough to get to zero. we haven't seen any movement in the past 3 years on severe and fatal collisions. going forward all the city vision zero efforts have to be laser focused and unfonchinately the new strategy is more like a butter knife than a laser. it spreads out the city efforts rather than focus them so the city can bree successful. the vision zero coalition analyzed the document and found 5 areas where we feel like it needs serious improvement and
7:37 am
requested a meeting with city leaders to discus the concerns. we feem the primary focus should be building safety streets. the basis of vision zero is having a transportation system that is forgivering and knes humans make mistakes but doesn't let humans die. the action strategy should focus on strategies that are the most effective at reducing crashs. third, all of the items thip strategy should be specific enough to be measurable. fourth, the strategies should make sure that vision zero enforcement narrowly focuses on the top, very top collision factors. number 5, the current action strategy need to be not a stand alone document. have the previous action strategy and in a context of 10 year strategic plan. we know the city can reach zero and look forward work wg you to
7:38 am
help get there. thank you. >> hello commission rs. suvolcanoa blide from the sf bike coalition. in lightf the slow progress toward the goal by 2024 we support walk sf and rest of vision zero coalition asking the new action strategy be more focused and robust than the previous two year action strategy. the prime or focus should be safe streets using priveen engineering solutions. 10 of the 29 are the most effective reducing injury crashs accord toog the sfmta and department of public health. 7 years remaining we should focus on actions proven to make a impact. in addition, the new strategy should review the previous vision zero two year action strategy and include a 10 year plan for achieving vision zero. thank you commissioners for continuing your attention on vision zero and mayor ed lees
7:39 am
executive director on bike and pedestrian safety. >> god afternoon commissioners. my name is catty ludel, a part of the vision zero coalition, the president of the south beach rincon beach neighborhood association. we are a member of the coalition and part the rincon hill cbd. i'm here because i have read through this strategy. it is a good one, but it is just a beginning. what it really lacks is specificity, so as cathy deluca mentioned we need to zero in. a lot the things in here are just what i call loosey goosy, just sentence and don'ts have goals and not specific and don't tell who they will target. 2ndly, i just want to mention that the police, the focus on the 5 we need to keep it to 5 or eve n
7:40 am
fewer. we don't want to expand in any kind of good sense situation. you know that the more things you try to focus on, the more things row go away from so want to really focus on the 5 or focus on the 2 or 3 things to make sure that we really look at vision zero. lastly, i want to support cathy deluca with a request to meet with city leaders to look at this document. i personally have a lot of suggestions on how it can get more specific so looking for withered forward to doing that. thank you. >> thank you. >> hi, thanks. marti martinez with the safe routes to school nalths partnership so a national organization but our northern california region is part the san francisco
7:41 am
coalition cathy deluca and walk sf were talking about and a resident of district 8. we recently completed a scan of vision zero policies arond thecountry and i know san francisco is one out of the gate and it is great policy and held it up as a model but as we have done the national scan we found san francisco is significantly far behind for specificity and maybe because other cities that came on later were able to build off what we did here, but i do think the update to the action plan is a great opportunity to add specificity to continue to be held up as a model so we join that letter cathy deluca mentioned and look forward continuing the work with the city on that. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon. ellis roger jz vice president of south beach mission bay rincon association. a lot of neighborhoods in there so
7:42 am
doubling up our representation. i'm here to at and reinforce the vision zero coalition list of requests and wisdom that cathy deluca enumerated for you. this is a really wide-spread coalition. it was less than pleasing to see the coalition cited as a copartticipant in this action strategy when infact we were not allowed to review it before it was released and signed off. so, it is very important. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. i want to say, can i ask a question about the straltagys strategies plan? i don't recall, but we might have had a discussion here on this particular committee on this-did we have this in the past? >> yes, in december i think we
7:43 am
gave a bit of a preview and also had meetings with- >> before holiday mode? >> 15th. >> so i don't remember it. what is the procedures at this point? are we adopting those plans at this point or how does it work? >> this is a two year action strategy that was endorsed by the heads of 17 city departments and so we work together with staff in order to develop a strategy and then they by signature directed their staff to per view. >> since december 15 were there updates? >> yes. >> you know, i think this is a important document and i feel like we haven't had the opportunity to look at it. it
7:44 am
all most feels like it should go to the whole ta board for discussion, but i'll talk to chair peskin about this and whether it should go to full board or assist and give a better idea of the differences or changes and whether or not we can provide input and maybe we have more public comments at that point. or, we could have a meeting of the committee on this and have discussion but i don't want to wait three mupths to have that so may have a special meeting and i'll talk to executive director tilly chang. >> thank you. >> so, i want to close this information item, but before i close i want to say that we kind of skipped through or didn't really talk about the
7:45 am
education piece that much and you know, for our next meeting i want to make sure we have emphasis on that to give a better update. okay? any other comment s? let's go to item number 7. >> item 7, update on safety improvements, to high-injury corridors. this is information item. >> so, this informational item and it's been asked for by request from commissioner safai, so would you like to go ahead and read the discussion? >> yes, thank you, chair yee. so, the reason we called this was because since being in office for the last 85 days we had just in march alone we had three pedestrian accidents and we had one fatality at mission and neigh street in my district. around a week later
7:46 am
a students on the way to san francisco community school was hit in a cross-walk. thankfully she survived. and two cars were in a major accident on mount vernon. mission street was originally identified as a high injury corridor in 2011 and recently just after that time of the pedestrian hit in the excelsior in supervisor yee pfs district the student hit on monterey boulevard on the way to school as well. that goes back to my question of safety around schools and improvements on the high injury corridor. the general sense from a lot of constituents and feedback i have gotten is since it is 2017 there is a lot of discussion about traffic safety and
7:47 am
traffic calming but it seems the southern neighborhoods in san francisco haven't gotten significant improvements for engineering and safety. so i want to try to understand now if you look that reports it says that all most every single arterial roadway in our district is classified as a high injury corridor. i want to understand what is implemented in other areas of the city to replicate the work that we have done through muni forward and sfmta and other project said to begin to move on this because there is a lot of frustration in my district and know it is felt in the public comments. i like to recognize supervisor yee who dedicated many year advocated for traffic safety first on the board of education and now for his leadership on the board so thank you commission and supervisor yee. i want to also recognize supervisorgeny kim for her work on pedestrian safety and the work she has done on leading the
7:48 am
conversation around vision zero city-wide and thank you sfmta and ta staff and department of public health preparing the report. i like to hear report and have follow up questions after that. >> thank you. once again luis montoya from the mta. as you mentioned supervisor we came prepared to speak about invesment in creating safer streets since vision zeery started in 2014. we also want to talk about the future investments so you get a sense of the whole range of what we have planned and then also touch on some of the education and outreach in tandem with engineering efts. so, when vision zero was adopted in 2014, we were directed to implement city agencies directed to implement 24 projects in 24 months and i think the imitous here is show
7:49 am
a big impact quickly on high injury network streets, a range of geographic diversity and range of different improvement types. i have here some photo's of those. we actually implemented the 24 projects in 22 months so exceeded that goal and in the end implemented 30 of the projects within the 24 month period. also, over the past few years beyawn just those original 24 projects we focus on location with highest number of collisions. i have a photoin the upper left och the protected intersection completed at 9th and division on the upper right a protected bikeway all most completed on 7th street where we did have a fatal collision in 2016. i also have photo's some initiatives that were brought
7:50 am
forth by the communities where the communities in the supervisors office drove our attention to places like oseansy and soon to be multia and also kearny and clay where we installed a scramble. vision zero goes beyond just a few projects here or there, it is about how we changed our processes so when we pave a street we look at all opportunities to do things like improve bikeways whether or mot on the high injury network. improve traffic signals, add councht down signals. we use these coordination opportunities to get the maximum benefit. we also do safe routes to schools that benefit kids who walk whether or not on the high injury network and we make improvements to the transit infrastructure to improve safety for transit customers and people who drive in this case to make it clear to folks not drive down the tunnel. it adds up to more 13 miles of
7:51 am
engineering improvements each year which is the goal we set in 2014. that is just counting the infrastructure on the high injury networks but as i mentioned we have been investing across the city. here we just have a simplified map that shows how we have been investing in a number of intersections as well as corridor projects and the reason we make that distinction is a lot of times at intersections where we see the majority of collisions there are context sense tv things like where the bus stop is located, how cars are turning we can change relatively quickly and have a tool box called the quick and effective tool box we implement at hundredoffs intersexzs as you see the yellow dots we think these have a big impact improving safety. it is fornt to keep in mind it larger corridor project wheres we are able to do things for the
7:52 am
stretch of a street and effect speeding or adding bikeways, improving transit, so improving the transportation options in addition to safety. looking ahead we continue to have the goal of invest ing at least 13 milesanyially and want to focus on reducing speeding because we know that speed is the factor whether somebody dies when hit by a car but also because it is a leading cause of collisions. we also want to keep our focus on quick and effective intersection treatments so we effect the locations that are having the most collisions but also to get things in the ground quickly that are not necessarily multi-year multi-million dollar projects. we will continue to pursue the multi'year and million dollar projects through coor dor transformation projects and
7:53 am
these are like projects on 6th street and mission and excelsior and 19ict avenue where we take the time to invest in the corridors properly to implement complete streets vaeft improvements. here is a map of the things i listed and many more. it shows the overlay of our upcoming projects and this is about a 5 year period. the reason we use a 5 year period is because that is roughly or known funding timeline so can say we are committing to these projects that we have outlined here. in addition to improving the safe design the streets we want to make sure that people understand how to navigate on the streets, what are the issues driving these collisions in general. we embarked on a
7:54 am
multi-media campaign with really focused goals using consultant to help create our messages and make sure we are doing the right thing by targeting our messages to the the right audiences over the right media. so many objectives is getting name recognition but what vision zero is so people understand we do have a traffic safety issue on the streets and when they see that word associated with changes on the neighborhood corridor they understand why that is. we are also really-these photo's are of outreach efts trying to connect with communities to understand what their per suved issues are the streetsment we don't want to sit and rely on data we want to hear from folks . this is multi'lingual throughout the city to understand their needs.
7:55 am
get nothing to more specifics about the campaigns. we are doing a lot of work to educate professional drivers. in the upper left that's a video that we tweped seberal videos for taxi and tnc drivers, large operators of large vehicles, we also have passed messages across the transit fleet and billboard as mentioned by a previous commenter. of course we are making surethality vision zero is a part of outreach in schools through the safe routes to school program we reach about half san francisco unified elementary schools so that is a great program that has grown since 2009 where we educate as early as possibly. we are helping the media get the word out about the improvements we are
7:56 am
making on the streets and policy changes and hopefully being able to amplify our voice in that way. the last thing i'll show are the examples of messages we are putting out to help folks understand the leading cause of collisions and how they behavior can effect those causes. so, specific things like yielding, speeding, right hook crashs with people bicycling as well as connecting the general public with families who have been efeathed by traffic violence, in particular families who lost luved ones to traffic violence and feel this is a really important thing to do to remember the instances and honor the folks and hope we can learn from that and share those stories. the last thing i'll point to is in addition to getting messages out we combine
7:57 am
the education efforts with targeted enforcement so this is a map-sure it is probably hard to see, but you can see that we are-this is a grant we received to work with the police department to get specific safety messages about speeding and slowing down out on things like some of the trailer signs, the orange signs that flash messages as well as other medium to get folks the message they should slow down, let them know enforcement is coming and follow up with enforcement. so, this is a program that kicked off last year and closely evaluate for its effectiveness. thank you. >> i have a few very brief slide that i can present very quickly if that's okay with the committee and the chair. >> [inaudible] policy and
7:58 am
programming at the transportation authority. just quickly, we organize our work program into plan, fund and deliver. sfcta is and continues to be focused on key areas of the work to support vision zero and fundamentally the main forum for policy direction on vision zero is sfcta vision zero committee that we support. the committee was established in 2014 and we provide the staff support. so again in the plan fund and deliver context, we have been doing some of the planning work around some of the projects within the city, the freeway corridor management study is related efforts as it advances from long term planning and explore strategies for safety and reliable moving people
7:59 am
along 101 and i 280 but the project focus is manage safety and objective and compliments the work we are doing for the district 6 vision zero ramp nrlt section study, which is to study some of the potential short-term improvements that can be implemented at the intersections under the study. there are 5 of them and implemented citylife wide. we have caltrans grant for prop k funds which is a more city wide squerft larger effort that will begin soon for longer term improvements up to 10 intersections primarily in the south of market area. work wg caltrans and the city partners. we led the initial planning and environmental work for van ness and geary and also been-we
8:00 am
were instrumental in the preplanning work for geneva harny brt. these are multi-modal projects but will implement a host of safety improvements along the corridors. we have been advancing various planning projects for high injury corridor locations through the neighborhood transportation improvement planning work that has been done throughout the city. on thefunding side, we have-the transportation authority board has the most control over the prop k sales tax and registration fee program but integrated safety into the bay area grant program. going back to prop k and prop aa is one of the highest priority factors considered when selecting projects for most of the programs under prop k. we also have been a funder of many of
8:01 am
the first and second generation projects and safe routes to schools program, large vehicle driver training, traffic calming signals, bike facilities. we are supporting mta and the city and work for advancing automated speed enforcement a well as a host of other activities related to advancing safety at the regional and state levels. lastly, on the deliver side, the work that we have been doing over the last 5 years along presidio and ramps at yerba buena, major capital projects that resulted in immediate safety improvements once they open for youth really. the i 280 interchange we have gone over with briefly with supervisor safai but that will advance in particular the intersection at southbound
8:02 am
ocean off-ramp and also the wurk that we are doing to support projeths throughout the city that have fund requirements but these are the second streets and other large street transformative projects that luis mentioned funded by federal or state funds to help secure the fund. with that, i can answer any questions. >> i have a few questions, but just ending on the last point, one thing that jumps out in me in this presentation is you have a need to balance the larger projects related to freways versus the smaller like neighborhoods. it seems like yerba buena park way and park street and ocean avenue and think the number you gave me was like $13 million which will probably be more than that. those eat up a lot of things
8:03 am
that i think what i hear most about from the folks in our neighborhoods want to see. how do you balance that? is this specific pools of money you have to spend on off-ramp or highway related projects because i understand when and present to me ocean avenue, city college there is a lotf pedestrians there but it seems to me like maybe there is a way to if you could-i don't know if the entire off-ramp need to be engineered and about bulbouts and traffic lights so how do you balance that because that is a sorfs frustration for a lot of folks in the neighborhood cht i see 24 projects first generation high injury and 57 others and there is limited mount of money, so that is a really important aspect what i hear. >> thank you for the question. we do have the voter approved
8:04 am
expenditure plan for prop k that directs fund to specific projecktds. it is a half dozen to dozen. doyle drive, central subway, van ness and geary, brt, transbay terminal but beyond that we have 20 categories so it is up to you as comeitioner and public to prioritize the funds that can go to road improvement or traffic calms and that is a programming and prioritization this body can take. >> we said don't do the ocean avenue but focus on the pedestrian area, could you do that >> certainly. >> okay. >> i want to note that work came out of community based plan spanning several years. >> i get a concern when i get feedback in preparation to the meeting and folks say when you have a project thereat is 13 to
8:05 am
$15 million. >> that project isn't funded. >> it isn't but hopefully will be. i just use that as a xmp to highlight the hears the cross walks and mainarterial streets, the traffic calm in the neighborhood, the areas in and athround schools. so that is-at least for the folks in our neighborhood because we are not really served in the other manner and so- >> part the decision is you whether you wish to fun or not but we are not the only funding source and the city and mta have other sources of funding and do prioritization the fund. it is important to do the capital planning and prioritization together. >> i get it and not to keep hitting home on this point but think it is really important so when folks see a map and see improvements done to district 11 or southern neighborhoods and the example is, the
8:06 am
off-ramp on ocean avenue and sthra light and cross walk and people are like that is proportioninate because it is a $13 million project but you spread around all the other stuff where maybe on lombard or over the marina there are more pedestrian things leading to the grownway that are neighborhood based, that is a source of frustration because we cant ask for everything or all the money and neither can supervisor yee. >> we can ask. >> there is a-traffic- >> sthr is a finite pool of money so to have all that money spent on a off-ramp to add a additional lane. the other question is, have we identified the 57 other priority projects because i see safe routes to school and that was-i said it before, but folks are really really concerned-we have the highest concentration of children under the age of
8:07 am
18, disproportionate number of schools and there isn't necessarily a sense of safety pedestrian safety around schools so for us that would be a big priority. >> yes, so the specific question about the 57 projects have been identified- >> they have? >> it is a two year work plan. we continue to identify new projects so we are happy to work with your office about where the ninety-two needs are. one thing menged was traffic calming and we have funding set aside starting next year to do focus work around schools and where seniors conrogate and parks and be more proactive toward these areas opposed to sitting back and waiting for applications to come in. >> going back the high injury intersections arond public schools, those are some of the things that are really
8:08 am
important and see that you identified them. is there a correlation between the high injury corridors and the schools? >> yes, and no. so, i think the high injury networks when we look at the correlations it epd up be agnumber of factors like transit and high auto use and a lot of times sometimes schools are near those, but other times schools are located in neighborhood streets. if you look specifically at what has been called the safe routes to school program, it has been a mixture of investing in more heavily trafficked areas like mission and anen daiga or more neighborhood type of streets like things like jefferson elementary off 19th avenue. >> for example on that project you took away the [inaudible] there are a lot of people. do you think about the streetscape as well because again another
8:09 am
thing that we got back from that was you added all this concrete and there was no consideration added to greening. >> sometimeatize is challenges because of the funding source so i can't speak in too much detail and anybody feel free to speak up what safe routes to school is able to fund but know some funding sources are strict what you can fund. >> that is something i got a lot of feedback on not to harp on the off-ramp and that is a lot of money and when people see [inaudible] filled in that is great because we want cars to slow down and dopet want to crete more concrete. they see a difference in other neighborhoods in the city when it done when you fill that in but there is greening and landscaping associated with it, so want to make sure that is a high priority. my next question is in terms of
8:10 am
engineering achievements, we had some traffic circles and calming done but parking is removed and in our neighborhood it is a battle because folks are concerned about having a car. they are somewhat car dependent. there are a lot of children and elderly so when you do that you take the parking away but the cars are not necessarily slowing down and stopping the behavior because you created a quick pattern for folks to get around and illegal behavior like the doughnuts in the middle of the intersection because you remove the cars they can do had doughnuts athround round about so you have taking away parking space squz cars are still going quickly and doughnuts are still happening so how are you measure a success on the engineering chuvments? >> there are a couple answers. one is and mentioned in the
8:11 am
action strategy we are doing an evaluation plan so we are looking at many of our key safety projects and looking at their effectiveness reducing collisions scr deterring behave ior you described and we also just go and observe the thing. you are pointing to examples right thaly implemented last year and we need to get a closer look whether they are being effective so we are open minded about that and learn from that. >> okay. i know we want to have folks line up for public comment but just to end on supervisor yee's point, we have a lot of non english speaking households and elderly and folks car dependent and it is about education so how do you balance doing the engineering or work, what is the education component? and saw the slide and people, it isn't
8:12 am
necessarily clear if they are mta or ta or planning or dpw, how that coordinates so when we call for the high injury update informational hearing we wanted to hear from dpw, sfmta, public health and mta together so don't know if there are representatives here. it's okay, we can continue the conversation, this is beginning the conversation and not meant to put anyone on the defensive, just to think about at least when it comes to implementing in the southern neighborhoods and my district and some of the other folks that i heard from, other supervisors how do we balance that? because we want to do the big projects but also want the beautification. >> a more comp rehensive approach. letting people know you are coming through a area that is livable with schools and neighborhoods. we hear this a lot. we saw fraexample in district 6 with supervisor
8:13 am
kim was grappling with 70 percent of the trips are freeway ramp oriented. >> that is great for her. freeway stuff makes a lot of sense. >> she was worried about what about the neighborhoods crossing the streets with betsa car michael. too much focus is getting through that area and not enough on the neighborhoods so put banner aids and campaigns and some are effective and some less effective. i think we can more a robust conversation about those strategies. >> i will end in terms with the way my office operates we want to work with you to include the other departments and then get more feedback. on the pork chop project maybe we can revisit that and add beautification. exactly and same on the round abouts in some areas maybe it makes sense to take away the parking and
8:14 am
others it probably doesn't because you don't change behavior and added frustration. >> okay. >> thank you. >> we go ahead and public comment. >> hello again, richard rothman district 1 and i'm surprised public works isn't here. they should be part of the project. an example that didn't work aapparently they got stimulus money in 2008 before i moved back to the richmond and did a project from 34th and balboa to 39th and don't know if mta was involved but they didn't have enough money to finish the project and left 38th and balboa in a more dangerous predicament than was before. they wouldn't take responsibility. they wouldn't
8:15 am
fix it and so after a number of years hopefully mta next month is going to fix the intersection, so i think there should be more coordination or i dont know how the two departments work or maybe part of it-public works should merge with mta, but from what i see on 38 and balboa there needs to be more coordination in this process and sorry public works isn't here because apparently they do streets also, so i don't know how they are involved. thank you. >> thank you. next. >> organizing with the san francisco bike coalition. thank you commissioner sawify for calling this item. i'm here to call to attention the proposed bike lanes
8:16 am
opturkwaterered down to a paint only design which offers no protection to people riding. our commitments are clear. the newly released two year vision zero strategy redo zine corridors with high quality treatments especially high injury corridorsism turk street is a high injury corridor and a paint only bike lane will not only be a danger to san franciscans but go against the city commitment to smart design and safe streets thmpt leadership can not continue to gut bike lane projects on tougher or any other streets. we hope the sfmta will do right regardless of the hurtlesment look forward working with commissioners to make sure safety is a priority on our streets. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is
8:17 am
natasha [inaudible] community organizeer at walk sf and here >> to address the need for improvement along mission and excelsior. [inaudible] trying to cross mission street this intersection is two lanes each direction with no traffic light or stop signs, cross walks are your only protection. after mrs. [inaudible] timedly dodged through the first two lanes of trach traffic she was hit by a car that showed no sign of yielding. it sped in sending flying into the-air. [inaudible] half way through the journey impacted before reaching the safety of the sidewalk. had the cross walk been visible and driver slowed down she would be alived. march 7, a middle schooler from sf community fs hit and injured on the walk to school. she was 15 to 20s fellow class mates who witness thd crash. held a fund raiser to buy new glasses
8:18 am
and still deal wg injuries. these crashs are not surprises. mg mission street is a high injury corridor. a street where crashs cluster. there are proven solutions to make the streets safer. we are pleased the city has funding and vision to improve mission street through the 14 hour mission project but must act now to make sure no more lives are lost before the long term solutions take place. walk sf is work wg sfmta and excelsior action to expedite safety along the dangerous intersectionism will continue to the work and urge you to insure the city acts swiftly to protect people on mission street. thank you. >> thank you. next. >> hello commissioners. [inaudible] executive dreblther of excelsior action group. thank you for calling attention to the issues happening
8:19 am
specifically on mission street. i had a list of things to talk about but think supervisor safai covered most of it. i want to give background of the spatial needs on the mission corridor. we have 22 t intersections along the mission stree corridor out of 27 intersections total so the majority the intersectionerize t. 77 percent the intersections are unmarked or poorly marked. all those need improvements. with that said, limitation tooz what mta can do and eag and walk sf is work wg mta for about 2 years performing walk audits, meetings and trying to create a great working relation ship and we have one but the issues coming up from their side and there are delays and delays are because they have inadequate
8:20 am
staffing and limitations. supposedly it is 10 per year city-wide and a typical time to install a flashing beacon can take up to 3 yearsism we know the interventions needed but the issue is mta isn't equipt to make the interventions happen so we are trying to ask the commissioners to do is consider how to streamline the efts because the needs are there, the collisionerize happening, the deaths are happening and need solutions. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is holly burke and here on behalf of the green cross located on mission street in the excelsior. we are here to express our great concern about pedestrian crossing on mission street especially at the mission andinate street where a
8:21 am
woman was killed in a car accident last month which our security cameras caught and provided to . this is a huge concern because of patrons and neighborhood said crossing the street especially for bart riders for glen park. vehicles speed down mission street all the time every day exceed thg 25 mile per hour speed limit. it is extremely challenging and dangerous to cross the thorough fair. there is very little visibility at night and the green cross has needed to take matters in into our hands and put up our pedestrian crossing signs on the mission street. also our security personnel had to help pedestrians cross the street safely every day. in light we also made a 311 request asking the city to take immediate action to know avail thus far. in light of the
8:22 am
recent unfonchinate accident we ask you to urge mta to make immediate action to rectify this problem and make it safer for the community at large. thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. >> aaron goodmen district 11. i want to point out the concerns that supervisor safai had mentioned. those are at ocean and almaimy the areas where the built the cut out squds there is no plantings. the tool bauxitems implemented need to be rereviewed and reinstalled and changed adapted and fixed and corrected. that is something i dont think we have seen enough of such on the bike corridor and alemany where the cones are knocked out and gone or implemented on bay shore transit platforms and put bike cone lane things on the
8:23 am
front end but that wont prevent a car going over and hitting people and step out past the bike lane on to the curb.
8:24 am
8:25 am
8:26 am
8:27 am
8:28 am
8:29 am
8:30 am
>> ladies and gentlemen the chairman has called the meeting to order. please, turn off your electronic devices. and please rise for the pledge of allegiance. >> [pledge of allegiance] >> commissioner turman i like to call roll call turman here, mazzucco present, marshall present, dejesus is excused. tran laura present melara present, ong hing present. a quorum is