sustainable at 40 million, but perhaps there is another way to look at it. i think it is support to have it over many years. >> thank you. what we've been looking at is like a prop m office allocation to make sure we're not exceeding the amount of allowable. we've also been considering tying it to an expense, rather than an actual dollar value, because that would help as meter the program as opposed to what growth is happening. commissioner avalos: think you for your presentation. if there are no other questions, we can go on to public comment. -- thank you for your presentation. if any member of the public would like to comment, please come forward. >> andy zorley. we of the talking about this for

a very long time. i am looking at commissioner olague and getting rid of o.l.s. as a process of ceqa. this body really got the conversation going in 2005. it is exciting. and try to pace myself. we have some time to go even if things go well. i do want to think of 40 staff and planning department and the mta and the mayor's office for pushing along on this. -- i do want to think the staff, and planning department and the mta and the mayor's office. it is also a great opportunity and obligation to rationalize our impact fees. that is a good thing, to. o. i'm really encouraged to see the

great questions coming from the committee. these are questions that will h we will have time to ask, but the more we ask, the better the program will be. a very much looking forward to seeing the draft ordinance, and that will be a draft and devolve a little bit. on the notion of outreach, we it to talk to as many people as we can about this. let's keep this going and get this done. commissioner avalos: thank you. next speaker, please. >> right now, in the city and county of san francisco we have very few areas where we can have that big developments, so we have one area right now that you commissioner should go and review and see what is happening

right now, and what can happen in this area three years from now, five years from now, 20 years from now, and that is mission bay. just see how well you have performed on mission bay. the second area where outreach should be done. where meaningful data should be given to the people is the area here, it may be hunters point -- maybe hunter's point, sunnydale. we do not need to go everywhere. these are the kind of ideas that are used in other countries, but a kind of difficulare kind of dn

san francisco because of various factors, one of them being the hills and another because how the city was planned. thirdly, over the past 20 years we need to find out of a vigil history othe financial history . i know they are projecting the data and a conceptual way. how well are they going to do? commissioners, you have not asked any benchmarks, and i suppose you cannot come up because some of the documentation tied to it is not available. it is going to be available in the queue days or few weeks. so i would say we need a hearing on this. thank you very much.

commissioner avalos: thank you very much. if there are no other members of the public that would like to comment, we can close public comment. madam clerk of information i. >> recommendation of allocation of 209,514 in propek k funds. this is an action item. >> i am a planner with the authority for this item which has request from the mta and on page 43 of the packet. my colleagues will present on the traffic comi calming reques that will be followed by a presentation. sfmta is requesting a long-term

bike storage plant. some of the tasks include a review of best practices and codes that could inhibit it -- the needs assessment and a final report. through this project we will work with other agencies as well as perform public are reached through surveys and interviews in forming a final strategy that will be outlined in a final report. staff will perform all labor position diassisted with the pr the final strategy from the plan will guide the sfmta in the future of bike planning projects. commissioner avalos: thank you for your presentation. >> welcome.

i am going to spend one minute to give you a quick overview on the five-year prioritization program that is significant for the item. this body approves every few years but includes a prioritization methodology for the categories in the project were they all work together. it is supposed to have a five- year project list with full funding plans. today this item is about the traffic coming category come in this is one of the categories where prop k provided the first able funding. the authority has a long history of this. in 1998 be a story -- the authority board adopted a strategic analysis report that was developed in close coordination with the mta. that laid the foundation for

them to develop the traffic coming progralming program. we will give you quick overview of the item before you. most of offices have been briefed on this, but because of the extremely important role that prop k plays, you will have a final call on approving the traffic to shift the focus between the local traffic calming projects and school tracks in light of the next five years worth of programs. >> ben stepa. i will do a brief overview of the allocation request that is before you today, and mike sells very well due representation in state of the current program. -- mike salbury.

this is a request to about your weight the trevaluate the traffg program, and looking at the way products are delivered to the community. we give an overview of the history of the traffic calming froprogram, but it does have three tracks. what is the local neighborhood track that is delivering speed reduction projects to local communities and local streets. there is a track that is currently used to fund the participation in larger part arterial projects. the final track is the school track, which is providing local map funding. the effort that mta is

undertaking is really rebalancing the program to focus on newly-identified city objectives in terms of pedestrian safety. as you know, the mayor recently set up a pedestrian safety task force, and that task force did some analysis, and we gave you the methodology in the analysis and it is in the package for you and stuff to look at. in that analysis, the majority of high-injury collisions is bound to be on arterial. so this is really an effort to look at the traffic c calmin calming program in to sef we can use resources to look at those issues on arterial. this is not totally reviewing the program, just rebalancing

the program. in terms of the request itself, the project will begin in march of this year and end by january of next year. it does require a small amendment to the five-year prioritization program to create a new project to allow for the funds in this specific project. in the projects that will be funded out of this program after the request will have to be preceded by a comprehensive amendment to the entire five- year prioritization program, so that would be something that comes before this committee, and you would understand how the new a valuation effects the five- year prioress stati prioritizat with that, i will turn it over to mike for his presentation on the whole program. >> migood morning, commissioner. many of its mike salibury.

as staff has mentioned some i will give a brief overview of the program prior to the decision about the allocation. this slide, if you have the information printed out in front of you, this outlines the goals of traffic calming. improving pedestrian bike safety, increased driver awareness, and prevent shifting the problems from one street to another. maintain access, and also include education and enforcement efforts. this is a brief history of the traffic calming program. the program has been up and running for a little over 10 years. we agree this is a great time to take a look of the program and make sure it is meeting our needs as efficiently as

possible. we have up to threthe tracks. local streets, arterial streets, and school streets. the number one goal is safer streets for everyone, and ultimately we want to make the streets more conducive to bicycling and wafflilking. i will focus on the local streets track. we've received over 500 applications. i think this demonstrates strongly the demand throughout the city prior to the program. before funding was even available for meaningful work, we are ready had 135 except and applications. right away we have high demand for our work. -- we already have 135 applications. the reason why the number is a range of 5-8 is we have those that work on projects that shift

according to demand at the time. this is to give you an idea of how the staffing is. we split up into three teams. we have staff allocated whether it is a traffic calming, pedestrians, or bicycle traffic. there is an application process, and we analyze the request to determine if it meets the warrants for traffic calming. our goal is to address the worst, most severe problems first. that is the living document and the ships according to incoming requests. i am not board to go through every box, but this is giving you an idea of what the process looks like. i think the process has a good foundation and is very thorough. traffic calming evoke strong

emotions from people so we want to make sure the process is as thorough as possible. this is in the five-year prioritization plan documents, too. this is once we initiate a traffic calming study. these are the various steps along the way. meeting with the community, a technical analysis, and other cities prior to construction. timeline for developing local and area-wide plans. much of the time is spent waiting. you submit an application. if your area is not the worst in the city, we have to deal with the most severe problems first. it may take awhile for your problem to rise to the top. many times it may take years before your project its in the queue. once that happens, it takes about 16-18 months. it may take two-five years'

time. this is to give you an idea of the various area-wide projects around the city. total cost implement all of the measures as $27 million. more demand than resources of this particular moment. this is a visual. you feel like there has been such a late in demand or current demand even for traffic calming, that given various limited resources, that those requests are piling up. we are completing projects that we think our quality projects. we want to make sure those are focusing on where we have the most needs. that was mentioned as good and it is for seeing if we are completing projects in the area of most need. so in this allocation we are requesting there are various areas we want to address. our program is strong and filled

with other best practices. this is the last slide. these are some of the areas we want to address in the current effort. what we want to do is check the current best practices around the nation and see how we can rebalance the effort so we get the most bang for the buck. commissioner cohen: i was wondering what the traffic calming work you are doing around the state, i was wondering if you were in contrast with the state -- is the work being done to get there? >> certainly. we of stuff that is working with dpw to identify overlaps. -- we have staff that is

working with dpw to identify overlaps. >commissioner cohen: i was curious if you find one part of the city of with a greater need for traffic calming. maybe it is where the streets are more narrow. north beach is a little bit older. if there is any way you can add context -- >> sure. one of our goals is geographic and it would cost to the city, but we try to identify where the most issues are. in the past we have found a lot of traffic calming issues in the south and southeast part of the city, and also the middle of the city. what we're finding when you look at the safety directive is a lot of places are havinhappening ona

few key arterioles. we're trying to rebalance where we find the most applications in the most identified collisions. commissioner cohen: i assume this application is under your web site? under which tab? >> sfmta most livable streets, traffic calming. we will be putting the application process on hold. we want to match the application process. we're going to communicate that through your office as appropriate, through our web site come in current applications that we have. commissioner cohen: when will you open a back up? >> probably later this year is

when we will have a better idea of where we're headed. commissioner farrell: a few questions. as the representative of district two, there is not much color and no indust color in dit 3. can you talk about that a little bit more? >> it may be a blessing that we do not get many requests from your district, but we really are applicant-driven. we do not seek out the projects, they come to us. commissioner farrell: fair enough. the second question is, when i hear the word rebalancing, you're taking from peter to get to paul. that is inherently the case that someone will lose. i know one thing that i do a lot

in interaction with my constituents is try to be responsive to them. as we know on the board of supervisors, parking and traffic is at the mta, we cannot dictate anything really. we can advise, just come in traffic calming is something that is a big deal at times. things that i do not realize or stop does that have time to realize, it is no one -- staff does not realize. it strikes me this is moving away from that are being able to address those concerns. i hope is this is not we're going to stop doing that. my question is, how are we going to continue to address those issues? i do not want to be faced with an instance where there are cars are buzzing down my street, making it almost got run over if that happens every week. i am sorry, there's nothing we

can do about it. >> you are correct, there will be a shifting of funds, but there will still be a local program in place. our department is always able to respond to these requests. we will be a front that there will be less funding for local streets and more of a shift to arterial is where we see a lot of collisions happening. we want to be transparent about that, but we will still have a local streets program. commissioner farrell: i am all for getting more bang for our buck in pedestrian safety, but what is the magnitude? are we going from 5 to 1? if we cannot get anything done, that is born to be a problem. ." that remains to be seen, and that is what the process will help us determine. >> i think you probably all heard from constituents that the

program right now is very frustrating as it is. it is very frustrating for stop on our side, too. i think you'll see a number of fte's devoted to traffic calming rise as a result of this, because as we rethink the program, were over half of our severe and fatal head collisions happen on 7% of our streets. it is very obvious if we can focus more of the energy there, we can have a very big impact. we can probably avail ourselves of a wider array of funding sources. as we take a look at how the real problems are -- as we take a look at what the real problems are, and we tinker with a program to people do not feel hopeless and they get clear messages about -- right now the message is you might qualify five years from now, because

we're problem is not the worst in the city. it might be better to really give people a transparent and clear way of when they will qualify, rather than saying we to the q 43 or four years. we're trying to make the message more clear. -- rather than same weigait in e queue for three or four years. we will be coming back to this group at least three or mofour times to talk in detail. we do not want to be in that position more than you do telling people there is nothing more that we can do. commissioner farrell: i think it is great. clarity is terrific. generically hearing it, it is a frustrating process, and i appreciate that from staff, but if you're going to take more

money away from it, then it strikes me will only get worse. i hope that is not the case, because that is certainly a big deal for me. we will look forward to this the future discussions. i want to make sure that is considered as a huge priority going forward. >> absolutely. we would not take any kind of action or solution until we all agree that was the right direction to go. commissioner avalos: i am all for empowerment, and as a supervisor i feel not very empowered when i get presented many real concerns people have a around safety around parks in intersections that are not necessarily arterial, that our local, and i feel responsible to respond and have solutions in place, but do not always feel they are there. i know this is a dynamic process and it will continue, and we're really looking forward

to working closely with you in planning solutions. commissioner olague: i share a lot of the concerns that commissioner cfarrell and avalos raised. i know was some point, it was mentioned we can go to the website, and i do want to look at district five, because whether it is a community meeting or meeting in office, most of the constituents's concerns directly relate to traffic calming, i think. not the majority, but a big percentage. i would like to see what is in the pipeline for district five. most of it is constituent- driven, but concerns keep on coming up, the same ones come up

there might be times when i might want to request something or engage in some dialogue with you all based on what i am hearing from constituents. where do i get a list? do i meet with you? do i go on liline? >> as part of our application we did put together a list district by district of all the different applications we have it. there are ripped out five different places they could be, and we can provide that to you. we have one for each district. just a little over a month we received $2 million to move forward with implementation, so implementation will not stop. that will be continuing. we're planning to make good on promises we are ready made and move forward with community process and implementation of speed bumps and other things of

that nature. implementation will be continuing. we will figure out how we could traffic calming a little bit better and then we will open up the process again from a bridge towards the end of the year. certainly, we are always open and available to talk with you about traffic issues in your district. >> you have in your package in front of you all of the traffic calming area wide plans. it has a map of the city-wide, map for each of the planning areas, table that and edifies each of the traffic calming solutions identified in the area wide plan, and the current status of that, down to the speed hub level. commissioner olague: that is the level of detail i was looking for. commissioner avalos: if there are no other comments or questions from the committee, we will go on to public comment.

>> a good morning, again. and the parkton with the san francisco bicycle coalition. regarding long-term bike planning, to state the obvious, as more people are bicycling, parking will be more important. we support the mta boss modest allocation request to do some master planning on that. we look forward to the supervisors' committee later this week to take a supervisor at avalos' measure to allow commercial buildings. on traffic calming, we are supportive of this as well. we are most supportive of the process of the mta developing a strategic monitor system. previously, citizens would come and complain about and material -- an