of the applications receiveder said we do have processes where people can apply at any time through submitting a application for speed humps or island or get a new cross walk or stop sign. people can apply for those at any time and on the last slide we have nrfckz about how to apply for that stuff. we need it make sure residence know thereat is available year rounds [inaudible] i want to wrap up by describing something we saw. some of the best applications described the issues rather than the solution that gives the engineers to [inaudible] having a face approach for the projects where we have funding in one year to do a kudy and recommend a few different alternatives and then cost. this is what we did with sunnyside safe access memo and

it can work out well. it is great to have [inaudible] at the table early [inaudible] i know our staff was able to talk to applicants about what they put in n to the had application squz what engineers need and what type of projects are less likely to be implemented within those categories. so, i have the link here for our website for applying and you can call 311 for stop signs, speed humps and cross walk squz i provided a handout that gees into detail about each of the 9 projects. if you have any further questions about this in addition to asking them now i have my phone number and e-mail at bottom and i'm happy to follow up. >> quick question, i know that residence or people from the

community could apply for traffic coming and pedestrian safety engineering measures and sometimes they get accepted or may not get accepted and sometimes it takes a long time to get to those projects. in the case of the participatory budgeting, for us in our district this is the priority and it goes to the top of the list, primarily if it is a doobl project and makes sense, the funding is there so i just want to make sure that with distinguish the 2 ways for residence to get things done in the districts or in san francisco >> so, for projects that have standard solutions like a stop sign or speed hump we have criteria we apply. there have

been a couple locations where maybe we couldn't implement what the applicant suggested and that is something where we can come back and direct the funding somewhere else or come with a different recommendation >> my point really is that we only have a limited number of projects for the general traffic budget and not everyones request will get funded so it will take a lot more time when you apply randomly >> for the most part if there is something where there is clear speeding on a speed for each year based on the average number oaf applications we can [inaudible] then it is the edge line cases so it something is on sth boarder of whether we can fund it in the year that could make a difference. absolutely >> thank you. next

presenter. would be jessica look. hi. from the planning department >> good afternoon supervisors my name is jessica look and urban designer and planner. [inaudible] the program is [inaudible] i'm joined by robin [inaudible] department program [inaudible] and finance director. i want to thank you for the opportunity regarding the status of the park projecktd which is sponsored by green house cafee and this is in the west portal commercial district. i'm the assignment project manager and here to explain the history of the project and answer questions you may have. green house cafy

and the owner [inaudible] [inaudible] accepted within the program in the summer. the proposed parklet will be the firpsh in the west portal community and has strong community support. since the acceptance in into the program the designs were reviewed by the team consisted of [inaudible] and we delivered the comment in the fall of 2014. the revised drawings were not submitted back to the department because the designer that was working on the parklet project was unable to see it through. due to this the department granted her an additional 6 month extingz. in twaent 14 [inaudible] applied for the budget funding and approved 15 thousand dollar grant. the city dispersed the

funds to planning and they will [inaudible] park alliance who partners with the parklet sponsor on implementation. the parklet also provides resource tooz the sponsor such as implementation and funding strategies so this is a great opportunity for the project sponsor. due thaadditional funding and of the request from the project sponsor the department gave another extension to april 11, 2015. there are 2 delays for 2 reason squz the first is the inability to secure a architect who has time and ability to work on the brauject. we are in a construction boom so finding a designer to work for free is difcult. the overall budget for green house cafe. now there is a budget of 30

thousand and she privately raised 700 and she also have 15 thousand from the grants. she is trying to use the bulk of the funding she does have the construction cost and she informed me when she does obtain the permits she wants to implement a kick starting campaign. she up dated me that she secured a new designer whose is a neighbor in the west portal community and so we are hopeful the project can be completed on time. so the current deadline is april 11, but the park team supports this project and want to leverage thefunding you have given her so we are giving an additional 6 months and this is for the design, review and permitting of the project. overall through the process we met one

on one and given support and goal setting, but up front with the parklet projects we let project sponsors know that they are responsible fl the design funding and construction of the parklet. this is stated up front in all the materials and open houses that we have so they are very well aware of the expectations. lastly through our experience the parklets do take 12-16 months from destwrine permitting so while this seems like a long time line it is typical with this program. lastly, we are work with the public works because they are going to be doing repaving on west portal so we want to insure when we does get permits she doesn't tear the parklet down so we are timing that for her as well. if you have any questions i'm here to answer them >> no questions. thank you

very much. next up with the [inaudible] from the office of economic and work force development. >> good morning mr. chair and supervisor [inaudible] office of economic and work force development and [inaudible] give an up date on the path way forward for a better west portal. and this is submitted by matte rogers on behalf of

the [inaudible] association. 50 thousand dollars and [inaudible] back in may of 2014. then the grant was work ordered to our office and after conversations with our financial team and the city attorneys office we were advises we have to [inaudible] because through the budgetary process the project was [inaudible] but not the [inaudible] so then we rsp pd the project and [inaudible] was the only applicant for that particular project so we awarded a total of 20 thousand dollars, 15 from your office and the other 5 from the naird neighborhoods. we thought this would be a better match. on october 22, 2014 [inaudible] awarded [inaudible] and that

would pay for basically the 6 deliverables to hire a consultant and put it on a website and inform the public [inaudible] and also develop a data base so all those ininvolved are [inaudible] draft a plan and [inaudible] report which is under review and has been submitted to our office and a data base which basically out lines how much the property [inaudible] which has been re-created. we are working towards the final draft of the engineer report. lastly some of the funds will go towards petition support so after we review the final plan and the engineers report they will move towards the petition phase which we would have to have results from the [inaudible] committee by may 4.

just very quickly the next 3 slides are a update on what is froposed. boundsry services and budgementment currently the broundries are 3 linear blocks. it includes [inaudible] it also includes public library and transfer station and parks on both sides of [inaudible] clarmont boulevard. sorry for the quality of the map. there are 2 major budget of services arounds maintenance [inaudible] development activities. and this is the proposed budget, so it is about 227 thousand dollars for expendstures and expect to generate 220 thousand

in revenues. and i think that is a update. we are hoping that we will laer from the committee on the commission by may 4 and [inaudible] board of supervisors before the end of july before you go to recess >> i appreciate the effort in lechberaging fundsing for west portals [inaudible] and also [inaudible] 2 projects completed from the participatory budget in terms of using the funding and getting it to the places and exercising what they were going to do so appreciate >> not a problem. thank you >> thank you very much. there was the-the other project is scholarship program to encourage student to read for the public library and that

was-the scholarships were given pretty recently so i didn't ask them to come to present that. the other presenter is katie [inaudible] >> i'm katie [inaudible] director of administration and finance at racken park. racken park was awarded 3 separate projects in the 13, 14 budget process. the first is was for district 3. we received auththousand dollars to install security cam raws at the betty an [inaudible] senior center. [inaudible] supplemented the 8 thousand dollars with another 27.500 in order to make it viable funding for the project. we are in the process of working with our security

camera contractor to identify the right locations and camera types for the project. we expect we'll be able to begin installation in june >> [inaudible] we have combined that 23 thousand dollars with 100 thousand dollars that the mayors office put into the 14-15 budget and that 123 thousand dollars at the request of the golden gate heights neighborhood association will be used to replace one picnic table at the park and add a new picnic area with table and binchs. the 123 thousand dollars will fund the purchase of the new tables and benches as well as grading of the new picnic area and pooring

concreate pads for the installation of the furchture. any remaining money will be used for path way improvement at the park entrance. we'll use a contractor for this work. we rin the process of-we put our job order contracts out to bid next month and expect we'll have new contractors in place in the next month or so and that we can award thins june and work will start in july. the final project was 10 thousand dollars for early childhood urban agriculture programming in district 10. so, we actually partnered with a community based aurgz called, girls 2,000 to expand existing use development and urban agriculture program that they

run. we will include additional fieldtrips to head start facility, particularly in visitation vamy and engage the young person in the head start program in community gardening particularly along the [inaudible] green way which has spectacular gardens and the goal of the program is get kids bethrough the age of 5 interested in and engaged in growing vegetables and understanding where their food comes from >> supervisor christensen >> can we circle back to [inaudible] there seems to be a disconduct between the 8 thousand dollar budge squt the actual number needed of about 4 times >> there was >> they pay for cameras but not installation? >> there was a miscommunication, so when the

budget opportunity came up, i think the supervisors staff at the time started talking to facility staff and our facility staff didabout understand we had to use a established city contractor so she basically did googling to look around and see what it may cost for camera installation. city contractor and the soft cost volved planning-when we realized the money that was awarded in the participatory budget process wasn't enough we reconnected withstuff and supervisor chew supplemented >> are the result oz of these recording monitored in real time or only accessed if there is a problem >> these cameras are for the interior of the building. it isn't a building where staff can be in one place and see

what is going on, so i think what staff is hoping for is that they will be able to be in one place and keep a eye what is going on in-air yeahs of the building that is monitored. >> i believe there may be one more project i can think of. i thought it was sunnyside to put--no. there may be one more project >> i do have the list of projects as forwarded by the controllers office and there are only-according to that list the awardees only included one project per district >> i'll double check. i could be getting it confused with this year >> one of the compicating factors is there are different pots of funding we get so there

may be fubdsing through participatory budget or adbacks or funding through a supervisors district fund, so these in particular were specifically related to participatory budgeting >> got you. thank you very much >> thank you >> the next person is a resident that was able to secure one of the projects and this is harry prince. he is going to maybe shed some light on some of the issues we face when projects get approved. hopefully your presentation will be how we can learn from that. >> thank you very much. my

name is harry prince and residence of district 7. sthaunk supervisor christensen and yee for convening this meeting. i prepared a software presentation is that available for projection now? where would it be? student>> dd you plug in your flash drive? >> no, i e-mailed it to the office here. sorry, i'm having

difficulties here. let me try it one more time. i'm the author of the 14t avenue proposal. i must say i appreciated mr. [inaudible] presence from the sfmta, but her presentation implied the traffic [inaudible] was requested is approved and the sfmta is proceeding with installation and this simply isn't true. the sfmta looked at 14t avue and the humps they put in are some dist toons the south than what was in the proposal and the current status is sfmta will study the issue and give a response in 2015

whether the sfmta will move forward with the installation. thank you very much. here sh the outline at the top as i planned it. while i'm here--i live at the indicated intersection. this is the time my flee year old son and turns 5 in april. it is my hope the hump will be installed before he enters high school. thank you. this is the pathway of interest. it is a path of over 3 quarter miles length. there is no interdeckz of any kind, a stop sign or speed bump. the box here represents the intersection in question which is clearly identified in the participatory budget proposal. people race up and down the street at high speed, it is of

great concern to myself and my neighbors and that is why the proposal passed quite successfully in the battle that took place last spring. here is a timeline of interactions between supervisor yee offices and the sfmta. 23 may 2014 i learned the proposal was approved with 306 votes. 26 of june and called [inaudible] contact in supervisor uoffices and they congratumented me and advised they would contact me in july. [inaudible] he contacted them and request that they reach out and look forward for a call. by the first of august i didn't hear.

[inaudible] i should respect a response by the end of the day. on the 4 of septstill not having heard i called mr. mooreeeno again and he said he would call sfmta again and should expect a response on the 4about oaf 5. in midoctober i called mr. merino again advising of the inaction and providing the name and number of the [inaudible] public liaison [inaudible] i called mr. putell on the 28 of october and reached him and had a extended conversation. i'm grateful for his time and attention. he advised all proposals are under review. he said we see this as a 2 year process which came as a surprise to me burkts he said he would check the status of the program and call the follow

day. on the 29 of october and there after i received no response from mr. putell. on the 8 of december 2014 supervisor yee kicked off the 2015 budget process and held a public meeting. i attended that meeting as a interested person. mr. putell also ateneded and i met him face to face at the meeting. he said he was sorry he wasn't able to chat has he promised, offered an apology for not calling me back and said he would assign a project manager by the end of jan 2015. the follow day i did receive a e-mail from mr. putell, it included draft criteria for the snaugz of the speed bump and said these are not final criteria. i waited for the assignment of the project manager. on the thirt

of jan 2015 i received a e-mail from charles green and said the sfmta is planning to install bumps elts where on 14th avenue and should expect action and final decision in may 2015. i must take exception this is a approved project and sfmta is moving forward. it appears it will be a full year before i hear information about when they plan to? stall a speed hump at the indicated nrbt section. a few observations, the sfmta doesn't operate with normal courtesy. there were pneums promises to contact constituents and thereert no action. mr. putell said directly he would call me tomorrow and there was no such

call. the sfmta makes and changes rules at will. i received draft material for speed hump instullation, why not send the kunt one. [inaudible] i received no appointment of a project manager. finally there is a lack of urgency and the sfmta operates on a evast time scale. i understand approval of the projects, but don't understand why it takes 2 years to pile asphalt on a roadway. i do have some suggestions. i may point out the representative from sfmta made her presentation and departed and doesn't seem interested in hearing comment from the public. i remind they are here to serve the public and not themselves i ask the leadership of sfmta attempt to create a

culture of accomplishment. at a minimum when you say you will do something, do it. finally, please put in the hump. elected officials, i may suggest make the sfmta a issue. you will find many sympathetic ears among the voters, i'm sure. i have my own idea which is one of competitive government >> can we wrap it up, please? >> very good. thank you for your time and appreciate your attention >> any public comments on this item? mark christensen and [inaudible] >> good morning supervisors. first of all to [inaudible] thank you very much and to the other supervisor frz the participatory budget process to give individuals and community organizations a vehicle to

bring needed projects to their districts. i'm hoping that all supervisors will avail themselves of this to give residence a opportunity to be part of the process. one of the projects that i was involved with was the radar speed signs on allah meanie bull vrd. we waited 6 months to hear and then on jan 30, i received a e-mail from livable street subdivision stating that we have started conducting field works and reviewing information about the location in relationship to your request to verify the extent of speeding at this location and recommended location of the speed radar signs. the letder goes on to state, the sfmta will be contacting you when the study is complete to