mta will be advancing to help improve transportation. >> would it be possible for you to get closer to the microphone? >> better? great. i'm megan wier, i co-chair our city vision zero efforts and i'm the lead on the work for data and evaluation. thank you. vision zero is the city's commitment to safer streets, eliminating traffic dust and eliminating severe injuries. 2017 was our lowest year for traffic deaths in our recorded

history of over 100 years, but we know we have a lot more work to do and that's why i'm here today. and core principles of vision zero is preventing severe and fatal injuries, saving lives and addressing equity, ensuring that vision zero benefits all people. we're working to create safe streets, safe people and vehicles and fundamental to vision zero is addressing speed which because there is a leading predictor of whether someone survives a traffic crash. we work to define what inequities and severe and fatal injuries mean, injury outcomes that result from unfair differences in social, economic and political conditions. and people with disabilities are among the communities that we're addressing for particular risk

of experiencing injuries inequity. as i mentioned last time, we currently have a safe street for seniors program that is led by my colleague from the department of public health that has been focused on educating seniors and service providers about vision zero, including conducting multilingual presentations, thus far the program reach is 730 seniors and staff at 25 locations. they've been funding community based organizations to do outreach and educational outreach and targeted locations, including eight, which includes lighthouse for the blind. my presentation is going to focus on a summary of the geographic areas we identified where targeted safety investments can help improve safety for seniors and people with disabilities, using our police, and hospital data. and then also, patrick golier is talking about the

recommendations prioritizing locations. as i mentioned, seniors are at increased risk of death and severe injury. they're five times more likely to die in a traffic crash than younger adults. we found among people in traffic crashes, seniors are disproportionately represented relative to younger adults and even to senior motorists. people with disabilities are a particular concern. people with disabilities comprise 6% of people that are admitted for transportation-related injuries. and disability defined as having mobility, hearing or visual disability. we heard a lot of concerns related to those issues and navigating the street and the potentially limited visibility

of people in wheelchairs. today is the day that i'm talking about disability data from the trauma registry. that is abstracted from medical records of the people most severely injured. it's part of a linked data system, linking data for vision zero. before we didn't have access to data because it had been not routinely collected in police data. the data that we have to share today is from 13 and 14, because abstraction was not possible in 2015, due to staffing shortages, so retro abstraction is still possible. i want to take a moment to acknowledge the historic advocacy around the issue and how helpful it has been. increasing awareness of the importance of disability and understanding traffic injury, and just thank everyone for their continued engagement so we

can continue to understand and advance this work. so, among the people with disabilities in 2013-14 data, 59% of those injured were using a wheelchair, walker or cane. approximately one quarter had hearing impairment and 20% had visual impairment. again, these are people seen at our trauma center for a severe traffic injury. about 70% of those injured were pedestrians. and similar proportions, 13% were drivers and 11% were bicyclists which is notable also. >> sorry, those are the people injured? >> correct, we're talking about people with disabilities seen at the trauma center of san francisco general hospital for severe injury. among those treated at the trauma center, over half were seniors, age 65 and older.

34% were aged 45-64 and 10% were less. >> i'm sorry -- [inaudible] . >> i'm sorry were less than 44 years and under. thank you. 10%. thank you. so we, the remainder of the analysis, we combined seniors and people with disabilities for the analysis to look at pedestrian injuries for seniors and people with disabilities and where they're concentrated on the street network. we worked closely with the privacy officer and the city attorney to make sure that we were able to share data that could be useful for informing traffic safety interventions, but also that protected patient confidentiality, so combining these two populations given the small numbers was important to share the math analysis. i wanted to provide that context. so we looked at three years of

data, we considered all injuries, both from police and hospital records and multiplied severe and fatal injuries by three and then mapped all locations with a score of 3 or more. the math i'm about to show you, 100% of severe and fatal injuries for seniors and people with disabilities are represented, and 87% of total injuries for people with disabilities, and a little over half of the senior injuries are represented in the segments. these segments represent 31.5 street miles, approximately half are in the city, vision zero high injury network and third are eligible for the program which patrick is going to talk about next. so this is a city-wide map of the street segments. we can see that a lot of the segments are concentrated in the northea

northeast quadrant of the city. 19th avenue. i just wanted to -- i'll pause for a moment so people can take a look at the map. and again, i'm happy to follow up with detailed questions people may have. is that helpful?

next, we identified priority areas, so we have the streets segments throughout the city and wanted to identify priority areas which include where seniors and people with disabilities live. we did that by identifying census tracks that had the highest one-third of seniors and people with disabilities and conducted a survey to identify priority locations we should target. which includes where might these populations be traveling more often? that includes senior centers, libraries, public health facilities and others that provide targeted services to seniors and people with disabilities. so when we looked at the priority areas, we did a good job overall of prioritizing where the segments. two-thirds of the priority segments we just looked at in the previous map are in the priority areas and that's where

75% of severe and fatal pedestrian injuries were also concentrated. these included 63% of total injuries to people with disabilitiesnd 43% to seniors. that's the next map. the seniors and people with disabilities are in the tan, and the green areas are around the attractions where people might be go. that includes the senior centers, libraries, public health facilities and meal programs. >> is it possible to make -- >> yeah, and i could also -- is there a particular area you wanted to see more closely? >> the screen is hard to see. >> just hard to see overall?

>> yeah. >> do you feel like having -- just having a much bigger map with street names or something like that. >> yeah. >> that's something we can follow up with. >> it would also be helpful if you described the neighborhoods that are being highlighted because some people can't see at all. >> thank you so much for noting that. again, this really focuses on the northeast quadrant of the city. we have concentrations in chinatown and the south of market area. again, along the geary corridor and the western part of the city. and there is also concentrations in the various southeastern part of the city as well. now that we've completed the maps, an important question is how could they be useful to

inform safety traffic improvements. so it includes addressing concerns, how can we overlay that over the city as projects advance and ensure there is particular attention to the needs of people with disabilities and seniors in those areas? and then broadly considering the segments throughout the city for prioritization as well. again, patrick golier is going to talk about an mta program that is going to be doing that. but before we move to that, i wanted to give a brief highlight of a survey we conducted at the end of 2016 that helped this analysis. we administered it online, in spanish, english and chinese. we were really pleased to receive results nearly 300

responses to the survey. 38 people reported representing people with disabilities and another 80 representing seniors. and just to highlight some of the issues that are important that could be considered more closely in the planning processes, included concerns crossing safely, with not enough time to cross, with issues with drivers yielding and a lack of crosswalks and then more general issues regarding visibility. and we also asked people, what were locations that were of particular concern to national assembly the city? so just in the survey and we overlaid that data with the priority areas of concern that we identified. and with respect to the intersections that people were concerned about, as well as corridors which people use long definitions, 71% of the intersections that people were concerned about in the survey were included in the priority

areas and 55% of the corridors, this is a layer that was not only capturing where injuries were concentrated, but some of the areas that people felt less safe in. the priority areas did a better job at doing that. 26% of the corridors and 36% of the intersections were in that segment. that concludes my presentation. i welcome any questions or comments or anything clarification that may be helpful. >> one moment, there is a comment on the bridgeline from orkid, i believe.

>> ok, yeah, well first of all, you know, i wanted to know, i've been in touch with a deaf-blind individual and there are few groups who i feel like are impacted the most that don't have guide dogs. they've never had a guide dog. and they have very limited vision, so that does -- a few of them have been hit by a car and some have a problem with, they're saying drivers drive too fast and don't give them a chance to get across the crosswalk, they walk slowly because of balance problems. so how would we train drivers, here in san francisco, more and more drivers are driving for über and lyft and they come from out of the city into the city to do their job and drive around and earn more money.

so they're not aware of people living in those low case indication -- locations and they're driving too quickly. that's an issue. i wonder if you would hire a traffic coach, or some kind of management, specifically for market street. you know, for people trying to cross the street, because drivers are driving too quickly. and the way the sidewalks are designed, it can create confusion as far as where people are going and traffic is moving. so it's just not the best design for people coming from out of the city into the city. especially in regards to speeding. you know, me as a mother, i've seen at my son's school, some serious barriers there and part of the problem is the drivers themselves. so you know, they don't have the right to go through the red light, but ironically, the law sometimes allows that, they may

or may not know if they can go through that red light or not. and may or may not end up in jail. how do we resolve that problem with people going through red lights? it's scary. specifically for deaf-blind individuals who have no or limited vision and they're trying to walk and all of a sudden, they're hit. the emphasis really is on the driver. >> thank you so much for the feedback. i couldn't agree with you more regarding concerns with respect to speeding and red light running. for vision zero, we actually have the sf police department, has a program called focus on the five, where they focus on the top violations that contribute to the most severe traffic injuries in the city. and that includes speeding. as well as red light running

along with stop sign running, failure to yield and i always forget one. failure to yield while turning. so i feel like your comments included all of those violations which we have identified as critical issues for the police department to focus their initiatives on. that includes recently a year long campaign that focused on speeding on the high injury corridors in san francisco. along with education campaign around speeding. vision zero focuses a lot on speed, not only enforcement, but street design. street design is a critical way to help slow traffic speeds. i'm sure that patrick is talking about that next. he's an expert from sfmta, so i don't want to steal his thunder, but he's a lead for the program, which focuses just on doing that. i would also be remiss if i didn't mention our top legislative priority for speed

at the state level is automated speed enforcement which would allow for automated enforcement in san francisco of speeding violations. which in other jurisdictions where it's been implemented have been shown to decrease the fatalities by 50%. i really hear you around those concerns and really welcome the support for vision zero. and for these types of initiatives that will go a long way. we currently were not able to advance the bill for automated speed enforcement in the legislative session this year, but it's something we're committed to long-term. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you. now, we're going to go to patrick in a minute, but there is, i think, a council member here who would like to ask a question.

so first is alex and then helen. >> thank you for coming and sharing the updates to us. i just have a question for you. i this is the first -- i know this is the first publish. what is maybe stats on implementing -- >> that's why i'm so excited. when i was invited to speak, i was asked if patrick would come, because that's what he's going

to talk about. through vision zero, our agencies coordinate closely so we can inform improvements and that's one of the things he's going to be talking about today. >> thank you. >> council member smolinski: i'm curious, what is the thinking behind traffic circles? is this more appropriate for your colleague? >> yes, i'm so excited he's here. helen smolinski that's fine. >> co-chair blacksten: sally. >> council member mcdonald: your data indicates road users are the victims, is that what you're saying? you had pedestrians, people with motorcycles, and people with bicycles. those were defined as road users. >> in the pie chart? >> council member mcdonald: i'm trying to understand if we're after just protecting

pedestrians if these two are falling into protected classes, or if your data indicates like when bicycles hit a pedestrian, when motorcycles hit a pedestrian, all those things happen as well. >> sure, so -- are you still seeing the slides i'm looking at? this one that you're talking about? >> council member mcdonald: yes. i'm trying to figure out who we're talking about. >> for this slide in particular, it's focused on the victim. regardless of falt, this is the person who is injured and came to the hospital. for vision zero broadly we focus on people walking, on people biking, on drivers, on motorcyclists. for this analysis that i shared today, the mapping focuses on pedestrians because our goal for vision zero is eliminating traffic dust. and this past year, 14 of 20 deaths were pedestrians, half of which were seniors.

70% of the people with disabilities were injured as pedestrians and that's why we focused on walking. in terms of if a motorist versus a cyclist, it's just someone injured. >> council member mcdonald: that's what i wanted to know. one other question, you said you sent the survey to all these groups and only 30 people representing disabled? >> 38, correct. >> council member mcdonald: thank you. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you. your colleague, would you like to have him make a few comments? because we need to go to staff, too. >> i would suggest that we move

patrick's presentation and go back to questions and public comment. >> co-chair blacksten: great. patrick, you're on. >> thank you very much for having me. again, my name is patrick gloelier, i'm from sfmta, one of the hats that i wear is on the traffic calming program manager, so today i'm excited to talk to you all about a new capital program that we're launching at the mta, called safe streets for vulnerable populations. sorry for the formatting of the presentation. first, just a little bit of background. as many are aware, the sfmta is

laser focussed on safety. we're focus on the high injury network. many of the capital programs are and resources are allocated toward the high injury network and this is based on previous efforts of the department of public health and the mta to data crunch and come out with a list of corridors and a map where collisions are happening across the city. on the other hand, the city's traffic calming program is at the other end of the spectrum. it addresses residential vehicle speeds on residential streets. it's application based. so it's a customer service program for citizens across san francisco, but it is reactive in nature. so residents on their local streets are applying to the mta for traffic calming. they initial engineering review and result in a certain number

of traffic calming projects annually across the city. the scope is limited. and we've got a limited range of tools in order to address speeding. largely, it's a speed hump program. and that is primarily because speed humps are the most effective way of addressing speeds on residential streets. but for a number of years i've been advocating for a new program that bridges these two programs. and i have been initially scoping it as a proactive calming program where the city identifies streets across the city that could benefit from speed reduction. when my staff and i started to thinking about this and scoping it, one of the things that came out was the need to address vulnerable populations in the program. megan and i became aware of the initiatives and started collaborating a bit more on what

the program might look like. and the result is a new capital program which would provide annual stream of funding for engineering solutions that will address collisions involving vulnerable populations across san francisco. including seniors, people with disabilities and youth. the program goals of this new capital program would be to reduce the disparities among vulnerable populations and traffic injuries and deaths. we want to address safety issues taking place off the high injury network. that's important, because these are streets that otherwise may not be prioritized for capital improvements and yet these are streets where people live, where they walk, where they're crossing the street and where we are hear ago lot -- hearing a lot of concern from people and yet many of the capital resources are allocated toward the high injury network today. we want to improve comfort for

those traveling by foot or bicycle. what is important, while megan's data is extremely valuable in identifying where injuries are occurring, that sense of comfort is also important to residents and these are things that we learn about as we engage with communities and various populations about areas where people don't feel safe crossing the street. my library or bus stop is over there and i avoid this intersection because of a number of different factors. so these are issues that we want to identify as part of the program as well. we want to improve neighborhood connections to some of the key destinations that megan identified and would be identified through a robust engagement process. our approach is to be data driven, so thanks to megan and her team for helping us to identify locations across san francisco and patterns of

collisions among these vulnerable populations. and then the outreach is the other big piece. we want to work directly with neighborhoods and stakeholder groups representing vulnerable populations in order to identify these issues. the first step besides getting funding of course, is to identify some of the focus areas. megan's information and data will weigh heavily in that, but there are other factors in considering which neighborhoods should be prioritized for these types of improvements. land use analysis, geographic equity is important, whether there is support in the community for the improvements and whether there are other capital projects in the area we can piggy back off of. our planning process, heavily

involved in outreach and engagement. we want to be able to go into the neighborhoods, talk to the people that live there, get input from the senior groups and other stakeholder groups representing people with disabilities. talking to the school district, doing walking audits around the schools to try to identify these issues. and then going out to the broader community. this is duplicate of the previous one, but this outlines what a process might look like from identifying a focus area to construction. data collection, of course is something that megan will help us out on. data input. coming up with project proposals for traffic calming and other capital improvements to address safety. going back into the community with open houses, opening up the discussion with a broader

community. tweaking that design as necessary. and then moving into construction. this is very, very similplistic but outlines what a program might look like. one of the benefits of the program is that the tools in our tool kit are expanded. i mentioned that for the traffic calming program, we're fairly limited and largely it's a speed hump program, but i'm envisioning for this program a number of different tools depending on the issues. it's definitely not a one size fits all. every community is different, every community has different issues, but the solutions could range from traditional speed humps and other types of traditional traffic calming to signal timing improvement, crosswalk improvements, bulb outs, painted safety zones, et cetera.

this map is just an example of a project that is being worked on today from the mta in the excelsior district and what it is meant to illustrate is how this process might play itself out. the project area is identified in yellow on the map. and the red dots are key land uses and destinations within that district, including schools, parks and so on. in this case, very sight specific pedestrian safety improvements are identified with a little pedestrian icon, and then corridors are identified as well for traffic calming improvements. again, we're really excited to be able to launch this program with the mta. we feel like it's greatly needed and appreciate your support. and any questions that you might have.

>> co-chair blacksten: thank you for your presentation. so, i know time is moving a little bit away from us. i want to go back to my colleagues on the council. are there any additional questions that you would have of either one or both of these people? helen? >> council member smolinski: patrick, thank you for the presentation and this new initiative. it's very exciting and i think good news for all san franciscans. question about traffic circles. i noticed more of them popping up in the city. and specifically i'm speaking about tuk lid consider door. i noticed while they slow drivers down, pedestrians, and i'm included among them, i'm confused by them when i'm crossing. and i certainly feel safer in a

crosswalk than i do crossing at a four-corner traffic circle. what is the rationale behind them? i imagine this is recently installed and we imagine that it was put there to improve pedestrian safety? >> traffic circles can be put in a number of ways. people think of roundabouts that are more european and help to facilitate large numbers of vehicles safely. roundabouts -- >> are they the same thing? >> no, they're not. so what we're installing at some locations across san francisco, we consider them to be traffic calming circles. so the intersections that you're referring to are always stop-controlled. meaning that vehicles do have to stop at that intersection. that the circle in the middle is meant to visually slow traffic down and there is deflection for

vehicles. the input i'm getting from the community around the corridor is as pedestrians, people don't feel as safe. we've installed a number of other traffic circles, similar to this in other neighborhoods across san francisco and have not gotten that same feedback, so we're doing a formal evaluation of the circles on euclid. we're evaluating it against things like yielding to pedestrians in the crosswalk and stop sign compliance. >> council member smolinski: that's good to hear. and that specific one, drivers slow down, which is terrific. but i can tell drivers are confused and it's a very heavy pedestrian neighborhood. and then the pedestrians were halfway through the intersection, and then you notice the car that you thought

was going to turn around the circle is actually go straight. it's just -- it slows every down for sure. so that's great. >> that's good [laughter]. >> council member smolinski: that's good to know it's being evaluated. >> co-chair blacksten: any other comments from the counsel, including orkid? alex? >> co-chair blacksten: who was first? let's go with orkid. >> council member sassouni: i know there are some neighborhoods that try to add those signs, you know, i don't know if you've seen the deaf child at play signs and usually that comes up because there is a disabled person or deaf child in the area and it's like a warning sign. i was a survivor of a car accident as a young deaf girl

and the only problem is identification process. how do we make drivers not only slow but pay attention to what is around them on the road? because every time i go to a corner i know as a pedestrian that i have to wait until i get a visual confirmation that the driver sees me, but if i don't have someone make that eye contact, i'm afraid i'll be hit. if they don't know i'm in the area, it can lead to an issue. i think we should consider educating drivers to make eye contact with people like me who can't hear them. >> i think that's a great comment and something that megan will take away as part of the education component of vision zero. it's also important for us at the mta to think about. visibility at intersections and perhaps relates back to the traffic circle question about as a pedestrian, am i visible? do i feel safe?

if i can't see the driver. >> council member sassouni: yeah, it helps so much. as someone from new york, i know what it's like to be in a busy intersection. i think we could -- [inaudible] -- and just look for one another so we don't have shortstops or misunderstandings and that eye contact is key, just an idea. >> co-chair blacksten: now, alex, coming to you. >> circle back to my question. i have two questions. one the original question, what are the improvements they made after the analysis? and second, do you have a targeted location that you

follow to improve? >> i think the first question was what type of improvements -- >> that gets done after the analysis? >> that goes back to this slide, where i mentioned a broadening of the different type of engineering solutions that we might install as part of the program. i don't think there is a one size fits all. we have a broad sense of solutions here that would be determined as part of outreach process with the community. recognizing that every community is a little bit different and the destinations are a little different and the populations. >> help to clarify through the chair, i want to make sure that the council understands this data has just been put together, so this project is brand new. and so my understanding from these presentations, they're

ideas that have been generated, but we don't have data on changes yet. but the traffic calming projects have been in for some time. >> implementing? >> this particular project that patrick is talking about today has not been implemented. >> i'm trying to get funding as part of the program. i have requested an annual stream of funding for this program. >> thank you. >> sure. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you. so, i just want to make one brief final comment. you made a great presentation. lots of information to digest. and you know, you've got a lot of good work to do and we're here to collaborate with you. as a blind person with a guide dog, i'm also hard of hearing.

and so i'm concerned about what is going on the streets as well. we had not with my current dog, but my past dog, we almost got hit one time. came within six inches of his nose, the car did. so that was extremely close. so i'm very interested in what you do, having a guide dog, i depend upon her to see when to cross. i give her the commands to go. and with the traffic circles that is of concern to me, too. i appreciate all the work you're doing. so let me go to staff. any questions there? >> i have before we go to public comment, very briefly, i wanted to say thank you again to patrick and megan for being here today, and for really placing importance on getting this data together. i know it's been in the works for a long time. and i know there has been

difficulties around pulling the data together. so i really want to say thank you for your perseverance. i have two questions. one is i know that vision zero has website and information available. if you could speak for a minute on what you're thinking around how to make the data and research public, that would be a nice thing to know. and the next question is what is the best way you would like to receive feedback from the disability community around how the projects are prioritized moving forward? >> thank you so much for your ongoing support and collaboration on this. we're actually in the process of updating the vision zero website, so this is a timely question. and i haven't actually -- we're still in the outreach phase of sharing these findings and getting feedback.

so we definitely would like to share with -- we're meeting with the vision zero coalition, the senior work group, and sharing this with the task force and getting additional feedback. and then i would love to be back in touch when it is publicly available to share the resources. in terms of ongoing engage. we have the task force. that meets quarterly, that is open to the public and everyone is invited. i know that patrick's program will involve as they mentioned a stakeholder outreach component. so to the extent that the leverage for those projects, that would be exciting. >> great, i wanted to express that mod would be interested in helping to get the word out as that moves forward. >> co-chair blacksten: patrick and megan, thank you for a wonderful presentation. definitely learned a lot. i did have a follow-up question

regarding some of the traffic calming projects that you mentioned. when the time is right, i would encourage coordination with the san francisco public works curb ramp program. marci camacho who was here earlier. and getting information regarding complaints and grievances at certain intersections as it pertains to safety. because that's another resource in terms of getting input from the community. and then of course, when identifying these traffic calming -- or intersections that receive traffic calming, what have you, the curb ramps at those intersections would also get upgraded as part of that and

coordinating with the curb ramp program so we're not duplicating our efforts within the city family. >> sure. >> i think we can move to public comment. >> i want to thank you for making the presentation. that's all the questions we have right now. let's go to public comment. anybody from the public like to step up to the mic and give us your comment or observation? >> we have a comment on the bridge line. >> co-chair blacksten: ok, all right the bridge line. >> yes, something to do with the traffic calming. there is sometimes when you're driving in a car with somebody, a taxi or personal vehicle and bicycle will get in front of the

car to slow the car down and the car will try to go around the bicycle driver and almost hit me last week. and this is happening when bicycles are trying to frustrate drivers. you should be ware of this because these bicycles are going to cause accidents. one more thing, just one more question. sir, that was one more question that i had. this is concerning the overall participation of disabled people in the public forums. someone should make the board of supervisors aware that all these commissions and boards should have available because us at home can't make it to the meetings, don't have a chance to participate in the meetings. and i've seen a will the of things happen that i would like to participate in, but because

they don't have a land line, we can't participate in government at all. i'm disabled and can't get out to go to the meetings, but i would appreciate it, because the land line is my life. i think the board of supervisors, should have every board and commission with the land line available to people who can't get out to the meetings. thank you. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you. we've heard your comment and we take good notes in these meetings. i want to assure you, we'll get back to you and go forward with it. >> ok, because you know, that part about the landline, that's really important. because i definitely want to participate in government. and i'm not able to. >> co-chair blacksten: we hear you. thank you. >> another public comment. >> co-chair blacksten: one other

public comment. >> hi there, i want to thank megan and patrick for an incredible presentation, i learned a lot and it's really exciting to see this project happening. the name says it all, project zero, great name for the project as well. i want to thank the co-chair jim blacksten for your telling story of what you experienced personally, because it's not uncommon and i've had experiences where i've been afraid for my safety crossing the street. it's actually not uncommon. and so this affects a lot of us and it's great we're having this conversation. i had a couple suggestions that i just wanted to offer. one is, i share the call in concern with lyft and über driving fast because they have incentive to, financially, for their work.

and my suggestion would be maybe to start a conversation with those companies around providing maybe some kind of incentive for their workers to drive a little safer. i know that lyft and über drivers do not make a huge salary and so maybe some kind of incentive would help with that. the other suggestion that i had was possibly working with the dmv and their educational program they have. as someone who has gotten a driver's license, there was not a great amount of information given to drivers about people with disabilities. and the different kinds of disabilities you might come across when you're driving. and so i think maybe having a conversation with the department of motor vehicles could be beneficial for the issue. and lastly, i wanted to bring to the attention of the people here, the idea of adding more crossing lights. i've seen a lot more crossing

lights in san matteo and berkeley and i don't see them in san francisco, and maybe there is a budget issue, but i wanted to put that out there because i find those visual indicators to be extremely help. >> co-chair blacksten: thank you for your comments. as a guide dog user, i've had experience with lyft and über. that's fantastic. we're taking notes. all right, i think what we're going to do is close out this information item and we'll move on to our third information item of the day. and that is overview of the -- that's number 9. this is the overview of the accessible business entrance program. let's see, our presentation is

by regina dick-endrizzi. director, office of small business. welcome to the council. >> thank you, good afternoon chairs blacksten and director bond, as i said, i'm director of the small business and with me today from the department of building inspection is ed sweeney and bill strome and then the president of the access appeals commission walter parks, to help answer any questions. so today we're going to provide you with a little bit of background on how we got to where we are today. some of the program overview

compliance and time lines, outreach and education, and the department of building inspection is here to be able to answer any questions around the details of the requirements for property owners. so, on this slide, there is a picture of a corner cafe. and that corner entranceway has a step up and the doors are at 45° angle. this cafe is in a 581 square foot space and 400 square feet was for the dining rather. -- area. now the department of building inspection has numerous solutions to deal with entryways that have been approved by the state architect. and we will see an example in the next slide of one of those

equivalent facilitations. so the architect for this business used one of those facilitations which would have included having a ramp with a power door and the level landing inside. but what this would require to achieve that accessible entrance was to change the angle of the entryway from 45° angle to 90. because this property is in a property that is over 50 years old, dbi could not just sign off on that solution. it had to go be submitted to historic preservation. so historic preservation was not -- this did not meet their criteria and so would not approve the modification. and said that they would require a detailed architect and historical assessment before

they would begin working with the business on finding a solution for accessible entranceway that met historical preservation guidelines. what that meant was that the property owner would have to submit 4,000 application fee and hpc did say it might take another six months to be able to come to an agreeable slags and suggested -- solution and suggested to go to talk to public works about sidewalk encroachment coach ment /* -- public works was not aimable to doing that encroachment. on the next slide, i wanted to provide you with the opportunity for those who are able to see

it, the drawings where the architect utilized the department of building inspection equivalence facilitation with the change of the angle of the door. so again, just to reiterate that the new business could not afford the time or cost to navigate the city's process. and so ultimately had to make the decision that -- or made the decision that they would apply for a hardship waiver and they opened their business with a non-accessible entryway. so learning about the challenges that businesses have in navigating the different agencies and trying to come to a solution, our office -- that occurrence and that information came to our office in 2012. and so over the time our office

developed a white paper in proposing solutions in how the city could actually improve the process. so making, achieving accessible entryway was more easily doable. and at the end of the day, a result of achieving more accessible entryways. so, then in may of 2013, supervisor tang asked for the white paper and legislation was created from that. that legislation -- and i know that the council has received a presentation on the legislation back in 2015 -- so that legislation was introduced in 2015 and then was signed into law by mayor lee in april of 2016. the accessible business entryway program requires property owners

of buildings with places of public accommodation to make the primary entrances and entrance routes to the building accessible to people with disabilities. now this program resides in the department of building inspection. they're charged with the implementation and enforcement. i wanted to make sure that was clear, it's not our office, but the department of building inspection is the regulatory agency for this program. through the accessible business entrance program, the city and county of san francisco is taking a step forward in helping property owners better comply with federal and state disability access laws and ensuring the civil rights of individuals with disabilities are upheld. an interagency team is working on streamlining the process for compliance with the ordinance and construction related disability access laws.

the planning department, the historic preservation section, has created design guidelines, so now it's much more apparent as to what the hpc is looking for when having to alter entryways of properties that are over 50 years old. the department of public works is also in the process of creating some design guidelines, so if a property owner does need to give consideration in going into the sidewalk area to create an accessible entryway, they know up front what the department of public works is looking for. the interagency group involves building inspection, access appeals commission, planning department and the historic

preservation. san francisco public works for sidewalk modifications, office of small business will be doing outreach and education and providing resources to small businesses and your staff, the mayor's office on disability for their expertise on disability access standards. compliance is required, so for properties, for property owners who have places of public accommodation, they're required to comply with this law. and so, places of public accommodation examples are restaurants, bars, hair salons, nail salons, gyms, retail stories, grocery stores, daycare centers, et cetera. there are four exemptions to the properties entryways that are

exempted from the law and one is buildings that are built on or after the year 2002, because those are deemed to have been built compliant. buildings owned and operated by religious organizations. bona find private club. and four, buildings without public accommodation. barriers to accessible entrances include one or more -- bariers to entryways can include one or more steps to the entryway, door handles that do not meet regulations and sloping or narrowed doorways and uneven floors. so, there are several steps that a property owner needs to report to the department of building inspection in regards to their entryway. so the first step a property owner will need to