intervention with the bicycles, where the injuries have to happen. how can we just continue to it rate and get smart, based on what we know from the data and make the interventions more targeted and surgical. >> i think the quick-build approach is by its nature targeted. i think with the capital reconstruction, we're -- for the projects that we've brought here to think about geary or 6th or masonic, often reallocating road space, aiming for low-chip goals, controlling the overall speed of traffic. that's the ultimate source of our safety problems. one benefit to quick-build approach gives us, if we see a street that has a particular pattern of there's pedestrians that are continually being hit by right-turning vehicles or there's a traffic light that's continually being run, we can in a very surgical way, change the traffic light, ban the right turn on red, so we are addressing, you know, that, as

you said, the data-driven source of the problem in interim way. >> so you mentioned may you'll bring back sort of potentially a policy and assessment of the resource needs. in terms of that larger top-down analysis of the whole network that you spoke about, kind of when can we expect to see that piece? >> well, i'd like to bring some findings in may. i think the -- you know, we've analyzed the whole network. it kind of underpins our capital program. and the prioritization that's in our capital program. we did this real quick cut of the highest of the high in the slide that i showed, showed here. what i'd like to do is maybe show places where there are particular tools like high-visibility crosswalks or right turn on red bans or signal timing changes that might address -- here's 20

intersections where that tool makes sense and we're going to go ahead and do that. now that's iterative, too. never with this level of focus and turnaround. it will be a -- it will be an evolutionary step forward in the way we use the data. but i don't -- wasn't planning on bringing the other 120 miles after that list row-by-row to you. i was going to suggest that we bring data from the high-injury network and match it to tools. >> to address all of the areas of concern. okay. that sounds good. >> anything else? any other questions? >> i have a question. i know that we came out with meaningful word a few years ago, that has to do with the buses. separately we have the bicycle plan and obviously the project that's a part of our high-injury network, with our capital program. how do they all overlay

basically? >> that's a good question. one thing we notice whenever we map ourman -- muni forward network, i think of the 20-odd corridors in the muni forward network, three of them are not high-injury network corridors. that's why the geary project is going to have pedestrian bulbs everywhere, the street that's really important for transit. but it also has -- it's one of the streets where pedestrian safety is a big concern. so there's a pretty close overlap between high injury and the muni forward network. the bike corridors we're trying to find places to build bike lanes that are not on high-frequency routes to create some separation between those two modes. there are also a lot of high-injury corridors that don't have muni service and that are

bicycle routes. without showing you a map, that's kind of how it lines up. >> it would be interesting to see. in the context of the other plans we have studied a lot of these and contemplated projects in some instances in these areas. it would be interesting to kind of overlay kind of the work that we've already done for those areas with the work we're doing now. because i do think that often when things happen, people act as if we just thought about it yesterday, when these things have always been in the works. and kind of, you know, in the background. they've been study -- had environmental studies take place. i think it would kind of help better inform the public, as to what wow overall strategy is. because i think there's a lack of understanding that we have a strategy. and i often direct people to the strategic plan, which speaks more to goals and kind of tactical things that are bigger picture and not so much to like individual-specific projects that people are interested in. so i think, you know, however we

can better communicate how all of the things that people have heard about in the past relate to vision zero, which is now what people are hearing about today, will better help corral support and understanding for what we're doing. >> what? >> okay. any other questions? before we go to public comment, i have one. the market street still very much a part of that high-injury network. very dangerous street from the charts we've seen today and here on other days. do we know what sorts of vehicles are involved in the crashes that are going there? and in particular, is it a relatively concentration on private automobiles involved in the crashes on market street? >> i do not know the answer. but i can bring you back that answer. >> i do know that in advance of seeking your approval for the

safe road market street project, which was from 3rd to 8th, that the basis for that approval to restrict private vehicle traffic on that stretch of market street was disproportionate share of serious and fatal collisions on market street, accounted for by private vehicles. so that was -- that was why -- that was what made the case for those restrictions. so that was the case at that time. >> right. >> so we would have to bring that analysis forward to see how that's playing out, in that area, where there's still some places where vehicles can legally enter and many places where vehicles illegally enter, as well as the rest of the corridor to see what that data looks like. but that was definitely the case, that the private vehicles were disproportionately responsible for the serious and fatal collisions. >> well, proving that we've been doing this together for eight years. you saw exactly where i was going and not distracted by my shoe bling. i mean, here's the reality. if we're trying to speed this

up, and we've got a portion of market street that is waiting for the better market street project, but a portion of market street, where the crashes and the pedestrian danger is disproportionately caused by private automobiles, could this be one way that expedite this? and i don't think we know the answer today. i think we need some more information. i'm sorry for turning the questions into the sort of speech part of this. but director reiskin prompted that. >> the draft was issued at the end of february. the current schedule, it's an ambitious one, would have the a.r. certified i think around september. our plan is to bring to this board the parking and traffic changes, that come out of that process soon there after, at

which point, we have budgeted for this, $2.2 million in the capital project. we have budgeted for near-term improvements, after the environmental is approved. should you approve the parking and traffic changes. we're already planning on -- have budgeted for near-term improvements on market street, as early as towards the end of this calendar year. >> yeah. okay. well, and, you know, 90 days is 90 days. maybe this is quickly as we can go there. but that would be something that would interest me. if this is the timeline that we're following for that, that sounds ambitious. but hopeful as well. okay. miss boomer, do we have public comment on this item? >> yes, mr. chair. charles, followed by kevin stall and then jan. >> charles, welcome back. nice to see you. >> thank you, chair. you, too. directors. charles, senior organizer at the san francisco bicycle coalition.

first, on behalf of our 10,000 members, thank you to this board, to staff for really quick turnaround on this 90-day action plan. pretty remarkable to see it come back to the next meeting. after two weeks ago, you know, we had hundreds of people demanding protected bike lanes. and we didn't have that many answers about how to get there. so this 90-day action plan is the first step towards getting there. but it is a first step. i'm going to comment on a couple of the actual elements within the 90-day action plan. the first is the list of ten quick-build projects, to be built by the end of 2019. again that's a good start. that will close gaps in our high-injury network. the list needs to be bigger. these are all projects that have some foundation of design work and outreach done already. so that we can move them forward quickly. many of the projects fit those two criteria. so seventh, valencia, embarcadero is a really big one. page, 11th, bayshore, market

street, thank you, chair, for bringing that one up. we want to see some progress on in the next six months. certainly by the end of the year. so we want those projects added to the list. we want to see that list expand. we also need timelines and milestones attached to these projects, so this 90-day plan can be more accountable, so we can hold yous all as directors accountable right now. we have this end end-of-year timeline, but some of these hopefully can be done quicker. [bell ringing] we want to see timelines attached. so these are low hanging fruit. once we get them in the ground, subsequent projects will be -- and approvals processes. so this morning we cut the ribbon on polk street, which took over half a decade to get in the ground. we can't have that process repeated. it just doesn't work. so we need to rethink every aspect of a project's lifespan, design, outreach, environmental approvals. and as bits of that here -- [bell ringing]

expanded and hopefully we can see that in a report back in may. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> after kevin stall and jan, it will be kathy deluca. >> good afternoon. my name is kevin stall, i'm the chairperson for the pedestrian safety advisory committee. i'm 100% in full support of these quick-term improvement projects. i also am in full support of the long-term projects that will definitely help improve the safety of our pedestrians, bicyclists, all throughout the city. but quick-term improvements is what is most needed, especially for areas that have the most vulnerable population, especially the tenderloin, which is 100% on the high-injury corridor network. and that is not fair for the residents there. we have the highest concentration of seniors and disabled people and families

with children. and on a daily basis, they try and cross these streets and then the traffic is to dangerous, that a lot of them do not get to do what they want to do, go to the store, go to school, things like that of that nature. and we need to like do -- obviously we're trying to push for more safety in the city, though. but, i mean, it's definitely going to take a long term. but quick-term solutions are definitely 100% will get things done a lot sooner to make people competent enough to be able to do their daily needs. and i know that as a former resident of the t.l., i experienced that on a daily basis. [bell ringing] so i highly encourage you guys to do as best you can to try and get these quick-term solutions done as soon as possible, so everybody can feel safer in this city. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker.

>> jan van der loot, kathy deluca, winston parsons. >> hi, i'm stepping in for kathy today. my name is jody. >> clerk: -- thank you, director reiskin for mentioning walk to work in your report today. thank you to tom mcguire and his team, who put the report together. it was really great to see the priorities. i know the liveable streets team is working really hard to do the planning and project work to get the safety improvements on the ground quickly. we are happy to see taylor and 6th street ant quick-build projects, two of the major safe. improvements campaigns passed in 2018. and for including california street on the list for 2019, with the pedestrian fatality earlier this year. we know that that desperately needs expedition of safety changes. one of the most delayed and very important projects that we feel is missing from the list is mission and geneva. this project lass suffered years

of delay. we originally saw the plans in fall of 2015. it's gone through three years of community outreach, designs have been vetted by the supervisor and hopefully we'll see legislation this summer. like charles, and the bike coalition, we would have liked to see the list a little longer than just the ten projects. and walk san francisco really wants to see the projects focused on pedestrian safety. 70% of the projects on the ten quick-build list are all bike lanes. yes, they do help pedestrians. but they aren't the comprehensive treatments we need to get on our most dangerous corridors. [bell ringing] we're hopeful that the next report on the comprehensive analysis of the high-injury network, will include a priority list of paint and post treatments that we've been advocating on all 100 miles of the linguistic network. -- high-injury network. it includes daylighting, high visibility crosswalks, left-turn traffic calming and, of course, our increased crossing times.

[bell ringing] >> thank you very much for your comments. next speaker, please. >> clerk: jan, followed by winston parsons and then alice rogers. >> welcome. >> hi. thank you. my name is jan. i was at her house a week before she passed. she's a cyclist that passed away on march 11th. on the one hand, it -- it exhilarates me to see like these projects moving along so fast. on the other hand, it makes me very sad. i looked back and i saw articles from 2015, listing howard street as a problematic street then. and finally we're going somewhere. one thing i see now at howard is measures have been taken, but cars and especially you can see

drivers, which are unbounded in number and they're often not from the city and don't get any training. they still park -- they still park there. and i tell them like you can't park here. i'm just picking someone up. and you're forced again into like high-speed traffic and it's very dangerous. what i would like to challenge you on is can we get law enforcement, police involved in this process? and make sure that they -- they ticket people for this. like i've never seen this. i've never heard anything about this. it's always people from like the bicycle coalition, like as a reporting hotline, you can take pictures. like uber and lyft, you cannot even send -- i tried to contact them. [bell ringing] hey, this driver is parking illegally. they don't have a way of sending complaints about drivers. zero. so i would like ticketing enforcement and like signs for

these companies, if they don't get their drivers to obey the law. we can design out of the bike lanes we want, but if cars are just going to park in them, i don't know how it will help us. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> clerk: winston parsons, alice rogers and then rachel heiden, who is the last person to in a speaker card. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is winston parsons. i work at the richmond senior center at gary and 26th avenue. every day our center serves over 100 older adults a and adults with disabilities. and i'm here to start with a thank you, because as you may be aware, we have a petition online and on paper titled six california street now. specifically in response to the killing -- the whole segment from 18th is a high-injury street. we have almost 400 signatures thus far and it's still growing. so seeing this on a quick-build project, that's great. thank you. but i really urge this to be as

robust and comprehensive as possible. if we're doing daylighting, please protect it. people are parking in daylighted areas and you can paint the red curb, unless something is put there like a bake rack, i don't know what, people will park there. lastly, i think this should lead towards a capital project. these quick-build fixes are great. as we heard, they're interim fixes. i also think there's a reason or good reason to focus on transit improvements with many of these projects. transit first should be a primary vision zero strategy. and again i'd like to echo what another said, we're glad for see the quick-build projects. but we would wish that we had more pedestrianable project -- pedestrian projects on this list. i would say lastly the biggest things my clients express to me with how little time to cross the street. it's going to be years, five years before we increase

pedestrian crossing times across the city is absurd. [bell ringing] and whatever resources that need to be allocated to change that sooner, rather than later, please allocate them. if there's anything we can do as advocates to help make that happen, we will do it. because that is something that they experience daily. and just crossing fulton to catch the five on the way here, i witnessed a senior stuck in the middle of the street, she crossed right at the light. [bell ringing] still not enough time. >> thank you very much. >> alice rogers, rachel heiden. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm alice rogers, president of the south mission bay neighborhood association. more importantly a member of the vision zero coalition. and i'm mostly here to jump up and down and thank you very much for this very robust conversation that you've been engaging with with staff, the back and forth is fabulous. it's moving things forward five years and the clock is ticking. so we need all of this accelerated work.

thank you very much. i'm also here to second or third or fourth the motion of walk san francisco. to please not leave pedestrians behind. the bike projects are very important. everybody who changes mode is a savior. but the pedestrians cannot be the vulnerable people left behind. just last week i was walking down market street at rush hour and between 4th and 5th, and a cyclist, no arts were involved, a cyclist clipped a senior. luckily nothing too serious was done. but i think it just makes the point that we need management of all modes, so that we don't build conflict in. we need to engineer for everybody, so everybody can go together. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. thanks, speaker. >> rachel heiden, last person to

turn in a speaker card. >> thank you, chair heinicke. i was sprinting down 4th street during the meeting, i want to thank director brinkman for the missing transit only lanes, just to let all of the directors know -- and we would love to see those comments come back. i'll be sending a long letter. and while i have you, it is your -- which means you design streets that put transportation first, not cars. and this seems to be an egregious -- the lane is going to come back. so i want to talk really quickly about director mcguire's presentation, specifically as it relates to the ten quick-build projects, which don't seem to touch on public transit whatsoever. and we know that paint on

transit-only lanes is a great way to make muni more reliable and speed it up. and also i think something that we're completely missing is that transit-only lanes significantly improve street safety. so this agency, staffer, leadership, directors need to start talking about public transit as a real true solution to vision zero. when we can get -- when we can make public transit competitive, they're not driving, that means less cars on the streets, that means our streets are safer. sop bringing it full circle here, we need to see the transit-only lanes back. people are hit by vehicles, they're dying on our streets. and we have real tools, real solutions to fix it. really quickly, 100% support tom mentioning of piloting projects. how about we pilot some transit-only lanes on mission street as part of the excelsior project. thank you. >> very good. any further public comment on this item? seeing none, we'll close public comment. directors. >> i have -- >> please, rubke.

>> thank you to the advocates who are here. i thought the public comment on this item was really, really helpful. i have a few follow-up questions based on some of that. just before i forget on the signal crossing time, i just had a question about our rollout of that. because five years obviously seems like a long time. but as i understand, it will be rolling that out. i'm just wonder going there is any sort of -- are we prioritizing certain locations, where we know there's specific problems and what -- anything about the rollout where we can kind of do it in a day -- data-driven prioritization sort of way would be helpful i think, especially given that long horizon. >> so i think, you're right director, rubke. in response to a previous question, i said we were going to dig into our high-injury network data and look for ways to match tools like extending crossing time, with the actual

patterns of crashes perform with we don't have the answer today. that's an approach we're going to be taking. the other answer on rolling out things like signal timing improvements, if we can get more resources. we could do that faster. as i said, we'll be coming back with a recommendation on resources and more of those terrific electricians you met earlier today, that will help us there. >> that's really helpful. then i have another, more of a comment, we received a letter from -- i'm always getting the working group's name wrong. [laughter] the working group for the vision zero coalition. kathy deluca is shaking her head. she knows i got it wrong. [laughter] the working group sent a letter about expediting protected bike lanes in particular. i'm the most impatient person in the world. i want too see the projects yesterday. all of them. but the letter pointed out we

need to make sure part of the process in providing these quick bike improvements and protected bike lanes is to make sure that people with disabilities and seniors are not adversely impacted by the design. they're coming out with some tools, some principles that we should consider in our engineering process. and i just encourage staff and i know you guys will do this, you know, and encourage you to meet with them and make sure that's really baked into our process so that we can get these improvements in the ground quickly and accessible for everyone. >> absolutely. we've seen that letter, too. and we agree. we're not -- this is the list of projects where we think we can get really, really meaningful, useful things in the ground, including but not exclusively parking-protected bike lanes. places where there's a really complicated issue, where people might need to get auto boarding island. we're not quite sure how to make the transit and bikes work yet.

that needs more design, more work with stake holders, including all of our stakeholder communities. so, yes, you're right. we're not going to raise something that doesn't meet the needs of people with disabilities. >> okay. any further? please. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chair. so, you know, on the crossing times, i feel like that is an issue at a number of intersections. i kind of wonder if anybody looked at technology allows you to say -- hit a switch that gives you more time than the default, in order to have an extra minute or whatever it takes on a very wide intersection. >> yeah, our approach historically has been to increase the amount of time for all pedestrians, so that we don't ask pedestrians to ask for more time. we kind of give it as a default. especially when you look at this map and you see the concentration of high-injury corridors like chinatown and the line and south of market, where so many seniors are living.

we probably ought to time the signals, you assume a senior is present. that's been our approach, to achieve what you're trying to achieve. >> i would say that more in some areas like california or geary or 19th avenue. we're seeing people stranded in the middle, because they were moving slowly. it just wasn't enough time. thank you. >> related to that, we don't have -- do we have sensors that track pedestrians. i know with our -- we have signal prioritization for buss. is that possible to do that for pedestrians? just like you could sense that people were still in the crosswalk. i know some jurisdictions do have that. and i don't know if that's something that we can look at. i think it's a real issue. i know the light usually holds for a few seconds after changing. but a number of intersections. it's true. i think i have complained before the intersection at bush and

sampson is like seven -- counts down from 7 seconds, longer than 7 seconds. but it's not a whole lot of seconds, considering it's downtown, right by the muni bart station. luckily the traffic is always stopped up on the evening rush hour. so people can walk at their leisure basically. but that never made sense. i definitely had an experience many years ago when someone i dated was hit by a car and he was young and he was walking with a walker. and every time he crossed lombard street, he could never make it across lombard street with one light change. right. because even though he was young and able-bodied, other than the fact that he was now using a walker, it took too long to get -- for him to get across the street to get, you know, with one traffic light. and he was young, right. so i can't imagine how long it takes for other people. and i think that's something, if we can look at sensors, because i do think as we talked about this before, the population generally starts to age, this is going to be increasingly an issue for people. and i don't think that there's

ago going to be a one-size-fits-all necessarily on just countdowns. >> could you help us to understand -- let's say we did decide california street or whichever street, you know, it's a minute and it needs to be 2 minutes. can you help us understand how difficult it is to make that change? is it a major engineering change, is it a major cost change or is it we can reprogram the signal to give more time and that's something we can do relatively quickly? >> well, we need to -- actually the change is a key part of what it takes, that requires an electrician to go out to the field. on a street like california, we have frequent muni service, we want to be very careful to make sure that we don't make signal timing change to let's say extend the crossing time to cross california. and suddenly throw the coordination out of whack or slow down the thousands and thousands of muni riders we have there. so again we have traffic

engineers who are able to weigh those balances, it does require some traffic engineering analysis before we just -- it's not something as simple as flipping a switch. >> okay. is there environmental analysis that goes along with that? >> we don't do analysis for signal timing. >> okay. great. and then it seems related to that then is the concept of transit signal prioritization. and i see you could give a longer crossing phase for pedestrians. if it was a muni vehicle, you could give signal prioritization to the vehicle. can you help us understand that a little bit more? >> okay. so transit signal priority is something we have on i believe close to 50% of the signalized intersections that muni passes through. and it's -- it's a very, very complicated engineering challenge, because you've got, you know, muni is carrying passengers -- we're not the kind of city where everybody travels downtown on the bus in the morning, travels back out in the

afternoon. so you've got to decide give the inbound priority to the outbound. you add the pedestrian variable into it, it becomes even more challenging. the question we ask ourselves, what is the actual need of pedestrians. in many, in most cases it's simply more crossing time. generally again our approach to give them more crossing time. to build that into the timing pattern of the intersection, which can then vary with the transit signal priority calls. >> anything else? >> yes, please. >> go ahead. >> thank you, mr. mcguire. there's so much in this that i think is really important for us to support you in moving forward. i think the quick safety updates are just going to be key. as we've seen, we can do so much with paint, with road diets. i think continuing to focus on efficient outreach, that

includes piloting the projects during the outreach is a great idea. i think to your point, just makes it a lot easier for people to understand what it's really going to be like and what the effects are going to be. as those of us who have been on this board for a while have seen projects that neighborhoods have said are going to cause car m mag eddon. pedestrians are safer and cyclists are safer and transit that's more efficient. i think something that we had talked about before, that maybe we missed a little bit in this presentation, was the enforcement. i remember you saying that the focus on the five tickets, the percentage in each precinct and the number of tickets had gone down. so anything that we can do to help bring that back to the attention, including bike lane ticketing. mr. van der loop -- i'm so, so sorry for your loss. that really hit us all very,

very hard. so thank you for coming here today. we don't see a lot of bike lane ticketing. and i understand it's such a fast-moving target. when i was riding up to the polk street ribbon cutting today, i had to go around two taxis in our lovely new protected bike lanes. it's frustrating. at least the taxis have a number, i actually could have called them in. but to mcguire's point, with uber and lyft, again van der hoof's point, we don't even have a way to report them, unless you want to stop and take a picture with your cell phone and then you have no way to get in touch with uber and lyft. i wonder if we as a city have -- lyft is a publicly traded company to have a way to report these drivers. i think the driver churn is still pretty intense. i don't think drivers last for more than six months opinion we need a way to let them know which drivers are making really bad safety decisions, especially lyft. i mean, with all of their stuff about they want to take the city to a post-car environment.

all they're doing is just clogging up bike lanes and parking in the wrong spots and causing safety issues. polk street. as i said, i was at the ribbon cutting, super bittersweet. the lower part of that project is lovely. the middle part of that project is not great. and i know that in our legislation, it's in there to take a further look at polk street. and i think we said 12 months after it was completed, i hope that taking a further look at it doesn't happen after a fatality on the bit that doesn't have protected bike lanes. and if does, that's going to be horrific. but i'll just make a plea that we not wait too long on that one. yeah. it's just -- the upper bit of polk street. and i know staff -- this is not to disparage staff, and the department, i saw the plans. those plans were fantastic. those plans got watered down and

pulled back severely. the plans for 6th street i know got watered down. that brings me back to what i'm going to continue to bring up is, are we okay with telling staff to make great changes to our streets, to get to vision zero, to get to transit priorities, to get to a bicycle network and then are we just going to sit back and let those plans get watered down by whoever. by the chamber of commerce for 6th street, by a supervisor for mission geneva and the red transit lanes. and so i really -- i would love to hear from other -- from other commissioners, because my fellow board members, if i'm the only one who thinks that, then i'll stop. if everybody else thinks that we can support staff better, by saying bring us iterations, bring us maybe what the community finally agreed to or the community who showed up to rachel heiden's point, the community who is being heard, is not the transit riders. it sounds like it's the car

drivers who are being heard there. they can all kind of agree and get their mind around pedestrian safety things, but they're not getting to transit efficiency. they don't think it's them. it's not their community riding the bus. maybe the way we get around this, you bring us more than one option when a project comes to us. you bring us the option that was agreed to in the knock down, drag drag them out, however long outreach lasted. you also bring us a future vision. so the out-there vision. the one that's going to get us to vision zero and the one that's really going to move the needle. and see what the board comes down on. maybe this board has the guts to go ahead and do the projects that are really going to move the needle. because i know your staff can do it. we have seen it. we've seen what comes out of staff, brilliant minds and thank you all so much, before it gets put through the hop hopper, as

it were. again appreciate it. the quick safety updates, the efficient outreach with piloting, focus on the bike lane tickets and something, i wish there was something we could do with uber and lyft to actually have a way to report those drivers in a more efficient way. so thank you, mr. mcguire. >> perhaps an approach might be to refer to the retirement commissioner and ask him not to invest in any stock of lyft, or any other t.n.c. i'm sick and tired of them as well. we know what they cost to our community and streets. it's not fair to the people that live here and drive cars. they're put in the same -- it's not great. we've got to do something. whether it's congestive pricing, i know it's controversial, but i support. we need to get down to the real nitty gritty of practical issues. i'm sure no one can ever tell cheryl to stop. [laughter] >> oh, thank you! >> that's the nicest thing you've ever said to me. >> okay. that takes care of the motion

for a group hug. [laughter] >> i want to say something. i think one of the things i've been pushing for, i know this department has really beefed up, our community outreach work. because i think the key is that in the past i haven't always thought we have done enough to make people feel inclusive in the process. or even understanding the problem. and i think one of the challenges is people don't want to have agreement on what the problem is, then when you proposing solutions, they're going to veto them all and tell you there's not a problem. i think we have to -- i'm glad that we have this new -- pops or pros, whatever program. right. i'm glad that we have people aligned with the supervisors opposite. we have to do the hard work and think about designing a city for the future. i remember a conversation we were having recently about the central subway. at the time it seemed like a political giveaway. now we almost seem genius

because of the growth of south much market and the center. seems like we were forward-thinkers and we were not. we have to plan -- we have to inconvenience people today for the city we need to be for the future. i don't know how we better communicate that to people. i think work with people, so that they understand that, you know, it's nationally, you know, people getting driver's licenses declined across the country, not just in san francisco, but everywhere. the only group that has more drivers than it had in the past is -- those over 70, which we can argue about what a that's a good thing. anyway. >> hey, hey! [laughter] >> yeah. but the point -- >> that was a quick hug. >> yeah. [laughter] >> but the point just being is that we know that the future isn't cars. but we still have people who drive today. and so we have a really interesting construct of how do

you help transition people who are likely wouldn't be in cars at all, right, if you had better transit, better walking and better cycling. but also, you know, not condemning those people who have to fill or will only drive some place and hoping you don't create it so more people drive as a consequence. but i think that we have a lot of work to do in helping people understand the city of the future. i think that we all know where things need to go. and ping in -- i think in ordero be successful and make the projects turn out the way we like and get supervisors on board, is that we have to give them permission, like to -- we have to show a vision, are you part of the future, are you part of the fast. we talk about the city of innovation and where things are going. we also have to deal with people's real-life fears of today and gentrification, which is the biggest kind of challenge that happens in a weird sort of way, when you start talking about red transit lanes. or, you know, bike lanes on certain streets. the fact that some people have

choice and other people don't have choice. and i think when you don't have choice, you're angered by policies that you feel like limit your choices, right. and so how do we deal with that reality of the fact that it hasn't been always fair for some people and those people maybe didn't have a choice, you know. we find that a lot in communities of color, they couldn't afford to buy cars, they finally get to buy a car, you tell them you don't want them to drive it. they look at people choosing to ride bikes and take buses, they have a choice and can get a car and buy a car when they want it. we have to deal with all of those sort of things. we can't be psychiatrists or psychologists. we can include people in what the problems are and how we need to fix them today, tomorrow and in the future. using the problems of today, like the t.n.c.s that, you know, we could have -- we could have maybe anticipated had we thought a little better about those sort of things and used that as a platform for how do we anticipate the future and plan

for the future, without, you know, without completely, you know, anticipating the present. so how can we get people to be bigger thinker and beyond themselves and make them realize a bus with 45 people, 5 55 people is more important than one car. this is messages we need to work through. i think poets -- right. it's a place where a lot of that starts. also, as i said, going back to muni-forward, the bicycle network plan and all of those things to kind of overlay how that is part of a strategic strategy and not a willy-nilly decision. >> very good. this is an information-only item. you have received an awful lot of information. thank you all. you thought you were giving us information and you're leaving with a whole barrel full of it. thank you, mr. mcguire, for the very important work that you do. >> hear, hear. >> can i make one more comment real quick? >> sure. >> were you going to step in,

director, carolina? >> -- director heinicke? >> no. >> if there are watering down of projects, it would be nice to see that done in the light of day. talking about daylighting a lot. bring to this board two options and let us choose which we feel is the stronger option. and then just a couple of additional comments. support the policy recommendation, mr. mcguire, that you bring back to us in may. very happy to see that in the pilot. 9 innovative thinking about the pilot concept. looking forward to seeing that. to the larger kind of challenge, i'm going to keep bringing it back to the bigger picture and the 2024. not a patchwork, but a network for people to use. looking at the larger picture. definitely want to continue the emphasis on that analysis of the system as a whole. and i think you said maybe some thoughts as to this is a fix

here, this is a fix here. i think that makes a lot of sense. but if we're going to look at the resources needed, as is one of your slides, the resources needed to deliver on vision zero, it seems to me we need to continue to take a comprehensive look at the entire problem, as opposed to just the quick-build. so understand that takes time and resources to do that analysis, what's the right fix. but i do want to keep coming back to that bigger picture. and, you know, so we can understand what it would cost to design, what it would cost to actually build in a real comprehensive way to address the entire network. and then, third, just i want to echo the enforcement piece. i bike a lot. and i have to swerve into fast-moving traffic a lot to get around people parked in the bike lanes. i also had the pleasure of riding on a muni bus on the 24 recently and watching the driver give a ticket on the spot to one of the lyft drivers that was parked in the transit stop.

and he actually claimed to me how it worked. you push this button and that guy just got a ticket and that's $400 right there. i'm pleased to see that that transit-only lane enforcement. that enforcement of violation of parking in the bus stops is actually occurring. and apparently the operators are educated on the how to make -- how to be part of that enforcement system. and i just wonder if we think about the same thing on -- in terms of bike lanes. cot parking control officers be enforcing illegal parking in the bike lanes. or is there some other system to grow those who, you know, who can help to take on that responsibility? >> so while we can't deputize you to give a ticket by camera, i can tell you a way or any other cyclist or driver or pedestrian can help with bike-lane blocking. we take reports of double parking on 311. we aggregate the data, we have heat maps and send parking

patrol officers out to the streets. that's not -- that's not report this license plate to 311 and the person gets a ticket. making those reports ep helping us deploy the scarce resources that we have, we have issued 29% more tickets for double parking, bike lane blocking and illegal stopping in traffic lanes this year than last year. and in part thanks to that crowd-source data. so 311 is kind of like a secret weapon there. >> okay. any more information? very good. thank you so much, mr. mcguire. item 12 is off, is that correct? >> no. actually the only item in closed session, there is an item in closed session. item 12, discussion to invoke the attorney-client -- >> move to go to closed session. >> is there a second? all in favor please say aye.

>> it will close out our agenda. all of you who came down today, thank you. and please leave the room. >> all in favor please say aye. >> any opposed? >> motion of the disclosed passes. and again we are adjourning today's meeting in memory of mr. antonio. i've been informed his wife, his widow, a member of our muni team. thank you very much.