>> so moved. that motion passes unanimously 6 -0. >> they will place us on item 21 discretionary review. >> good evening. this is going to be a little bit longer than the typical presentation. david winslow, steph architect. the item before you is a public initiated requests for discretionary request for discretionary review for building permit location -- for the building permit application to construct a 20 story vertical addition, a rear horizontal addition and façade alterations to a existing two story one family residence.

the requesters -- the first, stephen chan, the jason neighbor to the west of the proposed project is concerned that the proposed height of the vertical addition is not compatible with the residential design guidelines. the proposed alternatives are setbacks to the third floor so that the scale matches other buildings on the block and does not block light and secondly to move the elevator so it does not -- to match his a little existing light well on the west side. the second d.r. requester, a neighbor to the south of the

proposed project is concerned with the proposed addition is a demolition and should be reviewed as such, and number two , the measurement of the project height is erroneous and exceeds the allowable height prescribed by the planning code and that the proposed addition is not compatible with the following residential design guidelines. to his proposed alternative is to limit the fourth floor. public comment to date, the department his receipt four letters and opposition in four letters in support of the project. the department's analysis and recommendation, demolition counts were provided and staff reviewed and determined this is not a demolition of the planning code.

it has provided a site survey by a licensed property surveyor that addresses the slope and the site relative to the building height. the residential design advisory team review confirmed that with respect to light impact to the adjacent d.r. requester's side yard setback, a perfect merging alignment is not typically required but typical to allow some buildings extension into the side yard. extends forefoot eight beyond the d.r. requester's end wall of his side setback and is open and clear to the rear. as such, we did not see an extraordinary conditions with respect to matching of the light well. the original review recommended illuminating the fourth floor and the reduction of the rear expansion to provide a massing transition between the adjacent buildings. at this points, the proposed third floor was set back from

the front building while 11 and a half feet on the setback of the adjacent neighbor. it was assumed to be adequate. in response, the project sponsor reduced the size of the fourth story and reduced the massing at the rear to the neighbor to the east but moves the third wall forward. staff determine the size on the location to be minimally visible and allow it to go out for neighborhood notification. the topography of the site renders this massing about two and a half stories above grade at the rear because of the up sloping of the lot. staff recommended further refinements and modifications to the third story massing to address the scale at the street and the pattern and scale of buildings as they stepped down the street. following adjustments were

requested. one, match the setback the proximally 8 feet of the third floor to the adjacent neighbor to the west, to the midpoint of the façade of the mid-floor, setback the remainder of the third floor by 4 feet and set -- i'm sorry, lower the third floor ceiling height by 1 foot to reduce the massing, and eliminate the parapet above the third floor to also reduce its massing. also illuminating the overhang of windows above the third floor and raising the parapet of the second floor to mask the massing of the third floor. it also recommends modifying window proportions to relate to the surrounding pattern of the windows. it sets a new -- a project sponsor responded to some but not of -- not all of these suggestions.

it sets a new precedent and stuff i additional measures be taken to comply with the residential design guidelines in relation to the d.r. requester's issues related to the building scale of the street. specifically the measures that were not in that packet. staff recommendation is to take d.r. and approve the project with those modifications. that concludes my presentation and i'm here to answer questions thank you. >> thank you. we will now hear from the d.r. requester number one. it doesn't matter which one. come on up.

>> this portion of 26th street is a well-established pattern of houses that are up to three levels on the street with for -- third floors being a setback as noted in the d.r. they are -- there are seven properties around the subject property all the way up to douglas street that have third-floor setbacks that are consistent with each other, as you can see here. the project proposes a four level structure of almost 4,000 square feet and includes five bedrooms, five and a half bathrooms, two family rooms and in addition to a living room. the fourth floor which is entertainment space with a wet

bar, this fourth floor negatively impacts the surrounding properties, reducing air, light, and privacy, particularly to adjacent properties in the two setbacks to the rear. it will also shade some of the solar panels of the upper neighbors. it is contrary to the zoning guidelines and would establish a new precedent. this is excessive and not consistent with the height and bulk of the homes in the area. the third floor setback requirements were established long ago and renovations in the area in the past and recently including the other d.r. requester's home has complied with these setbacks, which are reflected in appearance today of the street. applicant his claim the fourth floor is not visible from the street, but this is not the case it is obscured from one angle

since they moved the third floor , and included a parapet extending to the top of the third floor. it is still visible from most any other vantage on the street. if you take a few steps to the right or left, from the uphill, you would plainly see the third floor and the fourth floor extending up. from the other side you would also see both of these. if the parapet was removed, would be even more visible. there is substantial neighborhood opposition to this. currently there are 47 neighbors that have signed or sent letters in opposition of this project which includes 301 households on the same block or cross the street of the project. in the mediation meeting on july 17th with applicants, the d.r. requester and the planning manager, mr. winslow reviewed the file and said the d.r. requester his had valid points and that it did not comply with residential guidelines. from his review, was unclear how

this project was approved. he noted that the p.d.r. require the project sponsor to illuminate the fourth floor. however, this was not done and it was unclear exactly how this was pushed through. after the meeting, the d.r. analysis report appear to do an about-face and presented an awkward partial setback of the third floor and reduction or removal of the parapet but no mention of the third floor -- the fourth floor. this last-minute proposed plan fails to involve the substantial problems. we were surprised to see this proposal particularly after david's comments in the meeting, so after the meeting i reviewed the record and created -- and it was unclear how exactly this plan was pushed through. the applicant referred to the fourth floor as the third floor, which is confusing and improperly portrays a project is smaller than it really is.

the applicant move the third floor forward to the street and added the parapet so the third floor obscured the smaller fourth floor, instead of resolving the fourth floor issue , this created another setback issue which is why we're here today with two d.r. on these issues. i also found in the file review a letter from the applicant sent after the meeting in which the applicant says he is seeking legal council and says to david, and i quote, in the meeting with the d.r. requester, you suggested there was error that may have been made. if you plan to bring such a claim to commission, i want to see the documentation how the error was made despite the thorough review. obviously this represents significant sloppiness and unprofessionalism on the part of the planning department. this would be an opportunity for me to highlight how acceptable this is. this is not have planning should be conducted. the design guidelines and planning department decision

should not hinge on veiled threats from bullying applicant. it was already admitted the plan did not comply and there are two considerable issues that have not been resolved, and furthermore, there is no compelling reason to depart from the established residential design guidelines, even illuminating the third floor and doing a proper third-floor setback, the applicant can achieve at least 30500 square feet, five bedrooms, family room , and four-point five bathrooms as shown here. this project is excessive, negatively impacts neighbors and unnecessarily sets any precedent thank you for your consideration >> thank you. thank you very much. will now hear from the second d.r. requester. >> hello. i am the owner of the house directly up the hill. this is the photograph i took of the street. you can notice the topography. we are on a hill and every bit

-- building steps down. my house is this red one. it has a setback third-floor. you really can't even see it from here. this house also has a setback. the proposed house that is coming in would be three floors to the front. it also creates a light issue where -- i have not seen the revised plans. the other thing that i think -- that is one piece, and as david mentioned, the light well, this area right here, there is an overlap or the elevator is encroaching on the light will. and lastly, maybe a minor issue, i will point out in terms of the parapet, there are 16 houses, 13 of them have entrances on the second floor, by revising this façade, if it is flipped, it is

removed -- this tree is removed. and it potentially reduces a parking spot. i know that is all structured into the guidelines. it might be worth taking a look at. for me, my request is the third floor setback -- as is, this house will cast a shadow in the morning on my whole house and block every window on the left side of my house. i am sort of okay with that. he has a right to build something, but i am requesting that we do the setback and lower the structures as much as possible. would be nice to see over the structure. thank you. >> thank you. do we have any public comment in support of the d.r. requester his? come on up. >> my name is lorraine.

good evening. i feel it necessary to speak with you in opposition. >> please speak into the microphone. i am a 23 year resident and i see this project as an example of a disturbing trend that pushes the limits of height, overall size in relation to surrounding homes and design guidelines. the existing home is probably less than 1,000 square feet. while i cannot determine the square footage of the proposed home, i get it costs or four times that size. the impact to light and green space and privacy is considerable. there are no surrounding homes. this is not a precedent that should be set in the neighborhood. indeed there is precedent for not allowing a fourth level at all. while i understand the property

owner's right to demolish the existing home and build a new modern building, i would hope that this can be done with respect for the surrounding neighbors and the larger neighborhood in which i assume they intend to live. i urge the planning commission to take discretionary review and not allow this fourth floor of this project to be built. thank you.

>> i want to remind you that -- i know it has been a long day, earlier in the day, you actually eliminated the fourth floor for a different request, and that was 900 square feet. here we are just asking for a very small portion that is considered labelled as family room. this is the second family room. families don't need to have two family rooms. if they need two family rooms, it should not be a menace to the

surrounding neighbors. just to illustrate my point, i am just putting down the section of the plan. overhead, please. this is the before, this is how it is today, and this is what the project sponsor wants to do. you may recall that a year ago we had a similar thing, and the neighbors called it a crows nest , that fourth floor that was a very little thing on 2302 -- on 2302 clifford. we don't need to have over 4,000 square feet, four floors, an

absolute anomaly for this part of the valley. particularly if you ever pass by ongoing 26th street. it is a very steep street. if you get on top of this street , which his properties very close, you would not even be able to see the fourth floor. think of it this way. this is almost 9:00 p.m., we are here because we are trying to get you to eliminate 366 square feet. this is a drop in the bucket. please consider admitting that and please give us the front setback that the other d.r. requester has asked. i think it amounts to 188 square feet. again, we're talking about chump change when you're dealing with big projects like this. i wish that neighbors were more considerate in terms of when to do their buildings. think about the people that you are going to be living next to. thank you so much. my time is up. this is the last time you will see me this week. thank you.

>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is chris. projects like these are unreasonably large. they don't take into account the character, the aesthetic of the neighborhood, and they are a nuisance to light of privacy of all surrounding neighbors. therefore they don't benefit the community in any way. therefore i oppose these projects. thank you for your time. >> thank you. any other public comment? in favor of the d.r. requester his? >> that evening, commissioners. i am an architect. i have lived in the valley for over 30 years. i took a look at this project. it seems that it is a large project.

it is a large vertical and horizontal addition. the top floor is a small entertainment room. they label it as a family room, but there is also a family room on the ground floor. i think personally houses that have two family rooms are divisive for family rather than creating a sense of community and family gathering. there is some confusion about whether it is three stories or four stories. the building code deals with great plain, and the basement is considered a story and then the first story above that plane looks at it differently. it certainly looks like a four story building when you look at the façades. i think the top floor is small. it doesn't seem like the neighbors are asking for a lot.

they would like to accept this new person to be a neighbor and are asking for a setback in the front to comply with the next her neighbor and protect light and ventilation, and they would like to not have a roof deck, which is mostly what the top floor is. it seems like it is a large roof deck and a small room up there. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment in support of the d.r. requester? okay. with that, we'll hear from the project sponsor. >> thank you. i'm travis murdoch, thank you for staying so late and spending time with me this evening. can you put up the projector, please? i'm a physician. i work as an investor and my wife is a nurse. we move five years ago from

canada. we have many relatives from canada. many of whom are our coming to visit us. we are planning on having three kids. we have one, we have one on the way. this is a project for us, 100%, with the intent to stay in a city and stay in the neighborhood that we really love much to say about our top floor, which we have refined and diminished in size quite significantly. it is a very important space for us for the three reasons. one is it is a family room, there is a small family room in the basement which will be used by my parents when they are staying there. the second point is that it is a separated space that i can use for business meetings, and i get a further guest bedroom when our families in town. you may have heard that people were upset about the project. many have actually written letters in support, including the neighbor to the east east. i should note i saw his note

that he had a red. on the place to the east, but in fact, the neighbor who is the renter who is supportive of this project and tells us she was actually misinformed when he came back and that she wouldn't have signed the prewritten letter that he gave her had it not been for him being pushy. another example, a neighbor across the street owns two properties and lives in one is very supportive of the project as it stands. the assertions about this fourth floor are completely -- are completely flawed. others have suggested that it significantly affects their air, late, and privacy and that it somehow is a menace to the neighborhood, that is not the case. in fact, if you look at where he is, the neighbors directly to the rear, about 100 feet away, they are uphill from us, this is

the reason why code 261 exists. additionally, if you look at the plans, we are setback to maintain the mid block light. we are set back setback from the sides, as well as setting back from the front property line by 27 feet. none of the four-story properties on the street were shown in the other presentation, however in fact, there are four four-story properties that are in close approximation to us down the hill. there is another in planning with a plan to go to four stories. i suspect it will be approved. hopefully you have seen the 3d three images we have provided to really demonstrate how this

property is in keeping with character of the neighborhood. is concerning to me that there's been so much misrepresentation there of. i am deeply looking forward to meeting this neighbor. we tried it length to come to terms with him on the front setback. that was not a walking up and down the block and discussing the character of the neighborhood. that was standing on his roof and seeing how it affected views what we propose, i tried to spend time with him last week, and it was to articulate back and provide some setback and relief for him in terms of light , will also eliminate -- limiting the front roof deck. what you can see is -- we are

stepping down the block, more a 2-foot stepped down on the third level versus his level to the west, but also, you know, creating some dynamic and a very positive dynamic for the neighborhood. finally i mentioned that, you know, the actual setback of the third floor are very inconsistent on the block and hopefully what you can see here is that we have struck a balance between the rear setback that he has proposed, which is actually beyond his neighbor to the west, and the neighbors to our east. ultimately, this relates to private views given that the proposed top floor is not visible and we are articulating the third floor back, and so we are trying to be good neighbors and we're trying to -- we have made substantial changes. i truly want this project to go forward because i have a family and we are currently in a very small two bedroom, one bathroom,

but i also feel compelled that -- to make changes that seem reasonable. at this point, these changes don't seem reasonable to me. i want to say i really appreciate mr. winslow's continue discussions with us in support. >> thank you. do we have any public comment in support of the project sponsor? okay. d.r. requester his, you each get a two minute rebuttal. >> first off, i merely spoke with neighbors, if they agreed to it, they signed it. i didn't push anyone into anything.

she changed her mind, i wonder why, but it is certainly her entitlement to change her mind. as far as the other properties, they are not -- they are actually three-story homes. the garages are not part of the house, they are three level houses. the entire house is set setback of a steeply sloped hill. sloped more steeply than his. they're not similar in situation or anything similar to his house and they are built between 191915. they are truly not relevant to today's discussion. clearly the design guidelines that were applied to other recently renovated homes were not similarly applied to this property. it is important the design guidelines adhered to and report consistently to ensure consistency and avoid issues like this and inevitably multiple d.r. his. they are not thoughtful designs

and they failed to consider. there's no compelling reason to depart from residential guidelines. and even removing the fourth floor, there is 30500 square feet with five bedrooms and a family room and four and a half bathrooms, which is more than enough for any growing family. these are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and i urge the commission to take d.r. and properly advise -- apply the property guidelines. thank you. >> thank you. >> i lived in that house for five years, it was a remodel. it was like that when i got there. i did a dig out into a man cave, but that is about it. the one thing i will say is that it was -- this is about light. this has some architectural light windows and we have great light.

the stuff that he will build will block everything, anyway. it doesn't matter. we are propagating it because if you look at his plans, all of the windows are on that side. there is a deck there, there's windows, windows, windows in the fourth floor is above this, too. i think it is -- i don't think it is fair to say this is about views when this is about living, light and, you know, we will not have any views from that sight anyways. i have given up on that. it is ironic you can say that and his whole west side of the home, or eastside of the home is about windows and view. >> okay. project sponsor, you have a rebuttal. >> thank you for your patience. i know you are all tired. we did put a deck on the west side of the back. that was intentional to give

some release -- relief to our neighbors to the east. east. we did not -- what i would say is that the scope and size of this home is entirely in keeping with the models. the square footage, as contemplated, it is less then his home. and then he dug out his basement i understand that it is potentially a bigger property then some other homes, and some of us need larger spaces, which is why i am embarking on this. without needing this, i wouldn't be here. i would have acquiesced to their demands. so i think what we are doing is really trying to be neighbourly

and at the same time, we continue to give them changes in there seems to be nothing on the other side. i appreciate all of you staying late for this and spending time. i know it is likely more mundane than some of the serious issues that you handle. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners? >> mr. moore? >> reading staff recommendations , i see several versions of your recommendation. you looked at the report again and trying to balance them with the d.r. requester his and public comment. i still see a number of issues, which i don't think have been addressed. one of the issues is the

reduction of third story height by one additional foot, increase the width of the setback at the third floor addition and raising the window cells to bring the proportional glass more in keeping with the pattern in the neighboring buildings. could you elaborate on that in what form of the project as submitted mrs. out on those issues? -- project as submitted mrs. out on those issues? >> we want to make a building fit within its context and it is just that, it is iterative. is a constant call and response. in this case, the last call and

response with of the outstanding items that you just enumerated, was the suggestion that i gave in light of the d.r. to the project sponsor in an attempt to make this project fit the design guidelines with respect to the scale of the street. the simple first request would be match the exact line of the existing adjacent setback. okay, there is another way of achieving that same goal. let's try this out. match it, do it and extent, mask it, lower the height, et cetera. those three items or items that were enumerated and elected by the project sponsor, but i included it as my recommendation for the commissioners to take d.r. and impose those conditions >> thank you for explaining how you are doing it and thank you

for also going to minimize massing. if a massing in context is an issue, which we didn't discuss ad nausea him every thursday, and it is 9:00 p.m., plus we have done it probably ten times today, i would have to say that simply looking at the massing that it is, it is far too large for where it is. there are other issues which i have issues with, but i have reviewed their only two simple ideas. either the project contracts and modulates itself.

it takes the essence of the neighborhood away by not looking at what is at the core of why we have guidelines. i think at this moment the project as proposed is not, from my perspective meet those objectives. >> commissioner fung? >> mr. winslow, if the fourth floor was removed, would you have the same recommendations? >> yes. >> from the rereview perspective , to our perspective, it is small, it is that back, it is minimally invisible. the real issue is the scale of the street. the project sponsor showed illustrations of buildings down the street that might be approaching the three and four story scale, but the immediate

neighbors are the two story with the exception of the buildings to the east or west uphill, and those have third story setbacks. we were trying to at least say that is the standard of if you are going to be adding a third story, that is what you need to match. >> commissioner moore? >> one of the questions that would be worth entertaining here is we are talking about appropriate sizing. and well we are fully supported for multifamily living and really growing families, when you convert an existing neighborhood to building from 1,000 to 4,000 square feet in an r.h. one, in other cases you're taking the side view and more specific measures to bring that building.

4,000 square feet is very large, or we are basically reducing the square footage to exist in an r.h. one to adhere to context. >> commissioner richards? >> i moved to take d.r. and approve a project with a modification that mr. winslow made with the fourth floor. >> second. >> i will say that i actually have no issues with the fourth floor because of the topography of where the house is. i do support all of mr. winslow 's recommendations i think the issue, in terms of the context of the three and the massing, i think where the problem is is the bay windows on the third floor. i don't think that the fourth floor is actually -- it makes no sense to me. i don't know why you would need

a fourth floor. it is so tiny. i have no issues with it. i am wondering if we have two more commissioners to vote on this because, can you guys come back? >> there is a motion, if you want. >> commissioner richards? >> i made a motion to take d.r. to take the project as proposed. >> there is a motion that has been seconded -- >> his commissioner moore? >> the fourth floor also has a roof deck. where are we with that? >> i don't support the roof deck it is not necessary. >> you are were talking about the roof deck? >> i have no issue.

>> i made the motion and i will remove the roof deck. >> no, you misunderstood. take the fourth floor off and then there is no roof deck. >> no roof deck on the third floor. >> let me clarify. there is a proposed roof deck as a setback of the front of the third floor. i don't know that anyone has issue with that. what you're talking about is the roof deck at the top of the uppermost floor would be eliminated. [laughter] i know it is late. >> very good. if there is a moat -- there is a motion to be seconded. >> hold on a second. we are giving fellow commissioners time to catch up.

>> the roof deck sits on the third floor. >> it sits on the fourth floor. >> we're getting rid of the fourth floor. i thought you amended the motion -- >> there is a motion that has been seconded to take d.r. and approve the project with staff recommended modifications and removing the fourth floor, thereby removing access. on that motion. [roll call]

>> so moved. that motion passes 4-2. okay. that is all, folks. >> okay, we are done. you zack mac

>> hello, everybody. i am london breed, mayor of the city and county of san francisco , and i'm really excited to join you here today, but i tell you that no one is more excited than the parents of the kids who will be returning to school on monday. and today is an opportunity to us to really get the word out to people all over san francisco that we have thousands of kids who are returning to school on monday. we will see kids walking, we will see them by king, we will see them on buses and yes, some of them will get dropped off by parents in their car. but ultimately, we want everyone will get around this city safely because there will be more

people out on the streets now than ever before as a school began on monday. so a part of today is really about highlighting the awareness that we need people to slow down we need people to be aware. we need people to do better. we have had sadly a number of tragedies that have occurred on our city streets and we know, unfortunately, that has a lot to do sometimes with speed. we need to slow down. yes, i have asked the chief to increase citations, and to be aware in this high injury corridors, the need to make sure that there are consequences for people who are speeding, which sadly can cause tragedy. if a pedestrian is hit by a driver at 20 miles per hour,

their risk of fatality is 5%, but if that is 30 miles per hour , their risk jumps to 45%. what we don't want to continue is sadly what we see happening on our streets where we are losing far too many lives, and our most precious assets are our children, so we want to make sure that when they are moving around san francisco, going back to school, that they are safe. when i was a kid, i went to school across the street from where i lived. it used to be called -- but the name is now rosa parks elementary school. what was so cool about that is we would all just walk to school someone would walk up to my window, yell my name, there would already be three or four kids. we would get to the corner on eddie and buchanan, and then there was a crossing guard right there to make sure that all cars stopped so we could safely get

across the streets and move on our way to get to school. i never realized how valuable that was until i became an adult and i see so many kids that are out there trying to get to school. we were also taught to look both ways before crossing the street. we also have to get back to some basics. this year we have hired more crossing guards and we want to thank the folks who are joining us here today for your service and for your commitment to making sure that people get around our streets safely. we also, as i said, we have the chief here. we will be placing additional enforcement in certain areas, and so i just want to also ask drivers to do better to stop texting, to stop making phone calls, to stop making -- looking at your phones when you're driving on our streets, to slow down, and to look both ways and to be very careful when you are navigating the streets of san francisco to follow the laws.

the stop signs, the crosswalks, and all of those things are there for a reason. it is to keep all of us safe. the protected bike lanes are there to make sure that by his -- bicyclists are safe, the people walking across the streets are safe, that people are moving. this is all about safety. this is all about highlighting the need for us as a safety to do much more than we have in the past so that we can truly realize the goals of vision zero , and that is no fatalities of any kind in this city because of traffic or cars or what have you. at this time, i would like to introduce the supervisor that represents this district, represents marine at middle school where there will be a lot of kids here first thing monday. supervisor catherine stefani.

>> thank you. i love the middle school. it is so beautiful. i want to thank everyone, especially mayor breed and the students, parents, and city leadership who were able to make it out today as well as crossing guards. the most important people in the morning when we're dropping our kids off at school who really did the important work of making sure our students are safe in our communities. my son just started high school on wednesday and my daughter is starting fifth-grade next week and i dropped dominic off at high school on his first day. i insisted i did it. and besides saying to me, mom, don't say anything weird when you dropped me off, this people around, i said to him, look both ways. it is on a busy street. he is still 14 years old and still telling my child, be careful when his crossing the street considering how dangerous our streets can be. as we kick off the new school year, as we all know, hit and

runs and collisions between pedestrians and bicyclists and be at -- vehicles are way too common in san francisco. nearly every community meeting i have been to recently, neighbors have voiced support force crating safer streets and sidewalks and i definitely share this goal. it is our collective responsibility to make sure our streets and sidewalks are safe and secure for families who are walking, for those who are driving, and for those who are riding their bikes to school. we know we all have work to do when it comes to making sure our kids are safe. i know i can always do better out there when you get to a stop sign, count to three, don't open a door before looking before -- for a bicycle and always be aware, don't take calls when you were driving, just like mayor breed said. we can all do much better. i am so proud to join chief scott and his department who performed a traffic safety enforcement list earlier this month. i am grat -- glad i didn't get a ticket.

interim director mcguire who continues to work with their communities and crating safe and sustainable transportation options, and marine, who has been an advocate for students and pedestrians across our city. and of course, again, mayor breed was continue to shine a light on transit safety and has worked towards creating a safer san francisco for all of our students. as we begin our school year, let's all recommit ourselves to making our commute to and from school safer. i look forward to working with mayor breed and my colleagues on the board of supervisors, our department heads, and families and all of our school communities to further our shared vision for a safer san francisco. thank you so much. [applause]. >> thank you, supervisor. at this time, i would like to introduce our police chief, bill scott. [applause]. >> thank you, mayor. thank you. good morning, everyone. first of all, let me say thank you to the mayor and supervisor stefani for their leadership on traffic and pedestrian safety.

back-to-school is an exciting time. it is exciting, it is a lot of work and we want to start with this. slow down a little bit. slow down. the mayor mentioned it earlier. speed kills. in terms of the focus of the violations that we concentrate on the most, we are trying to get people to slow down. as the mayor stated and supervisor stefani stated, we are going to be out doing enforcement. i want to also think the mayor and the supervisor because what allows us to get better at this is the generous support of our budget this year. last year the mayor signed a budget, and this year she signed a budget that included continuing our hiring plan. what that has allowed us to do is increase the size of our traffic company and our motorcycle officers. we have at least ten more motorcycle officers then we do this time last year thanks to the mayor's leadership on the budget and the supervisor stefani's leadership on the budget. what that means is we are able to do more enforcement and get

people to slow down and save lives. what that looks like in the first six months of 2019, we have had 19 light armed forces operations, we have head sting and decoy operations, pedestrian sting and decoy operations, we have had a bike lane enforcement operation, we have initiated over 2301 vehicle traffic stops through the office of traffic safety grant operations, we have issued almost 100 citations just for holding a cell phone in your hand. i mentioned this at last year's press conference, that is a big issue for us. people driving in our city while they're talking on the cell phone or texting or distracted otherwise, and that is a big issue. will be focusing on that as well we sighted almost 75 of these operations just for citations for texting while driving, which is very dangerous. the bottom line on this is enforcement is only one part of the puzzle. we have tom maguire up here with

this -- with us, we have crossing guards, this is really a community effort and a community event. we really need the community's support and your support to get the message out. slow down, pay attention, be careful because our kids mean so much to us. save lives. thank you very much, mayor and supervisor stefani for your leadership, and thank you all for being here. [applause] >> thank you, chief. another important part of making our streets safer is improving our infrastructure. now i know that sometimes this can be a bit of a tug-of-war because we have protected bike lanes that we need to install, and sometimes that would require the removal of parking, and we have changes to the way that we need to develop our city moving forward to because because when you think about it, you know, 20 years ago, you didn't see as many people cycling, and now you

have people using that as a primary mode of transportation. that is not only protecting our environment, but it is also keeping people healthy and it is also making sure that the buses are less crowded and less people are driving. so as we make these improvements to our infrastructure, the goal is safety. it is about making sure that everyone knows where they should be when they're on the road in order to keep people safe. so the m.t.a. is charged with the responsibility of helping us to reconfigure san francisco as a place that used to focus mostly on developing our streets for cars, and now it is time to develop the streets for the future and that includes cars, walking, busing, and biking in all of those things in between, his the person who is leading the m.t.a. at this time is the acting director, tom mcguire. [applause]

>> thank you for drawing the connection between the changes we see on our streets and the choices that all of us make every day about how we get around san francisco. our goal is to make everyone feel like it is safe for kids to be able to walk to school or bike to school or get to school on the bus. the 190 crossing guards will be out on the street this week. they are here with one thing in mind, that is the safety of the children of san francisco. we have been doing a lot of work this summer to prepare the city for a safe start to the school year. we read striped 90 of the crosswalks around schools around the city. we've got troopers, we got transit assistance staff who ride the bus with her high school and medicals -- middle school students to make sure they are safe as they navigate the city, and we are ready for a safe start to the school year however you get around. the m.t.a. has got something for

you to keep you safe. we are grateful for the support of the mayor and supervisor stefani. all the city's elected officials for the goal of vision zero to end traffic fatalities in the city. thank you. [applause]. >> thank you. we have a very special guest. the ladies of the westside waves are here today and speaking on behalf of the team is maureen. [applause] >> hi. my name is maureen and i am here today because five months ago on march 15th, my friend was struck by a car and died ten days later, so i have normal memories of eighth grade. i remember my eighth grade play,

spending iron -- hours on my science fair project and studding from a big math test, but i also remember coming in late to my homeroom when i saw my teacher crying. i remember my team and i knew madeline was in the hospital because she was 14 and of course, she was going to wake up i clearly remember spending my eighth grade graduation holding in my tears after her memorial because i didn't want to ruin my mascara. when someone dies, especially such a bright light like mandelman, a community suffers. and knowing she died in a way that is utterly human and utterly preventable makes it so much more heartbreaking. our city has a problem and it is killing people. with all the statistics and initiatives going around, this is easily the site of the real impact madelyn's parents, or siblings, your parents and her teammates were left behind, trying and failing to move on. i am so grateful we have the support of so many of our city

leaders. we got some of the change we asked for, but it is not enough. it will not be enough until this stops happening. we cannot lose sight of what happens -- of what matters. we have to remember what we as a city lose. we can end this. we will end this. thank you. [applause] >> thank you for really putting it into perspective of why we need to do better. so thank you to everyone who is here today. please keep in mind this is a changing city, it is a growing city. we have a lot more people who are out there on the streets, on the roads walking, so please be careful. so we also will be out there and enforcing the rules of the road, and just keep in mind that there are a lot of people out there o