2 Are basic neighborhood requests from EPCs proportionally eligible to be completed as requested? Or is it possible, due to regulations or roadway classifications or other factors, that requests from EPCs have to be modified or rejected at a higher rate than requests from other communities?
Pages 19 and 20 indicate, "39 percent [of quick build projects]" and "31 percent [of basic traffic safety service requests]" were in MTC EPCs, "while those communities accounted for 26 percent of census tracts." Given the disparities that EPCs often face, should those percentages be higher in order to deliver more equitable outcomes?
Also, although this audit report is technically focused on proactive traffic safety services, a very related and important topic is the delivery of services after a severe crash has occurred. I would have liked to explore:
How do SJPD/SJFD/ambulance response times to KSI crashes compare between EPCs and other communities?
How often are emergency responders and/or hospital personnel able to prevent a serious injury from becoming a fatality, in EPCs vs other communities? Finally, I'd like to continue to highlight the need to revisit/strengthen the 2018 Complete Streets Design Standards and Guidelines, so that all repaved roads are treated with pedestrian-supportive elements and traffic calming by default. In the long run, this should reduce the need for after-the-fact traffic calming requests. DOT staff have agreed to revise the design standards, and I thank them for that. ---
Regarding the Administration Response to Recommendations #4 and #5: Given the recent closure of school campuses, and those many students now commuting longer distances to get to different campuses, please consider whether these two recommendations should attempt to be completed this calendar year.
---
Regarding Recommendation #6 DOT should update and translate its traffic safety resources, including the Traffic Calming Toolkit: Please look at Pittsburgh, PA's Neighborhood Traffic Calming website <https://engage.pittsburghpa.gov/neighborhood-traffic-calming> as a potential North Star. Their website is extremely informative and transparent to the public. Most notable are their online request form, annual reports of each individual completed and in-progress project, and a GIS map showing the status of all past/present/upcoming/requested traffic calming projects and the streets that are eligible for the neighborhood traffic calming program.
Thank you,
Jordan Moldow (speaking only on his own behalf)
District 3, Japantown, 95112
P.S. It is my desire that the City conduct an analysis of the costs associated with traffic collisions [1] so that we know how much money we can save / how many resources we can redeploy by achieving Vision Zero. San Francisco recently conducted such an analysis "of the economic costs and fiscal impact of traffic collisions in San Francisco over the past five years, including total costs such as medical care, property damage, and loss" <https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/BLA.Traffic_Crash_Costs.042325.pdf>,