an additional long block then while waiting on 19th after the closest stop the 28 passes you bye so how will that effect getting to your destination quicker. furthermore, eliminating stops doesn't suspend service that much. let's say you have 10 pedestrians at one stop and another stop that's going to be eliminated. at one stop it takes time for those 20 people to board the bus under the t e p you have the same people board at one stop. it basically takes the same amount of time. i grant you it does take a

little bit more time but is that time savings worth eliminating the stop for passengers who have to walk a bloke or two. for those who need did you have the 28 inlimited then you villaraigosa a bull about. it blocks traffic and that will further block traffic and result in dlaifg the next bus for the traffic back up. in closings you are hernd the elderly the very people you're trying to serve. does not element stops, in fact, your make it harder just to say

the bus is moving slightly faster then you can say it got from one - >> sir this hearing is on the draft environmental impact not the service changes. those comments are better suited to be provided to the sfavt board. this is about the adequacy of the board and we'd appreciate it if you limit our comments to that effect. thank you >> i'm herbert i'm a native san franciscan and also an i am paled stakeholder of mta. sadly this hearing addresses the transit effectiveness project and doesn't include human

impact. no physician or professional has rectified this impact upon pedestrians. it is basically flawed because it does talk about bus transportation while the transportation agency claims it's adding new vehicles it's retiring vehicles at the same time and pollution exists while the ridership grows without services increasing. if the mta can spend more money on others facilities why can't it allocate funds for a net increase for transportation vehicles why must it make the residents surf from discontinued

bus runs. it will be less services to the neighborhood. the heart and soul of san franciscans. the elderly and frail will have to walk longer distances to the bus stops. notablely in the chronically terminally ill. while this plan is sound it's humanly a hardship for many. electric muni buses. please send this project and those formulated back to the board to come up with a better

transportation plan and please include human impact. this is throwing the most vulnerable under the wheels. i want to include this in the record >> you can leave it on the podium. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is alex i live here on jackson. i'm part of a group of people who are concerned about the proposed impact of terminateing the quality of life on our riders and second from the congestion we believe will result from more car uncle.

i'd like to provided a little bit of background from our neighborhood. my colleagues will then talk about the environmental concerns we have about this impact. to understand our neighborhood you have to realize we're primarily a residential community not a designation community and therefore the majority of our ridership is in the morning and afternoon from downtown into our area. we have 20 to 25 percent of our riders of the age of 65 or older and finally, we're a very hilly community. the number 3 bus goes through the spine of our community and it goes downtown if it's

terminated what do we do then we have number 2 but in our neighborhood it's 7 blocks away and somewhere between 1 hundred and two hundred feet in elevation change. we can use the 22 or 34 or 33 which runs perpendicular. however, to take that requires additional walking and a bus ride and a requires a transfer. what is the result for our riders especially the elderly atkins and the young. we believe it to be a serious inconvenience associated with changing buses especially at night. will the exciting 3 riders continue to be muni riders if you terminate their service.

thank you >> thank you. >> i'm barbara and i live on jackson street and i'm following up with alex on say environmental impact of the plan. the goals set out to enhance accessibility and railways traffic time and improve reliability b will not be achieved. we estimate that half of the passengers about 2 hundred and 35 a day about 6 hundred people will be stranded and forced to use taxis. this adds 5 hundred miles of auto traffic and another 3 hundred and 25 cars and a taxis driving and parking downtown near union square. there are no benefits from the t

e p instead we add 2 hundred and 25 metric tons of greenhouse gas. it's a negative impact on san francisco's goal for a green city. will they're there be a cost savings. the number 3 is not the most under used lines. thirty to 35 have lower use and 20 of the lines have lower use in the night time hours. the eir plans to expand buses on the number 2 and 22 and 34. if 50 percent of our riders go over to their buses they would have to add considerable 76 percent of the eliminated buses would have to add and that's a

case of robbing he peter to help paul. we'll be hurting those who cannot afford cars and the elderly and hurt those people who can't afford to hire taxis and sealed it will push those people who are doing the right thing for the environment by taking the bus thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners i live on jackson street. isn't there a positive fix to this? rather than cutting service and forcing more use of private transportation can't we work to take muni in and out of

our neighborhood. there are 7 schools in our neighborhood. this would possibly reduce the congestion during pickup and drop off. i don't know if you've been through our neighborhood but there's long lines of cars at the 3 o'clock waiting to pick up their kids and filling the air with greenhouse gases. we can coordinate with culture centers. and during the day when the ridership is lower we can element the frequency of some of those buses >> as the next speaker comes up i'll call more speakers

(calling names). >> good afternoon. my name is jean kelly. i live on jackson street. this is the second time i've come down here in the last 5 years to plead for the savior of the 3 jackson which is the only bus that come into our neighborhood that will take us to our jobs in the financial district and back. the 3 jackson is often crowded even when i ride it durable the day. i'm getting older i don't want to hike up and down hills with the number 1 or 2 that involves a transfer. i want to let everyone know we count on this bus service.

many of us don't drive and many of us are too old to drive and we really need to keep this. we can't use the union street buses they don't take us to where we want to go. the number 2 goes to union square but it goes gown to market street this is not convenient. thank you >> thank you. >> those members waiting in line to speak can you move to this side your blocking the doors. appreciate it. >> i'm adam i live on 22nd street in harrison. i want to point out the

discussion of folsom 27 line does not this the fact that the main artery for bicycle traffic and in doing so it fails to recognize that it will create hazard ooze environment for bicycle traffic. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm maria clyde. i love the neighborhood despite the fact we're crowded with churches go schools and hospitals. i love the street and i beg you to keep the line thank you. thank you

>> if the members of the public could please silence their mobile devises just simply turn it off. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> yeah, i'm william kelly i'm on jackson. first thing i'd like to do is respectfully obtain to the character that's given on say pieces of paper reduction of traffic times we're talking about the 3 jackson this seems possible it's the exact opposite of what's being proposed. i don't have had any more statistics to over is jackson i live on jackson and i guess this is a map the east, west lines

there's nothing between california and my own street which is absolutely incredible. i never understood or why this is attempted it's not the most sparesly used line in the city. i'm 65 it gets - there's the alternatives. it occurred to me if it weren't for the 3 jackson i'd have to walk up the hill back to jackson and it would be walking all the way home myself maybe that's what everyone's intending. i'm getting older and walks like this are becoming extremely inn.

>> (speaking foreign language). >> good afternoon. i'm the president of the an association. we're the largest orientation in the city and our members are low income members. >> (speaking foreign language).

>> public transit is a necessity not our choose most you have us are transit dependent. those are simply a reduction in services >> (speaking foreign language). >> we absolutely does not need any chinatown transit i discourage u encourage all the commissioners to take the climate lines and see how it is to commute in our neighborhood. >> (speaking foreign language).

>> mta should be thinking about how to address services such as an overcrowded buses eliminating buses is an inappealing thing for our residents. thank you >> thank you. >> (speaking foreign language).

>> good afternoon commissioner i'm the vice president of the improvement association high-rise as established. public housing in san francisco chinatown. we have over 4 hundred low income speaking families >> (speaking foreign language).

>> i'm here today to share my concerns on say route to the fisherman's wharf. this is going to change the life of our residents we rely heavy on this i take the bus to safe way to buy food. this will impact our community and please keep it the way it is. thank you >> thank you. >> (speaking foreign language).

>> good afternoon. i'm here to express my concerns regarding the number ten and 12 bus lines. i'm lived in the knob hill since my families came here 27 years ago. we use the chinatown bus lines

and i'm satisfied to have those two bus lines in my neighborhood >> (speaking foreign language). >> however, the t p proposals the elimination. i have a lot of folks who use

those buzz lines and this means that the people will have less room on the buses and will have to walk uphill with their groceries to their homes >> (speaking foreign language). >> assessable public transportation is especially important for senior residents. please don't eliminate the number 12 bus lines and any elimination will hurt us >> thank you before the next speaker let me call some names

(calling names). >> if you could please line up on the screen side of the room. thank you >> (speaking foreign language). >> good afternoon. i'm lived in chinatown for seven years. i'm a grassroot resident i'd like to express my concerns about the bus lines >> (speaking foreign language).

>> the t p has proposed to

eliminate our bus lines. we have a lot of residents who use this and i have friends who have grandchildren and go to the north ridge library and i go to invest my relatives and if we indeed make this change the elderly will have to transfer from one bus to another and this could result in injuries >> (speaking foreign language).

>> lastly, the working class and immigrant population are constant riders that he this bus lines connect the communities. we don't like the change and please don't eliminate my bus lines >> thank you. >> filling chin speaking on behalf of the chinatown research improvement project. the first thing i would like to share with you say my changes to the commission who sit on one of

the most difficult commission and doing some of the most difficult work. i for one appreciate that. on the subject china attain trip has been around for over 36 years and we've looked at the transportation issues since muni had their first goal or reranging the light structure. we've worked with them on a number of changes. on the changes that have been proposed this time we've actually thought we'd researched consensus on a couple of things. the thirty stockton there was a proposal for a stop on the near side of washington and stockton. we generally support having four site stops. on this particular case we didn't feel it was safe because

at the intersection and one bloke away there's 3 major construction projects that will be going on for several years. if the stop is on the far side it will create gridlock. we feel that further down the line open stockton that there was a variant to not eliminate parking but just to reduce the ladies and gentlemen of the jury, to two wired lanes we think that's a better solution. there's no need to pick a fight by removing parking. and finally we want again to caution that