>> good afternoon. >> good afternoon, john decastro from the neighborhood association. a couple of things that i wanted to comment on. the eastern neighborhoods plan called for approximately 3500 housing units to be approved by 2015 in potrero hill and dog patch. it's going to be a problem, because you have got a lot of hills. we'll be happy to do the same thing that my friend miss

kirschenbaum suggested by giving you a working tour. my wife is disabled and they drives everywhere, because the buses don't have low floors and my card is the clipper card; which is what you want me to do. we have got the proposed changes of the 22 to motorcoachs, an interim step to get around caltrain and gets people to transfer at church street to the 22 motorcoach, which is going to cause issues there. so i think potrero needs to be accelerated a little bit. i talked to mr. haley about the need to come to the boosters meetings and also mr. kennedy and see if we can get something together soon and mr. reiskin, you might want to join the party. thank you for your time.

[ applause ] >> next speaker, please. [ reading speakers' names ] >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. my name is gloria million and i will not repeat several of the important issues brought up by just about everybody, the aging population of this city and lessening parking spaces and i'm here to speak for the j church, that i understand is being considered to be eliminated. i live in an area that is served by j church, which also serves a lot of very steep hills. i live in the particular section of liberty street, where at least i know of three disabled young -- i say young ladies, who would take the j

church. they all have crutches. and one of the issues that i just don't quite understand is why we're even thinking about eliminating any of these stops, when i thought that the public transportation's main aim was to public transportation used by just about everybody. i am sure one answer that will come easily to some of you, most of you is that we have got to cut the budget; there is not enough money. well, i think public transportation should be the last item that should be cut. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you. next speaker, please. [ reading speakers' names ] >> any of those folks here? >> is miss ford here? >> she stepped outside with the young man. >> christa tanaka.

>> good afternoon. >> three cheers for the san francisco muni system. i think it's the best system in the whole country. i can get from any place that i want in san francisco. i have depended for 40 years on the no. 3, from the same location and please keep the no. 3. it's my lifesaver. so again, three cheers, wonderful system. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you. is anyone else to speak to this? and who else, miss boomer? >> that is the last person for whom i have a speaker card. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. i am a rider of the 3 jackson. and i almost also an academy of arts student. 3 jackson really means a lot to me, because even though you might say you have your own

shuttle system, our shuttle system is so poor, it's unbelievable. i would be waiting for 20 minutes for a shuttle to show up and on the weekends it's even worse. i rely on 3 jackson, especially after it closes and when i have to go from 180 to montgomery -- and take up 3 jackson. that bus means a lot to me. i also live, like, on bush and leavenworth, one of the dorms over there. you might say take the 27 bryant. i don't want to go on the 27 bryant. it's just messed up and i don't want to be part of that crowd. i just want to enjoy my ride home. definitely. and like walking -- like i used to live at sacramento and octavia. i would be forced to take the 1

or whatever, but then, like, i also heard, like, they are going to incorporate the 10 in that. and to do some of the part 3 jackson route, and i don't think anyone is able to sit there and just walk all over the place, you know? or just sit on the bus for 30, 40 minutes. that is all i have to say. and leave the 71 and the 6 alone. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you very much. that concludes the public comment at this point. members of the board, let me thank mr. kennedy for the staff report and the thoughtful comments from the members of the public about the various lines and i can assure you this board has heard those and listened to those and the process is ongoing. there is no action for the board to take this afternoon. i would like to share my own view of this, the role of myself as a commissioner. that the primary job is to look

out for the overall good of the entire city and at same time, be particularly mindful of citizens for these reasons and that is the challenge that this board has. as we go further and further along, we'll hear from people across the city about this. so it's very difficult things that we have to do, but we definitely appreciate your very thoughtful input. members of the board? >> yes. again, i will just echo what the chairman said and do appreciate everybody showing up. i know you have taken time out you have your busy day to come here and share your personal experiences with us. i do really appreciate that. as chairman nolan said, this is going to be a process going forward, and we do listen to your comments, and we want to make sure that we have a transit system that works for the entire city. a couple of questions, actually, first for mr. kennedy. >> mr. kennedy. >> so you had touched briefly when we went through the presentation, the next steps and comments to the eir have closed, but as these projects

are brought forward to us, they are not brought forward to us in stone, are they? they are brought forward to us with recommendations from staff on what actions we might take? >> yes. excuse me, yes, recommendations from staff. >> so there will be the opportunity as we move forward on each of these different segments to modify things, to change things, to try to make things work better for everybody? >> if i could just add. i think there were some comments about the outreach process to-date, and i am sure that there are always ways we could be doing better in terms of doing outreach. i think the primary focus of the outreach to-date was to try to help people understand what was in the body of work that was being cleared environmentally? and that is the process that is underway now. we expect to have environmental clearance as sean said next spring.

but the outreach that he mentioned that we would be starting this january is to talk about the specific issues, the liberty stop on the j, the three jacksons and the 8x extension and absolutely take the public speakers up on their challenge to work with them to find solutions if what we have proposed isn't the best solution. so what i said at the start, the environmental review clears the bounds of what we would have the ability to bring to you. we will take from that starting point, just as we did with the 5l, based on public feedback and bring you perhaps revised proposals and in some cases bring you no proposals and in some cases bring you proposals that match more or less what that starting point was. so there is a lot of space between now and bringing you any recommendation on a particular

route continue corporate that feedback. i do want to just put in context, the great majority of the tep is increased service. so we're increasing on the majority of lines that serve the major of riders of muni. 100% of the public comment was about ones that are most difficult, but i don't want to you lose sight of what is being evaluated into the environmental review service and what we'll bring forward to is increase is service. we'll be most sensitive to places where we're changing or eliminating service or stops and look forward to working with the community to bring you recommendations that will hopefully reflect a consensus recommendation. >> thank you. i think it's very good to hear how much people love muni and

ride muni and do depend on muni. i would just remember everybody that not everything in the tep is about eliminating a stop or a line as director reiskin said. i would encourage you all also not to lose that enthusiasm that we need to support this process going forward and also make the changes that are going to help improve the transportation system that are not directly affecting your line of service. thank you for the presentation and look forward to this coming before us. >> thank you to the people who came out to us today, especially the 3 jackson and liberty church and you represented yourselves very well and clearly stated your concerns to us. as a general matter, we'll have tough decisions to make overall, upgrades to the system and of course, any bus route

that is eliminated or decreased will have people that are unhappy, but as chairman nolan said, we'll have to look out for the overall best for the city. i appreciate your comments director reiskin that we're very early in the process and we'll meet with the communities to see if there are compromises, or all together changes in the proposal that could be made to service them. the concern that i heard or the comment that i heard that concerned me the most really both about the liberty hill stop or the liberty stop on the j church and most about the 3 jackson was it appeared that in our early discussions, the residents didn't perhaps understand why we were proposing these changes. and in particular, one member of the -- several organizations saying i really don't understand why you are doing it. i am sure there is a why and

it's allocation of transit resources and coaches and that sort of thing, but i would urge in our early discussions with these groups that we explain why we are doing what we are doing. first of all, we owe them that. if we're going to take away someone's bus line we have to explain that for the greatest greater good of the city. two, it leads to a more robust discussion to achieve that. i realize we're early in the discussions, but the thing that concerned me most from what we heard from the public, that they didn't necessarily understand why we were doing and i think we owe that to this them early in the process and not at the end. >> director rubke. >> we got a lot of wonderful community feedback and i know it has been a large community

outreach process. are we getting data from our transit operators and feedback from them as to the tep proposals, because obviously these folks know the lines very well. so i would hope that their input is being considered in some formal way -- i don't know how that is working. >> mr. kennedy. >> yes. so we are involving both the union 258, and meeting with them on a regular basis on our proposals and re-going over some of those proposals. back in 2006-2008 was our initial push into developing these proposals and they were directly involved in basically that whole development of ideas and of projects. and now we are going back to them kind of revetting, i guess you could say, our proposals as we go forward. and you know, as we learned in the 5 and 5l implementation, i agree they have added input on what would make the project and proposal better. so we're working with them closely.

>> okay. >> and then i just had another question about a couple of people brought up the idea that we have some -- you may have provided this, so i just want to know, are we considering demographic information in terms of when we are saying -- for example, a lot of people brought up the 3 today obviously and how maybe there is not a huge number of riders, but the type of riders that are on that bus route are particularly vulnerable or in need of that transportation? do we have that data when we are considering these types of service changes? >> we just received a ridership survey about a week and a half ago that has all of that demographic data by line. we have 22,000 responses, basically makes by line levels of significance for understanding race, ethnicity and basically our rider on each line and we're now in the process of analyzing that data and we'll be able to distill

that information when we start the outreach process in january. >> also, i know one ever our speakers said that we needed to be mindful of scheduling community meetings. i personally attended a saturday meeting and saw a range of options available. so good job so far and i hope we continue to do that. >> thank you, director. director ramos. >> thank you, chairman nolan. i really appreciate everybody coming out today. it's really critical for you to be here and express yourselves and in the comments that you made today. i want to encourage you it's our job as a board to hear you out and think about system as a whole and think about how to move forward. in your comments in the future and your future interaction with staff and what have you, please be mindful of the comments that director heinicke has commencingeded and mentioned and it's clear that there are short comings that

are happening. it's reflective in the performance of the system and the delays that happen and unfortunately worse worst-case scenarios. so please think about alternatives and ways to improve the service as a whole. i appreciate the comments made by people about the tweaks in alterations in routes and that is the kind of constructive input that staff could benefit from. please recognize that we didn't get here you know, from anybody's particular choice or what has happened, but everything evolves. if you have got an iphone, you are constantly getting updates and using windows -- if you

are using a computer, updates, things have to constantly change to keep pace with progress. so it's important that we'll re-evaluate the transportation system and the best possible outcomes we can get is when they are informed by people like you, who are experienced and are taking transit on a regular basis. we need to make sure that we have all of the perspectives in consideration. i really want to suggest that staff do a good job of conveying the information. i really liked what director heinicke said, understanding why this is happening. when you are conveying information, make sure that people do understand the situation that we are in, and why it's happening. you said early on in your presentation, that transportation is the key, the life blood of our city and a lot of different people feel that about whatever they do. you ask the small businesses

and they are the life blood of the city and the tourism will say -- i think what is important about transportation in particular, even if you are not a transit rider, you are still impacted by the transportation system. everybody what that is in a car has more parking spaces available to them when people take transit. i think it's important that people understand that this transportation system itself is supposed to serve everyone, not just the transit riders themselves. so thank you very much for all of your great work and looking forward to the ongoing conversation and continuing to hear back from the public as we move forward. one last thing -- the maps themselves i noticed the 35 map on the tep site shows the route itself as it navigates and then the 3 jackson shows the overlapping routes. those are two different maps, it seems like. if you could have a little bit of consistency with respect to showing the different routes

that are nearby, i think it would be really helpful for people neuter in the future and for people like me of what we're expecting future riders to do to get around. >> thank you, director lee. >> thank you, mr. kennedy for your presentation and thank you to the members of the public for coming out. there is a major disconnect and how come we're hering about this now, but i'm satisfied with director reiskin's explanation now and i will be curious how to rolls out as we hold more public outreach meetings and the outcomes. thank you all for coming out. >> anything at the end, director reiskin? >> i would add it's great to hear so many people coming out and talking about how much they like their muni service and want to keep it.

i think that is a good problem for us all to have. i very much like, as i think somebody made reference to people saying that they wanted to work with us and partner on outreach and partner on finding solutions, all of great opportunities for the tep and other things that we're doing with muni to achieve those goals of better muni service. >> thank you. thank you, again, mr. kennedy and look forward to working with you as the process goes forward. with that, we'll take a >> item 12, approving the conceptual traffic-coaxing project for the dewey boulevard. >> we have a brief overview,

and there is a well-written staff report explaining what we are proposing and we have gotten a lot of written feedback on this. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. thank you, director reiskin and directors. my name is nick carr and i'm the project manager for the dewey boulevard area traffic-calming project, a project looking at the local streets and forest hill and upper golden gate heights neighborhoods. i'm going to put up the map of proposed traffic-calming changes, developed through this project and quickly go through the community process that was involved. we're here today seeking approval of a conceptual plan

for this neighborhood for traffic-calming. if approved many of the traffic-calming measures within this plan will still come back for an additional layer of legislation or detailed design work with stakeholders, who may have concerns. for instance, some of more significant measures will go to detailed design with direct input from the fire department and other stakeholders on the transportation advisory safety committee. i would like to talk a little bit about how this project was conceived. this was a community-requested project. we looked at a compilation of traffic-calming requests from residents in the neighborhood. in advance of the total and during the planning process for this, we received 15 resident requests for traffic-calming within the project area. so

something that residents definitely see as a priority in their neighborhood. three public meetings, general public meetings were held for the project in the fall of 2011. and then again in the fall of 2013, as a follow-up, after the development of the proposal. the project area encompasss about 1600 households, whether they by apartments or stand alone houses. our mailing list included three notices to those 1600 residences. from the resident population, we recruited a ten-member work group to develop this traffic calming plan, four from the forest hills association and four other members represented the up upper golden gate neighborhood eastern annex of

forest hill neighborhood. some of those members are here today to speak in favor of the project. stakeholder involvement in the project was fairly wide. we have been working with supervisor norman yee's office since the germination of the project and worked consistently with the home associations neighborhood and golden gate association and west portal association, west portal school and herbert hoover school along with the supervisor's office. in general community feedback has been very positive to this proposal. not unanimously so, obviously. it's a very large project area, but we have received much positive feedback and i know you have seen many letters coming to you and in total i have counted 17 letters of support, including the endorsement of the forest hills homeowners' association.

as i mentioned before, prior to and during this process, we received 15 resident requests for traffic-calming. some of those that were concurrent with our planning process we were able to fold right into the planning process and address their concerns on the run, so to speak. i have received five letters or emails in opposition to this project. several are in opposition to traffic calming in general, stating that we just need to fix the arterials, leave the arterials alone and remove bike lanes and things of that nature, recent changes to laguna honda boulevard and if we did those thing we wouldn't need to do this project. be that it's may, this project is here and heavily requested by the neighborhood and heavily vetted through the neighborhood

and the ten-member work group that sat with me and our staff this summer to develop this proposal. definitely stands behind it. i have on the reader, if you would like to bring that up, a map of -- >> i think we have that. >> you have that in your packet. okay. then i won't need to bring that up. you can see it's very area-wide in nature. it addresses historical concerns of speeding and cut through, that stretch from portola as a way to forego using the arterials in the neighborhood. woodside, laguna hond, 7th avenue, even dewey boulevard

itself, they see an alarming traffic volume in certain instances, when it be a pm rush commute or something like that. so i would just close by saying that i know there is opposition to this. i have talked to a number of people who have opposed it; as i said, i got five written emails or letters in opposition. but the community process for this project has been quite robust and i think that you will find the community's support for this project is also quite robust. >> thank you, mr. carr, we appreciate your presentation. miss boomer, do we have members of public that wish to speak . yes, we do. [ reading speakers' names ] >> good afternoon. >> my name is reuben vector and i was on the working group

with mr. carr and i live just on the 9th avenue part outside of forest hills, part of the cut through route that he was speaking of. it's also next to a little playground and tennis court called j.p. murphy. as he was mentioning there is congestion there and that has resulted in a mass -- hasn't really changed over the 15 years that i have been living there. i have always been trying to get something done there to calm the traffic. and so the accidents -- i have pictures over the years of various accidents, cars smashed up. generally it's cars -- one a few months ago a car trying to get out of a parking place after playing tennis and a person didn't stopped and smashs into a car in a parking space. so there is alarming speeding and it's just a really

dangerous situation that would result not only car crashes, but eventually the children and strollers and things crossing the street that is also congested for parking and how people get to the playground and what not? so it's just a matter of time before someone gets hurt and/or killed. the thing i wanted to say about this project to my dismay at the beginning, nick clarified this wasn't a traffic-diversion project, but a traffic-calming project. i would love that the traffic is diverted from the neighborhood, but it's not, it's to force the people to follow the rules and drive 25 instead of 35 40 45 miles per hour, which we saw on our speed checks. so the traffic can still go through. they are not being detered from going through, but they have to follow the rules. so