the draft states that opening this would redistribute traffic from ocean avenue and fredda calloway resulting in transit delay and this would provide emergency vehicles better access. further, it would result project generated traffic volume at lee avenue which is identified in the draft report as a troublesome intersection with a lot of projected congestion. in 1917, westwood park laid out several stub-end street -- laid out with several stub-end street. in 1986, westwood park successfully blocked the opening of one on the west side of westwood park and so that's just a solid wall and on the other side is the el dorado development which happened in the '80s. the plan envisioned the stubs would be connecting up with new streets as future residential development happened in the surrounding neighborhoods. connecting this to the balboa project would seem like an obvious part of the site but apparently, the barrier to do so lies far in the past. i have a conveyance real estate which was just provided to me by the assessor today which shows in 1955, westwood park acquired a slice of san ramon way

for a four-minute delay for an entire route but the travel from the reservoir along fredda spawc llowafredda calloway and resultn an increase. whether legal, ethical or engineering, this is wrong, the scir is in error in this faulty method of determining transit delay. so as for me, i am an electrician and we build things. and i'm not against development. i'm totally if the bag for city college and for diversity and for truly deeply aforrable affoe housing. i'm a small-time landlord. but this is luxury housing. can we stop pretending that this is l.a.? we can't cram an infinite a lott of people in a 7 by 7-mile city in a quiet residential neighborhood and a college that's serving working-class and poor people and many people and can we stop pretending gende ger diverspretending genericpretend. transit rich is just a substitute for we're not going to plan, budget or spend for muni. i talked to carmen chu, developer money is rolling in and you can afford to subsidize housing. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> i'm the other randolph, and i think if there's an inadequacy in the eir, it',