what i'm hearing, director rubke? >> c. rubke: i have several questions. not to belabor this. >> chair c. brinkman: no, go ahead. >> c. rubke: i did see comments from the public and thank you to those who came out to talk about this, concerns about accessibility from the slope and just getting up and down that hill. my understanding the proposal to keep starr king is a.d.a. accessible as well as appropriate grade level, right? >> that's correct. there are two main factors to the code compliance. one has to do with the slope. if the bus stop is at the same slope as the street that's considered compliant, and secondly has to do with how much horizontal clearance there is, so in general the sidewalk is 10-feet wide at the point of the shelter, it narrows to just over four feet and minimum clearance is four feet so we are compliant on both those factors. though certainly, we recognize, this isn't an ideal stop from an accessibility perspective, one impetus is looking at the other location. >> c. rubke: as far as those folks coming from, i think closer to st. m

director rubke? >> commissioner rubke: the timeline that you discussed, it it for 4th through 8th? >> yeah, so the immediate improvements are 4th to 7th. we're trying to address the most critical and difficult section first. >> commissioner borden: i'm heartened that the project is back on the schedule again. i apologize to the community that we in some ways failed you in not getting this done sooner. as you know, all transportation projects take a long time? it's frustrating for us up here, whether we're waiting for an sbrt, which i was on the committee in 2003, talking about it. everything takes longer than it needs to. i don't really know and maybe with the -- in the changes of looking forward, if there's a way it have things like this happen faster, we have to be more nimble. time is passing too quickly. i know this is not -- it's a very multilayered challenge that we have. but whatever we can do to move it forward, protected bike lanes are the only ones that will not be driven into. i see it -- i own and work with restaurants and struggle well keeping ride-shares or valet out

and director rubke, who lives close to this intersection, knows how difficult it is for pedestrians and cyclists to maneuver around the 30, the 45, who have been rerouted, along with the ride-share vehicles and our cyclists and pedestrians, who use this intersection very well. i understand that it is a costly project. the changes could cost up to $6 million and there are concerns about how long the improvements will be in place given that we are also planning for the downtown extension of caltrain. however, i will say this. we know regardless of our hopes and our faith, that delays are inevitable. but even if our best assumptions move forward and d.t.f. comes to the ground in the next five years, we should not think of the number of years that revenue and investment should be put in place on this particular corridor, but to think about the number of users. i think this particular corridor has a higher number of users and many others that prioritized in district 6. if you multiply the users with this corridor, even a five-year investment is well worth it. even if we save one lives, two l