we believe it will demonstrate the full opportunity for this new mode of transit for the city brt, and not on the for the city, but for the region and our nation as we struggle to do more with fewer resources. we want to pledge our continued support together. you're the previous speaker that the item had been deferred. i would characterize that as procedural. we did receive some late correspondents yesterday and did not have an adequate time to brief the stakeholders. then the authority board will consider policy action in the joon plans and programs meeting. and i just want to clarify that we do expect the center running alternative to maintain% throughput will have so many -- maintain person throughput. we will have some any more people on buses. the fewer left turns and signals will benefit traffic appeared thank you for your of leadership and your support. >> thank you. thank you for all of your work on the mta wit -- with the mta on this. >> good afternoon. i am the director -- executive director of walk san francisco. i'm here because walk sf strongly supports this as an elegant

the city. the one at school -- the one nonprofit school you are trying to address this issue with, they do not care. brt have their thousands of units. they

the city. the one at school -- the one nonprofit school you are trying to address this issue with, they do not care. brt have their thousands of units. they have millions -- they already have their thousands of units. you were not addressing the unit with them. if you do pass this, you will make a lot of other schools suffer as a result. students will have a difficult time coming to the city. the other point is that it is unrealistic for schools and developers to replace the current needs of students. you have to allocate a space for 20,000 students for housing and it is just an unrealistic expectation. you've got to realize that the reality is a huge number. students are low income individuals. they are either at 0 in come, or very little they are low-income individuals. and i have been a resident of san francisco for 22 years. i am the father of four. the endearing thing about this city with all of its issues and problems is its openness to individuals. the way i see it is that if you bring this on and you're starting to profile groups and individuals. we need to think about who this ordinance is real

the geary corridor? >> mta is looking for a signal prioritization and priority city-wide. i am guessing that would be coordinated as part of the van ness avenue brt indeed geary project. i cannot speak to the details of how lakari and van ness -- how that would work, especially during construction. but i think the priority will mostly be for van ness, because it will have the upgrades. it is tough to have signaled priority in two directions at an intersection. commissioner borden: it would help. >> yes, it would. certainly minimizing the closure of that transit lane will be a priority during construction. >> there is signal partition on geary west of presidio. beyond that, i do not know. >> i think that mta is looking at signal prioritization on geary east of van ness. hopefully there will be an opportunity to make up some of the time of the delay with construction for these projects and the hospital will have the opportunity to reconcile that elsewhere. during construction, there will be disruptions. commissioner borden: i do not know if you have an answer about the excavation period, approximately? >> i am the planner for california pacific med

the center-running brt option will actually make public transportation a lot faster and more reliable along this corridor, which is a central, a critical corridor for transportation through our city. it is also a good improvement for pedestrian safety, for the people walking along van ness. in fact, for the people who might otherwise walk along van ness bed now choose not to because it is scary and -- but now choose not to because it is scary and there are no countdown signals. those things will be improved in this project, and that is in the we strongly support. it will generally calm traffic along van ness, making conditions safer for everyone, not just pedestrians or transit users, also drivers. by reducing left turns, it will protect pedestrians. as michael schwartz said, that is something that often contributes to pedestrian collisions. having better lighting will help people on foot see and be seen. i would think about it a little bit more as actually sort of living up to the sustainable transportation potential, the 21st century transportation potential. [bell rings] san francisco should have that, so we support this project. thank you. supervisor avalos: thank you very mu