Cover hoffman and douglas. While that does provide some basic access for folks what we heard is they are really trying to make connections to 24th street as the commercial street as well as to j and bart. So what we recommended is that the 58 when it is adopted that it be extended to cover the stops up on grand view which are on a very steep hill top and that the 49 48 would not move forward until the proposal is in played. The reason we recommend the 48 and not the 58 is the loop for the route and the others taking advantage of the service. Right now its in the middle of its route and everybody in the bus is traveling through that 5 or 6minute deviation as they try to reach other destinations. There were several routes that were modified prior to march 14th that the policy and Governance Committee supported and i do have those maps if any of those questions come up as a response to public feedback. Over all for these proposals, their strength i believe is that not that they are going
Heard concerns particularly at the Planning Commission about the bulb at mccall and visadero and it will roll out about the same time the bulb would be built and would allow more space for passengers to wait and more space for the shelter. We were able to, there is two Business Owners that would be affected by these bulbs. We were able to communicate with one yesterday and send him more details about the proposal and hope the work with him on things like potentially sidewalk amenities that we could incorporate into bulb to compliment his business. Then the big corridor project is portrero. Here we completely integrated with the dpw great streets project. So this project in addition to creating a southbound transit lane and bulbs would also include a landscape media and a larger sidewalk . Front of sf general and there was a lot of outreach and it would improve Parking Spaces. One asset to this proposal which has been controversial is the proposal to close 23rd street off to through tra
But they would in many cases be similar to what youve already reviewed. The over all title 6 report shows no impact to Minority Community or low income communities. Thats because over half of the routes that benefit under these proposals are minority and low income routes. The title six documents were included in your packet. Since the new circular came out, a pretty good change is that you will be adopting the title 6 analysis. Previously title 6 analysis was something we did and had on file with staff, but wasnt included in the board packet. Here is just an example of the map of the minority routes that benefit. These are routes that a percent of customers who use them exceed our citywide average of 58 percent. And then this shows the low income routes that would also get increased frequency. These are routes that exceed the citywide average of 51 percent. Even our least low income route though still has almost a quarter of its customers of low nvenlth in addition to doing the more f
Civic center. The Service Proposals are shown on this slide and you have them in your packet. We have some additional work to do on the weekend proposals, but they would in many cases be similar to what youve already reviewed. The over all title 6 report shows no impact to Minority Community or low income communities. Thats because over half of the routes that benefit under these proposals are minority and low income routes. The title six documents were included in your packet. Since the new circular came out, a pretty good change is that you will be adopting the title 6 analysis. Previously title 6 analysis was something we did and had on file with staff, but wasnt included in the board packet. Here is just an example of the map of the minority routes that benefit. These are routes that a percent of customers who use them exceed our citywide average of 58 percent. And then this shows the low income routes that would also get increased frequency. These are routes that exceed the citywi
And low income routes. The title six documents were included in your packet. Since the new circular came out, a pretty good change is that you will be adopting the title 6 analysis. Previously title 6 analysis was something we did and had on file with staff, but wasnt included in the board packet. Here is just an example of the map of the minority routes that benefit. These are routes that a percent of customers who use them exceed our citywide average of 58 percent. And then this shows the low income routes that would also get increased frequency. These are routes that exceed the citywide average of 51 percent. Even our least low income route though still has almost a quarter of its customers of low nvenlth in addition to doing the more formal title 6 analysis, we also did an overall Equity Analysis that fall outside of the framework. We looked at the travel time proposals to make sure that the travel time benefits were benefitting minority and low income customers. We also looked at