as well as the pedestrian environment. the services improvement you are more familiar with. i won t take as much time with it. i will add the urgency and excitement that we are at our highest bus rider ship in 5 years and we do expect that trend to increase. all of the service proposals have been done with extensive outreach throughout the process. we try as much as possible to be good listeners. that doesn t always mean that we recommend changes, but we try as much as possible to identify solutions that don t compromise the original intent of the proposal but still meet the needs of the community. there are several proposals that are on hold as we discussed at the last meeting. we will begin doing outreach over the next 6-12 months on those proposals to resolve those issues and bring them forward for you. the service proposals also include two new routes, embarcadero and the 11 downtown connector and the standards hours of operation for the two to commence will replace the t
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 th
donahue is not here. rick lopez. good morning, i m the president of the park association. i was not on the bus that tested the route. i echo the great community leader as well as i who handled the corridor in glen park. i m happy that the rest of the route is approved but the 35 is not acceptable. it is one of the most busiest tiny streets and one of the safe havens for the community itself. we had a great big plan that was done and approved and took about 11 years to get that approved. actually glen park community plan has a bus loop and it is in front of the battery bart station and nazi plan and that should be used. the statement of the cross corners of the community to reach bart is on wilder street. we have seen people get hit and thrown up in the air. it does not comply with your vision zero absolutely not. there is so many pedestrians that cross. this is a tiny street there. another thing is that the bus that stops there already at diamond and wilder actually comes
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 wasn t 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 it s 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 als
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 you ve already reviewed. the over all title 6 report shows no impact to minority community or low income communities. that s 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 wasn t 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 exce