pages: CityCouncil/2020-11-17.pdf, 9
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2020-11-17 | 9 | Discussed her experience with the OAAP project; stated the City has rejected the solution since the 2009 estuary crossing study; the project is not a net gain; there is no data to suggest new users; the path would be a waste of taxpayer dollars; urged Council to reject the Webster Tube path and find a way to include a meaningful multimodal solution: Lucy Gigli, BikeWalk Alameda. Discussed poor air quality due to traffic; stated infrastructure changes have been needed for two decades; creating ease for car drivers during a climate crisis is unconscionable; any fundraising making the project easier for drivers is akin to climate denial; discussed the impacts of cars on the climate crisis; urged Council to reprioritize infrastructure projects; stated Oakland is the victim of Alameda's commuting and infrastructure choices: Tommaso Boggia, Oakland. Discussed his experience bicycling through the Posey Tube; stated the new bicycle pedestrian lane is needed and will be used; expressed support for Alameda requesting Caltrans to have monthly maintenance cleaning of the walls and to upgrade the air circulating technology of both Tubes; stated that he supports the OAAP; there would be more favorable opinions with another vehicle bridge access on and off the Island: Jim Strehlow, Alameda. Discussed his experience bicycling through the Posey Tube; stated a second bike path will not improve the overall experience and is a bad option; discussed bicycle and pedestrian interfaces; stated there will be multiple conflicts between bicyclists and pedestrians; the goal of improvements is to increase the number of people biking and walking through the Tubes; expressed support for spending funds on a real solution: Michael Sullivan, Alameda. Stated that he believes the project is designed exclusively for drivers of private automobiles, which does nothing for multimodal access or long-term sustainability; the bike and pedestrian components of the plan are laughable and have been provided as a sop; the project will do nothing to further the City's goals of reducing automobile trips, greenhouse gas emissions and traffic will likely exacerbate the issues; Alameda has an opportunity to encourage more bicycle transit with the estuary bike pedestrian bridge; urged Council to condition support on a firm commitment to fund the estuary bike pedestrian bridge: Doug Letterman, Alameda. Expressed support for ACTC committing funding to the bike pedestrian bridge; stated there has not been clarity on money from the OAAP funding the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the bike pedestrian bridge; expressed support for having clarity and including it in the letter: Dave Campbell, Bike Easy Bay. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about Council conditioning support of the OAAP funding the estuary crossing. The Planning, Building and Transportation Director stated staff prepared a first draft letter Special Meeting Alameda City Council November 4, 2020 | CityCouncil/2020-11-17.pdf |