pages: TransportationCommission/2013-06-26.pdf, 10
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2013-06-26 | 10 | Transit would conduct a focus study, so that would be the appropriate place for the discussion to occur. Commissioner Bertken said it would be redundant to have both lines, so, which one is more viable. Colin Burgett replied if AC Transit preferred the Lines #51A and O to operate on Santa Clara Avenue, then investing in rapid bus improvements on Lincoln Avenue become questionable. Commissioner Bertken said based on the presentation illustration, moving the Line #51 down a block showed the influence lines for various transit. He exclaimed there was still a small island of no transit usage down the middle. So, if AC Transit moved the Line # 51 that would not be a little island anymore, but a large number of residents who would not be able to access the line. Commissioner Schatmeier addressed the corridor concerns and said he understood the review of looking at Lincoln, Clement and other potential transit corridors. Yet, he pointed out the City would still establish an east and west transit corridor policy and that is an issue that was not settled by the report. He asked if the Transportation Commission adopted the report would that become City policy. He referenced the presentation's bubble illustration and how all transit lines are equal to each other (e.g. Line #51 operates throughout the day and with higher frequencies compared to Line #20). He also questioned the point of moving a transit line close to an employment center unless there were other reasons for justifying the line. He went on to say the initial transit study conducted by the City with AC Transit recommended a second trunk line for the City down the Buena Vista corridor, through west Berkeley and El Cerrito and on to the Oakland International Airport. Consequently, he exclaimed the City got the now defunct Line #19, which was not a trunk line, nor did it run everyday and had 30-minute headways. Colin Burgett presumed the line did not survive because there was too much overlap with the Line #51 catchment area and it was essentially too close. Commissioner Schatmeier said overall the report was reviewing the transit policy of the east and west corridor in Alameda and he hoped that passing on any information or endorsing anything going forward would not endorse policy for the City to move the main corridor. Commissioner Bertken felt the report contained a lot of information and he would like to have time review the document again and make notes. Thus, he would like to delay the comment process. Alex Nguyen, Alameda City Manager, replied that the outcome is contingent on AC Transit's response. So, he does not want the City to get so far into the planning process and at the end of the day AC Transit does not agree with the plan. He recommended staff have another study session with the Transportation Commission, community members and key members of AC Transit. Commissioner Miley replied that based on John Knox White's comments, it might be useful to have a joint Transportation Commission and Planning Board meeting on items that deal with land use and transportation planning and this might be that item. He also asked the consultant if Page 10 of 17 | TransportationCommission/2013-06-26.pdf |