pages_fts: 18623
This data as json
rowid | text |
---|---|
18623 | on the list have been in Alameda's plans for years and we are not finding much to add to it. He said he would like to see what the experts think we should be doing instead of just responding to what people are saying they want. He said he would like to see using TNCs for paratransit rides come back on the list. He said BART to Alameda deserves its own special category and does not belong in 8+ years. He said he is floored that the only short term bike projects are two projects that should be done by now. He said he is not convinced that Otis is the highest priority, but getting people across the Fruitvale Bridge should be a top priority. He said some of the items on the list are not fleshed out enough. He said there are some projects that are clearly not meeting the definition of TDM, like improved freeway access. He said nobody ever complained about High St. but it is the same width as the new Shoreline. He said liveability is not just how comfortable are you when you are driving. He said we might want to eliminate the goal of getting people to San Francisco and focus on getting people to BART. Board Member Curtis said the solutions provided were good solutions. He confirmed that the initial rankings are somewhat subjective and that they would develop benchmarks and then revisit the rankings. Board Member Zuppan said she was disappointed with the lack of detail and lack of inclusion of items that received the most public input. She said the city told the business community that they would study the free shuttle idea. She said it is not properly described and not about getting people transbay. She said we need to stop focusing on getting people off the island and need to focus on getting them used to using transit. She said an in island shuttle would cast a wider net and be more effective at getting people to use transit than just making new homeowners buy a bus pass. Staff Member Ott said that item 18 is free bus service. She said that they can clarify the idea of providing free bus service with ten minute headways is a good one but paying for it will be very difficult. She said you would need a parcel tax or congestion pricing to pay for it and that is why it is categorized as it is. She said staff does not think they can accomplish it within eight years. She said they can create more nuance in their timeframes, but they have to be realistic in projections. Board Member Zuppan said they have many one off shuttles that can support a free shuttle. Staff Member Ott said they are working closely with AC Transit and the private shuttles to make sure they are not undermining their public transit funding. Board Member Zuppan said that it is not meant to undermine, but supplement AC Transit service. She asked that the electric component of that service be included in the description. She said this still seems like a list of all the things we already have. She would Approved Minutes Page 8 of 11 Planning Board Meeting December 12, 2016 |