3A Public Hearing 2010 0517 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Special Meeting Minutes March 25, 2010 Agenda No. 10-03 Page S of 20 not yet produced solutions to those issues they could do so in the Final EIR. So San Leandro will have another opportunity to weigh in again during August or September. Commissioner Fitzsimons asked whether AC Transit will study Option B only if we ask for it. Secretary Livermore replied that AC Transit is sure to study Option B if we ask for it, but there is still a possibility they will do so even if we don't ask. Mr. Cooke pointed out that in any case, AC Transit needs the feedback for funding purposes as well, because the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) will have to see that all communities have made input when it reviews the EIR: We are obliged to select a LPA. Vice Chair Dlugosh asked, "We have to?" If we decide we want nothing and AC Transit wants to go all the way to Bayfair, do we have a choice? Mr. Cooke said that if San Leandro said we wanted no dedicated lanes, there would be no dedicated lanes in the City of San Leandro. He explained that CalTrans also would have a say, and he expects CalTrans to look to San Leandro for direction. He also said that FTA will look at that as well, and make a decision about how viable BRT is. Commissioner Abero expressed disappointment that the San Leandro Boulevard corridor was rejected as a study alternative because "it would duplicate BART service over much of its length." She said it is a "ridiculous" and "inappropriate" comment because it's a matter of four blocks. The logic is neither good nor strong. Commissioner Collier agreed, saying she was "totally amazed" that the idea of San Leandro Boulevard was just dropped completely. Mr. Cooke said that decision was made back in 2002. In terms of what was proposed for development and what development already existed, East 14th Street was "just a more attractive corridor," closer to the high schools and more adjacent to work centers. San Leandro Boulevard isn't at that level of development yet. Walk distances for bus riders are a bit shorter for effectiveness than BART, which also leaned toward the East 14th Street alternative. He said that the MIS Study's "Evaluation of Alternatives Report" is accessible through AC Transit's website. Commissioner Collier asked if we aren't trying to attract people to the new TOD housing being developed on San Leandro Boulevard. Mr. Cooke said in terms of that project, this is true, but what is currently on San Leandro Boulevard versus East 14th Street, the densities are still higher on East 14th Street. Commissioner Abero said in that case, if you really wanted to make a bang for your buck, you'd run BRT down to the airport and go down Doolittle Drive where there is industry and people who would be interested in mass transit. Commissioner Ponder, observing that BRT's purpose seems to be to connect people to businesses and services along the corridor, asked about how far people would be expected to go on the bus. To the Fruitvale District, for example? Mr. Cooke said yes, that's where the benefit would be - in the shorter-distance trips, especially when it comes to attracting new riders. People decide on which system to use based on time, money, walking distance and so forth. People are already moving up and down the East 14th Street corridor for work and shopping. The route includes a considerable amount of senior housing; the densities are good and increasing. Accordingly, it's primed to be a great place for improved transit; in fact, he said the old Key System streetcars, which served the East Bay until 1960, is largely responsible for the development of East 14th Street. Commissioner Reed inquired about BRT's extension south of San Leandro.