My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
3A Public Hearing 2010 0517
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010
>
Packet 2010 0517
>
3A Public Hearing 2010 0517
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/14/2010 10:58:22 AM
Creation date
5/14/2010 10:58:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
CM City Clerk-City Council - Document Type
Staff Report
Document Date (6)
5/17/2010
Retention
PERM
Document Relationships
_CC Agenda 2010 0517
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Agenda Packets\2010\Packet 2010 0517
Reso 2010-054
(Reference)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
128
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Livermore, Kathleen <br />From: Diana Dorinson [dianadorinson@yahoo.com] <br />Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 4:42 PM <br />To: Livermore, Kathleen <br />Subject: Yes! Let's Study BRT! <br />At tonight's meeting, you will be asked to decide on what you would like AC Transit to study <br />in their Final Environmental Impact Report for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). I urge you to <br />collaborate with Oakland in keeping all of your options open by studying dedicated lanes and <br />platform stations in Berkeley and San Leandro along the proposed BRT route. <br />I myself am not sure whether I fully understand the benefits and impacts of the BRT system, <br />but I am most certainly in favor of proceeding with the detailed studies necessary to <br />properly analyze the multiple proposals that have been suggested for this corridor. I would <br />like to see both full-build BRT and some alternative proposals studied in the EIR,-including <br />the recent ULTRA proposal for side running BRT. <br />I've heard that there has been opposition to the project, especially by a few relatively <br />small but extremely vocal groups. From my perspective, their opposition to the BRT project <br />has been transmuted into opposition to the EIR process, which is actually counter to their <br />best own best interests. The EIR process is designed to analyze issues like traffic and <br />parking, and can be used to identify whether or not reasonable mitigation can be designed to <br />minimize any negative impacts. By voting on the study of a full-build BRT system, we will <br />have a clearer idea of what the project really will mean to the communities along the route. <br />I am sure you understand that your vote in favor of a study of a full-build BRT system is not <br />a vote in favor of the project. It will simply be a vote to study the impacts and to begin to <br />identify mitigation to concerns that have come up with respect to the impacts of the proposed <br />dedicated lanes and stations on parking and traffic. <br />I am confident that AC Transit will do it's best over the next several months to address the <br />concerns being raised. I hope you will give them a chance, for the sake of the 20,000 current <br />and future transit riders, and in your search for alternatives to the status quo in light of <br />our growing awareness of climate change. <br />Again, please vote in favor of keeping our options open by studying a robust BRT system with <br />as much dedicated lane as possible. <br />Sincerely, <br />Diana Dorinson <br />3205 College Ave. #6 <br />Berkeley, CA 94705 <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.