From: Alameda Citizens Task Force
To: Marilyn Ezzy Ashcraft; Tony Daysog; Malia Vella; Trish Spencer; Tracy Jensen Cc: Manager Manager; City Clerk; Yibin Shen
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Correspondence, 11/21/23 City Council Agenda, Item 7-B Date: Wednesday, November 15, 2023 9:35:39 AM
Attachments: ACT Letter 11_15_2023_Item 7B_Estuary Bridge.pdf Dear Mayor and City Council members,
Please see attached correspondence for the 11/21/23 City Council Meeting, Item 7-B.
Thank you.
ACT
ACTAlamedaCitizensTaskForceVigilance,Truth,Civility___________________________________________________________________________________ November15,2023
DearMayorandCityCouncilmembers,
Re:11/21/23,AgendaItem7-B
WewritetoyoutoexpressthefollowingconcernsregardingItem7-B,andaskthatyounotapprovetheupdateuntilfurtherclarificationandstudyisprovidedtothepublic:
1.TheStaffpresentationfailstoadequatelyinformthepubliconamoreaccuraterealizationoftheproposedbridgeproject.Photographsfromestuarybridge.orgshouldbeincludedintheStaffreport.Thesedemonstrateamoreaccuratescaleratherthantheartisticsketchdrawings.Theclearingdistancerequiredforsailboatsis40feetfromthewater--approximatelya4storybuilding.TheStaffpresentationdrawingsshouldreflectthisnecessaryrequirementforfullvisualtransparency.
2.TherewasadetailedreportdoneinJan,2021consideringallalternativeestuarycrossings(110pages)thatismissingfromtheStaffreport. https://www.alamedaca.gov/files/content/public/v/269/departments/planning-building-and-transportation/transportation/estuary-crossing-report_20210125.pdf ThereisalsoanFAQdocumentat:https://estuarybridge.org/documents https://ehq-production-us-california.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/53671a21fd9ff2bde9bcf864af12ca6f242935c2/original/1675200902/0d3b9c4f9bc20eeb23a8da8579771073_Oakland_Alameda_Estuary_Bridge_FAQ.pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIA4KKNQAKICO37GBEP%2F20231113%2Fus-west-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20231113T023901Z&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=abdff6405be1696ef361212858c7f45fa589b83bb52de86075e61c13c21ced6d Thisinformation,includinglinks,shouldalsohavebeenincludedintheStaffreportforthepublictoreview.
3.FAQ#8statesthataliftbridgelikeatFruitvalewouldneedtobeabout200feettalltoallowa175-foot-tallCoastGuardcuttertopass.However,adrawbridgelikeParkStreetwouldnotrequireasmuchheight.FAQ#9tellsus,“Ifthebridgedeckisapproximately60feetabovethewater,thelengthofthebridgewouldbeapproximately3,150feetinlength.Ifthebridgeisdesignedtobe40feetabovethewater,thebridgelengthwould AlamedaCitizensTaskForce,P.O.Box6413,Alameda,CA94501
beapproximately2,240feet,butthelowerbridgewillneedtoopenmoreoftentoallowtallsailboatswithmastsover40feettopass.
Theaboveinformationleadsustoconcludethatadrawbridgewouldbepreferableinordertoavoidtwo200’towers.Wealsothinkthat,sincethisisnotavehicularbridge,morefrequentraisingofthelowerbridgewouldbeaminorinconveniencewhencomparedwiththebetteraestheticsandtheeasiercompliancewithADArequirementsfordisabledusers.
4.The2021Reportatpage15andfollowingincludesaTrafficDemandModuledonebyaprivateconsultant.Thisanalysiscontainsnopollingofthepublicastowhethertheyusethebridgeandhowoften.Whileitcontainsalotofdata,thedataprovidesnomorethansomewhatinformedspeculationonitsusageprojections.
Thecommunitysurveyincludedinthehttps://estuarybridge.org/websitealsofailstosolicitmoresubstantiveinformationastowhetherornotthepublicwouldindeedutilizethepedestrian/bikebridgecrossing.Thecurrentquestionssimplyaskabasiclevelofaccessibility,butastrongerandmoredetailedpollisneededtounderstandiftheend-to-endproposedpathwaysreflectaccuratedestinationpointsthatwouldindeedincreasepedestrianandbicyclemobility.Afurtheranalysisoflikelyfrequencyandtimeofdayusewouldalsobehelpfulinformationtogatheratthistimeintheplanningphases.
WefurthersupportamorethoroughreviewoftheBroadwaycrossing.TheseconnectionpointswouldbetterservetheneedtoaccessAmtrak,JackLondonSquarerestaurantsandretail,andtheBARTconnectionatBroadway/12thSt.
Thankyou.
Sincerely,
AlamedaCitizensTaskForce
AlamedaCitizensTaskForce,P.O.Box6413,Alameda,CA94501
From: Transportation
To: Transportation Commission; City Clerk
Subject: Correspondence: Bicycle Bridge
Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 2:15:26 PM
Correspondence on Estuary Bridge item on the TC and CC agendas, 11/15 and 11/21 meetings, respectively.
Thanks,
Rochelle
Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator, City of Alameda (she/her) 510-747-7442 | [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: John Jacobs <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 11:48 AM
To: Transportation <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Bicycle Bridge
Please don’t waste any time or money working to develop a bicycle bridge in West Alameda. I see it as being much like the situation of the Richmond Bridge, which closed lanes to traffic to accommodate a few bicycle riders and is now facing pushback from the communities it serves. I wouldn’t want to see the City of Alameda make the same mistake spending huge amounts of money to satisfy a very limited number of people when there are other much more urgent situation’s that require attention and money.
John Jacobs
Fourth generation Alameda resident
Sent from my iPhone
From: Rochelle Wheeler
To: Transportation Commission; City Clerk
Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Oakland-Alameda Estuary Pedestrian-bike bridge presentation Date: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 1:58:41 PM
John Galloway indicated that he'd like us to forward these questions to the TC and CC for their 11/15 and 11/21 meetings, respectively, RE: the Estuary Bridge item.
Thanks,
Rochelle
Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator, City of Alameda (she/her) 510-747-7442 | [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: John Galloway <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 5:32 PM
To: Rochelle Wheeler <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Oakland-Alameda Estuary Pedestrian-bike bridge presentation What I do NOT find in your estuary bridge presentation is:
* You claim that key uses would be commuting, accessing services and recreation but I find no survey data showing how many people even claim that they would switch from other transport to a bike for commuting or service access were this bridge available.
* While the Posey & Webster tubes are very bad for bikes, they are also bad for cars and likely will have to be replaced/rebuilt/expanded at some point but I find no data estimating when this might occur yet this seems key to determining if such a bridge is worth the cost since new/expanded tubes could greatly improve bike access. * I do not see any info on similar projects elsewhere in the world yet there must be at least a few somewhere. How did they turn out and how much did they cost?
* What of the alternative of a very small bike and pedestrian only (possibly fully automated free) ferry that only crosses the estuary. While not nearly as sexy as a sweeping bridge such likely is orders of magnitude less expensive. I do not see alternatives such as this investigated in your presentation. -john galloway