Supervisors,
I wanted to follow up my comments from this morning with some
factual references, and comments I did not have time to cover.
SPENDING MONEY TO SHIFT
DRIVERS TO CYCLING DURING COMMUTE
We need an honest
conversation about transportation. Supervisor Adams spoke today of bike paths
as reducing commute traffic, together this and the argument of reducing
greenhouse gases is also frequently used to justify spending millions, but the
facts do not support these arguments.
The NTPP Congressional
Report appendix notes that $28m was spent on Marin's bike paths, but the bike
counts clearly show usage is not just in the weeds (tiny compared to freeway
counts of 15,000 cars per hour with 1.67 occupants per vehicle)
Look at table 2 in this
US Census data specific to Marin commuting, this clarifies that there has not
been any "significant change" in terms of switching from car to bike
commuting:
The walk-bike Marin
counts show tiny figures, see the weekday bike counts on page 23:
It is important that
while you are frequently engaged by the bicycle coalition, who are well funded
with professional paid attendees who meet with you and speak at events, that
you maintain balance by understanding the facts and the needs of people. Many
(most) of those people simply cannot reasonably switch their commute from cars
to bikes for practical reasons (distance, traveling with kids, physical health,
available time...)
SUPERVISOR KINSEY
Please engage with us
more. While you have especially strong influence as an MTC Commissioner, you
are not being observed to engage as effectively as many would like. You are
seen to leave meetings immediately after they adjourn. You do not respond to
emails or invitations to meet. At a town hall meeting last year where many
shared concerns you supported a vocal crowd outside who were accusing those
with valid concerns of being "racists". Many are starting to conclude
that your tactic to deal with any opposing your views is to antagonize - if so
I would ask that you reconsider the effectiveness of such an approach.
Please help support
preserving and improving the quality of life for those who use the Richmond San
Rafael Bridge everyday. While the accomplishment of completing a bike route may
appeal, it is far more important that you maintain perspective that adding a
third lane during commute will help save many combined lifetimes for drivers
both crossing the bridge, or simply affected by the 101 backups. Tens of
thousands cross that bridge each day or are affected indirectly by the backups,
each could save minutes each day with appropriate traffic alleviation. By
comparison during commute one might at best see perhaps 0.1% of that volume
commute across the bridge by bike.
When I say
"we", I refer to others like myself who seek an honest dialog to
preserve the quality of life in Marin, to base this on facts, and the
representation of residents. I believe the election has helped make it clear
just how many are concerned by quality of life issues that are exacerbated
through a policy of "high density, transit oriented development".
SUPERVISOR ARNOLD
We both found the letter
by Dr Robert Frankel objectionable that you read out at a prior supervisors
meeting. You used this objectionable letter (a nice "straw man" that
made it easy to shoot down and suggest opponents are unreasonable) and then
spoke of "tea party and extremist infiltration". Please can you help
restore engagement to the conversation - this speech did not help.
Reasonable people, many
like myself who are registered Democrats, were just a little shocked by your
speech. We don't want to be - we want a supervisor who does not seek to
polarize issues - that can potentially log-jam engagement, allowing railroading
through of a desired agenda.
SUPERVISOR RICE
Thank you for
representing residents concerns to the town council of Larkspur regarding the
Larkspur Station Area Plan. We encourage this and further engagement.
COMMENTS AT TAM MEETING
REGARDING COUNCILLOR EKLUND OF NOVATO
I am concerned by some
of the negative comments made regarding councillor Eklund's attempts to engage
on the matter of Plan Bay Area at a recent TAM meeting with Steve Kinsey and
Dan Hillmer present. Pat Eklund is to be applauded and upheld as an example.
She is making genuine efforts to engage in dialog about this Plan and its
successor with a large number of people who hold concerns. She is listening,
and genuinely seeking out the facts in a fair and balanced manner.
The comments at these
meetings served to dismiss and characterize her actions as negative when they
should instead be embraced by Marin's elected representatives as a model for
better engagement.
PEOPLE SUPPORT
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Finally please let go of
the disingenuous straw man that Marinites oppose affordable housing. The vast
majority have these concerns:
- we want to preserve
quality of life, this should be a top priority in planning (but is either
diminished or missing)
- we want to understand
genuine impact on traffic, parking, schools and especially the environment
- we don't want
buildings that are out of character to our beautiful county (aesthetically, out
of scale, too high...)
- we recognize that
highway 101 is a vital resource that could easily be pushed beyond capacity;
Sonoma County has PDAs with 24,010 housing units planned; this will clearly
have significant impact on 101. We cannot presume that the new residents will
take SMART or burden those with no alternative but to use 101 by turning it
into a parking lot by adding too many housing units.
We can embrace the
continued slow growth of our county with new buildings that are in character,
that ensure 20% of new units are affordable, that do not concentrate undue
burdens on specific neighborhoods, that reuse or convert existing buildings
and/or by encouraging second units.
Thank you for listening.
I do sincerely hope that engagement can be improved for the benefit of all
residents of Marin including our elected representatives,
Richard Hall
San Rafael
No comments:
Post a Comment