Laserfiche WebLink
diesel infrastructure runs contrary to RWC's Climate Action Plan. The ferries do not contribute <br />to relieving traffic congestion, contrary to the claim in the report. The anticipated daily ferry <br />commuter ridership of 2030/day by the year 2040 (table 7-1, page 95) is minuscule compared to <br />the 70,000 commuters who use employer shuttles today and the 63,000 commuters who use <br />Caltrain. We can anticipate that employer shuttles, cars, buses, and trains will run on electric <br />power in the future and that would markedly reduce emissions. <br />Sea Level Rise: The ferry terminal and access routes from RWC are all vulnerable to sea level <br />rise in the near future. Costs for these required improvements are not included in the financial <br />analysis. <br />Based on the Report's analyses, the ferry project to/from SF and RWC and to/from Oakland and RWC <br />would not be a cost-effective transportation investment. The environmental concerns that we have will <br />need to be examined and mitigated in the EIR. <br />We recognize that a major consideration is that the ferry would provide water emergency services if there <br />were a crisis such as a bridge failure. However, the small passenger volumes transportable raise serious <br />questions about the ferry service's viability in a disaster and there are better more resilient options for the <br />funds. <br />Thank you for your attention, <br />da <br />°"�_ <br />Gladwyn d'Souza, Co -Chair Conservation Committee <br />Gita Dev, Co -Chair Sustainable Land Use Committee <br />_Je��L �- <br />Susan Lessin, Environmental Legislative Action Committee <br />CC: James Eggers, Executive Director, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter <br />sierraclub.org/loma-prieta — 3921 East Bayshore Road, Suite 204, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Page 2 of 2 <br />