body,date,page,text,path
PublicArtCommission,2006-05-24,1,"CITT
$
MINUTES OF PUBLIC ART COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 24, 2006
CO.
DATE:
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
TIME:
7:00 p.m.
PLACE:
City Hall, 2263 Santa Clara Avenue, Third Floor, Room 360
Alameda, CA 94501
1.
Roll Call:
The meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m.
Present:
Chair (C) Huston, Vice Chair (VC) Lee, Commission Members (CM)
Cecilia Cervantes, K.C. Rosenberg, and Peter Wolfe
Staff:
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager
Doug Vu, Planner III
Andria DeBose, Staff Member
2.
Approval of Minutes
A. Minutes of Meeting on February 22, 2006
Commission continued consideration of February 22, 2006 meeting minutes.
3.
Oral Communications
(Any person may address the Committee in regard to any matter over which the
Commission has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance that is not on the
agenda.)
The Commission and staff discussed the approach and format used to prepare
staff reports and resolutions for approval. In particular, C Huston sought
clarification as to how staff determines that a proposed project is in compliance
with the requirements of the Public Art Ordinance and how staff recommendations
should be formatted. Staff described the approach used to prepare staff reports
and resolutions and agreed to work with the Commission to refine the format.
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager introduced Doug Vu, Planner III to
the Commission.
4.
Written Communications
-None.
PAC Meeting Minutes
1
May 24, 2006",PublicArtCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
PublicArtCommission,2006-05-24,2,"5.
New Business
- None
6.
Old Business
A. Presentation on Alameda Towne Centre
Tad Savinar, Art Consultant presented the Alameda Towne Centre Public Art
proposal. He described the proposed sculpture by Brad Rude and introduced
artist John Larsen, who presented the interpretive panels depicting important
historic events or places in Alameda.
The Public Art Commission reviewed the materials and continued further
consideration of the proposal to a special meeting of the Public Art
Commission scheduled for June 7, 2006
B. Public Art Handout (Quick Guide)
The Public Art Commission approved the Public Art Handout with minor
revisions.
C. Revisions to PAC description in Boards and Commissions Handbook
The Public Art Commission approved the board description with minor
revisions.
7.
Subcommittee Reports
- NONE
8.
Commissioner Communications
- NONE
9.
Staff Communications
- NONE
10. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
PAC Meeting Minutes
2
May 24, 2006",PublicArtCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,1,"TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES
MAY 24, 2006
Chair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:30 p.m.
1.
ROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded.
Members Present:
John Knox White
Jeff Knoth
Michael Krueger
Eric Schatmeier
Robert McFarland
Absent:
Pattianne Parker
Robb Ratto
Staff Present:
Barbara Hawkins, City Engineer
Barry Bergman, Program Specialist II, Public Works
Andrew Thomas, Planning Services Manager
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Schatmeier noted that his question at the last meeting what if the AC Transit
advertising bus shelter program maintenance requirements are similar to the requirements of the
City's maintenance contract.
Commissioner Krueger requested some edits to the minutes from the April meeting:
The motion regarding the bus shelter guidelines, reaffirming based on the results of the
survey.
In the discussion of the results, he had pointed out that scores for protection from rain and
wind are higher for the shelter that have walls than for the canopies.
Commissioner Schatmeier made a motion to approve the April meeting minutes with the
recommended additions. Commissioner Knoth seconded. Motion approved unanimously, 5-
0.
3.
AGENDA CHANGES
Chair Knox White moved Item 7C to the top of the agenda.
1",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,2,"4.
COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
The Multimodal Circulation Plan sub-committee has not met since the last TC meeting and there
is nothing to report on. The Pedestrian Plan will be discussed tonight. The Bicycle Plans update
has not been started as of this date.
5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
7C.
CITY POLICY REGARDING SPACING BETWEEN BUS STOPS
Staff Bergman presented the staff report. He noted that the Transportation Technical Team (TTT)
had requested that the Transportation Commission provide more specific policy direction
regarding bus stop location and how their benefits should be evaluated against any negative
impacts. He distributed the AC Transit bus stop policy.
Chair Knox White asked Staff Bergman to identify what the safety concerns were.
Staff Bergman said that a representative from the Alameda Police Department would speak on
that issue.
Officer Craig Rodrigue said that there was a concern from the crossing guard Mr. Garlets on
trying to cross the kids with the crosswalk located across Otis Drive which the location of the
bus stops would hinder the safety of the children. With the amount of traffic they had to step out
a little further past the end of the bus to look for oncoming traffic. There are also cars that creep
up and keep going across the crosswalk without stopping. There are concerns of having a bus
stop there in front of the school for both the children and the crossing guards.
Officer Rodrigue indicated that he had discussed this issue with Michael Margulies of the Public
Works Dept. in the past. After the concerns were raised, the bus stop was bagged and removed.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Peter Muzio stated that it is 900 ft to Grand and a couple of thousand feet to the Willow bus stop.
The bus stop is not in the middle of the block. He recommended putting the bus stop by the
walkway, about half way between the two existing stops.
Barbara Nemer stated that the proposed bus stop location is hazardous. She said that the
crosswalks are not observed by drivers and the location is unsafe because of parents dropping off
and picking up their children at the school.
Elmer Garlets, a crossing guard at Lum School, stated that the proposed bus stop location is
hazardous. He said that the bus stops right on top of the crosswalk, which blocks the view of the
crossing guards of oncoming traffic and that vehicles cannot stop in time for the crosswalk. He
2",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,3,"suggested moving the stop bar approaching the crosswalk to the west side of the Waterview Isle,
which would direct drivers to stop further back from the crosswalk. It would also need adequate
signage for the vehicles to remain behind the line when the crosswalks are occupied. He also
requested that a parking stall on the west side of Sandcreek Way be reserved for the crossing
guards at Lum School during school hours.
Chair Knox White responded that the TC could not make any decisions on specific parking but
that this could be presented to the Transportation Technical Team (TTT).
Liz Cleves reiterated what was said at the TTT meeting concerning the bus stop. She suggested
locating it at Pond Isle or Glenwood Isle, instead of near Sandcreek, as this would be closer to
the mid-point of the existing bus stops. She noted that the crosswalk near the school is very busy
with pedestrians crossing and cars going past without stopping for the pedestrians.
CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT
Staff Hawkins asked AC Transit staff to elaborate on their guidelines in placing bus stops.
Sean Diest Lorgion from AC Transit said that currently the bus stops are 2900 feet apart. Policy
508 states that mid block stops are rare and considered only when there are no alternatives
available and upon approval of the transportation project coordinator along with the
municipality. The design guidelines recommend 1000 feet but the policy actually provides for a
range of 800-1300 feet. There are also considerations for ADA access and where shelters are
placed.
Commissioner Schatmeier asked if there are any policies regarding locating bus stops near
schools.
Mr. Diest Lorgion responded that he was not aware of any such guideline.
Staff Hawkins described a situation when the City had requested relocating a bus stop from the
intersection of Encinal/Versailles to Encinal/Grove. Since the stop would have been changed
from a controlled to an uncontrolled intersection, and the new location was a skewed
intersection, AC Transit would have absolved themselves of all liability
Commissioner Krueger asked if there are a defined circumstances under which AC Transit would
transfer all liability to the City.
Mr. Diest Lorgion said that their traffic engineer would have to review the location for safety
concerns, and that this is done on a case by case basis.
Chair Knox White said that AC Transit's policy seems to address the Commission's concerns.
Commissioner Schatmeier stated that all stops should be safe, but potential usage should be a big
factor in the stop location.
3",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,4,"Chair Knox White moved to accept AC Transit board policy considering bus stops.
Commissioner Krueger seconded. Motion was approved unanimously, 5-0.
7A. Review of Environmental Review Process
Andrew Thomas of the City's Planning and Building Department described the environmental
review process for the Commission.
7B. Alameda Landing (Catellus) Mixed Use Development Project Draft Environmental
Impact Report (DEIR).
Staff Thomas said that this document is a supplemental DEIR. He noted that the proposal is
actual an amendment to the Catellus Master Plan. The original DEIR was completed in 2000 and
was certified by the City Council as adequate.
Prologis/Catellus has submitted a proposal to revise the approved 1.3 million square feet of
office space. The proposal will be going to the Economic Development Commission on June
15th, then on June 26th back to the Planning Board concerning the project and master plan
amendments. This summer all the responses and comments/revisions done to date will then be
brought back to the Planning Board for their final consideration. After that it will be forwarded to
the City Council for a final decision.
Chair Knox White wanted to know the steps that were needed to approve the DEIR mitigations?
Staff Thomas said that there are a couple of steps. When they certify the DEIR they also adopt
the mitigation-monitoring program. The mitigations would then be put into a chart for approval.
Dan Marcus of Catellus stated that the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan would
be paid for by charging customers when they buy or rent office space or retail space, and to
homebuyers when they buy their homes. He stated that once Alameda Point, which is 700 acres,
is developed, significant revenue can be generated for a coordinated west end TDM program.
Commissioner Krueger asked if the re-orientation of 5th Street to line up with Broadway in
Oakland had accounted for a possible transit connection across the estuary.
Staff Thomas said they would build a physical crossing or an aerial tram but it would take time
and support from the City of Oakland. He stated that there were a lot of issues with Oakland on
the bridges/aerial tram, but that a transit crossing would likely be west of Broadway in Oakland.
Public Comment
Ani Dimusheva stated that she liked the alignment of 5th Street aligning with Broadway in
Oakland to connect the cities. She was bothered that 5th Street is the only way to get to the
recreation area along the water, and suggested extending other streets towards the water. She
4",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,5,"asked how people would be able get out of Alameda? The tube is very congested, and the water
taxi would only get people to Jack London Square, still a significant distance from the BART
station. She also asked why there is no connection from Alameda Landing directly to the
Alameda ferry terminal.
Lucy Gigli she stated that many of the mitigation measures would make walking and bicycling
worse. Adding lanes on a street would make it more difficult to add bike lanes. She asked that
the water taxi be used as a mitigation measure, which would be a good way to encourage people
to get out of their cars.
Ricardo Pedevilla stated that he is a resident and a new member of Bike Alameda. He indicated
that he supports improvements that will treat bicycling as a serious mode of transportation. He
noted that the Posey tube is a terrible option. He recommended that a water taxi be implemented
early on in the project.
Public Comment Closed
Commissioner Krueger found some discrepancies between the document on the cities website
and the document in the TC packet. The one in the packet has a date of May 11th. Concerned the
mitigation at 8th and Central that one version talks about widening 8th Street.
Staff Thomas said there was a draft for two potential mitigations to deal with that intersection.
The Planning Board and City Council can review the options and decide what they want to do.
Chair Knox White asked if the city has adopted thresholds of significance beyond those for the
tubes through the Traffic Capacity Management Procedure (TCMP).
Staff Thomas said there is not, but that the City tries to maintain consistency from one EIR to the
next.
Chair Knox White asked if these traffic projections include the Target project and the Clement
extension?
Staff Thomas responded that Target was included, but the Clement extension was not.
Chair Knox White wanted to know how 20% of the retail trips that the site generates would come
up Westline and 8th Street.
Staff Thomas said that he would have to get to him on that.
Chair Knox White said that there were discussions that 40% of trips to the main island were
coming from the south. On IV.H-2b it shows 18% along I-880. We assume that 22% are using
city streets heading south.
Staff Thomas said that 18% of the office R&D is heading south on I-880 and 15% on Atlantic,
but a percentage of that may continue and go over the Fruitvale Bridge.
5",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,6,"Chair Knox White said it appears that there was no analysis done on the transit, pedestrian and
bikes.
Staff Thomas said that there is a need to consolidate the set of concerns that need to be addressed.
Need to come up with an approach to mitigate impacts of vehicle traffic on bicycles and for
pedestrians.
Chair Knox White asked why not specify TDM program before certifying it.
Dan Marcus said the preliminary TDM will be required and would be consistent with the current
entitlement, but that the final details would be approved at a later date.
Staff Thomas said that the water taxi needs certain permits that are outside of the cities control to
build a new landing/dock.
Chair Knox White asked that on the mitigation budget for this TDM if dropping the speed limit
on Atlantic along with some new signs would be a low cost solution.
Staff Thomas said that it was not in the environmental document. There is a development
agreement and a development disposition agreement that was approved in 2000 along with
financial agreements. It needed to be amended and that they were trying to get cost estimates on
these mitigations.
Staff Thomas summarized the Commission's comments as follows:
1. Trip distribution numbers (east end and Fremont)
2. Transit bike and pedestrian analysis adequately considers the effect of additional
congestion on these modes.
3. Would lowering of speed limits be an alternate of equally effective mitigation as sound
walls?
4. Would reducing speed limits on Atlantic Avenue an alternate mitigation to signals and
signal coordination suggested in the DEIR.
Staff Thomas suggested that the Commission to transmit policy questions to Council separately
from questions about whether the analysis is sufficient.
Commissioner Krueger expressed concern that some of the mitigations for roadway level of
service could have negative impacts on the bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes, as well as on
noise levels.
Chair Knox White offered his comments:
1. The long-range transit plan doesn't appear to have been consulted.
2. Bike plan was accepted but not adopted.
3.
He asked if the parking provided through the project is assumed to be free for users.
Staff Thomas said yes.
6",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,7,"Chair Knox White said that in the DEIR on page III-6 talks about reducing the impacts on
automobiles in the general plan goal. He suggested that it would be helpful to explain how the
project would do that, since free parking would actually encourage automobile use.
Commissioner Krueger moved to complete the discussion of the EIR. Commissioner Knoth
seconded. Motion was approved unanimously, 5-0.
Staff Thomas noted that he had a list of the issues raised by the Commission, and that these
would be reflected in the meeting minutes and would also be submitted as a letter to be included
in the final EIR.
Chair Knox White said that a list of polices would be worthwhile for the City Council to look at.
Look at its thresholds of significance and perhaps create a threshold of documents. The
thresholds of significance could be updated to better evaluate the impacts on transit, bicyclists,
and pedestrians. The city should not rush into it but do an analysis on it.
Congestion may be preferable to the impacts of the mitigations
Staff Thomas said that they would look very carefully at it. There are no real straightforward
clear accepted thresholds or methodologies for looking at any of the things have been raised.
Staff Hawkins asked if there are specific locations that he is concerned about.
Chair Knox White asked that the analysis be done for the intersections of concern and the major
bike routes. For pedestrians, the area of concern is in the area of the mitigations.
Chair Knox White moved to the following: 1) To request that the City Council direct the
Transportation Commission, working with staff, to create thresholds of significance to better
address the impacts on bicycling, walking, and transit; and 2) To recommend that the City
Council carefully evaluate mitigations that require additional lanes in terms of their negative
impacts, since some level of increased congestion may be preferable to adding lanes on the
west end. Commissioner Schatmeier seconded. Motion passed unanimously, 5-0..
Commissioner Schatmeier motioned to extend the meeting until 11:00 p.m. Commissioner
Knoth seconded. Motion approved unanimously, 5-0.
6A. Draft Policies for Pedestrian Plan
Chair Knox White suggested adding policy C-2.4c, that the City should work with public and
private schools to identify needs and roles in addressing infrastructure, education and
encouragement.
Commissioner Krueger mentioned that the last two polices did not make it into the document
that was in the packet. Could not find D4.1.C and D4.3A anywhere.
7",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-05-24,8,"Commissioner Krueger said that D4.1C is to establish an annual program to install curb ramps at
crosswalks throughout the City to comply with the ADA. D4.3A is to develop guidelines
choosing appropriate street trees and avoiding species with aggressive roots that can cause
sidewalk damage.
Commissioner Krueger motioned to adopt the polices as presented with the three additions
noted. Commissioner Knoth seconded. Motion approved unanimously, 5-0.
8. Staff Communications
Staff Bergman mentioned the update on the bus stop inventory. He noted that it's about 3/4 of the
way done and should be completed by the next TC meeting. He also noted that AC Transit staff
had passed along some information on the bus bunching issue. They had a consultant look at
that issue and what they are considering is lengthening the running time along those routes to
account for potential bunching which would result an addition to two peak buses being added to
the schedule. Would allow for an additional 8 minutes on the longest run. Staff Bergman said
that if this change is approved it is scheduled to be implemented August 27th
Commissioner Krueger noted that this also happens during non-peak hours, and questioned if
there are other operational issues that need to be addressed. Commissioner Schatmeier also
noted the problem during off-peak hours.
Commissioner Krueger asked if AC Transit staff could make a presentation on this topic.
Staff Bergman said he would make the request of AC Transit.
Staff Hawkins said that the Economic Development Commission and the Planning Board had a
meeting, which they had reviewed the scope of work of a business district Parking Study. Public
Works is not leading the study but will be able to provide input regarding things like use of
transportation demand management (TDM) measures free up parking spaces. She noted that it
has been recommended that the report be brought to the Transportation Commission when it is
30-50% completed, and again later on in the process.
Staff Bergman followed up on the discussion at the May meeting by distributing a section of the
maintenance contract for AC Transit's bus shelter advertising program.
Chair Knox White asked to receive the complete EIR in the future.
Staff Hawkins responded that she had requested copies but that Public Works did not receive the
document. She indicated that she would ensure that copies are sent out for the Target EIR.
8. Adjournment
Meeting as adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
G:\pubworks\LT\TRANSPORTATIONICOMMITTEES\TC\2006\0606\TC min 51006-final.doc
8",TransportationCommission/2006-05-24.pdf