body,date,page,text,path
LibraryBoard,2006-12-13,1,"CITY OF
TERKA
ORATEID
Minutes of the
ALAMEDA FREE LIBRARY BOARD
DECEMBER 13, 2006
The regular meeting of the Alameda Free Library Board was called to order at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Karen Butter, President
Ruth Belikove, Vice President
Leslie Krongold, Board Member
Alan Mitchell, Board Member
Mark Schoenrock, Board Member
Absent:
None
Staff:
Jane Chisaki, Library Director
Marsha Merrick, Recording Secretary
CONSENT CALENDAR
An asterisk indicates items so enacted and adopted on the Consent Calendar.
A.
*Report from Library Director highlighting Library Department activities for the
month of December 2006. Accepted.
B.
*Draft Minutes of the Regular Library Board meeting of November 8, 2006.
Approved.
C.
*Library Services Report for the month of October 2006. Accepted.
D.
*Report from Finance Department reflecting FY 2005-06 Library expenditures (by
fund) through November 2006. Accepted.
E.
Bills for ratification. Approved.
Board Member Schoenrock asked why our payments to Baker & Taylor for the Opening
Day Collection only totaled $20,000. Actually, Baker & Taylor was paid on two different
check registers during the month of November for a total payment of close to $65,000. The
library is still waiting for additional billings to come in for the Opening Day Collection.
Board President Butter asked for a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.
Board Member Krongold so moved; Vice President Belikove seconded the motion which
carried by a 5-0 vote.",LibraryBoard/2006-12-13.pdf
LibraryBoard,2006-12-13,2,"Page 2 of 6
Minutes of the
Alameda Free Library Board Meeting
December 13, 2006
At this point, Director Chisaki asked President Butter if the Board would consider going out
of regular order to allow the Wood Museum to make their presentation. Butter agreed, and
AUSD Representatives Paul Ruffino and Nancy Ely gave a brief Power Point display
showing past art pieces created by Wood Middle School history students in the 6th, 7th and
8th grades. The students write a paper and put together a label for their art piece as well.
Last year, over 250 students participated in the program.
The board as a whole was impressed and agreed that the Library would be happy to host the
Wood Museum in 2007. In the coming months, logistics will be worked out with AUSD.
The opening day reception for the Wood Museum will occur on April 23, 2007 in the large
meeting rooms at the Main Library.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A.
Art Display Policy and Gifts of Art for the Main Library (J. Chisaki)
Director Chisaki had prepared a draft display policy, and inquired if the Board
thought she was going in the right direction before she tackled writing up
procedures. Board Member Schoenrock asked if there should be a review process
for complaints either against an exhibit or about consideration for an exhibit. The
appeal might start with the Library Art Exhibit Committee, then if not satisfied with
the outcome, move on to the Library Board, and then finally to the City Council as a
last alternative.
Exhibits being offered to the Library range from Bay Area photography, to sculpted
masks made out of feathers. A woman from the Frank Bette Center has come
forward to be a volunteer curator if needed, and also has quite a bit of art that could
be displayed from local artists who now have no venue. The Library would really
like to showcase local art. There is one unlit display case in the living room area by
the fireplace, but it has yet to be utilized.
One challenge would be hanging things on the walls without causing damage. A
suggestion was made to mount wooden strips at ceiling level and drop a line down.
The Board agreed that a 5-person committee would be about the right size. The
committee should have at least one Library employee, besides Director Chisaki, that
could represent her or at the very least, walk potential exhibitors around the building
to show them the spaces available for their art.
Before being allowed to exhibit, the artist would have to sign a waiver that the
Library would not be responsible for any damage or loss. Conversely, if the exhibit
caused damage to the building, the artist would be responsible for the repair cost.
Director Chisaki will return at the next meeting with procedures that go along with
the policy, and possibly an application the exhibitor would complete as a request.",LibraryBoard/2006-12-13.pdf
LibraryBoard,2006-12-13,3,"Page 3 of 6
Minutes of the
Alameda Free Library Board Meeting
December 13, 2006
B.
Friends of the Library ""Day"" (J. Chisaki)
Director Chisaki found out it would be relatively easy to have the City Council
designate a Friends of the Library day, week or perhaps month, by writing a
resolution. This could be put on a City Council agenda under Special Orders of the
Day, or if a party were planned, the Mayor would come and read the formal
proclamation there. The board thought a Friends week might be appropriate with
planned activities going on such as celebrity book readings.
Friends President Skeen said she would put together a committee to come up with
some ideas, and also plan an anniversary party which the Friends had wanted to do
anyway around the end of March. Director Chisaki will write up the Council
resolution for the Board's review.
NEW BUSINESS
A.
Presentation on the Wood Museum (P. Ruffino and N. Ely)
See notes above on the presentation for the Wood Museum.
B.
Library Board's Visibility in the Community (J. Chisaki)
Director Chisaki asked for some direction from the Board on where they wanted her
to go with this item. Board Member Krongold stated that she had been searching for
materials from a strategic training session done previously, but hadn't come up with
anything yet. When she locates her notes, she will pass them on to Director Chisaki
who can copy and release them in an upcoming board packet.
Vice President Belikove would like to see a big effort made to visit culturally diverse
communities within the City, and talk to members about getting involved in library
activities such as story sessions. Director Chisaki indicated that after the first of the
year, there would be a series of Russian story readings taking place.
Belikove mentioned having a resource list for people to refer to which would contain
names of people in the community with special talents to offer as well.
C.
Alameda Free Library Foundation (A. Mitchell)
There had not been a recent meeting so there was nothing to report. The Board
asked how much money the Gala had raised; ticket sales took in over $20,000. A
presentation by the Foundation is planned for the January Board meeting.
A question arose on naming an area of the Library after Regina K. Stafford who left
a large bequest to help fund the building of the new Main Library. It was suggested
the large Community Meeting Rooms be re-named the Stafford rooms. All were in
favor, and it was discussed how to approach the Foundation with this idea. Because",LibraryBoard/2006-12-13.pdf
LibraryBoard,2006-12-13,4,"Page 4 of 6
Minutes of the
Alameda Free Library Board Meeting
December 13, 2006
the money came to the Library, President Butter wondered why the naming decision
lies with the Foundation and not with the Library Board. Director Chisaki was not
sure how this came about, but believes the Library Board should take the initiative in
this instance. Director Chisaki will write a resolution for the Library Board to sign,
and Board Member Mitchell can take it to the next Foundation meeting. The
Foundation will be responsible for ordering and funding the signage.
D.
Friends of the Alameda Free Library (M. Skeen)
Friends President Molly Skeen mentioned that their first author night in the new
Library was on the schedule for the following evening. ""Unreleased Beatles Music
& Film"" by rock historian Richie Unterberger will take place on Thursday,
December 14th starting at 7:30 p.m.
The Café is in its third open week and the Friends have been working through
various operational issues. The biggest challenge is getting enough volunteers to
cover all the shifts. The Friends are actively seeking a volunteer coordinator, and if
they can't find one soon, they may have to shut down until they are better prepared.
Gross sales are running between $60 and $120 a day.
E.
Library Building Watch (M. Merrick)
Recording Secretary Marsha Merrick reported that she was again unable to get an
issue of the newsletter out. She cited an overwhelming workload in relation to the
new Library which is expected to lessen as time goes on, but hasn't happened yet. A
December issue being released was considered unlikely as Merrick's vacation time
was coming at the end of the month.
F.
Patron suggestions/comments (Speak-Outs) and Library Director's response.
Several requests for clocks were made, and by the time of the current board meeting,
5 clocks had been installed in various places around the building. Labels on DVDs
and videos instruct patrons not to put them in the bookdrops, but policy has changed.
Staff is removing these labels as quickly as possible. A request for a step stool at the
self-checkout counter so children can reach the equipment was made. A stool will
be located and placed in that area. A recycle bin was requested for the print room.
Bins have been placed in each printer alcove.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment)
Audience member Marc Lambert asked for an update on the CALTAC workshop. Director
Chisaki responded there is no update as no new information had been received. The room
has been booked and we are awaiting direction. Lambert related a story about a group of
youngsters that were on the same bus as he was on the trip across town. They were all
excitedly talking about going to the Library.",LibraryBoard/2006-12-13.pdf
LibraryBoard,2006-12-13,5,"Page 5 of 6
Minutes of the
Alameda Free Library Board Meeting
December 13, 2006
LIBRARY BOARD COMMUNICATIONS
Board Member Krongold does tutoring at the Library, and when she was waiting for her
learner one evening, there was a line of 5 or 6 people at the check-out desk. The self check-
out stations were completely free, and Krongold asked if anyone in line would like to try
using them or if she could assist them if they were unfamiliar. The group met her with some
pretty frustrated looks, but one woman came over and said if she could figure it out she
might use them. Krongold was trying to help her, and felt that the woman clearly wasn't
able to follow the instructions. She suggested that a display stand with some step by step
instructions might be helpful and would be happy to help set that up.
Board President Butter had just attended a Planning Board meeting that Monday night, and
suggested that ""Oral Communications, Non-Agenda"" be moved up on the regular Library
Board Meeting Agenda. This section gives audience members a chance to speak to the
Board on topics of interest to them. By moving the section up on the agenda, the public will
not have to sit through most of the meeting waiting for their chance to speak. Recording
Secretary Merrick verified that ""Oral Communications, Non-Agenda"" would be placed on
the agenda directly after the Consent Calendar piece.
Butter then asked what was going to be done about the branches now. Director Chisaki is
planning some public meetings to take place after the New Year. If the Board agrees, there
will be two public meetings for the West End Branch, and two for the Bay Farm Island
Branch. One of the meetings will be held right in each of the branch libraries, and the other
meetings would be held in a community meeting place, such as a church, closely located to
each branch. Director Chisaki asked the board if they thought a Library Building Team, on
a smaller scale than the Main Library's Building Team, would be appropriate. President
Butter, who had been on this team, said it is a good concept because it enables you to bring
in standpoints that are lacking in the Board, such as architectural expertise. A disadvantage
for the Board is that they might feel a little left out from some of the decision-making.
Director Chisaki also stated that the Recreation Commission would have to be involved if
expansion was planned for the Bay Farm Island branch, because it would impinge on
Leydecker Park.
President Butter asked Director Chisaki if they could sit down with Honora Murphy, who
had been the Chair of the Library Building Team, and get some input from her perspective.
Board Member Schoenrock suggested a scaled down team but with similar representation.
Having members of the public on the team would almost guarantee community enthusiasm.
There is about $2 million dollars available for branch improvements, plus whatever the
Foundation and Friends can contribute. With other projects in town underway, such as the
theater and parking garage, it is unsure where the branch improvement would fall in the
construction or renovation schedule.
After more discussion had ensued, Director Chisaki suggested that the community meetings
should happen first so it could be seen in which direction the public wanted to go, and then
make committee or team plans accordingly. The Board agreed with this concept.",LibraryBoard/2006-12-13.pdf
LibraryBoard,2006-12-13,6,"Page 6 of 6
Minutes of the
Alameda Free Library Board Meeting
December 13, 2006
DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS
The three full-time positions, Supervising Librarian-Adult Services, Supervising Children's
Librarian, and Library Technician are all open right now and the filing period closes on
Friday of the current week. There are 5, 6 and 2 applications respectively; however the
Human Resources Department speculates that more applications will come in right at the
deadline. The applications that have been turned in all seem to meet the minimum
qualifications. One of the major duties of the Library Technician position will be coordinate
Library volunteers. Part-time Aides, Technicians and Librarians will be hired after the full-
time positions are filled to help pick up the additional workload created by the size of the
new facility.
Mid-year budget adjustments are due at the end of the month, and the Library will be asking
for some significant increases as it is very expensive to live in the new building. Being the
closest public restroom to Park Street has taken a toll on the janitorial supply budget dollars.
Bob Haun's last day in the building is the following week, at which time he will be on
vacation until the end of the year. He thanks the Board for their cooperation and patience
throughout the process and has enjoyed working with them. There are only five items left
on the contractor's punch list and they should be resolved very soon.
Staff will have training with the Police Department at the end of the year so they can
effectively deal with the behavior problems presented by the public in the Library.
Board Member Mitchell said that the new Library was mentioned in a Library Hotline issue.
He inquired about the date for the next Foundation meeting which Director Chisaki
confirmed. Mitchell also asked about the Ethics Training the Board was required to take.
ADJOURNMENT
Board President Butter called for a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Board
Member Mitchell so moved, Board Member Krongold seconded the motion, and it was
carried by a 5-0 vote.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane Chisaki
Library Director and
Secretary to the Library Board
This meeting's agenda was posted 72 hours in advance in accordance with the Brown Act.",LibraryBoard/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,1,"DRAFT
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES
December 13, 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
Michael Krueger
Robb Ratto
Eric Schatmeier
Srikant Subramaniam
Members Absent:
Jeff Knoth
Robert McFarland
Staff Present:
Obaid Khan, Supervising Civil Engineer
Barry Bergman, Program Specialist II
Eric Fonstein, Economic Development Coordinator, Development Services Dept.
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of October 25 and November 15, 2006 Minutes. Chair Knox White advised that there
was not a quorum to vote on the minutes of October 25, 2006.
Chair Knox White advised that there was not a quorum to vote on the minutes of November 15,
2006 minutes.
3.
AGENDA CHANGES
There were none.
4.
COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
a.
Multimodal Circulation Plan
b.
Pedestrian Plan
c.
TSM/TDM Plan
Chair Knox White advised that none of the subcommittees had met yet. He noted that he received
a letter advising that AC Transit was having a proposed review of
[[burst of static on",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,2,"tape]] service deployment policies. He understood that those meetings would commence in
January 2007.
5.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
6A. RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE MULTIMODAL CIRCULATION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON RECONCILING TMP POLICIES WITH THE 7 NEW
POLICIES.
Staff Khan presented the staff report. He noted that on October 17, 2006, City Council approved
the initiation of the process for a General Plan Amendment to incorporate the Transportation
Master Plan policies and the seven additional policies recommended by the Transportation
Commission. Following the meeting, the Transportation Commission met in October, and the
Commissioners asked the Multimodal Circulation Subcommittee to examine the TMP policies to
determine whether any conflicts existed. If conflicts did exist, they were requested to address and
reconcile the policies. The Subcommittee met after that meeting and developed
recommendations, including minor changes to the TMP policies, as well as a substantial change
to Policy 7 of the EIR policies. He detailed the changes in the policies as described in the staff
report. The staff recommendations were intended to ensure that if Policy 7 were to be
implemented, and if a certain level of congestion were to be accepted in certain locations in the
City, some thresholds would be established that would take into account the impacts that may be
generated from the increase in congestion.
Staff Khan described the current CEQA process in detail. Staff recommended that Policy 7 be
strengthened so that if the TSM or TDM measures were implemented, they would be verifiable
on an annual basis. If they were not being met, additional measures would be implemented. Staff
requested that the Commission examine the changes recommended by the Subcommittee and by
staff, and to approve the changes with the changed policies as recommended by staff.
Public Comment
There were no speakers.
Closed Public Comment
Commissioner Krueger noted that he was trying to reconcile how staff's wording related to the
goal of strengthening the TDM language. He noted that the second set of language seemed to put
conditions on when unmitigated congestion could be accepted with TDM. He believed that
weakened the intent of Policy 7 as he understood it.
Staff Khan noted that Policy 5 addressed the issue of pedestrian and bicyclist impacts, which they
tried to tie to Policy 7, and which strengthened Policy 7 in establishing thresholds.
A discussion of the impacts and thresholds ensued.
2",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,3,"Chair Knox White noted that the Subcommittee had addressed Item B-2.1 by email, and came to
the consensus that changing ""protect"" to ""promote residential neighborhood integrity"" actually
weakened the proposed language. He believed that the following four lines appeared to be
editorializing, rather than making a policy statement. He did not believe it was necessary, and did
not believe it added anything to the policy. Regarding Item 7, he recalled that Commissioner
McFarland stated that the first part of it was nearly a duplication of the next statement regarding
the implementation and verification of a quantifiable TSM. He believed the language as written,
which included words such as ""could be"" instead of ""are going to be,"" significantly reduced the
effectiveness of Policy 7.
Commissioner Schatmeier agreed with the lack of necessity on Item B-2.1 in Policy 7, and
believed that the first sentence was superfluous.
Commissioner Krueger noted that was word ""yearly"" was included to specify a timeline for
verification, and inquired how important the yearly verification was.
Chair Knox White inquired once the EIR was passed, and the mitigations accepted, what the
addition of the language would do in terms of the City's ability to do anything differently.
Staff Khan advised that if the EIR had indicated thresholds, such as a 10% reduction in trips, and
if there was only a 5% reduction after the first year, the next level of TSM/TDM measures may
be required.
Chair Knox White believed the intent of Policy 7 was to bring the City out of having to mitigate
every possible piece of congestion at every possible intersection, which created an uncrossable
environment at some intersections. He believed this language may be appropriate for the TDM
plan, which would say that the TDM plan should have various phases to help achieve the TDM
plan goals.
Staff Khan noted that there were two aspects of the language: to ensure the measures were
verifiable and quantifiable, and to ensure that when the EIR was done, that the public would be
fully aware of the impacts if a certain level of congestion were to be accepted.
Chair Knox White noted that part of the EIR process was to identify and call out congestion. He
did not understand how the additional language accomplished that goal, other than to say it ""can
be decided.""
A discussion of level of service language and other wordsmithing items ensued.
Commissioner Krueger noted that he was inclined to accept Attachment 1 as it is, and he
suggested that specific language be added to state that the congestion should be quantified. He
believed the City should have clarification on the number of minutes traffic would be delayed.
He suggested that language be added explicitly stating that the facts would be put on the table.
3",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,4,"Chair Knox White inquired whether the following language would be acceptable: ""During the
EIR process, the full extent of congestion at intersections will be disclosed beyond the LOS
letter.'
Commissioner Krueger concurred with that suggestion.
Chair Knox White suggested the following language, ""This unmitigated congestion should be
expressly evaluated and disclosed during the EIR process, and acknowledged as a byproduct of
the development.'
Commissioner Krueger suggested adding the following language, ""The alternate methods of
transportation, impacts of pedestrians, bicycles, queues at intersections, driveway access"" as
examples of the kind of disclosure being discussed. He added that including the language, ""could
be included, but not limited to as an example of the kind of things to be disclosed.
Staff Khan thanked the Commissioners for the specific language, and believed that would be
useful.
Chair Knox White suggested: ""This unmitigated congestion should be evaluated and disclosed,""
and if staff wished to discuss queues at intersection, that would be included in the LOS
discussion.
Staff Khan noted that LOS addressed delays, but did not take queues into account. He noted that
the queue analysis was performed as part of the model that examined LOS at intersections.
Commissioner Ratto moved to accept staff recommendation with the changes discussed by the
Commission, including the addition of the language ""This unmitigated congestion should be
evaluated and disclosed (including intersection delay length of time) during the EIR process,
and acknowledges a byproduct of the development.""). Commissioner Schatmeier seconded.
Motion passed, 5-0.
6B.
REVIEW AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS ON DRAFT FUNCTIONAL
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CONCEPTS * 2ND PRESENTATION.
Staff Khan presented the staff report, and noted that the consultant, DKS, would continue the
presentation. He noted that DKS had examined what other cities throughout the country had
done. They reviewed the cities' existing functional classification systems, and discussed them
with personnel from the other cities, resulting in recommendations and changes to the functional
classification maps and overlays. Staff requested the Commission's recommendations and input
for staff and the consultant. Staff would return with the final recommendations and changes in
January 2007, and would present the final report at that time.
Mark Spencer, DKS Associates, continued the presentation on the Street Functional
Classification System work that they had undertaken with City staff. He presented the overview
of the material covered in the previous meeting, and displayed a PowerPoint presentation
4",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,5,"discussing the candidate streets and the primary concerns for each street, such as speed, access,
function, design features, land use and other elements explained in the report. This information was
compiled into a matrix table, which Mr. Spencer displayed on the overhead screen. He described the
methodology for creating the report and the maps. He noted that the pedestrian access layer was
removed, as all streets have pedestrian access and are integrated in the grid system. Mr. Spencer
indicated that there are two key recommendations: 1) implementation policy to recommend design
standards, and 2) prioritization and decision-making framework to address stakeholder concerns and
conflict resolution.
Chair Knox White noted that one step recommended an implementation process for creating
design standards, and inquired whether it was intended to accomplish that before or after the EIR
process. Staff Khan believed it would be more beneficial if it was part of the GPA, and that staff
recommended it be accomplished before that. Staff was in the RFP process for the consultant,
and hoped that by the end of January, a consultant would be found for the GPA analysis. If the
Multimodal Circulation Subcommittee could meet within the next month and provide some
recommendations, he hoped staff could return in January to discuss the implementation policies.
Public Comment
Jim Strehlow inquired whether the map depicted existing or proposed streets, because the
Clement Avenue went all the way through. Mr. Spencer replied that it depicted proposed streets.
Mr. Strehlow inquired whether the street segments would be published in a PDF file so the
public could comment on the classifications. Mr. Spencer replied that would be possible,
although they were currently unreadable; a new PDF version would be posted on the TMP
website on the City's website. A higher resolution version would be posted for readability.
Commissioner Krueger noted that a PDF file would have more flexibility for the user to zoom in
on a segment of the map.
Closed Public Comment
Commissioner Krueger noted that Alameda had very mixed land uses, and inquired whether
some cities had a mixed use classification, or whether the predominant use in a given area was
used. Mr. Spencer replied that most cities had mixed use land uses, and that most cities have not
undertaken this on a citywide basis; rather a more focused scope was used, within a
neighborhood or street corridor-type basis, which can change from block to block.
Commissioner Ratto noticed that on the land use map, part of Park Street was designated as a
school and recreational area, which he noted was not correct. Mr. Spencer noted that was
because of Island High, which would be moving. Commissioner Ratto added that Park Street was
still not a school zone. He noted that it was a Commercial zone, and inquired why it was labeled
that way. Staff Khan noted that the way the Transportation Commission looked at the zones,
there was a two-block radius around the school. Mr. Spencer noted that the zones were layered
on top of the other, and that the classification on top was the most visible.
5",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,6,"Commissioner Ratto noted that he had an issue with respect to the maps regarding the proposal to
extend the truck route all the way down Park Street, from the bridge to Alameda Towne Center.
He agreed with the changing classification of Park Street, noting that from the Encinal to Otis
Drive, it changes into residential, as well as one lane in each direction. He had a huge problem
with that being designated a truck route so that it would increase the truck congestion during the
day. After Alameda Towne Center finishes it improvements, he believed the congestion could
become severe.
Staff Khan noted that was a very good point, and added that staff would examine it further.
Mr. Spencer added that staff questioned them on that item as well, and he noted that the
alternative was more circuitous truck routing. Normally, they would want to take a more direct
route.
Commissioner Ratto noted that his association, the Park Street Business Association, would fight
that tooth and nail.
Staff Khan noted that if trucks made deliveries to a certain destination, they would be allowed to
use that street for delivery access. Truck routes were defined as handling through traffic.
In response to an inquiry by Chair Knox White whether the City had truck count information,
Staff Khan replied that classification counts were performed as part of City studies, and that he
could look into it further.
Commissioner Schatmeier complimented DKS on the quality of the report, and added that he had
questioned the need for hiring a consultant to do this kind of work. He had previously expressed
dismay at duplicating work that had been already done by the Transportation Commission. He
believed that the work shown at this meeting had not substantially added to the work previously
done by the Transportation Commission. He noted that the subcommittee consisting of
Commissioners Knox White, McFarland and himself had been cognizant of the funding needs,
and also vetted their work with community workshops and other Commissions within the City.
Commissioner Krueger inquired whether the arterial spacing guidelines on Table 3-2 (page 7)
referred to a national standard designed to apply to all cities. Mr. Spencer confirmed that was
correct. Commissioner Krueger was surprised to see on page 8 the spacing of arterials that
seemed very dense, given the Alameda population of 70,000 people. He would have expected to
see that spacing for New York or Chicago, and inquired about the thinking behind the number of
arterials. Mr. Spencer replied that Alameda had very short blocks with tight spacing and a lot of
traffic interruption. In addition, the grid pattern was very dense. He noted that Alameda did not
have many collectors, and that the main part of the Island was mostly grid.
Commissioner Krueger noted that given that Alameda was not an intense, highly dense urban
core, it may make sense to make some of the streets collectors, and have fewer arterials. He
inquired about the rationale behind not doing that. Mr. Spencer replied that it was not just the
density, but also how the street functioned. Regardless of the amount of volume, the traffic
experienced in Alameda was set up so that most of the streets functioned in a very equivalent
6",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,7,"manner. He noted that if Alameda doubled in population, and if the traffic doubled, the streets
would still function similarly, but with much more volume, and assuming they could handle the
capacity.
Chair Knox White expressed concern about the way arterials were currently defined, and
believed that the current plan as set up seemed to completely contradict one of the main themes
of the Alameda General Plan, which was de-emphasis of the automobile. He believed that, as
proposed, the plan was completely out of compliance with the current, as well as the soon-to-be-
updated, General Plan. Regarding the classifications, he was surprised that there was a lot of
landscaping design, and that street widths were not called out in the matrix, that the work from
the subcommittee regarding the number of lanes for various types of arterials was left out, and
that the traffic calming had been left out as well. He inquired why the lanes and the traffic
calming had been left out. Staff Khan thanked Chair Knox White for his comments, and did not
see any reason why that could not be included. He noted that the consultant tried to incorporate
that by examining the buffers, including landscaping, for residential. He noted that by reducing
the street grid, the perception of the motorists would result in traffic calming. Chair Knox White
noted that he liked the landscaping very much.
A discussion of the subcommittee's work as it related to this current report ensued.
Chair Knox White noted that on page 10, two goals were expressed in 3.2, ""preserving arterial
functionality"" and ""improving residential livability.' He was not sure that they were not
opposing goals. He suggested that the Transportation Commission hold further discussion
regarding those two goals. He noted that it was difficult to back out of your driveway into fast-
moving traffic.
With respect to land use overlays, Chair Knox White believed the gateways were a landscaping
category, which was acceptable to him. He believed that gateway prioritization should start with
the highest occupancy vehicles and zero-emission modes, in other words, not moving the most
cars, but the most people.
With respect to residential corridors, Chair Knox White inquired whether they were only for
arterials, because he believed the map contained collector streets that were not called out as
residential corridors, despite being 100% residential. Mr. Spencer noted that he would look at
that issue on the map, and added that many arterials were also residential corridors, which led to
the conflict pointed out by Chair Knox White.
Chair Knox White noted the language on page 13 read, ""On-street parking preservation is to be
encouraged over other pedestrian and bicycle improvements if there is insufficient right of way.
He noted that the Transportation Commission had attempted to address that issue in a slightly
different way, which was, ""The preservation of on-street parking should be encouraged when
there is no adjacent off-street parking available and additional width is needed for pedestrian and
bicycle "" He noted that if you were next to a parking lot or garage, it should be acceptable to
install the bike lanes as a buffer, or other improvements.
7",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,8,"Chair Knox White noted that on page 25, the arterial overlay matrix, the automobile column
essentially focused on peak vehicular mobility and capacity at all times. He noted that the
original intent of the TC Subcommittee, using the modal overlays, was to outline a network of
usable bike and transit systems that allowed for the City to create that system, including bike
lanes. He noted that for the bicycle priority overlay, the intent was to prioritize the streets for
bike improvements. He was concerned that by naming every street in Alameda that went across
the Island an arterial, and then stating that the street would be designed to carry as much traffic
as possible to meet the capacity and maximize flow, the City was limiting itself in the ability to
do any bike or transit planning.
Chair Knox White noted that on page 31, he believed the language, "" providing a comfortable
pedestrian environment,"" should be more fully fleshed out.
Chair Knox White noted that the parking part of the matrix was the same everywhere, and he
believed that there should be street parking wherever it is feasible.
Chair Knox White noted that he was willing to accept that there would not be pedestrian zones,
and noted that the definition of a pedestrian zone was difficult to define. He noted that the
subcommittee was not particularly supportive of the idea of pedestrian corridors as a meaningful
concept. He complimented the consultant on reflecting that in the matrix. Regarding the bike
map, he would like to see the subcommittee's bike map, which included new streets for future
use. He noted that they did not call out the classifications. He asked that the transit overlay be
called ""transit priority"" instead of ""transit preferred"", and that the original subcommittee's
definition of a primary transit street be included in the documentation. He complimented the
consultant on the transit map, and noted that the consultants elevated Lincoln from a primary
transit street to an exclusive transit right of way street, which he would not argue with. He noted
that there was a caveat after the description of the three kinds of street which said, ""Streets not
classified as either primary, secondary or exclusive transit right of way could nevertheless be
used by such nontraditional transit services as neighborhood shuttles, paratransit, electric buses,
etc. Nonclassification does not preclude specialized school routes of full-size buses as
necessary.'
Chair Knox White believed that if the multimodal overlays were prioritized, he believed most of
the conflicts between the uses should be discovered before the document is adopted. He
summarized the approaches taken by several other cities that were studied. He believed that any
process that goes forward should honor and acknowledge the Transportation Master Plan that
was passed by the City Council. He concurred with Commissioner Schatmeier's statement that
the document was well-done and readable, and added that the matrices enhanced the clarity of
the work. Staff Khan thanked the Chair for his comments.
Commissioner Krueger noted that he would submit further comments to staff via email. Staff
Khan requested that Chair Knox White submit his comments and modifications to staff as well.
Commissioner Schatmeier supported the idea of developing an implementation policy, and
would like to participate in that. He inquired what that would be based upon.
8",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,9,"Chair Knox White suggested that the Commission address that issue during the January 2007
meeting, after the proposal final draft is distributed. Staff Khan requested that the additional
information be returned to staff by February in order to be included in the GPA process.
Mr. Spencer thanked the Commission on the level of effort and detail in responding to the
document. He noted that the use of the terms ""arterials,"" ""collectors"" and ""local streets"" would
be difficult to precisely define, and noted that the use of the terms allowed eligibility for funding
and consistency with County-wide, regional, and state plans. He noted that funding was the
primary reason for continued use of those terms.
No action was taken.
7A.
CITY OF ALAMEDA BUSINESS AREA PARKING STUDY
Eric Fonstein, Economic Development Coordinator, Development Services Department,
presented the staff report describing the parking study for the two business districts. He described
the study's background and scope, and advised that the goal was to provide a framework for a
comprehensive strategy to manage and regulate parking in the rejuvenating business districts. He
noted that the Park Street business district had changed since the last study with the additions of
many new retail businesses such as Starbucks and Peet's Coffee. He noted that the consultant,
Wilbur Smith, was completing the first technical memo, which reviews and analyzes the existing
parking conditions for both on- and off-street parking, including public and private lots. He noted
that the study would eventually contain five technical memos: Existing Conditions, Demand,
Loading Zone, Analyzing the Parking Code/Alternative Code Requirements, and Parking
Management Plans/Incentives for Parking Facilities.
Staff Fonstein noted that after the findings were concluded in the spring, staff would return to the
districts and community workshops to present the findings. Staff would then come before the
Transportation Commission, EDC, Planning Board and the City Council to present the final
report for approval.
Commissioner Ratto suggested that the study area be extended up to the estuary.
Staff Fonstein noted that the first task, data collection, was nearly complete, and that it would
stretch the study budget to return to the field and extend the study area.
Commissioner Ratto noted that data was collected between 7 and 9, he suggested that the hours
be extended to 10. He also suggested that the weekend hours be earlier. He requested an
updated work schedule.
Commissioner Krueger was surprised that the study area for Park Street (Figure 3 map) went so
far west, near Walnut Street, but did not extend as far east to Broadway. He inquired why the
study area was so lopsided. Mr. Fonstein noted that the map was drawn erroneously.
Commissioner Krueger asked why the Webster Street area is so much narrower than the Park
Street area.
9",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,10,"Staff Fonstein responded that study areas respond to the areas where there are parking
restrictions. He advised that a draft recommendation would be presented to the Commission in
the spring.
There was no action.
Chair Knox White requested a motion to continue the meeting.
Commissioner Schatmeier moved to continue the meeting past 10:00 p.m. Commissioner
Krueger seconded. Motion passed, 5-0.
7B.
STATUS OF RED-CURBING FOR BUS STOPS
Staff Bergman provided an update on the efforts to improve accessibility at the City's bus stops.
Based on guidelines and discussions with AC Transit, it was determined that 55 feet of red curb
was sufficient at the nearside bus stops, and 65 feet at the far side stops; the City began to
provide those improvements. The table attached to the report indicated where there were
deficiencies. At 23 of the locations, additional red curb was required; some of those could be
addressed administratively because only one space was required; the other locations would be
brought to the TTT. Twenty-seven of the stops on the list were only served by either school
routes or Transbay peak hour-only routes; signage would be used to have minimal impact to
allow parking on the weekends and other times when buses were not running. Ten other stops
had individual situations that needed to be resolved. The staff report indicated that the 60
locations will be taken to the TTT beginning in February, and after internal discussion, it would
be done more quickly than originally planned if there was not significant opposition. The staff
report indicated that red curbing was removed from some locations, and after further
investigation, it was determined that nearly all of them resulted from bus stop consolidations.
The only stops affected by that were those that were being relocated.
Commissioner Ratto noted that in the staff report it states that red curb was removed after it had
previously been approved. Staff Bergman replied that was the result of an internal
miscommunication, and investigation of most of those sites were the result of consolidation.
Commissioner Krueger inquired whether there were any instances where the red curbs were
removed, but the bus stop signs were not; he recalled that there were several instances on
Encinal. Staff Bergman noted that at Mound, there was a bus stop, and that red curb needed to be
put in.
Chair Knox White thanked staff for compiling the database.
No action was taken.
10",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf
TransportationCommission,2006-12-13,11,"7C.
SELECTION OF A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT/
TRANSPORTATION
DEMAND
MANAGEMENT
(TSM/TDM)
SUB-PLAN
SUBCOMMITTEE.
Staff Khan presented the staff report, and noted that staff would like to complete the TSM/TDM
plan by the end of 2007, with implementation anticipated to begin by the end of 2007. Staff
requested that the Transportation Commission appoint a subcommittee to work on developing
the policy's objectives for this sub-plan. He noted that the subcommittee would participate in
identification of thresholds for peak hour trip reduction, revise existing Citywide ordinance on
TSM/TDM programs, develop management and operation procedures for the Transportation
Management Associations, and support the establishment of fees to administer the TSM/PDM
programs. Staff would work with the subcommittee to establish the policies, goals and objectives
as soon as possible.
Chair Knox White noted that he would be willing to participate in the subcommittee, and that this
was an issue of interest to him. He anticipated one meeting per month.
Commissioner Ratto volunteered to participate in the subcommittee.
Commissioner Subramaniam volunteered to participate in the subcommittee.
8.
STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Staff Khan inquired whether the Commissioner S had taken the ethics training course. He noted
that they were due by the end of the year, and could be taken online.
Meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
11",TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf