{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 1, "text": "TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES\nFebruary 27, 2008\nChair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:35 p.m. He noted that a\nquorum was not yet present, so the Commission would address several discussion items that did\nnot require action.\n1.\nROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded.\nMembers Present:\nJohn Knox White\nMichael Krueger\nRobert McFarland\nEric Schatmeier (arrived at 7:50 PM)\nMembers Absent:\nRobb Ratto\nSrikant Subramaniam\nNielsen Tam\nStaff Present:\nObaid Khan, Supervising Civil Engineer\nBarry Bergman, Transportation Coordinator\n2.\nAPPROVAL OF MINUTES\na.\nJanuary 23, 2008\nChair Knox White noted that a full quorum was not present to consider the minutes, and that they\nwould be addressed at the next meeting if a quorum was present.\n3.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nChair Knox White suggested that the agenda be taken in order until a quorum has been reached,\nif Item 7A comes up before that occurs, Item 7B would be heard.\n4.\nCOMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS\nChair Knox White noted that the State Senate had a new bill number assigned to address the\nclean-up language for the establishment of the Water Emergency Transportation Authority\n(WETA), but no actual language was associated with it. He noted that the TC had requested that\nSen. Perata's staff be on hand for a public meeting regarding this matter.", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 2, "text": "Chair Knox White inquired what the City's policy was regarding parking in red zones and across\nsidewalks. He believed the City should investigate an education campaign regarding the new\ncrosswalk lights. He has seen almost no change in driver behavior regarding the lighted\ncrosswalks.\n5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS\nOpen public hearing.\nThere were no speakers.\nClose public hearing.\n6.\nOLD BUSINESS\n6A.\nUpdate on I-880/Broadway/Jackson Project Study Report.\nStaff Khan presented the staff report, and updated the I-880/Broadway/Jackson project. He\nsummarized the history of the project, and displayed and described the proposed arterial changes\nand signals in detail. Staff was concerned that any change to the historical structures would cause\nstructural and environmental issues. The speed required for the right turn would have to be no\nmore than 25 mph. Caltrans did not support traffic slowing down abruptly coming out of the\nPosey Tube, which led to further options being studied for traffic coming out of the Tube in\nOakland. A left turn onto the existing one-way Sixth Street was suggested, with further\nimprovements intended for Sixth Street; he noted that option showed great promise. The\nfeasibility study suggested that for northbound traffic on I-880, the Broadway off-ramp be\neliminated and a new ramp be installed at Webster Street, which would improve access to\nAlameda by allowing people to make a left turn into the Webster Tube entrance. He noted that\nthe final report was due to be completed in Summer 2008.\nCommissioner Schatmeier joined the Commission on the dais. He inquired what specific\nproblem the project was intended to solve, and noted that while he used it during off-peak hours,\nhe understood that it was cramped and awkward.\nStaff Khan replied that the northbound Jackson Street on ramp has a weave as it comes onto the\nI-880 freeway; and reduction in any traffic trying to use Jackson Street will improve the safety\non the freeway. He added that the City was looking into further improvements to provide better\ncirculation along the corridor near Sixth Street. He noted that by 2030, congestion in the Tubes\nwould be substantially increased. With respect to Chinatown, the traffic would be moved away\nfrom the pedestrian concentration at Seventh and Harrison. He noted that there was a fatality at\nSeventh and Harrison, and that this was a serious concern for the Chinatown community.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired whether this plan would help traffic moving southbound, as\nwell as at the weave. He further inquired whether there had been any investigation into shifting\nthe traffic by the Senior Center onto arterials without having to cut the corner.\n2", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 3, "text": "Staff Khan replied that the hook ramp created the benefit of creating an arterial in front of the\nPulte building. The City was interested in the alternative because of the importance of the\nsouthbound access. There were constraints with respect to the entrance to the Pulte building.\nNo action was taken.\n7.\nNEW BUSINESS\n7A.\nResidents' appeal to Proposed Changes to Central Avenue\nStaff Khan presented the staff report, and detailed the background of this matter. He noted that\nparents and school officials had submitted concerns regarding circulation and drop-off zones in\nfront of the school. Parents had been concerned about double-parking during the school drop-off\ntime, people blocking entrances and children's safety. Staff's major concern was separating the\nvehicular traffic from the children exiting the cars. He noted that one goal was to remove parking\non the west of the school driveway; he displayed the loading zone area at the school on the\noverhead screen. He noted that if the white zone were to be moved onto school property, the cars\nwould also be moved. The double-parked cars would be addressed by removing the parking\naltogether west of the school entrance. The third action was to create a one-hour parking zone in\nfront of the zone where an unrestricted zone had previously existed. He noted that cars could not\nremain in a white zone unattended. He added that it aided children with special needs and their\nparents.\nStaff Khan noted that his discussions with the school indicate that they have seen substantial\nimprovements in this area as a result of the changes implemented to date. They also wanted to\ncreate a program at the school that would allow teachers or volunteers to receive the children,\nopen the door and get them out of the cars, which would improve the traffic flow. Staff\nencouraged the principal and the parents to implement this. Staff conducted a survey of the\nparking supply as compared to demand. Christina Hanson, a resident, sent a survey to staff that\nshe conducted at approximately 30 minute intervals, and staff conducted another survey between\n8 a.m. and 3 p.m. Staff found that if one-hour parking was installed, the smallest number of\navailable parking spaces at 9 a.m. was five spaces; there were 16 spaces available at 3 p.m. He\nnoted that staff's intention was to improve traffic circulation, address children's safety, take the\nvehicular traffic away from access of children getting into the school, address access for special\nneeds children by providing some parking for parents to enter the school, and to improve parking\nconditions by removing several red curbs to provide additional parking spaces. The striping\nwould be redesigned to allow the parking at that location.\nIn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Krueger whether any of the red curbs were in place\nto provide visibility, or whether it was due to the striping, Staff Khan replied that the existing red\ncurb at Fifth and Central would be removed because it had been installed for visibility reasons\nwhen there was no stop sign. They wanted to maintain some visibility at the signalized\nintersection of Ballena and Central, but there was a substantial amount of red curb that could be\naddressed to accommodate the parking configuration.\n3", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 4, "text": "Staff Khan noted that the City had coordinated with local Eagle Scouts to perform some of the\nstriping. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner McFarland whether the curb would be\npainted, Staff Khan replied that it would not be painted and because it was time-limited, there\nwould be signs placed at those locations.\nA discussion of the details of the various parking zones ensued.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired which of the safe routes to school had been addressed. Staff\nKhan replied that the school did not yet have a safe routes to school map, and that Public Works\nbegan creating those maps last year. This year, the plan was to work on the West End for this\nschool, Chipman, Encinal High and Ruby Bridges. He noted that it generally took time to engage\nthe community and the parents, and staff felt that the drop-off zone would enable to parents to\nunderstand what was going on. Staff felt that the parents would be encouraged to continue their\nsupport to create a robust program to allow the drop-off zone, and then a walking school bus or a\nbicycle train.\nOpen public hearing.\nMs. Chris Hanson, 461 Central, appellant, noted that this had been a frustrating situation for\nherself and her neighbors. She felt the City had mishandled this process, and added that she had\nbeen a municipal employee for over 15 years, including for Alameda, and that she understood\nthe public process and rationale. She noted that the length of the curb in front of the school was\nsupposed to be a green curb with seven spaces for one-hour parking at 7 a.m. She noted that the\nsituation was very stressful, and had tried to get information from Alan Ta, junior engineer with\nPublic Works; she had been told it would be done. She was later told by Public Works Director\nMatt Naclerio that the notifications would be re-sent. She did not believe the City should cater to\na specific interest group without considering the concerns of all the neighbors. She appreciated\nthe marked improvement with the traffic flow, and noted that the week the school had monitors\non duty, there was also improvement. She noted that the speed of the through traffic was\nexcessive. She noted that there were already spaces available at the peak usage hour, and did not\nunderstand why there must be time-limited parking spaces if a minimum of five spaces were\navailable at all times.\nMs. Hanson displayed photos showing that seven spaces were available. She noted that the\nneighboring houses were built in 1910, and did not generally have garages; in addition, there was\nlimited driveway and off-street parking. She added that most of the neighbors had to park on the\nstreet, and that many neighbors took public transportation. She did not believe that the neighbors\nshould have to move their cars before going to work in the morning. She noted that many people\ndrove compact cars, and suggested that the curb be repainted for compact spaces. She suggested\nthat if the school wanted to add three spaces of private staff parking, they could add three more\nspaces in that location because the concrete at the back of the school was already being utilized.\nShe suggested that some of the staff members park further down so three spaces could be made\ngreen.\nMs. Hanson distributed three letters from her neighbors to the Commission.\n4", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 5, "text": "Ms. Robin Hewitt echoed Ms. Hanson's comments and frustration. She expressed concern that\nabout growing congestion in the Tube, and noted that Alameda was losing parking spaces as it\ncontinues to grow. She noted that apartment buildings have fewer vacancies and more cars as the\nhousing market crisis continues. She believed the parking enforcement at schools should have\nstronger enforcement. She has observed illegal U-turns, double parking and no place for children\nto cross the street except at the intersections of Central at Fourth and Fifth Streets.\nClose public hearing.\nCommissioner Krueger noted that Ms. Hanson's letter, parking counts and photos showed many\nempty spaces. He inquired why it would create a hardship if the other spaces were taken away in\nthat case. Ms. Hanson replied that from the hours of 8 to 3, she demonstrated that there was\nample parking. She inquired why there would be limited parking spaces during a time there was\nample parking. She noted that in the event she did not have to leave her house until 9 a.m., she\nwould have to get up earlier to move her car during the school drop-off hours before it was 8\na.m., when the limited parking started. She did not believe the neighbors should be subjected to\nthat inconvenience.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired about the issue of special needs children, and whether it was a\ndifferent scenario from a handicapped parking zone. He further inquired whether those children\nmust be escorted to school, and whether the staff parking lot could be used for that purpose. Staff\nKhan replied that the handicapped parking inside the parking lot could be used. The school\npreviously had two disabled parking spaces (blue and green lots on the overhead map), and they\nallow the children to be escorted to school without leaving the car unattended on the street. Staff\nbelieved this addressed the needs of the parents and the school.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired about the appellant's suggestion of creating more space within\nthe off-street parking lot in order to create temporary parking for people going into the school\nwithout taking street parking spaces. Staff Khan noted that the parking lot was configured for\nemployees or people who would be there a long time.\nChair Knox White indicated that he understood the concern about having the drop-off zone just\nprior to the entrance to the school, and asked if the spaces could be converted to on-street\nparking. Staff Khan replied if the spaces were not occupied, that this area would continue to\nfunction as a drop-off zone, and could lead to double-parking in that area.\nChair Knox White stated that did not make sense to him, and was concerned that the Police\nDepartment enforces parking restrictions inconsistently, including near schools, and that having\nspecific designations for each section of curb may lead to further problems if it can't be\nenforced. Since both the staff report and Ms. Hanson's survey seem to indicate that there is\nsufficient parking in the area, he did not believe it was necessary in this case to carve out so\nmany specific uses for each part of the right of way, and believed that the need for parents\naccessing the school should not be prioritized over residents accessing their houses. He was\nsurprised that so much staff time was available to address parking issues outside of schools, but\nnot for walking and biking issues around schools, and that a majority of the students live within\n5", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 6, "text": "walking or biking distance of the school. He noted that a lot of time has been spent on school\ndrop-off zones. He suggested enacting an ordinance to enforce double fines in school zones, as is\nallowed by the state. He understood that staff had a difficult job in balancing many wants and\ndesires in the City. He did not see any need to remove the parking at Paden school, and\nsuggested adding a crosswalk in front of the school across Central Ave. He suggested\nencouraging walking to school, and strongly encouraged the neighboring residents to be notified\nof actions such as this near their neighboring school. He would like the personnel manual to\ninclude a requirement to inform the public of changes happening near their homes. He noted that\nresidents should realize that it was not always possible to park directly in front of their house or\nschool.\nStaff Khan noted that it was important for staff to work with the school principal, parents, school\ndistrict and police. He noted that additional Police staff had been hired to increase enforcement\nin front of the schools, primarily for the children's safety. He noted that the intention was to\nremove the children from the path of traffic. He noted that they were working with the school to\ndevelop a safe routes to school map.\nCommissioner Schatmeier echoed Chair Knox White's comments, and did not see any\ncompelling reason for the one-hour parking zone in front of the school. He noted that when his\ndisabled child was school-age, she often took AC Transit when she was old enough. He noted\nthat he had to fight for parking places like everyone else for parent-teacher conferences. He did\nnot see a reason to grant a parking space for someone who would be at the school for an hour or\nless. He noted that people should be able to find some other place to park, or use the off-street\nlot, and did not agree with the staff report in that regard.\nCommissioner Krueger did not see a compelling need for the time-limited parking, but was\nconcerned about the traffic flow and safety. He inquired about other safety and circulation issues\napart from double parking. He believed that parking should be designated in the correct way,\nwhether or not the restrictions were enforced.\nStaff Khan displayed the circulation map, and replied that in the morning, parents used the white\nzone to drop off, and other cars would stop in the middle of the street. He noted that the access\nwas changed to eliminate other cars impeding the access.\nIn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Krueger whether compact spaces would be possible,\nStaff Khan replied that the City did not have any ordinance for compact spaces. He added that the\nCommission could recommend to the City Council that an ordinance for compact spaces be\ndeveloped.\nChair Knox White noted that if there did not seem to be a need for a restriction which was not\nbeing enforced anyway, he did not believe it made sense to have such a restriction. He believed\nthe City's roadways should interact with the land uses.\nCommissioner Krueger moved to accept the staff recommendations, with the modification to\nremove time-limited parking, and retaining the no-stopping zone during school hours. Motion\ndies for lack of a second.\n6", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 7, "text": "In response to an inquiry by Chair Knox White regarding double fines in school zones, Staff\nKhan replied that that law would sunset this year. Chair Knox White suggested that double fines\nin school zones be considered.\nCommissioner Krueger suggested that the road diet issue be examined by staff.\nCommissioner Schatmeier moved to accept the staff recommendations to uphold the appeal,\nwith the modification to remove time-limited parking. Two of the three white parking spaces\nwould be preserved, and no stopping would be allowed in one space closest to the driveway\nfrom 7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Commissioner McFarland seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-\n0.\n7B.\nConceptual Design of Mariner Square Drive Realignment and Park and Ride\nLot/Transit Hub\nStaff Khan presented the staff report, and displayed and described a conceptual design of a\nproposed realignment of existing Mariner Square Drive to a former railroad right-of-way, and\nconstruction of a transit hub in the vicinity of the Posey Tube entrance. The existing Mariner\nSquare Drive would be used to provide buses with direct access to the Posey Tube. The project\nincludes a Class I separate bicycle/pedestrian path that would provide connectivity to the Bay\nTrail and the Posey Tube, a future estuary crossing for transit, bicyclists and pedestrians that is\ncurrently under study, and the proposed Cross Alameda Trail. He noted that there is the potential\nto explore shared parking opportunities with adjacent businesses and property owners. He noted\nthat electronic bike lockers were being considered, and that bus line modifications could be\nconsidered to bring the W and 19 buses to access this site. Staff requested the Commissioners'\ncomments about pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation. In addition, there has been\npreliminary interest expressed in constructing a hotel on an adjacent City-owned site, so staff\nalso invited comments from the Commissioners on the potential for the transit hub and potential\nhotel to share parking, given the needs of these types of uses. He discussed that proposed costs\nfor each part of the proposal, and noted that the City is including this in the analysis for the TMP,\nsince if the project is included in the General Plan it will facilitate getting access to funding.\nIn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Krueger whether the amenities include bus shelters\nand seating, Staff Khan replied that shelters would be part of this, and the City may also look into\nincluding electronic Next Bus signs to provide real-time information about transit vehicles\narrival times.\nIn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Krueger whether the intersection of Atlantic Ave.\nand Webster Street would be served, Staff Bergman replied that one option that could be\nconsidered is rerouting the W to serve the transit hub, but maintaining the existing Line O route,\nwhich is heavily used at Atlantic and Webster.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired whether there was a way to serve this area, as well as Atlantic\nand Webster, Staff Khan replied that there could be a shuttle service to BART offered by AC\nTransit. Staff intended to address the issues regarding the congestion pressure on the Tubes, and\n7", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 8, "text": "City Council has shown strong interest in discussing shuttle service.\nChair Knox White inquired how well the characteristics of this location match up with best\npractices for a Park and Ride lot, Staff Khan replied that staff was looking into that issue.\nAvailability of land and access to the Posey Tube are very attractive features of this site, but that\nother consideration must be evaluated as well.\nCommissioner Krueger noted that in the Long Range Transit Plan, the College of Alameda was\nidentified as a location for a transit hub. He asked if this project would be pursued as one of\nseveral transit hubs, or if it would preclude hubs at other sites. Staff Khan responded that this\nsite could potentially enhance access to the college, and there may even be an opportunity to\npursue funding jointly with the college. He estimated that the distance from the college to the\ntransit hub is less than 1500 feet.\nOpen public hearing.\nHussein Khomani noted that he ran a daycare at 2100 Mariner Square Drive with 125 children,\nand he was very concerned about the safety of the children if this proposal were to be\nimplemented. He was opposed to the proposal, and believed that general pedestrian safety would\nbe impacted as well, especially in the morning and afternoon when 125 parents dropped off and\npicked up their children. He noted that the first dropoff was at 6:30 a.m., and children were\npicked up at 6:00 p.m., and believed the pollution and noise would affect the children. He was\nconcerned about the elevation of the area, which was almost five feet above his property. He did\nnot believe $12 million was sufficient to resolve the elevation. Staff Khan responded that as part\nof the proposal, new pipes would address the drainage issues.\nPhilip Thorn noted that he lived in the Heritage Bay complex, that his children attended the\nnearby daycare center, and that his office location would also be impacted. He would like the\nTransportation Commission to be aware that the daycare center was a dedicated facility for the\nchildren, with an outdoor area facing the proposed road. He was very concerned about the noise\nand pollution impacts on the children, and noted that there were regular accidents on that road.\nHe believed it would be very dangerous to have the road with a thin fence that close to the\nplayground. He added that there were regular accidents at the Tube, and that cars would not be\nable to evade the accidents with the new plan. He suggested that more money be allocated to\nmitigate flooding. He did not believe a four-lane road would be appropriate next to the daycare\ncenter. He inquired about the timeframe of this proposed project, Staff Khan replied that funding\nwould not occur earlier than 2012.\nBill Smith noted that he had ridden his bicycle in the area for 15 years, and expressed concern\nabout the speed in the Tubes. He inquired where the 1,500 cars coming from the Base were. Staff\nBergman noted that was from Marina Village Parkway. Mr. Smith noted that he generally saw\nbuses, not cars. Staff Khan described the route he had inquired about. Mr. Smith expressed\nconcern about the truck traffic near the daycare center.\n8", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 9, "text": "Close public hearing.\nCommissioner Schatmeier noted that this kind of proposal concerns him as a transit user. He\nbelieved this project was an example of the best of intentions yielding the worst of results. He\nnoted that it took 2\u00b9/\u00b2 to 3 hours for a transit bus to get from Santa Rosa to San Francisco because\nthe bus must exit the freeway and wait for local transit. He added that it took twice as long for a\ntransit user to make the trip than a driver in a car. He believed that routing the San Francisco\nbuses to the transit hub site would be a significant diversion of a normally rapid route. He\nbelieved it would only benefit users of the park and ride lot, at the expense users further down\nthe line. He inquired why shuttles were discussed when the AC Transit service was good. He\nbelieved that both directions must be served without delay, and that this would be a deterrence to\ntransit ridership. He believed this would work only if it can be served efficiently without serious\nsacrifices in running time.\nCommissioner Krueger echoed Commissioner Schatmeier's concerns. He noted that while the\nidea seemed to be good, the location was not a hub of any kind. While it may be easy for the City\nto build on this site, he did not believe it was the right thing to do. He noted that he liked the\nqueue jump concept for lines that we know are successful, not necessarily with reconfigured\nroutes.\nIn response to an inquiry by Chair Knox White whether Mariner Square Drive was on a map,\nsimilar to Mitchell Moseley, Staff Khan replied that it was currently included in the Draft\nTransportation Element.\nChair Knox White shared the Commissioners' concerns. He believed the number of riders served\nwould have minimal impact on Tube traffic. He was concerned that the City may need to reroute\nseveral bus lines, which would add run time even if funds were obtained. He believed this\nproposal would be a mistake to implement.\nStaff Khan noted that there would be funding from developers from Alameda Landing and\nAlameda Point, and that those developments triggered the need for this proposal.\nChair Knox White believed the bus routes should be planned before the transit hub was located,\nnot the other way around, and was concerned that multiple bus lines might be reconfigured to\nserve the project. He believed that four lanes for Mariner Square Drive seemed excessive, and\nwould be apprehensive about adopting this plan into the Transportation Element. He would like\nto see the Alameda Landing EIR numbers in order to comment further. He noted that because the\ndaycare center is located so close to the Posey Tube entrance, it is already heavily impacted by\ntraffic. He also questioned the location of the project in terms of adjacent land uses, as there are\nno easy pedestrian connections to Marina Village or Alameda Landing. While he supported the\ninclusion of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, he expressed concern that if the road is constructed\nto be four lanes that people would want to use it for biking and walking. While this plan was\n9", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 10, "text": "very conceptual, he believed it would be important to stay in contact with the daycare owner,\nsince they owned the building. He stated that this may not be the right location for a transit hub,\nand it is not the right time to be pursuing it, that there are many existing pressing needs for transit\nin the City.\nCommissioner Krueger noted that regarding the realigned road, he would like to see more detail,\nand added that shortening the route from Alameda Landing to the Tube made sense. He also\nbelieved that this use of the railroad right of way made sense. He did not believe that a four-lane\nroute may be necessary.\nChair Knox White did not see a transit hub with commercial spaces being a good match for\nshared parking. He would like to see this proposal again when the traffic model was done, with\nmore specific numbers.\nStaff Khan noted that he would add the speakers to the email list for this proposal.\nCommission Communications (cont.)\nChair Knox White noted that the federal grant for bus shelters that the City had applied for was\ndenied.\nStaff Bergman noted that those funds were generally earmarked and were competitively awarded.\nStaff would continue to track that issue.\nCommissioner Schatmeier noted that the bike path near Mount Trashmore was overgrown with\nhedges, and would like it to be trimmed back.\nChair Knox White noted that the bus route map at the southwest corner of Santa Clara and High\nwas covered with graffiti.\nCommissioner Krueger noted that he had complained about it, and was told that all complaints\nabout graffiti must be routed through AC Transit. Staff Bergman indicated that the City is\nresponsible for graffiti on shelters, but that AC Transit is responsible for other bus route maps\nposted at bus stops.\nChair Knox White noted that there was broken glass at the shelter at Webster and Santa Clara, as\nwell as Willow and Santa Clara.\n8.\nStaff Communications\nStaff Bergman provided an update on the Estuary Crossing Feasibility Study, funded by a\n$100,000 grant from ACTIA. ARUP was hired as the consultant, and Caltrans District 4 would\nprovide access to its on-call outreach consultant. Oakland has also contributed to the project as\nwell. Several community meetings had been scheduled in Chinatown (April 10) and in Alameda\n(April 12).\n10", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-02-27", "page": 11, "text": "Staff Bergman noted that the March ILC would be rescheduled.\nStaff Bergman noted that the City received a grant to install bike lockers and racks at the Harbor\nBay Ferry Terminal, as well as near key commercial areas.\nStaff Bergman noted that paratransit program enrollment had increased by 25% during the past\nyear, and that enhanced marketing was being undertaken.\nStaff Khan noted that the Ecopass program was being finalized with AC Transit for all City\nemployees. The program is anticipated to be in place by early summer.\nStaff Bergman updated the bus stop improvements which would be implemented in conjunction\nwith AC Transit.\nStaff Khan noted that a Park Street redevelopment project was being initiated, and a charrette\nwould be presented at the Alameda Library.\nMeeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.\nG:\\pubworks\\LT\\TRANSPORTATIONICOMMITTEESITC\\2008\\032608\\packet\\022708minutes-draft.d\n11", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-02-27.pdf"}