{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 1, "text": "CHT\nOF\nof\nTERKA\nORATED\nMinutes of the\nALAMEDA FREE LIBRARY BOARD MEETING\nNovember 12, 2008\nThe regular meeting of the Alameda Free Library Board was called to order at 6:01 p.m.\nROLL CALL\nPresent:\nRuth Belikove, President\nMike Hartigan, Vice President\nKaren Butter, Board Member\nAlan Mitchell, Board Member\nGail Wetzork, Board Member\nAbsent:\nNone\nStaff:\nJane Chisaki, Library Director\nMarsha Merrick, Recording Secretary\nCONSENT CALENDAR\nAn asterisk indicates items so enacted or adopted on the Consent Calendar.\nA.\n*Report from Library Director Highlighting Activities for the Month of November 2008.\nAccepted.\nB.\n*Revised Minutes of the Regular Library Board Meeting of September 10, 2008. Approved.\n*Draft Minutes of the Regular Library Board Meeting of October 8, 2008. Approved.\nC.\n*Library Services Report for the Month of September 2008. Accepted.\nD.\n*Financial Report Reflecting FY 2008-09 Expenditures by Fund through October 2008.\nAccepted.\nE.\n*Bills for Ratification for the Month of October 2008. Approved.\nMember Butter mentioned the door count at the Main for September was much higher than in past years.\nDirector Chisaki explained this was because the door counter had not been working properly at first.\nThe branch door counts had also risen, and Chisaki said that extensive weeding was done on their\ncollections, making books much easier to find. Additionally, the Supervising Children's Librarian has\nbeen bringing classes through the branches by their schools to familiarize students with this resource.\nButter also noticed that homebound patrons had declined; Chisaki said they had lost quite a few this\nyear, but the service is advertised around town at care homes, Mastick Senior Center, etc.\nPer a question from Member Butter, Director Chisaki spoke about the state of the budget, what cuts had\nalready been taken, and what was on the table for the future if there was a request to cut more.", "path": "LibraryBoard/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 2, "text": "Page 2 of 4\nMinutes of the Alameda\nFree Library Board Meeting\nNovember 12, 2008\nPresident Belikove had read in the Director's letter about the new book drop awning and shelf that will\nbe installed, and asked if there was a possibility of putting an additional book drop in the back of the\nbuilding. Chisaki explained this had been investigated previously, but it was found that there was no\nway to accommodate a book drop at the rear of the building.\nPresident Belikove asked for a motion to accept the Consent Calendar as presented. Member Mitchell\nso moved; Member Wetzork seconded the motion which carried by a 5-0 vote.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON-AGENDA (Public Comment)\nAudience member Li Volin spoke up about the recent fund-raising program the Library Foundation had\nhosted with food author Michael Pollan. Ms. Volin thought the event had been absolutely fabulous, and\nothers in attendance at the meeting echoed her sentiments.\nUNFINISHED BUSINESS\nA.\nNeighborhood Library Improvement Projects (J. Chisaki)\n23 architectural firms showed up for the mandatory branch walk-through. They asked a lot of\ngood questions; their proposals are due on November 24. Laurie Kozisek, project manager for\nPublic Works, had located floor plans for WEB and aerial photos of both branches that Director\nChisaki will put up on the webpage. The first meeting between Library, Public Works, Friends\nand Foundation representatives will be on Wednesday, November 19; 5-10 meetings will be held\nthroughout the design phase of the project. Chisaki queried the Board on whether they would\nlike to see West End and Bay Farm residents on the committee so there could be community\ninput. Member Wetzork listed both positives and negatives for consideration; Member Butter\nwas very much in favor of resident participation, as was Vice President Hartigan. Chisaki said a\nPowerPoint presentation could be put on the website for the community to view and submit\ncomments that way. Butter said that is a good idea, but believes it is key to have community\nmembers on the committee so they can give their input \"live\" during the process. Chisaki will\nmove forward in contacting the people they have in mind and inquire about their availability\nand/or willingness to sit on the committee.\nNEW BUSINESS\nA.\nProposed Donation of Art from Gary Bukovnik (R. Belikove)\nThe Board looked over the picture from their packet and had a lengthy discussion on where it\nmight be mounted. Several locations for the artwork were discussed, but due to the size of the\npiece, it was difficult to come up with anything reasonable. It was requested the painting be\nviewed before acceptance, to ensure it was in good shape and wouldn't need restoration efforts.\nThe Art Exhibit Committee was tasked with drafting an Art Acceptance Policy before the next\nBoard meeting, as something should be in place if the Library is offered other pieces of art.\nPresident Belikove, as Board liaison to the Art Committee, will bring this to their next meeting.", "path": "LibraryBoard/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 3, "text": "Page 3 of 4\nMinutes of the Alameda\nFree Library Board Meeting\nNovember 12, 2008\nB.\nArt Exhibit Committee (R. Belikove)\nThe Art Exhibit Committee did not have its regular meeting in November due to it falling on\nVeterans Day, however, they will meet the following Tuesday. The Art Exhibit calendar is\nrapidly filling up; President Belikove mentioned the current exhibit by Peter Tonningsen, which\nincludes many photographic images of Alameda. There will be a display of original graphic\nnovel artwork coming up, and Belikove had brought in several books that were given to her by\nImage Graphics of Berkeley. There will be a Mata Ortiz pottery demonstration the following\nSunday in the Library courtyard, and Belikove invited all present to attend. On November 19,\nthere will be a program about Alameda's Neptune Beach in the Community Meeting Rooms.\nC.\nAlameda Free Library Foundation (L. Engh)\nLuzanne Engh, Foundation President, was in attendance to update the Library Board on what the\nExecutive Committee and Board have been working on. Lots of good news about the Michael\nPollan event - they netted just over $10,000 and had also made great community connections\nthrough this effort. Special thanks go to Slow Food Alameda, who was instrumental in putting\nthe food part of the evening together. The restaurants that participated were delighted to be part\nof the event and happy to know that it was in support of the Library.\nThe Foundation is reviewing and updating their mission statement and goals and objectives. The\nmission idea is that the Foundation seeks private financial support to supplement City and public\nfunding in order to support the mission and goals of the Library, and to ensure that quality\nLibrary services continue in Alameda, now and in the future. The Foundation has approximately\n$300,000 in cash, money market funds and CDs and would like to protect the principal of it.\nInstead of supporting individual programs, they would like to have guidelines for an annual\ncontribution to the Library who will be able to use the money as they see fit. They would also\nset aside a certain percentage of any fund-raising programs they do. Engh asked the Board if\nthey see this as a good direction for the Foundation to be going. The Library Board thought this\nwas a very reasonable approach and encouraged Engh to move forward accordingly.\nD.\nFriends of the Alameda Free Library (M. Lambert)\nMarc Lambert was not in attendance to report, but had sent President Belikove an e-mail with his\ncomments which she read for the Board. The book sale had been another success, netting over\n$17,000. Thanks go to all who helped out, including the Coast Guard. The next Friends meeting\nwill be on November 17 and the agenda will include consideration of the By-Laws Committee\nreport, changing the membership year to coincide with the calendar year, and the 2009 budget.\nThe Caf\u00e9 is now serving sandwiches from Feel Good Bakery.\nE.\nPatron suggestions/comments (Speak-Outs) and Library Director's response.\nA patron wrote that the Alameda Library is too noisy. We are a community base as well as a\ntraditional library and before and after special programs, such as author events or storytimes,\nthere is more traffic and it can be louder. Staff is busy and can't always stop to \"shush\" people.", "path": "LibraryBoard/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "LibraryBoard", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 4, "text": "Page 4 of 4\nMinutes of the Alameda\nFree Library Board Meeting\nNovember 12, 2008\nIf there is a real problem with the noise level, please ask a staff person to intervene. Board\nMember Butter suggested the person might use the Quiet Reading Room as an option. Director\nChisaki also noted that new signs will go up that tie in to the current \"Free2\" campaign, which\nshows (by being crossed out with a big red line) that you are not \"Free2\" do things like talk on a\ncell phone. This apparently has worked well in other libraries.\nLIBRARY BOARD COMMUNICATIONS\nThere were no communications from the Board.\nDIRECTOR'S COMMENTS\nDirector Chisaki updated the Board on the switchover from Veicon to Envisionware. Many obstacles\nhave been encountered during the process, and what was supposed to take 3-5 days has now taken\nalmost a month. David Boxton, lead on the project, has been working literally day and night, and it is\nnow at the point where extra help needs to be brought in to speed the process. Staff has not been given\nmuch information about what is going on because it is possible that the City may take Veicon to court.\nThis has led to numerous complaints by the public who want to know what is happening, and staff can't\ngive any kind of explanation. One patron has now escalated his complaint to the City Council level.\nEvery service the Library offers is still available, with the exception of public internet access, and the\nreason that is not up is because of the layers of security that need to be built in before public use. There\nis a small glimmer of hope this access will be restored the following week. Vice President Hartigan\ncommented that this could be taken as a \"warning shot across the bow\" so to speak. If there are future\nplans to upgrade computer systems we must make very sure that we are ready to respond quickly, or risk\nthe public's displeasure. Chisaki said that every effort had been made, with planning done far in\nadvance, to make this a smooth process, but with each step taken, new issues had come up regarding\nwhat Veicon had done to our system. Once all is said and done, however, Chisaki speculates this will be\na much more manageable in-house system, as we will have full access to everything. Veicon had been\nunwilling to give us this, and it was a very difficult lesson to be learned. Hartigan commented that he\ndidn't mean any criticism to what we had done, but \"lessons learned\" is certainly key in this situation.\nCLA is coming to San Jose this weekend; Chisaki will attend some parts of the conference, working\naround a scouting event that's planned. The League of Women Voters has agreed to act as host for an\n\"Inauguration Day\" party in January in the Community Meeting Rooms. The big wall TV and the\nsmaller TV on the moveable stand will be used to watch the swearing in ceremonies.\nADJOURNMENT\nBoard President Belikove asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m. Member Butter so\nmoved; Member Wetzork seconded the motion which carried by a 5-0 vote.\nRespectfully submitted,\nJane Chisaki, Library Director and\nSecretary to the Library Board", "path": "LibraryBoard/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 1, "text": "MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC ART COMMISSION\nREGULAR MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2008\nCONFERENCE ROOM 391, CITY HALL\n2263 SANTA CLARA AVENUE - 7:00 PM\nCONVENE: Acting Chair Lee called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.\nROLL CALL:\nPRESENT: Vice Chair Lee, Commissioners Candelario, Ibsen and\nCommissioner Leal\nABSENT:\nNone\nSTAFF PRESENT: Jon Biggs, Planning Services Manager/Secretary to\nPublic Art Commission; Maria Luisa Flores, Intermediate\nClerk, Planning & Building\nMINUTES:\nMinutes from the meeting of September 10, 2008\nMotion (Leal)/Second (lbsen) to approve as submitted\nAyes: 4; Noes: 0. Motion passed.\nAGENDA CHANGES AND DISCUSSION:\nNone\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS:\nNone\nREGULAR AGENDA:\n(4A.) Guidelines for Public Art Projects Identification Signage\nMr. Ibsen asked if the dimensions for the signage will be too small at 5\"x5\". He\nnoted the signs should be legible at three paces.\nOther Commission members commented that the dimension should be a\nminimum and the guidelines modified to reflect this.\nMs. Candelario noted that the guidelines should make it clear that Commission\napproval of the signage is required.\nMotion (lbsen)/Second (Lee) to approve the public art identification signage\nguidelines subject to the following changes: 1. The 5\"x 5\" size noted in the\nguidelines are the minimum dimension of public art signage. & 2. Add\nlanguage to the guidelines making it clear that Public Art Commission\napproval of the proposal is required. Ayes: 4; Noes: 0; Absent: 0. Motion\npassed.", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "PublicArtCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 2, "text": "(4B.) Adoption of 2009 Public Art Commission Calendar\nThe commission reviewed the proposed calendar for 2009.\nMotion (lbsen)/Second (Lee) to adopt the 2009 Calendar\nAyes: 4; Noes: 0; Absent: 0. Motion passed.\n(4C.) Adoption of Resolution of the Public Art Commission acknowledging Cecilia\nCervantes to the citizens of Alameda\nMs. Lee noted that there were other members of the Community that had\nrecently served on the Public Art Commission and they should also be\nacknowledged for their service.\nAll other Commission members agreed.\nMs. Lee suggested that the item be continued to the next meeting to allow staff to\nprepare resolutions for Katina Huston, K.C. Rosenberg, and Peter Wolfe.\nMotion (Lee)/Second (lbsen) to continue the item to the next regular\nmeeting so that resolutions recognizing former members of the\nCommission could be crafted.\nAyes: 4; Noes: 0; Absent: 0. Motion passed.\n0\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS:\nStaff reported.\nWRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:\nNone\nCOMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS:\nEric Ibsen and Andrea Leal have drafted a press release regarding locating public art in\nAlameda which they would like to have agendized for discussion at a future meeting.\nADJOURNMENT:\nThe meeting was adjourned at 8:17 p.m.\nRespectfully submitted,\nJon Biggs, Planning Services Manager/Secretary\nPublic Art Commission\nG:\\PLANNINGIPAC\\Agendas_Minutes\\Minutes_08/11-12-08 draft minutes.doc\n2", "path": "PublicArtCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 1, "text": "TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES - DRAFT\nNovember 12, 2008\nChair Knox White called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:35 p.m.\n1.\nROLL CALL - Roll was called and the following recorded.\nMembers Present:\nJohn Knox White\nMichael Krueger\nJane Lee\nKathy Moehring\nMembers Absent:\nRobert McFarland\nEric Schatmeier\nSrikant Subramaniam\nStaff Present:\nObaid Khan, Supervising Civil Engineer\nBarry Bergman, Transportation Coordinator\nLt. David Boersma, Alameda Police Department\n2.\nAPPROVAL OF MINUTES\na.\nOctober 22, 2008\nThese minutes will be considered at the December 10, 2009, meeting.\n3.\nAGENDA CHANGES\nThere were none.\n4.\nCOMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS\nChair Knox White wished to discuss the traffic light at Park and Blanding at 8 a.m. on\nFriday morning. He noted that it was red in all directions for three to five seconds, and\nchanged from green on Park to green on Blanding. He added that at the light at Santa\nClara and High the City had previously had added one second to the red, but that it was\nnot there now.\nChair Knox White inquired about the establishment of a transit plan subcommittee. Staff\nKhan replied that staff was concerned about the resources needed to implement that\nrequest, and suggested revisiting the request in December.\nChair Knox White requested that on future agendas, items brought for content be\nagendized for action as well. Staff Khan noted that staff would look into that request.\nChair Knox White noted that the question was raised at the Alameda Reuse and\nRedevelopment Authority (ARRA) meeting whether comments represented consensus or\n1", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 2, "text": "the opinions of individuals.\na.\nPedestrian Plan Task Force\nThere was no report.\nb.\nBicycle Plan Update Group\nThere was no report.\nc.\nAlameda Point Advisory Task Force\nThere was no report.\n5.\nORAL COMMUNICATIONS - NON-AGENDIZED ITEMS\nThere were none.\n6.\nOLD BUSINESS\na.\nMonitoring of Oak Street and Central Avenue Intersection\nStaff Khan summarized the extensive staff report and detailed the background and scope\nof this item. He described the monitoring plan, and added that Public Works and\nAlameda Police Department (APD) coordinated the work with the community groups,\naddressing their concerns. In response to a request by APD, City Council approved the\nchange to the Municipal Code on June 17, 2008 regarding the use of the garage by\nskaters and skateboarders.\nIn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Moehring about additional bike racks in the\narea, Staff Bergman replied that there was not a current proposal for anything on the north\nside of Central near the theater. Staff Khan added that staff would continue to examine\nthat issue, and that racks would be installed in Lot C.\nCommissioner Krueger noted that page 4 stated that there was a pedestrian crossing time\nof 4 to 7 seconds, and inquired why there was a maximum walk time. As a pedestrian, he\nexpected that the flashing hand time should be equal to the crossing distance divided by\nthe average walking speed, and that the green signal should last through the crossing\ntime. He would like to see the crossing time maximized.\nStaff Khan replied that based upon the studies, 7 seconds at a signalized intersection was\nthe maximum to coordinate with the cycle.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired whether it would be possible to have a white hand and\ncountdown that changed to an orange flashing countdown as the crossing time ran out.\nStaff Khan stated that a $50 parking permit was being considered for Monday through\nFriday parking. Staff would consider the PSBA request to increase the parking time from\nfour to eight hours.\nIn response to an inquiry by Commissioner Krueger whether the truck that hit the\n2", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 3, "text": "marquee would affect the bulbout design, Staff Khan replied it would, but that the bulbout\ncould not be extended to the alley because of the need for the commercial loading zone.\nIn response to an inquiry by Chair Knox White whether peak commute hour traffic was\nmeasured, as opposed to peak use of the theater, Staff Khan replied that commute traffic\nwas higher than traffic associated with the theater.\nChair Knox White stated that the intersection of Oak and Central was identified as a\nproblem in the negative declaration for the theater project. Staff Khan responded that\nchanges were made to the signal timing at that location in conjunction with the opening\nof the theater to address those concerns.\nChair Knox White requested that the staff report be clarified, as it appears to state that\nright turns from Central onto Oak were excluded from the analysis.\nChair Knox White expressed concern about the bike and pedestrian right-of-way\nviolations, and noted they were not mentioned in the report. He noted that he witnessed\nthe violations frequently, and that many people double-parked in the bike lane.\nLt. Boersma noted that double-parking data was collected by the Finance Department,\nand that the data could not be obtained.\nIn response to an inquiry by Chair Knox-White whether the tree that was removed would\nbe installed on the bulbout, Staff Khan replied that staff would look into that, and added\nthat it may also be installed in Lot C.\nOpen public hearing.\nLucy Gigli noted that she was disappointed when she saw the flier that the City\ndistributed regarding bicyclist and pedestrian safety. She noted that when this item went\nto the City Council, the Transportation Commission wrote a letter regarding its concerns\nwith the right turn lane, and she was disappointed that she did not see any analysis of how\nit all worked. She noted that with respect to the bulbouts, which she generally favored,\nshe did not completely understand the argument for having them, as the number of\njaywalkers did not appear to be very high. She asked if any reports were available\nregarding use of the parking structure. She noted that if bike parking were installed in Lot\nC, the bulbout would help bring it closer and link it to the theater.\nStaff Khan replied that the parking structure was underutilized at this time, and staff was\nexploring the possibility of reducing the parking requirements for area businesses.\nMs. Gigli inquired whether the study would look at removing on-street parking to reclaim\nthe space instead of increasing prices. Staff Khan replied that this would not be feasible as\nthere was free parking in the residential neighborhoods.\nClose public comment.\n3", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 4, "text": "Commissioner Krueger expressed concern about the traffic backup on the intersection at\nPark Street, which he assumed was based on the traffic predictions. He inquired whether\nthe traffic volume was sufficient to justify the queuing.\nStaff Khan replied that staff did not see the traffic buildup when looking at the numbers.\nCommissioner Moehring noted that she would like to see bike parking in front of the\ntheater.\nChair Knox White agreed with that suggestion. He noted that bike parking in the garage\nwas relocated without any input. The volumes were lower, and the long dropoff wasn't\nneeded. He would like to see something in the City Council report about illegal use of the\nbike lanes for passing. He would also like to see bike parking in front of the theater.\nStaff Khan noted that the bulbout also helped by providing spaces for patron queuing at\nthe theater.\nCommissioner Lee expressed concern about the $150,000 cost, and commended staff on\nthe brochure, which could be modified and used for schools.\nStaff Khan said that staff could email her a copy of the file if the schools were interested\nin reproducing and distributing additional copies.\nCommissioner Moehring suggested sending it out through the Alameda Educational\nFoundation.\nCommissioner Krueger suggested that the City Council report mention how the bulbout\nwill help with patron queuing and protection of the marquee. He believed the bike\nparking should be as close as possible to the theater entrance.\nNo action was taken.\nb.\nTransportation Element Update Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR)\nStaff Khan presented the staff report, and requested comments on the analysis, as well as\nthe content of the Transportation Element. He noted that with respect to the flexibility of\nthe Transportation Element, the guiding policies would go to the decision-makers who\nwould make the final decisions based on specific conditions. He noted that the\nTransportation Element was a policy document, and was a program level analysis.\nProject level Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) would address more specific issues,\nand the staff recommendations attempted to provide the City Council with some\ndiscretion in dealing with them. He noted that secondary impacts could result from the\nincreased traffic congestion resulting from the proposed policies, such as increased cut-\nthrough traffic and negatively affecting the City's ability to implement transportation\nsystem management strategies. With respect to the concerns about CMA funding, staff\nrecommended changes to the proposed language in policies EIR-1, EIR-2, and EIR-6.\n4", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 5, "text": "Commissioner Krueger inquired whether trip reduction related to transportation demand\nmanagement (TDM) was considered in the analysis, or whether it did not reduce the trips\nsufficiently. Staff Khan replied that the anticipated reductions were not sufficient to\nmitigate the congestion resulting from the proposed policies, and that this analysis was\nconducted in response to the comments that had been received.\nCommissioner Krueger suggested that that language be clarified.\nWith respect to flexibility, Commissioner Krueger inquired whether the policy as written\ncould be overridden. Staff Khan replied that the General Plan would have to be changed.\nCommissioner Krueger inquired whether a Specific Plan could override the General Plan.\nStaff Khan replied that a Specific Plan must be consistent with the General Plan.\nChair Knox White noted that the City Council has already accepted the EIR policies, and\nthat the EIR does not approve or deny a project, it just describes the impacts. He believed\nthat the proposed language for EIR-1 and EIR-2 essentially made their intent\nmeaningless. He added that the CMA had never withheld gas taxes for deficiency issues.\nHe noted AC Transit's comment C-4 about bikes and transit mixing relatively well. He\nsuggested adding clarification that the primary and secondary transit street classification\ndid not have to do with current or anticipated service levels, but how the streets were\ntreated. He noted that the EIR policy allows a queue jump on secondary streets.\nOpen public comment.\nChair Knox White responded to a letter submitted from Ani Dimusheva. The letter\nexpressed concern that the City would be instituting measures to force traffic toward\nparticular streets. Chair Knox White noted that other than transitional streets, the\nTransportation Element does not propose change in the use of the streets. The letter also\ndescribed the treatments employed on Fernside Blvd. and compared conditions to Grand\nStreet. Chair Knox White noted that the speeds on Fernside and Grand were found to be\nsimilar.\nClose public comment.\nChair Knox White requested that two clarifications be added to the draft Transportation\nElement:\n1.\nA description of how the overlay maps for the functional classification\nsystem should be used regarding:\nClassification layer - should describe the expected overall use of the\nstreet\nLand use layer - should describe the interaction between the roadway\nand the surrounding area\nModal layer - should indicate the priority of specific modes\n2.\nThe EIR policies should be renumbered and listed under the\nimplementation strategies in section 4.4.2.\n5", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 6, "text": "Transportation demand management (TDM) does not have to focus solely on trips\ngenerated by the project. For example, the bus rapid transit (BRT) proposed by SunCal\nfor Alameda Point will largely serve other sections of the island.\nThe TC had recommended that Mariner Square Drive include only two traffic lanes, not\nfour.\nChair Knox-White noted that he liked staff's proposed change to policy EIR-7 .\nCommissioner Krueger noted that he was concerned about the proposed changes, as\ncompleted projects do not always uphold what was stated in the General Plan.\nStaff Khan noted that if these policies had been in place previously, that elements from\nsome project that the TC has object to could not have been constructed. For example,\nAtlantic would have a 25 mph speed limit, and there would be no soundwall.\nCommissioner Krueger moved to accept the three clarifications. Commissioner\nMoehring seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0.\nCommissioner Krueger moved to accept staff's recommendation regarding the\nproposed modifications of selected street classifications. Commissioner Moehring\nseconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0.\nCommissioner Krueger moved to accept staff's proposed changes regarding policy\nEIR-7. Commissioner Moehring seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0.\nCommissioner Moehring moved to accept staff's changes regarding policies EIR-1, EIR-\n2 and EIR-6. There was no second.\nCommissioner Moehring moved to accept policy EIR-1 as written, and policy EIR-2\nwith the addition of exceptions for the addition of transit-exclusive or nonmotorized\nvehicle lanes. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0.\nChair Knox-White invited a motion to extend the meeting to 11:00 p.m.\nCommissioner Krueger moved to extend the meeting to 11:00 p.m. Commissioner\nMoehring seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0.\nCommissioner Krueger moved to recommend adoption of the Transportation Element\nwith the previously stated changes. Commissioner Moehring seconded the motion.\nMotion passed 4-0.\nCommissioner Krueger expressed concern about induced traffic, and wished to clarify the\nmeaning of \"environmentally superior\" in the language of the EIR.\n6", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 7, "text": "Commissioner Krueger moved to recommend approval of the EIR, with comments,\nwith the provision that the environmentally superior alternative does not include the\nphenomenon of induced traffic, and does not include analysis of all the environmental\neffects, particularly emissions in reaching the conclusion of \"environmentally\nsuperior,\" and only looks at the City's adopted significant criteria. Commissioner\nMoehring seconded the motion. Motion passed 4-0.\nc.\nThresholds of Significance Scope of Work and Schedule\nOpen public comment.\nThere was none.\nClose public comment.\nChair Knox-White noted that Phase I should be completed by March 2009, and would\nlike it to become a priority.\nNo action was taken.\n7.\nNEW BUSINESS\nThere was none.\n8.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS\na.\nEstuary Crossing Feasibility Study\nStaff Khan noted the study was expected to be completed in early 2009, and that the draft\nof the study would be presented to the Transportation Commission first.\nb.\nBroadway/Jacksor Update\nStaff Khan noted that the project study report (PSR) was submitted to Caltrans, and added\nthat they did not have the funds available to review it. He noted that ACTIA was hiring a\nconsultant for the study report.\nStaff Khan noted that the Pedestrian Plan would go to City Council in January 2009, and\nthat ACTIA had indicated that it would regard the City as meeting its project deadline if\nthe Planning Board approves the Transportation Element in November.\nc.\nMonitoring of Oak Street/Central Avenue intersection\nStaff Khan noted that there was no report.\nd.\nUpcoming development-related traffic studies and plans\n7", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2008-11-12", "page": 8, "text": "Staff Khan noted that there was no report.\ne.\nFuture meeting agenda items\nADJOURN: 10:50 p.m.\nG:\\pubworks\\LT\\TRANSPORTATIONICOMMITTEES\\TC\\2008\\121008\\111208minutes-draft.doc\n8", "path": "TransportationCommission/2008-11-12.pdf"}