{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 1, "text": "Transportation Commission Minutes:\nWednesday, March 26, 2014\nCommissioner Jesus Vargas called the Transportation Commission to order at 7:00 p.m.\n1.\nRoll Call\nRoll was called and the following was recorded:\nMembers Present:\nJesus Vargas (Chair)\nThomas G. Bertken\nChristopher Miley (Vice Chair)\nEric Schatmeier\nMembers Absent:\nMichele Bellows\nGregory Morgado\nStaff Present:\nLiam Garland, Deputy Public Works Director\nVirendra Patel, Public Works Transportation Engineer\nGail Payne, Transportation Coordinator\nSergeant Ron Simmons, Police Department\n2.\nAgenda Changes\nNone.\n3.\nAnnouncements / Public Comments\nCommissioner Vargas said he spoke with Will Kempton, Executive Director of Transportation\nCalifornia, and he may not go forward with this year's ballot measure to raise funds for\ntransportation. The consequence of it will now put pressure on cities, counties and transportation\nagencies. He explained that this issue will be addressed through the Alameda County\nTransportation Commission seeking more funding through Measure B reauthorization.\nNevertheless, there are projects that are funded from existing Measure B and prior Measure B\nmonies.", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 2, "text": "Page 2 of 12\n4.\nConsent Calendar\nA quorum was not met to approve the minutes. So, the minutes will be carried over to the next\nTransportation Commission meeting.\n4A.\nMeeting Minutes - Wednesday, December 11, 2013\n4B.\nMeeting Minutes - Wednesday, January 22, 2014\n5.\nNew Business\n5A. Update on I-880/23rd Avenue/29th Avenue Interchange Project (Alameda County\nTransportation Commission)\nStaff Patel gave an update on the project and introduced the speakers.\nStefan Garcia, Alameda County Transportation Commission, presented the report.\nGarrett Gritz, Design Manager and Consultant for Environmental Planning and Final\nEngineering Phase, presented the existing conditions and the intended changes.\nVal Ignacio, Caltrans Project Manager, presented Scott McCrank, Caltrans Senior Project\nCorridor Manager and RocQuel Johnson, Caltrans Public Information Officer, to explain more\nabout the project.\nCommissioner Vargas asked if the information on the website included the rerouting of traffic.\nRocQuel Johnson replied yes.\nScott McCrank presented the stages of the project and projected reroutes.\nCommissioner Miley asked if any of the stages would overlap.\nStefan Garcia said this project is designed linearly, but because of the area's uniqueness of\ntraffic and demand, the stages would be followed very clearly. There are phases within each\nstage, but there should not be much overlap.\nCommissioner Bertken said when staff spoke of the stages, he assumed they were talking about\ntraffic stages and there could be construction stages that overlap.\nStefan Garcia stated that there are only minor portions that will have overlapping.\nCommissioner Vargas opened the floor to public comments.\nJim Strehlow, Alameda resident, explained that the city of Alameda would suffer for five years,\nAlameda businesses would suffer for the next 20 years and the project was based on the city of\nPage 2 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 3, "text": "Page 3 of 12\nOakland's needs. Additionally, he stated that the bridges for San Leandro would become wider\nand Ford Street at 29th Street would become a major choke point. Moreover, he felt that there\nwas not a mitigation plan for Alameda. Fruitvale Avenue and High Street should contain extra\nlanes. Overall, he felt Alameda has been totally neglected in this plan.\nCommissioner Miley said his comments echoed Jim Strehlow's and felt that the Fruitvale and\nHigh Street traffic counts are not as high as Park Street. Moreover, he felt Fruitvale Avenue has\nenough traffic capacity that is not being used. He also believed the light at Elm Avenue is a\nhindrance and he would like to see something done about the light cycle. He also recommended\nthat there should be a second northbound to I-880 lane at High Street and if there will be a lot of\ndetours he would like staff to look at how to improve traffic flow on Fruitvale Avenue and High\nStreet bridges. He was concerned about the amount of outreach conducted for the project and\nthe fact that mailers were only sent to residents around the corridor rather than throughout the\nisland. However, he commended staff that a committee was put together and the initial outreach\nwas made. Moreover, he wanted to know if signage would be erected to alert commuters about\nthe traffic conditions.\nScott McCrank replied that the overhead signage on the freeway would display the changes, but\nfor local traffic changes, they would have changeable message signage such as \"This Bridge\nclosed use 23rd Avenue\".\nCommissioner Miley replied that traffic was light on the Fruitvale Avenue bridge. At Elm Street,\nthey should restripe to allow two lanes going northbound to improve capacity.\nScott McCrank replied that they would have to work with both cities to see if changes could be\nmade.\nCommissioner Bertken replied that having a seven-day period to see what happens is a very\nreactive approach and he wanted to know what staff was doing to locate the traffic patterns now\nto know what will occur.\nGarrett Gritz said analysis was conducted for the intersections of Oakland and Alameda. He\nexplained that staff incorporated the detours and used the numbers from the traffic analysis and\neverything worked and a contingency plan was in place if changes occur such as from the\neconomic improvement.\nCommissioner Vargas wondered if the new CTMP group met regularly.\nScott McCrank said they met during the design phase and they are at a lull right now because the\ncontract was going through the bidding process and more meetings will occur as the schedule is\ndefined. All project information including changes would be presented to Staff Patel.\nCommissioner Vargas explained that when accessing I-880 southbound from Park Street, there is\ndeteriorating pavement and he wondered who would rehabilitate that now.\nStefan Garcia replied there was not much they could do until they get the contractor on board.\nPage 3 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 4, "text": "Page 4 of 12\nThe responsibility would be directed to the city's maintenance department depending on the\njurisdiction.\nCommissioner Vargas asked if the TMP document could be made available to the Commission.\nStefan Garcia replied that the document has been circulating since 2012 and the addendum has\nbeen circulating since last year.\nCommissioner Vargas requested that staff send the documents to the Commission.\nCommissioner Vargas asked if more money were made available for the project would there be\nmore enhancements that could benefit Alameda.\nStefan Garcia replied that the project is coming from a state bond specifically from the\ninfrastructure corridors fund. So, they are limited in construction from that funding source and\nthe project was under tight scrutiny from the state-bonding program.\nGarrett Gritz explained that they looked at a number of alternatives and they were told by the\nAlameda business community that they tell their customers to use High Street. Thus, this project\nwill allow customers to exit off of 29th Avenue and arrive at the Park Street triangle. He\ncommunicated this project to the business community and they felt that it was a positive change.\nAdditionally, he explained that some of the components that were not implemented were for AC\nTransit bus queue jumps within the corridor. He said that it was talked about in the early\nplanning stages but these transit components were not part of the funding source.\nCommissioner Schatmeier asked staff if there was a post project evaluation that would take place\nto see if they had accomplished what they set out to do because the High Street project made the\nqueues longer and the signal timing is worse.\nStefan Garcia explained that the concern was concentrated on the movements on the local streets\nand street light timing. There will be scrutiny during and after the construction by the two cities.\nCommissioner Miley seconded Commissioner Schatmeier's comments and asked about the\nmetering lights, which he felt was an Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC)\nfunction. He also asked if anyone reviewed the function of the metering lights near I-880 and the\nfact that they may not be necessary at 98th Avenue, Davis or Marina, particularly because the\nlanes are narrow and the delays are difficult.\nStefan Garcia said that the 98th Avenue corridor was under construction and generally the ramp\nmetering lights and intersections nearby are controlled by Caltrans. However, the metering\nlights have to be coordinated with the city lights and that is not always a perfect fit. They would\nhave to coordinate with local jurisdictions to persuade them that a change would be needed.\nScott McCrank replied that he communicates with the ramp metering groups often and he could\ngo back and talk with them to see if adjustments could be made.\nPage 4 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 5, "text": "Page 5 of 12\nCommissioner Miley stated that the project's website address is hard to remember and suggested\nthe URL be shortened.\nRocQuel Johnson explained that the website www.dot.ca.gov was a state website and brought the\npublic to all the projects listed within District 4. It was not feasible to shorten the website\naddress. She also suggested that people can enter \"I-880 overcrossing\" into Google and the\nproject would pop up.\nCommissioner Bertken replied that Caltrans' project reports should not only identify what is\nunder construction, but report the public benefits so the project could be monitored after\ncompletion.\nStefan Garcia said that there are detailed summaries and reviews by the operations staff to meet\nthe end goal.\nStaff Patel stated Caltrans would present their report to the City Council, but the date has not\nbeen set.\n5B. Park Street Pedestrian Safety Project\nStaff Patel explained that they conducted a series of community meetings with the business\ndistrict and residents around the location between Lincoln Avenue and Buena Vista Avenue. He\nalso introduced the project consultants Joy Bhattacharya from Stantec Consultants and David\nMahama from DKS Associates to present.\nJoy Bhattacharya, Stantec Consultants, presented.\nCommissioner Schatmeier asked how the bulb-outs proposed compare to the existing bulb-outs\non Park Street near Santa Clara Avenue.\nJoy Bhattacharya replied that the protrusion of the bulb-out remains the same.\nCommissioner Miley asked staff if they needed approval from the Commission to move the\nproject forward.\nStaff Patel replied that they are in the conceptual design stage, but they would like the\nCommission to approve the concept so they can move to the construction phase.\nCommissioner Vargas opened the floor to public comments.\nRobb Ratto, Park Street Business Association Executive Director, thanked staff and the\nconsultants for conducting a raucous public meeting at the library on October 2013. He\nexplained that he was in support of the project and appreciated that parking spots were spared,\nwhich is important to the small businesses on Lincoln Avenue and Park Street. He said his board\nlooked at the project design and supported the project. Additionally, he looked forward to the\ncorner where the Chevron Station is located becoming a real corner.\nPage 5 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 6, "text": "Page 6 of 12\nDavid Burton of the Planning Board spoke before the Commission as a local resident and\narchitect. He thanked staff for the public process, but was not completely happy with the design.\nThe Buena Vista Avenue intersection is an improvement and created pedestrian access. The\nbiggest concern is at the Lincoln Avenue and Tilden Way intersection. Although it is a modest\nimprovement, the design does not go far enough to create a pedestrian friendly environment.\nThe Planning Board rezoned the area north of Lincoln Avenue with the intent to revitalize the\narea and make it a pedestrian friendly environment. The intersection was crucial to making a\nsuccessful bridge with the southern stretch of Park Street and the northern stretch. The\nalternatives studied were much more favorable because they narrowed the intersections and\nslowed traffic. Moreover, he referred to the General Plan, which states that biking and transit\nhave priority over vehicles and this design ignores the directive. He encouraged the Commission\nto approve a plan that is consistent with the General Plan and that this intersection needs further\ndevelopment.\nCommissioner Vargas asked David Burton which area he wanted to narrow.\nDavid Burton replied all four sides of the intersection specifically travelling along the Park Street\ndirection because it is not a comfortable environment for pedestrians.\nLucy Gigli, President of BikeWalk Alameda, thanked staff for working diligently on the project\nand organizing the outreach meetings. The proposal indicated that it would be the final part of\nthe Park Street Streetscape Plan, which confused her because she thought they would continue to\nimprove the streetscape north of Lincoln Boulevard. The changes at Buena Vista Avenue and\nPacific Avenue are good because the intersection reduced the crossing distances. She is\ndisappointed with the north end of Lincoln Avenue because of the lack of improvements. She\nalso explained that the Walgreens and the Marketplace area will have a new parking lot and that\nparking lot should be shared by all modes of travel. The Mayor recently stated that the City\nneeds to make bold and daring decisions, which is not shown here with the Lincoln Avenue/Park\nStreet proposal.\nAudrey Lord-Hausman, pedestrian advocate and member of the Commission on Disability\nIssues, said overall there are a lot of good concepts in the project. She also felt the Walgreens\nand Marketplace parking lot works well for those who need to make multiple trips to different\nstores in the area. She has been working with Staff Patel on placing the light signal push buttons\nin an accessible place for elderly and disabled pedestrians on Webster Street, which also is\nneeded here on Park Street. Additionally, she suggested having upright flashing lights placed at\nthe pedestrian crossings for motorists to see pedestrians and not the recommended in-pavement\nlights as recommended at Park Street/Pacific Avenue.\nCommissioner Miley asked staff about the funding source and time constraints for the funds.\nStaff Patel replied that the funding was part of the transportation, community, safety and\npreservation funds. He also explained that staff started the process in 2012 and when staff\nreceived the funding for the preliminary engineering they have two years to complete the project.\nPage 6 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 7, "text": "Page 7 of 12\nCommissioner Miley asked staff if the funds have to be allocated or spent at a certain date.\nStaff Patel replied within 2-3 years.\nCommissioner Schatmeier referred to the Lincoln Avenue and Tilden Way interchange and the\nfive alternatives that were considered. He wondered if any of the alternatives addressed the\nnorth side of the intersection in terms of bulb-outs and modifications.\nStaff Patel replied that staff reviewed the north side of the intersection and construction of the\nWalgreens store was underway. He said the store planned to improve the light standards and the\npoles, which are getting hit by trucks making right-hand turns. He said the area would be safer\nwith the changes, but there are challenges with the area because it was not laid out on a true 90-\ndegree angle.\nCommissioner Schatmeier said staff made several safety improvements, but nothing similar\nto\nthe north side and based on staff's response that was due to the Walgreens project. He wanted to\nknow if they could look at the north side. He felt a review was important because the area\nencouraged vehicles to make fast turns from Park Street onto Lincoln Avenue.\nStaff Patel said staff would review the area.\nCommissioner Bertken said he looked at the diagram (westbound) and he is familiar with the\nintersection going up Tilden Way crossing Park Street. He explained that motorists have to\nmerge in and they effectively lose a lane when crossing over, but the diagram showed the\nfollowing three lanes: a straight lane, a turn lane and an unknown lane near the curb.\nJoy Bhattacharya replied that the unknown lane is a continuous bike lane. He said staff\nreviewed the options for bulb-outs on the north side, but the lanes on Lincoln Avenue and Tilden\nWay, plus the left turn movements prohibit staff from creating a bulb-out at that location. He\nexplained that Park Street on the north and south sides do not have a left turn lane, so that allows\nstaff more space to work.\nCommissioner Miley referred to Lincoln Avenue and asked staff if the two lanes headed\nwestbound could merge onto Tilden Way and become one lane on Lincoln Avenue. He also\nwanted to know if the traffic counts would prohibit this type of configuration.\nJoy Bhattacharya replied that they reviewed that option, but the traffic counts were too high.\nAlso, one of the lanes becomes a left turn lane at the next intersection.\nCommissioner Vargas asked Sergeant Simmons to talk about accident and fatality counts on Park\nStreet.\nSergeant Simmons, City of Alameda Police Department and Traffic, stated that within his 22\nyears with the Alameda Police Department he does not know of any fatality collisions at these\nintersections along Park Street. However, he said there were pedestrian collisions, but he does\nnot have the data available.\nPage 7 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 8, "text": "Page 8 of 12\nCommission Bertken said they talked about the markings on the pavement for pedestrian\ncrossings for example near Lum Elementary School. Yet, he wanted to know how well motorists\nunderstood the markings and actually stopped for pedestrians.\nSergeant Simmons said drivers do adhere to the limit lines or markings and they have crossing\nguards to make sure motorists yield to pedestrians at Lum School.\nCommissioner Berkten would like to see more public information on traffic control devices\npresented to the public.\nSergeant Simmons said that as they become more apparent within the City, then community\noutreach will increase.\nJoy Bhattacharya replied staff reviewed data at the intersections of Buena Vista Avenue and\nPark Street as well as Lincoln Avenue and Park Street over the last five years. They concluded\nthat four injuries involving pedestrian collisions occurred and along Tilden Way, five accidents\noccurred.\nCommissioner Miley asked what cross time improvements were made at Lincoln Avenue at Park\nStreet, specifically where the bulb-out is implemented on the west side.\nJoy Bhattacharya replied that there is a 5.6 feet reduction, so pedestrians walking at 3 feet per\nsecond or an elderly person walking at 2.5 feet per second would gain 2-3 seconds. He also\nstated that the opposite direction would be 12-feet with a 4 second reduction. Moreover, the\nsignal light would include longer countdown times.\nCommissioner Schatmeier referred to the north side on Tilden Way and found conflicting\nresponses from staff. First staff said they would look at the area once the Walgreens project was\ncomplete and then staff said the area was impractical for aggressive enhancements. So, he felt\nthere are two conflicting answers to his question. Also, he did not hear staff address the same\nissue on the north west side, where the automobile lanes are merging into one. Ultimately, he\nwanted to know if staff was still looking at the area to make further enhancements to pedestrian\nsafety.\nDavid Mahama replied staff conducted a template analysis to place bulb-outs in the area, but\nthey had to figure out how vehicles and pedestrians would navigate the intersections safely. He\npointed out that a few delivery trucks use the area during the daytime hours and it is not feasible\nto put a bulb-out at the two corners.\nJoy Bhattacharya replied what came out of the community meetings was a concern for lost\nparking spaces. Staff could revisit the north west corner and draw a bulb-out and then provide\nthe information of how many parking spaces would be lost.\nCommissioner Schatmeier said he would like to see the analysis of the area.\nPage 8 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 9, "text": "Page 9 of 12\nStaff Patel said that staff would come back to the Commission and report their findings.\nCommissioner Bertken made a motion to approve the intersections presented, with\nthe exception of the Tilden Way and Lincoln Avenue intersection, which would be\nreviewed later. Commissioner Miley seconded the motion. The motion was\napproved 4-0.\n5C. Informational Report on Parking Meter Study\nLiam Garland, City of Alameda Deputy Public Works Director, presented the report.\nCommissioner Vargas opened the floor to public comments.\nRobb Ratto said Liam Garland presented at their board meeting and felt the extra signage to\ndrive people to the parking lot was a great idea. However, he stated that the metered equipment\nties into the rates and Liam Garland said the rate of $1.50 was too high for Park Street. Yet, he\nfelt the biggest complaints that come to him were the inconvenience of carrying so much change\nto park. He believed that smart meters using credit cards are needed, especially within the 1400-\n1600 block of Park Street and the side streets. He also stated that he would meet with Sergeant\nSimmons to request for more aggressive enforcement because many motorists stay at one meter\nand feed it throughout the day.\nCommissioner Miley asked what is the cost differential between the smart meters and kiosks.\nLiam Garland replied that the smart meters are less costly than the kiosks. However, staff must\nconduct an analysis on how many meters per kiosk are needed and then establish the fee\nstructure. He pointed out that one company dominates the smart meter market and they are\noffering a competitive per credit card meter rate.\nCommissioner Miley asked staff since one company dominates the market would they be locked\ndown into a contract where the rates could possibly change.\nLiam Garland said staff was concerned about this issue. The company is working with a number\nof cities such as Berkeley, Los Angeles and Santa Monica. Additionally, the company can\nprovide this competitive cost because they come from the telecommunications sector and they\nare currently entering the parking sector.\nCommissioner Miley asked in the short term what will be done.\nLiam Garland replied on Park Street that there are kiosks and they are exploring to expand them,\nbut they need public input. Also, he stated that it is not just about the costs, but also street\naesthetics.\nCommissioner Miley said bicyclists tend to park their bikes at the meters and he would like to see\nmore bike parking if the City removes the meters. He also pointed out that if people are parking\nall day then the parking rates are not high enough.\nPage 9 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 10, "text": "Page 10 of 12\nCommissioner Schatmeier stated that when he reviewed the study he wondered if staff looked at\na demand-based parking strategy and referred to city of San Rafael's success at implementing\nsuch a strategy. He stated that if the parking spaces are filled then the City needs to charge more\nfor them.\nLiam Garland explained that the City of San Francisco has implemented a demand-based\nparking strategy (SFPark) and many parts of the city have different rates and the rates vary based\non the time period. Regular meters require a lot of labor to change the rates, but the kiosks and\nsmart meters could be easily changed.\nCommissioner Bertken asked staff if they have reviewed whether people would avoid the meters\nif the parking rates increased.\nLiam Garland said that he has some data from the cities of Berkeley and San Francisco\nsuggesting that it took a year or two for the price signal to sink in so the City will not see\npeople's behavior change until that time.\nCommissioner Bertken asked staff if they reviewed whether people would shift their shopping\nbehavior due to the parking increase to South Shore Center where parking is free.\nLiam Garland said staff was concerned about the potential loss of business from Park Street to\nthe South Shore shopping center because they have free parking. Yet, staff had evidence from\nthe City's sales tax receipts that both locations have done well year after year and each location\nwas vastly different.\nCommissioner Schatmeier stated that if you raised rates too high then people would go away, but\nthe key is to price it to have available parking and keep the demand there.\nCommissioner Vargas wanted to know if there is a maintenance component to the smart meters\nversus the kiosks.\nLiam Garland said the City would have to contract out to troubleshoot and repair the kiosks, but\nthe City's maintenance team could be trained to switch out the top of the smart meters.\nCommissioner Vargas asked about the implementation.\nLiam Garland explained that staff is waiting for data from the parking occupancy survey. Once\nthey receive data, they will begin the implementation process.\n5D. Grand Street at Wood School Intersection Improvement Project - Final Design\nStaff Payne presented the report.\nCommissioner Vargas asked if the plants are native or low water plants.\nPage 10 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 11, "text": "Page 11 of 12\nStaff Payne replied both and she asked the Commission to approve the design. Also, the next\nsteps were to put together the specifications and bring the plan before City Council in order for\nthe project to go out to bid for construction. Once staff selects the contractor, they would go\nback to the City Council and then begin construction. She estimated that the project would be\ncompleted by December of this year.\nCommissioner Bertken questioned the purpose of the bulb-out on the west side as opposed to the\ntwo bulb-outs on the east side.\nStaff Payne replied that the purpose was to constrain vehicle movements because motorists are\npassing other motorists in the bike lane.\nCommissioner Vargas called for a motion.\nCommissioner Bertken made a motion to approve the item. Commissioner Miley\nseconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-0.\n6.\nStaff Communications\n6A.\nPotential Future Meeting Agenda Items\n- Special Transportation Commission meeting will be held Wednesday, April 23rd\n- Draft Transportation Demand Management for Alameda Point\n- Transportation Grant Applications\n- Regional Transit Access Study / Federal Transit Administration Project Next Steps\nCommissioner Schatmeier stated that he would like a representative from Water Emergency\nTransportation Authority (WETA) to present to the Commission and speak about the increase in\ndemand on Harbor Bay and Oakland/Alameda ferries.\nCommissioner Miley replied that he would like the topic to be included in the May\nTransportation Commission meeting's agenda.\nStaff Payne replied that staff would bring back the meeting minutes for approval and the parking\nstudy would be brought back in May. She also will contact WETA staff requesting a\npresentation at the May meeting.\n7.\nAnnouncements/ Public Comments\nStaff Payne made an announcement about two events taking place in April. The citywide Earth\nDay event will take place on Saturday, April 26 at Washington Park and the next day on Sunday,\nApril 27, will be the Alameda Bike Festival from 12:30-4:00 pm at Henry Haight Elementary\nSchool.\n8.\nAdjournment\nPage 11 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2014-03-26", "page": 12, "text": "Page 12 of 12\n9:29 pm\nPage 12 of 12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2014-03-26.pdf"}