{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 1, "text": "Approved Minutes\nTransportation Commission Meeting\nWednesday, January 27, 2021\nTime:\n6:30 p.m.\nLocation:\nDue to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners was able to attend\nthe meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to\nthe public during the meeting.\nLegistar Link:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811332&GUID=173EF9EF-7A08-48E9-AD93-\n5B2FOBD42357&Options=info/&Search=\n1. Roll Call\nPresent: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Nachtigall and Commissioners Yuen, Kohlstrand and Weitze.\nAbsent: Commissioner Hans\n2. Agenda Changes\nChair Soules requested to switch 6A and 6B to accommodate schedules.\n3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758231&GUID=BE96F602-9092-4789-A529-\n8D29AA900855&Options=&Search=&FullText=1\n4. Announcements/ Public Comments\nWalter Jacobs in Harbor Bay stated that he has a problem with a roundabout or a traffic signal at Island Drive\nand Mecartney Road. He prefers a flashing beacon. He has not seen a car crash here. He has a concern about\nthis proposal.\nJim Strehlow stated that he wants a status on the water taxi. The Fernside area HOA feels that Moreland Drive\nhas more speeding due to the Slow Streets program on Versailles Street, and other adjacent streets to Slow\nStreets program has similar speeding problems.\nMichael Robles-Wong stated that he had served on the board of Harbor Bay but is speaking as a 25-year resident\nof Bay Farm Island. He agrees with Mr. Jacobs. A traffic guard was hit a few years ago at this Island/Mecartney\nintersection. There is a concern about how pedestrians will cross this street.\nAnthony Lewis stated that he is blind. Gail Payne had a meeting about a roundabout with the blind community\nbecause it is something new for the blind community. He recommended that a tactile map be created, and to\nhave a mobility specialist assist with educating blind people how to use roundabouts. The Sherman/Encinal\nintersection is complicated even for people who can see. There are approximately 20 people in Alameda who\nare blind.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n1", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 2, "text": "Morgan Bellinger stated that he hopes that everyone listens to the educational presentation on roundabouts, and\nrespects science and then will make decisions based on science.\nSteve Barrett stated that he is a resident of Park Street, and cars speed on this street. He is thrilled to see that\nCouncil is considering roundabouts because drivers will be forced to drive more safely.\nChair Soules read an email from Cheryl Chi, who was unable to come to the meeting, requesting that City staff\nlook into the trees that were planted along the Cross Alameda Trail because of the round balls that are dropped\nby one of the species.\nSteven Jones stated that he is a lifelong resident. About the Island/Mecartney intersection, he feels it runs\nsmoothly and people are courteous. He worked for the City of Alameda Fire Department for 30 years, and he\ndoes not recall ever responding to a collision at that intersection. He worked with a former Public Works\nDepartment Director who concluded that a traffic signal is not needed. He thinks the intersection works fine.\n5. Consent Calendar\n5A. Draft Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting from Wednesday, November 18, 2020 (Action\nItem)\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758232&GUID=9172809E-8E90-4634-8A56-\n238C4C3B26CC&Options=&Search=&FullText=1\nNo changes proposed. Vice Chair Nachtigall moved to approve as is. Commission Yuen seconded. The\nmotion passed 4-0 and Commissioner Kohlstrand abstained since she was not at the meeting.\n6. Regular Agenda Items\n6B. Review Educational Presentation on Roundabouts (Discussion Item)\nGail Payne, Senior Transportation Coordinator introduced Kittelson staff - Erin Ferguson, Lawrence Lewis\nand Mike Alston, who gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at:\n https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758234&GUID=2345B774-9EAA-4A94-9A51-\nBFC236809F5E&Options=&Search=&FullText=1\nAt the end of the presentation, Staff Payne added that the City had presented the roundabouts topic to a\ngroup of people with visual impairments, and are preparing tactile maps of a typical roundabout, which will\nbe shared with the blind community.\nCommissioner Clarifying Questions for #6B\nVice Chair Nachtigall asked in relation to pedestrian safety and the Central Avenue project, if a traffic\nsignal provides priority for pedestrians so that vehicles stop when they get a green, how roundabouts are\nsafer for pedestrians and if vehicles stop.\nMs. Ferguson responded that drivers can easily see pedestrians and yield to them at roundabouts.\nPedestrians look for a gap in traffic and proceed. There are ways to encourage auto yielding behavior, such\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n2", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 3, "text": "as using Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. Research has found that the yielding rate is good for single\nlane roundabouts. The rates do go down with multiple lane roundabouts.\nVice Chair Nachtigall asked if landscaping of roundabouts and the splitter islands might reduce the visibility\nof pedestrians.\nMs. Ferguson responded that, as part of the roundabout design process, sight distances are measured to\ndetermine a landscaping plan including planting heights, or if no landscaping should be installed, to retain\nvisibility.\nCommissioner Yuen asked if traffic circles have the same benefits as roundabouts, particularly since many\nAlameda intersections could not accommodate a modern roundabout.\nMs. Ferguson responded that mini-roundabouts are encouraged by the Federal Highway Administration for\nsafety. And, they can be safer than other intersection controls. The important design considerations are to\nslow vehicle speeds, and to make clear how bicyclists and pedestrians will navigate the mini-roundabout.\nThe reduced number of conflict points still are realized with mini-roundabouts.\nCommissioner Weitze asked for information on the different types of accidents that occur at one lane, versus\ntwo lane roundabouts.\nMs. Ferguson responded that both eliminate fatal and severe collisions. However, more side swipe\ncollisions occur with multi-lane roundabouts as drivers change lanes in the roundabout.\nCommissioner Weitze asked if this increase in minor accidents is this more or less than one would see at\nan intersection with a traffic signal.\nMs. Ferguson stated that it varies depending upon context and the design of the roundabout such as which\nlane the vehicles are in as they enter the intersection.\nCommissioner Weitze stated that he has heard people say that because roundabouts are unfamiliar to the\npublic, they will be dangerous. He asked if this is true, and if the collisions reduce over time, as the\ncommunity gets used to them.\nMs. Ferguson stated that single-lane roundabouts are consistently safe over time, even if the road users are\nunfamiliar with them. Multi-lane roundabouts perform better when drivers are familiar with them. For\nexample, in Bend, Oregon, they used many single-lane roundabouts successfully for many years. Then,\nwith growth, they planned multi-lane roundabouts, and for this they did an extensive outreach and education\neffort. There is no research on changing collision rates as familiarity increases, however, anecdotally, if\ncollisions start out higher, they reduce with familiarity.\nCommissioner Weitze asked if the City has accident history for the Bayport roundabouts.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n3", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 4, "text": "Staff Payne responded that these are not modern roundabouts, and that staff would have to look up what\ndata we have.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand asked if the City would use traffic circles to meet some traffic management\nneeds, where there is less space for a full roundabout.\nMs. Ferguson said that mini-roundabouts are another option when right-of-way is constrained, particularly\nto remove two- or four-way stops. The key is that there needs to be enough space to manage vehicle speeds\nand the direction of travel. Mini-roundabouts still use central islands and splitter islands, but they are\ntraversable by larger vehicles.\nChair Soules asked staff to clarify the process on determining the locations for roundabouts, and the\nlanguage in the slides. The City should not be trying to find out where they could work. This is just one\npossible option for intersections, part of the tool box. She would like staff to solve issues, rather than just\nrespond and analyze the community's specific request for a specific device, like a stop sign.\nStaff Payne clarified that this roundabout effort is part of City's Vision Zero effort. This analysis with\nKittelson is being used to determine the top five intersections for roundabouts in the City, based on safety,\nlooking at the High Injury Network.\nChair Soules encouraged community involvement in these types of decisions with new treatments.\nPublic Comments for #6B\nMichael Robles-Wong stated that they learned to use roundabouts in the United Kingdom, and knows they\nare safer, especially for very wide intersections. His primary concern is for pedestrians and children. They\nnotice that the crosswalks are further from each other. They encouraged the City to talk to the Police\nDepartment, since they pay the crossing guards. They wondered if the Island/Mecartney intersection would\nneed four crossing guards, instead of the one or two it has now if a roundabout were installed due to the\nspacing of the crosswalks and the lack of visibility between them. Thank you for the great informational\npresentation.\nWilliam Pai, Board President of Harbor Bay Isle, sees advantages of roundabouts. He is curious about the\nIsland/Mecartney intersection and if it were to be done how long would it take to implement. He has\nconcerns about the construction period.\nStaff Amiri, City Traffic Engineer, clarified that Public Works hired a consultant in 2019 to perform an\nIntersection Control Evaluation, which compared three options (existing, traffic signal and roundabout),\nand recommended a roundabout as the best for traffic control. She offered to present it at a future meeting.\nA typical construction period could be as long as a year.\nChair Soules asked staff to explore the construction period needed, and the neighborhood disruption, and\nbring to future meeting.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n4", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 5, "text": "Jennifer Rakowski asked: (1) how roundabouts impact emergency response vehicles and response times,\nand (2) if there is any data on the number of police stops at roundabouts versus a traffic signal.\nFor (1), Ms. Ferguson replied that the roundabout design always accounts for emergency vehicles to be able\nto maneuver through the intersection. The slowing through a roundabout would be similar to the slowing\nemergency vehicles do as they pass through a signalized intersection to check for cross traffic.\nStaff Amiri added that typically the Fire Department is one of the loudest voices in the design of\nroundabouts.\nFor (2), Ms. Ferguson stated there is only anecdotal information, and no research, regarding police stops.\nIn Bend, the City found they could shift their enforcement focus to other parts of the city, since roundabouts\nhave a natural traffic calming benefit. So, there was less enforcement needed at roundabouts than at\nsignalized intersections.\nAnthony Lewis thanked the City for the presentation and appreciated Staff Payne for following through on\nthe tactile maps. There are 20 blind people who want to be able to understand how roundabouts work. It\nwould be helpful if blind people and people with disabilities could do a \"walk through\" of a typical\nroundabout to understand it further, and asks that staff set this up. Also, they wondered how people in a\nwheelchair, who are lower to the ground, would be visible if there is landscaping at the roundabout.\nStaff Payne stated that she likes the idea of doing a field visit to Lafayette, which has a modern roundabout,\nand will try to set up a field trip, post-COVID.\nGeoffrey Burnaford, who lives on Central Avenue at McKay Street, asked if there is a roundabout proposed\nat Encinal High School. They can imagine traffic gridlock as students walk across the street, which would\nhappen at any high pedestrian intersection. Recently, they saw some very heavy large vehicles on Central\nAvenue, and he hopes the concrete of a roundabout can accommodate this weight at the Sherman\nStreet/Encinal Avenue proposed roundabout.\nStaff Payne stated that City staff is proposing, and the Transportation Commission approved, roundabouts\nalong Central Ave at these two intersections. Central Avenue is a truck route so the roundabouts are being\ndesigned to accommodate large trucks with the biggest being 100 feet long and 15 feet. Today, the high\nschool students take over the intersection, and this condition still would be expected for ten minutes before\nschool starts. The consultant did some research and found that roundabouts work quite well in front of\nschools.\nMs. Ferguson stated that at schools, with their peak periods of student crossings, there will be delays, but\nthe benefit is that as soon as that peak is past, traffic can flow steadily through the intersection. At a\nsignalized or stop sign controlled intersection, it would take much longer for the traffic to clear, through\nseveral signal cycles or many cars stopping.\nJim Strehlow commented that there were no diagrams in the presentation that show the closure of Sherman\nStreet for the Central Avenue project. He also asked if the cost of installing and then removing roundabouts,\nafter complaints are made, has been considered. Pleasanton is now removing some roundabouts due to\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n5", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 6, "text": "community complaints. And, how much more property damage occurs at intersections with roundabouts,\ndue to cars hitting houses/property, as they round the turn at high speeds.\nMs. Ferguson responded that there is no data on the number of communities that have put in and then\nremoved roundabouts. Conversations with the public are important, and a thoughtful process on where,\nand how they are designed is essential. As for property damage, the data shows that rear-end crashes, which\nare lower severity, are the most common at all roundabouts, and also side swipes, at multiple lane\nroundabouts. With signage and the right geometry, they do not see overly aggressive and fast driving\nthrough intersections. It is just not feasible.\nDenyse Trepanier, Bike Walk Alameda Board member, appreciates staff bringing this item up. She strongly\nencourages everyone to view the NHTSA website, which has great case studies and some write ups from\nconservative places, where roundabouts have been installed with opposition and then later were embraced\nby the community. In the Bay Area, there are mini-roundabouts implemented inconsistently, which makes\nit difficult for the community. In Berkeley, some have no stops, others have two-way stops and others have\nfour-way stops. It is unclear how to use them. She hopes that Alameda will have consistency with their\nimplementation and that stop signs would be pulled out where mini-roundabouts are installed. Combining\nthe two devices is confusing.\nSteven Jones appreciates the education from the consultants. A roundabout at Central/Encinal/Sherman\nmakes sense since there have been bad accidents there, which he knows as a past Fire Department employee.\nAt Island/Mecartney, however, conflicts are extremely low. If it ain't broke then don't fix it.\nChair Soules, based on the Zoom chat, asked for staff to respond to a question about roundabouts and stop\nsigns.\nMs. Ferguson stated that stop signs should not be used at roundabouts. Either stops signs or roundabouts\nare installed, not both.\nMr. Alston stated that there are many types of circular intersections. In Berkeley and Oakland, these are\nnot modern roundabouts.\nMichelle Wan, via the Zoom chat, asked three questions: (1) In the presentation, there was a slide for Safety\nPerformance. I would like a clarification on what is the set up that is compared to, and whether the set up\nis similar to the spots (including Bay Farm) that we are considering putting roundabouts.\nMs. Ferguson stated that statistics are from studies of roundabouts from the United States. They compared\nintersections that were converted from signalized to roundabouts at intersections, and looked at before and\nafter data, usually with 3-5 years of data for both. There were many locations and they were urban or\nsuburban.\nMichelle Wan asked what the cons are of roundabouts.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n6", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 7, "text": "Ms. Ferguson stated that roundabouts may not perform as well as a traffic signal because of delays. In some\nsituations, they are a good solution, and in others they are not. There are situations that are not as\nadvantageous - like a series of signalized intersections, where roundabouts would decrease the efficiency\nof signals.\nMichelle Wan asked about statistics on the Bay farm location that can be shared.\nStaff Payne provided a link in the Zoom chat:\nPage\n10: https://www.alamedaca.gov/files/assets/public/departments/alameda/transportation/vision-\nzero/alamedavisionzerocrashreport-update.pdf\nCommissioner Comments and Discussions for #6B\nCommissioner Kohlstrand asked about the five high priority intersections and if the Commission will get a\ncomprehensive presentation on these locations and if Island/Mecartney is part of the five.\nStaff Payne stated that the five have not yet been selected. Staff are doing roundabout education first. The\ngoal is to try to select up to five, and this can be brought up as an agenda item, possibly in May.\nIsland/Mecartney is not part of this study; it is a separate process.\nStaff Amiri responded that when a development project was done, they set aside funds to address this\nintersection of Island/Mecartney. To date, staff have only done the evaluation of intersection control types.\nNo decisions have been made, and no community outreach has been done. Traffic volumes do warrant\nsome type of control.\nVice Chair Nachtigall asked if the increase in rear-end collisions is due to cars stopping for pedestrians.\nAnd, she wondered if there are increases in pedestrian collisions at roundabouts.\nMs. Ferguson stated that there have been 15 years of thorough research, but there is not great data on\nbicycle/pedestrian collisions, since there are so few collisions and the sample size is so small. This topic\ncontinues to be an area of study.\nStaff Amiri added that speed is the biggest factor in the severity of collision. Since roundabouts slow\nvehicles, it is logical that they would reduce pedestrian fatalities.\nChair Soules stated that she appreciated the presentation, and she would like elevated transparency in the\nprocess, since this is a novel treatment. Please keep the public and community informed, and provide\nforums for them to ask questions and provide input.\nChair Soules requested to change the agenda to better accommodate schedules to 6D, 6C and then 6A.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand made a motion and Yuen seconded the motion.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n7", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 8, "text": "6D. Community-Led Committee on Police Reform & Racial Justice Draft Recommendation to\nReview Traffic and Parking Citation Fines (Discussion Item)\nLisa Foster, Transportation Planner introduced the Steering Committee and the following individuals were\npresent:\nChristine Chilcott, Al Mance, Cheryl Taylor, and Jolene Wright as well as community volunteers Heather\nReed, Hannah Grose, Beth Kenny, Lynn Cunninghas, Melodye Montgomery and Jennifer Rakowski\nCheryl Taylor made a presentation. Lynn Cunningham also provided comments. Jolene Wright provided\nthe webpage that is listed in the staff report: :https://www.alamedaca.gov/RESIDENTS/Police-Reform-and-\nRacial-Equity\nThe staff report and attachments can be found at:\n  https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758236&GUID=985566B1-9A05-405B-BE8D-\n20B72B6989D6&Options=&Search=&FullText\nCommissioner Clarifying Questions for #6D\nChair Soules asked about who provides the parking enforcement and about automatic license reading.\nStaff Foster responded that the parking enforcement is done by non-sworn, civilian staff.\nChair Soules asked about automatic license reading with parking.\nStaff Foster responded about the technology to automatically read license plates to see if the car has been\nthere past the time limit or if they have paid. Speed cameras are more of an equity concern and not parking\nsince people usually are not at the car when ticketed.\nHeather Reed discussed a walk through at Alameda Point. Hannah Grose reported about issues with drag\nracing, speeding, sidewalks in disrepair, lighting, lack of striping and lack of speed humps/dips. Additional\nsignage on the speed limit and enforcement would be helpful. Heather Reed is working with Madlen Saddik\nof the Chamber of Commerce and businesses on signage to make people aware of the residential business\narea. There is a drunk driving concern. It is extremely expensive to be poor.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand stated that the most equitable way to ticket is by camera and asked if they want\nto keep it in the Police Department. She also asked about neighborhood policing to ensure more positive\ninteractions with the community.\nHannah Grose said that the Alameda Point does have a great relationship with one police officer. They also\nhave said that calls have gone unanswered. They are interested in having more positive interactions with\npolice. They would prefer not to have drunk driving in their neighborhood.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n8", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 9, "text": "Beth Kenny stated that one of the recommendations will be for the City to advocate to allow for automated\nspeed enforcement. Police should focus on responding to crimes and not on abandoned vehicles. The\nnumber one way people interact with police is through traffic violations, and we want to reduce this\ninteraction. We want to look at taking it out of the Police Department.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand stated that San Francisco has shifted to traffic control officers and not sworn\nofficers.\nChair Soules mentioned a number of equity studies in the Bay Area to spur economic justice reform.\nCommissioner Yuen stated that she appreciates all the work from the steering committee and community\nvolunteers. She would like to see more information on the scale of the problem in Alameda such as what\nwere the violations and who was involved to better understand the gravity of the problem related to traffic\nstops. She also would like to know the scale of the fines and fees such as costs and numbers. She\nencourages more studies on the matter, especially on how to use enforcement as a strategy.\nCheryl Taylor responded that a crime analyst position could help better understand ticketing and traffic\nstops by demographics. An article was written by Rasheed Shabazz about the west end being over ticketed:\nhttps://m.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/towing-for-dollars-in-\nalameda/Content?oid=22699785&showFullText=true\nJennifer Rakowski responded that larger cities are required to count ticketing by demographics, and\nAlameda will begin with citations moving forward. Data shows that minorities are more likely to have\ntraffic stops in Alameda based on Census data such as Black community members are five to six times more\nlikely to be stopped for traffic citations compared to White community members.\nLynn Cunningham responded that automated technology will be more objective than a police officer.\nPublic Comments for #6D\nRasheed Shabazz stated that he appreciates that there is a Transportation Commission. He wants to have\nnon-police methods of police enforcement such as creative artwork for traffic calming. He questions the\nuse of technology because facial recognition is biased. He is grateful that the Alameda Police Department\nwill report this data that has been available since 1998. He mentioned about a young child who was hit by\nChipman School yet no speed humps were installed because of where it occurred. He related that he was\ntowed and his white neighbor's car was not towed at the same parking spot. He wants to see fee forgiveness\nfor people who are disproportionately impacted.\nMorgan Bellinger wants to echo Rasheed Shabazz about cameras and facial recognition. He states that free\nparking is inequitable since wealthier people park more cars on the street. Roads can be used by anyone\nincluding bus riders. A citywide parking permit program would be more equitable.\nJim Strehlow stated that the laws only allow sworn officers to see license plate information to protect\nprivacy.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n9", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 10, "text": "Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6D\nCommissioner Nachtigall commented about Alameda Point, and there are a number of long-range plans for\nAlameda Point and realizes that these improvements are not helping now. She stated that the Slow Street\ninitiative is looking to expand to Alameda Point.\nCommissioner Weitze stated appreciation for the presentation by the steering committee. The infrastructure\nis neglected in Alameda Point, and it should be upsetting to all of us.\nHeather Reed responded that she is speaking about Orion Street, and would like it to be a Slow Street. It\nneeds permanent traffic calming solutions. Facial recognition is problematic in that it is racially biased.\nBeth Kenny stated that they do not want storage of personal information, and wants to move forward in a\nway that addresses these issues.\nStaff Amiri is new to Alameda, and is surprised about the condition of Alameda Point. The striping is faded\nin Alameda Point, and Public Works staff will be installing high visibility crosswalks, increased visibility\nat intersections and signage. The City is closing Oriskany Avenue at Central Avenue.\nChair Soules mentioned that there are signs/fees/penalties and partnerships with other cities that could be\ncreated. About Alameda Point, she mentioned how difficult it is to transform federal land and that it is very\ncomplex. She would be interested to understand more about temporary solutions for immediate relief such\nas to alert the police about high speeds. She wants to tackle equity and mobility, and would like to sort it\nout in the different areas with City staff.\n6C. Endorse Council Approval of Grant Applications to Alameda County Transportation\nCommission for the 2022 Comprehensive Investment Plan Call for Projects (Action Item)\nRochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments\ncan be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758235&GUID=5EB01FE9-69E6-43D2-A061-\n6CEF2AA5BD55&Options=&Search=&FullText=1\nCommissioner Clarifying Questions for #6C\nVice Chair Nachtigall asked about the trail submittal and potentially not submitting it.\nStaff Wheeler responded that the City would try to submit both with the bridge being the higher priority yet\nit would be difficult to cover both potentially due to the funds needed.\nCommissioner Weitze asked about the gates at Jean Sweeney Park and if they are open.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n10", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 11, "text": "Staff McGuire responded that the public can access the park at Eighth Street.\nCommissioner Weitze asked if the City looked to open gates without the pathways.\nStaff McGuire stated that it needs to be accessible if the gates are opened.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand asked about St. Charles Street in that the path does not go through there.\nStaff Wheeler stated that it is Housing Authority roadway so the path would connect to it.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to endorse the Jean Sweeney trail grant application, and then\nCommissioner Yuen seconded the motion. The motion passes 5-0.\nChair Soules recused herself for the vote on the bike/ped bridge grant application.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to approve the bike/ped bridge grant application, and\nCommissioner Weitze seconded the motion. The motion passes 4-0.\n6A. Endorse the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and the Annual Report\non Transportation (Action Item)\nGerry Beaudin, Assistant City Manager, gave an overview of Climate Action and Resiliency Plan\n(CARP) work. The staff report and attachments regarding the Annual Report on the Climate Action and\nResiliency Plan and the Annual Report on Transportation can be found at:\nhttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758233&GUID=ED785EAD-B7EB-4471-\nA03B-1E1375D9B441&Options=&Search=&FullText=\nCommissioner Weitze praised the report and said resilience is important. He asked how much staff time is\nput towards resilience versus mitigation.\nStaff Beaudin said that they do not quantify the breakdown but can think about that as a metric in the future.\nHe spoke about neighborhood-based resilience hubs and said that Alameda's Emergent Groundwater study\ncaught a lot of attention regionally and other cities are doing similar studies. Alameda has a new\nSustainability and Resilience Manager: Danielle Mieler.\nCommissioner Kohlstrand asked about the evaluation of the Commercial Streets program, which said there\nwere no significant traffic delays, but she read that there were AC Transit delays. She expressed concern\nthat the City is not putting enough focus on transit outside of ferry terminals. For instance, the\nimprovements on Encinal Avenue, which is a Caltrans project, include bike lanes, but she said Encinal\nAvenue is designated as a transit priority street, not a bicycle priority street.\nCommissioner Yuen is concerned about changes that will impact the transportation system, and the cuts\nthat AC Transit is planning to make. She asked how those cuts impact our ability to meet CARP goals.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n11", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 12, "text": "Transportation Department on a traffic analysis policy for new developments. She also is working on a\ntraffic signal operations policy to look at prioritization including transit. Installing the right equipment at\nintersections to service transit will require investment.\nChair Soules said she hopes that the Bay Area can receive federal funding to bring transit back post-\npandemic. We need to continue showing the relationship between land use and transportation, which is\nimportant for sustainability. She encouraged Gerry Beaudin to come back and talk about metrics.\nCommissioner Weitze moved to endorse the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and\nthe Annual Report on Transportation. Commissioner Yuen seconded. The motion passes 5-0.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n12", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}
{"body": "TransportationCommission", "date": "2021-01-27", "page": 13, "text": "7. Announcements/ Public Comments\nJim Strehlow stated that double parked delivery vehicles block the street with the most courteous drivers\nbeing from the U.S. Postal Service. He suggested creating a new class of parking spaces for delivery during\nthe day in residential streets if residents request it.\n8. Adjournment\nChair Soules adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m.\nTransportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021\n13", "path": "TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf"}