pages: CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf, 19
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2006-10-17 | 19 | process works in that people are able to step up and acknowledge the problem and other options are reviewed; he feels that Policy No. 7 needs to be flushed out. Mayor Johnson stated that Policy No. 7's language needs work; Policies No. 1 through 6 look like good goals to have; the policies should be changed to be more like guidelines. The Transportation Commission Chair stated the recommendation is twofold; the first recommendation is that the policies are guidelines for the EIR policy the second recommendation is to go forward with the TMP and adopt the TMP as policies into the General Plan as part of the Transportation Element the Transportation Commission wanted to get the recommendations to Council before a number of very large EIR'S came up so that the recommendations could be considered as guideline policies. Mayor Johnson stated the policies are good because the policies address the issue of traffic reduction, not just mitigation and the Travel Choice shows that traffic reduction is possible if the right efforts are made; she is okay with Policies No. 1 through 6; Policy No. 7 needs more work to make sure the intent is correct. The Transportation Commission Chair stated at the Transportation Commission meeting next week, the policies going forward with the TMP would be discussed. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the A through F level of service ratings would change, to which the Transportation Commission Chair responded in the negative. Councilmember Daysog stated Policy No. 7's first sentence could be interpreted more broadly in that the Policy is not just about congestion but is about other impacts associated with congestion such as noise and air quality. Councilmember deHaan stated he has an additional concern with Policy No. 7; already many activities occurring across the Estuary have impacts on the City's intersections; Oak Street to Ninth Avenue is a good example; inquired whether situations might occur where widening or creating additional automotive traffic lane options should be considered. The Transportation Commission Chair responded the 1990 General Plan specifically states that increasing through capacity on the Island is not to happen in order to keep the traffic volume down. Councilmember deHaan stated periodically widening and lane changes Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 19 October 17, 2006 | CityCouncil/2006-10-17.pdf |