pages: CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2015-01-21 | 6 | hurts, using consultants costs money; she favors the cautious route of having the appropriate State agency conduct a review; the City should get information and proceed in an incremental process, which is what the amended language encompasses. Mayor Spencer inquired whether Councilmember Oddie agrees that the Council would hear back and staff would determine the next step depending upon what the State agency says, to which Councilmember Oddie responded in the affirmative. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (15-072) Consider Directing Staff to Install Flashing Pedestrian Crosswalk Signs at Two Locations: 1) Maitland Drive and Mecartney Road, and 2) Mecartney Road and Belmont Place. (Councilmember Oddie) (Continued from January 20, 2015) Councilmember Oddie made brief comments on the referral; noted the referral should read: Maitland Drive and Island Drive and Mecartney Road and Belmont Place; since the referral, he has also been asked about Broadway and San Jose Avenue; that he is willing to amend the referral so that Council will get a report back on priority areas for flashing crosswalks. Mayor Spencer expressed her appreciation for Councilmember Oddie's comment. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated that she would like to hear from a department, such as Public Works, as to whether flashing pedestrian crosswalk signs are the best remedy. Councilmember Oddie concurred flashing crosswalks might not be the best remedy. Councilmember Ezzy Ashcraft stated Councilmembers are probably not as well equipped to decide; something needs to be done to address the issue of pedestrian safety; the referral might be one thing to consider; however, there is probably a whole tool box; Public Works, the Transportation Commission and Police Department should review the matter. Councilmember Oddie stated that he was amenable to modifying the referral or coming back with a different referral. The Assistant City Manager recommended demoting the matter from a Council referral to add three individual intersections to the Public Works queue; stated there are many tools in the tool box; Public Works would have to study the matter and recommend the best option; the matter would be brought back so Council could see how the Public Works queue works as opposed to the referral regarding the Bay Farm Island Bridge [paragraph no. 15-070]; the two requests are very different scales; normally, an individual or group of neighbors would make a request; the request would go into the queue and Public Works does studies and public outreach; Public Works views each Councilmember as a representative of more than one neighbor; there is a balance of Special Meeting Alameda City Council 6 January 21, 2015 | CityCouncil/2015-01-21.pdf |