pages: PlanningBoard/2005-04-25.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2005-04-25 | 4 | 8. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: 8-A. Recommendation of the Cross Alameda Trail Feasibility Study (BB). A request for review and recommendation of alignment for the Cross Alameda Trail Feasibility Study. The Cross Alameda Trail would enhance access to destination points along the northern portion of Alameda's main island by providing improved bicycling and pedestrian facilities and would also serve as a recreational facility. Ms. Barbara Hawkins summarized the staff report. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Jon Spangler, Cross Alameda Trail Steering Committee, 1037 San Antonio Avenue, spoke in favor of this item, and commended the Public Works staff for their efforts in finding a logistical solution for a difficult trail. He noted that it would provide an east-west transportation link for pedestrians and bicyclists; it will provide better links to BART; it will provide the possibility of a bus- rapid transit or ultralight rail right-of-way. The eventual development of Alameda Point would make those items necessary. He noted that it would be easier to address the section between Main Street and Webster Street, which he believed would have a great effect on the Webster/Atlantic intersection, if grant money could be obtained. Ms. Debra Arbuckle, 9th Street, spoke in favor of this item, and noted that the neighborhood had been working on this issue for approximately nine years. She supported the use of alternative transportation, such as electric bikes, and noted that this issue needed a lot of community support. The public hearing was closed for Board discussion. In response to an inquiry by Ms. McNamara, Ms. Hawkins explained the difference between commuter alignment and recreational alignments #1 and #2. She noted that in the past, Bike Alameda has proposed a bicycle boulevard down Pacific, which would enhance bicycle opportunities by creating less of a desired route for vehicles. Mr. Lynch did not believe that a bike rider considered a Class 1, 2 or 3, but that they moved to avoid traffic upon perception of that traffic. As bike paths are being created, he suggested that other traffic calming techniques be considered that are not currently in place, and that may mean additional inconvenience in terms of travel time for vehicles. Ms. Hawkins advised that the Transportation Master Plan will feature a grid system for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Planning Board Minutes Page 4 April 25, 2005 | PlanningBoard/2005-04-25.pdf |