pages: PlanningBoard/2006-09-25.pdf, 15
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2006-09-25 | 15 | about traffic congestion to Target, and noted that there was more to quality of life than tax revenues. He believed this use would be too big, would generate too much traffic and did not fit in Alameda. Mr. Noel Folsom spoke in opposition to this item. He expressed concern about the traffic congestion surrounding this use, and its impacts on the residential neighborhoods. Mr. Scott Brady, 1812 Encinal Avenue, spoke in opposition to this item. He was very concerned about the traffic portion in the EIR, and noted that the level of service figures would be meaningless to readers without the number of vehicles per hour included in the correlation. He believed this EIR was a piecemeal document, and that it was a recipe for disaster. Mr. Andrew DuBois, 2101 Shoreline Drive #438, spoke in opposition to this item. He was concerned about the adequacy of the traffic study, and sometimes had to wait for three green lights to get across Park Street at Otis. Mr. Jon Spangler, 1037 San Antonio Avenue, spoke as a member of Bike Alameda. He supported Lucy Gigli's comments on the inadequacy of pedestrian and bicycle comments in the EIR, and the provisions for them. He was disappointed that this continued a trend that pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders had not been adequately accounted for and taken care of in the South Shore traffic pattern. He would be willing to accept Target as a good neighbor in the right location. He noted that many low-income families needed a store like Target in Alameda, and did not believe they should have to go to San Leandro. He noted that Target was a big supporter of community programs. He believed that it should be located in the right place, supported by a developer that is willing to pay the freight on the development, and to adequately provide for all the needs to support Target and South Shore being a good neighbor. He did not believe that standard had yet been met, and did not believe it had been met in 2003 with the EIR at that time. He believed this DEIR could be improved. Ms. Lucy Gigli, President, Bike Alameda, PO Box 2732, noted that Bike Alameda had been waiting for this most recent proposal. They believed that there had been no meaningful analysis of walking or bicycling had been made in and around the project area. She believed the additional cars on the road warranted safer facilities for bikes and pedestrians. She noted that secure long-term and employee bike parking needs were not met. They believed that the bike lanes being placed on the main access roads of Otis, Park and Shoreline would create safer access with the new intersections. She believed the Target area would have increase turning movements on Whitehall, and the sidewalks should be made much safer. There would be added pedestrian traffic between Walgreen's and Office Max, and should require an east-west parallel sidewalk along the inside of Otis to get between those stores and Target. She noted there would be an increased amount of pedestrians along the Park Street area near Walgreen's and the Sushi House would warrant an enlarged sidewalk. M/S Cunningham/McNamara and unanimous to extend the meeting to 11:15 p.m. AYES - 7; NOES - 0; ABSTAIN - 0 Planning Board Minutes Page 15 September 25, 2006 | PlanningBoard/2006-09-25.pdf |