pages: TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2005-11-16 | 6 | Chair Knox White responded that one purpose of the classification is to help define street design. He stated that the Circulation Subcommittee chose not to identify Oak as a collector or arterial, which could encourage the expansion of lanes, and noted that the Circulation Plan includes no volume limits for streets. He said that the classification of 8th Street poses a similar issue, and the subcommittee chose to classify it as a collector to indicate that the street should not be redesigned to encourage additional through traffic. He suggested that it may be appropriate to use different terminology if that is causing confusion. He also noted that while it is not reflected on the map, that the subcommittee recommends classifying Oak as a priority pedestrian street. Commissioner Knoth asked for clarification on the pedestrian map. Chair Knox White stated that the pedestrian zones were not identified as a way to indicate pedestrian routes, but as a way to identify priority areas where funding should be targeted. He emphasized that the map is only an initial draft, and that the Pedestrian Subcommittee should hopefully use this as a starting point. Commissioner Schatmeier stated that he hoped the role of the consultant is to evaluate the Subcommittee's proposals from a technical standpoint and to look at the consequences of those decisions, and not to question the intent of the Subcommittee. Commissioner Knoth asked what staff's concerns are about the Subcommittee's recommendations, and what staff would like to see the consultant do. Staff Bergman said that staff's concerns were mostly related to some of the issues already discussed, such as the classifications of Park Street and Webster Street as minor arterials, and 8th Street, and that the definitions do not fit the standard definition of collector and local. He noted that the consultant work scope has not yet been drafted, and that staff is looking for input from the Commission. Staff Hawkins stated that part of the problem was how the process was set up, that Subcommittee and the task force would meet but other department would not have a chance to comment until after it went through all the boards and commissions. Chair Knox White disagreed, stating said that in the first part of the Circulation Plan, the draft material was routed to staff for comment prior to being presented to the other boards and commissions. What are the goals of the consultant. Staff Hawkins said that the goals are to look at the work. Lots of it was based on the personal experience and living in the city, whereas the consultant can draw upon on work they have done in other areas. They can look at the concerns raised by the Subcommittee and staff and draw on their experience resolving similar issues elsewhere. 7C. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Call For Projects Staff Hawkins referred to four handouts that had been distributed: 1) the calendar on how to proceed with the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), 2) a list of the carry over projects, 3) a list | TransportationCommission/2005-11-16.pdf |