pages: TransportationCommission/2006-02-22.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2006-02-22 | 3 | reviewed and provided some comments to the General Plan Amendment in 2004. A sub- committee was formed and put together for comments. The EIR report has just been issued and will be available thru the end of March for comments. The packet included the Transportation and Circulation sector project description based on the General Plan Amendment that was circulated before. None of the comments have been incorporated as to this date. Once the EIR is finalized it will be forwarded to the Planning Board and Council. The TC members can review the comments, which they can modify. Chair Knox White said that the members would like to review those comments. Commissioner Parker had a question. In the Project Description, Page 7, there is a discussion of scattered residential properties. She expressed concern that some of these properties might block a future transit corridor. Chair Knox White said that it should be on the next meeting for discussion. Commissioner Parker said that the DEIR, Transportation and Circulation deal with impact fees. Some new developments have had their impact fees waived or reduced. Wants to make sure the DEIR is based upon assessment of impact fees to stand firm on its policy. She also stated that the DEIR indicates that the intersection of Clement and Park will be very congested in 2010 and 2025 whether the Northern Waterfront project is approved or not. Chair Knox White responded that on Page IV.E-27, the baseline for 2025 with no project is Level Of Service B. Commissioner Parker responded that the text on Page IV.E-28 is not consistent with that. She noted that the report says "the impact of the Clement extension on the intersection of Park and Clement in 2025 is determined to be significant and unavoidable." Commissioner Krueger noted that on page 10, Line 19 runs on weekdays but also on weekends. Regarding the transit discussion on page 18, he asked if there is sufficient right of way for a future transit corridor. Staff Bergman responded that cross-sections were developed as part of the Cross Alameda Trail Feasibility Study, which illustrate how vehicles, bicycle facilities, and a rail corridor could be accommodated. He indicated that along Clement Avenue the cross-sections located the rail corridor within the roadway. Chair Knox White stated that he was not aware of this, and asked that the cross-sections be shared with the Commission for discussion at the March meeting. Commissioner Krueger noted that there were originally three rail corridors through the Northern Waterfront area, and that there were a number of houses located on them. He asked how the development could have been approved when this area had been identified by the City as a future rail corridor. Commissioner Parker noted that it is has been recommended by several Boards and Commissions that they reserve a continuous transit right of way. 3 | TransportationCommission/2006-02-22.pdf |