pages: TransportationCommission/2006-03-22.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2006-03-22 | 5 | Commissioner Krueger moved to include the following explanatory text to accompany the TC's recommendation to delete policies 10.6.j and PS-3 from the GPA: "These two policies prohibit full use and/or any future extension of the Alameda grid system. Depending on the future outcome of the ballot initiatives for the Alameda Beltline property or the future development plans for the Pacific Storage property, extension of the grid may not be necessary or desirable. However, until the future uses are established for these two sites, the General Plan should not prohibit any future consideration of access to the Pacific Storage or the Beltline site from the north-south streets in the grid." Commissioner Schatmeier seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously, 4-0. Chair Knox White asked to discuss the right of way for the proposed rail transit, and referred to the cross-section drawings from the Cross Alameda Trail Feasibility Study. Staff Hawkins stated that staff looked at the constraints of the roadway system on both sides and looking at both the existing Clement and connecting into Atlantic. This included a look at potential cross-sections from Main to Tilden to see how the different modes of transportation could be accommodated. This also included the geometrics of a road that would be constructed between Sherman and Clement, so even though this is a preliminary proposal, it is based on pretty refined measurements. Staff Hawkins said that the original light rail study did not get to the refined level that was done in the trail feasibility study. She noted that San Francisco is currently using a rail system that has shared turning lanes with vehicles but doesn't have shared through lanes. Commissioner McFarland said that it is possible to get 15 minute headways for a rail service even if there is a mile of single tracking. Commissioner Krueger questioned whether Clement is the best right-of-way for a potential rail corridor. Commissioner McFarland also noted that space would be required for stations. He suggested that if rail were implemented in this corridor, it should probably be operated in the street, shared with vehicle traffic. Chair Knox White said that the TC has a concern that the right of way that is being discussed in this plan could have operational issues. He suggested that another route for the rail might have to be considered. Commissioner Krueger agreed. Staff Hawkins said that it is difficult to protect right-of-way because of the various competing needs for things such as development, transportation, parking, and shoreline access. She noted that there is a pinch point between the developer's property and a retaining wall near the water by the Encinal Terminals site. It is difficult to determine how much space should be set aside without knowing the operational demands, and it could be costly. She stated that additional analysis would be needed to provide some of this information. Page 5 of 7 | TransportationCommission/2006-03-22.pdf |