pages: TransportationCommission/2006-10-25.pdf, 2
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2006-10-25 | 2 | Chair Knox White inquired whether the neighboring property owners had been notified of this discussion meeting. Staff Bergman noted that at this time, there was no proposal to actually install anything at those locations, and that the standard noticing procedure had been followed. Chair Knox White did not feel comfortable moving forward with this item without hearing from the residents at these locations. He suggested that the discussion be refocused on Otis Drive at Sandcreek Way, and whether or not there were other, better options; the discussion may be rescheduled for November after taking public comment. Commissioner Ratto inquired when and why the bus stop was abandoned. Audience member responded that it was abandoned in February 2005 because of safety issues. Public Comment Elmer Garlitz, 1511 Pacific, noted that he has worked as a crossing guard at Otis and Sandcreek Way for Lum School, and that he was totally opposed to a bus stop anywhere near Sandcreek Way and Otis Drive. He believed it would create a safety problem for the crossing guards in getting the children across the street, and noted that it would be very difficult to hold the children until the bus went by. He believed the bus should be held to allow the children to cross. He believed the bus stop as proposed would create a safety hazard because the bus stop sign was placed in such a position that the bus stops right on top of the crosswalk, thereby blocking the view of oncoming traffic from either direction from behind the bus, requiring the crossing guard to step into the path of oncoming traffic without being seen until he or she clears the body of the bus. Since the average traffic speed is about 30 mph, this would mean that a driver could not safely stop the vehicle in time to avoid striking a pedestrian using the crosswalk. He would like to see changes in the current signage. Barbara Nemer suggested that this bus stop would be a mistake, and noted that two children had been hit at Franklin Elementary the previous week. She did not understand why a bus stop that had been removed for safety purposes would be reconsidered. She noticed that there were no red curbs in other areas of Alameda where bus stops were located. Diane Voss cited an article in the Alameda Journal of September 5 2006, which referred to the crossing guards as "sentinels of safety." She urged the Commission to listen carefully to the opinions of the crossing guards, who had been consistent in their opinion that a bus stop at Otis Drive and Sandcreek Way would be unsafe. She had been told the red curb was to prevent people from parking or stopping there to keep the visibility at the crosswalk open, not so a bus stop could be placed there. She believed that the spreadsheet's statement that no additional signage was required at Otis and Sandcreek was incorrect, and that it would have to be put up for the bus alone. She noted that the sheet did not mention the children who use the crosswalk at Otis and Sandcreek. She believed that a bus stop at either location would not have children crossing every day at their respective locations. She noted that the children would be at Otis and Sandcreek, not 2 | TransportationCommission/2006-10-25.pdf |