pages: TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2006-12-13 | 3 | Chair Knox White noted that the Subcommittee had addressed Item B-2.1 by email, and came to the consensus that changing "protect" to "promote residential neighborhood integrity" actually weakened the proposed language. He believed that the following four lines appeared to be editorializing, rather than making a policy statement. He did not believe it was necessary, and did not believe it added anything to the policy. Regarding Item 7, he recalled that Commissioner McFarland stated that the first part of it was nearly a duplication of the next statement regarding the implementation and verification of a quantifiable TSM. He believed the language as written, which included words such as "could be" instead of "are going to be," significantly reduced the effectiveness of Policy 7. Commissioner Schatmeier agreed with the lack of necessity on Item B-2.1 in Policy 7, and believed that the first sentence was superfluous. Commissioner Krueger noted that was word "yearly" was included to specify a timeline for verification, and inquired how important the yearly verification was. Chair Knox White inquired once the EIR was passed, and the mitigations accepted, what the addition of the language would do in terms of the City's ability to do anything differently. Staff Khan advised that if the EIR had indicated thresholds, such as a 10% reduction in trips, and if there was only a 5% reduction after the first year, the next level of TSM/TDM measures may be required. Chair Knox White believed the intent of Policy 7 was to bring the City out of having to mitigate every possible piece of congestion at every possible intersection, which created an uncrossable environment at some intersections. He believed this language may be appropriate for the TDM plan, which would say that the TDM plan should have various phases to help achieve the TDM plan goals. Staff Khan noted that there were two aspects of the language: to ensure the measures were verifiable and quantifiable, and to ensure that when the EIR was done, that the public would be fully aware of the impacts if a certain level of congestion were to be accepted. Chair Knox White noted that part of the EIR process was to identify and call out congestion. He did not understand how the additional language accomplished that goal, other than to say it "can be decided." A discussion of level of service language and other wordsmithing items ensued. Commissioner Krueger noted that he was inclined to accept Attachment 1 as it is, and he suggested that specific language be added to state that the congestion should be quantified. He believed the City should have clarification on the number of minutes traffic would be delayed. He suggested that language be added explicitly stating that the facts would be put on the table. 3 | TransportationCommission/2006-12-13.pdf |