pages: TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2007-02-28 | 5 | Chair Knox White would like to further explore the role of municipalities in other TMAs, and wanted to ensure that the City had a real voice in how it moved forward, such as the Council having a voting member or be required to approve the program. He wanted to be careful that the TDM program did not become exclusively a shuttle program. He felt strongly that the City should evaluate the program by counting trips, using the ITE trip generation rates as a baseline. Mr. Knopf noted that the City Council has some authority over the TDM program, as it must approve any reallocation of the budget involving at least $45,000. Chair Knox White recalled that at the last meeting, Commissioner Schatmeier suggested not using the word "shuttle," and that it should be discussed in a more inclusive sense. He believed the surveys were good and worthwhile, but believed that counting cars would be the best way to judge the effectiveness in the early years. He believed the agreement between City Council and ProLogis gave a lot of cover for not meeting the goals. He believed that the efforts should go beyond what was expected, and that all participants should work aggressively to meet the goals. Chair Knox White noted that page 3 of the TDM program read, "The first phase of TDM program will have regular supplementary ground shuttle service running at 30-minute headways." He had assumed that AC Transit would run some type of service through the project area, and that tension would build between AC Transit and the private shuttles. He believed that language was needed that addressed AC Transit service as the preferred transit service, and that an agreement be reached between AC Transit regarding the thresholds that would trigger their ability to go into offering that service. Chair Knox White noted that the bottom of page 3 read, "Within Alameda Landing, neither property owner or tenant, other than the affordable housing, will be a participant in the TDM program, paying annual TDM assessments." He requested a clarification that this referred to the payment, that the affordable housing tenants would not be asked to pay into the TDM program, but that they would be able to participate in the program. Mr. Knopf confirmed that they would not be asked to pay into the program. He stated that they would also be able to access the EcoPass. Chair Knox White echoed Commissioner Krueger's comments about including the EcoPasses as one of the priority possibilities for the program, rather than a voluntary or optional item. He noted that Table 2 on page 10 (Projected TDM Implementation) should be titled as an example of TDM implementation. He wanted to allow the flexibility of the program to change as its effectiveness is evaluated over time. He also noted that some items called out as part of the TDM program were already parts of the City ordinances, and were required independent of the existence of the TDM program. They included bike parking and bus shelters. He would like those prerequisites to be pointed out as such. Chair Knox White noted that a car share programs should not cost the project any money to implement. Mr. Knopf noted that the $2000 for guaranteed ride home was mostly for the marketing efforts and implementation; he noted it would not be effective if nobody knew about it. Transportation Commission February 28, 2007 Page 5 of 9 | TransportationCommission/2007-02-28.pdf |