pages: TransportationCommission/2008-07-23.pdf, 11
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2008-07-23 | 11 | visibility of lights, sun glare with respect to east-west orientation, and shadow of trees or buildings. He noted those were site-specific considerations, and added that the draft would be completed to be accepted by the Public Works Director. Open public hearing. Audrey Lord-Hausman, Pedestrian Friendly Alameda, noted that the group had been a strong advocate for the in-pavement crosswalk lights, and was impressed that Alameda had 10 such crosswalks. She expressed concern about the false sense of security, and that such amenities were only as good as the education. She believed that was an area that needed a great deal more work. She noted they were very effective at night and in inclement weather, but that during a bright, sunny day, it was difficult for motorists to see them right away. She suggested that an education program be enacted, including the use of newspaper articles, pamphlets, and items on the City's website. She noted that because motorists' memories were short, and to address new residents coming into the City, that there be an ongoing education effort. Jon Spangler agreed with the previous speaker's comments, and added that enforcement was at least as important as education. He noted that enforcement was very effective, and that it would also be remunerative to the City. He liked the effectiveness of the in-pavement lights during bad weather and nighttime hours, but that they were almost useless on a sunny day at Webster and Taylor. Shaded locations worked better than lighted locations. He noted that a Yield to Pedestrians sign would work well in conjunction with other measures, particularly at schools. He commended the funding method of using grants. Close public hearing. Commissioner McFarland noted that he liked the in-pavement lights. Chair Knox White noted that these devices had a time and a place, and added that they were very expensive. He echoed Mr. Spangler's comment about the grants used to pay for them, and added that the grants came from competitive money that could be used for other things. He did not believe that was a good rationale to install them just for that reason. He believed they should be used very sparingly. He was concerned that drivers disregarded measures to protect pedestrians. He suggested a special paint scheme such as those used in school zones that would indicate pedestrian crossings more clearly. He supported an education campaign as well. Staff Khan noted that was a good point, and complimented Staff Bergman on the research and evaluation of the studies he performed in compiling the staff report. He noted that each study cautioned against overuse of these devices, which may render them ineffective. He hoped that safety committees or local committees at schools could be formed to increase education with respect to pedestrians and bicyclists. Page 11 of 14 | TransportationCommission/2008-07-23.pdf |