pages: TransportationCommission/2008-07-23.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2008-07-23 | 8 | facilities, or reduces the LOS for these modes.' He believed that the modes had been given short shrift in past EIRs, and believed that statement should be placed in the beginning to identify the key impact. He suggested that a significant impact be anything that increased the average pedestrian delay to more than 25 seconds in various zones where pedestrians walk. He noted that the light at Encinal at Park was one of the longest lights in the City at 25 seconds. He believed there should be clarifying statements in the documents as well, including LOS impacts for bicycles caused by pedestrian improvements that would not be considered a significant impact. He added that pedestrians had the right of way, and that there should be a clarifying statement indicating that a decrease of automobile LOS created by accommodating one of the alternative modes not be considered significant. He noted that would be an acceptable impact if accompanied by some kind of TDM. He suggested that the gateway street classification could be useful to ensure that transit service would remain a priority at these locations. Commissioner Krueger recalled another city, perhaps Portland, that had ranked its transportation modes - pedestrian, bike, bus, automobile. Staff Bergman noted that may have been for a limited, probably not citywide. Commissioner Krueger indicated that he believes that the example he was referring to was for planning purposes, not to resolve conflicts regarding the environmental impacts. Commissioner Krueger noted that the regional arterials were important for transit and other modes, and was concerned that if the vehicle LOS trumped everything else, that the City would be in trouble as it continued to rely more on transit in the future, not to mention pedestrians and bikes. He believed there should be another means of resolving the conflicts. Commissioner Schatmeier shared Commissioner Krueger's concerns, and did not agree that transit should always come in second when there was a conflict. He viewed transit as a method of relieving congestion. Staff Khan noted that if the City were to maintain a certain level of service for automobiles, the transit LOS would automatically be associated with the automobile LOS. In rare circumstances where a queue jump lane would be provided, where the transit would bypass the backup at an intersection that would trigger that concern. In general, a good LOS for automobiles would be a good LOS for transit. Commissioner Krueger believed that Mr. Spangler's idea of measuring persons moved per segment was an interesting idea, although it may short-shrift pedestrians and bicyclists. Commissioner Schatmeier believed there was value in looking at transit as high-occupancy vehicles. Chair Knox White noted that the Planning Board was the body that would approve the EIR, and that the Transportation Commission did not generally have that authority. He noted that the Transportation Commission and the Planning Board would be able to discuss the core key issues during the joint meeting. Page 8 of 14 | TransportationCommission/2008-07-23.pdf |