pages: TransportationCommission/2012-05-03.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission | 2012-05-03 | 3 | with the design, he found that it was overkill; he did not see the safety hazards there. He hopes the Commission supports the recommendation of the staff. However, he is dumbfounded to see that this project had legs and he does not understand it. Gordon McConnell, Fairview Avenue resident, stated he attended two out of the three public meetings. Public Works were not responsive to the residents' views, and the overall public consensus of the second meeting was to do nothing. He called into question the integrity of the City Manager and the grant application. He stated there was an initial meeting with residents to develop minor traffic calming measures but not to the extent that the Public Works Department proposed. Paula Kaneshiro explained that she did collect signatures to end the project and one of the things that she appreciated was the fact that residents wanted some type of traffic calming on their street. She also questioned why Public Works continued with the project when the public stated they did not want the project to continue. Finally, she said it started as a traffic calming effort and she does not understand why the City went out for a Safe Routes to School grant. James Tham stated this project is doing the wrong thing. The intersection is already safe and he has traveled through the intersection by bike, foot and car for the last 40 years. He felt the City should have been frugal with their money and not waste with staff work hours. Thus, he believes the project is wasteful and other projects should require much more attention than this one. He encouraged the Commission to look at the Public Works Department and review their business plan. Jim Anglom has lived near the project for more than 30 years and he does not want to see the project proceed. The project would bring reduce property values and parking spaces. Furthermore, he believes additional improvements to the intersection would create complications and a liability to the City. Commissioner Moehring asked for any additional comments or questions from the Commission. Commissioner Bertken stated he believes the public provided plenty of information for the Commission to proceed with a decision. However, there was one question about a public statement regarding secret meetings between City staff and a select number of individuals. Matthew Naclerio replied that staff is prohibited by the Sunshine Ordinance to conduct meetings involving a decision to proceed with a project without public notice. However, initial meetings were conducted with residents who brought forth the petition, which is standard procedure. Staff Khan replied City staff does this for other projects when they receive a petition and they talk to the petitioners and then they go to the community about everything staff is proposing. Commissioner Miley applauded the public for coming out to speak about the project and it is important to receive public opinion. He questioned how the City prioritized its projects and he knows that staff is working on the list currently. He asked if this type of project falls within the priority list and if not, then why not. Page 3 of 5 | TransportationCommission/2012-05-03.pdf |