pages
18,746 rows sorted by path descending
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: body, date (date)
Link | body | date | page | text | path ▲ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 8 | Commissioner Nachtigall discussed the different barriers they had to remove to be successful. Chair Soules discussed the possibility of another joint meeting with the Planning Board. Public Comments for #6B Jim Strehlow spoke against multi-family housing. He also expressed his concerns about safe evacuations off the island. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Jim Strehlow pointed out that in-person meetings were better because you could see who was attending them. He also wanted to hear more about the plans for water taxis. Alex Spehr asked about the bike barge idea instead of a bridge. She also suggested bollards for protected bike lanes. Chair Soules discussed items that should come back such as Estuary Crossing options. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. TC Draft Minutes 8 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 7 | Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to endorse the Transportation Annual Report. Commissioner Nachtigall seconded the motion. Chair Soules made an amendment to consider the priority and the low feasibility of the Bike/Ped Oakland Bridge (West End Bike Bridge) with the comments made by Commissioner Rentschler. Commissioner Rentschler seconded the amendment. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 6B. A Public Workshop to Review and Comment on the Draft Housing Element Update to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the Period 2023-2031 in Compliance with State Law Director Thomas introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385300&GUID=E42261C5-E282- 4236-BC4A-145AB6AEF4CD&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions and Comments for #6B Chair Soules asked for clarification on State requirements. Director Thomas discussed and explained what State Law required and that part of these workshops was showing citizens what the city had to do. This was a State requirement and the city had to do this. Commissioner Rentschler discussed the difficulties around this challenge, such as SB-10. Commissioner Kolhstrand wanted clarification on where SROs (single room occupancy) were allowed. She wanted to ensure there was a mix of housing types. She also discussed the Gold Coast and High Street and where multi-family housing could work. Director Thomas went into the details around SROs and what other changes were coming to Park and Webster. Commissioner Weitze believed that SROs were good and worked. He discussed why they were beneficial. He also discussed Linear Park and why it should be rezoned. He thought it would be great for more housing. Chair Soules went into detail about the importance of equity. TC Draft Minutes 7 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 6 | Staff Member Wheeler said the fencing should be down from the Cross Alameda Trail on the following Monday. Commissioner Nachtigall asked about the Grand resurfacing project. She discussed other sections that should be included. She also discussed priorities and that completing the Cross Alameda Trail should be high on the list. Staff Member Vance explained that sections for resurfacing were chosen based on paving needs. Commissioner Weitze discussed the Cross Alameda Trail and how to safely get people to the Alameda Landing Waterfront. He also wanted an update on the Alameda Point Adaptive Reuse Project and about the EV (electric vehicle) plan for the parking lot at Seaplane Lagoon. Staff Member Wheeler answered that Fifth Street was the best option. She also pointed out other places to find information on the connected network. Staff Member Vance gave an update on the Adaptive Reuse Project. Staff Member Foster answered that EV chargers should be put in by spring, it was currently only a small percentage. Chair Soules expressed the need for equity with having EV charging spots, especially with reducing overall parking. She then discussed goals in the Vision Zero Plan and that you have to look at more than one plan to get the full picture. Vice-Chair Yuen gave her thoughts on the West End Bike Bridge and the feasibility of it happening. She believed that regardless of whether the bridge happened or not it was imperative that the city looked at alternative ways to get on and off the island. Chair Soules agreed and discussed other potential ideas. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to endorse the Transportation Annual Report, Commissioner Nachtigall seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands, all were in favor except for Commissioner Rentschler. Commissioner Rentschler discussed his issues with the ambitious bike/ped bridge. He believed the cost was too high, was not feasible and he could not support it. TC Draft Minutes 6 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 5 | Staff Member Payne then introduced Lisa Foster, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, who gave a presentation on the Annual Report on Transportation. Robert Vance and Areli Vazquez of Public Works and Rochelle Wheeler of Transportation and Director Thomas also presented. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385389&GUID=CD117554-40EC- 4D67-9B54-5D65F51F339B&FullText=1. Public Comments for #6A Transportation Annual Report Denyse Trepanier expressed her appreciation to the staff for their work and commented on the Clement St bike path. She also discussed improvement ideas for Willow to make cycling safer. Jim Strehlow believed that the Traffic Fatality goals were faulty, he believed that traffic fatalities were usually committed by drunks and bad drivers. He thought the goals penalized good citizens with infrastructure changes. He discussed how roundabouts would not decrease greenhouse gases. He also gave suggestions on how Agendas for meetings should be worded. Commissioner Clarifying Questions and Comments #6A Transportation Annual Report Commissioner Rentschler discussed roadway striping on Alameda Ave and the paid parking at Seaplane Lagoon. He discussed that fares should really benefit the rider and he urged everyone to think twice about charging for parking right now. He also discussed the bike/ped Oakland Bridge and the likeness of it happening. Chair Soules discussed the best way to get updates with PowerPoint and what data needed to be seen by the public and the Commissioners. Commissioner Kohlstrand agreed with Chair Soules about the mid-year updates through PowerPoint. She also discussed parts of the Cross Alameda Trail that said they were completed but were still fenced off. She also wanted the Sub-Committee to get information on the Street Classifications before it came back to the Commission. She also discussed and agreed with some of the points made by Commissioner Rentschler about the bike/ped Oakland Bridge. Director Thomas discuss… | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 4 | Commissioner Weitze asked about the Easy Pass Programs and free bus tickets. He was concerned they were not targeting the right "carbon-intense" groups. He liked the program but wanted to make sure they were targeting people who would otherwise drive. Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning Buildings and Transportation, discussed Alameda's role with AC Transit and how they were looking at the E-Z Pass Program. Commissioner Kohlstrand noted that the E-Z Pass Program was not on target and wanted to know metrics that were being discussed to get in back on target. Vice-Chair Yuen wanted to see a dashboard with performance metrics to see where they were on track. She also wanted to see Greenhouse Gas measurements. Staff Member Meiler answered that a dashboard was in the works and explained other metrics that were in the works. She also discussed potential regional greenhouse gas emission measurements that locals could use. Commissioner Yuen then asked about existing housing for electrification. Director Thomas discussed existing incentive programs and potential requirements to encourage electrification. He added that this is something that would take time. Commissioner Alysha Nachtigall asked about data availability for car, electric vs. non-electric ownership. Staff Member Meiler answered that 2020 was all that was available at the moment. Vice-Chair Yuen asked about Congestion Pricing. Director Thomas said it was still in the plans and that it needed State Legislation to make it successful. They would have to work with the regional partners. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to support the endorsement of the Climate Action Plan to the City Council. Also to urge the City Council to not only prioritize Climate Actions for funding in the city but also to strongly consider new local funding sources to facilitate concrete action towards meeting these goals. Commissioner Rentschler seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 6-0. TC Draft Minutes 4 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 3 | Staff Member Payne introduced Danielle Mieler, Sustainability & Resilience Manager, who gave the presentation on the Annual Report on Climate Action & Resiliency 2022 Work Plan. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385389&GUID=CD117554-40EC- 4D67-9B54-5D65F51F339B&FullText=1 Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6A CARP There were no questions.) Public Comments for #6A CARP Jim Strehlow discussed how many recent council actions (roundabouts) were already slowing down traffic, he felt that these actions would increase carbon emissions as cars wait longer for non-existent pedestrians. He also discussed how the city was not preparing for electrical brownouts, and that too much demand was being put on electricity, especially with plans to get rid of PG&E gas lines to homes. He felt that these plans were leading Alameda's citizens and businesses to chaos. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6A CARP Commissioner Scott Weitze questioned the goal for commuters and if it was on track. Staff Member Meiler discussed current traffic demands and telecommuting. She acknowledged that people were returning to work but that emphasis was on public transit. Commissioner Rentschler discussed that FHWA (Federal Highway Administration) had recognized that roundabouts reduced greenhouse gases and decreased travel times. He then discussed how the pandemic had affected the data but it looked like people were going back to driving. He did believe though that the city's goals were on target even if they feel aspirational. Commissioner Kohlstrand believed Alameda had done a good job developing the policy framework for CARP. She noted this was a critical time to take action against climate change. She noted the importance of funding to take concrete actions. Chair Soules also discussed the stretch goals and goals that were not on track due to lack of funding. She wholeheartedly would recommend to Council to have revenue priorities. TC Draft Minutes 3 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 2 | Chair Samantha Soules congratulated Commissioner Randy Rentschler who had recently retired from MTC (Metropolitan Transportation Commission). 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Approve Special Meeting Minutes - October 27, 2021 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385386&GUID=7761655A-3E7F- 4669-9501-35A0E865E689&FullText=1. 5B. Approve Meeting Minutes - November 17, 2021 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385387&GUID=9067248C-DC24- 40D2-9BED-5F5A482C4702&FullText=1. Commissioner Rebecca Kohlstrand made a motion to approve the minutes from October 27th and November 17th, Commissioner Natchtigall seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 5-0, Commissioner Rentschler abstained since he had been absent at the meetings. 5C. Approve Meeting Calendar for 2022 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385388&GUID=3A8E20A9-B5DF- 4B06-B387-8CC10BC3F5BA. Gail Payne, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, explained the changes in the calendar for July. Chair Soules opened public comment. Jim Strehlow thought that the changes complicated things but he understood and would make sure people knew about the schedule changes. Chair Soules closed public comment. Commissioner Rentschler moved approval of the 2022 Meeting Calendar and Vice-Chair Tina Yuen seconded the motion. A vote was taken by raise of hands and the motion passed 6-0. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Discuss and Endorse the Annual Report on Transportation and the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan for the 2022 Work Plan (Multiple City staff) (Action Item) TC Draft Minutes 2 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2022-01-26 | 1 | Draft Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, January 26, 2022 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 codified at Government Code Section 54953, Transportation Commissioners can attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allows public participation via Zoom. Legistar Link: https://alamedaca-gov.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_RdDnLxBeQjuXZhWV-OEQNA 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Yuen and Commissioners Kohlstrand, Weitze, Rentschler and Nachtigall. Absent: Commissioner Michael Hans. 2. Agenda Changes None. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5385385&GUID=0524F134-2FC5- 47DB-8D47-125D50782A68&FullText=1. 4. Announcements / Public Comments Jim Strehlow questioned why July 27, 2022, had been recommended for cancelation. He also had issues with recent City Council decisions about slow streets and beg buttons. He noted there was no public opportunity to question why the City Council had not followed the staff's recommendation. He felt that the public had been left out of the process. He also discussed a recent trip to Orlando Florida where he felt they had very bad bike/pedestrian facilities. Robert Vance, Public Work Senior Engineer, introduced Tawfic Halaby who had recently joined Public Works as a Supervising Civil Engineer. He would be working on the Capital Improvement Program. TC Draft Minutes 1 1/26/22 | TransportationCommission/2022-01-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-11-17 | 6 | Mr. Huynh added that the plan for all the fiber optic cables was to put them underground. Commissioner Kohlstrand wanted to see a policy that showed they were working toward undergrounding all wires in the city. Chair Soules also wanted to see a more documented policy on undergrounding all utilities in Alameda. She believed for the unhoused, cell phones were lifelines and cell phone dependence skews towards less education levels and equity priority communities so it is important to have public wifi, especially due to lack of an address. Data plans also are expensive so it is important. She discussed the importance of establishing the relationship between the ISP (Internet Service Provider) - owning the asset and leasing it out is better so as to leverage the investment for the long term. She did not want to turn over to the private sector and wanted the city to retain those rights. She then discussed how deliberate policies could help with cyber security with how this data was used. She did not want to see a misuse of data. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Chair Soules reminded everyone to be safe out there with the sun setting earlier and encouraged everyone to check out a reflective vest. She also wished everyone Happy Holidays since this was the last Transportation Commission Meeting of the year. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 8:30 p.m. | TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-11-17 | 5 | Vice-Chair Yuen asked if the new Infrastructure Bill could help with funding for this project. Staff Member Vance explained what was budgeted for this project and what projects could be supplemented. 6B. Review and Comment on the Draft Smart City Master Plan Recommendations (Discussion Item) Gail Payne, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at ps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5198417&GUID=0D6FDA4C-7B68- )FA-898A-D30B6EOOD7B4&FullText=1 David Huynh and Monique Fuhrman from Iteris also presented and made themselves available for questions. Public Comments for #6B There were no public comments. Commissioner Clarifying Questions, Discussion, and Comments for #6B Commissioner Weitze asked for clarification on the Deploy Public WiFi Map. He also wanted to know more about Traffic Signal Priority and how that would work in school areas. Staff Member Payne explained the thought process and criteria behind the map. She also explained how the priority worked for the traffic signals. Mr. Huynh added that pedestrian safety was always the top priority with traffic signal timing. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about equity for internet access and wanted to know how the homeless would be included. She also wanted to know how this new system would be integrated with all the overhead wires, and if there was a plan to move more underground. She thought this was a really good job and important to think about these things for the future. Staff Member Payne discussed the facilities that would have resources available, and those facilities would have access to public wifi. She then discussed the undergrounding project lists that Alameda Municipal Power was working on. | TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-11-17 | 4 | Commissioner Kohlstrand thanked the school staff who had participated in this work and linked important items back to the Vision Zero Plan. She discussed her concerns about Fernside Blvd., especially between Blanding and High Street, as well as her concerns about Buena Vista Avenue. She wanted to see more opportunities for the public to have input and not just use a systematic approach. Commissioner Nachtigall discussed the pickup and drop-off rules at Nea Charter School. Chair Soules expressed her concerns about Earhart School pick up and drop off; not just drivers who need to behave properly. She also expressed her concerns about road diets and diversions to adjacent parallel streets. She believed they needed to look into it and get a grander sense of where traffic was being pushed. Commissioner Weitze added that Third Street by NEA was a good example of how preserving parking was part of the problem. If the parking were removed then there would be more places to pick up and drop off. Commissioner Hans asked if there was a plan to bring back Crossing Guards for Secondary Schools. Funding now only allowed for Crossing Guards at elementary schools. Staff Member Wheeler had heard more interest and conversation about having crossing guards at secondary schools but had not heard about funding. She discussed the growing costs of having Crossing Guards. Commissioner Kohlstrand discussed protocols of pick up and drop off at San Francisco Schools and expressed interest in bringing those protocols to Alameda. Staff Member Wheeler discussed the 17 schools that had signed up and what grant funding they had received. Commissioner Weitze asked about the School Route Map. He pointed out that Nea had many roads marked as routes but he preferred funneling kids into fewer streets. Staff Member Wheeler explained that this map had not been updated yet and then discussed what that process entailed. Chair Soules praised city staff for their work and said she would take on a personal role to get the word out about this program. | TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-11-17 | 3 | Rochelle Wheeler, a Senior Transportation Manager, added other information about the Safe Routes to School Program and the importance of having schools that engage and advocate for this program. Commissioner Nachtigall asked about bicycle education for 5th Graders and wanted to know if that included private and charter schools as well. She then thanked the staff for doing this important work. She also discussed Maya Lin since some students had reached out about having more crosswalks on Buena Vista, she thought some of those improvements could be integrated into this effort. Staff Member Wheeler clarified that the goal was to include all 5th Graders but they did not have enough funding at this point, but it was for both public and private schools. Staff Member Foster discussed what this report included and Buena Vista was outside of the area of the study. She did note that it was an important route to Maya Lin and they were still looking to add a crosswalk on Ninth Street when it would be resurfaced next year. Commissioner Scott Weitze asked for clarification on what a High Visibility Crosswalk was. He also wanted to know why some crosswalks got push-buttons for flashing beacons. He also wanted to know more about the plan to make school drop off and pick-ups better, he was stunned that this was something that schools could decide or not decide to opt into. Robert Vance, a Senior Engineer with Public Works, described what a high-visibility crosswalk was, wide bars through the center and painted with light-reflective paint. He added that they would be installing more Rapid Flashing Beacons at intersections near schools and those were evaluated on a case by case basis. Staff Member Foster said that under the Vision Zero Plan, the action is to have City Transportation Engineers support schools in developing their own pickup and drop-off policies. It will be done on a school-by-school basis. Staff Member Wheeler added that the city had also worked with the County-Wide Safe Route to School Programs on improving school … | TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-11-17 | 2 | Commissioner Rebecca Kohlstrand expressed her condolences and also asked that everyone be aware as you move about the city. Commissioner Alysha Nachtigall also expressed her condolences and asked that everyone be safe. Michael Sullivan discussed the pedestrian/bicycle bridge over the estuary and wanted a status update as well as what the bridge landing options were in Oakland. He hoped there would be funding for this project in the Infrastructure Bill that had just passed. Denyse Trepanier, Board President for Bike Walk Alameda, discussed the sad tragic passing of Alameda County Supervisor Wilma Chan and how she was now one of the too many people who have died in traffic collisions. She also discussed the Memorial Ride that was planned. 5. Consent Calendar None 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Review and Comment on School Street Safety (Discussion Item) Lisa Foster, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5210434&GUID=DABCODOF-3768- B1E-9039-4D56689524B8&FullText=1. Public Comments for #6A There were no public comments. Commissioner Clarifying Questions, Discussion, and Comments for #6A Chair Soules asked where was the best place the public could engage on this topic. Staff Member Foster discussed reaching out to the principal of your school or your child's school and saying you want to see the Safe Routes to School Program at your or your child's school. | TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-11-17 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, November 17, 2021 Time: Chair Samantha Soules convened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Location: Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 codified at Government Code Section 54953, Transportation Commissioners can attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allows public participation via Zoom. Legistar Link: ttps://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811337&GUID=55BD7254-0A79-471E- 9760-3COE243F3935&Options=info/&Search= 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Yuen and Commissioners Nachtigall, Hans, Kohlstrand and Weitze. Absent: Commissioner Randy Rentschler 2. Agenda Changes None. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5210433&GUID=7ABD3D66-2823- -496F-8237-1570FE110518&FullText=1. 4. Announcements/ Public Comments Chair Soules expressed her sadness and sympathy for the recent death of Alameda County Supervisor Wilma Chan who was killed in a vehicle-pedestrian collision. She spoke on the important work and accomplishments done by Supervisor Chan and of the urgency of the Vision Zero Plan. Vice-Chair Tina Yuen also discussed the travesty of Wilma Chan's death and made a call for safety on Alameda streets. | TransportationCommission/2021-11-17.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,10 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 10 | Commissioner Kohlstrand discussed charging for parking at Seaplane Lagoon and wanted to make sure it was equal at the other ferries as well. She also agreed with separating parking enforcement from police duties and was ready to endorse this recommendation. Staff Member Foster addressed the public comment about ALPRs reading window placards, this issue would not be a problem. Chair Soules provided input on considerations for lower operations and maintenance costs, and to consider electrification and equity issues, especially with curb management. She wanted to see a privacy policy that reflected the city's values to not introduce risk and to offer a cost-effective parking payment program. She also wanted vendors to meet PII compliance and to look at San Francisco and BART for their privacy policy. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to endorse the City Council's Adoption of the Parking Program and Fund Reorganization and Moving Parking Enforcement from Police to Public Works. Chair Soules seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 5- 0. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Chair Soules reminded everyone to watch out for Trick or Treaters this Halloween and that APD would do a free car seat assessment. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 10:22 p.m. | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 9 | Staff Member Foster introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5182989&GUID=FBA40E71-EB91- 45E6-B7B4-1F790A336070&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6D Chair Soules asked about parking enforcement at Harbor Bay Ferry and wanted to know if this would relieve APD and be more cost effective. Staff Member Foster answered yes and that more staffing would help. Enforcing parking time limits by hand was difficult. Public Comment for #6D Carmen Reid was concerned about having paid parking at Seaplane Lagoon and wanted it to be free to address equity issues. Carol Gottstein expressed concern for how ALPRs (Automated License Plate Readers) would look at the plates of cars that didn't have handicap plates but instead had a handicap placard in the window. Christy Cannon promoted the new bus line, #78, that would serve the Seaplane Lagoon. It would go from Fruitvale BART through Alameda to the Seaplane Lagoon. She also pointed out that having paid parking would be a major motivation to use that bus. Jim Strehlow felt that parking places were being reduced too much all over the island. He was also 100 percent against the use of ALPRs and wanted the police to continue to enforce parking rules. Commissioner Comments and Discussion for #6D Vice Chair Yuen endorsed the staff recommendation. She did want to focus on and tie in equity to make sure that low-income groups would not be disproportionally affected by parking fees or fines. She added that police focus should be on crime and that parking enforcement would not be the best use of their time. | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 8 | 6C. Review and Comment on the Draft Climate Adaptation and Hazard Mitigation Plan (Danielle Mieler, Sustainability, and Resilience Manager) (Discussion Item) Danielle Mieler, Sustainability and Resilience Manager, introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5182988&GUID=446D7CFB-1B78- 4177-819F-50203E0C9CA4&FullText=1. Public Comments for #6C Jim Strehlow discussed the issues around tsunami evacuation planning for the island. Chair Soules pointed out emergency planning tools and education that were available on the city's website. Commissioner Comments and Discussion for #6C Commissioner Kohlstrand wanted to know if currently there were no lifelines designated to get off the island. Staff Member Mieler said as of now that was correct. Commissioner Kohlstrand agreed with establishing lifelines as a high priority. She encouraged more planning for natural disasters and having different alternatives for getting off the island. Staff Member Mieler discussed different scenarios and what had been planned. Staff Member Payne noted that the state has modeled the ability to evacuate for a tsunami and showed it is possible within the timeframe needed. Chair Soules was concerned about tsunamis and wanted more coordination with AC Transit, especially at Alameda Point. She also wants more outreach, especially to seniors. 6D. Endorse the City Council's Adoption of Parking Program and Fund Reorganization and Moving Parking Enforcement from Police to Public Works (Lisa Foster, Senior Transportation Coordinator) (Action Item) | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 7 | Commissioner Kohlstrand said she supported this program and thought that it fit in with the city's overall objective of reducing greenhouse gases. She did have concerns about Versailles and San Jose after hearing the comments. She stated that since Versailles and Gibbons were used as collectors they needed to be evaluated as part of the street classifications in the General Plan update. She wanted staff to do more exploration in the neighborhoods around San Jose and Versailles, and to see if Pearl could be a better alternative to Versailles. Commissioner Weitze wanted to see how this program would work in a post-COVID world for at least a year. He pointed out that it was confusing at the intersections where Slow Streets end and wanted to see better signage here. Commissioner Nachtigall was in support of the Slow Streets Program. She also wanted to see signage that clarified where the slow streets began/ended and for them to connect to the Cross Alameda Trail in JSOSP. Vice Chair Yuen supported the staff's recommendations and thanked everyone for their comments. She recommended that staff keep the survey open to gather additional comments for the remainder of the year. Commissioner Weitze expressed concern for fatigue if people felt that a street was being cut off for them, and that frustrated drivers were not safe drivers. Chair Soules supported the original concept but struggled with the extension due to the skewed data and issues with inequities. She wanted the parallel streets to be considered and wanted to follow established processes with more community outreach. Commissioner Weitze wanted Pearl to be studied but did not want to remove Versailles. Vice Chair Yuen wanted to see more data collected through the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) process to leverage the existing planning process and use the more traditional approach to outreach. She wanted to study Versailles as part of the ATP process. Chair Soules made a motion to approve the staff's recommendation with the amendments to evaluate Pearl St as an … | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 6 | Jay Garfinkle thought this study was scientifically unsound, the data was biased, the whole effort was misleading, and that the public was being manipulated. Cyndy Johnson, Bike Walk Alameda, expressed her support for the staff's recommendation to extend and enhance the Slow Streets Program. She discussed all the ways this program had benefited Alameda and wanted the expansion of the program to include connections to Jean Sweeney Park (JSOSP). Michael Sullivan was excited to hear that the program might expand. He suggested adding more barricades and wanted to see the slow streets connected to form a network. Cameron Holland, Bike Walk Alameda, discussed what an asset this program had been for Alameda. She thought this program was a great way to combat speeding and wanted to see better signage on the Slow Streets. She urged the board to approve the staff's recommendation. Carmen Reid expressed concern about San Jose, especially by Chestnut and Willow, and thought that the slow street should be removed. Jill Staten wanted to see Versailles Street removed from the program. She cited that on the survey over 50 percent of residents on this street wanted it removed. Denyse Trepanier, Bike Walk Alameda, thanked the staff and thought the program had been a success. She discussed how this program was in line with fighting climate change. Jeanne Lahaie voiced her support for the Slow Streets Program. She also voiced her concern for the intersections at Bayview, Shoreline, and Broadway and wanted to see more barricades for the bike lanes. Jim Strehlow thought this was a failed experiment and that the program encouraged bad habits on non-slow streets. Jen Whatley doubted and had concerns about the survey results. She also felt that the barricades were a distraction and that there was more of an impact on side streets than acknowledged. She felt like the citizens of Alameda were being tricked. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6B | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 5 | 6B. Endorse the City Council's Adoption of the Slow Streets Recommendations (Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator) (Action Item) Rochelle Wheeler, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5182987&GUID=6B504F66-005A- 46C2-BEF4-BAA9D3A49881&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6B Commissioner Weitze asked about the stats on the reduction of collisions. He also asked that staff clarify why Versailles was chosen and maintained as a Slow Street. Staff Member Wheeler discussed the reduction in collision numbers. She then explained the criteria and reasons why Versailles was chosen as a Slow Street. Chair Soules asked if the staff's recommendation was an all-or-nothing endorsement. She reminded the commission that amendments could come after public comments. Staff Member Wheeler said this was just the staff's recommendation. The commission could modify this in any way, remove a street or change a street segment. Commissioner Weitze wanted to know if Pearl Street could be an alternative choice to Versailles. Staff Member Wheeler explained why Versailles was a better choice over Pearl Street. Commissioner Michael Hans wanted to know why Orion had such negative feedback and what criteria would have to be met for a Slow Street to be removed. Staff Member Wheeler discussed that given how short the Orion Slow Street is, few people are using it, and therefore there is not so much negative feedback as a lack of strong support to maintain it. For criteria, staff looked at the traffic statistics, plus public comment to make a determination. Public Comments for #6B | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 4 | Staff Member Foster addressed the car racing concerns, and said that the commission could direct them to add actions specific to car racing. She discussed that it was a data-based map and that she would double check the data. Chair Soules discussed how the data had been collected and that it was dependent on the public input. She wanted to know if that was a fair assessment. Staff Member Foster said that along with police reports for data they also were using See Click Fix. Since some people did not file police reports, they looked at other ways of collecting data. Vice Chair Yuen recommended double-checking the data and how the high injury corridors were identified. She also wanted to see a separate map of the near misses. Commissioner Alysha Nachtigall discussed her experience of living on Buena Vista and which areas needed attention. Commissioner Weitze discussed improvements planned for city vehicles and felt that would require a lot of money with not much gain. He also felt that "alcohol adjacent areas" should also be included in the section about collisions. He wanted to see Alameda Police be on board and supportive of automatic speed readers and felt that staff had done a great job with outreach. Commissioner Nachtigall thanked staff and everyone involved for their hard work on this plan. She was happy to see that equity had been included when discussing traffic safety and supported the time frame being reduced by five years. She looked forward to seeing the emphasis on education and the potential Infrastructure Rapid Response Program. Chair Soules supported this bold and aggressive target to try to reach. She believed that design leveled the playing field and technology was a worthwhile investment, which would have long- term impacts. She also believed that data integrity was important because of environmental justice and would skew against disadvantaged communities. Vice Chair Yuen thanked staff for their leadership on this great plan. She was excited to see the plan's implementation to make Alameda safe… | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 3 | Jay Garfinkle was concerned that the 2035 goal was too far away and that this plan removed personal responsibility and put too much emphasis on system changes. He wanted the staff and Public Works to look into the effect construction has on collisions. Cyndy Johnsen, Bike Walk Alameda, expressed her support for the Vision Zero Plan. She discussed how for too long the emphasis had been on cars and thought this plan was a good move away from being a car-centric culture. Carmen Reid brought attention to streets that needed repair, specifically on Lafayette between Clinton and Encinal, also portions of Encinal Avenue between Grand Street and Park Street. She suggested additional signage and lights to help with speeding. She also suggested a robust repainting campaign to make crosswalks more visible. Karen Bey from the Fifth Street Neighborhood group was concerned that the plan did not address the car racing that was happening on the West End and Fifth Street. She discussed safety requests that would help tackle illegal racing. Jim Strehlow believed that system changes would never be able to eliminate drunk driver/pedestrian/cyclist collisions. He also questioned and had issues about how they captured the data, he did not think it was the fault of the corridors but the people who used them instead. Marilyn Alwan supported Karen Bey's comments and asked for proactive actions for Fifth Street. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6A Vice Chair Yuen pointed out that the High Injury Corridor Map from the plan was different than what was on the website. She asked that it be reconciled before the plan was finalized. Staff Member Foster said that she would follow up to make sure which one was the correct one and would get that fixed. Commissioner Kohlstrand thought the plan was a great effort and supported moving the goal to 2035 and cautioned the need for adequate budgeting. She also wanted staff to look into car racing on slow streets, design changes cannot change bad behavior but there were things they could do. She… | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 2 | https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5182985&GUID=6CFE355D-9085- 46A7-84A4-6FB800501F57&FullText=1. Commissioner Scott Weitze clarified his comments for Agenda item 6-C, his concern was for the scheduling, he felt the scheduling could be better. Commissioner Rebecca Kohlstrand clarified her comments for Agenda item 6-B. Commissioner Weitze made a motion to approve the minutes with these edits and Vice-Chair Tina Yuen seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 4-0, Commissioners Nachtigall and Hans abstained due to their absence at this meeting. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Endorse the City Council's Adoption of the Vision Zero Action Plan (Lisa Foster, Senior Transportation Coordinator) (Action Item) Lisa Foster, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5182986&GUID=2C8EE9A4-BCB9- 4772-AAFD-3E9D1F4C119C&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6A Commissioner Weitze asked about the socially vulnerable area around Webster and the Webster Tube since there was not much of a population there and asked if another analysis has been done since the map updates. Staff Member Foster said they had not done another analysis since removing certain areas but they were planning on updating the Socially Vulnerable Map. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about the High-Injury Corridor Map and wanted to know why the number differed online from what was in the plan. Staff Member Foster said she would double-check that information and make sure they had the most recent map. Public Comments for #6A | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-10-27 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Special Meeting Wednesday, October 27, 2021 Time: Chair Samantha Soules convened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. Location: Pursuant to Assembly Bill 361 codified at Government Code Section 54953, Transportation Commissioners can attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allows public participation via Zoom. Legistar Link: https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=898688&GUID=FAAC6994-94BA-4EED- 96B5-18C9183B36BD&Options=info/&Search= 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Yuen and Commissioners Nachtigall, Kohlstrand, Hans and Weitze. Absent: Commissioner Randy Rentschler 2. Agenda Changes None. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5182984&GUID=3D056E3F-2689- 40BE-8934-A82B73813818&FullText=1. 4. Announcements / Public Comments Yahav Kimel Green, a 9-year-old Alameda resident, expressed the need for more crosswalks or slow signs on Wood or Chapin Street to make it easier and safer for children walking to school. Jill Staten brought up issues with the Slow Streets and did not feel that they were any safer. 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Approve Draft Meeting Minutes - September 22, 2021 (Action Item) | TransportationCommission/2021-10-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,10 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 10 | 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 9:05 p.m. 10 TC Minutes 9/22/21 | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 9 | Staff Member Payne pointed out where the update for the Oakland/Alameda Access Project was located, page 23, and then discussed that project and timeline. She also clarified that the before and after data for Otis was based on quantitative analysis. Chair Soules added that she would follow up with Staff Member Payne about Orion St. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6C Commissioner Weitze wanted to know what success for Line 78 would be. He felt that it was a difficult time to be starting a bus line during a pandemic, and he expressed concerned that people were hesitating to get on a bus right now. Staff Member Payne answered that she had not seen any of the parameters on what was needed for that bus line to be successful. She added that there is a good faith effort to keep it beyond the first year. Commissioner Weitze wanted to further discuss the Slow Streets map from the presentation. He discussed what he had observed about slow streets near where he lived, Woodstock, and felt that at the end of slow streets they did not create safe pedestrian behavior. He wanted to know if staff had looked at what happens when slow streets end and what people do. Staff Member Wheeler said that was something that could be incorporated into their work. She added that a common response they had received on the survey was that people wanted a network of slow streets created. She discussed how that could address the issue of slow street endpoints. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Commissioner Kohlstrand wanted to know if there was a date set up to initiate the sub-committee discussions on the technical report for the Mobility Element. Staff Payne stated that was being delayed until next year until after the AC Transit Recovery Plan and the Active Transportation Plan approval. She explained what other input was needed since it all would build on each other. Staff Member Payne pointed out that it was National Roundabout Week. Chair Soules pointed out that it was Walk and Roll to school on 10/6 and reminded everyone that th… | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 8 | outreach. Public outreach would start late this year or early next year and she then laid out the phases and what that entailed. This was a major effort and they would be applying for grant funding to complete and construct. She also explained what information they look for and gather during the evaluation. Chair Soules asked with the investment in bike infrastructure, were they collecting data on bike counts. Had they been doing surveys, travel diaries, or counts in mode shift? Staff Member Wheeler answered that they had done a statistically significant survey asking about mode choice. She did acknowledge that a travel diary would be the best survey and they could do those in the future. She also pointed out the bike counter on the Cross Alameda Trail but due to the pandemic, those numbers aren't a true reflection. She discussed other surveys and numbers they had been looking at for future comparisons. Staff Member Payne added that working on better data collection with new technologies was something they would be working on as part of the Smart City Master Plan effort. Chair Soules discussed how data collected intersected with their equity issues. She wanted to see if there was actual uptake in what they were offering as the transportation options to a larger population. Staff Member Wheeler discussed how the statistically significant surveys would consider the population diversity. She also added that after projects were done they collected data as well. Public Comments for #6C Jill Staten discussed how important before and after data was, you needed to have good baseline data. She did not believe that survey data was good data, what really mattered was the observational data. She encouraged more observational data and fewer survey data. Jim Strehlow wanted more clarification on where the work on Orion Street would take place. He also had concerns about safety on the new bike lane on Clement. He also wanted an update on when the Oakland/Alameda Access Project would begin. He also agreed with the previous speak… | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 7 | Commissioner Weitze stated that he would vote against this resolution strictly on the idea that he did not believe that an on/off again pedestrian recall was safer. He saw Vision Zero as important and believed this resolution was the opposite of that. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to approve/endorse the staff's recommendation with the amendment that the wording change to "community mixed-use/Commercial" to be consistent with the staff report. Chair Soules seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 3-1 with Commissioner Weitze voting against and Commissioner Rentschler being absent. 6C. Status Report on Transportation - September 2021 (Discussion Item) Staff Member Payne gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5137023&GUID=F0B7864D-20DE- 402B-AC24-FFFFC8AF4048. Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator, Lisa Foster, Transportation Planner, and Staff Member Vance also gave updates on projects. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6C Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about the repaving and repainting along Buena Vista and if it would include restriping near Maya Lin School. Would they be establishing crosswalks near that location? She also wanted to know the timeframe for that project. Staff Member Vance said the project that just wrapped up was not a resurfacing project so they did not add crosswalks at that time. The next phase would include a designer who would evaluate accessible curb ramps, pavement markings, and that is when they would look at that intersection. This will take place sometime next year, in the fall and the winter. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked staff to respond to the public comment who was concerned for that intersection and give them an update on the timing of that project. Commissioner Weitze asked for a completion date for the evaluation (bike lane, road diet) of the Lincoln/Pacific corridor. Staff Member Payne discussed how the project had been expanded a… | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 6 | Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6B Commissioner Rentschler wanted to know if this was something that should be revisited. He did not want to create friction between modes and have people angry needlessly. He also wanted to know if this didn't work, what was the plan. Director Smith explained how recall was already implemented on Park and Webster currently and that this policy would allow for the implementation of the time of day component, which is the functional change of this policy. They would only revisit it if they were directed to do so. Commissioner Weitze first endorsed Bike Walk Alameda's statement and letter about signal improvements for bikes on Appezzato Parkway; he thought that was way overdue. He explained his concerns with the "sometimes this and sometimes that" signals, especially in locations where they are teaching walking signals to children. He thought it should be, you push a button, and then it's safe to walk. He worried that having recall different at different times could be confusing and possibly dangerous. He was against the time of day recall. Commissioner Kohlstrand agreed with Commissioner Weitze's observations and was also struggling with the time of day concept. She thought that having recall all the time along Park and Webster would be good. She also wanted to know why the intersection of Park and Otis was left off the pedestrian map, she pointed out what a busy pedestrian intersection that was. Other than that she was supportive of the staff recommendation. Director Smith explained what decisions and criteria had gone into the pedestrian map. *Commissioner Rentschler had to leave the meeting. He had originally made a motion to approve this resolution but since he had to leave Commissioner Kohlstrand made the motion instead. Chair Soules appreciated the red-line and she liked the time of day technology. She discussed how if the lights were not timed right, you would see drivers trying to "beat the light". She also believed this would allow balance for the different modes… | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 5 | Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6B Commissioner Rentschler wanted staff to be able to maximize use of available tools for optimizing signal timing. He also made note that despite the City's goal for mode shift, most people currently drive. He understood there was pressure on Public Works to reach the mode shift goals but he was opposed to creating needless wait time for drivers as a means to get there. He believed that actuated pedestrian signal use was most efficient. He discussed other ways they could improve the system as it was now. Commissioner Kohlstrand generally agreed with the revisions that had been made. She then asked for a clarification on the wording in the redline resolution. Director Smith clarified that the staff report and the presentation were correct, and that the intent is to use land use designation for community/commercial She apologized for the mistake and noted that the resolution would be updated for Council's consideration. Public Comments for #6B Alexis Kreig strongly opposed prioritizing cars' convenience over allowing pedestrians to be able to cross when the light is green. She thought that since it was car emissions that were causing the climate crisis it was unconscionable to be prioritizing driver convenience over pedestrian safety and access. Jim Strehlow highly commended the rewording of this resolution and thought it was very workable. He also endorsed Commissioner Rentschler's words as well and appreciated the work done by Russ Thompson. Denyse Trepanier, Board President for Bike Walk Alameda, wanted to have a larger conversation about how they would want their intersections to behave since there were so many competing voices. She thought that they had already established in the Vision Zero plan that they would not prioritize driver convenience so she was surprised to see that as a priority in this policy. She was not opposed to this policy but believed it did not get to the conversation they should be having. TC Minutes 5 9/22/21 | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 4 | Crossing that the rest of the project would not fizzle. What planning and forethought had been given to funding and future support. Mr. Evans wasn't sure if there was a great answer other than planning for the years ahead and raising expectations, which they were doing. He discussed the other agencies that were involved and believed this was a Golden Age in rail improvement. Each improvement would inspire people and groups to want the next one. Commissioner Randy Rentschler wanted to know if there was any other city that had the same potential as Alameda to get another potential station. Mr. Evans stated the reasons why Alameda was a good choice. Public Comments for #6A Jim Strehlow discussed how he liked the studies that showed the differences between East and West Bay. He then discussed his history of living and working in the Bay Area and how transportation and commuting around was difficult and that sometimes a personal vehicle was the best option. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6A Commissioner Kohlstrand discussed some of the limitations for high-speed rail in the area, the main one being no dedicated funding source. For this project, she believed everyone in Northern California needed to come together to identify how to get these things done. Also, they would need to work with the federal government for potential funding. 6B. Endorse the City Council's Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Signalized Intersection Equity Policy (Action Item) Erin Smith, Public Works Director, introduced the item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5137022&GUID=61E66B31-15AE- 49F5-A8F2-793575E7CCDE&FullText=1. Director Smith introduced Russ Thompson, Interim City Engineer, Robert Vance, Public Works Senior Engineer, and Ryan Dole, a Transportation Engineer with Kimley Horn who were available for questions and input. TC Minutes 4 9/22/21 | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 3 | Commissioner Weitze wanted to know how this project would be different from the High-Speed Rail project that California had been developing, which in his opinion had been a disaster. He wanted to know what lessons they had learned from that project. He also wanted to know how much faster this would be if they just focused on one thing and then worried about the connections. Mr. Evans said they had learned a lot from that situation. He explained how and why this project was different. He saw their analysis as using existing highly functional systems and making improvements to these existing systems. He then explained what their findings had discovered, to serve the megaregion this project would likely start in the inner Bay Area but it would still serve the larger area. Vice Chair Yuen wanted to know more about potential impacts to the City of Alameda, such as potential service stops. She also wanted to know what information they should be gathering about potential stops and the best way to share that information. Mr. Evans said they would rely on the involvement of city staff and this commission to know where they thought service stops should be. Then they could match that up with their findings. Staff Member Payne discussed the work and research staff had done to best locate and decide on potential service stops. She discussed other ways they could gather information and was open to other suggestions. Ms. Franklin discussed the community engagement that BART had done to better understand service needs and aspirations. She would alert staff about their next survey and would share those findings. Chair Soules brought up the RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation) and the changing population that would be happening and wanted to make sure those demographic changes were captured. Mr. Evans discussed how the Transbay Crossing was the centerpiece of this project and how this project would enable so much more. It was not just a way to get to and from San Francisco and he further discussed how this would serve differen… | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 2 | Wood, 9th, and Buena Vista. She added that it was hard to cross there and that cars drove by without stopping and at high speeds. Jill Staten discussed the slow street on Versailles and thought that this street was not well chosen for the program. She explained the many issues with the traffic that she had noted and that drivers would become frustrated. 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Draft Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting from Wednesday, July 28, 2021 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5137020&GUID=EE3E1FEB-85D0- 3AF-985C-5744F51CD6B4&FullText=1. Gail Payne, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, corrected that Commissioner Hans had been present at the meeting. Commissioner Rebecca Kohlstrand made a motion to approve the minutes with the correction and Chair Soules seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 4- 0, Vice-Chair Yuen abstained since she had been absent at the meeting. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Discuss Link21: New Regional Rail/Transbay Rail Crossing Project Update (Discussion Item) Staff Member Payne introduced Nicole Franklin with BART and Alex Evans of HNTB who gave the presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5137021&GUID=8186601E-EB9D- 4ED2-8402-B67366E4B6C5&FullText=1 Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6A Commissioner Kohlstrand wanted more information on the vehicle types that would be used. She wanted to know how the technology would link together and what would need to be electrified. Mr. Evans explained about the new generation electric vehicles they were working on and how Caltrans would adopt that technology. He explained what was being electrified and what systems could use both diesel and electricity. TC Minutes 2 9/22/21 | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-09-22 | 1 | Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, September 22, 2021 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners were able to attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to the public during the meeting. Legistar Link: https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811336&GUID=3E8F230B-9CBC-47B0- 8633-082B444CD1D6&Options=info/&Search=. 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Yuen and Commissioners Kohlstrand*, Weitze*, Rentschler. Absent: Commissioner Michael Hans and Alysha Nachtigall. *Kohlstrand and Weitze arrived after the initial roll call. 2. Agenda Changes Chair Samantha Soules said they would delay item 5 until they had a quorum. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5137019&GUID=B567D985-136F- 4FC9-B85D-073F5DCFEFDC&FullText=1. 4. Announcements / Public Comments Chair Soules thanked Vice Chair Tina Yuen for stepping into the role of Vice Chair. She then expressed her deepest condolences to the family of the man who was killed recently in a traffic fatality on Fernside. She discussed the important work that staff was doing with the Vision Zero Plan. Hannah Green expressed her safety concerns about crossing the street on Buena Vista with her children near Chapin Street. She asked that crosswalks be painted at the intersection of Chapin, TC Minutes 1 9/22/21 | TransportationCommission/2021-09-22.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,11 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 11 | with AC Transit on this issue. He also wanted the city to create educational materials on how pedestrians should dress when walking around at night. Chair Soules reminded everyone that school started on August 6 and that meant many people figuring out new morning commutes. She encouraged everyone to reach out to bring awareness in the community to help everyone stay safe. She then thanked Vice Chair Nachtigall for her hard work as Vice Chair. Vice Chair Nachtigall thanked everyone and said it had been an honor. She concurred with everyone being aware of children going to and from school and parents figuring out school pick up and drop offs. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 9:38 p.m. TC Meeting Minutes 11 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,10 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 10 | 6D. Discuss the Alameda General Plan Update, including the Mobility Element and Transportation Element Appendix (Discussion Item) Director Thomas introduced this item. The staff report and attachments can be found at ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037422&GUID=7BF1A807-4CFB- 4402-94F3-DE5D4BAA1B1A&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions and Discussions and Comments for #6D Chair Soules discussed what she would want to see at a subcommittee meeting and she wanted to see the timeline for the street categorization. Director Thomas explained more about the appendix maps they had sent AC Transit. He also discussed the public comments they had received as well as comments from other boards and commissions. He then explained the next steps. Commissioner Kohlstrand discussed a few wording changes she wanted to see. She wanted to have another subcommittee meeting on the Mobility Element appendix. She was not comfortable incorporating these maps, she had many concerns about Clement Avenue. Chair Soules and Commissioner Weitze concurred about having another subcommittee meeting. Director Thomas discussed what would be helpful. Public Comments for item #6D Jim Strehlow took issue with the language around converting gas to electricity for new construction as well as existing buildings. Director Thomas said they were still taking public comments on these policies. He pointed out the next public hearing for the Planning Board would be September 14. He explained more about the Electrification Ordinance and how Climate Change was impacting everything including our use of natural gas. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Jim Strehlow discussed how confusing bike only and bus only lanes were on Webster Street at Willie Stargell Avenue. He wanted to allow bicycles in the bus lane and wanted a discussion TC Meeting Minutes 10 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 9 | Public Comments for #6C Bill Chapin, an Alameda resident, gave his support of these amendments. He also discussed his background with a Master's Degree in Urban Planning and that his master's project was on minimum parking requirements. Jim Strehlow discussed his concerns with the electric vehicle charging program with the state having brownout warnings. He did not understand the move to more electrical and wanted to know how the bureau of electricity was going to generate more electricity. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6C Commissioner Weitze asked about User Permits and how would those interact with the required disabled access parking spaces. So if a place wanted to turn their parking lot into outdoor sitting. How would that work? Staff Member McGuire explained how the code was written and that in the Use Permit review is when they could make requirements for accessible parking. Each situation would be different. Director Thomas explained more about what a Use Permit allowed and what impacts the staff would consider. The staff has to make findings and they have the authority to make conditions of approval. Staff Member McGuire added that they have a pending Use Permit right now that brought up this issue. The conditions are where they could add that accessible parking was required or a rideshare drop-off space. Director Thomas discussed how informative and helpful the meeting with the Commission of Disabled People had been. Chair Soules was happy to see the electrification element and agreed that it was important that they find a way to keep up with the need for more electricity. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to approve the Draft Recommendation to the City Council and Commissioner Weitze seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a show of hands and the motion passed 5-0, Commissioner Rentschler had to leave the meeting before the vote. TC Meeting Minutes 9 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 8 | Chair Soules asked for clarification on what would happen over the proposed two years. Staff Member Wheeler explained that over the next year the staff would monitor and make tweaks on parking and work on design guidelines for the parklets. Then over the next year, they would finish out the Active Transportation Plan, Vision Zero Plan, and their planning. Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning Building and Transportation, added that the two years would allow the staff and the community to better understand the final design that Park and Webster St should be. He discussed the items that had come up during this meeting only that needed to be addressed sooner rather than later. Chair Soules appreciated his comments but her concerns were based on the people who wanted the four lanes back. She wanted to acknowledge and recognize the voices who did not like the changes. The planning process that is traditionally used would allow more public outreach. She did not want to just serve half of the community. She also wanted to know the demographics of the survey results to make sure a group of people was not being left out, and thought that would be fairer. Director Thomas agreed. Chair Soules made a motion to accept and approve all staff's recommendations for the Commercial Streets Program and Commissioner Weitze seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 6-0. 6C. Recommend Approval of Draft Amendments to Alameda Municipal Code Section 30-7 Off-Street Parking and Loading Space Regulations to improve environmental quality in Alameda and implement the City of Alameda Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and Transportation Choices Plan (Action Item). Brian McGuire, Planner with Planning Building and Transportation, introduced the item and gave the presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037421&GUID=AC653E42-7C7E- 4DFD-A744-96A04E1573D6&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6C No commissioners had quest… | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 7 | Staff Member Wheeler explained the work that DABA had done to control late-night activities on Alameda Avenue. Chair Soules said the two-year timeframe concerned her. She said she would be more supportive of one year versus two years. She discussed the survey results and that parking enforcement should be monitored more as well as safety and design guidelines. She discussed the importance of really looking at who was being inconvenienced by these changes and not discount how they had traditionally done things. Commissioner Kohlstrand said if they wanted to put something permanent in place then they would need to monitor the temporary situation for another year. The second-year could be a more public process of moving into a more permanent process. She also had concerns about trying to put a bike lane on Park Street. TC Meeting Minutes 7 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 6 | Joan Stebbins, the owner of Honey Salon and DABA member, discussed how much businesses still needed the Commercial Streets Program to stay in place. She implored the commission to keep it. She also discussed all the benefits of the program she enjoyed. She agreed that with more time they could make it look more cohesive. She was in full support of staff's recommendations. Sabrina Cazarez, the owner of Twirl, said she was in full support of the parklets. The parklets allowed businesses to survive as well as created a sense of community and helped with safety concerns. Denyse Trepanier, Board President for Bike Walk Alameda, discussed the importance of being able to reimagine and redesign our public spaces. She added that with all the changes that had happened and the changes that were in the works it would be too disruptive to go back to the way things were. She thanked the staff for their thoughtfulness and hoped they were given the chance to continue this work. Linda Asbury, Executive Director of the West End Business Association (WABA), said the board of directors and members of WABA were in favor of extending the program to December 2022. She discussed the benefits for the many businesses on the West End and thanked the staff for all their hard work. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6B Commissioner Weitze wanted to know how many short-term parking spots would be lost on Webster St. He cautioned that those spots would be treated as permanent spots and he thought the short-term spots were nice to have. Staff Member Wheeler did not have an exact number but after talking with businesses they were interested in keeping 4-5 spots along Webster. The staff would still want to consider loading zones and green zones. Chair Soules asked for clarification on the program timeframe of the recommendation. Staff Member Wheeler clarified that the recommendation was for two years from this October, which would then be until October 2023. Commissioner Kohlstrand thanked the staff for all their hard work on this program… | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 5 | 6B. Recommendations for Commercial Streets (Action Item) Staff Member Wheeler introduced this item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037420&GUID=2B5A74EA-642E- 4F2F-994C-30CE45C3454E&FullText=1. Public Comments for #6B Cyndy Johnsen, an Alameda resident, gave her support for the continuation and improvement of the Commercial Street Program. She also encouraged that protected bike lanes be incorporated into the program. She discussed her own experiences as a cyclist. Kathy Weber, Executive Director to the Downtown Area Business Association (DABA), discussed the many benefits of the Commercial Street Program, that City Staff had worked so hard on for the businesses during this difficult time. She thought that continuing the program was vital to businesses as they continued to navigate through the pandemic. She was in full support of staff's recommendations. Jim Strehlow thought the parklet structures blocked some businesses' storefronts. He also did not think dining near busy streets was enjoyable. He discussed his other concerns such as backed-up traffic and wanted someone to measure how many people no longer come to Alameda because of the closed streets. He knew many people who no longer visited Alameda. John Frangoulis, owner of Park Street Tavern and member of DABA, thanked the city for all the support they had given restaurants and bars. He supported the continued use of the program and believed that if they made this permanent then more bike lanes would come which would allow people to feel safer. He hoped they would approve all the proposed projects. Curtis Azevedo, an Alameda resident, thought the parklets were a spark of joy during a dark time. He thought instead of dedicated bike lanes they should consider more slow streets and traffic circles. He discussed how much he had enjoyed the slow streets as a cyclist. Ron Mooney, the owner of Daisy's, fully supported the Commercial Street concept and process. He wanted… | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 4 | Mr. Alston discussed the difference between modern roundabouts and traffic circles. He went into the details and the geometric space needed for each to work. He said the main difference with traffic circles is that they are more appropriate for low volume, local streets. Commissioner Kohlstrand discussed her experiences with traffic circles. She felt that they would not have that kind of space in Alameda but that should not keep them from improving safety. She asked if a smaller version could work in those higher volume intersections that have 25 mph speed limits. Mr. Alston discussed the emerging trend of using mini-roundabouts. He explained how they address the space constraint issue, the center aisle is completely traversable and can work in spaces with low-speed limits. He did add that they are usually used in places that have an established history of roundabouts, so people know how they work. Staff Member Payne clarified that the 85 percentile speed was more like 32-35 mph, which was much higher than the actual speed limit. Commissioner Weitze wanted to know what was the typical minimum/maximum for a traffic circle or a mini-roundabout. Mr. Alston explained the physical attributes that mark the difference between traffic circles and roundabouts. Chair Soules said she appreciated the criteria to apply some sort of guidance for future funding. She encouraged the staff to focus on education and outreach to help people understand. Staff Payne confirmed that the commission wanted them to continue this research and work on the remaining arterials and collectors in town. Chair Nachtigall very much wanted them to continue this work. She agreed with Commissioner Kohlstrand about being able to implement them in other ways. She had an appetite for exploring intersections where any sort of circular intersection could work. Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator, discussed the work she had been doing with the Slow Streets Program and how temporary traffic circles had been discussed. The idea was to test out… | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 3 | Gail Payne, Senior Transportation Coordinator, introduced this item and gave a presentation. She also introduced Mike Alston, a consultant with Kittelson & Associates, Inc. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037423&GUID=1BE1750D-6EA2- 4133-A912-638485701722&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6E Chair Soules asked about the Social Vulnerability Index and its update status. Staff Member Payne shared that the update is being covered as part of the Hazard Mitigation Plan update effort. Public Comments for #6E Jim Strehlow was pleased that there was not enough space for roundabouts everywhere. He discussed what his concerns were and called out Pearl Street by Tilden Way as an example of what might get overlooked. He also pointed out that at Otis Drive and Grand Street it was difficult for Fire Engine 1 to make a turn. Staff Member Payne addressed his concerns about roundabouts and this was an initial scan to see what was possible. For the intersection discussed (Tilden/Blanding/Fernside) they would of course take Pearl Street under consideration. Then for Otis and Grand, they did consider that issue, the consultants did make sure it could fit. Mr. Alston discussed all the elements they look at when they evaluated an intersection. He explained what they had studied and looked at for the intersection analysis. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6E Commissioner Kohlstrand wanted to know if smaller traffic circles could work in locations that had been deemed too unsuitable for roundabouts. Instead of focusing on those intersections, she wanted to focus on intersections that could still use a traffic circle. Staff Member Payne answered that this study had been focused on the modern roundabout, our fatal and severe injury collisions, and where those took place. They happened on the busier and wider streets. She explained more about why they had focused on the modern roundabouts. TC Meeting Minutes 3 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 2 | ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037417&GUID=C108F591-B9D7- 4FAF-9DF2-2CC39C5426ED&FullText=1. Commissioner Weitze moved to approve as is and Vice-Chair Nachtigall seconded. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 5-0 with Commissioner Hans abstained since he had been absent. 5B. Approve Meeting Minutes - May 26, 2021 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037418&GUID=E1EF96FE-5C3C- 4C78-BEF2-DA7C32B4F47D&FullText=1. Commissioner Kohlstrand moved to approve the minutes as is and Vice-Chair Nachtigall seconded. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 6-0. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Elect Chair and Vice-Chair of the Transportation Commission (Action Item) The staff report can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037419&GUID=EFD295E3-0188- 4D90-820E-A52EB8BC601D&Options=&Search= Public Comments for #6A There were no public speakers. Chair Samantha Soules opened the floor for nominations. Vice-Chair Nachtigall nominated Chair Soules as Chair for the next term and Commissioner Weitze seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the nomination passed 6-0. Chair Soules thanked everyone for their confidence in her leadership. Chair Soules nominated Commissioner Yuen for Vice-Chair, she had discussed this with her before the meeting and could confirm her interest in the role. Commissioner Rentschler seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the nomination passed 6-0. 6E. Discuss Citywide Roundabout Analysis Results (Discussion Item) TC Meeting Minutes 2 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-07-28 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, July 28, 2021 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-08-21, Transportation Commissioners can attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. Legistar Link: https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811335&GUID=54809A56-6AF9-435D- 311A-81073DAB8EB1&Options=info/&Search= 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Nachtigall and Commissioners Rentschler, Hans, Kohlstrand and Weitze. Absent: Commissioner Yuen. 2. Agenda Changes Chair Soules requested to move item 6E to after item 6A to accommodate the consultant's time. No one objected. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5037416&GUID=9CD69079-4C3B- 4F7D-833A-9428E0160AD5&FullText=1. 4. Announcements/ Public Comments Commissioner Rentschler discussed a deal that Congress was working on that had many benefits for the Bay Area. Commissioner Weitze praised Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) for the system they had set up to reimburse businesses for setting up Electrical Vehicle (EV) charging stations. 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Approve Meeting Minutes of the Special Joint Meeting of the Planning Board and Transportation Commission - May 10, 2021 (Action Item) TC Meeting Minutes 1 July 28, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-07-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,13 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 13 | Commissioner Yuen had also thought about the VMT returning to almost 100 percent in parts of the Bay Area. She wondered what that meant for the future VMT for Alameda and how to keep it low. She saw transit as a way to do that and a way to alleviate fears with Covid measures. Public Comments for #6D Jim Strehlow said they completely ignored the Alameda Oakland Access project. This was a major project over the last 6-8 years. It will highly affect the multimodal travel patterns. He asked that they also identity Orion Street's endpoints. Commissioner Comments and Discussion #6D There were no other comments on this item. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Commissioner Kohlstrand discussed a recent story she heard on NPR about the potential removal of the I-980 Freeway in Downtown Oakland and that it was gaining some interest in moving that project ahead. She wanted to know if Alameda had been involved in that discussion, she believed it would be wise to do SO. Staff Member Wheeler said she had not heard that story but they could reach out to Oakland City Staff. Staff Member Payne agreed they could and should look into that. Jim Strehlow also discussed the potential closure of the I-980 Freeway in Oakland. He could not believe that was a good idea and was going backward. Chair Soules discussed the morning's tragedy at the Santa Clara VTA rail yard in San Jose. She sent her thoughts to the victim's families and everyone in the industry. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Approved Transportation Minutes 13 May 26, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,12 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 12 | Commissioner Kohlstrand asked if it was based on Census Data or some other data. Staff Member Payne said that it was mainly based on Census Data and a combination of various factors. 6D. Status Report on Transportation - May 2021 (Discussion) Staff Member Payne introduced the item and gave a brief presentation with Staff Member Wheeler. The staff report and presentation can be found at http://alameda.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=792bf795-7f1d-41b8-a994- 14e7b34ce277.pdf and http://alameda.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=e03c16e4-945d-47c1-bf9d- 07656ad6a5a7.pdf. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6D Chair Soules said the graphics and the layout had come a long way. She commended the extra effort the staff did to make this more readable. Vice-Chair Nachtigall asked if they were going to be charging for parking right away at the Sea Plane Lagoon ferry terminal. Staff Member Foster said they would not have paid parking in place for when the ferry started but they would be getting it implemented soon. Pay stations will be installed in the coming months. Commissioner Weitze wanted to know what the staff thought about traffic being bad and backed up everywhere except getting on and off the island on the West End. How could they keep that going forward? Staff Member Payne said much of that had to do with the demographics of Alameda, people tend to have jobs where they can telecommute, and schools were not in session. Commissioner Weitze asked if city staff was projecting that to continue since demographics were going in the direction of telecommuting. Staff Member Payne said that was hard to predict but it did present an opportunity to help with congestion on and off the island. Approved Transportation Minutes 12 May 26, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,11 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 11 | Commissioner Yuen thanked Staff Member Foster and city staff for all their work on the Vision Zero Plan and was really pleased with the progress. She asked what city staff had learned from a recent fatality and two severe injuries that happened in the first quarter of 2021. Staff Member Foster said the fatality had been a cyclist and they had done a Post-Collison Site Visit. She discussed the ways they were planning on making the intersection safer and the entire corridor was slated for improvements. The other two collisions still needed to have their Post- Collison Site Visit. Commissioner Yuen said since the data went until 2018 was there any plan to continue to update the crash data and high injury corridors. Staff Member Foster said the plan was to do a full high injury corridor every 5 years. She also discussed other information that would improve and help her studies. Vice-Chair Nachtigall appreciated the data-driven analysis and commended Staff Member Foster, staff, and the consultant team. She found the information easy to read and understand. She stated as the parent of a third-grader the findings in the study were very challenging and unfortunate. She appreciated the new high visibility crosswalks and safety measures, and she was looking forward to seeing the full Vision Zero Action Plan. Commissioner Weitze asked about the crash data in the report and wanted to know specifics about the 33 percent of drivers hitting pedestrians in crosswalks. He wanted to know if that included straight-on collisions and right turns. Staff Member Foster said that was drivers traveling straight, not turning. Commissioner Weitze asked if they had the information about crashes where drivers were turning. Staff Member Foster said she could get that information for him. Commissioner Kohlstrand echoed her fellow commissioners in that this was great work so far. She asked when the Socially Vulnerable Map would be updated. Staff Member Payne said it was happening with the Hazard Mitigation Plan update that was beginning now. App… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,10 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 10 | Vice-Chair Nachtigall believed this was very notable especially with the research that showed that over 40,000 fewer auto trips per week were possible. She was in full support. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to approve the staff recommendation that the City Council Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Documents Necessary to Accept and Allocate $1,555,000 in Grant Funds from the Alameda County Transportation Commission to Complete a Project Initiation Document for the Alameda-Oakland Bicycle-Pedestriar Bridge Project. Commissioner Michael Hans seconded the motion, a vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed 5-0 with Chair Soules having recused herself. 6C. Update on Vision Zero Action Plan Development and Crash Data Analysis (Discussion) Lisa Foster, Transportation Planner, introduced this item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at ttps://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4957784&GUID=CC342571-9648- 4854-9EF6-C939AA16557F&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6C Commissioner Weitze asked if the recent work done at Alameda Point had conformed to all the Vision Zero recommendations. Staff Member Wheeler said they were focusing on as much state-of-the-art infrastructure as they could. Public Comments for #6C Jim Strehlow said that this study did not publish counts of who was at fault, such as poor lighting or someone distracted by their phone. He said with all the different cultures on the island, he wanted to know in what different languages they had created safety information for. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6C Chair Soules said this was a lot of data but thought it had been put forward in a great graphic way. Approved Transportation Minutes 10 May 26, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 9 | Staff Member Wheeler. She believed that this should not be a city lead project but a regional project and felt that Staff Member Wheeler had done the lion's share of this project. She acknowledged that getting a new transit service up and running was really hard and time- consuming. She discussed all the difficulties in getting the water shuttle services up and running and it was the short-term solution. She thought they were in a really good place to move forward with this project. Susie Hufstader echoed what Ms. Trepanier had said about Staff Member Wheeler and her team for all the work she had done shepherding this project forward. This project was overwhelming and it took a lot of work from the city staff. She discussed the importance of really thinking differently about infrastructure and what other cities were doing. She believed this project would be transformative for Alameda. She encouraged the commissioners to speak up about this project to make it a high priority. Cyndy Johnsen also thanked Staff Member Wheeler and staff for working on this gigantic project. She wanted everyone to think about how big and impossible it seemed at one time to have highways across America, and now it's just part of life. The price might seem high but there was no bike infrastructure or the West End that connected to Oakland. She gave other ideas on how to think about bike equity and discussed all the different requirements this bridge had to meet. She hoped there were ways they could work with the Coast Guard and look at design elements to bring the cost down. She was very excited about this project. Jim Strehlow wanted to discuss the Feasibility Study from 2009 that had been a priority for 7 years. He had asked repeatedly for a year now for a project status update from Staff Member Wheeler. He wanted to know how much income had been brought in since Alameda Landing was supposed to contribute $175,000 and he wasn't sure if that was yearly or not. He thought that going from the Main Street ferry terminal to Webster Street w… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 8 | Staff Member Payne said it was during commute time at this point and it was part of the Sea Plane Shift. Commissioner Weitze said that was helpful information but it did not answer his question. He did not understand how the boat cost $1 million and $2 million a year to operate but the bridge cost $200 million in 25 years when they build it. He did not understand why there wasn't a new boat out of Alameda Landing 6 months from now and they just don't run it. Staff Member Wheeler said the medium term option was the water shuttle. She discussed all the effort going into getting a water shuttle and getting a boat in the first place. She also discussed all the ways they had looked into bringing the cost down. Commissioner Weitze asked if this project were to be funded, what kind of population requirements were there for the island. Staff Member Wheeler said they had looked at the projected population based on current zoning and planned projects. She believed they would be looking at the number of people who use the boat, which is also based on employment. She did not anticipate that Alameda had to grow by a certain amount. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about the first forecast for the Pedestrian and Bicycle Demand from 2009 and wanted to know if they would look at that again when it came in for environmental review. Staff Member Wheeler said they had done the Traffic Demand Model with the study they had published this year. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked if the bridge was high enough that it would not have to be raised for the sailboats but just the Coast Guard Cutters. Staff Member Wheeler said when the bridge would be down, the height would be about 65-70 feet above the water and that would allow about 90 percent of sailboats to go underneath it. Public Comments for #6B Denyse Trepanier, with Bike Walk Alameda, gave her support for the staff recommendation that they accept $1.5 million from the county. She also wanted to acknowledge all the work done by Approved Transportation Minutes 8 May 26, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 7 | Commissioner Kohlstrand asked that there be more explanation around the term intersection access equity. Even with all her experience in the transportation field, she had never heard that term. Chair Soules made a motion to bring this agenda item back at the July meeting or according to the schedule that the city staff set with the time needed for revisions before it went to Council, and wanted to reference "signalized" intersection access equity. Commissioner Weitze seconded and a vote was taken by a raise of hands, the motion passed 6-0. 6B. Recommend that the City Council Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute Documents Necessary to Accept and Allocate $1,555,000 in Grant Funds from the Alameda County Transportation Commission to Complete a Project Initiation Document for the Alameda-Oakland Bicycle-Pedestrian Bridge Project (Action) Chair Soules recused herself from this agenda item. Staff Member Wheeler introduced this item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4957783&GUID=809FF584-BBD0- 49BD-8E4C-6F4A45F057E2&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6B Commissioner Weitze asked for clarification on the initial and annual costs of the water taxi. Staff Member Wheeler pointed out that was part of the feasibility study page. She added that it would depend on how frequently the boats were used, who owned the boats, and many other factors that the study did not go into. In general, the potential cost would be around $1 million to initiate the water services and $2 million to operate and maintain it annually. Commissioner Weitze said that he was baffled by the numbers, and he did not understand why those numbers were what they were. Why not just buy the boat tomorrow? Staff Member Payne explained they would have the boat in July, WETA would be starting water shuttle services from the Alameda Main Street ferry terminal for commuters going to Oakland. Commissioner Weitze asked if that was the short ho… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 6 | Director Smith clarified that intersection access equity was not an industry term, and it came out of the Council's referrals. She thought of ways they could broaden that term or clear up the language. She also thought about not defining it and just moving forward with the Council's referrals. Commissioner Yuen said she was challenged by what the goal of the policy was trying to achieve. She wondered if there needed to be some articulation of principals around what was guiding the effort. Director Smith clarified the crux of what they had been going for was to serve the needed time to the users when they were there. This was about detection and actuation in setting signal timing. They did not want to put an undue burden on the people who were actually at the intersection. Commissioner Weitze said he read this document as an allocation of time document as opposed to a safety document. He thought it did a good job of balancing multiple needs as well as acknowledging the requirements for changes. While he did normally agree with Bike Walk Alameda and Oakland on a lot of issues he did, however, not agree with them on the evils of beg buttons. He thought they were good, solved many problems, and were not an undue burden in the majority of cases for pedestrians and bikes who use them. Commissioner Kolhstrand said she tried to understand the Council's specific questions about signal timing and tried to reconcile that with the staff report and the statement that intersection equitable access had to do with signal timing. She thought if they cleaned that up, it would be better. Director Smith asked if it would help if they renamed it or coined a different term. She discussed the different programs they had that did address safety to various other intersections. Rochelle Wheeler, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, believed that changing the title of that definition would have it go in the right direction since they have many policies and documents that had looked at intersections of all types. She added that staff should… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 5 | asked about Transit Priorities and when the Mobility Element Technical Appendix would come back for a review. She believed it was important that they review that appendix since the Transportation Element itself did not address transit or bicycle priority, that information was in the appendix. Staff Member Payne did not believe the status on the Transit Priorities Streets would change much because it tended to be where AC Transit was operating. She saw that as a stable situation. Commissioner Kohlstrand said she disagreed with that. She had looked at it again and she did not believe it reflected where AC Transit services are. She gave the example of how Clement Ave was listed and it was not up to date. Chair Soules recalled that they were going to get an updated version of the appendix because they knew it needed a revision. Going forward they were going to want that to serve as a baseline as other projects came forward for approval. She offered to follow up with Staff Member Payne to see what the status was. She added that when she read the resolution, if and when there was a traffic signal this is how they would operate. She felt that this captured that one piece where it didn't need to contemplate everything else because it was only where it applied to an operation of traffic signals. Commissioner Kohlstrand said she appreciated what Chair Soules said and as it related to the management of traffic signals she did not have an issue with what staff recommended. It was that the definition of intersection equitable access was focused solely on signalized intersections and that was where they had made a misstep, it should not just be focused on that. Director Smith appreciated the comments and said it had been a difficult one to frame. She agreed with Chair Soules that this was more of a traffic signal operation policy but perhaps there should be better framing around that. She also agreed that when they defined intersection access equity they had been thinking about how it would apply to signalized intersections in… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 4 | Public Comments for #6A Denyse Trepanier, from Bike Walk Alameda, thanked staff for putting this policy out for the public to respond to. She thought it was very important they discussed how much of a burden they wanted to put on people who move around public spaces not in a car. However, Bike Walk Alameda was hoping that this policy would address the inequities there were in the burden right now in terms of how they move about. She discussed all the inequities around the city and felt that this policy didn't deal with the inequity of burden. Cyndy Johnsen appreciated the effort so far on this important issue but she thought that the resolution still needed work. She believed it fell short of the Council's direction and she hoped that it could be improved. She called out the Council's first request about how if access is given to the car then the pedestrian way should be granted too, and in the policy, it had been watered down to only happen in certain circumstances. She brought up cities like Berkeley and Seattle that were making bolder commitments to pedestrian safety and equity. She hoped they could work a little harder to get it right. Jim Strehlow said he agreed with the staff's recommendations that were against the Council's referrals. He was happy to see a Civil Engineer finally providing input into these much-needed discussions since without one it had lead to bad decisions historically. He agreed long and unnecessary wait times lead to delays in transit and adds to greenhouse emissions and gave the example of Sixth Street and Pacific Avenue and others. He agreed with Commissioner Weitze that dangerous intersections exist that do not need crosswalks and gave the example of High Street and Marina Drive. Commissioner Comments and Discussion for #6A Commissioner Kohlstrand agreed with many of what the public speakers had said and commended the staff for moving this issue forward. She was also pleased to see many new crosswalks painted around the city at intersections that had pedestrian safety issues. She ge… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 3 | Staff Member Thompson said he didn't want to give the impression that there was a rush to do it. The overarching goal was to make intersections have crosswalks on all sides. That's assuming there was Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) money available to extend sidewalks to create the infrastructure that was needed. He discussed the expenses that would go into making intersections fully functional on all legs. Commissioner Weitze asked if there were any intersections where it didn't make sense to put a crosswalk. Staff Member Thompson said each intersection had to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Certainly, if it would cost $300,000 to do all the improvements, it would have to compete with other intersections. Some things were cost prohibitive and if no real traffic or pedestrian safety was being solved that would be a factor as well. Ryan Dole, Traffic Engineer with Kimley Horn, added that the photo in the staff presentation was at Packet Landing on Bay Farm Island. It was a good example of where sometimes barricades were used to funnel people to a specific crosswalk, sometimes done for efficiency and not just safety. He also explained the reasoning behind another intersection and why barricades could still be warranted and useful in some intersections. Commissioner Weitze asked if there was actual data that backed up faster cycle times at intersections. He felt that drivers would get more frustrated if only a few cars made it through the intersection at a time. Staff Member Thompson said the thought was they were trying to avoid allocating time to a movement in an intersection when nobody needed it. The frustration comes in when the cars are stacked up North/South and no pedestrians crossing East/West. That was a simplified version of what they were trying to do, to allocate time to those most in need. Chair Soules asked about when the commission makes these endorsements and the council adopts these resolutions she wanted to know more about how they were used. She wanted to know how the resolution would be used… | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 2 | 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Draft Minutes - Transportation Commission Meeting from Wednesday, September 23, 2020 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4957780&GUID=A3EDAE6D-7EAB- 53E-8949-A3C1522365AD&FullText=1. 5B. Draft Minutes - Transportation Commission Meeting from March 24, 2021 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4957781&GUID=0F801557-03F6- 4328-9695-12B963C5E801&FullText=1. Commissioner Rebecca Kohlstrand made a motion to approve both sets of minutes and Commissioner Tina Yuen seconded the motion. A vote was taken by a raise of hands and the motion passed. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Endorse the City Council's Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Policies on Intersection Access Equity and Pedestrian Timing and Detection to Improve Safety at Intersections (Action) Russ Thompson, Interim City Engineer, introduced this item and gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4957782&GUID=45694D62-1596- 4907-982E-A627F75C67DA&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6A Commissioner Kohlstrand asked if there was a specific deadline that this needed to go back to City Council. Staff Member Thompson said it was currently scheduled for the second week of July. Erin Smith, Director of Public Works, said there was no specific deadline but that the referral was from September 2019. There was some pressure to be responsive. Commissioner Scott Weitze wanted to know the thinking behind the removal of the pedestrian barriers and what the data had shown. Approved Transportation Minutes 2 May 26, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-05-26 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, May 26, 2021 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners were able to attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to the public during the meeting. Legistar Link: https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811334&GUID=929D18C0-4EF7-433D- 83B3-574DE7818372&Options=info/&Search= 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Nachtigall and Commissioners Yuen, Kohlstrand, Hans and Weitze. Absent: Commissioner Randy Rentschler 2. Agenda Changes None. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4957779&GUID=CF0A5B93-1B33 4C37-B39B-6855036CD070&FullText=1 Vice-Chair Alysha Nachtigall addressed the upcoming election for Chair and Vice-Chair. While she had valued and appreciated her time as Vice-Chair she would not be throwing her hat in the ring and would be stepping back for the next year. 4. Announcements / Public Comments None. Approved Transportation Minutes 1 May 26, 2021 | TransportationCommission/2021-05-26.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,12 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 12 | has different demographics, North was residential and South was commercial, when changes for Orion Street were discussed he wanted this difference noted. Lastly, he wanted the commission to promote "Bike to Wherever Day," which would be on May 21st. Chair Soules promoted the website alameda2040.org to get people excited and involved with the General Plan. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 9:01 p.m. Approved Minutes - Transportation Commission March 24, 2021 12 | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,11 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 11 | Staff Member Payne said she could look into when someone from Iteris could come. She added that fiber would be the backbone part of the infrastructure and this would be the expensive part and it won't be completed overnight. Chair Soules compared this to the electrical on your home, which is the heaviest investment but you are better off in the long run. She saw this as helping the community to embrace new technology. She also seconded getting an information item on the agenda for a future meeting to learn more about what the fiber cables will do for Alameda. Staff Member Amiri added that with the CIP that they discussed earlier the fiber cables will tie into that as well. Public Comments for #6C. Jim Strehlow said that with technology improvements in the city there is also an increase in remote computer hacking opportunities into the city's services. He wanted to see security reviews on all such projects. He also discouraged putting everything into electrical cabinets due to accidents. He believed that roundabouts would slow down police, fire, and ambulance services. He wanted to hear from those parties on their opinion on roundabouts. He believed that the solution was to better educate people and not waste money on roundabouts. 6D. Review and Comment on the General Plan Schedule of Planning Board Public Hearings (Discussion Item). Staff Member Payne introduced this item on behalf of Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning Building and Transportation. The staff report can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4855390&GUID=6F196672-B114- 463B-9E5D-7984C3E15500&FullText=1. Chair Soules thanked everyone for their time on this. There was no discussion or comments on the schedule. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Jim Strehlow had three issues. First, he wanted a residential loading zone for each street so that Amazon and other delivery trucks don't block traffic as they do every day. Secondly, Orion Street Approved Minutes - Transportation Commission March 24, 2021 11 | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,10 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 10 | Board Clarifying questions and comments #6C. Commissioner Weitz asked if the theory behind this was that the structure would get put in but then private companies would then run the actual access. He wondered how that would work for equitable internet access since private companies could charge whatever they wanted. Staff Member Payne said that was correct, the city does not plan on being a service provider. The asset as a city would be the infrastructure and to be able to put this super-fast fiber into the ground the city could then leverage that asset to lower rates or public wifi access. Commissioner Yuen wanted to know more about the impact on transportation infrastructure. She wanted to hear about changes and benefits that could be seen as part of this. Staff Member Payne said that they could have a better emergency response for the Fire Department and with the same technology AC Transit could use their signal detection, all of this would be wrapped into what the fiber could provide. She also noted that driverless cars were just around the corner and they would also use this type of technology. Staff Member Amiri also discussed how this would all tie together and the process of updating the conduits. Chair Soules discussed the frustration and expense of trying to deploy new technology on old infrastructure. She was excited that Alameda was doing this and saw it as a public agency function to invest in this type of infrastructure. Commissioner Kohlstrand thanked Chair Soules for her insight and wanted to make sure they captured the equity part of this. She asked about overhead wires that are currently going through backyards and wanted to know if there were opportunities for undergrounding utilities at the same time as they were installing this fiber. Staff Member Payne said that was a project for Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) and they were currently in the process of undergrounding different corridors. They would be working with AMP because it is all related. Commissioner Yuen brought up the comment about th… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 9 | Commissioner Kohlstrand said she was prepared to make a motion to endorse the program with a caveat that there would be a greater investment in roundabouts. She wanted the commission to express its interest in a different way of thinking without completely disrupting the improvement process. Commissioner Rentschler said he would second that with the knowledge that his fellow commissioners had already put a lot of work into this. He wanted to support something that acknowledged the situation they were in but also to have a citizen's voice be heard on this subject. Chair Soules said the last meeting was very educational on roundabouts and not public review on any particular intersection. She asked Staff Member Payne if this was one path forward, in the 10- year CIP to revisit mobility elements and goals related to specific intersections to identify where roundabouts or traffic signals would be most beneficial. Staff Member Payne said that was something they were already in the process of doing. They were doing a city-wide roundabout analysis. She then discussed the last meeting where roundabouts had been heavily discussed to inform Commissioner Rentschler and explained the next step in the process. Staff Member Vance said this information helps as they start refining the 10-year CIP and to see what is important. Chair Soules wanted to know if this would lead to an assessment of whether or not a signal vs a roundabout would be more appropriate. She did not want to take on each roundabout separately or project by project. She discussed how the study would help them with that decision. Commissioner Kohlstand made a motion to endorse the 2-year CIP with the caveat that the Transportation Commission recommends greater investment in roundabouts compared to traffic signals. Commissioner Rentschler seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. 6C. Discuss Smart City Master Plan Overview (Discussion Item). Staff Member Payne introduced this item and gave a presentation, Staff Member Amiri also p… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 8 | She wondered if the scoring was discerning enough and suggested having a 1-5 scoring instead. She thought the table was very clear but wanted more clarity for scoring and the recommendations. Staff Member Vance said that version was included in the staff report. Chair Soules suggested having a few slides where it clearly shows what the process will look like since it will morph over time, which would help the city understand it more. Commissioner Rentschler acknowledged the great work by Public Works and how they were constantly being asked to do more with money they don't have, there would always be tradeoffs. He saw policies like safety and complete streets with the same projects. He discussed all the benefits of roundabouts and how that can be beneficial for different policies. He encouraged how good design was important and didn't want to see the same cookie-cutter mistakes made. Chair Soules said that the staff had come a long way in developing these tools and they were not perfect or easy and continual feedback was expected. Commissioner Kohlstrand gave a thought on the tradeoff of roundabouts and traffic signals. She clarified that the staff was not recommending putting anything about roundabouts in the capital budget, it got a no recommendation, and traffic signal systems got a yes. She wondered if there was any room for modification so that in the traffic system they could find the ability to introduce roundabouts. She wanted to see a study to learn where the roundabouts would be most appropriate. Staff Member Vance said roundabouts were being considered within funded capital projects so they don't have to wait for everything else. He said the roundabout study was continuing and as that developed it was something that could be funded later under future capital budgets. For traffic signals there were two categories, one was rehabilitation and maintenance and the other is for traffic signal modifications/modernization. Roundabouts would be more equivalent to modernization and part of the study is to help c… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 7 | Chair Soules recommended a past Transportation Commission meeting to Commissioner Weitze where pavement funding was further discussed. She agreed that looking at this through an equity lens was important but the timing and conditions of when pavement needs to be replaced was a big deal for the Capital Budget. Commissioner Weitze said what he was worried about the new Main Street neighborhood, on the estuary side of Site A, would be overlooked since developers keep backing out. Commissioner Kolhstrand asked about the dedicated grant funding column and that it didn't fit with the "123" criteria. She pointed out where he had stepped out of the form. Staff Member Vance said she was correct and that he would have to take a look at that. Chair Soules explained what they had been trying to achieve and explain the rating system. Commissioner Kohlstrand believed they had come a long way in terms of a more rigorous system of evaluation. She wanted to see feasibility included, really thinking about is this something that could be implemented right now. She also observed that with Urban Forest and Landscape Maintenance and other maintenance projects and wondered if there should be some sort of split of funds. She saw that there was not a lot of differentiation among the scores and wondered if they were capturing all the right goals. She noted that the recommendations for moving ahead do not align with the scores and thought that needed to be rethought. She pointed out ways they could improve transit services, she felt that it was being pushed to the bottom of the list. Staff Member Payne described how the ranking process worked and how they had had this problem before. She pointed out an oversight that paratransit money funds benches and bus shelters and bus stops in general. Staff Member Vance said some of the planning projects are and aren't included in the Capital Budget. He explained the criteria for the different categories. Chair Soules said that tweaking the actual criteria to make them more appropriate for capital VS… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 6 | Public Comments for #6B. Jim Strehlow said in regards to Vision Zero he described what he saw daily as he rides his bike around. He saw people ignorant of the laws and people crossing in front of him even though he had the right away. He also described people crossing when he had the green light. He wanted to see more education included in Vision Zero for pedestrians for their damn safety and his safety. Chair Soules thanked Mr. Strehlow and clarified that Vision Zero did have a good outreach component. Commissioner Clarifying Questions, Comments, and Discussions for #6B. Commissioner Weitze wanted clarification on why Urban Forest and Landscape Maintenance was recommended even though it had a low score. Staff Member Payne reminded everyone that the map was out of date, this had been mentioned in the Staff Report. Staff Member Vance described why Urban Forest and Landscape Maintenance was included, it was because it does share funding with some of the Transportation projects. It has to be funded somehow, there are street trees that need to be maintained for safety and aesthetic reasons. Commissioner Weitze was curious about the equity of paving management. This was a very broad category and with equity in mind, certain parts of Alameda were in desperate need of being repaved, and certain parts of Alameda were doing well. Staff Member Vance discussed the equity score of the projects and how they could use similar criteria that Oakland used to put more of an equity focus on how they spend pavement funds. It was something that could be incorporated into these projects since they were citywide. Commissioner Weitze said he hoped they would be more focused on parts that had not been paved in a while. Staff Member Vance said these projects had traditionally been condition-based, the pavement management in the past had typically followed the sewer replacement program. The funding available for pavement was almost a 1:1 with sewer, the city would rehab 3 miles of sewer per year and then pave 3 miles of sewer per year. Tha… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 5 | Staff Member Payne discussed the funds (Measure BB) for improving bus services, and one of the projects was improving Appezzato Parkway for buses. They were waiting to see what AC Transit does first before starting on that project. That intersection had also been noted as a potentially good location for a roundabout. Donya Amiri, Principal Engineer with Public Works, discussed how they would be improving signal timing and what adjustments they had already done to that intersection and others. They would also be revisiting the intersections along Ralph Appezzato Memorial Parkway (RAMP) to improve signal timing and for bicycle operations. Commissioner Kohlstrand was supportive of the proposed reintroduction of the ferry service that was proposed here. She wanted to see a mid-year review to see what the ridership was like and encouraged to have someone from AC Transit present. She believed they needed to take a comprehensive look at how they would provide transit services on the island. She agreed with Commissioner Rentschler's point about it being a "zero-sum game" if they gain something in one area and lose it in another. She continued to be concerned about having limited parking and thought that should be monitored. Chair Soules talked about her own experiences with being a Bay Farm Ferry user and why driving is easier and more appealing She was glad they were adding a midday service. She thought a quarterly review would be beneficial to see how the stimulus was being used and she was curious to see the uptake on the Clipper START. Often equity programs are offered but rarely used. She also found the Hop Through App to be very convenient. Mr. Connolly thanked the commission and also shared that he had skepticism about the bus transfer to the ferry. He believed that now was the time to test it and was happy to come back and share whatever data they needed. They were open to experimenting and trying new things to see what worked best. He also clarified to Ms. Johnson (public speaker) about the service start, they p… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 4 | Staff Member Payne said that was the trade-off, these types of Federal Stimulus Packages can't provide operations money long term into the future. She discussed how the services have to equal out with the other local jurisdictions serviced by AC Transit. Chari Soules said that could have discussions at other meetings about how that stimulus money would be used. Public Comments #6A Cyndy Johnson, with Bike Walk Alameda, believed the proposed Alameda Main Street to Oakland Short Hop Ferry Service would be a fantastic option for Central and Western Alameda Commuters. She thought this would greatly benefit cyclists who wouldn't have to run the risk of getting bumped off the bus due to lack of bike racks and would encourage more bike commuters. She saw this plan as a win, win, win. She did share some concerns from fares to what services would be offered at certain times. She ended by saying all of Bike Walk Alameda was excited by this proposed plan. Jim Strehlow discussed a few issues. First, he thought it was a hike to get from Webster Street to the ferry to get to Oakland, therefore riding the ferry would not be an option for him. Secondly, he told about 150 people how he rode the Alameda to San Francisco Ferry to get to the Moscone Center to get his vaccine and he found it to be a very pleasant and fun trip. Thirdly, he was concerned about how WETA tied into the water taxi program of Alameda. He had asked many times for a status report of the water taxi program from Rochelle Wheeler. Staff Member Payne gave a reminder about the water taxis that the Alameda Landing Waterfront Project was currently in construction and they were required to build the infrastructure for it. That's why it hadn't happened, that project is still in construction. Rochelle Wheeler, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, said she was able to share more information with Mr. Strehlow. City staff is constantly discussing water taxi options and other matters around water taxis, mainly operating costs. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6A … | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 3 | wanted to make sure they were not hampering people using the ferry either because there weren't enough public transit options or parking places. Mr. Connolly said WETA has had an effective partnership with the City of Alameda and a good partnership with AC Transit. AC Transit was working on a proposal to serve the new Main Street Terminal. He spoke on the drawbacks of the 96 Bus and that the option AC Transit was developing would be better. He did not want to go into much detail, he did not want to "steal their thunder" He was very optimistic and grateful for the work done by AC Transit. Staff Member Payne discussed how AC Transit was "moving mountains" to make this happen, and they had been under a lot of pressure due to the Pandemic. There is an upcoming meeting where it would be discussed further. For parking, she discussed the new parking lot at Seaplane Lagoon has 400 spaces and that there was more work to do. Commissioner Weitze asked if the plan was to charge for parking or had it been pushed off. Lisa Foster, Transportation Planner, said she didn't have a timeline to share. There were plans for paid parking at Alameda Point but as for now, there was no parking fee. It had been put on hold with the Pandemic, but they would move forward with that in the future. Commissioner Weitze asked if it was unlikely that they would start charging for parking in August. Staff Member Foster said that would be fair to say. Commissioner Rentschler thanked Mr. Connolly for his presentation and commended WETA for embracing change since now with the Pandemic it was a great time to do it. He urged WETA and the commission to keep an open mind on what the possibilities could be. He thought the bike access at Seaplane Lagoon was better and safer and encouraged the same bike structure that was at the Main Street Ferry terminal. He was not optimistic about the bus but was happy they were trying it. He did not want to see an experiment that doesn't work to become permanent. Commissioner Yuen discussed the decision to potentially cu… | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 2 | 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Draft Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting from Wednesday, July 22, 2020 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4855385&GUID=AF4ED835-78EE- 40E7-AAEA-EOF5814FD2F8&FullText=1. Commissioner Kohlstrand moved to approve the minutes and Commissioner Yuen seconded. A hand raise vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. 5B. Draft Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting from Wednesday, January 27, 2021 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4855386&GUID=A5B2B626-D69B- 43BE-AC28-53D36B14D68E&FullText=1. Commissioner Kohlstrand moved to approve the minutes and Commissioner Yuen seconded. A hand raise vote was taken and the motion passed 6-0. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Discuss Water Emergency Transportation Authority's Pandemic Recovery Program (Discussion Item) Kevin Connolly, from WETA (Water Emergency Transportation Authority), introduced this item and gave a presentation. The report and attachments can be found at https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4855387&GUID=ABA17FD9-653F- 4496-88DF-C941A16FDBD8&FullText=1. Commissioner Clarifying Questions #6A. Commissioner Weitze wanted to know what kind of hop through ridership was normal, the short hop from Alameda to Oakland. Mr. Connolly said it was less than 10 per day. That's also because the only option was Oakland to Alameda, not the reverse. Commissioner Kohlstrand had concerns about the connecting transit service and making sure there were enough parking facilities. She also wanted to know what was the status of the 96 Bus. She Approved Minutes - Transportation Commission March 24, 2021 2 | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-03-24 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, March 24, 2021 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners were able to attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to the public during the meeting. Legistar Link: https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811333&GUID=861FEF9A-1D51-4AD8- 8E6C-EB2F878B1A64&Options=info/&Search=. 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules and Commissioners Yuen, Kohlstrand, Hans, Rentschler and Weitze. Absent: Vice Chair Nachtigall This was Commissioner Rentschler's first meeting and everyone welcomed him. 2. Agenda Changes None. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4855384&GUID=13BD4EBF-0DC4- 4FD9-B3A1-B123E9507062&FullText=1. Gail Payne, a Senior Transportation Coordinator, discussed the tentative upcoming joint meeting with the Planning Board on May 10 and other scheduled meetings. 4. Announcements / Public Comments No public comments. Chair Soules congratulated Commissioner Kohlstrand for her Lifetime Achievement Award with WTS, they had honored her for all her hard work in the Transportation field. Approved Minutes - Transportation Commission March 24, 2021 1 | TransportationCommission/2021-03-24.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,13 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 13 | 7. Announcements/ Public Comments Jim Strehlow stated that double parked delivery vehicles block the street with the most courteous drivers being from the U.S. Postal Service. He suggested creating a new class of parking spaces for delivery during the day in residential streets if residents request it. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 11:00 p.m. Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021 13 | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,12 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 12 | Transportation Department on a traffic analysis policy for new developments. She also is working on a traffic signal operations policy to look at prioritization including transit. Installing the right equipment at intersections to service transit will require investment. Chair Soules said she hopes that the Bay Area can receive federal funding to bring transit back post- pandemic. We need to continue showing the relationship between land use and transportation, which is important for sustainability. She encouraged Gerry Beaudin to come back and talk about metrics. Commissioner Weitze moved to endorse the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and the Annual Report on Transportation. Commissioner Yuen seconded. The motion passes 5-0. Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes - January 27, 2021 12 | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,11 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 11 | Staff McGuire responded that the public can access the park at Eighth Street. Commissioner Weitze asked if the City looked to open gates without the pathways. Staff McGuire stated that it needs to be accessible if the gates are opened. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about St. Charles Street in that the path does not go through there. Staff Wheeler stated that it is Housing Authority roadway so the path would connect to it. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to endorse the Jean Sweeney trail grant application, and then Commissioner Yuen seconded the motion. The motion passes 5-0. Chair Soules recused herself for the vote on the bike/ped bridge grant application. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to approve the bike/ped bridge grant application, and Commissioner Weitze seconded the motion. The motion passes 4-0. 6A. Endorse the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and the Annual Report on Transportation (Action Item) Gerry Beaudin, Assistant City Manager, gave an overview of Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (CARP) work. The staff report and attachments regarding the Annual Report on the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan and the Annual Report on Transportation can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758233&GUID=ED785EAD-B7EB-4471- A03B-1E1375D9B441&Options=&Search=&FullText= Commissioner Weitze praised the report and said resilience is important. He asked how much staff time is put towards resilience versus mitigation. Staff Beaudin said that they do not quantify the breakdown but can think about that as a metric in the future. He spoke about neighborhood-based resilience hubs and said that Alameda's Emergent Groundwater study caught a lot of attention regionally and other cities are doing similar studies. Alameda has a new Sustainability and Resilience Manager: Danielle Mieler. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about the evaluation of the Commercial Streets program, which said there were no significant traffic delays, but she read that there were AC Transit d… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,10 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 10 | Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6D Commissioner Nachtigall commented about Alameda Point, and there are a number of long-range plans for Alameda Point and realizes that these improvements are not helping now. She stated that the Slow Street initiative is looking to expand to Alameda Point. Commissioner Weitze stated appreciation for the presentation by the steering committee. The infrastructure is neglected in Alameda Point, and it should be upsetting to all of us. Heather Reed responded that she is speaking about Orion Street, and would like it to be a Slow Street. It needs permanent traffic calming solutions. Facial recognition is problematic in that it is racially biased. Beth Kenny stated that they do not want storage of personal information, and wants to move forward in a way that addresses these issues. Staff Amiri is new to Alameda, and is surprised about the condition of Alameda Point. The striping is faded in Alameda Point, and Public Works staff will be installing high visibility crosswalks, increased visibility at intersections and signage. The City is closing Oriskany Avenue at Central Avenue. Chair Soules mentioned that there are signs/fees/penalties and partnerships with other cities that could be created. About Alameda Point, she mentioned how difficult it is to transform federal land and that it is very complex. She would be interested to understand more about temporary solutions for immediate relief such as to alert the police about high speeds. She wants to tackle equity and mobility, and would like to sort it out in the different areas with City staff. 6C. Endorse Council Approval of Grant Applications to Alameda County Transportation Commission for the 2022 Comprehensive Investment Plan Call for Projects (Action Item) Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Coordinator gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758235&GUID=5EB01FE9-69E6-43D2-A061- 6CEF2AA5BD55&Options=&Search=&FullText=1 Commissioner… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 9 | Beth Kenny stated that one of the recommendations will be for the City to advocate to allow for automated speed enforcement. Police should focus on responding to crimes and not on abandoned vehicles. The number one way people interact with police is through traffic violations, and we want to reduce this interaction. We want to look at taking it out of the Police Department. Commissioner Kohlstrand stated that San Francisco has shifted to traffic control officers and not sworn officers. Chair Soules mentioned a number of equity studies in the Bay Area to spur economic justice reform. Commissioner Yuen stated that she appreciates all the work from the steering committee and community volunteers. She would like to see more information on the scale of the problem in Alameda such as what were the violations and who was involved to better understand the gravity of the problem related to traffic stops. She also would like to know the scale of the fines and fees such as costs and numbers. She encourages more studies on the matter, especially on how to use enforcement as a strategy. Cheryl Taylor responded that a crime analyst position could help better understand ticketing and traffic stops by demographics. An article was written by Rasheed Shabazz about the west end being over ticketed: https://m.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/towing-for-dollars-in- alameda/Content?oid=22699785&showFullText=true Jennifer Rakowski responded that larger cities are required to count ticketing by demographics, and Alameda will begin with citations moving forward. Data shows that minorities are more likely to have traffic stops in Alameda based on Census data such as Black community members are five to six times more likely to be stopped for traffic citations compared to White community members. Lynn Cunningham responded that automated technology will be more objective than a police officer. Public Comments for #6D Rasheed Shabazz stated that he appreciates that there is a Transportation Commission. He wants to have non-police methods of police … | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 8 | 6D. Community-Led Committee on Police Reform & Racial Justice Draft Recommendation to Review Traffic and Parking Citation Fines (Discussion Item) Lisa Foster, Transportation Planner introduced the Steering Committee and the following individuals were present: Christine Chilcott, Al Mance, Cheryl Taylor, and Jolene Wright as well as community volunteers Heather Reed, Hannah Grose, Beth Kenny, Lynn Cunninghas, Melodye Montgomery and Jennifer Rakowski Cheryl Taylor made a presentation. Lynn Cunningham also provided comments. Jolene Wright provided the webpage that is listed in the staff report: :https://www.alamedaca.gov/RESIDENTS/Police-Reform-and- Racial-Equity The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758236&GUID=985566B1-9A05-405B-BE8D- 20B72B6989D6&Options=&Search=&FullText Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6D Chair Soules asked about who provides the parking enforcement and about automatic license reading. Staff Foster responded that the parking enforcement is done by non-sworn, civilian staff. Chair Soules asked about automatic license reading with parking. Staff Foster responded about the technology to automatically read license plates to see if the car has been there past the time limit or if they have paid. Speed cameras are more of an equity concern and not parking since people usually are not at the car when ticketed. Heather Reed discussed a walk through at Alameda Point. Hannah Grose reported about issues with drag racing, speeding, sidewalks in disrepair, lighting, lack of striping and lack of speed humps/dips. Additional signage on the speed limit and enforcement would be helpful. Heather Reed is working with Madlen Saddik of the Chamber of Commerce and businesses on signage to make people aware of the residential business area. There is a drunk driving concern. It is extremely expensive to be poor. Commissioner Kohlstrand stated that the most equitable way to ticket is by camera and asked if they want to keep it in the Police Dep… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 7 | Ms. Ferguson stated that roundabouts may not perform as well as a traffic signal because of delays. In some situations, they are a good solution, and in others they are not. There are situations that are not as advantageous - like a series of signalized intersections, where roundabouts would decrease the efficiency of signals. Michelle Wan asked about statistics on the Bay farm location that can be shared. Staff Payne provided a link in the Zoom chat: Page 10: https://www.alamedaca.gov/files/assets/public/departments/alameda/transportation/vision- zero/alamedavisionzerocrashreport-update.pdf Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6B Commissioner Kohlstrand asked about the five high priority intersections and if the Commission will get a comprehensive presentation on these locations and if Island/Mecartney is part of the five. Staff Payne stated that the five have not yet been selected. Staff are doing roundabout education first. The goal is to try to select up to five, and this can be brought up as an agenda item, possibly in May. Island/Mecartney is not part of this study; it is a separate process. Staff Amiri responded that when a development project was done, they set aside funds to address this intersection of Island/Mecartney. To date, staff have only done the evaluation of intersection control types. No decisions have been made, and no community outreach has been done. Traffic volumes do warrant some type of control. Vice Chair Nachtigall asked if the increase in rear-end collisions is due to cars stopping for pedestrians. And, she wondered if there are increases in pedestrian collisions at roundabouts. Ms. Ferguson stated that there have been 15 years of thorough research, but there is not great data on bicycle/pedestrian collisions, since there are so few collisions and the sample size is so small. This topic continues to be an area of study. Staff Amiri added that speed is the biggest factor in the severity of collision. Since roundabouts slow vehicles, it is logical that they would reduce pedestrian… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 6 | community complaints. And, how much more property damage occurs at intersections with roundabouts, due to cars hitting houses/property, as they round the turn at high speeds. Ms. Ferguson responded that there is no data on the number of communities that have put in and then removed roundabouts. Conversations with the public are important, and a thoughtful process on where, and how they are designed is essential. As for property damage, the data shows that rear-end crashes, which are lower severity, are the most common at all roundabouts, and also side swipes, at multiple lane roundabouts. With signage and the right geometry, they do not see overly aggressive and fast driving through intersections. It is just not feasible. Denyse Trepanier, Bike Walk Alameda Board member, appreciates staff bringing this item up. She strongly encourages everyone to view the NHTSA website, which has great case studies and some write ups from conservative places, where roundabouts have been installed with opposition and then later were embraced by the community. In the Bay Area, there are mini-roundabouts implemented inconsistently, which makes it difficult for the community. In Berkeley, some have no stops, others have two-way stops and others have four-way stops. It is unclear how to use them. She hopes that Alameda will have consistency with their implementation and that stop signs would be pulled out where mini-roundabouts are installed. Combining the two devices is confusing. Steven Jones appreciates the education from the consultants. A roundabout at Central/Encinal/Sherman makes sense since there have been bad accidents there, which he knows as a past Fire Department employee. At Island/Mecartney, however, conflicts are extremely low. If it ain't broke then don't fix it. Chair Soules, based on the Zoom chat, asked for staff to respond to a question about roundabouts and stop signs. Ms. Ferguson stated that stop signs should not be used at roundabouts. Either stops signs or roundabouts are installed, not both. Mr. Alston stated… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 5 | Jennifer Rakowski asked: (1) how roundabouts impact emergency response vehicles and response times, and (2) if there is any data on the number of police stops at roundabouts versus a traffic signal. For (1), Ms. Ferguson replied that the roundabout design always accounts for emergency vehicles to be able to maneuver through the intersection. The slowing through a roundabout would be similar to the slowing emergency vehicles do as they pass through a signalized intersection to check for cross traffic. Staff Amiri added that typically the Fire Department is one of the loudest voices in the design of roundabouts. For (2), Ms. Ferguson stated there is only anecdotal information, and no research, regarding police stops. In Bend, the City found they could shift their enforcement focus to other parts of the city, since roundabouts have a natural traffic calming benefit. So, there was less enforcement needed at roundabouts than at signalized intersections. Anthony Lewis thanked the City for the presentation and appreciated Staff Payne for following through on the tactile maps. There are 20 blind people who want to be able to understand how roundabouts work. It would be helpful if blind people and people with disabilities could do a "walk through" of a typical roundabout to understand it further, and asks that staff set this up. Also, they wondered how people in a wheelchair, who are lower to the ground, would be visible if there is landscaping at the roundabout. Staff Payne stated that she likes the idea of doing a field visit to Lafayette, which has a modern roundabout, and will try to set up a field trip, post-COVID. Geoffrey Burnaford, who lives on Central Avenue at McKay Street, asked if there is a roundabout proposed at Encinal High School. They can imagine traffic gridlock as students walk across the street, which would happen at any high pedestrian intersection. Recently, they saw some very heavy large vehicles on Central Avenue, and he hopes the concrete of a roundabout can accommodate this weight at the Sherman … | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 4 | Staff Payne responded that these are not modern roundabouts, and that staff would have to look up what data we have. Commissioner Kohlstrand asked if the City would use traffic circles to meet some traffic management needs, where there is less space for a full roundabout. Ms. Ferguson said that mini-roundabouts are another option when right-of-way is constrained, particularly to remove two- or four-way stops. The key is that there needs to be enough space to manage vehicle speeds and the direction of travel. Mini-roundabouts still use central islands and splitter islands, but they are traversable by larger vehicles. Chair Soules asked staff to clarify the process on determining the locations for roundabouts, and the language in the slides. The City should not be trying to find out where they could work. This is just one possible option for intersections, part of the tool box. She would like staff to solve issues, rather than just respond and analyze the community's specific request for a specific device, like a stop sign. Staff Payne clarified that this roundabout effort is part of City's Vision Zero effort. This analysis with Kittelson is being used to determine the top five intersections for roundabouts in the City, based on safety, looking at the High Injury Network. Chair Soules encouraged community involvement in these types of decisions with new treatments. Public Comments for #6B Michael Robles-Wong stated that they learned to use roundabouts in the United Kingdom, and knows they are safer, especially for very wide intersections. His primary concern is for pedestrians and children. They notice that the crosswalks are further from each other. They encouraged the City to talk to the Police Department, since they pay the crossing guards. They wondered if the Island/Mecartney intersection would need four crossing guards, instead of the one or two it has now if a roundabout were installed due to the spacing of the crosswalks and the lack of visibility between them. Thank you for the great informational presenta… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 3 | as using Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons. Research has found that the yielding rate is good for single lane roundabouts. The rates do go down with multiple lane roundabouts. Vice Chair Nachtigall asked if landscaping of roundabouts and the splitter islands might reduce the visibility of pedestrians. Ms. Ferguson responded that, as part of the roundabout design process, sight distances are measured to determine a landscaping plan including planting heights, or if no landscaping should be installed, to retain visibility. Commissioner Yuen asked if traffic circles have the same benefits as roundabouts, particularly since many Alameda intersections could not accommodate a modern roundabout. Ms. Ferguson responded that mini-roundabouts are encouraged by the Federal Highway Administration for safety. And, they can be safer than other intersection controls. The important design considerations are to slow vehicle speeds, and to make clear how bicyclists and pedestrians will navigate the mini-roundabout. The reduced number of conflict points still are realized with mini-roundabouts. Commissioner Weitze asked for information on the different types of accidents that occur at one lane, versus two lane roundabouts. Ms. Ferguson responded that both eliminate fatal and severe collisions. However, more side swipe collisions occur with multi-lane roundabouts as drivers change lanes in the roundabout. Commissioner Weitze asked if this increase in minor accidents is this more or less than one would see at an intersection with a traffic signal. Ms. Ferguson stated that it varies depending upon context and the design of the roundabout such as which lane the vehicles are in as they enter the intersection. Commissioner Weitze stated that he has heard people say that because roundabouts are unfamiliar to the public, they will be dangerous. He asked if this is true, and if the collisions reduce over time, as the community gets used to them. Ms. Ferguson stated that single-lane roundabouts are consistently safe over time, even if the r… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 2 | Morgan Bellinger stated that he hopes that everyone listens to the educational presentation on roundabouts, and respects science and then will make decisions based on science. Steve Barrett stated that he is a resident of Park Street, and cars speed on this street. He is thrilled to see that Council is considering roundabouts because drivers will be forced to drive more safely. Chair Soules read an email from Cheryl Chi, who was unable to come to the meeting, requesting that City staff look into the trees that were planted along the Cross Alameda Trail because of the round balls that are dropped by one of the species. Steven Jones stated that he is a lifelong resident. About the Island/Mecartney intersection, he feels it runs smoothly and people are courteous. He worked for the City of Alameda Fire Department for 30 years, and he does not recall ever responding to a collision at that intersection. He worked with a former Public Works Department Director who concluded that a traffic signal is not needed. He thinks the intersection works fine. 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Draft Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting from Wednesday, November 18, 2020 (Action Item) https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758232&GUID=9172809E-8E90-4634-8A56- 238C4C3B26CC&Options=&Search=&FullText=1 No changes proposed. Vice Chair Nachtigall moved to approve as is. Commission Yuen seconded. The motion passed 4-0 and Commissioner Kohlstrand abstained since she was not at the meeting. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6B. Review Educational Presentation on Roundabouts (Discussion Item) Gail Payne, Senior Transportation Coordinator introduced Kittelson staff - Erin Ferguson, Lawrence Lewis and Mike Alston, who gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758234&GUID=2345B774-9EAA-4A94-9A51- BFC236809F5E&Options=&Search=&FullText=1 At the end of the presentation, Staff Payne added that the City had presented the roundabouts topic to a group of people wit… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2021-01-27 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, January 27, 2021 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners was able to attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to the public during the meeting. Legistar Link: https://alameda.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=811332&GUID=173EF9EF-7A08-48E9-AD93- 5B2FOBD42357&Options=info/&Search= 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Nachtigall and Commissioners Yuen, Kohlstrand and Weitze. Absent: Commissioner Hans 2. Agenda Changes Chair Soules requested to switch 6A and 6B to accommodate schedules. 3. Staff Communications are as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4758231&GUID=BE96F602-9092-4789-A529- 8D29AA900855&Options=&Search=&FullText=1 4. Announcements/ Public Comments Walter Jacobs in Harbor Bay stated that he has a problem with a roundabout or a traffic signal at Island Drive and Mecartney Road. He prefers a flashing beacon. He has not seen a car crash here. He has a concern about this proposal. Jim Strehlow stated that he wants a status on the water taxi. The Fernside area HOA feels that Moreland Drive has more speeding due to the Slow Streets program on Versailles Street, and other adjacent streets to Slow Streets program has similar speeding problems. Michael Robles-Wong stated that he had served on the board of Harbor Bay but is speaking as a 25-year resident of Bay Farm Island. He agrees with Mr. Jacobs. A traffic guard was hit a few years ago at this Island/Mecartney intersection. There is a concern about how pedestrians will cross this street. Anthony Lewis stated that he is blind. Gail Payne had a meeting about a roundabout with the blind community because it is something new for the blind community. He recommended that a tactile map be created, and to have a mobility specialist assist with educating blind people how to use roundabouts. The Sherman/Encinal intersection is… | TransportationCommission/2021-01-27.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,9 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 9 | Vice Chair Nachtigall thanked City staff for a comprehensive staff report. She supports the project's safety improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists, the roundabout recommendations and minimizing tree removals. Chair Soules stated that Commissioner Kohlstrand expressed a concern about increased traffic on Eighth Street, which would get heavy traffic diverted from Webster Street. Chair Soules also stated that the public street is not there for private parking storage. She expressed concerns about diversions and outreach to renters. Staff Payne replied that all residents along the corridor including renters received notifications as well as property owners. Public Comments for #6A Jeanine Gravem stated that the notification was not done well for Sherman Street in that she first heard of the project when she received the postcard for the recent workshop. Donna Gravem stated that the City should take into consideration the age of the Sherman Street area. Many of the houses were built before cars were common, so there is not a lot of off-street parking. Please take that into consideration. Cynthia Cooper appreciates that Chair Soules heard the parking concerns and she supports a parking permit idea. She agrees that Eighth Street can be challenging, and it can be tough to get off the island. Commissioner Comments and Discussion for #6A Vice Chair Nachtigall made a motion to support the final concept Chair Soules added the following friendly amendments: to minimize tree removals and maximize tree plantings, to look at ways to mitigate parking loss, to ensure that the outreach is sufficient, to mitigate traffic diversion and transit performance issues and to bring back traffic diversions, parking and the landscaping plan to the TC. Commissioner Hans seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. 7. Announcements / Public Comments Jim Strehlow stated that the current Atlantic Avenue and Constitution Way light timing is bad and need to wait a long time as a pedestrian and a bicyclist so the loop detectors need to work bet… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 8 | Commissioner Hans stated that he is proud of City staff in that they have worked hard on this project, including community engagement, working with WABA and considering schools' needs. He fully supports the project. Commissioner Yuen stated that she is a big supporter of this project, and appreciates the focus on multiple goals: safety, Vision Zero, High Injury Corridors, climate, stormwater management, pedestrian and bicycling. She supports the roundabouts. The issues of parking and diversions should not slow down this project. She would like a chance to comment on the tree survey in the final concept. Staff Payne clarified that this is the final concept for approval, but staff will come back during next steps to talk about trees. About outreach, staff has done notifications to properties within 300 feet three times since 2015, and there are over 500 people on the Central Avenue email list serv. For parking, the project opens up some street parking west of Sherman Street where none currently exists. The 2045 projections are worst- case scenario, pre-covid, SO they probably are accounting for more traffic and they include cumulative impacts from new development expected in 2045. Chair Soules stated that if any Commissioners have concerns like parking, trees, diversions, we can request Council to address them. She requested a friendly amendment to have the tree survey come back to the Transportation Commission. She asked how many other east-west corridors are planned for a road diet. Staff Payne replied that there is a proposed project on Lincoln Avenue. Chair Soules expressed concerns about Lincoln Avenue also getting a road diet in that having road diets in multiple places could increase commute times, and we need to maintain service levels for transit. She requested before/after data to show that safer routes allow people to shift modes. Staff Payne stated that the cycle tracks on both Fernside Blvd. by Lincoln Middle School and on Shoreline increased bicycling. Chair Soules stated that high schoolers should be… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 7 | cul de sac or right turn only. The project will cause confusion and congestion in that there is a lot of traffic coming through here. Compressing to one lane in each direction will slow people down and she does not think a roundabout will work. She is very concerned about parking, too. There are many apartment buildings in this area, and some do not have garages or driveways. Some households have multiple cars. She thinks decreasing parking by 23 percent is pretty extreme. Cyndy Johnsen stated that it is a fantastic project and can't be built soon enough. It has safety for all, more efficient traffic and less engine idling. It is a win for everyone. She is glad the project is prioritizing safety and climate over parking. She commends staff on the virtual open house and hope to see more of these in the future. Jim Strehlow stated that earlier AC Transit said Webster Street and Central Avenue intersection would not work for them and asked why there is not more public input on it. Sherman Street looks horrible. He stated that motorists will become trapped in the middle of the roundabout with pedestrian crossings. He asked if all the residents have been notified, if the Fire Department has approved, and if the side streets been notified. The PDF on page 9 lists lost parking spaces as 70, but the PowerPoint shows 122. The numbers are misleading. The scanned text cannot be searched, and one font is not supported. He wants more public workshops. There is no participation panel during this meeting so it is unclear how many people are participating tonight. Christy Cannon stated that she supports roundabouts in that there would be less idling and less pollution. Commissioner Comments and Discussions for #6A Chair Soules stated that Staff should take steps to increase transparency and watch the fonts and to confirm community engagement. She asked if AC Transit and WABA have worked on this project in that they were not talked about in the presentation, and should be looped back in. She wants to see data on traffic diversion… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 6 | Ruth Abbe stated that she is with Community Action for a Sustainable Alameda, and is active on CASA's transportation committee. She is very supportive of this project both for its safety and climate benefits. She really thinks the emphasis on increased safety for walking and biking, and on reducing this as a corridor for traffic is great. She wants to commend staff and to provide full support. Christopher Buckley stated that he is a City planner and a tree advocate. He wants to go to bat for preserving the maximum number of trees and for adding more trees. He understands that trees will be planted, and discussed options for adding trees even at narrow sidewalk locations with Staff Payne. He wants to ask the Commission to support these efforts that staff and consultants are doing for tree preservation and to maximum tree plantings, and to recommend them to Council. Amos White stated that he is the Founder of 100,000 Trees for Humanity. He is committed to planting this many trees in Alameda, and to help Alameda meet its 2030 climate goals. He commends the work that the Commission is doing on this project. He stated that there is no indication in the concept plans of where trees will be located, but there is talk in the staff report of removing trees, which is concerning. He asks the Commission to emphasize maximizing tree planting, such as at roundabouts and landscaped areas, and to minimize any tree removal. He asked the Commission to avoid or minimize as much as possible the removal of trees and to maximize planting of new trees to support CARP. John McCabe thanked staff and the consultants. He thinks that this will be a great project. He runs and bikes in the area. The bike lanes will help him drive less, and the students will be able to bike to school instead of being driven. The increase in visibility is a big issue for turning on and off Central Avenue. He is looking forward to the project. The roundabouts are new, and he lives close to a proposed one. These intersections proposed for roundabouts are really m… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 5 | Commissioner Yuen asked why there are no beacons at Fourth and Fifth Streets. Staff Payne responded that the project is hoping to include a roundabout at Fourth Street and that it is currently signalized. The Fifth Street intersection will be simplified and will include new curb extensions, high visibility cross-walks and refuge islands. At Ninth Street, the new beacon, as explained, is for Maya Lin students. St. Charles has been selected to have a flashing beacon since it is a future bike boulevard. Page Street will have a flashing beacon at the consolidation bus stop location. Lincoln Avenue by Encinal School will have one to give students a safer crossing. Vice Chair Nachtigall asked if the City is planning any pedestrian crossing improvements along Lincoln Avenue since the project is showing that traffic will divert to this street. Staff Payne responded that the City is having Kittelson Associates do a citywide review of roundabouts, and may add roundabouts to Lincoln Avenue since it is a wide street. In the Transportation Choices Plan, there is a corridor-long improvement project planned for Lincoln Avenue. Staff Wikstrom added that Lincoln Avenue is identified for short-term improvements since it is a high injury network corridor, which includes daylighting intersections, and possibly high visibility crossings. Mr. Schuster added that a flashing beacon and a high visibility crosswalk will be added where Lincoln Avenue and Central Avenue intersect. Chair Soules had a general question about diversion and what has been studied and how will that study continue during the design phase particularly for Webster Street given the planned limited turn options at Central Avenue/Webster Street intersection. Mr. Schuster stated that the diversion is covered in detail in the TOAR exhibit of the staff report, and it shows some diversion maps. Webster St. and Eighth St. to Constitution Way are the most preferred routes in the morning for those motorists trying to leave the island. The project may cause additional motorists… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 4 | Commissioner Hans asked what the estimated construction period is. Mr. Schuster stated that he estimates six to eight months, depending on weather, time of year and other changes. Chair Soules stated that she has heard that traffic circles can be problematic for the visually impaired and wanted to clarifications on the accommodations. She questions whether the lower operations and maintenance costs include the landscaping maintenance and irrigation systems. Mr. Schuster responded that accessibility measures are included for people with visual impairments, including tactile domes, refuges within the splitter islands, and shorter, high visibility crossings. He agreed that landscaping and irrigation would include operations and maintenance costs but less than signals. Landscape costs would be mitigated with carefully selected native plants and water efficient irrigation design. but any plants will still have an establishment period when watering is needed of up to the first three years. Staff Wikstrom added that while there are long term costs of roundabouts, the traffic signals have many more regular maintenance and replacement costs, like traffic signal bulbs. Commissioner Weitze asked why we are keeping some of the all-way stop intersections given the benefits of roundabouts. Staff Payne and Mr. Schuster responded that the roundabouts take up more space, so the City cannot install them in more constrained locations such as Fifth Street, Webster Street and Eighth Street. The City is considering one at Fourth Street but the budget needs to be considered. Commissioner Yuen asked what the planned treatment of trees is along the corridor, about the school coordination and concerns and about the selection of intersections for pedestrian-activated beacons. Mr. Schuster responded on the trees that it is a priority to save and protect the existing trees. Contractors will be required to protect the trees to avoid damage. The team is in the middle of a tree study, which is an inventory of every tree, including species, cond… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 3 | Stefan Schuster also introduced: Jennifer Cheung of CDM Smith Michael Bjork of CDM Smith Szu-han Chen of CDM Smith Jake Gunther of CDM Smith Commissioner Clarifying Questions for #6A Commissioner Weitze asked questions about the plan overall. Chair Soules asked staff to clarify the current stage of the plan and what comes next. Staff Payne responded that the 35 percent drawings are complete. Staff is looking to obtain overall project approval before spending effort on developing detailed designs. Mr. Schuster added that more details will be developed for roundabouts with all stakeholders. At this time, the City is looking for approval of the corridor-wide concept with the roundabouts. Commissioner Weitze stated that there are points of friction that are not totally addressed such as in front of Encinal High School and at the transitions from two-way bike path to single-sided paths, and he is not sure why these choices were made. Staff Payne responded that Encinal School area is confusing today because drop off/pick up is under construction and there will no longer be a parking lot there. This project will create room for a center turn lane, and a bus pull-out for a bus to wait out of the traffic lane, just west of the jet and so we expect it to function better than it does now. The City team is coordinating with the school on the design. As for why there is a change from a two-way to bike lanes at Eighth Street, this was analyzed in 2015, and there are too many driveways east of Eighth St, which creates a visibility issue and takes away a lot of parking. The number of driveways also means the center turn lane is more valuable here. Also, this is Caltrans right of way, so the City needed to be more conservative. Mr. Schuster added that the width is constrained and there are large heritage trees that need to be protected. Commissioner Weitze clarified that he was talking about the change at Central/Pacific from two-way protected bike lanes to standard bike lanes. Staff Payne stated that on Main Street, one can use … | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 2 | 3M. Emergency Alerts for Alameda - Subscribe at AC Alert web page: https://www.acgov.org/emergencysite/ 3N. Regional Emergency Transportation Alerts - Subscribe: https://511.org/alerts/emergencies/511Alert 30. Clipper Card (adults) - order on line or at Walgreens or set up Autoload to add value automatically: https://www.clippercard.com/ClipperWeb/getTranslink.do 3P. Clipper Card Discounts for youth, seniors and people with disabilities - ittps://www.clippercard.com/ClipperWeb/discounts/index.do 3Q. FasTrak or new toll tag for upcoming I-880 Express Lanes scheduled to open late summer 2020: on line or at Walgreens (except not Park Street location) and then register on line: https://www.bayareafastrak.org/en/signup/signUp.shtm 3R. City Adaptation Project - web links www.alamedaca.gov/ShorelineWebsterPoseyTubes www.alamedaca.gov/ShorelineDoolittleDr www.alamedaca.gov/ShorelineVeteransCt 4. Announcements / Public Comments No public comment. 4A. Transportation Commissioner Appreciation of Service Resolution for Commissioner David Johnson (Information Item) Chair Soules recognized former Commissioner David Johnson's work on the Transportation Commission by reading the Appreciation Resolution as shown here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4692142&GUID=6E20E869-87B5-4AAA-9151- CF52B01073CF 5. Consent Calendar 5A. Approve Special Meeting Minutes - October 28, 2020 (Action Item) as shown here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4692143&GUID=6C38C6E2-F113-44B3-B7A OFBC34881B33&FullText=1 No changes proposed. Commissioner Nachtigall moved to approve as is. Commission Yuen seconded. The motion passed 5-0. 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Recommendation to Approve the Central Avenue Safety Improvement Project Final Concept (Action Item) Gail Payne, Senior Transportation Coordinator and Stefan Schuster of CDM Smith, gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4692144&GUID=26A3562E-9A47-432D-9624- 973193AAOB… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2020-11-18 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Meeting Wednesday, November 18, 2020 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners was able to attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allowed public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to the public during the meeting. 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Vice Chair Nachtigall and Commissioners Hans, Yuen and Weitze. Absent: Commissioner Kohlstrand. 2. Agenda Changes - none 3. Staff Communications as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4692141&GUID=8D171B30-7FE5-4F69-9740- AC133A1D805E&Options=&Search=&FullText=1 3A. Vacancy on Transportation Commission - To apply, please complete online form: www.alamedaca.gov/GOVERNMENT/Boards-Commissions/Online-Application 3B. Willie Stargell Complete Street Survey - www.Alamedaca.gov/stargel 3C. Potential Future Meeting Agenda Items 1. Annual Report on Transportation 2. General Plan Update 3. 10-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 4. Active Transportation Plan Update 5. Intersection Access Equity - Traffic Signal Policy 6. Citywide Roundabouts Analysis 3D. Update on the Subcommittee for the General Plan Update and 10-Year CIP 3E. Future Meeting Dates for 2021 - Meetings start at 6:30 p.m. 1. Wednesday, January 27 2. Wednesday, March 24 3. Wednesday, May 26 4. Wednesday, July 28 5. Wednesday, September 22 6. Wednesday, November 17 3F. Alameda Active Transportation Plan: Latest info at www.ActiveAlameda.org 3G. Alameda County Safe Routes to Schools online resources, activities and webinars during coronavirus pandemic: http://www.alamedacountysr2s.org/covid-19 3H. Alameda Slow Streets program web page: http://www.slowstreetsalameda.org/ 3I. Alameda Commercial Streets program web page:www.alamedaca.gov/commercialstreets 3J. COVID 19 Get Around Safe Pledge: www.alamedaca.gov/AlamedaPledge 3K. Vision Zero Program: www.alamedaca.gov/VisionZero 3L. Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) 2020 Trainings: ittps://www.alamed… | TransportationCommission/2020-11-18.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,8 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 8 | Commissioner Kohlstrand: She said that it is difficult to understand the funding and the process, and she requested more input earlier than next Spring such as briefings on how it is coming along would be helpful. The discussion on metrics is pertinent with limited funding, and is needed to have the most effective and efficient use of public funds. Chair Soules: She asked Commissioner Kohlstrand if it is a topic to fold into the General Plan subcommittee study sessions. Commissioner Kohlstrand: Yes, it would be helpful. Chair Soules: She stated that Alameda has been extremely competitive with grants compared to the rest of the region. It is a commendable track record. These projects have done the greatest good with the least assets. We need to closely consider our regional partners, and how the projects impact the region. The projects need to state the benefits such as showing the mode split quantitatively, and staff needs to factor this analysis into the entire cost of the project. For equity, it is important to reduce barriers such as credit card issues, language issues, etc. She appreciates that lens in Alameda, and would like for staff to do this outreach to educate ourselves and transit users. Administratively, the commissioners will provide input to staff through the subcommittee. More voices and louder voices are great at this stage. Public Comment for #6C - none 7. Announcements / Public Comments Jim Strehlow: Before COVID, the Bay Area was seeing increased use for water shuttles. Water taxis were the 2009 solution, and he would like to know the status of the water shuttle program, especially the status of the Alameda Landing payment for it. It should have been a yearly commitment. The General Plan discussion needs to address the main problems similar to what the discussion stated. 8. Adjournment Chair Soules adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Transportation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - October 28, 2020 8 | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,7 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 7 | Staff Thomas: He stated that it would be a worthwhile conversation, and could help guide the priorities. It is difficult to prioritize bicycling, walking, greenhouse gas reductions because these projects are trying to solve multiple problems. Chair Soules: She said that having rigor costs money. We need to base the traffic numbers on an updated analysis to serve as a backdrop and for context on how to prioritize projects. Staff Thomas: He would like to have a sub-committee with the specific policies in front of the group. We are unsure how the future will be for transportation and if the entire travel pattern will shift due to COVID and telecommuting in the future. For example, WETA is expecting midday boats to be more crowded. Chair Soules: She agreed that it is difficult and we are trying to think long term, and she will follow up with the study team on how to follow up for more details on the sub-committee. Commissioner Kohlstrand: She would like to have a viable transit system even if we have less congestion by making it more attractive. Commissioner Weitze: He asked how does Alameda promote working from home. There is talk about incentives for local businesses such as financial incentives. Alameda should try to do it. Chair Soules: She said that regionally, telecommuting is being mandated. Public Comment for #6B Christy Cannon: She said that she is on the Community Action for Sustainable Alameda, and she attends Planning Board meeting, and thinks it would be wonderful to have regular joint meetings with the Planning Board. It is tightly related, and is complicated. There are no easy ways to get people to talk about these issues. Making a City plan forces us to think 20 years ahead. She worked on promoting AC Transit bus line 19, and is excited to emphasize transit. It is a great conversation, and she appreciates the time taken by commissioners and staff. 6C. Public Works 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan Draft Recommendations Scott Wikstrom, City Engineer and Robert Vance, Supervising Civil Engineer gave a pr… | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,6 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 6 | Alamedans think of density and land use. She would like to see a special workshop meeting or sub- committee to capture all the different perspectives of the commissioner members. She would like more emphasis on transit in that a higher percentage of trips are on transit compared to bicycling and walking, especially getting on/off the island. She is unsure how to proceed with housing obligations until we know what happens with Measure Z. Staff Thomas: He said that Measure Z will impact how the City can proceed with residential density. The City needs to meet the state's housing obligations. Commissioner Kohlstrand: She stated that she would like to consider doing sketch planning with Measure A or with something more rational. Chair Soules: She agreed, and would like to have more comments on the General Plan with a sub-committee process. Commissioner Weitze: He would like measurable actions agreeing with Commissioner Yuen. He would like to set an actual goal for the percent of trips going on and off the island such as car-free to help with funding projects. Chair Soules: She stated that the surveys need more quantification. For example, the survey responses are heavily skewed towards white. The report does mention the groups that are underrepresented, and it needs to report back on how the gap would be reduced. She would like to have more prioritization of projects as well as timing. It is important to have rigor in the objectives and metrics. Transit moves the most amount of people, and transit needs to come back strong. She would like to see another Planning Board and Transportation Commission joint meeting to better understand zoning and development agreement requirements and to ensure coordination. Commissioner Yuen: She likes the idea of the joint meeting with the Planning Board, and supports the transit first idea, and would like to lift it up in the update. The survey results are lacking, and the charts are confusing. She would like an expert to look at it who knows qualitative research. There needs more out… | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,5 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 5 | 6B. General Plan Update (Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning, Building and Transportation Department) Andrew Thomas, Planning, Building and Transportation Director, gave a presentation and introduced consultant Sheffield. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4672975&GUID=66886312-9FOE-4C9E-9485- 317F282E7D8E&Options=&Search= Chair Soules requested to take community comments and to set up a process for future commissioner comments as a sub-committee. She would like a high level of engagement. The General Plan sets a baseline for projects moving forward. It is an opportunity to have community members' voices heard. There were no community comments on Item #6B at this time. Commissioner Comments and Discussion for #6B Commissioner Yuen: She had the following comments: It is a great start of this General Plan and she commends staff for all the hard work on it. The pandemic has changed city planning and how we are dealing with commercial and slow streets, and it impacts fiscal budget of the City. The General Plan needs to mention the pandemic. Staff Thomas agreed about the pandemic and released this draft just as the pandemic began, and will add lessons from the pandemic in the second draft. Commissioner Yuen continued her comments: The actions within policies should be enumerated. Some actions are specific and others are broad, and would like the actions to be as specific as possible to be able to check them off the list if completed. Some actions are global across several chapters such as complete streets, climate and mobility element, and would like to see if it is possible to see mapping by element and action. Staff Thomas said that the update needs to be restated to better understand progress to inform budget decisions, and staff/consultants are working on cross indexing. Vice Chair Nachtigall agreed about the need to include mention of the pandemic. It is well designed and pretty, and yet the photos and the design graphics need to better visua… | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,4 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 4 | Commissioner Weitze: He supports the bike/pedestrian bridge, though he recommends that it be designed as a bike/pedestrian/transit bridge, since transit will help individuals who do not bike or walk. He is disappointed that the conversation is focused on a one-foot wider bike path, and instead would like to see a path protected from traffic and air pollution. He would like other path options, and not to have a path that exposes people to the air in the Tube. He is hesitant to support the project as is. It is not multimodal. The bike/pedestrian bridge is the long-term solution. Vice Chair Nachtigall: She supports the project, and the current experience is dangerous for pedestrians. She is concerned about the potential for delay, and the bike/pedestrian bridge should not preclude this project. It is not the most multimodal solution but incremental improvements are needed and this project has been in the works for a long time. Commissioner Kohlstrand: She requests that it needs to be clear what the Commissioners are being asked to do for any agenda item. She is open to adding language to enhance pedestrian and transit access as a motion. Vice Chair Nachtigall: She asked for clarification on if it an action item. Staff Thomas: Staff would like to pass comments to the City Council. Can be either consensus-based or an action. Commissioner Weitze: It is not a multimodal project so it does not feel like Alameda should give up on the Webster Tube path improvements. Commissioner Kohlstrand made a motion to support the staff letter with two modifications: Remove statement that the City would not oppose the removal of the proposed Webster Tube walkway if it could help fund the next phases of the Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge. Request that Caltrans and Alameda CTC enhance transit access to and from the Tubes both in Oakland and Alameda, which would improve multi-modal access of the project. Commissioner Yuen: She seconded the motion by Commissioner Kohlstrand. The motion passed 6-0. Transportation Commission Special Meeting Minut… | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,3 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 3 | Michael Sullivan: He bikes through the tubes on a daily basis. It would be unfortunate to spend monies on another path in Webster Tube. It is not a multimodal project. He strongly supports investing in the bike/pedestrian bridge. Ed Manasse, Deputy Director of Planning with the City of Oakland. He has been working with the Alameda CTC project staff and consultants. He appreciates the comments heard tonight, and the City of Oakland will be drafting a letter of support for this project. He also supports the bike/pedestrian bridge project, which will be positive for both cities. Jim Strehlow: He is a bicyclist and motorist. The 2009 Estuary Crossing Study stated that the number one priority would be the water taxi program, and he wants to know the status of this project. The OAAP project is multimodal. The bike/pedestrian bridge is too far north for his needs so he would not use it. Sixth Street is six lanes, and will become a traffic jam. He supports this project. Cyndy Johnson: She is with Bike Walk Alameda, and highlighted the portion of their submitted letter about the bike/pedestrian bridge. The project path does not meet best practice standards. The bike/pedestrian bridge should have been included in this project, and could accommodate up to 13 percent of the estuary trips. Alameda CTC should identify funds for the bike/pedestrian bridge. This bridge has been ten years in the making. Commissioner Comments and Discussion for #6A Commissioner Kohlstrand: She stated that this project is a long time in coming, and it is an important project, particularly for the City of Oakland. It seems to be a reasonable solution, and we should support the project as recommended by City staff. She has used the bus more than the car in this corridor, and is concerned that no transit improvements are listed as part of the project. She would like to have transit priority on both sides of the tube, and would like to hear why it was not included in the project. She would rather see the Webster Street path improvements than shift the … | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,2 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 2 | project, unless one is coming from San Leandro. If coming from San Francisco, this problem has not been solved from Broadway by this project. Paul Ashby: He encouraged the City of Alameda to support inclusion of the Webster Tube walkway for bicyclists. He has concerns about traffic off the island, for bicyclists and for pedestrians. This $100 million project is not yet funded and he is concerned about how to fund the $200 million bike/pedestrian bridge and when it could be funded. Pedestrian improvements will be valuable. Bicycling is difficult in the tubes, and the Webster Tube bike improvements are not satisfactory; however, a four-foot wide path (in Webster Tube) would be better than the three-foot wide path (in Posey Tube). Sugiarto Loni, representing Oakland Chinatown Chamber. He stated that Chinatown receives the brunt of the traffic problem. He was involved in the previous Broadway-Jackson Study; however, Alameda was opposed so the study was delayed for ten years, is his understanding. The OAAP project is a good project for the Chinatown community. The project would open up the Chinatown community making it better for pedestrians. He thinks the horseshoe will work, and he does not want to lose time with a $200 million bike/pedestrian bridge, especially with the planned development of Alameda Point. He hopes that Alameda will support OAAP and not derail it. Serena Chen: She has lived in Alameda for 23 years, and also lived in Oakland and helped build the social communities in Oakland. The freeway cut off Chinatown, and this project is a serious social justice issue. Institutional decisions destroyed the Oakland Chinatown area. She does not want to hold up the opportunity to bring Chinatown together and reduce pollution from Alamedans who drive. She wants to move forward, and she also supports the bike/pedestrian bridge. John Han: He was born in Alameda, and he lives and works in Alameda. The progress of this project is necessary. Alameda will grow yet there is no other ingress or egress. The collisions cont… | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf,1 | TransportationCommission | 2020-10-28 | 1 | Approved Minutes Transportation Commission Special Meeting Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Time: 6:30 p.m. Location: Due to Governor Executive Order N-29-20, Transportation Commissioners can attend the meeting via teleconference. The City allows public participation via Zoom. City Hall was NOT open to the public during the meeting. 1. Roll Call Present: Chair Soules, Commissioners Kohlstrand, Nachtigall, Hans, Johnson, Yuen, Weitze. Absent: None. 2. Agenda Changes - none 3. Staff Communications as shown in the web link here: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4672973&GUID=F417595E-294D-4A7A-81A9- 930246FOCDD5&Options=&Search=&FullText=1 4. Announcements/ Public Comments - none 5. Consent Calendar - none 6. Regular Agenda Items 6A. Recommendation to Review and Provide Input on City Staff's Draft Support Letter for the Oakland Alameda Access Project (OAAP) and to Provide Comments on the Project's Draft Environmental Document Chair Soules recused herself from this item, and Vice Chair Nachtigall led this item. Andrew Thomas, Planning, Building and Transportation Director, gave a presentation. The staff report and attachments can be found at: https://alameda.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4672974&GUID=E0OCAC43-48BD-4066-8468- E7ED82F902BF&Options=&Search= Staff Thomas also introduced: Rodney Pimentel of HNTB Susan Chang of Alameda County Transportation Commission Speakers on #6A Gary Knecht: He stated that it is Jack London District and not Jack London Square, which is concerned with connection to Chinatown. He does not want more frontage roads, and will tolerate them. The horseshoe does create a frontage road of concern. Getting to Alameda will not be improved with this Transportation Commission Special Meeting Minutes - October 28, 2020 1 | TransportationCommission/2020-10-28.pdf |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE "pages" ( [body] TEXT, [date] TEXT, [page] INTEGER, [text] TEXT, [path] TEXT, PRIMARY KEY ([path], [page]) );