In Bloom
The last three posts have all been about existing transportation city policy, so now it’s time to make the great leap to proposed policies. It’s good to remember that the General Plan is suppose to be updated every 10 years and that it’s been 16 years since it’s been through an update. This isn’t just rearranging the deckchairs on a large ship that has hit an iceberg and is sinking while the band, having given up hope of rescue, plays on in an attempt to calm peoples nerves. But I digress, as I often do. Have you ever noticed that digressions are (d’oh).
Without further ado, the proposed Transportation Master Plan (the first of what will be many pages):
Proposed policies Transportation Master Plan/Transportation Element Update
The proposed Transportation Master Plan (TMP) policies were created by the Transportation Commission and a task force consisting of members from a variety of city boards and commissions, including the Planning Board, Economic Development, Rec and Parks, Housing, etc. as well as public input gathered at many public meetings as well as a large, random sample survey of Alameda Households.
The proposed TMP policies then underwent extensive city staff comment and review and the final proposed policies were circulated to many of the city boards and commissions for comment. These recommended policies were then used as the bases for the circulation chapter of the plan.
The circulation plan specifically identifies the street classification. The existing roadway infrastructure and current usage was used as the basis for the proposed classifications, and the recommendations were then vetted by an respected, outside transportation consulting firm, DKS. In March of 2007, the Transportation Commission made a recommendation for a set of policies and street classification that form the Transportation Master Plan. This recommendation was circulated to many of the city’s boards and commissions for comment and is currently undergoing an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR process will identify a variety of transportation issues and help to ensure that the policies will not overly burden Alameda’s streets with undue traffic volumes.
In January, 2008 (or so), the public environmental reporting process will begin with public meetings on the proposal. These meetings will take place that Transportation Commission and Planning Board, with a final recommendation being sent to the City Council at the beginning of summer, 2008.
The proposed TMP continues to acknowledge that:
“Virtually every street in Alameda is a residential street. Therefore, transportation decisions need to balance the goals of moving traffic smoothly and quickly with Alamedans much loved quality of life. As they have in previous Transportation Workshops, including the 1990 General Plan update meetings, Alamedans have made is clear that they are willing to forgo high speed streets in order to accommodate the community aspects that are fostered by slower speeds.”
The TMP starts by defining that the roadways should be classified in a way that encompasses multimodal transportation:
Policy 4.1.1.a Maintain a consistent multimodal classification system of streets throughout the City that will be the basis for identifying vehicle commuter routes, transit routes, bike lanes, as well as corridors for other modes of transportation.
It also has numerous policies that provide a policy basis for the expected use of the roadways, as well as identifying protections, at city-policy level, for existing neighborhoods:
Policy 4.1.1.h: Encourage traffic within, to, and through Alameda to use the appropriate street system by providing clear and effective traffic control measures to promote smooth flow without unduly disrupting the quality of life for residents.
Policy 4.2.2.a: Protect residential neighborhood integrity by minimizing the impacts of through traffic on low-volume residential streets.
Policy 4.2.2.d: Develop a program that monitors and reacts to traffic volumes on selected city streets to ensure an appropriate distribution of traffic.
Policy 4.2.2.e: Maintain a speed limit of 25 MPH on all streets in Alameda in order to avoid creating barriers between neighborhoods….
An example of a change in policy is policy 4.2.2.2d (above), which calls for “[ensuring] an appropriate distribution of traffic.” In this policy, an “appropriate” distribution means that no single street is carrying a large share of the traffic in Alameda. This is meant to keep any one street (and therefore neighborhood) from becoming burdened with a high percentage of cross-island traffic.
One majore change in the classification of Alameda’s roadways is the re-defining of the terminology used to indicate the types of streets that Alameda has. Where the existing plan literally has “Major” and “minor,” the TMP proposes three different classification categories:
- Street Types
- Land-use Classifications
- Transportation Mode Classification
Each street receives a classification in each category (more on this below).
The TMP identifies six different Street Types and explains their role as:
“Each street type reflects the function of the street relative to the rest of the network. Streets in Alameda are classified as follows (click the links for the descriptions):
Each of these classifications is clearly defined by their primary function, constraints on the number of lanes, amount of congestion, and types of traffic calming. The end result is a roadway system that is similar to the existing system, with a few notable exceptions (8th, Gibbons, Blanding, and Bay View), but that provides greater protection and guidance for planners and residents.
One of the obvious questions is how do the proposed classifications stack up against the existing ones. And while it is not completely direct, What are now “Major” streets become Arterial/Collectors and “Minor” streets become “Local streets.” There are a few exceptions, which will be on the exceptions page.
A proposed map of the proposed Street Type classification identifies the various classifications. This varies greatly from the original staff/consultant created map, in that a number of streets were downgraded from the staff recommendation. Although this map breaks up into an unreadable mess when you zoom in too close, the preponderance of “blue” Regional Arterials and “yellow” collectors are a good indication as to the changes the Transportation Commission made in the maps, with the guidance of the trained engineers and planners on the commission, as well as input from staff and the engineers from DKS.
Leave a Reply