City of Alameda - File #: 2021-1314

• File #: 2021-1314
• Type: Regular Agenda Item
• Body: Transportation Commission
• On agenda: 9/22/2021
• Title: Endorse the City Council's Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Signalized Intersection Equity Policy (Action Item)

Title

Endorse the City Council’s Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Signalized Intersection Equity Policy (Action Item)

Body

To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Transportation Commission

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On May 26, 2021 staff presented a resolution to the Transportation Commission establishing policies on intersection access equity and pedestrian timing and detection.  Staff was directed by the Commission to consider modifications that:

1)                     Define “Intersection Access Equity” to be more focused on either all intersections or alternatively just “signalized intersections”

2)                     Reduce focus on “allocation of time” and better emphasis on “safety”.

3)                     Modify resolution to better state purpose of the policy, and the resulting improved focus on pedestrian safety

Following the May 26^th Transportation Commission, the City Manager and Council Member Knox White convened a meeting with staff to clarify the pedestrian push button proposal in the September 3, 2019 City Council referral, “Consider Providing Direction to Staff on Transportation Priorities in Advance of the Active Transportation Plan Work” (Exhibit 1). This staff report includes discussion on the clarified proposal in the Council referral and analysis to demonstrate impact of the proposal. The staff recommended policies are unchanged from that presented to the Transportation Commission on May 26, 2021 except the above mentioned refinements, which are shown in track changes in the attached resolution (Exhibit 2).

The purpose of the attached resolution for Transportation Commission and City Council consideration is to 1) define signalized intersection access equity for Alameda and 2) adopt guiding policy(s) to accommodate all modes of transportation at signalized intersections that increase safety, enhance mobility, and minimize delay for all users.

Safety is paramount in moving all modes of travel through signalized intersections.  In addition, it is a City goal in several adopted policy documents to increase the number of people walking, biking and using transit. The programming of signalized intersections can improve or degrade the convenience and comfort of these travel modes.   The draft policy presented here, if approved, establishes guiding principles on traffic signal design and operations that support mobility and access, minimize delay for all modes, and increase safety for pedestrians.  This policy combined with intersection design, improved signal timing, enhanced detection, coordination along corridors, and infrastructure modernization will guide City actions needed to manage all modes of transportation safely and equitably.

Staff is seeking endorsement from the Transportation Commission on the proposed resolution.

BACKGROUND

On September 3, 2019, the City Council adopted a referral providing direction on short- and medium-term project priorities.  The referral included eight short-term items for staff to consider.  Staff returned to City Council on November 5, 2019 with a Vision Zero policy aimed at reducing and ultimately eliminating severe and fatal injuries caused by traffic collisions in Alameda.  The Council adopted the policy, which established safety as the number one priority for the design, reconfiguration and maintenance of city streets.  Vision Zero dictates that the City changes the way the public right-of-way looks, feels and operates to achieve Alameda’s transportation, safety and climate action goals. The Vision Zero policy also formalizes the City’s use of the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) guides. NACTO’s many guidance documents, such as the Urban Street Design Guide and the Urban Bikeway Design Guide, contain forward-thinking strategies for designing streets that are safer for all transportation system users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.

On February 4, 2020, staff reported to the City Council on completed items for Vision Zero. This included a new approach to reviewing serious collisions, involving formation of an interdisciplinary response team, site visits and investigations.  Improvements at 25 intersections included refreshed and enhanced high-visibility crosswalks, the addition of stop bars to encourage vehicles to stop farther back from crosswalks, additional red curb at intersections to improve visibility (daylighting), and additional signage. 

On April 21, 2020, the City Council adopted policies on street width, lane width, crosswalks and bulb-outs to promote safe, livable streets, and environmentally sustainable transportation choices.  The City Council also provided further direction on a safety toolkit of policies and design guidelines.  At that time, staff also outlined a plan to return with the remaining items in the original referral at a later date.  Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated activities, staff’s response to the remaining items from the referral have been delayed.   Tonight’s item is focused on the signalized intersection access equity portion of the Council referral. 

New priority and/or policy should be developed consistent with the General Plan. Specifically, street classifications in Alameda are defined by the Transportation Element of the General Plan and generally prioritize streets in the community with respect to their importance in moving traffic on, off and around the island.   

The Transportation Element of the General Plan further discusses Transit Priority Streets.  These modal classifications are used to denote the preferred mode of travel on a particular street segment, as well as appropriate design treatments. The vast majority of streets within Alameda are residential streets. All streets, regardless of classification, have a limited amount of right of way available and the modal network connectivity should be preserved within these constraints. The three existing modal classifications are: Transit Priority, Bicycle Priority and Truck Route.

Transit Priority

•                     Primary Transit Streets are candidates for transit priority treatments such as traffic signal priority, and or pre-emption.

•                     Secondary Transit Streets are for local and neighborhood transit service without physical priority treatments (no signal pre-emption).

•                     Exclusive Transit Right-of-way is dedicated solely to bus rapid transit or light rail service.

Bicycle Priority

•                     Streets identified on the bicycle network map are candidates for Class I (off road path), Class II (bike lanes), and Class III (shared lanes) bike routes. These streets are identified in order to provide a network of streets that give cross-island access to bikers of all abilities.

•                     Bicycle detection is typically warranted at intersections with Class II class designations.

•                     All new auto-actuated traffic signals shall receive bike detection regardless of classification.

Truck Routes

•                     The truck route network is designed to maintain a limited number of streets on which through truck traffic is allowed. These routes generally warrant more emphasis on vehicle through-put.

•                     May conflict with transit, pedestrian, and bicycle design goals

The discussion below explores signalized intersection access equity and provides specific response and recommendations to the items listed within this component of the City Council referral.  All recommendations are consistent with the City’s 2009 Pedestrian Plan vision statement:

Plan, construct, and adequately maintain a functional, comfortable and convenient pedestrian network throughout the City of Alameda that addresses pedestrians’ mobility needs in a manner that enhances community identity and livability.

Note that the 2009 Pedestrian Plan will be superseded by the forthcoming Active Transportation Plan.

DISCUSSION

NACTO’s Urban Street Design Guide acknowledges that, “Equally important to the allocation of right of way space, in the form of street cross-sections and geometry, is the allocation of time, performed by traffic signals. Space and time in combination govern how streets operate and how well they provide mobility, safety, and public space. Signal timing is an essential tool, not just for the movement of traffic, but also for a safer environment that supports walking, bicycling, public transportation, and economic vitality.”  Traffic signal design and operation can vary greatly depending on nearby land use, roadway configuration, street classification, traffic demand, state of existing infrastructure, and user access needs.  Traffic signals allocate the time dedicated to various users of an intersection to travel through it in a safe manner.  Due to the many competing interests vying for use of an intersection, a one-size-fits-all approach is not feasible.  Trade-offs are required to balance the various needs. 

The four items outlined below in italics comprise the signalized intersection access equity component from the City Council referral. 

Intersection Equity

Council Referral 1: All street users, regardless of mode, will be provided access to the intersection at controlled intersections.

Historically, national transportation engineering practices emphasized personal vehicle travel needs over those of other users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and freight vehicles.  Vehicle throughput was valued at the expense of more vulnerable users such as pedestrians and bicyclists.  Advances in traffic signal technologies, engineering analysis, and policies such as Vision Zero have shifted the practice in Alameda to provide safe, multimodal operations at signalized intersections.  Determining an equitable distribution of traffic signal cycle time for all users is a complex balancing act that must consider:

•                     Complexity of intersection geometry (number of legs, or in some cases offsets)

•                     Crosswalk lengths

•                     Traffic volumes (of all modes)

•                     Surrounding area land use/Street Classification in General Plan

•                     Types of street users

•                     Traffic signal infrastructure capabilities (e.g., location and type of detection, controller)

•                     Bus stops and routes

•                     Corridor signal coordination (sometimes with Caltrans)

Signal Time for Pedestrians: The City’s pedestrian green phases (WALK symbol) are typically 7 seconds.  This time allows for pedestrians to leave the curb and shoulder before the start of the pedestrian clearance interval (flashing don’t walk sign).  Walking rates and crosswalk length are then used to calculate the pedestrian clearance interval of a signal in accordance with the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).  Typically, 3.5-feet per second is used but special considerations of slower walking speeds should be given to intersections with high volumes of pedestrians who are elderly or disabled. 

To ensure all street users are provided access at signalized intersections, staff recommends the City maximize the pedestrian phase so that it ends concurrently with the parallel vehicle green interval. One potential exception is transit signal priority, in which green times may be extended to allow buses to continue through the intersection. This may occur after completion of the pedestrian phase.

Staff also recommends walk durations longer than 7 seconds and assumed slower walking speeds to determine the appropriate pedestrian clearance interval in school zones and areas with large numbers of elderly pedestrians.

Pedestrian Signal Phasing: The most common type of pedestrian signal phases provide a “WALK” and a “DO NOT WALK” phase, preferably with a countdown timer to indicate the amount of clearance time remaining.  Nationally, most vehicle/pedestrian/bike collisions involve turning vehicles.  One strategy the City currently uses to improve the pedestrian’s visibility at signalized intersections is leading pedestrian interval (LPI) that gives pedestrians a 3 to 7 second head start while the adjacent vehicle phase is red.   Staff recommends LPI be considered at intersections with crash histories, or over 25 pedestrian crossings per hour.   

The City’s principal objectives of traffic signal operations are safely accommodating all modes of traffic, and minimizing delay for all users.  Although achieving one objective may conflict with another, the City has strived to exercise professional judgement to achieve a balance amongst these objectives to avoid any single user from experiencing unwarranted delay. 

Staff recommends definition and adoption of signalized intersection access equity as the defining principal objective for traffic signal operations. Signalized intersection access equity will maximize safety and minimize delay for all modes of travel.    At its core, Signalized Intersection Access Equity can be defined as:

The distribution of cycle time allocated for the various users of the signalized intersection in a balanced manner, by providing the necessary infrastructure improvements needed to allow each user to safely and conveniently cross the street.

Roadway users other than individual passenger vehicles are granted equitable access at a signalized intersection through the following applications:

•                     Provide pedestrian enhancements such as leading pedestrian intervals, countdown signal heads, and audible/accessible pedestrian signals (APS) , where applicable

•                     Provide bicycle enhancements such as detection, bicycle timing parameters, and bicycle signals on designated bikeways, as determined feasible

•                     Implement transit signal priority along major transit corridors

•                     Implement emergency preemption equipment and timing

Staff recommends adoption of these applications for equitable access.

Pedestrian Detection

Council Referral 2: If access given because car triggered light, pedestrian light activated automatically. Beg button used only as means to signal access needed, not at all times

Detection is an essential tool in the design and operation of a traffic signal system to increase efficiency by allowing for demand-based operations.  Detection inputs are used for all modes entering an intersection, including pedestrians, vehicles, bicycles, and transit.  Detection allows for demand-based signal operations, which allows for reduced wait times for all users and lower vehicle emissions.

For determining a pedestrian’s desire to cross an intersection, the most common and reliable pedestrian detection tool has proven to be the pedestrian push button. Passive pedestrian detection, which uses sensors to identify when a pedestrian is waiting to cross a street is another method.  There are several types of passive pedestrian detection technology including microwave, video, and infrared. The basis for these technologies is the detection zone on the curb. Once a pedestrian enters the detection zone, the device places a call to the traffic controller for the Walk signal. While studies have shown that passive detection reduces the percentage of pedestrians who cross roadways at inappropriate times, passive detection has limited ability to accurately detect the pedestrian’s desired crossing direction, resulting in false or inaccurate calls.

For pedestrian detection, the City of Alameda deploys pedestrian push buttons exclusively.  69 of 89 signalized intersections currently have pedestrian detection.  Exhibit 2 shows these locations.  While passive detection is used by the City for the both motorists and bicyclists (i.e., in-pavement loops and video detection), it is not used for pedestrians given the current state of the technology. In addition, the City’s existing traffic signal controller systems are not effectively equipped to accommodate wide scale passive pedestrian detection. Staff will continue to stay up to date on emerging transportation technology that have been tested and meet industry standards.

Pedestrian phases can be configured as recall or pushbutton actuated. Recall automatically activates the pedestrian green (WALK signal) every cycle whether the pedestrian pushes the button or not.  Actuation requires the pedestrian to press the push button to activate the WALK signal. 

The Council referral proposes a version of recall that requires a pedestrian to push the button to activate the WALK signal when there are no vehicles traveling in their same direction; however, when a vehicle triggers the light green, the WALK signal would automatically be served regardless of whether a pedestrian is present.  The Council referral proposes this approach for all signalized intersections citywide.  This version of recall reduces the need for pedestrians to trigger the push buttons and mitigates instances of pedestrians arriving at the intersection too late when the light has just turned green and having to wait an entire cycle length before the WALK signal is served. This type of recall is currently being used on Park Street and Webster Streets.

A disadvantage of the proposed recall operations is that pedestrians may not be aware that they have to use the push button if no vehicles are present. There are instances where the signal will revert back to a vehicle phase (e.g., the main street movement) to maintain coordination even when there isn’t a vehicle present. In these instances, since there was no vehicle detected, the pedestrian phase isn’t activated. As such, there are still occurrences where vehicles are served but pedestrians are not, particularly if a pedestrian wasn’t aware they needed to use the push button due to the lack of a vehicle traveling in their same direction. The City has received SeeClickFix comments which denoted pedestrians were being skipped and staff investigations attributed to this operational issue.

A second disadvantage of this type of recall (as well as full pedestrian recall) is that serving a WALK signal every time a vehicle triggers the green will increase intersection delay due to the pedestrian timing when a pedestrian is not present. Increase vehicle delay has emission impacts.  Also, pedestrian recall limits the traffic signal’s ability to adjust timing as the signal must serve the pedestrian phase, regardless of the actual presence of a pedestrian.  Using pedestrian actuation enhances the ability to implement Transit Signal Priority (TSP) since the signal controller can reallocate side-street time to the main street for transit vehicles to progress through the intersection when pedestrians are not present.

To understand the potential delay and emissions impact of the citywide recall proposal in the Council referral, staff modeled the proposed signal timing at 8 signalized intersections representative of the various types of intersections across town. For the analysis, each of the 8 intersections were evaluated under the proposed recall operations (i.e., vehicle call triggers ped call) and under fully actuated (i.e., demand based). For the intersections on Park and Webster which currently have coordinated timing plans, the coordination was maintained under both analysis scenarios. As shown in Tables 1 and 2, all intersections operate more efficiently under actuated operations since the signals will terminate phases without demand to serve the phases that do. For the 8 sample intersections, the increase in emissions during morning and afternoon peak is estimated at 1.36 tons. Assuming similar rates across the City’s 89 signals, this is nearly 15 tons, or the emissions equivalent of nearly 1,700 gallons of gasoline.

While the increase in delay and emissions seem minor (<1%) at certain intersections, the peak periods assessed are when pedestrian/vehicle volumes are likely at the highest. As such, these values represent when the signals are operating at their “max” and likely can’t operate much more efficiently due to high demands. A higher %-delay/emissions is expected during off-peak times because actuation becomes more important when traffic is more sporadic and pedestrian volumes lower.

Table 1: AM Peak (7AM - 9AM) Recall Proposal versus Actuated Comparison

Intersection	Recall*		Actuated*		Δ - Actuated to Recall
	Total Delay (hr)	Total CO Emissions (lbs)	Total Delay (hr)	Total CO Emissions (lbs)	Increase in Total Delay (hr)		Increase in Total CO Emissions (lbs)
Constitution & Atlantic	8,871	1,569	8,653	1,531	218	2.5%	37.80	2.41%
Webster & Pacific	1,943	756	1,253	742	690	35.5%	13.74	1.82%
High & Ferns/Gibbons	10,932	3,225	10,034	2,180	898	8.2%	1,045.73	32.42%
Broadway & Otis	8,824	4,765	8,559	4,721	265	3.0%	43.52	0.91%
Main St & Atlantic	1,378	927	1,062	885	316	23.0%	41.23	4.45%
Park Ave & Blanding Ave	3,951	1,388	3,606	1,332	345	8.7%	56.12	4.04%
Grand St & Encinal Ave	2,717	2,366	2,579	2,348	138	5.1%	18.33	0.77%
Grand St & Otis	3,116	3,065	2,483	2,977	633	20.3%	88.19	2.88%

*Yearly totals, assume 260 weekday workdays

Table 2: PM Peak (4PM - 6PM) Recall Proposal versus Actuated Comparison

Intersection	Recall*		Actuated*		Δ - Actuated to Recall
	Total Delay (hr)	Total CO Emissions (lbs)	Total Delay (hr)	Total CO Emissions (lbs)	Increase in Total Delay (hr)		Increase in Total CO Emissions (lbs)
Constitution & Atlantic	24,677	4,139	16,622	3,189	8,055	32.6%	950.66	22.97%
Webster & Pacific	1,659	780	1,295	707	364	22.0%	73.30	9.40%
High & Ferns/Gibbons	7,903	2,676	7,171	2,591	731	9.3%	84.76	3.17%
Broadway & Otis	12,828	5,232	12,405	5,186	424	3.3%	45.81	0.88%
Main St & Atlantic	1,416	873	1,078	834	338	23.8%	38.94	4.46%
Park Ave & Blanding Ave	8,091	2,435	7,705	2,358	385	4.8%	76.74	3.15%
Grand St & Encinal Ave	2,717	2,366	2,579	2,348	138	5.1%	18.33	0.77%
Grand St & Otis	3,116	3,065	2,483	2,977	633	20.3%	88.19	2.88%

*Yearly totals, assume 260 weekday workdays

Based on the these findings, staff does not recommend the widespread deployment of pedestrian recall (whether full pedestrian recall or the modified recall proposed in the Council referral) but rather using full pedestrian recall in certain areas during peak pedestrian hours. Time-of-day based recall takes advantage of pedestrian actuation during non-peak pedestrian times; thereby allowing more time for transit signal priority to increase the schedule reliability of transit service and avoid unnecessary delays.  A nearby example of where time-of-day recall is used is Downtown City of Oakland along Broadway. Broadway experiences high pedestrian and transit volumes during daytime hours, as well as steady vehicle volumes. Due to the high number of pedestrian volumes, the traffic signals are programmed to operate under pedestrian recall from 7am to 7pm. However, since Broadway is a primary transit corridor, the City and AC Transit agreed that pedestrian recall could be turned off during off-peak times where there are lower volumes of pedestrians to allow for actuated operations and to afford more time to transit signal priority. Adopting signal operation policies that preserve flexibility would allow Staff to evaluate a similar approach time-of-day recall approach to help buses progress along Park and Webster Streets during off-peak hours.

The attached resolution contains the following policies:

1.                     To achieve signalized intersection access equity, signalized intersections will be in recall (a pedestrian WALK signal at every cycle) under the following conditions:

•                     Intersections without existing push-button pedestrian detection

•                     Signalized intersections adjacent to schools where pedestrian or bike-on-sidewalk crossings exceed 50 pedestrians per hour for at least two hours a day. Recall will be implemented during peak pedestrian hours (start/stop times of school).

•                     Signalized intersections in Community Commercial land use category with pedestrian and bike-on-sidewalk crossings exceed 25/hour for at least 2 hours a day.  Recall will be implemented during peak pedestrian hours only.

Time of day based recall allows transit signal priority to be prioritized outside peak pedestrian hours to increase schedule reliability and avoid unnecessary delays.   Signalized intersections not meeting the above criteria will be pedestrian actuated - pedestrian pushes the button for the WALK signal to be served - to maximize efficiency in traffic signal operations.

The City of Seattle’s pedestrian detection policy is referenced by some community members as a model for Alameda.  There seems to be a misunderstanding that the Seattle policy calls for pedestrian recall at all signalized intersections. Instead, Seattle calls for recall at signalized intersections in their Urban Centers and Urban Villages.  Land uses in Alameda do not approach the densities of Seattle’s Urban Centers and Urban Villages.  At locations outside of Urban Centers and Urban Villages, Seattle’s policy has specific criteria for recall to be considered (ex. pedestrian volumes).   In addition, even within the Urban Centers and Villages, Seattle’s policy has potential exceptions to recall that include the following:

•                     The traffic signal is under the jurisdictional authority of the State, which includes some intersections at or near access to states highways.

•                     The implementation would not be in alignment with the City’s multimodal access, safety, and mobility goals, for example:

•                     Locations with very low pedestrian volumes (less than 25 per hour)

•                     Significant delay and impact to transit (greater than 20 seconds per cycle)

•                     Locations where low pedestrian and side street volumes allow cycle length shorter than 70 seconds if we maintain actuation.

Staff used the pedestrian volume threshold in Seattle’s policy as basis for the criteria in which in which signalized intersections in Alameda will be considered for recall. 

Council Referral 3: Cover beg buttons at intersections where the button is not needed, (avoid confusion)

As noted above, pedestrian detection is critical to efficient traffic signal operations.  Although an automatic pedestrian WALK signal every cycle is recommended under certain conditions, the conditions are time of day based and it is not feasible to routinely cover/uncover pedestrian pushbuttons. 

In addition, the MUTCD recommends Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) systems to communicate information about the walk phase in audible and vibrotactile formats to assist individuals with hearing or vision impairment.  Regardless of whether the signalized intersection is in recall or pedestrian detection activated, APSs remain active at all times to assist those hearing and vision impairment.  39 of the 69 intersections with pedestrian detection have APS systems with integrated speakers in the push button units.  Staff currently installs APS whenever possible, in accordance with the General Plan’s guiding policy 4.1.1.f.1:

Staff recommends:

1.                     Not covering pedestrian push buttons

2.                     Continue to upgrade existing pedestrian signals by adding pedestrian countdown, audible, and tactile/vibrational signals.

Pedestrian Barricades

Council Referral 4:  No pedestrian blocking barricades

Pedestrian barricades are used to direct pedestrians toward painted crosswalks and away from undesirable crossings.  Undesirable crossings may include locations where there is no existing continuous path of travel through an intersection (e.g., median/barrier in roadway inhibiting crossing) or where safety concerns (e.g., line-of-sight restrictions) may put pedestrians at risk.  Nevertheless, there are instances of barricades being used to consolidate pedestrian movements to a single crossing to improve signalized intersection efficiency, which leads to de-prioritizing pedestrians by making them use a longer and slower path of travel through an intersection.  As such, pedestrian barricades can be a barrier to access instead of a tool for improved safety.

Staff recommends:

1.                     Construction of new traffic signals shall have crosswalks marked on all legs.

2.                     Prioritize removal of existing pedestrian barricades at signalized intersections according to:

a.                     Vision Zero high injury corridors

b.                     Surrounding land uses such as schools, parks, and commercial streets

3.                     Remove and replace existing barricades with new ramps and crosswalks in conjunction with ADA improvements required as part of the City’s Pavement Management Program as funding allows. As needed, provide traffic signal modifications.

Intersection Enhancement and Education

The recommendations above focus on pedestrians from a traffic signal operations perspective; however, to provide a comprehensive approach to pedestrian safety, traffic signal operations needs to be paired with complimentary design and educational considerations to enhance safety and access.  Physical improvements such as intersection geometry, lighting, and signage, as well as educational tools have been shown to have a compounding effect on overall pedestrian safety.

Pedestrian focused educational campaigns serve two purposes:

1.                     Educating drivers to be aware of pedestrians, and

2.                     Educating pedestrians on how to safely cross and use available crossing facilities.

Both the draft Vision Zero Action Plan and draft Active Transportation Plan include educational efforts. Through these efforts, staff will collaborate with the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC), Alameda Unified School District and Bike Walk Alameda to leverage existing and any new projects and programs.  These efforts will create a more well-rounded approach to pedestrian safety, which includes traffic operations, intersection design, and educational campaigns.  

ALTERNATIVES

1.                     Recommend the policy to the City Council as recommended by staff.

2.                     Recommend changes to the policy before consideration by the City Council.

3.                     Do not recommend the policy for City Council consideration and provide a different direction to staff.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

Implementation of the proposed policy will be incorporated into existing and future contracts and projects, which have dedicated funding sources.  No funding allocation is being requested at this time; however, future requests for funding related to this policy will need to balance the need to increase traffic safety with other priorities such as implementation of citywide traffic signal re-timing consistent with this policy, and other projects listed in staff recommendations.

MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE

Adopting a resolution on Intersection Access Equity and pedestrian timing to improve safety at intersections is consistent with many existing City policies and planning documents, including:

•                     Vision Zero policy (adopted in 2019) to reduce and eventually eliminate traffic deaths and severe injuries;

•                     Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (2019) requirement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 50% below 2005 levels by 2030; and

•                     Transportation Choices Plan (2018) Goal #2 to increase the share of walking, bicycling, bus and carpooling trips within Alameda.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

Approval to develop planning documents is statutorily exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Adoption of this policy does not have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.  Any future physical changes to the environment or roadway network that requires discretionary action by the City Council or Transportation Commission will be subject to future environmental review.

CLIMATE IMPACT

As identified in the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan, transportation is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Alameda.  Making streets safer and prioritizing people who walk, bike or use transit will encourage more of these trips and fewer automobile trips.  Additionally, updating traffic signal timing and coordination, and modernizing intersections will allow signalized intersections to operate more efficiently, reducing overall motor vehicle emissions.

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends the Transportation Commission endorse the City Council’s adoption of a resolution establishing policies on signalized intersection access equity and pedestrian timing and detection to improve safety at intersections

Respectfully submitted,

Russell S Thompson, Interim City Engineer

By,

Erin Smith, Director of Public Works

Financial Impact section reviewed,

Annie To, Finance Director

Exhibits: 

1.                     Council Referral

2.                     Map

3.                     Resolution