There is clearly a benefit to high gas prices beyond reduced deaths, pollution, and improved national security from less drivng. Communities like Martinez and Benicia benefit when refiners go out of business. The economic rationalism that reigned over our political, economic and business worlds has ignored the public health while subsidizing a toxic world. The risks were always clear, as defined by rational science, while a logical analysis of the economics showed acting early was cheaper than acting late. For example a UC Davis study showed that living within 500 feet of a major roadway resulted in permanent lung damage for children. Yet a strange kind of religious and ideological zealotry holds federal policy in its grasp ignoring public health at the expense of declined national security.
Ethanol's problem stems from starving people to feed our cars. Instead the Federal government should push for walkable communities on the transit corridors. Growing Cooler from the Urban Land Institute shows that walkable communities on the transit corridor can lower green house gases by 40% and Robert Cervelo at UC Berkeley says that if Transit can capture the landuse value created by its presence and that if done right, like in Hong Kong, transit can be operated on a profit with conventional economic models. The green house gas reduction could reach as high as 60 percent, Cervero added, compared to the level of per-capita emissions that would result from continuing business-as-usual sprawl-inducing policies.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Ralston 101 next step
History
Design started in 1998. Scott Mace of Mid Pen Bicycle Coalition warns about danger to cyclists and pedestrians. There are three authorities. Redwood City is the lead authority. Belmont and Caltrans are the other two.
Issues from the past
1- Belmont and Redwood City decide that bike accommodations are not necessary because a parallel bike bridge will be constructed shortly. Government penalizes walkers and cyclists today, for some Clean Air Act fix in the future, like the TDA-3 over-crossing of Ralston 101 which is now ten years late.
2- Caltrans accommodates compromised access provisions despite its district protests over such design elements on Page Mill Road at 280 and the resulting bicycle fatality that required an interchange restripping plan.
3- Redwood City is able to add two north bound ramp lanes in front of Oracle to 101 from Marina Parkway (which is what Ralston is called on the Redwood City side) to meet their Congestion Management Level of Service (CM-LOS) provisions because of acceptance of compromised access for bicycles and pedestrians today. (See Plan Expectations item 7 below.)
Status-
1- Interchange is still not signed off by Belmont because the landscape provisions have not been completed.
2- The onramp to 101 southbound from Ralston has the most pedestrian bicycle crashes in Belmont.
3- The bicycle bridge ten years later is less than 25% funded, mostly from TDA-3 funds (See Plan Expectations item 7 below.)
4- Numerous complaints about the interchange safety for bikes and peds followed from 2002 onward on the lines of the Scott Mace's notice of dangerous conditions. Peter Voramasenti, Peter Ingram, Dwight Caldwell, Ray Davis, and Julian Caroll were involved. The bridge was opened in 2004.
5- A subsequent meeting in May 2008 with Rich Napier, Dwight Caldwell, Paul Pang, Tom Madalena, and Peter Voramasenti resulted in a decision to review the striping of the interchange.
6- Redwood City painted a dashed pocket lane left of the two onramp lanes from Oracle as part of a larger (well done) restriping program in Redwood Shore in September 2008.
Paint Expectations
1- Caltrans will complete their restriping plan from the May 2008 meeting to allow a bike lane to the gore when westbound on Marina Parkway past the two onramps.
NOTE: subsequent update- Peter Dalgado in RWC said that RWC, as the lead authority on the unsigned off plan (see item 1 under status) would paint in the lanes on their dime if Caltrans can finish the drawings.
2- Belmont will draw and paint bike lanes from Ralston and Hiller to Ralston and Old County.
NOTE: subsequent update- Council member Bill Dickenson, lead to the Belmont Green Advisory Committee, said he would take this provision up with the Belmont City Council.
3- Peter Delgado in RWC said he might paint the pocket lane on Marina Parkway in solid lines after a bike lane to the gore is painted in. This would made the automotive design elements in the present striping plan safer since it causes motorists to rethink cutting in at the last minute.
Plan Expectations
1- CCAG will write a policy for interchanges that requires routine accommodations- bike and ped access will be designed into all projects and fully funded at the design stage. Sandy Wong, assistant director at CCAG acknowledged before the CCAG board, July 10th 2008, in response to question from Kelly Furgusson on item 4.10 pulled from the consent calendar, that this would be necessary.
2- CCAG needs to address how its CM-LOS goals result in designs like this 2004 interchange which compromise bicycle and pedestrian safety, comfort, efficiency, health and access elements.
3- Todd McIntyre of the Transit Authority was asked by Committee For Green Foothills, the Sierra Club, and Gladwyn d'Souza in the reauthorization of Measure A to only include funding for road projects that fully include bicycle and pedestrian access in August 2008.
4- Rich Napier said in May 2008 that he would look into getting full funding of bike and ped access in road projects from other road funding sources like the project budget itself. CCAG needs to write this into their project design requirements.
5- Belmont's unfunded bike bridge takes riders almost a mile off course with severe egress and exits time compromises. Egress issues are prevalent for all POCs including the Belmont Bike Ped bridge which seeks to provide access to the Bay Trail and links an east 101 Belmont neighborhood with Nesbit Elementary School. Caltrans is looking into egress and comfort issues on the upcoming Woodside interchange which could be a model of how future projects are designed. General plan circulation elements should state that POCs should be part of an Urban Trail System that provides complete regional access for children's land uses.
6. Caltrans District 4 needs to fully implement DD-64
7. MTC and the TA needs to review how CM-LOS provisions results in denied access and the resulting role of TDA-3 funds in compromised safety and access for non motorized modes.
Design started in 1998. Scott Mace of Mid Pen Bicycle Coalition warns about danger to cyclists and pedestrians. There are three authorities. Redwood City is the lead authority. Belmont and Caltrans are the other two.
Issues from the past
1- Belmont and Redwood City decide that bike accommodations are not necessary because a parallel bike bridge will be constructed shortly. Government penalizes walkers and cyclists today, for some Clean Air Act fix in the future, like the TDA-3 over-crossing of Ralston 101 which is now ten years late.
2- Caltrans accommodates compromised access provisions despite its district protests over such design elements on Page Mill Road at 280 and the resulting bicycle fatality that required an interchange restripping plan.
3- Redwood City is able to add two north bound ramp lanes in front of Oracle to 101 from Marina Parkway (which is what Ralston is called on the Redwood City side) to meet their Congestion Management Level of Service (CM-LOS) provisions because of acceptance of compromised access for bicycles and pedestrians today. (See Plan Expectations item 7 below.)
Status-
1- Interchange is still not signed off by Belmont because the landscape provisions have not been completed.
2- The onramp to 101 southbound from Ralston has the most pedestrian bicycle crashes in Belmont.
3- The bicycle bridge ten years later is less than 25% funded, mostly from TDA-3 funds (See Plan Expectations item 7 below.)
4- Numerous complaints about the interchange safety for bikes and peds followed from 2002 onward on the lines of the Scott Mace's notice of dangerous conditions. Peter Voramasenti, Peter Ingram, Dwight Caldwell, Ray Davis, and Julian Caroll were involved. The bridge was opened in 2004.
5- A subsequent meeting in May 2008 with Rich Napier, Dwight Caldwell, Paul Pang, Tom Madalena, and Peter Voramasenti resulted in a decision to review the striping of the interchange.
6- Redwood City painted a dashed pocket lane left of the two onramp lanes from Oracle as part of a larger (well done) restriping program in Redwood Shore in September 2008.
Paint Expectations
1- Caltrans will complete their restriping plan from the May 2008 meeting to allow a bike lane to the gore when westbound on Marina Parkway past the two onramps.
NOTE: subsequent update- Peter Dalgado in RWC said that RWC, as the lead authority on the unsigned off plan (see item 1 under status) would paint in the lanes on their dime if Caltrans can finish the drawings.
2- Belmont will draw and paint bike lanes from Ralston and Hiller to Ralston and Old County.
NOTE: subsequent update- Council member Bill Dickenson, lead to the Belmont Green Advisory Committee, said he would take this provision up with the Belmont City Council.
3- Peter Delgado in RWC said he might paint the pocket lane on Marina Parkway in solid lines after a bike lane to the gore is painted in. This would made the automotive design elements in the present striping plan safer since it causes motorists to rethink cutting in at the last minute.
Plan Expectations
1- CCAG will write a policy for interchanges that requires routine accommodations- bike and ped access will be designed into all projects and fully funded at the design stage. Sandy Wong, assistant director at CCAG acknowledged before the CCAG board, July 10th 2008, in response to question from Kelly Furgusson on item 4.10 pulled from the consent calendar, that this would be necessary.
2- CCAG needs to address how its CM-LOS goals result in designs like this 2004 interchange which compromise bicycle and pedestrian safety, comfort, efficiency, health and access elements.
3- Todd McIntyre of the Transit Authority was asked by Committee For Green Foothills, the Sierra Club, and Gladwyn d'Souza in the reauthorization of Measure A to only include funding for road projects that fully include bicycle and pedestrian access in August 2008.
4- Rich Napier said in May 2008 that he would look into getting full funding of bike and ped access in road projects from other road funding sources like the project budget itself. CCAG needs to write this into their project design requirements.
5- Belmont's unfunded bike bridge takes riders almost a mile off course with severe egress and exits time compromises. Egress issues are prevalent for all POCs including the Belmont Bike Ped bridge which seeks to provide access to the Bay Trail and links an east 101 Belmont neighborhood with Nesbit Elementary School. Caltrans is looking into egress and comfort issues on the upcoming Woodside interchange which could be a model of how future projects are designed. General plan circulation elements should state that POCs should be part of an Urban Trail System that provides complete regional access for children's land uses.
6. Caltrans District 4 needs to fully implement DD-64
7. MTC and the TA needs to review how CM-LOS provisions results in denied access and the resulting role of TDA-3 funds in compromised safety and access for non motorized modes.
STRS funding needs effectiveness appraisal.
As the state gears up to release $48.5M in Safe Route To School funding they need to look how jurisdictions are spending the money and what the planning agencies are doing to the reduce the occurrence of problems from Level of Service "enhancements."
Measure A money is used by the Transportation Authority in San Mateo County to "relive congestion" from low LOS grades at interchanges with planning through CCAG. The larger permitted traffic take away pedestrian and bicycle facilities. For example the Ralston 101 interchange in Belmont CA took the sidewalk away on the north side and has street furniture in the narrow five foot sidewalk on the south side. The doubled up right turning freeway access lanes to 101 northbound took away a shareable bike lane westbound. Some cyclists began riding wrong way on the south side sidewalk interfering with peds on the narrow sidewalk. And cyclist-vehicle collisions have increased where the sidewalk crosses the access lane to 101 northbound.
Belmont told Caltrans at the interchange design phase in 1998 that they would be building a Pedestrian Over Crossing which is why the ped and bike facilities were compromised. The POC has only secured twenty five percent of its funding ten years later. The city has applied for a stimulus grant because they say it is a shovel ready project. Because of the topography it will add, if and when completed, 7/8s of a mile to a ped trip!
In the neighborhood on the northwest side of the interchange complaints of cut through traffic resulted in a 450k SRTS grant for bulbouts. This was installed without any neighborhood meetings. When other neighbors complained that the bulbouts only made it difficult to get in and out of their side streets and did nothing for cut through traffic on the collector, the city took them out for $500k.
The larger interchange has resulted in higher traffic volumes and off peak speed increases. Complaints from parents of school aged children resulted in a couple of SRTS grants to install lighted crosswalks and a couple for Automatic Speed Radar Display signs. One of the intersections where the SRTS lighted crosswalk was installed is more than 70 feet wide and complaints have persisted from parents about near misses with children. The city is considering removing the lighted crosswalk and going with a zebra crossing instead.
Meanwhile the off peak speed increases have raised complaints that the ASRD signs are routinely ignored. The response from public works is to point to enforcement and the response from police is that the Prima Facie Speed law conflicts with the Speed trap law and they can't do anything about it. However when San Mateo City police chief Mannheimer tried to get the state to allow ASRD signs to also write speeding tickets none of the surrounding jurisdictions supported the effort. In the neighboring city of San Carlos a the police say the same thing after an SRTS funded ASRD sign was installed on San Carlos Ave. When a senior was killed crossing SCA a couple years ago the city's first response was to try and take away the crosswalk. However after protests, I saw this last weekend, that they have paid to signalize the intersection.
Measure A money is used by the Transportation Authority in San Mateo County to "relive congestion" from low LOS grades at interchanges with planning through CCAG. The larger permitted traffic take away pedestrian and bicycle facilities. For example the Ralston 101 interchange in Belmont CA took the sidewalk away on the north side and has street furniture in the narrow five foot sidewalk on the south side. The doubled up right turning freeway access lanes to 101 northbound took away a shareable bike lane westbound. Some cyclists began riding wrong way on the south side sidewalk interfering with peds on the narrow sidewalk. And cyclist-vehicle collisions have increased where the sidewalk crosses the access lane to 101 northbound.
Belmont told Caltrans at the interchange design phase in 1998 that they would be building a Pedestrian Over Crossing which is why the ped and bike facilities were compromised. The POC has only secured twenty five percent of its funding ten years later. The city has applied for a stimulus grant because they say it is a shovel ready project. Because of the topography it will add, if and when completed, 7/8s of a mile to a ped trip!
In the neighborhood on the northwest side of the interchange complaints of cut through traffic resulted in a 450k SRTS grant for bulbouts. This was installed without any neighborhood meetings. When other neighbors complained that the bulbouts only made it difficult to get in and out of their side streets and did nothing for cut through traffic on the collector, the city took them out for $500k.
The larger interchange has resulted in higher traffic volumes and off peak speed increases. Complaints from parents of school aged children resulted in a couple of SRTS grants to install lighted crosswalks and a couple for Automatic Speed Radar Display signs. One of the intersections where the SRTS lighted crosswalk was installed is more than 70 feet wide and complaints have persisted from parents about near misses with children. The city is considering removing the lighted crosswalk and going with a zebra crossing instead.
Meanwhile the off peak speed increases have raised complaints that the ASRD signs are routinely ignored. The response from public works is to point to enforcement and the response from police is that the Prima Facie Speed law conflicts with the Speed trap law and they can't do anything about it. However when San Mateo City police chief Mannheimer tried to get the state to allow ASRD signs to also write speeding tickets none of the surrounding jurisdictions supported the effort. In the neighboring city of San Carlos a the police say the same thing after an SRTS funded ASRD sign was installed on San Carlos Ave. When a senior was killed crossing SCA a couple years ago the city's first response was to try and take away the crosswalk. However after protests, I saw this last weekend, that they have paid to signalize the intersection.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
