But your question is key – what kind of commission? A powerful one, or a an advisory-only one? That’s also related to the question about what to do about the Council’s haphazard approach to transportation decision-making. Should some power, say over encroachments or taxi permits, be invested in a Transportation Commission instead of the Council? In order to have full review of important transportation decisions, it’s probably necessary to have an independent body with actual decision-making power, more akin to the Planning Commission than the Budget Advisory Committee.

I attribute the difference (and I am not alone in this) to cultural differences. The Bay Area has been settled by all sorts of different groups moving here largely for their own economic gain during boom times from the Gold Rush to W.W. II when California was the focus of so much military spending.

Oregon was originally settled by community-oriented groups from established communities in the east of the U.S. who moved there in the hopes of continuing their highly-functional community life based on agricultural economies rather than the economic booms of gold and war with their inherent corrupting effects.

Why not try this:

1. Read some books about urban/transportation planning. What has worked well and where. There’s lots of information out there.

2. Contribute here something that you have actually spent time reflecting on. Your snarky put-downs reveal not much more than your adolescent developmental level.

That’s exactly right. I began working with nonprofits 20 years ago (in Seattle) in promoting alternative urban land use and transportation policies (they are of course intimately tied together). I attended the first “Car Free Cities” conference in Amsterdam in about 1990. Mayors and planning officials from cities from London to Athens were in attendance. I was the only person from the U.S. there.

European urban regions, and Canadian as well, can succeed in implementing long-range environmentally- and economically-sound transportation planning. In Europe and Canada, regional transportation agencies create thoughtful plans and have the power to see them through. Here transportation planning is all about turf battles, city public transits systems vs one another vs BART vs the paving industry. Our regional transportation agency has is powerless.

Some cities, like Portland, Oregon have succeeded in doing the right thing primarily because of the long-term commitment of well-informed citizen groups and a strong larger sense of community which is lacking in the Bay Area.

Oakland has policies in place for transportation, but as V notes below, the problem seems to be lack of follow through on those policies. We already have city staff, commissions, and even city council that are supposed to enforce those policies, but all too often totally ignore policy do to whatever they feel like. And this is true for issues far beyond transportation. Adding one more government agency doesn’t seem like it would necessarily do any better job of enforcing transportation policy without the commitment to back it up.

I agree with V that a coordinated review of transportation elements is needed, but this review is already within the scope of staff and the planning commission. They just do not do a very comprehensive job of it. Rather than add another layer to the review process, council could just make it clear to current agencies that this transportation review is expected from them.

For example, at a recent Rules Committee meeting, staff attempted to agendize an update on AC Transit’s BRT project for a committee meeting, and Council President Jane Brunner refused to schedule it, saying simply “we’re all pretty aware” of the project and that more information was unnecessary. If we had a Transportation Commission, they could hear the update on BRT. But as long as policymakers remain disinterest, would that review accomplish anything for the City? I’m not sure.

At a minimum, we need project-level review of the transportation aspects of significant projects. Such review should consider transportation impacts of project design, as well as compliance with the City’s various transportation-related adopted policies. Is a separate Commission needed to accomplish this? I don’t know. Perhaps a Transportation Subcommittee of the Planning Commission would suffice.