The corners of Bird Avenue and San Carlos Street, Lincoln Avenue and Willow Street, and Meridian Avenue and San Carlos Street are among 13 intersections across the city that would not be subject to current traffic-calming measures if a new transportation policy is approved.

The proposed policy is based on an environmental impact report that was released in September 2004. The old policy, approved more than 20 years ago, required developers to decrease traffic congestion caused by new projects. Under the revised proposal, developers would not be subject to these requirements at selected intersections, but would be obligated to improve the surrounding area for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport.

Although these intersections may accrue higher levels of traffic if new projects are developed, Transportation Deputy Director Hans Larsen said, the upside of this revised policy would enable the city and communities to have greater flexibility when working with developers on other issues that would affect area neighborhoods. Hypothetically, developers could fund improved sidewalks, bus shelters, or tree plantings.

Intersections like Lincoln Avenue and Willow Street were chosen because they are already built out and located near a neighborhood business district or planned development.

Willow Glen Neighborhood Association first Vice President Edward Rast said additional traffic caused by future development at these major intersections would cause an overflow of traffic onto side streets and create new neighborhood speeding problems.

Yet, Rast and North Willow Glen Neighborhood Association Vice President Harvey Darnell readily admit they have not had time to fully understand the proposed policy because, according to the men, they did not receive the information on a timely basis.

Although the San Jose Department of Transportation advertised four community meetings in the San Jose Mercury News, first advertising the meetings on Oct.18, several residents did not learn about the proposed policy and community meetings until Oct. 22 when an email was sent from District 6 Councilman Ken Yeager's office. This was only three days before the first meeting on Oct. 25.

"When you have a late notice, we don't have time to read and understand the environmental impact report," Rast said. "Right now, we don't really understand the impact."

Darnell concurs and said, "It may be a good thing, but I don't know enough to make a judgment."

And he still had questions about the revised policy after attending the Oct. 28 meeting at city hall. Some of those questions related to whether the policy provides a mechanism for developers to work with the community on improvements and whether a developer's money would directly fund improvements near that intersection.

On Nov. 3, the transportation and planning departments met with the city and decided to extend the public comment period, as requested by Rast and other community members.

This was particularly important to the men because the transportation department switched the meeting places, which resulted in some citizens going to the wrong location, Rast said. One meeting had just a single attendee.

The department set the next community meeting for Dec. 2 at city hall and extended the comment period for the environmental impact report until Dec. 6. The proposal will go before the planning commission on Jan. 26 and the city council on Feb. 15.

To view the environmental impact report, visit http://www.sanjoseca.gov/planning.