Laserfiche WebLink
Discussion: <br /> <br />15. <br /> <br />Require dedication/construction of the arroyo trail if Zone 7's master plan <br />would not widen this stretch of the arroyo and it is adopted within five <br />years of project approval. <br />Include a separated bike-pedestrian trail along the community park <br />frontage of Pleasanton Avenue. <br /> <br />The arroyo trail at the top of the existing bank is feasible within the <br />setback proposed so long as the arroyo is not widened. Staff did not <br />believe it made sense to construct a trail only to have it removed for arroyo <br />widening. If the channel is widened, the "trail" would become the Zone 7 <br />access road as it is along other stretches of "improved" arroyos. It is <br />feasible to adopt a requirement coupled to Zone 7's master plan <br />determination as described in the second "bullet" above. The community <br />park plan would typically incorporate a widened multi-use sidewalk/trail <br />along its Pleasanton Avenue frontage. Staff has left this to the park <br />planning stage for decision. Staff believes the on-street bike lanes and <br />parking are important to be retained along the park frontage since bikers <br />will continue to legally ride in the street even if given a separated bikeway <br />(note Hopyard Road experience). <br /> <br />Principles of Agreement: Implies project will not construct regional trail; different <br /> sidewalk plan along community park was not specifically addressed. <br /> <br />Staff Recommendation: The arroyo trail would be a reasonable project requirement if <br /> the Zone 7 master plan were completed and showed no widening here. It <br /> provides an excellent, non-street link for the entire project to reach <br /> schools, parks, downtown, etc. A conditional requirement would be <br /> favored by staff, similar to the second "bullet" alternative. The <br /> community park trail is best incorporated into the park master plan so it <br /> can be designed to complement the park uses/facilities. <br /> <br />Transportation Improvements <br /> <br />Issue: <br /> <br />The project adds too many traffic signals to Bernal Avenue and should not cap <br />local/regional traffic fees. <br /> <br />Proposed Project: Signalizes interchange intersections and all street entrances to its <br /> project (four streets, including Valley Avenue). Caps fees by limiting fees to <br /> existing improvements forming the basis of the fee but accommodates <br /> inflationary increases. <br /> <br />Substantive Issues/Alternatives Page 18 June 9, 1999 <br /> <br /> <br />