PC 07/07/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

16. Alternatives: Reduce Westem Area density by half and eliminate westem access signal by limiting left-turn lane to one lane. Eliminate easterly street access to Central Area. Uncap traffic fees. Discussion: The westerly emrance road has improved safety with a traffic signal for both the project and the Windsor subdivision. It cannot feasibly be a four-way stop due to its proximity to the intemhange off-ramp intersection. The easterly street access is a recommended traffic circulation mitigation measure which staff supports. This signal should be possible to link with its adjoining signals to allow predominant platoons of traffic to move through these intersections without interruption. The fee caps are only relevant if Pleasanton and/or the Tri-Valley Traffic Committee (TVTC) choose to add new facilities to the fee list during the 10+-year build-out of the project. In Pleasanton, all General Plan street improvements are included; the only current discussion is to eliminate some, not add more. The TVTC fee only covers a small fraction of the cost of its project improvemem list; staff finds it difficult to believe new projects would be funded through this fee during the project build-om. Nonetheless, staff would have preferred to have no caps. Staff recognizes San Francisco's legitimate concern to know its costs when it agrees to the project amenity package; however, staff believes San Francisco's chief concern is bad faith actions by Pleasanton, not legitimate concern over costs. Principles of Agreement: Traffic signals are not specifically addressed, although the basic land use/circulation plan was envisioned. Local traffic fees were specifically capped as shown. Regional traffic fees were not capped. Staff Recommendation: Staffrecommends that the intersections shown are desirable given this project and should be signalized given Bernal Avenue traffic volumes. Staff does not favor fee caps; however, the negotiations leading to the Principles of Agreement and subsequent proposed project led to their inclusion. Staff believes the caps will have little or no real effect on future fees collected but prefers the principle of projects paying all citywide fees at the time permits are issued. This makes both practical and administrative sense. Transportation Systems Management Issue: The project lacks a transit center concept. Proposed Project: Requires a Transportation Systems Management (TSM) plan in conjunction with the Village Center PUD; bus accommodations are required. Substantive Issues/Alternatives Page 19 June 9, 1999