PC 040902 - Laserfiche WebLink

r initiate the enhanced trip reduction program now; and perform an analysis of funding sources for both alternatives before any kind of Caltrans process. He advised that he feels there needs to be some outreach and that he would like to see another citizens committee. He commented that it needs to be an open process, with minutes, adequate advertisements, and representatives from all affected neighborhoods. He stated that he thinks it is time that the business community pays for some of this work, noting that the basic problem is trying to get traffic out of North Pleasanton businesses onto the freeway, and North Pleasanton businesses should help pay for this study. -- Commissioner Roberts advised that she is very disturbed with the process that resulted in the development of a minority report, as she feels there was a lack of communication. She questioned whether the Planning Commission should have asked for minutes from this Committee, as they have with other groups. She stated that she likes the staffs recommendation at this point and she feels the studies need to be done, especially the pedestrian/school safety study. She further stated that the 2001 Baseline Traffic Report needs to be completed before the construction of any improvements. She noted that she does not think it is possible to get a handle on cut-through traffic and she is not sure that she would agree with having the East Side study included, unless there is something in the East Side study that provides information about cut-through traffic. She advised that she does not think there is a problem with waiting to do the enhanced trip reduction until the commuter transportation survey is completed, and that survey should be done as quickly as possible. She noted that it sounds right to separate the studies from the Caltrans process, but it is a real negative financially, and because it may be necessary to complete the studies twice. She advised that she wants a City-oriented mitigation study based on neighborhood impacts with comparisons, and then the Caltrans study could be added. She commented that she does not really have any problem with the staff recommendation. She stated that she does not want to start another committee and she does not feel the Committee could have gone any further, noting that Committee members should not be expected to do the kind of research Mr. Pretzel did. Commissioner Kameny stated that he concurs with conducting the pedestrian safety study and implementing the trip reduction measures now. He advised that he does have concerns about cut-through traffic. He noted that he agrees with the Commissioner Roberts' suggestions. Chairperson Maas moved to support the staff recommendation with the following: expand the EIR to: (1) definitely incorporate all safety issues (including the pedestrian and school safety issues), and (2) address the noise and air pollution issues and the cut-through traffic impacts consider the 2001 Baseline Traffic Report prepare some type of analysis of the funding sources conduct the studies concurrently with the CaItrans process incorporate all public verbal and written input in the EIR include the HOV auxiliary lanes which were part of PLANS 3C and 3D Commissioner Harvey questioned whether Chairperson Maas would want studies for all four options. Discussion ensued as to whether the options should be limited. Mr. Lum noted that it was the recommendation of the Committee to look at PLANS A and C, but not to close the possibility of considering other options. Chairperson Maas advised that her preference is - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 9, 2002 Page 12