17 - Laserfiche WebLink

the price every set amount of months to slowly balance out supply and demand. That's the first thing. The second thing I'll just say is another presentation was exactly as you mentioned, Commissioner Ritter, which is a gentleman praised Uber and Lyft and other services like that for basically reducing traffic congestion, parking needs and specifically a good way to solve it if implemented in your city. And the last thing I'll mention is that they are talking about when the car is gone. What are you going to do when the car is gone because it is something that many cities are foreseeing? THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Angie Summers: My ears perked up when she said a one-way street loop, and I said Pleasanton is ideal the way it is. If it isn't broken, don't fix it and I mean it. Thank you. Beaudin: Can we just clarify? That is not the recommendation in the report and not staff's recommendation. It was a comment letter that was received from the public. Summers: Oh, well see I didn't hear that. Thank you. Beaudin: I just wanted to clarify. Chair Balch: Okay, so no additional speaker cards. With that, we've closed the public comment period and we'll bring it back before the Commission. Again, our goal is to decide if we are going to recommend adoption of the plan or not. I do want to mention that Commissioner Nagler joined us at 7:15 p.m. because we started a little late. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Nagler: I did have a chance to greet Commissioner Allen on her way out the door so that was good. Just a general comment—I think that the plan has been very well strategized and it represents some real opportunities that I too support the idea of alternative strategies before we invest upwards of $6 or $8 million in a parking structure. And I would support the recommendation of this plan to the City Council. Commissioner Brown: So, a few comments. I did see the promotion of the 10 items and the heavy recommendation around paving the transportation corridor. How can I put it...I'm not opposed to the paving of the transportation corridor. I am opposed to paving of the transportation corridor for the sole purposes of parking. I know it states there will be a design and other things, but one of the things I feel particularly passionate about is we don't provide enough transit through the downtown for pedestrians to access businesses from parking and that transportation corridor seems like a very logical place to have a nice multi-use, bike-friendly, pedestrian-friendly bikeway and that, to me, is actually more important than parking cars on. I think it needs to be both frankly, but that's just my own personal opinion. I've been to enough downtowns that have that. Monterey comes to mind for example. It's got a very wide EXCPERT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 8, 2017 Page 4 of 10