17 - Laserfiche WebLink

I also think the time restrictions—we need to leave those at three. I know we were at two once before and we moved that. Again, we want to encourage people to come and have a luncheon or friends that could take an hour and one-half or almost two hours. We want people to stay and shop. We want to. If they want to, we don't want to have to scoot them along too early so like Commissioner Ritter stated, I think three hours does a good job of keeping the employee out of those spots if we're managing them properly. But I think we have to have at least a three hour slot to increase the utilization Downtown. I think what everybody else said I agree with. Chair Balch: Thank you. So I know we're not going to necessarily re-write it whether we push it off to Council or not so I'll kind of do like my fellow Commissioners and just give some commentary. I also support the three hour versus the two hour. I think as some of the others here have mentioned and maybe not this way, not to say I had any better reference point than anyone else has said, but two hours with lunch in Pleasanton—by the time you find it, walk to it, eat, you are hustling back too in my opinion. I also like that it mentioned bike corrals. I think that is an important thing for us and the only hesitation I had with the Lyft or Uber or kind of the transportation, I just don't know if they can designate a drop-off spot. Maybe they do have that programming ability, but I don't know if we as a City have that in terms that we can designate it. I do know that we probably all have experienced, you know, they drop you off when you're in front of your restaurant and you've just stopped all the cars behind you to get out, right? They don't always stop in a spot. It's a little interesting sometimes where they stop. So that being said, if we had that ability to say this block stop here for the next two blocks, think that'd be great personally. Kind of like a quick loading zone, or like a taxi station. Commissioner Brown: Side street. Chair Balch: Yeah, very good point right, so that we're not doing it. I want to mention coming back to this one-way because I said I would. My general comment is that before we build a parking structure of some millions of dollars, I think our plan needs to include a lot of different options and I'll just mention a few. My mind is the one-way. Hayward just converted from a two-way system to a one-way system loop and to Adam's comment it has significantly increased the speed of the traffic which I don't know is what we desire. I don't think we desire what they now have achieved, but they have a different set of issues than we've got here, but it's a case study ready to be studied. So before we build a $10 million parking structure, personally, I would like to see them weigh things like, do we go to one-way, do we do a loop, you know, these things need to be in the mix and my other thing—I know it's not going to be popular with the Downtown Association, but I think we should look at are we going to close Downtown's Main Street to vehicular traffic in the next 50 years or not; more long term. And I say that in light of the conference I went to where they're talking about....what they're doing in some cities is that they are closing streets to vehicle access longer than just the farmer's market that we might know of. They're doing it for longer periods and they're planting trees and stuff and making it more of a pedestrian corridor versus a vehicular corridor. And you know, maybe that's not a 10-year plan. Maybe that's a 50-year plan like I mentioned, but if we're going to put $10 million into a parking structure, I think we need to think outside of the parking structure and that would be the one-way or to get EXCPERT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, March 8, 2017 Page 7 of 10