SR 05:027 - Laserfiche WebLink

Other types of commercial/office/industrial, schools, parks, and other institmional uses also contribute traffic. These are specified in the 2003 Baseline Report. For all the analyses which follow, the total trips generated from within the City are constant, reflecting the total buildout level described above. SUGGESTED REVIEW PROCESS As summarized above, there has been substantial public outreach coupled with City Committee/Commission input on circulation issues prior to the joint workshops held previously by the City Council and Planning Commission. The issues have been well-defined. As the City decision-makers explore the ramifications of all of the various options/alternatives, it is important to continue to allow full public participation. The goal -both legally as well as practically required - is to reach a new, internally consistent balance of circulation policies, planned street network, and future land uses. And, as both required by General Plan policy as well as practically, the goal is to reach the goal with the fullest of public participation. Notwithstanding the above, it is important to move forward with the review of options/alternatives in a manner which allows a full understanding of the model output before reaction to the various analyses is heard. There are two distinct steps in the process as envisioned by staff. The first is to present information to the public, Commission, and Council concerning the full range of options/alternatives requested by Council and others. The second is to reach interim and, ultimately, final decisions on the options/alternatives. During the first step - information gathering/understanding - it is staff's belief that public participation can be limited to questions concerning the analyses themselves, not whether the option/alternative is good, bad, or indifferent. The public process has already identified public sentiment concerning a number of the alternatives, and this sentiment need not be reiterated at this time. There will be subsequent opportunities for public input on which options/alternatives deserve incorporation into the new plan. Staff's position concerning this is practically based: there is a lot of information to present, and staff believes it is likely that several of the workshops will be necessary simply to present this information, clarify it as necessary for the public and the Planning Commission and City Council, and answer questions concerning it. The second step - selection of options/alternatives - is a key step wherein substantive public input is welcomed. At this step the public itself should be able to use the model output to assist in its input. SR 05:027 Page 3