My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 06:204
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2006
>
SR 06:204
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2006 2:45:43 PM
Creation date
8/10/2006 11:36:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
8/29/2006
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 06:204
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />City of Pleasanton, CA - City Council <br /> <br />Page 3 of 12 <br /> <br />Ms. Roberts thought the 2003 model had taken out West Las Positas. <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles referred to page 64 of the 2003 baseline report, Table 18, which describes <br />everything omitted in the model from the General Plan. As staff works through the General <br />Plan and prepares environmental documents, it must know what would have happened if the <br />General Plan were built out unchanged. From this point, decisions can be made on what to <br />add or take out. <br /> <br />Mr. Arkin felt it would be beneficial to have the political discussion on whether to delete <br />West Las Positas and Stoneridge and then for the next five meetings that confusion would <br />be removed. These issues have been discussed for years. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said when discussion reaches the combined alternatives; there will be models <br />without those streets. There will be many alternatives. However, before you get to that point <br />and before the General Plan is changed, there must be analysis of what happens if the <br />General Plan is built as is. There will be models with everything included and there will be <br />models with many things changed. Staff believed it would be easier to consider each point <br />individually before getting to those issues of concern, such as West Las Positas, Rose <br />Avenue, Stoneridge Drive, Foothill Road, etc. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern asked for an explanation of Level of Service. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift indicated it is in the Baseline Report and reviewed the average delay per signal <br />light phase for each Level of Service. <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles added his remarks to clarifY levels of service. <br /> <br />Ms. McGovern hoped the goal was that a person did not have to wait at a signal longer than <br />55 seconds. <br /> <br />Ms. Fox inquired about Table I on page 7 and referred to the problems at Santa Rita and 1- <br />580 eastbound on-ramp. She felt it should be LOS F rather than LOS C. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said on-ramp metering is included at this intersection. When the intersection gets <br />full, vehicles go to other intersections in the area to get onto the freeway. The traffic model <br />assumes the ramp meter rate until the year 2025. <br /> <br />Ms. Fox did not think the LOS C accurately reflected the actual wait to get onto the freeway <br />and should be changed. <br /> <br />Mr. Blank felt if the model is artificially limited, he did not think it was providing an <br />accurate view of the intersection. <br /> <br />Mr. Swift said there could be a demand based model output, which shows vehicles going <br />wherever the drivers want regardless of lanes on the road, or if the freeway is full. It just <br />shows where the cars go. The current model is a constrained model, which is based on <br />shortest time and indicates when a particular road is full; cars will go another route. <br /> <br />Mr. Blank stated that conceivably the user experience could be considerably different than <br />what is shown on the model, because the model is constrained. <br /> <br />http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/archive/ccwsminutes050111.htmI <br /> <br />8/22/2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.