Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of Pleasanton, CA - City Council <br /> <br />Page 7 of 12 <br /> <br />fronting residential units, makes no difference with two lanes or four lanes, it might be <br />determined that the road should stay two lanes. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky agreed with that because that would not be a cut through route, but Hopyard <br />could become an alternative route that would change significantly based on other arterial <br />changes in the city. <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles said everything has pros and cons. For example, Del Valle and Hopyard is a <br />four-way stop intersection. The General Plan assumes it is a traffic signal. That will affect <br />how much volume is on Hopyard, because a lot less can use it if it is a four way stop. Also if <br />you increase the capacity on Hopyard, how much more traffic do you want to bring to <br />Division Street or Del Valle Parkway? <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky was unclear how to use the model data presented at this meeting for future <br />decisions, if all the other data will be changing. <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles said he was trying to present the kinds of data available to acquaint everyone <br />with how the traffic model works. <br /> <br />There was discussion about whether to proceed with the staff presentation in order to hear <br />from the public or whether to postpone the remainder of the presentation for the next <br />workshop. It was determined to proceed with the staff report. <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles reviewed the widening of Dublin Canyon Road. <br /> <br />There was discussion about the definition of regional cut through traffic and local cut <br />through traffic and whether local cut through could be tracked on the model. <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles referred to the staff report and using Foothill Road as an example, it was <br />possible to summarize who is using a particular section of the roadway. <br /> <br />Mayor Hosterman indicated there would be another workshop on January 25 and asked staff <br />is it could continue to review potential road widenings at that time? She asked the Council <br />and Commission if anyone had further questions to ask staff to present at that meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky referred to Figure 19 on page 39 of the staff report, which shows Foothill <br />Road. He asked if it were known where the trips started or ended for the trips on that road? <br />Is there a way to analyze whether a person is using the road for a specific reason or just to <br />avoid other congested areas? <br /> <br />Mr. Knowles said he could show where all northbound traffic originated; or he could <br />indicate who used that road for various destinations. Displays are not created until it is <br />known if it would be useful in making decisions. He also noted the models can show how <br />traffic changes over time. <br /> <br />Mr. Arkin felt the current process was looking at the 1996 General Plan and subtracting <br />items to see the impact. He felt that was a long tedious process that he did not think was <br />valuable. He wanted to zero out everything that is not approved and then talk about adding <br />things and the impact. He asked if there was support from Council for that process. <br /> <br />http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/archive/ccwsminutes050111.html <br /> <br />8/22/2006 <br />