SR 06:204 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton, CA - City Council Page 9 of 12 decision is made on the preferred network for the city. It would make more sense to review the existing roadways and analyze them to decide what to add. Ms. Maas asked staff to explain why it used the method it selected. Mr. Swift said no matter what approach is used, you will arrive at the same place at the end. Staff was trying to use a method that was best to show who is using the streets that mayor may not be included in the General Plan when the process is completed. If you start with existing land use and street networks and then add approved projects, we know what that does and it is in the baseline report. There are level of service E and F all over the city. The question then is what is to be done. Are street networks added or is land use added. If land use is not added, are those properties to remain empty? On the other hand, if you start with the General Plan and then take things away, find out where traffic would flow and then start working on land use, you will end up at the same place and it will take fewer interim decisions by the Planning Commission and City Council to get there. If we you use Mr. Arkin's approach, it will simply not work. At a future workshop, the first land use altemative will show existing plus approved and there will be an example of the General Plan build out network. The model will show what additional land use is possible ifthe entire 1996 circulation network is built. The model will probably not include West Las Positas interchange and Stoneridge Drive extension, since it is quite clear that those two are not acceptable to the public. Staff is just now trying to determine what each segment means in terms of who might want to use them and why. Mr. Blank liked Mr. Arkin's proposal. He was surprised to see the West Las Positas interchange included in the staff report. No matter which model is used, the concepts of additional hours spent driving, the number of miles traveled over small areas, over large areas, etc. are very amorphous. Most people don't know what we are talking about. People can relate to Table I. He would like a tool that shows what traffic is today and a tool that allows easy comparisons of various options. He wanted something that shows routes turning red if a certain thing happens, therefore showing that thing was not a good idea. Mr. Swift said that information is available and staff will be providing it. He explained how the models would work. Staff wanted to avoid all those models until real alternatives are determined. Absent doing models in conjunction with different land uses and combinations of street options, he felt it would be overkill in terms of output. It would take a lot longer. Ms. McGovern referred to the regional improvements that were to be done as part of the 1996 General Plan, some of which have not been done. She asked if staff included those regional improvements when it reviewed the plan. Mr. Swift said most of Highway 84 improvements were deleted for the model presented at this workshop. In addition, the six-lane expressway for Isabel is not included. Mr. Sullivan said looking at all these options does not mean anything until decisions are made on various combinations. He hoped to get to that point sooner rather than later. Mr. Swift said staff hoped to get to that point, but it wanted to present information on what shifts could happen, all things being equal, knowing that what is really to be decided are the multiple changes to both network and land use. For example, when one looks at the West Las Positas interchange, if you look at a citywide map, you can show that even though http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/archive/ccwsminutesOSOIII.htmI 8/22/2006