SR 06:204 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton, CA - City Council Page II of 12 Service chart. It is difficult to define delay. He was more interested in seeing the worst case option, which turn movements are the worst and what is more acceptable. He thought it would be necessary to modify the level of service standards. He noted that in the morning it takes 120 seconds for him to cross First Street at Neal. That is acceptable for some. He felt that should be the minimum traffic signal time for LOS F designation. Ifthat were adopted, then 14 of the 27 LOS F intersections would disappear. There is a way to redefine what is really acceptable to have. In terms of the model assumptions, Figure 2 on page II shows increase in growth in Dublin, but he did not think staff was adequately addressing what is happening in Pleasanton in terms of Dublin traffic. The traffic from the EI Charro interchange is not reflected and he felt that will be significant in the future. He wanted the assumptions for the City of Dublin as shown on page 12-13, Figures 3 and 4, to be increased to show people living in Dublin and working in Pleasanton. He also referred to the numbers used for the Stoneridge Mall area and felt those same numbers should be used for those working in Pleasanton. He wanted to have more realistic assumptions for those living in Pleasanton and working in the Hacienda Business Park. The model needs to be refined with respect to East Dublin and the areas he mentioned. He urged people to be patient and felt all the data necessary would be provided. He felt there were about three meetings necessary before significant discussions could be held. Becky Dennis, 838 Gray Fox Circle, said she was representing Pat Belding and Citizens for a Caring Community. She said as Pleasanton approaches build out there was great concern that there be the potential to meet affordable housing needs. In spite of the fact that some of the intersections don't work as well as some would like, there are growth controls, an urban growth boundary, and a voter approved housing cap. We have those because the citizens have agreed to embrace the obligations that come with planning in the city, such as state housing mandate numbers, in order to maintain the legal integrity of the growth constraints. She wanted to plan a circulation system that will serve the fixed housing cap of 29,000 units. There is no fixed number for jobs or commercial/retail development, which generates more traffic than residential units. It seems all assumptions are related to that 29,000 number. When she was on Council, the city fee system was redone to pay for the street improvements based on that number. Every unit of housing and square foot of office/conunercial paid its fair share of the improvements to service the build out number. In order to maintain consistency among the elements of the General Plan, the Circulation Element must be viewed as serving that core number upon which the philosophy of growth management and constraints is based. If the numbers are changed to make the streets work better, she felt it would open the entire concept to challenge of the legitimacy ofthe growth constraints. That will change the number people have targeted with the fees they have paid, their expectations of property and the need for the city to provide certain types of housing that is not as profitable, but nonetheless part of our responsibility as planners of an urban area. Mayor Hosterman asked the Council and Planning Conunissioners to stay the course as set out by staff. ADJOUJ{NMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:36 p.m. The next workshop is scheduled for January 25, 2005. Respectfully submitted, http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.uslarchive/ccwsminutes050 lll.html 8/22/2006