01 - Laserfiche WebLink

2) What would happen if we build Stoneridge Drive today? The purpose of the General Plan model is a build-out model. They did not look at this at all, as it was not their intention. Their model is to look at what happens at 2030 to see what sort of roadway improvements are needed for those 2030 land uses at build-out conditions. He said under the City's 2007 Triangle Study they looked at what would happen if they extended Stoneridge Drive today. It is a model that was used to look at regional improvements and to determine which ones are best and in what order they should come in. One of the main questions that came up was how much would be cut-through traffic if we connected it today? What the Triangle model showed was that about 50% of the PM traffic going eastbound would be cut-through traffic. There was not much change in the AM. There was also a question asked about what would that volume be? While staff took a lot of time going over what the build-out model assumptions were, he explained that one of the things they put in place was ramp metering at the EI Charro on-ramp, so the eastbound traffic is limited to 600 vehicles in the peak hour. So, you could try to put 1,000 vehicles on that road, but only 600 are going to get to the freeway. If drivers cannot access the freeway in that hour, the model is not going to assign it there. The outcome indicates +280 vehicles are local traffic eastbound and another 350 of the 600 would be cut-through traffic. Mr. Tassano said another question asked about what the comparative costs were if they were to build Stoneridge Drive extension or build the improvements that would be necessary if we do not build the extension. There is a lot of background information staff needs to do to go and find the specifics of this question, such as a third southbound left- turn lane at Santa Rita and Valley which would be about $80,000 to $100,000, but there is more variance with others because they have not measured total widths, turn pocket lengths, and widening of the bridge structure. Regarding the traffic model, Council requested staff to review the Consensus Preferred Plan, the Dispersed Growth Option and the Concentrated ResidentiallTransit Oriented Development (TOD) Mixed Use Option. They modeled both with and without the Stoneridge Drive extension and also looked at transit oriented development with a reduced trip generation rate. They looked at overall traffic volumes throughout Pleasanton for each land use, specific flow patterns resulting from the extension of Stoneridge Drive for each land use, cut-through volumes at key locations, direct volume comparisons at key locations and level of service and delay for each land use both with and without Stoneridge Drive for every 100+ intersections. The results generated five broad conclusions: 1) There is little difference in the traffic volume and delay when comparing the three land uses with and without Stoneridge Drive; 2) There is little difference between the two types of transit oriented development whether they looked at the further reduced trip generation rates or the full Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) rates-the volumes are very similar; 3) The Stoneridge Drive extension did result in the redistribution of traffic and it relieved some of the more heavily traveled roadways; 4) At build-out the extension increases the number of vehicles on Stoneridge Drive; and 5) Stoneridge Drive extension reduces peak hour volumes and cut-through trips on various routes at General Plan build-out. City Council Minutes 6 May 1, 2007