PC 072606 - Laserfiche WebLink

alternatives, and Alternative A is described as the existing and improved circulation ( system in Pleasanton with intersection mitigation and gateway constraints that aze necessary to satisfy that. She added that they also included some things that were not in the existing General Plan as well. Commissioner Fox inquired if staff could identify which items on the memo were not in the 1996 General Plan to help clazify whether what is not included on the memo were dropped or stricken out. Ms. Stern advised that the information in Attachment 1 is exactly the same as what was presented in the traffic workshops as the "working draft" circulation network. She indicated that staff is not prepared at this time to do an analysis of what was and was not in the 1996 General Plan. She added, however, that if the Commission had any comments on concerns regarding a specific improvement, staff would pass them onto the Council. Commissioner Peazce expressed her appreciation for allowing Commissioner Olson and herself to comment on this item as they were absent at the last meeting. She clarified that staff wanted the Commission to comment only on major street extensions and roadway widening issues in order to do the traffic analysis, to look at the bigger picture and not the specific level of detail. Ms. Stern confirmed Commissioner Peazce's statement. r"' Commissioner Blank noted that some of the items are too detailed and appear not to conform to the concept of the General Plan; for example, the first bullet under "Significant intersection changes" that allows right turn only from Angela Street at Bernal Avenue during peak hours. He inquired if a General Plan amendment would be required should the Traffic Engineer find it necessary to make changes five yeazs down the line. Chairperson Arkin explained that these aze not policies but a "working draft" that the traffic model will use. Ms. Stern added that some of these items many not be included in the General Plan; however, some of them, such as the triple left-tum lanes, are actually included in the General Plan. Commissioner Blank stated that some items such as the West Las Positas Boulevazd interchange and the Stoneridge Drive extension aze big issues that aze specifically addressed. He expressed concern, however, about other items which aze too specific, such as no right turns during peak hours, and inquired if the General Plan would have to go back to a vote of the people should the Traffic Engineer over time want to change some of these items. Commissioner Peazce stated that she believed the level of detail that appears in Attachment 1 should not be in the General Plan. She indicated that she appreciated the detailed work being done for the traffic model but that she does not want to have to go PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, July 26, 2006 Page 4 of 24