My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
RES 89175
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
RES 89175
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2012 4:56:58 PM
Creation date
11/30/1999 12:17:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
4/4/1989
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
SR 89:133 <br />Page 7 <br /> <br /> Short Range Analysis <br /> <br />There are a number of variables involved in the Short Range <br />Analysis. These are: <br /> <br /> When will the buildings really be built? <br /> How long will it take for them to fill up? <br /> How long will it take to construct funded transportation <br /> improvements? <br /> <br />Current short range analysis assumes that all buildings will fill <br />to 100% and that all under construction transportation mitigation <br />improvements which are included in the trip assignment model will <br />be completed and in place at the time the buildings reach <br />occupancy, and that a level of service of "E" is NOT acceptable <br />(v/c>=0.91). <br /> <br />The short range analysis includes in the transportation system all <br />components of existing streets and also all components from those <br />projects under construction (eg. 1-680 Stoneridge interchange). <br />It also includes all North Pleasanton approved private development <br />projects at 100% occupancy and all constructed buildings factored <br />to 100% occupancy. The model does not have the 1-580 Hacienda or <br />Santa Rita interchange improvements included, as these are not yet <br />"under construction." <br /> <br />Staff has been requested by the NPID Committee to reduce the <br />percent occupancy from the current 100% used in the trip <br />generation model. The argument to reduce the occupancy rate is <br />that it is unreasonable to expect all multi-tenant buildings to <br />fill to 100% at the same time and that, even within a single <br />building, it is not likely that all spaces will be used to maximum <br />occupancy. <br /> <br />The NPID Committee has submitted data to support this request. <br />(Attached) <br /> <br />The information compiled in this year's occupancy studies showed <br />the average occupancy of the 16 buildings included within the <br />Driveway Study to be 87%. The average occupancy of all buildings <br />considered in the "Office" category was 83%. Most "Owner- <br />Occupied" buildings are shown as 100% occupied while the vacancy <br />rate occurs in "Multi-Tenant" buildings. <br /> <br />Where there are a number of unknowns, the more common practice in <br />traffic engineering is to use the full (100%) occupancy figure. <br />Where more information is available, it is possible to predict <br />based upon that information. In a short term projection, it is <br />unlikely that all buildings will reach 100% occupancy and a more <br />probable percentage of 90 to 95% could be used. This would assume <br />that additional buildings (and additional traffic improvements) <br />can continue to be built, avoiding a saturated market and allowing <br />mitigation to keep abreast of occupancy. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.