01 - Laserfiche WebLink

felt the City should be supportive of recreation for adults and youth and said one never knows what could be worked out until the matter is reviewed and discussed, and she hoped all financial and operating issues would be part of the agreement in order to fully see how the plan would work. She felt there were not enough recreational facilities in town, agreed the town should be open to others coming to its facilities and thanked staff and the Commission for working so hard on the plan. Councilmember Cook-Kallio felt the ice facility was something for youth, who are not attracted to soccer or other sports, thanked staff and the Commission for bringing the matter forward, felt it was important to honor the commitment expeditiously and liked the configuration. Mayor Hosterman agreed and said she was excited about the opportunity conceptually. She said there would be more information gathered through the public process. She felt it was a great opportunity for the people of Pleasanton. City Manager Fialho said staff will follow-up in writing as to Ms. Fox's questions regarding the park acreage. Motion: It was m/s by Thorne/McGovern to approve the conceptual site/use plan and reorientation of the park boundary for the proposed Staples Ranch Community Park as recommended by the Parks & Recreation Commission. Motion passed by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmembers Cook-Kallio, McGovern, Thorne, Mayor Hosterman Noes: None Absent: Councilmember Sullivan Mayor Hosterman called for athree-minute break and thereafter reconvened the regular meeting with all members being present. 23. Consider Sycamore Road and Alisal Street Traffic Calming Program Traffic Engineer Michael Tassano provided a PowerPoint overview of the Happy Valley Traffic Calming Program, gave a history and identification of current increased speeds after the opening of the golf course, the work to find immediate solutions, and said they propose moving the access road from where it currently exists to the Bypass Road location. He said concerns voiced by residents related to speed and the types of solutions available. A Steering Committee was formed with one resident from each of the three streets which met through the spring of 2007 to develop a plan. The Steering Committee tried to address impacted locations and the plan they came up with included six speed lumps and two radar speed signs. They presented this plan in March of 2007 to residents. The residents showed a general interest and support as being good solutions, they added an additional speed lump in another location, the spacing was enlarged from the standard 300-500 feet apart so some location intervals were greater and if additional lumps were needed, they could be added, the location of which he also presented. Following the March 29 meeting where residents generally supported the program, staff asked the Steering Committee to return to residents within 500 feet of the radar speed signs and speed lumps and collect signatures through a written petition of support. He said the Committee circulated 9 separate petitions, all petitions received the required 67% strong majority; however, Alameda County has a requirement that to illuminate any traffic calming device a street light must be installed adjacent to the traffic calming device. City Council Minutes 12 July 17, 2007