My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN041895
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
CCMIN041895
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:54:18 AM
Creation date
5/20/1999 11:10:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
The roll call vote was as follows: <br /> AYES: Councilmembers - Dennis, Michelotti, Mohr, Pico and Mayor Tarver <br /> NOES: None <br /> ABSENT: None <br /> ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> Item 6g <br /> Alameda County CMA Congestion Management Plan. (SR 95: 117) <br /> <br /> Randall Lum presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver noted there is mixed review by the CMA on this issue. He described a <br /> potential Catch-22 because some jurisdictions may exclude their arterials from the CMP network <br /> to avoid having to come up with deficiency plans. He is unsure where to stand on this issue. <br /> He notes that Pleasanton will probably have several arterials put into the CMP network. He is <br /> concerned that a city may try to design roads to carry anticipated traffic, but may be penalized <br /> if the road can't handle the traffic from all the other cities. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver feels the jurisdiction responsible for the road should be agreeable to putting <br /> it in the network. He does not feel it is appropriate to change the rules at this time. <br /> <br />-- Ms. Dennis supports the change of language, but notes a flaw in the system that must be <br /> addressed. <br /> <br /> In response to Ms. Michelotti, Mr. Tarver advised that the CMA is attempting to modify <br /> the language at this time. If enough cities come forward agreeing to keep joining the network <br /> an option of the jurisdiction, it will stay that way. The CMA is wanting to include all major <br /> arterials. <br /> <br /> General discussion ensued among the Councilmembers regarding these issues. Mr. Pico <br /> commented that the Council' s position on the CMP is opposite to what they advocated in the Tri- <br /> Valley Transportation Plan. Mr. Tarver feels the correct way to proceed is to develop a <br /> network to carry the traffic to be designated as routes of regional significance. It should not be <br /> up to the individual jurisdictions to decide what they will or will not put into the network. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis suggested that language be added that would address the problem by <br /> encouraging the jurisdictions to include arterials in the system without penalty. Mr. Tarver <br /> believes that this may be the right approach, however, the CMA has always been hesitant to <br /> direct jurisdictions. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver believes the Council should take the position of saying it is necessary for the <br /> CMA to develop a model of the transportation system with all routes of regional significance. <br /> <br /> 04/18/95 - 14- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.