CCMIN051992 - Laserfiche WebLink

48 Mr. Swift indicated staff had already taken into consideration the change for the Kaufman and Broad project, plus the proposed warehouse use by Mr. Madden on the balance of his property. Those changed dramatically the amount of trips out of that piece of property. Mr. Butler indicated the traffic conditions established for North Pleasanton made a lot of sense at the time. It was important because no one knew what all impacts would be. Now, because the North Pleasanton Improvement District has made major improvements in the street network long before needed, everyone is finding these improved streets are great to use. That is where the fairness issue comes in. It is unfair to hold the same property owners fully accountable for everything. Part of the picture is that if we let the levels of service get up to a high level, such as D or E, then the people would stop using the roads and traffic would go away by itself. We are now at a point where we have a much better idea of traffic factors that individual developments generate and it is much easier to project the remaining portion of the park as opposed to trying to project the whole thing. Mr. Butler indicated he was sympathetic to approving Option 2 to look at where we are right now, include the extraneous traffic as part of the base, but not allow future traffic of that sort to impact the model. Mr. Butler was also in agreement with eliminating Valley/Santa Rita from the picture if it becomes necessary because it is too far from all of the development and is the intersection most impacted by the extraneous traffic. Mr. Tarver was not in favor of Option 2 because there are other alternatives that need to be looked at. Traffic is not a science and at the beginning it was predicted there would be 46% outcommute and now it is really 76%. We did make a commitment to the voters that traffic would not get like this. He would support Valley and Santa Rita being excluded, and within the Business Park itself there might be a need for certain exemptions, but he did not want to remove the condition from the entire Business Park. The Tri-Valley Transportation Council is working on the same issue, i.e. to change the land use if the roads don't work. Mr. Tarver indicated more attention should be paid to the freeways, because if they are congested, people take cross-town roads~ Pleasanton businesses and people should not be the only ones to suffer as a result of poor planning for the whole region. Ms. Mohr wanted to clarify that with the million square foot reduction in Hacienda, and a comparable reduction from Signature, conditions will still be met for the .91 LOS D. So what is happening is not changing conditions, but making Hacienda smaller so it can build out and still meet the conditions. Mr. van Gelder indicated what is being considered is similar to what was done for the Wells Fargo project. It had a project and the City set forth traffic conditions that must be met if it build. 5/19/92 16