CCMIN100494 - Laserfiche WebLink

growth management. In fact, many jurisdictions have indicated they will not approve this plan if land use and growth management are made part of it. Mr. Pico felt if the connection cannot be made, then everyone is wasting their time. Mr. Pico then referred to page 13 of the Plan which identifies critical intersections in the region. The Tri-Vailey Transportation Council established a minimum level of service (LOS) F for Fallon Road and Dublin Boulevard, which doesn't exist today. This plan appears to have accepted a failed scenario and this is unacceptable. He stated the Alameda County Congestion Management had reviewed this plan and made comments to the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. CMA believed the level of service stated in the Plan (LOS F for four hours at peak periods) was too high, since the CMA standard was LOS E for only one hour. There is a significant problem on the freeways and that should not be accepted without trying to plan to avoid that. He believed reduced development could solve this problem. Mr. Pico also felt the traffic model was flawed in two areas. It does not plan for accidents or other incidents and the plan includes a fundamental axiom that the ability exists to constrain the gateways into the Tri-Valley, i.e. Altamont Pass, 1-680, Vasco Road, Crow Canyon Road, etc. The CMA believes that methodology is not consistent with gateway constraint modeling. If we cannot constrain the gateways, then the information in the plan is worthless. Mr. Pico had many more comments to make and believed that this should be reviewed in a workshop to allow a thorough analysis. That needs to be scheduled prior to November 4th in order to submit comments. . .. Mayor Tarver requL-,s~d the Councilmembers to submit their comments to staff. Council would like staff to address the following in the workshop: consistency of this Plan with the CMP and CMA; whether it is possible to accept LOS F at new intersections; feasibility of constraints at gateways; financial constraints similar to CMA to balance the funds with the necessary projects; residential fee and possibility of excluding commercial fees; concept of growth management and land use; potential suggestion of subregional planning discussions. This matter was continued to a workshop to be scheduled. Item 10b Adoption of Alameda County Lore! Range Transporlation Plan (SR 94:341) This item was discussed earlier in the agenda. 10/04/94 - 17 -