My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN050702
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
CCMIN050702
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:35 AM
Creation date
8/8/2002 8:07:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/7/2002
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN050702
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
Ms. Ayala asked what happens if the new traffic simulation model is completed and it <br />finds that none of the alternatives work? If we are only months from getting the rest of the solid <br />data, why would we want to make a decision now? <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti agreed the first step would be to get the baseline traffic report as soon as <br />possible. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum said when the baseline traffic report with the new simulation comes to Council, <br />it will do its projections based on the General Plan. It will not analyze whether to build the <br />interchange or not. Hard data on this issue will not be coming to you, only the General Plan. <br /> <br />Ms. Ayala felt Council would be able to draw some conclusions from that information. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum stated that even if staff is authorized to proceed with the environmental studies, <br />it would finish the baseline report first and get the traffic model adopted by Council and then use <br />it for the environmental studies. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti said she wanted the most updated traffic study because everything has <br />been based on 1998 information. She wanted the most up to date information on the levels of <br />service. If we proceed with the studies, at the same time she will be pushing for the <br />improvements to Highway 84 and she felt that will make a big difference to traffic in Pleasanton <br />and there may be another alternative that could be a win/win solution. She was at a TVTC <br />meeting where the projection for building Highway 84 was set at 2010. If that schedule was <br />moved sooner, we may be looking at different traffic counts. She felt the major traffic is what <br />comes through the 580/680 interchange and we could get some of that going the other way. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum said there was no problem in waiting to see the new traffic model and baseline <br />report before considering the West Las Positas recommendations. Staff would not proceed with <br />the studies until after Council adopted the baseline report anyway. <br /> <br />Ms. Ayala asked if the East Pleasanton Study would follow behind that? <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum said staff would use the new model to do the analysis of the various East <br />Pleasanton street connection issues as well. The difficulty is that all these elements of the street <br />network are interdependent. Staff cannot model every variation there is, but will do its best to <br />work through it. <br /> <br /> It was moved by Ms. Ayala, seconded by Ms. Michelotti, to continue this item to be <br />addressed when the baseline traffic report is completed. <br /> <br />The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Ayala, Campbell, Dennis, Michelotti, and Mayor Pico <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 25 05/07/02 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.