My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN082202SP
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
CCMIN082202SP
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:35 AM
Creation date
10/2/2002 4:25:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/22/2002
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN082202SP
DOCUMENT NAME
TRAFFIC
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
Dick Willits, Via del Cielo, understood metering on Sunol and time delays going through <br />on First Street. How many of the signals are affected by people crossing Sunol, which disrupts <br />the flow of traffic. To what extent can signals be synchronized, so if you left Arlington and <br />drove 30 mph you could get all the way to Shadow Cliffs without stopping. If you consider <br />metering at Bernal to restrict flow going to town that will only increase traffic on Valley. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said if one looks at the cut through percentage on Bemal and Sunol in the <br />baseline report, there would be a reduction in traffic, assuming the construction of Highway 84. <br />They have not modeled future street metering. In terms of signal synchronization, many people <br />are not happy with existing timing. Because of ongoing technical improvements, he felt that by <br />the end of the year traffic flow should be so good he would be coming back to Council to say <br />how much more efficient the signals are. He further explained the dynamics of traffic signal <br />timing and the differences that can occur. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti referred to the metering at Sunol and the possible metering of Bernal and <br />asked what would happen at Stoneridge Drive? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said there are two different philosophies involved. The old one was when <br />evaluating the West Las Positas interchange how could you maintain level of service D and let <br />everyone get through town who wanted to. It is a completely different story when you talk about <br />metering to reduce cut through traffic. That is a paradigm shift. If it's okay for Stoneridge to <br />handle its own traffic, but not to allow everyone through town, the northbound off ramp from <br />680 will naturally meter people. Only so many cars can get off on that one-lane off ramp. There <br />is a good chance Stoneridge may not need to be widened. Therefore, Stoneridge Drive may not <br />backup or need metering. <br /> <br />Mayor Pico asked why there is not a similar natural metering with the Bernal offramp? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said there would be at a point, but the point at which Stoneridge and Bernal <br />would naturally meter themselves far exceeds the downtown capacity. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico asked if metering between the freeway and the Valley/Bemal signal was <br />possible, perhaps at Koll? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles was trying to select locations that are signal controlled with few ways <br />around them. The left turn into the Koll Center is signal controlled and it is possible to control <br />how many cars can make that turn into the center and then exit the other side onto Valley. The <br />test at Sunol shows that the signals can do that. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico felt that if traffic is constrained going onto Valley, that is possible by <br />regulating the number of cars that can make a left turn off Bemal onto Valley by the timing of <br />the left turn lights at Bernal/Valley, plus the timing of the light at Koll. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Special Meeting Minutes <br /> <br />5 08/22/02 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.