CCMIN021803 - Laserfiche WebLink

not designed for through traffic of any kind. He objected to removing the signs under any circumstance, regardless of metering. Howard Hyman, 547 Sycamore Road, said although he opposed metering, he understood the reasons for it and sympathized with Council for its difficult decision. He did not understand why Sunol is being widened to four lanes when the City is trying to stop traffic from using it. He said if someone does not want to live next to a freeway, then don't buy the house and then try to get CalTrans to change the speed limit or alter the freeway. When things like metering are imposed or attempts are made to change how people travel within their city, it just makes it more difficult for the residents. He agreed with Ms. McGovem that there needs to be an overall General Plan review and traffic should not be solved piecemeal. He complimented Mr. Knowles. He has done a great job of listening to residents. He is one of those who appealed for a long fight mm lane. Council asked for feedback on possibly moving the meter back to Arlington. It would be a nightmare for him and the residents of Bridle Creek. Mr. Knowles has provided a long right turn lane that allows them to bypass the metering and he did not want to see that lost. He believed that before Council considered metering in other parts of the City, that it should consider the impact on local residents. When he has to make several trips to and from his home, he must sit through the metering each time. As it is added to other parts of the City, there will be residents trying to get downtown and back to their homes and on various errands that will be impacted. In summary, he opposed metering and wanted a General Plan update. Carl Pretzel, 3633 Glacier, opposed on ramp metering at Santa Rita. He was on a traffic study committee and attended a CalTrans presentation at a workshop four or five years ago. He referred to information that was given in relation to the West Las Positas interchange committee and ramp metering was discussed using a range of 200-900 cars per hour and that document showed no effect on the freeway. The freeway was estimated to have 20,000 cars per hour and the metering had no effect. At the workshop the question of whether the metering was reversible was asked about twelve times and CalTrans finally said it was not. He was suspicious of anyone that won't let you reverse something. He believed there was other data that shows metering will not have any effect. He did not feel it was right to make an irreversible decision at this time. The concept is to make traffic flow better, but there is going to be more and more traffic on the freeway and when the freeway is fully saturated, the metering lights will just max out. The meter just releases one car after another and what happens is that traffic backs up into the City. At this time, traffic is close to gridlock at West Las Positas and Santa Rita and if meters are activated, he predicted that in a couple of years the traffic will be at gridlock. There will be no cut-through traffic but that is because there will be no place to go. If the City Attorney can prepare something that would allow the City to try metering for a while and then be able to mm it off, it might be Wol~h trying. Under the present circumstances, he felt it was a really bad idea. There were no ftmher speakers. Mayor Pico said he firmly believed that it has been proven that traffic metering can work. At some point in the future, the City will be fomed to adopt the concept of metering at almost all of the gateways if traffic flow within the city is to be preserved. He said that while there have been some benefits to neighborhoods in town as a result of the metering, there has been an equally negative impact on other neighborhoods. Although he is convinced metering can work, Pleasanton City Council 21 02/18/03 Minutes