My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN041503
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
CCMIN041503
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:37 AM
Creation date
4/29/2003 10:49:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/15/2003
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN041503
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
currently not in place. Completing this is within the ultimate corridor plan. One thing <br />that is being counted on with the current proposed metering is there will be more traffic <br />going northbound on 1-680 and using the connector ramp to go eastbound on 1-580 <br />instead of driving through Pleasanton. There are advantages to the City not having the <br />580/680 interchange metering before City metering because City metering would <br />discourage cut through traffic. Pleasanton is expecting to discuss this with Caltrans as a <br />full corridor project in four to five years. This is a test pilot program for both agencies. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said he was concerned about the staff time expected for the <br />monitoring of this situation. Synchronizing the traffic lights is a top priority and the <br />traffic circulation element will be discussed in the General Plan Update. He wants to <br />make sure monitoring this program will not take any time away from the City trying to <br />meet its schedules for getting these priorities accomplished. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said the model update has already been started and counts are <br />currently being done throughout the City. The circulation element is now underway. <br />Simulations and traffic forecasts are making assumptions as to the effect of ramp <br />metering. It is very important that in the next few months, that the City get hard data in <br />terms of what is the effect regarding cut through traffic so this can be included in the <br />model as the City does the circulation element update. Otherwise it is just a guess as to <br />what will go on five years from now. If the City can quantify exactly what the effect is <br />today, the City will be much better at forecasting this. This will drive the discussion <br />about the impact of building or not building certain roadways and intersections. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said his concern was that if the metering does not work, he doesn't <br />want to spend unnecessary time trying to make it work. He wants to be able to turn the <br />metering to all green and look at it again at a later time when the City has the time to do <br />this. He did not want any time taken away from other projects. Is there a City obligation <br />to try to work with Caltrans to try to make it work, or can we say this is just not working <br />and request it be turned to all green and look at it later? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said if staff felt it was on the verge of making it work then it would <br />be pursued. If this isn't the case, staff would not go any further. One of the reasons staff <br />asked for nine months of testing was the flexibility of fine tuning this with the <br />expectation that in six months it would be stable, and the final three months for drivers to <br />establish new traveling patterns. Hopyard and Owens is being planned for a triple left <br />turn lane from. If metering works the expected way, this triple left land will not be <br />necessary. Hacienda and Owens is also an area currently being looked at. Depending on <br />how ramp metering changes east/west traffic flow will effect the signal timing at these <br />and other intersections in Pleasanton. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 13 04/15/03 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.