My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN011105
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CCMIN011105
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:40 AM
Creation date
1/5/2005 10:47:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
1/11/2005
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN011105
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Mr. Brozosky clarified that staff is saying this is the current model, later it will say <br />how it affects the network and then will ask for the various combinations to be run on the <br />model to see the effects before making a decision or policy change? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles agreed and gave an example that if the model shows West Las <br />Positas, with fronting residential units, makes no difference with two lanes or four lanes, <br />it might be determined that the road should stay two lanes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky agreed with that because that would not be a cut through route, but <br />Hopyard could become an alternative route that would change significantly based on <br />other arterial changes in the city. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said everything has pros and cons. For example, Del Valle and <br />Hopyard is a four-way stop intersection. The General Plan assumes it is a traffic signal. <br />That will affect how much volume is on Hopyard, because a lot less can use it if it is a <br />four way stop. Also if you increase the capacity on Hopyard, how much more traffic do <br />you want to bring to Division Street or Del Valle Parkway? <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky was unclear how to use the model data presented at this meeting <br />for future decisions, if all the other data will be changing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said he was trying to present the kinds of data available to acquaint <br />everyone with how the traffic model works. <br /> <br /> There was discussion about whether to proceed with the staff presentation in <br />order to hear from the public or whether to postpone the remainder of the presentation <br />for the next workshop. It was determined to proceed with the staff report. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles reviewed the widening of Dublin Canyon Road. <br /> <br /> There was discussion about the definition of regional cut through traffic and local <br /> cut through traffic and whether local cut through could be tracked on the model. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles referred to the staff report and using Foothill Road as an example, it <br /> was possible to summarize who is using a particular section of the roadway. <br /> <br /> Mayor Hosterman indicated there would be another workshop on January 25 and <br /> asked staff is it could continue to review potential road widenings at that time? She <br /> asked the Council and Commission if anyone had further questions to ask staff to <br /> present at that meeting. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky referred to Figure 19 on page 39 of the staff report, which shows <br /> Foothill Road. He asked if it were known where the trips started or ended for the trips on <br /> that road? Is there a way to analyze whether a person is using the road for a specific <br /> reason or just to avoid other congested areas? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said he could show where all northbound traffic originated; or he <br /> could indicate who used that road for various destinations. Displays are not created until <br /> it is known if it would be useful in making decisions. He also noted the models can show <br /> how traffic changes over time. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.