CCMIN011105 - Laserfiche WebLink

quadrants (north, south, east and west) and taking one quadrant at a time to review in accordance with the 1996 General Plan and then apply the new assumptions. In that way, it would be easier for her to determine what new development is acceptable, what roads need to be improved, etc. For example, there was just discussion about Foothill Road and Dublin Canyon Road and the fact that it will be LOS F. She did not see how it could reach that level, She was overwhelmed. Ms. Fox said she agreed with Mr. Arkin's approach. We know the 1996 General Plan does not work and the levels of service listed do not reflect reality. She was surprised about discussing widening streets at this point. She felt that decision was far down the line after a decision is made on the preferred network for the city. It would make more sense to review the existing roadways and analyze them to decide what to add. Ms. Maas asked staff to explain why it used the method it selected. Mr. Swift said no matter what approach is used, you will arrive at the same place at the end. Staff was trying to use a method that was best to show who is using the streets that may or may not be included in the General Plan when the process is completed. If you start with existing land use and street networks and then add approved projects, we know what that does and it is in the baseline report. There are level of service E and F all over the city. The question then is what is to be done. Are street networks added or is land use added. If land use is not added, are those properties to remain empty? On the other hand, if you start with the General Plan and then take things away, find out where traffic would flow and then start working on land use, you will end up at the same place and it will take fewer interim decisions by the Planning Commission and City Council to get there. If we you use Mr. Arkin's approach, it will simply not work. At a future workshop, the first land use alternative will show existing plus approved and there will be an example of the General Plan build out network. The model will show what additional land use is possible if the entire 1996 circulation network is built. The model will probably not include West Las Positas interchange and Stoneridge Drive extension, since it is quite clear that those two are not acceptable to the public. Staff is just now trying to determine what each segment means in terms of who might want to use them and why. Mr. Blank liked Mr. Arkin's proposal. He was surprised to see the West Las Positas interchange included in the staff report. No matter which model is used, the concepts of additional hours spent driving, the number of miles traveled over small areas, over large areas, etc. are very amorphous. Most people don't know what we are talking about. People can relate to Table 1. He would like a tool that shows what traffic is today and a tool that allows easy comparisons of various options. He wanted something that shows routes turning red if a certain thing happens, therefore showing that thing was not a good idea, Mr. Swift said that information is available and staff will be providing it. He explained how the models would work. Staff wanted to avoid all those models until real alternatives are determined. Absent doing models in conjunction with different land uses and combinations of street options, he felt it would be overkill in terms of output. It would take a lot longer.