My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN032205
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
CCMIN032205
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:41 AM
Creation date
5/3/2005 11:32:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
3/22/2005
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN032205
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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. Knowles commented that as more traffic occurs in Pleasanton, the pass through <br /> routes become less attractive. Just because regional congestion increases, because of <br /> Pleasanton's internal traffic problems, there would not be major increases in cut through <br /> traffic. <br /> <br /> Mr. Iserson proceeded with the staff report PowerPoint presentation and <br /> discussed mitigations. He summarized that this is the point where Council must choose <br /> Options B-1 or B-2. Staff believes the best option would be B-1. Whichever option is <br /> selected, it will take about one month to bring land use changes back to the next <br /> workshop. <br /> <br /> Mayor Hosterman asked staff if the plan would be to work through groups of <br /> mitigations, intersection by intersection, or what? <br /> <br /> Mr. Iserson suggested working on the simpler mitigations at first. That would <br /> take two to three workshops to get to a decision. More complex changes would be <br /> considered at later workshops. <br /> <br /> Mayor Hosterman asked if staff could present additional data within the same <br /> timeline? <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said it depended on what is done first. Option B-1 presents multiple <br />-- mitigations for each intersection. Staff hoped to build on the feedback from Council to <br /> continue to refine the traffic models as the process goes along. In addition, models can <br /> be produced to show what traffic is internal and how much is cut through and described <br /> each category of read users. <br /> <br /> Ms. Roberts believed it made sense to know who is using a particular <br /> intersection before making decisions on mitigations. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said that was possible with the tools available. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sullivan asked for clarification of the options. Option B-1 means the group <br /> would go through existing plus approved development to develop mitigations for <br /> intersections and then land use changes could be added. <br /> <br /> Mr. Knowles said that was correct. Once the mitigations are selected to make <br /> traffic work as well as possible, then land uses can be reviewed to see what additional <br /> development could be approved and what additional mitigations would be necessary. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sullivan asked if Option B-2 were selected, before any more models are <br /> done, would it be necessary to have more workshops regarding land use changes? <br /> <br /> Joint Workshop <br /> City Council and <br /> Planning Commission 4 03/22/05 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.