CCMIN083005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Brozosky commented that the improvements to Isabel were in fact fully funded, due to a T.E.A. allocation from the federal government. He said there are funds for 1-580 HOV lane and a pilot for an HOT lane on 1-680. Cindy McGovern asked if staff had the figures for number of jobs in the community versus number of housing units and whether there was a great disparity? Mr. Iserson said those figures had been presented as part of the Housing Element and will be updated when the Land Use Element is reviewed. Currently the jobs/housing ratio is 1.7/1. Ms. McGovern stated there is a housing cap, but no cap on commercial retail or office. She did not know how it would be possible to have a jobs/housing balance unless a policy were adopted to cap commercial/office/retail. She did not want to do that because that is the economic base of the city. She then noted there are few funding mechanisms for Alternative B and asked if that Alternative were adopted would the city find ways to fund it? Mr. Iserson said it would happen over time. Traffic impact fees would be used along with new development exactions, dedications and improvements. Any improvements would happen incrementally as the need arises. Ms. McGovern was concerned since the city is near build out and she was uncertain how much more funding could come from new development. She then referred to the staff report and the suggestion that local cut-through could be discouraged by increasing delay. She asked if that was a positive thing? Mr. Iserson said if certain streets that are cut-through routes experience more delay, then they are less likely to be used. Delays are not encouraged on other streets because that would impact local residents. Ms. McGovern referred to EI Charro and asked if the cut-through routes were based on Alternative A. Staff agreed. She then referred to the statement that Alternatives Band C would encourage regional cut-through traffic. She had not seen models that demonstrated the effects on Stanley, First and Bernal. Mr. Iserson said those models had not been run. Ms. McGovern said she could not adopt Alternatives B or C without first seeing what the impact would be on Pleasanton streets. She asked if studies had been done to show what percentage of the community uses public transportation or alternatives to the freeway? Mr. Iserson said the exact percentage is not known but there are many considerations in the equation than just traffic congestion that are addressed in the Circulation Element. Ms. McGovern commented there is encouragement from the state to construct transportation oriented developments (TOD) and noted the percentage of residents in these developments that actually use public transportation varies from 5% to 40%. She wanted to know how public transportation or BART affects this community. Joint Workshop City Council/Planning Commission 5 08/30/05