My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN082906
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
CCMIN082906
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:44 AM
Creation date
8/25/2006 12:16:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
8/29/2006
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN082906
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
<br />Director Iserson said the model keeps existing plus approved development in and then <br />gets to the 29,000 cap by adding units to Hacienda, Stoneridge Mall/BART station area <br />(350 units), etc. He explained how staff determined the units in an alternative. <br /> <br />Mayor Hosterman asked to bring the discussion back to the concept rather than all the <br />details of data. This is simply direction to staff to model this particular alternative. <br /> <br />Council member Brozosky believed he was being asked to make an uninformed decision. <br />He again asked staff about the units and asked if the alternative would have no reserve <br />and no unit's downtown. <br /> <br />Director Iserson said staff adjusted the numbers in the different altematives and he <br />believed they all had a 200-unit reserve. <br /> <br />Councilmember Brozosky asked if any units in Staples Ranch were counted. <br /> <br />Council member Sullivan said his intent with his motion was for staff to bring back the chart <br />showing units and their locations. He did not what the model to exceed the 29,000 unit <br />housing cap in any case. He was comfortable with staff moving the units around to make <br />sure everything fits. <br /> <br />Director Iserson said this will all be modeled in the environmental impact report anyway <br />and it is just a timing question. Since Council has said it wanted them all modeled the <br />question is do we do it now or later with the EIR. The suggestion is to run it now. <br /> <br />Councilmember McGovern believed staff would run all the three land use plans for the <br />EIR, but she thought a traffic model would be run then Council would look at and possibly <br />make changes to it, so when it was run for the EIR it would be a final, preferred traffic <br />model. What she seems to be hearing is to run multiple models at multiple costs. She <br />preferred to run the preferred plan with this traffic model, review it, and then decide what <br />the final traffic model is and run it for the EIR for the three plans. If she were making a <br />motion it would be to go along with staff to run the preferred plan and take out Santa Rita <br />Road/Valley Avenue improvements. <br /> <br />Substitute Motion: It was m/s by McGovern/Brozosky, to run what staff has identified as <br />the preferred land use plan, run both Alternative A and Alternative B as follows, with two <br />exceptions; remove Santa Rita Road at Black, and take out the improvements at Santa <br />Rita and Valley Avenue for the third turn lane. <br /> <br />Year 2025 - Alternative A) Pleasanton intersection capacity enhancements - Existing + <br />Approved Pleasanton Land Development, plus regional 2025 development with buildout of <br />the Livermore and Dublin General Plans. <br /> <br />Over the next 20 years, this alternative assumes that the following regional network <br />element will be constructed: <br />. An HOV lane on eastbound 1-580 from Hacienda to Greenville Road. - revised as a <br />result of Triangle Study <br />. Isabel at 1-580 Interchange <br /> <br />Special City Council Meeting <br />Minutes <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />August29,2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.