CCMIN013007 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Stanley and asked how traffic enforcement affected the model and described various situations he has seen. He believed expanding the roads would not solve the problems. He supported expanding the ACE train service and felt it would be better than expanding BART. He noted if there were eight trains a day, it would take 10,000 more riders and 5,000 cars off of I-580. He noted the San Joaquin Rail Commission estimated the cost at $300 million. He also noted this county was supporting a billion dollar BART extension that would only carry about 3,000 more riders. He urged Council to consider the improvements to the ACE train and felt Council should not approve any development until it solved the traffic problems. Councilmember Sullivan asked if the traffic model included any public transit such as ACE or BART. Deputy Director Tassano said it did, but the percentage for model choice did not increase greatly with build out. Councilmember Sullivan asked if transit oriented development would be modeled to see how it would take traffic off the road. Deputy Director Tassano said that has not been done yet but would be part of the next step. Heidi Massee believed it would be better to model Stoneridge Drive extension sooner rather than later. She wanted to know exactly how it would impact traffic both in and out of the city. She indicated at the present time there is no hard data that says if Stoneridge was extended that 580/680 traffic would come through the city. What we do know is that the level of service at various intersections is below LOS D and there are safety risks for pedestrians. Another belief is that the extension would help disperse traffic through the city more evenly as it was always intended. Therefore, she asked that the model include the impact of the extension on traffic coming off the freeway and passing through the city, the impact of the extension versus no extension on traffic originating within the city, and use all that data to understand the impact to Valley and Santa Rita. Nancy Allen believed the Stoneridge decision was the most important decision for the Council this year. She indicated no matter what the final decision was, the process is as important or perhaps more important than the final outcome. She supported modeling both options and felt people wanted to understand the regional cut-through issue, local impacts, etc. From her review of development in northeast Pleasanton over the last twenty years, she understood that it was predicated on Stoneridge Drive being able to move traffic through the city. She felt the models would also help to understand the impact on key intersections. She urged Council not to approve the Home Depot until the traffic problems were solved. LaVonne Youel supported doing the Stoneridge model before the EIR. If the decision is to proceed with the extension, then it should include some of the alterations Mr. Wolfe suggested in terms of traffic control. She did not want to accommodate Livermore's businesses or to alter the quality of life drastically for those who live along Stoneridge. She also believed consideration should be given for the quality of life of those who live along Valley Avenue. She encouraged Council and the Commission to resolve city traffic issues not only for Valley/Santa Rita or the Stoneridge extension, but to look at the City Council Minutes 8 January 30, 2007 Joint Workshop