PC 102407 - Laserfiche WebLink

_ Page 3-4 With respect to the LOS D traffic volumes limit stated in the second sentence of the fifth paragraph, Commissioner Blank inquired why the phrase "a maximum of was deleted. Ms. Stern replied that it was to encourage people not to go to the maximum of LOS D. Commissioner Blank noted that the language seemed stronger with the deleted language retained. Ms. Harryman suggested the phrase "to LOS D or less." Commissioner Olson suggested the phrase "to LOS D or better." Commissioner Blank liked that language. • Modify the second sentence of the second paragraph to read as follows: "These level-of-service (LOS) standards require developers of major projects to limit traffic volumes to LOS D or bel[er...." Commissioner Narum noted that Mr. Paxson mentioned ride-sharing as a potential mitigation. She believed that large developers such as the Business Park should utilize ride-sharing programs. Ms. Stern noted that it was a mitigation that could reduce the number of trips. Chairperson Fox noted that the Livermore General Plan has encouraged vehicle trip reduction with the following language: "Work with employers to encourage ride-sharing, carpools and vanpools, public transit, bicycling, walking, flexible working hours, and preferential parking." Commissioner Blank inquired why bicycle lanes were not mentioned. Ms. Stern replied that the language was "such as ride-sharing" and was not intended to be exclusive. Commissioner Blank believed that bicycle lanes should be supported more strongly. Chairperson Fox suggested including the language called out in the Livermore General Plan. Ms. Stern noted that would be fine. • Include language called out in the Livermore General Plan. Commissioner Narum noted that not every item in Livermore's language would be applicable to developers, and that they would not provide public transportation. Commissioner Blank noted that the developers could subsidize public transportation. Page 3-S No changes. Page 3-6 Chairperson Fox noted that Livermore's General Plan read, "Develop a Downtown circulation system that is pedestrian-oriented and supports Downtown as a destination." She believed that may be the intent of Pleasanton's goals with respect to traditional pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. Ms. Stern noted that this section specifically addressed the design quality of the Downtown, which included "wide sidewalks, shade trees, and outdoor dining," which was in contrast to the idea of widening the streets to achieve the LOS. This paragraph was intended to convey the idea that Pleasanton had specific design characteristics in the Downtown that the City wanted to preserve, possibly at the expense PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 24, 2007 Page 28 of 40