Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Blank noted that he has read in the newspaper recently that BART is <br /> considering expanding retail footprints within the BART stations themselves as a <br /> revenue-generation mechanism. He inquired if this was true. <br /> Mr. McPartland replied that this has been mentioned in Board meetings and has been <br /> given to staff to experiment with to determine whether revenue can be developed. He <br /> indicated that he has seen retail on the platform in other countries and stated that this <br /> will never happen with BART because of safety considerations. He noted that BART <br /> currently has contracts for retail within the downtown San Francisco BART station which <br /> may be expanded in the future. He indicated that there are no plans at this time to do <br /> the same in the Dublin/Pleasanton area. He stated that in the Concord area, retail <br /> entities within the immediate vicinities of BART stations protested as soon as this <br /> subject came up. He added that BART Directors have indicated that they would do this <br /> in a balanced way without threatening existing businesses. <br /> Commissioner Blank inquired if there would be no retail in the platform areas. <br /> Mr. McPartland said yes. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Chair Narum called for a break at 9:17 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:27 p.m. <br /> Chair Narum referred to pages 19 through 21 of the Traffic Analysis and requested <br /> Mike Tassano, City Traffic Engineer, to explain Options Ala and Alb for the Owens <br /> Drive lane reduction and why he is not recommending Option Alb. <br /> Mr. Tassano stated that his analysis addresses some of the safety elements that occur <br /> with lane reductions proposed is Options Ala and Al b. He indicated that the traffic <br /> model was run primarily to determine whether or not there would be level-of-service <br /> (LOS) failures at any of the locations. He noted that there were no LOS issues but that <br /> there was a reduction in the number of vehicles with the land use change. He added <br /> that from a circulation standpoint, lane reductions defer traffic, although in very small <br /> increments, and there are other parallel arterials that support traffic. He noted that there <br /> was an increase of 30 to 40 vehicles, the equivalent of about one or two extra vehicles <br /> per minute, which is not noticeable on the parallel arterial system. <br /> With respect to the difference between the two options, Mr. Tassano stated that the first <br /> option, Option Ala, reduces the six lanes to a single lane in each direction with a <br /> six-foot wide bike lane, a six-foot wide landscaped island, a second lane, and then a <br /> parking lane. He explained that the benefit of this option is that the angled parking <br /> separates the parking area from the traffic and bicycle lanes and provides a protected <br /> interaction so that vehicles can easily back out of the parking space and into the traffic <br /> lane without having to worry about pedestrians or other vehicles. He added that it also <br /> moves cyclists to the through movement as opposed to having to ride behind vehicles <br /> that are trying to back out of the parking space and driving back into the travel lane. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 26, 2011 Page 16 of 40 <br />