Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03241992 - TC.4 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Costa - DATE: March 16, 1992 `..' ' County c•. SUBJECT: Circulation in the Vernal Drive/Livorna Road area in Alamo SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: REFER back to the San Ramon Valley Planning Commission the issue of bicycle and pedestrian circulation in the Vernal Drive/Livorna Road area to provide children safe access to the area schools and to Livorna Road, as the issue relates to the Foskett General Plan Amendment properties. II. Financial Impact: None Ill. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: There is currently a General Plan Study in the Livorna Road/Vernal Drive area to review the potential of a general plan amendment. Staff is concerned with the adequacy of the circulation and emergency access to, the Vernal Drive area if many more units are added to the road system. Staff brought this issue to the San Ramon Valley--Planning Commission at a workshop on February 19, 1992. The San Ramon Valley Planning Commission was very interested in the subject but suggested the issue be brought to the Board of Supervisors for consideration, as it dealt with the issue of potential future growth in the area. In the meantime the Anderson and Foskett properties have been processing subdivision applications on their properties which were being held up pending a resolution to this issue. On March 16, 1991, this issue was brought before the Transportation Committee. There were three items that were discussed: 1) The safety concerns at the intersection of Vernal Drive and Livorna Road that would be exacerbated with any further changes in the general plan, 2) The poor circulation in the area for vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic and 3) The lack of emergency access in the area. Continued on Attachment: SIGNATURE: X RECOMMENDATION O ARD COMMITTEE _APPROVE ER SIGNATURE(S)• Tom Torlakson ACTION OF BOARD ON March 24, 1992 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT. ABSTAIN: I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy Y an action taken and entered on the minutes of the RMA:CI Board of Supervisors on the date shown. c:BO16.t3 ATTESTED: March 24, 1992 PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board Orig. Div: Public Works (R/E) of Supervisors and County Administrator cc: CAO by &L. __ ,oeputy Community Development Interested Parties (via P.W.) r� Circulation in the Vernal Drive Area Page Two March 16, 1992 III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background cont.: It was generally agreed by all present that the vehicular circulation in the area is poor, but it was the desire for the area residents to keep the area a system of cul de saced streets, with no future connections of vehicular traffic. It was also agreed that the circulation in the area. for pedestrian and bicycle traffic is poor and should be improved along with planning for safe pedestrian and bicycle access to Livorna Road and the schools. Emergency access was also discussed, but the property owners in the area weren't convinced of the need for it and didn't feel it was an immediate concern. Finally, in bringing the focus back to the pending Anderson and Foskett applications, the Transportation Committee decided the following: 1) Using the premise that connecting the private roads to provide vehicular circulation is not desirable, then the only issue that would impact the pending development would be pedestrian and bicycle circulation and safety access. This item should then be referred back to the San Ramon Valley Planning Commission for consideration with the two developments. 2) The Foskett General Plan Amendment considered the impacts of the Anderson and Foskett subdivisions on the area, including vehicular circulation, operational concerns at the Livorna Road/Vernal Drive intersection and emergency access; and the issues need not be revisited as they may pertain to potential future development. None of the discussions at the meeting, however, presupposed any future changes in the General Plan in the area. If any future requests for general plan amendments are received, then the above issues should be studied in more detail. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission will have no direction concerning the issues raised at their February 19, 1992 workshop, as they pertain to the pending Anderson and Foskett applications.