My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2025
>
031825 REGULAR
>
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2025 2:43:59 PM
Creation date
3/18/2025 2:36:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/18/2025
EXPIRATION DATE
3/18/2045
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
147
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
Submitted On: <br />Mar 13, 2025, 01:54PM PDT <br />City Council Regular Meeting - <br />Submit your written public <br />comment <br />City of Pleasanton <br />Full Name First Name: Todd <br />Last Name: Nelson <br />Email (this entry is disclosable <br />if included)654tnelson@gmail.com <br />City Council Meeting Date March 18, 2025 07:00 PM <br />Meeting Type Regular Meeting at 7 pm <br />Agenda Item Number 8 <br />Comments 1. Please provide documentation supporting the necessity for a full <br />new Master Plan rather than a minor update. <br />The City of Livermore recently did a minor update on its 2018 Master <br />Plan. Staff verbally told BPTC that we wanted to do a minor update <br />but were forced to do a full one. What authority made this demand? <br />What is it about Pleasanton's 2018 plan that made this a <br />requirement but not Livermore's 2018 plan? And whatever difference <br />there was, does our new RFP highlight this so that our next revision <br />can be minor? <br />2. Please provide the comparison analysis that allowed Hexagon to <br />win this bid. <br />Fehr & Peers would seem to have an advantage since they wrote our <br />previous plan. I believe that Fehr & Peers maintains our TDM and <br />Exhibit A indicates that Hexagon will make use of a TDM; will <br />Hexagon recreate one or will Fehr & Peers give Hexagon access? If <br />the latter, will financial considerations be expected? A cursory review <br />of Hexagon's website suggests they are primarily a Traffic <br />consultant, not a Bike/Ped consultant. The example bike/ped projects <br />have no links; has Staff reviewed their Master Plan examples? The <br />projects I could find were only minor corridor projects. Hexagon <br />worked for the City in 2013 on the Downtown Parking Study but I've <br />never heard them mentioned with respect to bike/ped work. <br />3. Item 10 of the Agreement requires that the consultant cannot <br />sublet or transfer anything without written consent of the City. Please <br />provide whatever written agreement already exists for Hexagon to <br />work with Toole Design. <br />Toole Design is referenced in Exhibit A, Task #3 but nowhere else in <br />this agenda item. Toole Design's involvement was verbally implied to <br />BPTC by Staff. What role does Toole Design have in this project and
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.