20 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Page 1 of Janice Stem From: Anne Fox lanne_tox ©comcast nets Sent: 2008 -12- 05 16:59 I LETTER 7 I To: Janice Stern Cc: Marra Hoey Subject: Comments DEIR General Plan (part 1) I'm sendrn) the first 20 questions to you Thanks Anne 1, During the 1996 General Plan Update, Livermore commented 'City staff supports the proposal to utilize the quarry lands as an urban separator between Livermore and Pleasanton. Future land uses of agriculture, recreation open space, water management, and wildlife habitat, as opposed to residential, are appropriate given 7.1 the proximity of the Livermore Municipal Airport and Livermore's goals for community separation" Why then for East Pleasanton (including Chain of Lakes) on p. 3 11 -5, does this include land use designations such as High Density Residential, Business Park, General and Limited Industrial, Commercial, and Public and Institutlorial? It was envisioned in 1998 and in the discussions in the General Plan by the Planning Commission as an are for parks and recreation. 2. City staff conducted in the Planning Commission DEIR review meeting that the greatest contributor to the decreased Air Quality in Pleasanton via the buddout General Phan was due to CornmerctawO(cei'Retail deveopmnnt envisioned in the quarry land area? 1 do not recall that the City Council or the Planning Commission or the 1993 General Plan Steering Committee envisioned the quarry land to be Intensive CommerciaVOfflcerRetall developmunl. At one point it was designated "Water Management and Recreation' by the city staff. How did this get changed to Commercial/Offrce /RetaHiResidential? 2. During the 1996 General Plan update, the DEIR comments focused on some of the consistencies and inconsistencies with the Alameda County East Area Plan tECAP) tp, 23 and onward), Given that Measure D changed the East County Area Plan, please define all of the inconsistencies between the tared use policies and 'and use designations of the Pleasanton GP and the ECAS as modified by Measure D 4. During the 1996 GP process, the Alameda County Public Works Agency asked the city of Pleasanton to reflect In its own General Plan that the county supported construction of multiple use trails along the "Iron Horse trail Si the rights of way only with the assurance that public transit use will also be provided within the corridor. Given that the County proposed diesel trains as a shared use along the Iron Horse Trail in multiple Tri- Valley cities in 2003, please provide details on whether the Iron Horse trail ono related trails are pedestrianlrecreational only trails or am envisioned to also provide mess transit capabilities along it in the future Please also describe the potential environmental impacts if the right-of-way includes mass transit capabilities or light rail capabilthes 5. Regarding the Mixed Ilse designation, please define traffic impacts [rem outside the cty vs. inside the city and how this irhpacts the total traffic picture. For example, in the 1998 GP comments, BART commented: 'The Land Use Goats, Policies, and Programs call for High Density Residentat Development near the East Dublin/Pleasanton BART station. While housing always compliments a BART station area, commercial developnwmt must be promoted as wee Large scale office developments near the BART station will make the greatxst contribution to reducing traffic from outside the city 6. Inadequate parking at BART stations- Residents report that the DuoliriPleasanton parking lots for BART fret at an early hiuur, forcing Pleasanton residents and other residents from outside the area to exit 1 -580 looking for parking at BART then returning to 1 -580 to drive to the Bayfair station where parking is available. Please provide an analysi of parking that will be provided at each BART station in Pleasanton (East and 'Nest) 2008.12 -:)5