01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Sullivan said the project in question may be rescinded as a result of current litigation. He stressed the personal commitment he made to the public in convincing them that the General Plan would contain a set of protections and recourse on the matter. He intends to honor that commitment and asked if the Council cannot do the same, that it consider bifurcating Policy 1.6 from the rest of the plan. Mayor Hosterman said she would support such a request. Vice -Mayor Cook Kallio noted there is always recourse for an unhappy community. She agreed that there are many elements of the extension that still require discussion, but she does not believe that a year full of emotionally charged squabbling amongst neighbors is the appropriate way to do this. She said it is the Council's job to balance the benefits and burdens of the community throughout all of Pleasanton. Councilmember Sullivan argued that balance cannot be achieved until the environmental work has been completed. He said that the City approved the road without the document once before and is now involved in litigation. He stressed that he only agreed to include this in the General Plan with the promise of a process by which it could be analyzed. This has not been done and said it is the lack of follow- through that he objects to. Vice -Mayor Cook Kallio supported bifurcation of Policy 1.6, but not a referendum. Councilmember Sullivan noted that sometimes councils make incorrect decisions and citizens deserve the right to overturn those decisions. Councilmember McGovern said the intent to reach an agreement with regional partners is insufficient and she asked staff to make some assurances that the Council is committed to protecting the community's quality of life and minimizing potential impacts. Mayor Hosterman concurred that safeguarding quality of life is tantamount and asked if staff could include language stating that the completion of Stoneridge Drive will be done with consideration for quality of life throughout every neighborhood in the city. Councilmember Sullivan suggested language that includes the intent to identify all environmental impacts from the extension of Stoneridge Drive and implementation of mitigations for surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Roush said this is the intent of the EIR and there is argument that it has already been done with the project's initial approval. He acknowledged that it is subject to litigation, noted the Council has requested a supplemental EIR, and impacts and mitigations mentioned will be part of the forthcoming Supplemental EIR. Mayor Hosterman agreed to support the addition of brief language clearly outlining safeguards to balance the burdens of the project throughout the entire community. Mr. Fialho stated that the Circulation Element includes a number of safeguards it hopes to achieve through build out, including pedestrian safety, traffic speeds, design standards and noise attenuation. All of these are inherent in the dialogue which will occur when the Supplemental EIR is reviewed. City Council Minutes Page 13 of 15 July 21, 2009