CCMIN082410SP - Laserfiche WebLink

Traffic Engineer Mike Tassano provided a brief PowerPoint presentation on traffic impacts, the two Stoneridge Drive extensions, and the SEIR supplemental traffic study. He noted that most information on the 4 -lane concurrent alternative was available in the original EIR, but the SEIR condenses the information into one location as presents it as an alternative. He noted that the proposed cul -de -sac or barrier project in the original EIR did identify a segment of Santa Rita Road as an impact, but did not clearly state such. The SEIR identified the 2 -lane constrained extension as the preferred project alternative and listed 6 impacted intersections, 4 of which are in Pleasanton and all of which are mitigated. Impacts to 5 roadway segments were also identified, are more regional in nature, and have mitigations supported through regional transportation fees. In addition to local traffic impact and Tri- Valley Transportation fees, the Alameda County Surplus Property Authority will provide $1.5 million for construction of roadway improvements that go to overlay, new traffic signals, and intersection modifications identified as necessary in the SEIR. Mr. Dolan reviewed the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the SEIR, which relate to aesthetic and visual quality, air quality, climate change, noise, and traffic. He noted that the categories of air quality impacts that are significant and unavoidable are regional, not local in nature. Significant and unavoidable traffic impacts relate to an intersection in Dublin, and the City of Dublin has chosen not to make those improvements. He reminded the Council that the California Environmental Quality Act does not prohibit the Council from approving a project with significant and unavoidable impacts, but does require adoption of a statement of overriding considerations. Councilmember McGovern questioned and confirmed with City Manager Fialho that staff sees the Regional Transportation Agreement based on Program 1.6 of the Circulation Element to be both a policy statement and a funding plan. Mr. Fialho stated that Hybrid 1A not only estimated the cost of construction for each regional improvement identified, but also provided the framework for Alameda County and its partner agencies to identify funding as it comes available. He also confirmed for her that several projects prioritized above completion of SR -84 have been completed, effectively moving SR -84 further up the list. Mr. Fialho did note an exception is cases for funds are limited to use only on certain projects, but said most are allocated based on priority. Referring to the Page 6 of the MMRP, which states that reducing the size of outdoor spaces could mitigate air quality issues, Councilmember McGovern recalled discussions that CLC will not be doing that and that the language could be removed. Mr. Bocian confirmed. Councilmember McGovern strongly supported outdoor opportunities for residents and wanted to ensure that is not used as a mitigation measure. Referring to Page 21 of the MMRP which discussed severely limiting or prohibiting Diazinon, Councilmember McGovern said she would rather not allow it so close to the Arroyo district. On Page 27, Item NO -1.2, she said there has also been discussion on removing the suggestion of inoperable windows as noise impact mitigation. Mr. Bocian said CLC has indicated that they intend to design independent living units with operable windows. Councilmember McGovern referred to Page 30 of the MMRP, which discusses plans for 6 days per week construction. She asked if a requirement could be added to limit Saturday construction to work that is more interior in nature, rather than grading or other invasive activities. Mr. Fialho confirmed. Councilmember Cook - Kallio suggested that it be based on location, noting that areas nearer the freeway would not be impacted the same as those immediately next to existing residences. Special City Council Minutes Page 4 of 9 August 24, 2010