PC 040902 - Laserfiche WebLink

r r- r- advised that he has not been able to obtain the numbers that indicate what the true PLAN C versus PLAN A traffic levels are. He commented on the noise in the Springdale/Stoneridge area and the information that he has prepared and presented in the Minority Report. He noted that the real question is what would the difference in noise levels be comparing PLAN A to PLAN C. He provided information on the development ofthe chart provided in the Minority Report illustrating traffic noise for I -680/Stoneridge. Mr. Gill stated that he feels the development of a project study report was a very large mistake, because the real important studies such as those related to safety were deferred. He noted that the report includes historical numbers related to traffic accidents which is obsolete and do not reflect the effects of the traffic with either plan. He noted that there have been accidents and injuries since the opening of Hart Middle School and this information has not been included in the majority report. He expressed concern that public comments made during the Advisory Committee meetings have not been documented and the Committee did not follow a process of reviewing and approving minutes for its meetings. Mr. Pretzel recommended that the City not go through the Caltrans process which would result in another part of the approval process for the construction of the West Las Positas Interchange, and that instead the City conduct a study to look at the issues in such a way that all of the alternatives and comments that are identified are documented, transmitted, and communicated to the Planning Commission and the City Council. He noted that the Minority Report recommends that there be a free and open study that is not limited in scope or content by the Caltrans formula, and that after the City reviews the information and makes a decision, that data be used in whatever formula is required for the next step. Mr. Pretzel clarified that he thinks before the City enters another Caltrans approval process, the City needs to perform an independent study that is much more objective and free of constraints of a narrow scope to determine some of the issues so the funding numbers can be accurately determined. He advised that he would like to see a citizens' committee that could be expanded to include a lot more areas that may be positively or negatively affected. Mr. Pretzel commented on the date of the pedestrian counts at the intersections of the West Las Positas at Hopyard and Dorman Roads, noting that the counts were done on a Saturday during summer vacation. In response to a request for clarification from Chairperson Maas, Mr. Pretzel advised that it would be acceptable to him ifthe safety and noise studies are not performed under the guise of preparing an approval document for the Caltrans formula. He noted that he feels that the matter should go to the City Council and the Council should make the decision as to which of the two alternatives it wants, prior to creating the Caltrans report. He noted that he feels it is very important that the public input be recorded. Jeff Knowles advised that the City's staff recommendation was developed after reading and reviewing the Advisory Committee's report. He noted that because the process took so long, many of the traffic numbers that were used were from previous models and there is some discussion about exactly what the appropriate volumes are that need to mitigated. Mr. Knowles presented the staff recommendation which was detailed in the staff report. He noted the project report that staffis recommending be developed would be a City-prepared and -funded document, with Caltrans being one of the parties whose concerns will need to be addressed in the process. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES April 9, 2002 Page 5