01 - Laserfiche WebLink

system that distributes traffic and protects neighborhoods. He said report indicates that the traffic volumes for a projected Stoneridge Drive cut-through would be manageable and he felt the amount of cut-through would be excessive, but another point of the report was that residential areas adjacent to Valley and Santa Rita would have less traffic impacts and congestion, would reduce mitigations, and improve resident’s high quality of life, and he felt it would be best served with the extension. David Richter, addressed the City Council, presented a PowerPoint report, said when he looked at the traffic report, he questioned whether it was a benefit to the community. He had three questions which were inconsistencies between the initial summary and conclusion, the unclear timeframe of what was covered in the snapshot which he later learned was 2030, and what assumptions were included in the cut-through traffic, which were covered. He looked at conflicting statements involving relief, reduced traffic at some intersections, and service level improvements. Brian Arkin, addressed the City Council, asked staff to do a minor edit to the report and clean up some of the consistencies that the previous speaker described because it is difficult for people to read and understand. He also received a letter from the City Attorney in response to a letter he sent last December. He asked about the conflict of interest of Council and Planning Commissioners and their material affect the extension would cause. Commissioner Fox did say she would have a conflict. He discussed the impacts surrounding Councilmember Thorne’s home, City Manager Fialho’s home and the City Attorney concluded that for both, there would be no conflict of interest due to no material impact to their homes. He said he keeps hearing that the extension would improve Valley, but 2/3 of Valley would be impacted if the extension is built. Mayor Hosterman indicated the City Attorney was consulted and no conflict of interest was found. Rongming Sun, addressed the City Council, asked how many people are more than 40 years old. He said the modeling is 23 years in the future for people who may not be here, acknowledged the work of staff, and questioned if the modeling would be accurate due to uncertainty of the future. He proposed doing the modeling again in the future, said many people have mentioned I-580 and cut-through neighborhoods and felt Valley residents experience cut- through from the south and felt there was no incentive for those drivers to use Stoneridge Drive extension and those coming from the west will have more incentive to use the extension and he felt the benefits that we get by building the extension were negligible. Jeet Jagasia, addressed the City Council, opposes the extension for logical and analytical reasons, said many people in the community are from the high tech industry. He believes when making a decision, staff should not whole-heartedly look only at the benefits for the businesses, as it is not about driving revenue but more for protecting the quality of life for residents. He said many parents who bring their children to the schools, they are not very cognizant of the fact that there are many children who go to school every day and if the drive is extended, the children will be at risk every day. He asked the Council to make sure they take into consideration the quality of life and the safety of the children. Jereen Gilbert, addressed the City Council, said she has no financial interest in having the extension go through, said her main purpose was to solve the safety crisis she saw affecting school children, mainly the 12 who have been hit at the intersections of Santa Rita and Moore, Greenwood and Valley, Black and Santa Rita and near Coleman Valley. She has been on a Workshop Minutes 19 April 24, 2007