CCMIN012197 - Laserfiche WebLink

Brad Hirst, 1811 Santa Rita Road/]128, referred to the letter submitted by the Chamber of Commerce. He encouraged Council to continue to process applications on a first-come/first- served basis. Pleasanton has just had nine years of economic slump and now that the office market is recovering, it is not wise to turn away applications. He believed the quality of life is good when business is good. He indicated the business community is looking forward to working with the residents on the West Las Positas Interchange study. He is looking forwarding to finding mitigations that are satisfactory to everyone. Eric Semmelmayer, 7429 Aspen Court, encouraged Council to discourage projects. According to the staff report, the majority of the existing major projects will generate the most traffic. He felt smaller projects could be discouraged. Pleasanton will continue to be a desirable business address. He also felt discouraging applications could speed up the study process, because the committee will be dealing with a fixed level of traffic. Lori Schmucker, 7414 Palm Court, indicated she moved to Pleasanton from Hayward because of problems in Hayward. She referred to current problems in Oak Hill Park and believed that the interchange would add to this. It will provide easy access to the residential area and will increase crime. She urged Council to consider the welfare of the families. Phil Sayre, 3644 Glacier Court Noah, reiterated his concerns about the interchange, the safety of the children, property values, noise, air pollution, etc. He is not opposed to growth in Pleasanton, but he felt the interchange will only benefit Hacienda Business Park and Stoneridge Mall. He believed this will affect the quality of life in Pleasanton. He believes the traffic in Pleasanton is now at a very good level. Only a few times a day does it become congested. Nate Meeks, 6387 Paseo Santa Mafia, Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee, indicated the Committee is concerned about any debate regarding discouraging business development applications. Both the residential and office markets are just now improving and it is important to maintain a positive development atmosphere to encourage businesses to locate in Pleasanton and for existing businesses to continue to improve. The Committee encourages Council to continue to accept applications on a first-come/first-served basis and review each application on its own merits. The Committee is also concerned about the contentious atmosphere surrounding discussions of the interchange. It believes that Council should direct the study to focus on finding aitematives for the interchange. The business and residential communities need to work together on this matter. Jack Hovingh, 4250 Muirwood Drive, recommended continuing to process applications with conditions that the developers pay a fair share of the traffic mitigations should the interchange be eliminated. He also believed the developers should acknowledge that the City is not guaranteeing the existing traffic levels of service at LOS D. He supported staff recommendations 1 and 2 but not 3. He referred to the removal of transportation systems management requirements and his belief that the recently adopted General Plan created a jobs/housing irabalance. 5 1/21/97