CCMIN102197 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Pico asked if the increased traffic projection is 1%, would Taubman pay 1% of the cost? Mr. Gibson said typically fair share looks at the new traffic that would be generated by development. The 1% increase he mentioned earlier is 1% of the total capacity of the intersection. New traffic increments from the Mall would be much higher. Mr. Swift said the figure is unknown at this time. All agreements say development will pay its pro-rata share as determined by the City Council at sometime in the future when it is determined what that share is, based on the improvement or participation in an assessment district if and when it has been established. The City Council ultimately determines the improvement costs, the manner the costs are spread, and the extent of the spread among the bene~tting properties. These are included in the prior agreement and are carried forward. Ms. Ayala asked if Council was comfortable with Mr. Gibson' s determination of the cut- through traffic going east, rather than west. Mr. Pieo said there are concerns in the neighborhoods that need to be addressed. He asked whose priority comes first, the business community or the neighborhoods? He did not feel comfortable that the cut-through traffic issue had been answered. He did not have enough information to make a decision. Ms. Ayala said she was looking for Council to work on reaching a solution because the Stoneridge Mall and the neighbors are a partner with Pleasanton. She felt the Mall did not want traffic circulation problems, so it will want to work with the City. She wanted to be able to give the shopping center the ability to negotiate with future clients and not lose them to other areas. Mr. Pico felt the City should wait until the studies are done. Taubman has said there is no imminent need for this additional development capacity and if there is really a partnership, then Taubman should be willing to work with the City. He did not agree with signing a development agreement amendment until the traffic impacts are better known. Mayor Tarver agreed with Mr. Pico, but also wanted to see the Mall succeed and grow. lie wanted to make sure things were done the fight way. He did not want to sign an agreement that says somehow the majority vote of the Council is lost, and a super majority is needed before development can be suspended. This was a loophole that he could not accept. He said in order to get a moratorium there has to be 4/Sths vote and he did not want to be in this situation. He wanted everyone to know the facts up front. Ms. Ayala asked if it would be possible for someone from the shopping center to address the long and short term planning and how the seven month waiting period would impact the center. Pleasanton City Council 10/21/97 Minutes 19