CCMIN011502 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. McKeehan referred to Council's conunents suggesting the two committees get together and view this property as a big park and what could be done differently. If the property is viewed as a big park, Council can be less specific about where things have to go. Council never made the decision about this plan going to a vote in November. This is different than Measure I and there has been no decision about taking the plan to a vote. The two committees can work together for a park plan, and staff would prepare information regarding possible ballot language, how general the language should be, whether it can be done without an EIR, etc. Mayor Pico suggested it could also be an advisory vote and not necessarily the final vote on a plan. He thanked everyone for their input. Ms. Michelotti asked whether a decision had been made requiring a vote on the plan? Ms. McKeehan said that when Council talked about Measure I, it was clear that the plan would require a community vote. The situation was different then; people would be asked to pay for the property and would then be asked what would be done with the funds. Council talked about having a community vote on the plan after Measure I was defeated, but there have also been conversations that acknowledged this is a different situation and whether there is a vote depends on what came out of the process. The decision on whether to vote on this is still before Council. Item 6d Review and approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and approval of design modifications for construction of Bernal Avenue Bridge improvements at the Arroyo de la Laguna. (SR 02:010) Phil Grubstick presented the staff report. Ms. Dennis referred to the trail under the bridge, which is adequate for equestrians. She asked ifa rider would have to get off the horse. Mr. Grubstick said the height is eight feet and it would be necessary to dismount. He did not believe it would be possible to make the trail any lower. Ms. Michelotti said the arroyo is very steep and clarified that the trail would just go under the bridge, but back up to grade level on the other side. Mr. Grubstick agreed. Ms. Ayala believed that for the number of horses that would use the trail, she felt it was better for the riders to dismount than to have to reengineer the whole project. She referred to the removal of the old abutment and appreciated the benefit to the Valley Trails residents, but inquired what happens downstream. Mr. Grubsfick said there were minimal effects. Pleasanton City Council 19 01 / 15/02 Minutes