CCMIN030502 - Laserfiche WebLink

Otis Nostrand, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce, 777 Peters Avenue, indicated the Board had unanimously supported the Downtown Specific Plan as presented. This is a good Plan that reflects a lot of hard work by the community members and staff. Adopting the Plan at this meeting would not preclude anyone from doing further studies if they so desire. He urged Council to adopt the Plan as presented. Mr. Campbell asked for a explanation of the difference between the Chamber of Commerce and the Pleasanton Downtown Association (PDA). Mr. Nostrand said the Chamber is made up of about 950 members in the City of Pleasanton. The Downtown Association is made up of businesses in the downtown area only. He said some of the Chamber members are also members of the Downtown Association. Bonnie Krichbaum, 303 Neal Street, indicated the Downtown Specific Plan Committee was appointed by the City Council in May 1999. It has spent more than two years receiving input from citizens, doing research, attending meetings, etc. There were at least 101 meetings and if each meeting took three hours, that is a total of over three hundred hours of meetings. The Committee decided the train should come no farther than Junipero. The plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission three times and it also decided the train should not come farther than Junipero. She urged Council to give credence to the decisions by these volunteers appointed by Council. If it does not heed their advice and research, it negates what the volunteers were asked to do. The Pacific Locomotive Association is mostly comprised of people who do not live in Pleasanton and do not vote in Pleasanton, yet they continue to lobby to bring the train into Pleasanton. She urged Council to give heed to the people you have asked for advice. Michael O'Callaghan, 3425 Arbor Drive (125 West Neal Street), indicated he was sorry for how upset the people on Second Street and the seniors are and for the dissension in the Downtown Association. He would like to find a compromise for this situation. He felt it would he beneficial for all parties to sit down and discuss this and volunteered his mediation services. He believed that if many members of the Parks and Trails Committee had not gone on to serve on the Downtown Specific Plan Committee, that there may have been a different outcome. The PDA believes there is still information to be gathered and he agreed with that. He referred to Exhibit B of the staff report, items 13 and 20, which deal with the train and the realignment of Main Street. He felt that some people had lost their objectivity. All these issues are related and he felt they needed more study. Howard Neely, 448 Amador Court, indicated that of a 17 page staff report, ten pages are dedicated to the railroad. Staff did an excellent job of recapping the history of the train proposal, which started in 1991. He felt it was strange that all three Councilmembers had to agree on this item and he did not feel it was democratic. He suggested that there should be seven Councilmembers. When he was a Parks and Recreation Commissioner, he reviewed plans for the park downtown and at that time he asked why the train was not included, since the people had voted in support of it. The architect said he was told by staff not to show it. Mr. Neely called the City Attorney and asked the legal aspect of the vote. Mr. Roush said it was only an advisory vote. Mr. Neely disagreed with that. He read the exact language of the ballot measure. Pleasanton City Council 7 03/05/02 Minutes