CCMIN050702 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Pretzel looked at the enrollment of the schools. Ms. Dennis said she was not familiar with the NEPA process, but she was familiar with the CEQA process. That is the city's process and it could provide any scope of work it wanted to. If he wanted to insure documentation of public testimony, she thought the CEQA process was very good to make sure that the things the community wants accomplished do get done. There was a major CEQA process regarding the ridge issues as well as a fiscal analysis and the community was able to effectively use those documents to support their arguments. She believed CEQA was one of the most citizen-friendly processes and also provides access to the court system if something is overlooked. There is more protection for the participants in that process. She believed that would address all his concerns and would provide the opportunity to comment on the draft and provide answers to all the questions. If people are not satisfied with the answers, they can take all the documents to the court and challenge the adequacy of the study. Mr. Pretzel said his main focus was on the CalTrans PR/ED. He did not have experience with the CEQA process, only with the CalTrans process. Mr. Campbell asked why minutes were not taken at the committee meetings. Mr. Lum said in the later couple of years, the committee worked on a very informal process. In the early days of the committee, efforts were made to keep minutes and to record comments. In later years, as the committee was working on fine tuning the recommendations and the wording of the final report, the committee's work was less formal and there were no minutes kept. Ms. Dennis again felt the CEQA documents were much more valuable that any tapes or minutes from committee meetings. Mr. Pretzel referred to his experience on the Bernal Property Task Force and it has a posted agenda, formal reports and minutes. That is the way a committee should be run. Judith Fox, formerly of 3645 Virgin Island Court, and member of the West Las Positas Committee, agreed with the concern about undocumented comments. At the Planning Commission, a City staff member made a statement that the committee did not ask for studies on safety issues. She disagreed strongly. At the Planning Commission meeting, it was noted that there will be a safety study involving pedestrians, bicycles, etc. and traffic to the various schools. She felt part of the problem was that this interchange is so close to four school exits and entrances. There will be kindergarteners crossing Donlon less than 400 feet from the freeway offramp. She was told that CalTrans didn't care about the school kids; it only cares about what happens on the onramps. Unless the City directs that a study be done which involves those pedestrians (children) they would be in harm's way. She referred to a traffic count and said the date was a Saturday before school started. Another study at West Las Positas was during spring break. Those are not accurate. She believed that if the West Las Positas interchange is Pleasanton City Council 20 05/07/02 Minutes