CCMIN031803 - Laserfiche WebLink

changes to the General Plan. As a practical matter, he understood the desire to do this as part of the General Plan update because it would be far simpler. Without the commitment, he did not think the process would be adequate. He believed a parallel approach may be a little more expensive than simply lumping the question into another General Plan review. It seemed the West Las Positas Committee has already accomplished much of the work needed for an EIR and the additional environmental work necessary could be shared with the EIR for the General Plan update. Since staff will be coordinating both efforts, this would minimize any additional costs. He clarified that when he is talking about a parallel effort, he is not talking about starting the CalTrans process. He did not think any process should be started that would enable the interchange to be built. When evaluating costs, we need to consider the long-term cost effectiveness of the approach. If the City goes through a General Plan update and the interchange is not removed, then the citizens will be back in another ten years discussing it at the 2013 update, examining the same questions and spending more money. He believed the most cost-effective approach is to follow the process that has the best chance for success. He also believed the decision should be ratified by the voters of Pleasanton, so a furore Council, with an agenda not so supportive of neighborhood interests, cannot simply reverse the decisions made here. Finally, Council should consider the time, energy and commitment made by the citizens of the community in this process. Undertaking a process without Council commitment is almost certain to fail and it would be squandering that value and short-changing your constituency. He urged Council to provide direction in no uncertain terms to establish a process to remove the interchange in the most proactive, direct, focused and cost effective manner possible. He inquired about the citizens' initiative approach and asked if the initiative would have to address all the goals and objectives of the General Plan that might be impacted? Mr. Roush said the initiative would have to modify or amend those portions of the General Plan necessary to keep it internally consistent. Mr. Sullivan said that was similar to what occurred with the CAPP initiative. From what he has heard, he supported the direction Council is heading and urged it not to reject any creative alternatives. There may not be money to build the interchange, but the citizens will not sleep well if that is the only line of defense. The residents want the interchange out of the General Plan. Kurt Kummer, 4456 Clovewood Lane, said he was in favor of taking the West Las Positas interchange out of the General Plan as soon as possible. He showed an aerial photo of the West Las Positas and 1-680 intersection. He noted the locations of four schools near this and the number of children who cross West Las Positas. He then related the accident history of various intersections and noted West Las Positas at Dorman Road is the worst in the city. He noted the number of vehicle trips using the intersection and the number projected in the future. If the interchange were to be built, the volume more than doubles at that intersection, which is already the worst in the city. He showed a view of the vacant land that had been set aside for the interchange and presented his proposals for a hike and bike park and staging area for access to trails on one side of the freeway. On the other side of the freeway, he proposed senior or affordable housing. That would be close to shopping and services. It would also be close to schools where the seniors could donate their time as mentors. Pleasanton City Council 24 03/18/03 Minutes