CCMIN052405 - Laserfiche WebLink

joined a committee to study the alternatives for removing the interchange. When he ___ joined the Planning Commission, he continued to urge removal of the interchange. He has been working for this for ten years and said his commitment toward removing the Stoneridge extension is no less firm. He wanted to make certain the City has a General Plan that can stand up to a legal challenge and did not want to take shortcuts that would jeopardize that. He supported the staff recommendation for several reasons. One was the defensibility of the General Plan. He also felt some of the information about traffic going to and frem the business park and what cut through traffic is doing would help in finding mitigations. It also would show regional impacts and could help in solving regional problems. He wanted to make these policy decisions as soon as possible. He wanted to get the alternatives, come to the next meeting and say take out West Las Positas and Stoneridge and concentrate on some combination of models 1 and 2. He did have some concerns about Rose Avenue. He wanted to start talking about land use, whether there would be houses in the hills, whether there should be transit oriented development, etc. He wanted to discuss if transit development could help with traffic preblems. The bottom line is quality of life and Council needs to make decisions in the best interest of the community. Mr. Brozosky felt many of Pleasanton's traffic preblems are the result of things that were not foreseen in 1996. It is unfortunate the city is in the middle of a triangle and is the optimal route to get through. He felt decisions had to be made for the benefit of Pleasanton even though they affect the region. The state has not kept up with solving regional traffic problems. There is no 580/680 flyover, Highway 84 has not been .... improved, etc. It is possible the interchange and street extension could be removed from the General Plan and twenty years from now, the regional problems were fixed and we could reconsider these items. However, he did not believe that would ever happen. These models are based on logic, but people's decisions in traffic are not always based on logic. A route may not be the shortest or quickest, but at least the car is moving. He was uncertain the model could predict all that. There are observations frem the past that could be used and he trusted that more than a tool. He did not want to add freeway lanes in Pleasanton. Even though West Las Positas and Stoneridge could help regionally, it is adding traffic in the city. Quality of life is a main concern. He acknowledged Mr. Arkin's idea of an underpass was interesting, but traffic on Stanley is not moving and if there were an underpass, it would just have more cars that are not moving. He felt an underpass would be less expensive than a freeway interchange. He wanted to review models 1 and 2 with variations and not look at items 3 through 5 until the end of the process. He wanted to get through the Circulation Element and to the land use and other elements of the General Plan. He felt there would be time at the end of the process to review models in the EIR process. He wanted the Stoneridge extension and West Las Positas interchange reviewed at the end of the process in order to get more variations. Even if a model were run early on, it would still have to be done again at the end of the process. Ms. McGovern asked if the assumptions counted on El Charre going to Stanley Boulevard? Mr. Knowles said that was built into roadway network alternatives 3 and 5. Joint Workshop City Council and Planning Commission16 05/24/05