CCMIN083005 - Laserfiche WebLink

felt Pleasanton was ahead of them in defining cut-through traffic. He believed the goal was to balance moving local and regional traffic and minimizing impacts on neighborhoods with regard to safety and quality of life. He believed Alternative B provides the best balance. It also gives alternatives on how to deal with the rest of the traffic, local, business park, commuter and regional issues. He agreed with Mr. Pico that we should have concern of our neighboring communities and to make the region work. He did not like the Rose Avenue extension, widening Foothill Road, or widening Bernal. There has never been opposition to an EVA at Stoneridge to EI Charro. He did not believe regional transportation problems should be solved by using city streets. He wanted to work to identify alternatives to deal with and accommodate locally generated traffic, whether residential or commercial. There needs to be regional cooperation to solve regional problems. He felt there was more value to a four-lane Highway 84 than a Stoneridge Drive extension. Those are the kinds of things to be reviewed. The mayor and councilmembers are on many regional transportation boards trying to solve these problems. At the same time, we need to protect our community. He did not want a quick fix like the Stoneridge Drive extension has been portrayed. There has been some discussion about a ballot initiative to ask whether people want the Stoneridge extension or other things. He did not oppose Council putting an advisory measure on the ballot, but that should only happen when work is done on the General Plan Update, with decisions on land use and the circulation system. Then the information would be available to make an informed decision. If done before that time, he felt it would be premature and irresponsible. Mayor Hosterman felt this had been a really good workshop and the public had made many good comments. She thanked them for coming to the meeting. She liked having a definition for cut- through traffic and felt it would be good to have a coordinated definition for purposes of addressing traffic on a regional level. She like the definitions presented by staff but would also like to review those definitions in Dublin and Livermore. She supported Alternative B because it includes everything. She liked being able to identify and understand the impacts of each mitigation in the areas affected. She reiterated it is a working draft and allows further discussion of land use questions. She appreciated Mayor Pico's comments and felt she was lucky to continue where he left. She has served on the Congestion Management Agency for the last two years and continues to fight for Area 4 (Pleasanton, Dublin, Livermore and Alameda County). The CMA has finally started a Triangle Study a few months ago to determine regional solutions for the Tri-Valley. This is a partnership to work together and to formulate a memorandum of understanding to take to the Legislature regarding the needs of the area and requests for transportation dollars. She believed there is a new partnership with the business community. Oracle Corporation has worked with the City to identify its needs as the largest employer in Congressman Pombo's district. With that kind of support, she was confident funding will be forthcoming for improvements to 1-580 and 1-680. This General Plan update process is difficult in terms of finding a balance between special interests and insuring safety, quality of life for neighborhoods as well as the entire community and insuring the community character. Everyone is working hard to accomplish that. She noted that if the Stoneridge Drive extension remains in the General Plan, it would be easy to condition that extension on every regional upgrade in order to make it work. That is the only way it would work for her. It is possible there could be a Council sponsored advisory measure in the future, but not at this time. After the General Plan process would be the appropriate time to seek some type of ratification from the community. Joint Workshop City CounciVPlanning Commission 16 08/30/05