CCMIN013007 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC Mayor Hosterman invited public testimony. Naomi Jones indicated she supported doing a traffic model with the Stoneridge Drive extension. She believes the residents near Valley Avenue were told months ago that there were studies of the extension being done and she wanted to know where the results of those studies are. She felt the Stoneridge residents should share the traffic loads and not push their problems onto the residents near Santa Rita and Valley. The extension has been planned for fifteen years. She noted there are approved plans for a shopping center, including a Home Depot, in the area of Santa Rita and Valley. There is already a traffic problem on Valley Avenue and after the completion of the shopping center; the traffic burden will only increase. She urged Council to do what is best for the whole city and make certain the traffic study with the Stoneridge extension is done, in order for decisions to be based on the facts. Dan Maslana indicated he did not want to put one neighborhood against another and wanted to see what was best for the entire city. He expressed his concern about the traffic on Valley and he asked Council to reject the plan for the Home Depot on Valley Avenue. He felt the site should contain businesses useful to the southeast part of the city so the residents don't have to drive to other parts of the city, thereby reducing traffic on Valley Avenue. He suggested Longs Drugs, gas station, bagel shop, etc. because those businesses would decrease cross-town traffic. He commented that the original predictions in 1985 for the Stoneridge extension were that it would increase traffic by one-third during peak time by cut-through drivers avoiding congestion. That was a time when I-580 was not even in the top 20 congested areas and now it is number 2 in the Bay Area. He felt the cut-through traffic today would be a disaster. The city predicted only an 8% relief in traffic on Valley. He also noted Livermore's plans for an outlet retail center east of EI Charro. He believed the Stoneridge extension would be used by all the people trying to get to the Livermore businesses from out of town. He did not think the Pleasanton businesses would appreciate being bypassed. Finally, he felt the extension would create safety issues for children. He noted Council had adopted ordinances 1875 and 1882, which acknowledged the safety concerns that already exist on Stoneridge. Furthermore, he pointed out that State Senate Bill 352 was passed which prohibits construction of schools 500 feet from a highway or major thoroughfare. In conclusion, he urged Council to consider the long list of problems related to the Stoneridge extension. Garland Draper believed that to insure that traffic decisions are made for the benefit of the entire city, traffic models should include all options, including the Stoneridge extension. He noted the General Plan was written a number of years ago as the blueprint to guide future planning in order to keep pace with the business and housing developments. It included the extension of Stoneridge to EI Charro for nearly twenty years. To insure the safety of the neighborhoods and long-term success of the local businesses, he believed the traffic provisions of that General Plan must be implemented. Additionally he noted that traffic should not be added to intersections that are already dangerous. Vaughn Wolfe indicated he would like to reduce traffic on Valley, but felt that extending Stoneridge without limiting traffic access from I-580 during peak hours would be worthless. He pointed out the number of cars that run the traffic signal at Valley and City Council Minutes 7 January 30, 2007 Joint Workshop