CCMIN050107 - Laserfiche WebLink

added it will be as if Staples and the new market is in Livermore rather than Pleasanton, and asked the Council to leave the extension in the plan. Stacey Borsody said she grew up in Pleasanton and is an Amberwood neighborhood homeowner. She would be negatively impacted by any decision to stop or impair the Stoneridge Drive extension, felt the needs of the greater citizenry would go unfulfilled if the extension is not included in the General Plan, felt traffic was impacting resident views on approving retail development such as the second Home Depot, felt expanding State Route 84 and working on I-580 were only half the solution, asked the Council to show leadership to benefit all residents and asked all options be kept open for building the extension. Heidi Massie said the traffic study concluded that if the Stoneridge extension were eventually built, it would help balance traffic throughout the City, felt the extension must remain in the General Plan, felt it is good for Pleasanton, there is no cost, no risk in doing so, it keeps the city’s options open, it keeps with the City’s planning strategy determined years ago, and is supportive by the entire business community. She quoted answers given by staff to her two questions, that if the extension stays in the plan, “The retention of the extension is consistent with the current General Plan and therefore does not require any further analysis.” If the extension is taken out of the plan, staff answered, “To remove the road from the General Plan requires the City to find an environmental circulation alternative that does not worsen traffic within the City. Removal creates a greater impact that would be virtually impossible to mitigate environmentally.” She felt the traffic study provided valuable information and has given the answer they need to make the right decision; that keeping the extension in the General Plan is good for Pleasanton’s future. She asked the Council to be the leaders, be decisive, do what is best for the entire City’s future, and vote to keep the extension in the General Plan. Nancy Allen said she was discouraged when she read an article that building Stoneridge would not necessarily improve traffic on Valley, but make it less worse. She felt if leaders do not take action today, things will only definitely be worse for the entire city. She felt Pleasanton is and will be more congested with or without Stoneridge, but sharing Stoneridge will make it better and it is the only solution on the table. She felt more was also needed in determining solutions such as transit oriented housing and telecommuting standards for new jobs. She said over 8200 Stoneridge homes would benefit and asked the Council to do the right thing by keeping the extension in the General Plan. Judy Symcox, addressed the City Council, supported the extension, liked Ms. Allen’s idea for other options, suggested a Hacienda shuttle system to bring people to jobs, discussed unsafe biking on Valley Avenue, noted Stoneridge has bike lanes, longer queue pockets for turning lanes, two long left turn lanes, and felt both Valley and Stoneridge traffic could be reasonably managed. Regarding plans for a second left turn lane from northbound Santa Rita onto Stoneridge West, traffic should be allowed to use the much shorter Stoneridge extension as planned. She discussed excessive pollution caused by gridlock, and asked the Council to include the extension in the plan, build it, and improve State Route 84. Judith Geiselman said she was against extending Stoneridge Drive as she did not feel it is the answer, and thinks it will create a terrible mess if built. After reading the traffic study, she found insufficient evidence to build it based on the current report, believes that if staff could have done a summary it would alleviate some of the polarized extremes of opinions. She said Valley Avenue residents have voiced their personal experiences against building City Council Minutes 11 May 1, 2007