01 (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

to small businesses. So, he felt they were looking at a best case of a worst case scenario with the PRC study. Councilmember Sullivan said most important is the overwhelming public opposition to the project. There has not been this much objection for a long while, said a previous Council approved California Splash which was heavily opposed and he hoped the current Council would not make that same mistake with this project. When he first met with Regency, he told them that the only way he could support the project is if they got community support, which has not occurred, felt the project did not make sense for the location, for traffic and business reasons, for the local economy, and he felt the Council should take a step back and look at the site given the Eastside Study, the circulation element and look at how they all fit together. To significantly downsize a project there will most likely not work for the developer and the Council needs to take a step back and consider options for the next meeting. He acknowledged people in that area want services and retail and this should be done. The old shopping center, Vintage Hills, is pretty much abandoned, we talked a long time about what would work there, we talked to grocery stores, but as he looks at the site there are high density apartment buildings, and resident on the other side. He felt the City should talk to something that is a walk able neighborhood center with a mixed use project. Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she read all of the information and data, thinks it was good to take a pause, said she struggled a lot in voting for it and her concern was Home Depot, but what tipped the balance was the truck issue down First Street. She said she was so focused on what was going to be done with Valley and Stanley that she missed the point at the last meeting. She noted that the trucks are bad down Valley and horrible down First Street and the fact that the Council would condition it, enforcing it would be impossible. She appreciated the personal comments of everyone, said the Council struggles with projects and how they affect the entire City, they try and balance things constantly, and how numbers are interpreted is manipulated at times. She looks forward to the circulation discussion and said the Council will have to make some immediate decisions about circulation. She is increasingly convinced that it is irresponsible for the Council not to have the County pay for the extension and said it will not solve everything but will help the situation. She said she would like to see some retail on the site, said the developer has been very cooperative throughout the process, she would like some attention to be paid for the developer to look to locate local businesses rather than chains and thinks whatever is there to have value for the entire community. While there have been many contentious issues lately, she reiterated how appreciative she is with the respectful nature she has been approached as it makes it easy for her to listen and also realize she is struggling with the issue and making her decision based on evidence. Councilmember McGovern said each time the Council has such discussions, it brings up additional concerns about other problems in Pleasanton. She asked Mr. Tassano today if a study was ever done about what traffic would look like if Pleasanton did not build another thing tomorrow, ever. Right around us, so much growth is occurring, Livermore is about to meet Pleasanton at EI Charro, Dublin is developing its side of the freeway, and she felt the City needed to get into perspective of just what we are going to be looking at in the future and how much development will affect the community even if we do not build. Each time Stoneridge is discussed, she remembers a 2030 build out and if you were to Stoneridge today with I-580 and Route 84 not improved, you could create traffic coming into Pleasanton because drivers want to get off in Pleasanton from freeways that do not move. If this comes on to Stoneridge, it will also come to Valley. City Council Minutes 14 December 4, 2007