01 022409SP2 - Laserfiche WebLink

counted. Over 60% to 70% of the facility is not classified as a residential unit, so units might be built but not counted toward the cap. Councilmember McGovern felt this made it more important to leave it in the growth management ordinance. Councilmember McGovern referred to the purple pipes as a condition of approval. City Manager Fialho confirmed this would be done. Councilmember McGovern referred to the new, revised General Plan, it states, "The policy plan may also authorize the immediate construction of the Stoneridge Drive extension. This policy plan shall be subject to Referendum. If the policy plan does not authorize the immediate construction of the Stoneridge Drive extension, and thereafter, the City Council votes to construct, it shall do so conditionally and shall defer proceeding with the actual construction of Stoneridge Drive for one year to allow citizens who disagree with the decision the opportunity to circulate an Initiative Measure." She questioned if the motion on the floor would have to say that the referendum proponents would have to start collecting signatures tomorrow. Mr. Roush said the Specific Plan Amendment is adopted by a resolution, there is no second reading, and therefore, the 30-day referendum period would start tomorrow. Councilmember McGovern questioned if a second reading of the resolution could be agendized such to provide additional time for residents. Mr. Roush said the Council has that flexibility, but the general rule has been that resolutions take effect immediately. But if the Council wanted to defer the effective date, it would be within the Council's discretion. Councilmember Thorne thanked staff for the additional information, thanked the audience and those who have participated, said this is a difficult issue, there is absolutely no way the decision will make everybody happy. He said the public has participated in workshops, commission meetings, and others, he cannot recall ever having discussed Staples Ranch without Stoneridge Drive and the implications made to the contrary were false. He felt it was time to make a decision and given public discussion and documentation, he concludes that Stoneridge Drive with Staples Ranch is in the best interest of the community. He felt it would be fiscally irresponsible not to do both together, especially given the County's funding offer. If it is put off, the City may never have the capability for it. His objective is to make sure Stoneridge Drive is built as a part of the Staples Ranch project and it is never re-cul-de-sac'd, and to make sure the project moves forward without delaying any of these things. He said in looking at the progress made as a Council and previous Councils, it is impressive of what has been accomplished. However, if you look in the last few years, we do not do a good job of meeting deadlines and timelines. Lastly, regarding the regional circulation impact issue, Councilmember Thorne thinks the City needs a signed document regarding Pleasanton, Dublin, Livermore and the County that agrees to what all will do and contribute to the regional circulation issue, and put SR 84 back in the funding priority. He asked Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio to add the inclusion of the signed document prior to beginning the project. Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio accepted the amendment. Councilmember Sullivan clarified with Councilmember McGovern that the agreement could return to the full Council but it must be done quickly. He said SR 84, Dublin Blvd., Jack London must be part of it, and all must be in agreement prior to moving forward. Councilmember Sullivan said the Council asked for a public process to discuss what those elements should be, review them in a public hearing, and then it would be adopted by the Council. Councilmember Thorne believed staff was close to reaching agreement. City Manager Fialho confirmed staff would deliver to the Council a policy document that would have been executed by City Council Minutes Page 15 of 17 February 24, 2009