01 022409SP2 - Laserfiche WebLink

the community park after it had been configured, noting that Council directed staff to prepare a Park Master Plan, which was has been done. Mr. Bocian gave a slide presentation of the full extension of Stoneridge Drive from Trevor Parkway to EI Charro and noted that the MOU anticipates an extension, but not with the initial approval of the project. The EIR analyzed the extension occurring at a later date and there is analysis in the EIR and the traffic report relating to the analyzed cumulative impacts of the roads extension. As an alternative, the EIR also looked at the 1989 Specific Plan that included the full extension of the road. A number of responses were received on the EIR and in addressing some of the comments, additional information was provided relative to the full extension of the road. The documents prepared do not include atwo-lane option at this time. Alameda County has an interest in the project and in seeing the full extension of the road. Recently, Supervisor Haggerty informed the City that as a member of the Alameda County SPA, he would recommend the SPA cover the cost of the full extension and some off-site mitigation. There are environmental documents that are adequate to make a decision to extend the road with approval of the SPA. However, the County has also indicated they would generally support additional environmental analysis if the Council chooses to pursue that, provided it is reviewed and approved at the same time the Council would approve the SPA and zoning ordinances. This is addressed as a variation of Option 2 in the staff report. In presenting the information, staff proposes three options regarding the full extension of the road 1. To approve the staff recommendation included in the February 3, 2009 agenda report which does not include the full extension of the road, but approve the environmental and planning documents. This is consistent with the MOU, it allows all of the development applications and PUD's to move forward, it may create issues for other agencies and it would result in no current funding source if the City were to extend the road in the future. 2. To approve the staff recommendation, but direct staff to conduct additional environmental review for a two and four lane extension. If the Council were to approve this option, it would allow the development application to be processed; the type of environmental review would be determined by staff i.e., a Supplemental EIR or addendum to the EIR. The goal would be to approve all of the work prior to approval of a development agreement and submittal to lAFCO. This means the intent would be to continue to process the development applications while the environmental work was being done in parallel. 3. To approve the staff recommendation and include the full extension of Stoneridge Drive. This would also allow the PUD's to proceed, it reaches a policy decision allowing for the cost efficient design and planning for the full extension, and it would allow all infrastructures to be built at once, with some associated cost savings. Although, it may not be fully accepted by the community and it may raise questions regarding the adequacy of the EIR, the full extension and off-site mitigation to be paid for by the Alameda Surplus Property Authority would be in place, and it allows staff to work immediately with the region to address the Regional Policy Statement. Staff recommends Option 1, however, should the Council express an interest in the full extension of the road at this time, staff would recommend Option 2. City Council Minutes Page 2 of 17 February z4, zuua