|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Pleasanton City Council is set to consider canceling its decision from last year to approve the Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone in favor of more environmental and public review of the project, a move that would also indefinitely delay the new Costco store and hotels proposed to move into the JDEDZ area.
The plan to revisit the JDEDZ aims to address questions raised in the lawsuit that challenged the city’s regulatory framework that paved the way for Costco, two hotels and other retailers to move onto rezoned land near the I-580/I-680 interchange.
“Given the inherent delay associated with litigation involving the California Environmental Quality Act, the city has agreed to set aside the approvals so that supplemental environmental review can take place,” city attorney Dan Sodergren said Monday.
“Although this project has already been subject to extensive environmental review, the city believes that this is the most effective way to provide the public and public officials with information and allow for reconsideration of the project,” Sodergren added. “Costco is in support of this approach and is a signatory to the (court) stipulation.”
Former City Councilman Matt Sullivan, spokesman for the Pleasanton Citizens for Responsible Growth group that sued the city last December after the council certified the environmental impact report (EIR) for the JDEDZ project, said the resident coalition supports the city’s plan for more analysis.
“The city is doing the right thing by rescinding the JDEDZ approvals, reopening the supplemental environmental impact report and fully exploring the environmental impacts of this project on the community. We look forward to reviewing the revised environmental study when it is complete,” Sullivan said Tuesday.
The lawsuit argues the EIR was an inadequate analysis that failed to mitigate all significant impacts of the project, including but not limited, to impacts on air quality, human health, transportation and traffic, utilities and urban decay.
The group also contends city officials did not adequately respond to public comments on the draft EIR and did not recirculate new information in the final EIR.
The JDEDZ proposal, initiated by the city to spur commercial development on under-utilized land on Johnson Drive and Commerce Circle, detailed rules for how redevelopment could occur on the 40 acres near the freeways’ interchange, including a nearly 20-acre site left vacant when Clorox closed its research center there.
City officials initially stood by its public review process when presented with the lawsuit, but they now appear to support pausing any JDEDZ development and revisiting the environmental issues rather than wait out potentially lengthy legal proceedings that could force that very same reconsideration process in the end.
The plan of action was set into motion days after the council provided confidential direction to its legal team in a closed-session meeting July 3, according to court records.
“Once this supplemental environmental review is complete, additional public comment will occur, and the City Council will consider re-approving the project,” Sodergren said, citing specifically assertions in the lawsuit related to air quality and economic analysis.
Attorneys informed the court earlier this month that city staff plans to present the council soon with a proposed resolution to set aside the Nov. 7 JDEDZ approvals and that the city and Costco agree to take no future actions that rely on those prior approvals, effectively delaying any work on the proposed Costco. The two hotels in the JDEDZ, approved by the Planning Commission last month, are also on hold.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Brad Seligman then signed an order on July 16 suspending the lawsuit’s briefing schedule and postponing the next court date until Sept. 25 to check in on the status of the case.
Sodergren said he could not estimate how long the JDEDZ supplemental review would take. He also noted the council took a similar approach when faced with a lawsuit challenging the Staples Ranch development EIR in 2009, a project that was approved again after the city completed extra environmental review.
As originally approved, the JDEDZ proposal rezoned 12 parcels for potential commercial development, along with strict design guidelines that could help expedite city review of future projects in the marquee area and a tax-sharing agreement between Costco and the city to help pay for roadwork needed to accommodate the increase in traffic in the area.
When the council picks up the conversation again, at an undetermined date likely in September, it could well do so with only three members.
Councilwoman Karla Brown recused herself from subsequent JDEDZ discussions in April after announcing she discovered she owned $2,900 Costco stock in a retirement fund. That recusal followed Mayor Jerry Thorne stepping down from the JDEDZ consideration process months into the debate in July 2016 after revealing his retirement fund included Costco stock — which he later sold.
The city of Pleasanton should file a nuisance complaint against Matt Sullivan!
At this point, I would not mind a ballot measure to force the city to accept the EIR as is and proceed with the suit.
I think the city council and mayor are clueless when it comes considering an EIR.
I don’t see how traffic exiting Northbound I-680 on Stoneridge can in any way dive over several lanes of traffic on eastbound Stoneridge in order to make a left turn at Johnson Drive in order to get to Costco.
I can only make the left turn to Johnson on Stoneridge after I exit off of I-680 when there is absolutely little to no traffic on Stoneridge. During the day and early evening on weekdays and weekends, this lane dive from the I-680 exit to the left turn pocket lane on Stoneridge to make the left on Johnson Drive is next to impossible.
The city will probably have to completely rebuild the Johnson and Stoneridge intersection and build a Stoneridge Drive flyover for a left turn into Johnson in order to route I-680 Northbound traffic into the Costco area.
Easy to do. Cheaper than a lawsuit. Pleasanton is checking the boxes so Sullivan will have no bullets to support his fat cat gas station owning clients who have been gouging Ptown forever. Sullivan is NO friend to Pleasanton. Just his money interests.
Traffic nightmare!
No way.
Once Costco is built, the traffic will be exiting to buy gas and shop Costco.
Anyone driving past Stoneridge will have an open fast freeway.
Maybe this time there will be a REAL SEIR which will consider REAL traffic numbers, REAL pollution,
For my two cent, “Traffic nightmare” you have it right. Loved your post to the topic.
Dumb logic…..where was this argument with all the rack and stack zero lot line housing. Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore shopping complexes…
We need to sue Matt. E
Looking at the aerial view of the 580 and 680 interchange and seeing how close that is to the proposed Costco site, given what has happened to the 237 and 880 interchange and the 101 and 85 interchanges and numerous HOV flyovers, I would not be surprised if within a few decades Caltrans does eminent domain over the entire area surrounding the 580 and 680 interchange in order to build multiple HOV flyovers and get rid of the entire set of cloverleaf configurations.
Probably with getting rid of the cloverleafs and doing HOV flyovers, the entire area including the Costco area will be subject to condemnation proceedings eventually anyway to make way for more freeway ramps.
Perfectly said by Traffic Nightmares.
I go to Club Sport on Saturday and Sunday. I go at non peak times—around 3:00. EVERY time I exit Hopyard and turn left (coming from Santa Rita), I go over the overpass and experience the same thing: a wall of cars that backs up 2-3 light rotations. It’s so annoying! I stopped using the freeway to get to my local gym. Now I take Sant Rita to Stoneridge and it’s still not so great. How can we stick a Costco there?? And the huge gas station with tankers…,come on folks, drive a few miles to Livermore or Danville and keep Pleasanton’s traffic within reason.
So we shouldn’t build a costco because of air quality….and people should drive a little bit further to Livermore or Danville.
You can’t make this up folks.
How many accidents on I-580/I-680 until we say no more huge truck and automobile traffic generators like Costco. Yes, we are living a traffic nightmare. It gets worse and worse.
I say vote the bums out of office. Not one of them will stand up against the Chamber or Costco.
Seems strange to me, that if the first SEIR was not flawed, why would the City give up so easily. One reason,: it was not defendable.
Yet, our Mayor, Council, City Manager and Staff defended it until sued. Now, without a fight, now they want a “do-over”.
Agree with “50 Years Here”. Nothing added up. First, it was an additional 12,500 vehicle trips per day; then the City said 8,000.
First, the infrastructure costs were $15 million; then $16 million; then $21 million. The SEIR stated only a 1.6% loss of business from existing businesses. The City said that only 17 cars from Costco would enter Nortbound I-680 during peak evening hours. Bay Area Air Qualty said the pollution was unacceptable and unavoidably. The City basically said “too bad, every use would creat pollution”. Hopyard/Johnson Drive Intersection traffic would be the worst rating possible, an “F”. Again, “too bad, there’s nothing we can do”
Another botched EIR.
The city’s estimate is that only 17 cars that would Costco that would enter Northbound I-680 during an *entire* typical evening commute time frame? That sounds completely absurd.
This reminds me of when the city council majority approved the EIR of Staples Ranch to put Stoneridge Drive through to Livermore, but the EIR and all the traffic numbers said that Stoneridge Drive would dead end at Pleasanton city limits. The EIR did not even include the Stoneridge Drive extension, but they approved the Stoneridge Drive extension anyway.
This is disgraceful.
Do you really think that lot is going to lay vacant??? If Costco doesn’t move in something else most definitely will. I’d rather have a Costco then more stack and pack housing. Talk about congestion with each one of those units adding at least two cars. Then there’s the whole water issue.
For those complaining about the interchange on don’t see how its going to work, please learn something before you complain. A HUGE part of this project is total reconfiguration for the interchange with costs in the tens of millions
“Do you really think that lot is going to lay vacant???”
Well, it has been 7 years that it has been empty. With the way lawsuits are filed about this piece of land companies are going to have to seriously think about getting involved in a project there.
Of course someone eventually will build there, but I wouldn’t bet a lot of money that it occurs in the next decade.
Has the thought never occurred to anyone that buyers are moving away from brick and mortar shopping and turning to online stores? Look at Amazon’s strategy and the results of so many companies – closed or closing.
Granted, we will want and need grocery stores but don’t you expect them to evolve into something else based on buyers lifestyles and demands?
I like Costco, heck I love Costco for the value and savings I receive on an annual basis for glasses, travel, groceries and other home items I never expect to buy when I enter the store……. But I do not foresee the ROI of building a Costco and the additional infrastructure to support it based on analysts reports regarding buyers trends.
The city has built a business plan based on “expected” Sales Revenue/Tax Revenue for Pleasanton from Costco’s historical figures – how customers have been buying. In the City’s proposal, did they anticipate the change in habits of buyers due to eCommerce and factor a decline in revenue into their business plan??? Or was it assumed the revenue would be sustained or even grow???
Just Curious –
What is the point of having voted on this issue if someone who doesn’t agree with the way the vote turned out can file a lawsuit and stop what the voters approved? Why are our city leaders allowing themselves to be bullied to the point where they are reevaluating the entire project? We’ve been there done that with debating the value of having a Costco in that location and the impact on traffic.
What’s the big deal….you have traffic congestion every where you go, is this a total surprise to the Tri-alley area ? Look at the City of Dublin, they are building up the yang yang and do you hear them complaining about
freeway exits or congestion? No ! People are moving in and this is called progress no matter where you might go, unless you buy a farm if you are lucky to find one without a freeway exit.
Matt Sullivan should move into the White House with Trump and his goonies.
He tends to think that he is the ” Speaker of the House”. We also desperately need a fresh and younger leader as our Mayor. You know what they say about ” fish ” after the third day! Same goes with the rotten apple. Time to clean out the spider webs my fellow citizens..!
Long live our quaint City of Pleasanton….
What poor city “leadership “ ! Pleasanton residents voted FOR Costco! But our city council ignores us! So sad!
We are to believe 17 cars per day from Costco entering Nortbound 680 during evening peak hours. The city leaders aren’t being bullied, they know the SEIR is bogus. They would be embarrassed in court to defend these numbers.
I agree “disgracefull”, “absurd” – as posted by others.
Let’s see a real SEIR.
This is just nuts, how many times do we need to vote on this? Build Costco!
Democracy a system of government by the whole population: (Pleasanton Voters)
Tyranny a government in which all power belongs to one person: (Matt Sullivan)
I’m disappointed once again one person can use the courts and block what the voters of Pleasanton approved. This is not about if I support the project or not. It is that I support a Democracy system and the voters of Pleasanton.
This isn’t about a vote.
This is about redoing faulty information which could have affected the outcome of the vote.
The SEIR needs to give correct information.
What is troublesome is that the EIR consultant who the City hired to prepare the analysis did not do a thorough job to make the document legally defensive. That makes the EIR as well as the JDEDZ consultant costs a waste of taxpayer money not to mention paid City Staff time. Perhaps the EIR costs were covered by Costco as the applicant which is legal and not By City monies?
I have almost come full circle. I want Costco but the access via the freeways seem to create too much congestion at busy traffic times especially when combined with a new hotel. If there was another street access into that area, Id be less concerned.
How about review EIR at Bart station Owens Dr three lanes become one lane?
Probably a good thing that Pacific Pearl didn’t get built with a gas station to compete against Shell oil, saved MS from filing another lawsuit against the city, same thing with all that building going on in Dublin- more stack and pack housing = more commuters who will need that overpriced Shell gas! Besides throwing our city council out on their butts maybe we should not be buying that expensive gas there are plenty of other places to gas up at a minimum of 20-30 cents a gallon cheaper, please wake up people!!
I voted for Costco. I no longer want it. Don’t trust our city leaders anymore. I read what “35 Years Here” posted.
If the city leaders were telling the truth, they would defend it it court. Simple, it was a pack of lies.
I don’t need Costco and another SEIR. I’m done!
I say no to Costco but TopGolf is a different conversation……….a venue Pleasanton families could truly benefit from!
Shame on you Pleasanton. You buckled. All this talk about traffic is so disingenuous, overplayed, and wrong. I see this as a death sentence to COSTCO; they will move on. This is what is occurring in the UK with wanting another vote over Brexit, or Hillary wanting a re-election. You don’t like the results, do another vote until you get the answer or decision you want.
Jake:
Costco will build in Pleasanton, despite the minor non participative minority opposition against it to it.
Costco had one chance with me. They paid for the pack of lies in the first SEIR.
It was so bad, the city bailed when it was challenged.
Now they want to start over. With whose money this time. No one has said.
Aniother 2 years, or more of battles, and another $400,000 fir the SEIR, plus legal fees from outside attorneys. No thanks.
One chance. I voted for it. They blew it. I’m done.
No thank you!
@Silverfox. Good call on that Nor Cal Market, we went there Friday afternoon and it turned into the biggest nightmare I have ever seen at our fairgrounds, poorly planned poorly organized and run, hopefully this group won’t be back anytime soon in our town. Yes on Costco, No on the current City Council and Planners, what a bunch of “flipfloppers”
@No Longer Want Costco- good question who pays the $400,000 for the second SEIR?
@Flightops- agree throw the bums out. They’ve waisted 4 years on a faulty SEIR. Flipfloppers. First they backed the SEIR; now they concede it is not defendable.
Watch Costco move on and sell to a home developer with deep pockets and aggressive lawyers. Our political leaders are not protected in this town so they fold. This will be the first domino followed by Castlewood then East Pleasanton.
Rob: As a data point if all went full steam ahead and Costco built only then would they own their own parcel. As of this moment they don’t own anything.
Really wish this new costco was built; would relieve traffic at Danville Costco. Oh well.
These lawsuits are why businesses are moving out of California and taking the middle class with them. Another reason it’s so expensive to live in California. A business doesn’t like competition so they hire a mouth piece and stay hidden. We pay the price. The mouth piece makes a nice income. Disgusted and soon moving to some place sane. The party of the rich and the needy that run this state have driven another member of the middle class out.
If you’ve read the documents, they never did add up. This comes as no surprise.
NIMBY ALERT! DANGER!
Pleasanton used to be a great place to live. This is absurd.
Map,
You’re absolutely right – “does development increase traffic and gas sales? Yes, fast track”
“Does development compete with gas sales? Yes, need x, y, z, 4 lawsuits, and tears from a unicorn to build”
Lets solve 2 problems. Relocate the Costco store to the lower Castlewood golf course site.
Yes to Costco and NO to the stupid Nor cal market at the fairgrounds. Talk about traffic. Costco traffic is nothing compared to the crap we had to deal with over the weekend. This traffic puts Costco to shame (traffic that is). And us residents of downtown didn’t received proper noticed of the gridlock till Friday afternoon by then it was too late.
@Flipflops-NorCal nightmare will be back the weekend of September 21,22,23.
Thank you Mr Sullivan. More delay and taxpayer money wasted. More abuse of the State’s environmental review process to delay something he personally does not like. That would be any big box retail company. Remember he also tried to attack WalMart by predicting urban decay, traffic melt-downs and air quality degradation. He also was involved in trying to delay Stoneridge Drive completion by claiming the existence of an endangered plant which turned out to be a common weed. I recall Mr Sullivan is employed by some environment sustainability engineering firm which sounds nicely green but I think it boils down to him seeing everything slanted accorfing to his view of political economics. Or a legacy donation to a favorite cause.
I want Costco too… But when the report states that Costo will generate 44% of the traffic, and Patio World, Black Tie, Doggie Dynasty, a church and a tutoring center are also going to generate 44%??? I find those numbers hard to believe…
Rick,
Just wait for California’s move out of state tax….I promise you Nancy is drooling over the opportunity.