My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN092496
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
CCMIN092496
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/26/2010 10:53:55 AM
Creation date
5/13/1999 11:15:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
West Las Positas interchange. Mr. Gibson supported the transportation priorities of the flyover, <br />Highway 84 and the BART station and felt they will all help conditions in this part of <br />Pleasanton. Stoneridge Mail has aiways been on record in support of the west BART station. <br />The only concern has been the issue of overflow parking. There are three components of a <br />successful BART station: a platform, a bus transfer station, and a park and ride lot. If any one <br />of those three elements are missing, there is not a successful BART station. Taubman and <br />Stoneridge are only concerned if the parking lot is removed. He compared that to building a <br />new house and not putting in electricity because you could just plug into the electricity in the <br />neighbor's house. Even a well designed BART station will have impacts on the mail. <br />Stoneridge will have to spend time and money to make the shopping center work with the BART <br />station, but they are willing to do that because the station will be of benefit to the community. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti indicated she had attended CaiTrans hearings at the time Stoneridge was <br />being reviewed and clarified that the residents of the West Las Positas area were concerned <br />because they wanted the interchange at Stoneridge Drive and not at West Las Positas. <br /> <br /> Tom Terrill, 1200 Concord Avenue #200, Concord, representing Reynolds & Brown, <br />felt Council had the opportunity to take locai money and do something very positive. Council <br />should consider the impact of its decisions on a long term basis. BART is coming to the Vailey <br />and that will remove less than 2% of the cars on 1-580 today. One station can still get enough <br />people to San Francisco or other parts of the East Bay. Highway 84 provides an opportunity <br />to look ahead and provide a way to get to other employment centers in the East Bay and South <br />Bay areas. Other cities in Contra Costa County failed to provide for traffic years ago and now <br />have tremendous cross-city commutes which have had major impacts. He urged Council and <br />staff to start working on a way to design the Stoneridge flyover so it provides the best access <br />possible. He applauded Council's actions and felt there is no other city that has anywhere near <br />the baseline data and the knowledge of how traffic flows around town. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum briefly reviewed the report regarding Highway 84 and indicated the primary <br />issue is which section, if any, should be included in the TVTC fee study priority. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver cladfled that the section of road staff is proposing for a priority is the portion <br />from Vineyard around Ruby Hill to 1-680 at Vailecitos and that will cost $25 million for a two- <br />lane straightened road. <br /> <br /> 09/24/96 <br /> -20- <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.