Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pico referred to the pathway replacement for Kottinger Park between Adams <br />and Bernal. It appears it will not be done until 2007. He hoped that was not the case <br />because most of the pathways needed to be replaced right now. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe said that was in the process right now and the project would go to bid <br />in the next couple of months. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti inquired about the funding for improvements to the Bemal Adobe. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe indicated the funding was over three years. Until the master plan is <br />completed, staff does not know the exact costs. <br /> <br /> The Workshop was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. <br /> <br />SPECIAL MEETING <br /> <br /> The Special Meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. <br /> <br />1. Meeting Open to the Public <br /> <br /> Carole Varela, 3858 Mohr Avenue, indicated that during the campaign for <br />Measure P, the public was told Foothill Road was unsafe and the development was <br />necessary to make improvements in the Foothill/Muirwood area. Now staff is saying <br />there is a need for a traffic signal but the road is really safe and other intersections need <br />improvements more. She expressed concern about misrepresentation of the facts. She <br />asked for information about accidents on Foothill Road. She then expressed her belief <br />that the San Francisco project will have an impact on the Foothill/Muirwood intersection. <br />She related a conversation she had with Bill van Gelder, Traffic Engineer, and his <br />statement that it would cost $120,000 for the signal. The other improvements of <br />widening the street, adding a sidewalk and making left-turn pockets would be about <br />$250,000. She referred to the statement that the signal was a condition for a developer <br />and asked for explanation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lum said only the intersection would be widened, not Foothill Road itself. <br />The widening would be in order to install the traffic signal. The project is considered as a <br />future developer-funded project. <br /> <br /> Ms. Varela believed that safety should be the number one priority, not the cost of <br />the improvement. She asked if the City could install the traffic signal and then get <br />reimbursement from some future developer. She did not want the improvement to wait <br />for development. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver believed staff had done its job and proposed what is necessary in the <br />CIP. He did not want to talk about election rhetoric. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 6 06/22/99 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />