CCMIN110585 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Kulpan, 4112 Stanley Boulevard, stated she concurred with the comments made by Mr. Pons. She favored alignment A of the staff report as the best alignment and best planning. She stated the difference in the cost is not that different and it would benefit.the most people. Mr. Tom Schutter, 471 St. Mary Street, representing the residents on St. Marys Street, stated they are in support of the Stanley Boulevard people. He presented a petition, signed by 32 residents in the area, which read as follows: "We, the representatives of the downtown residential district, would like to document our position on the proposed Del Valle Parkway project. We have reviewed the City Council Staff Report 5A entitled "Del Valle Parkway Alternatives" and, in general, are supportive of the follow- ing staff recommendations with some minor variations as indicated. I.Del Valle Parkway Extension Easterly of Main Street (Page 2, I.) We agree with Alternative "A" exactly as stated in the report. Alternative "A" is "similiar in alignment to the existing plan line that was developed in 1967." II. The Hopyard Road/Del Valle Parkway/Division Street Intersection Alignment (Page 7-8, A-C) We support either Alternative 1 or 2. Alternative 1 "allows a smooth [curving] transition from four lanes on Hopyard Road to the two lanes on Del Valle Parkway." Alternative 2 is "basic- ally the same alignment as Alternative 1. The exception is that traffic travelling southbound on Hopyard Road has a free right turn onto Division Street." III.Interim Alignmerit Del Valle Parkway/Main Street/Stanley Boulevard (Page 9) We support #3 (Left-Turn Prohibited Alternative) with a minor modification. We recommend that a left turn from Del Valle Parkway on to Main Street be permitted during non-peak traffic hours. We suggest that Pleasanton take advantage of the massive amounts of state money spent for the traffic flow capability of Del Valle Parkway as originally planned. Again, we are in general concurrence with the staff recommendations except for item III., as indicated." Mr. Schutter stated the people who bought homes on Del Valle Parkway should have been aware that the street had been planned for widening in the future. He stated that traffic on St. Marys Street at peak hours is unacceptable at this time and will get increasingly worse unless the Del Valle Parkway is al- lowed to be constructed as planned. Mr. John P. Corley, Attorney representing Auf der Maur/Rickenbach, stated that these men have dedicated land for the Del Valle Parkway at the terminus - 5 - 11-5-85