CCMIN011984 - Laserfiche WebLink

251 Mr. Victor Bailey, 4565 Black Avenue, former member of the BART citizens advisory committee, stated that BART routes have been planned for years and that BART engineers and MTC staff have given careful study to the most feasible routes to serve the great- est number of people. He stated he is concerned that Pleasanton make the right deci- sion. He stated this is a rare opportunity to get BART in town. Mr. David Peters, 4139 Garatti Court, stated he is opposed to BART coming on the Southern Pacific tracks because his back yard faces these tracks. He urged Council to make a strong statement in favor of the freeway route. Mr. Ben Fernandez, 2385 Sandpiper Way, stated it is the unanimous opinion of the Chamber of Commerce of the three communities of Livermore, Pleasanton, and Dublin, that BART should come to the Valley as soon as possible and that two stations are necessary. He stated it is their opinion that it is very important that selection of the station sites be made as soon as possible. He stated he has also served on the Transportation Subcommittee of the General Plan Review, and it is this Committee's unanimous decision that the Freeway 580 route be taken. He added that parking will have a great impact on Pleasanton. Mr. Brad Hirst, 2456 Minivet Court, representing the Steering Committee of the General Plan Review, restated their position recommending that BART use the freeway route. He advised this route is already shown in the Pleasanton General Plan, will be less disruptive to already developed businesses, and best serve future development. He added that it will also be the best possible connection to serve the Bishop Ranch. Mr. Steve Hughes, 587 Touriga Court, asked that Mr. Joe Callahan take a stand on what route he wants. Mr. Joe Callahan, representing Cal!ahan Pentz Properties, stated that a route continuing east on Freeway 580 to E1 Charro in the County area between Livermore and Pleasanton would probably be the most logical route with the least impact. He stated he will need some type of mass transit by the mid-1990ts to shuttle employees to and from Hacienda Business Park. Mr. Robert Allen stated he would have to leave the meeting at this time to go to work, but that he would take the comments of the citizens and Council under considera- tion. Mr. Joseph Madden, 3851 Vineyard Avenue, stated that MTC requires BART to use ABAG projections to the year 2000, which do not accurately reflect Valley population figures. He stated he concurs with the staff report but felt four acres is too small for a park- ing lot, and thought it would be wiser to plan for a larger one. He urged the City to get into studies regarding financing and grants for BART service. There being no further testimony, Mayor Butler declared the public hearing closed. He thanked the citizens for their participation and input into this very important matter. After discussion, it was moved by Councilmember Mercer, and seconded by Council- member Wood, that Resolution No. 84-21, expressing strong support and right of BART extension to the Valley using the freeway median as the rail route, and the need for two stations, be adopted. The roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Councilmembers Brandes, Mercer, Mohr, Wood, and Mayor Butler NOES: None ABSENT: None 12. 1/9/84