CCMIN020502 - Laserfiche WebLink

She agreed with Ms. Hurst that it will be a different downtown with the train. She wanted a decision tonight and not in eighteen months. Ingrid Marble-Knox, 4614 Second Street, said she normally does not get involved in politics, but felt that if she did not, the downtown may be mined. She said if the train goes through, then every public vehicle, van, bus, or truck carrying hazardous material will have to stop at the railroad tracks every day of the week and that will stop traffic behind them. That would also occur at Abbie, Angela and Neal. There is already congestion, why increase it? The proposed train has been studied, questioned, had public meetings, etc. etc. What else needs to be done to prove the train is not good for Pleasanton? In November 2000, the City of Pleasanton paid $38,000 to an independent research firm, Economic Research Associates, for a final report called the Downtown Pleasanton Revitalization Strategy Recommendations. It included information on the impact of the train. She quoted from the report that parking was essential for the future of the downtown vitality and acquisition of the Transportation Corridor was essential for parking spaces. The report further stated there were costs and benefits for the downtown. The benefits accrue when the riders from Fremont get off in Pleasanton and local riders come to board the train and later return. This train will increase the number of outsiders and frequency of locals visiting downtown. Shops and restaurants will get increased revenue from this visitation. However, given the relative infrequency of actual train operations, the sales gained by downtown merchants will be modest. The costs would be incurred because the train's use of the downtown stretch of the Transportation Corridor conflicts with the downtown need for additional parking. Depending upon the exact station location, a substantial number of these 300 proposed public parking places intended to support downtown business will be compromised during the days when the train is in operation. ERA supported bringing the train to Pleasanton, but located the station on the south side of Bernal. She cited other quotes from the EIR that the master plan for downtown parks and trails utilize the Transportation Corridor north of Bemal solely for parks, trails and parking. She quoted other impacts from the noise of bells, whistles, uncoupling cars, overspill parking at the Senior Center on weekends, where there are already weekend events for the seniors. She talked about safety impacts, parking, traffic, etc. This has been discussed over and over and there have been reports, studies and meetings taking up everyone's time. These reports show the train is not good for Pleasanton. We should be planting trees, flowers and making trails, not spending time in City Hall. She did not want to split the town every day for a train that will mn only one to two days a week. Let's have parks and trails we can enjoy every day of the year. She strongly supported the Downtown Specific Plan in its proposed form. Ted Bolls, 7760 Country Lane, supported the Downtown Association's request to leave the options open to bring the train into town. Joseph Heman, 4582 Second Street, indicated he was strongly opposed to the train. He was happy to hear there has been extensive study and analysis about whether it was good or bad for Pleasanton. All the studies said it was not a good thing for downtown, so why is it still an issue? How much more do we have to hear about the negative impacts before we finally put ten years of effort to rest. The Downtown Specific Plan is good. Please vote for it as presented. Several people have cited the 1996 advisory vote. He felt the wording of the measure virtually guaranteed people would vote for it. That vote did not count because it was supposed to be a steam train at no cost to the City of Pleasanton. He understands that the PLA steam train does Pleasanton City Council 14 02/05/02 Minutes