CCMIN041602 - Laserfiche WebLink

he would like to have them connected. He has had the experience of getting to the end of a trail and finding it closed. He did not think the trails needed to be paved or have "fancy" bridges. He just wanted some kind of bridge so he doesn't have to get wet feet crossing the arroyos. There are opportunities to have continuous loops and to provide a way to Livermore. He also liked going under 580 to access Dublin and the Iron Horse Trail. He was definitely pro-trails. John Whitehead, 3322 Biscayne, Davis, and 6627 Conestoga Lane, Dublin, said he lives near trails in both those places and uses them frequently. He thought it was wonderful to be able to go places using the trails and to take his son. Last year, his three year old son rode his tricycle to downtown Davis and back, seven miles. Children should not be denied that opportunity. He used to live on Stoneridge Drive near Santa Rita and walked to the grocery store. Whenever he crossed the Arroyo Mocho bridge he saw fence across the trail and thought that was crazy. He applauded Council for changing that. He has seen people in Davis and Danville put in gates in their fences to access the trails directly. He has seen people take away wooden fences and install chain link fences so they can be part of the nature area. Regarding the north versus south question, he noted the large park and felt many kids would want to bike to the park. Obviously, a bridge would have to be built to get f~om the north side to the park. That mid-point connection to a city street makes perfect sense from the south trail. Once people start biking to the park instead of driving, the neighborhood will get quieter. There will be less traffic. He noted it is possible to slide slats into chain link fences to provide a visual barrier. It is not necessary to build a whole new fence. He acknowledged the Iron Horse Trail goes through Danville and is very close to the houses. He said he has also biked from Davis to Folsom and used the trail shown in the video. He referred to a friend who prefers having his house on a bike trail and bikes from Davis to San Francisco. He believed that a trail that is legally open will have less illegal activity than a trail that is fenced off. There will be lots of people on the trail who are not criminals or juvenile delinquents, but who are responsible. We should teach our children it is possible to go places safely without polluting the air or sitting in traffic. We will be healthier in the process. Fossil fuels will be used up someday and trails will be more important in the future than can be imagined. Mary Roberts, P. O. Box 154, believed it was important to go forward with the trails. She referred to a Safeway employee who would like to rollerblade to work in Pleasanton using the Iron Horse Trail. She said at the last Planners Institute, there was a discussion about safe routes to schools. There is funding available for this. She felt the concerns of the Parkside residents was understandable and she felt many of things brought up could be conditioned and allow the trails to move forward. However, she was concerned about giving the homeowners money for the fencing. She agreed with a prior speaker, who said that if fences are to be built, it should be by the city and for all the property owners, rather than leaving it to the individuals. The real problem is there is not good trail usage around here and the trails are left as places for kids to hang out after school and she felt they were a mess. She felt that the people who want and use the trails should be responsible for them. That would limit the problems and vandalism that could occur. She felt there would be a precedent in paying for fences. She owns property with almost 600 feet fronting Vineyard Avenue. This could be a vandalism problem, but she would not ask someone else to build a fence for her. She has about linear 8,000 feet on her property where a trail is proposed by the City. She also does not expect the City to build a fence Pleasanton City Council 20 04/16/02 Minutes