My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN052003
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
CCMIN052003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/17/2007 10:56:37 AM
Creation date
5/16/2003 9:43:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
5/20/2003
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN052003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Brozosky felt at that point all the environmental studies will have to be done and he <br />felt the no money would be saved at this point because the environmental studies will have to be <br />done again in the future. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said the future phase of the project is fifteen to twenty years down the road. <br />At that point, it is expected there will be agreements with the City of Livermore as well. This <br />loop road is necessary well before that occurs. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky asked if the current construction would be sufficient for the growth in <br />Dublin. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said the future improvements in fifteen to twenty years are not due solely to <br />Dublin, Pleasanton or Livermore. It is more of a combination of all. Future interchange <br />widening will be a joint project. Pleasanton will get credit against future costs for what is <br />contributing today for this loop. He explained that the 1998 Agreement regarding the <br />interchange is still valid and has no timeline. It is based on traffic percentages and clearly <br />includes participation from the other jurisdictions. <br /> <br /> Mr. Campbell asked if building this interchange had any relation to whether Stoneridge <br />Drive is extended or not extended? <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said it is not related to Stoneridge Drive. It is based on the Staples Ranch <br />development and is necessary whether there is development there or not. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala referred to the credit for future interchange improvements. She said <br />Pleasanton has been the "bank" for Hacienda and Santa Rita interchange improvements. Is it <br />now the "bank" for E1 Charro? <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said no. Pleasanton paid in advance for the other interchange improvements <br />and Dublin is reimbursing Pleasanton. He explained the amount advanced, payments made and <br />balance due on these agreements. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said it appears Dublin is doing the financing on phase one of these <br />improvements and asked if Pleasanton would take the lead on phase two? <br /> <br /> Mr. Wilson said that is unknown at this time. The participation for phase two will be <br />based on traffic percentages. The cost of phase one is based purely on construction cost for the <br />loop and not traffic. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala felt the connection of E1 Charro from 1-580 to Stanley Boulevard was <br />important and she could see the importance of the proposed loop for changes that may occur on <br />the east side of Pleasanton. She asked if this loop could help that connection to occur sooner? <br /> <br /> Ms. McKeehan indicated there are a number of improvements the County will be doing <br />in the quarry area as part of the designing efforts for the Staples Ranch area. The County has <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 21 05/20/03 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.