CCMIN012406 - Laserfiche WebLink

Diane Lester Kolb, 11021 Dublin Canyon Road, asked if there was to be a study of the Pleasanton Ridge hillside. Mr. Sullivan said the next workshop would cover the area along Foothill Road and would include Dublin Canyon. Ms. Kolb indicated her family has owned 120 acres in that area since 1916 and she hoped Council would work with her family for a future project. Mike Bottarini, 4151 Alvarado Street, indicated he did not want to see more houses near Busch Road because of increases in traffic. He was opposed to high density residential, but felt medium density was not too bad. He suggested a change in the timing of the traffic signals to improve the flow of traffic. He requested Council to find a location for a 4H or FFA farm for student projects. Vaughn WOlffe, 1798 Peru Court, disagreed with a previous statement that the current location for the ACE train station was the best available. He felt if the service grows to the estimated eight trains a day, it will mean four times the number of riders and people driving downtown to park at the station. He felt the ACE train could carry many more people than BART and there would be a need for a station far bigger than the existing one with much more parking required. He felt there should be a train station near businesses to accommodate those people coming over the Altamont. The 1-580 study done a few years ago indicated the BART extension would only accommodate 3,700 riders at a cost of a billion dollars. The ACE enhancements, at a cost of $300,000,000 would provide almost four times as many riders. He said 55% of the people coming over the Altamont are coming to the Tri-Valley and BART would not serve them. About 25-40% of the commuters are going to Silicon Valley or the Peninsula and BART cannot service that population either. He believed the train station should be on the east side of Pleasanton to get the traffic out of downtown. He commented about the large number of people who run red lights at the intersection of Valley and Santa Rita and urged better enforcement. Mr. Sullivan asked staff about the ACE station and whether there had been any discussion with the ACE Board about locating a train station on the east side? Ms. Stern said she had talked to the San Joaquin Rail staff and there was no indication that the developer had talked about locating a station in this area. The Board felt Pleasanton could only support one station at this time. Mr. Sullivan referred to Mr. Wolffe's comments about enhancing the system with more and faster trains and asked if staff was aware of a study that had been done that quantifies that. Ms. Stern said staff would get more information on that to bring back to Council. She noted she had spoken to BART representatives who said for the amount of money to be spent on an extension, it would get very few more riders. Vanessa Kawaihau, 871 Sycamore Road, had questions about Attachment 1, item B, of the staff report. She asked what unentitled units were? Since the Happy Valley area is one of the southeast hills and has a potential for density transfer, she wanted to know if the 100-150 units are available in the east area of Pleasanton and are they first come/first served or allocated proportionately to the three major developers in the southeast hills as well as those remaining in the Foothill Road area? If the south Pleasanton open space project becomes a Joint Workshop City Council/Planning Commission 9 01/24/06