01b - Laserfiche WebLink

option is not to have high speed rail at all come through the Altamont and have all high speed rail service operate through the Pacheco Pass, which is longer from Sacramento to the Bay Area and is possible and was the original plan. The negative for Pleasanton is that the ACE service gets only partially upgraded to the 45 mph train and not to the 70 mph train. If it were to stop at Isabel/Stanley, it would continue on through the Union Pacific corridor and not back to 1- 580. Councilmember Cook-Kallio confirmed that if it goes through Pacheco Pass it would go through downtown San Jose and Gilroy. City Manager Fialho felt the question was whether it could stop in Livermore with a transfer from BART and have that be the terminus rather than continuing on. Ms. Nelson said she was not sure this has been looked at as an alternative, but could be done as a phased option, but it would require all high speed traffic from Sacramento and Central Valley to terminate in Livermore. Councilmember McGovern questioned the number of trains proposed and Ms. Nelson said they were probably talking about 6-12 high speed trains a day, and service every 15-20 minutes for upgraded ACE trains. Councilmember McGovern confirmed trains would not have horns at grade separations, they would not run 24 hours a day and BART's current hours were from 5:30 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Ms. Nelson noted the electrified trains were significantly quieter than diesel trains, less vibration with speeds under 150 mph. Councilmember Sullivan said he has ridden the bullet train in Japan and felt it was a great way to travel, but he has been in stations where trains came through which felt like a 747 was flying past you. He asked if the Council was being asked to endorse one of the two alternatives. Deputy Director of Public Works Tassano said before the Council was not to endorse either alternatives, but to provide language that the City would include in response to the EIR for the high speed rail. Part of this discussion was to how it works in with the overall regional plan. He noted the alternatives include the I-580/1-680 option as well as the Union Pacific corridor, but not necessarily weighing in on either option. He felt the Council may want to provide clarity on options it may be looking for and said comments must be provided back on the EIR for the high speed rail before September 28, 2007. City Manager Fialho said Pleasanton and Livermore has had as a policy for some time the interest of expanding BART somewhere in Livermore, whether it is at the Isabel/Stanley or Greenville locations. He felt the ultimate goal for Livermore is how to connect these two projects, provide a mechanism to expand BART and utilize and leverage the dollars associated with high speed rail to have that accomplished. He felt the City has obvious concerns with high speed rail at any level below, at or above going through the middle of Pleasanton, the concerns of which have been made clear at all meetings. Mayor Hosterman felt the Altamont alignment is delusional and that there was no way the Tri- Valley would support it; however, she said it was important to support additional study on both of the alignments and possibly what would become clear is that the Pacheco Pass alignment truly is the preferred route. But, what it does is provide the Council with an opportunity to work with other agencies in being supportive of additional study and also recall that in this additional study, we will be able to move forward with a BART EIR process in looking at the extension of BART beyond Greenville Road and she felt this was critical to us in the Tri-Valley. City Council Minutes 8 September 18, 2007