Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Nelson provided a PowerPoint presentation which included discussion points concerning: <br />• The High Speed Rail Authority <br />• The Tri-Valley's Vision for Rail Investment <br />• Maps depicting travel demand patterns to/from Tri-Valley and to/from Altamont (2020) <br />• Regional Rail Plan Overall Vision <br />• Regional Rail Plan (Without High Speed Rail) <br />• Regional Rail Options Studied for Tri-Valley <br />• Regional Rail Plan Draft Recommendations for the Tri-Valley <br />• Is the Regional Rail Plan Consistent with the Tri-Valley's Vision? <br />• Bay Area High Speed Rail Alignment Options - I-580 <br />• Bay Area High Speed Rail Alignment Options -Union Pacific <br />• Bay Area High Speed Rail Alignment Options <br />• Next Steps in the Tri-Valley <br />• Issues for Further Study <br />• Key Dates <br />• Photos of I-580 Existing and I-580 with High Speed Rail <br />Mayor Hosterman said both she and Supervisor Haggarty had an interest to include in the study <br />BART beyond, and Ms. Nelson agreed and this was included in the PAC recommendation, but it <br />is not expressed in the current recommendation from the regional rail plan. <br />Ms. Nelson introduced Tom Radulovich, a BART Board Director, who was seated in the <br />audience to answer any questions. <br />Mayor Hosterman said staff is asking the Council to review regional rail and high speed rail <br />alternatives and provide direction on a letter to be sent to the MTC with comments on the <br />EIR/EIS process. <br />Councilmember Cook-Kallio referred to the map presented by Ms. Nelson and questioned how <br />a train could go through Pleasanton at over 200 mph. Ms. Nelson said this was a maximum <br />speed; that the train operating through the Tri-Valley would be traveling at these high speeds <br />only through long stretches and where stops are not made. It would operate through the Tri- <br />Valley around cities at about 90 mph and noted current trains were operating at about 30 mph <br />with stops and about 45 mph without stops. There would be no cross traffic, they would be <br />operating quietly, the rail would be depressed, there would be no additional space required and <br />no interruption between street traffic. <br />Deputy Public Works Tassano said staff is also going to be making a presentation regarding the <br />plan, as well. <br />Councilmember McGovern confirmed that a draft EIR has been done on the high speed rail <br />alternatives for reaching the Bay Area, it will be finalized at the end of the year, and the <br />environmental document is the next step on the BART extension, and that high speed rail would <br />operate and most likely have one stop at IsabeVStanley, which would be at about 50-60 mph. It <br />would also go through Livermore, Fremont, Redwood City and Oakland. <br />Councilmember McGovern noted it would go through Bernal Park where the Council has been <br />trying to make serene and felt this would be a major impact. She asked if Pleasanton had to <br />have high speed rail come through town. Mrs. Nelson said there are a couple of options; one <br />would be to have high speed rail operating in the I-580 median rather than through the existing <br />Union Pacific corridor, which is significantly more money and involves structures. The other <br />City Council Minutes 7 September 18, 2007 <br />