HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.2 BART Extension Study Livermore/Pleasanton CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 9, 1984
SUBJECT BART Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study Update
Analysis Final Report
EXHIBITS ATTACHED Letter from BART dated December 20 , 1983 ; Letter from
Bob Allen dated December 20 , 1983 ; Letter from Ben
Fernandez dated December 28 , 1983 ; City Council
Position Letter dated October 26 , 1983
RECOMMENDATION( See below
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at this time
DESCRIPTION On January 17 , 1984 a public meeting will be held at
the Alameda County Fairgrounds Cafeteria in Pleasanton to provide the public
with an opportunity to comment on the BART Livermore-Pleasanton Extension
Study Update Analysis Final Report . (A copy of the Final Report has
previously been delivered to the City Council under separate cover) .
As you may recall , the City Council has previously taken a position with
respect to the BART Extension Study as it impacts the City of Dublin, as
indicated in the letter of October 26 , 1983 which the City Council approved
and sent to the BART staff . In addition, during the General Plan study
sessions , the City Council reemphasized its desire to coordinate development
with a BART parking lot for the station site proposed in downtown Dublin.
Since the City Council ' s last discussion of this item, the City has received
a letter from Robert Allen, Director, District S , Bay Area Rapid Transit
District, requesting the City to freeze development for the next 9 months in
the area of the proposed station sites . The City has also received a letter
from Ben Fernandez on behalf of a joint chamber of commerce committee from
the Cities of Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin indicating the positions of
the three chambers of commerce with respect to the BART extensions to the
Tri-Valley Area.
BART ' s final report does not make a recommendation with respect to the route
most desirable once the rail system leaves the City of Dublin. The report
identifies two basic route alternatives from Hopyard Road to the east. The
final report also recognizes some of the concerns that the City Council
expressed in its letter of October 26 , 1983 with respect to the parking lot
location at the Dublin station to the north of the freeway. However, no
firm recommendations are made in the report with respect to ultimate
configuration of the station site .
It is Staff ' s recommendation that the City Council review its position
letter of October 26 , 1983 to determine whether or not it still accurately
reflects the City ' s positron at this time . It is also recommended that the
Council direct Staff to modify that position paper if necessary, and prepare
to present remarks on the part of the City for the public meeting to be held
on January 17 , 1984 .
Lastly, it is recommended that the City Council direct Staff to respond to
Director Allen ' s request to freeze development in the area of the proposed
Dublin station site . It ' s important to note that Director Allen ' s request,
is a personal one and is not written on behalf of the entire BART Board of
Directors .
----------------------7-7--------------------------------------------------
// COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. 4�• !Z>
bi R T BAY ARE., iAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
800 Madison Street
Oakland, California 94607
Telephone (415) 465-4100
December 20, 1983
ROBERT S. ALLEN Mr. Richard Ambrose
PRESIDENT City Manager
JOHN H. KIRKWOOD City of Dublin
VICE-PRESIDENT P. 0. Box 2340
KEITH BERNARD Dublin, CA 94568
GENERAL MANAGER
Dear Mr. Ambrose:
DIRECTORS Subject: BART Livermore-Pleasanton Extension
Study Update Analysis Final Report
BARCLAY SIMPSON
IST DISTRICT Enclosed for your review and distribution are 25 copies of the BART
NELLOBIANCO Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study Update Analysis Final Report.
2ND DISTRICT I am providing the number of reports requested by you at the last
ARTHUR J. SHARTSIS Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting held in October. Please
3RD DISTRICT distribute the enclosed documents to the appropriate interested
MARGARET K. PRYOR groups and individuals. Since financial constraints limit BART's
4TH DISTRICT distribution of this document, it is also suggested that at least
ROBERT S. ALLEN one copy of the report be made permanently available to the public
5TH DISTRICT at a convenient location such as the Planning Department, the
JOHN GLENN City/County Clerk's Office, or the Community/Agency Library.
6TH DISTRICT
A public meeting will be held at the Alameda County Fairgrounds
WILFRED T. USSERY cafeteria in Pleasanton on Tuesday evening, January 17, 1984 at 7:00
' 7TH DISTRICT
p.m. which will give interested citizens an opportunity to comment .
EUGENE GARFINKLE on the BART Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study Update Analysis
8TH DISTRICT Final Report. BART requests that each TAC member, by its usual
JOHNH. KIRKWOOD notification process, announce the January 17th meeting throughout
9TH DISTRICT
its area of responsibility.
Any questions regarding this document, or the Livermore-Pleasanton
BART Extension in general , should be directed to me at 465-4100
extension 587 or BART Project Coordinator Jim Evans, at extension
372.
Sincerely,
v
Richard C. Wenzel
Project Manager
cc: H. L. Goode, BART Technical Advisory Committee:
B. A. Neustadter, BART Richard Ambrose, Dublin
W. T. Kritikos, BART Gerald Peeler, Livermore
J. P. Evans, BART Robert Harris, Pleasanton
Bruce Fry, Alameda County
James Dicks, CALTRANS
bA R T BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT y
800 Madison Street
P.O. Box 12688
Oakland, CA 94604-2688 J I
Telephone (415)465-4100
11..1.
December 20, 1983
The Honorable Peter W. Snyder
ARTHUR J.SHARTSIS
Mayor, City of Dublin
Clt Hall
PRESIDENT P. O Box 2340
NELLO BIANCO Dublin, CA 94668
VICE-PRESIDENT
KEITH BERNARD
GENERAL MANAGER Dear Mayo �yder:
You should have by now a copy of the LPX (Livermore-
DIRECTORS Pleasanton Extension) Update Analysis final report. A new
route - when adopted by the BART Board early next year -
BARCLAYSIMPSON would replace the existing I-680/Fairgrounds route adopted
ISTDISTRICT in 1974.
NELLO BIANCO
2ND DISTRICT In essence the new LPX route leaves our Fremont line
ARTHUR J.SHARTSIS south of Bay Fair, enters the Rt 238 corridor, stays in the
3RD DISTRICT I-580 Median through Castro Valley and over Dublin Hill, and
MARGARET K.PRYOR continues along I-580 to the railroad overpass east of Hopyard
4TH DISTRICT Road. This much is basically in Phase I of our Extensions
ROBERT S.ALLEN Program.
5TH DISTRICT
JOHN GLENN East from that overpass the report presents two alternative
6TH DISTRICT routes: Freeway and Railroad. The Railroad alternative would
WILFRED T.USSERY serve the West Livermore station site already acquired by the
7TH DISTRICT City of Livermore for transit purposes. The Freeway alternative
EUGENE GARFINKLE would miss that station and aim more toward the proposed new
8TH DISTRICT town at Las Positas.
JOHN H.KIRKWOOD
9TH DISTRICT We will be seeking public input on this choice next month.
In the meantime, as BART Director representing the Valley, I
urge you to freeze development as best you can for the next
nine months where we show proposed stations sites. Figure V-2
(page V-11) portrays the proposed Dublin station layout.
Figure V-3 (page V-20) shows the Pleasanton station if the
Railroad route is chosen. Figure V-4 (page V-21) shows the
Pleasanton station if the Freeway route is chosen.
In 1980 about 800 of the voters opted for BART Rail over
Bus Only (Measure Q, November ballot) . By freezing development
at these station sites you will help to make it all possible.
Very truly yours,
Robert S. Allen
Director, District 5
/I COOPER McKENZIE MURPHY
POST OFFICE 80X 1030
PLEASANTON,CA.94566
PHONE:415-846-4423
December 28 , 1983
City of Dublin
6500 Dublin Boulevard
Dublin, CA 94568
Attn: Richard Ambrose, City Manager
Dear Rich:
Enclosed is a recent resolution made by the combined Chambers
of Commerce of Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin regarding BART
extensions to the Tri-Valley area. It was the unanimous deci-
sion of the three Chambers of Commerce that two stations be
included in the first phase to the Tri-Valley area. It is our
feeling that one location will not serve the best interest of
the community, BART, the business community and our citizens .
We will have representatives on hand at the 1/17/84 public hear-
ing on BART locations . We will also be at your disposal to
discuss our findings . We look forward to a cooperative effort
in achieving this greatly needed service to the Valley.
Best regards ,
COOPER gaKENZIE MURPHY
Ben Fernandez
BF:mw
Enclosure
Itftl/vouMeyrnNN
_ rAGENT
-®.
TC�: WT f=oam of ki roctcrs oU the "etronol i tnr,
Transportation rnTmission '-enrnitte on ^'eL
fjAPT Stations A FXters ions .
SUP? : Station locations for cities of Pulrl in and
Pleasanton , nlamp&a r'ounty , r'al ifornia .
^epresentatives from the Chambers of Commerce from the cities
of Publ in , Pleasanton , cP, Livermore have completed a series
of meetings regarding RAPT Station locations , and unanimously
agree that two stations are noeded for Dublin-Pleasanton .
WP recorrmenrl that the Duhl in station he located in the area.
hetwoen I (,SO and San Pamon Valley nowIeyarn interchange on
15SO in PuM in and the rleasonton station `•c located in the
area vrst of the Proposes' r 'acOnda i nterrhanve at 1 scn . Those
two stations would as'enuately serve hoth ""blin 0 M easanton .
alleviating the necessity of an additinnal station in the "itv
of Pleasanton
President -nuhl in 'C'harnher of C'or.-merce
President -Pleasanton Cham`� .r of Commerce/ 1
C_l '
Pres i dent -r.i vermore "bamhor of Commerce
Oci_obt?r 26, 19:13
itichard C. bvenzel, project i•ianager
Bay Area Ra Adi Transit u i s tz ict
800 Madison Street
Oakiand, CA 94607
Dear i4r. iienzel :
In your Septemoer 29 , 1983 letter you asked for written cci*aments fro-i the
-City of Dublin on the dreaSC final report for the Livermore-Pleasantcr,
3:RT e:ctonsion study. The City Council ac its October 24 , 1963 „leering,
discusseu the report and developer: a number of coi,uments about the issue.
Obviously; in the time alloteu, the City Council and the Staff have :laid
an opportunity for only a preli;ninary -review of the report and expect to
have colimients basea on more detailed review during the public review
period of the final report itself . The City of Dublin' s comments are as
follows :
1 . The City is in support of the tao station concept for the Dub!J--
P1°asanton area- Two stations, each navina access and par:cing on
bath the Dublin anct Pleasanton sides of the freeway ao—Dears to be an
a Jprupriate 'Way of spreaCing th` tra_-Zlc and: the im;Dacts of tie
station itself and to serve the future BAR'f patrons .
2 . fide City also suo-dorts tad, conc'a7L of construction a',-id tae operation
of t_he two stations simultaneously in one phase ratner than building
t:ie Dublin Station first anti the Hacienda station in a later phase .
3 . The City of Dublin strongly supports the adoption or the I-580
alignment to Livermore . It appears that the analysis in the repot,
in which year 2000 costs, revenues and patronage form a key inp- for
tiie final recoinnendation is siiortsignted. Based on the tentative
time table established for the Liv(:rlaore portion of the line, it is
possible that the line itself niay not even be operational by the year
2000 . In this case, a longer analysis would be indicated. A lco;c
into the valley of the future would certainly swing the patronage and
revenue projections in support of tiie I-580 alignment in view of the
11;cely development of inajor projects along the I-580 corridor itself.
4 . The proposed downtown Dublin station area occupies valuable potential
co:hunerclal area within the City. While we are supportive of 1-1avizg
an adequately sized parking aroa we are also concerned about the loss
or both d'evelooable and partially developed land. Par this reason,
It is our position that BART should consider stations involving
dbu:)le--necking par:<ing lots or unc'.er round pr3r.,ing or other :iheans to
Iriciint:ain ad:et- uate capacity but rcuucec: Lana recuire:'-,eihLS . l':hiS
ootentlal cci:;binatlon or parking over�low In tihe iiOhlnrown area and
!--he rt3duc.ion of coiilllHercial developabl- area is tie reason. that =.`hi'
City had earlier e;cpre?ssec? concerI-I wi-Lh the station In tills 1(.)car c,-1 .
'-Z not:! Urg.° Lhat tiles('_ Joints be carefully considered Jy BART in LLS
finch «d;Uption an future p1c3nIllrig
it.icila. werizel -2- uctci)er ?d, 1933
i:'nat: circulat,.orl cat both stations woulc be ennanced by a
Cross connection ber-weer Lie i)unlin anal i easanton sillies of the +
pI .. ng areas . This would: allm.v the stsclons to have ?ropor
I,:ir.culatiurl simJ lar to nose other: B.AiZ1 facilities Withou`l- tale use of
e%tensive circuitous routes on City streets. Such overpass
connections would need ;-o be w�.,ll designed so as to nut encourage
through local traffic .
o . It is e:coected that there would be significant impacts on the streets
near the HART sLai.ions theiilselLes . `i'his should be the subject of
iurt ler stu( v so chat necessary improvements to the Streets call be
maLie and; that Manning for these i:-,l,)roverients can coiL.i,.cnce at tihLAJ.s
V.i II;_ .
7 . Rel at�eo. to the access issue is file City o% Dublin' s need. for direct
access to the 1-680 freewa ' near Dui)lin boulevard. A major purpose,
of tills access would: ne to provide access to the downtown BART
szation from areas to the nor'. 1,, such as San .Ramon. The int(e-change
:mule' preclude the need fo_ " L_Ilrough" B I:T traffic for San Rar-,;on or
`lsewh`re to use our local street s'r s teCn. It IS Cili desire tYla t:1Ee
i:IA_-f -Jianni ng lnciuce t,nis aC;C_tlOnCll _n:::..:Change_ . Tne C icy
cu::rte;:_l! feels C.:le filial a:J7r ov l Of a c o,,.,nz:own } iUT s,'t3: lon
ts`1__ is, in zact, cono.3.tlonec u.--)on the dLdi :lor'.al lnt:erc.^.1nga . The
C l Uf JL JI_.. 13 lls0 d__ocli.ssln^y tills Concern W1t:1 tle
or:�senc
J . :is VUIl kno'.,, ci,.e Cit'! of. ::u.J)!Li is cu_zently conduct-,n s u(diies wt_ch
7111 leas 1:O t_`le auoP_1Gn or its first General ?lall In the hear
future. Many of i`le bik1:T related (fletails sui:h as access, circula '_on
and lanC. use Heat' Cihe �)r07U5�'_(. stations are of vital importance in
our General Plan process . ro= i nls reason, It is 1..iportant to the
Cl c•1 z;,,a t W r' Ilaln gain con�1;Iuous coi:;Irlunlcatlon b<e t:•.reOn our l;lu:_U;il
punning efforts .
'.Lh,.ih:C you for the'_ opportunity to coia;,t1P_nt on the Craft final report.
PleaSE' Contact isle It tilere are, cuestlons .
Sincerely,
R'Lci:ar d C. IL,:„rose
City -Manager