Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-05-1990 Adopted CC MinBART ExtSPECiaL ~EET~N~ - February, S, 1990 A special meeting of the City Council of the City of Dublin was held on Monday, February 5, 1990, in the Council Chambers of the Dublin Civic Center. The meeting was called to order at 12:40 p.m., by Mayor Paul Moffatt. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Moffatt. Councilmembers Hegarty, Jeffery, Snyder, Vonheeder and Mayor PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Mayor led the Council, Staff and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag. BART DUBLIN/PLEASANTON EXTENSION PROJECT City Manager Ambrose advised that on Friday, February 2, 1990, he and Councilmember Jeffery met with Council representatives from the other Valley Cities, Supervisor Campbell, local representatiVes from the State Legislature, Directors from the Bay Area Rapid Transit, and Councilmember Dutra from the City of Fremont. Mr. AmbroSe explained that the purpose of the meeting was to clarify the position of the Valley Cities with respect to the BART Extension to the Valley, as well as the position of Fremont with respect to the Warm Springs Extension. Compromise project language was offered for consideration, which would read: "The Bay Area Rapid Transit District would adopt a Dublin/Pleasanton Project which would consist of three stations. BART would fund two stations for this extension, one in Castro Valley and one in East Dublin. The third station (WeSt Dublin) would not be funded by BART funds until the Warm Springs/Irvington Extension wascompleted." It was further understood that if private funds became available for the completion of the third BART station (West Dublin), that station could be constructed prior to the completion of the Warm Springs/ Irvington Station. Mr. Ambrose advised that Staff recommended that the City Council adopt a position with respect to station location and that this position be communicated to the BART Board at its public hearing on Tuesday, February 6, 1990. Staff further recommended that the Council designate a representative of the Council to present the City's position. Chris Kinzel reviewed some of the impact differences between the East and West station locations. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM -VOL 9 - 9.4 Special Meeting February 5, 1990 A copy of the draft resolution by the Board of Supervisors was passed out and Mr. Ambrose stated that it does not agree with what was discussed at the meeting on Friday. This resolution puts the City of Dublin in the position of proving that the East Dublin station is less costly than the West Dublin statiOn. The BART Board of Directors will conduct a public hearing tomorrow morning and in all likelihood, they will close the public hearing and we will have no further opportunity to submit comments The Final EIR does not address the necessary impacts for an East Dublin station. BART should have some responsibility for mitigation measures and these should be identified in the FEIR. Cm. Hegarty expressed concern that when the funding was set up and the 1/2 cent sales tax was voted in, it was for an extension to Castro Valley and Dublin. There was no talk of a third station. In the City's 1983 General Plan discussions, there was input on this topic and a portion of land was designated in West Dublin for a BART station. The people voted for the 1/2 cent sales tax for a station to go in West Dublin. All sorts of things have changed since that time, and Cm. Hegarty questioned why everything seems to have gone wrong. The traffic impacts with a West Dublin station are going to be tremendous, and he wanted to make sure that the station is in the right place. Cm. Vonheeder stated that she did not feel a specific location was pinpointed for the voters. If the station is a terminus station, it creates all sorts of traffic problems. She did not feel that Dublin would be misrepresenting anything if it went with an East Dublin station. The West Dublin station would be a collector station rather than a terminus station. A BART station should be positive for the businesses nearby. Cm. Hegarty queried the Council regarding a better place to put the station in Dublin. cm. Jeffery stated she felt that Dublin got caught in a political screw as there were individuals who came in at the last minute to fight Measure B unless they got what they wanted. Some dollars were taken out of the Dublin/Pleasanton extension to be placed elsewhere. The original cost estimates by BART weren't event.close. Costs of cars were to have been included originally, and were not to have been a part of this project. This is no longer true. Also, the original location was shown somewhere before 1-680. Newspapers have reported that the different City Councils are not in agreement. Cm. Jeffery felt it was important for everyone to understand where Dublin is coming from. Dublin always felt that West Dublin would be mitigated. BART has recognized that it cannot'be mitigated without a second station to the east. West Dublin would not be beneficial to us and being a terminus station, it would need 40% more parking. If East Dublin were built first and the pad layed for the West Dublin station, when the dollars become available, the commitment would be there and there is a method of retrofitting. Actually, BART is going to have trouble funding even one station. Mitigation aspects were extensively discussed, and BART understands that their report is insufficient. Mr. Kinzel reviewed the East Dublin station versus West Dublin station report. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 9 - 25 Special Meeting February 5, 1990 Cm. Hegarty felt that because BART will eventually go on to the east, the terminus station situation will lessen. Cm. Jeffery pointed out that in the EIR, they did not consider any traffic from the Danville area. Mr. Kinzel advised that Crow ~Canyon Road was the divider point. People north of there would most likely use the Walnut Creek station. Cm. Jeffery stated that in discussions with Danville Councilmembers, it was felt that even though there is only a .3 mile difference, they felt that people would come to Dublin because of a lighter traffic situation. Cm. Jeffery felt that San Francisco/Oakland will not necessarily be the heaviest employment centers in the future. Cm. Vonheeder felt that the parking would be much more desirable than in Walnut Creek. Mr. Kinzel advised that parking seems to be the biggest problem in talking with cities that have existing BART station(s). Cm. Hegarty discussed several BART stations in San Francisco where there is virtually no parking whatsoever. He questioned if the City should even consider this type of a station. What would be the problem with using this concept for a West Dublin station. Mr. Kinzel pointed out that these areas are major employment centers and are very transit oriented and feed into a bus or connector system. Cm. Snyder felt it may be too late in the ballgame to go forward with the concept of limited parking, although he felt this idea has merit. A "shopper station" may be what is needed. If the engineering for this type of a station were done, we could look for funds to complete it if this design were decided upon. Cm. Jeffery advised that there was lengthy discussion related to the construction of a pad. Cm. Snyder stated he still did not understand the urgency of making this decision. Cm. Jeffery indicated there is some sort of a cutoff for Caltrans and BART regarding making a design decision regarding some routing of 238. She asked that our station location be separated out, but was advised that it could not be done this way. BART Board will be making a recommendation tomorrow morning one way or the other. She felt Dublin should reiterate the problem with the mitigation measures and advise that we want the pad in West Dublin to be put in. Cm. Hegarty indicated he had never seen a station where it was retrofitted. Also, he questioned what other city has had to put in their own dollars. Future financing options were discussed, with SCA 1 being one possibility. @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM- VOL 9 - Z6 Special Meeting February 5, 1990 John Hughes, a homeowner in Dublin, stated he felt that when you create a no-parking system, you create a jungle and you must put in parking meters which become unsatisfactory. He complimented the City Council on their wisdom and advised that the Council had addressed every single point that he has made at the BART hearings in the last 2 years. Carolyn Morgan, Livermore, questioned who will purchase the land in East Dublin for a BART station. She understood that there is no money for a road to the East Dublin station. She questioned if Livermore would have to wait for both stations to be built before BART gets to Livermore. Cm. Jeffery advised that thee is 35 acres done in a land swap trade which we think will be the County's contribution to the project. Earlene DeMarCus is committed to the concept of having 2 stations in Livermore. Dave Burton, 11396 Dillon Way, commended the City Council for covering a lot of the subjects related to planning for BART. He had heard a comment that they could not go through 1-680 and asked if this has been addressed in the extension. Mr. Burton also stated that the type of buildings we will attract near a BART station (high rise) must. be considered. It will be a different character of business than we are presently used to. The City should plan the East Dublin station so that it looks at the area as a concentration of office buildings. The commute patterns will be reversed. Cm. Jeffery stated she'understands that with regard to the height of the bridge, this is being heightened. 1-580 is not as wide on the other side of the bridge. Bill Foster, Dublin resident, complimented the City Council for doing their homework related to a terminus station versus a regular station. East Dublin will be a regular station someday. He felt he had heard many negative comments and asked if anyone had actually considered what, if any, advantage there was to having BART come to Dublin. He had heard no one say, "We want BART out here because ..." Cm. Jeffery advised that 5 million people per year are moving to California. The idea of putting in BART is to give people an option so that we can at least keep traffic moving. As traffic become more and more unbearable, people will use BART. Cm. Snyder felt that at least 40% of the patrons will arrive from the east. The Council discussed the wording of the drafted policy statement resolution: "The Bay Area Rapid Transit District should adopt a Dublin/Pleasanton Project which would consist of three stations. Bay Area Rapid Transit District should fund two stations for this extension, one in Castro Valley and one in East Dublin. The third station (West Dublin), would not be funded by BART funds until the Warm Springs/Irvington Extension is completed. It is further understood that if private funds become available for the completion of the third BART Station (West Dublin), that station could be constructed prior to the completion of the Warm Springs/Irvington Station." @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM- VOL 9 - ~7 Special Meeting Februar~ 5, 1990 Cm. Jeffery suggested adding, "As a measure of good faith, BART will construct a pad for the West Dublin station and consider it in the engineering." Cm. Hegarty felt the policy statement should be worded stronger. He felt the words "private funds" should be deleted and that a condition should be put in that the pad will be put in West Dublin as a commitment for this station. Cm. Snyder felt this would preclude any effort done to get state or federal funds. Cm. Jeffery stated that there are only a certain amount of dollars available for transportation. DeLaine Eastin feels that it should be stated in this way so that we do not go into competition with the Warm Springs/Irvington station. Cm. Snyder indicated that the EIR is not sufficient to build a West Dublin station. If it is not done right, he questioned how the Council could support it. Mr. Ambrose advised that if BART proceeds with the project in the next 30 days, the Council will have to decide if it wishes to challenge the EIR. BART does not want to recirculate the EIR. The Council agreed to language drafted by Mr. Ambrose to be put into the Resolution: "The Bay Area Rapid Transit District should adopt a Dublin/ Pleasanton Project which would consist of three stations. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District should initially construct one station in Castro Valley and one station in East Dublin. The third station (West Dublin), should not be funded by traditional BART funds until the Warm Springs/Irvington Extension is completed. Should non-traditional BART funds become available prior to the completion of the Warm Springs/ Irvington station, the third station (West Dublin), could be constructed prior to the completion of the Warm Springs/Irvington station. Included in the initial two station project, BART should include the design for the West Dublin station. In addition, BART should construct a pad for the West Dublin station. BART should identify mitigation measures necessary to resolve the environmental impacts associated with the construction of the East Dublin station." On motion of Cm. Jeffery, seconded by Cm. Vonheeder, and by unanimous~vote, the Council adopted RESOLUTION NO. 10 - 90 ESTABLISHING A POLICY STATEMENT REGi%RDING THE BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DUBLIN/PLEASANTON EXTENSION PROJECT @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@ CM - VOL 9 - 28 Special Meeting February 5, 1990 The Council determined that Cm. Jeffery and Mayor Moffatt would represent the City of Dublin at the BART public hearing on February 6, 1990. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjOurned at 2:16 p.m. ATTEST: City Clerk @*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@*@,@*@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@,@ CM- VOL 9 - Z9 Special Meeting February 5, 1990