26 - Laserfiche WebLink

ATTACHMENT 2: PUBLIC COMMENTS *a x p Bet x • Sw x *w., x •AS x •Me x . .,, a fel x w, x U Nit x a1(34 x •A•x 0 + _ a x E C Q i trttps www.shorn,corn 1eatreopa14 2,,121 07461/3'n5315i hottrid, 41 • • 0 0 ;a 0 4 * Boaxmeos a tinea!corn 0 Cele Levee!Tectn; X Confluence ADI(Rectory Search ®LlnSeAal Snare • SPCA"BMDD 0 SPCA •SOS CI SOS Sta!orst w r Other 6uoxmarke $TRAVA Q Dashboard a Treeing a Explore.. Challenges a 40- O / 4 Global Heatmap +, . Heatmap Co+or itp Ibt Rue Gra9 Ned ip Activity Type Ii Heat Opacity 01 Sol 60% 80% 100% Layers \ // Mao Labels Satellite / Dacover how the heatmap was built f Learn how Strava Metro can help your cornmunity 1111111116 O 0 y • ■ • + t.07 3:250•:1, 0 However,this conflicts with the potential Niles Canyon Railway plan to bring the train into Pleasanton. The City has a position that the train will not be brought past Bernal Avenue, but makes no position about anything south of Bernal. Regardless of the conflict, bringing the bicycle and pedestrian trail from Angela to Bernal Avenue would be beneficial. I researched the Niles Canyon Railway topic. In 1992,the city approved bringing the Railway into Downtown (Resolution No. 92-12). In 1996, Ballot Measure DD approved the same with 75%in favor (with caveats,one being that it is"no cost"to Pleasanton). In 1999,the Downtown Parks and Trails Task Force recommend not bringing the train beyond Bernal Ave.Also,the Downtown Specific Plan Committee voted 8-5 not to extend past Bernal.This went to City Council and was a heated topic. In 2002,the City approved acquiring the right of way north of Bernal Avenue with stated priorities: 1) parking, 2) improving the Bernal entrance to Main Street,and 3) Niles Canyon Railway, in that order. City Council approved a position that the train not come any further north than Bernal. Based on comments and overflow meetings,this was a very emotional and decisive issue. My interpretation is that the citizens of Pleasanton like the train and our heritage with the railway, but don't like downsides (lots of Sunol residents complain about the train and its owners—Pacific Locomotive Association, PLA) or the expense. Nonetheless,the recent Bike/Ped Master Plan included: Action 1-3D: Develop the Downtown portion of the Alameda County Transportation Corridor for pedestrian, bicyclists and motor vehicle parking,consistent with the 2002 Master Plan for Downtown Parks and Trails System and with the current update to the Downtown Specific Plan. The details were: • Near-Term Proposal: Conduct Trail Feasibility Study to convert old railroad right-of-way to shared use path. 5