Laserfiche WebLink
The roll call vote was as follows: <br />AYES: Councilmembers - Ayaia, Campbell, Dennis, Michelotti, and Mayor Pico <br />NOES: None <br />ABSENT: None <br />ABSTAIN: None <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis was pleased to approve this piece of the process and congratulated Bridge <br />Housing on its endurance in this process. She hoped the project will move forward <br />expeditiously. The community has been waiting for a facility like this for a long time. <br /> <br /> Ms. Ayala reiterated the goal that the project would be available for occupancy by late <br />2003. She commended the commissions that have worked very hard for this facility. <br /> <br />Ms. Michelotti thanked the Assisted Living Sub-Committee. <br /> <br /> Mayor Pico thanked Bridge Housing, Lytton Gardens and staff for their work on this and <br />for moving forward with the project. He looked forward to a long lasting relationship. <br /> <br />Item 6c <br />Determination of Route of Stoneridge Drive Across the Standard Pacific ProperW. in the <br />event Stoneridge Drive is extended easterly of its present terminus. (SR 01:260) <br /> <br />Brian Swift presented the staff report. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis asked if the Livermore staff had an opinion regarding the Pleasanton staff's <br />recommendation on the proposed Stoneridge Drive route. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said Livermore is satisfied with the northerly alignment. Livermore already <br />has rights of way for Jack London Drive. He went on to explain other alignments and the <br />necessary acquisition of rights of way. He said the Livermore city limit extends all the way to E1 <br />Charro Road. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti referred to attachment 4-B and asked about the number of bridges needed <br />and why the southern alignment does not work as well. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said there are a number of issues. Arroyo Mocho tums at one point and a <br />bridge would be necessary, which would be close to the street intersection. It would be <br />necessary for the bridge to include all the through lanes and turn lanes and it would become <br />twice as wide as the same kind of bridge at a different location that merely crosses the arroyo. <br />The other portion of the arroyo is not proposed to be widened by the County. In addition, the <br />southerly portion of the creek would be treated as a natural creek and environmental permits <br />would be required for a bridge. He said there is also a problem with the separate haul routes for <br />the gravel tracks. If the bridge were located at the southern route, it would be so close to the <br />arroyo that there would not be space to go under the roadway and would created traffic impacts. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 12 11/06/01 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />