My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
04 ATTACHMENT 10
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2009
>
022409
>
04 ATTACHMENT 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/28/2016 2:42:11 PM
Creation date
2/20/2009 11:55:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
2/24/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
04 ATTACHMENT 10
Document Relationships
10
(Cross Reference)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2009\020309
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Do we need another park (without soccer or football fields) in Pleasanton <br />Do we need an expensive Senior Assisted Living facility next to a freeway <br />Do we need another retail commercial center with so many others failing ? <br />Thera are ALSO plenty of reasons listed in the Environmental Impact Report that would make the development of Staples <br />Punch Undesirable. <br />VISUAL RESOURCES: The LOSS of the rural look and feel of Pleasanton when <br />the open land along the freeway is no more. We will join other cities like <br />Fremont as having a "solid city" look: not knowing which city you are in since its just one city after another. <br />The AIR QUALITY will be even gorse if we open Btoneridge Drive to El <br />Charro. The current EIR shows that with just the EIA connection( much <br />less traffic) the ozone is already above thresholds used by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, So we are <br />already above thresholds, and they want to add thousands more traffic trips along Stoneridge Drive ! Crazy r <br />C Building the BDE before Pleasanton has Regional roadmap is inept, fiscally irresponsible, and morally reprehensible. <br />Inept - No plan in place: We are supposed to have a Regional Road-Map of <br />what improvements get built and in what order. We do IT yet have a <br />Regional Road-Map agreement where the local jurisdictions have all agreed on what infrastructure improvement should <br />be made and in what order. <br />Pleasanton needs to have Highway 84 expanded in order to reduce out- through traffic and yet our Regional partners on <br />several agencies continue to place Highway 84 on the low priority list. <br />Fiscally Irresponsible: Pleasanton will pay much higher ongoing road <br />maintenance expenses! Since we know from the Triangle Traffic Study that <br />0% of the cars using Stoneridge Drive will be cut - through traffic ( No origin or destination within Pleasanton) there will be <br />much higher costs for road maintenance in the future which will be a burden on the City of <br />Pleasanton. Instead of CalTrans paying for road maintenance due to all the <br />traffic on the freeway; Pleasanton is going to make the sacrifice by allowing traffic to use Pleasanton streets for regional <br />access. Pleasanton will pay for ongoing maintenance for our share of the traffic and loo % more to cover the cut- through <br />traffic that does not belong here! <br />Morally reprehensible: For most of us who live along Stoneridge the price <br />will be incredibly high in the LOSS of Quality of Life. Our quiet area <br />will become a freeway bypass and our air duality will certainly be <br />detrimentally affected. The noise, traffic, and crime within Pleasanton as <br />a whole, are all certain to go up once Btoneridge Drive is extended to El <br />Charro. All residents throughout Pleasanton will be paying the price to <br />help Regional traffic ! The Triangle Traffic Study shows that TRAFFIC GETS WORSE BE - not better; if the Btoneridge Drive <br />Extension is implemented before other REGIONAL highway improvements are Nn place. <br />Bo is it WISE for Pleasanton to step forward to Help the Regional Traffic <br />,Need by opening up Btonridge Drive to El Charro ' I think Not! <br />D) Environmentalists: Oppose the Maples Punch EIR approval until the Ice Fink is relocated away from the Arroyo <br />Mocho <br />While there seems to be a myriad of reasons to reject the entire Maples Punch Development project, there are a number <br />of reason to at least modify <br />(correct) the plan before the project gets approved. The design of Maples <br />Punch Park is deeply flawed and should be completely re- worked. I could go <br />on and on! Drop me an email if you want more information about the park. <br />One specific change which I consider an absolute Must before any approval of <br />the EIF, would be relocating the Ice Facility. For some unknown reason the <br />massive Ice Facility was relocated from original designs) closer to the Arroyo Mocho. BIG MISTAKE ! To protect the <br />wildlife along the Arroyo Mocho the Ice Facility should be moved North (away from the arroyo) and East to be closer to the <br />other Commercial structures. <br />Please email me if you have additional questions or any comments for me! <br />I will be away on Saturday, but be able to respond to you sometime Sunday) Please send an email to the Mayor & City <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.