LivermoreBART.org

Comment from Linda Jeffery Sailors
Time: November 21, 2009, 9:11 pm

I have attended two Livermore community “BART” meetings lately. The one sponsored by the city is not affiliated with BART. It is a separate study by the city to determine what the community wants their station to look like. The city meeting did not give any information about the pros or cons for each station location, but was stressing a downtown location because it offers development potential.

The informational hearing sponsored by BART was very good. The meeting was geared to give facts about the proposed BART routes, answer logistical questions about noise, costs, location pros and cons and more. The topics discussed included affected homes and businesses on the proposed routes, concern about security (crime around the stations), connectivity to ACE train and Wheels, costs and timelines for building BART to Livermore.

BART is accepting comments and questions from the public that they will address in the final Program EIR. In summery, most of the people in attendence were in favor of the I580 route because it was the only route that did not adversely impact the neighborhoods.

Linda Jeffery Sailors

Comment from Martin Isenburg
Time: December 3, 2009, 2:47 pm

The city of Livermore is holding three workshops to gather public input on the possible alignments and station combination for the BART extension. The first one was well attended and it seemed as if the audience’s opinion more or less converged on having two stations: One in downtown Livermore to serve the residents, to vitalize local businesses, and to spark sustainable transit-oriented development but with strict parking regulations to keep car commuter traffic out of downtown. The other one as far east as possible with ample amounts of parking to serve commuters from Mountain House, Tracy and beyond and ease congestion on I-580.

A pure I-580 alignment is something that i – and all urban planners and city officials i talked to – strongly dislike because it would mean to repeat the mistakes of (auto-centric) planning in the past. a BART station in downtown Livermore presents a unique opportunity to create a wonderful walkable community around downtown setting a textbook example for sustainable transit oriented planning in America. i already love what city has done during the redevelopment efforts of the past few years that have converted downtown from a four-lane freeway to a welcoming and cute destination. but it is still a downtown on life-support. there is no sustainable traffic throughout the day to support the kind of business you expect to find in a healthy downtown: produce stalls, a delicatessen, a small grocery store, a bakery, a cheese store, or a butcher. well done a downtown BART station could turn Livermore into a poster child for sustainable urban growth that promotes local business, healthy lifestyle, and walkable communities.

Comment from Henry D. Shay
Time: December 5, 2009, 6:00 pm

The extension of BART along I580 with stations at Isabel and
Greenville offers many opportunities for community development in
addition to the obvious benefit of reducing traffic on I580.

Consider the area of Livermore north of I580, near the construction
of the new Isabel interchange. It hosts score upon score of high
density residential units, many acres of business parks, and a
greatly enlarged campus for Las Positas Community College. With the
completion of the extension of Portola Avenue over I580 and the
addition of a BART station, this area will become a very attractive
addition to Livermore.

Similar potential exists at the area around the proposed BART site at
I580/Greenville Road. Critics have complained that it is not zoned
for residential development, but deliberations in a Livermore City
Council meeting (City Council minutes of 2/9/04) strongly suggest
that this objection is easily overcome: referring to the BART parcel
at I580/Greenville, “CM [Council Member] Leider said the General
Plan Steering Committee had agreed that it did not want a message
sent to BART that Livermore was not interested in the extension. She
said the newer regulations stipulate that Livermore would have to
build a TOD [Transit Oriented Development] where a BART station would
be. She said that this property was within the UGB [Urban Growth
Boundary] and to have a General Plan Amendment to change the zoning
would not require a vote of the people.”

So – in addition to all of its other advantages, a BART extension
along I580 offers excellent community develop possibilities for
Livermore.

Comment from Robert Baltzer
Time: December 10, 2009, 7:19 pm

Due to a substantial turnout at the Dec. 2nd Public Hearing, I feel that a strong case was made for a downtown subway BART station with undergrounding down Portola/Junction and no station at Isabel/I-580.

Unfortunately, the superiority of the Vasco/Ace station to Greenville East and the problems with Greenville East did not come through as well. The primary problem with Greenville East recognized by BART is the fact that there is not enough land around this new location to build Transit Oriented Development (TOD) without moving Livermore’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The UGB can only be changed by a vote of the Livermore electorate. TOD around a new station is a primary requirement for federal and state funding. Some confusion has arisen over zoning in the area that may be cleared up with a little history.

When the North Livermore UGB Initiative was written, BART had purchased land for a rail yard north of I-580 and land for a station west of that and still north of the freeway; therefore, the initiative included these parcels and land north of them within the UGB. This was incorporated in the 2003 City of Livermore General Plan with the intent that the land north of the station would be used for TOD, which was a requirement then as well. In 2007, the desirability of an intermodal connection with the ACE train was recognized; the planned station could not provide that. Therefore, when the current DEIR was written, that location was “withdrawn.” The new location about ½ mile southeast and south of I-580 on the Union Pacific Railroad right of way was selected, one which could connect with ACE. However, that would put the land originally designated for TOD outside the ½ mile radius recognized by MTC. The new location is now constrained by the UGB and does, in fact, require a vote of the people of Livermore to change the UGB in order to get adequate residential units within a ½ mile of the new station.

Such an election would be likely to include not only this particular TOD, but also the Isabel/I-580 area, as well as any other area that development interests might favor. As with Springtown, these developments would be isolated from the rest of the City. Approval of the Greenville and Isabel/580 stations could lead, then, to opening up both East and North Livermore to piecemeal development, wiping out the gains for the preservation of our rural surroundings that we have made in the past ten years. It would destroy the UGB as a permanent barrier to sprawl.
Many do not realize that a freeway station would fill up early with commuters no matter how much parking was placed there, leaving nothing for those who may live in Livermore outside the TOD area. Most Livermore citizens would lose out at both the proposed freeway sites. Since the Isabel/Stanley station has worse problems with TOD than any other station site and any route through the quarries with either an elevated or at grade approach to the downtown is objectionable to homeowners close to the right of way, the only station pairing that would be consistent with our community values is Downtown & Vasco with the approach via subway down Portola/Junction.

There will be a City Workshop on Thursday, December 10th from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. at the Shrine Event Center, 170 Lindbergh Ave., Livermore. The Topic will be station “pairings” and design characteristics. This is an opportunity to weigh in on this extremely important issue. Please plan to attend.

Comment from Vamsee Lakamsani
Time: December 11, 2009, 12:32 am

I attended this second City of Livermore workshop on BART to Livermore alignments today. It was an interesting experience. Here’s some jerky, amateur iPhone video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qMSynsO9VY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxteWEJ6jTQ

At the beginning Livermore Police Chief Steve Sweeney presented information about his department’s research on potential crime increase due to BART stations. He found that BART stations did not have impact on crime either way and that his department was prepared to work with BART police to ensure the stations are safe. He also said something to the effect that he intends to live in Livermore after he retires (so he has a personal interest in crime in the area).

The people that attended this event were assigned to numbered tables. After the initial presentations, the group at each table was asked to evaluate (using 10 or so criteria) preferred station pairings from the 6 available pairings. In addition, all potential stations were divided into 3 categories namely infill, downtown and freeway. We were presented with 3 groups of numbered stations photos (of other similar stations) and asked to rank the stations in terms of fitness for Livermore.

Most of the people selected either a downtown/vasco pairing or a downtown/greenville pairing. Most of the downtown selections preferred an underground station (not a current option and somewhat more expensive). At our table we requested a (not currently offered) 7th pairing that involved a downtown station and a greenville station that also has an Ace station.

Comment from Linda Jeffery Sailors
Time: December 17, 2009, 11:52 pm

Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric for putting a BART station in downtown Livermore. That would require the loss of some homes and businesses, not to mention extreme noise and visual disturbances. If tunneling is the answer, Livermore will have to find the extra $2-3 billion to pay for it. This is what happened to Berkeley. Another reason to shun the downtown station is the parking issue. We all know that without adequate parking, people will stay in their cars.

BART on the I580 freeway to Greenville will be 1/3 of the cost of any of the downtown alternatives, will have a lot more riders, and has the space for parking and some transit oriented development. Most important of all, it will be the route that is most likely to get funded. Let’s not ruin our chance to have BART in our lifetime. The last four studies on BART to Livermore have recommended the freeway route because it is the alternative the serves the most people and costs the least.

Make your voice heard to the BART Board. Let’s keep BART on I580. They can be reached at boardofdirectors@BART.gov. It will only take a minute to do something good for Livermore.

Comment from Scott Raty
Time: December 17, 2009, 11:56 pm

The Pleasanton Chamber is very supportive of the BART to Livermore extension and looks forward to its construction at the earliest possible date. The document that is currently being circulated for comment contains a massive amount of useful information and represents an important step forward in the selection of a preferred alternate.

As a general comment, the EIR language appropriately calls for numerous opportunities for comment, input and community discussion from Livermore residents, officials, and other interested parties. However, five of the nine final alternatives have potentially significant impacts on the developing eastern edge of Pleasanton, the EIR barely discusses these impacts and the public review process seems to largely ignore Pleasanton.
Earlier this year, the Pleasanton City Council certified an EIR for the Staples Ranch Specific Plan, and with it adopted a plan to complete Stoneridge Drive to El Charro Road. The City is in the final stages of adopting a supplemental EIR to provide more supporting studies for several subsequently identified environmental issues.

Noteworthy in that process was the approval of land uses that back-up to the I-580 freeway and which are protected with special features including setbacks, berming, sound walls and landscaping, all intended to minimize the impacts of the freeway, and of the potential future BART extension, upon the selected land uses – an 800 unit continuing care senior housing development and a major auto sales and service complex.

These two land uses are very important to the City and Alameda County and should be very carefully considered in the BART to Livermore DEIR. Instead, it appears potential BART impacts in this area either have been overlooked or trivialized. For example the DEIR in the land use section mentions this area but does not depict it as containing sensitive land uses, even though senior housing in general is spelled out as such.

The five affected alternatives involve BART routing beginning in the I-580 median at grade, then rising in a retained fill east of Santa Rita Road, then in an elevated structure flying over the eastbound lanes of I-580 and continuing on an elevated structure along the diagonal portion of El Charro Road. No details are given beyond these descriptions. On page 3.3-51the issue is dealt with in this manner: “The area to the west in Pleasanton is proposed to also be retail and also house an auto mall, community park, and continuing care community. These uses do not exist and are not physically integrated as a community.” Therefore, the document seems to conclude, this area can be ignored. But, an elevated structure in the backyard of a new senior housing complex and in the front or side yard of a proposed auto mall, would seem to have dramatically significant impacts.

The Cities of Pleasanton and Livermore, along with nearby affected landowners, have adopted a memorandum of understanding and a plan for the roadways in the area south of I-580 in the El Charro Road/Jack London Boulevard/Stoneridge Drive area. The intersection of these three key arterials is about to be constructed and was not included as a study intersection in the DEIR – it should have been.

In Section 3.5, Visual Quality, the Illustration contained on Figure 3.5-12 masks the impacts of the flyover in the background with the overpass in the foreground. A better idea of the significant visual impacts to the auto mall and the senior housing center can be gained from Figure 3.5-19, although any specific impacts are left to the imagination of the reader. Although much effort was made to provide this photo illustration, there is no plan view in the DEIR to show how the alignment might affect the auto mall and the 800-unit senior housing complex.

In summary, the Pleasanton Chamber feels the DEIR ignores or understates the impacts that the BART alignments that use the El Charro (Quarry) corridor would have on surrounding planned land uses. The land uses in this area are approved and can be expected to be constructed and completed long before BART is in place. There is no description of how the flyover near El Charro Road would impact the planned and approved land uses. In other alternatives and locations described in the DEIR, a much greater detailed depiction of the alternatives alignment is offered. The DEIR ignores the traffic impacts of the key intersection in east Pleasanton/ west Livermore – El Charro Road at Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard – even though an aerial structure is contemplated for the area.
Some of the under-described impacts might be lessened with the ‘Portola Solution’, a crossover from BART that goes under (not over) the eastbound lanes of I-580 to reach the El Charro corridor. However, because of the lack of detail included in this area, even this approach cannot be adequately analyzed without more information.

Unless the problematic features of the alternatives using the El Charro corridor can be resolved satisfactorily, the Pleasanton Chamber strongly favors the I-580 alternatives that do no encroach upon Pleasanton’s Staples Ranch area.
We hope your future studies will address these issues.