In the Dec CC meeting when several residents questioned the narrowing of Owens Drive, Mayor Thorne said the issue will be added to the agenda so that it can be discussed further. Three CC meetings later, it is still not on the agenda. The council is either stalling or just hoping the issue will go away. The traffic congestion at that intersection remains and in fact appears to have grown a bit worse, perhaps due to more jobs opening up in Silicon Valley in recent months.

Plain and simple, the city made a huge change on a major street by eliminating 2 lanes out of 3, and caused a big problem for Pleasanton commuters where such a problem did not exist before. And please stop blaming those actions on the pedestrian crossings to and from the Oracle/Kaiser campuses. If that really is the main problem, then build a small pedestrian bridge like many BART stations have.

This issue could have been avoided if the developer and the City had simply reduced the number and/or size of the units that were built. Reducing the footprint of the development would have allowed setting the units further back from Owens and allowed for the necessary parking. Unfortunately, this would have reduced the revenue for the developers and probably reduced the campaign contributions to the City.

This has nothing to do with the apartment buildings across the street. Nor was this narrowing decided upon by the current council. This is the result of the Hacienda TOD task force decision to make this a transit-oriented development years ago. There were monthly, widely-noticed public meetings for over a year; I'm sorry none of you were paying attention but this ship has sailed.

I went by there a few days ago to go to my car's dealership on Owens and the left two of the three through traffic west bound lanes on Owens were blocked by a BlackTie bus trying to turn left onto Owens to head toward Hacienda, but got stuck at the intereaction and just sat there.

There was so much irony in that moment it would have been funny if it wasn't so...ironic for everyone there.

This is the biggest mess I have ever seen a City anywhere agree and approve of,, while it was going in I could not believe what I was seeing...
Very Bad decision...what were YOU PEOPLE THINKING.????

I'm in full support of the new changes to this area, as a person who has driven, bicycled and walked in that area many times. Having read about the concerns I've deliberately driven through the newly-narrowed areas several times in my car, and have yet to encounter an unacceptable delay. In contrast, when on my bike I'm very grateful for the city's new advanced design because it narrows the traffic from 3,500 pound vehicles to one lane in places where our most vulnerable travelers are. Ask anyone who does it regularly: when you bike or walk it takes you a few minutes longer to get there, but you spend less time in frustration over the car or truck in front of you. Isn't it time we think outside the 3,500 pound box, and become open to multiple ways of getting from point A to B? Caution: you might just get healthier and happier if you do so.

Jim, are you advocating that all roads in Pleasanton get narrowed down to a single lane each way to make it safer for bikes? This is the last block in getting to BART and due to the distance for many of us, and the dangerous streets for bikes in the rest of the city, making this a narrow road does very little to address our safety but does make a heavily used intersection much more congested and thus will reduce safety as people get frustrated there.

Let's just be thankful that the developer didn't ask for all the eastbound lanes and was "giving" enough to leave us one lane! In this town the developer gets whatever they want.

I've lived in this town for 20 years now - I'm no longer a fan of "Unpleasanton" and extremely disappointed with the "progress" being driven by our "leaders". Sadly, home town America has officially left the Tri-Valley.

@ Jim Van Dyke- I think the reason many of us are concerned about this development is that it appears two lanes of a public roadway were given to a developer for their own gain and not for the gain of the community. If the developer had simply scaled back the development and allowed for the proper set back on the property, they could have provided the parking that is now utilizing the two public traffic lanes.

@Hansen, I appreciate hearing your point of view. I am not tracking any potential developer issues, and rather bring an appreciation of what this recent change brought to the community: a move away from freeway-like conditions that have come to characterize Pleasanton. When I first moved here 30 years ago, the city's streets weren't an extension of the freeway like they are today. Hacienda business park was also clearly overbuilt (I owned a business there for many years), sometimes with three extremely wide lanes of traffic when one one was needed. It's not sustainable for us to have all these unnecessary lanes of traffic. Meanwhile, we recently had many kids tell City Council their parents won't let them ride bikes to school out of safety concerns-unlike when I was a kid. In this recent change, I don't see where I lost anything as a driver, but it's clear to me how I gained something as a pedestrian or a bicyclist. And there's no future in Pleasanton devoting such an overwhelming priority to only car drivers, at the expense of the lives and health of those who ride or walk. I want a city where I can choose a healthier way to get from point A to B without fearing for my life, and this recent change provided that.

"This is by far the worst problem people of Pleasanton are suffering everyday for more than six months," Bhayani said,"...really?? I drive that street often and live nearby and although I may encounter traffic at *certain times* during the day, it's an minor inconvenience in exchange for what I think is a safer crossing for pedestrians. We need to expect Owens to be busy with people getting to and from Bart from the apartments - one less person taking Bart instead of driving is a good thing to me and we should be designing streets and crossings to accommodate that. So, good on the city and hope they have the backbone to stick with their decision.