Costco update: Pleasanton commission endorses revised JDEDZ documents | Town Square | PleasantonWeekly.com |

Town Square

Post a New Topic

Costco update: Pleasanton commission endorses revised JDEDZ documents

Original post made on Dec 18, 2019

The proposed Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone is on track to return to the Pleasanton City Council for reconsideration early next year after the Planning Commission gave unanimous support last week to revisions made to the docs.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, December 18, 2019, 10:29 AM

Comments (51)

27 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 18, 2019 at 11:11 am

James Michael is a registered user.

You gotta admit this about Mr. Sullivan...he never gives up, even when he's down for the count he's still trying to get up off the mat(t). I expect to see him and his group laying in front of the earth movers when they finally break ground on the project.


22 people like this
Posted by Patriot
a resident of Birdland
on Dec 18, 2019 at 3:13 pm

Let’s see real leadership from our council and build our long delayed Costco now!


8 people like this
Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Dec 19, 2019 at 8:08 am

Grumpy is a registered user.

Ok, didn’t want to weigh in but the quote below needs calling out.

To quote the article—caps mine:

"Especially egregious is the city's refusal to examine cumulative impacts of nearby current and planned growth on air quality and traffic, failure to accurately account for health risks due to project air emissions, the impact on climate change from increased greenhouse gas emissions, understating the impacts of the Costco gas station AND ITS EFFECT ON OTHER LOCAL GAS STATIONS, increased traffic from fuel truck and merchandise delivery, and urban decay from loss of business at other local grocery stores and shopping centers, especially in the downtown," Sullivan added.

Not an environmental issue, but a competitive one. This is still a gross abuse of process to use environmental issues as a pretext to protect other gas stations from the competitive impact.

Frankly, we could do to have a few stations around here close, dig up their tanks, and reduce the environmental damage from potential leakage in residential neighborhoods, the residential emissions from cars idling while waiting in line for gas, and spillover fumes. That would be a real environmental impact stance. Let us have our gas stations in the middle of a residence-free zone like Costco where the tanks are new and built to modern environmental standards and the emissions are a drop in the bucket of freeway pollution rather than next to houses with babies in them.

The cringing that the local gas station owners would feel about that last paragraph is how you know Sullivan’s argument is a pretext.


12 people like this
Posted by Matt Sullivan
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 19, 2019 at 10:56 am

Matt Sullivan is a registered user.

Grumpy,

You are showing your ignorance of CEQA. Part of the environmental review process is to study the impacts of a new project on the local economy, including in this case gas stations. Were you aware that the proposed Costco gas station will the the largest gas station in California? Think that will have an impact on other, locally owned stations? Think that will have an environmental impact as well?

This is the typical, uninformed opinion posted by anonymous subscribers to this site.


16 people like this
Posted by Rob
a resident of Mohr Park
on Dec 19, 2019 at 11:00 am

Let’s not delay the $1.50 hot dog and soda any longer! Mr. Sullivan’s time would be better spent fighting to save the mall, Castlewood, and the Eastern area from being turned into dense housing.


11 people like this
Posted by Russell M
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 19, 2019 at 11:21 am

Grumpy, the Costco complex will affect residential areas. Val Vista and Stoneridge. The air quality will be worse than is now and it will definitely affect the health of the residents of my neighborhood. We have many residents in their 60’s and 70’s who purchased in Val Vista from 1976-1986.


4 people like this
Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Dec 19, 2019 at 11:45 am

Grumpy is a registered user.

No, in your zeal you’re both missing my point.

I’m aware that the CEQA is expansive and encompasses local business impact. But my point is to show the pretext, which is clear. Matt is representing the local gas stations, which are the tiniest sliver of importance in the balance of things—and as I pointed out, there is a real civic and environmental value to shifting the location off gas stations away from residential areas.

Stoneridge and Val Vista will be affected, no doubt, though I question the air quality impact relative to a freeway whose congestion will only get worse and which will need to be widened in the next decade to accommodate toll lanes, as that area is the gap.

As for people who bought in the 70s...I’m sorry, but Costco is not going to be as much of an influence as the overall growth of the tri valley area was. I have some sympathy for them, but I don’t want to conflate that with a specific project that is not convincingly large enough to cause the problems you mention.


9 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 19, 2019 at 11:45 am

James Michael is a registered user.

I live in Val Vista and I'm more concerned about the traffic increase due to the Donlon expansion than I am about Costco. Costco is down the road...Donlon is in the middle of the tract. If Costco had no gas station in the plan then there wouldn't have been an issue. The pollution argument is a ruse...if I drive farther to Livermore or Danville am I not creating more pollution than I would be if I drove to Johnson Drive? In fact, I would actually drive past the Costco site to get on the freeway to get to Livermore.


10 people like this
Posted by Matt Sullivan
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 19, 2019 at 12:02 pm

Matt Sullivan is a registered user.

Grumpy,

Let me be crystal clear: I am not representing gas stations, or anyone else. I am exercising my rights as a citizen to oppose a bad project. And when our legislative body fails us as it has in this case, I'm exercising my legal rights to try and overturn a bad decision. That is all. Again, an uninformed opinion on your part.


16 people like this
Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Dec 19, 2019 at 1:17 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

Matt, do not sit here and tell all of us that you are merely stating a personal opinion. This has been hashed out here far longer than I care to think about.

Whether you choose in that letter to couch it in your own voice is merely a choice. You do not get to rewrite history and disclaim your representation of others now. You’re biased, and can not claim to be occupying neutral ground.

You are a representative of Pleasanton Citizens for Responsible Growth. You have used that title in this very dispute. It is a matter of public record. Do not gaslight us.


4 people like this
Posted by Dave Limato
a resident of Stoneridge
on Dec 19, 2019 at 4:19 pm

""Especially egregious is the city's refusal to examine cumulative impacts of nearby current and planned growth on air quality and traffic, failure to accurately account for health risks due to project air emissions, the impact on climate change from increased greenhouse gas emissions, understating the impacts of the Costco gas station and its effect on other local gas stations, increased traffic from fuel truck and merchandise delivery, and urban decay from loss of business at other local grocery stores and shopping centers, especially in the downtown," Sullivan added. "

I think a report of this nature would be absolutely impossible to deliver. Here is the truth of the matter. For thosethat want slow growth, a better fight shoudl have been give against the Bart Extension. You can't have Mass Transit where there is no Mass.


6 people like this
Posted by sumati
a resident of Kolb Ranch Estates
on Dec 19, 2019 at 4:21 pm

"Especially egregious is the city's refusal to examine cumulative impacts of nearby current and planned growth on air quality and traffic, failure to accurately account for health risks due to project air emissions, the impact on climate change from increased greenhouse gas emissions, understating the impacts of the Costco gas station and its effect on other local gas stations, increased traffic from fuel truck and merchandise delivery, and urban decay from loss of business at other local grocery stores and shopping centers, especially in the downtown," Sullivan added.

Well two environmental impact reports later Mr. Sullivan still does not agree with their findings.. personally I think his worries are red herrings e.g. his concerns are more focused on not wanting a Costco there for other reasons. Any rational person would recognize that the location of this Costco is right next to two major freeways and a sewage plant- which have much more impact on increased greenhouse gas emissions and local air quality - if he is really concerned about this I would applaud him more if he had spent the dollars that he spent on measure MM and this litigation on something that would really impact greenhouse gases rather than focus on a single Costco.

Matt- you do have the right to exercise your legal right to litigate... ( it would be great to know if your funding this by yourself or who else is participating) ... and we have every legal right to say this is a complete waste of time and unfortunately our money as well.


11 people like this
Posted by Steven 3
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Dec 19, 2019 at 6:27 pm

Steven 3 is a registered user.

Matt says Costco may impact our local gas stations. I agree. I hope it does as local stations seem to think they have a monopoly and can gouge us. That is why I buy most of my gas in Livermore. I feel guilty and would rather have options in Pleasanton.

Competition is healthy and drives more competitive prices for residents. I always try to shop local if pricing fair. Hoping our local gas stations adapt and charge fairer prices and everyone will win. Hope they do this now before Costco comes in so I can move my tax dollars back now.


13 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Dec 19, 2019 at 7:21 pm

Watch how quickly the other gas station prices drop once Costco comes. None will shutdown, they’ll finally be honest


8 people like this
Posted by MsVic
a resident of Mission Park
on Dec 19, 2019 at 10:02 pm

MsVic is a registered user.

Happy to see Costco moving forward after unnecessary delays and frivolous lawsuits. Bring on less expensive gas and $1.50 hot dogs;)! And tax revenue for our city.


10 people like this
Posted by Anti Costco liars
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 20, 2019 at 7:34 am

The gas stations should be worried about EV’s not Costco. I’d bet Costco will also have fast charging available at their location to support locals and those traveling through our lovely area.


12 people like this
Posted by Melinda
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Dec 20, 2019 at 11:24 pm

Melinda is a registered user.

Mr. Sullivan, you have a right to exercise your rights as a citizen but you are costing all of us taxpayers a lot of money in useless analyses to support your personal mission. Interesting you always try to shame anonymous posters but you refuse to disclose who provides financial contributions for the PCRG and who their membership consists of. This CostCo will not be identified as the Pleasanton store but rather as the Tri Valley location.


11 people like this
Posted by Dave
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Dec 21, 2019 at 9:11 am

Happy holidays everyone! A Costco without gas station like Danville’s one can be choice for our town. It’s not difficult to imagine that tremendous extra pollution would come from lined vehicles with engines on.


7 people like this
Posted by Sky
a resident of Beratlis Place
on Dec 21, 2019 at 9:52 am

Well two environmental impact reports later Mr. Sullivan still does not agree with their findings.. personally I thinkWeb Link his worries are red herrings e.g. his concerns are more focused on not wanting a Costco there for other reasons. Any rational person would recognize that the location of this Costco is right next to two major freeways and a sewage plant- which have much more impact on increased greenhouse gas emissions and local air quality - if he is really concerned about this I would applaud him more if he had spent the dollars that he spent on measure MM and this litigation on something that would really impact greenhouse gases rather than focus on a single Costco


4 people like this
Posted by Darrek
a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Dec 21, 2019 at 9:55 am

Mr. Sullivan’s time would be better spent fighting to save the mall, Castlewood, and the Eastern area from being turned into dense housing.


7 people like this
Posted by Fifty Years Here
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Dec 21, 2019 at 9:59 am

Fifty Years Here is a registered user.

The deal is still less than transparent. Many of the assumptions are flawed, and there are aspects of the "loans" that common sense tells you will never have to be repaid.


9 people like this
Posted by justwondering
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 21, 2019 at 10:17 am

justwondering is a registered user.

50 years here, could you please list the flawed assumptions as well what aspects of the loan will never be repaid? Without specifics, your comment is really meaningless.

To Matt Sullivan, you say you are just representing yourself. Does that mean that you alone funded the lawsuit? That's a yes or no answer which so far you haven't been willing to address. If others contributed, don't you have an obligation to disclose those since you tout yourself as champion of transparency and accuse others of not being transparent with regard to Costco?


9 people like this
Posted by Fifty Years Here
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Dec 21, 2019 at 4:11 pm

Fifty Years Here is a registered user.

Justwondering:
One of the assumptions says that The Church, Patio World, Dog Dynasty, Black Tie and Consumer Learning Center are going to generate the same amount of traffic as Costco... Seriously?
And part of the "loan" gets paid back with large assessments when any of those properties "redevelop." An economic development zone is supposed to assist property owners to redevelop, not slap them with a disincentive.
I want the Costco, I just want to be told the truth with regard to how much it is costing us.


1 person likes this
Posted by David
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Dec 21, 2019 at 5:48 pm

David is a registered user.

Without CostCo Upfront obligations, Caltrans funding for the much needed I680 Northbound ramp widening would be at the bottom of the list if included at all.
I recall the same traffic and air quality angst over Stoneridge Drive extension. Now I see those Same residents using Stoneridge to get to Livermore and a quicker I580 access. Perhaps Val Vista will like a faster freeway and Mall access built with monies from CostCo. I see the sewer treatment plant, leach field, InterState noise and flood control canal doing more to impact the quality of life and property values in that neighborhood closest to Stoneridge than CostCo.


16 people like this
Posted by Flightops
a resident of Downtown
on Dec 21, 2019 at 9:50 pm

Flightops is a registered user.

We have a better chance of seeing Trumps tax returns before we will ever find out who is funding MS and his sue happy band of troublemakers. How about closing down the overpriced shell gas stations and turn them into mini parks. Just get the Costco built.


4 people like this
Posted by Vy
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 23, 2019 at 9:43 am

Matt Sullivan needs to back down. Wasting tax payer money and time. Typical old timer attitude of not wanting growth. The project brings in revenue for city, schools, provides construction jobs, retail jobs, less commute for shoppers thereby reducing carbon emissions, and makes use of open land. It’s not like that land is good for a park...


6 people like this
Posted by No for Angela Holmes
a resident of Bordeaux Estates
on Dec 23, 2019 at 4:16 pm

Pleasanton Weekly - it is time to block Angela Ramirez Holmes from posting attacking comments about other people on your Times Square. let's talk topics not attack people. The Times square has become a source for her to make money attacking good people in this town. She is a PAID consultant for Costco and your site is a medium for her vitriol. Please make it stop.


3 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 23, 2019 at 6:24 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

And just where are these Angela Ramirez Holmes posts? I'm not finding them.


2 people like this
Posted by highdiver
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 23, 2019 at 8:04 pm

The worst thing about Costco coming to Pleasanton is the location chosen. Having been a resident in Val Vista for many years, Stoneridge Drive tends to clog at 3 times a day already. It will be worse with a Costco there. If you have ever been to Costco in Livermore on a weekend , it's a nightmare. A better location is needed here. Maybe where Orchard used to be near Kohls. Or another alternative, just build the Costco gas station there, and the store at another site, like they do in other cities.


2 people like this
Posted by James Michael
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 23, 2019 at 8:15 pm

James Michael is a registered user.

highdiver...you're concerned about Costco but not about the Donlon expansion. GET READY FOR AN EDUCATION!!


3 people like this
Posted by Russell M
a resident of Val Vista
on Dec 26, 2019 at 2:39 pm

high diver is right on regarding the Stoneridge traffic. It is already horrible because of eastbound commuters using it as a frontage road to 580. The Costco will make it so much worse. A different location is needed. Better yet we can be satisfied with the existing stores in Livermore and just off Crow Canyon.


8 people like this
Posted by Bring on costco
a resident of Birdland
on Dec 27, 2019 at 9:32 pm

Hey Russell, every time I have to drive to “just off Crow Canyon” I have to drive on Stoneridge to get to the freeway so instead of getting to Costco before I even get on the freeway your saying I drive an extra 16 miles even though I will have to drive along the same route up Stoneridge to get to “just off Crow Canyon”. Do you see the disconnect and how absurd the argument is?? 16 additional miles of driving from where the Pleasanton Costco is to “just off Crow Canyon” think about it. We will still have to drive on Stoneridge to go to Costco, just a lot farther and with no tax gain and that money going to Coco County.


8 people like this
Posted by NO to a Pleasanton Costco
a resident of Del Prado
on Jan 4, 2020 at 4:11 pm

I don't think I will be severely affected by the thousands of new cars on the roads all around the new Pleasanton Costco, but I don't think the $21 MILLION Dollars (much of it is from taxes collected for traffic mitigation from other Pleasanton businesses and developments, and another chunk is from a LOAN from Costco). The financing is creative but IMHO, not smart government. A short drive to get to a Costco is reasonable depending on where you live -it is either 15 minutes to the Crow Canyon exit, or 15 minutes to the Airway Blvd. in Livermore.

So to save me 5 minutes, I am going to push traffic onto another Pleasanton neighborhoods to reduce my trip from 15 minutes to 10 minutes? No thank you.


10 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 4, 2020 at 9:56 pm

I agree with “No to a Pleasanton Costco”. We already have access to not just one but two Costco’s within a short driving distance to us. It’s not like having a Pleasanton Costco would make a big difference would make a big difference in our ability to quickly get to a Costco. On the other hand, having a Pleasanton Costco would make a big difference in the amount of traffic on our roads in that proposed area every day of the week. Don’t think that saving a few minutes of time for a Costco trip that a typical Pleasantonian may make once a week to once a month is worth the trade-off.


12 people like this
Posted by justwondering
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2020 at 7:39 am

Be careful what you wish for! Remember the proposed Home Depot at Valley/Stanley/Bernal that Nancy Allen et al opposed? Look what got built instead--330 apartments. Would you rather have 450 or more apartments on the 15 acres with an additional 450+ peak AM trips trying to get on the freeway at Stoneridge Dr or a Costco that doesn't open until 9:30AM and will bring additional sales tax revenue to the city instead of having it go to Livermore or Danville?


8 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 5, 2020 at 8:29 am

@justwomdering

I think that your post shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the circumstances which led to Pleasanton being ordered by the courts to build more apartment housing. Pleasanton had to build more housing because the ratio of the number of Pleasanton jobs to the number of adult Pleasanton residents was ridiculously out of whack due to Pleasanton’s pro-business & anti-housing development strategy. The ratio reached an extreme level of 1.6 Pleasanton jobs for every adult resident of Pleasanton. It was the city of Pleasanton encouraging so many businesses to move into Pleasanton that led to Pleasanton being forced to build so much more high-density housing in order to accommodate the housing needs of the employees associated with all of those businesses. You seem to think that building a big Costco in Pleasanton will somehow prevent more high-density housing from being built in Pleasanton whereas in reality it will result in increased pressure to do exactly the opposite. More businesses and increased high-density housing go together.


Like this comment
Posted by Pete
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2020 at 8:31 am

LMAO...Really...? justwondering...


2 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jan 5, 2020 at 8:48 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

We voted to allow a big box store, not for a Costco (I don't have a preference for who finally builds). I don’t think apartments can be put there without some action by the council or another vote by us.

The apartments and small shopping center at Bernal and Stanley have been a nicer addition than a Home Depot might of been, but I’m saying that because I live close enough to utilize that center.


7 people like this
Posted by justwondering
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2020 at 9:16 am

Wombat, I've very familiar with how the RHNA numbers work. My point is that something is going to get built on the 15 acre site currently owned by Costco. Given all the new housing legislation coming out of Sacramento, if Costco doesn't get built there, it will likely get rezoned for housing at 30+ units to the acre which will have a worse impact on AM & PM peak traffic then Costco would have. Again, if your concern with Costco is traffic to the Val Vista neighborhood, apartments built there instead will have a greater impact than the Costco so becareful what you wish for.


1 person likes this
Posted by Bring on Costco
a resident of Birdland
on Jan 5, 2020 at 11:53 am

From Stone Ridge and Johnson Drive to travel the additional mileage to Danville Costco and back on a no traffic Sunday morning the distance is 15.6 miles an additional 9 stop lights and an additional 24 minutes of driving if you catch the stop lights, which we know better. In your big American sedan (an extrapolation) that’s going to be an additional gallon of gas burned every trip. Just think, every 20 trips to Costco you get to buy another 20 gallon tank of expensive gas from our local stations. I can see why they oppose Costco here. The numbers come from Apple Maps on a Sunday morning, likely the fastest you could get there and back.


6 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 5, 2020 at 12:42 pm

@justwondering

Your post is nothing more than speculations and unsupported assumptions piled on other speculations and unsupported assumptions. I’ll tell you something that is not a speculation or unsupported assumption: If a Pleasanton Costco is built, then Pleasanton will be held responsible for the additional housing needed for 200 to 300 more households, which corresponds to the 200 to 300 employees who will be working at a new Costco within our city limits. The courts have made it very clear that Pleasanton cannot shuffle off that housing responsibility onto surrounding cities and communities. The additional traffic on Pleasanton streets due to all those additional households will be on top of the additional traffic due to a new Pleasanton Costco itself.


6 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 5, 2020 at 12:50 pm

@Bring On Costco

If you’re driving a gas-guzzling monster getting only 15.6 miles per gallon, then you have a problem that no number of Costco’s will solve.

BTW, don’t know why you used the Danville Costco for your example when the Livermore Costco is almost 2.5 miles closer to the Pleasanton location that you mentioned.


5 people like this
Posted by Kiko
a resident of Val Vista
on Jan 5, 2020 at 3:26 pm

Actually, wombat's posts are " nothing more than speculations and unsupported assumptions piled on other speculations and unsupported assumptions." I haven't seen "wombat" produce one fact or point to one link anywhere in this discussion.


6 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 5, 2020 at 3:48 pm

@Kiko

The points I made about Pleasanton’s formerly bloated jobs-to-residents ratio and Pleasanton’s responsibilities in regards to providing affordable housing are summarized in Jerry Brown’s 2009 memo to the city of Pleasanton. Here it is:

Jerry Brown 2009 memo to Pleasanton: Web Link

Happy reading!


4 people like this
Posted by Bring on Costco
a resident of Birdland
on Jan 5, 2020 at 4:56 pm

Wow Wombat great catch on Livermore then I only have to drive a total of 10 miles further than a Pleasanton Costco. Livermore is to crowded so we have to sit and idle around trying to find parking which means we still have to drive an extra 15.6 miles to Danville and back. Nice try at a diversion but I don’t drive a guzzler I just extrapolated from your arguments that you did, my bad. Even still your argument requires, more miles, more highway time, more burned gas, more time sitting at stop lights, less time at home with family, sales taxes going to a different city and or county.


4 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 5, 2020 at 5:36 pm

@Bring on Costco

You "extrapolated" that I drive a 15.6 mpg gas-guzzler?
:-)

Don't bother. Not even interested an explanation.


6 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 5, 2020 at 5:36 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

The Livermore and Danville Costco stores are maxed out as everyone knows with the long lines and stuffed parking lots, and is the reason Corporate made a decision to build a Costco store in Pleasanton, Pleasanton has tens of thousands of residents that are Costco members.

Costco gasoline is sixty to seventy cents per gallon cheaper than all others in the area. For every ten gallons of gas pumped one will save six to seven dollars. Costco gasoline is a top tier gasoline.

Costco top tier gasoline exceeds EPA minimum mandatory requirement five times for detergents, the ethanol in Costco gasoline is a minimum 10%, all others meet the EPA minimum standard, they do not exceed it.

Costco gasoline purchased and consumed in the Bay Area burns much cleaner than all other gasolines. If everyone would burn Costco gasoline, the air in the Bay Area would be much cleaner.

Cadillac, Pontiac, Chevrolet, BMW and Audi require high octane gasoline, failure to use the higher octane negates the warranty. Those same cars can burn Costco gasoline without restriction. Costco premium gasoline is 93 octane where all other gasolines in the area are 92 octane.


5 people like this
Posted by Wombat
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 5, 2020 at 6:11 pm

@Michael Austin wrote “ Costco top tier gasoline exceeds EPA minimum mandatory requirement five times for detergents, the ethanol in Costco gasoline is a minimum 10%, all others meet the EPA minimum standard, they do not exceed it.”

Nope. Lots of gasoline brands offer Top Tier gasoline: Shell, 76, Chevron, Exxon, ARCO, BP, etc..

Consumer Reports, Top Tier gasoline: Web Link

- - -


7 people like this
Posted by pope john
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 5, 2020 at 6:24 pm

pope john is a registered user.

For sixty to seventy cents per gallon more than Costco!


8 people like this
Posted by Oral Roberts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2020 at 6:35 pm

Wombat cannot see the trees for the forest.


8 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 5, 2020 at 7:26 pm

COSTCO HAS A BETTER PRODUCT FOR A LOT LESS MONEY!


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields


Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Big money pouring into Livermore referendums
By Tim Hunt | 12 comments | 2,045 views

You Can Help: Scents and Migraines
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,712 views