Town Square

Post a New Topic

Widening Alamo Intersection?

Original post made by Wasteful, Alamo, on May 1, 2012

Why waste more money on widening portion of Alamo only traffic controlled intersection?

Where will any extra cars go? Why widen there? Why waste money,time,and disrupting what flow of traffic there is?

Will this be a monument to the ultimate stupidity? Widening a small portion of the road?
Who needs to enlarge their ego to widen an intersection going no where?

Whose property will be removed for a short distance to satisfy bloated plans dedicated to wasteful spending?

Nationally this happens but why here?

Use what money there is to determine better ways for pedestrians to cross along the road in the smallish commercial one/two block of the road!!!!

May 3 county committee will decided to expand short portion to no where this intersection.

Are you concerned? furious? dumbfounded? perplexed?

Who wouldnt be!!!!!

Request an explanation as to why and to where and for long a widening!!

Do you part and participate actively rather then read and move on bemoaning public apathy.

Comments (9)

Like this comment
Posted by [removed]
a resident of Alamo
on May 1, 2012 at 7:22 am

Dear Editor,

This is becoming a story impacting voters' considerations of district 2 and 3 supervisors' candidates. On June 30. 2008, Mary Piepho announced that "the ultimate solution" of expanding the Stone Valley Road and Danville Blvd intersection and road way in the Alamo business district was removed from county consideration. That didn't happen! Neither Mary or Chief of Staff Tomi van de Brooke followed through to make sure that such a project was removed from all county planning.

The real solution for the Alamo business district was proposed more than a decade ago in creating a MALL with access lanes and eliminating Danville Blvd and Stone Valley Road in the business district. The goal is to discourage commute traffic from using Alamo roads and lanes to by-pass 680 and is achieved by making Alamo a destination and not a commute corridor.

Remember, traffic & Transportation are one of five primary voter issues in the current districts 2 & 3 elections. Thus, this is an election story that deserves home page coverage.

Like this comment
Posted by jjjj
a resident of Alamo
on May 1, 2012 at 9:02 am

[Removed because it was off topic and disrespectful]

Like this comment
Posted by [removed]
a resident of another community
on May 1, 2012 at 2:03 pm

Dear Gina and Jessica,

Thank you for your efforts to focus this exchange.

The reference to the MALL conversion of the Alamo business district was in a "downtown" plan created by Donna Gerber, district 3 supervisor, circa 1999/2000. The plan was in at least three forms and one specifically removed Danville Blvd and Stone Valley Road in the business district and created multiple access lanes within the MALL to route traffic to expanded retail, commercial, hospitality, high density residential and multi-story parking.

Various investor groups over the past decade have reviewed that "downtown" plan and considered various modifications to Danville Blvd and Stone Valley Road to make the "Alamo Downtown" a more contained business center tying all segments together for safer and easier walking of the entire district.

In 2009, CCC Community Development provided copies of Donna's downtown plans to neighborhoods committees focused on economic development in the Alamo region. As you consider a story on "the Ultimate Solution" it is likely fitting to report on the significant options of a MALL that would fully eliminate Stone Valley Road and Danville Blvd in the Alamo business district.

Like this comment
Posted by Beck
a resident of Blackhawk
on May 2, 2012 at 10:38 am

Alamo downtown does not make sense ... there are vibrant walnut creek, Danville downtown's for residents to choose from.

Like this comment
Posted by Wasteful
a resident of Alamo
on May 3, 2012 at 6:26 am

Ultimately, if such widening were to take place as the "insightful" planning of investors or business persons, it's the local taxpayers who will pay, via taxes, for the upkeep of these additions so that business or investors can make more money!!!

Does this make sense to anyone?

What well established trees have to be taken down for more, possibly,money to be made?

Like this comment
Posted by [removed]
a resident of another community
on May 3, 2012 at 7:10 am

Dear Editor,

The Ultimate Solution uses funds received from developers to create more lanes at the Stone Valley/Danville Blvd intersection and to extend widening north and south to accommodate the traffic invited off 680 to commute through Alamo. By contrast, Donna Gerber's "Downtown Plan" made the Alamo business district a destination and reduces the attraction of commuters due to the removal of Danville Blvd in the Alamo business district and the development of access lanes throughout the new MALL. Clearly the business district is mostly private property including the easements for Danville Blvd as presently configured. If a MALL was pursued, the development would be done with private capital on privately-held land.

The news story is "what does Alamo's majority of residents want as their business district and major roadways?"

Like this comment
Posted by Wasteful
a resident of Alamo
on May 3, 2012 at 8:23 am


So it is believed that private developers will put in their own money?

Since when?

That cost IS ALWAYS PASSED ON TO the local citizens in any land, country, era!!


Is this lunacy in the making?

What kind of double hidden talk is this?

Invite more traffic into a very short widened road to shop when bigger shopping areas are better located close by?

Invite more traffic into a smaller community to shop and make merchants more profit?

Why allow it?

Why invite freeway traffic into a smallish community?

Alamo by its very nature and wealth structure will not go away.

Need more inviting from the freeway?

How superficially dumb is this?

Invite more congestion into an admittedly close quarters road way so shoppers can enter Alamo?

Like this comment
Posted by Informed Resident
a resident of another community
on May 3, 2012 at 9:39 am


Reality check time...

Your attempts to discredit Mary or Tomi for a situation they did not create once again falls on deaf ears and reflects poorly on you. Your daily examples of your frustrations and confusion of the facts is just a further demonstration of your hypocrisy and infatuation with that which you do not understand. We get it by now-you don’t like Tomi or Mary. They represent progress, logic, and the “majority” which flies in the face of everything you believe in.

I don’t know how many times it must be repeated to you for it to sink in. There is NO campaign in District 3 (Mary Piepho). You are just making yourself look foolish. Then you tip the scale by actually suggesting that you, with all of your acquired wisdom know more than planners and engineers. To bad that secret oath you took that prevents you from having any real impact comes into play!

Where you completely fail, is your inability to see that while you get an opinion on matters, it doesn’t guarantee anyone will agree. Face the reality, Hal, your opinions don’t usually make sense and it at the root of why you are (for the most part) ignored.

p.s. How is that representation from your new Supervisor (Gayle Uilkema) working for ya? You had been posting about her amazing service, so I was just wondering….

Like this comment
Posted by rufous
a resident of Alamo
on May 8, 2012 at 4:41 pm

"Downtown" Alamo is a 1960's era strip mall with a road running thru it. It is not pedestrian friendly and reeks of social engineering by unqualified politician "planners". Thanks to prop 13 the commercial property owners (who pay nominal property taxes since they pass the property on to their heirs and have nominal debt) have no economic incentive to modernize. If the road is to be widened it should come with conditions for higher density adjacent zoning as an incentive. If you want a real downtown you have to encourage WALKING. And keep politics out of the planning process.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Salami, Salami … Baloney
By Tom Cushing | 24 comments | 502 views

Time for new collaboration between city and school district
By Tim Hunt | 2 comments | 435 views