PC 052803 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Iserson noted that this land use change was for a proposed expansion of an existing use, not a change of use. Commissioner Roberts noted that the kids in Pleasanton have wanted the BMX park for a long time, and did not believe that delaying it 18 months following the General Plan Update would be beneficial. Mr. Iserson cautioned the Commission against lengthy delayed consideration of applications without going to the legal proceedings regarding moratoria He believed that the Commission was appropriately requesting more information on the General Plan Land Use analysis in terms of possibilities for the site across the street Commissioner Sullivan expressed concern about traffic, and had grave concerns about using the old traffic model_ He believed the EI Charro extension would result in more cut- through traffic, which would make the traffic around the water park worse. He noted that there was enough question and controversy with respect to the noisy study that it should be peer reviewed by the City. He noted that there were questions regarding the true water use, and believed that water could be a major issue in the valley. He inquired whether the Negative Declaration was adequate for this project, and whether an EIR may be necessary. Comiriissioner Sullivan noted that with respect to the Green Building Ordinance, this building did not exceed 20,000 square feet; however, it was anenergy- and water- intensive use. He would like to see further information on how to minimize those impacts_ He my uired whether the expansion would be compatible with the park itself, as well as with future plans for the East Side. He inquired whether there was an requirement to process a General Plan Amendment right before a General Plan Update. Mr. Tserson noted that the application may be denied, but there were time limits stated in State law that require that action be taken on aii application. Preparing to do a General Plan Update would not be a Legitimate reason to not consider an application without the City Council declaring a moratorium if it so desired, but the Commission may not set a project aside prior to a General Plan Update. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Maas, Mr_ lserson was not sure if this application was heard by the Parks and Recreation Commission. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Roberts whether it would be possible to separate this application from the BMX park, Mr. Iserson replied that the BMX park could not be considered without the General Plan Amendment and the rezoning of the De Silva property. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Maas, Mr_ Iserson noted that he did not know when the construction of the BMX park would be funded. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES May 28, 2003 Page 19