PC 121003 - Laserfiche WebLink

"M:r. Iserson l.""1oted t.1"1at. ret-erendable actions ""ere legislati-vc actions" sucl""1 as a General Plan .Amendmen.t or rezoning. On. the other hand., a conditional u.se permit or design. re-vievv- V\Tere adjudicatory actions. l'V1s. Nerland advised that the Commissioners V\Tere in a quasi-judicial function." V\7hich is not an action tl""1at is subject: to referendum. .A pun or a zon.ing change is a legislati-ve act. :rv1:r. Iserson advised that the ex.ist.ing zoning on the park is a condit.ional use. Because tl""1e existing park vv-as set up under that process V\Tith that zoning" staff believed t.l"1ey had sufficient control to go through the conditional use permit process. St.a:tI- did not consider "V'Vhether an item is referendable or not and vv-as a"V'Vare that it V\Tould require Planning Commission re-vievv- and approvaL This application "V'Vas also designed t.o require City Council appro-val. I-Ie n.oted that st.aff did not initiate the pun process because the ZOrl.il""1g vvas already there,. "V'Vhich set up the conditional use "V'Vhich V\1ould require City re-vieVV". He noted tl"l.at the ex.isting zoning VV"as appropriate for the use", V\Thich V\Tould not typically require a PUO. l'V1s. Nerlm"l.d advised that a pun Llsually CalTle t.o thc C~olTl.missiol.""1. as a pacl<-aged application." containing the zoning cl""1.al""1.ge: aJ.""1d the developn"l.ent plan. Commissioner Sullivan ad-vised that he I""1ad participated in tV\TO pun ref-erenda" and inquired "V'Vhether the Cornmission or the City CcH.u.....ci I V\Tould be able to chm""1.ge t.he application to a PUD. :rv1:r. Iserson confirn""1ed that the Commission or Cormcil may initiate a pun rezoning" "VVhich V\Tould restart: the process as a PUD/Rezoning/Development Plan application_. Commissioner Fox noted that after the Concord accident" a Patron Responsibility Ordinance had been implemented V\1herein an arresting officer n"1ay cite people for breaking park rules. She inquired vv-h.ether tl""1.e Park District had investigated implementing a similar ordinance in Pleasanton.. I\Ilr. I\Ilikkelsen replied that the District and the City had a joint. policing agreement. V\Tith respect to response and noted that any time a lavv is broken" the officer has the ability to cite tl""1e offender. He :noted that people have occasionally been arrested in the parks. V\Tith respect to' the vvat:cr slide,. the "District had :not. SpOkel""1. in detail ",-,"ith the City. ~e noted that having a police officer on sit.e "VVas meant t.o enforce a problem that is already out. of- hand~ the idea vv-as to prevent such problems from occurring. He noted that the managen:"l.eITt of personnel V\Tas important arid t.hat: poor bel""1.avior must: be dealt. "",it:l""1. before a l11ajor problem occurs. Chairperson Arkin. not.ed t.hat as a parent,. l"1e '\.Vas initially excited about t.his parl<-. Hovve-ver" as l""1e heard the concerI""1S of the community" his opinion changed", and he belie-ved that the community concerns vvere very valid. J-"ie "V'Vould support an appro-val to allovv- annual attenda..nce up to 100",000 for three years", a..nd then have the applicants come back f:or further attendance appro-val. PLANNING COl'Vll'VlISSION l'VlINUTES December 10, 2003 Page 24 .. r.. -r '.--r-.-,