Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3. 'rhe dense landscapil.""1g and :te.ncing along tl""1e southern part o:t-tl""1C site; <br /> <br />4. The limited hours o:t-operatiol.""1 betvvee1""1 10:00 a.m. a.1""1d 6:30 p.n""1." VV"ith <br />some acti-vities continuing at a smaller scale until 7:30 p.m.; <br /> <br />5. The existing ambient 1"1oise d1...1-e to traffic", trains", quarries", and airpla..nes; <br /> <br />6. The use vv-as seasonal", lasting only Tour months; and <br /> <br />7. No portable radios and li-ve or amplified music "V'Vould be allo"V'Vcd. <br /> <br />l"v'lr. lserson advised that the noise st.udies :tocused on three main" potentially sigIlificant <br />sources of noise: <br /> <br />1. "VVater pumps". located in enclosed buildings. Specific proposed <br />mitigations ""ere proposed such as acoustical duct liners", acoustical <br />louvering", and closed roo:t- hat:ches; <br /> <br />2. Th.e P.A. syst.em "VVould include noise-level regulation on eacl"1 speaker t:o <br />keep the noise ""ithin tl"1e 70 dB at 25 Teet: starldard; al."1d <br /> <br />3. Eight:-foot tall barriers vvould be used on the plat.forms of the vva.terslides", <br />extending completely t:o t:he ground. ~rhese vv-ould deflect the 1"1oise <br />l.""1orth"V'Vard", avvay from the homes to t.he south. <br /> <br />The noise consult.a..nt a..nd peer revievv-er examined the Vintage Hills noise and concluded <br />that VV"hile some noise may be a1...l.dible in some properties" it vvould not exceed City <br />standards due to the distance mitigations and ex.istence of lovv ambient noise levels. <br />Therefore", tl""1at n.oise "V'Vould not be a signi-fi.cant impact. <br /> <br />In. response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox., l.V1:r. Iserson conf:'irmed that the -fIeld <br />noise tests included people screaming. <br /> <br />In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Sulli-van", IV1r. Iserson confirmed that t:he <br />Plexiglas vv-as clear a..nd vv-as rmsure "V'Vhether it clo1...l.ded over time. He noted that it V\Tas <br />i..~t.ended to shield tl"1e sou.r1d and direct it aV\Tay from the residential neighborhoods. Both <br />1""1oise consultants believed t.hat V\Tas an e:t"Iective solutiorL <br /> <br />,^,,"ith respect to -visual issues" staff believed tl"1at the bu.ilding designs vv-ere attract:i-vc and <br />vv-ere made of I-Iardiboard siding and either metal or can-vas roofs. Staff belie-ved that the <br />design. of the buildings vv-erc appropriate :tor a recreational attract.ion. Sta:tr- suggested th.at: <br />tl""1e colors be toned dovvn" elimil"1atirlg tl""l.C teal arld vv-hite colors and retai1""1i1""l.g t:he greerl. <br />and broVV-ll colors" so that it '\..Vould blend vvitl"1 the surroun.ding areas. At tb.e <br />Commission."s request., the applicant: provided a1""1 additional photo simulation", vvhich <br />shovv-ed the site from the Stanley Boulevard median. ~rhey also submitted a panoramic <br /> <br />PLANNING COl'Vll'VlISSION l'VlINUTES December 10,2003 <br /> <br />Page 7 <br /> <br />r <br /> <br />,..- <br /> <br />.. -r-------; <br />