CCMIN082002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mayor Pico reviewed the process up to this point and he felt Council had not acted to approve or exclude the silo. There was a proposal to add the silo to the plan. Council had directed staff to investigate adding the silo. Mr. Wolfe commented that the Parks and Recreation Commission and the Planning Commission had recommended that the park be approved without the silo. When the matter came before Council in January 2001, the silo was not an item, but by a majority vote of the Council, staff was asked to review the concept of including it and addressing cost and impact on the historical designation of the site. Council did approve the master plan, but asked for additional information in order to make a determination on the silo. Ms. Michelotti clarified that the rest of the plan for the park has been approved and there were three votes to take a look at the silo. Bill Eastman, 677 Windmill Lane, believed that the process is what has caused this problem. He related the history of the pla~ing process for the Alviso Adobe Park. He felt that ifa farmer, developer, or resident came before Council today and wanted a silo, Council would not allow it if there were objections from the neighborhood. This park may be out of the Foothill Overlay District, but people will wonder about a double standard if a white barn or silo are allowed. People are wondering why they are back fighting the same battle, when they thought the issue was resolved. This is a pseudo-silo, not an historical structure of the same proportions and on the same location. He wondered if consideration had been given to moving it to another location. If that can help reach a compromise that may be an answer. He believed that to build it in the selected site is wrong. The wishes of the people should be considered and he felt the comment about the people versus the fish is valid. He urged Council to reconsider this and stop exercising so much process at the risk of defeating purpose. Joanie Fields, 4053 Walnut Drive, indicated she was definitely in favor of the silo. She was a member of the Task Force and went through a long process. The bottom line is she wants the park, which has more significance and can do more educationally for future generations. That is what this is all about. She had no problem with the silo or its aesthetics. She agreed all the homes can see it, but they will also be able to see the barn. She was upset that people have hostile feelings and believed the overall plan was more important. There is a lot to be learned from this site and she felt that the Laguna Oaks residents will find that the Alviso Adobe Park will be an asset to their neighborhood. Speaking as a member of the Board of Directors of the Historical Society, it is very much in favor of the park. It has raised over $50,000 for the interpretive center so the children will understand what this community was like before all the housing projects. This was a farming community and there used to be eight 4H Clubs in town and nine dairies. She did not want to lose this park. She said the reason the Takens family moved from Pleasanton to Tracy was because they could no longer afford to be dairy farmers in Pleasanton. She supported the silo, but she much preferred seeing the bunkhouse constructed to be used for small classes and the barn for the interpretive center. She wanted to be able to have docents from the Historical Society be at the park to teach students about the history of Pleasanton. Pleasanton City Council 20 08/20/02 Minutes