CCMIN081903 - Laserfiche WebLink

Vanessa Kawaihau, 871 Sycamore Road, said there are a couple of shared wells in the Happy Valley area and any decision on this application may affect them in the future. She liked the alternative of a waterline extension as a temporary solution in ease of a drought. However, she wanted the Brozoskys to pay the connection fee the moment they use that line. She did not want a double standard to be set. She encouraged the Chrismans to drill their own well. She said when people in the Happy Valley connect to city water, they are encouraged to keep their wells for landscape purposes. Mary Roberts, P. O. Box 154, said both she and the Sarichs have a water tank and that is not the answer. She has an 8,000 gallon tank. She felt the problem was having two pumps in the well. She asked Council to make a regulation that applies to all. She noted her well is on the Sarich property, but the access to the well is on her property. She has had terrible easement problems with the previous owner of the Sarich property. She felt this was precedent setting and the regulation needed to be general. She did not want staff involved in arguments about flow, etc. She felt the first owner to develop their property, should abandon the well. She did not believe a 2,400 gallon tank was adequate. Just watering her lawn uses 1,000 gallons. The tank is there so she does not have to pump all the time. Steve Brozosky, 1700 Vineyard Avenue, said at the last Council meeting, the applicant was asked to work with him to resolve the issues. He has not been contacted and no one has tried to work with him. He said there are no problems with the well at this time, but that does not guarantee water in the future. Most wells last about 20 years before there are problems. The well on his property is 27 years old. He was uncertain about the water tank. The questions are how big, where to place it, and who pays for it? He explained he would have to replace the pumping equipment, etc. and it may cost up to $5-6,000. He was not certain a tank was a good idea. He has had many problems with easements and has g4ven Council letters regarding that. There are maintenance issues with the wells and common areas. There is discussion about the fact that he could get city water and he agreed that was possible, although it would cost about $50,000 and six months time for installation of the line. The Chrismans' connection is being paid for by their development. He noted the Chrismans have said they don't trust city water and prefer their well water. They are connecting to city water because they are required to. What would stop them in the future from going back to using the well water for their residence? He referred to the staff suggestion of ten gallons per minute as the low level on the system. That would require purchasing new equipment, since he has 20 gallon per minute pumps. If the flow were down to ten gallons per minute, the whole system would fail. He objected to the statement the Chrismans gave up two lots. He believed they transferred them to another site for some compensation. If city water is brought to the edge of his property, who would pay the connection fee and how does it get fi.om the property line into his water system? Mr. Happ said he would be willing to drill another well on the Chrisman property, but there is no guarantee it will produce. The Specific Plan says they have to use well water for agriculture. He believed the problem was really more related to the easement. Mr. Brozosky does not like the Chrismans entering his property to access the well. Ms. Ayala referred to his comment that the tentative map is deemed approved because it has taken more than thirty days for the heating. Pleasanton City Council 11 08/19/03 Minutes