Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Brozosky mentioned that one of the things Council asked last time for the <br />design competition was to include the Phase I baseball diamonds that were part of the <br />original community park. As he read it, if the initafive that is being circulated for <br />collecting signatures does pass, those baseball diamonds would be out of the 800-foot <br />setback. He asked Mr. Roush if Council needed to reconsider what it will give to the <br />design competitors because if the initiative does go to the ballot and does pass, Council <br />could not actually put the baseball diamonds where it actually thought they would be <br />located in this previous drawing. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said he thought the Director of Parks and Community Services had <br />prepared a memo to the City Manager that discussed this in some greater detail, and <br />perhaps before he answered the question fi.om a legal point of view, it would be wise for <br />Mr. Wolfe to discuss the various maps. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe said that what staffprepared for Council demonstrates some of the <br />distance lines between the residential properties and the community park site. If he <br />understood the question correctly, the initiative shows an 800-foot distance between the <br />residential properties and the park property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said that he understood that the proponents of the initiative wanted <br />an 800-foot setback from the residential. <br /> <br /> Mr. Wolfe said that was correct. He believed Mr. Brozosky's question was how <br />would that affect the fields that the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky mentioned that one plan did not go through the Parks and <br />Recreation Commission but another plan did. The Commission picked a plan to get two <br />baseball diamonds done early and that was what was brought to the City Council at that <br />one workshop, correct? <br /> <br />Mr. Wolfe said that was correct. <br /> <br /> Mr. Roush said that his recollection was that neither of the layouts had been <br />approved by the City Council. Several layouts had gone through various stages of review <br />by the Task Force and the Parks and Recreation Commission but none have been <br />approved by the Council. Secondly, under the one plan that is outside the line that the <br />initiative establishes for sports fields, nothing in the initiative prevents the Council from <br />approving fields outside of the area establishing the initiative line. <br /> <br /> Mr. Brozosky said he understood the initiative to create an 800-foot setback, and <br />the cross-hatched area would be the community park. Any use outside that would not be <br />the community park. It was his understanding that anything that is not within the Phase I <br />community park as outlined in the Bemal Specific Plan, requires a vote of the people. <br />Council could solve this by having the voters vote on the initiative and on all other uses <br />on the Bernal property. If that did not happen at the same time, it might hold up putting <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council 7 03/02/04 <br />Minutes <br /> <br /> <br />