CCMIN031604 - Laserfiche WebLink

community. The Park District did not see that park adding to the crime rate in any community. In fact, the location ora park is a good amenity for a community and it is a place for people to enjoy recreation. Mayor Pico opened the public hearing. Carl Schlachte, 906 Gray Fox Circle, spoke in opposition to the expansion of the water park. He asked Council to listen to the opinions of the youth both for and against the water park. He did not agree that traffic would have the opposite effect from the commute hours, and that it would take place at other rimes from the commute hours. He believed this meant there would be more traffic all of the time. He liked the alternate choice of having a BMX park, which would attract the youth. He thought of cities that have water parks as commercial dries rather than residential cities. He liked to think of Pleasanton as a residential city, and did not want the idea that Pleasanton was a commercial city to be attached to its name. He wondered how it was possible to have an increase in the volume of people at the water park with no increase in sound. Isaac Storch, 3193 Chardonnay Drive, spoke in opposition to the expansion of the water park. He was concerned about traffic, noise and crime. His primary concern was what the youth of Pleasanton want. He gathered information and prepared a survey. The survey listed the pros and cons of the expansion in two columns. The response sheet consisted of columns in which the students could write down their name, address, whether they are in favor, opposed or indifferent to the expansion of the water park, and how many times a year they would go if it were built, and their grade level. He tried to make the survey as unbiased as possible. The survey was presented at the student summit at Foothill High School. The Leadership class distributed the survey. Surveys were collected from a variety of classes, totaling 288 student responses. The results showed that 39 percent were in favor of the expansion of the water park, 47 percent opposed and 14 percent indifferent. The only grade level that showed a majority in favor of the expansion of the water park was the freshman class. As far as geographic location was concerned, the most in favor were from the Ruby Hills area. The area where most opposition came from was from the Raley's and Bernal area. Surprisingly even though it is the farthest distance away fi.om Shadow Cliffs and the least likely to be affected by the negative impacts, Foothill Road students were 44 percent in favor and 44 percent opposed. The students opposed to the expansion of the water park were not geographically limited to the Shadow Cliffs area. There were a significant number of students all over Pleasanton who were opposed to the expansion. On an average, freshman students would go 4 times per year, sophomores and seniors would each go twice a year, and juniors would only go once a year. These averages do not include seven students who are particularly enthusiastic about the expansion of the water park. These seven students consisted of only three percent of the student survey, thus only a tiny fraction of Foothill High School students are enthusiastically in favor of the expansion. He did not question the credibility of the survey. He noted that entire classes had the tendency to vote together with some stxong dissenters. He believed the dissenters encouraged apathetic students to vote in a particular way. He did not believe this discredited the survey, as the dissenters accurately represented a diversity of the student Pleasanton City Council 23 03/16/04 Minutes