CCMIN031604 - Laserfiche WebLink

Joshua Brysk, 3174 Chardonnay Drive, a member of the No Water Park.eom organization, mentioned that he was a new resident of Pleasanton and was not aware that there was a water slide at Shadow Cliffs. He believed it was a credit to Mr. Kierstead and the personnel who are running the water park because it does not impact the community the way it currently operates. He pointed out the frustration the Planning Commission had with the applicant and with the application. The frustration was in the lack of detail and inconsistency in the details that were presented. He believed there was a concern regarding the lack of detail in the phasing of the proposed project, and it was unclear to him what that phasing would be. The existing water slides are built on the hillside and barely visible fi.om Stanley Boulevard. The slides that are proposed to be built are elevated slides and the level of elevation has been ameliorated somewhat by building up the hillside. In order to mitigate some of the noise that will be attributed to the elevated slides and to mitigate some of the visual impact, barriers will need to be built. He believed Council needed to consider the impacts on the quality of life that this project will have on the community, and the impacts on the community in general. He believed there were many positive things about the project. While the proposed expansion for the water park is not a bad idea, it is located in the wrong place and the wrong scale for the community. This project will be a very large consumer of resources. Pleasanton is a beautiful community that has grown and developed slowly over the years, and it is very different fi.om many cities in the Bay Area. The community has been planned with a lot of careful thought. With the possible location of an Ikea store in Dublin, circumstances surrounding Dublin, the community and the Bay Area will also affect Pleasanton. These circumstances need to be taken into account when it is determined what is to be planned for the entire community with all of the resources available to the community in its future. He reminded Council of the characteristic of responsibility that is included in the Community of Character. He asked Council to consider its responsibility for this project, as Pleasanton is the responsible agency. If for any reason Council did not feel confident that it had the full support of the community in this matter, he suggested that Council allow for further study to learn the details of the project, to work out the inconsistencies for this project, and to determine what mitigations could be done. Ultimately, he believed this matter should be taken to a vote of the people. Ms. Ayala suggested continuing this matter to another meeting to allow the remainder of the public speakers sufficient time to address Council. She noted that it was Council's responsibility to make a decision. While the decision may be difficult, she did not want Council's decision to be made in haste, as it will have an impact on Pleasanton for a long time. Mayor Pico asked staff for the next available date to continue this matter. Ms. McKeehan indicated that this matter could be continued to March 23 after the General Plan Workshop, or a Special Meeting could be held, or the matter could be continued to the next regular Council meeting of April 6, 2004. Mr. Brozosky wanted to allow members of the public an oppommity to address Council this evening if they were unable to attend the adjourned regular meeting. Pleasanton City Council 34 03/16/04 Minutes