CCMIN033004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Campbell asked if a substitute motion would completely counteract the main motion? Mayor Pico said yes. He could withdraw his motion if Ms. Hosterman would allow it to be withdrawn. The motion made by Mayor Pico and seconded by Ms. Hosterman was withdrawn. It was moved by Ms. Ayala to approve a scaled down Phase I portion of the project, with any other phases to be reviewed in the future, and for Phase I to include the existing four water slides with the addition of four new water slides on the same hill, and the ground level attractions that were submitted, which included the wave pool, Lazy River, and children's activity pool. Ms. Ayala clarified that her motion did not intend to include all of the ground level attractions, as she did not believe they would ail be necessary given the scaied down version. She wanted the applicant to scale down ail of the structures as necessary. Mr. Brozosky noted that the applicant did not need to scale down all of the ground level amenities. He believed Ms. Ayala's motion indicated that the applicant was given the maximum approval for the ground level amenities. Ms. Ayala said the applicant would be given the maximum approval, but the applicant could come in with fewer ground level attractions. Mayor Pico believed Council should either approve the project with ail of the proposed facilities but with a phasing plan, or scale down the project and eliminate ground level facilities. He believed there is a difference because if Council approved the entire project as planned but with a difference phasing, for example, to allow only four new water slides to the existing hill, and allow all of the ground level amenities to be built with any subsequent water slides to be in a Phase II plan, that would require conditional approval by the Council at the time of that phasing. This means that the applicant could go ahead and build everything the way that they see it and the size they want with the anticipation that when the applicant comes forward with plans for Phase II, they will not have the significant impacts and the community would be ready to accept it, or Council would be ready to accept the additionai amenities. If Couneil wanted to eliminate something he believed it should be discussed. He did not believe Ms. Ayaia's motion scaied down the project at ail. Mr. Campbell agreed with Mayor Pico that Ms. Ayala's motion did not scale down the project. Ms. Ayala asked Mayor Pico why he did not see her motion as scaling the project down. Pleasanton City Council 12 03/30/04 Minutes