December 22, 2004

Rosita pool complex gets go-ahead

By Linda Taafe/ Town Crier Staff Writer

The wait to find out the status of a community pool in Los Altos is over. The Los Altos City Council unanimously added an aquatic center slated for Rosita Park to the city's 2004-05 Capital Improvement Projects budget last week following more than a year of setbacks due to a neighborhood lawsuit. Whether the project will include one or two pools at the site remains undecided.

Councilmembers agreed that the community should have a pool center. They agreed that the pool center should be appropriate for the neighborhood as well as the community at large. They could not, however, decide how to reach such a compromise.

Neighbors have argued that two pools would create too much traffic and noise. Pool supporters say one pool would not adequately support community programs that require separate water temperatures for team training and recreational swim lessons.

"I believe every neighborhood should shoulder some burden for the benefit of the community, but we can't put all of the burden on one community," Councilman Ron Packard said. "I have a very particular feeling about not abusing this neighborhood any more than we have to."

Members of the fund-raising group Swimmers Promoting Los Altos Aquatics, Safety and Health (SPLASH) teamed up with the city in 2001 to bring a community pool to Los Altos after the Los Altos School District demolished the public pool at Covington when it converted the campus back into an elementary school. SPLASH agreed to provide the funding, if the city would provide the land and construct the pool.

Noise appears to be the one significant and unavoidable impact that the two-pool complex would have on the neighborhood, according to findings in the court-ordered environmental study by consultant group David J. Powers & Associates.

Traffic would cause a substantial increase in noise on Rosita west of Campbell Avenue. Noise would reach 5 decibels, one point higher than the acceptable threshold, according to the study.

A one-pool facility at Rosita would reduce noise to acceptable levels but would not meet the objective of providing programs necessary to fully serve the city.

Size constraints and the probability of the same unavoidable impacts identified at the Rosita site occurring elsewhere ruled out all alternative locations, the report concluded.

State law allows the council to balance the community benefits of a project against its unavoidable environmental impacts when approving a project. The council unanimously approved the environmental study and acknowledged that noise impacts could not be mitigated in the Statement of Overriding Consideration, with Packard opposing the consideration.

The council agreed to consider a list of recommendations by Councilman King Lear that included implementing a series of traffic safety measures, such as limited hours and Class I bike paths, before moving forward with any of the conceptual plans.

The city could supplement some of the center's programs. Los Altos funds 35 percent of the cost of most city-operated recreational activities. The funding would enable the pool to remain economically healthy without operating as many hours for additional revenues, meaning noise and traffic reductions.

Designing two smaller pools that would fit into the footprint of a single pool is another option.

Kathy Englar, SPLASH spokeswoman, said two smaller pools would be workable.

Karl Urban, president of the Rosita Neighborhood Coalition, which filed the lawsuit to stop the project last year, released this statement:

"Because of the way the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) works, the Rosita Neighborhood Coalition is required to file a lawsuit within 30 days of the city's certification of the EIR in order to maintain our options. The Coalition has been in discussions with the City Council and SPLASH on an appropriately sited and developed facility, and we expect to continue these discussions. But the City's action has the unfortunate result of forcing the Coalition to file suit to preserve its rights."