Parkside residents push back on plan to build recycled water fill station in neighborhood

This is a good project idea situated in the wrong location. You just don’t put an operation like this in a residential neighborhood, regardless of the hours of access, where there are only two entrances to the site, neither of which was built for this kind of traffic. I don’t understand why the former site off Stoneridge cannot be reopened.

A Correction to the Story above, regarding this statement:

“According to a frequently asked question page on the Pleasanton Operation Services website, the city sent a notification out on June 21 and notice postcards were issued to neighbors within 1,000 feet.“


The Council met on June 21 and approved the project. 9 days later, a postcard dated June 30th was created, and mailed out just before July 4.

This ‘ notice’ was sent to only 25 percent of Parkside residents. AND was received almost 2 weeks AFTER the council had voted.

I appreciate the council’s decision to re-notice all Parkside residents and to hear our concerns, and work to find another location.

Also, While the Dublin site did cost more, it seems to me the cost would be worth it, realizing the site would be a Permanent location and could serve residents from many cities for years and years to come.

Build it once, in the right location. A location that can handle all the traffic and operate more hours for those wishing to use recycled water. And doesn’t impact a residential neighborhood and sports park.

The additional one time construction costs for a permanent Dublin location would be money well spent.

Posting again to update my Log On community location as Parkside. Thank you

REGARDING WATER USE

The important starting point for recycled water is noteworthy, that valley residents are not objecting to clean recycled water in concept.

WHAT IF FANTISCY WATER LEVELS?

My rough calculations for clean water systems based on 102 gallons of water per person per day, then build in 20 year margin for error and push consumption up to 450 gallons per person per day. Is there any way to reach this level? That's 5.4-million acre feet per year non-ag water.

Are regional agencies even looking into such planning as a 20 year master water plan for non-ag use? The answer of course is no.

FULL DISCLOSURE - WHY NOT?

We may first need to flush out all preconceived notions that shape our collective ignorance. Web Link Our weather is manufactured. What if we discovered Lockheed Martin was controlling our weather under the guise of National Security? Would congress do anything about it? No - Congress is captured by global corporations.

PLOW AHEAD

So just plow ahead and plan our own alternative solutions.

LET'S CONSIDER EVERYTHING - JUST FOR FUN

(1) Atomic Power recycling: Web Link
(2) Earth and wetlands contributions: Web Link
(3) Turning deserts into green zones: Web Link
(4) Full disclosure.

Typical NIMBYism. Recycled water would help all of Pleasanton!

Patriots,

Having access to recycled water is a good thing. Doesn’t sound like you have studied the issues about the Zone 7 location. Trucks will line up 10-15 feet from our windows. Idling engines, or engines start/stop as users creep forward.

This would be an issue in ANY residential area. Even in Birdland. I’d be the first to support you or any neighbor that would have a station being built on your/their street.

There are many factors and reasons. Hope you learn about the impacts and decide to join us in finding an appropriate, non- residential site for the future.

I didn't see in the article or subsequent discussions why the original recycled water station off of Stoneridge is not an option? The facility had 20+ filling stations and could handle trucks with trailers plus other vehicles. There was rarely a line to fill-up your containers. Cars did not need to line up in a residential neighborhood waiting to fill up.

And the best part....the recycled water does not need to be pumped across town, it comes from the waste water plant RIGHT THERE!

I am sympathetic to the concern about additional traffic and resulting noise on a residential street.

As a side note, even if Dublin offered recycled water I will not participate. The water is full of high levels of sodium and minerals. I discarded all the hose fixtures due to mineral build up from two years of collecting recycled water.

As a local Driving School Instructor, this proposed location is totally unsuitable as many new students are learning to drive and are being tested by the DMV around this neighborhood and greater area. Talk about additional unnecessary stress for our teen population trying to navigate around trucks! This needs to be located in an industrial area, not local neighborhoods.

Jeff

The DSRSD location is the right location. However, the leadership of DSRSD doesn’t want to open it. Spigots and hoses are still there. Open the gate and it’s ready to go.

They don’t want to be bothered. One excuse was that they get deliveries of chemicals. Of course they do. They always have… and it wasn’t an issue in the past.

The city has met with DSRSD and they just don’t want to open.

The infrastructure is there. The space is there for a ton of vehicles, the water and hoses are there.

Their denial of use is silly, and hurts the community they reside in.

Pleasanton, Dublin snd Livermore will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to construct a Zone 7 station.

Money that should be spent on other city projects like fixing the roads ( example West Las Positas).

I hope the cities and DSRSD can come to an agreement and do what’s best for their citizens.

I suggest people contact the General Manager at DSRSD and tell him to
Open the ready-to-go, EXISTING 40 spigot station off Stoneridge. And copy your message to the Board of Directors:

Daniel McIntyre, PE
General Manager
mcintyre@dsrsd.com  925-875-2200

Email the entire Board of Directors at board@dsrsd.com.

In order to help residents........
The City of Livermore and the City of Pleasanton
DSRSD and Zone 7
are proposing this project in the middle of a neighborhood, next to the wonderful sports park.
City of Pleasanton needs to stop endorsing this location for this purpose, they should instead be proposing the reopening of the previous location.

PART 2
Subject: Vintner Alert 17: How To Increase Crop Yield And Nutrition

Vintner Alert 17 - GROW MORE FOOD (even with less water)

My friend is a preeminent mainstream plasma physicist. I love sharing insights on the subject of plasma energy with him. He always listens. This video explains how to energize seeds and plants to use their natural intelligence to increase crop yields and nutrition. Penny is the scientist in the video and Patty is the film maker.

Web Link

Plant changes: (Not GMO modified)

* Vines naturally become more tolerant to temperature ranges
* Vine root systems naturally become healthier with less water
* Leaves resist molds naturally.
* Taste can be transmitted based on personal experience and preferences of the wine maker communicating with vines. What? !!!
* Vines can be asked to carry specific healing benefits to consumers by your winemaker. ... are you now getting the picture?

Vintners have a lot of political clout. You may want to sponsor studies at UC Davis on positive uses of plasma energy on grape vine development. Use your intuition. Get past fear. The science is real and has been suppressed.

Namaste

Typo: Leafs not Leaves

Reading about this, one has to wonder whether due diligence was performed. A $1-2M unnecessary expenditure of taxpayer money for a seemingly inappropriate location. Were all the impacts understood by the cities and DSRSD? Were other options explored including using the currently closed existing site? How does such a proposal fit with the immediate and longer term water plans? Who stands to gain from such an expenditure? Almost anyone familiar with the Parkside location and the experience of the depot operations could understand the operation wouldn't be appropriate there. It's possible these questions may have been addressed by the proposers, but not mentioned in this article.

Change.org petition title is; "STOP INSTALLATION OF RECYCLED WATER DISTRIBUTION SITE ON PARKSIDE DRIVE"

Direct Link:

Web Link

PARKSIDE DRIVE AND MEASURE D NEXUS

MEASURE D IS A FRAUD AND A TAXPAYER TRAP - VOTE NO

Livermore Vintners plan to flush BILLIONS of gallons of water down our sewer lines and bill Livermore’s Taxpayers to clean up it. There are alternatives.

Measure D is a BAD DEAL for Livermore. Measure D is sneaky! It passes all future winery clean up costs onto Livermore Taxpayers. These costs will be huge.

Livermore is in a “SEVERE DROUGHT.” Zone 7 has declared a "DROUGHT EMERGENCY" and has instructed voters to cut back drastically while they supply billions of gallons of fresh water to selected vineyards and golf courses.

Just looking at one large Livermore Vintner, Zone 7 has contracted to supply nearly 1-billion gallons of fresh water... and that's just one large vintner.

A CHANGE OF RELATIONSHIP MUST START NOW

The relationship between the needs of urbanization-population and agriculture must shift. Measure D is not neutral, it encourages wasteful water use by the ag-community. There are alternatives. *”They should learn to do as Napa does and process their sewer in place and preserve their ground water.” They are not as modernized as you may think. Once these vineyards tap into our sewer system the clean up costs transfer to you and me.

MEASURE D LOCKS-IN MORE WASTE, NOT LESS

* “ Livermore's sewer costs are foolishly OUT OF CONTROL. Sewer fees used to be steady - $465.00 a year per single family home until 2007, then $489 through 2014. But starting in 2015 under previous mayor John Marchand, our sewer fees EXPLODED, going up EVERY YEAR.”

*Data supplied by 3rd party sources.

A CALL FOR NEW MORAL COURAGE TO SAY NO TO MEASURE D