Laserfiche WebLink
approach. She was not confident with the 7.5 percent contingency, and if staff was attempting to <br /> secure Federal funding, she believed a 15 percent contingency should be used. She asked if <br /> any State Park funding was available for this historical project? <br /> Mr. Wolfe recalled an element of funding in the 2002 State Park Bond Act was <br /> specifically set aside for historical structures and parks. The City submitted a proposal for <br /> funding and he believed Pleasanton ranked seven out of 50 projects that were submitted <br /> statewide. The funding was depleted at the fifth priority project and additional funding has not <br /> been available since that time. <br /> Ms. McGovern said she was trying to understand how this project could be tied to the <br /> Golf Course and how it could be considered a mitigation for the Golf Course. <br /> Mr. Roush said when the City was going through the process of attempting to obtain <br /> permits from the regulatory agencies, it had proposed a number of different mitigations for the <br /> Golf Course, including purchase of conservation easements on the Koopmann property as well <br /> as placing a conservation easement over the open space portion of the Golf Course Open <br /> Space project. The regulatory agencies wanted additional mitigation and the City proposed an <br /> interpretive program to be included as part of the Alviso Adobe Community Park which the <br /> regulatory agencies found to be one of the other acceptable mitigations, which was ultimately <br /> made a mitigation of the Golf Course Project. It was not a condition that the program had to be <br /> in place prior to the opening of the Golf Course, but the City agreed that when the Alviso <br /> Community Park was operative it would include the Interpretive Program. <br /> Ms. McGovern mentioned she had a discussion with a resident about the proposed <br /> amphitheater. The resident expressed concern that it would be similar to the amphitheater <br /> proposed for the Bernal property, which included lights and amplified sound. Ms. McGovern <br /> asked if the proposed amphitheater for the Alviso Adobe Community Park included amplified <br /> sound. <br /> Mr. Wolfe said the small amphitheater included amplified sound, which was an issue that <br /> surfaced when this project came before Council. Staff received direction from Council to <br /> contain the sound on site. Because of the location of the amphitheater and the fact that is <br /> proposed to be located in a lower area, it should not impact the neighbors to the east. He noted <br /> that amplified sound would only be used for group orientations or group presentations. The <br /> amphitheater would have seating capacity for approximately 60 people. <br /> If Council authorized staff to proceed with bidding this project, Mr. Brozosky asked for <br /> the time frame to receive and evaluate the bids and the timeframe to identify a funding source? <br /> Mr. Wolfe said the timeline to advertise, except bids and authorize construction of the <br /> project would take a minimum of two months. <br /> If Council decided to proceed with a phased approach, he asked if the bid could contain <br /> bid alternatives? <br /> Mr. Wolfe said Council could proceed with a phased approach and have contractors bid <br /> on the base bids. Staff would prioritize the additional add alternative items and have the <br /> contractors provide a cost. When Council awarded the bid, it could make a decision in terms of <br /> whether it wanted to include the add alternatives as part of the project and identify funding. <br /> Pleasanton City Council 9 02/21/06 <br /> Minutes <br />