My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
021715
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 2:33:48 PM
Creation date
2/11/2015 3:19:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
2/17/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Councilmember Pentin noted that some of the trees planted along the Marilyn Murphy Kane Trail are <br /> 10 years old and fail to provide any significant amount of shade. He asked whether there is any <br /> recommendation regarding a certain type of tree that may mature more quickly. <br /> Bob Tanaka, project architect, said he would propose native trees of the fast-growing deciduous <br /> variety, which should grow faster than the broad leaf evergreen trees along the trail. Regardless, he <br /> would not expect that they would provide any significant shade for at least 5 years. <br /> Vice-Mayor Brown said she received a call from a resident expressing their preference for decomposed <br /> granite footing and asked staff to explain its recommendation to use the Fibar material. <br /> Mr. Tanaka explained that Fibar is used throughout the city's playgrounds. Generally, it is more <br /> attractive and less abrasive to a dog's sensitive foot pads than something like decomposed granite. <br /> Vice-Mayor Brown asked how Fibar rate in terms of cleanliness, given the level of urine and fecal <br /> matter contamination. <br /> Mr. Tanaka estimated that natural turf would be ideal in terms of cleanliness but is not a viable option <br /> for obvious reasons. Being natural, organic matter Fibar would seem to be the next best alternative. In <br /> terms of eliminating contaminated material this, like any other surface, will require manual removal. <br /> Vice-Mayor Brown asked again how likely it is that a large dog could leap the 3.5 foot fence to the small <br /> dog side of the park. <br /> Mr. Tanaka explained that large dogs can scale 6 foot high fences; therefore any fence of a reasonable <br /> height presents that sort of potential. As such, much of the responsibility for ensuring that does happen <br /> falls to the dog owners. He said he felt the fence height was adequate and explained that the taller 5 <br /> foot portion is intended to provide an increased sense of security for trail users. <br /> Councilmember Pentin asked and staff confirmed that Muirwood has the same 3.5 foot fence height. <br /> He agreed that many dogs, his own Border Collie included, are capable of scaling a 6 foot fence and <br /> that an owner's willingness and ability to control their pet is important. He said he was comfortable with <br /> the proposed heights and expressed concern that anything much higher would create more of a <br /> penitentiary like setting than an inviting area. <br /> Vice-Mayor Brown asked if, as this project would modify a portion of the Bemal Property, there is any <br /> conflict with Measure P. <br /> Mr. Bocian said "no," the Council determined this use to be compatible for the side as was allowed by <br /> Measure P. <br /> Vice-Mayor Brown opened the item for public comment. <br /> Wendy Stevens asked how the Fibar product compares to the wood chip footing at Muirwood which <br /> tends to be sharp, decomposes fairly easily and does not compact very well. <br /> Mr. Bocian explained that one of the benefits of Fibar is that it does tend to bond and compress, <br /> creating a firmer base that does not dig up as easily, and is a very common material in dog parks. As <br /> with any product it will require a regular maintenance program. <br /> Cele Gutierrez asked and staff confirmed that the perimeter barrier, which was discussed at the Parks <br /> and Recreation Commission meeting and is designed to minimize migration of the footing onto the trail, <br /> is still part of the project. She said she would prefer to see a 5 foot fence around the entire perimeter <br /> although thought that even 4 feet would be preferable to the 3.5 feet proposed. She noted that some of <br /> City Council Minutes Page 7 of 12 January 20, 2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.