My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2021
>
100521
>
17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2021 11:12:43 AM
Creation date
9/30/2021 11:11:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/5/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
The Parks and Recreation Commission members provided the following comments on <br />the design concepts: <br />a Most appreciated concept 1; however, they were concerned about the <br />custom nature of the main bird sculpture and its durability and playability <br />Would like more accessible parking included <br />■ Like the event stage and picnic shelter ideas in concept 2 <br />ID Love the fitness equipment in addition to the park <br />® Would like a variety of seating elements included <br />Like the addition of sensory elements, swings, and the challenge course <br />The Human Services Commission provided the following comments on the design <br />concepts: <br />® Appreciated that the designs sparked imagination <br />Liked that the designs were interchangeable <br />® Loved that the designs were utilizing the existing landscape and appreciated <br />that the existing tree canopy will offer shade <br />Tended to favor concept 2 slightly <br />Appreciated the all -ages approach to design <br />Would like to see a double swing included and to ensure that the quiet <br />areas are as quiet as possible <br />Liked the inclusion of generational games <br />■ Wanted more disabled parking spaces included in proximity <br />Overall did not feel enough additional parking spaces were added <br />The Youth Commission provided the following comments on the design concepts: <br />® The commission liked both designs, but the majority preferred concept 1 for <br />the following reasons: appears to have more play options than concept 2, is <br />well planned out, has good flow, is sectioned -off well, is more eye-catching <br />and vibrant, and the commission thinks it will be more enjoyable for children. <br />They also felt that concept 1 could and should still reflect the character of <br />Pleasanton. <br />Keep the horizontal pine tree and incorporate it into the design <br />Preserve as many of the healthy trees as possible <br />Further public input is planned per the below schedule. Once all public input has been <br />received and incorporated into a final conceptual design, the consultant will also create <br />an estimate of probable project costs. There is currently enough funding for design but <br />no funding for construction has been identified. The estimate will be utilized to identify <br />the amount of funding needed for the construction of the project. <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.