SR 05:165 - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton, CA - City Council Minutes Page 12 of 16 did not know how to put that in the northeast comer without blocking the view of the hillsides. It may make mom sense to locate it off Valley Avenue. There is another opportunity to access that facility through the South Bay Development property off Valley, which would allow it to stay away from the existing neighborhood and could improve transportation circulation throughout that area. Again, she liked the idea of the northeast comer. She asked staff if it were possible to develop a design concept by June 21 that might give a better idea of what it would look like if the cultural arts center were in the northeast comer. She acknowledged the ACE train is a major issue and public transportation is very important, especially when the economy improves in the future. Keeping the ACE train somewhere in Pleasanton is important, but putting it on the Bemal property is not a priority. She liked all the comments regarding the teen center and would like it somewhere on this property. In the meantime, she encouraged the Youth Commission to work on opportunities for the youth of the community. Regarding fields, she liked the original RRM design and wanted as many fields as possible to serve the needs of sporting families. She felt there was room in these 318 acres to address the needs of the community and still have a beautiful walking park. She acknowledged there are many people who would like a quiet place with water and trees. She then referred to the recommendations on page 6 of the staff report and asked staff to summarize the comments this evening and see if they needed more direction. Mr. Rasmussen believed alternatives B, C and E were to be eliminated. A new altemative was to be prepared showing the cultural arts center to be located in the northeast comer, similar to the suggestion of the sports and arts groups at the beginning of the meeting. He still had a few questions on the specific plan. He asked for more details on the vision for the large central area between the existing residential neighborhood and the community park area. At this point, the plan shows trails, expansion of wetland areas toward the southern portion with grassland in between with limited shade structures. So far there has been no discussion about buildings or recreational uses. He asked if that is what Council wants to see? Mayor Hosterman felt that was correct. Mr. Brozosky believed people wanted wildflowers in the meadow and wide trails. Accent the area with bushes or roses and places to sit down and some kind of water element. He did not want something huge or manicured, more natural. Ms. Narum would like to see something like rose gardens such as appear in Golden Gate Park on a small scale. No structures and very passive. Ms. McGovem wanted lawn areas to throw a Frisbee or lay on the grass, but not used for organized sports. Mr. Rasmussen asked if tree areas were important? Somewhere where trees are grouped near meadow areas. The trees would be low, so as not to block views. Mr. Brozosky felt the trees were needed for shade. Mr. Sullivan said he liked everything he had heard so far. The Golden Gate Park idea of meadows separated by trees was very good. Mr. Rasmussen said that same concept was used on the other side of the freeway to provide http://www.ci.pleasanton.ca.us/archive/ccminutes050512ws.html 6/9/2005