My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 07/23/86
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
PC 07/23/86
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/17/2017 11:05:04 AM
Creation date
4/23/2007 4:21:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
7/23/1986
DOCUMENT NAME
PC 07/23/86
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Dolores Bengtson, Director of Parks and Community Services, <br />addressed the Commission. She stated that it is felt 5 acres <br />constitutes a neighborhood park and generally has a back stop <br />installed, a childrens' play area and generally no parking is <br />provided. <br />Ms. Bengtson then reviewed the definition of a community park <br />with its amenities. Ms. Bengtson cited the Tawny park as being <br />3.7 acres and was a compromise. Orloff is 8 acres and Woodthrush <br />is 2 acres. However, it should be noted that Woodthrush backs <br />into the Sports Park. <br />Commissioner Michelotti discussed with Ms. Bengtson park location <br />near the Staples Ranch and asked if that is why Park and <br />Recreation recommended the northeast corner for expansion. Ms. <br />Bengtson said they want to be able to increase it to a five acre <br />neighborhood or larger neighborhood park at a future date. Ms. <br />Bengtson further explained that many areas of town have waited 10 <br />years for development of their community parks and when a project <br />is pushed ahead it merely makes another one wait. Until such <br />time as access from the Stoneridge area is determined and <br />circulation patterns set, no one is sure what kind of park should <br />go in this location. <br />Ms. Bengtson stated that what she and Jacquie Oliverius stated to <br />Ms. Wallace was that nothing could be done until a development <br />goes through normal channels. The park was never brought to the <br />Park and Recreation Commission with a project and that is why it <br />was never considered. <br />Chairman Lindsey stated the Alternative "B", 2.5 acre parcel <br />would give flexibility to the expansion of a larger neighborhood <br />park. <br />Commissioner Michelotti said she had received a call from Park <br />and Recreation Commissioner Cooper whose main concern was the <br />lack of ability to expand later. She didn't want the <br />neighborhood to have a substandard park. <br />R. A. Oliva, 3109 Camdon Court, stated that 2.2 acres is just <br />fine for a neighborhood park based upon his years of experience <br />in dealing with such matters. He expressed concern with density <br />and resulting traffic problems. He stated he had called the <br />Parks Department on two separate occasions when this project came <br />up and was told that the situation was useless. He said since <br />that time somewhere along the line everything got messed up. Now <br />there is a question of a community park vs a neighborhood park. <br />All they want is a small green area and a place for the children <br />to play. <br />Commissioner Innes discussed with Mr. Oliva the size and location <br />of the proposed park. Mr. Oliva felt it should be at the center <br />or northwest corner of the site. <br />Larry Coleman, 3016 Leger Court, lives 300 feet from the proposed <br />project site. He was opposed to the construction of 110 homes <br />- 14 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.