CCMIN021505 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. McGovern believed this part of the process is troublesome, as the process seems to continue further without anyone actually making decisions. She would prefer to have some concrete part of the precess that talks about what this is really going to look like. Mayor Hosterman believed Council did discuss whether the community park would be 50 acres and if it should include ten lighted sports fields. Mr. Woffe said Council provided direction to staff at a workshop. He noted that neither this Council nor the previous Council has ever formally taken any action on a master plan for the Community Park. Mr. Sullivan believed these decisions would be made in steps one through four as outlined in Option One. Mr. Brozosky pointed out that there are five Phase II Specific Plan alternatives and only one plan for the sports fields. He believed the Commissions could consider new ideas for the entire area. Mayor Hosterman invited public comments. Jerry Thorne, a Pleasanton resident and co-author of the Initiative to Save Our Community Park, said he conducted an informal survey of a cross-section of the community. He said that most sports people felt that the Community Park was a done deal; the plan was in place. Now there is a concern that it is not a done deal. He added that there is a general feeling that there may be some intent to cireumvent the Initiative or to go around the intent of the Initiative. He pointed out that the firet plan that was proposed by the Community Task Force included an amphitheater, which is smaller than what is currently being considered. He believed Council needed to revisit the firet plan, as there was a high level of public input in the development of that plan. He is concerned about the location of the arts center and wanted to make sure that it is the focal point of the Bernal property. His vision for the arts center has been that it is located off Bemal Avenue, which creates an entryway into the property. Mary Roberts, a Pleasanton resident, supported staff's recommendation for the Option One process for reviewing the Community Park Master Plan. She supported Measure V and the design competition because she assumed that all of the functions that people want in this park would be integrated into the entire plan. She believed it is confusing to the community that there is a 30-50 acre community park that is a portion of the entire 318-acre City-owned portion of the Bernal property. The 30-50 acre community park is primarily a sports park but it has everything thrown into it, including the arts. She felt that planning the two pieces together would result in greater integration of the uses the community would like to see on the site. It is important for kids to realize that a park is more than a sports park and it is more than something for them. She believed there currently is a segregation of the various uses by generations, and that through this joint planning process, there will be an opportunity to integrate the uses. Pleasanton City Council 8 02/15/05 Minutes