My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:131
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:131
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2005 3:12:38 PM
Creation date
5/6/2005 2:53:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
5/12/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:131
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
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
"Beauty, You know it when you see it." This should be the priority. <br />There would be nothing more beautiful than having a community gatherin§ <br />area where the interests of all people are considered. As I have <br />described in the past, focusing on a plan which balances the service to <br />ALL, not just the organized, is the way to create a first class, <br />shining light in Pleasanton. <br /> <br />12. Reserving Space "For Future Use" <br /> <br />One person made the comment about having a "reserve". This makes good <br />planning sense. Removing above-ground parking and placing it <br />underground will free up more space which can be used in a category of <br />"Reserved For Future Use." This conservation of future options is an <br />excellent way of dealing with an uncertain future which nobody can <br />predict. In the meantime, the space can be used as a "Community Garden <br />Area" for growing vegetables, teaching farming, or something else. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br /> <br />Most of the people chose D, and I liked D and E (because the train <br />station was not on them), but after thinking about the details above, <br />it is not clear which would be best plan to accommodate the elements, <br />or whether another options should be brought forth. Incorporating <br />design elements and projecting them visually using animation would help <br />a great deal in assisting the members of the resident public in <br />visualizing and choosing the most balanced, family-focused, resident <br />focused plan. <br /> <br />Looking forward to helping think through the details. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Steve Page <br /> <br />From: Stephen Page <ichannel@comcast.net> <br />Date: Mon Apr 11, 2005 1:33:47 PM US/Pacific <br />To: tsnyder@ci.pleasanton.ca.us <br />Cc: ichannel@comcast.net <br /> Subject: Comments for the Bernal Property meeting <br /> <br />April 11, 2005 <br /> <br /> TO: Terry Snyder, City of Pleasanton <br /> <br /> FROM: Stephen J. Page, representing my children and other children who <br /> live in the South Pleasanton Sector of KB Homes, Bridle Creek, and <br /> other homes with no access to sports fields, basketball courts, or <br /> common gathering spots, 1113 Hopkins Way, Pleasanton, CA 94566, T: <br /> 925-484-5402, email: ichannel@comcast.net <br /> <br /> Title: Every day wasted talking and not acting, silently injures <br /> hundreds of children who lose the enjoyment which could result IF <br /> people acted in their best interests and built accessible, unlocked <br /> facilities. (Why the five site plan alternatives should be discussed <br /> while building out the core elements of an accessible, resident-focused <br /> plan...) <br /> <br /> Dear Terry and the City of Pleasanton leaders, <br /> The following are a set of facts which should guide the <br /> decision-making regarding the Bernal Property. <br /> <br /> Fact 1. The Pleasanton Community Park and Recreation department <br /> policies works in conjunction with the school district policies (PUSD) <br /> to limit the supply of available recreational facilities, placing <br /> locked gates around the playgrounds, which prevent neighborhood <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.