HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 Jordan Rch Park Conceptual Design tir it> \1'
fr 82 STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK
CITY COUNCIL File #920-60
10.
DATE: January 21, 2014
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Christopher L. Foss, Acting City Manager ��--
SUBJECT: Jordan Ranch Park Conceptual Design
Prepared by Douglas Rooney, Parks & Facilities Development Coordinator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The 2012-2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes funding for the design and
construction of a 4.4 acre Neighborhood Park in the Jordan Ranch Development. This park was
formally known as Fallon Village Neighborhood Park (Project Number 950020). As part of the
design process, Staff is seeking City Council approval of the Preferred Conceptual Design.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The project is funded through Public Facility Impact Fees. The Engineer's estimate for the park,
as designed, is $1,540,276. Sufficient funding is available to construct the park.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the presentation, approve the Preferred
Conceptual Design for the park, and authorize Staff to proceed with preparation of construction
documents.
put malA, NI/Rt./4
ubmitted By Reviewed By
Director of Parks and Acting Assistant City Manager
Community Services
DESCRIPTION:
The Jordan Ranch Planned Development covers 189 acres on the east side of Fallon Road and
the south side of Positano Parkway. The 2012-2017 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
includes funding for the design and construction of a 4.4 acre Neighborhood Park in the Jordan
Ranch Development. This park was formally known as Fallon Village Neighborhood Park
(Project Number 950020). On October 1, 2013, the City Council approved an agreement with
GSM Landscape Architects, Inc.to provide design services for the park.
Page 1 of 3 ITEM NO. 8.2
The Park parcel is located along Jordan Ranch Drive in the low density (phase 1) neighborhood
of the Jordan Ranch Development. The street wraps around the park on three sides. The
remaining side to the south abuts a trail that runs north to south through the Positano and
Jordan Ranch Developments, as well as an open space area and seasonal creek.
Staff worked with the landscape architect to develop three conceptual designs for the park.
Staff made additional efforts with this park project to increase the amount of input from residents
on the design. This included launching the Jordan Ranch Park Design Facebook page to serve
as a vehicle for making announcements, spurring community discussion and receiving
comments, to augment notifications from the City website. In addition, public meeting notices
were mailed to residences located south and east of Positano Parkway and email notices were
sent to all Brookfield homebuyers by the builder. A survey was posted on the city website and
linked to the Facebook page to gather input from those neighbors that could not make the
workshops, as well as input from the general community. The survey was available for a 12-day
period from November 25 through December 6, 2013.
A total of three public workshops were held where the landscape architect presented three
design options (Attachments 1 to 3). The presentations were recorded and posted on YouTube
for viewing by those unable to attend the meetings. The first meeting was held at the Civic
Center on November 13. Two subsequent meetings were held in a model home near the park
site on November 16 and December 7. Total attendance for the three workshops was 46
persons. The online survey was completed by 52 persons.
Feedback
After distilling all of comments from Facebook, the public meetings and the survey results, the
following preferences emerged.
Top five priorities for the park: Most important amenities:
#1 — Benches/tables #1 — Shade Structure (tie)
#2 —Trees #1 — Basketball Court (tie)
#3 — Children's play equipment (tie) #3 — Bocce Courts
#3 — Paths (tie) #4 — Horseshoe Pits
#5 —Shade #5 —Volleyball
Despite these areas of agreement, no clear preference emerged for both the park design and
the style of play equipment. A compilation of information from the workshops, survey and
Facebook yielded a near 50-50 split for design options A and C. As such, Staff directed the
landscape architect to prepare two preferred conceptual site plans to present to the Parks and
Community Services Commission (Attachments 4 and 5).
Preferred Conceptual Designs
GSM Landscape Architects has worked to incorporate the comments received to date from the
community into the two preferred conceptual designs.
Preferred Conceptual Site Plan 1 (revised - Option A) has incorporated the following changes:
P ) p 9 9
• Additional bench locations along pathways
• Large dense groves of trees added to shade picnic areas
• Mix of play equipment adjusted to reduce climbing structures and increase interactive
and moving elements. The style of the play structures remains "traditional."
Page 2 of 3
Preferred Conceptual Site Plan 2 (revised-Option C) has incorporated the following changes:
• Additional bench locations along pathways
• Bocce ball courts have been replaced with the basketball court
• Mix of play equipment adjusted to reduce climbing structures and increase interactive
and moving elements. The style of the play structures remains "futuristic and sculptural."
Parks and Community Services Commission Recommendation
The three original conceptual designs, as well as the two preferred conceptual plans, were
presented at the fourth public workshop that was held in conjunction with the Parks and
Community Services Commission meeting on December 16, 2013. After receiving public
comment, the Parks and Community Services Commission unanimously recommended
approval of Preferred Conceptual Site Plan 2 (Attachment 5) to the City Council.
Upon City Council approval of the Preferred Conceptual Design for the park, Staff will initiate the
development of construction documents.
The remaining schedule for the project is as follows:
• Construction Documents February 2014 — June 2014
• Bidding and Award July 2014 —August 2014
• Construction and Plant Establishment September 2014 — May 2015
NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:
Residents within the geographic neighborhood around the park site were notified via mail for all
public meetings. In addition, the builder emailed notices to all homebuyers including those
homes that were yet to be occupied.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Option A
2. Option B
ti 3. Option C
4. Preferred Conceptual Site Plan 1
5. Preferred Conceptual Site Plan 2
y3R
Page 3 of 3
0
O
m
=o <
<� w
y ¢ Q u 0 u 3 0
j n Ur UU m O• b o
oz he
F� I-4
pq
u Q
I--I d
2
U
z
u Q
zy
U
Z
Q
O
El
z
O
F-
n
O
Q
n
W
F-
N
J
F—
IL
LU
U
z
O
U
Q H
N
z w
x
O a
N
J
Q
U
z
CD
0
N
M e.
W.
m
� afro
LU
11
v�
UJ
U N
O °
u„
C U .
� ctl i
1 i %l
C)
'Z
V
w
ILQ
IL
U
Z
u
I
a� °moQa � LL
3
H u� o �
o`
oz Q N
El
El
N
J �C
2
L U
H a�ro z Z Z
rc
Z
a
0
0
m
Z
0
o
z
Q
J
W
J
Q M
O
w a.
Uw
Z �
w_
— U °
�e
� VE
U
b U9
� Q u&
�r c3e
%h5
i
I
7
W
W O
J `? vii w
J n H m
ug Q tr
W
to
r
� ii►
cL \\ ...
O<
O.
O
i
w z
Q
Z W
�=
Q
O u
CL
LL N
El
J r�
2
Q
U�
z
Z
Nrb ¢ 4
off h °
Q
m
o O
z
Q
O
U
z
O
F-
n
O
Q
J
n
W
F-
N
J
Q
W
z
O
U
co
O r
N
W
W
O a
Z �8�
v N
c3 �
U
d
L'i U. °^
k
q
��J' • 1-
a
o �
U
p � U
6 �
�as�m���o�3ooz�a
szwz000zF
000aoo oaa00000
a
\\ O ~ II O
Or—
LU
>O
0
0
o_
U
o
r'
\_
C)
O
\l
O \
r
O
O
i
oz
F
2
U
U=
o U
Z
Q
O
Z
Q
J
w
F—
J
w
U
O
U
0
w
M
^
I L
W
LL
W
CL
4 �
N
Z w
� x
O
N
J
Q
U
z
m
0
O pa
N ;?
N �s
q§
�k
w fx
m d6
'H
L ��y
w ge
LU
12
a
vN
�ju
G
s
t
0
w
�
�
W
a
p
2
w
U
N1y N V�
i
LU O� m o Z
z w z 0
Z rc¢ w v O
O
z
O O < w u O
O a o o
a
--ln 7
u oa000U am
7", o717-717-1
it
l
Ul/
it
Q I�
u
�i
I
I
0
� u
w i
\1
oz
I--�
a
2
w
U
N1y N V�
i
a�
z
a
it
0
m
z
Q
^J
I..L
LU
F—
V)
J
Q
F—
IL
W
z
0
U
0
LU
ry
LU
LL
LU
Q Ln
N
Z w
x
O a
J
Q
U
Z
co
D
0
Sn
O
N
N <_
� y=
LU %a
a0
W
Ui
LU "a
Vm
C
[6 U
7 ,fie
N U