Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves City Park playground plan but rejects late change to taller slide over grant and schedule concerns
Summary
The Corcoran City Council approved a City Park playground plan, after councilmembers debated raising the slide height. Staff warned that increasing the slide would trigger additional engineering, larger safety impact zones and potential delays that could risk previously awarded federal funding.
The Corcoran City Council voted to approve the City Park playground design after a divided discussion over whether to install a taller slide than the plan adopted by Parks & Trails.
A councilmember recommended adding roughly 8 feet to the slide height and suggested the incremental cost (discussed in early vendor quotes as about $20,000) was a small portion of the project. City staff and the parks design consultant pushed back, saying a taller slide would expand the fall‑zone and require re‑engineering, larger playground foundations and likely a larger containment area, which would create additional, unquoted costs and delay the project schedule.
Staff warned council that re‑designing the site to accommodate a taller slide would likely delay bidding and construction and could jeopardize federal grant funding tied to the project. "We would lose $500,000 in federal funding if we don't start something," a staff member said, noting grant execution timelines and the city's deadline to complete grant‑funded work. Staff also said Parks & Trails had recommended the chosen slide height of 13 feet 8 inches as a compromise between providing a signature feature and meeting the project’s cost and schedule constraints.
Councilmembers discussed smaller design adjustments — for example, adding painted play markings such as hopscotch in alternative locations — which staff said could be implemented without changing the engineered fall zones. The council approved the project design as presented; the vote included at least one recorded opposition during the motion to approve.
Staff noted that if the council asks staff to pursue the taller slide, the project timetable would need to be revisited and additional engineering and cost estimates obtained before re‑advertising bids.
