Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council weighs four options for downtown park parking; tradeoffs include parking, safety and stormwater
Summary
Staff presented four options to repave and reconfigure the downtown park parking area (add spaces, remove parking, grass with bollards, or permeable pavers). Council debated tradeoffs among parking supply, child safety near the playground, farmer’s market access, stormwater control and maintenance costs.
Assistant Manager Cameron and planning staff presented four alternatives for the downtown park parking area and asked council for direction to refine estimates and designs.
Option 1 would remove bulb‑outs and increase parking from eight to 12 spaces, an approach several council members favored as preserving downtown parking. Option 2 would eliminate parking spaces but retain a mountable drive for service and market access. Option 3 would allow driving across grass for market/service access and restrict access with bollards; staff said this option would likely be the least expensive. Option 4 would install permeable pavers (the most expensive option, in staff’s estimate, at roughly $175,000-plus) to reduce runoff and allow heavier event use without destroying irrigation systems.
Council members raised safety concerns about adding spaces near a playground and backing movements; one member said adding 12 spots "puts 12 vehicles right next to a park where kids are gonna be running around." Staff noted the current parking lot has drainage and inlet structures and that switching to permeable surfaces could help reduce flood impact but would require ongoing maintenance to retain permeability. The town has $125,000 in the draft budget for the project and $50,000 set aside for irrigation upgrades; staff said more precise contractor estimates would follow if council narrows options.
No final design decision was made; council asked staff to gather contractor estimates and return with refined costs and implementation timelines. Councilmembers suggested observing farmer’s market activity and flooding patterns over the next month and revisiting the decision in July–August.
