Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Planning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board reviews Eastgate and Factoria neighborhood draft policies; members press for stronger safety and partnership language

Parks and Community Services Board · May 20, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City planners briefed the Parks and Community Services Board on draft neighborhood policies for Eastgate and Factoria. Board members urged stronger attention to public safety (CPTED), partnerships with private property owners and faith‑based organizations for gathering spaces, and more data-driven approaches to balancing court and field use.

City planners presented draft neighborhood‑area policies for Eastgate and Factoria and said the Great Neighborhoods program — begun in 2018 — has engaged roughly 1,200 people through 31 events to shape draft vision and policies. Justin Panganiban, senior planner, told the Parks and Community Services Board the draft policies emphasize neighborhood identity, community gathering space, mobility and access, and environmental protections, and that staff will bring an updated draft to the Planning Commission in June followed by council review later in the year.

Board members’ discussion focused on implementation and public safety. "Public safety is a lens in which we are looking at all of these different policies," Panganiban said, adding that design, partnerships with police and fire, and other measures will be considered. Board member Eric (last name not specified) asked whether the program will include crime‑prevention‑through‑environmental‑design studies. He said lighting alone is not sufficient and pushed for exploring environmental‑design studies as part of project planning.

Members also raised recreational resource allocation and partnership challenges: several speakers noted conflicts between pickleball and tennis courts and suggested collecting anonymized usage data to inform where courts should be sited or converted. Board members encouraged staff to pursue partnerships with property owners and faith‑based organizations to develop gathering spaces where public land is scarce, particularly in Factoria where few parks exist today. Paul Clark, in his final meeting, echoed the need for data and advance planning to avoid problems as neighborhoods densify.

Planners said concept maps are intentionally illustrative, not project lists, and represent candidate locations for possible neighborhood parks, thresholds (visual markers), and connected trail segments. Staff noted that neighborhood plans are intended to be revisited on a roughly decadal cycle and that future conditions such as light rail or major redevelopment could prompt targeted updates.

No formal board recommendation was requested on the neighborhood policies at this meeting; staff said feedback from the board would be included in the engagement report submitted to the Planning Commission.