Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Barker Park Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews three Barker Park concepts; staff recommends phased build with parking and events capacity
Summary
Consultants presented three conceptual layouts for Barker Park, each with soccer fields, pickleball, a destination playground, pavilion/event space and a pump track; council discussed parking counts, phasing, fundraising and long‑term maintenance and asked staff to refine phasing and cost estimates.
Kimley Horn landscape architect Marissa Pellegrini presented three concept plans for Barker Park developed through community outreach: all concepts include multi‑use soccer fields, a destination playground (separated by age groups), pickleball courts, group ramadas/pavilions, a three‑cell dog park and a pump track; the concepts differ in parking, the size and placement of the playground and an expanded event lawn in Concept C if an adjacent house were acquired.
Pellegrini said Concept A provides the most parking to support sports overlap and events; Concept B reduces parking and opens street frontage for visibility; Concept C imagines a larger contiguous event lawn and hardscape if the city were to purchase the neighboring house. The presentation included phasing: phase 1 focus on core amenities (fields, playground, pickleball and primary ramadas), phase 2 on additional parking and the dog park, and phase 3 on the island/event components. Pellegrini said the design included provisions for utilities and infrastructure for food trucks and event power runs.
Councilors asked about parking capacity for large annual events; staff said the largest event (the fireworks/charity day) would require roughly 1,500 stalls if the park were intended to host it in full, a scale beyond the concepts presented; nevertheless, Concept A’s higher parking count (over 400 stalls in the higher‑parking configuration) and flexible lawns would handle most regular uses and medium‑sized events. Staff estimated earlier versions of the park had a planning figure of about $8,000,000 and said build‑out will be phased and supplemented with grants, naming opportunities and impact‑fee allocations. Councilors emphasized maintenance costs, trail connections to the hollows and the possibility of closing the older dog park in favor of a consolidated facility in Barker Park.
Council generally favored advancing design work for phase 1 and 2 to address parking and field needs quickly and asked staff to return with cost estimates, a recommended phasing sequence and options for fundraising and grant applications. No final design or appropriation was approved at the meeting.
