Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nick Shannon Playground topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Gladstone board narrows priorities for Nick Shannon playground; accessibility and adaptive swings top survey results
Summary
Board members reviewed more than 100 survey responses and asked staff to pursue design options that prioritize accessibility, compact footprint and features such as ramps, adaptive/basket swings, spin elements and varied climbing features within an estimated $150,000 budget.
The Gladstone Parks and Recreation Board on Sept. 8 discussed design priorities for Nick Shannon Park after staff shared survey results that received more than 100 responses. Board members emphasized accessibility for a wide range of users — including sensory and cognitive needs and caregivers — and asked staff to ask designers for multiple options to fit a roughly $150,000 project budget.
Silas Richardson, public works director, told the board: "The budget we have earmarked for this is about a $150,000 for the project," and said that amount would need prioritization for play equipment, site preparation and surfacing. Members reviewed photographs of three example playgrounds and debated trade-offs between larger two-level structures and compact single-level designs with added elements such as ramps and accessible slides.
Board members suggested specific elements to include in the designer brief. Kate Cornelius voiced a preference for rotating play elements: "I just like spinny things, so I vote spinny things." Ian Moore and others recommended basket-style adaptive swings and a roller-style slide (which one board member said drains rainwater and is less slick when wet). Eric Butler urged including a mix of climbing and nature-play features to span ages and abilities.
Members discussed colors that would blend with the park’s oak-tree setting and asked staff to request mock-ups with option A/option B design alternatives. The board asked staff to advance the design procurement and return mock-ups for further review rather than finalizing components at this meeting.
Next steps: staff will solicit design options and return to the board with drawings and cost estimates for the selected footprint and features.
