2026 6 16 PACKET Regular Session Council

Unverified text extraction. Check the original page for numbers, names, and layout.

accommodate the request to change direction of the parking spaces  ( facing in  
towards the courts instead of out towards Harper Johnson) 
5. This project would involve limited demolition of existing sidewalk facilities 
6. This project would result in some loss of usable green space (7,000-10,000 SF) 
a. One thing to consider is that it does pu t parking  directly next to  existing park 
amenities ( basketball court) in addition to  potential future park amenities  ( i.e. 
repurposing green space to a splash pad, additional courts, etc.) 
7. The updated base option cost dropped primarily due to being able to eliminate the 
segmented retaining wall, which isn’t needed if the parking is flipped 
a. There is still a projected need for the small, segmented retaining wall in order to 
accommodate additional parking along E Harper Johnson  if the larger/expanded 
option is chosen 
 
In summary, based on public input the proposed layout(s) best aligns with the current and future 
needs of park users. Council has two options to consider.  
 
As was discussed at the input meeting, this assessment does not include costs for relocation of 
the monument. As was explained at the meeting, relocation should instead be  considered at a 
future date  commensurate with a decision on potential repurposing  of green space. 
Consideration should be given as to  whether the monument should be relocated elsewhere in 
the park (i.e. at the front next to the flagpole , as has been mentioned) or whether it may be 
preferable to modify/ integrate it into whatever amenity is constructed in a more holistic way 
that allows park goers to enjoy the facilities while also learning more about the park’s history.  
 
If there are any additional questions or concerns, let me know. 
 
39