My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2018-03-12 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
AgdaPkt 2018-03-12 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/13/2018 10:10:25 AM
Creation date
3/8/2018 4:15:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
3/12/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
274
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
DRAFT | 2 march 201833V SITE RANKINGSite Evaluation Ranking and ResultsThe ranking of the six selected sites is based upon the site and cost analyses as detailed in the fi rst few chapters of this report. This ranking utilizes the Site Evaluation Criteria presented in Chapter I to measure the various elements of what makes a park valuable to a community against the sites that were pre-selected for study by the City. Sites were individually scored using a 1-3 scale:• A ranking of 1 means that the site does not generally meet the individual criteria;• A ranking of 2 means that the site neutrally meets the individual criteria; and• A ranking of 3 means that the site fully meets the individual criteria.It should be noted that the individual criteria were weighted in the ranking to ensure that – overall – the three, broad categories (Safety & Vibrancy, Circulation & Connectivity and Potential for Program) were all weighted equally.On January 11, 2017, a workshop was held with roughly 20 Redwood City staff to discuss the project objectives, vet the Site Evaluation Criteria, and review each site’s opportunities and constraints. Throughout the workshop, staff provided input and “insider knowledge” on each of the selected sites. They also used the scoring program to rank each of the six sites; the staff rankings were consistent with those prepared independently by the consultant team. The draft analysis was then revised and presented to the Parks Commission during their January 24th public meeting. During the Parks Commission meeting, comments were received by the Commissioners and by members of the public who were in attendance. Several concerns addressed by the Parks Commission were related to the loss of surface-level parking spaces. The analysis has since been revised to indicate the potential number of spaces to be eliminated from the various sites. However, the site ranking has not been changed to address the potential loss of public parking spaces because it is still acknowledged that there remains a surplus of parking spaces in Downtown Redwood City.7.B. - Page 38
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.