|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A Pleasanton task force has recommended building a multi-million-dollar Civic Center and public library on a 27-acre site in the Bernal Community Park between Bernal and Valley Avenues and alongside the Union Pacific Railroad tracks.
The complex would replace the aging Civic Center and City Hall on a 13-acre parcel at 200 Old Bernal Ave. and the library at Old Bernal and Bernal avenue.
Pleasanton’s municipal buildings are the oldest among the 13 cities in Alameda County.
Brian Dolan, assistant city manager, said the task force was formed in February 2015 to explore options and make recommendations to the City Council. It now has completed that work, with its preferred plan the Bernal Park site, although it also included an alternate development that would keep a new Civic Center and the library on the current site all along Bernal Avenue and surrounded by a central internal plaza.
In that plan, a new community center would face Main Street with a new police station moving to face Old Bernal Avenue.
Dolan said the task force clearly favored the Bernal property, adjacent to where new sports fields and a wooded parkland are under development. That site would allow construction of an architecturally-creative building in a semi-circle configuration, backing on to the railroad corridor but facing out to the new Bernal Park meadow and a public plaza “which would flow out into the greater Bernal Community Park,” Dolan said.
A parking deck would be located east of the extension of Pleasanton Avenue into the complex.
Space in the proposed new library would be boosted from its current 30,000 square feet to 70,000 square feet in a two-story building. The new City Hall would occupy 45,000 square feet in a new two story building with the new police station to have 35,000 square feet of space, up from its current 21,000 square feet.
A new community center would have 20,000 square feet of space.
Dolan said city planners and the task force will hold public meetings to review the plans from 6 – 8 p.m.Tuesday May 31 and from 10 a.m. – noon Saturday June 18 in the Pleasanton Library, and also will present the plan to a Chamber of Commerce committee and the Pleasanton Downtown Association governing board on June 16.
It would be a real shame to see all of this moved away from downtown after such a long standing tradition.
Maybe we can pay for it and the 3% increase to employees with the added taxes we receive from the new Costco and new hotels.
Funny. I keep thinking the current library IS new. More likely, I AM old.
@Bill
In comparison to the libraries in Dublin and Livermore, our library is both small and old.
When was the downtown Pleasanton library built, by the way?
@Kathleen Ruegsegger: “Why do we need a new library?”
LOL! Your uncanny ability to come down on the wrong side of any topic is truly amazing, Kathleen!
@Sam
current library was opened in 1999.
The idea behind moving the library as well would be to open up the entire lot for things like a new retail space or parking.
@Kathleen Ruegsegger
Sorry if it came across as rude, Kathleen. I was just trying to have some fun.
@BOB
oops I stand corrected. it opened in 1988 but was still operating as a county library. It become a city library in 1999.
Sorry!
What the hell good does anyones comments do here?! Do you think any of the city planners,council members,or builders read this or care what we think?
Ultimately,whatever they want,they get!
I have used the library at all times of day and have never once seen it full. After school I have seen groups of screaming and misbehaving kids there because their parents find it an easy day care location. We do not need a new library, this one is fine. Just tell the parents that the library is not for unsupervised brats.
I think it is a excellent idea to make a new civic center. All of you are just fixated on the library. have you seen our city offices? They are in portables and spread over 3-4 separate buildings. We look like the poor cousin to other cities like Livermore, Dublin and Fremont and even Hayward. Just go and visit them and you will realize what i am talking about. This is long overdue.
Our library is much smaller then all these other cities. It is used a lot and it needs room to grow. For once the City leaders are on the right track.
I agree with Kathleen. Although a new Civic Center on the Bernal property would be nice, it would leave a large vacancy at the southern end of our downtown. The new center would be disconnected from downtown, difficult to walk to for many, and use land that has other potential uses. A new Civic Center in the same area as the current collection of portables and the library would be a nice anchor at the southern part of Main street allowing for cross-pollination of visitors between downtown businesses and the Center.
The late Bob Cordtz proposed this plan in 2000–with the Ace train station–and a larger meeting/convention center. Good idea then and a good idea now.
Have we saved up go this? Can we afford it?
I think this is a great idea.
Why do we need a new library? And why aren’t we considering ways to house the school district and city central offices together? That might open up the current school district/Village for other options, including a magnet high school.
Sam, I asked a question. Fair to give a legitimate answer rather than just being rude. Would love to know (1) why it has to be new as opposed to expansion, redesign, or both; (2) how you define “the wrong side” (because it doesn’t match your *sensibilities*?); (3) when it was decided million(s) dollar tax funded buildings less than 20 years old were a reasonable tear down option; and (4) why there isn’t a collaboration on a real city “center” to include school district offices; maximized use of tax payer dollars; and forward thinking, community based solutions.
This article says the current building opened in 1988.
http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/news/2013/11/15/library-celebrates-25-years-tonight
Thanks BobB, still sub-30 years and $6 million. I don’t know what that is in today’s dollars. Was there a design that did not tear down the library or that used the library in some other way?
Sam, I’ll take you at your word.
Roger, I don’t disagree the city (and the school district) could use new offices. I do, however, take exception to tearing down a $6,000,000 building to accomplish it. Did anyone ask for the architects to incorporate the library, up to and including expanding or remodeling if needed? Did any elected officials consider options for including the school district?