The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022-06-28 Parks & Recreation Summary MinutesAPPROVED Approved Minutes 1 1 2 3 MINUTES 4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 5 SPECIAL MEETING 6 June 28, 2022 7 Council Chamber & Virtual Conference 8 Palo Alto, California 9 10 Commissioners Present: Chair Greenfield; Vice Chair LaMere, Commissioners Nellis 11 Freeman, Shani Kleinhaus, Anne Cribbs, Amanda Brown, and Joy 12 Oche 13 Commissioners Absent: 14 Others Present: Councilmember Tom DuBois 15 Staff Present: Lam Do 16 CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL 17 BUSINESS 18 1. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing Use of Teleconferencing for Parks and 19 Recreation Commission Meeting During COVID-19 State of Emergency 20 Commissioner Brown moved to adopt the Resolution. Seconded by Commissioner Cribbs, 21 the motion passed, 7-0, by roll call vote. 22 PUBLIC COMMENT 23 Susan Kemp, Palo Alto resident, said she is a long-time, regular lap swimmer at Rinconada 24 Pool and a member of Friends of Rinconada Pool. She referred to concerns mentioned 25 back in January about the inequitable and near elimination of discounts for seniors and 26 Palo Alto residents, compared to Master Program non-resident and non-senior 27 membership fees at the pool. They were told the pricing structure would be reexamined 28 when the summer changes were made in June. At the end of June, they have seen no 29 changes and not heard whether the issue has been considered. A survey circulated to 30 swimmers in early June showed that while seven in ten feel that the price they pay is 31 acceptable, six in ten felt the disparate increase in prices is unfair and should be remedied. 32 To their knowledge, no other Parks and Recreation program has reduced senior and 33 resident discounts this dramatically, so it cannot simply be a consequence of the COVID-34 APPROVED Approved Minutes 2 19 pandemic. Ms. Kemp said it feels discriminatory and is harming the health of seniors 1 and residents in Palo Alto. 2 Yudy Deng, Palo Alto resident, said she regularly runs at the Cubberley Community track 3 and field. She saw that the Friends of Palo Alto Parks are raising funds to refurbish the 4 field and track. Several years ago, she was a Parks Board member at City of Bellevue, 5 WA. She was in full support of the program and started fundraising within her two Asian 6 American groups. First, in the Burn [phonetic] Running group raised about $6,000. The 7 other, the Asian American Youth Soccer Academy, raised about $2,000. They would like 8 to do a celebration ceremony at the community track and want to invite a few 9 Commissioners to attend their celebration, if possible. 10 Chair Greenfield expressed appreciation for the public comments, positive comments, and 11 information regarding celebrations. 12 AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, DELETIONS 13 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 14 2. Approval of Draft Minutes from the May 24, 2022, Parks and Recreation 15 Commission Meeting 16 Motion by Commissioner Brown to approve the minutes of the May 24, 2022, Parks and 17 Recreation Commission meeting with amendments noted by Vice Chair LaMere and Chair 18 Greenfield. Seconded by Commissioner Kleinhaus, the motion passed, 7-0 by roll call 19 vote. 20 Chair Greenfield noted that Councilmember DuBois joined the meeting. 21 CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 22 3. Department Report 23 Mr. Do acknowledged and thanked Nadia Chuprina in helping to facilitate the meeting 24 while some staff members needed to attend remotely. 25 Mr. Do reported that on June 1st the City Council reviewed and approved the 2022 – 2023 26 work plan for the Parks and Recreation Commission. On June 6 the Council adopted the 27 Tree Ordinance, including an update to the Municipal Code 2.25.050, which is the 28 purposes and duties of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The update is in response 29 to City Council’s direction to have staff formalize the Commission’s role and input into 30 Urban Forestry issues. The Commission will serve as a community forum for the 31 Department of Public Works, Urban Forestry Section matters and also provide feedback, 32 recommendations, and interpretations to the City Council on the Urban Forest Master Plan 33 APPROVED Approved Minutes 3 and other associated policies. 1 On June 15th, there was a community meeting to discuss adding a skate park adjacent to 2 the existing skate bowl at Greer Park. There were 21 participants at the meeting, and the 3 feedback was generally positive and supportive of the proposed location and the process 4 so far. The Skateboard Ad Hoc Committee will be meeting and preparing to bring the topic 5 back to the full Commission potentially in July. 6 The Cubberley tennis courts should be completed within the next couple days and will 7 open in July. The tennis courts at Peers are being renovated as well, with completion 8 expected by early July as well. 9 Mr. Do gave an update on recruitments in the Department. Within the Division of Open 10 Space, Parks and Golf there were two recruitments for the Parks team. They are currently 11 recruiting for a Parks Maintenance position and a Parks Irrigation position. Also, they are 12 recruiting for an hourly Assistant Park Ranger. Within the Department of Community 13 Services, they are recruiting for a Senior Management Analyst. 14 Family movie nights at Mitchell Park are back. Movies start at 7:00 p.m. and attendance 15 is free. The next movie night is scheduled for July 22nd, when the movie, Luka, will be 16 shown. Space is limited, and pre-registration per family is required. Registration may be 17 completed at the “City Events” page on the City calendar at cityofpaloalto.org/calendar. 18 On June 18, from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., the City of Palo Alto hosted an open house at 19 the Municipal Service Center to showcase activities behind the scenes at the Center and 20 services offered to the community by staff. This event was on hiatus during the COVID 21 period, but the City has brought it back. 22 At the May Commission meeting, staff had mentioned that pickleball lines on the shared 23 use tennis courts at Mitchell were painted on May 23rd. The intent was to provide a color 24 that made it easier to see the lines. A Commissioner suggested checking in to see how they 25 are working, and they have since received numerous emails from the pickleball community 26 expressing their thanks and pleasure with the painted lines. The responses came in 27 immediately, so the lines seem to be working out at this point. 28 Cubberley Gym A and Gym B remain closed due to flooding issues in the gym crawlspace 29 and walls. Public Works is working with contractors on the issue. Use of the Pavilion for 30 all gym activities is limited. Staff has located other spaces to refer displaced renters to, 31 including the Cubberley Pavilion and referrals to other gyms, such as the YMCA. 32 The Fourth of July Summer Festival is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at Mitchell 33 Park. There will be live music provided by Radio City Allstars and DJ Verz. There will be 34 food trucks and a kids area including games, activities, and inflatables. 35 APPROVED Approved Minutes 4 At Rinconada Pool, hiring is underway for group lessons, and they anticipate offering 1 lessons throughout July. The Open Swim program has been a little slow, but participation 2 is expected to pick up with the arrival of warmer weather. Current swim lessons and 3 summer camps are doing well and reaching capacities. In response to a question at the last 4 Commission meeting regarding how many scholarships have been requested and awarded 5 for swim lessons, camps, and other recreation programs, for the pool and Tim Sheeper, 6 they offer a scholarship program which is directly administered by them and Beyond 7 Barriers. Mr. Do provided some statistics. For calendar year 2021, there were 36 8 scholarship participants who took part in 169 lessons, which averaged out to about 4.7 per 9 participants through the program. Scholarship activity for 2022 should increase, as it will 10 include swim camps as well. 11 Programs offered through the City’s Community Services Department in recreation 12 include scholarships at different levels. Nine scholarships have been awarded at a 25-13 percent reduction; 157 at the 50-percent level. Three annual passes for low-income 14 families have been issued at Foothills. The number of applicants declined was not available 15 as it is not tracked; however, people placing applications are aware of the income level 16 standards and where they fall in line, so most application received are approved. 17 Mr. Do reported at the last meeting there was a question about the middle school athletics 18 program. They are currently running their full complement of programs, including girls 19 and boys volleyball and basketball, along with co-ed flag football, co-ed cross country, co-20 ed tennis, co-ed track and field and co-ed wrestling. All programs remain quite popular 21 and fill up quickly. Hiring has been the biggest challenge with the programs in the past 22 and remains so. Unfortunately, it is now a bigger hurdle. Typically, they hire as many 23 qualified coaches as possible, which allows for adding capacity. They also hire volunteer 24 coaches to support the demand who are trained in-house by City staff and Positive 25 Coaching Alliance. They are looking at a change to the registration process. Currently, 26 programs fill within minutes of the registration window opening, so they are looking at 27 moving away from the current process and looking for a process that may be more 28 equitable. 29 For the current year, the challenge in finding and hiring coaches has been much more 30 difficult. In prior years the challenge has been finding people available between the hours 31 of 3:00 to 6:00 p.m., for after-school sports. These hours have limited the pool of available 32 coaches. This year it has been much more difficult to find people willing to coach at all. 33 They are unsure whether this is COVID-related. The hiring process has also been impacted 34 by a slower onboarding and hiring process due to the Citywide backlog of hiring for 35 programs throughout City departments. It has also been impacted by a backlog of hiring 36 due to staff turnover throughout the city. 37 Mr. Do reported on a proposal to add a water play feature at one of the parks. Staff has 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 5 discussed this and feels it is better to revisit such a proposal after the drought is over. There 1 is also a challenge with staff time, both in Community Services and in Public Works 2 Engineering, having enough bandwidth to manage existing projects and ones identified in 3 the near future, such as the CIP plan. 4 Lastly, Mr. Do reported that staff has coordinated with the Chair to establish a frequency 5 in providing the Commission with Public Comments submitted outside of Commission 6 meetings. As Public Comments are sent via email, the emails will be provided to the 7 Commission on Mondays (each week with and without a Parks and Recreation 8 Commission meeting), and on the Friday (end of day) before a Parks and Recreation 9 Commission meeting, and on the day of the meeting up until 3:00PM. 10 Vice Chair LaMere asked Mr. Do if there was a way to find the number of youth served 11 in the middle school athletic programs in an academic year. Mr. Do will coordinate with 12 the Recreation Division that runs the program and will provide it in a future Commission 13 meeting. 14 BUSINESS 15 4. Ad Hoc Committees and Liaison: Reports and Assignments and Consideration of 16 Establishing an Urban Forest Ad Hoc Committee 17 Chair Greenfield explained there is currently a two-person Liaison role for Urban Forestry. 18 There was no Ad Hoc previously created because there was no specific project for an Ad 19 Hoc to discuss. With City Council recently adopting the update to the Tree Ordinance, 20 Title 8, they have requested that within the next year both the Planning and Transportation 21 Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission review the updates regarding the tree 22 ordinance and recommend any potential changes, so there is now a formal task regarding 23 Urban Forestry to review. This is an action they would vote on. Chair Greenfield invited 24 any discussion regarding this proposal. He said currently, he and Commissioner Kleinhaus 25 are the Liaisons to Urban Forestry. The update regarding the Parks and Recreation 26 Commission Municipal Code formalizing their role with Urban Forestry does not change 27 anything they do, because there was a provision in the Municipal Code allowing them to 28 take on additional responsibilities as directed by City Council, but it seemed appropriate 29 to formalize that change so that it will be called out in the Municipal Code in Chapter 2, 30 and the responsibilities for the Parks and Recreation Commission are defined. 31 Commissioner Cribbs asked which staff member from Community Services is working 32 with the Ad Hoc Committee. Chair Greenfield replied it is Peter Gollinger, of the Public 33 Works Department, who is the Urban Forester. 34 Commissioner Brown asked if there would need to be a revision to the workplan approved 35 by Council to establish the ad hoc. Chair Greenfield said in this case they have been 36 APPROVED Approved Minutes 6 directed by City Council to take on the action, so he didn’t think there was any question 1 or problem with them creating an ad hoc, but here is a question about adding the item to 2 the work plan to address this. Councilmember DuBois thought there would be updates to 3 workplans every six months or so. Chair Greenfield suggested in addition to creating the 4 ad hoc, that the new ad hoc can create a workplan item to bring to the Commission for 5 approval as an action item, and then send it on to City Council for approval at Council’s 6 discretion. 7 Commissioner Freeman asked if there are any already items in the workplan that could be 8 incorporated into that. Chair Greenfield said there is currently a workplan item regarding 9 Urban Forestry to address Urban Forestry matters as appropriate. Hearing no further 10 discussion, Chair Greenfield invited a motion to create the Ad Hoc. 11 Commissioner Kleinhaus moved to create an Urban Forestry Ad Hoc Committee. 12 Seconded by Commissioner Oche, the motion passed (7-0), by roll call vote. 13 Chair Greenfield currently said Commissioner Kleinhaus and he are the Liaisons to Urban 14 Forestry, so he assumed they would stay on the Ad Hoc but there would be an opportunity 15 for a third person to join the Ad Hoc. With no other Commissioners desiring to be on the 16 Ad Hoc, Chair Greenfield directed that he and Commissioner Kleinhaus be moved from 17 Liaisons to the Urban Forestry Ad Hoc Committee. 18 Chair Greenfield invited reports from the remaining Ad Hoc Committees. 19 Commissioner Cribbs requested that the Commission look at the list of committees to 20 make sure they all have an up-to-date list with the appropriate staff people, since some 21 changes have been made. Chair Greenfield agreed that they will update the Ad Hoc and 22 Liaison sheet, and there will be a link to it on the Parks and Recreation Commission 23 landing page. 24 Commissioner Cribbs gave a report on the Recreational Opportunities Ad Hoc. Regarding 25 the Community Wellness/Recreation Gym/Center, they are thinking about the most 26 appropriate name for the facility, wanting to get away from simply “gym,” because it is 27 meant to be more than a basketball court solely, but to serve the entire community and 28 provide a sense of a gathering place for all ages. Commissioner Freeman thought they had 29 settled on “Recreation Center of Palo Alto,” at this point. Commissioner Cribbs said they 30 are also working on corporate documents. They have a list of locations that were shared 31 last year when reporting on this, and they are creating details on each location. They are 32 talking quietly in the community with both community members who support the concept 33 and Councilmembers, since they will need everyone to get involved in the project. She 34 thought it was time for the full Commission to have a discussion at a future meeting, 35 perhaps in August or September. 36 APPROVED Approved Minutes 7 Commissioner Cribbs commented that the community meeting referenced by Mr. Do 1 regarding the skate park was excellent, and the skaters were very excited about moving 2 ahead and the upcoming discussion with the PRC. The Friends of the Parks indicated they 3 would be honored to receive the funding for the skatepark as a place for the community 4 and the stakeholders to put their money as they move to raise money for it. She encouraged 5 the Commissioners to go to the Friends of Palo Alto Parks website to look at the things 6 they are funding, such as the track referred earlier. 7 Commissioner Freeman added that the Ad Hoc meets on a weekly basis, for discussion 8 including looking at gyms/recreation centers in other cities, potential board and Advisory 9 board candidates, and identifying resources in the community. Getting a name that people 10 can be become familiar with is one of their current challenges, as well as looking at 11 different locations and the pros and cons of each. 12 Vice Chair LaMere followed up on Mr. Do’s comments regarding Cubberley and said they 13 have heard it could be at least a year that the gyms will be out of commission. It is great 14 that they have been able to accommodate people, but for other events looking to use the 15 gyms in the future with the shape Cubberley is in and thinking of recreational opportunities 16 as a whole as well and adding capacity or building a new recreation center is important. 17 Chair Greenfield asked for clarification that the gyms that were damaged may be offline 18 for a year or more. Vice Chair LaMere confirmed this. 19 Commissioner Kleinhaus thanked the Ad Hoc for their exciting work. She suggested that 20 in their outreach to the public regarding locations, they add the Sierra Club and other 21 environmental organizations to the community that is being consulted regarding location. 22 Councilmember DuBois said he thought the Council was told about the Cubberley issue, 23 but not the extent of it. He suggested a letter to them from Parks and Recreation 24 Commission would be useful to inform them about how long Cubberley will be out of 25 commission. Chair Greenfield asked if it should be from the Commission or from staff. 26 Councilmember DuBois thought it could be either, but it just should be highlighted, even 27 if by just one Commissioner would call it to Council’s attention. He said he would also 28 talk to people about it, because he didn’t think people realize the extent of the problem. 29 Commissioner Cribbs added, except the people who were using the facility and are 30 currently unable to. She volunteered to send a letter or email to the Council, or work with 31 the Chair to do so. She mentioned the money for the roof has already been approved, and 32 that the school kids will be there for two years. They are concerned about the fact that the 33 gyms won’t be available for that period of time. Chair Greenfield noted that they will make 34 sure a communication is shared with Council when they return from their break. 35 Commissioner Brown commented that the City of Tracy is building a multi-generational 36 recreation center. They had an RFP issue around 2021 and also have information on how 37 they funded the center. She said it might be a good case study to look at and contact some 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 8 of their staff or Commission members. Commissioner Cribbs said she was aware of the 1 work they have done, which is great outreach and development, and good to keep track of. 2 Commissioner Freeman reported they have been looking at some of the documentation on 3 activity on the soccer fields. He thought they are moving in the right direction. There were 4 some lights out, and they got feedback on the project there going forward. He said he met 5 last week with Mr. Do and got an update on the golf. He inquired about the comment that 6 there is a maintenance position open for the golf course. He wondered if this was the 7 position for the vendor who is providing the landscaping and maintenance. Mr. Do 8 responded that two positions mentioned – Park Maintenance and Park Irrigation positions 9 – are for maintaining City parks and some agreements for shared maintenance of some 10 school district sites. It is separate from the agreement with the contracted golf course 11 operator. Chair Greenfield added, regarding the fields, that Mayfield – Stanford’s playing 12 fields – will be closed from July 27th through August 9th, with possible extension through 13 August 16th, to replace the infield material. He said he has been there recently, and the 14 condition is not good. 15 Commissioner Cribbs said regarding the Funding Opportunities Ad Hoc, Commissioner 16 Oche, Vice Chair LaMere and she met last week and talked about the past reports that have 17 been done and going forward in the future they will be meeting with staff the first week in 18 July with hopes of putting together a funding suggestion report that will come to the 19 Commission in July to discuss and hopefully make some progress. Chair Greenfield added 20 that all of the ad hocs should be working to bring an update to the full Commission on an 21 upcoming agenda, so that decisions can be made as a body. He looks forward to having an 22 update on funding at either the July or August meeting, depending on their readiness. 23 Commissioner Kleinhaus asked if the Funding Ad Hoc is looking at State funding for 24 restoration projects for parks, such as the ITT property. She said there is quite a bit of 25 money and will be more with the 30 By 30 campaign. She wondered if Palo Alto has 26 thoughts about trying to get some of that money for their parks. Commissioner Cribbs 27 thought it was important for it to be on the list for discussion and also to see what is 28 available. Post-COVID, there may be funding, but she knows there are foundations very 29 interested in restoration and open space, as there is much needed. Commissioner Kleinhaus 30 said they could pitch the fact that Foothills is now open to everyone, so it needs additional 31 investment. Commissioner Oche added that when they present to the PRC meeting in July, 32 they will also talk about exploring opportunities to get grant writers. 33 Chair Greenfield reported on the Hawthorns site, part of Windy Hill Open Space Preserve, 34 part of Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space District. It is a new site, triangle-shaped and 35 in proximity to Foothills Nature Preserve and Arastradero Preserve. It is currently closed 36 to the public, but Mid-Pen is working on an outreach project to allow public access. The 37 process includes outreach to the City of Palo Alto. He has met with a project manager from 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 9 Mid-Pen, as well as staff members, Daren, and some of the park rangers. One of the most 1 interesting takeaways is the timeline. It is drawn out quite far into the latter part of the 2 decade before there will be any kind of access. There will be a task force of stakeholders, 3 as discussed last summer, and they are looking to create this about a year from now. In the 4 meantime, there were some tours available of the site, open on the Mid-Pen website, which 5 filled up very quickly. Hopefully, there will be more available, and he will notify the 6 Commission if this occurs. 7 Chair Greenfield reported on the Park Dedication Ad Hoc. They met with Daren for initial 8 discussions about a recommendation to re-dedicate the Measure E site as parkland. This is 9 the 10 acres at the Baylands (located in Byxbee Park Hills). They look forward to coming 10 back to the Commission with a recommendation in the next month or two. 11 Chair Greenfield reported that the Electric Conveyances Ad Hoc met again to continue 12 work on a recommendation for a policy for the City of Palo Alto regarding ebikes and 13 other electric conveyances for parks and open spaces. Part of this includes a survey of what 14 other organizations are doing. Mid-Pen is having a meeting tomorrow to consider changes 15 to their rules. They currently have a couple trials in process regarding ebikes. 16 Chair Greenfield and Commissioner Kleinhaus attended the Foothills stakeholder group. 17 The group meets every month or two to review a range of subjects at Foothills Nature 18 Preserve. The new Supervising Ranger at Foothills, Mike Warner, gave a presentation. 19 Chair Greenfield thought they could ask him to come to the Commission so they can meet 20 him and get an update of what’s happening at Foothills. 21 Commissioner Cribbs shared her Aquatics Liaison report. She had a conversation with 22 Tim Sheeper recently about how swimming is going, particularly the scholarships and 23 swim lesson program and how much they can be doing to make sure kids in the community 24 are able to have lessons and learn to swim. He felt it is going much better now. Swim 25 lessons are incorporated as part of the camps right now. She felt things are looking up from 26 that perspective. She read an article that there is a national lifeguard shortage, not just in 27 Palo Alto, but everywhere across the country, about 30 percent less lifeguards are 28 available. There are about 110 new staff people working and training right now, so Mr. 29 Sheeper feels he is near normal, although he would like to have 30 to 40 more people 30 working for him. She felt the work that everyone has done with Mr. Sheeper and Team 31 Sheeper is bearing fruit. 32 There is still discussion about pricing for the lap swimming, especially the senior 33 discounts, because people are feeling that it is too expensive. She thought the Department 34 was going to continue to look into that through the summer. She felt they should keep 35 track of this, because swimming is so good for the senior population, and she felt the 36 Commission should help make it as inexpensive and cost effective as they can while 37 making sure the bills can be paid. 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 10 Commissioner Cribbs said the wading pool will closed on Saturday, because kids are 1 getting cut feet. This happens a lot when the concrete is not smooth. It is a maintenance 2 problem that they will work on, although she didn’t know how long it will take. The public 3 will be informed about this. Mr. Sheeper also mentioned that his relationship with Public 4 Works is great and that the maintenance issues that come up get resolved quickly. She also 5 found out that they did not get to do the family restroom yet that was in the works and in 6 the CIP plan. It went away during COVID, and she hoped it would come back again. 7 Chair Greenfield asked that she keep them posted on the review of the fees, because it is 8 something they are interested in hearing. Commissioner Cribbs said it is tough because 9 swimming pools, lessons, lap swimming, all make their money during June, July and 10 August, and those funds support the rest of the year. She said it is something they should 11 all try to keep track of, and it is good to hear from the public about it. Chair Greenfield 12 added that, similarly, he wanted to make sure she or staff is in touch with Yudy Deng to 13 get information on their planned fundraising celebration at Cubberley. Commissioner 14 Cribbs noted that Friends of Cubberley Track is something that David Moss initiated and 15 has the piece on the website on the Friends of the Park website. She said she would be 16 happy to reach out to Ms. Deng, unless it’s more appropriate for staff to do it. Chair 17 Greenfield thought it would be great if she could reach out to Mr. Moss. He has seen the 18 poster at Cubberley and heard people comment about it, and he has explained to some 19 people what it is there for. Commissioner Cribbs thought that everyone is very happy about 20 the track, it is well-used. 21 Chair Greenfield invited any further questions or comments from Commissioners or staff. 22 Hearing none, he closed the agenda item. 23 5. Mitchell Park Dog Park Expansion 24 Chair Greenfield invited Peter Jensen, City of Palo Alto Landscape Architect, to present 25 this item. Mr. Jensen shared a presentation regarding expansion of the Mitchell Park Dog 26 Park. He explained that there are currently four dog parks in Palo Alto. Mitchell Park is 27 about a half-acre in size. It was, for a long time, the largest dog park in the city and is very 28 well-used. Not long ago, the Peers Park Dog Park was finished, which is now the largest 29 dog park in the city. There is also Greer Park and Hoover Park which are much smaller 30 scale parks in the system. The current policy for dogs in parks is that no off-leash dog 31 activity is currently allowed in any park in Palo Alto unless in a fenced, designated dog 32 park area. Citations and fines can be issued for dog owners currently if they are off leash 33 in parks. 34 The City is actively trying to expand the dog park system to provide areas for off-leash 35 dog activity for the underserved areas. When the City put together the Parks Master Plan 36 in 2016-2017, a site analysis was done of different amenities in the city. He showed the 37 geographic analysis for off-leash dog parks in the city at the time. Peers Park did not exist 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 11 at that time. He shared a diagram pointing out areas that are within a quarter mile or half-1 mile of a dog park. They have tracked the distance that it would take to walk to those parks. 2 For Hoover, the location within the half-mile is out of the area when physically walking 3 there, depending upon street access, creeks, et cetera, which can limit access. Mitchell dog 4 park is in the south of town; Hoover in the middle of town; Greer Park to the east, and the 5 north Palo Alto does not have any dog park activity at all, which is something that came 6 up as part of the Parks Master Plan and that they want to focus on. Peers Park was added, 7 and in the future, they will be adding Bowden Park which is fairly close, so the central 8 area of Palo Alto provides dog park areas, but they are still lacking in North Palo Alto. 9 The City Council prioritized the expansion of dog parks as a goal in 2017 as part of the 10 Parks Master Plan. An ongoing capital improvement was set up as a response to that, the 11 goal of which is a bi-annual CIP so every other year there is $150,000 basically set aside 12 in a CIP fund to build new dog parks or expand existing ones, trying to prioritize a dog 13 park in the north Palo Alto area. In 2018, the City opened the first dog park in 20 years in 14 Palo Alto, at Peers Park, which is almost an acre in size. With construction at Boulware 15 Park coming up, they will also have a new dog park there. 16 Future projects include the current project at Mitchell Park and future exploration of off-17 leash dog use areas in parks. Instead of having a devoted single-use space just for dog 18 parks, they are looking at parks in general and providing areas at specific times during the 19 day that dogs can be off leash in the park. This is something that they will be exploring 20 more in the future. 21 Regarding the Mitchell Park Dog Park expansion, Mr. Jensen shared the layout, which is 22 a little over a half-acre. When trying to expand the system, one acre in size is preferred for 23 the overall space itself and heavy use. An acre is a little more manageable especially if 24 trying to maintain turf in the area. Half of the Mitchell Park area is turf and half is 25 decomposed granite. This is because at some points during the year for a few months the 26 grass area is closed off in order to renovate and repair it. When the dog park is smaller it 27 is more difficult to keep turf in the area. 28 Current amenities include two hose bibs, which provide water for the dogs and allow them 29 to be washed off. It has seven benches, two picnic tables and one waste receptacle, and is 30 surrounded by a chain link fence. The scope of the project is basically to expand the area, 31 make it larger than the half-acre. They would also like to look at creating a small dog park 32 area. They see success when the smaller dogs have their own space, since they can get 33 overwhelmed in a space with larger dogs. They would like to replace the existing fencing 34 with new fencing that is a little higher, add additional seating, maintain the hose bibs, but 35 relocate them to be more optimally located; reconfigure the irrigation to optimize 36 maintenance and irrigation of the grass and try to keep the grass in shape. 37 One thing the dog park doesn’t do now is allow for the 10-foot setback, the easement from 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 12 the creek. Currently the park goes all the way to the creek, so they want to re-establish the 1 easement there. The plan also keeps the picnic area and hilltop separate from the dog park 2 area. The hilltop has some bench seating. The majority of the benches are donated 3 community benches, and they felt it was better to provide full community access to the 4 benches at the top of the hill instead of having them accessed within the dog park. The 5 plan replaces the hilltop slope grass with a different type of grass, a no-mow variety, to 6 reduce the maintenance and watering for those areas on the outside of the dog park itself. 7 that are not used as much. 8 There was a community meeting held on May 4th regarding the dog park project. There 9 were six attendees. The proposed expansion of the existing dog park as well as the addition 10 of a small dog park were supported by those in attendance. Participants commented on 11 trying to make the area as large as possible. Some definitely would like to see the hilltop 12 and slope added to the overall design. In the iteration of a newer design, they did expand 13 into the hillside area to get more space for a larger dog park. There are some drainage 14 issues in the decomposed granite space where the area fills up with water after rain. They 15 would like to rectify this so there is not a big lake out there after a rain. They would like 16 to provide more seating. Everyone in attendance was in favor of trying to maintain the 17 grass as best as possible. Mr. Jensen noted that it is very difficult to maintain grass in a 18 dog park. The only effective way is to shut it down now and then. They hope to shut the 19 turf down in phases so that areas of turf will be maintained open and there will be 20 accessible grass throughout the year. 21 The large dog park area proposed was shared. The fence will be moved ten feet away from 22 the creek. The area for the small dog park was shared. In between the spaces is the hilltop 23 where the bench seats are located that they would like to maintain outside of the fenced 24 area. Overall, the new dog park would be 35,000 square feet, or 0.82 acres, which is close 25 to the ideal one-acre. The smaller dog park would be 4,000 square feet, about 0.1 acre, 26 which seems small, but for smaller dogs it is a good size. The overall increase is 0.36 acre, 27 almost a full acre if adding the small and large parks together. Small dogs are still invited 28 to use the larger area based on owner preference but will have the opportunity for the 29 smaller area to be available as well. 30 Mr. Jensen reiterated the scope of the project, including expanding the current dog park; 31 creating a separate small dog park; replacing existing fencing around the perimeter from 32 the current four-foot chain link fence to a five-foot height to help maintain balls, toys or 33 dogs that may jump out. They would like to replace the gates and maintain the double 34 entry gates, which is a safety feature. The project will add additional seating, consisting of 35 two benches to the big dog park and three to the small; relocate the two hose bibs to more 36 optimal locations and add one to the small dog park area; reconfigure the irrigation, which 37 is a large part of the project. To make the turf area successful it relies on irrigation, which 38 is tough in a drought, but the better coverage and newer types of irrigation products help 39 APPROVED Approved Minutes 13 both reduce water and disperse more evenly through the space. The project will re-1 establish what should have been there from the beginning. The picnic area and hilltop area 2 will be outside so they can still be used by the full community. The area outside the dog 3 park currently is in grass that is mowed, and they propose to maintain the grass to keep the 4 aesthetic feel of the space, but will be changed to a no-mow variety to reduce maintenance 5 as well as pollution from lawn mowers. It will also use a little less water. 6 Another slide showed the proposed servicing of the different areas. They will maintain the 7 decomposed granite in the larger dog park. They will maintain the existing grass area that 8 is currently there and add onto the area with new seeded grass. The small dog park will 9 also have grass. There is a frontage along the walkway of decomposed granite, which is to 10 help in trimming the grass underneath the fence when it has an edge between the sidewalk 11 and actual grass area. Most of the grass is on a sloped space and is not used for any 12 programmed activity, so for environmental purposes and maintenance, they have changed 13 that to a no-mow grass. 14 The project schedule is to return to the Parks and Recreation Commission either next 15 month or the month after with a Park Improvement Ordinance which would go to Council 16 to be adopted. They are currently working on actual construction and bid package to be 17 able to send it out to bid, once the PIO is approved by Council at its second reading. The 18 project hopefully will be built in the fall and open sometime either at the end of this year 19 or the first of next year. 20 Chair Greenfield invited Commissioner Brown, Liaison for the dog park, to add any 21 appropriate comments. Commissioner Brown applauded the extensive outreach that Mr. 22 Jensen has done with dog park stakeholders, community stakeholders as well as city 23 stakeholders in planning for the maintenance and function of the area. 24 Chair Greenfield invited clarifying questions from the Commission. 25 Commissioner Kleinhaus thanked Mr. Jensen for keeping the hill with benches outside of 26 the expansion. She said there are many people on the hill, almost all day, people with 27 babies, people using the benches, and it is nice to see. She wondered if they might need to 28 build a retention wall with all of the activity on the slope, to support the hill. Mr. Jensen 29 said the overall slope is not overly steep and they do not anticipate any degradation of the 30 it. The grass will assist with that, as well as some existing trees that will remain. Their 31 initial plan that was previously shown to the community had the fence coming down 32 further and not capturing as much of the slope as they now show. 33 Mr. Jensen said there was a request by the community to try to make the dog parks larger 34 and incorporate some of the slope into the dog park itself. In their design considerations 35 for doing that, they are trying to keep the slope that is within the dog park either on the top 36 of the mound or coming downslope. There is one section that is downslope, so it you threw 37 APPROVED Approved Minutes 14 a ball, it will basically come back down the slope and will always be in view of your dog. 1 If they had expanded it lower down, a ball could be thrown over the mound creating the 2 possibility of losing track of the dog and the ball at the same time, so their plans were 3 based upon the anticipated uses. Also, there is a redwood tree that was dedicated by a 4 community member a long time ago, that they would maintain outside of the fenced area. 5 Chair Greenfield asked about the no-mow grass, if it would only be added in areas outside 6 the dog park. Mr. Jensen said this was correct. The no-mow grass is more fragile and 7 doesn’t have the durability of regular turf grass. Turf grass has been engineered by humans 8 for a long time, so it’s what they will be using in that area will be built for heavy foot 9 traffic, et cetera. The grass fields in Palo Alto have actually become a mix of seven weeds, 10 and that is what they imagine will happen to the dog park area. It is actually the toughest 11 of all the grasses once it is mowed. Chair Greenfield observed that they are taking 12 advantage of the maintenance opportunity and funding to change the grass out for easier 13 maintenance overall. Mr. Jensen agreed and said the sloped areas are not usually used for 14 play activity but mostly made for sitting on, leisure-type activities, which denotes the use 15 of the no-mow grass as well. 16 Commissioner Freeman asked regarding the grasses whether the intent is to keep the 17 existing grass and if so, whether the no-mow grass will impact things like drainage. Mr. 18 Jensen said the no-mow grass is basically all located on the sloped area, so it won’t have 19 an impact on drainage. Commissioner Freeman asked if the intent is to keep the existing 20 grass as well. Mr. Jensen said during the construction process they will overseed or reseed 21 the existing area with the new grass seed, so pretty much the entire area will be re-seeded. 22 Once irrigated, the existing root system of the grass the existing grass will also germinate 23 and come back quickly. So, with the seeding and the existing root system and more optimal 24 irrigation system, he felt that they can grow a fairly tough grass. The area is a lot larger 25 than what they had at Peers Park, which had about 0.25 acre of grass, with the rest mulch. 26 That area was not big enough to sustain the grass. He said they will hope that the grass 27 will be able to survive the use. Again, because it is a bigger area, they do have the option 28 of closing down segment of it certain times of the year to re-grow it, which will also help. 29 Commissioner Kleinhaus asked if the picture was to scale that they were looking at. Mr. 30 Jensen said yes. She inquired about the 10 feet is the mulched area and how wide the 31 stretch is along the apartment housing where there are some trees. Mr. Jensen replied it is 32 about 15 feet wide. The area, including the trees, belongs to the City. Commissioner 33 Kleinhaus asked about the name of the no-mow grass. Mr. Jensen said no-mow is a generic 34 term for grass that is not mowed. They will be specifying a California native meadow mix, 35 mostly consisting of Festuca californica, the native fescue of California. It also has a 36 couple other types of grasses mixed into it. He explained that it is always the hardest to 37 keep a monoculture alive. It has been proven best to have a mix of grasses. They all look 38 the same, but some do a little bit better in shade, some do a little better on a slope, so 39 APPROVED Approved Minutes 15 depending upon it’s growing environment a specific variety will establish itself more. 1 Commissioner Kleinhaus thought that was great. She asked what happens if the area gets 2 mowed by mistake. Mr. Jensen said it depends mostly on the time of year. If they mowed 3 it right now it would be the worst, because no-mow grass is about 10 to 12 inches long and 4 lays over on itself and basically shades itself and maintains water. When the top is cut off 5 it reduces the amount of shade it’s giving itself and impacts the grass. If mowed in the fall, 6 it actually has some benefit because it allows it to strengthen itself and grow a bit thicker 7 in the cooler time of year when they hopefully get some rain. 8 Commissioner Oche thanked Mr. Jensen for the presentation and the work that has gone 9 into the project. She asked if they will be adding a small signpost to differentiate the parks 10 for the community, where large dogs go and where small ones go. Mr. Jensen said if people 11 are okay with their smaller dog and the dog is okay playing with larger dogs, they can use 12 the larger area. Dogs in the five- to ten-pound range have the option of the smaller area if 13 bigger dogs intimidate them. They do have signage that will be posted to explain that the 14 small dog park area is actually restricted to small dogs, the same as at Greer Park. 15 Chair Greenfield clarified what the Commission’s role and goal was in regard to this 16 preliminary review of the dog park plan, which will return to them in the next month or 17 two for a recommendation of the Park Improvement Ordinance. It is an opportunity to 18 voice input or suggestions on how to potentially change the proposal for something they 19 would like to adopt. Mr. Jensen agreed with this. 20 Chair Greenfield invited comments from the public. Hearing none, he invited 21 Commissioner Brown, as Liaison, to provide her comments. 22 Commissioner Brown thought the plan accomplishes its goals in terms of expanding the 23 dog park access, restoring the easement, reducing maintenance costs and water use. She 24 appreciated the efficient use of the space. She thought having the separate small dog area 25 is a positive. She said she goes to Peers Park often (and personally apologized for any 26 damage her dog did to any of the turf). Having the small dog next to the large dog area is 27 great for most dogs, but there can also be a lot of yapping going on between the chain link 28 fences, so she thinks this is a great plus for the community where the dogs can feel safe 29 and play. The hill lends itself as a visual barrier as well. She felt it will be very positive 30 for the community. She did inquire about the no-mow grass, because of the state order of 31 not being able to water non-functional turf, which would be the no-mow grass, if the order 32 will still be in effect when the construction is going on and wondered if it would impact 33 the installation, or if it would just be phased in over time. Mr. Jensen acknowledged it is 34 something they would definitely take a look at. He couldn’t say how it would be handled 35 at this point. It is something they could bring back with the PIO. If they decided not to 36 seed the area with the no-mow grass, that they would probably mulch it for the short term, 37 to protect the soil and trees growing there, and then come back at a later date when the 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 16 opportunity arose to seed the area. Commissioner Brown thanked Mr. Jensen for the hard 1 work. 2 Commissioner Cribbs asked Mr. Jensen if there was anything he or the other stakeholders 3 really wanted to see in the dog park that they couldn’t afford that had fallen out of the plan. 4 She said this because they are thinking about the dog park funding at Friends of the Park. 5 There is funding there that the dog owners started to put money in, so this might be the 6 opportunity to utilize that if there was something they didn’t have the opportunity to do. 7 Mr. Jensen was sure there were more site amenities that they could put there. The area 8 could definitely have more seating, more benches. They did try to reduce some of those 9 things because their budget is $150,000, and they are pushing that right now. He said there 10 is also a Chapter of the Girls Scouts locally that actually want to do some fundraising for 11 the dog park to add some amenities, more like play equipment. They are working with 12 them to assist in that endeavor. Overall, the size of the fenced-in areas are maximizing 13 what is out there, so mostly it would be on the inside of the dog park, adding other things. 14 Commissioner Cribbs thanked him for all his work. 15 Commissioner Freeman thought they had done a gone job with the plan. He stated that 16 many people in the community are pleased that they are expanding the park and also taking 17 care of the little dogs. He echoed Commissioner Cribbs’ comments about if there is 18 anything that was left out, he encouraged them to take advantage of this time to add those 19 things that are needed. He thought, from a community perspective, people are onboard. 20 Now it is just tracking once everything is approved how much time it’s going to take and 21 keeping everyone aware of the timeline on it, as this is one of the things people have been 22 wondering about. Mr. Jensen said their goal was to make this happen fairly quickly, within 23 the next six months or so. 24 Commissioner Oche said she was trying to figure out if the expansion might qualify for 25 ISI verification. She will find out and see if it’s something that’s possible for it to be a 26 great stamp for a City project. Chair Greenfield asked her to expand upon what ISI is. 27 Commissioner Oche replied this is the Institute of Sustainability Infrastructure that she is 28 a member of. It is a sustainability related verification for infrastructure projects, in which 29 cities explore the opportunity to get a stamp, such as a platinum, gold, et cetera, a stamp 30 based on following a checklist that the project ticks off compared to the baseline of what 31 it was when the project started. Chair Greenfield asked if this is something Mr. Jensen was 32 familiar with. He responded he was not, but asked Commissioner Oche to send him the 33 requirements for the different levels, because they have many projects that they work on 34 across the city. They could look at those things and see if they can check some boxes off. 35 Commissioner Kleinhaus spoke about the Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Open Space and 36 Recreation Master Plan. Under Principles, the first item in the Park Plan says, “playful, 37 healthy, sustainable, inclusive, accessible, flexible, balanced,” and “nature.” She noted that 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 17 nature could not really fit into something that ends in “ble” such as sustainable, playful, et 1 cetera. The reason it didn’t fit in very well is because it really needs to permeate 2 everywhere. Looking at goal number four, she said it includes “protect natural habitats and 3 integrate nature, natural ecosystem, ecological principles throughout Palo Alto.” It is 4 looking at how to integrate and permeate the entire city. It looks at connecting natural 5 areas, open space, creeks and vegetated areas, in parks, on public land, to create wildlife, 6 bird, pollinator and habitat corridors, plant native oaks, promote, expand and protect 7 habitat and natural areas, et cetera. 8 Commissioner Kleinhaus stated that there are many other policies in the Parks Master Plan 9 that cannot really be reached unless they are looking system-wide, and it is the same for 10 the Urban Forest Master Plan, and this is the way she looks at the issue of how to put 11 nature into a city park. It really is the connective tissue. It is what makes people love their 12 parks – seeing the birds, seeing greenery. When there are a lot of fences cutting the park 13 into interest areas, we have to compensate for that. When they increase the pie, everybody 14 wants a piece – dog park, skate park, pickleball courts, tennis, et cetera – and land is 15 limited. So, if they are to share the pie, it is always going to be smaller and smaller slices. 16 She said the way to expand the pie in a limited area is to enrich it in a way that when you 17 establish one place you also create inside it the enrichment that compensates for the fact 18 that now it’s only one group that can use that area. 19 Commissioner Kleinhaus commented about the area near the creek, stating that creek 20 corridors are vital to sustain ecosystems, even when made from concrete like this little 21 creek. But even when made of concrete, they still have water in them and are still used as 22 corridors, and the area around them is a wildlife corridor. When looking at it from an 23 ecological perspective one would usually look at about 100 feet to 300 feet to enhance the 24 habitat. She asked how they would do it here. She suggested they have an opportunity 25 along the creek to take another 15 feet and not put grass on it, but instead plant trees. There 26 must also be 10 feet of mulch because of requirements from the water district. She 27 suggested to add another 10 or 15 feet of no grass. It wouldn’t mean the dogs can’t go 28 there. It would provide shading in the long term. Trees planted there today it will provide 29 for the people who sit there much later, and maybe the few bald sections on the other 30 easement where there are some trees can have a few more added. 31 Commissioner Kleinhaus said she sees people in the park with their dogs sitting in the 32 shade. A dog park is a huge amenity to a community. People connect, talk about their dogs, 33 their children, become friends. She has friends from the dog park and thinks it’s a very 34 important amenity but providing shade near a creek in a natural area, or restoring a little 35 bit of the nature, is critical. She stated that, in looking at the Urban Forest Master plan, it 36 talks about how South Palo Alto is hemorrhaging canopy, and this is an opportunity to put 37 a little bit of it back, and they should do that where they can. She said she knows they do 38 this routinely, and she would like to see it done in this one. She acknowledged the amazing 39 APPROVED Approved Minutes 18 amount of work that has been done in transitioning to native plants. She would think the 1 area along the creek could have maybe something like elderberry or some plant that 2 belongs there. They could use some of the water in the grassy area, or choose other trees, 3 but Commissioner Kleinhaus said she is looking to see trees in the plan. She said adding 4 trees would improve the dog park, would improve the connection to the dog park, will 5 make it loved. She wasn’t sure that it is loved now, but she didn’t know how to express it 6 any better. Commissioner Cribbs asked for clarification on the area. Commissioner 7 Kleinhaus was referring to on the map. Mr. Jensen pointed out the area. Chair Greenfield 8 clarified it is the area bordering the creek. 9 Vice Chair LaMere thanked Mr. Jensen for his work and creative designs. He appreciated 10 the separation of the dog parks. In terms of users displaced, having walked around there, 11 he didn’t think the areas it is expanding into are heavily used, but he asked Mr. Jensen to 12 address that and any impact of the dog park as it encroaches on the benches at the top of 13 the hill. Mr. Jensen didn’t have much data about the users in the expanded area but felt it 14 is limited because it is mostly slope and hillside, so it would be difficult to throw a ball 15 around there. It is mostly used for passive activities, picnicking, et cetera. They are still 16 maintaining a good amount of that around the edges, however, so it will still be available 17 for those activities. Currently, the area of the expansion has some irrigation issues so it is 18 mostly dead grass and dirt right now. He doubted if it was really be utilized in any way 19 currently. The upper hillside area that terminates at the hilltop would remain open. People 20 definitely sit up there a lot. It gives a good vantage point of the park and the dog park as 21 well. They would like to maintain that and keep that open to the community without having 22 to go through a gate to get to that point. Also, the benches there are dedicated community 23 benches, and they felt that it was better for the community to keep that space open and not 24 within the fence line of the dog park itself. Vice Chair LaMere thanked him for the 25 excellent work. 26 Chair Greenfield echoed thanks for the presentation and thoughtfulness in the design and 27 working on outreach with the community. He liked the “yap buffer” as suggested by 28 Commissioner Brown. He liked the idea that the small dog park is in view of the Magical 29 Bridge area, as it is of interest to the kids playing in the area. He assumed they were not 30 looking to add a new dog park but, rather, upgrading an existing one because there is no 31 immediately obvious viable alternative or location to add a new park. Mr. Jensen said as 32 far as expanding the current dog park system, this is the low-hanging fruit that’s there. 33 This is a large facility already that has the opportunity to be expanded for more dog users, 34 so they felt it was a good direction to go just to help expand the system. They would 35 definitely still be working to find places to have either more dog parks or maybe some off-36 leash pilot programs in other parks in the future. But this is the current obvious place where 37 they can make an impact and make more space for dog users. It’s also a bonus that Mitchell 38 Park is one of the regional parks, so it has some other amenities that some of the smaller 39 neighborhood parks don’t have, such as parking and restrooms and things of that nature. 40 APPROVED Approved Minutes 19 Commissioner Brown added that Daren was looking into a potential new dog park area in 1 the downtown north area. It is preliminary and involves other community partners, so it is 2 being talked about. Chair Greenfield said his point is this is the $150,000 to spend every 3 other year, so they would be a couple years away from doing something else. He asked, 4 since small dog park is all grass, if it would be closed periodically. Mr. Jensen said it would 5 depend on the use. This dog park is about three times the size of the Peers Park dog park. 6 They are hoping the grass can be maintained in there, but since it is bigger it provides an 7 opportunity that if they have to close half of it at some point to save the grass, they could 8 segment it off and still leave some of it open and useable. Chair Greenfield asked if they 9 would consider a lower fence for the smaller dog park. He appreciated Commissioner 10 Kleinhaus’ comments that more fences are not a plus, and it is a pretty visible corner, and 11 perhaps a four-foot fence would suffice for small dogs. Mr. Jensen said they would 12 definitely take a look at that. 13 Chair Greenfield appreciated Commissioner Kleinhaus’ comments about shade and 14 acknowledged that people do gravitate to shade. Adding a buffer along a creek makes 15 sense, or if not trees then some sort of natural planting and potentially increasing it into 16 the dog park area. There have been concerns about oaks and dogs in the past. He wondered 17 what the thoughts were regarding what trees would be best to plant in an area where there 18 are dogs, but it seems that adding trees would be a benefit over time. With respect to trees, 19 he said it would be helpful to get better clarification in the diagrams where the existing 20 trees are and where any new trees would be, and which would be within the dog park. Mr. 21 Jensen said, for the PIO, he will bring an exhibit showing the existing trees. The majority 22 of them are redwood trees, most 15 or 20 years old, not overly large yet. There is one large-23 scale native oak tree, a quercous lobata, that is at the location. Regarding planting of trees, 24 he said along the edge and in the no-mow area would be fine. Trees are harder in grass 25 areas, because the weed whipping and mowing usually take a toll over time. Also, the 26 trees create shade, and shade usually is not optimal for growing grass, so there is a trade-27 off. Shade will impact the turf-growing capacity so they would have to be mindful of where 28 they locate the trees. The problem is in providing shade for the users, but not reducing the 29 amount of turf that the users want as well. Chair Greenfield understood it’s a balancing 30 act. 31 Chair Greenfield inquired about the quercus frainetto on the corner, on the path leading 32 towards the Magical Bridge, and wondered if it was in the dog park. Mr. Jensen said it is. 33 It sits in the corner. Chair Greenfield noted the redwoods on the hill are not doing well and 34 he wondered if that is a consideration in including them in the dog park area. There is an 35 older redwood tree on the border of the current dog park, close to the playing fields. Mr. 36 Jensen said the redwood trees enjoy water, so if they can get the irrigation out there to 37 maintain the grass it will give them a better environment to thrive in. They are definitely 38 struggling right now because in that area the irrigation may be turned off or just not 39 working in that space, and redwoods require a continuous feed of water to maintain them. 40 APPROVED Approved Minutes 20 He said having them out in the grass area there is perfectly fine and will benefit them in 1 the long run. 2 Chair Greenfield also wondered about the layout in the bottom left corner of the dog park 3 area, going over the flat area, as opposed to keeping the border on the downslopes. He 4 asked what the tradeoff is for including that, or not. He was also concerned about the buffer 5 between the bench areas and the dog park. There won’t be much of a buffer, and it seems 6 like the bench area is losing a bit of its solace. Mr. Jensen said the dog park will definitely 7 encroach and be closer than it is now. The dictating factor for not pushing the dog park to 8 another area was there is a redwood tree there that is dedicated, and they didn’t want to 9 put the fence around it. Also, they are trying to optimize a play area that makes sense with 10 the hill. Chair Greenfield said his question was related to making the dog park a little 11 smaller and cutting it off before it got over the hill, or at the hilltop. He was not clear what 12 the benefit is of having the hill area for the dogs in general. He asked how much of this is 13 usable area, and to the extent to which it is beneficial to include a little bit wider buffer 14 between the bench area and the dog park. Mr. Jensen thought the majority of the space 15 would be fine. He pointed to an area where they could bring the fence around the 16 topography and keep it outside of the fence to help buffer the picnic area. He said he 17 knows the lounging areas are appreciated and has noted when there are activities, soccer 18 tournaments, et cetera, people look for places to hide out. Those areas are used and 19 appreciated, though not as heavily as other areas, but it is nice to have escapes within a 20 park. This is why they wanted to keep some of the area outside of the fenced area. 21 Chair Greenfield invited further comments from the Commissioners. 22 Commissioner Kleinhaus repeated her suggestion for 15 feet less grass along the buffer 23 from the creek and planting trees there. She like the idea of the lower fence that Chair 24 Greenfield had proposed. She felt it is a gateway by the bridge and was not sure of the 25 visual impact of that section. She acknowledged that the dog park users will, of course, 26 welcome more area, but was not sure how other park users would feel about it. She said 27 there is a level of serenity on the top of the hill that will be lost. 28 Chair Greenfield asked if it would be possible to put some signage up in the area where 29 the small dog park is being considered and also in the bench area on the top of the hill that 30 would be coming close to the new dog park, to give people information how on to get on 31 an email list for updates, and to understand when this will be coming back to the 32 Commission. Mr. Jensen said he definitely will do this. 33 Chair Greenfield was interested to hear from other Commissioners regarding increasing 34 the buffer along the creek. He felt it is an interesting idea worth considering and weighing 35 the pros and cons. 36 Commissioner Brown thought that the easement size was probably done for a reason and 37 APPROVED Approved Minutes 21 saw no reason to shrink the dog park. She felt that something that came across very clearly 1 from the community was that they wanted it as large as possible. She thought having the 2 picnic area somewhat close to the dog park was great because at Peers right now there are 3 some families that go, and kids don’t necessarily want to be run over by the dogs the whole 4 time, and there’s nowhere for them to go where the parents can keep an eye on them 5 because the playground is around the corner without a good sight line. She felt this would 6 be a very compatible use and she liked the footprint proposed. She thought using some of 7 the funds from either the Girls Scouts of the Friends of the Park for trees would be a 8 possible way to incorporate more of the trees. She agreed with the comment by 9 Commissioner Kleinhaus said that trees always add to the scenery, and they would be very 10 beneficial to this project. If they don’t necessarily want to fund trees, maybe the trees could 11 come from a City budget, and the Friends could fund the benches in a partnership so that 12 everyone feels they’re contributing the way they want to. 13 Commissioner Freeman said he liked the footprint but wanted to add to what 14 Commissioner Kleinhaus said about the trees. He thought they need to be careful about 15 the size and the amount of shade, even though shade is important, but taking away from 16 some of the real estate and some of the grassy area. There are different heights of trees that 17 could be investigated but he thought adding a good row of trees providing shade over time 18 and being aware of the height of those trees would be something to keep in mind. 19 Chair Greenfield responded to Commissioner Brown’s comment about adding 15 feet to 20 the buffer, clarifying that it would not be taking away area from the dog park. 21 Commissioner Brown preferred to defer the idea to Mr. Jensen and staff. Mr. Jensen said 22 they would be exploring this. Commissioner Cribbs added that she thought it is a great 23 opportunity to plant as many trees as possible as long as Mr. Jensen tells them that they 24 are compatible with what he is planning there already. She felt the dog park should be kept 25 as big as possible because that is what they heard loud and clear from the community. She 26 looked forward to Mr. Jensen coming back with some options for trees and information 27 on what problems they might bring with them at the next discussion. 28 Commissioner Oche supported Commissioner Kleinhaus and Commissioner Freeman’s 29 recommendations. She noted that planting trees would also be a big plus towards attaining 30 the Sustainability Award she noted earlier. 31 Chair Greenfield invited any questions from Mr. Jensen, who did not have questions but 32 did announce that staff has put together a dog parks webpage which went online that day. 33 It is basically informational about the current dog parks system and also has information 34 on projects, so information for the Mitchell Park expansion will be located there. It uses 35 the map the Commission had been looking at to show where the dog parks are currently 36 in Palo Alto. It is an official dog park page that calls out and describes the dog parks, their 37 size and amenities and then talks about current and future projects to expand the system. 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 22 Commissioner Cribbs expressed this is great and nice to see. She wondered if they could 1 put a sentence in that if anyone would like to contribute to the dog park they could be 2 directed to Friends of the Park. Mr. Jensen said he would talk to Daren about that, although 3 he didn’t see why not. They would probably have to have an agreement with the Friends 4 of the Park to have a spot for the money to go. Commissioner Cribbs said they already 5 have it. It would just be putting it on this website. 6 Chair Greenfield asked him to add some information about the Mitchell Park Dog Park 7 update in progress on the website. Mr. Jensen said this is the second aspect of the webpage 8 – information about the current system, and then a part about current and future projects. 9 Another aspect is adding the current dog park policy, so people can refer to it and have 10 that information available. 11 Webpage URL: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Public-Works/Engineering-12 Services/Engineering-Projects/City-of-Palo-Alto-Dog-Parks 13 Chair Greenfield closed the item, thanking Mr. Jensen for all his efforts. 14 6. Parks and Recreation Commission Webpage Update 15 Chair Greenfield introduced the item, stating Javod Ghods has been working with the 16 Website Ad Hoc, Commissioner Brown, and himself. The item is a discussion item, not 17 an action item, regarding updates that would make sense for the Parks and Recreation 18 Commission landing page. The goal of the website update is to make it more user-friendly 19 with an improved layout, to increase transparency and public access to the Commission 20 documents and the work the Commission is doing and take a step backward to be more 21 consistent and in conformance with formatting that the other Commission webpages are 22 using. They have met with Mr. Do and Mr. Ghods a couple times. Mr. Ghods has done 23 great work putting up a mock-up of what the new website will look like. The goal of the 24 discussion would be to get feedback and a report on what they are doing. 25 Mr. Javod Ghods, Coordinator, Open Space, Parks and Golf, shared the old PRC landing 26 page next to the sandbox page with the updates. He pointed out the distinct differences 27 between the current live page and the sandbox page (sandbox meaning a practice page for 28 editing design, content, and features before publishing to public site). First, language was 29 added for the Commission’s contributions to Urban Forestry, listed in the first paragraph, 30 and also at the final bullet. Side panels on the righthand side have been updated to show 31 assignments and workplans, and is where the Ad Hoc, Liaison lists and work plans can be 32 found. Year-round recruitment and survey side panels have been removed and are featured 33 in other parts of the website. Another added side panel contains the current PRC priorities 34 and subscribing to minutes, agendas and meetings. 35 Chair Greenfield interjected that there are a number of items on the existing webpages, 36 APPROVED Approved Minutes 23 such as the surveys, that are out of date, up to six to ten years old, so a lot of what they are 1 doing is cleaning this up to make it current and to display information pertinent to the work 2 the Commission is currently involved with. Commissioner Brown added that it also 3 matches better some of the other Commissions so that people looking for information at 4 the various Commissions are not seeing completely different websites as they are combing 5 through. 6 Chair Greenfield said when items go away, it is because they don’t really belong. 7 Mr. Ghods continued to explain that recruitment for the Commission was moved down to 8 the featured area for Commissioners. This is more in line with the other Commission pages 9 in hopes of creating consistency. At the bottom of the page, there was a long-running list 10 of all documents. These have been placed into accordion items which make it more 11 accessible for screen readers. The two documents removed from “Resources” were the 12 work plans which are now featured on the side panel near the top of the screen. Also 13 removed were some of the documents. He noted in looking at the page that the Tide Gate 14 document still needs to be added to “Current Policy Topics” as well as the Mitchell Park 15 Dog Park expansion presentation. 16 Chair Greenfield pointed out that a lot of great work is in the sandbox, the new website, 17 but it is still a work in progress. The Ad Hoc will still be meeting to flesh out which bullets 18 to include under document area. 19 Mr. Ghods moved to the agendas and minutes page. It is the same format. The Urban 20 Forestry information is featured in the opening paragraph. Scrolling down, all video links 21 to past meetings have been updated. Minutes with amendments have been added. Staff 22 presentations will be added to agendas as attachments, as provided. Draft minutes will be 23 uploaded and renamed once the Commission amendments have been made. There will 24 also be a new column for public comment. There will be an area for uploading a single file 25 showing all public comments submitted via email from the four weeks between the 26 meetings, flushing out any spam. A statement was added at the bottom for consistency. 27 There were not many changes on the agenda and minutes page, just trying to make things 28 more accessible, more consistent across the different Commission pages. 29 Chair Greenfield commented that one of the big updates on the agenda and minutes page 30 is filling in all of the minutes and video links and updating them, which is appreciated. 31 Commissioner Cribbs asked why there is recruiting for the Human Relations Commission 32 on their page. Mr. Ghods replied that this is a feature that the City Clerk has placed on 33 each Commission page for active recruitment. Commissioner Cribbs said she saw one the 34 last time she looked at the old page, and it looked like it was meant for another 35 Commission, but she understood it came from the City Clerk. Mr. Ghods commented on 36 the agendas page, that he will be trying to capture the Commission’s actions and motions 37 APPROVED Approved Minutes 24 passed to the summary minutes. Commissioner Cribbs asked about the public comments 1 and if they will contain any answers or just what individual have said. Mr. Ghods said it 2 will be only what individual members have submitted. Chair Greenfield thought it was a 3 little confusing on the public comments and clarified this is where the emails sent in by 4 the public will be posted. This is for increased transparency so that any emails that come 5 in either before of after Commission meeting will be posted. For example, emails on an 6 item they receive will be visible to the public and accessible before they discuss things. In 7 the same way Commissioners can see things, the public will be able to see them. Public 8 comment is kind of confusing in that it is letters received via email or perhaps something 9 sent in a physical letter. He asked if there is a better name for that column, while 10 conforming to what the rest of the City is doing, but it is a little confusing in that public 11 comments during meetings are transcribed under that heading. Commissioner Kleinhaus 12 suggested perhaps, “Letters from the Public,” or something like that. Thinking about other 13 cities, some people think they can go there and comment. 14 Mr. Ghods said he appreciates the feedback, and staff will work on creating appropriate 15 language. Commissioner Oche asked if they needed to collate the responses to the letters 16 received. Chair Greenfield said there is no specific response or obligation to respond, 17 although they can comment on things during meetings. Commissioner Kleinhaus asked to 18 show the page that this originates from. When someone goes to the City website, how do 19 they get there? Mr. Ghods responded this is accessed via the Parks and Recreation 20 Commission landing page. Mr. Ghods illustrated the links to view all of the parks in the 21 area. Commissioner Kleinhaus asked if there is a link to the Commission from that page. 22 Mr. Ghods said they can definitely add that. He pointed out there is also a search feature 23 for Open Space and Parks. He said they will add links to the map from the Commission 24 page. Chair Greenfield pointed out the easiest way to get to the Commission page is to 25 hover over City Hall, and then select Parks and Recreation Commission on the left. 26 Chair Greenfield invited other comments or suggestions. He asked Mr. Ghods to also 27 include an update on how the public comment and emails to the Commission will be 28 handled in terms of being passed along to the Commission. Mr. Ghods said every Monday 29 he will be sending out an email to the Commission with receipts from the prior week. The 30 week prior to a Commission meeting he will send it on the Monday and Friday. He will 31 be sending it Monday and Tuesday throughout the day, as emails come in, to make sure 32 the Commission stays up to date with public comments that are submitted. They will not 33 get an email if there were no emails from the public. 34 Mr. Ghods indicated that some other Commission pages have bios listed for each member, 35 and if the Commission wants to be even more transparent and accessible, other 36 Commission pages are doing that. When the City updated to the new format website all of 37 their previous bios were lost for those who had been on the Commission, so all of the 38 Commissioners should be submitting a bio to Mr. Ghods so that he can update it on the 39 APPROVED Approved Minutes 25 website, and if anyone does not have a photo yet, they should submit a photo, or update 1 their photo if they wish. He strongly encouraged all Commissioners to have their photo 2 and bio information sent to staff so that it is updated before the next Commission meeting. 3 Chair Greenfield invited further comments. Hearing none, he thanked Mr. Ghods for his 4 great work which came together quickly. It is a project that has been on his to-do list for a 5 number of years, and it is great to see it getting done, and also talking about doing things 6 in a sustainable manner, updated over time. If any Commission members have suggestions 7 regarding the website, please send it to the Website Ad Hoc - Commissioner Brown and 8 him. They will parse it and pass it on to Mr. Ghods, who will be working with him on a 9 monthly basis to add pertinent documents to the accordions so that from their landing page 10 they can easily access things they are working on, and the public can see those things as 11 well. He felt it will be a big improvement for their individual usage and also for public 12 transparency. 13 Mr. Do acknowledged Mr. Ghods work and said since joining their team, he has been 14 immensely contributing to not just these webpage updates, but also has assisted in the 15 Division work outside of the Commission work, and he is excited to see this work come 16 through. He reiterated this is something they have struggled with for a while as they have 17 not had the bandwidth to work on it. Now they have Mr. Ghods onboard they not only 18 have more balance but also the knowledge and expertise that he brings pertinent to the Ad 19 Hoc as well and supporting the Commission. Mr. Ghods appreciated the kind words and 20 looked forward to participating with the Commission in many future meetings. 21 COMMISSIONER/BOARDMEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS OR 22 FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 23 Chair Greenfield invited discussion about future agenda items. Mr. Do reported that for 24 the July meeting they are looking at possibly having discussion on the skatepark, 25 discussion on the horizontal levy, discussion on a Dog Park Improvement Ordinance. Also, 26 possibly for some future items, there is some discussion of when they may want to bring 27 Utilities Undergrounding in the Foothills to the Commission. This may be placed in July’s 28 meeting or the meeting after that. Chair Greenfield said there are also a number of potential 29 items, including Funding Opportunities, Park Dedication, and there was one other item. 30 Mr. Do said there are two more in a future agenda, to be determined when, bringing a Tree 31 Annual Report and also going back and revisiting the Advanced Water Purification System 32 at the water quality control plants. Chair Greenfield added there is also the BCCP when it 33 is ready – the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan. He was also thinking about 34 utilities at Foothills and Arastradero. Mr. Do clarified that his earlier comment referred to 35 the Foothills in general, not Foothills Nature Preserve only. Chair Greenfield invited 36 further items for future agendas from the Commissioners. He said if an ad hoc has not been 37 discussed as coming forward or is not presented already, they should think about how to 38 APPROVED Approved Minutes 26 move forward in the fall and getting it to the Commission to share with them. 1 Chair Greenfield thanked Nadia for attending and helping out. He thanked Javod and Lam 2 and staff for all their work for the Commission. 3 ADJOURNMENT 4 Meeting adjourned at 9:38 p.m. 5