HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-08-27 Parks & Recreation Commission Summary MinutesAPPROVED
DRAFT 1
1
2
3 MINUTES 4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 5 REGULAR MEETING 6 August 27, 2024 7 In-Person & Virtual Conference 8 Palo Alto, California 9 10 Commissioners Present: Chair Amanda Brown, Vice Chair Nellis Freeman, Commissioners 11 Anne Cribbs and Shani Kleinhaus 12
Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Jeff Greenfield and Bing Wei 13
Others Present: Council Member Vicki Veenker 14
Staff Present: Steve Castile, Sarah Robustelli, Lam Do, and Javod Ghods 15
CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL 16
PUBLIC COMMENT 17
None 18
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS 19
None 20
APPROVAL OF MINUTES 21
1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the July 23, 2024, Parks and Recreation 22 Commission Regular Meeting 23
Vice Chair Freeman made a motion to approve the Parks and Recreation meeting 24
minutes of July 23, 2024, as presented. Motion seconded by Commissioner Cribbs. The 25
motion passed 4-0 by roll call vote. 26
CITY OFFICIAL REPORTS 27
2. Department Report 28
Division Manager Sarah Robustelli presented the Department report. 29
APPROVED
DRAFT 2
The MSC Open House had over 1200 attendees. The last several Twilight Concerts were 1
held at Rinconada Park with an estimated 700 in attendance. This month marked the end 2
of the Movie Night series in Mitchell Park. Ms. Robustelli stated all the summer events 3
were a success. 4
The 40th Annual Moonlight Run & Walk will be held on September 20, 2024, including 5
a half-marathon, 10K and 5K run, and a 5K walk. Visit PaloAltoOnline.com/moonlight-6
run/ to register or see more details. 7
On Friday, October 25, the Parks and Recreation Department will host the Jack-O-Jaunt 8 from 6:30 to 8:30 at Lytton Plaza. Attendees will choose winners for the categories of 9 scariest, cutest, and most creative costume. Contest winners will receive $75 to spend at 10 a Palo Alto business. 11
Recreation had 35 special interest camps with four post camps this summer. There was a 12 wide variety of specialty classes for the 656 campers to choose. This summer’s revenues 13 exceeded last year’s by 15 percent. It had become a yearly tradition for the mayor to 14 attend one day of the camp. This year, the Young Mayors had the opportunity to share 15 their LEGO build and masterplan for a green community with Mayor Stone. 16
Steve Castile, Assistant Director of Open Space, Park, and Golf, thanked the 17
Commission for hearing PAUSD’s request at the last meeting for pickleball lines at 18
Fletcher Middle School (Terman Park). PAUSD agreed with the Commission’s 19
recommendations. Pickleballs were tested on the court and five types of pickleballs were 20
approved, each with a decibel reading of around 70, which was equivalent to a vacuum 21
cleaner. Mr. Castile tried the Librarian foam pickleball but the court was too abrasive 22
and it tore the ball apart. Staff would provide court closure notification once the work 23
date was confirmed. 24
Mr. Castile mentioned staff recarpeted the Foothills Nature Preserve Conference Room 25
and replaced the desks and tables. 26
The City of Palo Alto partnered with Santa Clara County FireSafe Council for the annual 27 evacuation route mowing of Arastradero and Page Mill Road. The Fire Department, 28 FireSafe Council, Public Works, and Communications Division collaborated on this 29 project, which lasted three weeks and ended today. 30
The station repairs were completed on the golf course irrigation and storm water pump 31 last week and included a sustainable pump and a breaker switch. The staff installed new 32 check valves to keep the water operation functioning properly. The storm drain pumps 33 were replaced last week in anticipation of the upcoming rainy season. 34
The Ramos Park restrooms were in the final stages of renovation and scheduled to open 35
APPROVED
DRAFT 3
by mid-September. The newly renovated Rinconada Park restrooms were opened to the 1
public yesterday. 2
Most of the concrete work at Boulware Park was complete. The focus was on the final 3
grading. The contractor will start installation of the playground footings next week. 4
Overgrown junipers at Cameron Park were removed for better accessibility. Mr. Castile 5
will collaborate with Public Works to replace the bollards for traffic safety. 6
Chair Brown invited questions from the Commission. 7
Regarding the Ramos Park restrooms, Commissioner Cribbs questioned if the plantings 8 would be in by mid-September. Mr. Castile said he would try his best to get the plants in 9 by the reopening in mid-September or soon after. 10
Commissioner Kleinhaus was concerned with the orientation of the picnic tables to the 11 restrooms at Ramos Park. Mr. Castile hoped to have an answer at the next meeting. 12 Commission Kleinhaus requested Mr. Castile to provide a nature corner in his report. 13 Commissioner Kleinhaus queried what would replace the loss of habitat caused by 14 removing the juniper bushes in the park. Mr. Castile replied that the plan was to add 15 native plants along the two existing walls adjacent to the playground area. 16
Vice Chair Freeman inquired about the timeline and impact of painting pickleball lines at 17
Fletcher Middle School. Mr. Castile stated that the pickleball lines would be painted 18
soon. Mr. Castile did not expect any impact to the school but he would coordinate with 19
the principal to ensure it did not impact any school activities. The courts were intended 20
for PAUSD students and their afterschool programs, not the public. 21
Chair Brown commented that testing the pickleballs was a great idea and believed that 22
70 decibels was in line with the noise ordinances in the residential area. Chair Brown 23
thought FireSafe mowing was funded by the FireSafe Council but Mr. Castile explained 24
it was a collaboration of funding. 25
BUSINESS 26
3. Park Improvement Ordinance for the Valley Water’s Palo Alto Floods Basin 27 Tide Gate Structure Project 28
Mr. Castile introduced Carl Newman from Valley Water. Mr. Newman introduced his 29 colleagues, Bhavani Yerrapotu, Deputy Operating Officer from the Watersheds Capital 30 Division and Ted Ibarra, Project Manager and Associate Engineer of Inner Division. 31
Mr. Newman delivered a slide presentation on Phase 1 of the Palo Alto Flood Basin Tide 32 Gate Structure Project, Seismic Retrofit, and Rehabilitation. 33
APPROVED
DRAFT 4
Mr. Newman discussed the history of the existing tide gate structure built in 1957. This 1
flood basin provided flood protection for Matadero, Barron, and Adobe Creeks. The tide 2
gate had a bridge along both sides of the levee that was part of the San Francisco Bay 3
Trail. The function of the gate was to seal out high-tide water from coming into the basin 4
and then drain water into the bay at low tide. 5
Mr. Newman presented an overview of the project location and tide gate. The project’s 6
main purpose was seismic retrofitting and rehabilitation of the outdated structure to meet 7
current seismic codes. Mr. Newman believed a large earthquake could damage the 8 connection to the timber piles, causing them to move and be displaced, or settlement 9 could move downwards or sideways, causing the flap gates to not open or close properly. 10 If the flap gates do not open or close properly, it could affect how the tidal water flows in 11 and out of the basin and into the bay, which was its main function. Any significant 12 damage resulting from an earthquake would require the closure of the structure and a 13 portion of the Adobe Creek Loop Trail. 14
Mr. Newman explained that project objectives would be completed in two phases. Phase 15 1 would be done now. Phase 2 was dependent upon when the Army Corps of Engineers 16
begins the shoreline levee work, which was estimated to start in 2060. The seismic 17
retrofit was intended to extend the design life of the structure by an additional 30 to 40 18
years. Project benefits included continued coastal flood protection, continued use of the 19
Adobe Creek Loop Trail, improved tide gate structure and deck surface quality, 20
protection of flood basin wildlife and habitat, and reduced trail closures. 21
Mr. Newman presented a 3-D rendition of the work to be completed. Rehabilitation 22
elements included covering the deck with a polyester polymer concrete (PPC) overlay, 23
which should give the structure another 20 to 30 years of design life. The height of the 24
gates would be raised to 54 inches. The Commission could choose the color of the fence 25
and PPC overlay. Maintenance access points would be added for crews to easily access 26 the trash racks and perform general maintenance. The retrofit element included adding a 27 deep foundation system on both sides of the structure, which were two cylindrical piles 28 going deep into the ground and connected to the existing structure with rebar. 29
Mr. Newman presented the schedule for Phase 1 of the project. The CEQA addendum 30 document was completed this month and tentatively scheduled for Valley Water Board's 31 consideration on October 8, 2024. Valley Water will hold a public meeting unveiling the 32 new design on November 20, 2024. This fall, Valley Water planned to complete the 33 design documents and have the proper environmental permits in place. In the spring of 34 2025, Valley Water would advertise the bid to potential contractors. Valley Water Board 35 would award the contract to the lowest qualified bidder. In the early summer of 2025, 36 notice to proceed would be issued to the contractor who won the bid. On-site 37
APPROVED
DRAFT 5
construction work would be performed from September 2025 to January 2026. 1
Ridgway’s rail would not be in the area during the construction work. 2
Valley Water intended to close a little less than one mile of the trail between September 3
2025 and January 2026. The construction hours would be 7-6 Monday through Friday, 4
and Saturdays if necessary. There may be occasional construction traffic but flaggers 5
would be present when the construction equipment was coming on or off public streets. 6
Throughout the construction process, Valley Water will make public outreach efforts. 7
All construction signs would have a QR code for Valley Water’s website. A public 8 announcement would be made before construction begins and would include the 9 construction schedule and any anticipated impacts. 10
Valley Water’s final Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) document was adopted on 11 April 27, 2021, and was available on their website. Since the scope was reduced to a 12 retrofit and rehabilitation project, there was an addendum to the MND going before the 13 Valley Water Board on October 8, 2024, for approval. The permits pertaining to this 14 project were from the California Department of Fish & Wildlife, California Water 15 Boards, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission. 16
Documents and reports were available at https://www.valleywater.org/pafbtidegates. 17
Questions or concerns could be directed to Project Manager Ted Ibarra at 18
Tibarra@valleywater.org or Neighborhood Liaison Jiana Escobar at 19
Jescobar@valleywater.org. 20
There was no public comment. Chair Brown invited comments from the commissioners. 21
Commissioner Kleinhaus asked what magnitude of an earthquake the current bridge was 22
able to sustain versus the new construction and if the City’s Public Works Department 23
had reviewed the proposed design. Mr. Newman responded that the retrofit was designed 24
for a 7.0 magnitude on the Richter scale. 25
Commissioner Kleinhaus inquired if Valley Water had any studies done on liquefaction 26 of the levees and if it was possible for the new structure to remain standing while the 27 levees around it would be gone. Mr. Newman stated that Valley Water’s technical 28 consultant identified liquefiable soils beneath the levee and near the tide gate. The deep 29 foundation, which was the main seismic retrofit element, was designed to accommodate 30 liquefaction in the soil. When subjected to earthquake loads, liquefaction reduces the 31 strength of the soil. Another effect could be the settlement of the land surface above the 32 liquefiable soil. Mr. Newman does not expect a major failure but settlement could result 33 in cracking of the levee surface requiring repair. 34
Commissioner Kleinhaus questioned why Valley Water wanted to change the bridge’s 35 gravel surface. Mr. Newman explained the existing surface had concrete fractures, 36
APPROVED
DRAFT 6
referred to as spalls. The salt in the air weakened concrete and the reinforcement in the 1
concrete. The new overlay would provide a fresh, smooth surface and a level of 2
protection for the reinforcements in the concrete, which should have an estimated 20- to 3
30-year lifespan. A PPC overlay was commonly used on bridges with a typical 10-year 4
lifespan and since this bridge would not be subjected to vehicle traffic, it was expected to 5
last longer. In reply to Chair Brown’s understanding that the PPC surface would require 6
less maintenance and would not need to be repaved, Mr. Newman confirmed Chair 7
Brown was correct. 8
Mr. Newman mentioned the ability to match the concrete color to the fence. 9 Commissioner Kleinhaus referred to the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan, 10 which said to include appropriate environmental art in the Baylands that builds on Palo 11 Alto’s Public Art Master Plan and to identify appropriate locations for additional public 12 art. Commissioner Kleinhaus recalled the public repeatedly identified the opportunity to 13 install art with the fencing. Commissioner Kleinhaus did not believe a tall, black fence 14 was compatible with the Baylands. Commissioner Kleinhaus knew the Water District 15 had a program that sponsored or provided grants and the City had funding for art. Mr. 16
Newman stated Valley Water had several discussions with Ms. Robustelli, Mr. Castile, 17
and the City staff overseeing the public art program. If required, Mr. Newman would 18
work with City staff to install public art. Ms. Robustelli added that staff met and 19
reviewed the project but determined it did not fit the guidelines to require public art. The 20
public art staff stated during the staff meeting that the project timeline did not lend itself 21
to incorporate art concurrently. Commissioner Kleinhaus’s preference was to replace the 22
fence with art compatible with the location if possible but in the meantime for the fence 23
to be a nice color the birds could see, not black. Mr. Newman was unsure if it was 24
possible but he would discuss it with Valley Water’s art staff. 25
Chair Brown pointed out that the discussion was outside of the PRC’s purview in 26 imposing specific requirements related to public art. There had not been significant 27 discussion, outreach, and public comment on public art, which was not noticed properly, 28 and the PRC did not have enough information to make an informed decision tonight. 29 Chair Brown opined that the fence should be minimal, natural, and not have art. 30
Commissioner Kleinhaus could look over the fence while standing but would no longer 31 have that ability once the higher fence was installed. Commissioner Kleinhaus wondered 32 if it was a requirement or recommendation to make the fence higher. She did not believe 33 it was likely for a biker to fall off the bridge into the water. Mr. Newman stated the fence 34 height was a recommendation. Valley Water performed research with regard to fence 35 height and safety for bikers and pedestrians. Valley Water decided on a higher fence to 36 provide safety for bikers. Mr. Newman offered to work with staff on whatever staff 37
recommended and preferred. Mr. Castile remarked that staff could evaluate the height 38
restrictions and recommendations for public safety. 39
APPROVED
DRAFT 7
Vice Chair Freeman asked about the frequency of inspections and if the condition was 1
worsening. Mr. Newman explained that water seeping below the structure and into the 2
flood basin was identified in 2011. The leak under the structure was fixed. Since then, 3
Valley Water’s structural consultant performed full yearly inspections of the structure 4
and steel sheet piles, and notified Valley Water if any imminent repairs were needed. 5
Divers perform an underwater inspection every few years. After the proposed project is 6
completed, Valley Water would continue to perform routine maintenance and visual 7
inspections by trained engineers as well as divers looking for voids and distress within 8
the concrete below the water surface. 9
Vice Chair Freeman queried how potential flooding emergencies would be addressed 10 before completion of the tide gate structure. Mr. Newman replied that Valley Water’s 11 staff performed yearly maintenance to ensure debris was removed from the trash rack so 12 there was no impedance to the flow of water. Mr. Newman thought maintenance would 13 be performed at the end of October 2024 to ensure the gates were working properly and 14 sealed as well as ensure the trash racks were operating properly. Valley Water monitored 15 water levels within the flood basin and worked with City staff to see if Valley Water 16
needed to remove any debris. 17
Commissioner Cribbs requested information on the communication plan and the 18
November 20 public meeting. Mr. Newman stated the plan was to hold an in-person 19
meeting at the Mitchell Park Library and meetings usually had a virtual option. Valley 20
Water would reach out with mailers and Nextdoor, and the City would publish 21
information on the City website. 22
Commissioner Cribbs inquired as to the confidence level of the project being finished in 23
2026. Mr. Newman was confident about the January 2026 target date, assuming there 24
were no permit issues. A lot of the earthwork would be done before the rainy season. The 25
deep foundation system would be put in between September and October 15. 26
Chair Brown advised it was important for the PRC to ensure safety for visitors and 27 maintenance workers, making sure they had good working conditions, and to consider 28 the fence height in rainy conditions to avoid potential legal liabilities. Chair Brown 29 deferred to staff’s recommendations on fence height and color. Valley Water needed to 30 know the preferred colors and fence height by the time their design documents were 31 ready to present to potential bidders. 32
Chair Brown asked if there were significant comments on the addendum to the MND. 33 Mr. Newman explained that the addendum did not go through a public scoping period 34 because the scope was less than the original project. 35
Chair Brown read Commissioner Greenfield’s request for an update on the non-passive 36 sluice gate. Mr. Castile replied that staff was reaching out to contractors to see what 37
APPROVED
DRAFT 8
maintenance work was needed for the sluice gate. The sluice gate had not been 1
operational for the last four years. Staff was working with local regulatory agencies to 2
determine if permitting was required. Staff potentially would work with Valley Water on 3
a plan to clean the gate and possibly have it functional in October. 4
Council Member Veenker queried when this project would be presented to the Council. 5
Mr. Newman believed it was the October 15 City Council meeting. Ms. Robustelli 6
pointed out that the CEQA had to be approved at Valley Water’s Board Meeting before 7
the Council could act on it. A public meeting update was scheduled for November 20, so 8
this project may come to the Council in December. 9
Valley Water Deputy Operating Officer Bhavani Yerrapotu addressed Council Member 10 Veenker’s questions about the impact of BCDC’s upcoming guidance and standards in 11 the shoreline adaptation plan. The Army Corps of Engineers concluded that the amount 12 of damage envisioned for this area did not meet their criteria for project funding. Valley 13 Water would coordinate with the City’s Public Works Department on any regional 14 efforts. The Army Corps of Engineers’ study finding was that the amount of damages 15 and the federal interest for funding a project was probably not until 2060. The City of 16
Palo Alto, Caltrans, and others were part of a regional collaborative effort. Valley Water 17
staff monitored those efforts; however, a project was not in Valley Water’s 20-year work 18
plan because of the Army Corps conclusion that the amount of damage was not 19
significant enough until much further in the future. When BCDC releases their 20
guidelines, Valley Water staff along with City of Palo Alto staff would determine if 21
anything needed to be revisited. 22
As there were no further questions or comments, Chair Brown asked for a motion. 23
Commissioner Kleinhaus made a motion to recommend to City Council to approve the 24
project with additional considerations of the heights and colors used in this project and 25
the potential to introduce art. Ms. Robustelli noted that the motion needed to include 26 “with approval of the Park Improvement Ordinance.” Commissioner Kleinhaus agreed to 27 add it to her motion. Chair Brown seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0 by roll 28 call vote. 29
4. First Tee Update 30
Mr. Castile introduced Lam Do, Superintendent of Open Space, Parks, and Golf; and 31 George Maxe, President and CEO of First Tee - Silicon Valley. 32
Mr. Do presented an informational update on the collaboration between the City and the 33 First Tee - Silicon Valley. The youth development program started in 2009, teaching life 34 skills and core values through golf. These values encompassed honesty, integrity, 35 sportsmanship, respect, collaboration, confidence, and responsibility. The program 36 allowed 300 participants per year at the Baylands Golf Links and there was a waiting list. 37
APPROVED
DRAFT 9
The participants were within Grades 2-12; however, the majority of the participants were 1
in Grades 2-8. Participants were 41 percent girls, 59 percent boys, 31 percent from Palo 2
Alto, 5 percent from East Palo Alto, 20 percent from Redwood City, and 44 percent 3
regional. First Tee - Silicon Valley encompassed all of Santa Clara County as well as 4
parts of San Benito County and San Mateo County. An outreach program to 1600 5
students in eight regional schools supplemented the on-course program. First Tee - 6
Silicon Valley offered financial aid to offset participation costs. 7
Under the interim use agreement, the schedule was four seasons, eight weeks each 8 season, at Baylands Tuesday through Friday from 4:30 to 6:00 PM, tee times from 4:30 9 to 5:20 PM using Holes 1-4, with use of the range and putting green using four bays. 10 During winter, the schedule was one hour earlier, no course access, and using eight bays. 11
The desired program expansion would accommodate 800 participants per year, 5000 12 students through outreach programs at schools, and add Saturday classes. The goal was 13 to be 85 percent ethnically diverse and 50 percent low income (currently 32 percent). 14 The standard price of a class was $240; however, families could pay as little as $20 with 15 financial assistance or attend at no charge in cases of family hardship. 16
The golf course was highly utilized, especially on Saturdays. The youth area (irrigated 17
and fenced-off area between the range and Embarcadero Road) needed protection from 18
range balls. The cars and street needed protection from the youth area. Safety nets were 19
proposed for the youth area to accommodate most of First Tee’s programming. First Tee 20
would use a portion of the small putting green and between four to eight bays of the 21
driving range, depending on negotiations with the City. 22
Mr. Castile reviewed the next steps: Implement the short-term use agreement. Develop a 23
multi-year agreement for longer-term use. Continue to strategize and develop the 24
program. Continue outreach efforts. Evaluate opportunities for practice area 25
improvements. 26
There was no public comment. Chair Brown asked for commissioner comments and 27 questions. 28
Commissioner Cribbs thought First Tee was a great national program. Commissioner 29 Cribbs wanted dates for the next steps. Commissioner Cribbs was part of First Tee with 30 the San Jose Sports Authority. Commissioner Cribbs was proud to see the program 31 extend to Palo Alto and stated she was a huge supporter. 32
Vice Chair Freeman agreed with having some dates for next steps. Vice Chair Freeman 33 asked for the status of the public partnership between the City and First Tee, the 34 timeline, and the reason for the delay. There was no timeline but Mr. Maxe, Mr. Castile, 35 and Mr. Do were eager to further this partnership. Mr. Castile believed discussions 36
APPROVED
DRAFT 10
would take months. Mr. Maxe added that they were very close on the interim agreement, 1
maybe within weeks. Mr. Maxe noted that Mr. Castile was familiar with First Tee San 2
Francisco in Harding Park, which was a larger-scale project. 3
Commissioner Cribbs requested that every monthly PRC meeting’s Department Report 4
include a progress report on First Tee. Mr. Castile agreed to provide reports on First Tee. 5
Commissioner Cribb asked if there was any additional information on having a second 6
story on the driving range. Mr. Castile thought there was a draft and recommendations 7
were under review. 8
Chair Brown inquired how the increased program capacity was determined. Mr. Maxe 9 explained the capacity was 128, four days of 32 kids with class limits of 16. In reviewing 10 the layout of the facility in the youth area and the high demand, the assumption was that 11 the program could grow substantially. The program in East San Jose had over 800 kids 12 per year, Tuesday through Friday and almost all day on Saturdays, and something 13 equivalent could be done in Palo Alto. Original estimates were over 1000 but that many 14 participants could not be accommodated due to the high utilization of the golf course. 15 With the addition of Saturday programs, low-income participation was expected to 16
increase because of transportation constraints for families Tuesday through Friday. Teen 17
participation may increase because kids have other activities in high school and prefer 18
Saturdays. First Tee’s emphasis is on life skills through golf, not golf instruction; 19
therefore, First Tee was not competing with the operator’s staff offering private 20
instruction. First Tee wanted kids who were interested in golf and excelling to take 21
private lessons from the golf course. 22
Commissioner Cribbs asked about First Tee’s outreach to kids who did not think they 23
wanted to or could play golf. Mr. Maxe replied that the school program’s goal was to go 24
to Title 1 schools to try to get students interested in the game and the program by tabling 25
after school, coffees with parents, and back-to-school night. First Tee partnered with 26 PAL Redwood City to bring some kids to and from the golf course for the program with 27 the requirement that parents have a relationship with First Tee. Outreach is to the parents 28 because they are the decision makers. To reach the Latino community, all English 29 materials were available in Spanish. 30
5. Ad Hoc Committees and Liaison Updates 31
Commissioner Kleinhaus remarked that the BCCP ad hoc met with staff. The ad hoc will 32 help update the existing condition report. 33
Chair Brown stated that the Master Plan Ad Hoc had a meeting and spoke with staff. 34 Chair Brown will report on the dog park meeting next month. 35
APPROVED
DRAFT 11
Commissioner Cribbs announced the aquatics fall schedule was beginning and 1
everything was going well according to Tim Sheeper. Mr. Sheeper was continuing his 2
search for instructors to provide adult swimming lessons. The skaters’ collective initiated 3
a press release about their goal to raise $1.5 million. Contributions could be made 4
through the Friends of the Palo Alto Parks website. 5
Kristen O’Kane and Mayor Stone provided quotes about the importance of the 6
Recreation & Wellness Center. The Friends was producing a deck about the potential for 7
fundraising, which would be available in the next month or so. The ad hoc committee 8 was waiting for the Cubberley decision about the land, acquisition, and next steps as well 9 as looking at Greer as a possibility. 10
Vice Chair Freeman commented on the Nature Preserve. Staff installed signage indicated 11 on the map except for two signs at the Friendship Bridge. East Palo Alto needed to 12 confirm the sewer line location before completing the installation of those signs. There 13 were 14 “e-bikes not permitted” signs and 11 “permitted” signs placed throughout the 14 Baylands. Where space allowed, staff installed trail courtesy triangle signs. Vice Chair 15 Freeman asked if there had been any comments on the signage. Ms. Robustelli had not 16
received any feedback. Bike racks were purchased. Ranger staff met with a contractor 17
last week and scheduled another contractor on August 28 to obtain bids for installation. 18
Ms. Robustelli will provide a report next month and supply the ad hoc with more 19
information as things progressed. 20
Commissioner Cribbs asked if there was anything to report on the courts. Vice Chair 21
Freeman did not meet with Adam. Additional analysis was being performed, so the hope 22
was to have more information for the next PRC meeting. Part of the analysis was 23
surveying the pickleball and tennis community about the courts. 24
COMMISSIONER/BOARD MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, AND 25 ANNOUNCEMENTS, OR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 26 27 Two potential items for next month’s agenda included an informational PowerPoint 28 presentation on the Baylands and a presentation from the youth council. Commissioner 29 Cribbs asked about the work plan. Chair Brown responded that the work plan was going 30 to Council on October 7. Vice Chair Freeman and Chair Brown would be at the Council 31 meeting to speak to the work plan. 32
ADJOURNMENT 33 34 Meeting adjourned at 8:37 PM. 35