HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-07-24 Parks & Recreation Agenda PacketADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations, auxiliary aids or services to access City facilities, services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn about the City's compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact 650-329-2550 (voice), or e-mail ada@cityofpaloalto.org This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section 54956. Members of the public are welcome to attend this public meeting.
AGENDA IS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54954.2(a) OR SECTION 54956 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting July 24th, 2018 AGENDA
City Hall Chambers
250 Hamilton 7pm *In accordance with SB 343 materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Commission after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the Lucie Stern Community Center at 1305 Middlefield Road during normal business hours. Please call 650-463-4912.
Attention Speakers: If you wish to address the Commission during oral communications or on an item on the agenda,
please complete a speaker’s card and give it to City staff. By submitting the speaker’s card, the Chair will recognize you at
the appropriate time.
I.ROLL CALL
II.AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, DELETIONS
III.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the public may address the Commission on any subject not on the agenda. A reasonabletime restriction may be imposed at the discretion of the Chair. The Commission reserves the right tolimit oral communications period to 3 minutes.
IV.DEPARTMENT REPORT
V.BUSINESS
1.Approval of Draft Minutes from the June 26th, 2018 Parks and Recreation Commission
Meeting – PRC Chair McDougall – Action (5 min) ATTACHMENT
2.Palo Alto Recreation Foundation Goals and Collaboration Opportunities – Jack Morton –Discussion (30 min)
3.Cubberley Master Plan Community Co-Design Process – Presentation by Bobbie Hill and
Connor McManus of Concordia, LLC – Discussion (30 min) ATTACHMENT
4.Fiscal Year 2019 Budget Overview – Discussion (60 min)
a.CSD Operating Budget - Jazmin LeBlanc
b.CSD Muni Fees and Fee Reduction Program- Jazmin LeBlanc ATTACHMENT
c.Capital Improvement Plan Process and FY19 Adopted Parks CIP Budget – Daren
Anderson ATTACHMENT
MEMO
REVISED
ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations, auxiliary aids or services to access City facilities, services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn about the City's compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact 650-329-2550 (voice), or e-mail ada@cityofpaloalto.org This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section 54956. Members of the public are welcome to attend this public meeting.
5.Other Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Updates – Chair - Discussion (15 min)
VI. COMMENTS AND ANNOUCEMENTS
VII.TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR August 28, 2018 MEETING
VIII.ADJOURNMENT
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 1
1
2
3
4
MINUTES 5
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 6
REGULAR MEETING 7
June 26, 2018 8
CITY HALL 9 250 Hamilton Avenue 10 Palo Alto, California 11 12 Commissioners Present: Anne Cribbs, Jeff Greenfield, Jeff LaMere, Ryan McCauley, Don 13
McDougall, David Moss, and Keith Reckdahl 14
Commissioners Absent: None 15
Others Present: 16
Staff Present: Peter Jensen, Kristen O'Kane, Natalie Khwaja 17
I. ROLL CALL 18
II. AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, and DELETIONS 19
Chair McDougall: Do we have any agenda changes, deletions, requests, reordering 20
relative to the agenda? Everybody's okay with that? 21
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 22
Chair McDougall: The next thing on the agenda is Oral Communications. These are oral 23
communications that are not specific to business items that we have on the agenda. I 24
believe that Herb Borock is not speaking to an agenda item, so I would invite him to 25 come and speak. 26
Herb Borock: Good evening, Chair McDougall and Commissioners. I came to the 27 meeting because I saw the agenda and some items of interest. When I entered, the copies 28
of the staff reports are not here. Recently I was at another meeting of the Commission 29
when there also weren't staff reports. You get a packet with printed staff reports and 30
other items that are on the agenda. The State's open meeting law, the Brown Act, 31
requires that there be copies of everything you got that's not confidential available for the 32
public to review at the meeting. Instead, all there is is a piece of paper with links to 33
internet sites. As far as I know, this is the only legislative body in the City, Council 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 2
committee, board, commission, that does this. It's only been doing it recently. I request 1
that it stop and that you go back to what you did previously. Thank you. 2
Chair McDougall: Thank you. 3
Natalie Khwaja: If I may really quick? We were directed by the Clerk's Office to start 4
presenting the attachments and reports in this manner to save paper because often we 5
would print a lot and no one would take them. If you would like me to go back to how it 6 was done before, I have no problem doing that. 7
Chair McDougall: I'm not sure we should make that decision on the spot as opposed to 8
understand what it takes and why that recommendation. I think I can understand that 9
recommendation, but maybe there's a compromise, maybe there's some other way to look 10
at it. I don't think we should make that decision right now. We'll publish that decision. 11
Herb, I'll make sure that they send whatever answer we get directly to you personally. 12
Mr. Borock: (inaudible) 13
Chair McDougall: Pardon me? 14
Mr. Borock: And the name of the person in the Clerk's Office who said that because to 15
my knowledge there is no connection between that Council-appointed officer and the 16
staff that is here, who reports to a different Council-appointed officer who is the City 17
Manager. I'd be interested in the name of the person and, if it was in writing, to see that 18
from that person. 19
Chair McDougall: We'll be happy to provide you with the conclusion of our 20
investigation. 21
IV. DEPARTMENT REPORT 22
Chair McDougall: The next is approval of the minutes of the April 24 meeting. Am I 23
missing something? 24
Kristen O'Kane: The department report. 25
Chair McDougall: Yes. 26
Ms. O'Kane: Kristen O'Kane with Community Services. Daren is out sick today, so I'm 27 going to provide some updates from Parks and Open Space on behalf of Daren. The first 28
one is the Peers dog park opening was held on June 14. It was a very nice event. The 29
dog park was packed with people and their dogs enjoying the site. Daren wanted to 30
extend a big thanks to the Commissioners, especially Commissioners Cribbs, LaMere, 31
McCauley, and Chair McDougall, for attending and Chair McDougall for speaking at the 32
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 3
event. The next item, the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority flood 1
protection project is starting its final construction season on July 2. Expected project 2
completion is spring of 2019. The Friendship Bridge and the creek-side trails are 3
expected to be closed for the duration of the final construction season. For the Foothills 4
Park trails, we have submitted our application to the Planning Department for rerouting 5
the trails, and we expect to get approval in late August. Our trail contractor is available 6 to do the work in August. Hopefully, we can kick that off towards the end of the 7
summer. The Lucie Stern brick pathway project—I don't know if any of you have been 8
to Lucie Stern recently. As you know, the brick pathways, because they're really, really 9
old bricks, are very worn. The grouting between the bricks was very worn. We're 10
actually in the process of redoing the brick pathways around Lucie Stern. A certain 11
percentage of the original bricks, because they are considered historic, is being preserved 12
and being put back into the brick pathways. We're doing this in a three-phase approach 13
so there are always two entrances and exits out of the Lucie Stern Community Center. 14
The final note from Daren is the Baylands Boardwalk. This is going to Council on 15
June 25, which was yesterday. This was awarded last night for construction at Council. 16
Construction is anticipated to begin in September and be completed by January 2019, 17
which is good news. I think that was all from Daren. I just have one thing I would like 18
to give everyone information about. On June 18, Council approved our contract with a 19
company called Concordia to assist with the Cubberley master planning. Council also 20
approved a cost-share agreement with the Palo Alto Unified School District. The City 21
and the School District will be sharing equally in the cost to do the master planning 22
effort. This is very exciting. We are going to use the summer time to get them up to 23
speed, to put together our community engagement plan, which will include recruiting for 24
what they call community fellows or citizen planners, who will be members of the 25 community and who will help us facilitate meetings, help us move the project along, help 26 us just be advocates for the project, and get people involved. I may be asking all of you 27 to help identify some people within the community that might be really good at helping 28
out with the project. The first community meeting will be in September. Commissioner 29
Cribbs. 30
Commissioner Cribbs: I was just wondering how the consultants are going to initially 31
interact with the Parks and Recreation Commission and if there will be some engagement 32
on the part of the Parks and Recreation Commission in the early planning stages. In 33
addition, it'll be interesting to see how a firm who comes from so far away understands 34
very much about the process of Cubberley and the history of Cubberley. Maybe that's 35
not important, but just curious. 36
Ms. O'Kane: They're in New Orleans. They have a lot of experience locally and are also 37
working on some other projects in California. There are two local partners that they have 38
on their team. One is at Stanford, and one is local. She's a consultant, but she used to be 39
in charge of the State's education department, for lack of a better term. They do have 40
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 4
local representation here in Palo Alto. This just happened on June 18, so I need to talk 1
with them on how we should get the Commission involved. I know there's either an ad 2
hoc or liaison group. I think it's specifically an ad hoc group for the Cubberley master 3
planning process. Natalie sent that to me the other day because I was asking who those 4
people are. There are three of you. I apologize that I can't exactly remember who the 5
three of you are. We'll definitely have you involved from the beginning. Was there 6 another question? 7
Commissioner Cribbs: That's probably enough. Thank you. 8
Chair McDougall: Jeff, did you have a question? Kristen, just quickly, is this idea of 9
citizen planners the same thing we've always done or is that an effort to be more locally 10
engaged? 11
Ms. O'Kane: It's different from what we have done. A lot of times there's a stakeholder 12
advisory group, and then there are community meetings that happen once in a while. We 13
decided not to have a stakeholder advisory group. Every community meeting is open to 14
everyone, and they're actually working meetings. They will not be in this style of 15
meeting where people are talking and we're getting questions. It's people sitting around 16
tables, working together, actually putting pen to paper. The community fellows will 17
facilitate the table discussion. They can have their own ideas, but they're not pushing a 18
particular agenda as that community fellow. But they're, of course, welcome to 19
participate in the discussions as well. It's just to have people who are really embedded in 20
the community be advocates … 21
Chair McDougall: Invested in the project. 22
Ms. O'Kane: … and invested and can help. We're hopeful we'll have a few hundred 23
people at these community meetings that are sitting around the tables working. We're 24
going to need help with those meetings. We're hoping the fellows can do that. 25
Chair McDougall: Hopefully, that will help address Commissioner Cribbs' question. I 26 think she might have another one. 27
Commissioner Cribbs: Thank you. I have just one more. The survey that Amy did to the 28
Cubberley tenants, when is that done and is it going to be public information, the results 29
soon? 30
Ms. O'Kane: When the consultant was here—they were here for the Council meeting—I 31
didn't mention the Board of Education approved the cost-share agreement the next night. 32
They came here for those two items. While they were here, they met with the existing 33
Cubberley tenants just to introduce the project. I think there was some concern that this 34
meant things were going to change for them. We wanted them to meet the consultants 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 5
right away. They sent out a survey for the tenants specifically to complete just about 1
their experience at Cubberley. That is due, I think, the end of this week or next week. 2
We are going to have, just like we did for the Parks Master Plan, a website that's going to 3
have everything on it, all of the data that's collected, all the information, meetings, results 4
of meetings, things like that. 5
Chair McDougall: I know it's not directly related, but do you have a status of the Zoo 6 moving to Cubberley? 7
Ms. O'Kane: They needed to make some improvements. They needed to do some 8
construction at Cubberley to make it suitable for the Zoo. They're doing that right now. I 9
don't have an exact date of when that move will happen, but it's in the works. 10
Chair McDougall: That's fine. Thank you. (inaudible) and we'll invite Yuko Tanaka to 11
come and speak for a couple of minutes. 12
Yuko Tanaka: My name is Yuko Tanaka, and I play tennis, and also I volunteer as a 13
Board Member of Palo Alto Tennis Club. I would like to raise three points for your 14
consideration regarding tennis court usage. Recently, the level of frustration among the 15
tennis players who cannot access the public courts has been increasing. One of the most 16
common reasons that they express is that the City tennis court usage policy says that 17
more than 50 percent of the courts cannot be reserved at the same facility at the given 18
day, given time. However, the City has been giving the reservation for more than 50 19
percent of the courts for many reasons. One recent experience was pickleball reserve 20
three courts at Mitchell Park for drop-in. In addition to that, there was a special senior 21
event, and they reserve the additional, so that was more than 50 percent. That was an all 22
weekend event. People were saying that this is violating the City policy. Also, the tennis 23
side is not innocent either. We do hold the USTA Junior Tournament probably seven, 24
eight times a year. During that time, we reserve six courts, one day the weekend. Of 25 course, that's more than 50 percent. People expressed concerns about more than 50 26 percent is against the City policy, but the City is giving away those reservations more 27 than the policy. What's going on? Those people send an email to the City. City's answer 28
is "we support senior event." That is not a good response for them to hear. Right now, 29
especially since the pickleball—there is no designated pickleball courts. We probably 30
have to have those circumstances for a long time until we create a plan and survey and 31
build. It takes time. I think, even if it's temporary, we should address those policy to the 32
level that we actually can comply or the City can actually comply. Right now the City is 33
really accommodating the senior events, junior events. I really appreciate that for all of 34
the racket players. At the same time, the people's frustration is also valid. I would like to 35
raise points that I would like to see the policy to be updated so that we can do that. 36
Chair McDougall: Thank you very much. 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 6
Ms. Tanaka: The second point … 1
Chair McDougall: I'm sorry. I said you could have a couple of minutes, and you've gone 2
on for 3 minutes. 3
Ms. Tanaka: Sorry. Two more points. 4
Chair McDougall: You've got 30 seconds. 5
Ms. Tanaka: One way to reduce the tennis courts reservation is look into the USTA team 6 reservations. I checked current USTA team reservations. Out of ten teams currently 7
reserved, only one team has more than 20 percent of Palo Alto residents as a player. 8
Some teams do not have even no Palo Alto residents as a roster player. Those people are 9
reserving Palo Alto tennis courts, and then the tennis players in Palo Alto community are 10
… 11
Chair McDougall: I'm going to have to ask you to stop. Thank you. I will tell you that 12
we do have both an ad hoc committee looking into the courts themselves. We do have an 13
ad hoc committee that's working with staff on the usage of fields and courts and into 14
those policies. We're not unaware. If you'd like to—I have your name. Potentially they 15
can reach out to you or others. You should know that we're not unaware of some of the 16
questions that's you're raising. 17
Ms. Tanaka: Ten seconds. The Palo Alto Tennis Club is not involved in that ad hoc 18
group, and we would like to ask that the Palo Alto Tennis Club be included in that ad hoc 19
group. 20
Chair McDougall: Any time we have public meetings, everybody is invited, the tennis 21
club and everybody else. We'll just make sure that everybody is aware. 22
Ms. Tanaka: Thank you. 23
Chair McDougall: Thank you. 24
V. BUSINESS 25
1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the April 24, 2018 Parks and Recreation 26
Commission meeting. 27
Approval of the draft April 24, 2018 Minutes as presented was moved by Vice Chair 28
Greenfield and seconded by Commissioner Reckdahl. Passed 7-0 29
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 7
2. Renzel Pond Project Update 1
Chair McDougall: Next on the item is the Renzel Pond project update. Welcome, 2
Ms. North. It's nice to see you. 3
Karin North: Nice to see you. 4
Ms. O'Kane: Good evening. Kristen O'Kane. I just wanted to introduce Karin. I know 5
she's been here before. There was a request, I believe, from Commissioner Moss, to have 6 her come back and give an update on what's happening at the Renzel Wetlands and 7
answer any questions any of you might have on the progress. I'll turn it over to Karin. 8
Ms. North: My name is Karin North. I'm the Watershed Protection Manager. I work out 9
at the wastewater treatment plant. I'm with Environmental Services in Public Works. 10
Some of the benefit of our Renzel Pond was a water reclamation project back in the early 11
1990s to recycle and reuse a lot of our plant effluent. I'm just going to give you the aerial 12
view. Probably many of you know this area. It's that pond area down here at the bottom. 13
Some of this might be a repeat. Some of the Commissioners weren't here the last 14
meeting, so it's sometimes nice to know. This entire area is the ITT property; now, it's 15
called the Renzel Wetlands. It was cut off due to our landfill, which is now Byxbee Park. 16
Back in the early '90s, we tried to restore some of this. This was all previously upland, so 17
we put in a pipeline from the wastewater treatment plant, which is right here. About 5 18
percent of our flow flows through the Renzel Wetlands. Currently, no flow is flowing 19
through it. There is another secondary pipe that during high tides saltwater, Bay water 20
flows through here and down along this channel and then it gets pumped into Matadero 21
Creek. The recycled water and the salt marsh were designed to complement each other, 22
to balance out the salinity going into Matadero Creek in the flooding basin. This is what 23
the area was back in the day, in 1991. Good thing we have all these Google images that 24
we can pull from, which is nice. This is what it was in 2002. You can see we had a few 25 habitat islands. It was designed to—we're trying to make it into a nice habitat for the 26 environment. As you can see, in this little corner that island is gone. The cattails are 27 starting to take off in 2009. We're not exactly sure. We think it's the berm deterioration. 28
We had muskrats. We've had it breaking down, subsidence over the years. You can see 29
in 2014 it's basically turned into almost two ponds. Last year, we know now that because 30
of the cattails, when we started to drain it, it did turn into essentially two ponds. We had 31
over 16 breaches last summer over here. We were spot fixing them, which was very 32
challenging because you have to mobilize equipment. You're going into the 33
environment; you have to basically piecemeal this berm back together. We decided that 34
this was the year to fix it versus having another year of going in there and just doing spot 35
fixes. The last time I came to talk to you, I talked about we were going to start draining 36
the pond. We drained the pond. As I mentioned before, it turned into two ponds, so we 37
had to get this long-reach excavator in to dig a channel to allow both the north end and 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 8
the south end of the pond to drain. This is what it was looking like during the draining. 1
This is the pipe that actually drains out the pond. If you guys haven't been out there, it's 2
completely dry now, which is good because we needed to let it dry out before we bring in 3
the large, heavy equipment to move the silt. The silt over the years, over 25 years, has 4
basically silted up because of the cattail growth. When it breaks down, that silt 5
accumulates in the pond. We have to do—unfortunately this massive equipment needs to 6 come in. We are limited with our season of when we can get in there because it's in a 7
previous wetland. We don't want it to go in while there's a rain event. We're very 8
limited, and it's a short season. It's not ideal. We understand people are very concerned 9
about the habitat out there. We're trying to be very mindful of that while we're doing this 10
project. This is part of our NPDES permit to discharge to the Bay. Maintenance is a 11
requirement. Shani Kleinhaus from Audubon Society was concerned about birds. We 12
had the Rangers out there regularly checking on bird habitat. They did not see any. 13
Because of her concern, we did hire a certified biologist. They went out, and they did 14
find six nests. Based on the recommendation of the biologist, we put a 30-foot buffer 15
around them. We are continuing to do the berm work because that's taking the longest 16
amount of time. We're building up the berm, making it wider, so then we can go in and 17
maintain that marsh in the future. Not ideal, but something we need to do. Last night, 18
the City Council approved O'Grady. They're going to come in starting at the end of 19
August. We were originally going to have them come in sooner, but we're pushing it past 20
the nesting season to come in. They're basically going to be moving dirt. They're going 21
to be pushing all the dirt from this side up to this area of the pond, and we're going to see 22
how much we can—maybe this will turn into an upland area. This will turn into a 23
shallow marsh, and then this will be an open marsh. We're doing a little bit of adaptive 24
management. We're trying to be mindful of our funds and see what we can get done. 25 Ideally, I don't want them coming in again because we also have plans potentially to 26 expand this wetland as well. If we're going to expand the wetland, I would say in 5-10 27 years' time because of permitting, then hopefully we'd get in there and do it all once 28
again. This is what it looks like now. We have a silt fence up there. I know 29
Commissioner Moss has been out there. Have any of you guys driven past it? It's 30
definitely not what it was before. It's changing, and we're hoping that we can at least get 31
it back to its natural habitat in the fastest time possible. We do have a silt fence around it. 32
We are bringing in a lot of trucks with material. We had a soil brokerage contract with 33
our landfill, so we're utilizing that and capitalizing on it. That's only 'til 2019. This was 34
our year to also get in the soil that's free. We're building up the berm. We have signage 35
out there for residents so they know what's happening if they read it and wonder what 36
we're doing and why we're doing it. We have an active website as well. We've gone to 37
all the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan meetings to let them know what's 38
happening. We're coming to you to talk to you as well. This is from June 2018. You can 39
see it looks very different now. It is dried out, but we don't know how thick that crust 40
layer is, which is why we want to let it dry as long as possible before we bring in the 41
equipment to start moving dirt around. This is what the contractor was awarded last night 42
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 9
from Council. We're not sure how far this will come down. We're hoping we can try and 1
keep it as compacted as possible, but we won't know until we're really in there moving 2
the sediment and the silt around. This area is going to be the drying beds for the cattails. 3
We've also talked to Shani and Emily about leaving some of the cattails, so we're not 4
going to remove them all. That will be something we'll do. We haven't made any 5
decisions at this point in time. We have another meeting coming closer to then. We can 6 walk out to the site and try and identify cattails that we could keep. Obviously we don't 7
want the cattails in this area, this pinch point, because we'll just have that problem yet 8
again. We're trying to do our best. Hopefully, it'll go back to what it was in 1991 and 9
then evolve, and the cattails will grow back and the habitat. We're hoping we can do this. 10
It's been once in 25 years. I'm hoping that I won't have to do this again while I'm with the 11
City of Palo Alto. Hopefully we do it right, and we can maintain it, and we won't have to 12
do this again. Feel free to ask questions. I think Shani has some comments too. 13
Chair McDougall: Thank you, Karin. Shani. 14
Shani Kleinhaus: Good evening. Shani Kleinhaus with the Audubon Society, resident of 15
Palo Alto. This project makes me really, really sad. It started without CEQA because it 16
was a maintenance project. We were told, "We have to fix the leaks. We have to do it 17
now. It's a maintenance project. We don't need CEQA." I said, "What about the birds? 18
This is nesting season. This is the most sensitive area in the Baylands at the height of the 19
nesting season." I was told, "We're not impacting anything. We're only draining the 20
water. We need to do that because, when we come in after the nesting season and start 21
doing some work with dirt, then we won't have birds nesting there." I accepted that. I 22
started getting reports from birders going there saying, "Why are they covering all the 23
reeds with dirt?" I went to look, and that was what was happening. It turns out we were 24
importing soil, building berms, doing all this groundwork, and dumping the dirt on top of 25 the reeds, and there were birds in those reeds nesting. There were birds nesting on the 26 areas where the soil was dumped. When I was there, there was a killdeer—it's a little, 27 ground-nesting bird—that was running around and doing this game where they pretend to 28
be injured so you'll follow them away from their nest. The next day, there was a lot of 29
soil on that site, and the bird was not there anymore. Talk about sensitivity. What I ask 30
you, one, is learn about CEQA. A project like that should have gone through CEQA. 31
There would be mitigations necessary and biologists onsite. They did send a biologist 32
after we started screaming. I'm sorry. I know that you didn't intend to cause damage. 33
When the process is broken and there's no CEQA, because this is only a maintenance 34
project for something that started 30 years ago or 20 years ago, then you don't have the 35
mitigations that are necessary to protect our resources now. The public doesn't know, 36
and they're surprised when they see a huge project taking place when we were told that 37
it's only the draining of the ponds that is going to happen now. Another thing. When I 38
asked then, I understand it is emergency fixes, but you say you don't want to come back 39
there again. The whole project that you're going to hear next is about how do we design 40
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 10
this area. This was an opportunity to look at something in a much bigger framework. I'm 1
not only doing maintenance on a project and talk to me now about leaving some refuge 2
for the animals so not all the reeds will be gone and so on. This was an opportunity to 3
actually look at how do we do a project and enhance the environment at the same time. It 4
wasn't. It's not going to be, but it's still not planning to have a real ecological design team 5
work on this project. It's a maintenance project. I sent a letter about the next item, which 6 is the Baylands Comprehensive Plan. You have at least 13 projects that are capital 7
improvement, and three projects are enhancements. We talk about balance. We need to 8
start at looking at every project as how do we balance this project. This was the ultimate 9
opportunity that happened in a very sad way as far as the birds are concerned. Again, I 10
don't think there's anyone who means to do something that is not necessary. Yeah, they 11
needed to fix the leaks. There are things that need to be done, but there are too many 12
breaks in the system. All of you, please, if anybody proposes a project whether it's Public 13
Works or anybody and it touches on a park, insist on CEQA so you know what's going to 14
happen, so you make sure everything is right and accidents to killdeer don't just happen. 15
Thank you. 16
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Do people on the Commission have questions for Karin? 17
David. 18
Commissioner Moss: I went by the pond and was really surprised at how significant, 19
how huge this project turned out to be. I guess I didn't quite realize it. I want to 20
emphasize what Shani said about maintenance projects versus something that requires 21
environmental review. What's going to come out of this also is there's a path all the way 22
around that could become a path for people who want to walk or bike or walk their dogs 23
or whatever around there that didn't exist before. It really should be covered by the 24
Baylands Comprehensive Plan so that we deal with that new feature and others. I 25 strongly believe that that pond should be open to the public in some way to allow an 26 observation or whatever to be able to look out at that. I'd like to see birds there too. I've 27 always wondered why it wasn't open to the public for bird viewing. I would like to echo 28
what Shani said about taking the broader view with this project. I don't know what we 29
can do at this point. As soon as it's done, I want to put all the birds back. That's my 30
comment. 31
Chair McDougall: Anybody else have questions, comments? Thanks, Ryan. 32
Commissioner McCauley: Karin, could you perhaps tell us what your plan is for 33
mitigation with respect to the birds? You've now put up these 30-foot—is it a barrier of 34
some sort? 35
Ms. North: If you go out there, there are orange, 30-foot—they're 30 feet away from the 36
nests. That's what the biologist recommended that we hired and then to maintain those. 37
Before O'Grady comes into the area, we'll have a biologist come back again to ensure 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 11
there's no new nests and that the nests have been—basically the nesting season's over. 1
Then, we can go in and remove the reeds. I know we haven't done the CEQA, but we're 2
trying to do all the—since it's a maintenance project, I'm wearing my environmental hat. 3
We're trying to do our due diligence on making sure that we're looking for birds, looking 4
for nests, mitigating any potential impacts. The area around the pond for the maintenance 5
will be a road. It will be your decision to determine if that becomes part of the trail 6 system, but we do need a road for maintenance. Part of the reason why it was not opened 7
up is it was an ankle-turner with the berm. It was completely divots and falling apart. I 8
just want to respond a little bit to Shani's concerns. I originally had the plan of a larger 9
vision. With the Baylands Conservation Comprehensive Plan, we wanted to incorporate 10
it. That started, and then we had all those leaks. We are still looking at the larger vision, 11
but we also have to maintain our current infrastructure. I know it's odd that a pond is 12
infrastructure, but it is. It's part of our treatment process. We do get some nutrient 13
removal. It's in our actual permit that requires us to have a certain percentage of our flow 14
go there to reduce the flow going into the San Francisco Bay. I would not say this is my 15
favorite project. I'm just trying to get it done and do it the most environmentally sensitive 16
way I can. Keep on asking me questions because it challenges staff to come up with 17
strategies on how to do it. We feel like we've talked to the biologist. We didn't have a 18
biologist on staff. We were relying on Rangers prior to that. We'll bring the biologist 19
back out again. If you have any other recommendations, we are open to them. We have 20
talked to the consultants for the Baylands Conservation Comprehensive Plan, that's who 21
was our biologist for assessing the birds. This is an adaptive management strategy. None 22
of us has ever had to deal with a large freshwater pond that was wastewater for 23
maintenance. 24
Commissioner McCauley: I think we all appreciate that you're trying to be thoughtful 25 about all this. Are there other wildlife mitigation issues that need to be considered? 26
Ms. North: For full disclosure, we did find fish. Some of them got moved into the flood 27 basin before they died. CDFW, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, told us to 28
euthanize the rest of the fish. Any fish that were left were euthanized. 29
Commissioner McCauley: Is there any plan to restock fish or something like that? 30
Ms. North: The fish probably were not naturally there. They probably got stocked over 31
the past 25 years. We're not sure how they got there because it's not hydraulically 32
connected to the creek. The water flows into the creek, and creek water should not be 33
flowing back. It's been a fun project, let me tell you. 34
Chair McDougall: You don't have fish that come from the wastewater treatment plant? 35
Ms. North: No. We're failing miserably if we have fish coming from the wastewater 36
treatment plant. 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 12
Chair McDougall: David mentioned the inevitability or suggested the inevitability of 1
there being a path around there. You said there would be a road whether it became an 2
open path. I would see at some level that area is just not that big. Wishing for the birds 3
to be there but allowing your dog to be there at the same is a little bit of a contradiction. 4
Ms. North: That's what I'm saying. The Parks and Rec Commission can determine if it's 5
going to be a maintenance road or a path. That has not been determined at this point in 6 time. We're just trying to create a maintenance road. Obviously, we know that people 7
may take that path, but there are ways to deter folks from going there if we do not want 8
people going down around that pond. It's really up to you guys to make that decision. 9
Chair McDougall: Would that decision be made in the context of the Comprehensive 10
Plan or would that be made separately? 11
Ms. North: No. This is part of what's looking into the Comprehensive Plan. 12
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Any other questions? Jeff. 13
Vice Chair Greenfield: Thank you. I appreciate that there was no ill intent. In all this, 14
the intentions were well founded. Proceeding without a CEQA study because this was a 15
maintenance project was legally permitted. My question is what we have learned from 16
this and how can we improve in the future and is there a policy change that we should be 17
considering to protect against something like this happening in the future. I'm interested 18
in the staff perspective. 19
Ms. North: Definitely. If someone was to tell me that we're under a maintenance 20
exemption, I would now based on my knowledge absolutely say no. Now that I'm a 21
wiser staff individual, I would require us to get this. This was something that we've 22
learned from. We're doing the mitigation as we go. I don't think it would have really 23
changed the outcome of what we would have planned on doing, except maybe we would 24
have had a biologist out there sooner. 25
Vice Chair Greenfield: Help me out here. For a maintenance project, is a CEQA study 26 not officially required? 27
Ms. North: That was our interpretation. My interpretation has changed since we started 28
the project. 29
Vice Chair Greenfield: We now believe that a CEQA study should be required? 30
Ms. North: If I did a future project just for—that way if Shani asked me questions or 31
other people asked me questions, just for my own basis, I would require it. I don't think 32
it's necessarily required by law; I just would do it regardless. Does that make sense? 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 13
Vice Chair Greenfield: Sure, that makes sense. My concern is … 1
Ms. North: Am I being clear in terms of—we were going under the premise that it was 2
not required for maintenance. Now what I know and with my knowledge base, I believe 3
still legally it's not required for maintenance, but I would probably still require us to do it. 4
Vice Chair Greenfield: It seems very clear that you're once bitten, twice shy. You would 5
certainly not proceed in the same manner. What's to stop someone else? If someone else 6 is in a similar situation and a CEQA study isn't officially required, is there something that 7
we should be doing as a body to consider a policy change (crosstalk)? 8
Ms. North: I think the policy change has already happened. I don't think this will happen 9
again. 10
Vice Chair Greenfield: Where has the policy change occurred? 11
Ms. North: We've been told that if we were to do any other future projects, because of 12
concerns from public, we would do CEQA documentation. It will happen. I work for 13
Phil so, yes, it would be happening again. 14
Vice Chair Greenfield: Thank you. 15
Commissioner Reckdahl: What was the reason for not doing CEQA? Was it a cost issue 16
or a schedule? 17
Ms. North: Cost issue, time issue, maintenance. We were under the gun of trying to get 18
this completed during the dry season when we were trying to do the larger aspect of it. 19
We realized we didn't have the cost to actually go out and do the larger study of the 20
whole region. We are trying to limit costs and get it done. As you know, our Council is 21
trying to limit every cost angle. We're trying to do our best as City staff of not spending 22
money when we don't need to spend money. 23
Commissioner Reckdahl: Every dollar that you spend is something that maybe could be 24
used elsewhere, but you also don't want to overlook important things. It's a tough 25 situation. 26
Ms. North: Which is why in my mind we're doing all the mitigation that would be 27 required anyway for CEQA, which is why when I was wearing my hat we were getting 28
the Rangers out there. We had the biologist go out there. Those are all the mitigations 29
that would have been laid out in a CEQA document anyway. 30
Commissioner Reckdahl: Do you have a rough estimate of how much money it would 31
have cost and what kind of schedule it would have impacted? 32
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 14
Ms. North: It probably would have added about a year and probably around $100,000. 1
Commissioner Reckdahl: Could the berm have lasted another year or would we have to 2
… 3
Ms. North: No. We had 16 breaches in the berm the previous summer. No, it couldn't 4
have lasted another year. 5
Commissioner Reckdahl: In hindsight, if we wanted to do CEQA, would we then have 6 gone in and fixed that berm for that final season, or what would we have done? What 7
would have been the best option in hindsight? 8
Ms. North: We could have just drained the pond and left it and not done any kind of 9
work. That would have been two seasons with the water being out. This is where we're 10
stuck, as staff, trying to make the right decision. We couldn't have left it in there and 11
kept on going and patching it while we were trying to do our CEQA. We have the cards 12
that we're handed. We try and do our best decision-making process. I have a master's 13
degree in environmental science. I wear my environmental hat. I've been with the City 14
since 2001. We are trying to do the best we can. We consult with our consultants as well 15
because they're part of the Baylands Conservation Comp Plan. Our experience getting 16
through procurement and getting CEQA done is a much lengthier process. It's at least a 17
year if not longer. Just to get the consultant on board for the moving of the dirt took 18
around 4 months. It's timing unfortunately. I wish things could go quicker, but that's the 19
City process that we're in. 20
Commissioner Reckdahl: You mentioned these cattails and reeds. Are they all native 21
vegetation? 22
Ms. North: No. 23
Commissioner Reckdahl: They're not native? 24
Ms. North: No. It's a freshwater pond. Cattails are going to grow wherever they come. 25
Commissioner Reckdahl: This is naturally occurring. If you had a freshwater pond 100 26 years ago … 27
Ms. North: If you had a freshwater pond, then cattails naturally occur. Boronda Lake 28
has cattails in there. They have a maintenance—they go in every year, I think, or every 5 29
years and clean out the cattails. We know we're going to have to do some more 30
maintenance on it similar (crosstalk). 31
Commissioner Reckdahl: That was my next question. What prevents these from doing 32
the same thing that just happened? 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 15
Ms. North: One, by having a road around the perimeter, we can keep better access to it. 1
Before our guys were using goats and machetes to actually get to the interior of the pond. 2
Commissioner Reckdahl: If we start having a choke point now with cattails, what would 3
we do? 4
Ms. North: We would hire the—do it from the water similar to what they do at Boronda. 5
They go in and harvest a certain percentage of it but not remove all of it. That would be 6 our next strategy. Prior to doing that, I would probably get a full—another CEQA 7
documentation with maintenance agreements built into that. 8
Commissioner Reckdahl: You mentioned the saltwater pipe. What's the condition of 9
that? Is that … 10
Ms. North: That's why it's part of the Baylands Conservation Comp Plan. That is 11
another part of the wetland that needs some maintenance because it's silted up. We've 12
historically had our operators go out there and hand dig the channel. We need to actually 13
dig it out properly. That will be part of the next stage, which is why I say it's 5-10 years 14
to see when we can get money to look at the entire area. You see the remnant slough, 15
which is right here. We also want to see if we can connect that. That's part of the 16
Baylands Comprehensive Plan. We're trying to look at the area holistically. Ideally, we 17
would have done the whole thing and then done CEQA and done the entire pond at the 18
same time. As I said before, our timing just didn't match up with the breaches and the 19
leaks. 20
Commissioner Reckdahl: When you talk about what's going down in 10 years, do we 21
have a good idea of what we want to do or our options are open and we have do to a lot 22
of planning? 23
Ms. North: We have some options available. AECOM, the consultant, is laying out 24
some and looking at what makes the most sense for that area, utilizing their experience. 25 We're not there yet. It's coming up in the timeline. They have it on their agenda to talk 26 to you about it. 27
Commissioner Reckdahl: Thank you. 28
Chair McDougall: David. 29
Commissioner Moss: One more comment based on what we've just heard. The pond 30
was always considered just a part of the wastewater treatment plant. As we now know 31
after the fact, it is not just part of that like your cement-lined tanks over on the left. It is 32
now part of the Baylands Open Space Preserve and must be treated with the respect that 33
that deserves. What you're doing now is building this pond for the next 25, 30 years 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 16
before the Baylands Comprehensive Plan is complete. I would like to address do we put 1
an island or two in the middle there. That maintenance road, do we make sure that you 2
have those metal barriers with a lock and key so that only maintenance workers go back 3
there and that we allow that other part of the road to be a path sooner rather than later? 4
All of these things for the 25-year plan is covered in the Baylands Comprehensive Plan 5
that won't be completed for another year, but you're working on it now. I worry that you 6 might have to go back and do this all over again. I don't want that to happen. 7
Ms. North: If we do, we do. 8
Commissioner Moss: We're between a rock and a hard place. Can we get the Baylands 9
Comprehensive Plan—can we do some work on that ahead of time regarding that part of 10
the Baylands before you're done? 11
Ms. North: The consultants have been out prior to the work, during the work. They're 12
planning on incorporating it in. They're also looking at the larger vision. If we wanted to 13
increase the pond size, what makes the most sense for that area? It will definitely be 14
incorporated. 15
Commissioner Moss: I would like the Baylands Comprehensive Plan ad hoc committee 16
to have a discussion in the next month or two just to hear what is going to be—what the 17
pond is going to look like after they're done even though the Comprehensive Plan is 18
going to be done for a year. 19
Ms. North: It's going to be done by the end of the year. It's incorporated. 20
Chair McDougall: I think we're going to have a discussion on the Baylands 21
Comprehensive Plan in a few minutes. Hopefully we can address that problem there. If 22
nobody else has any questions, I would like first to thank you not just for your 23
presentation, but I thank you for your very conscientious efforts to look after the 24
environment. I think everybody's aware that you have not been doing anything malicious 25 here. In fact, you've been working hard to protect it. In fact, you're dealing in a difficult 26 situation that we have in the whole Baylands, all parts of it, where it's been re-engineered 27 and re-engineered. In several cases, we're trying to protect nature that isn't even nature. 28
That provides a double challenge. I do agree that anything we can do to holistically look 29
at what's happening so that we're not making individual decisions is important. I hope 30
we'll hear more about that in a minute. On the question of the cattails, the only thing that 31
came to mind there was if in fact there is culling going on, how do we—if in the 32
meantime birds have come back hopefully—make sure we're not culling where the birds 33
have come back. I don't know that you need to answer that question. 34
Ms. North: I think I'm learning a lot about this habitat. The plan would be to do a water 35
culling of the cattails during non-nesting season. We unfortunately couldn't do 36
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 17
everything during non-nesting season just because nesting season is during the dry season 1
which is when we need to be out there. That would be my strategy. 2
Chair McDougall: The last comment I'd like to make is I share Ms. Kleinhaus' 3
enthusiasm for CEQA. When you say that policy has been made, I think when you 4
mention Phil's name you're saying that Phil's now decided we're going to do that all the 5
time. I'm not sure how we would have that as a policy. Is it a policy if we're dealing in 6 more than an acre or more than 3 acres or if we're dealing in wetlands or saltwater. I 7
don't know how we would have that kind of policy. I think it deserves more discussion to 8
make sure it's everybody's deliberate awareness of when to ask or when to say can we 9
trust you to do this analysis or the consultants you bring in versus CEQA. I think Shani's 10
right; getting it on the tip of everybody's tongue is probably more important than it being 11
a specific policy. 12
Ms. North: It's definitely on the tip of everyone's tongue now. Thanks to our project, it's 13
on the tip of everyone's tongue. The Planning Department and the City Attorney's 14
Department—it's definitely been a policy change. I can assure you that the Public Works 15
Department will not be doing anything again if they think CEQA should be potentially 16
there. We are going to be cautious and not (crosstalk). 17
Chair McDougall: It is a policy that the City has put in place. Maybe at some point we 18
should just ask if somebody would come and inform us of how that works. That would 19
probably be useful. 20
Ms. North: We have two very strong CEQA folks in the Planning Department, actually 21
many in the Planning Department and our City Attorney's Office as well. 22
Chair McDougall: Thank you for that. Thanks for that clarification. With that, I'd like 23
to thank you for your, as I said, appearance tonight and the work that you've done. 24
Ms. North: We can come and give you guys, if you want, an update. As I said, this is an 25 adaptive management since we aren't sure exactly once we bring in the heavy equipment 26 at the end of August. I'd be happy to come back again and tell you guys where we're at. 27 I'm hoping that we can fill the pond by October. That's my goal. During the dry season, 28
get it done and then fill the pond up again. 29
Chair McDougall: We'll just fill you in for a permanent spot on the agenda for the next 30
… 31
Ms. North: That's totally fine. I would much rather have you know that we're full 32
disclosure. We have nothing to hide. We put everything on our website. We're not 33
trying to do anything under the radar. It's a very visible area that we all drive past or 34
walk past. I'm not hiding anything. 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 18
Chair McDougall: Look forward to seeing you soon. 1
3. Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan 2
Ms. O'Kane: A natural next agenda item is an update on our Baylands Comprehensive 3
Conservation Plan. I'd like to introduce Petra Unger and Diana Edwards from AECOM, 4
who have been working closely with Daren and a lot of stakeholders who are interested 5
in the Baylands on moving this forward. I'll go ahead and turn it over to you. 6
Chair McDougall: Good evening and welcome. Nice to have you with us, Daren. 7
Petra Unger: Good evening, and thanks for having us. We're happy to provide an update 8
on where we've been with the Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan and where 9
we're going and what the schedule is and how that interacts with Karin's project and 10
others. 11
Chair McDougall: Thank you. 12
Ms. Unger: My name is Petra Unger. I'm the project manager at AECOM; we're the 13
consultant preparing the Comprehensive Conservation Plan. With me is Diana Edwards, 14
who is the deputy project manager. Both of us have been very involved in this from the 15
very beginning and on a day-to-day basis coordinating with Daren. As you heard, we 16
were planning on having Daren here presenting with us, but he's out today. I believe he's 17
been giving updates to the Commission on a regular basis on where we've been. On 18
today's agenda, I'll give you a brief overview on what the Baylands Comprehensive 19
Conservation Plan is, our planning process, steps completed to date, ongoing activities, 20
and also the timeline. What is the BCCP? It's a comprehensive conservation plan to 21
manage the Palo Alto natural Baylands for the next 15 years and beyond. It's supposed to 22
be ecosystem-based and comprehensive, incorporating both the habitat and the natural 23
resources out there with environmental education, art, and uses that are out there now. 24
It's also supposed to take your current and future projects into account. There are a lot of 25 projects going on around it and in the area as we've already heard today. We've heard 26 updates on San Francisquito Creek and on what's going on at the Renzel Wetlands. 27 There are other projects as well. There are current things and new trends that we're 28
taking into account such as climate change and other opportunities. It also includes some 29
site-specific aspects for two of the properties in the Baylands, one of them being the 30
Renzel Wetlands/ITT property and the other one being Byxbee Park where we're doing 31
some site-specific planning. Overall this is supposed to be an 18-month process, and we 32
got started about a year ago, last June. Other aspects of this, we're incorporating the 2008 33
Baylands Comprehensive Master Plan Update. Over the years, there has been a lot of 34
work out at the Baylands and a lot of work going into that Master Plan. There's a lot of 35
excellent information in there. There's also a lot of new data and new trends and new 36
projections that we're incorporating. Stakeholder and public outreach is an important 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 19
aspect of this planning process, as I understand is with pretty much any project in Palo 1
Alto, which is great. Our scope of work included 12 distinctive tasks that we're 2
completing. The first task we did was to complete a work plan that laid out what those 3
steps are, what timeframe they would be completed in, and what is part of each of those 4
ones. Our first deliverable to the City was the existing conditions report, where we 5
basically documented what is out there now, what are the habitats, what kind of species 6 use the Baylands. We did some original habitat mapping. We interviewed the Rangers. 7
We spent a lot of time with Daren, who knows the Baylands inside out like no one else. 8
We talked a lot to the folks doing the restoration out there, the Rangers, people eating, the 9
nature walks. We read all the literature, and then we produced the existing conditions 10
report. We also developed a stakeholder engagement plan that laid out at what stages in 11
the planning process we would engage the stakeholders and what that would look like, 12
their meetings. There is an opportunity to review interim deliverables and provide 13
feedback. We started with our first stakeholder meeting last October, which was 14
basically—you can see pictures of that here—a kind of early brainstorming, determine 15
different people's vision for the BCCP, what it should look like, and what should go in 16
there. We then completed a summary of the first stakeholder workshop that was shared 17
with the stakeholders and also posted on the website. We became aware that these 18
projects were being planned at the Renzel Wetlands, so we pulled that particular part of 19
the Baylands Plan forward so we could incorporate that and coordinate with Karin. Just 20
as you've been directing, you were hoping that would happen now. Prior to our second 21
stakeholder workshop, we had a tour at the Renzel Wetlands where we invited the 22
stakeholders to join us out there and did a comprehensive tour, walked around, looked at 23
the issues at there with the marsh and also the ITT buildings and the property that has 24
become parklands recently and that we're addressing in more detail here. We have a 25 stakeholder workshop specifically on Byxbee Park and the ITT property and also develop 26 the themes from that as kind of a meeting summary. We also launched the project 27 website where we're posting this themes paper and interim deliverables that have been 28
completed. If somebody cannot attend the meetings or chooses to review the 29
deliverables, they can go on there and get an idea of what's been completed. We had our 30
third stakeholder meeting in February of this year. That one was an evening—by the 31
second workshop, we opened it up to the public because we wanted to get a broader 32
input. There was some desire by several of the stakeholders to have this open to anybody 33
who wanted to come. We also got a request to maybe hold an evening workshop instead 34
of daytime to enable a broader group of people to come. That was well received. A lot 35
of people thanked us for doing the evening workshop as well. Also, we were trying to 36
get some broader input from some of the users out there, so we launched a survey, which 37
has some very simple questions about what do you like at the Baylands, what do you like 38
to do out here, how often do you come out, what are your favorite things, what are your 39
issues of concern. That was administered onsite by the Baylands Rangers. We've gotten 40
some pretty good feedback from that as well. With all of that and the input received from 41
those stakeholder workshops, we developed a draft vision, goals, and objectives 42
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 20
document, which basically lays out the main themes that people want to see for the 1
Baylands and how we would go about developing that. As you may be aware, the City 2
has a stipend for some artists-in-residence that was allocated to this planning process. 3
They have been recently brought onboard. In fact, they're here tonight, Mary O'Brien and 4
Daniel McCormick. That is the City's art program led by Elise DeMarzo. They came 5
onboard to provide an art overlay or art aspect that interacts with the Baylands 6 Comprehensive Conservation Plan. When they came onboard last month, we had a 7
meeting with them at the Baylands and a tour where we shared information about what 8
we are each doing, what stage of the Plan we're at and how we can interact. We met with 9
them again this afternoon onsite to discuss some ideas and such. We also have conducted 10
site visits to explore some of those issues at the ITT and Byxbee Park. We're doing this 11
presentation today as an update. Ongoing activities. On a very regular basis we 12
coordinate with the Rangers or with the stakeholders. They've been providing feedback 13
on some of the deliverables we've had. We incorporate those comments and feedback. 14
We've also been coordinating with the Historic Resources Board because, as you may be 15
aware, the former ITT property has the buildings that are of historic significance. There's 16
some discussion as part of the BCCP what should happen with those buildings. We're 17
coordinating with the artists-in-residence. Kathleen Jones, Head Ranger, has been a 18
guest instructor at a local community college where they did parks planning. They chose 19
a plan for the ITT property as their class project. She shared some of the project results 20
that we've gotten from that class. We're looking at those for ideas too, just to see what 21
the local students came up with. Here are some examples from the artists-in-residence 22
materials and some ideas. The general feel is that whatever art is out there as an overlay 23
should be natural and in nature and fit well into the whole theme of the Baylands. This is 24
all the things from Elise DeMarzo with the City who has been leading that artist-in-25 residence overlay. Next steps. Right now, we're preparing another chapter of the Plan 26 that's called the draft and final opportunities, limitations, and best management practices. 27 This is where we present, based on everything that's out there and what people would like 28
to see, what are some of the best management practices that should be implemented out 29
there. That can be anything related to habitat and wildlife and invasive species 30
management, user impacts, user opportunities, also with the art, and so on. We're also 31
working on a chapter on sea level rise and climate change. That's currently underway. 32
Then, we'll develop from all this material a draft action plan saying now that we know all 33
this, how do we move forward and implement some of those parts. We will put all those 34
chapters together and have a draft BCCP and a final BCCP. Both of those will be 35
presented to the Commission as well. The timeline for those. You see the sea level rise 36
paper will be done by July. The draft Plan should be done by September, and then the 37
final Plan will be done by the end of the year. In terms of the ITT and Renzel Wetlands, 38
the use scenarios, you were asking what we're doing there. We're currently in the process 39
of developing three alternative scenarios that explore what could happen at the ITT 40
property. We're looking at different options for access, trails through there, reuse or even 41
removal of the buildings, what are the options there, what kind of habitats can be 42
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 21
expanded or created there and also what kind of connections to Byxbee Park could be 1
done there. We visited last month when we toured with the artists. We had our 2
landscape designers and restoration ecologists visit the site and look at it firsthand and 3
come up with some ideas. They're now translating those ideas into some conceptual 4
drawings. I believe Daren will be sharing those with you in the not-so-distant future. I 5
already touched on the draft and final Plan outline. As far as Byxbee Park, there's an 6 interim management plan for the park. There are some aspects that we're supposed to 7
complete as part of this Plan, and that relates to habitat management and invasive weed 8
control to parking and circulation to the interpretive signage and also to the use of the 9
composting facility parcel that's part of Byxbee Park. With that, I'd be happy to answer 10
any questions. Diana as well. 11
Chair McDougall: Should I assume everybody might be interested? I'll start at one end. 12
Jeff. 13
Commissioner LaMere: I'll begin. Appreciate all the work that's been done with this, 14
and excited to get this going. It's such a beautiful area. 15
Chair McDougall: I'm sorry, Jeff. Do we want to do the Commission comments or do 16
we want to do the public comments? Shani, would you like to comment please? Sorry, 17
Jeff. 18
Ms. Kleinhaus: Shani Kleinhaus, again, with Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society and a 19
resident of Palo Alto. In the last 2 years, I had the opportunity to participate in three 20
stakeholder groups for parks master plans, the one that Palo Alto did as well as San Jose 21
and Cupertino. Those are not done yet; I'm still participating in that process. In all of the 22
surveys and everything that the cities have asked, all the residents always prioritize nature 23
as the highest priority that they want to see in their parks, not only in parks that are 24
natural like we're very lucky to have, but in every city park. They want to see butterflies 25 everywhere. The reason I'm saying this to begin with is because it's really hard to 26 implement. It's very difficult to know because people are not trained how to create and 27 do nature. They know how to do landscape ecology, landscape architecture, how to put 28
trails in a place, how to do all these things that bring people. How to bring nature back 29
and regenerate it is not that simple. This Plan is called a comprehensive conservation 30
plan. It's not called the comprehensive access and trails plan. It's not called art plan. It's 31
a conservation plan. I'm not saying that it's not important to look at those things, but art 32
suddenly is an overlay that was (inaudible) upon us. I'm not opposed to art necessarily, 33
but I don't know that that's the best place for it. It's so beautiful; why don't we have art 34
where it's less beautiful? We can do both, but I think it needs a lot more consideration of 35
detail. Connectivity is not always good for nature. You connect something in nature for 36
people, you disconnect it from nature often. You connect it for people, the creatures now 37
have to find a way across. As we talked about the project before, we need those gates 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 22
that Commissioner Moss said. We need them now before we expose the whole perimeter 1
of the pond to traffic. Yes, we want people to get there. We want them to enjoy the 2
ponds, but maybe only half. They go and see half of it, and the other half is for the 3
wildlife and the birds. Which half, I don't know. These are things we need to think about 4
already. When you look at all these things and you have all these inputs, sometimes you 5
get—everybody wants to do something. In the stakeholder meetings that I participated 6 in, the ultimate wish of the people that have the background and history with the 7
Baylands was to really think about how to minimize the intrusion, the segmentation, the 8
fragmentation of the habitat, how to really create a very viable ecosystem and allow 9
people to glimpse in and enjoy it, but not build it for the people. Build it for the wildlife 10
because they have almost nowhere to go anymore. We've been developing the edge of 11
the Bay so fast and the sea is rising, there's very little area for them to still go into. The 12
focus on the ecology really needs to be—it speaks to people. People understand it. Even 13
when they want access, if you tell them there's no access here because there's something 14
going on here—the gray foxes need a place to breed, the birds need a place to breed—15
they understand that. They accept it, and they love it. Comprehensive Conservation Plan 16
and restoration plan, not BCDC, not a development and conservation. Thank you. 17
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Jeff, I'll let you start over again. 18
Commissioner LaMere: Just appreciate all the work that's gone into this, and excited for 19
this project and gaining a better understanding. One of my main comments is also about 20
the art. Understanding the permanence when there's installation of art, be very judicious 21
or very careful or having an understanding of both future use of a place but also impact to 22
the environment, I think is extremely important because, as we've learned, with these art 23
installations, especially the permanent ones, when they are there, it's very difficult to 24
adjust or change or do something else or modify. As we move forward with the thought 25 of art, especially the permanent art, how we study that and how we think about that is 26 really important. 27
Ms. Unger: Point well taken. In meeting with Mary and Daniel, it's very clear that they 28
have a very soft and natural touch, that they're very aware of the sensitive nature of the 29
habitat and how that all relates. I am a scientist by training; I'm a biologist by training. 30
As I was telling them today, I think sometimes when we in our conservation science or 31
biology write policies and best management practices, that echoes with a certain kind of 32
audience. An artistic interpretation or relation to something echoes with a whole other 33
type of audience. There can be a very subtle overlay and a way to meld those two 34
together. 35
Commissioner LaMere: Just to underscore. If it's a permanent installation, what 36
permanence means. We've gained a greater understanding of permanence with artistic 37
installations. 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 23
Commissioner Cribbs: I just wanted to ask—first of all, it's great that you're doing this. 1
The project is big, and it's very important. It's certainly important to everybody in Palo 2
Alto and outside Palo Alto as well. Thank you. I think we talked a couple of months ago 3
about engaging along with the stakeholders that exist now the youth of the community, 4
going out to high schools, perhaps the environmental classes at high schools, both private 5
and public schools, and also the Youth Council. I just wondered if there had been an 6 opportunity to do that. 7
Ms. Unger: We have not gone out to the public high schools or anything like that. The 8
closest we've come to that is the input from the community college class. 9
Commissioner Cribbs: I saw that in the report, and that's good because it's a great source. 10
I'd really like to see the youth in our community have a voice to talk about this at least 11
because they're the ones that are going to be using it in the future. They always have 12
good ideas about things, and it's a different perspective. If there's an opportunity to do 13
that, I would really support that. The second question is just about when do you know 14
about the cost of the Comprehensive Plan. Will you ever put a price tag on it to say if we 15
do these things or we don't do these things, this is what it's going to take to keep the 16
Baylands the way the stakeholders want it to be? 17
Ms. Unger: As far as our scope goes, the only part that has a price tag is the 18
implementation of those different opportunities or scenarios at the ITT property. If we 19
went with Option A, this would be a ballpark. If we went with Option B, this would be a 20
ballpark. A good way to do that is by unit. If you build X feet of trail this way or that 21
way, that's going to have a cost. If you want to rebuild a building and do that sort of 22
thing. Those concept scenarios are supposed to have some ballpark costs associated with 23
them. 24
Commissioner Cribbs: That'll be good. Thank you very much. 25
Commissioner McCauley: Thank you very much for the presentation. 26
Commissioner Reckdahl: Were you at the stakeholders meetings? 27
Ms. Unger: Yes. 28
Commissioner Reckdahl: Can you give us some flavor? Was there a uniformity of 29
opinion or were people pulling in all directions? 30
Ms. Unger: I would say what you heard from Shani. The majority of the stakeholders 31
that attended those meetings is very interested in maintaining the natural side, leaning 32
towards the restoration and protecting the wildlife. Keeping them natural or making them 33
more natural again is definitely reverberating with the majority of the stakeholder 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 24
outreach. There was some interest in access for the users as well. We also had a couple 1
of people from the City airport join us on a couple of the meetings. They certainly had 2
some ideas of other things that could happen in the larger part. My feeling for what I've 3
heard so far is that people are basically very happy with having this resource out there 4
and wanting it preserved. We haven't heard anybody even from the user survey saying 5
you have to do this totally different. Everybody really likes to have this at their doorstep 6 and wishes to see it preserved and wishes to see it in a natural state, much like you've 7
heard. 8
Commissioner Reckdahl: I really have a love/hate relationship with Byxbee Park. The 9
views are wonderful up there, but it's so artificial. What are your thoughts of Byxbee? 10
What options do we have for Byxbee? 11
Ms. Unger: Byxbee, as you know, is a closed landfill and, as such, comes with a lot of 12
stipulations that are beyond wishes of what can and cannot happen out there. Most of 13
that is related to the depth of the soil out there and the cap and what is allowed to grow 14
and not to grow. It's somewhat limited in that. There have been the habitat islands 15
installed out there, and they're providing a little bit of variation. In some areas of the 16
park, where they have the engineered soils there's a little bit more opportunity for having 17
a broader range of plants grow with a little bit deeper roots. We're exploring those 18
concepts for those areas. Overall, it's a very regulated environment. It's a tough choice. 19
Before it was built as a landscape, it was a bayfront marsh. I don't think it'll ever go back 20
to that, but there's definitely some opportunities for some enhancements on habitat. 21
We've been discussing potential habitat for owls and other things that have been out 22
there, what can be done in terms of maybe more shrubs, a little less manicured. We're 23
going to look at the whole regime of mowing and all of that. 24
Commissioner Reckdahl: Have you come up with any options that we haven't thought 25 of? I know Daren has the plan of possible things in the evolution of Byxbee. Are there 26 any new options that you've come up with? 27
Ms. Unger: I wouldn't say entirely new like this will be very different than it used to be. 28
There's definitely opportunities for enhancing some of the habitats out there. Like Karin 29
mentioned, to maybe reconnect that dry wetland next to the creek, because of all the 30
infrastructure that has been built over the years, it's a very engineered system even though 31
a lot of it looks very natural right now in terms of the flow and the flood basin and 32
saltwater and freshwater and using it for treatment. It's not a natural system. 33
Commissioner Reckdahl: What about the ITT property? We have this big area of marsh 34
that's been neglected. To do it would probably be very expensive. Are there some ways 35
that we could use that and improve that without breaking the bank? 36
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 25
Ms. Unger: There are some areas of the ITT property that flood at times. There's 1
saltmarsh in areas beyond the channel. With some of the infrastructure that has been 2
taken out associated with the buildings, there are some opportunities there. We're also 3
looking at connecting the little lake as well. We've been discussing those options that 4
Karin is interested in, expanding the Renzel Wetlands over time. There is an opportunity 5
for invasives control as well; some of it is very weedy. That one has more potential for 6 natural sites than maybe Byxbee. We're exploring what we can for Byxbee. 7
Commissioner Reckdahl: Thank you. 8
Vice Chair Greenfield: Thank you for all your efforts on this comprehensive project. It's 9
very detailed. This is a cherished resource for the community, so it is well appreciated. I 10
do look forward to seeing your recommendations to balance recreation and art 11
enhancement within the natural environment while maintaining the priorities of the 12
natural environment. I echo Anne's concerns about costs. We have a lot of projects now 13
that are underfunded. I hate to see this one fall onto the stack of unfunded projects. 14
There are lots of great things we want to do, and we need to figure out how to take action 15
and make things happen. I echo Jeff's concerns as well in terms of the sensitivity of the 16
art enhancements within the natural environment. One question I have is are there any 17
trail additions that you're looking to recommend? One thing I appreciate is when walking 18
a loop around the Baylands area, like starting where the bike bridge underpass comes 19
from 101 and walking along, the walk back is along the Bayshore Boulevard. It's the 20
least natural part of the walk. If there were some way to have more of that loop walk be 21
off the highway, perhaps walking along one side of the road in the Renzel Pond area 22
that's being redeveloped right now, that would be an improvement. I do appreciate that 23
we want to limit access sensitively to maintain the natural environment. If there were 24
some way to improve that part of the loop, that would be an appreciated enhancement. 25
Ms. Unger: We are looking at the back side, at those businesses along Embarcadero. 26 There's a narrow strip of restored or enhanced outdoor space, and we are looking at the 27 potential to put a trail connection through there. You would have a more natural 28
connection to the backside of Byxbee. We're also exploring as one of the options for the 29
ITT property to have a connector. If you put a trail through the ITT somewhere to have 30
one that would cross the saltwater channel and go into Byxbee Park, that is controversial. 31
Not all the stakeholders are supportive of that, but we're exploring that as one of the 32
scenarios. There are some constraints associated with that because of the saltmarsh 33
providing habitat for the saltmarsh harvest mouse. 34
Vice Chair Greenfield: That's great. That analysis of the options and the pros and cons 35
will be much appreciated. 36
Ms. Unger: I heard somebody, maybe Shani, say concerns about landscape architecture. 37
Our landscape architects are working on this. They're both restoration ecologists as well, 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 26
so they're more on the restoration side. They've done a lot of work on levees and open 1
space and that balance. You need not worry that we're creating a hard-surface, urban 2
landscape design for your park. 3
Commissioner Moss: This is a question for Kristen. We have had three people on the 4
Commission who are on the Baylands Comprehensive Plan subcommittee. It would be 5
good to get more regular updates than in this forum. A number of the questions that have 6 been asked here could have been answered or discussed outside of the meeting ahead of 7
time. I'm a little bit worried that the subcommittee is not being utilized to the fullest that 8
it could. We've only got 6 months left on this 18-month project, and already we're 9
talking about final drafts. I would like to see some drafts before then privately or in that 10
subcommittee. If that's possible, can we get that to happen? 11
Ms. O'Kane: I can certainly pass that message onto Daren when he comes back. I 12
appreciate that. We do have an ad hoc, so we should be utilizing them. We would still 13
want to hear from all the Commissioners. It may be the same questions that the ad hoc 14
has. I'll pass that onto Daren. 15
Commissioner Moss: I've been on this Commission for 3 years, and I've been on a 16
number of subcommittees for other subjects, and we've had a lot more behind-the-scenes 17
discussion than has been afforded to this particular project. That's why I brought it up. 18
Ms. O'Kane: I just wanted to add that a lot of the information that we're collecting and 19
that they're using is coming from the stakeholder group and from the users of the 20
Baylands. There are some projects, like the dog parks, where the ad hocs will be more 21
involved. For projects that there's a lot of data being collected and a lot of community 22
involvement, the ad hocs may be less involved. I'll certainly pass that along to Daren. 23
Commissioner Moss: The two examples that I want to bring up specifically, that have 24
already been brought up here, are the artist walk. We were not aware of that artist walk. 25 It would have been nice for some of us to be on that walk. The second thing is, going 26 back to what Commissioner Reckdahl said, what is the natural potential for Byxbee Park. 27 I would look towards Coyote Hills, San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge on the 28
other side of the Dumbarton Bridge. They have pretty pristine environments unlike our 29
dump, which is covered with dirt. The weeds just land there. If we could replicate 30
Coyote Hills or the Bay Wildlife Refuge, those places have not only hills that are natural 31
but also freshwater marsh and brackish water marsh and the connection to the creek. I 32
can't remember which creek it is, but it's a huge creek like our San Francisquito Creek. 33
They've got all the features that we have. If we could just replicate that, that would be 34
fantastic. I would love a tour with your group to those places so we could point them out. 35
Either one or both places would be a wonderful model. That's all. 36
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 27
Ms. Unger: Thank you. Great suggestion. We can look into that. On the point of 1
having concerns about how far along we are and not having seen any part of it, maybe I 2
didn't make it very clear. All those chapters that we've been delivering, the existing 3
conditions and the draft visions, goals, and objectives and the future projects, are all 4
chapters of the BCCP. As we've completed them, they have been shared for interim 5
review with the stakeholder committee. People have had the opportunity to comment on 6 those. What you'll see when it's all put together won't be entirely new. Those chapters 7
have all been shared. As we complete additional draft chapters, they will also be shared. 8
Chair McDougall: I'd also like to make some comments. My first comment would be to 9
thank you for your work and effort. In your presentation, you talked about the fact that at 10
the second meeting you had developed some themes for the third meeting. As you know, 11
I was at all those meetings. To answer Commissioner Reckdahl's question, the general 12
theme was we don't want balance. That's really important to remember as we start saying 13
we want balance between recreation and nature. The theme of those meetings was no 14
balance. This is a situation where we want total imbalance. We want everything to go 15
towards nature. I'll go back and say there is no nature there. There's a landfill and a 16
bunch of Baylands that have been re-engineered. It's really hard to create nature out of 17
that. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do it, but it's a double effort that we have to 18
make. The only way we can make that effort is to remember we don't want balance. We 19
want that imbalance. I obviously need to ask what's the status of the CEQA? 20
Ms. Unger: There is no CEQA currently. It's a plan. The BCCP will have 21
recommendations and in the action plan ideas for future projects. As they move forward, 22
they would have to go through CEQA. In our best management practices, we will 23
definitely have some call-outs saying before you implement any of these, here's what you 24
have to consider, here's what you need to implement before you move forward with any 25 project. It's really a plan, not an action. 26
Chair McDougall: At some point, CEQA has to be a part of it. Even if that wasn't 27 specific, it was anticipated on your calendar. It would be a good reminder of the 28
discussions we've had earlier tonight, particularly if it's now a policy. 29
Ms. O'Kane: Chair? I'd like to add onto that. Just like we did for the Parks Master Plan, 30
we will be doing a high-level programmatic CEQA document. It's not part of their scope 31
because we wanted all of the funds to go towards development of the Plan. There will be 32
a separate CEQA process. Just like the Master Plan, it's high level and programmatic. 33
Any future things that are more detailed, any projects that we would do that require 34
CEQA, would have a separate CEQA document under that. 35
Chair McDougall: Thank you. The only other thing I want to mention is the habitat 36
islands on Byxbee were mentioned. I agree with Commissioner Reckdahl that it's not a 37
natural environment. They have constructed these habitat islands. When Daren was here 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 28
at the last meeting and talking about what was happening with Byxbee, his point was it's 1
nice that we put in those habitat islands, but there's a heck of a lot more space up there 2
that is full of invasive plants, and it won't take long for the invasive plants to eat up the 3
habitat islands. I met with Daren and the Rangers to discuss that. I propose that it would 4
be an interesting idea to not try to get one organization, Environmental Volunteers or 5
Audubon or Acterra, to take over the whole place to maintain them. It would be 6 interesting to actually allocate an island to a different group. It could allocate an island to 7
Audubon, one to Environmental Volunteers, and one to the local Audi dealership. There 8
was a fair amount of skepticism. I can tell you that at this point the Rangers have already 9
arranged for all of the gloves, bags, and pickup that would be necessary. They've 10
embraced this idea. My point would be to invite my fellow Commissioners to contact me 11
whether they would like to have the Commission as a whole adopt one of the islands. 12
Nobody needs to talk about that now. You can send me a note later. It would be a good 13
idea for us to go ahead and adopt an island and do what Daren was talking about, which 14
is do what we can to protect those islands and help them grow as opposed to watch them 15
shrink with nothing happening. With that, I'd like to thank you very much for your 16
presentation and discussion and the effort tonight. Thank you. 17
Ms. Unger: Thanks for your time. 18
4. Boulware Park Update 19
Ms. O'Kane: Next we have a familiar face in the room, who hasn't been here in a while. 20
Peter Jensen, Landscape Architect, with our Public Works Department, will be providing 21
an update on Boulware Park. 22
Peter Jensen: Good evening, Commission. Peter Jensen, Landscape Architect, City of 23
Palo Alto, here to present Boulware Park. It's our most recent park renovation project. I 24
want to walk you through what has been proposed for the renovation elements, discuss a 25 little bit about the community meeting we had, and give you a rundown of the schedule 26 of the project to date. This is an aerial view of Boulware Park, very close to the Fry's 27 location. It has some potential to be incorporated into that overall design in the future. 28
For our purposes, we have a capital improvement project with a construction budget of 29
$475,000. The renovations mostly look at the playgrounds and replacing the play 30
equipment. The last time the playgrounds were renovated was 1993. We usually change 31
out that equipment in 15-20 year timespans. It's getting time to do that. 32
Commissioner Reckdahl: What year was that put in? 33
Mr. Jensen: '93. Along with renovation of the playground, it does take up a majority of 34
the budget. Not only do we have to do the equipment, but we also have to bring it up to 35
ADA standards, which the playgrounds do not meet now. If you have seen the 36
playgrounds, they are very large sand areas with equipment that floats in the middle, not 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 29
much access to the equipment from the sides. One of the playgrounds has an elevated 1
step-lip around it that doesn't allow any kind of access. We'll have to work on those 2
ADA limitations as well as a few others that are in the park. We want to look at the 3
irrigation and planting that's out there and make sure it's brought up-to-date and working 4
efficiently as well as the site furnishings, the benches, tables, barbecues, trash 5
receptacles. All of them are a little antiquated and need to be replaced. I would like to 6 look at a little turf reduction. I think that will be a bid alternate item, but there are 7
locations in the park that have small areas of turf, are not used, could be converted, and 8
made to be native areas. I address some of the ADA improvements that have to be made 9
for the playground. Within the park, there are no direct crosswalks or ramps that meet 10
ADA standards and that get you to the park if you're across the street. There is one ADA 11
parking stall on the street that has some slope difficulties that need to be addressed. 12
Some of the walkways around the park don't meet ADA standards due to their cross-13
slopes being greater than 2 percent. The graphic shows the proposed renovations to the 14
park. Because the tot lot and the children's playground are fairly significant in size and 15
because of the fairly limited budget, we looked at combining the playgrounds into one 16
location. To demolish one of the playgrounds and replace it with something new would 17
take the entire budget. We're going to maintain the playgrounds. We're going to employ 18
a tactic that we used at Bowden Park and the Ventura Community Center where we 19
utilize the existing poles for the play equipment, repaint them, and then put new 20
equipment onto the poles, which saves a significant amount of money. I was looking at 21
the construction drawings the other day, and the footings for some of the playground 22
equipment are quite significant and would be a chore to remove. Economically, it would 23
behoove us to use what we have. The community does like the play equipment and how 24
it's set up now. They were supportive of that. Irrigation improvements in the central turf 25 area, just reconfiguring and changing some of the heads to make that work more 26 efficiently. There's a very large ivy hedge that needs to be addressed. I don't think it 27 started out as a hedge, but it's grown to be a hedge. That's another area to change the 28
planting to more native vegetation. There's an unused turf space that could be renovated 29
to more native landscape. We're going to propose two curb cuts and get a direct 30
crosswalk. One crosswalk currently gets you into the park from this side of the road. 31
Unfortunately, it uses someone's driveway apron as the ramp, which it shouldn't do. 32
We're eventually going to abandon that crosswalk and build a new one. Site furnishings, 33
picnic tables, barbecues, trash receptacles, drinking fountain, need to be changed out. 34
The asphalt walkway along the rear portion of the park dead-ends into the basketball 35
court. Unfortunately, a good amount of that doesn't meet ADA standards. Instead of 36
removing that entire walkway and redoing it, we're proposing to connect the walkway to 37
the existing walk and to maintain an ADA-accessible loop within the park. You will be 38
able to walk along here and access the basketball courts. Currently, the walkway ends at 39
the basketball court, so you have to use the court as the path. If someone's playing out 40
there, the connection is awkward. Making that one connection will address some of our 41
ADA needs and make the flow and connection of the amenities better than they are now. 42
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 30
A picnic table exists back here in the corner; it is not totally visible from the street and 1
has had incidents in the past. People have used it to sleep and to jump over the fence. 2
We would like to move that picnic table to the other picnic tables. This was brought up 3
in the community meeting and by staff. The accessible parking stall needs to be re-4
graded. All the paving in the park is asphalt, so we will be refinishing the asphalt 5
surfacing to clean it up and remove the cracks. These are some images of the playground 6 equipment. In Palo Alto, we use a lot of Ross Recreation equipment. In situations like 7
this, they have the original plans from 1993. I can use that information, and it was very 8
easy for them to re-clad the poles and new items. It is very similar to the existing 9
equipment. We've toned down some of the color, but I would like to get rid of some of 10
the oranges and blues to make it more natural. We will work on that some more. When 11
we went to the community the first time, we didn't specifically talk about each piece of 12
equipment, but that is a conversation they want to have at the next meeting. Any 13
questions or comments from the Commission? 14
Chair McDougall: Does anybody have any questions? Jeff. 15
Commissioner LaMere: I was out there the other day, a weekday morning. I saw maybe 16
three or four separate seniors walking the loop and cutting through the basketball court, 17
as you mentioned. I know we're really tight on money. As we move forward on some of 18
these projects and we look at different playgrounds for the youth and tot lots, what is out 19
there for seniors? Are there other elements to parks that we can incorporate, especially 20
when the Master Plan talks about the aging population? I'm not an expert but just 21
wondering are there other elements within a park or things you can add besides a nice 22
walking path and a bench that could potentially be appealing. 23
Mr. Jensen: There is the option, which they've had for a while, of adult fitness 24
equipment. I can't say it's built for someone that wants to be a weightlifter. Especially 25 for older adults, it does gear itself toward that kind of user group. We can look at adding 26 some of that equipment in the areas. Like I said, the play areas are quite large. There is 27 maybe some possibility of incorporating that stuff in there. We also discussed having 28
open, rubberized surface areas that you could do low-impact physical activity on, whether 29
that be yoga or some type of stretching activity. That's another possibility to do. Again, 30
proving the walking path is always good. Providing seating that's inviting and under 31
shade are key features as well. There are some things we can address. 32
Commissioner LaMere: Was the community meeting well attended? It seems like a 33
fairly dense area. Is that correct? 34
Mr. Jensen: The Ventura community is not a large overall space but one of the most 35
densely populated as far as housing, mostly apartments. We did have ten people come to 36
the meeting. Most of them were young families. They provided good feedback on the 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 31
plan and what they wanted to see there. Of course, it's ten people in an area of a lot of 1
people. We did the best at capturing what the community wanted. 2
Commissioner LaMere: Thank you so much for all your work. It's great to see 3
something like this move forward. 4
Commissioner Cribbs: Totally agree it's great. Thanks for doing that. I'm glad to see the 5
community meeting still on the schedule. How did you publicize them? 6
Mr. Jensen: We do it in a couple of ways. I think the most successful is the mailer. 7
Technically, we're only supposed to do within 600 feet or 1,000 feet; I don't know what 8
that is. We always do a lot bigger. We actually captured the entire Ventura community 9
area. We mailed out 1,500-1,800 postcards to residents. It was signed within the park for 10
a few weeks about the meeting. It is pushed out on all the City's social media platforms, 11
Twitter, Facebook. There was an ad in the newspaper that ran the two Fridays before the 12
meeting. We try our best. We try to use all the avenues that we can. For most of these 13
meetings now, I usually ask at the beginning of the meeting how people heard about it 14
because that is interesting to me. It was mostly the postcard. I think someone saw it on 15
Facebook. A few people saw the signs in the park. 16
Commissioner Cribbs: Does it make sense to do anything through our summer camps 17
and also through the School District or is that not possible? 18
Mr. Jensen: I think through the School District definitely. For those entities that have 19
mailing lists, they can help out. Any avenue of pushing out information is always good. 20
Commissioner Cribbs: Maybe the PTA Council as well. 21
Commissioner LaMere: I would quickly make one comment on that. There's a website, 22
Nextdoor, and I see sometimes Planning and Transportation meetings on that. That's 23
becoming more and more popular to use, whether it's for our own Parks and Recreation 24
Commission to shoot something out on that or other avenues. 25
Mr. Jensen: I'd have to confirm, but I believe we do push information on that platform. 26
Commissioner McCauley: Peter, first off, kudos again on the dog park. 27
Commissioner Cribbs: Oh, yeah, me too. I wanted to say that. 28
Mr. Jensen: I'm sorry I wasn't there for the opening of it. I would have like to have seen 29
that. 30
Commissioner McCauley: It was a great crowd. It seems like it has been well received 31
and well used. 32
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 32
Mr. Jensen: Yes, it was well used before the fence was put up. 1
Commissioner McCauley: From the first community meeting—I know that it's a small 2
sample size—was there any consensus on improvements or was it just "we want you to 3
update the playground equipment"? 4
Mr. Jensen: The majority of the conversation centered around the playgrounds and 5
making sure the playgrounds were going to stay there or the size was going to stay the 6 same and the equipment was going to be fairly the same. We're not proposing a lot of 7
change to the park. I think everyone was comfortable and understood the aspects of the 8
renovation and the things that needed to be addressed. 9
Commissioner McCauley: Something I know you take into consideration all the time and 10
we talk about sometimes up here as well is diversity of amenities within parks. The tot 11
playground at Boulware Park is a great example of that, where you have a park that has a 12
specific type of amenity that would be good for young families. Daren had raised the 13
adult fitness equipment just as a general matter maybe one or two meetings past, thinking 14
about where we might integrate additional adult fitness equipment. That would be a great 15
idea. If there's an opportunity and if you have some money available, you might take a 16
look at places within Boulware where that could be added. Thanks again. 17
Commissioner Reckdahl: I used this park or my kids used this park quite a bit. It was 18
within stroller radius, so we made the trip over there quite a bit. Even back then, it was in 19
bad condition. I'm glad to see that we're repairing things. That back corner is just 20
problematic. It's kind of tucked away. We're taking the picnic table out. What are we 21
going to do back there, just have grass or … 22
Mr. Jensen: I think we're going to leave it like it is now, a mulched area, because of the 23
incidents that have occurred there and the lack of view. It's probably best to leave it open 24
as much as possible. One thing that was brought up in the meeting was a request for 25 better fencing in that corner because of the … 26
Commissioner Reckdahl: Against the creek? 27
Mr. Jensen: Yeah, against the creek. There's one house that backs up there as well. 28
People have gone into the backyard before. Enhancing the fencing back there, probably 29
using the Caltrain style of fencing that we just put up along the line. Architecturally, it 30
looks better than chain link, but it's very difficult to climb, almost impossible. That 31
might help the area because it would close down that access point. What I heard mostly 32
is people are using the creek as a hidden pathway to move around. The community was 33
concerned, and they would like to limit that as much as possible. The part they're 34
identifying is that back corner. I think we will probably address that with some upgrades 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 33
in the fencing. Putting anything else back there, I'm not quite sure. Maybe a horseshoe 1
or bocce court, something that provides a lot of visibility and another amenity. 2
Commissioner Reckdahl: It's hard because you don't want to have something that's going 3
to attract a nuisance and you don't want it to be unused. It's tough. 4
Mr. Jensen: It is a tough one, and it is extremely close to the house back there. It's hard 5
to squeeze something else in there that's going to be close to someone's house. At this 6 time and with the budget we have, it's going to stay open. Some way of linking the Fry's 7
development over to the park and re-creating that edge along there would be interesting 8
to look at. 9
Commissioner Reckdahl: That back corner could be used as a bridge access. That would 10
not be a bad idea. 11
Mr. Jensen: Or restoring the creek. 12
Commissioner Reckdahl: During the Master Plan, we mentioned that. If we had the 13
money to do that, is that still of interest to us, to restore the creek at that point and 14
provide access, or would we not want to do that? 15
Mr. Jensen: I think we would want to do that. It's always best to restore the creek where 16
possible. I know the County had visions of doing that and was trying to locate funding to 17
set up a grant to do that. The cost of doing something like that is not small. When they 18
started to do that a few years ago, we did talk about the area in Mitchell Park around the 19
Adobe Creek bridge and restoring Adobe Creek in Mitchell Park to what it was before. 20
They seemed open to that. They haven't figured out the funding for their grant yet. We 21
were waiting on that. It's going to take something like that to make that happen or a 22
development that's large enough to funding something like that. 23
Commissioner Reckdahl: Do you think the neighbors would be receptive to that or do 24
you think … 25
Mr. Jensen: Again, it's mostly about design. No, they wouldn't if it was an overgrown 26 place for people to hide out and camp. If it was developed more natural, open, and 27 accessible, that's a possibility. 28
Commissioner Reckdahl: My kids love Shoup Park in Los Altos. We spend a lot of time 29
in the stream up there. If we had something local, that'd be very nice. 30
Mr. Jensen: When we started to talk about the Mitchell Park Adobe Creek segment, 31
some people in Public Works who have grown up here talked about that as the favorite 32
thing. It would be nice to get those areas back in there. 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 34
Commissioner Reckdahl: Thank you. 1
Vice Chair Greenfield: Thank you for your efforts on this. It's great to see us working to 2
enhance our parks. You mentioned the cycle that the parks are typically refurbished. Did 3
you say 15-20 years? 4
Mr. Jensen: For play equipment, yes. That kind of dictates our renovation schedule 5
because the playgrounds usually are a larger part of the project budget. We usually 6 renovate a park every 15 or 20 years, mostly looking at the playground. 7
Vice Chair Greenfield: My sense is it seems to run more than 20 years. 8
Mr. Jensen: That depends on the budget and working the projects in there. I would agree 9
with you. We do start at the 15-year mark to try to get the projects on the books as 10
quickly as we can. Sometimes that takes longer than other times. 11
Vice Chair Greenfield: Do you know which parks are up next? 12
Mr. Jensen: I know that Bol Park is on the list. are a few. Over the next few years, 13
there's five or six parks that are going to go through the same renovation style. I don't 14
recall offhand what they are, but they are in the capital budget. 15
Vice Chair Greenfield: Did you mention the sand is going away and will be replaced 16
with … 17
Mr. Jensen: That's something we'll talk about more with the community. I'm sure there 18
is a desire to keep some of the sand. We probably will keep some of the sand in the tot 19
lot area. The way that it's set up now, the front half of it has all the equipment, and the 20
back half is a sand play area. Probably the sand in the big kids' area will go away. 21
Vice Chair Greenfield: As a general policy, we are continuing to keep sand in some 22
cases? 23
Mr. Jensen: In a limited fashion, yes. We don't have a policy of eliminating it altogether. 24
It does seem, just from experience and community meetings, the community likes it and 25 wants to maintain it as much as possible. 26
Vice Chair Greenfield: I certainly support the idea of removing turf and converting to 27 native plants where appropriate. I'm wondering if the back corner would be appropriate 28
to add some nature. 29
Mr. Jensen: Perhaps some trees just to keep the ground plane clear. It's a possibility, 30
planting some small oak trees. It is a good space for it. It's sad that we can't develop it 31
just because the value of the land is … 32
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 35
Vice Chair Greenfield: Just one more comment, and there's probably nothing to act on. 1
There's been a lot of discussion about the desire to add the AT&T property to Boulware 2
Park. I'm wondering, if you knew that property was going to be added in the next 5, 10, 3
or 20 years, is there anything you would do differently. 4
Mr. Jensen: That's based on the budget. If you had unlimited, I would probably start 5
from scratch and lay it all out again like we did for Scott Park. It was just so small we 6 could do it with the budget we had. I think that would be a longer conversation about the 7
road and if it stays or goes away to make the connection of the space. There is a prime 8
opportunity in the development of the Fry's location to make that connection all the way 9
across. There's possible funding that could happen there. I haven't really thought about 10
the design, so I can't say if there's anything I'd do differently. Most likely it would be a 11
larger, more active turf space that would start to extend itself with more native planting 12
around the outside in the edging if we could eliminate the road because it's not overly 13
used. That is a point of concern for the community because the road has been used for 14
long-term parking for people living in their cars. 15
Vice Chair Greenfield: Thank you. 16
Commissioner Moss: Most of my comments have been covered. I'd like to make a 17
comment about each of those comments. First of all, it's absolutely essential that 18
whatever you do on the side that's not AT&T property should be something when you 19
add AT&T you don't have to redo a lot of what you're doing here. If you want to add 20
more turf, if you want to add more native areas, that's great as long as you don't mess 21
with what you're doing now. It looks like the road—it's pretty self-contained, the stuff on 22
the left side of the road. You're doing a great job. I want to make sure you don't too 23
much that's going to go away if you add AT&T. 24
Mr. Jensen: Looking at the long run, that was a consideration, the idea that the AT&T 25 part could be developed. We would not want to build anything, a bathroom or something 26 like that, along the edge that would have to be torn down to reconfigure it. That area is 27 maintained just the way it is. 28
Commissioner Moss: I had the exact same suggestion that Commissioner Reckdahl had 29
about making a bridge from the Fry's property to that back corner. That seems like a 30
perfect place for a bridge similar to Magical Bridge in Mitchell Park. That gives you 31
access to the creek; you get to look at it and everything like that. It's very nice. You get 32
a tie-in to Fry's. When you had that stakeholder meeting, I wanted to make sure that the 33
ad hoc committee for park amenities is specifically invited. Commissioner Reckdahl is 34
on the Ventura Coordinated Area Plan, and he should have been invited specifically for 35
that. Maybe he was. For any future park re-dos, that park amenities ad hoc committee 36
should be invited specifically by name. I really like the idea of whatever you can do for 37
Adobe Creek in Mitchell you could do for this creek here. Some kind of interface with 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 36
the creek, even if it's a hill overlooking the creek and maybe not access to the creek, some 1
nice transition would be great if we can do it. I'm assuming with the turf reduction and 2
irrigation changes, you're going to try to use that purple-pipe water that's going to the 3
Stanford industrial park. 4
Mr. Jensen: If that was a possibility, yes. If we could get the water over there, we would 5
want to do it. Our City policy for renovation of parks is we do install recycled water 6 products. One day probably all the parks will operate off recycled water. 7
Commissioner Moss: That's all I had. Thanks. 8
Chair McDougall: The first thing I'd like to do is repeat the dog park thing. That was an 9
exciting event. It was well attended and well done. You talked about repairing asphalt. 10
Is there any consideration to any of those places where we would take out asphalt and put 11
in gravel or something that is more permeable? 12
Mr. Jensen: It's just about cost. The asphalt is not in bad shape. Over time, it cracks 13
because of the material. It's pretty easily fixed. Northing has been considered to replace 14
it with another material. I would consider it semi-permeable because it does sheet flow 15
off to landscaped area, not just the street. At least it has that going for it. 16
Chair McDougall: You mentioned cost. I think I heard you say there was something like 17
$400,000-and-some involved as you went through it. I'm not against doing things that 18
are ADA, but it sounded to me like an awful lot of the effort is to comply with ADA. I'm 19
not objecting to that, but is there anything we've ever considered or is there any 20
opportunities to get ADA funding for any of these projects in our parks? 21
Mr. Jensen: For this park in particular, the budget was set before we had our ADA 22
review. I actually have now a little book that talks about every park and every little area 23
in every park that needs to be addressed. When we put the budget together for future 24
projects, we will be adding a sum of money to address those issues in the parks. That 25 will be part of the renovation, so we can cover those. There has not been a conversation 26 that I'm aware of about setting up a separate stream of annual funding to address things. 27
Chair McDougall: I was thinking of Federal funding or something that could be used. 28
Mr. Jensen: No, there's nothing now. It's on us to address shortfalls in the parks. 29
Chair McDougall: In terms of the stakeholder and outreach meetings, I would like to 30
echo what Commissioner Moss said in terms of inviting—I would go so far as I don't 31
think there would be any Brown Act violations if the whole committee was invited, as 32
long as we're not having specific meetings. If more than the ad hoc showed up, that 33
would be good and not bad. I've done that in some of the Cubberley park stuff, and it's 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 37
always interesting. I'm interested in at some point—Keith, I think you're our 1
representative to the Ventura park project or whatever—maybe coming back. I don't 2
know how much progress has been made. The tie-in to here would be interesting to hear. 3
Mr. Jensen: There's a green space there. Capitalizing on what we have already and 4
building on it would be a good idea. 5
Commissioner Reckdahl: Ventura's first meeting was supposed to be about a month ago, 6 and they have delayed it. It's about a month from now, the first meeting. 7
Mr. Jensen: For this project and for some in this price range, to stretch the dollars as 8
much as we can the design and the construction drawings are all done in-house by myself 9
and staff. If you look at the capital improvement budget book, there's $450,000 for 10
improvements and another $45,000 for design. We're going to take that $45,000 and 11
move it to the improvement part. We do try to stretch as much as possible, especially 12
with the market we're in now. Everything we have proposed we can do with the budget 13
we have now. 14
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Any other questions? If not, we can let Peter go. 15
Commissioner Cribbs: I have one. 16
Chair McDougall: Sure, Anne. I'm sorry I missed that. 17
Commissioner Cribbs: Are there AEDs in all of our parks? Do you know? 18
Mr. Jensen: I do not believe so. 19
Commissioner Cribbs: In some of the bigger ones but not the smaller? 20
Mr. Jensen: The regional parks, Mitchell Park, Rinconada Park, and Greer Park, have 21
them by the restroom facilities. I do not believe any of the other parks have them. 22
Commissioner Cribbs: It might be interesting to think how we could do that because 23
there are some programs around that … On this project schedule, I was confused because 24
maybe you meant to say 2019 for the second meeting and the third meeting and the 25 adoption. 26
Mr. Jensen: It should be '19, not '18. The Parks and Rec Commission meeting in January 27 would be January 2019. The PRC meeting for the park improvement adoption would be 28
in February '19 as well. 29
Commissioner Cribbs: Since we have these park improvements going on and we're 30
starting to meet with all the potential stakeholders and people are giving their 31
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 38
impressions, is now the time to start thinking about Friends of the Parks, not in the 1
foundation way but people who live close to the park, trying to formalize in a really nice 2
way about taking good care of the park once it gets reinstalled and celebrated? I think 3
we've talked about that in the past but maybe never really did it. I don't know that it's a 4
staff thing. It's something that might organically spring up about "we have a new park, 5
and let's see what we can do to take care of it." Just a thought. 6
Mr. Jensen: It's a good thought. I know there's an ad hoc group associated with Friends 7
of the Parks now. We should have further conversations offline with staff and the ad hoc 8
about better ways that that group can be used to help us preserve the parks, fund the 9
parks, all those fun things. 10
Commissioner Cribbs: It might be fun to try with this particular one when it gets done. 11
Mr. Jensen: They've expressed that some want to financially help fund some of the 12
picnic tables or the amenities. That would be low-hanging fruit they could help with in 13
the short term. That group has the potential to impact the park system in a large way over 14
a period of time. 15
Commissioner Cribbs: Some things are more fun to fund than other things. When we 16
had that itemized sheet from the dog park, there were some things that looked like 17
opportunities for people to fund. If we could look at a park and say, of this $459,000, 18
what are some things … 19
Mr. Jensen: Besides benches and tables, probably a much more exciting item for people 20
to donate to is some of the play equipment. That's mostly about marketing and what 21
people are excited about. 22
Ms. O'Kane: I wanted to add that in the Parks Master Plan there is a program that talks 23
about establishing community neighborhood groups that participate in cleanup and 24
maintenance of parks. You have a neighborhood park maintenance day, and neighbors 25 can come out and help do the work that staff would do, which gives them a sense of 26 ownership of the park and would make them want to take care of it a little bit more, not 27 that people aren't. Daren and I have talked about it a little bit and how we can get that 28
going. I'd like to explore that a little bit more. 29
Mr. Jensen: I've also found that using our local nonprofits, especially Canopy, is 30
beneficial. It doesn't have to be associated with the project. At the end of the project, it 31
would be nice to do a tree planting out there. It involves the local community to be more 32
in touch with the park. They can look at the park and say, "I planted that tree," and they 33
can watch it grow for a long time. 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 39
5. Other Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Updates 1
Chair McDougall: As a quick update that would go into the next section of ad hoc 2
committee or liaison updates, we have had recent meetings with Friends of the Palo Alto 3
Parks on various conversations. I will be meeting with them again next Thursday, taking 4
them into the field so they can get a better view of what the opportunities are. Peter, I 5
know you mentioned at one point we should work on developing the relationship. With 6 Kristen's support, we're working hard at that. 7
Commissioner Moss: One comment along those lines. Just like we told the Friends of 8
the Palo Alto Parks about the dog park, in community meeting two and community 9
meeting three they could be there with a table and a little card or envelope that says, "If 10
you want to contribute towards some of the amenities for this park." We should make 11
that a regular feature of a community meeting for a particular park for a particular 12
community because that's the best way to get the community to be part of it. 13
Chair McDougall: Are there any other ad hoc committee or liaison updates? I don't have 14
the chart in front of me. 15
Commissioner Reckdahl: I have one question for Peter while he's here. You did a nice 16
job a couple of years ago leading that Bol Park planting alongside the path. Some of 17
those plants have died obviously. Overall, they're doing well. Is there any plan to replant 18
the ones that have died? 19
Mr. Jensen: We replanted in the fall. I think we planted eight or nine plants. I looked at 20
it the other day, and some other plants have died. We're doing pretty good. We are 21
planning on re-installing the plants this fall. This is the last year that we'll be replacing 22
the plants. The VA in the last few weeks has started their planting along that wall. 23
Commissioner Reckdahl: When they take the fence down, there will be some extra space 24
between their wall and the park. Are they going to put stuff where that fence is right 25 now, the construction fence? 26
Mr. Jensen: I'd have to look at this again. I believe they put the fence back up, so there's 27 an alleyway between a fence and the wall, but they planted it. 28
Commissioner Reckdahl: They planted between there. 29
Mr. Jensen: They put the fence back. I think their original plan was to plant all redwood 30
trees along there. We had a conversation with them about planting native oak trees, so 31
they did change their plant palette. It's not the easiest (crosstalk). 32
Commissioner Reckdahl: We didn't want redwood because … 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 40
Mr. Jensen: It's just not … 1
Commissioner Reckdahl: It wouldn't do well in that area? 2
Mr. Jensen: No. When you walk through that area, it is mostly an oak woodland. It does 3
have a lot of oak trees, especially coast live oak. We wanted to maintain that (crosstalk). 4
Commissioner Reckdahl: In Bol Park, there are some redwoods along the creek. 5
Chair McDougall: Places like Stout Park that have redwood groves, all those redwoods 6 are dying. 7
Mr. Jensen: The redwood requires irrigation. El Palo Alto lives in a unique micro-8
environment. It was next to the stream and had access to water and was able to grow. 9
The specialty around it was it was the only one. Everything else that grew around it was 10
oak trees, so it stood out even more. Over time, it is a very easy tree to propagate and to 11
grow. We have grown a massive redwood forest on the lowlands. If you take the 12
irrigation away, they only live for 5 or 6 years until they start to decline or die. You can 13
even see that in the Magical Forest in Rinconada Park where there's not a supplemental 14
irrigation system. 15
Chair McDougall: The hydraulics in those trees will only move water up 60 feet. The 16
reason they can live on the coast is they get the water from the mist above 60 feet. 17
Otherwise, they just die off. 18
Mr. Jensen: The majority of water intake by a redwood, unlike other trees, is absorption 19
through its leaves, mostly through fog. If you don't have the fog, then it's a problem. The 20
redwoods around here will max out at the same height. That's the height they can push 21
up to in the drought and the heat of the area. In prolonged periods of drought, the tops 22
will die. For Bol Park, we wanted to make it more native. Hopefully by the time the VA 23
system stops functioning, those trees will be established and can live without any more 24
maintenance. 25
Vice Chair Greenfield: Just one more note. I believe Palo Alto has three protected tree 26 species, redwood, coastal live oak, and valley oak. My understanding is there's a 27 movement that the redwood might not be protected because it's not appropriate for most 28
of the locations here. 29
Mr. Jensen: That's been discussed, but it's more of a political question. If Palo Alto 30
wasn't called Palo Alto and Redwood City wasn't called Redwood City, it would 31
probably be easier to make those changes. 32
Commissioner Reckdahl: Going forward, if you have another planting like you did on 33
Bol, please invite the Commission. That was a very good way to spend a morning. 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 41
Mr. Jensen: That was a very successful planting. That was the biggest planting I've done 1
with Canopy to date. I think it was 60 trees and 40 plants. 2
Commissioner Moss: I have an update on an ad hoc committee. It's not necessarily for 3
Peter. 4
Mr. Jensen: The replacement of the bridge in Mitchell Park will start July 9, and it is 5
going to be a logistical challenge because the bridge will be closed from July 9 through 6 August 30. I'm hoping it will be done by the time school starts, which is August 14. 7
Commissioner Moss: How will they get to Magical Bridge? 8
Mr. Jensen: I have a detailed plan that shows the access route. It's very difficult to get 9
there. I haven't gotten all the agreements from the adjoining parties yet, so I'd rather not 10
say how that's going to happen. Hopefully, it's going to go down Middlefield and then 11
into the playground. 12
Commissioner Moss: There's no way to create the new one just to the left of the old one 13
and leave the old one up until … 14
Mr. Jensen: Our idea was we would do the bridge at the same time as Magical Bridge. 15
Unfortunately, we had a funding gap, and the bridge stayed. We built the pathways on 16
each side to meet the new bridge. Now, we've just got to put the new bridge. Installing 17
the bridge will be very quick; it's mostly demolishing the old bridge and building the 18
abutments. 19
Commissioner Moss: Why did you pick summer instead of the dead of winter? 20
Mr. Jensen: For the school. 21
Commissioner Moss: The major access to JLS. 22
Mr. Jensen: It's used by hundreds of students in the morning going to all the schools 23
around there and commuters as well. The logistic hurdle is getting the detour plans out to 24
the public. We decided on July 9 because of the July 4 celebration in the park. 25
Vice Chair Greenfield: Have we notified the pickleball community about this closure? 26
Mr. Jensen: I just got approval today of my alternative parking plan to give them. I will 27 be emailing them tomorrow probably about the—they know about the project, but they 28
don't know the access and the route to get into there. The tennis courts and the 29
playground will remain open. I'm working with Friends of the Magical Bridge to get the 30
information on their website. 31
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 42
Commissioner Moss: What about the back parking lot of the Unitarian Church? 1
Mr. Jensen: I haven't reached out to them yet. They've been doing work in the area, and 2
it would be best to do the parking and close that area. There is no ADA ramp that goes 3
from their property, and you still have to go out to Charleston and down the pathway. 4
There is some street parking on Charleston that we're going to make available and show 5
parking there. 6
Chair McDougall: Thank you, Peter. I'm going to assume you have no more bad news. 7
Mr. Jensen: That's it. 8
Commissioner Moss: I didn't hear earlier in the department report about the golf course 9
opening. That was a really big deal since our last meeting. I just wanted to make sure 10
everybody knew how incredible that opening was. We tried to make a reservation for a 11
slot this week, and it's full. It's getting a lot of great traction. It's just a great job you 12
guys did. 13
Ms. O'Kane: Daren is going to be coming either next month or the month after to give an 14
update on the course. It's great to hear that you couldn't get in. I hope that you do find a 15
time to get in. I was able to play the course, and it's really fun and beautiful. 16
Commissioner Moss: One of my favorite subjects is connections to other open space. I 17
went to the Mid-Peninsula Regional Open Space board meetings the past couple of 18
months. One of them had a very nice new addition from the City of Saratoga into all of 19
their open spaces. It reminded me how lucky we are to have all the connections that we 20
do to their open space preserves. On July 1, I will be walking from Palo Alto to the sea, 21
39 miles, on public trails from Arastradero Preserve through Foothills Park through Los 22
Trancos Open Space to Black Mountain to Portola State Park to Gazos Creek. We should 23
probably publicize that connectivity that we have and that other towns wish they had. In 24
order for us to have an official trail, it has to be open to pedestrians and bikes. I had a 25 conversation with Daren about the connectivity between Arastradero Preserve and 26 Skyline. The only section that doesn't fit that is Foothills Park and the Los Trancos Open 27 Space. They've already said they would open the Los Trancos Open Space Preserve to 28
bike traffic if we would open up Foothills. There is no way at this particular time—29
there's no connection from Arastradero. The public can walk from Arastradero Preserve 30
through Foothills Park to Los Trancos, but they cannot bike. 31
Commissioner McCauley: Not as a technical matter because this park is not open to the 32
public. 33
Chair McDougall: David, I'm going to suggest that this could be an interesting topic at a 34
future meeting where we could actually spend time discussing it. It's a good topic. I'd 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 43
like to make a note and explore it that way. Does anybody else have anything that they 1
would like to bring up or add? 2
Commissioner McCauley: I was just going to ask where David is camping on his trek. 3
Commissioner Moss: At the top of Black Mountain (inaudible). 4
Commissioner Cribbs: Could I ask one more thing before we go? 5
Chair McDougall: Sure. 6
Commissioner Cribbs: I was really intrigued with the whole conversation about the 7
environment and the CEQA today. It just occurred to me that I didn't know as much as I 8
should know about it. If I could answer the question of when does a maintenance project 9
become a construction project—is it the amount of area that is affected or is it the cost or 10
something else that I don't understand? Is there an easy answer to that or not? 11
Chair McDougall: I'm betting that there's not an easy answer; although, Kristen's about 12
to prove me wrong. 13
Ms. O'Kane: Are you asking with respect to CEQA? 14
Commissioner Cribbs: In general, when does a maintenance project that doesn't need 15
CEQA become a construction project? What's the trigger there or is there no trigger? Is 16
it a cost? Is it an acreage? 17
Mr. Jensen: The maintenance project was set up to be done over periods of time. They 18
did not do that, and it became a bigger project. That project was established from their 19
permit, and that's why it became maintenance. It was operating on a permit that they 20
hold. It wasn't a construction project. A construction project would require a new 21
permit, and that permit would trigger the CEQA aspect. 22
Commissioner Cribbs: That helps. 23
Ms. O'Kane: If the Commission as a whole is interested in understanding CEQA better 24
and not necessarily for a specific project, we could add that to the agenda. 25
Commissioner Cribbs: That would be nice at least from my perspective. Thank you. 26
Commissioner McCauley: This isn't an ad hoc item, but it was raised by one of the 27 speakers. It might have been the Commission that asked not to have unnecessary paper 28
materials at these meetings and also not to have advance paper-printed packets delivered. 29
It probably makes sense to have a few copies available for the public in case people need 30
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 44
them. Maybe there is a hybrid. If that's possible, that might be the easy route to resolve 1
that question. 2
Ms. O'Kane: There was some confusion as to the City Clerk's direction. Moving 3
forward, we'll provide paper copies of the staff reports. That's the appropriate thing to do 4
for the public. 5
Commissioner McCauley: Try and right size it so you don't have a whole bunch of extra 6 copies that go unused. 7
VI. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 8
None 9
VII. TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR JULY 24, 2018 MEETING 10
Ms. O'Kane: Did you want to go through the agendas? 11
Chair McDougall: I've got a list of the golf course, connectivity, the Foothills, CEQA. 12
Ms. O'Kane: You have in front of you the agenda items schedule. For July, Jack Morton 13
from Parks and Rec Foundation is coming to give a basic talk on their role. You can 14
share with them what you think the Commission's priorities might be. Daren will be 15
giving an update on the Foothills Park Trail reroute project. The other two items are 16
budget related, and we're adding one which is an update on Municipal Fees for the 17
Community Services Department and any changes for fiscal year 2019. We'll group that 18
into a fiscal year '19 budget update now that Council has adopted the budget. 19
Commissioner Reckdahl: Jack Morton, is that Palo Alto Recreation Foundation or did 20
they change their name to Parks and Recreation Foundation? 21
Ms. O'Kane: It should be Palo Alto Recreation Foundation. 22
Chair McDougall: Remind me who has the liaison with them right now? Jeff. I may 23
spend a few minutes talking to you about the kind of presentation and what we had with 24
the Palo Alto Friends of Parks. 25
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 26
Meeting adjourned on motion by Commissioner Reckdahl and second by Commissioner 27 Moss at 9:48 p.m. 28
Concordia: harmony and agreement among
people and things.
It’s our one word mission statement.
We create authentic community-centered
processes and spaces shaped by the people
who will use them every day.
Our Team
Where we’ve worked: How we think:
NEXUS PLANNING FRAMEWORK
Co-Design, how we design. engage. work.
4 Projects
THE TRIBUNE BUILDING
WISCONSIN RAPIDS, WI
BRRRR
WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN HERE?
PHASE II: DESIGN
Microbrewery
Culinary Kitchen
Recreational Rental
Welcome Area
Café/Pub
Game Area
Conference Room
Play Area
Flexible/Multi-use space
Social Space
Workshop
Creative/Art Studio
Rooftop Lounge
& Roof Deck
BAKER RIPLEY NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER
HOUSTON, TX
Community
Library
Charter
School
Welcome
Center
Business
Incubator
Tax prep
Center
Town
Hall
Community
Stage
Community
Park
Arts
Center
Public
Parking
Splash
Park
Community
Pavilion
Health
Clinic
Marketplace
Credit
Union
Community
Kitchen
JEFFERSON HOUSTON PRE-K - 8
ALEXANDRIA, VA
Platinum Award for Architecture, Virginia School Boards Association (VSBA) – LEED Gold
2012 (before)
2014 (during)
2016 (after)
EMERYVILLE CENTER OF COMMUNITY LIFE
EMERYVILLE, CA
Global Award of Excellence, 2017-2018, Urban Land Institute
PROGRAM OPTIMIZATION
Office
School
Community
Shared
Additional Program
Capability
187k
SF 150k
SqFt
•Additional Program Added
•Additional Optimization
20%
150k
SF 135k
SF
155k
SF
170k
SF
28%
•Program Right-Sized
•Highly Utilized
•Conceptual Master Plan Program
INCREASED UTILIZATION = COST SAVINGS
K-8 SCHOOL
SPORTS FIELD COMMUNITY
GYM & POOL
HIGH SCHOOL
COMMUNITY
COMMONS
LIBRARY
HEALTH CLINIC
SENIOR CENTER
TOWN HALL
LEARNING
GARDEN
MULTI-PURPOSE
THEATER
PLAY AREAS
Plan Recommendations that the Cubberley Plan
could possibly support:
•Enhance existing sports fields
•Playground
•New gymnasium
•New aquatics facility
•Public restrooms
•Sustainable maintenance practices
•Adult fitness facilities
•Community gardens
•Expand programs for seniors
•Expand non-academic programs for teens
•Design to exceed ADA
•Integrate nature
•Connect to trails
Existing Bikeway Network
Source: Bicycle + Pedestrian
Transportation Plan
Proposed Bikeway Network
Source: Parks, Trails, Natural Open Space
& Recreation Master Plan
Assets across Domains
(In progress)
N
Any questions so far?
Q.
HOW CAN PRC help?
•Attend the Community Meetings
•Help spread the word about the Community Meetings
•Help us identify and recruit Fellows
HOW DO YOU THINK CUBBERLEY CAN
SUPPORT THE GOALS OF THE PRC?
Thank you for your time!
If you have any questions, please reach out to
Connor McManus
cmcmanus@concordia.com
337.654.5873
1
TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: JAZMIN LEBLANC, STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS SENIOR MANAGER,
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
AGENDA DATE: JULY 24, 2018
SUBJECT: MUNICIPAL FEES IN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document provides information on the policies and procedures that guide fee setting in
the Community Services Department (CSD). It also includes the status of Audit
Recommendations from the City Auditor’s recent evaluation of CSD’s municipal fees and cost
recovery levels.
RECOMMENDATION
No action to be taken.
BACKGROUND
The City provides a variety of services to the public which provides a variety of services that
benefit the entire community, including individual residents and local businesses. For certain
services such as facility rentals, arts and science classes, and recreational activities, the City has
traditionally recovered the partial or full cost for providing these services, which would have been
otherwise paid from the General Fund. The Community Services Department (CSD) offers a
variety of fee-based programs and services within its various divisions. CSD’s fee-based programs
must adhere to the City’s User Fee Cost Recovery Level Policy which was adopted by the City
Council on May 18, 2015 (CMR #5735).
The City’s Cost Recovery Level Policy directs staff to set municipal fees to recover a portion or all
of the cost of activities with the following considerations:
1. Community-wide vs. Private Benefit: Does it benefit specific people or businesses or does
it provide a community-wide benefit?
2. Service Recipient vs. Community Benefit: Is it a regulated activity, such as an activity
requiring police issued permits or development review that will mainly benefit individual
service recipients?
3. Consistency with City Goals and Policies: Will the cost to residents encourage or
discourage an action that the City Council has prioritized such as healthy habits and
environmental stewardship?
2
4. Elasticity of Demand for Services: If the City will significantly impact demand by adjusting
the price of a service, staff should consider that when making price adjustments.
5. Availability of Services from the Private Sector: When services are also available from
other sources, a high cost recovery level is typically sought to preserve City funds for other
uses.
Given these policy considerations, the Cost Recovery Level Policy includes the following table
outlining cost recovery goals:
The three Cost Recovery Groups are:
Cost Recovery
Level Group
Cost Recovery
Percentage
Range
Policy Considerations
Low 0% - 30% • No intended relationship between the amount paid and the benefit
received
• Fee collection would not be cost effective and/or would discourage
compliance with regulatory requirements
• No intent to limit the use of the service
• Public at large benefits even if they are not the direct users of the
service
• Affordability of service to low‐income residents
• The service is heavily supported through donations
Medium 30.1% - 70% • Services which promote healthy activities and educational enrichment
to the community
• Services having factors associated with the low and high cost recovery
levels
High 70.1% + • Individual users or participants receive most or all of the benefit of the
service
• Other private or public sector alternatives provide the service
• The use of the service is specifically discouraged
• The service is regulatory in nature
DISCUSSION
Palo Alto’s Community Services Department is committed to providing a wide variety of high
quality programs and services for all residents. CSD offers activities that promote positive
community values such as:
• Lifelong learning
• Health and a sense of well being
• A sense of community
• Respect for the natural environment
Palo Alto residents have made significant investments in our parks and facilities. As a
department, CSD is responsible for protecting these investments through sustainable operations
3
and maintenance practices, which includes the collection of fees to reduce the department’s
reliance on the City’s General Fund.
Participation in CSD’s programs provides community-wide and private benefits. Personal
benefits include: an increased a sense of wellbeing, lifelong learning, and enjoyment. Community
benefits include: increased community involvement and cooperation, a more attractive location
for businesses and their employees, better educated and more responsible youth, improved
public safety and health, stronger and more cohesive neighborhoods, and greater respect for the
environment. As such, CSD’s programs and services are supported by a blend of participant fees
and taxpayer funding.
Generally, CSD’s programs and services will fall into categories as outlined below:
Cost Recovery
Level Group
Programs and Services
Low • Special Events
• Programs targeted at low-income or
special needs populations
• Human Services programs
• Programs supported by Friends groups
• Facility rentals by non-profit partners
• Classes aimed at teaching an essential life-
skill or a skill aimed at increasing safety,
such bike safety
• Programs aimed at decreasing teen stress
such as participating in the Mitchell Park
Teen Center
Medium • Group classes, camps and workshops
• Sports league registrations
• Field and facility rentals for programs
providing services to majority Palo Alto
residents
High • Private lessons
• Facility rentals for private events
CSD’s Administration, together with program staff, evaluates programs and services several
times each year. Revenue targets and cost recovery levels are included in program reviews.
4
Non-Resident Pricing
Approximately 20 percent of CSD’s class and camp participants are not residents of Palo Alto.
CSD currently charges non-residents a 15 percent premium to participate in classes and camps
and a 15 to 50+ percent premium to book facility rentals depending on the location and date.
Many, but not all, neighboring communities charge non-residents a premium to participate in
recreational programming and for facility rentals. When premiums exist, they are typically set at
15 to 25 percent.
It is important to recognize that non-residents have alternatives to participating in CSD’s
programs, and therefore, CSD cannot charge prices beyond what the market will bear. It is also
important to recognize that residents support CSD’s programs and facilities through ongoing
General Fund contributions and should be prioritized above non-residents whenever possible.
CSD prioritizes residents by both offering lower prices to residents and by offering residents the
opportunity to book programs before non-residents. The non-resident premiums that CSD
currently utilizes aim to increase cost recovery levels, while still maintaining prices that will
attract non-residents to programs with space available.
Fee Reduction Program
Since 1996, the City has provided a Fee Reduction Program for low income and disabled residents
of Palo Alto to reduce the cost of CSD classes, camps, community garden fees and other
programs. There have been several modifications to the program since its inception; until July
1st of this year, that included a limitation in the program’s scope to cover only low-income
children and seniors but not low-income adults.
The program for disabled residents and low-income youth and seniors currently provides a 25 or
50 percent fee reduction per eligible person per year with a $300 per year subsidy cap. The
reduction amount varies based on the eligible person’s income level; lower income residents
receive a higher fee reduction. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19, CSD is testing a fee reduction program
for low income adults as well. Low-income adults will be limited to a subsidy cap of $150 per
year in FY 2018-19. This subsidy cap will allow CSD to minimize the potential financial impact of
this program as staff assess the demand for this program.
Over the past several years, the fee reduction program has had a financial impact of
approximately $25,500 per year. Staff anticipates that expanding the program to include low
income adults in FY 2018-19, may increase the impact by about $10,000 to approximately
$35,500 per year. In typical years, approximately 300 residents participate in the program, with
approximately 80 percent of program participants qualifying for the very-low income discount of
50 percent off all fees. On average, participants receive a subsidy total of approximately $90 per
year.
5
Starting here is where it doesn’t transition well. It might help if you do a longer executive
summary guiding the reader through the purpose of this document. For someone who isn’t
familiar, it may draw the question of why are you bringing in the audit when you are talking about
how we set muni fees.
Municipal Fee Schedule
CSD presents municipal fee changes to the City Council for approval through the City’s the City’s
Municipal Fee Schedule, which is adopted by City Council each fiscal year. Typically, City staff
recommends that each fee in the schedule increase by the City’s anticipated average cost
increase to deliver the service. This level of fee increase should maintain the cost recovery level
for each fee. In FY 2019, most CSD fees increased by 2.6% which was the average increase of
salaries and benefits for FY 2019.
One new fee was added in 2019, this was the Corporate Event Fee. CSD staff reviewed facility
rental policies and rates to ensure that largely “private-benefit” events with exclusive facility
usage for long periods of time will more than fully recover the cost of their rental. Their usage
does limit the ability of the community at large to use City facilities. The new corporate rate
fee ranges from $4,000 to $8,000 per day, in addition to the normal facility rental fees which
will also be applied. The range is assessed based on the size and duration of the rental.
Several other fees were adjusted by more than 2.6% including community garden plots, golf
course green fees, and picnic reservations at Foothills Park. These fees were increased based
on reviews of competitor programs/facilities and in the case of community gardens, rising
potable water costs. The full list of CSD Adopted FY 2018 Municipal Fees is attached as
Appendix A to this report and the list of FY 2019 changes is included in CMR #9210.
Cost Recovery Audit Recommendations
The City Auditor’s Office issued an audit, the Community Services Department (CSD) Fee
Schedule Audit on February 14, 2017, which included a review of CSD’s procedures around
municipal fee setting. The full audit report can be found here:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55243. The audit objective was to
determine if department fees cover the cost of services to ensure:
• Financial sustainability of CSD programs;
• Customers pay the appropriate share of service costs, including direct costs and the
indirect cost rate related to the service;
• City programs are subsidized in accordance with the City’s cost recovery policy and that
the financial impact of subsidies on total cost recovery is clear.
6
The City Auditor made three recommendations to strengthen the department’s cost recovery
procedures and processes for monitoring program costs. The key recommendations were:
1. The City Manager’s Office should coordinate with the City Attorney’s Office and the
Administrative Services Department to revise the City’s cost recovery policy and
Questica budget system procedures to clarify which fees are not subject to laws limiting
fees to cost recovery.
2. CSD should create a procedure to implement the City’s User Fee Cost Recovery Level
Policy and incorporate relevant and useful elements from its existing “Class Cost
Recovery Policy,” which can then be rescinded.
3. CSD should work with the Administrative Services Department (ASD) and the
Information Technology Department to configure SAP or include a requirement for the
proposed new enterprise resource planning system to align cost centers with CSD
programs.
CSD has already completed the tasks suggested in Recommendation #2 and has begun
implementing the tasks in Recommendations #1 and #3. Staff anticipate that this fall, the CMO
will bring an updated Cost Recovery Level Policy forward for Council adoption and will update
budget system procedures which should complete the tasks in Recommendation #1. Staff will
also continue the task of cost realignment within CSD’s cost centers which should complete the
tasks in Recommendation #3.
CONCLUSION
There are a variety of policies and procedures that guide CSD in setting and evaluating
department fees. Staff assess program fees regularly to ensure that they continue to meet
policy and procedural requirements and approved Council direction. CSD also has the ability to
reduce fees for low-income and disabled community members to expand program accessibility
throughout the community.
1
TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: DAREN ANDERSON DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES
DATE: JULY 24, 2018 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE 2019-2023 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
RECOMMENDATION This is an informational report. No action is recommended.
BACKGROUND The FY 2019-2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Plan (https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64860) guides the City in the planning and scheduling of infrastructure improvement projects over the next five years. It is developed in coordination with all City departments responsible for capital projects. As required by the City Municipal Code, the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) reviewed the 2019-2023 CIP on May 9, 2018 to evaluate the program’s compliance with the Updated Comprehensive Plan. The PTC forwarded its recommendations to the Finance Committee and City Council. Council adopted the CIP Plan on June 18, 2018.
The FY 2019 Proposed Capital Budget, which includes the Capital Improvement Funds, Enterprise Funds, and Internal Service Funds, is $211.7 million. The overall 2019-2023 Capital Budget is $738.0 million. Within the Capital Budget, the Capital Improvement Fund is 125.5 million for FY 2019 and $328.4 million for FY 2019-2023. The funding allocated towards Community Services is illustrated in the following pie chart, which shows that Parks and Open Space are allocated 7.7% of the funding over the five year Capital Improvement Fund plan. It should be noted that the Council only approves the budget for the first year of any five year CIP, and the remaining four years are to be used for forecasting and planning.
2
DISCUSSION Attachment A is a spreadsheet that shows all of Community Services Department’s FY19 to FY23 CIPs broken into fiscal years. The FY19 projects include:
Every CIP has a project page that provides details regarding the project description, justification, significant changes, schedule, funding, budget source, and other details. The following is an example project page:
3
4
Funding The funding for the projects comes from a variety of different funds. The majority of the CIPs are funded through the General Fund. Projects that meet the criteria of Impact Fees (which include amenities that increase the capacity of a park) may utilize Park Development Impact Fee funding (e.g. new park restroom). Projects at Cubberley Community Center may be able to use Cubberley Funds, which is an account that the City contributes the $XX that were once paid to the Palo Alto School District under the Covenant not to Develop Agreement. The total cost of the FY19 CSD related projects is approximately $20.8 million
Prioritization The method for prioritizing projects has evolved through the years. In the past staff was asked to fill out priority matrix forms and rank projects based on the following criteria:
• Council Direction
• Leverage Funding (Private/Public/Grants/Impact Fees)
• Health and Safety Requirements
• Code/Legal Requirements
• Operational Needs and Efficiency
• Sustainability
• Community Priorities
• Revenue Generating Potential Over the last several years, staff has prioritized projects based on a combination of the criteria listed above, as well as feedback from the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Parks Master Plan, and addressing the Catch-up/Keep-up projects as a priority. Catch-up and Keep-up are terms used by the City’s Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Committee that evaluated the City’s infrastructure in 2011. The Catch-up projects are ones that were identified previously as a priority need for repair or replacement, but were never implemented. Erosion repairs to Buckeye Creek is a good example of a Catch-up project because it was identified many years ago as a need, but wasn’t addressed. Keep-up projects are the ones that are forecasted to be necessary for repair or replacement in a coming year. A good example of a Keep-up project would be a park playground that will have reached the end of its anticipated useful life (typically 15 years).
CIP Process Timeline
• October/November—Staff begin planning for the next capital budget and meet with the
Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee to discuss prioritizing the projects.
• December/January—Staff submit the proposed five year capital budget to Finance
Department
5
• April--Planning and Transportation Commission review the Capital Plan to ensure that
the projects comply with the Comprehensive Plan.
• May-- Finance Committee review’s capital plan
• June-- Council reviews and adopts capital budget PREPARED BY:__________________________________________________________ DAREN ANDERSON Division Manager, Open Space, Parks, and Golf