HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-05-28 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 ofthe 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 May 28th, 2019 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 reasonable time restriction may be imposed at the discretion of the Chair. The Commission reserves the right to limit oral communications period to 3 minutes.
IV.DEPARTMENT REPORT
V.BUSINESS1.Approval of Draft Minutes from the April 23rd, 2019 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting –
PRC Chair McDougall – Action (5 min) ATTACHMENT
2.Draft Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan – Daren Anderson – Discussion (45 min)
ATTACHMENT
3.Rinconada Park - Park Improvement Ordinance– Peter Jensen – Action (45 min) ATTACHMENT
4.Cubberley Master Plan Update – Kristen O’Kane - Discussion (30 min) ATTACHMENT
5.Colleagues Memo from Commissioners McDougall, Greenfield and Moss Regarding Housing at
Cubberley – Vice-Chair Greenfield – Action (15 min) ATTACHMENT
6.Other Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Updates – Chair – Discussion (15 min)
VI.TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR JUNE 25th, 2019 MEETING
VII.COMMENTS AND ANNOUCEMENTS
VIII.ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC LETTERS
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 1
1
2
3
4
MINUTES 5
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 6
REGULAR MEETING 7
April 23, 2019 8
CITY HALL 9
250 Hamilton Avenue 10
Palo Alto, California 11
12
Commissioners Present: Jeff Greenfield, Jeff LaMere, Ryan McCauley, Don McDougall, 13
David Moss, and Keith Reckdahl 14
Commissioners Absent: Anne Cribbs 15
Others Present: Council Member Cormack 16
Staff Present: Daren Anderson, 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, Requests, Deletions that are not in 20
the agenda as provided? If not, could we move on to Oral Communications then? 21
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 22
Chair McDougall: Kristen, please. 23
Kristen O'Kane: Oral Communications are for members of the public to speak. 24
Chair McDougall: Do we have anybody who would like to speak on a topic that's not on 25
the agenda tonight? Thank you. 26
IV. DEPARTMENT REPORT 27
Chair McDougall: Department Report. Sorry about that, confused you. 28
Daren Anderson: Hello. Daren Anderson with Community Services Department. I've 29
got a few items for you, a couple of FYIs. There's a project coming up in Palo Alto 30
Unified School District at Hoover Elementary School that involves building some new 31
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 2
classrooms that may involve moving portables onto the grass field. This project would 1
start in June and go until 2023. There are other possible impacts from the project that 2
may affect the adjacent parkland at Mitchell Park. It's the student drop-off and pick-up 3
that would be impacted. They're looking at other alternatives that may involve using the 4
parking lot at Mitchell. With our last experience with the solar project at PAUSD, we 5
wanted to bring this to your attention as soon as I became aware of it and ask if the 6
Commission would like to form an ad hoc committee to meet with staff and ultimately 7
with PAUSD staff as well and see if we can weigh in and help with input on this project. 8
Perhaps I could finish the Department Report and we can come back to that. 9
Chair McDougall: Thank you. 10
Mr. Anderson: Another event is unaffiliated but happening at Mitchell Park. The 11
Utilities Department is replacing two transformers, so the power will be out to the park 12
from May 13 through May 15. This will include the restrooms, the tennis court lights, 13
the irrigation, the water feature, and all the park lighting. They're going to do their best 14
to get it completed as soon as possible. We'll make sure that we inform all the adjacent 15
groups, the library, the schools, the community center, and everyone in and around the 16
park. We'll have it signed really well. Just an FYI that's coming. 17
Commissioner Moss: Does that mean the library and the community center will be 18
closed? 19
Mr. Anderson: No, I'm sorry. The light control will only be going on in the park itself. 20
It's just the power inside Mitchell Park. This other FYI is unsubstantiated. A fisherman 21
reported a gar up at Foothills Park at Boronda Lake. A gar is an invasive fish, usually the 22
result of an aquarium release, which is kind of interesting. They can grow from 1 foot to 23
9 feet long. This isn't the first time we've had this happen. Ten years ago, we had a 24
similar report, and we did the same thing we did this time. We contacted California Fish 25
& Wildlife Service. They send out a biologist. We electroshocked parts of the lake 26
looking for this fish. Electroshock is essentially putting in a battery-powered electrifier. 27
It shocks a little portion of the lake. Fish are stunned momentarily and rise up to the top. 28
You can see if you've got any invasive ones, in particular this gar that we're looking at. 29
In this instance, the Fish & Wildlife biologist came out again and did a survey and didn't 30
find it again. Just wanted to let you know if you hear about it, we're on top of it. We're 31
communicating with people that are fishing at the lake on a regular basis to educate them 32
about what the gar looks like and if you catch them, please do not re-release it. We'd like 33
to capture that, freeze it, and call Fish & Wildlife Service. Just an FYI, there are five of 34
the seven gar species that are native to the United States, but none of which are in 35
California. 36
Ms. O'Kane: I have some things to share as well. I'm Kristen O'Kane, Community 37
Services. Mine are about two special events that are coming up. The first is Palo Alto 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 3
Day. As you probably know, hopefully, this year is Palo Alto's 125th birthday. There's 1
an event occurring on King Plaza this Sunday at 2:00 to celebrate Palo Alto Day. It's a 2
community event put on by different members of the community, not just the City, to 3
celebrate and to open a time capsule that was buried here in City Hall 25 years ago. 4
There were three time capsules buried 25 years ago, one to be opened in 2019, one in 5
another 25 years, and maybe another 50 years after that. We're going to open that. We're 6
going to have just a fun celebration. There will be some singing groups. I encourage you 7
all to attend. The actual program starts at 2:00, but there's some music that starts at 8
12:45. Again, King Plaza this Sunday. The second one, I wanted to remind everyone of 9
the May Fete Parade that is happening the following weekend on Saturday. I do have a 10
request. We are looking for some judges to judge the floats at the May Fete Parade. If 11
anyone is interested, we would greatly appreciate it. It requires that you get there a little 12
bit earlier, 9:15, but you do get to vote on all the floats and make some kids feel very 13
special that day. If anyone is interested, please let me know. Again, if you haven't let 14
Stephanie Douglas know if you'd like to walk in the parade, please do so, so we can make 15
sure we have the right number of people accounted for. Two fun community events 16
coming up. I hope to see you there. Thank you. 17
Chair McDougall: Daren, would you like to go back to the question about the ad hoc. 18
Which school did you say that was? I'm sorry. 19
Mr. Anderson: This is Hoover Elementary. I think it might be helpful to form an ad hoc 20
if the Commission feels that would benefit the process. I'd be glad to work with the ad 21
hoc and connect them with PAUSD staff and see if we can discuss this project in more 22
detail. 23
Vice Chair Greenfield: I'd be happy to be involved with that. I live down the street on 24
Waverley Street. I know part of the transportation plan they're talking about is 25
potentially opening up Waverley Street as a one-way road for drop-off. I know Hoover 26
School is trying to do some outreach, so this is a good time to plug the message a little bit 27
for the people who are listening. As part of the construction, the loop through the school 28
area will be closed. It'll be dead-ended on the side adjacent to the home on the other side. 29
Traffic will either have to turn around and then go through Waverley Street or go back 30
out the way they came. It's a problem any way you look at it. I'd be happy to be involved 31
with that. 32
Chair McDougall: Is there anybody else who would like to join that? I hate to think 33
you'd do it alone, so I'll volunteer to participate with you. 34
Vice Chair Greenfield: Love to spend more time with you, Don. 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 4
Chair McDougall: People are going to start talking. That's good. I think we should 1
make sure or certainly express the appreciation that the School Board reached out. That 2
should not go unnoticed. 3
Vice Chair Greenfield: I just had one question regarding the utilities issue at Mitchell 4
Park. Will that affect the tennis and pickleball courts? 5
Mr. Anderson: Yes, the lighting on all the courts. 6
Vice Chair Greenfield: No lights on May 13 through 15. 7
Mr. Anderson: That's correct. 8
Chair McDougall: Any other questions for Daren or Kristen? In that case, I'd like to 9
move on to approval of the minutes. 10
V. BUSINESS 11
1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the March 26, 2019 Parks and Recreation 12
Commission meeting. 13
Approval of the draft March 26, 2019 Minutes was moved by Commissioner Reckdahl 14
and seconded by Commissioner Moss. Passed 6-0, Cribbs absent 15
2. Recommendation to City Council to Adopt a Park Improvement Ordinance 16
at Mitchell Park for Constructing Two Pickleball Courts, Converting Tennis 17
Court 5 into Four Pickleball Courts, and Restriping Courts 6 and 7 for Dual 18
Use. 19
Chair McDougall: The next item is recommendation to City Council to adopt a Park 20
Improvement Ordinance at Mitchell Park. I'd like to invite Adam Howard to participate 21
with Daren to make that presentation. For the audience, I have three cards here. The 22
process will be that we'll hear the presentation. If I have cards, you'll be invited to speak, 23
and then the Commission will speak, and then there will be a motion. Thank you all for 24
being here. Remember the thoughtful and peaceful approach that we've witnessed from 25
all of you before. Adam. 26
Adam Howard: Thank you. Good evening. Adam Howard, Senior Community Services 27
Manager. Thank you for having me here. Yes, we are here to receive a recommendation 28
to send forward a Park Improvement Ordinance for the Mitchell Park courts. A brief 29
background as we've discussed this before. We've seen an increase in Palo Alto in 30
pickleball play. Our first step to help with that solution was to update the Court Policy to 31
allow pickleball play to happen in Palo Alto. August 28, we brought a recommendation 32
for changes to the Court Use Policy to the Commission. You sent it forward to the City 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 5
Council, who approved it on October 15. Again, we realized that was the first step and 1
what we needed to do was provide some designated space for the pickleball users. 2
February 19, staff held a public meeting to discuss redesigned plans at Mitchell Park. On 3
February 26, we came back and reported that to you. What you'll see is the same plan 4
designs from that previous meeting with a little bit more detail and in the form of a PIO. 5
The paperwork in front of you is some changes that took place since the PIO was sent. 6
They're really just changes to the note section of the diagram. The wording is the same, 7
but in the note section some things didn't correlate with the picture that you see. We 8
wanted to make sure that those corrections came forward to you. For tonight, the Park 9
Improvement Ordinance focuses on these six things: the removal of four trees and 10
replanting additional trees according to the City Arborist's replanting recommendations; 11
install two new pickleball courts and new perimeter fencing that is currently outside the 12
passive grass area and adjacent to the existing tennis courts; install a new concrete 13
walkway along the exterior of the new pickleball courts; convert one existing tennis 14
court, Court 5, into four dedicated pickleball courts; stripe the two existing tennis courts, 15
Courts 6 and 7, into multiuse courts; and install one drinking fountain adjacent to the 16
courts for everybody's use. This is an overhead image of Mitchell Park Courts 5, 6, and 17
7. You have seen this before. We'll go into a little detail of each of those steps I just 18
talked about. First is the removal of four trees. The red large circles are the current 19
locations of those trees. Just a picture of those trees, three palm trees and I don't 20
remember the name of the larger tree. You can see where they are adjacent to the tennis 21
courts currently. Those would be removed. The recommendation would be to replant. 22
At this point, we're looking at replanting seven trees in Mitchell Park. Most of that will 23
go in the new landscaping area, but some of them might go other places in the park. This 24
is the overhead of where the new pickleball courts and perimeter fencing will remain. 25
We're basically bumping out the current perimeter fence to this new red line. That's 26
where the two new pickleball courts will go. We would install a new walkway along the 27
exterior of the fence. That's what the yellow image represents. That way we have a 28
concrete walkway around the new existing perimeter fence. This shows the conversion 29
of Court 5 into four designated pickleball courts. We would then dual stripe Courts 6 and 30
7 to provide both tennis and pickleball use with the previously mentioned designated 31
times for each sport. The red circle is where the water fountain will be located. There is 32
also a water fountain in the Magical Bridge Playground, so this will be the second water 33
fountain in the area. As an overview and recap, this proposed plan gives eight designated 34
pickleball courts, which does include the two recently redesigned paddleball courts; four 35
designated tennis courts, which are all lit; and two multiuse courts, which make two 36
tennis courts or seven pickleball courts, all with lights. If the recommendation goes 37
forward tonight, next steps are to bring the Park Improvement Ordinance to City Council 38
in May and, while doing that, finishing the Planning Department permits. The hope 39
would be to get Council to approve the contract in July with construction starting in 40
August and completion in October. Questions or comments? 41
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 6
Chair McDougall: I'd like to go to the public speakers. If anybody is planning on 1
speaking, I'd appreciate it if you'd submit cards now. We've had the situation before 2
where people have wanted to speak afterwards, and I'm afraid we can't allow that. I'll 3
wait one minute. While we're waiting, to go in the order the cards were submitted, I'll 4
start with Harvey Alcabes . I hope I have that right. Next is Kay Carey, if they can be 5
ready. 6
Harvey Alcabes: Hello. My name's Harvey Alcabes. I'm a longtime Palo Alto resident, 7
have been a tennis player for a while. In the last year, I started playing pickleball. I've 8
found that it's something that a lot of people really enjoy. With the tennis courts, there's 9
generally been—pickleball is very, very fast growing. Even from last summer until now, 10
there is a lot more players. In one court, we can have 16 people playing in what would be 11
one tennis court, where up to four people could play. I just want to recommend that the 12
Council approve this request. 13
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Kay Carey followed by Ann Lemmenes [phonetic]. 14
Kay Carey: Good evening. I'm Kay Carey, a longtime Palo Alto resident, past president 15
of Palo Alto Tennis Club. I've recently tried pickleball. It's certainly fun. This has been 16
a very thoughtful plan that has been put forward by the Rec Department and is a useful 17
compromise so that we can have both tennis players and pickleball players getting court 18
usage. I hope, though, that the Commission is going to be monitoring the usage of the 19
courts because ultimately it would make a lot of sense to think about Cubberley as a 20
pickleball center. For example, I believe $80,000 is being spent for the two new 21
pickleball courts. It would be interesting if instead $100,000 was spent to light two 22
Cubberley courts, which could be mixed use, that is eight pickleball courts or two tennis 23
courts. Just a suggestion because the parking problems at Mitchell are severe. Cubberley 24
makes sense as a pickleball center. It doesn't have a nice little viewing area, which would 25
be a wonderful thing to put in. I just wanted to make the suggestion that, as you are 26
continuing to monitor it, you might be thinking in terms of where do you want your 27
pickleball center to be. I think it would be difficult to have it at Mitchell Park. I certainly 28
commend this plan as a good transition plan. Thank you. 29
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Ann Lemmenes followed by Lee Caswell. 30
Ann Lemmenes: Hi. My name is Ann Lemmenes, and I'm a Palo Alto resident and 31
property owner. I want to thank you, first of all, for all your hours, days, weeks, months, 32
and years of work on this project. I think the proposal is really a good one. It doesn't 33
overly benefit pickleball nor unduly harm the tennis community. Thank you very much. 34
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Lee Caswell followed by Monica Williams. 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 7
Lee Caswell: Hi. My name is Lee Caswell. I'm a longtime tennis player and an even 1
longer time Palo Alto resident. I do recommend moving forward. It's a very thoughtful 2
proposal, a balance of pickleball and tennis. What I wanted to talk about just for a 3
minute, though, was the nature of this game and how, from a community standpoint, it 4
really does by compressing the skillset allow people to interact in a way that is indicative 5
of how we want Palo Alto to behave. We're bringing people from different ages. I've 6
played with everyone who's a pickleball player here at different times. Although I was a 7
competitive tennis player, I'm able to play with a group of people that is a big range of 8
folks, different sexes, different ages. It's really been my pleasure to be part of that. I am 9
the spouse of a School Board Member, so I do happen to just run into people from all 10
different schools and kids who are participating in sport where it's not easy to enter tennis 11
the same way as it is to get into pickleball. I'm really enthusiastic about having dedicated 12
courts. It's a pretty big drag on the pickleball players to bring all these courts in every 13
week. The setup and downtime with this are quite an effort, and I think this is going to 14
go a long way towards improving the enjoyment of the game, number one, and also a 15
little bit on safety too. Thank you so much. 16
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Monica Williams follows by Susan McConnell. 17
Monica Williams: Good evening, Chair McDougall and Commissioners. I'm Monica 18
Williams, President of the Palo Alto Pickleball Club. I want to thank you for this 19
proposal. Four years ago, an article in the Mercury News called me a 73-year-old 20
pickleball goddess. That was four years ago. I'm absolutely delighted that you have 21
brought this to fruition. We're looking forward to having this facility at Mitchell Park. 22
We'll be able to teach a lot more youth. This gives us the possibility of people just 23
coming in and playing rather than having to put up a net. That's why with our youth we 24
want to have them be able to come onto the courts and practice. There's nowhere else to 25
do that without putting up courts. Having the dedicated courts is really fantastic. Thank 26
you so much. I want to also say that, for those people who are not speaking tonight, we 27
want to respect your time, so we don't want to take too much of your time. To have those 28
people who are supporting pickleball to stand up please. Thank you. That looks like 100 29
percent. Thank you, and the proposal is fantastic. Thank you very much. 30
Chair McDougall: Thank you. Susan McConnell. 31
Susan McConnell: Hi. My name is Susan McConnell, and I'm a member of the Palo 32
Alto Pickleball Club and a resident of Palo Alto for 46 years. For 18 years, I captained 33
many Palo Alto USTA teams until my knees gave out. This past Monday morning when 34
I arrived at Mitchell Park to play pickleball, there were 44 people playing on three tennis 35
courts with people waiting to go on the courts. I looked when I came in, and there were, I 36
believe, only two tennis players on your newly resurfaced courts. We have a very vibrant 37
pickleball community at Mitchell Park. In fact, there's a vibrant pickleball community 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 8
throughout the United States. We support the plan proposed by the Palo Alto Parks and 1
Rec Department to change one tennis court, Number 5, into four dedicated pickleball 2
courts. Dual lines will be put on Courts No. 6 and 7. This is a fair compromise. Tennis 3
players will have 21 lit courts instead of 22. Thank you. I sure hope this goes through. 4
Chair McDougall: Thank you. I'd like to now convert to talking with the Parks and Rec 5
Commission. I think I'll start, David, with you. 6
Commissioner Moss: Thank you. I've been starting to play pickleball, and I've noticed 7
this camaraderie, and I think it's fantastic that you have this focus in one geographic area. 8
I noticed that there are two pickleball courts that used to be paddleball courts, and almost 9
nobody uses them. Having that focus is really great. I'm very happy that you're creating 10
this center in Mitchell Park and not, for instance, putting two or three courts at Cubberley 11
and two or three courts somewhere else. I don't think they'll be used like they're used at 12
Mitchell Park. It's just fantastic. I also heard for the first time a seating area for 13
watching. I've never heard that before in the year and a half. I don't know if that's 14
possible, to put a two-layer bleacher or something like that somewhere. 15
Mr. Howard: This has been part of the conversation. We looked at a full set of 16
bleachers, but we couldn't put down a pad due to the proximity to the creek. In the 17
landscaped area, we do hope to include some picnic-style benches so people can sit and 18
enjoy the shade and the game. 19
Commissioner Moss: Can you tell me what is between the two new courts and the 20
existing Court 5 in the way of fencing? Is there a half fence, no fence? What's between 21
the two when you're done? 22
Mr. Howard: Between the courts, we'll have dividing fences basically that are used in 23
pickleball. The cement walkway that's there now will be removed so all the surface will 24
be the same. They'll just have little dividers that divide each of the courts. It'll be a very 25
low—I don't know if I'd call it a fence. It's 3 feet high. 26
Commissioner Moss: There's one that already exists between Courts 5 and 6. There's a 27
little half fence that—is that going to be similar between … 28
Mr. Howard: It would probably be even lower than that. That fence will be extended a 29
little bit so that tennis and pickleball could be at the same time without interference. 30
Commissioner Moss: I'm really happy to see, every time I go by there, the ability of the 31
pickleballers and the tennis players to share Courts 6 and 7. I encourage us to keep 32
working on that. That's working out great. Thank you. 33
Chair McDougall: I'll go to the other end. Commissioner McCauley. 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 9
Commissioner McCauley: Adam and Daren, this has been a long time coming. 1
Congratulations, well done. 2
Chair McDougall: Commissioner LaMere. 3
Commissioner LaMere: Appreciate all your hard work on this. It's a great plan. A 4
couple of things that came to mind in terms of long-range thinking. I was really excited 5
to see you able to bump-out and use existing land and expand things at the park. To 6
continue to look at our different parks and how land can be used in efficient ways is 7
exciting. I know we've talked about it a lot, but to continue to study where can we put 8
lights up and where does it not impact the residents and what parks can we really put 9
lights up whether it's for tennis courts, soccer fields. Our population is growing. It's 10
going to get more and more impacted. To continue to find different ways to utilize our 11
space. Congratulations on this. I know you guys have worked very, very hard. You've 12
engaged the public. Excited to see this plan come to fruition. 13
Commissioner Reckdahl: I'll say me too. Thank you very much. I also appreciate the 14
October completion date. That's very good. I know you've worked very hard to squeeze 15
that through. I appreciate that. Refresh my memory. What are the dedicated hours right 16
now in Mitchell Park for pickleball? 17
Mr. Howard: Currently? 18
Commissioner Reckdahl: Currently. 19
Mr. Howard: I'm not going to remember the—it's Mondays and Wednesdays for one 20
group. Tuesdays and Thursdays are the next. Maybe they remember which one is which 21
off the top of their heads. The remaining evenings is first-come-first-serve. 22
Commissioner Reckdahl: We do have some evening slots right now? 23
Mr. Howard: Right now, it's 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday and Wednesday are one 24
sport, and 4:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Tuesday/Thursday is the other sport. I can't remember 25
which night is which. 26
Commissioner Reckdahl: Do we get a lot of pickleball in the evening? 27
Mr. Howard: Yeah, especially now that the weather's improving. 28
Commissioner Reckdahl: These new courts, we're not going to put lights up. Do we get 29
extra light bouncing off the courts? Are they playable in the evenings, these new courts? 30
Mr. Howard: We're not sure. There is going to be some light, but we don't know if it'll 31
be enough light. We're not positive about that. We can't redirect, so we're not positive. 32
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 10
Commissioner Reckdahl: The current lights are fixed? 1
Mr. Howard: Yeah. 2
Commissioner Reckdahl: If we wanted to add lights to these courts down the road, is this 3
minor? I think it's like $100,000 to do a court. 4
Mr. Howard: Daren might remind me if I'm wrong. I think they gave us a quote of 5
$70,000 if we wanted to light the addition. 6
Mr. Anderson: I might add that there's also the permitting process, which is more 7
complicated when it comes to lighting things. Of course, the adjacent courts are lit, so 8
that will help. It's not a totally unlit area. Adding additional lights in parks is sometimes 9
a challenge. As Commissioner LaMere pointed out, as we try to maximize space, we'll 10
certainly be looking at options to light a number of areas. 11
Commissioner Reckdahl: The fact that we already have lights there, I assume that would 12
simplify it. 13
Mr. Anderson: I would think so. 14
Commissioner Reckdahl: This $70,000 quote was including the fact that they could tie 15
into the existing lights? 16
Mr. Howard: Right, because they had been to the courts before, so they knew that. 17
Mr. Anderson: I just wanted to qualify that that $70,000 wasn't fully vetted. It was an 18
envelope estimate. 19
Commissioner Reckdahl: Just a rom estimate. I appreciate that. Finally, I like the 20
benches at the trees. The fact that they're movable will be a feature because in the 21
morning the sun is going to be coming from the right side. If you want shade, you'll want 22
the benches on the left. In the afternoon, it may be reversed. The fact that they're not 23
fixed is a good thing. How wide is that strip of grass right now? Is it 10 feet? 24
Mr. Howard: Currently or in the design? 25
Commissioner Reckdahl: When they build it. 26
Mr. Howard: It was roughly 10 feet. 27
Commissioner Reckdahl: If you put the trees in the middle, you could move the picnic 28
table back and forth, something like that. Thank you very much. I look forward to this 29
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 11
being heavily used. When I walk through the park, pickleball is very heavily used more 1
so than tennis. This is the right decision. 2
Chair McDougall: Commissioner Greenfield. 3
Vice Chair Greenfield: I'd like to thank staff and the community for the collaborative 4
effort in getting to where we are today. It's been a long process. A lot of people have 5
been along for the ride for a long time. I'm happy to see the light at the end of the tunnel. 6
I have nitpicked plenty of details within the ad hoc. I'm happy with things as they are. 7
Congratulations. 8
Chair McDougall: I can only echo the appreciation for the work, Adam, and the stamina 9
that has gone into this. We should also commend pickleball particularly and the tennis 10
people for both their persistence and stamina in this because it's been a necessarily long 11
process. You've done an incredible job of making sure everybody's voice was heard. I 12
have no other comments or questions, just to say thank you to you and everybody that 13
worked with you and helped you. With that said, if there are no other comments—I turn 14
and look at Allison. We have developed the practice of inviting Council Member 15
Cormack to speak at our meetings on our topics. The next thing that happens with this 16
item is it goes before Council. She has suggested it would be inappropriate to participate 17
today because she'll be participating on this in the future. Thank you for your 18
understanding. The next thing would be a motion. The motion would be—would 19
somebody like to give us the specifics of the motion? Is that a slide we could look at? 20
MOTION 21
Commissioner McCauley: I would move to recommend that the City Council adopt the 22
Park Improvement Ordinance that's before us. 23
Chair McDougall: Is this the definition here? This would be the appropriate wording. 24
Ryan, would you like to … 25
Commissioner McCauley: I move that the Commission recommend to the City Council 26
that it adopt the Park Improvement Ordinance at Mitchell Park for constructing two 27
pickleball courts, converting Court 5 into four pickleball courts, and restriping Courts 6 28
and 7 for dual use. 29
Chair McDougall: It is useful to add anything about "and the appropriate amenities" or 30
does that come with it? 31
Mr. Anderson: You can leave it as is. The PIO includes that, and it gives us a little 32
flexibility. 33
Chair McDougall: Do I have a second? 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 12
Vice Chair Greenfield: I'll second. 1
Chair McDougall: Anybody in favor? All in favor please. Anybody opposed? With 2
that, it's passed unanimously [Cribbs absent]. Thank you again to the attendees. Thank 3
you again to the staff and the Commission. 4
3. Preparation for Council Study Session 5
Chair McDougall: The next item on the agenda is preparation for the Council study 6
session. Kristen, do you want to start off and provide some context? 7
Ms. O'Kane: We have, as you know, a joint study session. It's currently scheduled for 8
May 6. I was just trying to pull up the time. It's a little later than we usually do because 9
there's a special order and another study session that same day. We had also, just a side 10
note, planned for the Cubberley joint study session between Council and the School 11
District. That's been moved probably 'til later in the summer. That one is not on May 6. 12
Typically the process for these study sessions is the Chair and the Vice Chair and staff 13
will meet with the Mayor and Vice Mayor. In this instance, we met with the Mayor and 14
Council Member Cormack, which was actually a really good fit for the study session. 15
The Vice Mayor will not be there on May 6, so he deferred to Council Member Cormack. 16
What we did at that meeting is just talk through what Chair McDougall will likely present 17
at the meeting on behalf of the Commission, which would be accomplishments from the 18
previous year and then priorities for the coming year or the current year. I'll turn it over 19
to you, Chair McDougall, but it would be good for the Commission to know generally 20
what the presentation will be and if there's any particular focus you'd like to take the 21
study session and a little bit of choreography maybe would help as well. I'll turn it over 22
to you, and I'm here to answer any questions that you might have along the way. 23
Chair McDougall: Thank you. We met with Mayor Filseth and Council Member 24
Cormack. I want to thank her for being there and her participation in that meeting. It 25
was very useful. I'd like this not to be my presentation but our presentation. What we 26
have in front of you is—I said earlier today that it was a summary version, but then I 27
changed that to say it was a redacted version because that seems to be the term of use 28
these days—what we presented that day. I put it this way so we're not sitting here saying, 29
"Remember the bridge. Remember that." Hopefully, most of the things that we would 30
remember are here. I would suggest that the presentation or discussion be more or less in 31
this direction. What we really need to do is see if we can come to agreement of what 32
we'd like to achieve. Would we like to achieve the fact that they should be confident that 33
the Parks and Rec Commission is doing a good job or should we try and achieve the fact 34
that they should be looking at something in particular? Should we achieve some 35
warnings about what we think is coming in the future? There's any number of things that 36
we can do. Through this conversation, I'd like to invite Commissioner Greenfield to 37
interrupt me at any time because he was instrumental in doing this. The agenda we had 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 13
for that meeting was we just put up the priorities and thoughts and what the citizen input 1
was. We talked about highlights and activities and celebrations. I put in the guiding 2
principles outcome that we had from our meeting. I didn't think priorities covered what 3
we were trying to do. It says CSD-PRC projects. None of these are our projects. They're 4
very much CSD projects, and they're in fact Public Works projects that CSD is 5
substantially leading. To that end, we wanted to make sure it was understood what our 6
role was relative to the overall organization. I did talk about funding sources and some of 7
the data that I've used before. I don't think that's meaningful in a general Council 8
conversation. What I learned from this meeting is if you want to talk in big numbers, you 9
can. That doesn't last for more than about 30 nanoseconds before it's in small numbers. 10
The small numbers are, number one, not our business and, number two, they're way too 11
movable to bring in front of Council in this fashion. The thing that I bolded there was the 12
challenges and projects of interest. I'll count on Commissioner Greenfield to help me talk 13
about that. Under the introduction, it's useful to continue to reinforce that Parks and Rec 14
is really responsible for what I would consider to be—I've used this term before—scarce 15
and valuable resources. I put up the Council Priorities because climate and sustainability 16
are part of that. I put up the Mayor's values—he didn't argue with them—from his 17
presentation, which included sustainability in nature and sustainability in fiscal 18
responsibility, and a Health City Healthy Community, and being a good neighbor. I did 19
talk about the Citizen Survey and the great marks that the parks and open space received 20
in the Citizen Survey. The recreation highlights, I'm not going to go through them. You 21
can read them. The parks highlights, the open space, the infrastructure, and the concept 22
of partnership development, the fact that we had had several different organizations come 23
and speak to us and we look to engage with those organizations. The highlighting has 24
more to do with—in fact, in some version of it there was color in there, which were the 25
ones the Mayor called out in his speech, not necessarily the really important—there are 26
things that were more important than others. The priorities. These are divided into 27
sections. Priorities are part of both the CIP and Master Plan projects. They're listed 28
there. There are specific park projects. There's specific CSD projects, the Cubberley 29
Master Plan and recreation opportunity analysis. You might throw BCCP up there 30
earlier. Those are just activities that are going on. As you talk about priorities, for this 31
Commission and for the City climate change is incredibly high. Certainly from my 32
position, funding needs and opportunities and strategies are important. In terms of 33
challenges, we said there was projects of current public interest. We think the Baylands 34
BCCP, including the ITT building, including the 10 acres, will solicit and involve 35
community conversation. The Ventura plan will clearly include that. We would happily 36
present them with a really nice racket sports package. There's the whole conversation of 37
park dedication. Projects of potential public interest, the Foothills creek hydrology and 38
restoration. Funding strategies, we talked a lot about that with Council Member Cormack 39
and the Mayor. The other in terms of challenges is clearly climate change. That's a very 40
quick overview. I would invite comment, first, from Commissioner Greenfield about that 41
meeting and how we should proceed with the Council. 42
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 14
Vice Chair Greenfield: One thing we're certainly mindful of is we're talking about a 60-1
minute meeting. There are 14 individuals who all like to talk on varying levels. We want 2
to jump to the meat of any meeting as quickly as we can. That's really what the outline of 3
the pre-meeting with the Mayor and Council Member Cormack was. We outlined a 4
number of things, ran through them quickly, highlighted the last item, which was the 5
challenges that we wanted to spend the most time talking about, getting feedback on 6
specific projects, what makes sense. One thing that we did hear, which was useful, 7
regarding the 10.5 acres at the Baylands—there has been previous guidance from 8
previous Councils that that area would be targeted towards recreation development. It 9
would behoove us to address this with the current Council to make sure the guidance is 10
still the same before we move forward with trying to develop that. That is a priority for 11
the Commission right now, to figure out what we're going to do with that land. It's a 12
good time to be talking about it. Before we can make very specific plans in a specific 13
direction, we need some guidance. Be happy to have your comments on that as well. 14
Council Member Cormack: This is an area where each Council Member has various 15
background and understanding, and we only have one member of Council who has a long 16
history of experience. The recommendation that you all bring forward should probably 17
include pros and cons, some information on both sides in addition to what you 18
recommend. Personally, when I get staff reports, if there are a couple of options and I 19
have a better sense of why there's been a particular recommendation. It's possible that the 20
Commission may not agree. That's fine, recognize that. Just doing a holistic approach, 21
not just some people a while ago said that. Maybe that will be stare decisis, and we'll 22
stick with that. That would be my one suggestion in that area, especially with respect to 23
sea level rise. We've got a bunch of things going on now that's new information. 24
Chair McDougall: Is that recommendation specific to the 10.5 acres or any of these 25
topics? 26
Council Member Cormack: It's specific to the 10.5 acres, but it's also general to me. 27
Vice Chair Greenfield: In the section of projects of current public interest, the BCCP and 28
the 10.5 acres, Ventura and the racket sports all speak for themselves. You may wonder 29
what park dedication is doing on that list. It's something we've talked about but hasn't 30
been a specific project of effort. We were looking for guidance on is this something that 31
is important to the Council to pursue because there's question about how much effort we 32
should put into pursuing it. Actually there were questions about dedicating parks before 33
we came up to it in this portion of the presentation. The general feedback we got is there 34
is interest in looking for park areas that should be dedicated. Right now, I have a liaison 35
role with Kristen, and I'll pursue that. If anybody wants to join me on that effort, they're 36
welcome. 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 15
Chair McDougall: I'm going to Council Member Cormack if she has any other points of 1
guidance from that meeting. 2
Council Member Cormack: The upcoming decisions—if you start with the achievements 3
from last year, that's the important thing to start with. Don't sell yourselves short, and 4
make sure staff gets all the credit that they deserve. The upcoming decisions is definitely 5
where we should spend most of the time. It's always helpful for any of us to get a heads 6
up before something arrives. There are two things on this list that might not jump out to 7
your average Council Member. One is the recreation opportunity analysis. I'm not sure 8
that's something that people would necessarily know about. You might want to spend a 9
little time talking about taking a step back and where that came from at the retreat. The 10
other thing, when we had the budget presented last night, one of the items on the list of 11
how we are going to achieve our fiscal sustainability did include public-private 12
collaborations. While I realize it's early to talk about fundraising, it's probably a good 13
time to mention that it's on your radar, your planning horizon, as you look for appropriate 14
projects and appropriate partners. I encourage you to mention that. Those are the things 15
that jump out to me from this list. 16
Vice Chair Greenfield: Regarding the Foothills Park Buckeye Creek restoration project 17
and hydrology study, as you know in 2017 we passed a motion recommending the middle 18
option of three in terms of the restoration of just the upper portion of Buckeye Creek in 19
Wildhorse Valley in the $4 million range rather than recommending the full-blown $10 20
million project which would include that area as well as Las Trampas Valley and the 21
Buckeye Flats 7.7 acres. Some guidance we got is if we were to find outside funding 22
sources for the whole package, we shouldn't worry about the fact that we've only 23
recommended the middle option. In the event we were able to find someone or some 24
group that was interested in pursuing the full package, we can solve that problem later. 25
Find the money, and everything else will fall into place. 26
Chair McDougall: I'm going to start at the other end. Ryan, do you have anything to 27
add, any suggestions, anything you'd like to achieve? 28
Commissioner McCauley: This is a very thoughtful approach to the meeting with 29
Council Member Cormack and the Mayor. Well done on that count. Having a brief 30
handout that perhaps lists the 2018 accomplishment might be good. It doesn't need to be 31
lengthy. It can probably be what you have here, maybe with a few words to describe 32
some of the things the Council Members may not be aware of. That way, we can spend 33
maybe five minutes on that and then spend the majority of the time talking about what we 34
foresee coming up in the next year. On that note, there is another item, which several 35
people know about on the Commission, which is access to Foothills Park for students 36
from neighboring communities. I don't know if there was any feedback on that topic. I'd 37
be interested to hear thoughts on that. The ad hoc committee—we can talk about it more 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 16
when we get to the ad hoc updates—has been moving forward with that concept. We can 1
discuss it in more detail at the ad hoc update phase. I'm curious to know where that one 2
stands and whether we should talk about it with the Council or not if for no other reason 3
than to let them know that we're exploring it. Thoughts on that one? 4
Chair McDougall: You and I talked briefly about this. The biggest concern from both of 5
the participants was what problem are we solving. I would encourage the ad hoc—6
however we go about it—to try and answer that question. If we think we can answer that 7
question articulately, then we could bring it up as there's a problem we're trying to solve, 8
and we should solve it this way. If we can't answer that question articulately, then—I 9
don't know what expression to use—we should keep our powder dry. Bringing it up as a 10
possible discussion could sidetrack everything else and could cause—I worry that a 11
negative minority could escalate into something that we'd never achieve what you'd like 12
to achieve. 13
Commissioner McCauley: I entirely appreciate that sentiment. I hear you. The ad hoc 14
has talked about this may not be the best forum in a session with the Council, which is 15
very compressed and quick, to bring up a topic that probably deserves a more in-depth 16
discussion. In response to the question you posed, which is a totally fair question, it's a 17
question of social justice. There are perhaps competing narratives about how we got to 18
where we are with Foothills Park and the residents exclusiveness requirement. One is 19
that Palo Alto was the community that stepped up to preserve that area and put the money 20
up in the first instance. Other communities weren't willing to pony up at that point in 21
time. Palo Alto somewhat understandably said, "Okay, but this is going to be for Palo 22
Alto residents." There's a counter-narrative, which some of us have probably heard, that 23
Palo Alto is a white-flight suburb of the 1950s and '60s and exclusive resident facilities 24
and parks and things like that were a symptom of those sorts of mentalities, which 25
effectively were to keep the riff raff out of what was an exclusive area. I'm not going to 26
try and resolve what narrative is the right one. That's, at least in some people's view in 27
our community, what is underlying the whole issue. It really is a social justice issue, 28
which we can either clean up ourselves or probably become the headline of local 29
newspaper or perhaps even be on local newspapers that Palo Alto is potentially still 30
promoting that sort of exclusiveness in a facility that in most places would be open to the 31
entire public. There are probably multiple ways to accomplish it. This proposal was 32
intended to be a targeted way. It's a pilot proposal to study whether there would be any 33
impacts from allowing students from neighboring communities that are 34
socioeconomically disadvantaged schools to come to Foothills Park. The park is a 35
resource that is underutilized. Actually it's pretty significantly underutilized. Many of 36
our resources within the park system are overutilized. We have excess capacity. That's 37
really the genesis. I didn't mean to speak for so long, but that's the answer, at least from 38
my perspective, which is it's a social justice issue that we can either rectify ourselves or 39
become perhaps publicized in ways that we don't want to be publicized. 40
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 17
Chair McDougall: I've got understanding and notes of that. I appreciate your passion on 1
that. I'll go to Commissioner LaMere. 2
Commissioner LaMere: I don't have anything additional to add; although, I do support 3
Ryan in his comments as well as exploring the Foothills Park and the pilot program. 4
Chair McDougall: Thank you. 5
Commissioner Reckdahl: I'm not necessarily opposed to investigating this. I don't think 6
a Council joint study session would be the place to do it. I'd be afraid that it would 7
swamp all our other discussions. We have a lot of very nebulous things. We will have 8
new parkland at Cubberley, Ventura. The 10.5 acres, what are we going to do there? 9
That's very nebulous. The 7.7 acres is very nebulous. How to approach funding, there's 10
not a clear answer to that either. Normally, we do the churn and then we shut up and 11
listen. In this case, we want to listen to the Council and see what they have to give us 12
guidance on these areas. These areas are areas where there isn't an obvious answer, and 13
guidance from the Council will be needed. 14
Chair McDougall: That's a good point. We want to make sure we don't spend an hour 15
talking, but we spend 15 minutes addressing and identifying issues and making sure that 16
we're listening and getting guidance as opposed to tell them what … Commissioner 17
Moss. 18
Commissioner Moss: That was going to be one of my questions. You had said in the 19
beginning that this was our presentation, not your presentation. Are you going to divvy 20
this up among the seven of us, three of us, four of us? As you said, you don't want to 21
monopolize the entire 60 minutes with us just talking heads. You want a discussion. I 22
don't know how you want to handle that. Do you want the liaisons and the 23
subcommittees to be prepared to talk about any of these issues in greater depth in 60 24
minutes? What did you have in mind? 25
Chair McDougall: There are two answers to that. One is I'm not sure I want anybody to 26
talk in greater depth in any of those. We want to identify topics and issues. We want to 27
be very careful about us talking so much in greater depth that we don't hear. On the other 28
hand, I would like to go through the various ad hocs and have a representative of an ad 29
hoc talk about some of these topics rather than me simply going through the list. We 30
have a slide of accomplishments. We have a slide of priorities. I could take ad hocs and 31
divide that up. I would try my best to create what's called a tick-tock, which Joe Simitian 32
is very famous for creating tick-tocks, so that we really knew minute-by-minute what it 33
was we were trying to do. We can't control the Council speaking, but we can control 34
ourselves speaking. If everybody knows that he has this topic and he has two minutes 35
and it's not free form, we'll use our light here or something. I would prefer to divide it 36
up. I would know what priorities people have by what ad hocs they're on. 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 18
Commissioner Moss: I did want to hear if Council Member Cormack had any more 1
comments, but one other question. There are some things here that are more 2
controversial. They're not fully fleshed out, for instance, the AT&T property, things like 3
that. How much detail do we—do we even bring those up or is this the set list? 4
Chair McDougall: This is not necessarily a set list. We did not put the AT&T property 5
on here because there's already action on that, that probably can't be discussed in a setting 6
like that. Kristen, do you have comments to add on that? 7
Ms. O'Kane: I do. I just wanted to chime in a little bit. What Commissioner Reckdahl 8
was saying is based on past practice. My experience is the best part of these study 9
sessions is the dialog between the Council and the Commissioners. The way to 10
accomplish that is to give the most time for that dialog. If everyone is participating in the 11
presentation, it's going to take a long time for that presentation. My recommendation is 12
the Chair and Vice Chair give the presentation together. It's not their presentation. 13
They're there representing all of you. Then the conversation, more feedback, and dialog 14
with Council can take place. That would be my recommendation, and that's based on 15
how we've done it previously. I'd welcome your thoughts on that. I would be worried 16
that all of a sudden 30 minutes would pass, and we would not have heard from the City 17
Council. 18
Chair McDougall: With that approach, I would go out of my way to make sure that 19
everybody participated in answering. Any kind of conversation that got started, I would 20
not want to be the one or necessarily Commissioner Greenfield to—a topic comes up 21
maybe almost random as opposed to—Commissioner Reckdahl, why don't you talk to 22
that. If you're comfortable talking to it, then do it. If you'd rather not be the one to talk to 23
it, bounce it back. We want to get everybody engaged in the conversation. I would be 24
happy at the end if I—unlike these meetings where I don't think I talk the least, I'd be 25
very happy in this meeting if I was the one who talked the least. 26
Ms. O'Kane: It's good to maybe do bigger picture items instead of focusing on specific 27
project updates at the study session. If a Council Member asks, that would be 28
appropriate. We don't want to get into a discussion about a particular project necessarily 29
as much as big picture priorities. What does the Commission want to move the needle 30
on? What sorts of policy issues are there that the Commission would like to see come 31
forward or changed in some way? That's my recommendation. 32
Commissioner Moss: I'm assuming in this dialog we may not have answers. It may be 33
that they will ask us questions and give us several months' worth of work to do because 34
of this, rather than us being able to answer all their questions right there in that 60 35
minutes. Is that right? 36
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 19
Ms. O'Kane: That has happened with other Commissions as well. It's something to 1
consider. Something happened like that with the Human Relations Commission. They 2
did get a project out of their study session, and they were happy to take it on. Staff can 3
help with that. If it seems to be too much or out of the realm of what you're interested in, 4
we can follow up afterwards. 5
Commissioner Moss: The example that we had here was funding. Mayor Scharff said, 6
"What about funding the entire 20-year Parks Master Plan tomorrow? Can you do it?" 7
We spent a lot of time trying to figure out how we could fund it. We didn't get very far, 8
but we spent a lot of time on it. 9
Chair McDougall: I thought it was very generous of Commissioner Moss to say that the 10
Council might give us more work. Does anybody else have any comments? If not, I 11
would redraft this a bit, find a way—I'm sorry, Council Member Cormack. 12
Council Member Cormack: The good news is for the first time we're evenly matched, 13
seven on seven. You won't be completely outnumbered. I want to address head on what 14
Commissioner McCauley brought up. It's actually already in the press. There is some 15
very strong language that some people are using. We should all be prepared in case this 16
becomes an issue that is relevant to the people who live here and to people who don't live 17
here. It's totally up to the Commission. I'm not taking a position on whether you should 18
or should not bring it forward. In my experience, things that can be controversial are best 19
well thought-out in advance. If you decide to bring it up, fine. If you don't, that's fine 20
also. It doesn't mean you can't work on it. I'd encourage you to think long and hard. I 21
would expect the Council, as we always do, will look to our Boards and Commissions to 22
make recommendations and manage initial hearings on that line. I just want to address it 23
head on. It is a topic in the news. This would be the appropriate place for it to be 24
considered. 25
Commissioner Reckdahl: It's possible that after we shut up and start listening, one of the 26
Council Members may bring it up. If they want to bring it up, I have no problem with 27
that. If they have some insight to guide us, that could be appropriate. 28
Chair McDougall: The important thing that we've just been reminded of is we need to be 29
well prepared. 30
Vice Chair Greenfield: I have some more comments on the Foothills Park access issue. I 31
was waiting 'til we finished talking about the bigger picture of how we're going to handle 32
our joint session. 33
Ms. O'Kane: I just want to make sure—this isn't an agendized item. We don't get into a 34
discussion on it. 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 20
Vice Chair Greenfield: I'm just passing comments from the Mayor's session. This is 1
some additional comments. 2
Ms. O'Kane: Thank you. 3
Vice Chair Greenfield: We did broach the subject at the meeting, which is probably clear 4
but wasn't explicitly stated. In addition to the question of what problem are we trying to 5
solve, other questions that were posed for us to consider are is there significant unserved 6
demand, what are options to addressing this issue. If the issue does exist and there is 7
demand, does Foothill Park need to be used as part of the solution or are there other 8
solutions in place or is there demand being met by other open space areas already? The 9
underlying question as well, which maybe we got some answer to just now, is what is the 10
appropriateness or priority of using staff resources for an investigation of this effort. If 11
this is something that Council isn't going to support, then we're not well served to use 12
staff time on this. It's a bit of a chicken and egg issue. We need to figure out how to get 13
guidance on this before we're shut down from pursuing it. 14
Council Member Cormack: A slightly different recollection. What I remember talking 15
about is prioritization. We all have to choose. What are the things we're working on, and 16
where do we want to spend our time? If this is what the Commission wants to prioritize, 17
then that's appropriate. If there are other things that the Commission wants to prioritize, 18
that's appropriate as well. I didn't personally talk about staff time. It might have been 19
someone else in the meeting. Really more about prioritization. If it's at the top of the list, 20
then you should talk about it with us. If there are other things that are more important, 21
then I encourage you to put those at the top of the list. It's agnostic as to the topic. 22
Commissioner McCauley: We can perhaps talk about this a little bit more when we get 23
to the ad hoc committee updates. As a general matter, from my limited experience of 24
being at one of these study sessions previously, it makes a lot of sense to be as structured 25
as possible. Your tick-tock idea, Don, is a very good one. Without stepping on any feet 26
because I recognize that we view our Council Members as our bosses in this context, you 27
as the Chairman need to be assertive to actually keep us on schedule. I recognize that the 28
last time we went through this exercise, it's easy with Council Members to go off on lots 29
of different tangents and down many different rabbit holes. I would be assertive. That's 30
my last piece of input. 31
Vice Chair Greenfield: One other comment I'd like to make not related to any specific 32
item for discussion, but in general, for the meeting between the Parks and Rec 33
Commission and City Council. The last time we met was almost two years ago. We 34
didn't get a meeting scheduled last year. I'd like to recommend we put calendar reminder 35
items to start next February or so looking to schedule the Mayor's meeting, which would 36
be followed by the joint session, so we can make sure to include this next year. It's 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 21
valuable time. As Commissioner McCauley alluded, we're meeting with our bosses at 1
this meeting. These one-on-ones at least once a year seem like a reasonable practice. 2
Council Member Cormack: I'll point out that we all serve the public. 3
Chair McDougall: Unless anybody has more comments, then I'll work with 4
Commissioner Greenfield and do a little more homework, find a way to appropriately 5
distribute it, and commit to you now that my goal would be to make sure it's a discussion 6
that we learn from and that it's not my conversation. It's everybody participating in the 7
conversation. You're free to kick me in the shins whenever that's inappropriate. With 8
that, I would like to suggest that we move on to the next topic, which is … 9
Commissioner Reckdahl: I have one question. The fact that we haven't had a meeting in 10
two years, do you want the accomplishments to be listed for the last two years or just for 11
2018? 12
Chair McDougall: As soon as Commissioner Greenfield said that, I made a note to think 13
back to the previous year. I don't think I'd want to go through all the accomplishments. 14
If we did a moonshot the previous year, we should add the moonshot in there. 15
Commissioner Reckdahl: Especially if there are any open issues with any of the projects 16
that we did in the past. 17
Chair McDougall: If there's any particular accomplishments that anybody's particularly 18
sensitive to, if they could inform Natalie—to keep me out of Brown Act problems—I'll 19
work with Natalie to collect them. Thank you, Natalie. Any other comments on that? 20
Relative to the agenda, I don't know that we're looking for more things to put on the 21
agenda as opposed to things to move on the agenda. Maybe Kristen can give us a little 22
input of what's in front of us. 23
Ms. O'Kane: The next item is the other ad hoc committee updates. Did you want to … 24
Chair McDougall: I'm sorry. I skipped that. 25
4. Other Ad Hoc Committee and Liaison Updates 26
Chair McDougall: I would invite Commissioner Greenfield, since it's in front of us and 27
he's done a nice job of championing this, to make comments on what we have in front of 28
us. 29
Vice Chair Greenfield: I had recommended a little bit more streamlined approach, which 30
isn't exactly what's in front of us. It's more similar to what we used a couple of years ago. 31
Rather than adding the meeting date and attendees, simplify things by putting things in a 32
single column with all the update information. Put things in a format that Natalie can 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 22
paste right into this document. Each monthly update would be in a single column, and 1
the document would be updated. A new column would be inserted for the new month, 2
and the previous month would get shifted to the right so you could see a history of all the 3
updates for each of the particular ad hocs or liaison roles. We can either have separate 4
tabs in a document for ad hocs and liaison or everything sequentially in one document. It 5
would be nice if there was a location that could be hosted where everyone can access this 6
document. I don't think we should have Brown Act issues if all of this information is 7
then presented in a meeting because it's then public information. It'd be very useful for 8
the individual ad hocs to see what's happening month-to-month. A year later, we can at a 9
glance see is it worth our time to have this ad hoc or would it make more sense to reduce 10
it to a one-person liaison role or is it something we need at all. 11
Chair McDougall: I'm going to suggest that we continue to discuss and work on that and 12
work with Natalie and Kristen. The idea was that we didn't spend a lot of time on this 13
because we already had the information here. Does anybody have a burning interest in 14
commenting on anything on here that either they submitted or they see? 15
Ms. O'Kane: The reason why it's not printed is there were last-minute additions. Our 16
goal is to—Commissioner Greenfield and Natalie and I will work on it too—is to get it 17
on a monthly schedule so you're all expecting it, we're expecting a response. We'll be 18
able to track it as we move along. It is a work in progress, but we're working on it. 19
Chair McDougall: This is a great improvement from last month's when Commissioner 20
Greenfield was the only one who submitted something. Now, anytime there was 21
something submitted or an ad hoc happened, we've got a decent report. I appreciate 22
everybody's participation in that. 23
Vice Chair Greenfield: An important part of the process is for Natalie to send the 24
Commission a reminder three or four days before you need the reports done. We need to 25
be disciplined in making sure we get a report in. The goal is for each ad hoc to send in a 26
report of some form even if it's "no update this month," which will be reasonable some 27
months. It doesn't have to be formal meeting notes from gathering as a meeting. A lot 28
can be done online together or reviewing an update. For example, the pickleball plan was 29
reviewed by the Park and Facility Use Policy Ad Hoc this past month, but the ad hoc 30
didn't actually meet. 31
Chair McDougall: Are there any incremental additions that people would like to talk 32
about, liaison meetings or anything else? 33
Commissioner McCauley: I was going to offer a quick suggestion. Maybe it will be 34
easy. I hope it will be something that would streamline this. It would be to remove a 35
couple of these columns, as Jeff was mentioning. You can figure out which columns to 36
keep. That doesn't matter so much. Definitely you're going to keep the status update 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 23
column. Perhaps you just keep in one spreadsheet or one document the prior status 1
update so that you have last month and this month. That way it's really easy. You can 2
just move it over and create a new column. 3
Vice Chair Greenfield: That is exactly the plan. It would be four columns. It would be 4
the ad hoc group, the members of the ad hoc, the staff liaison of the ad hoc, and the 5
current month's update. That's all that would be in the packets that would show up on a 6
monthly basis. The master document would include all the extra columns exactly as 7
you've envisioned. 8
Commissioner McCauley: I would like to talk about the Foothills issue just very briefly 9
again, but we can talk about other items first so that they get their due. 10
Chair McDougall: If we're not careful here, I'm going to create an ad hoc to create ad hoc 11
reports. This morning I got a call from Bob Moss, the Chairman of the Library 12
Commission. The Commission is asking for a joint session with the Parks and Rec 13
Commission and the Library Commission. I've suggested that we have a pretty heavy 14
agenda for the next several months and agreed that we should set up an ad hoc/ad hoc to 15
meet with a couple of their people. They have five Commissioners, so two would be the 16
right number for them. If I could get two volunteers from here to meet with them to plan 17
a joint session, that would be appropriate if anybody is interested in helping with that. If 18
nobody's interested in helping with that—David, thank you. I'll see if I can find 19
somebody else to work with them on that. It's important that we plan this. We need to 20
know what we're trying to achieve and not just have the two groups. Certainly we don't 21
have agenda time in the short term to do that. Is there any other liaison topics that haven't 22
been discussed? David. 23
Commissioner Moss: I have several questions about the purpose and the use of this, not 24
the specifics. 25
Chair McDougall: I'm going to suggest that we not spend more time worrying about the 26
reporting format. Maybe people could submit comments and questions about the 27
reporting format to Natalie. Natalie can work with Commissioner Greenfield and Kristen 28
to come up with something that works for them as well as works for us. 29
Commissioner Moss: That was not my question. My question was what do we do with 30
this information in this meeting. Do I ask questions about the Foothill Park status? 31
Chair McDougall: The idea is we don't have to have presentations. You should have 32
read this ahead of time. If you've got a question about it, now's the time to ask the 33
question. 34
Commissioner Moss: Do I ask it in the meeting or do I just … 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 24
Chair McDougall: Right now. 1
Commissioner Moss: … email the attendees? 2
Chair McDougall: Right now. 3
Commissioner Moss: For the Foothills Park, I've always thought there ought to be a Los 4
Altos Day or a Menlo Park Day or whatever. I'm wondering if the ad hoc can discuss 5
that as well. When you talk about the next steps for 7.7 acres, when will that be an 6
agenda item? How close are you to having that be an agenda item? 7
Commissioner McCauley: I'll look to Daren, but I think the answer is there's a public 8
outreach process that needs to happen in the first instance and some design 9
conceptualization that will go along with the public outreach process. I expect it's going 10
to be late this year at the earliest. 11
Mr. Anderson: That's exactly it. 12
Vice Chair Greenfield: Would we need to identify funding before we pursue a public 13
outreach process? 14
Mr. Anderson: No, I don't think so. We keep funding in mind, of course, throughout the 15
process. As you know with our capital program, we cannot submit a project before it's 16
been planned out, so no placeholders. If the funding is indeed coming from our capital 17
program, no. What we could do is engage with our partners to figure out what's doable 18
within the partnership and existing resources there. We've been talking at the ad hoc to 19
some degree with some of our very preliminary thinking on the 7.7 acres that that would 20
be part of it. In fact, we've already engaged Grassroots Ecology. They've already given 21
me a conceptual plan for what we could do. Now, it's the vetting process, work that 22
through with the ad hoc and, as you say, agendize it with the Commission. 23
Commissioner McCauley: With respect to the Foothills Park neighbor days or whatever 24
we might call that concept, the committee hasn't discussed it further from when David 25
raised it this past October, I think it was. The two items that we've discussed—the 26
principle one is providing access for students. The other one that we've kicked around a 27
little bit and actually—there's two different committees that both have a stake in this. 28
The other is the Parks Rules and Regulations because allowing people who are not 29
residents of Palo Alto into the park requires an amendment of the Park Rules and 30
Regulations, the Park Municipal Code. We've talked at a very high level about some of 31
the partner organizations like Canopy, Environmental Volunteers, Grassroots Ecology, 32
providing access to some of their volunteers who are doing good work in Palo Alto but 33
otherwise wouldn't be able to access Foothills Park. Those are the two main ones that 34
we've talked about so far. In terms of the neighbor days, I certainly would be open to the 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 25
idea. It probably needs to be fleshed out how we go about it. I welcome your thoughts 1
on that. 2
Chair McDougall: Are there any other comments on that? 3
Commissioner McCauley: I'll try to be very brief, but I'll take 60 seconds to talk about 4
what the ad hoc has come up with thus far on the Foothills access for students from 5
neighboring communities. 6
Ms. O'Kane: I'm not sure if we can have—we're getting into a discussion item that wasn't 7
agendized. 8
Commissioner McCauley: I'll be very careful not to make it a discussion but an update of 9
where things stand. The proposal that's on the table at the moment is to allow PAUSD 10
students who are not residents of Palo Alto as well as students from neighboring 11
communities in school districts that under State standards are determined to be 12
socioeconomically disadvantaged. The only school district that would apply to is 13
Ravenswood. To allow them access to the park as a pilot for a one-year period, study the 14
effects, if any, and then make a more permanent recommendation whether to allow those 15
people into the park on a more permanent basis. Daren and his Ranger staff have been 16
excellent in providing feedback on that proposal. We first talked about it in the ad hoc 17
this past October, I believe it was. We've talked about it at a number of meetings since 18
then. That's what the proposal within the ad hoc is at the moment. John Aiken has 19
provided some input and feedback from the recreation side and recreation programs that 20
are happening in the park already. I just wanted everyone to have a sense for what that 21
was. I think it'll be coming before the Commission. I don't know what our agenda will 22
look like in the next couple of months, but probably before too long it'll be before the 23
entire Commission to weigh in on. 24
Chair McDougall: Thank you. With that, I'm going to ask Kristen to go to the item I 25
talked about before. 26
VI. TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR MAY 28, 2019 MEETING 27
Chair McDougall: Now, we can talk about the future agenda. 28
Ms. O'Kane: May is looking to be a pretty busy month so far. Daren will be here with 29
our Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan consultant to present the draft 30
conservation plan. That's going to be a pretty big item. We also have two park projects. 31
Peter Jensen will be coming back with the Rinconada Park Improvement Ordinance, 32
asking for a recommendation for the Commission to recommend that Council approve it. 33
He was also planning on coming back potentially with a proposed plan for Boulware 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 26
Park, which is due for park renovation. That will not be a PIO but an introduction to his 1
proposal. 2
Chair McDougall: In the short term, we're pretty well set with what we're bringing 3
forward. 4
Ms. O'Kane: That's right. 5
VII. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 6
Chair McDougall: Are there any other comments or announcements? 7
Vice Chair Greenfield: The Rules and Regulations Ad Hoc is looking forward to coming 8
to the Commission soon with potentially a discussion item of rule changes which would 9
be followed by an action for approval. This could either be a single agenda item to 10
approve the action in a single meeting where there'd be an opportunity for review, 11
discussion, and amendments to that, and a follow-up meeting. We'll probably be on 12
target for having some discussion in the June agenda. 13
Mr. Anderson: That's reasonable. 14
Chair McDougall: I'm going to mention one other thing that came out of the meeting 15
with the Mayor and Council Member Cormack. At the last meeting, I did mention that 16
we have had an awful lot of climate change-related presentations, GSI and the trees and 17
so on. It would be interesting to know if there was an overarching committee or look at 18
that within the City. Council Member Cormack suggested there was—what was it—a 19
committee going to look at that and suggested that maybe somebody from the Parks and 20
Rec Commission would join that. I'm mentioning that now as a reminder to all of us that 21
that would be really useful if we could do it. 22
Council Member Cormack: That was embedded in the staff report for our Earth Day 23
study session. There will be a group coming forward. It was just one sentence. There 24
wasn't anything more on that. I think that'd be worth considering. 25
Vice Chair Greenfield: I wanted to bring up Cubberley as a potential agenda item for the 26
meeting in May. Is this something that would be appropriate for us to schedule? 27
Ms. O'Kane: We talked about that. I'm worried about May going 'til midnight. Once I 28
have a Council date for when—the plan for Cubberley is it will likely go to Council, not a 29
joint study session with the School District, to talk about certain aspects of Cubberley, 30
one being housing. The School District will have a similar meeting with their Board, and 31
then we'll do the joint study session later. The timing on when we come to the Parks and 32
Rec Commission is important. I can see whether Rinconada and Boulware Park could 33
move from the agenda. I expect that will also be a rather lengthy item. I'm trying to be 34
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 27
respectful of Commissioners' time limits. We'll work with you and Chair McDougall on 1
that. 2
Vice Chair Greenfield: I agree that we shouldn't be aiming for more than three agenda 3
items. The question is would Cubberley have a higher priority than one of the park 4
discussions for that meeting. That's what I'm hearing from you, that may be the case and 5
we'll talk about it. 6
Commissioner Reckdahl: The slides that you went over at the last City/School meeting 7
were very good. You could go over them in 10, 15 minutes just for information only and 8
no so much getting our opinions but keeping us in the loop. That might be some value 9
added there. Since they're already prepared, it would be minimal preparation on your 10
part. 11
Ms. O'Kane: I forgot to mention earlier May 9 is our next Cubberley community 12
meeting. It's our final meeting. I really hope that you all come and help spread the word. 13
It's 7:00 at the Cubberley Pavilion on Thursday, May 9. 14
Commissioner McCauley: This is the earliest we've finished a meeting in a very long 15
time. I feel necessary to be really short. On the topic of park dedication, Jeff, you were 16
suggesting you might want some help or assistance. I'd be more than happy to help. 17
Should we have that be an ad hoc? 18
Vice Chair Greenfield: It was an ad hoc last year. At the retreat this year, I was the only 19
one interested, so we decided one person does not make an ad hoc. I became the liaison. 20
We could easily open it up as an ad hoc again. 21
Chair McDougall: Are you volunteering? 22
Commissioner McCauley: I am, yes. If others are in agreement, then … 23
Chair McDougall: Why don't I work with Kristen to formalize that as an ad hoc? 24
Commissioner Moss: Are we going to have a Boardwalk grand opening? The last one 25
got rained out. 26
Mr. Anderson: That's with Public Works Engineering right now. They have not 27
rescheduled one. As soon as they do, I'll be sure to let you know. 28
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 29
Meeting adjourned on motion by Commissioner McCauley and second by Vice Chair 30
Greenfield at 8:40 p.m. 31
1
TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: DAREN ANDERSON DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES
DATE: MAY 28, 2019 SUBJECT: BAYLANDS COMPREHENSIVE CONSERVATION PLAN
RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) discuss and provide
feedback on the draft Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan (BCCP) (Attachment A).
BACKGROUND The purpose of the BCCP is to develop goals, policies, prioritized action steps, and best
management practices to holistically manage the Baylands Nature Preserve over the next 15
years and beyond. The BCCP will provide staff, the PRC, and the City Council with clear
direction on how to manage the Baylands using an ecosystem-based approach that will help
guide the protection of the preserve’s habitat, wildlife, and natural resources; ensure that stewardship and access to nature-friendly recreational opportunities are available for park visitors to enjoy the Baylands now and in the future; and help the City manage the Baylands in a
way that allows the preserve to thrive in the face of challenges such as sea level rise and climate
change. It also incorporates opportunities to provide art in appropriate public spaces.
DISCUSSION The draft BCCP includes the following sections:
• Existing Conditions;
• Planned Future Improvements and Activities;
• Vision, Goals, and Objectives;
• Opportunities and Challenges Analysis;
• Climate Change and Sea Level Rise at the Baylands;
• Action Plan and Best Management Practices;
• Design Plan for Byxbee Park; and
• Concepts for the Former ITT Property/Renzel Wetlands.
Public, stakeholder, and PRC involvement has been an integral part in the development of the BCCP and has contributed valuable insight and guidance throughout the planning process.
Public and Stakeholder Involvement included the following opportunities for participation and input into development of the BCCP:
• Stakeholder Meeting 1 on October 18, 2017
• Tour of former ITT Property/Renzel Wetlands on November 13, 2017
• Stakeholder Meeting 2 on December 5, 2017
2
• Stakeholder Meeting 3 on February 15, 2018
• Onsite Baylands User Survey in April and May 2018
• Stakeholder Meeting 4 on November 29, 2018
• Project website as an alternative opportunity for the community top review and provide
feedback on BCCP chapters.
• The PRC discussed the BCCP on February 27, 2018; June 26, 2018; September 25, 2018; and December 18, 2018
• Review of draft sections of the BCCP via email
Five overarching themes emerged as important throughout the public and stakeholder process including:
• Natural Resources;
• Public Access and Facilities;
• Public Engagement;
• Public Art; and
• Operations and Management
These themes formed the basis of topic areas that are the focus of the BCCP. For example, Natural Resources were identified as an important asset of the Baylands, and Natural Resources Management is a prominently featured topic in the Goals and Objectives developed for the
BCCP, and is included as a main topic in Opportunities and Challenges Analysis. Natural
resources and habitats are specifically addressed in the Sea Level Rise and Climate Change
Assessment chapter. The BCCP also includes specific natural resources management action plans, specifically the Habitat Conservation and Restoration Plan and the Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Plan. Natural resources conservation is also included as a main objective in the
Byxbee Park Plan and the former ITT/Renzel concepts. Natural resources/ecology is also a major
theme of Art Overlay section of the BCCP.
On December 18, 2018, the PRC discussed elements of the BCCP and focused their feedback on the Draft Design Plan for Byxbee Park. The PRC supported the Draft Design Plan for Byxbee
Park, and recommended the parking lot improvement option (Concept 2), which allows vehicles
to drive a loop through the parking lot. The PRC also requested adding bus parking to the design. The PRC feedback was incorporated into the Final Design Plan for Byxbee Park.
On May 7, 2019, staff met with the PRC Ad Hoc Committee to discuss the draft BCCP. The Ad
Hoc Committee expressed support for the draft plan, and recommended a few minor changes:
• ITT conceptual plan—keep the one low to the ground antenna in the former ITT area.
• Include bio-blitzes as a method of monitoring and measuring wildlife and habitat.
• Do not clutter the Baylands with too many interpretive signs.
• The action plan it mentions “native plants” and “climate smart plants”. Consider using
the term “habitat supportive plants”. The idea is that at some point it might not just be
native plants that are best for supporting habitat given sea level rise.
• Include an appendix page with a list of volunteer partners.
• For Byxbee Trails, include the mileage of the loops.
3
NEXT STEPS AND TIMELINE
•CEQA Analysis—June to December 2019
•Parks and Recreation Commission to recommend and City to formally approve Final BCCP
and certify CEQA document – December 2019
ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Draft Baylands Comprehensive Conservation Plan
TO: Parks and Recreation Commission
FROM: Public Works
DATE: 5/28/19
SUBJECT: Rinconada Park Improvement Project
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting that the Parks and Recreation Commission provide a recommendation
to City Council to adopt a Park Improvement Ordinance (PIO) for the Rinconada Park
Improvement Project.
BACKGROUND
Capital improvement funding of $1.7 million was approved by City Council to address
current park improvement needs for fiscal year 2020. The improvements include
infrastructure, accessibility and maintenance needs of the park. The proposed
improvements were identified and supported by the community as part of the
Rinconada Park Long Range Plan, which was adopted by City Council in the summer of
2017. The improvements of the existing two playgrounds and replacement of the
existing asphalt walkways with concrete comprise the major budget items being
addressed by the project scope. Park improvements are anticipated to begin in the fall
of 2019 to coincide with the construction of the new Junior Museum and Zoo (JMZ),
which is anticipated to open in the summer of 2020.
Improvement Items Proposed for Rinconada Park Include (Attachment A):
• Playground & Tot Lot Renovation
• Relocate Tot Lot closer to main playground
• All new playground equipment, fencing, rubber surfacing
• New Pathways
• 12’ wide main connection pathway
• 8’ wide connection pathways
• Site Furnishing Replacement
• Picnic Tables, Benches, Water Fountain, BBQ’s, Trash/Recycle
Receptacles
• Picnic Areas
• Renovate existing group picnic area
• Create new picnic area at rear of JMZ at playground
• Expansion of main turf area
• New irrigation
• Install drainage
• Renovate planting areas
• Reduce small turf areas
• Native/Habitat planting
• Pollinator garden
• Directional signage
• Bid Alternate Scope
• Restroom
For more information regarding the current Rinconada Park Improvement project please
visit the project web page at: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/rinconadaplan
For more information regarding the Rinconada Park Long Range Plan and process
please visit the project web page at:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/rinconadaplan.asp
DISCUSSION
As part of the community engagement for the Rinconada Park Improvement Project a
series of meetings were held to review the proposed plan. The following meetings were
held to review and provide input on the proposed park improvements:
• Community meeting - February 21, 2019
• Parks and Recreation Commission - February 26, 2019
• Teen Advisory Board - March 5
• Palo Alto Youth Council - March 19
• Community meeting - April 4
The following sections review the input received in those meetings and how the
proposed improvement plan addresses that input.
Parks and Recreation Plan Input
Comments received from the Parks and Recreation Commission, and how the comments
were resolved are provided below.
Comment: Relocate and disperse adult fitness equipment to outside of the defined
playground area.
Response: Adult fitness equipment moved to outside of play area.
Comment: Review location of transit stop along Middlefield Road
Response: A transit stop currently exists along Middlefield Road near the
school. Transportation will review the optimal location of transit stop along
Middlefield with the new JMZ and parking lot as well as the new
bike/pedestrian route at Kellogg.
Comment: Remove decomposed granite pathway from scope.
Response: Decomposed granite was removed from the plan for budget
considerations.
Comment: Maintain restroom in the bid plan.
Response: A new restroom will remain a bid alternate in the plan. The
restroom installation will be determined by the overall project bids.
Comment: Solicit further teen input.
Response: A meeting with the Palo Alto Teen Advisory Board and Youth
Council were held to obtain input on the proposed plan.
Comment: Add a flashing light at Kellogg.
Response: Transportation is determining the feasibility of installing a flashing
light at the Kellogg intersection of Middlefield.
Comment: Review future phases to guide scope.
Response: Future phases of Rinconada were reviewed by staff to determine
project scope.
Pathway improvements
Playground is due for renovation (15+ years)
Coincide with the JMZ and parking lot project
Added picnic areas are needed in the park
Current group picnic area in need of renovation
Site furnishing needs replacement
Follow the phase scope of work established by Long Range Plan
Comment: Scope of project to reflect family activities (playground and picnic), future
phases focus on other park activities (fitness, art etc.)
Response: The project scope was established to meet current maintenance
and access needs of the park, while addressing the aging playground
equipment. The proposed project provides for family activities such as play
and picnicking, as well as fitness opportunities of stand-alone equipment and
walking loop path.
Community Meeting Plan Input
Two community meetings were held to review the proposed improvements. The following
input was provided by the community, which is followed by how the input has been
addressed in the plan.
Comment: Improve and expand the parking lot.
Response: As part of the Junior Museum and Zoo (JMZ) Project the parking
lot will be reconfigured, but not expanded.
Comment: Improve entry into the park from the parking lot.
Comment: Maintain Hopkins parking lot connection.
Response: A driveway connection on Hopkins will be maintained in the
parking lot.
Comment: Create a better link between Middlefield and the park.
Response: A new bike/pedestrian path will be constructed as part of the JMZ
project from the Kellogg intersection into the park.
Comment: Provide more climbing structures in the playground.
Response: Additional climbing structures were added to the playground.
Comment: Move adult fitness to outside of playground.
Response: The adult fitness equipment was relocated outside of the
playground.
Comment: Increase size of existing pathways.
Response: New pathways will range from 12’ to 8’ in the west end of the
park.
Comment: Maintain and improve rear school access.
Response: Rear school access will be maintained and improved with the
addition of a more direct path from Hopkins to the rear school gate.
Comment: Maintain school access during construction.
Response: Access to the school will be maintained during the construction
phase of the project.
Comment: Limit the number of trees to be removed.
Response: One tree is proposed to be removed at the park entry to create a
clear access path into the park. The non-native tree is also crowding out a
native oak tree and its removal is recommended with limited loss of overall
canopy and an improved growth environment for the native tree.
Youth Council and Teen Advisory Board Meeting Plan Input (Attachment B)
The proposed Rinconada Improvement Plan was presented to both youth groups with
question and answer period, and a task asking what they would like to see in the plans for
the park. The Youth Council was also asked to provide input about why inclusive
playgrounds are needed in the community. These responses can be found in (Attachment
C). Most of the park amenities identified by the responses were already included in the
design including: Shady places to sit, drinking fountain, new park furnishings, fitness
equipment, and expanded seating and picnic areas. Other items like volleyball courts, a
climbing wall, basketball courts and food carts and trucks can be explored with future
improvement phases.
With the expanded picnic area at the rear of the zoo it was suggested this space could be
used for teen events and meetings and could include a partnership with the Junior
Museum and Zoo to assist with programming.
Park Improvement Ordinance (Attachment C)
Staff is recommending the Parks and Recreation Commission recommend to City Council
the adoption of a Park Improvement Ordinance for the Rinconada Park Improvements.
NEXT STEPS
•Bid Document Preparation & Project Bidding: Spring/Summer 2019
•Council to Adopt (PIO) and Approve Contract: Summer 2019
•Bidding of Project: Summer/Fall 2019
•Construction Begins: Fall 2019
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The proposed design is consistent with the following Policies from the Parks, Trails,
Natural Open Space and Recreation Master Plan:
Policy 1.E Apply universal design principles as the preferred guidance for design
solutions in parks, striving to exceed Americans with Disabilities Act
requirements.
Policy/Program 3.A.9 Develop adult fitness areas in parks including exercise
areas for exclusive use of older adults (seniors).
The proposed recommendations are consistent with Policy C-26 of the Community
Services element of the Comprehensive Plan that encourages maintaining park
facilities as safe and healthy community assets; and Policy C-22 that encourages new
community facilities to have flexible functions to ensure adaptability to the changing
needs of the community.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An initial CEQA Study was prepared as an aspect of the Rinconada Park Long Range
Plan. None of the proposed new improvement require further study and are exempt from
CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Proposed Park Improvement Plan
Attachment B: Youth Council and Board Input Cards
Attachment C: Park Improvement Ordinance (PIO)
Attachment D: Parks and Recreation Commission Presentation
PREPARED BY
Peter Jensen
Landscape Architect
City of Palo Alto
TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: KRISTEN O’KANE, COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
DATE: MAY 28, 2019
SUBJECT: CUBBERLEY MASTER PLAN UPDATE AND NEXT STEPS
Recommendation
Staff will provide an update on the Cubberley master planning effort. No action is
required.
Background
The Cubberley Community Center is located on a 35-acre site in south Palo Alto that
was home to Cubberley High School until 1979. Of the 35 acres, the Palo
Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) owns 27 acres and the City of Palo Alto owns 8
acres. The City leases PAUSD’s 27 acres and operates the community center on the
combined 35-acre site. The lease has since been amended multiple times and the
current amendment will expire in December 2019. The lease amendment includes a
condition that the City and PAUSD will jointly develop a master plan for the entire site
by December 31, 2019.
Cubberley currently provides space for City staff, long-term non-profit tenants, and
hourly rentals. Cubberley provides an opportunity for organizations to offer programs
and services to the community in an affordable space. The collective of these
organizations results in a vibrant multi-generational, multi-cultural community center
that supports health and wellness, education, and the visual and performing arts.
On March 9, 2016, the Palo Alto City Manager and PAUSD Superintendent signed a
Cubberley Futures Compact to demonstrate the commitment between the City and
the School District to collaboratively plan for the future of the 35-acre Cubberley site.
City and PAUSD staff began working together on a scope of work and request for
proposals for professional services to assist with the master planning effort and
community engagement.
A professional services agreement with Concordia, LLC was approved by City Council on
June 18, 2018 to assist with engaging the community to develop a vision and master
plan for the 35-acre site. The City and PAUSD are sharing equally in the cost of the
master planning effort. On December 17, 2018 City Council approved the addition of
the adjacent PAUSD properties, Greendell School and 525 San Antonio Road, to the
project area and scope of the master plan, increasing the project area by 7.7 acres.
The PAUSD Board of Education subsequently approved the addition of the two parcels.
The June 18 and December 17, 2018 City Council Staff Reports can be found at:
https://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65435
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=63453.06&BlobID=6
8173
Discussion
Summary of Process
The Cubberley community co-design process began with two community meetings at
the Cubberley Pavilion on September 27, 2018 and November 1, 2018. At these
meetings, and with assistance from a team of volunteer community “fellows”,
participants engaged in activities that would help define additional or expanded
programs to complement the existing uses at Cubberley and allow for a future school at
the site. At the first meeting, participants nominated over 200 unique ideas to enhance
or improve the existing programs and services at Cubberley. For meeting two, these
ideas were organized into common groups and themes and participants were asked to
rank them and describe their vision in more detail. The highest ranked ideas included:
• Adult education
• Theater/performing arts space
• Green space
• Makerspace/workshop
• Senior/multi-generational programs
• Health and wellness center
• Café
• Flexible rental space
• Pool
• Performing arts center
Participants were generally in favor of sharing space between the community center
and future school where possible. The recommendations for shared space include a
theater, gymnasiums, arts classrooms and gallery space, a community kitchen,
makerspace, and a large flexible event space. Participants also engaged in activities
designed to understand the community’s preferences and tolerances toward building
height, parking, and amount of green space, using existing zoning limitations as a
guide. Participants expressed a tolerance for 2-3 story buildings and preferred
underground parking to maximize the site for green space.
The third community meeting on January 24, 2019 used a draft massing (building
shape, form and size) and program organization model to begin conversations around
site circulation, program layout, and aesthetics. The model was developed from the
community input received during the first two meetings and was intended to plan and
organize the array of recommended educational and community uses that exist and
were recommended. The model also provided an opportunity to analyze site circulation
and potential phasing.
After the first three community meetings, a series of study sessions were held to check
in on progress and share input received from the community thus far. A study session
was held with City Council on February 11, 2019. Presentations were also made to the
Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) and the Planning and Transportation
Commission (PTC). The PAUSD Board of Education held a study session on February 12.
The February 11, 2019 Council Study Session report can be found here:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/68770
The fourth and final community co-design meeting was held on May 9 and presented
elements of a draft Master Plan, developed from input received from community, City
Council, Board of Education, PRC and PTC. Major changes made between meeting
three and meeting four were a result of community feedback and include:
• Removed vehicle access into Cubberley from San Antonio
• Moved two-story buildings away from neighbors
• Reduced parking structure from 35’ to 9’ tall
• Move the swimming pool away from neighbors
• Design bike paths to be two-way
During the February 11 Council study session and the PTC discussion, some feedback
was received to include an alternative that showed housing on the City’s eight-acre
parcel. Working with Concordia, three additional scenarios with varying levels of
housing were developed and all were presented to the community at the May
community meeting. The number of housing units in each scenario is summarized
below and shown in Attachment A (page 6).
Number of units
on PAUSD land
Number of units on
City land
Total housing units
Housing Option 1 32 0 32
Housing Option 2 64 0 64
Housing Option 3 64 48 112
Housing Option 4 64 100 164
In addition to housing, the 179 meeting participants viewed specific elements of the
draft master plan and were asked to comment on each element. Meeting results will be
presented at the PRC meeting. The visuals used at the community meeting are included
in Attachment A. The specific elements are:
1. Summary of process
2. Site organization
3. Site circulation
4. Look and feel
5. Phasing
6. Housing
7. Sustainability Targets and Strategies
All project information, including meeting presentation and materials, meeting
summaries and deliverables are available on the project website:
www.pausd.org/cubberleycodesign.
Next Steps
June 10, 2019 – City Council update and action
June City/School Committee meeting – Discuss upcoming Joint Study Session
Summer 2019 – Consultant begins business plan development
Fall – City Council and Board of Education Joint Study Session
December 2019 – Staff to recommend City Council adoption of Master Plan and CEQA
Attachment:
A: Draft Master Plan Elements
PALO ALTO PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
COLLEAGUES’ MEMO
DATE: May 23, 2019
TO: Parks and Recreation Commission
FROM: Vice-Chair Greenfield, Commissioner Moss, Chair McDougall
SUBJECT: COLLEAGUES' MEMO RECOMMENDING THE CUBBERLEY MASTER PLAN PRIORITIZE
RECREATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES OVER THE INCLUSION OF HOUSING ON CITY PROPERTY
Recommendation: We recommend our colleagues in the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)
approve submittal of the attached letter to City Council.
Discussion:
1. Recreation programs and services are highly prized by our community.
2. Our community is concerned about the amount and diversity of recreation opportunities.
3. We recognize the need for increased housing in Palo Alto and that our resident population will
increase substantially in years to come.
4. As we grow, our recreation assets become even more important, scarce, and valuable.
5. PRC is committed to maintaining, developing, and adapting our precious recreation resources to
meet the evolving needs of our community.
6. Cubberley Community Center is Palo Alto’s largest hub for recreation programs and services.
7. Over the lifetime of the new Cubberley Community Center, continuing to meet our community’s
increasing recreation needs will be challenging.
8. We recommend all building space on City land at Cubberley should be designated as a public
recreation resource to meet our evolving needs over the lifetime of the new Cubberley
Community Center project.
9. The direct consequence of including housing on City land at Cubberley will be to limit future
recreation growth, as well as losing a community recreation resource for many generations, if
not forever.
10. As stewards of our recreation and open space resources, it is incumbent upon the PRC to
strongly advocate for maximizing recreation facilities and programs at Cubberley and not
including any housing on City property at Cubberley.
PALO ALTO PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
DRAFT LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL
DATE: May 28, 2019
TO: City Council
FROM: Parks and Recreation Commission
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CUBBERLEY MASTER PLAN TO MAXIMIZE RECREATION
FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS AND NOT INCLUDE HOUSING ON CITY PROPERTY
The Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that the Cubberley Master Plan not include housing
on City property as part of the Cubberley Community Center redevelopment.
Palo Alto Recreation Programs and Services are highly prized, as reflected in the recent citizen survey
where "recreation and wellness" polled as "very high". The same survey indicated community concern
about “recreation opportunities”.
As Palo Alto grows, our community recreation assets will increase in importance as scarce and valuable
resources. Over the lifetime of the new Cubberley Community Center, continuing to meet our
community’s increasing recreation needs will be challenging. We must remain committed to providing
the diversity of recreation opportunities demanded by our populace.
We recommend that all City land at Cubberley be designated as a public recreation resource to meet our
evolving program and services needs over the lifetime of the new Cubberley Community Center. Any
City land dedicated to housing at Cubberley will directly limit future recreation growth and become a
critical lost recreation resource for many generations.
The Parks and Recreation Commission recognizes the need for increased housing in our community,
consistent with the Housing Work Plan. We do not oppose adding housing on PAUSD property at the
525 San Antonio site.
As stewards of our recreation and open space resources, the Parks and Recreation Commission strongly
advocates maximizing recreation facilities and programs at Cubberley and not including any housing on
City property at Cubberley.