HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-10-26 Parks & Recreation Agenda PacketPARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
October 26, 2021
AGENDA 7pm
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070.
********BY VIRTUAL CONFERENCE ONLY*******
Pursuant to the provisions of California Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20, issued
on March 17, 2020, to prevent the spread of Covid-19, this meeting will be held by
virtual teleconference only, with no physical location. The meeting will be broadcast
on Midpen Media Center at https://midpenmedia.org. Members of the public who
wish to participate by computer or phone can find the instructions at the end of this
agenda. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest calling in or
connecting online 15 minutes before the item you wish to speak on.
https://zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 999 3789 9745 Phone: 1(669)900-6833
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.BUSINESS
1.Approval of Draft Minutes from the September 28, 2021 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting
–Action (5 min) ATTACHMENT
2.Ad Hoc and Liaison Updates – Chair – Discussion (15 min)
3.Update on Water Recycling and Palo Alto’s One Water Plan Development-- Karin North and Karla
Dailey-- Discussion (30 min) ATTACHMENT
4.Update on the Status of Measure E Area at Byxbee Park—Karin North and Phil Bobel-- Discussion
(30 min) ATTACHMENT
5.Create an Ad Hoc Committee for the Measure E Area at Byxbee Park—Chair—Action (10 min)
6.New Rules for Pickleballs Courts --Adam Howard—Action (20 minutes) ATTACHMENT
7.Court Usage Policy– Adam Howard— Discussion (45 min)
VI.TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR NOVEMBER 17, 2021 MEETING
VII.COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
VIII.ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC LETTERS
ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations, auxiliary aids or services to access City facilities,
services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn about the City's compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact
650-329-2550 (voice), or e-mail ada@cityofpaloalto.org This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section 54956. Members of
the public are welcome to attend this public meeting.
Public Comment Instructions
Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via
email, teleconference, or by phone.
1.Written public comments may be submitted by email to
ParkRec.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org
2.Spoken public comments using a computer will be accepted through the
teleconference meeting. To address the Commission, click on the link below to
access a Zoom-based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully.
A.You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser.
If using your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date
browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain
functionality may be disabled in older browsers including Internet Explorer.
B.You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that
you identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used
to notify you that it is your turn to speak.
C.When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Staff
Assistant will activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be
notified shortly before they are called to speak.
D.When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted.
E.A timer will be shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments.
3.Spoken public comments using a smart phone will be accepted through the
teleconference meeting. To address the Commission, download the Zoom
application onto your phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and
enter the Meeting ID below. Please follow the instructions B-E above.
4.Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed
below. When you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we
know that you wish to speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name
before addressing the Commission. You will be advised how long you have to
speak. When called please limit your remarks to the agenda item and time limit
allotted.
https://zoom.us/join Meeting ID: 999 3789 9745 Phone:1(669)900-6833
June 22, 2021
ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations, auxiliary aids or services to access City facilities,
services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn about the City's compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact
650-329-2550 (voice), or e-mail ada@cityofpaloalto.org This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section 54956. Members of
the public are welcome to attend this public meeting.
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 1
1
2
3
4
MINUTES 5
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION 6
SPECIAL MEETING 7
September 28, 2021 8
Virtual Conference 9
Palo Alto, California 10
11
Commissioners Present: Chair Anne Cribbs, Keith Reckdahl, David Moss, Amanda Brown, 12
Jeff LaMere, Vice Chair Greenfield 13
Commissioners Absent: 14
Others Present: Council Member Kou 15
Staff Present: Daren Anderson, 16
I. ROLL CALL 17
II. AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, DELETIONS 18
III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 19
IV. DEPARTMENT REPORT 20
[meeting in progress at start of recording] 21
Mr. Anderson advised the Commission it appears as though meetings will remain remote 22
until January. 23
The Palo Alto Soccer Club will start their annual seasonal lighting of Cubberley turf field 24
on November 7th and will have use of the lights for practices Monday through Friday, from 25
5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. through March 11th. Recreation staff will send notices to the 26
surrounding residents in early October. The field brokering meeting for winter and spring 27
2022 will held in late October and early November. 28
Mr. Anderson reported on recent and upcoming special events. The Annual Moonlight 29
Run was last Friday and went very well, with a great turnout. The pre-registration included 30
about 1,800 sign-ups. The next special event will be the 2nd Annual Jack-O-Jaunt, which 31
will be held Friday, October 29th, 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at Lytton Plaza. A pre-event 32
workshop will be held from 3:30 to 5:30 for participants to receive and decorate pumpkins 33
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 2
for submission in the Jaunt event. Five $75 gift cards will be awarded to category winners, 1
donated by Palo Alto Recreation Foundation. Winners will be selected by event 2
participants, who will fill out a survey on their phones to select the winners for each 3
category. Information on the event can be found on the Enjoy! online page. The Great 4
Glass Pumpkin Patch event will be held at the Art Center on October 2-3 from 10:00 a.m. 5
to 5:00 p.m. Visit greatglasspumpkinpatch.com for more information. 6
Mr. Anderson called upon Chair Cribbs to report on the Senior Games. She reported that 7
they kicked off the Encore Games, a part of the Bay Area Senior Games, last Friday 8
afternoon with a full complement of pickleball players at Mitchell Park’s pickleball arena, 9
where they played for three days and had a great time. There were approximately 275 10
entrants. On Sunday there was a volleyball tournament at Cubberley. Monday there was 11
golf at the Baylands. Next will be basketball, then archery in San Jose, and cycling in 12
Pescadero. The cycling is a 5kK and 10K time trial. Soccer and swimming will be at 13
Rinconada. Track and field will be at the College of San Mateo and will conclude on 14
December 12th. 15
Chair Cribbs said the Games consist of about two-and-a-half months of senior athletics for 16
men and women over 50 years of age. Both the Encore Games and the Bay Area Games 17
are part of the California Senior Games Association and National Senior Games 18
Association. There are Senior Games in every state, supported by a variety of 19
organizations, including parks and recreation departments, states, senior activities 20
directors and non-profits. The first four places in the recent Encore Games qualify by age 21
division, from age 50 to 95. The first four places in each age division and each sport qualify 22
to go to the National Summer Games in Fort Lauderdale, Florida in May, 2022. Chair 23
Cribbs reflected that the outdoor sports are much more popular, and she thinks people feel 24
safe being outdoors. However, she admired the volleyball players who played with their 25
masks on. Proof of vaccination was required. She said they are grateful for the help of the 26
City of Palo Alto, Parks Department, Community Services Department, Facilities, the 27
volunteers, Palo Alto Pickleball Club and the Encore Games Sports Commissioners. Chair 28
Cribbs remarked that the Senior Games may be the best kept secret in the state. She listed 29
the websites for the Games: encoregames.org; bayareaseniorgames.org, 30
californiaseniorgames.org, and nsga.org. She said it is an amazing achievement for the 31
seniors involved, and the atmosphere is contagious, enthusiastic, upbeat and positive. 32
Commissioner Reckdahl asked Mr. Anderson what the JMZ soft opening meant and 33
whether they are charging admission. Mr. Anderson said it is to be determined, and when 34
they have a more solid game plan, he will let the Commission know. He thought it was 35
partially related to COVID, the number of people, how widely it’s publicized, and perhaps 36
which parts are open. 37
Commissioner Moss remarked regarding the Cubberley lights, in years past they have 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 3
turned off the lights during the Christmas break and he asked if this would be the case this 1
year. Mr. Anderson thought they would. 2
Vice Chair Greenfield commented in regard to the Jack-O-Jaunt that it was interesting for 3
the winners to be selected by participants and asked if this was to try to get better 4
participation. Mr. Anderson thought it was simply an opportunity for people to vote for 5
the ones they like best, and also possibly due to the difficulty in getting judges. 6
Vice Chair Greenfield asked what it meant that the BCCs needed to adopt findings. Mr. 7
Anderson said he didn’t have any additional information but thought it was something to 8
the effect of supporting and understanding the logistics and constraints in continuing with 9
the remote meetings through the next 30-day period; however, he didn’t get any details on 10
what exactly it means. He thought it would be a quick action item and will share the 11
template when he receives it from the Sheriff’s Office. Vice Chair Greenfield asked what 12
would happen in months where there are five weeks between meetings instead of four. Mr. 13
Anderson preferred to defer to the Attorney’s Office in that regard. 14
Chair Cribbs asked if there was any discussion about the public being able to attend by 15
Zoom once public meetings were resumed. Mr. Anderson said on November 1st the 16
Council will have a hybrid meeting. People can attend in person and via Zoom. He and 17
Mr. Do will be attending training on Thursday to learn how it works and try to figure out 18
the details. He said he is concerned that it will be a little heavy on staff resources to make 19
it work and he hopes to find a way to handle it with just the two of them. 20
Commissioner Moss said they don’t know yet whether the new Commissioners chosen 21
will start January 1st or mid-April. Mr. Anderson said he couldn’t answer that, but he 22
believes it will be concurrent with terminations, so as people expire the new ones would 23
start at that meeting. Commissioner Moss wondered if the expiring Commissioners may 24
need to stay on until April. Mr. Anderson did not think so, but he has a request in to the 25
Clerk’s Office for answers to those questions. Vice Chair Greenfield thought the terms 26
expired on December 15th. If their December meeting were after the 15th, it would be the 27
new Commissioners coming on at that time. Mr. Anderson said this was his understanding 28
as well. 29
V. BUSINESS 30
1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the July 27, 2021 and August 24, 2021 Parks and 31
Recreation Meetings 32
MOTION 33
Approval of the draft Minutes from the July 27, 2021, Parks and Recreation meeting was 34
moved by Commissioner Moss and seconded by Commissioner Reckdahl. The motion 35
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 4
passed 6-0, by roll call vote. 1
Approval of the minutes from the August 24, 2021, Parks and Recreation Commission 2
meeting was moved by Commissioner Moss and seconded by Commissioner Reckdahl. 3
The motion passed 6-0, by roll call vote. 4
2. Ad Hoc and Liaison Updates 5
Foothills Nature Preserve – Commissioner Moss said they have met several times. 6
Regarding use of, They had a request from a group of bicyclists asking if the gate between 7
Arastradero and Foothills could be opened up for bicyclists. Vice Chair Greenfield added 8
it was a joint meeting with members of PABAC, the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory 9
Committee. Commissioner Moss said they also discussed videography and the need for 10
differentiation between videography in Foothills versus the rest of Parks and Open Spaces, 11
the goal being a recommendation to the Commission this year. If terms expire on the 15th 12
of December, Vice Chair Greenfield thought they should have their meeting before that, 13
or bring the item to the November meeting. Chair Cribbs asked if there was a date for a 14
report to Council. Vice Chair Greenfield said there is no specific date for a report to 15
Council, but they would look for it to come to the Commission first and then have a 16
recommendation to Council coming from the Commission. Commissioner Moss said they 17
owe a report on many issues they’ve dealt with all summer to the Commission before the 18
end of the year and are on track to do that hopefully at the November or December meeting. 19
Commissioner Reckdahl suggested the last meeting could possibly be scheduled on the 20
14th, in order to avoid Christmas week. Vice Chair Greenfield added they will probably 21
want to look at scheduling the November and December meetings soon. 22
Fund Development CY21 – Chair Cribbs said they met once and they hope to bring a 23
memo to the Commission in October. 24
CIP Review – Commissioner Moss said they are waiting until the end of the year to start 25
discussion on the CIP for next year. 26
Racquet Court Policy – Commissioner Brown reported they had an update on the 27
pickleball courts and the tennis usage. Staff was hoping to bring forward some revised 28
policies at the October meeting. Commissioner Reckdahl said he missed the meeting but 29
the summary mentioned changing USTA, potentially, and having other tennis groups and 30
that will be part of their recommendation. Commissioner Moss about signage or private 31
lessons. Commissioner Reckdahl said there is nothing new to report. Chair Cribbs asked 32
if he was talking about the colors of the lines on the courts was discussed. Commissioner 33
Reckdahl said there is no resolution to that at this time. The concern is if the pickleball 34
lines are made more visible, it’s harder on the tennis players. There seems to be no good 35
solution. 36
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 5
Dog Park and Restroom CY21 – Chair Cribbs asked about restrooms in development at 1
Rinconada and Ramos. Mr. Anderson said there is not funding at this time to move forward 2
on the Rinconada restroom, so it may be in Phase 2 of the project. The timing on Ramos 3
will depend on Public Works’ engineering staff. Boulware is slated to go out for bid in 4
January or February. A third project is the field restroom for Cubberley. Commissioner 5
Brown added Heritage Park with the Museum was also discussed. Regarding the dog park, 6
Chair Cribbs said they are still treading water on the community meeting to discuss the 7
pilot program. They have talked to the dog owners but have not done any further outreach. 8
Commissioner Moss said the Cubberley Field restroom has been delayed several years 9
because of technical difficulties. Mr. Anderson replied that they are getting closer to 10
working these out. 11
New Recreation Opportunities – Chair Cribbs said they haven’t meet with the soccer group 12
again, although they would like to schedule a meeting with them. The skateboard group is 13
meeting and working through issues. Mr. Anderson wasn’t sure if they would be back in 14
October because staff is overwhelmed with other projects at present. Chair Cribbs said 15
discussion on the gym is making progress and will talk about it next month. 16
MidPen Regional Hawthornes Area Planning – Vice Chair Greenfield said there is nothing 17
happening on this. There are no meetings scheduled at this point. 18
Aquatic Liaison - Chair Cribbs said she and Tim had a discussion and everything is great 19
with the pool. 20
Baylands 10.5 Liaison – Chair Cribbs said the soccer groups would like to have a 21
conversation. 22
Cubberley Liaison: Commissioner Moss said they are still waiting for the school district 23
and City Council to start meeting. Council Member Kou said the school board ad hoc was 24
going to take it back to the full board to discuss what they are going to vote on and to 25
determine what kind of sizes they require, how much of a potential exchange, how much 26
more land they need, and what their goals in terms of Cubberley and other sites. They have 27
to go back and speak to their board and update them. The Council is to do the same. There 28
was discussion of a joint study session between the school board and Council at some 29
point, but staff is overwhelmed at present so she doesn’t know where it is in the priorities. 30
Chair Cribbs said everyone is very interested in what may or may not happen with 31
Cubberley and it’s hard to understand how much energy should be expended on doing 32
anything with Cubberley or not. She was glad that they were able to have a volleyball 33
tournament there on Sunday. She said she appreciates the facility but it needs paint 34
desperately and attention to the parking lot, which has chuckholes almost big enough for 35
her car to fall into. She said it would be nice if the community, not staff, could put some 36
attention toward Cubberley in the short term rather than long term. Commissioner Moss 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 6
said it was mentioned before about resurfacing the tennis courts to take the burden off of 1
Mitchell Park tennis courts. There was some question about wanting to spend the money, 2
and he thinks they should, and even put some temporary lights in. 3
Field Users: Vice Chair Greenfield said he didn’t know if he would be participating in the 4
upcoming meeting but he would engage if there are issues. He had no update this month, 5
but did say the field condition at Cubberley is as poor as it’s been in some time. The grass 6
fields are a mess. He said he didn’t know exactly why, probably part of it use and 7
overwatering in some areas creating swamp areas in the middle of the fields. In the past 8
few years the fields have been in pretty good condition and generally better than the 9
Mitchell Park fields, but that is not the case at present. Commissioner Moss said part of 10
the COVID budget was to reduce maintenance. Mr. Anderson acknowledged this was a 11
factor. He said renovations of Cubberley Fields were part of some of the necessary 12
reductions and these are the effects. Vice Chair Greenfield commented if the stakeholders 13
were notified when these reductions are put in place they might choose to pony up some 14
funds to help keep the fields in better condition. Mr. Anderson said they have provided a 15
bid from the provider to Palo Alto Soccer and refreshed it again recently, so they’ve got 16
the information. Commissioner Moss said Cubberley fields are used by hundreds of kids 17
every afternoon, many different groups, not just Palo Alto Soccer, and they all should be 18
made aware that they could help fund maintenance. 19
GSI Liaison: Chair Cribbs said they do not have a liaison right now. The Palo Alto 20
Recreation Foundation had skipped their meeting in August and are now meeting again, 21
working on vaccines and also talking about upcoming projects for the Foundation to fund. 22
Safe Routes – Vice Chair Greenfield said he had no update, although the discussion with 23
PABAC and Foothills Nature Preserve Ad Hoc was related to Safe Routes. 24
Sustainability – Commissioner Brown said the community meetings for the Climate 25
Action Plan are ongoing, but nothing pertinent to report right now. 26
Urban Forestry Liaison: Vice Chair Greenfield said the Policy and Service Committee had 27
recommended some significant changes to the City Tree Ordinance. Part of it was also a 28
recommendation to formalize the relationship between PRC and the Urban Forestry 29
Department. That is going to City Council on October 18th, so it’s possible they may get 30
some update before the next Commission meeting. Commissioner Moss questioned 31
whether the Commission would meet with or hear from Urban Forestry before the Council 32
meeting. Vice Chair Greenfield said there is no mandate for that at this point. 33
Commissioner Moss said he thought there was to be a more specific relationship with 34
Urban Forestry starting last year. Vice Chair Greenfield said about two years when Walter 35
Passmore last presented the annual report to the Parks and Recreation Commission, there 36
was an agreement in principle that they should pursue a relationship. That languished 37
during COVID in terms of formalizing it, but it is something the City Council is 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 7
considering next month. 1
North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan – Commissioner Reckdahl reported the Plan went 2
to Council for the last time and they finished it eight days ago. The Council was responsive 3
in regard to the parks and implemented a low intensity use which hopefully will leave 4
more room for parks. The problem is that this is all privately owned and doesn’t include 5
any explicit funding, so down the road they will have to find funding for parks, which will 6
take some funding and some planning by Council. The issue isn’t over, but he thinks it’s 7
a good first step. Chair Cribbs said Commissioner Reckdahl’s letter made good points and 8
his comments in the newspaper were very reasoned. 9
Youth Council: Chair Cribbs reported that the Youth Council is back to meeting. She 10
attended their last meeting and stopped by their retreat the week before. She said it is 11
fortunate there are such bright, enthusiastic, energetic young people and it is a pleasure to 12
watch them hold a meeting, make plans, model inclusiveness and show excitement about 13
the world in general. She appreciates the work that Recreation and Community Services 14
staff is doing with them. Mr. Anderson said he will pass that on to them. Commissioner 15
Moss remarked there is an amazing number of liaisons and ad hocs, doing a huge amount 16
of work. He thought the City Council mentioned that when they were trying to figure out 17
last spring whether or not to reduce the number of Commissioners, but the number of balls 18
in the air is incredible. Chair Cribbs said turning some of the ad hocs into liaisons is why 19
there are so many liaisons. She agreed it is a lot and the Commissioners are doing a lot of 20
work. 21
3. First Tee of Silicon Valley Public/Private Partnership Proposal 22
Mr. Do introduced this youth development opportunity through public-private partnership 23
proposed by the First Tee. The First Tee and the City have collaborated for the past 12 24
years in facilitating this program, focused on youth development through learning the 25
game of golf. First Tee has approached the City to further solidify this collaboration by 26
formalizing a public-private partnership on a long-term basis and are proposing a two-part 27
partnership. First, a term of 50 years to ensure program growth and access for continuing 28
youth development with established priority for dates and times. The second component 29
of the partnership involves infrastructure improvements to bring the Baylands facilities to 30
the level to be able to facilitate the goals of the First Tee and also those of the City in 31
further expanding opportunities for youth in, not just golf, but the overall goals of 32
Community Services, which is to promote assets and skill sets learned in youth 33
development. Mr. Do turned the presentation over to George Maxe, CEO of First Tee, 34
Silicon Valley. 35
Mr. George Maxe gave a presentation to the Commission, much of which had been 36
presented to them about ten months ago. He said it has not changed much in the last year 37
with the challenges of COVID. The program was begun at Palo Alto Muni back in 2009, 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 8
and moved to Moffett Field during the years of the construction project. It returned to 1
Baylands in 2018. The next year, the number of children grew to about 290. He reported 2
they have now returned back to normal, while following all the safety protocols. They 3
have approximately 100 youth signed up this fall for classes and also have approximately 4
65 on waiting list. The demand is high for their program. The program teaches life skills, 5
and golf is the vehicle, and character development is key to what they do. First Tee is 6
trying to expand access and participation into the game of golf to children from 7
backgrounds in which the family may have no connection to golf. It is important for the 8
organization to be able to do this during after school hours and Saturdays. To be able to 9
reach the youth that they want to draw in, outreach is critical. They target the Title I schools 10
in the underserved communities to try to help introduce the game of golf to those kids. 11
Mr. Maxe said Baylands is one of three locations for the First Tee. Their largest location 12
has been in East San Jose, and they are also at Gavilan College Golf Course in Gilroy. He 13
highlighted that the program serves about 40 percent girls, and about 85 percent of the 14
participants are non-white. Around 30 percent of the youth are from low income families, 15
and their goal is for that to be 50 percent. 16
Mr. Maxe said when he and Mr. Do first began discussing this a few years ago they were 17
talking of possibly doing a high performance center, with covered rain stalls, et cetera. It 18
became clear that the amount of time it would take for approvals and the process to move 19
through the City would delay their continued expansion of the program. They thought 20
they could facilitate a much quicker impact for the public and the kids if they split into 21
two separate projects that are part of the same vision. They are now focused on Project 22
One, an approximately $4.2-million project. This project includes higher range netting and 23
new lower netting to protect golf balls in the youth area from going into Embarcadero 24
Road. This would allow safe programming in the youth area completely out of the way of 25
the public. The area in question has never been utilized in the history of the golf course. It 26
would also open up use of the short game hole which was developed when the course was 27
improved. 28
Mr. Maxe said the second project really depends on the first project being completed. One 29
of the things that is very important is for them to get a City commitment so that they can 30
go out and raise funds. He said SAGA Foundation, a local foundation, has pledged a half-31
million dollars. The charitable side of Wadsworth Golf Construction which did the 32
Baylands construction project will probably contribute about $100,000. He said as soon as 33
they get that commitment and can get rolling on the project they will significantly increase 34
their outreach. Because of the current demand, there is currently nowhere for the kids to 35
go. If they were to reach out to Palo Alto and Ravenswood Schools there is no place for 36
the kids to go. They would like to ramp that up significantly so that they can reach around 37
5,000 kids per year and would like to ultimately grow to about 1,000 children per year at 38
Baylands. This equates to about $500,000 in investment in instructors, infrastructure into 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 9
the community for classes, and about $100,000 for outreach. 1
Mr. Do added that staff for the past few months have been in discussions with the First 2
Tee, but with differences from when they first made the proposal to the Commission to 3
introduce the project. They are now asking for a recommendation from the Commission. 4
Chair Cribbs invited comments from the public. Hearing none, she invited questions and 5
comments from the Commissioners. 6
Vice Chair Greenfield felt the work Mr. Maxe and Mr. Do have put into this outreach for 7
the program and the diversity is impressive and laudable. He hoped a way can be found to 8
expand their reach. He asked how many stalls there currently are in the driving range stalls 9
and how many the project would expand this. He questioned about expanding the driving 10
range to two floors and wondered if it could potentially stall things out. Mr. Do said 11
depending on how far apart the stalls are spaced, the capacity can vary. They are not 12
permanent but divided by a movable guard and mat. He said they can set up between 24 13
to 28 stalls. During COVID there were fewer stalls. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if 14
expanding to a second floor to increase driving range capacity was included in the $4.2 15
million project. Mr. Maxe responded that it is not part of this project, although there is 16
some interest in that. One of the issues with that would be the height of the nets. The 17
trajectory study that was done a few years ago showed that the nets needed to be at least 18
132 feet high. The approval that they gained from the FAA was for 135-foot nets. An 19
added level on the driving range would probably mean an additional 15 feet or potentially 20
more. Vice Chair Greenfield asked how this feature would impact the finances. Mr. Do 21
said it could be part of Phase II, or separate. 22
Vice Chair Greenfield asked for clarification on the eight stalls to be dedicated to First Tee 23
on Saturdays, and questioned the impact it would have on current users on Saturdays. Mr. 24
Do said it is correct that First Tee would be asking for use of up to eight stalls on Saturdays 25
as well as up to six stalls during the week in the afternoons for roughly an hour-and-a-half 26
to two-hour timeframe. Since they are at capacity this would mean all day on Saturdays 27
and would anticipate classes from 8:00 a.m. to probably 6:00 p.m. Vice Chair Greenfield 28
observed it would be taking anywhere from a third to more than a quarter of the stalls and 29
asked if the current golf operator has weighed in on the proposal. Mr. Do clarified that the 30
First Tee is proposing this throughout all four seasons, but with eight-week seasons. He 31
said the current golf management company is in favor of expanding programs to youth, 32
but do have some concern about the impact on the community if they were to dedicate 33
some space. While they do want to see youth participation continue, their question is more 34
how to go about it, what can be worked out and perhaps having a set framework to plan 35
around. 36
Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the current operator is specifically aware of the request and 37
the plan to dedicate the eight stalls on Saturdays to First Tee. Mr. Do said they are aware, 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 10
but he suggested that they should perhaps think about the longer-term. It would be a 50-1
year partnership, which may change during that time. The agreement with the golf course 2
operator currently is for three years, with an opportunity to renew for an additional three 3
years. They will have the current operators for up to six years and after that the City will 4
either renew again or go with another operator. He said there are two things going on – 5
how long the current operator is with the course and also how long the partnership is. 6
Vice Chair Greenfield asked how the short game hole is used at present. His understanding 7
is these areas are not developed or used at all currently. He wondered if these would be 8
exclusive use for First Tee, or available to others when First Tee is not using them. Mr. 9
Do said both the area to the left of the driving range, the youth area, and to the right of the 10
driving range, the short game area, were developed during reconstruction of the golf course 11
three years ago, but they have not been put into use. This is because the current height of 12
the driving range nets does not retain balls hit. Each day they have from a handful to 20 to 13
30 balls leaving the driving range and landing in those areas, depending on the wind pattern 14
of the day. As a result, those areas have very little usage, which is why a key part of the 15
proposal is to raise the height of the nets. Mr. Maxe said their use of the short game area 16
would be only during their programming. They have discussed the youth area with the 17
current operator, and when First Tee is not using the area it would be under the control of 18
the operator. First Tee would have the ability to use it during off class-time hours, but the 19
operator would be in more control over it during those times for private lessons and other 20
youth organizations. It would not be completely open to the public since the short game 21
area can serve that purpose. Vice Chair Greenfield restated his understanding - the youth 22
area would be available for supervised youth in the off hours. It would be a secure area 23
where programs could be run. Mr. Do said he thought this was the goal, to get to an 24
agreement on that. It would be included in the final proposal, with the caveat that they still 25
have a lot of ironing out to do. From the City’s perspective they would like it to be an area 26
that could be programmed with planned use. He thought they were close to coming to an 27
agreement on that. 28
Vice Chair Greenfield asked, since it’s a 50-year agreement, if the facilities being added 29
are intended to have a 50-year lifespan, or if this is just a start and there will be ongoing 30
development. Mr. Do thought it was hard to say what the lifespan of the infrastructure 31
improvements will be. It will be dependent on how it’s constructed. For example, metal 32
poles versus wooden poles. The netting over time would need to be replaced. Gauging by 33
current use he thought the nets that are there right now, as far as he knows, have not been 34
replaced in at least 15 years or more. The poles he thought had been there from the 35
beginning. The next version of the poles in the proposal would be a different design, and 36
it would depend on the design. Mr. Maxe said their understanding from the Judge Netting, 37
who does a lot of this work around the Bay Area, is that it would require metal poles. One 38
of the benefits of this is that they would only have to have half as many poles, so in terms 39
of sight lines, et cetera, it would be half as many poles to see. Vice Chair Greenfield said 40
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 11
it was his understanding from previous conversations that the poles would change from 1
wood to metal. Staff at that time said that would be assessed. He thought having half as 2
many poles would be a positive. He wondered what the increase would be in height of the 3
poles. Mr. Maxe said they would go from 70 feet to 135 feet. 4
Commission LaMere said that Vice Chair Greenfield had asked many of the questions he 5
also had, and he appreciated the detail and the work Mr. Maxe and Mr. Do have done on 6
this exciting project. He commented that it is just as Commissioner Reckdahl had 7
mentioned about the Ventura project and parks – so much of what they do comes down to 8
funding. He said it seems the more they are involved in this as time goes by, the public-9
private partnerships are very important to what they do with parks and recreation. He said 10
it was to hear that the existing operator is also excited about the project. More than 11
anything, he said he appreciates the opportunity for the youth, because anything they can 12
do to create opportunities for the youth is a real benefit. As a coach in his profession, he 13
very much believes in the ability of sports to impact youth. First Tee’s model and focus 14
on character and integrity and how sports can impact that is tremendous. 15
Commission LaMere continued that it looks like with the improvements to the poles and 16
the netting is the majority of the cost. Mr. Maxe agreed and said their estimate for the 17
netting was slightly over $2 million, but one of their questions is what to do with the 18
existing poles. They were given the impression that if the existing poles did not have to be 19
removed from the ground it could save up to half a million dollars, so there is some 20
variability in that, but it is mostly the netting and the poles as well as preparation of the 21
youth area. Commission LaMere asked if the City would be responsible for maintenance 22
and if something did happen to the nets such that they do need to be replaced, if it would 23
fall upon the City, or what the arrangement would be. Mr. Do said that has not been 24
discussed. He said there is much discussion forthcoming as part of the Letter of Intent 25
developed or Memorandum of Understanding, and then a final partnership proposal. 26
Currently, he said the City does maintain the site and would be responsible at present for 27
the poles and nets. Regardless of whether or not the partnership proceeds, in the current 28
facility, the City would need to invest in the driving range as well. 29
Mr. Maxe said he thought there had been discussions about the idea of a lease-back period 30
for construction. The 50-year lease they are talking about is for the youth area and not for 31
the whole range and short game. To enable them to do the construction he thought there 32
needed to be some type of lease and then a lease-back, or something like it. Mr. Do said 33
this is a possibility depending on what model is used to facilitate the development of the 34
site. In the past the City has used that type of model, where they leased the property to the 35
public-private partner and then the partner developed it and gave it back to the City. An 36
example would be the Magical Bridge Playground, in which the City owned the land in 37
the beginning. They leased it to Magical Bridge, who developed it in partnership with the 38
City and afterwards – he thought through a quit-claim or some legal process – gave it back 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 12
to the City. Commission LaMere thanked them for their time and remarked it’s great that, 1
after about a year, First Tee could be back here with the Commission, trying to take action 2
and push a project like this forward. He said he is in full support of what they are doing 3
and hopes to get this to the City Council. 4
Commissioner Brown asked what the initial estimates were on the fundraising numbers 5
and capacity, and whether they have initial projections on how long it would take them to 6
raise the full amount. Mr. Maxe said it is unclear. He added that he had been thinking of 7
three gifts to the organization over the last three years from the same individual. One was 8
for $5 million for a facility in San Francisco. Another was $5 million for a First Tee facility 9
in Austin and the third was $25 million for the First Tee nationally, all from the same 10
individual. So, he thought it was not out of the realm that that same individual, who grew 11
up playing at Palo Alto Muni, might do the same type of thing here. He said it is hard to 12
tell, but that there is money in the area, for sure. 13
Commissioner Brown said it’s nice to see that there’s already a lot of interest in this and 14
it has a larger community benefit. She suggested that, considering the maintenance being 15
a hot topic with the Commission, with the maintenance requirements at other facilities, as 16
they look at materials or modifications to consider the maintenance cost of those and try 17
to really prioritize what will last the longest. Mr. Maxe thought the presnet general 18
manager had estimated that maintenance in the area might run $1,200 to $1,800 a month 19
for the youth area. Mr. Do agreed that that sounded about right and added that the cost to 20
maintain the area is not necessarily an additional cost if they go into a partnership with the 21
First Tee. The City currently maintains that area as part of a larger maintenance contract. 22
The City does maintain it, and with the partnership both parties would gain use of it, so it 23
would not necessarily be just a burden on the City. There would be a mutual benefit – to 24
the youth, to First Tee and to the Community Services Department. 25
Commissioner Reckdahl said he is excited about this and thinks it will be a win-win. Golf 26
is a very inclusive sport. He likes the fact that the resident discount will be extended to 27
EPA, and sees it as a very neighborly thing to do and good practice. Regarding the 30-year 28
use with a 20-year renewal as shown in the attachment, he asked whose option it would be 29
to renew. Mr. Do thought it would be an automatic renewal, or perhaps based on their 30
desire, but they haven’t gotten into much detail on that. Mr. Maxe said their attorney had 31
presented his logic of why it was that way. He understands that the entire agreement can’t 32
be more than 50 years. There’s apparently something in state regulations in that regard, 33
but unfortunately the attorney could not be at the meeting to explain this. Commissioner 34
Reckdahl asked if the spirit of it is that they expect this to last 50 years. Mr. Maxe affirmed 35
that this is their hope. 36
Commissioner Reckdahl asked what ”the action and priority for all youth” meant, whether 37
it includes everyone, even those not affiliated with the First Tee. Mr. Do said part of the 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 13
First Tee’s goal is to instill not just access for the First Tee but also to have an 1
understanding with the public that in the afternoons where there is a likelihood of lower 2
usage, that the First Tee and other youth who want to use the facilities would have access 3
to it. How that works out, they don’t know what the details would be yet, but that’s the 4
goal – not just make this a First Tee priority access, but also in general expand it to allow 5
for youth access as sort of a youth hub in the afternoons. Mr. Maxe said that would include 6
the Gunn and Palo Alto High School teams. Commissioner Reckdahl asked about just 7
some kid from Palo Alto who comes down, unaffiliated, unsupervised. Mr. Maxe said that 8
would be great. Mr. Do said the vision is not that they would just hop on and walk up and 9
join a First Tee program. It would be somehow that there are other opportunities for youth 10
to walk up and participate and play golf or practice. 11
Commissioner Reckdahl said he was glad to hear that the new areas, like the chipping 12
areas, the youth area, and the short game area would be supervised, because he thought it 13
would be troublesome to have it unsupervised, especially with the tee box there and the 14
possibility of people hitting the balls and getting in the way of others. He asked about taller 15
nets and said he thought 70 feet going to 135 feet sounded like a lot but he had pulled up 16
Google street view and saw that there are some trees next to it that appear to be maybe 17
one-and-a-half times that, on the order of perhaps 180-foot trees, so he thought 135 isn’t 18
obscene. He encouraged them to work with Urban Forestry or Canopy when putting this 19
big net in and thought that having some type of natural trees in front of it would be a very 20
good option. 21
Commissioner Reckdahl asked for clarification that if they went to two stories on the 22
driving range it would probably be about a 15-foot addition. Mr. Maxe said he assumes 23
the second floor would be about 15 higher than the ground level, but it is not something in 24
the proposal, either Project One or Project Two. It came up because Mr. Do had heard 25
comments and suggestions about it. Commissioner Reckdahl asked Mr. Do if he knew of 26
any other second-story driving ranges and what the spacing is. Mr. Do replied that there is 27
one in San Mateo/Foster City there is one and another at the Pruneridge Golf Course.. Both 28
are more of a second deck, not necessarily a second story. He thought there tends to be 29
more nighttime use of them than during the day. People tend to prefer the bottom level 30
during the day. Some golf courses that have double decks have different types of 31
restrictions on what can be used on the upper deck versus the lower deck. Some of that is 32
to address the distance that is necessary to have a second level, so certain clubs are 33
restricted. Commissioner Reckdahl said he could see that being problematic. 34
Commissioner Reckdahl said he felt the City may be giving up quite a lot, and he wondered 35
if Mr. Do had done any estimates on what kind of lost revenue they would have, for 36
example, if they lost some of the driving range with the dedicated eight stalls. He said 37
they’ve lowered the green fees for the EPA residents, and then would also be giving some 38
slots to the kids. He was curious how much that might cost in lost revenue. Mr. Do said it 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 14
hasn’t been calculated and the impact to green fee revenue if the plan was adopted, by 1
expanding the resident rates to select non-residents is difficult to gauge. Commissioner 2
Reckdahl asked, if there are eight driving range stalls used on the weekends, how much it 3
would cost. Mr. Do said he has not yet crunched those numbers. Commissioner Reckdahl 4
advised that the Council will want those numbers, so estimating that is something that 5
eventually needs to be done. Commissioner Reckdahl stated that he is more interested in 6
making sure that they have a full story for the Council, to know exactly what the costs are, 7
the maintenance that they’re promising, the cost of the nets, et cetera. If the nets and poles 8
combined are $2 million, and if the netting were half of that cost and estimated to last 20 9
years, the Council should know that they will have a looming bill for maybe $1 million 10
sometime in the next 20 years. 11
Mr. Do acknowledged the importance of having the financial impacts to bring to Council. 12
He pointed out that what they are asking for right now is initially a recommendation that 13
the Council direct staff to enter into a Letter of Intent or Memorandum of Understanding, 14
the purpose being to establish a City commitment towards it. It would be non-binding, 15
however there be a guarantee that they would continue on and are able to come to full 16
agreement. It would not necessarily be something that’s binding on the City, but it would 17
help the First Tee do the lion’s share of their fundraising. Commissioner Reckdahl said if 18
they could just give a ballpark figure to the Council they could make a better decision. Mr. 19
Do agreed and added they would go back to the Council perhaps a second time with more 20
details once they have a Letter of Intent. Commissioner Reckdahl didn’t think doing that 21
would kill the project. It would show that they are getting good value while being clear to 22
the Council what they are giving up. 23
Chair Cribbs said thanked to the Commissioners for good questions, and she like the idea 24
of trying to get some numbers. Their task at present is to make a recommendation to the 25
Council that they move forward with a Letter of Intent. She said she has been incredibly 26
enthusiastic about this from the beginning. She has known First Tee since they started back 27
at the San Jose Sports Authority 20-some years ago. They have evolved into a fine 28
organization and are nationally well-thought-of. She said she has total confidence in the 29
Silicon Valley organization, the people, the coaches and the teachers. She also has a great 30
deal of confidence in City staff and in the golf course vendor that they can put this together. 31
It is a big win for the city, and she is very enthusiastic because she believes in the power 32
of sports, especially golf, to change the lives of kids and their families. 33
Vice Chair Greenfield asked what the time period of closure of the driving range would 34
be anticipated during construction of the new netting and poles. Mr. Maxe said when they 35
spoke to Judge Netting his impression was that it would be minimal, which surprised him. 36
He was also surprised that on the Embarcadero side they could actually erect the poles and 37
put in the netting while the existing netting was there. On the short game side, they are 38
talking about potentially straightening the line, so the new poles might be slightly outside 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 15
of the existing netting poles. He thought it would be maximum a week to two weeks, but 1
it all remains to be seen. Vice Chair Greenfield asked for clarification of the participation 2
numbers. He heard that in 2019 they had 290 participants and now they have about 161 on 3
the waiting list. Mr. Maxe said there are four seasons, so the 100 becomes 400. What they 4
saw pre-COVID was that children were taking, on average, around 1.7 classes per year, 5
and they take multiple seasons of classes. Vice Chair Greenfield said overall there has 6
been much progress and improvements in addressing concerns since they last spoke about 7
this. He looks forward to being able to support the youth with this opportunity. 8
MOTION 9
Motion to recommend that City Council direct staff to develop a Letter of Intent or a 10
Memorandum of Understanding between the City and First Tee of Silicon Valley towards 11
establishing a public-private partnership for youth development and infrastructure 12
improvements at the Baylands Golf Links was moved by Commissioner Reckdahl and 13
seconded by Commissioner Commission LaMere. The motion passed, 6-0, by roll call 14
vote. 15
4. Valley Water Purified Water Project 16
Mr. Anderson introduced Kirsten Struve, Assistant Officer with the Water Supply Division 17
Deputy’s Office, Valley Water. 18
Ms. Kirsten Struve said Karin North, Palo Alto staff, was also there to answer any 19
questions from the Commissioners. She shared a presentation on the project that they are 20
collaborating on with the cities of Palo Alto and Mountain View. The reasons for doing 21
the project include climate change. Santa Clara County will face more droughts, which 22
will have economic impacts, not only from lack of water, but also because of land 23
subsidence, the land sinking due to over-pumping of ground water. Half of the water in 24
Santa Clara County is imported from outside the county, so it has been important to 25
develop locally-controlled supplies, which is why recycled and purified water is an 26
important component of their water supply portfolio. She said by recycled water they mean 27
treated wastewater that is used for non-potable, non-drinking purposes. This is typically 28
delivered in purple pipes and is used for landscape irrigation or industrial purposes. 29
Purified water is recycled water that has undergone additional steps to make it cleaner and 30
therefore suitable for drinking water purposes. At present they are at five percent of 31
recycled water use to meet demands in the county. They hope to grow that with this project. 32
The purpose of the project is to further develop purified water as a drought-resilient local 33
water supply. Per the Water Supply Master Plan, they have a goal to double the share of 34
recycled and purified water to ten percent. They previously collaborated with the City of 35
San Jose to construct the Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center, which began 36
operations in 2014. That purification center uses treatment processes including 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 16
microfiltration, reverse osmosis and ultraviolet disinfection. She invited Commissioners 1
to take one of their excellent tours which have been virtual tours during COVID. She 2
explained that this technology can be used safety to create safe, clean and reliable water. 3
The technology is also used on the International Space Station and water supplies around 4
the world. They would like to use this technology to then pump the clean water and 5
replenish the groundwater basins. 6
The project would include a new or expanded water purification facility located in either 7
San Jose or Palo Alto and 18 to 20 miles of pipeline to the Los Gatos recharge system. She 8
explained that the RO concentrate, which is reverse osmosis concentrate, is essentially a 9
brine that is left behind. The reverse osmosis removes contaminants and is also the same 10
technology that would be used for desalinating seawater. For every 100 gallons that goes 11
in, 85 gallons of pure water are produced and 15 gallons of concentrate. The concentrate 12
is something that must be disposed of safely. At the San Jose facility it is blended with the 13
remaining wastewater and discharged to the Bay. This approach was allowed in San Jose’s 14
treatment plan permit. They are currently working with both Palo Alto Regional Water 15
Quality Control Plan staff and the regulators on an approach for RO concentrate should 16
the facility be located in Palo Alto. 17
Ms. Struve shared a photo of the Los Gatos recharge system. Essentially, these are ponds 18
where water can infiltrate into the groundwater. She pointed to where the purified water is 19
delivered which will mix with the existing groundwater and can be used from there by 20
well users. This is called indirect potable reuse because it has an environmental buffer 21
before the water is actually used. 22
Ms. Struve explained that the site they are considering in Palo Alto is the former Los Altos 23
treatment plant site at the end of San Antonio Road in the Baylands area. They have a 24
partnership agreement with Mountain View and Palo Alto that was signed in 2019 that 25
would allow them to purchase wastewater. The other main component of the agreement is 26
that they are funding a local salt removal facility in Palo Alto for $16 million. This is their 27
own purification facility that would enhance the purple pipe water and make it more usable 28
for different purposes and also water supply options for the cities of Palo Alto and 29
Mountain View, should they be needed in the future. At this site they are doing 30
environmental work including delineating existing wetlands, geotechnical work including 31
field exploration to see what the conditions of the site are. The proposed project would 32
provide benefits to the city beyond those in the agreement. It would include payments for 33
treated wastewater as well as the land lease and will increase the use of treated wastewater 34
to further regional sustainability and climate adaptation goals that they share with the City. 35
They have been collaborating with Palo Alto staff on outreach related to the project, 36
including the virtual tours and holding informational meetings with interested 37
stakeholders. 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 17
Ms. Struve said the timeline is to have a board decision on the project site sometime this 1
fall or winter and award the project next year to a private entity. They are using a public-2
private partnership model where a private partner would design, build, finance, operate 3
and maintain the facility, but Valley Water would retain ownership. Their procurement 4
process is currently ongoing. Once the selection is complete it would go to design, and 5
construction would be likely between 2024 and 2028 with water delivered to the Los Gatos 6
recharge system. 7
Ms. Struve said that an EIR is needed to satisfy the requirements of the California 8
Environmental Quality Act. They released a Notice of Preparation and held a public 9
scoping meeting back in March. The draft EIR will evaluate the proposed project’s 10
environmental conditions, range of alternatives, environmental impacts and then provide 11
mitigation measures. This will likely be released in early 2022. 12
Chair Cribbs invited questions and comments from the Commissioners. 13
Commissioner Moss said he is amazed that half of the drinking water in the county comes 14
from within the county groundwater. He said the fact that the facility they are looking at – 15
Los Altos treatment plant – is very close to existing purple pipe is a positive. He asked if 16
they would ever be using that land to increase the Baylands if it were not used for this 17
facility, or if it is never going to be considered to be added to the Baylands. Mr. Anderson 18
said it is not in any of the plans to make it parkland or add it to the Baylands. It was 19
discussed in the Baylands Master Plan. They talked about the property because it is 20
adjacent to the Baylands and there are parts of the LATP site that have wetlands in it and 21
pickleweed areas, but there are no discussions at this time of making it parkland. 22
Commissioner Moss asked what portion of the five percent of water today that is treated 23
wastewater, which they want to increase it to ten percent, would be purple pipe, non-24
potable, and what portion would be purified water for drinking. Ms. Struve said right now 25
the five percent is all purple pipe, about 10 million gallons a day that they are proposing 26
from this facility would be the purified water. Commissioner Moss asked if they had gotten 27
any negative feedback from people drinking purified wastewater in the other facilities. Ms. 28
Struve said they have not, and in fact everyone loves it. 29
Ms. Struve introduced Board Vice Chair, Gary Kremen, to the Commissioners. She 30
pointed out that they do count water conservation as a local supply because they have done 31
such a good job that it is actually 15 percent. Commissioner Moss asked if they had 32
considered desalination. Ms. Struve said they have, and they have participated in a regional 33
project. She explained that desalination is actually simple. It creates the same brine 34
referenced earlier, but more often, because the water is saltier to begin with. Putting it 35
through the RO membranes to make it drinkable also requires more energy. At this time 36
they are focusing on purified wastewater as the more environmentally friendly strategy, 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 18
but they are looking at desalination because they will likely need every drop that they can 1
get locally. 2
Mr. Gary Kremen mentioned that the plant for which Valley Water is giving $16 million 3
to the City will allow the recycled purple pipe water to be used on redwoods. The current 4
water supply is too salty to be used on redwoods and other sensitive plants. Also, it can be 5
used in Mountain View for cooling towers. They sell the recycled water there, so it will 6
be less strain on Hetch Hetchy, and less strain on the Bay delta in general. They feel this 7
will be an early benefit of the project. He thought it would be done in the next two years. 8
They will be paying more for wastewater than anyone else ever has in California, but will 9
hopefully stop or reduce the growth of imported water, and he feels it is a good deal for 10
all. 11
Commissioner Reckdahl said this is a great project and one they should have been doing 12
20 years ago. He said the Council had talked about the new Life Moves location and it 13
looks like it is inboard. He asked Mr. Anderson if this is a conflict. Mr. Anderson thought 14
this was the case. Ms. Karin North, acting Assistant Public Works Director, Environmental 15
Services Division, responded to the question, stating she participated in the Council 16
meeting last night talking about Life Moves. It is in the area of Portion C, and this is the 17
staging area, so Councilmember Cormack suggested, and the Council approved, that they 18
will need to be working with Valley Water in helping them find another staging area. She 19
said they should be able to exist next to each and be complimentary. She said purified 20
water is quiet and clean and without smells. She said it’s exciting to see a sustainable water 21
supply which supports their Sustainability and Climate Action Plan goals. 22
Commissioner Reckdahl said they mentioned that this area in the Comprehensive Plan is 23
classified as a conservation area, so they have to do a Comprehensive Plan modification. 24
He asked if that would be needed for this project also. Ms. North said this is correct and 25
that more of Area B is conservation land than the Area C that was discussed. This is part 26
of the work that she and Ms. Struve have been working on to develop a Comprehensive 27
Plan amendment. 28
Commissioner Reckdahl noted there are three categories of processed water – the regular 29
processing of sewage, the purple pipe and this. He asked what the delta cost is if you take 30
treated wastewater and convert it to purple pipe. Ms. North said for them right now the 31
cost is not much, because it’s simply an extra step of filtration, and they don’t even parse 32
that out. The current sewage treatment plant produces high quality water that’s almost 33
purple pipe quality. They add one more step of filtration and another chlorine step for 34
disinfection. The enhanced recycled water referred to, with the salt removal facility 35
currently in design, will reduce the total dissolved solids down to around 450, which is 36
adequate for salt-sensitive species. There will be an increased delta cost because of the 37
energy cost for putting it through micro filtration and the reverse osmosis. She said it is a 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 19
very small plant, around 1.25 million gallons of water per day that will get blended to 1
produce the enhanced recycled water. Commissioner Reckdahl asked what the cost of the 2
enhanced water is. Ms. North did not have the exact dollar amount but said they will be 3
starting to charge their partners for the enhanced, because of the increased energy cost for 4
using the microfiltration and the reverse osmosis. 5
Commissioner Reckdahl asked Ms. Struve how much the purified water costs. She replied 6
the project is a little more than half a billion dollars, $600 million, but they hope that 7
private sector innovation will lower that cost and any sort of rate impacts. She said a lot of 8
the cost is not just the treatment but also the conveyance. Building a pipeline can be 9
expensive. Commissioner Reckdahl wanted to know how the proposal compares to Hetch 10
Hetchy water, if the cost of purchasing a gallon of Hetch Hetchy water or a gallon of the 11
purified water are in the same ballpark or still drastically different. Ms. Struve said they 12
will be different, with the purified water being more expensive. Right now they are paying 13
a lot for imported water because of the drought. When there is a drought, water gets more 14
expensive, and as a result this is an important part of their portfolio. The way they balance 15
things is by having a portfolio which makes the City resilient, having different sources of 16
water, local and imported, as well as purified water and aggressive water conservation. 17
She said they look at it as a portfolio approach. 18
Commissioner Reckdahl asked if it is a technology or a scale issue. If they build a huge 19
plant would the economies of scale make it competitive or if it was that we just don’t have 20
the technology. Ms. Struve said it will always be more expensive because it’s not just the 21
building, the facility and the conveyance. Running the facility and taking the pollutants 22
out of the water to make it drinkable takes a lot of energy. There will ongoing operations 23
and maintenance costs. They will be partnering with a private entity, rather than paying all 24
of the capital cost and operation cost, they are paying for the water When they go out with 25
the request for proposal they will be giving a fixed price for the water, and then they can 26
determine whether that is feasible for them, or who has the best price. 27
Commissioner Reckdahl reflected it would be nice if they could just have a closed loop 28
and not have to pipe water down from the Sierras, and just reuse the wastewater. He asked 29
if instead of piping the water down to Los Gatos and putting the aquafer down there, if 30
they could they do that locally, because it seemed to him like it would be cheaper not to 31
have to pipe it all the way down there and would also help the local water tables. Ms. 32
Struve said they replenish groundwater in the “unconfined zone.” In Palo Alto most of the 33
zone is a clay layer above the useable groundwater. The Los Gatos recharge system is the 34
one that has the largest capacity, which is needed to be able to take 10 million gallons a 35
day, so it is the closest with the largest capacity. However, there might be better options 36
in the future that don’t exist presently. There is such as thing as “direct potable reuse,” for 37
which the regulations are not yet written. Groundwater recharge will be important 38
regardless because now we use imported water to recharge our groundwater as well as 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 20
local water supplies, but the pumping exceeds what can be recharged naturally with just 1
rain and our reservoirs, so the imported water could be freed up to use somewhere else. 2
Ms. Struve explained that the groundwater is connected, so even Palo Alto’s emergency 3
wells would benefit from having a sustainable groundwater storage. Direct potable is 4
perhaps in the future but not part of the current project. It is being developed, but the State 5
of California wants to be very careful to make sure there are no hiccups that would 6
endanger public health. Ms. North added that she believes her team has talked to the 7
Commission about the Northwest County Recycled Water Strategic Plan. They did look 8
at indirect potable use and potentially taking water from their wastewater treatment plant, 9
purifying it and injecting it into the basin within Palo Alto. They looked at the groundwater 10
basin in the area, and it actually has a very good sustainable yield at this time. If they 11
replenished the groundwater it would just end up in the Bay ultimately, and that is why it 12
makes more sense for it to go down to Rinconada. 13
Commissioner LaMere asked, regarding emergency wells for Palo Alto, if there are private 14
entities using wells and drawing groundwater, or if that is generally something that is in 15
reserve for the municipalities. Ms. Struve said one of their largest retailers uses a lot of 16
groundwater and several other retailers do too, so groundwater is definitely used to supply 17
homes and businesses, not in Palo Alto but in other areas. In South County it is the only 18
source of potable water, so during the drought, they primarily recharge in South County 19
to make sure that they continue to have water supply. The groundwater is their largest 20
storage. Commission LaMere asked if private entities trying to access groundwater as well, 21
such as the problems in the Central Valley with agriculture and people digging deeper and 22
deeper wells, is a concern. Ms. Struve said Valley Water is also the groundwater 23
management agency for Santa Clara County. They ensure that groundwater is used 24
sustainably, and they permit any wells that are drilled. There are thousands of private well 25
owners. Some are retailers and some are private. In South County there are agricultural 26
users as well as retailers and also smaller private wells for home use. The agency makes 27
sure that water is used sustainably, and they monitor for subsidence. Mr. Kremen added 28
that the reason they don’t have the Central Valley problem is that they actually know all 29
the well owners and they tax them up to the level that they are indifferent to using treated 30
water versus well water. There is not the same kind of subsidence issue there, because it 31
doesn’t make economic sense for them. 32
Vice Chair Greenfield asked if he understood correctly that the decision on where to put 33
the advanced water purification facility is between two options – the Los Altos treatment 34
plant location in Palo Alto, or San Jose. Ms. Struve said that is correct, and their board will 35
be making that decision depending on the status of having all the contracts in place with 36
their wastewater partners. Vice Chair Greenfield was wondering what the pros and cons 37
are for the two sites, what the potential benefits are for the site that’s selected, or if there 38
is a potential that down the road eventually more than one site would be utilized. Ms. 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 21
Struve thought that with climate change they will need to develop water further. It is 1
definitely a potential that both could be used. She said they just re-started speaking to the 2
City of San Jose, and their board will make that decision. San Jose has more water than 3
Palo Alto, but they are a little further along with their discussions with Palo Alto. Vice 4
Chair Greenfield asked staff if the decision is made by staff or City Council to avail this 5
site. Ms. North said they are currently in negotiations with Valley Water. This is a follow-6
up to the 2019 agreement between Palo Alto, Mountain View and Valley Water, which 7
essentially holds up approximately half of the effluent for Valley Water for future 8
purification. In addition, there was also the $16 million contribution to build the salt 9
removal facility at their site. The intent is they’ve been working with Real Estate at the 10
staff level and then they will eventually go to Council. There are logistics they need to get 11
through in terms of the reverse osmosis concentrate. They’ve been coordinating with all 12
the regulators to try to make sure they have a sustainable solution for disposal that is 13
mutually-agreed upon. There is leasing of the land, site evaluations and logistics that she 14
and Kirsten’s team are meeting on regularly to make sure they are putting the best solutions 15
forward for both agencies. They have a Joint Recycle Water Committee that meets 16
approximately quarterly. Council Member Cormack and Council Member Filseth are the 17
two that are representing the Council at those meetings. They will be going to the full 18
Council for final approval. 19
Vice Chair Greenfield wondered if Valley Water is looking to make a site selection this 20
year. Ms. Struve said they are hoping as soon as possible. With the current drought 21
developing this should have happened sooner, but they are working as fast as possible and 22
will try to bring something to their board for a decision by the end of the year. Vice Chair 23
Greenfield asked for clarification on the usage of the purple pipe water versus the higher 24
quality water. If the five percent of recycled water right now all goes to purple pipe, he 25
wondered if this plan is put in place what the numbers would be. Ms. Struve said they 26
would reach the ten percent and have 10 million gallons a day of the purified water. The 27
difference is that purple pipe water can be just the basic wastewater, the way Palo Alto is 28
using it now with some additional steps and chlorination, or it can be enhanced. The 29
facility in San Jose currently enhances their purple pipe water by reducing the salinity, 30
similar to what Palo Alto is doing under the funds from this agreement. It is still not 31
drinkable but is of a higher quality. The next step up is having something suitable for 32
groundwater recharge, and then likely direct potable will include additional treatment that 33
will be required when those regulations come to pass. 34
Vice Chair Greenfield commented that there’s purple pipe, there’s purple pipe plus and 35
there’s groundwater recharge, and potable is something in the future. If this goes through, 36
he asked if there will be five percent of purple pipe plus and five percent of groundwater 37
recharge, or would the entire ten percent be all groundwater recharge. Ms. Struve said right 38
now they count all of the recycled water use in the county, and there are four wastewater 39
treatment plants in the county. San Jose is the largest, then Palo Alto, Sunnyvale and the 40
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 22
South County wastewater facility. All of them, with Valley Water support, are producing 1
recycled purple pipe water right now. Once this project is implemented, both San Jose and 2
Palo Alto will have purple pipe plus water, purified water, and the regular purple pipe 3
water from Sunnyvale and the South County facility, so there will be a mix of what they 4
count in the ten percent. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the amount of available purple 5
pipe water for Palo Alto would increase or decrease. Ms. North said when they negotiated 6
the agreement with Valley Water they only negotiated approximately half of the flow of 7
the treatment plant because they anticipated future purple or enhanced purple pipe use 8
within their region. Currently, the majority of their water goes to the golf course and Greer 9
Park, and then most of it is utilized in Mountain View. They have part of the Northwest 10
County Recycled Water Strategic Plan. They looked at Phase 3, looking at purple pipe 11
going up to Stanford Research Park, but at this time the cost for the purple pipe versus the 12
volume of water that will be utilized, they are recommending not to move that project 13
forward. This was discussed at length with Council. 14
Vice Chair Greenfield said he was still not understanding if the purple pipe water available 15
to Palo Alto will increase or decrease. Ms. North said the purple pipe water currently 16
available will increase with the salt removal facility. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if, in the 17
2019 partnership agreement, Valley Water is purchasing wastewater from Palo Alto. Ms. 18
North said that is correct. The agreement is that the first 13 years, while Valley Water is 19
trying to figure out if they are going to take water from Palo Alto, is where the $16 million 20
option payment to “hold” the water comes in and then after that it’s about $100 an acre-21
foot. Vice Chair Greenfield said it’s a very worthy project and a great need today and more 22
so in the future. 23
Chair Cribbs thanked the participants for their presentation and said it is an amazing thing 24
for non-water people to think about, and they look forward to hearing more about their 25
progress. 26
Commissioner Moss commented that he thought they would they eventually use both sites 27
– Palo Alto and San Jose. Ms. Struve said that is possible and depends on the cost and 28
what happens in the future, but she thinks their board is very interested in further 29
development purified water as a local and drought-resilient water supply. 30
5. Sidewalk Vendor Regulation 31
Mr. Anderson presented the Draft Sidewalk Vendor Open Space and Park Regulations and 32
the recommendation that the City Manager approve the updated Open Space Park 33
Regulations to add new Regulation R1-41, which is the Sidewalk Vendors. This would 34
take place upon the City Council’s adoption of a separate Sidewalk Vendor Ordinance. 35
He stated that on May 25, 2021, the Commission reviewed examples of potential 36
regulations for the sidewalk vendors operating in parks and open space. They established 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 23
at that meeting an Ad Hoc committee. This was a result of a 2018 State of California-1
approved SB 946, which requires cities and counties to allow sidewalk vendors to operate 2
in their jurisdictions, including parks and open space. It also allows local governments to 3
regulations the time, place and manner for sidewalk vendors in one or more of the 4
following conditions are met: 5
1. They are directly related to objective health, safety, or welfare concerns. 6
2. They are necessary to ensure the public’s use and enjoyment of natural resources 7
and recreational opportunities. 8
3. They are necessary to prevent an undue concentration of commercial activity 9
that unreasonably interferes with the scenic and natural character of the park. 10
Mr. Anderson said, while vending in Palo Alto parks is allowed, these new regulations 11
are necessary to ensure sanitary, safe and clean conditions, to protect wildlife and habitat 12
and to continue to provide a positive visitor experience. The Ad Hoc committee and staff 13
met multiple times to develop the draft regulations that define where and how the vendors 14
are allowed to operate in parks and open space, including maps identifying locations where 15
vendors can operate in open space. The committee and staff also developed justifications 16
for the regulations. 17
Mr. Anderson went over a few examples of the draft regulations and their justifications. 18
He said vendors will be prohibited in many areas. One example is parking lots, parking 19
stalls or designated parking areas. This refers to health and safety. They added further 20
justification at the advice of the Attorney’s Office which, for this one, is that it would 21
impact public safety for both drivers and the vendors. He showed the Commission a map 22
developed to show vendors where they could vend, rather than where they could not, which 23
makes it easier for the vendor or anyone that has to enforce the regulations. 24
Mr. Anderson gave Foothills Nature Preserve as an example. The justification that it is a 25
sensitive area, like all the open space preserves, with limited parking or no parking in some 26
areas. For this proposed area they would take one space of the least-used parking areas and 27
convert that one area to a vending location. There would be a sign that says vending is 28
allowed in this spot. It would be selected as the least impactful to park visitors or park 29
habitat. Vendors will not be permitted further into the preserve. The park consists mainly 30
of unpaved trails. The area on the map showed the Foothills Nature Preserve Interpretive 31
Center and the Oak Grove Picnic Area and several little pull-out parking spots on the edge 32
of the lower turf. He pointed out the one spot where people could vend in Foothills. He 33
said they had an iterative process where he would explain some feedback from the 34
Attorney’s Office and he clarified that the Ad Hoc committee sought to limit the impact 35
on both park visitors, wildlife and natural areas. The committee had hoped they could 36
preclude vending altogether from open space areas, particularly Foothills where it seems 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 24
inappropriate. The attorney was helpful in answering their questions but the bottom line 1
was they couldn’t eliminate it completely, but could limit it severely, so this is what they 2
tried to do. 3
He explained Attachment B, the Park and Open Space Regulations, which is the same as 4
the document, but without the justifications. He reiterated that the Attorney’s Office 5
recommended they go through the process of also adopting the justifications. In case they 6
were challenged on anything, there is documentation that they looked at the reasons and 7
justified why they are limiting where they are. 8
The Ad Hoc committee members offered comments on the regulations and the process of 9
developing them. Commissioner Brown said she wanted to preface the discussion by 10
outlining a couple things that came up that might be helpful. She said the spirit and general 11
purpose of the regulations are to enable sidewalk vending, while limiting the legal ability 12
to be able to control the situations such as the Baylands and Foothills Nature Preserve 13
where it is desirable to limit the sidewalk vending. This differs from one jurisdiction to 14
another. They looked at other jurisdictions and found that some Attorney’s Offices clearly 15
had a different interpretation of the legislation. The regulations they came up with 16
represent what Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office was comfortable with and they were able 17
to back up with the justifications. Commissioner Brown said Palo Alto is unlike any other 18
city because of its diversity and so many different facilities and terrain, which also led to 19
some unique specifications and justifications. They also wanted to consider ease of 20
implementation and ability to enforce. They wanted to be able to explain them, show them 21
on a map, make it easy for people to find the information that they need. She added this is 22
not the final work. Additionally, sidewalk vendors need to get a health permit from the 23
counties. There is a public health aspect, and those requirements are significant. They did 24
research those for their own information. She said it was a lot of work but she felt they 25
ended up with a great end product. 26
Commissioner Moss shared that everything Commissioner Brown said is very true. They 27
looked at dozens of situations, the most frustrating being the open spaces. The idea of 28
having vendors selling ice cream cones on the shore of Boronda Lake or balloons and 29
things like that were very taxing to the Ad Hoc. They did what they had to do and came 30
up with the best they could. He emphasized it is not the last word. 31
Vice Chair Greenfield was grateful to members of the committee, the City Attorney’s 32
office and especially Mr. Anderson for guiding the process and helping formulate their 33
input into the finished product. He added that one of their considerations was the reality 34
that resources for enforcement are fairly non-existent in the city, so it needs to be 35
something they keep in mind. It would be nice if there were more resources available but 36
they want to keep this as simple for the public and vendors to understand and simple for 37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 25
staff to explain and be able to enforce. He said there is a lot of detail in the regulations and 1
he invited questions and input from fellow Commissioners. 2
Chair Cribbs asked if the first vendor at a location gets to have the spot. If there are two 3
spots in a park designated then it’s first-come-first-served in all situations. She wondered 4
if people would end up unhappy with each other. Mr. Anderson reiterated that this is not 5
a done deal. He said the Attorney had revisited that point several times, advising them to 6
get something on the books, evaluate how it goes, and readjust. In an example like 7
Foothills where there is only one spot, he thought they could monitor that a little easier, 8
and if there are conflicts or issues, adjust as necessary. Some of the areas he didn’t think 9
would necessarily be very popular. In other areas, like Mitchell Park, they tried to be 10
judicious about how many were allowed and where they are allowed in areas where the 11
most people would likely be trying to vend and where there was potential for folks crossing 12
over each other and perhaps stepping on each other’s toes. He said that situation has not 13
presented itself thus far, even though people are allowed by state law to vend there right 14
now. He said staff will observe what happens and adjust as necessary. 15
Chair Cribbs asked if there is a review period built into the regulations or if it is just an 16
ongoing process. Mr. Anderson said the regulations go to the City Manager for approval, 17
and that’s a little quicker process, so they can make it happen faster. He recommended that 18
staff keep reporting back to the Commission and on how it is going and base their time for 19
renewal on the problems or successes they see. 20
Commission LaMere complimented all the work of the committee. He asked if there are 21
restrictions on open flames that a vendor may use, or any sort of fire danger to worry about. 22
Mr. Anderson said there is a restriction on woodburning. In that area they probably 23
wouldn’t allow any flames as it’s too close to dry vegetation that may or may not be 24
mowed. He said they may have to look into that. They have other regulations on the books. 25
This is one of many regulations about where they can vend, but in terms of what they can 26
vend, some things apply to all visitors. No one is allowed to set up a barbecue in that site, 27
but are limited to existing facilities. The same would apply to a vendor, and if there was 28
some threat that their activity could contribute to wildfire danger they would be asked to 29
leave. 30
Commissioner Reckdahl thanked the committee for their work. He mentioned the 31
regulation stating they can’t vend on a trail less than eight feet wide. He asked if “trail” is 32
a generic legal term that covers walks and paths and other things. Mr. Anderson said yes, 33
and they are using that broadly. Pathway is used a lot. He said they defined the surfacing 34
that they are considering a trail in that same section. He gave an example, of Sara Wallace 35
Park, a small park where the trails are only about five feet wide. If a vendor were to set up 36
anywhere on that pathway, they would automatically be obscuring the pathway for 37
visitors, meaning either they or the visitor would have to walk off into the vegetation. The 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 26
committee didn’t want that, which is part of the rationale behind the eight-foot distance. 1
He said this only pertains to the parkland, so on the sidewalk outside the park this would 2
not apply. The other ordinance that the police department is pushing forward would take 3
over in that area. Commissioner Reckdahl asked about Mitchell Park and said along 4
Meadow there’s a sidewalk. Mr. Anderson said that is not part of the park. 5
Commissioner Reckdahl had a concern about trash. He wondered if they would ensure that 6
each site will have a trash can and recycling can at these locations. Mr. Anderson said 7
there will not be, but they are asking the vendors to remove any and all materials that they 8
generate. The only thing that can be left behind – a wrapper, for example – that wrapper 9
may be disposed of by the park visitor into one of the park’s trash cans, but the vendor 10
may not. Commissioner Reckdahl said his concern is that if they sell someone an ice cream 11
bar and the next trash bin is far away, that may end up being litter. He felt they should 12
make sure that wherever there are sales, there’s a nearby trash can, or that the vendors be 13
required to provide a trash can. Commissioner Moss said they absolutely dealt with that 14
and stated that they did have to deal with their trash, and it was a big issue for them. Mr. 15
Anderson said in the vast majority of areas – Bayland, Arastradero and all of the urban 16
parks – there are ample trash cans available for the visitors to use nearby. The one 17
exception would be Foothills where they don’t have a trash can. He is leery of adding them 18
just for the vendors because they may end up using it and abusing it. Also, most of their 19
trash cans are concentrated where they have a lot of people, picnic areas, near restrooms. 20
This is a remote area. He said he preferred to try this route and if they see problems, they 21
can address it by adding something if necessary. 22
Commissioner Reckdahl asked about hours and if they can only do this during park hours. 23
Mr. Anderson thought that was stated explicitly, saying it is permitted only from 9:00 a.m. 24
to 30 minutes before sunset, and they must vacate the park by sunset. They were explicit 25
in making sure that while its still light they are cleaning up their site and leaving. Vice 26
Chair Greenfield clarified that the open space preserve hours extend after sunset. 27
Commissioner Moss said some suburban parks stay open until 10:00 p.m., so that’s why 28
they are saying before sunset. 29
Commissioner Reckdahl asked if alcohol is permitted. Mr. Anderson responded that there 30
are several ordinances about alcohol in parks. Some is prohibited entirely, some prohibited 31
without a permit, and some is allowed. Vice Chair Greenfield said the alcohol was 32
considered along with the item that has tobacco and cannabis, and the City Attorney 33
recommended it could be removed because it was already covered elsewhere by City Code. 34
Commissioner Reckdahl remarked that Foothills allows alcohol and asked if someone 35
could sell it up there. Vice Chair Greenfield said it was definitely not their intent. Mr. 36
Anderson said they had specifically called out alcohol at one point and he thought the 37
Attorney had suggested changing it. He said they could add it back in. Commissioner Moss 38
said he thought they had to do what the City Ordinance specified on the sale of alcohol 39
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 27
and not add anything additional. Commissioner Reckdahl asked if a vendor can even sell 1
alcohol in general. Vice Chair Greenfield suggested perhaps leaving it as is with staff 2
having the understanding that when this goes to City Council, to research that and 3
recommend a change if appropriate and necessary. 4
Commissioner Reckdahl brought up the skate bowls in Mitchell Park and Rinconada and 5
wondered if those are considered recreational such that a vendor could sell in those areas. 6
He said these areas are essentially treated as plazas, so in some ways it’s a good spot for a 7
vendor but in other ways, if you are someone who is there for skateboarding they are 8
interfering. Mr. Anderson said they are not allowed to interrupt or disturb any recreational 9
activity. Commissioner Moss said they spent a lot of time talking about closeness to any 10
recreational facilities, like a soccer field and how close to a soccer you would allow 11
someone to vend. They can’t be in the way of the action or in the way of people watching 12
it. Commissioner Reckdahl said no one really roller skates in the bowls and they are more 13
like gathering areas. He thought perhaps they should not do anything and see if it becomes 14
a problem. Vice Chair Greenfield thought they would want to inhibit vending within the 15
bowls. Mr. Anderson said he sees the bowls used for roller hockey and tai chi frequently 16
and would certainly consider them a recreation area. Vice Chair Greenfield wondered 17
where the vendors would be permitted in the scenario of a concert going on in the bowl. 18
Mr. Anderson said there are some wide parts of a pathway near the bowl. In Mitchell Park 19
they would probably be on the pathway, on the sides. 20
Mr. Anderson added there are other codes, too, about disturbing permitted activities within 21
the Municipal Code. Vice Chair Greenfield asked if the bowls are structures. Mr. Anderson 22
the Attorney had recommended using that word as it could be applied in a lot of different 23
areas as needed. He thought the bowls would be considered structures, and he would also 24
consider them a recreation area. As such, they vendors wouldn’t be permitted within 100 25
feet of a structure. Commissioner Moss said somewhere in the document it talks about 26
special events. Commissioner Brown quoted the document, stating that vending is 27
prohibited during any City-sponsored or permitted special event. Commissioner Moss said 28
in his mind this is the one that the vendors will complain about the most. He commented 29
that at the end of the May Fette Parade, in Heritage Park, there are vendors there. He said 30
they are not talking about those vendors, or the Baylands Athletic Center, where they have 31
a snack bar, but they are talking about the Music in the Park in Rinconada, where he would 32
think vendors would want to be on the outskirts selling. He wondered if the City has 33
vendors that they allow there today. Mr. Anderson thought it was on a case-by-case basis 34
on the special events, depending on the permit. 35
Chair Cribbs thought the regulations presented were good and after a year or two in use if 36
there needs to be changes that can be done, but she thought it was enough to move forward 37
with a motion. 38
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 28
Motion to approve the Draft Sidewalk Vendor Regulations and their Justifications 1
(Attachment A); and recommend that the City Manager approve the updated Open Space 2
and Park Regulations to add new Regulation R1-41(“Sidewalk Vendors”)(Attachment B) 3
upon the City Council’s adoption of a Sidewalk Vendor Ordinance was moved by Vice 4
Chair Greenfield and seconded by Commissioner Brown. The motion passed, 6-0, by roll 5
call vote. 6
VI. TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR THE OCTOBER 26, 2021 MEETING 7
Mr. Anderson advised the Racquet Court Policy will be in October for discussion. The 8
City Clerk had offered to come speak with the Commission on recruitment and perhaps 9
other things. There are several other items in varying states of readiness for October, 10
including the skatepark. He thought fire safety would be coming back to the Council in 11
late October or early November. They talked about the Friends of Palo Alto Parks and the 12
Recreation Foundation returning, which might be in November or December. Recycled 13
water line was also on the list, either as part of the Department Report or an invitation to 14
Public Works staff to come and talk about that. Also, the Measure E site, the undedicated 15
ten acres at Bixby which in November will be available for re-dedicating should Council 16
choose to do so. Chair Cribbs said there is also a chance they might want to talk about the 17
Commission’s stance on a city gym. Commissioner Moss asked about the Foothills wrap-18
up and said it would be great if it was before December 15th. If after the 15th, he would 19
love to see it in November. Mr. Anderson recommended that he and the Chair meet soon 20
to plan. Commissioner Reckdahl mentioned talking about the purple pipe, as some 21
questions were answered tonight, but he would like to have a short talk about what the 22
plans are for purple pipe and where it would be extended. 23
VII. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 24
Vice Chair Greenfield suggested they talk about meeting plans for the end of the year and 25
perhaps agree to have the December meeting on December 14th, to have one extra meeting 26
with this group, and also to avoid meeting on the 21st. He said November could either be 27
Tuesday the 23rd or the 16th. He said he would personally prefer the 16th if there was staff 28
availability on these dates. Chair Cribbs said they can look at this when they have their 29
agenda meeting. Vice Chair Greenfield requested to hear from the Commissioners their 30
thoughts on those dates. Commissioner Moss approved of the dates. Commissioner 31
Reckdahl preferred November 16th as opposed to the 23rd, and he was in support of 32
December 14th. 33
Commissioner Moss said the Palo Alto Weekly will be publishing his opinion piece 34
sometime in the next two weeks about being a Parks and Rec Commissioner and about 35
encouraging people to put an application in for any of the commissions. 36
37
DRAFT
Draft Minutes 29
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 1
Motion to adjourn by Vice Chair Greenfield, seconded by Commissioner Moss. 2
Meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. 3
October 26, 2021 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Update on Water Recycling and Palo Alto’s One Water Plan Development:
Water Supply Planning for a Resilient Palo Alto
Parks and Recreation Commission
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
2 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•April: SFPUC asks Wholesale customers to voluntarily keep water use to same as
summer 2019
•Dry but system storage in pretty good shape
•June 9: Valley Water imposes mandatory 15% water use reduction compared to 2019
•State Water Project shortfall
•Anderson Dam undergoing seismic upgrade
•July 8: Governor declares emergency; asks for voluntary 15% water use reduction
compared to 2020
•July 12: SFPUC mirrors Governor’s ask
•October X: ?
Quick Drought Update
2021 Timeline
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
3 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Water Shortage Contingency Plan
•Stage I (up to 10%): Permanent restrictions against waste
•Stage II (10%-20%): + No irrigation of turf within 48 hours of rain
•Stage III (20%-30%): + Turf irrigation max 3 days per week in summer and 1 day per week in winter
•Stage IV (30%-40%): Turf irrigation reduced to max 2 days per
week in summer
•Stage V (40%-50%): No turf irrigation
•Stage VI (50% and up): No outdoor water use except on trees
•Alternative Irrigation Plans may be put in place with water use reduction targets and flexible number of irrigation days
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
4 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Palo Alto Water Supply Overview
•100% of potable water imported System
from City & County of San Francisco’s
Regional Water
•~85% from Tuolumne River
•Palo Alto potable demand:
•~11,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) or
•~10 million gallons per day (MGD)
•Currently ~$1,900/AF
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
5 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Back to the Main Topic
Water Reuse 101
•Highly treated wastewater that islocally produced and
can be sustainably and
safely reused for various water demands
•Right water quality for
the right purpose
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
6 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•Drought
•Climate change
•Regulations
•Population/demand
•Economy
Palo Alto Water Supply Challenges and
Uncertainties
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
7 www.cityofpaloalto.org
“One Water” Goal (part of City’s Sustainability
and Climate Action Plan):
Council adoption of a One Water supply plan
that is a 20-year adaptable roadmap for
implementation of prioritized water supply
and conservation portfolio alternatives.
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
8 www.cityofpaloalto.org
One Water Role in Palo Alto Planning
One Water
Integrated Water Supply Planning
S/CAP Update
Northwest County Recycled
Water Strategic Plan and Effluent Transfer Agreement
Community Engagement
Stakeholders, Residents, Businesses, Tree Canopy
Planning and Development
Green Building
Public Works
Green Stormwater
Infrastructure, Sea Level Rise, Flood
Management
Utilities
Capital Planning
20 Year Roadmap For Implementation of
Prioritized Water Supply Portfolios
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
9 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•SFPUC water
•Groundwater
•Basement dewatering water
•Valley Water treated water
•Demand management programs (passive and active conservation)
•Water reuse alternatives, potable and non-potable
•Stormwater and rain capture and Green Stormwater Infrastructure
•On site (customer) water capture and or reuse projects, gray and black
•Storage (local or regional)
•Transfers
•Desalination, distributed and centralized
•Atmospheric water generators
Potential Water Resources
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
10 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Parks
•Valuable trees and community assets
•Fields are already managed very
efficiently
•Irrigated areas and Boronda Lake offer opportunities for alternative water supplies
•Recycled water
•Groundwater
•Stormwater
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
11 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•Planning level cost, capital, O&M and replacement of asset (life cycle costs), avoided costs and unit cost
•Possible sources and availability of funding
•Normal year reliability
•Drought resiliency
•Contribution to canopy health
•Water Quality
•Sustainability
•Equity
•Flexibility to adapt to changing conditions including SFPUC activities, state actions regarding environmental flows
or water reuse regulations, Valley Water activities, and climate change
•Complexity
•Alignment with other City and regional initiatives including S/CAP, green stormwater program, sea level rise policy,
and Comprehensive Plan
•Ease of implementation
•Speed of implementation
•Public acceptance
•Customer impact (e.g., bill impact and mandatory water restrictions)
•Other criteria
Criteria
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
12 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Questions and Comments
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
13 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Additional slides
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
14 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•Rebates, Surveys and Devises
(In partnership with Valley Water)
•Landscape replacement
•Irrigation system controllers
•Grey water system rebate
•Indoor and outdoor Surveys
•Free showerheads, faucet aerators and toilet
flappers
•Green Buildings and Landscaping
•Education and Outreach
•Workshops
•Bill inserts, e-blasts, social media
Demand Management/Conservation
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
15 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Recycled Water Strategic Plan Results
Non-Potable Reuse (NPR)
(excluding satellite)
$6M -$85M for infrastructure
$2,100 –4,600/AF
Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR)
$92M -$198M for infrastructure
$3,300 -$4,400/AF
Direct Potable Reuse (DPR)
$105M for infrastructure
$2,500/AF
SFPUC Potable Rate (2030) ~$3,000/AF
Groundwater Extraction Rate (2030)~$3,000/AF
16 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Northwest County Recycled Water Strategic Plan
(Done in Partnership with Valley Water)
•How best to expand RWQCP Recycled Water Program
given:
•Recent regulatory developments
•Prolonged drought
•1992 Recycled Water Master Plan recommended projects
•Study Area:
•RWQCP service area
•Additional areas within Menlo Park & East Palo Alto
•Time Period
•Through 2030
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
17 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Current Local Recycled Water Program
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
18 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Potential Regional Transfer
October 26, 2021 www.cityofpaloalto.org
2011 Palo Alto Ballot Measure “E”:
Parks and Recreation Commission
De-designated 10 acres of
Byxbee Park ( Former PA Landfill ) as Parkland
For a Period of Ten Years through Nov 1, 2021
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
2 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•Provide a reliable, long-term organics solution
•Enhance the beneficial use of organic materials
•Reduce landfill disposal
•Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
•Allow the City to phase out the existing incinerator for Biosolids (phase out is now
complete).
Objectives of Measure “E”
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
3 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•10 years to develop Facility on Byxbee Park (Former Landfill)
•Council May then Re-Designate as the 10 acres as Parkland
•Use of land to be very specific
•Other uses only allowed following new Vote
•Treatment of Wastewater Residuals, Food Scraps & Yard Trimmings
•Treatment must be Biological or Equivalent
•Measure was written and advocated by Residents
•Approved by 63 % of Voters
Key features of Measure “E”
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
4 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Material Tons/Year
Biosolids (26% solids) 32,000-42,000
Fats, Oil & Grease 158-226
Yard Trimmings 13,500-14,300
Food Scraps 12,100 -15,500
Feedstocks to be Used
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
5
North
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
6 www.cityofpaloalto.org
10-acre Landfill Site
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
7
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
8
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
9
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
10 www.cityofpaloalto.org
•RFP Processes concluded the proposed, specific use was not cost effective
•Palo Alto’s organic residuals are now handled very nearly as envisioned, just not
within Palo Alto
•Council may, after Nov 1, 2021, return the 10 acres to Parkland; but is not required
to.
•Council could forgo immediate action, leaving many possibilities open
•One possibility, although not the leading candidate site, is a Regional Water
Purification Plant to produce drinking quality water
•Any non-parkland use, other than the one exactly specified in Measure “E”, would
require a new vote of PA residents
Future Possibilities for the 10 Acre Site
TITLE 40 FONT BOLD
Subtitle 32 font
11 www.cityofpaloalto.org
Questions and Comments
1
TO: PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM: ADAM HOWARD, RECREATION SUPERVISOR
DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY SERVICES
DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2021
SUBJECT: REVISED PALO ALTO FIELD AND TENNIS COURT USE POLICY
– RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO INCLUDE PICKLEBALL
RULES
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Parks and Recreation Commission recommend that City Council adopt
the revised Palo Alto Field and Tennis Court Use Policy (Attachment A), which includes new rules
regarding pickleball.
BACKGROUND
In 2019 The City of Palo Alto City Council adopted a Park Improvement Ordinance to create
designated pickleball courts in Mitchell Park and turned two tennis courts into multiuse courts.
Over the past two years, pickleball has continued to grow in popularity and the courts in Mitchell
Park are in high demand. When passing the Park Improvement Ordinance, it was decided it was
best to leave the general court rules in place until staff could observe how the new courts were
functioning. After two years, staff feels it is important to update the policy to include pickleball
specific rules that help increase the utilization of courts and provide structure that fits the sport of
pickleball.
DISCUSSION
Staff recommends adding pickleball specific rules to better manage the game of pickleball. Some
of the most important changes are length of time a group can hold a court and a method of rotating
on and off the courts. With such high demand on the courts, it is important to decrease the time a
group can hold a court and encouraging more rotation. Recreation Staff met with the Court Ad
Hoc committee and the Palo Alto Pickleball Club to discuss rules that would work for the
pickleball community while utilizing the public courts in a fair manner. The rules have the support
of the Ad Hoc and the Palo Alto Pickleball Club.
Recommended New Pickleball Rules
• Courts are available on a first come, first serve basis for both doubles and singles play.
• If all courts are full and players are waiting, court time is limited to 20 minutes. Players
can rotate back onto courts as many times as they desire.
• When courts are full, waiting players may place paddles next to the net of a game in play.
When the game is over, players will relinquish the court to those waiting, as follows:
2
• 4 paddles down: all players leave court to those waiting.
• 3 paddles down: All players leave the courts to those waiting. Waiting players may
accept a 4th player from the exiting players.
• 2 paddles down: the winning team may stay on, or the waiting players may choose to
play singles.
• Double stacking of paddles (playing a game while having a second paddle waiting on
another court) is not allowed.
• City Permits and Recreation Programs have priority over drop-in play.
NEXT STEPS
If the PRC approves the staff recommended rules, staff will bring the revised policy to City Council
for approval. If approved, new rules will be posted on Pickleball courts as soon as possible.
Updating the court usage policy is an important step; however, it is also important to look at the
previous policy decisions around usage to evaluate how those policies are working and have
discussions on if changes need to be made. Staff would like to gather information on lit court use
in Palo Alto and how the policy on priority use is working on our multiuse courts. Current policy
is that Pickleball has priority 7 days a week 8am-3pm and Tennis has Priority 7 days a week 3pm-
10pm.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment A: Draft Palo Alto Field and Tennis Court Use Policy
3
Draft - City of Palo Alto Field and Tennis Court Use
Policy- draft
The City of Palo Alto (the “City”) Field Use Policy (and the procedures adopted hereunder) has
been established to ensure that City-owned, -maintained and –managed park and athletic field
facilities, including the fields owned by the Palo Alto Unified School District (the “District”) are
utilized for recreational, athletic, cultural, educational, social and community service functions
that meet the needs and interests of the community, and that permitted users are fully informed
as to the City’s guidelines that govern their use of the park and athletic field facilities.
Purpose:
• To strive to provide all Palo Alto residents with an opportunity to participate in their activity
of choice.
• To establish policies and procedures governing the use of City parks, fields, tennis courts and
District playing fields managed by the City of Palo Alto.
• To ensure Palo Alto residents have priority access to parks and playing fields.
• To provide for a variety of activities reflecting the athletic preferences of Palo Alto residents.
• To contribute a proportionate amount of field use time to regional organizations that Palo
Alto residents participate in.
• To collect fees for the use of fields, in support of their ongoing maintenance.
• To ensure that decisions regarding the use of City parks and athletic complexes and District
sites are used in the best interests of the neighborhoods, sports organizations and residents of
Palo Alto.
• To ensure that appropriate sports are permitted on appropriate fields.
Field use permits are required for exclusive field use or for any on-going seasonal, organized
use of athletic fields maintained or managed by the City. In accordance with Palo Alto
Municipal Code Section, the Recreation and Golf Services Division issues field use permits.
The exclusive use of a field or an athletic field requires the making of an advance reservation
and is subject to fee and security deposit requirements.
Appendix A - Available Facilities and Park Amenities
Appendix B - Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines
I. Field Use Permitting:
Field space usage requests are considered at three separate and seasonal intervals per fiscal
year. Field space is awarded on a priority basis at the beginning of each fall, winter/spring, and
summer period. After the original requests are processed on a priority basis, the fields are
available to other non-priority requests. To apply for an Athletic Field Use Permit, an applicant
must submit a field request form to the Field Coordinator/Supervisor. Field request forms are
4
available:
1. Online at www.cityofpaloalto.org;
2. In person at Cubberley Community Center; or
3. By requesting a form from the Field Coordinator/Supervisor at
playingfields@cityofpaloalto.org
Fall ~~ The first day of school (mid-August) through December 31.
Winter/Spring ~~ January 1 through the last day of school (end of May early June).
Summer ~~ early June through mid-August.
II. Field Request Form Deadlines:
1. For Fall seasonal use dates, request forms must be submitted by May 1.
2. For Winter/Spring seasonal use dates, request forms must be submitted by November 1.
3. For Summer seasonal use dates, request forms must be submitted by March 1.
III. Seasonal Use Priority:
• Palo Alto resident youth non-profit soccer and football organizations have field
use priority on soccer/baseball/football joint use fields during the Fall use
period.
• Palo Alto resident youth non-profit baseball, softball and lacrosse organizations
have field priority on the baseball-softball/soccer joint use fields during the
Spring use period.
IV. Exceptions to Seasonal Priority:
• District programs have annual priority on District fields only.
• Palo Alto Recreation-administered programs have annual use priority on all fields.
V. Eligibility:
The following are the field use guidelines that will be used for priority booking at the
start of each seasonal brokering period. Priority will be given in the order below.
1. City and District Activities
2. Palo Alto Youth, non-profit* organizations with at least 51% residency
3. Palo Alto Adult, non-profit* organizations with at least 35% residency
4. Non-profit groups with 25% or more Palo Alto residence will be given priority
for any remaining fields
5. Other groups not meeting the 25% requirement or for profit will be considered at
staff discretion.
*To qualify for non-profit rates, organizations must provide a copy of their letter of non-profit status from the
California Secretary of State’s Office with their non-profit ID number indicated thereon, Payment with an
organization’s check or charge card is required.
5
Priority organizations (groups 2 and 3) will have the opportunity to discuss field use
needs with City staff facilitating, and attempt to negotiate an agreement on field
allocations. The negotiated field allocation agreement must be consistent with section VI
Field Allocations below. If two or more organizations are unable to agree with a
negotiated field allocation agreement then a round robin brokering system will be used to
determine the allocation of fields among organizations.
Organizations will receive priority based on seasonal sports first (see Section III),
followed by organizations that meet the priority residency requirement above. Adults and
youth will broker separately with slots set aside for youth and adults as defined in Section
VI. Groups with less than 25% residents and for-profit groups, reserve fields on a first
come first served basis as available.
If a round robin process is used the first round will be based on the number of residents in each
organization. The number of residents will be broken down to equal a number of teams. Each
team will then receive two practice slots a week and 0.55 game slots per weekend. The second
round will broker for the total number of teams each organization has, less the teams that
received fields in the first round. For more information please see.
VI. Field Allocations: Fields will be permitted for the activities in which the field(s) are
intended for, designed for, classified as, or for activities conducted in a manner that does not
compromise public safety or field quality and integrity.
• Youth organizations or leagues that qualify for priority booking will be allocated fields as
follows:
• Two (2) practice slots* per team per week.
• 0.55 game slots* per team per week
• Fields will be allocated to age appropriate athletes
• 7v7 or younger - small fields
• 8v8 -10v10 - medium fields
• 11v11 - large fields
*Game slots, Practice Slots and age breakdowns are defined based on sport and field
When priority booking takes place, slots are reserved for the entire brokering period. Slots
brokered do not change because of daylight savings.
• At the Stanford/Palo Alto Playing Fields, the 8:30-10:00 pm weekday slots will be reserved
for adult league play Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday. 7pm-10pm slots are reserved for
adults on Wednesday and Friday.
• Sunday mornings from 8:00 am to 12:30 pm, at Terman 1 and 2, JLS 1, 2 and 3 and
Mayfield will be reserved for adult league play. Adult leagues will be held to a
maximum of 1 slot per team every other week. Any additional slots are open to
all.
Each group that has seasonal priority can reserve all the slots they require based on the number
of teams in their organization.
6
Tournaments:
Organizations who receive priority brokering may request one tournament a year; that
tournament will be given priority of fields use. Tournament dates must be given in advance of
brokering and there can only be one tournament a weekend. All additional tournaments are at
staff discretion.
Additional information found in Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines.
VII Residency:
A resident is a person residing within the city limits of the City of Palo Alto. Any person owning
and paying taxes on real property in Palo Alto, but who is not living in the City, and any person
having only a Palo Alto business address, is NOT considered a resident for field use application
purposes. Children attending District schools are considered residents for brokering purposes.
The City will require identification or documentation of residency. In the event proof of
residency cannot be established, the person will be classified as a non-resident and fees and
brokering privileges will be adjusted accordingly.
VIII. Residency Verification:
Palo Alto Recreation requires a master league roster complete with players’ first and last names
alphabetized, address, phone number, team, and proof of residency. Proof of residency may
include:
• Palo Alto Utility Number
• Copy of Current driver’s license with Palo Alto Address
• Copy of current school I.D. card or verification form (provided by city) signed by school
(for youth attending PAUSD school)
Any group or organization found to be misrepresenting its residency status will have its permit
revoked for the season and will be excluded from brokering for the following season. In
addition, any group or organization found to be reserving field use for any time period time for
another organization (that would otherwise have a lower priority for field scheduling) will be
penalized by the revocation of its permit for the season for which the permit is issued and that
group or organization will be assigned the last (or lowest) priority for field use scheduling for the
immediately following season.
IX. Fees
All fees are due and payable prior to the issuance of any approved field use permit. The fees and
charges for any field use permit are established by the City Council in the Municipal Fee
Schedule and are not negotiable; only the Council has the authority to waive fees and charges by
amendment to the Municipal Fee Schedule. Fees will be reviewed regularly and adjusted
accordingly.
Fees can be found in Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines.
X. Deposits
1. A refundable deposit of one hundred dollars ($100.00) is required for all single athletic field
use reservations. Long term renters are required to provide a $750 refundable security deposit.
2. The City reserves the right to deduct from the security deposit any and all additional charges
relating to, but not limited to, janitorial services, maintenance/repair services, staff time, or
7
emergency services that are required as a result of the field use.
3. Forfeiture of all or part of your security/damage deposit may occur for any of the following
reasons:
a. Damage to facility;
b. Misuse of the facility;
c. Inadequate cleanup by the permit holder, requiring additional custodial/staff time
following the permit holder’s use;
d. Violation of field use rules
4. If additional fees due and payable exceed the amount of the security deposit, the permit holder
will be billed for the balance due. Payment will be due and payable within thirty (30) days of the
date of invoice. Fees that are not paid will be assigned for collection to a collections agency and
the user group will be ineligible to apply for field use until the unpaid amount is settled in full.
Insurance Liability
A valid insurance certificate is required for use of any City or District field. The insurance
certificate must afford one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) of general liability coverage per
occurrence and contain the following information:
• General liability coverage (property and bodily injury) as evidenced by an insurance
certificate with an endorsement naming the City of Palo Alto (CPA) AND the Palo Alto
Unified School District (PAUSD) as ADDITIONAL INSURED, and guaranteeing 30
days prior notice to change or cancellation of the policy.
Use of fields will not be permitted unless a valid insurance certificate has been received by not
later than two
(2) business days prior to the scheduled date of use of the field or other facility.
1. The permit holder shall be responsible for any and all damage to the City’s or the
District’s premises, turf, equipment and/or property. If additional maintenance is deemed
necessary (in excess of normal services/time) to restore the premises, turf, equipment
and/or property to reasonable use by others. the permit holder shall be charged
accordingly.
2. The City and the District disclaims responsibility for any accident, injury, liability, loss or
damage to person or property as a result of unauthorized field use.
3. The permit holder will be responsible for all actions and omissions that result in damages
that are caused by their attendees.
XII. Tennis Court Usage
1. Tennis courts are available for reservation for Palo Alto Tennis Club and USTA
tournament/match use only.
2. The City brokers all City and District tennis courts.
3. Only 50% of the available courts at any location can be reserved at the same time and date.
All other courts will remain open to the general public.
4. Tennis courts are not available for reservation by individuals for private use, including private
lessons, picnics and individual play. No person shall provide or offer tennis lessons for
compensation on City-owned tennis courts except as part of and approved as a City-sponsored
program.
5. Tennis courts are available for individual use on a first-come, first-served basis. Each court
8
use is subject to a one-hour time limit whenever there are others waiting to use the court.
6. Tennis courts are for tennis play only. No rollerblades, skates, skateboards, or pets are
permitted on any tennis court.
7. No individual may solely occupy and use a court if other individuals are waiting to play on
that court.
8. No person shall play a sport other than tennis on City-owned tennis courts unless expressly
allowed via permit issued by the City Recreation and Golf Division.
9. All steel racquets must have guards.
10. Only tennis shoes and non-marking soled shoes are allowed on the tennis courts.
A: Locations: Tennis courts are available at the following locations:
o Cubberley Community Center (6)
o Mitchell Park (7)
o Rinconada Park (9)
o Hoover Park (2)
o Peers Park (2)
o Terman Park (2)
o Weisshaar Park (2)
o Gunn High School (7)
o Palo Alto High School (7)
o JLS Middle School (6)
o Jordan Middle School (4)
B: Tennis Court Fees:
Residents: $5.00-$10.00 per court per hour
Non-residents: $7.00- $20.00 per court per hour
XIII. Pickleball Court Usage
1. Courts are available on a first come, first served basis for both doubles and
singles play.
2. If all courts are full and players are waiting, court time is limited to 20 minutes.
Players can rotate back onto courts as many times as they desire.
3. When courts are full, waiting players may place paddles next to the net of a
game in play. When the game is over, players will relinquish the court to those
waiting, as follows:
a. 4 paddles down: all players leave court to those waiting.
b. 3 paddles down: All players leave the courts to those waiting. Waiting
players may accept a 4th player from the exiting players.
c. 2 paddles down: the winning team may stay on, or the waiting players
may choose to play singles.
9
4. Double stacking of paddles (playing a game while having a second paddle
waiting on another court) is not allowed.
5. City Permits and Recreation Programs have priority over drop-in play.
6. An individual may not hold a court when players are waiting.
7. Court shoes only, no cleats allowed.
8. No wheeled vehicles allowed inside fence.
9. No private lessons for compensation permitted.
10. Locations: Pickleball Courts are located in Mitchell Park.
XIIIXIV. Permit Rules & Regulations
1 Permits cannot be transferred or assigned to any other person, group or organization for
any reason.
2 Users must pick up and remove any trash generated by their activity.
3 The misuse of City or District facilities or the failure to conform to facility regulations,
established policies (including the Wet Field Policy) and procedures or any other Federal, State,
or local law, rule regulation or ordinance shall be sufficient grounds for the immediate
revocation of the permit and/or the denial of any future applications. No refund will be granted.
4 Permit holders shall restrict their use to only those fields or courts specifically reserved
and paid for, as designated in their permit. Other fields or courts may be scheduled by other
groups and may not be available. Permit holders must be in possession of their Field Use Permit
in case there is a need to address the question of who has priority use or reservation for the field
or court in question. If the permit holder cannot use a field or court due to unauthorized use by
another party, the permit holder should contact the Palo Alto Police Department at 650-329-
2413.
5 Complaints from surrounding neighborhood residents as to the permittee’s activity noise
level, litter and debris, and/or disregard of parking regulations could lead to the cancellation of
the permit or reservation, the forfeiture of the security deposit, and the denial of facility use in
the future. See Good Neighbor Policy
XIV. General Rules & Regulations
All City of Palo Alto Municipal Codes/Regulations apply to all City and PAUSD fields.
1. No activity other than softball is permitted at the El Camino Park and Baylands Athletic
Center softball fields, unless such activity is expressly allowed by permit.
2. The City reserves the right to cancel an approved reservation due to maintenance needs,
overuse of facility, unsafe conditions, or due to a conflict with a City or District event. In these
cases, all attempts will be made to provide a minimum of 15 days advance notice and to provide
an alternate location for the group’s scheduled practice, game or activity. In the event of an
emergency, when only short or no notice can be provided, groups must cooperate with the
request to not use the facility or risk loss of current permit and denial of future use. If there are
no alternate facilities available, the City is not obligated to provide an alternate facility. In case
of such event, a full refund will be given.
3. No person shall use an athletic field which is posted as being closed, whether the closure is for
excess rainfall or for field maintenance or other reason.
4. All motor vehicles must park in marked stalls in the parking lots or legally on side streets, or
be subject to citation. No unauthorized vehicles shall enter park premises, drive on turf, grounds,
10
playfields, or paved walkways.
5. All dogs must be on a leash and owners must clean up after their dogs.
6. For guidelines regarding facility hours of operations, see Appendix B.
7. No portable BBQ’s are permitted at any time in any facility.
8. No golf is permitted at any park or sports complex, with the exception of the Palo Alto
Municipal Golf Course.
9. Baylands Athletic Center is closed on Mondays for maintenance.
10. No alcohol or tobacco products are allowed on any District property at any time.
11. Athletic fields may be lined prior to a group use. Water soluble spray paint is the only
permitted means of lining a field. No fields are permitted to be lined by means of Round Up,
Dolomite or other herbicide, which can permanently burn lines into the field. Different color
lines should be used for different sports. Soccer shall use white, rugby shall use blue and
lacrosse shall use yellow.
12. Vending at a field is permitted only if the vendor is associated with the activity and has
received the prior approval of the City’s representative.
13. Gambling is prohibited at all City and District property.
14. Soccer goals must be anchored at all times when they are located on the playing fields.
When goals are not being utilized for play, they must be secured off the playing fields in a
manner which will not permit tipping or create any hazardous condition that could cause injury
to any person. The City of Palo Alto and District are not liable for accidents, injuries or loss of
or damage to individuals or property. Should any goal left on site be found not secured and
locked up properly, the permittee will be subject to a fine of $250.00. A subsequent violation
will result in revocation of the current field user’s permit.
15. The City of Palo Alto encourages partnerships and volunteerism to improve field quality and
maintenance; however, in the absence of a written agreement, donations and/or contributions of
time does not give any organization priority at any facility. Groups wishing to make alterations
to facilities must submit these improvement requests in advance to the City. No groups will be
allowed to make any alteration to any facility without first obtaining the City’s approval.
XVI. Field and court releases
Field and court releases and refunds shall follow guidelines below.
Weekday Slots:
• Field releases done before the start of the permit will receive a full refund.
• Field releases done after the start of the permit must be done by the 7th of each month and
will receive a 50% refund
• All refunds done after the 7th will receive no refund
Weekend Slots:
• Weekend slots can be released up to 3 weeks after the publication of the league game
schedule for a full refund.
• Releases after 3 weeks of the publication of the league game schedule can be done by
the 7th of each month for a 50% refund.
11
• All releases done after the 7th will receive no refund.
Users who are found to not be using the field and court space and not releasing can be subject to
losing field space for the following brokering period.
•
XVII. Wet Field Policy
No refunds will be given for field closures due to rain. Field slots can be rescheduled.
Athletic use of wet or saturated fields may cause extensive damage resulting in field closure and
costly renovations. Groups shall abide by the Wet Field Policy and preserve the life and
condition of the fields by not playing on them in wet conditions. The following policy applies
to a period of rainfall, over-watered fields and/or irrigation breaks. The “rainout” condition
hotline is 650-329-2697.
• All grass fields are deemed closed to use during rainfall. Play will be allowed
during a light mist if the ground is hard and relatively dry at the time field use is
considered.
• In the event of rainfall (any precipitation that is greater than a light drizzle on a
dry field), the fields will be deemed closed after the cessation of precipitation.
A failure to abide by this policy may result in the revocation of the permit and/or elimination
for priority brokering for the following season. Individuals who violate this provision may also
be subject to a $100 fine in accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Please see Field and
Tennis Court Use Guidelines for additional information
XVIII. Field Preservation:
The City will aim to maintain fields uniformly and at the highest possible quality.
Your cooperation is needed to preserve the fields on City and District fields by following these
guidelines:
1. Limit the use of cleats. Cleats longer than one-quarter inch (¼”) are prohibited for use on any
synthetic turf playing fields.
2. Field use, especially sports practices, should be conducted in a manner that play will take
place on different sections of the turf, thus reducing excessive turf wear and damage to any one
area.
3. Rotate use of areas (i.e.: use middle of turf area for drills one day and sides of the field the
following day), and when possible, stay off of the fringe or bare areas to limit erosion and further
damage.
3. Replace turf divots at the end of each day to help re-root the grass.
4. Do NOT use the fields during or after heavy rain, or when wet or muddy, for at least 48 hours
5. Soccer practices shall NOT be held on the infield area of a softball or baseball diamond.
6. Softball, baseball, and T-ball practices shall be held only on designated ball fields in order to
prevent injuries to other park users.
7. Remove all equipment at the conclusion of use each day. This includes soccer goals. No
equipment shall be allowed to be left unattended on City or District property without the prior
approval of the Fields Coordinator.
8. Do not overcrowd fields by scheduling multiple games in areas reserved. Allow a safe
distance between fields for safe passage of spectators and participants.
9. Water soluble spray paint is the only approved method of applying lines to the fields. Burning
of lines with chemicals or cutting lines into turf areas is not allowed.
12
10. Report hazards on City property to the Parks Division office at 650-496-6962.
11. Report emergencies (e.g., broken water lines, gushing sprinkler heads, etc.) promptly to Palo
Alto Communications at 650-329-2413 who will summon the appropriate personnel. When you
make the call, be prepared to fully identify yourself, your location, and the specific nature of the
emergency.
12. Do not drive or park cars, motorcycles, or other motorized vehicles on turf areas.
13. Bicycles are prohibited on all synthetic turf fields.
14. No food or beverages, with the exception of water, will be permitted on any synthetic turf
field.
XVIIIXIX. Good Neighbor Policy The purpose of this policy is to ensure that decisions
regarding the use of City fields, parks and athletics complexes and District sites are used in the
best interests of the neighborhoods, sports organizations, and citizens of Palo Alto. The City has
established the following rules and regulations to govern the use of the City’s and the District’s
facilities for the safe and pleasant enjoyment of participants and neighbors. Every person is
expected to abide by these rules or be subject to forfeiture of the security deposit and/or loss of
the privilege of future use of the facilities.
1 All litter and debris that may occur as a result of your event must be picked up and
deposited into trash receptacles, where provided, or removed from the premises.
2 All groups are responsible for the condition in which they leave the facility. Any
excessive clean-up required by City or District crews following your use will be cause for
forfeiture of all or part of your damage deposit.
3 No amplified music, use of musical instruments, radios, or Public Address System testing
or use allowed before 9:00 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m. and is allowed by permit only. In all parks,
care shall be taken so that speakers are not directed at residences.
4 Complaints from surrounding neighborhood residents as to noise level, litter and debris,
and disregard for use of parking regulations could result in cancellation of your reservation,
forfeiture of security deposit, and denial of future facility use.
5 No person shall park a motor vehicle in such a place or manner as would block or
obstruct any gate, entrance, or exit or resident driveway.