HomeMy WebLinkAboutID2039-Art-Center-Connectivity-5-21-12 (1)City of Palo Alto (ID # 2039)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Meeting Date: 5/21/2012
May 21, 2012 Page 1 of 12
(ID # 2039)
Summary Title: Art Center/Main Library Connectivity
Title: Selection of Option for Connectivity Between the Art Center and the Main
Library (CIPs PE-11000, PF-07000)
From:City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council:
1.Approve the removal of a redundant driveway in front of the Art Center,
installation of a plaza area between the Art Center and Main Library,
removal of a parking lot shed (Component I of Options A, B C and D,
defined below); and
2.Approve the construction of a vehicular connector and an accessible path
between the Art Center and Main Library parking lot and removal and
relocation of impacted community garden plots. (Component II of Option A
defined below). An existing redwood tree would be retained and the
connector driveway would be curved as much as feasible so as to slow
traffic.
(Recommendation 1 and 2 together form Option A, discussed herein).
Or, as an alternative to Recommendation No. 2,one of the following three
Options:
4.Approve the construction of a bicycle and pedestrian connection and an
accessible path between the Art Center and Main Library parking lot and
removal and replacement of impacted community garden plots.
(Component II of Option B defined below).
May 21, 2012 Page 2 of 12
(ID # 2039)
5.Direct staff to design and construct a bicycle/pedestrian connecting path
which is adjacent to, (but not impacting) the Community garden plots
(Option C).
6.Direct staff not to construct a new connector between the Arts Center and
Library parking lot (Option D).
Executive Summary
Staff is recommending approval of a project to connect the Art Center and Main
Library into a more cohesive campus, restructuring the space between the two
buildings to improve pedestrian links and safety, and to create a visually pleasing
landscaped area (Component I).Staff is also recommending linking the parking
lots for the two buildings with a connecting driveway to enhance visitor parking
and reduce the search time for parking (Option A of Component II).Alternative
types of connectors are also included in which the link is a path for pedestrians
and cyclists, but not cars.
Background
Measure N approved $76 million in funding for improvements to the Downtown
Library (PE-09005), Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (PE-09006),and
the Main Library (PE-11000). Of the total funding, $18 million was allocated for
the design and construction of the Main Library improvements and expansion.
At a November 2010 Architectural Review Board and at a community meeting,
questions were raised as to whether the Main Library site could be better
integrated with the adjacent Art Center. In responding to these requests for a
more campus-like feel, on July 25, 2011, Council directed Group 4 Architecture to
develop conceptual options for a redesign of the landscaping and parking areas
on the south side of the Main Library to provide improved parking and circulation
as well as a visual connecting link with the adjacent Art Center (staff report 1438).
Over the last few months, these conceptual options have been presented to the
community,boards and commissions.
Although these parking and circulation improvements were not included in the
original cost estimates or preliminary designs in existence at the time Measure N
was submitted to the voters, they fall reasonably within the scope of renovations
and improvements to Main library and, to the extent they relate to the library, are
expenses that may be covered by bond funds. To the extent the improvements
May 21, 2012 Page 3 of 12
(ID # 2039)
are proposed on Art Center property or for access to the Art Center, costs would
be attributable to the general fund. Thus, the design fee for the Main Library/Art
Center was shared equally between the general fund (PF-07000) and the Measure
N funds for the Main Library (PE-11000). Depending upon the design option, if
any, chosen by Council, the construction cost would also be shared between the
general fund and the Measure N library/community center funds. Based on
conceptual design of the square footage and materials for construction, costs are
to be in the range of $400,000 to $500,000 for the general fund (for the Art
Center’s share of the improvements) and $400,000 to $500,000 from Measure N
library bond proceeds for the Main Library’s share of improvements.
The design of the Main Library is nearing completion and has been reviewed at
community, Historic Resources Board, Architectural Review Board and Library
Advisory Commission meetings. The Main Library improvements will include
small group study rooms that are acoustically separated from the rest of the
existing building, and a new adjacent program space that will seat 100 people. To
accommodate the new program space, the Main Library will expand by
approximately 4,000 square feet from the current 21,000 square feet on the
ground floor of the building (CMR:434:06). The interior of the existing library will
also be reconfigured to make better use of the space. Lighting and other existing
building systems will also be upgraded. All of the improvements will be made with
consideration for the historic nature of the existing building. The building will be
designed to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design “Silver” level.
Improvements to the Main Library will be the final component of the Measure N
Bond measure projects. During the recent reviews of the Main Library, the Art
Center parking and integration options were also discussed.
Discussion
Parking and Circulation Improvements Between the Art Center and Main Library
The issue of integrating the Main Library and Art Center had originally been
explored during the previous 2002 library bond, Measure D. Years later, however,
renovations for the Main Library and Art Center sites later began the design
process as separate projects. Because these renovations were being planned
separately, under different design firms and project managers, little attention was
paid to the overall integration of the campus. It was only during design
development presentations of the Main Library project to the Architectural
Review Board and at a community meeting in November 2010 that the issue of
May 21, 2012 Page 4 of 12
(ID # 2039)
improving the connection of the Art Center, Main Library and Community gardens
into an overall campus site was raised again.
As a result of these inquiries, Group 4 Architecture was asked to make a cursory
exploration of the feasibility and cost related to making the site have a more
campus-like feel. These initial designs were discussed in a joint exploratory
meeting between the library and Art Center stakeholders and staff in the spring of
2011. Both groups recommended exploring the concept further. On July 25,
2011, Council approved Contract Amendment Four with Group 4 Architecture to
better develop the initial designs, gather input and report the findings back to
Council for further direction (staff report 1438). Group 4 Architecture and staff
then met with a task force of community gardeners to gather more input and
took those comments into consideration in the development of two design
options. The updated design concepts, Option A and Option B, were subsequently
presented to the Architectural Review Board (ARB), Historic Resources Board
(HRB), Library Bond Oversight Committee (LBOC), Library Advisory Commission
(LAC), Parks and Recreation Committee (PARC) and at community meetings.
These two options, discussed in more detail below (and shown in Attachment A)
are very similar with the exception being the driveway that would connect the
two sites. The driveway in Option A is wide enough to allow cars on the driveway.
The driveway in Option B is narrower and only wide enough for bicyclists and
pedestrians.
Site Issues
Several issues related to connecting the two sites were identified as a result of the
exploration of design options:
Safety:
-The existing driveway in front of the Art Center is used by cut-
through traffic avoiding the traffic signal at Embarcadero and Newell.
Combined with reduced visibility due to landscaping, this creates
unsafe conditions for people accessing the parking lot.
-There is little to no sight lighting provided on the campus which
makes traversing the campus on foot or bicycle after daylight hours
unsafe and challenging.
May 21, 2012 Page 5 of 12
(ID # 2039)
-The storage shed in one of the parking lots between the two sites is
dark and attractive to vagrants. People are unclear if the area under
the shed roof is open to the public.
-During high-participation events, drivers jog from parking lot to
parking lot via Newell Road, creating increased traffic and impacting
a bicycle lane.
Access:
-No easy and clear access between sites for pedestrians or drivers
Wayfinding:
-Visitors new to the site often cannot easily locate individual facilities
-Campus lacks an overall, cohesive plan with walkways and gathering
spots
-Parking: The community has expressed concerns about insufficient
site parking during large events. With a new community room
planned for the Main Library and anticipated increased visitors to the
Art Center, parking demands may increase. In addition, no additional
parking was ever provided for gardeners with the creation of the
Community Gardens. There are four separate parking lots on the
campus, three of which are linked (Art Center side) and one of which
is not (Library side).
Site Utilization:
-There are significant areas of the campus that are underutilized by
the community because they are inaccessible and the landscaping is
not inviting
Design Options
Several conceptual design options were originally developed by Group 4
Architecture in response to the site issues and presented to Council in July 2011
(see staff report 1438). Since that time and working with library and Art Center
staff and gardeners,two options have been refined as follows:
-Option A:
- Component I:Remove the redundant driveway in front of the Art
Center to reduce hazards caused by speeding and cut-through traffic
May 21, 2012 Page 6 of 12
(ID # 2039)
from Embarcadero and Newell; reconfigure the parking area between
the Art Center and Main Library entrances into a curved design to slow
traffic and better align the entrances to the Art Center and Main Library;
create pedestrian plazas and integrate new trees and other landscaping
between the two sites; remove a storage shed in one of the parking lots
in order to increase parking,
- Component II: Add a new connector roadway accessible by cars, to
connect the Main Library and Art Center parking areas.Removable
bollards will be included in the connector design and can be inserted to
restrict cars as needed for special events.
-Option B:
- Component I:is the same as Option A,
- Component II:differs from Option A in that the driveway connecting
the Main Library and Art Center sites would not be accessible to cars
and could therefore be narrower.
-Option C:
-Component I: is the same as Option A,
-Component II: following an April 19, 2012 community meeting, another
option was identified, namely,the creation of an accessible, non-
vehicular footpath connector adjacent to (but not impacting) the
community Garden. Component II differs from Option A and Option B in
that there would be no impact to the community gardens.
-Option D:
-Component I: is the same as Option A,
-Component II: No connector between the Arts Center and the Main
Library Parking Lot.The initial design and construction cost estimate for
the Main Library improvements did not include any connectivity
elements for the Main Library and the Art Center.
-Other: Council may decide to direct staff to make some modifications to
the site, such as removal of the shed in the smaller parking lot between
the Art Center and Main Library,but likely not to the extent of either
Option A or B.
May 21, 2012 Page 7 of 12
(ID # 2039)
Main Library/Art Center Integration-Summary
Driveway
accessible
by cars?
Boards and
Comm.
Favoring
Construction
Cost –
Measure N
portion Only
Parking
Difference
Garden
Plot
Gain/Loss
Option A Yes LAC, HRB,
ARB
$400-500K.
Of this, the
‘car
connector’
driveway is
approx $100K
-2
(less
spaces
than
Option B)
Loss and
relocation
of up to 12
plots; gain
800 sf
elsewhere
Option B No PRC $400-500K.
Of this, the
‘bike + ped
connector’
driveway is
approx $80K
+2 (more
spaces
than
Option A)
Loss and
relocation
of up to 12
plots; gain
800 sf
elsewhere
Option C No n/a $400-$500K.
Of this, the
‘ped +bike
path’is
approximately
$90K
No change
from
current
None
Community Gardens Impact
The Community Gardens would be impacted if either Option A or B is selected
because of the construction of either a car or bike/pedestrian driveway would
result in the relocation of up to 12 plots. Explorations suggest that connecting the
Art Center and Library parking lots with a driveway would require the relocation
of up to 12 garden plots. The plots could be relocated to an area currently used
as an internal access road, which would also provide approximately a 1,000
square foot net increase in garden square feet resulting in potentially one
additional garden plot.
At community meetings on May 5, 2011,and April 19, 2012, gardeners associated
with the Community Gardens expressed concerns about the possible loss of
garden plots due to any driveway construction;the noise and safety impacts of a
May 21, 2012 Page 8 of 12
(ID # 2039)
driveway near the garden and the need for a buffer zone and increased parking
needs resulting from the loss of approximately two parking spaces in the library
parking lot needed for the driveway (see Attachment A). Gardeners questioned
whether some of the lawn area at the Main Library might be used for parking,
whether ‘parking lot full’ electronic signs could be employed or whether speed
tables could be used to improve crossing safety in front of the Art Center. After
Council approval of additional design on July 25, 2011, Group 4 Architecture met
with a working group of comprised of people who have plots at the community
garden to gather input on potential design options. At a subsequent community
meeting on October 24, 2011, Group 4 Architecture presented the result of their
more detailed design, which is reflected in Options A and B. People commenting
felt that digital parking counter signs that would indicate ‘parking lot full’ were
overkill for such small parking lots. Parking on the lawn is problematic given the
visual impact and historic nature of the Main Library and the number of trees in
the lawn area. Speed tables, which are slightly elevated crossing walkways, may
be incorporated into the design to further slow vehicles that cross pedestrian
crossing zones.
Discussion
Overall, the feedback from the gardeners was that a driveway connecting the
Main Library to the Art Center through the Community Gardens might at worst be
dangerous and at best be unnecessary. The Parks and Recreation Commission
(PARC) and many gardeners (particularly those whose plots would be relocated)
supported the idea of improving connectivity and circulation but preferred Option
B, which had a connector driveway that was narrower and could not be used by
cars. No redwood or oak trees would need to be removed to construct the
driveway, although one other tree might need to be removed. This tree is not a
heritage tree and its potential removal has been reviewed and approved by the
City Arborist.
The construction cost of Option B (bicycle/pedestrian option)would be
approximately $10-20,000 less than Option A (car accessible)due to the
difference in costs between landscaping and paving materials for the reduced
road width. If the narrower bike/pedestrian connector were to be constructed,
the cost of deciding years later to widen the connector to accommodate cars
would be more than $20,000 due to the need to design, re-mobilize and construct
(with matching materials, if possible)a wider connector.
May 21, 2012 Page 9 of 12
(ID # 2039)
In October and November 2011, the Library Advisory Commission (LAC), the
Historic Resources Board (HRB) and Architectural Review Board (ARB) expressed
support for Option A. Meeting minutes for the LAC and PARC are shown in
Attachments B and C, respectively. The Library Director, Art Center Director,
Library Stakeholders group and Art Center Foundation have previously expressed
support for the driveway concept in Option A. The ARB liked the idea of the
vehicular connecting driveway in Option A, but wanted to explore the idea of
removing a redwood tree and making the driveway a straight-line connection
between the Main Library and Art Center parking lots. Members felt that a
straight connection would be a more visible, obvious route to drivers, as opposed
to the curved roadway shown in Option A. Staff, however, recommends that
Council direct that the redwood tree remain and that the connector road should
be curved so as to slow traffic.
A final community meeting was held on April 19, 2012,to insure that all
comments from adjacent residents (especially those on Walnut Drive)were aware
of the project and had the opportunity to comment. Postcards and door hangers
were used to publicize the meeting. Attendees were asked if there were
comments or concerns about impacts to homes or yards on Walnut. No concerns
about impacts to locations on Walnut Drive were raised. The concerns raised at
the meeting were in large part the same ones raised at earlier meetings-impacts
to the garden, safety, disrupting the ‘rural” feel of the location, and parking issues
Resource Impact
Design costs to complete the design of either Option A B, or C have already been
included in Amendment 4 with Group 4 Architecture and, since the improvements
benefit each site, costs were evenly split between the Art Center (CIP PF-07000)
and the Main Library (PE-11000) at $53,843 apiece. Funding for the construction
of either Option A or B will be included as part of the upcoming Main Library CIP
budget proposal for FY 2013 for the Main Library (PE-11000). Various code
compliance and deferred maintenance improvements approved by Council in July
2011 (Staff Report 1438)will also be included in the upcoming FY 2103 budget
proposal. All of these additional improvements are consistent with necessary
renovations to the Main Library and have been determined to be bondable
expenses.Option C, which is for a smaller footpath that does not impact the
May 21, 2012 Page 10 of 12
(ID # 2039)
garden at all, would be less costly than either Option A, and could be covered
within the upcoming FY 2103 budget for the Main Library.
The estimated construction costs of $800,000 to $1 million would be shared
between the Art Center and Main Library projects. The construction cost can be
better determined once materials are selected through the board and
commission review process. Assuming that the parking lots and driveway are
equally used by Art Center and Library patrons, a 50 percent ($400,000 to
$500,000) cost allocation to each project (PE-11000, Main Library and PF-07000,
Art Center Renovation) could be assumed. Funding for the non-bondable portion
of the work would come from construction cost savings of approximately
$300,000 from the Art Center renovation now underway (PF-07000) and the
remaining $200,000 would come from a Budget Amendment Ordinance from the
Infrastructure Reserve.Bollards will be added to the connector design and can be
used as needed to restrict cars some or part of the time.
The project cost for the Main Library was originally estimated at $18 million and
has recently been updated to $20 million by the construction manager, Turner
Construction. Of this increase, roughly $1.5 million was due to the July 25, 2011,
approval by Council of deferred maintenance, code compliance and other
enhancements (staff report #1438). The remaining $500,000 cost increase is due
to $500,000 that was budgeted for any approval of improved connectivity
between the Art Center and Main Library. Even assuming the updated Main
Library project cost of $20 million, and if the Mitchell Park Library and Community
Center costs were to increase to the level of the original $50 million budgeted for
Measure N, the overall library bond measure costs would still be roughly $7
million below the bond limit of $76 million.
Policy Impacts
The Art Center and Main Library site integration was not considered nor discussed
at any public meetings leading up to the Measure N bond,but only became
identified during the public review process of the Main Library. The integration of
the Art Center and Main Library sites is a renovation that would contribute to the
functionality of the library building and enhance the user experience by improving
circulation and parking for the building.
The City’s bond counsel has determined that these added costs related to the
May 21, 2012 Page 11 of 12
(ID # 2039)
library are bondable under Measure N as renovations that will serve the newly
expanded building. While staff recommends approval of Option A, it should be
noted that adding this improvement will have an impact on property assessments
because bonds will need to be issued in an amount sufficient to cover the initial
project cost and newly proposed renovations, including the connectivity
component. However, based on current cost estimates for all Measure N work,
the expected, final assessment for property owners is well within $76 million
approved in Measure N.
Timeline
If a design option is selected by Council, the design would be completed and
advertised for construction bids as part of the overall Main Library construction
package. Specifics of the connectivity design such as materials, colors and
plantings would be reviewed by the ARB and HRB along with any design items
that relate to the Main Library building. Staff would work with the gardeners and
PARC for items that pertain specifically to the community garden. If a connector
between the Art Center and Main Library is approved by Council, those plots
impacted by the connector driveway would be closed shortly before construction
and relocated to another area. Staff will work with impacted gardeners prior to
the start of construction to determine the best means of, and season for moving
existing garden beds, materials and plants. With the exception of the time
needed to move impacted garden plots, gardeners should have access to their
plants throughout the construction period via the Art Center parking lot off of
Embarcadero Road.
The Downtown Library re-opened on July 16, 2011,and the Mitchell Park Library
and Community Center is currently estimated to re-open to the public in early
2013. The design for the Main Library is approximately 90 percent complete and
the plans are expected to be ready to bid in November or December of 2012.
Construction on the Main Library is expected to last 14 to 16 months.
The temporary Main Library will be located in the Art Center Auditorium which is
now under construction as part of the Art Center renovation. It is expected to be
opened to the public once the Main Library has closed.
Environmental Review
On July 21, 2008, the Council confirmed the Director of Planning and Community
May 21, 2012 Page 12 of 12
(ID # 2039)
Environment’s approvals of a 2007 Addendum to the 2002 final Environmental
Impact Report for the Main Library.
Attachments:
·Attachment A: Connection Options (PDF)
·Attachment B: Library Advisory Commission meeting minutes (PDF)
·Attachment C: PARC Meeting Minutes, Oct 25, 2011 (DOC)
Prepared By:Karen Bengard, Senior Engineer
Department Head:J. Michael Sartor, Director
City Manager Approval: ____________________________________
James Keene, City Manager
Existing Site
Community
Garden
Art
Garden
Main
Library
Art
Center
2
Option A –Vehicle Connector
3
Option B –
Pedestrian + Bike Connector
4
Option C –Option C –
Pedestrian + Bike Path
5
Existing Garden Annex ‐Aerial
6
Proposed Garden Plots ‐Aerial
7
Proposed Garden Matrix
8
LAC:20111027m 1
MINUTES
Library Advisory Commission (LAC)
October 27, 2011
Downtown Library Community Room
270 Forest Ave.
7:00 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Tolulope Akinola (7:30), Leonardo Hochberg, Eileen
Landauer, Bob Moss, Theivanai Palaniappan,
Mary Beth Train
Staff Present: Monique le Conge, Cornelia van Aken, Evelyn Cheng
Council Liaison: Greg Schmid
CALL TO ORDER – Palaniappan called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS – None
AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, DELETIONS – The order of Agenda items
#3 and #4 were switched to accommodate the public.
BUSINESS
1. Establishing Rules of Conduct and Procedures at LAC Meetings
Palaniappan recommended that the Commission establish the following
rules of conduct and procedures at meetings:
- Adhere to time limits for agenda items.
- Stay focused on the topic of discussion.
- Aim to end the meeting by 9:30 p.m. If not, stop at 9:30 p.m. to
assess if remaining agenda items should be moved to the next meeting.
.
MOTION: Landauer moved, seconded by Hochberg.
“The LAC accepts the rules of conduct and procedures as
presented by the LAC Chair.”
Motion passed, 5-0 (Akinola was not present at time of voting).
2. Approval of Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting on July 28, 2011
With corrections, Hochberg moved to approve minutes of Regular
Meeting on July 28, 2011. Landauer seconded. Minutes were approved
unanimously.
APPROVED
LAC:20111027m 2
3. Main Library Design update and Main Library/Art Center Connectivity Plan
Palaniappan recognized Rita Morgin, 600 Channing Ave., from the
audience. Morgin spoke against the option to widen the connector
between the Main Library and Art Center to allow pedestrians, bikes as
well as vehicles.
Karen Bengard, Senior Engineer/Public Works, gave background on how
the idea to better integrate the two buildings came about, with Group 4
Architecture developing conceptual options for a visual connecting link.
These conceptual options have been presented to the community and
boards and commissions.
Dawn Merkes, Group 4 Architecture, gave updates on Library projects
schedule and more specifically on the Main Library building design –
sustainable building strategies, additions to the building, e.g. bracing,
bicycle canopies, study/program rooms, restrooms - including landscape
and tree preservation plan, as well as the Main Library and Art Center
campus integration concepts.
There are two options for the site integration:
Option A – Road connector with concrete/cobbled textured paving,
widens the connector to allow vehicles but reduces the parking
count by 3 spaces
Option B - Concrete path for pedestrian/bike only; adds two stalls
for parking
Site integration goals are
1) Provide a safer pedestrian crossing and entry connection between
the two facilities
2) Provide as much parking as practical within existing hardscape
areas
3) Create a campus design that connects the Library, Art Center and
Community Garden
4) Improve access to campus parking
Palaniappan recognized the following from the audience, who spoke about
their concern for safety with the proposed shared space for cars,
pedestrian and bikes (Option A), and their preference for Option B:
- Andrew Boone, resident (nauboone@gmail.com)
- Herb Borock, P.O. Box 632, Palo Alto Borock also spoke about
the venue for LAC meetings, now held at Downtown Library
instead of City Hall’s Council Conference Room.
- Adina Levin, 1015 Fremont St., Menlo Park
LAC:20111027m 3
Discussion followed, with members of the LAC providing comments,
asking questions/clarification about the additions for Main Library and
stating preferences regarding the site integration concepts.
MOTION: Moss moved, Landauer seconded.
“That the LAC recommends Option A, with the caveat/understanding to
reconfigure if any problem does arise later.”
Motion passed, 5-1 (Hochberg opposing)
City Council’s discussion of the options for connectivity between the Art
Center and the Main Library is scheduled for December 12 (Action item).
4. Presentation on Art for Main Library and Art Center Percent for Art Project
Le Conge introduced Larisa Usich, Vice Chair of the Public Art
Commission (PAC), who gave a background of the process for selecting
the public art for the Main Library and Art Center, and a presentation on
the work of the artists selected for this project. The goal is to enhance the
connectivity between the Art Center, Main Library and adjacent
Community Gardens.
Commissioners watched the proposal video of the artists Joe O’Connell
and Blessing Hancock of Tucson AZ: six interactive metal sculptures in
lantern like forms for the plaza with letter cutouts forming words and
narrative phrases. These sculptures are lit at night and will change colors
when the public interacts with the sculptures.
Usich said the artists and PAC would like some help to refine the design
and would be interested to get input on thoughts for the languages and
texts to be used in the art pieces.
Members of the LAC asked questions about the art concept – where each
piece will be situated, safety issue, if any, etc. – and provided
comments/suggestions for moving the pieces around and for gathering
some statistics on what languages and texts to use.
Usich added that the artists will be coming back in December to get
community feedback.
The LAC thanked Usich for her presentation.
The contract with artist team Joe O’Connell and Blessing Hancock to
create site specific artworks for the Art Center and Main Library combined
percent for art project will go to Council on November 1.
LAC:20111027m 4
5. Reports from LAC Subcommittees on 2011 Priorities
The three LAC sub-committees met with le Conge to discuss their work
prior to the LAC meeting.
Moss and Train on measurement and analytics – will focus on developing
a simple dashboard and defining what the Commission wants to
know/work on and why.
Landauer provided a draft of dashboard metrics, with key information
taken from the Library’s statistical dashboard (How the Library Served
You @ http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=28746)
and included information highlighting those items chosen as key projects
by the LAC for the current year.
Akinola and Hochberg on communication/marketing – the sub-
committee is leaning towards focusing on a virtual branch for marketing
opportunities, utilizing the Library website to engage patrons to access
library resources and services.
Commissioners agreed to duplicate Landauer’s exercise to come up with
suggestions for a dashboard to streamline the process. Staff will send out
the two documents to Commissioners and comments, if any, will be given
to le Conge for review and/or to collate.
6. Planning for LAC Joint Meeting with City Council on December 5, 2011
Le Conge said the date for the Joint Meeting with City Council has been
moved to December 12 (new date), to coincide with Council’s discussion
of the options for connectivity between the Main Library and Art Center.
Members of the LAC gave suggestions for topics of discussion at the
December 12 meeting: the subcommittees’ work, why chosen and current
status; virtual branch for Library; populated dashboard; Link+; e-Books;
long-term takeaways - ideas on how to keep all five libraries open with
existing resources; suite of services available; how to be creative to
provide new needs/services to the community.
Hochberg said it would be more efficient to focus on a small number of
topics, get Council’s feedback and answer questions.
Schmid encouraged the LAC to use the time to not only bring issues to
Council, but to mention success stories as there is a sense of celebration
with the library building projects.
LAC:20111027m 5
The usual practice is for the Chair and Vice Chair to meet with the Mayor
and Vice Mayor to decide on the agenda for the meeting. Palaniappan
said it would be helpful if this meeting can be held before the LAC meeting
on November 17. Staff will send the meeting request.
LIBRARY DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Le Conge provided a written report of recent library activities of interest in the
packet, which included
All Palo Alto City Libraries will be closed on October 31 for a major
technology upgrade that will improve its Integrated Library and Public
Access Computer Systems. While the Library is closed, staff will work on
special projects that do not require a working catalog, including program
planning, community collaboration, and statistical analysis.
A tour of the Mitchell Park construction site is scheduled for (1) the LAC
and Parks and Recreation Commission on November 4, 4 p.m, (2) the
Palo Alto Library Foundation (PALF) on November 18.
Diane Lai’s first day in Palo Alto will be on November 17. She is the new
Division Head, Collections and Technical Services, replacing Mary Minto
who retired after 39 years of service.
Google Chromebooks (internet browsers) will be available to library users
at the Downtown, Main, and Mitchell Park Temporary Libraries from
November 8, 2011 through February 7, 2012. Palo Alto is the only public
library that Google approached for testing its product.
September’s Library Card Sign-up campaign was very successful in
encouraging City staff to visit the Downtown Library and sign up for library
cards.
Update on Mitchell Park project: Construction is progressing well and 5%
of the contingency has been spent to date.
Upcoming Council dates:
November 7 - Report on Automated Materials Handling
November 21 – Community presentation on Project Safety Net
OTHER REPORTS
Commissioner reports and questions:
Train said she appreciates getting copies of public letters to Council and
responses from staff.
Commissioners reported on other meetings that they attended in October:
Palo Alto Library Foundation Board meeting on October 11 - Train
Friends of the Palo Alto Library’s Board and Annual Meeting held
on October 12 – Moss
Library Bond Stakeholder’s Meeting on October 4 and 13 -
Hochberg
LAC:20111027m 6
Council Liaison Report:
Council interviewed candidates for the LAC vacancy on October 24 and
will be voting to appoint on November 7.
The submittal of the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Monthly
Construction Contract Report to Council and Council’s direction to staff to
continue these reports will be scheduled in November.
Schmid looks forward to the upcoming LAC Joint Meeting with Council in
December.
COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Commissioners agreed to continue to hold LAC meetings at Downtown
Library but with a different room set-up, similar to that in the Council
Conference Room, to interact effectively with the public.
Hochberg has photos available for Commissioners to review of his recent
visit to a London library.
le Conge asked about a December meeting for the LAC. In recent years,
the Commission did not meet in December unless there is a need to
respond to Council action.
AGENDA for meeting on November 17, 2011:
The items suggested for the meeting are:
Staff Presentation: Youth Services, e-Readers, Strategic Planning
Planning for LAC Joint Meeting with City Council on December 12,
2011
Library Dashboard
Virtual Library Plan
Hochberg moved to adjourn.
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 10:28 p.m.
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 1
Attachment C
MINUTES
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2011
City Hall
250 Hamilton Ave
Commissioners Present:Deidre Crommie, Sunny Dykwel, Jennifer Hetterly, Ed Lauing,Pat
Markevitch,Daria Walsh
Commissioners Absent:Paul Losch
Others Present: Council Liaison Karen Holman
Staff Present: Daren Anderson, Greg Betts, Sally Camozzi, Rob de Geus, Joe
Vallaire
I.ROLL CALL CONDUCTED BY: Sally Camozzi
II.AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, and DELETIONS:
III.ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:Mark Petersen-Perez commented that Police Chief
Dennis Burns is holding meetings behind closed doors, which he believes is a violation of
the Brown Act.
IV. BUSINESS:
1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the September 27, 2011 regular meeting - The
September 27,2011 draft minutes were approved as amended. Approved 6:0
2.Presentation from the Friends of Palo Alto Parks –Daren Anderson introduced
Susan Beale, a long-time resident of Palo Alto and a board member of the Friends of
Palo Alto Parks. She said the Friends work to achieve three objectives:
a. to provide funding to enrich, enhance and beautify Palo Alto Parks and
Open Space Preserves;
b. to foster greater public awareness, appreciation and ownership; and
c. to raise funds to assist in the purchase of additional parks and open space.
She went over some of the projects that they have and are currently working
on together as a public/private partnership. These included working with the
Kiwanis’ to provide color to the beds on Embarcadero Road and Heritage
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 2
Park playground. The beautification and the renaming of Lytton Plaza, the
Magical Bridge Project at Mitchell Park, one of the first universally accessible
playgrounds in Palo Alto’s park system. Susan Beale also invited the
Commissioners to come to one of their board meetings at 1950 University
Avenue on the second Tuesday of each month at 11:30am.
Public Comment
Mark Weiss –Mr. Weiss spoke on the renaming of Lytton Plaza. He made some
suggestions such as;Joan Baez, Wallace Stegner,and Goodwin Steinberg.
3.Recommendation to Council for a Park Improvement Ordinance for the
installation of a restroom at Juana Briones Park –Holly Boyd with the Public
Works Engineering department presented the Park Improvement Ordinance and asked
for the support of the Commission. Based on a community meeting in September
2011, the public supports a restroom but preferred an alternative location.The
proposed new location near the fire station would require the removal of 3 fruit trees;
however they would be replaced with new trees and plantings in the vicinity of the
new restrooms. The restrooms would be 20’ x 25’ with automatic locks which would
be programmed to unlock at dawn and lock for the night at dusk.
Public Comment
Aram James –Mr. James expressed concern about locking restrooms between dusk and
dawn. He suggested surveillance instead if the City is concerned about criminal activity
in the restrooms. He again stated that he was in favor of a restroom for everyone’s use.
Trina Lovercheck –Ms. Lovercheck spoke in support of the restroom in the park, and
feels the location near fire station is a good idea.
Mark Petersen-Perez –Mr. Peterson-Perez also expressed concern about vandalism, and
suggested that perhaps the public could use the restroom at the fire station instead. He
would like to see a green design for the new restroom that would utilize green technology
such as solar panels to provide power, and would like to see no additional expense
incurred to provide the restroom.
Commissioner Crommie suggested placards on the restroom to provide the location of the
nearest open restroom and a number for the public to call to report graffiti. She also
suggested the use of a graffiti-resistant coating to protect the restroom structure.It was
noted that the residents preferred the Seale Park model for the new restroom.
Commissioner Dykwel commented that the City has an ordinance that closes all parks
from dusk to dawn.Chair Walsh asked whether the restroom could be moved to the
decomposed granite area adjacent to the basketball court as opposed to on the grass
area requiring the removal of trees. Holy Boyd responded by saying the location was
recommended by the public at the community meeting and further she would be
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 3
concerned that the safety buffer zone needed for the basketball court would likely be a
problem.
Motion: The Parks and Recreation Commission Recommend to Council to approve
the Park Improvement Ordinance for the installation of a restroom at
Juana Briones Park. Passed 6:0.
4.Review updated concepts for improving the Main Library/Art Center connectivity -
Rob de Geus introduced Karen Bengard, Senior Engineer Public Work Department who
presented some renderings of three possible designs to improve Art Center / Main
Library connectivity. Karen Bengard stated that they had four goals in mind while
planning the project.
a. to respect the historical character of the site;
b. to embrace sustainable concepts;
c. to utilize the external space to allow people to gather; and
d. to integrate the design to provide a consistent campus.
The plan includes removal of 11 trees, of which 8 are large juniper shrubs. A total of 21
new trees would be planted to replace these existing trees/shrubs. The goals for the
integration of the space would be for safety and lighting. Two separate options were
introduced; one option (A) calls for a shared roadway for cars, pedestrians and bicyclists
sharing the road. Another option (B) calls for a pedestrian/bicycle pathway only.
Public Comment
Pingyu Liu -Mr. Liu felt the proposed renderings represented a beautiful, thoughtful
design, but doesn’t want the City to spend the money since he doesn’t see the project as a
necessity. He supports the proposed safety aspects but thinks signage could be used to
achieve the same purpose.
Andrew Boone –Mr. Boone frequently visits the Community Garden; he is concerned
about a road being placed into this safe and peaceful environment. Palo Alto should be
promoting more pedestrian only zones; he felt the city should be promoting safety for
children over having to drive a few extra minutes to find a parking space in an adjacent
lot.
Rita Morgin -Ms. Morgin expressed her concern over the design featuring cobblestones.
She felt the pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be handicap-accessible, paved with
smooth surfaces and clear, well-lit way-finding. She supports pedestrian and bicycle-
friendly pathways, but not car friendly. She also inquired about the cost of the project.
Ute Engelke -Ms. Engelke supported the previous public comment and reminded the
Commission that this is the year of the bicycle not the automobile. She added that she
would like to see more information related to the cost and the comparison of all the
options and a better understanding of the connectivity between the library and the
gardens which doesn’t appear to be shown in the design concepts.
Commissioner Comments
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 4
Commissioner Crommie agreed that the proposed connection was very beautiful; but
expressed concern over the need to connect parking lots. She felt there were two separate
issues; the connection between buildings and the connection between parking lots.She
also questioned the rationale for constructing a vehicle connector road and was not
convinced it would resolve the concerns of frustrated drivers.
Commissioner Markevitch suggested changing the timing for the light on Newell and
Embarcadero to relieve the car-parking issue. She stated that the reason for the public’s
frustration with cutting through lots is largely due to the long wait at the light at Newell
and Embarcadero. She also supports a pedestrian/bicycle pathway without cars.
Further discussion followed regarding the need to include Parks staff in the selection of
the plantings as they will be responsible for maintaining them. Commissioners were
interested to learn more about the cost of the connector road versus the bicycle pedestrian
path. According to Bengard, the Library Director fully supports the vehicle road. The
funding for this project would be divided 50/50 between the Art Center project budget
and the library project budget.
Motion: The Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation is Option B, the
pedestrian/bicycle pathway, between the Art Center and Library. Passed: 4:2
(Commissioners Walsh and Crommie)
Note –Chair Walsh opposed the motion in support of the Art Center Director and Library
Director who both support a connector road for vehicles believing it would be beneficial
to their respective operations. Commissioner Crommie opposed the vote for entirely
different reasons, believing that an option of no path, leaving the area more natural with
mulch should be considered.
5. Informational report on Public Art planned for the Main Library/Art Center Project
Elise DeMarzo of the City’s Art Center presented the artists’ renderings for the proposed
Art for the Art Center and Main Library connectivity. The Commission was pleased with
the proposed art.
Commissioner Dykwel suggested that the youth in our community come up with words
and phrases to be contained in the public art such as “proactive”, “open spaces” and
“innovation”. Commissioner Hetterly suggested that the lights in the art pieces shine
more brightly down and less brightly up. She also suggested some words for the art such
as “citizen engagement and informed” and recommended staff suggest words that speak
to the communities values.
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 5
6.Presentation and discussion on the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course
Reconfiguration Configuration -Rob de Geus provided some background information
to the Commission. In his discussion he provided specific information such as:
·The cost to run the golf course is approximately $3 million a year (excludes
overhead cost and debt service)
·Debt service is $650,000
·Play decline for the last 10 years
·100,000 rounds in 1990 to 70,000 rounds in 2011
·Palo Alto Golf Course still doing better then other local golf courses.
Forrest Richardson presented the process he has gone through in coming up with the initial
reconfiguration alternatives of the golf course in conjunction with the flood control project.
Mr. Richardson has completed a course evaluation and study, and based on this
information he has come up with various schematic design options. He has been contracted
by the City separately to also prepare a master plan for the golf course.
Mr. Richardson’s goals for this project include accommodating the creek mitigation,
improving play, creating a more memorable golf experience (the WOW factor) and
establishing a roadmap for the future. Given the current constraints, he offered 6 different
solutions by providing 6 schematic design options to reconfigure the holes to
accommodate the creek mitigation project. He also discussed incorporating the Baylands
theme into the master plan which can be implemented right now or over the next 10 years,
all with the goal of creating a better facility to include:
a.New entry signage and a new road into the golf course;
b.Expanded and enhanced parking with more spaces and landscaping;
c.A trail system (hiking and biking) with access to food and drink or perhaps the
driving range;
d.An open-air cart storage building with natural ventilation;
e.A high-tech range performance building;
f.A public putting green;
g.An expanded driving range with an estimated $30,000 per bay in projected annual
revenue;
h.A second putting green;
i.A wedding lawn; and
j.A clubhouse expansion/enhancement.
Public Comment
Craig Allen –Mr.Allen spoke on behalf of himself and other golfers saying that they
were excited about the options being proposed. He also felt that the City by not selecting
Option A and going with Option D would be beneficial to the city by drawing in more
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 6
golfers and increase revenue. Mr. Allen was also pleased with the cooperation that
SFCJPA has provided and felt it has added to the strength of the project.
The Commission was then given time for comments.
Council Liaison Holman asked if there were figures for the profit potential of the other
options which include weddings, utilizing the restaurant for dinner, etc. Rob de Geus
responded that they weren’t there yet, and they had just seen the schematics earlier that
day.
Commissioner Markevitch asked if it was possible to combine use of the driving range
with a soccer field after 8:00pm. Forrest Richardson responded that it was possible but an
analysis would be required. The driving range is currently graded for golf and not a
soccer field and he is not aware of another multi-use situation
Commissioner Hetterly knows golfers who would never choose Palo Alto Muni Golf
Course as their first choice, and she would not support Option A. She supports the other
options that would move the golf course up from the last choice course. She loves the
idea of bringing the Baylands feel into the golf course, and making the restaurant into a
lunch spot for the area.
Commissioner Crommie is not a fan of the golf course, and thinks if we plan to keep the
golf course we should make it an asset. She likes the dual-use concept, incorporating
trails for hikers and bikers. She also introduced the idea of bike rentals at the golf course
and feels it would make a better entry to biking at the Baylands. She also suggested a
name change for the course to Palo Alto Baylands Golf Course.
In response to Commissioner Crommie’s questions about the levy trail, Kevin Murray
(SFCJPA) responded that trail improvements are planned in the project which would
include improved connection to the Bay Trail to the north and south. Also, there will be
improved access and a wider trail from 12 to 16 feet wide.
Commissioner Lauing was really impressed with the architectural design of the proposed
buildings and also impressed with the price. He feels there would be many opportunities
for programming and he envisions it becoming another community center. His concern is
that in the past, Council has not been supportive of investments in the golf course, but
thinks this architectural design could prove to be a spectacular community center.
Chair Walsh believes it is critical to find new and creative ways to increase resident use
and participation of the golf course. If this becomes a place Palo Alto residents will go
and use, they will value it. She also recommends the plans for the golf course and
APPROVED
October 25,2011 Approved Minutes 7
buildings are as environmentally friendly as possible which will appeal to the
community.
7. Recommendation to revise Municipal Code 22.04.180 to place limits on amplified
sound at Lytton Plaza –Daren Anderson reviewed the recommendation of amending the
existing Ordinance 22.04.180 (Parks and Recreation Building Use and Regulations) of the
Municipal Code that was included in the Commissioners packet. The amendment is to
impose a permit requirement and time use limitations for sound amplification on
equipment only at Lytton Plaza.He informed the Commission that there have been
numerous complaints made to the police department from the surrounding local businesses
and citizens.According to April Wagner of the Police department, they do not have enough
resources to respond to these complaints.
Public Comment
Mark Weiss -Mr. Weiss commented on his disappointment with the staff report. He
encouraged the Commission to not approve this amendment. He referenced the cities of
Los Angeles and Seattle, stating that they both have attempted to ban amplified music
from street musicians and both cases wee subsequently thrown out of courts.
Herb Borack –Mr. Borack also opposed the amendment and felt it would have a definite
impact on the freedom of expression at Lytton Plaza.
Susan Webb –Ms. Webb spoke on not supporting this amendment. She has utilized this
location every Wednesday and Friday night since January 2010 and felt it would be a
shame to make the musicians pay for a permit to perform in the plaza.
The Commission after discussing this item felt that it needed to be discussed further and
Commissioners Markevitch and Dykwel suggested that a subcommittee be formed to look
into it further. An ad hoc committee was formed with Commissioners Lauing, Markevitch
and Dykwel.It was then agreed to take no action until after the ad hoc committee meets
and bring it back to the Commission at a later date.
V. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
None
VI.TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR DECEMBER 13, 2011 MEETING
VII. ADJOURNMENT
12 midnight