Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4305 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4305) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 12/2/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Study Session - Parks and Recreation Commission and Council Title: Potential List of Topics for the Joint Meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission and City Council From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services See attached agenda Attachments:  Council Study Session - December 2 2013 (DOC)  PARC Memo - Council Study Session 12-2013 v2 (PDF) 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. AGENDA IS POSTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2(a) OR SECTION 54956 CITY COUNCIL AND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MEETING DECEMBER 2, 2013 AGENDA City Hall Council Conference Room 5:30PM Meeting 250 Hamilton Ave 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 to15 minutes. IV. BUSINESS Below are the potential topics of discussion for the joint study session with the Parks and Recreation Commission scheduled for December 2, 2013 at 5:30PM: 1. Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2. Baylands Athletic Center - 10.5 acres 3. Shared-use of athletics fields for dog parks 4. Golf Course parking lot/entrance/clubhouse 5. Other items ___________________________ _____________________ Rob de Geus PAM ANTIL Division Manager, Recreation Services Assistant City Manager 1 To: City Council From: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: December 2, 2013 Subject: Sampling of recent Parks and Recreation Commission Work The purpose of the Parks and Recreation Commission (PARC) is to advise the City Council on matters pertaining to the activities of the Open Space, Parks and Golf Division and the Recreation Division of the Community Services Department. The Commission's responsibilities include:  Advising on planning and policy matters relating to the goals of and the services provided by the two Divisions;  Advising on planning and policy matters relating to the construction and renovation of capital facilities;  Reviewing state legislative proposals that may affect the operation of the two Divisions; and  Receiving community input concerning parks, open space and recreation activities. The Parks and Recreation Commission has a wide range of interests and works closely with CSD staff to improve the Parks and Open Space systems, to create better connectivity of trails, to enhance the health and wellbeing of residents, to enrich people’s lives through recreation programs and services and to help develop responsible long range plans for the highest and best use of parks and recreation amenities. Below is a sampling of topics the PARC has worked on this past year: 1. Field Use Policy – The PARC worked closely with staff and sports organization to improve the Fields and Tennis Court Use Policy resulting in more efficient use of athletic field space - see Attachment A for a summary of policy changes approved by Council. Parks and Recreation Commission MEMORANDUM 2 2. Cubberley Community Center. The PARC actively participated in the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee and advised Council with the memo - see Attachment B. 3. Parks and Recreation Master Plan – The PARC worked with staff to develop the scope of services and participated in the interviews and selection process of a consultant. 4. Golf Course Reconfiguration Project – The PARC has been closely involved with Golf Course reconfiguration project for the past two years - see Attachment C. The PARC is currently working with staff to help define an acceptable tree mitigation plan for the Golf Course. 5. Rinconada Park Long Range Plan – The PARC held numerous meetings to review and provide advice on the Rinconada Park Long Range Plan that will be before Council for approval in early 2014. 6. Smoking in Public Parks – The PARC provided advice to Council on banning smoking in Palo Alto parks. 7. Feeding Wildlife – The PARC recommend that Council amend Municipal Code to prohibit the feeding of wildlife and feral animals at Palo Alto’s Parks and Open Space areas. 8. Cost of Services Study – The PARC reviewed the Cost of Services Study and remains very interested in the topic and how parks, open space, golf and recreation services may be impacted. 9. Parks and Landscape design – The PARC regularly reviews and provides input on park and landscape design, in 2013 this included Scott Park, El Camino Park, Eleanor Pardee Park and the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) Landscaping Project. 10. Magical Bridge Playground - The PARC has been steadfast supporters and advocates for the Magical Bridge Play Ground. 11. Community Health and Wellness – The PARC has an ongoing interest in health and wellness and is an active member of the Project Safety Net Community Collation. Attachments: Attachment A: PARC Memo to Council regarding Cubberley Community Center Attachment B: Summary of adopted changes to the Athletic Field and Tennis Court Use Policy Attachment C: PARC Memo to Council regarding the Golf Course 3 ATTACHMENT A Summary of Changes to the Palo Alto Athletic Fields and Tennis Court use Policy Approved by Council - June 17, 2013 Policy Section Previous Policy Revised Policy Eligibility The previous policy gave priority to sports organizations that do not have a “try out” process. These organizations are called non-select leagues. The new policy removes exclusive priority for non-select leagues in favor of youth organizations with 51% or more residents and adult organizations with 35% or more, residents. Fields are now allocated based on the number of residents served in each respective organization. A round robin selection process is used to distribute fields as defined in the Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines that accompanies the policy. The revised policy allows youth organizations with 51% or more residents and adult organizations with 35% or more residents to discuss and negotiate a field allocation agreement with City staff facilitating in advance of a round robin process. If an agreement cannot be reached the round robin brokering process will be used. Cancellations Previous policy stated all cancelations must be made two weeks after the start of the permit. Previous practice allowed cancellations any time with no penalty. Cancellations for weekday use fields better defined: 1. 1. Before the start of the permit - full refund.) 2. 2. After the start of the permit by the 7th of each month - 50% refund. 3. 3. After the 7th of each month - no refund Cancellations for weekend fields:  1. Up to three weeks after the publication of the leagues game schedule – full refund  2. After three weeks of the publication of the leagues game schedule, and by the 7th of each month 4 - 50% refund.  3. After the 7th of the each month - no refund. Practice and Game slots Previous policy did not define practice or game field slots Practice slots are defined - for youth soccer 1.5 hours, 4-5:30pm, 5:30-7pm, with additional slots of 7-8:30pm and 8:30-10pm on fields with lights. Game slots are defined - for youth soccer 1.5 hours on small fields and 2 hours on 11 versus 11 (large fields). Field Allocations Previous policy did not allocate fields by age of user and size of fields. Fields are divided into three categories; Small fields = 7 versus 7 or younger Medium fields = 8 versus 8 and 10 versus 10 Large Fields = 11 versus 11 Fields will be allocated to organizations based on the age of participants and the appropriate size of fields. Field Allocation (daylight savings) Previous policy did not consider the loss of day light in fall due to daylight savings. Organizations are responsible for reserving sufficient 4pm field slots to accommodate the daylight savings time change. Tournaments Field brokering for tournaments was not addressed in previous policy. Organizations with 51% or more residents can reserve fields for one tournament in a calendar year. Adult Play Previous policy gave adults “some fields” on Sundays from 8-1:15pm, and set aside 8:30pm-10pm on Stanford Palo Alto Community Fields on Tuesday and Thursday and 7pm-10pm on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Revised policy specifies field locations and reduces one weekday evening field slot i.e. 7-8:30pm:  Stanford Palo Alto Community Fields are reserved for adult play 8:30pm- 10pm on Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday and 7pm-10pm on Wednesday and Friday.  Adult play will also be permitted Sundays from 8am-12:30pm on Terman 1 and 2, JLS 1, 2 and 3 and Stanford Palo Alto Community Fields North and South. 5 ATTACHMENT B To: Palo Alto City Council From: Palo Alto Parks and Recreation Commission Date: April 23, 2013 Subject: PARC Response to Report of the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee ________________________________________________________________________ The Parks and Recreation Commission fully supports the recommendations of the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee (CCAC). We specifically want to emphasize the importance of the following recommendations from the CCAC Final Report (letter headings refer to the CCAC Report, Volume 1, starting on page 11): A. “It is the strong recommendation of the CCAC that the entire Cubberley site become a joint/shared City/School District use facility.” Community services make a vital contribution to the quality of life for all ages in Palo Alto. These services bring the community together and provide ways for our youth to build developmental assets, for families to have quality childcare and early education, and for all residents to pursue opportunities for life-long learning and recreation for health and well-being. The co-location of school and community services on Cubberley’s large and easily accessible site offers a unique opportunity to coordinate facility design and programming to accommodate a combination of joint and shared use of the site1. Such an outcome promises not only to maximize use of this valued public resource, but also to realize an unprecedented integration of services for Palo Alto’s community. We urge you to pursue this strategy. C. “The current Covenant Not To Develop should be removed from a Cubberley lease extension.” We agree that the Covenant Not to Develop should be eliminated from the lease. The CCAC left it to lease negotiators to determine whether the funds associated with the existing Covenant Not to Develop would continue to flow to the School District in some way. While the School District relies on revenue from the Covenant in their annual budget, the City also faces substantial demands on those General Fund resources. Both agencies and the Palo Alto community also share a significant interest in a positive future for Cubberley. In light of the magnitude of the endeavor of comprehensive planning for shared use of Cubberley, we recommend that the City and the School District consider the option of using those "Covenant" dollars to support the steps 1 Joint use is use of the same structure/facility by both sets of users (either time separated, i.e., classrooms used by school during the day, and by community after school, or concurrent, i.e. food service facilities available for both school and community use throughout the day). Shared use refers to use that may include joint use elements, but also simply co-location of separate facilities on the same site. 6 necessary to realize the vision of integrated school/community use of the site (including funding of such things as needs assessment, planning, design and development.) I. “In the first five years of any lease extension, there should be a Community Needs Assessment developed with professional support.” We strongly support investment in a comprehensive community needs assessment with specific direction to look at city-wide public resources, including school sites, recreation facilities (i.e., fields and gyms), and community centers, with an eye toward geographic distribution suited to needs, accessibility by walking, bicycling and transit and joint use opportunities. We know that community services are supported in both City and School facilities, but there is little, if any, coordination between the two and a dearth of usable data about what is provided where, to whom, and at what cost, and whether or how such programming serves the needs of the community. We advocated for a Long-Range Master Plan for Parks and Recreation because we believe that parks and recreation improvements should not be considered in an ad hoc, reactive way. Instead, investments should be prioritized based on a more holistic view of community needs and resources. Using dog parks as an example, the community might be served better if we understood the type and size of facility and the geographic area(s) of greatest need and likely to get the most use, and then sought the best arrangement to accommodate it - instead of trying to squeeze any dog park into whatever space we can find. Similarly, thoughtful programming for a large site like Cubberley should take into account an understanding of community needs and public resources throughout the city and how best to integrate that facility into the network of publicly supported services. While the scope of the Long-Range Master Plan for Parks and Recreation is necessarily limited by the budget allotted, it will provide an important first step toward understanding our current park and recreation needs and resources. What it will not do is evaluate the supply and demand for the full range of publicly supported community services in Palo Alto or forecast the future needs of our growing and changing population. A city-wide, comprehensive needs assessment will fill in those gaps and help both the School District and the City to plan for appropriate programming and flexible new spaces and to make informed decisions about whether to make long term investments in the preservation of specific Cubberley facilities. K. “The City and the School District shall explore the possibility of expanding City/School District joint-use agreement models including the expansion of joint-use at City and School District facilities.” Given our growing population and shrinking opportunities to expand facility resources, the need to maximize use of our existing facilities will only increase. With the information to be gleaned from a comprehensive city-wide needs assessment, the City and School District will be in a good position to identify compatibilities in facility needs and to coordinate and prioritize facility use, both School- and City-owned. This course should be pursued not only at Cubberley, but at all publicly funded facilities. Under the current model, both the City and individual school sites program their facilities with little consideration of the services provided by the other – and based on different guidelines and fee scales. Programming all public spaces in a more coordinated way would provide a greater 7 variety of services to more residents, bring rental fees into balance (based on size, type and quality of facility rather than who the landlord is), ensure that public spaces serve the local community, and exploit opportunities for cost efficiencies through cooperative maintenance and/or operations. Expansion of existing joint-use agreements (e.g., the field use agreement) and development of new joint-use models will lay the critical groundwork to support the current and growing needs of our community. Q. “The City should not relinquish ownership of its 8 acres.” As noted above, meeting the needs of our growing and changing local population will require more community facilities, not less. As such, we strongly support retaining City ownership of 8 acres at Cubberley, as it ensures that both the City and the School District have a vested interest in cooperative development of the site while also safeguarding flexibility to address changing needs in the future. Of Special Concern to the PARC: Athletic Facilities – The CCAC report highlights the potential for a severe impact on availability of fields and gyms for community use if the School District plans a high school with a full athletic program. We are aware that many Council members hope to soften that impact through development of additional field and/or gym space at the Baylands Athletic Center (BAC) complex. However, we think it bears emphasis that the BAC is far from an ideal location, particularly for youth sports, due to its remote location, separated from the community by high traffic corridors and dangerous and limited bicycle and pedestrian connections. As a result, we would anticipate primary access by automobile, contributing to increased traffic congestion and parking demand. We encourage you to work closely with the School District to consider other options either in addition to, or instead of the BAC, to meet community needs for field/gym space, giving safe and easy access primary consideration. 8 ATTACHMENT C To: City Council From: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: April 16, 2012 Title: Palo Alto Golf Course Re-configuration Resulting From the San Francisquito Flood Control Project On March 27th, 2012 the Palo Alto Parks and Recreation Commission (PAPRC) endorsed option G for the renovation of the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course (Golf Course) in conjunction with the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (SFCJPA) renovation of the levy adjoining the Golf Course. Below the PAPRC articulate the benefits and areas requiring special consideration with option G:  This valuable recreation area is transformed into a magnificent layout integrating more naturally with the Baylands. It can be a destination “park” for golfers and other outdoor enthusiasts with the opportunity over time to make the clubhouse and its environs a true community center.  This design allows the City to reserve 10.5 acres suitable for multiple recreation and park needs while maintaining a full “regulation” golf course appealing to golfers of all ages and drawing golfers from a wide area. The Commission recommends that an open and inclusive process be undertaken to explore the full array of recreation needs for the use of the 10.5 acres.  The current course is profitable and contributes positively to City revenues. Assumptions and projections on estimated rounds played on the renovated course indicate that this asset is highly likely to substantially increase revenue contribution to the City after construction with option G contributing the highest revenue of all the options. The new design with “wow-factors” in many places will be a real draw for golfers from an extended geographical area.  The full long-term vision to complete transformation of the site – including clubhouse architectural drawings, new parking and pedestrian flow and practice areas - needs to be presented to the Council now for future planning. The above recommendation is tempered by the following facts:  Costs for option G are the highest of the choices - exceeding $7 million. Recently the Blue Ribbon Infrastructure Committee completed work on expenditure priorities. This new project needs to be prioritized and fully funded from known sources. In addition there will be one-year of course closure which will negatively impact stretched City budgets. Lastly, the City should be cognizant of the disproportionate burden on golfers to pay for a golf course design that sets aside 10.5 acres of land for other recreational uses. 9  While there is a lot of ad-hoc comment on the need for athletic fields there is no documented urgent need for additional athletic field space at present. The City has done a good job of expanding field space already. Notable examples are the new Stanford fields and the current construction on El Camino Park which will include a full size turf field. Further play on existing fields could be created by adding lights at lower cost than additional fields. Demographic and community trends need to be watched closely to address future recreational needs.  The full benefit of the golf course renovation (for golfers and non-golfers) cannot be realized without additional significant changes to the buildings, parking and pedestrian access, and practice area of the course. Maximum revenue will likely be blunted for tournament play and corporate outings/meetings by the current unappealing amenities. There will be a jarring difference between the entry to the facility and the course itself. Ideally, this would all be addressed as a total package on close construction timelines.  This project will have significant environmental impacts that will need to be evaluated prior to development given the proximity to sensitive environmental areas and riparian habitat.