HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-2019 PRC Agenda PacketCity of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission
Agenda
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Wednesday, December 4, 2019
5:30 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Council Chambers
990 Palm Street
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Rodney Thurman
ROLL CALL : Commissioners Kari Applegate, Keri Schwab, Vice Chair Robert Spector,
Adam Stowe, Chair Rodney Thurman, and Andrew Webber, VACANT
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the
agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address.
Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred
to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Committee of November 6, 2019.
CONSENT ITEMS
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Froom Ranch Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (Scott – 30 minutes)
Recommendation: Provide comments to staff on any additional analysis or information
needed to adequately evaluate impacts to parks and recreational facilities in the EIR for the
proposed Froom Ranch Specific Plan.
Parks and Recreation Committee Agenda for December 4, 2019
2 | P a g e
3. Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update (Avakian/Scott –
10 minutes)
Staff update of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update.
4. PRC Bylaws Review and Approval (Avakian – 10 minutes)
SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
5. Subcommittee Liaison Reports (Chair) – 15 minutes)
a. Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Spector
b. Active Transportation Committee: Commissioner Webber
c. City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner
Applegate
d. Jack House Committee: Commissioner Schwab
e. Tree Committee: Commissioner Thurman
f. Youth Sports Association: Commissioner Stowe
6. Directors’ Report (Avakian - 5 minutes)
7. Communication
ADJOURNMENT
To the meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commi ttee as approved by the PRC to
Wednesday , February 5, 20 20, at 5:30 p.m., Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request,
this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a
disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request
to the Parks and Recreation Department at (805) 781-7300 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following web address:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/fol/61014/Row1.aspx
City of San Luis Obispo, Agenda, Planning Commission
Minutes
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
5:30 p.m. REGULAR MEETING Parks and Recreation
Council Chambers
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA
CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Rodney Thurman
ROLL CALL : Vice Chair Rodney Thurman, Commissioners Kari Applegate, Keri
Schwab, Robert Spector, Adam Stowe, and Andrew Webber
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the
agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address.
Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred
to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting.
Public Comment:
Sallie Joyce Higgins and Tess Stapleton (SLO Resident): We represent the Central Coast Carousel
Committee; our goal is to bring a custom one-of-a-kind carousel to the City of San Luis Obispo.
We envision creating a carousel with whimsical animals that represent the Central Coast. We are
securing a financial sponsor and would like to inquire if Laguna Lake Park could be a place for
the carousel project.
Anita Smith (SLO Resident) – On behalf of many tennis players to return the Joanna Santassiere
Memorial tennis courts back to the tennis players. We understood that once the pickleball courts
were built, the tennis courts would be returned to tennis play. It is very difficult to play on the
courts with the multiple striping that was created for the temporary pickleball courts. The other
courts in the City are difficult to use during the day, i.e. the high school and Sinsheimer courts. I
have a petition with over 100 signatures to return the Joanna Santassiere Memorial tennis courts
to tennis only. Submitted petition to staff.
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
2 | P a g e
CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Committee of September 4, 2019.
ACTION: APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION FOR SEPTEMBER 4, 2019.
CARRIED 6:0:0:0 to approve the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body for the
regular meeting of 09/04/19 as motioned by Webber and second by Applegate.
AYES: APPLEGATE, STOWE, THURMAN, WEBBER, SCHWAB AND
SPECTOR
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
CONSENT ITEMS
NONE
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. North Broad Street Neighborhood Park (Kloepper – 30 minutes)
This is the 3rd revision and combines the comments from the September meeting to
formulate a potential final design. The goal is to endorse the design in order to bring
Recommendation:
1. Final review of North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Layout; and
2. Provide any additional direction on the North Broad Street Neighborhood Park Project.
Staff Kloepper provided a presentation on the third revision for the North Broad Street
Neighborhood Park at the corner of Lincoln and Broad, with the design by the consultant
group Cannon. The 3rd revision layout includes the summary of feedback from September 4th
meeting to combine the layouts. Staff Kloepper did indicate the parking is only eliminated on
one side of Broad Street, which forces safer parking access in the neighborhood. There is
currently no lighting at the park, there is power on the street with the potential for future
enhancements and the potential for solar lighting in the pathways.
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
3 | P a g e
Public Comment
T. Keith Gurnee – (SLO Resident): The Broad street neighborhood is under parked. A few
minor recommendations are to monitor the park for a homeless hangout. The biggest issue I
have is the lack of parking for the park, with the elimination of parking it will cause cars to
only go faster coming off the freeway. I do like the idea of perimeter fencing. Strongly
recommend keeping the onsite parking on both sides of Broad Street.
Commissioner Comment
Commissioner Applegate: Is the parking eliminated on Broad Street. Can you clarify the
reasoning behind the freeway onramp/offramp not being closed off.
Commissioner Spector: I would like to know the safety zone plan for the park, fencing,
cameras and lighting; as needed for all parks. Question for the corn hole court location,
is there a reason why the Bocce court was removed. Before this plan is approved I would
like to see a comprehensive safety plan that speaks to all these issues. Can you speak to
lighting, my concern how this affects a neighborhood park and attracts the unwanted
behavior this might bring once it is dark in the park.
Vice Chair Thurman: Comment on the planting, I appreciate the drought tolerant and
native plants. I am concerned about the purple fountain grass; it does have the potential to
be invasive and the park location is near a creek. How many Gingko trees will be
planted. Question on the ADA accessible garden plots, the reason for number of plots
assigned ADA and the spacing of plots. My preference is for a cemented raised bed
option.
Commissioner Stowe: Question regarding shade at the picnic table areas.
Commissioner Webber: Comment on the ADA garden plots, there are plots that are
raised where a wheelchair can slide (roll) under the bed, with drainage in the middle of
the bed, so can you come in on both sides, similar to a tabletop.
Summary of Commission Comments: We like the overall design. We would like to note
security enhancements, lighting, raised ADA garden plots, cemented garden plots, and native
plantings only.
3. Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update (Avakian/Scott –
1 hour)
Recommendation: Review, discuss, and provide consensus agreement on identified
Themes/Strategies, Goals, and Project Ideas for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and
General Plan Element Update.
Recommended PRC Discussion Items and Action:
1. Review and receive public comment on Draft Themes/Strategies, Goals, and Project
Ideas.
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
4 | P a g e
2. Identify any additional ideas, which can be shared with staff prior to or during the public
meeting. Are there modifications, deletions, or additions that should be included?
3. Provide consensus agreement on identified Themes/Strategies, Goals, and Project Ideas
for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update.
Staff Senior Planner Shawna Scott provided an overview of the draft themes and strategies, as a
context for the draft goals presented tonight: Goal 1: Build Community and Neighborhoods;
Goal 2: Sustainability; Goal 3: Safety; Goal 4: Parks, Facilities and Amenities; Goal 5: Fiscal
Responsibility.
Public Comment
Brian O’Kelly (SLO Resident): Representative for the Pickleball community. Today we had
44 people at French Park; playing on tennis courts, people also waiting; we would like you to
address pickleball in 20-year plan; For the Master Plan, it is typical to see a pickleball center.
We would like to a pickleball center with an additional 8 courts at French Park or another
suitable location.
Peter Meertens (SLO Resident): Resident of Sinsheimer Park neighborhood and representing
the neighbors who oppose the lights at the Sinsheimer Tennis Courts. The high school has
built wonderful new tennis courts; please use common sense planning; night time activity at
Laguna Lake; think more broadly about lights on the courts; lighting is expensive; I am
encouraged about acquiring school district land; school districts provide unique opportunity;
communication with school district/facilities.
Jeff Whitener (SLO Resident): Process concerns; and question about table; how does this fit
into the final document (Master Plan); I was thinking of a more clearly defined document;
this seems more out there; is this what final document will look like, or will it be a more
direct document; great ideas; needs to be defined better; how are we quantifying our goals;
would like to see where we are at as a City meeting recreational goals; types of activities and
quantifiable needs (how many courts for example do we need); looking at park standards
(where are we now and what do we need).
Steve Davis (SLO Resident): Looking to the future, I would like something that 10-15 years
from now has guidelines for parks and recreation to do things; look at long-term guiding
principles; looks at acreage needs; look at what we do not have in the city; how to find land;
concern about amount of housing and population base, plus workers, and growth; we need
100’s of acres of land; how to incorporate this much land in the City; need vision in Master
Plan to give freedom to do what we need to do.
Ed Gravell (SLO Resident): Representative of the Blues and the High School Baseball team.
I am surprised to see that there is not much in the presentation for enhancements at
Sinsheimer Stadium. The document online, not much in there; call-out (irrigation drainage
project); nothing in Community Needs Assessment about facilities; nothing in plan about
upgrading facilities and what is going to happen with that property (Sinsheimer) – either
attention is given to baseball field or it will be worn out; City has not done much with
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
5 | P a g e
facility; building in really poor shape, does not support needs of community/stadium;
working with community, people could get involved to make it a reality.
Izzy Ibarra (SLO Resident): I would like to talk about Irish Hills and riding my E bike in the
Irish Hills. I would like to inquire why I cannot ride my E bike on the trails. I question that
the E bike is damaging the trails more than a regular mountain bike, all it is providing a little
more assistance in pedaling on the trails.
John Smigelski (SLO Resident): Resident of the Laguna Lake Park neighborhood, I would
appreciate more focus on the maintenance of the park and the daily/nightly use by transient
behavior in the park. The large development across the street will create new needs for the
park and I do not see any futuristic plans for the park that is prioritized. idea for
boardwalk/wildlife viewing, not funded anywhere, in existing plan; large development (San
Luis Ranch) coming in, how to address their needs; funds coming from San Luis Ranch that
should be directed towards Laguna Lake Park; nothing in this plan addresses what the
community wants for Laguna Lake Park.
Commissioner Comment
Vice Chair Thurman: Staff brought a lot of details; jumped over broad picture; we don’t
have broad view; it’s too myopic; doesn’t give much latitude; I do believe we need a broad
vision of goals; then we can move into the details. The themes are great and the guiding
principles, I do have notes on every goal presented. I do question the next steps and how we
should move forward with the comments tonight. Quantifiable goals for the acreage over the
next 20 years. In general Goals are good, no major issues; wants to share other ideas with
staff regarding projects
Commissioner Applegate: I appreciate the goals and believe they represent the community
feedback. I do want to see Sinsheimer facilities to be added to Goal 5. I also have notes that I
will share with staff.
Commissioner Spector: We have come a long way; the themes and strategies, core beliefs;
not saying things strongly enough; need guiding principles; design excellence = commitment
to best practice, highest standards; should be driven by commitment to best practices; and a
commitment to health, safety, security; if safety is a core belief, address right up front; reality
of future, commitment of collaboration needed for survival; no statements about increasing
capacity to keep up with needs; need for quantitative yard stick, how to keep up; no
statement here about seniors; mainstreaming seniors; seniors want a senior center that is focal
point of aging services; access to range of medical care, services at center; services needing
to be accessible, manageable, and affordable; programming needs to look big; need to look at
Sinsheimer Park as a totality; not just elements; need a plan for Sinsheimer Park and Laguna
Lake Park (look at in totality, including neighbors); both decentralizing and centralizing at
the same time; intergenerational neighborhood centers; Emerson amphitheater; create vitality
within neighborhood; just say we should have a pickleball center; thinks we are on right
track; needs to look at big picture and small picture at the same time as we move forward.
I believe the themes/strategies could be bolder that will incorporate more of a best practice,
core beliefs and values. I am looking for, here’s where we are now; based on that we want
*this*; then goals, etc. The Goals make sense; we need more space, needs to be said in Goal
strongly that there is a need for more space; say it up front, powerfully.
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
6 | P a g e
Commissioner Stowe: General comment about Goal 5, land acquisition should be the number
one priority, critical for plan to succeed.
Commissioner Webber: At ATC they were talking about a special kind of fast track; some
process that gives PRC ability to fast-track; more to front of line or we can move forward
with short term, safety focused projects.
4. Appointment Chair and Vice Chair of Parks and Recreation Commission (Thurman –
10 Minutes)
ACTION: APPOINTMENT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION.
Commissioner Applegate nominates Commissioner Thurman for Chair and Commissioner
for Vice Chair.
CARRIED 6:0:0:0 to approve the nomination of Commissioner Thurman for Chair and
Commissioner Spector for Vice Chair. Motion by Schwab, second by Webber.
AYES: APPLEGATE, STOWE, THURMAN, WEBBER, SCHWAB AND
SPECTOR
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
5. Subcommittee Liaison Reports (Vice Chair Thurman – 15 minutes)
a. Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Spector: Seniors have a wide range of
classes and programming and going on trips and collaborating with other local senior
groups.
b. Active Transportation Committee: Commissioner Webber: They are progressing with
their Master Plan effort and they have a map of potential bike boulevards. I encourage the
commission to attend the Active Transportation Committee, it affects pedestrians and
cyclists.
c. City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner
Applegate:
Aquatics: Due to staffing shortages and to stay compliant, the SLO Swim Center has
offered limited pool access or had to close for Noon lap on multiple occasions over the
last couple of months. Parks and Rec is currently working with the Human Resources
Department to develop solutions to the staffing issue. Therapy pool opened at the end of
September after the re-plastering project. The SLO Swim Center will be received a digital
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
7 | P a g e
ad display. Parks and Rec will be able to feature pool programs, videos and divisional
events to the public.
Facilities: Jack House Gardens are closed for renovations. Will reopen in April 2020.
All fields, excluding Damon-Garcia are now closed for maintenance to reopen in January
and February 2020. The bridges in Meadow and Exposition Park will be under
construction for replacement starting in December through January. The Meadow Park
building will be closed during construction (limited access to facility).
Golf: The Volunteer perk program at the Laguna Lake Golf Course has been modified.
For completion of the daily checklists, Ball Pickers receive (1) Volunteer Round Card
and Marshalls receive (2) Volunteer Round Cards. The cards do not expire and can be
utilized by family and friends. Maintenance recently installed sod to the greens on holes
#6 and #7 to repair damaged areas. Holes are set to reopen November 12. The excess sod
was used to repair the putting greens at the entrance to the course. Night Golf in October
had over 50 participants. Night Golf will continue on November 14.
Community Services: September Scramble was held on September 28 with over 500
participants. Volunteers from Cal Poly provided assistance with the event. The Boo Bash
had over 1000 community members with 500 goodie bags distributed. Great family event
with a kid-friendly haunted house and activities. Emerson Park and Santa Rosa Park
hosted a City sponsored Food Truck night aimed at activating the park. Attendance was
over 100 per event and will become a monthly event within City parks.
The Golf Course will host the annual Gobble Wobble on Thanksgiving Day expecting
over 500 athletes.
d. Jack House Committee: Commissioner Schwab: September meeting planning for
Christmas tours, docent trainings and a commemorative plaque for the building and the
ADA accessibility.
e. Tree Committee: Commissioner Thurman: No meeting in October. Arbor Day event last
weekend, Islay Park received 4 new trees. ECOSLO has taken over the California Relief
Grant and have plants 17 trees of the 120 needed by next April.
f. Youth Sports Association: Commissioner Stowe: YSA met October 16, AYSO, SLO
Tigers, SLCOSD…. Will be rewriting their bylaws.
6. Directors’ Report (Avakian - 5 minutes)
It has been an amazing first 7 weeks. The night hiking pilot program is in its final
year of the two-year program, which began November 3rd. The public art manager
worked with local designer iiiDesign for new colorful parking kiosk booths. The
Activity Guide for Winter/Spring will be open for registration on December 2nd. City
Council approved funding to partner with First 5 for a study session on a County wide
study on childcare. Continue work on extension of agreements with our current
partners as we move through adoption of the Master Plan. Former Mayor Schwartz
passed away a few weeks ago, there will be a celebration of life at the Jack House
Gardens on November 30.
7. Communication
None
Parks and Recreation Committee Minutes DRAFT for November 6, 2019
8 | P a g e
ADJOURNMENT at 7:45 pm
To the Public Workshop of the Parks and Recreation Committee as approved by the PRC to
Wednesday, December 4, 2019, at 5:30 p.m., Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California.
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request,
this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a
disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request
to the Parks and Recreation Department at (805) 781-7300 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107.
Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following web address:
http://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/1/fol/61014/Row1.aspx
Parks and Recreation Commission
Agenda Report Meeting Date: 12/04/2019
Item Number:
DATE: December 4, 2019
FROM: Shawna Scott, Senior Planner, Community Development
Prepared By: Emily Creel, Contract Planner
SUBJECT: Froom Ranch Specific Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report
RECOMMENDATION
1.Provide comments to staff on any additional analysis or information needed to adequately
evaluate impacts to parks and recreational facilities in the EIR for the proposed Froom Ranch
Specific Plan.
SUMMARY/BACKGROUND
On April 5, 2016, the City Council authorized initiation of the Madonna on Los Osos Valley Road
(LOVR) Specific Plan (currently referred to as the Froom Ranch Specific Plan). The project includes a
Specific Plan, General Plan Amendment, and related actions that would allow for development of
approximately 50 acres of the 109.7-acre Froom Ranch Specific Plan area. Amendments to the General
Plan would include a change in the land uses to include a senior residential community (Villaggio) and
to allow development above 150 feet in elevation, since hillside development is regulated by several
General Plan policies and programs, including Policy 6.4.7(H), which specifies that no building sites
should be allowed above the 150-foot elevation line in the Irish Hills area. As part of its initiation of the
Specific Plan, the City Council required that the project applicant also develop a feasible “actionable
alternative” that located all development below the 150-foot elevation. Both the proposed project and
the actionable alternative are evaluated in the Draft EIR; the actionable alternative is discussed under
Draft EIR Alternatives Analysis, below.
Following initiation by the City Council and prior to submittal of the Specific Plan, the applicant
presented preliminary park concepts to the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) on August 3, 2016
and the Cultural Heritage Committee (CHC) on September 26, 2016. At the time of conceptual review
in 2016, the applicant had identified an adjacent 7.4-acre parcel located behind (west of) Home Depot
within the City limits as the potential site for a park, which was conceptually proposed as a receiver site
for two relocated historic structures (the main residence and bunkhouse) and other interpretive elements.
During PRC’s previous conceptual review, members commented on screening and fencing of the
proposed park from Home Depot, alternative access routes, lighting, ADA access, the need for a dog
park, workout equipment, and whether the location provided enough usable park space (refer to
Attachment 1, PRC Meeting Minutes August 3, 2016). During CHC’s previous conceptual review,
2
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 2
members considered the initially proposed relocation to be incongruous in proximity to Home Depot and
noted concerns that any building relocation “will destroy the historic narrative”. The CHC made a motion
“indicating CHC is in favor of the preservation of structures intact and in situ, in accordance with the
California Environmental Quality Act and Secretary of Interior’s Standards, and toward maintaining the
historic narrative and meaning of the complex”.
Based on preliminary feedback received from the PRC and CHC during 2016 pre-application review,
the applicant incorporated the public park into the approximately 110-acre Specific Plan area and
developed a preliminary plan for reconstruction and reuse of certain “key” historic structures within the
park (refer to Appendix F.3 for detailed information on the proposed relocation of historic structures:
main residence, dairy [round-nose] barn, creamery/house, and granary). The actionable alternative
(Alternative 1) assumes a similar relocation and reuse of these four buildings at a public park at a
different location located further west, adjacent to the Irish Hills Natural Reserve (refer to Figure 5-1 of
the Draft EIR).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Froom Ranch Specific Plan
proposes a mix of land uses, including
a Life Plan Community with 404 units
of independent and assisted senior
housing known as Villaggio, up to 174
multi-family residential units, 30,000
square feet of retail-commercial uses, a
70,000-square foot hotel, open space
(54% of the project site), and a public
park (see Figure 1 Conceptual Land
Use Plan).
Both the proposed project and the
actionable alternative propose to
reconstruct, relocate, and reuse four
historic structures within the Froom
Ranch Dairy complex to a new public
park, including the main residence,
creamery/house, dairy (round-nose)
barn, and granary. The location of the
public park under the proposed project
is shown in Figure 1; the location of the
public park under the actionable
alternative would be located to the
west of this location adjacent to the
Irish Hills Natural Reserve, as shown
in Figure 5-1 of the Draft EIR.
Figure 1. Conceptual Land Use Plan
PROPOSED
PARK SITE
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 3
The Draft EIR includes evaluation of parks and recreational facilities that would be potentially affected
by the proposed project. The Draft EIR has been referred to the PRC in order to receive focused
comments on the Draft EIR analysis which can be incorporated into the Final EIR and included with the
discussion when the Planning Commission and City Council consider certification of the Final EIR and
project approval. Relevant sections of the EIR, including the Public Services and Recreation section and
supporting technical reports are available on the City’s website:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-development/documents-
online/environmental-review-documents/-folder-2018
PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK CONCEPT
The project would include 2.9 acres
zoned for public facilities to provide
a public park; the park would serve
as a trailhead, with recreational
amenities, parking, and connections
to existing public trails within the
Irish Hills Natural Reserve. While
the Project would include
development of the park, it would
be owned and maintained by the
City.
The proposed park facilities would
include four relocated and/or
reconstructed / rehabilitated
historically significant structures
from the former Froom Ranch
Dairy complex, along with visitor
signage and information, a
playground area, picnic areas, 30
off-street parking spaces, and a
trailhead plaza with bicycle
parking. The proposed public park would link to the surrounding residential and retail uses and the
regional pedestrian and bikeway system with connecting Class II and Class III bicycle lanes and
sidewalks. The proposed park plan is shown in Figure 2.
PRC PURVIEW
The PRC’s role is to review the Public Services and Recreation section of the Draft EIR and provide any
feedback regarding the adequacy of the evaluation and additional needed information or modifications
or issues which should be addressed in mitigation measures.
Direct link to Draft EIR Public Services and Recreation section:
https://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=24501
Figure 2. Conceptual Public Park Plan
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 4
Staff will be available to clarify information contained in the Draft EIR, or to respond to straightforward
questions, but comments related to technical analysis are more appropriately responded to in the Final
EIR, once staff and the EIR consultant are able to accurately perform any needed technical review or
evaluation. Response in the Final EIR also provides full disclosure for all interested parties instead of
the information only being provided to members of the public in attendance at the meeting. All comments
received in this PRC review will be responded to and included in the Final EIR. The public comment
period for the EIR closes on December 23, 2019.
GENERAL PLAN GUIDANCE
The Froom Ranch Specific Plan area was one of three Specific Plan areas designated for development
in the General Plan Land Use (LUE) and Circulation Elements update (adopted by the City Council in
December 2014). The project is intended to be predominantly consistent with policy direction for the
area included in the General Plan by providing a mixed-use project that provides workforce housing
options and preserves at least 50% of the site as open space. However, the applicant has requested
modifications to the range of land uses currently designated in the LUE for the Specific Plan area,
including the proposed Villaggio life plan community and a requested modification to allow some
development above the 150-foot elevation, subject to certain performance standards.
EIR ANALYSIS
Potential impacts and mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR are summarized below.
Table 1. Summary of Impacts to Recreational Facilities
Impacts on Public Services, Parks, and
Recreational Facilities
Mitigation Measures Residual Significance
PS-4. The Project would increase the demand
for public parkland and neighborhood parks
from increased residential population.
MM PS-1
MM PS-2
Less than Significant with
Mitigation
The project is anticipated to generate approximately 1,231 new residents, which would utilize project-
proposed recreational facilities as well as existing parks and recreational facilities within the City and
surrounding area (e.g., Irish Hills Natural Reserve). The City’s General Plan Parks and Recreation
Element requires Expansion Areas and all residential annexation areas such as the project site to provide
developed neighborhood parks at the rate of five acres per 1,000 residents and at least ten acres of
developed parkland for each 1,000 new residents. The Project proposes a 2.9-acre public park and a
public trail along realigned Froom Creek. Villaggio would serve an older population with unique needs
from typical residential uses. Therefore, the Draft EIR evaluated the Villaggio and Madonna Froom
Ranch components of the project separately.
Villaggio. The project proposes a variety of resident-only recreational facilities onsite to serve the needs
of senior citizens, including an outdoor swimming pool, gym, pickleball, bocce ball, community gardens,
theater, outdoor seating areas, library, and craft rooms. Additionally, Villaggio would provide walking
paths, including the proposed Froom Creek Trail and internal trails throughout the developed areas.
Access would also be available to the existing public trails within the Irish Hills Natural Reserve for
Villaggio residents via gated access points.
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 5
Villaggio would generate an increased population of 825 persons, including approximately 93 persons
in assisted living, skilled nursing, or memory care units that would require special recreational needs
with facilities that would accommodate persons needing more mobility support and transportation. The
onsite recreational amenities would provide the range of amenities to serve these special recreational
needs. The remaining 732 residents would be able to utilize onsite recreational facilities provided within
Villaggio, but active seniors would also likely use offsite parks and open spaces, hiking trails, and other
outdoor amenities, including the Irish Hills Natural Reserve, City-owned and maintained trails and open
spaces, City parks, community centers (e.g., SLO Senior Center), and sports facilities such as tennis
courts. Increased demand generated by the Project and use of existing public recreational facilities by
Villaggio would contribute to the use and physical deterioration of existing facilities.
To meet the goals and policies of the General Plan Parks and Recreation Element and decrease the rate
of deterioration of existing facilities from increased demand, the EIR determined that the project’s
increase of 732 independent living population would require development of an additional 7.32 acres of
parkland including at least 3.66 acres of neighborhood park within the City, which would be partially
satisfied by the proposed public park within Madonna Froom Ranch and proposed public recreational
facilities such as the Froom Creek Trail. As this requirement would not be met entirely with onsite
recreational facilities, the potential impact associated with Villaggio’s residents’ contribution to
increased rates of physical deterioration of existing facilities offsite and the need for additional
recreational facilities to adequately serve this population consistent with City policy is considered
potentially significant.
Madonna Froom Ranch. Madonna Froom Ranch is anticipated to generate approximately 406 new
residents, including approximately 37 school-age children. Based on the anticipated increase in new
residents of Madonna Froom Ranch, increased use and demand by project residents may result in
accelerated physical deterioration of existing facilities. The project would provide onsite public
amenities that would partially offset the impact of increased demand for City park and recreational
facilities generated by Madonna Froom Ranch. This includes a 2.9-acre public park that would provide
the basic elements of a neighborhood park as defined within the General Plan, including benches, picnic
tables, restrooms, and a playground. In addition, the Project would develop a publicly accessible Froom
Creek Trail that would extend from the existing trail system in the Irish Hills Natural Reserve through
the Specific Plan area with a terminus near the Calle Joaquin wetlands.
Based exclusively on the maximum population anticipated for Madonna Froom Ranch, at least 4.06
acres of public park would be required to meet the General Plan Parks and Recreation Element Policies
3.13.1, 3.15.1, and 5.0.2, of which approximately 2.03 acres would need to be a neighborhood park. The
Project would provide 2.9 acres of neighborhood park, thereby meeting the City’s standard, but would
be deficient in approximately 1.16 acres of required public parkland. As this requirement would not be
met with onsite recreation facilities, Madonna Froom Ranch residents would contribute to increased
rates of physical deterioration of existing facilities and the need for additional recreational facilities to
adequately serve this population consistent with City policy.
Mitigation Measures. The Draft EIR identified two mitigation measures to reduce impacts on
recreational facilities:
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 6
MM PS-1 Public Parkland Requirements for Villaggio. Mitigation shall be calculated based on actual
buildout populations within Madonna Froom Ranch. At the discretion of the Community Development
Department and City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department, and to ensure that parkland
would satisfy the needs of the proposed population of Villaggio, the Applicant shall either:
a. Identify, purchase, and develop up to 7.32 acres of parkland, including 2.79 acres of neighborhood
park, within the City’s Sphere of Influence, consistent with City General Plan Parks and Recreation
Policies 3.13.1, 3.15.1, 5.0.1, and 5.0.2. If feasible, land for development of neighborhood park
space should be identified within interior areas of the City Sphere of Influence to maximize use and
access; or
b. Provide a contribution of fees in-lieu of dedication of parkland, restricted solely for parkland
acquisition and improvement.
Plan Requirements and Timing. The development of parkland and/or dedication of fees shall be
completed by the Applicant prior to issuance of building permits. While coordinating with the City
Parks and Recreation Department, the Applicant shall modify the Froom Ranch Specific Plan to
demonstrate the provision of recreational facilities to meet the demand of Villaggio residents if an
onsite option is selected.
Monitoring. The City shall ensure compliance with General Plan Parks and Recreation Element
Policies 3.13.1, 3.15.1, 5.0.1, and 5.0.2, and shall ensure the above measure is implemented prior
issuance of building permits.
MM PS-2 Public Parkland Requirements for Madonna Froom Ranch. The Applicant shall identify,
designate, dedicate, and/or develop up to 1.16 acres of public parkland into the Froom Ranch Specific Plan
to be operational at the time of buildout of the Project. Mitigation shall be calculated based on actual
buildout populations within Madonna Froom Ranch and may be implemented using one of the following
options, at the discretion of the Community Development Department and City Parks and Recreation
Department:
a. The Applicant shall designate an additional area of up to 1.16 acres of public facilities land use
with the intention of providing parkland, within the Specific Plan area, consistent with City General
Plan Parks and Recreation Element Policies 3.13.1, 3.15.1, 5.0.1, and 5.0.2, or
b. The Applicant shall identify and purchase or dedicate up to 1.16 acres of parkland within the City’s
Sphere of Influence, or
c. The Applicant shall provide a contribution of fees in-lieu of dedication of up to 1.16 acres of
parkland, restricted solely for parkland acquisition and improvement.
Plan Requirements and Timing. The development of parkland and/or dedication of fees shall be
completed by the Applicant prior to issuance of building permits. While coordinating with the City Parks
and Recreation Department, the Applicant shall modify the Froom Ranch Specific Plan to demonstrate
the provision of recreational facilities to meet the demand of Madonna Froom Ranch residents if an onsite
option is selected.
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 7
Monitoring. The City shall ensure compliance with General Plan Parks and Recreation Element Policies
3.13.1, 3.13.1, 5.0.1, and 5.0.2, and shall ensure the above measure is implemented prior to issuance of
building permits.
With implementation of these measures, the Draft EIR determined residual impacts on recreational
facilities would be less than significant with mitigation.
DRAFT EIR ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
The Draft EIR presents an analysis of four alternatives (Draft EIR Chapter 5), including the “actionable
alternative” required by the City Council as part of its initiation of the Specific Plan. The complete
alternatives analysis can be found in Chapter 5 of the Draft EIR:
https://www.slocity.org/Home/ShowDocument?id=24506
This discussion focuses on Alternative 1: Clustered Development Below the 150-foot Elevation
Alternative (the actionable alternative), which was evaluated at a similar level of detail in the Draft EIR
as the proposed project to allow project review and decision-making through a detailed comparison of
both alternatives.
Alternative 1 Project Summary
Alternative 1 proposes the same type, number, and mix of land uses as the proposed project; however,
Alternative 1 would include a major reconfiguration of the proposed land use plan to cluster proposed
land uses into a smaller development footprint on the lower elevations of the site. Consistent with the
2014 General Plan LUE, under Alternative 1, all new urban development would occur below the 150-
foot elevation line. All residential land uses under Alternative 1 would be relocated to areas within the
project site that are below the 150-foot elevation line and all development within the Upper Terrace
would be removed. The only development that would occur above the 150-foot elevation line would be
the proposed public park containing the same four Froom Ranch Dairy structures proposed to be retained
by the proposed project. The proposed Alternative 1 land use plan is shown in Figure 5-1 of the Draft
EIR.
Alternative 1 Impacts on Recreational Facilities
While the Draft EIR determined that Alternative 1 would avoid or reduce several significant impacts
that would result from the proposed project, impacts to recreation under Alternative 1 would be similar
to that of the proposed project. Impacts (compared to the proposed project) are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Summary of Impacts to Recreational Facilities
Impacts to Recreation Mitigation
Measures Residual Impact
PS-4. Alternative 1 would increase the demand for public
parkland and neighborhood parks from increased residential
population.
MM PS-1
MM PS-2
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
(Incrementally Less)
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
Froom Ranch Specific Plan
Page 8
By relocating the proposed public park and limiting all residential development below the 150-foot
elevation, Alternative 1 would provide 3.3 acres of public parkland within the project site, which is 0.4
acre greater than under the proposed project. However, Alternative 1 would still not meet the
requirements for public parkland under the General Plan Parks and Recreation Element. As under the
project, implementation of MM PS-1 and MM PS-2 would require additional parkland dedication or
payment of in-lieu fees to satisfy City requirements for 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents,
including five acres of neighborhood parks. As under the project, implementation of these measures
would result in impacts to park and recreation resources that would be considered less than significant
with mitigation.
NEXT STEPS
Provide any feedback regarding the adequacy of the parks and recreational resources evaluation and
additional needed information or modifications or issues which should be addressed in mitigation
measures and/or the Final EIR. All comments on the Draft EIR received in this PRC review will be
responded to and included in the Final EIR. When the Final EIR is complete, the PRC will consider the
Final EIR, Specific Plan, and associated entitlements, and provide a recommendation to the City Council.
The Planning Commission and City Council will consider the following entitlements: Specific Plan,
General Plan Amendment, Pre-Zoning, Vesting Tentative Map, Annexation, and certification of the
Final EIR.
ATTACHMENTS
1. PRC Minutes, August 3, 2016
2. Draft Froom Ranch Specific Plan, available online:
https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/community-
development/planning-zoning/specific-area-plans/froom-ranch
Minutes
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
3 August, 2016
Regular Meeting of the Advisory Body Committee Commission
CALL TO ORDER
A Regular Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order on the 3 rd day of August,
2016 at 5:32 p.m. in the City Council Chambers located at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California,
by Chair Whitener.
ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Douglas Single, Greg A vakian and newly sworn-in Commissioner Rodney
Thurman, and Chair Jeff Whitener
Absent: Susan Olson, Keri Schwab, Susan Updegrove,
Staff: Parks and Recreation Director Shelly Stanwyck, Recreation Supervisor Devin Byfield, Natural
Resources Manager Bob Hill
PRESENT A TIO NS, INTRODUCTIONS, APPOINTMENTS
1.Oath of Office
The City Clerk provided the Oath of Office for new Parks and Recreation Commissioner;
Rodney Thurman
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
ACTION: APPROVE THE MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 6, 2016 AS AMENDED BY
COMMITTEE MEMBER AV AKIAN, SECOND BY COMMITTEE MEMBER SINGLE.
2.Consideration of Minutes
CARRIED 4:0:0:3 to approve the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body for the
meeting of 07/06/2016.
AYES: AVAKIAN, SINGLE, THURMAN, WHITENER
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT: OLSON, SCHWAB, UPDEGROVE
ATTACHMENT 1
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND BUSINESS ITEMS
3.Presentation of Conceptual Designs and Proposed Park Site Plan for Froom/11 Villagio
Project
ACTION: RECEIVE INFORMATION AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK
Contract Planner, Shawna Scott, presented to the Commission the Conceptual Park Site
Plan component of the Froom I 11 Villagio Specific Plan (Madonna on Los Osos Valley
Road Specific Plan). The proposed project would require several entitlements, which
would ultimately lead to the development of the project site. The applicant is proposing
a mix of land uses including a Continuing Care Retirement Community, housing,
commercial, open space, and park land. The applicant has identified an additional,
adjacent, 7.4-acre parcel located within the City limits as the potential site for a park.
Ms. Scott added that this is the first review of the project by the Parks and Recreation
Commission. She noted that the applicant is seeking early feedback from the
Commission on the proposed, conceptual, park facilities identified for the Specific
Plan, and for the Commission to provide preliminary input with respect to their
potential consistency with policies and programs contained in the Parks and Recreation
Element before preparing the Draft Specific Plan for the project.
Ms. Scott noted that the applicant team met with Parks and Recreation while
developing conceptual plans to determine the character and range of improvements
desired in a park for this project. The applicant has made an effort to make the character
of the proposed park more "naturalistic", celebrating the "uniqueness of the site". In
addition, parking and access to the open space have been identified as priorities at this
location. Ms. Scott said that the applicant is proposing a 4.7-acre park with the
following amenities:
•Parking lot area to provide approximately 26 spaces
•Historic plaza including relocated historic residence and bunkhouse (to be used as a
ranger's office and storage building) and a public restroom
•Playground area with naturalistic equipment
•Dog park area
•Wetland overlook
•Trail rest area
•Drought-tolerant landscaping
Developer Representative, Pam Ricci, RRM spoke about the park design
Commission Comments followed.
Commissioner Single asked for clarification on screening between current development (Home
Depot) and Primary Park in reference to area in between park and Home Depot. Director
Stanwyck responded that loading area could not be adjusted but that fencing could be required
to alleviate safety concerns behind the trees. Commissioner Single expressed concern about
Minutes -Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of August 3, 2016 Page 2
ATTACHMENT 1
safety and suggested small fencing. Ms. Ricci responded that the plans at this time are
conceptual.
Commissioner Thurman asked about workout equipment and the continued usage of the
equipment.
Commissioner A vakian asked about access to the park with the adjacent Home Depot and
Costco traffic. Ms. Ricci commented added that there has been discussion with current stores
for alternate routes.
Commissioner A vakian commented on senior living and access to the trail through the new
proposed neighborhood. Ms. Ricci added that there would be additional pedestrian access
between residential trails with a five-minute walk. Commissioner Thurman commented about
trailhead plaza being private. Commissioner Avakian asked about lighting and ADA access.
Chair Whitener asked about connectivity of the park to City. Ms. Scott responded that the park
would connect to Irish hills and current development with potential additional connection.
Commissioner Single said he viewed the conceptual park design more as a pocket park and
noted the need for a dog park in this area.
Chair Whitener added he was not in support of the location as there was not enough usable park
space.
Public Comments:
Michael Parolini, San Luis resident, commented that the conceptual design does not feel like a
typical park given its isolation and potential maintenance issues and suggested this located be
considered as open space.
Neil Havlik, San Luis resident, agreed that this is not an ideal location for a park.
John Madonna, San Luis resident, spoke about the ease of access to the trailhead as opposed to
the access from Madonna Road.
4.Update for Laguna Lake Dredging Project Relative to Laguna Lake Park
ACTION: RECEIVE INFORMATION AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK
Natural Resources Manager, Bob Hill, presented the Commission with an update on the Laguna
Lake Dredging and Sediment Management Project relative to the Laguna Lake Park Area. He
added that he is seeking the Commission's input about the recreational uses at Laguna Lake
Park and Natural Reserve.
Commission Comments followed.
Commissioner Thurman commented about capturing sediment attachment into the lake. Hill
explained the procedure in excavation of sediment and dewatering plans for removal.
Minutes -Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of August 3, 2016 Page 3
ATTACHMENT 1
Commissioner Single asked about the dry lake conditions and cost associated with dredging.
Staff Hill explained difference between hydraulic (wet) and mechanical ( dry) dredging and
condition of lake during dry conditions.
Commissioner Avakian asked about the project duration and impact on other park usage. Staff
Hill responded that dredging would potentially occur over several seasons to minimize
construction impacts and employ a sediment management strategy that would limit amount of
sediment flowing into lake, thereby minimizing future impacts to the lake. Staff Hill added that
there would be minimal impacts to the public and estimated approximately 400 cubic yards per
day could be removed (approximately 10 truckloads).
Public Comments:
Mike Parolini asked about the cost of the project and the tax incurred by the residences of
Laguna Lake.
John Smeglski, San Luis resident, asked if the improvements to Vista Lago Park would be
associated with the project. Staff Hill responded to provide feedback about how the
improvements could be incorporated.
5.Selection of Wes Conner Awardee for 2016
Director Stanwyck recommended the Commission postpone this agenda item to the September
meeting to allow the full Commission the opportunity to consider and select the Wes Conner
awardee.
ACTION: MOTION BY COMMITTEE MEMBER AVAKIAN, SECOND BY COMMITTEE
MEMBER SINGLE, to recommend postponing the selection of the 2016 Wes Conner Awardee
to the September 7, 2016 meeting. Motion passed 4:0:3:0 on the following roll call vote:
AYES: AVAKIAN, SINGLE,
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT: OLSON, SCHWAB, UPDEGROVE
6.Discussion of Annual Park Tour Dates and Topics
THURMAN, WHITENER
Director Stanwyck explained the itinerary of annual park tour and potential locations to visit.
The Commission agreed to finalize this at its September meeting.
COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS
Director's Report
Director Stanwyck provided a brief overview of current Parks and Recreation programming.
•Hydro Flask Rewards for staff
•Box Art Policy-Vote for next locations to be painted by August 281h
•SLO Triathlon - a Success!
•Movies in the Mission, 8/6, 8/13, 8/20
Minutes -Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of August 3, 2016 Page4
ATTACHMENT 1
•Family Overnight Camp Out in Laguna Lake Park will be held on August 13-14
•Skate Park Ramp n' Roll 8/20 (Fun & Educational Event)
•Volunteer Appreciation Dinner 9/22 (at Jack House)
Commission Communications
LIAISON REPORTS
•Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Single said adult softball ended last week
and it was a great season. Fall softball sign-ups are starting. French Park pickleball is
being played twice weekly after restriping of the basketball courts. The Ludwick
Community Center hosts volleyball and table tennis -and attendance is in good numbers.
Adult soccer is starting at Damon Garcia Sports Fields. Seniors are staying active with
fun, well-attended, activities at senior center including bunko and bridge. Commissioner
Single requested a list of Senior Center Board Meeting dates.
•Bicycle Advisory: No report. Commissioner Olson absent.
•City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner
Avakian said that summer is busy. Damon-Garcia is open as of August 1 but still closed
on Mondays for field recovery. Jack House weddings are booked through October. New
tables were ordered for the Ludwick Community Center. The City/County Library
conference room will be reserved for library use from October 2016 through January
201 7. The Swim Center had a rise in attendance and will be closed for two weeks in
August for maintenance. Golf Course had good summer with rounds up 100 from
previous month and 550 rounds in one weekend. Increased youth participation at the Golf
Course and increase in merchandise sale. Tournaments were held over summer months.
Middle school classes held at Golf Course during school year.
•Jack House Committee: No Report. Vice Chair Updegrove was absent.
•Tree Committee:No Report. New subcommittee assignment for Commissioner
Thurman.
•Youth Sports: Chair Whitener said YSA had some issues with field use due to
construction at SLO High School. YSA is planning a meeting with the School District to
discuss topics related to youth sports.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. The next Regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation
Commission is scheduled for 07, September, 2016 at 5:30 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo, California.
APPROVED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION: 09/07/2016
Minutes -Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of August 3, 2016 Page 5
ATTACHMENT 1
Advisory Body Handbook February 6, 2018
City of San Luis Obispo 58 | P a g e
J. Parks & Recreation Commission Bylaws (A)
ARTICLE 1. PURPOSE
The Parks & Recreation Commission (PRC) is a body of citizens appointed to advise the City's
Parks & Recreation Department and the City Council on the development and operation of
recreation programs and parks, and on the implementation of the Parks and Recreation Element of
the City's General Plan. It also provides recommendations to the City Council and San Luis Obispo
Coastal Unified School District Board of Trustees regarding those facilities which have been
mutually designated as joint use facilities; and for the operation of recreational facilit ies, priority
for use of the facilities, and development of new recreation facilities at Sinsheimer Park.
ARTICLE 2. MEMBERSHIP
1. The Parks and Recreation Commission shall consist of seven members.
2. Members are appointed by the City Council for a term of four years. Members are eligible
for reappointment for an additional four-year term. Members are subject to a term limit of
eight years, or two consecutive four-year terms.
ARTICLE 3. MEETINGS
1. Regular meetings of the Parks & Recreation Commission shall be held on the first
Wednesday of each month at 5:30 p.m., except during the annual tour of the City's parks
and facilities.
2. Meetings will be held in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis
Obispo, California. In the event that the Parks & Recreation Commission chooses to hold
all or any portion of a regular meeting other than at City Hall, then the place of such
meeting shall be posted at least 72 hours in advance at the Parks & Recreation Department
office, 1341 Nipomo Street, San Luis Obispo, California and on the bulletin board located
at the entrance to the City Hall prior to the established meeting time.
ARTICLE 4. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
1. In April of each year, the Parks & Recreation Commission shall select a Chair and Vice
Chair from among its members to serve a one-year term.
2. Commissioners shall serve as Chair or Vice Chair at the discretion of the Commission.
3. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Parks & Recreation Commission. The Vice
Chair will act as the Chair in the absence of the Chair or in case of the inability of the Chair
to act.
4. In the event that the Chair and Vice Chair are unavailable to attend to their duties, the
assembled members shall determine a Chair Pro Tempore.
5. No person shall serve as Chair or Vice Chair for more than three consecutive terms.
Advisory Body Handbook February 6, 2018
City of San Luis Obispo 59 | P a g e
ARTICLE 5. CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
All meetings will be conducted in accordance with City practices, customs, and policies. Robert's
Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall be utilized as a guide in the conduct of meetings.
ARTICLE 6. QUORUM
Four members of the Parks & Recreation Commission shall constitute a quorum for the purposes
of conducting business.
ARTICLE 7. VOTING
1. Except as otherwise provided in the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code and state law, no
resolution, motion or other action shall be passed or become effective without receiving
the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the members present.
2. Failure to receive such an affirmative vote shall result in failure or denial, as appropriate,
of the motion, resolution or other action.
3. Except as allowed under the Political Reform Act of 1974, as amended, any member
abstaining due to a declared conflict of interest shall not participate in the discussion of the
items or otherwise influence or attempt to influence in any manner the decision on the item.
4. All members, when present, must vote except when abstaining due to a declared conflict
of interest.
5. Failure or refusal to vote when present—except for a declared conflict of interest—shall
be counted as an affirmative vote.
ARTICLE 8. PUBLIC RECORDS
Records of all public hearings shall be made available to the public in the offices of the Parks &
Recreation Department.
ARTICLE 9. ATTENDANCE
Any member of the Parks & Recreation Commission who fails, for any reason, to attend three
consecutive regular meetings or a total of six regular meetings within any twelve month period
shall be automatically be considered for replacement by the City Council. The Chairperson of the
Parks & Recreation Commission shall inform the Council of such a situation, explaining any
special circumstances.
Advisory Body Handbook February 6, 2018
City of San Luis Obispo 60 | P a g e
ARTICLE 10. COMMITTEES
1. A member of the Parks & Recreation Commission shall represent the Commission and sit
as a voting member on the following City advisory bodies: Jack House Committee and
Tree Committee.
2. Additional committee assignments shall be made as deemed necessary by the Chair.
3. Committee assignments will be made in April of each year.
ARTICLE 11. AMENDMENTS
1. These bylaws may be recommended for amendment by the majority vote of the
Commission members present at a regular meeting, provided that a quorum is present.
Members shall receive the proposed amendments at least seven days prior to the meeting
in which the amendment is proposed.
2. Prior to May 1 in each odd-numbered year, these bylaws shall be reviewed by the
Commission. Any proposed changes shall be submitted to the City Council for approval.
If no changes are proposed, a report of the review shall be submitted.