The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/21/2005, C12 - LAGUNA LAKE PARK MASTER PLAN Counat "'""O� June 21,2005 j aGEnaa Repoat h.N� ell- CITY ZCITY OF SAN LUIS O B I S P O FROM: Paul LeSage, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: LAGUNA LAKE PARK MASTER PLAN CAO RECOMMENDATION As recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission, adopt a resolution that amends the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan by: 1. Removing the Adventure Playground and Pond Elements 2. Adding a permanent Off Leash Dog Area 3. Adding a Disc Golf Course DISCUSSION In June of 2004, the Parks and Recreation Commission began an extensive review of the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan. The review included three meetings, an on-site field trip, testimonies by over 50 citizens, and a considerable amount of discussion by the members of the Commission. Why review the plan? The Park Master Plan was originally adopted in 1993, and amended in 1998. The plan contains an implementation schedule that, except for a few projects, has not been implemented. Fiscal priorities are the primary reason the park has not seen any significant improvement projects. Other projects have consistently been judged to have a higher community priority. It had been eleven years since the plan was adopted, and it was possible that the community's view of the best use of the park could have changed. Did the review include a discussion of dredging? While the Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the lake dredging options extensively, dredging is not a part of the Laguna Lake Master Plan. As such, no specific recommendations concerning dredging are a part of this report. In a previous report to City Council from the Engineering Division of the Public Works Department, the Commission indicated support for dredging of the lake and using a portion of the park for implementing the project. What are the highlights of the existing master plan? Because of its scenic value and biological resources, Laguna Lake Park is viewed as a nature preserve. Of the 200 acres of land in the park, 160 are set aside as a nature preserve, with 40 acres designated as the active park. There are five program elements to the plan: 1. Overall park experience and motif. The main features of the park, such as the entry, signage, roadways, parking areas, restrooms, and picnic areas, are to be constructed using natural materials whenever possible in a manner that softens their impact on the park. Stated GASIaff Kh Mgmda Prep R1,M.21.05.LLPM CAR.DOC /A• I Laguna Lake Park MasterPlan Page 2 in simpler terms, park improvements are to be as "natural looking" as possible. Some sections of the roadway are to be moved away from the lake. 2. Passive recreational opportunities. The Plan calls for stabilization of the lake shoreline to accommodate recreational activities such as fishing and feeding the ducks. About 1,000 feet of shoreline starting near Madonna Road was stabilized in 1.999 with mixed results. The area along the lake was turfed to provide the stabilization, but the turf is taking a beating from the ducks and geese that inhabit the lake. The Plan calls for the creation of a number of windbreaks using dredge spoils to provide protection to features within the park. A system of paths and trails are included, as well as, several additional family and group picnic areas. The Rotary Pavilion, which functions as a group barbeque area, is shown on the site plan. More than any element of the Plan, the Commemorative Grove program has been implemented. Several acres in the active park are planted with commemorative trees. Perhaps the most active of the passive recreation elements is an adventure playground and pond. Adventure playgrounds were popular at the time the MasterPlan was adopted. In this case, the playground included conventional play apparatus and two water elements. There is a re-circulating stream and a pond designed for use by children. 3. Water related recreational opportunities. The Plan calls for the maintenance and improvement of docking and launching facilities on the lake. The stabilized shoreline would aide those launching boats. 4. Nature preserve. The Plan provides for the maintenance and enhancement of the natural area of the park. Elements noted include re-vegetated shoreline; new wetlands, wetland buffers, trails, fences, entry portals, wildlife corridors, interpretative signage, boardwalks, seep protection, and a nature center.. 5. Maintenance and safety. The Plan identifies locations for a maintenance yard, service roads, and public telephone. . Finally, several new park acquisitions and trail easements are noted in the Master Plan. Why was the plan amended? In 1998, the Parks and Recreation Commission expressed a frustration with the pace of the implementation of the Master Plan. While money was an issue, there were other factors. Many of the projects in the plan required materials dredged from the lake or take place within the lake. Permits were needed from several agencies, including the Army Corp of Engineers, before any work could take place. This is a time consuming process. In 1998, the Commission, with the help of a citizen's task force, made several recommendations that were adopted by the Council. Some of the implementation projects were moved up on the priority list. They were the following: 1. New park entry sign. 2. Shoreline stabilization. 3. Tree planting. C'/2 2 Laguna Lake Park Master Plan Page 3 4. Nature Center. 5. Split rail fencing to divide the active park from the nature preserve, replacing the existing barbed wire fence. Most of these projects, except the previously noted shoreline extension, became casualties of the recent City budget reductions. The split rail fencing has been purchased and will be installed this year. What was the process for amending the Plan? When the Plan was adopted in 1993, there was a significant amount of public participation in the process. This was the case during the recent review. The Commission first reviewed the Plan on June 2, 2004 in a nearly full City Council Chamber. The staff presentation focused on the development of the current plan, the relationship of the Plan to the Parks and Recreation Element, and options if a more intense use of the park was seen as desirable. Staff also recommended that the adventure playground and pond elements of the Plan be removed for health and safety reasons. Thirty two people spoke, with the vast majority in support of maintaining the intent of the current plan. A number of people asked that the current off-leash dog area in the park be included as a permanent element in the Plan. The Commission continued the item to the August 4`s meeting to allow anyone who had been unable to attend the meeting to appear and testify. In the interim, the Commission visited the park as a group, along with several staff members, including Neil Havlik, Natural Resources Manager. Since this was a full commission meeting, it was publicly noticed and one local resident also participated in the tour. Commissioners remarked that the tour was a valuable part of the review of the Plan, especially since Neil was able to answer a number of questions concerning park habitat issues. At the August 4, 2004 meeting, the Commission continued its review with close to forty people in attendance. Fourteen spoke primarily in support of the existing plan, with the addition of the off-leash dog area. Adding a disc golf course to the Plan was also suggested at the meeting. Those in attendance also supported this item. After an extensive discussion, the Commission asked staff to return on October 6`h with a draft of an amended plan that would include the following: 1. Remove the Adventure Playground and Pond Elements 2. Make the Off Leash Dog Park a permanent feature of the Park 3. Add a Disc Golf Course to the park Staff brought a revised plan to the Commission containing the recommended changes: Remove the Adventure Playground and Pond Elements from the Plan. Adventure playgrounds were quite popular at the time the plan was adopted in 1993. Unfortunately, they no longer meet current Consumer Product Safety Commission Standards and have been removed in most communities. As an alternative, staff proposes to replace the current playground equipment in C/�-3 L !J Laguna Lake Park Master Plan Page 4 the park with elements that are "adventure" themed. The equipment is due for normal replacement soon. The pond and recirculating stream element would be problematic under current health code regulations. A "planned and built water attraction" designed for human use must meet the same standards as a swimming pool. This includes the appropriately size filtration and chemical systems, fencing, certified lifesaving staffing, deck, and shower areas. The expense involved in such a project is significant. Such an element was clearly not the intent of the original plan. The revised park map (Exhibit A) has removed both the adventure playground and pond. Make the Off Leash Dog Area a permanent feature in the park. Laguna Lake Park has had an off-leash dog area since 1998. It is the most used part of the park. Users self regulate the park with little assistance from staff. The Commission heard testimony from many users extolling the virtues of the dog park during the public hearings. No one spoke in opposition. Since the dog area was not part of the Plan, it has always been considered a pilot program. The action of placing it in the Plan is to memorialize it. The Plan contains language as to the exact location. It is also shown on the revised park map (Exhibit A). The Plan does not contain language as to how and when the area will be fenced. That will be determined as the rest of the park is developed. Add a Disc Golf Course to the park. Disc golf is a low impact passive recreational activity that is growing in popularity in the community. The idea of adding a course to the park was presented to the Commission at the August 4, 2004 review of the Plan. It was well received by both the Commission and those attending the meeting. While the action calls for a course in the park to be located entirely within the active park, the exact layout is not specified. That will be determined at the time when resources are available for construction and installation. The course will be designed in such a manner that it will blend into the natural environment of the park. The updated park map will not have a course layout on it. There was strong support from the community for the amendments to the Plan. They were approved by the Commission and forwarded to the Council for adoption. CONCURRENCES As previously noted, the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the Plan on October 6, August 4, and June 2 of 2004. Copies of the minutes of those meetings are included with this report as attachments 3A, 3B, & 3C. The Community Development Director reviewed the amended plan and determined that Planning Commission review was not required. The Director determined that the amendments are minor in terms of scope and effect consistent with the intent of the approved Master Plan. A copy of that determination is included as attachment 4. FISCAL IMPACT There is no immediate fiscal impact to approving this plan. Removing the Adventure Playground and Pond Element will eventually result in a cost saving to develop the park. The off-leash dog Cl2- Laguna Lake Park Master Plan Page 5 area will not change until such time as fencing is needed, which will be several years from now. The Disc Golf Course will be donated, as was the one in Sinsheimer Park. ALTERNATIVES Do not approve the changes. While the impact would be minor, it would exclude two activities from the park specifically requested during the public testimony and recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1. Legislative draft of amended plan pages 2. Resolution amending the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan with the amended Park Master Plan and revised site plan included as Exhibit A. 3. Minutes of Parks and Recreation Commission meetings A. June 2, 2004 B. August 4, 2004 C. October 6, 2004 4. Memorandum from the Community Development Director e12--Sp- Berms and Windbreaks: MACNMENT 1 � • create berms in several key locations, using dredge spoils, that will be planted with California native windbreak trees. • berms shall be four to six feet high with gentle slopes not exceeding 5:1, and contoured to appear natural. • windbreak trees shall not include eucalyptus species, but rather a mix of native conifers and oaks. • windbreak trees shall have supplemental irrigation to encourage rapid growth. Paths: • the existing paved shoreline road shall be narrowed to 10 feet in paved width for use as a bike,jogging and walking path. • all other park paths shall be decomposed granite or gravel surface, 8 feet in width. • exercise stations shall be supplied at intervals on designated path loops. • provide a total of 30 parking spaces for walkers and joggers. Family Picnic Areas: • provide family picnic areas in several locations both sheltered and at the shoreline. • equipment shall include picnic tables on concrete or decomposed granite pads and barbecue pits. • provide parking at a ratio of one space per 2.5 users accommodated, and not further than about 300 feet from the furthermost edge of the picnic area. • provide a few sitting areas along Madonna Road for people on lunch breaks. Group Picnic/Barbecue Areas: • in addition to the existing group area, provide a new group area accommodating about 75 persons, with a barbecue pit. • develop a shelter or pavilion to cover part of the picnic tables provided. • provide parking at the ratio of one space per 2.5 users. • provide turf play areas associated with group areas. • the group area should be designed to also function as a day camp area for summertime recreation programs. Adventure Naygr-ouad- 4dd4iA;; to the a :ming playgr-etmd, provide aft.tl.er play area ated with nem, r.Feup and family ninninr thio venter of the park. i en a suitable sand safety , large nl 1 t f the eenyentie,n plat gr- .a n .,&e:,tufe play �1crliV��G7clGii7iCi�'r'vtax�cmrrcixrroxxrn--p=u�bx v uixa, .uiz-�aa r v��,.� play area ting of n e cire..lating JIIrvum with s} allew waling ponds, large pie ha:dieap aeeessible--paths to and aleng the stream, along with Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 6 - ClZ--(p Peadi AITACHMENT 9 er-eate n ..hallew w a thL4 is supplied by re eir-eu ate.l lake ,ate.- The stream Eley w.1�.stie' getntea shoreline en the bank opposite the family pienie area that is also aeeessible to eM!&ea to a&entufe-PhqY. the till would o l.i �n-f�vrr��omv-$c.TdP.-3S-a `-`l P.plif.a!'-E1f other-park-wPt4aad-@aYif9S-th3t-iS Off Leash Dog Area: • provide an area to all for dogs to use the park off leash. • location is the grassy area adjacent to the north park restroom. • use patterns and park development will determine the need to fence the area. Disc Golf Course: • provide the opportunity to participate in disc golf. • a standard course of 18 holes will be located in the park within the active portion. • the course shall be designed in such a manner as to blend into the natural environment of the park. Games: • game areas including volleyball and horseshoes facilities shall be developed associated with the group and family picnic areas. Commemorative Grove: • continue to develop and expand the grove to the north and east. 3. Water Related Recreation Opportunities Goal: Maintain and improve the desirability and utility of the lake for low impact water activities including low power fishing craft, canoes, sailboats and sail boards.(Planning Principles 1,3,10,28) Launch and Docks: • maintain and improve access to the existing boat launch ramp and docks. • provide an open turf area near parking for sailboard rigging. • provide several parking spaces for vehicles with boat trailers.. • develop a trail from the sailboard rigging area to the western point along the peninsula currently used for sailboard launching. • provide a stabilized turf shore for sailboard landing and novice launching. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE AMENDED LAGUNA LAKE MASTER PLAN WIfREAS, Laguna Lake is a unique habitat and an important part of the park system of the City of Luis Obispo, and WHEREAS, the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan, adopted in 1993 and amended in 1998, is the planning document that guides all development in the park, and WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Commission, after an extensive public hearing process, has recommended to the City Council that the plan be amended, and WHEREAS, those amendments are of a minor nature, and do not change the overall intent of the plan, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Luis Obispo does adopt the revised Laguna Lake Park Master Plan, included as exhibit A.-� Upon motion of seconded by and on the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing resolution was adopted this 215`day of June 2005. Mayor Dave Romero ATTEST: Audrey Hooper, City Clerk GACounal Agenda ReponAaguna lake Pa,86.21.0M.21.05 Remlmion(aaach.l Adoc C,12,-g APPROVED AS TO FORM: 0 on Lowell, City Attorney GACouncil Agenda ReportAagunu late ParM6.21.OM.21.05 Resolution(afrach.l).dor e�z 9 LAGUNA LAKE PARK MHSTER PLAN PROGRAM ELEMENTS AND EXHIBIT DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINE TABLE OF CONTENTS City Council Resolution No. 8183 ................................................................. ii ThePlanning Process .................................................................................... 2 Nature Preserve Concept ...........................................................:....................2 ParkProgram Elements .....:............................................................................5 New Park Land Acquisition ......................................................................... 11. Cost Estimate and Phasing ............................................................................ 13 FundingStrategy .................................................................................:......... 16 Exhibits Exhibit A. Active Park and Nature Preserve Limits Exhibit B. Park Land Acquisition Appendices Appendix A — Master Plan Exhibits 1-5 Appendix B — Initial Analysis and Planning Principals Appendix C —Programming and Conceptual Alternatives cedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions e/'? -ID The Planning Process —� The first steps in the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan process included public workshops, opinion surveys and constraint analysis, all leading toward the development of planning principles. These planning principles, which are contained in a separate document, guided the preparation of three different park plans. These alternative designs depicted various intensities of development and combinations of park elements. After public hearings before the Parks and Recreation Commission, Architectural Review Commission, Planning Commission and City Council, one of the alternative park designs was selected for development into a final park master plan. The final master plan consists of the following components: ❑ Park Master Plan at 1:200 scale. El Active Park Plan at 1:100 scale. ❑ Detail Plans and cross sectional illustrations of major park elements. ❑ the narrative portion in this document including a description of program elements, land acquisition, cost estimate and phasing plan. Nature Preserve Concept The planning process developed a consensus of opinion that because Laguna Lake Park is a unique scenic and biological resource, recreation uses should be limited to mostly passive activities and low intensity water sports such as canoeing and sailboarding. In addition, a major portion of the park should become a nature preserve. Exhibit A depicts in a generalized way the active park limits and the area encompassing the nature preserve. The final Master Plan includes several design features that will serve to strongly establish the nature preserve. These include: ❑ the creation of additional wetlands. ❑ the re-vegetation of degraded shoreline. ❑ the creation of a wetland buffer. ❑ the establishment of vegetated wildlife corridors. ❑ the protection of wetlands by controlled visitor access. ❑ the creation of distinct "portals" for access into the nature preserve. ❑ the creation of an outdoor interpretive display and trail loop for educating the park users as to the values of the nature preserve. ❑ a new name for the Park: "Laguna Lake Nature Park". Each of these elements is described in greater detail under "Park Program Elements". To further enhance the nature preserve certain key lands outside the park boundary have been identified for acquisition, as described under "New Park Land Acquisition". Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions 2- C/Z // \ ' UN j':MATURE _PRESERVE. I ✓ „ \\ I \ ' el LAKE pin , :•.. � Qp r i G4GUNA LAKE PARK MASTER PLAN Exhibit ACTIVE PARK AND NATURE PRESERVE BOUNDARIES A NORTH SO&e Crawford Molter;&Starr L.atsure Visions Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 3 - Park Program Elements The following description of program elements is divided into five categories: 1) Overall park experience and motif 2) Passive recreation opportunities 3) Water related recreation opportunities 4) Nature Preserve 5) Maintenance and safety These categories have accompanying goal statements that express what it is that is intended to be achieved, and are referenced to the applicable Planning Principles. Each of the program elements then become the physical means to achieving the goals identified. 1. Overall Park Experience and Motif Goal: Provide a safe, attractive park in which the built elements emphasize the overarching character of the park as a natural place. (Planning Principles 40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,49) Park Entry: • construct a massive entry feature utilizing earth berms, native stone walls, tree and shrub plantings, with a heavy, rustic timber trellage over the road, or as an alternative approach; • construct a softer, low key entry using earth berms, masses of naturalistic boulders, and tree and shrub planting. • new signage and gates for night closure should be included. • convert all planting fronting Madonna Road to native ground covers, retaining small turf or meadow areas only at the gate. Park Roads and Parking: • all roadways should be two way with a 20-foot wide asphaltic concrete paved surface with two-foot gravel shoulders • all roadways shall be bounded by horizontal log barriers on both sides to contain vehicles. • parking areas should be AC paving in high use areas such as near playgrounds and the shoreline, and `redrock' surfaced in lower use areas to avoid an overly paved appearance. • concrete curbs are not envisioned, however AC berms should be employed as necessary to convey stormwater. • remove and realign two existing roadway sections to deemphasize the existing power transmission towers.. • develop a bus stop in the center of the park to encourage less vehicle use in the park. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions 4 C/2-/3 Restrooms: • a new standard restroom building should be designed that incorporates naturalistic materials such as stone, split faced concrete masonry and heavy timbers. • design should provide for security and adequate surveillance. • a changing area and exterior shower for sailboarders should be included. Handicap Accessibility: • all restrooms, paths, and picnic areas shall be handicap accessible. Signage: • provide direction and locational signage for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. • signage should be wood, designed to be in keeping with the natural motif of the park. Turf: • irrigated turf areas shall be limited to designated areas that serve as passive recreation zones, such as family picnic and games areas group barbecue areas, and shoreline activity areas. The use of reclaimed and/or lake water should be considered for irrigation. Drainage: • storm water runoff patterns should be retained as close as practical to existing. • areas of periodic flooding should not be viewed as undesirable as long as it does not adversely affect built elements. • new storm water conveyances should employ natural elements such as rock. • naturally occurring vegetation related to seasonally boggy areas should be encouraged. 2. Passive Recreation Opportunities Goal: Provide a variety of passive recreation opportunities for different age groups and interests that are compatible with the natural and scenic qualities of the park. (Planning Principles 24 through 30,33;34,39) Stabilized Turf Shoreline: • create a shoreline that is safe and accessible for fishermen, people feeding ducks, canoe and sailboard beaching, and children playing. • install a geotextile mat on a recontoured shoreline. • install turf and automatic irrigation • shoreline improvements should be along shore segments that are currently devegetated, however any minor loss in existing shoreline vegetation to create the turf edge would be compensated by creation of new habitat and wetlands elsewhere in the park. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 5 - C/;4 Berms and Windbreaks: • create berms in several key locations, using dredge spoils, that will be planted with California native windbreak trees. • berms shall be four to six feet high with gentle slopes not exceeding 5:1, and contoured to appear natural. • windbreak trees shall not include eucalyptus species, but rather a mix of native conifers and oaks. • windbreak trees shall have supplemental irrigation to encourage rapid growth. Paths: • the existing paved shoreline road shall be narrowed to 10 feet in paved width for use as a bike,jogging and walking path. • all other park paths shall be decomposed granite or gravel surface, 8 feet in width. • exercise stations shall be supplied at intervals on designated path loops. • provide a total of 30 parking spaces for walkers and joggers. Family Picnic Areas: • provide family picnic areas in several locations both sheltered and at the shoreline. • equipment shall include picnic tables on concrete or decomposed granite pads and barbecue pits. • provide parking at a ratio of one space per 2.5 users accommodated, and not further than about 300 feet from the furthermost edge of the picnic area. • provide a few sitting areas along Madonna Road for people on lunch breaks. Group Picnic/Barbecue Areas: • in addition to the existing group area, provide a new group area accommodating about 75 persons, with a barbecue pit. • develop a shelter or pavilion to cover part of the picnic tables provided. • provide parking at the ratio of one space per 2.5 users. • provide turf play areas associated with group areas.. • the group area should be designed to also function as a day camp area for summertime recreation programs. Off Leash Dog Area: provide an area to all for dogs to use the park off leash. • location is the grassy area adjacent to the north park restroom. • use patterns and park development will determine the need to fence the area. Disc Golf Course: • provide the opportunity to participate in disc golf. • a standard course of 18 holes will be located in the park within the active portion. • the course shall be designed in such a manner as to blend into the natural Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 6 - e/z-T environment of the park. Games: • game areas including volleyball and horseshoes facilities shall be developed associated with the group and family picnic areas. Commemorative Grove: • continue to develop and expand the grove to the north and east. 3. Water Related Recreation Opportunities Goal: Maintain and improve the desirability and utility of the lake for low impact water activities including low power fishing craft, canoes, sailboats and sail boards.(Planning Principles 1,3,10,28) Launch and Docks: • maintain and improve access to the existing boat launch ramp and docks. • provide an open turf area.near parking for sailboard rigging. • provide several parking spaces for vehicles with boat trailers. • develop a trail from the sailboard rigging area to the western point along the peninsula currently used for sailboard launching. • provide a stabilized turf shore for sailboard landing and novice launching. Shoreline Users: • create a sheltered cove and turf shore by shoreline excavation, berming and windbreak planting for the use of water sport participants and their families. • provide a fishing dock at the southerly end of the lake. • provide a total of 30 to 40 parking spaces for water and shoreline users. 4. Nature Preserve Goal: Maintain and enhance the natural vegetative and wildlife characteristics of the wetland and hillside areas of the Park providing for meaningful, but sustainable, human enjoyment of these areas. (Planning Principles:2,4,6,8,9,11,12,13,16 through 23) Revegetated Shoreline: • revegetate degraded areas of the southern shoreline along the active portion of the park with dense, native, wetland plants such as willows and blackberry. • the revegetation and improvement of degraded areas will compensate for any loss of wildlife value from the creation of stabilized turf shore along portions of the south shoreline for recreational use. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 7 - 02 -16 C New Wetlands: • excavate approximately two acres of land at the end of the "peninsula inlet" to an elevation such that standing water is extended about 100 feet east and seasonal inundation is extended about 600 feet east, creating new wetlands (marsh). • excavate a 20 foot wide channel across the base of the peninsula making it an island accessible only by footbridge. Wetland Buffer: • remove grazing and existing cattle fences from the Park. • designate a wetland buffer between the existing marsh edge and the 125 elevation contour (highest inundation level) of about 100 to 200 feet in width. • plant willows, cottonwoods, sycamore and oak trees in the buffer. Trails: • provide a nature/jogging trail along the edge of the wetland buffer, separated by a low wood rail fence screened with wire mesh to keep dogs out of the wetland. • trails on slopes less than 15% are suitable for jogging and should be surfaced with smooth decomposed granite or gravel. • trails for jogging shall be eight feet wide. • hillside trails shall be a maximum of three feet wide, and unsurfaced. Construction must include stone or timber dikes to sheet concentrated water off the trail to avoid erosion. Fence and Portals: • Demark the boundary between the active park and nature preserve with a three foot high wood rail fence, or alternatively, a low log barrier. • provide three access points into the nature preserve through "gateways" or portals signed to designate nature preserve entry.. Wildlife Corridors: • using dredge spoils, create landform modifications and recontouring to emphasize drainage swales in the land between the hills and marsh.. • plant oaks and native shrubs in the swales to provide wildlife corridors from the hills to the marsh. Interpretive Signage: • provide interpretive signage or displays at key points in the nature preserve. The displays should contain information about the geology, peaks, watershed, flora, fauna, and history of the Lake environs. Boardwalks: • access by foot to open water within the nature preserve shall be provided by Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 8 - /z-/7 paths anct-wood boardwalks over the marsh in two locations. • the boardwalk shall be elevated to allow wildlife movement under the walk, and include wood and wire rails to contain people and dogs. • access to the peninsula shall be regulated by building a drawbridge or other suitable method of closing the footbridge/boardwalk across the narrow channel. Seep Protection: • natural seeps in the hillside shall be mapped and monitored for the presence of rare or endangered plants. • areas with rare or endangered plants shall be isolated by low protective fencing and identification signage or interpretive display(s). Nature Interpretive Center: • using the new park motif of earth berms, stone walls and tree massings, create an outdoor interpretive display and plaza. • interpretive panels should be aluminum with micro-imaged, durable graphics covered with plexiglass mounted on stone walls. • community groups should be encouraged to sponsor local artists to create artwork for the interpretive panels. • provide a surfaced plaza with seating and some open turf areas for children to play. • provide 25 parking spaces for users of the Nature Interpretive Center and Nature Preserve at this location. 5. Maintenance and Safety Goal: Provide for the safe and efficient operation of the Park. (Planning Principles:41 through 50) Maintenance Area: • provide for a small maintenance yard and shed for equipment. The yard should be fenced, screened, and architecturally compatible with the park motif. Safety: • provide two public telephones in the park for use in the event of emergencies. • emergency numbers should be posted near the boat docks. • the park should be closed at night. • restrooms should be designed for the security of the user. Service Access: • the shoreline path should be gated to allow only service vehicle access. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 9 - 'f/2-/f' C C New Park Land Acquisition and Easements: Exhibit B illustrates the lands that should be acquired and added to the park to ensure adequate protection of the park wetland.resource and provide additional viewpoints and trails. The acquisitions and trails are all priorities and should be pursued by the City as opportunities arise. Land Acquisition: ❑ Acquisition One: acquire additional wetlands outside the park. ❑ Acquisition Two: acquire the rocky knolls north of the park to protect wildlife value and provide important viewpoints. ❑ Acquisition Three: acquire the eucalyptus grove south of the park, which has habitat value for important birds. Acquisition Four: acquire land to the northwest of the Lake. Trail Easements: ❑ Trail One: acquire a trail easement connecting the Park to Foothill Boulevard. Trail Two: acquire a trail easement connecting the Park with Los Osos Valley Road. ❑ Trail Three: acquire a trail easement to Cerro San Luis and Marsh Street. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 10 - Cl z-/9 T ' .�Qi�• fl,r � scout fir` ; ;: Trt CQUIS/T/ .,.109. LA U // •- _�+' �� moi. \' I ` , 1 r� PARK �7„ \ \ � i LAKE \ f 1 ,ll�COUISITION 3 j' /� f: i 1 i i i LAGUNA LAKE PARK MASTER PLAN Exhibit NEW PARK LAND ACQUISITIONS & TRAIL EASEMENTS B NORTH sedes Crawford Multeri&starr Leisure Vision* Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 11 - C'/2—ZO LAGUNA LAKE PARK MA ZR PLAN O CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE-DRAFT ❑ GRADING & PAVING EARTHWORK,EXCAVATION AND BERMS' $ 40,000 PAVEMENT DEMOLITION $ 12,000 NEW AC PAVING- ROADS $ 105,000 PARKING $ 23,400 PATH-A.C.8' $ 7,600 D.G. 8' $ 44,160 TRAIL 3' $ 2,500 $ 234,660 Ll PLANTING & IRRIGATION TURF(IRRIGATED) $ 121,300 SHORELINE STABILIZATION $ 29,000 SHORELINE REVEGETATION $ 15,300 WINDBREAK TREES AND WILDLIFE BUFFER $ 31,000 $ 196,600 ❑ INFRASTRUCTURE ELECTRICAL SUPPLY $ 10,000 DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY $ 4,5000 SEWER EXTENSION $ 7,000 MISC. DRAINAGE WORK $ 5,000 MAINTENANCE YARD $ 15,000 TELEPHONE $ 10,000 $ 51,500 ❑ ACTIVE PARK IMPROVEMENTS $ (8 820) ENTRY WALLS (ALT. 1) $ 3,675 ENTRY ROCK WORK(ALT. 2) $ 3,000 ENTRY SIGN $ $ (15,000) ENTRY STRUCTURE(ALT. 1) $ 45,000 PICNIC TABLES (45) $ 10,000 GROUP AREA TABLES (10) $ 7,500 FAMILY BBO'S (15) $ 3,000 GROUP BBQ'S (1) $ 30,000 PAVILION $ 26,000 VOLLEYBALL(4) $ 6,000 HORSESHOES (2) $ 13,000 FISHING DOCK(1) $ 2,400 DRINKING FOUNTAINS (4) $ 2,400 TRASH RECEPTACLES (12) $ 30,000 PLAY AREA $ 100,000 ADVENTURE PLAY STREAM $ 40,000 POND $ 2,000 MISC. SIGNAGE $ 323,975 Dredge spoil placement and contouring not included since quantities unknown. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 12 - Cl2Z/ MI AGUNA LAKE PARK N►ti�TER PLAN O CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ❑ RESTROOM $ 80,000 ❑ INTERPRETIVE AREA STONE WALL $ 17,000 INTERPRETIVE DISPLAYS (6) $ 6,000 PATIO SURFACE $ 5.600 $ 29,200 ❑ NATURE PRESERVE $ (1,800) PORTALS (ALT. 1) $ 900 PORTALS (ALT. 2) $ (66,000) RAIL FENCE(ALT. 1) $ 27,000 RAIL FENCE(ALT. 2) $ 45,000 MARSH EDGE FENCE $ 22,000 BOAR DWALKS $ 1,200 INTERPRETIVE SIGNS (6) $ (136,000) $ 96,100 ❑ DESIGN FEES $ 60,000 ❑ TOTAL $ 190729035 - $191329080 Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 13 - e/2-2Z LAGUNA LAKE PARK MA,._,&R PLAN O PHASING PLAN Implementation of the Master Plan is envisioned to be phased over approximately ten years. Initial City Council funding has been provided upon the adoption of the Master Plan for design of the first phase of improvements. The phasing schedule below was developed to initiate the nature preserve and earthwork/windbreak construction early in the process. The second phase fills in infrastructure (roads, stabilization, restrooms/utility extensions) and paths. The final two phases include construction of the remaining active and passive recreation improvements. The phasing plan is tied to the City's two-year budget cycle. It is anticipated that each phase would be considered during budget review. Fiscal limitations may preclude major capital improvement allocations for the Park in the near future. With this in mind, it should be emphasized that many of the elements of the plan can be implemented out-of-phase as funds or donations become available. PHASE ONE Approximate Cost: $195,000 Time Frame: 1995 budget cycle -terminate grazing lease and remove fence •excavate new wetland and pond -construct and plant berms -provide irrigation to new plantings construct interpretive area -construct wetland buffer fence -plant wildlife buffer -map and fence seeps PHASE TWO Approximate Cost: $395,000 Time Frame: 1997 budget cycle -construct new park entry and road extensions and realignments •construct path along marsh -develop shoreline stabilization and revegetation -develop shoreline bike/walking path •construct restroom near boat launch PHASE THREE Approximate Cost: $290,000 Time Frame: 1999 budget cycle -develop turf and family picnic areas near existing play area and near interpretive area *construct games areas •construct fishing dock -construct all remaining jogging walking paths -develop maintenance yard -construct boardwalk PHASE FOUR Approximate Cost: $235,000 Time Frame: 2001 budget cycle •develop group area and related turf and games area •construct play area, adventure play and pond Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 14- C/Z-,23 LAGUNA LAKE PARK.MA„_r'.R PLAN O PARK FINANCING BACKGROUND The draft Laguna Lake Park Master Plan provides for largely passive, outdoor-oriented, low- intensity recreation use compatible with the area's natural environment. The draft Master Plan provides for no specific active recreation use areas, except on parts of the take itself where aquatic activities such as sailboarding are allowed. As master planned, the improvements to the park are expected to cost approximately $1 million to install. This report reviews the financing options for building the recommended improvements. FINANCING GENERALLY In addition to financing the improvements planned for Laguna Lake Park, the City will also have to pay for the increased maintenance costs associated with the park improvements and the corresponding increase in activities that will occur there. The general climate for financing local government improvements, including parks and recreation facilities, is difficult at this time. The poor condition of California's economy, with only a slow recovery expected, suggests general funds will be constrained. The kind of park envisioned in the draft Master Plan provides no significant opportunities to raise revenues for capital improvements and/or ongoing maintenance costs through user fees or charges. Thus, the park will require a significant capital outlay and will incur potentially high ongoing maintenance costs for such tasks as habitat restoration/protection, dredging, etc., but does not have a significant revenue production capability. The following briefly discusses funding alternatives for construction and maintenance of Laguna Lake Park. GENERAL FUND The City could simply pay for capital improvements at Laguna Lake Park directly from current General Fund revenues or set aside enough monies each year in a reserve capital account until there are sufficient funds to construct all or a portion of the improvements at the park. This method of financing has the obvious disadvantage of potentially impacting other General Fund-supported functions. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - >5 - C/z.� LAGUNA LAKE PARK MAS._dR PLAN D DEVELOPMENT EXACTIONS The City can require developers to contribute to the cost of capital improvements as a condition of approval for project development. For such a fee to be legal, it must pass the "rational nexus test". This requires the exaction to be reasonably related to the costs of serving the development. The City currently uses the Quimby Act (Section 6647 of the. Subdivision Map Act) to assess new subdivisions, through dedication and improvement of land or payment of in-lieu fees, for the proportional impact of future residents on recreation and park facilities. This method effectively finances facilities, which reduce the impacts of residential subdivisions on the City's park system. It may be difficult to justify using development fees unless the subdivision is proximate to the park and can truly help address the recreation needs of the new residents. This kind of justification may be further strained given the nature of the facility: primarily passive recreation and habitat preservation. While the latter is a worthy goal, it may not tie directly to the real recreation needs of new residents. Furthermore, few new subdivisions are being approved in the City due to a combination of factors: the recession, lack of water, limited availability of land, etc. Use of developer fees for maintenance activities are constrained by law to very specific amounts and purposes. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT AND SPECIAL TAX DISTRICTS Assessment districts or special tax districts may be used to finance capital improvements that benefit specific properties. In both cases, properties that benefit from a specific capital improvement are placed in a district where the city levies a special assessment against those properties to fund the project. The assessment, collected along with property taxes, can only be used for the specific purpose for which it is collected. Two options may be considered by the City for construction and maintenance of improvements to Laguna Lake Park: 1) a Mello-Roos Community Facility District (technically a special tax district), and 2) a Lighting and Landscape Maintenance District. Both districts allow the City to fund capital improvements and ongoing maintenance through assessments of both residential and commercial properties. A city-wide assessment district with a small base assessment increasing with proximity to Laguna Lake Park, could be theoretically justified for this City-wide park. However, neither is viewed as a practical option. It is doubtful that the community will accept what is effectively seen as a property tax increase. A Mello-Roos special tax also requires a two-thirds vote of the affected property- owners to be implemented -- highly unlikely. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 16 - C/2-aS LAGUNA LAKE PARK MA.-,ER PLAN DEBT FINANCING Local governments issue bonds to borrow money for land acquisition and facilities. This method of financing, which would require general obligation (GO) bonds in this case, would allow the City to spread the $1 million dollar cost of improvements at Laguna Lake Park out over time and reduce construction costs by completing the park in a relatively short time rather than over many years. However, the City is required to seek two-thirds majority approval of voters to issue GO bonds for Laguna Lake Park. The State Legislature is currently considering a constitutional amendment, which would allow local governments to issue GO bonds specifically for parks and recreation facilities with approval by a simple majority. This change would significantly increase the chances of GO bond approval. Revenue bonds, which are backed by revenues from a project, facility or park, are not deemed feasible for Laguna Lake Park due to its passive nature and lack of revenue generating capabilities. An alternative to bonds is the use of certificates of participation (COP'S). The advantage of COP's is that no vote is required. The disadvantage is that interest rates for COP'S are higher than for GO bonds. In any case, the debt would have to be paid for out of the General Fund because of the limited revenue--generating potential of this use. In sum, revenue bonds are not possible in this case; general obligation bonds require a two- thirds vote and are impractical; COP's could be a plausible mechanism, but would have to be paid for out of the General Fund. PUBLIC-PRIVATE JOINT VENTURE Public-private joint ventures are partnerships between government agencies and private business to provide facilities or services to the public. Privatization of public functions, such as campground operations/reservations, ground leases for revenue producing recreation facilities, etc., could be part of this approach. No real opportunities for public-private joint ventures exist at Laguna Lake Park as it is currently master planned, due to the passive nature of the park. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - 17 - 6 12-21 LAGUNA LAKE PARK MA,._c,R PLAN GRANTS AND DONATIONS Grants are, from time to time, available for park development from the state and federal government on a competitive basis; however, the tenuous budget conditions at these government levels have left little grant funding available for park development currently. In addition, grants are generally awarded for only very small portions of a park as large as Laguna Lake and the amount of grant funds awarded is correspondingly small. For example, grant monies available from the federally funded Land and Water Conservation Fund for last fiscal year totaled just over$400,000 for all of Southern California. The solicitation of donations from individuals, corporations and other businesses for park development is deemed difficult without a core group of dedicated volunteers, a consultant or professional staff. The draft Master Plan for Laguna Lake Park may encourage formation of a nature association to lead nature hikes, give field lectures and conduct fund-raising efforts on behalf of the City, similar to the organization used to restore the Jack House and Gardens. Use of a fund raising consultant may help; Such an approach was used recently by the City of Paso Robles in constructing Centennial Park. CONCLUSION The estimated cost of Laguna Lake Park is about $1.0 million. Some monies may be raised through developer fees authorized through the Quimby Act. Grants are available (although for relatively small amounts and subject to stiff competition today) and should be investigated and applied for if appropriate. Significant opportunities exist for volunteer fund raising in the community, particularly from people interested in protecting and restoring habitat. Use of an assessment district or special tax district is deemed impractical in this case. User fees are not a significant options due to the passive nature of the park. Similarly, the lack of active recreation limits opportunities for income from leases, franchises or public-private ventures. It appears that the bulk of the money will need to come from the General Fund, either through a "pay-as-you-go" program or some debt financing mechanism. The City is currently retaining a firm to investigate ways of funding a more expansive open space program. Because Laguna Lake Park as currently master planned is primarily an open space and habitat reserve, perhaps the open space funds could be used to help install of the improvements and maintain that facility. Sedes Crawford,Multari&Starr Leisure Visions - Is - G/z o?7 fi h �' .. 1� of � o �'�.•. �, �� . /�#�Ny� �fi. Ar '1 O lu¢• . 2 (� ,~' �__ � �• �:� �� is 0f`,ap 44- 0 fl Qz- OQ cl IL 6� �� {�. _J✓ /i• art lL,.�i ' � z _ J�-_,...�_,�. � o°� 1r� � ��;�. .�+., Y!• . i � f: oma.. , c��. m< r3 1 t ` -•� `l - r ,:rA' ' �..'1 ��,��"��v/ :AFI . N �•C'�q, ..�'��v ��.��`.� ' � r 12 cr 31 LU �•• Y � �.� - _{-�� C.� � �1- % �� . +� �1'_'r� is i '��• '� � \"(ter CD oilscr J ATTACHMENTS-- Parks and Recreation Commission MINUTES City-County Library Conference Room Wednesday, June 2, 2004 6:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Peter Dunan called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Chair Pete Dunan, Commissioners: Gary Clay, Don Dollar, Ty Griffin, John Knight,Jill Lemieux, and Bill Pyper. ABSENT: None STAFF: Director Paul LeSage,Todd Beights, and Cindy McDonald. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: The minutes of the May 5, 2004 meeting wereapprovedas submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: Gary Nichols—San Luis Obispo—would like to see the Laguna Lake Park closed earlier. 1. Volunteer of the Month Postponed to next month. 2. Directors Report LeSage briefed the Commission on the dates of the Department's Staff Meeting and Park Tour. 3. Staff Reports Todd Beights,Parks Maintenance, updated the Commission with various park projects. 4. Committee Reports Commissioners gave reports on Committees they attended. ■ Tree Committee—Staff reported status ■ Joint Use Committee ■ Mayors Youth Task Force—Dunan ■ Jack House Committee—Pyper • Open Space—Dollar ■ Golf—Lemieux ■ Therapy Pool—Staff reported status ■ Landscape Parkways—Clay 5. Communications None. 6. Laguna Lake Park Master Plan LeSage presented the staff report. Chair Dunan opened the item to Public Comment. 1. Shirley Walker — San Luis Resident — would like the park to stay passive. (gave a written statement). 2. James Fickes — San Luis Obispo Resident — daily user, uses all aspects of the park. Is not a proponent for baseball, softball, or tennis courts— feels sound will travel quickly across the lake. Would like plantings for birds and wildlife but also liked the elimination of pond. He would like a ClCa &AMVAda Rep"ILagam Lake P&*16.21.05106.02.04 mmub dac C/)--a-1 Parks and Recreation Com _,,ion —A Minutes for June 2, 2004 Page 2 natural amphitheatre and would like the park to stay a passive park and keep the current character. 3. Marian Nelson — San Luis Obispo Resident — spoke in favor for more facilities for exercises, would like the tennis courts, it would improve the property values, and she enjoys the dog park. 4. Luzette Graves — San Luis Obispo Resident — daily user of park and open space, and is a dog owner who uses the park daily. Feels it is a wonderful gift for having a place for dogs. Would like to see it a permanent element in the park. 5. Justin Zeigler San Luis Obispo Resident — would like the continued dog park access continue. bicycle access. 6. Theadore Jones—San Luis Obispo Resident—is in opposition to tennis courts. 7. Kent Tayler— San Luis Obispo Resident- is happy with the way it is. Would like to see changes acquiring the Duvall property, a floating bridge access, Cerro San Luis Obispo Mountain added to the park, and acquire more land. He feels it is too windy for the recreation uses. 8. Kathy Kimball—San Luis Obispo Resident—regular user for 6 years with a dog. Would like to see the Plan state there is a permanent dog off leash area. Would also like better traffic flow and signage in the park. 9. Victoria Mederith — San Luis Obispo Resident- in favor of off leash dog park as there is only one dog park in the City. El Chorro is not an alternative—not a city dog park—summer fee. Feels that seniors use the park a lot. 10. Kim Winers— San Luis Obispo Resident—dog owner, who used the dog park, recommends speed bumps and keeping the area open. 11. Joanne Williams—San Luis Obispo Resident—dog owner, happy that the dog park will stay in the Plan. 12. Bren Cross — San Luis Obispo Resident —park is extremely utilized, only area to have a passive area. This is tremendous asset to the community. 13. Jim Foley— San Luis Obispo Resident— agrees with everything=not in favor of tennis or softball fields,Would like the road continued around the boat area, boater to use the lake, gazebo wrap the road around, restroom between the gazebo and lake, bike loop and wheelchair accessible. Regarding dredging: likes the idea of berms and wind breaks. 14. Marie Foley—San Luis Obispo Resident—opposed to a.sport facility because of the impact to the park. Does not like any building on the Plan,considers it a habitat. Likes the low impact use - has some ideas: signage, move the road, dredging, dog park permanent, memorial grove, no sports facility. (gave written statement) 15. Susan Tripp —San Luis Obispo Resident— dog park user three times a week - would like to make the off-lease dog park part of the permanent Plan — would be okay with tennis courts if the dog park stayed. Speed bumps should be put in. Stated the more people use the park the more the park will be supervised. 16. Paul Boniour—San Luis Obispo Resident— adamantly opposed to any sports facility—wants Fish and Game involved. Feels a sports complex would change the character. Feels there is a preconceived notion or plans for the park. Would rather see changes in the Garcia property or on the golf course. c i�30 \ ^1 Parks and Recreation Com ;ion 3 — A Minutes for June 2, 2004 Page 3 17. Jan Simek—San Luis Obispo Resident—Does not want tennis courts, wants a nature park. 18. David Bradie — San Luis Obispo Resident—daily user; agrees with passive nature open space, no planned activities. 19. Katie Peters — San Luis Obispo Resident — (President for SLO Girls Softball) — would like more fields, thanks to the Joint Use Committee for the money to play at Cal Poly_ . Would like more support in the City for fields. 20. Steve McMaster—San Luis Obispo Resident—daily user of the off leash dog park and a proponent of the dog park—maybe some symbolic fencing. Feels there needs to be more signage for the off— leash area,would like to keep the park in a passive use. 21. Nick Marinkovich - San Luis Obispo Resident — loves the dog park, keep it as is but would like speed bumps installed 22. Rich Kriet— San Luis Obispo Resident- (Joint Use Committee member) speaks in favor of more tennis court for the community. Supports sports fields. 23. Ron Rexier— San Luis Obispo Resident — (Youth Sports Association) — respects the opinions of the people, however, feels there is a demonstrated need for the softball/youth sports facility. Would like to think about a complex for the young people. (gave a written statement from Cal Ripkin). 24. Karen Roth — Los Osos Resident— (tennis instructor) Feels there is a need for more tennis courts. Supports the dog park. 25. Craig Williams — San Luis Obispo Resident — feels it would be a mistake if the park were turned into a sports complex. 26. Timothy Ohm—Grover Beach Resident—daily user of the park in all aspects, loves the it way it is, oppose to ball courts,diamonds, dredging is okay, is a dog park user, would like a spot for the dogs in the water. Invited the commission out there 3-5 pm any day. 27. Dick Bray—San Luis Obispo Resident—(active tennis player)lives across the lake, wants the park passive. Does not support tennis courts in Laguna Lake Park. 28. Janet Kourakis — San Luis Obispo Resident — tennis player — feels there is not enough tennis courts, spoke about conflict with the courts. 29. Scott Cleere — San Luis Obispo Resident—tennis enthusiast feels the need for more tennis courts. (gave written statement). 30. Susanne Kosaka—San Luis Obispo Resident?—likes the park area and is avid dog park user. 31. Marina Cardin —San Luis Obispo Resident— loves the lake, likes the bird life, however, does not like the dog chasing the geese,not opposed to the tennis courts. 32. Glenn Carlson — San Luis Obispo Resident — should be retained as a passive park— knows about the need for ball fields, and has reservations about the traffic that would it add. Feels that ball fields will change the character of the lake, is in opposition of any changes. Obispo Chair Dunan closed the item to Public Comment. Written statements addressed to the Commission to be added to the minutes 06.03.04—Chair Pete Dunan e iz -3j Parks and Recreation Com. bion 3— A Minutes for June 2, 2004 Page 4 06.02.04—Sarah McCandliss—supports the off-leash dog park. 06.02.04—Ann Calhoun—supports the off-leash dog park 06.02.04—Eva Vigil—supports a passive use park 06.02.04—Anne Schwab—supports a passive use park 06.02.04—Saeed and Shohreh Niku—supports a passive use park 06.02.04—Leslie Sands—supports a passive use park 06.02.04—Marianne Danner—supports a passive use park 06.02.04—Steve Davis—supports an active use park 06.02.04—Mbuchman—supports an active use park 06.02.04- Dodie Williams—supports a passive use park 06.03.04—Nancy Harper—supports a passive use park 06.04.04—Emily Hoyt—supports the off-leash dog park 06.07.04 0 Lucinda Cyr(sp?)—supports the off-leash dog park 06.15.04—Nancy Williams—supports a passive use park 06.21.04—Elaine Schmidt—supports a passive use park No date—Ron Tindall—supports a passive use park 06.02.04—Pricilla(no last name given)—supports a passive use park Recommendation: No action nor discussion from the Commission. Matter continued to the August meeting. 7. Laguna Lake Park Dredging LeSage introduced Barbara Lynch, Supervising Civil Engineer who presented the staff report. Commission discussed the item. Dunan opened the item to public comment 1. Brett Cross — San Luis Obispo Resident- concerned about the silt, showed pictures, worried about the arm of the lake. 2. Keith Kidwell — San Luis Obispo Resident —Does not like the idea of a marsh, asked to remove the reeds out of the lake because of the West Nile Virus. 3. Marie Foley— wants to the dredge the lake, for the long tern health, does not want the cove areas filled, and is okay with the dredging but not stretching over 15 years. 4. Robert Johnson — San Luis Obispo Resident —Think it is important that the lake be dredged, was on the Master Plan implementation in 1998. Agrees that mosquitoes are a problem right now. 5. Glenn Carlson—Commented on the plan. Dunan closed the item to public comment Recommended Action will be continued to the September meeting: Cl2--3Z Parks and Recreation Comi"sion I —A Minutes for June 2, 2004 Page 5 Commission discussed item and gave staff direction to come back in August and bring it for discussion. Provide direction to staff on options to dredge Laguna Lake and dispose of the dredged material. 8. Adjourned. The meeting adjourned at 9:35 pm to the July 14, 2004 Park Tour meeting. 3-t Parks and Recreation Commission MINUTES Council Chambers,990 Palm Street Wednesday, August 4, 2004 6:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Peter Dunan called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. ROLL CALL: Chair Pete Dunan, Commissioners: Don Dollar, Ty Griffin, Jill Lemieux, and Bill Pyper. ABSENT: Gary Clay and John Knight STAFF: Director Paul LeSage,Todd Beights,and Cindy McDonald. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: The minutes of the June 2,2004 meeting were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: Marie Foley San Luis Obispo Resident—Pocket bikes are nuisances and would like signage posted. Recently signs that have been gone up in the Laguna Lake Park. LeSage addressed the issues. Judy King—San Luis Obispo Resident—spoke in favor of more tennis courts in the community. 1. Volunteer of the Month Chair Pete Dunan presented Rusty Davis as Volunteer of the Month. 2. Directors Report No report 3. Staff Reports Todd Beights,Parks Maintenance,updated the Commission with various park projects. 4. Use Agreement for First Tee Program LeSage presented the staff report. Commission discussed the item. Recommended Action: Recommend to the City Council that the MOU be approved and executed (Pyper/Dollar unanimous). 5. Committee Reports Commissioners gave reports on Committees they attended. ■ Tree Committee—Dollar to attend ■ Joint Use Committee-Knight ■ Mayors Youth Task Force—Dunan ■ Jack House Committee—Pyper ■ Open Space—Dollar ■ Golf—Lemieux • Therapy Pool—Staff reported status ■ Landscape Parkways — Griffin to attend 6. Communications None. PlParks&Re Comm&ian=41Minute 108.04.04minutmdx ci2 '3y \` r Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes for August 4,2004 Page 2 7. Laguna Lake Park Master Plan—continued from the June 2,2004 meeting. LeSage presented the staff report and explained the map that was distributed. Chair Dunan opened the item to Public Comment. 1. Garry Ku cer—San Luis Obispo Resident—spoke in favor of a passive park no sports fields(gave a written statement from Carol Kucer). 2. Scott Martin—Los Osos Resident—spoke in favor of introducing disc golf course into the Laguna Lake Park. 3. Paul Boniour—San Luis Obispo Resident—is opposed to tennis courts. 4. Jim Foley— San Luis Obispo Resident—not in favor of tennis courts, advised to look at joint use with the school district. 5. Marie Foley — San Luis Obispo Resident — spoke about a petition being circulated. Opposed to tennis courts. 6. Kathy Kimball—San Luis Obispo Resident—would like a traffic flow and safety check. 7. Scott Cleere — San Luis Obispo Resident — opposed to tennis courts but would like to see a disc golf. 8. Deepali Pante—San Luis Obispo Resident—in favor for passive low impact activities in the park. 9. Gillian McCallum — San Luis Obispo Resident—park user daily, advocates open area in the park. Spoke about the noise issue if there are active sports. 10. Eva Vigil — San Luis Obispo Resident — opposes any active use; likes the natural wildlife, gave written comments. 11. Brett Cross - San Luis Obispo Resident — agrees with Eva Vigil. Suggested the Commission should look at a sailing program in the park. 12. Susan Tripp — San Luis Obispo Resident — supports off leash dog park in the Master Plan. Suggested that speed bumps and signage be installed for safety reason. Also, likes that it has no fences. Wants the open passive use no tennis courts or sports fields. 13. Mary Gibbs—San Luis Obispo Resident—supports the off leash dog area. There is a community of dog park users. 14. Rusty Davis—San Luis Obispo Resident—noticed there was not a bicycle trail in the park. Chair Dunan closed the item to Public Comment. Written statements addressed to the Commission to be added to the minutes 08.4.04—Commissioner John Knight. 08.04.04—Alissa Maddren—supports tennis courts but not in Laguna Lake Park. 07.28.04—Kent M.Taylor—supports dredging the lake. Commission discussed the item: L'(�-3s' Parks and Recreation Commission 3 — b Minutes for August 4,2004 Page 3 The Parks and Recreation requested that staff prepare an amended Master Plan for their review that: 1. Removes the pond, stream,and adventure playground from the Plan, 2. Makes the off-leash dog area a permanent part of the Plan, 3. Adds a disc golf course to the Plan. 8. Communications None.. 8. Adjourned The meeting adjourned at 8:26 pm to the September 1,2004 meeting. CI-2-3G i� O ATTACHMENT LL Parks and Recreation Commission MINUTES Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street Wednesday, October 6, 2004 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Peter Dunan called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. ROLL CALL: Chair Pete Dunan, Commissioners: Gary Clay, Bill Pyper, Don Dollar, Ty Griffin,John Knight, and Jill Lemieux. ABSENT: None STAFF: Director Paul LeSage, Nicole Adler,.Ashley Blake and Cindy McDonald. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: The minutes of the September 1, 2004 meeting were approved as submitted. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: Marie Foley - commented on staff needing to post the agendas on the website prior to the meeting dates. Commission directed staff to honor the request. 1. Volunteer of the Month Chair Dunan presented Bob Nanninga as the Volunteer of the Month. 2. Special presentation by Alyssa Miller,Teen Idol winner 3. Trout About Downtown Project LeSage introduced Betsy Kiser, Principal Administrative Analyst and the Fish Commish, who presented the staff report. Commission discussed the item. Recommendation: Support the use of Mission Plaza as a site for the temporary display of Trout About Downtown"fish art". (Griffin/Lemieux: unanimous). 4. Laguna Lake Park Dredging Lesage introduced Barbara Lynch, Supervising Civil Engineer, who presented the staff report. Public Comment: Jim Foley — San Luis Obispo resident spoke in favor of dredging the lake and encouraged the Commission to consider the complete project. Commission discussed item. Reopened Public Comment. Jim Foley—San Luis Obispo resident, added that he is opposed to anything that will reduce the, surface area of the lake unless it is the only option. ejcC nd/A9em1a RePoffyi gum Lake Pa*6.2i.a5va.O1 o4 moutesdw CIz-37 Parks and Recreation Comi lion O Minutes for October 6, 2004 Page 2 Marie Foley — San Luis Obispo resident, commented that she encouraged people to not come to this meeting since her and her husband represented the group. Also, she expressed the concern that the community living next to the lake is being discounted since they live near the park. The petition presented at the September meeting has more than half of the signatures of people not living at or near the lake. Commission voted on the seven questions presented in the staff report. 1. Does the Commission agree dredging of Laguna Lake is an important Parks and Recreation goal? (4—yes; 3 —no). 2. Does the Commission agree dredging of the lake is more important than other improvements in City parks such as upgrades and expansions if limited funds are available? (no—all) 3. Does the Commission support dredging a portion of the lake, in lieu of the entire lake, as a reasonable alternative to reduce project costs? (4—yes; 3—no). 4. Does the Commission support use of portions of the park for deposition of dredged material? (6—yes; 1 —no). Where? (all opposed the natural preserve; 6-1 agreed on the active park). 5. Does the Commission support creation of islands or wetlands in the lake using the dredged material? (1 —yes; 5 —no; 1 —undecided). 6. Does the Commission support a long term (over 10 years) project if necessary as a reasonable alternative to reduce project cost? (2—yes;4—no; 1 —undecided). 7. Does the Commission support buying adjacent land for deposition of dredged materials? (6—yes; 1 -no) Recommended Action: Provided direction to staff on the dredging of Laguna Lake. 5. Laguna Lake Park Master Plan LeSage presented to the Commission this item. Committee discussed the item. Recommended Action: Recommended to the City Council that the Laguna Lake Master Plan be amended as follows: 1. Remove the Adventure Playground and Pond elements from the plan. (Dollar/Pyper; unanimous). 2. Make the Off Leash Dog Area a permanent feature in the park. (Knight/Pyper; unanimous). 3. Add a Disc Golf Course to the park. (Griffin/Pyper; unanimous). Public Comment: Jim Foley—San Luis Obispo resident, wanted to make sure that nothing new was added to the Master Plan besides the points specified clearly by staff. Eva Hill — San Luis Obispo resident, concerned about the random tree species planted in the Commemorative Grove. Parks and Recreation ComC ion Minutes for October 6, 2004 Page 3 Scott Martin—County resident, supports the efforts made for putting a disc golf course in the park. 6. Directors Report LeSage briefed the Commission on the following projects: • Major City Goals ■ Landscape Parkways Taskforce a Upcoming Commission Agendas e. Volunteer Awards Dinner ■ The Senior Brochure ■ Damon Garcia Maintenance 7. Staff Reports Nicole Adler, Recreation Supervisor, presented the staff report on the 2004 Teen Idol Program. 8. Committee Reports Commissioners gave reports. • Tree Committee—Dollar ■ Joint Use Committee- ■ Mayors Youth Task Force—Dunan ■ Jack House Committee—Pyper ■ Open Space—.Dollar ■ Golf-Lemieux ■ Therapy Pool— ■ Landscape Parkways-Clay&Griffin 9. Communications None. 10. Adjourned The meeting adjourned at 10:03 pm to the November 3, 2004 meeting. �a 3F �J ATTACHM JN . city .of l US omSp Community Development Department MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Le Sage, Director, Parks and Recreation FROM: John Mandeville,Director, Community Developm� DATE: May 24, 2005 SUBJECT- Minor amendments to the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan You've requested a d etermination o f w nether se vera] in inor a mendments t o t he Laguna Lake Park Master Plan (LLPMP) require Planning Commission review. The amendments are not a change to the General Plan itself, but to a recreation plan that implements the General Plan. Based on my review of the proposed amendments and on the record below, I have determined the amendments are minor in terms of their scope and effects, and are consistent with the intent of the approved LLPMP and with the General Plan. Consequently, the amendments listed below Will not require Planning Commission review: 1. Remove the Adventure Playground and Pond elements; 2. Make the Off Leash Dog Area a permanent feature; and 3. Add a Disc Golf Course. Background Adopted on June 15, 1993 and amended November 17, 1993, the LLPMP is the community's guide for the devetopment of the Park and preservation of its resources. The Plan and subsequent amendments contain implementation schedules that, except for a few projects, have not been implemented, mainly due to financial constraints. It has been twelve years since the Plan was adopted, and the Parks and Recreation Commission recently acknowledged that community's views on the best use of the park have changed. Also, as described below, the regulatory a nvironment i n w hich w e w ork h as a Iso c hanged, a ffecting t he feasibility o f s ome uses. Parks and Recreation Commission Action On June 2 and August 4, 2004, the Parks and Recreation Commission held public hearings and considered public testimony, community recreation needs and preferences, environmental factors, General Plan policies and fiscal effects of amending of the LLPMP. Based on previous testimony and on its deliberations, the Commission took action at its October 5, 2004 meeting to recommend that the City Council amend the Laguna Lake Park Master Plan (LLPMP) as e/Z—' C) . > n f 1 Laguna Lake Park Master Plan Amendments Page 2 follows: 1. Remove the Adventure Playground and Pond elements; 2. Make the Off Leash Dog Area a permanent feature; and 3. Add a Disc Golf Course. The Commission recommended deleting the Adventure Playground and Pond elements, noting that adventure playgrounds were quite popular at the time the plan was adopted. Unfortunately, they no longer meet current Consumer Product Safety Commission Standards. The playgrounds have been removed in most communities. As an alternative, these would be replaced with new playground equipment that is "adventure" themed. Also, the pond and recirculating stream clement originally planned would be problematic under current health code regulations. A "planned and built water attraction" designed for human use must meet the same standards as a swimming pool. This includes the appropriately size filtration and chemical systems, fencing, certified safe saving staffing, deck, and shower areas. The expense involved in such a project is significant. Such an element was clearly not the intent of the original Plan. The Commission noted that the Park has had an informal Off Leash Dog Area since 1998 and that it is the most used part of the park. No one spoke in opposition to the dog area at hearings. The dog area was not formally part of the Plan when adopted and the Commission recommended that it be added as a permanent feature. It requires no significant changes to existing facilities or park features. Last, the Commission noted that disc golf is a low impact passive recreational activity that is growing in popularity, and that the idea of adding a course to the park was well received by both the Commission and the public at hearings. The course would be located entirely within the active portion of the park and require only minimal improvements to accommodate. The exact layout is to be determined when financial resources are available for installation. The course will be designed to blend into the natural environment of the park. General Plan Conformity Amendments to the LLPMP must be consistent with the City's General Plan. Following is a summary of pertinent General Plan policies and their implications for the proposed amendments. The recommended amendments are consistent with these policies: The Parks and Recreation Element and Parks Master Plan, adopted in June of 2001, is the primary policy source regarding Laguna Lake recreation improvements: 1. Policy 2.55.1 - Laguna Lake shall be maintained in an environmentally sound and self- sustaining manner. 2. Policy 2.55.2 - The revised Laguna Lake Master Plan shall be implemented. (This policy refers to the 1998 amendment). �l2-Zf( Laguna Lake Park Master Plan Amendments Page 3 3. Open Space Element policies protect scenic resources and limit facilities or activities such as grading, roads, parking, or structures that could cause visual impact in scenic areas. New developments in scenic corridors or open space areas should fit the site's scale and character, blend in visually with the colors and textures of the adjacent natural landscape, and should not mar views. 4. Land Use Element LU 6.4.4 says new public or private developments adjacent to the Lake must respect the natural environment and incorporate natural features as project amenities, allow public access,protect public safety, and maintain security and privacy for residents. 5. Safety Element policies address natural and manmade hazards. It calls for new development to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan (ALUP), and for land use decisions to consider the potential effects of electromagnetic fields. CC: Michael Boswell,Chair, Planning Commission ]h/Uparks and recreatimt/Lagunalakemenm5-24-05