The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-02-2015 PRC Agenda Packet Regular Meeting on Wednesday, September 2, 2015 @ 5:30PM, Council Chambers CALL TO ORDER: Chair Whitener ROLL CALL: Commissioners Ryan Baker, Susan Olson, Michael Parolini, Ron Regier, Douglas Single, Susan Updegrove and Jeff Whitener Public Comment Period. At this time, you may address the Commission on items that are not on the agenda but are of interest to the public and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission may not discuss or take action on issues that are not on the agenda other than to briefly respond to statements made or questions raised, or to ask staff to follow up on such issues. PRC Meeting Agenda 1. Consideration of Minutes of Regular Meeting of July 1, 2015 2. Introduction of Chris Woods, Recreation Coordinator Golf and Seniors 3. Community Input Focus: Laguna Lake Dog Off Leash Area & Community Gardens (Dave Setterlund and Lindsey Stephenson - 45 minutes) 4. Conceptual Review of Parks Proposal for Avila Ranch Development Plan (Pam Ricci, Andy Mangano, Steve Peck - 30 minutes) 5. Action: Select Wes Conner Awardee for 2015 – (Chair Whitener - 15 minutes) 6. Brainstorming: Park Tour Dates and Topics (Shelly Stanwyck – 15 minutes) 7. Director’s Report – (Shelly Stanwyck, Director - 10 minutes) 8. Subcommittee Liaison Reports Committee Liaison Adult and Senior Programming Baker Bicycle Advisory Regier City Facilities (Damon, golf, pool, joint use) Parolini Jack House Committee Updegrove Tree Committee Olson YSA Single 9. Communications Adjourn to Regular Meeting of October 7, 2015 APPEALS: Administrative decisions by the Parks and Recreation Commission may be appealed to the City Council in accordance with the appeal procedure set forth in Chapter 1.20 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code. The City of San Luis Obispo is committed to including the disabled in all of its services, programs, and activities. Please contact the Clerk or staff liaison prior to the meeting if you require assistance. City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle Council Chambers 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Wednesday, July 1, 2015, 5:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Whitener called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL: Chair Jeff Whitener, Vice Chair Ron Regier and Commissioners Ryan Baker, Susan Olson, Michael Parolini, Douglas Single and Susan Updegrove ABSENT: None COUNCIL: None STAFF: Shelly Stanwyck, Jamie Bell, Jeff Hendricks, Daniel Van Beveren Public Comment None 1.CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES (Committee) Motion: (Regier/Updegrove) Approve Meeting Minutes of June 3, 2015 as amended. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 2.COMMUNITY INPUT FOCUS: PARKS MAINTENANCE (Hendricks) Staff member Jeff Hendricks, Parks Maintenance Supervisor, provided an overview of Parks Maintenance duties, including maintenance, safety, and entire infrastructure of parks. Public Works collaborates with Parks and Recreation for special events considering park needs and impacts on infrastructure. Hendricks updated the Commission about the SLO Skate Park maintenance concerns. A Public Works part-time maintenance worker cleans up the park approximately 15 hours a week. Maintenance staff is dedicated at Damon Garcia and Sinsheimer Park. A partnership with Blues Baseball team has allowed sharing of resources to paint and repair the fence, which will be completed in 2-3 years. Softball Fields at El Choro and Santa Rosa will be receiving maintenance of the lights, turf and irrigation. These fields are used 38 weeks a year. Damon Garcia turf renovation is scheduled from April-July and takes approximately 45 hours to complete one turf renovation. Staff Hendricks spoke about City water reductions in parks. The State’s water restrictions currently only apply to potable water. Fortunately, many of our fields use recycled (non-potable) water. Parks Maintenance has implemented a 13% reduction in water usage and watering only 2 days per week. Staff Hendricks added that a Parks Major Maintenance budget request was passed by Council and is a part of the 2015-17 Financial Plan. This budget request includes funding for various minor capital Meeting Minutes Parks and Recreation Commission 1 1-1 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle projects such as infrastructure maintenance, hockey rink resurfacing, basketball courts at French and Islay parks and back stop repairs at Sinsheimer Stadium. Public Comment: None Commission Comment: Commissioner Doug Single asked about watering at a high time of day at Meadow Park and the condition of the dead grass. Staff Hendricks responded that the drought restrictions of watering 2 days a week has had a significant impact. Commissioner Single suggested making Meadow Park softball field into a soccer field. Staff Hendricks added that as the drought persists, watering would consist of higher use/critical fields only. Damon-Garcia Sports Field is not restricted to 2-days/17% reduction because of recycled water use. Commissioner Single asked about artificial turf for Damon Garcia. Staff Hendricks responded that this option would only be possible on the upper field, but not lower field because it is located in a flood plain. Director Stanwyck highlighted the maintenance inspections of play equipment and the importance for community safety. Commissioner Olson asked about the homeless in the park. Staff Hendricks said there are typically 6-10 individuals that hang around the park and unless they are causing trouble or inebriated, the police are unable to remove. Chair Whitener asked of there was any flexibility of State Mandated watering restrictions. Staff Hendricks said staff would continue to work on ways to enhance watering while complying with State mandates. 3.PROPOSED LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE RESTROOM REMODEL (Van Beveren) Commissioner Michael Parolini recused himself from discussion due financial conflicts. Staff member Daniel Van Beveren provided the Commission a project update about the Laguna Lake Golf Course (LLGC) restrooms. He described issues with current restrooms at LLGC, most notably non-compliance with ADA standards. Several design consultant’s submitted bids. Omni Design Group was awarded the design contract. Staff Van Beveren presented the project scope, which includes Men and Women restroom facilities with maintenance storage room (which will house the new ADA golf cart). The project entails a new stand-alone structure. Staff Van Beveren shared the color template and material samples to be used in construction. A concrete walkway would surround the building for all-weather access. Commission Comments: Commissioner Updegrove asked about the color schemes inside the restrooms. Staff Van Beveren responded that there would be blue and red tiles. Public Comment: None Motion: (Regier/Updegrove) Recommend to Council Approval of the Design for the Laguna Lake Golf Course Restroom Remodel. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 2 1-2 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle 4.DIRECTOR’S REPORT (Stanwyck) Director Stanwyck provided a brief update on Parks and Recreation projects and programs. The Sinsheimer pool replastering project is anticipated to begin in mid-August, with reopening in January 2016. This will impact many users groups. The Therapy pool will reopen after a few weeks of maintenance closure. Uses of the Therapy pool have been adjusted to accommodate public’s request that the deep end be used for therapeutic use only. Currently there is an ongoing Ranger recruitment for one full-time Ranger Maintenance Worker and two part-time Rangers. The Ranger program will focus on the patrol and maintenance of Open Space and creeks. The SLO Police officers will be patrolling parks. Commissioner Parolini asked about the Joint Use Agreement between the School District and the City. Director Stanwyck shared that the Agreement will be amended for this change. This item will be before the Commission in September and the City Council in October. The City is considering possible purchase of new trucks and electric bikes for the Ranger staff. Director Stanwyck shared that the Golf Course is currently recruiting for the Recreation Coordinator position responsible for pro-shop operations. She added that Triathlon Volunteers are still needed. The Triathlon will be held on Sunday, July 26. Director Stanwyck said that the SLO Skate Park is adding new summer programming. Other Community events include a new community garden at the Golf Course, summer youth camps, Junior Giants baseball and a Public Art Master Plan. She added a reminder that the City will be hosting the UAE Special Olympics on July 23 at Farmers Market with 100 athletes and their families. Director Stanwyck reminded the Commission that the annual Parks Tour is scheduled for the fall. 5.SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS •Adult and Senior Programming: Commissioner Baker reported adult sports are halfway though softball season, pickle ball numbers growing and SLO Tri volunteers are needed. The Senior Center had some concerns regarding long-time Center partners and proper agreements (clubs etc.). •Bicycle Advisory: Vice Chair Regier said there was nothing to report. •City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner Parolini said the railings at Sinsheimer stadium were installed today. He said he has a meeting scheduled with the Utilities Department on July 7 to discuss potable water at Damon Garcia. He urged the Commission to consider negotiating rates for recycled water as he feels 90% of the cost of potable water is too high a rate for such an inferior product. He talked about possible partnership to use Cal Poly’s lighted tennis courts. •Jack House Committee: Commissioner Updegrove reported on new marketing materials for Jack House, rack cards etc. She added that there are proposed changes to the Carriage House to improve ADA accessibility. Commissioner Updegrove reported that the Jack House Elevator Removal project was approved by the City Council. 3 1-3 City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle •Tree Committee: Commissioner Olson said she had no report as she was out of town during the Tree Committee meeting. •Youth Sports: Commissioner Single said there was no meeting this month and no report. 6.CANCELLATION OF AUGUST 5, 2015 MEETING Motion: (Updegrove/Regier) Approve the Cancellation of the August 5, 2015 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 7.COMMUNICATIONS None. Adjourned at 6:43pm to the September 2, 2015 Regular Meeting located in the Council Chambers at 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo at 5:30pm. Approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on __________________. ________________________________________________ Jamie Bell, Parks and Recreation Marketing Specialist 4 1-4 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of the parks proposals for the Avila Ranch Development Plan in the Airport Area Specific Plan. PROJECT ADDRESS: 173 Buckley Road BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner CITY FILE NUMBERS: SPEC/ER 1318-2015 FROM: Doug Davidson, Deputy Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: Find that the proposed parks proposal for the development meets the criteria and policy guidance contained in the General Plan. SITE DATA Applicant Avila Ranch, LLC Representative Steve Peck Proposed Zoning/General Plan Low, Medium, Medium-High, & High Density Residential (R-1, R- 2, R-3, & R-4); Neighborhood Commercial (C-N); Public Facility (PF); & Conservation/Open Space (C/OS) Site Area Approximately 150 acres Environmental Status An Initial Study of environmental impact has been prepared to identify issues and guide EIR preparation. SUMMARY Avila Ranch, LLC has submitted a development plan proposal for a new, primarily residential development on a 150-acre site north of Buckley Road in the Airport Area Specific Plan (AASP). As a new residential neighborhood, the applicant has included a variety of park types within the project. Prior to the completion of a Draft EIR, the applicant and City staff are seeking feedback from the Parks & Recreation Commission on the proposed parks plan for the project. 1.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW The Commission will review the range of park facilities planned for the new residential neighborhood and determine their consistency with policies and programs contained in the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan. Relevant excerpts from the General Plan are included in the Project Analysis section of the report for the Commission’s guidance. The guidance provided by the Commission in the form of directional items and minutes will be used Meeting Date: September 2, 2015 Item Number: 3 Site Avila Ranch Buckley Road Figure 1 Project Location 2-1 Avila Ranch Development Park Proposal Airport Area Specific Plan Page 2 for a future review of more detailed park plans. 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 2.1 Site Information/Setting The site is composed of approximately 150 contiguous acres at the northeast corner of Buckley Road and Vachell Lane, and is comprised of three separate parcels: APN: 053-259-006, -004 and -005. The site generally slopes from the northeast to southwest, although there are localized undulations. It is diagonally bisected by a drainage channel that is referred to as “Tank Farm Creek” which conveys on and offsite storm water to San Luis Creek and comprises approximately 10 acres of the 150-acre site. Unlike some other properties within the AASP, the site is free of problematic encumbrances such as agricultural processing facilities, extreme changes in topography, or major public facilities. 2.2 Project Description Avila Ranch is San Luis Obispo’s newest master planned residential development. The project includes approximately 700 dwelling units of various housing types, a centrally located “Town Center” with 35,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail and office uses, and 19.3 acres of pocket parks, mini-parks and neighborhood parks. Project amenities include riparian corridor enhancement, permanent open space dedication, community gardens and bike trails. 3.0 PROJECT ANALYSIS 3.1 Situation The subject site is designated for Business Park development in the current AASP. With the review of the LUCE, a modified land use proposal similar to the proposed development plans was programmatically evaluated in the LUCE and LUCE EIR. The LUCE designates the site for "primarily a residential neighborhood development with supporting neighborhood commercial, park, recreation facilities, and open space/resource protection. Within the project, emphasis should be on providing a complete range of housing types and afford abilities." Consistent with this, the proposed land use plan shows all four categories of residential zoning, supporting Neighborhood Commercial uses, parks, and open space for land outside the Urban Reserve Line and along the creek corridor and parks. With review of the development plan, the zoning and land use designations shown on the land use plan would be approved. The applicant will be amending the AASP to accommodate the proposed development plan and to assure that it is consistent with existing and amended programs, policies, and guidelines. Further guidance for development is contained in Section 8.1.6 of the LUCE. 2-2 Avila Ranch Development Park Proposal Airport Area Specific Plan Page 3 3.2 General Plan Guidance The Park and Recreation Element (PRE) Policy 3.13.1 requires park and recreation facilities in newly developing residential areas to be provided at a rate of 10 acres per 1,000 residents through a mix of neighborhood parks, mini-parks, pocket parks and community parks. Neighborhood parks are to be provided at a rate of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents as a base and are to be located within one-half to one mile of the serviced population. The remaining five acres required under the 10 acres per 1,000 residents in the residential annexation policy may be composed of other types of facilities and may be located anywhere within the City’s park system as deemed appropriate. Consistent with this guidance, there is also allowance for cash contributions or improvement to community-wide facilities. 3.3 Applicant’s Parks Proposal The projected residential population on the project site is 1,581 persons. This will create a park requirement of 15.8 acres. The neighborhood, mini-park and pocket park facilities proposed on the project site will total 19.7 acres, in excess of the minimum requirement by 3.9 acres. Proposed facilities result in a parks ratio of 12.5 acres per thousand population, in excess of the city standard of 10 acres per thousand population. A contribution to community-wide facilities of 1.5 acres in equivalent improvements will also be made. Avila Ranch Parks Park Type Provided Acres Relevant Criteria Required Acres Neighborhood Park 9.3 5 acres/1,000 residents 7.9 Mini Parks 5.6 Other park facilities 5 acres/1,000 residents 15.8 – 7.9 = 7.9 7.9 Pocket Parks 0.3 Community Gardens 1.5 Total 19.7 15.8 Neighborhood Park Applicant’s Proposal: A 9.3-acre neighborhood park will serve the project which has frontage on both proposed collector streets in the development. The riparian corridor flows through the center of the park providing an amenity and focal point to the park area. The proposed bike path along the riparian corridor provides linkages to the surrounding neighborhoods, and to the regional bikeway system. The park would be improved with typical facilities such as group BBQs, basketball courts, tot lots, baseball diamonds, off-leash dog parks, creekside passive play areas and volleyball courts. Open space areas of the park will work in concert with the modified riparian corridor to maximize site permeability and help achieve Low Impact Development (LID) goals. 2-3 Avila Ranch Development Park Proposal Airport Area Specific Plan Page 4 The neighborhood park would be ultimately dedicated to the City of SLO and maintained through a Community Facilities District (CFD). Conditions of approval would specify when dedications and improvements would be required. Attachment 2 shows that the park would be developed in conjunction with Phase 3. PRE Guidance Park Description (Section 3.3): The neighborhood park is defined as an area which is convenient and accessible for active and passive recreation to residents within a prescribed service area. Basic elements should include turf playfield, playground equipment, and landscaped picnic/seating area. Other elements may include hard surfaced courts, restrooms, group barbecue, incorporation of natural or cultural features, and on- site parking. May also be developed with other public entities. Policy 3.15.1. San Luis Obispo residents shall have access to a neighborhood park within .5 to 1.0 mile walking distance of their residence. Policy 3.15.2. The designs of neighborhood parks shall be consistent with the needs and preferences determined from a consensus of neighborhood residents. Policy 3.15.3. All residential annexation areas shall provide developed neighborhood parks at the rate of 5 acres per 1000 residents. Analysis: The 9.3-acre park will exceed the minimum requirement of 7.9 acres. It is centrally located so it meets the criteria of being within 0.5 to 1.0 mile walking distance of area residents. The creek corridor that runs through the center of the park incorporates bicycle and pedestrian paths that will allow for improved connectivity and access beyond traveling along streets. Mini Parks Applicant’s Proposal: Five mini-parks and a pocket park will also serve the neighborhoods. Each will be landscaped areas one-half to one acre in size and provide expanded pocket park facilities such as community gardens, tot lots, passive play areas, BBQ and picnic areas. The parks would remain in private ownership and would be maintained by the Homeowners Association related to the development they serve. Attachment 2 shows the phasing of the development of the mini parks with respect to the areas with which they are associated. PRE Guidance Park Description (Section 3.2): Residents of the immediate area or those frequenting the area design these parks for passive use. Basic elements are comprised of passive amenities. Policy 3.15.4. In neighborhoods where existing parks do not adequately serve residents, mini-parks may be considered. 2-4 Avila Ranch Development Park Proposal Airport Area Specific Plan Page 5 Analysis: These small parks will serve primarily residents within a one-eighth-mile radius and provide a common open area that may be more convenient and accessible than the neighborhood park facilities for daily use. The mini-parks will serve as a buffers to existing and future industrial and service commercial uses to the north and east, and will therefore be densely landscaped on their perimeters. The eastern mini park will connect to the eastern agricultural buffer and open space and provide community gardens. Contribution to Unmet Needs At the time that the AASP was reviewed and approved, residential development in the area was not anticipated. This is one reason that the Avila Ranch Project involves a Specific Plan Amendment. The proposed amendments to the AASP will include additional text and graphics to accommodate the proposed development plan and to assure that it is consistent with existing and amended programs, policies, and guidelines. Among the AASP amendments will be guidance on park facilities. Per amended AASP Policy 7.10.1, residential developments will be required to contribute an amount equal to 1 acre per thousand population for community wide facilities. This report has previously noted that onsite park facilities will be provided at 12.5 acres per thousand population, in excess of the city standard. Typically, projects which otherwise meet the 10 acres/1,000 population standard are not required by the Parks and Recreation Element to contribute to community wide facilities or parks. The proposed amended Policy 7.10.1 acknowledges that the project will result in impacts to the communitywide recreational facilities. To satisfy the amended AASP Policy 7.10.1, the applicant will make a contribution to community-wide facilities of 1.5 acres in equivalent improvements. This contribution will be used to augment special facilities that serve the entire community (e.g., Sinsheimer Park, Mission Plaza, Santa Rosa Park, Laguna Park, Damon-Garcia Sports Complex), including new residential areas in the AASP. This additional contribution will help address the unmet community wide park and recreation facility needs (such as those identified in Policy 3.12 of the Parks and Recreation Element). 4.0 DISCUSSION OUTLINE To assist the PRC in reviewing the project’s parks proposal, the following discussion has been drafted: Neighborhood Park 1.The description on Page 3 mentioned that typical facilities for the neighborhood park could include group BBQs, basketball courts, tot lots, baseball diamonds, off-leash dog 2-5 Avila Ranch Development Park Proposal Airport Area Specific Plan Page 6 parks, creekside passive play areas and volleyball courts. Are there particular facilities that the Commission would like to see added? 2.Does the Commission have recommendations on the number and location of parking facilities? 3.What type of access spots does the Commission envision along the creek corridor? 4.Does the Commission support the addition of informational signage and kiosks to highlight and educate the public on local natural features (such as fauna and biota)? Mini Parks 1.By definition, mini parks include limited improvements. Are there specific ideas that the Commission has for the various mini parks proposed in the development? 5.0 ATTACHMENTS 1.Overall Avila Ranch Project Land Use Plan showing park sites 2.Avila Ranch Project phasing plan 3.PRE Appendix C - Park Land Acquisition and Improvement in Annexation Areas 4.PRE Figure 2.00.1 – Park Facilities in SLO 2-6 AV I L A R A N C H D E V E L O P M E N T P L A N P- 1 J u l y 3 1 , 2 0 1 5 #1 0 1 1 0 2 3 La n d U s e P l a n 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 40 0 SC A L E : 1 : 2 0 0 ( 1 8 ” x 2 4 ” s h e e t ) Lo w D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( 7 d . u . / a c r e ) De t a c h e d h o m e s w i t h p r i v a t e o u t d o o r y a r d s p a c e Me d i u m D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( 1 2 d . u . / a c r e ) Co m p a c t d e t a c h e d h o m e s , o r a t t a c h e d u n i t s , a n d s m a l l e r y a r d s Me d i u m - H i g h D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( 1 8 d . u . / a c r e ) Pr i m a r i l y a t t a c h e d u n i t s , t w o - a n d t h r e e - s t o r y b u i l d i n g s , c o m m o n o u t d o o r Hi g h D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l ( 2 4 d . u . / a c r e ) Pr i m a r i l y a t t a c h e d u n i t s , t w o - a n d t h r e e - s t o r y b u i l d i n g s , c o m m o n o u t d o o r Ne i g h b o r h o o d C o m m e r c i a l Ne i g h b o r h o o d s e r v i n g c o m m e r c i a l u s e s Se r v i c e C o m m e r c i a l Bu s i n e s s P a r k R& D , l i g h t i n d i s t r i a l , a n d c e r t a i n o f f i c e t y p e s Se r v i c e s a n d M a n u f a c t u r i n g In d u s t r y , c o m m e r c i a l s e r v i c e s , a n d c e r t a i n o f f i c e t y p e s Op e n S p a c e Mo s t l y u n d e v e l o p e d l a n d o r b o d i e s o f w a t e r Pa r k Pu b l i c p a r k - l a n d Re c r e a t i o n La n d s u i t a b l e f o r o u t d o o r r e c r e a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s Re s i d e n t i a l L a n d Co m m e r c i a l L a n d Gr e e n S p a c e La n d U s e D e s i g n a t i o n s Ma p L e g e n d Ar e a C a l c u l a t i o n s Lo w D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l Me d i u m D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l Me d i u m - H i g h D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l Hi g h D e n s i t y R e s i d e n t i a l Ne i g h b o r h o o d C o m m e r c i a l 11 . 3 A c r e s 36 . 4 A c r e s 10 . 0 A c r e s 4. 6 5 A c r e s 3. 7 7 A c r e s OSOS OS Bu s i n e s s P a r k Re c r e a t i o n M- 1 M- 1 Se r v i c e Co m m e r c i a l Me d i u m D e n s i t y Re s i d e n t i a l Me d i u m D e n s i t y Re s i d e n t i a l Lo w D e n s i t y Re s i d e n t i a l Hi g h De n s i t y Re s i d e n t i a l Lo w D e n s i t y Re s i d e n t i a l CO M M E R C I A L CO M M E R C I A L Pa r k Pa r k Pa r k Pa r k Pa r k Me d i u m - H i g h De n s i t y Re s i d e n t i a l Attachment 1 1. 4 A c r e s .2 0 .4 5 .4 1 .3 1 1. 1 .7 7. 6 A c r e s 1. 3 2-7 AV I L A R A N C H D E V E L O P M E N T P L A N P- 6 A u g u s t 1 1 , 2 0 1 5 #1 0 1 1 0 2 3 Ph a s i n g P l a n 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 40 0 SC A L E : 1 : 2 0 0 ( 1 8 ” x 2 4 ” s h e e t ) Ph a s e 3 Ph a s e 4 Ph a s e 1 Ph a s e 6 Ph a s e 5 Ph a s e 2 Attachment 2 2-8 Parks and Recreation Page7-31 APPENDIX C Park Land Acquisition and Improvement in Annexation Areas A. OVERVIEW The purpose of these guidelines is to provide a framework for achieving General Plan park system goals in annexation areas. While these guidelines are not intended to be “hard and fast rules,” they are intended to provide sufficient direction to help ensure that: 1.We clearly communicate our goals – and method for achieving them – to those proposing residential annexations in order to avoid any misunderstandings about development requirements and related costs. 2.We achieve these goals in the most effective manner possible. B. GENERAL PLAN POLICIES The General Plan sets forth two key policies regarding the City’s park system standards, and new development’s responsibility to pay for the cost of the park land necessary to serve it: 3.The City shall develop and maintain a park system at the rate of 10 acres of park land per 1,000 residents (PR 6.1.1). 4.The costs of public facilities and services needed for new development shall be borne by the new development, unless the community chooses to help pay the costs for a certain development to obtain community-wide benefits (LU 1.14). C. IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES In accordance with General Plan policies, the City will use the following guidelines in acquiring and improving park land whenever State law allows us to do so. This is most likely to occur in the case of annexations. However, these guidelines are also applicable whenever discretionary approvals of the City are requested, such as zone changes, general plan amendments or development agreements. 5.Park land acquisition and improvement goal. The City will achieve a ratio of 10 acres of park per 1,000 residents projected to reside in the annexation area. This includes land and improvements. a.Privately owned and maintained landscaped areas such as interior parkways and community greens may be considered as contributing to this goal. This will be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the purpose and nature of such areas, and the level of public access to them. b.School sites may also be considered as contributing towards this goal. This will be determined on a case-by-case basis depending on the location of the proposed school site to planned park sites, and the likelihood that the school site will be used as a “joint use” facility. c.Open space will not typically be counted as park land in meeting the 10 acres per 1,000 residents standard. The City’s General Plan is clear in its distinctions between open space and parks, and the purpose of these guidelines is to help implement the General Plan’s park system goals, not open space goals. 6.Property owner dedication and developer improvement requirement. Through an annexation agreement, the City will generally require the dedication and full improvement of required park land by the property owner and/or developer (applicant) as a condition of the annexation. This means that the City will typically not take the lead role in acquiring and improving parks in annexation areas; this is the applicant’s responsibility similar to the construction of other on-site, project-related infrastructure Attachment 3 2-9 Chapter 7 Page7-32 improvements such as streets, sidewalks, storm drainage collection, water distribution lines and sewer collection lines. 7.Acquisition and improvement phasing. The phasing of when dedication and improvements are required by the applicant will be set forth in the annexation agreement, specific plan or development plan. While this will be determined on a case-by-case basis, land dedication and improvements should generally be phased as follows: a.Land should be dedicated upon annexation. b.Phase 1 improvements (as defined in the annexation agreement, specific plan or development plan) should be completed before the first certificate of occupancy is issued; other improvement phases and standards may be established in the annexation agreement, specific plan or development plan. c.All improvements should be completed by the time that about two-thirds of the units are available for occupancy. 8.Fees in-lieu of dedication and improvement. Depending on the circumstances, the City may prefer to develop some portion of the required park acquisition and improvements on property that is not being annexed. This would generally occur when the City plans to meet part of the “10 acres per 1,000 residents” requirement through a community-wide facility that is not located in the annexation area, or when the annexation area is not large enough to dedicate and improve a meaningful amount of park land. Whenever fees are paid in lieu of dedicating and improving park land, they will be: a.Restricted solely for park land acquisition and improvement. b.Determined, assessed, collected and accounted for in a manner consistent with state requirements for development impact fees as set forth in AB 1600. c.Used for park land and improvements that directly serve the annexation area, unless a finding is made that the area is already adequately served by existing neighborhood facilities. In this case, fees will be used to acquire or improve community-wide facilities. 9.Case-by-case review. The following issues will be addressed on a case-by-case basis as part of the specific plan or development review process: a.Amount of park land to be dedicated and improved within the annexation areas versus the amount that will be met through the payment of in-lieu fees in meeting the overall goal of 10 acres of parks per 1,000 residents. b.Location and type of park land to be developed in the annexation area. c.Value of the park land and improvements that will not be developed in the annexation, and the resulting amount of fees to be paid. d.Timing as to when these fees will be paid. e.Timing as to when park improvements will be made by the applicant. f.Distribution of any in-lieu fees between neighborhood versus community parks and facilities, and the need to redress any deficit in the availability of neighborhood parks in the vicinity of the annexation area. Attachment 3 2-10 BROA D HW Y 1 0 1 ORCU T T TA N K F A R M JOHN S O N BU C K L E Y M I L L CHOR R O P I S M O H I G U E R A LOS O S O S V A L L E Y M A D O N N A HI G H FO O T H I L L M A R S H L E F F I S L A Y HI G H L A N D HIG U E R A S FLOR A F O O T H I L L W TORO PR A D O OSOS SO U T H GRAND B U C H O N CALIF O R N I A MORR O SAN T A R O S A N SANT A R O S A P E A C H ELK S SA N L U I S M O N T E R E Y NIPO M O E L L A LO O M I S SANTA FE BI S H O P AUGU S T A PO I N S E T T I A BR A N C H LA U R E L HILL BULL O C K LU N E T A GARD E N DEL R I O PO L Y C A N Y O N P A L M VACHELL OCEANAIR E VIA CARTA BEAC H R O Y A L DI A B L O PEPP E R CASA LINCOLN JEFFREY ME I S S N E R MOUN T B I S H O P R D . M I O S S I SU B U R B A N GA T H E L I Z Z I E LIMA GROV E ROCK V I E W AI R P O R T F U L L E R DEE R SL A C K SA N D E R C O C K LON G SAC R A M E N T O W A L N U T HA Y S TI B U R O N I N D U S T R I A L HO P E S Y D N E Y I R I S BAL B O A BEEBEED A N A DAL I D I O C H U R C H HI N D FR E D E R I C K S LAWTON Mc C O L L U M U P H A M SIER R A BR I D G E GULF SPANI S H O A K S MA R G A R I T A LA W R E N C E ELM OA K GO L D E N R O D HA N S E N FERRINI HUAS N A SO U T H W O O D BO N D CALL E J O A Q U I N CHOR R O N GA L L E O N MU R R A Y CO R R I D A SE R R A N O IR O N B A R K FIXLI N I T A N G L E W O O D M I S S I O N WAV E R T R E E OJ A I MI T C H E L L HELE N A VICEN T E ETO DA L Y AL-HIL KLAMA T H GR A N A D A TONIN I IS A B E L L A L A G U N A ARCH E R FE L T O N C A U D I L L CL A R I O N JEAN ZA C A EL M E R C A D O ST O N E R I D G E AL B E R T LA EN T R A D A TR U C K E E W O O D S I D E A E R O C L O V E R McMILLAN C O R R A L I T O S FE L - M A R SEQU O I A F I E R O GARIBALDI C R A I G ME I N E C K E AL D E R CUESTA D E V A U L R A N C H F E E D M I L L R D . MA L I B U PARKERC E N T E R WI L S O N AL R I T A ESPERANZA MA P L E HED L E Y UNIVERSITY LEONA STORY A T A S C A D E R O Q U A I L A E R O V I S T A RA M O N A THELMA GA R F I E L D CR O S S LO S P A L O S VERDE PIN E ELLEN HORIZON RACHEL C O N E J O ROS E MEADOW LOS CE R R O S JANE HATHWAY DE L M A R PATRICI A AVA L O N WE S T M O N T F R A N C I S MA R I P O S A MA R L E N E C O R D O V A P O L Y V U E D R . CU Y A M A STENNER BO N E T T I CYPRESS T U L I P SA W L E A F V E G A WE S T V I A L A P A Z LA CANADA SAN A D R I A N O CH U P A R R O S A WALK E R DUNCAN FAIR W A Y SUNS E T ROSITA F R A M B U E S A TA F T BRIZ Z O L A R A E L C A P I T A N EL C E R R I T O O'CON N E R ALT A EL TI G R E P A C I F I C EMILY SANTA LUCIA MI R A S O L C O R A L S M I T H PH I L L I P S L O B E L I A BUSHNELL WARD HENR Y AR A L I A LE X I N G T O N RO U G E O T H U M B E R T SWE E T B A Y B R E C K CORT E Z RAI L R O A D A U T O P A R K P O P P Y BROOK LA C I T A VIL L A OLD WINDMILL C A R L A R I C H DEXTER PENN Y A Z A L E A WELS H M O N T E V I S T A AC A C I A HWY 1 0 1 HI G U E R A SO U T H W O O D CUESTA P A C I F I C HW Y 1 0 1 MISSIO N BROA D BROAD SL A C K L A W R E N C E P A L M 5 2 8 3 6 4 9 7 1 16 29 43 33 27 41 12 24 21 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 42 23 22 31 26 17 10 28 11 20 30 25 19 18 15 32 14 13 1. A n h o l m P a r k 87 0 M i s s i o n S t r e e t 2. B u e n a V i s t a P a r k 10 0 B l o c k o f B u e n a V i s t a 3. B i s h o p P e a k / T e a c h El e m e n t a r y S c h o o l 45 1 J a y c e e S t r e e t 4. C . L . S m i t h E l e m e n t a r y 13 7 5 B a l b o a S t r e e t 5. E l l s f o r d P a r k Sa n L u i s D r . n e a r Ca l i f o r n i a S t . 6. E m e r s o n P a r k 13 1 6 B e a c h S t r e e t 7. F r e n c h P a r k 10 4 0 F u l l e r S t r e e t 8. H a w t h o r n e E l e m e n t a r y 21 2 5 S t o r y S t r e e t 9. I s l a y H i l l P a r k 15 1 1 T a n k F a r m R o a d 10 . J a c k H o u s e & G a r d e n s 53 6 M a r s h S t r e e t 11 . J o h n s o n P a r k 28 7 5 A u g u s t a o r 10 2 0 S o u t h w o o d 12 . L a g u n a J r . H i g h S c h o o l 11 0 5 0 L o s O s o s V a l l e y R d 13 . L a g u n a H i l l s P a r k 89 0 M i r a d a D r i v e 14 . L a g u n a L a k e G o l f C o u r s e 11 1 7 5 L o s O s o s V a l l e y R d . 15 . L a g u n a L a k e P a r k 50 4 M a d o n n a R d 16 . L a s P r a d e r a s P a r k La s P r a d e r a s a n d Ma r i p o s a D r . 17 . L u d w i c k C o m m u n i t y C e n t e r 86 4 S a n t a R o s a S t r e e t 18 . M e a d o w P a r k & Ne i g h b o r h o o d C e n t e r 23 3 3 M e a d o w S t r e e t 19 . M i s s i o n P l a z a 98 9 C h o r r o S t r e e t 20 . M i t c h e l l P a r k 14 0 0 O s o s S t r e e t 21 . P a c h e c o E l e m e n t a r y 37 5 F e r r i n i D r i v e 22 . P a r k s & R e c r e a t i o n O f f i c e s 13 4 1 N i p o m o S t r e e t 23 . P r i o l o - M a r t i n P a r k 89 0 V i s t a D e l C o l l a d o s 24 . S a n L u i s O b i s p o Hi g h S c h o o l 13 5 0 C a l i f o r n i a 25 . S a n t a R o s a P a r k , So f t b a l l F i e l d , S k a t e P a r k & M u l t i - u s e C o u r t Sa n t a R o s a & O a k S t . 26 . S e n i o r C i t i z e n s C e n t e r 14 4 5 S a n t a R o s a S t r e e t 27 . S i n s h e i m e r E l e m e n t a r y Sc h o o l 27 5 5 A u g u s t a S t r e e t 28 . S i n s h e i m e r P a r k , St a d i u m , S o f t b a l l Fi e l d , T e n n i s C o u r t & P o o l 90 0 S o u t h w o o d D r i v e 29 . S t o n e r i d g e P a r k 53 5 B l u e r o c k D r i v e 30 . T h r o o p P a r k 51 0 C e r r o R o m a u l d o 31 . T r i a n g l e P a r k 17 0 1 O s o s S t r e e t 32 . V i s t a L a g o P a r k 12 6 9 V i s t a L a g o 33 . D a m o n - G a r c i a Sp o r t s C o m p l e x 68 0 I n d u s t r i a l W a y Pa r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n F a c i l i t i e s i n S a n L u i s O b i s p o Tr a i l s pa r k s sc h o o l s Op e n s p a c e st r e e t s Fi g u r e 2 . 0 0 . 1 00 . 5 1 0. 2 5 M i l e s Co m m u n i t y P a r k s Jo i n t U s e F a c i l i t y Mi n i P a r k Ne i g h b o r h o o d P a r k Op e n S p a c e Re c r e a t i o n a l C e n t e r / S p e c i a l F e a t u r e s Re s e r v e Op e n S p a c e A r e a s 34 . R e s e r v o i r C a n y o n N a t u r a l R e s e r v e 35 . C e r r o S a n L u i s N a t u r a l R e s e r v e 36 . R a i l r o a d R e c r e a t i o n T r a i l 37 . S o u t h H i l l s o p e n S p a c e 38 . I s l a y H i l l s O p e n S p a c e 39 . T e r r a c e H i l l O p e n S p a c e 40 . I r i s h H i l l s N a t u r a l R e s e r v e 41 . L a g u n a L a k e O p e n S p a c e 42 . B i s h o p P e a k N a t u r a l R e s e r v e 43 . B o w d e n R a n c h O p e n S p a c e Attachment 4 2-11 City of San Luis Obispo, Parks and Recreation, 1341 Nipomo Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3934, 805.781.7300, slocity.org August 26, 2015 MEMORANDUM From: Shelly Stanwyck, Director of Parks and Recreation Subject: WES CONNER AWARDEE IDEAS AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE 2015 ANNUAL VOLUNTEER DINNER Background The late Wes Conner was a devoted, civic-minded volunteer for the City of San Luis Obispo and an avid supporter of all things parks and recreation. Throughout his lifetime, Wes served on a number of City commissions, including the Parks and Recreation Commission, the Joint Use Committee, the Bicycle Committee, and the Jack House Committee. Wes had a particular love for the Jack House and, as a founding father of the Jack House Committee, served as a member for over thirty years. Wes, who was employed most of his life as a professor at Cal Poly, continually shared his knowledge of landscape architecture with the Jack House Committee. His influence is evident in the award winning Jack House gardens. In 2004, Wes was honored by the Olympic Torch Run committee to carry the torch the last leg of the run into San Luis Obispo. He was respected and loved by all those who knew him. Wes passed away in January of 2007 at the age of 82. The Wes Conner Award Criteria In February 2007, the Parks and Recreation Commission approved the creation of the Wes Conner Award to honor individuals who, like Wes, have provided sustained valuable service that resulted in improved access to high quality parks and recreation services in the City of San Luis Obispo. The criteria established for the award includes: 1.Honoree must have volunteered to advance the Parks and Recreation opportunities in the Community of San Luis Obispo for at least 10 years. 2.The honoree’s efforts must have been directed toward the benefit of multiple recreational interests within the City. 3.The honoree may not be an employee of the City or a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission at the time of selection. 4.Nominations can come from any source (staff, commissioners, and others). Staff will forward to Commissioners all qualified nominations at its July meeting. 3-1 2 Prior Recipients include: 2007 – Jim Neville 2008 – John Rosetti 2009 – Richard Kriet 2010 – Lee Hollister 2011 – Agatha Reardon 2012 – Bill Thoma 2013 – Greg Bettencourt 2014 – Rick May Below is a list of people that staff has provided. We have provided shorter summaries and more names. This is intended to provide Commissioners with some ideas for the Wes Conner awardee for 2015. Commissioners do not have to go off this list. Debbie Black Local landscape architect and involved in Volleyball activities. Ms. Black supported the development and expansion of boys and girls volleyball. Steve Davis Former Parks and Recreation Commissioner and Chair. Advocate for turf fields for all. Dedicated to public participation and input. Champion of increased use of Damon Garcia Sports Fields Todd Cooper Youth Sports Association Board Chair and Soccer advocate, Todd is a hands on and involved supporter of soccer for youth and adults. Spencer Crotty San Luis Obispo skater. Spencer from start to finish symbolized the youth in our community dedicated to the establishment of a permanent skate park. Spencer attended meetings, spok to the Council and grew into adulthood during this process. Herb Filipponi Herb has been one of our most outstanding benefactors and was instrumental in the donation of 89 acres of the Goldtree Tract. Herb also worked on the trail license for the property. (The value of the Filipponi and Twisselman donated properties is $325k). Herb saw that years ago his property would be a key connection for the Johnson Ranch Trail and Irish Hills. In a gesture of good faith and understanding, Herb granted the City a license agreement for use of his dirt road and to cross his land with a trail that is about 1.5 miles in length. Gary Havas A dedicated volunteer, building miles of trails and bridges, advocate and educator for cyclists, and all around Parks and Recreation enthusiast, Gary Havas is dedicated to improving parks and recreation facilities, bike lanes, and open space. Barry Karleskint Barry is a former Chair of the Parks & Recreation Commission (PRC) and the Planning Commission. He was involved in efforts to build the SLO Swim Center and was a supporter of the City’s open space program when it first began. 3-2 3 Craig Kincaid Former Parks and Recreation Commissioner and Chair. Advocate for open space, trails, and Laguna Lake. Dedicated to the Jack House and preservation of natural resources. Champion for all Parks and Recreation causes. John Spatafore John began his service to the community as a coach for the American Youth Soccer Organization (AYSO) when his daughters were young. His experience with the poor field conditions that existed in the City and School District prompted him to become a founding member of the Youth Sports Association (YSA) and serve as its first president. As president of the YSA, John led the charge for the development of the Damon-Garcia Sports Fields and spent countless hours at City Council meetings speaking of the turf field needs of the community. Nancy Roberts In Memorium. Nancy volunteered, running the pool at every single SLO Triathlon until this year. She passed away just before the SLO Tri but her spirit was there. Staci Truelson Stacy has been actively involved with AYSO for many years. She was the AYSO president elect, president and past president. Stacy has also been a YSA board member and held different positions on the board. She has been a referee and tireless supporter of soccer in the community. 3-3