HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-01-2016 PRC agenda packetRegular Meeting on Wednesday, June 1, 2016 @ 5:30p.m., Council Chambers
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Whitener
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Susan Olson, 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 May 4, 2016
2.Review and Recommendation of Approval of Righetti Ranch Parks Proposal (Dave Watson
- 45 minutes)
3.Natural Resources Program and Roundtable Update (Bob Hill – 30 minutes)
4.Review of Sports Court Survey Results and Proposed Pickleball Pilot Program Changes
(Ogden/Mudgett - 15 minutes)
5.Consideration of Multi-Use Court Striping Adding Roller Derby at the Hampian Hockey Rink
(Mudgett - 10 minutes)
6.Director’s Report (Stanwyck – 5 minutes)
7.Subcommittee Liaison Reports
Committee Liaison
Adult and Senior Programming
Bicycle Advisory
City Facilities (Damon, golf, pool, joint use)
Jack House Committee Updegrove
Tree Committee Olson
YSA Single
8.Ideas of Names for Wes Conner Award? (Whitener – 5 minutes)
9.Communications
Adjourn to Regular Meeting of July 6 , 2016
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
1
Ludwick Community Center
864 Santa Rosa Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Wednesday, May 4, 2016, 5:30 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Whitener called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m.
ROLL CALL: Chair Jeff Whitener, Commissioners Susan Olson, Douglas Single, Susan
Updegrove
ABSENT: None (Commissioner Single absent for Agenda items 3-6)
COUNCIL: John Ashbaugh
STAFF: Shelly Stanwyck, Melissa Mudgett, Jamie Bell, Amanda Golden (Designing
Local)
Public Comment
John Stocksdale, SLO Pickleball Club, asked for clarification of the Commission’s direction to staff at the
April 6th meeting. He asked when information following the survey will be provided. He urged the
Commission to allow pickleballers to the share in the use of French Park Tennis courts twice weekly. Director
Stanwyck responded that the sports court survey closed on April 30th and that staff is analyzing the data. She
reminded the Commission that SLO High School tennis courts will be under construction through to the winter
and, as per the Joint Use Agreement, the School District has first use of Sinshiemer Tennis Courts. This will
result in an increased use of Islay and French Park tennis courts of contract classes, tennis lessons and public
tennis use during the summer/fall 2016. She anticipates that the Commission should receive the survey results
and staff recommendations by summer; possibly July/August.
Jean Hyduchak, SLO Pickleball Club, thanked the Commission for their support of Pickleball and asked for
increased playing time while the survey results are being analyzed. She asked the Commission to consider
increased days at Meadow Park Basketball Courts or French Park Tennis Courts. Chair Whitener responded
that an increase in pickleball play is not on the agenda and therefore no action could be taken. He reiterated
that the Commission will be awaiting the sports court survey results in the summer.
Michael Parolini, SLO resident, supported the Pickleball Pilot Program and felt the City has done a good job in
accommodating the Pickleballers needs in a short amount of time. He felt that tennis players and Pickleballers
could reasonably share the courts.
Mila Vujovich-La Barre, SLO Resident, spoke about the property at 71 Palomar. She urged the Commission
to support the City’s purchase of this property for use as a City park. She added that this property is currently
this property is in escrow with a private developer and she would like to see the City make a counter-offer for
purchase of this property. Chair Whitener clarified that the purchase of property it outside the purview of the
Parks and Recreation Commission.
Cheryl McLean, SLO Resident, also spoke in favor of having the City purchase the property at 71 Palomar for
use as a city park; adding that this location is ideal for pedestrian access.
Meeting Minutes
Parks and Recreation Commission
1-1
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
2
1.CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 6, 2016.
MOTION: (Olson/Updegrove) Approved the Minutes of April 6, 2016 as amended.
Approved: 4 yes: 0 no: 0 absent
2.COMMUNITY WORKSHOP AND INPUT ON DRAFT PUBLIC ART MASTER PLAN
(Golden)
The Parks and Recreation Commissioners joined the audience to directly participate in the workshop activities.
Director Stanwyck introduced the Public Art Master Planning consultant, Amanda Golden of Designing Local.
Ms. Golden provided an outline of the Community Workshop activities. She added that the PRC Community
Workshop was intended as an opportunity to share the draft Public Art Master Plan with community members
and for the Commissioners and public to provide feedback about the draft Master Plan and proposed
recommendations. She reminded the group that a survey is also available through the City’s Website Open
City Hall Forum through June 15th for those who wish to provide the Advisory Body with feedback.
Ms. Golden presented the draft Master plan recommendations which were developed to help maintain and
nurture the public art program in SLO and to maximize the effectiveness of the public art program. The
Community Workshop was designed to be interactive with feedback and discussion; therefore no action was
taken by the PRC. Instead, the public attending the Community Workshop provided the Commission and staff
with feedback on the following draft recommendations. A summary of this feedback is provided below:
a.Maintenance of the Public Art Collection. The public attending the community workshop supported
addressing short and long-term maintenance plans for the art pieces and provided feedback on the
types of maintenance plans and activities they would like to Commission to consider.
b.Funding Analysis. Input was provided in support of pursuing new and diverse funding opportunities
including grants, partnerships (with TBID, schools, Cal Poly), special arts districts, and incentive
programs.
c.Community Engagement/Marketing. Input was provided about various types of communication
and marketing strategies that would better promote the City’s public art program.
d.Public Art Review Process. Input was provided about process enhancements would the community
recommend to streamline the public art process such as a mentor program and developing a directory
of artists and services.
e.Dedicated Public Art “Resource”. Input was provided about the level of staffing resource needed to
support a growing public art program.
f.Other Ideas. The community group provided additional input and feedback for the Commission to
consider when determining the strategic direction and growth of public art programming.
Parks and Recreation Manager, Melissa Mudgett, shared that the next step in the process will be the PRC’s
review of the updated draft Master Plan and the community’s feedback (received both at the workshop and
through the Open City Hall survey) at its next meeting on July 6, 2016. City staff and Ms. Golden thanked the
community members for attending the workshop and providing valuable feedback.
3.CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC ART POLICY ADDITIONS TO THE BOX ART PROGRAM
(Mudgett)
Parks and Recreation Manager, Melissa Mudgett, presented an overview of the proposed changes to the City’s
Public Art Policy for Utility Box Art. As part of the 2016 Box Art Repainting project, the City Council
1-2
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
3
recommended staff return to the Council with additional amendments to the public art policy for the Box Art
program to address maintenance, duration of mural exhibits, expansion of the program and archival of the box
art murals. Staff Mudgett said that the Box Art Stakeholders Group (which consists of various City staff,
artists and community organization representatives) was formed in response to Council’s direction and the
policy additions recommended this evening are in support of these community concerns. She added that the
purpose of the Temporary Public Art policy for Box Art is to encourage the creative uses of public art on
utility boxes throughout the community based on established guidelines. Staff Mudgett summarized the
proposed Utility Box Art program policy language and reiterated that the new language helps identify
parameters when expanding box locations as well as guidelines for mural replacement, ongoing maintenance
and care, and the proper archival of deaccessioned box art murals.
Public Comment
Michael Parolini, SLO Resident, asked the Public Art Program staff to consider adding QR codes to the utility
boxes which would like the public to the City’s website and information about the artists and box art. Staff
Mudgett responded that this is currently under consideration.
Commission Comment
Commission Updegrove asked for clarification that the yellow highlighted areas were the recommended
additional policy language; which were not a part of the adopted policy prior. Staff Mudgett confirmed that
this was correct; the highlighted areas were the newly recommended policy additions.
Commissioner Updegrove asked for clarification of “archival” and “deaccessioned”. Staff Mudgett responded
that archival refers to the preservation of the art mural in both print and media form; deaccessioned refers to
the removal of the physical utility box from the City’s traffic signal system. Staff Mudgett added that a
glossary of terms is also provided as Attachment 3 to the staff report for further clarification. Commissioner
Updegrove thanked the Box Art Stakeholder Group for their efforts.
MOTION: (Updegrove/Olson) Recommend that the City Council adopts the proposed additions to the Public
Art Policy for the Utility Box Art Program.
Approved: 3 yes: 0 no: 1 absent (Commissioner Single)
4.DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Director Stanwyck provided a brief overview of current Parks and Recreation programming.
3 PRC Advisory Body vacancies
Monster Skate on May 21st
Currently recruiting and training for lifeguards
Rangers working on Reservoir Canyon Trails
Kindergarten registration a success on May 2nd
Golf Course Restroom Remodel project is completed. Ribbon Cutting event to be scheduled.
Jack House Elevator Removal and Restoration project is completed. Ribbon cutting
ceremony on May 10th at 3:00pm
5.SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS
Adult and Senior Programming: No Report.
Bicycle Advisory: No Report.
City Facilities (Damon Garcia, Golf, Pool & Joint Use Facilities): No Report.
Jack House Committee: Commissioner Updegrove reported that the Jack House Elevator
Restoration project is now complete with a ribbon cutting ceremony is planned for May 10th
at 3:00pm. Jack House Mother’s Day will be on Sunday, May 8th from 1-4:00pm. There
will be love music and if there are three generations of a family present, they can tour the
house for free.
Tree Committee: Commissioner Olson said there was nothing significant to report.
Youth Sports: No Report.
1-3
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
4
6.COMMUNICATIONS
No other communications.
Adjourned at 8.17 pm to the Regular Meeting on June 1, 2016 at the City Council Chambers, 990 Palm
Street, San Luis Obispo at 5:30pm.
Approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on June 1, 2016.
________________________________________________
Melissa C. Mudgett, Parks and Recreation Department Manager
1-4
PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
SUBJECT: Final Design Review of the Neighborhood, Trail Junction, Linear, and Pocket
public park proposals for the Righetti Ranch Project (VTM#3063) in the Orcutt Area Specific
Plan (OASP).
PROJECT ADDRESS: 3987 Orcutt Road BY: David Watson, Contract Planner
CITY FILE NUMBER: TR / ER 114-14 FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Director
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS:
(1) Receive updated presentation on proposed parks and Public Facilities Financing Plan
considerations by the applicant; and
(2) Provide comments on proposed park improvement features and cost estimates (including
OASP parklands development fee cost-sharing implications) and provide a recommendation
to City Council on a final parks improvement plan for their review prior to recordation of the
initial the Final Map for this subdivision.
SITE DATA
Applicant Ambient Communities
Travis Fuentes, Dante Anselmo
Representative Chris Dufour, RRM Design Group
Zoning R-1-SP, R-2-SP & R-3-SP (Residential
designations) Open Space, Parks
Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP)
General Plan Low-, Medium- and High-Density
Residential, Open Space, Parks
Site Area 143.82 acres
Environmental
Status
A previously certified EIR (2010)
and an Initial Study-Mitigated
Negative Declaration (2015) were
adopted as part of the subdivision
processing.
1.0 BACKGROUND on April 6, 2016 PRC RIGHETTI PARKS STUDY SESSION
At your April 6th meeting the Commission reviewed the applicant’s presentation of proposed
elements of the four (4) public parks planned for the Righetti Ranch property. During that
review the Commission discussed the features of each park and provided direction to the
applicants and staff for follow-up items to be brought back for Final Design Review before
preparing a recommendation to Council.
Meeting Date: June 1, 2016
Item Number: _______
VTM #3083
Righetti
Ranch
2-1
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 2
Commission direction included:
Neighborhood Park
1. Increase the number of permanent pickleball courts.
2. Consider the feasibility of a dog park as part of the design.
3. Include additional amenities including bike pump station(s), dog hydration station(s) and
per waste mitts.
4. Provide information on the comparative construction and maintenance costs of artificial
turf as an alternative to the natural turf areas proposed for the soccer fields.
5. Review the number of parking spaces proposed for the park in comparison to other city
parks, to address whether the number of needed spaces, whether they be provided in one
or more phases of construction.
Trail Junction Park
1. Include the pump track features as park of the public park.
2. Consider adding a fitness station to the park.
Linear Park
1. Provide trash cans and pet mitts.
2. Revisit Public vs private (HOA) maintenance of the community garden and orchard.
Pocket Park
1. Provide trash cans and pet mitts.
The Commission also requested a more detailed estimate of the various park construction cost
estimates from the applicant.
2.0 SUMMARY of APPLICANT’S PROPOSED PARK PROJECTS
Tract 3063 (Righetti Ranch) would construct four (4) city parks, on-site trails and bike paths to
connect to nearby public trails, and also tie into the City’s regional networks of roadways, water,
wastewater and recycled water utilities.
Four (4) specific public parks are planned to be developed in phases under the approvals granted
in 2015 for the Vesting Tentative Tract Map. These include:
1. The planned “Neighborhood Park” of approximately 11.6 acres for the entire Orcutt
Specific Plan neighborhood.
2. An approximate 1.8 acre “Trail Junction Park” would be developed along the northern
boundary of the Righetti Hill open space area, and serve pedestrian and bicycle trails,
picnic-viewing areas, and a starting point for Righetti Hill and Edna Valley hiking trails.
3.A “Linear Park” of approx. 1.3 acres is planned for the western edge of the OASP to
provide resting/information points for systems of bicycle and pedestrian trails in the area.
4. An approximately 0.2 acre “Pocket Park” is planned along “D” Street.
The locations of these parks on the Righetti Ranch property are as follows:
2-2
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 3
A complete set of updated parks exhibits is provided with your packets for Commission review.
3.0 COMMISSION’S PURVIEW
The Parks and Recreation Commission’s responsibility tonight will be to review the applicant’s
responses to your directional items from April 6 th in the form of their final design presented to
you tonight. The PRC needs to formulate a recommendation to City Council to address (1) the
design of the public parks, and (2) provide a recommendation to Council on the construction cost
estimates and Public Facilities Financing Plan implications of this improvement program, to be
considered by Council concurrent with recordation of the initial final map.
4.0 STAFF ANALYSIS
The applicants have provided updated graphics and a written description of their revised
proposal in response to PRC’s direction (Attachment 1), a Preliminary Construction Cost
estimate for the design and improvement of the proposed parks (Attachment 2), and updated
conceptual park plans for the four (4) proposed parks (Attachment 3).
4.1 Central Neighborhood Park Design. Responding to comments from the Commission,
the applicants have modified the Neighborhood Park design to include:
a.3 additional pickelball courts, for a total of 6 (RRM exhibit keynote #5);
b. addition of a Dog Park and waste mitts/water fountain (keynotes #8 and #23);
2-3
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 4
c.added bike pump station (keynote #24); and,
d. added a hydration station (keynote #22); and,
e.removed one (1) row of parking spaces, reducing the total off-street parking to 55 spaces
(keynote #20).
On the issue of synthetic vs. natural turf fields, the applicants have estimated the cost
differential between natural lawn (~$2.75/sq ft) and synthetic turf (~$6.75) to run an overall
$1.2MM more to construct. Given the significance of the construction cost differential, and
acknowledging there is a capital cost to gear-up to maintain synthetic turf as well, staff has not
researched the differential costs to maintain the two types of turf any further at this time.
Regarding the parking count comparisons between the Righetti Park proposal and other similar
city parks, the original concept design reviewed in April for Righetti proposed about 90 off-street
parking spaces. Similar neighborhood-serving parks include Islay (32 spaces), French (27
spaces) and Meadow Parks (24 spaces). The revised proposal before Commission tonight has
reduced the parking count to 55 spaces by eliminating one bay of cars and adding intermittent
tree wells to provide more vehicle shade, which staff believes to be an appropriate number given
the neighborhood (as opposed to a more regional-serving) nature of this park. This parking
reduction also affords slightly more buffer between the parking lot and adjoining residential
homes.
The Commission also asked to clarify the distances from the Neighborhood Park to the
various homes of the OASP. The central orientation of the Neighborhood Park was considered
under the OASP to provide maximum proximity to most of the units in the Orcutt Area. At the
far extremes of the planning area to the Park, distances are about 1,500-1,800 lineal feet (as the
crow flies), with more than 80% of the planned OASP units within a ¼ mile or less walking
distance, which is considered appropriate by the General Plan, OASP and most major parks
planning literature.
4.2 Trail Junction Park Design. A bike pump station (keynote #8) has been added as
suggested.
4.3 Pocket Park Design. Mutt mitts (keynote #9) have been added as suggested.
4.4 Linear Park Design. A hydration station and mutt mitts (keynote #13) have been added
as suggested. Concerning discussion at the last meeting, public management and maintenance of
the community garden is now recommended by staff.
Subject to PRC feedback tonight, these individual park features can be revised/modified to
reflect a final recommendation by the Commission.
4.5 Construction Cost Estimates and Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP).
As discussed with the Commission in previous presentations on this and other projects within the
Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP), under the Specific Plan the construction of public parks (as
well as key transportation and pedestrian-bicycle trails) are to be improved utilizing the fees
generated from the PFFP. These fees are based on estimates generated at the time the OASP was
2-4
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 5
being processed, and are reflected in the Table of Chapter 8 of the OASP, pages 8-1 through 8-
13. In summary, Parks & Recreation improvement estimates were:
Table 1 – OASP PFFP excerpts Regarding Improvement Cost Estimates
Parks
Component Gross Total Cost OASP Fair Share Net Total Cost
Neigh Park (so of creeks) $ 3,628,000 100% $ 3,628,000
Righetti
Neigh Park (no of creeks) $ 500,000 100% $ 500,000
Garay
Pocket Park Righetti $ 220,000 100% $ 220,000
Linear Park Righetti $ 100,000 100% $ 100,000
Totals $ 4,448,000 $ 4,448,000
Note: As suggested above, the Trail Junction Park was not articulated separately in the OASP PFFP .
Pedestrian &
Bicycle Paths Gross Total Cost OASP Fair Share Net Total Cost
Ped and Bike Paths $ 648,200 100% $ 648,200
UPRR Ped / Bike Overpass $ 1,760,000 100% $ 1,760,000
Bike Path Extension over
Tank Farm Road $ 495,109 50% $ 247,555
Totals $ 2,903,309 $ 2,655,755
The applicants have presented a preliminary design and construction cost estimate that is detailed
in Attachment 2 of this report.
The following summary in Table 2 of this report presents a side-by-side comparison of the
various features of each park, and the construction cost estimates provided by the applicants.
2-5
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 6
Table 2 – Comparison of OASP PFFP Cost Estimates and Righetti Ranch Cost Estimates
2016 Applicant-Estimated
Righetti Parks
Construction Costs
Ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Pa
r
k
Tr
a
i
l
J
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
k
Po
c
k
e
t
P
a
r
k
Li
n
e
a
r
P
a
r
k
Site Prep 146,543 8,775 6,255 29,040
Circulation (walks & paths) 822,500 32,200 18,400 183,650
Stairs-Railings - 9,000 4,250 -
Restrooms 225,000 - - -
Parking 110,900 - - 26,295
Landscape-Furnishings 365,750 11,750 20,750 85,200
Viewing deck-Pavilion - 10,000 - -
Retaining Walls-Fences 143,000 33,750 30,000 11,875
Utility & Drainage 120,000 20,000 55,000 20,000
Creeks 47,000 - - -
Tennis 341,900 - - -
Basketball 48,800 - - -
Playground 424,100 - - 116,000
BBQ-Pavilion 139,000 - 94,000 75,000
Community Garden-Bldgs - - - 70,200
Pickleball 142,850 - - -
Soccer Fields-Turf Area 485,000 - - 25,844
Synthetic Turf - - 40,000 -
Dog Park 57,400 - - -
2016 Subtotals 3,619,743 125,475 268,655 643,104 4,656,977
Design Contingency (20%) 723,948 25,095 53,731 128,621
Constr Contingency (10%) 361,974 12,548 26,866 64,310
2016 Totals 4,705,665 163,118 349,252 836,035 6,054,070
2010 OASP PFFP Est’s 3,628,000 220,000 0 100,000 3,948,000
Differential -1,077,665 +56,882 -349,252 -736,035 -2,106,070
OASP PFFP
Fee Implications Existing 2010 Fees Option 2016 Fees Differential
SFR FEE TOTAL 63% 2,799,096 54% 3,269,198
SFR FEE per unit 5,352 per unit 6,578 +$ 1,226/sfr
MFR FEE TOTAL 37.1% 1,648,962 46% 2,784,872
MFR FEE per unit 3,983 per unit 4,920 +$ 937/mfr
2-6
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 7
Table 2 describes in more detail the various features that could be included in the proposed
Righetti Parks, for Commission deliberation tonight.
Table 2 also describes one scenario as to the implications on OASP Public Facilities
Financing Plan development fees by unit type, should the increased budget of projects be
recommended for approval to Council.
We emphasize one scenario, as the OASP PFFP fee structure for Parklands Development
projects were made based on various assumptions regarding the relative shares of benefit to each
land use type and the number of residents associated with those assumptions.
For example, comparing the 2010 OASP assumptions for unit types and the evolving reality of
subdivision approvals granted through 2016 yield the following different factors that affect any
fee computation formula:
SFR Units MFR Units Totals
2010 OASP projected 523 (63%) 414 (37%) 937 (100%)
2016 OASP to-date 431 253 684
2016 OASP remaining est’d 66 313 379
2016 to-date and est’d 497 (54%) 566 (46%) 1,063 (100%)
Therefore, the OASP Fee Implications presented in Table 2 can be characterized by a shift in
expected population, with fewer SFR units being achieved in favor of more MFR units. This
boosts MFR population, and under this scenario the MFR takes on a larger burden of the parks
improvements to serve their populations.
Overall, 2016 experience-to-date also shows that overall density is trending higher at 1,063 units
than the baseline 937 units used under the PFFP. For that reason it may also be important to
revise the baseline population, unit count and parks development fee allocation by unit type to be
more current.
Given the many variables possible in scenario building for this issue, the Parks Commission is
not being asked to recommend one fee program or another. Instead, the Commission is being
asked two (2) questions tonight:
1) Should the parks improvements for the Righetti Ranch development include the scope and
variety of improvements included in Table 2?
2) And if so, assuming a higher cost to construct such a final parks improvement plan, should
the OASP PFFP parks development fee structure be revisited by Council to develop a modified
and up-to-date spread of fee costs against the projected development projects and future residents
of the Orcutt Area?
A summary of the recommended park amenities are as follows:
2-7
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 8
Table 3 - Righetti Ranch VTM#3083 Public Park Features
Park
Park
Features
Neighborhood
Park
Trail Junction Park Linear Park Pocket Park Maintenance
Park Size /
Acres-SF
11.6 acres
505,005 SF
1.8 acres
78,400 SF
1.3 acres
56,600 SF
0.2 acres
8,700 SF
Dedication
Occurs
Phase 1 Phase 1 and Phase 2 Phase 1 Phase 1
Construction
Occurs
Rough Grade in
Phase 1; Complete
Park in Phase 2
Construct Phase 2 Construct Phase 1 Construct Phase 1
Active Play
Courts
4 = Tennis Courts
1 = Basketball Courts
6 = Pickleball Courts
1 = Dog Park
1 = Fitness station
1 = Pump track Public
Active Play
Fields
1 = Kids Playground
1 = Soccer (U19)
2 = Soccer (U8)
(natural turf lawns)
1 = Ranch-themed
Kids Playground
1 = Flexible Turf
area
1 = Climbing wall
1 = Synthetic
multi-use lawn
area
Public
Restrooms 1 = Restroom with
Maintenance Shed
Public
Community
Garden
12-20 plots
Orchard
Tool Shed
Produce Stand
Public
Picnic-BBQ
Facilities
and
Pavilions
BBQ pits w/Shade
Picnic Tables
Picnic Tables
View deck/telescope
Picnic Tables
Gazebo Pavilion
BBQ w/Picnic
Outdoor fireplace
Public
Lighting Security Public
Parking 55 car parking Bicycle parking 8 car parking Bicycle parking Public
Trails Pedestrian
promenade; Multi-
use
Dirt trail (hillside);
Multi-use; Hydration
station
Bike trail and UPRR
overcrossing to
Industrial Way
Hydration station Public
Kiosk-Info
Materials
Informational
Kiosk
Informational
Kiosk Public
5.0 RECOMMENDATION & NEXT STEPS
Staff is suggesting that the Parks and Recreation Commission consider the following recommendations to
City Council:
(1) A recommendation for City Council approval of the public parks improvements as reflected in
Table 3; and,
(2) A recommendation for City Council consideration of modifying the OASP PFFP fee structure for
public parks as suggested in Table 2.
ATTACHMENTS
2-8
Righetti Ranch Public Park Proposals – PRC Final Design Review (3987 Orcutt Road) June 1, 2016
Orcutt Area Specific Plan
Page 9
1.Applicant’s Updated “Righetti Parks” Introduction and Proposal, including park
improvements, targeted demographics of the Righetti Ranch residents, improvement cost
estimates, and phasing (5-20-2016)
2. Preliminary construction, design and contingency cost estimates breakdown by Park
3. Righetti Ranch VTM#3063 Illustrative Parks and Open Space Plans (RRM Exhibits 5-
19-16) included separately with your packets
4.Updated “Analysis of Parks & Rec IMPROVEMENT Fees Derived from Planned and
Approved Projects (5/22/2016)
2-9
1
Righetti Parks
Updated – May 20, 2016
INTRODUCTION
The Righetti Development is the largest component of the Orcutt Area Specific Plan (OASP). The
implementation of this project will add several City and HOA owned parks/open spaces to the area. The
large network of trails, bike paths, and multi-use paths proposed will allow inter-connectivity between
Righetti neighborhoods and expand access to adjacent neighborhoods.
As much as the parks are a major part of Righetti, we have made some of the Righetti style a part of the
parks as well. The agrarian and craftsman style chosen for the Righetti development is apparent in such
things as the community garden and the picnic structures designed within the parks. The ultimate goal
is to unify the Righetti area as a whole community.
The City owned and maintained parks proposed for Righetti within the OASP are as follows:
Neighborhood park (Approx. 11.7 acres)
Trail Head Park (Approx. 1.8 acres)
Linear Park (Approx. 1.3 acres)
Pocket Park (Approx. 0.2 acre)
DEMOGRAPHICS
The Righetti community presents a unique and exciting opportunity to maximize pedestrian circulation
and connectivity throughout the development. Central to each of the park designs is a pedestrian-
centric philosophy creating places that are welcoming for many different groups and ages.
In designing these parks, we understand that the future home buyers of the Righetti Homes will likely be
the largest user group for the parks. As such, we looked at what type of user groups will likely purchase
the Righetti homes. Based on analysis provided by HM-2 Marketing Development, the following
demographic groups of home buyers are anticipated to be the primary groups entering into the
neighborhood:
Young Family/Couple (50%)
Affluent Family (13%)
Wealthy Mature Family (18%)
Empty Nest (18%)
Young Family/Couple
This group is typically under 50 years of age with dual income and college education. Some of these
families will likely come with younger children. People within this focus group will likely gravitate
towards using the active play uses such as recreational fields, tennis, basketball, etc. The younger
couples with families will likely make use of the playground elements proposed as well.
2-10
2
Affluent Family
This group is typically between 35 and 50 years of age with dual income and college education. This
group tends to be more affluent and busy with family and work life. Most of these families will likely
come with children of various ages. The active play uses of the park will still be desirable for this
demographic for weekend sport events for the children and recreation. Families with children will
make use of the group picnic area and playground area for special occasions such as birthdays.
Wealthy Mature Family
This group is typically over 50 years of age, wealthy, and with a college education. These families will
likely have kids in college or high school. The active play areas within the park such as tennis, basketball
and pickle ball will prove desirable to this group with the exception of the occasional soccer pickup
game. The children of this demographic will likely be utilizing regional sports parks for collegiate or high
school level play.
Empty Nest
This group is typically over 50 years of age, wealthy, and with a college education. These families
typically no longer have children living in their home. Park elements such as tennis and pickle ball will
likely prove desirable to this group. If the family has grandchildren, they will likely bring them over to
the playground area or watch one of their sporting events at the park.
PARK COSTS
The Parks are currently planned to be built through fees collected by developers which would require
prevailing wage requirements. There are ongoing discussions that may result in the Righetti applicant
building portions of the Park in exchange for park fee credits which may provide the savings of not
needing to use prevailing wage. These negotiations are still ongoing and will likely not be completed by
the June 1st PRC Hearing.
In general, the total costs of the park as envisioned exceeds the total budget anticipated in the
OASP. This gap is further widened each time the City approves a project that proposes their own park
amenities and requests commensurate Park Fee credits as has been done for both Taylor Windgate and
West Creek. If this trend continues, there will be less than half the money needed to Develop the
Neighborhood Parks.
The OASP has made the following allowances for park construction costs:
Park Description OASP projected costs Current Projected Costs
(Preliminary)
Linear Park $100,000 $836,035
Pocket Park $220,000 $349,252
Neighborhood Park $3,628,000 $4,705,665
Trail Junction Park $0 $163,118
Total $3,948,000 $6,054,070
2-11
3
Please note that no dollar allowance was provided for the trail junction park within the specific plan.
SYNTHETIC TURF
Synthetic fields is still an option for the soccer fields within the neighborhood park. However, recent
cost comparisons suggest that synthetic turf (including carpet, subgrade, drainage) would run about
$6.75/sqft. This square foot price applied throughout the turf area would cost another $1.2 million
dollars approximately. Given the budget shortfalls to date, we have not pursued this avenue further.
PARK CONSTRUCTION PHASING
The current conditions of approval require all Park Land dedications to occur as part of Phase 1. This
should include the Neighborhood Park, the Linear Park, the Pocket Park, and the Trail Head Park. With
the exception of the Trail Head Park, the applicant is prepared to make such dedications subject to the
City’s ability to make financial arrangements to pay for the land for these Parks as outlined in the
Specific Plan. The applicant will not own the property that contains the Trail Head Park until Phase 3 of
the development. As such, the applicant proposes to dedicate the Trail Head Park land as part of Phase
3. The Specific Plan contemplates park improvements to be completed as fees are collected and there
are sufficient funds to pay for them. Contrary to this approach, the applicant has been conditioned to
provide conceptual designs and rough grade the Parks as part of Phase 1, which they are willing to do in
exchange for OASP Park Improvement Fee credits to offset those costs. Applicant may also consider; at
their sole discretion, to provide additional Park improvements as part of Phase 1, subject to additional
OASP Park Improvement Fee credits equal to the value of work performed not to exceed the original fee
obligations.
MAINTENANCE
The following discussion is intended to outline special maintenance considerations for the various parks.
This is intended just to highlight on a few key maintenance components of the project.
Neighborhood Park: City will own and maintain neighborhood park in total. Maintenance is
anticipated to be equivalent to standard neighborhood parks within the City.
Linear Park: City will own and maintain park space including the community garden space. The
community garden is intended to operate in similar fashion to existing community gardens
within the City. Interested parties will receive a designated plot for gardening. It will be their
responsibility to provide upkeep for their plots. The fruit stand is intended as an open air stand
where produce can be gifted or sold on the honor system. A utility shed is proposed for storage
of tools and equipment as deemed necessary. The shed would be locked with keys issued to
plot owners only.
Pocket Park: City will own and maintain park.
o Synthetic Turf Area: Homeowners are encouraged to bring bocce, croquet, and or golf
elements to make use of the multi-use synthetic turf area within the park.
2-12
4
o Picnic Pavilion: The picnic pavilion is intended for reserve use only for special events.
The City will provide access to the pavilion’s bbq and fireplace to patrons with
reservations.
Trail Head Park: City will own and maintain park including any improvements there in (ie: pump
track). The majority of the park will maintain in its native vegetation and will mostly require
fuel modification maintenance.
2-13
DATE:May 19, 2016
JOB No.:
JOB NM:Righetti Neighborhood Park
CALC BY:CD 3765 South Higuera Suite 102, SLO CA 93401
CHK BY:Ph: (510) 751-4910 email: www.rrmdesign.com
Righetti Neighborhood Park
BASE BID ITEMS
CAT. ITEM QUANT UNIT COST/UNIT COST DESCRIPTION
DEMO & EARTHWORK:
MOBILIZATION 1 LS 10000.00 $10,000 ALLOWANCE
CLEARING & GRUBBING 389,776 SF 0.06 $23,387 INCLUDES DISPOSAL
TREE REMOVAL 2 EA 500.00 $1,000 INCLUDES DISPOSAL
REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL LF ASSUMED NONE APPLICABLE
GENERAL PROTECTION FENCING 3,000 LF 6.00 $18,000 INCLUDES DISPOSAL
MISC. DEMOLITION 1 LS 3000.00 $3,000 MAY INCLUDE IRRIGATION, MISC CONC, SITE FURN
EARTHWORK 11,401 CY 6.00 $68,406
SUBGRADE PREP (HARDSCAPE AREAS) 3,500 CY 6.50 $22,750 INCLUDES COMPACTED SUBGRADES
Subtotal:$146,543
GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS
CONCRETE WALKS 36,000 SF 8.00 $288,000 4" THICK CONCRETE WALKS
CONCRETE CURB RAMPS 2 EA 650.00 $1,300 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - AC PAVING 23,000 SF 4.00 $92,000 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - CURBS 700 LF 17.00 $11,900 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - STRIPING 1 LS 4000.00 $4,000 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - CONCRETE APRON 1 EA 3000.00 $3,000 ALLOWANCE
BRIDGE & ABUTMENTS 2 EA 175000.00 $350,000 ALLOWANCE
BRIDGE/CULVERT XING 1 EA 20000.00 $20,000 ALLOWANCE
RESTROOM - PREFABRICATED BLDG 1 EA 225000.00 $225,000 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - SHRUBS/TREES 70,000 SF 2.50 $175,000 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - SHRUBS/TREES 70,000 SF 2.50 $175,000 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNISHINGS - BENCHES 13 EA 750.00 $9,750 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNISHINGS - WASTE 10 EA 600.00 $6,000 ALLOWANCE
CLASS I BIKE PATH 13,600 SF 12.00 $163,200 ALLOWANCE
WALLS (ALLOWANCE)1,300 LF 110.00 $143,000 ALLOWANCE
UTILITY - SEWER 1 LS 10000.00 $10,000 ALLOWANCE
UTILITY - WATER 1 LS 35000.00 $35,000 ALLOWANCE
UTILITY - SITE LIGHTING 1 LS 50000.00 $50,000 ALLOWANCE - EXCLUDES COURT & FIELDS
UTILITY - STORM DRAIN 1 LS 25000.00 $25,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$1,787,150
IMPROVEMENTS AT CREEK
CREEK IMPROVEMENTS 100,000 SF 0.25 $25,000 ASSUMES THINNING OUT, HYDROSEED WHERE NEEDED
FENCING AT CREEKS 1,100 LF 20.00 $22,000 OVER 4" CONCRETE
Subtotal:$47,000
TENNIS COURTS
POST TENSION CONC PAVING & SURFACING 29,500 SF 10.00 $295,000 ALLOWANCE
FENCING AT COURTS 900 LF 35.00 $31,500 ALLOWANCE
GATES AT COURTS 4 EA 250.00 $1,000 ALLOWANCE
NETS 4 EA 1500.00 $6,000 ALLOWANCE
DECOMPOSED GRANITE PAVING 2,800 SF 3.00 $8,400 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$341,900
BASKETBALL
CONCRETE PAVING & SURFACING 4,500 SF 10.00 $45,000 ALLOWANCE
BASKETBALL HOOP ASSEMBLIES 2 EA 1900.00 $3,800 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$48,800
PLAYGROUND
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT 1 LS 300000.00 $300,000 ALLOWANCE
RUBBER SURFACING 7,300 EA 17.00 $124,100 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$424,100
PRINT: 5/20/2016 AT 10:17 AM 1 Conceptual Level Cost Estimate.xls
2-14
Righetti Neighborhood Park
BASE BID ITEMS
CAT. ITEM QUANT UNIT COST/UNIT COST DESCRIPTION
OUTDOOR BBQ & PAVILION AREAS
PREFABRICATED SHADE STRUCTURE 1 LS 100000.00 $100,000 ALLOWANCE
PREFABRICATED SS - SMALL 1 LS 20000.00 $20,000 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - TABLES 7 EA 1200.00 $8,400 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - BBQ 2 EA 800.00 $1,600 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - WASTE 4 SF 600.00 $2,400 ALLOWANCE
DECOMPOSED GRANITE PAVING 1,700 SF 3.00 $5,100 ALLOWANCE
WATER FOUNTAIN 1 EA 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$139,000
PICKLEBALL
POST TENSION CONC PAVING & SURFACING 12,500 SF 10.00 $125,000 ALLOWANCE
FENCING AT COURTS 450 LF 22.00 $9,900 ALLOWANCE
GATES AT COURTS 3 EA 250.00 $750 ALLOWANCE
NETS 6 EA 1200.00 $7,200 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$142,850
SOCCER FIELDS
TURF - SEED 160,000 SF 0.25 $40,000 ALLOWANCE
SOIL PREPARATION 160,000 sf 0.75 $120,000 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - BOOSTER PUMP 1 LS 30000.00 $30,000 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - GENERAL 160,000 SF 1.75 $280,000 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - 90 DAY MAINTENANCE 1 LS 10000.00 $10,000 ALLOWANCE
GOALS 1 LS 5000.00 $5,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$485,000
DOG PARK
BARK MULCH 160,000 SF 0.25 $40,000 ALLOWANCE
FENCING 700 LF 22.00 $15,400 ALLOWANCE
GATES 2 EA 250.00 $500 ALLOWANCE
WATER FOUNTAIN 1 EA 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$57,400
SUBTOTAL:$3,619,743
Design Contingency (20% of total) $723,949
Construction Contingency (10% of total) $361,974
GRAND TOTAL: $4,705,665
THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED USING STANDARD COST AND/OR QUANTITY ESTIMATE PRACTICES. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT THIS IS AN ESTIMATE
ONLY, AND THAT THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO THE OWNER OR TO A THIRD PARTY FOR ANY FAILURE TO ACCURATELY ESTIMATE THE COST AND/OR
QUANTITIES FOR THE PROJECT, OR ANY PART THEREOF.
THIS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE IS PREPARED AS A GUIDELINE AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE BASIS FOR BID. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO PERFORM HIS/HER
OWN QUANTITY TAKE-OFF AND TO BID ACCORDINGLY. IN THE EVENT THAT ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED THROUGH THE BIDDING PROCESS,
PLEASE CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR CLARIFICATION.
PRINT: 5/20/2016 AT 10:17 AM 2 Conceptual Level Cost Estimate.xls
2-15
DATE:May 19, 2016
JOB No.:
JOB NM:Righetti Parks
CALC BY:CD 3765 South Higuera Suite 102, SLO CA 93401
CHK BY:Ph: (510) 751-4910 email: www.rrmdesign.com
Righetti - Linear Park
CAT. ITEM QUANT UNIT COST/UNIT COST DESCRIPTION
DEMO & EARTHWORK:
MOBILIZATION 1 LS 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
CLEARING & GRUBBING 59,000 SF 0.06 $3,540 INCLUDES DISPOSAL
REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL LF ASSUMED NONE APPLICABLE
EARTHWORK 1,750 CY 6.00 $10,500 ALLOWANCE
SUBGRADE PREP (HARDSCAPE AREAS) 18,000 SF 0.75 $13,500 INCLUDES COMPACTED SUBGRADES
Subtotal:$29,040
GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS
CONCRETE WALKS 14,500 SF 6.00 $87,000 4" THICK CONCRETE WALKS
CONCRETE CURB RAMPS 1 EA 650.00 $650 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - AC PAVING 4,200 SF 4.00 $16,800 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - CURBS 335 LF 17.00 $5,695 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - STRIPING 1 LS 800.00 $800 ALLOWANCE
PARKING LOT - CONCRETE APRON 1 EA 3000.00 $3,000 ALLOWANCE
STRUCTURE - TOOL SHED 1 EA 25000.00 $25,000 ALLOWANCE
STRUCTURE - PRODUCE STAND 1 EA 7500.00 $7,500 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - SHRUBS/TREES 15,000 SF 2.50 $37,500 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - SHRUBS/TREES 15,000 SF 2.50 $37,500 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNISHINGS - TABLE 1 EA 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNISHINGS - WASTE 2 EA 600.00 $1,200 ALLOWANCE
FENCING 475 LF 25.00 $11,875 ALLOWANCE
CLASS I BIKE PATH 8,000 SF 12.00 $96,000 ALLOWANCE
UTILITY - WATER 1 LS 20000.00 $20,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal: $352,020
PLAYGROUND
PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT 1 LS 65000.00 $65,000 ALLOWANCE
RUBBER SURFACING 3,000 EA 17.00 $51,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal: $116,000
TURF AREA & PAVILION
PREFABRICATED SHADE STRUCTURE 1 LS 75000.00 $75,000 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - TABLES 4 EA 1200.00 $4,800 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - WASTE 2 SF 600.00 $1,200 ALLOWANCE
WATER FOUNTAIN 1 EA 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
TURF - SEED 8,125 SF 0.25 $2,031 ALLOWANCE
SOIL PREPARATION 8,125 sf 0.75 $6,094 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - GENERAL 8,125 SF 1.75 $14,219 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - 90 DAY MAINTENANCE 1 LS 3500.00 $3,500 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal: $108,344
COMMUNITY GARDEN
GARDEN BEDS 10 EA 500.00 $5,000 ALLOWANCE
DECOMPOSED GRANITE PAVING 8,000 SF 3.00 $24,000 ALLOWANCE
ARBORS 6 EA 850.00 $5,100 ALLOWANCE
TABLES 3 EA 1200.00 $3,600 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$37,700
SUBTOTAL:$643,104
Design Contingency (20% of total) $128,621
Construction Contingency (10% of total)$64,310
GRAND TOTAL: $836,035
THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED USING STANDARD COST AND/OR QUANTITY ESTIMATE PRACTICES. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT THIS IS AN ESTIMATE
ONLY, AND THAT THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO THE OWNER OR TO A THIRD PARTY FOR ANY FAILURE TO ACCURATELY ESTIMATE THE COST AND/OR
QUANTITIES FOR THE PROJECT, OR ANY PART THEREOF.
THIS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE IS PREPARED AS A GUIDELINE AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE BASIS FOR BID. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO PERFORM HIS/HER
OWN QUANTITY TAKE-OFF AND TO BID ACCORDINGLY. IN THE EVENT THAT ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED THROUGH THE BIDDING PROCESS,
PLEASE CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR CLARIFICATION.
PRINT: 5/20/2016 AT 10:17 AM 1 Conceptual Level Cost Estimate.xls
2-16
DATE:May 19, 2016
JOB No.:
JOB NM:Righetti Pocket Park
CALC BY:CD 3765 South Higuera Suite 102, SLO CA 93401
CHK BY:Ph: (510) 751-4910 email: www.rrmdesign.com
Righetti Pocket Park
BASE BID ITEMS
CAT. ITEM QUANT UNIT COST/UNIT COST DESCRIPTION
DEMO & EARTHWORK:
MOBILIZATION 1 LS 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
CLEARING & GRUBBING 8,200 SF 0.15 $1,230 INCLUDES DISPOSAL
REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL LF ASSUMED NONE APPLICABLE
EARTHWORK 300 CY 6.00 $1,800 ALLOWANCE
SUBGRADE PREP (HARDSCAPE AREAS) 2,300 SF 0.75 $1,725 INCLUDES COMPACTED SUBGRADES
Subtotal:$6,255
GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS
CONCRETE WALKS 2,300 SF 8.00 $18,400 4" THICK CONCRETE WALKS
CLASS I BIKE PATH EXCLUDED
CONCRETE STAIRS 2 EA 1500.00 $3,000 ALLOWANCE
RAILINGS AT STAIRS 1 ALLOW 1250.00 $1,250 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - SHRUBS/TREES 3,750 SF 2.50 $9,375 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - SHRUBS/TREES 3,750 SF 2.50 $9,375 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - 90 DAY MAINTENANCE 1 LS 2000.00 $2,000 ALLOWANCE
WALLS (ALLOWANCE)200 LF 150.00 $30,000 ALLOWANCE
UTILITY - WATER 1 LS 20000.00 $20,000 ALLOWANCE
UTILITY - SITE LIGHTING 1 LS 35000.00 $35,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$128,400
PRINT: 5/20/2016 AT 10:17 AM 1 Conceptual Level Cost Estimate.xls
2-17
Righetti Pocket Park
BASE BID ITEMS
CAT. ITEM QUANT UNIT COST/UNIT COST DESCRIPTION
OUTDOOR BBQ & PAVILION AREAS
PICNIC STRUCTURE 1 LS 75000.00 $75,000 ALLOWANCE
FIRE PLACE 1 LS 8000.00 $8,000 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - TABLES 4 EA 1200.00 $4,800 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - BBQ 1 EA 2500.00 $2,500 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - WASTE 2 SF 600.00 $1,200 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNITURE - BIKE RACKS 1 EA 1000.00 $1,000 ALLOWANCE
WATER FOUNTAIN 1 EA 1500.00 $1,500 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$94,000
SYNTHETIC TURF AREA
SYNTHETIC TURF PATCH 1,600 SF 20.00 $32,000 ALLOWANCE
CLIMBING WALL 1 ALLOW 8000.00 $8,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$40,000
SUBTOTAL:$268,655
Design Contingency (20% of total)$53,731
Construction Contingency (10% of total)$26,866
GRAND TOTAL: $349,252
THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED USING STANDARD COST AND/OR QUANTITY ESTIMATE PRACTICES. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT THIS IS AN ESTIMATE
ONLY, AND THAT THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO THE OWNER OR TO A THIRD PARTY FOR ANY FAILURE TO ACCURATELY ESTIMATE THE COST AND/OR
QUANTITIES FOR THE PROJECT, OR ANY PART THEREOF.
THIS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE IS PREPARED AS A GUIDELINE AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE BASIS FOR BID. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO PERFORM HIS/HER
OWN QUANTITY TAKE-OFF AND TO BID ACCORDINGLY. IN THE EVENT THAT ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED THROUGH THE BIDDING PROCESS,
PLEASE CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR CLARIFICATION.
PRINT: 5/20/2016 AT 10:17 AM 2 Conceptual Level Cost Estimate.xls
2-18
DATE:May 19, 2016
JOB No.:
JOB NM:Righetti Trail Junction Park
CALC BY:CD 3765 South Higuera Suite 102, SLO CA 93401
CHK BY:Ph: (510) 751-4910 email: www.rrmdesign.com
Righetti Trail Junction Park
BASE BID ITEMS
CAT. ITEM QUANT UNIT COST/UNIT COST DESCRIPTION
DEMO & EARTHWORK:
MOBILIZATION 1 LS 750.00 $750 ALLOWANCE
CLEARING & GRUBBING 19,000 SF 0.15 $2,850 INCLUDES DISPOSAL
REMOVAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIAL LF ASSUMED NONE APPLICABLE
EARTHWORK 800 CY 6.00 $4,800 ALLOWANCE
SUBGRADE PREP (HARDSCAPE AREAS) 500 SF 0.75 $375 INCLUDES COMPACTED SUBGRADES
Subtotal:$8,775
GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS
DIRT WALKWAYS AND TRACK 19,000 SF 1.00 $19,000 4" THICK CONCRETE WALKS
CLASS I BIKE PATH NOT INCLUDED AS PART OF THIS ESTIMATE
FENCING 600 LF 22.00 $13,200 ALLOWANCE
STEPS 1 ALLOW 5000.00 $5,000 ALLOWANCE
RAILINGS AT STAIRS 1 ALLOW 4000.00 $4,000 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - SHRUBS/TREES 1,000 SF 2.50 $2,500 ALLOWANCE
IRRIGATION - SHRUBS/TREES 1,000 SF 2.50 $2,500 ALLOWANCE
LANDSCAPE - 90 DAY MAINTENANCE 1 LS 800.00 $800 ALLOWANCE
WALLS (ALLOWANCE)225 LF 150.00 $33,750 ALLOWANCE
SITE FURNISHINGS - KIOSK 1 EA 750.00 $750
SITE FURNISHINGS - TABLE 1 EA 1200.00 $1,200
SITE FURNISHINGS - BIKE RACKS 1 EA 1000.00 $1,000
SITE FURNISHINGS - FITNESS 2 EA 1500.00 $3,000
VIEWING DECK 1 ALLOW 10000.00 $10,000
UTILITY - WATER 1 LS 20000.00 $20,000 ALLOWANCE
Subtotal:$116,700
SUBTOTAL:$125,475
Design Contingency (20% of total)$25,095
Construction Contingency (10% of total)$12,548
GRAND TOTAL: $163,118
THIS ESTIMATE WAS PREPARED USING STANDARD COST AND/OR QUANTITY ESTIMATE PRACTICES. IT IS UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT THIS IS AN ESTIMATE
ONLY, AND THAT THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO THE OWNER OR TO A THIRD PARTY FOR ANY FAILURE TO ACCURATELY ESTIMATE THE COST AND/OR
QUANTITIES FOR THE PROJECT, OR ANY PART THEREOF.
THIS ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE IS PREPARED AS A GUIDELINE AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE BASIS FOR BID. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO PERFORM HIS/HER
OWN QUANTITY TAKE-OFF AND TO BID ACCORDINGLY. IN THE EVENT THAT ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED THROUGH THE BIDDING PROCESS,
PLEASE CONTACT THE ENGINEER FOR CLARIFICATION.
PRINT: 5/20/2016 AT 10:18 AM 1 Conceptual Level Cost Estimate.xls2-19
Orcutt Area Specific Plan updated
Analysis of Parks & Rec IMPROVEMENT
Analysis of Parks & Rec IMPROVEMENT Fees Derived from Planned Projects Fees Derived from Planned and Approved Projects
OASP Ref.APNs
OASP
Density
Range Acreage
Single-
Family
Units
Multi-
Family
Units
Parks & Rec
Improvement
SFR Fees at
$5,352
Parks & Rec
Improvement
MFR Fees at
$3,983 Applicant
SFR
Approved
Units
MFR
Approved
Units
Parks & Rec
Improvement
SFR Fees at
$5,352
Parks & Rec
Improvement
MFR Fees at
$3,983
Muick 076-481-017 91-96 12.00 76 20 $404,784 $79,495 Wingate - Taylor 78 64 $417,456 $254,912
Taylor 076-481-016 Tract 3044
Parsons several 288-313 143.83 190 112 $1,017,582 $447,681 Ambient Communities 272 32 $1,455,744 $127,456
(Righetti)Tract 3063
Jones 076-481-011 54-56 11.63 11 46 $56,220 $184,093 Ambient Communities 14 52 $74,928 $207,116
Tract 3066
Maddalena 076-481-001 79-89 6.66 0 83 $0 $330,531 Robins Reed 67 105 $358,584 $418,215
MidState 076-481-002 64-68 11.75 0 55 $0 $217,565 Tract 3083
276 316 $1,478,586 $1,259,365 431 253 $2,306,712 $1,007,699
subtotal =592 $2,737,951 subtotal =684 $3,314,411
Projected Projected Projected Projected
Anderson 076-481-008 68-77 5.35 0 77 $0 $306,691 Anderson 0 77 $0 $306,691
Evans 076-491-001 70-80 5.62 0 80 $0 $318,640 Evans 0 80 $0 $318,640
Farrior 076-481-015 7-8 0.76 0 8 $0 $31,864 Farrior 0 8 $0 $31,864
Fiala 076-481-012 3-4 0.95 4 0 $21,408 $0 Fiala 4 0 $21,408 $0
Garay 076-491-004 43-45 13.70 45 0 $240,840 $0 Garay 45 0 $240,840 $0
Hall 076-481-014 7-11 1.13 0 11 $0 $43,813 Hall 0 11 $0 $43,813
Imel 076-481-003 16-17 1.13 17 0 $90,984 $0 Imel 17 0 $90,984 $0
Pratt 053-061-024 49-55 5.41 0 55 $0 $219,065 Pratt 0 55 $0 $219,065
Pratt 076-481-007 72-82 5.55 0 82 $0 $326,606 Pratt 0 82 $0 $326,606
076-481-006
892-979 66 313 $353,232 $1,246,679 66 313 $353,232 $1,246,679
dwellings subtotal =379 $1,599,911 subtotal =379 $1,599,911
342 629 $1,831,818 $2,506,044 497 566 $2,659,944 $2,254,378
*due to rounding total*=971 $4,337,862 total=1,063 $4,914,322
Parks & Recreation Improvement Fee based on $4,448,000
Wingate-Taylor Credit Applied at Max Value -$417,456 -$254,912
$2,242,488 $1,999,466
$4,241,954
subtotals
totals w/credits
subtotals
totals
OASP Parkland Fees Analysis 9-16-2015 5-22-16 improve Current As Of: 5/23/2016
2-20
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
Parks and Recreation Commission
Agenda Report
DATE: June 1, 2016
FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director
Prepared By: Melissa C. Mudgett, Parks and Recreation Manager
Rich Ogden, Recreation Supervisor – Sports
Devin Hyfield, Recreation Supervisor - Facilities
SUBJECT: REVIEW OF SPORTS COURT SURVEY RESULTS AND
CONSIDERATION OF ENHANCED PICKLEBALL PILOT PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION
1.Receive and file the Summary of the 2016 Sports Court User Survey results.
2. Consider enhancements to the Pickleball Pilot Program for shared use of two existing
City facilities.
DISCUSSION
Background
Approximately two years ago Parks and Recreation began meeting with representatives of the sport of
Pickleball. As there were no dedicated facilities for this new sport, staff quickly responded to requests for
play areas by providing free of charge, the Ludwick Community Center during a time that it was not
programmed for other purposes.
A pickleball pilot program was recommended by staff and begun in the late summer 2014 with pickleball
play offered several days throughout the week at the Ludwick gym, Meadow Park, and Stoneridge
Neighborhood Park. The primary reason for a pilot program was to assess the impacts on existing
facilities that are being used for other sports and to create a balanced approach with this new use which
decreases access for basketball, volleyball, table tennis, tennis and other uses (depending upon the
facility).
A report on the pilot program was provided to the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) on March 2,
2016 (Attachment 1).
March 2, 2016 PRC Meeting Highlights Regarding Pickleball:
Continue Pilot Program
•Support by the PRC (and City Staff) is ongoing to Pickleball.
Expansion of the Pilot Program
•Supportive of possible future expansion at underutilized facilities.
Use of French Park Tennis Court and Other City Facilities
•Directed staff to conduct public engagement to assess impacts to
others.
•Initial engagement complete.
3-1
SPORTS COURT SURVEY AND PICKLEBALL PROGRAMMING Page 2
2016 Unique Impacts to City Tennis Facilities
This month, the San Luis Obispo Unified School District is closing its six tennis courts to the public
through late fall/early winter so that they can be reconstructed. The District generously allows the public
access to those courts when the high school is not using them. The impact of this will be profound as the
City itself has only eight public tennis courts. Not only is the public losing a place to play tennis during
the busiest time of year, but the San Luis Obispo high school players, under the City's Joint Use
Agreement, have reserved Sinsheimer Tennis courts during the summer and afternoons during the boys’
and girls' school season. Also during that same time period Sinsheimer courts are also reserved by the
Central Coast Women’s Tennis League (most mornings) regular mens’ groups, and Mission College Prep
girls and boys tennis during season. This is all on top of drop in play during the busy summer and fall
seasons.
In an effort to minimize this impact and allow for some public drop in use of the City’s tennis courts
during this severe reduction in available courts the Parks and Recreation Department have moved its
programs to both French Park Tennis Court and Islay Tennis Court. More specifically those two courts
have been scheduled for use throughout the summer and fall for lessons and/or summer camps that are
normally provided at Sinsheimer Tennis Courts. Any available times (when lessons and camps are not
offered) will accommodate drop in tennis play at French and Islay Parks (one court each) and Sinsheimer
(when the High Schools, league players, and morning regulars are not playing).
Additionally, several court (tennis and basketball) resurfacing projects are scheduled for this
summer/winter as part of the City’s approved 2015-17 Financial Plan Capital Improvement Project for
Parks Major Maintenance. The Court Resurfacing Project includes the Hampian Hockey Rink, Islay
Tennis and Basketball Courts and French Tennis and Basketball Courts. Public use of these court
surfaces will not be allowed during resurfacing.
Summary of 2016 Sports Court Survey Results
The City follows the industry best practice of engaging existing users of facilities about any changes in
use or availability. In order to accomplish this best practice regarding expanding pickleball on existing
recreational facilities public outreach and engagement to assess uses and what impacts changes to various
City facilities could have on existing users has been conducted. Current recreation customers were
invited to participate in the 2016 Sports Court User survey to provide feedback about the potential
impacts on existing users with increased programming at various court facilities. A summary of the
survey results is provided below.
5 Year CIP
•PRC will review future budget requests
Other
•PRC encouraged Pickleball to work collaboratively with tennis and
basketball user
•PRC encouraged Pickleball to consider fundraising for its desired
dedicated use.
3-2
SPORTS COURT SURVEY AND PICKLEBALL PROGRAMMING Page 3
146 Survey Takers Responded
*Other: Includes Softball, Basketball, Soccer, Table Tennis, Frisbee & RC Car Racing
Top 5 Recreational Facilities
Preferred Times to Play
1) Mornings 7am – 11:00am = 80%
2) Lunchtimes 11am-2:00pm = 10%
Impacts of Shared Use
62 out of 64 (97%) of Tennis, Basketball and “other” sport players said that sharing courts for multi-use
with pickleball has not significantly impacted their sport
42 out of 64 (66%) of Tennis,
Basketball and “other” sports
players would be in favor of
temporary pickleball use at French
Park
32%
56%
12%
Tennis (47)
Pickleball (82)
Other (17)*
Meadow Park
(3x/week)
Sinsheimer
(2x/week)
LCC (1x/week)
French Park (1x/Week)
Islay Park (1x/week)
42
22
0
10
20
30
40
50
Sharing of French Park Tennis Courts for Pickleball
YES
NO
Days Most Preferred
Tuesdays/Thursdays Mornings
Days Least Preferred
Fridays and Weekends
3-3
SPORTS COURT SURVEY AND PICKLEBALL PROGRAMMING Page 4
General Survey Comments
• Additional court lines could be distracting
• Don’t take from one group to give to another
• Would like one designated fenced area to play
pickleball
• Recreation is expensive. Multi-use is the wave of
the future.
• French Park is very unused for Tennis
• Multi-use of the best way to serve multiple interests
• Build an RC Track
• Consider partnerships with Cal Poly and Cuesta
College for use of their courts.
• Consider playing at Islay Park
• Extra court lines are confusing
Current Parks and Recreation Facility Reservations:
Schedule of Facility Use
LOCATION June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan-17
Meadow Park Basketball
Ludwick Community Center Gym
French Tennis PW Resurfacing
Project
French Basketball PW Resurfacing
Project
Islay Tennis PW Resurfacing
Project
Islay Basketball PW Resurfacing
Project
SLO HIGH
SUMMER CAMP
SLO HIGH
SCHOOL BOYS
TENNIS
PRIVATE
TENNIS EVENT
MISSION PREP
TENNIS
USTA JUNIOR
TOURNAMENT
CCWTL
SUMMER CLASSIC
TENNIS
TOURNAMENT
FALL CLASSIC
TENNIS
TOURNAMENT
WINTER CLASSIC
TENNIS
TOURNAMENT
Sinsheimer Tennis
Pickleball played M, W, F 9am-11:30pm. Drop In Basketball
Wednesdays Pickleball 12-2:00pm
CONTRACT CLASSES (Tennis Lessons, Coach Patience, MON-FRI 9:00am -
12:00pm)
CONTRACT CLASSES (Tennis Lessons, Coach Patience,
TU/THURS 1:00pm - 5:30pm)
CONTRACT CLASSES (Davide MON & WED 12-2:00pm)CONTRACT CLASSES (Davide MON & WED 3:00pm-
5:00pm), PRIVATE LESSONS TBD
SLO HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS TENNIS
MISSION PREP TENNIS
PLAYGROUND CONSTRUCTION
CENTRAL COAST WOMEN'S TENNIS LEAGUE
Staff reviewed the 2016 sport court survey results in conjunction with the upcoming summer/fall facility
reservations. Overall, the survey results indicated a majority of respondents had a favorable response for
allowing the temporary and limited use of pickleball at the French Park Tennis Court location noting that
the sharing of the courts for multi-use with pickleball did not significantly impact their sport.
Recommendations for Enhanced Pickleball Programming
1.Add Striping to the French Park Basketball Court. Staff recommends the addition of
Pickleball court striping to the French Park Basketball Court resurfacing project scheduled to
occur at the end of June 2016. Parks and Recreation and public Works staff have collaborated on
3-4
SPORTS COURT SURVEY AND PICKLEBALL PROGRAMMING Page 5
this resurfacing project to include multi-court striping. Once the Basketball Court resurfacing is
completed, it is recommended to increase Pickleball programming twice weekly at this location
(Tuesday/Thursdays 9:00am – 12:00pm). Staff does not recommend increasing play at the
Meadow Park Basketball Courts at this time as there are standing basketball games during
Tuesday and Thursday mornings, players have complained about a loss of use to staff, and Parks
Maintenance uses mornings to maintain that are of the Park and needs some time during the week
to do so.
2.Allow French Park Tennis Court for Pickleball Use After San Luis High School
Construction and Drop-in Rules are Completed. Given the tennis court reconstruction and
resurfacing discussed above staff does not recommend making changes to the Joanna Santarsiere
Memorial Tennis Court at French Park until that work is completed (presently anticipated to be
January 2017). French Park Tennis Court is tentatively scheduled for resurfacing and restriping
in January 2017. Once completed, staff recommends that shared use (tennis and pickleball) be
allowed with drop-in rules and etiquette applying for both tennis and pickleball users. Those
rules would be developed this fall and presented to the Commission for consideration.
Summary of Enhanced Pickleball Programming
The benefits resulting from the proposed short-term recommendations for the shared multi-use with
pickleball of existing public facilities is provided in the table below:
•Stripe French Park Basketball Court for
multi-use lines for pickleball
•Increase pickleball play to include
Tuesdays and Thursdays at the French Park
Basketball Courts from 9:00AM to NOON.
June 2016
•Stripe Joanna Santarsiere Memorial Tennis
Court at French Park with multi-use lines
for pickleball.
•Develop “rules of play” consistent with
"drop-in" play for both tennis and
pickleball players.
January
2017
Play
•Increased Pickleball
play by 2X weekly in
June 2016, and in 6
months increase drop-
in play opportunities
at French Tennis
Sharing
•Hours & locations
vary to be least
impactful to current
users (French tennis
courts used less.
Impacting only one
basketball court and
one tennis court)
Saving Money
•Can coordinate
striping with PW
Contract as part of the
Court Resurfacing
CIP – saves money
and P&R staff time
versus temporary tape
that has to be
repurchased and
reapplied.
Safety
•Accommodates the
Pickleball request for
one fenced area to
play
•French Park has
greater parking spaces
and on-street
residential parking
accessible for Seniors
3-5
SPORTS COURT SURVEY AND PICKLEBALL PROGRAMMING Page 6
Anticipated Longer Term Opportunities
The short-term recommendations above help to address the immediate impact of meeting the recreational
needs of an underserved population while minimizing its impact on existing users. In the longer-term,
there are future park expansions that may result in dedicated pickleball courts for recreational use;
1. The Neighborhood Park for the Righetti Ranch residential development has 6 pickleball courts
proposed.
2. A capital improvement project for the construction of dedicated pickleball courts at Laguna Lake
Golf Course has been drafted in anticipation of submission for consideration within the context of
the City's next Financial Plan cycle.
Next Steps
Upon PRC’s approval, Parks and Recreation staff will continue to coordinate with Public Works staff in
the French Park Basketball Court resurfacing project to include multi-use court striping for pickleball and
subsequently increase pickleball play twice weekly at this location. Additional drop-in play rules will be
drafted and staff will return to the PRC for direction.
ATTACHMENT
1. Parks and Recreation Commission Report, March 2, 2016
3-6
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
Parks and Recreation Commission
Agenda Report
March 2, 2016
FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director
Melissa C. Mudgett, Parks and Recreation Manager
Rich Ogden, Recreation Supervisor - Sports
SUBJECT: PILOT PROGRAM ANNUAL UPDATE - PICKLEBALL
RECOMMENDATION
Receive a presentation regarding the Pickleball Pilot Program and provide input to questions for
future options.
DISCUSSION
What is Pickleball?
Pickleball is the fastest growing sport in the United States and is increasing in popularity
Boomers (50+) and Senior age groups. A combination of racquet sports; Pickleball is a paddle
sport played with a whiffle ball on a badminton-sized court and a tennis-style net. This paddle
sport provides opportunities for all ages and athletic ability levels.
Purpose of a Pilot Program
Beginning in the summer of 2014, Pickleball enthusiasts informed the Parks and Recreation
Commission about the growing popularity of the sport and their desire to have recreational
opportunities within the City limits to play Pickleball. In March 2015, the Parks and Recreation
Department recommended to the Commission the initiation of a Pilot Program for the emerging
sport of Pickleball. The primary goals of a recreational pilot program is to address the following;
1.Meet a community needs
2.Enhance recreational play by implementing a temporary opportunity
3.Encourage healthy and active lifestyles
4.Implement (temporary opportunities) within existing resources and program budgets
Pickleball Pilot Program
Having met these goals and conditions as stated above; the Pickleball Pilot Program began in
March 2015 (Attachment 1 – PRC Memo). The intent was to provide Pickleball programming
for a 12-month period to adequately assess the community need and impacts to existing
resources. Existing City court surfaces were identified as having capacity and the potential for
this multi-use. The Ludwick Community Center and Meadow Park were two locations identified
as being suitable for multi-use with minimal impact to existing users. The Parks and Recreation
Department purchased the equipment needed to support the start-up program at these two
locations (paddles, balls, nets, tape, storage carts) and play was offered four times per week.
3-7
ATTACHMENT 1
UPDATE – 2016 PILOT PROGRAM PICKLEBALL Page 2
In September 2015, a 6-month program update was provided to the Parks and Recreation
Commission regarding the status of the Pickleball Pilot Program (Attachment 2 – PRC Update
Memo). At that time, neighbors of the Stoneridge Neighborhood Park advocated for a temporary
Pickleball designation at this location. Stoneridge Neighborhood Park was identified as a
suitable location and was added to the Pickleball Pilot Program on a “drop-in” basis. City staff
provided temporary tape court lining at this location. No other City equipment was purchased
for this location.
Currently the Pickleball Pilot Program is offered at three public locations and serves
approximately 150 players weekly. A summary of the program offerings at each location is
identified below;
t
The Pickleball Pilot Program has allowed for the maximization of existing facilities and
resources to full potential. Over the past year, staff estimates that approximately 7,800 players
have been accommodated as a result of the pilot program. This past year has seen the
development of a local Pickleball club (SLO Pickleball Association) who has been actively
seeking partnership opportunities with the City to grow and expand Pickleball.
Minimizing Impact on Existing Facilities and Users
Staff has received feedback on the pilot program from several other user groups. Those include:
roller derby, basketball players and tennis court users. This feedback has been purely unsolicited
and has come in person, via email, and letter. The letter attached (Attachment 3), gives a
•1 Indoor Court (Gym)
•Wednesdays, 12-2pm
•Temp Taped Court
•City Provided Equipment
•Beginner level
•Free
•20 Participants Weekly
Ludwick Community Center
(864 Santa Rosa Street)
•3 Outdoor courts (on Basketball courts)
•Mon – Wed – Fri (11:00am – 1:00pm)
•Temp Taped Courts
•City Provided Equipment
•Free
•120 Participants Weekly
Meadow Park
(2333 Meadow Street)
•1 Outdoor court (on Basketball Court)
•Drop-In Play
•Temp Tape Lines
•Free
•Community Donation for permanent line painting
Stoneridge Neighborhood
Park
(426 Stoneridge Drive)
3-8
UPDATE – 2016 PILOT PROGRAM PICKLEBALL Page 3
summary of several tennis player’s feedback. As PRC members are aware the City is under
served with tennis courts and so any reduction in their availability has ripple effects.
Future of Pickleball
As the popularity of Pickleball continues to grow, so does the demand on existing resources.
The Pickleball Pilot Program as developed has been successful in fulfilling a community need
for the Boomer and Senior populations within existing program budgets.
Staff is recommending continuing with the pilot program offerings and receiving input from the
PRC about possible next steps for expansion.
FISCAL IMPACT
Currently the Pickleball Pilot Program is offered free of charge for all participants and therefore
there are no revenues to help offset program costs. Original pilot program start-up costs have
been calculated at $3,000 which was support by one-time program savings. This cost does not
include staff time required to monitor the programming. The pilot program costs have been
identified as a one-time start-up expenditures which are not expected to continue from year to
year. Continuing the Pickleball Program at this pilot level would have a minimal ongoing fiscal
impact (such as periodic replacement of whiffle balls) to the Recreational Sports Operating
Budget.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSIONER INPUT
Below are proposed questions for PRC discussion and possible direction to staff:
1.Continued Pilot Program? Does the Commission support continuing the Pickleball
Pilot Program at its current level?
2.Expansion of Pilot Program? Would the Commission like to see the Pickleball Pilot
Program expand locations? If so do you have ideas for where?
3.French Park Tennis Court? If expansion of the Pilot Program is supported by the
Commission, it should be noted that French Park tennis court has been identified by staff
as a possible location multi-use location for temporary (tape) lines to be added to
maximize the use of this court. This location could be ideal for Pickleball players as it
provides a fenced area for wayward balls; allowing for more concentrated time of play.
Because this would reduce tennis court availability, what type of public engagement and
feedback from existing users would the Commission need?
4.Five-Year CIP? Recreational project requests have been submitted as part of the City’s
adopted five-year Capital Improvement Program for Sinsheimer Park Tennis Court
Lighting and New Park Amenity Initiatives. Does the Commission support staff in
continuing with the implementation of these capital projects as submitted into the CIP
program?
3-9
UPDATE – 2016 PILOT PROGRAM PICKLEBALL Page 4
a.New Park Amenity Initiatives has identified $60,000 in support of future park
amenity improvements. $10,000 has been allocated in 2018-19 for design
services and $50,000 (also in 2018-19) for construction of the projects. This
project funding could include various types of new park initiatives to address the
change in recreational needs, such as Pickleball, Foot Golf or Bicycle Pump
tracks. (Attachment 4)
b.Sinsheimer Park Tennis Court Lighting has identified $200,000 in support of this
improvement. $25,000 has been allocated in 2018-19 for design services and
$175,000 in 2019-20 fiscal year for construction. (Attachment 4)
5.Exploring Other Locations? Are there other locations for Pickleball, or expansion of
new park amenity initiatives, that the Commission would like staff to explore?
6.Helpful Feedback? What type of public input would the Commission find most helpful
in determining new recreational amenities or expansion of programming?
ATTACHMENTS
1. February 23, 2015 PRC Memo_ Pickleball Pilot Program
2. September 2, 2015 PRC Memo _ Pickleball 6-month Update
3. Community Correspondence dated February 10, 2016
4. Five-Year Capital Improvement Program; New Park Amenity Initiatives and Sinsheimer
Park Tennis Court Lighting Budget Requests
G:\ADMIN\Parks & Rec Commission\2016\Staff Reports\Pickleball Update\PRC Staff Report_2016 Pickleball Update.docx
3-10
City of San Luis Obispo, Council Agenda Report, Meeting Date, Item Number
Parks and Recreation Commission
Agenda Report
DATE: June 1, 2016
FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director
Prepared By: Melissa C. Mudgett, Parks and Recreation Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVE THE ADDITION OF MULTI-USE COURT STRIPING FOR
ROLLER DERBY AT THE SANTA ROSA PARK KEN HAMPIAN
HOCKEY RINK
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the addition of multi-use court striping for Roller Derby at the Santa Rosa Park Ken
Hampian Hockey Rink.
DISCUSSION
Background
In 1996 the City constructed the Santa Rosa Park multi-use court (also named the Hampian Hockey Rink
in honor of the former City Manager Ken Hampian) which is currently striped for both Basketball and
Roller Hockey only. Currently this facility is reserved on a regular ongoing basis by various organizations
for Basketball, Roller Hockey and Roller Derby.
Since 2006, Central Coast Roller Derby has utilized this public recreational facility for both practice and
competitive events. The Hampian Roller Hockey Rink provides the Derby with a flat track course that is
certified by the Women's Flat Track Derby Association (WFTDA), the international governing body
which regulates play for flat track roller derby. As the current rink surface is not permanently striped for
Roller Derby, temporary tape rink lines have been added to the surface to accommodate Roller Derby at
this location. The temporary taped lines, although meeting the immediate needs of the Roller Derby
group, is not a preferred method as the tape can negatively impact Roller Hockey players when the tape
adheres to the skate wheels and causes accidents.
Court Resurfacing Project
The court resurfacing project is included as part of the City’s adopted 2015-17 Financial Plan Capital
Improvement program for Parks Major Maintenance and Repairs (Attachment 1). The Santa Rosa
Hockey Court has been identified as the highest priority, due to the higher speeds of play and the
deterioration of the rink edges contributing to player injuries.
City staff in both Parks and Recreation and Public Works, have met with the Hockey Rink user groups to
coordinate the resurfacing project. At present, the project scope includes the restriping for Basketball and
Roller Hockey courts only.
Recommendation for Continued Multi-Use
In effort to remain response to the needs of all of our recreational users, City staff is recommending the
Santa Rosa Hockey Rink court resurfacing project include additional court markings for a Roller Derby
track. The additional track markings do not pose a conflict with current uses and would be applied in a
4-1
UTILITY BOX ART PROGRAM AMENDMENTS Page 2
different color distinguishing the markings from the Basketball and Roller Hockey courts. There is
minimal fiscal impact as a result of the additional Roller Derby track striping. The estimated additional
striping costs can be absorbed within the existing capital project budget for Parks Major Maintenance and
Repairs. Upon the PRC’s approval of the additional multi-use court striping at this location, the Hampian
Roller Hockey Rink would include permanent court markings for Basketball, Roller Hockey and Roller
Derby. (See Attachment 2 for court specification).
City staff, Central Coast Roller Derby, SLO Youth Roller Hockey League and the SLO County YMCA
concur with this recommendation for additional court markings to include Roller Derby. Roller Derby
has been a valued customer of this City facility for the past decade and they continue to work well with
other facilities users, such as the YMCA and Youth Roller Hockey League. Permanent track markings
for Roller Derby would improve the safety at the Hockey Rink by discontinuing the use of temporary
taped lines that can lift and negatively impact play.
Next Steps
Upon the Commission’s approval, Parks and Recreation Staff will continue to coordinate with Public
Works Staff for the Hockey Rink resurfacing project to include multi-use court striping for Roller Derby.
The resurfacing project is tentatively scheduled for the end of June 2016 and will take approximately two
weeks to complete.
ATTACHMENT
1. 2015-17 Financial Plan, Pages 3-221 to 3-228
2. Court Specifications; Basketball, Roller Hockey and Roller Derby
4-2
ATTACHMENT 1
4-3
4-4
4-5
4-6
4-7
4-8
4-9
ATTACHMENT 2
4-10