Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-01-2017 PRC Item 3, Schmidt From: Advisory Bodies From: Richard Schmidt [ Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 9:19 AM To: Advisory Bodies <advisorybodies@slocity.org>; Stanwyck, Shelly <sstanwyck@slocity.org> Subject: Don't Raid North Broad Park Fund REC:EI MAR 01 2011 Kevin and Shelley, would you both please forward the attached message to Park and Rec commissioners ASAP. Thank you. Richard Schmidt March 1, 2017 Dear Park and Recreation Commissioners, Regarding raiding the North Broad Park Acquisition Fund for a general plan update, you MUST NOT DO THIS! It would be unnecessary and improper, given the city has plenty of update funds if this project is done as it should be — in house, with local input and control, rather than hiring a fancy out of town consultant who's non-responsive to locals and interested only in the fees to be earned. There is no need to raid a fund set aside for a totally unrelated purpose. Also, it would a breach of faith on the part of your commission to raid these funds, given the long, sad history of doing exactly that and of neglecting a long -identified unmet park need for the neighborhood for which the funds have been set aside. Since it seems you are unfamiliar with the background to this matter, I append two recent communications (last spring) to the City Council which explain it quite clearly. Please do not raid the park fund for the general plan update. Thank you. Richard Schmidt Re: Agenda Item 22 Dear Council Members, Attached is a report from the informally -established residents' association that is seeking to get the city to fulfill a General Plan promise of more than 40 years — the acquisition of a neighborhood park site for the "North Broad" area of town. The General Plan recognizes this as the ONLY part of the older city lacking and needing a neighborhood park, and for many years has included ending this "unmet need" in its list of civic General Plan goals. The city says it's interested in stabilizing older neighborhoods, and a neighborhood park would be a way to help stabilize our threatened neighborhood. We are asking that an adequate portion of the $5.8 million in unanticipated funds be allocated to a reserve account so the city has funds at hand so it can pounce on any of the few remaining sites when they are available. Absent such ready access to funds, this park will NEVER happen — past opportunities have been lost for exactly the reason that funds weren't readily available. Our "association" consists of a core group of about a dozen working stiffs, and has the support of uncounted others. At a recent impromptu neighborhood sidewalk gathering, where a park was part of the subject interest, there were more than 50 residents. This park would serve thousands of your constituents, increasing their quality of life, and would help strengthen the social fabric of this threatened older part of town. It's exactly the sort of "good planning" project a Good City should promote and get behind. We request you do just that at Tuesday's council meeting. On behalf of the "steering association," I submit our "Committee Report" (our effort at providing the missing "staff report" on this subject) to you for your consideration. Richard Schmidt North Broad Neighborhood Park Acquisition Funding Request June 10, 2016 To City Council From Informal Citizens Committee for a North Broad Neighborhood Park Reason for this Request. We are requesting allocation of a portion of the currently available fund for a "reserve fund" for a "North Broad" neighborhood park so the city has funds available quickly when an opportunity arises to acquire a site for the neighborhood park. In the past, the city has lost opportunities because its budget process is too slow to allow it to compete in the real estate market. Time demands of today's market are even speedier than in past markets. Introduction. For decades the city has noted a park deficiency in the "North Broad" neighborhood, whose boundaries extend approximately from Stenner Creek to San Luis Mountain between Highway 101 and Foothill Blvd. • This project has been on the city's "to do" list for more than 40 years. It is called for in the General Plan. • This is unfinished business that needs to be finished. • Several ill-fated efforts have been made to obtain such a park. • Now, some 40+ years after efforts began, the neighborhood is virtually entirely built out, and only a few potential opportunities remain. If the city does not move now to assure funding, while funds are available to set up a park reserve account, it is likely there will never be a neighborhood park in the North -of -101 -to -Foothill area. Establishing a park in a built-up neighborhood presents opportunities, issues and problems different from establishing a park in an annexation area. Unlike in newly developed areas, in older areas potential sites are limited. Opportunities for acquisition may arise quickly, and if not acted upon with speed, the potential park site maygo for other uses before the city can budget funds. Therefore, it is important to have funds in reserve for this purpose, so the city can move quickly when the opportunity presents itself. Parks need to be understood as more than simply recreational facilities. In a transitional neighborhood such as "North Broad," they can serve as catalysts for strengthening a neighborhood. "North Broad" is currently threatened by speculator pressure to become a high density transient district, but is also buoyed by the desire of families to settle in an attractive and convenient older in -town location. A park as catalyst can stabilize a troubled neighborhood like "North Broad," making it more stable, more all -age friendly, more family -friendly. An example of "park as catalyst' can be seen in "Anholm Park," not really a park, but a tiny neighborhood playground, underutilized for many years, that has lately become a magnet attracting young families to the Lincoln Street sub -area of the larger neighborhood. "North Broad" badly needs a larger neighborhood park to provide "social cement' for an age -diverse area populated by both children and adults of all ages. The Need Is Stated In General Plan. Dealing with the lack of a park for "North Broad" has been a part of city park planning since at least the 1970s. In the current Park and Recreation Element of the General Plan (2001), for example, this need is made explicit in several places and several ways. The list of "unmet needs" denotes the "North Broad" neighborhood as having the only unmet need for a neighborhood park in the entire city. In the list below, copied directly from the P&R Element of the General Plan, "North Broad" park is item 6: 3.12. Unmet Needs The major unmet needs for parks and recreation facilities are: 1. Athletic fields 2. Multi -use community center and therapy pool 3. Mini -parks - Purple Sage Lane, Eto Street 4. Multi -use trails for recreational use and connect to facilities S. Lighted tennis courts 6. Neighborhood parks: In Broad Street area near Highway 101 and Foothill Blvd. 7. Upgrading and replacement of playground equipment 8. Specialty facilities such as disc golf, dog parks, BMX parks 9. Mini -parks in underserved areas where neighborhood parks do not adequately meet needs -Marsh & Santa Rosa Streets, Terrace Hill, Royal Way 10. Bocce ball facility Note that most of these "unmet needs" of 2001 have been met. The city even spent $2 million to build a new skateboard park to replace an existing skateboard park, and that item was not even on the "unmet needs" list. The "North Broad" park is one of the exceptions to the city's following this list of "unmet needs." The 2001 Park and Recreation Element also includes unmet need funding proposals. Here, again directly from the General Plan element, is that list: APPENDIX B Park Acquisition and Implementation Priority, 5-10 Years Lighted Tennis Courts Laguna Lake Park Improvements Sinsheimer Park Improvements Special Use Facilities Playground Equipment Upgrades Orcutt Area Neighborhood Park Neighborhood and Mini Parks Margarita Area Neighborhood Park Community Garden Improvements Open Space Trail Construction Athletic Field Improvements Broad Street Neighborhood Park $600,000 $400,000 $800,000 $400,000 ._. .....................- $1,000,000 Park -in -lieu project — — $400,000 Park -in -lieu project $20,000 $90,000 $500,000 Note that these were expenditures to be undertaken within a 5 to 10 year window. Most of these items have been dealt with. It has been 15 years, however, and still no movement on a "North Broad" park. It should also be noted that real estate today is much more costly, so the $500,000 acquisition estimate of 2001 is much too little in 2016's land market. History of Efforts/Opportunities to Obtain a "North Broad" Park. Our history only goes back to the early 1970s. 1. At that time, the first missed opportunity was the Forden farm, at the corner of Broad and Serrano, extending uphill to what is now Palomar. It came on the market. About 8 acres, with beautiful trees, a farmhouse and farm buildings including a great barn that could have been fixed up for community use, it would have made a wonderful park. But the city dallied because funds were -not at the ready, and a developer purchased it and subdivided the land. 2. In the later 1970s, Planning Director Rob Strong proposed, as part of a General Plan revision, that a park be carved out of already -developed lots in the 100 block of Broad. This proposal involved purchasing and demolishing the Brazil House at 148 Broad to create a parking lot, and condemning the back yards of several residences to create a center -of -block park. None of these properties were on the market — acquisition would have been via eminent domain. The Council took one look at the idea of condemning constituents' homes, and shelved the idea. (To illustrate how incongruous the idea was with various civic goals, the Brazil House is now on the city's master list of historic properties.) 3. For decades a large parcel between Foothill and Ramona next to the neighborhood shopping center sat vacant. One development proposal after another came and went. Neighbors repeatedly asked the city to purchase the tract as a park. Again, the city dallied, claiming lack of access to funds. After years of city inaction, the Mormon Church purchased the property and built on it. 4. Today, there are only two obvious potential park parcels remaining within the neighborhood, and at the moment, neither is for sale. We believe, however, that could change quickly and without notice, and the city would then have a narrow time window in which to act. That means funds would need to be at the ready — and that's the crux of this request for setting aside a reserve account for this purpose. In today's real estate market, the city simply would not have time to go through a budget cycle to acquire either of these sites. Funding Mechanisms. On this issue, we've found considerable confusion among both staff and council members we've spoken to. In annexation areas, park acquisition is generally carried out by agreement with the developer. That is the situation the city has dealt with in the recent past. For unmet needs in an older built -out part of town ("North Broad" was mainly subdivided in the 1920s and 1930s), developer exactions do not work. Meeting these unmet needs is therefore largely a function of using the city's general funds such as those being allocated by the Council tonight. This is explicit in the Park Element's program policies: Program 6.4.1 Schedule "unmet needs" projects for construction through the normal capital improvement proceeds, as funding exists. Clearly, as of this Council session and deliberation, funding exists in the form of the unanticipated $5.8 million in city revenues Council members are being asked to divvy up. Allocating a portion of those for the capital investment in a "North Broad" park site seems both reasonable and appropriate. Funding Request. This request has several aspects. 1. We request the funds be put into a reserve account earmarked for a "North Broad" park's site acquisition. The reason for a reserve is twofold: first, obviously the funds cannot be spent tonight on acquisition absent availability of a specific site; but second, and more importantly, they need to be available on short notice when one of the sites does become available so the city can move, with the speed required in the current real estate market. Without funds on reserve, we'll find ourselves where we've been in the past, with the city taking months to years to get in motion, and in the meanwhile the property being sold to others. IT IS ESSENTIAL FUNDS IN AN ADEQUATE AMOUNT BE AVAILABLE QUICKLY WHEN NEEDED. 2. The advantage of a reserve account is the money isn't actually spent until it's needed. In the meanwhile, it becomes part of the city's investment portfolio. Should the project ultimately fall through, the money is still available for other municipal purposes. 3. Our research of the current real estate market suggests a neighborhood park site could cost close to $3 million, perhaps a bit less. While that sounds like a lot of money, the city today finds itself with unanticipated funds plenty large enough to fund a reserve account of that size. In doing so, the Council would be providing residents with something of perpetual value rather than something internal to the city's management, of temporary value, from which none of them would actually benefit. We believe this is precisely the sort of public -benefit capital investment a Good City undertakes. 4. If the council is uncomfortable with an open ended "perpetual" reserve account, it might consider a "sunset" period equal to that of Measure G, 8 years. If the funds are not expended in that time, a "sunset" would allow the council to reassess at that time whether the funds should continue to be set aside for this park, or whether they are better reallocated, hopefully to some other long -benefit resident -serving project. 5. Our explicit request: That the Council set aside $2.8 million of the $5.8 million currently available in a ready reserve account earmarked for site acquisition for a "North Broad" neighborhood park. The "North Broad" neighborhood has been waiting for more than 40 years for a promised park. It's time to get this long-delayed process started in earnest.