HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/17/1988, 2B - AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PROCEED ON A REVISED ""PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT""; ALLOCATE $144.700 FOR THIS PROJECT (OVER TWO YEARS); AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RECRUIT A CONTRACT SENIOR PLANNER TO FACILITATE THIS PROJECT."'111111111111$1101►1 city of Safi Luis OBISPO
i COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
FROM: Michael Multari, Community Development Director
�l-
MEETING DATE:
REM NUMBER.
SUBJECT: Authorize staff to proceed on a revised "Parks and Open Space Element ";
allocate $ iaa , 7otfor this project (over two years); authorize staff to
recruit a contract senior planner to facilitate this project.
BACKGROUND
There is a need for a revised Park Element to the General Plan; further, the scope of
such an element should be expanded to include an open space component addressing open
areas for scenic, passive recreation and habitat protection purposes. These ideas are
discussed in more detail in the attached memo from the CAO.
This concept was presented to the Planning Commission and to the Parks and Recreation
Commission, both of which have endorsed it.
There would seem to be some distinct advantages to working on a Parks and Open Space
Element at the same time we work on our Land Use and Circulation Element updates. We
also recommend that any sensitive plan such as this is best done in -house rather than by
a consultant. However, the present Community Development staff and resources are
committed to those projects and to the ongoing responsibilities of project review. We
can not take on another element update in -house without additional contract staff and
funds for supplies and related expenses.
The attached memo outlines the expected costs. The principal expenditure would be in
hiring a contract senior planner for two years to head up the effort on this project and
to integrate it with our other advance planning work. This person must not only be
experienced in parks planning but in other aspects of advance planning, public relations
and project management. Thus, we feel it is necessary to use someone at this level.
The recommended approach has been reviewed with and is supported by the Parks and
Recreation and Public Works Departments.
Alternatives would be to not do a revised element; fund the project but use outside
consultants; postpone the project until after the Land Use Element work is substantially
complete and then use in -house staff with less of an additional general fund outlay.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
The estimated cost is $84.700 in the first year; $60,000 in the second. The attached
memo discusses these outlays in more detail. With this level of funding, a contract
senior planner can be hired and the work done in- house. There may be significant
environmental benefits from having a current Park and Open Space Element with a realistic
implementation plan, including an acquisition program for sensitive and /or vulnerable
areas.
2�
���� � uulll►I�pnN ►�UIU city of San Wla OBISpo
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Open Space
Page 2
CONSEQUENCES OF NOT TAKING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION
The present Parks Element will continue to be used; significant policy and planning gaps
will remain. A revised element could be postponed to the future and still be done
in -house perhaps in one or'two years, with substantially less cost. Some opportunities
for reserving or acquiring desirable areas for open space and /or recreation may be lost.
Coordination with the preparation of the Land Use and Circulation Elements will be
diminished.
SUMMARY RECOMMENDATION
Authorize staff to proceed with preparation of the Element at this time; authorize
$144.700(over two years) for this purpose; authorize recruitment of a contract senior
planner.
Attachments: Memo to Council from CAO
Memo from CD Director to CAO
26'2.
April 22, 1988
�r
city of sAn Luis OBISPO
990 palm StreetiPost Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100
To- John Dunn, CAO
From: Mike Multari, Community Development Director W1
Subject: Staffing for Parks and Open Space Element
I wholeheartedly endorse your recommendation to the City Council that we
undertake a comprehensive update of our Parks Element, including planning for
the preservation and acquisition of open space in and around the town. I
concur that closely coordinating this effort with the updating of the Land Use
Element is the best approach.
Further, I strongly recommend that this work be done in -house to the extent
possible. Experience with outside consultants doing this kind of sensitive
work has not been good: that approach usually results in an inferior product
and sometimes with an unusable one.
As you are aware, we have largely committed our existing staff to the update of
the Land Use and Circulation Elements; our resources in this regard are
adequate but straining. The Parks and Open Space Element can not be undertaken
now without additional temporary staffing.
The development of a this kind of program is going to require someone with more
than just a good technical background in parks planning. We need someone who
is strong in all types of advance planning to effectively coordinate with our
other land use and circulation efforts. Also, the staff person working on this
element will need excellent communication skills and the ability to work well
with a variety of commissions and with the public. The planning is going to
involve several departments (community development, parks, public works,
police, administration and the attorney) and several commissions (parks and
recreation, planning, ARC). Also, as we work on ideas about open space
preservation and acquisition, the person is going to have to deal effectively
with property - owners and the development interests as well as with the county
staff and elected officials.
I recommend that the type of person who can do these things must be at a
relatively high level in the profession, ie: the Senior Planner level in our
job descriptions. We will need to offer a salary in this range, with
benefits. I believe the contract will need to be for at least two years.
In addition to the contract Senior Planner, we expect to need some funds for
support personnel (our existing resources are all committed to the other
planning efforts), supplies, printing, reproduction and map - making,
transportation, ancillary contract services, etc. !
aQ -i
Parks Planner
Page 2
The estimated breakdown is as follows:
Contract Senior Planner. salary with benefits, approx. 553,000 /year
Support Personnel: temporary assistance (usually interns) for mapping, surveys,
graphics, data processing, field studies, etc., 515,000 /year.
Ancillary Contract Services: specialized services such as financial
consulting, park design, photography, etc., 510,000 /year.
Supplies, Operational Costs: supplies, transportation, printing and
reproduction, postage, telephone, etc. 57,000 /year.
It is possible that the need for the additional funds for support personnel
will decrease or be eliminated in the second year as existing departmental
resources are freed up from the circulation and land use element work. Also,
the need for specific contract services, estimated here at $10,000 per year,
may be lower as we detail the work program scope.
Thus, we expect the cost of the program to be about $60,000 to 585,000 /year for
two years. As we develop a more detailed work program, we can refine the costs
estimates further.
If you have any questions, or would like to discuss this further, please call
me.
cc: Toby Ross
Bill Statler
Jim Stockton
Terry Sanville
Allen Hopkins
Lane Wilson
Dave Romero
a8 - Ov
V
E
city or SAn hugs OB1Vo s
990 Palm Street /Post Office Box 8100 • San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 -8100
April 1. 1988
NEMORANDIJI4
To: City Council
From: John Dun
Subject: Nee for and Open Space Element concurrent with addressing
other major issues in the General Plan Revision Process
Conclusion:
1..,.,Wq...nged,.an.. ea4;LnSsd.pwk and open space plan and program
2. It would be ideal to do it at the same time as the General Plan
3. Be need a contract planner to do it.
Discussion:
Shortly after coming to San Luis Obispo. I convened a series of meetings
involving Jim Stockton, Dave Romero. Mike Multari. Toby Ross and myself for the
purpose of taking a closer look at park planning. design, acquisition and use
Issues.
The original reason for convening these meetings was to check my impression of
parks and open space in San Luis Obispo against the perceptions and knowledge
of others.
At that earlier time I had a very favorable impression of the physical city,
and positive impressions of some of our past achievements in the park area such
as Santa Rosa Park. Sinsheimer Park. Meadow Park. Mission Plaza and others. I
also had some less favorable impressions of some aspects of our park and open
space program.
Some of these initial impressions of San Luis Obispo were:
1. Substantial areas of the City could benefit from additional tree
planting
2. There is still a significant opportunity for enlarging and improving
Mission Plaza
3. There may be significant opportunities for creek improvements, possibly
incorporating a pedestrian or recreation trail system
4. Though significant progress has been made in hillside preservation,
additional work may be necessary to protect our hillsides, one of San Luis
Obispo's greatest assets
5. our-parks seem to exist as separate identities, and not a park system;
there may be opportunities for inter - connecting some of the parks with
trails and bicycle routes, or additional facilities
6. The Southern Pacific corridor is potentially a great community asset.
to be used, as has been done in other communities, with the creation of
bicycle and pedestrian trails; also Southern Pacific land represents a
significant enlargement and improvement opportunity for Sinsheimer Park.
7. The City owns land which could be developed into park sites
S. The City has several parks that need further development or improvement
because of age and use
9. There are several vacant parcels or underdevelopment situations within
the community which could be opportunities during the next few years; after
that. these opportunities will become almost prohibitive, economically and
politically, to achieve
10. We might look at our policies in regard to requests and requirements
of developers in the processing of subdivisions. recognizing opportunities
for dedication and easements for parks, open space, creekways, and paths.
11. The City has relied upon the hard work of the Parks and Recreation
Commission and community organizations and volunteers for park planning and
improvements; while this concerned volunteer work is a community asset, it
probably needs to be augmented by more community planning and by making
more City funds available for park acquisition, design and improvement
12. The City, from one perspective, seems to concentrate more on its
"hardscape" improvements (streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, bridges,
utility lines, etc.) than "softscape" (parks and open space); while no one
would argue to reduce the money for available streets and utilities, it
could be argued that the City should increase money available for parks and
open space
13. More generally, in the competition for attention and funds, the
development and growth and water and traffic improvement issues have tended
to dominate for the past several years; it may be timely to increase our
time and attention to other areas within the community, notably the
development of a long -term community plan which addresses maximizing our
parks. recreation and open space opportunities.
Several times during the course of the meetings we posed these questions in
various ways:
what is our collective vision for the future of the City, and the
portion of that vision dealing with parks and open space
opportunities?
aa- &
What is our image of the physical City and the role of parks and
open space in creating and improving that image?
We agreed that the present parks and recreation element, under review by the
Parks and Recreation Commission, is a serviceable document, particularly as it
will be added'to and refined. We also expressed the belief that the revision
effort could be hamstrung by a conservative conception of financial realities,
and that some ideas which should see the light of day and be subject to public
discussion might be terminated at an early stage due to the perceived cost or
complexity of implementation. We asked how the revised Park and Recreation
Element could later be made consistent with and integrated with the other major
components of the General Plan Revision Process, notably the Growth and
Annexation, Land Use, Downtown and Circulation Elements. We finally saw that
we were discussing two quite different alternatives, one a potential
incremental upgrading of the Park and Recreation Element which was not being
related to the General Plan Revision Process or, doing the job right, by
forging an early and complete integration of the Parks and Open Space Element
with the other elements of the General Plan Revision Process.
Subsequently. in late February the Planning Commission held a study session
with the Parks and Recreation Element $ubcommittee of the Parks and Recreation
Commission, and City staff (Mike Multarl, Jim Stockton and myself). After a
thorough discussion of the "separate" and the "integrated" approaches, both
bodies became quite excited about the possibility of combining the two efforts
Into a single integrated effort. A contract planner should be hired for a
two -year period in order to do this in the time frame of the General Plan
Revision Process.
To give a proper emphasis to park and open space planning and implementation
over the longer term, there is a "structural" matter which may have to be
examined in the future. The Recreation Director, working with the Parks and
Recreation commission, has been given certain park planning and park design
issues over the years, but the responsibility for overall parks and open space
planning and achievement has been diffused between the three departments:
Recreation, Public Works, Community Development. I am not proposing a
particular course of action for the shorter term; after the Park and Open Space
Element is prepared, and an implementation plan developed, it would be timely
to look at providing an improved organizational focus to improve coordination
and achievement in this area.
In summary, the City over the years has made some major achievements in park
planning and development. The present time, however, presents a unique
opportunity to look closer and to integrate this part of our planning with
other interrelated planning efforts.
Attached are some "thought papers" submitted by members of our staff planning
group.
a6.7
Fe wanted is to give you the opportunity to further think about these ideas,
and.to discuss them and to ask questions of any of us (J:a Stockton. Dave
Romero, Mike Multari, Toby Ross or myself): after two or tore weeks we will
place this matter of the contract planner on the consent agenda. At that time
!Bike will give'a more detailed description and anticipated duties and
responsibilities and assigned work tasks of the limited -term contract employee,
together with further explanation why this additional task'cannot be
tomfortably added to the present workload without having a negative impact on
the desired time schedule.
.;D: mp
Attachments
as -9