Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - PR - 2017.06.15City of Burlingame BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME BURLINGAME, CA 94010 F Meeting Agenda - Final Parks & Recreation Commission Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:00 PM Burlingame Recreation Center 850 Burlingame Avenue 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes a. May 25, 2017 Minutes Attachments: Minutes 3. Correspondence 4. Public Comments Members of the public may speak about any item not on the agenda. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State and local agency open meeting law) prohibits the Commission from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are asked to fill out a `request to speak' card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff, although provision of a name, address or other identifying information is optional. The Chairperson may limit speakers to three minutes each. 5. Old Business a. Skyline Dog Park Update Attachments: Staff Report Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C 6. New Business a. Recap from the City/BSD 2-2-2 Survey Attachments: Staff Report Exhibit A b. Review of Maintenance Practices in Mills Canyon Attachments: Staff report City of Burlingame Page 1 Printed on 6/9/2017 Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting Agenda - Final June 15, 2017 7. Staff and Commissioner Reports 8. Future Agenda Items 9. Adjournment Next Meeting: July 20, 2017 NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities should contact the Parks & Recreation Department at (650) 558-7323 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the agenda packet is available for review at the Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue, during normal office hours. The agendas and minutes are also available on the City's website: www.burlingame.org. City of Burlingame Page 2 Printed on 6/9/2017 CITY O O 9 gvorsar PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION DRAFT Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting on Thursday, May 25, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER The duly noticed regular meeting of the Burlingame Parks & Recreation Commission was called to order by Chair Baum at 7:03 pm at the Burlingame Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Ave, Burlingame. 2. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Baum, Dito, Milne, Schissler and Lewis COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Palacio and Malekos-Smith STAFF PRESENT: Parks & Recreation Director Glomstad, Supervisor Barry & Recording Secretary Helley OTHERS PRESENT: Derek McKee, Verde Designs; Jordan Gardner & Nick Swinmurn, Burlingame Dragons; Randy Schwartz & Dean Peterson, Burlingame Parks & Recreation Foundation APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Dito made a motion to approve the April 20, 2017 minutes. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Milne and was approved. 4-1-2. (Lewis abstained; Palacio & Malekos-Smith absent) 3. CORRESPONDENCE None 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS None 5. OLD BUSINESS None 6. NEW BUSINESS a. Youth Advisory Committee Wrap Up Recreation Coordinator Rath introduced members of the Committee. Members acquire between 75 -100 volunteer hours throughout the school year. The group recently attended the CPRS District IV Awards Dinner at which YAC member 8th grader Kya Standard Stockton received a Volunteer Recognition Award and BHS senior Emily Williams received a scholarship on behalf the Youth, Teen and 1 Parks & Recreation Commission Draft Minutes May 25, 2017 Recreation Services Committee. The group hosted a 55+ Senior Valentine's Day Dance, the Princess Dress Collection Project, a "May the 4th Be with You" Parents Night Out and the First Annual Royal Dance. The group also assisted with the City of San Mateo's Eggstravaganza Event in April and assisted with the Burlingame Streets Alive event in May. The group thanked the Commission for their constant support of their various activities. b. Presentation by Burlingame Parks & Recreation Foundation Randy Schwartz, President of the Burlingame Parks & Recreation Foundation, presented recent activities of the Foundation. The main goals of the volunteer 5016 Foundation is to fund the Recreation Scholarship program, to help with park improvements and to create new recreation programs. Funding sources are from providing beverages and snacks at Burlingame events: Music in the Park, Movies in the Park, the Fall Festival on Howard Avenue and the Holiday Tree Lighting event. Last year, the Foundation received a $1,000 grant from the San Francisco Credit Union for the Scholarship Fund. The group also conducted a Bocce Ball Tournament to raise funds for the Scholarship program, donated agility equipment for the dog park at Bayside Park and donated money to BYBA for the renovation of the Bayside Fields dugouts. In the upcoming year, the group will host a naturalist kayaking trip in Monterey, a computer security class and a home painting tips class. Additionally, they are working on the mapping & publication of the trails in Mills Canyon, participating with the Annual Bay Front Clean Up and will be hosting Visits from Santa. The group has started a "Dog Blog" where photos of your dog can be posted in the hopes of drawing interest to the website. The Foundation will also be assisting with the rebuilding of Paloma Park. The goal is to raise $10,000 for a synthetic grass section of the park with "donor bricks". Chair Baum appointed Commissioner Milne as the liaison to the Foundation. c. Burlingame Dragon's Proposal Jordan Gardner representing the Burlingame Dragon's presented information for the Commission to consider regarding the proposal to add bleachers at Murray Field which would necessitate the reduction of the number of field lines on the proposed synthetic turf field. The Dragon's had been exploring options to increase their attendance and facilitate their move to the United Soccer League. With the proposed installation of synthetic turf at Murray Field, it opened a partnership opportunity between the City and the Dragons. As part of the Murray project, they propose to install bleacher seating for 5,260, including a press box, scoreboard and ticket booth. The bleachers would be permanent and for use by other field users. The new LED field lighting would remain the same. While the lines that were approved by Commission work for non-professional user organizations, they are excessive for professional team play. The Dragons proposal includes permanent lining for only one full soccer field. The other sized lining would need to be temporary and removed as needed for Dragons' usage. The benefits to removable lines include the ability to change field sizes as requirements change or enrollment varies for the youth organizations and it allows for flexibility for other special events or other 2 Parks & Recreation Commission Draft Minutes May 25, 2017 sports. The downside to removable lines is the increase in staff time to remove and/or line the fields and the cost to purchase the materials needed. The Dragons' season would run from March through October and would have some overlapping use with the current field users. The majority of home games (18-22) would take place on Friday, Saturday or Sundays evenings after 6pm. Currently, most programming on the weekends ends by 8pm. If the Dragons used the field for practice it would be during the daytime hours when the fields are not being used by validated field user organizations. During the summer months, when there are City programs on the field during the day, the Dragons would move their practices off -site. For the couple of times a year that weekday evening times were needed by the Dragons, they would coordinate with the field users and the City field scheduler to ensure plenty of notice. The existing Murray parking lot cannot accommodate the parking requirements for Dragons' game days. The Dragons has tentatively secured 1,200+ parking spaces within 3/a mile radius of Murray Field. They also plan to run shuttles from off -site locations and from downtown Burlingame to encourage attendees to take public transit to reduce congestion. To increase the community benefit, the Dragons have offered to run free summer camps and clinics for the City of Burlingame residents. They have also committed to allotting tickets for underprivileged residents for each home game. If approved by the City Council, the additions would be bid as part of the City project with all items added by the Dragons paid for by the Dragons. After Commission discussion, including concerns about sufficient restrooms, the impact of relining the field, security issues and the development of a shared maintenance agreement the following motion was made. Motion by Milne (seconded by Schissler): Commission moved to recommend the proposal by the Burlingame Dragon's be presented to the City Council. MOTION PASSED 5-2 (Palacio & Malekos-Smith absent) d. User Group Validation — Burlingame Soccer Club Supervisor Barry stated that in December the Ad Hoc Field Use Policy Committee met to revise the current field use policy. The Committee gathered input from validated user groups and presented the final recommendations to the Parks and Recreation Commission in January. The Commission approved the revisions to the policy at the January 19, 2017 Commission meeting. Per the Field Use Policy, the Parks & Recreation Commission validates User Organizations before they can request field space for the seasonal sports leagues and tournaments. Staff has reviewed the Burlingame Soccer Club's Youth Field User Organization Validation Application (Exhibit A) and they do not meet the requirements to become a Validated User Organization. To be approved as a Tier 2 Validated User Organization, BSC must meet the following criteria: 3 Parks & Recreation Commission Draft Minutes May 25, 2017 1. A registered 501©3 non-profit, youth organization located in the City of Burlingame. 2. Comprised of a minimum of 51 % Burlingame residents ("emerging" or "underserved" sports can petition the Commission to be included in the allocation process). 3. Offer teams for a minimum of three (3) age groups and open to all residents. 4. Complete a Youth Field User Organization Validation Application and get approval from the Parks and Recreation Commission every year. 5. Has a governing board with at least 75% residents. 6. Operate as a Burlingame youth organization for a least five (5) consecutive years. 7. Enrollment cannot exceed 500 participants. According to the application submitted by BSC the current enrollment is 575 athletes which does not meet criteria #7 on the list above. If the BSC is not approved as validated organizations they have the opportunity to rent fields after the Validated User Organizations receive their allocated amount of field time. After Commission discussion, the following motion was made. Motion by Schissler (seconded by Dito): Commission moved to deny the validation of the Burlingame Soccer Club. MOTION PASSED 5-2 (Palacio & Malekos-Smith absent) 7. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER REPORTS a. Parks & Recreation Department Reports Director Glomstad reported that Top Golf is currently in negotiation with the City. The Council study session with the School District is Wednesday, May 31. The City and the District are discussing the agreement for the replacement of the synthetic field, the percentage of income share for afterschool enrichment and afterschool sports, and how the field fees are shared. Staff is hopeful to have a new agreement with the District in the next couple of weeks for fall program planning. b. Commissioners Reports None 8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 pm. The next meeting of the Parks & Recreation Commission is scheduled to be held on Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. at the Burlingame Recreation Center. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Joleen Helley Recording Secretary 4 Parks & Recreation Commission Draft Minutes May 25, 2017 6URLINGAME STAFF REPORT To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: June 15, 2017 From: Nicole Acquisti, Recreation Supervisor Subject Proposed Skyline Off -Leash Area Traffic and Parking Update RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Parks and Recreation Commission review information provided by the Community Development Department (CCD) staff with regards to parking, traffic and safety and provide recommendations for next steps. BACKGROUND On November 17, 2016, Recreation Supervisor Nicole Acquisti, presented feedback from the Skyline parcel community meeting held in October 2016. The three main concerns raised at the meeting or in correspondence were: 1. Parking a. Only one ADA spot was displayed on the proposal per the ADA requirements. 2. Traffic a. Increased traffic along Skyline Blvd. 3. Safety a. Safe access to off -leash area from street parking spaces. The Parks and Recreation Commission directed staff to contact the CDD to address the three concerns. DISCUSSION In January 2017, Supervisor Acquisti met with CCD staff to discuss traffic and parking concerns regarding the proposed Skyline off -leash area. Through an ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) report, CCD staff worked on generating information needed to determine the required parking and, in turn, how it would affect traffic specifically during the peak hours between 7-9 AM or 4-6 PM. The ITE Parking generation did not have a specific item for "dog park", so CCD staff looked at other sources including exclusive dog park locations and other studies in the Bay Area. 1 Proposed Skyline Off -Leash Area Traffic and Parking Update June 15, 2017 Staff met throughout February and March to determine possible additional parking locations, as well as entry and exit points, for minimal impact to the current traffic and residents. It was determined that since there is a slight slope up from the edge of paving at the proposed parking location, the best option was to put in parallel parking spaces at the most level part of the road shoulder adjacent to the site. The first draft of the additional parking spaces included the required 8" wide parallel spot. City staff met to go over the updated plans. After review and discussion, CCD staff required an 1 V-0" wide lane with a raised curb for the entry and exit point to increase off -leash visitor safety when entering and exiting vehicles from the street spaces. The landscape architect updated the plans to reflect the changes and the cost estimate (Exhibits A, B, and C). Based on the size of the proposed off -leash area, the daily traffic on Skyline Blvd, and the current lane space, CCD determined that a minimum of four parking spaces would be required. Details include: 1. One van accessible (ADA) stall and related back-up space and general layout (presented 10/6/016) 2. Three additional standard stalls a. Eleven feet wide and parallel with Skyline Blvd 3. Stalls separated by 5 foot wide bike lane from the south -bound travel lane In May 2017, the plans were reviewed again by CCD staff and approved the updated parking and lane additions. Fiscal Impact The initial cost estimate of this project was $241,210 (Exhibit D). With the additional parking and traffic safety measures, the added expense is $34,925. The new estimated cost to construct the off -leash area on Skyline is $276,135. The project is currently an unfunded capital improvement project. EXHIBITS A. Site Plan, June 15, 2017 B. Enlarged Plan, June 15, 2017 C. Updated Project Costs June 15, 2017 D. Projected Cost Estimate October 6, 2016 2 EXISTING TREE & SHRUB CANOPY Ile 42°26'41# E�� 75,01' a CIE, s 9 (q eD27,jje5.� V v ,moo 41 c; :t'n4 6' HIGH PERIMETER CHAIN -LINK FENCE 1 (TYf'!C;AQ . 4 MID -LEVEL OVERLOOK WITH. BENCHES 7ry�� �fA LEY G'IT TE _ A, 18, w� DESIGN OBJECTIVES • Sustainable approach: To the extent possible, the site will remain in its natural state with occasional landscape maintenance and a reliance on the good will of the park users to keep the park in an attractive condition. This approach will create a unique setting that will blend with the neighborhood and its beautiful surroundings. • Accessibility: While the park will maintain its natural state and rolling topography, accessibility is a top priority and is addressed with accessible parking, an unloading area and pedestrian gate access at the entry. • Pet freedom and safety: The site will be an off -leash park surrounded with a 6-foot high perimeter fence, a double -entry gate system and a watering station, all intended to provide for the comfort and safety of the pets and their owners/ visitors. o, HIGH-LEVEL OVERLOOK WITH BENCHES A _ f APPROXIMATE BRlFL1h4E _ � / (TYPICAL) A x f -- �J 30 w e'" ! `� �} ^Qi`'. '`,� x^ �'�-- ?�cC S � C.`4'1 fA r�k �^�`� j ^ 'a"" . "° '_°'^-•""'°,. co'�<4�� OPEN GRASS AREAS Ia0 0 . 1 <n ny� s �-,. � y; Xti /• C�.,`N� (v � .. r Fah •, � � �4 4J . X�� j fell �� % q�`• ,� mar'` r�`L „'?�" hvr �,�4, . .icy'" ,\� � f ,�t�''°� .���,,`Q�' � .,,,"-•-.4- , 4� � ��;�q• � O p # �A r., ,i�l=T x x by.,,�' � J >•''f rL (��e x'S! ,�A Fy�4` ' M �y0 �;;�/� xl dl ? C7I) [ iz rD> e �D�C �' / '„'1^• r ,ybJ c'`�4 - _ "_ mil), h. (U -,v., l,r -- y 's, a ACCESSIBLE PARKING �,w -- • • �,�7 `� • \+ 'w boo` \_—APPROXIMATE � 4 tx te. ♦ {':? ^•-,,,,'. (L �' ':... P Li `Y � \ i• � "a.t �,i �� Q 4 fV' � �3'liPiINE Q 0 4Ja` .. a� 1 M �'� ' Q '�'YPIC%il.. q •r"^-"--w......_� '`�;Q .,,.. Fh r�._...�k�. , rf2��'•-2-� � "".".�---'"".� �� ' j ti`�• '� �t ��,v X--••tiC��4� �4��,`i1 A ���v.y®.._"sue _ ._._ 4T.,� t31.a3 7''s �p'tiCz SEE ENLARGED PLAN r _�'� =�� U . `� ��� �G OF CORE AREA � � i. _ �Y: '. o,---..._„-.... 'l '� �~�-•...._.�ti q; tv - �`-.w...- r - .� .a.q.w r y ,g c. ._._-_-.-''e" 727.3QTG: 923.70iNV x• t� °rye ti _w4 Q i� _ - s - y F3�b• --- - ... �0O -`Y p_ �•�� ... _ T_ - 1 F'.4 �? IT?_ n�i C� 12�.98TG rp -"_`" •-• �� ti 3. r�� . 6 _ CEs— 1 ..48EN J 24 ,N M} JET tS° �a 121.33TG 122.31I�V 1t3"1N) c> - `r _ _n�? ��4 A.C. FAV 117.93?hSV ��i'j 11d 122.181 I`d 1 S„ Q 3i C 4.23TaI or six a �' �•.•. -- � aX� , �a 2�.� _ _— h 1 t 11I.531N )OUT) 4 78.50fAi!/(I 5") PAv1 A,C. PAVE ,° S K Y L I N E. B. O U L E V A R Y D 122.�1# S,S4"W9PARK El,+TR 142.03i?IM 94. f2ITV SS SS —N c A 7A_ _� ,__ NEW LANDSCAPE SORE Nt1�fG 2" �" — ALONG $KYL1NE` BLOULEVARD , -• 7E I ORARY BEKCHV.AR'! PEDESTRIAN ACCESS GAT WITH DOUBLE GATES FOR DOUBLE -ENTRY GATE SYS M MAINTENANCE ACCESS 5Vr et4 L-A�.6 69 460-�cA PAS F11 ` / r 7 . DOG PARK SITE PLAN 0 15 30 60 120, North JOHN CAHALAN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 15559 Union Avenue Suite 206 - Las Gatos CA 95032 T 4C8-358-5122 • F 408.358.5M fA Reg. No. 2894 p�R�t ►J L� S�Va y . 2 STAu-t SKYLINE BOULEVARD DOG. PARK, BURLINGAME, CA j,- o f 2- October 6, 2016 Prepared for: Parks & Recreation Department City of Burlingame, California ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN 16p, x (E) C.L.FENCE x CONCRETE CURB WALLS --- 89.00 \ 1 2:1 SLOPE to 89.34 91 0 I [ 8' 1 6" a V 2%MA%. SLOP 88.90 6' 89.60 86 Q *- P 89.30 JH SECTION VIEW - THIS SHEET c0� ADA DRINKING FOUNTAIN WITH DRAIN �o 0 PG&E EASEMENT - 00, (N) SERVICE GAT S 95.00 96.00 95.50 89.80 90 21 ELE"NCLOSURE 19- ' _ES -SIGN �P11-4� x 9s ` N cl REMOVE (E) FENCE ALONG SKYLINE BLVD. -`f_:; AT.ED ENTRY _ r- EDGE OF PAVEME PLAN at. CORE AREA North Scale: 1/8" 84.+ / (E) Io w Ic� f>^vr=-7v staw,Qz- i0A.0-lejnj5 SEI SKYLINE BOULEVARD DOG PARK ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS 6/9/2017 Prepared by: John Cahalan, Landscape Architect Item/Description Quantity Unit Cost Item Total Subtotal a. Mobilization/traffic control - 5% allow $12,500 b. Remove fence & gates and debris allow $7,500 C. Clearing, grubbing & off -haul 5,600 sf $0.60 $3,360 d. Excavation & grading (balance) 450 cy $35 $15,750 e. Concrete curb walls 275 If $120 $33,000 f. Concrete paving 50 sf $10 $500 g. Concrete valley gutter 175 sf $25 $4,375 h. Drain inlet, pipe and connection or daylight allow $5,000 i. Asphalt paving (4"/6") 1,450 sf $8 $11,600 j. Chain -link fence, 4'-6" high 150 If $45 $6,750 k. Chain -link gates, 4'-6" high allow $4,000 I. Parking/bike lane striping allow $10,000 M. Signage allow $2,000 n. Chain -link perimeter fence - 6'-0" high 1,080 If $60 $64,800 o. Chain -link gates, 6'-0" high allow $4,000 P. Water meter and connections allow $12,000 q. Drinking fountain and connections 1 ea allow $8,000 r. Benches 4 ea $2,000 $8,000 S. Soil prep., irrigation and planting 3,800 sf $10 $38,000 Subtotal $251,135 Contingency, 10% $25,000 Total estimated construction costs: $276,135 SKYLINE BOULEVARD DOG PARK ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS 10/6/2016 Prepared by: John Cahalan, Landscape Architect Item/Description Quantity Unit Cost Item Total Subtotal a. Mobilization/traffic control - 5% allow $10,000 b. Remove fence & gates and debris allow $7,500 C. Clearing, grubbing & off -haul 5,600 sf $0.60 $3,360 d. Excavation & grading (balance) 450 cy $30 $13,500 e. Concrete curb walls 215 If $120 $25,800 f. Concrete paving 50 sf $10 $500 g. Asphalt paving (4"/6") 1,250 sf $8 $10,000 h. Chain -link fence, 4'-6" high 150 If $45 $6,750 i. Chain -link gates, 4'-6" high allow $4,000 j. Parking striping allow $1,000 k. Signage allow $2,000 I. Chain -link perimeter fence - 6'-0" high 1,080 If $60 $64,800 M. Chain -link gates, 6'-0" high allow $4,000 n. Water meter and connections allow $12,000 o. Drinking fountain and connections 1 ea allow $8,000 P. Benches 4 ea $2,000 $8,000 q. Soil prep., irrigation and planting 3,800 sf $10 $38,000 Subtotal $219,210 Contingency, 10% $22,000 Total estimated construction costs: $241,210 BURLINGAME STAFF REPORT To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: June 15, 2017 From: Tim Barry, Parks and Recreation Supervisor Subject: City/Burlingame School District 2-2-2 Survey Summary RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Commission review the summary of the 2016-2017 City/Burlingame School District 2-2-2 enrichment and sports survey. BACKGROUND As part of the joint use agreement between the City of Burlingame and the Burlingame School District the 2-2-2 Committee is required to conduct a survey every two years to evaluate the after school enrichment and sports programs offered on district sites. The 2-2-2 Committee is comprised of two District employees, Gaby Hellier (CBO) and Marisol Visalli (PE Teacher at BIS) two City employees, Tim Barry (Recreation Supervisor) and Nicole Acquisti (Recreation Supervisor) and two community members, Gerami Seitzman and Marisa Wachorst. The survey was created in January and sent out in February through the weekly electronic bulletin to all schools. The Committee reviewed the survey results in April and presentations will be made to the Burlingame School District Board and the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Commission this month. The attached power point summarizes the survey results. FISCAL IMPACT None EXHIBITS A. Power Point Survey 1 Exhibit A BURLINGAME PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT 2016-2017 SURVEY RESULTS JUNE 15T"1 2017 1.0 SUMMARY OF PROCESS • THE CITY OF BURLINGAME AND THE BURLINGAME SCHOOL DISTRICT SENDS OUT A SURVEY EVERY TWO YEARS TO EVALUATE THE AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT AND SPORTS PROGRAMS OFFERED AT DISTRICT SITES. • THE SURVEY IS CREATED BY THE 2-2-2 COMMITTEE WHICH IS COMPRISED OF TWO SCHOOL DISTRICT EMPLOYEES, TWO CITY EMPLOYEES AND TWO COMMUNITY MEMBERS. • 2-2-2 COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP • GABY HELLIER, CBO, BSD • MARISOL VISALLI, PE TEACHER, BSD • TIM BARRY, SUPERVISOR, PARKS AND REC • NICOLE ACQUISTI, SUPERVISOR, PARKS AND REC • GERAMI SEITZMAN, COMMUNITY • MARISA WACHHORST, COMMUNITY SUMMARY OF PROCESS (CONY.) • THE SURVEY WAS CREATED IN JANUARY AND SENT IN OUT FEBRUARY THROUGH THE WEEKLY ELECTRONIC BULLETIN TO ALL SCHOOLS IN THE BURLINGAME ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT. • 2-2-2 COMMITTEE REVIEWED THE SURVEY RESULTS IN APRIL. • BSD BOARD PRESENTATION JUNE 13T" • PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION PRESENTATION 278 TOTAL RESPONSES TO SURVEY FRANKLIN 14 LINCOLN 25 ROOSEVELT 0 MCKINLEY 34 WASHINGTON 61 HOOVER 7 BIS 137 Survey returns by school Yes No #1 MY CHILD IS PARTICIPATING IN EITHER AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT OF SPORTS PROGRAMS 71% 80% 65% 28% 20% 35% 77% 86% 84% 23% 14% 16% #2 IN RANKING ORDER 1(HIGH) TO 6(LOW), PLEASE RANK THE BEST WAY TO LEARN ABOUT AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT AND SPORTS PROGRAMS. Flyer at School NA Mailer Home Posting at Rec School Newsletter Parks and Rec activities guide Parks and Rec Facebook Page McKinley.. Franklin Lincoln WL1--1 .. 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 2 2 3 1) 1) 6 6 5 5 2 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 5 5 6 6 #3 IF YOU REGISTERED ON-LINE FOR AN AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT CLASS OR SPORT AND IT WAS FULL, DID YOU CALL THE RECREATION CENTER TO BE PLACED ON A WAITING LIST. A - . . .. Yes 42% 32% 26% 38% 0% 58% No 7% 32% 44% 33% 14% 22% Unaware about 50% 36% 30% 29% 86% 20% the waiting list Yes No #4 I AM AWARE THE PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT HAS A SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM FOR THE STUDENTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT/SPORTS PROGRAMS. 29% 16% 24% 31% 0% 36% 71% 84% 76% 69% 100% 64% Yes No #5 MY CHILD HAS PARTICIPATED IN AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT CLASSES/PROGRAMS. anklin Lincoln McKinley Washington Hoover . . . . . . . . . . . 14% 4% 15% 16% 14% 27% #6 MY CHILD'S ENRICHMENT CLASSES HAVE BEEN HIGH QUALITY. Strongly Disagree 0% 0% 0% Disagree 9% 4% 1 1 % Agree 72% 75% 57% Strongly Agree 1 9% 21 % 32% 4% 0% 7% 2% 0% 11% 82% 83% 71% 1 1%, 1 70/, 1 1 0/n #7 IN RANKING ORDER 1(HIGH) TO 5(LOW), MY CHILD DOES NOT PARTICIPATE IN AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT CLASSES BECAUSE OF.. Child's Interest Convenience Location Offerings Price 3 1 2 5 3 1 2 5 5 3 1 2 4 r: 3 3 4 Yes No #8 1 AM SATISFIED WITH AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT PROGRAMS. 55% 58% 61% 45% 42% 39% 76% 83% 62% 24% 17% 38% #9 IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, PLEASE CHECK ALL OF THE REASONS THAT APPLY. -Washington.. Price 20% 10% 45% 9% 0% 27% Time 60% 30% 54% 36% 0% 29% Location 60% 90% 72% 27% 100% 31 % Instructor 0% 20% 27% 36% 0% 15% Offering/Choice 100% 70% 54% 54% 0% 70% # 10 PLEASE LIST ANY FUTURE PROGRAM IDEAS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE OFFERED AT YOUR SCHOOL FRANKLIN • COMPUTERS, CODING, CHESS, HOMEWORK ASSISTANCE, STEM PROGRAMS, MAC INTRO & MANDARIN. LINCOLN • ART, STEM PROGRAMS, SPANISH, 3D PRINTING, ROBOTICS, CHESS, DANCE, MUSIC & LANGUAGE. MCKINLEY • YOGA, SPORTS, FRENCH, COMPUTER PROGRAMMING, MANDARIN, K-3 SPORTS & SIGN LANGUAGE. WASHINGTON • COOKING CLASSES, CODING, SELF DEFENSE, CREATIVE WRITING, COMPUTER CLASSES AND YOGA. HOOVER BIS • MINE CRAFT, CODING, STEM PROGRAMS AND MANDARIN. • CODING, CARTOON DESIGN, SEWING/KNITTING, ART CLASSES, MUSIC, FRENCH, CREATIVE WRITING, LEGO AND Yes No #1 1 MY CHILD HAS PARTICIPATED IN 4T" & 5T" GRADE AFTER SCHOOL SPORTS PROGRAMS McKinley.. .. 23% 29% 15% 29% 29% N/A 77% 71% 85% 71% 71% N/A # 12 COMMITTING TO 3 DAYS A WEEK OF PRACTICE OR GAMES IS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION Yes 100% 57% 80% No 0% 43% 20% 56% 0% N/A 44% 100% N/A # 13 1 FEEL TEAM EVALUATIONS AND ASSESSMENTS ARE DONE IN A SYSTEMATIC AND FAIR FORMAT w -Washington.. Strongly Disagree 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% N/A Disagree 34% 0% 0% 6% 0% N/A Agree 65% 71% 80% 94% 100% N/A Strongly Agree 0% 29% 20% 0% 0% N/A 7m Yes No # 14 1 AM SATISFIED WITH THE ELEMENTARY AFTER SCHOOL SPORTS PROGRAMS. 67% 86% 100% 33% 14% 0% 88% 100% N/A 12% 0% N/A #15 IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, PLEASE CHECK ALL OF THE REASONS THAT APPLY. Franklin -Washington.. - Coach 0% 100% 0% 0% 0% N/A Game Time/Location 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% N/A Officials 0% 0% 0% 50% 0% N/A Facility 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% N/A Other 100% 0% 0% 50% 0% N/A Yes No #16 MY CHILD HAS PARTICIPATED IN BIS SPORTS. QQnklin Lincoln McKinley Washington Hoover . . . . . . . . . . 92% 92% 85% 82% 86% 17% Yes No # 17 COMMITTING TO 3 DAYS A WEEK OF PRACTICE OR GAMES IS A REASONABLE EXPECTATION. Franklin Lincoln MicK;iinley Washington Hoover ��•. •�'. .0 -•. M. 0% 0% 20% 33% 100% 13% # 18 1 FEEL TEAM EVALUATIONS AND ASSESSMENTS ARE DONE IN A SYSTEMATIC AND FAIR FORMAT w -Washington.. Strongly Disagree 0% 50% 20% 0% 0% 3% Disagree 1 00% O% 0% 22% 0% 21 % Agree 0% 50% 80% 78% 100% 66% Strongly Agree 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1 0% #19 BIS COACHES ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THEIR SPORT. Strongly Disagree 0% 0% 0% Disagree 0% 50% 0% Agree 100% 0% 80% Strongly Agree 0% 50% 20% NA 0% 0% 0% 22% 0% 45% 22% 0% 0% 100% 0% 2% 9% 69% 17% #20 1 AM SATISFIED WITH AFTER SCHOOL SPORTS PROGRAMS AT BIS Franklinim Yes 100% 0% No 0% 100% 100% 56% 100% 0% 44% 0% 85% 15% #21 IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO THE PREVIOUS QUESTION, PLEASE CHECK ALL OF THE REASONS THAT APPLY. a Frankllinl���� Coach 0% 50% 0% Game Time/Location 0% 0% 0% Officials 0% 0% 0% Facility 0% 0% 0% Other 0% 50% 0% ;hington.. - 75% 0% 47% 25% 0% 13% 0% 0% 0% 25% 0% 0% WHAT WE LEARNED? 1) TO FIND NEW WAYS OF MARKETING OF PROGRAMS TO SCHOOLS/PARENTS. 2) TO PROMOTE THE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM FOR AFTER SCHOOL ENRICHMENT & SPORTS. 3) TO MAKE SURE ALL COACHES UNDERSTAND THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE PROGRAM/LEAGUE. 4) TO DISCOVER NEW WAYS TO GET MORE RESPONSE FROM SURVEY 5) f3URLfNGAME STAFF REPORT To: Parks and Recreation Commission Date: June 15, 2017 From: Margaret Glomstad, Parks and Recreation Director Subject: Review of Maintenance Practices in Mills Canyon RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Commission review the maintenance practices in Mills Canyon and provide input to staff. BACKGROUND In 1952, the 28 acres adjacent to Mills Creek were set aside as a wildlife preserve. It was not until 1977 when a few of interested residents, led by Ed and Marjorie Taylor, began to clear and mark trails in the canyon. For their effort, the main trail was named after Ed Taylor in 1983. In 2006 there was a renewed interest, led by Bobbi Benson, in using and maintaining the trails in Mills Canyon and the Friends of Mills Canyon (FOMC) was established. Around this time, the City began contracting with the California Conservation Corps (CCC) to provide limited trail rehabilitation and maintenance work. In addition, over the years, there have been Boy Scout projects that have occurred in the canyon. Since 2013, the City has been working with CAL FIRE to reduce the fuel load behind the properties on the north side of the canyon which in the past averaged 15 crew days per year and 180 staff hours. In 2016, Mills Canyon efforts were increased by utilizing CAL FIRE for 68 days and approximately 816 staff hours. Since 15 crew days did not allow for enough time to reduce the fuel load behind all the homes on the north side each year, staff increased the work days. To help the City maintain and refurbish the trails in a systematic manner, the City retained a consultant in 2015 to perform reconnaissance, design and a scope of work for trail modifications, enhancements and repairs to reduce damage from water runoff and deterioration of the trail. The City uses the report to prioritize the available funds each year allocated to canyon work. To date, the work performed includes stairway rebuilding, retaining wall construction, trail tread improvement by lessening slope, improving drainage and creating stable surfacing for park users to traverse. Due to the age of the trees and vegetation in the canyon, City staff has moved away from performing work when staff was notified by community members and the Friends of Mills Canyon in 2007 to quarterly staff inspections in 2011 to monthly inspections starting in 2013 1 Review of Maintenance Practices in Mills Canyon June 15, 2017 which continue today. This is an increase of 32 staff hours per year. Work performed during the inspections includes monitoring site conditions and clearing immediate hazards from the trail. Parks staff return at least quarterly to remove tree hazards, vegetation encroaching the path or to repair signs and other trail fixtures. This work typically represents approximately 155 hours per year. In 2012, the bridge crossing the creek needed to be removed for safety reasons caused by significant erosion along the creek. Wilsey Ham, Engineering, Surveying & Planning were retained to determine the costs associated with installing a new bridge. The challenges to installing a new bridge included lack of direct access for construction, lacking staging area, the ongoing erosion along the creek, the length of bridge needed. After a recent consultation with the engineers in Public Works, in today's dollars, the cost estimate is estimated at $200,000 to $250,000. This would cover the costs associated with doing potential environmental studies and permitting as well as increases in construction costs. Public Works staff also communicated that the costs may well be more due to the increase in erosion and displacement of soil from the recent wet winter season. ni-qri issinm The cost for the work performed by the CCC has risen from $5,000 annually to $29,000 in fiscal year 2016. For the past couple of years, the work in the canyon has focused on erosion prevention and trail access improvements. In August 2016, City staff walked the canyon with the leadership of the FOMC, Bobbi Benson, Ralph Brenner and Ross Webber in order to learn about their ideas for the canyon and concerns. It appeared that while the majority of the FOMC are supportive and appreciative of the increased efforts undertaken by the City, it was mentioned that there is some disagreement about how, when and where work in the canyon is done. The FOMC also expressed an interest to coordinate nature hikes and educational encounters with the public. In early 2017, the City worked with the Burlingame Parks and Recreation Foundation to install boot scrapers at each of the entrances. The boot scrapers were purchased by the Foundation and installed by City staff. The Foundation is also working on GIS mapping of the canyon to produce a web -based and paper pamphlet for the community. For summer 2017, the goal for the CCC will be to reroute the lower trail due to a landslide and repair 3 stairways, as funds permit. It is anticipated the work will begin in June depending on the CCC schedule. Staff applied for grant funding to assist in the financing of additional maintenance and improvements to the Mills Canyon trail system. If awarded, the grant requires a 50/50 match. FISCAL IMPACT Funds in the amount of $50,000 were requested as part of the Parks Division operating budget for FY17-18. The Parks and Trees Capital Improvement Program has approximately $28,000 for Mills Canyon Fire Hazard Mitigation Plan. 2