HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/24/2005 PRC MinutesCITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
HEARING BOARD ROOM OF S.C.A.Q.M.D./THE GOVERNMENT CENTER
21865 Copley Drive
MARCH 24, 2005
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Grundy called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 7:11
P.M. in the SCAQMD/Government Center Building Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley
Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Chairman Grundy led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Chairman Dave Grundy and Commissioners Ling -Ling Chang, Benny Liang
and Marty Torres.
Vice Chairman Nancy Lyons was excused.
Staff Present: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Ryan Wright, Recreation
Supervisor; Bryan Petroff, Parks and Maintenance Supervisor; Alison Meyers, Recreation
Coordinator; Krista Berentis, CS Coordinator/Athletics, and Marisa Somenzi, Administrative
Assistant.
C. PRESENTATION OF YOUTH BASKETBALL SPORTSMANSHIP AWARDS —
RS/Wright.
RECESS: Chair/Grundy recessed the meeting at 7:14 p.m.
RECONVENE: Chair/Grundy reconvened the meeting at 7:34 p.m.
A. SELECTION OF CHAIR AND.VICE CHAIR FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION.
Commissioner Torres nominated Commissioner Lyons to serve as Chair.
Nomination seconded by Commissioner Grundy.
Commissioner Liang nominated Commissioner Grundy to serve as Chair.
Commissioner Grundy respectfully declined the nomination.
There were no other nominations offered. Commissioner Lyons was unanimously
elected to serve as Chairperson of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
Commissioner Grundy nominated Commissioner Torres to serve as Vice Chair.
Commissioner Liang seconded the nomination. There were no other nominations
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION
offered. Commissioner Torres was unanimously elected to serve as Vice
Chairperson of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
VC/Torres assumed the gavel.
B. INTRODUCED KRISTA BERENTIS, CS COORDINATOR/ATHLETICS— RS/Wright.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None Offered.
CALENDAR OF EVENTS: As presented in the agenda.
1. CONSENT CALENDAR
C/Grundy moved, C/Chang seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as
Presented, Without objection the motion was so ordered with Chair/Lyons being
absent.
1.1 Minutes of the February 24, 2005 Regular Meeting — as presented.
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
2.1 Recreation Program Report — RSII/Wright
CSD/Rose announced that recreation program registrations are now being
accepted via the Internet through the City's website www.diamondbar.com
The June 29 summer concert is being sponsored by the Diamond Bar
Community Foundation.
2.2 Park Visit Transmittal Report — PMS/Petroff
2.3 Diamond Bar Community Foundation Oral Report — C/Chang
C/Chang reported that due to lack of quorum no meeting was held in March.
She attended the March 15 City Council meeting during which the Council
approved proposed changes to the Foundation bylaws.
2.4 City Birthday Party Oral Report — C/Chang
No report offered.
2.5 Library Task Force Oral Report
CSD/Rose stated that the message sign in front of the library was up and
running. The task force met and discussed the list of items for
recommendation to the City Council for upgrading the current facility. Future
discussions will include discussion of possible funding sources for anew
library facility. C/Grundy stated that on Monday, March 28 the task force will
meet with the consultant who handles library collections.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION
2.6 C.I.P. Program Report -- CSD/Rose
a. Diamond Bar Center — First Anniversary of Grand Opening — March
20, 2005.
b. Sycamore Canyon Park ADA Retrofit Phase 11 — Bid Opening —
Tuesday, April 12 at 3:00 p.m.
CSD/Rose explained that due to plan check corrections the bid
opening may be set back about one week.
C. Starshine Park ADA Retrofit —
CSD/Rose stated that construction commenced Monday, March 21,
2005 and should be completed within 60 days.
d. Lots 1 and 61 — Proposed Sports Complex Site
CSD/Rose reported that this site would likely net out about 41 acres
for a facility, parking and amenities (six or seven soccer fields). He
visited the site today with a developer who builds sports complexes
for cities. The developer captures a portion of the site for commercial
with the remaining portion turned back to the City for use as it deems
appropriate.
CSD/Rose responded to C/Grundy that as information about a sports
complex became available he would bring it to the Commission.
3. OLD BUSINESS:
3.1 Consideration of Change to Skate Park Rules to allow use of Scooters in the
Skate Park.
RS/Wright reported that staff researched this matter extensively and asked
CA/Jenkins for his comments as well. CA/Jenkins confirmed that similar to
roller blades and bikes the City was not legally exempt from Razor injuries. A
JPIA representative stated that so far there had been no cases or lawsuits
brought against cities involving Razors in skate parks and until a claim was
brought the JPIA would not take a stance, rather provide only a
recommendation to protect the City and its assets. CA/Jenkins was
concerned only about whether Razors would be any more dangerous than a
skateboard should they become flying objects. Laverne and Claremont were
aware of Razors in their parks and although the cities do not condone their
use it is unsupervised. Because of the lack of immunity the cities indicate
that they are hesitant to allow them in the skate parks.
CSD/Rose responded to VC/Torres that the City did not allow bicycles in the
skate park.
C/Grundy said he had hoped that the City Attorney would submit a strong
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION
statement for or against this type of activity because it would make the
Commission's job much easier. He was concerned that there was insufficient
information to permit the Commission to make a decision to allow Razors in
the skate park.
In response to VC/Torres, RS/Wright said that today he spoke with
representatives of Brea and Rancho Santa Margarita and their comments
were similar to the JP1A that there was no precedence for allowing Razors in
the skate park.
Lora lllig, 23568 Prospect Valley Drive said that her son and others had
submitted their comments to the Commission in January. She felt it was very
important for kids of her son's age to be able to participate in positive
activities. They like to scooter and they are good at it. However, they are not
allowed to use them anywhere in the City. She asked the Commission to
consider allowing Razors in the skate park.
Rick Illig said that the Razors stayed in the hands of the user and when the
user fell the Razor stayed with the rider. On the other hand, skateboards fly
free when kids fall. He would be very disappointed if the kids were not
allowed to participate with their scooters.
VC/Torres asked if scooters were allowed or disallowed at this time.
CSD/Rose responded that the code specifically disallows scooters in the
skate park, a decision that was rendered upon opening of the skate park.
Currently, officers have a right to request that kids using scooters leave the
skate park or issue a citation if they feel it is necessary. He believed that
Razor scooters and bicycles have been used at the skate park. Some have
been cited and some have not. Although information regarding this meeting
was posted at the skate park staff received no telephone calls from
interested or concerned residents.
VC/Torres said he agreed with C/Grundy that he hoped the City would take a
position one way or the other on this issue.
C/Chang asked for additional time to consider this request. C/Grundy said
that regardless of the timeframe he would not be comfortable rendering a
Policy decision with no recommendation for or against from the City and the
City Attorney and he wanted to know if there was a chance that staff could
provide additional information that would allow the Commission to make an
informed decision.
CSD/Rose responded that the next opportunity for staff to speak with the
coalition would be in two months. in the interim staff could send out a letter
to the members asking for additional feedback.
C/Grundy asked if JPIA had specific exclusions in coverage for certain
activities and CSD/Rose responded "no."
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION
VC/Torres felt that Razor scooters might present a hazardous activity and
whywould cities not move to have immunity for bike riding and/or scooters in
skate parks? CSD/Rose explained that the State Legislature legislates
whether itis a hazardous activity. Bicycling, skateboarding, skiing, skydiving,
trick bicycle riding, etc. are defined under state code as "hazardous
recreational activities." Under state code hazardous recreational activities are
limited from liability if an individual is 18 years old or older. The uniqueness
of skateboarding is that the state legislature lists skateboarding down to the
age of 14 for limited liability. If a child age 14 breaks a wrist in the skate park,
for instance, as long as the City constructed the skate park to industry
standards the City would face no liability. This would not be the case for
other activities. The only reason it works for skateboarding is that there were
so many issues with skateboarders using commercial parking lots, streets,
etc. that agreement was reached at the state level that it would be better to
take a chance on a few kids being hurt than put them at greater risk in the
public arena.
VC/Torres asked if staff saw a conflict in allowing scooters in the skate park
along with skateboards. CSD/Rose said he did not see a built-in conflict. One
of the main reasons scooters were listed at the beginning when the skate
park first opened was because staff witnessed young kids aged 7 and 8 on
scooters. The bottom of the Razor was scraping the concrete and Purkiss-
Rose was concerned that the scooters would break the concrete. Likewise,
the designerwas concerned about bicycles because the sprocket breaks the
concrete. Someone who is experienced in the use of scooters would not
damage the concrete. Skateboards also have metal parts and when the user
grinds his skateboard the bolt on the axel damages the concrete. In his
opinion, it was unlikely that scooters would cause any more damage than
skateboards.
Rick Illig said that the scooter riders are currently using commercial parking
lots and streets. If they were able to use the skate park it would provide a
safe arena and cut down on the safety risks. CSD/Rose explained that
immunity for skate parks for minors is that 1) cities supervise the skate park
during hours that it is open for use or 2) cities do not supervise the skate
park and post and enforce the rules. JPIA says that in order to provide the
safest possible facility with respect to liability cities should require that any
minor under 14 sign a waiver and that the City should maintain that waiver
on file prior to allowing that individual to use the skate park. In order to
enforce this, a staff person would have to be present to enforce the rules
during hours when the park was open. Under this scenario the City would be
liable for any use whether it was authorized or unauthorized.
C/Grundy recommended that staff ask the City Attorney to consider these
two scenarios and make a specific recommendation to the Commission
about the viability of posting rules that state "Razors are not allowed unless
you have filed a waiver of liability with the City." He also wanted to know if
CA/Jenkins felt this would provide the City with adequate protection.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 6 P&R COMMISSION
CSD/Rose cautioned the Commission that whereas Razor scooters would
not interfere with the use of the skate park, bicycles would interfere unless
there were specific hours set aside for bicycling only.
C/Chang felt that in retrospect scooters and skateboards were very similar.
In fact, having used a scooter she felt skateboards were more dangerous.
'C/Grundy moved, C/Liang seconded to continue the matter to the April 28
meeting with the recommendation that staff follow up with CA/Jenkins for
responses prior to the meeting as well as attempt to find other cities that
allow scooters in skate parks. Without objection, the motion was so ordered
with Chair/Lyons being absent.
3.2 Damage to Parks due to Illegal Vehicle Entry
In response to C/Grundy, CSD/Rose explained that the strongest law is the
California Vehicle Code that calls out a $300 fine plus damages. The City
Code terms this type of damage an infraction and the first offense is $100,
$200 for the second and $500 for the third offense. C/Grundy wanted to
know what prevented the City from having a very aggressive penalty such as
$1,000 or $5,000 and would it be enforceable?
C/Grundy suggested that the City reconsider the City Code penalty for this
type of offense, re -codify it as a misdemeanor and increase the amount of
penalty.
3.3 Youth Master Plan
C/Grundy recommended that Commissioners study the Claremont plan
before making a decision on the revised D.B. plan. He further recommended
that the Commission schedule a study session to reach a decision about the
plan based on a thorough study of both documents prior to the meeting.
VC/Torres concurred.
The Commission agreed to schedule a study session for Wednesday, April
13 at 7:00 p.m., location to be announced.
4. NEW BUSINESS:
4.1 Project List for the 2005/06 FY Budget.
CSD/Rose asked if the Commissioners felt any of the listed items should be
deleted or given priority. Peterson Park should include removal of poison
Oak along the trail. He reported that the portable building at Sycamore
Canyon Park would soon be removed due to its poor condition.
Commissioners concurred to include Peterson Park poison Oak removal
along the trail. C/Liang said that from personal experience the poison Oak
should absolutely be removed for the protection of the children. He
wondered why the City Council would not consider this a priority budget item.
MARCH 24, 2005 PAGE 7 P&R COMMISSION
C/Liang urged CSD/Rose to erect a sign warning people about the mudslide
at Sycamore Canyon Park because in his opinion, the yellow tape was not
sufficient.
C/Grundy asked if the list was complete and CSD/Rose said there was some
concern about a guardrail along the access road from Grand Avenue to the
D.B. Center. He believed the item was included in the Public Works budget
list because it was a traffic issue.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Liang asked if staff contacted the County Department
of Flood Control regarding the handrail. CSD/Rose responded yes and that it had
been taken down. Staff will get back in touch with the County to discuss
reinstallation.
C/Grundy asked for an update on negotiations regarding the synthetic turf at
Lorbeer and whether discussions had begun with the Walnut Valley Unified School
District. CSD/Rose responded that staff had not begun discussions with the Walnut
School District and that CM/Lowry would be in touch with Patrick Leier to further
discuss this matter.
C/Grundy reported that Jeff Hull was experiencing health concerns. Mr. Hull served
on this Commission and was a memberof the Diamond Bar Community Foundation
and C/Grundy recommended that the Commission send a bouquet of flowers with a
card expressing the Commission's well wishes.
VC/Torres thanked outgoing Chairman Grundy for his outstanding service to the
Commission and the City.
ADJOURNMENT: Upon motion by C/Chang, seconded by C/Liang and there being no
further business before the Parks & Recreation Commission, VC/Torres adjourned the
meeting at 9:21 p.m.
Respegtfugy Submitted,
Bob Rdse, Secretary
Attest:
Marty Torres, Vice Chairman