HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/27/2006 PRC Minutes1
1
CITY 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
J U LY 27, 2006
CALL TO ORDER:
Vice Chairman Owens called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at
7:00 p.m. in the SCAQMD/Government Center Building Hearing Board Room, 21865
Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Low led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Lew Herndon, Benny Liang, Ruth Low and Vice Chairman
Ted Owens.
Absent: Chairman Dave Grundy was excused.
Staff Present: Bob Rose, Director of Community Services; Nancy Fong Community
Development Director; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Sara
Somogyi West, Recreation Services Manager, and Marisa Somenzi, Senior Administrative
Assistant.
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None Offered.
CALENDAR OF EVENTS: As Listed in the Agenda and reported by CSD/Rose.
1. CONSENT CALENDAR
1.1.1 Approval of Minutes for June 22, 2006 Regular Meeting.
1.1.2 Transmittal of Sports Complex Task Force Final Report to Commissioners—
Adopted by the City Council on May 18, 2004.
1.1.3 Transmittal of updated Organization Spread Sheet from User Group Meeting
for period of August 1 through December 31, 2006.
C/Low moved, C/Herndon seconded to approve the Consent Calendar with
C/Liang abstaining from approval of Consent Calendar Item 1.1.1. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:
Herndon, Liang, Low, VC/Owens
None
Chair/Grundy
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
2.1 Recreation Program Report — MS/Somogyi West
CSD/Rose responded to C/Lo h s t he du'eved the cost e to rental costsrforethel high
celebration was slightly higheryear
school stadium. However, it is possible that the sheriffs cost will be less
than in previous years. The City intends to hold future celebrations at DBHS.
C/Low suggested that lighting be installed in the gate area between the field
and the parking lot.
VC/Owens suggested the City ask the school district for a discount on the
cost of using the facility and CSD/Rose said that although it was a good
suggestion it was not likely to happen.
2.2 Diamond Bar Community Foundation Oral Report.
CSD/Rose reported that the Foundation offered a $2000 donation to cover
the cost of promotion banners for the Sunday at the Center Art Show on
November 19, 2006. The matter will be considered for acceptance at the
August 1 City Council meeting.
2.3 DB 4 Youth Report.
CSD/Rose reported that the DB 4 Youth would participate in the Diamond
Bar Day at the Los Angeles County Fair on Thursday, September 14. The
middle school dance will be held on Friday, November 3 at the Diamond Bar
Center.
2.4 Parks Report.
PMS/Jordan reported on maintenance and repairs at the City's parks.
C/Herndon stated that there was graffiti where the stream goes under the
field in the gate area to the left of the wooden bulkhead at Sycamore Canyon
Park. He asked about the City's plans for the slope damage in the
Summitridge area. CSD/Rose responded that staff received the final
remediation plans from Group Delta. As soon as the City's Building Official
signs off the project will go out to bid with construction to take place prior to
commencement of the rainy season. C/Herndon asked what kind of fix was
planned and CSD/Rose responded that it involved taking away dirt and
packing it back on at a cost of about $390,000 for the four areas. Most of
the remediation cost will be borne by FEMA because it was declared a
disaster area. C/Herendno
d ahe if additional
slope would b
anage e repabe cked and
ded and
CSD/Rose respond , that
landscaped as previously existed.
PMS/Jordan responded to C/Liang that he had not received reports of
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION
unusual or increased snake activity in the parks.
2.5 CIP Program Report
a. Sycamore Canyon Park ADA Retrofit — Phase III — CSD/Rose reported
that replacement of the retaining wall and two tot lots is out to bid with
bids due August 22 and construction slated to commence in the fall.
2.6 Lorbeer Middle School Agreement with PUSD.
CSD/Rose stated that on July 18 the City Council approved the agreement
and on July 25 the PUSD approved the agreement for Lorbeer Middle
School field. Valley Crest Landscape Maintenance will commence upgraded
maintenance similar to what is being done at Pantera Park. Once the
irrigation system is working properly the field will be aerated, reseeded and
fenced. At some point the middle field will be refurbished and if funding is
available the upper field will be done. The agreement also allows user
groups to use rest:rooms at Lorbeer Middle School. In addition, a staff
member will be available to control the area and make certain that vehicles
are not driven onto the fields. C/Herndon congratulated staff on a successful
resolution in a long and detailed negotiation.
2.7 Larkstone Park Presentation
CSD/Reported on the proposed Larkstone Park design plans.
C/Herndon said he would like to see the two areas jointed together in some
way such as steps similar to the steps at Sycamore Canyon Park that go up
to Diamond Bar Boulevard and wondered if it would create a problem for
handicapped access.
Kurt Nelson, JCCL„ South Point West, talk about the proposed project and
the purchase of the+ property and project will ultimately assist in fulfilling the
school district's promise to the City. The site is challenging and suffered a
significant landslide in 1995. The reason for the substantial grade
separation is due in large part to the substantial grading necessary to
stabilize the upper Ipad. He was not sure how to respond to the proposal to
join the two properties and said he would have to discuss the matter with his
engineers. Further, there may be some conflicts with respect to the
Americans with Disability Act.
Larry Ryan, RJM Landscape Architects explained the proposed project and
talked about the significant challenges the current codes. From a pro -active
standpoint the project should encourage equal opportunity play opportunities
within the same environment. He felt there was an opportunity to incorporate
a nice play environment at the upper pad area complete with a picnic area
and restroom facilities with parking at both locations. He handed out exhibits
showing existing parks in other communities that provided possible scenarios
for the lower pad.
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION
C/Herndon asked if any of the City's parks are used for weddings and
CSD/Rose said that the only area is at the Diamond Bar Center. C/Herndon
felt the proposed park area could be a good area for weddings. MS/Somogyi
West responded to C/Herndon that Mt. SAC provides a weekly gardening
class to D.B. Seniors.
C/Low said she loved the concept of a passive park for D.B. She liked
bench seating for small groups and felt the design presented encouraged
individuals to be friendly, would give them a sense of tranquility and intimacy
and allow them to express happiness. She liked the designs and particularly
liked the low walls with seating that included natural elements. She agreed
with C/Herndon that there should be steps/connectivity if possible between
the lower and upper levels to offer a sense of adventure. She referred to
Lacy Park in San Marino that has areas of grass and walkways for bicycling
and walking. She asked Kurt Nelson where he intended to place a piece of
art in the park. Mr. Nelson said he needed additional input regarding the
type of piece and where it should be located within the design — perhaps a
piece of sculpture in a contemplative area. C/Low said she noticed work in
tot lots that included art imbedded in walkways. Mr. Nelson said he would
consider the suggestion.
C/Liang asked if the design could include a water pond in the garden area.
Mr. Nelson said that because of liability concerns he has had to eliminate
very shallow fountains at project entryways. In addition, cities have concerns
about water features attracting mosquitoes and West Nile virus and
ultimately, additional maintenance.
VC/Owens said he would like to see nice entryways into both the upper and
lower levels; access between the lower and upper sites; concerns about the
picnic area and only six parking spaces. CSD/Rose said he viewed the
lower area as a very low-key area and the upper area being a more active
area.
VC/Owens agreed with C/Herndon that he believed the lower area would be
conducive to weddings but felt there was inadequate parking.
Mr. Nelson stated that the earliest the project would be before the City
Council in December or January and could be delayed beyond that time.
Assuming approval of a Tentative Map for the project the developer has six
months to record the final map, process grading plans, etc. and it would most
likely be a year before groundbreaking.
CSD/Rose explained that Los Angeles County quit claimed 2.87 acres that
are now used for South Point Middle School tennis courts. Because the use
was other than park use it violates the grant deed and there has to be
replacement land and the land being purchased by JCCL from WVUSD
includes the deeding of the land that comes to the City as part of this turnkey
park development. LA County has review responsibility for the park site and
the land to make sure that it meets their criteria and that the drainage system
will function properly for year-round use.
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION
Mr. Nelson responded to C/Low that public hearings would be held.
CDD/Fong stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission is responsible
for approving the park design. The Planning Commission's responsibility is
to approve the land use for the park. She further stated that a condition
could be placed on the project that prior to final map approval, the Parks and
Recreation Commission would approve the specific design of the park.
C/Herndon said he: was concerned about the drainage and slope failure
issues.
Mr. Ryan explained that the buttress fill would be compacted to 90 percent to
support the old landslide that occurred upslope from the site. C/Herndon
said he was concerned about the excessive amount of runoff to the lower
area and hoped there would be adequate drainage. CSD/Rose and
CDD/Fong assured C/Herndon that there would be adequate drainage in the
form of bench drains that would deliver the water offsite.
2.8 Lot Adjacent to Pantera Park
CSD/Rose stated that a review of the pad above Pantera Park revealed that
the City owns considerably more land than reported to the Sports Complex
Task Force. What was originally thought to be a 35 -acre site is actually an
80 -acre City -owned site that covers land from Summitridge Drive past
Pantera Park. Staff spoke with Jeff Scott of David Evans & Associates who
devised a schematic depicting a facility occupying about 18 acres of the site
with access from the secondary entrance to Pantera Park. The schematic
also includes four soccer fields, an Aquatics Park with two parking lots and a
tot lot with restroom and concession area in the middle. The estimated cost
for grading is $10 million to 18 million with construction. Since the City owns
the property there may be some grant funds available. Staff forwarded the
information to the City Council for their information. The engineer believes
that this site offers a better opportunity for a sports complex than other sites
currently under consideration.
C/Herndon wondered if it was feasible to get a developer to cooperate on a
joint venture. CSD/Rose responded that David Evans & Associates did not
offer that as an option for this site, only for Lots 1 and 61 because of the
visibility opportunities. C/Herndon was suggesting that a portion of the
property could be used for residential building if the developer could be
persuaded to cooperate on the building of the sports complex.
CDD/Fong responded to C/Herndon that she believed the property was
zoned open space and included a deed restriction that would have to be
changed by General Plan amendment.
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 6 P&R COMMISSION
2.9 2007 CPRS Conference in Sacramento
CSD/RoseMarch 8 through h
at the City intends to register all of the commissioners
for the 10 2007 CPRS Conference and needs to know what
Commissioners would not be available to attend.
3. OLD BUSINESS:
3.1 REVIEW OF DIAMOND BAR CENTER FACILITY USE POLICY.
a) Revise candle permit process for DBC — Section Vlll, Number 4,
Page 16).
b) Revise Deposit verbiage for Sycamore, Oak, Willow, Pine and Maple
Rooms use — Section VI, Number 2, Letter B, Items i and ii (Pg 10).
c) Add "consecutive" to maximum hours of alcohol use — Section VIII,
Number 1, Letter J (Pg. 15).
d) Revise where animals are allowed at Diamond Bar Center and
adjacent park — Section Vlll, Number 5 (Pg 16).
e) Clarify cleanup responsibilities — Section VIII, Number 14 (Pg. 17).
f) Revise Refund Policy to reduce amount of notice required for
Sycamore, Oak, Willow, Pine and Maple Rooms — Section VI,
Number 2, Letter C, Items I and ii (Pg. 10 and 11).
RSM/Somogyi West reported that staff reviewed the Commission's
recommendations and changed the policy wording accordingly. Staff
recommends that the Commission review the changes and recommend
approval to the City Council.
C/Herndon moved, C/Low seconded to accept staff's recommendation with
the addition of the name of the park under Section Vlll, Number 5 on Page
16. Without objection, the motion was so ordered.
4. NEW BUSINESS
4.1 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES:
CDD/Fong presented the concept of an Art in Public Places program to the
City Council on July 18, 2006. Several months ago the Planning
Commission directed staff to research other cities with such programs and
present its findings to the Commission. Staff's report to the Planning
Commission was included in tonight's packet. CDD/Fong said that the
Planning Commission forwarded its findings to the City Council and City
Council directed staff to present its findings to the Parks and Recreation
Commissioners for their input. Council was concerned about the definition of
"art," and where the art would be placed (public park, landscape median,
within private property). For example, if Target were to provide a piece of art
it would be on private property, privately owned and privately maintained. If
the City wished to place the art only in public places, what areas would be
designated? If the artwork were placed in a park for example, where would it
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 7 P&R COMMISSION
be located within the park? And, who would maintain the art piece? How
would the City procure art pieces? And, would the City acquire such pieces
through donations From foundations and companies or require developers
and business to pay for and maintain the art pieces. Other matters of
consideration would include the value of the art pieces and whether to
include items of lower quality and value and how it would affect the overall
program.
CDD/Fong read from the City of Oakland goals for their art program. She
said she would provide a list of some of the goals for the Commission's
consideration.
C/Herndon asked if the Commission should plan a study session to discuss
this item. C/Low thought it would be a good idea to include Commissioners
and other individuals who were interested in the concept. She said she was
unclear and frustrated about where the City was going with this.
CDD/Fong stated that staff could compile a conceptual program for
presentation to the Commission and upon consideration, could be forwarded
to the City Council, CDD/Fong said that she would need to discuss the
possibility of a General Plan amendment and Development Code
amendment for specific design criteria with the Planning Commission.
CDD/Fong responded to VC/Owens that the Planning Commission favors
the art in public places program. In order to implement such a program the
Planning Commission would have to create provisions within the code that
would allow for such a program. The current code language "encourages,
promotes and recommends" and the language would have to be specific and
forceful in order for staff to be able to require a developer to provide the art
pieces.
C/Herndon noted that some cities impose developer fees for art in public
places and wanted to know whether it was for the private sector as well as
the public sector. CDD/Fong said that in Brea it was for both the private and
public sector. Brea requires one percent of the development costs be
allocated toward art and there is a ceiling on the dollar amount. Brea places
art on private property as well as in public parks. Brea has a five -person art
commission that includes two art dealers and they review the design,
placement and location of the artwork.
VC/Owens asked if it was possible to hold a joint meeting with the Planning
Commission to discuss the matter and CDD/Fong responded in the
affirmative. She also suggested forming a subcommittee comprised of two
Planning Commissioners and two Parks and Recreation Commissioners.
C/Low felt that the power of a governing body in a municipality la with its
9 9 Y p Y Y
entitlements and what it gets from a developer and what drives a developer
is their ability to make money. In her opinion there would have to be
interplay between the two entities wherein if the City were offering something
desirable the developer will pay because it is desirable and the developerwill
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 8 P&R COMMISSION
make money from it. It requires fortitude to implement such a plan.
CDD/Fong believes it is important that the Council buy -in to the program
believing that art is good for the City. Perhaps the subcommittee should first
look at the goals and purposes for the City having public art.
C/Low said she did not see art pieces limited to public parks because in her
opinion, a public place is anywhere the public has access and should not be
limited to public parks.
C/Herndon asked if staff could bring its recommendations to the
subcommittee based on what other cities have found to be successful.
C/Herndon and C/Low volunteered to serve on the subcommittee as
representatives of the Parks and Recreation Commission.
C/Low moved, C/Herndon seconded to appoint C/Herndon and C/Low to
serve on the "Art in Public Places" subcommittee with direction to staff to
procure two volunteers/appointees from the Planning Commission to also
serve on the subcommittee. Once the Planning Commission subcommittee
members are determined staff will schedule a subcommittee meeting and
present a proposal for consideration and recommendation to the respective
Commissions for adoption and recommendation to the City Council. Without
objection, the motion was so ordered.
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
C/Low thanked staff and especially CDD/Fong for their presentations. She
complimented staff on the marvelous Concerts in the Park series. She felt very
fortunate to be able to attend and had a great time every Wednesday. The music is
fabulous and the location is great. It is a wonderful free service that the community
provides for its residents. She suggested that next year the City incorporate a
"Movie Night at the Park."
C/Herndon said he too had attended the Concerts in the Park and enjoyed them
greatly. Staff does a great job and the community responds favorably. He said he
noticed while driving through other cities that several have art in their entry areas
that often include a billboard/sign announcing various activities in the city and he felt
it would be great for D.B. to develop this type of entry reader board.
CSD/Rose stated that just prior to leaving the City CM/Lowry was beginning an
effort toward "branding" to create an entry statement for the City and the City has
hired a consultant to assist in the process.
VC/Owens concurred with his colleagues about the Concerts in the Park program, a
very positive program that brings the community together in a fun -filled atmosphere
and having food concessions available at that time of the evening is a bonus.
JULY 27, 2006 PAGE 9 P&R COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT: Upon motion by C/Herndon seconded by C/Liang and with no further
business before the Parks & Recreation Commission, VC/Owens adjourned the meeting at
9:15 p.m.
Attest:
ed Owens, Vice Chairman
J
1
bmitted,
se,'Secretary