Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/25/2011 PRC MinutesCITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION THE GOVERNMENT CENTER HEARING BOARD ROOM DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 AUGUST 25, 2011 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Roberto called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the SCAQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: C/ Liang led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Benny Liang, Ted Owens, Vice Chairman Lew Herndon and Chairman Dave Roberto. Absent: Commissioner Dave Grundy was excused Staff Present: Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Christy Murphey, Recreation Superintendent; Lorry Meyer, Recreation Specialist, and Marcy Hilario, Senior Administrative Assistant. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: Jessica Fajardo, Troop Leader, Brownie Troop #2234, and troop members Isabella Fajardo, and Jasmine Armas, shared that they were concerned about a falling hazard between the tot lot and the creek at Sycamore Canyon Park. The girls provided pictures as Ms. Fajardo read the offered suggestions. They suggested "falling hazard" signage and, better still, a temporary fence to prevent kids from falling and also to direct foot traffic to a safer access path to the creek side. The third suggestion, and recommended solution, would be to create a hedge fence. Ms. Fajardo said that the troop would offer to participate in the acquisition of materials and/or installation to make Sycamore Canyon Park a safer place. (New Business Item 4.2 was moved up on the agenda to address the concerns and suggestions presented) 4. NEW BUSINESS - 4.2 Erosion Control of Sycamore Canyon Park Creek — PMS/Jordan a. Sycamore Canyon Power Point Presentation PMS/Jordan stated that, with respect to the area of concern expressed by the Brownies and to keep water out of the playground, staff is considering installing a barrier/seating wall. This would serve to AUGUST 25, 2011 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION preclude access by a small child into the creek, and it would also create a seating surface for parents. Potential temporary fixes include signage, snow fence/temporary barrier which would offer on-going maintenance considerations, vinyl coated 36 to 42" high chain link fencing, vinyl fence (aesthetically pleasing), and lodge pole fencing (aesthetically the best solution). Currently, staff is evaluating four design firm proposals. Because there are no funds set aside for this project during the current fiscal year, the earliest there would be funding available would be in fiscal year 2012/2013. A temporary fix can commence fairly quickly once the decision is made about the materials with possible assistance from the California Conservation Corp on the lodge pole fencing. The principal costs would be for the material. Staff recommends lodge pole fencing. The hedge is a good solution as well; however, there could be a problem with the time it would take to grow the hedge. It would take years to get the full growth benefit from 15 gallon plantings. Chair/Roberto asked if staff intended to put gabion fencing along the creek bed as a permanent solution. CSD/Rose responded no, that the gabion fence would be at the point of erosion only and the rest would be left in its natural state for the most part. He went on to share about 15 years ago staff went through this and it is an on-going issue. PMS/Jordan said that the rate of erosion that the City experiences in this location is substantially less than what is experienced on the upper creek. Although the volume of water that moves through this area is much greater, the area that it flows through is much wider, which in turn makes the velocity relatively slow and, in the short term, the erosion of soil would be fairly insignificant. VC/Herndon stated that it appeared to him that there are boards on the bridge that prevent the kids from falling in and he would feel more comfortable bringing that fencing around. Even with the lodge pole fencing kids could climb over or through the lowest rail and although it may not be as aesthetically pleasing, it would probably be a lot safer. C/Owens asked if signage would be necessary and/or desirable in addition to the fencing and PMS/Jordan responded that it could be done.. CSD/Rose stated that from a liability standpoint, this is considered to be an 'open and obvious" issue which has been there for years and whether it is lodge pole or some other kind of structure, staff is not necessarily looking at this as a barrier to keep people out. The area was designed so that people could come in on the other side of the bridge as well and staff does not plan to block complete access to the creek. This is one of the recreation elements people enjoy and use in that park. Whatever material is used would be to help slow down individuals and give parents time to react to kids who are trying to run from the tot lot and not paying close attention to where they are headed. Staff wants to be very sensitive to the aesthetics of the park which is the reason there is nothing in place at this time. The goal was to keep it an open area. There are two tot lots; one tot lot was designed for two to five year olds so that they do not have an adjacent AUGUST 25, 2011 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION drop off. The tot lot in question is designed for five to 12 year olds and five year old kids have more skills and are more easily directed as to their boundaries. However, because some of the younger kids find their way into this tot lot area, it makes sense to put some kind of barrier up to help keep kids from charging into the creek area. VC/Herndon asked for input from the Brownies about a pole fence. Isabella Fajardo replied that she liked the pole fence and signage. C/Owens thanked both girls. C/Owens said he would favor the pole fence as a barrier with signage as a reminder to folks. He would not favor having a seating area because kids will play on it and it could be yet another hazard. He liked the idea of keeping the area open. C/Liang asked what the length of the pole fence would be and PMS/Jordan responded about 100 feet. C/Liang asked if a sign would relieve the City's liability. CSD/Rose responded that nothing eliminates the City's responsibility; therefore, the design of the fence is very important with respect to liability. Also, if the fence is placed right along the sidewalk and someone climbed the fence and fell over, they would fall on the grass on the other side. The design would be better and the liability would not be so great. Because this is an open an obvious situation, the expectation is that a reasonable person should stay away from the creek. Once a barrier is erected it could create an expectation that one would not have to be as vigilant. VC/Herndon moved, C/Owens seconded, to move forward with installation of a lodge pole fence with a couple of signs. Without objection, the motion was so ordered. CALENDAR OF EVENTS: 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1.1 1.2 As presented in the agenda Approval of amended Minutes for the May 12, 2011 Study Session. VC/Herndon moved, C/Owens seconded, to approve the Minutes of the May 12, 2011 Study Session as amended. Without objection, the motion was so ordered with C/Grundy being absent. Approval of Minutes for the July 28, 2011 Regular Meeting. VC/Herndon moved, C/Owens seconded, to approve the July 28, 2011 Regular Meeting Minutes as corrected. Without objection, the motion was so ordered with C/Liang abstaining and C/Grundy being absent. AUGUST 25, 2011 PAGE 4 P&R COMMISSION 2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 2.1 Recreation Program Update — RS/Murphey VC/Herndon asked if the financial summary for 2010/11 showing "rental lease of real property" projected to be about $19,000, even though it was listed as only $1,900 actual. RS/Murphey responded that it is correct. The amount varies from year to year. When she started with D.B. almost 10 years ago, the City spent more on facilities because the Diamond Bar Center and other facilities were not available. The City still budgets in case it is able to offer a really popular class for which the City might not have space and wants to make sure the money is available for rental. Chair/Roberto asked if the totals on the mid -year were actual totals and RS/Murphey responded no, those are mid -year projections. The financial summary page shows the actual totals. C/Owens asked if senior softball was over. RS/Murphey referred C/Owens to the next agenda item. 2.1.1 PowerPoint Presentation — Senior Softball/Senior Excursions — RS/Meyer. RS/Meyer thanked everyone for their kindness to her over the years and reported that she would be retiring from the City of D.B. on October 5. 2.2 Parks Report — PMS/Jordan 2.3 Status of C I P Projects — CSD/Rose 2.3.1 Washington Park — CSD/Rose explained that there were irregularities in the lowest and second lowest bids that were submitted. Also, there were budget protests from the second and third bidders who threatened litigation if the City awarded the contract to the lowest bidder. CA/Jenkins advised the City that the project could be delayed for quite some time if there was litigation; therefore, all bids were rejected by the City Council on August 16. As a result, the plans and specs were updated and the project is ready to go out to bid with bid opening on September 13 and award of contract projected for September 20. C/Owens asked how many contractors bid on the first project and CSD/Rose responded 18. Chair/Roberto asked if the contractors have to pay again and CSD/Rose responded yes, because this is essentially a new project. 2.3.2 Silver Tip Mini -Park — CSD/Rose stated that the bid opening was supposed to take place today. However, staff had to issue an AUGUST 25, 2011 PAGE 5 P&R COMMISSION addendum yesterday to delay the opening to September 1. There were a few issues with the plans and specs that were brought to staff's attention later which left insufficient time to complete the addendum and continue with the bid opening today. Thirty-eight contractors have picked up plans and specs for this project. Staff plans to award the contract on September 20. 2.3.3 Sycamore Canyon Park Trail — Phase IV — CSD/Rose reported that staff opened the bids on August 23 and the award of contract is scheduled for September 20. There were 13 contractors that submitted bids and the bids ran from $345,000 to $695,000. Ace Construction is the apparent low bidder and staff is checking references. Ace was previously called Mega Way, which is the company that built Sycamore Canyon Trail Phase III. VC/Herndon asked how frequently staff has to put projects out for rebid. CSD/Rose said it is very unusual that contractors are willing to litigate. The problem with the low bidder was that the bidder forgot to submit the required acknowledgement that he received the fifth of five addendums and he was willing to forgo the additional $200 for the fifth addendum. The City Attorney originally ruled that it was a minor irregularity that could be waived but the second bidder threatened to file an injunction if the contract was awarded to the low bidder. After speaking with their attorney, CA/Jenkins determined that it was not worth the risk that the project could be delayed by months. This does not often happen because most contractors are too busy to get involved in litigation. 3. OLD BUSINESS: None 4. NEW BUSINESS (Continued): 4.1 Philosophical Discussion of Program Finances - CSD/Rose CSD/Rose asked for Commission input as to how the report would best suit its needs. Staff has a program budget including the contract class budget that shows how much money is budgeted for each program and the Program Evaluation Financial Report reflects the real numbers which helps the program director determine what adjustments need to be made to the program and what needs to be budgeted. However, the reports need to also serve the Commission and from past discussions there have been many comments and a good amount of discussion indicating that the current reporting format may not serve the Commission's purposes. The report contained in the Commissioner's packet lists the actual expenditures for the programs or about 98.1% of the appropriated funds during the last fiscal year. The revenues are listed in the same categories as listed in the budget. D.B. collected 103% of the revenues that were projected. The overall subsidy level is basically the actual revenues divided by the actual expenditures which came out to about a 54% subsidy level. One expense that is not included in the current number is AUGUST 25, 2011 PAGE 6 P&R COMMISSION the quarterly recreation brochure, which is in a different budget from the Community Services budget. That expense is approximately $41,600 per year. Chair/Roberto stated that he felt that the point of past discussions was that the subsidy was somewhat hidden within the report and the Commissioners wanted to be sure that information was being properly communicated to the community reading the brochures when trying to determine the value of signing up for classes at a certain price. VC/Herndon asked if it was correct that the City was subsidizing those classes and CSD/Rose responded yes. For example, the classes that are held at the Diamond Bar Center are not charged rent for use of the Center, so utilities, loss of potential revenue, space, etc. are being subsidized. Chair/Roberto reiterated that in the past when the City did not have those facilities, it was paying someone for the rental space. CSD/Rose responded that Chair/Roberto was correct. CSD/Rose said he believed the highest amount that was paid to the school districts was about $120,000 per year. CSD/Rose confirmed to C/Owens that the City essentially subsidizes the programs at about a 54% level which includes full time employees, benefits, utilities, maintenance, etc. VC/Herndon felt that the recreation brochure should be included and he also believed that the breakdown of different costs included a statement indicating that, based on previous years' experience; the subsidy levels for this program would have been XX percentage. He believed this would provide a truer picture of what is happening. Chair/Roberto concurred with VC/Herndon and felt that statements at the bottom of each program would be an effective way of presenting the fact that there is an additional benefit to the participants. 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Liang thanked staff for the great job on the safety issues at Sycamore Canyon Park and for keeping the residents and the City safe. C/Owens shared that he attended several Concerts in the Park programs and was impressed with the crowds. He attended the Youth Baseball Picnic Awards and was impressed with the number of attendees. He thanked staff for organizing the events. VC/Herndon echoed comments about the great job staff does. He appreciates the great presentations and is always impressed with the results of the obvious efforts put forth by staff. When the Commission met to discuss the Parks Master Plan, there was a discussion about finding a spokesperson to help raise funds to AUGUST 25, 2011 PAGE 7 P&R COMMISSION develop sports fields. There was a budget mentioned and the possibility of organizations within the City getting involved. He would like to see a Council Member or someone of prominence in the City spearhead getting support for these sports fields. He believed there was a tremendous opportunity at this time with a tremendous adopted Master Plan. In addition, as was pointed out in the minutes, there may be funds available at the Federal level that could be utilized toward this effort and he would hate to see the ball dropped on this effort. He would like to see some forward movement on this issue. Chair/Roberto thanked staff for tonight's presentations and congratulated RS/Meyer on her retirement. He asked if the City had plans to recognize her and RS/Murphey responded that there would be a recognition ceremony for Lorry at the October 4 senior meeting. Once the details are made public, she will invite the Commissioners to attend. Chair/Roberto said he had no problem with staff opening mail that is addressed to him in care of the City. He appreciated the presentation on Item 4.2. He asked what staff would recommend that the Commission propose to the City Council to move forward with the Parks Master Plan. CSD/Rose stated that the first effort was to get the City Council to finance the new City Hall to get money back into the General Fund so that money could be earmarked for the sports facilities at Lorbeer and South Point Middle Schools. However, the City Council chose not to finance the facility and leave it as a cash purchase. Staff will propose to the City Council to see if they are interested in spearheading a fundraising effort. A number of years ago, then City Council Member and Mayor Bob Zirbes appointed a Sports Complex Task Force to study the matter which is how fundraising efforts began through the Diamond Bar Community Foundation. As a result, there are funds that have been set aside for a future sports complex; however, there needs to be more momentum and a citywide effort to move the matter forward. ADJOURNMENT: VC/Herndon moved, . C/Liang seconded, to adjourn the meeting. With no further business before the Parks & Recreation Commission, Chair/Roberto adjourned the meeting at 8:28 p.m. The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this ntt day of SEP1"C ` a -b , 2011. Respectfully Attest: DAVE ROBERTO, CHAIRMAN RETARY