Speaker 1: Recommendation to improve the park and recreation facilities project priorities.
Speaker 6: Good evening, Mayor and Council Amy Wooldridge, Recreation and Parks Director. So I'm here to discuss the Park and Recreation Facility Project Priorities. We're pulling up a map that shows you a high level look at all of the current and future projects. It was an exhibit to the staff report. So what I'll be doing with you, I know it's late, but I'm going to be reviewing the project status, the staffing and timelines and funding for each of the projects that are currently happening, as well as potential future projects, as well as essentially a third category of projects that are being built by developers but in collaboration with my department and will be managed operated by maintained by LAPD. So could I actually not have this one up with the map? Exhibit two, please.
Speaker 1: I thought this was exhibit two. I'm so sorry.
Speaker 6: Unless I got it. But if I can get the map. Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 0: The map is actually exhibit one, I think.
Speaker 6: Oh, my apologies. So. Okay, it's great. Okay, we'll fix it. So just to give you a sense of the scope, I wanted to give a sense of what I call the life of a project. This was really helpful for the commissioners when I presented at the Recreation and Parks Commission, just to give a sense of how much work actually goes into building a park. It doesn't just appear and there's a lot of steps in between when it's thought about and when it actually opens to the public.
Speaker 0: It's not just the ribbon cutting.
Speaker 6: It's not just a ribbon cutting, a fabulous ribbon cutting party, which we hold great parties. There's essentially three phases of the thank you of the park development. There's a master plan, conceptual design for starters. The second is doing detailed design and construction documents, and the third is actual construction. A fourth essentially is ongoing long term maintenance. So I always like to not lose sight of that and the costs associated with that. So for the first half, what we do is we do conduct a request for proposals for a master plan and then manage all of the public input and outreach to the community and getting that information and compiling it into a master plan and work with architects to complete that and get it back to the Recreation and Parks Commission and City Council for approval. Once we have our master plan, then we do another request for proposals for an architect to do detailed design and construction documents and work closely. That's a pretty in-depth process. During that time, we're identifying funding sources for each of these three phases. That could be grant funds, that could be development impact funds, that could be general fund, could be a mixture, usually a mix of all of them, and managing those grants in the budgets for each of those steps, as well as identifying maintenance funding. There's also securing as an island. We have a lot of permits that can take six months to a year. And so that's regional state, federal, city permits. And then we get to go out to bid for construction and do all the problem solving throughout construction. And then we get to accept the project and have a grand opening and ongoing maintenance. So staffing for these projects of what I just outlined. So as the director, I'm responsible for the overall project maintenance, project management, as well as securing all funding, managing all of the budgets, doing the master, planning the request for proposal processes, the detailed design and high level construction oversight and decisions. And a lot and a lot and a lot of problem solving. I work with our parks manager who helps consult on designs leading up to detailed designs because he knows what it works for maintenance and operations. He also assist with daily field coordination during construction. And then we have a public works project manager who basically jumps into the process once we're doing going out to bid and then coordinates the many moving parts during construction. He also will get involved in larger projects like Estero Park or Sweeney Park during design development. So we make sure it's a it's a good biddable design. As I mentioned, most of our projects are funded by a wide range of funding sources. The timing of when those sources become available is very unpredictable, will apply for grants. We may or may not get them. Development impact fees come only when housing developments are actually pulling building permits, and so that can be unpredictable. So with that, I want to start with going through the current park, our park projects to give you a sense of what we're currently working on and what's coming down the pipeline. So you know what you have before you cruisy park for starters, I want to see this. So Cruzi Park is right here on the east end of the island. We're right in the middle of construction right now as we speak. We've. Or the foundation. So it is finally actually happening. This has been a long time coming. This project replacing.
Speaker 0: Started.
Speaker 5: A.
Speaker 6: Few false starts since 2000. I think a lot about these. So we are replacing that recreation center with a new 2000 square foot recreation center. It will provide youth afterschool programs, rental facilities and much more. It will be fully built out, including furnished by June 2020. We also have the City Aquatic Center that is in concept design. It's progressing to the Commission Recreation and Parks Commission this month and to City Council in either April or May. And we had and that was a big public input process. We had three community meetings and so we're working through that. That's an interesting project because it's completely unfunded for detailed design and construction. And as you know, we're considering funding options such as a potential revenue measure. And so that's one of those projects where all these projects we can develop a park priority list, but we really need to consider it to be dynamic. And I'll talk about that a little bit later. And the City Aquatic Center is a great example of that, because if it does get funded, it would be a massive amount of staff, time and resources. If it doesn't get funded, we can redirect those staff time and resources to other projects. Jackson Park Player is something that you funded. Thank you. In the this two year budget cycle, we're finalizing several concepts for that play area currently and be bring it out to to the commission for design for decisions and then construction. And we've also been completing related pretty large maintenance projects on pathways and trees that have been taking a lot of interaction with with the local neighbors on those. We also have our annual playground replacement. We're replacing Bayport Park later this month on March 25th. We have a neighborhood meeting with designs. We'll be making decisions and that's on that and that's moving forward with Cruisy. Park is our next playground for this in 2021. We also have creek, a park parking lot actually went out to bid today for the for the parking lot itself and working closely with Greenway Golf on utilities. And that's had a lot of complications within that project. And they're also improving the sidewalks. We also have Northwest Territories regional shoreline up at Alameda Point. We recently had a thank you in memorandum of understanding, really kind of a historical moment with the Park District to to start to really move that park forward. I'm excited to report that today. Actually, I had a meeting with the Park District and we're already coordinating on how to get tours out there for the public. So it's exciting. It's moving forward. The work behind it means we need to do the lease agreement over the next year and then subsequently start working on the conceptual plan and community input with public feedback. After that estuary park we've completed a couple of years ago, phase one of the athletic facilities is heavily used and appreciated by the community. Phase two is a really critical component because that's all of the park. That's your average park that you think of for the community. It's it's it's the playgrounds and the grass area and the picnic areas and basketball courts, dog park. And that will serve that little four acre park will serve all of Alameda Landing, which currently has no park other than just some grass. It'll serve all of our Admirals Cove. So it's a bit of a a park poor area in terms of of that type of active park. It's there's no funding currently for it. It's estimated about $5 million. And so that for staff has been a top priority on figuring out how to get that funded because that's a need with residents now living in those new developments. Gene 20 Open Space Park. We've completed phase one, the most eastern portion, as well as across the Alameda Trail. Phases two and three are remaining and many people are asking when that that will be completed. It includes community garden and includes a large open space that is on hold. No working can both no work. And I can't go after grant funding until we settle the eminent domain case. And so that is essentially on hold until we we we work through that.
Speaker 0: And interject a quick question here for the city attorney. Why is it that I think I read in the staff report we don't even have a court date until February of 2021.
Speaker 7: I so in these these closed cases, unfortunately, suffer from everything else in the court system, which is that everything takes just okay.
Speaker 0: Is it just a lower priority or everything is.
Speaker 7: A lower priority to criminal cases, basically, and because criminal cases under state law has to be brought to trial within 30 days or 45 days without a time waiver. Everything is a lower priority to criminal cases.
Speaker 0: Is in eminent domain case is going to be heard before a criminal judge.
Speaker 7: No, but but in terms of how the court system distributes, judges have to staff criminal courts first before they staff civil courts.
Speaker 0: Okay. Okay. Thank you for that.
Speaker 6: And then we have the pathway is long for inside. And I'm sure I'm currently work with the city attorney's office. We've been meeting with every single neighbor, adjacent neighbor, because we have to do the legal work to get the new easements and do boundary work, survey work and get the new easements in place and get them done right so we can move past and not have the murkiness that we've had in the past. We also need to start short term improvements to make sure that the existing conditions are are appropriate and safe. And so subsequent to that, there will be design which will be quite complex. It's a four, four, five little pathways, it's a very complex design as well as a lot of regional permits. But we will start that design once we complete the legal easement work. So those, as indicated by the little blue shovel on the map in front of you are all of the existing current park projects. Okay. I'm going to jump to the projects that are being constructed, developed by developers and will be maintained by LAPD, because there's there's just there's less to say about those in some respects. But I don't want to undersell them because they are adding significant amount of new parkland to our community and will cost to maintain they'll be maintained by community facility districts so they won't be, in effect, impact to the general fund. But they also have been taking staff time on my part in terms of working with them to get the designs right for the community as well as something that we feel is appropriate to for us to maintain. So that includes Alameda Point, Waterfront Park and along Seaplane Lagoon. Those are in the green shovels and the neighborhood park, which is a small linear park, but has a lot of components packed into a little park because it's serving 800 homes. And so that has everything from fitness equipment to playgrounds to picnic areas and basketball court. So it has a lot packed into a little park. The last park being constructed by developers and maintained by LAPD is Alameda Landing Waterfront Park, which will be really unique for us. So we've been working out a lot of details on that because it's a we call it internally Pier Park because it's all a park on a concrete pier. And so that's very new for us and how to figure out how to do everything from like how do you install Drip when you're on top of a concrete pier , drip, irrigation, things like that. And so that was just more complex on the on the design front. So jumping to new park projects, those are the ones with the little trees. One is to water park, kayak launch. It's a it's a non-motorized it's a proposed non-motorized watercraft launch. So stand up paddleboards, kayaks, canoes, things like that. This was part of the Recreation and Park Commission's recommendation. They wanted to see us complete existing projects. They see the ferns on New Shore Pathways as an existing project, and they felt that this kayak launch as part of that project, simply because it was discussed, it wasn't part of the council final action, but it was discussed during that time, during that project as an alternative because that community, that neighborhood wanted a kayak launch. And and my recommendation was not to put one in in a neighborhood like that at Liberty and E Shore and instead to put it here at two Water Park.
Speaker 0: If you'll excuse the interruption. It is 1055 and council. We need to consider a motion before we get to 11 p.m.. We have two remaining items there. Council referrals items nine, eight and nine B. We have no speakers on either. Do we want to go past? Do we want to hear those after 11:00 and I need four votes.
Speaker 3: Vote some to do that I'll second.
Speaker 0: Okay, we have a motion. We have a second.
Speaker 8: Can we put a tie? I'm hoping that we can get out of here by time by midnight, and if we not move them to the next. So I'm happy to support.
Speaker 0: I wonder if we could say 1130 instead of midnight, try to get us out of here on the same day we can move discussion right here. Yeah. 11 Okay.
Speaker 3: 1130 But that will reconsider then.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Okay. All right. We're going to go until 1130 right now with the intent of hearing 99 be okay. All in favor of doing that. I can I get a verbal from you Mr.. Today so thank you. Just follow this. Okay. We're going to move quickly. Thank you. And this.
Speaker 6: Is great. So this kayak launch does have potential for funding, is completely unfunded, does have potential funding from the Division of Boating and Waterways. They have a fund specifically for public kayak launches that hardly anyone ever applies to and as a fund sitting there that they've asked me to apply for. So that has a potential D paved park is another one that is a new park that doesn't currently have any funding and is on the most western side leg of Seaplane Lagoon. It's been described in the Alameda Point town of waterfront for a precise plan is to convert its about 22 acres of existing concrete surface to passive parkland and sustainable ecological area, including wetlands. This would be designed to date over time and adapt to sea level rise. It does have strong potential for carbon sequestration benefits, but it's not specifically listed in the Climate Action Resiliency Plan for that purpose. This was recommended by the Commission to be the essentially the first new park on the list. So in terms of these four new parks that I'm discussing, they wanted to water park, kayak, launch to be first and then DEP have to be next after that. There is a strong potential funding source for this in Measure AA, which is the San Francisco Regional Bay Restoration Authority, and they have grant applications every December. So we could go to apply for a grant this December for a master plan process and then subsequently after that apply for construction. It would be a strong candidate for that. And that measure is funding, I believe, for about the next 20 years. So we have a number of cycles that we can use to go after potential funding for that. For this project. Enterprise Park is a triangular down by the internal boat launch. It's about 12 acre park between until sailboat launch and the USS Hornet, kind of includes the old Navy campground and recreation center. This has strong potential for public private partnerships. We have had a couple different local Alameda businesses express interest in public private partnerships here. The commission has has discussed this project in the past and so this is another potential project. Lastly, the Alameda Point Regional Sports Complex, a large 57 acre area up by the Alameda Point Gym in the skate park and spanning west and would have a variety of athletic facilities there. Currently, site developer Alameda Point Partners has to put had to put one point per their developers agreement $1.8 million in. So we will have that available any time we want to start the master plan process for that. Other than that, there's no design or construction funding identified. So with that I conclude my report and open any questions.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Do we have any clarifying questions of the staff report before we go to public speakers? Okay. And we have public speakers, correct? We have four public speakers. Okay. And public speakers. You all have up to 3 minutes. You don't have to feel. You have to use them all. But you've waited a long time to speak. So let's hear our public speakers Don Lemon.
Speaker 1: Ruth, Abby, Richard Bangert and Marjorie Powell.
Speaker 0: Good evening.
Speaker 5: Good evening. I did vote, but, you know, I think there's a limit on the number of hours that the weekend holds.
Speaker 0: Okay. Well, thank you. I think you're good word for that.
Speaker 5: My name is Dawn Lemoine. I'm here to speak in favor of making D Paved Park the highest priority of the Alameda Recreation Park Department. The city's recent Climate Action and Resiliency Plan focuses on, quote, an integrated approach consisting of both adaptation and greenhouse gas reduction. Development of Deep Park will further the goals of the Climate Action Plan. It will do so by number one, reducing the effects of sea level rise with the development of tidal marsh. And number two, reducing greenhouse gas as marshes act as carbon sinks through absorption of CO2 during photosynthesis. Furthermore, as we develop Alameda Point, the deep park will ensure resources remain for our beloved species of birds that nest around the Deep Park area. And I'm talking about great blue herons are endangered, leased terns, Caspian Terns, Ospreys and others. So I urge the City Council to move expeditiously to hire an engineering consultant to develop the master plan for Deep Pave Park. I further urge you to grant the HPD request for funding for an additional staff person who can start writing grant requests for the development of the park. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Next to her. Ruth. Abby.
Speaker 5: You mean Ruth? Abby with Community Action for.
Speaker 4: Sustainable Alameda, I am also.
Speaker 5: Writing to support the.
Speaker 4: Implementation of D Pave Park. It's a unique opportunity for the city in that it is a passive park. So it's not, you know, technically about trails and and playgrounds. It's about an investment in our future. It is going to be a symbol for us, but it also is going to help us with our sea level rise, our adaptation. And I'm not and I think we feel some urgency because we may not always have the philosophy that that Parkland needs to be brought back to the wetlands and back to the sea. And so we would really like to bake this project.
Speaker 5: In to the goal setting of this council and ask that you prioritize.
Speaker 4: This project. We very much recognize the constraints that the Rec and Park Department is under in terms of their staffing, particularly for project management and support of the director. We have so many park projects and they're so important and there's so much funding out there that's available and it's the stuff capacity issue and you know that I feel like we're up against and I feel as though we would very much support the idea of additional staff support for that department. I also think this particular project of Deep Park might be something that could be supported by the new position and climate and resiliency manager to support looking for those regional grants and support the project management of a park like this.
Speaker 5: Which is not a traditional recreation.
Speaker 4: Park, but is a different kind of.
Speaker 5: Unique opportunity for us.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Next speaker.
Speaker 0: Mr. Boehner.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Mayor. Excuse me. Members of the council and staff, thank you for going through this process and putting together this priority list. And I would just echo what the previous two speakers stated very well about the importance of the park, and I would hope that you would incorporate those recommendations into any motions that you make tonight because the agenda item says approve a priority list. But of course, approving a list isn't an action item. I mean, it's a list. So I would I, I was hoping after we started this process, after the council referral back in October, that if the park came out on top, that we would then decide to move forward. And I think I think based on what the previous two speakers said, I won't say everything again, but I think we can we can start moving forward with with the planning process. And I think that's. Urgent. And I think we should begin tonight by making a motion to do so. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 1: Marjorie Powell. Yes.
Speaker 0: Hello, Mr..
Speaker 5: Powell. Hello, members of the council. I am Marjorie Powell. I want to echo earlier comments and just make a couple of additional points. As Alameda Point gets developed, we will see much increased human use over what's been happening out there for the last five or ten years. That's going to put additional pressures on the various resources that are available for the all of the wildlife out there. But I'm focusing particularly on the wildlife, the birds that use that area. There is both the concern for sea level rise, but also a concern for warming of the ocean and acidification of the ocean, both of which are caused by increased human use, both of which influence the things that grow in the ocean on which the birds and the other animals out there feed. Think both the insects and the small fish. The in particular the least terns need small fish because they're feeding tiny chicks who don't chew. They simply swallow whole. So the the marshland development is going to be additionally important as that part of the island gets development. So I urge that you not only approve the list, but to the extent that staff has any resources, they start the process of looking for a consultant. And then I echo the point that when you come to talk about additional staffing, that the Recreation and Parks Department needs additional resources given all of the parks within the city. Thank you.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Is that our last proposal? Okay. So, discussion council. I mean, I look to my left. Vice mayor.
Speaker 8: I'm sure. Thank you for this. I really appreciated the staff report. I think it involved the written report provided a lot of important information. I guess I have a question. So so when I read the staff report, what I read is we have a lot of priorities. We don't have the staffing tonight. We are not being asked to add staff in. And I would not support the idea of using the currently the recent just a point just created sustainable and resiliency position to all of a sudden become kind of an A in adjunct parks position. I know that's something that might come forward in the mid-cycle, but I don't think that that's the type of working together and making sure that all of our departments are working on issues. A concept at least I approved that that piece for I. So again, I said when this came back the first time I was on the planning board, when this was when this was developed and designed, I was a strong voice for Dave Park. I'm excited about Dave Park. I'm a little concerned that it's a park that is not in any plans right now. We talk about resiliency and yet we have 11 resiliency projects that are unfunded in our recently adopted carp. This was not one of them. We have got sequestration projects in the carp that are identified and unfunded, and this is not one of them. And I'm just a little concerned that we are that that if we're not careful, I don't I'm not here to say let's not move forward with this at all. But I think if we're not careful, we're all of a sudden taking one park and jumping it to the head of a line of a lot of stuff after we've done a whole holistic planning around around parks and around and around climate. And so I think for me, if I was going to support something moving forward tonight, I think it basically I did ask staff and they have identified some funding that would be available to help plan this park that becomes available later this year, that would not be available to fund any of the other unfunded needs that we have for resiliency or parks or whatever else. And I think that if we were to give direction, I think tonight we need to make a a recommendation based on the the resources we have. Because I sat in a meeting today with our traffic and traffic safety folks and talked about all the needs they have. And I and I've heard from other departments about the needs that are, you know, that are coming forward and mid-cycle. I don't know where additional staffing is going to come, but I can't vote on something today. Assuming that in June I'm going to vote on it on a vote to approve another position for rec and park specifically because I haven't seen what all those with all the. So far. So for me, I'd like to see something that maybe gives direction. I like the way that, that, that, that, that this was presented as a priority and it was a presented in the win there. You know, we have the part that sorry. So I didn't want to go too late losing my ability to to think I like the fact that the that the rec and park commission and the staff report really laid out like let's do the things we we are already doing, let's finish the things we have already started. And then where it doesn't conflict and interfere and keep us from doing those things, we should also then start to work. And so I think whether it's the and I don't remember if it's probably a I think it was the the funding source funds that become available later this year. If we were able to write a grant that successfully got us a consultant who could actually do the planning so it could actually expand the resources we have in order to move forward on something like this. I think that would be a fantastic opportunity and so I'd be more than happy to support something like that.
Speaker 0: Thank you. As long as I'm on my left hand side. Councilmember Vella, do you want to go next?
Speaker 4: So I. I appreciate the work that's gone into this. I defer a little bit from my colleague in that when I look at the staff report in terms of the new park projects, it says Park No Direction received council referral from November 2019, but it was actually also talked about even prior to November of 2019. We had, I think in the first my first year on council, we had extensive conversations about De Park. And I do know that we've discussed in terms of the two water park kayak launch, but we also have some other water based parks that are coming along that are through developer projects. I. I would like to see us really start to focus on depth in terms of while we might not necessarily be funding things right away, we need to start seeing it show up in plans and then figuring out what the pathway forward is. And I understand that staff has limited amount of time to work on things, but I think we have a lot of nice parks throughout Alameda. It's one of the the things that makes Alameda. Alameda, but if we don't put d pave on the map and start carving out some time for it, I do have concerns that it's going to continue to be this item where we have not given clear direction to actually do that. So I want to do that tonight. I want to say, please move pave up on this list and and tell us what what are the next steps that where, you know, what do we need to do to to start making it a little more of a place? Because I remember Councilmember Marta Rossi brought this up when I was first here in the issues were signage and things like that. And we were told we can't do that because it would create liability issues. But it's it's basically sitting out there with a ton of potential. And we're not we're not doing anything with it. And it is this concrete wasteland. And I don't want to see that happen to what could be a very nice space. And I understand that there's all of these other, you know, state pressures coming down for other things. But I want to make sure that West Alameda and I know we've got Jean Sweeney and we've got the Cross Alameda Trail opening up through our Pizarro Parkway and things like that. But I want to make sure that De Pave doesn't get forgotten. And I think that it could play a key part in our climate action plan. So I'd like to see it prioritized higher.
Speaker 0: Councilmember de SAG.
Speaker 12: Well, thank you very much to Parks Director Woolridge and her presentation. And the map is very helpful in letting not just council members but the public see the breadth of new projects that were doing throughout Alameda not not just the east end of town but but but thankfully so much is happening on the west end of town . So I am I am so happy to see this map that's presented here. And I love all those little.
Speaker 9: Shovels, too.
Speaker 12: You know, I certainly welcome staff's recommendation, but I certainly also want to hear what my colleagues say in terms of, you know, how they would like to prioritize matters. You know, in terms of D Pave Park, I certainly join Councilmember Ody as well as all the other council members in in supporting De Pave Park largely because it's it's a different type of park, you know. I mean, we we in our minds, we have a certain thing about parks and how they function in our neighborhoods and how they look. But D pave in a way is is that not thinking out of the box for the sake of thinking out of the box, but thinking out of the box because there's a functional aspect to it with regard to climate change. And we can certainly be one city that that shows other cities how when it comes to planning parks, we can do it intentionally with regard to climate change. So that's why I certainly support I supported Councilmember Odie when he brought forward the matter again several months ago. Thank you for her for for letting me join you on that. And and I'm glad to see that there's not only community support, but that that our Parks and Rec and I also vetted this as well. So I look forward to what my colleagues have to say.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Alley, thank you.
Speaker 3: I'll be quick. I also appreciate all the work that Amy and her staff has done. It was nice to walk home from the event on Saturday and basically almost walk entirely through parks between Jean Sweeney and Lydecker Park. I was only a block away from home, so that was really great and it was a nice day too. So I think this council has a chance to go down, as you know, the most climate friendly council that we've ever had. We did the climate emergency. We did the Climate Action Plan. We hired the sustainability person or we didn't hire them. We authorized the money today. And now, you know, we have an opportunity to prioritize a park. You know, that could be state of the art. You look around the world, you know, Hong Kong has these wetlands park right on the edge of of of development, you know, huge, huge, huge populated cities. So the advocates of this park, you know, did what was asked of them. We sent this to the Park and Rec Commission. They evaluate it and they put it at the top after the two parks that are already in process. So I think we need to respect that, that decision. So I'd like to move to accept the recommendation.
Speaker 0: Would you mind if I had a chance?
Speaker 3: I want to make the motion because then we can have discussion. But I want to move to approve the priorities and then with direction to staff, to hire a consultant to develop this master plan and ballpark the cost and get this back to us by the end of July.
Speaker 0: So I'm going to speak next. That motion hasn't been seconded yet. I am I almost.
Speaker 3: A rule that you have to do a motion first before discussion. So.
Speaker 0: Okay, well then I will just comment that I was actually going to make my comments first, but I decided to respect your ability to go next. Okay. It's been moved. It's been seconded in my turn to discuss, I think, the hours getting late here. I also want to commend Ms. Wooldridge. That was an outstanding staff report you put together and the exhibits were great and I love the map. I have. I have much the same map on my wall, but it doesn't have all the new I might need to get a new map. But I also very much respect the Recreation Park Commission. I know that Ms.. Aldridge is extremely pleased with their composition. I think they're doing a good job for us. And so I, I think, you know, I think everything the council has said tonight is true and correct, including the points that the vice mayor made about we do have a climate action resiliency plan, and this wasn't a part of it. But I think we can in this particular matter, we can do it. Also, I would support the staff recommendation, which is to and it seems I can almost move forward on two tracks because the funding streams would be different because there are is this funding that is specific to the sort of park that. Park is. So I would support following the recommendation of the the Recreation Parks Commission to have the three priorities. But the two along the the waterfront on the East End followed by D paved park but they might even be moving forward kind of simultaneously insofar as going after funding that apparently you've been asked to to apply for. So if that is indeed the motion, I support it to. Okay. For the commission.
Speaker 8: So.
Speaker 5: Of course.
Speaker 8: Yeah. I guess I felt my comments were very aligned with the staff report and the recommendation of the of the park. But the motion then got into directing staff to hire an engineer and be back in July, which I don't think is. But also, I'm not clear where the funding is coming from that. And I'm wondering if we can talk about what what is what is not going to happen.
Speaker 0: You know what? I will just ask for clarification from the speaker. I'm sorry. I was trying to get a word in edgewise and so I wasn't probably listening as closely to. Can you tell us what Motion Councilmember Odie made was?
Speaker 1: It was to move from all of the except the staff recommendation about the priorities with direction is staff to hire a consultant that would be returned back by July.
Speaker 10: Oh.
Speaker 0: Before the budget process. They. Okay. So that. Well, say it again if you would like.
Speaker 1: It was to move acceptance of the staff recommendation on the priorities with directions of staff to hire a consultant that would return back in July. The matter.
Speaker 8: So I guess my my question is to the maker of the motion, where what funding are we using for that? Because we haven't we haven't budgeted for that.
Speaker 3: I think I'll leave that up to the the staff to figure that out. I mean, they were going to do these other projects also. So. Right. So what funding is there for those projects?
Speaker 8: Okay. So.
Speaker 3: I mean, the idea was to send it back to the Park and rec to prioritize on the budget they have on which ones they would focus on. And we don't even know how much this one's going to cost. That's why we want this done. It could be so cost prohibitive that we decide we're never going to do this. I don't know.
Speaker 0: Well, so as long as we're discussing, I think I another way to approach it might be to hold off on the direction to hire until we've had our mid-cycle budget discussions in that.
Speaker 3: Well, I don't know how much it cost to develop an RFP. I can't imagine it's like super expensive.
Speaker 0: Well, it's a little different than a fully loaded salary. I think we could agree to that.
Speaker 3: I mean, I would envision staff drafting an RFP, which I think they probably have them on the shelf that would require minor modifications. And then whatever the consultant I mean, they're not that expensive. I'm sure they're under the amount that even the city manager can approve. I don't even know if it has to come back to us.
Speaker 0: My concern is just taking things outside of the budget process when we're so close to contemplating that.
Speaker 3: But my concern is that this idea keeps getting kicked down the road and now we have an opportunity. We did what we were asked to do, which was take it to the Park Commission and get prioritized. So do we just leave it there or do we actually do something about it? Because maybe the intention was we thought we could kill it there, but it didn't die. So we need to keep it keep it moving.
Speaker 0: I I'm I'm sorry. I am troubled by that. The suggestion that we sent things to the, the Recreation and Parks Commission, a very hardworking commission to be killed, I think they took their mission very seriously, and I think they came back with a good recommendation. Councilmember De So you wanted to say something.
Speaker 12: In terms of the RFP for a consultant when when the July timeline was mentioned, that wasn't for the consultant to finish the work, is that correct? That was just the to the time by which we would select a consultant. Is that correct?
Speaker 3: Yes.
Speaker 12: Really?
Speaker 3: Yeah. So that we would have peace and people would come back with their proposals and then we would select somebody and then, you know, that would pretty much align with this December date to.
Speaker 5: Yeah. Okay.
Speaker 0: I am the city manager. Do you want to add anything?
Speaker 9: I was going to ask the rec and park director to come up.
Speaker 0: Here and just the introduction that she was seeking. Do you want to consult with as.
Speaker 9: Far as timing of how long it would take to do an RFP for this particular type of function? That would be one question, and I don't even know if you have a projection on what the budget for this type of console would be.
Speaker 6: I haven't delved into it enough to know the budget for a consultant. If I can tell you that the consultant to do the master planning process for the pool was about $68,000, so it could be roughly on that order of magnitude. Regarding time frame, I'm a little unclear. Normally for this type project, when we do a request for proposals, we don't bring choice for those consultants. Back to Council for decision. That's a different level of RFP on the development side, but not on this level. So. So the way it normally works is I identify funding prior to doing an RFP because I can't necessarily choose somebody and then say I need you to hold for a couple of months until I can get it in front of council because it takes us. It takes me at least if I have staff reports done and contracts done and everything I have, I need at least a month to get in front of the City Council because the Sunshine Ordinance, the RFP process itself, they're a little bit off the shelf is the term I heard. However, this is, as was mentioned, a very unique park. So you want to find the right kind of consultant. Someone who designs a baseball field is not necessarily somebody that you want designing this unique type of park, so you want someone that has the ecological. And so I would need to get more educated. I haven't built this type of park before. I need to reach out to my resources to get educated, to make sure we find the right consultant and don't waste our money on someone who wasn't correct. So I need at least a few weeks to do that. Generally, we have an RFP open for 30 days and it generally takes us about a month or so to pull together an interview, panel interview and some more time to get it under contract. It's usually anytime a type of RFP or bid process is about a three month process.
Speaker 3: So we would.
Speaker 0: Council member Rudy.
Speaker 3: Thank you. Would the beginning of September be reasonable to come back with? Whatever bids you get and then a budget request on whether we if we choose to accept one of those bids or authorize you to accept one of those bids, I really don't need to pick myself.
Speaker 0: You know, can you? I think I see Mr. Leavitt wanting to add something maybe he can.
Speaker 9: Recommend is that she put that in as one of your budget requests and then you can consider that during the mid-cycle.
Speaker 0: In May. Correct. Early May.
Speaker 9: In May. June. Yeah.
Speaker 3: And that I mean, that's fine to. It's just I still think we need to get the RFP issued. If you need more than two weeks or three weeks or four weeks to do that, then tell us how much you need. But at least we can get that out there.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Vela, did you want to say something?
Speaker 4: I think my concern and be this concern shared by my colleague is that if we don't at least start drafting the RFP and working on the RFP, we'll get proposals back. And we can we can put it in the in the budget cycle to actually say, okay, do we want to move forward? But if we don't actually start working on figuring out what the RFP would look like, then we're really falling further behind.
Speaker 0: So I have a suggestion. What if as part of this motion we include direction to include in the budget, the mid-cycle budget, the position of a position for a consultant for this specific unique part, because I don't think it's just any park park consultant. So with that and councilmember already to your concern that somehow and Councilmember Vela, I'm trying to be mindful of the concerns you're you're articulating. You don't want to see this pushed farther down the road. I'm here to tell you, it's the first meeting in March. We're talking about the beginning of May when this would come back. And it's you know, I think I mean, I think everyone on this council is saying, yes, let's do this. But I just think that it's a little a little neater, a little more adhering to a good budget project, a process to include them, include this position with specific direction to staff to come back with working that into the budget.
Speaker 3: Well, I agree with that idea, but I also think it should include some hard deadline on an RFP if that budget position is approved. I mean, whether that's whether May is too soon. I think I get that, whether June is too soon or July. But, you know, some day because.
Speaker 0: And and I understand that's your opinion. My feeling based on years of experience with Mr. Aldridge in the projects he's brought before us is that she gets the job done. And so I think that if we give direction that this is the will as a council and we're asking for that position in the budget, I don't feel the need to then, you know, double check her by telling her a date certain. And also we've heard her say that this isn't just any old park consultant and it might take just a little longer. But I don't. I don't. Speaking for myself, I'm certainly not trying to delay what you're trying to accomplish.
Speaker 3: So I didn't I didn't say you did it, but I. I said I also know that our Amy does what we asked to do, but she's done a lot. I went to that meeting and heard all of that. So this is not on the agenda. I think you need more people, but that's not for today's discussion. So I trust that you'll do what what you need to do. But we've given you a lot, just like we given the traffic people and we've given everybody else a lot, but. I mean, if maybe in the in the budget request, there is some some deadline put in that request, then, you know, that might work too.
Speaker 0: Councilmember Vela.
Speaker 4: I would like it to come back before you know, before I've been on the council for four years because we have been talking about this specific space for literally the entire time I've been on council and it continues to come up is kind of here's the placeholder for it. And I just want to make sure that whatever direction we're giving, it's clear enough that it doesn't come up again is on the list, but no council direction and no timeline. And I think that that's what we're trying to achieve. I'm fine if you know, if if as part of the budget process, it has a date certain to come back in the fall, but I would like it to come back prior to.
Speaker 0: Well, I think in the budget it could come back sooner than the fall, the budget hearings early May.
Speaker 4: That's fine. I think the question is she saying we're hearing from the director that putting together the RFP is going to take time. So I think part of the direction should be to at least do some of the background work to identify what would need to even go in the RFP.
Speaker 0: I might imagine that in order to put an item into the budget, there needs to be a little research about, you know, who that would be and how much it would cost. It is 1130, folks. So who wants to do.
Speaker 8: Can I just I guess I'm just unclear on what what I get the prioritization and moving the park forward and everything else. I'm not clear on what the RFP and what we're the motion is to hire an engineer, which I don't think is the type of thing we need to hire for this project. I'm sure that there will be engineers that are consulted at some point in time, but we don't even have a we have a minor concept, right? We have a high level.
Speaker 0: What what may I actually ask a legal question really quickly when you just stuck something in my mind? So this recommendation in the staff report is to approve the Park and Recreation Facilities Project priorities. Are we getting beyond the scope of what we were asked to do in this staff report.
Speaker 7: I think is part of the prioritization. The council could certainly give direction about timing, right? It's I think the council probably wouldn't want to go into budgeting and deciding whether or not you want a budget for an engineer. But I think if you were to just if the council direction was a particular deadline for a particular project, that's generally consistent with prioritization.
Speaker 0: A particular deadline for what?
Speaker 7: For a milestone. Right. Which is what I'm hearing from at least some of the council members. You want a milestone from a high priority for a high priority project to come back to the council that yeah, that's within the ambient prioritization. But obviously the council shouldn't be, you know, establishing budgets making very.
Speaker 0: I'm a little worried about date certain to come back with a date certain to come back with a RFP is that is that.
Speaker 7: I think you're I mean that the staff may have concerns about operationally whether or not they could do it. But I think because you're prioritizing you're simply saying I think what I'm hearing is that I want the first step of this process to come back to the council in the next three months. And that's the direction I think that's reasonable to give. As part of prioritization.
Speaker 3: We did it on six B, so we've already done that once tonight.
Speaker 0: I guess, Mayor Knox.
Speaker 8: Could we could we just clarify the motion so that it right now, I think it's almost meaningless that the engineer part. So if the question is that we want some sort of a plan with funding, etc.. Because we can't do an RFP. We don't know how we're funding this. I'd like to know if we're going if we're making a decision and it doesn't sound like we can actually say spend money on something specifically tonight, I'd like to know what we're not doing because we don't have a budget that's just the park slush fund. So could we. Knowing that knowing following the mayor's recommendation, knowing the budget is coming in two months, could we ask that there be a proposal with funding and a timeline for moving this, for moving to the next phase of this park, which I would imagine is some sort of an RFP for a planning process for. What will be a large and interesting park.
Speaker 0: Mr. Levitt, what do you think?
Speaker 9: Yeah, I think you could do that. As far as timing, I would agree with that. If you said you wanted to have the console come back, we would put this as the number one priority. Priority, because it's the first time that you said you want this to be in the mid-cycle. So if we don't have enough funding the mid-cycle, we'd cut something in there or we would put this before other other priorities if because it's the only one that you've prioritized at this point. I mean, why? Sorry. I mean, this is only if you said that, but is it consultants only? It's not only, but it's 60000 to 80000 to what I'm guessing.
Speaker 0: Well, I think I'm hearing that we're prioritizing all three.
Speaker 9: Well, what I heard was to have a consultant hired for this.
Speaker 0: For this particular one. Madumere, please do things.
Speaker 12: Maybe we should do the time. Yeah, I'd like to.
Speaker 0: Okay, so we said that at 1130, we would decide if we were going to go beyond 1132 here items. 99 BE.
Speaker 3: Yeah. And I'm okay with that hearing them or not hearing them or hearing on the hearing.
Speaker 0: It takes four votes. And I don't think that we're going to be more productive as the hour goes on. So I won't be supporting that. And did I hear the vice mayor say he wouldn't either? Okay. Okay, I. Okay. So back to this.
Speaker 12: Um, my comment.
Speaker 0: That was in your comment now.
Speaker 12: Yes, yes, yes. My comment now.
Speaker 5: Go ahead.
Speaker 12: Thank you. I think I will certainly join my colleagues in prioritizing Deep Park, largely because I do believe that there is community support for moving Dave Park forward, not just the support that I've seen recently, but it's the support that has been there for. I mean, it was there when in my first go around 2012. 2016. Right. So. So, yeah. Who's counting? So, so I do think that there's community support behind it and the fact that it was prioritized high. So but I also respect the fact that Parks Director Woolridge, as well as our city executive staff are making are are causing us to make sure to put together an RFP that reflects our best judgment and research. And my hope is that all of that can be done within some time frame that's more immediate than not immediate. And at some point in time, if someone says September 2020, they'd like to see an RFP start moving forward. I'm okay with that, that that falls within my timeframe. Do I have to prescribe it tonight? I don't know. But I do want to express my support and certainly moving forward, Dave Park because I do think that we're we're working on behalf of the people.
Speaker 0: Okay. Thank you. Well said, Ms. Wooldridge.
Speaker 6: If I could make a proposal so I'm more than happy to bring back a plan on D Pave Park, on what steps it'll take, what the funding is, what the timeline could be. If I could bring that later before our summer recess, somewhere around June, July. By that point, we may know more about potential funding sources for the Aquatics Center and what could or could not be happening with that. And so there's some other big projects that we'll know more at that point. And her and at that point, we may also have some decisions on whether there's additional staffing for the Recreation Department to help with this. Because then I can also do at that point is give you an update on okay, here's the D Pave Park plan. And if if staffing doesn't come during the mid cycle, here's what other projects will be delayed and by how long to refocus on this, because I guarantee other projects will get delayed. It could be the aquatic center. It could be for inside. It could be a lot of other projects that will get significantly delayed. If I refocus on it was fine and that's your purview to determine, but I can give you that what that balance looks like when we have more information by June, July. During that time, I'm more than happy to start researching and figuring out what goes into an RFP of this type and start planning on an RFP. There's no funding attached to developing an RFP, and that's certainly fine.
Speaker 0: How does that sound?
Speaker 3: It sounds good to me.
Speaker 0: Okay. Do you want to do you want to recraft your motion? So just adopt everything she said when she said, I can I say that here. Did you get that, Madam Quirk?
Speaker 3: Does that work for the city manager? Is it that that will give us the outcome that we want?
Speaker 0: And the city clerk says she got all that. So okay, so we have it. We have an amended motion. Do we have a second? Second and it's been seconded. Okay. So any questions now? Okay. All in favor I any opposed you abstained. That passes unanimously. Thanks, everyone. Good melding of the minds. Okay, so where are we? Besides, it's getting late. City Manager Communications Number seven, Mr. Lovett.
Recommendation to Approve the Park and Recreation Facilities Project Priorities.   (Recreation and Parks 51210)