Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/08/23 - Agenda Packet - Special~~Q aoa AGENDA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL WORKSHOP Thursday, August 23, 2007 4 3:00 p.m. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ~ Tri Communities Room 10500 Civic Center Drive ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-3801 A. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Mayor Kurth Mayor Pro Tem Williams Councilmembers Gutierrez, Michael and Spagnolo B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council on any Item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Ciry Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per Individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communlwtlons are to be addressed directly to the City Council, not to the members of the audience. This Is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. The public communications period will not exceed one hour prior to the commencement of the 6uslness portion of the agenda. During this one hour period, all those who wish to speak on a topic contained In the business portion of the agenda will be given priority, and no further speaker cards for these business items (wflh the exception of public hearing Items) will be accepted once the business portion of the agenda commences. Any other public communications which have not concluded during this one hour period may resume after the regular business portion of the agenda has been completed. C. ITEM OF BUSINESS CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK D. ADJOURNMENT I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 16, 2007, per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. P.1 STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPAR'T'MENT RANCHO Date: August 23, 2007 C,UCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director Subject: CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions relating to the future development of Central Park: 1. Approve the proposed Central Park Phasing Map and Priorities 2. Provide direction to staff for the scheduling of the proposed future phases of the Central Park development 3. Direct staff to prepare and submit a proposed architectural services agreement for Phase II and advance planning for future phases for Council consideration BACKGROUND The development of Central Park has been an important vision for the City since shortly after incorporation. The 100 acre property was acquired in 1984 in 'an acquisition program that took the next 10 years to complete. Although at the time of purchase, the City did not have the financial resources to develop the park, it had a long term vision for its future development and hoped to draw upon fiscal opportunities that might arise in the future. As a result of this long term vision, the City began a planning process to further develop this vision. During the mid-1980's, City staff, the Central Park design team and an active task force of community members worked extremely hard to determine the program/facility needs for the community and to develop a long term master plan for Central Park. In 1987, the City Council approved the Central Park Master Plan which has conceptually guided the on- going planning and development of the park over the years. While the design of specific park amenities and facilities has evolved since the original master plan vision, the City has remained very committed to the original overall master plan concept. Enclosed as .Exhibit #1 is a copy of the existing Central Park Master Plan. A funding opportunity arose in March 2002 through the passage of the 2002 Park Bond Issue approved by voters in California that allowed a $10 million grant to Rancho Cucamonga, which in turn enabled a cobbling of other funds to make possible a Phase I construction. The actual construction of the Central Park Phase I improvements began in 2003 and included the Senior and Community Center building, parking improvements and P.2 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK AUGUST 23, 2007 PAGE 2 approximately 23 acres of open space landscape areas that opened to the public on May 21, 2005. These facilities have 'been tremendously successful in offering enhanced programs and services to the community. As an expansion to these Phase I improvements, staff has worked with -the architects to design a youth playground to be constructed by Spring 2008 adjacent to the Community Center. As a separate but integrated project, the Pacific Electric Trail project that runs along the north boundary of Central Park is nearing completion and will be opened to the public this summer. This project was made possible with funding from the State Bicycle Transportation Act, State and Federal Funds through the Transportation Development Act, City Beautification Funds and City Park Development Funds. With Phase I of the park complete, the City Council has indicated their interest in moving ahead with the continued development of Central Park. As part of the Council goal setting process for upcoming year(s), the City Council identified the development of the Family Aquatics Center at Central Park as the highest park and recreation facility priority. The identification of the Family Aquatics Center as the Council's top priority was the result of many factors occurring over the past few years. The City has long had a strong interest in the development of an Aquatics Center at Central Park, as evidenced by the inclusion of a swimming facility in the original 1987 Master Plan. As part of the General Plan update in 2001, the Community Services Department implemented a community parks and recreation facility needs assessment study to determine the most pressing needs of the City residents for future improvements. The study results indicated a very high need for a recreational swimming facility, desired by 42% of the survey respondents. The only higher needs identified at that time were for aTeen/Youth Services facility and a Performing Arts facility, both of which have been met through the development of the Central Park Community Center and the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center respectively. The importance of insuring that the Aquatics Center is designed foremost as a recreational swimming facility was also represented in the survey since a high percentage of respondents (22%) indicated a very low need for a competitive swimming pool. When asked to name the one facility the City most needed, a recreational swimming complex received a very high response rate, again second only to an Arts Center. As planning and design for the Park's Phase I improvements were underway, staff worked with a very experienced aquatics center consultant to prepare a feasibility study which analyzed the different types of pools and their associated construction and operation costs, identified programming possibilities, studied the demographics of the community related to interest in aquatics facility use and more. The results of this study were discussed with the City Council and the Park and Recreation Commission in a workshop in October, 2006. As part of this study session, the consultant and staff informed the Council and Commission of the significant programming trends towards recreational based aquatics facilities throughout the country and the state in recent years. P.3 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK Aucusr23,2007 PAGE 3 To prepare for the continued development of Central Park and specifically the Family Aquatics Center, staff has been working on the development of future options for the City Council's consideration based upon Council priority, logical design phasing, fiscal reality, and all necessary processing steps. PHASING AND FUNDING ISSUES The complete development of Central Park is a long term project, consisting of logical design and construction phasing as funding for both construction and operations becomes available. There are still approximately 75 acres of undeveloped park land remaining, which includes the future development of the Family Aquatics Center, the Gymnasium and Tennis Center and the lakes/open space park areas. Planning for future improvements also includes incorporation of Fire Station 178 and park maintenance functions into the southwest corner of the park. Phasing Issues Development of new City facilities requires a considerable investment of not only design and construction funds, but even more important is the ongoing funding of facility maintenance, programming and supervision. Because of the realities of budgetary growth and the continued needs of all other ongoing service programs. There are not enough funds available to construct and operate the entire remaining park at once. As a result, staff has been working on phasing options and the development of a multi-year strategy for the development of Central Park, identifying what is required for each phase to become a reality. In developing these phasing alternatives, staff and the design team are challenged with addressing the issues below. It is suggested that the City Council consider these issues in reviewing the priorities for the proposed phasing: • Availabilitv of design and construction funding -Because of the size and number of planned amenities at Central Park, the costs for design and construction of public facilities are considerable. Staff and the City Council are challenged with identifying potentially available construction funds. Please note that capital projects are not funded from the General Fund but from other special funds as these become available. Availabilitv of programming and operations funding -Allocating funding for ongoing programming and operations of new facilities is even more challenging since these costs continue every year after opening and net operating costs must be funded by the General Fund. Any new projects must rely on future revenue growth for financial support. The challenge is not only estimating what the future revenue growth might be, but also tb anticipate what additional future costs the City will have to address in other service areas as well as increased fixed operating costs for existing programs. P.4 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK AUGUST 23, 2007 PAGE 4 When looking forward to future City facilities. that will require general fund support, sound planning dictates that the required amount of. annual revenue growth be preserved in advance for this future facility, to be sure that the City will realistically have the full funding in place to support the new operation once the facility is completed and opens. Also, since some types of recreation facilities produce more program-related revenue than others, this factor must be kept in mind when determining phasing priorities and estimating on-going costs. • Meeting highest community program and facility needs -While the realities of funding availability often dictates what future park facilities can be built, the phasing plan for Central Park also needs to consider which of the proposed ~ facility components will help satisfy the highest community needs first. • Construction related issues relating to phasing - From a logistical point of view, the Central Park phasing plan must take into consideration the most effective manner of how to develop different portions of the park at different times, while controlling costs and minimizing the inconvenience to park users and neighbors. Phasing Priorities Staff has spent a great deal of time considering the remaining Central Park Master Plan facility components, in the context of the phasing issues discussed above. Based on this analysis staff is recommending that the future build-out of Central Park be planned using the following phasing components and priorities. Exhibit #2 is a Central Park Site Plan, graphically divided into these corresponding phases, each phase having a distinct time line and funding requirement. • Phase II -This next phase would include the Family Aquatics Center, site development of the western 24 acres (including the park space adjacent to Fire Station 178), the maintenance service area, required parking spaces and interim landscape planting for the future gymnasium pad area (within the proposed Phase IV area). This interim landscape area would be primarily turf and would serve as a nice park play space and Family Aquatics Center programming area until such time as the gym is built. Staff is proposing this portion of the development as the highest priority for the following reasons: 1. Construction funding can be realistically made available for this work in the near future, allowing design work to begin immediately. 2. Based on the needs study, the Family Aquatics Center is currently the highest unmet need resulting from the 2001 community needs survey, and the need for a recreational swimming facility is one constantly heard by staff. 3. The Family Aquatics Center is a very cost effective facility due to its ability to attract a large number of participants and their willingness to pay the appropriate user and program fees. P.5 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK Aucusr23, 2007 PAGE 5 4. The landscaped areas are fairly contained in size and manageable in terms of ongoing costs. 5. The maintenance service area will be a critical maintenance component to the efficient operation of both the Aquatics Center and the existing portions of the park. 6. Constructing this western-most portion of the park in the near future also makes good sense logistically in order to minimize construction and use impact on the Senior and Community Center facility. 7. Building the Aquatics Center during approximately the same time as the Fire Station (approximately 2 acres) will result in a positive programming relationship between the two facilities relating to water safety, lifeguard training, community safety related programming and general park security in the southwest corner as well as efficient use of two funds contributing to the cost effective completion of this corner. • Phase III -Staff is proposing that the following phase of the Central Park development include the central 38 acres including the lakes, grounds, amphitheater, playgrounds and picnic shelters. The City Council has also expressed an interest in developing a space within the park to serve as a reflective spot honoring the community's veterans, which would likely be adjacent to the lakes. Additional parking spaces would also be developed in this phase. These amenities are being proposed as the third phase of the park development. The construction funding for this portion of the park will be considerable and funding resources are not currently available, but could be available in the not-to-distant future. An even more important funding consideration will be the ongoing costs necessary for maintaining the lakes and the large amount of open landscape space within the central portion of the park, especially since this phase of the park does not contain any high revenue producing amenities. In terms of community need, it is well known that most of the City's parks are heavily utilized for active recreation purposes, particularly for use by youth sports groups. There is a significant interest in passive park areas and picnic space. In the 2001 community survey, 39% of the respondents saw the need for more picnic facilities within the City. As the City's major park facility, residents are often asking for the development of playgrounds and passive recreation areas at Central Park. However, due to the much higher need for the Family Aquatics Center from the community, staff believes that this central portion would be better suited as a Phase III development option after completion of the Family Aquatics Center phase. Staff anticipates no construction related challenges with developing these Phase III improvements after completion of Phase II. P.6 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK AUGUST 23, 2007 PAGE 6 • Phase IV - It is recommended .that Phase IV of, the improvements include the northwest corner of the park, which would consist of the community gymnasium and tennis complex along with the required parking expansion. While actual construction of these Phase IV amenities might be many years from now, staff is proposing that the programming vision and the conceptual layout of these spaces be included with the Phase II project to insure that the Aquatics Center and the future gymnasium and tennis facilities are all designed to operate effectively together, once these are all built in the future. The current Central Park Master plan envisions a large gymnasium of approximately 80,000 square feet and a thirteen court competitive tennis complex: Based on programming trends over the past years, staff is proposing that the tennis complex would be more efficient if it were designed and operated as an eight court recreational facility, capable of hosting quality recreational lessons and tournaments. The construction and operating cost estimates included later in this report assume the gymnasium will remain at 80,000 square feet, but the size and programming philosophy, and therefore the costs, for this gym could easily be reduced and still be very successful in meeting the community needs. Staff is keenly aware that there is a strong community need for an indoor gym facility, as evidenced by the waiting lists for many of, our programs at the Family Sports Center. It is also getting more difficult, and costly, to rent school district gymnasiums for Community Services programs. The estimated construction and operational costs for the gymnasium and tennis complex are substantial, and the community need for the aquatics center and open park space outweighs the need for the gym/tennis complex at this point in time. Funding Issues Of course the most difficult challenge in the development of new community facilities is obtaining the necessary funds for their design, construction and operation. Using 2007-08 dollars, the estimated amount of construction and operating funding necessary for each phase is as follows: Phase II -Family Aquatics Center Project Design and construction related costs: $35 million Annual program and operation costs (first full year): $998,000 Phase III -Lakes and Open Space Proiect Design and construction related costs: $32 million Annual program and operation costs (first full year): $1,222,000 Phase IV -Gymnasium and Tennis Complex Proiect Design and construction related costs: $45 million Annual program and operation costs (first full year): $1,409,000 P.7 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK AUGUST 23, 2007 PAGE 7 The costs indicated are 2007-08 cost estimates, so it can be safely assumed that these costs will increase each subsequent year by approximately 3%. The annual program and operation costs shown are "net costs", meaning that projected revenues are factored into the analysis and this is the minimum amount of general fund support that would be required each year. In providing design and construction related funding resources for the Central Park project, a potential funding strategy would be to utilize a portion of the bonding ability of the Redevelopment Agency, specifically a portion of the proposed 2008 bond issue to fund the design and construction of Phase II. Another potential but not guaranteed funding source may be the opportunities for grant funding through some of the State bond issues for which guidelines have not yet been established by the State. Providing for annual programming and operation funding is much more difficult and requires much more advance planning and adherence to a long term financial plan. In planning for this discussion on the future Central Park development, it was necessary to complete a thorough staffing and operations yearly cost estimate for each of the proposed phases. These annual cost support estimates must then be evaluated in terms of how much new revenue growth the City can anticipate in future years, and how much of that revenue growth could potentially be "reserved" each year in the future to fund the operation of the new park improvements. Using the proposed Phase II improvements as an example, assuming that design on the improvements began immediately: i Design and construction would take approximately three years, so the Phase II improvements would open during the 2010-2011 Fiscal Year. Estimated annual operating costs for Phase II in current dollars are estimated at $998,000 for the first full year of operation. Assuming a 3% annual cost increase, the estimated annual operating cost for the first full year of Phase II in 2011-2012 would be $1,117,000. This would require the City to reserve approximately $300,000 in new revenue growth each year for the next four years to fund this annual $1,117,000 operating amount at the time of opening. Whenever the Phase III or Phase IV improvements are constructed, the annual operating costs would have. to be added to totals for Phase II, and the appropriate amount of future revenue growth would need to be reserved each year for this purpose. As an example, if the City were to proceed on all three remaining phases concurrently at this time, and assuming they all opened for the first full year of operation in 2011-2012, the annual operating budget requirement after the 3% annual inflationary adjustment would be $4,083,000. This would require the City to reserve approximately $1 million in future revenue growth each year for the next four years just to open the new facilities. This scenario would be highly unlikely. Phasing is the only prudent approach. P.8 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR CENTRAL PARK AUGUST 23, 2007 PAGE 8 Phasing Recommendations Based upon the realities of supporting the annual operating costs, in addition to the significant requirements for construction funding, staff has developed a phasing strategy for the remaining Central Park improvements as described above, with emphasis placed on completing the Phase II and Phase III projects as funding permits. Making progress on the Family Aquatics Center and the open space portions of the park will accomplish the current goals set by the City Council. Staff would propose that planning for Phase IV still continue, and that alternative and creative funding mechanisms be pursued for the gymnasium and tennis complex within Phase IV for the future. Staff has developed a chart for each of the proposed future phases of park development which indicates the time required for design and construction of each, as well as the estimated costs for construction and operation of each phase. Each phase is represented as a separate increment with its own construction and funding time lines. The specific timing to initiate each phase will depend upon the availability of capital funds and the status of cash flows in any given year and how these are managed to provide the necessary maintenance and operations at the conclusion of any phase. These phases can be linear, broken up or overlapped depending upon the above factors. Those charts are attached and are labeled Exhibits 3, 4 and 5. The City Council can use the enclosed schedule and funding charts to discuss potential phasing and financing options. Conclusion Staff is seeking direction from the City Council as to how to proceed with developing the next phase(s) of Central Park. If the City Council directs staff to proceed with the option described above to develop Phase II now and plan to begin Phase III work to follow in 3-4 years, staff will finalize the work plan with the design team and bring back the architectural services agreement for approval by the Council. To facilitate solid future planning, staff would proceed not only with the actual construction design of the identified Phase II improvements, but also include an update on the programming for the Phase III area and updated programming/conceptual design of the Phase IV gymnasium and tennis court complex. Ily su Lam, AICP ~J /~.~ Manager l Kevin NQcArdle Community Services Director Enclosures x w 0 z z ~~ ~ ~s P. 9 N X w _ i +, _ P. 10 ~a ;z .x ~o cL. ~~ ?U a .~ o :~ a +U A~ ~U ~O i2 .U .z a~ ~, 7~ . ~- .~ .~ c~ ~_ ~_ L X W _N M .~ ~ O ~ F- 00 m ~ .~ M a ~ ca 0 3 M ti til IA o R ~ ~ N ~' 3 00 In O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ m ~ v N N ~„~ N ~ ~ Q~ 4 N ~ , M ' . ~ L ~ ~ ~ } ` N ~ ~ ~ E{} ~ N o ~ M ~ .~ bF) a r o ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ C Rf ~' '~ ~ N a ~~ c~ 01 ~ ~.~-p ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 •- v~ ~ C ~. ~ C~ a ~ ~ ~v • ~ ~ [Q ~ ~ U a `.. cv ' a ~ + + ~ u 1 c n ~ Uo 0. a¢a ~ co ~ r. ~ O ~ ~ C~ C O ~p O ~ ~ ~ O ~ O LS ~ 0 0 ~ ~ n. c ~. ~ ~ v ~ N ... N ° ~ ~ c ._ U c U p r ~ .z ~ . a m vii ~° V O P.11 x w ~ ~ ~ rn O ~ H co m ~ . _ ~ M a ~ 0 a o N N r N o - ff! ~ ' - - !0 c ~ ~ O ~n ~ o r. A } ,~ - N N ~"~ o (~O L ~ r O N o I` ~. ~ N ~ ~ } ,~ Ef3 c os .y m ~ ~ ~ '~^ W N ~ o ~ N ~.,~ ~ ~ - ~ 0 ~ ~ a ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ t C '~ ~ . .~ ~ t N a O O ~ s ~ v~t n~+'"~ ~ c c ~ a v -vo~:~~ ~ . ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o 4. ~ _ ~ ~ `° ~ c ~ n.~ ~ ~ 0 v c ~~ L ~ Q d ~ N a ~ ~~ ~ o ~o ~- ~a P. 12 P. 13 ~_ L X W ~ ~ t0 N O N H O er o r I,R c M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M M ~ ti ~ N M o p ( ~ ~ ~ r.~ N C N ~ •~ ~ M co C a ° ~ ~o~Ev ~ o ~ ~ ~ N ~ " c ... a - ~ ~ o n ._ ~ ~ A~ W U C N ~"a .C ~ ~ ~' c~0 c N u O U a ~ > a o~ x .~ v ~ o ~ N~ N E Q~ N ~ cC ;a v ~ ~o a ~~~~~~ ~ o r ~o ~ ti z 0 0 w a a U w ~w~ c V - y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r o 3 `n F• E ~~ ~ ,fir, ~ .3~ '~ Y y it x '€ •~ x C r~ ~ ^ ~ a,~ ~~v. a v~y~a a .. ~.Wrs•E ~Y _~r d ~ C ~ ~Y L L' - r3 ri Q r. ~c e~ o0 0~ - - _i .~i rt .r..e r ._ >; 0 .a O Z W U U ~ `~ Q ~ 0 U ~, U d ° a. ~ U ..~ ~ E... ~ [z] ~' U U S[ •• J a. F r • _z ~ e v ~ 'r z S T C C •-.__ v5 u ~ L ~ C 4 C K ,; ~, ~, Tf~• C O a. ~ . v. yz°~v'~ X33 $~~~CJL~z<«~:~'< ~~~~-~- ri .•i~tvi•er=soa ~~~i~i~r ~.~r N z 0 H a V N d 1.. w a w H U Q w N C .~ ~. oG z U U E ~' c ~ o a~ ¢~ ~~ ~, U o a ~ ~ ~ F- o ~ ~' V U • r~ 6 ~ ~ o u - ~ J '~ ~ ~ ~ A Vi ~ ~ .G ~ U ~~ _ ;~S ~ .Y 3 .. x s B c a ~~ tr •~ ~: ^, a _~- >.Y Z$ r~ P L C c ~ ~~ `~ c$~ c ~ 3 ~ `..a ` rl.-sKvi.Gr x c ~- _i_ pvi.c ~~ M V M L 00 a d w _. fy'1 t= O .^R. cG E- z U U ~ ~ Q ~ 0 a~ x~ ~ V o a. -C ~ ~ ~ o tz .~' U U ~~ y _ :, Y. (~ . Q ~' :~ C 3J ri ~ `' Q ~ J C ~ D t ~ E •- d :J .x ~ ~ a .~ •_` ~ q d V1~~.^~ ~..o r oc a ° ~i r~i -t .r..C ~' z 0 0 c~ z w a a 4 w 0 O c~ F- z w U U ~~ Q ~ aE a~ ~~ ~y U Q o a ~ ~ ~ Q ~ Fes- o U U