Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem VOctober 23, 2000 STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor Campbell & Members of the City Council THRU: Donald F. McIntyre, City Manager FROM: Nancy Beard, Director of Parks, Recreation & Community Services SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation — Old Ranch Tennis Club Facility SUMMARY OF REQUEST: That Council accepts and approves in concept the Parks and Recreation Commissions recommendations following the dedication of the Old Ranch Tennis Club Facility to the City. BACKGROUND: The Bixby Old Ranch Tennis Club Site Ad Hoc Committee began meeting March 29, 1999. Eighteen volunteers were given the assignment to look at this site and determine its best use for the community. The committee's first order of business was developing a purpose and a mission statement. They are as follows: It is the purpose of this committee to develop recommendations for the use of the Old Ranch Tennis Facility following the dedication of the property to the City of Seal Beach. The recommendations will be presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission will then present its recommendations and findings to the City Council for their review and final guidance to the development, or non -development, of the property. Mission Statement This committee will develop recommendations for the best and highest use of the Old Ranch Tennis Club property for the community. It was the intent of the committee to present options for the site to the residents of College Park East. Following the committee's selection of one of the alternatives, a presentation will be made to the Parks and Recreation Commission. A presentation to Council will follow. The Process The committee met approximately nine evenings, for two hours each meeting, as well as completing "homework assignments" as needed. Each meeting was held at the clubhouse. The committee learned that, upon dedication of the club site, the Bixby Company would give the City $1,000,000 to renovate the facility as the community desired. So they began their process by getting very familiar with the existing tennis facility. The current Old Ranch Tennis site is seven acres. It contains: sixteen tennis courts, twelve of which are lighted; a 2,100 square foot clubhouse including a kitchen, lounge area, pro shop, and office area; a 3,200 square foot locker/shower and restroom facility; and a 1,000 square foot work-out room. The club is landscaped both within and outside its walls. The members studied the financial records of the existing operation (made available by the Bixby Company). They met with potential contract tennis club directors and landscape architects to capture a broad vision of the possibilities for this seven -acre site. They also met with their fellow community members, soliciting their needs and desires for the site. The committee started a "wish list" comprised of elements the members believed to be important in a community serving facility. Each committee member ranked those elements by importance. The full committee agreed upon a final ranking. This gave the committee a basis to determine the recreational amenities desired if the tennis site were to be combined with community recreation site. The highest ranking activities included: community meeting space; after school opportunities for school-age children; a small community pool; a community message area; tennis, volleyball, and basketball courts. Additional opportunities identified included a tot lot and a roller blade / skate boarding rink. Concurrently, the committee went forward with a Request for Qualifications from contract tennis directors, to assist the committee in determining the viability operating the site as it currently exists with sixteen courts, or as reconfigured to twelve or eight courts. Research developed from the Request for Qualifications demonstrated that the most desired configuration for operating the club was as it currently operates with sixteen courts; however, most of the operators believed that they would also benefit from a smaller configuration of twelve courts. Some operators were even willing to try to make a go of eight courts. Site Development Once the information and opinions were gathered, the committee began to narrow down the available options. It was the intention of the group to develop three site plans. The most obvious option was to leave the site intact with sixteen courts and to hire an operator. The development funds that were to come with the site could be used to upgrade the club and to save for future site developments. An alternative, mixed -site plan was worked on for many meetings. The goal was to encompass as many of the higher-ranking activities as possible while keeping within the $1,000,000 budget. As a result of this process, the committee took all of the top priority ideas another site plan that contained alternative site options. A key basis for this set of plans was the committee's concern for meeting the needs of school age children, particularly in light of the fact that there are over 800 public school children living in College park East. The mixed site plan includes leaving eleven tennis courts and the shower/dressing room intact and hiring a tennis site operator. Additionally, 1,000 square feet of the community center would be set aside for office space, as well as for a pro shop, if desired. The remainder of the site would be developed into a community recreation facility, beginning with an expansion of the 2,1000 square foot clubhouse to a 5,000 square foot facility. One of this plans options would have the building open up to a tiled outdoor staging or performance area overlooking a green park area. The facility would also open up to Basswood and Aster streets, giving the near -by residents a beautiful park to view as opposed to the existing cinder block wall. The park area would include a hardscape path to be used for a variety of activities, including bike riding or walking, a tot lot play area, and a picnic shelter area. The pay for play area options would include a Skate Park and pool. The pool would be approximately 40 by 60 feet, including a zero depth option, perhaps with spray equipment. This size pool would be a seasonable operation primarily with the opportunity for offering summer swim lessons to young children. Parking concerns were addressed next. The club currently has 77 parking spaces. It was anticipated that additional space would be needed to accommodate the clubhouse expansion and the community uses. There are no existing code regulations imposing a specific ratio of parking spaces to a recreational site. Identifying additional parking options was a monumental task. An option was developed which the committee felt might solve the two issues. Directly adjacent to the tennis club site on Aster Street, is Bluebell Park. The community has been struggling with what to do with the old tot lot site and the picnic shelter area as it is deteriorated beyond repair. Additionally, the existing basketball court, also in need of resurfacing, lies directly adjacent to a home. The remainder of the park is fenced and lighted. By taking all of the play elements currently in need of repair and placing them in the new park directly across Aster Street, thereby losing no play activities, a new landscaped area with twenty additional parking spaces could be created. This suggestion takes no green space from Bluebell Park and offers an alternative to the often -dangerous street parking options for those accessing the park. This option takes approximately one fourth of the existing acreage at the 1.3 -acre park. The committee offers these options for consideration: 1. The current 16 tennis court configuration 2. Combined community center site with a smaller tennis club site (11 courts). 2a. Includes a 5,000 square foot community center 2b. Includes a 6,300 square foot community center 2c. Includes a splash pool 2d. Substitute an additional half basketball court for the pool 3. The creation of a 20 space parking lot at Bluebell Park On May 2, 2000, Councilmember Campbell held a town hall meeting at the tennis club highlighting these plans. The Committee's plan was very well received by the approximately 50 residents in the audience. Following this meeting it was the intent of Councilmember Campbell to poll each of the residents of College Park East about the project. Current Information for September 2000 Mayor Campbell recently polled all College Park households, approximately 1700 in number and received over 500 responses. Each of the households was given the following options 1. To leave the Tennis Club facility as it is. 2. Remodel the club including a 5,000 sq. foot community center, basketball court, Skate Park, pool, tot lot and open park area or 3. This option is the same as #2 but substituting another basketball court for the pool. Options 2 and 3 include taking a portion of Bluebell Park for additional parking. The majority of the residents responding chose the committee's recommendation, to remodel the club leaving 11 tennis courts and creating a community facility with a 5,000 sq. foot community center, pool, skate park, basketball court, tot lot and open park area. (a design is included in this report) On September 27, 2000 the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the committee's recommendation and agreed in a 3 to 1 vote to support the committee's design concept. Copies of the draft meeting minutes (unapproved as the commission next meets October 25th) are attached inclusive of the public testimony received. Property Dedication How the property is dedicated to the City is outlined in the development agreement section 3.2.5.1. It states that ..... upon acceptance of this offer of dedication, Owner will also pay to the City the sum of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000). Such money shall be used for improvements that will benefit the College Park East neighborhood, including but not limited to improvements related to the Tennis Club property. This offer of dedication and payment shall begin on the Effective Date and shall remain open for a period of five years, and may be accepted by the City at any time after the Effective Date by sending written notice of such acceptance to Owner. FISCAL IMPACT: As noted in the background information, with the dedication of the property the Bixby Company gives the City $1,000,000 in support of this facility. This fee will cover a great majority of the anticipated cost of the project. The project as presented, has been estimated at $1,250,000. This estimate will no doubt vary greatly, following a competitive bidding process. Additionally, in the fiscal year 2001/2002,the City will receive a one-time grant amount as a result of the passage of Proposition 12. The City's per capita allotment is estimated at $325,000. Although the Parks and Recreation Commission has not yet addressed their recommendations regarding the use of these funds, they will be available for such projects. Without the development business plan, staff anticipates that the majority of the operational costs at this new community asset will, as with all other city facilities, be offset by user fees. The skate park fees will off set staff costs. This is currently the case at the city's skate park, which has been operating for one and one half years. Based on the current operation of the city's skate park fees will off set staff costs. This is currently the case at the city's skate park, which has been operating for one and one half years. Based on the current operation of the city's recreational pool, the seasonal pool facility in the proposed plan should operate with a maximum 20% general fund subsidy. The Community Center will generate fees from classes and rentals. Currently, the city is self-supporting in its operation of both the Marina Center and North Seal Beach Center. The contracted tennis facility will generate funds. In a typical agreement with a contractor, the vendor may be responsible for the care and maintenance of the facility while paying the City a portion of their profits once they have become solvent. On other agreements, the City is responsible all capital expenses therefore the contractor pays a higher operating fee to the City. The City of Seal Beach traditionally does not staff its facilities on an ongoing basis. A facility of this magnitude should have a full time staff person devoted to its management. The addition of a full time Coordinator level staff person will be presented with the 2001/2002 -budget cycle. It is anticipated that all the part time staffing cost will be revenue off set. RECOMMENDATION: For the City Council to approve the plan in concept allowing the City staff, when appropriate, to move forward with the development of bids and specs for the project. NancylL. Be irector Parks, RecrehUptVand Community Services NOTED ANDROVED: Donald F. McIntyre, Cilry Manager Agenda Item _ lee pq Seal Beach Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes For September 27, 2000 DRAFT Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Commission Chair Sustarsic at 7:08 p.m. Flag Salute Roll Call Chairperson Sustarsic, Commissioners Commissioner Chattler absent. Staff present - Director Nancy Beard. Watson, Frazier and Rohman present. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as presented. MSC Watson/Sustarsic All Approval of Minutes Due to Commissioner Chatter held for approval in October. Oral Communications None Agenda Items absence, the previous meeting minutes will be 1. Election of Commission Chair and Co -Chair. Commissioner Watson nominated Schelly Sustarsic as Chair. Motion second by Commission Frazier/all in favor. Commissioner Watson nominated Commissioner Frazier as Co -Chair. Chair Sustarsic seconded the Motion/all in favor 2. Old Ranch Tennis Facility The Director presented a report outlining the conclusions of the Council appointed Old Ranch Tennis Club Site committee. The report highlighted the committees work over a nine month period where they studied the recreational opportunities which might present themselves when the city becomes the property owner of the Old Ranch Tennis facility. The full report is attached. Following the staff report the Commission chair opened public testimony on the subject. Resident and Old Ranch Tennis Facility committee member John Unrath, reviewed the committees work as well as Mayor Campbell's College Park East survey. Mr. Unrath feels that the committees proposed use of the center has something for every age participant. Sally Unrath nasident and also committee member, added that the health and well being of the existing tennis courts were taken into consideration when the committee planed the other recreation activities placing activities which may be considered noisy at the back of the facility, closest to the freeway. Resident Dan Campbell identified him self as a member of the tennis club and hoped the club would be left as it is. He suggested placing the community center "somewhere else" in the city. Mr. Campbell had suggestions on the upkeep of the McGaugh courts. The Director informed Mr. Campbell about work both recently completed at the courts and work to be completed this fiscal year on the McGaugh tennis courts. Bill Moore, resident and charter member of the Tennis Club suggested removing the tennis courts at Heather Park making them available for use as basketball courts. Mr. Moore asked the definition of a resident. The Director explained that that would be someone with a City of Seal Beach address. Barry Hardwick, resident, explained that he had children and wanted to be involved in the decision making process as to the fate of the club. He believes that it is a crime to destroy the courts and noted that College Park East has more parks that anywhere else in the city. He stated that this decision should not be limited to the residents of College Park East but the entire city. Bob Litrich, the Old Ranch Tennis Club manager, commended the committees work. He stated that it does hurt to lose courts but the plan was beautiful and though that it may serve the community well. He stated that the membership at the club would like to be involved in the process. He felt that loosing the center court area was major in his opinion. He stated that Saturdays and Sundays all 16 courts were in full use. He feels that 12 courts meets a minimum need and that the existing courts were built to the highest quality level he had ever witnessed. He hopes that the Commission studies this issue carefully and that the center serves the community well and will assist in making a smooth transition whatever the outcome. Audry Kime, resident and committee member suggested that the committee worked in a "Solomon" like way. She believes that the community center will be much utilized by both children and adults a like. She reiterated that much thought was given to keeping as many of the tennis courts as possible and still including as many amenities as possible. She emphasized that the proposed community center would be open to all in the community members not just paid members. She believes that many people, even those who live next door to the current facility have never seen the inside of the club. She stated that more people would be able to enjoy this community asset if it does not have a singular purpose. At this time public input was closed. Commissioner Watson asked the Director if there was any consideration given to placing a new community center somewhere else. The Director explained that this is a unique situation in that the one million dollars given to the project was restricted to the current site therefore no other site had been considered. Commissioner Rohman asked the current club operator, Bob Litrich how many members the club had currently and how many of them were Seal Beach a resident. Mr. Litrich guessed that there were about 150 members and that approximately 30% of them resided in the City of Seal Beach. The Commissioner also asked Mr. Litrich the current monthly cost of membership. Mr. Litrich responded that there are many membership options but that the most common membership was $120 per month. Commissioner Watson stated that it was a beautiful, well thought out plan but questioned why others were not part of the planning process. She stated that this site could well become a "tennis mecca" if nurtured. The Commissioner said that she could not imagine carving up the Mission Viejo Aquatics Center, which she likened to eliminating tennis courts at the center. She further stated that tennis is a lifetime sport and wondered why we would consider eliminating such an asset. Commissioner Watson further stated that there are "needs and wants" which she considers this project to be. She stated that this was a golden opportunity and wanted to hold the million dollars to collect interest. She felt that club membership had dropped significantly due to the uncertainty of the clubs future. The Commissioner also felt that tennis would be going through a growth cycle as a result of the Olympics. Commissioner Frazier, an elementary teacher, believes that children are so busy working hard and trying to achieve that they are in need of stressful releases. She wants our Seal Beach kids to have places to play and believes the proposed plan meets these needs. She believes she is speaking for the children when she agrees with the proposed plan presented by the committee. Commissioner Rohman stated that the plan was a good one and that he had all his questions answered. Chair Sustarsic, who also acted as chair of the appointed committee, pointed out to the audience that there were members of the tennis club on the appointed committee. She reiterated the work the committee did in researching this site and in investigating ways to expand the city's recreational amenities. She reminded Commission members that they were kept appraised of the committee's progress and were invited to the open meetings. She believes the plan, while trying to preserve as many of the tennis courts as possible, strikes a balance with the community's recreational needs. The Chair felt that the versatility of the center would compliment many of the resident's needs. An example is while Mom or Dad might be playing tennis, their son or daughter may attend the facility at the same time to participate at the skate park or maybe by taking a class in the community center. Commissioner Watson made a motion to postpone the vote until next month, to further research the proposal. This motion failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Frazier motioned to accept the proposed recommendation and send if on to Council with the Commissions positive vote. Commissioner Rohman seconded the motion. Frazier/Rohman/Sustarsic — yea Watson/ no The motion passes 3 to 1. Directors Report 1. The Director reported on the summer successes of day camps, aquatics and the skate park. 2. The Director reported on the upcoming activities taking place this fall and reported that the pool dedication plaque was now in and that a dedication date would be set soon. 3. The Director reported that she had met with members of the Lions Club in regards to the expansion of the Marina Community Center. The Lions Club has agreed to be the major fundraising arm in the estimated $650,000 to $700,000 project. Commission Concerns Commissioner Watson reported on the Founders Day activities scheduled for October 7". Chair Sustarsic welcomed the two new Commissioners, Andy Rohman and Emily Frazier. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30pm. MSC Aaron/ Sustarsic/All Commissioner Rohman motioned to adjourn at 8:20pm Second by Frazier/All SURVEY LETTER RE PROPOSED CPE TENNIS CLUB PARK June 2M To The Residents of CPE: (;40 As you know by now, our Tennis Club Committee has diligently researched and reviewed many, many options for the re -use of the Tennis Club facility, and their associated costs. In May, an open house was held at the Tennis Club to display the artist's renderings of the ideas and options our committee arrived at. Bixby will also be giving the City SImillion to cover the conversion costs. Proposed: The Committee options would retain I I of the 16 tennis courts. A private tennis club operator would be retained to run the remaining courts as both a public and private facility. Eleven courts are the minimum required for such an operation to be run feasibly, and to allow for activities such as tournaments and club tennis. This would provide revenue to the city to cover the costs of maintenance. There are two park options and two options for the clubhouse. Please look at the two plans inside and let us know what you prefer. Retaining all 16 courts is also an option. Please complete the bottom of page three of this questionnaire, re -fold it with the city address on the outside, and return to city hall by Friday, July 14". The results of this survey will determine which direction we take. Also, since we have received some inquiries about completing more than one questionnaire, please leave your address labels on. Any surveys without address labels will not be tallied. The returned surveys will be available in City Hall after the count for review if you so wish. Thank you. Patty Campbell Schelly Sustarsic Mayor, Councilmember CPE Parks B Rec Commissioner CPE Plan B. Park, a tot lot, picnic tables, BBQ's, a skate board area, (one) half -basketball court and a splash pool. Sia .4►�3`�nt ,u AWOND 1 vrnvC Please complete either I or II, but not both. I. I prefer the tennis club left intact and be wholly run by a tennis club operator, open for both private and public use OR fl. Please check either Plan A or Plan B and either Plan C or Plan D PARK: Plan A. Park, a tot lot, picnic tables, BBQ's, a skate board area, and A (two) half -basketball courts. Plan B. Park, a tot lot, picnic tables, BBQ's, a skate board area, (one) half -basketball court and a splash pool Plan B FUTURE COMMUNITY CENTER (present club house): plaPlan C MnL. Present size: 2,300 sq. ft. Plan D Pian D. Enlarged to: 5,000 sq. ft. eeE� Sia .4►�3`�nt ,u AWOND 1 vrnvC Please complete either I or II, but not both. I. I prefer the tennis club left intact and be wholly run by a tennis club operator, open for both private and public use OR fl. Please check either Plan A or Plan B and either Plan C or Plan D PARK: Plan A. Park, a tot lot, picnic tables, BBQ's, a skate board area, and A (two) half -basketball courts. Plan B. Park, a tot lot, picnic tables, BBQ's, a skate board area, (one) half -basketball court and a splash pool Plan B FUTURE COMMUNITY CENTER (present club house): plaPlan C MnL. Present size: 2,300 sq. ft. Plan D Pian D. Enlarged to: 5,000 sq. ft. PARK: Plan A. Park, a tot lot, picnic tables, BBQ's, a skate board area, and (two) half -basketball courts. M 61t, a cvaen nrcc:a Five of the courts nearest Aster would be removed to make way for a park that would contain a tot lot, picnic tables. BBQ's, a skate board area, and either (two) half -basketball courtsor (one) half-baskethall court and a splash pool. The splash pool and/or skate park will he fee-based to dweT costs for a park attendant and liability insurance. Another option is whether or not to enlarge the present club house from its current size of 23(K) sq. it. to 5,M) sq. ft. There would also be a patio, stage area. overhead covered area and a bike path all around the proposed park. In addition, a parking area is proposed to be placed along the west side of Bluebell where the basketball court and overhead cover ars presently located. Comments: