Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2006-07-27 #R AGENDA REPORT DATE: July 24, 2006 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: John B. Bahorski, City Manager FROM: Mark K. Vukojevic, P.E., Director of Public Works / City Engineer SUBJECT: BLUEBELL PARK CONCEPTUAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The proposed City Council action will provide direction for the design of Bluebell Park Improvements. BACKGROUND: Bluebell Park is 1 -'/4 -acre park originally designed as an active sports area park and is surrounded by a chain link fence. It currently accommodates a 3 /4 -acre open play area, a wooden shade structure, and a full court basketball area. The park previously contained aged playground equipment, which was removed from the park in the late 1990's. Bluebell Park, in the past, was utilized as a practice field by nearby football, baseball, soccer and other organized sports groups, as well as passive neighborhood users. On January 25, 2006, a conceptual layout developed by the Council Member Ybaben's Bluebell Park Committee was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission for improvements to Bluebell Park. The proposed improvement plan recommended that the Park use be changed to a more passive park with removal of the existing chain link fence, demolition of the wooden shade structure, restoration of the existing basketball court, and installation of new playground equipment and furnishings at the northend of the park. At that meeting, the Commission requested that Community outreach be performed and that the item be brought back for consideration. On February 8, 2006, Council Member Ybaben hosted a townhall meeting at the Tennis Center. Approximately a dozen people attended and provided comments to Council Member Ybaben. On February 22, 2006, Council Member Ybaben's Bluebell Park Committee sought conceptual approval for Bluebell Park to be "configured primarily to support practices for team sports for age groups four to nine including practices and family sports usage; Aster Park ought to be configured primarily to support children play activities and family picnics." The Commission approved this concept. Agenda Item R After further investigation of the layouts and costs, and further community outreach, Council Member Ybaben directed a new concept to the Parks and Recreation Commission. On May 24, 2006, the Parks and Recreation Commission met to consider the most recent concept. The concept was to change the location of the playground equipment towards the north end of the park, remove half of the fence and reduce the height of the remaining fence, remove and plant new trees, remove the shade structure and asphalt area — replace with grass and resurface the basketball court. Please see Exhibit "A ". The Parks and Recreation Commission received approximately a dozen comments from the public and did not approve the plan. Rather, they directed staff to revise the conceptual plans to include the following: • Improve the fencing but retain the current height • No reduction in play field area and no change in present configuration • Replace tot lot where it was originally located and add a safety fence • Keep trees but provide trimming and pruning where needed; requested that staff receive input from the tree committee regarding any future consideration of tree removal • Resurface basketball courts • If shade structure needs to be removed due to rot, retain the concrete pad and provide information on temporary improvements that would add shade • Remove drinking fountain • present a revised layout for the next Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting scheduled for June 14, 2006. On June 14, 2006, the new Parks & Recreation Commission Plan (Exhibit `B ") was presented to the Commission. The conceptual layout involved keeping the existing layout of the park and its amenities, with rehabilitation. The plan included reconstructing the fence to existing height and location, resurfacing the basketball court area, replacing the basketball hoops, removing the wooden shade structure, prune trees and installing new play equipment for ages 5 -12 at the existing playground area location. The Commission received public comments from approximately a dozen people with the public split between the two conceptual plans. Council Member Ybaben presented his plan, Exhibit "A" and presented the Commission a petition with approximately 100 people in support of his plan. After lengthy discussion and questions and answers, the Commission voted to approve the Commissions Plan Exhibit `B ". Funds have been allocated by City Council from the Proposition 40 grant fund and Bixby Development fees in the amount of $190,000. Staff is requesting direction from City Council on layout of this park. Options include: • Approve Council Member Ybaben Plan Exhibit "A" (changing the layout of the park) • Approve the Commission Plan Exhibit `B" (keeping the park layout the same) • Direct modification for either plan • Refer the item back to the Parks and Recreation Commission • Cancel the project and reprogram the funds Agenda Item FISCAL IMPACT: Funds have been allocated by City Council from the Proposition 40 grant fund and Bixby Development fees in the amount of $190,000. RECOMMENDATION: City Council to provide direction for the design of Bluebell Park Improvements. Prepared By: Reviewed By: �'. J fl /i.- Raymond H. Velasco Sean Crumby, P.E. Associate Engineer Deputy City Engineer di Concur: NOTED � D AP' r,• VED: ,7/4 1; 44- Mark K. Vukojevic, P.E. Jo / v:. Bahorski Director of Public Works /City Engineer City anager Attachment: Exhibit A: Conceptual Layout #1 - Council Member Ybaben and Bluebell Committee Proposal Exhibit B: Conceptual Layout #2 - Parks & Recreation Commission Proposal Exhibit C: Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes — January 25, 2006 (Approved) Exhibit D: Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes — February 22, 2006 (Approved) Exhibit E: Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes — May 24, 2006 (Approved) Exhibit F: Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes — June 14, 2006 (Draft) Agenda Item 1- z w w j Ce lli CO a w fi . F Q m W H w O W re w J Z � m o p21. 6 coz 2° `° v a m 2 uu_li m¢ 0 6 0 uu Wix zcc Q� UW d w w w w ww w w w ~ z W� c� -ct a � a z z z zz z z z � W m U Lj ul 0 0 O O O 000 O O O O 2 k Cl) IFE z R W Z � Z� Z� W pc ~ i) �a a . � - '''''l • " 4'' C " t C< < ! �T..J Tt4 wy, ..a ya °t1y53`• . . O . , r ay J, r jr fi : f ( i•iy 'co :t � , � g W R;. j r 0 . o +' t 6 3> ? SS • `! E r , 4 t, ce Y• s P ^ J ' ' s = ,T7, ` ;- i. - ,..y +- . ( ... • ;ma •• ' �'. :. . J '4 JL : : 4 r ' J i. �e, , . S w�c J ` .f . . . fpf-' - ...II.- . t I Z + f(. CLt � � c `1,4.,- o d * /y icC .z al ' t to , ,;.'. . 11,14%. +5: ,-', W 4 ' 1 ' C e i s<' ,may"• a 3 • CO Ce • ,s. i .,, s Y f . � f '�,, '.i ra v < s ^ ^ ! s .s . / • w ! y ' r C3 ° lfr�ffYf' ^7 'RYTk. ~ - war 1 L •. t�s` ° a k , ....n ..: : M ii dery ..... -, a 2 . . ;, fix. 'y °t a., • YY a ,,��' Y nr. p , A .'� 1 L. }� t 1�j N • in Tj • T: � Vl1 r .tom_; " e > i t 1. '4 f iit --- —.„ ii: . 4 Liiik -..--, y � *±:-.." r 0 Ca I — 1 -!;-.,.. - .1 tiU- )- • -,...= • * is/.1 +.. -rfg ;.,-. , ./. !.4 T AL L .. 1 \ • -I ri" J ! ♦ c b 4 a :'; ` ° y CGS �� q , aP ,.,0 O. iii, Q I _ k - lc -0' • :, � 411 415: L.) , m V Q Zc� O ¢ u) Q Z U co uiu cc = 0 WQ �Z k ' - WQ QY Wo W- X z ww w z� �v, z�- cc"' W U zm za CCm v CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT #2 - PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION PROPOSAL FILE1 Y: \042 CIP - Capital Improvement Program \049 50206 Bluebell Park \Revised06.14.06.dwg 0 NEW PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT IMPROVEMENTS 0 NEW RIMS & BACKBOARDS 0 FENCE REHABILITATION 0 NEW GATE OPENING SEAL BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of Wednesday, January 25, 2006, 6:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Called to order by Chair at 6:02 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: James Deny, Graham McAllister, Claudia Higginbotham Absent: AnnaBeth Goering, Carla Watson III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (By motion of Commission) Chair Derry announced that at the request of the two commissioners not present, VI -1 will be continued to the next commission meeting on February 22, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber. In the interim, the City's Public Works Department will hold an information meeting on Bluebell Park at the Seal Beach Tennis Center on February 8, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATION Several residents of College Park East expressed their concerns and asked several questions regarding the proposed changes to Bluebell Park. The residents were advised that Public Works staff would stay after the meeting to assist in answering any questions and providing information regarding the proposed plan. V. CONSENT CALENDAR No items on the Consent Calendar. VI. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Bluebell Park Conceptual Plans Agenda Item VI -1 continued to meeting of February 22, 2006. VII. MANAGER'S REPORT — Informational items VIII. COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Higginbotham requested that a discussion on the Founder's Day donation be placed on the March agenda. She also requested that more trash cans be placed on the Electric Avenue Greenbelt or at least be better located. Commission McAllister complained about the overgrowth of vines at the Marina Park handball court and had questions regarding the Heron Pointe development regarding access to Gum Grove Park and the landscaping. This item will be on the next agenda as well as the discussion on the Edison Park Gardens. Chair Derry requested that the Recreation Fees be placed on the March agenda. Mr. Derry will have a conflict of interest on Bluebell Park and will need to recuse himself from the discussion. At the Agenda Item next meeting, immediate Past Chair Goering will be responsible for conducting the portion of the meeting regarding Bluebell Park. IX. ADJOURN The meeting was adjoumed at 6:22 p.m. SEAL BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of Wednesday, February 22, 2006, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Called to order by Chair at 7 :03 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: James Derry, AnnaBeth Goering, Claudia Higginbotham, Graham McAllister, Carla Watson III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (By motion of Commission) Chair Derry announced that he would be recusing himself from any discussions or actions relative to Bluebell Park. Per the City Attorney's opinion, Mr. Derry's townhome complex is within 500 feet creating a potential conflict of interest. This opinion was also verified by the FPPC. Therefore, at this time, Commissioner Goering assumed the Chair position. Because of the number of people in the audience wanting to speak on the Bluebell Park item, the Commission approved hearing Agenda Item VI -1 first. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATION Oral communications regarding Bluebell Park were submitted as part of the discussion on VI -1. Please see comments below. No additional comments were submitted. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of January 25, 2006 meeting. Approved as submitted. VI. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Bluebell Park Conceptual Plans Deputy City Engineer Sean Crumby provided an overview of the plan submitted by Council Member Ybaben. He indicated that the plan was conceptual therefore a detailed drawing was not provided in the staff report. He acknowledged that the concept of Aster Park was recently added and that staff has not held any recent community meetings in the neighborhood. Residents from the area submitted the following comments. John Montgomery, 3630 Bluebell — when did Aster become part of the process and were the residents notified regarding this inclusion' commented on no site diagrams for residents to review; liked the older plan concept; his neighbors on the north end did not want play equipment near them; questioned whether Aster Park neighbors had been surveyed. Agenda Item Schelly Sustarsic, — the park is used for sports activities and should continue as a practice field; playground equipment should be kept away from north side, fence should remain in place and the shade structure should be redone and not removed; support the sports park usage; suggest a combined use of the park with only one playground equipment; do not need changes that jeopardize the sports use, keep funding at Bluebell Park; Aster is not an issue at this time and residents in that area have not been part of any discussion. Lisa Gardner, 4357 Ironwood — daughter's soccer team used to practice at Bluebell Park; would like the agenda item be deferred and hold community meetings at Tennis Center so more residents that can participate in the discussion. Resident, 4140 Bluebell Park — on renovation committee, park is well overdue for changes, need more basketball courts, fence should stay and be fixed, suggest use of green vinyl coating, install at least one play equipment 2 -5 or 5 -10 and keep swings; basketball courts need to be resurfaced; need water fountain and more trashcans; opposed to BBQ grills because of party gatherings; replace patio structure with new wood structure like redwood because it does not attract termites; or use a product to treat wood; park should be for sports and play equipment. Norm Berry — interested in receiving a copy of Bluebell Park proposal. Resident, member of renovation committee commented that the park has not been used for years for any sports activities and that the proposed changes by the committee is long in coming. Onea Ostrich, 3621 Camelia Street — confused as to why Aster Park is now included in the concept when this has not been discussed with the neighborhood; need to keep sports - Bluebell Park is regularly used for sports activities, including Lacrosse, soccer, football, etc; need to keep lights, need to keep shade structure should not be removed but redone with better material, concerned that the neighbors on the north side have not been contacted regarding new plans for park; placement of tot lot should be in same location that it originally was; placing equipment along the north wall would interfere with the open area currently used; fence should stay but be fixed; would like a diagram of concept plan be shared with all the affected residents before plan goes to the commission. Recreation concerns include retaining large open field play area in Bluebell Park for sports activities; retaining lights in park; current uses include Itsy Bitsy sport programs (flag football, basketball, soccer, hockey), whiffle golf, lacrosse, and dog obedience classes; amenities the public requests most from parks are shade structure, picnic tables, benches around play area, tot lot for children to play in while siblings are participating in classes, sports or organized programs; retain fence for child safety; other items that would be nice to have are; restrooms, shade trees; concern that Aster Park is extremely small to add structures and equipment causing safety problems. Commissioner comments include: Watson — commended community interest in participating; concerned about eliminating the current use of park as a practice field for sports and use of night lights; retain park use by reinstalling tot equipment for 2 -5 years in previous location; and retain sports use for older kids; also encourage older groups to use tennis facility; would like unanimous decision, remembers the concerns when Edison Park was discussed; would like to see a more defined plan; as commissioner would choose sports over BBQ's, should retain as much green space as possible; consider fencing in tot lot similar to beach lot for safety; like the idea of camouflaging fence in colored material; cannot see destroying current field need, does agree that park needs to be upgraded; cannot make a decision tonight. McAllister— do not tear down big tree in park; need to keep green area; need a more definitive plan; hear that residents like the current park configuration and usage, just want the current amenities upgraded, the tot lot replaced; neighbors are saying they do not want the playground equipment to be installed on north side. Goering — confused about concept plan, would like more detail, keep as sports park for 2 — 9 years of age; need to keep lights and sports; put in new sod; resurface basketball courts; redo fence, keep in present location but likes the idea of green vinyl coating; Seal Beach Tree Committee could donate trees to beautify fence; concerned about budget and land constraints; would like to look at a more detailed diagram; requests that Public Works hold community meetings for both Bluebell and Aster Park before submitting a new proposal to Commission. Higginbotham — up to now, no complaints from residents about the park usage; seems to work for the community as it exists right now. The limited funds should be used to rehabilitate the current park amenities, retain the current layout of the park, likes Ms. Watson's suggestion for a play equipment for 2 to 5 year olds; have older group use tennis facility and more should be explored in how this group can use the facility's amenities; keep sports programs and recreation uses at park. Commission directed staff to return with a more detailed plan that incorporates the concerns of the neighborhood and retains the following; current configuration of park for sports use and lighting, upgrading of fence and shade structure; reinstalling tot lot equipment for smaller age group; respect the neighbors to north directly adjacent to park by not relocating equipment close to them; redoing basketball courts for older age groups or redoing surface to be used for another sport/recreation activity at present location; Public Works Department to hold community workshops for Bluebell Park and Aster Park neighborhoods so that they can comment on the design plan before it returns to the Commission. 2. Gum Grove Park Update Mr. Crumby reported that Laing Homes, as part of its subdivision agreement, would pay $145,000 to the City to provide improvements to the park. The Gum Grove Park Committee would be involved in the process. Commissioner Watson was concerned about the erosion occurring at the Park. Staff commented that at this time Laing Homes is still responsible for maintaining the area because the City has not formally accepted the park deed. Ms. Watson made a request that Jim Caviola from the Tree Committee be included in the discussion process. She also commented that a big issue is the wall and gate access. Commissioner McCallister also commented on the need for gate access, better signage and requested more information regarding what other improvements that Heron Pointe put into the development. Mr. Crumby advised that Laing Homes would not be putting in Agenda Item any additional improvements. Any additional improvements would be part of the City's conceptual plan that will be reviewed by the Commission at a later date. 3. Edison Park Community Gardens Assistant City Manager Yotsuya provided a brief report on the status of gardens. The Commission approved the proposed By -Laws with one change as submitted by Commissioner McAllister regarding weed abatement. Commissioner Goering was impressed with the new rules and setting up a Community Garden Committee. Commissioner Higgenbotham was pleased with the new program and like the idea of self policing and community cleanup of the gardens. Commissioner Watson suggested that staff take a look at Leisure World's garden operation for additional ideas. Commissioner Derry requested that the plot fees be reviewed at a later date because the current fees do not even cover the cost of water use. Commissioner McAllister would like a community cleanup day be scheduled soon to address the weed and common area problems. Ms. Yotsuya mentioned that staff will be working on submitting a grant request to the 5-10K Run Committee for monies to fix the fence and gate, put decomposed granite in the common areas, redo the plot borders and to create a new front entrance and bulletin board for the gardens. VII. MANAGER'S REPORT — Informational items No comments. VIII. COMMISSION CONCERNS No comments. IX. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. SEAL BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of Wednesday, April 26, 2006, 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Commissioner Watson called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: AnnaBeth Goering, Carla Higginbotham, Graham McAllister, Carla Watson Absent: James Derry III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (By motion of Commission) Approved as submitted. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATION None submitted. V. CONSENT CALENDAR None submitted. VI. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Recreation Fees The Commission recommended keeping the current fees except for the pool fees. The Commission requested that staff take a look at a slight increase in costs in swim fees and pool rentals and would defer to staff's recommendations on the appropriate increase. 2. Founder's Day Committee Community Services Grant The Commission concurred with preserving the Founder's Day Committee grant to support new recreation programs and not for capital improvements costs to parks and facilities that should be included in the City budget. In addition, the Commission determined that they would take on the project to determine potential uses of the Zoeter School site and would like a workshop to be set up by staff. (This item was originally deferred to a committee process due to the Commission's prior commitment to the Founder's Day program. However, now that the event is over, the Commission felt that discussing the future recreational uses of the site was an important issue to the Commission and keeping with future discussions on how to spend the Founder's Day Committee Community Services grant. VII. MANAGER'S REPORT — Informational items No comments. VIII. COMMISSION CONCERNS Commissioner Goering was concerned about when the Bluebell Park report would be submitted to the Commission for review and if Public Works staff had held in community meetings in the neighborhood as requested. Commissioner Watson was also concerned that the plan would reflect the Commission's directions and that it would address the residents concerns. Assistant City Manager Yotsuya was not aware of any meetings held to date. Commissioner McAllister said that the weeds were overgrown on the bikepath that bordered the north wall of Leisure World. Commissioner Goering wanted to know about the land in College Park West that used to have Basketball courts. Commissioner Higginbotham will not be at the May and June meeting. Commissioner Watson requested and the Commission concurred that the June meeting would be held on June 14, 2006 at 7 p.m. IX. ADJOURN Meeting was adjourned at 7.37 p.m. SEAL BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of Wednesday, May 24, 2006, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER Called to order by Chair at 7:03 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Present: James Derry, AnnaBeth Goering, Claudia Higginbotham, Graham McAllister, Carla Watson III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (By motion of Commission) Approved as submitted, with the following exceptions: 1. Minutes listed on the Consent Calendar will be vote separately in order for Chair Deny to abstain from voting on Item V -2. 2. Hear Agenda Item VI -1 first to accommodate members of the public present to speak on this matter. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATION Oral communications regarding Bluebell Park were submitted as part of the discussion on VI -1. Please see comments below. No additional comments were submitted. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of February 22, 2006 meeting. Approved as submitted. 2. Minutes of April 26, 2006 meeting. Approved as submitted with Mr. Derry abstaining because he did not attend the meeting. VI. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Bluebell Park Conceptual Plans • (Chair Deny recused himself for this item only due to conflict of interest.) The following resident comments were heard first by the Commission. Bob Sakaguchi, 3640 Aster St — neighbor since 1972 — neighborhood has larger families with various ages so any changes to the park would have long term impacts; supports team sports at park; playground equipment should have swings with toddler seats; current plan does not have any barriers at north end for fly balls; replacing fence along Bluebell is a good idea; but proposed 5ft fence is inadequate for sports use and should be higher; removal of trees is good because it creates more open green area and Agenda Item eliminates all the pine needle and tree droppings but there is no provision in plan for a shade structure or replacement trees; should add restrooms and water fountain; could add a portable restroom where shade structure currently is and surround it with shrubs; it should be located near street for ease of maintenance; or add a patio cover to posts to replace shade structure. David Rosenman, 8th Street — complained about Commission procedure regarding agenda; commented that he is a member of the Tree Committee and that this committee and not the Commission should decide on whether trees should be removed from the park. Mario Voce, 6th Street — stated that any tree removal issue should be sent to the Tree Committee. Floria Martinez, 3570 Aster — displeased that proposal locates play equipment close to homes; plan has no bathrooms; does not want picnic tables near her home but should be located in open area near street for public safety. Yvonne Metre, Old Ranch Condominium — great initiative to rehab the park; concerned that the plan should have adequate fencing and security for kids; would like to assist in selection of type of play equipment. Dean Crowley, 3580 Aster — opposes location of play equipment; opposes removal of shade structure; recommends that play equipment be located next to shade structure. Schelly Sustarsic — keep high fence, do not reduce; does not want sports practice uses eliminated — current plan will change the configuration of the fields and be sports unfriendly; keep trees; just needs maintenance, take care of overgrown roots and lifting concrete by using pavers similar to Old Town; keep shade structure, just rehab by wood treatment and staining, etc; locate play structure with fencing next to shade structure; maintain play field; lights are oriented for north -south use, if you shift direction of sports use, lights will not be used; lights are an asset to the park; contacted a recreation professional in another city regarding optimum park features and heard that play equipment should not be located near homes, unfenced berms near streets are a safety hazard because bike riders use them for jumps; expressed her unhappiness that plan did not include citizen input — the process has been very closed to neighborhood input; does not support the plan as proposed; likes the differences in the various neighborhood parks and they should not be made to look the same; Bluebell configuration should be kept the same but just upgraded by replacing the play equipment to where it was before, upgrading the fencing, fixing the basketball courts, shade structure and surface, etc. Lisa Crowley, 3580 Aster — moved in six months ago, likes the park for her teenage kid, feels there is a need for more sports activities for kids; supports keeping park sports active. Gary Byrum, 3570 Aster— does not like the location of play equipment as currently proposed, it will interrupt sports use, having it tucked in back would be bad for safety and visibility; wants play equipment located by shade structure, police can patrol better; proposed plan is contrary to report's statement that it will continue to support team sports, instead feels the proposed changes will be a negative impact to such uses; field should be repaired, current condition is why some groups do not presently use field like they used to; supports a higher fence; does not want trees removed or fences lowered to 5 ft. Arnold Wilkens, 450 Old Ranch Road — worked with Jim Deny, Council Member Ybaben and park committee and wanted to complement Sean Crumby on doing a good job in preparing a plan that reflects the concept that was agreed on; supports fence by basketball courts; likes the lights; likes the idea of creating a berm to keep balls from rolling into the street; because of other's comments not sure on removal of trees; likes the idea of lower fence to make park more open; likes the addition of walkways- likes idea of adding a cement wall around play equipment; supports the new location of play equipment as presented in proposed plan. Henry Eager, College Park East Neighborhood Association — current president; has heard from many homeowners who have expressed that they do not want the play equipment by the houses; would like the shade structure to be put back up ; the proposed 5 ft fences should be higher; supports putting in park benches. Commission also received written correspondence from: John Hum, 3861 Sunflower St, in favor of making needed repairs and upgrades to existing equipment, field, trees and fence but not changing the current configuration; Council Member RayYbaben providing more information on the proposed plan and urging the Commission to approve the design as presented; Schelly Sustarsic providing photos/info on park use and concerns that were also reflected in oral comments. Deputy City Engineer Sean Crumby presented a brief overview and requested that Commission approve the conceptual plan as submitted or give direction on how the plan should be modified. Commissioner Watson asked if slats could be placed across the posts as an alternative. She was not happy that the Commissioners recommendations were not reflected in the plan submitted. She indicated that the commission was in agreement not to reduce the play field and that the park plan changes the configuration of sports use, making future play more difficult. Commissioner Higginbotham queried on how many committee meetings were held with the residents and expressed her concerns as to why the Public Works Department did not hold any information meetings in the neighborhood as requested by the Commission. She also wanted more information on the committee that came up with the original proposal. Commissioner Goering did not understand why the playground equipment is being located close to the homes. She also asked why the shade structure needs to be removed and if it could be replaced. Commissioner Graham wanted to know about the lights on the field. He expressed concern that the plan would change the configuration of the playing field; the light standards would then be in the middle of the playing field and would affect sports play going east -west across the park. He also asked why the tree was being removed and if they were diseased. He also wanted to know if the concrete pad would remain once the shade structure was removed. Agenda Item '2 Mr. Crumby responded that he was not aware of the trees being diseased; that the plan does not affect the park lights; he explained that $190,000 is available for park improvements, that $40-60,000 would be needed to replace the shade structure and is not in the budget; the shade structure has termite damage and is recommended for removal but the removal of the concrete pad is optional; the Bluebell Park Committee was not a City committee, Council Member Ybaben designated several neighborhood residents to look at the issue. Ms. Higginbotham expressed her unhappiness that the current plan changes the park to a more passive orientation. She commented that the ficus tree is gorgeous and should not be removed; if the shade structure needs to be removed, that it should be only a temporary situation and that any future available funds be used to construct a new structure in the present location. In the meantime, the ficus can serve as a shade and that pavers or additional pads be considered under and around the tree for residents to use. She appreciated the concern that residents have regarding locating the play equipment close to the houses; does not understand why fences are being recommended to be reduced or removed and commented that it is a bad idea relative to safety; she commented that fences serve as a deterrent for people who might quickly snatch a child from a park. Ms. Higginbotham expressed her desire to see the play equipment be moved next to the trees away from the basketball court and to surround the playground with a three foot fence for safety. Ms. Goering expressed her concern that the process needs to be sped up; that the residents have spoken and the commissioners have previously concurred that the essential needs of the park are to repair the existing amenities and replace the play equipment; she was concerned about the timeframe and drawing out this process too long; she asked direction from Mr. Crumby on what recommendation options were available to the Commission. Ms. Higginbotham commented that for 40 years, the neighbors have enjoyed use of the park in its present configuration and that it has been expressed to her that they do not want to change the use of the park — they want the current amenities upgraded and modernized and the play equipment returned to the park. Ms. Watson expressed her concern that she could not fully understand the vision that promoted the current plan; that the commission had responded at the last meeting to the concerns of the park neighbors to keep the park in its present configuration but improve the park amenities and that the proposed plan before them did not reflect the direction of the Commission from the last meeting. Per the request for clarification, Ms. Yotsuya explained that the Commission could refer the item back for more committee and public input; they could provide direction to the Public Works staff on what elements of the conceptual plan they would like to see retained or modified and have those plan elements placed on the next agenda; they could also defer the item up to the City Council who would ultimately make the final decisions on expenditures for the park. The Commission approved the following recommendations: Improve fencing but retain the current height No reduction in play field and no change in present configuration Replace tot lot where it was originally located and add a safety fence Keep trees but provide trimming and pruning where needed; requested that staff receive input from the tree committee regarding any future consideration of tree removal Resurface basketball courts Add walkways If shade structure needs to be removed due to rot, retain concrete pad and provide information on temporary improvements that would add shade Remove drinking fountain Commission directed Public Works to work on a new conceptual plan drawing that reflected these recommendations, provide an aerial map of the park in its present state and to place this matter on the next agenda schedule for June 14. 2. Approval of Gum Grove Park Conceptual Layout Mr. Crumby provided a brief overview of the proposed Gum Grove Park improvements and requested that the Commission approve the submitted conceptual plan. He indicated that $145,000 was given to the City by the developer to construct the improvements and that staff has met with the Gum Grove Park committee. Commissioner Watson asked if the plan had addressed resident Mr. Vanderbilt's concerns on erosion. She also commented if the plan preserved the riparian habitat in the park; if staff has submitted any grant requests for additional plantings and improvements for the park; and that plan should indicate the size of trees to be planted; and asked about the cost of adding more trees to the park. Mr. Crumby stated that the proposed structure of the plan is designed to reduce erosion. Mario Voce, resident, indicated that he is Chair of the Gum Grove Park committee, and commented that the cost for trees is based on size. An average range is several dollars for a seedling up to $1000 for a large box tree. Trees do better if they are younger instead of well established at time of planting. Ms. Watson queried that people may want to donate or dedicate trees and asked about plaque designations. Mr. Voce commented that plaques may not be a good idea. The Coastal Commission may have concerns regarding adding such items like plaques and types of fencing, etc.; the focus right now is on the current conceptual plan because that is where the money is dedicated for use; and that the idea of introducing new native trees to rest of park would come later. Commissioner McAlester was interested in visually seeing the tree and planting selection. Commissioner Higginbotham commented on the park trails and its current uses. Ms. Watson commented further on the urban wilderness and hiking amenities. Chair Derry asked why the City would want to assume responsibility and liability for these improvements before the development is completed; concerned about doing improvement work until Laing Homes is done, in case more erosion occurs. Agenda Item Commission concurred with deferring the report to the next meeting to get more information about the completion date on development; how the money and improvements are written into the development agreement because of their concern about liability and any future erosion damages due to ongoing construction if rain occurs before the development is completed. VII. MANAGER'S REPORT — Informational items No comments. VIII. COMMISSION CONCERNS Ms. Watson requested that Zoeter school issue be placed on the next agenda to establish future meeting dates for a discussion on the matter. Mr. McAllister commented that a large pile of dirt was recently removed by Edison Gardens that could have been used to fill in the holes in the surrounding area. He requested that staff look into fixing the low spot at the northwest end by road. Mr. Deny expressed his concern about bicyclists using the west side of Aster Park where there are a number of ruts and holes and requested that Public Works look into the matter. IX. ADJOURN The meeting was adjoumed at 8:57 p.m. SEAL BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of Wednesday, June 14, 2006, 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Called to order by Chair at 7:07 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: James Derry, AnnaBeth Goering, Graham McAllister, Carla Watson Absent: Carla Higginbotham III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA (By motion of Commission) Approved as submitted, with the following exception: 1. Hear Agenda Item VI -1 first to accommodate members of the public present to speak on this matter. IV. ORAL COMMUNICATION Oral communications regarding Bluebell Park were submitted as part of the discussion on VI -1. Please see comments below. The following oral communications were heard after the discussion on VI -1: David Roseman — Seal Beach — spoke on the Bluebell Park item — expressed that it was a contentious issue. He commented that the meeting needed to be more structured in order to control outbursts from the floor and suggested that the Commission seek advice from the City.Attorney on how to deal with such matters specifically limiting having a colloquy with a Council Member during oral communications. Charles Antos — District 1 Council Member — He mentioned that a couple of years ago, the City Engineer put together a report on day care center that identified the discovery of asbestos and lead. He commented that he does not know if the report has been updated regarding future use, has not received an updated report on costs to demolish building or the costs to place the day care in a temporary or permanent facility, or made any budgetary conclusions on what to set aside. He commented on why Item VI -3 was on the agenda and it had not been to the City Council yet. (Commissioner Watson indicated that the item was sent to the Commission through the City Council for their input, but the item had been postponed to now. She asked if an ad -hoc committee might be useful.) Mr. Antos indicated that he wanted to hold a town hall meeting. V. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of May 24, 2006 meeting. • Approved as submitted. Agenda Item VI. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Annual Selection of Chair and Vice -Chair The Commission appointed Jim Derry to continue as Chair for the next year and Claudia Higginbotham to serve as Vice Chair. 2. Approval of Bluebell Park Conceptual Layout Due to a conflict of interest, Mr. Derry removed himself from the meeting for this item only and Ms. Goering conducted this portion of the agenda. Council Member Ybaben — 4373 Hazelnut — As mentioned in his letter to the Commission, he thanked the Commission for supporting his prior request to consider a combined Aster and Bluebell park solution; however, the option had been thoroughly examined and the conclusion reached that all improvements should be directed to Bluebell Park. He wanted the Commission to be aware that the plan for the park was developed between residents and City staff. As City Council Member, he served as a conduit and assigned Chair Derry to work on the design of the park. He indicated that the normal process would have staff work on the development of park improvements. However, he wanted to conduct the process differently by having Mr. Derry select a committee of residents to design the conceptual plan. He held a town hall meeting as part of the process. Mr. Ybaben briefly discussed that Mr. Derry's conflict of interest on the Commission was the reason that he is now taking the lead to complete the process. He commented on his approach and philosophy regarding the park. Because of the City's strong financial position, he called for a beatification initiative that the City Council agreed to and that City Manager Mr. Bahorski supports. He commented that branding a community includes creating a special look and that the City's parks are sub par and do not reflect the quality of the community. He wanted the Commission to understand his direction and where he wants to go. In regard to the Seal Beach Tennis Center, Mr. Ybaben commented that he had headed a group to take possession of the center and keep it as a tennis facility. He discussed how this issue was the reason for running for City Council. Due to his efforts, the City Council took action to accept the property and he was able to secure the Bixby money for the City. Mr. Ybaben worked hand in hand with city staff. He met weekly with the City Manager and staff to work minutely on how and what to do with the improvements to the property. He also worked with staff to select the new manager. He commented that now the center is first class. He also discussed the membership that it includes a large senior citizen group and that CIF holds playoffs at the center and is putting Seal Beach on the map. He commented further on his role in the tennis center and the vision, determination and hard work that made this happen. . He is now taking charge of the Bluebell Park plan. He mentioned that some original members of Mr. Derry's committee have spoken against the original concept plan. He commented this is okay that they have directed away from the original charge but wanted to remind the Commission that they were originally included in the process. He had meetings with the City Manager to discuss the pros and cons and went forward with the original design. But people were included in the process, even though they disagreed. The Commission may have some people in the audience who have come to speak on this matter. But just in case, he had people sign a petition in support of his plan. He also had a brief slide presentation for the Commission and provided the following comments: park is in poor condition, basketball court needs to be resurfaced, large concrete pad under tree is broken and shade structure is rotten. Sandbox is not used. Trees need to be removed. We want the Commission to develop a concept not a detailed plan and to let a professional contractor design the park in tune with his vision. The Commission is involved in too many details and they should let a professional architect do that. Do not be constrained by being too specific. The Commission should just present a general direction that a designer can work from to develop the details for the park. His general concepts include aesthetics — the park is now ugly, should be made more appealing and to take the park into high visibility and use. He mentioned that Bill Dubaurdieu was the architect who designed Laurel Park in Los Alamitos. He worked with Mr. Ybaben to develop his concept to remove concrete, focus on trees, include meandering sidewalks, picnic tables and places for people to sit. The alternate focus is on lot utility- you can redo basketball, put in a skatepark and attract kids from all over the City instead of having a lovely park. People who drive by but don't stop are still users of the park. Because of budgetary constraints, the compromise presented to people is that changes should be done in phases. So a design should be in place and Commission should not make concrete decisions. Most people agree that any improvements should take into consideration security and safety. Plan includes squaring off play area and putting in uses suitable for that area. Aesthetically, remove and reduce fence, add berms for safety and to make space more attractive and to open area. Rationale for putting play area in center is for safety — placing play area in another location would make child abduction easier, placing it next to homes promotes health and safety. A few homes may not like it but what is the greater concern? Mr. Ybaben talked to someone next to Heather Park who says there are no issues for the homes in having the play area close. He referred to his letter to the Commission. Regarding the question on trees — he suggests having and arborist look at the trees. The original plan said to remove the trees but staff made an error and meant to say that the trees be pruned at to have an arborist look at whether any trees should be removed. He mentioned that former Commissioner Ricki Layman supports his plan. She favors getting rid of the pine trees but retaining the ficus tree. Her preference is that the high fence is necessary but he commented that everyone has their own opinion — getting consensus is hard to do. Mr. Ybaben felt that the use of experts fall in line with the vision he proposes. However, he cannot hire a designer until the City Council approves funding. The Commission had a few questions of Mr. Ybaben, who responded by saying Jim Caviola's Trees for Seal Beach will provide the new trees that Ray wants. He will look at problem using professionals. His belief is that his design does not keep out sports use — organized sports are played elsewhere and Bluebell is too small for practices. Teams do not want to practice at Bluebell Park. It is for youth and family pick up games. Mr. Ybaben referred to Bart Farber, a former resident who just moved back on Birchwood. Mr. Farber mentioned that he met with Mr. Ybaben. As a child on Elder Avenue he would not go or use the park or fountain. He has lived in Foothill Ranch and enjoyed park system because it was a destination. He commented on the placement of toys for children and the swing set; he didn't think that parents would want to use the park and that the City needs to make the park more functional and beautiful. Mr. Ybaben requested that Mr. Dubaurdieu also speak. Mr. Dubaurdieu commented that Mr. Ybaben and he are long time friends. He lives in Rossmoor and practices in Los Alamitos. Besides Laurel Park he also did the Radisson Hotel. Instead of an iron grid layout, he would like to see a free form design. He does not have a problem keeping the basketball court and inter - mingling the tot lot with trees, fixing the concrete around the ficus and including a new design to work in walkways. Commissioner Watson asked how much adding berms would take away from play area. Mr. Dubaurdieu did not comment on the required footage but stated that berms are designed to slow down play. Mr. Ybaben made some closing remarks in support of his concept plan and suggested that the Commission move forward with the rest of public comment. Leon Foster, 3610 Bluebell — supports not cutting down trees, mentioned a petition to focus on not removing the ficus. Florica Martinez, 4570 Aster— dismayed that Mr. Ybaben would say that people have been talked to about park, that his plan still has the playground next to her house, She expressed her disapproval at the last meeting and had discussed that she did not want the playground next to her house and her concern to protect the kids from field ball play. She approves the location of the play equipment next to the ball court that has a safety fence. Gordon Trey, 4464 Elder — he is an original owner. He commented about the fence around park — it is lousy does not promote open space. Bluebell Park is for T -Ball and little people uses. He commented that at Heather Park, holes are being dug into the ground by neighborhood kids. David Roseman, 8 Street — he commented for the record that he received a phone call from Council Member and that it would be okay for an arborist to look at the ficus. He felt that the process used in the development of the Main Street plan should be used and include the whole city. Direct outreach just around the park does not represent all of Seal Beach use of the park. The Commission should think carefully — Bluebell Park is not just a park for the neighborhood but is a park for the city. He mentioned that McGaugh has a play area with fencing. Zoeter School site has fenced in play fields. This is a shared responsibility. He does not support locating play equipment where it would cut down the park. Mario Voce — member of the Environmental Review Board, Tree Advisory Committee and Gum Grove Park Committee — he stated that he cares about the environment. He does not support removing trees. The City should not cut down trees but look at how to save them and that any decisions should be go through the tree committee first. Onea Ostrich, 3621 Camellia — she support the democratic process. She is a Heather Park user as well. She commented that the homes near Heather Park are not as close as the two homes directly adjacent to the park and that the impact of play equipment in Heather is not the same as moving the play equipment close to the homes in Bluebell. Regarding the child abduction comment — she talked to Police Department, the main issues at Bluebell Park are teens making noise and disrupting park use and lack of visibility from the street could be a problem. She presented a petition that includes support for new playground equipment in original location, resurface of basketball court, retain all trees, replace concrete, replace shade structure, and retain and rehabilitate fence. Her petition is a difference of opinion with Mr. Ybaben's petition. They do not have as many signatures as Mr. Ybaben but her petition was just briefly circulated prior to the meeting and more signatures can be collected. She commented that the rest of Seal Beach uses the park as how all the parks in Seal Beach are used by everyone. Regarding the water fountain, the fountain does work and the wood shade is used in the park. She understands the need to remove the wood shade because of termites but is sad to see the structure go and would like it replaced in the near future. The fence should remain to support sports use. Schelly Sustarsic — in College Park East, homes have small back yards, and park is where children will play. Seal Beach has a rare and valuable park that is fenced and lighted for practice — anything that plans to change the park to a greenbelt to drive by and look at — any such changes should involve the whole community. The park has been and continues to be used for sports - ltsy Bitsy sports programs are played at Bluebell, the City has an alliance with Los Alamitos School District that utilizes parks throughout the two communities as sports practice fields. Any changes that affect the sports field use of Bluebell should not be done without input from other users such as these. For 30 to 40 years the park has been used for such activities with no problem. Seal Beach's parks may not be as fancy as South Orange County — but money and space is limited in Seal Beach and especially for its park system. Parks in Seal Beach serve many purposes for both sports and families, it may not be as glamorous but it works for the community. The lighted and fenced space for park and sports use needs to be kept. Sandy Welch, 4140 Birchwood — she commented that people are missing the point — her opinion is that the park is not working and nobody uses the park. She believed that Mr. Ybaben did a great job and worked really hard. She commented about the noise level next to the neighbor's house and invited her to come to Rossmoor school and listen to the noise level during recess — there are a hundred kids there, they do not make much noise and that it is not a big issue. Ann Nu, 4856 Fir— has a grandson who lives by park — had party at park, but would not take him to Bluebell because the concrete is broken — concrete is a liability and the raises create standing water. She queried about why the neighbor was complaining about noise when she lives next to a freeway. She wants the park fixed up like Almond and Heather Park. The play area at Heather is too small and people do not use the stop signs. The Ficus is a beautiful tree that needs to be taken care of, concrete needs to be removed, and park needs to be fixed so kids can use the play field and basketball courts. Charles Antos, District 1 Council Member— when there was a discussion of possibily doing something else at the tennis center, he went to Bluebell Park at noon on a Saturday to take noise readings for an hour. At that time, he reported to City Council that his decibel readings under the tree were at 75 -85 db level. Placing the play equipment farther away from the freeway is better. Arnold Wilkins, Old Ranch Road condominiums — re the petition, he has been talking to other people who are concerned that the fence is an eyesore. He read Kathleen McGlynn's 2004 report Fall Winter Schedule - soccer is first come, first served play, Arbor has new facilities, February through June, KBA uses McGaugh School, Bluebell Park serves purpose for little kids. Council Member Ybaben readdressed the Commission. He stated that the original committee has six people, two have drifted away and the current committee of four does not exist anymore. Commissioner McAllister— concerned about the number of plans that have been presented, bothered about making any more changes. He commented about the trees and plantings and why the pine trees were a problem other than what a regular maintenance program could resolve with regular pruning and cleaning up. Mr. Ybaben stated that the trees are not recommended by staff as City trees. After the public comment was closed, Deputy City Engineer Sean Crumby provided an overview of the staff report. He indicated that at the last meeting, the Commission reviewed the concept plan presented by Mr. Ybaben. At that meeting, the Commission recommended to go in a different direction as identified in the attached report and site layout. The new conceptual plan presented in the agenda report involves keeping the existing layout of the park and its amenities with a few changes, including rehabilitating fence at present height, adding new gate entries, refurbishing basketball court, demolishing shade structure and preserving existing concrete for future shade structure, replace concrete around tree, locating new playground equipment in original location. He indicated that meeting notices were posted at park and that homeowners within 500 feet were also notified. Ms. Watson — mentioned that the plan did not include the safety fence around tot area as discussed at the last meeting. She queried if there was any chance to create a tree buffer to reduce noise that Council Member Antos mentioned. Mr. Crumby stated that they could add to concept plan. Ms. Watson said that the park was heavily used in the past, that it continues to be used as a play field and some usages diminished as the park aged and maintenance and replacement were not kept up. With the improvements, the kids will continue to use this park. In the past, she has worked hard to preserve greenbelts and open spaces, but City should not do away with the utility of play that has existed and continues to exist on this park. The lights in the park and the security fencing are essential to sports play and should not be eliminated just for aesthetics. She is in support of the proposed conceptual plan that is part of the agenda report. Mr. Ybaben again addressed the Commission. He commented that if the Commission is going to have a split vote tonight, he recommends that the Commission take no action and continue the item until Mr. Ybaben could replace Chair Jim Derry with another individual who vote in his direction. Commission requested that Ms. Yotsuya outline the possible actions of the Commission regarding this agenda item. The options before the Commission include: 1) take no action; 2) move to approve conceptual plan submitted with any additional additions or deletions identified by the Commission and recommend forwarding to City Council for its consideration; 3) continue item and direct Public Works or a committee to readdress the issue and return to Commission at a later date with its recommendation, and 4) defer any decision directly to the City Council. Ms. Watson asked a question regarding the status of available funding for this project. Mr. Crumby stated the City had until 2007 to expend funds. Ms. Watson stated that she was ready to move forward with the plan and vote. Ms. Goering commented that she understood the desire to beautify the park but stated that the park is used as a sports field. But she does not want to offend anyone and wished there was a way to accommodate everyone's concerns. Ms. Watson commented that it would be nice to have parks similar to Irvine, but our parks and funding for them is limited. Bluebell Park has sports field uses and is not supportive of any change that affects this. She made a motion, seconded by McAllister to approve the layout as presented, including the 3 foot security fence around tot lot and forward recommendation to City Council. The motion passed 2 -0 -1 (Ms. Goering abstained from vote). 3. Consider Meeting Dates for Discussion on Potential recreation Uses at Zoeter Site. This item was deferred until a town hall meeting can be conducted by Council Member Antos. VII. MANAGER'S REPORT — Informational items June Yotsuya, Assistant City Manager, mentioned that at the last meeting, the Commission requested that an item regarding landscaping improvements for Gum Grove Park be placed on the June 14 agenda. However, Public Works was unable to complete the agenda report in time for this meeting. Mr. Crumby indicated a desire to have this item heard before their next regularly scheduled meeting in September. Based on Public Works request, the Commission agreed to meet on July 19 for this item only. VIII. COMMISSION CONCERNS Ms. Watson indicated that she would not be available for the July 19 meeting. Mr. McAllister requested that Public Works clean up the overgrown weeds that he observed in Bluebell Park at the corner where the north fence and the neighbor fence meets. IX. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 9:42 p.m.