Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2003-03-10 #O 1 r AGENDA REPORT DATE: March 10, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: John B. Bahorski, City Manager THRU: Douglas A. Danes, P.E. Director of Public Works /City Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE RECREATION COMIVHSSION RECOMMENDATION FOR THE OLD RANCH TENNIS CLUB CONCEPTUAL PLAN. SUNIlVIARY OF REQUEST: The proposed City Council action will approve retaining the Old Ranch Tennis Facility in it's existing configuration, direct the City Managers office to obtain proposals from private tennis facility operators, and direct staff to take possession of the funding and property after a tennis club operator is selected. In addition, staff is requesting that the City Council provide direction regarding the facility upgrades and the expenditure of funds for College Park East. BACKGROUND: History - As part of the City's development agreement with the Bixby Ranch Company, the Company has agreed to dedicate the Old Ranch Tennis Club to the City at no cost and pay the City the sum of one million dollars. The offer of dedication expires on September 23, 2004. As stated in the Operating Memorandum "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." The Old Ranch Tennis Club is a seven -acre site, containing 16 tennis courts, a 2,100 square foot clubhouse, a 3,200 square foot locker /shower /restroom facility, a 1,000 square foot workout room, and a 77 -space parking lot. In March of 1999, an 18 person volunteer ad -hoc committee known as the Tennis Club Site Committee (TCSC) was formed to look at the site and determine its best use for the community. The mission statement was "... develop recommendations for the best and highest use of the Old Ranch Tennis Club property for the community." The group met for a series of evening meetings and discussed the tennis club finances and operations, developed a recreational wish list, and developed three site plans with the help of Purkiss- Rose, a landscape architecture firm. In addition, the Recreation Department received proposals for tennis club operators based on its request for qualifications. • Agenda Item 0 At that time, the site plans included the demolition of 5 tennis courts, expansion of the club house to 5,000 or 6,300 square feet, an outdoor stage and performance area, basketball courts, restrooms, lighting, new landscaping and hard -scape which incorporated activities such as bike riding, walking, tot lot play, and picnicking. It also included a new skate park, splash pool, and the construction of 20 new parking spaces at Bluebell Park. On May 2, 2000, a town hall meeting at the tennis club was held highlighting these plans and the plans were well received by the 50 residents attending. In June of 2000, Mayor Campbell polled the residents of College Park East to determine interest and receive input on the proposed site plan. Of the 30% responding to the survey, 74% supported the proposed new park plan and 26% supported keeping the tennis facility as -is. This information was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission on September 27, 2000 and the design concept was approved and recommended to the City Council. On October 23, 2000, the site plan was presented to City Council for approval of the concept. At that time, the cost of the improvements was estimated at $1.4 million. With a $1 million budget, it was assumed that the City could use the anticipated Proposition 12 funds to make up the difference and the revenue from the Bixby Development to offset operational costs. The Recreation Director presented the staff report and extensive public comments were received at that time. The City Council discussed all aspects of the plan and report, and the comments received. At 12:20 am, a motion was carried that "...staff be directed to bring back additional complete information that proves the concept works, including bid information, that would be necessary to determine what will be done with this site." The project was then put on a temporary hold. In late 2001, the project and the associated costs were re- analyzed. The Public Works Department was assigned the project in November 2001. Costs ranged from $1.4 to $1.8 million and a re -scope of the project was sought. On December 19, 2001, the City Manager, the Deputy City Engineer, and the Interim Recreation Director met with the TCSC to discuss the project. The City notified the committee that several of the amenities including the pool, must be deleted since the project was over budget. One million dollars was stressed as the total budget. The TCSC directed staff to provide maintenance cost estimates to the existing and proposed facilities, cost estimates for the ADA upgrade to the existing facilities and future analysis. In January of 2002, the City contracted with an inspection firm to determine the required repairs and ADA upgrades necessary to the facility which was estimated at $250,000. Working with Council Person Campbell, staff further studied the project costs and the various ways to operate the facility in addition to studying' other similar proposed and existing facilities. Staff met with members of the TCSC, the Commission, Council, City residents, and local tennis club operators to develop a new scaled -down site plan. Several plan iterations were developed and reviewed. Agenda Item r r The Recreation Commission was updated on the progress and was presented with further information on costs and concepts on the scaled -down site plan on June 26, 2002. On September 24, 2002, the new scaled down site plan and costs were presented to the TCSC. The scaled down site plan included repairs and ADA upgrades to the facilities, - the demolition of four courts, construction of a new skate board park or dirt BMX area, small tot lot and new landscaping. After an extensive discussion, the TCSC agreed on the concept that open parkland space was more important than 4 tennis courts and moved approval of the new site plan. The TCSC agreed to share the concept with CPE residents and bring back comments to the next meeting. On October 15, 2002, the TCSC met and discussed comments they received from the public. Several comments were received in favor of the project and several against. They also discussed the options of using the money for other areas in College Park East. After further discussion, the TCSC reiterated the concept of parkland vs. tennis courts and moved "...that the previously approved concept plan be referred to the Recreation Commission for approval, that they refine the alternatives, and they approve the concept plan and forward it to City Council for their approval." Proposed Concept Plan approved by the Tennis Club Site Committee (Sept. 2002) The proposed concept plan which was approved by the TCSC is a scaled down version of the original concept plans. The existing site would be repaired to good working order and upgraded to full ADA specifications. This is estimated to cost $250,000 which leaves $750,000 for the remainder of the park concept. The proposed park concept will demolish approximately 1 acre, including 4 tennis courts, and construct a new skate board park or dirt BMX area, small tot lot, and new landscaping throughout the new park area at an estimated cost of $750,000. The tennis club facility would then retain an enclosed area containing 12 courts, the clubhouse, and locker /shower facility. The total estimated cost for this proposal including design, construction, inspection, and a contingency is $1,000,000. Recreation Commission Concept Plan (Jan. 2003) On January 22, 2003, the Recreation Commission was presented five alternatives for the project. The five alternative were as follows: Alternative No. 1 is the TCSC recommended alternative which includes the repairs and ADA upgrades to the center, demolition of four courts, construction of a new skate board park or dirt BMX area, small tot lot and new landscaping throughout the new park area. The estimated cost of this alternative is $1,000,000. The operation of the tennis center would be evaluated and determined based on the proposals to be received. • Alternative No. 2 includes demolishing the entire seven acres and landscaping with turf, creating open parkland. The cost of this alternative would be approximately $800,000 and may net the City up to $200,000 to be spent in the CPE neighborhood. Agenda Item Alternative No. 3 includes demolishing everything except the clubhouse, locker room, and parking lot and landscape the remainder of the site. The clubhouse and locker room would be repaired and brought up to ADA standards and the total cost of this alternative is $1,000,000. Alternative No. 4 includes the $250,000 repair and ADA upgrades to the center and no demolition at the site. The operation of the tennis center would be evaluated and determined based on the proposals to be received. The $750,000 in remaining funds would be used to make improvements in the College Park East neighborhood including repairs and upgrades to other parks, concrete repairs, street paving, storm drains and other improvements that benefit the CPE neighborhood. Planned amenities could also be added at other existing parks. Alternative No. 5 is a no -build alternative and the City rejects the dedication of the property. This alternative is a no cost alternative to the City. Prior to the meeting, staff met with members of the tennis club and in the College Park East neighborhood to take their comments. This included a meeting with a group called the "Committee to Preserve Our Neighborhood ". Approximately 100 people attended the Recreation Commission Meeting and 22 people made public comments. After a discussion, the Commission recommended to the City Council that the City accept the Old Ranch Tennis Site as is and it's funding, direct the City to obtain proposals from private tennis facility operators. Existing Facility Operations The Old Ranch Tennis Club is currently being operated by the Bixby Ranch Company. Membership ranges from 180 to 240 full -time members and 35% of the members are Seal Beach Residents. The courts and facilities are used for tennis play for full time members, hourly play patrons, tennis lessons, Los Alamitos High School tournaments and other regional tournaments. Proposed operation of the tennis club facility Several different formats for the operation of the tennis facility were reviewed and roughly studied. The proposals received in June of 1999 along with interviews with the existing operator and other local operators provided the information for the analysis. Staff determined three basic options may exist at the site. Each option assumed that a private contractor would operate the site. ❑ Full Private Membership Tennis Club ❑ Private/Public hybrid Tennis Club ❑ Public Tennis Facility (i.e. no membership dues) Analysis and research was conducted to determine the financial viability of 12 vs. 16 courts. In general, a 16 -court facility has a better opportunity to produce income. Agenda Item However, no direct evidence was found that a 12 -court facility would be detrimental to the facility. In general, a fully private facility has the best opportunity to break even or possibly provide income to the City. A private /public hybrid facility could break even. A Public Tennis Facility is most likely to cost the City annual funds to operate. As indicated above, the costs to operate these various scenarios varied and are somewhat inconclusive. The City Managers Office will prepare a request for proposals (RFP) to operate the Tennis Center. The proposals will be required to evaluate the different operation scenarios and the costs. With the firm costs provided, the Council will be able to decide what type of operation is fiscally prudent for the Community. The City would take ownership of the property after the operator is selected. If the City took ownership of the property without an operational plan, the City would immediately assume the fiscal responsibility of paying for tennis facility operation costs, utilities, landscaping, etc. These costs would outweigh any interest earnings, which may be gained by depositing the $1,000,000. Therefore it is not recommended the facility be accepted prior to receiving firm proposals from tennis club operators. Funding Expenditure Options An inspection of the facility indicates that $250,000 would be required to bring the entire facility to good working order status and to upgrade it to a fully accessible site. The City Council may direct that the facility be upgraded by the Public Works Department with the available funding. Another option is to have the future tennis club operator make the facility improvements instead of the City, similar to the Ruby's lease agreement. This approach is beneficial because it leaves the $1,000,000 in tact. However, with the low operating profit for this type of facility, this option may not be feasible or possible. Staff is requesting direction on this option. Staff is also requesting policy direction on the planned expenditure of the funds. Depending on the facility upgrades, these funds range from $750,000 to $1,000,000. The funds must be used to make improvements in the College Park East neighborhood. Possible projects include repairs and upgrades to other parks, further repairs and upgrades to the tennis center, concrete repairs, street paving, storm drains and other improvements that benefit the CPE neighborhood. Other amenities and improvements could also be added at other existing parks. FISCAL IMPACT: The offer of dedication will remain valid until September 23, 2004 and the total project budget is $1,000,000. Approximately $10,000 has been spent to date. No other project funds or annual maintenance funds are available at this time. Agenda Item RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the following items: 1. Retain the Old Ranch Tennis Facility in it's existing configuration; 2. Provide direction on the method to complete the facility upgrades (City or operator); 3. Direct the City Managers office to obtain proposals from private tennis facility operators; 4. Direct staff to take possession of the funding and property after a tennis club operator is selected; 5. Provide direction on the expenditure of funds for College Park East (projects). Prepared By: Reviewed By: lett - 1■4Z7Vukojevic, PE oug =. *an Deputy City Engineer Director of Public Works /City Engineer N • E'j ND APP O ED: /114 //' J• i B. Bahorski ` Manager Attachment: Approved Minutes from the Jan. 22, 2003 Recreation Commission Meeting • Agenda Item . SEAL BEACH PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Minutes of January 22, 2003 meeting I. CALL TO ORDER Called to order by Chair at 7:30 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL Present: AnnaBeth Goering, Rickie Layman, Schelly Sustarsic, Andy Rohman and Carla Watson IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Agenda was approved as submitted. V. ANNOUNCEMENTS Ms. Watson introduced the two newest members of the commission, Rickie Layman and AnnaBeth Goering to the audience. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATION None presented. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes October 30, 2002 meeting The minutes were approved, with Ms. Layman and Ms. Goering. abstaining. 2. Arbor Park 3. Capital Improvement Projects Status Report for Marina Center Improvements, Playground Equipment Rehabilitation Project and Community Pool Improvements 4. Un- funded Capital Improvement Program Parks Project List The balance of the consent calendar was approved as submitted. VIII. AGENDA ITEMS 1. Review of Old Ranch Tennis Club Proposed Site Plan Deputy City Engineer Mark Vukojevic provided a brief overview of the background of the Old Ranch Tennis Club, its existing conditions, the proposed concept plan approved by the ad -hoc Tennis Club Site Committee, the proposed operation of the tennis club facility, and several alternatives to the concept plan using the funds provided from Bixby Co. The options submitted to the Commission for consideration are: 1) repair site and upgrade to ADA specifications; demolish approximately 1 acre, including 4 tennis courts and construct a new skateboard park or dirt BMX area, small tot lot, and new park landscaping. Retain enclosed tennis club facility area including 12 courts, clubhouse and locker /shower facility; 2) demolish entire site and landscape with turf, creating open parkland; 3) retain clubhouse, locker room and parking lot, provide repairs and ADA upgrades, demolish and landscape remainder of site; 4) repair site and upgrade to ADA specifications with no demolition to site, use any remaining funds to make public improvements in the College Park East neighborhood, consider contracting with operator to maintain private tennis club, and as an alternative, consider requiring operator to make needed repairs and ADA upgrades; 5) reject dedication of property (no -build alternative). The committee then received comments from the public: - John Unrath, 4649 Dogwood Ave., S.B. - Old Ranch Tennis Center Site Committee member, summarized committee's recommendation, discussed park deficiency in College Park East (CPE), and commented that a majority of CPE residents responding to a survey were interested in expanded park area for kids. - Ray Ybaben, 4373 Hazelnut Ave., S.B. - Chair of Committee to Preserve Our Neighborhood and Tennis Club member, supports mixed use Seal Beach Tennis Center. - Robert Bolling, 4464 Hazelnut Ave., S.B. - should disregard survey, supports Option 4. -Jeff Harris, 4889 Ironwood, S.B. - did not like skate park idea, wants dog park, mentioned exposed maintenance sheds needs better fencing. - Dorothy Whyte, 4416 Candleberry Ave, S.B. - wants community center with the addition of a second story, against skate park/BMX. - Jeff Dunstan, 4532 Fir Ave., S.B - Tennis Center facility should be open to CPE residents.. - Dave Jeffrey, 3570 Wisteria St., S.B. - supports skate park. Dennis Dill, 4456 Dogwood Ave., S.B. - V.P. of Los Alamitos High School Booster Club, tennis team plays at club, supports retaining club as is. - Marty Mahrer, 3550 Pansy Circle, S.B. - did not like plan, commented on future problems with parking and traffic. George Springosky, 4156 Ironwood, S.B. - discussed financial viability of leaving facility as is. Karen Albers, 4308 Fir Ave., S.B. - interested in tot lot, picnic tables, community center for family use, keeping up maintenance, not interested in skate park /BMX, should do another survey. • Jim Nichol, 249 6th St, S.B. - against reduction of courts, doe not support skate park. - Melinda Rosenberg, 4573 Dogwood Ave, S.B. - against skate park /BMX, concerned that it will attract others from outside city, likes wading pool idea, should keep tennis club, but add a pool. - Ron Gaster, Long Beach - does not support skate park concept. - Robert Tumelty, 550 Old Ranch Road, S.B. - Old Ranch Townhome Association President, represents 60 homes, concerned that a broad spectrum recreational facility will not help keep the neighborhood quiet, would be noise and traffic impacts, should develop a strategic business plan. - Cheryl Saunders, 3661 Oleander St, S.B. - tennis player, supports community meeting space, combine tennis club usage with courts at Bluebell Park, would like exercise room for public use, does not support skate park /BMX, would like another ad -hoc committee. Lorraine Navarro, 4249 Ironwood Ave, S.B. - site committee member, does not support private club using public funds, wants more information on other operators, supports multiple amenities not just a tennis center, mentioned that according to former Recreation Director, Bixby operated Tennis Center at a loss. - Gordon Trigg, 4464 Elder Ave., S.B. - wants dead trees /trash along Lampson removed. Carol Ann Casesar, 275 Old Ranch Road/110 Ocean Ave., S.B. - should reassess what neighborhood wants, worried about future maintenance, wants to know if money could be used at Bluebell and other parks. - Dan Campbell, 220 Coastline, S.B. - supports single use, does not want other activities by club. -Charles Kruger, 4300 Fir Ave., S.B. - feasibility study needs to be done. -Dan Norton, 210 Old Ranch Road, S.B. - plays at Seacl If Tennis Club, wants facility available to public, should make clubhouse a community center, likes quiet, does not support skate park /BMX or tot lot, should put it on Heather Park, questions public liability for such activity. A. Commissioners provided the following comments: Carla Watson — committee should have included other people outside of College Park East, wants to retain tennis club as is, supports contracting out for private operation with public use, should open clubhouse to public, supports building a second story on clubhouse and using funds at other CPE parks. Rickie Layman — does not support skate park /BMX concept, supports tennis club operation as is. Andy Rohman — concerned with expense of proposals, feels that the money from Bixby should be used on rest of city, should continue operating tennis club as is, should encourage people outside of CPE to use facility, concerned with rest of Seal Beach subsidizing its operation. Shelly Sustarsic — mentioned that original intent of Bixby donating the tennis club site and funds was to mitigate the impact of its development on CPE neighborhood, is in favor of looking into alternative suggestions for use of site, commission should check further into economics of operating and maintaining site and studying options further before making a recommendation. AnnaBeth Goering — wants to maintain tennis facility and open it to public, interested in adding other amenities to site, would like to see site and funds used for whole community, should have accepted funds so City could earn interest (staff clarified that the funding structure for the ,$1M from Bixby does not allow the City to generate additional interest earnings) The committee approved a motion (4 -1, with Ms. Sustarsic voting no) to recommend that the City Council accept the tennis center site as is and its funding, and direct staff to seek proposals for private tennis facility operators. IX. MANAGER'S REPORTS No report provided due to time constraints. X. COMMISSION CONCERNS No additional comments. XI. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned to February 26, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Manager's Conference Room.