Loading...
P&R 11-07-02 APPROVED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION CITY OF CUPERTINO REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2002 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Bradford called the regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Commissioners present: Commissioners absent: Staff present: Others present: Jeanne Bradford, Frank Jelinch, Kris Wang Rod Brown, Roger Peng Therese Ambrosi Smith, Director; Don McCarthy, Recreation Supervisor; Richard Gonzales, Recreation Coordinator; Marie Preston, Administrative Secretary Adam Levermore-Rich, City of Sunnyvale; Brian Godbe, Godbe Research & Analysis; Terry Greene, Senior Architect for Public Works MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING 1. Minutes of September 5 and 29, 2002, were approved as drafted. COMMUNICATIONS NOT ON THE AGENDA · ORAL o none · WRITTEN - email from David Greenstein UNFINISHED BUSINESS 2. Presentation of City of Sunnyvale's grant program - Adam Levermore-Rich, Deputy Communications Officer for the City of Sunnyvale, reported that their grant program is run through the office of the city manager, with the cooperation of the other departments. He presented a short overview of their program; highlights of their program are: · Born out of a 1999 study issue on ways to promote non-city sponsored cultural events · 2001 was the community event grant program, which offered $25,000 in grant funding to help sponsor community events · In the first year, they received 10 applications and approved six of them for a total of approximately $15,000. The excess money, $10,000, was rolled over to this year's program · In 2002, $35,000 was made available for grants · A requirement is that grant funds represent no more than 40 percent of an event's proposed budget Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 2 of 9 · Events must be held in Sunnyvale, and planners are encouraged, but not required, to spend their funds within the city limits · Events must be free and open to the public · Only non-profits groups can apply · Grant funding is paid as reimbursement for invoiced expenses · Another aspect of the program is community event facilitation where they help people with the permitting and approval process · Events are required to draw at least 500 people in order to be awarded a community event grant · Staff is looking into the possibility of smaller grants for small events · Approval process is about a four-month process · Grant program materials are sent out in October · Flyers are distributed and local media are alerted · Reminders are sent out that the deadline is approaching · Deadline is December 2; decisions will be made in January · Review committee is a cross-section of all different departments; this committee makes recommendations on who should be awarded grants; recommendations are given to city council for their approval · Approved applicants have two years from the time they are notified, or 90 days after their event, to submit invoices for reimbursement · Event evaluation is required · They meet with event planners regarding public safety issues · Getting a grant does not entitle the event planners access to city facilities Mr. Leve~more answered clarifying questions from the commission. He is going to check to see if Sunnyvale waives fees, but at the time, he believes the grant program is the only way for event planners to receive financial relief. He stated that the process for prioritizing applicants is done through the evaluation team and a checklist of strengths and weakness. Via that process, recommendations are developed. There are certain criteria that weigh an event more heavily in favor of obtaining a grant; those include; previous experience holding a successful event, Sunnyvale event holder. He will provide us with a copy of the evaluation fo~ms, one for the staff team to make a decision to award funds and another form following the event. Therese reported that there is no action for the commission to take, as this information would be used to review the fee waiver policy that will be presented at the December meeting. Review of policy on fee waivers for use of city facilities - item tabled to the December meeting so that event planners can be notified. Some research on this topic was included in the commission's packet. NEW BUSINESS 4. Community survey results presented by Brian Godbe - Mr. Godbe presented the findings of the Cupertino community-wide telephone survey. This presentation had already been Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 3 of 9 given to the City Council. Five key objectives of the survey that were related to the Stevens Creek Corridor master plan process were: Receive representative data on the planning process throughout the city · Look at the proportion of residents that visit city facilities in the Stevens Creek corridor · Level of support for establishing a network of trails along Stevens Creek · Determine level of importance that residents place on various facilities in the corridor · Identify master plan preferences Commission comments: Commissioner Jelinch commented that the survey would be an aid in the next few months as they consider issues, i.e., trail, Stevens Creek corridor, and the Blue Pheasant. Commissioner Bradford stated that when she looked at the survey information, some of the data was conflicting. She also stated that the survey is a great start as it is important to get the community's feedback. She is alarmed that so many citizens are not aware and are not using the Blackberry Farm facilities. She believes the commission needs to consider the data when the Stevens Creek Corridor master plan is developed. Request for a dog park - At the September meeting, a citizen inquired about the feasibility of starting a dog park in Cupertino. Therese presented a survey of Cupertino parks for a suitable location and a survey of four local dog parks. Many of the issues for a dog park parallel skate park issues. She stated that the City Council would have to authorize pursuing this project, and if approved, neighborhood outreach would be initiated. Public comments: Claudia Faulk, 884 Fairgrove Drive, spoke in favor of a dog park. Naomi Bloom, 19940 Brenda Court, spoke in favor of a dog park. Suggested developing a cooperative program such as what Campbell is doing with Santa Clara County. She thought Monta Vista Park, behind the recreation building, might be a possible site, Linda Vista Park may not work as loud noises may interfere with golfers, and Wilson Park is underused. Obedience classes would be a wonderful recreational offering with a dog park. She volunteered to be on a citizen's committee if one was developed. Margaret Headrick, 10355 Moretti Drive, affiliated with Tri-Cities Little League, spoke against a dog park on the playing fields at Wilson Park, as it would interfere with little league games. Tom Haley, 19015 Pendergast Avenue, affiliated with Tri-Cities Little League, spoke against a dog park at Wilson Park. He would like more of Wilson Park developed for Little League and have all baseball fields consolidated at that park. Steve Campbell, 881 Ferngrove Drive, spoke against having a dog park at Wilson Park because it is currently dedicated for other sports, but does see the importance of a dog park in Cupertino. Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 4 of 9 Ron Bierman, 19781 Bixby Drive, spoke against having a park at Wilson Park. Laura Peters, 21311 Milford Drive, spoke in favor of a dog park. Commission comments: Commissioner Jelinch asked if anyone had looked into a partnership with the county. Therese answered that this approach had not yet been reviewed. Commissioner Wang commented that one of the commission's responsibilities is to help make the best use of the city's parks for the residents. She acknowledged the similarity of issues that they heard regarding a skate park, and that many people voiced their opinion as liking the idea, but not in their backyard; she gave a heads-up that the dog park issue may get the same reactions. Commissioner Bradford stated that a dog park would be a great amenity for the city. She also acknowledged the similarity with the skate park project. She agreed that Wilson Park would not be the best location for a dog park. She voiced interest in a Creekside Park location. She would like this project pursued. Therese stated that she'Il continue to investigate this project further, and with the City Council's goal setting meeting in January, she could come to the next commission meeting with further information. If the commission still feels they are interested in the project, they can recommend that the project be added to the city's work program. Therese was asked to look into Creekside and Linda Vista, Commissioner Jelinch requested that the project be narrowed to three sites. Commissioner Bradford felt that Linda Vista was at the extreme comer of Cupertino's boundaries and access is difficult. Therese will investigate Monta Vista and Creekside. From an audience member, it suggested the area where the Mary Avenue overcrossing was going to be placed also be investigate& Therese agreed to look into this area. Commissioner Wang asked if there would be budgetary issues. Therese answered that from the facilities she has seen, dog parks are not expensive to construct. Therese stated that finding a site would be the big issue. Request for review of the tennis court reservation policy at the Cupertino Sports Center - Therese briefed the commission on communications sent by Grace and Tony Toy. Briefly, Don McCarthy and Richard Gonzales have spent a lot of time meeting with the Toy's to try to address their concerns. Because staff has not been able to come up with a plan that is satisfactory to the Toys, this matter has been brought to the commission's attention. The reservation of tennis court #1 is central to the issue. She explained that policies would need to be set after the rebuilding of the Sports Center. This issue will be Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 5 of 9 brought up to the commission, as completion of the center gets closer. She stated that the commission might want to set policy now regarding the reservation of court # 1, but felt it was important to hear what the pass holders, in general, think about how we are managing the reservation system. Public comments: Ed Hirschfield, 734 Stendhal Lane, pass holder and tennis club member, stated that he is very happy with the way the Sports Center is being run. Believes that Parks and Recreation is doing a great job. It supports a combination of recreational and competitive use. Roughly half the pass holders are involved in the successful competitive tennis program. Court #1 is the most popular court due to visibility and lighting. The center is acknowledged throughout the state and nationally. Grant Gower, 10158 Ridgeway Drive, pass holder, tennis club member, and vice president of the tennis club board, outlined who and what the club represented, and that players in the club must be annual pass holders of the Sports Center. He stated that the members believe that the current process for allocating court #1 to USA league teams was fair and equitable. He stated that the Cupertino Tennis Club requests that court # 1 continue to be allocated for USA league play during prime time for all USA leagues. Charles Hanson, 7616 Elderwood Court, pass holder member, stated that the stadium court (court #1) is the best-lit court it has 12 lights and the other courts have only 8. He sees three issues: 1) current lights are old and do not compare to other lighted courts such as in Sunnyvale; 2) there are not enough lighted courts to fulfill the needs of the tennis players; 3) it seems difficult to get Public Works to fix one burnt-out light, they want to wait until there is more than one light out, so consequently, quite often other courts are not well-lit. He asked the commission to research the current technology and cost to upgrade all the lights at the Sports Center to bring them to current standards to reduce competition for court # 1, complete the lighting of the remaining courts to make more courts available for nighttime playing as the demand is there, and ask Public Works to give the Sports Center the same response and consideration as any request for street light outages. Jean Hassovn, 1594 Hervey Lane, San Jose, 95125, pass holder and tennis club member, spoke in favor of maintaining the current reservation process. He believes the issue is that some members are abusing the reservation process and hording court #1. He has not been able to get on court #1 because it is always reserved. Michael Zimmerman, 879 E. E1 Camino Read, #54, Mountain View, 94040, is a pass holder and tennis club member, stated that he believes league play provides an opportunity for many lonely people to play. Grace Toy, 10130 Crescent Road, pass holder (Tony Toy handed over his three minutes to his wife Grace), believes that the management highly favors team tennis and has granted tennis players the best-lit court at prime time when court times are extremely Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 6 of 9 tight for the general pass holders. She stated that there are over 500 tennis players and 300 pass holders who do not belong to team tennis. She said that the Sports Center management said they follow the reservation policy, but cannot present them the policy. She said that management says team tennis is a special event, but she disagrees and said it was a year-round event. She believes the commission should not distinguish between competitive players and discriminate against recreational players. The management is not doing the job to maximize the court use by all user groups and, therefore, the 300 regular pass holders are being ignored. She gave examples. She believes that the prime time court use is extremely inefficient and unfair. She strongly opposes rainout rescheduling teams be granted the best court. Mrs. Toy stated that she did not receive the mailed notice of meeting. She stated that on the staff report, staff recommends that the commission take public comment on the definition of court use for team tennis. She said that 180 pass holders have already received their instructions from their captains; they are organized, more vocal, and are currently enjoying priority court reservation over the 300 pass holders, and most of us are not aware that we have a meeting over here tonight. I personally did not receive any flyer from the Cupertino Sports Center regarding tonight's meeting. This opinion pool will not represent the true population of the pass holders. She asked that the commission establish a fair court use policy based on the fees paid by each pass holder so that no individual will have priority over the others. She proposed an alternative solution where by team tennis uses the courts on the weekends. The commission should consider charging fees all guests who play on team tennis, or reward non-team tennis players with free guest passes so those who do not join team tennis would receive free guest passes. She reported that the commission had received three emails from pass holders who have received the same instructions from their team tennis captain. Mrs. Toy wanted to emphasize that they are two pass holders and their reservation is more eye catching. She believes that the management does not actively monitor the reservations. Ellis Wilkens, 10631 Castine Avenue, pass holder and tennis club member, and supports the use of court #1 for the league play. Mike Wilkens, 10631 Castine Avenue, pass holder and tennis club member, and provided some court # 1 statistics that he gathered from the Sports Center records: · In August, Mr. and Mrs. Toy reserved Court #1 for 20 hours, in September 27 hours, and October, when leagues were playing, had 20 hours. He doesn't see the purpose of the their complaint · The rate of cancellations by the Mr. and Mrs. Toy on court # 1 - August 12 hours that were cancelled, September 16 1/12 hours · Cancellation dates were always on the day of play · In August, they controlled 32 hours that they didn't play, September 43 t/2 hours Chay Hickman, San Jose, pass holder and tennis club member since 1984, spoke in favor of fair treatment of all members for the court reservations. Over the years, she has not Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 7 of 9 heard many complaints accept tonight's issue. Spoke in favor of continued support of league play. Cindy Bjorkquist, San Jose, pass holder and tennis club member, has had difficulty getting a reservation on court #1 and believed that was part of the issue - that some people get more time on court #1. She believes that when league play is going on, individuals still have access to court #1, which is important to her. She would like to see more diversity in who gets to play on court #1 in the middle of the week between 7 and 9 p.m. Staff comments: Don McCarthy stated there are no illegal issues, but believes the issue before the commission is one of whether or not court #1 should be used for USTA league play, as well as for the pass holders. With the increased lighting in court/ti, it is the best court for viewing and playing. The Sports Center management recognizes all user groups coupled with balancing the needs of the user groups. The Sports Center has never had a complaint over this issue since 1991. What is viewed by other pass holders and the tennis clubs is almost an abuse by a couple of individuals, and the couple of individuals are seeing it as an abuse or a privilege given to a co-sponsored club by more court hours. He wanted to correct a statement that was made by one of the speakers in that every single pass holder was noticed for this meeting. They all got the same notification. Don also clarified that the league play, which is 3 to 4 months long, is given a use permit for that duration of time. For the timeframe October to January, over 50 percent of the time the court is open, not booked out, to individual pass holders. Individuals can reserve court #1 seven days in advance over 50 percent of the time between Monday and Thursday evenings during prime time, which is defined as 6 to 10 p.m. Commission comments: Commissioner Wang stated it was important that the Sports Center have a consistent policy to follow so everyone is treated fairly. It seemed to her that management was doing the right thing. Commissioner Jelinch said that he sees a sub-issue of cancellations and wanted to know what was being done to discourage cancellations--is there a penalty? It seems that it is not fair for people to sign up for hours and deprive others from the opportunity and come in and cancel. Don stated that there had been a committee that reviewed this issue a while back. The committee decided to use a warning approach with no consequences. He said that the issue continues to be a challenge, especially when there are people who book seven days in advance and call up to 15 minutes before their reservation to cancel. Commissioner Jelinch stated that the tennis club brings great pride to the city and their use of the center should be encouraged and accommodated. If there are pass holders who Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 8 of 9 want to use it and courts are available, that's OK; but pass holders should not be holding up an entire club. Commissioner Bradford said while everyone got the announcement, she believed that the non-team pass holders were probably under-represented at the meeting. She said she liked the recommendation to wait until the renovated Sports Center is closer to completion before making policy changes. She acknowledge that there is ill will amongst pass holders and team tennis players. She stated she would like to see a recommendation come from the users of the facility of what the right methodology is for reservations. She said that the commission could make a policy, but she would rather see what the users think is the right thing to do. She encouraged the group over the next several months to come up with suggestions for the commission about how things could be improved. She stated that when it is time to make the appropriate policy decisions, the commission would consider it, but not until there is more public input. In closing, she stated that the city needs to be supportive of the tennis co-sponsored team and that reciprocation is a part of that support. She recommended that the users talk about the right process, but at this time, it does not make sense to make policy changes. ACTION: A motion was made, seconded, and unanimously passed that there be no policy change, that the present policy be continued in effect that allows the use during limited (prime time) period of time on court #1 for the tennis club that it be given priority over pass holders, and that staff look into the improvements (lighting) of courts and their usage. 7. Consider moving the January 2, 2003 regular meeting to January 9 ACTION: A motion was made, seconded, and unanimously passed to move the January 2, 2003 regular meeting to January 9. MISCELLANEOUS - NO ACTION REQUIRED 8. Staff Oral Reports: City Center Park: Terry Greene presented drafted plans of the City Center Park, formerly called Four Seasons Comer, at the prominent southeast comer of Stevens Creek Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard. The park will have a public art piece, as well as offer opportunities for programming of public activities such as open markets, festivals, fairs, "Christmas In the Park," or simply free play. These plans will be going to the City Council on December 2 for their approval. Once approved, the timetable is that construction could start in May 2003 and be completed by November 2003. The commission expressed their positive opinions on the plans. They believe community will enjoy the park. 9. Legislative Update: None 10. Community Contacts: None Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes of November 7, 2002 Page 9 of 9 ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Bradford adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted Ma[ie Preston, Administrative Secretary Televised Council meetings may be viewed live on Cable Channel 26, and may also be viewed live or on demand via the Webcasting Library at http://~vww, cupertino, org/citv government/citv channel~index, asp. Videotapes of the televised meetings are available at the Cupertino Library or may be purchased from the Cupertino City Channel by calling 777-2364. Minutes approved at the December 5, 2002 regular meeting.