HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-13-1998 Playfield Agenda and Minutesi•
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Type:
Meeting Date:
Time Allotment:
Meeting Location:
Facilitator:
Recorder:
Time Keeper:
Meeting Context:
Project Planning Committee Meeting #
8.13.98
4:00-6:00 PM Project Name:
City Offices Project Ref. No.:
Jay Beals, BLAi
Jeff Kreps, BLAi
Allison Yamamoto, BLAi
LANDSCAPE
3 ARCHITECTURE
INC
City of Saratoga Park Development
98-12
Analysis of data gathered from user groups and other sources is 95%
complete-now moving into the preliminary project recommendation phase.
Meeting Purpose: 1) Review user group data.
2) Review preliminary site designs.
3) Present and discuss preliminary costs.
4) Present and discuss maintenance implications.
5) Discuss partnering opportunities.
Intended Results: 1) Approved Agenda for Task Force Meeting #3.
2) Receive direction for presentation of data at TF#3-and intended results.
WELCOME
•
II. GENERAL ISSUES
A. Project aerials.
B. Possible "extra" budget-related meeting-City Staff and Task Force members.
III. PROJECT REVIEW
A. Response to the overall "tone" of Task Force Meeting #2.
B. Comments on data gathered from user groups via questionnaires and TF#2.
IV. PROJECT DIRECTION
A. Present and discuss preliminary designs
items/services requested above-individual
based on three "levels" of service:
1. No field upgrades;
2. Field renovation;
3. Complete field upgrade.
B. Maintenance efficiency and cost implications.
C. Partnering opportunities.
and associated cost information for
items where appropriate, and costs
V. ACTION ITEMS
A. Approved agenda for Task Force Meeting #3
B. Receive direction for presentation of data at TF#3-and intended results.
VI. TASK FORCE MEETING #3
A. Wednesday, August 19,
F:1Jobs98\98-12 Saratoga Consulting\PPC#3MtgAgenda.doC
BEALS
1998, 4:00-6:00 PM, Saratoga Community Library
End of Agenda
f'~VO PJ~!RTN `i1ARfcT ~:~ jr, ~ ~R ~-`~fl i~ .~~ ,.~ ii' FFtQNE-~~tt.'~i-."0~ F.+6 4(;b-'8' ,'h`; ~ iC P10 15:1
BEALS
• Meeting Report
Date: 8.14.98
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTURE
INC
Meeting Type: PPC Meeting #3 Project Name: City of Saratoga Park Development
Meeting Date: 8.13.98 Project Ref. No.: 98-12
Meeting Time: 4:00-6:00 PM
Meeting Location: City Offices
From: Jeff Kreps Attendees: Irene Jacobs, City of Saratoga
Jim Shaw, Saratoga City Council
Jay Beals, BLAi
Jeff Kreps, BLAi
Copy to: ®Ali Attendees
All absent PPC members
This report, if not corrected within seven (7) days after receipt by any party in attendance, shall be
acknowledged as an accurate report of the events that took place at this meeting.
Meeting Context: Analysis of data gathered from user groups and other sources is 95% compiete-
now moving into the preliminary project recommendation phase.
Meeting Purpose: 1) Review user group data.
2) Review preliminary site designs.
• 3) Present and discuss preliminary costs.
4) Present and discuss maintenance implications.
5) Discuss partnering opportunities.
Intended Results: 1) Approved Agenda for Task Force Meeting #3.
2) Receive direction for presentation of data at TF#3-and intended results.
Note: Action items resulting from this meeting are listed at the end of this report.
WELCOME
GENERAL ISSUES
A. Project aerials: It was confirmed that we are going to order two (2), 50-scale mylar
aerials, and that Air Flight Service will be sending an updated cost quote to the City.
B. Possible "extra" budget-related meeting: The possible necessity of an additional meeting
between City Financial Staff and interested Task Force members was discussed. It was
felt that, to avoid spending too much time on budget-related items at the next Task Force
meeting (TF#3), a brief overview of the information sent out in the pre-meeting packet
would be presented, and then-- if necessary--a statement would be given providing the
opportunity to meet for an in-depth discussion.
. III. PROJECT REVIEW
A. All PPC members felt that the previous Task Force Meeting was a success, and that, as
F:Wobs98198-12 Saratoga ConsuflinglMeeting ItemslPPC#3Meeting Report.doc
T'JV~,~ N(':RrH P~IARKEi FIF?-~ Ft_~~Ofl ~a~l JOSE, CA 35''~ ; PHONE YGt3~~'8-' -t2C~ =A,< ;~~5-?37-016 LIC NO 153a
Meeting Minutes for: PPC Meeting #3 Project Name: City of Saratoga Park Development
Meeting Date: 8.13.98 Project Ref. No.: 98-12
Meeting Location: City Offices
a result, all Task Force members were "on the same page" and ready to get down to
work.
B. The data gathered at the last Task Force meeting was "distilled" and summarized in an
attachment contained in the pre-Task Force #3 packet. No major "holes" were found, but
the need for additional information regarding the irrigation systems at the City park sites
was identified. (See Action Items below.)
IV. PROJECT DIRECTION
A. Each of the sites was presented and discussion centered on four main issues:
1) Preliminary designAayout--Each site was reviewed in terms of its opportunities
and constraints from a design standpoint, and some basic considerations for play-
field siting were presented (such as backstop location, foul-ball tendencies, soccer
field orientation, etc.).
2) Associated deve/opmenbrenovation cost information-Costs were presented in
general figures, and PPC members were informed that, as the project gets closer
and closer to the final recommendations, the costs will become increasingly
refined and accurate. Jay presented the costs based on varying levels of
construction (for members who were absent, please see the enclosed document).
For the purposes of this project, we are essentially working with three levels:
1) Do nothing to the site; 2) Field renovation; 3) Complete field upgrade. Each
level dramatically affects cost, and a given level may be more appropriate at a
given site.
3) Maintenance efficiency and basic cost implications-As with construction levels,
• there are varying levels of maintenance depending on-among other things--
duration of use, type of use, type of surface desired, safety, etc. As plans go
forth, the appropriate maintenance levels for a given project must be considered,
as they will affect the cost of that project.
4) Partnering opportunities-The opportunities for partnerships between the City,
School Districts, and User Groups were discussed for each site. In certain
instances these opportunities are relatively few, while at others there is much
potential for cooperation and mutual benefit.
A few general comments are summarized as follows: Everyone present agreed that the
focal points/sites seemed to be Congress Springs Park, Blue Hills/Azule & Kevin Moran,
Marshall Lane, EI Quito Park, Foothill and Argonaut. It was also agreed that all sites-
and all options at each site-would be presented without bias at the next meeting, so
that the Task Force would have the ultimate responsibility of deciding on the projects
they felt were the most important. Jay recommended that separation of uses (soccer
and baseball/softball) be strongly considered, as this will significantly impact
maintenance routines and costs.
V. ACTION ITEMS
A. PPC members discussed the "mechanics" of TF#3 in order to increase efficiency (due to
the large amount of information to be covered) and to be sure that intended results are
achieved. The main desired result is agreement on some type of "plan" and a prioritized
list of potential projects. To this end, we will present the sites starting with the most
"complex" and work down toward those that are "simpler."
i~~
F:Wobs98198-12 Saratoga ConsuRing\Meeting ItemslPPC~3Meeting Report.doc 2
f3 L ~ L S L A v D S C: A P F. A R (' H 1 f t? C T f, R h. I V C.
Meeting Minutes for: PPC Meeting #3 Project Name: City of Saratoga Park Development
Meeting Date: 8.13.98 Project Ref. No.: 98-12
Meeting Location: City Offices
i•
VI. TASK FORCE MEETING #3
A. DATE: Wednesday, August 19, 1998
B. TIME: 4:00-6:00 PM
C. LOCATION: Community Room, Saratoga Community Library
D. PURPOSES:
1) Discuss proposed modification/development of selected sites;
2) Present associated costs;
3) Review maintenance changes resulting from proposed modifications;
4) Review associated maintenance costs;
5) Begin thinking about tentative lease/maintenance agreements.
ACTION ITEMS
Item Action Responsible Party
•
1. List of needed irrigation information Provide to Irene Jacobs BLAi
2. Aerials for Blue Hills/Azule, and Kevin Moran Order, to arrive before TF#3 City
3. Meeting minutes Provide to all PPC members BLAi
End of Report
•
F:Uobs98198-12 Saratoga ConsuttinglMeeting ItemslPPCp3Meeting Report.doC
3
l3 F. 1 L S L A N D S C A P E A R C H [ T F: C T U R E. ( ti C
CITY OF SARATOGA, PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
• ATTACHMENT #1: SITE SUMMARIES
•
•
Site-Notes Users Opportunities Constraints Needsldesires
1) EI Quito Park Saratoga Little Possible to put a Parking is an issue Switch from DG to
League, Quito Little small (60x100yd) with the neighbors- clay infield;
Site is used as a League, Saratoga field, or almost 3 of have been complaints Soccer goals;
practice field by Rec. Dept., De the "U-6" fields in in the past.
the athletic Anza Youth Soccer, the out-field area; Too small for afull-
groups; used Monday volleyball, Practice area in NW size game field.
heavily by pick-up soccer, pre- comer w/ a portable
general public school play-groups, backstop.
picnic rentals.
2) MaCauliffe Cupertino American 60x100yd field area- No room for any Dirt infield;
Elementary Little League, -small, but usable expansion Soccer goals
school activities. for practice;
Scheduling might
make better use of
this site.
3) Saratoga AYSO-U-8's 3x/day A 50x100yd field is School asphalt area Fix playing
Elementary almost daily in Fall; scheduled to be built will be expanding; No conditions-slope and
Formerly used by in the Fall-current way to widen the field drainage;
School district is Saratoga Little field will be leveled area to greater than Soccer goals
looking to League for practice. out and drainage 50 yds.
partner with the fixed.
City to help with School is trying to
the development acquire add'I. space
costs. which would add 80'
to the length.
4) Argonaut AYSO-for practice 70x100yd field is Poor drainage and Improve turf
Elementary in Fall, Saratoga potentially possible; pitting of field; old condition;
Little League, 60x100yd will fit irrigation system. soccer goals
formerly used by easily; 3 backstops
CYSA for practice on site
5) Marshall Quito Little League If school play area is Parking is a problem Need these fields for
Lane Elementary uses heavily; AYSO moved, the field in the neighborhood; U-10 and up; QLL
in Spring and Fall- space can be any attempt to locate proposed a T-ball
An important site two U-8 teams 1/2 widened (though this permanent restroom field, a Farm team
because of its field all week for will cost); a site facilities will meet field and 1 U~ soccer
location-not practice; CYSA 1/2 redesign might yield with resistance. field; restroom
many fields to field all week in Fall more efficient use of facilities;
serve this part of the space, but it
town. Campbell might be at
School District is considerable cost.
willing to partner
with City to
develo .
•
•
•
6) Redwood AYSO-6 teams in Field is large Field shape prohibits Improve turf
Middle School Fall, 1 game on enough to layout options condition;
Saturday; U-8's accommodate a soccer goals;
City and AYSO practice on the regulation-size field pitcher's mound;
contributed $ for small field; for upper division restroom facilities;
field upgrades 4 Saratoga LL uses games; good storage facilities
years ago. the Iwr dmd. for geographic location
u r div. ractice
7) Blue Hills AYSO and CYSA Much potential with Insufficient asphalt Improve field
Elementary/ split the use in Fall the inclusion of the area at school-will be condition; soccer
Azule Park and Spring; Azule site: It may expanding; significant goals; restroom
Cupertino LL uses be possible to fit 1- neighborhood facilities; possibly
School district is for Spring practice; 70x100yd field, plus resistance to storage facility if
willing to work a smaller field, plus development; parking increase in use.
with the City to 2 baseball fields; is a problem.
arrive at a pedestrian overpass
mutually to connect with
beneficial Kevin Moran Park
arran ement.
8) Kevin Moran AYSO has 2 teams Much potential due Much neighborhood Soccer goals;
Park on the site in Fall to proximity and resistance to any kind restroom facilities;
and Spring-split connection to Blue of development- larger field area;
use with CYSA. Hills site; possible to including the possibly storage
use one of the installation of facility if increase in
orchard areas as off- restrooms; traffic and use.
street pkg. Can fit parking are problems;
60x100yd, current usable area is
80x120yd, and LL small-would require
baseball field in much work; residents
orchard area feel City "promised"
that no development
would occur-passive
use onl
9) Foothill LG/Saratoga Girls With facility Parking is a problem- restroom facilities;
Elementary Softball; AYSO-3-4 upgrades and a though add'I. will be storage facility;
School teams in Fall; vigilant maintenance built-as is the lack of snack-shack; covered
program, the site facilities; dugouts; water
could be improved The design options fountains, batting
greatly; slight are limited due to the cage(s); pitching
alterations to space multi-level nature of areas; turf and infield
might make it more the site; to re-design renovation.
efficient. would be a
considerable cost
10) Congress AYSO, Pony Could the site be Parking is limited for Needs field upgrades-
Springs Park League, Saratoga designated as a the number of people -new irrigation, re-
Little League "Sports Park," in to be accommodated; grading, etc. Also
The primary which case the needs new fencing
game site for users could charge between the first-base
soccer, baseball, entrance fees, etc. lines and the play
and Pony area; storage
League. 4 facilities; foul ball
baseball fields screen; taller home
and 5 soccer run fence; batting
fields ca es;
• General notes:
A) Turf condition is a major concern at all sites. All of the school sites have irrigation
systems that are fairly old and which should be replaced.
B) Large "game-size" fields are in high demand; essentially, the kids can practice anywhere
there is flat grass, but there is a need for more big fields. Everyone agreed that the need
for "flat grass" outweighed a lot of other considerations.
C) There is a need for restroom facilities at alf sites except Congress Springs and EI Quito.
Currently, the groups must provide portables, and with large numbers of players, parents
and siblings, the facilities are just not adequate. Permanent restroom facilities are a
major cost and will have to be weighed as part of project prioritization.
D) Regarding maintenance, an important factor is being able to let the turf rest-like
Redwood does over the summer months. Developing a detailed use-schedule which
provides for each field to be rested at least one day per week is needed. Such a
schedule would also help to maximize the efficiency of the existing sites--and would cost
nothing.
E) There is a general call for more facilities (such as batting cages, storage areas, drinking
fountains, etc.) at all sites. These kinds of upgrades will be considered and weighed
against the cost of field upgrades.
C
•
3
CITY OF SARATOGA, PARK DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
ATTACHMENT #2: MAINTENANCE COST COMPARISONS
Enti Maint. Cost Per Acre/Year Inclu i -
~ n S /acre/ r.
City of Saratoga
Approximately $7600/acre/year,
for 55 acres in the Park system.
Park maintenance costs in
1995/96=$363,054.57 adjusted
@ 5%/yr. To arrive at the above
figure. NOTE: Does not include
vehicle and indirect costs.
Mowing-$882
Fertilization-$159
Renovation-$215
Weed control-$236
Water-$130, avg.
Plus: salaries, materials and
City of Los Altos
City of Cupertino
City of Sunnyvale
Jensen Corporation
equipment, maintenance (trash,
pruning, etc.)
With indirect costs included, the
cost would be approximately
$10,600/acre/year. The figure
would be closer to
$12,500/acre/year if you
proportion out the costs
attributed to maintaining
developed vs. Undeveloped park
land.
Approximately $4-8000/acre/yr.
depending on the type of
acreage...wide open turf areas
are generally less than highly
ornamental areas-though
additional money is spent
repairing the damaged athletic
type fields.
Fertilization-$320
Aeration-$125
Weed control-$345
Aerate/Seed/Roll-$2,178 (not
all sites)
Hole Fill-$80
Plus: water, mowing, salaries,
materials and equipment.
Note: these are costs to
maintain school sites.
Approximately $11,500/acre/yr
to maintain School District sites
(51.55 acres annual cost
=$602,105
Approximately $6000/acre/yr,
but this does not include water
costs.
Approximately $10,454/acre/yr
Salaries, materials, and capital
outlay
Renovation, mowing, contracted
weed/pest control, aeration,
fertilization, materials and
equipment, salaries
Fertilization, watering, aeration,
mowing, weed control, pruning
up to 12'
Environmental Care I Approximately $12,025/acre/yr. I Mowing, edging, fertilization,
weed control, water, aeration
• PAST ATHLETIC F• D USE SCHEDULE •
Field
Location User Group Month Day(s) Used Time(s) Used
M T W R F S S 8A 9 10 11 12 1P 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Congress 1. AYSO Au-De a a a a a b c b b b b be be be abc abc abc a
Springs 2. Stga L L Mr-Ju j j j j j k l k k k k kl kl kl k jkl jl j j
3. Pony League Mr-Ju r r r r r r r
Blue Hills 1. AYSO Au-De a a a a a a a
Elem. Fe-Ju a a a a a a a
2. CYSA Au-De d d d d d d d
Fe-Ju d d d d d d d
3. Cuper L L Fe-Ju t t t t t t t t t t
4. School AutiJu z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Kevin Moran 1. AYSO Au-De a a a a a a a
Park Fe-Ju a a a a a a a
2. CYSA Au-De d d d d d d d
Fe-J u d d d d d d d
Foothill 1. LG/Stga GSB Fe-Au n n n n n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o no no no no
Elementary 2. AYSO Au-De a a a a a a a
3. School Au-Ju z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Marshall 1. Quito L L Fe-Ju g g g g g h h h h h h h h h gh gh g g
Lane Elem 2. AYSO Au-De a a a a a a a
Fe-Ju a a a a a a a
3. CYSA Au-De d d d d d d d d d
4. School Au~lu z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Explanatory Notes: 1) The third column (Month) indicates which season(s) a given team uses a given site; bold type =Fall season
2) Each User Group has been randomly assigned two or three consecutive letters (ex. AYSO = a,b,c)
3) In the fourth column (Day(s) Used), the first letter for a given team indicates which wee da s) the group uses that particular field; the
second letter indicates use on Saturday; and the third letter indicates use on Sunday. (Ex.: At Congress Springs, during the AU-De
season, AYSO has teams on the field(s) every day of the week.)
4) In the fifth column (Time(s) Used), each hour of the day is shown with one or more letters below it (or no letters); since the letters
correspond to the days of the week, these same letters under a given time slot indicate that on that day of the week the group is using the
field at that time. (Ex.: At Congress Springs, at 11 am. AYSO only uses the field on Saturdays-since "b" represents use of the field on
Saturday. Similarly, at 3 pm. at Congress Springs, AYSO has teams on the field(s) every day of the week-since all three letters "a,b,c"
are shown in that time slot.)
5) (*) & (+) = A team or league uses this facility on an "as available" basis-no long-term agreement.
i
DUCT AT1.11 ~TI~` ICI 1'1 1 ICC C~'I.ICI'11 11 C ~`~1AIT11-11 ICn
Field
Location User Group Month Day(s) used Time(s) Used
M T W R F S S 8A 9 10 11 12 1P 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
EI Quito Park 1. Stga. L L Mr-Ju * * * * + + + + + + + + + *+ *+
2. Quito L L Fe-Ju + + + + + + + + + *+ *+
3. Sar Rec Dep Ap-Au s s s s s
Au- s s s s s
4. CYSA Oc d d d d d d d
5. Public # # * * *
Argonaut 1. AYSO Au-De a a a a a a a
Elem. 2. Stga L L Mr-Ju * * * + + + + + + + + + *+ *+
3. School Au-Ju z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Redwood 1. AYSO Au-De a a a a a b c b b b b be be be abc abc abc a
Middle Fe-Ju a a a a a b c b b b b be be be abc abc abc a
2. Stga L L Mr-Ju * * * * + + + + + + + + + *+ *+
3. School Autilu z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Macauliffe 1. Cuper L L Fe-Ju t t t t t t t t t t
Elem. 2. School Au~Ju z z z z z z z z z z z z z
Saratoga 1. AYSO Au-De a a a a a a a
Elem. 2. School Autilu z z z z z z t z z z z z z
Explanatory Notes: 1) The third column (Month) indicates which seasons a given team uses a given site; bold type =Fall season
2) Each User Group has been assigned two or three consecutive letters (ex. AYSO = a,b,c)
3) In the fourth column (Day(s) Used), the first le er far a given team indicates which ekda s) the group uses that particular field; the
second letter indicates use on Saturday; and the third letter indicates use on Sunday. (Ex.: At Congress Springs, during the AU-De
season, AYSO has teams on the field(s) every day of the week.)
4) In the fifth column (Time(s) Used), each hour of the day is shown with one or more letters below it (or no letters); since the letters
correspond to the days of the week, these same letters under a given time slot indicate that on that day of the week the croup is using the
field at that time. (Ex.: At Congress Springs, at 11 am. AYSO only uses the field on Saturdays-since "b" represents use of the field on
Saturday. Similarly, at 3 pm. at Congress Springs, AYSO has teams on the field(s) every day of the week-since all three letters "a,b,c"
are shown in that time slot.)
5) (*) 8~ (+) = A team or league uses this facility on an "as available" basis-no long-term agreement.
Meeting Agenda For: City, School Districts, Users Project Name: Saratoga Park Development
Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 13, 1998 Project Ref. No.: BLAi 98-12
Meeting Location: Saratoga Community Library
V. SITE REVIEW-Blue Hills Elementary, 5:30-6:00
A. Present and discuss renovation/development options
B. Present associated costs
C. Present and discuss lease options/partnering opportunities
•
VI. NEXT STEPS
A. To be undertaken before the next meeting:
1. BLAi will provide:
a) Meeting minutes;
b) Summaries of project sites-with associated costs;
c) Tentative {ease/maintenance agreement summaries;
d) Revised meeting schedule;
e) Draft agenda for next meeting.
VII. PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE
A. Blue Hills/Azule Park: Tuesday, October 20, 1998, 6:30-8:00 PM, at Blue Hills.
B. Foothill Elementary: Thursday, October 22, 1998, 6:30-8:00 PM, at Foothill Elem.
C. Marshall Lane Elem.: Tuesday, October 27, 1998, 6:30-8:00 PM, at Marshall Lane.
VIII. NEXT MEETING CITY, SCHOOL DISTRICTS, USER GROUPS
A. Date: Tuesday, November 3, 1998 (same structure as today)
B. Time: 4:00-6:00 PM
C. Location: City of Saratoga Offices
D. Purposes:
1. Review designs and costs at the 90%{evel;
2. Review/develop further the leaselmaintenance language for each site.
End of Agenda
~tServArtpro~tsVobs98~98-12 SaraRsga Cdnsu~iiVgVu~AgAAda11j:13.9d.doC E A R C H I T E C T U R E, I N C. 2