eComments During Meetings: When available, click here to submit eComments during a live meeting | Attendees must register here to attend all virtual meetings.

File #: 25-486    Version: 1 Name: Recommend Parks Plan to City Council: Planning Commission
Type: Minute Order Status: Reported to Council
File created: 11/4/2024 In control: PLANNING COMMISSION
On agenda: 11/13/2024 Final action:
Title: PC - Consideration of Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department's Parks Plan

title

PC - Consideration of Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department’s Parks Plan

 

body

Meeting Date:  November 13, 2024

 

Contact Person/Dept.:  Adam Ferguson, Senior Management Analyst / PRCS Department

 

Phone Number:  (310) 253-6685

 

Fiscal Impact:  Yes []    No [x]                                          General Fund:  Yes []     No [x]

 

Public Hearing:  []          Action Item:  [x]          Attachments:   Yes []     No [x]]   

 

Public Notification:   (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas - Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission (11/6/2024); (E-mail) Parks, Recreation & Community Services Department Updates (11/6/2024); (E-Mail) Meetings and Agendas - Planning Commission (11/8/2024) 

 

Department Approval:  Ted Stevens, PRCS Director (11/6/2024)

                                                                    Mark E. Muenzer, Planning and Development Director (11/6/2024)

______________________________________________________________________

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the Parks, Recreation and Community Services (PRCS) Department’s Parks Plan.   

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

At the City Council Meeting on May 8, 2023, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a parks master plan in conjunction with the feasibility study for Bill Botts Fields and Veterans Memorial Park.  The City Council selected OLIN as the consultant to prepare the Parks Master Plan.  The Parks Master Plan project schedule includes four specific time frames:

 

                     Information Gathering

                     Early Ideas

                     Draft Plan

                     Final Plan

 

During the information gathering section of the project, there were three community meetings with the public.  At the meetings, the public was able to ask questions directly to the project team and express any concerns they have for changes to the parks and/or current amenities and conditions.  The meetings included interactive boards of each park in Culver City allowing participants to leave comments pertaining to each park.  Attendees also were given the opportunity to express thoughts on the current PRCS program offerings by sharing PRCS programs they use the most and what PRCS programs they would like to see offered.  Two of the meetings were in-person and held at the following locations and times:

 

                     Syd Kronenthal Park - May 1, 2024, from 6:00 PM-8:00 PM.

                     El Marino Park - May 14, 2024, from 6:30 PM-8:30 PM.

 

A virtual meeting was also held on May 2, 2024, via Zoom.

 

Throughout the early ideas section, there were planned pop-up events at various locations in the City in order to received feedback from the public.  These locations included:

                     The Farmer’s Market in Downtown Culver City

                     Dances for the Developmentally Disabled (DDD) at the Senior Center

                     Love Local x Helms Market in the Arts District

                     Movies in the Park at Fox Hills Park

                     Fiesta La Ballona

 

There was also a Virtual Lunch Update on the Parks Plan at 12:00 PM on July 23, 2024.

 

As part of the draft plan section, two community meetings were scheduled to introduce the draft of the Park Plan to the public at the following locations and times:

 

                     Culver West Alexander Park - September 24, 2024, from 6:00 PM-8:00 PM.

                     Lindberg Park - October 2, 2024, from 6:30 PM-8:30 PM.

 

A virtual meeting was scheduled for October 3, 2024, from 6:00 PM-8:00 PM. 

 

In addition to the community meetings, the public provided written comment from September through November 5 on the draft plan and any proposed improvements to the individual parks. 

 

Planning Context and Documents

OLIN has also met with staff in various City departments including PRCS, Advanced Planning, and Public Works in order to better understand departmental needs, goals, and projects across the City.  In addition, OLIN has met with the Culver City Arts Foundation in order to better understand the artistic goals of the City and how those goals intersect with the City’s parks. 

 

In addition to meeting directly with staff, the following City documents were reviewed during the information gathering section and when applicable incorporated into the Parks Plan:

 

                     General Plan 2045 (2024)

                     Urban Forest Master Plan (2015)

                     Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update (2009)

                     Stormwater Quality Master Plan (2021)

                     Hazard Mitigation Plan (2023)

                     Culver City Emergency Operations Plan (2024)

                     Strategic Plan (2018)

                     Bicycle & Pedestrian Action Plan (2020)

                     Culver City Complete Streets Design Guidelines (2024)

                     Microgrid Feasibility Report (2019)

                     Energy Action Plan (2016)

                     Culver City Turf Report (2019)

                     Feasibility Study for Veterans Memorial Park and Bill Botts Fields (2024)

 

DISCUSSION

 

PRCS operates and maintains Culver City’s eleven parks and two parkettes.  This includes offering recreation programming at park sites, organizing and offering sports programs, and maintaining sports fields and passive grass areas.  The intent of the Culver City Parks Plan is to envision the next generation of Culver City’s parks by analyzing areas of need and opportunity through the lens of equity and the plan proposes improvements in facilities and programming.  The plan supports a community-driven vision, mission and various goals for the PRCS department. 

 

The full draft of the Parks Plan is currently available online at <https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:997998aa-b4f9-4096-8a6b-dadcc329227f>.

 

Vision, Mission, and Goals

 

The vision in the Parks Plan is an aspiration statement of what the ideal future is like for the parks in Culver City.  The Parks Plan states as the vision “Parks are the heartbeat of Culver City, bringing together people of all ages and backgrounds to recharge and inspire joy in vibrant natural environments that honor our shared history and community.”

 

The mission defines what the PRCS Department does or stands for from day to day.  The Parks Plan states that the mission is “To provide for the well-being of Culver City residents by supporting diverse, safe, and equitable opportunities for recreation, learning, and arts while protecting our most valued natural and cultural resources.”

 

The goals of the plan are broken down with actions and methods in order to ground the large concepts in the goals and give PRCS the steps, tools, and ability to meet each goal.  The goals are:

                     Provide equitable access to parks and park facilities.

                     Increase capital budget funding and staff longevity.

                     Integrate sustainability and climate resiliency into parks management, design, and construction.

                     Preserve and enhance natural habitats by supporting biodiversity and ecosystem connectivity.

                     Strengthen recreational, arts, and cultural programming for all ages.

 

 

 

Proposed Park System and Amenities Upgrades

The Parks Plan addresses each park in Culver City that is overseen by PRCS by listing the needs of each park and proposing improvements.  It also identifies which park has stormwater opportunities and what size that specific stormwater project could be (from on-site systems to simpler water use tracking).  Below is brief summary of the discovered needs for each park as identified in the Parks Plan:

 

                     Culver City Park

o                     The upper baseball fields are located on an old construction landfill and are experiencing extensive settlement issues, and PRCS spends a significant amount of its funding to maintain these fields.

o                     The “Friends of the Culver City Dog Park‘’ is a 501 non-profit with a board of directors that is associated with the Bone Yard Dog Park. PRCS had an MOU with this non-profit at one time, but it has since expired. Complaints are often received about the DG material in the park, which erodes down the slope during rains and kicks up dust in the dry months. However, PRCS has found it infeasible to maintain grass within the dog park.

o                     The wooden ramp nature trail leading down the hill to the ropes course from Bill Botts Field is not ADA accessible.

o                     Community members noted this park as an opportunity zone for public art and/or a splash pad, and suggested adding planting more native species, additional hiking paths, and pickleball or futsal courts.

o                     The idea of a large amphitheater over the baseball fields was not widely supported in previous studies by the city, however some community members were supportive of the idea of a small (<200 person) outdoor community space nestled along the roadway in the current storage yard.

                     Veterans Memorial Park

o                     The walking path needs repair and is not ADA accessible.

o                     There two softball fields cannot be used at the same time, and the field in the middle of the park is inconvenient for hosting other events. There are occasionally broken car windows in the parking lot due to the ballfields.

o                     Community members have noted that the current pool is at capacity and noted a need for future pools to accommodate CCUSD teams for water polo and swim team.

o                     Community members have requested improvements and/or expansions to the Scout House.

o                     Community members suggested a walking path around the park and noted that some of the grass areas become muddy.

o                     Community members have also suggested improving the rentable spaces and adding spaces to host programming.

                     Blair Hills Park

o                     There is no ADA walking trail around the park.

o                     PRCS staff have recommended better utilization of the diamond field in the park which is rarely used, and perhaps replacing it with a pavilion for passive activities such as yoga.

o                     Community members have suggested updating the picnic shelter and restroom.

                     Blanco Park

o                     Community members like the perimeter walking path and suggested updating the park building and picnic shelter.

                     Carlson Park

o                     Often people use this area for group activities without realizing a permit is required.

o                     Numerous community members have commented that they would like to keep the park as it is as a passive recreation area. Specifically, some nearby residents said they preferred not to add a playground. They noted that the park is well used already by children with parents or nannies, and they liked that the park provides unstructured access to nature.

o                     Community members also noted issues with traffic visibility along Braddock Dr. and suggested adding a stop sign at the intersection of Braddock Dr. and Motor Ave.

o                     Community members have suggested more benches and seating.

o                     Community members value the large and mature tree canopy of the park.

                     Culver West Alexander Park

o                     Overall updates to the playground are needed. The toddler playground needs to be resurfaced.

o                     The wood floor in the recreation building is worn out.

o                     Community members noted the grass areas are well used by families and people working from home, and that seniors and children enjoy the walking paths and picnicking. They also noted that the handball walls are well used for practicing a variety of sports beyond handball.

o                     Community members noted that the swings are well used but that the park could use more swings for bigger kids or teens.

o                     Community members suggested the multipurpose field could be converted to a passive park space.

                     El Marino Park

o                     There is no ADA walking path in this park.

o                     Picnic tables and rentable areas could be better utilized, as there is one picnic area in the middle of the field.

o                     Community members have noted that demand for the ceramics class, which maxes out at 10 participants, is much higher than available slots. The scale of the facility limits the number of participants, so a larger facility could help assist with this. There is no longer a need for the bathrooms on the outboard side of this facility, so that could become expansion space.

o                     Community members commented on resurfacing the basketball court, refilling the sandbox with sand rather than mulch, and adding additional space for aftercare programs.

                     Fox Hills Park

o                     ADA accessibility is an issue: access ramps surrounding the site do not meet ADA code.

o                     Steep slopes along Buckingham Parkway and Green Valley Circle have created problems around erosion.

o                     Playgrounds where ramps have been added have a large step drop-off due to settlement of wood chips.

o                     It is difficult to hold events here due to the lack of parking, and PRCS receives complaints about the lack of parking, difficulty accessing the park, and safety issues for pedestrians and cyclists. However, the neighborhood is against adding parking.

                     Lindberg Park

o                     The park edge along Ocean Dr. is very steep and the park is lacking in accessibility. There is no ADA walking path in this park.

o                     Courts, fields, and exercise equipment have been added over time.

o                     Community members have suggested updating the play equipment. Some community members expressed that they like the sand play area.

o                     Community members have expressed interest in a DG walking path around the park. Some community members specified they don’t want more concrete added and think the park is okay without additional sidewalks.

                     Syd Kronenthal Park

o                     The sports fields, courts, and workout equipment are very well used, however there have previously been issues with graffiti, vandalism, and gang presence at this location.

o                     The walking paths change materials several times throughout the park, which can present accessibility issues.

o                     Community members have commented that the surface for the tennis court could be improved and that they would like to see more tennis courts. There has also been competition for court space among tennis, paddle tennis, and pickleball players at this location.

o                     Community members noted that bicycles zoom along the pedestrian sidewalks in the park.

o                     Community members noted that the lighting could be brightened.

o                     Community members suggested a pool at this location.

o                     Community members also noted that fencing around play areas for toddlers like at Syd Kronenthal is an attractive feature that few other Culver City parks include.

                     Tellefson Park

o                     PRCS staff has recommended locating pickleball courts in this park.

o                     The picnic shelter is not often rented as the park has frequent concerns with the unhoused population.

o                     Shade can be more evenly distributed around the park-community members have noted that the pavilion often feels too dark and shaded, and the field can feel too hot and exposed.

o                     Community members suggested a DG walking path around the park, to plant more trees, and to improve the restrooms.

                     Coombs Parkette

o                     Community members have commented that the park can be muddy and to replant a groundcover that can tolerate the shade, to add benches and tables for the students that wait here to be picked up after school, and to improve street crossings and walking paths to connect to the school.

o                     Community members like this as a passive recreation space.

                     Fox Hills Parkette

o                     PRCS staff have recommended that this parkette could hold a piece of public art.

o                     Community members suggested creating  a dog park for Fox Hills here.

 

Since one of the Planning Commission’s duties is to make recommendations concerning proposed public improvement in general, the Planning Commission has the opportunity to review the Parks Plan and make any recommendations, amendments, or requests before the Parks Plan is taken before City Council.  A report will be presented by the project team and they will provide information on the background research, community engagement, and final conclusions.

 


FISCAL ANALYSIS

 

The agreement with OLIN and the unexpected contingency costs are for an amount not-to-exceed $750,000.  The Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 includes sufficient funding for these services in CIP No. PP023 (Parks Master Plan/42080000.730100.PP023).  Funding for future projects that come out of the Parks Plan has not been determined.

 


ATTACHMENTS

 

                     None

 


MOTION

 

That the Planning Commission:

 

1.                     If desired, make recommendations or proposed adjustments to the Parks Plan for consideration by the City Council; and

2.                     Recommend the City Council Approve the Parks, Recreation and Community Services Department’s Parks Plan with adjustments, if any.