To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
From: ELIZABETH HAUSE, INTERIM COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR
TITLE
title
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CITYWIDE PARKS SYSTEM ASSESSMENT
end
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council’s Strategic Plan includes an objective directing staff to develop the scope of work associated with the initiation of a Citywide park system study that reviews the City’s current park amenities and provide options for alternative and/or supplemental uses that would optimize park utilization and increase maintenance efficiency. This work effort could serve as the basis of a Parks Master Plan (PMP), which is a comprehensive, guiding document that outlines current park and recreation facility needs, along with recommendations for future improvements. The City does not currently have a PMP in place.
Staff contacted two leading consultant firms that have a proven history of providing PMPs for local jurisdictions to inquire about cost estimates for two options: a comprehensive PMP that includes an analysis of current conditions, community input and needs, and provides very specific recommendations for future park improvements, and a scaled-down PMP that considers current conditions, community input and needs, general benchmark metrics, and provides general recommendations for Citywide park improvements. Estimates for Option 1 range from $225,000 to $400,000, and estimates for Option 2 range from $150,000 to $250,000. There is no funding currently in the budget to hire a consultant to prepare a PMP or staff capacity to manage the effort. Once a scope of work is identified, staff would prepare a request for proposals, obtain more specific pricing, and prepare a budget response report or decision package for future budget consideration.
BACKGROUND
The City Council’s Strategic Plan includes an objective to determine, “…the scope of work and initiation of a Citywide park system study that reviews the City’s current park amenities, and provides options for alternative and/or supplemental uses that would optimize park utilization and increase maintenance efficiency.” The development of a PMP captures the objective’s goal, which is a comprehensive, guiding document that identifies current conditions of parks and recreation facilities; completes a needs analysis and prioritization of projects and improvements; analyzes and recommends ongoing operations and maintenance; and provides recommendations for future park enhancements or development.
A PMP is created following extensive community outreach and involvement to ensure the final recommendations capture the needs and desires of the community while balancing current park projects and site-specific limitations for each park or facility. The value of having a PMP is that future park improvements are done in a more thoughtful manner and can be completed based on overall need. It provides cities with a valuable reference tool to inform capital improvement discussions and conveys to the community that the City values its parks and recreation facilities and desires to be forward-thinking in this regard.
In most cases, cities utilize the services of consultants to complete their PMPs. Within the past few years, consultants have developed scaled approaches to developing PMPs for cities that create a more personalized report based on current concerns, needs, and available funding. Staff contacted two leading consultant firms that have a proven history of providing PMPs for local jurisdictions to inquire about cost estimates for both a comprehensive PMP, and a scaled-down version. Included below is a comparative table highlighting what’s included with each type of PMP, as well as descriptions for the two options:
|
Elements |
Option 1 |
Option 2 |
|
Project Management |
X |
X |
|
Existing Documentation Review |
X |
X |
|
Existing Conditions Review |
X |
X |
|
City Program Inventory |
X |
X |
|
Demographic Assessment |
X |
X |
|
Local Trends Analysis |
X |
X |
|
Custom Park Standards Calculations |
X |
|
|
Community Outreach Stakeholder Interviews; Focus Groups; Community Workshops; Community Survey |
X |
X |
|
Community Needs Assessment |
X |
X |
|
Recommendations |
X |
*X |
|
Operations & Management Plan |
X |
*X |
|
Financial Plan & Recommendations |
X |
|
*While these elements would be included in an Option 2 scenario, they would not be detailed and itemized for each park location like Option 1 would provide, but rather generalizations for the City’s park system as a whole.
OPTION 1: COMPREHENSIVE PARKS MASTER PLAN
A comprehensive, long-range plan that would provide a conceptual plan that will guide and inform the future growth and development of the City’s parks, green spaces and recreational amenities, addressing the immediate, short-term, and long-term needs of the community. This level of plan would include a detailed analysis of the City’s current park system; an extensive community outreach process to determine community needs and concerns; the condition of each location’s amenities; detailed, itemized recommendations for each park for future improvements; and critical maintenance plans to ensure the parks are maintained, including critical information related to proposed improvements.
OPTION 2: GENERAL PARKS MASTER PLAN
A general PMP provides elements of the more comprehensive PMP, though the intensity of assessment and recommended actions are more generalized. Below are some examples of this:
• Benchmark Metrics - Develop benchmark metrics for the City’s future planning efforts to replace, enhance, or construct new parks and/or amenities. This will not be specific to each park, but rather would use geographic regions to determine required or desirable enhancements
o Example: “North Redondo Beach should strive for two additional playgrounds, where feasible.”
• Recommendations - Develop strategies and recommendations for future park improvements and maintenance in response to community feedback and needs. This is not intended to be for each park location or amenity type, but rather reflects recurring themes or needs and input received by the community.
o Example: “It is recommended that Redondo Beach work towards having parks within 1 mile of every resident.”
Estimates for Option 1 ranged from $225,000 to $400,000 depending on the total scope of services and desired community outreach efforts. Estimates for Option 2 ranged from $150,000 to $250,000 with the conditions assessment being a key variable for the higher cost.
The City of Redondo Beach does not currently have an active or expired PMP, so this effort would require the development of an entirely new report. Typically, PMPs are updated on a ten-year cycle, so the plan is acceptable for long-range planning efforts. Staff is seeking direction on which, if either, of these options the City Council would like to pursue.
COORDINATION
The Community Services Department coordinated this report with the Public Works Department.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no funding set aside for the development of a PMP. If the City Council directs staff to pursue the development of a PMP, more specific pricing will be identified, and a budget response report or decision package will be prepared for consideration as part of a future mid-year or annual budget review.
APPROVED BY:
Mike Witzansky, City Manager