Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-09-29 PRC Regular Meeting Agenda Packet No, ,Noir AGENDA PALM DESERT PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MONDAY-SEPTEMBER 29, 1980 12:00 P.M. -CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III . CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES A. Minutes. of Commission meeting of August 25, 1980 IV. SELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON FOR TERM OF SEPTEMBER 1980, TO SEPTEMBER 1981 . V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS-1 Any person wishing to discuss any item not otherwise on the agenda, may address the Commission at this point by stepping to the podium and giving their name and address for the record. VI. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - NONE VII. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. Consideration of design and possible name for the proposed nine acre public park at the northeast corner of Monterey Avenue and Country Club Drive. VIII. NEW BUSINESS- NONE IX. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- 2 Any person wishing to discuss any item not otherwise on the agenda, may address the Commission at this point by stepping to the podium and giving their name and address for the record. X. COMMENTS A. Commissions B. Staff XI. SUMMARY OF MEETING XII. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF PALM DESERT STAFF REPORT TO: CHAIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT ON: PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONTEREY AVENUE AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE DATE: September 29, 1980 I. PURPOSE The subject of this staff report is to review the proposed park design and discuss the potential name for a nine acre public park at the north- east corner of Country Club Drive and Monterey Avenue. II. BACKGROUND This nine acre public park is being dedicated to the City, by the Mayer Group in conjunction with a 264 unit condominium project, which abuts the park on the north and east. A condition of approval was that a detailed plan of park development be approved by the Planning Commission after review by the Design Review Board, City Parks and Recreation Commission and Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District. This Commission discussed this subject at the meetings of May 27, July 18, and August 25, 1980. Since each review board presented comments pertaining to park design, the Planning, Commission decided the two park commissions should concur with the recommended design changes prior to final approval . III. DISCUSSION A. PARK DESIGN The conditions of approval defines the level of developer participat- ion in the improvements to include the following: 1 . Complete right-of-way improvements (including curb, gutter, and meandering sidewalk) . 2. Complete site grading. 3. Blowsand protection planting. 4. Ornamental landscaping and irrigation system for the perimeter parkway. 5. Construction of six (6) non-lighted tennis courts. 6. Provision of professional design services for the balance of park improvements, including working drawings. The plans submitted provide for six (6) unlighted tennis courts, a soccer field which will also function as a retention basin for the project, a baseball diamond, barbecue area, and off-street parking. There will also be access to the residential project directly from the park on the north and east. limme Now Page 2 STAFF REPORT TO: CHAIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT ON: PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONTEREY AVENUE AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. DATE: September 29, 1980 The reviewing bodies made a number of comments pertaining to the park design. These comments are as follows: 1 . Off-street parking should be maximized. The present plan does not provide adequate off-street parking. (24 provided - additional spaces can be provided by expanding proposed parking area. Addi- tional spaces could be provided in place of tennis courts) . 2. Fencing and/or screening should be provided to separate the soccer field and ball diamonds from the streets. (In addition to tennis court fencing) . 3. Night lighting of the park should be investigated. This can include tennis court lighting, walkway lighting, ball diamond lighting and parking lot lighting. 4. Trees utilized in the park should be shade trees which can make the park usable all year around. 5. Telephone facilities should be provided within the park area. 6. Restroom facilities should be provided. 7. A tot lot, possibly near the barbecue area should be provided. 8. Drinking fountains should be provided. The Design Review Board reviewed the park design on August 28, 1980. They generally felt the site should be a passive park. Additionally, they felt there was inadequate off-street parking facilities. Staff explained the concept and reasoning for the park, its location, and design. The Board did feel that if this plan is approved, the eight previous comments regard- ing additional facilities should be considered. To date, no maintenance agreements have been developed with Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District. However, previous correspondence with the district indicates that an agreement for maintenance may be possible as long as they are involved in the design of the park. Approximately $250,000 has been allocated for this park over the next two fiscal years. This money will come from park fees already collected or fees to be collected in the future from surrounding developments. This money will be used to provide for groundcover and irrigation systems for the interior portion of the park and other improvements deemed desirable as a result of this design study. B. POTENTIAL NAME At the meeting of August 25, 1980 the Commission requested the Staff to determine the feasibility of conducting a contest amongst local schools to decide on a name for the park. Due to limited Staff and the logistics requirements, it is not feasible to conduct such a contest. The Commission has not established standards or procedures in which to name City parks. Only once since the Commission was created, was this topic raised. In May, 1979, the City Council requested the Commission to discuss the matter of naming a City park after the late Stanley Sayles. At that time, the Commission went on record of being in favor of naming parks after location and persons only if they had assisted in park and recreation development. However, this should not preclude the Commission from considering the naming of parks after individuals who have contributed to the development of the community. t ' tie ;wry Page 3 STAFF REPORT TO: CHAIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION REPORT ON: PROPOSED PUBLIC PARK AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONTEREY AVENUE AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE. DATE: September 29, 1980 Using location as the guiding principle, there are three possible names for the proposed park; Monterey Park, Country Club Park, and Monterey- Country Club Park. Of the three, Monterey Park seems to be the best. Monterey-Country Club Park would be too closely identified to the develop- ment of the same name. Country Club Park may have a negative connotation to it. Palm Desert has an image of having numerous country clubs and naming a park as such could add credence to that image. Mayer Group has provided the City with possible names for the park; they are attached to this staff report. IV. REQUEST The Commission should determine the acceptability of the park design, and consider an acceptable name for the proposed park. The Commission's comments and recommendation, will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and the City Council .