HomeMy WebLinkAbout121195 CSC AgendaAGENDA
TEMECULA COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING
TO BE HELD AT
TEMECULA CITY HALL
Monday, December 11, 1995
7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER:
Flag Salute Commissioner Miller
ROLL CALL:
Henz, Miller, Nimeahein, Soltysiak, Commerchero
PRESENTATIONS:
David Fahrion, CR&R, Inc.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
A total of 15 minutes is provided so members of the public can address the
Commissioners on items that are not listed on the Agenda. Speakers are limited to
three (3) minutes each. If you desire to speak to the Commissioners about an item
not listed on the Agenda, a green "Request to Speak" form should be filled out and
filed with the Commission Secretary.
When you are called to speak, please come forward and state your name and
address.
For all other agenda items, a "Re~luest to Speak" form must be filed with the
Commission Secretary before the item is addressed by the Commission. There is a
three (3) minute time limit for individual speakers.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and all will
be enacted by one roll call vote. There will be no discussion of these items unless
members of the Commission request specific items be removed from the Consent
Calendar for separate action.
DIVISION REPORTS
COMMISSION BUSINESS
ADoroval of the Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:
1.1 Approve the minutes of the November 13, 1995 Community Services
Commission meeting.
Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update
RECOMMENDATION:
2.1 Receive and file.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION REPORT
· ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services Commission will be
held on Monday, January 14, 1996, 7:00 P.M., at Temecula City Hall Main Conference
Room, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California.
ITEM NO.
1
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1995
A regular meeting of the City of Temecula Community Services Commission was held on Monday,
November 13, 1995, 7:00 P.M. at Temecula City Hall Main Conference Room, 43174 Business Park
Drive, Temecula, California. Chairman Jeff Comerchero called the meeting to order. Commissioner
Jack Henz lad the flag salute.
PRESENT: 5 COMMISSIONERS:
Henz, Miller, Nimeshein, Soltysiak,
Comerchero
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Also I~resent were Community Services Director Shawn Nelson, Deputy Director Herman Parker,
Recreation Superintendent Julia Pelletier and Administrative SecretaW Gall Ziglet.
SWEARING IN CEREMONY
City Clerk June S. Greek administered the Official Oath of Office to incoming Community Services
Commissioner Jack Henz.
PRESENTATIONS
The Community Services Commission presented Certificates of Appreciation to the following
individuals for their service to'the City of Temecula:
June S. Greek, City Clerk
Harold Greek
Mario Munoz, Maintenance Worker
Director Nelson also thanked those individuals for their community involvement and service.
Chairman Comerchero declared a recess at 7:05 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 7:10 P.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mike Verkouteren, 31358 Avenida Del Reposo, Temecula, representing R.A.C.E.S. (Radio Amateur
Civil Emergency Services), advised that R.A.C.E.S. is interested in establishing a base station for
their radio equipment and would like the City's assistance in identifying a permanent location for the
system at the Community Recreation Center and additional space at the future Parkview Fire
Station.
Director Nelson advised Mr. Verkouteren that this issue should be brought forward to the Public
Traffic Safety Commission however, es Iogistics coordinator for the City Hall EOC, he stated he
would be interested in talking with Mr. Verkouteren regarding this matter.
Mike Verkouteren, 31358 Avenida Del Repose, Temecula, representing the Temecula Valley Soccer
Association, advised the Commission that the Temecula Valley Soccer League has set aside $5 from
each soccer registration to go into a building fund to be used for the acquisition of future fields.
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MINU'ff-~ NOVl~IBER 13. 1995
Mr. Verkouteren suggested The CiW of Temecula and the Temecula Valley Soccer Association enter
into a joint agreement to construct soccer fields at the Northwest Sports Complex,
Chairman Comerchero advised Mr. Verkoutaren to meet with The Community Services Department
and present his proposal.
Division Reoorte
Recreation Superintendent Julia Perletier reported the following:
The recreation department held a Temecula Spooktacula Halloween Bash on Friday, October
27, 1995 at the CRC. Staff estimates that 1500 adults and children were in attendance at
this event. The event included a pumpkin carving contest, a Halloween Costume Contest, a
screaming contest, carnival game booths, photos with Frankenstein, face painting and a
small haunted house.
As part of the teen program, staff arranged a trip to Knott's Scary Farm. There were 55
teens who participated in this field trip.
The CommuniW Services Department co*sponsored the first Temecula Triathlon on
Saturday, November 11, 1995 at the CRC, with 150 participants.
· Christmas Season events are as follows:
December 1, 1995 - Annual Santa's Electric Light Parade, 7:00 P,M. at Del Rio Road
and Jefferson Avenue
December 11, 1995'- The Annual Holiday Lights and Festive Sights
December 16, 1995 - Breakfast With Santa
The Winter/Spring brochure is in the final stages of preparation. Staff will be preparing
those to be mailed the first week of January, 1996.
Commissioner Soltysiak expressed some concern that the soccer fields are being over-watered.
Deputy Director Herman Parker said that staff is aware there has been a problem with over-watering
of the soccer fields and the City continues to work with the landscape maintenance contractor to
resolve this issue.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
1. Aoorovsl of the Minutes
Chairman Comerchero asked for a correction on Page 6, first paragraph under Director's
Report, to read *...two Commissioners to serve s three year term ......
It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak to approve the
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES
minutes as corrected.
NOVEMBER 13. 1995
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS: Henz, Miller, Nimeshein, Soltysiak,
Comerchero
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
Restroom Facility, Maroarita Community Park
Deputy Director Herman Parker presented the staff report.
Vince DiDonato, landscape architect and Dean Davidson, facility architect, presented the
restroom design alternatives.
Commissioner Henz recommended the men's restroom design include a privacy door to the
urinal.
Deputy Director Parker advised the Commission that he spoke to representatives from the
City of Rancho Cucamonga Parks and Recreation Department and they said they have
decided not to incorporate a unisex restroom for any of their park facilities. They added
that they are considering the unisex restroom design for indoor facilities which have more
supervision.
Chairman ComerChero said he supports the recommendation by Commissioner Henz to
install a door on the men's urinal.
Commissioner Miller said the unisex restroom can be incorporated into the design phase of
the Margarita Park Recreation Center.
Commissioner Soltysiak asked if this would create a problem because other City parks
restrooms do not have this design.
Director Nelson suggested that staff modify the restrooms at the Rancho California Sports
Park by installing a door on the urinal stall.
It was moved by Commissioner Henz, seconded by Commissioner Nimeshein to recommend
the unisex restroom design be deleted from the Margarita Community Park Master Plan and
a door be designed for the men's urinal stall and in the interim, the Community Services
Department install a door on the men's urinal stall at the Sports Park restroom facility on a
trail basis and the results brought back to the Community Services Commission in six
months for their review.
The motion carried as follows:
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES
NOVEMBER 13. 1995
AYES:
5 COMMISSIONERS:
NOES: 0 COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS:
Namino of Newly Acouired Park Site
Director Nelson presented the staff report.
Henz, Miller, Nimeshein, Soltysiak,
Commerchero
None
None
Pat Keller, P.O. Box 521, Temecula, expressed her desire to see the Duck Pond named by
the children in the community. Ms. Keller said she feels David Dixon should be recognized
somewhere at City Hall. Ms. Keller asked the Commission to consider a contest to name
the park site.
Director Nelson advised the Commission he received a letter from David Micheal, 30300
Churchill Court, Temecula, esking the Commission to name the park site 'The Pond' or 'The
Children's Park'.
Commissioner Miller said he feels David Dixon can be honored in a more appropriate way.
Commissioner Miller said he talked to several individuals from the community and they all
expressed to him they would like to see the park called "The Duck Pond".
Director Nelson advised the Commission the City Attorney has some concerns with regards
to naming the park site 'The Pond".
Commissioner Soltysiak said he is not comfortable giving the park site a memorial name.
Commissioner Nimeshein said he feels the residents have already named the park by
commonly referring to it as the "Duck Pond'. He suggested a park be named after David
Dixon, in creation.
Commissioner Henz said he feels Mr. Dixon would be much better memorialized for what he
did for the City of Temecula as an administrative leader.
Chairman Comerchero said he feels strongly the City should honor the accomplishments of
Mr. Dixon, however he does not feel the park site should be named after Mr. Dixon, end
that the park should be called 'The Duck Pond".
It was moved by Commissioner' Miller, seconded by Commissioner Soltysiak to recommend
to the Board of Directors that the 7.5 acre park site located at the corner of Rancho
California Road and Ynez Road be called 'The Duck Pond'.
The motion carried as follows:
AYES: 5 COMMISSIONERS:
NOES:
Henz, Miller, Nimeshein, Soltysiak,
Commerchero
0 COMMISSIONERS: None
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION lVHNUTES
ABSENT: 0 COMMISSIONERS: None
NOVEMBk'IR 13. 199~
COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Director Nelson advised the Commission the Annual League of California Cities Community Services
Conference will be held April 10 - 12, 1996, in Monterey, California.
Director Nelson said he forwarded the concerns expressed by Commissioner Soltysiak at the
October Commission meeting, regarding the intersection of De Portola Road and Margarita Road, to
the Traffic engineer. Director Nelson said that according to the Traffic engineer, that intersection
does not warrant a traffic signal or stop sign at this Time. Director Nelson suggested to
Commissioner Soltysiak if he still has concerns regarding This issue, he should send a letter To The
Pubtic Traffic Safety Commission or contact the traffic engineer.
Director Nelson reported the portable restroom will be delivered to the duck pond park site on
Tuesday, November 14, 1995.
Director Nelson reminded the Commission of the Park Tour on Friday, December 15, 1995, 8:30
A.M. at Temecula City Hall.
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION REPORT
Commissioner Miller said he attended the Public Safety Expo held at the Community Recreation
Center and recommended that the Community Services Commission sponsor a similar event or
participate in the next Public Safety Exl)o.
Commissioner Henz agreed that a Community Services Expo would be a great event to promote the
activities and events of the Community Services Department.
Chairman Comerchero advised the Commissioners he artended a recent Sports Council meeting and
he encouraged the other Commissioners to attend as many committees meetings and councils
meetings as possible.
Chairman Comerchero thanked Commissioner Miller for his year as Chairman of the Community
Services Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
it was moved by Commissioner Hertz, seconded by Commissioner Miller to adjourn at 9:05 P.M.
The motion was unanimously carried.
The next regular meeting of the Community Services Commission will be held on Monday, January
14, 1996, 7:00 P.M. at Temecula City Hall Main Conference Room, 43174 Business Park Drive,
Temecula, California.
A special meeting of the Community Services Commission will be held on Friday, December 15,
1995, 8:30 A.M., at Temecula City Hall, 43174 Business Park Drive, Temecula, for a Commission
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES
Park Tour.
NOVEMBER 13. 1995
Chairman Jeff Commerchero
SecretaW
ITEM NO. 2
CITY OF TEMECULA
AGENDA REPORT
FROM:
DATE:
Community Services Commission
Shawn D. Nelson, Director of Community Services
December 11, 1995
SUBJECT:
Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update
PREPARED BY: ~ Herman D, Parker, Deputy Director of Community Services
RECOMMENDATION: That the Community Services Commission:
Receive and file this report.
BACKGROUND: In 1991, the Community Services Department, working with a
consultant, completed the City of Temecula Parks and Recreation Master Plan. The intent of
the Parks and Recreation Master Plan was to develop and implement a plan for the
development of recreation programs and facilities through the year 2013. In fact, the purpose
of the Master Plan as stated in the executive summary is to "provide guidance to the City for
the organized and s{ructured development of the City's parks, recreation, trails, open space
facilities and programs."
Three community goals with objectives were established in the Master Plan. The goals
established were as follows:
Provide a comprehensive and balanced neighborhood and community park
system throughout Temecula.
Provide a City-wide multi-trails system that includes bicycle, jogging and
equestrian trails.
m
Provide a balanced recreation program that meets the needs of all age groups
in the community.
A strategic implementation plan was also formulated to guide the department towards the
successful completion of these goals.
Given the above mentioned community goals, staff will present an overview of the strategic
plan to accomplish our goals and identify what the department has accomplished over the past
five years. Staff will also present projects currently underway.
It is our hope that this staff report and presentation will generate a brief group discussion
regarding the direction of the Community Services Department for the next five years.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
ATTACHMENT:
Master Plan Executive Summary
w~rl
SUMMARY
This summary of the City of Temecula Parks and Recreation Master Plan provides a brief
and concise profile of the contents and recommendations contained within, The sections
following this overview describe details of the research and analyses from where the resulting
recommendations were generated. These sections outline points concerning existing park and
recreation facilities and programs, population and demographics, citizen participation,
current demand for recreation services and analysis of trends, needs assessment, policies and
goal. v, funding strategies, and recommendations for facilities improvements.
MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of the City of Temecula is to maintain a safe, secure, clean, healthy and
orderly community, to balance the utilization of open space, parks, trail facilities, quality
jobs, public transportation, diverse homing and adequate infxastructure and to enhance
and revitalize historic areas.
The City will encourage programs for all age groups, utilize its human resources,
preserve its natural resources while stimulating technology, promoting commerce and
utilizing sound fiscal policy.
It is the City Council's resolve that this mission. will install a sense of pride and
accomplishment in its citizens and that the City will be known as a progressive,
innovative, balanced and environmentally sensitive community.
PURPOSE
The City of Temecula Parks and Recreation Master Han was formulated to provide
guidance to the City for the organized and structured development of the City's parks,
recreation, trails, open space facilities and program~. This Master Plan recommends
regular reviews at three-year intervals a=:l is based on projections to the year 2013.
GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR PARKS, RECREATION AND LEISURE SERVICES
The following enumerates the general policies of the Community Services Department as
it pertain~ to its park and recreation objectives. A more detailed explanation of each
policy can be found in Section Five of thi~ Master Plan.
These 11 major guidelines are geared to provide the framework for the City's parks and
recreation program. These are:
A. Conserve open space for its natural, cultural and recreational values.
B. Provide financial support for parks and recreation services.
C. Provide close-to-home recreation oppornmities.
D. Encourage joint-use of existing physical resources.
E. Ensure that recreation facilities are well-tnanaged and well-maintained, and that
quality recreation program~ are available by employing an adequate number of
well-trained staff.
F. Provide a wide variety of recreation facilities and programs to create a positive
leisure environment.
G. Provide adequate and responsive recreation services through sound planning.
H. . Make environmental education and management an integral part of park and
recreation policies and programs.
I. Strengthen the role of cultural arts in recreation.
J. Encourage citizen interaction and socialiTation.
Foster a climate of volunteerism.
SPECIFIC PARKS, RECREATION AND LEISURE SERVICES POLICIES
The following is a list of specific policies for the Comrmmity Services Department that
corresponds to the framework established by the general guidelines named above. These
specffic goals were developed to assist the Depa~ Lment carry out its mission as the
steward of the community's parks, open space and natural resources. A more detailed
explanation of each goal can be found in Section Five.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Park lands and acquisition policy.
Park unit classification policy.
Park planning, design and development policy.
Programs and services policy.
Operations and maintenance policy.
ii
F. Economic performance and'finance policy.
G. Legislative and orrIin~nce policy.
COlVfM'UNITY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES OF MASTER PLAN
The Ma~ter Plan has been tailored to meet the goals of the City of Temecula as
expressed through the research methods used to gather information. Each commnnity
goal has a corresponding Master Plan objective devised to help meet that specific goal.
Based on the information from community workshops and telephone sm-veys, the
following comrn~mity goals have been identified with corresponding Master Plan
objectives geared to meet those goals:
Conlninnity Goal #1:
Provide a comprehensive and balanced neighborhood and community park system
throughout Temecula.
Master Plan Objectives:
1. DeCine the Limitations of neighborhood and community parks.
2. Divide City into two geographic areas and provide for an equal distribution
of facilities in each area.
3. Maintain a ratio of five developed acres per 1,000 population.
4. Utilize school facRities by mean~ of joint-use agreements.
5. Develop a Capital Improvement Plan that identifies and prioritizes an
orderly process for future development.
6. Condition residential development for park land dedication requirements.
Community Goal #2:
Provide a City-wide multi-trails system that includes bicycle, jogging and equestrian
trails.
Master Plan Objectives:
1. Develop joint-use agreements with private ownership and various public
entities, i.e., utilities and flood control agearies in order to establish right-
of-access.
2. Develop trail development standards.
3. Provide for circulation opportunities for transportational and recreational
USES.
Community Goal # 3:
Provide a balanced recreation program that meets the needs of all age groups in the
community.
Master Plan Objectives:
1. Periodic update of recreation needs assessment.
2. Provide park and recreation facilities to address recreation needs.
3. Provide staff to organize recreation program involving both City personnel
and community volunteers.
COMMUNITY PROFILE: POPUI~TION AND DEMOGRAPHICS
Temecula is situated in the southwestern portion of Riverside County. The City was
incorporated December 1, 1989 and has an estimated January 1992 population of 32,000.
The City projects growth to almost 90,000 population in 20 years as families travel
further to seek affordable housing in a rural atmosphere.
The present population is spread throughout the city with 17,600 north of Rancho
California Road and 14,400 to the south. By the year 2012, it is projected that 38,700
residents will be living north of Rancho California Road and 51,000 to the south. The
Master Plan displays both the present City limits and the projected sphere of influence
for planning purposes. Refer to Map 1-1.
iv
5
I
,i
!i
;]
The school district has seen a steady rise in enrollment and is in an on-going mode for
development of new schools to meet rising demand. Children of school ages 5 to 17
represent 21.7 percent of the overall population. Senior citizens within Temecula Valley
are active and persons ages 55 years and over represent 12.4 percent of the population.
Statistics indicate a strong growtl~. in the senior level age group over the next few
decades.
The City of Temecula is earnestly promoting commerce and industry to attract new
business into the area and increase the local job market. The majority of the work force
presently commute to Los Angeles or Orange County to their place of work.
The City has several tourist attractions including Old Town Temecula and the Wine
Country. The influx of tourists is encouraged as it brings income to the community.
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
Citizen involvement was a fundamental ingredient of the research process. Two methods
were chosen to incorporate feedback and reaction. A telephone survey was conducted
and involved more than 400 residents. Two Citizen Community Workshops were also
held and were attended by both special interest groups and citizens-at-large who
volunteered to participate. Participants came from all parts of the City and represented
all age groups.
The telephone survey accomplished several key elements in the planning process.
Paramount among these is that the survey was a method by which to identify and
determine cross sections among the participants as to their opinions regarding park use,
recreation and program demand. The survey also provides planners with an overview of
how the community perceives the park system. Workshop topics included identification
of the issues, demand analysis, sites and facilities? funding strategies, and policy review.
SUPPLY INVENTORY
The City of Temecula currently owns 244.95 acres of parkland, approximately 40 acres of
which is developed. Sports Park is currently planning its next improvement with the
addition of a community recreation center, pool complex and amphitheater. Pala Road
Park is currently being designed as a community park with the addition of many new
facilities.
The City is in the process of developing a bike route on its City streets. There are also
many recreational and equestrian trail~ throughout the eommnnity. This stage of the
City's development presents tremendous opportunities to establish comprehensive
guidelines for bicycle routes, recreational and equestrian trails.
V
The City will continue to work with the school clistri~ regarding the utilization of school
grounds and fields for recreational purposes.
The existing park inventory is displayed in Exhibit 2-3. The park and school sites and
potential parks and school sites are keyed by x~umber into Maps 2-1 and 2-2.
As new development is realized and park land obligation is fillfilled, many new acres and
facilities will be added to the inventory.
The following represents current standards for facilities existing in the City.
CITY OF TEMECULA
CURRENT STANDARDS FOR FACILITIES
Facility Type Facility/Population Ratios
Amphitheater ............................................................. 1/City-wid~
Softball
Adult SoftbaH .............................................................. 1/5.500
Youth Softball .. ............................................................ 1/7,300
Pracfice/Informul ........................................................... 1/5,400
Baseball
Little League .............................................................. 1/4,300
Adult .................................................................... 1/8,000
Practice Informul Play ........................................................ 1/6,000
Community Centers .......................................................... 1/25,000
Senior Centers .............................................................. 1/25,000
Recreation Centers ............................................................ 1/8,000
Convention Center ......................................................... 1/City-wide
Gymnasium ................................................................ 1/15,000
Handball/Racquetball .......................................................... 1/6,500
Library .................................................................... 1/2~,000
Football
OrganiTed Games .......................................................... 1/11,600
Soccer
OrganiTed Games ........................................................... 1/2,600
Basketball/Multipurpose ........................................................ 1/8,300
Tot Lots/Play Axeas ........................................................... 1/1,350
Swimming Pools .................. ' ........................................... 1/16,300
Tennis Courts ................................................................ 1/2,300
Volleyball Courts ............................................................. 1/8,000
Skateboard Area .......................................................... 1/City-wide
vii
CURRENT FACILITY DEMAND
Based on the needs analysis as described in Section Four, the following summary displays
the cm'rent need for facilities and acreage requirements.
Facility 1992 Existing Surplus/ School Total Total Existing Total
Needs City Deficit (-) Facilities Facilities Surplus/ Area Area
Facilities Avail. Avail. Deficit (-) (Acres) Demanded
Softball Fields:
Org. Youth 4.4 2 -2.4 0 2 -2.4 4.00 8.73
Org. Adult 5.8 2 -3.8 0 2 -3.8 4.00 11.54
Practice/
Informal Play 5.9 0 -5.9 4 4 -1.9 8.00 11.82
Baseball Fields:
Little League 7.5 6 -1.5 0 6 -1.5 7.20 8.94
Adult 4.0 0 -4.0 2 2 -2.0 7.70 1535
Practice/
Informal Play 53 0 -5_-3 5 5 -0.3 8.50 9.04
Football
Org. Games 2.8 0 -2.8 1 1 -1.8 1.50 4.15
Soccer Fields
Org. Games 12.0 4 -8.0 1 5 -7.0 10.50 25.11
Soccer/Football Fields
Practice/
Informal 12.6
0 -12.6 6 6 -6.6 12.60 26.40
Tot Lots/
Playgrounds 23.8 6 -17.8 12 18 -5.8 2.70 3.57
Swimming Pools2.0 0 -2.0 1 1 -1.0 1.00 1.96
Tenni~ Courts 13.9 0 -13.9 10.5 10.5 -3.4 2.10 2.79
Basketball Courts
Organized
Adult (Gym) 1.0 0 -1.0 0 0 -1.0 .05 .19
OrganiTed
Youth (Gym) 12. 0 -1.2 0 0 -12. ./.5 .23
Practice/
Informal 3.9 0 -3.9 29 29 25.1 2.90 .39
Jogging
Paths (nil) 23 N/A -23 N/A 0 -23 .00 231
Bicycling
Paths (nil) 52.1 N/A -52.1 N/A 0 -52.1 .00 52.12
Facility 1992 Existing Surplus/ School Total Total Existing Total
Needs City Deficit (-) Facilities Fac~lties Surplus/ Area Area
Facilities Avail. Avail. Deficit (-) (Acres) Demanded
w~
Paths (mi) 57.6 N/A -57.6 N/A 0 -57.6 .00 28.78
TraiLs (mi) 21.2 N/A -21.2 N/A 0 -21.2 .00 16.95
Volleyball
Cottrt~ 4.0 0 -4.0 20 20 16.0 2.00 .40
Racquet/
Handball Courts5.0 0 -5.0 8 8 3.0 .16 .10
Exercise
Courses 3.2 0 -3.2 0 0 -3.2 .00 3.23
Classrooms:
Adult 6.9 0 -6.9 i i -5.9 .25 1.72
Youth 6.0 0 -6.0 1 1 -5.0 25 1.50
Total 2.8 0 -12.8 2 2 -10.8 .50 9.21
Total Net Acres of Active Recreation Facilities (EXcluding
Trails and Goff Facilities)
76.46 139.00
Ratio of Total Parkland to Active Recreation Facilities
1.57 1,~7
Total Acres of Parkland
119.~0 217.97
The current standard of five acres per 1,000 population can be met by the City.
However, based on the demand analysis, current demand reflects a need for an
additional 1.8 acres to satisfy present and future community needs, bringing the total to
6.8 acres per 1,000 population. This additional acreage can be met by school facilities to
meet current requirements.
DEFINITION OF PARK TYPES
The table on the following pages depicts the various types of parks and their uses. These
categories represent basic explanations of what each park type normally contains at the
minimum level.
Following the table defining the park types is a chart showing the quality, type and
number of facilities that should be available at each park category.
BASE LEVEL PARK DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
Neighborhood Parks
Park ~
Neighborhood
Minimum to
Maximum Size
3 to 10 acres
Minimum Base Recreation Facilities
Tot Lot/Playground 1
Informal Open Space/
Play Atca 1
Open Picaic Tables 4
Picnic Shelters 1
Barbecues 5
Softbail: Informal 1
Basketball: Informal 1
Volleyball 1
Walkways 1
Trash Receptacles 7
Support Facilities
(Selective per project)
Parking for 5 to 10 cars
Public Restrooms
BASE LEVEL PARK DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
Community Parks
Park l~pe
Minimum to Minimum Base Recreation
Maximum Size Facilities
Suppo~ FadHfies
Optional Facilities
Community 15 to 40
Tot Lot/Playground 1
Informal/Open Space
Play Area/ 1
Open Picnic Tables 12
Picnic Shelters 4
Barbecues 16
Baseball: Litfie League 2
Sofxball 2
Basketball: Informal 2
Soccer 2
Te--i~ Courts 2
VoBeyball 2
JoF~,~ng/Ex. ercise Course
Trash Receptacles 20
Recreation BuDdl-g (2;500
to 4,000 square feet)
Note: 50% courts and organiTed sports fields lighted.
Parld-g for 50 to 100
cars (0.5 to 1 acre)
Public Restrooms 1/15 acres
Pefform i-g Arts
Gymnasium
Complex
[I t -!
BASE LEVEL PARK DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
Special Use Parks
Park ~vpe
Minimum to Base Recreation Facilities
Maximum Size
Support Facilities
Special Use 50 to 100+
acres
TOt Lot/Playground
Informal Open Space/
Play Area
Open Picnic Tables
Picnic Shelters
Barbecues
Softbail: Informal
Basketball: Informal
Volleyball: Iraformal
Swimming Complex
Softball: Organized Youth
SOftba~ O~A'i~iTt~d Adult
Baseball: Organized
Youth/Adult
Baseball: Littl~ Leagu-
Football
Soccer. OrganiTed
Tenni~ Complex
JoFL~nS/Exercis~ Course
Recreation BuHdin~ (4,000
tO 6,000 square feet)
Gymnasium
Audltoritun
pattlfig for 100 to 250
ears (I.0 to 23 acres)
Public Restrooms
Note: 50% all informal sports fields lighted; 100% courts and organiTed sports fields lighted.
xiii
Optional Facilities
Additional Facilities from
from parks listed above
Peffoming Am
Cultural Facilities
Tournaments
Equestrian
Archery Range
Fairs
Rodeos
Outdoor Amphitheater
City-Wide Maintenance
Yard
FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS
Several development priorities have been identified for implementation within the next five
years once funds have been approved. These improvements should correspond to the Master
Plan's recommendations regarding park and facilities standards for minirmim size and facilities
available and the City's Capital Improvement Plan.
A. Continued improvements to Sports Park (Comrmimty Recreation Center project).
B. Develop Pala Park and Master Plan site as future COmmunity park.
C. Acquire property in the Margarita Road and Moraga Road area and develop Master
Plan of site as future cOmmnnity park.
Master Plan bicycle and recreation trails, obtain rights of access and program phased
development.
Develop community park (Dendy property) in northern pan of the City (northwest sports
complex).
Develop Master Plan for Riverton 1 ~ne Park to meet neighborhood park standards.
Complete expansj, on of Calle Aragon Park.
Develop Master Plan for Loma I inda Park as a neighborhood park.
Develop a Senior Center.
Develop "L" shaped property adjacent to Sam Hicks Monument Park.
Develop parking and landscaping improvements to Sports Park.
Develop a skateboard facility within an existing City park.
G.
H.
I.
IC
L.
M.
xiv
"COSTS AND PRIORITIES
The following presents a summ3xy of park needs and costs of acquiring ~hese according m their
priority.
SUMMARY OF PXRK DEVELOPMENT NEEDS AND COSTS BY
PRIORITY
Current Short-Term Mid-Term Long-Term Total
1992 1992-1997 1997-2002 2002-2012
Park Acres
Requ~'ed by
City 160.0 80.5 118.5 89.5 448_~
Existing
Developed
Acres 40.0
Additional
Acres Needed 120.0 80.5 118.5 89.5 408.5
Additional Acres
to be Provided
by:
City 120.0 19.75 28.75 0 168.5
Developers 0 60.75 89.75 89.5 240.0
City Costs for:
Acquisition $0 $1,777,500 $'3,105,000 $0 ' $ 4,882,500
Development $16,200,000 $3,199,500 $5,589,000 $0 2r24,988,500
Total City
Costs $16,2D0,000 $4,977,000 $8,694,000 $0 $29,871,000
Total Additional
Annual Operations
and Maintenance
Costs* $1,200,000
966,000 $1,659,000 $1,521,500
* Assme at $10,000/acre in 1992 dollars.
Note: All cost figures are adjusted for inflation by period.
FUNDING STRATEGY
Although projected increases in City revenues from property assessments are anticipated to be
adequate to operate and maintain the level of park land defined in the needs study over the
next twenty years, inadequate funds will be available for acquisition and development of the
appropriate facilities. Part of thin acquisition gap will be accommodated by park dedications
within specific plan areas. Some can be met with Qnlraby fees. Additional sources of revenue
to accommodate this requirement include: increased bonding capacity supported by operating
revenues in excess of projected operating costs, increases in property assessment rates to
support bond issues, more aggressive dedication requirements, and development impact fees.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The following table represents the various projects the City has planned for the next 20 years.
Each project listed on this plan has been assigned a priority in order to accommodate available
funding. The following guidelines were used in determining which priority to assign each
project:
Priority 1:
The project is considered urgent and must be completed immediately.
Failure to do so may have considerable financial or social impact on the
community.
Priority 2:
The project is considered fairly imponant and necessary. The project
would affect safety, law enforcement, health, welfare, economic base,
and/or quality of life.
· Priority 3:
The project would enhance the quality of life and would therefore benefit
the COmmUnity. The immediate goals would be providing cultural,
recreational and/or aesthetic benefits.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Description
Funding Acquisition Improvement
Source Cost Cost
Short Term (1993-1998)
Sports Park Phase I
Amphitheater,
Pool
Community
Recreation
Building B
Pala Park (28.6 acre)
Community Park A, B, D
Senior Center
Riverton Lane B, G
(S.O acres)
Northwest Sports
Complex
40-acre site F, G
Moraga and Margarita
Parksite 20 acres A, D
CMIe Axagon Park
Expansion
Loma Linda Park G
(2.9 acres)
Recreation Trail D
Improvements
(Trail Head Parks)
Sports Park Phase II
Parking
Tot lot
Group picnic
Skateboard Area
Sam Hicks Monument Park
Restrooms
Develop "L" shaped
property
$ 454,455
$ 3,~0,000
$ 1,650,000
$ 5,709,669
$ 3,3~0,000
$ 882,679
$ 468,750
$ 3,600,000
$ 3,000,000
$ 75,000
$ 250,000
$ 1,000,000
$ 475,000
Priority
2
1
1
1
3
2
1
Description
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
(Continued)
Funding Acquisition Improvement
Source Cost Cost
P~o~
City-wide Bike Paths
Total:
Funding Sources:
$ 5,904,455 $20,246,098
A. Community Funding District 88-12
B. Community Services District Assessment Bond Proceeds
C. COmmunity Services District Assessments
D. Quimby Fees
E. Community Development Block Grant
F. Community and Corninertial Contributions
G. Developer Agreement
:a
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
(Continued)
Description
Funding Acquisition Improvement
Source Cost Cost
Mid-Term
Recreation Trail
Improvements
(Trail Head Parks)
D
Recreation Center
Pala Park Site
$
$1,6oo,o0o
Sports Park Improvements
Miscellaneous Neighborhood
Park Sites
P-1 north park
5-acre site
P-2 north park
5-acre site
P-3 southeast
5-acre site
P-4 southwest
5-acre site
P-5 northwest
5-acre site
P-6 northeast
5-acre site
$ 375,000
$ 375,000
$ 375,000
$ 375,000
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
$ 500,000
Olympic Swim C,D,F $1,500,000
Pool Complex
Total: $ 3,000,000 $10,100,000
Funding Sources:
A. Community Funding District 88-12
B. Community Services District Assessm6nt Bond Proceeds
C. Community Services District Assessments
D. Ouimby Fees
E. Community Development Block Grant
F. Community and Corninertial Contributions
G. Developer Agreement
Priority
1
15
ACTION ITEMS
The adoption of this Master Plan is the most basic step toward improving parks, recreation and
leisure services in the City of Temecula. When properly implemented, the policies and
recommendations of this plan will bear definite implications for future directions.
The Commnn{~ Services Depaament must initiate several processes immediately in order to
implement the recommendations of thi~ Master plan TO focus the discussion and provide a
guideline for definitive decision-making, the consultants have identified several activities as high
priority items which should take precedence over other actions. These are listed in logical
order based on our analysis; however, it should be noted that these should act only as a
springboard for the City Staff and Board for their debate and determination.
Among the actions to take are the following:
1. Review, analyze and adopt policies.
'Develop agreements with utilities companies and private landowners for long-ten use of"
easements, and develop joint use agreements with other public access.
3. Review, analyze and adopt funding strategy to meet shortfalls.
4. Fill location gaps in the provision of neighborhood sentice parks.
5. Aggressively move ahead with implementing the Capital Improvement Plan~
s~1
l J-J-
~,,I I T UI' I e'Me-~UL/~*"t;~*A I IUIM MAP
o
VAIL
LAKE I
LOS ANGELES
BEACH
PACIFIC OCEAN
F,o-~R BS~NARDINO
OCEANSlOE ESCONDIOO
REGIONAL
~ SAN DIEGO ,~
NORTH _ --/~er'
NOT TO SCALE BAJA CA.
TIJUANA