City Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda (May 10, 2012)

Agenda
City of Sacramento
Parks and Recreation Commission
Rosemarie Ruggieri
Jonathan Rewers
Jeff Harris
COMMISSION MEMBERS
Dave O'Toole
Malachi Smith
Dave Tamayo
Araceli Mercado
Virginia Guadiana
David Heitstuman
CITY STAFF:
Jim Combs, Director of Parks and Recreation
Lori Harder, Support Services Manager
Historic City Hall Hearing Room
9151 Street
May 10,2012 - 7:00 P.M.
Jay Hansen
Brandon Beaver
The Parks and Recreation Commission is a commission of the City Council that provides recommendations and
advise on policies, projects and other matters pertaining to parks, recreation, trees, and human services affecting
the City of Sacramento.
NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC
You are welcomed and encouraged to participate in this meeting. Public comment is taken ( _
_ on items listed on the agenda when they are called. Public Comment on items not listed on the
agenda will be heard at the end of the meeting as noted on the agenda. Comments on controversial items may be
limited and large groups are encouraged to select 3-5 speakers to represent the opinion of the group.
Notice to Lobbyists: When addressing the Commission you must identify yourself as a lobbyist and announce
the client/business/organization you are representing (City Code 2.15.160). Speaker slips are located in the
lobby of the hearing room and should be completed and submitted to the Commission Secretary.
Government Code 54950 (The Brown Act) requires that a brief description of each item to be transacted or
discussed be posted at least 72 hours prior to a regular meeting. The City posts Agendas at City Hall as well as
offsite meeting locations.
The order of agenda items is for reference only; agenda items may be taken in any order deemed appropriate by
the Commission. The agenda provides a general description and staff recommendations; however, the
Commission may take action other than what is recommended. The agenda is available for public review on the
_ prior to the meeting. Hard copies of the agenda, minutes, and staff reports are available from the Parks
and Recreation Department at 915 I Street, New City Hall, 5'h Floor (25 cents per page). Meeting facilities are
accessible to persons with disabilities. If you require special assistance to participate in the meeting, notify the
Parks and Recreation Department at (916) 808-5172 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Parks & Recreation Commission - May 10, 2012 Agenda
May 10, 2012
Historic City Hall Meeting Room
9151 Street
All items listed are heard and acted upon by the Parks and Recreation Commission unless
otherwise noted.
Call to Order - 7:00 p.m.
Roll Calli Commissioner Introduction
Public Comments- Matters Not on the Agenda
1. To be announced
Public Hearings
2. Appeal of a Decision of the Director of Transportation to Issue a Tree Permit to Remove
and Replace Five City Street Trees at 1420 and 1510 16'h Street
Location: 1420 and 1510 16 Street, Council District 4
Recommendation: That the appeal of the decision of the Director to issue a tree
permit to remove and replace five city street trees at 1420 and 1510 Street be denied.
Contact: Joe Benassini, Urban Forestry Manager, Department of Transportation, 808-
6258
Special Oral Presentation
3. None
Consent Calendar
All items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered and acted upon by one motion.
Anyone may request that anitem be removed for separate consideration.
4. Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Approve Commission minutes for April 5, 2012
Contact: Lori Harder, Support Services Manager, 808-5172
5. Naming of Park Sites in the Township 9 Development Project
Location: 819 North ih Street, Planning Area 1, Council District 3
Recommendation: Support staff recommendation to name all parks within the
Township 9 Development Project as outlined in this report.
Contact: Mary de Beauvieres, Principal Planner, 808-8722; J.P. Tindell, Park Planning
and Development Manager, 808-1955
Discussion/Action Reports
Discussion/Action reports include oral presentations including those recommending review and
comment
6. The Great California Delta Trail
Location: Along eastern bank of the Sacramento River between Tiscornia Park and
southern tip of the City; Planning Areas 1 and 4, Council Districts 4 and 7
Recommendation: Support staff recommendation to designate as the Great California
Delta Trail, the existing Sacramento River Parkway alignment through the City of
Sacramento.
Contact: Mary de Beauvieres, Principal Planner, 808-8722; J.P. Tindell, Park Planning
7. Parks and Recreation Commission's Annual Budget Workshop
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Parks and Recreation Commission review
and discuss proposed FY12-13 operating and capital improvement budgets for Parks
and Recreation and Urban Forest Services and take action if desired
Contact: Lori Harder, Support Services Manager, 808- 5172; J.P. Tindell, Park
Planning and Development Manager, 808-1955; Juan Montanez, Maintenance Services
Manager, 808-2254
8. Park Maintenance Parcel Tax Initiative (Oral Report)
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Review and Comment
Contact: J.P. Tindell , Park Planning and Development Manager, 808-1955
9. "Save our Pools" Campaign Results and Summer Aquatics Operations (Oral '
Report)
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Review and comment
Contact: Jim Combs, Parks and Recreation Director, 808-8526
10. Parks and Recreation Director Report (Oral): Review Highlights of April and May
2012
Location: Citywide
Questions, Ideas, and Announcements of Commission Members
Adjournment
Parks & Recreation Commission - May 10,2012 Agenda
DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
URBAN FORESTRY SERVICES
April 25, 2012,
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
CALIFORNIA
Sacramento, California
Honorable Members in Session
May 10,2012
Agenda Item 2
5730 24
T1l
STREET
BUILDING 12A
SACRAMENTO, CA 9 5822
PH (916) 80845257
SUBJECT: Appeal of a decision of the Director of Transportation to issue a
tree permit to remove and replace five city street trees at 1420 and
1510 16
th
Street.
COUNCIL DISTRICT: Council District 4
RECOMMENDATION: That the appeal of the decision of the Director to issue a tree
permit to remove and replace five city street trees at 1420 and 1510
16
th
Street be denied.
CONTACT PERSON: Joe Benassini, Urban Forestry Manager
Department of Transportation
(916) 808-6258
FOR COMMISSION MEETING: May 10, 2012
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The Capital Area Development Authority (CADA), in cooperation with Ravel Rasmussen
Properties and SeparovichiDomich Real Estate, is developing two properties at 1420 and 1510
16
th
Street, known as the East End Gateway, Sites 2 and 3 respectively. The sites are located on
the west side of 16
th
Street at the intersection with 0 Street, with Site 2 on the northwest corner
and Site 3 on the southwest corner of the intersection (Attachment I). The projects are for mixed
use with retail and commercial on the ground floor and rental apartments above. Site 2 will hold
a four story structure and Site 3 will hold a five story structure. There are twelve existing city
street trees adjacent to the sites. Of those, four mature trees are to be preserved, and five trees be
removed pursuant to the final tree permit. Of those, two are considered mature and three are
considered juvenile. Three small trees will be transplanted by City forces. New trees will be
planted by CADA that will better accommodate the streets and buildings. On behalf of CADA,
on October 24, 2011, West Fork Construction filed a tree permit application seeking a tree
permit from the City to remove trees (Attachment 2). Permits to maintain or remove city street
Appeal of Tree Removals at 1510 16
th
Street
Meeting of May 10, 2012
trees are addressed under Sacramento City Code 12.56 - Trees Generally (Attachment 3).
Specifically, section 12.56.070 - Maintenance and Removal Permits, authorizes the Director to
issue permits if certain conditions are met.
ANALYSIS
Urban Forestry staff regularly reviews construction plans for new developments. Where new
projects are planned that call for offsite improvements such as sidewalks, bulb-outs and
streetscape, staff reviews existing conditions regarding city street trees to determine the species,
size and condition of the subject trees and adjacent trees, the above and below-ground space
available, and the potential impact on the trees by the proposed project, including the
construction process itself and future long term impacts resulting from the development. The
Director andlor the Director' s designated representative considers the above factors in
determining whether or not to issue a tree permit to remove trees.
In this case, there are a total of twelve existing trees, including five trees in Site 2 and seven
street trees on Site 3. The trees to be preserved include three mature Liquidambars located in
front of Site 3 on 16
th
Street, and one mature London plane near the extreme northwest corner of
Site 3 on 0 Street (Attachment 4).
SITE 2 SITE 3
Species DBH CR Comment Species DBH CR Comment
Arizona ash 26 20 Remove London plane 37 30 Preserve
Trident maple 9 12 Remove London plane 19 30 Remove
Magnolia 9 30 Remove Shumard oak 12 20 Transplant
Shumard oak 12 20 Transplant Valley oak 14 35 Remove
Shumard oak 212 20 Transplant Liquidambar 17 20 Preserve
Liquidambar 18 20 Preserve
Liquidambar 21 20 Preserve
The decision to issue the permit to remove and replace the five trees in conjunction with this
project is driven by several factors.
The vertical faces of the buildings facing both 16
th
Street and 0 Street are at the property line
immediately at the back of the sidewalk and are approximately 58 feet in height (Attachment 5).
The projected distance from the center of the parking strips (trunk location) to the face of the
building wall is 12 feet, not including other protrusions such as signs, awnings, lighting, etc.
Allowing for an absolute minimum of 2 feet of clearance from the building reduces that distance
to 10 feet. The trees to be removed pursuant to the tree permit lack adequate above-ground space
for the mature (30 year) canopy size (Attachment 6). Pruning and shaping these trees to
successfully fit within the space allowed is not possible. This condition was noted in discussions
th
Street
Meeting of May 10, 2012
with CADA as far back as 2007 and again in comments from the City Arborist in January of
2009.
Species and Condition
In addition to concerns regarding space, there are other considerations. Arizona ash was planted
as a shade tree throughout the city and the region from the 1950' s through the 1970' s. It is an
undesirable species and is subject to anthracnose (a spring fungal disease which causes
defoliation) and mistletoe, though not as badly as its relative, the Modesto ash. In addition, it is
subject to weak branch attachment and co-dominant stems, often leading to branch fai lure and
split trunks. It is not planted by the City. The single Arizona ash on this site tree is in fair health
but poor structural condition with several areas of decay near the primary crotch on the south
side (Attachment 7).
London plane trees comprise fully 17 percent of the total tree population of Sacramento' s urban
forest. A recent report from the USDA Forest Service' s Urban Ecosystems and Processes Team
concerning municipal forest health in the city noted that the high percentage of this species
leaves the urban forest highly vulnerable to an increase in pest threat. In Sacramento, almost all
London planes, including the two on this site, are affected by sycamore anthracnose, disfiguring
the tree crown with each year's growth. The report recommends that the planting of London
planes be eliminated until 2020. While the larger of the two London plane trees will be
preserved, the smaller one in poorer condition will be replaced.
Construction Impacts
While existing trees can typically be worked around on open sites, it is extremely difficult to
provide adequate tree protection measures on urban infill projects such as these. Typical tree
protection measures include exclusion zones encompassing the area within the dripline,
something not possible on this site. Mechanical equipment and material storage along with foot
and vehicle traffic will likely compact the soil and will require that the soil be amended to
remediate the compaction. In addition, scaffolding is commonly required for finishing the face of
the buildings, and additional pruning will be required to provide sufficient clearance, typically a
minimum of 6 feet. Staff anticipates that preservation of the existing Liquidambars on 16
th
Street
will already present challenges.
Improved Streetscape
The current streetscape surrounding this project includes trees of different species and vastly
different sizes in parking strips without irrigation. Removal and replacement of the selected trees
allows staff to select species that are better fitted to the space available and to provide continuity
of species adjacent to the project. In addition, the developer will install automated irrigation to
the parking strip, reducing the burden on staff to provide manual irrigation as it currently does
for the young trees on the site. The proposed replacement planting will include a total of six trees
adjacent to Sites 2 and 3 on 0 Street and 4 trees on 16
th
Street. The three Shumard oaks on the
site will be transplanted to another site by City staff. Additionally, plans call for two small
ornamental trees to be added to the each bulb-out at the corners on the west side of the
th
Street
Meeting of May 10,2012
intersection of 16
1h
and 0 Streets. In total, ten shade trees and four small ornamental trees will be
planted in addition to the four being preserved. (Attachments 8 and 9).
APPEAL
Pursuant to SCC 12.56.120, on January 21, 2012, Nathan Jacobsen appealed the City' s issuance
of the tree permit (Attachment 10).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Sacramento City Code, section 12.56.070 - Maintenance and Removal Permits, authorizes the
director to issue permits to perform maintenance on or to remove city street trees if the applicant
has established, to the director's satisfaction, that there is need for the proposed work on the tree
and the persons who are to perform the work are qualified to do so. Staff recommends that the
appeal of the Director's issuance of the tree permit to remove five city street trees at 1420 and
1510 16
1h
Street be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
Attachment 1
Attachment 2
Attachment 2
Attachment 4
Attachment 5
Attachment 6
Attachment 7
Attachment 8
Attachment 9
Attachment 10
Schematic Design
Permit Application
Date 1
Date
Sacramento City Code 12.56 - Trees Generally
Removal Plan
Elevations
Projected Crown Radiuses for Existing Trees
Decay in Ash
Planting Plan
Projected Crown Radiuses for Proposed Trees
Jacobsen Appeal
Attachment 2
: ..
ApplicantIDfor.motion
-/J'.II (;;;-, - I J
-------
Depal'tinent,ofTrapsportation,
- . .
24th 'ShUt BuildingJ2 A Sucre!"'"to, Culifomll.9S822
or 31-1
urbanfortStJy@Cityof,act1lmento.org
Application fee,'Ssmoo -
.
,
_ TImE PERMIT
Name: \Jfht 'faR\!' teIUWfM.1IO!'!'
- - -
--
Address: 19)Aiw&-" '\1'
Pr.openy,;Owner)IiifOl'matiotuClf,dilTereotl: .
Rwa ' f('.wn;'>SSlPi . Phone (qltP) ixf'-$"Y-fu Fax (qlc..)
$ega- r Mi>el:.'r. :5M&i-fnt:;iu1e 914$140 " . " -
'. . . . . . Owiler/Agclit'Stoterqent .
PJO.peJtY. 1 pm tht:legal oWDcrofrccord ortlle'lendspecified!ri ibis 8pplIcation.or am,authorized to.aet 8S an Igen
OJ)!liehaJf.ofthe reJ'5JJ8tin &"IO'fbfS. application. I declare"that tneforegoing'is Uue Mel correct and'act:c:pt-tharfaiso 0
: owner 'ldile on . . '.' ' . . .
Signature:. L. Id;.. d.n. '4/1, . Date:/b -01;</- 1/ .
. . '.' . ' . .
'OResJdilliti'Ii1'Developmept . Development: DOwner-Occupant
! Yllo .;- J :1112' 119
111
',';.'f.. bk..f!t1Al ll'''l;A t/f8111 applied f01'1 ONo
List OtlicI pennits that you have applied f9r:.',B-(}JUlINf;;- PB<:1'!17 I . fllJq>..p)k ..
P@.M,1 " . '.
_________ ...;. ____ I
. Numbe! of Trees: Tree 'and DJariieter: --l
;::;.&/' IC/ <OOI.AIl..l l::l' 'I '
'.
(pleas'; attach other docUments such as arhoristreports.and site plans) .
Type of permi't:requested: .[)prune ofa MStreet Trce or DPnrlcnig 'Lot . .
Reason-foqiermit: M\i;, ' C>- 1\)t:.1iAlCl/ . ft f{4'J>'\!11sf) Iffi@ruft/l6Vr W9+ '
-1IJ.n.-- -r-;,:;-x . . r-;.. ,1::,1.1.1'" : t!>R.' !".&o';'",,- . s-"tvUf...PJ>..I.1.\/' IN.Sb<M.ll'> ",,;";.AI
. .
-We- 1I"f!AI,.",r::.r'l1' ,f. ''IIOI.S;MP.JU-r""c.
Applicant -. . Date; I:CJ.Ja4. / II ' . . .
*f'*"'*OFFIcE.USE ONLY ..
Receipt Number DYes DNo plans attached? DYes DNo
Pel'mit: DGRANTED PDENlED PermitNumber:_---'_.,-.,--__ _
Ciiy Arboristcommentl or conditions: .;.. ' _______ ___ -' __________ _
-.
.
iJIl1ltJ'l'411t,u11

,.,.. ...... Jt>II. ....
Authorized Signature: _.,--___ --:-------.Date: ____ __

Attaclunent 3
Chapter 12.56 TREES GENERALLY
12.56.010 Findings.
The city council finds and determines that the planting and preservation of trees enhances the
natural scenic beauty, increases life-giving oxygen, promotes ecological balance, provides
natural ventilation, air filtration, and temperature, erosion, and aconstical controls, increases
property values, improves the lifestyle of residents, and enhances the identify ofthe city. (Prior
code 45.01.001)
12.56.020 Definitions.
When used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall apply:
"City street tree" means and includes any tree growing on a public street right-of-way. City street
trees are maintained by the city.
"Director" means the director of the department of transportation or the director's designated
representative.
"Maintain" or "maintenance" means and includes trimming, pruning, spraying, injecting,
fertilizing, cabling, treating for disease or injury, and any other similar acts which promote the
life, growth, health or beauty of trees, excepting only watering, unless specifically so stated.
"Maintenance easement" means a strip of land parallel to a public street right-of-way and
adjacent thereto, which is six and one-half feet wide, measured from the front property line, (and
the side property line if a comer lot), except that a maintenance easement shall not be deemed to
exist on any parcel where the adjacent public street right-of-way provides space for a city street
tree.
"Maintenance easement private street tree" means and includes any tree growing within a
maintenance easement. No parcel contains more than one maintenance easement private street
tree per forty (40) feet of street frontage. If there is more than one tree in the maintenance
easement per forty (40) feet of street frontage, only the one closest to the street is a maintenance
easement private street tree, and the other(s) are private trees.
"Person" means and includes any individual , partnership, corporation or other private or public
entity, including but not limited to the property owner, a tenant, a licensed or unlicensed provider
of tree services retained by the property owner or tenant, or a licensed or unlicensed provider of
tree services acting without the consent of the property owner or tenant. "Planting list" is the list
of trees which is approved by the director for planting as street trees.
"Private tree" means and includes any tree on private property outside of the maintenance
easement. The owner of the parcel is responsible for maintenance of private trees.
"Propelty owner" means and includes the person listed as the owner of the propelty on the then
current assessor's roll.
"Public tree" means and includes any tree on public propeliy, excepting trees growing on a
public street right-of-way.
"Public utility" means and includes every pipeline corporation, gas corporation, electrical
corporation, telephone corporation, telegraph corporation, water corporation, sewer system, and
heat corporation, where the service is performed for or the commodity delivered to the public or
any portion thereof.
"Street tree" means and includes both city street trees and maintenance easement private street
trees. (Ord. 2008-031 1; Ord. 2004-040 5; Ord. 2004-006 1; prior code 45.01.002)
Attachment 3
12.56.030 Planting list-Tree planting.
A. The director shall promulgate a planting list. Such list shall consist of shade and ornamental
trees suitable for areas adjacent to sidewalks, streets, utility lines, etc. All new and replacement
city street tree plantings shall be confined to trees listed on the then current planting list.
B. The director shall provide for the planting of maintenance easement private street trees within
the maintenance easement of any new subdivision in conformity with Sections 16.40.170 and
16.48.110 of this code.
C. A maintenance easement, as defined in Section 12.56.020 ofthis chapter, shall be established
for any new development which is not subject to Section 16.40.170 of this code. The director
shall provide for the planting of maintenance easement private street trees within the
maintenance easement of the development. (Prior code 45.01.003)
12.56.040 Inspection, maintenance, removal and replacement.
The director may provide the following tree-related services:
A. The removal of street trees or limbs therefrom, which are a hazard to public safety, or a public
nuisance; provided however, that the director shall not cause the removal of any tree other than a
city street tree without giving thirty (30) days written notice to the property owner on whose
property the tree is located, except in the case of an emergency requiring immediate action. If the
owner objects to said tree's removal , the owner may, within saidthiliy (30) days, file objection
in writing with the director, and shall thereafter be given an opportunity to be heard in suppoli of
the objection. If such objection is not sustained, the removal may then occur, but only by written
order of the director, and only following expiration of the period for appeal pursuant to Section
12.56.120 of this chapter, or upon denial of such appeal.
B. The inspection, maintenance, removal, and replacement of city street trees.
C. The inspection, maintenance, removal, and replacement of maintenance easement private
street trees.
D. If there is more than one street tree in the maintenallce easement on a lot or parcel ofland
adjacent to a structure, it is the policy of the city to maintain only the city street tree, or if there is
no city street tree on that parcel , the street tree closest to the street. No maintenance service shall
be provided to any tree standing on private property beyond the maintenance easement or
standing in such a position that the use of mechanized equipment is impeded, or where fences
and landscaping beneath tbe tree might be damaged by the work; provided however, an
exception to this policy may be made if the condition of the tree presents a hazard to public
safety or if such service is necessary to control insects or diseases which tlu'eaten the health of a
significant number of street trees.
In order to perform the services listed in this section, the director shall have authority to enter
upon any part of the maintenance easement, and where necessary the properties adjacent thereto.
(Prior code 45.01.004)
12.56.050 Duties of property owner/tenant and public utilities.
A. It shall be the duty and responsibility of all property owners/tenants to maintain the grounds
of maintenance easements on the owner' s/tenants' property, and any unpaved portion ofthe
adjacent public street right-of-way where space is provided for a city street tree or other
plantings, regardless of whether such property is developed. This maintenance shall include
watering as needed and keeping such easements and unpaved areas free from weeds or any
obstructions contrary to public safety. Propeliy owners shall be responsible for watering mature
Attachment 3
city street trees whenever landscaping of the property is changed in such a manner as to deprive
the tree of its normal source of water. Such watering shall be continued during dry weather until
the city street tree becomes acclimated to the new environment, but need not exceed three years.
All watering requirements shall be waived to the extent inconsistent with governmental
restrictions on water use.
B. It shall be the duty and responsibility of every person owning or occupying any real property
within the city, at his or her own expense, to keep all trees on that property, including trees
located in an easement dedicated to the public, trimmed in such a manner that there is a clearance
of at least fourteen (14) feet above any street or alley, and a clearance of at least eight feet over
any sidewalk. It shall also be the duty and responsibility of every person owning or occupying
any real property within the city, at his or her own expense, to keep all trees on that property
trimmed in such a manner that they do not obstruct the view of any traffic sign or device for
vehicle traffic in the direction controlled by that traffic sign or device.
C. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit the duty or right of a property owner to
remove or perform maintenance at the properiy owner's own expense on any tree other than a
city street tree.
D. Whenever the director determines that removal of a private tree, or limbs therefrom, is
necessary to eliminate a hazard to public safety or a public nuisance, the director may issue a
written notice to the property owner specifying the work to be done.
E. If, in the opinion of the director, any maintenance easement private street tree or private tree is
in such a condition as to be imminently hazardous to public safety, the director may arrange to
have accomplished such work as is necessary to eliminate the imminent hazard.
F. Nothing contained in this section authorizes any person to remove, trim, prune, cut or
otherwise perform any maintenance on any city street tree without first obtaining a permit as
required by Section 12.56 .. 060 of this chapter.
G. It shall be the duty and responsibility of any public utility installing or maintaining any
overhead wires or underground pipes or conduits in the vicinity of a public street right-of-way or
maintenance easement, to obtain permission from the director before performing any
maintenance on said wires, pipes, or conduits, which would cause injury to city street trees or
maintenance easement private street trees. Said public utility shall in no way injure, cut roots,
deface, pnme, or scar any city street tree or maintenance easement private street tree until their
plans and procedures have been approved by the director. (Prior code 45.01.005)
12.56.060 Protection of trees.
A. No person shall remove, trim, prune, cut or otherwise perform any maintenance on any city
street tree without first obtaining a permit from the director pursuant to Section 12.56.070 of this
chapter.
B. No person shall interfere or cause any person to interfere with any tree related work being
done pursuant to this chapter by any employee of the city or any person or firm doing work for
the city.
C. No person shall injure or destroy any city sheet tree by any means, including but not limited
to the following:
1. Constructing a concrete, asphalt, brick or gravel sidewalk, or otherwise filling up the ground
area around any tree so as to shut off air, light or water from its roots, unless ordered or
authorized to do so by the city.
Attachment 3
2. Piling building material , equipment or other substance around any tree so as to injure the tree.
3. Pouring any deleterious matter on or around any tree or on the surrounding ground, lawn or
sidewalk.
4. Posting any sign, poster, notice, or similar device on any tree, tree stake or guard, or by
fastening any guy wire, cable, rope, nails, screws, or other device to any tree, tree stake or guard
for any purpose other than supporting the tree.
5. Causing any fire or burning near or around any tree.
6. Cutting roots with a diameter of two inches or greater for sidewalk repair or any other
purpose; provided, however, that roots with a diameter of two inches or greater may be cut if
authorized in advance by the director.
D. The director of public works and the planning director shall notifY the director of any
applications for new subdivisions, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street light or driveway installations, or
other proposed improvements which might require the removal of or cause injury to, any city
street tree, or interfere with the fulfillment of the maintenance easement private street tree
plantings. (Prior code 45.01.006)
12.56.070 Maintenance and removal permits.
A. The director shall issue pelmits to perfonn maintenance on or to remove city street trees, only
if the following conditions are met:
I. The applicant has established, to the director' s satisfaction, that there is need for the proposed
work on the tree; and
2. The applicant has established, to the director' s satisfaction, that the persons who are to
perfonn the work are qualified to do so; and
3. The director, in his or her sole discretion, has detennined that any potential detriment to the
city street tree population entailed by the proposed work, is justified in the individual case. In
making this determination, the director shall consider factors such as the probability that the
proposed work will destroy or seriously injure the tree, the tree's health, the desirability of that
species as a street tree, whether the tree's condition and size threaten serious damage to property,
the condition and number of other city street trees in the vicinity, whether there are other less
onerous means of accomplishing the applicant's goals, and other related criteria.
B. All work perfOlmed on city street trees pursuant to a permit issued by the director under this
section shall be done within a sixty (60) day period from the issuance of said permit, or within
such longer period as the director shall specify.
C. The director shall condition any pennit granted pursuant to this section for the removal of a
city street tree, on the permittee removing, and where the director determines it to be appropriate,
replacing the tree. In such case, the full cost of removal and replacement shall be borne by the
-permittee and such service shall not be provided by the city.
D. The director may condition any pennit granted pursuant to this section on any conditions as
the director detennines to be necessary.
E. The provisions of Section 12.56.110 of this chapter shall be complied with whenever an
applicant seeks a permit to remove or trim a city street tree to facilitate moving any building or
other structure. (Prior code 45.01.007)
12.56.080 Removal work.
Where the director has granted a permit to remove a city street tree, removal work shall include
removal of the tree stump and nearby roots to a depth of eighteen (18) inches, and filling of the
Attachment 3
hole with clean topsoil. If no replacement tree is required by the director, then lawn,
groundcover, or paving to match the adjacent area shall be provided by the permittee. The
permittee shall also repair any damages to the street, curb or sidewalk caused by the tree's
removal. (Ord. 2004-006 2; prior code 45.01 .008)
12.56.090 Replacement trees.
Where the director has granted a permit to remove a city street tree, and conditioned said permit
on the pennittee replacing the tree, the permittee shall provide the replacement tree of a size and
species determined by the director, and plant said tree in the location specified by the director.
The minimum repl acement tree size shall be as follows:
A. If the city street tree being removed is six inches or larger in di ameter, measured four and
one-half feet above ground, then the permittee shall cause to be replanted a tree of at least
twenty-four (24) inch box size.
B. If the city street tree being removed is small er than six inches di ameter, measured four and
one-half feet above ground, then the replacement tree shall be a minimum of fifteen (1 5) gall on
can size. (Prior code 45. 01.009)
12.56.100 Dutch Elm disease.
In the event of di scovery of the Dutch Elm disease fungus, ceratocystus ulmi , infecting any tree
in the city, the regulations of Chapter 12.60 ofthis Title shall prevail over any conflicting
regul ation contained in this chapter. (Prior code 45. 01 .011)
12.56.110 House moving.
A. The di rector of public works shall consult with the director prior to issuing a pennit for
moving any building or other structure along any city street.
B. The director may require the person moving any structure to furnish a bond in an amount
sufficient to cover the anticipated damage or destruction of any city street trees or
maintenance easement private street trees, if the route over which the structure is to be
moved potentially entails damage to city street trees or maintenance easement private street
trees.
e. No person shall remove a city street tree to facilitate the moving of a house or other
structure, without first complying with the permit provisions of Section 12.56.070 of this
chapter. Simil arly, if a permit is issued and the tree removed, the person moving the structure
shall comply with all other provisions of Sections 12.56.070 through 12.56.090 of thi s chapter,
including stump and root removal, planting an appropriate replacement tree, and repairing any
damage to the street, Sidewalk, or curb which the tree' s removal entai ls.
D. In connection with the relocation of a li sted historic resource as defined in Chapter 17.134,
the director shall give greater consideration to the removal of street trees if there is no
alternative way to preserve the structure. Factors to be considered by the director include the
historical significance ofthe structure, whether it could be preserved in its present locat ion, the
condition, size, and species of the trees to be removed, and other related factors. (Ord. 2006-
065 9; prior code 45.01.012)
Attachment 3
12.56.120 Appeals.
A. Appeal to Parks and Recreation Commission. Any person who is denied a permit to remove
or maintain a city street tree pursuant to Section 12.56.070 or who objects to the removal of a
street tree pursuant to Section 12.56.040 shall be entitled to meet personally with the director
to review the permit application or the proposed work. Except as provided in subsection (B) of
this section, any person aggrieved by the director's decision may appeal such decision to the
parks and recreation commission by filing a written notice of appeal with the secretary of the
commission within ten (10) days of the date ofthe director's final decision. The notice shall
clearly specify the action or determination appealed from, and the reasons for which a hearing
is requested. The decision of the commission shall be final and shall not be subject to appeal,
but shall be reported to and shall be subject to call-up for consideration by the city council as
provided in Section 17.200.040.
B. Appeal to City Planning Commission.
1. If the subject of the director's decisinn under subsection (A) of this section, is a tree located
on property for which an application for a discretionary development entitlement under Title
16 or Title 17 ofthis code is then currently pending or has been approved and is not expired,
and the purpose of the proposed maintenance or removal is to facilitate development of the
property consistent with the pending application or approved entitlement, then any person
aggrieved by the director's decision may appeal such decision to the city planning commission
by filing a written notice of appeal with the secretary of the planning commission within ten
(10) days of the date of the director's final decision. The notice shall clearly specify the action or
determination appealed from, and the reasons for which a hearing is requested. The filing of
the notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the fee specified in the city fee and charge report.
The director shall determine whether the appeal shall be heard by the planning commission
under this subsection, and the director's decision on this issue shall be final and shall not be
subject to appeal.
2. Notice of the appeal hearing shall be given by posting and by mail pursuant to subsection
(C)(2)(d) of Section 17.200.010, except that the notice by mail required by subsection
(C)(2)(d)(ii)(C)of Section 17.200.010 shall be given to the owners of real property located within
five hundred (500) feet of the subject real property.
3. The decision of the city planning commission shall be final and shall not be subject to appeal,
but shall be reported to and shall be subject to call-up for consideration by the city council as
provided in Section 17.200.040.
4. Except as otherwise specified in this section, the hearing before, and the decision of, the city
planning commission on an appeal under this chapter shall be governed in all respects by
Chapter 17.200 of this code. (Ord. 2009-030 1; Ord. 2004-040 2; Ord. 2004-006 3; prior
code 45.01.013)
12.56.130 Liability.
Nothing in this chapter shall be deemed to impose any liability upon any member of the city
councilor the city, or any of its officers, agents, or employees, or to relieve the owner or
occupant of any private property from the duty to keep their private property, Sidewalks, and
Attachment 3
adjacent public street right-of-way planting area in a safe condition and so as not to be
hazardous to public use. (Prior code 45.01.014)
12.56.140 Registration of persons maintaining street trees.
Nothing contained herein exempts any registrant from obtaining required permits for
maintenance or removal of street trees. (Prior code 45.01.016)
12.56.150 Suspension and reinstatement.
In the event that the director determines that any registrant has performed substandard
maintenance work on one or more street trees, the director shall issue an order suspending the
registrant's privilege to maintain street trees. The privilege shall be reinstated when the
registrant provides evidence, through further education or training, or certification by a
recognized national organization, that the registrant can perform tree maintenance work in
accordance with acceptable industry standards. Any registrant who contests suspension of his
or her or its privilege to maintain street trees shall be entitled to meet personally with the
director to review the suspension. The registrant may appeal the director's decision to the
parks and recreation commission by filing a written notice of appeal with the secretary of the
commission within ten (10) days of the date ofthe director's final decision. The notice shall
clearly specify the determination appealed from and the reasons for which a hearing is
requested. The decision of the commission shall be final. (Ord. 2004-040 3; prior code
45.01.017)
12.56.160 Solar Shade Control Act.
The city is exempt from the provisions of the Solar Shade Control Act, Chapter 12 (commencing
with Section 25980) of Division 15 of the Public Resources Code. (Prior code 45.03.200
)
12.56.170 Violation-Penalty.
Aoy person violating any provision of this chapter is guilty of an infraction. (Prior code
45.01.015)
AOII'd .a.-.N.
. ,
,
. .
!I

I !
,

I

,

,
, g'
I i !
.li
:' 4 .1
u 1;1/

,
, '
' I!!
I
hi! ,
"

on
AGIIV.d.-.a.
+
I
1---'
1
I
" I
1

,_ I.n
,
I
,
! I
,
I
,
I
,
I
,
I,
! i
Attachment 5
EAST ELEVATION I - 1'.0" ... ,-r--
EASTElEVATION.OVERAu.smEETSCAPE 11" . 20' r.
CHONG I
'. 1
PROPERTI ES
CADA Housing
1'thSt &QSt
s.c,.memo, Cclfomla
Schematic Design
...... ,
Pm. nut/on East

$trMt$upe
Attachment 6
Attachment 7

I ' ~ ,
., ,
I
/I
'"
" 1
. ,
. ,

00
~
j
., .
s .
,
~ J
,
I
I

,
I
I
Attachment 9
-
.J
- ---
Nj.STOST
, I ',-
o
DO'
Q
a
d
Attachment 10
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Thanks Paul,
Nathan Jamb;eD
~
Joe Benassinj; Sari My'] pierking
Re: January 10,2012 public records act request regarding changes in UFS/Policies for fX)Sting of public trees
for removal
Saturday, January 21, 2012 8:13:15 AM
I plan on getting in touch next week to further discuss this request.
As far as the block of trees posted on 0 street near 16th, I've heard from a number
of residents that they cannot access the area to see the signs posted on the trees.
If the area is closed off, perhaps notice can be provided in another more visible
way?
I haven't received the permit/reports for those trees and in the absence of the
information please consider this to be a formal appeal of the decision of the
director's decision to grant a permit to remove the trees/ or decision of the director
to remove the trees at his discretion.
Thanks and hope you enjoy the rest of the weekend.
Nathan
May 10, 2012
Meeting Minutes Agenda Item 4
Call to Order - 7:05 p.m.
City of Sacramento
AGENDA
April 5, 2012
Historic City Hall Meeting Room .
915/ Street
A regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order by Chair
Rewers at 7:05 p.m. All commissioners were present except Commissioner Hansen.
Public Comments- Matters Not on the Agenda
1. None
Public Hearings
2: None
Special Oral Presentation
3. Recognition of Cindy Cooke for Service on the Parks and Recreation Commission
and Parks and Recreation Citizen's Advisory Committee
Commissioners and staff recognized and thanked Vice Chair Cooke for 20 years of
service on the Parks and Recreation Commission and formerly on the Parks and
Recreation Citizens Advisory Committee.
As an administrative item, Deputy City Clerk Stephanie Mizuno gave Commissioners an
overview of process changes in filing required Confli ct of Interest forms.
Consent Calendar
4. Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Approve Commission minutes for March 1,2012
Action: Moved, seconded and carried to approve as mail ed. (Guadiana/Harris: Ayes:
Beaver, Harris, Rewers, Tamayo, Smith, Mercado, Guadiana; Abstain: O'Toole;
Absent: Hansen, Heitstuman)
Discussion/Action Reports
Parks & Recreation Commission - April 5, 2012 Minutes
Discussion/Action reports include oral presentations including those recommending review and
comment
5. Park Site CC1 Remedial Action Implementation Plan and Master Plan
Location: Southwest Corner of Intersection of 19
th
& Q Streets, Counci l District 4
Recommendation: Staff recommends support of the Park Site CC1 Master Plan
Contact: Mary de Beauvieres, Principal Planner, 808-8722; J.P. Tindell , Park Planning
The draft plans were reviewed. Commissioners and staff discussed site cleaning and
excavation plans, park safety review and site li nes, li ghting, seating, public artwork,
access to a future community garden and security for the garden area.
Action: Moved, seconded and carried to support the proposed Park Site CC1 Master
Plan and request staff report back at the end of the remediation peri od to review next
phases and related financing plans. (O'Toole/Beaver: Ayes: Beaver, Harris, Rewers,
Heitstuman, Tamayo, Smith, Mercado, Guadiana, O'Toole; Absent: Hansen)
6. Special Event Ordinance and Fee Schedule
Location: Citywide
Contact: Teresa Jackson, Recreation Supervisor, 808-3818; Vincene Jones,
Neighborhood Services and Special Events Manager, 808-5072
Teresa Jackson reviewed the item. Commissioners and staff discussed definitions for
family gatherings, block parties, and events; fee rates and services covered by the rates
includi ng park safety; noise level limits, monitoring and enforcement practices.
Neighbors of Southside Park spoke to impacts from the frequency, duration and noise
level of events in the park. Staff responded the City can modify or deny event permits,
as well as relocate proposed events to other locations. Commissioner Heitstuman,
Special Events Ordinance Review Committee Chair, spoke to efforts to make decibel
levels equitable within specific parks and surrounding streets and homes. Additional
individual sound assessments wi ll be conducted in City parks to establi sh decibel limits.
Action: Moved, seconded and carried to support the proposed special event
ordinance and fee schedule. (Heitstuman/Smith: Ayes: Beaver, Harris, Rewers,
Heitstuman, Smith, Mercado, O'Toole; Abstain: Tamayo and Guadiana; Absent:
Hansen)
7. Park Maintenance Parcel Tax Initiative - Oral Update
Location: Citywide
Contact: J.P. Tindell , Park Planning and Development Manager,808-1955
J.P. Tindell updated the Commission on the status of a public survey to ascertain
interest in funding park maintenance and other City services. Rosemarie Ruggieri
recommended a question be added ascertaining support for financing the City' s
undeveloped regional park system.
8. "Save Our Pools" Fundraising Campaign with Save Mart Stores - Oral Update
Jim Combs updated the Commissioners on the status of the fundraising campaign to
open at least six swimming pools this summer. The Mayor and Counci lmembers are
very involved in the campaign, and Commissioner Mercado has been instrumental in
securing funds.
9. Hand Tool Trailer for Park Maintenance Volunteers - Ad Hoc Committee Oral
Report
Location: Citywide
Commissioner Harris spoke to equipment needs and fund raising efforts to date.
Commissioners offered suggestions for the ad hoc committee to pursue.
10. Nominate and Elect a Vice Chairperson of the Parks and Recreation Commission
Recommendation: Nominate and Elect a Vice Chairperson
Action: Commissioner Harris was nominated and elected to serve as the Vice
Chairperson. (Nominated by Beaver. Ayes: Beaver, Harris, Rewers, Heitstuman,
Smith, Mercado, O'Toole, Tamayo, Guadiana; Absent: Hansen)
11. Director Report (Oral): Review Highlights of March and April 2012
Location: Citywide
Director Combs highlighted recent grant awards, funding for Land Park, and a
maintenance and programming agreement for the McKinley Park Rose Garden.
Questions, Ideas, and Announcements of Commission Members
Commissioners welcomed Dave O'Toole, representing Council District 4, who replaces
Commissioner Cooke.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m.
Approved by:
Jonathan Rewers, Chair
Respectfully submitted:
~ ~ . 1J- CVLr:)-> _____
Department of Parks and Recreation
DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS AND RECREATION
Park Planning & Development
Services
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
CALIFORNIA
April 30, 2012
Parks and Recreation Conunission
Honorable Members in Session:
May 10,2012
Agenda Item 5
SUBJECT: Naming of Park Sites in the Township 9 Development Project
91 5 1 STREET
511> Floor
SACRAMENTO, CA
95814
PH 9 16-808-5200
FAX 916-808-8266
LOCATION AND COUNCIL DISTRICT: 819 North 7'h Street, Planning Area I , Council
District 3
RECOMMENDATION: SuppOli staff recommendation to name all parks within the
Township 9 Development Project as outlined in this report.
CONTACT PERSON: Mary de Beauvieres, Principal Plmmer, 808-8722;
1. P. Tindell, Park Planning & Development Manager, 808-1955
FOR COMMISSION MEETING: May 10, 2012
SUMMARY: Staff is seeking suppOli to name all pm'k sites to be developed within the Township 9
Development Project as outlined in tllis report. The pm'k names were provided by the project
proponent and are either in reference to the area's previous use as an lli storic cannery or utili ze street
names. The recommended names are consistent with the principles set forth in the City'S Facility
Naming Policy, approved by City Council Resolution 2008- 112 on February 26, 2008.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Townsllip 9 is a planned mixed use community on a 65-acre
site adjoining the south side of the American River Parkway in the City' s River District - see
Attacrunent 1. On August 2, 2007, the City's Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed and
commented on the project. On August 28, 2007, City Council certified an environmental impact
repOli (Resolution 2007-641) for the project and approved the entitlements (Resolution 2007-644) to
Naming of Township 9 Park Sites
May 10, 2012
Page 2
develop Township 9 with 2,350 multifamily residential units, 986,628 square feet of commercial
retail and office space, and a series of small urban parks along with improved physical and visual
access to the American River Parkway.
The Master Plan for Township 9 Parks (excepting the paseos which will be designed in conjwlction
with the development within the same block) was reviewed and suppOlied by the Parks and
Recreation Corrunission on July 1,2010. The Parks Master Plan was approved by City Council on
August 10, 20 I 0; however, names for the parks had not yet been determined at that time. The
project proponent is now proposing names for all of the parks within the Township 9 development.
Many of the names are in reference to the area's historical use as a cannery; the remaining names are
derived from the sun'owlding streets. The following table shows the park's name and size; a map
showing each park's location within the proposed development is Attachment 2.
Park Name Size
7th Street Promenade 1.00 acres
Township 9 Park 5.40 acres
Victory Park 0.81 acres
Victory Promenade 0.5 acres
Bercut - Richards Plaza 0.32 acres
Camlery Plaza 0.19 acres
Persimmon Paseo 0.18 acres
PeachPaseo 0.48 acres
Pear Paseo 0.41 acres
The first parks to be developed will be the 1.0 acre 7
th
Street Promenade and the 5.4 acre
Township 9 Park adjacent to the American River. City staff is currently preparing an Agreement
for Design and Construction of Park Improvements for the 7th Street Promenade for City Council
consideration. Park development is anticipated to be underway later this year. A construction
schedule for Township 9 Park has not yet been determined.
The Township 9 project received significant funding from the State Depmiment of Housing and
Commwlity Development (Proposition 1 C). The funding has enabled the Developer to make
infi'astructure improvements and construct a Regional Transit station on Richards Boulevard.
The grant also requires the development of affordable housing units. The two parks will be
constructed early in the development process so that they will be available for the new residents
May 10,2012
Page 3
of the affordable housing complex, once it is complete.
City Council consideration ofthe Township 9 park names is scheduled for May 29, 2012.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: There are no financial considerations associated with
naming the parks in the proposed development.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This repOlt concerns administrative
activities that will not have a significant effect on the environment and does not constitute a
"project" as defined by the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 Cal. Code Reg. 15000 et seq.)
Sections 15061(b)(3); 15378(b)(2).
Sustainability Considerations: Not applicable.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: Naming the parks within the Township 9 development is
consistent with the City of Sacramento Facility Naming Policy (Resolution 2008- 112).
Presenting proposed park names to the Parks and Recreation Commission for support is pad of
this policy's procedures.
Providing parks and recreation facilities is consistent with the City's strategic plan to achieve
sustainability and liveability and to expand economic development tluoughout the City.
CONSISTENCY WITH GOALS OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO GREENPRINT:
Not applicable.
ESBD CONSIDERATIONS: Not applicable.
Recommendation Approved:
......
a , ~ '
J.P. TINDELL, M.S.
Park Planning and Development Manager
Attachment 1 - Township 9 Development Project Location Map
Attachment 2 - Township 9 Park Names
Parks and Recreation Commi ssion
May 10,2012
Page 4
Vicinity Map
Township 9
Attachment 1
o 250 9)0 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
_ I Feet
N
\ \ ~ y - I '
S
May 10,2012
Page 5
Attachment 2
Township 9 Development Project: Proposed Park Names
.,..-
Township 9 Parl(
LOT 18
_ _ _ _ (5.4 acres)
- - - - - - - = ]
LOT 3
Victory Promenade
(0.5 acre)
LOT 6
Victory Promenade
Victory Park --;-1-----../
(0.81 acre) I
I
I
I
I-
I (I)
: LOT LOT LOT LOT
Peach Paseo :'0 7A 7C 8A 8C
(0.48 acre) -+-' -I---+H---h. "'---'LL---'
PearPaseo
(0.41 acre)
LOT LOT
16A 16C
LOT LOT
15A 15C
LOT
l OB
r--,----., I
I I
LOr I LOT
ll A .... . )
.---rrr,4-; I
I
LOT LOT
12A 12C
.....
,
LOT 1A
LOT 1B
7th S!t:eet Promenade
(1 .0 acre)
: i
I :
I . I I
I I r I
1 : I:
i '- -----1 I
I I
i Cannery Plaza : :
y (0.19 acre) ::
I I I
I I I
I I I
I
! -
I
I
I
I
\
Persimmon Paseo
(0. 19 acre)
Bercut Richards Plaza
"'''=1 . J = t
Ricl"lclrc!s Blvd.
DEPARTMENT OF
Park Planning & Development
Services
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
CALIFORNIA
April 30, 2012
Honorable Members in Session:
SUBJECT: The Great California Delta Trail
May 10, 2012
Agenda Item 6
91 51 STREET
SIb Fl oor
SACRAMENTO, CA
95814
PH 916808-5200
FAX 916-808-8266
LOCATION AND COUNCIL DISTRICT: Along eastern bank of the Sacramento River
between Tiscornia Park and southern tip of the City;
Planning Areas I and 4, Council Districts 4 and 7
RECOMMENDATION: Support staff recommendation to designate as the Great California
Delta Trail, the existing Sacramento River Parkway alignment
through the City of Sacramento.
CONTACT PERSON: Mary de Beauvieres, Principal Planner, 808-8722;
J. P. Tindell, Park Planning & Development Manager, 808-1955
FOR COMMISSION MEETING: May 10, 201 2
SUMMARY: Staff is seeking support to designate the existing segments of the Sacramento River
Parkway (see Attachment I) within the City of Sacramento as a portion of the Great California Delta
Trail (Delta Trail). When fully implemented, the Delta Trail wi ll be a part of one of the most
extensive trail networks in California, linking almost 1,000 miles of conti nuous trails from the San
Francisco Bay tlu'ough the Delta and Sacramento region. Once designated, the Delta Protection
Commi ssion (DPC) will fabricate and install signs to identify the Great California Delta Trail within
the City of Sacramento.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Delta Protection Act of 1992 (Act) establ ished the
Delta Protection Commission, a State entity formed to plan for and guide the conservation and
Great CA Delta Trail
May 10, 2012
Page 2
enhancement of the natural resources of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, while sustaining
agriculture and meeting increased recreational demand. The principal jurisdiction of the Delta
Protection Commission is an area identified as the ' Primary Zone' . The Primary Zone is shown.
on Attachment 2; it covers about 500,000 acres of waterways, levees and fanned lands extending
over portions of five counties: Solano, Yolo, Sacramento, San Joaquin and Contra Costa.
The Delta Protection Act also recognizes a Secondary Zone within the greater Delta region. It is
also shown on Attachment 2. The Secondary Zone lies outside the Delta Protection
Commission' s area of authority. It is that portion of the greater Delta region that is developed
with incorporated cities or was planned for urban development at the time the Delta Protection
Act was adopted. The Secondary Zone includes the City of Sacramento along with parts of West
Sacramento, Stockton, and Antioch, among others.
In 2006, Senate Bill 1556 (Torlakson) passed which required the Delta Protection Commission to
establish a continuous recreation corridor, including bicycle and hiking trails, around the Delta. The
continuous regional recreational corridor is to be called the 'Great California Delta Trail ' . The bill
also requires "a plan to link the San Francisco Bay Trail system to planned Sacramento River trails
in Yolo and Sacramento Counties". Similar multi-jurisdictional trail networks may be found in the
region with the San Franci sco Bay Trail, the Bay Area Ridge Trail, or the Tahoe Rim Trail. All
three are multi-jurisdictional trail networks that benefit from regional trail planning, implementation
and the use of a cohesive standardized signage program for the benefit of the trail users.
City staff was recently contacted by DPC staff who requested that the City' S existing Sacramento
River Parkway also be designated as the Great California Delta Trail and that signage to educate the
public be placed along the existing segments of the trail. The existing developed segments of the
Sacramento River Parkway begin at Tiscornia Park at the confluence of the Sacramento and
American Rivers, extending southward along the eastern bank of the Sacramento River to the
southern tip of the City adjacent to the Freeport Regional Water Authority Water Intake Structure
near the intersection of Freeport Boulevard and Interstate 5. Gaps in the existing trail may be found
in the area north of Miller Park and in the Little Pocket and Pocket Areas of the City. At its meeting
on March 22, 2012, the DPC adopted the existing Sacramento River Parkway alignment as a
segment of the Delta Trail. Minutes from the meeting are Attachment 3.
Signage would consist of the placement of a standardi zed 12" x 18" metal sign containing the
Great California Delta Trail name and logo (see Attachment 4). The signs could be mounted on
existing posts recently installed along the Sacramento River Parkway to identify parkway
trailllead locations. Sign fabrication and installation will the responsibility of the DPC.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: There are no financial considerations associated with
designating the Sacramento River Parkway as a part of the Great California Delta Trail. The
May 10,2012
Page 3
fabrication and installation of signs to be placed on existing posts advertising the Sacramento
River Parkway. All costs will be borne by the Delta Protection COlmnission.
ENVIRONMENT AL CONSIDERATIONS:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The Environmental Services
Manager has reviewed this project and determined that it is exempt fi'om the provisions
of CEQ A pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 Cal. Code Reg. 15000 et seq.) section
15303 because it involves the addition of new signs to existing sign posts.
Sustainability Considerations: Not applicable.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: Providing parks and recreation facilities is consistent with the
City' s strategic plan to achieve sustainability and liveability and to expand economic
development throughout the City.
The designation oftbe Sacramento River Parkway as a segment of the Great California Delta
Trail is consistent with the plan to link the San Francisco Bay Trail system to Sacramento River
trails in Sacramento County. In addition, this project is consistent with policies contained in the
City of Sacramento' s Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2005-2010 to encourage recreational
development along the City' s rivers in the form of parkways (Policy Section 10) and promoting
and implementing connections to a regional trail system (Policy Sections 14 and 18).
CONSISTENCY WITH GOALS OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO GREENPRINT:
Not applicable.
ESBD CONSIDERATIONS: Not applicable.
ment Manager
Attachment 1 - Sacramento River Parkway Map
Attachment 2 - Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Attachment 3 - Minutes fi'om Delta Protection Commi ssion March 22, 2012 meeting
Attachment 4 - Great California Delta nail Sign Atiwork
Parks and Recreation Commi ssion
May 10, 2012
Page 4
City of Sacramento
Department of Parks and Recreation
Existing Seguu'nts of the SaCl'alllellto RiYer Parkway
Attachment 1
_ Sacramento River Po.kway
D City limIts
,
~ - - - - - - - - - = = = = = = = = = ~ ! ~ .

May 10, 2012
Page 5
YO LO CO UNT Y
SO LAN O O UNT Y
CON T RA COSTA
CO U NT Y
A L AMEJ1A-C
This map ancL'ot data has been PJepaled lor ;eneral informiltion purposes only.
Tho .... p wl .. .w .. t.. .. lI'fII'Md by fit Dt!:t CortmiloiOll ord clot; JIOt <.....rtno .. oIIclII ....
ot h noo doe< bwrdlJ'l w.., .. 1m"'" QI urt lard; 1IePt:.d Ql>f>o mop .. de>tlftd;. .... oIr ..
The ... p .... ,.. ... .. .... i1 'ut.j.dlO .. vision .. ft .... 4...: . h y
... _ ......... .... ... hdPnot.
Attachment 2
SACRAMENTO-
SAN JOAQUIN
DELTA
N
SC3le in milss l
- Della Pnmary Zone
Delli Seeomu'Y Zone
SACRAM ENT O
CO U NT Y
May 10, 2012
Page 6
Minutes of the Delta Protection Conllllission
March 22.2012
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
I. Call to Order/Flag Salute
Antioch Historical Society
1500 \V. 4th Street
Antioch, Calif011lia 94509
Chair Nottoli called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Attaclnnent 3
Present: Chair Nottoli; Co1ll1llissioners Eggman, Ferguson, Fenara, McGowan, Jvlitchoff (for
Piepho), Reagan, Scriven, and van Loben Sels.
Absent: Conllllissioners Bugsch, Cabaldon, Ruhstaller, and Schubert.
3. Public COlll1llenf
Satinder Malhti, East COlillty Liaison for Senator Mark DeSaulnier welcomed the Co1ll1llission to
the 7
dt
Senate District and thanked the C01l.llnission tor it advocacy in the Delta.
Darlene Dawson, Antioch noted that the Califomia Department of Boating and Waterways was
scheduled tor elimination. Ms. Dawson asked for the Co1ll1llission's help in saving the
department. Mike Machado responded that the Department was li sted in the Governor' s budget,
not tor elimination, but for reorganization under the Department of Parks and Recreation.
CONSENT AGENDA
4. Approve t-'linutes of January 26, 2012.
5. Receive Almual Report to the Govemor and the Legislatme on the Significant
Accomplislnnents of the Co1ll1llission for the Year 20 II .
6. Receive Update on the Draft National Heritage Area Feasibility Study, Including
COlllments Provided by the National Parks Service.
7. Receive Infollnational Update on the Delta Working landscapes Program Developed and
Administered by the Commission in Partnership with Ducks Unlimited and Hart
Restoration.
Vice Chair Reagan moved approval of the Consent Agenda: C01l.ll1llSsioner Mitchoff seconded.
The Consent Agenda was approved unanimously by voice vote.
REGULAR AGENDA
8. Receive Update on the Great Calitomia Delta Trail
May 10, 2012
Page 7
A. Receive Preselltatioll From East Bay Regiollal Park District Staff.
Jim Townsend, East Bay Regional Parks (EBRPD) repOlted that the Delta Trial was legislation
was proposed by then Senator Torlakson. :rvfr. Townsend said EBRPD was an early adopter of
the trail and has a llllmber to projects to implement the project. The trail will extend ti-om
Sacramento down to the Benicia Bridge. and Parks is currently in the process of developing
sections betweell Bay Point and Downtown Pittsburg: in addition to working with PG&E. Mr.
Townsend asked that the Co1lllllission adopt the EBRPD alig1lillent of the Delta Trail as the
fOllllal aligJ.lillent tluough Contra Costa County, to assist in the effOlts for EBRPD to secure
additional funding to complete other segments of the trail.
Co1lllllissioner Reagan asked how the Co1lllllission would move forwarded with isolated paths.
Nfl:. Machado responded that Commission staff is participating in Hwy 12 widening discussions.
and the Commission would be sending a letter to Caltrans to ask that bike lanes be incOl}lOratecl.
Co1lllllissioner Mitchoffmoved to adopt the Contra Costa County Trail alignment;
Co1lllllissioner Reagan seconded. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote.
B. Adopt Alignment of the Sacramento River Parhvay as a Segment of the Delta
Trail, and Delta Trail Logo Marker be Placed onto Existing Trails.
Alex Westhoff asked that the Co1lllllission adopt the Sacramento River Parkway aligJ.lillent. The
aligJ.lillent is a 13 mile stretch of trail from DiscovelY Park to the south end of the Pocket area.
Once adopted, Delta Trail signs would be installed.
Co1lllllissioner Nottoli moved approval of the adoption of the River Parhvay alignment;
Co1lllllissioner McGowan seconded. The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote.
C. Receive Update on the Blueprint Report Underway tor Sacramento, San Joaquin,
and Yolo Counties.
Commissioner vall Loben Sels asked that more time is spent on the remaining cOlUlties because
the lands are in the Primary Zone. He stated that representatives tiom the Farm Bureaus,
Stone lakes, and the Nature Conservancy should be brought into the planning discussions, alld he
said he does not believe lines in the ground aneVor maps should be shown.
Co1lllllissioner McGowan stated that Yolo COlUlty has conceptualized support on the trails
however, the county does not want to be a victim of evelyone' s ire.
Mark Wilson, Clarksburg stated that all public safety, reclamation districts and sheriff
departments should be noticed.
Campbell Ingram stated that the Delta Conselvancy is engaging in fellows to draft a paper for
enforcement in the Delta and the report should be related in lVlay 2012.
9. Receive Update on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Regional Flood Response Project.
ML Machado reported that because the application process has been pushed back. the
Co1lllllission would be filing an application in the fall.
May 10, 2012
Page 8
Commissioner Fen-am stated that the application sllOuld have a strong definition of the
Commission's role and timeline, as that would help with umding_
Commissioner van Loben Sels moved approval of the Flood Response Grant Application;
Conllllissioner Reagan seconded_ The motion was approved 8:0: 1_ (Conunissioner Fen-ara
abstained)_
10_ Receive Update on H.R. 1837.
NIL _Machado gave an update on the legislation moving through Congress. He said that many
groups have taken a stance against the legislation and asked that the Commission approve a
letter of opposition.
Commissioner Fen-am stated that the Resomces Agency sent a letter and he was glad to see the
Conunission taking action.
Commissioner Mitchoff asked that the letter be strongly worded.
David Travers, City of Oakley asked that the Commission speak with the Senate hierarchy_
Commissioner McGowan moved to write a letter of opposition to H.R. 1837; Commissioner
Reagan seconded. The motion was approved lUlanirnously by voice vote.
II. Discuss the Delta Stewardship Council's Delta Plan the Delta RefOlUl Act (SB X7-1), and
Possible Recon1lllendations 01' Actions By the Commission_
See agenda item 12.
12. . Receive RepOit From the Executive Director, Including InfOlUlational Updates On Delta
Stewardship Council and Delta Conservancy Activities and Other Delta Initiatives.
ML Machado repotted that the Commission completed the Economic Sustainability Plan and
submitted the proposal to the Delta Stewardship Council. He also reported that the 6'" (and last)
staff draft of the Delta plan should be released in April, and that staff is in discussions with San
Joaquin COlmty regarding an appeal on an easement for a solar wind fmUl.
Campbell Ingram, Delta Conservancy announced that the Conservancy was drafting its fu'st
strategic plan and is in talks with the Commission about coordination and overlapping roles. He
asked the Connnissioners for comments.
13. Receive InfOlUlational Presentation From Craig Wilson, Delta WatelUlaster, Appointed
By the State Water Board Pmsuant to the Provision ofSB X7-1.
Ml'. Wilson presented a slide presentation which included a background on the 2008 BaylDelta
Strategic Workplan, Delta Compliance and enforcement activities, investigations on in-igated
parcels other delta areas, and ulhlre efforts.
14. ConUllents and Announcements From Members of the Commission.
Commissioner EggmanrepOited that San Joaquin County has assembled a coalition and hired a
lobbyist to testify to the Delta Stewardship Council regarding the Delta Plan.
May 10, 2012
Page 9
Jessica Tucker-Mohl introduced Hanna Goldsmith as the legal intem working in the Attol1ley
General's Office.
Commissioner Ferguson 31l1lounced that the Asparagus Festival would take place April 27-29,
2012 in Stockton.
15. Adjoul1l
The meeting was adjoul1led at 7:40 p.m.
May 10,2012
Page 10
Attachment 4
THE GREAT CALIFORNIA
DELTA TRAIL
DELTA PROTECTION COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF
ADMINISTRATION
CITY OF SACRAMENTO
CALfFORNIA
May 2, 2012
May 10, 2012
Agenda Item 7
915 I STREET, Slh FLOOR
SACRAMENTO, CA
95814-2997
(916) 264-5200
FAX, 264-7643
SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Commission's Annual Budget Workshop
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Parks and Recreation Commission
review and discuss proposed operating and capital improvement budgets and take action if
desired_
CONTACT PERSONS: Lori Harder, Support Services Manager, 808-5172
J.P. Tindell, Park Planning and Development Manager, 808-1955
Juan Montanez, Maintenance Services Manager, Public Works
Department, 808-2254
FOR MEETING DATE OF: May 10, 2012
SUMMARY: Per City ordinance, the Parks and Recreation Commission is to conduct an annual
workshop to review the Department of Parks and Recreation' s proposed operating and capital
improvement budgets. Sections pertinent to Parks and Recreation were released on May 1, 2012
and are attached for review for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012. Complete proposed budget
documents are available on the City's website .
. The Parks and Recreation Commission is to provide recommendations and advice to the Council
and City departments on matters pertaining to trees. In FY 2008/09, the Urban Forest Services
Division was moved to another City department. Juan Montanez, Maintenance Services Manager,
will review the proposed Fiscal Year 2012/ 13 operating budget for Urban Forest Services.
Summary information is attached.
The City Council will conduct budget hearings throughout May and June. The Department of Parks
and Recreation' s proposed operating budget hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, May 15
th
The
proposed Capital Improvement Program is scheduled for Tuesday, May 29
th
Respectfully submitted,
~ ~ ~
FY2012/13 Proposed Budget
Parks and Recreation
To provide parks, programs and facilities and preserve open space to optimize the experience of living.
Sacramento's parks and recreation system provides the City of Sacramento's residents and visitors with
significant personal, social, environmental, and economic benefits. Directed by the City Council
through the approval of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan for 2005-2010 Technical Update,
program development and service delivery for the Department of Parks and Recreation are guided by
the following primary themes:
Promoting human growth and development by providing opportunities for engagement, safety,
relationships, and personal development.
Protecting the City's green infrastructure.
Optimizing the experience of living through people, parks, and programs.
The many unique physical assets and programs of the parks and recreation system form the green and
social "infrastructure" of a vital, sustainable city.
Department services are structured as follows:
'. . Park Operations Services
Park Planning and Development Services
Recreation Services
. Neighborhood Services and Special Events
Administrative Services
The department maintains over 200 parks and many miles of off-street bike trails. Slowed system
growth over the next few years continues to be under review given significant challenges in adequately
operating and maintaining new and expanded sites.
The department is responsible for over 30 aquatic facilities, community centers, and clubhouses with
numerous programs, rental uses, and leisure enrichment classes. Recreation staff strives to involve the
whole community in their programs and activities to enrich people's lives at all ages. Support from
external funding partners helps deliver services for children and youth development, older adults, and
the disabled. Core programming and services have, and continue to be, seriously affected by economic
challenges and a portion of these facilities are currently closed. A portion of the Community Center
system is now managed and operated by partner organizations. In the face of these challenges, the
community has stepped up volunteerism and individual contributions.
Department staff advocate for the importance of parks and recreation to the quality of life in
Sacramento; to the health and well-being of citizens, and to maximize services by partnering with
school districts, other government agencies, foundations, community-based organizations, the
business community, neighborhood groups, and volunteers.
FY2012/13 Proposed 8udget
PROPOSED BUDGET/STAFFING CHANGES
The Parks and Recreation Department's General Fund budget is proposed to be reduced by $553,312
including the elimination of 7.0 FTE, and the 4th R Latchkey Fund is proposed to be reduced by
$107,812 including the elimination of 3.05 FTE. Additional reductions of $358,594 and 8.85 FTE are
necessary due to reduced fee revenue from a significant drop in public participation and sponsorships
and the depletion of recreation revenue fund balance that helped extend services the past few years.
4th R Childcare
Reduction: 4th R Latchkey Fund savings of $107,812 and the elimination of 3.05 FTE.
Impact: The program will eliminate vacancies due to program downsizing and a drop in
enrollment.
Community Centers
Reduction: Net General Fund savings of $213,695 and the elimination of 3.0 FTE.
Impact: This reduction assumes continued transition of community centers to other
organizations. In the meantime, remaining Center staff will need to absorb job duties,
resulting in a decreased level of service and reduced Center hours.
Park Maintenance
Impact: Each position reduction leads to further erosion of the park system including more
weeds and garbage, and sports courts, picnic areas and walkways with more debris,
making the park system a bit less desirable to use.
Park and Recreation Planning and Development Services
Impact: Procurement, contracting, and inspection services will be reduced and consolidated,
requiring careful coordination to ensure park and recreation projects are adequately
addressed.
Additional Reductions: User Fees and Sponsorships
Impact : Reduced fee revenue and sponsorships as well as the depletion of recreation revenue
fund balance necessitates downsizing, primarily in Access Leisure.
FY2012/ 13 Proposed Budget
Department Budget Summary
Parks and R@creati on ChtllJue
Budget Sum m ;trv
FY2010 2011 FY2011 2012 FY2012''2013 MOle' (less l
Acl u.ll s AIIIII ovet ' Amendel l PI OI)Osetl PI 01)0 s ell Alll end ell
Budgeted Expenditures
Debt SeIVice 584,734 40,000 40,000 20,000 (20, 000)
Employee Sflvlce s 32, 173,757 26,493.744 26,7 48,651 26,523,' 27 (225,224)
labor/Supply Onset (3,959,261 ) (',195,698) (4,021 ,496) (4,068, 027) (46,531)
Other Se/v!ces and Supplies 9,470,003 6,836,253 8,5'12,655 9,259,764 747,1 09
Property 518,527 490,01 3 157,589 8'11,477 653,888
1M.)I: 38.787.759 31.J37,399 1,
Funding summ.ry by FundISpecl., District
4th R Lat chkey 6,19 1, 601 5,964,275 5,964,275 5,964,275
Fai, vl are Town (8,800)
Gene":l l Fund 15.304, 429 'II ,099, 186 12,066,970 '13,572,892 1,505,922
Hart Trust 80,01 3
Land Park 1 08,951 109,000 109,000 139,000 30,000
lighting and Landscape 3,1 27, 172 3,065,457 3,065,457 3,243,814 178,357
Oper ating Granl s 154
Other 100
Park Development 761,534 216,BOO 236,800 236,BOO
Special Oistl'ct s 970,547 1,131,615 1,822,586 1,872,586 50,000
Special Recre ation 4,380,154 2,859,780 2,954,1 13 2,299,075 (655,038)
START 7.871,904 5,218, 199 5,218,1 98 5,218,199
Tot ,)!: 38,787,759 29,66"' .312 3U17,399 32,5"'6,6-11 1; 109.2-12
Division Budget Summary

Ch,lIIJje
Divi sion Budgets
FY2010 ;2011 FY20 11 ..2012 FY2012,Z013 MOl e'llessl
Acll r;ll s AI)I)! ovell Amerltl el l PI OI)Osell PI 0l losed 'Al nelill el l
Adrnin lslr at we Services 1,370,272 1,1 60,B78 1,255,210 1,287, 434 32,224
Children & Community Re c 19,915,573 14,625, 237 14 ,650,237 14,020,438 . (629,799)
Park Maint enance Servic es 8,695,086 7,962,25 1 9,085,067 10,4 74,837 1,389,770
Park Plannmg and Development 24 1,772 (667,5BO) (647,5BO) (779, 399) (13I,BI 9)
Recreat ion Operati ons 2,794,4 13 2,341,613 2,350,B45 2,389,872 39,027
Teens & Community Re creallon 5,770,643 4, 241 ,914 4,743,620 5,153,459 409,839
Total: 38.787,759 29,66-1.3'12 lU17,199
FY2012113 Proposed Budget
Staffing Levels
P.uks and
Cll ,m!.Je
Divis.ion FTEs FY2010'2011 fY2011 12012 FY201 2,20'13 MOle'll ess\
Actu."ll s Ap,,, (lve,1 Amell liel l PIOIJOset l PIOI) Osell :Amelidetl
Admin lslr al flle Services 14.00 10.60 ' 0.60 10.60
Clllldren &. Community Ret 319.16 3'6.83 346.83 334.93 (11 .90)
Park r,Aa intenance Services 11.50 10 50 7050 6875 (1.75)
Park Pl an ning and Developrnen 13.00 12.00 12.00 10,00 (2.00)
Recreation Opera tions 48.68 37.68 37.68 3168
Teens e.. Cornrnunily Recre ation 1 14.89 101.02 93.34 90.09 iJ.2S)
Tot.)I: 6-17.83 578.63 570.95 552.05 (18.90)
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT- $9,177,918
START (Students Today Achieving Results for Tomorrow) $5,920,586
START has funding of $868,332 from the State of California Department of Education's After-School
Education and Safety (ASES) grant and $4,401,515 from individual school districts for this after-school
literacy and enrichment program that serves over 7,000 elementary school children in five school
districts. An additional $650,739 comes from the state allotment of federal AmeriCorps funds to
operate the "Get Fit Now!" nutrition and fitness portion of STARTs after-school curriculum.
Cover the Kids (CTK) $1,300,000
CTK is committed to ensuring that all children and families in Sacramento County have access to
affordable health coverage. CTK is funded by First 5 Sacramento, Kaiser Permanente, Dignity Health,
Sutter Health, UC Davis Health System, The California Endowment and federal funding through the
Medi-Cal Administrative Activities (MAA) Program.
4th R Program (before and after-school licensed childcare) $775,882
Annual renewable grant from the State of California Department.of Education subsidi zes childcare
enrollment fees for students in low-income families.
START Youth Snack Program $250,000
After-school snacks are distributed to thousands of elementary school children attending the START
program. Funding is provided through a federal grant administered by the State of California.
PASSage (SCUSD) and ASES (EGUSD) Programs $285,000
Grant funding from the State Department of Education provides after-school academic support,
enrichment activities, recreation and sports for students at middle schools in the Sacramento City
Unified School District and Elk Grove Unified School District. The school districts are the "grantees" and
contract with the Department of Parks and Recreation for the delivery of the program.
21st Century ASSETS High School After-School Program $250,000
Grant funding from the State Department of Education provides after school academic support,
enrichment activities, recreation and sports for students at up to five high schools in the Sacramento
City Unified School District. The school district is the grantee and contracts with the Department of
Parks and Recreation for the delivery of the program.
Workforce Investment Act/Youth Development Program $179,450
The Department of Parks and Recreation receives funds from SETA (Sacramento Employment and
Training Agency) for 48 in-school youth (ages 16 - 21 years old) each year. Activities are individualized
and may include paid work experience, tutoring, leadership development opportunities, adult
mentoring, comprehensive guidance and counseling and a minimum of one year of follow-up services.
"Stand Up to Falls" Program for Seniors $27,000
The Department of Parks and Recreation receives funds from the Area 4 Agency on Aging to conduct a
multi-faceted fall prevention program for older adults. Participants take part in half-day mini-courses
or eight-week educational sessi ons aimed at developing strategies to combat this growing public
health concern. In addition, weekly tai chi classes are provided at no cost at the Hart Senior Center and
Fall Prevention educational materials are distributed through community locations and directly
to seniors' homes throughout Sacramento.
Caregiver Respite Program $40,000
The Department of Parks and Recreation receives funds from the Area 4 Agency on Aging to provide
respite to family members who are caregivers for people with Alzheimer's Disease and other forms of
dementia. Family members attend Triple R, a social recreation program especially designed for seniors
with memory loss, while their family members go to work or take a much-needed break.
United States Olympic Committee (USOe), Paralympic Division - Sports Program $150,000
The Department of Parks and Recreation provides competitive adaptive sport programs or
opportunities for military veterans with disabilities to develop independence, confidence, and fitness
through participation in community sports, recreation and educational programs.
POLICE DEPARTMENT - $6,792,917
U.S. Department Of Justice - Office of Community Oriented PoliCing Services (COPS) $2,731,476
COPS Hiring Recovery Program Grant: This recovery program provides funding di rectly to law
enforcement agencies to create and preserve jobs, and to increase community poliCing capacity and
crime-prevention efforts. The Department is using this grant to rehire 35.0 HE police officers. It will
fund the entry level salaries and benefits for the officers for three years, and the positions added will
restore positions previously unfunded due to budget constraints. The grant requires a one year
retention period, at which time salary and benefit costs will shift to the City's General Fund.
U.S. Department of Justice - Office of Community Oriented Policing Services $2,716,671
COPS Hiring Program Grant : This program provides funding directly to law enforcement agencies to
create and preserve jobs, and to increase community poliCing capacity and crime-prevention efforts.
The Department is using this grant to rehire 25.0 HE police officers. It will fund the entry level salaries
and benefits for the officers for three years. The grant requires a one year retention period, at which
time salary and benefit costs will shift to the City's General Fund.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security-
FY2009 and FY2010 Urban Area Security Initiative $542,323
The purpose of the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) program is to increase and improve the
capabilities of emergency responders to prepare, prevent, and respond to terrorist threats or attacks.
The UASI program provides funding for regional planning, equipment, training, exercises, assessments,
and operational needs. This program involves the coordination and participation of the Sacramento
I CITY OF SACRAMENTO PARKS AND RECREATION PROGRAM OVERVIEW I
INTRODUCTION
The Department of Parks and Recreation's mission is to optimize the experience of living through
parks, programs, facilities, and the preservation of open space. Population and housing growth within
the City of Sacramento and the surrounding regional area has created increased demands and
opportunities for new parks and recreation facilities including urban plazas, trails, river parkways, and
passive open space areas. The City continues to improve park sustainability through renovated
irrigation systems, centralized water control systems, and water conserving plantings. The CIP for
parks and recreation refiects a significant decline in new development in the last five years, while still
addressing the Mayor and City Council's commitment to improving the quality of life for all residents
and visitors.
The CIP for parks and recreation projects consists of: Parks and Off-Street Bikeways. The FY2012/13
CIP budget for the Parks and Recreation Program includes funding for 11 projects and programs and
defunding of one project for a total of $2.3 million. These projects will increase the total CIP to
approximately 173 active projects and a total budget of $64 million.
Parks and recreation projects are funded primarily through special revenue sources: Park Development
Impact Fees (PI F); Quimby Act "In Lieu" Fees (where land dedication is not appropriate); Land Park
Fund; Federal Transportation Development Act (TDA) grants; state and federal grants; and private
foundation grants or gifts.
A challenge for the City is to match growth in
capital projects and facilities with ongoing
maintenance, operational , and programming needs.
Although the City has a sizable capital development
program for parks and recreation facilities, funds to
maintain, operate, and program new facilities and
amenities are insufficient. The Neighborhood Park
Maintenance Facilities District Funds provides only
60 percent of the funding for new neighborhood or
community parks and does not provide
maintenance funding for the remainder of a park's
acreage, or new regional park acreage. Some
community centers and clubhouses have been
leased to the nonprofit sector to mitigate their
closure. The City of Sacramento is challenged to
provide adequate staffing and supplies for the
remaining centers. Rea Park
The following plans, programs, and initiatives shape the City's improvement plan for its parks and
recreation capital facilities.
2012-2017 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN
In April 2009, the Mayor and City Council adopted a technical update of the comprehensive Parks and
Recreation Master Plan 2005-2010 for the City. This policy document has guided the City's parks and
recreation planning, development, programming, and services. The Parks and Recreation Master Plan
2005-2010 addresses all aspects of the department including: recreation and human services;
children's and teen programs; community centers; park planning and development; partnerships;
maintenance and tree planting; park operations and maintenance; marketing and special events;
sustainabilily and department-wide administrative services. Staff will continue to implement the plan's
policies and goals as funding is available.
CAPITAL GRANT AND RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
The Department of Parks and Recreation has made great strides over the past eleven years to secure
capital grant funds for the City's CIP for parks and recreation projects from external funding sources, to
establish public and private partnerships, and to engage in legislative activities to enhance regional and
neighborhood park and recreation amenities. State bond funds and competitive grant awards have
accounted for approximately two percent of the CIP. Staff is currently managing $1.5 million in bonds
and grants for a variety of acquisition,
development, and rehabilitation projects as
approved by the Mayor and City Council.
The Department's continued success in
securing competitive capital grants will
depend on the ability to effectively scope
projects and make them grant ready.
Funding for feasibility studies, scoping, and
other planning enhance the City's
competitiveness for capital grant funding II'"
and legislative earmarks. Burberry Park
PARKS AND RECREATION PROGRAMMING GUIDE
The 2008 Parks and Recreation Programming Guide (PRPG) is a planning document designed to
. identify, evaluate and prioritize unfunded park and recreation acquisitions, repairlrehabilitation,
development, community facility, and regional projects. The top projects are identified in each of the
City's Community Plan Areas as well as the top regional projects citywide. The PRPG process ensures
that the City Council and community are involved in the development of a comprehensive list of .
unfunded project needs and that those needs are prioritized based on City Council policy and
deficiencies identified.
Throughout each year, staff pursues opportunities to fund the top scoring "priority" projects through
available City funding. Staff also works to fund projects as opportunities arise that are ideal for specific
funding sources, such as a capital grant program. As projects are funded, they move into the CIP and
are removed from the PRPG. A review of the PRPG allows the community, Parks and Recreation
Commission, and City Council the opportunity to add new projects to be evaluated, scored, and
integrated into the next PRPG.
PARK DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
In the summer of 2004, the Mayor and City Council responded to the need for park and recreation
facilities for residents in growth areas by increasing the Park Development Impact Fee (PI F). The
previous fee level provided for only minimal park development amenities in new parks; it was
insufficient to provide for a range of recreational opportunities for Sacramento residents. The increased
fee allows development of a more complete array of park facilities including shade structures for picnic
areas and playgrounds, restrooms, innovative play features, sports courts, and sports field lighting. At
the Mayor and City Council's request, the Department updated the PIF Nexus Study to include
consideration of funding mechanisms for the acquisition and development of regional parks, trails and
open space, and funding for larger community facilities such as aquatic complexes and community
centers. Formal action by the City on the PI F Nexus Study recommendations is pending until better
economic times.
FUNDING CHALLENGES FOR RIVER PARKWAYS, REGIONAL PARKS, TRAILS, AND BIKEWAY
BRIDGE MAINTENANCE
Currently no dedicated funding source exists for acquiring, developing, or maintaining the City's
regional park and trail system, including river corridors and bikeway/pedestrian bridges. As identified in
the PRPG, there are significant needs citywide for regional park and trail acquisition, park development,
and rehabilitation. Regional facilities included in the PRPG such as sports complexes, artificial turf
sports fields, venues for sports tournaments, large public gathering places for festivals and special
events, and river trail enhancements improve the quality of life in the City, as well as provide significant
economic benefits. Maintaining and renovating high use regional facilities is a continuing challenge.
Staff will continue to seek funding for these facilities.
~ 2 e
J,
"
Martin Luther King, Jr. Park
PARK DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND PRODUCTION SCHEDULE
The park development process takes projects through a defined process, outlining how a park project
evolves from project concept to a developed park. Important aspects of the process include:
New project ideas come from a variety of sources including the community, staff, the Mayor,
City Councilmembers, outside agencies, and schools;
The PRPG is updated periodically to show progress on existing projects and provide
opportunities to include new projects;
A new project becomes a part of the approved CIP when it has a defined project scope,
adequate funding for that scope, a schedule, and meets the "readiness" checklist criteria as
outlined in the park development process;
Consideration may be given to special "opportunity" projects where new funding has been
identified for a previously unconsidered or under-funded project; and
Operations and maintenance resources need to be a primary consideration for project readiness
to ensure fiscal sustainability.
FY2012/13 PARKS AND RECREATION PROGRAM
Total Programming by Fund (in ODDs)
$2,321*
Federal Capital
Grants
$522
Quimby
$110
SNCIF
$200

Sales Tax - New
TDA
$286
Measure A
$1,500
*Nole: The Park Development Impact Fee (PIF) reduction of $297,088 is not reflected in this pie chart, but is reflected in the total
programming.
Transportation Development Act (Fund 2013): The TDA is used to account for receipts and
disbursements of money allocated pursuant to the State of California TDA, which dedicates a
percentage of the state's sales tax allocated to Sacramento County. The City has traditionally dedicated
these funds to off-street bikeway development. Implementation is coordinated with the City's
Department of Transportation. The total budget amount of the TDA programmed for FY2012/13 is
$285,955.
20122017 Capital Improvement Program
Transportation Development Act (Fund 2013)
Project # Title Five-Year Programming
12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
K15000000 Freeport Shores Bike/Pedestrian Trail 75,000 0 0 0 0
K15125000 Two Ri vers Trail Phase II 78,000 0 0 0 0
K19000100 Bike Trail Maintenance Program 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
K19000200
Bike Trail/Pedestrian Bridge Repair
103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000
Program
K19000300 Bike Trail Planning Program 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000
K19000400
TDA Federal/State Grants Match
955 153,955 153,955 153,955 153,955 .
Program
Total
$285,955 $285,955 $285,955 $285,955 $285,955
South Natomas Community Infrastructure Fund (Fund 2020): The South Natomas Community
Infrastructure Fund (SNCIF) was established in 1983 through development agreements for three
properties adjacent to Interstate 5: Metropolitan Center, Gateway Center, and Corporate Center. This
program established special fees paid by developers for construction of various capital improvements
to partially mitigate the impact of new commercial construction within the South Natomas area. The
total budget amount of the SNCIF programmed for parks or recreation in FY2012/13 is $200,000.
20122017 Capital Improvement Program
South Natomas Community Infrastructure Fund (Fund 2020)
12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
L19290000
Park Site SN2 Master Plan and Phase 1
200,000 0 0 0 0
Improvements
Total
$200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
New Measure A (Funds 2023, 2025, and 2026): The New Measure A program for a local one-half
cent transportation sales tax approved by Sacramento County voters became effective April 1, 2009,
The New Measure A has three funding components: 1) New Measure A Project Construction (Fund
2023) consisting of voter-approved projects (Intermodal Transportation Facility, Cosumnes Boulevard
Extension, and 1-5 Interchange, Richards Boulevard /1-5 Interchange, and Folsom Boulevard - Watt to
65
th
); 2) New Measure A Construction (Fund 2025) consisting of two programs: Traffic Control and
Safety, Streetscaping, and Pedestrian and Bike Facilities; and 3) New Measure A Maintenance (Fund
2026), The total budget amount programmed for parks or recreation in FY2012/13 is $1,500,000,
2012-2017 Capital Improvement Program
New Measure A (Funds 2023, 2025, and 2026)
12/13 13/14 14/ 15 15/16 16/17
K15105000 Guy West Bridge Rehabilitation
1,000,000 0 0 0 0
K15120000 Bikeway Program
500,000 375,000 375,000 375,000 375,000
Total
$1,500,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000
Quimby Act (Fund 2508): Title 16 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires developers to dedicate
land or pay a fee in lieu of land dedication to provide for community and neighborhood parks at a rate of
five acres per thousand residents, The majority of the City's parkland since its adoption of this
ordinance has come from land dedication, This fund is comprised of fees collected from developers in
lieu of land dedication for the park and recreation facilities as discussed above, The revenues must be
used "for the purpose of acquiring, developing new or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or
community park 'or recreation facilities to serve the subdivision," Programming of these funds must
occur in the Community Plan Area in which the in lieu fees are generated, The total budget amount of
the Quimby Act programmed for parks or recreation in FY2012/13 is $110,000,
Quimby Act (Fund 2508)
12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
L19100200
24" SI. Bypass Ph 2 Design and
50,000 0 0 0 0
Construction
L 19195200 Hagginwood Park Improvements Ph2 60,000 0 0 0 0
Total $110,000 $0 $0 $0 $0
Park Development Impact Fee (Fund 3204): The Mayor and City Council established the PIF in
August 1999; this fund is comprised of fees collected from builders of industrial, commercial, and
residential developments at the time a building permit is issued. The revenue must be used to benefit
the residents of the Community Plan Area in which the fee is collected. These funds are programmed in
accordance with this benefit requirement. The budget amount of the PIF programmed for parks or
recreation in FY2012/13 for new projects is $180,000 and for the defunding of the Hagginwood Park
Improvements (L 19195200) is ($447,088). The reduction of PIF is due to reconciliation of the PIF,
which resulted in a finding that funds were overstated for North Sacramento (Plan Area 8). This results
in a net budget of ($297,088).
Park Development Impact Fee (Fund 3204)
Project # Title Fi ve-Year Programming
12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
L19100200
24'" St. Bypass Ph 2 Design and
50,000 0 0 0 0
Construction
L19195200 Hagginwood Park Improvements Ph2 (447,088) 0 0 0 0
L19220000
Glenbrook Park and River Access and
100,000 0 0 0 0
Oki Park Improvements
Total
($297,088) $0 $0 $0 $0
Federal Capital Grants (Fund 3703): Capital grants account for various grants received from
developers, the state, the federal government, and other agencies, that are designated to be used for
specific projects or purposes. Each dollar spent must be accounted for and is audited to assure that the
monies were spent for the project intended. The total budget amount of Federal Grants programmed for
parks or recreation in FY2012/13 is $522,327.
Federal Capital Grants (Fund 3703)
12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17
K15000000 Freeport Shores Bike/Pedestrian Trail 522,327 0 0 0 0
Total
$522,327 $0 $0 $0 $0
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
MAINTENANCE/STREET SERVICES
URBAN FORESTRY
2012-2013 OPERATING BUDGET
-Urban Forestry operates as a part of the
Maintenance / Streets Services TIivision of
the Department of Transportation
-Employs a staff of 30 full time employees.
-Proposed Total Operating Budget of
$4,842,351.
-Employee Services $2,632,184.
- Services and Supplies $2,158,143.
-Funding Source: Lighting and
Landscaping (L&L).
Core Services
Forest Health
o Tree Planting and Replacement
o Young Tree Maintenance
o Integrated Pest Management
o Special Projects (Arbor Day, Holiday Trees, Home & Garden Show),
Wood Waste Management (wood chip recycling)
Forest Maintenance
o Inspections
o Mature Tree Pruning
o Tree Removal and Stump Grinding
o Emergency Response
continued
Arborist Services
[!] Technical Review of Development Projects
[!] Consultations
[!] Plant Problem Diagnosis
[!] Contract Supervision
[!] Permitting
[!] External partnership (Tree Foundation)
Administrative Support
[!] Customer Relations
[!] Maintenance of the work order management system
[!] Training, education
[!] Policy Development and Implementation
[!] Tree Hearings and Appeals
[!] Public Information

City Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda (May 10, 2012)

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

City Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda (May 10, 2012)

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Agenda

Вам также может понравиться