East Palo Alto Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan

EAST PALO ALTO

PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN FINAL DRAFT MARCH 24, 2023 City of

EAST PALO ALTO California

2

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO Melvin Gaines / City Manager Patrick Heisinger / Former Interim City Manager Humza Javed/ Public Works Director Azalea Renfield / Assistant to the City Manager Maurice Baker / Acting Community Services Manager Planning Commission Senior Advisory Committee

CONSULTANT TEAM WRT Prime Consultant / Planning / Urban Design / Engagement

SFEI Ecology + Public Health Technical Advisor

PROS Recreation Programing + Operations

ENVIROCOM COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIES Strategic Engagement Lead

NUESTRA CASA Local Community Engagement / Environmental Justice + Climate

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ............................................................ 03 Executive Summary.......................................................... 06 1.

Understanding East Palo Alto ....................................... 17 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5

East Palo Alto in Context The Role of Park Classifications Existing Parks System Assessment of City-Owned Facilities Overview of Future Planning Efforts

2. Community Priorities ....................................................... 81 2.1 Community Engagement Plan 2.2 Engagement At A Glance 2.3 Community Workshops 2.4 Focus Groups 2.5 Engaging Hard to Reach Populations 2.6 Pop-up Events 2.7 Survey and Online Feedback 2.8 Community Priorities

3. Needs Assessment ........................................................ 99 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5

4

General Plan Park Needs Existing Park Needs Community Priorities Recreational Trends Levels of Service

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

4. Recommendations & Implementation ......................... 117 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5

Improving our Parks Expanding our Parks Recreation in our Communities Capital Costs and Funding Opportunities Operations, Park Maintenance and Staffing Proposals

5. Design Guidelines ........................................................... 215 5.1 Site Planning 5.2 Public Safety 5.3 Trail Design 5.4 Shared Schoolyards 5.5 Privately Owned Public Open Spaces 5.6 Parks & Stormwater Management 5.7 Urban Landscape Ecology

Appendix A.1 Community Survey Summary

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AT THE EPA PRIMARY SCHOOL

6

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

A VISION FOR EAST PALO ALTO’S PARK SYSTEM The City of East Palo Alto (EPA) has compiled its first-ever Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Master Plan to guide its park improvements and growth to an equitable and resilient future ahead. Through robust engagement, the plan was developed to evaluate the strengths and areas for improvement of the existing parks, to prioritize the community’s parks and recreation needs, and to recommend best practices for future growth of parks in terms of capital improvements, recreational programming, funding, and operations and maintenance practices. The overall goal of the plan is to ensure that EPA residents can safely access parks and open space and that the plan is reflective of the community’s vision for the future.

Over the past year and a half, various groups including residents, coaches, recreation program leaders, school officials, students, community elders, regional parks managers, environmental justice advocates, and others participated in many parks planning conversations. These discussions emphasized the proud and abundant history of local leaders and organizations that have supported the community over the years. This tradition continues today across a range of parks and recreation organizations and program providers that serve youth and seniors, provide after-school academic support, distribute fresh food, advocate for environmental justice, and teach performing arts, among other initiatives. As the City plans for its future, we acknowledge the strength and resilience of our community. The strategies and recommendations that have emerged from the community engagement and parks and recreation needs assessments highlight the importance of continued partnerships and collaboration to provide the highest level of service to the community.

7

FIGURE ES-1:

EXISTING PARK ASSETS

8

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

UNDERSTANDING EPA

MEETING PARK NEEDS The needs assessment for EPA parks is based on the existing inventory, the unmet needs identified by the community, and the acreage and inventory needed to provide an effective parks system. The approach to meet EPA’s park needs has four parts: improved and expanded city parks, a shared use agreement with the Ravenswood Unified School District, new park opportunities in conjunction with private development, and long-term land acquisition strategies.

Today’s parks and recreation options in EPA are rooted in local neighborhoods across the city. While many parks are well-loved and well-used by some users, there is a growing sense that many people do not visit and may even avoid visiting their local parks. Some have pressing safety concerns, while others may be unfamiliar with existing offerings. There is a major deficit in park space overall in terms of public park acreage, and there is a perceived service gap between existing park amenities and citywide community needs. In order to fill some of these gaps in services, many of the existing park amenities, and all the local recreation programs are provided by private organizations and individuals. The Existing Park Assets diagram highlights the full range of both public and privately sponsored amenities provided across the city.

In recent years, and especially since the COVID pandemic, many community members have taken a renewed interest in parks. The City has undertaken many initiatives, including new summer activities, expanding senior program offerings, initiating individual park master plans, and spearheading this citywide roadmap for park improvements.

1

2

3

4

FIGURE ES-2: MEETING PARK NEEDS IN EAST PALO ALTO 9

COMMUNITY PRIORITIES Seven major community priorities for EPA parks emerged through the multilingual engagement process and are used as guiding principles to inform the recommendations throughout the plan.

1

Connect People to Parks

Ensure all EPA residents have safe access to parks and open space, and access to all facilities and programs.

2

Create Diverse & Inclusive Parks

Celebrate the unique history of people and place in EPA. Provide residents with parks that are reliable, free, and serviceable-for-all.

10

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

3

Promote Public Health & Sustainability

Establish and promote community health through parks and open space, reduce the impact of facilities on the environment, and encourage sustainable practices.

4

Celebrate The Bay

Reconnect the EPA community to the Bay by enhancing and improving safe and equitable access to all natural preserves and resources.

5

Activate East Palo Alto Parks

Provide programs and amenities that reflect the desires and needs of the community while improving safety and energizing parks.

6

Improve Park Operations

Maintain and improve park operations by expanding and diversifying staff resources.

7

Grow Programming & Partnerships

Create new partnerships and programming opportunities and strengthen existing relationships with local nonprofits and nongovernmental organizations.

11

RECOMMENDATIONS

DESIGN GUIDELINES

Recommendations developed in collaboration with community members provide guidance for City leaders and staff to define actions needed to achieve the community’s goals. Although the City today lacks the resources needed to implement all the recommendations identified in the plan right away, many of the goals are achievable through partnerships and long-term strategies.

Finally, in the Design Guidelines chapter, key design opportunities and challenges identified as priorities by the community are explored with guidance for planners and designers responsible for implementing successful parks in the City.

TOP PARKS MASTER PLAN OUTCOMES The plan includes analysis and recommendations addressing the comprehensive parks and recreation needs of the community. Community Priorities are well documented. City leaders can champion this plan because it:

1. Improves safety in existing parks 2. Connects the community to shared schoolyards 3. Reduces critical gaps in park acreage through private development 4. Complements much-needed housing without open space 5. Supports seniors with improved access to parks and programming 6. Provides design guidelines to ensure new parks meet community need 7. Promotes equitable access to parks, trails and open spaces 8. Enhances effectiveness of City services to residents

12

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

SHARED 2 CONNECT SCHOOLYARDS

NEW PARK 3 DEVELOP OPPORTUNITIES

EXISTING 1 IMPROVE CITY PARKS

FIGURE ES-3:

MASTER PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS

13

BUILDING EQUITY THROUGH ENGAGEMENT It was critical for our team to hear from as many people as possible while recommendations and strategies were being developed. Community members have the best local insight and creative ideas for the fit their parks and open spaces. The broad multi-lingual community engagement effort was an exciting opportunity to learn about the history of the park system in EPA and brainstorm future needs and solutions tailored to the growing needs of residents and families in the city.

ENGAGEMENT AT A GLANCE: 524 survey responses from individual households in English and Spanish 189 online comments and visions for the future of parks and recreation 4 Pop-up Events Over 15 focus group meetings with numerous groups and stakeholders 3 Community Workshops 2 City Council Meeting Presentations

14

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

ENGAGEMENT EVENTS AROUND EPA PARKS Pop-up events and Community Workshops

Community Priorities

15

JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK 16

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

UNDERSTANDING EAST PALO ALTO 1.1

East Palo Alto in Context

1.2 The Role of Park Classifications 1.3 Existing East Palo Alto Parks System 1.4 Parks Assessment of City-Owned Facilities 1.5 Overview of Future Planning Efforts

1

Understanding East Palo Alto

17

FIGURE 1-1:

REGIONAL PARKS SYSTEM

18

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

1.1 EAST PALO ALTO IN CONTEXT East Palo Alto lies along San Francisco Bay on the Peninsula. It is adjoined by the cities of Menlo Park, Palo Alto, and unincorporated San Mateo County. EPA is in the center of Silicon Valley, home to the world’s largest high-tech corporations and thousands of startup companies.

The inequity between EPA and its surroundings can be traced back to a history of racist housing policies leading to segregation and disinvestment. The City’s long time history as an unincorporated area hindered development, as the city missed out on infrastructure improvements and development capital for years.

Further, annexation of its land from Menlo Park and Palo Alto lowered the tax base, and created longterm difficulties in funding essential community open spaces.

Despite these historical challenges, the City of EPA, and its residents have risen above all obstacles and have built an active and engaged community. EPA’s residents care about their open spaces and share an aspiration to develop a Parks Master Plan that will improve public health, bring community equity in access to parks, improve the environment, and better prepare for climate change.

VIEW TOWARD SAN FRANCISCO BAY FROM COOLEY LANDING

Understanding East Palo Alto

19

FIGURE 1-2:

POPULATION DENSITY

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B01003

20 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

DIVERSE PEOPLE AND NEIGHBORHOODS

Hispanics/Latinx, African American’s, and Pacific Islanders making up more than half of the population and contributing to the remarkable diversity in the city.

Historically EPA has always been a diverse city. The land where East Palo Alto is today was originally home to Ohlone and Costanoan Indigenous communities and later to Spanish ranchers who used the land for agricultural purposes. During the period between industrialization and World War II, the city had large Italian and Japanese populations that contributed to EPA’s growing flower economy. The 1950’s saw a boom of middle-class Caucasian and AfricanAmerican residents looking for housing. As the city approached the new millennium, tremendous population growth occurred, primarily led by the Hispanic/Latinx community.

The city has a sizable young population, with over a quarter of residents under 18 and close to half between 18 and 44, making the need for parks and open space ever more important.

EPA is a dense community in relation to many of its neighbors: 11,880 people per square mile, in comparison to Palo Alto, which has a density of 2,871/square mile and Menlo Park with a density of 3,473/square mile. Given this high concentration of people and the number of large multi-generational households, the need for accessible park and open space are especially needed.

Today, according to 2019 American Community Census, EPA is an ethnically diverse city, with

RACE AND ETHNICITY

AGE

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B02001

Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B01001

White

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander

Under 18 Years Old

45 to 64 Years Old

Black or African American

Hispanic and Latino

18 to 44 Years Old

Over 65 Years Old

American Indian and Alaska Native Asian

Other Race Two or More Race

Understanding East Palo Alto

21

FIGURE 1-3:

MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME Source: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Table B19013

22 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

A RESILIENT COMMUNITY Given its history as an unincorporated community, the City of EPA primarily had relied on San Mateo County for many of its resources and support. After its incorporation in 1983, the City struggled to stay afloat financially as it faced revenue issues and funding shortages. The city’s history of poverty and inequality can be traced back to numerous housing and real estate policies that fostered the segregation of minority communities into EPA and concentrated poverty in one area of the region.

Explicitly discriminatory policies such as redlining made it hard for residents to get loans for homeownership or maintenance of existing properties.

Other actions such as blockbusting, where African American’s were introduced into previously white neighborhood to spark rapid white flight exacerbated segregation in EPA. The construction of the Bayshore Freeway (Highway 101) in 1962 further split communities apart by creating a physical barrier.

These cycles of disinvestment fostered by the policies mentioned above combined with the growing drug epidemic of the 1980’s led to historic problems of violence and crime in EPA. These are some of the reasons why we see dramatic disparities between the City of EPA and its neighbors, as Figure 1 demonstrates with median household income.

EPA has made tremendous strides over the last 30 years and continues to be a beacon of hope, progress, and resilience. The city has seen considerable crime reduction and major improvements have been made due to the strong City leadership and a plethora of organizations and faith-based groups working to improve the livelihood of EPA residents.

HIGHWAY 101 BIFURCATES THE EAST PALO ALTO COMMUNITY FROM ITS NEIGHBORS Source: Embarcadero Media file photo by Veronica Weber

Understanding East Palo Alto 23

FIGURE 1-4:

TREE CANOPY COVERAGE

Source: USDA 2018 Urban Canopy Data

24 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

TREE CANOPY AND COVERAGE Trees are an important part of the city’s infrastructure, benefiting the community by making the urban environment cleaner, cooler, more attractive, and healthier. Trees can reduce air pollution, which in turn can reduce rates of cardiovascular and pulmonary disease and asthma (McDonald et al. 2016; Ulmer et al. 2016). The urban forest can also cool the city and generate shade, improving human thermal comfort and reducing the risks of heat-related injury and death (McDonald et al. 2016; Eisenman et al. 2021; Graham et al. 2016). Trees improve neighborhood walkability and promote greater physical activity and active transportation, which has cascading benefits for health, including reduced rates of obesity and associated conditions (Ulmer et al. 2016; Eisenman et al. 2021). The urban forest has also been shown to significantly reduce stress, fatigue, confusion, anger, anxiety, and depression, and promote greater cognitive restoration and vitality (Elsadek et al. 2019; Wolf et al. 2020). Tree canopy cover between 25% and 50% has been shown to have the greatest level of stress reduction benefits (Jiang et al. 2014; An et al.

2004).

The City of East Palo Alto currently has about 13.5% tree canopy coverage, and is pursuing a goal of reaching 20% tree canopy cover by 2062 (Urban Forest Master Plan, pending adoption). The city’s parks currently have between 7% and 36% tree canopy cover, lower than the average 37% tree canopy cover found in neighboring Palo Alto’s parks. Martin Luther King Jr. Park has particularly low tree canopy cover at only 7%, which is partially explained by its location near the Baylands tidal marsh. Increasing tree canopy cover in this park could be achieved by restoring areas of native willow groves to create a transitional space between the marsh and the city, generating valuable wildlife habitat and environmental services for neighboring communities.

Acres

36%

7%

25% 25%

Jack Farrell Bell Street Park Park

Joel Davis Martin Park Luther King Jr. Park

TREE CANOPY COVER BY PARK

Source: SFEI, Urban Forest Master Plan

TREE CANOPY COVER BY NEIGHBORHOOD Source: SFEI, Urban Forest Master Plan

Understanding East Palo Alto 25

FIGURE 1-5:

URBAN HEAT

Source: SFEI. USGS Earth Explorer. Landsat 8 Provisional Surface Temperature. Landsat Analysis Ready Data.​

26 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

URBAN HEAT Extreme heat is a growing concern in cities due to increases in the number and frequency of heat waves with climate change, exacerbating the already warmer conditions found in urban areas compared to rural areas—a phenomenon known as the urban heat island effect. Even in regions with relatively cool climates, heat waves can be deadly for unprepared residents (Graham et al. 2016). In addition to the availability of technological and social solutions, such as access to air conditioning and cooling centers, the design of a city can help reduce the risk of extreme heat events for residents.

generating evaporative cooling. Even small parks can be significantly cooler than surrounding streets when they have enough tree canopy cover (Lin et al. 2017, Sodoudi et al. 2018). Furthermore, providing shade over playgrounds and parks can protect children from harmful heat and UV exposure (Olsen et al. 2019).

Because of the city’s low tree canopy cover, few parks, and high impervious cover, East Palo Alto residents have few natural escapes from extreme heat events.

As the average global climate warms in the coming decades, the region is expected to experience more frequent high-heat days, which greatly increases the risk of heat-related illness and worsening pre-existing conditions for vulnerable residents.

Parks can provide an escape on hot days, and can even cool temperatures in surrounding areas. Larger parks are the most impactful, with parks larger than 5 acres in size providing some cooling benefits and parks more than 30 acres in size consistently acting as cool islands (Cao et al. 2010, Chang et al.

2007, Wang et al. 2018). Trees also play an important role in keeping cities cool by providing shade and

CANOPY COVERAGE IN EPA PARK

STREET WITH LITTLE CANOPY COVERAGE Source: Google Earth

Understanding East Palo Alto

27

FIGURE 1-6:

SEA LEVEL RISE

Source: 2017 ART Bay Area Sea Level Rise Data - MHHW +77”

28 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

SEA LEVEL RISING AND FLOOD HAZARD As greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase, sea level rise projections pose a significant economic, environmental, and social risks to communities along the San Francisco Bay Shoreline. Sea level along the U.S. coastline is projected to rise, on average, 10-12 inches in the next 30 years. By 2050 flooding is expected to occur, on average, more than 10 times as often as it does today (NOAA). One third of the City’s area has been designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as Special Flood Hazard Area, EPA will continue to be exposed to sever flooding and coastal inundation, particularly for residents near the mouth of the San Francisquito Creek.

The County of San Mateo’s Sea Level Raise Vulnerability Assessment noted that nearly 60% of EPA’s population is susceptible to sea level rise.

A particularly high risk of flooding and permanent

inundation, storm surges, and saltwater intrusion to groundwater resources will adversely affect residents.

The report also noted that approximately 66% of EPA’s protective shoreline infrastructure is vulnerable and 34% of local roadways may be affected in the event of a flood in the mid-level scenario.

Several projects are underway to better protect residents of EPA from rising tides. A new, high levee that will be separating a portion of the city from the San Francisquito Creek has been under construction and should replace the old levee entirely by 2030.

The San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority is leading The Strategy to Advance Flood protection, Ecosystems and Recreation along the San Francisco Bay (Safer Bay), that aims to protect against a sea level increase of up to ten feet about today’s daily high tide. Phase 1 of the project is being implemented in EPA and Menlo Park, it will protect almost 1,6000 properties, and will enable restoration of approximately 600 acres of marsh.

1998 FLOODS IN EAST PALO ALTO

SAN FRANCISQUITO CREEK BY EAST PALO ALTO

Source: Teodros Hailye - KQED

Source: Veronica Weber - Palo Alto Online

Understanding East Palo Alto 29

FIGURE 1-7:

HISTORICAL ECOLOGY Source: SFEI.

30 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

HISTORICAL ECOLOGY The area now known as East Palo Alto is the homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone tribe known as the Puichon. The Puichon lived along and around the lower San Francisquito Creek and lower Stevens Creek (Milliken et al. 2009). One Puichon village named Ssiputca was situated at the mouth of the San Francisquito Creek, likely near today’s Ravenswood neighborhood of East Palo Alto (Milliken 1983).

On the drier soils towards the inland portion of the city, the landscape was dominated by oak woodland and oak savanna. Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) dominated East Palo Alto’s historical oak woodlands, with valley oak (Q. lobata) frequently interspersed.

Along the San Francisquito Creek in particular, a wide variety of other riparian tree species were also commonly found among the oaks. In contrast to these densely forested oak woodlands, oak savannas were more open with oaks dotting a grassy landscape.

Before Euro-Americans colonized the region in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, East Palo Alto’s landscape was characterized by a mix of woodlands, savannas, and seasonal wetlands, fringed by a vibrant tidal wetland (Figure XX). Most of the area was composed of wet meadows and possibly alkali meadows. Wet meadows and alkali meadows are both seasonal wetlands, where soils are saturated and support low-lying wetland vegetation throughout the wet season. These seasonal wetlands were found across much of East Palo Alto’s lowlands because of its fine soils and high water table.

Alongside these seasonal wetlands, willow groves occupied much of the city’s low lying land adjacent to the tidal Baylands. Today’s Gardens neighborhood of East Palo Alto contained the largest willow grove, spanning 140 acres. Willow groves are densely forested areas associated with high groundwater, dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) intermixed with a diversity of other moisture-loving trees and shrubs.

Understanding East Palo Alto

31

COMMUNITY HISTORY

1850S

1932

European Settlement

Construction of Highway 101

Agriculture And Ranching Expansion

Native Inhabitants - Ohlone

Housing expands in the area

1900S

1500 BCE

32 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Exclusionary policies shape racial segregation across the region

194060S

2007 Current YMCA facilities built.

1983

2000

City of East Palo Alto is incorporated.

Jack Farrell Park Renovation

Boys & Girls Club

Martin Luther King Jr. Park Renovation

2004

1993

2021 City of East Palo Alto begins first-ever Parks Master Planning Process.

Understanding East Palo Alto 33

BUILDING ON OTHER PLANS

parks and open space. The document serves as the primary reference and guide for future development and redevelopment of the area.

2035 GENERAL PLAN

The largest open space expansion to be undertaken in East Palo Alto is found within the Ravenswood/ 4 Corners district, therefore it was fundamental for the Consultant Team to understand community design goals and developments planned within the district.

A key part of the open space vision is a network of public amenities available to residents, workers, and visitors. Community members desire enhanced protection of access and views to the bay, improved circulation within the district, and the creation of Bay Road as the spine and “heart” of East Palo Alto.

The update to the General Plan, adopted in 2016, represents a long-term vision for the physical, economic, and social growth of the City of EPA. Major strategies were identified by the community through extensive community engagement process.

This Plan update seeks to respond to growing socioeconomic and demographic changes, update policies for land use, transportation, infrastructure, and quality of life, incorporate the vision and policies for the implementation of the Ravenswood/4 corners TOD Specific Plan, amongst others.

As it relates to the future Parks Master Plan, synergies include goals to implement citywide greening through the expansion of the urban forest, greening public spaces, drought-tolerant planting, protecting habitat.

Fostering a safe and healthy community through active transportation, access to parks, healthcare, and healthy foods. The General Plan highlights major opportunities for increased park acreage through the Ravenswood/ 4 Corners TOD Specific Plan, improved access to the Don Edwards SF Bay National Wildlife refuge and other connections to the Bay Trail.

RAVENSWOOD/ 4 CORNERS TOD SPECIFIC PLAN The Ravenswood/ 4 Corners “transit oriented development” plan arose out of extensive community input and engagement from 2009 through 2011. The plan area, which encompasses 350 acres, has the goal of successfully turning into a thriving district that will provide places for EPA residents to have access to housing, employment opportunities, and additional

34 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

FINAL CLIMATE ACTION PLAN The East Palo Alto Climate Action Plan (CAP), creates a high-level roadmap document and framework of actions the City of EPA can take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The CAP provides a prioritized list of measures for the city. As it relates to parks and open space, the CAP brings forth actions that overlap with goals of the Parks Master Plan. For example; • Promoting water efficiency, which may be linked to long-term park improvements connected to lowimpact development standards.

• Supporting efforts to plant more trees in EPA, also tied to the Urban Forest Master Plan.

• Developing a master pedestrian and bicycle plan to promote walkable streets, bike lanes, and bike parking, to better connect residents to parks and open space.

Lastly, the CPA recommends the continued implementation of the Ravenswood/ 4 corners TOD plan.

35

SAN MATEO COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN The 2021 update to the Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (CBPP) provides a framework to help City/County Association of Governments to improve walking and bicycling conditions within the county.

The goal of the plan is to make biking and walking safer and more comfortable for all, and improve health, accessibility, and livability throughout the county.

SAFER BAY PROJECT The San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (SFCJPA), is a regional government agency founded by several mid-peninsula cities that plans, designs, and implements capital projects to reduce flood threats, enhance ecosystems, create recreational opportunities, and connect communities.

URBAN FOREST MASTER PLAN

SFCJPA is leading the Strategy to Advance Flood protection, Ecosystems and Recreation along the San Francisco Bay (SAFER Bay) Project, an initiative that aims to reduce the risk of flooding within the cities of East Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The project will enable adaptation to our changing climate by utilizing tidal marsh areas for flood protection in a way that sustains marsh habitat and facilitates marsh restoration. The project seeks to expand opportunities for recreation and community connectivity in collaboration with the Bay Trail Program and efforts to enhance local trails and connections.

The Urban Forest Master Plan intends to support the City in effectively managing and improving their urban forest infrastructure. The City if EPA is facing numerous environmental challenges such as increase flooding, heat risks, health disparities, and limited potable water. Planning for a robust urban forest can address these numerous concerns.

There is tremendous synergy between the SAFER Bay Project and the EPA Parks Master Plan as numerous opportunities for park growth exist within the reach of the project. Making sure there is alignment between community desires and aspirations for open space and climate change preparedness, adaptation, and resilience will be fundamental to The Plan.

Within EPA the plan identifies several major streets within the city that as good candidates for complete street/multimodal improvement projects. These include Bay Road, University Avenue, and Woodland Avenue, which all provide access and connections to existing and future parks.

The goals of the plan include, growing canopy coverage to 20% by 2062 and 30% by 2122, defining responsibilities and improving maintenance practices, and lastly, connecting with engaged and informed community members to provide stewardship for the urban forest. The Parks Master Plan seeks to align with the Urban Forest Master Plan and support and encourage canopy growth through new park acquisitions and existing park improvements.

36 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

37

1.2 PARK CLASSIFICATION UNDERSTANDING THE ROLE OF PARKS Each park type within East Palo Alto’s park and open space system presents different design, planning, and recreation opportunities, as outlined in the following section. These guidelines should be used in tandem with Chapter 5, Design Guidelines.

COMMUNITY PARKS Community parks are larger parks that serve the recreational and open space needs of the broader community. These parks may contain athletic courts, aquatic amenities, playground, walking paths, picnic areas and various other active and passive amenities depending upon community needs and site suitability.

Community parks are appropriate for special facilities like event spaces, community centers and indoor recreation complexes. They usually serves two or more neighborhoods within a one-half mile to over three miles radius which is why amenities like parking lots and restrooms should be included.

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Neighborhood parks fulfill the daily recreation needs of residents within one-half to one-mile walking distance. The primary recreation use is informal leisure and free play. These are limited active recreation in these parks such as hard surface playing courts (basketball, tennis, etc.), multipurpose sports fields and playgrounds.

Passive recreational amenities such as picnic benches, trails, informal play areas and nature areas dominate these parks. Amenities like restrooms, if added, will make these parks more accessible to all age groups.

POCKET PARKS Pocket Parks serve a concentrated population area and provide for the limited recreation needs of residents. Their primary use is informal leisure and free play. The recreational amenities that can be provided will be restricted by the size and configuration of the park. Examples of amenities could include a playground, benches, picnic tables, gazebos, turf areas for free play, etc. They typically serve an area within a quarter-mile radius.

38 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS Open Spaces are areas with few or no built amenities that provide natural areas for passive recreation. These parks may have a trail, picnic tables and benches, but are dominated by open areas.

Park trails are multipurpose trails that provide safe and readily accessible connections between neighborhoods and other City parks. They encourage walking, jogging, bicycling and other forms of non-motorized recreational travel by connecting people to where they need to go, helping make exercise a daily part of people’s routines.

SPECIAL USE PARK/FACILITY Special Use Parks include spaces that do not fall within a typical park type and usually serve a single purpose. These sites can be either stand-alone (i.e. not located within a Pocket Park, Neighborhood Park, Community Park, Regional Park, Greenbelt/Trail, or Open Space/Natural Area) or may be located within another park (typically found at Community or Regional Parks).

SCHOOL YARDS School yards provide joint-use amenities and access to active amenities like sports courts as well as playgrounds. This helps fill service gaps for neighborhood or community parks in the system.

Understanding East Palo Alto 39

FIGURE 1-8:

EXISTING CITY-OWNED PARKS & PARK SPACES

40 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

1.3 TODAY’S PARK SYSTEM CITY-OWNED PARKS & SCHOOL FACILITIES CITY-OWNED PARKS 1. Jack Farrell Park 2. Pocket Park at Newbridge 3. Bell Street Park 4. Joel Davis Memorial Park 5. Martin Luther King Jr. Park 6. Cooley Landing

EPA’s parks system reflects its unique history, culture, climate, and geography. Each individual park is an important asset to the city and the surrounding community. The parks and open space system is diverse and spaced throughout the community, with six individual City-operated parks making up 23 acres of open space, the San Francisco Bay Trail, the Ravenswood Open Space Preserve, and the Baylands Nature Preserve. This network of parks, open spaces, and trails can be understood as an entire system.

Before planning for the future, it is fundamental to understand how the park system currently functions and how it serves its users.

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. PARK

Understanding East Palo Alto

41

FIGURE 1-9:

EXISTING SCHOOLS & SCHOOL FACILITIES

42 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

SCHOOL FACILITIES 1. Costano Elementary School 2. Cesar Chavez Ravenswood Middle School 3. Eastside College Preparatory School 4. East Palo Alto Academy 5. Los Robles Ronald McNair Academy 6. East Palo Alto Charter School 7. KIPP Esperanza High School

School facilities and the open space and amenities found within them make up an important part of the open space network in the City of EPA. The Ravenswood City School District manages five district run sites, and two charter schools. It also collaborates with several local organizations such as the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula and The Primary School.

The School District also manages large areas of open space in the city.

Sports and athletic facilities managed by The Ravenswood City School District contribute significantly to recreation in EPA for children and youth. Currently there is no joint-use agreement between the school district and the City that designates community use at school recreational facilities, but this will be a recommended strategy for the future.

C0STANO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Source: Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula

Understanding East Palo Alto 43

FIGURE 1-10:

OTHER RECREATIONAL ASSETS

44 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

OTHER RECREATIONAL ASSETS INDEPENDENT RECREATION FACILITIES 1. Rich May Memorial Field 2. Lewis and Joan Platt East Palo Alto Family YMCA 3. Boys and Girls Club

EXISTING PRIVATELY-OWNED, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PARKS 4. Boom Pop-up Park 5. Bridge Pop-up Park

The City of EPA has several additional recreational assets managed by independent entities that complement the existing park systems. These spaces are valuable and well-used by EPA residents and visitors.

The Rich May Field was created to honor the life of officer Rich May and is run by the Rich May Foundation. The field gives young athletes in EPA a world-class athletic field to practice and compete equal to those across the highway in Menlo Park and Palo Alto. The Lewis and Joan Platt EPA Family YMCA and the Boys and Girls Club provide additional recreational amenities and numerous programs for residents of EPA to participate in at low costs.

Small privately ran pop-parks, such as Boom Pop-up Park, and Bridge Pop-up Park transformed 0.7 acres of vacant land in EPA’s Woodland Park neighborhood into lively spaces for residents to enjoy the outdoors.

Woodland Park Communities have partnered with EPA’s YMCA to provide exercise classes and host community events.

BOOM AND BRIDGE POP-UP PARKS Source: SiteLab Urban Studio

Understanding East Palo Alto 45

Access to the Bay Trail via Rutgers St is currently blocked

FIGURE 1-11:

TRAILS & BIKE NETWORK

46 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

TRAILS & OPEN SPACE A successful park system is connected to its community by safe and well-defined routes that offer mobility choices to its residents. This can include walking, biking, transit, and vehicular options. The San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan provides a framework to help the City of EPA improve walking and bicycling in the city.

Here we map existing bike lane networks within the city in relation to the existing park system. Bell Street, the Pocket Park, and Jack Farrel Park are connected by existing bike networks. Possibilities to create additional connections to Martin Luther King Jr. Park and Joel Davis Memorial Park exist.

Trail networks are also an important part of a park system, these spaces connect people to different attractions, commercial areas, cultural landmarks, or recreational elements. Trails are intended to be used for leisure, exercise, and commuting purposes. The San Francisco Bay Trail outlines the Bay side of EPA and accommodates pedestrian, bicycle, and other non-motorized activities. Our map shows where access to the San Francisco Bay Trail is accessible and inaccessible within the community.

BAY TRAIL BY COOLEY LANDING

RAVENSWOOD OPEN SPACE PRESERVE Source: Lance Chen via Google Images

Understanding East Palo Alto

47

FIGURE 1-12:

EXISTING PARK SERVICE AREAS

48 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

COMPOSITE OF PARK SERVICE AREAS This composite map of existing park services area shows access within ½ mile and a ¼ mile to existing city-owned parks, privately-owned publicly accessible parks, and school facilities. This map demonstrates that there is decent access within a ½ and a ¼ of a mile to most residents in EPA. There are clear areas where there are gaps and a lack of access appears, primarily within the neighborhoods of Weeks, Kavanaugh, Willow, and Woodland Park.

EAST PALO ALTO ACADEMY

POCKET PARK AT NEWBRIDGE

Source: CAW Architects

Understanding East Palo Alto 49

FIGURE 1-13:

EXISTING PARK ASSETS

50 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

COMMUNITY PARK ASSETS 5 3 7 1 1 9 5 7

JACK FARRELL PARK

3 1 1 1 2 1

This composite map combines all of the community park assets in EPA regardless of ownership. It shows privately-owned parks, private recreation facilities, City-owned park assets, and school facilities. It also shows all available amenities throughout the city, from soccer fields to basketball courts. This map is useful, as it shows the congregation of amenities throughout the city and their ownership. It helps to see where gaps exists and where improvement can be made.

EPA YMCA Source: Carrasco Associates

Understanding East Palo Alto

51

1.4 ASSESSMENT OF CITY-OWNED FACILITIES The EPA parks system has six existing parks of varying sizes and programs, each one plays a specific role within the park system.

Jack Farrell, Joel Davis, and Bell Street Park are all general use parks with a variety of programming, including playgrounds and multi-use lawns. There is a range of amenities that serve all different age groups.

Two are within a residential setting, but the size of these parks can accommodate users from all over the East Palo Alto community.

The other three parks, Cooley Landing, Pocket Park at Newbridge, and Martin Luther King Jr. Park, all have different specific uses. Cooley Landing and Martin Luther King Jr. Park are gathering places, the former

JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK

52 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

for events, trail access, and wildlife viewing while the latter for active recreation and sports fields. The Pocket Park at Newbridge is not a gathering place but a small landing place as people commuted by bus or walked through the neighborhood.

Overall, parks had ample seating, mature shade trees, well maintained lawns, and trash was removed.

There were many users at each park, including those using the walking loop at Jack Farrell Park, volunteers at Cooley Landing, and YMCA campers on the playground at Bell Street Park.

Parks also showed challenges, most restrooms were locked and not accessible, though this is potentially part of a COVID restriction. Signage or messaging was

TABLE 1-1: PARK ASSESSMENTS OVERVIEW

Park ID

Park Classification (Recommended by WRT)

Park Name

Park Area (Acre)

Park Assessment Score

1

Jack Farrell Park

Community Park

3.73

Fair: 2.9

2

Pocket Park at Newbridge

Pocket Park

0.14

Good: 3.9

3

Bell Street Park

Neighborhood Park

2.56

Poor: 1.9

4

Joel Davis Memorial Park

Neighborhood Park

1.94

Good: 3.5

5

Martin Luther King Jr. Park

Community Park

5.49

Fair: 2.7

6

Cooley Landing

Regional Park

10.02

Great: 4.2

Poor: 1-2 points

Fair: 2.1-3 points

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points

not strong to communicate to when the restrooms would be open. Wayfinding signage was not adequate, especially with connections to the Bay Trail. In all parks, there is a need for clear, welcoming accessible entrances to invite the community in to the public space.

Understanding East Palo Alto 53

1. JACK FARRELL PARK ADDRESS: 2509 Fordham street SIZE: 3.73 Acres PARK TYPE: Community Park

MAJOR AMENITIES Basketball Court Playground Baseball Fields Walking Loop Lighting Bike Racks Picnic Area Restroom Fitness Equipment

54 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

±

0

100

200 ft

2.9 POINTS FAIR

= 3.0 POINTS

ACCESS + CONNECTIVITY Edge Permeability Signage, Maps, and City Branding ADA Accessibility Presence of Crosswalks Signals Sidewalks and Surrounding Circulation

2 2 1 3 3

Path Connectivity Within Park Sufficient Parking Nearby Bike Lanes and Bike Parking Public Transportation Nearby

3.6 POINTS

CONDITION + FUNCTIONALITY Diversity of Uses Paving Conditions Vegetation Condition Tree Canopy Coverage & Condition Restroom/ Building Condition

4 4 3 4 3

Playground Condition Recreational Amenities Condition Lighting Condition Furnishing Condition

2 2 3 3 3

Security Presence Ease of Navigation Nighttime Safety Mitigation of Surrounding Views/ Noise

2 5 4 2

3.5 POINTS

MAINTENANCE Broken or Vandalized Park Elements Availability of Trash Cans

3 4

3 4

Variety of Vegetation Vegetation Maintenance

1.5 POINTS

TRAILS Available Bike Facilities Directional Signage

Poor: 1-2 points

3 4 4 3

2.9 POINTS

SAFETY + COMFORT Adjacent Derelict Features Evidence of Illicit or Unauthorized Use Traffic Calming Measures Around Park Line of Sight / Openness Level of Activation

4 5 2 5

Fair: 2.1-3 points

2 1

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points Understanding East Palo Alto 55

1. JACK FARRELL PARK Jack Farrell Park sits low in a basin under mature shade trees, surrounded by residential areas. One side is open to the street, while the three other three sides are lined with fences to separate the park from backyards. The site is easily navigated and there was a steady stream of residents taking a walk around the loop.

Its program consists of mostly active recreation features, including ball fields and a perimeter walking loop, alongside a playground and dispersed picnic areas. There are murals on the walls lining the south side of the park, adding art into the EPA park system.

•

CHALLENGES •

Existing access to the site is difficult, especially at the entrance at Fordham Street, parking spaces are typically full. The entrance is regularly chained off to keep cars from driving into the park, a measure meant to enhance safety but impedes the main accessible entrance.

•

Around the perimeter of the park, areas of the fence have been broken for people to access the park from adjacent neighborhoods. There are signs of vandalism on the murals and a few adjacent buildings are in disrepair.

•

Fordham Street is a busy street with several bus stops. In front of the park, traffic calming measures could enhance the safety for park goers and commuters alike.

•

Some slopes are bare and need to be planted to avoid erosion. The low elevation of the park may also be an issue but could be an opportunity for implementing stormwater management measures.

SUCCESSES •

New fitness equipment donated by All-Pro Wide Receiver Davante Adams

•

Amenities, including sports facilities and the playground, are all maintained and in good condition, including restrooms.

•

The murals are a distinctive feature and could potentially be expanded to other vertical surfaces around the park to highlight the talent and culture within EPA.

•

A robust tree canopy provides plenty of shade in the daytime and the abundance of light poles makes the park safe for nighttime use.

The baseball field is well-maintained but replacing the outfield fence with a retractable fence would allow for a greater variety of recreational uses.

A DIVERSE MIX OF USES IN ONE PARK: SPORTS, ART, PICNIC, AND WALKING LOOP, ALONG WITH ADEQUATE SUPPORT FEATURES

56 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

See Chapter 4.1 for Park Recommendations

WELL MAINTAINED AMENITIES, INCLUDING BASEBALL FIELD AND PLAYGROUND

POPULAR WALKING LOOP, AMPLE LIGHTING, & SHADE TREES

ACCESSIBLE ENTRY USUALLY CHAINED OFF

FENCING BROKEN AS PEOPLE TRY TO ACCESS THE PARK FROM THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD

Understanding East Palo Alto

57

2. POCKET PARK AT NEWBRIDGE ADDRESS: Bay road and Newbridge street SIZE: 0.14 Acres PARK TYPE: Pocket Park

MAJOR AMENITIES Benches Lighting Bike Racks

± 58 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

0

50

100 ft

3.9 POINTS GOOD

= 4.0 POINTS

ACCESS + CONNECTIVITY Edge Permeability Signage, Maps,and City Branding ADA Accessibility Presence of Crosswalks Signals Sidewalks and Surrounding Circulation

4 3 3 3 4

Path Connectivity Within Park Sufficient Parking Nearby Bike Lanes and Bike Parking Public Transportation Nearby

4.2 POINTS

CONDITION + FUNCTIONALITY Diversity of Uses Paving Conditions Vegetation Condition

4 5 4

Tree Canopy Coverage & Condition Lighting Condition Furnishing Condition

5 5 2 4 3

Security Presence Ease of Navigation Nighttime Safety Mitigation of Surrounding Views/ Noise

3 5 5 2

4.5 POINTS

MAINTENANCE Broken or Vandalized Park Elements Availability of Trash Cans

4 5

5 4

Variety of Vegetation Vegetation Maintenance

3.0 POINTS

TRAILS Accessible by Bike Route Available Bike Facilities

Poor: 1-2 points

4 4 4

3.8 POINTS

SAFETY + COMFORT Adjacent Derelict Features Evidence of Illicit or Unauthorized Use Traffic Calming Measures Around Park Line of Sight / Openness Level of Activation

5 5 4 5

Fair: 2.1-3 points

3 3

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points Understanding East Palo Alto 59

2. POCKET PARK AT NEWBRIDGE Wedged into the corner at Newbridge Street and Bay Avenue, the Pocket Park at Newbridge provides a green space adjacent to a SamTrans bus stop. The adjacent roads have bike lanes for easy access. It is not a gathering place, but it provides a respite between the busy streets and its scale is appropriate for people to wait for their bus. People are consistently coming and going from the bus stop, so the park sees a lot of use.

NICE SHADE TREES WITH LAWN AREA

60 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

SUCCESSES •

The park is neatly defined and clean.

•

Sufficient lighting and seating.

CHALLENGES •

Crossing from the other sidewalks to and from the park can be difficult, with awkwardly placed crosswalks at the top of the triangle that occurs at a bend in the road.

See Chapter 4.1 for Park Recommendations

WELL MAINTAINED AMENITIES, INCLUDING BASEBALL FIELD AND PLAYGROUND

POPULAR WALKING LOOP, AMPLE LIGHTING, & SHADE TREES

ENTRY PROMENADE HARD TO FIND FROM STREET

EXCESS TRASH, ENCAMPMENT, AND LACK OF DEFINED PATHWAYS

Understanding East Palo Alto

61

3. BELL STREET PARK ADDRESS: 2159 University Avenue SIZE: 2.56 Acres PARK TYPE: Neighborhood Park

MAJOR AMENITIES Skate Park Playground Lighting Bike Racks Picnic Area Shade Structure

± 62 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

0

100

200 ft

1.9 POINTS POOR

= 1.9 POINTS

ACCESS + CONNECTIVITY Edge Permeability Signage, Maps,and City Branding ADA Accessibility Presence of Crosswalks Signals Sidewalks and Surrounding Circulation

1 2 1 2 2

Path Connectivity Within Park Sufficient Parking Nearby Bike Lanes and Bike Parking Public Transportation Nearby

2.0 POINTS

CONDITION + FUNCTIONALITY Diversity of Uses Paving Conditions Vegetation Condition Tree Canopy Coverage & Condition Restroom/ Building Condition

1 2 2 3 1

Playground Condition Recreational Amenities Condition Lighting Condition Furnishing Condition

1 1 1 2 3

Security Presence Ease of Navigation Nighttime Safety Mitigation of Surrounding Views/ Noise

1 2 1 2

1.8 POINTS

MAINTENANCE Broken or Vandalized Park Elements Availability of Trash Cans

1 1

2 3

Variety of Vegetation Vegetation Maintenance

2.3 POINTS

TRAILS Available Bike Facilities Directional Signage Directional Signage

Poor: 1-2 points

4 2 2 1

1.6 POINTS

SAFETY + COMFORT Adjacent Derelict Features Evidence of Illicit or Unauthorized Use Traffic Calming Measures Around Park Line of Sight / Openness Level of Activation

1 1 3 4

Fair: 2.1-3 points

3 3 1

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points Understanding East Palo Alto 63

3. BELL STREET PARK Bell Street Park has a prominent location along University Avenue. It has a large multiuse lawn and large, significant palm trees dotted throughout the site. The new-looking playground has the capacity for many children. However, Bell Street Park scored the lowest of all parks in East Palo Alto for several reasons.

CHALLENGES •

Aside from the playground, most amenities were in disrepair, such as the small shade structure and uneven paving surfaces.

•

The park does not have a cohesive layout. The navigation of the park is not clear and there is not a defined path from the playground to the main entrance off Bell Street. The main entrance is obscured by the large shade trees, though the promenade creates a distinct entry once it is found.

•

A network of closed gates and fences parses the space into confusing sections. The path surfaces are traversable by in disrepair.

•

There are other safety issues, including the adjacent empty lot next to the playground that is littered and an absence of lighting anywhere other than the main entrance.

SUCCESSES •

The Park is in a central, highly visible location, making this an opportunity to be a landmark when entering EPA. Adjacent bike lanes and sidewalks allow access for many different uses.

•

The Park provides open space to neighboring community centers, including the YMCA and the Senior Center.

•

The large playground provides a generous amount of space for whole classrooms full of children. The structures seem new and are well-maintained.

POPULAR, EXPANSIVE PLAYGROUND

64 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

See Chapter 4.1 for Park Recommendations

SHADE STRUCTURE IN DISREPAIR

CLEAN SKATE PARK WITH FENCE

ENTRY PROMENADE HARD TO FIND FROM STREET

EXCESS TRASH, ENCAMPMENT, AND LACK OF DEFINED PATHWAYS

Understanding East Palo Alto 65

4. JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK ADDRESS: 1960 Tate Street SIZE: 1.94 Acres PARK TYPE: Neighborhood Park

MAJOR AMENITIES Playground Lighting Bike Racks Benches Picnic Area BBQ Pits Restroom

± 66 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

0

100

200 ft

3.5 POINTS GOOD

= 3.3 POINTS

ACCESS + CONNECTIVITY Edge Permeability Signage, Maps,and City Branding ADA Accessibility Presence of Crosswalks Signals Sidewalks and Surrounding Circulation

4 2 3 4 4

Path Connectivity Within Park Sufficient Parking Nearby Bike Lanes and Bike Parking Public Transportation Nearby

3.4 POINTS

CONDITION + FUNCTIONALITY Diversity of Uses Paving Conditions Vegetation Condition Tree Canopy Coverage & Condition

3 4 4 5

3.8 POINTS 2 2 3 3 3

Security Presence Ease of Navigation Nighttime Safety Mitigation of Surrounding Views/ Noise

2 5 4 2

3.8 POINTS

MAINTENANCE Broken or Vandalized Park Elements Availability of Trash Cans

4 2

4 5

Variety of Vegetation Vegetation Maintenance

3.5 POINTS

TRAILS Available Bike Facilities Directional Signage

Poor: 1-2 points

1 4 4 2

Restroom/ Building Condition Playground Condition Lighting Condition Furnishing Condition

SAFETY + COMFORT Adjacent Derelict Features Evidence of Illicit or Unauthorized Use Traffic Calming Measures Around Park Line of Sight / Openness Level of Activation

4 4 2 3

Fair: 2.1-3 points

4 3

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points Understanding East Palo Alto

67

4. JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK Joel Davis Memorial Park is a well-maintained park that is popular because of the walking loop, playground, picnic tables, vast lawn, shade trees, and proximity to residential homes. The EPA Engineering building is on site, though there is little connection between the two.

SUCCESSES •

At the time of site observation, there were many different user groups around the site, from young children playing in the lawn, teenagers spending time together in the picnic area, and adults congregating around the perimeter under the shade trees.

•

The park feels like an extension of the neighborhood instead of a separate element, without being obtrusive to neighbors.

•

Amenities and planting were all in great condition throughout the site.

BENCHES AND LIGHTINGS ALONG THE WALKING PATH

68 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

CHALLENGES •

The connection between the park and the offices is not strongly defined. Removing fences may cause security issues but could provide a closer relationship between users and City officials.

•

Seating was abundant, but not always used when needed. Since some users were remaining close to their cars, providing seating around the edges could be more useful than the central picnic areas.

•

Only port-a-potties are on site. For the popularity of this park and its function as more of a community park for the rest of EPA, a more permanent bathroom may be more ideal.

See Chapter 4.1 for Park Recommendations

WELL MAINTAINED PLAYGROUND WITH RUBBER SURFACING AND LIGHTING

PICNIC AREA WITH SHADE TREES AND LIGHTING

SHADED WALKING LOOP AND STREET PARKING

TEMPORARY RESTROOM SOLUTION

Understanding East Palo Alto 69

5. MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR PARK ADDRESS: 435 Daisy Lane SIZE: 5.49 Acres PARK TYPE: Community Park

MAJOR AMENITIES Playground Baseball Fields Soccer Walking Loop Lighting Bike Racks Picnic Area BBQ Pits Restroom

70 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

±

0

100

200 ft

2.7 POINTS FAIR

= 3.0 POINTS

ACCESS + CONNECTIVITY Edge Permeability Signage, Maps,and City Branding ADA Accessibility Presence of Crosswalks Signals Sidewalks and Surrounding Circulation

3 4 4 3 3

Path Connectivity Within Park Sufficient Parking Nearby Bike Lanes and Bike Parking Adjacent Trails or Trailhead Public Transportation Nearby

2.4 POINTS

CONDITION + FUNCTIONALITY Diversity of Uses Paving Conditions Vegetation Condition Tree Canopy Coverage & Condition Restroom/ Building Condition

2 3 2 3 1

Playground Condition Recreational Amenities Condition Lighting Condition Furnishing Condition

3 3 3 3 1

Security Presence Ease of Navigation Nighttime Safety Mitigation of Surrounding Views/ Noise

3 3 2 2

2.5 POINTS

MAINTENANCE Broken or Vandalized Park Elements Availability of Trash Cans

1 4

3 2

Variety of Vegetation Vegetation Maintenance

3.0 POINTS

TRAILS Connectivity to Regional Trail Access by Bike Route Available Bike Facilities

Poor: 1-2 points

3 3 2 3

2.6 POINTS

SAFETY + COMFORT Adjacent Derelict Features Evidence of Illicit or Unauthorized Use Traffic Calming Measures Around Park Line of Sight / Openness Level of Activation

4 2 4 3 1

Fair: 2.1-3 points

4 4 3

1 3

Directional Signage Surface Condition

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points Understanding East Palo Alto

71

5. MARTIN LUTHER KING JUNIOR PARK Martin Luther King Jr. Park lies at the edge of the Bay Trail, linking it to the homes of the Gardens community of East Palo Alto. While the park is a gateway to the trail, it also has its own active recreation with ballfields and a playground.

SUCCESSES •

The views over the marsh are a straightforward way to experience the shoreline of EPA without making a trip out to Cooley Landing.

•

Lighting around the field enables nighttime use for sports although it provides limited coverage.

POWER LINES ALONG THE EDGE OF PARK

72 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

CHALLENGES •

The connection between park and trail is not immediately clear and could be enhanced by implementing wayfinding elements and educational signage.

•

Utilities block some views out over the marsh and people must cross under power lines to get to the trail.

•

Kiosk is locked and there is limited signage for park facilities.

•

There is little shade outside of the playground area.

•

The park is facing problems with a rodent infestation, making it unsafe for children to play and congregate.

See Chapter 4.1 for Park Recommendations

ENTRY AND PLAYGROUND

PICNIC AREA ADJACENT TO SPORTS FIELDS

BUILDING FOR RESTROOMS AND CONCESSIONS UNMARKED

SEATING AT SPORTS FIELDS AND BIKE FACILITIES

Understanding East Palo Alto

73

6. COOLEY LANDING ADDRESS: 2100 Bay Road SIZE: 10.02 Acres PARK TYPE: Regional Park

MAJOR AMENITIES Community Center Walking Loop Lighting Bike Racks Benches Picnic Area Shade Structure Restroom

± 74

East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

0

200

400 ft

4.2 POINTS GREAT

= 3.8 POINTS

ACCESS + CONNECTIVITY Edge Permeability Signage, Maps,and City Branding ADA Accessibility Presence of Crosswalks Signals Sidewalks and Surrounding Circulation

4 4 5 3 3

Path Connectivity Within Park Sufficient Parking Nearby Bike Lanes and Bike Parking Adjacent Trails or Trailhead Public Transportation Nearby

4.4 POINTS

CONDITION + FUNCTIONALITY Diversity of Uses Paving Conditions Vegetation Condition Tree Canopy Coverage & Condition

4 4 5 5

4.3 POINTS 5 4 4 5 4

Security Presence Ease of Navigation Nighttime Safety Mitigation of Surrounding Views/ Noise

4 5 4 4

4.3 POINTS

MAINTENANCE Broken or Vandalized Park Elements Availability of Trash Cans

4 5

4 4

Variety of Vegetation Vegetation Maintenance

4.2 POINTS

TRAILS Connectivity to Regional Trail Access by Bike Route Available Bike Facilities

Poor: 1-2 points

4 5 4

Restroom/ Building Condition Lighting Condition Furnishing Condition

SAFETY + COMFORT Adjacent Derelict Features Evidence of Illicit or Unauthorized Use Traffic Calming Measures Around Park Line of Sight / Openness Level of Activation

5 4 4 5 1

Fair: 2.1-3 points

5 4 5

3 4

Directional Signage Surface Condition

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points Understanding East Palo Alto

75

6. COOLEY LANDING Cooley Landing is the newest addition to the EPA parks system. Located along the Bay Trail and separated from the rest of the city by vast swaths of lands, it features new buildings, seating, and educational signage. It provides a distinct experience that allows residents to connect more with the natural resources of the shoreline.

SUCCESSES •

The location offers many opportunities for wildlife viewing at the water’s edge and out over the marsh.

•

Because the park has a segment of the Bay Trail running through it, residents and visitors regularly use the site.

GROUP PICNIC AREAS ARE A POPULAR DESTINATION

76 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

CHALLENGES •

The long road leading to the park is best for cars. Pedestrians and bikers must share the road with passing cars, making it less comfortable compared to separated, defined paths.

•

Though the facilities are new, there is still evidence of markings on the furniture and wear on the concrete seatwalls.

•

Nearby airfields are loud and can be disruptive to some outdoor activities or gatherings. The indoor gathering spaces may be best for focused presentations or performances.

•

The City has had difficulty finding an operator to manage Cooley Landing and continues to work with partners to address the need.

See Chapter 4.1 for Park Recommendations

AMPHITHEATER AND COVERED STAGE FRAME VIEWS OF THE BAY

EPACENTER: NEW COMMUNITY CENTER LOCATED DOWN THE ROAD FROM COOLEY LANDING

BAY TRAIL ACCESS DIRECTLY FROM COOLEY LANDING

SEATING AND EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE WITH EXTENSIVE VIEWS FACING THE BAY

Understanding East Palo Alto

77

FIGURE 1-14:

FUTURE PLANNING EFFORTS

78 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

1.5 OVERVIEW OF FUTURE PLANNING EFFORTS PROPOSED PARK IMPROVEMENTS IN THE WORKS Various partners across the City of East Palo Alto are involved in parks planning efforts to date. The following map includes an overview of improvements planned in existing parks, in schoolyards, and in various private developments including the Ravenswood Business District.

Understanding East Palo Alto 79

80 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

COMMUNITY PRIORITIES 2.1 Engaging the Community 2.2 Community Workshops 2.3 Focus Groups 2.4 Engaging Hard to Reach Populations 2.5 Pop-up Events 2.6 Survey and Online Feedback 2.7 Community Priorities

2 Community Priorities

81

2.1 ENGAGING THE COMMUNITY The community engagement plan evolved throughout the process to include a range of tools and meeting types to accommodate both virtual and in-person conversations - all with the goal of gathering feedback and input from as many community members as possible. The range of meeting settings around EPA allowed the team to hear from a wide range of community voices, from park users that are very familiar with the facilities and existing programs across the city, to people who currently do not frequent the city parks and trails and are unfamiliar with those resources.

This chapter outlines the numerous engagement activities that informed the plan and summarizes key take-aways and priorities that arose out of the process.

ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES At each step of the Parks Master plan process, input was sought through a range of activities to engage EPA community members on the future park system.

Community Workshops: Both in-person and virtual options for workshops invited stakeholders to participate in presentations, question-and-answer sessions, and numerous activities. Workshops were designed to encourage active engagement and provide a space for discussion and input.

Pop-Up Events: Local, in-person opportunities to share project information at existing community events with people, who may or may not be familiar with the project. This approach allowed the team to meet people where they are gathered (e.g. churches, parks, libraries, schools, special events).

82 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Surveys: A multilingual, citywide survey available online and in-person – with the support of outreach partners at Nuestra Casa and others – was conducted to inform the plan recommendations. Survey results are summarized in this report and in Appendix A.1.

Project Website Updates: Online resources including presentation materials and schedule information allowed residents to provide feedback at their convenience. This allowed for wider participation of community members who were unable to attend inperson due to family or COVID-19 constraints.

City Council Meetings: The plan updates were presented at a number of City Council meetings where the public could ask questions and provide feedback alongside City Council members. A joint session was also conducted to present the plan with the Planning Commission.

Focus Groups: Small group conversations, often with hard-to-reach groups, allowed people who share common interests to reflect and provide input on the EPA Parks Plan. Meetings were also held in Spanish.

Stakeholder Meetings: To round out the engagement, the team conducted numerous stakeholder group interviews and meetings. Groups included both City and non-City staff. Discussions ranged on topics from athletics programs, maintenance, partnerships, to outreach and communications techniques.

Community Priorities 83

2.2 COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS The series of three community workshops included an introduction to the Parks Master Plan, its purpose, and its goals. The meetings presented a review of the existing conditions of East Palo Alto parks, a park-bypark assessment, and an overall summary of future and ongoing opportunities citywide.

Additionally, the workshops consisted of mapping activities and interactive exercises that actively engaged community members.

WORKSHOP 1 The first community workshop, held on September 30, 2021, was a virtual meeting hosted on Zoom. It included an introduction from the mayor and the consultant team, and a presentation on existing conditions at EPA parks. Numerous polls were conducted and a break-out group activity for visioning was prepared. Seventy-nine community members attended.

WORKSHOP 1

The first workshop took place online on September 2021.

84 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

WORKSHOP 2 The second community workshop was hosted at Cooley Landing Center on February 26, 2022.

The Consultant Team reviewed survey results, and presented an initial assessment of facility and program needs. The presentation was followed by a collective mapping activity encouraged participants to work in small groups to determine the best location for future programs and amenities.

Numerous themes arose during the second community workshop. The key themes are summarized below: 1. Communication and Outreach: Participants suggested numerous ideas for successfully reaching disadvantaged and working class communities.

Ideas included; using larger banners and other visual advertisements at key city points and landmarks; conducting outreach at locations that are heavily used by community members, e.g., churches and markets; installing community boards in all parks; lastly connecting with existing organizations and community leaders.

2. Access: Important conversations took place regarding the improvement of connections to existing parks by upgrading pedestrian and bicycle connections so that residents can have access to a park within a 10-minute walk. It was also discussed that gates to parks should be open and accessible.

Some participants expressed a desire to reduce fees that may prevent low-income residents from renting spaces and hosting larger events. Additionally, there was a desire among residents for a more clear and transparent process for renting City facilities, as well as a clear understanding of costs and fees for different types of organizations.

3. Park Identity and History: Community members want to acknowledge and highlight the rich history of parks in EPA and suggest developing wayfinding, plaques, and other informational graphics to highlight existing parks and their histories. The community shared a need for building an overall park identity.

4. Facility and Program Needs: Below, we list some of the items that a majority of participants discussed; •

Open, clean and accessible restrooms

•

Community gardens

•

Theater and performing spaces

•

Improved citywide tree canopy

•

Free, or low-cost community pool

•

Spaces for local food vendors and local shops

•

Establishing a “Friends of EPA” group to support with funding, stewardship, and programming

WORKSHOP 3 The third community workshop will be hosted online and in person at the City Council Chambers on February 28, 2023.

WORKSHOP 2 PHOTOS

The second workshop took place at Cooley Landing in February 2022.

Community Priorities 85

2.3 FOCUS GROUPS As part of the insight gathering process, the consultant team conducted a series of focus group meetings and interviews over the span of a year. The subjects for these focus groups included: recreation and programming, park usage for seniors, ADA accessibility, health and wellness, education and personal development, environment and ecology, and other important topics.

ENGAGED GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS

Developer, Business and Other Consultants

Health and Wellness • •

Ravenswood Health Center Fresh Approach

FOCUS GROUP

Nuestra Casa focus group with the Environmental Justice Academy

• • • • • • • • • •

Sandhill Development Harvest Properties Harrison Street - Social Infrastructure Fund 2020 Bay Road Development Emerson Developer EPA Waterfront Ravenswood Business District Sobrato Magical Bridge Verde Design Raimi + Associates

86 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Media

Philathropy Groups • •

Emerson Collective Goldman Foundation

• • •

EPA Today EPA/Belle Haven Info PA Online

Environment and Ecology

Recreation • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • •

EPA Boxing Club MPAA Mastodons Youth Football Razorhawks Youth Rugby Greyhounds Track Club Ravenswood Youth Rugby Swagger Baseball Club EPA United Soccer Club EPA Junior Golf RYAA - Ravenswood Youth Soccer Association EPATT Tennis and Tutoring YMCA Boys and Girls Club of Mid Peninsula Baseball Ravenswood Little League EPA T-Ball & Pitching Machine My Gym Palo Alto Vikings Roadrunners Basketball Club Police Athletic League Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition

• • • • • • • • • •

MidPeninsula Open Space Aceterra Bay Trail (MTC) BCDC Committee for Green Foothills YUCA Canopy San Mateo Flood Control Agency San Francisquito Creek JPA SFPUC

Other Community Based • • • • • • • • • • • •

EPA Senior Center One EPA Ecumenical Hunger Program Bayshore Christian Ministry Project We Hope Bread of Life Outreach St. Francis de Assisi Church Community Church Walls of Faith COGIC Peninsula Interfaith Action Tongan Interfaith Council Tongan Assembly of God

Education/Personal Development • • • • • • • • •

Ravenswood City School District East Side Academy College Track Job Train Foundation for College Education Able Works Girl to Women EPA Center The Primary School EPA

Community Priorities

87

2.4 ENGAGING HARD TO REACH POPULATIONS To engage with hard-to-reach populations and ensure that the community feedback we received was as broad and inclusive as possible, the Consultant Team participated in focus groups with three key stakeholders. Nuestra Casa is an organization with a long history of building community power in East Palo Alto; Nairobi Advisors – a group of resident elders with abundance institutional knowledge; and the East Palo Alto Senior Center – which offers a variety of activities and assistance to seniors.

NUESTRA CASA On April 5, 2022, the Consultant Team joined 20 participants at Nuestra Casa’s office to discuss the Parks Master Plan. Major themes that arose from our discussion included; Improve Safety by: •

Increase lighting in many parks.

•

Curb illegal activities such as alcohol and drug consumption to alleviate concerns of families visiting parks.

•

Implement ways to increase surveillance in parks, such as installing cameras or ‘community watch’ programs.

•

Facility and Program Needs: •

Outdoor workout stations for all ages.

•

Low-cost or free access to a pool.

•

Food stalls or food trucks in parks.

•

After-school program for kids.

•

A stage or amphitheater space.

•

Farmers market.

NAIROBI ADVISORS On May 20, 2022, the Consultant Team met with community leaders that make up part of the Nairobi Advisors group. These are community elders who have been part of a political, social, and cultural movement in EPA since the 1960s. The focus group discussions yielded specific feedback and ideas: •

Memorialize the people and the history of EPA and its parks.

•

Provide resources to empower community members to run certain programs and initiatives that the City may not have capacity to do.

•

Further partnerships between local organizations and the City.

•

Establish ‘Community Benefits Agreements’ to guide development of existing and future parks.

•

Encourage more events and festivals.

Access and Communication: •

Ensure that all park improvements remain free and accessible.

•

Make announcements about events through multiple platforms, both online and in-person.

88 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Ensure that public meetings have translation services for non-English speakers.

•

Keep bathrooms open and clean so the community can use park space and host events.

•

Install more water fountains.

•

Facilitate low-cost or free accessible pool access, especially during warm summer months.

•

Establish cooling centers.

EPA SENIOR CENTER On June 13, 2022, the Consultant Team hosted a meeting with the East Palo Alto Senior Center, an institution that has been present in the city for over 30 years. The Senior Center provides food delivery services and other resources to the city’s seniors.

Given its close proximity to Bell Street Park, the Center has a significant role to play in shaping the future of this park. Their general comments included: •

Provide more benches, picnic tables, and other seating options for people to rest.

•

Install exercise equipment and space for active play.

•

Organize the return of programming and events, such as the Collard Green Festival and the Jazz Festival.

•

Create an opportunity for more joint-ventures between the City of EPA and the Senior Center – especially around programming.

FOCUS GROUP

Nuestra Casa focus group with the Environmental Justice Academy

Community Priorities 89

2.5 POP-UP EVENTS EPA TREE LIGHTING EVENT The Consultant Team hosted a pop-up event during the tree lighting ceremony at the EPA Senior Center on December 4, 2021. We collected feedback using two methods: a visual preference survey on different themes related to parks design, a more detailed online survey for which we had paper copies.

EPA LEGENDS EVENT

LEGENDS EVENT On December 17, 2021, the team participated in the “Legends Event” at Costaño Elementary School, we engaged with students and parents who were present at the basketball camp as well as the people who joined for the celebration of EPA community members.

Feedback on the Recreation and Open Space Master Plan was collected using detailed paper surveys as well as visual preference surveys on larger project boards.

TREE LIGHTING EVENT

EPA LEGENDS EVENT

90 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

CESAR CHAVEZ DAY AT EPA PRIMARY SCHOOL The third pop-up event was held at the East Palo Alto Primary School on March 25, 2022. We were invited to participate in a Cesar Chavez Celebration and Summer Program Fair, where multiple local organizations and partners shared their work and provided information on their services and programs.

We met with numerous parents and kids and were able to discuss the Parks Master Plan and the ongoing work that has been completed thus far. The team provided participants with surveys and gifted crayons, coloring books, and snacks.

BASEBALL OPENING DAY AT JACK FARRELL PARK

BASEBALL OPENING WEEKEND The fourth pop-up was hosted at Jack Farrell Park during the Baseball Season Opening Day on March 26, 2022. We were invited by the City of East Palo Alto to set up a table during the opening day ceremonies and provide information on the ongoing project and receive feedback from community members.

CESAR CHAVEZ SUMMER FAIR AT PRIMARY SCHOOL

We met with numerous parents, kids, and teens from the community and discussed the ongoing Parks Master Plan. We provided printed surveys for community members to fill out. The team had coffee and pastries for the community members.

CESAR CHAVEZ SUMMER FAIR AT PRIMARY SCHOOL

Community Priorities

91

2.6 SURVEY AND ONLINE FEEDBACK ONLINE SURVEY

HOW WE GOT THE WORD OUT

An online survey was conducted between September 30, 2021 through January 31, 2022.

The survey asked participants a range of things including, the reasons why they visited EPA parks, reasons that deterred them from going to parks, as priorities for program and facility improvements.

There were a total of 524 responses from individual households, a statistically significant sample. The racial and ethnic demographics of survey respondents is representative of and closely aligns to the overall city population.

Outreach for the survey was supported by Nuestra Casa’s Promotoras group at food distributions centers and pop-up events, announced on the City Newsletter, and posted on several local Facebook groups and via City-sponsored Facebook ads. Printed posters and flyers were distributed through the community at grocery stores.

See the Appendix A.1 for full survey results.

92 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

WHO TOOK THE SURVEY

MOST VISITED PARKS

PRIMARY REASONS YOU AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD USE PARK AND REC FACILITIES IN EPA?

PRIMARY REASONS THAT PREVENT YOU AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD FROM USING EPA FACILITIES?

48% Do not feel safe using parks/trails 37% Parks/trails are not well maintained 36% Lack of facilities to use 29% No park close to home 22% Lack of quality programs 18%

Lack of parking to access parks/trails

Community Priorities 93

2.7 COMMUNITY PRIORITIES SEVEN MAJOR PRIORITIES The community identified seven major priorities throughout the various engagement activities identified in this chapter. Each priority includes a brief description and various quotes from pulled from the wide range of community conversations throughout the planning process. The recommendations chapter further elaborates on the summary of community priorities and their relationship with our final recommendations.

1

Connect People to Parks

Ensure all EPA residents have safe access to parks and open space, and access to all facilities and programs.

Amenities like local food trucks, kiosks for coffee, and events such as music and art festivals in parks.

Amenities like water fountains, bike racks, Wi-Fi, and phone charging stations.

Multi-use fields with event and performance spaces.

A free or low-cost pool for the community, swim lessons.

Clean restrooms that are open.

Cleaner parks that are well maintained, more garbage cans.

94 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Continue supporting baseball and other sports programs at Jack Farrell and MLK Park.

2

Create Diverse & Inclusive Parks

Celebrate the unique history of people and place in EPA. Provide residents with parks that are reliable, free, and serviceable-for-all.

Artwork and interactive murals to present history and community culture.

Enhance connectivity and provide safer access for people walking and biking.

Better signage and markings for trailheads to understand public access.

3

Promote Public Health & Sustainability

Establish and promote community health through parks and open space, reduce the impact of facilities on the environment, and encourage sustainable practices.

Develop interactive mobile app for history and art.

Amenities like local food trucks, kiosks for coffee, and events such as music and art festivals in parks.

Access to Bay Trail for the community by unlocking gate from Rutgers Street.

Community Priorities 95

4

5

Celebrate The Bay

Reconnect the EPA community to the Bay by enhancing and improving safe and equitable access to all natural preserves and resources.

Provide programs and amenities that reflect the desires and needs of the community while improving safety and energizing parks.

Unlock gates to MLK Jr. Park Path.

Community gardens for parents and children.

Better bike trails and shared bike facilities.

Additional volunteers and paid staff to manage the parks system.

96 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Activate East Palo Alto Parks

Blue light emergency station.

Outdoor education about the environment and ecology.

Helping and providing services to homeless encampments in the parks.

6

Improve Park Operations

Maintain and improve park operations by expanding and diversifying staff resources.

Native planting for urban greening.

Green infrastructure like permeable paving and water capture along trails and in parks.

Flood announcement systems.

7

Grow Programming & Partnerships

Create new partnerships and programming opportunities and strengthen existing relationships with local nonprofits and nongovernmental organizations.

Well lit parks so people can frequent them at the end of the day.

Additional staff in parks, park ranger, concession employees, and volunteers or ambassadors.

More access to afterschool programs to keep kids out of trouble.

Community Priorities

97

COOLEY LANDING 98 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

NEEDS ASSESSMENT 3.1

General Plan Park Needs

3.2 Existing Park Inventory 3.3 Community Priorities 3.4 Recreational Trends 3.5 Levels of Service

3 Needs Assessment 99

NEEDS ASSESSMENT In order to understand the park needs for the City of East Palo Alto a comprehensive overview of City goals, community priorities and current inventory is needed. This chapter looks at each of those components in detail.

•

The General Plan 2035 has identified park acreage required to meet the needs of East Palo Alto’s growing populations. It also provides guidance on the appropriate standards for walksheds to parks as well as the amount of parkland the City will seek to provide per 1,000 people.

•

The existing park inventory summarizes the key deficiencies in the City’s park system in regards to amenities and acreages.

•

The next component that feeds into needs assessment is the community priorities derived from what we heard through numerous community conversations. The community needs have been rated as high, medium and low based on a Priority Ranking created from the summarized feedback.

•

Lastly, the levels of service standards projections for East Palo Alto’s population in 2035 guide which park type and amenity is deficient in the City. The standards are based on General Plan goals as well as regional and national resources.

100 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

3.1 GENERAL PLAN PARK NEEDS The General Plan (YEAR) reported a total of 33 acres of usable park land in EPA, translating to less than one acre of park land per 1,000 residents. (The General Plan also recognizes another 225 acres of open space along the Bay shore.) The City currently maintains a parkland dedication in/lieu fee standard of 3 acres per 1,000 residents.

With a projected increase in population of 7,515 by 2035, 79 acres of new parkland will be needed to meet the 3 acre standard. East Palo Alto’s demographics – with more children and larger household size than the County average – highlight the high demand for parks in comparison to neighboring communities.

Furthermore, many residents are located more than a 10-minute walk from a park--and in some cases the closest park lacks recreation amenities

GENERAL PLAN POLICIES FOR PARKS •

New parks and open space. Maintain a park standard of 3 acres per 1,000 residents.

Undertake a program to add 79 acres of new formalized park spaces, prioritizing the areas of the City currently underserved by parks (Weeks, Kavanaugh, Willow, and Woodland).

•

Bay Access Master Plan. Implement the park and trail improvements and expansions called for in the EPA Bay Access Master Plan.

•

Ravenswood Plan. Implement the parks and trails identified in the Ravenswood TOD Specific Plan.

•

Park access. To increase resident access to open space, strive to locate park facilities within ¼ mile walking distance of all residences in East Palo Alto.

•

Parks and open space. Establish a range of parks and open spaces, including tot lots,

FIGURE 3-1: GENERAL PLAN EXISTING AND PROPOSED OPEN SPACE NETWORK

neighborhood parks, community parks, plazas/ greens and/or greenways/parkways within all new Neighborhoods, Centers and Districts.

•

New trails and paths. Construct new trails or multi-use paths, particularly along the San Francisquito Creek or in the Baylands.

•

Gap closure. Work to fill critical gaps in the City’s trail network, particularly completing the Bay Trail and other planned connections in the Ravenswood Employment District, and along San Francisquito Creek between O’Connor and University Avenue.

•

Connections to Bay Trail. Explore new and improved connections to the Bay Trail in key locations.

Needs Assessment 101

3.2 EXISTING PARK INVENTORY The City of East Palo Alto presently has 6 City operated parks that provide the residents with approximately 24 acres of parkland. This leaves a large deficit that needs to be covered to reach the 3 acres per 1,000 people General Plan goal. From the park assessment we also learn that not all of these 24 acres of parkland are in good condition with the 2.56 acres of Bell Street Park ranking Poor with only 1.9 out of 5 in the park assessment. Additional 9.32 acres parkland in Jack Farrell Park and Martin Luther King Jr. Park only received a Fair score. The present park locations, as seen in Figure 3-2 leave major gaps in the park service areas if we look at the 10-minute walkshed for the parks. This points towards a need to fill these gaps with new park acreage to achieve park equity.

Existing Parks

Acerage

Jack Farrell Park

3.73

Pocket Park at Newbridge

0.14

Bell Street Park

2.56

Joel Davis Memorial Park

1.94

Martin LutherKing KingPark Jr. Park Martin Luther

5.49

Cooley Landing

10.03 Total

Open Space

23.89 Acerage

Don Edwards SF Wildlife Preserve

5.50

Shoreline Park

13.00 Total

18.50

TABLE 3-1: PARK ASSESSMENTS OVERVIEW

Park ID

Park Classification (Recommended by WRT)

Park Name

Park Area (Acre)

Park Assessment Score

1

Jack Farrell Park

Community Park

3.73

Fair: 2.9

2

Pocket Park at Newbridge

Pocket Park

0.14

Good: 3.9

3

Bell Street Park

Neighborhood Park

2.56

Poor: 1.9

4

Joel Davis Memorial Park

Neighborhood Park

1.94

Good: 3.5

5

Martin Luther King Jr. Park

Community Park

5.49

Fair: 2.7

6

Cooley Landing

Regional Park

10.02

Great: 4.2

Poor: 1-2 points

Fair: 2.1-3 points

102 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Good: 3.1-4 points

Great: 4.1-5 points

FIGURE 3-2:

EXISTING PARK SERVICE AREAS

Needs Assessment 103

3.3 COMMUNITY PRIORITIES During the planning process the community was consulted using multiple avenues as noted in chapter two. Based on what was heard from the community, especially from the community survey a Priority Ranking list was developed for both park amenity/ facility and for park programming. The purpose of this is to provide an objective tool for prioritizing investments based on the results. The Priority Ranking equally weighs (1) the importance that residents place on a facility/program and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the facility/program.

From Figure 3-3 we can see that the amenities with highest priority in the community are: 1.

Outdoor workout stations

2. Restrooms 3. Indoor basketball courts 4. Community gardens 5. Splash pad 6. Volleyball court

FIGURE 3-3 - HIGHEST AMENITY/FACILITY PRIORITIES (ALL SURVEYS) Source: Collected from all surveys to date (online, pop-ups, and focus group)

HIGHEST COMMUNITY NEEDS

MEDIUM COMMUNITY NEEDS

LOW COMMUNITY NEEDS

104 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Similarly, Figure 3-4 shows us that the highest programming priorities are: 1.

Adult fitness and wellness programs

2. After school programs for youth of all ages 3. Youth swim programs 4. Adult swim programs 5. Cultural enrichment programs

FIGURE 3-4 - HIGHEST PROGRAMMING PRIORITIES (ALL SURVEYS) Source: Collected from all surveys to date (online, pop-ups, and focus group)

HIGHEST COMMUNITY NEEDS

MEDIUM COMMUNITY NEEDS

LOW COMMUNITY NEEDS

Needs Assessment 105

3.4 RECREATIONAL TRENDS The Recreational Trends Analysis provides an understanding of national and local recreational trends. Trends data used for this analysis was obtained from Sports & Fitness Industry Association’s (SFIA), National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA), and Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI). All trend data is based on current and/or historical participation rates, statistically-valid survey results, or NRPA Park Metrics.

NATIONAL TRENDS IN RECREATION NATIONAL TRENDS IN GENERAL SPORTS The top sports most heavily participated in the United States were Basketball (27.1 million), Golf (25.1 million), and Tennis (22.6 million) which have participation figures well in excess of the other activities within the general sports category. Baseball (15.5 million), and Outdoor Soccer (12.5 million) round out the top five.

Five-Year Trend Since 2016, Pickleball (71.2%), Golf- Entertainment Venues (51.3%), and Tennis (25.1%) have shown the largest increase in participation. Similarly, Basketball

Basketball 27.1 Million

Golf 25.1 Million

(21.4%) and Boxing for Competition (20.7%) have also experienced significant growth. Based on the fiveyear trend from 2016-2021, the sports that are most rapidly declining in participation include Ultimate Frisbee (-40.4%), Roller Hockey (-26.1%), Volleyball (Sand/Beach) (-23.8%), Squash (-23.5%), Slow Pitch Softball (-21.9%), and Gymnastics (-20.7%).

One-Year Trend The most recent year shares some similarities with the five-year trends; with Pickleball (14.8%) and Boxing for Competition (7.3%) experiencing some of the greatest increases in participation this past year. The greatest one-year increases also include Fast Pitch Softball (15.3%), Gymnastics (10.9%), and Court Volleyball (8.1%). Basketball (-2.2%), Flag Football (-1.6%), Indoor Soccer (-0.6%) and Baseball ( -0.5%) have shown a five-year trend increase, but a decrease over the last year. This is likely a direct result of coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, other team sports such as Ultimate Frisbee (-5.8%), Slow Pitch Softball (-5.4%), Roller Hockey (-5%), Racquetball (-4.8%) and Beach/Sand Volleyball (-3.1%), also had significant decreases in participation over the last year.

LOCAL TRENDS GENERAL SPORTS MARKET POTENTIAL

The following charts show sport and leisure market potential data from ESRI. A Market Potential (MPI) Index (MPI) measures the probable demand for a product or service within the city. The MPI shows Tennis Baseball Soccer the likelihood that a resident of the target area will 22.6 Million 15.5 Million 12.5 Million participate in certain activities when compared to

106 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

the US National average. The national average is 100, therefore numbers below 100 would represent a lower than average participation rate, and numbers above 100 would represent higher than average participation rate.

Overall, East Palo Alto demonstrates average to below average market potential index (MPI) numbers.

General sports category has the highest MPI numbers with several activities having MPI scores that are above to well above the national average. These overall MPI scores show that East Palo Alto has the opportunity to grow participation in recreational activities. This becomes significant for when the City considers building new parks and/or facilities or starting up new programs; giving them a strong tool to estimate resident attendance. High index numbers (100+) are significant because they demonstrate that there is a greater potential that residents of the city will actively participate in offerings provided by the City.

FIGURE 3-5 - GENERAL SPORTS MPI

far below average locally.

•

Basketball is the most participated in sport nationally while soccer is the most participated in sport locally.

•

Football is losing participants both locally and nationally.

•

Outdoor recreational activities are on the rise nationally, but are less popular locally.

•

Based on national measurements, income level has a positive impact on activity rate.

Higher income households tend to have higher activity rates.

RECREATION TRENDS SUMMARY

•

Age is also a significant factor to inactivity level. Generation Z (age 6-17) had the lowest inactivity rate while the Boomer generation (age 55+) had the highest inactivity rate.

It is critically important for East Palo Alto to understand the local and national participation trends in recreation activities. In doing so, the City can gain general insight into the lifecycle stage of recreation programs and activities (emerging, stable and declining) and thereby anticipate potential changes in need and demand for the programs and activities that it provides to the residents of East Palo Alto.

Here are some major takeaways for local and national recreation trends:

•

Specific strategies must be developed to address the growing and diversifying senior (55+) population.

•

Besides income and age factors, nonparticipants are more likely to join sports or fitness activities if a friend accompanies them.

•

Fitness walking remained the most popular activity overall nationally, but is well below the national average locally. This activity will grow in popularity in East Palo Alto if safe pedestrian connections are developed.

•

All listed aquatic activities have experienced strong participation growth, nationally, but is Needs Assessment 107

3.5 LEVELS OF SERVICE LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS Level of Service (LOS) standards are guidelines that define service areas based on population that support investment decisions related to parks, facilities and amenities. The Parks Master Plan presents an opportunity to take a fresh look at these standards.

Our evaluation of LOS standards considered a combination of local, regional and national resources, including: •

General Plan; Parks and Recreation Element level of service goal of 3.0 acres per 1,000 population.

•

National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) guidelines.

•

Recreation activity participation rates reported by the Sports & Fitness Industry Association’s (SFIA) 2022 Study of Sports.

•

Recreation participation as it applies to activities that occur in the United States and East Palo Alto area.

•

Community and stakeholder input and general observations. This information allowed standards to be customized to the East Palo Alto Parks and Recreation system.

•

Planned yet not developed parks within each park classification system in East Palo Alto.

•

The ability for the City to financially sustain a high-quality park system.

These resources provide LOS guidelines based on population to inform and support investment decisions related to parks.

108 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

CURRENT LEVEL OF SERVICE The chart below provides a snapshot of the current level of service standards and East Palo Alto’s current level of contribution associated with the current service levels.

TABLE 3-2: CURRENT LEVEL OF SERVICE 2020 Inventory

Service Levels

Unit

City Inventory

Existing Private Inventory

Total Inventory

Current % of Inventory Provided by City

POCKET PARKS

Acre(s)

0.14

0.74

0.88

16%

0.03

acres per

1,000

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS

Acre(s)

1.94

1.94

100%

0.06

acres per

1,000

COMMUNITY PARKS

Acre(s)

11.78

11.78

100%

0.39

acres per

1,000

SPECIAL USE PARKS

Acre(s)

10.03

10.03

100%

0.33

acres per

1,000

Total Acre(s)

23.89

24.63

97%

0.79

acres per

1,000

Recreation Component

Current Service Level

DEVELOPED PARKS

0.74

OUTDOOR AMENITIES DIAMOND FIELD

Field

2.00

2.00

100%

1.00

Field per

15,017

MULTIUSE FIELD

Field

1.00

1.00

100%

1.00

Field per

30,034

BASKETBALL COURT

Court

1.00

1.00

100%

1.00

Court per

30,034

PICKLEBALL COURT

Court

-

-

NA

1.00

Court per

NA

TENNIS COURT

Court

-

-

NA

1.00

Court per

NA

VOLLEYBALL COURT (SAND/GRASS)

Court

-

-

-

NA

1.00

court per

NA

DOG PARK

Site

-

-

-

NA

1.00

Site per

NA

PLAYGROUNDS

Site

4.00

2.00

6.00

67%

1.00

Site per

5,006

PICNIC SHELTER

Site

-

-

-

NA

1.00

Site per

NA

BIKE PARK/SKATEPARK/PUMP TRACK

Site

1.00

1.00

100%

1.00

Site per

30,034

OUTDOOR SWIM CENTER

Site

-

1.00

0%

1.00

Site per

30,034

DISC GOLF

Site

-

-

NA

1.00

Site per

NA

Sq ft`

33,209

41,576

80%

1.38

Sq ft per

Person

1.00

INDOOR AMENITIES INDOOR COMMUNTY/REC FACILITIES

8,367

Needs Assessment 109

LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS RECOMMENDATION The current service levels have served East Palo Alto well and provide a basis for measuring park system performance. Coupled with the park system assessments, community input and analysis conducted, it is recommended that the City update

its level of service standards to better provide for the recreational priorities of its residents while seeking to achieve geographical equity. The following chart summarizes the recommended service level standards.

TABLE 3-3: RECOMMENDED STANDARDS FOR LEVEL OF SERVICE Service Levels

Recommended Service Levels

Current Service Level

Recreation Component

DEVELOPED PARKS POCKET PARKS

0.03

acres per

1,000

0.10 acres per

1,000

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS

0.06

acres per

1,000

1.00 acres per

1,000

COMMUNITY PARKS

0.39

acres per

1,000

1.63 acres per

1,000

SPECIAL USE PARKS

0.33

acres per

1,000

0.27 acres per

1,000

0.79

acres per

1,000

3.00 acres per

1,000

DIAMOND FIELD

1.00

Field per

15,017

1.00 Field per

20,000

MULTIUSE FIELD

1.00

Field per

30,034

1.00 Field per

7,500

BASKETBALL COURT

1.00

Court per

30,034

1.00 Court per

7,500

PICKLEBALL COURT

1.00

Court per

NA

1.00 Court per

10,000

TENNIS COURT

1.00

Court per

NA

1.00 Court per

15,000

VOLLEYBALL COURT (SAND/GRASS)

1.00

court per

NA

1.00 court per

15,000

DOG PARK

1.00

Site per

NA

1.00

Site per

20,000

PLAYGROUNDS

1.00

Site per

5,006

1.00

Site per

3,000

PICNIC SHELTER

1.00

Site per

NA

1.00

Site per

7,500

BIKE PARK/SKATEPARK/PUMP TRACK

1.00

Site per

30,034

1.00

Site per

75,000

OUTDOOR SWIM CENTER

1.00

Site per

30,034

1.00

Site per

50,000

DISC GOLF

1.00

Site per

NA

1.00

Site per

50,000

1.38

Sq ft per

Person

1.50

Sq ft per

Person

Total OUTDOOR AMENITIES

INDOOR AMENITIES INDOOR COMMUNTY/REC FACILITIES

110 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

PLEASE NOTE: Natural Area parks and trails, were not calculated in this populationbased service level analysis because they are based on resource location and connected networks rather than the city’s resident population.

MEETING RECOMMENDED SERVICE LEVELS IN 2035 The population of East Palo Alto is projected to increase by approximately 7,000 by 2035 and with it, there will be a correlating increase in need for park and recreation facilities. The following table shows the magnitude of additional park acreage, amenities,

and facilities that will be needed in 2035 based on the projected population growth and the recommended service level standard.

TABLE 3-4: LEVEL OF SERVICE NEEDS FOR 2035 Service Levels

Recommended Service Levels

Recreation Component

2035 Standards Overall

Meet Standard/ Need Exists

Additional Facilities/ Amenities Needed

DEVELOPED PARKS POCKET PARKS

0.10 acres per

1,000

Need Exists

3 Acre(s)

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS

1.00 acres per

1,000

Need Exists

35 Acre(s)

COMMUNITY PARKS

1.63 acres per

1,000

Need Exists

49 Acre(s)

SPECIAL USE PARKS

0.27 acres per

1,000 Meets Standard

3.00 acres per

1,000

DIAMOND FIELD

1.00 Field per

20,000 Meets Standard

- Field

MULTIUSE FIELD

1.00 Field per

7,500

Need Exists

4 Field

BASKETBALL COURT

1.00 Court per

7,500

Need Exists

4 Court

PICKLEBALL COURT

1.00 Court per

10,000

Need Exists

4 Court

TENNIS COURT

1.00 Court per

15,000

Need Exists

2 Court

VOLLEYBALL COURT (SAND/GRASS)

1.00 court per

15,000

Need Exists

2 Court

DOG PARK

1.00

Site per

20,000

Need Exists

2 Site

PLAYGROUNDS

1.00

Site per

3,000

Need Exists

6 Site

PICNIC SHELTER

1.00

Site per

7,500

Need Exists

5 Site

BIKE PARK/SKATEPARK/PUMP TRACK

1.00

Site per

75,000 Meets Standard

- Site

OUTDOOR SWIM CENTER

1.00

Site per

50,000 Meets Standard

- Site

DISC GOLF

1.00

Site per

50,000

Need Exists

1 Site

1.50

Sq ft per

Person

Need Exists

13,992 Sq ft

Total

Need Exists

- Acre(s)

87

Acre(s)

OUTDOOR AMENITIES

INDOOR AMENITIES INDOOR COMMUNTY/REC FACILITIES

Needs Assessment 111

FIGURE 3-6:

FUTURE PLANNING EFFORTS

112 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

FUTURE PARK AND FACILITY DEVELOPMENT Several future developed parks and facilities have been planned and are expected to be constructed within the next 10-15 years and are shown below.

The table identifies an additional 48.4 acres and park amenities that, when developed or made publicly accessible, will be added to the City’s parks system.

TABLE 3-5: FUTURE PARK AND FACILITY DEVELOPMENT Inventory

Unit

Total Exisiting Inventory

POCKET PARKS

Acre(s)

0.88

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS

Acre(s)

1.94

COMMUNITY PARKS

Acre(s)

11.78

SPECIAL USE PARKS

Acre(s)

10.03

Total Acre(s)

24.63

Recreation Component

Future Future Future Developer City School Related Inventory Inventory Inventory

Total Future Planned Inventory

% of Total Existing Inventory PLUS Future Provided by Inventory City

DEVELOPED PARKS 0.90

2.96

3.84

77%

9.86

11.62

21.48

23.42

8%

12.46

9.00

23.96

35.74

40%

-

10.03

100%

48.40

73.03

40%

-

2.00

100%

2.06 2.50

4.56

22.32

21.52

OUTDOOR AMENITIES DIAMOND FIELD

Field

2.00

MULTIUSE FIELD

Field

1.00

1.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

33%

BASKETBALL COURT

Court

1.00

3.50

2.00

5.50

6.50

15%

PICKLEBALL COURT

Court

-

-

-

-

-

TENNIS COURT

Court

-

3.00

4.00

4.00

0%

VOLLEYBALL COURT (SAND/GRASS)

Court

-

-

-

-

-

DOG PARK

Site

-

-

1.00

1.00

1.00

0%

PLAYGROUNDS

Site

6.00

4.00

1.00

5.00

11.00

55%

PICNIC SHELTER

Site

-

2.00

2.00

2.00

0%

BIKE PARK/SKATEPARK/PUMP TRACK

Site

1.00

-

1.00

100%

OUTDOOR SWIM CENTER

Site

1.00

-

1.00

100%

DISC GOLF

Site

-

-

-

-

Sq ft`

41,567

41,567

100%

1.00

INDOOR AMENITIES INDOOR COMMUNTY/REC FACILITIES

0

Needs Assessment 113

PLANNED FUTURE PARKS IMPACT ON LEVEL OF SERVICE NEEDS To understand the impact that the future parks and facilities will have on the City’s ability to meet the service level standards shown on the previous table, a comparative level of service table was developed as shown below.

TABLE 3-6: PLANNED FUTURE PARKS IMPACT ON LEVEL OF SERVICE NEEDS 2035 Standards BEFORE Future Inventory Added

Service Levels

Recommended Service Levels

Recreation Component

2035 Standards Overall AFTER Future Inventory is Added

Meet Standard/ Need Exists

Additional Facilities/ Amenities Needed

Meet Standard/ Need Exists

Additional Facilities/ Amenities Needed

DEVELOPED PARKS POCKET PARKS

0.10

acres per

1,000

Need Exists

3 Acre(s)

Meets Standard

- Acre(s)

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS

1.00

acres per

1,000

Need Exists

35 Acre(s)

Need Exists

14 Acre(s)

COMMUNITY PARKS

1.63

acres per

1,000

Need Exists

49 Acre(s)

Need Exists

25 Acre(s)

SPECIAL USE PARKS

0.27

acres per

1,000 Meets Standard

- Acre(s)

Meets Standard

- Acre(s)

Total 3.00 acres per

1,000

Need Exists

87

Acre(s)

Need Exists

38

Acre(s)

OUTDOOR AMENITIES DIAMOND FIELD

1.00 Field per

20,000 Meets Standard

- Field per

Meets Standard

- Field

MULTIUSE FIELD

1.00

Field per

7,500

Need Exists

4 Field per

Need Exists

2 Field

BASKETBALL COURT

1.00 Court per

7,500

Need Exists

4 Court per

Meets Standard

- Court

PICKLEBALL COURT

1.00 Court per

10,000

Need Exists

4 Court per

Need Exists

4 Court

TENNIS COURT

1.00 Court per

15,000

Need Exists

2 Court per

Meets Standard

- Court

VOLLEYBALL COURT (SAND/GRASS)

1.00

court per

15,000

Need Exists

2 court per

Need Exists

2 Court

DOG PARK

1.00

Site per

20,000

Need Exists

2 Site per

Need Exists

1 Site

PLAYGROUNDS

1.00

Site per

3,000

Need Exists

6 Site per

Need Exists

1 Site

PICNIC SHELTER

1.00

Site per

7,500

Need Exists

5 Site per

Need Exists

3 Site

BIKE PARK/SKATEPARK/PUMP TRACK 1.00

Site per

75,000 Meets Standard

- Site per

Meets Standard

- Site

OUTDOOR SWIM CENTER

1.00

Site per

50,000 Meets Standard

- Site per

Meets Standard

- Site

DISC GOLF

1.00

Site per

50,000

Need Exists

1 Site per

Need Exists

1 Site

INDOOR COMMUNTY/REC FACILITIES 1.50

Sq ft per

Person

Need Exists

Need Exists

13,992 Sq ft

INDOOR AMENITIES

114 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

13,992 Sq ft

The introduction of future parks into the parks system has a significant impact on the following park, amenity and facility categories as summarized below: •

Developed Parks: The introduction of 48.40 acres of developed parks will reduce the City’s developed park acreage need in 2035 by 54% - from 87 acres needed to 38 acres needed.

•

Multi-Use Fields: The introduction of two multi-use fields will reduce the City’s need for this type of field by 50% - from 4 fields needed to 2 fields needed.

•

Outdoor Basketball Courts: The introduction of six and a half basketball courts will fully satisfy the City’s need for this type of sport court.

•

Tennis Courts: The introduction of four tennis courts will fully satisfy the City’s need for this type of sport court.

•

Off-Leash Dog Area: The development of one off-leash dog area will fully satisfy the City’s need for this type of amenity

•

Playground: The introduction of five playgrounds will reduce the City’s need for this type of park amenity by 83% - from 6 sites needed to 1 site needed.

•

Picnic Shelters: The development of two picnic shelters will reduce the City’s need for this type of park amenity by 40% - from 5 sites needed to 3 sites needed.

CITY CONTRIBUTION LEVEL TO MEETING RESIDUAL UNMET NEEDS The recommended service level standards consider all publicly accessible parks and facilities and City of East Palo Alto is one of many citywide providers of park and recreation facilities and services and therefore generally provides less than 100% of the total public inventory. For each park and facility type, the City of East Palo Alto’s share or responsibility to address resident needs is reflected through recommended City of East Palo Alto contribution strategy. Several resources contribute to the determination of the City’s level of contribution, including but not limited to, the following: •

Ability for the City to acquire additional park land for developed parks.

•

The ability for the City to financially sustain a high-quality park, open space, and trail system.

•

Assumption that redevelopment within the city, including the provision of publicly accessible parkland, will complement the publicly accessible park and recreation offerings in the city.

The contribution strategy represents the percentage that the City should be responsible for in meeting community needs to provide its share of needed facilities and parkland through 2035. The following summarizes the level of City of East Palo Alto’s contribution to support the recommended Service Level Standards for each major park and facility type that will be needed through 2035. The plan recommends that the City be responsible for 50% of the additional acreages needed after the addition of the future inventory acreage. This is approximately 20 acres of developed parkland. The City should provide 100% of the remaining indoor community facilities square feet required which equals 13,992 square feet.

Needs Assessment 115

BELL STREET PARK BELL STREET PARK 116 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION 4.1

Improving our Parks

4.2

Expanding our Parks

4.3

Recreation in our Communities

4.4

Capital Costs and Funding Opportunities

4.5

Operations, Park Maintenance and Staffing Proposal

4 Recommendations & Implementation 117

COOLEY LANDING 118 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

RECOMMENDATIONS & IMPLEMENTATION This chapter weaves together the evaluation of existing conditions from chapter 1, the community priorities identified in chapter 2, and the needs assessment (based on demographics, economic and social changes, growth projections and planned developments) from chapter 3 into concrete actions and specific improvements aimed to achieve the goals of the master plan.

These improvements fall into six categories: (1) improvements to existing parks; (2) new or expanded parks; (3) recreation partnerships; (4) capital improvement costs and funding opportunities; (5) operations and staffing, and (6) park maintenance.

Improvements are described in the sections that follow.

In each section, general recommendations are presented, and shown alongside community priorities learned from the engagement process. More detailed site-specific enhancements are then summarized.

Recommendations & Implementation 119

COMMUNITY EVENT EPA TREE LIGHTING CEREMONY 120 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

4.1 IMPROVING OUR PARKS Existing parks are loved and can be invested in to better meet the needs of the community through augmented maintenance, lifecycle replacement of worn out items, and strategic improvements. Some parks are identified for major revisioning through a master plan. Two parks - MLK and Bell Street are already undergoing redesign through active community planning exercises.

This section describes general recommendations for each existing park based on feedback received though the Park Master Plan process.

Tables in the appendix list existing facility repairs and lifecycle replacements needed in each park.

These basic improvements are fundamental for a functional park. Projects may include repairs to paving, replanting, repainting, routine maintenance, as well as removing barriers of access for people with disabilities.

Strategic park improvements in the table are characterized as ones that aim to make measured park enhancement to the existing system. They may include site redesigns, amenity, and facility upgrades, introduction of new facilities within the park system.

This category describes the extra services or capital improvements that should be undertaken when additional funding is available.

Recommendations & Implementation 121

4.1 IMPROVING OUR PARKS The East Palo Alto community values and has deep ties with their parks. From cultural celebrations, family gatherings, and youth athletics, parks serve a wide cross section of the community. The community’s clear priority is to invest in existing parks to expand experiences, make repairs, and improve safety. The following recommendations will improve existing parks.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING PARKS

1. Increase accessibility to all

5. Improve signage and wayfinding

existing park restrooms by

markers at entrances and along trails

ensuring that they are open and

to help park users navigate with

well maintained

confidence

2. Create spaces within parks for

6. Incorporate historical markers,

locally owned businesses and

interpretative signage, and

food trucks to operate during

educational panels within parks

special community events and

7. Aspire to provide universal access

holidays 3. Ensure all parks are well lit to provide a sense of safety and improved surveillance 4. Install community bulletin

and go beyond minimum ADA requirements to achieve broader access for all residents 8. Improve pedestrian access to parks by advocating for safe street

boards in all EPA parks to provide

crossings within a 1/4 mile walkshed

community members with access

of all parks

to City resources, events, and other activities

9. Improve integration with transit and bicycle networks to expand park access and increase active transportation

122 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

REGIONAL CASE STUDY

10. Establish relationships with organizations such as Downtown Street Team to support unhoused communities living in parks and make parks available for everyone 11. Create greater connectivity to the Bay Trail - open the gate at Rutgers Street

✓

Connect People to Parks

✓

Create Diverse & Inclusive Parks

✓

Promote Public Health & Sustainability

✓

Celebrate the Bay

✓

Activate EPA Parks Improve Park Operations

✓

Grow Programmings & Partnerships

COMMUNIT Y PRIORITIES

DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM Downtown Streets Team works collaboratively to restore dignity, inspire hope, and provide a pathway to recover from homelessness.

Team members are unhoused neighbors or folks at risk of experiencing homelessness.

They receive access to case management, system navigation, and employment placement services from trained DST Case Managers and Employment Specialists. Teams engage in community beautification and clean-up projects that help challenge common negative perceptions of homelessness.

Downtown Streets Team operates in 16 communities across Northern and Central California. In the Peninsula, they work with communities in Redwood City, Sunnyvale, and Palo Alto.

Some parks in EPA host an unhoused population who would benefit from the support of the Downtown Streets Team to connect them with services and may result in a more welcoming park atmosphere.

Recommendations & Implementation 123

JACK FARRELL PARK COMMUNITY VOICES & PARK NEEDS Jack Farrell Park is a wonderful space that sits low in a basin in north EPA. It has numerous passive and active recreational amenities such as a basketball court, a baseball field, a walking loop, picnic and seating areas, as well as a playground, and recently installed fitness equipment.

slopes. The perimeter fence surrounding the park on the back is in disrepair and should be replaced.

Traffic calming should happen along Fordham for safer crossings. Other small planting improvements add to the sense of safety and appeal to residents.

Raising the canopy of existing trees, especially near the baseball backstop improves sightlines and “eyes on the park”.

Issues such as safety and disrepair affect Jack Farrell Park, but opportunities exists to make significant improvements in the short-term and long-term.

Long term strategies should consider stormwater storage capacity in large underground chamber under the park as part of a citywide plan to prevent flooding.

Access through Fordham Street can be improved by removing barriers such as chains and addressing

Seating and picnic areas

•

Entrance identity around the park

•

Access at park entries

•

Raise tree canopy for better sightlines

•

Lighting at outdoor basketball court

•

Fence replacement at park rear perimeter

124 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

P

•

A

ND

ING OUR P

EX

Multi-use fields for active play

A KS

•

$2,421,000 TOTAL COST OF LIFECYCLE REPLACEMENT

S

Amphitheater seating

P

R

•

NING OUR

RK

Access to park via Fordham St and Michigan Ave

IN

I TA

A

•

MA

LIST OF ENHANCEMENTS

$1,797,700

See Chapter 1.4 for Park Assessments

Recommendations & Implementation 125

JACK FARRELL PARK IMPROVEMENTS Important strategic park improvements can be accomplished at Jack Farrell Park to meet both level-of-service goals and desires from community members.

Amphitheater steps for event and performance viewing Improve lighting at existing basketball court

The conceptual proposal for strategic improvements recommends these key moves: •

An improved street entry that is ADA accessible with stairs and ramps creates a new visible park entry and gently bringing users down to the level of the sport fields and playgrounds.

New and improved entrance via Michigan Ave with walking path, signage, and planting.

•

Amphitheater seating to address grade changes along Fordham and provide seating to view events and performances.

•

Replace permanent outfield fence with temporary fence during games to allow other activities to use the grass during non-baseball game periods.

•

Consider turf improvements in order to ease maintenance and water usage.

•

Additional space for small amenities such as BBQ area, gathering, skate spot, etc.

•

New perimeter fence along the park.

•

Raise existing tree canopies to provide clear sightlines for safety within the park.

Expand use area for picnics and gatherings

Improved play areas

ue en Av

•

dha For

n ga hi

An improved street edge with parking spaces, permeable parking surface for storm-water management, and streetscape improvements.

ic M

•

et tre S m

Improved access on Michigan Avenue FIGURE 4-1: PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR JACK FARRELL PARK

126 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Grand new entry with stairs and ramps Renovate bathrooms with time locking doors Improve street edge and parking Raise tree canopy to improve sightliness

et Expand recreational use of tre S a existing field zag n Go Improve access to surrounding neighborhood

Install temporary fence during baseball games Replace fence surrounding the park Expand use area for picnics and gatherings

et

ois

n Illi

re St

Recommendations & Implementation 127

JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK COMMUNITY VOICES & PARK NEEDS Joel Davis Memorial Park is a well-maintained park that is popular because of the walking loop, playground, picnic tables, vast lawn, and shade trees.

It is nestled within a residential neighborhood and cohesively integrated within its context.

as a community park for the southern neighborhoods of EPA, installing permanent bathrooms is desirable.

More strategic improvements for the long-term success of the park are discussed in greater detail on the following spread.

Simple moves can enhance the park. Additional seating options can be placed around the park edges to offer local residents comfortable places to sit. A connection can be made between the park and the City’s governmental offices, to provide employees with an easier connection into the park and improve activation. Given the parks popularity and function

•

Outdoor putting green

•

Seating options around the perimeter of the park

•

Expanded picnic and seating options

•

Additional waste receptacles

•

Open lawn area for informal games and play

128 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

A

ND

ING OUR P

EX

P

Bocce ball courts

A KS

•

$1,197,000 TOTAL COST OF LIFECYCLE REPLACEMENT

S

Permanent bathroom (planned)

P

R

•

NING OUR

RK

Direct connection between the park and EPA’s Community and Economic Development and Public Works Engineering offices

IN

I TA

A

•

MA

LIST OF ENHANCEMENTS

$283,200

See Chapter 1.4 for Park Assessments

Recommendations & Implementation 129

JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS Joel Davis already is a well-maintained and heavily used park in EPA. It serves its neighborhood by providing a place for respite and leisure.

The strategic improvements proposed here aim to maintain the character and aesthetic of the park as a beloved neighborhood gathering space. Small recommendations and additions are proposed to expand recreational opportunities.

•

Open lawn area to be enhanced to allow for spontaneous and informal play such as Frisbee, soccer, touch football, or lawn picnics. Removal or phasing out of 2-3 trees over time should be considered.

•

Additional picnic and seating areas by Tinsley St and Mouton Cir to provide greater connectivity to adjacent neighborhood.

•

Additional benches around the perimeter of the park to provide residents and visitors with greater sitting options.

•

Two bocce ball courts to expand recreational opportunities and bring more amenities to the EPA residents.

•

New waste receptacles at corners of the park.

•

Small putting green court by Oakes St to enliven the park and expand amenities for EPA residents.

•

Improved access between the park and the City’s governmental offices to provide better access to City employees.

•

The popular play area can improved by adding shade canopy or trees. A tot area can also be considered.

130 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Existing park playgrounds can be improved with shade and small tot-lot

Ta te S

t

FIGURE 4-2: PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK

New gate to provide better access to City offices Open lawn area to remain clear for recreational activities New waste receptacles Mc Na ir

Additional seating and picnic space

St

on ut

r

Ci

o M

t

S ey

l ns i T

t

S es k a

O

New bocce courts for added recreation

Putting green course New waste receptacles Additional seating and picnic options

Recommendations & Implementation 131

POCKET PARK AT NEWBRIDGE COMMUNITY VOICES & PARK NEEDS The Newbridge Street Pocked Park is tucked between the corner of Newbridge Street and Bay Avenue. It contains few amenities and functions primarily as a passive green space for passerbys. It has a handful of benches and a bus stop. The area has potential to provide recreational benefit to residents through introducing new amenities as described in the next section.

Monument sign at the corner of the park

•

Corner beautification with planting and trees

ING OUR P

$384,000

132 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

A KS

Additional spaces for seating and resting

A

ND

R

•

P

•

$30,500 TOTAL COST OF LIFECYCLE REPLACEMENT

EX

New small path along west side of the park

P

S

•

NING OUR

RK

Small tot-lot with children’s play area, mounded turf, small sand play zone, and other play features

IN

I TA

A

•

MA

LIST OF ENHANCEMENTS

See Chapter 1.4 for Park Assessments

Recommendations & Implementation 133

POCKET PARK AT NEWBRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS The strategic improvements proposed here aim to expand the possible uses of the park to create a multigenerational space for neighbors to enjoy. Suggested improvements and changes include the following: •

A small tot-lot area (5-years and under), to serve as a gathering space for parents and their young children.

•

The tot-lot will include play features like low climbers, cozy houses, small slides, a play mound with tunnel, and a sand play area.

Peripheral seating helps caregivers watch their kids.

•

A 4’ fence secures the tot lot area.

•

The existing lawn and trees remain in place and can accommodate passive recreational uses, such as reading, lounging, or having a picnic.

•

Additional small gathering spaces around the children’s area with chairs and tables for neighbors to enjoy.

•

The garden-like tip of the park is enhanced with new flowering and climate appropriate plants for beautification.

•

New monument signage marks the parks corner entrance.

•

Signage identifies the park name and history.

Tree and planting beautification New signage to build park identity

FIGURE 4-3: PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS FOR NEWBRIDGE POCKET PARK 134 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Low fence around children’s play area Tot lot area Play mounds and tunnels Sand play zone Benches d

a Ro y Ba

Climbing play features

idge St Newbr

reet

Tot lot gate Additional seating area for seniors

Open lawn area to remain clear for passive activities

Recommendations & Implementation 135

COOLEY LANDING ADDITIONAL PHASES COMMUNITY VOICES & PARK NEEDS Cooley Landing is the newest park in EPA, its location offers many opportunities for wildlife viewing at the water’s edge and out over the marsh. The Bay Trail crosses through the park and provides a wonderful amenity for residents and visitors alike. The park’s community space is great for hosting events and other educational opportunities.

safer for pedestrians and cyclist to enter and enjoy the park. Completing the sixth phase of the Cooley Land Vision Plan will ensure that viewing piers and fishing piers are built to bring added amenities to the park and revive a history of fishing along the Bay. When evaluating Cooley Landing’s additional phases, reference the Cooley Landing Partnership Agreement between the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District and the City.

There are certain strategic improvements that can make the park more accessible to residents as the primary means to get to the park is via private vehicle. Improving active transportation along Bay Rd and ensuring for a complete street will make it

•

Finish implementing Phase Six of the Cooley Landing Vision Plan which includes viewing piers, additional parking spaces, cantilevered overlooks and a fishing pier

136 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

P

A

ND

ING OUR P

EX

Hire a third-party operator to run Cooley Landing and provide educational modules with the support of MidPen

TOTAL COST TO MAINTAIN OUR PARK

A KS

•

$6,578,000

S

Improve active transportation and public transit options to Cooley Landing to provide more safe and equitable access to all residents

P

R

•

NING OUR

RK

Ensure the correct waste receptacles are installed on-site to meet Bay Trail standards

IN

I TA

A

•

MA

LIST OF ENHANCEMENTS

$762,000

See Chapter 1.4 for Park Assessments

Recommendations & Implementation 137

BELL STREET PARK RENOVATION FUTURE MASTER PLAN BELL ST. UNIVERSIT Y AVEN UE

1 A master planning process was carried out in 202122 to redevelop Ball Street Park along University Avenue. The project is being led by the Magical Bridge Foundation, a local nonprofit. The goal is to create 3 2 an outdoor recreation space that serves the entire community.

SENIOR CENTER

Improved amenities will include an enhanced 4 pedestrian entry, a skate park, an activity lawn, 5 YMCA new playgrounds, BBQ stations, outdoor gym, an 7 amphitheater, picnic area, and gathering spaces.

6 17

21

6

1

10

7

8

9

9

13

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

19 19

14

Ensure there 12 are clear and easy connections between the YMCA and the future Bell St 10 Park 15

Ensure there are traffic calming measures to 10 create a safe crossing space for pedestrians and cyclist entering the park 17 UE

•

7

16

1

17

5

all abilities

2

ENHANCED PATH WITH SEATING AND WHEEL STOPPERS AT SENIOR CENTER. SENDERO PEATONAL MEJORADO CON BANCAS Y TOPES PARA LLANTAS

3

EXISTING PARKING LOT TO RENOVATE TO BE FLUSH WITH SENIOR CENTER’S SIDEWALK ESTACIONAMIENTO EXISTENTE A RENOVAR A NIVEL CON BANQUETA DEL CENTRO DE ADULTOS MAYORES

4

CURBLESS DROP-OFF AREA AREA DE DESCENSO A NIVEL

5

BIKE RACKS ESTACIONAMIENTO PARA BICICLETAS

6

OUTDOOR COMMUNITY GATHERING PLAZA WITH FIXED AND MOVABLE FURNISHINGS PLAZA DE ESTAR COMUNITARIA CON MOBILIARIO FIJO Y MOVIBLE

7

TACTILE GUIDEWAYS AT PAVING GUIAS TACTILES EN PAVIMENTO

8

OUTDOOR GYM FOR ADULTS AND SENIORS GIMNASIO AL AIRE LIBRE PARA ADULTOS

9

ALL ABILITIES, ALL AGES UNIVERSAL PLAYGROUND ZONA DE JUEGOS PARA TODAS LAS HABILIDADES Y CUALQUIER EDAD

10

LIGHT FIXTURES, DIFFERENT TYPES ACCORDINGLY WITH CONTEXT AND SAFETY REQUIRERMENTS LUMINARIAS DE DIFERERNTES TIPO DE ACUERDO CON EL CONTEXTO Y REQUERIMIENTOS DE SEGURIDAD

11

MAIN RECREATIONAL LAWN CESPED PRINCIPAL PARA ACTIVIDADES RECREATIVAS

12

SHADE STRUCTURE ESTRUCTURA PARA SOMBRA

13

EAST PALO ALTO PORTAL - THRESHOLD LANDMARKS HITOS - PORTAL DE ENTRADA A LA CIUDAD DE EAST PALO ALTO

14

SPECIAL PAVING ATP ENTRY PORTAL PAVIMENTO ESPECIAL EN EL PORTAL DE ENTRADA

15

AMPHITHEATER ANFITEATRO

16

FOCAL ELEMENT - I.E. CONCESSION KIOSK, WATERFEATURE, TBC AT DESIGN PHASE ELEMENTO FOCAL: KIOSKO DE CONCESION, FUENTE. CONFIRMACION EN LA ETAPA DE DISEÑO

17

POTENTIAL ENTRIES FROM ADJACENT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ENTRADAS POTENCIALES DESDE LOS PROYECTOS DE DESARROLLO COLINDANTES

18

SKATIE COURT PISTA DE PATINAJE

19

BBQ AND PICNIC AREA AREA DE PICNIC Y BBQ

20

ACCESIBLE BATHROOMS BANOS ACCESIBLES

21

U SHAPE COMMUNITY SEATS ASIENTOS COMUNITARIOS EN FORMA DE U

22

FEATUREE PLAZA AND DONOR WALL PLAZA Y MURO DE DONADORES

23

EUCLID CORRIDOR CORREDOR EUCLID

24

MULTI-USE COURTS: BASKETBALL AND SPEED SOCCER CANCHAS MULTIUSO: BASKETBALL Y FUTBOL DE SALON

25

HALF BASKETBALL COURTS MEDIAS CANCHAS DE BASKETBALL

26

STUDY OUTDOOR STATIONS POWERED WITH PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS ESTACIONES EXTERIORES DE ESTUDIO CON CELDAS DE ENERGIA SOLAR

27

OUTDOOR LEARNING PODS MINIPLAZAS DE INSTRUCCION AL AIRE LIBRE

28

ORCHARD COURTYARD PATIO DE HORTALIZAS

29

CHESS COURTYARD PATIO DE AJEDREZ

30

OUTDOOR SOFAS - CONCRETE BASE WITH RUBBER FINISH SOFAS EXTERIORES - CONCRETEO CON RECUBRIMIENTO DE GOMA

31

ACCESSIBLE RAISED PLANTING BEDS - SCIENCE CORRIDOR CAMAS DE PLANTACION ACCESIBLE PARA VEGETALES - CORREDOR DE CIENCIAS

32

EX

P

33

all ages

all welcome

G OUR ENTRYISIGN D N ANDDEWAYFINDING ENTRADA P Y CIRCULACION A NSENALAMIENTO

A BIORETENTION BASIN

AREA DE INFILTRACION DE AGUAS PLUVIALES

KS

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

PARK PEDESTRIAN ENTRIES ENTRADAS PEATONALES AL PARQUE

City of East Palo Alto - Magical Bridge Foundation

$15 MILLION

138 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

R

UTURE ELOPMENT

•

14

UNIVERSIT Y AVEN

18

11

1

BELL ST.

UNIVERSIT Y AVEN

UE

1

3

2 SENIOR CENTER

4 5

YMCA 17

AVE. EUCLID

7

22 5

17 1

21

17

10

6

1

10

7

23

8

9

9

20

6

13 19

11

14

19

14

12

18

10 15

7

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT 17 16

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

17 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

Bell Street Park

07.19.2022

1

UNIVERSIT Y AVEN UE

10

5

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT all abilities

all welcome all agesFIGURE 4-4:

BELL STREET PROPOSED MASTER PLAN

Source: Magical Bridge Foundation

Recommendations & Implementation 139

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. PARK RENOVATIO FUTURE MASTER PLAN In 2021 and 2022, the City was developing a new master plan to guide the improvement and expansion of Martin Luther King Jr. Park to better suit the needs and desires of residents. As of this writing, environmental review is underway.

There was community consensus around the idea of an intergenerational park with a dedicated baseball field. Key amenities will include a track, an amphitheater with performance space, accessible playground, outdoor fitness features, multi-use courts for soccer, football, and rugby, amongst other amenities.

Ensure clear and accessible connections between the park and the Bay Trail

•

Assess future opportunities for watercapture and storm-water management in the park

•

Assess possibility of installing cisterns below the park to mitigate future flooding A

A KS

Utilize seasonal wetlands as an opportunity for nature demonstration and education

ING OUR P

R

•

ND

EX

•

P

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

$22 MILLION

140 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

ON

FIGURE 4-5: MLK JR. PARK PROPOSED MASTER PLAN Source: Verde Design

Recommendations & Implementation 141

IMPROVING OUR TRAILS SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL The San Francisco Bay Trail – which provides more than 350 miles of multi-use trails – is a great amenity that residents of EPA are able to enjoy and have access to as part of their parks and open space system.

Recent projects in EPA, such as the Ravenswood Bay Trail project managed by the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, have helped close critical gaps of the Bay Trail between University Avenue and the Ravenswood Preserve. Completing this project continues to bring great benefits and access to residents of EPA. Ensuring that EPA residents continue to have safe access to the Bay Trail is of priority. Opening the gates on Rutgers St will remove a critical barrier between the community and the trail.

Ongoing trail maintenance and safety patrols are necessary to promote a safe environment for users.

existing Bay Trail levee in Ravenswood Open Space Preserve for recreational use.

BAY TO SEA TRAIL FEASIBILITY STUDY The Bay to Sea Trail is being spearheaded by the Peninsula Open Space Trust. The project is comprised of a 40-mile multi-use trail that would begin both in Redwood City’s Bair Island and the Ravenswood Open Space Preserve in EPA and extend through the foothills and into the ocean reaching Half Moon Bay. The multi-use trail will accommodate a variety of user groups such as hikers, equestrians, and bicyclist. It will have a consistent and continuous experience and aesthetic along the entire corridor. It has the opportunity to become a destination as it will start in EPA and extend west all the way to the ridge and ocean.

FIGURE 4-6: SAFER BAY LEVEE ALIGNMENT OPTIONS

SAFER BAY PROJECT The Strategy to Advance Flood protection, Ecosystems and Recreation along the San Francisco Bay (SAFER Bay) project aims to reduce the risk of flooding within the cities of East Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The project will enable adaptation to our changing climate by utilizing tidal marsh areas for flood protection. Two options were proposed for the area adjacent to the future RBD/4 Corners development. The preferred option for the location of the shoreline levee is on the shore side, Option 2, utilizing the levee for a bayside trail and the creation and retention of upland and marsh habitat while at the same time preserving the 142 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Existing Levee Trail Option 2 Levee (Retained) Option 1 Levee (Dropped) RBD Planned Park Areas

ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS •

Open gate to SF Bay Trail along Rutgers Street.

•

Ensure all entrances to the SF Bay Trail are open and have ADA accessibility.

•

Improve integration with transit and biking networks to expand access into the SF Bay Trail from surrounding neighborhoods.

Coordinate activity with RBD developments.

•

Enhance trail security through partnerships, volunteering, regular police patrols, and clean up.

See Chapter 5.4 for Trail Design Guidelines

FIGURE 4-7: IMPORTANT TRAIL NETWORK CONNECTIONS

Recommendations & Implementation 143

RENDERINGS FOR THE EAST PALO ALTO WATER FRONT PROJECT

SOURCE: CITY OF EPA 144 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

4.2 EXPANDING OUR PARKS As EPA focuses on the need to maintain, improve, and expand its existing parks system, the City must also provide new park land to keep pace with population growth and LOS goals. This section describes recommendations and opportunities for the City to deliver new parks as it is able to do so over time.

Identified opportunities include shared school yards and joint-use agreements; the Ravenswood Business District/4 Corners development; new city parks through City owned properties; and future public/ private partnership opportunities.

Recommendations & Implementation 145

4.2 EXPANDING OUR PARKS INCREASING OUR PARK LAND As the City continues to assess the best ways to increase park acreage to keep up with population growth and LOS goals, the following recommendations provide a road map for strengthening partnerships with the School District, collaborating with developers to provide access to residents, and exploring other mechanisms to incentivize additional park development.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXPANDING OUR PARKS 1. Implement shared-use agreements with the Ravenswood City School District.

2. Leverage City-owned property to create new parks.

3. Evaluate streets as potential open space assets and identify streets that could be converted to linear parks or plazas.

4. Pursue grants for parkland acquisition and development. For example, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds can be an important source of funding for park development.

146 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

5. Establish a Community Space Fund to collect development impact fees and accumulate funds for the acquisition and improvement of parks and open space.

6. Provide incentives for park land beyond what is required. The City can consider offering additional density, height, and floor area in exchange for the provision of public open space.

7. Establish Community Benefits Agreements between EPA and developers. Community-based organizations could play an active role in representing residents’ interests.

RENDERINGS FOR THE EAST PALO ALTO WATER FRONT PROJECT

8. Develop access and operation standards for parks owned or operated by developers to ensure spaces support community needs.

9. Explore greater use of Special Districts citywide such as a maintenance or community facilities district. By implementing maintenance agreements with developers the long term longevity and upkeep of new park facilities can be assured.

✓

Connect People to Parks

✓

Create Diverse & Inclusive Parks Promote Public Health & Sustainability

Chapter 5.5 for joint-use agreement best practices

Celebrate the Bay Activate EPA Parks

✓

Improve Park Operations

✓

Grow Programmings & Partnerships

COMMUNIT Y PRIORITIES

Recommendations & Implementation 147

NEW CITY PARK OPPORTUNITIES CITY-OWNED PARCELS The City of EPA owns ten parcels around the city that have the potential to provide additional greening to fill gaps within the park system. A majority of these parcels are fairly small, but the City can create small improvements with benches and trees to bring respite and greenery to residents.

CITY-OWNED PARCELS APN: 063042130

0.1

APN: 063083020

0.1 0.2

APN: 063102220 APN: 063210280 APN: 062243160 APN: 063551410 APN: 063501100 APN: 063533140 APN: 063680090 APN: 114160130

There is an opportunity to pursue the creation of a public linear park atop the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s right-of-way in the University Village neighborhood. The linear park would create a direct connection for residents to the Bay Trail, as well as safe access to the future EPA Waterfront. For this project to succeed there will need to be a conditional use agreement established with SFPUC to coordinate the construction and management of the park and coordination with SFPUC and Midpen on access to the Bay Trail.

0.06 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.5

2.06 acres 148 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

SFPUC RIGHT-OF-WAY LINEAR PARK

SFPUC RIGHT-OF-WAY PARK SOURCE: GOOGLE EARTH

CITY-OWNED PARCEL AT EAST BAYSHORE RD

EXAMPLES OF SEPARATED CLASS I BIKEWAY DELAWARE RIVER WATERFRONT IN PHILADELPHIA, PA

CITY-OWNED PARCEL AT UNIVERSITY ROAD Recommendations & Implementation 149

SHARED SCHOOLYARDS GREEN SCHOOLYARD RENOVATIONS In order to meet the open space goals in the General Plan, the Plan proposes a set of joint use agreements or agreements between the City of East Palo Alto and the Ravenswood City School District (RCSD).

Agreements would provide after-school access to outdoor portions of school campuses for use and enjoyment by the community. By opening schoolyards, there will be more opportunities for residents to have access to special equipment like courts, tracks, exercise components, and flexible black top areas.

School grounds can be community hubs for social gathering, emergency preparedness, play, and recreation programs.

Shared-use agreements will not only benefit the City and its residents, but they also have the potential to benefit the School District.

Shared-use agreements can create deeper connections between residents of East Palo Alto and the District, expanding the circle of ownership beyond those with direct links to the schools.

Shared-use agreements have the potential to broaden public support for funding improvements to both schools and parks.

Currently there are planned school renovations at Cesar Chavez Ravenswood Middle School, Costano Elementary school, and Los Robles Ronald McNair Academy. Joint community use of these sites would add an additional 22 acres to the City’s park system.

SHARED SCHOOL INVENTORY

COSTANO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CESAR CHAVEZ RAVENSWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL LOS ROBLES RONALD MCNAIR ACADEMY

150 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

7 12 3 22 acres

COSTANO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

CESAR CHAVEZ RAVENSWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL

LOS ROBLES RONALD MCNAIR ACADEMY

FIGURE 4-8: SCHOOLYARD IMPROVEMENTS EXISTING SCHOOL FACILITIES 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

Costano Elementary School Cesar Chavez Ravenswood Middle School Eastside College Preparatory School East Palo Alto Academy Los Robles Ronald McNair Academy East Palo Alto Charter School

LEGEND City Boundary Existing City-owned Parks Schools School Yard Improvements Recommendations & Implementation 151

SHARED SCHOOLYARDS CESAR CHAVEZ RAVENSWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL As part of a $50 million Measure M bond, Cesar Chavez Ravenswood Middle School (CCRMS), two new buildings are being constructed and all classrooms are being renovated. Recreational improvements include: •

•

Forever Young Foundation Partnership to build an 8to80zone. The 8 to 80 Zones are a collaboration between Steve Young (#8) and Jerry Rice (#80), which provide youth living in underserved communities the skills to pursue careers in technology, Esports, gaming, and media.

BAY ROAD COMMUNITY HUB In December 2022, the Ravenswood City School District received a $30 million gift from the SHP foundation to develop a community hub at the field of Bay Road at the Cesar Chavez Ravenswood Middle School. The Community Hub will have a multitude of dynamic uses and amenities, including: •

Basketball Gym

•

Community Meeting Spaces

•

Clinic Spaces

•

Other uses directly benefiting families

Magical Bridge Playpark is developing an all inclusive outdoor space, that will include, recreational amenities, spaces for gathering, and other amenities based on community input.

BAY ROAD COMMUNITY HUB PROPOSED PLAN SOURCE: RAVENSWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT 152 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

LOS ROBLES RONALD MCNAIR ACADEMY Los Robles-Ronald McNair Academy is a K-5 SpanishEnglish dual language immersion public school where children learn academic subjects and learn to speak, listen, read and write in Spanish and English. Funding is being sought after in order to implement conceptual plans for improvements to the academy including: •

Two new playgrounds

•

A renovated field of off O’Connor St and Pulgas Avenue

•

New community gardens and outdoor classrooms

COSTANO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Funding is being sought after in order to implement conceptual plans for recreational enhancements at the Costano School of Arts including: •

New kindergarten playgrounds

•

New sports field

CESAR CHAVEZ SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT RENDERINGS SOURCE: THE ALMANAC NEWS Recommendations & Implementation 153

NEW DEVELOPMENT PARK OPPORTUNITIES Public parks can be built by private developers. With several major initiatives underway, there is great opportunity to combine the assets of the public and private sectors in novel ways to create new and refurbished parks, greenways, trails, and other community assets in our cities without direct expense by the City and current residents. The City and developers can negotiate capital cost of construction as well as future operations and maintenance.

recommendations for the City are introduced to improve the outcomes of RBD and to ensure that residents are able to reap the most benefits out of these future developments.

The Design Guidelines chapter of this Plan describes best practices for designing these future parks.

The Ravenswood/4 Corners TOD District (RBD) represents the largest opportunity for park growth in EPA’s recent history. The four principal projects within RBD hold the potential to contribute an additional 21 acres to the City’s inventory.

The following pages introduce at a high-level the future projects and their amenities. Strategies and

DEVELOPER RELATED INVENTORY EAST PALO ALTO WATERFRONT 2020 BAY ROAD OFFICE DEVELOPMENT 1990 BAY ROAD (THE LANDING) 1675 BAY ROAD

9 4.5 7 0.9

21 acres 154 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

2020 BAY ROAD RENDERING SOURCE: DES ARCHITECTS

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RBD/4 CORNERS 1. Develop access and operation standards for parks owned or operated by developers to ensure spaces support community needs.

2. Explore greater use of Special Districts citywide such as a maintenance or community facilities district. By implementing maintenance agreements with developers the long term longevity and upkeep of new park facilities can be assured.

3. Establish Community Benefits Agreements between EPA and developers. Community-based organizations could play an active role in representing residents’ interests.

6. Create clear public park portals from neighborhood streets to the waterfront including Bay, Pulgas, Purdue, Stevens, and Illinois.

7. Integrate RBD public park recommendations into the RBD specific plan.

4. Ensure privately-owned-publicly accessible parks within RBD are clearly marked as accessible to residents and open from dawn to dusk.

See Chapter 5.6 for POPOs Design Guidelines

5. Establish design guidelines for the linear parks along all RBD sites to create a cohesive experience of the trail, furnishings, lighting, and signage throughout the area regardless of ownership and operation.

EPA WATERFRONT SITE RENDERING SOURCE: EMERSON COLLECTIVE Recommendations & Implementation 155

RAVENSWOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT /4 CORNERS CREATING A COHESIVE OPEN SPACE NETWORK The development of the Ravenswood Business District and the Four Corners Area holds tremendous opportunity for the growth of parks and open space in East Palo Alto. The projects planned for the area have the potential to create vital park area for current residents as well as future residents and workers. The adjacent diagram and description below identify the steps to align proposed developments with the goals of this plan.

Here, the EPA Parks Master Plan introduces two “nodes” of activity within the RBD waterfront lands.

These locations include proposals for a new community park to the north and a new neighborhood park to the south, each with appropriate amenities serving local residents and employees alike. Each stand-alone park is connected via a cohesive linear park and the Bay Trail. Recreational amenities mentioned on the diagram are recommended for consideration and are intented to represent the types of amenities needed and appropriate for each park area. A future park at 1900 Bay Road is also noted. This is not currently planned as a park within the development proposals however would significantly expand EPA’s waterfront park acreage.

156 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

COSTANO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

JACK FARRELL

FOUR CORNERS Public City Square Public Space Small Park Space

FIGURE 4-9: POTENTIAL PARK OPPORTUNITIES WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Demeter St

The EPA waterfront has the potential to become a vibrant, resident serving park that provides much needed amenity in a unique bayfront setting. The plan recommends each development provide an appropriate portion of the major recreational amenities needed in the City rather than redundant passive features such as lawn seating, benches, and picnic areas.

RAVENSWOOD PRESERVE

SAN FRANSCISCO BAY

EPA WATERFRONT

NE W

Potential community park amenities could include: Football Field Soccer Field Tennis Courts Pickleball Courts Indoor or Outdoor Basketball Volleyball Community Plaza

C

U NI T Y P AR

Potential linear park amenities could include: Small Picnic Areas Seating and Resting

y Ba

M OM

2020 BAY ROAD

ai Tr l

BAY ROAD PARK

K

Potential for future park

COOLEY LANDING

Rd

BAY ROAD

NEW NE IG HB

Ensure a complete street design Safe for pedestrian and cyclists

OR HOOD P A

RK

Bay

Potential neighborhood park amenities could include: Basketball Court Outdoor Fitness Volleyball Court Bocce Dog Park

Tara St

Pulgas Ave

1990 BAY ROAD

Recommendations & Implementation 157

RBD KEY PROJECTS AS CURRENTLY PLANNED The descriptions that follow are a snapshot of what is proposed at the time of plan publication by the developers of each site in the Ravenswood Business District. Proposed amenities are subject to change.

EAST PALO ALTO WATERFRONT East Palo Alto Waterfront is proposed as a mixed-use development in the Ravenswood Business District.

The project includes wetland restoration, jobs, and residential uses, as well as the following park and recreation amenities.

•

•

36 acres of open space, which includes 4 acres of a central open space, 5 acres of recreational open space, 11 acres of streetscapes, and 16 acres of wetlands.

Central Pavilion: gathering space (multi-use lawn and central space for gathering and events)

2020 BAY ROAD OFFICE DEVELOPMENT 2020 Bay Road consists of the redevelopment of a 17.2-acre site at the end of Bay Road with five 8-story office buildings (including civic, retail and business support service uses), parking garages, landscaping, plaza and open spaces. The project’s open space plan is centered around a Waterfront Park with active and passive zones. A multi-modal pathway will travel along the park.

Open space enhancements and amenities include: •

Waterfront park with direct entrance and connection to the Bay Trail

•

12 public parking stalls

•

Seating and planting amenities

•

Proposes large seating areas

•

Educational opportunities to learn about the bay and the local flora and fauna.

•

These educational opportunities find themselves in the form of interpretive signage and big binoculars for bird watching, star gazing or even ship watching.

•

The Orangerie: Public green house

•

Play Shed: with fitness classes, playground, and multi-use courts (soccer, basketball, yoga, tennis, playgrounds)

•

Additional programming mentioned in the initial documents (picnic and BBQ areas, play areas, wetland gardens)

•

Children can play at the flexible open turf area, graded in such a way this can be used for both educational events like an amphitheater or for smaller games of soccer.

•

Sports courts

•

197,093 SF of open space/landscape space.

1990 BAY ROAD RENDERING SOURCE: HOOD DESIGN 158 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

1990 BAY ROAD (THE LANDING)

LOOP ROAD/RAIL SPUR

“The Landing” will be a mixed-used development project that will include ground floor retail, civic uses, offices, laboratories and research and development spaces. The site will offer 40% open space for site visitors and residents who will have access to public accessible open spaces. Amenities include:

There is an opportunity to complete a linear bike and pedestrian loop that will connect Bay Road to the Bay Area Trail and to 1990 Bay Road (The Landing) mixed-use project with the future RBD area. It will also provide direct access to residents of the future 1804 Bay Road mixed-use development area and the 965 Weeks Street housing project.

•

Trail connection to Bay Road

•

Dog Park

•

Community Garden

•

20’ wide levee – public trail

•

Slope Lawn Amphitheater

•

Interactive Water Jet Plaza

•

Bocce Lawn

•

Picnic and Grill

•

Playground

•

Outdoor Fitness

•

Half-Court Basketball

•

Civic Plaza

•

Roof Terrace with Amenities

1675 BAY ROAD - PUBLIC SQUARE RENDERING

1675 BAY ROAD (FOUR CORNERS) The “Four Corners” projects is a community informed re-development containing multi-story mixed-used buildings that will bring retail and community uses in the ground floor and housing and employment uses above. Ample community space will be provided.

Additional project amenities will include: •

Public Town Square

•

Community Library

•

Public accessible connections to adjacent neighborhood and streets

•

Up to 40,000 SF of community spaces

Recommendations & Implementation 159

ADDITIONAL NEW DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES PRIVATELY OWNED, PUBLICLY ACCESSIBLE PARKS & COMMUNITY SPACES 965 WEEKS STREET HOUSING The vacant site will be developed into 136 units of multi-family housing for low-income households with unit sizes ranging from studios to four-bedrooms.

The 136 apartments would be located in a series of structures connected by interior and exterior walkways with public pedestrian/bicycle access through the site from Weeks Street to the public trail known as the Rail Spur. Outdoor play areas for residents will also provided.

WOODLAND PARK - EUCLID IMPROVEMENTS The Woodland Park Project has been approved for a general plan amendment, zoning, and development code changes. Once complete the project will entail the construction of 605 multi-family units and the demolition of 161 rent stabilized units. A publicly accessible open space park will be provided by the developer, additional common spaces will also be available for community members to use.

BOOM PARK PERMIT EXTENSIONS Currently the City is reviewing a temporary use permit to allow for pop-up recreation and a fitness area for Woodland Park.

BOOM PARK SOURCE: LMNOP DESIGN

965 WEEKS STREET HOUSING SOURCE: PLURAL LANDSCAPE 160 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

See Chapter 5 for design guidelines

WOODLAND PARK RENDERINGS SOURCE: DAVID BAKER ARCHITECTS

The recently approved Euclid improvement project, once built, will deliver a new park for residents on the west side and beyond to enjoy.

Recommendations & Implementation 161

COMMUNITY EVENT AT EPA PRIMARY SCHOOL SOURCE: CONSULTANT TEAM 162 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

4.3 RECREATION IN OUR COMMUNITIES Recreation programming serves residents of all ages to engage in individual and group activities hosted by a provider. Typical programs may address fitness and exercise, arts and crafts, skills training and intergenerational education. The City of EPA does not provide recreation programming, instead relying on its able partners to organize and execute the work.

The City contributes limited financial support to offset costs or contract outright with providers.

This plan recognizes the positive results achieved by providers and the City’s role to help align the types of programming offered to the actual needs of the community. The cost of services often exceeds the ability of residents to pay. To serve more people, expanded sources of funding and new partnerships are needed. The City should continue to develop its organizational capacity while strengthening its partnership agreements.

Recommendations & Implementation 163

4.3 RECREATION IN OUR COMMUNITIES The East Palo Alto community is currently served by community partners for recreational programming. The following recommendations will improve existing City partnerships and help fulfill the assessed recreational needs for the community.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RECREATIONAL PROGRAMMING

1. Continue to develop successful partnerships by identifying mutual benefits, setting clear outcomes, and documenting agreements to ensure community programming needs are met.

2. Establish participation parameters as the basis of funding distribution for summer activation grants to program partners.

3. Study opportunities to fund the YMCA to provide residents

establish potential “free days” for community members.

4. Streamline the reservations and permit request process in order to ensure transparency and equal access to City resources.

5. Continue to provide readily accessible information regarding the City’s recreational program offerings.

✓

Connect People to Parks

✓

Create Diverse & Inclusive Parks Promote Public Health & Sustainability

with low-cost classes, assess opportunities to have public pool

Celebrate the Bay

✓

Activate EPA Parks

provide residents with access

✓

Improve Park Operations

to cooling spaces. Collaboration

✓

Grow Programmings & Partnerships

between YMCA and the City to

COMMUNIT Y PRIORITIES

days during summer months to

164 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Recommendations & Implementation 165

OVERVIEW OF PRIORITIES AND CORE PROGRAM AREAS Recreation programming serves residents of all ages to engage in individual and group activities hosted by a provider. Typical programs may address fitness and exercise, arts and crafts, skills training and intergenerational education.

In 2019, City Council tasked the Community Services Division with the goal of activating every City-owned/ operated park and facility in the City of East Palo Alto with sports and recreation activities for youth and/or families during the summer months. The purpose was to activate the parks and facilities with programming for all residents and improve access to fun activities that promote wellness and healthy living.

In addition to receiving funding from the City’s general fund for this City Council initiative, the City of East Palo Alto’s Community Services Division successfully applied for annual grant funding from the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI) Community Fund (Community Fund Partners Directory - Chan Zuckerberg Initiative) in 2021. The CZI Community Fund is an annual grant-making program that pairs grants with capacity building resources to support community organizations in San Mateo County that are increasing access to the building blocks of social and economic well-being like housing, healthcare, education, job, and career skills, and supporting civic engagement so people have the power to shape their lives and communities. The City has been the only municipality to receive funding from CZI. Kudos to the City of EPA! The funding was primarily targeted to support community partners to increase participation in existing summer programming. In order to receive funding from the City, community partners needed to

166 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

formally apply to the City for a grant. The program has become increasingly successful each year it has been offered: •

2019 – $65,000 was awarded to 5 organizations.

•

2020 – $80,000 was awarded to 7 organizations.

•

2021 – $100,000 was awarded to 15 organizations.

•

2022 – $154,000 was awarded to 17 organizations.

This plan recognizes the overall successful processes that the City has in place to distribute the funding to its community partners and the positive results achieved by providers.

The City of East Palo has a professional staff that annually facilitates programs and services. City staff are responsible for the management and oversight of a diverse array of partnerships that provide recreation programs and special community-wide events.

Employees are engaged year-round in coordination and evaluation of programs and events.

CORE PROGRAM APPROACH The mission of the City of East Palo Alto is to ensure access to outstanding programs, services and community amenities that contribute to the quality of life in East Palo Alto. Part of realizing this vision should involve the identification of Core Program Areas to create a sense of focus around activities and outcomes of greatest importance to the community as informed by current and future needs. In other communities, public recreation is often challenged by the premise of being all things to all people. The philosophy of the Core Program Area assists staff, policy makers, and the public to focus on only what is most important. Program areas are considered as Core if they meet many of the following categories: •

Offered to the community for a long period of time (over 4-5 years)

•

Programs/services provided to the community 3-4 seasons per year

•

Wide demographic appeal

•

Tiered level of skill development available within the programs area’s offerings

•

Full-time staff responsible for the facilitation of programs and services

THE CITY OF EAST PALO ALTO PARKS AND RECREATION CORE PROGRAM AREAS The City currently facilitates programs and services through partnerships in six Core Program Areas: •

Art and Culture

•

Camps

•

Enrichment

•

E-Sports

•

Fitness, Health, and Wellness

•

Youth Sports

Ensuring The Right Core Program Mix The Core Program Areas provided by the City of East Palo Alto currently appears to meet some of the major needs of the City of East Palo Alto community.

The program mix should be evaluated on a regular and reoccurring basis to ensure that the offerings within each Core Program Area – and the Core Program Areas themselves – align with changing leisure and recreation trends, demographics, and needs of residents. The National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) recommends that six determinants be used to inform what programs and services are provided by the City. According to NRPA, those determinants are: 1. Conceptual foundations of play, recreation, and leisure – Programs and services should encourage and promote a degree of freedom, choice, and voluntary engagement in their structure and design. Programs should reflect positive themes aimed at improving quality of life for both individuals and the overall community.

2. Organizational philosophy, mission, and vision – Programs and services should support the mission and vision statements, values, goals, and objectives. These generally center on promoting personal health, community well-being, social equality, environmental awareness, and economic vitality.

3. Constituent interests and desired needs – Agencies should actively seek to understand the recreational needs and interests of their constituency. This not only ensures an effective (and ethical) use of taxpayer dollars, but also helps to make sure that programs perform well and are valued by residents.

4. Creation of a constituent-centered culture – Programs and services do reflect a citywide culture where constituents’ needs are the prime factor in creating and providing programs. This should be reflected not only in program design, but in terms of staff behaviors, architecture, furniture, technology, dress, forms of address, decision-making style, planning processes, and forms of communication.

5. Experiences desirable for clientele – Programs and services should be designed to provide the experiences desirable to meet the needs of the participants/clients in a community and identified target markets.

This involves not only identifying and understanding the diversity of needs in a community, but also applying recreation programming expertise and skills to design, implement, and evaluate a variety of desirable experiences for residents to meet those needs.

6. Community opportunities – When planning programs and services, a park and recreation agency should consider the network of opportunities afforded by other organizations such as nonprofits, schools, other public agencies, and the private sector. Agencies should also recognize where gaps in service provision occur and consider how unmet needs can be addressed.

Recommendations & Implementation 167

Survey Findings As part of the process for developing a Park and Recreation Needs Assessment, PROS Consulting conducted a holistic community input process to identify satisfaction with park and recreation facilities, identify needed park and recreation facilities and programs, and gain input from citizens that will assist with park and recreation resource allocation, budget, and policy decisions. Participants rated East Palo Alto as having a current or anticipated need for the following recreation programs, ranked in order of need:

PARTNERSHIP EVALUATION The City of East Palo Alto does not directly provide programs and services to the community. The approach the City has taken in activating its parks and public spaces is to fund through City Council support, and, in turn, to utilize this funding to provide grants to public and not-for-profit agencies, as well as private sector businesses. Table 2 provides a snapshot of the partnerships that the City entered in the summer of 2022.

In summary: •

17 partners applied for and received grant funding from the City.

•

Programs and services were provided in six different core program areas.

•

Most programs were provided outdoors.

Priority

•

Grant funding provided to each agency ranged from $4,000 to $10,000.

High

•

Number of hours of programming provided by each grant funded agency ranged from 10 to 120.

TABLE 4-1: RECREATIONAL PROGRAM PRIORITIES Recreation Program/Service Adult fitness and wellness programs After school programs for youth of all ages Youth swim programs Adult swim program Adult sports program Cultural enrichment programs Youth performing arts (dance, ballet, etc) Program for individuals with disabilities Youth fitness

Medium

Youth out of school camp programs Fitness boot camp Martial arts program Youth sports programs EMT program Senior program

168 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Low

GRANT FUNDING PER HOUR OF PROGRAMMING An evaluation was conducted to understand level of funding granted to a partnering agency based on the number of hours of programming provided to the community. This can be a useful measuring tool for recreation providers. Findings indicate this may be a useful tool for City staff to use in the future to improve the effective-less of funding and reach more residents.

Further analysis, as shown in the table below, reveals that: •

The average funding received by each partnering agency per-hour-of-programming offered to the community is $235.

•

The range of funding per-hour-ofprogramming-offered to the community is $83 per hour (Live in Peace) to $800 per hour (Sign Gypsies).

TABLE 4-2: 2022 Summer Partnership Programming 2022 SUMMER PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMMING

Agency/Business

Bottletree Culture

Camp Doza

Core Program Area

Activity

Art and Culture

West African dance instruction for all ages

Camps

Multisport camp featuring Basketball, Soccer, and Nature Youth focused Tennis camps and Academic instruction

# of Hours of Indoor or Outdoor Programming Grant Funding Activity Provided per Participant

Per Hour Subsidy

Hybrid (Mainly Outdoor for Program Purposes)

$10,000

45

$222

Outdoor

$10,000

80

$125

Outdoor

$10,000

90

$111

East Palo Alto Tennis & Tutoring

Youth Sports

EPA T-Ball & Pitching Machine

Youth Sports

Host partner for Junior Giants program

Outdoor

$10,000

64

$156

Fit To the Core

Fitness and Wellness

Multigenerational group fitness activities

Outdoor

$10,000

44

$227

GG Leagues

E-Sports

First time eSports programming

Indoor

$7,000

30

$233

Hope Horizon/BCM

Camps

Outdoor

$10,000

84

$119

Outdoor

$10,000

120

$83

Outdoor

$10,000

30

$333

Outdoor

$9,000

28

$321

Outdoor

$7,000

34

$206

Holistic youth camp catering to Westside community Youth Super Conditioning Camp (All land Sports) Youth competitive football training with holistic approach Gymnastics and Fitness training at Joel Davis Park Expert basketball instruction and sports challenges

Live in Peace

Youth Sports

MPAA Mastodons Football

Youth Sports

My Gym

Youth Sports

Paxton Sports Academy

Youth Sports

Razorhawks Youth Rugby

Youth Sports

Competitive youth rugby Summer Sevens

Outdoor

$9,000

42

$214

Enrichment

Multigenerational activties such as Meditation, bingo, paint by numbers

Indoor

$8,000

10

$800

Art and Culture

Contemporary, Hip Hop, Modern, Praise Dance

Indoor

$10,000

36

$278

StreetCode Academy

Enrichment

Tech and Engineering activities in the Park

Hybrid (Mainly Outdoor for Program Purposes)

$10,000

46

$217

The Process Academy

Youth Sports

High level Basketball instruction for youth up to 18

Outdoor

$4,000

18

$222

UEHL

Enrichment

Literacy and homework assistance for youth

Indoor

$10,000

80

$125

Sign Gypsies

Step It Up Dance

Recommendations & Implementation 169

TABLE 4-3: GRANT FUNDING PER UNIQUE PARTICIPANT

2022 Summer Partnership Programming

Agency/Business

Bottletree Culture

# of Hours of Core Program Programming Grant Funding Area Provided per Participant

Unique Per Hour Unique Participant Subsidy Participants Subsidy

Per Hour Per Unique Participant Subsidy

Art and Culture

$10,000

45

$222

24

$417

$9

Camps

$10,000

80

$125

42

$238

$3

East Palo Alto Tennis & Tutoring

Youth Sports

$10,000

90

$111

27

$370

$4

EPA T-Ball & Pitching Machine

Youth Sports

$10,000

64

$156

87

$115

$2

Fit To the Core

Fitness and Wellness

$10,000

44

$227

38

$263

$6

GG Leagues

E-Sports

$7,000

30

$233

18

$389

$13

Hope Horizon/BCM

Camps

$10,000

84

$119

40

$250

$3

Live in Peace

Youth Sports

$10,000

120

$83

78

$128

$1

MPAA Mastodons Football

Youth Sports

$10,000

30

$333

26

$385

$13

My Gym

Youth Sports

$9,000

28

$321

10

$900

$32

Paxton Sports Academy

Youth Sports

$7,000

34

$206

10

$700

$21

Razorhawks Youth Rugby

Youth Sports

$9,000

42

$214

46

$196

$5

Sign Gypsies

Enrichment

$8,000

10

$800

12

$667

$67

Art and Culture

$10,000

36

$278

29

$345

$10

StreetCode Academy

Enrichment

$10,000

46

$217

308

$32

$1

The Process Academy

Youth Sports

$4,000

18

$222

7

$571

$32

UEHL

Enrichment

$10,000

80

$125

13

$769

$10

$396

$14 Average

Camp Doza

Step It Up Dance

Average Per Unique Participant Subsidy

GRANT FUNDING PER UNIQUE PARTICIPANT The evaluation of the granting process suggests that in the future, the level of funding should be more closely tied to number of participants to be served through the programming provided. This will improve efficiency and allow more residents to participate.

Further analysis, as shown in the table below, reveals that: •

The average subsidy received by each partnering agency per unique participant is $396.

170 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

•

The range of funding per unique participant is $32 per unique participant to $900 per unique participant.

GRANT FUNDING PER HOUR PER UNIQUE PARTICIPANT The evaluation of the granting process suggests that in the future, the level of funding should be more closely tied to the unit cost of providing programming on per hour, per participant basis. Further analysis, as shown in the table on the previous page notes that:

TABLE 4-4: GRANT FUNDING PER HOUR PER UNIQUE PARTICIPANT - OUTDOOR PROGRAMMING 2022 Summer Partnership Programming

Agency/Business

Outdoor Activity

# of Hours of Per Hour Per Unique Programming Unique Grant Funding Provided per Participants Participant Subsidy Participant

Bottletree Culture

Hybrid (Mainly Outdoors)

$10,000

45

24

$9

StreetCode Academy

Hybrid (Mainly Outdoors)

$10,000

46

308

$1

Camp Doza

Outdoor

$10,000

80

42

$3

East Palo Alto Tennis & Tutoring

Outdoor

$10,000

90

27

$4

EPA T-Ball & Pitching Machine

Outdoor

$10,000

64

87

$2

Fit To the Core

Outdoor

$10,000

44

38

$6

Hope Horizon/BCM

Outdoor

$10,000

84

40

$3

Live in Peace

Outdoor

$10,000

120

78

$1

MPAA Mastodons Football

Outdoor

$10,000

30

26

$13

My Gym

Outdoor

$9,000

28

10

$32

Paxton Sports Academy

Outdoor

$7,000

34

10

$21

Razorhawks Youth Rugby

Outdoor

$9,000

42

46

$5

The Process Academy

Outdoor

$4,000

18

7

$32

Average Per Hour Per Unique Participant Subsidy

$10

TABLE 5: GRANT FUNDING PER HOUR PER UNIQUE PARTICIPANT - INDOOR PROGRAMMING 2022 Summer Partnership Programming

Agency/Business

Indoor Activity

Per Hour Per # of Hours of Unique Programming Unique Grant Funding Provided per Participants Participant Subsidy Participant

GG Leagues

Indoor

$7,000

30

18

$13

Sign Gypsies

Indoor

$8,000

10

12

$67

Step It Up Dance

Indoor

$10,000

36

29

$10

UEHL

Indoor

$10,000

80

13

$10

Average Per Hour Per Unique Participant Subsidy

$25

Recommendations & Implementation 171

•

The average subsidy received by each partnering agency per hour of programming per participant is $14.

•

The range of funding per hour per unique participant is $1 to $67.

KEY FINDINGS •

The Summer Activation Program is the cornerstone of the parks and recreation reactivation approach by the City to date.

Despite not having a formal recreation department, the City is actively ensuring residents have access to quality recreational programming opportunities through partnerships.

•

Tracking of direct and indirect cost associated with the existing partnerships is in place.

•

Updating of the partnership principles that guide the granting program need to be continually refined and put into place with a recital of why the City is entering into the partnership that explains the following - for what purpose, for what benefit, to achieve what outcome, at what cost.

•

Performance metrics used to evaluate the impacts of the partnership on the community currently only track participation numbers.

•

Staff training on managing partnerships is limited.

•

Financial audits are completed to show how the funding provided by the City is being utilized.

•

The City does not have a partnership policy in place that guides the partnering process.

GRANT FUNDING PER HOUR PER PARTICIPANT – OUTDOOR PROGRAMMING The evaluation of the granting process suggests that in the future, the level of funding should be more closely tied to the unit cost of providing programming on per hour, per participant basis. Further analysis of programs provided outdoors by partnering agencies as shown in the table below, notes that: •

•

The average subsidy received by each partnering agency per hour of programming per participant is $10.

The range of funding per hour per unique participant is $1 to $32.

GRANT FUNDING PER HOUR PER PARTICIPANT – INDOOR PROGRAMMING The evaluation of the granting process suggests that in the future, the level of funding should be more closely tied to the unit cost of providing programming on per hour, per participant basis. Further analysis of programs provided indoors by partnering agencies as shown in the table below, reveals that: •

The average subsidy received by each partnering agency per hour of programming per participant is $25.

•

The range of funding per hour per unique participant is $10 to $67.

172 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

RECOMMENDATIONS •

Establish unit cost parameters for receiving grant funding. For example, •

Partnering agencies will receive no more than $15 per hour of programming provided to each participant for outdoor activities and no more than $30 per hour of programming provided to each participant for indoor activities.

•

Participation Data Analysis: Through ongoing participation data analysis, refine recreation program offerings to reduce low enrollment or canceled programs due to no enrollment.

•

Expand programs and services in the areas of greatest demand: Ongoing analysis of the participation trends of programming

and services in East Palo Alto is significant when delivering high quality programs and services. By doing so, staff will be able to focus their efforts on the programs and services of the greatest need and reduce or eliminate programs and services where interest is declining. Specific efforts should be made to increase programming in the areas of greatest UNMET need as identified in the community engagement process.

•

Develop and implement recreation program standards utilizing the best practice guidelines.

•

Develop and implement a partnership policy utilizing the best practice guidelines.

COMMUNITY PARTNERS

PRINCIPLES FOR SUCCESSFUL PARTNERSHIPS FOCUS ON IMPORTANT NEEDS. Partnerships take time to establish and nurture in order to have successful outcomes. The decision to establish a partnership should begin with the belief that an important need can best be fulfilled through a partnership. Potential partners will always be knocking at your door suggesting partnering arrangements.

Often, we find ourselves in reactive rather than proactive situations -- responding to an idea from an outside party. It is more productive to be proactive.

First determine that a partnership is the best way to accomplish an important body of work. Then seek out the partner or partners who might best be able to help. In some cases, you may need to create the right partner.

MAKE THE PARTNERSHIPS A WIN-WIN. Successful partnerships begin and thrive with a clear understanding that mutual benefits will accrue to the partners involved. Each partner may not benefit equally, but each must realize a value-added benefit.

Each partner must constantly assess the needs of their respective partners and ensure that individual and collective actions are responsive to those needs.

It is important to tie the partnership and its outcomes to the missions of each partner. Partnership initiatives should not only be a great thing to do but also a

GRASSROOTS ECOLOGY Grassroots Ecology leverages the power of volunteers to create healthy lands across Silicon Valley. We restore native plants to open spaces and neighborhoods, steward creeks and watersheds, and provide hands-on nature education.

CANOPY Canopy prioritizes tree planting and stewardship, education, and advocacy in communities where people do not have a thriving urban forest due to limited resources, competing priorities, historical development, and urbanization patterns.

Recommendations & Implementation 173

benefit to each partner. Sharing resources, benefits and recognition for successes keeps the partnership from becoming lopsided or dominated by any one player. Each partner needs to see their contribution alongside the benefit gained.

ADOPT A SHARED VISION. Development and continuing refinement of a shared vision of the work to be accomplished is key to the success of any partnership. The shared vision should evolve from the full engagement of all partners in the relationship. The vision should reflect both the broad body of work and each project or initiative to be undertaken. Too often, one entity in a partnership independently develops the vision without full engagement of the other partner(s). This violates the underlying premise of a partnership and often results in insufficient ownership or emotional buy-in. Successful partnerships demonstrate a culture of full engagement from the very beginning that leads to collective enthusiasm and achieving results.

NEGOTIATE A FORMAL AGREEMENT. Good intentions and a handshake are not enough.

Partnerships need formal written agreements and work plans that define mutual interests and expectations, the roles and responsibilities of each partner, and clear accountability for the work to be performed. The formal agreement serves as a mutually binding contract to ensure that each partner acknowledges and fulfills their responsibility. Most people are overextended with work, and tasks can fall through the cracks. If a given partnership is important, provide structure for the partnership through a formal agreement and specific work plans that lay out what tasks need to be performed for each initiative, by whom, and when. In a busy world, clearly written intent, roles, process, schedules, and accountability procedures guide performance and follow through.

If differences arise or performance lags, the formal written agreement provides a touchstone for accountability, revisiting intent and commitments, reconciliation, and getting back on track. When 174 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

needed, the agreement should be updated or amended to keep it current.

ENSURE GOOD COMMUNICATION. The success of every partnership is dependent upon the structure, frequency, and quality of communication between the partners. The most successful partnerships incorporate regularly scheduled meetings or conference calls to review how the relationship is working and progress on individual initiatives or work elements. The work schedule/calendar should reflect the importance of the work. Even the best partnerships do not carry their own momentum for long without a structure for touching base to stay on task and on schedule. The chief executive of each partner entity in a relationship must demonstrate leadership and stay involved to the extent that executive level interest is re-enforced and policy direction is provided on a sustained basis. The executives also are responsible for ensuring that good communication processes are in place within and between each partner entity to maintain the excitement of the collaboration, resolve issues, and advance the work. No partnership can reach its full potential without good communication practices as a core element of the relationship. Partnerships, like any human relationship, are about communication, communication, and communication.

ENSURE THE PARTNERSHIP IS OWNED BY YOUR WHOLE ORGANIZATION. To succeed, partnerships need to be truly understood and embraced by the entire staff of the partner organizations. Partnerships often originate as a dream or vision of the CEO or an individual(s) within an organization and the compelling reasons and excitement for the potential outcomes are not shared throughout the organization.

This incomplete organizational buy-in inevitably limits or undermines full success when the rationales and commitments are not understood and shared by staff who have responsibilities for implementing the partnership. It is crucial for the leader to invest time and energy to build ownership of the partnership

throughout supervisory and staff levels. If the partnership is not understood or accepted as being important, it is difficult to sustain over time, especially when the key individuals responsible for its creation take other jobs or retire. Build a sense of team and a partnership culture so everyone understands the importance and value added by working collaboratively. You need to instill the importance of continually acknowledging the contributions of each party to the overall effort. In essence, individualism needs to be transformed into shared stewardship and responsibility that is re-enforced by actions as well as words.

MAINTAIN AN ENVIRONMENT OF TRUST. Trust is an essential ingredient for successful partnerships and enables collaboration and contribution. Trust must be demonstrated and earned day by day. A single betrayal can be costly and make it hard to regain the same level of trust between the partners. Trust eroding behaviors include independent action by one partner that has not been shared with the other partner(s); grandstanding at the expense of another partner; not honoring one’s word, commitment, or confidentiality; creating suspicion in terms of one’s motives; or acting in any way contrary to the best interests of the overall partnership. You build trust through the consistency and integrity of your actions over time. And you have to trust your partners in order to be trusted.

LEAVE YOUR EGO AND CONTROL AT THE DOOR. The most insidious impediment to good partnerships is the unwillingness or inability of a partner to share power and control. This can be the “Achilles heel” of partnerships. At their very basic definition, partnerships are about shared power, shared vision, and shared responsibility. While one entity may possess a superior position, larger budget, more staff, etc. in a relationship, the execution of the work and credit for accomplishments should not reflect this. This is not about a landlord-tenant relationship.

This is about two or more entities working in unity to accomplish important work. A “boss – servant”

COMMUNITY PARTNERS

FRESH APPROACH Fresh Approach is an organization locally-grown produce, nutrition education, and gardening skills to Bay Area communities so everyone can enjoy access to healthy food. They have volunteer opportunities for folks interested in learning about food systems and urban farming.

EPA SENIOR CENTER The East Palo Alto Senior Center offers a variety of activities and assistance to Seniors. The staff and volunteers provide information about resources in such areas as housing, employment, household help, recreation, financial assistance, health services and in-home help. Health education, screenings, and hot meals are served during the week.

Recommendations & Implementation 175

mentality will lead only to frustration and unfulfilled promise. Partnerships are about “we” not “I.” They are about creating an equality of importance -an environment where individual personal egos are subservient to the interests of the whole. It is important to help your organization understand that partnering does not mean giving up control or influence, nor does it mean that organizations give up their autonomy. Good partnerships represent a delicate balance between maintaining one’s own identity and adding value to a collective effort.

UNDERSTAND EACH PARTNER’S MISSION AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE. Every organization has its own culture that is built over time, based on its mission, its practices, its people, its governing values, its traditions, and its institutional history. In any partnership situation, it is important to acknowledge and understand these different organizational cultures, to respect them, and to find ways that these realities can contribute to strengthen the mutual endeavor.

The most successful partnerships recognize and value their differences and find ways to integrate them into a workable overarching partnership culture.

USE THE STRENGTHS OF EACH PARTNER. Each entity in a partnership brings special capabilities, unique authorities, and different flexibilities to further the work of the partnership. As specific needs and tasks are addressed, consider the strengths of each partner in determining the most cost-effective approach and who best to accomplish a specific task. Successful partnerships are characterized by a flexible approach to how needs and responsibilities are matched given each partner’s funding, policies, political connections, and other considerations.

FIND WAYS THROUGH THE RED TAPE. Partnerships regularly face “red tape” barriers in trying to work across organization lines, especially with public sector partners, which tend to have more regulations. Getting through these barriers and complications takes creativity and persistence. This can lead to heightened 176 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

frustrations and complications in moving desired work forward in a timely manner. The more entities in a relationship, the more likely that legal, policy, attitudinal, and cultural challenges will be part of doing business. Successful partnerships acknowledge and address these realities up front and take satisfaction in resolving them. Convert your stumbling blocks to steppingstones. Successful partnerships map out the red tape barriers and mobilize whatever it takes to overcome them. It is too easy to point fingers or use these impediments as excuses for derailments and not achieving success. How partners overcome adversity and the institutional complexities of individual partner members will determine, in large measure, the success of the partnership.

BUILD STEP BY STEP. It is natural for the partners to want early successes. There is a tendency to look at similar partnership arrangements and their results without appreciating all the steps taken that led to the result. You have to invest to get results and process is important to achieve successful outcomes. Every situation presents a different set of opportunities based on the unique social, economic, and political realities in which a partnership must operate. Much can and should be learned from the experience of others. Good partnerships take a steady investment of time and energy to build and develop. Successful partnerships are built incrementally by starting at the beginning and growing gradually and tackling more complex initiatives based on the competencies gained from the previous efforts. Successful partners understand the value of due process and earned vs. instant gratification. They recognize that investment in building the infrastructure necessary to achieve future success is important and are willing to forgo premature success in order to achieve larger, more important long-term gains. “Go Slow to Go Fast.”

Partners will grow as far in the partnership as the other partner(s) are willing to help or let them.

Challenge yourself and your partners to collectively raise the bar of expectations and advance the partnership step-by-step.

STRIVE FOR EXCELLENCE. A partnership ultimately gains stature and a reputation based on the quality of the work it accomplishes. The most successful partnerships understand the importance of doing everything well. Build an early reputation for excellence and sustain that reputation. This will be an important factor in how others view your partnership and what doors will be opened to you. People, and potential funders, want to associate with important work and a reputation for excellence. Step back and analyze what you want people to say about your partnership’s work and organizations. This standard then should underscore your strategy, behaviors, and actions to ensure your desired reputation is achieved.

DIVERSIFY YOUR FUNDING SOURCES. The ultimate success of any partnership depends on the human and financial resources it can garner. Successful partnerships develop multiple and steady sources of support, particularly for covering basic operational costs and launching new initiatives. There are many examples where partnerships become too dependent on one or too few sources of financial support. When these sources are reduced or disappear, sustainability of the partnership is jeopardized. Building a more diverse funding base is the best hedge against the vagaries of over reliance on fund sources that may be problematic or undependable from year to year.

Develop and periodically update a comprehensive business plan that addresses both near and longerterm public and private funding sources and earned as well as contributed funds that will give your partnership staying power and adaptability.

COMMUNITY PARTNERS

STREET CODE ACADEMY StreetCode’s mission is to invigorate innovation within their community. They provide historically economically disadvantaged people of color with the high-tech skills, confidence, and access to networks needed to enter the technology industry. They offer free courses in coding, entrepreneurship, and design. StreetCode engages communities seeking justice, innovation, and tech-driven economic opportunities.

CONSTANTLY SEEK OUT AND ADOPT BEST PRACTICES. The best practitioners are those who are a sponge for new ideas and always on the lookout for innovation and creativity that can be adapted to their partnership. Too often, we hear statements such as “We don’t do things that way. We’ve always done it this way.” “It won’t work.” “This is too risky.” “You have to tell them what they need to know.” “Don’t let

Recommendations & Implementation 177

them set the agenda.” While such cautionary thoughts need to be considered, successful partnerships are open to new ideas and better ways to accomplish their goals. They can readily grasp and adapt best practices. Overcoming resistance to change is one of the major challenges to partnership success. Partner entities need to seek ways to build in greater flexibility and adaptability in their structure and work in order to take advantage of “partnering moments.” Establish a work environment in which reasoned risk taking and creativity are encouraged and rewarded, and people are willing to risk possible failures in order to succeed.

Leaders should act as “champions” with the courage to support experimentation and risk taking and run interference when necessary. Resourcefulness also characterizes successful partnerships. Work together to identify and engage the abundant human talent residing in most communities to participate in and assist your partnership.

ALWAYS BE COURTEOUS AND DIPLOMATIC. Sustaining successful partnerships involves hard work, practiced effectively and consistently over time. It is essential that strong ground rules be established by the partner entities that will govern how the organizations and individuals will interact and treat each other. There is no room for disrespectful behavior. It serves only to tarnish how partners interact and work together. Honesty, respect, courtesy, tact, and diplomacy should govern partner relationships. A useful partnering technique is for the partners to define all behaviors that are crucial to sustaining good relationships and then ensure that accountability measures are in place to re-enforce their ongoing practice. Successful partnerships work constantly on developing effective relationships built on trust and a shared commitment to each other’s interests and success.

HONOR YOUR COMMITMENTS. Partnership work entails perseverance and follow through by each participating organization and individual. Partnerships

178 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

require a shared commitment to each other’s success.

Sustaining any partnership requires that exciting ideas of interest to the participants get executed. Progress depends on each person in the partnership honoring their commitment and following up their words with deeds. When work does not get accomplished, it suggests that the work was not really that important to the individual or organization. This, in turn, builds frustration in the other participants and eats at the mutual trust factor so essential to effective partnering.

Successful partnerships address these realities by putting in place reliable accountability measures and regular executive base-touching processes to stay on top of commitments and actions.

CELEBRATE SUCCESS. It is a mistake to not take time to celebrate successes formally and frequently.

Successful partnerships look for every opportunity to celebrate individual project successes or key benchmarks in the evolution of the partnership. Such celebrations allow the partners to recognize good work being done that re-enforces the goals of the partnership; to gain some outside recognition of the partnership; and/or to demonstrate possibilities for the partnership to grow. People often are reluctant to take the time to celebrate but invariably are pleased when it does occur. Recognizing and celebrating accomplishments helps motivate and spur people on to new challenges. It is a lost opportunity when it does not occur. If one’s goal is to build greater community awareness of the partnership, then the partners need to take every opportunity to legitimately “toot their horns” and market their work and successes.

Besides many people who pitch in on partnership do so because they believe in the cause and because it is enjoyable. Celebrating success milestones ensures everybody’s “fun-quotient” stays high. Especially when results are going to take time, it is important to have some early successes and milestones to enjoy and celebrate to build a sense of accomplishment and momentum.

RESPECT THE RIGHT TO DISAGREE; ACT ON A CONSENSUS BASIS. There are times and circumstances in partnerships where honest differences will surface and where reluctance to act on a proposal is deeply held and where compelling reasons are presented on why an action cannot be supported. It is important that partners respect these positions with adequate dialogue and understand the basis of’ the concerns. In successful partnerships, ground rules are established to give each partner a veto power over proposed actions. Partnership work means reaching consensus among the partners.

Homework well done should eliminate most of these differences before they become contentious. There simply is too much good work where commonality of support can be achieved for these situations to erode the core working relationship.

PUT MECHANISMS IN PLACE TO RE-ENFORCE THE PARTNERSHIP. To realize its full potential, a partnership needs: a clear vision, dedicated and skilled people, a rewards and recognition program, incentives that stimulate desired partnership activity, sustained management support and involvement, operational funds, and a clear understanding among supervisors and staff of the potential benefits that result from the partnership arrangements. These are complex, but essential, elements to put in place.

The seriousness with which they are addressed will determine your degree of success.

NETWORK AND BUILD RELATIONSHIPS. A core competency in partnership work is the ability to network and build relationships. People sell ideas to others. People lend support because people ask them to. Partnerships are about people working together and reaching out to others to gain their emotional engagement. Successful partnerships establish formal systems to identify people who can add value and support. They strategically build new relationships and expand networks to accomplish their priorities.

Their relationship building work is deliberate and proactive rather than reactive or coincidental. It is based on a clear strategy of engaging the specific organizations and individuals within the broader community who can advance the work of the partnership. Systematically match your needs with potential sources of support and resources to ensure that effective connections occur.

Recommendations & Implementation 179

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. PARK SOURCE: CONSULTANT TEAM 180 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

4.4 CAPITAL COSTS & FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES The section starts with a framework for improving existing parks, defining three types of park improvements: critical, strategic, and visionary. Costs associated to each category of improvements are described for each park. From the level of service we understand that East Palo Alto needs to increase its available parkland. This section identifies the costs associated with such a system expansion. Finally, we look at funding strategies available to achieve our goals. The funding strategies apply not just to capital improvements but also to programming, maintenance and operations.

Recommendations & Implementation 181

4.4 CAPITAL COSTS AND FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THREE TIERS OF EXISTING PARK IMPROVEMENT

TIER B: STRATEGIC PARK IMPROVEMENTS (CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS)

Park and facility improvements can be understood in three “tiers”. The first tier is focused on maintenance, the second on strategic enhancements, and the third on new or transformed parks.

These improvements are strategic to make measured park enhancements to the existing system. Examples of strategic improvements and redesign may include upgrades to existing amenities and facilities within parks, as well as enhancements to existing programs, introducing new alternative programs, adding new positions, or making other strategic changes that would require additional operational or capital funding.

TIER A: CRITICAL IMPROVEMENTS (OPERATIONS BUDGET) Tier A includes park improvements critical to maintaining a functioning park system. They include lifecycle replacements as well as routine repairs, replanting, and maintenance. The primary goal and intention of this category is to make the most of existing resources and for the parks department to maintain its services.

TIER 3: VISIONARY PARK IMPROVEMENTS (DEVELOPING NEW OPPORTUNITIES) Visionary improvements are long-range in nature, addressing future needs and deficiencies. They include comprehensive park renovations, acquisitions, and the creation of new parks. Typically, Tier 3 improvements start with a park or facility-specific master plan to analyze conditions, explore the needs

PARK IMPROVEMENT TIERS

$

$$

$$$

CRITICAL

STRATEGIC

VISIONARY

Maintaining What We Have

Improving What We Have

Developing New Opportunities

Tier A

Tier B

Tier C

182 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

of the community, and design a new park. This category represents the complete set of services and facilities desired by the community. It is fiscally unconstrained but can help provide policy guidance by illustrating the ultimate goals of the community.

Funding for visionary projects may be derived from partnerships, grants, private investments and new tax dollars.

CAPITAL INVESTMENT

TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP It is important to view the financial sustainability of the Parks and Recreation System through the concept of “Total Cost of Ownership” Total cost of ownership will take into account; 1) capital investments, the acquisition of physical assets by the City to maintain or expand its park systems; 2) operation and maintenance costs, to improve sites, grounds, facilities, and structures of the park system to provide optimal and enjoyable use; 3) lifecycle replacement, to maintain the functionality of all park assets.

LIFECYCLE REPLACEMENT SCHEDULE The EPA Parks Team will need to closely monitor the assets of the park system throughout their lifecycle to ensure the safety of park visitors. The plan recommends that assets be replaced to ensure efficient and effective utilization of operational dollars.

In the following pages we provide a lifecycle replacement schedule per EPA park. This schedule should be utilized as a guide for the creation of an asset management system that will guide an operational budget to maintain level of service.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

LIFECYCLE REPLACEMENT

TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP

Recommendations & Implementation 183

IMPROVING OUR PARKS TABLE 4-5: LIFE CYCLE REPLACEMENT COSTS PER PARK (TIER A) Park

Jack Farrell Park

Critical (Life Cycle Replacement)

Costs

Unit

Count

$150,000

EA

1

$150,000

25

Children's Playground

$350,000

EA

1

$350,000

15

Walking Loop Surface

$40

SF

1000

$40,000

30

Pedestrian Light Pole

$10,000

EA

35

$350,000

30

Bike Racks

$1,500

EA

1

$1,500

10

Restrooms

$500,000

EA

1

$500,000

30

Benches

$3,000

EA

1

$3,000

10

Bleachers

$2,500

EA

1

$2,500

15

Trash Receptacles

$1,500

EA

6

$9,000

10

Baseball/Softball Field

$750,000

EA

1

$750,000

25

Picnic Tables

$5,000

EA

3

$15,000

15

Fitness Court

$250,000

EA

1

$250,000

20

$2,421,000

Children's Playground

$350,000

EA

1

$350,000

15

Pedestrian Light Pole

$10,000

EA

3

$30,000

30

Bike Racks

$1,500

EA

6

$9,000

10

Benches

$3,000

EA

8

$24,000

10

Picnic Tables

$5,000

EA

5

$25,000

15

BBQ Pits

$1,500

EA

2

$3,000

10

Restrooms

$500,000

EA

1

$500,000

30

Trash Receptacles

$1,500

EA

4

$6,000

10

Fitness Court

$250,000

EA

1

$250,000

20

Total:

Pocket Park at Newbridge Street

$1,197,000

Benches

$3,000

EA

2

$6,000

10

Pedestrian Light Pole

$10,000

EA

2

$20,000

30

Trash Receptacles

$1,500

EA

2

$3,000

10

Bike Racks

$1,500

EA

1

$1,500

10

Total:

Cooley Landing

Suggested Lifecycle (in years)

Outdoor Basketball Court

Total:

Joel Davis Memorial Park

Total

$30,500

Community Center

$1,000

SF

5,800

Walking Loop

$40

LF

Pedestrian Light Pole

$10,000

EA

Bike Racks

$1,500

EA

Benches

$3,000

EA

Picnic Tables

$3,000

Shade Structure

$50,000

Trash Receptacles Restrooms Total:

184 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

$5,800,000

50

1600

$64,000

30

10

$100,000

30

2

$3,000

10

6

$18,000

10

EA

14

$42,000

15

EA

1

$50,000

15

$1,500

EA

1

$1,500

10

$500,000

EA

1

$500,000

30

$6,578,500

TABLE 4-6: STRATEGIC IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING PARKS (TIER B) Park

Jack Farrell Park

Strategic (Capital Improvements)

Costs

Unit

Count

Total

Remove site fencing

$10

LF

1,000

$10,000

New perimeter fencing at residental lots

$40

LF

1,000

$40,000

Renovated bathrooms (time locking doors)

$1,000

EA

2

$2,000

Suggested Lifecycle (in years) 20

Additional Sports Lighting

$10,000

EA

4

$40,000

30

Enhanced Entrance Signage

$20,000

EA

3

$60,000

30

Park Wayfinding Signage

$1,500

EA

2

$3,000

15

Multi-use Field Conversion (soccer)

$1,000,000

EA

1

$1,000,000

25

Amphitheater Retaining Wall/Steps

$25,000

LS

Tennis Court (with lights)

$200,000

EA

Improved entry along Michigan Avenue

$200,000

LS

$16

SF

1

$25,000

20

$200,000

20

$200,000

20

Rain Garden / Silva Cell - cost based on design Permeable paving

13,600

$1,797,600

Total: Enhanced Entrance Signage

Joel Davis Memorial Park

$20,000

EA

1

$20,000

30 15

Park Wayfinding Signage

$1,500

EA

2

$3,000

Additional benches

$3,000

EA

10

$30,000

10

Expanded picnic area

$5,000

EA

4

$20,000

15

Additional trash receptacles

$1,500

EA

4

$6,000

10

Bocce Ball Courts (12'x60')

$60,000

EA

2

$120,000

15

Putting Green

$40

SF

1980

$79,200

15

New gate/entrance by City's office

$5,000

EA

1

$5,000

20

$283,200

Total:

Pocket Park at Newbridge Street

Additional benches

$3,000

EA

5

$15,000

10

4' Fence around tot lot

$40

SF

400

$16,000

20

Children's Playground

$350,000

EA

1

$350,000

15

Picnic Tables

$3,000

EA

1

$3,000

15

$384,000

Total:

Cooley Landing

$217,600

Trash Receptacles

$3,000

EA

4

$12,000

10

Fishing Deck

$500

SF

1500

$750,000

30

Total:

$762,000

NOTES: 1. COST ESTIMATES DO NOT INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE. 2. COST ESTIMATES DO NOT INCLUDE DESIGN OR OTHER SOFT COSTS. 3. THE REPLACEMENT COSTS LISTED IN THIS TABLE WERE ESTABLISHED IN 2022 AND SHOULD BE ADJUSTED ANNUALLY FOR INFLATION.

Recommendations & Implementation 185

TABLE 4-7: VISIONARY PROJECT COSTS PER PARK (TIER C)

Park

Visionary Projects

Costs

Master Plan - Completed by Verde Design Multi-use Field Basketball Courts Tennis Courts

Martin Luther King Jr. Park

Renovated Restroom/Concession

$22 Million

Baseball Field Renovation of BBQ/Picnic Area/Playground Walking Loop Lawn for low impact uses

Master Plan - Magical Bridge Additional bike racks Outdoor Community Gathering Plaza Outdoor Gym for adult and seniors Universal Playground Recreation Lawn

Bell Street Park

Shade Structures Entry signange Amphitheater Skate Court BBQ and Picnic Area Accessible Bathrooms Plaza Space

The City of East Palo Alto is currently developing master plans for two existing parks, Martin Luther King Jr. Park and Bell Street Park. Both projects have their own timelines independent of the Parks and Recreation Master plan. The Consultant Team has collaborated with the specif project teams and accounted for the amenity additions to the city park system.

186 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

$15 Million

EXPANDING OUR PARKS TABLE 4-8: LIFE CYCLE REPLACEMENT COSTS PER PARK (TIER A)

Types of Providers

Acreas Provided to Meet City Needs

Cost / Acres to Develop

Total acres required to meet City needs

87

City of East Palo Alto (Planned)

4.56

$1,200,000

Joint-Use Schoolyard

22.32

Based on City and School District Agreements

Private Developers

21.52

Based on City and Developer Agreements

Provider to be Determined

38.6

$1,200,000

Land Acquisition costs

19.3

Based on City Negotiations

Park Development Cost

19.3

$1,200,000

Total

$5,472,000

$46,320,000

Potential Additional City Responsibility (50%)

$23,160,000

Recommendations & Implementation 187

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) FUNDING MECHANISMS

HIGHLY IMPLEMENTABLE FUNDING STRATEGIES

Municipal Parks and Recreation agencies across the United States today have learned to manage revenue options to support Parks and Recreation, especially with the limited availability of tax dollars. Municipal Park and Recreation systems can no longer rely on taxes as their sole revenue option and have developed new revenue sources/options to help support capital and operational needs.

Grant funds are used by many agencies to enhance parks and the availability of grants continues to grow annually. The City should continue to pursue grant opportunities. Matching dollars are required for most federal grants and many state grants.

A growing number of municipalities have developed policies on pricing of services, cost recovery rates, and partnership agreements for programs and facilities provided to the community. They also have developed strong partnerships that are fair and equitable in the delivery of services based on whom receives the service, for what purpose, for what benefit, and for what costs. In addition, agencies have learned to use Parks and Recreation facilities, amenities, programs, and events, to generate revenue and support economic development. Municipalities have also learned to recognize that people will drive to their community for quality recreation facilities such as sports complexes, pools, and tournaments, if the facilities/events are well managed and properly marketed.

In order to continue to build and maintain the Parks and Recreation system, funding should be pursued for the capital investments, such as those presented in this plan. The following funding approaches represent a broad range of options that the City can consider in future implementation for improving its Parks and Recreation system.

Grants

General Obligation Bond: A general obligation bond is a municipal bond secured by a taxing authority such as the City to improve public assets that benefits the municipal agency involved that oversee the Parks and Recreation facilities. General Obligation Bonds should be considered for park and recreation facility projects, such as updates to a community or regional park, trails, recreation centers, aquatic centers, or a sports complex. Improvements to parks should also be covered by these funding sources because there are very little operational revenues associated with these parks to draw from, and some of the city parks need upgrades and renovations. These parks help frame the city image and benefit a wide age segment of users and updating these parks will benefit the community as a whole and stabilize neighborhoods and other areas of the city. According to Trust for Public Land research, over the last 10 years across the United States over 90% of park and recreation bond issues have passed in cities when offered to the community to vote to support the community needs for Parks and Recreation.

National Recreational Trails Program: These grants are available to government and nonprofit agencies, for amounts ranging from $5,000 to $50,000, for the building of a trail or piece of a trail. It is a reimbursement grant program (sponsor must fund 100% of the project up front) and requires

188 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

a 20% local match. This is an annual program with an application deadline at the end of January. The available funds are split such that 30% goes toward motorized trails, 30% to non-motorized trails, and 40% is discretionary for trail construction.

User Fees:

Ordinances requiring the dedication of park land within developments to meet the park and recreation needs of the new residents often have provisions allowing cash contribution to substitute for the land requirement.

User fees are fees paid by a user of recreational facilities or programs to offset the costs of services provided by the Department in operating a park, a recreation facility or in delivering programs and services. A perception of “value” has to be instilled in the community by the Parks and Recreation staff for what benefits the City is providing to the user. As the Department continues to develop new programs, all future fees should be charged based on cost recovery goals developed in a future Pricing Policy. The fees for the parks and/or core recreation services are based on the level of exclusivity the user receives compared to the general taxpayer. It is recommended that user fees for programs be charged at market rate for services to create value and operational revenue for the Department. For services where the City feels that they cannot move forward on adequate user fees to obtain the required cost recovery, consideration of contracting with a not-for-profit and/or private company to help offset service costs should be pursued. This would save the City dollars in their operational budgets while still ensuring the community receives the service to keep the quality of life at a high standard.

Land Leases/Concessions:

Permit Fees:

Land leases and concessions are public/private partnerships in which the municipality provides land or space for private commercial operations that will enhance the park and recreational experience in exchange for payments to help reduce operating costs. They can range from food service restaurant operations, Cell Towers, hotels, to full management of recreation attractions. Leases usually pay back to the City a percentage of the value of the land each year in the 15% category and a percentage of gross from the restaurant or attractions. They also pay sales tax and employee income tax to the City.

This fee is incorporated for exclusive reservations for picnic shelters, sports fields, special events that are provided by the City, and competition tournaments held in the city by other organizations who make a profit off City owned facilities. Permit fees include a base fee for all direct and indirect costs for the City to provide the space on an exclusive basis plus a percentage of the gross for major special events and tournaments held on City owned permitted facilities.

Alcohol permits should be explored and if determined worthwhile, added to these permits which would generate more dollars for the City for these special

Design Arts Program: The National Endowment for the Arts provides grants to states and local agencies, individuals and nonprofit organizations for projects that incorporate urban design, historic preservation, planning, architecture, landscape architecture, and other community improvement activities, including greenway development. Grants to organizations and agencies must be matched by a 50-percent local contribution.

Agencies can receive up to $50,000.

Developer Cash-in-Lieu of meeting the Park Land Dedication Requirement:

Recommendations & Implementation 189

use areas. These dollars could be applied to the Recreation and Park Revolving Fund if developed to help support park improvements and operations.

Business/Resident Donations: Individual donations from corporations and private donations can be accepted to support specific improvements and amenities.

Nonprofit Organizations: Nonprofit organizations can provide support for green space and parks in various ways.

•

•

•

•

Conservancy or Friends Organization: This type of nonprofit is devoted to supporting a specific park. These Park Conservancy’s or Friends Groups are a major funding source for parks in the United States and should be considered for the Parks and Recreation facilities in the city.

Community Service Workers: Community service workers are assigned by the court to pay off some of their sentence through maintenance activities in parks, such as picking up litter, removing graffiti, and assisting in painting or fix up activities. Most workers are assigned 30 to 60 hours of work. This would seem to be a good opportunity for the parks to work with the sheriff’s or City police department on using community service workers.

Greenway Fundraising Programs: Agencies across the United States have used greenways for not-for-profit fundraisers in the form of walks, runs, bicycle races, and special events.

The local managing agency usually gets $2-$5 per participants in the events to go back to support the operations and maintenance costs.

Volunteer Work: Community volunteers may help with greenway construction, as well as conduct fundraisers. Organizations that might be mobilized for volunteer work include the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts.

190 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Concessions: Concessions can be leased out to a private operator for a percentage of gross profits. Typically, 15%-18% of gross profits for concessions of a profit operator, or a managing agency over a park site could manage concessions.

Field Permits: The City can issue recreational use permits for activities, practice, or games. Permits should cover the operational cost of each field and management costs. If a private operator desires to rent the site for a sporting tournament for private gain, the City should provide a permit fee plus a percentage of gross from the event for the exclusive use of the fields.

Volunteerism: The revenue source is an indirect revenue source in that persons donate time to the City to assist in providing a product or service on an hourly basis.

This reduces the City’s cost in providing the service plus it builds advocacy for the City.

FUNDING STRATEGY OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONSIDERATION Lease Back: Lease backs are a source of capital funding in which a private sector entity such as a development company buys the park land site or leases the park land and develops a facility such as a park, recreation attraction, recreation center, pool, or sports complex; and leases the facility back to the municipality to pay off the capital costs over a 20-to-30-year period. This approach takes advantage of the efficiencies of private sector development while relieving the burden on the municipality to raise upfront capital funds. This

funding source is typically used for recreation and aquatic type facilities, stadiums, civic buildings, and fire stations.

Corporate Sponsorships: Corporations can also underwrite a portion or all the cost of an event, program, or activity based on their name being associated with the service. Sponsorships typically are title sponsors, presenting sponsors, associate sponsors, product sponsors, or in-kind sponsors. Many agencies seek corporate support for these types of activities through friends’ groups and advisory boards.

•

Advertising sales on sports complexes, scoreboards, gym floors, trash cans, playgrounds, in locker rooms, at dog parks, along trails, flower pots, and as part of special events held in the city to help support operational costs have been an acceptable practice in Parks and Recreation systems for a long time and should be considered by the City to support operational costs.

Maintenance Endowment Fund: This is a fund dedicated exclusively for a park’s maintenance, funded by a percentage of user fees from programs, events, and rentals and is dedicated to protecting the asset where the activity is occurring.

Park and Recreation Revenue Revolving Fund: This is a dedicated fund to be used for park purposes only that is replenished on an ongoing basis from various funding sources such as grants, sponsorships, advertising, program user fees and rental fees within the park system. The City could establish a revolving fund supported by all of the funding sources identified in this section and kept separate from the tax general fund. This has worked well in many cities across the United States.

Parks Foundation: The utilization of a Parks Foundation is a jointdevelopment funding source with the City. The foundation operates as a non-profit organization, working on behalf of the public agency to raise needed dollars to support its vision and operational needs.

•

The dollars that would be raised by the foundation are tax-exempt. Foundations promote specific causes, activities, or issues that the Department needs to address.

They offer a variety of means to fund capital projects, including capital campaigns, gifts catalogs, fundraisers, endowments, sales of park-related memorabilia, etc.

•

Private donations may be received in the form of cash, securities, land, facilities, recreation equipment, art, or in-kind services.

Private Foundation Funds: Nonprofit community foundations can be strong sources of support for the Department and should be pursued for specific park and recreation amenities.

The Department should consider developing a good parks foundation.

Nonprofit Organizations: Nonprofit organizations can provide support for green space and parks in various ways. Examples include: •

Greenway Foundations: Greenway foundations focus on developing and maintaining trails and green corridors on a City-wide basis. The City could seek land leases along their trails as a funding source, in addition to selling miles of trails to community corporations and nonprofits in the city. The development rights along the trails can also be sold to local utilities for water, sewer, fiber optic, and cable lines on a per mile basis to support development and management of these corridors. Indianapolis Greenway Foundation has a specific Greenway Trail license plate they have had in place for over Recommendations & Implementation 191

20 years to help support the development and maintenance of trails in the city.

•

Adopt-a-Park, -Trail, -Stream: In this approach local neighborhood groups or businesses make a volunteer commitment to maintaining a specific area of a park or an amenity. Adopt-a-Park, or similar arrangements are particularly well-suited for the Department.

Local Private-Sector Funding: Local industries and private businesses may agree to provide support for greenway development through one or more of the following methods: •

Donations of cash to a specific greenway segment.

•

Donations of services by businesses and corporations to reduce the cost of greenway implementation, including equipment and labor to construct and install elements of a specific greenway.

•

Reductions in the cost of materials purchased from local businesses that support greenway implementation and can supply essential products for facility development.

Adopt-A-Foot Program: These are typically small grant programs that fund new construction, repair/renovation, maps, trail brochures, facilities (bike racks, picnic areas, birding equipment) as well as provide maintenance support.

The Adopt-A-Foot program is in the form of cash contributions that range from $2,640 to $26,400 over a five-year period.

Food and Equipment Sponsors: Official drink and food sponsors can be utilized for the City. Official drink and food sponsors pay the City a set percentage of gross. Typically, this is 15%-20% of costs for being the official product and receiving

192 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

exclusive pouring and food rights to the complex.

Likewise, official equipment sponsors work well for trucks, mowers, and tractors.

Advertising Revenue: Advertising revenue can come from the sale of ads on banners in the parks. The advertising could include trashcans, trail markers, visitor pull trailers, tee boxes, scorecards, and in restrooms.

Catering: The City has many sites that set up well to have high, medium, and low-level caterers on contract that groups can use. Caterers usually provide the parks with a fixed gross rate on food and beverage at 12%15% of the cost of food and 18% of drink back to the City.

Federal Housing Grants: Federal Housing Grants can also help support parks near federal housing areas and should be pursued if appropriate. Several communities have used HUD funds to develop greenways, including the Boscobel Heights’ “Safe Walk” Greenway in Nashville, Tennessee.

Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention (Small Watersheds) Grants: The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) provides funding to state and local agencies or nonprofit organizations authorized to carry out, maintain, and operate watershed improvements involving less than 250,000 acres. The NRCS provides financial and technical assistance to eligible projects to improve watershed protection, flood prevention, sedimentation control, public water-based fish and wildlife enhancements, and recreation planning. The NRCS requires a 50-percent local match for public recreation, and fish and wildlife projects.

Tax Abatement The governing body of a political subdivision may grant a current or prospective abatement, by contract or otherwise, of the taxes imposed by the political subdivision on a parcel of property, which may include personal property and machinery, or defer the payments of the taxes and abate the interest and penalty that otherwise would apply, if: •

•

It expects the benefits to the political subdivision of the proposed abatement agreement to at least equal the costs to the political subdivision of the proposed agreement or intends the abatement to phase in a property tax increase, and It finds that doing so is in the public interest because it will: •

increase or preserve tax base;

•

provide employment opportunities in the political subdivision;

•

provide or help acquire or construct public facilities;

•

help redevelop or renew blighted areas;

•

help provide access to services for residents of the political subdivision;

•

finance or provide public infrastructure;

•

phase in a property tax increase on the parcel resulting from an increase of 50 percent or more in one year on the estimated market value of the parcel, other than increase attributable to improvement of the parcel; or

•

stabilize the tax base through equalization of property tax revenues for a specified period with respect to a taxpayer whose real and personal property is subject to valuation

Tax Allocation or Tax Increment District: Commonly used for financing redevelopment projects.

A Tax Allocation District (TAD) involves the issuance of tax-exempt bonds to pay front-end infrastructure and eligible development costs in partnership with private developers. As redevelopment occurs in the

City, the “tax increment” resulting from redevelopment projects is used to retire the debt issued to fund the eligible redevelopment costs. The public portion of the redevelopment project funds itself using the additional taxes generated by the project. TADs can be used to fund park improvements and development as an essential infrastructure cost. These funds would work well in the downtown park redevelopment and in trail development.

Utility Lease Fee: Utility lease fees have been used to support parks in the form of utility companies supporting a park from utility easements, storm water runoff and paying for development rights below the ground. This funding source is derived from fees on property own by the City based on measures such as the amount of impervious surfacing as well as fees from utility companies having access through the park. It is used by many cities to acquire and develop greenways and other open space resources that provide improvements in the park or development of trails.

Improvements can include trails, drainage areas, and retention ponds that serve multiple purposes such as recreation, environmental protection, and storm water management. This could be a source for the utilities to contribute to support the parks and trails in the future.

This has been very successful in Houston along their bayous.

Food and Beverage Tax: This 1/8% sales tax is currently used by cities across the United States and usually requires voter approval.

These dollars can come from the local community as well as visitors to the city to help pay for a bond to finance future park and recreation related improvements. Food and Beverage Taxes are very well accepted in most communities.

Recommendations & Implementation 193

Tax Increment Financing (TIF Funds): The concept behind the tax increment financing is that taxes in a designated area are frozen and the redevelopment that occurs in the blighted, conservation, or economic development area will increase the assessed valuation of the property and generate new property tax revenues. The increase can be used on an annual basis to retire revenue bonds issued to finance redevelopment costs. A great deal of development is required to generate sufficient revenues to make it work.

World Wildlife Fund Innovative Grants Program: This organization awards small grants to local, regional, and statewide nonprofit organizations to help implement innovative strategies for the conservation of natural resources. Grants are offered to support projects that accomplish one or more of the following: (1) conserve wetlands; (2) protect endangered species; (3) preserve migratory birds; (4) conserve coastal resources; and (5) establish and sustain protected natural areas, such as greenways.

Wi-Fi Revenue:

Innovative Grants:

The City can set up a Wi-Fi area whereby a Wi-Fi vendor is able to sell the advertising on the Wi-Fi access banner to local businesses targeting the users of the site. This revenue has amounted to $20,000$50,000 in revenue for similar systems.

This funding can help pay for the administrative costs for projects including planning, technical assistance, legal and other costs to facilitate the acquisition of critical lands; retaining consultants and other experts; and preparing visual presentations and brochures or other conservation activities. The maximum award for a single grant is typically $10,000.

GRANTS THROUGH PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS AND CORPORATIONS Many communities have solicited greenway funding from a variety of private foundations and other conservation-minded benefactors. Some of these grants include:

Coors Pure Water 2000 Grants: Coors Brewing Company and its affiliated distributors provide funding and in-kind services to grassroots organizations that are working to solve local, regional and national water-related problems. Coors provides grants, ranging from a few hundred dollars to $50,000, for projects such as river cleanups, aquatic habitat improvements, water quality monitoring, wetlands protection, pollution prevention, water education efforts, groundwater protection, water conservation and fisheries.

194 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Bikes Belong: Bikes Belong coalition is sponsored by members of the American Bicycle Industry. The grant program is a national discretionary program with a small budget, to help communities build trail projects. They like to fund high-profile projects and like regional coalitions.

An application must be supported by the local bicycle dealers (letters of support should be attached). Bikes Belong also offers advice and information on how to get more people on bikes. Government and nonprofit agencies are eligible, and no match is required. The maximum amount for a grant proposal is $10,000.

Applications may be submitted at any time and are reviewed as they are received.

Partnership Development Agreement: Each partner would develop their respective facilities based on set design guidelines with the City, managing all the site elements. Partners would work collectively to promote the site versus individual amenities. This process was successful for Papago Park, located in the City of Phoenix, Arizona. The site included a major league spring training facility and minor league baseball complex, zoo, botanical gardens, history museum, and other attractions on site.

Community Forest and Open Space Program: Federal Grant with Estimated Total Program Funding of $3,150,000. Individual grant applications may not exceed $400,000. The program pays up to 50% of the project costs and requires a 50% non-federal match.

Eligible lands for grants funded under this program are private forests that are at least five acres in size, suitable to sustain natural vegetation, and at least 75% forested.

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program-fund: This source is for transportation projects that improve air quality and reduce traffic congestion. Projects can include bicycle and pedestrian projects, trails, links to communities, bike rack facilities. Average grant size $50,000-$100,000.

Community Facilities Grant and Loan ProgramGrant Program: This source is established to assist communities with grant and loan funding for the expansion, renovation and or remodeling of former school facilities and or existing surplus government facilities that have an existing or future community use. Facilities may be space for community gatherings and functions, recreational athletic facilities for community members,

particularly youth. These include space for nonfor-profit offices, childcare, community education, theater, senior centers, youth centers, and after school programs. CFP match requirements for requests up to $250,000 are 10-% eligible project costs. For requests over $250,000 to $1 million, the match is 15%.

American Hiking Society: Fund on a national basis for promoting and protecting foot trails and the hiking experience.

The Helen R. Buck Foundation: This foundation provides funding for playground equipment and recreational activities.

Deupree Family Foundation: The Deupree Family Foundation provides grants for Recreation, parks/playgrounds, and children/youth, on a national basis. This foundation supports building/ renovation, equipment, general/operating support, program development, and seed money.

The John P. Ellbogen Foundation: Children/youth services grants as well as support for capital campaigns, general/operating support, and program development.

Economic Development Grants for Public Works and Development of Facilities: The U. S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration (EDA), provides grants to states, counties, and cities designated as redevelopment areas by EDA for public works projects that can include developing trails and greenway facilities. There is a 30% local match required, except in severely distressed areas where the federal contribution can reach 80%.

Recommendations & Implementation 195

MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. PARK SOURCE: CONSULTANT TEAM 196 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

4.5 OPERATIONS, PARK MAINTENANCE AND STAFFING PROPOSAL Parks and amenities that are clean and functioning efficiently are a critical element to delivering high quality programs and services. The East Palo Alto Public Works Department maintains approximately 24 acres of developed parks (not including facility grounds and right-of-way/median landscape acreage).

The following section provides recommendations stay ahead of preventative maintenance and limit breakdowns.

The City of East Palo Alto at present does not have adequate staff to run recreational programs to meet the needs of its population. In addition, the shortage also apply to staffing shortages in regards to park maintenance. This sections provides an overview of possible organizational structuring to help bridge those gaps to meet the needs of East Palo Alto.

Recommendations & Implementation 197

4.5 OPERATIONS, PARK MAINTENANCE AND STAFFING PROPOSAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

1. Develop a “Friends of EPA”

4. Establish an additional recreation

program to coordinate and

coordinator focused on senior

manage volunteer opportunities

programming and support.

for individuals and groups to engage with EPA Parks. Service activities may range from ontime projects and events to longer term positions. Actives may include, litter cleanups, gardening and landscaping,

5. Develop a GIS-based asset management work order system to streamline park maintenance.

6. Ensure to set aside 3-6% of capital improvement budget for replacement and maintenance.

weed removal, and neighborhood park watch.

2. Establish a role for a dedicated park maintenance staff.

✓

Connect People to Parks

3. Establish a park team which

✓

Create Diverse & Inclusive Parks

includes a dedicated parks

Promote Public Health & Sustainability

director and recreation coordinator, in addition to part time staff – all underneath community service or recreation division under the administrative services dept.

198 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Celebrate the Bay

✓

Activate EPA Parks

✓

Improve Park Operations Grow Programmings & Partnerships

COMMUNIT Y PRIORITIES

Recommendations & Implementation 199

PARKS MAINTENANCE LINES OF SERVICE The core lines of service (functions) performed by the Parks Division are numerous. The lines of service are as follows: TABLE 4-9: LINES OF SERVICES IN PARK MAINTENANCE

200 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

MAINTENANCE MODES AND STANDARDS Regular maintenance requires unit-based quantification for most major resource requirements and provides the methods for projecting future resource needs. The City’s maintenance efforts as detailed are expansive and address diverse aspects of maintaining high-quality parks, amenities, and infrastructure to preserve the integrity of public assets and their meaningful use. The prevailing objectives of a standards-based park maintenance program are presented below but not in order of importance: •

Maintain and improve the sites, grounds, facilities, and structures of the City’s parks system to provide optimal and enjoyable use.

•

Provide landscaping and general maintenance for a multitude of City amenities, including but not limited to, landscaped beds and turf, urban open spaces, urban forests, and selected park buildings and structures.

•

Be responsive to maintenance needs of the City’s open-space tracts. Particular attention must be paid to access points, trail repair, erosion control, and trash removal.

•

Protect and preserve the value of City assets so that long-term maintenance costs are minimal due to extending the service life of those assets.

Many of the objectives assigned to the Park’s maintenance teams go beyond the traditional responsibilities of park maintenance employees.

scheduling tasks and responsibilities at each location.

A description of each of the maintenance modes is provided below:

MAINTENANCE MODE/LEVEL 1 Maintenance Mode/Level 1 (Mode/Level 1) applies to parks or sites that require the greatest level of maintenance standard in the system. These parks or sites are often revenue producing facilities, such as the athletic fields, where the quality and level of maintenance has a direct impact on the park facility’s ability to maximize revenue generation.

MAINTENANCE MODE/LEVEL 2 Maintenance Mode/Level 2 (Mode/Level 2) applies to parks or sites that require a moderate level of effort and maintenance standards in the system.

These include developed and undeveloped parks with amenities that are heavily used such as trails, community and pocket parks, and special-use facilities found in the City’s parks system.

MAINTENANCE MODE/LEVEL 3 Maintenance Mode/Level 3 (Mode/Level 3) applies to parks or sites that require a nominal level of effort and maintenance standards in the system. These generally include undeveloped parks with minimal amenities.

It is recommended that all park maintenance agencies adopt a system of grounds maintenance levels wherein functions are organized into a tiered structure with three different levels of service. These levels are referred to as maintenance modes, and each has a unique standard that dictates routine maintenance tasks and their frequency. The appropriate maintenance mode is assigned to each park or site, which creates a framework for organizing and Recommendations & Implementation 201

PARKS MAINTENANCE KEY FINDINGS MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Through the review of data and workshops with staff, the PROS Consulting team determined that the Parks Division does generally try to operate within the maintenance modes identified above.

Parks maintenance also intuitively follows a set of routine parks and grounds maintenance standards with task, frequency, and season of year for each of the functional work areas, however, a formalized, documented, detailed maintenance management plan does not exist. A formalized maintenance management plan includes not only maintenance modes and standards for each park but also tracks the performance of the work against a set of defined outcomes as well as the costs expended to achieve each outcome. A maintenance management plan is typically memorialized within an asset-based work order management system.

GIS-BASED ASSET MANAGEMENT WORK ORDER SYSTEM Parks maintenance in the City of East Palo Alto does not currently utilize a GIS-based asset management work order system and should consider

the implementation of such a system to document maintenance and asset replacement schedules as well as the track the time and resources required to perform work in the field. A work order management system can also determine the level of unproductive time expended by staff (i.e., travel time to parks).

EQUIPMENT Staff does not lack the necessary equipment or resources to perform tasks.

STAFFING LEVELS Developed Parks: The Parks Maintenance Division is comprised of approximately 1.5 full-time equivalents (FTES) dedicated to maintaining the developed parks system.

Best Practice Staffing Levels •

Level 2 Standard Staffing: Best practice ratio of FTE per park acres maintained at a Level 2 standard is 1:10 acres.

With the responsibility of actively managing 24 acres of parks at a level 2 standard, the Parks Maintenance Division DOES NOT HAVE the staffing capacity to manage the developed parks system. The following table indicates that the Parks Division is currently understaffed by 1 FTE.

PLEASE NOTE: Additional staffing levels shown above does not include staff needed for Right of Way, Median, and Public Facility Grounds Landscape Maintenance. It is recommended that the City consider contracting out these functions.

202 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

ANNUAL PARK OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING

create maintenance activities such as preventive work, reactive work, tests, or inspections.

Based on analysis conducted by the project team as summarized in the table below, unit costs for parks maintenance are not in alignment with best practice cost per acre for the maintenance of parks. The following table indicates that the Parks Division is currently underfunded by $163,000 annually.

Mapping Tools

PARK MAINTENANCE KEY RECOMMENDATIONS IMPLEMENT A GIS-BASED ASSET MANAGEMENT WORK ORDER SYSTEM

ArcGIS maps are an integral part of the work management process. This allows for the creation of map visualizations of database queries including open work orders, service requests, or work orders of a specific type and assignment. These tools empower both management and staff to interact with asset data.

Data Mobility A variety of tools to help maintenance staff access and update valuable information while in the field.

A work order system should be used to track lifecycle maintenance requirements that are tied to weekly and monthly work orders. This will help the staff to stay ahead of preventative maintenance and limit breakdowns. Further, utilizing the system will provide staff the necessary “actual cost” data for work being performed. The typical components of a work order management system are as follows:

Asset Management

Schedule Work Activities

A key component of creating an efficient parks maintenance operation is to minimize unproductive time, such as travel time between parks. Travel time on average should not exceed the maximum threshold of 2.2 hours for every 8-hour day.

Detailed framework for asset management by incorporating GIS into the asset repository. Allows for grouping of assets by location, type, age, or other key parameters. These groupings can then be used to

Track work performed on any asset at any given time throughout its lifecycle. Users can easily search for active work orders and view them dynamically on the GIS map. Track overdue work orders and monitor work associated with a specific task, contractor, or project.

Track Unproductive Time

Recommendations & Implementation 203

COST OF SERVICE/SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO CONTRACTING SERVICES Through the development of management processes, the Parks Division must begin to track cost of service at a unit activity level through the implementation of a work order management system. This, in turn, would internally analyze the unit cost to perform work internally against the unit cost to perform work by a third-party vendor, in particular right-of-way, median and public facility grounds landscape maintenance.

DEVELOPED PARKS AND TRAILS MAINTENANCE FUNDING It is recommended that the Parks Maintenance Division develop line-item budgets for each functional area of work, City parks, right-of-way/median maintenance, and public facility grounds.

ANNUAL PARK MAINTENANCE FUNDING AND STAFFING It is recommended that the Park Maintenance Operation be allocated an additional $163,000 annually for enhanced management and maintenance of parks. Of this funding, approximately $65,000 should be allocated for the addition of 1 FTE for this functional work area.

204 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS COST AVOIDANCE Maintenance operations are typically spent in divisions that do not have direct revenue sources that can offset expenditures. There are opportunities, however, to reduce expenditures through the following strategies: •

Park Ambassador Program: This formal volunteer program provides the City with “eyes” on the parks that can quickly provide staff with real-time incident reports.

Additionally, these volunteers provide park beautification and event assistance to the City.

This program has been in place in the City of Kansas City, Missouri for the last two decades.

•

Adopt-a-Trail Programs: These programs are similar to the popular “adopt-a-mile” highway programs most states utilize. Adopt-a-trail programs can also take the form of cash contributions in the range of $12,000 to $16,000 per mile to cover operational costs.

•

Adopt-a-Park Programs: These are smallgrant programs that fund new construction and provide maintenance support. Adopt-APark programs can also take the form of cash contributions in the range of $1,000 to $5,000 per acre to cover operational costs.

•

Operational Partnerships: Partnerships are operational funding sources formed from two separate agencies, such as two government entities, a non-profit and a public agency, or a private business and a public agency. Two partners jointly share risk, operational costs, responsibilities, and asset management based on the strengths of each partner.

Recommendations & Implementation 205

EAST PALO ALTO CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The City of East Palo Alto does not have a dedicated Parks and Recreation Department and currently lacks “dedicated to recreation” staff - only 1.9 FTE (1 FT Recreation Coordinator as of Fiscal Year 21-22 and 3 PT Recreation Leaders - 0.9 FTE). This inhibits the City from actively and directly provide programming to the community and, in turn, only functions to facilitate the process of activating parks with programming, through partnerships as noted in Section 4.3.

Additionally, parks maintenance is housed within the Department of Public Works and as noted in Section 4.5 also lacks the necessary staff and funding to perform maintenance of parks that consistently deliver high quality experiences for the residents of East Palo Alto.

FIGURE 4-1: EXISTING ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

City Manager Office

Public Works Director

Public Works Maintenance Manager

Community Services Manager

Parks Maintenance Worker

Recreation Coordinator

Part-time Seasonal

Part-time Recreation Leads

206 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE CHALLENGES The current organizational structure is not aligned with the primary functions of the department which are as follows: •

Recreation programs and services

•

Facility management

•

Parks maintenance

•

Administrative services

•

Program Standards – The silos have hindered the City in developing consistent operational and partnership standards that guide the delivery of programs and services.

•

Customer Service – Though staff strives to provide excellent customer service, the operational silos have created customer service standards that are personality driven as opposed to outcome driven.

This lack of alignment has created numerous systemic and operational challenges for the department.

OPERATIONAL SILOS Operational silos occur when business units do not interact with each other. This occurs on many levels recreation and parks maintenance operate independently. The operational silos have in turn created the following issues.

•

Silo Mentality – The operational silos have, in turn, created an organizational way of thinking often described as Silo Mentality. This mentality results in management groups not sharing information, goals, tools, priorities, and processes with each other.

•

Lack of Direct Service and Program Delivery – The lack of staff and operational silos have also contributed to a lack of collaboration and communication on the development of programs and services that meet the needs of the residents of East Palo Alto. This has led to not only a duplication of services and inefficient use of funding, but also an unhealthy competition between recreation facilities to try to outperform each other.

•

Inconsistent Park and Facility Management – The operational silos have also contributed to a lack of consistent standards in managing and maintaining park and recreation facilities.

Recommendations & Implementation 207

RECOMMENDED LONG-TERM ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

The following organizational structure is the proposed functional organizational structure for the longterm development of an East Palo Alto Parks and Recreation Department. This organizational structure will assist the City in overcoming the challenges created by the current operational silo structure and provide the greatest amount of efficiency related to decision-making and staff capacity to address the City’s parks and recreation needs.

City Manager Office

Public Works Director

Parks and Recreation Director

Public Works Maintenance Manager

Parks and Recreation Manager (formally known as “Community Services Manager”)

Parks and Maintenance Worker (2)

Recreation Coordinator (Recreation Programming)

Recreation Coordinator (Senior Programming)

Part-time Seasonal

Part-time Recreation Lead (3)

Part-time Recreation Lead (3)

FIGURE 4-2: PROPOSED LONG-TERM ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE 208 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

PRIORITIZATION OF IMPLEMENTATION The following table provides an average cost for the additional personnels proposed in the organizational structure. This is intended to guide the City’s budget allocation process.

If funding is available, the consulting team recommends the following timeline for implementation of the organizational chart and staffing levels. A job description for the Parks and Recreation Director position has been provided in the following pages.

TABLE 4-10: ADDITIONAL RECREATIONAL STAFFING COSTS

Recreation Staffing Costs

NUMBER OF POSITIONS

COMPENSATION (includes benefits)

NON-PERSONNEL COSTS

TOTAL COST

Parks and Recreation Director (full-time)

1

$175,000

$52,000

$227,000

Recreation Coordinator (Senior Programming) (full-time)

1

$99,400

$29,000

$128,400

$274,400

$81,000

$355,400

POSITION TITLE

TOTALS

TABLE 4-11: STAFFING PRIORITIZATION TIMELINE

NUMBER OF POSITIONS

TIMELINE

Parks and Recreation Director (full-time)

1

Fiscal Year 2026

Recreation Coordinator (Senior Programming) (full-time)

1

Fiscal Year 2026

POSITION TITLE

Recommendations & Implementation 209

JOB DESCRIPTIONS DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION The Director of Parks and recreation provides leadership, direction, and general administrative oversight to the Parks and Recreation Department and employees responsible for the development, maintenance and operation of the City Park system grounds and structures, preservation of open spaces and scenic environments and the provision of leisure activities and services to citizens of all ages. Work involves significant community engagement and public involvement with elected officials, other policy makers, and citizens. Serving as a member of the City’s senior management team, collaborates with the Executive and other City departments on strategy and policy to ensure that the City’s mission and core values are incorporated into operational activities and services.

SUPERVISORY RELATIONSHIPS Reports to the City Manager. Works independently with general guidance from the City Manager or designee. Supervises staff, directly, or through assigned managers. Works under City policies, procedures, and various State and federal regulations.

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE JOB 1. General Management: Plans, organizes, directs, controls, and evaluates the work of the Parks and Recreation Department.

Oversees the management of the dayto-day administration of the Department, including budget, capital projects, on-going maintenance, recreation, stewardship and development of assets, personnel and labor relations, and customer service activities.

2. Strategic Planning: Works with advisory boards, elected officials and other agencies to develop master plans and long-range plans for the acquisition, development and maintenance 210 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

of City parks and recreational facilities.

Facilitates and promotes ongoing research into new approaches and trends and recommends implementation of programs to assist elected officials and their community plan.

3. Policy Development: Develops, recommends, and oversees the administration of Parks and Recreation Department policies and guidelines. Maintains currency of policies and practices within the organizational needs of the City as well as with applicable federal and State laws and City Charter.

4. Personnel Management: Develops and maintains a workforce committed to, and with highly developed competencies in, customer service, results orientation, and team work. Directly or through managers, appoints, supervises, provides for training and performance evaluation and development, and ensures accountability of Department employees. Establishes and maintains a working environment conducive to positive morale, quality services, and innovation.

Provides for the training in, promotion of, and accountability for safe work practices and working conditions for employees. Ensures compliance with labor agreements and with City-wide and Department policies and state and federal laws and regulations.

5. Program Development and Project Management: Oversees all Parks and Recreation programs and projects for the city.

Coordinates programs and activities of the Department with other City departments, local and regional agencies, and citizen groups to ensure that programs and activities are in place to meet the needs of all segments of the community. Participates directly in the planning and development of significant projects such as those involving multiple jurisdictions and long-term implementation and ensures these are consistent with the City’s goals and objectives. Facilitates and promotes ongoing research into new approaches, technologies and trends, and recommends implementation of programs and equipment to help the Department achieve its objectives more efficiently.

6. Fiscal and Business Management: Ensures the financial well-being of the Department

by establishing cost control measures and monitoring all fiscal operations of the Department. Prepares annual budget and justifies budget requests and amendments.

Projects and procures revenues and funding for the work of the Department including management of grants and accessing federal and State funding sources. Ensures the efficient and economical use of departmental funds, manpower, materials, facilities and time.

Ensures effective execution of enterprise fund cost center within the department.

7. Citizen Involvement and Communications: Directs planning and presentation of public involvement programs for neighborhoods, businesses, and other community groups.

Provides for staff support of the Parks Advisory Board, Greenway Advisory Committee, and other parks- related citizen groups, coordinating work plans and staff assignments to facilitate efficient and meaningful public involvement and policy direction. Provides for City-wide citizen communication programs to disseminate information on Parks and Recreation projects and processes and conservation of assets.

8. Senior Management Team: Provides information and advice to the City Manager and City Council on strategic planning and accomplishment of City goals and objectives.

Participates in organization-wide strategic planning. Coordinates the Department’s activities with those of other City departments and offices to ensure a consistent approach towards common projects and interests and the cost-effective delivery of services.

9. Environmental Stewardship: Under policy direction from the City Manager and Council, responsible for the protection of the City’s Park lands and facilities. Promotes and develops effective facilities and systems to maximize the public’s enjoyment and use of park lands in harmony with environmental protection and stewardship. Works under applicable federal and State regulation and protection measures for protection of natural resources such as streams and forestland. Represents the City before regulatory agencies which interface with the work of the Department.

PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS (KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES) Knowledge of: •

Principles and practice of general business management and of municipal parks and recreation administration processes and management.

•

Parks and Recreation Department work and operations, stewardship and maintenance of park lands, facilities, and community infrastructure.

•

City legislative processes, fiscal and budget management processes, and applicable administrative policies and procedures.

•

Current departmental and related city issues and stakeholders (both internal and external), including other governmental legislative and agency processes, neighborhoods, and institutions.

•

Applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations, including development regulations, affecting the work of the Department.

Skill in: •

Excellent interpersonal skills for establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, other departments, elected officials, the media, and the public.

•

Highly effective team-building and leadership skills including consensus-building to resolve conflicts, negotiate agreements and gain cooperation among competing interest groups.

•

Strong business and fiscal management skills.

•

Problem analysis and decision making, adaptability/flexibility, and stress tolerance in a highly visible public environment.

•

Excellent strategic planning, organizing, and time management skills.

•

Excellent written and verbal communications skills including public presentation skills.

Recommendations & Implementation 211

WORKING ENVIRONMENT

Ability to: •

Manage by objective and facilitate achievement of City’s legacies and performance metrics.

•

Conduct self at all times in an ethical, professional and respectful manner.

•

Establish and maintain cooperative and effective working relationships with citizens and stakeholders, both internal and external.

•

Quickly grasp and manage complex and technical issues in a fast-paced environment and in a context of inter-related issues, systems, projects, and strategies.

•

Interpret, explain, and apply complex guidelines, codes, regulations, policies, and procedures.

•

Articulate the Department’s goals and work in an understandable and appropriate manner for the audience or individual.

•

Develop and maintain effective organizational structure, financial control, and management information systems for the Parks and Recreation function.

•

Identify the Department’s future direction in response to changing community needs, and to develop, implement, and monitor appropriate plans, schedules, and action steps.

•

Work independently under general policy and strategic guidance.

•

Maintain consistent and punctual attendance.

•

Willingness and ability to demonstrate the Public Service Competencies of Service Orientation, Results Orientation and Teamwork and Cooperation.

•

Physically perform the essential functions of the position, including: •

Correctable visual acuity to read a computer screen and a typeset page;

•

Fine finger dexterity to manipulate computer keyboard and mouse; and

•

Ability to talk and hear sufficiently to communicate with City officials, employees and the public.

212 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Work is performed primarily in an office setting subject to frequent interruptions with extensive work at a computer workstation and site visits to various City and community facilities, both outdoors and indoors.

May be exposed to highly stressful situations and individuals who are irate or hostile; may be subject to long hours due to attendance at City Council and Committee meetings and other responsibilities required at this executive level. Flexibility to work evening and weekend hours and occasional overnight travel to conferences and training sessions required.

EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS •

Bachelor’s degree in parks and recreation, public administration, program management or a related field. Master’s degree is preferred.

•

Five years progressively responsible experience in parks and recreation administration including three years in a senior management position.

•

Experience working in a unionized environment preferred.

•

Designation as a Certified Parks and Recreation Professional (CPRP) desired.

•

Preferred qualifications include a significant record of:

•

Responsibility for general fiscal management, grants procurement, capital budget management, and strategic planning.

•

Experience in a community with active citizen involvement and experiencing significant growth.

•

Effective work with elected officials, advisory boards, community and environmental groups.

•

Within an ethical framework, exhibiting creativity and innovation in programs and processes.

•

In place of the above requirements, any combination of relevant education and experience which demonstrates the knowledge, skill, and ability to perform the essential functions of the job will be considered.

Recommendations & Implementation 213

JOEL DAVIS MEMORIAL PARK 214 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

DESIGN GUIDELINES 5.1 Site Planning 5.2 Public Safety 5.3 Trail Design 5.4 Shared Schoolyards 5.5 Privately Owned Public Open Spaces 5.6 Parks & Stormwater Management 5.7 Urban Landscape Ecology

5 Design Guidelines 215

INTRODUCTION The Guidelines in this chapter are intended as a resource for use in the planning and design of future parks and trails. The Guidelines provide performancebased measures that create more sustainable, attractive, user-friendly sites that meet the needs of the public they serve. The recommendations are high level, appropriate to the context of a systemwide park master plan, not site-specific design requirements. Categories include site planning, public safety, trail design , privately owned public open spaces, flooding and urban landscape ecology. These general guidelines should be used in tandem with the park type definitions found in the Typical Park Classification, Section 1.2, as well as maintenance and operations standards, to ensure that all parks and trails owned and maintained by the City of East Palo Alto are planned, designed, managed, and maintained to provide the greatest value to the community.

216 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

Design Guidelines 217

5.1 SITE PLANNING PARK USER COMPATIBILITIES 1.

Care and consideration needs to be given to the use of each space, the relationship between activities and future expansion opportunities in a park.

2. Parks are multi-generational spaces and consideration of park user compatibility must be evaluated when determining the adjacency of site features.

3. Activities should be grouped to maximize desirable effects (accessibility, control of participants, multi-uses, maintenance) or separated to minimize conflicts including noise and degree of physical activity.

4. Address potential conflicts with passive use areas when locating active recreational areas, especially conflicts with children’s play areas.

5. Ideally locate restroom buildings within a 150’ radius of recreation fields and a 100’ radius of children’s play areas.

6. Locate maintenance yards away from children’s play areas and screen them from public view.

7.

Sports activities, field lights for evening sports activities, large group gatherings and pools are all potential sources of disturbance to the surrounding community. Consider all adjacencies when locating such park features.

8. Locate parking facilities near major park site features to facilitate the park user who may be carrying equipment and/or coolers to their destination.

218 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

FLEXIBLE USE 9. Indoor and outdoor spaces should be programmed for multiple functions and should be designed to allow for flexibility of use.

10. An emphasis should be placed on multi-use fields to increase the type of uses provided by the same amenity.

11. Multi-use lawn spaces should be encouraged to allow more spaces for unprogrammed, flexible free play as well as programmed community events.

12. Where possible, passive open play areas should remain unobstructed by trees, to support activities such as throwing a ball, a frisbee, and/or flying kites. Perimeter trees should be provided for shade.

ACCESS DESIGN 13. Provide multiple entry points to the parks where possible to increase the pedestrian and bike access to the parks.

14. All park entrances and major amenities should be ADA accessible.

15. Provide a highly visible and distinct park entry marker or gateway to create a sense of transition and arrival to the destination.

16. A strong visual access from high traffic streets to the park entrance and major amenities is encouraged where possible.

17. Use the shortest, least sight-limiting fence appropriate for the situation if fencing is required.

18. Where possible, provide a clear separation between the park’s vehicular and pedestrian entrances to eliminate potential conflicts.

19. Direct pedestrian entrances toward public transit centers to encourage and facilitate alternative modes of travel to the park when possible.

USER EXPERIENCE LEGIBILITY 20. Clearly mark all park entries with park name and important regulation information.

21. Establish a standardized wayfinding system to clearly identify amenities and facilities within the park as well as nearby civic, historic, cultural or ecological landmarks.

22. Place a standard, legally confirmed set of rules in a visible and secondary location that does not negatively impact the welcoming nature of the park entry.

23. Signage should use lettering sized for visibility, and include translation where needed.

Design Guidelines 219

COMFORT

ACTIVE & PASSIVE RECREATION

24. At least 50% of all seating and picnic areas should be shaded, either through natural tree canopy or installed shade structure (from at least 11 am – 4 pm).

31. Provide both active and passive recreation opportunities in all park designs.

25. At least 75% of all play areas should be shaded, either through natural tree canopy or installed shade structure (from at least 11 am – 4 pm).

33. Active recreation opportunities may include play areas, jogging/walking loops, aquatic and sport facilities.

26. Select non-heat conducting material for all seating elements, such as wood, concrete, or recycled plastic products, and avoid using heat-conducting materials in seating and play areas when possible.

27. Employ mitigation measures for sound, air quality, views, and safety at parks located near highways and major roadways such as: •

Dense tree canopy,

•

Dense vegetation buffers,

•

Water features,

•

Art elements with screening features.

28. Provide restrooms at community and special use parks.

29. Install drinking fountains near play areas and sports fields. Add bottle fillers, misters and dog basins to drinking fountains in order to expand usefulness.

30. Provide seating elements that are located to take advantage of hospitable conditions including shade, views, and sound.

220 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

32. Passive recreation opportunities may include seating, picnicking, and nature viewing.

34. In areas with adequate space, provide pedestrian loops for walking and jogging.

35. Small group picnic areas should accommodate twenty five to fifty (25-50) people while large group picnic areas should accommodate fifty to hundred (50-100) people.

36. Play Areas •

Design play areas to support activities for children of varied ages as well as abilities including tots, young children, and teenagers.

•

Create unique play experiences by including a variety of visual and physical elements that incorporate sight, sound and texture exploration.

•

Provide opportunities that encourage play in “unstructured” natural areas within parks.

•

Provide shaded seating near play areas for adult supervision.

•

Provide play areas at a safe distance from busy streets or provide appropriate barriers to ensure safety.

IDENTITY 37. Tell a story. Interpretive signage can tell us about native peoples, subsequent history, our environment, and our current experience.

39. Murals, and local art installations can reduce unsanctioned graffiti and vandalism by activating blank walls and surfaces.

38. Develop distinct themes for each park in addition to the overall park standardization to establish a unique character. Themes may be expressed through signage, custom furnishings, plant selections, and characteristic architectural details.

Design Guidelines 221

5.2 PUBLIC SAFETY ACTIVATION 1.

Provide amenities that attract positive social activity, including sports, play, and picnicking, throughout a site so “dead” zones do not welcome anti-social behavior.

2. Provide a diversity of site amenities that attract different types of recreation activity at various times of day.

3. Schedule activities in common areas to increase proper use, attract more people and increase the perception that these areas are being monitored. Provide program elements that encourage site activation among different age groups.

4. Provide spaces for creating flexible community events in parks to foster local identity and stewardship in park

5. Provide access to information like a website for parks facilities and other programs offered.

HIGH VISIBILITY 6. Use lighting to promote public safety and security. When creating lighting design, avoid poorly placed lights that create blind spots for potential observers and miss critical areas.

Areas like pathways, entrance/exists, parking, children’s play area, recreational areas, etc. should be well lit.

7.

Create highly visible spaces by designing park elements, including pathways, play areas, picnic areas and benches, to allow for natural surveillance among users.

8. Design buildings and facilities so that entries, windows, staffed areas and programmed activity overlooks populated public spaces.

9. Create clear sight lines into, out of, and within parks by strategically locating buildings and other large site elements.

10. Design pathways and sidewalks with unobstructed sight lines, especially from public streets.

11. Locate seating and play elements in areas with unobstructed views.

PERIMETER AND ENTRY TREATMENTS 12. Use the least sight-limiting fence and gate heights possible, and the least sight-limiting fence and gate materials possible.

13. Create inviting park perimeters and entry areas that encourage park use, including accent planting, attractive signage, and buffers that are not overly engineered.

PARK ACTIVATION USING PLANNED ACTIVITIES

Source: Top - Laumeier Sculpture Park food truck fest, Bottom - Prince George’s County Department of Parks & Recreation

222 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

14. Limit fence and gate use to areas where such elements are necessary (such as select

entry points and play areas to protect young children).

15. Consider landscape buffers as an alternative to fencing at park perimeters and entry areas .

16. Clearly identify and limit park entry and exit points when necessary.

17. Display notice of security system at park access points.

SECURITY MEASURES 18. Create a volunteer park safety ambassador program to help have friendly but visible park patrolling.

19. Add emergency call stations at parks to enhance public security.

UPKEEP & MAINTENANCE 20. Maintain a high standard of upkeep for all park and open space hardscape and landscape elements to promote a sense of ownership, encourage orderly behavior, and spur positive social interaction in public spaces.

21. Avoid using materials that can easily be damaged or vandalized. Use materials that are durable and will require less repairs.

SECURITY MEASURE FOR PARKS

Source: Top - UC Davis Middle - Tuscon police Bottom - Downtown Wilmington safety ambassadors

Design Guidelines 223

5.3 TRAIL DESIGN IDENTITY 1.

Establish and follow a baseline vocabulary for attractive, well-designed, commonly placed site elements for standard, system-wide identity. Baseline elements include signage and furnishings.

2. Working within that overall system identity, develop distinct themes for each trail to establish a unique character. Themes may be expressed through signage, custom furnishings, and plant selections.

3. Historic and environmental interpretive elements should be included to contribute to trail character.

TRAIL SURFACE AND CROSS-SECTION 4. Off-street shared use (pedestrians, bikes, and other non-motorized use) trails should generally have the following basic design characteristics:

•

Preferred width of 16’, including two shared 6’ travel lanes and two 2’ shoulders

•

10’-12’ trail width acceptable where context requires

•

Opportunity zones for amenities in additional 4’ right-of-way where possible

5. Trails should be a minimum of 10 feet wide to accommodate maintenance and emergency vehicles.

TRAIL ENTRY AND ACCESS 6. Provide trail access points that give a sense of arrival and encourage use, including accent planting and attractive signage consistent with City standards.

7.

Use universal design principles to facilitate access and movement onto and along trails for people of all ages and abilities.

8. Include secure bicycle parking at all destinations along trails, and at trail amenity zones.

Paved (asphalt or compacted AB) trail with soft shoulders (decomposed granite, gravel, or other approved material)

9. Maintain good sight lines from public streets and buildings and create clear entrances and clear boundaries, following principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED).

TRAIL THAT PEOPLE OF ALL AGE GROUPS FEEL COMFORTABLE USING

TRAILHEADS PROVIDING INFORMATION AND A SENSE OF ARRIVAL

Source: Josue Hernandez, Rich City RIDES

Source: Wald.Berlin.Klima. exhibition, hochC Landschastsarchitekten

•

224 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

10. Establish safe street and rail crossings.

Specific crossing design will be based on detailed, site-specific analysis.

EDGES ,BUFFERS AND SETBACKS 11. Trails along active rail lines should be set back a minimum of 26’ from the centerline of the nearest track. Within this setback, a vegetated buffer backed by a safety barrier that prevents access should be provided.

12. Trails along streets should be set back to provide a buffer from the traffic.

13. Through placement of amenities and use of planting and lighting mitigation techniques, design trails in a way that minimizes impacts such as noise and lighting on neighboring properties.

ORGANIZATION OF TRAIL ELEMENTS 14. Trail alignment and plantings should be designed to optimize visibility, to allow for natural surveillance among users and minimize conflicts between bikes and pedestrians.

15. Include amenities along the trail at intervals that ensure user comfort. Opportunities to sit or lean should be provided at least every 1/4-mile. Shaded areas with seating should be provided at least every 1 mile. These amenity zones should be located to take advantage of hospitable conditions including shade, views, and sound.

16. Locate permanent restrooms and drinking fountains where trails intersection with City parks.

18. Select non-heat conducting material for all seating elements, such as wood, concrete, or recycled plastic products.

19. Ensure that at least 50% of seating and picnic areas are shaded, either through natural tree canopy or installed shade structures (from at least 11 am – 4 pm).

20. Select all paving, site furnishing, and landscape materials based on durability as well as aesthetic value.

21. Trail amenities such as picnic tables, drinking fountains and benches shall be accessible to all users and abilities and comply with current state and national design standards that meet or exceed the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards for Accessible Design and the California Building Code.

LIGHTING AND FENCING 22. Use lighting to promote public safety and security, following the principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED).

23. Where appropriate, provide lighting to extend the use of trails at night.

24. Design lighting systems and select fixtures to minimize light pollution/spillage.

25. Require energy-efficient technology when replacing existing or installing new technologies, including light elements. Use “smart” technology when possible, i.e. lighting systems that adjust automatically depending upon user patterns in buildings and parks.

26. Barriers and fencing must successfully ensure privacy and prevent access, while also supporting a good trail experience.

•

Trails should be separated from the back yards of private property by plantings backed by fences, which should be eight feet in height.

•

Trails should be set back and buffered from rail lines and arterial roadways.

•

Trails should be separated from irrigation canals by a 4-foot barriers that preserve views of the canal.

FEATURES AND AMENITIES 17. Provide a diversity of trail amenities that attract and support different types of users, including recreational users, commuters, children and seniors.

Design Guidelines 225

SIGNAGE 27. Provide standard trailhead signage that identifies the trail name and promotes a positive and consistent identity for East Palo Alto’s trail system.

28. Place a standard, legally confirmed set of rules in a visible and secondary location that does not negatively impact the welcoming nature of the trail entry.

29. Establish a standardized wayfinding system to clearly identify trail route and destinations as well as nearby civic, historic, cultural or ecological landmarks.

30. Trail signage will: •

Vary by context. Signs at trailheads and along off-street and on-street trail segments will be designed and scaled for their setting and the user groups they serve.

•

Be legible and accessible. Signage will use lettering sized for visibility, and include translation where needed.

•

Leverage Other features. Signage may be mounted on street furnishings or painted on surfaces.

•

Create identity. More than any other trail element, wayfinding signs produce identity for both the system and individual trail.

•

Tell a story. Interpretive signage can tell us about native peoples, subsequent history, our environment, and our current experience.

TRAIL WAYFINDING

Source: Caboolture to Wamuran Rail Trail, Dotdash

STORYTELLING ON TRAILS

Source: Atlanta BeltLine Westside Trail, photo by John Becker

226 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

2'

Wayfinding signage

10-12'

2' Shoulder

Multiuse trail

FIGURE 5-1: TRAIL THROUGH PARK OR OPEN SPACE (TYPICAL)

25' min.

CL

2' Fence

Vegetated buffer

FIGURE 5-2: TRAIL ALONG ACTIVE RAIL LINE (TYPICAL)

10-12'

Multiuse trail

2'

Varies

Shoulder Street lighting

Trail cross-sections are conceptual and generalized.. Trail development will require detailed design .

Design Guidelines 227

5.4 SHARED SCHOOLYARDS 1.

In order for schoolyards to successfully serve as shared schoolyard space, they must have typical recreation amenities that are expected of parks.

2. Though these sites may have certain restrictions inherent in their dual use, they should provide a level of passive and/or active recreation amenities as outlined in the park-type definitions for neighborhood or community parks. These amenities may include enhanced landscape (including trees with large canopies that provide shade), areas for picnicking with tables and or benches, play areas, nature viewing areas, and architectural shade structures.

3. The design of site perimeters and boundaries is especially important to consider at shared schoolyard sites where there are distinct times of public recreation use and school use. By placing community-serving park amenities at community-facing edges, these sites can be inviting and permeable for public recreation. At the same time, strategic placement of fences and gates will help create clear and secure boundaries as needed.

4. Schoolyards should allow community use to the maximum extent possible after regular school hours, ideally no less than twenty (20) hours per week.

5. The schools should have exclusive use of the facilities for a few hours before and after regular school hours when school is in session.

During non-school hours, schools should have a priority of use of the facility in scheduling all school-sponsored athletics, activities, and other functions.

6. Schools should be responsible for providing staffing, supervision, and security during regularly scheduled school hours when school is in session, during any official, schoolsponsored activities that occur after school hours, and during other community events.

The City should be responsible for providing 228 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

staffing, supervision, and security as deemed necessary, at all times during which the facility is used for City sponsored activities and events.

7.

The School District and the City should each be responsible to pay a proportionate share of the applicable operations and utilities costs for the facility, including water and sewer, electricity, gas and refuse disposal, and custodial maintenance.

8. Common examples of programs include: •

Organized after‐school and weekend athletic activities and events for adults and youth,

•

Informal, or “open,” public access/use of school grounds and/or facilities,

•

Community gardens.

9. Allocate liability risk and determine whether and what type of indemnification to require.

Determine the types and amounts of insurance to require (consistent with legal and risk management requirements) and determine the types of documentation to exchange or require. Joint-use partners take responsibility for their own share of liability.

10. Identify the method and responsibility for repairing property, the method for calculating the repair costs, and how to allocate those costs.

11. Trees are particularly valuable and beneficial on school property, as well as in parks. East Palo Alto’s schools are severely lacking in trees: public schools in East Palo Alto have 7.4% tree canopy cover overall. The Urban Forest Master Plan established a 30% tree canopy cover target for schools by 2062.

Shade trees and fruit trees would be especially impactful for school children and park visitors alike.

FIGURE 5-3: EXAMPLE CONCEPT FOR A SHARED SCHOOLYARD SITE

Design Guidelines 229

5.5 PRIVATELY-OWNED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE (POPOS) LOCATION AND ACCESS 1.

The open space required may be on the same site as the project for which the permit is sought, or within 900 feet of it on private property.

2. Spaces should be situated in locations such that ingress and egress is easily accessible to the general public.

3. All open space shall be publicly accessible, at a minimum, from 7AM to 6PM every day 4. The sidewalk frontage of an outdoor open space located adjacent to a street is required to have a minimum 50% of its area free of obstructions to provide ease of access.

TYPE 5. The project may satisfy the requirements by providing one or more of the following types of open space: a plaza, an urban park, an urban garden, a view terrace, a sun terrace, a greenhouse, a small sitting area, an atrium, an indoor park, or a public sitting area in a galleria, in an arcade, in a public street or alley, or in a pedestrian mall or walkway.

6. To ensure spaces of adequate size are provided to serve the public and accommodate the required amenities, the minimum area for POPOS should be 2,000 square feet.

7.

POPOs should have an average width and depth of 40 feet.

8. Over time, no more than 20 percent of POPOS should be indoor space and at least 80 percent should be outdoor space. Once an indoor space has been approved, another such feature should not be approved until the total square footage of outdoor open space features approved exceeds 80 percent of the total square footage of all open spaces approved.

9. The provision of outdoor space, including off-site, should be given preference over the provision of indoor space.

DESIGN FEATURES 10. Incorporate various features, including ample seating and, if appropriate, access to food service, which will enhance public use of the area.

11. Provide adequate access to sunlight if sunlight access is appropriate to the type of area.

12. To provide both sunny and shaded areas in a POPOS and to foster success of plantings, south-facing spaces are generally preferred, unless particular lot configurations prevent such orientation. Where lots do not have south-facing portions or where the southfacing portions should be less than 40 feet in width, the open space is could face either east or west. Open spaces should not be only north-facing.

13. Ensure adequate lighting if the area is of the type requiring artificial illumination.

14. Design spaces to be protected from uncomfortable wind.

POPO AT E 34 ST AND 1 AVE, NYC

Source: Hey! We’re Walking Here by Rich Mintz

230 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

15. Any food service area provided in the required open space should occupy no more than 20%

of the open space.

16. Projects should make efforts to include at least one publicly-accessible potable water source convenient for drinking and filling of water bottles.

INDOOR SPACES 17. Provide a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 20 feet for at least 75% of the space; 18. Spaces should be situated, designed, and programmed distinctly from building lobbies or other private entrances to the building; 19. Open spaces should be maintained at no public expense. The owner of the property on which the open space is located shall maintain it by keeping the area clean and free of litter and keeping in a healthy state any plant material that is provided.

AMPLE SEATING SPACES

Source: Scott Strazzante, The Chronicle

20. Require signages at key locations stating the right of the public to use the space, the hours of use, the location of the open space, and, in cases where that space is not visible from a major sidewalk, include directions to the open space.

21. Open spaces should be ADA accessible in design.

22. Abundant, well-designed, and comfortable seating is one of the most critical elements of public plaza design. POPOS should provide ample seating which includes a variety of seating types like moveable seating, fixed individual seats, fixed benches, seat walls, planter ledges, and seating steps. The seating types should accommodate small groups socializing as well as individuals engaged in solitary activities. At least 50% of seats should have back and arm rests.

ROOFTOP POPOS

Source: Crocker Galleria

23. Seating that is too narrow, too high, or too short inhibits the usability of a space is prohibited.

INDOOR POPOS IN BUILDING LOBBY Source: Jessica Christian, The Chronicle

Design Guidelines 231

5.6 PARKS & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE 1.

Employ Low Impact Design (LID) practices to increase opportunities for stormwater and groundwater recharge by utilizing: •

Bioretention areas, to provide soil and plant passed filtration services that remove pollutants.

•

Permeable pavers, to allow rainwater to infiltrate on site.

•

Rain barrels and cisterns, to retain and store rainwater to be used for irrigation onsite.

•

Soil amendments, including the addition of compose and mulch, top soil, lime and gypsum to help offset erosion and improve their physical, biological and hydrological characteristics so they are more effective agents for stormwater management.

•

Green roofs, which help mitigate negative effects of urbanization on water quality by filtering, absorbing, or detaining rainfall.

PLANNING FOR SEALEVEL RISE 1.

The Strategy to Advance Flood protection, Ecosystems and Recreation along the San Francisco Bay (SAFER Bay) Project includes plans for levee and seawall improvements along the East Palo Alto shoreline. The details of the location and height and type of perimeter protection vary across the landscape, but there is a general approach towards aligning the Bay Trail with the top of future levee embankments along the city edge.

Many considerations including impacts to adjacent neighbors, impacts to wetlands and other important habitats, and others, inform the project.

WATER STORAGE TANKS 1.

During major park renovations or facilities improvements, long-term and large-scale stormwater management methods are important to consider. In the example shown, a playground area is rebuilt to include a major stormwater retention basin hidden below ground. The basin in this example serves the broader neighborhood and reduces rainyday flooding by providing additional storage capacity and relieving the pressure on the City’s storm drain infrastructure during major storm events. Funding for these multi-benefit projects can come from a wider range of sources associated with both grey and green infrastructure goals.

232 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

EXAMPLE OF WATER STORAGE INFRASTRUCTURE UNDER A CITY PARK (LIBERTY GREEN PITTSBURGH, PA)

2. The EPA Parks Recreation and Open Space Master Plan recommends and encourages the design of the levee structure to provide as much visual and active access and recreation as possible. Figure 5-4 illustrates potential iterations where the embankment slopes are tiered to allow for activation on the City side of the slope, and other options where its possible to build up parks and open spaces

to reduce the steepness of the embankments and allow for park activities to occur. Various opportunities exist to ensure that the broader community remains connected to the Bay Trail and that any major investments provide much needed open space and park amenities that are compatible along the shoreline.

FIGURE 5-4: SAFER LEVEE TREATMENT TYPICAL LEVEE TREATMENT

USABLE SLOPE

SUPER DIKE

Design Guidelines 233

5.7 URBAN LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY RECREATION NEAR SENSITIVE HABITATS 1.

Site recreational uses along a gradient within parks that are near sensitive habitats, from low-impact to high-impact. Prioritize lowerimpact recreational uses, such as trails and native plant gardens, near sensitive habitats, and high-impact facilities, such as playgrounds and sports fields, the furthest away from sensitive habitats.

2. Prioritize planting native landscaping in parks near sensitive habitats.

3. Reduce night lighting, persistent human use, and excessive noise near sensitive habitats.

Refer to the Model Lighting Ordinance developed by the International Dark-Sky Association and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America for guidance on lighting within parks and open space preserves in developed areas. Minimize natural or built raptor perches or nesting habitat.

4. Develop interpretive signage, educational programming, and volunteer clean-ups and planting events near sensitive habitats to engage the community in stewardship of these natural resources and promote integrating the local natural environment into

the community’s sense of place. Incorporate nearby social activities, such as cook-outs and music, into these programs and volunteer events to promote attendance and community connections to place.

5. Salt marsh harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys raviventris), a species protected under the Endangered Species Act, is found in the salt marshes of the San Francisco Bay and can be sensitive to some forms of park infrastructure that promote predation by raptors and other predatory birds. While the significance of raptor predation on salt marsh harvest mice populations is not well understood, threats from predation are expected to intensify as sea level rise causes more intense flooding in tidal wetlands, forcing the mice to seek refuge in the uplands (USFWS, 2010). In an effort to reduce the impacts of predation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recommends that habitatinappropriate trees, especially nonnative trees; power lines; and any other tall infrastructure that provide perch and nest sites for raptors and corvids should be removed from marshes and their perimeter (USFWS, 2013).

Discourage feral cats, feeding stations, and improper trash storage. Prohibit or limit dog access near sensitive habitats and wetland areas. Design guidelines should apply to parks and open spaces within the RBD Shoreline Parks Area.

6. Martin Luther King Jr. Park in particular will require strategic tree plantings with input from ecological experts due to its location near the Baylands. Designers should consider restoring native willow groves historically found at this site to create a natural transition, or “ecotone,” between the marsh and upland areas that will be of high value for native wildlife.

SALT MARSH HARVEST MOUSE Source: Shannon Skalos

234 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

URBAN FORESTRY AND HEAT MITIGATION 7.

Maximize the number of trees planted in appropriate areas. East Palo Alto’s Urban Forest Master Plan (UFMP) recommends planting approximately 2,700 new trees in the City’s parks and recreation zones over the next 40 years, in order to achieve 30% canopy cover across its parks by 2062 (City of East Palo Alto 2022).

8. Prioritize preserving and protecting existing trees within parks, in addition to planting new trees. Large, old trees provide more shade, cooling, and habitat value than small, young trees.

9. Select native tree species when feasible, based on the habitat zones and species lists provided in the East Palo Alto UFMP (See Habitat Zones below). Native trees create a sense of place and support local native wildlife, such as songbirds, which in turn can also improve mental health and recreational quality (e.g., Ferraro et al. 2020, Stobbe et al. 2022).

among streets, plazas, and parking lots, maximize the size of tree wells and consider the use of suspended pavement systems or structural soils.

12. Ensure soil properties, particularly drainage, are appropriate for the tree species selected.

13. To maximize their shade and cooling benefit, plant trees on the south or west side of recreational facilities and amenities, such as picnic tables, sports fields, playgrounds, buildings, and trails.

14. Vary tree planting configuration and species to provide unique character to different parks and use zones with parks.

15. Properly selecting and siting trees in parks can also play a role in intercepting and infiltrating stormwater. Trees planted in green stormwater infrastructure features such as bioswales should be selected to survive periods of inundation and/or be drained by underdrains.

10. Select trees with upright habit and greater trunk height to allow for clear sight lines beneath the canopy.

11. Locate trees in areas where they have access to large soil volumes to maximize tree health and longevity. For trees planted along and

Design Guidelines 235

HABITAT ZONES 16. Landscape and tree planting within parks should, where possible, match the target habitat zones developed in the East Palo Alto Urban Forest Master Plan.

17. The zones, which vary across the city based on historical, present, and projected future conditions; the desired habitat types for restoration; and ecological management in that area. See Figure 6.2 on page 93 and Table 6.3 from pages 94 to 95 of the plan to refer to the habitat zones developed by SFEI for East Palo Alto (City of East Palo Alto 2022). These zones were developed to support the City’s adaptation to climate change, mitigate air and noise pollution from the US 101 Highway, and promote locally-native biodiversity. Specific priority areas, including parks and schools, highlight where people tend to spend time outdoors and would benefit the greatest from the urban forest. Each zone is described below: •

•

The US 101 Highway Corridor zone prioritizes planting trees that filter air pollutants and act as an effective sound wall.

The Oak Woodland zone was informed by the City’s historical ecology and prioritizes planting native trees, particularly oaks, in order to support a functioning and productive urban forest.

IDENTIFY HABITAT ZONES Use the habitat zone and priority map to identify high-level strategic priorities and constraints for selecting a species or planting palette.

DETERMINE LOCAL PLANNING CONDITIONS Consider the local planting conditions to choose the right tree for the right place. An arborist can help identify the most important parameters to consider.

CONSIDER ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AND CONCERNS What else is important to you? Identify the value and traits you are interested in. For example, this could include selecting to support birds, create shade, or produce beautiful flowers.

EPA HABITAT ZONES Source: SFEI, Urban Forest Master Plan

236 East Palo Alto Parks Master Plan

•

The San Francisquito Creek Riparian zone promotes improving landscape connectivity both for wildlife and for people, in the form of recreation and active transportation.

•

The Salt Tolerant zone advances climate resilience by encouraging planting trees that are tolerant of saltwater intrusion, which is predicted to become more prevalent with climate change and sea level rise.

•

The Tolerant of High Water Table zone also prioritizes planting trees that are resilient to the projected impacts of climate change. In this zone, sea level rise will result in rising groundwater levels and increased flooding and inundation.

Design Guidelines 237

A.1

D. APPENDICES – East Palo Alto Parks, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan SURVEY DATA • •

• •

• •

The online survey had 524 responses from individual households, and was conducted between September 30, 2021, to January 29, 2022.

The survey included questions that asked participants a range of things, the reasons why they visited EPA parks, reasons that deterred them from going to parks, as well as questions that asked to rank their program and facility needs.

79% of survey respondents live in EPA. The racial and ethnic demographics of survey respondents is representative of and closely aligns to the overall city population. (See Question 20 in the survey responses below.)

According to Survey Monkey analysis, the number of survey responses is statistically significant (p=.05).

Outreach for the survey was supported by the Nuestra Casa Promotoras group at food distributions centers and pop-up events, announced on the City Newsletter, and posted on several local Facebook groups and via City-sponsored Facebook ads. Printed posters and flyers were distributed through the community at grocery stores

1. Which City of East Palo Alto parks and/or recreation facilities do you visit most often?

2. Which other parks and/or recreation facilities in East Palo Alto do you visit frequently?

3. Overall, how would you rate the parks and recreation amenities managed by the City of East Palo Alto?

4. How often have you visited City of East Palo Alto parks and/or facilities?

5. What are the primary reasons that you or household members use parks and recreation facilities in East Palo Alto?

6. What are the primary reasons that prevent you or household members from using City of East Palo Alto parks and recreation facilities more frequently?

7. What is the primary way you prefer to learn about City of East Palo Alto recreation opportunities and park programs?

8. What is your primary way of reaching your most visited park?

9. How far are you willing to walk or bike to reach a recreation facility or park?

10. What would most encourage you to walk or bike more often to a park/recreation facility?

11. Please rate how your needs for parks and recreation facilities/amenities in the City of East Palo Alto are being met using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met".

12. Which FIVE facilities/amenities are MOST IMPORTANT to you?

13. Please rate how your needs for parks programming in the City of East Palo Alto are being met using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met".

14. Which FIVE programs are MOST IMPORTANT to you?

15. How safe do you feel when visiting parks in East Palo Alto? Use a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means not safe and 5 means very safe.

16. How can we best address safety in parks? Check all that apply.

17. Which FIVE actions would you be MOST WILLING to support?

18. Tell us more about your vision for the future parks and recreation system in East Palo Alto!

What would you like to see? How would you like to be involved?

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

"Being a 25+ year EPA native my vision for future parks and recreation system is having a safe and secure place for the community overall" "Less drugs and crime more family" "I would like to see a safer way to get to the parks by walking" "If parks could be clean and well-maintained and if the bathroom facilities could be open, clean, and safe, that would be amazing!"

"For parks to be well taken care of such as being cleaned, kept proper."

"Clean, accessible facilities that speak to the residents of EPA" "I'd like to see more trees planted in parks. More places to lounge and relax."

"I would like to see more public art" "I would like to see more benches and picnic tables" "I would like to see summer live music in the parks & annual community events. Dog parks" "More community events: outdoor movies, art shows, music/events in the parks… I would love to volunteer!"

"It would be great to see more sports fields and gyms as well as more walking trails" "A dog park!"

Survey Demographics: 19. What is your gender identity?

20. What is your racial or ethnic identity?

*Compared to City Census Demographics (2021, https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/eastpaloaltocitycalifornia): • • • • • • •

Hispanic or Latino: White or Caucasian: Black of African American: Asian or Asian American: Another race: Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander: American Indian or Alaska Native:

61% 10% 11% 5% 5% 5% 1%

21. Are you a person living with a disability or mobility issue?

22. How old are you?

23. How do you describe yourself?

In-person Pop-up event 1: EPA Tree Lighting on December 4, 2021

In-person Pop-up event 2: Legends Event on December 17, 2021

In-person Workshop 2, on February 26, 2021