The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02142018 - packet CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 February 14, 2018 6:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. The Minutes of January 10, 2018 5. APPEAL PROCESS All determinations of the Planning Commission regarding major discretionary planning permits are final unless a written appeal, stating the reasons for the appeal, is filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date the decision was made. An interested party may appeal only if he or she appeared and stated his or her position during the hearing on the decision from which the appeal is taken. 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The Planning Commission welcomes input from the audience. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments. 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE 9. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS REPORT 10. C,5C❑725C6[� �3257� 11. CONSENT CALENDAR 12. NEW BUSINESS a. Review and Discussion of the Draft Wagenseller Park Feasibility Analysis, with possible Commission input and recommendations to Staff. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 14. ADJOURNMENT ADA ACCOMODATION: If you plan on attending the public hearing and need a special accommodation because of a sensory or mobility impairment/disability, or have a need for an interpreter, please call Cathy Elawadly at the City of Ukiah at (707)463-6752 to arrange for those accommodations to be made. Page 1 of 1 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 January 10, 2018 6:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT Mike Whetzel, Chair Mark Hilliker Christopher Watt Linda Sanders Laura Christensen STAFF PRESENT OTHERS PRESENT Craig Schlatter, Community Development Listed below, Respectively Director Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Whetzel at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. CHAIR WHETZEL PRESIDING. 2. ROLL CALL Roll call was taken with attendance as listed above. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Everyone recited. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Sanders made the following correction to the Minutes: • Page 2, first paragraph, revise second sentence to state�lq-I�FFHSU�❑dIF�..� 1,PRI-I�CP Dd�ll�LCC�H�RWH�Z C�-11M�❑J��❑[�[� � Motion/Second Watt/Sanders to approve the Minutes of December 5, 2017 as amended. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Sanders, Watt, Christensen and Chair Wetzel. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Hilliker. ABSTAIN: None. 5. APPEAL PROCESS 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS 7. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE Page 1 of 4 Minutes of the Planning Commission, January 10, 2018, Continued: 9. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS�tEPORT Commissioner Christensen will not be in attendance at the regular January 24, 2018 or May 9, 2018 Planning Commission meetings. Commissioner Watt will attend the regular January 24, 2018 Planning Commission meeting, but may be late in arriving. Chair Whetzel will not be in attendance at the regular February 28, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. 10. 3/ ❑1 1 ,1 ❑�,5 �❑72 5 C6�❑32 5 T Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director provided the following updates: • The Community Development departmental restructure program proposal was recently approved by City Council. The primary purpose of this restructure is to provide the highest level of customer service by looking at various ways/approaches to more effectively educate the community and improve/simplify development-oriented processes and procedures. The most significant change to the Community Development Department is the addition of two staff positions to include a Building Inspector I or II and an Associate Planner for the planning department with a Housing focus/emphasis that can also assist in the newly formulated Housing division of the Community Development department. • The addition of an Associate Planner-Housing to the Community Development department will also enable additional assistance in the upcoming General Plan update and implementation thereof and/or take on other planning-related responsibilities such that the need for the department to seek consultants will be reduced. • The addition of a Building Inspector will provide assistance to the Building Official in focusing on fundamental process improvements, education, and service enhancements necessary for effective/efficient and continued successful operation of the Building department. • The Planning/Building Technician position has been revised and the corresponding job description has been changed to Community Development Technician with a halftime focus on planning and a halftime focus on housing activities. • Phased City website improvements are being made to reflect changes to the Community Development Department for the purpose of providing for better understanding of these departmental changes as well as to increase the clarity and appearance of the website for ease of navigation. Commissioner Sanders asked about the status of the Planning Manager position that was recently vacated. Craig Schlatter: • The Community Development Department is actively recruiting for the above- referenced Planning Manager position. Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director: Page 2 of 4 Minutes of the Planning Commission, January 10, 2018, Continued: • A Wagenseller Park Feasibility Analysis has been completed in draft form and has been provided to the Wagenseller Neighborhood Association for input. It is anticipated that a final study will be completed within a month. The Planning Commission and Parks, Golf, and Recreation Commission will have the opportunity to review the document and provide input. • The Community Development Department has publically released a Housing Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). • Planning services and staff support concerning some assigned City projects are being provided for by Julie Price. She is affiliated with a local engineering firm and has worked on County projects for several years. • Would like to have a Planning Commission general/informal discussion concerning the upcoming General Plan update when possible and convenient for the Commission where workshop materials will be provided. Commissioner Sanders: • Related to the proposed General Plan update suggests looking at what other cities are doing to launch their General Plan process updates, particularly the City of Sebastopol. Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director: • Related to the recent topic of the American Planning Association (APA) membership Commission discussion, finds after researching membership opportunities in this organization that this may not be particularly beneficial at the California level in the way of having ample access to educational materials online. To the contrary, the National American Planning Association provides access to educational materials that include a planning publication and corresponding supplement, unlimited website access to current and archived publications, articles, and electronic book collections in addition to the networking working component of the membership. Invites the Commission to provide input regarding any interest in the aforementioned memberships. Commissioner Watt: • Would like for staff to provide the website link to the National American Planning Association. Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director: • Commented on upcoming planning projects for review by the DRB and Planning Commission. • Planning staff will not have any projects ready for Planning Commission review at the regular January 24, 2018 meeting. There was staff and Commission discussion: • An update on the proposed housing project on Norton Street and Main Street. • Recent City Council review and discussion regarding the proposed Cannabis Related Business Ordinance. 11. CONSENT CALENDAR 12. NEW BUSINESS M/S Watt/Sanders to cancel the regular January 24, 2018 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Sanders, Watt, Christensen and Chair Wetzel. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Hilliker. ABSTAIN: None. Page 3 of 4 Minutes of the Planning Commission, January 10, 2018, Continued: 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:28 p.m. Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary Page 4 of 4 � � ITEM NO.: 12a �. MEETING DATE: February 14, 2018 � � �`�� cr�' ��if�� 44.t1k��.4.�. . .�� 5 �.11�51�::�I . �lI'�5i.��5�1'I .ti5:. ti I il. .�i�. � .� I zl'..�i � 5. �I.k. AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Subject: Review and Discussion of the Draft Wagenseller Park Feasibility Analysis, with Possible Commission Recommendations to Staff. Background: The Planning Commission will review and discuss the draft Wagenseller Park Feasibility Analysis. The DGD@M�/�Z D�ffRP S��f'QFi�L1��7�C��F�1FM/�L�/�I-FI-P d-��C❑CC Discussion: 8 NDK�V�� HC�iIIDQ��Q �dopted 1995) identified the need for a park in the Wagenseller Neighborhood. The General Plan also outlined goals, policies, and implementation measures towards park creation. Completion of the Wagenseller Park Feasibility Analysis is the first step in the future development of a park. Planning Staff in the Community Development Department undertook this analysis in 2015 with the hosting of a community workshop. The analysis was completed in 2017. A draft report has been prepared and is being circulated among various boards and commissions for input. The draft report has also been shared with the Wagenseller Neighborhood Association, and Staff have received comments. Recommended Action(s): Review and discuss the Draft Wagenseller Park Feasibility Analysis; provide input and recommendations on study to Staff. Alternative Commission Option(s): N/A Citizens advised: N/A Requested by: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director Prepared by: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director Coordinated with: N/A Attachments: None �- - •- 1 � • � I � � .Y -*c ' �: ' :�r ,�'X �r 4�` � $ : ..�' . . ) � I +� ��`/-�� -y', x �-- t'� l� �s- .1 t� � ��r s I �,�.^� +� ,.w-FT'S^�..��'-`'��. �, :� k"'�.. a ,.i�r .. i� . I.'�, r .n'�h �"��«�� .� �'� i . . - t �, k .. . . � "S"'& 3. _ � � , I'�,�r Yn ",,�j. . " +cs'.' �t,�' �.S`�^�p�,'�y��r �t��'�i',y. � ..�^" � �?`�. � I�{ �• ��' ^"��' 1�„'.fi "` } `F, k r"f.r x'No� �, _ r �s' � 1 �"W � i Jfl�j�l �i\� f '�� .�'��f�� +? .� �V� �'.t-�3 �y'y� �, a ��- � I l i 1► ''�-� � '"'��^" � w�,� � ak �.r ,�i� � � �•+S-'x�'+�..� 'r -r 1 1��.,' ��.r i ,�Z ;�.� �, .r"'a' `' � . ._.t`� >r � � �-�. ��/ � �.�-- — � . � � . i�. � � ��.3� . � ..� � �.� •q•r:. yl,'�'��<��'r'�,� d�" �T `� � t+"r G` f.� -A' .f,k�" l. � -�-� .' 1 � �"'' „ ^ �'- y b � � 'S'> �d �+' ;,., r'� � y� � • Y <. r � ti.,.'� �� I , t� t3 r � - \ ¢r . x'�w ; -:- t r '�. �;� �nc �, r�'+,t . m `.,�.. �"`_- ' 7�''r^ � ,.� -� � �S�1h'. �. i��,,�. `C S�'�'� � �.'t' t/ , f� �p!w �^�`� �• I� � mwr�p[�L y.{ '� 't4. � � 4F �' c' 'K - � �.'�;' ,''� '� #=`.� r ;amt. ;�°,.r� • v d �'�� ir � Y�' .�, � � =�, �� . "_ [ F�'iF� ,N,�# s�" _.,�' 'rt�Z" {'`-✓ti s �. ` ��,.ts� - ' - t - I � FSA "� .r� �� s��' � t � ^�^ M•� yx f6 ��' ,.III� a'� 'A ;:�vR ��7 � "`•. �� ,. ¢ '°c - � �..I Y , � -_ .. . � ,f�. e'!�x �--' .a^_:' _ _' . .s � ' { �,Y ' .. w, . j , / :- i '0 I. I e��.. . _ ' ,� „:�, I�' � � �.,` . - ; , _ . � t '�. � •:�r ," � �°�.- y �;�F �,r.:_ _'� � `^ � - -� . f Y �' � , ��/ �,��' �-� Ar- ,.-..'�['. � ''+''I� � ��y,"�� !��■ ' i ��. � - _ _ - - - - - � + �{' ;� , i �� - . , .., :.� 1 � } �.. "` ' � . . . � � r•-- Contents 1.0 Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.0 Resource Survey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.0 Existing Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1 History 3.2 Current Demographic Information 3.3 Existing Recreational Facilities 3.3 Demand for Recreational Facilities 3.4 Potential for Recreational Connectivity 4.0 Summary of Workshop Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.1 Workshop 1: Needs Assessment 4.2 Workshop 2: Location Analysis 5.0 Site Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 5.1 Site 1: Ford St. and Sidnie St. 5.2 Site 2: Mason St. Railroad 5.3 Site 3: Brush St. and Orchard Ave. 5.5 Site 5 Orrs Creek Seasonal Underpass 5.4 Site 4: 190 Orr St. 6.0 Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 6.1 Funding 6.1.1 Foundations Case Study 1: Willits Kids Club Discovery Park; Willits, CA 6.1.2 Public Grants Case Study 2: Forestville Youth Park; Forestville, CA 7.0 Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.1 Recommendations 2 { 3� f V _ ,�' `a` r� `� '� . S �� Todd Grove Park, Ukiah, CA (HFLYH6PPU 5HVLGHWVRIWKH:DHVHOOHU1 HLKERUKRRGHSUHVVHGGHVLUHIRULWRI8NLDKVWDWRORRNLWR WKHIHDVLELOLWRIDSDUNLWKHLUHLKERUKRRG30DLVWDLWKHLWRI8NLDKRPPLW Development Department undertook this analysis in 2015, the culmination of which is this report. The report has been laid out as follows: Sections 2 and 3 outline existing policy, neighborhood history, and how they frame the need for a park in the neighborhood; Section 4 describes public workshops and the community engagement process, while also discussing which park attributes UHVLGHWVFRVLGHUHGPRVWYDODEOH6HFWLRDDOHVGLHUHWORFDWLRVIRUDSDUNDG Section 6 analyzes potential funding opportunities. Section 6 also describes an implementation VWUDWHIRUWKHGHYHORSPHWDGORWHUPPDLWHDFHRIDSDUN�.I�fFa,6DLRRHUV recommendations on how to proceed. 3 Map 1. Wagenseller Neighborhood Use and Density Characteristics. Low Gap Rd. Brush St. . � �� i � �. , Ford St. . Z _ � Clara Ave. �; i' �I i i ' �� o • _ � v _ _y ;, � s U N - O Z i 'r� � ��. 1� �'-$ ` N C O N R � WAGENSELLER NEIGHBORHOOD ----� HISTORIC SUBDIVISION EXISTING USES: COMMERCIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 4 5HVRUFH6UYH Existing policy supports the development of a park in the Wagenseller Neighborhood. 6SHFLFD00 1. Ukiah General Plan (1995). The General Plan Recreation Element (adopted 1995) LGHWLHVWKHHHGIRUDSDUNLWKH:DHVHOOHU1 HLKERUKRRGDGRWOLHVRDOV policies, and implementation measures towards park creation. 2. Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2016). The Ukiah Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan discusses the Wagenseller Neighborhood in relation to the Orr Creek Trail HYLVLRHGIRUWKHLW6SHFLFDOOWKH2UUUHHNSURMHFWHYLVLRVGHYHORSPHWRID paved two-mile pedestrian and bicycle pathway along Orr Creek from Low Gap to the Ukiah Sports Complex, on the east side of US 101, including a grade-separated crossing R186$OWKRKWKH8NLDK%LFFOHDG3HGHVWULDODVWHU30DGRHVRWVSHFLFD00 recommend a park in the Wagenseller Neighborhood, its promotion of increased pedestrian and bicycle access to the Ukiah Sports Complex could improve recreational opportunities in the neighborhood. This is discussed in more detail in Section 3.3. 3. Ukiah ValleyArea Plan (2011). The Wagenseller Neighborhood is located at the boundary of the City limits and the Mendocino County unincorporated area. Section 35DRIWKH8NLDK9DOOH$UHD30DUHFRPPHGVGHYHORSPHWRIDYDOOHZLGHSDUNV and Community Facilities Needs Assessment and Facilities Master Plan." 3.0 Existing Conditions 3.1 History The Wagenseller Neighborhood contains a mixture of uses, including commercial, industrial, and single- and multi-family residential. The historic core of the district is the 100 block of Clara Avenue, a late 1800s subdivision originally built for workforce housing. Much of the neighborhood was originally owned by Norton Wagenseller, a prune grower who subdivided WKHSURSHUWLWRORWVWKHZLGWKRIWKUHHSUHWUHHV6WUHHWVLWKHDUHDEHDUWKHDPHVR members of the Wagenseller family. A block of historic homes from the original subdivision is outlined by a black, dashed line in Map 1. 3.2 Current Demographic Information 7KHPDMRULWRI:DHVHOOHU1 HLKERUKRRGLVZLWKLHVV7UDFWWKHPRELOHKRPHSDUN and commercial areas south of Norton St. are in Census Tract 116, but considered part of the neighborhood). Census Tract 115 also includes the Oak Manor subdivision and subdivisions north of the Russian River Cemetery and South of Chablis Drive, as well as some agricultural and limited commercial areas in the unincorporated area. Compared to the two other Census Tract areas comprising the City of Ukiah, Census Tract 115 has the highest population— approximately 64% of which is employed—and a median household income of$40,144. According to the 2016 countywide incomes published by the California Department of Housing DGRPPLWHYHORSPHWWKLVZROGSODFHDSHUVRKRVHKROGZLWKLWKHRZ,FRPH income category for Mendocino County. Both Census Tract 115 and 116 are considered Disadvantaged Communities by the State of California. 5 Map 2. Primary Census Tracts in City of Ukiah. � �. � -- I �` : ti ;- �'� `� � - ,. , ,: � 1; ' ,J : ;, ;.� � f ' , - � � i z ' � ; �i � - � � � l _ :EI�1$US'�'RAC7', '� 'I j�; CITY LIMITS WAGENSELLER NEIGHBORHOOD CENSUS TRACT: 114 115 11G 6 Table 1. Demographic Comparison of City of Ukiah Census Tracts Census Tract 114 Census Tract 115 Census Tract 116 West Side Wagenseller+ Downtown and South w�� 3,723 5,212 4,256 _ _ _ _.. .. _ _ _ _.. .. _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ :... _ _ _.. _ _ . .. _ _.. _ _ _ . _ _ . .:. _ .. ._ _ .. ._ _ .. ._ _ .. ._ _ .. _ _ .. ._ :._.. _ _ _ . .. _ _ _.. .. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _... Employment Status* 2,127 3,355 2,550 _ _ _ _.. .. _ _ _ _.. .. _ _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ :... _ _ _.. _ _ . .. _ _.. _ _ _ . _ _ . .:. _ .. ._ _ .. ._ _ .. ._ _ .. ._ _ .. _ _ .. ._ .:._.. _ _ _ . .. _ _ _.. .. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _.. Total Housing Units 1,791 2,600 2,370 Type 1: 1-unit detached 1-unit detached (50.9%) i 1-unit, detached (29.5%) Type 2: (89.1%) 3 or 4 units (12.4%) 20 or more units (17.5%) 3 or 4 units (2.8%) Median Household Income $68,306 $40,144 $24,915 Percentage of Households Past 12 Months Income Below 5.2% 28.8% 27.3% the Poverty Level The California State Parks Community Fact Finder provides the following statistics for the Wagenseller neighborhood area which are a bit more accurate, because the calculations are based upon only the percent of any census block groups that intersect with the area shown in red in the map below. The radius of the red circle in the map below is one half mile, and doesn't include the various neighborhoods included in the data for Census Tract 115. With those neighborhoods excluded, the median household income drops to $35,283. The Park Acres per 5HVLGHWVLVDUWLFLDOOLDWHGEWKHLFOVLRRIWKH8NLDK6SRUWVRPSOH County Mendocino City: Ll kia h Total Population: 2531 Youth Population: 773 Senior Popul�tion: 222 Households Without Access to a Car: 20d.0 Num�er of People in Poyerty: fi88 y� Median Household Income: $35,283 Per Capit�Income: $18,241 P a rk Ac re s: 12.76 Park A�res per 1,060 Residents: 5_04 !lk al• 7 3.3 Existing Recreational Facilities The nearest formal recreation areas—Todd Grove Park and Vinewood Park—are at a driving distance of approximately one and one half miles from the Wagenseller Neighborhood. The Ukiah Sports Complex, within a straight-line distance of one half mile from the center of the HLKERUKRRGLVWKHPRVWGLFOWWRDFFHVVGHWRLKZD,IRUPDOZDONLSDWKVKDYH developed along Orrs Creek, which wends through the neighborhood from the west to east, and the North Coast Railroad Authority right-of-way which bisects the neighborhood north to south. Map 3 demonstrates the proximity of existing parks and recreational areas to the Wagenseller Neighborhood. Distances noted represent the approximate one-way driving distance from the neighborhood center to each existing recreation facility. A one half mile straight-line distance from the center of the neighborhood is depicted by a dashed circle. Purple denotes a newly- funded rail trail extension and pocket park. Map 3. Neighborhood Proximity to Existing Parks and Open Spaces :ti;; _ t�, �, ' , . {'�a�`i�.� . _ � 4 ' . . � � � . .. �A '\ S �'-- 4 �� • Redwood Empire Fair , �, �.;, - ' t1.Omi -��• � ■ \� ._� ;. Frenk Zeek ��!�� `\ . . � , � s. . ' ' t1.0 mi {„ ' r_ -+ .1' � =� ��, �J Low Gap Park � , } ' ,Yinewood Par �j ,Af'- •� l , t1.5 mi . � t1.0 mi,� �'kT— �i uf�'sl�.�� •i � _ ��`�, . � . .. ,,.�, ',- .. . . ,�} ��t .,Jy � _ .�I��I �t . -. _l` �'�' . s.�„ .� - '`�q'�,;aV�., . �� ? � �'' i i Ukia Sports Complex '��' " ^ 1-:• q.�'�-�' : �� ^ �\ �....-. �� _ 4 - ;Y' y,� q_S' , il .,. • , t2.5mi , .s`�,,� > .'` ` �._y'�¢'. ,} .;t �:, k �1' �•, 1 � � � i K:y�` ' -y� ��. �. _ �, �'n{ `� `1_E �� ' 7'�� Pomolita � { * !°� ,� � ;� t1.o mi `f•� 7 n1q�� ` ^ . . %1 'il�i � -.M . _ . a n .. �� n {�. _ i , i 1� �l� .:� ��'��^. �b" ' .. ... - . �• _ * �_.. , � �� .. ' . �.��1,�_ - � 1 ^��\� _ a a..`�� . . + ` i � :r i ',. � . . N � ��,,�„� � S .� / �� i�,_ �i�'" : r,' '�"� E . \�-. .,r' T ' �', ,�?t_�� , �. ,-�• � �..- :�"' . r ,Todd Grove ,_ �� - � . � iti. '� t1 5 mi �� ~4 _ .� . ... ' n t�� M�r L't � � ;�N �,:�. ��. . , _ .' . f '`� ' �r , � ��i � :.,ss:�� --� �ti } �,r�. -.� � '... �\' (i: . ' Anton Stadmm ''^ ��1�,��V�'�;i� ` nrty` �� ' : - -- � �¢ . .. .'t7 5 mi � . � � ' , .. js�� w.��t ti � � �- � ; ��. ��+�.;;��'n'y�.}'� i�3� ... . . . �, s': 3'3. .��'- . .. �-ff- . .. �� . . . t \� _�� h �e�+ a: `'� � '�^'��_ K � - :� Alex Thomas Plaza � "� ""�° ��' ±1.0 mi Rail Treil r . ��.�� : ",��"�^�r :�, � � �IAcGarvey Paik ,-8�Pocket Park � ..� � � . „.��'� ,,,, r�• �1 q mi ,. Oak Manor Park � �� +,`,�X �` � � t,12.Omi .Y j r `� ��,�' a s r . �, . , _ K . . . ,_ i � ��.:'- - �� g .a,`--y ' R .,,f,."3' �- ` . . ;� .. . . .. � �` ' �� `,`;,g.�"°�;a;�'�_ ". . ... _ � � ' ' _ . 1 _s�.. �" Map 4 illustrates existing active transportation options within proximity to the neighborhood, and that currently, no facilities exist within the neighborhood. Additionally, the Wagenseller Neighborhood is not only distant from existing recreation facilities (shown in Map 3, and shaded green above), but also schools (purple shading above). In summary, the Wagenseller Neighborhood is an economically disadvantaged and densely populated area with limited connection to existing recreational facilities. 8 Map 4. Active Transportation Options in the Wagenseller Neighborhood r�o�t,��.�, _ ,,,, - : yt.ta;,_ _ �r.�cC' - ��n:IN;; :dFq:i l - -,rr:ll.'.� - _ -- 1Q7 _ ";:;; . a - L'•ni'ir:a`•i • . - f�d �. %.:i;,•;:�., -. - ^fiiu'.h`.- - : 45;.,. -- � +.,�,n,.. - �S, _ y. - _ .,�.�2 � ': ' ,�ti��.i��i�'.��r�. �F_' :��G':". ,::ti�ri ,' •'riL'i'i1'y�'. _. !'..�,.II'1_-�( '�*l ;�Xtiy�,� ''� _ � - .i.d6�. u- _ �,' �''�l t eyik".- '�y - - :� .:'i` _ SSp9yypM1;.:��5'�. � � _ _ � � _ � :.'.Y} � .,-• ' . _ (.��`,ri,'ii. 'Y '��:1'� _ _ - F}�v��{iU,'�1�;;:i'}'�•1' _ .•;� � ��. _ _ -' •p, ' - _ _ ,1'=r„�i�•�.i��i��, "i7 � _ - Ki2'��'Riti = ir:t`'tde ' _ _ �� R I'iin,3y�� #�� - �- Legend �. �.�.:;r�� T � . � Wagenseller Neighborhood _ -:. ti';.czil'.��,e - — CiasiNPath�;ExistinQl _- 1 -- i'e — dff StreeiFootpaih ,�c�:��'.'"" - _ _ — 8ikelane �""�r - - _ • BikeRa�k _ _ %,,.,� , _ 5cre�t � 0 TrafficSi��al •'�r':�,:,,,, - �� All-4VayStcp `'�� 101 `_�.;,. - �� Railroac� Public Sc�oal Privar,e ScB�nol Pa rks and�pen 5pace .: :,�,:. Dn�n�mrtotivn CiCy Limit C� {].25 {1.5 1 Miles `;'-r'I!r � - 9 3.3 Demand for Recreational Facilities The two maps below demonstrate that although there is inadequate active transportation infrastructure within the Wagenseller Neighborhood, there is pedestrian and bicycle activity in the neighborhood. During a community survey conducted in preparation for the City's Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan, Brush and Clara streets each received comments regarding the need to improve bike and pedestrian access, as shown in Map 5. Clara Avenue is the primary access point in and out of the Wagenseller Neighborhood, and Brush Street is an important secondary access. Map 5. Streets Receiving Most Comments for Improved Bike and Pedestrian Facilities . -• � �� . = � • pw. � - •'k. c�„�., - •� 3n11arq • — . - '� r., .� ' ' ��ti r•. . ,. �� . ._ - �� ' � ti . � '� �, � ; �' �` • _ � �� -�,. 1 �� . �, •y . -�� '�, � , � . � _ . '_"�_ . i . 'I ' 'S II . -- ' 4 il . . � ��, � . :_ . . Wagenseller Neighborhood area 3.4 Potential for Recreational Connectivity One of the City's goals is to provide a system of paths, lanes, routes, and support facilities that enable and encourage convenient bicycle and pedestrian circulation for all transportation needs, including travel to work, school, shopping, or recreation activities. The City of Ukiah KDVLFUHPHWDOOLPSURYHGDSDWKZDDORWKHUDLOURDGULKWRIZm��'K�I nearest portion of which is approximately one-quarter mile from the center of the Wagenseller Neighborhood. The City was recently awarded funding to improve the trail from Clara Avenue WR%UVK6WUHHW7KHLWRI8NLDKV%LFFOHDG3HGHVWULDODVWHU30DODVWHU30DDOVR LGHWLHVWKHRZDS5RDG2UUVUHHN3DWKZDDPRLWVKLKHVWUDNLSURMHFWV 10 $VVKRZLODSWKHLWVODVWHU30DLGHWLHVWKHRUWKHUHWHWRI2UFKDUG$YHHDG the eastern extent of Brush Street as candidates for a Class I bike lane (purple dashed line), the railroad right-of-way as a Class II multi-use path (green dashed line), and Norton Street and Clara Avenue as a Class III Bike Route with sharrows (yellow and blue dashed line). Such improvements would increase neighborhood access to recreational facilities, and be a logical network within which to insert a park. Map 6. Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Paths � y � ��:,��:�u�_ �.,�a�t:; � - � - - � - - t � 101 �i,� _ ,.r��,;��". � r, `�W ts�; ` , • "fir R �' r'y. %t~ r �f�:3' � � t oi. . o� � � � #� 4 i��14 ! F .�' � - �- i: ('It'['•��s k3 :�, � *w .ry ■I�]f'.:r' - .ie ?x. �r ir � �t ��=�i 'I � - .xr`: t+` - o .� ,:I•.iri { r e� �f � �� -� , ��..,..:�y � p . , - w_ .,�� J + * y o Wagenseller Neighborhood area 4.0 Summary of Workshop Input An important goal of the park feasibility analysis was to engage with representatives of the Wagenseller Neighborhood towards understanding the need for a park, the type of recreational ., facilities the neighborhood desires, and ideas as to f � � the location for a park. Two public workshops were conducted to start this conversation while also answering two questions: 1. What are the recreational needs of the neighborhood? 2. What is a suitable location for a park or other recreational facility? Stakeholder Workshop, 2016 11 4.1 Workshop 1: Needs Assessment 7KHUVWZRUNVKRSWKH1 HHGV$VVHVVPHWZDVFRGFWHGR)HEUDU7KHRDORI WKLVUVWZRUNVKRSZDVWRVWDUWDGLDORHZLWKHLKERUKRRG�7'{�IR�C�L�,CIDJ summary of relevant comments: 1. Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC) is pursuing development of their property along Brush Street. In developing this property, RCHDC ZLOOEHHSORULWKHLGHDRIFUHDWLDOLHDUSDUNDGMDFHWW�Po1�41HIlE�dBHN opportunity to provide some recreational features and a trail within the proposed open space. 2. There are many homeless individuals in the area. There is concern among some neighborhood residents that a new park could attract additional homeless individuals to the neighborhood. 3. Incorporate public art, such as murals, into a park. 4. The neighborhood has little parking and a future park would need to provide additional parking options. 5. Orrs Creek runs through the neighborhood, and developing a park could also provide an opportunity to create a walking loop around Orrs Creek. 6. Traditional recreation opportunities such as basketball hoops and playground equipment could be valuable in the neighborhood. 7. Many people in the neighborhood live in apartments and there is a lack of available space for family gatherings.A park with barbeque pits and picnic tables could be a valuable amenity.Another valuable amenity could be a space for community gardens. 8. The train trestle near Ford Street along the railroad tracks is a hazard. 9. Residents prefer the bridge over Orrs Creek remain permanently closed to vehicular WUDF5HVLGHWVDOVRGHVLUHGWKHEULGHEHFRPHWKHSDUNHWUDFHDGSURYLGH additional parking options. 10. A new park and any play equipment should be fully accessible. 4.2 Workshop 2: Location Analysis � �� , , , � . '-- 'a On August 30, 2016, a second workshop . `'�. � ��:. ,a -�l "" *�• � � ' Y�:.,.... was conducted to discuss possible ;��;. �:a ;:` �e:�� locations for a Wagenseller Neighborhood �J �-,M � i h � • �� ' �,�`�� ,. ' ,,•y", ' '� 1 park. Four sites were presented: ` �4 �' �, i ,� 14�,�'�'��'� ,�>.��l��-'M ,. �. � 4 ,�' .a.�'�L� I� 1��','��t ,�,.�'� �1�: * � ` � �' � . , � ,i; ti�'`rl'I�� 1. The corner of Ford Street and ��- ,�, i a ,,�' � +�;, � Sidnie Street; >�!"`'�: '�r��: `' � ``".��'��' � � 2. Mason Street, along the railroad �, ` '� , ,y,�;�,;��"_ � ,��- ._' �, `��' �: '} ��, '�� ' tracks; �,� � � �, , �- x�., �'"• � , } �,*i� ��,..�� .• � ��:�� r =--,� ''�;� 3. Brush Street, near Orr Creek; and ,� � . 4 • � y,�� ? 4. 190 Brush Street. � '��"� � ..{pp� �" ;t ,�w, ��►».� •�,y �' '� � ��L � �, � W T_ _ k • �*S 7 { r IsY:i . ' !�r.'' �4�r�-F, '�ti-'�. .�. G�� i:�:-.rr� S.. ti}; `--r..:. +w;_ F � e�,•�� +k.r... Workshop participants discussed the merits �� . � � _ , i --� � � ,. �.�. . � of each site and arrived at a consensus �� ,, x �� ; �; �r = �� ,�,�. for a preferred location. Site 2—the Mason 1 ""' `_ ,,,�,�;�,_�- �r i , `-'�� '' ''�_*�* ��,�� .s.=, - , .:, Street Railroad location—was selected due `�� ;^� �� :;�'--h�� *s�"� y•.�' ��, ` ' �" . to its roximit to the rail trail and central i''�' ` � ' � ' � �i'� 3 ,fN�y '�'""" P Y �5 r , a ,, .;�r�«`..._;,� � F- ...�i.��""",,, �, , . ♦ ��' .. �. r'1 �,--,� location. -^�� ,�.. �� , ��-�:��,a � N el. _.. '-�1..a �.'�l.,1 A'�-. . �. ' � �� a.�� •k-L �... ... �_ Map 7. Locations of Sites 1 – 5 12 5.0 Site Analysis This section provides an analysis of the four sites discussed at the August workshop. A SWOT (Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities and Threats)Analysis was prepared for each site using the following criteria: presence of existing natural features, proximity to users and infrastructure, size, relationship to other public features, and accessibility. 5.1 Site 1: Ford St. and Sidnie St. This location bears the following site characteristics: Size: ±17,000 square feet (sf) Zoning: Planned Development Residential Owner: Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC) (Private, Corporation) Location: Corner of Ford Street and Sidnie Street Strengths: Weakness: • Proximity to park users • Small in size at 17,000 sf • Infrastructure in place: curb, sidewalk, • No parking water • No natural features • Limited space for community garden(s) Opportunities: Threats: • Potential for partnership with RCHDC • 5HVWULFWLRVR5VDFL • Street parking available • A park may be a source of noise and • Possibility for a pocket park impact the privacy of nearby multi-family housing 5.2 Site 2: Mason St. Railroad This location bears the following site characteristics: Size: ±3.35 Acres Zoning: Heavy Commercial C2 Owner: North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA) (Private, Corporation) Location: Mason Street along the railroad tracks Strengths: Weakness: • Excellent rail trail access • Known underground contaminants • Scores high for funding opportunities • Located within the airport master plan • Possible connectivity to rail trail area — possible restrictions due to airport land use regulations • Further away from potential park users • No natural features Opportunities: Threats: • Publically owned • Neighboring property owners using site • Limited potential for private development, informally for parking; could be resis- given site shape tance due to loss of parking • Funding for cleanup of contaminants • Possible design challenges due to the through grants and loans site's narrowness 13 5.3 Site 3: Brush St. and Orchard Ave. This location bears the following site characteristics: Size: 8 Acres Zoning: High Density Residential 3 (Mendocino County zoning designation) Owner: Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation (RCHDC) (Private, Corporation) Location: Corner of Brush Street and Orchard Avenue Strengths: Weakness: • Proximity to multi-family housing • Unimproved site • Undeveloped site • Not within City limits • $GMDFHWWRDFUHHNDGRWKHUDW�JDOfHD�RUGDEOHKRVLSURMHFWLVDSSURYHG tures for the site • Large site with potential for multiple uses • Scores high for funding opportunities Opportunities: Threats: • Possible partnership with RCHDC for park • Entire site could be occupied by an ap- with new housing SURYHGDRUGDEOHKRVLSURMHFW • 3URLPLWWRDRUGDEOHKRVL 5.4 Site 4: 190 Orr St. This location bears the following site characteristics: Size: 1.5 Zoning: Heavy Commercial C2 Owner: Daniel William (Private, Individual) Location: Intersection of Brush Street and the railroad tracks Strengths: Weakness: • 1.5 Acres—good size for park • 8LPSURYHGVLWHUHTLULVLLFDW • Connectivity to the future Rail Trail infrastructure upgrades • Limited connectivity to neighborhood • No natural features • May impact privacy of Buddy Eller Center Opportunities: Threats: • Potential partnership opportunity with Bud- • Future Buddy Eller Center development dy Eller Center may encroach in park area • Shared driveway opportunity 14 5.5 Site 5 Orrs Creek Seasonal Underpass One strategy to improving recreational options for residents of the Wagenseller Neighborhood is to increase active transportation routes—such as walking and biking paths—from the neighborhood to existing facilities. The nearest park to the neighborhood—the Ukiah Sports Complex—is actually the furthest to drive to due to the barrier that is Highway 101. Ukiah community members have proposed a seasonal underpass along Orrs Creek and under Highway 101 as a means of connecting the Softball Complex to the neighborhood and existing bike and pedestrian ways. The underpass would be open except for the winter when the sports HOGVDUHLIUHTHWOVHG The City's Public Works Department has plans for a habitat and trail corridor dubbed the Orrs UHHNUHHZD7KHUHHZDSURMHFWHYLVLRVGHYHORSPHWRIDSHGHVWULDDGELFFOH pathway along Orrs Creek from Low Gap Park to the Ukiah Softball Complex, including a new, UDGHVHSDUDWHGLKZDFURVVLDOVRNRZDVDRYHUSDVVDHDPSOHZROGEH that which bridges Highway 101 at Oak Manor and Gibson Greek). The trail would improve access to Ukiah High, Pomolita Middle School, and Frank Zeek Elementary School, Low Gap Park, and the Ukiah Softball Complex; and connect existing and planned bikeways and recreational facilities. The funding recently secured for extension of the Rail Trail north from Clara Ave. to Brush St. includes funding for a portion of the Orrs Creek Greenway trail where the railroad crosses Orrs Creek and extending west. Establishing a seasonal underpass underneath Highway 101 at the eastern end of the Greenway would further implement the Greenway vision—albeit incrementally—and interim bike and pedestrian access until a pedestrian overpass could be built. 6.0 Implementation HYHORSLDSDUNLVVLPLODUWRWHGHYHORSPHWRIRWHI�N'81111RI�dWWVHOHFWL the site; 2) assessing feasibility and identifying barriers to development; 3) making a plan for development, including identifying potential funding sources and creating a long-term management plan; 4) designing the park; 5) construction; and 6) maintaining the park long-term. 1. Select Site.RPPLWLSWGULWLV.�3)UHHFWHGSUHIHUHFHIRU6LWHWH ODVR6WUHHWSDLOURDGORFDWLRDOGHFLVLRUHDUGLVLWHVHOHFWLRVROGEH based on recommendations from this WPFA and further dialogue with residents of the Wagenseller Neighborhood. 2. Assess Feasibility.LVWSHRIIHDVLELOLWDVVHVVPHWLVGLHUHWIURPWH.�3)L that it is focused only on the site development phase, analyzing costs such as design, construction, and long-term operation. The feasibility assessment would also analyze and recommend models for management and ownership. 3. Plan. In the planning stage, a timeline for development is established and potential EDUULHUVWRGHYHORSPHWLGHWLHG)GLDSSOLFDWLRVDUHSUHSDUHGDGVEPLWWHGDG key community partners are assembled. Also, in this stage preliminary, conceptual plans may be created, as the plans can be powerful fundraising tools for conveying compelling narratives of place and need. 4. Design. HLLWLDOFRFHSWRIWHSDULVIUWHUUHHGLWRGHWDLOVLIRUPHGEIUWHU FRPPLWLSWDVHOODVFRPPHWVDGUHTL UHPHWVRIDHFLHVLWMUL VGLFWLR The overall concept of the park should not change dramatically from what was analyzed LWKHIHDVLELOLWVWG7KLVSKDVHHWVWKHSURMHFWWRDVWDWHWKDWLVVKRYHOUHDG Fundraising for the construction phase should be nearing completion. 5. Construction. By this step, a property should be acquired or under the appropriate 15 ownership or easement agreements for its new life as a park. The party that assumes OLDELOLWIRUZRUNHUDGYROWHHUVDIHWVKROGEHNRZ3URMHFWPDDHUVDUH LGHWLHGGHYHORSPHWSHUPLWVDUHDFTLUHGDGELOGLEHLV 6. Maintenance. Parks don't clean, maintain, or repair themselves, so a management plan and resources need to be in place which assigns responsibility and provide for a means WRHVUHWKDWDFOHDDGVDIHSDUNLVPDLWDLHGRWHUPPDLWHDFHLVMVWDV important as all the front end work of getting a facility established, and equal forethought should be put to this stage from the beginning. 6.1 Funding Successful creation of a park will depend upon multiple sources of funding being acquired. Potential funding sources are: private donations, loans, and grants. 6.1.1 Foundations Grants or gifts from private foundations should be considered as a potential source of support for a park. Seven private foundations have addresses in Ukiah—according to the Foundation Center (foundationcenter.org), which hosts an online database of foundations found nationwide—and four of them have provided funds in quantities less than $5,000 to the City of Ukiah in the past for parks and recreation uses. Other foundations are active within the state of California and should be researched. Case Study 1: Willits Kids Club Discovery Park; Willits, CA In 2013, the Willits Kids Club received $495,000 in Proposition 84 Statewide Park Program grant funds from the State of California Department of Parks and Recreation. The funds were used to develop a 1.25 acre parcel with new playground and shade structures as part of the OEVLVFRYHU3DUNDG30DURG:LOOLWV.LGVOEDRSURWRUDLDWLRZKLFK provides daily after-school programming for children from kindergarten through 8th grade as well as a summer day camp, was formed incorporated in 2000. The Willits Kids Club Youth Center was completed in 2009, after many years of fund raising and grant writing, and the logical extension of the facility was to provide a play area. 7KHGLVFRYHUSDUNLVDDWUDORWGRRUSODVSDFHGHVLHGWRSURYLGHFKLOGUH=RWK creative and physical challenges. The design was developed with community input, VWHPPLIURPWKHTHVWLRRZGLGROLNHWRSODDVDFKLOG$VDUHVOWWKHSDUN features climbing, hiding, water play, fort building, and traditional equipment such as a sand box, slides, and a merry-go-round. In addition to the Prop. 84 funds, the discovery park was made possible with support from the Community Foundation of Mendocino County, Re-Leaf, and local businesses and individuals. Use of the center and park is partially funded by monthly fees (scaled to family income levels and frequency of student attendance), and parents may further reduce or waive fees through volunteering their time at the center. 16 Table 6.2. Overview of Potential Grant Sources for Which City of Ukiah is an Eligible Applicant GRANT AGENCY/NAME SUPPORTED ACTIVITIES AMOUNT COMPETITIVE? SITE APPLICABILITY Trail/ Rehab Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Planning Acquisition Construction Habitat Trans Existing Programming Ford&Sidnie Railroad Brush&Or- Orr St Underpass chard California Natural Resources Agency: 1 Urban Greening X X X X $200k—1.5m Yes. X X X California Strategic Growth Council: Sustainable Comm. Planning Grants Yes, but intended for 2 and Incentive Program X $100-800k larger scale planning X X SURMHFWV Sustainable Comm. Planning Granf and Yes, but intended for 3 Incentives Program:Best Practices Pilot X X <$50k small scale land use X X planning. California State Parks: 4 Habitat Conserv. Fund X X X X X 1:1 Match Yes. X X X X 5 Local Agency Program X X X 1�$2am h Yes. X X X X 6 Outdoor Rec. Legacy Partnership X X X 1:1 Match No. Do not meet density Program $250-750k criterion. Outdoor Enviro. Ed.Facilities Grant Match Opt. No. Eligible activity � Program X <$500k scope very limited. X X 8 Statewide Park Program X X X No Match <HV1 HLKERUMULVGLF X X X X X $100k—5m tions have rec'd. California Youth Soccer and Rec. Dev. No Match No. Not urban, crime 9 Program X <$1 m too low. X X X California Department of Transportation: 10 Active Trans. Program/Rec. Trails X 12°/o Match Yes. X X X Program Amt. Unknown California Housing and Community Development: 11 Housing-Related Parks Program X X X $2•2—2•7k per Yes. X X X X bedroom USDA Rural Development: 12 Community Facilities Grant X X SURMHFW Yes. X X X X costs TALLY: 3 11 8 6 8 17 6.1.2 Public Grants $EURDGUDHRI)HGHUDODG6WDWHDHFLHVRHUUDWSURUDPVWKDWPDVSSRUWPOWLSOH SKDVHVRIDSDUNSURMHFWUDWVFDFRYHUDEURDGUDHRIDFWLYLWLHVDGDVFFHVVIO SURMHFWZLOOVSHDNWRWKHLWHUHVWVRIWKHIGHUVFKDVKDELWDWFRVHUYDWLRRUUHKDELO sustainable transportation, facilities for disadvantaged communities, climate change awareness, and outdoor education. Table 6.2 outlines a variety of grants that the City of Ukiah may be eligible to apply for, the types of costs the grants can cover, and the potential park sites which may be good candidates for the activities supported by the grants. The results of the analysis show that of the 5 locations considered, Site 2: Mason St. Railroad may be eligible for the most grant areas, and this is without research of grants for which it would be uniquely eligible, such DVEURZHOGUHKDELOLWDWLR6LWHLVDOVRWKHORFDWLRZKLFKZDVLGHWLHGLWKHFRPPLW workshops as the area of greatest interest. Case Study 2: Forestville Youth Park; Forestville, CA The Forestville Youth Park is a 1.5 acre privately-funded, public-access park featuring: a FRWHPSRUDUMOHPIRUHDUROGVDPLLPIRUWRGGOHUVDEDVHEDOOGLDPRGD VRFFHUHOGDOLWWOHOHDHEDOOHOGDGVDFNEDUVZLVHWV%%4DUHDVDGSLFLFVVDEOHV meeting rooms, and free parking for±80 vehicles. The park was established in 1960, when over the course of 4 months, a group of 17 FLWLHVLGHWLHGWKHHHGIRUDRWKIDFLOLWHVWDEOLVKHGWKH)RUHVWYLOOH<RJVK%HWWHUI Association, acquired donated land, and broke ground. Today the park is partly funded by $25 annual family memberships. This money supports park programs, at a place that is otherwise strictly run by volunteers. Various fundraisers are also held throughout the year. 7KHURSWKDWPDDHVWKHSDUNLV)RUHVWYLOOH3DUNHYHORSPHW,FDFRSURW organization founded in 1974. 7.0 Conclusion Research from this study and community input have demonstrated a need for a park in the :DHVHOOHU1 HLKERUKRRG2IWKHIRUVLWHVLGHWLHG6LWHWKHODVR6WUHHW5DLOURDGVLWH was voted the preferred site by workshop participants. Site 2 and Site 3- Brush and Orr, appear to score highest for funding opportunities. 7.1 Recommendations Based on the results of the community workshops, and the analysis contained within this report, RPPLWHYHORSPHWHSDUWPHWVWDUHFRPPHGWKHIROORZL 1. %DVHGRGLVL6HFWLRSODIRUDGSUVHUDWIGLRSSRUWLWLHV 2. RVLGHUIRUPDWLRRIDRSURWDVVHPEOHDGYLVRUERDUGDGVHHNSDUWHUV 3. Initiate discussion with North Coast Railroad Authority regarding future use of the Mason Street site. 4. Explore options for land acquisition. 5. Participate in upcoming General Plan update process—particularly the Recreation Element. 18