The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1997-01-20; Parks & Recreation Commission; 197-4; Veteran's Memorial Park Master PlanPARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - AGENDA BILL |AB# 197-4 NTG 01-20-97 I £PT CSD TITLE: VETERAN'S MEMORIAL PARK MASTER PLAN UPDATE (INFO) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept and file staff update. ITEM EXPLANATION: During the December meeting, the Commission requested an update on Veteran's Memorial Park/Macario Canyon. Specifically, the Commission requested an informational update on the future park site Master Plan and the site relationship to surrounded land uses. Attached as Exhibit 1 is the City Council Agenda Bill relative to the Master Plan which was approved by Council in 1989. The Park Development Coordinator will provide the master plan update and staff will also be available to address the following issues as they relate to Veteran's Memorial Park, they are: • Farming Lease • Biological/Habitat • Golf course • Kelly property/access • Cannon Road mitigation ~~ • Surrounding uses (Lego Land, Carlsbad Ranch, Agua Hedionda Lagoon) • CIP/Park Development funding FISCAL IMPACT: None at this time. EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Agenda Bill #9902, Macario Canyon Master Plan and Minutes 51 CARLSBAD — AGENCWPILL ABtf ^OO-^ MTG. 3/7/89 DEPT. P & R \ I TITLE: MACARIO CANYON PARK PLAN REVISION DEPT. HD.^/i^3 CITY ATTY\L§§_ CITY MGR&V^\ RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and comment on the Macario Canyon Park Plan Revision Study. Direct staff to finalize the Master Plan and initiate environmental review prior to the actual development phase of the project. ITEM EXPLANATION; The existing Macario Master Plan was originally completed by Iwanaga Associates in December of 1981. In an effort to update the plan and bring it into conformance with contemporary recreational trends, the 1988 Parks and Recreational Element, and current planning documents (i.e., Circulation Element), staff has prepared a revision to the Iwanaga study. The revised plan was developed through information from previous studies, citizen and staff input. From the information gathered, a revised Land Use Plan was developed ("City Wide Community Park, Plan A", Exhibit III) On December 27, 1988, the revised plan was reviewed by the Park and Recreation Commission's Park Site and Facility Planning Committee. On January 16, 1989 staff presented the plan to the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission voted unanimously to approve the Macario Canyon Park Plan Revision Study and direct staff to finalize the Master Plan and initiate environmental review prior to the actual development phase. In addition, Plan A, staff has prepared "Plan B" or "City Wide Community Park/Golf Course Plan." This plan is part of a report that analyzes three alternative sites for a golf course within the City. That report will be discussed in a separate Agenda Bill. FISCAL IMPACT; Twenty eight million ($28,000,000) dollars for Macario Canyon construction and loan payments has been identified in the Capital Improvement program budget for 1998+ 52 EXHIBIT 1 AB# Page 2 EXHIBITS; Attachments: Macario Master Plan Revision Study Exhibits: I. Study Area Map II. Acreage Chart III. Land Use Plan IV. 1981 Iwanaga Master Plan V. Comparison List of Recreation Uses (1981 Plan vs. Revised Plan) VI. Shopping List of Recreation Uses r r MACARIO CANYON PARK PLAN REVISION STUDY CITY OF CARLSBAD PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT FEBRUARY 1989 ATTACHMENT 54 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. STUDY OUTLINE pg. 1 2. GOAL #1 - CURRENT RECREATIONAL NEEDS pg. 2 3. GOAL #2 - LAND USE PLAN pg. 3 4. GOAL #3 - COMPARISON OF PLANS pg. 6 EXHIBITS: I. Study Area Map II. Acreage Chart III. Land Use Plan IV. 1981 Iwanaga Master Plan V. Comparison List of Recreation Uses (1981 Plan vs. Revised Plan) VI. Shopping List of Recreational Uses 55 r MACARIO CANYON PARK PLAN REVISION STUDY STUDY OUTLINE GOALS GOAL #1 Identify current recreational needs that would be compatible both functionally and environmentally with the project site. GOAL #2 Develop a revised Land Use Plan ("PLAN A - CITY WIDE COMMUNITY PARK") to accommodate updated recreational priorities and consider any new information about the site (i.e., revised study area and future road alignments) in the design of the new plan. GOAL #3 Compare the existing Master Plan (1981 Iwanaga) and the revised Master Plan ("Plan A - City Wide Community Park"). STUDY AREAS (Refer to Exhibit I) 1. Macario Canyon (City owned) - 288 acres. 2. HUB Park (City leased) ± 92 acres. *3. SDG&E (area with no current lease agreement located between Macario and HUB Park) ± 28 acres. * SDG&E has indicated that no new area will be leased to the City. Therefore any acreage used in this area (i.e., for a circulation link between Macario and the HUB) must be subtracted from the HUB Park site on a one to one basis. 56 GOAL II - IDENTIFY CURRENT RECREATIONAL NEEDS (PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT) The following recreational needs have been identified that update and expand upon the program development in the 1981 Master Plan: A. GOLF COURSE There is interest, through the Carlsbad Golf Association and other citizens, in a public golf course. There are currently three sites being studied for possible location of a golf course; 1. The "County Site" located northeast of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino. 2. Lake Calavera 3. Macario Canyon NOTE: A separate report has been prepared to analyze the golf course plans. B. SPORTS COMPLEX There has been and continues to be a demand for playfields by local organized sports groups. C. AMPHITHEATER/CULTURAL ARTS CENTER The Arts Commission and citizen groups have been seeking a permanent location for the performing and visual arts. D. TENNIS COMPLEX There has been interest shown through local tennis players in seeking a location for a complex of tennis courts somewhere in the City. E. MISCELLANEOUS AMENITIES The previously adopted Macario Canyon Park Master Plan identified compatible uses for the project site based on then current recreational interests and consultant input. The Park and Recreation Department staff has re-evaluated, expanded upon, and updated these uses based on current recreational needs. Based on the recreational needs identified above, a "shopping list" of amenities was taken into consideration in the program development for the revised Macario Canyon Park Plan (See Exhibit V). 57 r r GOAL 12 - DEVELOP A REVISED PARK PLAN (LAND USE PLAN) There has been extensive previous studies done on Macario Canyon Park: 1. Development Plan. Macario Canyon Park (Iwanaga Associates, 1981) 2. Macario Canyon Park, E.I.R. (Larry Seeman Associates, 1982) 3. Development Feasibility of a Public Golf Course at Macario Canyon Park (ERA, 1987) These reports outline in detail opportunities and constraints of the project site, land use feasibility and economics of the respective plans. The plan produced for this study takes into account opportunities and constraints, including environmental considerations identified in previous documents. Rather than duplicate information already set forth previously, it is the purpose of this report to use the existing information and update the land use plan according to current recreational needs in the City of Carlsbad. The Revised Hacario Canyon Park Plan (Refer to Exhibit III) "PLAN A - CITY WIDE COMMUNITY PARK" This plan offers a wide range of recreational amenities including active sports, passive areas, cultural, and nature/educational uses. The intent of this plan is to provide the type of uses typically found in regional parks servicing diverse recreational needs such as Balboa Park in San Diego or Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. The Plan strives to group similar and compatible recreational uses together in conjunction with distinct physical areas defined by landform and constraints. The Plan enacts the program developed through the process outlined in Goal #1 by designating uses per major study areas and the sub-category of special "Planning Areas". MACARIO CANYON STUDY AREA (288 acres): PLANNING AREA #1 Canyon floor: predominantly active athletic uses (soccer fields, ballfields, tennis, hardcourt basketball and volleyball) as well as some passive uses (controlled group camping and riparian preserve). PLANNING AREA #2 West and south facing slopes and valleys: predominantly cultural/educational recreational uses (conference center, amphitheater, and cultural arts center) with a few picnic sites. PLANNING AREA #3 North and east facing slopes and valleys: predominantly passive recreational uses (botanical gardens, and picnicking). HUB PARK STUDY AREA (± 92 acres): PLANNING AREA U Bluff Top: limited active uses under powerlines (one soccer field) and nature/educational and passive uses along bluff top (interpretive center and picnicking). PLANNING AREA #5 Lagoon shoreline and beaches: predominantly passive recreational uses along shoreline (limited access boardwalk for birdwatching, etc., beaches and picnicking) and a boat launching site at the western end of the site. SDG&E STUDY AREA (± 28 acres): No major uses are proposed due to constraints (steep slopes, powerlines, Cannon Road and riparian habitat) and the lack of ownership or current lease agreement. A trail system will link Macario Canyon to the HUB area along the wetlands passing under the proposed Cannon Road bridge. Due to the constraints, the only vehicular connection between Macario and the HUB is via proposed Cannon Road. NOTE: Major circulation routes including the vehicular, bike and a pedestrian trail system will make connections to the various planning areas where feasible and are shown on the plan. r.. r Plan A Is a "Land Use Concept Plan" intended to show in a general way design concepts outlining the ma.lor recreational uses. It is a tool used to determine the direction to pursue further studies. The next step in the process would be: 1. Refine the Land Use Plan into a Master Plan which would more precisely define the location and nature of the program elements. 2. Based on the Master Plan, conduct environmental studies. 60 r GOAL 13 - COMPARE PLANS EXISTING 1981 MACARIO CANYON PARK MASTER PLAN vs. REVISED MACARIO CANYON PARK PLAN ("CITY-WIDE COMMUNITY PARK, PLAN A"). The general character of the two plans remains the same in that both promote a wide variety of recreational experiences while protecting the aesthetic and environmentally sensitive character of the site. The following are areas where changes occur: STUDY AREA The revised study area does not include the Kelly wetlands property immediately east of the lagoon and north of Macario Canyon, (± 50 acres). This land was required to be retained and enhanced as a condition of the Kelly Ranch project since the 1981 Master Plan. LAND USE (See Exhibit IV for a complete comparison list of uses). The major changes are: 1. Cultural Recreation - Increased emphasis on the cultural aspect of recreation through the addition of an amphitheater and cultural center. The amphitheater is shown at the previous site of the athletic center (it is the current plan to locate the athletic centers in the community parks that will service each quadrant such as Stagecoach Community Park and Calavera Hills Community Park). 2. HUB Area - Location of a soccer field under the powerlines and nature interpretive center in place of concession/view area. The agricultural use shown in the '81 plan has been recommended to be eliminated. 3. Privitization De-emphasized - Although there are still opportunities for private participation (i.e., conference center, boat launch and restaurant), uses that indicate solely private participation such as convenience commercial, artisan village, and concession stand have been dropped. (Certainly the idea that 2/3 of the development and operating costs for Macario Canyon Park recommended in the 1981 Master Plan is no longer realistic under the revised plan). 61 r CIRCULATION 1. Cannon Road - The alignment stays basically the same, however, the Iwanaga Plan assumes a dike crossing through the wetlands. The new plan is for a bridge crossing (30' above existing wetlands at one point). The environmental impacts of Cannon Road are being dealt with separately from park planning issues in this study. 2. Faraday Road - Faraday was previously shown as a secondary park access. It is now the primary park access and is classified as a "collector street" on the General Plan's Circulation Element. The intent of the Faraday collector is to divert some of the traffic off of Palomar Airport Road through the park to Cannon Road then westward, to 1-5. This causes an adverse impact to the park but was felt to be a necessary component of the Circulation Element of the City. The previously designated "primary park access" road, Macario Canyon Road (a.k.a. Kelly Road) which entered the park at the southwest corner via College Boulevard, has been eliminated. This road is felt to be too steep and would create too much grading to be a desirable access. The Kelly Road alignment now veers westward at the southern boundary of the park and travels to the west of the park finally connecting to the proposed Cannon Road. * * ** * EXHIBIT I CITY WIDE COMMUNITY PARK - PLAN A ACREAGE FIGURES STUDY DEVELOPABLE *ENVIRONMENTALLY TOTAL (non-constrained) CONSTRAINED % DEVELOPABLE Macario 288 144 144 50% HUB 92 37 55 40% SUBTOTAL **SDG&E 380 28 181 199 21 48% 25% TOTAL STUDY AREA 408 188 220 46% * INCLUDES: SLOPE OVER 25%, SENSITIVE VEGETARIAN, ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES, UNSTABLE GEOLOGY AND POWERLINE FACILITY CONSTRAINTS ** NO USES PROPOSED IN THIS AREA EXHIBIT II 64 6.5 Xx —H >oi-»; <]S-«< 0) > > z O 3J oaj m U > tnco nenI T3 Y»UT CAMP1/CORRIDOFJO> n 66 m 30 MERCIALENTRYmm33 Z 30<5omCOen r rEXISTING MASTER PLAN vs. REVISED LAND USE PLAN 1981 MASTER PLAN Playfields Interpretive Center Boating Facility Beaches/Lagoon Access Nature Study Boardwalk Viewpoints Park Service Yard Botanical Center Picnicking Conference Center Trails Camping (Hike-in Picnic/Scout Camp) Riparian Preserve Corridor Tennis Wetland Preserve *Agricultural Preserve *Concession/Viewpoint Convenience Commercial Controlled Park Entry *Artisans Village *Athletic Center *View Restaurants REVISED PLAN PLAN A City Wide Community Park Playfields Interpretive Center Boating Facility Beaches/Lagoon Access Nature Study Boardwalk Viewpoints Park Service Yard Botanical Center Picnicking Conference Center Trails Camping (Group) Riparian Preserve Corridor Tennis Wetland Preserve (offsite) +Amphitheater ^Cultural Center *ELIMINATED IN THE REVISED PLAN 67 +NEU USES (Not Found In '81 Plan) EXHIBIT V SHOPfC.G LIST OF RECREATIOlC.L AMMENITIES MAJOR USES: Soccer fields (full size) Ballfields (youth and adult) Amphitheatre Cultural Arts Center Olympic Volleyball Center Camping (group) Tennis Community Center (without gym) Conference Center Botanical garden/tree farm Park Service Yard Restaurant Boating facility Picnic (group) Swimming Interpretive/Nature Center SECONDARY USES (TO BE LOCATED IN OR AROUND MAJOR USES) Trails 1. Cycling 2. Jogging 3. Cross Country Hard court - basketball Sand volleyball Caretakers residence Playground (totlot) Group rentals 68 Picnic areas EXHIBIT VI MINUTES MVch 7, 1989 Page 4 COUNCIL MEMBERS j 1 __— PUBLIC COMMENT: There Sere no requests to address Council. \PUBLIC HEARING: X 57) 18. AB #9899,- SCENIC CORRIDOR STUDY.*vMike Holzml 1 lePu Planning Director, gave the Initial staff report as>contalned In the Agenda Bill. He then Introduced John Tully of CYP, Inc., who gave an overview of the sfydy and the recommendations. Mayor Lewis opened the.Publlc Hearing at 6:29 p.m., and Issued the Invltat lonVo speak. Since no one wished to speak on this matter, tie Public Hearing was closed. Councl 1 adopted the Negative Declaration Issued by the Planning Director and approved the Scenic Corridor Study and directed staff to\jncorporate the Scenic Corridor Study Into the updafted Scenic Highways Element of the General Plan. \ DEPARTMENTAL AND CITY MANAGER REPORTS: (781 19. AB #9900 - AMENDMENT OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ASSESSMENT OF FALSE ALARM PENALTY FEES. Police Chief Vales gave the staff repoht as contained In the Agenda Bill. \ Council Introduced the following Ordinance! ORDINANCE NO. NS-53, AMENDING TITLE 8, CHAPTER 8.50 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO SET FEES FOR FALSE ALARMS . \ 20. Number not used. (70) 21. fAff^5902":-'TMAC AR 1 O^CAN YOfTPARKrPrAN RE V 1 S 1 ON ^f Parks and Recreation Director Dave Bradstreet Introduced this Item and Introduced Mark Steyaert, who continued the report, using wal 1 charts and transparencies to Illustrate the exhibits contained In the Agenda Bill. Council Member Mamaux commented that he did not want to see the conference center dropped from the park plan, as he felt It was very Important, and Council Member Kulchln concurred. W. R. Beverly, 4605 La Portal ada, addressed Councl 1 stating he was a tennis player, and recommended the following changes under Item D of Goal H\ and addition to Exhibits 5 and 6: D. TENNIS COMPLEX There has been Interest shown through local tennis players In seeking a location for a complex of tennis courts, Including a clubhouse and stadium court. Lewis Ku 1 ch 1 n Petti ne Mamaux Larson Lewis Kulchln Petti ne Mamaux Larson X X X X X X X X X X X X 69 MINUTES March 7, 1989 Page 5 DEPARTMENTAL AND CITY MANAGER REPORTS: (Continued) Jim Smith, 6725 Russella Court, stated his concern that an executive course was not considered for Macarlo Park. He concurred with the site selection of a large course, but felt consideration should be given to an executive course In Macarlo. Mr. Smith recommended that before Council accepted this plan, a study be done to find out whether a 50-acre executive-type golf course could fit Into this park and not take away from the other amenities. He further suggested that Hub Park be used for ballflelds, and that all studies should be done before the county property Is accepted for the golf course. Council directed staff to finalize the Macarlo Canyon Park Master Plan Revision, Incorporating Mr. Beverly's comments and to Initiate environmental review prior to the actual development phase of the project. RECESS: Mayor Lewis declared a Recess at 7:09 p.m., and Council re-convened at 7:20 p.m., with all Members present. DEPARTMENTAL AND CITY MANAGER REPORTS: (Continued) CRS) 2fcvAB #9903 - GOLF COURSE SITE STUDY REVIEW. Dave Bi^adstreet, Parks and Recreation Director, gave the staff^ report as contained In the Agenda Bill, using transparencies and wall charts to Illustrate the exhibits contained In the report. Frank Mannen responded to Councl 1 query that the Costa Real Board agreedvwlth the proposal. He also noted that any proceeds received from the sale or lease of the Calavera properfyywould go Into a capital development fund Jo Inrly administered for the benefit of the water rate payersV ^yJack Schumaker, 7217 San Miguel, President of the Carlsbad Golf Association, stated the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendations may be the best alternatives, but he suggested that the action was premature. First, there was a lackVof Input Into the decision-making process. He felt the^>golfers should have been Involved In the site selection^ Second, he did not believe all necessary InformatlonSwas obtained regarding the possibility of a short courseVIn Macarlo Canyon. V 70 COUNCIL V5- MEMBERS V Lewis Kulchln Petti ne Mamaux Larson 1 X $ X X X X X £$ ^1 1