HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2024-10-16 1,A k
N Li � PARKS, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY
.' villa
BOARD
• Alli MINUTES
. •
,
October 16, 2024
OREoo ` /
Recorded Minutes:
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2876975&repo=CityOfLakeOswego
CALL TO ORDER
Jason Dorn called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and Introductions are made.
ROLL CALL
Present: Jason Dorn, Co-Chairs • Kara Gapon, Co-Chairs • Greg Wolley • Sarah Ellison
Rebecca Greene • Matt McGinnis • Patrick Gutierrez •John Wendland, Council
Liaison • Diya Deepu, Youth Member• Katie Gragg, Youth Member
Alternates: David Walters
Absent: Tyson Hart, Ed Becker,Jennifer Mozinski
Staff: Ivan Anderholm, Director of Parks& Recreation •Jeff Munro, Parks Deputy Director•Jan Wirtz,
Recreation Deputy Director, Kyra Haggart, Parks Planner • Robin Krakauer, Communications and
Sponsorship Coordinator• Dina Balogh, Administrative Assistant
Guests: MIG: Matt Hastie and Jessa Miller
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
• The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Advisory Board (PARKS Board) reviewed and
unanimously approved the minutes from September 18, 2024 .
CITY COUNCIL UPDATE:John Wendland, Council Liaison
• Proclamation: October is Meals on Wheels month, a program that provides hot meals to
isolated seniors in the community.
• South shore fire station in need of repair or replacement.Task force working at what kind of
facility we need in the future that will withstand earthquakes.
• Changes to flood zone guidelines may require additional costs and consultants for development
projects.
• North Anchor project update. Breaking ground in July 2025.
• Update Michael Jordan, Portland City Administrator on the leadership change and a new
leadership structure with the upcoming elections. Portland will be run by the City Council with
12 members and Mayor. It will be a City run by professionals, a model unique to Portland.
• Business license fee changes to help promote business in LO.
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Advisory Board
October 16, 2024
YOUTH MEMBER UPDATE:
• Diya Deepu: Green team had their first meeting.Talked about goals and activities. Completed
ivy pulls. Also, collaborated with our greenhouse at LOHS to plant more native plantings.
Oswego Lake Watershed ivy pulls. Going to try and work with SOLVE to pick up trash. Working
on hosting an annual sustainability fair at our schools around April. Met with DEI working group
on Sunday,working on edits.
• Katie Gragg: Between this meeting and the next board meeting in November, many students will
be submitting their first round of college applications. Early action and early decision deadlines
tend to fall the first of November for a lot of colleges.This means a lot of students are hard at
work writing their essays.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Friends of Luscher Farm, Stephanie Hallock, President of the board and Gail Wallmark.
Public comment on the 12 capital investment projects listed under Luscher Farm Park& Natural Areas.
Luscher is a unique property in the portfolio of the Parks and Recreation Department. It comprises 100
plus acres along Rosemont Rd zoned for Exclusive Farm Use. The namesake Luscher property is home to
community gardens, a farm that supplies fresh produce to our community, classes and camps for kids
and adults, and the Rogerson Clematis Garden.The acres of open space include walking trails,wildlife
habitat, wetlands, meadows, hedgerows,tree stands, and vistas of surrounding farmland.
Luscher is different than any other park, and the Friends of Luscher Farm advocate to preserve its rural
character and agricultural history. Our mission has been informed by the 2013 Luscher Area Master
Plan, but much has changed since it was adopted. With the Hazelia field complex,the dog park,the
Rassekh skatepark, and LORAC to open soon,this quiet rural corner of our city has become a hub of
active recreation.
It is time to draw the line on recreational development at Luscher. We support projects on the CIP list
that focus on passive recreation and sustain the essential rural character of the Luscher properties. We
support improving access and parking, more community gardens, rehabilitation of the historic buildings,
and upgrades and ADA improvements for the programs offered. We also support restoration of Wilson
Creek and hope we can help in that effort.We have consistently advocated for increased agricultural
activity on the Luscher properties and have made a specific proposal to the Parks Department in that
regard. We also support construction of an urban agricultural and environmental center but recognize
that would require an exception from the state to Oregon's land use laws.
We do not support active recreation such as the teams of mountain bikers that currently use the farm
for practice, and we do not support the climbing and ropes courses proposed on the list of twelve
projects. We are concerned about putting gravel and cedar chips on the natural trails, and we need to
learn more about the scope of plans to develop picnic and playground areas.
Luscher Farm Park does not check the boxes associated with traditional parks. While we appreciate the
consideration being given to this unique and magnificent piece of Lake Oswego history we urge you to
think creatively about sustaining a bountiful, historic place that invites visitors of all ages to enjoy, learn
about, and connect with our natural environment, agricultural roots, and our history.
REGULAR BUSINESS:
PARKS PLAN 2040: Capital Projects List (1.5 hours)
Kyra Haggart, Parks Planner
Matt Hastie, MIG
Jessa Miller, MIG
Parks Plan 204 Presentation#6:
http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=2878070&repo=CityOflakeOswego
2IPage
Matt started with an overall update on where MIG is in the process and approximate time frame.The
presentation included a broad overview summary, a sense of the Capital projects distributed among
different types of projects geographically.The project is in the last quarter of the process.This is MIG's
6th meeting with the Parks board and will be meeting with the CAC next week.
The next step is to prioritize the projects in that list, particularly in terms of the timeline for
implementation of the projects. MIG will talk about the recommended evaluation criteria and go
through the exercise with the board.
A brief update on the survey that is open, where MIG is asking folks in a broader community to do some
prioritization in terms of types of projects and give their priorities related to evaluation criteria. The
survey is oriented towards prioritizing the categories of projects and will also give feedback on the
evaluation criteria.
NEXT STEPS:
One,there's another kind of element of this project. MIG went through the CIP list and is working on
costs associated with the projects in the CIP, they are really close to having a set of costs for those
projects,wrapping up and prioritizing the CIP and then the next steps of that are the implementation of
the action plan piece.Then move into rolling everything up into a draft plan. Matt talked a little bit
about what those next steps look like towards the end, where they are headed into that draft plan
development review and refinement stage.
MIG is still wrapping up some things and action plan, including the online survey.Those are the things
that are left in terms of the community engagement and putting the draft plan answers for people to be
able to review and comment on.
Matt gave a quick recap from the last time he met with the board when the focus was on the system
wide recommendations. are Matt stated MIG is updating the recommendations based on what they
heard from the Parks Board and the CAC prior to that meeting. MIG may end up doing a little bit of
reorganization of those with staff, but the content won't change much. Organizing the
recommendations in different categories might a little bit would be a key element of the plan as well.
The focus today is on those site specific recommendations and capital improvement projects.
Q&A
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT LIST:
PURPOSE:To identify capital projects to achieve the community's vision for Lake Oswego's park and
recreation system through the year 2040.
CIP STRUCTURE &APPROACH - Project Categories:
The CIP identifies 124 total projects for implementation in the near-term, mid-term, and long-term
based on available resources such as funding and staff time.There are four types of project categories:
• Kyra—Comment—only one nature project. However, we have a lot of added maintenance is in
another category.
• Matt H—A lot of these nature projects are in other categories. Investments.
• Greg—What project?
• Kyra—Wilson Creek Project at Luscher.
• Jason—Is there an order to the list?
• Matt H—Yes, it is through the classifications. Regional, pocket, urban. Recreation facilities are at
the top. Order by size.
CIP MAP SUMMARY AREA A, B, C, D—All Proposed Projects: Reinvestment/Build/Add/Access/Nature
31
• David—Monetary cost question?
• Matt H - No it will be coming in the future.
• Kyra—Get a more accurate cost estimate.
• Matt H—Will summarize that information and get that to everyone.
DRAFT OF CIP SUMMARY—Proposed New Parks & Facilities (No Site Identified):
Project: Neighborhood Park, Outdoor Pickleball Courts, Water Play Feature, Sand Volleyball Court,
Westside Indoor Community/Recreation Center,
• Matt M.—Indoor pickleball courts?
• Kyra—There will be 3 in the new LORAC. Outdoor courts are something that everyone wants.
• Kara—Pickleball—removable nets—different lines with other sports—think about permanent
verses opportunities for multi-sport.
• Kyra—Yes, we can explore opportunities. School district has met some of those needs. People
want permanent places to play.
• Kara—Uncovered desirability for a covered court.
• Kyra—People would prefer a covered outdoor court.
• David—All the grade schools have a covered area. Palisades.
• Kara—Noise studies—the noise went up and out—not sure if the noise was lightened.
• Matt H—These are all good questions that need further study.
• Kyra—We would go through a whole process. First thing we do is look for an appropriate place.
• Patrick—Is this the next step? Do we do studies?
• Matt H—Yes,we will do studies and then go do more research. Study to evaluate potential sites.
• Kyra—124 projects, 15 years, and how do we prioritize the projects?
• Sarah - Fully inclusive playground. Was it included in a section?
• Kyra—We are looking to reinvestment project. Replace a playground with inclusive play
equipment.
DRAFT CIP SUMMARY— Proposed Systemwide Improvements:
Project: Neighborhood Trail Connections,Systemwide Drinking Fountain Implementation, Systemwide
Bollard Replacement.
• Sarah—Assume it would be more expensive?
• Kyra—Play equipment is somewhat more affordable in some respects.The Wilsonville
playground has some ADA features.
• Jeff—Cook Park is fully inclusive.
Proposed Systemwide Improvements— Questions on projects?
• Rebecca—Luscher Farm—Active Recreation Programs?
• Ivan—Based on Luscher 2012 Master Plan. Luscher area includes Rassekh, Steven Meadow, etc.
Looks at things comprehensively.
• Rebecca - Horse trails?
• Kyra—IDK.
• Ivan—There have been design considerations with the Stafford trail. Only can have horses
where it is assigned, by hunt club with assigned trails.When horses were allowed they were
everywhere and were causing degradation of trails. We don't have the facilities to house the
horses—parking lot(horse trailers).The 100 acres is small for a destination for horses.
• Kyra—Active recreation—sports field projects.
• Rebecca—(Feels that there is too many. Not to add to Luscher).
4IPage
• Kyra—Fields in addition to Hazelia.
• Matt H—The Luscher area master plan includes all the areas around it.
• Kyra—At one time adding fields behind Hazelia.
• Sarah—Once the Rassekh fields are built is that something that will fulfill the need.
• Matt H—Adding an athletic field study. Will it be enough or not? It will define more on demand
for athletic fields.
• Kara—Hazelia?
• Kyra—Hazelia is included—now it has been developed as its own park.
• John Wendland—Field study—need to get the macro for LOSD. Look at resources of all fields.
• Matt H—Separate consultant that specializes in that for field and will work with LOSD.
• John W—Gym study,too.
• Matt H—No.
• John W—City Council has committed to pickleball as a priority for a study. We would prioritize
finding a new home.
• Sarah—Signage ? Need accessible signage (both language and other disabilities).
• Kyra—Talks about the big monumental signs.Also,talks about rules and regulations. Include
icons. Not sure of the level of accessibility.
• Jeff—includes ADA signage. Restrooms, etc. Every sign in park needs to be upgraded.
• Matt H—There is a number of systemwide topics on the sign and inclusive recommendations.
• Sarah—Signage about accessibility. Would be great to have different languages. Good thing to
explore.
• Greg—General planning—Chapter 10— How did that affect planning?
• Kyra—Some projects on the list where you will see a note that this is outlined. Brant Park—
predated the charter—adopted before plan. Need to check with city attorney on whether we
can or cannot do that plan. It was a desire from community. More investigation is needed.
• John W—You can go to the voters. Including proposed measure on 3-618. Stevens Meadow
Project.
• Kyra—Stevens Meadow—If there was a priority we would have to amend the Chapter 10 and go
to the voters.
• Ivan—Community desires.Access parking in natural areas. We polled the community.
Something for the voters would be looking at accessible parking in some natural areas. Maybe it
would be something in the future. Springbrook, Stevens Meadow. Prioritization will be that
theme where Council can make a policy decision.
• Jason - Paths and connectivity- Does transportation have something?
• Matt H—Yes—the City has a transportation plan. Will require additional coordination with the
City.
• Kyra—There are opportunities to do things like safe routes to school —safe routes to parks. CIP
update. Transportation advisory board. Crossover from other boards. Know that pathways to
parks are a priority.
• Patrick—McNary plan?
• Jeff—Yes, we have plans. Gate, benches, McNary is not really a park(built on a water tower).
Pathway is ours and working on drinking fountains. We are trying to hit some of the major parks
first.
• Rebecca—Luscher Farm trail improvement—paths are clear. What is the benefit to add gravel?
Compacted gravel would be ADA compliant. Engineered wood fiber is also considered ADA
complaint.
• Kara—Due to the holes in the ground.
• Kyra—Improved trails with gravel would help with that.
• Jeff—There would be a lot of care.
51
• Kyra—Luscher—refine the scope. Projects for Luscher came out of the Luscher Farm Master
Plan. We need to look at what projects can be implemented.
• Matt H - Identified at high level projects. Need additional community engagement.
• Sarah—DEI feedback—loop in Luscher farm for accessibility would be great.
• Kyra—When you have identified trails it is better to keep people on the trail and not go on
sensitive areas.
• Greg—Slopes at Luscher?
• Jeff—It would have to be looked at so the ADA would not have slopes and adhere to the
requirement.
• Ivan—Need to reengage with community.The loops would have to come off of accessible
parking or from an area that is already accessible.
• Jeff—The plan recognizes the needs for trails that are accessible.
• Ivan—If we rock some of those it helps injury and erosion.
• Dave—Plans—Do some get too old?
• Kyra—Yes, we look at it and we make sure that some things are appropriate to move forward
on. Maybe some things are relevant or not. Freeponds—master plan.
• Kara—Unsung heroes—Quarry bike park—people of all ages use it. Seating area in this area?
Covered area? Designation of area for seating that is safe away from the bikes. Bike repair area.
Tools on chains.
• Jeff—Had one area for bike repair—continued getting destroyed. Cut and took tools.
• Ivan—We did have kiosk and benches but they were vandalized. Need to have provisions to
keep an eye on it.
EVALUATION CRITERIA- Determining CIP Implementation—
The project fills a gap in an area of the City where similar facilities or services are not currently available.
The project addresses the needs of people or groups with specific park and recreation needs (e.g.,
people with disabilities, low-income families, older residents,youth).
The project meets multiple park system planning goals and objectives.
The project's cost and feasibility are scaled appropriately to the benefit it will provide
Availability of state or federal grant funding or similar sources of money for implementation
The project addresses one or more identified citywide goals or initiatives (i.e., sustainability, climate
resilience, DEI, Council goals, etc.)
• Ivan— Maybe results can be weighted? Get Ranks from MIG Survey
• Dave—On the costs—are you going to include ongoing costs?
• Matt H -Yes, includes ongoing costs. Capitol cost, replacement cost.
• Dave—Is there a way to do it without being tech savvy?
• Matt H - We can have copies at City Hall.
NEXT STEPS:
1. Prioritization Survey, Funding+ Implementation Strategies, &SDC Methodology Update October
—Early November.
2. Parks Board Meeting#7, December 18,TBD. CAC Meeting#7, December 12,TBD.
3. Draft& Final Plan Development&Adoption, November—Early Spring.
MIG Action Items:
• Prioritize the projects in the capital improvement project list based on timeline for
implementation.
• Complete the cost estimate for the projects.
• Develop a new neighborhood park in the southwest portion of the neighborhoods.
6I
• Conduct a field usage and demand study to determine if the proposed athletic fields will satisfy
the needs of the community.
• Evaluate the accessibility of signage, including icons and multiple languages.
• Assess the accessibility of big monument signs and rules and regulations signage.
• Upgrade all park signs, including parking signs and restroom signs, as part of the ADA plan.
• Consider specific features for accessible signage, such as hearing and wayfinding times.
• Consult with the City Attorney to ensure compliance with charter language regarding project
allowances.
• Encourage participants to take the online survey and spread the word.
• Consider including ongoing maintenance costs in the project evaluation criteria.
• Review the results of the online survey and look for instances of multiple submissions from the
same person.
• Explore alternative ways to participate in the survey for those who are not tech-savvy, such as
providing paper copies at City Hall.
• Consider translating the survey into other languages.
DEI FRAMEWORK UPDATE AND RECOMMENDATION (20 min)
DEI Working group: Sarah Ellison, Greg Wolley, Dave Walters and Diya Deepu.
Sarah and Greg took the draft DEI framework from the September meeting to the DEI advisory board for
review and comments.We also had an opportunity to meet with Ivan and Kara to get their input. The
working group met to review the draft and made updates based on feedback and filled in details that
were missing.The group received a lot of good feedback. The goal was changed slightly based on
feedback and clearly states it is a recommendation.The groups hope is that once we make the
recommendation,the department could consider the recommendation to draft the department policy.
Timeframe for actions, annually or every five years to coincide with departments policy review schedule.
One section that received a lot of good feedback from the DEI board is on site navigation signage The
DEI board also gave feedback on the scholarship program.
• Rebecca:There is a gap on English speaking children learning Spanish and vice a versa.Talked to
schools and would like to have this offered to children. Spanish classes start for students in
Middle School.
• Rebecca:The document references Lake access.
• Kara:There are a lot of legal complexities.
• Ivan: Change to public bodies of water, publicly owned and controlled.
Motion:
Jason Dorn moved to approve the recommendation with changes to the Oswego Lake reference to
public bodies of water.
Discussion:
Greg: Scholarship program—Explore renaming the program.
Ivan:The department will explore renaming the scholarship program.Acknowledge that it is donor
driven program and will look at how we will be able to manage it. Good recommendation. We will look
at it and apply whet we can do.
Motion:
Jason Dorn made a motion to approve the recommendation with the changes to the Oswego Lake
reference to "Public Bodies of Water". Patrick Gutierrez seconded the motion.The board unanimously
approved the motion with the Public Bodies or Water changes.
7IPage
• Sarah:Timeframe to finalize the document?Would like to have it approved before Diya leaves
the board.
• Jan: Working with the Scholarship committee. Will discuss scholarship recommendation timeline
and suggested changes?
• Ivan: Overall reaction to it and how we can develop it internally. Will look at, collect data, etc.
Come up with a draft and take to DEI coordinator and then to CMO for review. By the end of
December,the department should be able to come back to the board with something.
STAFF AND BOARD MONTHLY UPDATES:
• Jason:Three PB Goals:
■ DEI, happy with this was accomplished,
■ Natural Areas Management.
■ Luscher Farm.
Looking for board members to work on the efforts to the other goals. Looking for recommendations
and keep an eye out for funding. Recognize constraints that are at Luscher. Kyra is will willing to
meet for a Luscher 101.Jason asked for board members to help Patrick with the Luscher Farm goal.
Greg said the Natural Area working group met last week.
• Kara: Luscher Farm working group needs to be separate from Natural Areas working group.
• Ivan: One of the quickest ways to set a meeting with Kyra and she can let the group know what
the deep dive was into the Luscher project.This will help the Luscher working group.
• Jeff: Update - Received Doug's memorial benches. Hope to be installed by next meeting. Leaving
it up to the family on what kind of dedication they would like to do. Will report when it is
installed.
The next regular scheduled meeting will be Wednesday, November 20, 2024,4 p.m.
Jason Dorn adjourned the meeting at approximately 6:20pm.
Prepared by, Dina Balogh,Administrative Assistant
Wage