HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1997 0702 CC REG ITEM 09E69q, 30
ITEM �
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
CITY OF MOORPARK
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Mary K. Lindley, Director of Community Servi '� !°
� ARK. CALIFORNIA
DATE: June 23, 1997 (CC Meeting of July 2) of City Council Mating -199 7
SUBJECT: Consider Funding for Tennis Courts ACTION•
BY: ..mow.....• �..�
Background -1 „&e
7a R G 141 .
On June 11, the City Council heard testimony from residents who are member Moorpark -
Tennis Club requesting the construction of additional tennis courts. The Council discussed the
future plans of a tennis complex at Arroyo Vista Community Park (AVCP) consisting of 8 to 12
courts and expressed the desire to begin as soon as feasible with the construction of at least four
courts. Staff informed the Council that the MUSD Superintendent, Dr. Duffy, had previously
indicated interest in constructing four (4) tennis courts on AVCP property north of the park
access road, adjacent to the site of the future MHS parking lots. Dr. Duffy proposed that MUSD
fund the courts but that funding was not immediately available. In response, the City Manager
indicated that the City may consider a cost sharing arrangement (which could include advancing
funds) and suggested two alternative locations (MUSD future parking lot and a site adjacent to
the park's southwestern slope). At the June 11 meeting, Council's discussion leaned in the
direction of locating the courts in one grouping (a complex) inside of the park.
Discussion
It is estimated that four lighted tennis courts would cost approximately $200,000 ($50,000 per
court). There may be some savings with the construction of four courts to be located in one area,
thereby reducing the cost. Staff has identified approximately $176,000 in future revenue which
would be deposited into the General Funds and which could be used to largely fund four courts.
The Council is being asked to consider a loan to the Community Park Zone of $176,000 which is
comprised of a one (1) percent fee scheduled to be paid to the City as part of the Carlsberg
development Community Facility District (CFD) and $100,000 which will be paid to the City, if it
accepts, "cast in place” pipe in instead of pre -cast pipe, for a portion of the Carlsberg
development. The City can expect to receive both of these revenue sources by December 1997.
In addition to a funding source, the City Council is being asked to give consideration to the
potential location(s) of the future tennis court complex. Initially, it was thought that the complex
would be located in the eastern half of the park, in the area currently undeveloped. As mentioned
C: \D O C S \C OMSER V\TENNI S C T. AGD
006043
Tennis Courts
June 23, 1997
Page 2
above, MUSD has since approached the City with the possibility of using property on the north
side of the access road for four tennis courts. With the desire to expedite the project, staff also
identified three other locations in the developed portion of the park that may be feasible: 1) the
area south of the Recreation Center, previously planned for the future pool, 2) the area south of
the second parking lot where the pavilion is currently located, and 3) the area currently occupied
by soccer fields. Depending on how the courts are stacked, eight courts would require an area of
approximately 120 feet wide by 480 feet long, if placed side -by -side, or 240 feet square if the
courts are stacked in two sets of four. Twelve courts side -by -side would require an area of
approximately 120 feet wide by 720 feet long; if stacked in two sets of six, the area would need to
be approximately 240 feet long by 360 feet wide.
Each of these identified site locations offers advantages and disadvantages. Locating the tennis
courts in the vicinity of the developed park area provides tennis players easy access to the
Recreation Center as well as the future locker rooms planned for construction with the extension
of the gym. The disadvantage is that all of the large physical structures (Recreation Center, gym,
future pool and proposed tennis complex) would be grouped in close proximity which may not be
seen as desirable.
Placing the tennis complex up against the south slope, in the area presently designated for the
future pool, may be the best location in regards to mitigating the use of lights. This location may
also be highly desirable from the standpoint of use of the courts by the High School tennis team
and physical education classes, since it would be easy for them to access. However, these same
reasons also make the location very desirable as the site of the future pool. Parking in the first lot
would probably need to be expanded to accommodate the additional demand generated by a
tennis complex and /or pool. Stars preliminary estimates of available space in this location (400 -
600+ feet wide by 100 feet long) indicate that it may not be enough to adequately accommodate
the length of a court in the western corner, and that courts placed in this location would most
likely need to be placed side -by -side along the bottom of the slope for approximately 480 to 720
feet across.
Moving the tennis complex to the area adjacent to the second parking lot would reduce the
potential demand for parking in the first parking lot and provide players easy access to the
proposed future locker rooms. However, this site does not provide residents with the level of
protection from the lights that the site next to the slope would. To accommodate the tennis
complex in this area, the picnic pavilion and the play area would need to be relocated to a location
preferably in the developed portion of the Park. The estimated available space in this location is
250 feet wide by 400 feet long.
C:\DOCS\COMSERV\TENNISCT.AGD
000044
Tennis Courts
June 23, 1997
Page 3
Lastly, constructing the tennis complex adjacent to the third parking lot, in the area currently
occupied by soccer fields, still provides tennis players relatively close access to the proposed
future locker rooms and it disperses the facilities and demand for parking over a larger area. The
soccer fields would have to be relocated to the undeveloped portion of the Park and the City
would need to work with AYSO to accommodate its needs during an interim period. This
location does not provide residents protection from the lights, but this problem might also be
present if the City elects to install lights on one or more of the existing soccer fields or the second
softball diamond. The estimated available space is 350 feet wide by 660 feet long.
If the City, Council approves the recommended action, staff envisions the project proceeding as
follows(1) confirm MUSD's participation in the project, including fundin `2 ity Council to
select a location for the tennis complex [consider referring to Public Works, Facilities and Solid
Waste Committee for recommendation to Council]; 3) retain the services of a consultant to
provide tennis complex design; 4) confirm drainage and other park landscape and infrastructure
concerns; and 5) complete design work for City Council action and request construction
proposals. The selection of the final site location will involve an evaluation of the arrangement of
the tennis courts; e.g., 12 courts side by side, two stacked groups of six, or a variation thereof.
At a point in the near future, the City Council will need to consider priority use of the courts.
Depending on WSD's participation, this would include NMS physical education classes, NMS
tennis team, general public use, City recreation classes, tennis club(s), and other potential users.
The discussion could include the three courts at Tierra Rejada Park and the planned two courts at
the park in the Carlsberg Specific Plan.
Recommendation
Staff r6com6ends that the City Council approve a loan from the General Fund in the amount of
$176,000 to the Community Park Zone to construct feuf4ighte4 tennis courts and direct staff to
solicit bids to perform said work consistent with the steps identified in this report.
C:\DOCS\COMSERV\TENNISCT.AGD
000045