SunnyvaleRTC

January 10, 2006

SUBJECT: Explore Locations for Community Gardens and Special Agreement with Sustainable Community Gardens (06-013)

REPORT IN BRIEF

This report is provided in follow up to Report to Council No. 05-077 reviewed by City Council on March 22, 2005. That evening, Council received substantial public input and directed staff to further explore the possibility of an agreement with Sustainable Gardening Group (now Sustainable Community Gardens) for the development of community gardens on City property under the assumption that capital and operating costs will not be the City’s responsibility, examine performance measures to determine the future success of community gardens and ensure that gardeners are notified of the term of the agreement (five years). Please see Attachment A, Draft Agreement for the Development, Operation and Maintenance of Community Gardens.

Council also directed staff to explore further with residents and affected neighborhoods three separate locations that were potential sites for community gardens. The locations were City-owned parcels between Mathilda Avenue and Charles Street; the John W. Christian Greenbelt near Manzano Way; and, a City-owned parcel along Charles Street north of 505 West Olive Avenue. Please see Attachments B, C and D vicinity and parcel maps of these sites. Staff has met with the community and gathered input regarding the three potential locations.

Regarding the potential site located along Charles Street north of W. Olive Avenue, Council noted that any use of this parcel for community gardens would be limited to a five-year period to ensure that the future use and alternate options of uses of this parcel would be reconsidered by City Council after the five-year period. This limitation was provided in consideration of fiscal constraints and the immediate need to reduce expenditures or increase revenues for existing City programs and services. The City fiscal climate remains of concern and the City Manager continues to examine options to close a Citywide structural imbalance. At the time of writing this report, the structural imbalance was approximately $1,800,000 yearly. However, in November 2005, residents approved increases to the Business License Tax and the Occupancy Tax for Hotels/Motels. The added revenue from these sources will reduce the imbalance significantly but not eliminate the imbalance entirely. More detailed information on this topic will become available as staff addresses this topic in the coming months.

One strategy to reduce the structural imbalance would consider liquidating some of the City-owned parcels throughout the City, including those along Charles St. to provide one-time resources or on-going revenue in the form of interest income. In this regard, the 505 W. Olive/Charles Street parcel was part of a larger parcel purchased approximately five years ago for $70 per square foot. The 1.8 acre portion being considered for gardens was valued at approximately $5,500,000 at that time. The current value and opportunity for sale is conservatively in the neighborhood of $6,700,000.

Similarly, the parcels located between Mathilda Ave. and Charles St. could be considered for liquidation, development or other purposes. These parcels were purchased with an intention of consolidation and construction that would enhance efforts of developing the Sunnyvale downtown. While these parcels are too small and disconnected to provide a community gardens site, the current value and opportunity for sale is conservatively estimated at approximately $3,000,000.

The City does not own the John W. Christian Greenbelt property but manages it though a revocable permit (P-3697) with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). Staff has contacted SFPUC to ascertain whether any adjustments or changes might be required to place community gardens at this location. On November 3, 2005, SFPUC provided a modification to the existing Use Permit P-3697 to specifically include the activities of community gardening. Please see Attachment E, staff correspondence with SFPUC regarding Use Permit P-3697.

Regardless of which site may be designated for Community Gardens, it is likely that the site will become the home for Community Gardens for a very long time to come. In efforts to note the potential for future change Council has designated a specific term for potential use of the 505 W. Olive site (five years maximum) and has directed that a termination clause be added to any proposed Agreement (180 days). However, the Gardens will become a special and successful addition to the community no matter where they are constructed. As such, any desire to relocate gardens once constructed, regardless of desirable city-wide outcomes, would be very disappointing for the gardeners and neighbors that welcome the view and activities of gardening.

Staff has met with leadership of Sustainable Community Gardens and developed a Draft Agreement for Development, Operation and Maintenance of Community Gardens in accordance with Council’s Agreements with Outside Groups Policy. The agreement contains a requirement that SCG notify each gardener of the five-year term of the agreement and specify the actual termination date within the garden plot assignment agreements. In follow up of Council’s request for performance measurements, the proposed agreement contains a requirement for the group to provide yearly reports of gardener participation noting their residence by neighborhood, various age groups, hours of education instruction and the number of plots in use the previous year. This information will enable Council to determine the success of the community gardens in the coming years. Sustainable Community Gardens group strongly supports use of the Charles Street site north of 505 West Olive Avenue for community gardens and sees the John W. Christian Greenbelt site as an excellent location for a neighborhood garden site to serve Lakewood Village Neighborhood.

In light of current fiscal constraints that may determine the need to sell City properties and the opportunities costs previously identified for the parcels along Charles Street (Mathilda/Charles parcels $3,000,000 and Charles/Olive parcel $6,700,000) staff recommends that Council approve the Agreement essentially as expressed in Attachment A and designate an approximate 1.8 acre portion of the John W. Christian Greenbelt property identified in Attachment B for use by SCG for a five-year period beginning on January 1, 2006.

The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed this report on December 14, 2005, and recommended that Council approve Alternatives 1 and 4. The motion passed unanimously 4-0, with Commissioner Chuck absent.

1. Approve an agreement with Sustainable Community Gardens for the development, operation and maintenance of community gardens consistent with Attachment A and authorize the City Manager to enter into the agreement on behalf of the City.

4. Designate the 1.8 acre City-owned parcel west of Charles Street and north of 505 West Olive Street as depicted in Attachment D for the exclusive use of community gardens to be developed, operated and maintained by Sustainable Community Gardens for a period of five-years with any extension of this use period only as approved by City Council.

Additionally, Commissioners recommended adding language to be placed into the draft proposed agreement (Attachment A) regarding the notice of the time span of the proposed agreement as follows:

Current statement in Attachment A, Draft Agreement page 3, paragraph 6:

GROUP shall inform all gardeners yearly, through special notice included in all Garden Plot Assignment Agreements, that the term of this Community Gardens Agreement is five (5) years and shall specify the termination date of this Community Gardens Agreement as approved by City Council.

Commissioner’s recommended statement for Attachment A, Draft Agreement page 3, paragraph 6; Italicized wording is recommended by Commissioners:

BACKGROUND

On March 22, 2005, City Council reviewed Report to Council No. 05-077, Consideration of Community Gardens and Possible Locations. This report noted the positive aspects of community gardening, grants that had been approved and received in the amount of $40,000 for developing community gardens from the Satterberg Foundation, a non-profit philanthropic organization and provided several possible locations that could be explored should Council determine to provide community gardening for Sunnyvale. Additionally, this report noted the positive relationship growing with a local gardening group, Sustainable Gardening (now Sustainable Community Gardens) and sought direction from Council for a potential special agreement for development, operation and maintenance of community gardens on City property in Sunnyvale.

Upon review of this report and significant public input, City Council directed staff to:

· Explore the possibility of an agreement with Sustainable Gardening (now Sustainable Community Gardens) for the development of community gardens on City property under the assumption that capital and operating costs will not be the City’s responsibility.

· Examine possible performance measures such as participants by age groups (youth and seniors) and by location of residence to ensure service to a broad spectrum of the City.

· Ensure that gardeners are notified regarding the five-year term limit of the agreement and of the specific date that the agreement would terminate without additional Council action(s).

· Ensure that the agreement contains a termination clause that provides ample time and opportunities for gardeners to harvest planted crops if the City requires other use of the garden site and must terminate the agreement.

· Further explore with residents and the affected neighborhood the possible development of community gardens on a portion of the John W. Christian Greenbelt just west of Manzano Way.

· Further explore with residents and the affected neighborhood the possible development of community gardens on City-owned parcels between Mathilda Avenue and Charles Street, south of McKinley Avenue and north of Iowa Avenue.

· Further explore with residents and the affected neighborhood the possible development of community gardens on a 1.8 acre City-owned parcel on Charles Street north of 505 West Olive Avenue. Regarding this site, Council further directed that any use of this parcel for community gardens would be limited to a five-year period to ensure that the future use and alternate options of uses of this parcel would be reconsidered by City Council at that time.

This report describes that exploration and seeks Council action regarding the next steps for community gardens in Sunnyvale.

EXISTING POLICY

From the Open Space Sub-element:

Goal A: Manage a comprehensive open space program that is responsive to public need, delivers high quality customer service and exemplifies the city's commitment to leadership in environmental affairs.

Policy A.1: Encourage active citizen involvement in the development and management of open space.

Action Statements:

A.1.a. Provide opportunities for public participation in planning the development and management of open space.

A.1.d. Investigate and pursue avenues for citizen involvement in the implementation of open space programs, such as landscape plantings and park beautification activities.

Goal B: Acquire and develop open space identified as high priority through land dedication or purchase.

Policy B.4: Identify revenue sources and increase revenues, where possible, which can be allocated to parks and open space operating budgets and capital improvements.

Action Statements:

B.4.c. Encourage contributions, grants and loans for open space acquisition and development through the community and other foundations, civic organizations, and individuals.

Goal C: Maintain a system of parks that assures all residents, workers and visitors access to recreational opportunities by providing neighborhood parks, athletic/play fields and special use facilities.

C.1.e. Consider acquisition or lease of sites to assure that accessible open space is maintained in each existing neighborhood and provided to any new neighborhoods.

Policy C.4: Provide, develop and maintain Special Use Parks and Facilities.

Action Statements:

C.4.c. Provide for a balance between general recreation uses and special interest uses in parks and facilities.

C.4.e. Consider the designation, development and management of an Orchard Heritage Park at the Community Center site consistent with an overall plan and in cooperation with the Sunnyvale Historical Society.

DISCUSSION

As noted above, Council requested that staff further explore several aspects of the topic of community gardens including a potential agreement to develop, operate and maintain gardens and three potential locations for community gardens in Sunnyvale. Staff provides this information as follows.

Explore an Agreement with Sustainable Community Gardens

Staff has pursued a written agreement with Sustainable Community Gardens (SCG) in accordance with Council’s Agreements with Outside Groups Policy and consistent with direction received from City Council on March 22, 2005. SCG is a group of resident gardeners interested in organic, sustainable gardening to produce high-quality fruits, flowers and vegetables while educating the community of the positive aspects of this activity. Staff and representatives of SCG have met numerous times throughout the seven months time period and have completed a draft agreement for Council’s review. Please see Attachment A, Draft Agreement between the City and Sustainable Community Gardens for the Development, Operation and Ongoing Maintenance of Community Gardens. Through this agreement, the City would provide:

· Exclusive use of a site for the purpose of community gardening;

· Free use of a park building for monthly meetings;

· Free referrals to Sustainable Community Gardens in future Recreation Activity Guides;

· Review and approval of community gardens design, layout and construction specifications;

· Review and approval of all policies, rules, regulations, etc. for the operations of the community gardens, including garden plot assignment practices;

· Disbursement of funds granted to the City for community gardens by the Satterburg Foundation for the development and construction of community gardens (Grant funds may not be used for operational expenses.); and,

· Access to utilities at the site.

Consistent with the draft agreement, Sustainable Community Gardens would provide:

· The design, build, operation and maintenance of community gardens at the Council approved location;

· Payments to the City to offset utility costs in the form of $2,200 annually or direct payment to Finance, Utilities Division, for actual utility consumption at the site;

· Plans and design specifications for review by City;

· Non-profit community gardening services;

· Notice to gardeners of the five-year term of the agreement noting the specific date of termination;

· One copy of all garden plot assignment policies, by-laws, operating manuals, rules, regulations, etc. as approved by the Director of Parks and Recreation; and,

· A yearly report that notes the number of plots in use, total numbers of gardeners participating for the previous year, their age groups, neighborhoods of residence and the hours of educational instruction provided for the community.

The site would allow approximately 25% of the garden plots for Senior Center gardening (minimum of 15 plots) and 75% of available plots for the general community gardeners. Only residents, as primary gardeners, would be assigned garden plots. Non-resident gardeners, whether senior or not, would be allowed to assist resident gardeners but would not be assigned a garden plot.

Sustainable Community Gardens would comply with all laws and regulations including those related to growing only legal crops and would not grow marijuana (Cannabis s.) in any case. They would provide a year-end report including the number of plots in use, total number of participants, number of hours of educational instruction, and the numbers of resident, non-resident, senior, youth, and low-income residents served for the previous year. This information will be useful for City Council in determining the success of SCG in serving the community through operation of the community gardens in the coming years.

Explore three locations for potential sites of community gardens

On March 22, 2005, Council directed staff to explore, with neighbors and the affected community, three separate sites as possible alternatives for location of community gardens. The sites were:

1. City-owned parcels bounded by Mathilda Avenue to the east, Charles Street to the west, Iowa Avenue to the south and McKinley Street to the north.

2. The John W. Christian Greenbelt near Manzano Way.

3. City-owned parcel west of Charles Street and north of 505 West Olive Street.

John W. Christian Greenbelt near Manzano Way

The eastern end of the John W. Christian Greenbelt near Manzano Way is a possible location for a community garden. Please see Attachment B, vicinity and parcel maps of this location. This area is far greater in size than the other parcels under consideration. A 1.8 acre portion of this parcel (similar in size to Charles and Olive location) would be reasonable for community gardens while retaining current transportation, recreation and leisure uses of the pathway. Although this location would provide a large number of residents of north Sunnyvale a garden easily accessible by walking or biking, it is not actually owned and under the complete control of the City. That is, this parcel is owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) and is a portion of the Hetch-Hetchy water system. As such, the City has developed and maintains a landscaped walking/bicycling path for public use under a special, revocable permit issued by the SFPUC (Permit P-3697).

A review of Attachment E, staff correspondence with SFPUC regarding Permit P-3697, notes that community gardening has been specifically included as an allowed use at this location.

Staff received mixed comments from attendees of public input meetings regarding this site. All attendees appreciated the concepts of community gardening, organic gardening and the positive social and recreational benefits of gardening. Some attendees expressed concern that the beautiful landscapes currently in place along the John W. Christian Greenbelt might be exchanged for community gardens that might not be as well-maintained. It was acknowledged that near neighbors included single-family home sites with existing gardening opportunities and numerous mobile home communities with an absence of opportunities to garden at present. Additional input as well as a summary of information from staff follows.

Pros

· Ample space

· Large southern exposure—good for gardening

· Good size for a community garden

· Soil tests indicate quality soil for agricultural purposes

· Large numbers of mobile home and apartment residents with little room at home to garden

· Considerable numbers of low-income residents per capita

· Approved by SFPUC for community gardening purposes

Cons

Not centrally located
Not ideal for seniors or community members outside the neighborhoods served by JWC Greenbelt
This area is used by neighbors on holidays, especially each Fourth of July to view nearby fireworks displays of Great America theme park.
Requires demolition of existing aesthetically pleasing landscapes
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission uses do not generally allow planting of trees along this right of way. This could eliminate options of planting fruit trees for use in pruning and pest control classes. However, the SFPUC will review any and all planting plans once they are developed.

Of concern is the potential for third-party interruption of use of this site as the parcel is actually owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) and maintained by the City through a revocable permit. The parcel is the underground home of the large water transport pipelines for the Hetch-Hetchy water system that delivers drinking water to San Francisco and cities of the peninsula. Should the pipelines require repair or maintenance, use of the parcels could be interrupted causing disruption of gardening activities. Should alternate use of the land be required, SFPUC could terminate the permit that was issued to the City of Sunnyvale, thereby ending the gardening use of the area.

Representatives of SCG see this location as an excellent spot for a neighborhood garden that could serve the north end of Sunnyvale. However, they feel that because this site is not centrally located it would not be visited by many residents from other neighborhoods.

City-Owned Parcels between Mathilda and Charles

Staff has examined the City-owned parcels located between Mathilda Avenue and Charles Street bordered by Iowa Avenue to the south and McKinley Avenue to the north. Please see Attachment C, vicinity and parcel maps of this location. A review of Attachment C indicates the lack of sufficient open space available for the use by community gardens at this location. The several parcels owned by the City within this block contain small homes while other areas are vacant but are not connected to one another. Current value of these parcels is conservatively estimated at approximately $3,000,000.

Staff shared the site descriptions and general overview of this location with those that attended public input meetings. Public comments were few and limited to a consensus that this would not be the best location for community gardens because of heavy traffic along Mathilda Avenue and the limited space available for gardens. Representatives of Sustainable Community Gardens shared the perspective that these parcels would not be a suitable location for community gardens. A summary of information and input follows.

Pros

· Centrally located

· Would help offset heavy development associated with downtown

· Large numbers of apartment residents with little room at home to garden

· Would help offset heavy development associated with downtown

· Would beautify vacant parcels that are unattractive at present

· Off-street parking is available at 505 W. Olive Avenue

Cons

· Small, disconnected parcels lack the size and shape suitable for community gardens

· Heavy traffic along Mathilda Avenue

· Value of land. The current value for these parcels is conservatively estimated at $3,000,000. This is a relatively expensive price tag for community gardens, particularly when compared to other options for providing that service such as the John W. Christian greenbelt, which would essentially cost the City nothing.

· Opportunity Cost. Due the small size and shape of disconnected parcels, this City-owned land does not provide as many opportunities for alternative development as other sites under consideration, particularly the 505 W. Olive Ave/Charles St. location. Regardless of the City’s financial situation, the Council may wish at a future time to further explore alternative uses for this site, including revenue generation through liquidation. But liquidation would not be possible throughout the duration of any time period agreed to for community gardening. The proposed agreement provides a five-year commitment to community gardens. The agreement does contain a clause that would allow the City to terminate the agreement with a 180-days’ notice to SCG. Once established, however, community gardens will likely be very difficult to move even should that be deemed in the best public interest.

Charles Street north of 505 West Olive Avenue

This 1.8 acre parcel along the west side of Charles Street and north of 505 West Olive Avenue is currently vacant. Please see Attachment D, vicinity and parcel maps of this location. Purchased at $70 per square foot approximately five-years ago, this property is conservatively valued at $6,700,000 at present. There are a few low quality trees scattered about the site and a row of mature higher-quality shade trees along the south border near the parking lots for 505 W. Olive Ave. Originally purchased to provide alternatives for expansion or relocation of City Hall, the parcel has occasionally been the site of illegal dumping of household and construction debris.

During public input meetings, neighbors and attendees perspective consistently favored this site for community gardens. Speakers expressed strong support for its central location. It was also acknowledged that near neighbors included single-family home sites with existing gardening opportunities along with numerous apartments nearby with an absence of opportunities to garden at present. Additionally, comments noted the aesthetic improvement for the neighborhood by establishment of gardens in place of a vacant lot. A summary of information and input as follows.

Pros

· Ample space of 1.8 acres

· Centrally located

· Abundant parking

· Quiet, pastoral street

· Large numbers of apartment residents with little room at home to garden

· Would help offset heavy development associated with downtown

· Would beautify a vacant parcel that is unattractive at present

Soil tests indicate quality soil for agricultural purposes
Through beautification and fencing, could protect area from further illegal dumping

Cons

· Value of land. The City paid $70 per square foot for this property totaling some $5,500,000 in expense. Current value for the 1.8 acre parcel is conservatively estimated at $85.00 per square foot for a total estimated value of $6,700,000. This is an expensive price tag for community gardens, particularly when compared to other options for providing that service such as the John W. Christian greenbelt, which would essentially cost the City nothing.

· Opportunity Cost. Due to its size and location, and the fact that the City owns this land, this site provides more opportunities and options for alternative development or revenue generation than any other site under consideration. Originally purchased for future expansion of the Civic Center Campus, this site has also been considered as a possible housing site for seniors and a possible expansion site for the Library. Regardless of the City’s financial situation, the Council may wish at a future time to further explore alternative uses for this site, including revenue generation through liquidation. But liquidation would not be possible throughout the duration of any time period agreed to for community gardening. The proposed agreement provides a five-year commitment to community gardens. The agreement does contain a clause that would allow the City to terminate the agreement with a 180-days’ notice to SCG. Once established, however, community gardens will likely be very difficult to move even should that be deemed in the best public interest. This would be true at any site, but is a more critical factor here given the opportunities and options presented by this site.

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no fiscal impact associated with approval of the agreement with Sustainable Community Gardens to develop and operate community gardens. Costs to develop and construct the community gardens would be funded through a previously approved grant proved by the Satterburg Foundation, a private philanthropic organization dedicated to supporting collaborative efforts resulting in positive community impact. Future operating costs would be provided by Sustainable Community Gardens. (Grant funds cannot be used for operating expenses.)

Two potential fiscal impacts could occur related to the Community Gardens.

1) An opportunity cost would be created should Council determine to place Community Gardens on City-owned parcels that currently are available for other uses including revenue generation through sale. This opportunity cost is estimated at $3,000,000 for the Mathilda Ave./Charles St. parcels; and, $6,700,000 for the parcel located on Charles St. north of 505 West Olive.

2) Should Council decide to site the Community Gardens at either of the Charles Street locations and then determine that it was necessary to use the parcel(s) for other means such as revenue generation it may be necessary and costly to relocate the community gardens to new site(s) after their construction.

Conclusion

Public input has consistently and strongly supported the concept of community gardening in Sunnyvale. Gardeners would appreciate and support having opportunities for community gardening regardless of which site is selected.

Parcels located between Mathilda Avenue and Charles Street are small, some contain small homes and are disjointed. Therefore, they are not well suited as community gardens sites.

The Charles Street and W. Olive Avenue parcel would be well suited for community gardens but would limit City options such as expansion of City Hall, future library site, senior housing or revenue generation through sale of that parcel during the timeline of any agreement.

Placing community gardens at any location for a short time span (five-years or less) and then relocating them to an alternate site would be more expensive and difficult than placing community gardens at a site that does not require relocations.

The John W. Christian Greenbelt site near Manzano Way would be well suited to community gardens, but it is not owned and/or solely controlled by the City.

Some neighbors have expressed concerns regarding changes to existing landscapes of the John W. Christian Greenbelt site near Manzano Way should it be converted to community gardens.

Sustainable Community Gardens strongly prefers locating community gardens at the Charles Street and W. Olive Avenue site.

PUBLIC CONTACT

Public presentations and opportunities for public input and near neighbor comments were provided at the following locations, times and dates:

Lakewood Park – Lakewood Village Neighborhood Association meeting on Thursday evening August 11, 2005.
Lakewood Park – Near Neighbors Meetings held Thursday August 25, 2005, at 1:30 p.m. and 7 p.m.; and, Saturday August 27, 2005, at 1:30 p.m.
Washington Park – Near Neighbors Meetings held Wednesday August 24, 2005, at 1:30 p.m. and 7 p.m.; and, Saturday August 27, 2005, at 10:30 a.m.

Copies of this report have been provided to Josh Salans, President of Sustainable Community Gardens, the Satterberg Foundation, and the presidents of each Neighborhood Association. Notice of Commission and Council meetings regarding this report was also distributed to the “Friends of Parks and Recreation” mailing list (a list of organizations and individuals who have expressed an interest in Parks and Recreation issues).

Public contact was made through posting of the Parks and Recreation Commission and Council agendas on the City’s official notice bulletin board, posting of the agendas and report on the City’s web page, publication of the Council agenda in the San Jose Mercury News, and the availability of the report in the City Clerk’s office, Library, Parks and Recreation Administration, Community Center, and Senior Center.

ALTERNATIVES

2. Designate an approximate 1.8 acre portion of the John W. Christian Greenbelt near Manzano Way as depicted in Attachment B for the exclusive use of community gardens to be developed, operated and maintained by Sustainable Community Gardens at essentially no cost to the City.

3. Designate City-owned parcels bounded by Mathilda Avenue to the east, Charles Street to the west, Iowa Avenue to the south and McKinley Street to the north as depicted in Attachment C for the exclusive use of community gardens to be developed, operated and maintained by Sustainable Community Gardens with a one-time opportunity cost to the City of $3,000,000.

5. Other options as determined by Council.

RECOMMENDATION

Additionally, Commissioners recommended adding language to be placed into the draft proposed agreement (Attachment A) regarding the notice of the time span of the proposed Agreement as follows:

Current statement in Attachment A, Draft Agreement page 3, paragraph 6:

Commissioner’s recommended statement for Attachment A, Draft Agreement page 3, paragraph 6; Italicized additional wording is recommended by Commissioners:

Note: Following Commission’s review of the Draft Report to Council, Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 were modified to include the opportunity costs associated with each Alternative.

Staff recommends Alternatives 1 and 2.

This action would support the community’s strongly expressed desire for Community Gardens in Sunnyvale and provide the best possible site among those considered. While providing immediate opportunities for Community Gardening, it would allow the City flexibility in the long-term financial planning with opportunities to develop or liquidate any City-owned parcel(s) that could improve the City’s financial position. The proposed agreement would allow Sustainable Community Gardens to demonstrate that community gardens are viable in Sunnyvale and that residents have a long-term interest in this type of gardening.

Although use of this site for community gardens would present the need to eliminate existing lawn and shrub landscapes, Sustainable Community Gardens group has expressed a strong commitment to providing gardens that are well-maintained and aesthetically pleasing for passers by. The group includes many longtime gardeners and numerous members that should be well-able to meet this commitment.

Reviewed by:
David A. Lewis Director, Parks and Recreation

Prepared by:

Curtis Black, Superintendent of Parks

Approved by:
Amy Chan
City Manager

Attachments