To: HONORABLE Mayor and From: Sara
L. Hensley
City Council
Subject: TRAIL PROGRAM - Date: 08-12-03
PRIORIZATION PROCESS
COUNCIL DISTRICT: Citywide
SNI AREA: N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Council approval to develop a
Prioritization Process to strategically implement the Trail Program utilizing
the two supporting processes:
1.
An Annual Work Plan to accomplish Greenprint[1]
strategic goals.
2.
A strategy for developing a Grant-Seeking Work Plan that
supports delivery of the Annual Work Plan.
BACKGROUND
The City’s Greenprint document provides a 20-year strategic
plan for development of parks and recreational facilities. The document represents input received from
hundreds of citizens. For trails, it
sets forth a strategy to “create a citywide trail network that encourages
alternative transportation modes and provides access to recreation.”
Guidance in implementing the trail program and selection of
projects comes from the Greenprint and four other sources:
- Greenprint
– A planning tool approved by Council in September 2000 that documents a
long-term strategic plan for trail development by identifying specific
projects by Council district.
- Santa
Clara County Trails Master Plan – By reference, this document forms
the trail program’s work plan. The
Greenprint document indicates the need to “support the proposed projects
in the Countywide Master Plan.”
- Collaborative
Action Plan (CAP) – An inter-agency agreement signed by the City
Manager and Santa Clara Valley Water District Board in January 2003 that
identifies work plan elements for trails development. The document acknowledges that the City
will work collaboratively with the District to increase open space by
building trails along District waterways.
- Strong
Neighborhoods Initiative – A commitment made to City residents in
designated blighted neighborhoods to deliver projects identified by
Neighborhood Improvement Plans.
The plans identify specific projects.
- Special
Requests/Concerns – Project suggestions are received from Council
offices, citizens, neighborhood associations and businesses.
Implementation of the Prioritization Process, Annual Work
Plan and Grant-Seeking Work Plan will support the City’s efforts to provide a
trail system that meets stakeholder expectations.
Prioritization Process
Development of a Prioritization Process for implementation
of existing projects was made necessary by the approval of the CAP. Staff sought to incorporate joint-trail[2]
development into the existing workload.
In developing the process, staff received input from the
Building Strong Neighborhoods Committee (BSN) and the City Council.
|
Date |
Discussion |
|
February 26, 2003 |
General overview provided to BSN. BSN requested that the process for “Interim
Trails” delivery be described in greater detail. |
|
March 17, 2003 |
Refined prioritization process presented to BSN. The process integrated the implementation
of interim trails into the overall process. |
|
May 20, 2003 |
Council approved the Quarterly Status Report for the
cooperative effort with the SCVWD.
Council members provided input on the prioritization process. (Council item 5-20-03, 7.1a) |
|
June 16, 2003 |
Existing project inventory in priority order presented to
BSN. BSN recommended that staff
complete development of the process by integrating SNI projects and present
the process to Council at a later date.
|
With the input received, staff refined the process to
differentiate between “at risk” and “opportunity” funding. It also identified the need for supporting
processes (Annual Work Plan and Grant-Seeking Strategy) to focus
project-delivery efforts and ensure that new projects are in line with the
overall strategy presented by the Greenprint.
|
Table A – Prioritization
Process |
|||
|
Priority |
Type |
Description |
Supporting Process |
|
1 |
Funding At Risk |
Projects that have existing funding
that may be at risk if not expended in a timely manner. |
Annual Work Plan |
|
2 |
Funding Opportunity |
Projects that take advantage of a unique or timely funding
opportunity. |
Grant-Seeking Work Plan |
|
3 |
Interim trails |
Existing Water District service roads that can be opened
to the public with minor improvements and agreement processing. |
Annual Work Plan |
|
4 |
CIP-Funded |
Projects funded as part of the City’s annual Capital Improvement
Program. |
Annual Work Plan |
|
5 |
Master Planned |
Projects with completed master plans/environmental
documentation that can move forward to construction if adequately funded. |
Grant-Seeking Work Plan |
|
6 |
No Plan/No Funds |
The balance of projects.
Projects that have been suggested but have not been developed beyond
development of a preliminary concept. |
Grant-Seeking Work Plan
|
ANALYSIS
Prioritization Process
As noted previously, development of the prioritization
process occurred as staff sought to incorporate projects required as part of
the CAP into the existing workload.
The process identifies five levels of priorities, in general; projects
that may lose funding are of a top priority and projects with no funding and
little development having the lowest priority.
In forming the priorities, it was apparent that existing
projects should be identified in an Annual Work Plan to limit the potential for
new projects to prevent staff from managing previously committed efforts. In similar fashion, several priorities
require funding and staff needs to identify an approach for seeking funds, as
they become available throughout the year.
Priorities 1, 3 and
4 identified in Table A are for projects with funding. Assigning a high priority for development to
these projects ensures that projects with allocated funds are completed.
Priorities 2, 5 and
6 are those projects that require funding.
It is important to note that projects with a “funding opportunity” have
a high priority. This acknowledges that
funding opportunities can present themselves throughout the year, and that
staff will commit resources to seeking funds if the project aligns with
strategic objectives. As an example,
the Willow Glen Spur Trail was identified in the Greenprint as a project to be
pursued after 2010. Recently, the
railroad right-of-way has been offered for sale. Staff has actively pursued funding for purchase and limited
development.
Annual Work Plan
The current practice of work plan development is not clearly
defined. Project requests are derived
from the Greenprint, individual Council offices, Collaborative Action Plan, SNI
Program, community associations, businesses, and citizens.
Development of a process to address the multiple requests
for projects would require screening mechanisms to allocate the available
resources in both an equitable and strategic manner. The current practice considers the Greenprint and other
documented sources but does not adhere to them. This approach can result in development of discontinuous segments
that reduce usability and do not support the City as it competitively seeks
grant funding.
To support development of an Annual Work Plan, staff has
inventoried all known trail alignments (both constructed and proposed). The inventory specifically identifies
projects that are identified by the Greenprint, SNI Neighborhood Improvements
Plans and SCVWD/City interim trails.
Coinciding with the annual Parks and Community Facilities
Development process, staff will meet with each Council office in a three-round
process as described by Table B to obtain project suggestions.
TABLE B - Annual
Work Plan Development
|
Schedule |
Activity |
Outcome |
|
September – Round 1 |
§
Review current work load status and issues |
§
Develop scope of work and project estimates |
|
§
Present list of recommended projects (source:
Greenprint, CAP, etc.) |
|
|
|
§
Solicit project ideas |
|
|
|
December – Round 2 |
§
Review list project scopes and estimates |
§
Funding strategy (next fiscal year, 5-year CIP or
Grant-Seeking Work Plan) |
|
§
Obtain buy-in for projects |
|
|
|
January – Round 3 |
§
Review and obtain buy-in for funding strategy |
§
Prepare “Source & Use” documentation for Budget
Office |
|
|
§
Document Annual Work Plan |
Grant-Seeking
Work Plan
Staff has identified
30 funding sources that align well with trail development. These sources are tracked and staff actively
seeks these funds, as they become available.
Funding is offered
from local, state and federal sources and each grant program has its own
specific objectives and requirements.
Therefore it is difficult to identify the specific type of projects to
be pursued. Instead, the grant-seeking
strategy presents a general guide for staff to actively seek grant funding for
a set of projects on an annual basis and acknowledges with category 5 that
grant-specific requirements will support the pursuit of funds. It is important to acknowledge that it is
highly unlikely that the City will secure all grants pursued. The strategy guides development of a work
plan for grant writing staff to pursue, it does not indicate the grants that
staff will acquire.
|
No. |
Category |
Description |
Factor Type |
|
1 |
Identified project |
Identified by the
Greenprint and/or SNI Neighborhood Improvement Plan. |
Primary |
|
2 |
Partnering |
Project is covered
by the Collaborative Action Plan. |
Primary |
|
3 |
Strategic |
Project strongly
aligns with strategic goals. |
Primary |
|
4 |
Developed |
Project is
sufficiently developed to accept funding. |
Primary |
|
5 |
Grant-specific |
Project aligns
with grant-specific requirements. |
Primary |
|
6 |
Connectivity |
Project supports
connectivity (connecting parks, trails, open space, and/or community
resources identified in Greenprint). |
Contributing |
|
7 |
City-wide |
Project crosses
multiple Council Districts. |
Contributing |
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Staff coordinated development Trail Program Prioritization
Process with the Building Strong Neighborhoods Committee.
COORDINATION
The process was coordinated with the Santa Clara Valley
Water District in developing the Trail Program Prioritization.
CEQA
Not a Project.
SARA L. HENSLEY
Director of Parks,
Recreation and
Neighborhood Services