|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
After years of delays and scaled-back plans to improve Mountain View’s community center at Rengstorff Park, the City Council on Tuesday approved a design that would renovate the 50-year-old building and expand the facility deeper into the park.
The design calls for an entirely new “social hall” to be added to the side of the community center facing the park, big enough to fit 250 seats and support large events. The existing social hall will be renovated and converted into a preschool room.
The $17 million face-lift will add about 6,700 square feet to the center.
Council members approved the design in a 5-1 decision, with council member John Inks dissenting and Mayor John McAlister absent.
While the price tag on the renovation is substantially less than re-doing the whole building, and a big step back from the original $140 million improvement plans to Rengstorff Park in 2011, council member Mike Kasperzak pointed out that’s still a pretty big cost for how much the city is getting.
The high cost can be largely attributed to the state the community center is in, according to Karl Danielson of the architectural firm Dahlin Group. Danielson said the Rengstorff Community Center, built in 1964, needs substantial work inside the building to address problems like accessibility, aging plumbing, lack of elevators and a non ADA-compliant ramp into the building, among other things.
One of the key design changes in the proposal is to make the center open up to and link into the park itself, rather than remain an isolated building on the edge of the park.
“Today you have a community center at a park. You don’t have a community center in the park,” Danielson said, noting that the building is fenced off from playgrounds and the park, and has no windows facing the park at all.
So to turn that around, the design calls for the social hall to be built out into Rengstorff Park with plenty of large windows and doors that open up directly into the park. Council members had mixed reactions on the design choice.
Council member Ken Rosenberg said the design will bring both “utility and function” to the park by increasing the usage of the community center, and the loss of park space will be offset by future open space projects. While the new square footage does eat up part of the park, he said the addition of windows and access to the park at the new social hall will bring the outdoor open space into the facility.
“When you bring the outside world in, you extend the park,” Rosenberg said.
Kasperzak agreed, and said it’s been interesting to see how the plans for the community center have evolved over the years. Kasperzak reminded his colleagues that he was on the council when the original, more expensive plans to tear down the facility and rebuild it were discussed.
“To me, this is making it part of the park, not something at the park,” he said. “I think this is the way to go.”
Inks, on the other hand, said he was inclined to support an alternative design by the architect that keeps the social hall in the same place and adds new multi-use rooms to the front of the facility facing Rengstorff Avenue.
“I would be inclined to support (the) option … if for no other reason than for less of an open space compromise,” Inks said.
Mountain View property owner Don Letcher told City Council he “totally opposes” the idea of spending $17 million on a project that takes away the small amount of park space left in the city for more building space and pavement.
Other residents raised concerns over the eight heritage trees that would need to be removed to make way for the facility, and issues over traffic and the ability for residents to get in and out the homes on Rengstorff Avenue with increased traffic and future plans to add a stoplight at the intersection of Rengstorff and Stanford avenues.
The upgrades are likely to be paid for through $12 million in park fees and $5 million from reserve funds, according to a staff report. Planning and construction could start in the 2016-17 fiscal year.
Glad to have the building renovated but with open space at such a premium in Mountain View, not sure converting park space into a Social Hall is really beneficial.
I am very glad it’s being renovated. I think the general condition it’s in deters people from wanting to go there. It would also be great if it offered more activities like Sunnyvale does.
Thank Goodness.
Hopefully this includes the bathrooms by the swings.
I agree that the restrooms near the swings BADLY need an upgrade. Their current condition is apalling.
What about the pool area. Its so bad and very dangerous in the changing room and needs a complete overhaul. Go see for yourself. One long bench to change in front of or sit on. Seven showers and classes of 25 to 50 and 15 minutes to shower and dress after swimming. Way to many falls on slippery floors. It needs to be boomed and rebuilt from top to bottom. Please
Someone put up a donation box for this, and see how much will be collected. Probably not much.
Or we could empty your wallet and use that to help finance the project, Monta Loma.
It is great that we are getting a new community Center! But where did this money come from? Oh! I see! We looted the Park Fees collected to buy parks in other parts of the city, mostly from old mountain view. We are badly in need of park space.
Buildings could be funded many ways. Buildings could be built most any place.
Council and PRC stole park fee money which we agreed to collect so we could get new parks, and built new office space for JP and his staff. We have been ripped off.
We lost existing park space, and allowed money for new parks to be diverted.
Staff can do what ever they want. It is their city not ours.
17 million buys quite a bit when you already own the land. Who is in charge of spending and how do we get to bid(gouge) the public coffer? It appears the wrong people are in charge.
Neighboring cities Los Altos, Palo Alto, and Sunnyvale all have superior parks to Mountain View.
Neighboring cities Los Altos, Palo Alto, and Sunnyvale all have superior adult recreation and enrichment programs to Mountain View.
Can someone please explain why?
Can you explain in detail how their parks are superior?
I think Cuesta is pretty nice, but it is nothing compared to the beautiful parks in Sunnyvale full of people having a great time.
I did read that Mountain View won an award for being the most “water wise” with our parks in the entire state! I’m sure some city employees will get medals for applying to get this award, but what about the residents who want to go out and enjoy beautiful,green recreation areas? Where are they getting represented?
And wow…have you seen some of the parks in Los Altos? Gigantic mature trees.. peaceful and gorgeous. Or what about the park in Palo Alto that has a fishing pond and camping?!
It just seems that Mountain View is only interested in building economical, low maintenance areas that maximize revenue streams. Sure, spend the money on expanding a community center so it can be rented out for more expensive events. Look, fiscal responsibility is important, but is our city really that broke compared to our neighbors?
Let me see, where do Los Altos kids go when they want swim lessons (oh yes, their country club pool – no city rec pool). Where do they go when they want a sailing lake (with wind, Palo Alto), let me see – shoreline Los Altos? I guess there is a Palo Alto muni golf course also (Los Altos – just go to your county club man). The City Council represents me. I’m glad they live within OUR MEANS. We did not want extra Bond Taxes (for outrageous beauty), so we get functionally nice parks. We would have had a +$100 M park, if voters had shown they were going to support +$200 M of principal + interest. Not that much “interest” I guess.
It’s not a Tea Party – cause it’s not Taxation without Representation
“functionally nice parks”
What drivel.
This city is getting so pathetic and the apologists within it bring us all down.
Not alk recreation takes place on the lawn or the playground. Sometimes the need for reasonable space for classes, clubs or events. Not everyone can afford a country club, hotel or a restaurant/banquet room.
Please, don’t remove the heritage trees! These ginkgo trees are so beautiful and so rare…
The last line of the article is the key information.
The twelve million dollars in park fees is money that was collected to provide park space for residents of new housing developments.
So, instead of adding new parks to accomodate the new residents, we are spending twelve million dollars to make the park smaller.
Moreover, this action violates explicit city policies that the top priority for parks funds should be to acquire new park land, and that the highest priority for new park space should be those planning areas that have the lowest amount of park space per capita.
I am completely against this expansion plan. I live next to the park and spend quite a lot of time there. If the City truly has its residents and community at heart they would understand that the open space in this park is precious, valued and every inch is used. The people who use this park live in the neighborhood which is predominantly condos and apartments – we rely on every inch of this open outdoor area park to stretch our legs, play field games, walk the dog, play soccer. The very last thing this neighborhood needs is a 6,700 square foot social hall taking away a significant portion of this precious green space.
Personally I will never be able to leave my driveway as Rengstorff is already completely backed up in the stretch between California and Central on any given day or time. The existing community center is also way too close to the surrounding residences for the noise and added traffic not to become more of a nuisance with the proposed expansion. Holding 250 seat events will make living next door or across the street unbearable. The neighborhood does not have the capacity, nor does the street.
The intersection at Central and Rengstorff is also very poorly engineered and dangerous, and the recent changes completely ineffective. I would rather see the City funnel this money into making the intersection at Rengstoff and Central safe, and save critical injuries. I cannot believe the City would even consider adding public street traffic to the current mess.
Lastly, I have lived in Mountain View for 16 years and what made MV charming and differentiated it from the rest of the urban sprawl were the quaint greenbelts and plots of land that dotted the city giving it a unique rural feel in the middle of SVC. Now these are almost completely gone in the name of “progress” It saddens me deeply that the City has seemed to have lost site of what made MV special and now wants to take away green park space. What is next?
This proposal is unneeded and ill conceived for the neighborhood and current street conditions. I implore the City to not pass this initiative. Keep what little is left of the remaining charm of MV and truly understand what is needed in this neighborhood. Thank you.