But the city is in no rush to start planning for Cubberley's future. On Tuesday night, June 11, the council's Policy and Services Committee voted 3-1, with Karen Holman dissenting, to defer until a future date a decision on whether to proceed with a "community needs assessment" for the site.
The needs assessment is one of 17 recommendations issued by the Cubberley Community Advisory Committee, a group of citizens that in March submitted a detailed analysis of Cubberley issues. The group — which included neighborhood leaders, city commissioners, school volunteers, and other stakeholders — recommended that the city and the school district renew the Cubberley lease and that the center become a facility used by both entities. The group also urged the city to develop within the first five years of the new lease a community needs assessment.
"Deciding which buildings to build or remodel as well as deciding on renting and leasing priorities for a community center requires a very thorough community needs assessment to identify what services and opportunities are needed by the community, where such services exist now, and what services are best offered at Cubberley to meet community needs," the report states. "We need professional expertise to do this work well. Only by investing in such a systematic study with the school district as a willing partner can we be sure we are planning well for a facility that will serve Palo Alto for years to come."
But this systematic study will have to wait a while. City Manager James Keene urged the council not to proceed with the assessment at this time. He noted that the effort would potentially extend well beyond the Cubberley site, and staff's efforts are focused on lease negotiations with the school district. He also said that proceeding with the master plan at this time would be premature because the city doesn't yet know how the negotiations would be resolved.
"I don't see how the staff can support a concurrent needs assessment, particularly on a project that's really not defined at all," Keene said.
His argument won over three of the four members of the Policy and Services Committee. Councilwoman Gail Price proposed deferring the conversation.
"Staff is already doing several activities that can provide background for this discussion and foundation for future work," she said.
These activities include an update to the city's Comprehensive Plan (its land-use bible) and a new parks master plan. The city is also about to launch a process for creating a community vision for 27 University Ave., a site next to the downtown Caltrain station.
Price also said that until the city and the school district come up with a new agreement, the council is "working without a context."
Councilwoman Liz Kniss, who chairs the committee, concurred.
Even though the council anticipates a lease extension, she said, "No one has signed on the dotted line yet to say that's going to happen."
Councilman Larry Klein joined Kniss and Price in voting to defer the discussion. Holman, who dissented, said she would like to see the planning work begin sooner and suggested that the Parks and Recreation Commission can help get the ball rolling.
It's important that the council understand what the community wants as it proceeds with other major projects, including the planned construction of three new athletic fields at the renovated Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course, she said.
"It's a practical exercise and a dreaming exercise, but it helps refine what's important," Holman said.
Jennifer Hetterly, vice chair of the Parks and Recreation Commissions and member of the Cubberley advisory group, urged the council not to wait too long before making a decision. While there's no need to actually begin the assessment at this time, the city should make a decision soon on whether to go forward with it at all, she said. Funding for the planning effort could become a factor in the negotiations between the city and the school district.
She noted that the city is currently working on several other strategic documents, including a parks master plan and a community vision for the area around 27 University Ave. A broad community needs assessment, she said, would lead to more thoughtful planning project for both Cubberley and 27 University.
"Reinventing the wheel on a site-by-site basis seems very inefficient," Hetterly said.
Committee members also had different ideas about what this future needs analysis might entail. Klein recommended asking the community to include in suggestions for new amenities some ways to pay for these amenities, including public-private partnerships.
"It's easy to give your opinion when there's no money involved," Klein said.
Requesting funding suggestions, Klein said, would "focus the mind" and promote a "bottom-up approach" to planning for improvements at Cubberley and elsewhere.
"It really puts people to the test: Are you willing to do something other than just say, 'I think something is a good idea'?"
Holman disagreed, and said the council should welcome all suggestions, whether or not they are coupled with funding recommendations.
"People proposing something — let's say a bocce ball court — may not know how to fund it, but if it's put on the table, there may be others who see this list and know how to fund it," Holman said.
The council should welcome the public's suggestions on how to fund new facilities, Holman said, but not require them.
"I'd hate to edit people's thoughtful suggestion," Holman said.
This story contains 1008 words.
Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.
If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.