7.1.3 Public Workshop .........................................................................................31
7.2 Parks Master Plan Community Survey ......................................................................31
7.3 Community Engagement Takeaways and Policy Considerations..............................34 Trails & Connectivity ..................................................................................................34 Beaches & Water Quality...........................................................................................34 Park Amenities...........................................................................................................34 Park Comfort..............................................................................................................34 Community Events and Programs .............................................................................35 Indoor Recreation and Swimming..............................................................................35 8 Key Issues and Opportunities Summary ..............................................................................36
8.1 Foster City’s Park System..........................................................................................37
8.2 Park Usage ................................................................................................................38
8.3 Site Assessment ........................................................................................................38
8.4 Market Potential Index ...............................................................................................39
8.5 Community Priorities..................................................................................................40 Tables
Table 1 Foster City Parks by Type ..........................................................................................3 Table 2 Foster City Park Amenities.........................................................................................6 Table 3 Acreage of Level of Service .....................................................................................14 Table 4 Neighboring City Level of Service ............................................................................14 Table 5 Park Amenity Level of Service .................................................................................15 Figures
Figure 1 Parks and Open Space in Foster City ........................................................................5 Figure 2 10-Minute Walkshed in Foster City ..........................................................................10 Figure 3 Foster City Youth and Senior Population .................................................................11 Figure 4 Race & Ethnicity in Foster City.................................................................................12 Figure 5 Median Household Income in Foster City ................................................................13 Figure 6 Annual Number of Visitors by Park (Oct 2023 – 2024)............................................17 Figure 7 Park Accessibility and Connectivity Scores..............................................................21 Figure 8 Park Comfort & Safety Scores .................................................................................22 Figure 9 Functionality Scores .................................................................................................23 Figure 10 Park Condition Scores..............................................................................................24 Figure 11 Priority Index Rating for Facilities/Amenities ............................................................32 Figure 12 Priority Index Rating for Programs/Activities ............................................................33 Figure 13 Focus Area and Opportunities..................................................................................36
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
409
Introduction
Parks and Recreation Assessment 1
1 Introduction
Parks are a cornerstone of Foster City’s quality of life. As a distinctive urban environment, Foster City offers a diverse range of park facilities and recreational programs that enhance residents' health, well-being, and cultural engagement. This Parks and Recreation Assessment provides an evaluation of existing parks, amenities, and recreation programs, identifying opportunities for enhancement and growth. This document serves as a foundational tool to support policy development and identify multi-benefit opportunities in coordination with the Parks Master Plan for the update to the Parks and Open Space and Conservation Element.
The Parks Master Plan is a coordinated effort between the Foster City Parks and Recreation Department and WRT to assess current conditions of the city’s park system and propose strategic recommendations tailored to the park system’s needs.1 The planning process for the Parks Master Plan begun in summer of 2024, and is scheduled to finish in the Summer of 2025.
This assessment relies heavily on data and insights from the Parks Master Plan process, which includes valuable information about Foster City’s park system.
This assessment presents the parks system in terms of park type and describes recreation amenities. It highlights unique assets such as the levee pedway and the lagoon. A key component of this initiative is the identification of community priorities, which have emerged through a public engagement and a Parks Master Plan Community Survey. The assessment compares Foster City’s parks and programs with national standards, offering insights into areas for improvement and strategic development.
By presenting a detailed overview of Foster City’s parks and recreation landscape, the assessment will be the foundation for policy recommendations aimed at enhancing the quality and accessibility of these essential services. These recommendations support the city’s ongoing commitment to meeting the recreational needs of its residents while aligning with the objectives outlined in the Parks and Open Space Element of the General Plan. 1 Foster City Parks Master Plan | Foster City California
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
410
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 2 2 Regulatory Triggers
The following California regulations mandate an update to the Parks and Open Space Element and the Conservation Element. A full regulatory setting is provided in the Open Space and Conservation Assessment.
Senate Bill 1425 Open-space element: updates
Senate Bill (SB) 1425 (Stern 2022) requires that every city and county review and update its local open space plan by January 1, 2026. The bill requires the local open space plan to include plans and an action program that address specified issues, including climate resilience, equitable access, and rewilding opportunities, correlated with the Safety Element, Environmental Justice Element, and Land Use Element respectively. The requirements set forth in SB 1425 may be best met by pursuing policies that promote multi-benefit approaches.
Fundamental to the multiple benefits of open space is the provision of natural areas that provide human and ecological benefits through habitat, recreation, natural resources, historic and tribal resources, water management, and aesthetics. In the context of climate change, open space provides a form of natural infrastructure, for which a definition is provided in Gov. Code § 65302(g)(4)(C)(v). Natural infrastructure utilizes natural ecological systems or processes to reduce vulnerability to climate change related hazards, or other related climate change effects, while increasing the long-term adaptive capacity of natural areas by perpetuating or restoring ecosystem services.
Assembly Bill 1889 Conservation element: wildlife and habitat connectivity Assembly Bill (AB) 1889, known as the Room to Roam Act (Friedman 2024), requires the Conservation Element of a city’s general plan to include an identification and analysis of connectivity areas, permeability, and natural landscape areas within its jurisdiction by January 1, 2028. It further requires an assessment of existing or planned wildlife passage features, such as wildlife crossings or underpasses, to ensure planned developments do not comprise these critical habitats or wildlife movement corridors.
Specifically, the bill directs local governments to consider the impacts of existing and future development on wildlife connectivity, emphasizing the importance of protecting and enhancing wildlife corridors, particularly in response to the challenges posed by climate change and habitat fragmentation. Local jurisdictions are required to:
•Identify connectivity areas, permeability, and natural landscape areas. •Inventory and analyze existing or planned wildlife passage features, aligning efforts with state-level connectivity assessments and plans.
•Evaluate how development may create barriers to wildlife movement. •Develop strategies to avoid, minimize, or mitigate impacts to wildlife connectivity from land- use decisions.
•Explore opportunities to remediate existing barriers and restore degraded habitats, integrating best available science and datasets from regional habitat connectivity assessments, wildlife movement studies, and other relevant resources.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
411
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 3
3 Foster City’s Parks System
Foster City originated as a master-planned community on the edge of the San Francisco Bay.
As shown in Figure 1, a lagoon winds through the city and connects all the city’s neighborhoods.
Foster City has 155.8 acres of parks and open space. At the heart of the city is Leo J Ryan Park, which borders the lagoon and lies along Hillsdale Boulevard, one of the city’s main arteries. The park also contains two of Foster City’s primary recreation facilities – the currently- under construction Community Center and the Vibe Teen Center. Sea Cloud Park is located to the south closer to the Bay’s edge and is Foster City’s largest park and the location of many of its soccer, baseball and softball fields. Smaller parks are distributed throughout the neighborhoods, placing all residents within a half mile walk of a park. Lining the edge of the city is the Levee Pedway, an integral part of the San Francisco Bay Trail. The Levee Pedway allows residents to walk, bike, and jog along the city’s edge and take in scenic views of the bay.
3.1 Park Classification
Foster City’s park system consists of five park types, as outlined in Table 1. Community parks offer a wide range of active and passive recreational opportunities that serve a substantial part of the city; the four parks in this category account for the largest portion of the city’s park land.
Neighborhood parks provide a smaller range of amenities tailored to the daily recreational needs of one or more neighborhoods; these parks make up about one-third of the city’s parks acreage. Mini parks, which occupy the least acreage, offer basic recreational amenities for residents within a specific neighborhood. Special-use parks are designed for specific recreational purposes or population groups; in Foster City: Boat/Dog, Baywinds and Bridgeview parks fall into this category. Trails and pathways also comprise a significant portion of Foster City's Park system, with the Levee Pedway making up a substantial share of this acreage.
Foster City also has several privately owned parks and recreation facilities. Though not detailed in this assessment, these facilities also help meet residents’ recreational needs. Private parks that have been officially designated as publicly accessible, such as Town Center and Triton Parks, have been included (see Table 1 and Figure 1).
Table 1 Foster City Parks by Type
Park Type Number Acres Amenities
Community Parks 4 64.7
Boothbay 11.2 Playground, Ballfield, Basketball Court,
Soccer/Multipurpose Field, Tennis Courts, Volleyball Court, Restroom, Picnic Shelter, BBQ
Edgewater 8.5 Playground, Ballfield, Basketball Court,
Soccer/Multipurpose Field, Tennis Courts, Restroom,
Picnic Shelter
Leo J Ryan 20.7 Basketball Court, Pickleball Courts, Bocce Ball Courts, Tennis Courts, Beach, Boat Launch, Parking Lot
Sea Cloud 24 Playground, Ballfields, Soccer/Multipurpose Fields, Restroom, Picnic Shelter
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
412
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 4 Park Type Number Acres Amenities
Neighborhood Parks 10 34.9
Catamaran 5.9 Playground, Basketball Court, Soccer/Multipurpose Field, Tennis Court, Volleyball Courts, Restroom
Erckenbrack 3.5 Playground, Restroom, Beach
Farragut 3.9 Playground, Restroom
Gull 3.1 Playground, Restroom
Kildeer 2.4 Playground
Marlin 3.1 Playground, Restroom
Port Royal 4.0 Playground, Basketball Court, Soccer/Multipurpose Field, Restroom, Parking Lot
Pilgrim Triton* 1.2 Playground, Picnic Area
Shad 2.1 Playground, Basketball Court, Restroom
Shorebird 3.5 Restroom
Sunfish 2.4 Playground, Basketball Court,
Mini Parks 6 5.7
Arcturus 0.75 Playground
Gateshead 0.1 None
Ketch 1.6 Playground, Basketball Court
Leo 0.015 None
Pompano 0.5 None
Turnstone 1.5 Playground, Basketball Court,
Town Center Park* 1.1 None
Special Use Parks 3 7.7
Bridgeview 3.2 Restroom, Parking Lot
Baywinds 1.3 Restroom, Shower, BBQ
Boat/Dog 3.2 Restroom, Boat Launch, Dog Park, Parking Lot Subtotal, Parks 23 112.9
Trails and Pathways 6 45.2
Levee Pedway 43.3
Arcturus 0.09
Constitution (North) 0.17
Constitution (South) 0.7
Pilgrim (East) 0.19 Sandbox
Pilgrim (West) 0.73
Total 29 158.1
*Pilgrim Triton and Town Center Park are private parks, but are publicly accessible
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
413
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 5
Figure 1 Parks and Open Space in Foster City
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
414
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 6 3.2 Park Amenities
Foster City’s parks provide numerous recreation amenities. The amenities with the highest quantity are playgrounds, tennis courts, soccer/multipurpose fields, and ballfields, showing how Foster City provides ample opportunity for sports and fitness within its parks. There are relatively fewer picnic shelters and barbeque spots, and one dog run. Because of the lagoon, Foster City has four beaches and two boat launches as indicated in Table 2.
Table 2 Foster City Park Amenities
Amenity Number
Sports Fields and Courts
Ballfields 10
Soccer/Multipurpose Fields 12
Basketball Courts 8
Pickleball Courts 6
Bocce Ball Courts 4
Volleyball Courts 2
Tennis Courts 13
Playgrounds and Passive Use Amenities
Playgrounds 16
Picnic Shelters 4
Barbecues 2
Beaches 3
Special Features
Boat Launch 2
Dog Run 1
Community Garden 1
3.3 Indoor Recreation Facilities
Foster City’s indoor recreation facilities serve as community gathering spaces and provide a wide range of activities that serve all demographic groups, including kids and seniors. The facilities also provide spaces that can be rented by residents for birthday parties, meetings, and other special events.
3.3.1 William E. Walker Recreation Center and Future Facility Located within Leo J. Ryan Park, the William E. Walker Recreation Center was demolished in late 2024 to make way for a new facility. The future community center will expand event space and create more opportunities for Foster City residents. The new facility will include dedicated rooms for seniors, a space for preschool, art studios, and fitness rooms. The new facility will also incorporate sustainable design strategies related to water efficiency, energy conservation,
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
415
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 7
and waste management, achieving a LEED Silver certification.2 The project is expected to be complete by the summer of 2026. Foster City Community Center Located across Shell Boulevard from Leo J. Ryan Park is the Foster City Community Center.
There are four spaces residents can rent for parties, large meetings, training classes, and more.
These spaces range in size. Additionally, there is an outdoor patio on the second floor of the building, and an outdoor garden facing Shell Boulevard.
3.3.2The Vibe Teen Center
Like the future recreation center, the Vibe Teen Center is also located within Leo J Ryan Park and is meant to primarily serve youth in Foster City. The facility offers a multipurpose room, kitchen, patio, and game room. In addition to serving as a meeting place for residents, the city organized drop-in and after-school programs at the Vibe Teen Center.
3.4 Paths and Trails
3.4.1Levee Pedway
The Levee Pedway is one of the most significant features of Foster City’s park system, forming a key segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail. As shown in Figure 1, this 8-mile paved path follows the shoreline along the city’s outer edge, accommodating pedestrians, cyclists, rollerbladers, scooters, and strollers. Offering scenic views of the San Francisco Bay, the pedway runs past Baywinds Park, Bridgeview Park, Shorebird Park, Gateshead Park, Sea Cloud Park, and Port Royal Park. The route provides a continuous path without requiring on- street travel. While much of the pedway overlaps with the Bay Trail, a segment of the trail runs alongside Seal Slough and terminates in San Mateo City limits, allowing users to navigate much of the city. Further development of the trail within San Mateo would establish a complete trial loop around the City.
3.4.2Neighborhood Trails
Given Foster City’s compact size, its network of neighborhood trails plays a crucial role in serving residents' open space and recreational needs. According to the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, a multi-use trail system for walking, biking, and jogging is the top investment priority for residents3. Ranked as the most important facility in the survey, 81% of respondents expressed a need for these trails, making them the highest-priority amenity.
Beyond recreation, these neighborhood trails provide safe connections for children traveling to school, easy access between parks, and a sustainable, pedestrian-friendly way to navigate the city.
2 Recreation Center Rebuild Project, City Council Presentation, September 2023. URL:
https://www.fostercity.org/parksrec/project/recreation-center-rebuild-project-cip-301-678 3 Parks Master Plan Community Survey
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
416
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 8 Photo #1: The Levee Pedway, as seen from Gateshead Park. Source: WRT
3.5 Foster City Lagoon
The lagoon is a defining feature of Foster City. The lagoon spans five miles and offers residents water-based recreational opportunities such as kayaking and paddling. Residents appreciate how the lagoon complements Foster City's parks, particularly Leo J. Ryan Park. As reported in Section 8.1 Community Priorities, waterfront parks and programming emerged as a popular activation opportunity, with strong resident support for opportunities such as waterfront dining, park-lagoon interactions, and floating art installations. Concerns about water quality have made some residents hesitant about recreational activities on the lagoon. Many expressed a strong interest in improving water quality for swimming and some were open to reconfiguring the lagoon edge. Residents emphasized the importance of creating safe and engaging ways to interact with the lagoon.
3.6 Park Walksheds
Walkable access to parks and open spaces is essential for promoting physical activity, fostering community interaction, and supporting overall well-being. Having a park within a 10-minute walk is generally considered the national gold standard by well-known organizations such as the Trust for Public Land, which uses walkable access as a key metric to rank city’s by park access.4. As shown in Figure 2, all of Foster City’s residential neighborhoods are within a 10- minute walk of a park – a feat that many communities struggle to achieve. 4 Trust for Public Land Park Equity Scoring: Understanding A City's Parkscore: Trust for Public Land
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
417
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 9
3.7 Park Access and Equity
All neighborhoods in Foster City have access to parks. However, there are notable demographic patterns in Foster City that should be taken into account when considering future park development. As shown in Figure 3, there is a concentration of people 65 and over in central Foster City neighborhoods, generally along the Foster City Boulevard corridor. This suggests an opportunity to focus senior-serving recreational resources in this area. The central location of the existing and future Community Centers supports this. Leo J. Ryan, Catamaran, Ketch, Port Royal and Edgewater parks are also in close proximity to where many seniors live, including Metro Center Senior Apartments and Alma Point Senior Apartments. Youth appear to be more evenly distributed in Foster City, though overall the central neighborhoods have a higher density of people (of all ages).
As shown in Figure 4, parks are generally accessible to residents across different racial and income groups. While most residents in Foster City are Asian and/or White, there are no areas with culturally specific communities. As shown in Figure 5, household income does not appear to influence spatial access to parks in Foster City, with most residents enjoying sufficient park access regardless of income.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
418
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 10 Figure 2 10-Minute Walkshed in Foster City
Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
419
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 11
Figure 3 Foster City Youth and Senior Population
Source: American Community Survey, 2023 5-Year Estimates
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
420
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 12 Figure 4 Race & Ethnicity in Foster City
Source: American Community Survey, 2023 5-Year Estimates
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
421
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 13
Figure 5 Median Household Income in Foster City
Source: American Community Survey, 2023 5-Year Estimates
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
422
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 14 3.8 Level of Service
3.8.1Acreage Level of Service
Park level of service (LOS) measures the availability and quality of parks and recreational facilities relative to a community’s population, ensuring equitable access and adequate resources. As shown in Table 3, Foster City’s approximately 158 acres of parks, open space, and trails provide a level of 4.5 acres per 1,000 residents. When considering developed parkland only, Foster City’s current inventory equates to 3.2 acres per 1,000 residents. As shown in Table 4, Foster City offers a relatively high level of service in terms of developed land per resident.
The Foster City General Plan 2009 establishes a goal of 5 acres per 1,000 residents, including all types of parks and open spaces. Foster City anticipates adding 1,896 homes as part of their RHNA target, which will result in its population growing from 35,004 today to 39,070 by 2040
5.. To meet the General Plan standard, Foster City would need an additional 40 acres of park and open space by 2040. The Parks and Open Space and Conservation Element and Parks Master Plan process gives the City an opportunity to revisit its level of service standard. Given the high level of satisfaction in Foster City’s parks and recreation and the limited availability of land, it may be appropriate to establish a standard for parks at the current level of service (3.2 acres per 1,000) and an overall parks and open space standard of 5 acres of 1,000.
Table 3 Acreage of Level of Service
2024
Inventory Service Levels 2024 Needs 2040 Needs
Parks Area (acres)
Current
Service Level
(acres/1,000
residents)
Service Level
Standard
(acres/1,000
residents)
Additional
Acreage
Needed in
2024
Additional
Acreage
Needed in
2040
Parkland* 3.2 NA NA NA
Parkland & Open
Space (Pedway,
Walkways, Public OS)
158.1 4.5 5.00 19 40
*Includes city-owned and publicly accessible private parkland Table 4 Neighboring City Level of Service
City Population Total Developed Acres per 1,000 Residents City of Foster City 35,004 3.16
City of Belmont 28,307 3.99
City of Burlingame 32,121 2.91
City of Menlo Park 35,258 1.54
City of San Bruno 43,440 1.59
City of San Mateo 107,227 1.94
5 Foster City Housing Element 2022. URL:
https://www.fostercity.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community_development/page/3431/foster_city_he_rev_3.20.2024.pdf
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
423
Foster City’s Parks System
Parks and Recreation Assessment 15
3.9 Park Amenity Level of Service
Like park acreage level of service, standards can also be applied to individual park amenities.
Table 5 details the Foster City population per typical park amenity. These values can then be compared to the averages for comparably sized communities. These averages along with clear understanding of community priorities set the groundwork establishing amenity standards that are responsive to community needs.
As shown in Table 4, Foster City generally exceeds national service levels for park amenities, particularly for tennis, pickleball, playgrounds, soccer fields, basketball courts, and diamond fields. This abundance has led to most of these amenities having low Priority Investment Ratings (PIRs)2 in the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, suggesting demand for additional of these amenities is low. In contrast, volleyball courts and the dog park fall below national service standards but are viewed as medium PIRs, suggesting a need for future investment.
The Parks Master Plan provides an opportunity to set specific targets for each of these amenities (and others), to help shape future investment in parks.
Table 5 Park Amenity Level of Service
Recreation
Component
Foster City
Inventory Current Level of Service Average Level of Service1 Priority
Investment
Rating
Outdoor Recreation Amenities
Diamond Field 10 1 Field Per 3,500 1 Field Per 3,007 Low Soccer/
Multipurpose Field
12 1 Field Per 2,917 1 Field Per 3,333 Low
Basketball Court 8 1 Court Per 4,376 1 Field Per 7,501 Low Tennis Court 13 1 Court Per 2,693 1 Court Per 5,461 Medium Pickleball Courts 6 1 Court Per 5,834 1 Court Per 7,737 Medium Bocce Ball Court 4 1 Court Per 8,751 1 Court Per N/A Low Volleyball Court 4 1 Court Per 17,502 1 Court Per 14,280 Medium Dog Park 1 1 Site Per 35,004 1 Site Per 27,508 Medium
Playgrounds 16 1 Site Per 2,188 1 Site Per 3,105 Low
1 For agencies serving communities of between 20,000 and 49,999 residents. Source: National Recreation and Park Association, 2024.
2 Source: Parks Master Plan Community Survey, 2024. Priority Investment Rating is an index score based on residents’ level of unmet need and level of importance for each amenity.
3.10 Policy Considerations
The following policy considerations highlight strategic opportunities to enhance the availability, distribution, and quality of Foster City’s parks:
1. Park Land and Amenity Standards
•Through the Parks and Open Space Element update, the City can revisit and recalibrate park acreage standards to reflect realistic growth and community preferences.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
424
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 16 •Overall, Foster City provides approximately 3.2 acres of park land per 1,000 residents— or 4.5 acres, if paths and trails and open spaces (in particular, the Levee Pedway) are accounted for. This falls slightly short of the current General Plan standard of 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. Policies can include methods to feasibly add additional acres of parks and open spaces to meet the decided-upon General Plan standard. •Policies that establish an amenity level of service would help align prioritization of amenities with indicated community desires.
2. Facility and Amenity Enhancements
•Foster City could consider targeted expansions of high-demand facilities, including additional dog parks and sports courts.
3. Trail and Connectivity Improvements
•The City may consider promoting policies that support the development and enhancement of interconnected pedestrian and bicycle trails linking parks, neighborhoods, and the Levee Pedway.
•Policies should highlight and enhance access to and experiences on the Lagoon.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
425
Park Usage
Parks and Recreation Assessment 17
4 Park Usage
Park usage metrics provide insights into visitation patterns, including visitor numbers, visit frequency, and average dwell time. This data was collected in 2024 using Placer.ai, an analytics platform that leverages anonymous mobile location data to analyze how people move through and interact with different spaces.6 By examining how Foster City’s parks are used, insights emerge that can inform future planning and improvements. Findings are summarized below with further detail available in the Foster City Parks Usage Analysis.
4.1 Well-Used and Under-Used Parks
High visitation, frequent use, and extended dwell times may be seen as indicators of parks that people prefer, making them valuable models for success. In Foster City, community parks on average saw many more annual visits than other types of parks; per square foot, special use parks saw the highest visitation. Leo J. Ryan Park had the highest number of annual visits at 621,923, which is nearly 500,000 more visits than the second highest park visitation count. This is likely attributed to its many successful community events throughout the year at Leo J. Ryan Park. Sea Cloud Park, which had 181,980 visits, hosts Foster City’s active sports users. In contrast, less-used parks—especially when compared to parks of similar size and context—may merit more attention. Among community parks, Boothbay and Edgewater parks saw relatively low visitor levels per square foot at 68,176 visits and 57,323 visits respectively. Among neighborhood parks, Catamaran and Port Royal parks received a high number of visits per square foot, owing in part to the sports fields there, while Farragut, Gull, Killdeer, Marlin, Shad, and Sunfish saw quite low levels of use.
Figure 6 Annual Number of Visitors by Park (Oct 2023 – 2024) Source: Placer.ai
6 Location Intelligence & Foot Traffic Data Software – Placer.ai
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
426
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 18 4.1.1 Catering to Residents, Capitalizing on Visitors Foster City parks primarily cater to residents. However, parks like Baywinds Park and Leo J.
Ryan Park, which attract significant non-resident visitation, provide opportunities for cost recovery through user fees, equipment rentals, or other strategies. Other parks with desirable recreation amenities, like Sea Cloud, may have potential to be leveraged for more cost recovery.
4.2 Extending Use
Lighting and shade play a crucial role in shaping park usage patterns, both seasonally and throughout the day. Parks with higher lighting scores in the site assessment (see next section) experience increased visitor activity during evening hours, with a noticeable peak around 5-8 PM. Enhanced lighting can extend usability into evening hours, while adding shade trees and structures could improve comfort and attract more users during peak sunlight. These upgrades could also promote greater year-round accessibility and enjoyment of park spaces.
4.2.1Understanding Park Users
Demographic analysis highlights the importance of tailoring Foster City's parks to the diversity of its residents. Young adults and Hispanic/Latino and low to moderate-income households show strong park engagement, while seniors, middle-aged adults, and Asian residents—despite being the city's largest demographic group— may be underrepresented. It should be noted that visitor demographic data is inferred based on a visitor’s census block group, providing insights into the demographic composition of neighborhoods rather than the specific traits of individual users.
These trends underscore the need to maintain affordable, accessible amenities while expanding culturally relevant programming, improving language accessibility, and enhancing facilities to attract underrepresented groups.
4.3 Policy Considerations
The following policy considerations highlight strategic opportunities to optimize park utilization, enhance comfort, and ensure equitable access and representation:
1. Comfort and Extended Use
•Foster City’s parks vary widely in use, from the highly used Leo J. Ryan, Sea Cloud, Catamaran and Port Royal parks to the relatively less-used Edgewater, Farragut, Killdeer, Shad, and Sunfish parks. Policies can propose amenities or enhancements to maximize the use of existing park spaces and encourage use in under-utilized parks. •To increase park usage in the evening, the City could prioritize installation of lighting to extend park usability into evening hours.
•To boost park usage during the day, the City could incorporate shade structures or plant trees with large canopies strategically to enhance daytime comfort.
2. Visitor Management and Revenue Opportunities
•Management strategies could be developed for parks attracting visitors from outside Foster City, including improved user experiences and the potential introduction of user fees or revenue-generating events.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
427
Park Usage
Parks and Recreation Assessment 19
3. Equity and Cultural Representation
•Policies could be developed to gain insights from underrepresented groups on what amenities and programming would reflect and support the cultural diversity of Foster City residents.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
428
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 20 5 Site Assessment
An on-the-ground assessment of each park site was conducted to better understand how Foster City’s parks are serving residents in their current condition. WRT evaluated Foster City’s parks using an array of criteria, organized into four categories: access and connectivity; comfort and sense of safety; functionality; and condition.
5.1 Access & Connectivity
Access & Connectivity refers to the opportunity to access amenities for users of all abilities. It includes factors such as signage, internal/external path connectivity, safe pedestrian crossings, parking, and more. The highest scoring parks included Leo J. Ryan, Shorebird, and Gateshead, which generally have great internal and external path connectivity. Parks such as Pompano, Baywinds, Turnstone, Shad, and Edgewater scored lower in this category particularly due to their lack of internal pathways, signage and clear edge permeability. Some parks are more visible, while others are located away from roadways and thoroughfares, making them hard to find and access. Not all parks have the same signage. Bicycle and pedestrian connectivity rated highly, but there is a general lack of bike amenities, such as bike racks. There is sufficient parking at most parks, but additional parking could be added in parks where large events are hosted.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
429
Site Assessment
Parks and Recreation Assessment 21
Figure 7 Park Accessibility and Connectivity Scores
Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
430
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 22 5.2 Comfort & Sense of Safety
Comfort and sense of safety refer to the presence or absence of comfort amenities such as seating, shade, drinking fountains, and restrooms. This category also includes criteria that affect the feeling of safety within a park, such as unobstructed sightlines, signs of vandalism, and lighting. The City’s community and neighborhood parks scored better in this category compared to the mini and special use parks, which tended to have fewer amenities. While most parks are well shaded, there is more shade needed around seating and active amenity areas. Although larger parks had more amenities, many of these were clustered together, leaving areas of the park lacking in shade or places to sit. There is an opportunity to install plantings and offset sidewalks next to busy roads to mitigate noise where it’s necessary at parks next to roads.
Lighting is inconsistent, with some parks having pathway and sports field/court lighting, and others not.
Figure 8 Park Comfort & Safety Scores
Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
431
Site Assessment
Parks and Recreation Assessment 23
5.3 Functionality
Functionality refers to how well the park “works” in providing recreation, a respite, and a setting for community life. It includes criteria such as the diversity and arrangement of amenities, appropriateness of vegetation, and compatibility with neighboring land uses. High scoring parks tend to have a variety of amenities (such as Port Royal, Sea Cloud, Leo J. Ryan, Catamaran, and Ketch). Parks with limited amenities scored lower, including Pompano, Leo, and Bridgeview Park. There are a variety of landscapes throughout the park system. There are water-intensive trees throughout the park system, and turf fields are common. There are few parks with distinct, identity-creating planting areas. Meanwhile, the low-water, low-maintenance planting at Shorebird Park may be a model for other sites. Many parks are in quiet residential areas, and fencing and planting provides additional privacy for nearby homes.
Figure 9 Functionality Scores
Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
432
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 24 5.4 Condition
Condition refers to the physical condition of park assets and amenities. The City’s mini parks scored the highest in this category. Geese present a significant impact on parks in Foster City; their droppings and feathers diminish the overall cleanliness, especially at sites like Erckenbrack, Gull, and Marlin Park, where there are beaches on the lagoon. Otherwise, sports fields, site furnishings, and playgrounds are generally in good condition. Some furnishings are damaged at specific parks, like Baywinds, Ketch and Shad, and Erckenbrack.
Figure 10 Park Condition Scores
Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
433
Site Assessment
Parks and Recreation Assessment 25
Photo #5: Many park amenities are in good condition, especially at Mini parks, as seen here at Ketch Park. Source: WRT
5.5 Overall
Foster City has a high-quality park system overall, with targeted enhancements needed to elevate park access, experience, functionality and condition. In terms of access, additional signage, improved visibility, and path connectivity are needed at specific parks. Lighting, insufficient shade, restrooms, and seating make comfort and safety challenging in some of Foster City’s smaller parks. Parks like Leo J. Ryan offer a diverse range of amenities and well- placed features, but some smaller parks lack sufficient amenities. Enhancing Park amenities and adopting more low-water-use planting areas would improve the overall functionality of the park system. The condition of Foster City parks is generally high, but the presence of geese and some variability in the condition of playgrounds and sports fields need to be addressed.
5.6 Policy Considerations
The following policy considerations highlight strategic opportunities to address park design, infrastructure, and ecological sustainability:
1. Connectivity and Accessibility
•Implementing unified signage and wayfinding systems in larger parks could increase visibility and support navigability of smaller parks.
•The City should consider expanding bicycle infrastructure, including additional bike racks and facilities.
2. Connectivity and Accessibility
•Strategically incorporating amenities such as shade, seating, restrooms, lighting, and water fountains could improve user comfort and park usability.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
434
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 26 3. Sustainable Landscaping and Ecology
•Diversifying plantings could enhance aesthetic value, reduce water usage, and create unique park experiences.
•The City should integrate drought-tolerant landscaping and water-conserving irrigation systems in park renovation projects.
4. Maintenance and Wildlife Management
•The City should continue monitoring and improving upon comprehensive management strategies addressing geese populations and their impacts on park conditions and lagoon water quality, as specified in the Geese Management Plan.7 7 Foster City Geese Management Plan: foster_city_goose_management_final_draft.pdf
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
435
Market Potential Index
Parks and Recreation Assessment 27
6 Market Potential Index
The analysis also provides insight into the demand for recreation activities as well as expected consumer attitudes towards these activities by Foster City residents. To better understand demand, ESRI, a spatial analytics company that uses datapoints to visualize, analyze, and interpret geographic data, utilized the Sports and Leisure Market Potential (MPI) tool. ESRI estimates market potential by analyzing consumer survey data and grouping people into segments. They calculate how likely each segment is to use a product or service and apply those rates to local households. Combining these numbers across all segments gives the expected number of consumers in an area. Once this is complete, they compare local usage to national usage to create a Market Potential Index, showing how demand in one area compares to the national average. Higher MPI scores suggest high demand, while lower scores indicate either low interest or limited access. This data, combined with other planning insights—such as demographics, community input, and current park facilities—helps determine the appropriate level of park space and amenities.
Foster City is evaluated in four categories: general sports, fitness, outdoor recreation, and commercial recreation.
•General Sports: Foster City shows higher sports participation rates than the national average in most categories, especially in Golf and Tennis. •Fitness: The city surpasses national averages in many fitness activities, with the most notable gaps seen in Walking for Exercise, Weightlifting, and Pilates. •Outdoor Recreation: Participation is generally higher in Foster City for more active outdoor pursuits, particularly Hiking and Road Bicycling.
•Commercial Recreation: Foster City residents engage more in dining out, cultural activities, and photography, suggesting a preference for social and artistic experiences over electronic gaming.
•Overall Participation: Across all categories, Foster City generally ranks average to above average, reflecting strong participation when opportunities are available.
When analyzing Foster City’s MPI, it is critical to note that Foster City’s participation estimates are not restricted to the city’s boundaries. That is, the MPI may consider participation estimates of neighboring communities.
6.1 Recreation Trends
There are notable trends occurring in Foster City that align closely with national trends.
Pickleball continues to be the fastest growing sport in America. Total participation for fitness, team, outdoor, racquet, water and winter sports are higher than their pre-pandemic participation rates. Walking is the most popular recreational activity nationwide. Additionally, participation in commercial recreation has risen across the country, including activities such as dining out, attending sporting events, visiting art galleries and museums, and enjoying live theater performances. Given Foster City’s demographic trends and MPI, we expect Foster City’s recreation trends to closely follow national trends.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
436
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 28 6.2 Policy Considerations
The following policy considerations highlight strategic opportunities to proactively respond to evolving community interests and recreation trends:
1. Recreation Trends Monitoring
•The City may consider adopting a formal process to regularly monitor recreation trends and demographic changes, positioning program and facility offerings to remain responsive to community demand.
2. Targeted Program Development
•Market potential data could be leveraged to guide investment in high-demand recreation activities such as walking paths, fitness programming, swimming, yoga, tennis, pickleball, basketball, hiking, and cycling.
3. Flexible Facility Planning
•Policies can be developed to promote flexibility in facility design and programming, enabling adaptive responses to emerging recreation trends and community priorities.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
437
Community Priorities
Parks and Recreation Assessment 29
7 Community Priorities
As part of the Foster City Master Plan development, several public engagement and outreach efforts were conducted as follows:
•Pop-up Events: 800+ engaged
•Public Workshop: 132 engaged
•Community Survey: 310 responses
•Park Improvement Questionnaire: 265 comments
•Focus Group Meetings: 38 Engaged
•Project Website: 1,600+ views
What emerged from public outreach and engagement further illuminates the existing condition of Foster City parks and recreation programs, and what improvements can be made.
7.1 Community Outreach Events
7.1.1 Pop-Up Events
The pop-ups involved a booth and simple engagement activities with City staff and consultants at key community events. At the pop-ups, the planning team set up poster boards and invited community members to answer key questions about what park users would like to see in their parks, such as amenities, facility improvements, and activation and programming. There were 7 pop up events and over 800 people were engaged.
Photo #7: Pop-Up events provided park users an opportunity to engage with the planning process in an informal and relaxed environment. Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
438
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 30 7.1.2 Task Force Meeting
The City established a task force to help guide the Parks Master Plan process. The Task Force is made up of Foster City residents who applied and were selected to represent a broad cross- section of community interests and knowledge. The goal of the Task Force is to strategize to inform an inclusive engagement process, identify facility and programmatic opportunities, and develop a vision for what Foster City parks and recreation should look like in the future. As summarized below, the first Task Force meeting was held in October 2024 at the Foster City Community Center, where members discussed the current state of Foster City’s parks and recreation, opportunities for updating and expanding parks, and a vision Foster City’s parks and recreation system.
Photo #8: At the Task Force meetings, stakeholders with varying knowledge and expertise offer targeted feedback about specific opportunities for different parks across Foster City. Source: WRT
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
439
Community Priorities
Parks and Recreation Assessment 31
7.1.3 Public Workshop
A public workshop was held on January 22, 2025 to engage with the community on analysis findings, to gain a deeper understanding of the City’s parks and recreation needs, and to share information about the planning process, including project updates, scope, and timeline.
Additional comments were solicited via an online survey and through the Parks and Recreation Committee Meeting in February 2025.
Photos #9: The workshop provides Foster City residents with an opportunity to meet their neighbors and discuss various challenges and opportunities related to their parks and recreation programs.
Source: WRT
7.2 Parks Master Plan Community Survey
A Parks Master Plan Community Survey was administered by ETC Institute. The survey was distributed through mail and online to a random sample of households throughout Foster City during the winter of 2024-2025. Foster City residents were surveyed on various park-related topics: facilities and program use, the benefits, importance, and improvements to parks and recreation in Foster City, and facility/amenity needs and priorities. The survey results were compared with the national average for each category. The overall results of the over 300 residents which achieved a 95% confidence level show that the results are reflective of the City’s overall population. According to the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, 85% of residents are satisfied or very satisfied with the City’s parks and recreation system, which is significantly higher than the national average (62%).
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
440
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 32 To define what facilities and programs were a priority for Foster City residents, ETC used its Priority Investment Rating (PIR) tool. The PIR equally weighs (1) the importance that residents place on facilities and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the facilities.
Figure 11 Priority Index Rating for Facilities/Amenities As shown on Figure 11, multiuse trails, a recreation center, indoor exercise/fitness equipment, a swimming pool, beaches, trees and shade, and walking trails in parks are top resident priorities.
Medium priority facilities/amenities include community gardens, picnic shelters and BBQ areas, multipurpose lawns, pickleball courts, and open space and conservation areas. The lower priority items include facilities that serve less traditional sports, such as a golf course, a bike park, baseball fields, and a skate park.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
441
Community Priorities
Parks and Recreation Assessment 33
Figure 12 Priority Index Rating for Programs/Activities As indicated in Figure 12, top resident priorities for programs and events include fitness/wellness programs, community special events, outdoor recreation, programs for seniors, cultural enrichment programs, visual arts & crafts programs, performing arts programs, and pickleball lessons & leagues. There were three medium priority programs, which were swim lessons, tennis lessons, and STEM classes. The lower priority programs ranged from less traditional sport programs such as rugby, lacrosse, and cricket to nature camps, after school programs and seasonal day camps.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
442
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 34 7.3 Community Engagement Takeaways and Policy
Considerations
Overall, hundreds of engaged residents have shed light on the aspects of the parks and recreation system that should be improved, added, or prioritized. Key themes emerged from the outreach and engagement process:
Trails & Connectivity
Multi-use trails are the highest priority need according to the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, indicating a desire for additional trail connections throughout the city. In engagement activities, many residents mentioned wanting additional walking loops in parks, and impr oved signage and lighting. One of the more important elements that could be improved is identifying clear guidelines for trail users and installing clear markings to guide pathway users and mitigate safety hazards.
Beaches & Water Quality
Foster City’s access to the Lagoon and San Francisco Bay is unique. However, residents indicated several improvements needed to make both waterbodies true recreational assets. The water quality keeps residents away from recreating on the lagoon, and several residents mentioned eliminating the beaches entirely and replacing them with docks for boat access. Otherwise, the lagoon makes Foster City unique and creating opportunities to bring residents closer to the water, such as waterfront dining and public art, is an important next step.
Park Amenities
There is a desire for additional park amenities, particularly passive facilities used to walk, picnic, or relax. Amenities to each of these activities could include trails, gardens, and picnic shelters. As identified earlier, the need for active park amenities, such as playgrounds and sports courts and fields, is being met compared to passive park amenities. But, given the popularity of sports and fitness classes, new and improved courts could be added.
Park Comfort
The community expressed a desire for increased park comfort, through additional shade, restrooms, seating, lighting and more. Many residents expressed how certain parks have unplanned green space, and there is an opportunity to activate those parks with seating and lighting.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
443
Community Priorities
Parks and Recreation Assessment 35
Community Events and Programs
There is a strong need for additional programs and events in Foster City.
Community events were highlighted by Foster City residents, such as outdoor markets that promote diversity and inclusion or seasonal markets around holidays. Other events included performing arts shows and holiday parades.
Additionally, community programs that promote fitness and outdoor recreation is a high priority need, as well ensuring there are ample programs for kids and seniors.
Indoor Recreation and Swimming
Throughout the community engagement process, particularly in the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, there was a demonstrated need for additional indoor recreation facilities and a swimming pool. Without improved water quality in the lagoon, a swimming pool is a high priority for residents. However, if the lagoon’s entryways and water quality can be improved, the lagoon could serve as an asset to serve multiple activities.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
444
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 36 8 Key Issues and Opportunities Summary
Foster City has a dynamic park and open space network. With 24 parks, several miles of multi- use paths, a lagoon, recreation facilities, and a diverse range of programs and services, Foster City’s parks are a key part of supporting livability and creating a healthy atmosphere in the city.
In its current state, Foster City parks and open space are set up for success in the future, and there are actionable goals that will help sustain success into the future. This section highlights key issues and opportunities to address community priorities and changing trends.
Figure 13 Focus Area and Opportunities
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
445
Key Issues and Opportunities Summary
Parks and Recreation Assessment 37
8.1 Foster City’s Park System
Key Issues
•Facility and Amenity Enhancements: While Foster City is currently building a new community center that will augment indoor recreation opportunities, the City will still lack a gymnasium or a swimming pool.
•Lagoon Activation and Accessibility: Limited Lagoon Access. Foster City Lagoon is a unique and treasured asset, and one that several Foster City parks border. However, recreational use of the lagoon is currently limited by relatively limited public boat launch points and water quality concerns.
Opportunities
•Park Variety. Foster City has a balanced park system, with a mix of parks serving the whole community (community parks), parks serving neighborhoods and local areas (neighborhood and mini parks), and parks serving specific types of activities (special use parks). •Park Accessibility. The City’s parks are well-distributed, putting virtually all residents with a half-mile walk of a park—one of the gold standards of current park system planning.
Furthermore, the concentration of community parks and indoor recreation facilities in central Foster City is particularly well-suited to the concentration of seniors. •Park Land and Amenity Standards:
oFoster City’s Parks and Open Space Element update and parks master plan provide an opportunity to revisit its level of service standards to make sure they are calibrated to align with priorities. The current overall standard would require 40 acres of additional park and open space land—a target that is ambitious but may be achievable with targeted new open space opportunities.
oThe City can establish amenity level of service standards to align with the level of prioritization indicated by community engagement and the Parks Master Plan Community Survey. This may result in a focus on increasing the number of dog parks and pickleball courts, while potentially holding steady or reducing the number of diamond fields and certain other amenities.
•Recreation Facility Partnerships: The lack of a gymnasium available for community use may be addressed through partnership with the school district and/or the Peninsula Jewish Community Center (PJCC).
•Trail and Connectivity Improvements: There is an opportunity to augment the Levee Pedway with new paths and trails that connect through the city and between parks. Direction may be provided both from a recreation perspective, through the Open Space and Recreation Element/Parks Master Plan, and through an active transportation planning process.
•Lagoon Activation and Accessibility: The Lagoon is a very special amenity with unrealized potential. There is an opportunity to support more recreational experiences, through improved access to the water and experiences along the water (e.g. outdoor dining, promenades, relaxation spaces, destination amenities.)
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
446
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 38 8.2 Park Usage
Key Issues
•Comfort and Extended Use: Many parks in Foster City see their dwell times fall after dark, likely due to lack of lighting. Others may have lower usage during the day due to limited shade.
•Equity and Cultural Representation: Diverse communities may not feel represented in the availability of amenities offered in Foster City’s parks. This is suggested by the relatively lower level of use by Asian residents.
Opportunities
•Visitor Management and Revenue Opportunities: Parks that attract people from outside Foster City—Leo J. Ryan, Sea Cloud and Baywinds—may present opportunities for more attention to creating a positive experience, and greater leveraging of investment, such as through park user fees.
•Comfort and Extended Use: The addition of lighting in parks is likely to extend park use into the evening hours and provide good recreational value for residents. Similarly, more shade in parks will have the effect of bolstering their appeal on hot days, allowing people to still enjoy being outdoors.
•Equity and Cultural Representation: Foster City can work to improve accessibility and culturally relevant amenities and programming, recognizing the full diversity of its residents.
8.3 Site Assessment
Key Issues
•Connectivity and Accessibility: Foster City parks generally have successful access and connectivity characteristics. Areas of potential improvement include consistent signage, wayfinding in larger parks, greater visibility for some small parks, more bike racks, and potential resizing of parking.
•Comfort and Usability Enhancements:
oSome Foster City parks would benefit from additional shade around seating and active amenity areas, and more distribution of comfort amenities in parts of larger parks as well as in mini parks.
oMost Foster City parks offer a range of passive and active amenities, in a functional arrangement. Some parks, especially the smaller ones, are thin on amenities, and in general, parks would benefit from more unique recreational experiences and planting palettes.
•Sustainable Landscaping and Ecology:
oFoster City’s parks involve extensive water-loving landscapes and will need to be adapted for greater water conservation, especially areas that lack amenities. oIrrigation systems in some parks are in need of significant upgrades.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
447
Key Issues and Opportunities Summary
Parks and Recreation Assessment 39
•Maintenance and Wildlife Management: While parks in Foster City are in good condition overall, geese are a significant issue, leaving droppings, and feathers and degrading water quality in the lagoon. Issues are highlighted in the Geese Management Plan.8 Opportunities
•Connectivity and Accessibility: Signage and wayfinding improvements can help knit together Foster City’s larger parks and make some smaller parks more visible. •Comfort and Usability Enhancements:
oThe strategic addition of shade, seating, lighting, restrooms, and bike racks will make Foster City’s parks more comfortable and accessible and extend their hours of use. oFoster City can activate underutilized park spaces to meet the needs and interests of park users and create new and interesting park experiences. •Sustainable Landscaping and Ecology:
oDiversifying plantings will add character to parks in Foster City and also enable the City to maintain parks with lower water use.
oIrrigation upgrades can be paired strategically with significant park enhancements.
8.4 Market Potential Index
Key Issues
•Recreation Trends Monitoring:
oFoster City has a higher-than-average market potential index (MPI) for nearly all of the general sports and fitness activities measured by ESRI. Foster City would be expected to have a high MPI for walking for exercise, weightlifting, swimming, jogging/running, yoga, aerobics, golf, tennis, and basketball. Hiking and road bicycling are also rated highly.
oChanging trends in recreation will continue to present new challenges around delivering the facilities and services that residents demand.
Opportunities
•Recreation Trends Monitoring: As recreation trends continue to evolve, it will be important for Foster City to track these changes while administering programs and building new amenities.
•Flexible Facility Planning: Foster City should recognize the high potential demand for certain sports and fitness activities as it creates new opportunities in existing recreation facilities, fitness programs and health and wellness classes. 8 Foster City Geese Management Plan: foster_city_goose_management_final_draft.pdf
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
448
City of Foster City
General Plan Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Element 40 8.5 Community Priorities
Key Issues
•Priority Amenity Investments:
oMulti-use trails are the highest priority need according to the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, indicating a desire for additional trail connections throughout the city. Additionally, residents expressed a need for trail lighting, signage, and safety improvements. Foster City’s access to the Lagoon and San Francisco Bay is unique.
However, residents indicated several improvements needed to make both waterbodies true recreational assets. Key needs include improved water quality, increased boat access, and waterfront amenities. There is a desire for additional park amenities, particularly passive facilities used to walk, picnic, or relax. In general, the need for active park amenities, such as playgrounds and sports courts and fields, is being met compared to passive park amenities. The community expressed a desire for increased park comfort, through additional shade, restrooms, seating, lighting and more. oThroughout the community engagement process, particularly in the Parks Master Plan Community Survey, there was a demonstrated need for additional indoor recreation facilities and a swimming pool.
•Program Expansion and Community Events: There is a strong need for additional programs and events in Foster City, particularly ones that promote fitness and outdoor recreation. Additional senior programming was also indicated as a high priority need.
Opportunities
•Priority Amenity Investments: Invest in improving high priority amenities that are important to park users and serve the needs of residents, the highest priority facilities being multiuse pathways for walking, biking, and jogging, recreation Center, fitness courts and stations, swimming pool, lagoon entry points, and shade areas.
•Program Expansion and Community Events: Invest in expanding high priority programs and services that bring residents together, reach a large swath of age groups, and are seasonally sustainable such as fitness and wellness programs, community special events, outdoor recreation, arts programs, and sport tournaments •Enhanced Trails and Connectivity: Create and expand trails that connect neighborhoods and park spaces together, create more space for residents to walk, and connect to the Levee Pedway and San Francisco Bay Trail.
•Lagoon Recreational Enhancements: Re-imagine the lagoon entry points beyond their traditional layout and consider changing the beaches by the lagoon to docks at appropriate locations.
8.3 Attachment 4 - Parks & Recreation Assessment
449
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
180 North Ashwood Avenue
Ventura, California 93003
805-644-4455
w w w . r i n c o n c o n s u l t a n t s . c o m
April 9, 2025
Project No: 24-16899
Vanessa Brannon
City of Foster City
610 Foster City Boulevard
Foster City, CA 94404
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Foster City Parks and Open Space Element and Conservation Elements Update March Study Session Notes
City Council Study Session #1
Date: March 17, 2025
Councilmember Written Questions
1.How are these elements being aligned with the other GP elements? The project scope includes a review and assessment of alignment across all General Plan elements.
We began with a thorough review of relevant City and regional policies and programs to ensure consistency and coordination.
2.Question on data sources
A wide variety of sources are being used, including State and local agency data, GIS tools, City- specific assessments, and more.
3.What specific methods will be used to engage residents that may not be as engaged in civic/govt topics but are personas we want to reach?
oSurveys available at multiple pop-up events, in both written and digital formats oPop-ups are designed to engage people at already-occurring events or popular spaces, catching those who do not typically come to workshops or public meetings oOutreach through City communication channels such as the website and social media oMailers could be discussed if the City has the capacity oTranslation services were not originally budgeted, but accommodations can be considered as specific needs arise
4.Are there mapped potential or known wildlife corridors, or will that come from this update? We are referencing the California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project map (commissioned by CDFW and CalTrans). The Element will identify current data gaps and suggest actions to improve data availability in the future.
5.What are the growth projections used?
We are using projections from Plan Bay Area 2040, consistent with those used in the Housing Element.
Additional Notes from Council Discussion
•Noted item on the agenda: water conservation challenge •Wastewater plant expansion: a joint project with the City of San Mateo, designed to support recycled water use for irrigation and landscaping
•Development of guidelines for a water neutrality growth ordinance for new development
8.3 Attachment 5 - Public Meeting Notes
450
City of Foster City
Parks and Open Space and Conservation Elements Update
2 •Suggested community engagement partners include Rotary Club, the Chamber of Commerce, and the senior community
•Community Ambassadors program could serve as a focus group mechanism Planning Commission Study Session #1
Date: March 20, 2025
Commissioner Questions
1.Regarding the 30% goal by the State of California to conserve 30% of land and coastal waters by 2030… what percentage does Foster City currently have in this category? The 30x30 goal is a statewide initiative and does not assign specific targets to individual jurisdictions. However, Foster City’s preserved areas, such as Belmont Slough, would contribute to this broader goal.
2.Can the same land be used to meet open space and conservation elements? Yes. Lands contributing to the 30x30 effort can also be counted toward the Open Space and Conservation Element goals for providing outdoor recreation. Foster City currently provides 4.45 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, with a target of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. This target will be reassessed in the Parks Master Plan and General Plan Elements.
3.How is the levee land looked at? Seems like open space, conservation, recreation and safety.
Yes, many areas in the city serve multiple purposes. These lands will be assessed for their co- benefits across different Element goals.
4.Regarding the Conservation Element… what area does Foster City currently have and what percentage of Foster City does that equal?
The Conservation Element evaluates the City’s natural resources broadly and develops strategies to maintain their quality. Quantitative assessments are in progress.
5.How is Foster City doing regarding recycling in relation to the Conservation Element? Waste management and recycling goals can be incorporated into the Element if the City desires.
6.What is Foster City’s water allotment and what percentage of it does the City use? We are reviewing multi-year water supply and demand data. A specific response was provided by Sofia.
7–9. Status questions regarding:
•Water line from Redwood City/Belmont
•Third 4-million-gallon water storage tank
•Reclaimed water (“purple pipe”) infrastructure
Responses to these questions were provided by Sofia during the meeting.
10.Should we review the 1992 Lagoon Management Plan?
Yes, this and other adopted City plans are being reviewed for relevant policies and potential alignment with the General Plan update.
General Comments and Discussion Themes
•Energy Conservation:
oPG&E was noted as a barrier due to slow timelines and additional upgrade requirements
oConsideration of microgrids and local resilience solutions •Parks and Recreation:
oParks serve as regional attractors, despite originally being designed for neighborhood use
8.3 Attachment 5 - Public Meeting Notes
451
City of Foster City
Parks and Open Space and Conservation Elements Update
3 oFoster City lacks school properties that often double as parkland in other communities—suggested revisiting the original Master Plan to address this oConsider offering differentiated amenities by park to enhance citywide access oSuggestion to explore corporate sponsorships for park enhancements •Conservation and Sustainability:
oLevee provides protection for Foster City, but adjacent jurisdictions without levees may pose risks—need to evaluate cross-jurisdictional implications oDiscussion of compliance with solar energy mandates
oIdentified barriers include state mandates on water usage, plant types, and lawn restrictions, which may require community education and support for smooth transitions
•Visioning and Long-Term Planning (10–20 years):
oOptimism for tech breakthroughs in energy and water, with Foster City well-positioned to benefit
oOngoing tension between growth pressures and sustainability goals oParks and open space goals should focus on access, shade, biodiversity (e.g., increasing tree cover and species diversity), and use efficiency
oSpecific interest in enhancing the lagoon’s ecological function and recreational use oPilot community garden program opening April 1, with potential for expansion •Notable Park and Land Use Concerns:
oBridgeview Park noted for low perceived use—suggested alternative uses oSunfitch Park identified as lacking shade
oLagoon-front properties noted as underutilized or blighted—suggested open space improvements as revitalization strategy
oPreservation and enhancement of lagoon areas are key priorities, especially given commercial and recreational access
Citizen's Sustainability Advisory Committee (CSAC)
Questions and Comments for Study Session #1 Presentation April 9, 2025
Questions:
Q: The project seems to focus on Air Quality and Water Quality, but what about light pollution, which can disrupt birds and wildlife? A more visible night sky can aid wildlife.
A: It's currently not in the project plan.
Comments
What issues regarding conservation and sustainability are most important to the future of Foster City?
•Electrification and decarbonization
•Climate change
8.3 Attachment 5 - Public Meeting Notes
452
City of Foster City
Parks and Open Space and Conservation Elements Update
4 •Leo Ryan Park used to have to look more beautiful, natural, wild, and attract many butterflies –natural habitat is lost
•Concern about the use of pesticides
•More butterflies, more natural things, and more trees
•In comparison to the City of Portland, which looks much more green and natural •Foster City should become a green city
•The new Foster City School was an example of no trees, no green spaces •Unfortunately, the soil in Foster City is not amenable to trees and cannot take root because of the salt water and the water table
•Finding trees that can grow in Foster City is a challenge, other than Palm Trees, which provide no shade
•Better understanding of our environment to see what plants and trees can work in Foster City - the shelf life of trees in Foster City is much shorter •We lost trees in Catamaran Park due to rot
•Increase the walkability around the City and make it safer and more appealing to walk instead of driving
•With rewilding, what does it mean if something is already developed? Can it be changed to a wildlife or a natural habitat or something – like the Lucky's store that recently left Foster City (Understanding that it's private property
What barriers to improving conservation and sustainability currently exist? •Responsibility for improving the City's natural habitat – residents need more connection to the City
•A leaky pipe at Catamaran Park was left unreported – the City needs to advertise Foster City Access more
•Financial constraints to making improvements
What do you imagine conservation and sustainability will look like in Foster City over the next 10 to 20 years?
•Would like to get back to the original vision that Fosters had. •Urging more green spaces on private land
•More solar
•Regional connectivity will help us in the future
What issues regarding parks and open space are the most important to the future of Foster City?
•Increasing accessibility to the Parks and open spaces
•That's good, enhancing accessibility.
8.3 Attachment 5 - Public Meeting Notes
453
City of Foster City
Parks and Open Space and Conservation Elements Update
5 •Is there a Park Square footage per resident goal we can aim for? •Urging private landowners to convert unused concrete spaces into green spaces •We need more natural flowers in the City, but it can increase water usage What barriers to improving parks and open space currently exist? •Again, financial constraints
•Apathy and no consequences to the problems facing the City, like Climate Change How do you imagine parks and open spaces will look in Foster City over the next 10 to 20 years?
•More plants, more butterflies
•Fining people who litter or don't recycle
•Placement of all three garbage bins (Trash, Recycling, and Compost) in the parks with instructions on how to recycle and why
•Updating the Parks for accessibility
8.3 Attachment 5 - Public Meeting Notes
454
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
FOSTER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND
JOINT STUDY SESSION BETWEEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE
Council Chambers – 620 Foster City Boulevard – Foster City
M I N U T E S
March 20, 2025
1. CALL TO ORDER
At 7:00 p.m. by Chair Haddad
2. PLANNING COMMISSION ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Jagtiani, Kenkre, Pedro, Stoveland and Chair Haddad
Staff Present: Sofia Mangalam , Community Development Director ; Kevin McGill, Assistant Planner ; Nori Jabba, Housing Coordinator; Della Acosta, Consultant Planner; Denise Bazzano, Assistant City Attorney
3. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
1. None
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. None
5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
1. None
6. NEW PUBLIC HEARING
1. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE USE PERMIT
REQUEST TO ALLOW A HEALTH SCIENCE UNIVERSITY USE AS A UNIQUE USE WITHIN AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED AT 989 E. HILLSDALE
BOULEVARD IN THE TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD AND FINDING THE
PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIORMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15301 (EXISTING FACILITIES) – APN: 094-522- 170
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Jagtiani, seconded by Commissioner Pedro, to adopt Resolution No. P -4-25 Approving UP2024-0037 subject to the conditions of approval in Exhibit A, passed 5-0-0-0.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
455
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
7. OLD BUSINESS
1. None
8. NEW BUSINESS
1. None
9. STUDY SESSION
Community Development Director Mangalam recessed the meeting into a joint study session between the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Committee.
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE ROLL CALL
Present: Committee Members Baer, Bindal, Corpuz, Fong, and Ryzak.
Absent: Committee Member Duncan and Chair Tiwari
1. THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY IS IN THE PROCESS OF UPDATING THE TWO REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL PLAN, INCLUDING (1) PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT; AND (2) CONSERVATION ELEMENT. THE PARKS AND OPEN
SPACE ELEMENT ADDRESSES THE PRESERVATION OF PARKS AND OPEN
SPACE IN FOSTER CITY, WHILE THE CONSERVATION ELEMENT ADDRESSES
THE PRESERVATION OF CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES IN FOSTER CITY.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY SESSION IS TO PROVIDE THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, PARKS AND RECREATION COMMITTEE AND THE PUBLIC AN
OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS FOR UPDATING
THE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PLAN.
Planning Commissioners had the following discussion:
Commissioner Kenkre asked if the Conservation Element will address the Geese Population Control Plan.
Consultant Planner Acosta stated that they are in the process of reviewing the plans and how to incorporate the strategies into the General Plan.
Commissioner Pedro clarified that in order to meet the Executive Order, is it 30% of land and 30% of water, or is it 30% of land and water.
Consultant Planner Acosta confirmed that it is 30% of land and water.
Commissioner Pedro asked if the same land can be used to meet both Open Space and Conservation Element.
Consultant Planner Acosta confirmed.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
456
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
Commissioner Pedro asked if the levee falls under Open Space Conservation, Recreation, or Safety.
Consultant Planner Acosta stated that part of the update is to look at the multi-beneficial uses and co-benefits of everything.
Commissioner Pedro proposed identifying the percentage of open space and conservation Foster City currently has in the analysis.
Consultant Planner Acosta explained that conservation does not break down into percentages and rather investigate strategies to do better from the baseline. She identified that ‘conserving’ are things like air quality and water quality.
Commissioner Pedro cited the conservation element and asked if recycling efforts would be included.
Consultant Planner Acosta replied that it can be included.
Commissioner Pedro referenced Foster City’s allotment for drinking water and inquired about the percentage of use.
Community Development Director Mangalam reported that Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) has a supply guarantee of 5.9 MGD and, per the 2022 -23 numbers, Foster City is currently using 3.6-3.7 MGD.
Commissioner Pedro requested a status update on the potential additional water supply that will come from the Redwood City/Belmont area that was referenced in the report.
Community Development Director Mangalam stated that there are currently two emergency connections from the California Water Service and will have to confer with Public Works for an answer.
Commissioner Pedro cited the report, where it indicated two (2) four-million-gallon water storage tanks and a possibility for a third and asked for an update on the third water tank.
Community Development Director Mangalam reported that EMID has four water storage tanks currently.
Commissioner Pedro requested the status on examining reclaimed water or purple pipe for irrigation purposes, which Redwood City had similarly done.
Community Development Director Mangalam referenced the 15-year CIP project that is related to recycled water connection.
Commissioner Pedro identified that the Lagoon Management Plan mentioned in the report is from 1992 and asked if it will be revised.
Community Development Director Mangalam informed that there is a 2022 Foster City Lagoon Management Plan.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
457
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
Commissioner Stoveland asked if wildlife corridors are only for endangered species or for all species.
Consultant Planner Acosta stated that the law does not specify ; however, their team is working with LCI , the State agency responsible for overseeing the General Plan guidelines, to review the technical analysis on that law and to provide a clearer definition for the next study session.
Commissioner Jagtiani raised concerns regarding the delays homeowners face when converting to high-efficiency systems due to PG&E’s slow response rate. He questioned if the city would have to step in to expedite that process.
Consultant Planner Acosta indicated that the newly adopted Climate Action Plan addresses these energy conservation topics. She furthered that the data and strategies they have will be in alignment to that plan.
Chair Haddad inquired if the golf course would be part of the study.
Consultant Planner Acosta reported that the golf course is being counted as a publicly accessible open space.
Committee Member Corpuz asked for clarification on the scope of what has been learned about the lagoon water quality and what measures will be implemented to ensure safer and cleaner water.
Consultant Planner Acosta noted that they have been provided with water quality testing of the lagoon that will allow them to evaluate if there’s additional recommendations on top of the existing strategies in place.
Committee Member Corpuz inquired about the inclusion of the regionality of Foster City parks, the impact on attracting visitors, and the implications to economic development within the scope of the Parks and Open Space Element.
Consultant Planner Acosta stated that they are looking into park access and will evaluate and review strategies regarding the balance of local and regional use.
Committee Member Baer recommended looking into the original element of the Master Plan and raised concerns about Foster City being taxed for facilities that are not being fulfilled. He referenced the 54- acre plan that consisted of a high school , recreational facilities, and indoor facilities and was to be developed with mostly open space but was abandoned after Proposition 13.
Committee Member Bindal requested a status on the Foster City’s current progress toward meeting the statewide goals, like ’30 by 2030.’
Consultant Planner Acosta noted that the 30 by 30 goal is a statewide initiative and has been making great progress. She mentioned that in order to meet other mandates, they are focusing on modernization and cited SB 1425 and AB 1889 which is related to open space, climate, resiliency, and wildlife connectivity.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
458
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
Commissioner Pedro inquired about Foster City’s allocation of the San Francisco Bay in regard to open space.
Consultant Planner Acosta clarified that Foster City’s allocation is the shoreline and the access to the bay. There will be additional research on marine life in the bay adjacent to the shoreline.
Commissioner Jagtiani suggested a more creative approach to park planning that focuses on serving different needs for different members of the community. He expressed a barrier to infrastructure improvements is the cost and mentioned the possibility of working with the larger companies within Foster City to sponsor the developments.
Summary of staff questions:
What issues regarding conservation and sustainability are most important to the future of Foster City?
Commissioner Pedro stated that water resources are an important part of the conservation element and are important for future planning, building and parks maintenance. He furthered that with 60% reuse of the current water allotment, there is still room for growth.
Committee Member Ryzak referred Foster City’s levee and how surrounding cities are not similarly protected . She raised concerns that this may lead to potential impacts and downfalls of reaching conservation goals.
Consultant Planner Acosta stated that the levee data is incorporated into the analysis, including sea level ri se, tidal flooding, and groundwater rise and will continue to look at data on those impacts.
Commissioner Jagtiani referenced the net neutrality clause stated on every project brought to Planning Commission. He reiterated his prior comments on State mandates of high-efficiency systems and the need to address how Foster City will comply.
Committee Member Baer identified Sea Cloud Phase 2 as part of the Development Plan for recreation; however, CEQA and other agencies prevented Foster City from developing those areas. He asked if this example fits into the current topic.
Consultant Planner Acosta stated that she is unfamiliar with Sea Cloud Phase 2 but will do further research.
What barriers to improving conservation and sustainability exist currently?
Commissioner Pedro stated that energy conservation can be included in this element. He suggested a microgrid, similar to that of Palo Alto, to allow Foster City to be self - sustainable and provided examples like solar power and wind power.
Commissioner Stoveland inquired if the energy conservation topics will be discussed with the Sustainability Committee as well.
Consultant Planner Acosta confirmed.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
459
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
What do you imagine conservation and sustainability will look like in Foster City over the next 10 to 20 years?
Commissioner Pedro stated he looks forward to the future and that Foster City has the right things in place, such as great staff, strong elected officials, and an active and involved community. He provided the levee as an example of investing in the future, as far as conservation and sustainability. He furthered that Foster City will have major breakthroughs in renewable energy and water.
Committee Member Ryzak raised concerns on the requirement for growth and balancing it alongside conservation and sustainability.
What issues regarding parks and open space are most important to the future of Foster City?
Commissioner Jagtiani encouraged using the parks more efficiently and effectively, to meet the needs of all members of the community.
Commissioner Stoveland indicated that many parks are in the center of residential neighborhoods and to ensure the right use of the park depending on location.
Commissioner Kenkre stated that he would like to see usage of each park and referenced Bridgeview Park being utilized more for parking for the levee trail.
Committee Member Corpuz highlighted the importance of responsibly acting on key important issues of safety, sustainability, and functionality. He provided an example of Foster City beaches and their water quality as well as the water and recreational uses of the lagoon on a regional level.
Commissioner Pedro concurred that lagoon conservation is important. He added that retail is attached to the lagoon and could play a role in one of the issues regarding waterways and lagoons.
What barriers to improving parks and open space exist currently?
Commissioner Ryzak identified State Mandates on water usage and plant varietals to be a barrier to improving the parks. She stated that as the new Parks Master Plan is implemented, creating a smooth transition and communication with the community is of importance.
How do you imagine parks and open space will look in Foster City over the next 10 to 20 years?
Commissioner Kenkre raised concerns about the lack of wildlife in Leo J. Ryan Park, such as birds and butterflies, sans geese.
Committee Member Corpuz stated that he imagines more trees, shade, and open spaces.
He indicated a challenge to be the current use and zoning, such as waterfront properties, but can be further enhanced by the economic development from the P arks and Open Space Element.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
460
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
Commissioner Stoveland concurred and added that his neighboring community members have expressed a desire for more trees in Sunfish Park.
10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REPORT
1. None
11. STATEMENTS AND REQUESTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS
1. Commissioner Stoveland thanked staff for the reports.
2. Commissioner Jagtiani thanked staff for the reports and reminded everyone that Saturday is Holi.
3. Commissioner Kenkre stated he had nothing to report.
4. Commissioner Pedro thanked staff and the Parks and Recreations Committee for their attendance and stated that he’s looking forward to the process.
5. Chair Haddad thanked staff for the report and for the Parks and Recreation Committee for attending their meeting.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Adjourned at 8:12 p.m. to a Regular Meeting, April 3, 2025, Council Chambers, 620 Foster City Boulevard, Foster City, California.
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
461
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 20, 2025
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Foster City at a Regular Meeting thereof held on April 3, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES, COMMISSIONERS: Jagtiani, Kenkre, Pedro, Stoveland and Chair Haddad
NOES, COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN, COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS:
_________________________________
NICOLAS HADDAD, CHAIR
ATTEST:
________________________________
SOFIA MANGALAM, SECRETARY
Nicolas Haddad (Apr 7, 2025 20:31 PDT)
Nicolas Haddad
8.3 Attachment 6 - March 20, 2025 Study Session Meeting Minutes
462
Prepared Date 5/5/2025 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register
Accounting Period 2025/11
Report Number 35
Check Number Vendor Name Description
154859 DANIEL STRAMBI LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025
350.00
Check Date Check Amount
5/5/2025 350.00
Submitted for Information:
____________________________________________
Nate Cruz, Finance Director/City Treasurer
CHECKS ON THIS REGISTER PROCESSED AND MAILED ON MAY 5, 2025
9.1 Warrant Register Report FY 2024-2025 Number 35 - May 5, 2025
463
Prepared Date 5/5/2025 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register
Accounting Period 2025/11
Report Number 35A
ACH Date ACH Vendor Name Description
5/5/2025 ACH WILLIAM CLARK LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 210.00 5/5/2025 ACH BARBARA SCHUTZ LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 200.00 5/5/2025 ACH DAVID VILLANUEVA LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 200.00 5/5/2025 ACH MOSHE JOSHUA LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 275.00 5/5/2025 ACH GLENN WILSON LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 140.00 5/5/2025 ACH ERIC EGAN LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 210.00 5/5/2025 ACH DOUGLAS ESTILL LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH THOMAS LINARI LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH MONICA MEDRANO LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 345.00 5/5/2025 ACH JOSEPH PIERUCCI LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 140.00 5/5/2025 ACH BRIAN TIDWELL LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 210.00 5/5/2025 ACH MICHAEL TOWNS LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH CHARLES GOODWIN LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH KENNKETH LAMBRO LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH MOHAMMAD ASLAM LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 345.00 5/5/2025 ACH KRAIG WHITNEY LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH ALBERT PIACENTE LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 350.00 5/5/2025 ACH STEVEN ARCHER LONGEVITY 04/16/2025-05/15/2025 140.00 4,865.00
Amount
Submitted for Information:
____________________________________________
Nate Cruz, Finance Director/City Treasurer
ACH ON THIS REGISTER PROCESSED ON MAY 5, 2025
9.1 Warrant Register Report FY 2024-2025 Number 35A - May 5, 2025
464
Prepared Date 5/14/2025 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register
Accounting Period 2025/11
Report Number 36
Check Number Vendor Name
154861 AAA BUSINESS SUPPL IES & INTERIORS
154862 ADRIENNE TORRE
154863 AFTER SCHOOL HOOPS
154864 ALHAMBRA & SIERRA SPRINGS
154865 ALMA POINT AT FOSTER SQUARE
154866 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES, INC.
154867 AMS SYSTEMS INC
154868 ANIMAL DAMAGE MANAGEMENT, INC.
154869 APEX TESTING LABORATORIES, INC.
154870 AXION COMMUNICATIONS
154871 BANK OF SAN FRANCISCO
154872 BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES
154873 BAY AREA WATER SUPPL Y & CONSERVATION
AGENCY
FY24/25 4TH QUARTER ASSESSMNT, WATER LOSS
CONTROL PROGRAM, LANDSCAPE AUDIT: JANUARY -
MARCH 2025, DROPLET TECHNOLOGIES LICENSING FEE:
APRIL - JUNE 2025, AND REIMBURSEMENT TO BEACH
PARK ELEMENTARY AND RONALD C. WORNICK JEWISH
DAY SCHOOL
154874 BELKORP AG LLC
154875 BHM CONSTRUCTION LLC
154876 BMR-LINCOLN CENTRE LP
154877 BRADY INDUSTRIES
154878 BZ CONSTRUCTION CO
154879 CALIFORNIA POLICE CHIEFS ASSOCIATION
154880 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC POLICY GROUP INC.
154881 CARLOS MUNGUIA
154882 CHENXING GUO
154883 CHRIS DOLBERG
154884 CINTAS CORPORATION
154885 CITY OF SAN MATEO
154886 CLARK PEST CONTROL OF STOCKTON INC
154887 CLASSIC AMUSEMENT LLC
154888 CODE PUBLISHING, LLC
154889 CONTRACT SWEEPING SERVICES
154890 CORE & MAIN LP
154891 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
154892 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO (BHRS)
154893 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMUNICATIONS
154894 DATAWORKS PLUS, LLC
154895 DEPENDABLE LOCK AND HARDWARE INC
154896 DEWEY PEST CONTROL
154897 DOG WASTE DEPOT
154898 ERIVERTO PLANCARTE5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 200.00 5/14/2025 PEST CONTROL - 501 PILGRIM 210.00
5/14/2025 DOGGIE BAGS 4,457.40
5/14/2025 FINGERPRINTING SCANNER, READER, CAMERA SYSTEM,
SOFTWARE, TRAINING, AND INSTALLATION
26,281.87
5/14/2025 KEYS AND LOCKSMITH SERVICES 982.85
5/14/2025 COMMUNITY WELLNESS, CRISIS RESPONSE TEAM
(CWCRT) PROGRAM CLINICIAN COST
27,372.77
5/14/2025 MESSAGE SWITCH: APRIL - JUNE 2025 4,095.75
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - SEWER PROGRAM 716.41 5/14/2025 SAN MATEO COUNTY TRAINING CONSORTIUM 2025
SPRING ACADEMY REGISTRATION FOR 5 EMPLOYEES
1,875.00
5/14/2025 MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATE 844.50
5/14/2025 STREET SWEEPING SERVICES - APRIL 2025 10,500.00 5/14/2025 PEST AWAY SERVICES 366.00
5/14/2025 DEPOSIT FOR CARNIVAL RIDE AT SUMMER DAYS 2025 5,000.00 5/14/2025 UNIFORM/LAUNDRY SERVICES 703.10
5/14/2025 CIP652 WWTP DRAW REF #46-71: MARCH 2023 - APRIL 2025
16,000,362.08
5/14/2025 CLASS REFUND: CAMP OUTBACK 350.00
5/14/2025 EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT: OPENGOV MOUNTAIN
WEST REGIONAL CONFERENCE 4/8/25 - 4/9/25
276.46
5/14/2025 LOBBYING SERVICES: APRIL 2025 5,000.00
5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 200.00
5/14/2025 BATHROOM REPAIR - 833 COMET 395.00
5/14/2025 WOMEN LEADERS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING
SYMPOSIUM REGISTRATION FOR 4 POLICE EMPLOYEES
2,300.00
5/14/2025 D530: BIOMED-ILLUMINA 200 LINCOLN CENTRE DR.
DEPOSITS ACCOUNT CLOSE AND REFUND
2,915.83
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - PARKS PROGRAM 3,268.68 5/14/2025 EQUIPMENT PARTS - VEHICLE PROGRAM 84.72
5/14/2025 CIP678: RECREATION CENTER REBUILD PROJECT -
CONSTRUCTION SERVICES: APRIL 2025
1,550,742.79
5/14/2025 WATER AND WASTEWATER RATES STUDY 13,500.00
5/14/2025 55,707.89
5/14/2025 TELEPHONE LINE - BUILDING ENTRY 52.39
5/14/2025 BHM CONSTRUCTION RETAINAGE PAYMENT APPLICATION #6
81,618.04
5/14/2025 GROUND SQUIRREL CONTROL 350.00
5/14/2025 CIP678: RECREATION CENTER REPLACEMENT PROJECT - TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES: 2/15/25 - 3/28/25
25,271.30
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - BUILDING PROGRAM 345.35 5/14/2025 CUSTOM PRINTING & POSTAGE FOR WATER AND SEWER
PROGRAM
7,626.03
5/14/2025 MEASURE K EMERGENCY RENT RELIEF FUNDS: YOLANDA JARA - 790 ALMA POINT LANE #304
943.00
5/14/2025 EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT: CALIFORNIA CRIMINAL
JUSTICE WARRANT SERVICES ASSOCIATION ANNUAL
CONFERENCE 4/30/2025 - 5/2/2025
902.00
5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: AFTER SCHOOL HOOPS 7,757.80
Check Date Description Check Amount
5/14/2025 OFFICE SUPPLIES 138.37
5/14/2025 5 GALLON BOTTLED WATER 172.84
9.1 Warrant Register Report FY 2024-2025 Number 36 - May 14, 2025
465
Prepared Date 5/14/2025 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register
Accounting Period 2025/11
Report Number 36
Check Number Vendor NameCheck Date Description Check Amount 154899 ESSEX PORTFOLIO, LP
154900 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS
154901 FILCO LLC
154902 FORELAND PARTS INC.
154903 FRANK AND GROSSMAN LANDSCAPING
154904 GARY WONG
154905 GAWFCO ENTERPRISES INC
154906 GOVINVEST INC.
154907 GRAINGER
154908 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY
154909 GRAPHIC ELEC TRONICS, INC.
154910 GYM PRECISION INC
154911 HACH COMPANY
154912 HARRELL'S LLC
154913 HERC RENTALS INC
154914 HIP HOUSING AFFO RDABLE VENTURES INC
154915 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
154916 IEDA
154917 INTERSTATE TRAFFI C CONTROL PROD INC
154918 JAMES MACKINLAY
154919 JAY'S TOWING SERVICE LLC
154920 JDH CORROSION CO NSULTANTS, INC.
154921 JOSHUA MCDONALD
154922 KATHERINE ESTRADA
154923 KINETIC KIDS LLC
154924 L & M DISTRIBUTION INC
154925 LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA INC.
154926 LORAL LANDSCAPING INC.
154927 LYNDSEY CASTRO
154928 LYNGSO GARDEN MATERIALS, INC.
154929 MANITO CONSTRUCTION, INC.
154930 MARCUS TERRY
154931 MARK LEE
154932 MARLIN COVE APARTMENTS
154933 METRO LIGHTING
154934 MICHAEL GREENE
154935 MIGHTY PLUMBING
5/14/2025 POST TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT 1,817.09
5/14/2025 WATER HEATER REPAIR AND PLUMBING SERVICES - 501
PILGRIM
2,425.00
5/14/2025 MEASURE K EMERGENCY RENT RELIEF FUNDS: KENIA
SOTELO - 1000 FOSTER CITY BLVD #4103, SELIM
SAHINKAYA - 1000 FOSTER CITY BLVD #4104, AND YI YAO
GUAN - 1000 FOSTER CITY BLVD #5303
6,882.50
5/14/2025 LIGHTING SUPPLIES 597.56
5/14/2025 POST TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT 881.90
5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 195.00
5/14/2025 CLASS 2 BASE ROCK - WATER PROGRAM 316.64
5/14/2025 CIP660: WATER TANK IMPROVEMENTS - CONSTRUCTION SERVICES: APRIL 2025
189,724.03
5/14/2025 LANDSCAPE, MEDIANS AND EASEMENTS MAINTENANCE
FEE: MAY 2025
19,032.62
5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 200.00
5/14/2025 PICKLEBALL NETS 618.06
5/14/2025 D537: FOSTER SQUARE DEPOSITS ACCOUNT CLOSE AND REFUND
4,141.96
5/14/2025 EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT: PARKING FOR CALIFORNIA
MUNICIPAL CLERKS ASSOCIATION ANNUAL CONFERENCE
4/29/25 - 5/1/25; FILING AND POSTAGE FOR NOTARY
COMMISSION
142.97
5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: TRACK & FIELD 973.00
5/14/2025 CIP657: LEVEE PROTECTION PLANNING AND
IMPROVEMENT - SEAWALL CORROSION MONITORING
SERVICES
11,171.25
5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 200.00
5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 200.00
5/14/2025 TOWING SERVICES 100.00
5/14/2025 LABOR RELATION SERVICES: MAY 2025 3,615.48
5/14/2025 "NO PARKING ANYTIME" SIGNS FOR PARKS PROGRAM 479.61 5/14/2025 HIP MANAGEMENT FEE AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT:
APRIL 2025; LABOR AND MATERIALS FOR 501 PILGRIM;
DISHWASHER FOR 501 PILGRIM #103
8,046.37
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - PARKS, LAGOON, SEWER,
BUILDING, VEHICLE AND WATER PROGRAM
4,124.99
5/14/2025 AGRICULTURAL SUPPLIES 1,146.17
5/14/2025 PROPANE 80.42
5/14/2025 GYM EQUIPMENT SERVICES & PARTS 923.13
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - WATER PROGRAM 1,044.82 5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - WATER AND STREET
PROGRAM
1,241.44
5/14/2025 MEMORIAL BENCH PLATE 278.00
5/14/2025 LABOR COSTING MODULE ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION:
5/20/2024 - 5/19/2027
16,000.00
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - SEWER, LAGOON,
BUILDING, VEHICLE, AND PARKS PROGRAM
2,442.68
5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: PICKLEBALL 770.00
5/14/2025 CARWASH SERVICES: MARCH - APRIL 2025 554.52
5/14/2025 AUTO PARTS 683.34
5/14/2025 ENCROACHMENT DEPOSIT REFUND 650.50
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS MATERIALS & IRRIGATION SUPPLIES -
PARKS PROGRAM
78.18 5/14/2025 DEPOSIT FOR BEVERAGE SERVICES AT SUMMER DAYS 2025
2,500.00
5/14/2025 MEASURE K EMERGENCY RENT RELIEF FUNDS: AVI
PETEL - 100 GRAND LANE #308, LATISA BROOKS - 3 PLAZA
VIEW LANE #111, AND SIMIN GARAKANI - 1000 FOSTER
CITY BLVD #8106
7,482.00
9.1 Warrant Register Report FY 2024-2025 Number 36 - May 14, 2025
466
Prepared Date 5/14/2025 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register
Accounting Period 2025/11
Report Number 36
Check Number Vendor NameCheck Date Description Check Amount 154936 MISSION CLOUD SERVICES, INC
154937 MISSION LINEN SUPPLY-UNIFORM
154938 MTC XCAVATING LLC
154939 MUNICIPAL RESOURCE GROUP, LLC
154940 NATALIE BRAEGGER
154941 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS, INC.
154942 NBC SUPPLY CORP
154943 NWESTCO LLC
154944 OFFICE DEPOT
154945 PACIFIC AUXILIAR Y FIRE ALARM CO
154946 PACIFIC GAS & EL ECTRIC COMPANY
154947 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION, INC
154948 PEN MEDIA
154949 POLLARDWATER
154950 PRUDENTIAL CLEANROOM SERVICES
154951 ROGELIO GUERRA
154952 SAN JOSE BMW
154953 SAN MATEO COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
154954 SAN MATEO COUNTY ELECTIONS
154955 SAN MATEO LAWN MOWER SHOP
154956 SAN MATEO-FOSTER CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
154957 SCHAAF & WHEELER CONSULTING
154958 SERVICE PRESS INC.
154959 SST CONSULTING & INSURANCE SERVICES
154960 EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPT
154961 STILES TRUCK BODY & EQUIPMENT, INC.
154962 SUMMIT AUTO BODY & PAINTING
154963 THE CITIES GROUP
154964 THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP INC.
154965 THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO
154966 THOMAS SARSFIELD
154967 TOUCH 3 VOLLEYBALL LLC
154968 TURNER CONSTRUCTION
154969 ULISES RENTERIA
154970 UNDERGROUND REPUBLIC WATER WORKS
154971 URBAN INSIGHT, INC.
154972 UTILITY TELECOM GROUP, LLC
154973 VALLEY OIL COMPANY
154974 VAULT ACCESS SOLUTI ONS & FABRICATIONS,
INC.
154975 VDA, INC
154976 VERITIV OPERATING COMPANY
154977 VISION SERVICE PLAN - (CA)
154978 WE GO LOGO5/14/2025 STAFF UNIFORMS - PARKS DEPARTMENT 3,133.08 5/14/2025 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES 1,871.08
5/14/2025 VISION PREMIUM: MAY 2025 1,709.57
5/14/2025 LIFT STATIONS VAULT LIDS REPAIR 2,500.00
5/14/2025 CIP708: COMMUNITY CENTER ELEVATOR EVALUATION
SURVEY
2,400.00
5/14/2025 TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES 3,039.70
5/14/2025 LABOR TO TRANSFER FUEL AT CORPYARD 375.00
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - WATER PROGRAM 5,899.00 5/14/2025 CALOPPS TECH SUPPORT SERVICES: APRIL 2025 2,750.00 5/14/2025 D536: ILLUMINA 200 LINCOLN CENTRE DEPOSITS
ACCOUNT CLOSE AND REFUND
16,628.34
5/14/2025 VISION REIMBURSEMENT 200.00
5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: TENNIS 5,334.00
5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: VOLLEYBALL 770.00
5/14/2025 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SERVICES 760.00
5/14/2025 PAINT 448.64
5/14/2025 TRUCK #50 REPAIR & PARTS 1,929.42
5/14/2025 GROUP LIFE PROGRAM DEPOSIT AND LONG TERM
DISABILITY PROGRAM ASSESSMENT: 1/1/2025 - 6/30/2025
58,521.52
5/14/2025 UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFIT CHARGE:
JANUARY - MARCH 2025
11,113.00
5/14/2025 TAILGATE FOR TRUCK #49 1,529.06
5/14/2025 BUSINESS CARDS FOR 3 PARKS EMPLOYEES 145.10
5/14/2025 QUARTERLY MEETING - QUARTER 1 2025 2,500.00
5/14/2025 FY24/25 3RD QUARTER CROSSING GUARD PROGRAM;
CLASSROOM AND FACILITY USE AT BEACH PARK,
AUDUBON, AND FOSTER CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL:
4/9/2025 - 6/4/2025
11,716.08
5/14/2025 D561: 331 LAKESIDE CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT 10,062.50 5/14/2025 ELECTION CANDIDATE STATEMENTS AND PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTION SERVICES
65,989.31
5/14/2025 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - VEHICLE PROGRAM AND
GENERATORS - WATER PROGRAM
2,569.56
5/14/2025 MOTORCYCLE PARTS & REPAIR 3,046.82
5/14/2025 PORTABLE WATER LAB TEST 1,790.00
5/14/2025 TOWEL/UNIFORM LAUNDRY SERVICES 328.89
5/14/2025 CALPERS HEALTH INSURANCE REFUND 4,177.13
5/14/2025 CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS
VIDEO SERVICES: MARCH & APRIL 2025
4,584.00
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - WATER PROGRAM 308.22 5/14/2025 ELECTRICITY 44,571.80
5/14/2025 COPIER USAGE CHARGES 3,526.73
5/14/2025 OFFICE AND COFFEE SUPPLIES FOR PARKS PROGRAM 317.71 5/14/2025 FIRE ALARM INSPECTION 492.00
5/14/2025 MISCELLANEOUS SUPPLIES - PARKS AND SEWER
PROGRAM
4,528.13
5/14/2025 MONTHLY FUEL SYSTEM CHECK 125.00
5/14/2025 CLASS REFUND: VOLLEYBALL 42.00
5/14/2025 PARTICIPANT FEE: APRIL 2025 200.00
5/14/2025 ENCROACHMENT DEPOSIT REFUND 417.50
5/14/2025 EXECUTIVE TEAM WORKSHOP ON 4/22/2025 13,500.00 5/14/2025 CALOPPS SUPPORT SERVICES: MAY 2025 AND CALOPPS SUPPORT - AMAZON WEB SERVICES: APRIL 2025
7,176.08
5/14/2025 LAUNDRY SERVICES 1,575.98
9.1 Warrant Register Report FY 2024-2025 Number 36 - May 14, 2025
467
Prepared Date 5/14/2025 City of Foster City, CA
Accounts Payable Check Register
Accounting Period 2025/11
Report Number 36
Check Number Vendor NameCheck Date Description Check Amount 154979 WHITNEY FUSION LLC
154980 WILDLIFE INNOVATIONS, INC.
154981 WILSEY HAM
154982 WORLD CUP SOCCER CAMPS & CLINICS
154983 4LEAF, INC.
154984 888 TABLE TENNIS CENTER5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: PING PONG 128.00 18,470,083.10
Submitted for Information:
____________________________________________
Nate Cruz, Finance Director/City Treasurer
CHECKS ON THIS REGISTER PROCESSED AND MAILED ON MAY 14, 2025 5/14/2025 INSTRUCTOR FEE: SOCCER 184.80
5/14/2025 BUILDING OFFICIAL SERVICES: MARCH 2025 18,240.00 5/14/2025 CANADA GOOSE POPULATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 7,990.00 5/14/2025 RS2025-0001: LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT #2 GILEAD
SCIENCES - 331 LAKESIDE
1,545.00
5/14/2025 CARHARTT SWEATSHIRTS, JACKETS & HOODIES FOR
STREET AND BUILDING PROGRAM
1,745.90
9.1 Warrant Register Report FY 2024-2025 Number 36 - May 14, 2025
468