Attachment 4
1 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan – March 2026 PRC and Community Feedback Summary of Feedback Themes and Plan Revisions
On March 17, 2026, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) discussed and provided feedback on the draft Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan (Plan), which had been available for public review beginning on March 3, 2026. At that meeting, the PRC approved a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan. As part of the recommendation the PRC supported incorporating ways to prioritize expansion of parks and open space to underserved a r e a s o f t h e C i t y , t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t d e p e n d e n c e o n s c h o o l fi e l d s a n d 1 0-minute walking distance, in addition to looking at acres per thousand. The PRC’s recommendation also emphasized identifying opportunities and implementing near -term improvements to benefit all parks and open spaces with an emphasis on planting native canopy trees and landscaping consistent with the Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan. In addition to public input received at the PRC meeting, staff also received written comments through the project website and via email.
Based on the PRC’s recommendation and public input, staff made further refinements to the Plan in the following areas:
• Define underserved Planning Areas using a combination of three factors: (1) acres of park land per 1,000 residents, (2) access to parks within a 10 -minute walk, and (3) reliance on school fields to meet recreational needs;
• Prioritize the expansion of parks and open spaces in underserved Planning Areas; • Acknowledge that achieving the citywide Level of Service goal of 3 acres per 1,000 residents is not currently feasible in every Planning Area;
• Prioritize locally native species for trees and landscaping in parks and open spaces; • Identify incremental, near-term opportunities to expand native planting and tree canopy; and • Elevate the role of trees and biodiversity in park design.
Due to the breadth of revisions and the development of a final version of the Plan in a designed format, the updated Plan is not presented in track changes format. The purpose of this attachment is to summarize the key themes raised by the PRC and community members, and to identify where and how those themes have been addressed in the revised Plan presented for City Council adoption on May 26, 2026.
Attachment 4
2 Feedback Theme Revision to Draft Plan
Define underserved Planning
Areas as a combination of
three factors: (1) acres of park
land per 1,000 residents, (2)
access to parks within a 10-
minute walk, and (3) reliance
on school fields to meet
recreational needs.
• Added Defining Underserved Planning Areas, Section 5.4.5, which states this definition of an “underserved Planning Area”
Added Table 20: Level of Service without School Field
Access by Planning Area to display the Planning Areas' Level of Service without access to school fields
• Added Table 21: Underserved Planning Area Criteria
Summary to summarize low park acreage, reliance on
school fields, and limitations to walkable access by Planning Area
• Added language on what an underserved Planning Area is in the Executive Summary (Section 1.1.4)
• Updated the Prioritization Criteria Aligned to Plan Goals and Strategies (Section 8.6.7) to reflect the definition of underserved Planning Areas
• Added language to the Introduction (Chapter 2) noting the definition of underserved
• Added text acknowledging the importance of looking
separately at both City-owned parks and school fields when looking at Park Acreage in Defining Level of Services (LOS) (Section 5.4.2)
• Added reference to reliance on school fields and their tie to underserved Planning Areas in Identifying and Responding to Risks under the Changes in School Field Access (Section
8.5.4)
• Updated Planning Area Descriptions (Section 9.7.1) to highlight language related to underserved Planning Areas Prioritize the expansion of
parks and open spaces in
underserved Planning Areas
• Updated the Prioritization Criteria (Section 8.6.7) to note that the highest priority will be given to projects that expand parks and open space in underserved Planning Areas (This is one of two top priorities, along with near-term
opportunities to expand California native, regional native, and near-native planning across City parks and open space, per the theme below.)
• Added language in the Executive Summary (Section 1.1.7) referencing the updated Prioritization Criteria
• Added language to Develop New Parks (Section 7.2.1)
• Updated Action 1.1.1 to prioritize underserved Planning Areas and updated milestones
• Updated milestones for Action 1.1.4
Attachment 4
3 Feedback Theme Revision to Draft Plan
Prioritize California native,
regional native, and near-
native species for tree canopy
and landscaping within parks
and open spaces (consistent
with language in the
Biodiversity and Urban Forest
Plan)
• Where native and/or trees and landscaping were noted, clarified native as “California native, regional native, and/or near-native” - Executive Summary (Section 1.1.3 and 1.1.5), Vegetation Condition (Section 5.3.8), Tree Canopy (Section
5.3.8), Functionality (Section 6.1.3), Landscape Features (Sections 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.3), Integration of Biodiversity into Park Designs (Section 6.3)
• Updated milestone for Action 2.1.1
• Updated Performance Metric 4 (Section 8.7.2)
Identify incremental, near-
term opportunities to expand
native planting and trees in
City parks and open spaces to
the fullest extent possible
• Updated the Prioritization Criteria (Section 8.6.7) to note that the highest priority will be given to projects that can be implemented relatively quickly to increase tree canopy and native plantings in all City parks (This is one of two top priorities, along with the expansion of parks and open space in underserved areas, per the theme above.)
• Updated the Prioritization Criteria Aligned to Plan Goals and Strategies (Section 8.6.7) to move the criteria
associated with increasing tree canopy and biodiversity near the top of the list and added text to note “and can it be implemented in most, if not all, City parks?”
• Added language in the Executive Summary (Section 1.1.7) referencing the updated Prioritization Criteria
• Added language to Update Improvements (Section 7.2.3) • Added language related to timelines of the Action Plan in How the Action Plan was Developed (Section 8.5.1)
• Added “tree canopy and other natural elements” to Action
1.2.7 • Updated timelines for Action 2.1.2 to Immediate and updated Action and Milestones to focus on natives in all City parks
• Updated milestones for Action 2.1.3
• Added a criterion related to near-term/immediate
improvements for habitat, biodiversity or ecological function in Prioritization Criteria (Section 8.6.7)
• Updated Performance Metric 4 (Section 8.7.2)
Acknowledge that it is not
currently feasible to achieve
the citywide Level of Service
goal of 3 acres per 1,000 in
every Planning Area
• Added language recognizing this acknowledgment in the Executive Summary (Section 1.1.4)
• Added language in the Introduction (Chapter 2)
• Added language to Defining Level of Service (LOS) (Section
5.4.2)
• Added language to Develop New Parks (Section 7.2.1)
Attachment 4
4 Feedback Theme Revision to Draft Plan
Further recognize the
important role trees play in
parks and open spaces
• Added language in the Executive Summary (Section 1.1.5) of the critical role trees play in providing shade, supporting habitat, reducing urban heat, managing storm water, and enhancing climate resilience
• Added statement in the Introduction (Chapter 2) on
essential benefits provided by Biodiversity in parks and open spaces
• Added “cooling” as a benefit of tree canopy in Tree Canopy (Section 5.3.8)
• Added more benefits under Functionality (Section 6.1.3), Landscape Features (Sections 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.3)
• Updated Performance Metric 4 (Section 8.7.2)
Clarified when it may be
appropriate to incorporate a
shade structure into park
design, with preference
provided to tree shade
• Updated language under Distribution of Sunny and Shaded Areas under Functionality (Section 5.3.9)
• Updated language under Functionality (Section 6.1.3)
• Updated Potential Amenities for each park type to prioritize shade preferably through tree canopy (Sections 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 6.2.3)
Amplify the role of
biodiversity within parks and
open spaces in creating a
connected habitat network
• Added language to the introduction of Park Design
Guidelines by Park Type (Section 6.2) to define “biodiversity anchor” and role
• Added language to Park System Importance to Biodiversity in Mountain View (Section 6.3.1)
• Updated Action 2.2.1 to recognize habitat protection
Reference the forthcoming
Dark Skies Ordinance, where
lighting is mentioned
• Within Park Design Guidelines by Assessment Criteria
(Section 6.1) added to reference the forthcoming Dark Skies Ordinance, where lighting was mentioned under Condition (Section 6.1.2) and Safety and Comfort (Section 6.1.4)
• Added a reference to the forthcoming Dark Skies Ordinance, where lighting is mentioned for Potential Amenities under Park Design Guidelines by Park Type (Sections 6.2.1 and
6.2.2)
• Added reference in Biodiversity and Urban Forest Plan Guidelines (Section 6.3.2)
Incorporate a review of
expanding the Recreation
Swim program
• Added recreation swim to the action and milestones for Action 3.1.7