Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 04/26/2016 - REFRESHING FORT COLLINS PARKSDATE: STAFF: April 26, 2016 Kurt Friesen, Director of Park Planning & Development Mike Calhoon, Parks Supervisor WORK SESSION ITEM City Council SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Refreshing Fort Collins Parks. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to inform Council about refreshing Fort Collins parks. Fort Collins parks are aging and in need of improvements in order for them to adequately meet the growing demands of today’s users. Currently, there are two programs in place for construction and infrastructure replacement in parks, the park build-out and park life cycle programs. These programs provide funding for construction of new parks in the city and replacement or restoration of existing park components. Both of these programs have inadequate funding. Currently there is not a program in place for adapting parks to meet the changing needs of park users. There are numerous reasons to refresh parks. These include keeping pace with changing trends in recreation, adapting to changing community needs, providing equitable park experiences city wide, connecting people with nature, and replacing and improving antiquated infrastructure. A proposed process for refreshing parks has been identified, and is currently being implemented at City Park. The steps for this process include project goal identification, preparation of initial concepts, gathering community input, master plan development, phase I project identification, and phased construction based on available funding. The focus of the park refresh program should be on community parks, as these typically are more programmed than neighborhood parks. It is estimated that approximately 50 million dollars are needed to refresh 4 aging community parks. There are numerous benefits to parks, including economic benefits as illustrated by studies completed by the National Recreation and Parks Association and Trust for Public Land. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED City staff is seeking direction on whether Council agrees with the park refresh concept and would like City staff to further investigate funding mechanisms for refreshing parks. In support of this concept, Council needs to be aware of funding deficiencies in the park build out and park life cycle programs. Specific questions to be answered include: 1. What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh concept? 2. What direction does Council have regarding funding options for refreshing parks? 3. What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life cycle programs? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Fort Collins parks provide an invaluable role in citizen’s lives. They provide sports venues, engaging play environments for children to learn and explore, open spaces to enjoy a picnic, read a book or throw a frisbee, and quiet places for relaxation and rejuvenation. With over 48 parks totaling 957 acres, Fort Collins provides quality parks dispersed throughout the city, most conveniently located within walking distance from homes. Parks consistently rate very high on citizen surveys. Since 2008, over 90% of citizens have rated the quality of Fort Collins parks as “good” or “very good”. Parks are well used by citizens throughout the city. Some of the most significant community events take place in parks, including the Independence Day celebration in City Park, the annual kite festival in Spring Canyon Park, Tour de Fat in Washington Park, and multiple concerts and fairs in Civic Center Park. In 2015, over 4,800 sporting events occurred in Fort Collins parks, with over 170,000 attending April 26, 2016 Page 2 these events. Parks are integral to the health and well-being of citizens, and provide an important role in reducing obesity and maintaining a healthy lifestyle. The most beloved activity in parks is walking, as many Fort Collins’ residents begin or end each day with a walk around one of Fort Collins parks. Currently, there are two programs in place for construction and for infrastructure replacement in parks, Park Build Out and Park Life Cycle. A brief summary of these programs follows: Park Build Out The Parks and Recreation Policy Plan, most recently updated in 2008, provides a blueprint for new park construction in the City. Not including Southeast Community Park, which is anticipated to be constructed soon, there are 2 community parks and 13 neighborhood parks remaining to be constructed in the city. The majority of these parks will be located in the northeast portion of the City, as development occurs in this area. City staff coordinates with developers to identify and purchase park properties based on the plan. Design and development of the park typically begins after approximately 75% of homes around the park have been constructed. Impact fees paid at the time of building permit issue provide funding for new parks. Current parks being developed include Southeast Community Park, located at the intersection of Ziegler and Kechter, and Maple Hill Park, located near the intersection of Country Club Road and Turnberry. New park costs have increased dramatically over the last few years. New park components include raw water, land, consultant fees, development fees, miscellaneous costs, and construction. A ten year projection of Community Park and Neighborhood Park impact fees fall short of what is needed to fund new park construction. In order to keep pace with rising costs, City staff recommends an increase to the impact fees. An evaluation of park impact fees is currently underway, with a recommendation to Council anticipated later this year. Park Life Cycle The park life cycle program repairs and renovates park assets throughout the existing park system. Initiated in 1993, this program supports repair and renovation of over 1,000 varied park assets within many different component categories including: hardscapes, buildings, fields, trails, courts, structures, playgrounds, irrigation, and water related park components. The program prioritizes repairs based on health and safety concerns and regulatory related mandates (such as the Americans with Disabilities Act). The program also looks for opportunities to replace outdated resource intensive infrastructure with more sustainable infrastructure that meets current codes and best management practices. Typically, the Life Cycle Program completes 30-40 projects per year including items like playground renovations, court asphalt repairs, minor irrigation repairs, walkway and bridge repairs, lighting upgrades, park roadway and parking lot repairs, painting buildings, etc. This program is essential to repairing the infrastructure of existing park facilities as well as enhancing the infrastructure to support growing demand in the parks. The life cycle program also is imperative to preserving equity within the City to ensure that every household, regardless of the age of the neighborhood, has access to high quality parks. In 2002, the Parks Life Cycle program was funded at $463,160 for 703 acres of park land which equates to $660 per acre. During the recession the funding was cut back to $275,533. In 2016, the Parks Life Cycle program was funded at $526,152 for 957 acres which equates to $550 per acre. Life cycle funding has not kept pace with park land expansion or increasing costs. Based on the current park asset inventory and current component repair and renovation costs, the Parks Life Cycle fund needs a minimum of $2,500 per acre to address major park life cycle needs (hardscapes, restrooms, playgrounds, irrigation systems, bridges and some structures). A BFO offer will be proposed in the 2017-18 budget cycle to address the Park Life Cycle shortfall. Park Refresh Park Refresh is a new concept for Fort Collins. Over time, park user needs change, and it is not always appropriate to replace the same aged park element with a new one, as provided through the Life Cycle program. Instead, it makes sense to update parks for several reasons: April 26, 2016 Page 3 1. Keep pace with changing trends in recreation New trends in recreation are continually emerging. For example, today pickleball is a sport that has rapidly grown in popularity nationwide and in Northern Colorado. Pickleball players have expressed a desire for dedicated, lighted pickleball courts in Fort Collins. There is a need for parks to accommodate this emerging use. There are many other similar recreational activities in demand. 2. Adapt to changing community needs As evidenced by the many ways City Park has been used over its 100+ year history, parks must be versatile and adapt to changing needs of the community. A desire for healthy living, locally grown food, and greater connections with nature are in demand among Fort Collins residents. Today there is a high level of citizen interest in community gardens and nature play environments. Fort Collins parks should adapt to these and other changing needs. 3. Provide equitable park experiences city wide Newer parks in the southern parts of the City including Fossil Creek Park and Spring Canyon Park provide amenities such as skate parks, dog parks, newer playgrounds, and quality restrooms and shelters. Older parks including Lee Martinez and City Park in the northern part of the city do not provide the same level of service as these newer parks. A park refresh would raise the level of service in older parks to match the newer parks. 4. Connect people with nature Fort Collins parks provide an excellent venue to connect residents with nature. Naturalistic plantings within parks create environments that provide a nature retreat for residents, demonstrate the value of native or xeric plants, provide wildlife habitat, and contrast beautifully with turf areas. Many Fort Collins parks are Audubon Certified, and provide valuable sanctuary for birds. Many parks in the city lack this natural character, and would benefit from a park refresh to enhance and improve residents’ connections with nature. 5. Replace and improve antiquated infrastructure Fort Collins parks are aging. The average age of parks within Fort Collins is 27 years. Infrastructure including parking lots, drives, irrigation systems and lighting have exceeded their life cycle and are in need of replacement. Many parks were constructed before the Americans with Disabilities Act was in effect, and require upgrades to bring them to current standards. A park refresh would enable parks to be improved to meet current needs and replace aging infrastructure. A six step process for refreshing parks is proposed: 1. Identify project goals 2. Prepare initial concepts 3. Gather community Input 4. Develop a park master plan 5. Identify a phase I project 6. Phased construction based on available funding This process is currently underway for City Park. There is some available funding for improvements to City Park through the Building on Basics capital tax. Funding has been identified for replacement of the City park train, improvements to Club Tico, and minimal improvements to the park. Project goals and initial concepts for the park were developed, and two community meetings for the project were conducted in early March. All project materials are available on the project web site for community review and comment. After the comment period closes, a master plan for the core area of the park will be developed, a phase I project identified based on available funding, and construction of a phase I project will begin. Subsequent phases will be constructed as funding becomes available. This is the process proposed for future park refresh efforts. April 26, 2016 Page 4 Although both neighborhood and community parks are in need of refreshing, the primary focus should be on community parks, as they are typically more program intensive than neighborhood parks. Estimates for refreshing parks are very conceptual at this point, as no planning has been conducted. Assuming approximately ½ of the acreage of a park is improved, the cost for improvements to the four oldest community parks (City Park, Rolland Moore, Lee Martinez, and Edora), may cost approximately 50 million (2016 dollars). Parks are a Good Investment Numerous studies illustrate the many benefits of parks. Both the National Recreation and Parks Association and the Trust for Public Land have prepared studies on the economic benefits of parks. In the 2015 study, The Economic Impacts of Local Parks: An Examination of the Operations and Capital Spending on the United States Economy, the NRPA reports nearly 140 billion in economic activity and the creation of 1 million jobs in 2013. In Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System, The Trust for Public Land cites seven ways parks bring value to a city. These include increased property values, increased tourism spending, direct use value, health benefits, community cohesion, and improved air & water quality. Options for funding refreshing parks may include the development of a park improvement fee, funding through typical BFO cycles, or funding through the 10 year capital improvements tax. ATTACHMENTS 1. Community Parks Map (PDF) 2. Powerpoint presentation (PDF) /HH0DUWLQH]3DUN &LW\3DUN 5ROODQG0RRUH3DUN 6SULQJ&DQ\RQ3DUN )RVVLO&UHHN3DUN 6RXWKHDVW&RPPXQLW\3DUN (DVW&RPPXQLW\3DUN (GRUD3DUN , +DUPRQ\5G (0XOEHUU\6W 1RUWKHDVW&RPPXQLW\3DUN ([LVWLQJ&RPPXQLW\3DUNV 3URSRVHG&RPPXQLW\3DUNV ([LVWLQJ1HLJKERUKRRG3DUNV Existing and Proposed Parks April, 2016 College Ave. Horsetooth Rd. Trilby Rd. Carpenter Rd. Drake Rd. Prospect Rd. Vine Dr. Lemay Ave. Timberline Rd. Shields St. South Taft Hill Rd. North Taft Hill Rd. Overland Trail ATTACHMENT 1 1 Refreshing Fort Collins Parks Kurt Friesen, Park Planning & Development Director 6-26-16 ATTACHMENT 2 Questions for Council 2 • What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh concept? • What direction does Council have regarding funding options for refreshing parks? • What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life cycle programs? 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Fort Collins Parks are Valued 10 Three Part Approach 1. Park Build Out – Completing the Park System 2. Park Life Cycle Program – Maintaining What We Have 11 3. Park Refresh – Adapting to Changing Needs Existing Process 12 Proposed Process 13 Park Build Out • Maple Hill • Trailhead • Bucking Horse • Eastridge • Interstate • Richards Lake • Bacon Elementary • Iron Horse • Lind • Fossil Lake • Lake Canal • Airport • Huidekooper 14 2 Community Parks • East Community Park • Northeast Community Park 13 Neighborhood Parks Based on 2008 Parks & Recreation Policy Plan Current Park Projects Southeast Community Park 15 16 Current Park Projects Southeast Community Park 17 Current Park Projects Southeast Community Park 18 Current Park Projects Southeast Community Park 19 Current Park Projects Southeast Community Park 20 Current Park Projects Southeast Community Park Current Park Projects 21 Maple Hill Neighborhood Park Neighborhood Park 10 Year Projection 22 $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Administration Park Projects Impact Fee Collections Community Park 10 Year Projection 23 $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,000 $8,000,000 $9,000,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 East Park Community Projects Park Impact Impact Fee Fee Collections Collections Park Build Out Suggested Solution: • Increase park impact fees. Fee increase evaluation is currently underway. 24 Parks Life Cycle Program 25 Playground before Playground after Replacement or Restoration of Existing Park Elements Recent Projects • Greenbriar Playground • Edora Ballfield Lights • English Ranch Walkway repairs • Golden Meadows Tennis Court • Spring Canyon Bike Park Renovation Phase 1 Parks Life Cycle Program 1,000+ Acres • 6 Community Parks • 42 Neighborhood & Pocket Parks • Archery Range 26 Asphalt/ Concrete Buildings Fields Courts Irrigation Playgrounds Structures Water Life Cycle Components Average Park Age 27 Note: The three oldest parks in the city, Washington Park, Library Park and City Park are over 100 years old and not included in the average. Parks Life Cycle Funding 28 0 200 400 600 800 1000 $- $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total Acres Actual Life Cycle Funding Acres Life Cycle – 10 Year Projection 29 $- $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $4,000,000 $4,500,000 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Community Park needs Neighborhood/Pocket Parks KFCG Contribution Includes only current park acreage – no proposed parks included Park Life Cycle Suggested Solution: • BFO Offer for Additional Life Cycle Funding 30 Park Refresh Reasons to Update Parks • Keep Pace with Changing Trends in Recreation • Adapt to Changing Community Needs • Provide Equitable Park Experiences City Wide • Connect People With Nature • Replace and Improve Antiquated Infrastructure 31 Reasons to Update Parks Keep Pace with Changing Trends in Recreation Pickleball 32 Reasons to Update Parks Adapt to Changing Community Needs 33 Community Gardens Nature Play Reasons to Update Parks Provide Equitable Park Experiences City Wide 34 Fossil Creek Park Playground Lee Martinez Park Playground Reasons to Update Parks Connect People with Nature 35 Reasons to Update Parks Replace and Improve Antiquated infrastructure 36 Accessibility Irrigation Pavements Park Refresh Process 37 Park Refresh Example 38 March 3 & 7 Community Meetings Park Refresh Example 39 “Trolley Garden” Concept 40 Park Refresh Estimate by Park Approximately 50 Million Dollars Total $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 $18,000,000 City Park Rolland Moore Park Lee Martinez Park Edora Community Park Park Refresh Funding Options • Development of a Park Improvement Fee • Funding through Typical BFO Cycles • 10 year Capital Improvements Tax 41 Parks are a Good Investment • Increase in property value • Increase in tourism spending • Direct use value • Health benefits • Community cohesion • Improved air & water quality 42 140 billion in economic activity that resulted in nearly 1 million US jobs in 2013. 1 - 2015 The Economic Impacts of Local Parks: An Examination of the Operations and Capital Spending on the United States Economy 2 - 2003 Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System – Trust for Public Land Questions for Council 43 • What feedback does Council have regarding the park refresh concept? • What direction does Council have regarding funding options for refreshing parks? • What feedback does Council have regarding park build out and life cycle programs?