AGENDA #10

BUDGET WORKING PAPER

TO:	Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager
FROM:	Bill Webster, Interim Director of Parks & Recreation Robert Minick, Landscape Superintendent, Public Works Department
SUBJECT:	Park Maintenance Issues
DATE:	April 18, 2007

PURPOSE

At the Council’s March 28, 2007 meeting a Council member asked for additional information on park maintenance and renovation issues.

The Town currently maintains 10 parks that have a variety of facilities. Some parks are heavily developed with many active facilities, while others have only a few improvements. At this time we do not have a comprehensive inventory of maintenance needs. However, we do have a partial list that, if they were addressed all at once, would cost several millions of dollars to correct.

Park-Wide Issues

The following problems are found in many of our parks:

• Paths and parking lots – Many park paths and parking lots have fallen into disrepair. The amount of funding available through the Capital Improvements Program has allowed us to address the problems with the greatest needs, but problems remain throughout the park system.
• Athletic and tennis court light poles – All of our older poles have reached the end of their useful lives. They were installed in the mid-1970s and were meant to last 25 to 30 years. These poles can be found throughout the park system.
• Erosion and stormwater issues – Several parks have on-going drainage issues that have resulted in erosion and wet conditions.
• Fencing and site furniture – Many of the fences, picnic tables, benches, grills, signs, and other site furnishings at Town parks should be replaced.

Specific Park Issues

We have identified maintenance issues in all of our parks. Below are examples of outstanding problems within three Town parks:

Cedar Falls Park: This is one of the Town’s oldest parks and one of the most run-down. The four ball fields are in need of renovation; the parking lot is in very poor condition; signage is outdated, paths are in disrepair; tennis court and ball field lights should be replaced. Additionally, the park paths are eroded and should be renovated; and the restroom facility should be upgraded.

Hargraves Park: Work is currently underway on some of this park’s worst problems, but several issues remain. Landscaping around the building, ball field fencing, and most site furnishings should be replaced. Erosion problems exist throughout the park because of poor drainage.

Oakwood Park: This small park is a popular neighborhood facility that is in generally poor condition. The play area has a severe drainage problem; most of the trees have died; and the play equipment should be replaced. The tennis court lights do not work; the light poles should be replaced; and the edge of the court has erosion problems. The play field is poorly drained and is often too wet to use.

Cost Issues: We do not have a specific cost analysis, but we believe that it would require a significant infusion of funds to address the needs of our park system. We typically address the most pressing safety issues each year with funds supplied through the Small Park Improvement program within the Capital Improvement Program. In the current year, the Small Park Improvement program was funded at a level of $60,000.

Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation: The Commission recommended a four-pronged approach to the problem. Please see the attached Commission memorandum. In summary they recommended that the Council provide funding for the following:

• Park assessment program dealing with routine maintenance, renovation needs, and replacement schedules.
• Increased funding for routine maintenance.
• Adherence to a replacement plan for outdated equipment and facilities
• Targeted renovations of facilities that have deteriorated past the point of repair.

Establishment of Priorities: We agree with the Parks and Recreation Commission’s approach to the problem. We believe that a full assessment of our parks by an outside firm could provide us with a logical maintenance, replacement, and renovation plan with some cost estimating. We have added an option for a $30,000 Parks Assessment Project in the preliminary Capital Improvements Program budget for Council consideration.

In the near term, if the council desires, we could provide a list of projects that we could accomplish with any dollar amount the Council would make available.

ATTACHMENT

1. Parks & Recreation Commission Recommendations (p. 3).