Loading...
9E - Lamun/Dome/YWCA/Penut Butter Players/Toadstool Playhouse SiteDO NOT REMOVE - PRAB F~le Mater~al ..... CITY OF BOULDER PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: March 31, 2003 (Agenda Item Preparahon Date: Mazch 24, 2003 ) AGENDA TITLE: Lamun / Dome / YWCA / Peanut Butter Players / Toadstool Playhouse Site REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Jan Geden, CPRP, Duector of Parks & RecreaUon Jeff Lakey, Pazks & Recreahon Plamm~g and Development Supenntendent Ka~a Bernhazdi, Associate Parks Plarrier FISCAL IMPACT: $349,000 asking price for site ~ PURPOSE: ,.... The Pazks and Recreahon Advisory Boazd (PRAB) has expressed an mterest ~n staff reviewmg the opportunity to acquue as a pocket park site a porhon of a property cunently for sale. Three Bluff Street citizens livuig near the site aze also encouraging the City to consider purchasmg a portion of the site as a park. BACKGROUND: Ms. Lamun owns the property noted above, somehmes referred to as the Toadstool Playhouse, Peanut Butter Players, YWCA, or pome site Mr Buchanan of Wnght-Kingdom Realtors advises the department of its availabihty (letter February 23, 2003). He notes that the whole site (0.89 acres) includes the dome building, a house, and a disconhguous and vacant "pazk/IoY' lytng between 2442 and 2502 Bluff Street on rts south side. A public alley sepazates the vacant "pazk/loY' &om the remainder of the site. Mr. Buchanan mdicates that the entire site is for sale for $1,249,000, and that the disconhguous vacant lot (pazk srte) is comparably analyzed to be worth $349,000 for approxunately 10,500 square feet of land (about $33 per square foot). The City paid $13.41 per square feet m 1992 for 1.49 acres for Greenleaf Park located at the comer of Folsom and Spruce Streets. T'his pazk was purchased to serve the Wtuther Neighborhood. $13.41 per square foot is the lughest per square foot pnce paid to date for park ~ property. AGENDA ITEM # IX-E ; PAGE 1 ~. ANALYSIS: ~ 1. Is there any money left in the Neighborhood and Pocket Parks fund from the bond :ssue, and tf so, how much ~ Yes. The acqmsihon fund balance is cmrently $21,445 rema,,,;ng after purchase of the Mesa Memorial Site. The Fund will be annually recervuig $100,000 agazn m 2007. (Recall that the 2002 Caprtal Improvement Plan [CIP] designated $100,000 annual accumulahons to occur begmnmg m 2004, but due to adjustments requued last yeaz from reduced revenues, it was mstead set to begn m 2007). The Permanent Pazks and Recreahon Fund and other funds aze available for allocahon to desired uses, and the CIP can be amended to reflect changes in pnonries. All Pazks & Recreation funds can be evaluated for re-allocahon to suit new pnonries if necessary. The time required to make CIP project and budgetary changes can be weeks or months and will mvolve the City Manager. The City Manager will determine whether the proposed changes requtre review and appmval by Plamung Boazd and City Council. Although these are processes that can be undertaken anytime, it would be faz more prudent to let the annual CIP update process be our DepartmenYs wstrument for making these kinds of changes. 1 If not, are funds sh11 being collected that could be used to purchase this property or other properhes if opportunihes to acquire them anse~ ~" ...~ Yes, although currently declining qwte siguficantly, funds aze shll be~ng collected from the 0.25% sales tax and other sources. However, based on recent PRAB and Department pnonty decisions, the use of funds has been directed to other, non-acquisihon needs, mcluding the renovahon and expansion of the North Boulder Recreahon Center and other capital, rencca .a ., ~Y,. uhor.s, ar.u :namienance pra~ects aa spec:fie.a. s. ~e onginal ballot measure. Also, some of the sales tax money is bemg used to repay the debt on the bond issue (roughly $2,000,000 to $2,500,000 annually through 2008 m the current CIP). Importantly, sales tax revenues for January 2003 are over 13% less than were collected m January 2002. When the board reviewed the proposed 2003 CIP in ApnUMay of 2002, it approved a revenue reduction of $4.9 aullion compared to the pnor year At that tune, PRAB agreed on a pohcy decision to focus on renovarion and refiubishment. As a result, no renovarion or refurbishment budgets were reduced m the 2003 CIP. Budget reducnons were apphed only to new development CIP pm~ects. On a limited basis compared to the fundmg of new development in the late 1990s, there are 2003 CII' uses of funds that mclude pazk development and renovahon fundmg mcludmg, for example, Smton Park, Tom Watson and Wonderland Park Playgrounds, Elmer's Two Mile Pazk, the North Boulder Recreahon Center Remodel, irrigahon renovarion and water efficiency projects such as the Motorola central .nw, con~ol system, Columbia Cemetery renovahons, the Civic Pazk Complex renovarion, ,~, AGENDA ITEM # IX-E ; PAGE 2 ,.~ ~...- Foottulls Pazk development, and more. Most of these projects have already begun and have used up a porhon of the comuutted funds. However, as already noted, slufts in capital pnonries can be made with receipt of appropnate approvals and to accommodate logisrical issues reqwred to phase-out of old pnonties and adopt new ones. For example, stoppmg or altering Phase 2A at Foottulls Community Park, or removmg one or two large group picmc shelters from the construction scope might present an opportumty to redirect caprtal money m an amount that might allow acquisirion of the Lamun srte at the askmg pnce (wluch may or may not be equal to the actual value). This step would reqwre redesign to reduce or eliminate construchon scope or work items That pmcess of studying, cost estimatang, and venfyu~g deletion items would cause pro~ect delays, wluch might affect bid pnces due to changes in the conshuchon season and reqwre mcreased costs for pro~ect redesign. All of wluch is to say that uiefficiencies w~uld be created, dimmislung the produchvity of funds, and delaying the provision of commumty pazk sernces to that azea of Boulder. Other opporhuuties may exist to re-pnoririze capital funds allocated to Valmont Pazk m the 2004 budget yeaz. These funds aze currently desig-ated for a pro~ect to begm the relocahon of .~ the Pazk OperaUons sernces to another part of the Valmont Pazk site. However, there are alternahve potential uses that might also be considered pnonhes for these funds if the Boazd wishes to amend the 2003 CIP. • Recovery of turf throughout the park system will be a drought-related expense that is not already covered in the CIP. • Drought-related prauie dog habitat expansion is talang place that requires some abatement, relocahons, and fencmg to protect pazk lands including Tom Watson ballfields, Valmont City Pazk, and most recently Footlulls Pazk. • The settlement of the Westem Disposal Annexahon may tngger mstallahon of deferred reqwremenu for Pazks and Recreahon to develop a full v~ndth road, ali nght of way unprovements (bilce lane, sidewalk, vegetahon) and uhhty extensions adjacent to Stazio Ballfields, roughly estrmated to be azound $800,000 to $1,000,000 • The City' proposed new hghhng ordmance v~nll reqmre replacement of all lighUng fixtures or systems that do not comply, witlun a fifteen year penod after appmval of the ordinance. Staff is currently evaluahng the unpact ttus may have on the Pazks and Recreation CIP. ..~s '"""" 3 If the property:s not purchased, will the Department be meenng community needs jor pocket park development~ AGENDA I1'EM # IX-E ; PAGE 3 ~ Yes. If the property is not purchased, there will remazn several small residenhal areas that he ~ outside the preferred neighborhood and pocket park level of sernce standards that were previously found to be acceptable to the PRAB (Attachment A). During its acqmsihon progrun, the department did make several attempts to purchase ttus pamculaz srte and rt was not avazlable. Remuider Pocket Park Level of Service Standards, "are used to help meet neighborhood pazk needs where no other alternahve e~sts; less than 5 acres, usually 1- 3 acres; located ~rnth'/< mile of the popularion to be served." (See Attachment B, map) Attachment A explaws, "Dunng the departmenYs acrive acqmsition penod, a sernce azea map for the neighborhood and pocket park system was developed showing a radu of either '/~ or'/< mile dependmg upon the size of each exishng pazk site. It also took mto account access bamers such as ma~or streets. Tlus mapping allowed us to easily see under-served areas based on the Pazk Level of Service Standards." "A comprehensive effort was undertaken to tdenhfy all parcels of land m the under-served areas wtuch miigt-t serve the need. All la-own mformahon about the potenhal sites was compiled m a notebook for review by the PRAB Tlus notebook idenhfied 55 potenhal pazcels." ~ ..- "In February of 1997, the PRAB removed all but 26 of the potenrial pazcels for vanous reasons rangmg from a behef that the pazhculaz site would not meet the pazk sernce need, to havmg a property owner who was unwillmg to sell. PRAB was not mterested m usmg emuient domazn proceedings m tlus acqwsihon program. The plan reqmred stafFto further pursue each of the remazmng sites and retum to the PRAB vnth recommendahons for acquis~~.on ior the siia wtuch best met the service area need for an acceptable pnce. Smce there was more than one site m several sernce areas and total acreage faz exceeded the 26 acre lmut, rt was not mtended tttat tlus would result in a contract for each site." "Dunng the January 1999 PRAB meeting, the Boazd reexamined the Master Plan Pazk Level of Sernce Standards and clanfied its intenhons regardmg how nearby undeveloped Urban Pazk, Mountaw Pazk, Open Space or other publicly owned and accessible lands play into the sernce need, and how the potenrial of park and recreahon easements on Boulder Valley School Distnct pmperties may affect the sernce provision. The Boazd also expressed its concem at this hme with the lugh cost of land, ongomg mazntenance wsts and the long term sustaznabihty of the park system" (Attachment A). Attactunent A was reviewed by City Council m May of 1999. Some of the areas once considered potenhally under-served shll remazn but are lazger and ,~ more populated than Wlumer, suggeshng the potenual for a greater remauung pazk land need m other areas. These include the azea northwest of Foottulls Parkway and Baselme Road, the AGENDA TTEM # IX-E ; PAGE 4 ~... azea lymg south of Baseline Road between US 36 and Broadway, an azea centered on and 1}nng west of Baselme and Broadway, and an azea northwest of Jay Road and 47~' Street (Attachment B). Fu~ally, the Wluther Neighborhood is served by three pazk sites, Lover's Hill, Greenleaf Pazk, and shared use of the Wluttier School Site. The City actually dces own park property along the east side of the Wtuttier School srte wluch was developed to enlazge and enhance the open play azea of the site The Greenleaf and Lover's Hill sites were purchased and developed within the past 10 years to assist in meeting the park service standards for the neighborhood. 4. If the Ciry chooses to buy this s:te, how could it be done~ The "pazk/loY' is a pomon of a larger landholdmg for sale. That landholding is encumbered by a site review permrt which treats the whole site m aggregate m terms of its development code comphance. A"site review amendmenY' would be requued to split the land in terms of achieving mdependent comphance (the "pazk/loY' is akeady a disconhguous land umt, lying across a pubhc alley from the rest of the site, so a land parrihon is probably not reqwred; land "parhhon" means to divide the land mto subumts -"lots" or "pazcels" - such as a muior land pamhon or a subdivision mstrument would accomphsh, creatmg more than one legally biuldable lot out of one onginal land ownerslup pazcel or lot). Assuming that agreement on ,~„ value could be reached wrth the Ms. Lamun, she and the City would need to agree to jointly pursue site review amendments in good fazth towazd eventual land purchase if the mutually agreed condrtions of compensatory value aze met. The site value is perhaps siguficanUy lower than the pnce asked given that it is underlain by water and sewer lines. Addirionally, and unportantly, it also cazries a deed restnction lunihng Yuture development to park or playground purposes only, maku-g it unattrachve as a building srte with or wrthout City ownerslup. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the available records and suggests that the restncuons appeaz hkely to be valid and could only be removed with the consent of those who currendy own ad~ounng pmpemes. It also appears that it would not be necessary for the City to purchase tlus properry to prevent development on Uus site other than a pazk. T'he CIP budget could be ad~usted to reflect a change in pro~ect pnonhes, pendtng review by the City Manager and potenhally the Planning Boazd and City Council, talang money from some other lme item. As the Boazd ts awaze, the Planning Board and City Council must also take achon on matters related to land acqwsihon for parks The Department and Board then should consider clanfymg City prionhes for Pazks & Recreahon uses of funds, perhaps by descnbmg a policy context for that re-pnontizadon to help commumcate our pohcy mtent. AGENDA TTEM # IX-E ; PAGE 5 .~ An acquisihon budget, a development budget, a development schedule, and an allocataon for „a mamtenance would need to be made regarding tlus new pmject, if the site was to be acquired. These items might impact other pro~ects in the capital budget. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS: People who spoke at the February 24, 2003 PRAB meehng: Chrystal Grey, 1709 Spruce Street, Boulder 80302 David Newman, 2502-B Bluff Street, Boulder 80304 Chrishne Arden, 2502-B Bluff Street, Boulder 80304 Judy Gilbert, 2502-A Bluff Street, Boulder 80304 Please refer the PRAB Mmutes from February 24, 2003 for the sub~ect of comments recerved from the pubhc members above. STAFF RECONINIENDATION: ~ The acquisihon of ttus site for a pocket pazk is not compell~ng. The srte is already "developed" "'" for a pazk with a stone lmed gravel path, turf and other vegetarion that appears to be moderately mamtazned by someone Because of its restncuons on use and the presence of underground unlihes, it has little perceivable value as anythmg other than a pazk. Although rt is unfenced and publicly accessible now, a fuhue owner could contam it and restnct access to it, but that owner could not uhl~ze ttus land for anything other t6an pazk or playground purposes. The City has prepazed a needs assessment that suggests there is a greater demand m Boulder for public pazks and recreahon purposes than a pocket pazk m ttus azea. Lazge turf play surfaces were idenhfied as lugh prionhes for soccer and other ptuposes. There aze other azeas in the city that once were considered under-served that might azguably shll have a percerved need greater than ttus percerved need for a neighborhood or a pocket pazk. Attachment A descnbes the process by wluch these apparent needs were found to have been met by the Pazks & Recreahon Advisory Board achons m 1997 and 1999. The EBRC site that may be for sale is a more compelling hypothehcal acquisihon srte due to its size, locat~on, adjacency, and development potenrial for needs that are currently identified than Ms. Lamun's s~te. Yet the Pazks and Recrearion department is not presently operahng in an achve acqmsihon mode gven the pnor achons of the PRAB concernmg the uses of the sales tax ~ fund. Considerations regardmg the recent precipitous drop m revenues together with our duhful ~ managenal concem for the amount of funduig allocated to development of pazk land compazed to AGENDA ITEM # IX-E ; PAGE 6 ~ the amount allocated for mauttenance also unpacts our sense of appropnateness of expanding our system at tlus hme. Changes to the capital budget now could conceivably be accommodated, but potenUal cost unphcahons and delays u- committed projects are likely to result. A quesrion anses about how potenhal opporiunihes such as tlus should be measured and captured in the apparent absence of guiding land acquismon or capital expenditure pnnciples and the current envuonment of city- wide sales tax revenue declmes. Staff recommends that the Boazd not pursue a pocket pazk acquisirion of the Lamun property, and that the Boazd reconsider neighborhood and pocket pazk acquisihon pohcies dunng the Master Plan Update process in 2003-2004. ATTACHMENTS: A. Weekly Informarion Packet to Council, May 1999 B. Neighborhood Pazk Sernce Areas Map AGENDA ITEM # IX-E ; PAGE 7 Attachr.ient A WEEKLY INFORM.~TION P~CKET TO: Mayor Will Toor Membezs of Ciry Council CC: Pazks and Recreatioa Advisory Boazd FRONI: Ronald A Secrist, City Manager Chris Dropinski, Director ofPazks and Recreation DATE: April 29, 1999 SUSJECT: Informatian Item: Mana3ement Report on Neighborhood and Pocket Park Acquisition Program ST~TE~;VT OF THE ISSUE Several questions have been raised regazding the status of the Neighborhood/Pocket Pazk Acqwsition Program. In particular, there is interest in how we are proceeding to honor our commitment to the voters with respect to the acquisition of additional city pazk lands, the pace of ' the acquisition program, acquisition strategies and changes in funding aadcipated to meet the ~°~- commitment Tlvs management regort will descnbe the pIan which honors our commitment to the voters of adding up to 26 acres of parkiaad to the neighborhood/pocket park imemory while employing creative akemative acquisition shategies. P.4RI{ ACQIIISTTION CONII~IITME;VT The Neighborhood/Pocket Park Acquisition Program is responsive to the Pazks and Recrearion Master Plan, adopted by City Councii in 1996, through the Pc~klarrd Level of Serv:ce Standards and P~klcmd Acqursmon Recammendairon. The voter approved 1995 ballot and bonding language, based on the Master Plan revision process completed to that date, called for a ma~mum of 26 acres to be added to our neighborhood/pocket park imentory to meet ansting need relative to the new Pazk Level of Service Standazds. Ongoing operating and maimenance expenses were a(so included in the ballot issue for those 26 acres In November of 1998 the acreage limitaaon for mountun pazk land and neighborhood pazk land was lifted by the voters, pnmarily to provide +lexibiliry in our Mountain Pazk Acqwsiuon Program, not due to any id~ufied need to increase the 26 acre maximum for the nei3hborhood park program. For the neig[iborhood pazk program, we have added 4.53 acres to date aad antic~pate another potenzial 16 76 acres may be added m 1999 for a total of 2129 acres Another AGENDA ITEM # ~x"E , pAGE_,~ 7 sites of unknown totai acreage aze under consideration or will be considered for the future, wtuch will likely exceed the ongina126 acre ma~dmum. (Ttus is in additxon to nearly 300 '"""` additional acres in the last two years added to the system for the large park purchases ) °~ P~CE OF THE ACQUISTTION PROGR~,vI The pace of the acquisitions is withui the three to five yeaz completion goal. The City received the authociraaon from the voters in November of 1995 to bond funding for the acquisition program. After a comprehensive effort to define the large park acquisition program, bonds were so[d in December of 1996 for large paz14 mountain pazk and nei3hborhood pazk acquisition purposes. We are currently in the second quarter of the third year for use of the bond funds wluch has been anticipated to be substanhally completed in no more than five years. Some confusion may exist about our progress smce we have been unable to meet the need in some small identified underserved areas for several reasons including: neighborhood opposiuon to a pazk site in a particular tocation, leaving us no other aiternauves at this time, pazk needs in some very small underserved azeas unable to be met throu3h pocket pazks because of unwilling sellers; and one case where res~demial developmeni seemed to be eminent, but is now not likely so the need is no longerjusufxed. ACQUISTITON STR~ITEGY Ai~iD FUNDING Through a diligent and creative effort to provide ne~ghborhood pazk services, we expect to be able to fulfill the commitment made to the voters without expending all of the funds availabie ~~w, through boading for this purpose. The Parks andRecrearion Advisory Boazd (PRAB) aad `~' departmerrt staff are very pleased that we have been so successful at acquiring pazk land in locations to meet ihe service area needs through sirategies other than outright purchase. These strategies include both interdepartmemal and intergovernmental agreements as well as donations and dedications. If we were to acquire much more acreage than the original plan called for, it wouid ruse a concem about funding for ongoing operating and maintenance costs and sustainability The PR?,B is currently analyzing tlus issue. - Due to the unanticipated success of altemative acquis~tion strategies, it is probable that a sigmficant amount of the funds bonded for the neighborhood and pocket pazk purpose will not be necessary to meet the commitment made to the voters. In light of other needs idemified in the Master Plan, the PRAB is exploring akemarives to address ttvs issue. BdCgGROiIND ~I~ISTER PL.~`1 POLICY DOC[7~,~iT The Pazks and Recreation lviaster Plan addresses the acquisiuon of pazk land to serve neighborhoads through: ~ AGENDA ITEM # ~x-E , PAGE~ Levelof Service Standards ~~ 1Veiahborhood Parks `" • at least 5 acres in size • located vrithin'/: mile of popuiation to be served • 1'h acres per 1,000 residenu in each subcommunity and city-wide Pocket Pazks • used to help meet neighborhood pazk needs where no other alternative exists • less than 5 acres, usually 1-3 acres • located within 1/4 mile of the population to be served Parkland :~cquisition Recommendarion The Master Plan recommendations aze based on the nine subcommunities as defined in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. I3eighborhood paz'.{s are recommended as detailed below for ncnghborhoods for the fallowing subcommuniues (rn itakcs) • Crossraads - between 28th and 30th north of Valmont; between Folsom and 28th south of Iris; Boulder Junction azea if residential development occvrs • East Boulder - 5 acres within the Valmont park site • North Boulder - west of 28th and north of Jay; Mann site - north ofLee I3'ill west of Broadway; between 28th and Broadway north of Yazmouth if residenual developmeat occurs • • Sauth Boulder - west of Broadway south of NOAA/NIST • Gunbarrel- no recommendation for addihonal park land, the Eaton donation of pazk land was already lmown at the writing of the Master Plan Pocket parks - ten sites of one acre each aze recommended for the following sub- communities (no specific Iocations withia the subcommunities were detailed): ~ Central, South, Sautheast and Crossroadr ~CQUISITION STR~TEGY METHODOLOGY A service azea map for the neighborhood pazk system was developed showing a rad'u of either ~/2 or I/4 mile depending upon the si2e of each c~sting pazk site. It also took mio account access barriers such as major streets. This mapping a(lowed us to easily see underserved azeas based on the Park Level of Service Standards A comprehensive effort was undertaken to idenrify a(1 pazcels of land in the underserved azeas which might serve the need. AlI known information about the potemiai sites was compiled in a notebook for review by the PRAB Tkus notebook ident~fied 55 potemiai parcels In Febcuary of 1997, the PR~B removed all but 26 of the potential pazcels for various reasons ranging from a belief that the particular site would not meet the park service need, to having a properry owner who was unwilling to sell PRAB was not urterested m using enunem domain ~ AGENDA iTEM #,LX- ~~ , PAGE~ pzoceed:~.gs ;n t us acy,is.uo:. g,-c~am. The plan required staff to further pursue each of the remaimng sites and retum to the PRAB with recommendations for acquisitioa for ihe site which best met the service azea need for an acceptable price Since there was more than one site in several service areas and total acreage far exceeded the 26 acre limit, it was not intended that tlvs wouid result in a contract for each site. Dunng the January 1999 PR?,B meeting the Boud reexamined the biasta Plan Park Level of Service Standards and clarified iu imentions regazding how nearby undeveloped Urban Park, Mountain Park, Open Space or other publicly owned and accessible lands play imo the service need, and how the potential of pazk and recreation easements on Boulder Valley School Disuict properties may affect the service provision. The Boazd also expressed ~u concern at this time wish the lugh cost of land, ongoing maintenance costs and the long term sustainability of the pazk system See Attachment A ST ~TUS OF DIEIGHBORHOOD A,~TD POCKET PARK ACQIIISTTION PROGR~.tit Attachmern B provides more information about specific s~tes; a summary follows: • 4 53 acres at 3 sites have been acquired as paric land to date ~ antic~pate 16 76 aczes at 6 sites may be acquired in 1999, brin3mg the total acquisition to 2 i 29 acre~ • Another 7 sites of unknown total acreage are cuaendy under consideration or will be considered for the future Oniy 6 of the above 16 sites have required or aze anticipated to require an outnght purchase In addition to outrigirt purchase, strategies for acquiring park land have included • ImerdepaRmemal agreements for land already owed by the City but available for serving a pazk function while retaining their origiaaIly imended function, (e g. Iris Hollow - F1ood Uuliry land) • Pursual of park and recreation easements with the Boulder Valley School District, (e.g. Haicyon School at 31st and Bucl~ell) • Pursual of urtergovernmenta( agreements vnth the Boulder Va(ley School District, (e g. Baseline Ivtiddle School) • Dedication of pazk land in newly deveIoping azeas, (e.g. Theater Site) In response to speci&c questions raised recernly Eik's site - 7 93 acres north of Four Mile Creek is being recommended to Ciry Council on lbiay 4 to acquire as paztc land. This does not include the 137 acre Outlot A north of Four vfile Creelc aad west of Farmer's Ditch. The Elk's aze unwilling to sell the oudot at this time and in a very lengthy process have received all their required approvals for the existing contract througEi their national levei offices They have indicated that they may have interest in a discvssion about the sale of this outlot in the future. We do have agreement with the Ellc's for a 20' pedestrian and ~*.R ~ ~ ~ ~ AGENDA ITEM # I lC _~ , PAGE~ b:cycIe e:se:.iea: ac:oss t~:'; cut;ot .o accoaunodate a trail connection along FourMlle Creek R. from the parlc site to the west ~de of the Ellc's property. .._- vlesa vlemonal Baptist Cfiurch site - a recent inquiry has been made about the use of this site for affordable housing. Further discussion at the staff level about the acqwsiuon of this properry will take place before the PR~1B recommendation is brought forward ta Planning Board and City Council. Norwood and ~nd/7a"rd - akhough there is no call for a park site in tlvs vicuiity, the ~Iorth Boulder Subcommunity Plan caUs for a pedesiriaa/bilce connection m this azea in both the Transportation and Pazks sections Staff will further explore this issue FG'~iDPi iG Funding for neighborhood and pocket pazks was anucipated through. Permanent Park and Recreation Fund Lottery Fund The 1995 .25% Ballot Issue • a" i i.4 miliion was oonded in December 1996 for acquisi6on of nei~ahborhood/pocket pazk and mountain pazk land. Funds aze to be spent in a three to five year period, we aze now in the second quarter of the tlurd year. • Original ballot language called for no more than 26 acres of neighborhood and pocket pazk land; this acreage restriction was lifted by the voters in a Novembez 1998 election ~ which was promoted primarily to lift the restriction on the mountain pazks portion of the issue. ~ Throu,gh a diligent and creative effort to provide neighborhood park services, we expeci to be abte to fu(fill the commitme.nt made to the voters without expending all of the funds that were bonded for tfvs purpose. The per acre estimates for acquisition were qurte high based on our ~penence with the Bndfield site purchase prior to the 1995 ballot issue The bond issue authorian,g tanguage allowed up to S29 4M to be bonded for acquisiuon purposes. It was our e:cpectation ai the time the bonds were sold thaz it would require the entire amount to pursue the total largs pazl~ ne~3hborhood park and mountain pazk acquis~hon program. In light of the resultant savings, wluch are estimated ai ~6-T.~I from success ia acquinng pazk land through straze3ies other than outright purchases, the PRAB is not proposing or recommendin3 chan,~ng the service standards or purchasing land for other purposes 'The PR~B instead has focused on our abiliry to provide funding for ongoing operating and maintenance cosu for new lands, long term sustainabiliry, and other needs idennfied in the Master Plan, including renovarion and refutbishment of Park and Recrearion tands and facilities; earlier development than othezwtse possible for pazk sites; and funds to encourage realisnc parmering opportunities for the large pazk site ameniues - aGENDa ITEM #~ Y" ~ , PAGE ~~- . Along with assuring that we aze able to meet the commitment made to the voters, the PRr1B will be exaauning altematives to dealing with bond funds not needed for acquisition in the next two ~ years If these funds become available for purposes in addition to acquisitioq they will also ~ remain available for acquisition ia the future. If there aze questions, please contact Chris Dropinsld at 303 413-7206 ATTAC~IEENTS: A Notes of consensus from PRr1B meeting on January 25, 1999 regarding Ne~3hborhood and Packet Pazk discussion B Ne~ghborhood and Pocket Pazk acquisition status detail (Attachmeaes to this Cauncil WIP item are available to the PRAB upon request) sa~ .. ,w-» AGENDA ITEM ~ / ~' - ~ , pAGE~ .... . _ _ . : . . .. _ -. . . . .. . . .. . . .. . _. - , .-_..,:~- - -- •- --- - --- _. _ _. ~ ~ Nei .~ g U c~ ~ ~ Q hborhood Park Service Area - City of Boulde W Q r a W ~ i tD. ~ W ~ ~ Z w ~~~ Q F ~ ~ . ~ ! J ~ p ~ ~ J ' O ~ ~ ~ I N ~ S f ~~~r't~ ~~~~ ~ ~ . `~ . . . I . p~ `,''~~ ( . .r ~~~ ~~ Q~. ~ o ~ Linden Ave. -- f . f - ~ ~_.., • , ~ • • . . , ~.~ ~ . ~ ',~ ~ - ~ Independence Rd. " ~~ °~,. ti c_~- cn 1, y . ^_ ~ , ~ rn ~~~ J . ~ ~ ~ ~, fr ~._..1.- ~ Iris Ave, ^ --~ ~ l J I ~ -TI ~ ~ 3. ' ~; ~ . _ _- _ /~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~.. _ _ . _ * ~ ' . ;._. . . , Y. . :~' ~ ~ ~ ' . . ~; ° _: ' ~' ' mont Dr.'~ _ _~~~ ~~t~~~ ~' ~' ::.....: ~~~ ~ . ~~~ ~,..'~ ~ '~~~ ~ Val , ~ ~~ lllli~~..~~.~_.1_ * ' c~n ~ a ,~ `, ..~ , i , ~ ~ _. , ~ Valmont Rd. ~i ~_' ~ ~, ~ I ` i - - Balsam Ave. . '.. .: . : •' W ' _ ~ Q`~~~ ~, ~ . \ _ c ~ .. -5.- : . ~ _ a Pe _ ,~ % `i ~~ _ .. pine sti' ~Pear\S~~ :: o •, ~ ~ ~~ ~ - : ~ . ., ' 1 ~, ; '.~.~r 1' ~'~' . .- ;:_; ._ :; . ._ . _ ~ ~,~~~.~ ~-~-- oy ~~ ~ ; .~ ~ ~ ,._...: ' . I • .... a .•:: •:..•.:.•> ::>: ; Arapahoe Rd. ~' . ... ..?' :::::::..:.. .. ... .......@• ,_ I ..... .. ..~i'~. ........, ~ ~} ~ ~.o:aM~s„~w: "•~. . ~>i~' ' ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . ~ . . . _:~ ~ ~ _ ~~. i _ ~nll~ _ . .,i ,. , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~~ f~ .'~ ~`.. ~ ~ .~ _. , i~ ~ Colorado Ave. ~~ ~ u, ~' ~ ''' ' ~ ' ~__, ~FY „ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~' . cn . ~ ~. ~ ' , . , ;_ . . ~ , . . . . . ~ . ' . - .," ~ _ -: .. . . ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ . ^ _ ~ . I ~ _ rl . , , ~ 7...: > . , ' .. ' ~, ' ~ M`~ I ., , ~ . ..~.:~~~ ~, ~ B~~ '"~, ~ ~ ~ i i r j '. . i II seline ~ ~' .- ~' ~ - Baseline .~. ..~.•::. . ~ . , ~.~~- .. ~ p . . , , ~r T~ ~ ~ , _ _; , '' ; , ~ , ~ , !, ~ . ' t~'~~ \ _ , o • 'r - , - ~ ; /~ ' ~ ~~ .~ ; o _ cn ~ /'!": ~ ~ ~ ~ - . - ~ L ~ % .,.i I ` - . ~, i ~ - . ( ~ -- : . . . . - __ I iI I ~ , ~ ~ ~ - ~..~ 1 ... _ ~ ., - n - ; ~~ I ~ ~ ~ ~'~ I ~ . ' _ ac ~ - . _ .. .. - --- ~ ~ -~.,.~~' I` . -~ ._ .~_ . .. , k ~~ ~ ' ; ' p ' South Boulder Rd. :~ A%~/~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ S~_ I ., Table Mesa Dr ~__ I il ' '' ~ • _ ~ , ~ ~ ~ - ~I _. . _ ~ •,: ~ ' I, ~ - ~ ' , ~.:: , .. ,.., .,..,,... _. , , 1 ~~ '~,~,. _ ,'~w ~ Legend ,,i , I~ i , Park Service Area 3 fi i . ~~ ',~ ~ ~~ ~. ! '~ `~' ~' ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ Park Service Area Barrier to Access • " ' ' ~ ' ~ ~°` ~:: Provisional Park Service Area ; " ~ ,-` ~- ~ , ....... I ~'-y Under Served Areas T "~ '~°~ E-_ ~+ o~ f Industrial, Commercial, Public, Agricultural Zoned Areas . ' ~ ~ ' Future Development Site N ~ _ - Natural Park Land . ~'' ~ ~' . - Special Use Facility , . ~ ;. ~~ _ • , Urban Park • ~ ~ ~ ~- • ~ ~ . - Area II ;,' Open Space and Mountain Parks Land ' ^ Underpasses and Bridges --a,.~"~'' ` - ~ Niwot Rd. • NIWOT RD. NIWi ~~- j' ~ ` F i ~ rn '~-~' D ~ [~ w ~. , ~ ~ C~ ~ Q ~ ~ L ~ Monarch Rd. MONARCF ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~~~~ a ,~~ ~ ' ~~ ~ _ ~~~ ~~~ - - ~ ~~ ~ _-1-- ~~^+~~ SpineRd. ' , ' g -- . _ __ ? '~•~ ~~ ~ Mineral Rd. i ~. -~ ~ „ `~~ I ,~I . ~ ,. ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~/ ~ J -f` '~ ~~- -- .._--- ~ _ - ~ ;~ ~~~~~ : ^rf ) ,/ ^ ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~,t---_ ~ ` ~ ~ I ~_ ~ ~i, ~~`~~ ,~ LookoutRd. ;:; ~ ~ ~ ~~_J °~~----. ~ _ °~' ° . n ~;~ "'"~, . ~~~ ~' ~ ~\ ~- ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~ . ~. ~ ~~~ q ' , I -~ . ~~ ',, ~ _ t- ~ ~ ~a , ~, ~ ~ Lee Hill Dr. - o 0 - .~ j ~,~ ,a~ ...~ ~ o w ~~ ~'g~hs . ~ , ~ J ~,~ I ~ ' ~ ~ „~' ~ '". ~ ~ ~ o ~ ` ^ ~ ~ ( , , ~ . - ~c~f ~ ' • ~ 5 ~~ r ~ Violet Ave. , ~ o,°c ~ ~:- - . \a L: ~-~ b~,. o ~ . . ~ . JayRd. - - ~ C. ~'- `i;;:< ; _ . - ~ ~ 4,' Q ~ ~