Loading...
B - Prioritizing Park DevelopmentAttachment B ~ypF BOp~O PRIORITIZING PARK DEVELOPMENT ~-~~~~~~~ Pahs & Receea~~un 2.2.06 Setting Priorities for the Development of Undeveloped and Partially Developed Parks The Parks and Recreation department developed criteria to analyze the relative need, opportunities and constraints for developing undeveloped parkland. The process is intended to be fleixble to respond to changing conditions and new opportunities. In determining priorities for park development projects, the Parks and Recreation Department considers the following: A. Demonstrated Need Does it fill a gap in an already underserved area? Does it fill a priority need identified in the 2005 Parks and Recreation Survey or in other sources? B. Development Constraints Is the site ready for design and development with no significant physical or legal constraints? C. .25 Cent Sales Taz Analysis Does it meet an unmet ballot measure commitment? D. Collaborative Opportunity Is there a high potential for partnership? E. Maintenance Dollars Identi~ed Have maintenance dollars been identified and earmarked for this project? F. Population Served Does the area have a high percentage of low income residents and/or children, youth, and seniors? Is it high density? G. Revenue Potential Will the development have revenue potential (rental of fields, etc.)? H. Development Efficiency Will development be more efficienU cost-effective if timed with other public projects? I. Environmental Constraints Are there environmental constraints on the property that would need to be mitigated? J. Project Status Is the project partially built? PARKS ANO F ECF2 EATION... ....TH E BEN EFITS ARE ENDLESS: Prroritizrng Yark Develpment, page 2 flraft Prinriti7atinn nf Un[~eVe~ODe(~ dllC~ P'dPtld~~Y ~eVe~Oped ~dPkS A B C D E F G H I J i d L u Q ~,, y N ~ ~ ! + '~ ~ ,~ V ` Z ~j y ..y. ~ ,C •j, C a~i > •C •ie ~ ~ v 0~ ~ d g N U ~ ~ C '~ 0r .~ °~ ..~ •~ O Gr ~ a p..~. Q ~ a R ~ y 0.u ~~ V V fC ~ C ; C A ~ a y R C > 4. O p •~ "' Undeveloped Parksites ~ ~ £ o ~ N v O ~ a ~ p W W v a .o ~ ~ ~ ~ o°7e a' 1. Area III 1997 City 191 Yes (3) Yes(12 15) U 2. Alpine 1998 Pocket-.3 ~ 3. Dakota Ridge 2000 Neigh-3 Yes (1) Yes (6) A 4. East Bolder Phase 2 1985 Com-1 S Yes (2) Yes(10) es(12) Yes(16) B 5. Eben Fine East 2001 Pocket-.5 ~ 6. Elks 1999 Neigh-7.9 Yes (1) Yes (6) Yes(11 es(13) B 7. Foothills Phase 3 1985 Com-12.5 Yes(10) es(12) Yes(16) B 8. Heatherwood 1985 Neigh-5 Yes (4) Yes (6) B 9. Hickory (portion) 1999 Pocket-.7 ~ 10. Holiday 2003 ~'ocket-1.1 Yes (1) Yes (7) Yes (9) A 11. Mesa Memorial 2002 Pocket- 1.7 ~ 12. Sinton 1993 Nocket- .7 C 13. Valmont 1997 City - 119 Yes (2) Yes (5) Yes (8) Yes(10) es(12) D 14. Violet 1987 Neigh- 7.2 Yes (1) Yes (6) Yes(11 es(13) B 15. W of Justice Center 1972 Pocket- 2.5 es(14) D Note: Shaded areas a~e a negative, a!1 others are positive. Chart Legend A - Demonstrated Need (1) Underserved area within city limits on ServiceArea Map (2) High recreation facility need met - multipurpose fields (programmable) B - Development Constraints (3) Area III - not available for development (4) Not in city Iimits (5) Access road not ready C- .25 Cent Sales Tax Analysis (6} Neighborhood parks needed to comply with slaes tax bal- lot language D - Collaborative Opportunity (7) Neighborhood cost sharing proposed (8) BVSD partnership proposed (see BVSD Facilility Needs Assessment) E - Maintenance Dollars Identified none identified at this time F - Population Served (9) High level of affordable housing, families with children G - Revenue Potential (10) Sports field rentals H - Development Efficiency (11) Floodplain work will prepare site for park development I - Environmental Constraints (12) Prairie dogs on site (13) Floodplain work needed prior to park development (14) Environmental hazards (15) Threatened and endangered species J - Project Status (16) 5ignificant portion of park built KS ANC Pnoritizmg Park Develpment, page 3 Draft Prioritization Results Priori Grou in # of luses # of minuses Fundin Plan Priori Grou in A(0 minuses and at least one plus) Fiscall Constrained Holida Pocket Park 3 0 Dakota Rid e Pocket Park 2 0 Priori Grou in B(onl 1 minus and more than 1 lus) Elks Nei hborhood Park 3 1 Action Plan Violet Neighborhood Park 3 1 East Boulder Communi Park Phase 2 3 1 Foothills Communi Park Phase 3 2 1 Heathenvood Nei hborhood Park 1 1 Note: com letlon of an Priori Grou in 8 a~k assumes that the "minus" listed can be miti ated Park site can potentially move to Priori Grouping A if "minus" is miti ated and fundin identified Priori Grou in C(0 minus, 0 lus) - in al habetical order Action Plan AI ine Pocket Park 0 0 Eben Fine Eas[ 0 0 Hicko Pocket Park 0 0 Mesa Memorial Pocket Park 0 0 Sinton Pocket Park 0 0 Note: Could move u to riorit rou in A with an identi~ed collaborative o ortuni . Priori Grou in D(more than 1 minus, or 1 minus and 0 luses) Vision Plan Valmont Ci Park 3 2 West of Justice Center 0 1 Area III Ci Park 0 3 PARKS AND R ECR EAi'ION........TH F BENEFITS ARE ENDLESS!