01.22.18 PRAB PacketPARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
City Council Chambers, 1777 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80303
6:00 p.m., January 22, 2018
100 Years of Excellence
Boulder Parks & Recreation
Advisory Board Members 2018
Marty Gorce
Tom Klenow
Jennifer Kovarik
Tyler Romero
Raj Seymour
Kelly Wyatt
Valerie Yates
Mission Statement
BPRD will promote the health and well-
being of the entire Boulder community
by collaboratively providing high- quality
parks, facilities and programs.
Vision Statement
We envision a community where every
member’s health and well- being is
founded on unparalleled parks, facilities
and programs.
Goals of the Master Plan
1. Community Health and Wellness
2. Taking Care of What We Have
3. Financial Sustainability
4. Building Community
5. Youth Engagement
6. Organizational Readiness
For more information on BPRD Master
Plan visit the City of Boulder web site
at: https://bouldercolorado.gov/pages/
parks-recreation-master-plan
AGENDA
All agenda times are approximate
I.APPROVAL OF AGENDA (6:00)
II.FUTURE BOARD ITEMS AND TOURS (6:03)
III.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (6:05)
This portion of the meeting is for members of the public to communicate ideas or concerns
to the Board regarding parks and recreation issues for which a public hearing is not scheduled
later in the meeting (this includes consent agenda). The public is encouraged to comment on
the need for parks and recreation programs and facilities as they perceive them. All speakers
are limited to 3 minutes. Depending on the nature of your matter, you may or may not receive
a response from the Board after you deliver your comments. The Board is always listening to
and appreciative of community feedback.
IV.CONSENT AGENDA (6:10)
A. Approval of minutes from November 27, 2017
B. Parks and Recreation Development and Operations Update
V.ITEMS FOR ACTION (6:15)
A. No items this month
VI.ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/INFORMATION (6:15)
A. Boulder Parks and Recreation Service Delivery Update
B. Provision of Public Restrooms in City of Boulder Urban Parks
VII.MATTERS FROM THE DEPARTMENT (6:45)
A. Boulder County Farmers Market Update (verbal update)
VIII.MATTERS FROM BOARD MEMBERS (7:00)
A. Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Letter to Council Update
B. Boards and Commissions Recruitment (verbal update)
C. PRAB Community Engagement Updates (verbal update)
IX.NEXT BOARD MEETING: February 26, 2018
X.ADJOURN
PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
100 Years of Excellence
Future Board Items 2018
January 22
• Service Delivery Update (d/i)
• Public Restrooms in Parks (d/i)
• Boulder County Farmers Market
(md)
• PRAB Letter to Council Update (mb)
• Board Recruitment (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
February 26
• Volunteer Program Update (c)
• Boulder County Farmers Market (a)
• Flatirons Golf Course Concession
Contract Renewal (d/i)
• 2017 Master Plan Implementation
Update (md)
• Updates to the Integrated Pest
Management policy and related
programs (md)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
March 26
• Boulder Reservoir Boat Rental
Service Provider Contract
Renewal (c)
• Flatirons Golf Course Concession
Contract Renewal (a)
• Urban Forest Strategic Plan (d/i)
• 2019-2024 CIP (1st touch) (md)
• New Member Orientation (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
April 23
• Board appointments (p)
• Election of officers (p)
• First meeting for new Board
members (p)
• Urban Forest Strategic Plan (a)
• 2019-2024 CIP (2nd touch) (d/i)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
May 28
• 2019-24 CIP (3rd touch) (a)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
June 25
• Creek Festival Update (c)
• Civic Area Activation (c)
• Access Update (c)
• Operating Budget and Fees (d/i)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
July 23
• Commercial Use (c or d/i)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
August 27
• CIP 2019-2024 Update (c)
• Recreation Activity Fund (RAF)
Sustainability and Fees (d/i)
• PRAB Retreat (mb)
• PLAY Foundation Update (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
September 24
• PRAB Retreat Agenda Review
(mb)
• PRAB New Member Application
Review (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
100 Years of Excellence
LEGEND
Procedural Item: (p): An item requiring procedural attention
Consent Item (c): An item provided in written form for consent, not discussion by the Board; any consent
item may be called up by any Board member for discussion during the matters
from the department
Action Item (a): A public hearing item to be voted on by the Board (public comment period provided)
Disc/Info Item(d/i): An item likely to become a future action item (or council item) and/or that benefits from
an in-depth presentation of background, financial/social/environmental impacts, public
process, staff analysis and next steps (e.g., presentation of major project initiative)
Matters from Dept (md): Items that will be reviewed and discussed during the meeting but not requiring the level
of in-depth analysis of an action or discussion/information item
Matters from the Bd (mb): Items initiated by the Board that will be reviewed and discussed during the meeting but
not requiring the level of in-depth analysis of an action or discussion/information item
October 22
• 2018 Operating Budget and
Recreation Fee Update (md)
• PRAB Retreat Follow Up (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
November 26
• Capital Project Update (md)
• PRAB Retreat Follow Up (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement
(mb)
• PRAB Goals for City Council Work
Session (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
December 17
• Asset Management Plan (md)
• Finalize 2019 PRAB Work Plan (mb)
• PRAB Community Engagement (mb)
Future Board Items 2018 - continued
PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
100 Years of Excellence
COMMUNITY TOUCHES - The City has recently been working on an update to the calendar of all city events
for community use. Please view the calendar online for all of the latest updates for upcoming events. We are
encouraging staff and the community to be aware of and use the new tool.
https://bouldercolorado.gov/calendar
The event list can be filtered to see only Parks and Recreation events by choosing ‘Recreation’ from the dropdown
menu at the top of the page, and then clicking on the submit button.
If you would like more information about any of the events, just use the link above and select the event you are
interested in. Additional information will appear at the botton of the page with a link directly to the event web page.
Below is a sample of what you will see, once filtered. For live links or the most up to date information, please use the
link above.
PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
100 Years of Excellence
3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200
TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
FROM: Yvette Bowden, Director, Parks and Recreation Department
Ali Rhodes, Deputy Director
Jeff Haley, Planning, Design and Community Engagement Manager
SUBJECT: Consent Agenda
DATE: January 22, 2018
A. Approval of Minutes from November 27, 2017
B. Parks and Recreation Development Update
The following information is intended to provide the PRAB with relevant updates on specific
projects as they reach major milestones. This section is not all inclusive of all current projects
and only illustrates major project updates. For a complete list of all current projects and details,
please visit www.BoulderParkNews.org.
Planning and Design
The following projects are currently in the planning and design process that involves research,
alternatives analysis, public involvement and development of planning documents and design
plans to guide decision making and future capital improvements.
•Scott Carpenter Outdoor Pool Redevelopment: Staff has been working with Essenza
Architecture to prepare construction drawings for the redevelopment of Scott Carpenter
Outdoor Pool. Currently, the plans are roughly halfway complete with full completion
expected in April 2018, when the project is expected to go out to bid to a general
contracting firm.
In November 2017, the department solicited qualifications (RFQ) from general
contracting firms interested in performing pre-construction and construction services for
the project. Six firms responded and a committee shortlisted four general contractors.
Fransen Pitman, Golden Triangle Construction, PCL Construction, and Sampson
Construction were asked to submit proposals when the project goes out to bid. PCL
Construction was selected to perform pre-construction services.
Pre-construction services will include providing suggestions to the design team for cost
savings and schedule efficiencies based on the proposed plans for each of the
construction document submittals, detailed cost estimating, identifying obstacles and
solutions to meeting an aggressive construction schedule.
A construction request for proposal (RFP) is anticipated in April 2017.
3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200
• Boulder Reservoir Visitor Services Center: Design is progressing on the Visitor
Services Center with delivery of 100 percent Design Development drawings anticipated
in January 2018 and construction drawings anticipated for completion in second quarter
2018. Staff is working with PCL Construction to perform pre-construction services
including cost estimating, value engineering and construction scheduling. The project is
expected to go out to bid to a general contracting firm in second quarter 2018 and is
anticipated to start construction in September 2018.
• Coot Lake: Trail improvements at Coot Lake have been completed and the trail is open
to the community. Steep bank and habitat restoration will occur in spring/summer as
weather permits.
• Urban Forest Strategic Plan: A second open house is in the planning stage with a target
date of early March. Feedback from the community open house will be consolidated with
staff comments from other city departments and included in the final revisions. The plan
is expected to be presented to PRAB for acceptance in April.
• Asset Management Plan: Work is concluding on the first several chapters of the Asset
Management Plan (AMP) with a focus on outlining policies and procedures for
management of the department’s asset inventory. Work to date includes guidelines for
development of an asset inventory, performing condition assessments and determining
asset criticality, as well as development of asset cost structures. A high-level overview of
work to date will be presented to the PRAB in March 2018.
• Beehive Asset Management Software Implementation: In partnership with the city’s
Public Works and Open Space and Mountain Parks departments, Beehive Asset
Management Software will be implemented in first quarter 2018 and will continue
through early 2019. This software is intended to provide a single source for management
of asset inventories, work and fiscal planning and assist in data driven-decision making
related to staff and funding allocations for asset related projects.
• Planning Projects Underway: Staff or contractors continue to work on the following
projects and will update the PRAB as major milestones are achieved:
o Boulder Reservoir South Shore Site Management Plan;
o Boulder Junction Park;
o Carter Lake Pipeline;
o Engagement Coordination Committee; and
o Parks Planning, Construction, Operations and Maintenance Manual.
Construction
The following projects are scheduled for construction, under construction or have been recently
completed. For additional details please visit www.BoulderParkNews.org.
• Lighting Ordinance Compliance: Upgrades and replacements to existing exterior
lighting assets that are not currently compliant with the City's Outdoor Lighting
Ordinance are set to begin in February 2018. The project includes replacement of 52
fixtures across twelve properties as well as full replacement of existing North Boulder
Recreation Center tennis court lights. The project is anticipated for completion in July
2018 in accordance with Outdoor Lighting Ordinance deadlines.
3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200
• Civic Area Park Development: Phase 1 of the Civic Area – “park at the core” – was
completed on schedule in December 2017. The newly completed park begins to deliver
on the long term Civic Area Master Plan vision of becoming the heart of the Boulder
community.
The newly constructed park provides areas for a variety of active, passive and
programmed recreation opportunities. Access to and through the park is enhanced with a
circulation system that creates a hierarchy of types of paths by separating commuter
bikers, casual walkers and park users. Views and physical access to Boulder Creek and
other natural areas is accomplished with topography, enhanced visual site lines and new
approaches down to the creek. Connectivity through the site to different parts of the
downtown area is also accomplished with the new 11th St. Spine bridge, which provides a
visual and physical connection from ‘the hill’ to the Pearl St. Mall. A new nature
playground will be a major attraction to the park. Inspired by feedback from local school
children and rooted in the principals of nature play, this one-of-a kind play space
provides the opportunity for a wide variety of experiences where kids can climb, balance,
run, manipulate, reflect and interact.
The new park design further delivers on the city’s commitment to enhancing visitor
safety including better visibility throughout the park, nighttime lighting and a design that
accommodates safe access and a variety of uses along the Boulder Creek Path.
Plans for a more significant park opening will be planned for spring/summer 2018 with
more information to follow.
• 2017 Neighborhood Park Renovations (Arapahoe Ridge ‘Rock’ Park, Howard
Heuston Park, and Tantra Park): Playground construction is complete and the parks
are now open for play. Minor landscaping and aesthetic amenities will be complete by
Spring or as weather permits. Park renovation celebrations will be planned in the spring.
• Holiday Park Shade Shelter: The poles for the shade shelter are installed and an
extension of the concrete patio to cover the footers is expected to be complete by the end
of January. Playground surfacing, vegetation in planters, turf and irrigation will be
repaired in the spring as weather permits.
• Construction Projects Underway: Staff or contractors continue to work on the
following projects and will update the PRAB as major milestones are achieved:
o Coot Lake;
o Elks Park Arbor;
o Foothills Community Park (OSMP led project).
3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200
Natural Lands
The following projects, focused on habitat and wildlife management in an urban environment,
are currently being managed by the Urban Resources staff:
• Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Restoration:
o Prescribed Fire: Extensive planning led to a successful first prescribed burn in
the work group’s 17-year history. The burn was coordinated with the city’s
Wildland Fire, Boulder Reservoir, Water Treatment Plant, Water Quality, OSMP
and P&DS staff. The burn was performed at one of the natural areas west of
Boulder Reservoir known as Windsurfer’s Point and included the burning of
cattail monoculture and dead vegetative material that will result in increased
sunlight to the soil surface and deliver previously trapped nutrients back into the
soil promoting growth and plant life diversity. Visit bouldercolorado.gov/fire-
rescue/wildland-home for more information.
o Aquatic Nuisance Species: After we received genetic confirmation of the
presence of from an Invasive Species Specialist from Colorado Parks and Wildlife
(CPW) of the presence of New Zealand mudsnails (NZMS), signs have been
posted at Fourmile Canyon Creek where it extends through Pleasant View Soccer
Complex. NZMS can consume 75 percent of the production in a system and can
alter stream food webs. NZMS reduce the number of native aquatic insects
resulting in the decrease of a main food source for fish making it important to stop
their spread. For more information on the NZMS visit
http://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/ANS/StoptheSpreadHandout.pdf.
3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200
• Urban Wildlife Management:
o Prairie Dogs: The prairie dog relocation at Foothills Community Park concluded
with 42 animals relocated from OSMP and department land to OSMP property.
One prairie dog remains at the site and lethal control in the form of Pressurized
Exhaust Rodent Control (PERC) is expected to be used in the coming months.
The city’s Urban Wildlife Conservation Coordinator (UWC) will notify the CMO
of the relocation status and will provide an update to council. After council is
informed of the expected lethal control, the UWC will update the Prairie Dog
Working Group and work with department staff to schedule a PERC contractor.
This is consistent with the previous relocation and removal effort for the site.
Staff continues to participate on the city-wide Prairie Dog Working Group
(PDWG). Phase 1 recommendations are anticipated to be finalized and given to
City Council by the end of January. Phase 2 has begun and is anticipated to last
through May. The Phase 2 objectives are to:
Agree on an overall prairie dog management goal(s) for the City of Boulder
based on agreed upon guiding principles;
Identify associated changes to plans and policies needed to achieve
management goals; and
Recommend to the City Manager goal(s) and associated changes to plans.
More information can be found at https://bouldercolorado.gov/osmp/prairie-dog-
working-group.
o Northern Leopard Frogs
– The Northern Leopard Frog
(Lithobates pipiens, pictured)
has disappeared from many
areas where it was once
abundant and is listed as a Tier
1 Species of Greatest
Conservation Need (SGCN)
by Colorado Parks and
Wildlife.
A 2017 Audubon Society of
Greater Denver Lois Webster
Fund grant to aid in hiring a consultant to perform herpetological surveys on water
bodies across the city’s urban-interface system and to make management
recommendations to support native species such as the Northern Leopard Frog (NLF).
Sites were selected based upon observations of NLF’s within the past five years or
their egg masses or potential habitat for the species.
The grant report can be found at http://www.denveraudubon.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/12/2017-LWF-N-Leopard-frogs.pdf and the full survey report
will be made available once finalized.
3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200
•Natural Lands Projects Underway: Staff or contractors continue to work on the
following projects and will update the PRAB as major milestones are achieved:
o Natural Lands Volunteer Recruitment and Training; and
o Regulations and Seasonal Wildlife Closures.
C. Operations Update
2018 Fitness Fest: On January 1st, the East Boulder Community Center (EBCC) hosted a
rebranded ‘Fitness Fest’ event and open house. A staff team from the Recreation Centers,
Fitness, Marketing and Program workgroups worked to improve the previously held ‘Fitness
Jam’ concept that EBCC has hosted for several years. Key updates for 2018 were free
participation, including childcare, a streamlined showcase of new and popular classes, a
nutritional lecture and a celebration of the 25th anniversary of the EBCC.
Community response to the event was favorable, with over 200 patrons each hour focusing on
their new year’s resolutions and learning how department facilities and services can support
those goals. Almost all classes were at capacity, and a newly offered Kaiut Yoga program
(focusing on joint health) had over 90 participants. Due to high patronage, the leisure pool access
was waitlisted between 11am-4pm to maintain safe occupancy levels. The Fitness Fest also
served as the kick-off to the department’s New Year’s Sale and attendees were able to sign up
for this promotion on-site.
CITY OF BOULDER
BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING MINUTES
To listen to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meetings in their entirety, please go to the following link:
www.boulderparks-rec.org
Name of Board/Commission: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Date of Meeting: November 27, 2017
Contact Information Preparing Summary: Sarah DeSouza, 303-413-7223
Board Members Present: Tom Klenow, Kelly Wyatt, Jennifer Kovarik, Marty Gorce, Valerie Yates, Raj
Seymour
Board Members Absent: Tyler Romero
Staff Present: Yvette Bowden, Jeff Haley, Sarah DeSouza, Bryan Beary, Keith Williams, Dean Rummel,
Brenda Richey
Guests Present: Bill Cowern,Transportation Department; Susan Connelly, Community Vitality; Amanda
Bevis, Public Works
Type of Meeting: Advisory/Regular
Agenda Item 1: Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m.
Agenda Item 2: Future Board Items and Tours
Bowden reviewed upcoming community touch opportunities. These events can be found at
www.BoulderParks-Rec.org
Agenda Item 3: Public Participation
There were no speakers present.
Agenda Item 4: Consent Agenda
A. Approval of Minutes from October 23, 2017
Minutes from October 23, 2017 were approved as written.
B.Parks and Recreation Development and Operations Update
PRAB members did not have any comments on this item.
Agenda Item 5: Action Item
No items This Month
Agenda Item 6: Discussion/Information Item
No Items This Month
Agenda Item 7: Matters from the Department
A.Staff Briefing and PRAB Board Feedback on the Chautauqua Access Management Plan
(CAMP) Summer 2017 Pilot Results and Preliminary Recommendations
Cowern, Connelly and Bevis presented this item to the Board.
PRAB members shared the following questions and comments about this item:
•Are community members aware they will be required to pay for parking next year?
•Will wifi access near Chautauqua be stronger next year to allow for downloading of the parkmobile
app?
•Why was Lyft the service provider chosen to support this effort?
•Could bike commutures and walkers be incentivized?
•Will the ambassador program continue in the future?
•Appreciate the parking evaluation and question whether a utilization evaluation will be also be
conducted.
•Will the parkmobile app be updated to support Spanish?
•Appreciate the kiosk for those without phone or app technology.
•Concern with charging residents that chose to park in front of their homes.
B.Sugary Sweetened Beverage Tax (Health Equity Fund) Spending Update – Dream Big:
Healthy Together Initiative
Beary and Rummel presented this item to the Board.
PRAB members shared the following questions and comments about this item:
•Clarify that initial staff were hired by the I Have a Dream Foundation.
•Clarify the YSI program being offered at the three recreation centers.
•Are adult recreation classes for targeted populations successful?
•Could class schedules be aligned with RTD bus schedules?
•Are residents from other sites able to attend the programs?
•How can the department’s financial assistance programs be used?
C.Sugary Sweetened Beverage Tax (Health Equity Fund) Spending Update – Financial Aid
Program Enhancements
Beary and Rummel presented this item to the Board.
PRAB members shared the following questions and comments about this item:
•Concern that access to affordable child care may impact participation in this program.
•Is this program available to residedents who benefit from Section 8 housing as well as Boulder
Housing Partners residents?
•Are similar types of program offered elsewhere in the United States?
D.Capital Project Update
Haley presented this item to the Board.
PRAB members shared the following questions and comments about this item:
•Does the recent Community Cultural Tax passage impact anything at Mapleton Ballfields (potential
Firehouse 3 relocation)?
•Does the total cost of capital projects include staffing costs or is it only construction costs?
•What is planned for the refurbishment at Tom Watson Park?
•What will happen to the 51st Street Path?
•When will the Valmont City Park project be continued?
Agenda Item 8: Matters from the Board
PRAB Letter for City Council Retreat
PRAB members will work online to prepare a letter to be included in City Council’s 2018 retreat packet.
PRAB Retreat Follow Up (2018 Work Plan)
PRAB members shared the following questions and comments about this item:
•The Board recommended future tours to Tom Watson, Eaton and Valmont City Park and Gunbarrel
to include sites prior to development and early in the planning process.
•The Action Plan is focused on community engagement and less on role relating to the department
and City Council.
•Move the PLAY Foundation bullet to organizational readiness area of the work plan.
•Consider assigning PRAB members to attend other board meetings and meetings for other city
efforts and initiatives.
PRAB Community Engagement Updates
•Board members attended the following activities/meetings/tours: Switch on the Lights event,
Excellence in the work of the PLAY Foundation (Wyatt and Romero); Howard Heuston Park
construction site; Council election work; Christianson Park; Library Master Plan process; met with
members of the Rugby community, cleanliness of bathrooms at Foothills Community Park,
Flatirons Golf Course, Open Studios.
Next Board Meeting: January 23, 2017
Adjourn: There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, the meeting was adjourned
at 7:18 p.m.
Approved by: Attested:
_________________________ ________________________
Tom Klenow Sarah DeSouza
Board Chair Board Secretary
Date _____________________ Date ____________________
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 1
C I T Y O F B O U L D E R
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: January 22, 2018
AGENDA TITLE: Boulder Parks and Recreation Service Delivery Update
PRESENTERS:
Yvette Bowden, Director, Parks and Recreation
Ali Rhodes, Deputy Director, Parks and Recreation
Dean Rummel, Recreation Manager, Programs and Partnerships
Matt Kamhi, Recreation Supervisor
Chelsea Cerny, Recreation Coordinator
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Boulder’s Parks and Recreation (department) continues to work collaboratively with the
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) to ensure that resources are focused on
community priorities. This item provides an update to the PRAB on recent efforts to
continue the implementation of the department’s financial sustainability policies
according to the following three-step approach:
1. The department shall determine the actual cost of an activity or service using a
standardized method that emphasizes consistency of data inputs and analysis
methods;
2. The department shall categorize services using a recreation priority index based
on the organizational mission, target population served, service outcomes,
contributions to the Boulder sustainability framework, partnership value and
redundancy with services provided by others in the community in order to guide
offerings; and
3. The department shall establish cost recovery rates and associated pricing. Fees
shall be based on the recreation priority index, community versus individual
benefit, cost to provide services and the prevailing market rate for comparable
services.
In 2017, the departments Service Delivery Model was both simplified and enhanced to
ensure service alignment with policy direction. The purpose of this item is to gather the
board’s feedback on proposed updates to the 2014 Recreation Priority Index (RPI) and
provide an overview of planned 2018 service evaluations. PRAB’s continued guidance
and support on service subsidization and program pricing is an essential component of
meeting the community’s values.
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 2
BACKGROUND:
The department continues to respond to the community’s values and the need to provide
for health and wellness programming and services that are accessible to the entire
community. Since City Council accepted the master plan in 2014, staff has focused on
two complementary initiatives:
•Ensuring that recreation services are intentionally planned, delivered and
evaluated to impact community health and wellness through a Service Delivery
Model; and
•Ensuring the community subsidies are directed towards programs that provide
community benefit.
The first phase of work, completed in 2014, focused on building and developing staff
mastery of the tools used to support more intentional service delivery and fee setting.
Subsequent efforts have focused on a targeted and phased implementation plan of these
tools.
Community Health and Wellness
According to the Master Plan, all department services should emphasize the department’s
mission to enhance the public health and wellness of the community. As such,
department services are deliberately and thoughtfully designed and delivered to enhance
member’s health and wellness and a life-cycle management approach is used to ensure
services remain aligned with community interests. By implementing standardized
measurement and evaluation processes and focusing on measurable program objectives,
the department has completed this effort. Department staff have also been trained staff in
the use of the Service Delivery Model that includes awareness of best practices in
program design, delivery and evaluation.
Financial Sustainability
In an effort to ensure that community resources are allocated appropriately and in
alignment with the direction of the master plan, a three-step approach has been
implemented as follows:
1. The department shall determine the actual cost of an activity or service using a
standardized method that emphasizes consistency of data inputs and analysis
methods;
2. The department shall categorize services using a recreation priority index (RPI)
based on the organizational mission, target population served, service outcomes,
contributions to the Boulder sustainability framework, partnership value and
redundancy with services provided by others in the community in order to guide
offerings; and
3. The department shall establish cost recovery rates and associated pricing. Fees
shall be based on the RPI, community versus exclusive benefit, cost to provide
services and the prevailing market rate for comparable services.
By categorizing services and understanding the cost, the department can ensure that
general fund subsidies are focused on community priorities. For example, by reducing
subsidies to exclusive services, funding becomes available to support financial aid
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 3
programs to remove participation barriers for our low-income community members
thereby fulfilling several master plan initiatives.
In 2014, he PRAB provided input on the initial version of the RPI that is used to
objectively categorize, prioritize and fund services. Service categories are defined as
follows:
In 2014, with regular input from the PRAB, a standard methodology for allocating
departmental costs to services was finalized. Using new industry software (PASS®) to
simplify cost identification and allocation, staff conducted an analysis of 2013
expenditures and used this initial data to establish new subsidy levels for exclusive and
other services.
Costs
Service
Categories
Subsidy
levels
and fees
Benefit Service Categories Subsidy
Targets
Community: Services that enhance the health, safety and
livability of the community and therefore require minimal
obstacles to participation.
Recreational: Services that benefit a broad range of users
and are targeted to promote physical and mental well-being.
Exclusive: Services targeted to specific individuals or user
groups with limited community benefit. High Low
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 4
The implementation of service categorization has allowed the department to apply
available subsidies to the programs that the community would like to support and
establish fees that recover the appropriate amount of costs.
The RPI score is unique to individual program, regardless of the delivery method. To
objectively assign cost recovery amounts to program offerings, it is necessary to develop
a system to prioritize and fund services. The RPI uses a three-category system as outlined
below.
Outcomes achieved as a result of these efforts include:
•Deliberate and thoughtful program design, delivery, and evaluation:
o Increased staff understanding of total cost of service delivery and the
values of municipal parks and recreation;
o Improved data collection to facilitate life cycle service evaluation;
o Improved program curriculum, resulting in alignment and customer
satisfaction;
o Improved customer communication and feedback mechanisms;
o Improved analysis of actual service cost recovery comparison to cost
recovery goals and then systematic fee increase strategies to align with
cost recovery goals;
o Adoption of online camper information software to simplify registration
and reduce paper; and
o Enhanced on-line registration with Active.net software upgrade.
•Gaps and duplications within program offerings identified and resolved including:
o BVSD partnership with YSI for Summer Learning aftercare programming;
o BVSD partnership with EXPAND for programming at Summit Middle
School; and
o I Have a Dream and Boulder Housing Partners partnership with YSI to
offer Healthy Together programming.
•Shifts in Programming related to exclusive services such as:
Category Definition RPI Range Subsidy Rate
Community Programs that enhance the health,
safety and livability of the
community and therefore require
minimal obstacles to participation.
70+ 100-80%
Recreation Programs that benefit a broad range
of users and are targeted to promote
physical and mental well-
being.
69-40 79-10%
Exclusive Programs targeted to specific
individuals or user groups with
limited community benefit.
<40 <10%
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 5
o Supported development of the Go Flyers Club: Gymnastics Parent Booster
Club/Program to facilitate exclusive portions of gymnastics programs;
o Contracted watercraft rental services at Boulder Reservoir, and
o Developed private swim lesson packages that include resident and non-
resident pricing.
•Program shifts to increase accessibility such as:
o Preschool gymnastics program increased offerings to three evenings per
week to build on program options available to working parents;
o Extended camp service hours to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. to better
accommodate parent schedules;
o Adult gymnastics/fitness classes offered two evenings per week to remain
aligned with the public’s interest;
o Partnership with Boulder Housing Partners for free membership vouchers
to all low-income residents within housing sites;
o Silver Sneakers expansion to all three recreation centers to increase
participation opportunities;
o Addition of Silver and Fit programming to all three recreation centers to
increase participation opportunities in addition to Silver Sneakers
members;
o Integration of the Colorado Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) for
camp services; and
o Collaboration with Boulder Community Health to offer Walk with a Doc
programming to leverage partnerships with health providers and allied
agencies.
o Creation of 10 Channel 8 fitness videos to facilitate in-home exercise
•RPI Framework facilitated development of formal Space Allocation Guidelines
for Aquatic and Athletic facilities.
ANALYSIS:
With a focus on continuous improvement and as part of annual work planning, early in
2017 staff identified three priorities to improve the existing Service Delivery Model:
1. Simplify the Service Delivery Model (Attachment A) so that:
a.Staff know how to use tools and department expectations for program
design and delivery;
b. The model is easily understood and implemented; and
2.Create common evaluation metrics and tools so that:
a.Progress can be easily shared using a common language;
b. Service shifts are based upon solid data and information;
c. Services meet service goals and objectives; and
d. Customer satisfaction levels are high.
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 6
3.Review and update the RPI to ensure that the criteria are applicable and service
scoring is appropriate in order that:
a.The RPI works and is easily used and understood;
b. Scoring criteria and points system align with community values; and
c.Distribution of programming and categories between Community,
Recreation, and Exclusive is appropriate.
Three separate staff teams led work to address each of these priorities. The Service
Delivery Model now includes a step-by-step guide and simplified materials to help staff
ensure that programs are designed, delivered and evaluated according to best practices
and department standards. These improvements also facilitate onboarding of new staff
and ensuring continuity and consistency of performance expectations.
Common evaluation tools are in the final phase of development and will be implemented
in the second quarter of 2018.
Updating the Recreation Priority Index
Throughout 2017, staff updated processes and procedures related to the department’s
service delivery goals and objectives to address the first two priorities. The work to
address the third priority, review and update the RPI to ensure that the criteria are
applicable and service scoring is appropriate is the focus of this discussion item with the
PRAB.
As part of this evaluation and updating process, the assumptions used to develop the
original RPI were examined and validated with a goal of creating an updated tool (RPI
2.0) that is concise, includes better and more applicable examples, and is simpler to use.
Staff reviewed the original RPI and identified areas where employees encountered
challenges understanding and/or applying the criteria and focused on improving those
areas with the update.
The revised RPI includes more clear instructions. In addition, staff made improvements
to the criteria so that there are clearer definitions that fewer, simpler, and more
appropriate examples.
Additionally, revisions to the following definitions were made:
Family Participation
Previous Definition and Examples
Participant families are encouraged at all times to participate in service offering
through volunteering, positive spectatorship, and special events. Additionally, a
code of conduct guideline are established and players, families and spectators are
proactively informed, reminded, and help accountable for sportsmanship.
•A gymnastics service in which families socialize, travel, and support
children in their learning, skill development, and competition.
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 7
•A little league service in which parents sign up for and take turns
providing nutritious snacks for participants while ensuring children are
organized and assisting coaches in team activities.
•An off-site location service in which parents take turns chaperoning field
experiences.
New: Definition and Examples
Families are encouraged to engage in programs offered through volunteering,
participation and special events.
•A parent and toddler gymnastics class in which parents assist their
children in the class,
•A Parent/Child dance at one of the recreation centers,
•A Halloween carnival in which families attend, socialize with one another
and participate in activities together.
Neighborhood Based
Previous: Definition and Examples
Service is offered in a location that promotes face-to-face social interactions
through settings and situations where community members gather and live.
•An after school service that takes place in a neighborhood park and is
designed for local residents
•A service offered in a central location designed to attract adjacent
residents
•A special event at a neighborhood park that encourages area residents to
meet each other, recreate, and learn about the parks/trails in the
neighborhood
New: Location Accessibility Definition and Examples
Services are offered in multiple locations to be close-to-home and promote social
interactions by neighbors where they gather and live. Points are allocated
depending on the number of locations offered. 1 location = 0 points, 2 locations =
2 points, 3 or more locations = 4 points
•An after-school program offered that takes place at 3 low-income housing
sites = 4 points
•A water aerobics class that is offered at all 3 recreation centers = 4 points
•A soccer league only offered at Pleasant View Sports Complex = 0 points
Criteria on delivery and reach, location accessibility, family participation and targeted
goal have improved by removing subjectivity in the original RPI scoring system. Staff
believe the update will lead to more accurate and consistent results, while enhancing
master plan connectivity and ease of use.
NEXT STEPS:
The PRAB’s feedback will be included in the final RPI 2.0. Additionally, service costing
will be updated with 2017 expense data and programs will be categorized using the
Agenda Item VI-A, Page 8
revised and updated RPI 2.0. For services that are categorized as “exclusive” and where
feasible, phased fee increases will be charged on the basis of the actual costs of providing
services. For services that are categorized recreational or exclusive that charge a fee in
excess of delivery costs, fees will be set according to market value. Outreach on any
changes will be made to impacted users. Where fee increases are not feasible, program
objectives will be revised and alternate methods of program delivery or exit strategies
will be developed.
The timeline for these efforts is as follows:
•February 2018 - Service delivery staff workshop (RPI 2.0);
•March 2018 - 2017 Financials and Service Categorization Updated
•March 2018 – 2017 financials and Service Categories (RPI outcomes) updated
into PASS software;
•April/May 2018 - Analysis to inform 2019 budget development and planning
processes; and
•June 2018 - Return to PRAB with identified focus areas as part of the 2019
Operating Budget conversation.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Service Delivery Graphic (2017)
Attachment B: RPI 1.0 (2014)
Attachment C: RPI 2.0 (2018)
Click on this interactive PDF to learn more about each piece of the Service Delivery Puzzle
2017 Service Delivery Cheat Sheet
Attachment A
RPI Criteria
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute 1
Recreation Priority Index Criteria
The Recreation Priority Index (RPI)
The RPI is a balanced scorecard approach that allows recreation managers and decision-
makers to compare the relative importance of services in relation to one another. This metric
can be used to create an overall service offering strategy. Additionally, this metric may be used
as a compelling, data-driven case for setting fee structures and cost recovery rates for different
services. Similarly, it may indicate where services could be targeted for sunset and/or
facilitative delivery during long-range planning.
Figure 1: RPI Criteria Relative to Each Other
The RPI uses a 100-point scale and is based upon three major factors as above. This
approach is used in balanced scorecards. (Generally balanced scorecards use a minimum of 3
and no more than 8 factors.) Within the 3 factors above are six criteria for rating a service that
include: substitutability, community health and wellness, building community and relationships,
targeted goal, reach, and delivery method.
Criterion, as found in the following pages, should be evaluated against an individual service by
carefully reading the definition and corresponding examples in order to determine the score
that most accurately defines that service.
Special instances are considered during the scoring process. Legislative mandates may
elevate the service’s relative RPI score into a higher classification. Also, it should be noted that
there are Core services that will be offered by the department regardless of the score. The
following definitions and examples are to be used during the RPI scoring process.
Sustainability
Framework
Delivery Method
and Reach
BPRD Themes
64% 16%
20%
Attachment B
RPI Criteria
2 April 2014
Scoring Instructions and Order of Analysis
1.Answer Question 1 to determine if service may be scored through the index.
2.Answer Questions 2 – 7 by reading through each definition and example(s) given
3.Calculate final RPI score and compare to subsidy categories found on last page
Question 1 – Mandated Service/Facility Rental Analysis
A.Is this service or program mandated by federal or state law?
Yes No
*If question A is answered “Yes”, completion of the RPI worksheet is not required. Proceed to
develop program outcomes and measurable objectives, and gain all approvals to offer the program.
B.Is this service or program mandated by City Council policy, budget enactment, or
other direction to BPRD via the CMO?
Yes No
C.Is this a rental, exclusively a fee for access arrangement?
Yes No
*If question B (or C) is answered “Yes”, the service may not be scored in the RPI due to BPRD’s
inability to influence alignment with community values. Renters may explore a partnership for
discounted fees to be considered.
RPI Criteria
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute 3
Delivery Method and Reach Factors
Question 2 – Delivery
Direct Definition Service is organized, funded, overseen, and instructed by department.
Examples
•A swim lesson service that is operated at a department facility with no outside
service provider assistance.
•A family open swim activity held at a BPRD recreation center that allows drop-in
participation.
Facilitated
Non
Mission-
Driven
Definition
Service may be overseen by department; however, instruction, organization, and/or
funding are provided by external entity
AND
External entity does not demonstrate alignment with department goals
Examples
•A stand-up paddle board service that is instructed and organized by an external
private entity, but is overseen by the department, and does not demonstrate an
active educational component.
•A gymnastics service that is led by an external entity and the service does not
demonstrate community-based promotion such as broad inclusion.
Facilitated
Mission-
Driven
Definition
Service may be overseen by department; however, instruction, organization, and/or
funding are provided by external entity
AND
External entity demonstrates alignment with department goals
Examples
•An archery service that is instructed and organized by an external 501 c 3
educational nonprofit entity and the organization’s mission to promote community-
based growth aligns with the department’s values.
•A soccer league operated by an external 501 c 4 sport organizing nonprofit entity
that supports departmental goals through targeting youth.
RPI Criteria
4 April 2014
Delivery Method and Reach Factors
Question 3 – Service Reach
Minimal Definition
Service design and anticipated participation appeals to limited segments of the
community, and has limited appeal to community members pursuing a highly
specialized recreation activity. The market potential for registrations is considered to be
less than 514 individuals annually; the market potential for participations is considered
to be less than 9,999.
Examples •A competitive, traveling baseball service that has a yearly registration of 400.
•A yoga service that has a yearly registration of 200.
Low Definition
Service design and anticipated participation appeals to significant segments of the
community, and has appeal for a cross section of community members in a geographic
region or for a specialty recreation activity. The market potential for registrations is
considered to be between 515 – 769 individuals annually; the market potential for
participations (is considered to be greater than 10,000 participations and less than
49,999 participations.
Examples •A youth recreation program that has 700 yearly registrations.
High Definition
Service design and anticipated participation appeals to broad segments of the
community, and has appeal for a broad cross section of community members based on
demographics. The market potential for registrations is considered to be greater than
770 individuals annually; the market potential for participations is considered to be
greater than 50,000.
Examples
•A youth swim lesson ages 3-5 have over 770 registrations and registered youth
participations total 10 participations (10 lessons/swimmer); gross total of all
swimmers in the program is anticipated at 50,000 participations annually.
*Reach is calculated using program registration numbers. Each program or service will be scored on how it
compares to the total yearly registration average of all combined program and service areas.
RPI Criteria
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute 5
Substitutability Factor
Question 4 – Substitutability (Reliance on City as Only Service Provider)
No
Substitute Definition
Service is truly unique and is only offered by your department within BPRD’s service
area.
-OR-
No suitable "substitutes" exist for the functional requirement or purpose of this service
within the community and surrounding neighborhoods.
Examples
•A youth in nature service that takes at-risk kids into the woods to learn about
nature.
•A therapeutic recreation service that focuses on individuals with a particular
disability (e.g., mental health, lower-leg, etc.)
Some
Alternative
Providers
Exist
Definition There are one or two services available in BPRD’s service area that serve the same
purpose of your service in question and have similar participant access.
Examples
•There is a community pool that offers regular lap swimming and swim lessons.
•There is a non-profit that offers weight training and cardio classes.
•There is a private entity that offers yoga, Pilates, and weight training opportunities.
•There is a private entity that offers traveling sport teams.
High
Number of
Alternative
Providers
Exist
Definition There are three or more services available in BPRD’s service area that serve the
same purpose of your service in question and have similar participant access. That is,
there is competition for your target audience and the service you provide.
Examples
•There is a community pool that offers regular lap swimming and swim lessons.
•There is a non-profit that offers weight training and cardio classes.
•There is a private entity that offers yoga, Pilates, and weight training opportunities.
•There is a private entity that offers traveling sport teams.
•Private vendors or non-profit organizations offer the same “pay to use” services.
RPI Criteria
6 April 2014
BPRD Master Plan Theme Factors
Question 5 – Community Health & Wellness
Scope of
Opportunities Definition Encourages participation in programs and services by addressing financial and
ability barriers and other identified barriers to participation.
Examples
•A soccer league that has discounted rates, a centralized location based on
transportation needs, and provides inclusivity for all participants.
•Pool use is open to all children in community and access time/day promotes
arrival by vehicle, bus, or shared transportation.
Lifelong
Movement Definition Service promotes prolonged behavioral patterns that include physical activity and
motion.
Examples
•A personal training class that teaches body mechanics and how to perform
technical exercises.
•A sports service that teaches kinetics and proper body mechanics in lifelong
activities such as jogging, running, and sprinting.
•A golf service that teaches warm up, exercises for the activity, and the proper
techniques so that participants can participate in the activity on their own.
•A program supports the movement of individuals such as a “show and go.”
•A softball league that supports social interaction and movement to promote
health.
Health
Education
Component
Definition Individuals and groups of people participating in the service learn to behave in a
manner conducive to the promotion, maintenance, or restoration of health including
physical, social, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual health.
Examples
•A personal training service that teaches the health benefits of anaerobic and
aerobic exercises.
•A competitive league that teaches how eustress is different from stress.
•A yoga class that teaches how meditation and relaxation is important to
emotional and spiritual well-being.
•A youth team sport where coaches and program leaders review proper body
condition, stretching, and how the sport encourages health.
Specific
Health Target Definition A service with a service goal of providing a specific health benefit (such as
addressing a known public health epidemic such as obesity, screen time, unhealthy
eating, etc.)
Examples
•A basketball league that specifically targets childhood obesity by focusing on
kinetic movement and condition training.
•A pottery service that targets individuals subject to increased screen time and
provides an outlet to be “unplugged.”
RPI Criteria
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute 7
BPRD Master Plan Theme Factors
Question 6 – Builds Community & Relationships
“Network”
Relationships Definition Promotes working relationships with community partners including friends groups,
foundations, non-profits, public organizations, and private entities.
Examples
• A concert in the park series that is sponsored by the foundation, a business,
or a non-profit organization.
• A concessions service that is operated by an organization other than the
department.
• A personal fitness service that is a joint-venture by the YMCA and the BPRD.
• A youth sport offered through an association or non-profit club in partnership
with BRPD to allow use of department facilities.
• An after school service that utilizes the school’s facilities.
Family
Participation Definition
Participant families are encouraged at all times to participate in service offering
through volunteering, positive spectatorship, and special events. Additionally, a
code of conduct guideline is established and players, families and spectators are
proactively informed, reminded, and held accountable for sportsmanship.
Examples
• A gymnastics service in which families socialize, travel, and support children
in their learning, skill development, and competition.
• A little league service in which parents sign up for and take turns providing
nutritious snacks for participants while ensuring children are organized and
assisting coaches in team activities.
• An off-site location service in which parents take turns chaperoning field
experiences.
• An interactive outdoor education program involving parents and children in
movement, learning, and experiences related to the outdoors.
Neighborhood-
Based Definition Service is offered in a location that promotes face-to-face social interactions
through settings and situations where community members gather and live.
Examples
• An after school service that takes place in a neighborhood park and is
designed for local residents.
• A service offered in a central location designed to attract adjacent residents.
• A special event at a neighborhood park that encourages area residents to
meet each other, recreate, and learn about the parks/trails in the
neighborhood.
Encourages
Diversity Definition Service attracts participants of different cultures and ethnic backgrounds and
promotes respect among participants.
Examples
• A soccer service that targets underrepresented populations by advertising in
diverse neighborhoods and through appropriate social media avenues.
• An arts and crafts service that is instructed by a diverse staff that reflects the
city’s demographics.
• A Yoga class that involves a community outreach component such as Yoga in
the park or other events to attempt to attract diverse groups.
• A pottery class that is instructed in dual languages and its program materials
are offered in more than one language.
RPI Criteria
8 April 2014
BPRD Master Plan Theme Factors
Question 7 – Targeted Goal
Youth Definition Service specifically targets youth 18 and under in skill development, health
education, and building social capacity.
Examples
•Youth swim lessons.
•Youth after school service.
Outdoor/Nature Definition Service is located in an outdoor setting and/or in nature.
Examples
•Golf lessons on location at the golf course.
•Kayak class that meets at an outdoor reservoir, beach front, or lake.
•A hiking class that takes participants into woods, forests, or other natural
resource areas.
Low-Income Definition Service specifically targets low-income individuals and provides services that
allow full participation.
Examples •A pottery class that provides scholarships for full participation.
•A free after school service that caters to at-risk youth.
People with
Disabilities Definition Service specifically targets people with disabilities and provides services that
allow full participation.
Examples •An adaptive aquatics service.
•A therapeutic horse riding service.
RPI Criteria
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute 9
Service Categorization
As mentioned before, the RPI is a balanced scorecard approach that allows recreation
managers and decision-makers to compare the relative importance of services in relation to
one another and establish cost recovery rates. The score produced will be unique to individual
services, regardless of the delivery method being direct, facilitated, rental, etc. In order to
objectively assign cost recovery amounts to service offering, it is necessary to develop a
system to prioritize and fund services. This RPI uses a three category system as outlined
below.
Category Definition RPI Range Subsidy Rate
Community Services that enhance the health,
safety and livability of the
community and therefore require
minimal obstacles to participation.
70+ 100-80%
Recreation Services that benefit a broad
range of users and are targeted to
promote physical and mental well-
being.
69-40 79-10%
Exclusive Services targeted to specific
individuals or user groups with
limited community benefit.
<40 <10%
RPI Score Sheet
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute
*Step 1: Before Beginning Scoring Activity*
a)Is this service or program mandated by federal or state law?
Yes No
b)Is this service or program mandated by City Council policy, budget enactment, or other direction to BPRD via the
CMO?
Yes No
c)Is this service or program a rental of a facility without any partnership or co-sponsorship agreement?
Yes No
If any questions are answered “Yes”, completion of the RPI worksheet is not required. Proceed to develop program
outcomes and measurable objectives, and gain all approvals to offer the program, or process the rental agreement with
conditions and at rates as approved by the City.
April 2014
*Step 2: If all answers to Step 1 were no, begin assignment of RPI factors to the program as below.
Category Scoring Areas Points
Received
Points
Possible
Delivery and Reach Factor
Choose
One
Answer
Delivery
Direct Facilitated
Non Mission-Driven
Facilitated
Mission-Driven 12
4 8 12
Reach Minimal Low High 4 0 2 4
Substitutability Factor
Choose
One
Answer
Substitutability
High Some None
20 0 10 20
BPRD Themes Factor(s)
Select
All That
Apply
Community
Health &
Wellness
Scope of
Opportunities
Lifelong
Movement
Education
Component
Specific
Health
Target 24
6 6 6 6
Builds
Community &
Relationships
“Network”
Relationships
Family
Participation
Neighborhood-
based
Encourages
Diversity 16
4 4 4 4
Targeted Goal Youth Outdoor/Nature Low-Income PWDs 24 6 6 6 6
RPI Score Sheet
April 2014
Concept copyright by
Trustees of Indiana University
on behalf of Eppley Institute
Score Sheet
Category Program Name Here Program Name Here Program Name Here Program Name Here
Delivery
Reach
Substitutability
Community Health &
Wellness
Builds Community and
Relationships
Targeted Goal
Total
RPI Criteria
1
Attachment C
Recreation Priority Index Criteria
The Recreation Priority Index (RPI)
The RPI is a balanced scorecard approach that allows recreation managers and decision-
makers to compare the relative importance of programs in relation to one another. This metric
can be used to create an overall service offering strategy. Additionally, this metric may be used
as a compelling, data-driven case for setting fee structures and cost recovery rates for
different programs.
Figure 1: RPI Criteria Relative to Each Other
The RPI uses a 100-point scale and is based upon three major factors as above. This
approach is used in balanced scorecards. (Generally balanced scorecards use a minimum of 3
and no more than 8 factors.) Within the 3 factors above are six criteria for rating a program that
include: substitutability, community health and wellness, building community and relationships,
targeted goal, reach, and delivery method.
Criterion, as found in the following pages, should be evaluated against an individual program
by carefully reading the definition and corresponding examples in order to determine the score
that most accurately defines that program.
Special instances are considered during the scoring process. Legislative mandates may
elevate the service’s relative RPI score into a higher classification. Also, it should be noted that
there are Core services that will be offered by the department regardless of the score. The
following definitions and examples are to be used during the RPI scoring process.
Sustainability
Factor
20%
Delivery
Method and
Reach
16%
BPR Themes
64%
RPI Criteria
2
Scoring Instructions and Order of Analysis
1.Choose program or program group. Scoring is meant to work best when all of one type of
program is scored together.
•All pre-school gymnastics would be scored as a whole as opposed to scoring 3-year-old, 4-
year-old and 5-year-old classes separately or even by barcode.
•Kids Camp at South, East and North would be scored as one but independently from Goats
and Gardens Camp or Water Sports Camp.
2.Answer Question 1 to determine if program may be scored through the index.
3.Answer Questions 2 – 7 by reading through each definition and example(s) given
4.Calculate final RPI score and compare to subsidy categories found on last page
Question 1 – Mandated Service/Facility Rental Analysis
A.Is this service or program mandated by federal or state law?
Yes No
*If question A is answered “Yes”, completion of the RPI worksheet is not required. Proceed to develop
program outcomes and measurable objectives, and gain all approvals to offer the program.
B.Is this service or program mandated by City Council policy, budget enactment, or
other direction to BPR via the CMO?
Yes No
C.Is this a rental, exclusively a fee for access arrangement?
Yes No
*If question B (or C) is answered “Yes”, the service may not be scored in the RPI due to BPR’s
inability to influence alignment with community values. Renters may explore a partnership for
discounted fees to be considered.
RPI Criteria
3
Delivery Method and Reach Factors
Question 2 – Delivery
Direct Definition Program is organized, funded, overseen, and instructed by department.
Examples
•A swim lesson program that is operated at a department facility with no
outside program provider assistance.
•A recreational gymnastics class that teaches children fundamental gymnastics
skills while focusing on physical, social and emotional development.
Facilitated
Mission-
Driven
Definition
Program may be overseen by department; however, instruction, organization,
and/or funding are provided by external entity.
AND
External entity demonstrates alignment with department goals
Examples
•An archery program that is instructed and organized by an external 501 c 3
educational nonprofit entity and the organization’s mission to promote
community- based growth aligns with the department’s values.
•A summer camp offered by a local climbing gym that focuses on introductory
rock climbing skills and physical well-being. Part of the summer camp takes
place at a BPR rec center
RPI Criteria
4
Delivery Method and Reach Factors
Question 3 – Program Reach – Program reach is defined by the number of registrations
in a program area’s peak season. Registrations is defined as the total number of
participants registered for an individual program. Peak season is defined by the season
(Winter, Spring/Summer or Fall) in which the number of registrations is highest.
Minimal Definition The peak season is less than 100 registrations.
Examples
•A youth sports program that serves 20 youth with disabilities in Winter.
•A yoga program that has 80 registrations during Fall.
•A gymnastics summer camp that had 95 registrations.
Low Definition The peak season is 100-400 registrations.
Examples •A summer camp that has 350 registrations for the entire summer.
•A gymnastics team that has 150 team members.
High Definition The peak season is more than 400 registrations.
Examples
•A beginner gymnastics class that had 450 registrations during the fall.
•An adult softball league that had 1000 players in the summer.
•A concert in the park that had 500 attendees.
*For leagues, take the number of registrations and multiply by the average number of players per
team
RPI Criteria
5
Substitutability Factor
Question 4 – Substitutability
(Service area is defined as a 10-15 mile radius around Boulder. This would include neighboring towns such as
Louisville, Lafayette and Superior.)
No
Substitute Definition
Service is truly unique and is only offered by your department within BPR’s service
area.
-OR-
No suitable "substitutes" exist for the functional requirement or purpose of this program
within the community and surrounding neighborhoods.
Examples
•A summer camp that offers children the chance to directly interact with goats
and gain knowledge regarding animal care and gardening.
•An adaptive water ski program that serves individuals with physical disabilities
and traumatic brain injuries.
Some
Alternative
Providers
Exist
Definition There are one or two programs available in BPR’s service area that serve the
same purpose of your program in question and have similar participant access.
Examples •An adult outdoor recreational kickball league
•An instructional sports programs for kids with special needs.
High
Number of
Alternative
Providers
Exist
Definition There are three or more programs available in BPR’s service area that serve the
same purpose of your program in question and have similar participant access. That
is, there is competition for your target audience and the service you provide.
Examples
•Yoga classes taught by a certified yoga instructor
•A general summer camp that offers a variety of activities for children
•Indoor climbing lessons for youth
•Personalized training programs for weight lifting
RPI Criteria
6
BPR Master Plan Theme Factors
Question 5 – Community Health & Wellness
Scope of
Opportunities Definition Encourages participation in programs and services by addressing financial
barriers to participation.
Examples
•This includes programs eligible for reduced rate such as swim lessons,
gymnastics classes, intro to yoga etc.
•This does NOT include personal training, private swim lessons, adult sports
leagues or other programs not eligible for reduced rate or scholarship.
Education
Component Definition Provides instruction that promotes skill development, health and wellness,
or environmental awareness.
Examples
•A summer camp held outside which teaches the children the philosophy of
"Leave no Trace."
•A yoga class that teaches how meditation and relaxation is important to
emotional and spiritual well-being.
•A youth team sport where coaches and program leaders review proper body
condition, stretching, and how the sport encourages health.
Specific
Health Target Definition A program with a service goal of providing a specific health benefit that addresses a
known public health concern.
Examples
•A diabetes prevention program geared toward people who have received a
diagnosis of "pre-diabetic".
•A warm water class that is specifically designed assist in alleviating pain
associated with arthritis.
RPI Criteria
7
BPR Master Plan Theme Factors
Question 6 – Builds Community & Relationships
“Network”
Relationships Definition Promotes working relationships with community partners including friends groups,
foundations, non-profits, public organizations, and private entities.
Examples
•A concert in the park series that is sponsored by the foundation, a business,
or a non-profit organization.
•A personal fitness program that is a joint-venture by the YMCA and the BPR.
•A youth sport offered through an association or non-profit club in partnership
with BPR to allow use of department facilities.
•A summer camp offered through BPR held in a local elementary school.
Family
Participation Definition
Families are encouraged to engage in programs offered through volunteering,
participation and special events.
Examples
•A parent and toddler gymnastics class in which both parents assist their
children within the class.
•A father daughter dance at one of the recreation centers.
•A Halloween carnival in which families attend, socialize with one another and
participate in activities together.
Location
Accessibility Definition
Parks and Recreation programs are offered in multiple locations that shall be
promoted and accessible to all community members. Points are allocated
depending on the number of locations offered. 1 location - 0 points,
2 locations – 2 points, 3 or more locations - 4 points
Examples
•An after school program offered through BPR that takes place at several
low income housing sites - 4 points.
•A water aerobics class that is offered at all 3 rec centers - 4 points.
•A soccer league is only offered at Pleasant View Fields - 0 points.
Encourages
Participation of Non-
Native English
Speakers
Definition Program is specifically marketed to and designed for those whose primary
language is not English. This includes those that may speak Spanish, ASL,
Mandarin or a variety of other languages in the home.
Examples
•A Yoga class that is instructed in Spanish.
•An after school program in which all of the instructors are bilingual.
•A fitness class that specifically markets the availability of an ASL interpreter.
RPI Criteria
8
BPR Master Plan Theme Factors
Question 7 – Targeted Goal
Youth Definition Program specifically targets youth 18 and under.
Examples •Pre-School age swim lessons
•A beginner gymnastics class for 6-12 year old’s
Low -Income Definition
Program specifically targets low-income individuals and provides services
that allow full participation.
Examples
•Kids Camp offering CCAP as a way for low income families to attend camp.
•A free after school program that caters to at-risk youth.
People with
Disabilities Definition
Program specifically targets people with disabilities and provides services
that allow full participation.
Examples •An adaptive aquatic program.
•A summer camp for teens with developmental disabilities
RPI Criteria
9
Program Categorization
As mentioned before, the RPI is a balanced scorecard approach that allows recreation
managers and decision-makers to compare the relative importance of programs in relation to
one another and establish cost recovery rates. The score produced will be unique to individual
program, regardless of the delivery method being direct, facilitated, rental, etc. In order to
objectively assign cost recovery amounts to program offering, it is necessary to develop a
system to prioritize and fund services. This RPI uses a three category system as outlined
below.
Category Definition RPI Range Subsidy Rate
Community Programs that enhance the health,
safety and livability of the
community and therefore require
minimal obstacles to participation.
70+ 100-80%
Recreation Programs that benefit a broad
range of users and are targeted to
promote physical and mental well-
being.
69-40 79-10%
Exclusive Programs targeted to specific
individuals or user groups with
limited community benefit.
<40 <10%
RPI Score Sheet
*Step 1: Before Beginning Scoring Activity*
a)Is this service or program mandated by federal or state law?
Yes No
b)Is this service or program mandated by City Council policy, budget enactment, or other direction to BPR via the
CMO?
Yes No
c)Is this service or program a rental of a facility without any partnership or co-sponsorship agreement?
Yes No
If any questions are answered “Yes”, completion of the RPI worksheet is not required. Proceed to develop program
outcomes and measurable objectives, and gain all approvals to offer the program, or process the rental agreement with
conditions and at rates as approved by the City.
*Step 2: If all answers to Step 1 were no, begin assignment of RPI factors to the program as below.
Category Scoring Areas Points
Received
Points
Possible Delivery and Reach Factor
Choose
One
Answer
Direct Facilitated Mission-
Driven 8
Delivery 4 8
Reach
Minimal Low High 8
0 4 8
Substitutability Factor
Choose
One Answer
High Some None
Substitutability 0 10 20 20
BPR Themes Factor(s)
Select
All That
Apply
Community
Health &
Wellness
Scope of
Opportunities
Education
Component Specific Health Target 24
8 8 8
Builds
Community &
Relationships
“Network”
Relationships
Family
Participation
Location Accessibility Non-Native
English 16
4 4 0,2,4 4
Targeted Goal
Youth Low-Income Disabilities 24
8 8 8
Score Sheet Category Program Name Here Program Name Here Program Name Here Program Name Here
Delivery
Reach
Substitutability
Community Health &
Wellness
Builds Community and
Relationships
Targeted Goal
Total
INFORMATION PACKET
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager
MaryAnn Weideman, Deputy City Manager
Yvette Bowden, Director, Parks & Recreation
Alison Rhodes, Deputy Director, Parks & Recreation
Jeff Haley, Manager, Parks Planning, Development and Community Engagement
Brenda Richey, Parks & Recreation Business Services Manager
Callie Hayden, Urban Parks Manager
Date: January 12, 2018
Subject: Provision of Public Restrooms in City of Boulder Urban Parks
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This memo provides Council with an update concerning the sustainable provision of public
restrooms across the City of Boulder’s urban parks system.
Boulder’s urban parks system of over 100 parks, plazas, courts, and fields currently includes 45
public restrooms of varied infrastructure and servicing levels. The City’s Parks & Recreation
Department currently expends approximately $213,500/year in servicing and maintaining in-park
restrooms. As noted in the benchmarking analysis (see Attachment A), this level of service
meets and/or exceeds that provided by peer communities. The department’s annual Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) and on-going asset management practices prioritize capital projects
each year with a focus on maintaining safe and pleasant visiting experiences, including access to
public restrooms. Current planning addresses deferred maintenance at two neighborhood parks
and a gap in the system at East Boulder Community Park. Moreover, practices related to the
location, hours and seasons of availability and servicing of these restrooms also meet and/or
exceed current industry practice for urban parks.
Over the past year, community members have contacted City Council and the department
suggesting enhancements related to public restrooms seeking greater access (locations, hours,
seasons) and/or enhanced services (supplies, attendants, servicing schedules). This memo:
•reviews the department’s current provision of restrooms in public parks,
•analyzes benchmark community amenities and practices,
•summarizes relevant policy direction, and
•outlines planned capital projects and options which enhance restroom access.
Staff believe the current Capital Improvement Program (CIP) plans appropriately and sustainably
address the needs for facility access across the system. Regarding servicing of restrooms, staff
regularly adjusts service levels based on weather, demand, and customer feedback. Finally, in
connection with other city-wide public space initiatives (including, but not limited to, the city-
wide Response to Encampment Impacts effort), staff has provided options for both capital
projects and operational enhancements. These options, including a staff preferred option, are not
funded and would require new funding or the reallocation of resources from other services.
BACKGROUND
The City of Boulder’s urban parks system currently includes over 100 parks, plazas and
facilities. Levels of service (regarding size, proximity and connectivity) for these amenities were
last studied in 2013 in the need assessment phase of the Parks and Recreation Department's
extensive master planning process. Per industry practice, the department categorizes urban parks
into classifications:
Neighborhood Parks
Typically, between 5-20 acres and within walking distance of neighborhood residences.
This category may also include ‘pocket parks’ between 1-5 acres. Examples include
Melody Park, North Boulder Park, Emma Gomez Martinez Park, and Washington Park.
Community Parks
Larger than neighborhood parks, typically up to 100 acres in size, these parks are
developed to serve a wider population than the surrounding neighborhood and often
including a larger recreational amenity such as a dog park or sports field. Boulder has three
community parks: Foothills, East Boulder, and Harlow Platts.
Regional Parks
Up to 300 acres in size, and frequently attracting visitors from outside of the Boulder
community, these amenities provide unique experiences and often host large permitted
events. Boulder’s regional parks are Valmont City Park, the Boulder Reservoir, and the
Civic Area/Central Park.
Civic Spaces
Other land types and amenities of varied uses serving the general community, for example
the Pearl Street Mall.
Natural spaces
The urban parks system also includes several natural areas within the urban core currently
undeveloped and/or reserved as future park sites.
Park classifications allow the department to identify necessary service standards, meet the need
for community amenity access and allocate the system infrastructure as the City evolves. In-park
amenities (benches, playgrounds, trash containers, path connections) are planned in accordance
with these standards and anticipated uses. Such is the case as the department determines
restroom access and infrastructure.
Typically, neighborhood parks serve the immediately surrounding community within ½ mile of
that location. They tend not to have specialized features like ball fields, dog parks or pools and
are not generally permitted for large events or expected to be visited for significant lengths of
time. Because they are not designed to include such features, they typically do not include
regular restroom access. This would also be the case for natural spaces. By comparison,
Community and Regional Parks are more likely to host permitted events and often draw larger
groups for longer periods of time. To that end, they may be outfitted with access to a nearby
restroom. The City of Boulder’s urban park system currently consists of 6 Community and/or
Regional Parks.
Given the variety in the Neighborhood Park Classification, the department considers the
following anticipated uses when determining restroom infrastructure locations:
•Where groups of people gather per day in a four to six-hour period at a location at least
three times per week during the summer months (Chautauqua Park, North Boulder Park,
Martin Park, Eben G. Fine Park);
•Where permitted athletic events take place on a consistent basis, such as sports
complexes and lighted ballfields (Stazio, Pleasantview, Mapleton);
•Where there is a dense congregation of uses, such as the grouping of picnic tables,
playground and athletic fields (Tom Watson Park); or
•Where there is dense informal use (not permitted) that would demand water and
restrooms facilities, such as Valmont Skate Park.
I. Assessment: Infrastructure, Seasonality, Servicing and Benchmarks
City of Boulder provided restrooms vary by type and include permanent winterized buildings,
non-winterized restrooms, and semi-permanent mobile units (for example, the current unit at
Flatirons Golf Course purchased following demolition of the flood-impacted Events Center), and
portable toilets. Capital and maintenance costs associated with each type of equipment varies.
Responding to recent community interest, the department developed an interactive map of
currently available restrooms which may aid visitors in selecting which park location to frequent.
With our upcoming Design Standards initiative (2018), this map might be enhanced to include
other amenity listings (playgrounds, picnic pavilions, pools/splash pads, dog parks and specialty
features such as art installations, historic assets, fishing spots, slacklining course areas and skate
parks).
Including Pearl Street Mall, the City currently operates 45 public restrooms across Boulder’s
urban parks. In addition to in-park amenities and the public restrooms available at Boulder's
three Recreation Centers and two public pools, the community has access to other restrooms not
managed by the Department. Some public restrooms available near public parks include the six
locations housed within library branches, the Municipal Building, and the Ranger Cottage near
Chautauqua, all available during normal operating hours.
Infrastructure
In addition to the park classification considerations, restroom structures and locations must
address the requirements of the Boulder Revised Code, including building, energy code and
lighting standards and flood plain requirements. Permanent restrooms require access to service-
related utilities, while portable restrooms require flat grade to function properly and for service
access. For these reasons, it is not always possible to provide restrooms where the community
might desire them. In addition, the department is not able to implement such capital
improvements where the facility is owned by another entity (the County or Boulder Valley
School District, for example) and may also be restricted on certain historic properties (e.g.
Columbia Cemetery). Where long-term and year-round use is needed, the department has found
that permanent restroom infrastructure is most durable and preferred over use of portable
restroom units.
Renewal of facilities occurs based on asset condition and life-cycle and updates all fixtures,
finishes and elements to be like new. This can include upgrades or improvements to meet
standards such as ADA accessibility or energy efficiency.
Hours, Seasonal Closures & Servicing
It is customary in the Parks & Recreation industry to maintain access only during normal park
hours and to conduct seasonal closures or reduce hours as aligned with park use. Hours of
availability may also be determined by the specific equipment available at each site. Doing so
allows for the department to responsibly allot resources and reduces the likelihood of costly
vandalism. Aside from Recreation Facility restrooms, six City of Boulder urban parks provide
access to a permanent restroom year-round: Pearl Street Mall, Foothills Community Park, Eben
G. Fine Park, Tom Watson Park, Chautauqua Park and Harlow Platts Community Park. Even in
these instances, hours are adjusted each winter as visitation decreases.
Across the system, in-park permanent restrooms are serviced a minimum of once per day while
in in operation. Some are serviced more than once per day based on use of the park. In a few
circumstances, the servicing level is supplemented to accommodate park programming (e.g.
Farmers Markets, Snow Much Fun or large permitted events). As noted in City Council materials
related to Living Wage, contracted custodial services have proven to be most efficient and
effective in performing such services (a higher percentage of contract custodial workers live in
the city, benefits for part-time workers, more opportunities for formal training and career growth,
efficiencies involving economies of scale and reduced overhead and, more flexibility for staffing
that helps ensure customer service standards can be met). Servicing is coordinated by the
department and conducted by vendors selected through a competitive procurement process. The
department currently expends roughly $146,000/year on custodial contracting to serve in-park
permanent restrooms. The department performs annual minor maintenance on these facilities
each year. These activities can include interior painting, polishing and deep cleaning of the
interior and furnishings, as well as refinishing of the components to keep up with the impacts of
public use.
Comparatively, the department expends roughly $67,500/year servicing portable toilets through
contracted service (also secured via a competitive process). These include units provided where
site permanent bathrooms are winterized as well as those meeting supplemental needs. It also
includes several year-round placements scheduled to be replaced by permanent restrooms per the
department’s 5-year CIP. Servicing levels vary from 1 to 4 times/week based on need. The
average portable toilet is serviced 2-3 times/week in our system.
These expenses do not include direct city personnel costs in monitoring/maintaining the
restrooms but do include:
•Adjustments to service in recent years to accommodate increased use due to warmer
temperatures in the typically cooler months;
•Adjustments in custodial contracts to reflect the city’s Living Wage policy direction;
•Addition of sharps containers to restrooms;
•Additional fees charged by contractors for managing hazardous materials (e.g.
hypodermic needles); and
•Additional portable units installed to reduce human waste along the Boulder Creek
corridor (2017 Restroom Pilot which led to a proposal funding an additional a permanent
in-park restroom in this area).
In summary, across the system, the department spends ~$213,500 per year servicing and
maintaining restrooms in urban parks (up roughly 32% since 2015).
Since 2015, the department has also:
•Invested in three capital projects enhancing or replacing restroom infrastructure at
Foothills, Harlow Platts, and Valmont City Parks;
•Continued to evaluate and adjust servicing levels to meet community needs; and
•Updated benchmarking to ensure that the City’s current practices are in-line with peer
cities.
Benchmarking
As part of the Parks and Recreation master planning process in 2013, the department identified
12 benchmark communities. Each was chosen based upon similar population size, presence of a
major university, and as accredited and /or national award-winning agencies. For purposes of this
review, staff compared provision of restrooms in public parks among six of the benchmark
communities as well as 2 other local communities [Attachment A].
Boulder’s provision of public restrooms exceeds levels currently provided by benchmarked
communities. Boulder provides more year-round restrooms than any of its peers, and only
Longmont has more in-park restrooms (Denver provides a greater number overall but far fewer
as a fraction of total parks or per capita). Boulder also leads its peers in the provision of restroom
sharps containers and maintains a competitive position in provided hours of operation.
II.Policy Guidance
Needs Assessment and public engagement data from the 2014 Parks and Recreation Master Plan
informed “Taking Care of What We Have” as a key theme for the department's work directing
the department to:
•Ensure adequate resources are available to maintain and operate assets within community
sustainability goals by implementing a life cycle approach.
•Implement an asset management system that tracks asset condition, critical systems
maintenance and repair and rehabilitation requirements use the system in making park
and facility investment decisions.
•Evaluate the proposed development of any new park and facility assets through a
feasibility study that includes a needs assessment, user profile, projected participation,
development funding method, life cycle cost pro forma and alternative development
trade-off analysis.
•Seek and develop partnerships and opportunities to leverage maintenance and capital
building funds.
The department’s annual CIP and longer-term Capital Investment Strategy align with this policy
direction. Related to restrooms in public parks, it is important to note that any additional
portable, permanent and/or year-round restrooms create ongoing and presently unfunded
operating budget impacts.
III.Options to Enhance Provision and Servicing
Boulder’s current levels of services related to restrooms exceed those as compared with
benchmark communities, and meet the established criteria for provision of restrooms. In
addition, the current 5-year CIP plan for the department includes the improvement of deficient
assets as well as the addition of permanent restrooms to East Boulder Community Park.
The department considered systems and service options to enhance the sustainability and
efficient operation of public restrooms and which might also improve community
satisfaction. As noted, these options are not funded and would require new funding and/or
reallocation of funding from other services as capital considered amongst the city’s varied
priorities.
Infrastructure Enhancement Options
Table 1 below summarizes currently planned, funded capital improvements. This includes
funding to build new permanent restrooms at the Civic Area (on the west side of the park) and at
East Boulder Community Park. Adding restroom facilities at these sites is in line with the criteria
and operating costs are included in the 2018 operating budgets. Additionally, public access to
year-round restrooms at Scott Carpenter Park and the Boulder Reservoir will be enhanced as
facilities are replaced with the projects at these sites beginning in 2018 and scheduled for
completion in 2019. North Boulder Park and Martin Park Shelter refurbishments are planned for
2021.
Table 1: Summary of 2018 – 2021 Planned Restroom Capital Improvements
New Restroom Installation 2018 2019 2020 2021
Civic Area West Side $300,000
East Boulder Community Park $300,000
Renovations to Existing
Restrooms
2018 2019 2020 2021
Scott Carpenter Park Restrooms Restrooms
included in
larger pool
project
Boulder Reservoir Visitor Services
Center
Restrooms
included in
larger project
North Boulder Park Shelter
Renovation
$120,000*
Martin Park Shelter Renovation $169,000
*Funding in Public Works/Facilities and Asset Management CIP
In addition to the currently programmed projects, staff development of the recommended 2019-
2023 CIP might also evaluate options to reallocate funding and project schedules accelerating the
renewal of the shelters currently planned to occur in 2021. Alternatively, should Council deem
that currently programmed projects do not align with their priorities, other funding might be
considered.
Operations Enhancement Options
Some community members have suggested the provision of attendants, showers or 24-hour
access to park restrooms. Park operating hours are 5:00a.m.-11:00p.m. daily and 365 days/year
and additional restroom access during park closures are not recommended. Showers in park
restrooms are likewise not recommended as this level of service is not consistent with municipal
park operations. Staff were unable to find benchmark communities, or generally any municipal
park system, where showers are provided in park restrooms. There are a few instances where
public showers are provided via nonprofit partner organizations.
Nevertheless, staff provides the following options for enhanced service.
1)Parks and Recreation assume management of Civic Area East portable restrooms.
Current portable restrooms are provided to support the Farmers’ Market and are only
available on market days. Additional restrooms are brought in to supplement for special
events. Concurrent with finalizing the BCFM's 2018 license agreement, the department
might assume management of these restrooms so that units may be more accessible to
park visitors on non-market programming days.
Cost: ~$9,000/year depending on hours of operation.
Benefits: Increased control of and access to restrooms on the eastern edge of the Civic
Area. Temporary solution through 2018 which allows for flexibility as East Bookend
planning evolves.
Concerns: This expense is unfunded. Portable units in this area are subject to higher fees
due to high prevalence of hazardous materials (such as hypodermic needles) and
vandalism (while still more cost effective than a permanent or semi-permanent unit),
portable restrooms are generally seen as less attractive and enjoyable for visitors.
2)Increase permanent restroom servicing to twice per day and all portable units to 3
times/week.
This would be accomplished by adjusting the contracts with the service providers.
Cost: $110,000
Benefits: Increased attention to the restrooms without impacting core services performed
by city staff.
Concerns: This scenario would require additional funding and would detract funding
from other city needs and/or priorities.
3)Increase permanent restroom servicing to regular day porter servicing.
This would provide a level of service like the municipal recreation centers, with on-site
staff monitoring cleanliness and supplies system-wide.
Cost: Challenging to determine as this level of service does not exist in other municipal
urban park systems. A best estimate is $164,000 per location for service during operating
hours of 5:00a.m.-11:00p.m. and based on recreation center expenses.
Benefits: This option would ensure a very high level of cleanliness.
Concerns: This option is fiscally infeasible and would also provide a level of service not
in alignment with municipal park operations.
IV.PUBLIC INFORMATION AND INPUT
Staff routinely monitors and responds to community feedback concerning Parks and Recreation
services, including those related to the provision and servicing of public restrooms across the
city’s urban parks system. In response to feedback received since 2016, staff has adjusted
service levels twice (emphasis on Spring and Summer servicing) and implemented a public
restroom pilot during the summer of 2017 which informed the information and recommendations
herein.
V.NEXT STEPS
Based on industry standards, updated benchmarks, fiscal impact and the state of existing public
restroom infrastructure, staff recommends:
1) Continue with the current CIP projects in 2018. As 2019-2023 CIP is developed, evaluate
opportunities to accelerate the renewal of shelters at Martin Park and North Boulder Park
and explore program options to fund restroom renewal/replacement at Tom Watson Park.
2)City assume management responsibility for portable restrooms on the East Bookend of
the Civic Area, funding operating expenses from BCFM license and 2018 operating
budget. This is a temporary solution while 2018 produces spatial planning for the East
Bookend.
3) Continued exploration of service enhancements to be reflected in the 2019 budget
proposal. Staff will continue to monitor restroom conditions and adjust service levels
based on community feedback, weather, and funding.
4) 2018 Park Design Guidelines will further codify city standards and process for the
provision of restrooms in Boulder’s urban parks.
City Council should contact Yvette Bowden (bowdeny@bouldercolorado.gov) by January
26, 2018 if there are questions about the options or recommendations described above. In the
absence of Council feedback or questions, staff will implement the proposed recommendation
including the development of related funding requests. The impact and sustainability of such
enhancements will be addressed in the department’s budget proposals for 2019 and, as
appropriate, future budget years.
Restrooms in Urban Parks: Attachment A
Boulder Broomfield Ft.
Collins
Denver Longmont Westminster Ann Arbor, MI Bend, OR Berkeley,
CA
Bloomington,
IN
Population 108,090 65,065 164,207 682,545 92,858 113,875 120,782 91,122 121,240 84,465
# of Parks 60+ 54 50 250 40 60 147 81 52 40
Acreage 1.810 1,015 875 <5,000 1,962 2,910 2,089 2,600 235 2,342
Total # of
bathrooms
45 12 28 57 38 6 33 0 11 10
# Open
24 hours
0 0 0 0 0 (Portables
open 24/7)
0 0 0 0
# Open
Year-
Round
20 8 6 10 12 0 N/A 14 11 0
Hours 5am – 11 pm 5am – 11pm 5am-
11pm
5 am – 11pm
in summer,
10 am- 6 pm
in winter
5am – 11 pm Sunrise-
11:00p.m.
7 am- 10 pm Daylight
hours
Daylight
Hours
5 am- 11pm
Sharps In downtown
and Creek
corridor
locations
No No Yes at 3
Downtown
locations
No No No Pilot this
year on 4
locations
Yes – all No
Seasonal? Yes, Some. Yes, 4 Yes Yes Yes, Some Yes, Some Yes Yes No Yes
Portable
Restrooms
Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Staffed? No No No No No No No No No No