Parks & Recreation

Master Plan Presentation

November 17, 2015

Agenda

• Overview of purpose

• Key highlights

• Implementation

• Recommendations 2

Overview: Purpose • Assess current state of the parks and recreation system

• Engage public in identification of issues and solutions

• Update standards for parks and recreation level-of-service

• Develop plan based on rational decision-making and policy

• Prioritize development of park and recreation systems

• Provide foundation for financial priorities and investments

3

Key Highlights • Part I: Trends, observations & outreach

• Part II: Guiding principles

• Part III: Park Classification Developing Recreation Planning Areas

• Part IV: Level of Service

• Part V: Improvements to current park system

• Part VI: Service delivery gaps 4

Part I: Trends

• Demographics • County-wide “Level-of-Service”

− Adopted during July 20, 2010 Comp Plan change − LOS Adopted: 16 pts / 1,000 pop.

− 2015 LOS: 17.5 pts / 1,000 pop – Points based upon amenities and acreage – 2025: deficiency without new facilities

• SWOT analysis

5

Part I: Trends

• General Trends (National and State) – Moving away from team activities – Reduced program lengths – Health, wellness, and fitness – Trails, greenways, blueways – Sports, cultural, and eco-tourism – Tech access in parks (Wi-Fi)

6

Part I: Trends

• Trends cont. – Paw parks – Extreme activities – Recreation centers – multi-purpose and multi-

generational to reduce costs – Non-traditional sports are growing (pickleball,

dodgeball, kickball)

7

Part I: Observations

• Lack of connectivity • Lack of bike racks • Reduced maintenance • Limited shade at active parks • Need for inclusive playground equipment • Overall aesthetics, branding, signage

8

Part I: Public Outreach Summary – Needs Assessment

• Stakeholder interviews – Education, Real Estate, Building, Business, Medical,

Environmental

• Focus group sessions – Youth Sports, Seniors, Boaters, Teens, Neighborhoods, Adult

Sports

• Two public workshops (March 2014) • Online survey– submit comments

9

Part I: Public Outreach Summary – Master Planning

• Steering Committee – Parks & Rec Advisory, School Board, MSBU, MAC,

Environmental groups, Youth Sports Council, Economic Development, Chamber of Commerce, United Way

• Three public workshops - May 2015 (Englewood, Port Charlotte, Punta Gorda)

• Online / website access – submit comments

10

Part I: Public Outreach Summary - Input

• General support for guiding principles • County should focus on community,

regional, environmental and special purpose parks

• Take care of what we have – priority • Sustainable design and practices • Financial Options

– User Fees (public #1 response)

11

Part I: Public Outreach Summary – Input cont.

• Infrastructure and general improvements needed

• Increase shade • Competitive tournament facilities

– Different than general recreation facilities • Better promotion of environmental lands to

promote eco-tourism

12

Part II: Guiding Principles Guiding Principles: - Established by Steering Committee

& Consultant

• Diversity and Distribution of

Inventory and Services • Economic Vitality through

Parks • Service Excellence

13

Part II: Guiding Principles

14

Guiding Principles: • Positive Partnerships • Sustainable Practices • Health and Wellness • Continuous Improvement

QUESTIONS

BREAK 15

Part III: Recreation Planning Area

Recreation Planning Areas (RPAs) • Each area represented by land use character and

neighborhoods (revitalizing, maturing, managed, and emerging)

• Created to recognize geographical and community uniqueness of Charlotte County

• Opportunity to utilize for maintenance planning

16

17

18

Part III: Classification of Parks

• County’s Primary Role (Primary Parks): – Community, Regional, Environmental and

Special Purpose Park

• Secondary Parks – Mini/pocket parks – Neighborhood parks

• Private development, special districts and municipalities

19

Part III: Classification of Parks

Reclassification of the following parks: • Community to Regional

– Harold Avenue Park – 41.27 ac

• Neighborhood to Special Purpose:

– Allapatchee Shores Park - .32 ac – Learning Garden – 1.54 ac – Ollie’s Pond Park – 41.18 ac

20

21

Part III: Classification of Parks

• Neighborhood Park to Community Park: – Bissett Park – 19.10 ac – Deep Creek Park – 6.09 ac – GC Herring Park – 19.31 ac

• return to full maintenance and redevelop

– Harbor Heights Park – 8.20 ac – Maracaibo Park/Kidspace – 11.50 ac – McGuire Park – 4.96 ac

22

23

Part IV: Level-of-Service

• Comp Plan calls for a specified LOS for acreage, amenities and location. – 16 points per 1,000 people for amenities

• Points awarded per features or amenities in the park – Playground: 5 points – Recreation Center: 30 points – 1000 sq. ft. of dock/board walk: 1.5 points – Pavilion: 4 pts – Acre of active park: .3 points/acre

24

Part IV: Level-of-Service • Comp plan calls for LOS to be 16 points per 1,000

population • Master Plan recommends increasing the LOS from 16

to 18 by 2025 and then to 20 by 2050 – Proposed increase in LOS, to meet Guiding Principle for “Continuous

Improvement”

25

2015 2020 2025 2030 2040 2050

Population 183,493 193,284 203,023 212,706 231,858 250,693

Points 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20

Estimated LOS 17.55 16.66 15.86 15.14 13.89 12.85

Recommended LOS 16 16 18 18 18 20

(surplus/‐deficiency) 2 1 ‐2 ‐3 ‐4 ‐7

Part IV: Level-of-Service

26

• Sales Tax projects will add LOS points into the system (below are estimates).

– Two new Recreation Centers – 60 points – Additions to McGuire Park – 20 points – Harborwalk Gateway – 6 points – Splash Pad at Oyster Creek Pool – 12.5 points – Mutli-purpose trails – 50 points – Veterans Park at G.C. Herring – 40 points – ESTIMATED INCREASE – 188.5 points

2015 2020 2025 2030 2040 2050

Population 183,493 193,284 203,023 212,706 231,858 250,693

Current Points 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20 3,220.20

Estimated LOS 17.55 16.66 15.86 15.14 13.89 12.85 Recommended LOS 16 16 18 18 18 20

Points w Sales Tax 3,408.70 3,408.70 3,408.70 3,408.70 3,408.70 3,408.70

Estimated LOS 18.58 17.64 16.79 16.03 14.70 13.60 Surplus/Deficit 2 1 -2 -2 -4 -7

Part IV: Level-of-Service Establish a point system LOS per park: • Neighborhood Parks: 4 points/acre

– Typical 8 ac = 32 pts

• Community Parks: 3 points/acre – Typical 25 ac = 75 pts

• Regional Parks: 3.5 points/acre – Typical 80 ac = 280 pts

• Allows for equal distribution of points throughout the system

• Allows local community to help with planning of each park to meet their needs and desires

27

AINGER CREEK PARK SPECIAL PURPOSE PARK

.75 pts - Boardwalk

8 pts – Boat Ramp

Total Pts = 9.35

.6 pts - Acreage

BISSETT PARK COMMUNITY PARK

1 pt – Shuffleboard

1 pt – Pavilion

10 pts – Tennis Court

5 pts – Playground

6 pts – Restroom

Total Pts = 28.7

5.7 pts - Acreage

Proposed LOS: 57.3 pts needed for this park

NORTH CHARLOTTE REGIONAL PARK

31 pts - Acreage

Total Pts = 163

36 pts – Sport Lighting

3 pts – Specialty Garden

40 pts – Baseball Fields

24 pts – Soccer Fields

12 pts – Concessions

12 pts – Restrooms

5 pts – Disc Golf

New Rec Center (sales tax project)

Proposed LOS: 361.5 pts needed for this park

Part IV: Level-of-Service

Proposed LOS • Allows micro and macro analysis of system • Gives consideration to amenities, acreage, and

location (distribution) • Recommendation of condition assessment requires

grading of facilities (1-5). Score of 2 or lower would remove facility (points) from LOS calculation

31

Part V: Improvements

• Continue taking care of what you have • Add more shade • Develop and improve water access • Increase trails internal and external • Improve sport facilities – tournaments • Signage, wayfinding, and branding for Parks

32

QUESTIONS

BREAK 33

Part VI: Service Gaps Parks

Community Parks (through 2050) • East Kings Highway • South Murdock • South Gulf Cove • Englewood South • Northwest Port Charlotte

– Charlotte County already owns land in many of these areas – The plan calls for consistent review, to allow the County to be

responsive to population growth and changes to the modelling 34

35

36

Part VI: Service Gaps Recreation

• Establish a program participation level to measure success: – 70% participation or less requires elimination,

reconfigure, or revamp program. • Maintain Department philosophy and

continue to partner with community organizations – focus areas

37

Part VI: Service Gaps Recreation

• Accreditation through National Recreation and Parks Association’s “Commission for Accreditation of Parks and Recreation Agencies” (CAPRA) – 151 agency standards, and must comply with

37 fundamental standards – Achieves national recognition and shows

commitment to quality park and recreation system and programs

38

Part VI: Service Gaps Babcock Ranch

• Large private development – master planned • DRI agreement calls for:

– 11 Mini Parks = 19.5 ac – 7 Neighborhood Parks = 58.4 ac – 1 Community Park = 77.9 ac – 1 Regional Park = 100 ac

39

Part VI: Service Gaps Babcock Ranch

• Challenges: – Maintenance (distance, additional staff –

significant increases to operations budget) – In conflict with recommendations about mini

parks and neighborhood parks – Capital costs to complete parks – No guidance in agreement on facilities at parks

(LOS compliance? Who pays for development?)

40

QUESTIONS

BREAK 41

Implementation: Funding Needs

• Funding Needed Through 2033 – FY 16-21 Projects $ 56,000,000 – FY 22-27 Projects $ 41,100,000 – FY 28-33 Projects $ 45,000,000

Total Need: $142,100,000

• Costs to meet goals and proposed LOS • Plan is “pay as you go” and is responsive to community driven

desires and projects 42

Implementation: Funding Plan

43

23.4 23.6 25.7

72.6

3.1 1.8 7.5

12.4

29.5 15.8

11.9

57.1

.

20.

40.

60.

80.

100.

120.

140.

160.

2016 - 2021 2022 - 2027 2028 - 2033 Total by Funding Source

Mill

ions

6-Year Project Segments

Caital Projects Fund Impact Fees Sales Tax

Implementation: Alternative Funding

• Grants – Florida Recreation Development Assistance

Program – Florida Communities Trust

• Endowments • Sponsorships and Partnerships • User Fees • Constantly reviewing new funding options

44

Future policy decisions

• Adopt the Parks & Recreation Master Plan • Adopt appendices as part of the adopted

plan • Adopt re-classifying of parks • Adopt recreation planning areas • Adopt new LOS recommendations

45

Future policy decisions

• Provide funding for ongoing maintenance and improvements of current facilities

• Adopt plan to develop new parks & trails • Adopt funding options • Implementation of Master Plan should be

population/density driven, not date specific driven

46