1 Presented by: In association with: ETC Institute Leisure Vision Nationally Recognized….Uniquely...

1

Presented by: In association with:ETC InstituteLeisure Vision

Nationally Recognized….Uniquely Local

March 2008

2

Connecting people to opportunities and places within Mecklenburg County Parks and Recreation Services Three Key Themes:

▪ Conservation and Stewardship▪ Parks and Greenways▪ Recreation Programs and Facilities

3

Seek community input to guide Department direction

Update Nature Preserves Plan Update Greenways Plan Identify GAPS in parks and recreation facilities

across the County and in Towns Identify remaining pieces of land that could be

acquired for park and nature preserves Establish what to do with “land banked” properties

4

Development of a Program Plan for the Department to implement

Establish park, facility and amenity standards and needs across the County

Establish a Capital Improvement Plan for existing assets, new parks, recreation facilities, and land

Coordinate the needs of Towns in the County with the MCPR Master Plan as one plan

5

Focus groups, stakeholder interviews, household survey

Analysis of existing master planning documents Greenprinting process to identify available land and

gaps based on a weighted criteria built on community values for natural areas, neighborhood parks, community parks, and regional parks

7

Mecklenburg County Citizen Survey

Questions on full range of usage, customer satisfaction, needs, unmet needs, and priorities questions

Goal of 1,000 completed surveys.

Actually completed 1033 surveys. Results have 95% level of confidence with margin of error of +/-3%

8

Finding #1: Usage of Parks is High with Good Satisfaction

Yes76%

No24%

Q2. Whether Respondent Household Members Visited Any of Mecklenburg County Parks During the Past Year

by percentage of respondents

Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (January 2008)

Usage ratings higher than

national benchmark of 72%

9

Finding #2: Participation in Programs is Lower with Good Satisfaction

Yes19%

No81%

Q3. Whether Respondent Household Members Participated in any Recreation Programs Offered by the Mecklenburg County Park

and Recreation Department During the Past Yearby percentage of respondents


Participation is lower than

national benchmark of

30%

10

Finding #3: Mecklenburg County is Prime Provider of Services

56%

37%

36%

29%

27%

24%

23%

23%

12%

3%

4%

15%

Mecklenburg County parks

YMCA

Churches

North Carolina State parks

Private clubs

Homeowners assoc/apt. complex

School District facilities

Parks and recreation facilities in class

Private youth sports leagues

Boys and Girls Club

Other

None - don't use any organizations

0% 20% 40% 60%

Q15. Organizations Respondent Households Have Used for Indoor and Outdoor Recreation and Sports Activities

During the Past 12 Monthsby percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made)


Mecklenburg County highest

priority in households with

children and households

without children

11

Finding #6: Residents Have a Need for a Wide Range of Parks and Recreation Facilities

76%64%

62%62%

60%50%

44%43%

42%41%

40%40%

39%37%

36%32%32%32%

28%27%26%26%

25%24%24%

16%15%

6%

Walking and biking trailsLarge community parks and district parks

Small (2-10 acres) neighborhood parksNature center and trails

Park shelters and picnic areas Playground equipment and play areas

Indoor fitness and exercise facilitiesOutdoor tennis courts

Outdoor swimming and spraygroundsCommunity gardens

Indoor swimming pools/leisure poolOutdoor amphitheaters

Indoor running/walking trackSmall (less than 2 acres) pocket parks

Mountain bike trailsYouth/teen baseball and softball fields

Youth/teen soccer fieldsOutdoor basketball courts

Indoor sheltersYouth/teen football fields

Golf coursesIndoor basketball/volleyball courts

Off-leash dog park Boating and sailing areas/sailing center

Adult softball fieldsAdult soccer fields

Skateboard ParkSoapbox Derby track

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Q10. Respondent Households That Have a Need for Various Parks and Recreation Facilities

by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made)


The needs for a number of

facilities is higher than the National

Benchmarking Average

12

Finding #8: Walking and Biking Trails and Outdoor Swimming Pools Are Most Important Facilities

44%26%

23%18%18%

14%14%

13%12%

11%11%11%

10%10%

9%9%

7%7%

6%6%6%

5%4%

3%3%3%

2%1%

Walking and biking trailsSmall (2-10 acres) neighborhood parks

Large community parks and district parksNature center and trails

Playground equipment and play areas Indoor fitness and exercise facilitiesIndoor swimming pools/leisure pool

Park shelters and picnic areas Off-leash dog park

Outdoor swimming and spraygroundsIndoor running/walking track

Outdoor tennis courtsSmall (less than 2 acres) pocket parks

Community gardensMountain bike trails

Golf coursesOutdoor amphitheaters Youth/teen soccer fields

Youth/teen baseball and softball fieldsBoating and sailing areas/sailing center

Outdoor basketball courtsIndoor basketball/volleyball courts

Indoor sheltersYouth/teen football fields

Adult softball fieldsAdult soccer fields

Skateboard ParkSoapbox Derby track

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Most Important 2nd Most Important 3rd Most Important 4th Most Important

Q11. Parks and Recreation Facilities That Are Most Important to Respondent Households


by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top four choices

Blue line represents intensity of importance

Blue line represents intensity of importance

All 4 colors represents depth of

importance

13

Finding #9: Respondents Have a Need for a Wide Range of Programs


50%49%

39%37%

33%31%

30%29%

28%28%

26%25%

25%23%

22%22%

21%20%20%

20%17%17%

Special events/festivals

Adult fitness and wellness programs

Family Recreation/Outdoor Adventure programs

Nature Education programs

Education/Life skills programs

Water fitness programs

Adult sports programs

Tennis lessons, clinics and leagues

Youth/teen sports programs

Youth Learn to Swim programs

Adult art, dance, performing arts

Senior programs

Youth/teen summer camp programs

Adult swim programs

Youth/teen art, dance, performing arts

Youth/teen fitness and wellness programs

Golf lessons

Before and after school programs

Martial arts programs

Pre-School programs

Gymnastics and tumbling programs

Programs for people with disabilities

0% 20% 40% 60%

by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made)

Q12. Respondent Households That Have a Need for Various Recreation Programs

Respondent Households Have a Need for a Wide

Range of Programs

14

Finding #13: 50% of Respondents Do Not Feel There Are Sufficient Parks and Green Space Areas Within Walking Distance of Their Residence, With 11% Not Sure

Yes 39%

No50%

Not sure11%

Q5. Whether Respondent Feels That There Are Sufficient Parks and Green Space Areas Within Walking Distance of Their Residence



15

Finding #14: Using Greenways for Environmental Protection and Major Connected Network of Trails Are Very Important

77%

66%

17%

22%

3%

8%

4%

4%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Not Sure

Q7. Importance of Using Mecklenburg County Greenways for Various Purposes



Major connected network of walking, biking and nature trails

Environmental protection

16

Finding #16: Purchase Land to Preserve Open/Green Space, Use Floodplain Greenways to Develop Trails/Facilities, and Develop New &

Connect Existing Walking/Biking Trails Are Most Important Actions

50%

52%

58%

59%

56%

45%

39%

31%

35%

32%

26%

22%

23%

17%

18%

15%

12%

5%

33%

31%

24%

23%

24%

32%

33%

39%

28%

26%

28%

26%

24%

21%

20%

20%

20%

13%

13%

13%

12%

12%

13%

16%

21%

20%

21%

24%

26%

29%

29%

35%

27%

30%

31%

34%

5%

5%

6%

7%

7%

8%

7%

10%

16%

18%

21%

23%

25%

27%

35%

35%

37%

47%

Fix-up/repair older park buildings/recreation ctrs

Upgrade existing neighborhood/community parks

Use floodplain greenways to develop trails/facil

Develop new & connect existing walk/biking trails

Purchase land to preserve open/green space

Develop new nature trails/nature centers

Upgrade existing youth/adult athletic fields

Purchase land to develop athletic fields/rec facil

Develop new indoor recreation centers

Develop special events park for festivals/concerts

Purchase land to protect the environment

Develop new outdoor spray pools

Develop multi-purpose indoor athletic/activity ctr

Develop new fieldhouse at Grandy Cole Center site

Develop new off-leash dog parks

Develop a new 50 meter competitive pool

Develop skate parks

Develop soap box derby

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Supportive Somewhat Supportive Not Sure Not Supportive

Q16. Level of Support for Various Actions Mecklenburg County Could Take to Improve the Parks,

Recreation and Green Space System



17

Finding #16: Purchase Land to Preserve Open/Green Space, Use Floodplain Greenways to Develop Trails/Facilities, and Develop New &

Connect Existing Walking/Biking Trails Are Most Important Actions

44%34%34%

28%25%

22%18%17%

17%13%

12%10%

9%6%6%5%

4%1%

4%

Purchase land to preserve open/green space

Use floodplain greenways to develop trails/facil

Develop new & connect existing walk/biking trails

Fix-up/repair older park buildings/recreation ctrs

Upgrade existing neighborhood/community parks

Develop new nature trails/nature centers

Develop new indoor recreation centers

Develop special events park for festivals/concerts

Purchase land to protect the environment

Purchase land to develop athletic fields/rec facil

Develop multi-purpose indoor athletic/activity ctr

Upgrade existing youth/adult athletic fields

Develop new off-leash dog parks

Develop new fieldhouse at Grandy Cole Center site

Develop new outdoor spray pools

Develop a new 50 meter competitive pool

Develop skate parks

Develop soap box derby

Other

0% 20% 40% 60%

1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th Choice

Q17. Actions Respondents Would Be Most Willing to Fund With Their County Tax Dollars


by percentage of respondents who selected it as one of their top four choices

18

Finding #17: Over 75% of Respondents Would Vote in Favor or Might Vote in Favor of a Bond Referendum to Fund the Acquisition, Improvement and Development of the Parks, Trails and Facilities Most Important to Their Households

Vote in Favor53%

Might Vote in Favor25%

Not Sure16%

Vote Against6%

Q18. How Respondents Would Vote on a Bond Referendum to Fund the Acquisition, Improvement and Development of the

Types of Parks, Trails, Green Space and Recreation Facilities Most Important to Their Households



19

Summary of Overall Findings

Usage of parks is high with good satisfaction Participation in programs is lower with good

satisfaction Mecklenburg County Parks is the prime provider of

services

20


Enjoyment of the outdoors and close to our home/residence are prime reasons for usage

Market reach of web site is high with opportunities to improve overall marketing

There is a wide range of needs and unmet needs for outdoor and indoor parks, trails, recreation facilities and programs

21


Walking and biking trails are the most important facilities, followed by small neighborhood parks, and large community and regional parks

Special events/festivals and adult fitness and wellness programs are most important programs

22


Market opportunities exist to grow programs of high importance at Mecklenburg County facilities

50% of household respondents do not feel there are sufficient parks and green space areas within walking distances of their residence, with 11% not sure

23


88% or more of households feel it is important to use Mecklenburg County Greenways for environmental protection and a major connected network of walking, biking and nature trails

24


Purchase land to preserve open/green space, use floodplain greenways to develop trails/facilities, and develop new and connect existing walking and biking trails are most important actions respondents would support with tax dollars

26

Park and Facilities Standards

PARKS:

Park TypeMeet Standard/

Need Exists

Neighborhood / School Parks (Acres) 2 - 20 acres 1.13 acres per 1,000 3.00 acres per 1,000 3.00 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 1,597 Acre(s)

Community Parks (Acres) 20 - 100 acres 2.74 acres per 1,000 4.00 acres per 1,000 4.00 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 1,072 Acre(s)

Regional Parks (Acres) 100+ acres 4.34 acres per 1,000 5.00 acres per 1,000 5.00 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 559 Acre(s)

Special Use - Golf/Sports Park/Other (Acres) (1) 2.02 acres per 1,000 1.00 acres per 1,000 1.00 acres per 1,000 Meets Standard - Acre(s)

Total Park and Special Use Acreage 10.23 acres per 1,000 13.00 acres per 1,000 13.00 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 3,229 Acre(s)

Nature/Preserve Area (Acres) 7.68 acres per 1,000

Greenways (Acres) 3.67 acres per 1,000

Total Other Open Space Acreage 11.35 acres per 1,000

Total Combined Inventory Acreage 21.58 0.00 1,000

AMENITIES: (2)

Playgrounds 1.00 structure per 5,610 1.00 structure per 2,500 1.00 structure per 4,000 Need Exists 61 Structures(s)

Outdoor Pools (2) 1.00 site per 94,740 1.00 site per 20,000 1.00 site per 50,000 Need Exists 8 Site(s)

Spraygrounds (2) 1.00 site per 170,531 1.00 site per 25,000 1.00 site per 50,000 Need Exists 12 Site(s)

Picnic Pavilions - Large 1.00 structure per 53,291 1.00 structure per 20,000 1.00 structure per 20,000 Need Exists 27 Structures(s)

Picnic Pavilions - Medium/Small (3) 1.00 structure per 6,047 1.00 structure per 5,000 1.00 structure per 10,000 Meets Standard - Structures(s)

Picnic Pavilions - Indoor 1.00 structure per 121,808 1.00 structure per 50,000 1.00 structure per 50,000 Need Exists 13 Structures(s)

Trails - All Surfaces - Paved (Miles) (4) 0.10 miles per 1,000 0.40 miles per 1,000 0.40 miles per 1,000 Need Exists 238 Mile(s)

Basketball Courts 1.00 court per 6,714 1.00 court per 2,500 1.00 court per 5,000 Need Exists 44 Court(s)

Tennis Courts 1.00 court per 5,030 1.00 court per 4,000 1.00 court per 4,000 Need Exists 44 Court(s)

Volleyball Courts 1.00 court per 18,948 1.00 court per 15,000 1.00 court per 15,000 Need Exists 12 Court(s)

Dog Parks (3 acre minimum) 1.00 site per 170,531 1.00 site per 50,000 1.00 site per 50,000 Need Exists 12 Site(s)

Skateparks 1.00 site per 284,219 1.00 site per 50,000 1.00 site per 100,000 Need Exists 6 Site(s)

Nature Centers 1.00 site per 213,164 1.00 site per 50,000 1.00 site per 100,000 Need Exists 6 Site(s)

Aquatic Center/Indoor Pool (Square Feet) 0.08 SF per person 0.50 SF per person 0.50 SF per person Need Exists 360,736 Square Feet

Recreation/Fitness Center Space (Square Feet) 1.09 SF per person 1.50 SF per person 1.50 SF per person Need Exists 351,864 Square Feet

Mecklenburg County - Facility Standards 3/14/2008

Additonal Facilities/Amenities Needed

Service Levels - Current, National, and Recommended Preliminary 2008 Facility Standards

Current Service LevelTypical National Standards /

BEST PRACTICESRecommended Standards;

Revised for Local Service Area

27


PARKS:


Need Exists



Regional Parks (Acres) 100+ acres 4.34 acres per 1,000 5.00 acres per 1,000 5.00 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 1,207 Acre(s)







AMENITIES: (2)
















Preliminary 2012 Facility Standards





Service Levels - Current, National, and Recommended


28


PARKS:


Need Exists



Regional Parks (Acres) 100+ acres 4.34 acres per 1,000 5.00 acres per 1,000 5.00 acres per 1,000 Need Exists 1,785 Acre(s)







AMENITIES: (2)
















Preliminary 2017 Facility Standards





Service Levels - Current, National, and Recommended


Greenprinting: 2-stage process

1. Resource Analysis Top-down conservation assessment

2. Parcel Prioritization Bottom-up acquisition analysis

5% Forested Habitat5% Early Successional Habitat5% Wetland Habitat5% Riparian Habitat5% Natural Heritage Sites25% Buffer zones adjacent to identified unique/rare habitats and NHSs10% Wildlife Corridors10% Endangered, Rare, and Species of Concern5% Critical Watersheds25% Large Unbroken Natural Areas

*Relative weights indicate strategic importance for acquisition

Requirements: Must be greater than 5 acres Must contain a critical natural resource

Scoring Criteria: Total area of natural or pervious cover Cultural resource present: farmland or

historic site Adjacent to an existing Nature Preserve Targeted for acquisition (MIL Corridor

property or 2007 Natural Areas Needs Assessment property)

Significant for water quality protection Adjacent to existing park or greenway Adjacent to other natural areas (CLC

lands) No Nature Preserve within a 3 mile radius

Tier 160 properties 3,578 acres

Tier 228 additional properties 2,591 additional acres

Tier 1 and Tier 2

- Priority Lands for Natural Area Protection

Tier 160 properties 3,578 acres



Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3

- Priority Lands for Natural Area Protection

Rate of DevelopmentRate of Development

36

Land Banked Properties- Nature Preserves

Stevens Creek Nature Preserve

Berryhill Nature Preserve

Oehler Nature Preserve

Gateway Nature Preserve & Community Park

Davis Farm Nature Preserve (N. side of Hucks Road)

Sherman Branch – to be determined / remain land-banked

37

Land Banked Properties- Neighborhood, Community & Regional Parks

Neighborhood Parks• Teddington Drive• Crossridge Road• Eagles Landing property• Lincoln Heights property• Mayerling Drive• Prosperity Church property• Reid Park property

Community Parks• Capps property• Ezzel Farm property• Belt Road property• Pineville property• Reddman property• Gateway property• Hucks Road property

Regional Parks• Back Creek Church Road property• Eastfield property

Sherman Branch – to be determined / remain land-banked

38

7-1. Master Planning: Is the recreation center identified in the 2008 Parks Master Plan? [Y=2, N=0]7-2. Property Ownership: Does the county, or partnering entity, currently own all parcels necessary for recreation center development? [Y=6, N=0]7-3. Service Gap: Are there any developed recreation centers within a 2.5 mile radius? [Y=0, N=3] 7-4. Expansion: Does the project expand the current scope of programming at the recreation center? [Y=1, N=0] 7-5. Partnership Opportunity: Has a school, senior center, church, and / or library partnership opportunity been identified? [Y=5, N=0] Have outside funding sources been identified? [Y=3, N=0] Is the recreation center adjacent to a school, senior center, church, and / or library facility? [Y=1, N=0] 7-6. Linkages: Is the recreation center adjacent to a planned and / or developed greenway? [Y=1, N=0] Is the recreation center adjacent to a planned and / or developed park? [Y=1, N=0] 7-7. Mass Transit: Is the recreation center within a 0.5 mile radius of a public transportation station / depot? [Y=1, N=0]

Nature Center Methodology

41

Greenway Action Plan

Primary Creek Corridors Minor Modifications – Town

additions, citizen input, partnership opportunities

5 Year Development Plan Focus trail development on County

land Apply ranking criteria to prioritize

trail development

Improvements to Existing Facilities

Overland Connections – coordination with CDOT

10 Year Development Plan 5 Year Acquisition Plan Previous 10 year CNA Ranking Criteria

42

Primary Greenway Corridors Back Creek Back Creek Tributary Barton Creek Briar Creek Caldwell Station Creek Campbell Creek Cane Creek Clarke Creek, South Prong Clark’s Creek Clark’s Creek Tributary Clem’s Branch Coffey Creek Dixon Branch Doby Creek Edward’s Branch Flat Branch Four Mile Creek Gum Branch Irvins Creek Irwin Creek Kings Branch Little Hope Creek Little Sugar Creek Long Creek

Mallard Creek Mallard Creek Tributary McAlpine Creek McDowell Creek McIntyre Creek McKees Creek McMullen Creek Paw Creek Polk Ditch Ramah Creek Reedy Creek Reedy Creek Tributary Rocky River Rocky River, North Prong Rocky River, South Prong Rocky River, West Branch Six Mile Creek Steele Creek Stewart Creek Stewart Creek – Lakewood Tributary Sugar Creek Toby Creek Torrence Creek Torrence Creek Tributaries Walker Branch

43

Greenways Trail Development Methodology

Trail Development – Ranking Criteria No Significant Barrier to Construction Developed Miles Per Park District

▪ <10% of planned miles, 10 points, >50% 0 points Project Partnerships

▪ 10 points per mile – public or private partnerships. No $ necessarily tied to development

Funding Partnerships▪ 1 point per $10,000

Located in Surrounding Town Listed in Other Adopted Plans or Studies Linkages -- Connectivity

▪ School, park or greenway facility, planned regional trail, destination, college/library, mixed-use development, transit, office or commercial area, neighborhood access

Land Acquisition Multiplier

44

5 Year Results

Trail Development 42.8 miles of trail ($46.8M), 12.8 of

which is currently funded 68 miles of trail by 2013! Distributed across the County Focus on Partnerships Trail development in parks and nature

preservesImprovements to existing – 22 projects,

$5.2MOverland Connections – further

collaboration with CDOTPlanning Process Update

Stakeholder process on the front end Town plans are the county plans

Recommendations – Ordinance review, Development Efficiencies

45

10 Year Results

5 Year Acquisition Plan

Trail Development Complete Little Sugar Creek

Greenway Complete Mallard Creek

Greenway Regional Connections CDOT Connections 61.9 miles – total of 129

miles!

47

2-stage process:

1. Capacity Service Area Analysis Existing assets - map service areas based on facility capacity

2. Gap Analysis and Parcel Prioritization Identify opportunities for new facilities in service gaps:

» Size» Access via frontage on a major or minor thoroughfare» Partnership via adjacency to a school, library» Linkages to greenways» Linkages to developed parks» Residential population within new service area» Public transit accessibility

Park Facilities Gaps and Needs Analysis

48

Park Facilities Methodology

6-1. Master Planning: Is the project identified in the 2008 Parks Master Plan? [Y=2, N=0]Does the project have its own approved Master Plan? [Y=2, N=0] 6-2. Service Gap: Are there any parks within the project’s intended service radius? [Y=0, N=4] 6-3. Residential Population: What is the residential population within the intended project’s service radius of the project (normalized to 0.5 mile radius)? [Add 1 point for each 10,000 persons] 6-4. Expansion: Does the project expand the current scope of programming at the facility (i.e. additional phase of development)? [Y=1, N=0] 6-5. Partnership Opportunity: Is project adjacent to a school and / or library? [Y=1, N=0] Has a public and / or private partnership been identified? [Y=1, N=0]Has an outside funding source been identified? [Y=2, N=0] 6-6. Linkages: Is project adjacent to a planned and / or developed greenway? [Y=1, N=0]Is the project adjacent to a planned and / or developed nature center? [Y=1, N=0]Is project adjacent to a planned and / or developed recreation center? [Y=1, N=0] 6-7. Mass Transit: Is the project within a 0.5 mile radius of a public transportation station / depot? [Y=1, N=0]

49

Neighborhood parks are 2 to 20 acres

Neighborhood parks service radius is density based upon 3 acres per 1000 people

50

Neighborhood Parks- 10 Year CMS Elementary School Plan

51

Community parks are 20 to 100 acres

Community parks service radius is density based upon 4 acres per 1000 people

52

Community Parks - 10 Year CMS High School Plan

53

Regional parks are 100 acres and up.

Regional parks service radius is density based upon 5 acres per 1000 people

54

Community and Regional Parks Combined- Service Area Analysis

55

8-1. New Amenity: Does the project provide an amenity and / or recreation activity not currently available? [Y=3, N=0] Does the project produce a new and / or enhanced revenue-generating program? [Y=1, N=0] 8-2. Special Program: Has a unique population (i.e. inner city youth) been identified as beneficiaries of the project? [Y=3, N=0] Does the project expand program offerings that address one of the following needs: (A) drowning prevention, (B) youth obesity, or (C) crime prevention? [Y=2, N=0] 8-3. Partnership Opportunity: Has a private and / or public partnership opportunity been identified? [Y=2, N=0] Will taxpayer dollars be saved via an identified partnership? [Y=2, N=0] Have outside funding sources been identified? [Y=3, N=0] 8-4. Linkages: Is project adjacent to a planned and / or developed greenway? [Y=1, N=0]Is the project adjacent to a planned and / or developed nature center? [Y=1, N=0]Is project adjacent to a planned and / or developed recreation center? [Y=1, N=0] Is the project adjacent to a planned and / or developed park? [Y=1, N=0] 8-5. Mass Transit: Is the recreation center within a 0.5 mile radius of a public transportation station / depot? [Y=1, N=0]

Aquatic Facility Methodology

58

Athletic Field Capacity-Demand Methodology

Capacity - amount of hours a field can be played on and still maintain the integrity of a safe play surface.

Factors influencing the capacity of a field include:

• Irrigation improves the capacity of turf to regenerate.

• Engineering improves the soils and the ability for fields to withstand wear.

• Synthetic surfaces greatly expand the amount of play a field can withstand.

• Length of growing season and when play occurs.

• Softball/baseball fields can withstand more play because much of the play is on a non grass surface.

59

Athletic Field Capacity-Demand Methodology (cont.)

Demand - amount of hours (practices and games) that all the leagues and users are putting on fields.

Factors impacting demand:

• Number of participants in leagues.

• Number of teams.

• Number of preseason games and practices.

• Number of regular season games and practices.

• Number of post season games and practices.

• Tournaments and special events.

Demand is broken down into three main seasons:

• Quartile 1 - March 1 to May 31

• Quartile 2 - June 1 to August 31

• Quartile 3 - September 1 to November 30

• Quartile 4 – December 1 to February 28 was not analyzed due to limited play.

60

Athletic Field Capacity-Demand Findings

The park system is well balanced with a majority of the athletic fields in community and regional parks supporting leagues and tournaments.

Field usage by quartile:

• In the first quartile, 147 of the 189 fields are in use.

• In the second quartile, 138 of the 189 fields are in use.

• In the third quartile, 125 of the 189 fields are in use.

• In all three quartiles, over 100 of the fields are being programmed above recommended capacity.

Fields require rest and maintenance and all fields should not be in use during any quartile. A percentage of them should be rested or closed for maintenance.

Most fields are being programmed at double the recommeded capacity.

• 26 of the 30 large multipurpose fields in the first and third quartile are being used above capacity.

• 39 of the 48 large softball fields in the first and second quartile are being used above capacity.

61

Athletic Field Capacity-Demand Recommendations

Develop Two New Policies:

Develop a use, rest and preventative maintenance policy that dictates when assets should be off line.

Establish a priority use policy based upon entity participation.

To Enhance Amateur Sports Opportunities:

Develop a 6-8 field youth/fast pitch softball complex.

Develop an 8-10 field large multipurpose field complex.

Build a field house with multiple courts.

Evaluate existing multipurpose field usage for consideration of converting to synthetic surfaces.

The need for additional fields based upon current demand:

• Softball field, 200 foot fence – 5 additional fields.

• Softball field, 300 foot fence – 1 additional field.

• Multipurpose field, small – 2 additional fields.

• Multipurpose field, large – 9 additional fields needed.

62

Athletic Fields Coming Online From 2004 Bonds

Adult Baseball• Southwest Park 2

Softball fields, 200 foot fence – 5 additional fields needed

• Berewick 3• Shuffletown 2• Winget 1

Softball fields, 300 foot fence – 1 additional field needed

• Eastway 2• Bradford Park 5

Multipurpose field, small – 2 additional fields needed

• Robert L Smith 1

Multipurpose field, large – 9 additional fields needed.

• Clanton Park 2• Harrisburg 2• Matthews Sportsplex 5• Bradford Park 3• Eastway Park 2• Robert L Smith 2

63

Athletic Fields Planned But Not Funded

Softball field, 200 foot fence• Berewick 6• Col. Beatty 2• Flat Branch 2• Bradford 2• Mallard Creek 4• Balantyne 3• Winget 3

Softball field, 300 foot fence • Col. Beatty 1• Eastway 2• Shuffletown 5• 521 Park 4• Balantyne 4

Multipurpose field, small• Balantyne 3

Multipurpose field, large• Harrisburg 11• Matthews Sportsplex 7• Bradford Park 3• Eastway Park 7• Berewick 7 • 521 Park 8• Flat Branch 1

64

7-1. Master Planning: Is the recreation center identified in the 2008 Parks Master Plan? [Y=2, N=0]7-2. Property Ownership: Does the county, or partnering entity, currently own all parcels necessary for recreation center development? [Y=6, N=0]7-3. Service Gap: Are there any developed recreation centers within a 2.5 mile radius? [Y=0, N=3] 7-4. Expansion: Does the project expand the current scope of programming at the recreation center? [Y=1, N=0] 7-5. Partnership Opportunity: Has a school, senior center, church, and / or library partnership opportunity been identified? [Y=5, N=0] Have outside funding sources been identified? [Y=3, N=0] Is the recreation center adjacent to a school, senior center, church, and / or library facility? [Y=1, N=0] 7-6. Linkages: Is the recreation center adjacent to a planned and / or developed greenway? [Y=1, N=0] Is the recreation center adjacent to a planned and / or developed park? [Y=1, N=0] 7-7. Mass Transit: Is the recreation center within a 0.5 mile radius of a public transportation station / depot? [Y=1, N=0]

Recreation Center Methodology

66

Assessment of all program services provided by to the County.

Assessment of other community suppliers including towns and YMCAs that provided information.

Gap analysis of programs not being served adequately in the County with recommendation for enhancing existing services and building new core services.

Program Plan Methodology

67

Offer core programs outlined in the program plan with high cost recovery levels

Utilize training and performance measures to create consistency

Employ partners and volunteers to support program operations and build advocacy for the County recreation program brand

Stronger efforts are necessary in programming existing recreation centers

Theme some centers to attract stronger user participation Better efforts are necessary to market the services provided

68

Continue the following core program areas that are already in existence: Aquatics Programs Environmental Education Therapeutic Recreation programs Athletics for adults and youth 4‐H programs Golf Services Senior Adult services

69

Develop new core programs in the following areas: Adventure Sports Community‐wide Special Events Active Adult Program for 50 to 65 year olds Fitness and Wellness Programs Summer Camps and After School Programs Performing Arts and Fine Arts Programs in conjunction

with ASC

70

Evaluate staffing needs to meet core program needs based on the hours required to produce the programs desired and missing in the County

Develop consistent program standards and program development process used for all core programs offered to provide consistency in delivery of services

Implement the Sports Tourism Plan as it applies to developing traditional and nontraditional events in the County to promote the region and create economic impact for the County

Develop a pricing policy based on the true cost of services tied to the level of exclusivity a user receives over a general taxpayer and based on ability to pay

Program Development Strategies

71

Develop a marketing strategy for recreation and program services to increase the level of participation by the community from 19% to 30% over the next five years

Develop partnership agreements with measurable outcomes for all special interest groups involved with the County

Develop program partnership agreements with the local towns to maximize each other’s resources and meet the community’s unmet need

Develop program policies on public/public partnerships, public/private partnerships and public/not‐for profit partnerships

Develop a specific branding program for program services across the County

Program Development Strategies

73

Renovations to Existing Facilities Methodology

4-1. Facility Condition: What is the Facility Condition Index Rating of the project? [Facility Condition Index Score]4-2. Safety: Does the project correct a safety concern? [Y= .05, N=0] 4-3. Accessibility: Does the project improve ADA accessibility to an existing program component? [Y=.05, N=0] 4-4. Visitation:4-5. Security: Does the project improve security? [Y=.05, N=0]4-6. Operation and Maintenance Costs: Does the project impact operation and maintenance costs in a positive manner [Y=.05, N=0]4-7. Operational Support: Does the project have potential to generate revenue or partnerships? [Y=.05, N=0]4-8. Citywide Citizen Survey: Does the project meet priorities identified in the citywide customer survey? [Y=.05, N=0]

74

Total Maintenance & Repair Costs

75

Facility /Amenity 2008 - 2012 Score

Aquatic Center $ 2,482,886 0.24

Reedy Creek Indoor Shelter $ 82,292 0.13

East AOB $ 124,610 0.10

Grady Cole Center/Memorial Stadium $ 546,399 0.09

Reedy Creek Nature Center $ 134,832 0.09

Mallard Creek Recreation Center $ 280,623 0.09

Southview Recreation Center $ 280,950 0.09

Playgrounds $ 686,753 0.09

Tennis Courts $ 834,052 0.09

521 Park Recreation Center $ 243,674 0.08

Marion Diehl Recreation Center $ 513,668 0.08

Greenville Recreation Center $ 227,471 0.08

Tuckaseegee Recreation Center $ 149,212 0.08

Jetton Indoor Shelter $ 39,264 0.08

Armory Building $ 171,099 0.08

Veterans Indoor Shelter $ 60,463 0.08

Col. Francis Beatty Indoor Shelter $ 54,293 0.08

Central AOB $ 99,529 0.08

Naomi Drenan Recreation Center $ 147,208 0.08

West Charlotte Recreation Center $ 139,157 0.07


Amay James Recreation Center $ 212,349 0.07

Arbor Glen Recreation Center $ 196,868 0.07

W. R. Davie Indoor Shelter $ 42,409 0.06

Methodist Home Recreation Center $ 113,858 0.06

Admin. Office Building $ 802,523 0.06

Hawthorne Recreation Center $ 133,090 0.06

Sugaw Creek Recreation Center $ 109,865 0.06

Shelters,well houses,storage areas $ 1,164,744 0.06

Caretakers, restrooms, Freedom NC $ 1,396,760 0.06

Basketball Courts $ 85,844 0.06

Ballfields- Back stops and fencing $ 374,358 0.06

Boat Docks $ 166,400 0.06

Historic Sites $ 89,902 0.06

Mahlon Adams Pavilion $ 32,729 0.05

Albemarle Recreation Center $ 156,862 0.05

Ray's Splash Planet $ 122,291 0.05


Latta Nature Center $ 46,512 0.05


Waymer Recreation Center $ 70,194 0.04

Total Maintenance & Repair Costs 2008-2012

76



Playgrounds $ 457,191 0.04

Caretakers, restrooms, Freedom NC $ 929,865 0.04



Latta Recreation Center $ 136,559 0.04

McDowell Nature Center $ 37,052 0.03

Barns and Sheds $ 214,610 0.04

Irrigation Systems $ 248,167 0.04

Athletic Court Lighting Systems $ 660,218 0.04

Ballfield Lighting Systems $ 1,826,136 0.04

Shoreline Stabilization $ 94,099 0.04

Skateparks $ 30,000 0.04




Bette Rae Thomas Recreation Center $ 138,264 0.02



Horticulture Compound $ 16,245 0.02


Hickory Grove Recreation Center $ 55,794 0.02

Shelters,well houses,storage areas $ 755,195 0.02

Barns and Sheds $ 98,186 0.02

Tennis Courts $ 569,726 0.02

Ballfields- Back stops and fencing $ 255,718 0.02


Athletic Court Lighting Systems $ 428,071 0.02




Oaklawn Recreation Center $ 50,315 0.01

Tom Sykes Recreation Center $ 32,514 0.01


TOTAL $21,924,706 0.14

Total Maintenance & Repair Costs 2008-2012 (cont.)

77

Facility/Amenity 2013 - 2017 Score

Col. Francis Beatty Indoor Shelter $ 107,019 0.15

Jetton Indoor Shelter $ 67,443 0.13

Albemarle Recreation Center $ 394,490 0.13

McDowell Nature Center $ 126,176 0.12

West Charlotte Recreation Center $ 325,063 0.11




Amay James Recreation Center $ 446,528 0.10

Mahlon Adams Pavilion $ 61,103 0.10

Synthetic Turf Fields $ 7,242,947 0.09

Naomi Drenan Recreation Center $ 252,695 0.09

Tom Sykes Recreation Center $ 282,211 0.08

Hickory Grove Recreation Center $ 276,999 0.08

Oaklawn Recreation Center $ 399,473 0.08

Admin. Office Building $ 902,648 0.07

Aquatic Center $ 751,997 0.07

Boat Docks $ 202,448 0.07

Armory Building $ 213,944 0.07


East AOB $ 78,859 0.07

Sugaw Creek Recreation Center $ 196,355 0.06

Tuckaseegee Recreation Center $ 180,493 0.06

Ray's Splash Planet $ 299,151 0.06

Playgrounds $ 1,391,766 0.06

Caretakers, restrooms and Freedom NC $ 2,830,662 0.06


Tennis Courts $ 1,690,282 0.06

Spraygrounds/Outdoor Pools $ 347,647 0.06


Bette Rae Thomas Recreation Center $ 347,012 0.06

Horticulture Compound $ 51,868 0.06


Southview Recreation Center $ 248,757 0.06

Reedy Creek Indoor Shelter $ 32,645 0.05


Arbor Glen Recreation Center $ 137,598 0.05

Mallard Creek Recreation Center $ 208,545 0.05

Marion Diehl Recreation Center $ 258,632 0.05

Total Maintenance & Repair Costs 2013-2017

78


Shelters, well houses and storage areas $ 2,385,050 0.04

Barns and sheds $ 434,928 0.04

Ballfields - Back stops and fencing $ 766,574 0.04


Athletic Field Lighting Systems $ 1,324,058 0.04


Shoreline Stabilization $ 224,921 0.04



Central AOB $ 41,547 0.03





Total $31,653,392

Total Maintenance & Repair Costs 2013-2017 (cont.)

80

Total Preliminary Capital Costs 2008-2017

2008-2018 CAPITAL NEEDS ASSESSMENT

COST BREAKOUT BY CATEGORY

Category 5Y 10Y Total 5Y 10Y Total 5Y 10Y Total Grand-Total

Conservation and Stewardship 36,000,000 0 36,000,000 7,800,000 11,100,000 18,900,000 - - - 54,900,000

Greenways 46,887,000 109,175,000 156,062,000 5,220,000 - 5,220,000 - - - 161,282,000

Parks-Community 9,000,000 10,800,000 19,800,000 10,703,000 30,115,600 40,818,600 - - - 60,618,600

Parks-Neighborhood 11,400,000 - 11,400,000 3,100,000 - 3,100,000 - - - 14,500,000

Parks-Regional 14,400,000 18,000,000 32,400,000 123,539,402 19,460,500 142,999,902 - - - 175,399,902

Parks-School 2,100,000 - 2,100,000 600,000 - 600,000 - - - 2,700,000

Rec. Facilities-Aquatic-Improvements - - - 8,000,000 31,900,000 39,900,000 - - - 39,900,000

Rec. Facilities-Aquatic-New 0 10,500,000 10,500,000 - 9,000,000 9,000,000 - - - 19,500,000

Rec. Facilities-Rec. Ctr. 63,000,000 25,000,000 88,000,000 142,930,800 46,623,800 189,554,600 - - - 277,554,600

Rec. Facilities-Special - - - 24,000,000 - 24,000,000 - - - 24,000,000

Improvement-Athletics - - - 17,700,000 4,517,000 22,217,000 - - - 22,217,000

Improvement-Parks - - - 17,407,500 3,873,000 21,280,500 - - - 21,280,500

Improvement-Maint. & Repair - - - - - - 21,924,706 31,653,392 53,578,098 53,578,098

Total $182,787,000 $173,475,000 $356,262,000 $361,000,702 $156,589,900 $517,590,602 $21,924,706 $31,653,392 $53,578,098 $927,430,700

SUMMARY: 5 YR. NEW DEVELOPMENT $182,787,000 5 YR. IMPROVEMENTS $361,000,702 5 YR. MAINT & REPAIR $21,924,706

5 YR. TOTAL $565,712,408

New Development Improvements Maintenance & Repair

81

Questions and Comments?

1 Presented by: In association with: ETC Institute Leisure Vision Nationally Recognized….Uniquely...

Documents

Transcript of 1 Presented by: In association with: ETC Institute Leisure Vision Nationally Recognized….Uniquely...