Parks And Rec - Master Plan

WELCOME Purpose The purpose of Open House No. 2 is to share the feedback from the first open house and get feedback on options for the future of the City’s Parks and Recreation facilities and programs. The overall system options will include concepts for meeting needs for: • Parks, open space and trails • Greenway and riverfront uses • Indoor recreation

Tentative Open House Schedule Open House No. 1

Needs, Existing Facilities, Process, Work to Date Tuesday, June 23, 4-7 p.m. DONE

Open House No. 2

Master Plan System Options Tuesday, August 18, 4-7 p.m. Wednesday, August 19, 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. Crowne Plaza Hotel

Open House No. 3

Master Plan Selected System Options Tuesday, October 6, 4-7 p.m. Crowne Plaza Hotel

The Challenge This Parks & Recreation Master Plan Open House Process must address the following questions: • What are the best future investments to achieve high quality of life, compete with other Midwestern cities and encourage community development? • How does the City of Cedar Rapids meet the community’s parks and recreation indoor and outdoor needs and ensure the system is sustainable and affordable, now and in the future? • How does the overall Parks and Recreation Master Plan impact flood recovery planning and reinvestment in the river corridor areas?

Master Plan Chronology 2003 – Recreation Department creates its own master plan of facilities and programs. 2007 – City Parks Department and Recreation Department combine to become one department. 2008 – City begins process of its first Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Activities including an inventory of the parks system, needs assessment and stakeholder interviews, were completed. June 11-13, 2008 – Flood results in damages and needed investment of at least $3 billion in Cedar Rapids, including some damages to river corridor parks and recreational facilities. August 2008 – Parks master planning process resumes and a post flood inventory occurs. June 23, 2009 – First of three sets of Parks & Recreation Master Plan open houses held.

Other Related Processes: • P.L.A.Y. multi-generational community center/recreational facility (2005 to date). • Greenway – Flood Management System – River Corridor Process (June-Nov. 2008). • Riverfront Uses – Riverfront Master Plan Process – Halted due to June 2008 flood. • Neighborhood Planning Process – Reinvestment plans for 10 flood-impacted neighborhoods (Jan.-May 2009).

Master Plan Project Goals • Meeting needs to attract and retain residents and the next generation workerforce. • Providing a community-wide perspective to the parks and recreation system as priorities are set to meet operational funding constraints. • Enhancing the use of our riverfront and attracting residents to the river. • Ensuring indoor recreational facility needs are met and are affordable for the community. • Addressing flood damage to the parks and recreational system. • Enhancing connectivity of parks and open space through the trail system. • Ensuring a system which the City and its taxpayers can afford.

How do we currently support the Parks & Recreation System? Unlike most Midwest communities, Cedar Rapids must fund parks and recreation with only two revenue options: 1) Property tax subsidy 2) User fees Our System Faces Significant Challenges: • Maintenance – A high number of park acres (3359) to maintain. • Greenway – Acquisition of the riverfront greenway as flood protection that must be maintained and have some program elements. • Flood – Park and recreation facilities damaged by the 2008 flood. • Age – Recreation facilities that have outlived their life expectancy and have limited revenue potential. • Trails – Low number of trail miles in comparison with other Midwestern cities. • Needs – A growing community has growing needs. • Resources – Limited resources within the City to meet a high level of needs.

How can we lower maintenance costs to make the system more sustainable? The following are potential strategies for the City to lower maintenance costs of the Parks & Recreation System.

PARKS & OPEN SPACE Strategy

Impact on Level of Service

Rationale

Capital Cost Implications

Operating Cost Implications

Timing

Potential Funding or Partnership Opportunities

Policies/Standards: Adopt mandatory parkland dedication

Provides parkland for new residential developments

Affordable parkland to serve new residents

No cost to City

NA

0-5 years

Land provided by developer

Adopt park impact fee

Provides fee to build park on dedicated land from new development

Growth contributes to park capital costs to serve new residents

Depending on fee – partial-to-full costs of park development

City Maintenance cost of $2237 per developed park acre

0-5 years

Apply a percentage of new property tax revenue to park maintenance budgets

Minimal to Moderate

Environmental Impact; Affordability

$20,520 to convert to switch grass

Cost per acre to maintain decreases from $2237 per acre to $250 per acre

0-5 years (Ongoing)

Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources and environmental grants for prairie restoration

Park Maintenance: Convert select park mowed areas to natural areas

$124,800 to convert to prairie grass

$100,000 in mowing equipment

Lower park maintenance standards (e.g. reduce frequency of mowing of lower-use parks)

Moderate

Affordability

None

Cost per acre to mow decreases from $425 to $290

Timing: 0-5 years

Increase parkland agreements/ leases for maintenance by private groups for recreational uses

Minimal to Moderate

Affordability

None

Savings of $425-$2237 per acre

0-5 years

Requires commitment from homeowners and/or neighborhood associations to maintain at an acceptable level of service

Minimal

Affordability

None

Savings of $425-$2237 per acre

0-5 years

Potential buyers of re-purposed land

Underutilized Lands and Facilities: Re-purpose lands or facilities that do not contribute to parks and recreation system, and level of service

What can we do to increase funding? The following are potential strategies for the Parks & Recreation System to increase revenue.

Alternative Funding Sources • Increase funding through sponsorships (including naming rights) • Federal, state and local grants

Community Support • Develop a “Friends” group to increase grant and private funding • Develop an “Adopt-a-Park” program • Increase partnerships with schools • Pursue partners to assist with capital projects

Programs and Special Facilities • Recreation programs: Strategic review and refinement of fees and charges • Old MacDonald’s Farm: Identify private endowment to fund operation budget • Rentals: Increase rental of indoor and outdoor facilities • Ushers Ferry Historic Village: Increase cost recovery (non-tax revenue)

Parks & Recreation System Sustainability The Parks and Recreation Master Plan must identify ways for the system to address financial challenges so that it can endure for future generations.

The Master Plan must: • Provide for maintenance of a newly-acquired greenway • Address deficiencies in indoor recreation and trails • Meet quality-of-life expectations • Plan for a growing community with limited new funding opportunities

Open House No. 1 Feedback – Important System Facilities

The number of times a response was mentioned in the feedback is indicated in parentheses after each item. Parks, Open Space, Trails

Riverfront

Indoor Recreation

Trails & connectivity (42)

Trails & connectivity (20)

Active recreation/outdoor sports facilities (23)

Ellis Harbor (10)

Parks & park components (18)

Outdoor event spaces (7)

Dog park (10)

Outdoor cafés and restaurants (7)

Riverfront recreation (9)

Boating (7)

Event space/amphitheater (7)

Active recreation (6)

Open space (7)

Amphitheater/outdoor concert venue (6)

Community gardens (6)

Open space (5)

Playgrounds and splash pads (5)

Community gardens (4)

Picnic/shelters (4)

Indoor recreation/community centers (4)

Natural areas/habitat (3)

Arts and culture (4)

BMX and remote-controlled airplanes (1)

Natural areas (4)

Indoor pool (18) Active recreation (14) Indoor recreation/community center (10) Community/meeting space (6) Track (5) 50-meter competition pool (4) Gyms (3) Weights/fitness (3) Skate park (2) Marketplace (2) Dance facilities (2) Indoor event space (2) Childcare (1) Indoor dog and pet facility (1) Indoor water park (1) Tournament facilities (1) Indoor water park (1) Tournament facilities (1) Aquarium/zoo (1) Therapy pool (wellness) (1) Party rental room (1) Early childhood (1) Outdoor children’s play area (1) Central café/concessions (1) Gardening (1)

Water taxis (3) River walkways (3) Dog and pet facilities (2) Picnic areas (2) Market/festival space (2) Retail (1) Waterpark (1) Ushers Ferry (1)

Community Benefit/Sustainability Analysis – Park Facilities & Programs When adding or creating parks and recreation facilities and services, cities look at how broad the community impact is of that facility or program and how integral it is to a parks system. They look at the number of users and the cost to provide the service, then determine how to pay for it. Generally, there are three main categories.

Broad Community Benefit – City subsidy Funding – Find ways to minimize operating costs and make more functional.

Community/Individual Benefit – City subsidy & user fees Funding – Fees & charges cover some, but not all, operating costs.

Individual Benefit – User fees Funding – Self-sustaining with user fees; ideally generating a profit.

Many users, basic to parks system, essential to greater community.

Serves individual interests but has broad appeal in the community.

Specialized services, limited users and not part of direct parks/recreation mission.

How Do You Incorporate Facility Feedback into the System Options? In order to determine the cost of incorporating the facility feedback into options, the feedback was evaluated for sustainability/affordability and community benefit.

Broad Community Benefit – City subsidy Funding – Find ways to minimize operating costs and make more functional.

Community/Individual Benefit – City subsidy & user fees Funding – Fees & charges cover some, but not all, operating costs.

Individual Benefit – User fees Funding – Self-sustaining with user fees; ideally generating a profit.

Parks, Open Space, Trails Trails & connectivity (42) Parks & park components (18) Playgrounds & splash pads (5) Picnic shelters (4) Natural areas/habitat (3)

Riverfront Trails & connectivity (20) Open space (5) Indoor recreation/community centers (4) Natural areas (4) River walkways (3) Picnic areas (2)

Indoor Recreation Active recreation (14) Indoor recreation/community center (10) Community/meeting space (6) Track (5) Gyms (3)

Parks, Open Space, Trails Active recreation/outdoor sports facilities (23) Dog and pet facilities (10) Event space/amphitheater (7) Open space (7) Community Gardens (6)

Riverfront Boating (7) Outdoor event spaces (7) Active recreation (6) Amphitheater/outdoor concert venue (6) Community gardens (4) Dog and pet facilities (2) Market/festival space (2) Water park (1)

Indoor Recreation Indoor pool (18) Outdoor children’s play area (1) Gardening (1) Dog and pet facility (1)

Parks, Open Space, Trails BMX and remote-controlled airplanes (1)

Riverfront Ellis Harbor (10) Outdoor cafés and restaurants (7) Arts & culture (4) Water taxis (3) Retail (1) Ushers Ferry (1)

Indoor Recreation 50-meter competition pool (4) Weights/fitness (3) Skate park (2) Dance facilities (2) Indoor event space(2) Aquarium/zoo (1) Central café/concessions (1) Early childhood (1) Tournament facilities (1) Childcare (1) Therapy pool (wellness) (2) Party rental room (1) Outdoor children’s play area (1) Indoor water park (1)

City Council Direction The City Council frequently uses these five keys to successful redevelopment to evaluate initiatives. • Consistent with Community Goals • Neighborhood Support • Financial Feasibility • Market Feasibility • Experienced Development Team

Evaluation Criteria In addition to the Council’s keys to successful redevelopment, the criteria listed below are being used to evaluate parks and recreation options.

Cost Short-term capital costs to implement

Affordability Long-term operating costs and sustainability

Need Meets a demonstrated need and has community support

Quality of Life Impact to residents’ health, safety, family life and community life

Community Impact Number of people that will use it or be affected by it

Economic Impact Impact in terms of competitiveness to attract and retain residents, bring visitors to Cedar Rapids, or result in additional revenue to businesses

Environmental Impact Ecological benefit by providing flood mitigation, stewardship of natural resources, and environmental sustainability

Three Options to Improve and Sustain Our Parks System Noelridge Park

Noelridge Park Ushers Ferry Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Shawnee Park Cherry Hill Park

Shaver Park Daniels Park Time Check

Downtown Bender

Apache Park

Jones Park

Squaw Creek

Ellis Seminole Harbor Valley

Bever Park

Ellis Park Time Check Greenway

Ambroz Van Vechten Park

Cherry Hill Park

Apache Park

Cedar Valley Park Urban Fishery

Beverly Park

Daniels Park

Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley Bever Park

Ellis Park

Downtown

Bever Park

Downtown Cherry Hill Park

Landfill Urban Fishery

Beverly Park

Urban Fishery

Future (based on growth)

Jones Park

Option 1: Decentralized System

Option 2: Centralized System

Option 3: Hybrid System

The Decentralized System works closely with the existing parks system, relying on enhancing existing facilities rather than creating new facilities. Neighborhood spaces, community parks and regional facilities are dispersed throughout and beyond the City limits.

The Centralized System creates a recreational destination riverfront by focusing new community and regional facilities in the future Greenway.

The Hybrid System creates focused activity centers along the Greenway and throughout the City. This option consolidates active programming to meet community needs into a series of multi-neighborhood cluster parks.

EXISTING PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK RIVERFRONT ACTIVITY NODE INDOOR RECREATION NATURALIZED GREENWAY PRIORITY TRAIL

Decentralized System Option (Please fill out the Option 1 comment card while viewing this set of boards and drop it in the nearby kiosk.)

The Decentralized System Option The Decentralized System Option works closely with the existing parks system. Neighborhood spaces, community parks and regional facilities are dispersed throughout and beyond the City limits. This option relies heavily on enhancing existing facilities rather than creating new facilities.

Noelridge Park

Squaw Creek

Ushers Ferry Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Shaver Park

Riverfront

Daniels Park Bever Park

Shawnee Time Check Park Apache Park

Downtown

Bender Pool

Cherry Hill Park Potential Future Facility

Ambroz Van Vechten Park

Jones Park

EXISTING PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK RIVERFRONT ACTIVITY NODE INDOOR RECREATION NATURALIZED GREENWAY PRIORITY TRAIL

Trails Focuses on planned and funded trails.

Cedar Valley Park Urban Fishery

Beverly Park

Focuses a limited amount of new programming in the downtown core.

Indoor Recreation Replaces the City's three facilities with similar facilities and provides programs in two schools or neighborhood centers. Parks and Open Space Maintains the existing parks and open space system.

Decentralized System: What does this mean for the Riverfront? Focuses new programming along the riverfront in the downtown core, between I-380 and 12th Street. Areas of the riverfront beyond the downtown are naturalized with trails and prairie plantings.

Seminole Valley

Downtown Facilities

• City promenade with outdoor dining and cafés • Farmer's Market • Event Plaza on May's Island

Ellis Park

Downtown

Urban Fishery

Capital Cost: $101,700,000 Total Operational Cost: $361,100 New Operational Cost: $169,250 Advantages • Incorporates naturalized riverfront into the regional trail and ecological system. • Creates some new riverfront access with event space.

Disadvantages

Naturalized Areas

• 80% of the Greenway is naturalized. • Prairie plantings, river's edge naturalization and the creation of wetlands.

Wetlands

Event Space

O Ave

Naturalized Greenway

Naturalized Greenway Boat Dock Plaza at Time Check

• Does not make the riverfront and Greenway a regional recreational destination. F Ave

City Promenade

Boating • Expands Ellis Harbor facility to include public landing and boat launch. • Expands facility to include boating and fish stocking program.

Decentralized System: What does this mean for Trails? Focuses on developing trails that are already planned and funded.

Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Downtown

Urban Fishery

TRAIL STRATEGY Capital Cost: Funded New Operational Cost: $49,000 Advantages • Provides some trail connectivity. • More affordable due to a lower amount of new trail miles.

Disadvantages EXISTING TRAILS

• Less extensive trail system.

FUNDED TRAILS

• Does not maximize trail connectivity.

TRAIL SYSTEM CEMAR Trail

Ellis Trail

Trails funded by others

•

Connects Cedar River Trail to Boyson Trail

•

•

•

Connects Eastern and Southern Marion to Central Cedar Rapids and Cedar River Trail

Connects Ellis Trail to Ellis Park and Edgewood Road Northwest

Hoover Natural Trail: Connects metro area to Johnson County through Ely

•

•

Ely Connection

•

Provides access to: Mt. Mercy College, Regis and Arthur Schools

Provides access to: riverfront West, Ellis, and Manhattan- Robbins Lake, and Ellis Golf Course

•

Grant Wood Trail

Greenway Trails

Decentralized System: What does this mean for Indoor Recreation? Meets indoor recreation needs by replacing the three existing facilities: Ambroz, Bender, and Time Check. Continues some indoor recreation programming co-located at two schools or new neighborhood centers.

Replace Ambroz

• Gymnasium

• Indoor 6-lane lap pool

• Dance

• Party rental room

• Arts and crafts

• General program room

• Multi-purpose rooms • Support spaces • Facility administration • Reception Time Check

Bender Pool

Replace Bender

Ambroz

• Creative play/ child care • Support spaces • Facility administration • Reception

Potential Future Facility

Replace Time Check

Capital Cost: $24,000,000 Total Operational Cost: $237,100

• Gymnasium

• Gymnasium

• Social and cultural programming

• Reception

New Operational Cost: $129,739

• General programming and service club

Advantages

Disadvantages

• Support spaces

• Replaces existing buildings with new facilities that are code compliant and energyefficient.

• Duplicates staff, spaces and utilities at multiple facilities, decreasing efficiency.

• Facility administration

• Has limited potential for additional revenue based on size and program elements. • Current locations are difficult to access and do not meet the growth of the community.

Co-location at Neighborhood Centers

• Reception

• Office

Decentralized System: What does this mean for Parks and Open Space? Neighborhood spaces, community parks and regional facilities are dispersed throughout and beyond the City limits. This option relies heavily on enhancing existing facilities rather than creating new facilities. Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Shaver Park Daniels Park

Shawnee Park

Cherry Hill Park

Squaw Creek

Downtown

Apache Park

Bever Park

Van Vechten Park

Cedar Valley Park Jones Park Beverly Park

Streamline Park System • Removes parcels that have no recreational value (such as road medians). • Converts 104 acres of parks to natural areas for overall operating efficiencies.

Active Recreation • Maintains existing ballfields and sports complexes. • Adds baseball and softball tournament facilities to the Tuma Complex.

Capital Cost: $10,904,160

Special Facilities

New Operational Cost: New operational costs are offset by operational efficiencies.

• Maintains one dedicated dog park facility at Squaw Creek location.

Advantages

Disadvantages

• Maintains neighborhood level of service provided by current parks and recreation system.

• Favors neighborhood facilities with fewer programs and services over community facilities with a higher level of programs and services. • Dispersed system is less efficient to maintain.

• Improves existing skate park at Riverside Park.

Budget Reductions: Operational Savings: saves $320,587 annually • • •

Close 12 old wading pools (saves $34,992) Privatize Ushers Ferry (saves $196,293) Full cost recovery at Tuma (saves 89,302)

Give property to adjacent school for maintaining: saves $34,047 annually Coolidge ballfields, Monroe playground, Pierce playground, Reed trail and soccer fields, Van Buren playground and trail, Viola Gibson ballfield.

Turn over property with no recreational value to another department (i.e. traffic islands, boulevards): saves $3467 annually Chandler, Fairview, Glenway, Haskell, Huston, Krebs, Stefan.

Evaluation of the Decentralized System Option Minimizing Increase in Long- Meet Community Short-Term Costs Term Affordability Need

Community Impact (# Users)

Economic Impact on City

Minimizes Environmental Impact

Improvement of Quality of Life

Notes

Parks & Open Space

Low

Low

High

High

Low

Medium

High

Status Quo with some improvements

Riverfront

High

High

Low

Low

Low

High

Low

Naturalized with Downtown Core

Trails

High

High

Low

Medium

Low

High

Low

Indoor Recreation

Medium

Low

Low

Low

Low

Medium

Low

Medium

Medium

Already funded Trails Dispersed indoor recreation at upgraded existing facilities High

Capital Cost: $137 million New Operational Cost: New operational costs are offset by operational efficiencies. Advantages

• Maintains neighborhood level of service provided by current parks and recreation system. • Creates some new riverfront access with event space at the downtown core. • Provides some trail connectivity. • Indoor recreation needs are addressed by replacing the outdated and inaccessible buildings with new, efficient, and code-compliant buildings. • No additional operating expenses and the lowest capital cost of the three options.

Disadvantages • Does not keep Cedar Rapids competitive with other communities in terms of employee recruitment, quality of life enhancement, and national recreational trends. • Favors more lower quality neighborhood facilities over fewer high quality community facilities. • Does not make the riverfront and Greenway a regional recreational destination. • Does not maximize trail connectivity. • Duplicates staff, spaces and utilities at multiple facilities, increasing capital and operating costs at indoor recreation facilities. • Converts to natural areas and repurposes parks for operational efficiencies.

Centralized System Option (Please fill out the Option 2 comment card while viewing this set of boards and drop it in the nearby kiosk.)

The Centralized System Option

The Centralized System creates a recreational destination riverfront by focusing new community and regional facilities in the future Greenway. Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley

Riverfront Introduces activities and programs along the entire riverfront to provide a high-quality regional destination.

Ellis Harbor Daniels Park

Ellis Park

Bever Park Time Check Greenway

Prioritizes trail segments that connect to the riverfront and City center.

Downtown

Cherry Hill Park

Apache Park

Indoor Recreation

Landfill

Jones Park

Beverly Park

EXISTING PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK RIVERFRONT ACTIVITY NODE INDOOR RECREATION NATURALIZED GREENWAY PRIORITY TRAIL

Trails

Urban Fishery

Locates a regional-scale, centralized "Multi-Generational Community Life Facility" along the River in Ellis Park. Parks and Open Space Increases operational efficiencies by repurposing parks and recreation facilities that are outdated or do not meet community needs.

Centralized System: What does this mean for the Riverfront? Focuses new program and shift some existing park uses to the riverfront to create a regional attraction.

Riverfront Programming • 7500- person with permanent and lawn seating. • City promenade at downtown core with outdoor dining and cafés.

Seminole Valley

• Fountain/ event plaza/ ice rink on May's Island.

Ellis Harbor Ellis Park Time Check Greenway

• Inflatable dam near the 8th Avenue Bridge creates a recreational pool downtown for boating.

Downtown

• Urban Fishery expands to include boating and fish stocking programs.

Landfill Urban Fishery

Fountain / Event Plaza / Ice Rink

City Promenade

Greenway

• New outdoor recreation fields in Time Check Greenway and Seminole Valley.

Boat Docks

• Temporary beaches for volleyball and boat launch.

Amphitheater with Fixed and Lawn seating

• 70% developed/ 30% naturalized Greenway

Capital Cost: $259,200,000 Total Operational Cost: $659,150

Pedestrian Bridge

New Operational Cost: $378,900 Advantages • Makes the riverfront a signature destination for the City of Cedar Rapids and the region. • Accommodates a variety of programming, appealing to a wide range of users, at the riverfront.

Disadvantages

O Ave

• Draws resources away from dispersed neighborhood parks and facilities.

Soccer Fields

Boat Dock

Plaza at Time Check Baseball Parking BMX / Skatepark

F Ave

Centralized System: What does this mean for Trails? Develop trails that connect regional systems and neighborhoods to the riverfront, the Greenway, and City Center. Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley

Ellis Harbor

Daniels Park

Ellis Park

Bever Park

Downtown Cherry Hill Park

Apache Park Urban Fishery

Beverly Park

TRAIL STRATEGY Capital Cost: $25,800,000 New Operational Cost: $374,100 Advantages • Increases connectivity to the downtown core from some neighborhoods and the riverfront. • Increases trails level of service in the downtown core.

EXISTING TRAILS FUNDED TRAILS

Disadvantages • Does not maximize connectivity to neighborhoods.

PRIORITY TRAIL CONNECTIONS

TRAIL SYSTEM Implement funded trails • CEMAR • Ellis Trail

Lincoln Trail (Mt.Vernon to CEMAR) • Connect CEMAR Trail to Sac & Fox and Squaw Creek Trails • Connects SE Linn County: Bertram, Mt. Vernon, & Lisbon to the Cedar River Trail • Provides access to: Sac & Fox, Bever, Cottage Grove Parkway, & Northview, and Franklin & Washington Schools

Prairie Creek • New trail connecting SW Cedar Rapids & the city of Fairfax to the Cedar River Trail system

F Avenue • On-street trails

Centralized System: What does this mean for Indoor Recreation? Creates a regional scale (245,000 square foot) indoor recreational facility, The MultiGenerational Community Life Center, along the Greenway in Ellis Park. Repurposes existing outdated facilities. Partners with schools to offer programming in other parts of the city.

The Multi-Generational Community Life Center would include: Passive Recreation

• Dance • 2 Arts and crafts rooms • 8 Social and cultural programming rooms • Multi-use room and stage

Ellis Park

• Kitchen • Party rental room

Conceptual View of Center at Ellis Park Active Recreation Capital Cost: $82,900,000 Total Operational Cost: $298,000

Advantages

Disadvantages

• Creates a state-of-the-art facility with multiple partners to serve regional recreation needs, enhance redevelopment and generate tourism revenue.

• Reduces neighborhood level of programming.

• Efficiently uses staff, space and utilities at one facility to reduce ongoing operating costs.

• Increases travel to recreation facilities.

Partnership Opportunities

• 8 Gymnasiums

• Older adults partner

• Indoor track

• Community early learning institute partner

• Indoor lap pool

New Operational Cost: $232,639

• Creative play and child care with indoor playground

• Indoor family activity pool • 50 Meter competition pool • Health and fitness • Aerobics • Rock climbing

• Wellness partner • Central café • Community safety partner • Branch library partner

Centralized System: What does this mean for Parks and Open Space? Increases operational efficiencies by repurposing or naturalizing parks with lower recreational value. Noelridge Park

Daniels Park

Cherry Hill Park

Bever Park

Streamline Park System • Repurposes or creates management partnerships for the Tuma Complex. • Converts areas with less recreational value to lowmow and prairie plantings to minimize maintenance cost. • Creates partnerships with community groups to maintain existing park land.

Apache Park

Jones Park Beverly Park

• Skate park • Rugby field • Dog park

New Operational Cost: New operational costs are offset by operational efficiencies. Advantages

Disadvantages

• Focuses facilities and attractions in the City’s core along the riverfront that benefit the entire community.

• Reduces developed parks and recreational facilities within neighborhoods to support facilities and programming in the Greenway along the riverfront.

• More efficient to maintain a high level of amenities in a concentrated area.

Same as Option 1: • Operational Savings: saves $320,587 annually • Give property to adjacent school for maintaining: saves $34,047 annually • Turn over property with no recreational value to another department (i.e. traffic islands, boulevards): saves $3467 annually Additional Strategies: • New Funding Strategies $100,000 Sponsorships, annual campaign, donations.

Replaces existing park amenities with improved facilities in the Greenway

Capital Cost: $399,160

Budget Reductions:

• Spray pools • Basketball courts • New outdoor recreation fields in Time Check Greenway and Seminole Valley Park

• Conversion of manicured park land to prairie or switch grass: saves $237,459 annually Bowman Woods (100%), Cherokee, extended (93%), Cherry Hill (35%), Cheyenne (100%), Delaney (10%), Ellis Park (8%), Interstate Ramp Areas (75%), Lincoln Way (38%), Navajo (72%), Nixon (9%), Osborne (100%), Seminole Valley / Usher's Ferry (10%), Shawnee (83%), Stejskal (100%), Sun Valley (100%), Tait Cummins (30%).

• Repurposing, selling, or transferring maintenance: saves $54,538 annually 10th Square, Anderson, Arrowhead, Central Park, Garnett, Iroquois, Lincoln Heights, Northview, Sokol, Tokheim, Glass Road, Long Bluff Road, Papoose, Sinclair, Wellington, Whittam, Williams.

• Change frequency of mowing from every 10 days to 15 days: saves $34,560 annually Alandale, Apache, Cedar Hills, Delaney, Fox Trail, Hayes, Huntington Ridge, Jacolyn, Jackson, Shaver, Shawnee, Van Vechten, Wilderness Estates.

Evaluation of the Centralized System Option Minimizing Increase in Long- Meet Community Short-Term Costs Term Affordability Need

Community Impact (# Users)

Economic Impact on City

Minimizes Environmental Impact

Improvement of Quality of Life

Notes

Parks & Open Space

High

High

Low

Low

Low

High

Low

Shifts resources to Greenway

Riverfront

Low

Low

High

High

High

Medium

High

Creates Regional Destination

Trails

Low

Low

High

High

High

High

High

Network brings people to Riverfront

Indoor Recreation

Low

Medium

High

High

High

High

High

Centralized at Riverfront

Low

Capital Cost: $388 million

Medium

High

New Operational Cost: $300,900 Advantages

Disadvantages

• The riverfront becomes a signature destination for the City of Cedar Rapids and the region, attracting residents, workers and visitors.

• Diverts neighborhood resources from current parks and recreation system to support an intensely programmed greenway.

• Programming appeals to a wide range of users and provides residents with greater access to the river.

• Does not maximize the connectivity to the neighborhoods.

• Connects the neighborhoods to the downtown core through walking and biking trails. • Indoor recreation is consolidated into one efficient, multi-generational center.

• Requires travel to indoor recreation services.

Hybrid System Option (Please fill out the Option 3 comment card while viewing this set of boards and drop it in the nearby kiosk.)

The Hybrid System Option The Hybrid System creates focused activity centers along the Greenway and throughout the City. This option distributes new programming to meet community needs within a series of existing activity nodes, balancing new developed park amenities with naturalized spaces throughout the park system. Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Riverfront

Bever Park

Trails

Downtown

Focus on developing trails that connect selected clustered parks where recreational opportunities are focused within the City limits.

Cherry Hill Park

Urban Fishery Jones Park Future (based on growth)

EXISTING PARK NEIGHBORHOOD PARK RIVERFRONT ACTIVITY NODE INDOOR RECREATION NATURALIZED GREENWAY PRIORITY TRAIL

Focus new programming and activities in a few key activity centers along the riverfront: downtown, Seminole Valley, Ellis Park and the Urban Fishery.

Indoor Recreation One midsize and two neighborhood indoor recreation facilities occur in selected cluster parks to serve recreation needs. Parks and Open Space Focus on consolidating recreational opportunities into parks that could serve multiple neighborhoods, including Ellis, Cherry Hill, Jones, Noelridge, and Bever Parks.

Hybrid System: What does this mean for the Riverfront? This option consolidates recreational amenities into a series of parks to serve as multi-neighborhood centers. These "cluster" parks would be Ellis, Cherry Hill, Jones, Bever, and Noelridge with a potential future cluster near Kirkwood to serve the growing south side.

Downtown Facilities • 5000 person grass amphitheater • City promenade with outdoor dining and cafés • Farmer's Market Flexible Plaza

• Event Space

City Promenade

Naturalized Greenway

Ushers Ferry Ellis Park

Boat Docks Grass Amphitheater

Downtown

Boating and Fishing Urban Fishery

• Installs a rubber, inflatable

Active recreation • Creates new soccer complex,

dam near 8th Avenue to

camping facilities and a public boat

create a new recreational pool

launch at Seminole Valley.

downtown. • Expands Urban Fishery facility

• Creates temporary beaches for volleyball and boat launch.

to include boat rental and fish

Capital Cost: $175,200,000 Total Operational Cost: $500,190 New Operational Cost: $219,940 Advantages

Disadvantages

• Does not fully take advantage of • Provides a mix of programmed and naturalized opportunities to develop communitywide amenities in the Greenway. spaces along the riverfront.

stocking program.

Naturalized Areas • 50% Naturalized Greenway. • Prairie plantings, river's edge naturalization and the creation of wetlands at Time Check Greenway and between downtown and the Landfill.

Ushers Ferry • Increases revenue-generation with a rental facility for events and weddings.

Hybrid System: What does this mean for Trails? This option focuses on developing trails that connect selected clustered parks where recreational opportunities are focused within the City limits.

Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Bever Park Downtown

Cherry Hill Park Urban Fishery

Future (based on growth)

Jones Park

TRAIL STRATEGY EXISTING TRAILS FUNDED TRAILS PRIORITY TRAIL CONNECTIONS

Capital Cost: $8,300,000

TRAIL SYSTEM

Total Operational Cost: $120,350 Advantages

Disadvantages

• Increases connectivity between cluster parks.

• Does not maximize regional trail connectivity

• Creates several trail loops in different parts of the city.

Implement funded trails CEMAR, Ellis Trail

Kirkwood Trail Extension (new priority) • Connects to existing Bowling Street Trail to Cedar River Trail • Provides access to Jones Park

Lincoln Trail (Mt.Vernon to CEMAR) • Connect CEMAR Trail to Sac and Fox and Squaw Creek Trails • Connects SE Linn County: Bertram, Mt. Vernon, and Lisbon to the Cedar River Trail • Provides access to: Sac and Fox, Bever, Cottage Grove Parkway, and Northview, and Franklin and Washington Schools

Morgan Creek Trail • Connects to Ellis Trail to the Hwy. 100 Trails • Provides access to: Morgan Creek and helps create a connection to Cherry Hill

Hybrid System: What does this mean for Indoor Recreation? Indoor recreation needs are met through the creation of a midsize (150,000 sq. ft.) indoor recreational facility at Noelridge Park, along with neighborhood facilities within cluster parks at Jones and Cherry Hill. Existing indoor recreation facilities are repurposed. Noelridge Park

One Mid-Size Recreation Center Active Recreation: •

3 Gymnasiums

•

Indoor track

•

8-lane indoor lap pool

•

Indoor family activity pool

•

Fitness

•

Aerobics

•

Rock climbing

Passive Recreation: Cherry Hill Park

Jones Park

Capital Cost: $61,400,000 Total Operational Cost: $720,000

•

Dance

•

Arts and crafts

•

3 Social and cultural programming rooms

•

Multi-use room and stage

•

Kitchen

•

Party rental room

•

Creative play and child care

Two Cluster Neighborhood Park Facilities

New Operational Cost: $654,639

• Gymnasium

Advantages

• Classrooms

Disadvantages

• Provides increased • Duplication of staff, spaces and programming opportunities. utilities at multiple facilities increases ongoing operational costs. • Meets indoor recreation needs of multiple neighborhoods.

• Size limits community partners and revenue generation.

Partnership Opportunities • Older adults partner • Wellness partner • Community safety partner

Hybrid System: What does this mean for Parks and Open Space? Consolidates recreational amenities into a series of parks to serve as multi-neighborhood centers. These "cluster" parks would be Ellis, Cherry Hill, Jones, Bever, and Noelridge, with a potential future cluster near Kirkwood to serve the growing south side.

Streamlines Park System • Converts areas of littleto-no recreational value to low-mow and prairie plantings to minimize maintenance costs.

Budget Reductions: Same as Option 1 and / or 2: • Operational Savings: saves $320,587 annually

Noelridge Park

• New Funding Strategies $100,000

Cluster Parks Accommodate Multiple Amenities Bever Park

Cherry Hill Park

Future (based on growth)

Jones Park

Capital Cost: $5,179,160

Coolidge ballfields, Monroe playground, Pierce playground, Reed trail and soccer fields, Van Buren playground and trail, Viola Gibson ballfield.

• Cluster parks are located at existing favorite parks of residents, according to survey results and open house feedback.

• Turn over property with no recreational value to another department (i.e. traffic islands, boulevards): saves $3467 annually

• Multiple neighborhoods share high-quality clustered amenities, such as pools, playgrounds, sports fields, and community gardens.

Special Facilities

• Change frequency of mowing from every 10 days to 15 days: saves $34,560 annually Alandale, Apache, Cedar Hills, Delaney, Fox Trail, Hayes, Huntington Ridge, Jacolyn, Jackson, Shaver, Shawnee, Van Vechten, Wilderness Estates.

Signage and Wayfinding

• Provides for some development of riverfront recreational amenities in the Greenway. • Provides a high level of recreational amenities in one location. Maintains neighborhood service level.

Bowman Woods (100%), Cherokee, extended (93%), Cherry Hill (4%), Cheyenne (100%), Delaney (10%), Ellis Park (8%), Interstate Ramp Areas (75%), Lincoln Way (38%), Navajo (72%), Nixon (9%), Osborne (100%), Seminole Valley / Ushers Ferry (3%), Shawnee (24%), Stejskal (100%), Sun Valley (100%), Tait Cummins (30%).

Disadvantages • Does not take full advantage of opportunities to develop community-wide amenities along the riverfront in the Greenway. • Reduces park amenities in mini parks and neighborhood parks.

Additional Strategies: • Conversion of manicured park land to prairie or switch grass: saves $228,061 annually

New Operational Cost: New operational costs are offset by operational efficiencies. Advantages

• Give property to adjacent school for maintaining: saves $34,047 annually

• Repurposing, selling, or transferring maintenance: saves $32,422 annually

• Relocate amenities from less used parks to cluster parks. • New dog facilities at Bever and Cherry Hill. • New skate park at Jones and Bever.

Central Park, Garnett, Iroquois, Lincoln Heights, Glass Road, Long Bluff Road, Sinclair, Wellington, Whittam. Increases awareness of parks and recreation facilities by enhancing park wayfinding signage.

Evaluation of the Hybrid System Option Minimizing Increase in Long- Meet Community Short-Term Costs Term Affordability Need

Community Impact (# Users)

Economic Impact on City

Minimizes Environmental Impact

Improvement of Quality of Life

Notes

Parks and Open Space

Medium

Medium

Medium

Medium

Low

Medium

Medium

Creates neighborhood centers

Riverfront

Medium

Medium

Medium

Medium

Medium

Medium

Medium

Focused program areas at River

Low

Low

High

High

High

High

High

Trail system connects nodes

Low

Low

High

High

Medium

Low

High

Several new facilities

Trails

Indoor Recreation

Low

Total Capital Cost: $250 million

Medium

High

Total New Operational Cost: $341,785 Advantages • Resources are distributed more evenly between the riverfront in the Greenway and neighborhood parks that serve each area of the city. • Provides a combination of programmed spaces and naturalized areas along the riverfront. • Trails encourage connections between neighborhoods. • Indoor Recreation Facilities are well-distributed to service multiple neighborhoods.

Disadvantages • Does not take full advantage of the riverfront and Greenway to develop the major community-wide amenities. • Partial dispersal of parks and facilities causes some duplication in staff, maintenance and facilities, increasing operating costs. • Does not attract residents or visitors to Cedar Rapids and has minimal revenue generation potential.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Options Noelridge Park

Noelridge Park Ushers Ferry Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Shawnee Park Cherry Hill Park

Squaw Creek

Shaver Park Daniels Park Time Check

Downtown Bender

Ellis Seminole Harbor Valley

Ellis Park

Bever Park

Time Check Greenway

Ambroz

Apache Park

Jones Park

Van Vechten Park

Cherry Hill Park

Apache Park

Cedar Valley Park Urban Fishery

Beverly Park

Daniels Park

Noelridge Park

Seminole Valley

Ellis Park

Bever Park

Downtown

Downtown Cherry Hill Park

Landfill Urban Fishery

Urban Fishery

Jones Park Beverly Park

Future (based on growth)

Option 1: Decentralized

Option 2: Centralized

Option 3: Hybrid

Advantages:

Advantages:

Advantages:

• Evenly distributed neighborhood parks throughout the City.

• Creates a regional destination riverfront with waterfront activities for a variety of users.

• A naturalized Greenway contributes to passive recreation and regional ecological systems.

• Puts the greatest amount of park amenity and indoor recreation in the heart of the City, accessible to all residents by an improved trail system.

Disadvantages: • Does not draw people and resources to the riverfront, downtown and city center. • Dispersal of parks and facilities causes duplication in staff, maintenance and facilities, increasing operating costs. • Focuses more on quantity and distribution than quality of experience.

Bever Park

Disadvantages: • Investment in the riverfront and new Greenway requires less investment in neighborhood parks. • Higher capital cost from increased new programmed parks on the riverfront.

Jones Park

• Resources are distributed more evenly between the new Greenway and neighborhood parks that serve each area of the city. • Indoor Recreation Facilities are well-distributed to service multiple neighborhoods. • Trails encourage connections between cluster parks.

Disadvantages: • Partial dispersal of parks and facilities causes some duplication in staff, maintenance and facilities, increasing operating costs.

Comparison of the Programming in the Options Parks and Open Space Features

Option 1: Decentralized

Riverfront Option 2: Centralized

Option 3: Hybrid

Features

Remove parcels that have no recreational value

X

Maintain existing ballfields and sports complexes

X

Add baseball and softball tournament facilities to Tuma

X

Maintain one dog facility at Squaw Creek

X

Activity on May's Island

Improve existing skate park at Riverside

X

Destination play space at riverfront

Convert areas that have little or no recreational value to low-mow and prairie plantings

X

Adopt-a-park program for maintenance in new residential development

X

X

X

Boating Fishing

X

X

X

Option 1: Decentralized

Amphitheater City promenade with dining and cafés

X

Indoor Recreation

X Flexible lawn space

Option 2: Centralized

Option 3: Hybrid

7500- person amphitheater with formal and lawn seating

5000- person amphitheater with grass terraced seating

X

Spray fountain in Flexible plaza summer/ skate rink space in winter

X

X X

Facilities

X

X X

Gymnasiums

Rental facility for events/ weddings

At Ushers Ferry

At Ushers Ferry X

Indoor lap pool

X

Potential repurpose or landbank of Tuma

X

Multi-purpose fields at Time Check Greenway

X

Move dispersed or defunct facilities to Greenway

X

Temporary beaches and boat launch

X

Aerobics

Dog Park on riverfront

X

Rock climbing

Skate Park/ BMX at riverfront

X

Dance

Enhanced signage and wayfinding system

X

Neighborhood Cluster parks at Ellis, Cherry Hill, Jones, Bever, Noelridge

X

Explore possibility of new southern cluster park for future

X

High quality tournament facilities at Seminole Valley, Noelridge, Ellis New dog park at Bever and Cherry Hill, skate park at Jones and Bever Lower mowing schedule for neighborhood Parks

X

X X

X

Vegetate landfill

X

Privatize Ushers Ferry

X

Percentage Naturalized Area

Improve / replace Bender, Ambroz, Time Check (74,000 sq. ft. total)

245,000 square foot Multigenerational Community Life Center at Ellis; existing facilities repurposed

150,000 square foot Community Recreation Center at Noelridge; existing facilities repurposed Neighborhood Facilities at Cherry Hill and Jones

Gymnasium Space

Program Rooms

2

8

5

X

X

10,000 - 12,000 sq. ft.

5,000 - 7,000 sq. ft.

3 lanes x 25 yd

8 lanes x 25 yd

Health and fitness

Active recreation at Seminole Valley X

Option 3: Hybrid

Indoor track

X

New active recreation at Seminole Valley

Option 2: Centralized

Additional Facilities Programming partnerships at schools or neighborhood centers

X X

Features

Option 1: Decentralized

80%

X

30%

6 lanes x 25 yd

Competition pool

50m x 25 yd

Indoor family activity pool

X

X

1 (sub-dividable)

1 (sub-dividable)

1

1

stand-alone feature

in gymnasium

1

1

1

Arts and Crafts

1 (sub-dividable)

2 (sub-dividable)

1 (sub-dividable)

General program rooms and Social and cultural programming rooms

4 (sub-dividable)

6-8

6

1 (sub-dividable) w/ stage

1 (sub-dividable) w/ stage

Creative play w/ indoor playground and childcare

Childcare only

Older adults partner

Leased space

Shared space

Wellness partner

Leased space

Shared space

Community safety partner

Leased space

Leased space

Community early learning partner

Leased space

Central café

Leased space

Party rental room (by pool)

X

50%

Multi-use room and stage with catering kitchen Creative play and child care

1 (sub-dividable)

QUESTIONS • What do you like and dislike about each of the options? • What other advantages and disadvantages do you see to each of the options? • What programs in the options are important to you? • Which features do you believe are important to make the Parks and Recreation System more affordable and sustainable?

Next Steps Open House No. 2 Master Plan System Options Tuesday, August 18, 4-7 p.m. Wednesday, August 19, 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. Crowne Plaza Hotel

August/September City staff and consultants analyze feedback and do further study to produce Draft Master Plan.

Open House No. 3 Draft Master Plan Presentation Tuesday, October 6, 4-7 p.m. Crowne Plaza Hotel

THANK YOU for providing your feedback at this open house.

Comments/Questions? Please provide your feedback on the following topics: • Strategies to reduce costs and increase revenue • The Decentralized System Option • The Centralized System Option • The Hybrid Option • The public participation process • General comments/questions