Parks Open House Boards

WELCOME PURPOSE The purpose of this first open house is to get feedback on the City’s parks and recreation needs, public participation process, and work to date. This Master Plan Process will include information on specific elements of the plan, including: s 0ARKSANDOPENSPACENEEDSFORAGROWINGCOMMUNITY s $EVELOPMENTANDRECREATIONALUSESFORTHEGREENWAYANDRIVERFRONT s 4RAILSANDCONNECTIVITYBETWEENPARKSAND s )NDOORRECREATIONANDTHEGRASSROOTSINITIATIVEFORAMULTI GENERATIONAL community life center.

Tentative Open House Schedule Open House No. 1

Needs, existing facilities, process, work to date. 4UESDAY *UNE  PM Crowne Plaza Hotel

Open House No. 2

Master Plan Facility and Programming Options 4UESDAY !UGUST  PM Location to be determined

Open House No. 3

Master Plan Final Selected Facility and Programming Options 4UESDAY /CTOBER  PM Location to be determined



The Challenge This Parks & Recreation Master Plan Open House Process must address the following questions: s7HATARETHEBESTFUTUREINVESTMENTS to make to address quality of life needs, competition with other Midwestern CITIESANDCOMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT s(OWDOESTHE#ITYOF#EDAR2APIDS meet the community’s parks and recreation indoor and outdoor needs and ensure the system is sustainable and AFFORDABLE NOWANDINTHEFUTURE s(OWDOESTHEOVERALL0ARKSAND Recreation Master Plan impact flood RECOVERYPLANNINGANDREINVESTMENTIN THERIVERCORRIDORAREAS

Master Plan Chronology 2003n2ECREATION$EPARTMENTCREATESITSOWNMASTERPLANOF facilities and programs. 2007 – City Parks and Recreation departments combine to become one united department. 2008 – City begins process of its first Parks and Recreation -ASTER0LAN!CTIVITIESINCLUDINGANINVENTORYOFTHEPARKS SYSTEM NEEDSASSESSMENTANDSTAKEHOLDERINTERVIEWS were completed. June 11-13, 2008n&LOODRESULTSINDAMAGESANDNEEDEDINVESTMENT of at least $3 billion in Cedar Rapids, including some damages TORIVERCORRIDORPARKSANDRECREATIONALFACILITIES August 2008 – Parks Master planning process resumes and a post mOODINVENTORYOCCURS June 23, 2009 – First of three Parks & Recreation Master Plan Open House held.

Other Related Processes: s P.L.A.Y.MULTI GENERATIONALCOMMUNITYCENTERRECREATIONAL facility (2005 to date). s Greenwayn&LOOD-ANAGEMENT3YSTEMn2IVER#ORRIDOR0ROCESS *UNE .OV  s Riverfront Usesn2IVERFRONT-ASTER0LAN0ROCESSn(ALTEDDUE to June 2008 flood. s Neighborhood Planning Processn2EINVESTMENTPLANSFOR mOOD IMPACTEDNEIGHBORHOODS*AN -AY 

What is a Parks & Recreation Master Plan and why do we need it? A Parks and Recreation Master Plan will: s'UIDEDECISIONSABOUTEXISTINGANDNEW PARKSFORTHENEXTlVETOTENYEARS s)DENTIFYPARKIMPROVEMENTANDDEVELOPMENT priorities to ensure a system that meets community needs. s%STABLISHCLEARMAINTENANCEGUIDELINESAND strategies consistent with City capabilities. s-AKERECOMMENDATIONSFORCOSTRECOVERY land acceptance standards and operational efficiencies. s!SSISTINTHEPURSUITOFALTERNATIVEFUNDINGBY demonstrating community need and support. s!LLOWTHESYSTEMTOADAPTTORECENTDEMOGRAPHIC changes (i.e. “boomers entering retirement” needs). s%NSURETHE#ITYSSYSTEMISSUSTAINABLEAND financially feasible into the future.

What is the value of our open space and recreation system? 7ELL DESIGNEDANDMAINTAINEDPARKS open space and recreational opportunities PROVIDEAPOSITIVEIMPACTTO

s4HEHEALTHOFTHECOMMUNITYBY ENCOURAGINGMOREACTIVELIFESTYLES s4HEECONOMICDEVELOPMENTOFTHE#ITY by attracting businesses and retaining current residents. s4HEQUALITYOFLIFETOCURRENTRESIDENTS and future generations. s4HEECOLOGICALHEALTHOFTHECOMMUNITY BYPROVIDINGHABITAT WATERQUALITY ANDPLANTDIVERSITY s4HESAFETYOFTHECOMMUNITYBYREDUCING crime, with a focus on youth crime. s4HEQUALITYOFLIFEFORAGINGPOPULATIONSBY INCREASINGHEALTHANDINDEPENDENTLIVING

Master Plan Project Goals s%NSURINGASYSTEMWHICHTHE#ITYANDITS taxpayers can afford. s-EETINGNEEDSTOATTRACTANDRETAIN residents and the next generation of workers. s%NHANCINGTHEUSEOFOURRIVERFRONTAND ATTRACTINGRESIDENTSTOTHERIVER s%NSURINGINDOORRECREATIONALFACILITY needs are met and are affordable for the community. s!DDRESSINGmOODDAMAGETOTHEPARKSAND recreational system. s0ROVIDINGACOMMUNITY WIDEPERSPECTIVETO the parks and recreation system as priorities are set to meet operational funding constraints. s%NHANCINGCONNECTIVITYOFPARKSANDOPEN space through the trail system.

Overview of Parks and Recreation System The City's existing Parks and Recreation System consists of the following:

Parks and Open Space • There are 3,091 acres of named park areas, excluding golf courses, at 57 sites. An additional 60 parcels of land comprising 268 acres are located throughout the City. • The majority of this acreage is in large parks such as Ellis Park and the Tuma Complex. • There are also many small parks that serve the City's neighborhoods and areas that are natural and undeveloped.

The Riverfront • Approximately 1700 acres. • 48 percent of the City’s open space and natural areas are within FEMA designated flood plains. 80 percent of this property is a natural area, greenway or open land.

Indoor Recreation • 3 functioning indoor facilities – Bender Pool, Ambroz Recreation Center, and Noelridge Greenhouse. • 2 indoor facilities destroyed by the flood – Time Check Recreation Center and the Riverside Roundhouse.

Trails • 24 miles of existing trails.

How does our Parks System compare to similar Midwestern communities? Compared to seven similar Midwestern cities, the Cedar Rapids Parks and Recreation System is:

Cedar Rapids Parks and Recreation System RESOURCE MAP B: SYSTEM LEGEND Boundary - Corporate Recreation Locations

Overall Budget

Cedar Rapids Parks Golf Course Metro Parks

F G

Indoor Recreation Facilities

Recreation Trail Alignments - Post 2008 Flood Conditions Trail Currently In Use

• At the midpoint overall in budget

Trail Currently Not Accessible Other Park Trails & Paths Public School Tuma Memorial Soccer Complex

College or University Railroad

Parks and Open Space § ¦ ¨ 380

Lowe City

• Third highest total park acres

J.W. Gill Huntington Ridge Fox Trail

Butterfield

Fay M. Clark Memorial Park Kainz

Nixon

Gazebo

Ashworth Ct. 18th/Miller

Willowood

Boyson

Dry Creek

• Third highest ratio of total park and open space acres per 1,000 people

Taube

Bowman Woods Lininger

Guthridge Tucker

Donnelly

Willow

Elza

Tower

Hanging Bog Collins Road

Twin Pines Golf Course Rock Island Preserve

Thomas/Legion Hanna

Noelridge

Starry Ascension

• Lowest in total developed park acres

Twin Pines Squaw Creek (City CR) Garnett

Kenwood

Glenbrooke Cove

Unnamed Glass Rd. NE

Faulks Heritage Woods

Unnamed Long Bluff Rd. NE

Shaver

Seminole Valley - Ushers Ferry

Trails

Papoose

Cedar River Trail ROW

Manhattan-Robbins Lake

Ellis Park Golf Course

Mohawk

Mt. Mercy College

McCloud Run

Daniels

Ellis

1s

Central

Shawnee

Cherokee

Fairview

Haskell Cedar Hills

Krebs Reed

Williams Cleveland Veterans Memorial Tennis Center

Coolidge

Bender Pool Viola Gibson

Riverfront East Chandler

Masaryk

Sokol

F G

Lincoln Heights

F G

Ambrose Arrowhead

Hidder

Sinclair

Whittam

F G

Osborn

Riverside Roundhouse Stejskal

Iroquois

Stefan Hayes Field Delaney

Irene Dumpke Cheyenne

Sac & Fox Greenway

Cedar Valley

ail T

ve tA

Stewart Road Property

Van Buren Jones

Cedar Valley Lake Urban Fishery

r

Fo x

1s

Alandale

e nu

Don Murphy Lake

&

30 £ ¤

Monroe

Van Vechten

Riverside 10th Square

Anderson

Glenway Green Square Plaza

Tokhiem

Apache

Jacolyn

Sac & Fox Greenway

Sun Valley

Bever

Wellington

Time Check Riverfront West

Cherry Hill

Quarton

ue

ac

• Second lowest miles of trails

en

Huston

F G

Jackson

t Av

Redmond

Coe College Time Check

Wilderness Estates

Donald Gardner Golf Course

Northview

Tomahawk

Artists Memorial

Cedar Lake

Morgan Creek

Recreation

Grant Wood Trail

Peg Pierce Complex

F G

Pierce

S

Jones Park Golf Course Tait Cummins Sports Complex Prairie Creek

iver Trail

• Second lowest square footage of indoor recreation

Old River Rd.

Cedar R

Beverly

Navajo

Beverly Gardens

30 £ ¤

Lincolnway

• Second highest recreation cost recovery

Kirkwood Community College

Eastern Iowa Airport

0

§ ¦ ¨ 380

*Cities included Sioux Cities, IA; Rockford, IL; Sioux Falls, S.D.; St. Cloud, MN; La Crosse,WI; Lincoln, NE; Grand Rapids, MI; and data based on total quantity per 1,000 residents.

1

¶

2

3

Map Scale In Miles - Primary Frame Map Produced For The City Of Cedar Rapids, Iowa - By The GRASP® Team This Map Is Intended For Planning & Discussion Purposes Only - Please Refer To The Project Document For Map Details Legend Elements May Vary In Size, Color And Transparency From Those Shown On Map GIS Data Sources May Include: The City Of Cedar Rapids, US Census, ESRI, GRASP® Team - January 2008 Copyright© 2009 The City Of Cedar Rapids - Map Revised – January 2009

CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS - IOWA PARKS MASTER PLAN

How Do We Pay? Funding Challenges Public funding is needed to support parks and recreation systems. The primary source of funding in Iowa is the property tax.

Budget Breakdown FY 2010 FY 2010

Transfers In ($ 96,200) Misc. Revenue ($ 53,190) Rents & Royalties ($ 294,619)

Usher’s Ferry ($ 277,638)

Funding Sources FY 2010 FY 2010

Opportunities for park and recreation user fees and charges are limited. Unfortunately, other funding sources that are available in other states are not available in Iowa. These include: • Park Impact Fee (fees to fund new parks to serve new residential development) – is allowed but often challenged by developers. • Park Land Dedication Requirements – need more specific land acquisition criteria to assure dedicated land is appropriate for needed and intended use. • Special Taxing Districts – also rely on property taxes. • Sales Tax – recent passage of a one percent sales tax has limited some of that capacity.

Aquatics ($ 1,351,756) Parks ($ 3,149,477) Recreation ($ 2,790,840)

Parks & Recreation Total = $ 7,569,711

• reducing the amount of maintenance required; and, • increasing fees to support expanded parkland.

CIP Breakdown FY 2010 Usher’s Ferry ($ 0)

Riverfront ($ 0)

• repurposing under utilized parkland;

Property Tax Subsidy ($ 5,265,178) Licenses & Permits ($ 16,000)

• Grant funding – is limited and competitive with a high level of community redevelopment needs.

In future Open Houses, citizens will weigh in on prioritizing the use of funds. Options to help balance budgets include:

Charges For Services ($ 1,844,524)

Aquatics ($ 212,500)

Recreation ($ 28,000) Parks ($ 812,936)

Parks & Recreation Total = $ 7,569,711

What challenges for the Parks System were created by the 2008 Flood? The 2008 Flood had a wide range of impacts to the existing Parks and Recreation system: • Temporarily impacted operationally The Sac and Fox Greenway, for example was impassable during the flood. • Moderately impacted / Needed repair Forty-six of the City's parks and recreation properties were impacted; thirteen of these were in need of repair. One site is 100 percent repaired, the other properties are approximately 40 percent repaired. • Significantly damaged / Candidate for replacement Riverside Park's Roundhouse and the Time Check Recreation Center. • New park space created The City's adopted Flood Management Strategy created 220 acres of new park space (“Greenway”) between the flood protection line and the Cedar River. The Park System, at the same time, fulfilled one of its purposes by helping to offset some of the flood's impact on the community by storing water, absorbing water, and by preventing development in flood-prone areas.

City-Owned Parks Affected by the 2008 Flood

What does the Community think about the existing Parks System? A survey conducted by the Cedar Rapids Park and Recreation

Department in 2008 was mailed to 7,000 households. More than 829 individuals responded (a 12 percent response rate). Some of the findings include:

Highest in Overall Satisfaction (Percentage of respondents to respond '"Excellent")

Most important outdoor facilities to be added, expanded, or improved Trails (Cedar River/Sac & Fox) Picnic shelters/pavilions

1. Park Maintenance (77 percent)

Outdoor swimming pool and aquatic centers

2. Trail Maintenance (77 percent)

Playgrounds

3. Parks and recreation programming (68 percent)

Most important concerns for City to address to increase use of parks and facilities 1. Better condition of parks 2. More trails 3. Greater awareness of programs (increased communication)

Top three priorities for park and facility development 1. Improve existing parks 2. Develop more trails 3. Add an outdoor event facility

Neighborhood walking trails (Cherokee Park/Cherry Hill Park) Splash pads Urban fishing (Mcleod run/Robin's lake)

4%

Dog park (off-leash areas)

5%

Baseball fields

5%

9%

14%

7%

3%

12%

9%

7%

5%

4%

3% 3%

6%

7%

5%

36%

11%

12%

13%

42%

39%

13%

12%

14%

11%

7%

13%

24%

31% 30%

16% 14% 13%

10%

Most important Softball fields Developed park land

3% 4% 3%

2% 3% 4%

0%

10% 8%

Second most important Third most important

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Percent Responding

Parks and Open Space System - Goals and Principles • Provide a high level of service for parks, natural areas, and greenways. • Provide an appropriate distribution and diversity of parks, natural areas, and greenways. • Maintain parks, natural areas, and greenways to meet community expectations. • Provide a system of parks, natural areas, and greenways that include active and passive recreational opportunities within walking distance of all urban residential development. • Provide a park system that is sustainable for future generations.

Developed Parks are manicured open spaces with paved areas, mowed lawns, and active recreation. They support many activities and require a high level of maintenance. Natural Areas require less maintenance and financial investment than developed parks.

Parks and Open Space System - Survey Highlights Top five most important outdoor facilities to be added, expanded, or improved: • Trails (Cedar River/Sac & Fox) • Picnic shelters/pavilions • Outdoor swimming pool and aquatic centers • Playgrounds • Neighborhood walking trails (Cherokee Park/Cherry Hill Park) Parks and recreation values and preferences responses • 82 percent would like a mix of parks that incorporates both native and manicured parks. • 82 percent value having active recreation opportunities in the parks near their home. • 80 percent feel it is important to have a park within walking distance of home.

Parks and Open Space System – Analysis of Level of Services A level of service analysis was completed to determine how various parts of the community are being served by parks and recreation facilities.

PERSPECTIVE A: NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS TO ALL COMPONENTS NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS TO ALL COMPONENTS POST-FLOOD POST-FLOOD LEGEND Tuma Memorial Soccer Complex

Boundary - Corporate Recreation Locations Cedar Rapids Parks Golf Course Metro Parks

F G

Indoor Recreation Facilities Manhattan-Robbins Lake Twin Pines Golf Course

Recreation Trail Alignments - Post 2008 Flood Conditions Trail Currently In Use

Donald Gardner Golf Course

Mt. Mercy College

Trail Currently Not Accessible

Seminole Valley - Ushers Ferry Coe College

Other Park Trails & Paths

Ellis Park Golf Course

Van Vechten

Public School Tuma Memorial Soccer Complex

College or University

Cheyenne

Barriers Limiting Pedestrian Access

Prairie Creek

Beverly

Railroad

1. Cedar Rapid’s parks and recreation facilities (including each component such as playgrounds, shelters, ballfields, etc.) were inventoried and mapped to establish a complete and accurate database of parks and recreation amenities.

GRASP® Perspective - All Values

Sac & Fox Greenway Jones Park Golf Course Cedar Valley Lake Urban Fishery

Kirkwood Community College

Less Access Eastern Iowa Airport

§ ¦ ¨ 380

Lowe

Greater Access

LEGEND

City

No Service

GRASP® Perspective - Target Values Below Target Minimum At or Above Target Minimum No Service

J.W. Gill Huntington Ridge Fox Trail

Butterfield

Fay M. Clark Memorial Park Kainz

Nixon

Taube

Bowman Woods

Willowood

Boyson

Dry Creek Gazebo

Ashworth Ct. 18th/Miller

Lininger

Guthridge Tucker

Donnelly

Willow

Elza

Tower

Hanging Bog Collins Road

Twin Pines Golf Course Rock Island Preserve

Grant Wood Trail

Peg Pierce Complex

F G

Pierce

Thomas/Legion Hanna

Noelridge

Starry Ascension Twin Pines Squaw Creek (City CR) Garnett

Kenwood

2. An area within a 10-minute walk (1/3 mile; 3 - 4 blocks) and 10- minute bike ride (1 mile) of each facility was shaded to show access.

Faulks Heritage Woods

Papoose

Cedar River Trail ROW

Manhattan-Robbins Lake Shaver

Seminole Valley - Ushers Ferry

Ellis Park Golf Course

Mohawk

Mt. Mercy College

McCloud Run

Daniels

Ellis

1s

Central

F G

Jackson Shawnee

Haskell

Krebs Reed

Veterans Memorial Tennis Center

Coolidge

Bender Pool Viola Gibson

Sokol

F G

Lincoln Heights

F G

Ambrose Arrowhead

Hidder

Sinclair

Masaryk

Whittam

F G

Osborn

Riverside Roundhouse Stejskal

Iroquois

Stefan Hayes Field Delaney

Irene Dumpke Cheyenne

Sac & Fox Greenway

Cedar Valley

T

ail

e nu

Stewart Road Property

Van Buren Jones

Cedar Valley Lake Urban Fishery

r

Fo x

ve tA

Don Murphy Lake

&

1s

Alandale

ac

30 £ ¤

Monroe

Van Vechten

Riverside 10th Square

Anderson

Glenway

Riverfront East Chandler

Williams Cleveland

Sac & Fox Greenway

Sun Valley

Bever

Fairview

Green Square Plaza

Tokhiem

Apache

Cedar Hills

Quarton

ue

Wellington

Time Check Riverfront West

Cherokee Jacolyn

en

Huston

Time Check

Wilderness Estates

t Av

Redmond

Coe College Morgan Creek

Donald Gardner Golf Course

Northview

Tomahawk

Artists Memorial

Cedar Lake

Cherry Hill

S

Jones Park Golf Course Tait Cummins Sports Complex Beverly

Old River Rd.

Cedar R

Prairie Creek

iver Trail

3. Areas on the map with darker shading have greater access to parks and recreation facilities – a higher level of service.

Glenbrooke Cove

Unnamed Glass Rd. NE Unnamed Long Bluff Rd. NE

Navajo

Beverly Gardens

30 £ ¤

Lincolnway

4. A target was established of having one park (with four components) and one multi-use trail within walking distance of home.

Kirkwood Community College

Eastern Iowa Airport

0

§ ¦ ¨ 380

1

¶

2

3

Map Scale In Miles - Primary Frame Map Produced For The City Of Cedar Rapids, Iowa - By The GRASP® Team This Map Is Intended For Planning & Discussion Purposes Only - Please Refer To The Project Document For Map Details Legend Elements May Vary In Size, Color And Transparency From Those Shown On Map GIS Data Sources May Include: The City Of Cedar Rapids, US Census, ESRI, GRASP® Team - January 2008 Copyright© 2008 The City Of Cedar Rapids - Map Revised – December 2008

CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS - IOWA PARKS MASTER PLAN

What were the results of the Level of Service Analysis? The level of service was analyzed in two ways: how well neighborhoods are served in general and how walkable the park and recreation system is. The results showed: General Access* • 85 percent of Cedar Rapids has neighborhood access to parks; of that, 62 percent has service that meets or exceeds the target. • The airport and agricultural lands comprise much of the areas that do not have service. Walkable Access** • 57 percent of Cedar Rapids has walkable access to parks; of that, 23 percent is meeting targets. • Overall 34 percent of Cedar Rapids has walkable access to service that is meeting target levels. • There are significant areas that do not have access to parks and recreation within walking distance from home. • Walkable level of service is higher for areas near trails. • There is a lower level of service in growing areas of Cedar Rapids. • Much of the service available to lower density residential areas is being provided by schools. • Some service in the older and denser residential areas is being provided by very small streetscape parks. *10-minute bike ride **10-minute walk

What are residents’ priorities for Parks (in flood-affected areas)? The four-month Neighborhood Planning Process, from January to May of 2009, worked with citizens to develop Area Plans and to begin Action Plans for flood-affected neighborhoods. The information from the Parks and Recreation Master Plan will be incorporated into the Action Plans being carried out in the future.

Manhattan Robbins Lake Park

Shaver Park

I-380

Edgewood Rd

Ellis Harbor

Ellis Park Golf Course

Daniels Park Ellis Park

Feedback regarding Park priorities from the Neighborhood Planning Process included:

Cedar Lake O Ave

Time Check

Shawnee Park

e

TH

10

St

TH

St

Oak Hill Jackson

TH

5

Greene Square Park RD

3

St

Ave

TH

8

5TH Ave

12 TH Av

Cleveland Park

New Bohemia

Veteran’s Memorial Park TH

6 St

Riverside Park

Van Vechten Park

Czech Village

16TH Ave

Hayes Park

0

• A revitalized Time Check Park connected to the Greenway

2,500 ft N

Iroquois Park

C

Murdoch Linwood Cemetery

Bowling St SW

Wilson Ave SW

• A new park on the West side of the Cedar River

St. John’s Cemetery

e

Taylor Area

e

Av

16 TH Av e

ST

1

• An expanded Greene Square Park

Oak Hill Cemetery

St

Apache Park

Feedback on interests for Specific Parks:

Av

3

F Ave

• Pet-friendly areas

e

RD

E Ave

• Outdoor Event Spaces

Av

Time Check Park

8

• More sports fields close to downtown

ST

1

Ellis Blvd

• A range of new open spaces, including mini-parks, neighborhood parks and community parks

Czech National Cemetery

St

Cedar Valley Park

Cedar Valley (Rompot)

Urban Fishery

Parks and Open Space System Challenges • Land within dense urban residential developments may be hard to acquire, if necessary for expanding parkland to meet minimum goals. • Some park components, such as destination playgrounds and outdoor pools cannot be offered within each developed park due to cost of construction and operations. • Parkland located within the floodplain may have restricted uses, excluding fencing and structures. • Balancing the needs for neighborhood parks and development of the Greenway. • Supporting operations to maintain 220 additional acres of green space along the river.

Parks and Open Space System - Questions

• What are your parks and open space needs and what activities are important to you?

• Which parks do you currently use and why?

What is the Cedar Rapids Riverfront and why is it important? The Cedar Rapids Riverfront extends from Seminole Valley – Usher's Ferry to the north, through the City of Cedar Rapids, to Cheyenne Park to the south. Prior to the Flood, the Downtown Vision 2007 for Cedar Rapids recognized the revitalization of the Riverfront as a top priority: • to create a centralized destination for Greater Cedar Rapids • to provide civic places and spaces for gathering on the river; and, • to create continuous public access via trails and connected park spaces.

N

1 inch = 2,000 ft 0

10,000 ft

The Flood Management System - The Greenway Following the 2008 Flood, the City and its citizens mobilized to create a plan for reinvestment and recovery. During the first phase of planning, the River Corridor Redevelopment Process, a flood management strategy was identified to provide greater flood protection for the community.

Ellis Harbor

Cedar Rapids’ new flood management system will include riverwalls, levees and a 220-acre open space between the levees and floodwalls and the river. This new space, called "The Greenway, " will help to absorb flood waters and will become a community recreational area.

I-380

Edgewood Rd

Edgewood

Cedar Lake

O Ave

ST

1

Av

e Av

RD

3

e

TH

10

Ellis Blvd

Time Check

TH

St

8

F Ave

St

E Ave TH

5

Oak Hill Jackson

RD

3

St

St

Ave

TH

5TH Ave

e

New Bohemia

Av

TH

6 St

12 TH Av

e

Taylor Area

8

16TH Ave

16 TH Av e

ST

1

Czech Village

Wilson Ave SW

0

2,500 ft

Bowling St SW

C

St

Cedar Valley (Rompot)

N

Greenway

Floodwall

Bridge Improvement

Levee

Gate or Levee opening

Existing Parks

Important Cross-River connection

Area of non-structural flood control

Restrictions on the Greenway’s Use Within this 220-acre Greenway, 192 properties were deemed eligible for acquisition through the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. Properties acquired through this program carry permanent restrictions on what can be developed. These restrictions are: Allowable Uses: • Open Air Structures

I-380

Edgewood Rd

Ellis Harbor

• Public Restrooms

Cedar Lake

• Camping

O Ave

Time Check

e Av

RD

3

TH

St

St

E Ave

Oak Hill Jackson

TH

5 RD

3

St

St

• Multi-purpose fields

Ave

TH

5TH Ave

New Bohemia

12 TH Av TH

6 St

• Enclosed Structures

e

Av

e

Taylor Area

Uses Not Allowed:

8

16TH Ave

16 TH Av e

ST

1

Czech Village

• Indoor Performance Venue Wilson Ave SW

• Impermeable Surfaces 0

Bowling St SW

C

• Indoor Pavilion • Paved Sports Courts

e

TH

8

F Ave

• Boat ramps, docks, piers for public recreation

Av

10

• Unpaved roads, trails

ST

1

Ellis Blvd

• Agriculture

St

Cedar Valley (Rompot)

2,500 ft N

• Swimming Pools • Paved Streets

Flood-affected Parcels

Greenway

Construction Area

Neighborhood Revitalization

What are residents' priorities for the Riverfront? Feedback specific to the Riverfront from the River Corridor Redevelopment Planning Process (Phase 1) and the Neighborhood Planning Process (Phase 2) included: Ellis Harbor

• Promote multi-seasonal uses

I-380

Edgewood Rd

• Provide activities for a range of age groups and activity levels • Maintain views of the river from the city whenever possible; and,

Cedar Lake

Wetland/ Restored River Edge Prairie Landscape

• Incorporate sustainable infrastructure, green building and solar/ wind power.

O Ave

TH

TH

St

RD

St

e

New Bohemia

Av

16 TH Av e

e

8

12 TH Av TH

6 St

16TH Ave

River Walk

Landscape Types

• Wetland areas

0

2,500 ft N

Bowling St SW

C Wilson Ave SW

• Prairie plantings

Sport Recreation

Czech Village

• Taking advantage of the landfill for views, sledding, skiing, water park

• Public gardens

St

8

3

• Shops, restaurants, and pavilions along the new Greenway

St

5 Ave

Taylor Area

• Spaces for Public Art and Interactive Sculpture

TH

TH

TH

e

Oak Hill Jackson

5

Riverfront Amphitheater

Ave

e

ST

1

c ra er yT Cit

an Urb rk Pa

• Outdoor event space(s)

Av

3

y's Ma nd Isla

E Ave

• River walk

e

10

Sports Fields/ Recreation Prairie Landscape

F Ave

Av

RD

Walk

• Active recreation areas

ST

1

Plaza

River

Activities

Great Lawn/ Sport Recreation

Ellis Blvd

Time Check

St

Cedar Valley (Rompot)

Urban Fishery

Usher's Ferry Historic Village Overview Usher's Ferry Historic Village is an open living history facility featuring exhibit buildings located on ten acres adjacent to Seminole Valley Park. The Village produces a wide variety of workshops, programs and special events that fulfill the mission of interpreting small town Iowa life one hundred years ago. Programming includes tours, a Parlour Theater, school programs, a Folk Festival, a Fairy Tale Festival, a Wild West Weekend and Safe Halloween for Kids. Chronology • 1966 – Following the 1962 flood, the City of Cedar Rapids acquires the Seminole Valley area for flood control and expansion of the City’s well system. • 1975- 2000 – Many historic homes and businesses are relocated to Pioneer Village. With the arrival of the 1855 Henry Usher home in 1984, the Village is renamed Usher's Ferry. • 2008 – The June 2008 flood inundates Usher's Ferry with 34 of its 36 buildings taking on anywhere from 1 foot to 15 feet of water. Six structures are destroyed and 2,000 of 7,000 objects in the collection are lost or destroyed. • October 2008- May 2009 – More than 10,000 hours of volunteer labor assist in recovery efforts. Over $40,000 in grants and donations are received. Friends of Usher's Ferry receives 501C3 non-profit status in May 2009 to assist in fund raising and development.

Flooding Impact at Usher's Ferry • 34 of 36 historic homes and businesses flooded. • Six structures destroyed: Log House, Tinker Shop, Livery Stable, Blacksmiths Shed, Scale Shed, Section Hand Shed. • Approximately 2,000 of 7,000 objects in the collection lost or destroyed. • More than 10,000 hours of volunteer labor for flood recovery since October 2008. • Over $40,000 in grants and donations received to assist with recovery. • Volunteers have come from Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, Missouri, and many other states to help with recovery.

Usher's Ferry Historic Village Museum Assessment In July of 2008, Usher's Ferry Historic Village was informed of approval for its participation in the Museum Assessment program through a grant. This is a partnership program of the American Association of Museums and the Institute for Museum and Library Services. A committee of Usher's Ferry staff, volunteers and visitors has been meeting monthly for the last year to complete the self-study portion of the assessment. The committee has examined every aspect of the site’s operation including its mission statement, governance, finances, interpretation theory and visitor experience. Items discussed to date include: Challenges: • Indoor programming space needed The village needs indoor space for special events, programs and revenue-generating rentals. • Protection from future flooding Increased flood protection including the possibility of raising or moving buildings is needed. • Sustainability Alternative funding sources must be explored to increase revenue and decrease subsidy levels for future sustainability of the Village.

• Indoor Space – A need for increased indoor space for special events, programs and revenue generating rentals. • Flood Protection – A need for increased flood protection for the Village, including the possibility of raising or moving some Village buildings as a flood protection measure. • Building Removal – The need for the removal of several Village buildings that cannot reasonably be restored or protected from future flooding. • Decrease Taxpayer Funding – The need to continue to decrease taxpayer funding by increasing revenue generation, visitation, grant funding, and corporate and individual contributions. • Partnerships – The opportunity to create and grow partnerships with area museums, businesses, and schools for events, funding, and educational programming.

What are some potential ways of programming and recreating on the River? Community feedback during previous planning efforts has consistently indicated a desire for more active use of the Cedar River. Focus for the future could include expansion, improvement or development of opportunities such as: Boating Boating within Cedar Rapids is limited to the pool upstream of the 5-in-1 Dam, with access only possible at Ellis Harbor and at Mohawk Park. A 2008 Survey of Ellis Harbor stakeholders found support for attracting a wider public to the riverfront. Fishing Dedicated fishing sites on the river are generally limited to upstream of the Dam and Cedar Lake. The Urban Fisheries project to the south is underway and will provide further opportunities. River Access Most of the walkways are significantly higher than the normal river elevation, allowing few opportunities for physical access to the river. Water Events Water-based events and spectacles are currently limited. These include water skiing shows and occasional boating events during larger City events like the Freedom festival.

Riverfront Questions

• What’s important to you regarding the future use of the riverfront?

• Which waterfront uses are important to you in the future Greenway being created as part of the flood protection system?

Indoor Recreational Deficiencies Current indoor space is very limited in scope and availability. The City’s Indoor recreation centers are very limited functionally, are aging, and are challenging to maintain. There is a desire to expand recreational program offerings, but the lack of adequate indoor recreation spaces limits programming opportunities. In the development of the current Parks and Recreation Master Plan, it was discovered that several studies and community engagement processes identified the need for and grassroots support for indoor recreation facilities. These include: • City’s Comprehensive Plan (1999): Plan for development of indoor multi-purpose facility to serve the entire community. • Healthy Linn County Initiative: Activity center is a worthwhile strategy to address the issue of healthy community. • 2003 Citizen Survey: Indoor recreation center is the second most important action to improve or expand facilities. • 2003 Recreation Master Plan: Indoor program space is deficient. • Fifteen in 5 Community Planning Process (2005): Identified as one of fifteen community initiatives. • P.L.A.Y. Feasibility Study: Indoor facilities are lacking for programming aquatics and recreation. Opportunities exist for collaboration to replace existing facilities.

How Do Other Cities Fill Recreation Needs? Citywide/Regional Service: • Regional indoor recreation facility offering key components of aquatics, fitness, gyms, and multi-purpose space. - Allows for types of amenities that would be very expensive to operate in more than one location, yet provides maximum opportunity to generate revenue to offset operating costs. - Does not provide local service.

Central Park Monon Community Recreation Center Carmel, Indiana

• Neighborhood Centers - Smaller recreation centers that fill a neighborhood need.

Centre of Elgin Main Entry Elgin, Illinois

- Allow for service to neighborhood and immediate youth; does not meet City indoor space deficiency; lower revenue generation. Community Service: Offering programs within communities at gyms and multipurpose rooms in schools and other public facilities, such as police sub-stations. • Allows for local service in general activity spaces.

Center of Elgin Lap Pool

• Is limited to available space and time in existing facilities.

Elgin, Illinois

• Does not provide types of amenities identified as most desired by residents (such as fitness and aquatics). Combination: Provides opportunities for desired specialized amenities supplemented by local service for more general amenities.

Central Park Monon Community Recreation Center Carmel, Indiana

Current Indoor Recreation Facilities The Parks and Recreation Department manages the following indoor recreation facilities: • Ambroz Recreation Center, a former school building that is over 100 years old and is inefficient to operate. It has seven levels and is not ADA accessible. • Bender Pool, an indoor pool that is 40 years old and has reached its life expectancy. Other indoor facilities that were lost due to the 2008 flood include:

Ambroz Recreation Center

• Time Check Recreation Center, a neighborhood recreation center. • The Riverside Roundhouse. The Department cooperates with other organizations to provide programming at schools, churches and parks.

Bender Pool

Indoor Recreation Challenges • Current indoor recreation facilities do not meet the needs of our residents. • Compared to seven similar Midwestern cities, Cedar Rapids has second lowest recreation center square footage per 1,000 persons. • The ability to program recreation activities, and raise fee-based revenues in the City is very limited due to the lack of space and resources. • Most program space is antiquated and not large enough to have various programs occurring. • From athletics to cultural arts to youth activities, most indoor program areas are not conducive for recreation trends or for people with disabilities. • Current facilities lack a community gathering place. • Cedar Rapids is lacking in recreational amenities which attract and retain young professionals in the workforce and community. • Due to a lack of indoor activities for families during the winter, citizens travel to other cities to fulfill these needs. • Lack of space for older adults to walk or workout. *Cities included Sioux Cities, IA; Rockford, IL; Sioux Falls, S.D.; St. Cloud, MN; La Crosse,WI; Lincoln, NE; Grand Rapids, MI

?

IM

S AGE

What is P.L.A.Y.? What is a Multi-generational Community Life Center? P.L.A.Y. (Planning Lifelong Activities for You) is a volunteer group that was formed as a result of the Fifteen in 5 initiative for a community center. A Multi-generational Community Life Center is the name of the project. The project is not just a recreation center. While it could include gyms and an indoor aquatic center, it would also serve as a gathering space and community service center for individuals of all ages.

What has been done to date? • Initiated by interested citizens that supported the 15 in 5 initiative, funding was secured for a feasibility study. • Consultants interviewed and hired. • Stakeholder interviews held. • Community wide survey conducted. • Open house for public participation held. • Potential site identified and conceptional designs created for potential funding opportunities in March 2009.

P.L.A.Y. Survey Results The City of Cedar Rapids, Linn County, and the P.L.A.Y. feasibility study process included a Community Attitude and Interest Survey. Surveys were mailed to a random sampling of 3,000 residents throughout Cedar Rapids and Linn County in April of 2008. The results have a 95 percent level of confidence with a precision of at least +/- 3.9 percent. Results showed: • 48 percent of respondents currently use indoor recreation space and aquatic facilities. Of those, 60 percent said current facilities are not fully meeting their needs. • Respondents feel it is very important for the new center to serve the needs of a wide range of groups and ages. • Youth would most use an indoor aquatics/swimming center, indoor playground, and indoor turf fields. • Adults would most use an indoor running/walking track, weight room/cardiovascular equipment area, and indoor aquatics/ swimming center. • The main aquatic purposes respondents would use in a new center include recreational swimming and fitness and exercise.

P.L.A.Y. Programming Potential The P.L.A.Y. Group is examining a wide range of potential programming options for the Multi-generational Community Life Center. These include: • Meals for Seniors and recreational program area (replace Witwer Senior Center) • Athletic gymnasiums • Walking/Running track • Health and fitness area • Field House with multi-use competitive fields • Multi-purpose rooms for arts, crafts and vocational programs • Aquatics zero depth entry leisure pool with slide and active water features • Therapy pool • Hot tub/sauna/whirlpool/Jacuzzi • 25-yard and 50-meter lap pool • Early Childhood Programs Have we missed anything to meet the community’s needs?

Multi-generational Community Life Center Criteria Various options will be considered at the next open houses. These include facility programming, location and sustainability. The following criteria will be used to evaluate options.

Programming Criteria • Does it fill existing gaps in the parks and recreation system? • Does it complement other recreation services and minimize duplication of services? • Is it accessible to all individuals? • Does it provide opportunities for collaboration? • Is it sustainable as an individual service? • How sustainable and financially feasible is the service when bundled with an overall programming package?

Site Selection Evaluation Criteria • Is it compatible with community plans? • Is it easily accessible by all areas of the city? • Is it easily accessible by existing transportation routes? • Does it have access by trails? • Can it accommodate a facility 200,00+ square feet? • Does it have existing utility services? • Is it publicly owned or require land acquisition? • Is it outside the 500 year flood plain?

Are there Partnership Opportunities for a Multi-generational Community Life Center? A number of organizations in the community have expressed interest in the Multi-generational Community Life Center concept. Partners could provide a financial commitment toward the facility or lease space from the managing organization. • Witwer Senior Center • Community Early Learning Institute (CELI) • Hospital/Wellness/Physical Therapy/Nutrition • Shared use with service clubs and non-profit organizations • Community services area with public safety offices • Branch library • Café

Indoor Recreation Questions • What are your needs from indoor recreational facilities?

• What’s important to you regarding indoor recreational options to be developed?

Goals and Principles for the Trail System • Provide a trail system that links to other parks, natural areas, and greenways and increases the overall walkability of the park system. • Provide a system of trails that includes active and passive recreational opportunities with neighborhood and/or a community access to all urban residential development. (An example of an active component is a hard surface, multi-use trail. An example of a passive component is a small area with a seating bench.) • Create trails that serve as an alternative mode of transportation for commuters. • Provide a trail system that creates connections between neighborhoods, public amenities, and quadrants of the City while creating opportunities for users to create loop within the system.

Trails – Analysis of Level of Services A level of service analysis was completed to determine how various parts of the community are being served by trails.

PERSPECTIVE D: ACCESS NEIGHBORHOOD TO TRAILS - POST-FLOOD NEIGHBORHOOD TO TRAILS -ACCESS POST-FLOOD LEGEND Tuma Memorial Soccer Complex

Boundary - Corporate Recreation Locations

1. Cedar Rapids’ trails were plotted on a city map.

Cedar Rapids Parks Golf Course Metro Parks

F G

Indoor Recreation Facilities Manhattan-Robbins Lake Twin Pines Golf Course

Recreation Trail Alignments - Post 2008 Flood Conditions

2. An area within a 10-minute walk (1/3 mile) of each trail was shaded.

Trail Currently In Use

Donald Gardner Golf Course

Mt. Mercy College

Trail Currently Not Accessible

Seminole Valley - Ushers Ferry Coe College

Other Park Trails & Paths

Ellis Park Golf Course

Van Vechten

Public School Tuma Memorial Soccer Complex

College or University

Cheyenne

Barriers Limiting Pedestrian Access

Prairie Creek

Beverly

Railroad GRASP® Perspective - All Values

Sac & Fox Greenway Jones Park Golf Course Cedar Valley Lake Urban Fishery

Kirkwood Community College

Less Access

3. Areas on the map with darker shading have greater access to trails – a higher level of service.

Eastern Iowa Airport

§ ¦ ¨ 380

Lowe

Greater Access

LEGEND

City

No Service

GRASP® Perspective - Target Values Below Target Minimum At or Above Target Minimum No Service

J.W. Gill Huntington Ridge Fox Trail

Butterfield

Fay M. Clark Memorial Park Kainz

4. A target was established of having one multi-use trail within walking distance of home.

Nixon

Taube

Bowman Woods

Willowood

Boyson

Dry Creek Gazebo

Ashworth Ct. 18th/Miller

Lininger

Guthridge Tucker

Donnelly

Willow

Elza

Tower

Hanging Bog Collins Road

Twin Pines Golf Course Rock Island Preserve

Grant Wood Trail

Peg Pierce Complex

F G

Pierce

Thomas/Legion Hanna

Noelridge

Starry Ascension Twin Pines Squaw Creek (City CR) Garnett

Kenwood

Results

Faulks Heritage Woods

Shaver

Ellis Park Golf Course

Mohawk

Mt. Mercy College

McCloud Run

Daniels

Ellis

1s

Central

F G

Jackson Shawnee

Haskell Cedar Hills

Green Square Bender Pool Viola Gibson

Riverfront East Chandler

Krebs Reed

Williams Cleveland Veterans Memorial Tennis Center

Sokol

F G

Lincoln Heights

F G

Ambrose Arrowhead

Hidder

Sinclair

Masaryk

Whittam

F G

Osborn

Riverside Roundhouse Stejskal

Iroquois

Stefan Hayes Field Delaney

Alandale

e

Irene Dumpke Cheyenne

Sac & Fox Greenway

ail

nu

T

ve tA

Stewart Road Property

Van Buren Jones

Cedar Valley Lake Urban Fishery

r

Fo x

1s

Cedar Valley

Don Murphy Lake

&

30 £ ¤

Monroe

Van Vechten

Riverside 10th Square

Anderson

Glenway Plaza

Tokhiem

Apache

Jacolyn

Coolidge

Sac & Fox Greenway

Sun Valley

Bever

Fairview Wellington

Time Check Riverfront West

Cherokee

Cherry Hill

t Av

Quarton

ue

Huston

Time Check

Wilderness Estates

en

Redmond

Coe College Morgan Creek

Donald Gardner Golf Course

Northview

Tomahawk

Artists Memorial

Cedar Lake

ac

• Cedar Rapids takes advantage of its Greenways and river corridors to provide residents with two extensive trails that follow the Cedar River and the Sac and Fox Greenway.

Papoose

Cedar River Trail ROW

Seminole Valley - Ushers Ferry

S

Jones Park Golf Course Tait Cummins Sports Complex Beverly

Old River Rd.

Cedar R

Prairie Creek

iver Trail

• 47 percent of Cedar Rapids has some neighborhood access to trails. Of that, 26 percent is meeting the taarget of the equivalent of one multi-use trail within a walking distance from home.

Glenbrooke Cove

Unnamed Glass Rd. NE Unnamed Long Bluff Rd. NE

Manhattan-Robbins Lake

Navajo

Beverly Gardens

30 £ ¤

Lincolnway

• Citywide, 12.5 percent of Cedar Rapids has access to trails that meet the target – a 10-minute walk from home.

Kirkwood Community College

Eastern Iowa Airport

0

§ ¦ ¨ 380

• There are significant areas that do not have access to neighborhood trails. Trails ranked high in the city survey as an amenity residents would to have improved.

1

¶

2

3

Map Scale In Miles - Primary Frame Map Produced For The City Of Cedar Rapids, Iowa - By The GRASP® Team This Map Is Intended For Planning & Discussion Purposes Only - Please Refer To The Project Document For Map Details Legend Elements May Vary In Size, Color And Transparency From Those Shown On Map GIS Data Sources May Include: The City Of Cedar Rapids, US Census, ESRI, GRASP® Team - January 2008 Copyright© 2008 The City Of Cedar Rapids - Map Revised – December 2008

CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS - IOWA PARKS MASTER PLAN

Trail Survey Highlights • Trails rated as the most important outdoor facility to be expanded or improved. • Regional trails like the Cedar River Trail rated higher than neighborhood park walking trails.

Most Important outdoor facilities to be added, expanded, or improved Trails (Cedar River/Sac & Fox) Picnic shelters/pavilions

Playgrounds Neighborhood walking trails (Cherokee Park/Cherry Hill Park) Splash pads Urban fishing (Mcleod run/Robin's lake)

4%

Dog park (off-leash areas)

5%

Baseball fields

5%

9%

14%

7%

3%

12%

9%

11%

7%

5%

4%

3% 3%

6%

7%

5%

36%

11%

12%

13%

42%

39%

13%

12%

14%

Outdoor swimming pool and aquatic centers

7%

13%

24%

31% 30%

16% 14% 13%

10%

Most important Softball fields Developed park land

3% 4% 3%

2% 3% 4%

0%

10% 8%

Second most important Third most important

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Percent Responding

What are residents’ priorities regarding the trail system? Improvements to the trail system were among the residents’ top priorities in the Neighborhood Planning Process. Feedback included: Ellis Harbor

I-380

Edgewood Rd

• Develop pedestrian and bike trail systems along the Greenway to bike lanes and sharrows (shared auto and bike lanes) downtown and in the neighborhoods

Cedar Lake

• Promote compact and walkable pedestrian environments downtown that foster interaction and health

O Ave

ST

1

e Av

RD

e

TH

10 TH

St

8

F Ave

St

• Introduce a Trail Loop around the City core to connect neighborhoods and community resources

Av

3

Ellis Blvd

Time Check

E Ave TH

5

Oak Hill Jackson

RD

3

St

St

Ave

TH

TH

5 Ave

e

New Bohemia

Av

Av

TH

16 Ave

e

TH

12 TH

6 St

• Encourage non-vehicular modes of connection

8

e

Taylor Area

16 TH Av

ST

1

Czech Village

• Convert the 4th Street rail to a pedestrian corridor

0

St

Bowling St SW

C Wilson Ave SW

2,500 ft N

Existing Trails

Existing Bike-friendly Streets

Proposed Trail Connections

Cedar Valley (Rompot)

Trail System Challenges • Acquiring land and or permission for the creation of new trail links where gaps in service exist. • Enhancement of existing, or creation of new recreational trail connections between parks. • Additional maintenance required by development of new trails. • Prioritization of new trail development as well as trail linkages. • Development and implementation of a consistent funding and management strategy for land acquisition, design, construction, and maintenance of the trail system. • Complexity of coordination: Linn County Trails Association plans and funds trails, Public Works builds trails, and Parks and Recreation maintains trails.

Trail System Questions • What are your needs from the trail system?

• How often do you use the trail system and how do you use it?

Parks & Recreation Master Plan Evaluation Criteria All four major elements of the Parks & Recreation Master Plan – parks and OPENSPACE TRAILS RIVERFRONT ANDINDOORRECREATIONnMUSTWORKTOGETHERAS ANENTIRESYSTEM4HEFOLLOWINGQUESTIONSWILLHELPTOGUIDEEVALUATIONOFTHE competing needs and priorities.

Prioritization Criteria s )SITALIGNEDWITH#ITYOF#EDAR2APIDSAND0ARKSAND2ECREATION$EPARTMENT VISION MISSIONANDVALUES)SITCONSISTENTWITHCOMMUNITYVALUES s $OESITADDRESSADEMONSTRATEDCOMMUNITYNEEDORDESIRE EGDEMONSTRATEDBYCOMMUNITYSURVEY PASTPLANSSTUDIES ETC  s )SITACORESERVICEANDORFACILITYTHATWOULDNOTEXISTWITHOUTCITYSUPPORT EGPARKS TRAILS ETC  s )SITREQUIREDEGmOODMITIGATION !$!  s $OESITCONTRIBUTETOTHEQUALITYOFLIFEOFTHECOMMUNITY s )STHEREABROADCOMMUNITYBENElTEGINCREASEHEALTHANDWELLNESS PROTECTNATURALRESOURCES ETC  s )STHEREAPOSITIVEECONOMICIMPACTEGRETAININGANDATTRACTINGRESIDENTS GENERATINGREVENUE INCREASINGHOMEVALUES ETC  s )STHEREAPOSITIVEENVIRONMENTALBENElTEGENERGYSAVINGS INCREASE ENVIRONMENTALAWARENESS MODELPROJECT  s)SITlNANCIALLYFEASIBLE s )STHERECOMMUNITYSUPPORTTHROUGHWILLINGNESSTOPAYUSINGTAXDOLLARS ANDORUSERFEES s $OESITMAXIMIZEOPERATIONALEFlCIENCIES

Next Steps June/July City staff and consultants analyze feedback ANDDOFURTHERSTUDY ANDUSEITTODEVELOP MASTERPLANOPTIONSINCLUDINGRIVERFRONTUSES INDOORRECREATIONALFACILITYPROGRAMMING parks and open space, and trails.

August 18 Open House No. 2 – Master Plan Facility and Programming Options, 4HURSDAY !UGUST  PM Location to be determined.

August/September City staff and consultants analyze feedback and do further study, to identify final selected facility and programming options.

October 6 Open House No. 3 – Master Plan Final Selected Facility and Programming Options, 4UESDAY /CTOBER  PM Location to be determined.

THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING YOUR FEEDBACK at this first open house.

Comments/Questions? 0LEASEPROVIDEYOUR COMMENTSQUESTIONSONTHESHEETCARDS PROVIDED ONTOPICSINCLUDING

s#ITY0ARKS2ECREATION.EEDS s/PEN(OUSE0ROCESS s0ARKS/PEN3PACE s2IVERFRONT5SES s)NDOOR2ECREATION s4RAILS s-ASTER0LAN%VALUATION#RITERIA s'ENERAL#OMMENTS1UESTIONS

Outcomes for the Parks & Recreation Master Plan Open House Process This process will help the City develop a Parks & Recreation Master Plan to: s-AKETHEBESTFUTUREINVESTMENTSTOENSURETHEQUALITYOF LIFENEEDSOFTHECOMMUNITYAREMETAND#EDAR2APIDSCAN COMPETEWITHOTHER-IDWESTERNCOMMUNITIES s%NSUREWEHAVEASYSTEMTHATISSUSTAINABLEANDAFFORDABLETO THE#ITYANDITSTAXPAYERS BOTHNOWANDINTHEFUTURE s-EETTHENEEDSOFOURKIDSANDGRANDKIDSANDTHENEXT GENERATIONOFWORKERS s%NHANCETHEUSEOFOURRIVERFRONTANDATTRACTRESIDENTSTO THERIVER s%NSUREINDOORRECREATIONALFACILITYNEEDSAREMETANDARE AFFORDABLEFORTHECOMMUNITY s!DDRESSmOODDAMAGETOTHEPARKSANDRECREATIONALSYSTEM s0ROVIDEACOMMUNITY WIDEPERSPECTIVETOTHEPARKSAND RECREATIONSYSTEMASPRIORITIESARESETTOMEETOPERATIONAL FUNDINGCONSTRAINTS s%NHANCECONNECTIVITYOFPARKSANDOPENSPACETHROUGHTHE TRAILSYSTEM s%NSUREITISAPLANTHATISCONSISTENTWITHCOMMUNITYGOALS ANDINTERESTS

Outcomes for Parks & Recreation Master Plan Open House No. 1 Establish the public’s feedback on: s THE#ITYSPARKSANDRECREATIONNEEDS s MASTERPLANEVALUATIONCRITERIA s PUBLICPARTICIPATIONPROCESSAND sWORKTODATE This open house and the entire Master Plan Process will seek general feedback as well as input on specific elements of the plan, including: s 0ARKSANDOPENSPACENEEDSFORAGROWINGCOMMUNITY s $EVELOPMENTANDRECREATIONALUSESFORTHEGREENWAY ANDRIVERFRONT s 4RAILSANDCONNECTIVITYBETWEENPARKSAND s )NDOORRECREATIONANDTHEGRASSROOTSINITIATIVEFOR AMULTI GENERATIONALCOMMUNITYLIFECENTER 4HISFEEDBACKWILLBECRITICALINDEVELOPINGOPTIONSFOR /PEN(OUSE.OANDIDENTIFYINGSELECTEDOPTIONSFOR /PEN(OUSE.O ANDULTIMATELYINDEVELOPINGAMASTER PLANWITHTHEBESTFUTUREINVESTMENTSFORTHECOMMUNITY