Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-01-28 Correspondence~.r®~i~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~_ City Council Meeting Schedule and CITY OF IOWA CITY Work Session Agendas January 27, 2009 www.icgov.org Revised • WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p City Conference Board -Separate Agenda Posted Dinner provided Special Work Session Senate File 44 -Sales Tax General Budget Discussion Boards/Commissions/Community Events Presentations • THURSDAY, JANUARY 29 Emma J. Harvat Hall 4:30p Special Work Session Dinner provided Boards/Commissions/Community Events (continued) General Budget Discussion TENTATIVE MEETING SCHEDULE SUBJECT TO CHANGE • MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Council Work Session • TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOP Special Formal Council Meeting • MONDAY, FEBRUARY 16 Emma J. Harvat Hall President's Day Holiday -City Offices Closed • MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p City Conference Board -Separate Agenda Posted Special Council Work Session • TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOp Special Formal Council Meeting • TUESDAY, MARCH 10 Emma J. Harvat Hall TBA Special Council Work Session Special Formal Council Meeting Continue Special Work Session if necessary • MONDAY, MARCH 23 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Special Council Work Session • TUESDAY, MARCH 24 Emma J. Harvat Hall 7:OOP Special Formal Council Meeting • MONDAY, APRIL 6 Emma J. Harvat Hall 6:30p Council Work Session ~~ r ~ ~w~~~ -•~.a.~ CITY OF IOWA CITY January 27, 2009 410 East Washington Street Iowa Cily. Iowa 52240-1826 (319) 356-5000 (319) 356-5009 FAX www.icgov.org To: Iowa City City Council Fr: Michael Lombardo, City Manager Re: SF 44 -Local Option Sales Tax Changes On Friday, Mayor Bailey, Councilmember Hayek and I met with our area Legislators and with representatives from the cities of Coralville and North Liberty to discuss the above referenced Bill that is fast-tracking through the various State committees. By all appearances it is likely that some iteration of the bill will be passed and given speed with which the proposed legislation is moving thought it would be prudent to discuss the implications of these changes with Council at our Wednesday work session. A copy of the draft bill is enclosed. In its present form, SF 44 would: • accelerate the timeline to allow for a March or May 2009 vote for disaster-effected cities; • change current legislation by allowing individual cities to adopt a Local Option Sales Tax. Additionally, the City of Coralville has expressed an interest in pursuing a local option sales tax to fund flood recovery and mitigation efforts; the current path to a ballot initiative requires Iowa City support (as the largest jurisdiction in terms of population.) My understanding is that the Coralville City Council will be taking up the matter this evening and that we can anticipate a letter requesting Iowa City support for a ballot initiative at a special election sometime early this year. Given the extent of flood damage and resulting price tag of recovery and mitigation projects such as elevating Dubuque Street 8~ Park Road Bridge, consolidating the North & South Wastewater Treatment Plants, and potential flood recovery and mitigation efforts throughout the city in areas such as the Parkview Terrace, Idyllwild/Taft Speedway, and South Gilbert Street neighborhoods, Council may also wish to discuss the local option sales tax as a possible funding source to facilitate recovery where broader state and federal support will in all likelihood fall short. Bill/Amendments for SF 44 Senate File 44 - Introduced SENATE FILE BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS (SUCCESSOR TO SF 31) (SUCCESSOR TO SSB 1065) Passed Senate, Date Vote: Ayes Nays Approved Passed House, Date Vote: Ayes Nays A BILL FOR 1 An Act relating to the imposition of a local option sales tax 2 after a disaster and providing an effective date. 3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF IOWA: 4 TLSB 1746SZ 83 5 tm/sc/5 PAG LIN 1 1 Section 1. A city or unincorporated area located in a 1 2 county in which the president of the United States declared a 1 3 disaster to exist at any time during 2008 may impose a local 1 4 option sales tax pursuant to chapter 423B using the procedure 1 5 provided in this section. A city or unincorporated area where 1 6 a local option sales tax is imposed pursuant to chapter 423B 1 7 on the effective date of this Act is prohibited from using 1 8 this section. The provisions of chapter 423B shall apply to 1 9 the imposition of a local option sales tax pursuant to this 1 10 section with the following exceptions: 1 11 1. Notwithstanding section 423B.1, subsection 3, 1 12 subsection 6, paragraph "a", and subsection 9, and section 1 13 423B.5, unnumbered paragraph 1, cities contiguous to each 1 14 other shall not be treated as part of one incorporated area 1 15 for purposes of the election on, imposition of, and repeal of 1 16 a local option sales and services tax. For purposes of this 1 17 Act, a local option sales and services tax shall be imposed in 1 18 a city only if a majority of the votes cast in the city on the 1 19 proposition favors the imposition of the tax, and a local 1 20 option sales and services tax shall be imposed in an 1 21 unincorporated area of a county only if a majority of the 1 22 votes cast in the unincorporated area on the proposition 1 23 favors the imposition of the tax. 1 24 2. a. For purposes of section 423B.1, subsection 4, a 1 25 motion by the governing body of a city or county requesting 1 26 that the question of imposition of a local sales and services 1 27 tax be submitted to the registered voters must be received by 1 28 the county commissioner of elections by 5:00 p.m. on February 1 29 3, 2009, or by 5:00 p.m. on March 10, 2009. If the fifty 1 30 percent threshold required in section 423B.1, subsection 4, Page 1 of 3 http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=AmendPri... 1 /27/2009 Bill/Amendments for SF 44 1 31 paragraph "b", is met in a county by the February 3, 2009, 1 32 deadline, then by February 8, 2009, or as soon as practicable, 1 33 the county commissioner of elections shall publish notice of 1 34 the ballot proposition concerning the imposition of the local 1 35 sales and services tax. If the fifty percent threshold 2 1 required in section 4238.1, subsection 4, paragraph "b", is 2 2 met in a county by the March 10, 2009, deadline, then by March 2 3 15, 2009, or as soon as practicable, the county commissioner 2 4 of elections shall publish notice of the ballot proposition 2 5 concerning the imposition of the local sales and services tax. 2 6 b. The petition method described in section 4238.1, 2 7 subsection 4, paragraph "a", for requesting the submission of 2 8 the question of the imposition of a local option sales and 2 9 services tax to the registered voters shall not apply under 2 10 this Act. 2 11 3. Notwithstanding section 4238.1, subsection 5, and 2 12 pursuant to section 39.2, subsection 4, the question of the 2 13 imposition of a local option sales and services tax shall be 2 14 submitted at an election held on March 3, 2009, if the 2 15 February 3, 2009, deadline provided in subsection 2 of this 2 16 section is met, and on May 5, 2009, if the March 10, 2009, 2 17 deadline provided in subsection 2 of this section is met. 2 18 4. Notwithstanding section 4238.1, subsection 5, and 2 19 section 4238.6, subsection 1, paragraph "a", the imposition 2 20 date for a local option sales and services tax approved at an 2 21 election held pursuant to this Act, on March 3, 2009, shall be 2 22 April 1, 2009, and the imposition date for a local option 2 23 sales and services tax approved at an election held pursuant 2 24 to this Act, on May 5, 2009, shall be July 1, 2009. 2 25 5. Notwithstanding section 4238.7, subsection 4, for a 2 26 local option sales and services tax imposed pursuant to this 2 27 Act, the three=year period referenced in section 4238.7, 2 28 subsection 4, shall be the three=year period beginning July 1, 2 29 2004, and ending June 30, 2007. This subsection shall not 2 30 apply to a city or the unincorporated area of a county that is 2 31 imposing a local option sales and services tax on the 2 32 effective date of this Act. 2 33 Sec. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Act, being deemed of 2 34 immediate importance, takes effect upon enactment. 2 35 EXPLANATION 3 1 This bill allows a city or unincorporated area located in a 3 2 county in which the president of the United States declared a 3 3 disaster to exist at any time during 2008 to impose a local 3 4 option sales and services tax pursuant to Code chapter 4238 3 5 using an expedited procedure. A city or unincorporated area 3 6 where a local option sales and services tax is already imposed 3 7 pursuant to Code chapter 4238 on the effective date of the 3 8 bill is prohibited from using the provisions in this bill. 3 9 The provisions of Code chapter 4238 apply to the imposition of 3 10 a local option sales and services tax under the expedited 3 11 process with the following exceptions: 3 12 1. The bill provides that cities and counties contiguous 3 13 to each other shall not be treated as part of one incorporated 3 14 area for purposes of the election on, imposition of, and 3 15 repeal of a local option sales and services tax. The bill 3 16 provides that a local option sales and services tax shall be 3 17 imposed in a city only if a majority of the votes cast in the 3 18 city on the proposition favors the imposition of the tax, and 3 19 a local option sales and services tax shall be imposed in an 3 20 unincorporated area of a county only if a majority of the http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=AmendPri Page 2 of 3 1/27/2009 Bill/Amendments for SF 44 3 21 votes cast in the unincorporated area on the proposition 3 22 favors the imposition of the tax. 3 23 2. The bill provides that a motion by the governing body 3 24 of a city or county requesting that the question of imposition 3 25 of a local option sales and services tax be submitted to the 3 26 registered voters must be received by the county commissioner 3 27 of elections by February 3, 2009, or by March 10, 2009. If 3 28 the 50 percent threshold required in Code section 423B.1, 3 29 subsection 4, paragraph "b", is met in a county by the 3 30 February 3, 2009, deadline, then by February 8, 2009, or as 3 31 soon as practicable, the county commissioner of elections 3 32 shall publish notice of the ballot proposition concerning the 3 33 imposition of the local option sales and services tax. If the 3 34 50 percent threshold required in Code section 423B.1, 3 35 subsection 4, paragraph "b", is met in a county by the March 4 1 10, 2009, deadline, then by March 15, 2009, or as soon as 4 2 practicable, the county commissioner of elections shall 4 3 publish notice of the ballot proposition concerning the 4 4 imposition of the local option sales and services tax. 4 5 3. The bill provides that the question of the imposition 4 6 of a local option sales and services tax shall be submitted at 4 7 an election held on March 3, 2009, if the February 3, 2009, 4 8 deadline is met, and on May 5, 2009, if the March 10, 2009, 4 9 deadline is met. 4 10 4. The bill provides that the imposition date for a local 4 11 option sales and services tax approved at an election held on 4 12 March 3, 2009, shall be April 1, 2009, and the imposition date 4 13 for a tax approved at an election held on May 5, 2009, shall 4 14 be July 1, 2009. 4 15 5. The bill, for purposes of a local option sales and 4 16 services tax imposed under the bill, amends a three=year 4 17 period used for purposes of distribution of tax receipts. The 4 18 amended three=year period does not apply to a city or the 4 19 unincorporated area of a county that is imposing a local 4 20 option sales and services tax on the effective date of this 4 21 Act. 4 22 The bill takes effect upon enactment. 4 23 LSB 1746SZ 83 4 24 tm/sc/5 Page 3 of 3 http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=AmendPri... 1 /27/2009 ~r , ~m,~~. ,S +. y~®1~~ "+L.Y~- CITY OF IOWA CITY o O www.icgov.org January 27, 2009 Email to: Jim Fausett, Mayor CTTY COUNCIL City of Coralville Dear Mayor Fausett: Regenia Bailey Mayor During our discussion with our local legislative delegation on Friday concerning SSB Mike O'Donnell 1065, you indicated your City Council's interest in pursuing a local option sales tax Mayor Pro Tem for the City of Coralville to address the flood damage that your community Connie champion experienced last summer. Amy Correia Matt Hayek I understand that SSB 1065 has now been introduced as a bill (SF44) with two ROSS w-lhnrn options for expedited timelines to enable flood-affected cities to use a local sales tax Mike Wright and get the funding to their communities more quickly. The proposed legislation would allow individual cities that are contiguous to one another to pass the tax in their communities by a majority vote, rather than treating the contiguous cities as one unit for the purposes of voting on this, as the current law does. As we discussed on Friday, this would enable Coralville citizens to pass a sales tax in Coralville, even if the residents of Iowa City do not pass one in our community. Because Iowa City, as the largest city in this contiguous group, must request that this issue be placed on the ballot, I am writing to confirm Coralville's interest in pursuing a local option sales tax. If, after reading the proposed legislation, you and your council are still interested in having Iowa City request to put this on a ballot for the contiguous cities in Johnson County, please send our City Council a letter indicating as much. In this bill, one of the options for the timeline for placing this on the ballot begins next week and the other is in early March. With our current meeting schedule, the March date is much more feasible. However, we will still have to move quickly. We plan to amend our work session agenda on Wednesday evening to discuss this bill, but if your letter were also there, we could discuss Coralville's interest in having this on ballot as well. Your concerns about flood mitigation in your community are understandable and we are supportive of the State's efforts to address these needs through legislation like this. I look forward to hearing from you. Si erely, ~_ ru e enia D. Bailey, May r council@iowa-ciry.org 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone: (319> 3s~-solo Email Copies: Kelly Hayworth, Coralville City Administrator Fax: ~sl~> 3s~-soon Rod Sullivan, Johnson County Board of Supervisors Senators Bolkcom, Dvorsky, Hahn Representatives Mascher, Jacoby, Lensing, Kaufmann _` .~ .. _., . ?, January 28, 2009 Mr. Michael Lombardo City Manager 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Michael: The City of Coralville Engineering Department has been working with two consulting engineers on flood mitigation plans for our community since July 2008. The consulting engineers have compiled their studies, which outline numerous improvement projects that need to be completed to provide flood protection for our community. These projects total $53 million dollars and include: pump stations, storm sewer improvements, earthen dikes, bridge improvements and flood walls. Our staff has identified grant opportunities that may cover $14 million dollars of these outlined improvements. The Coralville City Council discussed at their work session, last night the local sales tax opinion legislation SF/ 44 being considered by the Iowa Legislature. The Coralville Mayor and City Council would ask that Iowa City consider putting the local opinion sales tax on the ballot and that a sunset provision also be considered. The local sales tax option in Coralville would be utilized for flood relief and mitigation efforts. We look forward to hearing thoughts from you and your City Council on this topic. Sincerely, t..~` s Kelly J.~ayworth ' City Administrator `` City of Coralville ~' l F CC: Mayor Fausett, Coralville City Council, Senator Robert Dvorsky, Senator e Bolkcom, Representative David Jacoby, Representative Mary Mascher, Representative Vicki Lensing City Administration 1512 7th Street Coraivil{e, Iowa 57141-1708 319-248-1700 Fax: 319-248-1894 I r ~..:.®~r znl~ ~ ~w~~~ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Michael A. Lombardo City Manager m ichael-lombardo~iowa-city.org Dale E. Helling Assistant City Manager dale-helling((ir~iowa-city.org Kathryn L. Johansen Administrative Assistant to the City Manager kathnm-johanscn(u~iowa-city.org 410 E. Washington Street lowa City, IA 52240 January 23, 2009 To: City Council Fr: Michael Lombardo, Cit anager Re: FY2010 Budget This memo provides updated information regarding suggested changes to the proposed FY2010 operating budget and resulting effects on the property tax levy, as well as information on the fiscal condition of Iowa City both generally and as a result of specific funding decisions that are being contemplated as part of the FY2010 budget process. Let me start by restating a key point that was made in my budget transmittal letter. Foremost, what has been presented to you is not a sustainable budget. This point was briefly touched upon in previous budget work sessions, but it appears that the significance of this point is being lost as we focus our attention on specific issues such as funding a new fire station and the desire to minimize increases to the property tax levy. In order to provide you a balanced budget, $3.5 million in expenditure reductions were made with the belief that we can not afford to maintain current service levels and that very difficult decisions must and will be made over the coming months to reduce services to a sustainable level; this is commonly referred to as "right-sizing" the budget. Without aright-sizing of the operating budget through sustained decreases in service levels, the bulk of the $3.5 million in proposed expenditure cuts for FY2010 will beg to be funded -maintenance, equipment, and training cannot be put off indefinitely -- and we will be confronted with soaring deficits beyond levels previously experienced in Iowa City. The proposed $3.5 million in budget reductions comes at a cost to services and operations and are not resulting from bloated departmental budgets or unnecessary requests. A summary of the reductions is provided as an attachment to this memo and I would ask that Council consider hearing directly from Department Directors at an upcoming work session in order to gain a deeper understanding of the operational impacts of these cuts prior to the making additional expenditure reductions of any significant amount. We have provided you credible data and information demonstrating that as a result of a faltering economy and an anemic housing market compounded by the affects of epic flooding throughout Iowa City, growth in assessments so vital to our ability to fund existing services can not be expected for the foreseeable future. Phone: (314)356-5010 t~~~®~'1 ~III~~~~ ~~ ,~®r~~ -~a.a~._ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Michael A. Lombardo City Manager m ichael-lombardo@iowa-city.org Uale E. Helling Assistant City Manager dale-helling~?iowa-city.org Kathryn L. Johansen Administrative Assistant to the City Manager kathryn-j ohansen@i owa-city. org At the annual Economic Forecast Luncheon sponsored by the Corridor Business Journal, the President and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis indicated that an economic rebound may begin as quickly as six months. I am hopeful that this may be accurate but want to emphasize that while broader national markets and economic conditions may begin to turnaround, the prognosis for our local economy as it relates to how we generate revenue will lag this turnaround by several years. Fire Station #4 Fire Station #4 will cost just under $1 million annually to staff and operate. As we have discussed, the University of Iowa's cost share formula for fire services and the Employee Benefits Levy combined will cover slightly less than half of the total costs, but approximately $550,000 annually in additional operating costs must be funded from the general fund. Given the current $3.5 million shortfall and sustained deficit projections, we can not afford the added fiscal burden of Fire Station #4 without an increase in revenues or a dramatic decrease in other service levels. In an effort to reduce the effects of staffing Fire Station #4, Fire Chief Rocca and his staff have indicated that they could delay filling the three (3) new Lieutenant positions until fiscal year 2011. This will reduce costs for FY2010 by $267,546 and the proposed increase in the emergency levy to $0.204 per $1000 assessed value. I strongly recommend that the Emergency Levy be increased to fund Fire Station #4 if it is Council's desire to proceed with this expanded service. As an alternative, Council certainly may choose to cut costs by reducing services provided by other departments. If this is the preferred method for funding Fire Station #4, I would ask for your express commitment to reducing services levels accordingly through apriority-setting process over the next four to five months. 420th Street Industrial Park Expansion of industrial property to develop "shovel-ready" sites poses a different challenge for the organization, but I believe is necessary in order to stabilize our long-term fiscal condition. Following is a summary of costs and proposed funding: 420th Street Industrial Park Costs: Land Acquisition $2,300,000 Utility Improvements 1,500,000 Road Improvements 3,405,000 Sub-total 7,205,000 Enterprise Fund Pmt. - 1,500,000 Inter-fund Loan $6,205,000 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Phone: (319) 356-5010 ~~.~.®a7 -•t.as~_ CITY OF IOWA CITY www. icgov.org OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Michael A. Lombardo City Manager michael-lombardo@iowa-ciry.org Dale E. Helling Assistant City Manager dale-belling@iowa-city org Kathryn L. Johansen Administrative Assistant to the City Manager kath ryn-j ohansen@iowa-city. org The $6,205,000 inter-fund loan must be repaid. However, in an effort to reduce the financial strain on the general fund budget we propose delaying repayment for a period of 3-4 years; this will provide time for the site to be prepared and [heavily] marketed. Once parcels begin to sell and develop we anticipate creating a TIF district to repay the costs. I would ask that Council discuss this during our budget deliberations and approve the strategy. Capital Improvement Program Council's desire to further reduce the affects of adding Fire Station #4 on the tax levy were heard and we have amended the Capital Improvement Program, which will reduce the Debt Service Levy and overall impact on taxpayers. The FY2009 and FY 2010 CIP's have been reduced by $2 million and $1.3 million respectively as follows: • $1 million in funding for the 1 S' Avenue/IAIS RR Crossing for both FY2009 and FY2010 moved out to FY2011-12 -based on project timing, we do not believe this will seriously delay the project; Sand Lake Recreation Area funding has been moved out to FY2013 -- $2 million dollars is at stake in State CAT Grant Funding. We are hopeful that by FY2013 we might find a way to bring the project to reality. However, Council may at their discretion choose to delay this project indefinitely either now or in the future. I ask that Council affirm this plan to proceed or move it to unfunded status. 410 F.. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 • Funding for the Evidence Storage Facility improvements was reduced to $250,000 to reflect accurate costs estimates; and • Excess fund balance in the debt service fund was eliminated. The overall impact was to reduce the total levy by 1.1 %. I have included an updated copy of the CIP funding summary with this memo. Non-Bargaining Employee Wages and Benefits In your previous work session, Council requested wage and benefit data for all employees unrepresented by a bargaining unit; the following chart depicts costs increases for various COLA levels: Phone: (319) 356-5010 ~III~~~~ ~ooi~~ -~a.as__ CITY OF IOWA CITY www.icgov.org OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Michael A. Lombardo City Manager m i chael-Lombardo@iowa-c ity. org Dale E. Helling assistant City Manager dale-helling@iowa-city.org Kathryn L. Johansen Administrative Assistant to the City Manager kalhryn-Johansen@iowa-city.org 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 1A% 1.5% Z.0% 3.1% FY2090 FY10 Base increase increase increase increase Salary/Wages 6,933,961 65,965 98,947 131,930 204,491 Benefits 2 21~ 430 9 99~ 1d 99B 1g.99d 30,981 Total 9,146.391 75.96 113943 151.924 235,481 Discussions at a prior work session indicated a desire, at least by some, to limit or freeze the COLA for all or a portion of this group. I would urge you not to attempt to solve our budget problems on the backs of a few individuals. In general, such practices should only be considered as a short-term measure and in instances where projected deficits span a limited period of time. This is not the case for Iowa City and while this practice has become somewhat fashionable at the Federal and State levels of government over the past several years such budget gimmicks do little to solve the systemic problem with our funding and create serious equity issues within the organization. tt is also important to understand that there is considerable distance between policy-makers, management, and the rest of the workforce in such large bureaucracies -- the affect on a small organization such as ours is much more dramatic and serves only to pit one employee against the next. If limiting the increase in personnel costs is desired then I would recommend that we pursue such strategy across the entire organization. I understand that there are existing contracts, and I am familiar with the difficulties of opening them up. However, in an effort to stave off the ill- effects of singling out a specific group maintain that it is the best approach for our employees and the overall tenor of employee relationships. The decisions before us though challenging may be overcome with a commitment to finding the right balance between service expectations and available resources; I look forward to working with you toward this endeavor. Phone: (319) 356-5010 City of Iowa City FY2010 Proposed Budget Add: Fire Station #4 in FY2010, 3.0 Lieutenants in FY2011 City of Iowa City FY2010 Proposed Budget Administrative Adjustments following Department Proposals Revenue Estimate Revisions: 11.07.08 Mid-American Tree Planting Donation 12.08.08 Admin. Charge to Proprietary Funds -revised 12.15.08 Police -Local Govt Match - Jo Co Metro Bomb Truck 12.15.08 New Horizons -Donations increased to match expenditures Hotel Motel Tax estimate revised Property Tax estimates revised 12.18.08 Animal Services 28E Agreement (new) 12.19.08 Interest Income -revised Recommended Fee Increases: 12.08.08 Memorandum from Norm Cate /Housing Inspection Services re: recommended fee increase 12.12.08 Memorandum from Chris O'Brien /Transportation Services re: recommended fee increases Expenditure Reductions: 20,000 690,602 26,250 1, 380 (9,049) 145,737 (62,151) (890,880) 82,936 Temporary Employee Wage Reduction: $.50/hr (62,989) 12.04 - 12.11 (does not reflect impact on benefits) Misc. Other Adjustments -Finance Admin.: 11.07.08 Parks & Rec Admin -duplicate entry (1,700) 11.07.08 Recreation -move sale of helmets from expenditure reimb. (1,000) 11.07.08 Building Maintenance -revised est. Fire Station #1 Kitchen 6,500 11.13.08 Police Department -staff entry corrections 11,900 Fuel Costs -Direct & Indirect Charges (21,394) Energy Conservation FTE Correction (17,451) 12.09.08 Asst. City Attorney FTE allocation to 0 Tort Liability -shift from $8.10 levy 12.18.08 Library Computer Replacement Reserve (48,350) (revised expenditures to not exceed avail. cash balance) Parking Citations /Fines: 118,566 Parking Garage Permits: 121,030 12.11.08 Email from Doug Boothroy & Tim Hennes /Building Inspection: Recommended fee increase: Mechanical Permits 7,500 City of Iowa City FY2010 Proposed Budget Administrative Adjustments following Department Proposals City Manager Reductions (Division-specific): 12.15.08 Animal Care & Adoption: Temporary Facility -out (31,000) Truck Transport Boxes (32,000) Vehicle Laptops -out (16,000) 12.15.08 Cemetery (29,930) 12.15.08 Fire Department -Capital Outlay: (153,295) 11.07.08 Cental Business District (6,960) 11.07.08 Recreation (6,500) Expanded Service Level Requests -Cut: (1,690,854) Fire Station #4 Staffing -proposed separately for feasibility: (516,994) Staff Response to Request for 1% Reduction in Expenditures: 12.09.08 City Manager Letter to Staff requesting 1 % reduction in expenditures to close $1.0 million gap 12.10.08 City Attorney (6,264) 12.10.08 Revenue (10,041) 12.11.08 Library (29,330) (does not reflect proposal to use $25,000 in restricted cash for budgeted capital outlay) 12.11.08 Building Inspection (35,722) 12.11.08 Cemetery (3,672) 12.11.08 Fire Department (60,500) 12.11.08 City Council (2,475) 12.11.08 City Manager (6,067) 12.12.08 Human Rights (2,600) 12.12.08 Government Buildings (5,727) 12.12.08 Parks & Rec Admin (2,354) 12.12.08 Recreation (27,053) 12.12.08 Public Works Admin (5,000) 12.12.08 Engineering (8,740) 12.12.08 Energy Conservation (250) 12.12.08 Forestry (31,577) 12.12.08 Dept. of Planning & Community Development, (15,664) 12.12.08 City Clerk (1,000) 12.12.08 City Clerk -Temp Employee omission -add in: 10,620 Staff Response /Reductions: 01.20.09 Personnel (5,000) 01.20.09 Senior Center (8,553) Adiustments -Following Distribution of Proposed Book: City of Iowa City FY2010 Proposed Budget Administrative Adjustments following Department Proposals Misc. Other Adjustments -Finance Admin.: 01.21.09 Fuel Adjustment 01.21.09 UI Fire 28E Contract -revised to include FS#4 in FY11 & FY12 Council-directed Changes: 01.20.09 Fire Station #4 -Operating Costs & Staff 01.21.09 Fire Station #4 -Project Funding: General Fund Cash Balance to CIP 01.21.09 Fire Station #4 - Interfund Loan Receipt Fire Station #4 - Interfund Loan to CIP (137,259) 0 765,871 1,000,000 (1,000,000) 1,000,000 City of Iowa City FY2010 Proposed Budget Add: Fire Station #4 in FY2010 Estimated Property Tax on $100,000 Residential Valuation (Iowa City portion) FY2009 $780.96 Taxable Valuation City Levy Property Taxes City of Iowa City FY2010 Proposed Budget Add: Fire Station #4 in FY2010, 3.0 Lieutenants in FY2011 FY2010 $819.41 FY2009 FY2010 44,080 $ 45,589 17.717 $ 17.974 780.96 $ 819.41 Estimated Property Tax on $100,000 Residential Valuation (Iowa City portion) FY2009 ~] ~ $815.10 $780.96 1 FY2009 FY2010 Taxable Valuation $ 44,080 $ 45,589 City Levy $ 17.717 $ 17.879 Property Taxes $ 780.96 $ 815.10 City of Iowa City FY2009 - FY2013 Capital Improvements Program Funding Summary Project Category FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 Total Airport 4, 752, 573 3, 021, 850 8, 092, 550 2, 205, 570 1, 326,150 19, 398, 693 Landfill 10,521,572 3,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 16,921,572 Parking & Transit 930,000 500,000 - - - 1,430,000 Parks, Recreation & Trails 3,019,852 2,960,000 2,530,000 4,875,000 4,867,500 18,252,352 Public Safety 3,659,250 3,250,000 452,500 572,000 - 7,933,750 Streets, Bridges & Traffic Eng. 11,313,177 9,247,500 18,441,500 7,480,000 9,210,000 55,692,177 Misc. Other 3,252,062 5,960,000 460,000 1,077,000 100,000 10,849,062 Total Projects: 37,448,486 28,039,350 31,076,550 17,309,570 16,603,650 130,477,606 Capital Improvement Program Funding by Category FY2009 - FY2013 Parking & Transit 1% Streets, Bridges & Traffic Engineering 43% Public Safety 6% Parks, Recreation & Trails 14% C-1 City of Iowa City Capital Improvements Program Project Category: AIRPORT Project Name Airport Equipment Shelter Fundinp $ 150,000 Description ~ 150,000 Snow removal equipment was stored in the old United Hangar, which was removed as part of the obstruction mitigation program for Runway 7-25. The airport is in need of storage for their snow removal equipment. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grant $ - $ - $ 142,500 $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 7,500 $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Airport Runways 7- 25 & 12-30: Rehabilitation $ 7,348,400 Description The existing pavements on Runways 7-25 and 12-30 have reached the $ 7,348,400 end of their useful life and are showing signs of pavement distress. Reconstruction of the southwesterly section of Runway 7-25 and its intersection with Runway 12-30 will occur in FY2010. Reconstruction of Runway 12-30 is scheduled in FY2011 and includes replacement of the runway edge lighting system. Fundinp Federal Grants 10 GO Bonds 11 GO Bonds C-2 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 $ - $ 2,870,760 $ 4,110,220 $ - $ - $ - $ 151,090 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 216,330 $ - $ - City of Iowa City Capital Improvements Program Project Category: AIRPORT Project Name Fundinp Airport Runway 7-25 Parallel Taxiway -Grading, Paving & Lighting $ 4,346,570 Description $ 4,346,570 A parallel taxiway is needed for the main runway to allow for safe taxi of aircraft to and from Runway 7-25 and the terminal area as well as to allow for lower instrument approach minimums for Runway 7-25. Funded by two separate grants, taxiway grading is scheduled to occur in FY2011, paving and lighting in FY2012. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ - $ 2,033,950 $ 2,095,290 $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 107,050 $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 110,280 $ - Project Name Fundinp Apron Reconstruction & Connecting Taxiway $1,326,150 Description $1, 326,150 Existing terminal apron is showing signs of pavement failure and needs replacement. In addition, the ever-growing amount of general aviation traffic using the facility requires expansion of the apron and provision of additional connecting taxiways with the runway system. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ - $ - $ - $1,259,842 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 66,308 Project Name Fundinp Airport Runway 12-30: Obstruction Mitigation & Part 77 Removals $ 475,000 Description $ 475,000 FAA Flight Procedures have LPV approaches planned for Runway 30 at the Iowa City Municipal Airport. To establish these approaches, removal of obstructions identified in the Airport Layout Plan have been identified as needed. Removal of these obstructions will allow for better minimums for the LPV approach. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grant $ - $ - $ 451,250 $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 23,750 $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Corporate Hangar'L' $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Description Construct large bay hangar for Fixed Base Operator (FBO) to manage. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 State Grants $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ - $ - C-3 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: LANDFILL Project Name Eastside Recycling Center Fundinp $ 2,081,641 Description The Eastside Recycling Center is located at 2401 Scott Boulevard. Phase I of this project iincludes overall site preparation, waste oil dropoff, compost pickup, electronic waste dropoff and improvements to the existing building. Also included is a loading dock and utilization of precast concrete panels on existing buildings. •'. _ `- ;.d.~.......«........®.....,...«.~.._...... + ~ sike facaYfties `~ - -~ - I Y WZ~ Ru.s fro l+ 4 I T"~ - - f~ 3rY. HnFi[ F2 1 Es U:Y•ys~..a:r~ r' s. 5e ~ Bern ...~ I I .- _ d. FtnC'Yn .ry 4'~AP Eat .. ~"r -- _ - - - ~ r, 3" ~p,i prPP AaiPe '+r ~ + "~ _- -.. C I @. Co pns1 Pick-lJp f r Skl j ~~~ __ .. ~. b ~. 7. WPa¢Chip Pick-VP Y7 ~~, ~ I B. ~E,PC[ .N44uta. f{ ~rn~a nPi SEty • ~~ ~, I - >, ~A d s ,E 8,~.~a ~ - .~ r ~e~ I Ey ~;; " - ,a. ~t, wPU~ - _ -- OISM L f St lean {. ~ i2. Ed A.- A `$ 33. AW b €iue 'Space "'~-,. I ~ 1.1. #ip 1 Wit HYrT'•+rdous' Efl A S+J k Li~•Y 1e!e !: ~'~ Wa E M aifaTreiler C iCy Pf l ~.r, - ' ~~~ J:rnc 3... tli!~ 1rt Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Landfill User Fees $ 81,641 $ 2,000,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Landfill Cell - FY09 Description Design and construction of a new landfill cell is expected to extend into FY2010. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Landfill User Fees $ 7,000,000 $ - $- $- $- Fundinp $ 7,000,000 C-4 City of Iowa City Capital Improvements Program Project Category: PARKING and TRANSIT Project Name Near Southside Multi-use Parking Facility Fundinp $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Description Allocation for concept planning and preliminary design on a proposed multi-use parking / commercial /residential facility on the former St. Patrick's Church site on South Linn Street. This lot was purchased during the spring of 2008 for $3.0 million with a combination of Parking Impact Fees and an interfund loan to the Parking Division. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Parking Fees $ - $ 200,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Parking Garage Elevator Upgrades -Capitol & Dubuque St. Garages $ 600,000 $ 600,000 Description Elevator upgrades at the Capitol and Dubuque Street Garages. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Parking Fees $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - C-5 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS Project Name Butler Bridge Pedestrian Trail Description Construction of a separated pedestrian bridge on the widened piers of North Dubuque Street's Butler Bridge. This allows for separated pedestrian and bicycle travel. This project utilizes Federal STP grant funds. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 State Grants $ - $ 440,000 $ - $ - $ - Coralville $ - $ 82,500 $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 27,500 $ - $ - $ - City Park Projects Old Shop Repairs: Replace roof and rafters on the old park shop, also rebuild adjacent retaining wall which was impacted by the flood. Trail Lighting: Install pedestrian lighting on the trail system in City Park. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 330,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Frauenholtz-Miller Park Development Description Develop approximately three acres of newly-acquired parkland on Lower West Branch Road adjacent to the new Saint Patrick's church site. Funding includes use of Neighborhood Open Space Fees. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 223,000 $ - Neighborhood $ - $ - $ - $ 57,000 $ - Open Space Fees Fundinp $ 550,000 $ 550,000 Fundinp $ 90,000 $ 240,000 ~ 33U,000 Fundinp ~ 280.000 C-6 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS Iowa City Kicker's Soccer Park Funding FY2010 Soccer Park Shelters: Construct two large park shelters to accommodate park patrons $ 150,000 when large tournaments are hosted. FY2012 Soccer Park Improvements: This allocation provides for the continued development $ 250,000 and improvement of the Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park. Planned improvements would create a system of trails to enhance accessibility and create a more park-like atmosphere to the open space areas of the facility. FY2013 Soccer Park Pond: Construct a pond to accomodate a field irrigation system. $ 337,500 $ 737,500 Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 337,500 Project Name Funding Mercer Pool Solarium Renovation $ 220,000 Description Replace all windows, doors and the ventilation system in the solarium $ 220,000 section of Mercer Pool. Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 220,000 $ - $ - Misc. Park Improvements Funding Hickory Hill Park -Restroom & Bridge: This project includes construction of a $ 150,000 restroom and replacement of the oldest pedestrian bridge in Hickory Hill Park, approximately a 50 foot span. Court Hill Park -Restroom: Construct a restroom in Court Hill Park. $ 95,000 Kiwanis Park -Restroom: Construct a restroom in Kiwanis Park. $ 95,000 College Green Park -Light Replacement: Replace pedestrian lighting system. $ 90,000 Mercer Park & Fairmeadows Park -Sidewalk Replacement: Remove 3,100 lineal $ 85,000 feet of 4' sidewalk and replace with 6' sidewalk. $ 515,000 Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 515,000 $ - $ - C-7 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS Project Name Fundinp North Market Square Park Redevelopment $ 280,000 Description $ 280,000 Work with the Northside Neighborhood Association and Horace Mann School to redevelop this 1.5 acre park at the intersection of Fairchild and Johnson Streets. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 280,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Outdoor Ice Rink $ 1,500,000 Description Construct an outdoor ice rink suitable for figure skating or hockey. During $ 1,500,000 warm weather this area would be available for other recreational uses such as a skate park and/or roller hockey. (Note: Only $700,000 can be funded without voter approval.) Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 Project Name Fundinp Pedestrian Br idge -Rocky Shore Drive to Peninsula $ 1,300,000 Description $ 1,300,000 Construct a pedestrian bridge from Rocky Shore Drive across the Iowa River, connecting the Iowa River Trail and peninsula parkland trails. This will also provide greater access to the dog park and disc golf course. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 1,300,000 $ - Project Name Fundinp Peninsula Park $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Description Development of the lower elevation into a "natural park", with prairie grasses, wildflowers, native woodlands and trails. Improvements will also provide protection to the City's water supply wellheads. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - C-8 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS Robert A. Lee Rec Center Improvements East Enterance: Reconfiguration of the east entrance, including ramp accessibility, steps, railing and lighting; replacement of the social hall's collapsible wall and enclosure of the pool balcony for access by the general public. Elevator Replacement -Replace elevator car, hydraulics and controls. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 295,000 $ - Project Name Riverbank Stabilization -City Park FY13 $ - Description This project will repair the riverbank along City Park and south of Park Road Bridge on the eastern shore. The work is eligible for federal funding with a 65/35 match. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ 310,000 $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 90,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Sand Lake Recreation Area Description This project provides for the phased development of the Sand Lake Recreation Area located at 4213 S.E. Sand Road (former S&G Materials site). This 180 acre area will include both recreation and conservation components. An Iowa Community Attraction and Tourism (CAT) grant application is being submitted to the State of Iowa for this project. Fundinp $ 225,000 $ 70,000 $ 295,000 Fundinp $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Fundinp $ 6,250,000 $ 6,250,000 Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 State Grants $ - $ - $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ - 08 GO Bonds $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 500,000 $ - 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000,000 General Fund $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Contributions & $ - $ 750,000 $ - $ - $ - Donations $ 500,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,250,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 2,000,000 C-9 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PARKS, RECREATION AND TRAILS Project Name Fundinp Scanlon Gym -Elevated Running /Walking Track $ 880,000 Description Construct an elevated running /walking track in the Scanlon Gym facility. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 880,000 $ - Project Name Fundinp Scott Park Development & Trail $ 780,000 $ 780,000 Description This project will help develop Scott Park into aneighborhood /regional park, with the addition of restrooms, some excavation to the detention basin and construction of a new trail to connect with other trails in east Iowa City. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 780,000 Project Name Fundinp Waterworks Park Hospice Memorial $ 115,000 $ 115,000 Description Develop apark-like Hospice Memorial area in Waterworks Prairie Park for passive enjoyment and contemplation. Private donations are anticipated in the amount of $25,000. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 90,000 $ - Donations $ - $ - $ - $ 25,000 $ - C-10 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PUBLIC SAFETY Project Name Fire Station #4 Fundinp $ 2,863,923 $ 2,863,923 Fire Station #4 is scheduled for construction in FY2010 at the intersection of North Dodge Street, Scott Boulevard and North Dubuque Road in the northeast quadrant of Iowa City . Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 05 GO Bonds $ 163,923 $ - $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 700,000 $ - $ - $ - Interfund Loan $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - GeneralFundCash $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Fire Apparatus: The following Fire Department vehicles are scheduled for replacement $ 2,607,602 with the exception of one new eng ine for Station #4. $ 2,607,602 FY09: Pumper (1 ), Engines (2) FY11: Heavy Res cue Truck (1) FY12: Engine (1) Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 06 GO Bonds $ 124,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 07 GO Bonds $ 102,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 08 GO Bonds $ 848,102 $ - $ - $ - $ - 09 GO Bonds $ 509,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 452,500 $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 572,000 $ - C-11 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: PUBLIC SAFETY Project Name Fundinp Evidence Storage Facility $ 250,000 Description Construction of a 12,000 square foot facility to house evidence for $ 250,000 criminal trials. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Radio System Upgrade & Migration $ 1,212,225 $ 1,212,225 Description Replacement of radio communication egiupment as necessary to keep the existing system operational until Joint Communications Center is on-line and non-emergency users are added on. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 05 GO Bonds $ 12,225 $ - $ - $ - $ - 06 GO Bonds $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 07 GO Bonds $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 08 GO Bonds $ 600,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 09 GO Bonds $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - C-12 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: STREETS, BRIDGES and TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Burlington Street -Traffic Control Improvements FY2010: Burlington /Madison Intersection and Median: This project includes the initial phase of the Burlington Street Median project, with construction from the Iowa River to the Madison Street intersection. Improvements will address pedestrian and traffic flows associated with the University of Iowa Rec Center, which is slated for completion during the spring of 2010. Reconstruction of the intersection includes signal improvements, the addition of left turn lanes and replacement of water and sewer utilities. FY2011: Burlington Street Median: Construction of the Burlington Street Median from Madison to Gilbert Street, including relocation of water and sewer utilities. FY2013: Burlington / Clinton Street Intersection Improvements: Construction of left turn lanes is recommended at the Clinton and Burlington Street intersection in order to reduce the crash rate. Inclusive of utility improvements, this project is proposed for completion during construction of the Hieronymous Square project. qi a F H tq .- ! ~ u..n ~ ~ m sawce ___ m Ye ~ ~i YA C . ~ i. ~ w I ~ = ~ ~ _ H to c ~ rHi ) , --__ I~} /~ ~ E I DOl16i ~ 6~ ~.. w N B -- ~ .J_~- !.- ~ ~ '~ ~, .- ___v__ r .'l=°"'A"~,_T".lam' ~-" - 1 I OA':: t TER Vi I ~ rS.", s__ _ a-'%' - ~ Q C "4"~1 ~- _- - ~ __~ - - - ~ Rl,1NGT~lP +3T ' f ~ [y . ~ W. Burlington Street: ~« Ago ~raroti . Iowa River to Clinton St. RR;,~o~o . , „ ~ Hi, ow REC cErarE~ nananacHn Fundinp U of I Contribution 10 GO Bonds Water User Fees 11 GO Bonds Wastewater User Fees 13 GO Bonds Fundinp $ 1,140,000 $ 1,860,000 $ 1,140,000 $ 4,140,000 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 $ - $ 400,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 640,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 150,000 $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ 1,410,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,040,000 $ - $ 1,140,000 $ 1,860,000 $ - $ 1,140,000 C-13 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: STREETS, BRIDGES and TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Project Name Fundinp 420th Street Improvements -Highway 6 to Taft Avenue $ 3,000,000 Description This project includes construction of a sewer main and reconstruction of 420th $ 3,000,000 Street to urban standards east from Highway 6 to Taft Avenue. These improvements will facilitate expansion of the industrial park. RISE grant funding of 50/50 may be available for road construction. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 State Grants $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - Wastewater U ser Fees $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 09 GO Bonds $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp American Leg ion Road -Scott Boulevard to Taft Avenue $ 3,027,000 Description This project will reconstruct American Legion Road to urban standards $ 3,027,000 including an eight foot (8') sidewalk. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,000,000 Development Fees $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 27,000 Project Name Fundinp Burlington St. Pedestrian Bridge Rehabilitation $ 350,000 Description This project will rehabilitate the existing pedestrian bridge at Highway 6 and $ 350,000 Burlington Street. This will be a joint project with the Iowa Department of Transportation and University of Iowa. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 State Grants $ - $ 150,000 $ - $ - $ - Road Use Tax $ 40,000 $ 85,000 $ - $ - $ - University of Iowa $ - $ 75,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Dodge Street / I-80 Pedestrian Bridge $ 1,800,000 Description This project is currently #47 on the Unfunded Project list and provides for $ 1,800,000 construction of a pedestrian bridge over Interstate 80 at North Dodge Street / Highway 1 in FY2012 - FY2013. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grant $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,440,000 Road Use Tax $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 360,000 C-14 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: STREETS, BRIDGES and TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Project Name Fundinp First Avenue / Iowa Interstate Railroad Crossing Improvements $ 6,392,000 Description $ 6,392,000 This project includes construction of a railroad overpass on First Avenue with federal funding of $1.7 million. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ - $ 1,700,000 $ - $ - 08 GO Bonds $ 192,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 09 GO Bonds $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 1,000,000 $ - $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 $ - Project Name Gilbert St. Streetscape Description Streetscape improvements including brick, trees, lighting and bike racks on segments of Gilbert between Prentiss and Burlington Streets. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 310,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Interstate 80 Aesthetic Improvements Description Landscaping and bridge aesthetic treatments in the Interstate 80 corridor Fundinp FY09 Coralville $ 20,000 $ Road Use Tax $ 20,000 $ Project Name Lower Muscatine Avenue Kirkwood to First Avenue FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 - $ - $ - $ - 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ - Description This project reconstructs Lower Muscatine from Kirkwood to First Avenue, including the addition of a center turn lane. Also included in the project are storm sewer, sanitary sewer and water main reconstruction; undergrounding of aerial utilities and installation of sidewalks on both sides of the street. This project utilizes federal STP funds. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ 860,000 $ 860,000 $ - $ - 09 GO Bonds $ 125,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 627,500 $ - $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 627,500 $ - $ - Contributions $ - $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ - $ - Fundinp $ 310,000 $ 310,000 Fundinp $ 100,000 ~ ~ ~~,~~~ Fundinp $ 3,700,000 y J,/ VV,VVV C-15 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: STREETS, BRIDGES and TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Project Name Fundinp McCollister Boulevard -Highway 921 to Gilbert Street $ 6,219,436 Description McCollister Boulevard will connect with Mormon Trek Boulevard at Highway 921 $ 6,219,436 and extend to Gilbert Street. This section of paving is 4,000 feet long, including a 500' long bridge over the Iowa River. Prior year expenditures for this project total $2.4 million. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ 4,200,000 $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - Water User Fees $ 477,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - 08 GO Bonds $ 1,442,436 $ - $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Mormon Trek -Left Turn Lanes $ 3,750,000 Description Construct left turn lanes at major intersections or a continuous center lane $ 3,750,000 through the corridor between Melrose Avenue and Abbey Lane. Federal STP funds are proposed for this project. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ - $ - $ 1,500,000 $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 2,250,000 $ - Park Road & Park Road Bridge Fundinp FY2011: Park Road Bridge & Intersection Improvements: Replace Park Road bridge deck, $ 8,000,000 reconfigure lane markings at the Park Road /Dubuque Street intersection and add a right turn lane on south-bound Dubuque. This project is eligible for federal STP funds. FY2012: Park Road -Third Lane Improvement: This project accommodates traffic flow on $ 1,140,000 Riverside Drive and Park Road to Hancher by adding a center turn lane between Lower City Park entrance and Riverside Drive. The walkway lying on the north side of Park Road between Upper City park's main entrance and Templin Road will also be replaced at this time with an 8' sidewalk. Timing of this project will be in conjunction with the Park Road Bridge Improvement project. $ 9,140,000 Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ - $ 6,400,000 $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 1,600,000 $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 1,140,000 $ - C-16 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: STREETS, BRIDGES and TRAFFIC ENGINEERING Public Works Facility - S. Gilbert Street Funding FY2010 -Fuel Facility: Construct new fuel tanks and fueling island at the South Gilbert St. $ 480,000 Public Works Facility, replacing existing fuel facilities at Riverside Drive. FY2011 -Vehicle Wash System: Construct an automated vehicle wash system for large $ 440,000 vehicles and provide wash racks for the manual cleaning of large vehicles at the South Gilbert Street Public Works Facility. $ 920,000 Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 480,000 $ - $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 440,000 $ - $ - Funding Rochester Avenue Bridge $ 519,000 Description This project will replace the bridge over Ralston Creek and construct sidewalks $ 519,000 on both sides. Financing includes 80/20 in federal bridge funds. Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Federal Grants $ - $ - $ 415,200 $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 103,800 $ - $ - Funding Rohret Road Improvements -Phoenix Drive to City Limits $ 2,150,000 Description The project will reconstruct Rohret Road to urban standards. $ 2,150,000 Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 13 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,150,000 Funding Scott Blvd Pavement Overlay - Rochester to Court Street $ 400,000 Description This project includes an asphalt overlay on Scott Boulevard from $ 400,000 Rochester Avenue to Court Street. Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 400,000 $ - $ - Funding Sycamore Street -Highway 6 to the City Limits $ 3,125,000 Description This project reconstructs Sycamore Street to municipal arterial standards between $ 3,125,000 Burns and the City Limits, including sidewalks. The existing portion between Hwy 6 and Burns is converted from 4 lanes to 3 lanes. Funding FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Development Fees $ - $ 100,000 $ - $ - $ - 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 1,930,000 $ - $ - $ - 11 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ 1,095,000 $ - $ - C-17 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: MISC. OTHER PROJECTS Project Name Fundinp 420th Street Industrial Park $ 7,705,000 Description This project provides for land acquistion ($2.3 million), site grading, street and $ 7,705,000 sewer systems infrastructure ($5.405) as required for the industrial park on 420th Street. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Interfund Loan $ - $ 6,205,000 $ - $ - $ - Wastewater User Fees $ - $ 1,500,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System $ 1,060,000 Description $ 1,060,000 This reallocates funding previously designated for selection and implementation of two systems (Payroll/Human Resources Information System and Utility Billing system) to purchase an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system to address these needs as well as core functions, including finance and budgeting. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 08 GO Bonds $ 500,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - Water User Fees $ 224,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - Stormwater User Fees $ 56,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - Wastewater User Fees $ - $ 224,000 $ - $ - $ - Refuse User Fees $ - $ 56,000 $ - $ - $ - Project Name Fundinp Geographic Information System Software $ 927,000 Description Procure and install a geographical information system to provide a $ 927,000 comprehensive, interactive database for City facilities, infrastructure records, permitting, crime and accident data. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 927,000 $ - Project Name Fundinp N. Gilbert Street Box Culvert $ 360,000 Description Replace box culvert on North Gilbert Street, south of Kimball Road. $ 360,000 Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Stormwater User Fees $ - $ 360,000 $ - $ - C-18 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Project Category: MISC. OTHER PROJECTS Gland Cemetery Projects Road Resurfacing: Resurface specified roads within Oakland Cemetery as part of the city- wide biennial asphalt resurfacing program in FY2010 and FY2012. Cold Storage Building: Construct a 20' x 40' concrete building with attic trusses to be used for year-round cold storage. Infant Columbarium and Sculpture: Construct a 64 niche columbarium in the Innocense section of Oakland Cemetery to accommodate ash urns for cremated infants. Will also include a sculpture of a mother and infant in a rocking chair. Purchased niches will offset capital costs over a period of several years. Fundinp FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 10 GO Bonds $ - $ 175,000 $ - $ - $ - 12 GO Bonds $ - $ - $ - $ 50,000 $ - Fundinp $ 100,000 $ 40,000 ~ $ 85,000 ~ $ 225,000 ~ C-19 City of Iowa City Capital Projects by Category - Scheduled for Completion in FY2009 - FY2009 Estimated Amended Final /Total Project Category Budget Project Cost Airport: Runway 7 Design, EA, Extension, FAA #10 $ 92,470 $ 1,347,134 Runway 7 Grading FAA #11 & #12 25,961 174,832 Runway 7 Paving/Lighting FAA #14 938,036 1,758,095 Aviation Commerce Park South 750,000 750,094 Hard Surface Floors Bldgs B & C #91-05-OIOW 6,381 84,794 FAA Runway 7 Grading/Obstr Mitigation #3190 608,143 1,734,620 Runway 7-25 Rehab PCC Full Depth Repl 3-19- 1,751,852 1,819,282 Rehabilitate South T Hangar Taxi Lanes 91-0 9,807 167,094 West Terminal Apron Rehabilitation 44,619 440,601 Rehab North Taxilane Access to N T Hangars 172,553 175,050 UI Hangar Expansion 352,751 400,000 4,752,573 8,851,596 Parkina & Transit: Parking Access Controls for Capitol, Dubuque & Tower Place 630,000 630,000 Paratransit Vehicles* - 607,254 630,000 1,237,254 Parks, Recreation & Trails: Waterworks Prairie Park 100,000 299,658 Rec Center Window Replacement 35,000 722,161 Mercer Diamond Lighting/Field #3 Improvement 19,265 300,000 Festival Storage/Sidewalk/Shelter/Restrooms (pre-flood) 15,639 260,000 Napoleon Park Restroom & Concession Building 15,626 300,000 Soccer Field Renovation 100,000 100,000 Soccer Park -Other Improvements 39,292 123,895 Napoleon Softball Field Renovation 180,000 180,000 Mercer Aquatic HVAC Replacement 14,375 57,500 Mercer Pool Filter System Replacement 250,000 250,000 Park Shelters 70,000 70,000 Court Hill Trail 643,027 815,676 Rec Center Roof 263,779 330,515 Wetherby Splash Pad 200,000 200,000 1,946,003 4,009,405 Public Safety: Police Records & CA Dispatch 1,000,000 1,000,000 Police 2007 JAG Block Grant - 69,754 1,000,000 1,069,754 Public Utilities: Highlander Lift Station Force Main Replacement 450,000 450,000 Rapid Creek Watershed Sewer Service Study 85,000 85,000 Dewey St Water Main 94,000 165,738 (continued on next page) C - 20 City of Iowa City Capital Projects by Category - Scheduled for Completion in FY2009 - FY2009 Estimated Amended Final /Total Project Category Budget Project Cost Public Utilities (cont.): Golf View Water Main 60,000 150,023 Laurel/Carrot/Highland Water Mains 68,000 170,342 Hwy 218 Water Main Ext-Morman Trek/Isaac Wa 279,000 726,190 Roosevelt St Water Main -Sheridan to Track 73,760 73,837 1700-1800 Morningside Dr Water Main 176,873 176,873 Koser Ave -Melrose to George/Highland Dr W 213,298 276,792 Highland Court Water Main 165,000 168,884 Water Plant Automatic Source Transfer 140,000 140,000 Sandusky Stormsewer 635,000 635,000 $ 2,439,931 $ 3,218,679 Senior Center: Senior Center ADA Restrooms Renovation* $ - $ 370,000 Senior Center Roof and Tuckpointing 43,000 74,000 Senior Center Boiler & Chiller Replacement 711,107 772,857 754,107 1,216,857 Streets, Bridges & Traffic Engineerin College St Streetscape 47,000 110,089 Dubuque/Church Radius Improvement 244,864 279,343 Lower West Branch Road Reconstruction 828,000 3,488,644 Gilbert/Bowery/Prentiss -Left turn lanes o 21,877 1,214,836 1,141,741 5,092,912 Misc. Other Projects: Salt Storage Building 785,000 836,318 Public Works Facility Site Work 280,000 280,000 Remodel Lower Lever City Hall 152,116 155,000 Remodel City Hall Lobby and Revenue 210,000 210,000 City Attorney Remodel* - 225,450 1,427,116 1,706,768 Grand Total -Projects Scheduled for Completion in FY2009: $ 14,091,471 $ 26,403,225 * Funded in prior years, scheduled for completion in FY2009. C-21 City of Iowa City Capital Improvement Program Recurring Projects FY2009 - 2013 The following allocations have been made for annual improvement and maintenance of municipal infrastructure, including public streets, bridges, traffic control and park facilities. Project Type Primary Funding Source FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 Bike /Pedestrian Trails Road Use Tax 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Brick Street Repair Road Use Tax 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Bridge Maintenance Road Use Tax 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 City Hall -Other Projects GO Debt 140,104 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Neighborhood Ped. Lighting Road Use Tax 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Curb Ramps Road Use Tax 50,000 - 50,000 - 50,000 Open Space Land Acquisition General Fund 50,000 - - - - Overwidth Paving /Sidewalks Road Use Tax 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Parks Maintenance/Improv. GO Debt 473,849 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Pavement Rehab Road Use Tax 535,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 Public Art GO Debt 150,735 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Railroad Crossings Road Use Tax 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 Sewer Main Replacement Sewer User Fees 300,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Sidewalk Infill GO Debt 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Street Pavement Marking Road Use Tax 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 Traffic Calming Road Use Tax 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Traffic Signal GO Debt 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 Water Main Replacement Water User Fees 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 Total -Recurring Projects: 3,019,688 2,520,000 2,570,000 2,520,000 2,570,000 C - 22 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 3011 - Elevator Upgrades , Elevator upgrades to Capitol and Dubuque garages. 393230 From Parking Operations 300,000 300,000 600,000 Receipts Total 300,000 300,000 600,000 510400 Capitol Street Garage Operations 300,000 300,000 510500 Dubuque Street Garage Operations 300,000 300,000 Expense Total 300,000 300,000 600,000 3012 - Near Southside Multi-use Parking Facility Purchase property for eventual construction of multi-use parking/commercial/residential facility. 393230 From Parking Operations 3,050,022 200,000 393900 Misc Transfers In 2,500 Receipts Total 3,052,522 200,000 510800 Parking Capital Aquisition/CIP 3,052,522 200,000 Expense Total 3,052,522 200,000 3,250,022 2,500 3,252,522 3,252,522 3,252,522 3101 - Annual Sewer Main Projects Annual costs to replace sewer mains. 363150 Copies/Computer Queries 1,230 1,230 369100 Reimb of Expenses 7,653 7,653 369900 Miscellaneous Other Income 40 40 393220 From Wastewater Operations 570,718 300,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,870,718 Receipts Total 579,641 300,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,879,641 520300 Sewer Systems 579,640 300,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,879,640 Expense Total 579,640 300,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 2,879,640 3204 - Annual Water Main Projects Annual replacement of water mains. 393210 From Water Operations 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3,100,000 393421 From Wtr Rev Bonds 3,401 3,401 Receipts Total 3,401 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3,103,401 530300 Water Distribution System 3,401 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3,103,401 Expense Total 3,401 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3,103,401 3316 - Eastside Recycling Center Phase 1 includes overall site preparation, waste oil dropoff,compost pickup, electronic waste dropoff, existing building enhancements. Also included is a loading dock facility and utilization of precast concrete panels on existing buildings. 393260 From Landfill Operations Receipts Total 550900 Landfill Capital Acquisition/CIP Expense Total 188,240 81,641 2,000,000 188,240 81,641 2,000,000 188,240 81,641 2,000,000 188,240 81,641 2,000,000 2,269,881 2,269,881 2,269,881 2,269,881 C - 23 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 3427 - Runway 7 Parallel Taxiway Grading A parallel taxiway for the main runway is needed to allow for safe taxi of aircraft from Runway 7-25 to and from terminal area and to allow for lower instrument approach minimums for Runway 7-25. This is the grading project. 331100 Federal Grants 2,033,950 2,033,950 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 107,050 107,050 Receipts Total 2,141,000 2,141,000 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 2,141,000 2,141,000 Expense Total 2,141,000 2,141,000 3428 - Runway 7-25 Parallel Taxiway Paving & Lighting A parallel taxiway for the main runway is needed to allow for safe taxi of aircraft from Runway 7-25 to and from terminal area. This project is the paving and lighting construction. 331100 Federal Grants 2,095,290 2,095,290 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 110,280 110,280 Receipts Total 2,205,570 2,205,570 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 2,205,570 2,205,570 Expense Total 2,205,570 2,205,570 3429 - Runway 12-30 Rehabilitation The existing Runway 12-30 pavement is in excess of 60 years and shows signs of pavement distress. This phase will complete the reconstruction of Runway 12-30 at a width of 75 feet. This project includes the replacement of runway edge lighting system. 331100 Federal Grants 4,110,220 4,110,220 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 216,330 216,330 Receipts Total 4,326,550 4,326,550 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 4,326,550 4,326,550 Expense Total 4,326,550 4,326,550 3430 - Apron Reconstruction & Connecting Taxiway Existing terminal apron is showing signs of pavement failure and needs replacement. In addition, the ever-growing amount of general aviation traffic using the facility requires the expansion of the apron and the necessity to provide additional connector taxiways to the runway system. 331100 Federal Grants 1,259,842 1,259,842 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 66,308 66,308 Receipts Total 1,326,150 1,326,150 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 1,326,150 1,326,150 Expense Total 1,326,150 1,326,150 3437 - Corporate Hangar L 9I090IOW300 Construct large bay hangar for FBO to manage. C-24 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 334900 Other State Grants 500,000 500,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 500,000 500,000 Receipts Total 1,000,000 1,000,000 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 1,000,000 1,000,000 Expense Total 1,000,000 1,000,000 3441 - Runway 7-25 & 12-30 Rehabilitation (Phase 2) The existing pavements on Runway 7-25 & 12-30 have reached the end of their useful life. This phase will reconstruct the southwesterly section of Runway 7-25 and the intersection with Runway 12-30. 331100 Federal Grants 2,870,760 2,870,760 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 151,090 151,090 Receipts Total 3,021,850 3,021,850 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 3,021,850 3,021,850 Expense Total 3,021,850 3,021,850 3442 - Runway 12-30 Obstruction Mitigation & Part77 Removals Removal of obstructions per FAA Airport Layout Plan. 331100 Federal Grants 451,250 451,250 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 23,750 23,750 Receipts Total 475,000 475,000 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP 475,000 475,000 Expense Total 475,000 475,000 3443 - Airport Equipment Shelter Snow removal equipment was previously stored in United Hangar. Equipment shelte would provide room for snow removal equipment. 331100 Federal Grants 393420 From 11 GO Bonds Receipts Total 560300 Airport Capital Acquisition/CIP Expense Total 142,500 7,500 150,000 150,000 150,000 142,500 7,500 150,000 150,000 150,000 3622 - North Gilbert Street Box Culvert Replace box culvert on North Gilbert Street south of Kimball Road. 393290 From Stormwater 360,000 Receipts Total 360,000 580200 Storm Water Mgmt Capital Acquisiti 360,000 Expense Total 360,000 360,000 360,000 360,000 360,000 3802 - Rohret Rd Improvements-Phoenix Dr to City Limits Project will reconstruct Rohret Rd to urban standards. 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds Receipts Total 434710 Roads 2,150,000 2,150,000 2,150,000 2,150,000 2,150,000 2,150,000 C-25 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Expense Total 2,150,000 2,150,000 3803 - Lower Muscatine-Kirkwood to First Avenue Reconstruct Lower Muscatine from Kirkwood to First Avenue including the additio of a center turn lane. Construction includes stormsewer, water mains, sanitary sewer, undergrounding of aerial utilities and sidewalks on both sides of street. This project is utilizing Federal STP funds. 331100 Federal Grants 860,000 860,000 1,720,000 362100 Contrib & Donations 300,000 300,000 600,000 393150 Road Use Tax 2,939 2,939 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 125,000 125,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 627,500 627,500 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 627,500 627,500 Receipts Total 2,939 125,000 1,787,500 1,787,500 3,702,939 434710 Roads 2,939 125,000 1,787,500 1,787,500 3,702,939 Expense Total 2,939 125,000 1,787,500 1,787,500 3,702,939 3807 - Street Pavement Marking Annual appropriation for painting crosswalks and centerlines on roadways. 363150 Copies/Computer Queries 40 40 369100 Reimb of Expenses 16,932 16,932 393150 Road Use Tax 428,309 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 1,353,309 Receipts Total 445,281 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 1,370,281 434710 Roads 445,281 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 1,370,281 Expense Total 445,281 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 1,370,281 3811 - Sycamore St-Highway 6 to City Limits This project reconstructs Sycamore to arterial standards, including sidewa lk improvements and bike lanes. 341500 Dev Fee-Sdwlk/Paving 26,795 100,000 126,795 369100 Reimb of Expenses 15,502 15,502 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 1,930,000 1,930,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 1,095,000 1,095,000 Receipts Total 42,297 2,030,000 1,095,000 3,167,297 434710 Roads 17,042 2,030,000 1,095,000 3,142,042 Expense Total 17,042 2,030,000 1,095,000 3,142,042 3814 - Traffic Signal Projects Annual appropriation for the signalization of intersections. 393150 Road Use Tax 113,084 113,084 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 120,000 120,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 120,000 120,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 120,000 120,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 120,000 120,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 120,000 120,000 Receipts Total 113,084 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 713,084 433500 Traffic Eng Lights 113,084 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 713,084 Expense Total 113,084 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 713,084 C-26 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 3815 - Gilbert Street Streetscape Streetscape elements including brick, trees, lighting, and bike racks on segments of Gilbert St between Prentiss & Burlington. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 310,000 310,000 Receipts Total 310,000 310,000 434710 Roads 310,000 310,000 Expense Total 310,000 310,000 3816 - Traffic Calming Annual appropriation for providing traffic calming. 393150 Road Use Tax 58,870 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 208,870 Receipts Total 58,870 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 208,870 433500 Traffic Eng Lights 58,870 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 208,870 Expense Total 58,870 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 208,870 3821 - Overwidth Paving/Sidewalks Annual appropriation for providing extra width pavement on roadways. 393150 Road Use Tax 34,836 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 184,836 Receipts Total 34,836 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 184,836 434740 Sidewalks 34,836 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 184,836 Expense Total 34,836 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 184,836 3822 - Curb Ramps-ADA Biennial appropriation for the construction of ADA accessible curb ramps. 393150 Road Use Tax 197,110 50,000 50,000 50,000 347,110 Receipts Total 197,110 50,000 50,000 50,000 347,110 434740 Sidewalks 197,110 50,000 50,000 50,000 347,110 Expense Total 197,110 50,000 50,000 50,000 347,110 3823 - Brick Street Repairs Annual appropriation for the repair of brick streets. 393150 Road Use Tax 50,866 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,866 Receipts Total 50,866 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,866 434710 Roads 50,866 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,866 Expense Total 50,866 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 150,866 3824 - Pavement Rehabilitation Annual appropriation for resurfacing roadways. 363150 Copies/Computer Queries 330 330 393150 Road Use Tax 1,780,334 535,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 3,915,334 Receipts Total 1,780,664 535,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 3,915,664 434710 Roads 1,780,664 535,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 3,915,664 C-27 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Expense Total 1,780,664 535,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 3,915,664 3827 - Scott Blvd Overlay-Rochester to Court St Overlay Scott Blvd from Rochester Blvd to Court Street. 393150 Road Use Tax 1,793 1,793 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 400,000 400,000 Receipts Total 1,793 400,000 401,793 434710 Roads 1,793 400,000 401,793 Expense Total 1,793 400,000 401,793 3828 - Sidewalk infill Annual program to construct sidewalks where gaps exist. 393150 Road Use Tax 1,830 1,830 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 Receipts Total 1,830 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 501,830 434740 Sidewalks 1,830 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 501,830 Expense Total 1,830 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 501,830 3834 - Burlington/Madison Intersection and Median Add turn lanes and signal improvements to Burlington/Madison intersection. Replace water and sewer lines. This is the 1st phase of the Burlington St median project, from Madison to the Iowa river. 334900 Other State Grants 400,000 400,000 393210 From Water Operations 100,000 100,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 640,000 640,000 Receipts Total 1,140,000 1,140,000 434710 Roads 1,040,000 1,040,000 530300 Water Distribution System 100,000 100,000 Expense Total 1,140,000 1,140,000 3837 - Burlington Street Median Construct the Burlington St median from Gilbert St to Madison St. Project includes relocation of water and sewer u tilities. 393150 Road Use Tax 22,900 22,900 393210 From Water Operations 150,000 150,000 393220 From Wastewater Operations 300,000 300,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 1,410,000 1,410,000 Receipts-Total 22,900 1,860,000 1,882,900 434710 Roads 22,900 1,410,000 1,432,900 520300 Sewer Systems 300,000 300,000 530300 Water Distribution System 150,000 150,000 Expense Total 22,900 1,860,000 1,882,900 C - 28 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 3840 - Burlington/Clinton Intersection Improvements Construct left turn lanes at Clinton St and Burlington St. Some associated utility improvements. 393210 From Water Operations 100,000 100,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 1,040,000 1,040,000 Receipts Total 1,140,000 1,14D,000 434710 Roads 1,040,000 1,040,000 530300 Water Distribution System 100,000 100,000 Expense Total 1,140,000 1,140,000 3843 - RR Crossings- City Wide Annual appropriation for the repair of railroad crossings. 393150 Road Use Tax 136,853 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 261,853 Receipts Total 136,853 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 261,853 434710 Roads 136,853 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 261,853 Expense Total 136,853 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 261,853 3854 - American Legion Road Scott Blvd to Taft Ave Reconstruct road to urban standards and include an 8' sidewalk. 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 3,000,000 3,000,000 Receipts Total 3,000,000 3,000,000 434710 Roads 3,000,000 3,000,000 Expense Total 3,000,000 3,000,000 3868 - Mormon Trek-Left Turn Lanes Construct left turn lanes at major intersections or a continuous center lane through the corridor between Melrose and Abbey Lane. Federal STP funds are proposed for this project. 331100 Federal Grants 1,500,000 1,500,000 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 2,250,000 2,250,000 Receipts Total 3,750,000 3,750,000 434710 Roads 3,750,000 3,750,000 Expense Total 3,750,000 3,750,000 3871 - 1st Ave/IAIS RR Crossing Improvements 2013 Total Construction of a railroad overpass on First Street. Federal grant is STP funds. 331100 Federal Grants 393150 Road Use Tax 89,755 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 38,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 393420 From 11 GO Bonds Receipts Total 127,755 1,700,000 1,500,000 192,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 692,000 1,000,000 3,200,000 1,500,000 1,700,000 89,755 1,500,000 230,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 6,519,755 434710 Roads 4,445 500,000 1,000,000 3,200,000 1,500,000 6,204,445 C-29 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 434720 Bridge Construction 109,692 206,000 315,692 8xpense Total 114,137 706,000 1,000,000 3,200,000 1,500,000 6,520,137 3873 - Neighborhood Pedestrian Lighting Annual project to provide pedestrian scale lighting in neighborhoods. 334900 Other State Grants 31,509 31,509 393150 Road Use Tax 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 400,000 Receipts Total 31,509 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 431,509 433500 Traffic Eng Lights 31,509 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 431,509 Expense Total 31,509 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 431,509 3883 - McCollister Blvd-Highway 921 to Gilbert Street McCollister Boulevard will connect the future Mormon Trek Boulevard (at Hwy 921 to Gilbert Street. This section of paving is 4000 feet long, including a 500 foot long bridge over the Iowa River. 331100 Federal Grants 4,200,000 100,000 4,300,000 363150 Copies/Computer Queries 330 330 393150 Road Use Tax 251,156 251,156 393210 From Water Operations 477,000 477,000 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 1,876,368 1,876,368 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 257,564 1,442,436 1,700,000 Receipts Total 2,385,418 6,119,436 100,000 8,604,854 434710 Roads 2,047,907 2,822,436 175,308 78,056 80,941 5,204,648 434720 Bridge Construction 337,511 2,800,000 3,137,511 530300 Water Distribution System 477,000 477,000 Expense Total 2,385,418 6,099,436 175,308 78,056 80,941 8,819,159 3888 - 420th Street improvements-Hwy 6 to Taft Reconstruction of 420th Street to urban standards from Hwy 6 to Taft. Construction of sewer main. This project will facilitate expansion of the industrial park. ARISE grant funding of 50/50 may fund the road construction. 334900 Other State Grants 1,000;000 1,000,000 393220 From Wastewater Operations 500,000 500,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds .1,500,000 1,500,000 Receipts Total 2,000,000 1,000,000 3,000,000 434710 Roads 1,500,000 1,110,674 114,608 118,591 2,843,873 520300 Sewer Systems 500,000 500,000 Expense Total 2,000,000 1,110,674 114,608 118,591 3,343,873 3897 - Park Road 3rd Lane Improvement Add center turn lane on Park Rd between Lower City Park entrance and Riverside Dr. This will accommodate traffic to Rancher and on Riverside Dr. Timing of project with improvements to Park Rd bridge. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 1,140,000 1,140,000 Receipts Total 1,140,000 1,140,000 434710 Roads 1,140,000 1,140,000 Expense Total 1,140,000 1,140,000 C - 30 Activity CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 3907 - Park Road Bridge & Intersection improvements Replace bridge if we receive federal funding. If not replace bridge deck and reconfigure lanes on bridge and add a right turn lane on southbound Dubuque St. This project is eligible for federal STP funds. 331100 Federal Grants 6,400,000 6,400,000 393150 Road Use Tax 3,007 3,007 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 1,600,000 1,600,000 Receipts Total 3,007 8,000,000 8,003,007 434720 Bridge Construction 3,007 8,000,000 8,003,007 Expense Total 3,007 8,000,000 8,003,007 3910 - Bridge Maintenance/Repair Annual appropriation for the repair of bridges. 393150 Road Use Tax 56,525 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 356,525 Receipts Total 56,525 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 356,525 434720 Bridge Construction 56,525 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 356,525 Expense Total 56,525 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 356,525 3919 - Rochester Avenue Bridge Replace bridge over Ralston Creek and construct 8 foot wide sidewalk. This project will be funded with 80/20 federal bridge funds. 331100 Federal Grants 415,200 415,200 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 103,800 103,800 Receipts Total 519,000 519,000 434720 Bridge Construction 519,000 519,000 Expense Total 519,000 519,000 3920 - Burlington St Pedestrian Bridge Rehabilitation This project will rehabilitate the existing pedestrian bridge at Highway 6 and Burlington St. 334900 Other State Grants 150,000 150,000 336190 Other Local Governments 75,000 75,000 393150 Road Use Tax 3,841 40,000 85,000 128,841 Receipts Total '3,841 40,000 310,000 353,841 434720 Bridge Construction 3,841 40,000 310,000 353,841 Expense Total 3,841 40,000 310,000 353,841 3921 - Interstate 80 Aesthetic Improvements Landscaping and bridge aesthetic treatments in the Interstate 80 corridor. 336130 Coralville 20,000 20,000 393150 Road Use Tax 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 80,000 Receipts Total 40,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 434720 Bridge Construction 40,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 Expense Total 40,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 100,000 C-31 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 3925 - Dodge St/I-80 Pedestrian Bridge Pedestrian bridge over Interstate 80 at North Dodge Street(Hwy 1). 331100 Federal Grants 1,440,000 1,440,000 393150 Road Use Tax 360,000 360,000 Receipts Total 1,800,000 1,800,000 434720 Bridge Construction 1,800,000 1,800,000 Expense Total 1,800,000 1,800,000 3957 - Vehicle Wash System Construct an automated vehicle wash system for large vehicles and provide wash racks for the manual cleaning of large vehicles at the So Gilbert St Public Works Facility. 393420 From it GO Bonds 440,000 440,000 Receipts Total 440,OOD 440,000 434730 Other PW Capital Acquisition/CIP 440,000 440,000 Expense Total 440,000 440,000 3958 - Fuel Facility Construct new fuel tanks and fueling island at the So Gilbert St Public works Facility, replacing the existing fuel facilities at Riverside Dr. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 480,000 480,000 Receipts Total 480,000 480,000 434730 Other PW Capital Acquisition/CIP 480,000 480,000 Expense Total 480,000 480,000 3959 - Utility Bill Software Replacement Selection and implementation of new utility billing software. 393210 From Water Operations 224,000 224,000 393220 From Wastewater Operations 224,000 224,000 393250 From Refuse Operations 56,000 56,000 393290 From Stormwater 56,000 56,000 Receipts Total 280,000 280,000 560,000 520100 Wastewater Treatment Administratio 224,000 224,000 530100 Water System Administration & Supp 224,000 224,000 540100 Refuse Collection Administration & 56,000 56,000 580200 Storm Water Mgmt Capital Acquisiti 56,000 56,000 Expense Total 280,000 280,000 560,000 4130 - Parks Annual Improvements/Maint. Annual appropriation for maintenance and improvments in parks. FY08 includes $700,000 for potential trails allocation by City Cou ncil. 362100 Contrib & Donations 17,627 1,127 18,754 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 200,000 200,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 194,590 200,000 394,590 393412 From 03 GO Bonds 140,882 140,882 393414 From OS GO Bonds 400,000 400,000 C-32 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 119,278 72,722 192,000 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 200,000 200,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 200,000 200,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 200,000 200,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 200,000 200,000 393910 Misc Transfers In 2,914 2,914 Receipts Total 875,291 473,849 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 2,149,140 441820 Parks Operations & Maintenance 244 244 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 870,394 473,849 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 2,144,243 441880 Trail Construction 995 995 Expense Total 871,633 473,849 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 2,145,482 4136 - Hickory Hill Park Restroom and Bridge Construct a restroom and replace oldest pedestrian bridge in Hickory Hill Park, approximately 50'. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 150,000 150,000 Receipts Total 150,000 150,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 150,000 150,000 Expense Total 150,000 150,000 4137 - Frauenholtz-Miller Park Development Develop newly acquired parkland on Lower West Branch Rd adjacent to St. Patrick's church site. 362100 Contrib & Donations 57,000 57,000 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 223,000 223,000 Receipts Total 280,000 280,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 280,000 280,000 Expense Total 280,000 280,000 4145 - Cemetery Resurfacing Resurface specified roadways within Oakland Cemetery as part of the city-wide biennial asphalt resurfacing program. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393412 From 03 GO Bonds 50,102 50,102 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 Receipts Total 50,102 50,000 50,000 150,102 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 50,102 50,000 50,000 150,102 Expense Total 50,102 50,000 50,000 150,102 4146 - Soccer Park Shelters Construct two large park shelters to accommodate park patrons when large tournaments are hosted. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 150,000 150,000 Receipts Total 150,000 150,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 150,000 150,000 Expense Total 150,000 150,000 C-33 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 4151 - Riverbank Stabilization - City Park This project will repair the riverbank along City Park and south of the Park Road bridge on the eastern shore. This project is eligible for federal funds on a 65/35 matching basis. 331100 Federal Grants 310,000 310,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 90,000 90,000 Receipts Total 400,000 400,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 400,000 400,000 Expense Total 400,000 400,000 4152 - Sand Lake Recreation Area This project provides for the phased development, in accordance with the concep plan, of the newly acquired Sand Lake Recreation Area (former S & G Materials site). The area will include both recreation and conservation components. An Iowa Community Attraction and Tourism grant application will be submitted. 334900 Other State Grants 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 362100 Contrib & Donations 750,000 750,000 369100 Reimb of Expenses 2,433 2,433 382100 Land Rental 6,300 6,300 393140 General Fund CIP Funding 591,833 591,833 393150 Road Use Tax 100,000 100,000 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 500,000 500,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 2,000,000 2,000,000 393415 From 06 GO Bonds 200,000 200,000 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 500,000 500,000 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 500,000 500,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 250,000 250,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 250,000 250,000 Receipts Total 1,400,566 500,000 1,000,000 1,250,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 7,650,566 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 1,400,566 500,000 1,000,000 1,250,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 7,650,566 Expense Total 1,400,566 500,000 1,000,000 1,250,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 7,650,566 4153 - Soccer Park Improvements This project provides for the continued development and improvement to the Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park. Planned improvements include a system of trails to enhance accessibility, and to create a more park-like atmosphere in the open space areas of the facility. 362100 Contrib & Donations 5,805 5,805 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 250,000 250,000 393414 From O5 GO Bonds 18,119 18,119 393415 From 06 GO Bonds 46,971 46,971 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 13,708 39,292 53,000 Receipts Total 84,603 39,292 250,000 373,895 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 84,603 39,292 250,000 373,895 Expense Total 84,603 39,292 250,000 373,895 4160 - Peninsula Park Development of the lower elevation into a "natural park", with prairie grasses, wildflowers, native woodlands, and trails. This development will protect the City's water supply wellheads. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 300,000 300,000 C-34 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Receipts Total 3D0,000 300,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 3D0,000 300,000 Expense Total 300,000 300,000 4164 - Soccer Park Pond Construct a pond at Kickers Soccer Park to accommodate a field irrigation system. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 337,500 337,500 Receipts Total 337,500 337,500 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 337,500 337,500 Expense Total 337,500 337,500 4167 - City Park - Old Shop Repairs Replace roof and rafters and on the old park shop at City Park. Also, rebuild the retaining wall adjacent to the building, which was impacted by the flood. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 90,000 90,000 Receipts Total 90,000 90,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 90,000 90,000 Expense Total 90,000 90,000 4168 - Cemetery Storage Building Construct a 20' X 40' concrete building with attic trusses to be used for year round cold storage. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 40,000 40,000 Receipts Total 40,000 40,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 40,000 40,000 Expense Total 40,000 40,000 4169 - Infant Columbarium & Sculpture Construct a 64 niche columbarium in the Innocence section of Oakland Cemetery t accommodate ash urns for cremated infants. Will also include a sculpture of a mother & infant in a rocking chair. Sales revenue will offset the capital costs over a period of several years. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 85,000 85,000 Receipts Total 85,000 85,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 85,000 85,000 Expense Total 85,000 85,000 4170 - Court Hill Park Restroom Construct a restroom in Court Hill Park. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds Receipts Total 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP Expense Total 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 95,000 C-35 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 4171 - Kiwanis Park Restroom Construct a new restroom in Kiwanis Park. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 95,000 95,000 Receipts Total 95,000 95,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 95,000 95,000 Expense Total 95,000 95,000 4172 - College Green Park Light Replacement Replace entire light system in College Green Park. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 90,000 90,000 Receipts Total 90,000 90,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 90,000 90,000 Expense Total 90,000 90,000 4174 - Park Sidewalk Replacements Remove 3,100 lineal feet of 4 foot sidewalk and replace with 6 foot sidewalk at Mercer Park and Fairmeadows Park. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 85,000 85,000 Receipts Total 85,000 85,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 85,000 85,000 Expense Total 85,000 85,000 4203 - Pedestrian Bridge Rocky Shore to Peninsula Construct pedestrian bridge over the Iowa River to connect the Iowa River Trail to the Peninsula parkland trails, and to provide better access to the dog park and disc golf course. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 1,300,000 1,300,000 Receipts Total 1,300,000 1,300,000 441880 Trail Construction 1,300,000 1,300,000 Expense Total 1,300,000 1,300,000 4206 - Intra-City Bike Trails Annual appropriation for the construction or repair of bike trails. 393150 Road Use Tax 60,600 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 310,600 Receipts Total 60,600 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 310,600 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/C1P 1,362 1,362 441880 Trail Construction 59,238 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 309,238 Expense Total 60,600 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 310,600 4217 - Butler Bridge Pedestrian Trail Construction of a separate pedestrian bridge on widened piers on the Butler Bridge, allowing for separated pedestrian and bicycle travel. This project will be utilizing Federal STP grant funds. C-36 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name - Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 334900 Other State Grants 440,000 440,000 336130 Coralville 27,500 27,500 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 82,500 82,500 Receipts Total 550,000 550,000 441880 Trail Construction 550,000 550,000 Expense Total 550,000 550,000 4218 - City Park Trail Lighting Install pedestrian lighting on the trail system in City Park. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 240,000 240,000 Receipts Total 240,000 240,000 441880 Trail Construction 240,000 240,000 Expense Total 240,000 240,000 4219 - Scott Park Development & Trail Development of Scott Park into a neighborhood/regional park, some excavation to the detention basin, and the construction of a new trail to connect with other trails in east Iowa City. Restroom included. 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 780,000 780,000 Receipts Total 780,000 780,000 441880 Trail Construction 780,000 780,000 Expense Total 780,000 780,000 4313 - Public Art Annual appropriation for the acquistion of art. 346700 Special Events 214 214 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393412 From 03 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393414 From OS GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393415 From 06 GO Bonds 49,265 735 50,000 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 Receipts Total 199,479 150,735 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 550,214 458000 Community & Econ Dvlp CIP 191,032 150,735 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 541,767 Expense Total 191,032 150,735 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 541,767 4316 - Recreation Center Improvements Rebuild east entrance to Robert A. Lee Center including accessible ramp, railing, fencing, steps, and lighting. Also, enclose the pool balcony so it can be used and enjoyed by center patrons. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 225,000 225,000 Receipts Total 225,000 225,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 225,000 225,000 Expense Total 225,000 225,000 C-37 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 4320 - North Market Square Park Redevelopment Work with the Northside Neighborhood Association and Horace Mann School to redevelop the park. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 280,000 280,000 Receipts Total 280,000 280,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 280,000 280,000 Expense Total 280,000 280,000 4321 - Waterworks Park Hospice Memorial Develop a parklike Hospice Memorial area in Waterworks Prairie Park for passive enjoyment/contemplation. 362100 Contrib & Donations 25,000 25,000 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 90,000 90,000 Receipts Total 115,000 115,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 115,000 115,000 Expense Total 115,000 115,000 4322 - Outdoor Ice Rink/Skate Park Construct an outdoor ice rink suitable for figure skating or hockey. During war weather the rink could be used as a skate park and/or for roller hockey.($700k can be funded without an election) 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 1,500,000 1,500,000 Receipts Total 1,500,000 1,500,000 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP 1,500,000 1,500,000 Expense Total 1,500,000 1,500,000 4323 - Recreation Center Elevator Replacement Replace the elevator car, hydraulics, and controls on the elevator at the Recreation Center. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 70,000 70,000 Receipts Total 70,000 70,000 445100 Culture & Recreation Capital Acqui 70,000 70,000 Expense Total 70,000 70,000 4325 - Mercer Pool Solarium Renovation Replace all windows,doors, and ventilation system in the solarium at Mercer Park. 393420 From 11 GO Bonds Receipts Total 441870 Parks Capital Acquisition/CIP Expense Total 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 220,000 zzo,ooo C-38 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 4326 - Scanlon Elevated Running/Walking Track Construct an elevated running/walking track in the Scanlon Gym facility. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 880,000 880,000 Receipts Total 880,000 880,000 445100 Culture & Recreation Capital Acqui 880,000 880,000 Expense Total 880,000 880,000 4404 - Radio System Upgrade Gradual replacement of the Radio Communications System that was originally purchased in 1991. 336110 Johnson County 20,320 20,320 336130 Coralville 7,620 7,620 336190 Other Local Governments 22,538 22,538 393414 From O5 GO Bonds 87,775 12,225 100,000 393415 From 06 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 600,000 600,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 300,000 300,000 Receipts Total 138,253 912,225 300,000 1,350,478 421700 Police Capital Acquisition/CIP 138,253 912,225 300,000 1,350,478 Expense Total 138,253 912,225 300,000 1,350,478 4406 - Fire Apparatus vehicles scheduled for replacement within this plan are: FY08 Smeal Pumper $448,102 FY09 E-One Engine $509,000 FY10 Smeal Engine $524,000 Purchased in FY09 FY11 Heavy Rescue Truck $452,500 FY12 Spartan Engine $572,000 369100 Reimb of Expenses 134,065 134,065 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 572,000 572,000 393415 From 06 GO Bonds 1,500,000 124,000 1,624,000 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 345,156 102,000 947,156 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 848,102 848,102 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 509,000 509,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 452,500 452,500 Receipts Total 1,979,221 1,583,102 452,500 572,000 4,586,823 422800 Fire Capital Acquisition/CIP 1,979,221 1,602,125 452,500 572,000 4,605,846 Expense Total 1,979,221 1,602,125 452,500 572,000 4,605,846 4407 - Fire Station #4 Land acquistion and design only. Cons truction is for FY10. 393140 General Fund CIP Funding 2,000,000 2,000,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 28,153 28,153 393412 From 03 GO Bonds 100,000 100,000 393414 Prom OS GO Bonds 36,077 163,923 200,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 700,000 700,000 Receipts Total 164,230 163,923 2,700,000 3,028,153 422800 Fire Capital Acquisition/CIP 174,102 163,923 2,700,000 3,038,025 C-39 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Expense Total 174,102 163,923 2,700,000 3,038,025 4415 - Fire Station #2 Expansion Remodeling and expansion of Fire Station #2 on Emerald Street. 393140 General Fund CIP Funding 1,950,000 1,950,000 393415 From 06 GO Bonds 14,204 14,204 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 700,000 700,000 Receipts Total 2,664,204 2,664,204 422800 Fire Capital Acquisition/CIP 990,758 1,673,446 1,862 2,666,066 Expense Total 990,758 1,673,446 1,862 2,666,066 4421 - Evidence Storage Facility Construction of a 12,000 sf facility to house evidence for criminal trials. 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 871,400 871,400 Receipts Total 871,400 871,400 421700 Police Capital Acquisition/CIP 871,400 871,400 Expense Total 871,400 871,400 4512 - 420th Street industrial Park This project will construct the infrastructure and site grading for the industrial park on 420th Street. 393140 General Fund CIP Funding 3,905,000 3,905,000 393220 From Wastewater Operations 1,500,000 1,500,000 Receipts Total 5,405,000 5,405,000 434710 Roads 3,9D5,000 3,905,000 520300 Sewer Systems 1,500,000 1,500,000 Expense Total 5,405,000 5,405,000 4704 - City Hall - Other Projects Annual appropriation for improvements to City Hall. 363150 Copies/Computer Queries 345 345 393140 General Fund CIP Funding 111,383 111,383 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393411 From FY13 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393416 From 07 GO Bonds 84,896 40,104 125,000 393417 From 08 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393418 From 09 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393419 From 10 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 393420 From 11 GO Bonds 50,000 50,000 Receipts Total 196,624 140,104 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 536,728 419200 General Government Capital Acguis i 196,624 140,104 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 536,728 Expense Total 196,624 140,104 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 536,728 4716 - Geographic Informations System Software Procure and install a geographical information system that would provide an interactive referenced database for City facililties from infrastructure records to permitting, with crime and accident data also included. 393410 From FY12 GO Bonds 927,000 927,000 C - 40 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Summary by Name -Presentation Activity Receipts Total 419200 General Government Cap Expense Total Report Receipts Total Report Expense Total Prior Years 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total 927,000 927,000 ital Acquisi 927,000 927,000 927,000 927,000 17,134,355 15,846,307 28,660,750 31,076,550 17,309,570 16,603,650 126,631,18 15,419,802 17,532,776 28,848,594 31,269,214 17,509,102 16,603,650 127,183,13 C-41 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Projects by Funding Source -Receipts Detail Project 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Federal Grants 3416 Runway 7 Design, EA, Extension 92,470 3420 Runway 7 Grading FAA #11 & #12 25,961 3421 Runway 7 Paving/Lighting FAA # 938,036 3425 FAA Runway 7 Grading/Obstr Mit 608,143 3426 Runway 7-25 Rehab PCC Full Dep 1,664,259 3427 Runway 7 Parallel Taxiway Grad 2,033,950 3428 Runway 7-25 Parallel Taxiway P 2,095,290 3429 Runway 12-30 Rehabilitation 4,110,220 3430 Apron Reconstruction & Connect 1,259,842 3441 Runway 7-25 & 12-30 Rehabilita 2,870,760 3442 Runway 12-30 Obstruction Mitig 451,250 3443 Airport Equipment Shelter 142,500 3803 Lower Muscatine-Kirkwood to Fi 860,000 860,000 3868 Mormon Trek-Left Turn Lanes 1,500,000 3871 1st Ave/IAIS RR Crossing Impro 1,700,000 3883 McCollister Blvd-Highway 921 t 4,200,000 100,000 3907 Park Road Bridge & Intersectio 6,400,000 3919 Rochester Avenue Bridge 415,200 3925 Dodge St/I-80 Pedestrian Bridg 1,440,000 4151 Riverbank Stabilization - City 310,000 Total: 7,528,869 4,140,760 16,113,120 3,595,290 2,699,842 Other State Grants 3424 Hard Surface Floors Bldgs B & 6,381 3432 Rehabilitate South T Hangar Ta 9,807 3434 Rehab North Taxilane Access to 147,775 3437 Corporate Hangar L 9I090IOF7300 500,000 3834 Burlington/Madison Intersectio 400,000 3888 420th Street Improvements-Hwy 1,000,000 3920 Burlington St Pedestrian Bridg 150,000 ' 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 1,000,000 1,000,000 4201 Court Hill Trail 305,676 4217 Butler Bridge Pedestrian Trail 440,000 Total: 469,639 1,990,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 Iowa City Comm Schools 4165 Mercer Aquatic HVAC Replacemen 14,375 Total: 14,375 Coralville 3921 Interstate 80 Aesthetic Improv 20,000 4217 Butler Bridge Pedestrian Trail 27,500 Total: 20,000 27,500 Other Local Governments 3920 Burlington St Pedestrian Bridg 75,000 Total: 75,000 Dev Fee-Sdwlk/Paving 3811 Sycamore St-Highway 6 to City 100,000 Total: 100,000 C - 42 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Projects by Funding Source - Receipts Detail Project 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Contrib & Donations 3803 Lower Muscatine-Kirkwood to Fi 300,000 300,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 1,127 4137 Frauenholtz-Miller Park Develo 57,000 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 750,000 4319 Wetherby Splash Pad 100,000 4321 Waterworks Park Hospice Memori 25,000 Total: 101,127 1,050,000 300,000 82,000 Reimb of Damages 4142 Rec Center Window Replacement 115,000 Total: 115,000 Miscellaneous Other Income 3423 Aviation Commerce Park South 750,000 Total: 750,000 Bond Sales 4907 2009 GO Construction Funds 9,200,000 4908 2010 GO Construction Funds 10,100,000 4909 2011 GO Construction Funds 10,900,000 4910 2012 GO Construction Funds 6,900,000 Total: 9,200,000 10,100,000 10,900,000 6,900,000 General Fund CIP Funding 4131 Open Space-Land Acquisition 50,000 4318 Senior Center Boiler & Chiller 54,107 4407 Fire Station #4 2,000,000 4512 420th Street Industrial Park 3,905,000 Total: 104,107 5,905,000 Road Use Tax 3807 Street Pavement Marking 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 185,000 3816 Traffic Calming 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 3821 Overwidth Paving/Sidewalks 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 3822 Curb Ramps-ADA 50,000 50,000 50,000 3823 Brick Street Repairs 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 3824 Pavement Rehabilitation 535,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 3832 Dubuque/Church Radius Improvem 74,864 3843 RR Crossings- City Wide 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 3873 Neighborhood Pedestrian Lighti 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 3910 Bridge Maintenance/Repair 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 3920 Burlington St Pedestrian Bridg 40,000 85,000 3921 Interstate 80 Aesthetic Improv 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 3925 Dodge St/I-80 Pedestrian Bridg 360,000 3955 Salt Storage Building 85,000 4206 Intra-City Bike Trails 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Total: 1,204,864 1,005,000 970,000 920,000 1,310,000 From Water Operations 3204 Annual Water Main Projects 700,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 600,000 3264 Dewey St Water Main 94,000 3265 Golf View Water Main 60,000 3266 Laurel/Carrol/Highland Water M 68,000 C - 43 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Projects by Funding Source - Receipts Detail Project 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 3268 Hwy 218 Water Main Ext-Morman 279,000 3270 Roosevelt St Water Main - Sher 73,760 3271 1700-1800 Morningside Dr Water 176,873 3272 Koser Ave - Melrose to George/ 213,298 3273 Highland Court Water Main 165,000 3274 Water Plant Automatic Source T 140,000 3834 Burlington/Madison Intersectio 100,000 3837 Burlington Street Median 150,000 3840 Burlington/Clinton Intersectio 100,000 3856 Lower West Branch Road Reconst 400,000 3883 McCollister Blvd-Highway 921 t 477,000 3959 Utility Bill Software Replacem 224,000 Total: 3,070,931 700,000 750,000 600,000 700,000 From Wastewater Operations 3101 Annual Sewer Main Projects 300,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 3132 Highlander Lift Station Force 450,000 3133 Rapid Creek Watershed Sewer Se 85,000 3837 Burlington Street Median 300,000 3888 420th Street Improvements-Hwy 500,000 3959 Utility Bill Software Replacem 224,000 4512 420th Street Industrial Park 1,500,000 Total: 1,335,000 2,224,000 800,000 500,000 500,000 From Parking Operations 3009 Parking Access Controls for Ca 630,000 3011 Elevator Upgrades 300,000 300,000 3012 Near Southside Multi-use Parki 200,000 Total: 930,000 500,000 From Airport Operations 3433 West Terminal Apron Rehabilita 44,619 3434 Rehab North Taxilane Access to 24,778 3436 UI Hangar Expansion 352,751 Total: 422,148 From Refuse Operations 3959 Utility Bill Software Replacem 56,000 Total: 56,000 From Landfill Operations 3315 Landfill Cell FY09 7,000,000 3316 Eastside Recycling Center 81,641 2,000,000 Total: 7,081,641 2,000,000 From Stormwater 3621 Sandusky Stormsewer 635,000 3622 North Gilbert Street Box Culve 360,000 3959 Utility Bill Software Replacem 56,000 Total: 691,000 360,000 From FY12 GO Bonds 3428 Runway 7-25 Parallel Taxiway P 110,280 3814 Traffic Signal Projects 120,000 C - 44 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Projects by Funding Source - Receipts Detail Project 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 3828 Sidewalk Infill 100,000 3868 Mormon Trek-Left Turn Lanes 2,250,000 3871 1st Ave/IRIS RR Crossing Impro 1,500,000 3897 Park Road 3rd Lane Improvement 1,140,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 200,000 4137 Frauenholtz-Miller Park Develo 223,000 4145 Cemetery Resurfacing 50,000 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 500,000 4153 Soccer Park Improvements 250,000 4160 Peninsula Park 300,000 4164 Soccer Park Pond 337,500 4203 Pedestrian Bridge Rocky Shore 1,300,000 4313 Public Art 50,000 4321 Waterworks Park Hospice Memori 90,000 4326 Scanlon Elevated Running/Walki 880,000 4406 Fire Apparatus 572,000 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 50,000 4716 Geographic Informations System 927,000 Total: 10,612,280 337,500 From FY13 GO Bonds 3430 Apron Reconstruction & Connect 66,308 3802 Rohret Rd Improvements-Phoenix 2,150,000 3814 Traffic Signal Projects 120,000 3828 Sidewalk Infill 100,000 3840 Burlington/Clinton Intersectio 1,040,000 3854 American Legion Road Scott Blv 3,000,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 200,000 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 2,000,000 4219 Scott Park Development & Trail 780,000 4313 Public Art 50,000 4322 Outdoor Ice Rink/Skate Park 1,500,000 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 50,000 Total: 11,056,308 From 05 GO Bonds 4404 Radio System Upgrade 12,225 4407 Fire Station #4 163,923 Total: 176,148 From 06 GO Bonds 4142 Rec Center Window Replacement -42,654 4313 Public Art 735 4404 Radio System Upgrade 100,000 4406 Fire Apparatus 124,000 Total: 182,081 From 07 GO Bonds 3856 Lower West Branch Road Reconst 428,000 4128 Waterworks Prairie Park 100,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 72,722 4142 Rec Center window Replacement -37,346 4149 Park Shelters 70,000 4153 Soccer Park Improvements 39,292 4157 Festival Stage/Sidewalk/Shelte 15,639 4201 Court Hill Trail 27,351 4313 Public Art 50,000 4404 Radio System Upgrade 100,000 4406 Fire Apparatus 102,000 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 40,104 C - 45 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Projects by Funding Source - Receipts Detail Project 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total: 1,007,762 From 08 GO Bonds 3819 College St Streetscape 47,000 3832 Dubuque/Church Radius Improvem 170,000 3864 Gilbert/Bowery/Prentiss - Left 21,877 3871 1st Ave/IAIS RR Crossing Impro 192,000 3883 McCollister Blvd-Highway 921 t 1,442,436 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 200,000 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 500,000 4155 Mercer Diamond Lighting/Field 19,265 4161 Napoleon Park Restroom & Conce 15,626 4201 Court Hill Trail 310,000 4313 Public Art 50,000 4317 Senior Center Roof and Tuckpoi 43,000 4318 Senior Center Boiler & Chiller 657,000 4404 Radio System Upgrade 600,000 4405 Police Records & CA Dispatch 500,000 4406 Fire Apparatus 848,102 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 50,000 4712 Payroll & Human Resources Soft 500,000 4713 Remodel Lower Level City Hall 152,116 Total: 6,318,422 From 09 GO Bonds 3426 Runway 7-25 Rehab PCC Full Dep 87,593 3803 Lower Muscatine-Kirkwood to Fi 125,000 3814 Traffic Signal Projects 120,000 3828 Sidewalk Infill 100,000 3871 1st Ave/IAIS RR Crossing Impro 500,000 3888 420th Street Improvements-Hwy 1,500,000 3955 Salt Storage Building 700,000 3956 Public Works Facility Site Wor 280,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 200,000 4162 Soccer Field Renovation 100,000 4163 Napoleon Softball Field Renova 180,000 4313 Public Art 50,000 4315 Rec Center Roof 263,779 4319 Wetherby Splash Pad 100,000 4324 Mercer Pool Filter System Repl 250,000 4404 Radio System Upgrade 100,000 4405 Police Records & CA Dispatch 500,000 4406 Fire Apparatus 509,000 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 50,000 4714 Remodel City Hall Lobby and Re 210,000 Total: 5,925,372 From 10 GO Bonds 3441 Runway 7-25 & 12-30 Rehabilita 151,090 3803 Lower Muscatine-Kirkwood to Fi 627,500 3811 Sycamore St-Highway 6 to City 1,930,000 3814 Traffic Signal Projects 120,000 3815 Gilbert Street Streetscape 310,000 3828 Sidewalk Infill 100,000 3834 Burlington/Madison Intersectio 640,000 3871 1st Ave/IAIS RR Crossing Impro 1,000,000 3958 Fuel Facility 480,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 200,000 4145 Cemetery Resurfacing 50,000 4146 Soccer Park Shelters 150,000 4151 Riverbank Stabilization - City 90,000 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 250,000 C - 46 CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Projects by Funding Source - Receipts Detail Project 4167 City Park - Old Shop Repairs 4168 Cemetery Storage Building 4169 Infant Columbarium & Sculpture 4217 Butler Bridge Pedestrian Trail 4218 City Park Trail Lighting 4313 Public Art 4320 North Market Square Park Redev 4404 Radio System Upgrade 4407 Fire Station #4 4421 Evidence Storage Facility 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 90,000 40,000 85,000 82,500 240,000 50,000 280,000 300,000 700,000 871,400 50,000 Total: 8,887,490 From 11 GO Bonds 3427 Runway 7 Parallel Taxiway Grad 107,050 3429 Runway 12-30 Rehabilitation 216,330 3437 Corporate Hangar L 92090IOW300 500,000 3442 Runway 12-30 Obstruction Mitig 23,750 3443 Airport Equipment Shelter 7,500 3803 Lower Muscatine-Kirkwood to Fi 627,500 3811 Sycamore St-Highway 6 to City 1,095,000 3814 Traffic Signal Projects 120,000 3827 Scott Blvd Overlay-Rochester t 400,000 3828 Sidewalk Infill 100,000 3837 Burlington Street Median 1,410,000 3871 lst Ave/IRIS RR Crossing Impro 1,500,000 3907 Park Road Bridge & Intersectio 1,600,000 3919 Rochester Avenue Bridge 103,800 3957 Vehicle Wash System 440,000 4130 Parks Annual Improvements/Main 200,000 4136 Hickory Hill Park Restroom and 150,000 4152 Sand Lake Recreation Area 250,000 4170 Court Hill Park Restroom 95,000 4171 Kiwanis Park Restroom 95,000 4172 College Green Park Light Repla 90,000 4174 Park Sidewalk Replacements 85,000 4313 Public Art 50,000 4316 Recreation Center Improvements 225,000 4323 Recreation Center Elevator Rep 70,000 4325 Mercer Pool Solarium Renovatio 220,000 4406 Fire Apparatus 452,500 4704 City Hall - Other Projects 50,000 Total: 10,283,430 Interfund Loans Proceeds 7600 Airport 352,751 Total: 352,751 Receipts Total: 47,001,237 38,760,750 41,976,550 24,209,570 16,603,650 C - 47 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects Project Name Description Unfunded Amt 1 -Bridges 1 BURLINGTON ST BRIDGE- The south bridge is having a problem with delaminating $849,000 SOUTH concrete on the bottom side of the arches. 2 F STREET BRIDGE This project involves the removal and replacement of the $265,000 existing corrugated metal arch bridge with a larger bridge. 3 FOURTH AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over the South Branch $272,000 of Ralston Creek at Fourth Avenue and will include sidewalks. Possibility of approximately $75,000 state funding. 4 PRENTISS ST. BRIDGE This project involves the removal and replacement of the $398,000 existing triple corrugated metal pipe culvert with a bridge. 5 SECOND AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over Ralston Creek at $265,000 Second Avenue and will include sidewalks. 6 SIXTH AVENUE BRIDGE This project involves the removal and replacement of the $265,000 existing twin box culvert with a larger bridge. 7 THIRD AVENUE BRIDGE This project will replace the bridge over the South Branch $265,000 of Ralston Creek at Third Avenue. 2 -Streets 8 AMERICAN LEGION/SCOTT Install traffic signal and construct turn lanes at American $583,000 BLVD INTERSECT Legion and Scott Boulevard intersection. 9 BENTON STREET - This is a capacity related improvement identified by the $3,713,000 ORCHARD TO OAKNOLL Arterial Street Plan. 10 BRICK STREET Reconstruct 1 block of brick street as a pilot project. $412,000 REPLACEMENT 11 DODGE ST -GOVERNOR Street Reconstruction. $5,644,000 TO BOWERY 12 DUBUQUE RD PAVING - Reconstruct and upgrade to urban cross sections. $637,000 BRISTOL TO DODGE 13 DUBUQUE ST ELEVATION This project will elevate the north bound lane of Dubuque $2,652,000 Street between Taft Speedway and Foster Road. This project will eliminate the frequent flooding of the north bound lanes caused by locally heavy rains. 14 FOSTER RD- DUBUQUE TO This project will pave this portion of Foster Road. $955,000 PRAIRIE DU CHIEN 15 GILBERT / US 6 Reconstruct the intersection of Gilbert & US 6 to include $4,429,000 INTERSECTION LEFT TURN dual left turn lanes on Gilbert St. LANES C - 48 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects 16 GILBERT ST IAIS This project relocates the sidewalks of the Gilbert St. $299,000 UNDERPASS underpass at the IAIS Railroad. The sidewalks are moved further from the street and existing erosion problems are addressed. 17 OLD HWY 218 Streetscape improvements on Old Hwy 218 entrance - $743,000 STREETSCAPE Sturgis Ferry Park to US Hwy 6. This project includes landscaping, lighting and sidewalk improvements. The project should be coordinated with Sturgis Ferry Park upgrade and /or Riverside Drive Redevelopment project. 18 HIGHWAY 965 EXTENSION This project will be initial phase of constructing Hwy 965 $5,305,000 extended from the south side of Hwy 218 to Melrose Avenue to arterial standards. 19 INTERSTATE 80 AESTHETIC This project will construct landscaping and bridge aesthetic $618,000 IMPROVEMENTS treatments in the I-80 corridor. The intention is $200,000 per year for 3 years. 20 KEOKUK ST This project would reconstruct Keokuk St. and remove the $1,634,000 RECONSTRUCTION sharp turn south of Highland Avenue. 21 LAURA DRIVE This project would reconstruct Laura Drive between Foster $530,000 RECONSTRUCTION Rd. and Forest View Trailer Court. 22 MCCOLLISTER -GILBERT Extend proposed McCollister Boulevard from Gilbert Street $6,896,000 ST TO SCOTT BLVD to Scott Boulevard. 23 MELROSE-WEST-218/CITY Reconstruct and improve street to urban design standards. $3,183,000 LIMITS 24 MYRTLE/ RIVERSIDE Signalization of intersection based on warrants. The $824,000 INTERSECTION project will also include paving improvements. 25 N DUBUQUE ST MEDIAN This project will improve the pavement cross section, $520,000 IMPROV. provides trees and shrubbery in the median and improved low level lighting. 26 OAKDALE BLVD This project would construct an extension north across I-80 $5,305,000 to a new intersection with Iowa Hwy 1. 27 RIVERSIDE DRIVE Streetscape improvements on Riverside Drive between $2,122,000 STREETSCAPE Myrtle Avenue and US Hwy 6. Project includes consolidation of driveways, undergrounding of utilities, installing sidewalks and landscaping. 28 S GILBERT ST Reconstruction from Benton Street to Stevens Drive. This $3,183,000 IMPROVEMENTS project does not include improvements to the Gilbert St. / Highway 6 intersection. 29 SIDEWALK-BENTON Install and widen sidewalks on Benton Street between $849,000 STREET Riverside Drive and Sunset Street. Existing sidewalks would be widened from 4 feet to 8 feet wide. C - 49 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects 30 SOUTH ARTERIAL AND Construction of a south arterial street and bridge over the BRIDGE, US218 TO Iowa River, connecting from Old Hwy 218/US 218 GILBERT STREET interchange on the west side of the Iowa River to Gilbert Street/Sycamore 'L' intersection . 31 SYCAMORE-CITY LIMITS TO Reconstruct Sycamore to arterial standards from City limits 'L' to the Sycamore L. Storm sewer, sidewalk improvements and bike lanes are included. 32 SYCAMORE-HWY 6 TO This project involves additional lanes to improve capacity. DEFOREST 33 TAFT AVENUE 34 TAFT SPEEDWAY 3 -Parking & Transit Lower West Branch to American Legion Road. This project will elevate Taft Speedway. 35 U SMASH 'EM DEMOLITION Demolition of the U-Smash'm bulding; securing adjacent foundations; and restoration of the area to grass. This does not include demolition of the bus depot of the Wilson's building. (A water pipe will need to be relocated before demolition can occur.) 4 - Ped & Bike Trails 36 CITY PARK TRAIL This project calls for the replacement of the old section of IMPROVEMENTS trail in the southeast portion of the park and relocating it closer to the river. Another part of the project is to expand the trail system by constructing a new section of trail near the bottom of the wooded hill south of the Boys' Baseball fields. 37 HWY 1 SIDEWALK /TRAIL Construct a 10 foot wide sidewalk along IA Hwy 1 between Riverside Drive (Old 218) and Mormon Trek Boulevard. 38 HWY 6 TRAIL - Extend existing trail along Hwy 6 between Broadway to BROADWAY/SYCAMORE Sycamore Street. 39 HWY 6 TRAIL -SYCAMORE Extend existing trail along Hwy 6 between Sycamore Street TO LAKESIDE and Lakeside Drive. 40 IA RIVER TRAIL - BENTON Relocate a portion of Iowa River Corridor Trail between ST/HWY 6 Benton Street and Clinton Street , approimately 1,500 feet. Project would relocate this portion of the trail from a high truck traffic location in front of City Carton , to along the river in back of City Carton. $14,630,000 $2,079,000 $1,432,000 $3,713,000 $2,207,000 $202,000 $292,000 $1,591,000 $2,369,000 $1,698,000 $117,000 C - 50 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects 41 IA RIVER TRAIL- Continue the River Trail project from Benton St., along the $2,122,000 BENTON/STURGIS west bank, through Sturgis Ferry Park, and construct a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over the Iowa River to connect with the existing trail on the east bank, near Napoleon Park. 42 IRC-ELKS PROPERTY Construction of a trail along the Iowa River Corridor (IRC) $849,000 on the south side of the Elks property. 43 LINN ST PED Installation of pedestrian and streetscape improvements in $359,000 IMPROVEMENTS walkway next to Van Allen Hall between Iowa Avenue and Jefferson Street. 44 LONGFELLOW/TWAIN PED Extension of Longfellow/Twain pedestrian trail to Pine $127,000 TRAIL Street. 45 N DISTRICT NATURE TRAIL Construct a trail along Williams pipeline easement from $318,000 Bristol Drive to Dubuque Street. 46 PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE Construct a pedestrian bridge over Interstate 80 at $2,575,000 OVER I-80 AT DUBUQUE Dubuque Street. STREET 47 PEDESTRIAN OVERPASS - Construction of an ADA accessible pedestrian overpass $1,061,000 BENTON ST over Benton Street at Roosevelt School. 48 RIVERSIDE DRIVE PED Construction of a pedestrian tunnel through the railroad $849,000 TUNNEL embankment to provide a pedestrian route on the west side of Riverside Drive south of Myrtle Avenue. 49 SAND LAKE TRAIL (Behind Develop awalking/biking trail around Sand Lake (behind $424,000 Hills Bank) Hills Bank) to tie in with existing Iowa River Trail and the Highway 6 Trail. 50 SHIMEK SCHOOL / FOSTR Construct a trail north of Shimek School to future Foster $74,000 RD EXT TRAIL Road. 51 SIDEWALK-HIGHWAY 921 Construct a 10 foot wide sidewalk along S. Riverside Drive $637,000 (Old 218) between US Hwy 6 and the future extension of Mormon Trek Boulevard. 52 WILLOW CREEK TRAIL - Construct a trail from Willow Creek Drive, under Highway $796,000 PHASE III One, around perimeter of airport, to connect with Iowa River Corridor (IRC) Trail. 53 WILLOW CREEK TRAIL- Connect Willow Creek Trail from its current west terminus $2,575,000 WEST via a tunnel under Highway 218, to connect with the trail in Hunters Run Park and further west. 5 -Wastewater 54 NORTH BRANCH DAM This project extends easterly along Ralston Creek from the $3,533,000 TRUNK SEWER North Branch Dam to Scott Boulevard. C-51 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects 55 NORTHEAST TRUNK Reconstruction of an under-sized sewer through the $4,778,000 SEWER northeast neighborhoods. 56 ROHRET ROAD LIFT Construction of a lift station south of Rohret Road and $1,249,000 STATION adjacent to the east property line of Hwy 965 extended. This project will be necessary to accommodate growth in the southwest district and to accommodate future expansion of the landfill. 57 ROHRET SOUTH SEWER This project would extend the 30" sanitary sewer along $1,061,000 Abbey Lane from Burry Drive to the west side of Highway 218. This project will allow development within the watershed of Highway 218. 58 SCOTT BLVD TRUNK This project will extend the Scott Boulevard Trunk Sewer $1,273,000 SEWER - IAIS/WINDSOR from the north side of the Iowa Interstate Railroad at the RIDGE Scott Six Industrial Park to the lift station currently serving the Windsor Ridge Subdivision. This project would allow the Windsor Ridge 6 -Water 59 TAFT/COURT GROUND Construction of a one million gallon buried potable water $1,326,000 STORAGE RESERVOIR storage reservoir including pumping facilities. Land Acquisition was in FY02, FY03. 7 - Stormwater 60 CARSON LAKE REGIONAL Construction of a regional storm water management facility $1,061,000 STORMWATR on the middle branch of Willow Creek immediately west of Highway 218. This facility will serve development west of Highway 218 and south of Rohret Road. Rohret South Sewer project is a prerequisite. 61 IOWA AVENUE CULVERT This project will repair a box culvert that carries Ralston $318,000 REPAIRS Creek under Iowa Avenue. 62 N BRANCH BASIN Aerial mapping done for the update to the flood plain maps $123,000 EXCAVATION revealed that sedimentation has consumed a portion of the capacity of the facility. This basin is located in Hickory Hill Park. 63 OLYMPIC COURT Stormsewer retrofit to relieve localized flooding from $424,000 STORMWATER stormwater runoff. 64 SUNSET ST STORM SEWER The area just north and south of Kineton Green, east of $403,000 Sunset, has experienced back yard flooding and drainage problems. 8 -Parks & Recreation 65 DESTINATION/ADVENTURE Replace playground equipment in upper City Park with a $750,000 PLAYGROUND "destination/adventure playground" as recommended in the Parks & Rec Master Plan. C - 52 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects 66 DOG PARK Construct a second large dog park, probably in the south $220,000 central part of the city, as recommended in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 67 MESQUAKIE PARK This project will cover the entire old landfill with soil for $1,591,000 safety purposes in order to open up the green space for passive/semi-passive public use. 68 PARK SHELTER Replace Creekside and Happy Hollow Shelter/Restroom $170,000 IMPROVEMENTS buildings. 69 PENINSULA PARK ENTRY Construct a sidewalk adjacent to the entry road into $100,000 SIDEWALK Peninsula Park to reduce safety concerns with pedestrians utilizing the same narrow road utilized by motor vehicles. 70 REC CENTER EXPANSION Expand the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center; $5,305,000 likely expansion would be to the east over the existing parking lot which would allow for an expanded gymnasium as well as additional space for racquetball, arts and crafts, community meetings and other activities. 71 RECREATION /AQUATIC As recommended in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, $1,800,000 CENTER construct a major new Recreation & Aquatic Center, probably in the western part of Iowa City. 72 REDEVELOP CREEKSIDE Renovate Creekside Park as recommended in the Parks & $300,000 PARK Receation Master Plan. 73 SAND PRAIRIE Take steps to clear, re-seed and perform low impact $265,000 ENHANCEMENT & development on the 38 acre sand prairie and adjacent PRESERVATION McCollister property acquired in 2004/05. The primary objective is to re-introduce sand prairie grasses in this area and construct a nature trail and small parking area. 74 WEST SIDE PARK Acquire and develop land for a major new parkin the west $1,650,000 part of the city, as recommended in the Parks & Recreation Master Plan. 11 -Other Projects 75 CEMETERY MAUSOLEUM Construction of a mausoleum. $371,000 76 CHAUNCEY SWAN This project involves the reuse of components of the old $117,000 FOUNTAIN City plaza foruntain. 77 FIBER OPTIC SYSTEM This project connects outlying City buildings onto the fiber $371,000 optic backbone, greatly increasing data transmission capacity. 78 FIRE STATION #1 Relocate and expand /modernize Central Fire Station #1. $10,609,000 RELOCATION 79 FIRE STATION #5 Construction of Fire Station #5 in the South Planning $2,652,000 District. C - 53 city of Iowa city Capital Improvements Program Unfunded Projects 80 FIRE STATION #6 Construction of Fire Station #6 in the Southwest Planning $2,652,000 District. 81 FIRE TRAINING FACILITY This project will construct a state of the art fire training $944,000 facility to address all aspects of emergency service delivery including fire suppression, emergency medical services, hazardous material releases and rescue. The facility will be used for new recruits, continuing education for veteran firefighters, and shared with the Johnson County Mutual Aid Association. 82 OLD BUS DEPOT LAND Acquisition of the old bus depot from the Parking Fund. City $424,000 ACQUISITION Council removed from CIP plan and placed on unfunded at their 1/30/07 budget session. 83 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANC E Construction of new Equipment Maintenance Facility at the $8,652,000 FACILITY So. Gilbert St. Public Works site, replacing the existing facility at Riverside Dr. 84 STREETS AND WATER Construct new building at the So. Gilbert St. Public Works $6,286,000 DISTRIBUTION FACILITY site to accommodate the Streets, Traffic Engineering, Refuse, and Water Distribution Divisions. 85 RIVERSIDE DRIVE This project includes methane abatement, excavation, and $2,313,000 REDEVELOPMENT fill at the 7 acre site owned by the City at Riverside Dr. and Hwy 6. This site preparation would allow for marketing of this property for commercial development. 86 SUMMIT ST. HISTORIC Streetscape and intersection elements through Summit $276,000 PLAN Street Historic District. 87 ANIMAL FACILITY New Animal Care and Adoption Center comprising of $4,680,000 12,000 square feet. GRAND TOTAL -ALL PROJECTS: $ 164,758,000 C - 54 ~~~~ CarridorFree~rel~ess;lnc- PU, Box 6S~ Iowa Ciry, IA 524 ~~~ ww~rrcfreewrs~.org .~ January 28, 2009 ~r `4: ~`" Mayor and City Council `'~ `_~ City of Iowa City `=--~' 'ice 410 E. Washington Street ~ • ~,•; ~ ~;- ~µ Iowa City, Iowa 52240 ` ~~' _,~, :~. .. RE: Community Event & Program Funding Request for FY2010 ~ `~'~' Dear Mayor and City Council: On behalf of the cFree Wireless Board of Directors, I would like to thank you for considering our grant request under the Community Event and Program Funding. I had hoped to make a presentation in person with the other applicants, but we rarely receive mail in our PO Box and I did not find the meeting notice soon enough to be placed on the agenda this evening, so I will .provide a brief background on the project. The cFree Wireless Network began in early 2005 when two groups of young professionals, one in Iowa City and one in Cedar Rapids, met at a community event .and discovered a common interest: Providing free, wireless internet access in key, public spaces within the Corridor. From the summer of 2005 to the fall of 2006, cFree Wireless successfully installed wireless internet access coverage in the Iowa City Pedestrian Mall, Downtown Cedar Rapids, and the Iowa River Landing and two other locations'in Coralville. Initial project funding and assistance came from many sources, including the Cedar Rapids Downtown District, Linn County, City of Coralville, Avalon Networks (now LightEdge), and Communications Engineering Company (CEC). Cedar Rapids businesses and the City of Coralville .have both invested over $35,000 .each into the project. We have also seen interest from groups such as the Iowa City Area Development Group, wanting to show potential incoming .businesses that the Corridor is a progressive community with amenities such as cFree Wireless. If we are awarded the $2500 grant, it will be used to cover the internet service provider fee for the Iowa City Pedestrian Mall in FY 2010, with any remaining funds set aside for network maintenance. Again, thank you for your time and your consideration of our grant request. Sincerely, Scott Larson, resident, cFree Wireless Phone: 319-248-1728 BUDGET SUMMARY FOR 2008/PROPOSAL FOR 2009 BACK 2 SCHOOL PICNIC & FEED THE NEEDY 4 THE HOLIDAY COST FOR PICNIC 2008 BACK PACKS/BAGS: $600.00 SCHOOL SUPPLIES: $400.00 MEATS : $350.00 OTHER FOODS & SNACKS: 200.00 SODA,JUICE,WATER : $150.00 RENTAL FEES: $75.00 TOTALS = $1775.00 COST TO FEED THE NEEDY 2008 75 FOOD BOXES FOR FAMILIES CHURCH SPENT =$300.00 DONATIONS =$400.00 ROOM RENTAL =$30.00 TOTAL= $730.00 PROJECTIONS FOR 2009 PICNIC 150 BACK PACKS =$800.00 SCHOOL SUPPLIES FOR 150 YOUTH= $600.00 MEATS TO FEED 300 GUESTS= $500.00 OTHER FOODS FOR PREPARATIONfSNACKS= $ 300.00 SODA, JUICE & WATER TO FEED 300 = $200.00 RENTAL & EQUIPMENT ENTERTAINMENT FEES = $250.00 TOTALS = $2750.00 PROJECTIONS FOR FEED THE NEEDY 2009 DRY GOODS/FOODS FOR 150 BOXES/FAMILIES = $1500.00 150 TURKIESlHAMS = $2000.00 EQUIPMENT TRUCK/ROOM RENTAL = $100.00 TOTALS = $3600.00 /-~2 ~=o~ Hawkeye Area Council Boy Scouts pf America Crib Scout Day Camp • Held Annually at the Johnson County Fairgrounds $40 participant fee includes t-shirt and all program/ activity supplies • Nearly 350 Cub Scouts participate • Staffed by 50 adult volunteers • All activities are age appropriate and have included: o UI Air Care demonstrations o BB Gun & Archery Shooting o American Legion flag etiquette o Athletic Stations o Johnson Co. Conservation presentations o Team Building Activities o Crafts /-~8-oy ~~ ~~ 2009 Important Dates: January 15 Artist applications for the Iowa Arts Festival available online January 24 FREE Artist Workshop at the Iowa City Public Library,1-4 pm January 25 Winterfest in Coralville - Summer of the Arts is sponsoring some fun outdoor activities during Winterfest, come join the fun! February 13 The Neville Brothers and Dr. John with the Lower 911 - a joint fundraiser with Summer of the Arts and The Englert Theatre. March 1 Last day to submit your application for the 2009 Arts Fair! April 1-4 Mission Creek Festival -NEW this year, look for the Literary Workshops and readings sponsored by Summer of the Arts! May 21 Thursday Night special performance of the City High & West High Jazz Ensembles on the Iowa City pedestrian plaza May 29 Friday Night Concert Series Kicks Off and continues each Friday through September 11 on the Iowa City pedestrian plaza. June 5-7 Iowa Arts Festival! June 13 The MidWestOne Bank Free Movie Series begins and continues each Saturday through August. July 3-5 Toyota-Scion of Iowa City Jazz Festival August 28-30 Sand in the City -Join us for a brand new community event which will help raise funds for ALL of the Summer of the Arts events. Team sponsorships are available now, contact Mary Frieden, email mare summerofthearts.org or call 319-337-7944. Letter to Iowa City City Council from the Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee. Page 1 of 1 Marian Karr From: Mark T. Seabold [mseabold@shive-hattery.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 1:53 PM To: Council Subject: Letter to Iowa City City Council from the Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee. Please distribute this letter to Iowa City City Council members prior to the January 28, 2009 work session. Dear Iowa City City Council, As chairperson of the Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee, I would like to strongly encourage that the Public Art funding of $50,000 budgeted for Fiscal Year 2010 be preserved as you work your way through various options to reduce City expenditures. The projects produced from these funds are critical to maintaining what we all appreciate as our City's quality of life, cultural interest and energy. Ongoing projects such as Poetry in Public, the downtown Iowa Sculptor's Showcase pad, the Peninsula Park Showcase pad, Recognition of Art in Non-Public Spaces, the Neighborhood Art program and the recent Wetherby Shelter mural (produced by area grade school, junior high and high school students) have all been funded and/or supported through the Public Art program and the Public Art Advisory Committee. Larger projects, such as the large scale sculpture currently under consideration to be placed at the Iowa City North Water Plant property adjacent to Interstate 80, will provide a welcoming to residents and visitors to Iowa City as well as serve as a landmark for those passing through. The Public Art Advisory Committee is considering various fund raising and grant opportunities to fund current as well as future projects and will continue to pursue these options as they become available but want to continue to suggest that the minor annual appropriation to the Public Art Program has enabled many of our art projects to occur and acted as seed money to see many more art related projects and activities happen in our community. The Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee appreciates your continued support! Thank You, Mark Seabold Chairperson Iowa City Public Art Advisory Committee 1/27/2009 city of Iowa city PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 220 S. Gilbert ..Street TO: City Council FROM: John Westefeld/,, P/arks & Recreation Commission Chair ~~~ i~"V V V l Mike Moran, Superintendent of Recreation DATE: January 28, 2009 RE: Iowa City Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan It is with great pleasure that we give you the Iowa City Parks, Recreation and Trails aster Plan Final Report. It was with your blessing that we were able to fund this process and he p us to establish future priorities, programs and park plans. You received a short power poi t synopsis of the report late last Fall from one of our consultants to keep you abreast of the proces .The Parks and Recreation Commission will be asked to formally adopt this plan at its February 11th meeting. After that event we would like to submit this plan to you for formal adoption at your] February 24th Council meeting. Thanks again for your support of this project. We look forward to obtaining the goals of this plan as outlined by the support and input from the citizens of Iowa City that participated ~n this process. ...,~ :~ ~~ b ~`~~, 4y s $ ~ r ~• / :~~r.. ~~~` F .. ' ; , ,~ t rr 1~ ~ ~ 1.. ~-' ~~ Y.. Y .7 ~.. try (T~~ ~yyl~~~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~~ ' ~ ~~ - November zoo8 ~. ~, `~ ++ ,f~' r ~ `~ ~fi- . ~_ ~,~ _ _,. Acknowledgements City Council Regenia Bailey, Mayor Connie Champion Amy Correia Matt Nayek Mike O'Donnell Ross Wilburn Mike Wright Michael Lombardo, City Manager Parks and Recreation Commission Matthew Parha, Chair John Westefeld, Vice Chair David Bourgeois Craig Gustaveson Margaret Loomer Ryan O'Leary ferry Raaz Philip Reisetter John Watson City of Iowa City Staff Terry Trueblood, Director of Parks and Recreation Mike Moran, Superintendent of Recreation Terry Robinson, Superintendent of Parks and Forestry Tammy Neumann, Administrative Secretary Marcia Klingaman, Neighborhood Services Coordinator Barb Meredith, Senior Engineering Technician Bob Miklo, Senior Planner Consultant Team GreenPlay, LLC Design Concepts Geowest For more information about this document; contact GreenPtay, LLC At: 3Q50 Industrial Lane, Suite 2QQ, Broomfield, Colorado 8QQ2Q, Telephone: 3Q3-439-8369 Fax: 3Q3-439-Q628 To!! Free: 866-549-9959 Emait: infon« areenplavttc.com www.greenplayltc.com Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary 1 11. Past, Present, and Future- The Planning Context 29 A. Iowa City Parks and Recreation Gaal Statement 29 B. Purpose of this Plan 29 C. History of Iowa City's Parks and Recreation Department 29 D. Parks and Recreation Department C-verview 31 E. Related Planning Efforts and Integration 31 F. Methodology of this Planning Process 31 G. Timeline for completing the Master Plan 32 !1-. What We Want- Our Community and Identified Needs 34 A. Community Profile and Demographic Information 34 B. Current Park and Recreation Trends 40 C. Community and Stakeholder Input 46 D. Statistically-Valid Community Survey Findings 49 !V. What We Have Now- An Analysis of Programs and Spares s3 A. Community Recreation Programs 53 B. Inventory of facilities 61 C. Alternative Providers 62 D. Iowa City Context 66 E. Facility Inventory and Level of Service Analysis 66 F. Level of Service 69 V. How We Manage- An Analysis of Administrative Findings 78 A. Funding 78 B. Analysis of Benchmarking 87 C. Guiding Themes 9Q VI. Great Things to Come- Recommendations and Action Plans 91 A. Recommendations 91 List of Tables Table 1: Race(Ethnicity Comparisons for 2007 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36 Table 2: Educational Attainment - 25 Years and Older (2000} ................................................................ 37 Table 3: Housing Units j2007} ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 38 Table 4: Population projections and percent change- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa ......................... 40 Table 5: Top Ten Sports Ranked by Total Participation 2006 ................................................................. 42 Table 6: Total Participation percent change 2001 to 2006 in Select Activities ........................................42 Table 7: Youth Participation in Selected Activities and Percent Change 1997-2006 ............................... 43 Table S: Attendance by Age Group- Selected Arts Activities 2007 .......................................................... 45 Table 9: Perspective A -Neighborhood Access to All Components, Overall Statistics .............................. 71 Table 10: Perspective B -Walkable Access to All Components, Overall Statistics .................................... 72 Table 11: Perspective C: Neighborhood Access to Indoor facilities, Overall Statistics ............................. 73 Table 12: Perspective D -Walkable Access to Trails, Overall 5tatistics ................................................... 74 Table 13: Community Components GRASPS Scores and Population Ratios ............................................. 75 Table 14: Capacities Level of Service {LOS} .............................................................................................76 Table 15: Benchmarking Comparison -Iowa City, IA---------------------------------------••--------.....----------.............. 89 Table 16: Cost Estimates and Funding Sources for 2009-2020 Recommended Priorities ....................... 105 List of Figures Figure 1: Percent change in population 2000 to 2007- the City of Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa ...... 34 Figure 2: 2007 Population Breakdown Percent of Total by Age- Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa .. 35 Figure 3: Households by Income- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa ....................................................... 38 Figure 4: Percent change in population- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa 2000-2007, 2007-2012.........40 Figure 5: City of Iowa City Location Map ................................................................................................ 66 Appendices I. Survey Executive Summary II. GRASP® History and Methodology III. Sample Sponsorship Policy IV. Pyramid Methodology V. Sample Partnership Policy VI. GRASP° Maps and Perspectives Map A: Regional Context Map B: System Map C: Recommendations Perspective A: Neighborhood Access to All Components Perspective B: Walkable Access to All Components Perspective C: Neighborhood Access to Indoor Recreation Perspective D: Walkable Access to Trails VII. Inventory Spreadsheet I. Executive Summary Iowa City Parks & Recreation Goal Statement Provide ahigh-quality level of leisure time opportunities, increase the number of people served, improve the quality of program delivery, and advocate the benefits of recreational involvement to the general public. Purpose of this Plan The Iowa City Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan is intended to help meet the needs of current and future residents by positioning Iowa City to build on the community's unique parks and recreation assets and identify new opportunities. The citizen-driven plan establishes a clear direction to guide city staff, advisory committees, and elected officials in their efforts to enhance the community's parks system, open space, trails, recreation facilities, programs, and services. History of Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department The history of public parks in Iowa City can be traced back to 1839, which shows both College Green Park and North Market Square Park as part of the original city plat. The early history of parks is unclear, but it is known that the original Park Board was established by code around 1905. It would seem that this timing might have had something to do with the acquisition of land in 1906 that became City Park, which remains today as the City's most popular park, and one of its largest. Organized public recreation began in the early 1930's. One of few facilities available at the time was a small privately owned and operated swimming pool in City Park known as the "Big Dipper." Beginning in the latter part of 1932, students from the University of Iowa's Physical Education Department conducted a part-time recreation program on Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings at the American Legion's gymnasium, located at the corner of College and Gilbert Streets. In June, 1934, a supervised Summer Playground program was introduced at Longfellow School. As community support grew, a Board of Recreation Works was formed, and in 1934 the Board employed the City`s first Recreation Director. Financial support came from the Iowa City Women's Club and Community Chest funds. In July 1936, there was a fire in the American Legion Building and it was heavily damaged. After being renovated, the building's name was changed to the Iowa City Community Building. Among other things, it became the local recreation center and included a gymnasium, rifle range, handball court, and a small restaurant. In June, 1944 the citizens of Iowa City voted to establish a Playground and Recreation Commission to be supported by public taxation. The Commission held its initial meeting in September, 1944 with H.S. Ivie serving as President, and noted historian Irving Weber as Vice-President. In 1947 voters approved a $50,000 bond issue, to go with $62,500 already saved, for the construction of anew swimming pool in City Park. The pool opened in June, 1949, and is still operating today. In 1952 a rather unique operation was established in City Park -children's carnival rides, which included a train, Ferris wheel, carousel, and other rides. This was a privately owned operation of the Drollinger family who continued to operate the rides for 47 years, and covered three generations. They paid a small percentage of their income to the City as rent for the property. When the Drollingers decided to retire from the business in 1999 the City purchased the rides in order to keep this tradition alive. This is believed to be the only city-owned park in the State to offer this type of attraction. In 1955, a second fire destroyed the Community Building, and the recreation offices were moved to the airport building for two years; programs were conducted at various buildings throughout the City. In 1956 a proposed bond issue to construct a new recreation center was defeated. That same year the recreation offices were moved to 130 Lafayette Street. Then in 1962 the citizens of Iowa City overwhelmingly passed a referendum to construct a new recreation center, now known as the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center, named in honor of Iowa City's Superintendent of Recreation from 1951 to 1983. Total cost to construct and equip the new building was $715,000. In September, 1964, as the new Recreation Center neared completion, the City Council voted to abolish both the publicly elected Park Board and the Playground and Recreation Commission, and to merge the functions of these separate units into a single advisory body to be known as the Parks and Recreation Commission, which still exists today. The Park Board, however, did not go quietly, feeling the City Council did not have the authority to abolish a publicly elected board. They eventually took their case all the way to the State Supreme Court which upheld the legality of the City Council's action. At the time of this merger, there were eight public parks in existence: Black Springs Circle, Brookland, City, College Green, Court Hill, Creekside, Happy Hollow, and North Market Square. The total parkland inventory amounted to 129 acres, 107 of which were in City Park. Today the City manages over 1,600 acres of parkland/open space, which includes 42 developed parks, with 31 playgrounds, 43 athletic fields, 45 park shelters, 75 community garden plots, over six miles of nature trails and miscellaneous other amenities such as tennis courts, basketball courts, bocce courts, horseshoe courts, dog park, disc golf, etc. The City's trail system has grown to include over 50 miles of trails. Since 1997 three major regional parkland areas have been acquired: Peninsula Park, Waterworks Prairie Park, and Sand Lake Recreation Area. In 1972 the Parks and Recreation Department launched a new Farmers Market program, which initially consisted of 17 stalls and operated Saturday mornings. It now operates Wednesday evenings with 57 stalls and Saturday mornings with 112 stalls. In 2006, two indoor holiday markets were added to the program, which are very popular. Recognizing the need far programs to accommodate people with special needs, the Special Populations Involvement (SPI) program was established in 1974, initially funded with cone-year grant awarded by the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. The SPI program became fully funded by the City, and has grown to a comprehensive recreation program serving over 500 people. This program is nationally recognized, having received the prestigious National Gold Medal Award in 1984 and again in 1992. As the years passed several major recreation facilities were constructed, and others renovated, to add to the City's recreation offerings. The new facilities include: The Mercer Park Aquatic Center, a cooperative project with the Iowa City Community School District, which opened in 1988; a cooperative arrangement was entered into with the University of Iowa in 1996 forjoint use of the Hawkeye Softball Complex; the Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park opened in 1997; the Scanlon Gymnasium was added to the Mercer Park Aquatic Center in 1999; the Riverside Festival Stage, home to Riverside Theatre's Annual Shakespeare Festival, opened in 2000; the Iowa City Skate Park was completed in 2002; the Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park, in cooperation with Johnson County DogPAC, opened in 2006; the Grant Wood Community Gym, another cooperative project with the School District, also opened in 2006; the Peninsula Park Disc Golf Course was completed in 2007; and the City and University entered into an agreement in 2007 which will allow for a University Boathouse (with community use) to be constructed in Terrell Mill Park, scheduled to open in 2009. The number of recreation programs and activities offered has also grown over the years. From the meager beginnings of pond swimming, a marble tournament, and one playground program, the Department now offers over 1,000 activities annually. To enhance and expand upon the opportunities offered to the community, the Department also partners with a number of organizations. In addition to an arrangement with the School District for joint use of facilities, the Department has long-standing relationships with a number of "affiliates," the largest of which are: Iowa City Boys Baseball, Iowa City Girls Softball, Babe Ruth Baseball, Iowa City Kickers Soccer Club, and the Iowa City Eels Swim Club. Parks and Recreation Department Overview Department Description Iowa City Parks and Recreation is a department of the City of Iowa City and receives funding authorized by the City Council through budget appropriations. Funding is also provided through fees charged for specific programs and services and through grant funds. Additionally, the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Foundation provides funds through donations and bequests that enhance department programs, services, and projects. Through these means, parks and recreation programs and services are provided and maintained for the citizens of Iowa City. Related Planning Efforts and Integration The City of Iowa City has undertaken several planning efforts in recent years that have helped inform the planning process for this Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update. These efforts include: • City of Iowa City Comprehensive Plan • Neighborhood Open Space Plan • Existing Trails Plan • Existing Park Plans • Existing Policy Manuals Methodology of this Planning Process This project has been guided by a project team, made up of city staff and the Park and Recreation Commission. This team provided input to the GreenPlay consulting team throughout the planning process. This collaborative effort creates a plan that fully utilizes the consultant's expertise and incorporates the local knowledge and institutional history that only community members can provide. The project consisted of the following tasks: Needs Assessment and Public lnvoivement • Review of previous planning efforts and city historical information, and a recent statistically valid community interest and opinion survey. • Consideration of the profile of the community and demographics, including anticipated population growth. • Extensive community involvement effort including focus groups, meetings with key stakeholders, and community-wide public meetings. • Identification of alternative providers of recreation services to provide insight regarding the market opportunities in the area for potential new facilities and services. • Research of trends and statistics related to American lifestyles to help guide the efforts of programming staff. Level of Service Analysis • Interviews with staff to provide information about parks and recreation facilities and services, along with insight regarding the current practices and experiences of the City in serving its residents and visitors. • Analysis addressing recreation, parks, and related services. Inventory • Inventory of parks and facilities using existing mapping, staff interviews, and on-site visits to verify amenities and assess the condition of the facilities and surrounding areas. Assessment and Analysis • Review and assessment of relevant plans. • Organizational SWOT Analysis. • Measurement of the current delivery of service using the GRASP® Level of Service Analysis and allowing for a target level of service to be determined that is both feasible and aligned with the desires of citizens as expressed through the citizen survey. This analysis is also represented graphically in GRASPS Perspectives. • Exploration of finance and funding mechanisms to support development and sustainability of the system. Recommendations: Goals, Strategies, and Action Plan • Identification and categorization of recommendations into themes with goals, objectives, and an action plan for implementation. • Development of an action plan for capital improvements including cost, funding source potentials, and timeframe to support the implementation of the plan. Timeline for Completing the Master Plan Start-up Needs Assessment and Public Involvement Inventory and Assessment of Existing Facilities Program and Services Inventory and SWOT Analysis Findings Compilation Report Guidelines, Standards and Recommendations August 2007 September 2007 -February 2008 September 2007 -March 2008 September 2007 -March 2008 April 2008 May -June 2008 4 Financial Resources and Expenditure Analysis April -July 2008 Recommendations and Action Plans June -August 2008 Final Plan and Presentation October 2008 Community Profile and bemographic Information Service Area and Population The primary service area for this analysis is the City of Iowa City, Johnson County, and the State of Iowa. All estimated 2007 populations, as well as projected population and demographic breakdowns by population are taken from ESRI. The projected 2007 population far Iowa City is 66,177, for Johnson County is 124,240, and for Iowa is 3,030,140. Population Forecasts Although we can never know the future with certainty, it is helpful to make assumptions about it for economic reasons. 2000 populations are from the 2000 US Census. 2007 and 2012 projections were derived from ESRI Business Information Solutions. All three regions: Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa, are estimated to decrease in rate of growth over the next five years. Iowa City's growth rate is projected to slaw down by 1.5% over the next five years. Johnson County's growth rate is anticipated to decrease by 3.8°l and the State's by 0.9%. Figure 4 illustrates estimated percent change in population for Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa for 2007-2012 as percent change in population from 2000- 2007. Table 4 contains estimated population increase for Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa. Percent change in population- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa 2000-2007, 2007-2012 O Iowa City P.dJahnsan County J Iowa 15A°l° - 10.6% 10.0% S.0°!° 0.0% Source: FSR! Business Information Solutions Table 4: Population projections and percent change- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa . •- - ~. 2000 62,220 111,006 2,926,324 2007 66,177 5.9% 124,240 10.6°!° 3,030,140 3.4% 2012 69,274 4.4% 133,403 6.8% 3,110,913 2.5°!° 2000-2007 2007-2012 Community and Stakeholder Input A total of seven focus groups were held on September 18, 19, and 2Q with a public forum on the 20`h as well. Over 90 users of the City of Iowa's parks and recreation amenities and programs and non-users participated. The following is a summary of key issues identified through the process. Ryerson Woods Trail GENERAL Strengths ^ Staff- visionary, responsive ^ Facilities- well maintained, many different park types ^ Services and programs- lots of diversity, encompasses all ages ^ Support and Funding- good relationship with City Hall, capital funding is effective Opportunities for Improvement ^ Lack of certain types of facilities, trail connections, and river access ^ Public awareness- lack of information and education, need to promote Parks and Recreation as a quality of life issue ^ Poor maintenance of natural areas ^ Lack of staff- need more maintenance, programming, Foundation and PIO staff ^ Funding- lack of capital and operations and maintenance {O&M) funding ^ Programming- need to use natural resources, need to increase collaboration, need to identify core service ^ Planning- need to improve strategic planning and increase collaboration, both in neighborhoods and regionally ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS ^ Need programming for all ages below 26 and over 40 ^ Need additional programming in the following areas: o Wellness and fitness, nature based, outdoor winter activities, outdoor water-based activities, drop-in unstructured activities IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING PARKS AND FACILITIES ^ Need to improve maintenance at parks and facilities ^ Recreation centers and pools: o Need overall facility upgrades, more space, increase air quality at Mercer Pool, safer entryways, additional leisure aquatic components IMPROVEMENTS TO SUPPORT SYSTEM ^ Funding-need to redo fee structure, need additional sources, need to involve friend's groups ^ Need staffing increases to assist in maintenance, programming, marketing, grant writing ^ Need to improve/redo policies for alcohol use, safety, Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance, developer land dedication/fees-in-lieu ^ Need to improve transportation to increase access to programs and facilities ^ Need to increase collaborations with Senior Center, University, schools, and neighborhood associations RATINGS S=Exeellent Average Rating .. _ : ~°:vnt programs 4.1 Quality of existing facilities 3.4 Maintenance of facilities 3.6 Quality of custon7er service 4.0 Effectiveness of seeking feedback 3.3 UNDERSERVED PORTIONS OF IOWA CITY Geographic: o SW- parks, SE- pool, NE-playground, far west, north and south future development, central/dense areas-parks Demographic o Active seniors/baby boomers, people with disabilities, low income, those without transportation, 18-25 year olds NEW PARK AMENTITIES ^ Pedestrian Bridge at dog park ^ Trails- connector, rail corridor, multiuse ^ River access ^ Neighborhood parks ^ Additional dog parks ^ Basketball courts NEW FACILITIES ^ Outdoor leisure pool with lap swim ^ Recreation/aquatics center on west side of town ^ Municipal golf course ^ Splash pad/sprayground ^ Indoor soccer ^ Farmer's Market facility ^ Multipurpose rental/meeting venue for large gatherings ^ BMX park/trails FINANCIAL ^ Issues to be considered Park and Recreation services should be funded through a combination of taxes and fees o Should serve all citizen regardless of ability to pay o Most respondents are comfortable with current fees structure- could tolerate fee increases in some areas o Concern about tax increase-property or sales How to support o Parks and Recreation foundation, grants, donations, partnerships, sponsorships, motel/hotel tax SENSITIVITIES ^ Increase in taxes, University relationship, school district relationship, Senior Center relationship, affordability, ADA accessibility, changing demographics, City Council support KEY PARTNERSJSTAKEHOLDERS Corporations/businesses, Chamber of Commerce, ICCCVi3 and Sports Authority, Service ~nizations/Nonprofit Organizations, neighboring communities/governmental entities, other ty Departments, University/Kirkwood College, support groups, neighborhood groups, City Council and Commissions, local associations ~,. I KEY ISSUES/PRIORITIES Funding Long range strategic planning/vision Recognition of Parks and Recreation as quality of life Collaboration Celebrate successes Trails/bicycle transportation Vision and access for Riverfront Development Operational resources Age change in drinking establishments Statistically-Valid Community Survey Findings The City of Iowa City conducted a Community Attitude and Interest Survey in January and February 2008 to establish priorities for the future improvement of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the community. The survey was designed to obtain statistically valid results from households throughout Iowa City. The survey was administered by a combination of mail and phone. Leisure Vision worked extensively with Iowa City officials in the development of the survey questionnaire. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future system. In January 2008, surveys were mailed to a random sample of 2,500 households throughout Iowa City. Approximately three days after the surveys were mailed, each household that received a survey also received an electronic voice message encouraging them to complete the survey. In addition, about two weeks after the surveys were mailed, Leisure Vision began contacting households by phone, either to encourage completion of the mailed surveyor to administer the survey by phone. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 500 completed surveys. This goal was far exceeded, with a total of 676 surveys having been completed. The results of the random sample of 676 households have a 95°t level of confidence with a precision of at least +/-3.8%. The complete executive summary, including graphs and charts, can be found in Appendix l of the Master Plan. Participation and Visitation ^ Of the 92% of respondent households who visited Iowa City parks over the past year, 92% rated the physical condition of all the parks as either excellent (26%) or good {66%). Additionally, 8% rated the conditions as fair, and less than 1% of respondents rated the parks as poor. Thirty-percent {30%) of respondent household members participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year. ^ Of the 30% of respondent household members that have participated in any recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year, 68% have participated in at least 2 different programs. Additionally, 24°I have participated in at least 4 different programs. ^ Of the 30% of respondent household members that have participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year, 9Q% of respondents rated the overall quality of programs as either excellent (27%) or good (63°!). In addition, 8% rated the programs as fair, and only 1°I rated them as poor. ^ Parks/Recreation program guide (65%) had the highest percentage of respondents indicate it as the way that they learn about Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department programs and activities. Other frequently menitoned ways respondents learn about programs and activities include: newspaper articles (5Q%) and from friends and neighbors (46%). ^ Iowa City Public Library {64%) is the organization used by the highest percentage of respondents for indoor and outdoor recreation and sports activities during the past year. Other frequently mentioned organizations include: Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department {54%), State of Iowa parks (47%), and County parks (46%). Usage byAge ^ Based on the sum of their top two choices, the organizations respondent household members ages 17 years and under use the most far sports and recreation programs and services include: Iowa City Parks and Recreation department {15°I°), school district facilities (12°1 ), and Iowa City Public library (11%). ^ Based on the sum of their top two choices, the organizations respondent household members ages 18 years and older use the most for sports and recreation programs and services include: Iowa City Public Library (33%) and Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department {32%). ^ "I do not know what is being offered" (21%} and "program times are not convenient (21°I°} have the highest percentage of respondents indicate them as the reasons preventing household members from using parks, recreation trails and sports facilities or programs of the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department more often. Facilities There are six facilities that over 60% of respondent households have a need for: walking and biking trails {79%), nature center and trails (68%), small neighborhood parks (68%), large community parks {66°t ), wildlife and natural areas (64%), and riverfront parks (62%). There are three facilities that completely meet the needs of over 50% of respondent households: youth soccer fields (66%), youth baseball and softball fields {55%), and adult softball fields (51%) 10 ^ Based on the sum of their tap four choices, the parks and recreation facilities that are most important to respondent households include: walking and biking trails (53%), small neighborhood parks (30%), wildlife and natural areas (26°I), and nature center and trails (25%). It should also be noted that walking and biking trails had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important facility Programs ^ There are three programs that over 45% or more of respondent households have a need for: Farmers' Market {72%}, adult fitness and wellness programs {50%},and special events {48%). ^ There is only one program that over 50% of respondents indicated completely meet the needs of their household: Farmers' Market {54%}. ^ Based on the sum of their top four choices, the recreation programs that are most important to respondent households include: Farmers' Market {58%}, adult fitness and wellness programs {29%}, and special events {26%}. Itshould also be noted that Farmers' Market had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important program ^ Based on the sum of their top four choices, the programs that respondents currently participate in mast often at Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department facilities include: Farmers' Market {57%} and special events (24%). Itshould also be noted that the Farmers' Market had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the program respondents currently participate in most often Indoor Space ^ Walking and jogging track {67%) had the highest percentage or respondents indicate it as the potential indoor programming space their household would use if the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department developed new indoor programming spaces. Other frequently mentioned potential indoor programming spaces include: weight roomJcardiovasculareguipment area (43%}, exercise facility for adults 50 years and older (39%), nature center (37%), and aerobics fitness/dance class space (35%) ^ Based on the sum of their top four choices, the indoor spaces respondent household members would use most often include: walking and jogging track (59%), weight roam/cardiovascular equipment area (29°!) and exercise facility for adults 50 years and older (28%). Itshould also be noted that walking and jogging track had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the indoor space respondent household members would use most often The Benefrts of Parks, Trails, and Recreation Facilities ^ Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with various benefits being provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities. All 10 of the benefits have over 50%of respondents indicate that they either strongly agree or agree that those benefits are provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities. ^ Based on the sum of their tap three choices, the benefits most important to respondent households include: improve physical health and fitness (71%), preserve open space and the environment (49%), and make Iowa City a more desirable place to live (49%). Itshould also be noted that improve physical health and fitness had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the benefit they feel is most important to their household 11 Support and Satisfaction ^ Respondents were asked to indicate how supportive they would be of various actions Iowa City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system. Far all 12 actions, over 40% of respondents indicated being either very supportive or somewhat supportive of actions Iowa City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system. Based on the sum of their top four choices, the actions that respondents would be most willing to fund with their City tax dollars include: develop new walking and biking trails and connect existing trails (55°!), use greenways to develop trails and recreational facilities (50%), and purchase land to preserve open space and green space (44%). It should also be noted that purchase land to preserve open space and green space had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the action respondents would be most willing to fund with their City tax dollars ^ Seventy-six percent (76%) of respondents indicated that they are either very satisfied (28%) or somewhat satisfied (48%) with the overall value their household receives from the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department. In addition, only 5% indicated that they were very dissatisfied (1%) or somewhat dissatisfied (4%}. Additionally, 5% indicated don't know and 14% indicated neutral Recommendations and Action Plans 60AL 1; MAXIMIZETHEILANNINBIR~CE$S Action Steps: • Assign responsibility and time frame, and allocate resources necessary to complete each action identified in annual work plans. Strategy: Assure that al! levels of staff are informed of and are set up Action Steps: • Inform all levels of staff of the direction of the Plan, allow for staff input, encourage buy-in, and encourage input from all staff members. • Provide cross-departmental staff teamsJteam members, as appropriate, with education development opportunities, necessary equipment, and supplies. 12 GOAL 2: TRACI(PERFORMANCE MEASURES Action Steps: • Establish service standards for all community services activities. Suggested criteria for service standards include: • Programs: participation levels, revenue, instructors, customer satisfaction, cost per experience (or per hour, per class}, customer retention • Instructors: experience, knowledge, friendliness, recruiting, rewarding, training, standards • Volunteers: experience, knowledge, friendliness, recruiting, rewarding, training, standards • Facilities: cleanliness, aesthetics, comfort • Staff: Experience, knowledge, friendliness, rewards, training, trends Action Steps: • Identify all major maintenance tasks including such things as: o Turf /Mowing o Plantings o Restrooms o Sidewalks and paths o Irrigation o Weed and insect control o Curb appeal o Playground and picnic equipment o Courts and fields o Litter control • Evaluate and develop a scaring system far each task to meet desired and consistent service leve Is. • Involve staff in the development of the standards and scoring system. • Conduct maintenance standardstrainingfarall staff. • Establish and monitor recordkeeping procedures to document the actual hours and materials costs for each maintenance operation. • Apply appropriate maintenance standards and define set up/tear down requirements for all special events, tournaments, or other activities that currently stress resources. Assure adequate staffing and funding to take on the task, prior to making a commitment. ENHaN~F PI~O~RAI~I DEVELOf~M~N Strategy: Seek ways to respond to identified programming priorities The Department has a strong reputation far being responsive to community desires within budget constraints. The citizen survey and public input sessions highlighted areas of additional programming desire including: 13 • Opportunities to connect people to the natural environment • Additional learn-to-swim, water fitness and outdoor swimming • Outdoor leisure pool opportunity • Additional special events and family/community gathering opportunities • Expansion of art, dance and performing arts opportunities • Expansion of fitness and wellness programming Action Steps: • Evaluate the development of new programs based an community interests. It is very easy to focus on programs that have worked for a number of years, especially if they are still drawing enough interested participants to justify the program's continuation. Starting new programs, based on community demand and/or trends, can be risky due to the inability to predict their success. If the program interest seems great, as with those identified in citizen survey, then the programs should be considered for expansion. • Establish criteria forthe implementation of new programs (based an research and feedback}. The Department should pursue program development around the priorities identified by the survey, using the following criteria: • Need: outgrowth of a current popular program, or enough demonstrated demand to successfully support a minimal start (one class for instance] • Budget: accounting for all costs and anticipated (conservative} revenues should meet cost recovery target established by Department within two seasons • Location: appropriate, available and within budget • Instructor: qualified, available and within budget • Materials and supplies: available and within budget • Marketing effort: adequate and timely opportunity to reach intended market, within budget (either existing marketing budget or as part of new program budget) • Develop program evaluation criteria far existing offerings and implement annually. Using historical participation levels to determine program popularity and participant feedback can be helpful in deciding if programs should be continued. Annually all current programs should be evaluated to determine if they should be continued, changed (market segment focus, time/day offered, etc.) or discontinued. A few simple questions should be asked about each program that include: • Is participation increasing or decreasing? If participation is increasing then it could clearly mean that the program should be continued. If participation is decreasing are there any steps to take to increase interest through marketing efforts, change the time/day the program is offered and change the format or instructor? If not, it may be time to discontinue the program. • Is there information contained in the participant feedback that can be used to improve the program? • Are cost recovery goals being met? If not, can fees be realistically increased? • Is there another provider of the program that is more suitable to offer it? If yes, the Department could provide referrals for its customers for the program it does not or is not willing or able to offer. • Is this program taking up facility space that could be used far expansion of more popular programs or new programs in demand by the community? 14 The City should continue its leadership in this area by developing facilities and programming that are an the cutting edge in parks, recreation, and cultural arts. Continuing to diversify recreational opportunities will enable the department to attract revenues through fees and charges that will support the desires of residents. Action Steps: • Focus on the enhancement of fitness and wellness components at recreation centers. Regularly update fitness equipment to stay current with fitness trends and public demand and seek opportunities to expand the size of the fitness facilities through renovation and new facility development. • Prepare far the fitness and wellness desires of the aging baby boomers. This group is also known as the group entering into the traditional "senior" age group of 55 and over, who do not identify with the term "senior." This cohort is seeking a continued active lifestyle and is not likely to partake in traditional "senior" offerings. • Provide concurrent youth and adult programming as a way to increase participation. There are many successful youth programs offered by the Department for which adults are bringing and picking up children. The Department should offer mare adult programming, such as fitness and wellness, concurrently with youth programming as a way to entice parents and guardians to stay and participate in programs. 4~ PIl~SUE CDNIPI~E~fEN~1 VE SEJ~VICE DELIVERY As a tax supported operation, it is important that efforts are made to reach underserved segments of the population. Strategy: Reach out to those with frnanela! need. ~ Action Steps: • Review the existing financial assistance program to maximize use. Seek assistance from other providers oflow-income services to help promote the opportunity. Assure that use of the program is available in the most dignified manner possible. • Research transportation accessibility issues and work with other community groups and private entities (such as public transit or the school bus system} to develop options to address needs. Transportation for low-income families was identified in the focus group sessions as a significant barrier to participation. Strategy: Assure programming opportunities are reasonably available to a!! geographic sectors of the City. _, The facilities and programming offered should be thought of as a system. Some of the components in the system, due to their expense, should be available to serve the whole community (such as indoor 15 swimming pools), and some should be available to serve local neighborhoods {such as after school programming). Action Steps: • Investigate ways that facilities and programs can be accessible to more people through connectivity of the trail system for pedestrian and bike use, better public transit, parking availability and general awareness of opportunities. • As growth continues in the west part of town, pursue an indoor multi-purpose recreation facility to serve that geographic sector. GOAL 5.•SOLICIiCOMMUN1iY1NVOLVEMENTANDFEEDBACM The Department has an excellent reputation for responsiveness to the community. The opportunity exists to become more pro-active in this regard. Action Steps: • Implement a Standard Practice far Customer Program Feedback, Program Evaluation and Program Development. Customer feedback will help improve programming by being able to respond to customer needs in a timely matter. Information sought from participants should include: • Satisfaction levels and supporting reasoning • Suggestions for improvements to programs • Suggestions for new programs • Solicit youth input through future surveys and other opportunities. Soliciting youth feedback is a challenging proposition far parks and recreation entities. Working with other service providers may also provide important information and opportunities to attract this age group. • Create a "Mystery Shopper" program where secret shoppers evaluate services anonymously and results are tracked. Strategy: Expand Department volunteer opportunrtres. Action Steps: • Seek volunteer effort to support expansion of programming into opportunities to connect people to nature. Many individuals and groups are interested in sharing their expertise and/or sweat equity with a goal of promoting stewardship of our natural resources. • Harness the energy of seniors and the retiring baby boomer generation as instructors and program leaders. Across the country, interest is being expressed in sharing expertise and hobbies. • Consider the addition of a volunteer coordinator in the department, ar a shared volunteer coordinator in the City. A successful volunteer program must be well organized and 16 advertised, with specific, rewarding, and recognized opportunities that allow individuals and groups to feel they are contributing to a larger goal. • Create a "Park Ambassador" program where residents living adjacent to parks are trained to inspect parks and then file a weekly report in exchange far a nominal fee or pass. GOAL 6:INCREASEAWARENESSOFPROGRAMOFFERINGS In the citizen survey, `not being aware of the department program offerings' was one of the top reasons given for not participating. Action Steps: • Enhance the branding and identity of the Department. Providing a consistent look to department advertising in the brochure, on the web site, on flyers, maps, etc., will help the community become aware of what is available to them and of the breadth of the offerings. • Celebrate the accomplishments of the department in promotional materials. Focus groups and public meetings brought to light that many existing participants in department activities, programs and use of facilities are unaware of the variety and expanse of what is available. Most participants have a relatively narrow view of what is available and outcomes achieved based on their limited use of department offerings and facilities. It is a suggestion of the community that the department "toot its own horn," in order to gain support far future endeavors. • Coordinate Department of marketing and communication opportunities with citywide efforts. • Create an annual marketing plan far the Parks and Recreation Department. • Update and expand website marketing efforts. The web site can serve as a one stop shop for everything in which the department is involved, including program offerings, facility information, trail and facility maps, opportunities through volunteerism and the Foundation, financial assistance, etc. • Develop an evaluation process far marketing media such as newspaper, seasonal brochures, website, direct mail, targeted e-mails, radio, and television advertising to continuously determine effectiveness of marketing dollars. 6QAL L' ASSURE FINANCIAL SUSTA/NABILITY Diversity in the department's funding and revenue portfolio is as important in the public sector as in the private sector. The City has the ability to use these mechanisms to enhance the quality of life in Iowa City and expand recreation, park, open space, trails, programs, and services to the community. 17 Action Steps: • Work with the City, residents and partners to establish additional revenue through a combination of the following sources to implement the recommendations of the Master Plan: • Potential redirection of existing City funds • Alternative Funding options {see Section 1/) • Strategic partnerships • Fees and charges • Further investigation of support for an education campaign for a ballot initiative to pass a bond referendum far future capital improvements. Many departments within Iowa City have experienced challenging times in the recent past, with limited funding and staffing levels, and the Department should explore the best means of achieving its funding goals. Alternative funding methods may be instrumental to the operations of the City's recreation programs and facilities on an ongoing basis. Allocating resources {assigning staff time, matching funds, etc.) to pursue alternative funding should be considered an investment in the future, with an outlined and expected positive rate of return. Action Steps: • Identify opportunities to increase community support and revenue opportunities such as grants, partnerships, sponsorships, volunteers and earned income {see Section Vfor Alternative Funding Resources). • Assign staff resources and/or investigate the possibility of utilizing volunteer efforts to apply far such funding. • Develop a "Wish List" to identify philanthropic opportunities that align with these needs. Once identified, aggressively apply for grant funding and Foundation assistance. • Expand and formalize a volunteer program to include standards, recruiting, training, retaining, and rewarding volunteers in all program areas. • Create new and formalize existing Sponsorships {see Sample Sponsorship Policy in Appendix!!!) with equity agreements that are reviewed annually. • Create an annual "Sponsorship Manual" listing all the opportunities for the year and distribute within the community in a menu format that creates a sense of urgency within the business community. • Work with Parks and Recreation Foundation to facilitate the receipt of grant funds and other fundraising activities. • Seek collaborations with developers forfuture development projects to include recommended parks and recreation facilities and standards It is suggested that the City employ a cost recovery policy that provides the foundation for setting fees and charges based on the organizational vision, mission, and values of the City, and who in the 18 community benefits. This will help determine the cost recovery and subsidy level of each program and facility and serve as a tool to monitor these goals over time. Action Steps: • Clarify the bepartment's Pricing Policy and Strategy. If a pricing policy exists, even loosely, it should be fine-tuned to provide expanded detail in guiding management decisions. If a written policy is not in existence, one should be created. • Refine Cast Tracking. Review direct and indirect costs assigned to specific programs and facilities in order to assure consistency in balancing costs with revenues. Assure that the accounting system is capable of providing information monthly, quarterly, and annually to inform management decisions. • Identify citywide participant categories. Participant category examples for use of facilities and programs include resident and non-resident, age, partners identified through various inter-governmental agreements, non-profit organizations, and private organizations, as well as many others. • betermine fee schedule and subsidy levels. Based on the Pyramid Methodology for resource allocation and cost recovery (see Appendix 11!), for each program/activity and facility, determine the subsidyJcost recovery target level incorporating participant categories. • Partial Cast Fee: recovers something less than full cost. This partial cost fee could be set at a percentage of direct costs, all direct costs, all direct costs plus a percentage of indirect casts, or some combination. • Full Cast Fee: recovers the total cost of a service including all direct and all indirect costs. • Market Rate Fee: based on demand for a service or facility. Determine the market rate by identifying all providers of similar services (e.g., private sector providers, other municipalities, etc.) and setting the fee at the highest level the market will sustain. • Consider policy revisions to increase revenue generation potential. • Use discounted fees as a special promotion such as reduced fee hours during off peak times. • Reconsider the current alcohol policy to allow for limited and appropriate alcohol use to make rental opportunities more attractive. GOAL B. COlL4BORAiEWIiNCOMMUNIiYORGAN11GilONSANUBUSINESSES Action Steps: • Investigate partnerships with local medical and health organizations to increase fitness and health programming particularly for the aging population and youth population within the community. 19 • Create new and formalize existing partnerships (see Sample Partnership Policy in Appendix I/) with equity agreements that are reviewed annually. • Strengthen and expand IntergavernmentalRgreements (IGAs}with schools for use of fields, gyms, and multipurpose spaces. • Explore the possibilities of revising and promoting adopt-a-park/trail programs to help with park maintenance, beautification, and civic pride. • Investigate, where appropriate, collaborations with entities suggested by the community during the public input process of this master planning effort • Large businesses and local businesses • Chamber of Commerce, Visitors and Convention Bureau, ICCCBB Sports Authority for the promotion of sporting events • Iowa City Area Development Group (ICAb) • University of Iowa and Kirkwood College, public schools • Neighborhood Groups • Support Groups dog park group, Friends of the Iowa River Scenic Trail (FIRST}, sports groups, Project GREEN, Friends of Hickory Hill, Backyard Abundance, I- WATER,Johnson County Heritage Trust, Master Gardeners, Future Perfect • City Council, City Commissions, Public Art Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, other City Departments • I-DOT, Johnson County, neighboring cities • Local associations of service providers: sports, martial arts, private/non-profits, UAY The existing Senior Center serves the traditional "senior population" in a limited facility, by today's standards. As the baby boomer cohort moves into the 55 and over age group, its members will be looking for non-traditional and highly active physical and social opportunities. Action Steps: • Provide crass marketing between the existing senior and recreation programs in order to assure a comprehensive approach to serving the older adult population. • As new facility development opportunities present themselves seek ways to encourage participation by the older adult population through a comfortable setting with shared access to activity centers such as swimming pools, therapy pools and light weight fitness equipment. Strategy: Explore a community access relationship with the University of Iowa at its new Student Wellness Facility currently under construction. At this time, the University has intentions of community access with options of daily admission fees and annual fee for use of the pool, gym, and fitness facilities. The facility will provide the only indoor leisure pool in this part of the state. Fees are anticipated to be high in relation to fees at the existing recreation center, albeit for a higher service level offering. Community use times will be a second priority to all University uses and student needs. 20 Action Steps: • Continue discussions with the University to maximize community use times. • Seek to maximize the use of bath pools to the extent possible in a complementary fashion. • Upan opening of the facility, monitor and evaluate community use opportunity. GOAl9; CONflNUEiOiROVIDEEpUIiABIEIOSINEMISflNG1AR!(SANDFACIAiIES Action Steps: • Strive to replace or renovate all components scoring below community expectations. See list below for specific components that scored below community expectations. Playgrounds should be prioritized for renovation/replacement. City Park ~. Playground .. .., 1 Upper playground City Park Playground 1 Upper playground City Park Playground 1 Upper playground Court Hill Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair Court Hill Park Natural Area 1 Small and littered Court Hill Park Educational Experience 1 _ Sign in disrepair Creekside Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair Creekside Park Playground 1 Qlder Creekside Park Happy Hollow Park Water Access, General Basketball 1 1 Creek is hidden Needs surface repair Highland Park Playground 1 Older Mercer Park Playground 1 Swings and climber older Mercer Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair North Market Square Park _ Basketball 1 Needs surface repair Peninsula Park Water Access, General 1 Visual access only to water Scott Park open Water 1 Creek is hidden Sturgis Ferry Park Water Access, Developed ~ 1 Access to water is steep unless via boat trailer Terrell Mill Park Shelter 1 Needs repair Terrell Mill Park Volleyball 1 Needs surface repair Tower Court Park Playground, Local 1 Older 21 Add comfort and convenience features to parks where missing, such as benches, drinking fountains, and restrooms. It is recommended that at least 7 out of the 14 listed comfort and convenience features listed in the park inventory data report be provided in each park. (Refer to park inventory data far a list of missing comfort and convenience features by park.) Consider adding restrooms to mare neighborhood parks to increase the length of stay for families at parks. Parks in locations that are not in proximity to other parks with restrooms include: East Iowa City o Pheasant Hill Park o Court Hill Park West Iowa City o Benton Hill Park o Brookland Park or o Harlocke Hill Park • Continue to make the development of Sand Lake Recreation Area a priority. • Either upgrade all basketball courts to a playable level ar remove some courts and concentrate efforts an a few that will get the most use overall. System wide, basketball courts are in conditions that are below community standards. The community survey reports that the small need for courts in the community are being largely unmet. • Continue to upgrade playgrounds as funding is available. The list of components in the first strategy of Goal 9 lists the playgrounds that are priorities for replacement. • Continue to work with the City to find construction techniques that increase maintenance efficiencies along the Downtown Pedestrian Mall. • Pursue plans to build out ballfields in Kicker's Park. This is currently the best location for new ballfields in the City. Although the need for new fields is not eminent the City can expect to see increased demand in the next 5-7 years as the community grows. • Add more shelters to I.C. Kickers Park to increase the comfort of park users • Add loop walks to parks as funding is available and opportunities exist. • Continue to upgrade and improve small neighborhood parks. These facilities ranked highly for need among the community • Improve Creekside Park to address low levels of walkable service in that part of town. Improvements can include: o Upgrade the basketball court or replace with a component selected by residents o Upgrade or replace the playground o Improve security lighting ~„ _ _ Strategy: Fr!! gaps rn walkable servrce V Action Steps: • Work with the School District to provide adequate recreational amenities at schools that are the singular providers of recreation in a neighborhood. Priorities include: o Helen Lemme Elementary School o Irving Weber Elementary School 22 o Shimek Elementary school Work with other city departments to increase walkability throughout the community by adding sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, and bridging barriers. Improve parks that lie in low service area (as shown in Perspective B, Appendix VI) to increase walkable recreational opportunities. Strategies outlined in Strategy 1.1 should be employed in park improvement. Access to nature and natural areas ranked highly as a need in the community survey. The City has a great base of resources from which to respond to this need. As parks and properties are being developed a priority should be placed on natural areas enhancement and creation Action Steps: • Continue to maintain and enhance natural areas throughout the system. • Enhance natural drainages, waterways, and native areas in developed parks. • Work with friends groups to improve and maintain soft surface trails within parks. • Increase interpretive signage at natural areas throughout the system. • Work to maintain a diversity of natural areas within the system including prairie, woodland, riparian areas, and wetlands. • Ensure that maintenance staff is trained in natural areas management techniques. • Partner with the U.S. Army Carps of Engineers to create canoe access to the Iowa River. • Conduct a feasibility study forthe construction of a nature center. biversifying recreational opportunities in Iowa City's existing parks by adding exciting new recreational facilities will ensure the creation of a system that will attract both new and old residents. Such facilities will continue to help make Iowa City unique in the region and will foster a positive image of the City for residents and non-residents alike. Action Steps: to add a "destination playground" to an existing park. Destination Jude special features such as a climbing wall, spray feature or adventure play. Often they involve special theming and opportunity to teach children and parent something of the local history, culture, or ecology of an area. Look for opportunities to add a "boundless playground." Boundless playgrounds are designed to be fully accessible to children with disabilities and represent a growing trend in parks and recreation. While built to serve the local community, both may potentially attract visitors from the region. Look for opportunities to build spray grounds in parks. These can be added to existing parks or suggested as features of new park. They provide opportunities for water play without the staffing and maintenance needed for outdoor pools 23 • Consider adding a climbing feature to the next playground renovation. Climbing walls would bean addition to the parks that could be a unique draw to Iowa City Parks. ~~ , GOAL 10. PLAN FOR CONfINUEO EQUIiABIE LOS AS COMMUNITY GROWS Action Steps: • Work with surrounding developments to bring utilities to Future Parks. • Plan and budget far park development based on development trends. Currently new development is concentrated in the western part of the community. Consider developing one of the future parks as the development continues. • Add park maintenance resources as additional park, trails, and facilities are added to the system as needed. • Review land dedication and impact fees for new development to ensure that the department is getting the needed resources to provide parks and recreation to new residents. • Work with interest groups to add new dog parks to serve the southern and central part of Iowa City. The high density of the central core of lava City may justify the need to add an additional dog park to aid with the high number of residents without yards or transportation. 24 The southern part of Iowa City is another likely location for the addition of a new dog park to serve this area of the community. Strategy: Increase the level of service provided for indoor facilities Action Steps: • Work with the University of Iowa to gain access to new recreation center facilities. • Conduct a feasibility study far the construction of an indoor recreation/aquatic facility an the west side of Iowa City that includes multi-purpose program space, gymnasiums, walking track, fitness, aquatics, cardio and weight rooms • If feasible, design and construct a new indoor recreation/aquatic center on the west side of lava City GOAL 11. INCREASELEVEL Of SERVICEFOR iR~ILS Action Steps: • Increase neighborhood connections tomulti-use trails • Add small shelters along trails to provide shelter during extreme weather conditions and sudden weather changes. • Create rest stations along all multi-use trails and wide sidewalks to encourage recreational use • Track trail maintenance tasks, hours, and expenses to determine actual trail maintenance costs • Modify the trial maintenance budget to reflect actual trail maintenance costs. Trail maintenance efforts should be balanced between available budget and user expectations. • Work to improve trails within parks to make them safe and enjoyable • Increase walking opportunities in parks by adding loop trails as allowable ~, Strategy: Increase trail connectivity and overall trail network Action Steps: • As a priority in park and facility construction, prioritize trail construction in capital improvement spending. • Continue to build proposed trails as funding allows. Priorities for trail construction include: o Connections between existing trails o Connections between trails that create large loops o Connections to parks and greenspace o Connections to schools and other public facilities o Neighborhood connections to the larger network • Pursue projects to add a bridge to cross the Iowa River bridging Peninsula Park and Crandic Park. 25 • Pursue funding to create a pedestrian underpass across Highway 218 at Hunters Run Park. Recommendation Cost Estimates The following table includes recommended capital projects and additional items that significantly impact the annual operational and maintenance budgets and are above and beyond what is currently funded in the City's FY09-FY12 CIP Budget and the City's operating budget. All cost estimates are in 2008 figures. Funding sources listed are suggested methods of funding and can be enhanced with additional methods of funding. Overall staffing cost projections are included in the annual operational and maintenance cost estimates. Table 16: Cost Estimates and for 2009-2020 Recommended Priorities Upgrade or replace playgrounds at Creekside, Highland, $240,000 CIP N/A N/A Mercer, and Tower court Parks {4 total Add restraoms to one $150,000 CIP $5,000 General Fund west side park Add two small shelters $30,000 CIP $2,000 General Fund to multi-use trails Construct Planned Trail $3,000,000 CIP, Partnerships, $10,000/mile per General Fund Projects Grants year Create a renovation master plan for $10,000 General Fund N/A N/A Creekside Park Addition of one NJA N/A $38,000 General Fund maintenance worker Kickers Soccer Park $890 500 CIP N/A N/A improvements Butler Bridge $550,000 CIP,Grants $1,000 General Fund Pedestrian Trail City Park Trail lighting $240,000 CIP $2,500 General Fund Frauenholtz-Miller Park $280,000 CIP, N.O.S. Fees $5,000 General Fund development Hickory Hill Bridge $50,000 CIP N/A N/A Napoleon Softball Field $180,000 CIP N/A N/A renovation North Market Square $280 000 CIP N/A N/A Park redevelopment Outdoor ice rink $400,000 CIP $20,000 General Fund 26 Pedestrian bridge- Peninsula/Rocky Share $1,300,000 Peninsula Park $300,000 development Recreation center $225,000 i m pravem ents Sand Lake Recreation $5,900,000 Area Waterworks Prairie $115,000 Park Hospice Memorial Wetherby Park $200,000 splashpad Tota 12008-2012 CI P (in 2008 dollars} $11,340,500 Replace upper playgrounds at City $750,000 Rork with aDestination/ Adventure Playground Construct Planned Trail $g 000,000 R roject s Implement Creekside $300,000 Park Master Plan Add restraoms to one $150,000 east side park Add two small shelters $30,000 to multi-use trails Addition of two maintenance workers NJA Sand Prairie $260,000 development Scott Park development $450,000 Tota12013-2016 CIP $g,g40,000 (in 2008 dollars} CIP CIP CIP CIP, Grants, Donations CIP, Donations CIP, CDBG, N.O.S., Grants, Donations CIP, Partnerships, Sponsorships, Grants CIP, Partnerships, Grants CIP CIP CIP, Grants N/A CIP, Grants CIP $1,000 General Fund $2,500 General Fund N/A N/A $50,000 General Fund $1,000 General Fund $5,000 General Fund $10,000 General Fund $10,000/mile per General Fund year N/A N/A $5,000 General Fund $2,000 General Fund $76,000 General Fund $5,000 General Fund $2,500 General Fund l 27 Construct Planned Trail $10,000,000 CIP, Partnerships, $10,000/mile per General Fund Projects Grants year Acquire and Construct New Park in West part unknown Dedication Fees, unknown General Fund Bond, CIP of City Construct additional $75,000- CIP, Partnerships, large dog park in south- $150 000 Grants $8,000 General Fund central part of City , feasibility Study for Recreation/Aq uati c $70,000 General Fund N/A N/A Center an West side of community Design and Construct a new Recreation / $15,000,000- Band $500,000 General Fund AquaticCenter an West $20,000,000 side of City Total 2017-2020 CIP +/- (in 2008 dollars) $30,220,000 Total 12 Year CIP +/- (in 2008 dollars $42,880,000 Benton Hll! Park 28 II. Past, Present, and Future- The Planning Context A. Iowa City Parks & Recreation Goal Statement Provide ahigh-quality level of leisure time opportunities, increase the number of people served, improve the quality of program delivery, and advocate the benefits of recreational involvement to the general public. B. Purpose of this Plan The Iowa City Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan is intended to help meet the needs of current and future residents by positioning lawa City to build on the community's unique parks and recreation assets and identify new opportunities. The citizen-driven plan establishes a clear direction to guide city staff, advisory committees, and elected officials in their efforts to enhance the community's parks system, open space, trails, recreation facilities, programs, and services. C. History of Iowa City Parks and Recreation bepartment The history of public parks in Iowa City can be traced back to 1839, which shows both College Green Park and North Market Square Park as part of the original city plat. The early history of parks is unclear, but it is known that the original Park Board was established by code around 1905. It would seem that this timing might have had something to do with the acquisition of land in 1906 that became City Park, which remains today as the City's most popular park, and one of its largest. Organized public recreation began in the early 1930's. One of few facilities available at the time was a small privately owned and operated swimming pool in City Park known as the "Big Dipper." Beginning in the latter part of 1932, students from the University of Iowa's Physical Education Department conducted a part-time recreation program on Wednesday evenings and Saturday mornings at the American Legion's gymnasium, located at the corner of College and Gilbert Streets. In June, 1934, a supervised Summer Playground program was introduced at Longfellow School. As community support grew, a Board of Recreation Works was formed, and in 1934 the Board employed the City`s first Recreation Director. Financial support came from the Iowa City Women's Club and Community Chest funds. In July 1936, there was a fire in the American Legian Building and it was heavily damaged. After being renovated, the building's name was changed to the Iowa City Community Building. Among other things, it became the local recreation center and included a gymnasium, rifle range, handball court, and a small restaurant. In June, 1944 the citizens of Iowa City voted to establish a Playground and Recreation Commission to be supported by public taxation. The Commission held its initial meeting in September, 1944 with H.S. Ivie serving as President, and noted historian Irving Weber as Vice-President. In 1947 voters approved a $50,000 bond issue, to go with $62,500 already saved, for the construction of anew swimming pool in City Park. The pool opened in June, 1949, and is still operating today. In 1952 a rather unique operation was established in City Park -children's carnival rides, which included a train, Ferris wheel, carousel, and other rides. This was a privately owned operation of the Drollinger 29 family who continued to operate the rides for 47 years, and covered three generations. They paid a small percentage of their income to the City as rent for the property. When the Drollingers decided to retire from the business in 1999 the City purchased the rides in order to keep this tradition alive. This is believed to be the only city-owned park in the State to offer this type of attraction. In 1955, a second fire destroyed the Community Building, and the recreation offices were moved to the airport building for two years; programs were conducted at various buildings throughout the City. In 1956 a proposed bond issue to construct a new recreation center was defeated. That same year the recreation offices were moved to 130 Lafayette Street. Then in 1962 the citizens of Iowa City overwhelmingly passed a referendum to construct a new recreation center, now known as the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center, named in honor of Iowa City's Superintendent of Recreation from 1951 to 1953. Total cost to construct and equip the new building was $715,000. In September, 1964, as the new Recreation Center neared completion, the City Council voted to abolish both the publicly elected Park Board and the Playground and Recreation Commission, and to merge the functions of these separate units into a single advisory body to be known as the Parks and Recreation Commission, which still exists today. The Park Board, however, did not go quietly, feeling the City Council did not have the authority to abolish a publicly elected board. They eventually took their case all the way to the State Supreme Court which upheld the legality of the City Council's action. At the time of this merger, there were eight public parks in existence: Black Springs Circle, Brookland, City, College Green, Court Hill, Creekside, Happy Hollow, and North Market Square. The total parkland inventory amounted to 129 acres, 107 of which were in City Park. Today the City manages over 1,600 acres of parkland/open space, which includes 42 developed parks, with 31 playgrounds, 43 athletic fields, 45 park shelters, 75 community garden plots, over six miles of nature trails and miscellaneous other amenities such as tennis courts, basketball courts, bocce courts, horseshoe courts, dog park, disc golf, etc. The City's trail system has grown to include over 50 miles of trails. Since 1997 three major regional parkland areas have been acquired: Peninsula Park, Waterworks Prairie Park, and Sand Lake Recreation Area. In 1972 the Parks and Recreation Department launched a new Farmers Market program, which initially consisted of 17 stalls and operated Saturday mornings. It now operates Wednesday evenings with 57 stalls and Saturday mornings with 112 stalls. In 2006, two indoor holiday markets were added to the program, which are very popular. Recognizing the need far programs to accommodate people with special needs, the Special Populations Involvement (SPI) program was established in 1974, initially funded with aone-year grant awarded by the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. The SPI program became fully funded by the City, and has grown to a comprehensive recreation program serving aver 500 people. This program is nationally recognized, having received the prestigious National Gald Medal Award in 1954 and again in 1992. As the years passed several major recreation facilities were constructed, and others renovated, to add to the City's recreation offerings. The new facilities include: The Mercer Park Aquatic Center, a cooperative project with the Iowa City Community School District, which opened in 1955; a cooperative arrangement was entered into with the University of Iowa in 1996 forjaint use of the Hawkeye Softball Complex; the Iowa City Kickers Soccer Park opened in 1997; the Scanlon Gymnasium was added to the 30 Mercer Park Aquatic Center in 1999; the Riverside Festival Stage, home to Riverside Theatre's Annual Shakespeare Festival, opened in 2000; the Iowa City Skate Park was completed in 2002; the Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park, in cooperation with Johnson County DogPAC, opened in 2006; the Grant Woad Community Gym, another cooperative project with the School District, also opened in 2006; the Peninsula Park Disc Golf Course was completed in 2007; and the City and University entered into an agreement in 2007 which will allow for a University Boathouse (with community use) to be constructed in Terrell Mill Park, scheduled to open in 2009. The number of recreation programs and activities offered has also grown over the years. From the meager beginnings of pond swimming, a marble tournament, and one playground program, the Department now offers over 1,000 activities annually. To enhance and expand upon the opportunities offered to the community, the Department also partners with a number of organizations. In addition to an arrangement with the School District for joint use of facilities, the Department has long-standing relationships with a number of "affiliates," the largest of which are: Iowa City Boys Baseball, Iowa City Girls Softball, Babe Ruth Baseball, Iowa City Kickers Soccer Club, and the Iowa City Eels Swim Club. D. Parks and Recreation Department Overview Department Description Iowa City Parks and Recreation is a department of the City of Iowa City and receives funding authorized by the City Council through budget appropriations. Funding is also provided through fees charged for specific programs and services and through grant funds. Additionally, the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Foundation provides funds through donations and bequests that enhance department programs, services, and projects. Through these means, parks and recreation programs and services are provided and maintained for the citizens of Iowa City. E. Related Planning Efforts and Integration The City of Iowa City has undertaken several planning efforts in recent years that have helped inform the planning process for this Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update. These efforts include: • City of Iowa City Comprehensive Plan • Neighborhood Open Space Plan • Existing Trails Plan • Existing Park Plans • Existing Policy Manuals F. Methodalagy of this Planning Process This project has been guided by a project team, made up of city staff and the Park and Recreation Commission. This team provided input to the GreenPlay consulting team throughout the planning process. This collaborative effort creates a plan that fully utilizes the consultant's expertise and incorporates the local knowledge and institutional history that only community members can provide. The project consisted of the following tasks: 31 Needs Assessment and Public lnvoivement • Review of previous planning efforts and city historical information, and a recent statistically valid community interest and opinion survey. • Consideration of the profile of the community and demographics, including anticipated population growth. • Extensive community involvement effort including focus groups, meetings with key stakeholders, and community-wide public meetings. • Identification of alternative providers of recreation services to provide insight regarding the market opportunities in the area for potential new facilities and services. • Research of trends and statistics related to American lifestyles to help guide the efforts of programming staff. Level of Service Analysis • Interviews with staff to provide information about parks and recreation facilities and services, along with insight regarding the current practices and experiences of the City in serving its residents and visitors. • Analysis addressing recreation, parks, and related services. Inventory • Inventory of parks and facilities using existing mapping, staff interviews, and on-site visits to verify amenities and assess the condition of the facilities and surrounding areas. Assessment and Analysis • Review and assessment of relevant plans. • Organizational SWOT Analysis. • Measurement of the current delivery of service using the GRASP® Level of Service Analysis and allowing for a target level of service to be determined that is both feasible and aligned with the desires of citizens as expressed through the citizen survey. This analysis is also represented graphically in GRASPS Perspectives. • Exploration of finance and funding mechanisms to support development and sustainability of the system. Recommendations: Goals, Strategies, and Action Plan • Identification and categorization of recommendations into themes with goals, objectives, and an action plan for implementation. • Development of an action plan far capital improvements including cost, funding source potentials, and timeframe to support the implementation of the plan. G. Timeline for Completing the Master Plan Start-up Needs Assessment and Public Involvement Inventory and Assessment of Existing Facilities Program and Services Inventory and SWOT Analysis Findings Compilation Report Guidelines, Standards and Recommendations August 2007 September 2007 -February 2008 September 2007 -March 2008 September 2007 -March 2008 April 2008 May -June 2008 32 Financial Resources and Expenditure Analysis Recommendations and Action Plans Final Plan and Presentation April -July 2448 June -August 2448 September 2448 Carouse! !n City Park 33 111. What We Want- Our Community and Identified Needs A. Community Profile and Demographic Information This analysis uses figures from the 2000 U.S. Census, as well as projections from ESRI Business Information Solutions. ESRI offers a more current look at Census data by calculating current year estimates (2007, as well as five-year projections (2012) for overall population and population breakdowns. Service Area and Population The primary service area for this analysis is the City of Iowa City, Johnson County, and the State of Iowa. All estimated 2007 populations, as well as projected population and demographic breakdowns by population are taken from ESRI. The projected 2007 population for Iowa City is 66,177, for Johnson County is 124,240, and for Iowa is 3,030,140. Population, Age Ranges, and Family Information Population Dlsrriburion Population growth percentages from 2000 to 2007 for the City of Iowa City, Johnson County, and the State of Iowa are illustrated in Figure 1. Johnson County is estimated to have experienced a population growth of over 10%, compared to the State at only 3.4°l. Iowa City is estimated to have grown less rapidly than the County, at slightly less than a 6% increase in population over the last seven years, but much more rapidly than the State. 1: Percent change in population 2000 to 2007- the City of Iowa City,lohnson County, and Iowa 12.0% 10.0% S.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Percent change 2000-07 Age Disrriburlon The following age breakdown is used to separate the population into age sensitive user groups and to retain the ability to adjust to future age sensitive trends. Percent of population distribution by age for Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa is shown in Figure 2. 34 Iowa City Johnson County Iowa • Under 5 years: This group represents users of preschool and tot programs and facilities, and as trails and open space users, are often in strollers. These individuals are the future participants in youth activities. • 5 to 14 years: This group represents current youth program participants. • 15 to 24 years: This group represents teen/young adult program participants moving out of the youth programs and into adult programs. Members of this age group are often seasonal employment seekers. • 25 to 34 years: This group represents involvement in adult programming with characteristics of beginning long-term relationships and establishing families. • 35 to 54 years: This group represents users of a wide range of adult programming and park facilities. Their characteristics extend from having children using preschool and youth programs to becoming empty nesters. • 55 to 64 years: This group represents users of older adult programming exhibiting the characteristics of approaching retirement or already retired and typically enjoying grandchildren. • 65 years plus: Nationally, this group will be increasing dramatically. current population projections suggest that this group will grow almost 70°l in the next 13 years. Programming for this group should positively impact the health of older adults through networking, training and technical assistance, and fundraising. Recreation centers, senior centers, and senior programs can be a significant link in the health care system. This group generally ranges from very healthy, active seniors to more physically inactive seniors. ire 2: 2007 Population Breakdown Percent of Total by Abe-Iowa City. Johnson County, and Iowa 40.0% 35.0% 30.0°!° 25.0% 20A% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Under 5 5-14 15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Source: FSR! 35 Population Comparisons Overall, Iowa City has much higher populations in the 15-24 years category, as well as higher populations in the 25-34 years category, when compared to Johnson County and Iowa. Given the large population of Iowa University students in Iowa City, it is expected that the populations in these age groups will be significantly higher. By contrast, the State, when compared to both Iowa City and Johnson County, has a higher percentage of population in the older age categories (35 and older) and in the youngest age categories (14 and younger). Iowa City has lower population percentages in the youngest age categories than both the County and State, as well as lower percentages of population in the oldest age categories, than both the County and State. The median age for Iowa City is 26.7, for Johnson County it is 29.4, and for Iowa it is 37.9. Gender (2Q07) According to ESRI Business Solutions, the 2007 population estimate for Iowa City is 49.3% males and 50.7% females. For the County the 2007 estimates are 49.9% males and 50.1%females, and for the State are 49.3% males and 50.7% females. Race/Ethnicity (2(107) Statistics gathered from ESRI Business Solutions provide the race and ethnicity breakdown for Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa. As shown in Table 1, the race with the largest population is White for all three regions. By comparison, Iowa City has a more racially and ethnically diverse population than the County and a more racially diverse population than the State. Table 1: Race/Ethnicity Comparisons for 2007 White Alone 83.5% 87.1% 92.4% African American Alone 4.3% 3.3% 2.4% American Indian Alone 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% Asian or Pacific Islander Alone 8.5% 6.3% 2.0% Some Other Race Alone 1.6% 1.3°f 1.7% Two or More Races 1.8% 1.6% 1.2% Total 100% 100% 100% Hispanic/Latino Origin (Any Race}* 3.7% 3.3% 3.7% Source: ESRI Business Information Solutions *Persans of Hispanic Origin maybe of any race. This number reflects the percentage of the total population. EdUCation According to ESRI Business Information Solutions and shown in Table 2, mare than half of all residents in Iowa City have a bachelor's degree or higher. The University of Iowa students and staff make up a large portion of the overall population of Iowa City, thus it is expected that the educational attainment levels of the residents in Iowa City are much higher than those of the County or State. to Johnson County 36 47.5% of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher and in the State of Iowa 21.2% have a bachelor's degree or higher. Table 2: Educational Attainment -25 Years and Older Less than 9`" Grade 1.9% 2.8% 5.6% 9`"-12`" Grade, No Diploma 3.3% 3.5% 8.3% High School Graduate 15.4% 19.8% 36.1% Same College, No Diploma 17.7% 18.8% 21.4% Associate Degree 5.8°l 7 4°l 7 4% Bachelor's Degree 28.1% 26.1% 14.7% Master's/Prof/Doctorate 27.8% 21.4% fi.5 Source: ESR! Business Information Solutions The University of Iowa Iowa City is home to the University of Iowa. According to the University of Iowa (http:J/www.uiowa.edu(facts/index.html) the University has a current enrollment of 30,409 students of which 20,907 are undergraduate, 5,482 are graduate, and 4,020 are professional students. Additionally, the University employs 1,700 tenure or tenure track professors, 456 clinical or clinical track faculty, 7,440 professional and scientific staff, and 5,398 general service staff. It is difficult to assess the exact number of University of Iowa students and staff that are included in the overall Iowa City population. According to the University Registrar's Office approximately 12°l of students live outside of Iowa City and city staff estimate that approximately 5,500 students living in dorms are not counted in the census as well as an undetermined number living off campus. City staff also estimates that approximately 20% of IU staff live outside of Iowa City. Household Jncome According to ESRI Business Information Solutions, the estimated 2007 median household income for Iowa City is $42,412 and per capita income is $27,210, both are slightly lower than the County ($49,829 and $29,856, respectively). The median household income for the State is $49,331 and per capita income is $25,252. The median household income for Iowa City is lower than both the County and State, likely because of the large student population. FJgure 3 shows the percent of households by income. 37 Figure 3: Households by Income- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% o Iowa City olohnson County u Iowa <$15,000 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999 $75,000-$99,999 $100,000ormore The highest percentage of households in Iowa City earn less than $15,000 annually (18.1%). The second highest percentage of households in the City earn over $100,000 annually (17.4%). Again, this seeming discrepancy is likely due to the fact that Iowa City is a college town with a combination of students and more established residents. In Johnson County, the highest earning bracket is over $100,000 (20.3°t ), followed by the $50,000- $74,999 a year bracket (17.2%). In the State of Iowa, the highest percentage of the population earns between $50,000- $74,999 (22.4%), followed by the $35,000- $49,999 category (17.0%). C-verall, only 14.3% of the State's population earns over $100,000 annually. Household Size and Units The 2007 average household size in Iowa City is 2.15 persons. The average household size in Johnson County is 2.26 persons, and in the State it is 2.41 persons. Fable 3 shows that Iowa City has a significantly higher renter occupied housing units than the County and the State. Again, the large number of students in Iowa City explains the high percentage of rentals. The State has a much higher percentage of vacant housing units, a much lower percentage of renter occupied housing units, and a much higher percentage of owner occupied housing units when compared to the County and Iowa City. However, compared to the overall population in the United States, the percentage of vacant housing units in the State is 2% lower, and the percentage of renter occupied housing is 4.9°l lower. The percentage of owner occupied housing units in Iowa is 6.9% higher than the U.S. Table 3: Housing Units Owner Occupied Housing Units 45.9% 55.9% 68.2% Renter Occupied Housing Units 49.9°! 39.2% 23.9% Vacant Housing Units 4.2% 4.9% 7.9% Source: FSR! Business lnformatlon So(utron 38 Employment According to 2007 estimates, 96.3% of the 16 and older population in the labor force is civilian employed in Iowa City. In Johnson County 96.9°t° of the 16 and older population is employed, and 96.0% of the population in the State is civilian employed. According to 2007 estimates of the employed work force in Iowa City, approximately 69.8% are engaged inwhite-collar professions such as management, business, financial, and sales. The balance of the work force is engaged in service industries (17.9%) and blue-collar (12.3%) professions. Johnson County reflects similar percentages as Iowa City, 68.5% are engaged inwhite-collar professions, 16.1°l in service industries, and 15.4% in blue-collar professions. The State, however, has a much lower percentage of the population engaged in white-collar professions (56.5°!), and a much higher percentage engaged in blue-collar professions (27.9%). The remainder of the population of Iowa, 15.6%, is engaged in service industries. Additional Information Nealth and Obesity The United Health Foundation has ranked Iowa 11th in its 2006 State Health Rankings. It was 10th in 2005. The State's biggest strengths include: • Low rate of uninsured population • Low incidence of infection disease • Ready access to adequate prenatal care • High rate of high school graduation • Low infant mortality rate Same of the challenges the State faces include: • Low per capita public health spending • High prevalence of obesity Source: http:/Jwww.unitedhealthfoundatian.argjahr20d&jstates/towa.htmt Population Forecasts Although we can never know the future with certainty, it is helpful to make assumptions about it for economic reasons. 2000 populations are from the 2000 US Census. 2007 and 2012 projections were derived from ESRI Business Information Solutions. All three regions: Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa, are estimated to decrease in rate of growth aver the next five years. Iowa City's growth rate is projected to slow down by 1.5% over the next five years. Johnson County's growth rate is anticipated to decrease by 3.8°t and the State's by 0.9%. Figure 4 illustrates estimated percent change in population for Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa far 2007-2012 as percent change in population from 2000- 2007. Table 4 contains estimated population increase for Iowa City, Johnson County, and Iowa. 39 ure 4: Percent than 15.0% in population- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa 2000-2007, 2007-2012 o laws City ~ Johnson County ~ Iowa 10.6% 10.0% S.0% 0.0% Source: ESR! Business Information Solutions Table 4: Population projections and percent change- Iowa City, Johnson County, Iowa s . • ~ s a 2000 62,220 111,006 2,926,324 2007 66,177 5.9% 124,240 10.6% 3,030,140 3.4% 2012 69,274 4.4% 133,403 6.8% 3,110,913 2.5% B. Current Park and Recreation Trends In this fast-paced modern society, it has become essential to stay on top of current trends impacting parks and recreation. The recreational provider is faced with the challenge of meeting and exceeding user expectations. Part of this task involves understanding what participants want now and projecting future recreation trends. The following information highlights relevant local, regional, and national parks and recreational trends from various sources. Seniors The following are trends related to the aging population in the United States: • America is aging and it is estimated that by 2010, the median age will be 37 years, and by 2030 the median age will be 39 years. • The current life expectancy at birth in the United States is 77.9 years. • There is a growing body of evidence that indicates that aging has more to do with lifestyles and health behaviors than genetics. 40 2000-2007 2007-2012 • Seniors control more than 70°! of the disposable income and have more than $1.6 trillion in spending power, according to Packaged Facts, a division of MarketResearch.com, which publishes market intelligence on several consumer industries. • Seniors also are the fastest growing segment of health club memberships, according to the International Health, Racquet and Sportsclub Association {IHRSA). • The top three sports activities for persons 65 years and older in 2004 were: exercise walking, exercising with equipment, and swimming. {NSGA) Baby Boomers Baby Boomers are made up of adults born between 1946 and 1964. This generation makes up approximately 25% of the total population in the United States. The following are trends of this generation: • According to International, Health, Racquet and Sportsclub Association data for 2003, 91% of Boomers feel the need to take measures to ensure their future health. • Boomers claim 37.6% of all health club memberships. • Eighty percent of Boomers in a study by American Association of Retired Persons believe they will continue to work either full- or part-time into their retirement years. Young Adults According to the International, Health, Racquet and Sportsclub Association {(HRSA), 80°f of Millennials, and almost 90°! of Generation X feel the need to make sure their health will be good when they get older. There is a growing trend in adult populations of a need for more drop-in programming within recreation facilities, and less structured classes. However, according to the National Sporting Goods Association {NSGA), the average age for participants in team sports ranges from 16 to 29 years. For males, the range is 18.2 to 29.3 years, compared to 16.2 to 25.3 years far females. Aquatics National Trends According to the National Sporting Goods Association, swimming ranked second in terms of participation in 2006. There is an increasing trend towards indoor leisure and therapeutic pools. Respondents ranked indoor competitive pool as the 5`" most important indoor recreation facilities to be added, expanded, or improved in the 2008 Citizen Survey. Additionally, they ranked indoor aquatic center 5`"and indoor competitive pool 6`"when asked to indicate which facilities were the three most important to them. Athletic Recreation Sports Participation The 2006 National Sporting Goods Association Survey on sports participation found the top ten activities ranked by total participation included: exercise walking, swimming, exercising with equipment, and bicycle riding. Additionally, the following active, organized, or skill development activities still remain popular: hiking, runningJjogging, soccer, basketball, and football. Fable 5 shows the top ten sports ranked by total participation in 2006. 41 Table 5: Top Ten Sports Ranked by Total Participation 2006 Tota I Exercise Walking 87.5 1.7% Swimming 56.5 -2.6% Exercising with Equipment 52.4 -3.4% Camping (vacation/overnight) 48.6 5.7% Bowling 44.8 i -1.3% Fishing 40.6 -2.5% Workout at Club ' 36.9 6.5°l _ Bicycle Riding 35.6 -13.3% Aerobic Exercising 33.7 0.0°~ Weight Lifting 32.9 -1.9% Source: NSGA 2QQ& Among team sports tackle football, swimming, and soccer had large increases in participation between 2001 and 2006. Additionally exercise activities including: working out at a club, weight lifting, aerobic exercising, and exercising with equipment, increased significantly. Table 6 shows percent change in total participation for select activities from 2001 to 2006. Table 6: Total Participation percent change 2001 to 2006 in Select Activities Sport 2006 2001 Percent Change Weight Lifting 32.9 23.9 37.6% Aerobic Exercising 33.7 26.3 28.1% Mountain Biking (off road) 8.5 6.9 23.8% Exercising with Equipment ~ 52.4 ~ 43.9 ~ 19.3°l° ~ Hiking 31.0 26.1 18.7% Running/Jogging 28.8 24.5 17.3% ^ Exercise Walking 87.5 78.3 11.7% Swimming 56.5 i 54.8 i 3.1% i Skateboarding 9.7 9.6 1.1% Soccer 14.0 13.9 1.0% Source: NSGA 2QQb From 2001 to 2006, there was a significant decline in participation in in-line skating and scooter riding. Additionally, softball, tennis, and volleyball experienced decreases in participation. When ranked by state, the top sports activities by participation for Iowa are water skiing, snowboarding, freshwater fishing, skateboarding, and hunting with a bow and arrow. (NSGA 2006) 42 Football (tackle) 11.9 8.2 45.0% Paintball Games 8.0 5.6 44.0% Youth Sports • Specific offerings for kid's fitness are slowly increasing in health and fitness facilities. {IDEA) • For youth seven to 11 years of age, bicycle riding has the highest number of participants. According to the NSGA, in terms of overall youth participation, snowboarding, skateboarding, tackle football, ice hockey, and mountain biking experienced the largest increase in participation from 1997- 2006. In-line skating experienced the largest decrease in participation. Volleyball, baseball, softball, basketball, and bicycle riding also experienced decreases in participation rates. Table 7: Youth Participation in Selected Activities and Percent Change 1997-2006 Ove ra I I Age 7 -11 Age 12-17 Change 1997-2006 % Change 1997-2006 % Change vs 1997 Total U.S. 9.5% 0.0°! 9.5°1 Baseball 3.5% -22.1% 6.3% Basketball ~ -12.8% ~ -20.6% ~ -8.4% ~ Bicycle Riding -21.1% -29.6% -25.3% Bowling 0.0% -11.7% 6.9% Fishing (Fresh -6.0% -7.5% -19.1% water) Football {Tackle) + 44.6% = 19.5% = 39.1% ~ Golf -6.8% -16.1% -4.7% Ice Hockey ~ 32.9°1 ~ 41.3% ~ -17.5% In-line Skating -60.5% -66.1% -57.4% Mountain Biking 5.4% -13.5% -16.1% (off road) Skateboarding 53.6% 9.6% 84.8% Skiing (alpine) -27.9% -53.8% -33.2% Snowboarding 84.8% 80.5% 54.3°! Soccer 2.7% -14.7% -0.3% Softball -23.9% -1.9% -17.7% -6.8% -23.0°1 25.5°1 -38.0% -39.2% -18.0% Source: National Sporting Goorls Association 2006 Natural Environments and Open Space Environmental Education In April, 2007 the NRPA sent out a survey to member agencies in order to learn more about the programs and facilities that public park and recreation agencies provide to connect children and their families with nature. A summary of the results follow: • 68% of public park and recreation agencies offer nature-based programming and 61 percent have nature-based facilities. More than 30°l of public agencies offer no nature programming, and slightly less than 44% have no nature-based facilities. • The most common programs include nature hikes, nature-oriented arts and crafts, fishing- related events, and nature-based education in cooperation with local schools. 43 • When asked to describe the elements that directly contribute to their most successful programs, agencies listed staff training as most important followed by program content and number of staff/staff training. • When asked what resources would be needed most to expand programming, additional staff was most important followed by funding. • Of the agencies that do not currently offer nature-based programming, 90% indicated that they want to in the future. Additional staff and funding were again the most important resources these agencies would need going forward. • The most common facilities include: nature parks/preserves, self-guided nature trails, outdoor classrooms, and nature centers. • When asked to describe the elements that directly contribute to their most successful facilities, agencies listed funding as most important followed by presence of wildlife and community support. According to the Outdoor Industry Association {OIA) report "the Active Outdoor Recreation Economy" released in 2006: • Over three-quarters of Americans participate in active outdoor recreation each year. • Five percent of Americans, almost 6.5 million, depend on the active outdoor recreation economy to make a living. • Americans spend $289 billion each year on gear, trip-related items and services to enjoy active outdoor recreation. Cultural Arts • According to a survey published in the 2007 Statistical Abstract of the United States, the highest percentage of persons visiting historic sites was in the 45-54 age group {38.0%), followed by the 35-44 age group {35.8%). The highest percentage of persons visiting art museums and galleries was in the 45-54 age group {32.9%) followed by the 55-64 age group {27.8%). • Attendance at the traditional performing arts events has steadily increased between 2000 and 2004 for all categories except opera and symphony/orchestra. {2007 Statistical Abstract) • Those with incomes less than $29,999 enjoy arts/craft fairs and festivals. Individuals with income levels between $30,000 and $74,999 enjoy art museums, galleries, arts/craft fairs, festivals and historic sites. More than 50% of those with incomes aver $75,000 visit historic sites. {2007Statistical Abstract) • Organized events held in public parks {arts festivals, athletic events, food festivals, musical and theatrical) often bring substantial positive economic impacts to their communities, filling hotel rooms and restaurant, and bringing customers to local stores. (Trust for Public Land) A study released by the Statistical Abstract of the United States in 2007 showed attendance at arts activities by age group for persons 18 years old and over. Table 8 shows results of the study. 44 Table 8: Attendance by Abe Group- Selected Arts Activities 2007 Jazz 9` 10. Art 23.7% 26.7% 27.4% 32.9% 27.8% 23.4% 13.45 Museums/Galleries Art/Craft Fairs & 29.2% 33.5°! 37.2°l 38.8% 35.1% 31.1% 15.7°f Festivals Historic Sites 28.3% 33.3% 35.8% 38.0% 31.6% 24.2% 12.8% Literature* 42.8% 47.7% 46.6% 51.6% 48.9% 45.3% 36.7% Trails and Specialty Parks Trails, parks, and playgrounds are among the five most important community amenities considered when selecting a home, according to a 2002 survey of recent homebuyers by the National Association of Home Builders and National Association of Realtors. (Pack & Schunuel) Two of the emerging specialty parks include skate parks and dog parks. (van der Smissen et at. ) The Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association estimates there are about 1,000 skateboard parks in the United States. Facilities The June 2007 "State of the Industry" report surveyed all types of organizations including public, private, and non-profit. The largest percent of respondents were in the Midwest (31.9%), and the highest percent of respondent organizations were public (67.1%). • More than three-quarters of respondents reported that they have plans to build new facilities, add to their existing facilities, or renovate their existing facilities within the next three years. • On average, facilities are planning to spend nearly $3.8 million on new facilities, additions and renovations over the next several years. • Across the board, the most common amenity included in facilities of all kinds were outdoor sport courts for such sports as tennis and basketball, locker rooms, bleachers and seating, natural turf sports fields for sports like baseball, football and soccer, and concession areas. • More than 60% of respondents said their facility included an outdoor sports court. The current national trend is toward a "one-stop" facility to serve all ages. Large, multipurpose regional centers help increase cost recovery, promote retention, and encourage cross-use. Agencies across the U.S. are increasing revenue production and cost recovery. Amenities that are becoming "typical" as opposed to alternative include: • Multipurpose, large regional centers (65,000 to 125,000+ sq. ft.) for all ages/abilities with all amenities in one place. This design saves on staff costs, encourages retention and participation, and saves on operating expenses due to economies of scale. • Leisure and therapeutic pools 45 • Interactive game rooms • Nature centersJoutdoor recreation and education centers • Regional playground for all ages of youth • Skate parks • Partnerships with private providers or other government agencies • Indoor walking tracks • Themed decor Amenities that are still considered "alternative" but increasing in popularity: • Climbing walls • Cultural art facilities • Green design techniques and certifications such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental design (LEER). A recent BCA survey indicated that 52% of the recreation-industry survey respondents indicated they were willing to pay more for green design knowing that it would significantly reduce or eliminate the negative impact of buildings on the environment and occupants. Partnerships In the Parks and Recreation industry it is common to form partnerships with other organizations either to increase funding potential or to improve programming options. According to the June 2007 State of the Industry Report published in Recreation Management Magazine, 96.3% of survey respondents in the Parks and Recreation industry have found one way or another to partner with other organizations to accomplish their missions. • Over 78°l of parks and recreation departments reported forming partnerships with local schools. • Local government was the second most common partnership. More than 67% of parks and recreation departments in the survey listed local government as a partner. • Other partners listed in the survey include: IHRSA, the American Camp Association, Professional Golf Association (PGA), Rotary International, Lions and Elks Clubs, faith-based organizations, the Boys and Girls Clubs, Boy Scouts and Girl Scout, the Special Olympics, and local and state tourism boards. • Facilities least likely to form partnerships with external organizations included: resorts and hotels, water parks, amusement parks and theme parks, campgrounds, youth camps, private camps, and RV parks. C. Community and Stakeholder Input A total of seven focus groups were held on September 18, 19, and 20 with a public forum on the 20`h as well. Over 90 users of the City of Iowa's parks and recreation amenities and programs and non-users participated. The following is a summary of key issues identified through the process. 46 GENERAL Strengths ^ Staff- visionary, responsive ^ Facilities- well maintained, many different park types ^ Services and programs- lots of diversity, encompasses all ages ^ Support and Funding- good relationship with City Hall, capital funding is effective Opportunities forlmprovement ^ Lack of certain types of facilities, trail connections, and river access ^ Public awareness- lack of information and education, need to promote Parks and Recreation as a quality of life issue ^ Poor maintenance of natural areas ^ Lack of staff- need more maintenance, programming, Foundation and Pt0 staff ^ Funding- lack of capital and operations and maintenance {O&M) funding ^ Programming- need to use natural resources, need to increase collaboration, need to identify care service ^ Planning- need to improve strategic planning and increase collaboration, bath in neighborhoods and regionally ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS ^ Need programming for all ages below 26 and over 40 ^ Need additional programming in the following areas: o Wellness and fitness, nature based, outdoor winter activities, outdoor water-based activities, drop-in unstructured activities IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING PARKS AND FACILITIES ^ Need to improve maintenance at parks and facilities ^ Recreation centers and pools: o Need overall facility upgrades, more space, increase air quality at Mercer Pool, safer entryways, additional leisure aquatic components IMPROVEMENTS TO SUPPORT SYSTEM ^ Funding-need to redo fee structure, need additional sources, need to involve friend's groups ^ Need staffing increases to assist in maintenance, programming, marketing, grant writing ^ Need to improve/redo policies for alcohol use, safety, Neighborhood Open Space Ordinance, developer land dedication/fees-in-lieu ^ Need to improve transportation to increase access to programs and facilities ^ Need to increase collaborations with Senior Center, University, schools, and neighborhood associations 47 RATINGS . ::rent pragrams Quality of existing facilities Maintenance of facilities Average Rating 4.1 3.4 3.6 Quality of customer service 4.0 Effectiveness of seeking feedback 3.3 UNDERSERVED PORTIONS OF IOWA CITY Geographic: o SW- parks, SE- pool, NE-playground, far west, north and south future development, central/dense areas-parks Demographic o Active seniors/baby boomers, people with disabilities, low income, those without transportation, 18-25 year olds NEW PARK AMENTITIES ^ Pedestrian Bridge at dog park ^ Trails- connector, rail corridor, multiuse ^ River access ^ Neighborhood parks ^ Additional dog parks ^ Basketball courts NEW FACILITIES ^ Outdoor leisure pool with lap swim ^ Recreation/aquatics center on west side of town ^ Municipal golf course ^ Splash pad/sprayground ^ Indoor soccer ^ Farmer's Market facility ^ Multipurpose rental/meeting venue for large gatherings ^ BMX park/trails FINANCIAL ^ Issues to be considered Park and Recreation services should be funded through a combination of taxes and fees o Should serve all citizen regardless of ability to pay o Most respondents are comfortable with current fees structure- could tolerate fee increases in some areas o Concern about tax increase-property or sales How to support o Parks and Recreation foundation, grants, donations, partnerships, sponsorships, motel/hotel tax SENSITIVITIES ^ Increase in taxes, University relationship, school district relationship, Senior Center relationship, affordability, ADA accessibility, changing demographics, City Council support 48 KEY PARTNERS/STAKEHOLDERS Corporations/businesses, Chamber of Commerce, ICCCVB and Sports Authority, Service other City departments, University/Kir groups, City Council and associations mental entities, neighborhood ~,. I KEY ISSUES/PRIORITIES Funding Long-range strategic planning/vision Recognition of Parks and Recreation as quality of life Collaboration Celebrate successes Trails/bicycle transportation Vision and access for Riverfront Development Operational resources Age change in drinking establishments D. Statistically-Valid Community Survey Findings The City of Iowa City conducted a Community Attitude and Interest Survey in January and February 2008 to establish priorities for the future improvement of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the community. The survey was designed to obtain statistically valid results from households throughout Iowa City. The survey was administered by a combination of mail and phone. Leisure Vision worked extensively with Iowa City officials in the development of the survey questionnaire. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future system. In January 2008, surveys were mailed to a random sample of 2,500 households throughout Iowa City. Approximately three days after the surveys were mailed, each household that received a survey also received an electronic voice message encouraging them to complete the survey. In addition, about two weeks after the surveys were mailed, Leisure Vision began contacting households by phone, either to encourage completion of the mailed surveyor to administer the survey by phone. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 500 completed surveys. This goal was far exceeded, with a total of 676 surveys having been completed. The results of the random sample of 676 households have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least +/-3.8%. The complete executive summary, including graphs and charts, can be found in Appendlxl. 49 Participation and 1/lsitatlan ^ Of the 92% of respondent households who visited Iowa City parks aver the past year, 92% rated the physical condition of all the parks as either excellent (2fi%} or good (66%). Additionally, S°l rated the conditions as fair, and less than 1% of respondents rated the parks as poor. Thirty-percent (30%} of respondent household members participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year. ^ Of the 30% of respondent household members that have participated in any recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year, 68°l° have participated in at least 2 different programs. Additionally, 24°l have participated in at least different 4 programs. ^ Of the 30% of respondent household members that have participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year, 90% of respondents rated the overall quality of programs as either excellent (27%} or good (fi3%}. In addition, S% rated the programs as fair, and only 1% rated them as poor. ^ ParksJRecreation program guide (65°l) had the highest percentage of respondents indicate it as the way that they learn about Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department programs and activities. Other frequently menitoned ways respondents learn about programs and activities include: newspaper articles {50%) and from friends and neighbors {46%). ^ Iowa City Public Library (Fi4%} is the organization used by the highest percentage of respondents for indoor and outdoor recreation and sports activities during the past year. Other frequently mentioned organizations include: Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department {54%), State of Iowa parks {47%), and County parks (46%j. Usage byAge ^ Based an the sum of their tap two choices, the organizations respondent household members ages 17 years and under use the mast far sports and recreation programs and services include: Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department (15°l ), school district facilities (12%), and Iowa City Public library (11%}. ^ Based on the sum of their tap two choices, the organizations respondent household members ages 18 years and older use the most for sports and recreation programs and services include: Iowa City Public Library (33%} and Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department (32%}."I do not know what is being offered" (21%}and "program times are not convenient (21%} have the highest percentage of respondents indicate them as the reasons preventing household members from using parks, recreation trails and sports facilities or programs of the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department more often. Facilities ^ There are six facilities that aver 60% of respondent households have a need for: walking and biking trails (79%}, nature center and trails (68%), small neighborhood parks (C8%}, large community parks (66%), wildlife and natural areas (G4°1), and riverfront parks (b2%). 50 ^ There are three facilities that completely meet the needs of over 50% of respondent households: youth soccer fields (66%), youth baseball and softball fields (55%), and adult softball fields (51%} ^ Based an the sum of their tap four choices, the parks and recreation facilities that are most important to respondent households include: walking and biking trails (53%}, small neighborhood parks (30%}, wildlife and natural areas (26°l}, and nature center and trails (25%}. It should also be noted that walking and biking trails had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important facility Programs ^ There are three programs that aver 45% or mare of respondent households have a need far: Farmers' Market (72%}, adult fitness and wellness programs {50%), and special events [48%). ^ There is only one program that over 50% of respondents indicated completely meet the needs of their household: Farmers' Market (54%). ^ Based on the sum of their tap four choices, the recreation programs that are mast important to respondent households include: Farmers' Market (58%), adult fitness and wellness programs (29%}, and special events (2G%). It should also be noted that Farmers' Market had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the mast important program ^ Based an the sum of their tap four choices, the programs that respondents currently participate in most often at Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department facilities include: Farmers' Market (57%}and special events (24%). It should also be noted that the Farmers' Market had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the program respondents currently participate in mostoften Indoor Space ^ Walking and jogging track (67°I}had the highest percentage or respondents indicate it as the potential indoor programming space their household would use if the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department developed new indoor programming spaces. Other frequently mentioned potential indoor programming spaces include: weight roam/cardiovascular equipment area (43%), exercise facility far adults 50 years and older (39%), nature center (37%), and aerobicsjfitness/dance class space (35%) ^ Based on the sum of their top four choices, the indoor spaces respondent household members would use mast often include: walking and jogging track (59%}, weight roam/cardiovascular equipment area (29%}and exercise facility for adults 50 years and older (28%}. It should also be noted that walking and jogging track had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the indoor space respondent household members would use most often Fhe Benefrts of Parks, Fra!!s, and Recreation Facl1ltr'es ^ Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with various benefits being provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities. All 10 of the benefits have aver 50% of respondents indicate that they either strongly agree or agree that those benefits are provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities. ^ Based on the sum of their top three choices, the benefits mast important to respondent households include: improve physical health and fitness (71%}, preserve open space and the environment (49°l},and make Iowa City a mare desirable place to live (49°I}. It should also be 51 noted that improve physical health and fitness had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the benefit they feel is most important to their household Support and Satisfaction ^ Respondents were asked to indicate how supportive they would be of various actions Iowa City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system. For all 12 actions, over 40% of respondents indicated being either very supportive or somewhat supportive of actions Iowa City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system. Based an the sum of their top four choices, the actions that respondents would be mast willing to fund with their City tax dollars include: develop new walking and biking trails and connect existing trails (55%}, use greenways to develop trails and recreational facilities (50%}, and purchase land to preserve open space and green space (44°I°}. It should also be noted that purchase land to preserve open space and green space had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the action respondents would be most willing to fund with their City tax dollars ^ Seventy-six percent (76%) of respondents indicated that they are either very satisfied (28%) ar somewhat satisfied (48%) with the overall value their household receives from the lava City Parks and Recreation Department. In addition, only 5% indicated that they were very dissatisfied (1%) or somewhat dissatisfied {4%}. Additionally, 5% indicated don't know and 14% indicated neutral Photo by Jeff Harper 52 IV. Whaf We Have Now- An Analysts of Programs and Spaces The following is a description and analysis of Iowa City's current recreation programs. This section explains each branch of the recreation division, program accomplishments, the cost-recovery levels from 2004-2008 (2008 projected} of each branch, and articulates the central issues facing the division. Finally, this section concludes with a description of some of the key area recreation providers and partnerships to help assess how these alternative providers impact Iowa City's future opportunities for expanded parks and recreation services in this community. A. Community Recreation Programs The Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department provides many types of recreation opportunities to the community. Programming includes multiple offerings in the areas of general activities; fitnessJwellness; aquatics; cultural arts/social programs; special populations including therapeutic recreation; and sports programs. Major programs for each area are separately examined including cost recovery levels for each category. Issues affecting each program area are identified based on a review of programming related information as well as program staff interviews and focus groups. Overall, division-wide participation information is also provided. Recreation Program Accomplishments The division experienced many accomplishments inthe recent past. Most of these successes reflect efforts to stimulate and meet increasing demand for recreation programming. Mast of these efforts have resulted in increased participation. Some examples of this progress include: • The Farmer's Market was expanded by 20 plus vendors in 2006 and again by 30 plus more at Saturday markets. Two holiday markets have also been added in November and December and grilling vendors have added a new flavor to the market. • Market Music is a fine example of local partnership. Far many years, the University of Iowa Community Credit Union has co-sponsored 14 Wednesdays of music during Farmer`s Market. Far 2008, the Credit Union has agreed to double its funding so that Market Music can expand to Saturday markets as well. • Taste of Market is an opportunity for vendors to advertise their products and the City to showcase the market itself. This highly successful special event usually draws upwards of 500 to 600 participants, partly because of the music made possible through the Credit Union. • Art in the Park is a no charge, drop in activity, for children of all ages, held in conjunction with the Saturday morning Farmer's Markets, June through July. Although slow in taking off, Art in the Park has grown significantly in popularity, regularly serving 35 to 40 children each Saturday in 2007. • "Neighborhood Family Fun Nights" have been held at eight to ten neighborhood parks on Thursday evenings for the last two summers. Now called "Parties in the Park," the Department organizes live music, carnival style games, and arts and crafts. Cooperation with the City Planning Department has encouraged many Neighborhood Associations to participate by advertising the event and holding additional activities such as potlucks. • Youth and adult clay programs, although always popular, have experienced a recent increase to the point where it is difficult to keep up with demand. One indicator of this heightening popularity is the number of kiln firings completed per week. In 2006, firings were made only one 53 to two times per week. Beginning in 2007, the number doubled. Currently, at the end of the year in 2007, kilns are being fired at an average rate of six per week. • Special interest classes have gained in popularity over the last several years, currently offering four times the number of babysitting trainings, personal first aid, and self-defense classes than when the Department first began offering these types of activities in 2004. • Improving customer service at City Park Pool by adding greenspace and offering lounge chairs has helped increase participation. For example, the Arthritis Aquatic program has grown and consequently added classes and recruited more volunteer leaders to meet this heightened demand. • Birthday parties, arts and craft parties, and roller-skating parties are booked approximately twice per month on average. Tot and sport parties are even more popular, with 68 such parties in 2007. • Roller skating has seen increasing participation even though the national trends indicate that roller-skating is an activity experiencing decline. Every Saturday night 60 - 80 children and adults roller skate at no charge. • Staff involvement on the steering committee for SAFE KIDS Johnson County has resulted in the coordinated cooperation of nearly 30 agencies to produce the annual SAFE KIDS Day. Hundreds of children and their caregivers attend. Also as a part of SAFE KIDS, and in cooperation with Bell Sports, the Recreation Division sells bike and all sport helmets at a reduced rate. Last summer's sales exceeded 190 helmets. • Tat Time is weekly morning program, started in 2001, that allows parents to bring their kids {ages 0-6) to an indoor play area for exercise and fun. At the end of first year, 1,446 kids had participated. Through grants and service group donations, Tat Time reached 5,000 participants far 2007. • Iowa City was one of 37 communities chosen throughout the country to participate in the Youth Sports Summit. • The Department also participates in the National Recreation and Park Association {NRPA} "Take Me Fishing" grant program. • The Special Populations Division led the way in the state in meeting the needs of the disabled, continuing to be one of the only community-based therapeutic recreation programs in Iowa. Evidence of this accomplishment is the continuing development of the Iowa City Special Olympics program, which attracts more athletes each year. • Iowa City was a national gold medal winner in bath 1984 and 1992 far excellence in park and recreation administration. Recreation Division Strengths • Longevity and experience. Currently, all full-time staff members are seasoned veterans, who know their jobs well. • Quality, well-maintained facilities. The recreation center is 44 years old, but exceptional maintenance, as well as the variety of programs offered, ensures continued use. Programming is offered for all ages. • A unique market niche. Despite the high number of private providers in close proximity, the Division serves a unique niche providing exposure to a variety of activities, serving all ages, serving those that cannot or do not use private facilities, and also being a participant feeder for the private providers. An example of the City's role is illustrated in the points below as the 54 University of Iowa plans the construction of a large multipurpose student recreation center five blocks from the Iowa City recreation facility: ^ The public may use these university facilities by paying a daily walk-in fee, likely to be set at around $7.00. The new amenities of this facility may attract public participation but, for the most part, it will be student dominated which, the University has found, tends to discourage public use. Pursuing ajoint-use agreement with the University should be investigated. ^ Since age groups such as youth, active adults, and senior programs will not be the focus at the college recreation center, Iowa City will continue to focus on these areas of service delivery as well as the 18-25 age cohort not attending the university. Public involvement. Staff members make efforts to listen to the public and develop activities desired, within budgetary parameters. Existing partnerships. The City stretches its resources though partnerships with the school district and youth sports organizations. ^ A joint use agreement exists between the City and the School District regarding the swimming pool at Mercer Park. The City called a special election to finance its share of the facility cost and to renovate City Park Pool. ^ A joint use agreement exists between the City and the School District regarding the Grant Wood Elementary School Gymnasium. ^ The City and School District also have a general reciprocal use agreement in place allowing far the use of one another's facilities, largely at no cost. ^ The City has recognized partnerships with a variety of local affiliate groups such as Kickers Soccer Club, Girls Softball, Boys Baseball, Babe Ruth Baseball, Eels Swim Club, etc., for the provision of youth sports utilizing City facilities. ^ A joint use agreement exists between the City and the University regarding City funded lighting on University softball fields allowing community use in the evenings. ^ Anew agreement was recently finalized allowing the University to construct a boathouse in acity-owned park in exchange for community use of the facility. Recreation Division Challenges • Meeting the changing needs of residents. The citizen survey provides in depth information and sub analysis of respondents that will foster understanding to meet resident needs. • Meeting the needs of the young adult age population (18-25). Those of this age bracket and not in college could be a greater focus of the division. • Separated Senior Center. Iowa City has a senior center that operates independently from the Parks and Recreation Department. This facility abides by a different philosophy, where the participants take the lead in organizing their own programming. A sharing of resources could maximize activity spaces and programming opportunities available to provide physical activity to all age groups. • Lack of sufficient multiple use spaces. There are inadequate facilities from which to run programs desired by the community. • Responsibilities needing to be fulfilled. Staff has indicated a need for focus that could be addressed through the addition of the following staff resource: naturalist, marketing and promotions specialist, and fundraiser {perhaps to work through the FoundationJ. Some of these positions could be shared with other city departments with similar needs. 55 Citizen Input Addressing Programs and Facilities Focus Group input provided suggestions for consideration regarding facilities, programs, and program delivery methods to be explored or expanded. Additional programs/activities ^ Intergenerational programming, toddler programs in the evening, daytime toddler swimming or other activities far under-4 year olds, school age programs in the summer, tweeners activities, music or other venues for young adults, non-traditional high school sports such as rowing, family drop-in programming, domestic animal program, unstructured play opportunities, indoor walking, racquetball, and programs for the non-sedentary older adult such as Senior Olympics tournaments ^ Other programming enhancement including public display gardens, more community gardens, kayaking and other water programs at Sand Lake, arts magnet school, better use of the river (opportunity to partner with the University} • Facility improvements ^ Better locker rooms and other renovations at the community center; updating pool sites with more green area, heated outdoor water, improved access for individuals with special needs and improving the air quality at Mercer Pool; better drop off access at centers; expansion of the gymnasium at Mercer(Scanlon; and new kilns for the pottery program. Recreation Division fJppartunities • Deepened partnerships. Iowa City has relationships with all youth sports. One of the strongest is with Iowa City Kickers, who donated over $400,000 to build a soccer complex. Additionally, the City benefits from a great relationship with the school district with joint-use of gymnasiums, and with the University of Iowa with Iowa City lighting university fields in exchange for nighttime usage for adult softball, and more recently a new boathouse to be constructed in Terrell Mill Park. These partnerships should be expanded and formalized, with a focus on avoiding service duplication. • Enhanced outdaar education. Outdoor leisure opportunities could include programming and opportunities for exploring natural areas. • Increased awareness. More focus on promoting the importance of a healthy lifestyle and the major role the department plays in providing such benefits to the community. Additional publicity is needed to make the community mare aware of what the Recreation Division has to offer. Recreation Program Participation Levels Total Attendees, Trends, and Program Capacities Year Number of participants % increase/decrease % program from previous year capacity 2007 833,958 -10% 2006 929,808 +3% 56 MAJOR PROGRAM AREAS Below is a summary of the major program areas provided by the Recreation Division. Currently, the Division is sub-divided into five program areas including General Recreation, Aquatics, Social and Cultural, Special Populations, and Sports/Wellness. Cost recovery levels, primary issues and key focus areas that emerged from focus groups conducted with the public and staff interviews are included. General Recreation Activities General Recreation activities include all services of the Recreation program that are not called out in the other categories highlighted in this section. The expenses are burdened with the administrative overhead of the division, and therefore this area is expected to have very low cast recovery. Genera! Recreation Cost Recovery • 2008: 7% (budgeted) • 2aa7: s°~ • 2aa6: g°i • 2005: 14% • 2004: 7% Aquatics Aquatics is responsible for activities including swimming instruction, water exercise and water sports. Programs are held in the Recreation Center Pool, City Park Pool, and the Mercer Park Aquatic Center. The following cast recovery levels include revenues from the hotel/motel tax increasing from $84,000 to $104,000 over the four-year time frame, as well as other governmental revenues collected from the school district from itsjoint use agreement. Aquatics Cost Recovery • 2008: 50°I (budgeted) • 2007: 61°t • 2006: 55% • 2005: 57% • 2004: 61% Prr'mary lssuesJFocus Areas • Rentals limit the amount of time the public can use the pool. However, reducing rentals would decrease the revenue generated and consequently, the cost-recovery level of aquatics. • Pool passes currently cannot be purchased at City Park Pool • Iowa City lacks a water park/leisure pool. • Traditional swimming pools are in adequate condition, but really lack family appeal. Many nearby communities such as Coralville, North Liberty, and Cedar Rapids have, in recent years, built water parks with slides attracting many Iowa City residents. Iowa City could build a new family water park, or pursue a less costly option of adding slides or other features to existing pool areas. 57 Survey Feedback Importance • 14% of households indicated youth learn-to-swim as most important programs. • 9°f selected water fitness programs as most important. Need • 25% of households indicated that current youth learn-to-swim programs are meeting their needs 100%. • 30% of households indicated a need for water fitness programs. • 22% indicated a need for youth learn-to-swim programs. • 35% of households indicated that indoor swimming pools/leisure pools were completely meeting their needs. • 34°f indicated that outdoor swimming pools/leisure pools were completely meeting their needs. Participation • 22% of households selected leisure pool {water slides, sprays, etc.) as one of their top four choices of facilities they would use most often. • 18% chose lap lanes for swimming. • 32% of households chose a leisure pool. Social and Cultural Activities Sociat and Cultural Activities Cost Recovery • 2008:53% {budgeted) • 2007: 60% • 2006: 67% • 2005: 59°I • 2004: 58% Survey Feedback Importance • 5$% of households indicated Farmer's Market as one of the top four most important programs. • 26% indicated special events as one of the four most important programs. • 11% indicated adult art, dance, and performing arts as one of the four mast important programs. Need • 72% of households indicated that they have a need for Farmer's Market. It was the only program that over 50% indicated their needs were completely met {54%). • 48% indicated a need for special events and only 21% indicated that the current special events offered completely meet their needs. • 15% indicated that adult, and 12% indicated that youth art, dance, and performing arts programs completely meet their needs. 5$ Participation • 57% indicated Farmers Market as one of the programs most often participated in. • 24% selected special events as one of the programs most often participated in. • 6% selected adult art, dance, and performing arts as one of the programs most often participated in. Sports and FitnessJWellness Sports and FitnessjWe!lness Cost Recovery The following cost recovery levels include revenues from the hotel/motel tax ranging from $70,000 to $56,000 over the four-year time frame. Sports • 2005: 70% • 2007: 7s% • 2006: 79% • 2005: 76% • 2004: 70% FitnessjWellness • zoos: 17°~ (budgeted) • 2007:9°i • 2006: 5% • 2005: 4% • 2004: 6% Survey Feedback Importance • 29% indicated adult fitness and wellness programs as one of the most important programs, this was the second most important program after Farmers Market. • 4% indicated youth fitness and wellness as most important. Need • 50% of households indicated a need for adult fitness and wellness programs. • 12% indicated a need for youth fitness and wellness programs. • 11% of households indicated that current adult fitness and wellness programs were completely meeting their needs. • 15% indicated that youth fitness and wellness programs were completely meeting their needs. Participation • Based on the sum of their top four choices, the program that households currently participate in most often, adult fitness and wellness programs was the third ranking {10%). 59 Special Populations Special Fapuiations Cost Recovery • 2008: 7°l (budgeted) • 2007: s°i • 2aa6: 1a°~ • 2005: 9% • 2004: 10% Tatat Recreation Division Total Recreation Division cost recovery includes revenues from the hotelJmotel tax, as well as other governmental revenues collected from the school district from its joint use agreement. Total Recreation Division Cost Recovery • 2008: 40% (budgeted) • 2007: 41% • 2006: 41% • 2005: 42% • 2004: 39% Prr'mary lssuesJFacus Areas • The Union creates unique challenges for the Parks and Recreation Department. For example, in a number of positions, part time employees may not exceed 10 hours a week (20 hours for students), limiting the amount of service that can be provided by very talented and dedicated employees. • The amount of rental activity limits the amount of family programming and free events encouraging family involvement. • Coordination between the Recreation and Parks Divisions is a challenge regarding the park shelter and field reservations made though the Recreation Division. Registration procedures should be evaluated to determine a more effective approach. Survey Feedback Importance • Based on the sum of their top four choices, the three recreation programs that are most important to households include: Farmers' Market (58%},adult fitness and wellness programs {29%), and special events {26%). Need • There are three programs that over 45% or more of households have a need for: Farmers' Market {72%), adult fitness and wellness programs {50%), and special events {48%). Participatran • 30% of household members participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation department during the past year. • Households participate most often in Farmers' Market (57%} and special events (24%}. 60 • Of the 30% of households that have participated in recreation programs offered by the Department during the past year, 90% rated the overall quality of programs as either excellent (27%~, or good (63%). • 21% of households indicated "program times are not convenient" as the reason preventing household members from using programs. • 21% of households indicated "I don't know what is being offered" as the reason preventing household members from using programs. B. Inventory of Facilities Parks Iowa City has a number of parks that serve the community at-large in a variety of ways. Among the park properties are extensive natural areas, trails, large parks, smaller parks, sports parks, and indoor recreation facilities. Within these parks are a variety of components that appeal to park users of all types. Generally Iowa City's parks and facilities are well maintained, diverse, well used, well distributed, and present a high level of design. City Park City Park is Iowa City's largest developed park and has 107.3 acres of sports fields, river frontage, an outdoor theater, playgrounds, outdoor pool, open play areas, picnic shelters, and public art. The park is centrally located and encompasses part of a hillside which slopes gently to the Iowa River floodplain. This park is one of the most featured parks in the system and is highly valued in the community. Benton Hill Park Recently developed, this park filled the need for recreational amenities in one of Iowa City's central residential neighborhaads. As a newer park, it represents the direction of design that the City is choosing for new parks: it is thoughtfully designed; incorporates art; and has an excellent mix of active, passive, and educational opportunities. I.C. Kickers Park This large park is devoted entirely to field sports, with soccer being the primary use. In addition to the existing 17 soccer fields and two ballfields, there is room to add an additional three ballfields. This park is well equipped with restrooms, a playground, and concession stands. South Sycamore Greenspace and Trail Although roughly the same size as the I.C. Kickers Park, this property could not be more different. It is a natural area that includes a large stand of native prairie, wetlands, and woodlands. Its developed amenities include public art and amulti-use trail, which allows for walking, running, biking, wildlife observation, and nature study. The high level of maintenance and attention to native species vegetation at this park is typical of all of the natural areas in Iowa City. Pedestrian Mall The only plaza-style space of Iowa City's several urban parks, the Pedestrian Mall unifies downtown and provides important civic space where shoppers can relax, play with children, and 61 enjoy shade and public art. Like City Park and Hickory Hill (natural area}, this property creates the unique identity of Iowa City. Other Parks In addition to the sampling of parks listed above, Iowa City has many other parks that serve the needs of the residents. Many of the parks are smaller parks that are designed and maintained to meet the needs of the immediate neighborhood and generally contain a playground, open turf, and often a picnic shelter. In addition, many of the parks provide mature vegetation and are located with easy access to the neighborhoods. All Iowa City park properties are well maintained and welcoming. In addition to the City's parks, apartment complexes also provide some recreational opportunities such as tennis, playgrounds, and clubhouses. These facilities, however, are often open only to the residents of the complex and act a supplementary services not considered to provide service to the community as a whole. Trails Iowa City has both paved multi-use trails and unpaved primitive trails. Currently there are three named multi-use trails, the Iowa River Trail (I RT}, the Willow Creek Trail, and the Sycamore Trail. More multi-use trails and connections are planned to serve a larger part of the City. In addition, many of the parks have loop walks and walking paths that provide opportunities for fitness walking and experiences in the natural environment. Indoor Facilities Iowa City has two main indoor facilities: the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center and the Mercer Park Aquatic Center. These facilities house a variety of recreational options including: indoor pools, arts and crafts roams, fitness and weight rooms, game rooms, and multipurpose spaces. The indoor facilities are well maintained and well used by the community. Both buildings are older buildings and have undergone various renovations so that they remain highly functioning buildings. In addition to City-awned buildings, recreation programs are also held at non-city facilities such as schools. The Grant Wood Gymnasium is often used as it is available to the City after school and on weekends C. Alternative Providers Located within ar nearby the City are other providers of recreational facilities that have some impact on the services provided by the City. Knowledge of alternative providers helps avoid service duplication, identify a department's niche within the market, and identify potential partnerships. What follows is a brief description of the main alternative providers in and around Iowa City. Non-Private Service Providers: University of Iowa Recreation Services E216 Field House Iowa City, IA 52242 New center at the intersection of Burlington and Madison streets. http://recserv. usiowa.ed u 62 Brief descriptian of provider: "The University of Iowa Division of Recreational Services is here to serve the recreation needs of the University Cammunity. We offer a variety of programs far all ages, serving U I students, U I Faculty and Staff and members of the surrounding community" {University of Iowa website). Housed in seven separate locations, facilities include aquatics, fitness, gyms, indoor courts, indoor track, equipment rental, outdoor fields, and natural areas. The segment of the organization's mission which describes services offered to the surrounding community is of interest because it impacts the demand for City amenities. This is especially true given the current construction of a new state-af-the-art recreation center in close proximity to the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center. This facility will combine many of the current services and provide new opportunities. The recreation and wellness center will be 215,000 square feet, 4 levels and include a diving tower, a natatorium, a cafe and lounge space, a 9000 square foot Wellness Center, a classroom, a steam room, a sauna room, a 54 foot high climbing wall with 8 rapes and a separate bouldering wall, a 20,000 square foot fitness area, 3 activity rooms, administrative areas, a 17 foot diving well, a leisure pool, locker rooms, gymnasiums and indoor track, 2 basketball courts, 1multi-activity court and a 8-lane 50 meter competition pool. This new university recreation center is being built six blocks away from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center, less than a 3-minute drive away. North Liberty Recreation Center 520 W. Cherry Street, {319) 626-5716 http:/Iwww.northlibertyiowa.ors/rec/index.htm Basic descriptian of provider: `The North Liberty Community Center, home to the Recreation Department, Library, community rooms and our local access channel {NLTV), is the cornerstone of our community" {North Liberty Recreation Home Page). In fall 2004, the Phase II expansion was completed, which includes an indaar and outdoor pool, a reception hall/conference area, a second gymnasium and a multipurpose room with expanded before-and-after-school services. This facility is 1.99 miles and a 6- minutedrive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Coralville Recreation Center 1506 8th St. {319)248-1750 Coralville, IA 52241 http://www.coralville.or~/mod.php?mod=department&op=viewcustom&did=24&cid=3 Basic description of provider: "This 72,000 square foot facility is the heart of recreation programming. Recreation Administration offices are located in the Recreation Center and many classes take place here. The Recreation Center serves over 90,000 visitors per year and 7500+ children participate in youth recreation programs" {Coralville Recreation Center Horne Page). Facilities include two gyms, game room with pool tables, foosball, video games, and vending area. The fitness center includes weight machine, treadmills, stair climber, elliptical, recumbent, exercise bikes, racquetball court, two meeting rooms, indoor pool and locker rooms and outdoor tennis courts. This facility is 3.95 miles and a 10-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Cammunity Recreation Center. 63 Private Service Providers: Body Dimensions Fitness Center 319.339.9494 111 East Washington Street, Iowa City, IA 52244 Brief description of provider: Fully equipped fitness center. This facility is .3 miles and a 1-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Cindy K's Fitness for the Busy Woman 319.339.7435 1859 Lower Muscatine Road, Iowa City, IA 52240 Brief description of provider: Weight machines, bikes, treadmills, sauna, showers, lockers, and various classes including senior programming and yoga. This facility is 2.57 miles and a 6-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Core Fitness 319.351.2673 1555 South 1st Avenue, Iowa City, IA 52240 http://www.corefitnessl.com Brief description of provider: Steam room, sauna, cardio area, weight room, and locker rooms. The membership rate is $49 per month and includes attending any of the ninety classes offered per week in areas such as spinning, yoga, and Dilates. This facility is 2.57 miles and a 6-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Curves 702 South Gilbert Street Suite 106, Iowa City, IA 52240 88122nd Avenue, Coralville, IA 52241 httg://www.curvesi nternational.com Brief description ofprovider: Awomen-focused, fitness and wellness franchise, Curves Fitness Centers offer women a place to exercise and maintain weight. The Iowa City facility is .4 miles and a 1-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. The Coralville facility is 4.24 miles and a 10- minutedrive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Gold's Gyrn 319.338.3488 213 E. 10th Street, Coralville, IA 52241 http://~olds~ym.com Brief description of provider: Weight room with machines and free weights, elliptical equipment, treadmills, boxing, cycling and classes using this equipment. The monthly membership fee is $47.70 per month with aone-time $75 start-up fee. Corporate memberships and discounts are available. This facility is 3.92 miles and a 9-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Iowa City Fitness 319.339.0348 213 East College Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 http://www.iowacityfitness.com 64 Brief description of provider: Open twenty-four hours with a pool, whirlpool, sauna, fitnessjcardio areas including treadmills, elliptical machines, bikes, stair-steppers, showers, and locker rooms. Currently, the cost is $19.99 per month with an $80 initiation fee. This facility is .09 miles and a less than 1-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. North Dodge Athletic Club 319.351.5683 2400 North Dodge Street, Iowa City, IA 52245 Brief description of provider: The facility includes private tennis courts, public tennis courts, fitness consultants, pool (indoor with five Ianes7, free weights, full court basketball, and cardiojfitness equipment, many items with their own television. Classes are included in the membership and include spinning, yoga, and Pilates etc. The monthly membership rate is $59.36. This facility is 3.04 miles and an 8-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. New Life Fitness World -Iowa City 319.351.1000 2220 Mormon Trek Boulevard, Iowa City, IA 52246 Brief description of provider: The center offers day care, personal trainers, racquetball courts, tanning, aerobics, steam and sauna rooms, month-to-month memberships, expanded cardio center, computer treadmills, elliptical machines, free weights, aerobics studio, indoor pool, whirlpool and ice room. This facility is 3.24 miles and a 7-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. The Studio 319.466.9300 700 South Dubuque Street, Iowa City, IA 52240 http:/Iwww.iowacitystudio.com Brief description of provider: Health club and gym with yoga instruction and therapy massage, personal training and cardio center. This facility is .52 miles and a 2-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. University Athletic Club 1360 Melrose Avenue, Iowa City, IA 52246 Brief description of provider: Health club and gym. This facility is 1.73 miles and a 6-minute drive from the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. Alternative Provider Key Issues • There are eight private providers within three miles of the Robert A. Lee Community Recreation Center. The presence of a multitude of private providers in close proximity is not an unusual circumstance. Although some of the more profitable market for adult fitness, sports, and other amenities geared toward serving adults, is provided for, these facilities often serve no more than 20- 24% ofthe population and have significant barriers to participation including the membership fee structure and the fees themselves, and are not often well suited to serving youth, older adults and special populations. • The affect of the university facility should be carefully considered in any future planning to understand its target market and availability to the community as a whole, its service philosophy, and its fee structure. 65 D. Iowa City Context Iowa City, Iowa is located in the east central part of the State. It has a population of 62,220 residents and is home to the University of Iowa. The rolling hills of eastern Iowa and the Iowa River provide a beautiful setting for Iowa City. It is the cultural hub of eastern Iowa and is the former state capital. Iowa City has a thriving downtown that is comprised of apedestrian-oriented shopping district, the old state capital, and the edge of the University of Iowa. The nearby town of Coralville, hugs the northwest border of town and competes for sales tax dollars. The Iowa River bisects the community along its central north-south axis and regional transportation corridors run along its east-west axes -the railroad is in the center and Interstate 80 runs along the north. The development of the City started downtown in 1839, and has grown consistently. Figure 5: City of Iowa City Location Map i ~ ;,:~ -r.._ ~_. ', 1, `~ .y~ ,, ,~ i _~ ; ._W~ ~` E. Facility Inventory and Level of Service Analysis One essential part of this project is to establish a complete and accurate database of amenities related to the provision of recreation by Iowa City. A complete inventory was conducted in September of 2007. This was accomplished by visiting each property and facility, talking with appropriate personnel, and recording the quantity and functionality of the each component. For the purposes of this master plan, the inventory focused only on components at sites that are maintained for public use by the City of Iowa City. It is recognized that other providers exist, and that the facilities they provide are part of the overall level of service enjoyed by people in Iowa City. However, the purpose of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of the city-provided services and to create a complete inventory of those things that the City takes responsibility for providing. 66 Each component was located, counted, and assessed for the functionality of its primary intended use. A GRASP score was assigned to the component as a measure of its functionality as follows: - Below Expectations (BE) -The component does not meet the expectations of its intended primary function. Factors leading to this may include size, age, accessibility, or others. Each such component was given a score of 1 in the inventory. - Meeting Expectations (ME} -The component meets expectations for its intended function. Such components were given scores of 2. - Exceeding Expectations (EE} -The component exceeds expectations, due to size, configuration, or unique qualities. Such components were given scores of 3. - If the feature exists but is not useable because it is unsafe, obsolete, or dysfunctional, it may be listed in the feature description, and assigned a score of zero (0}. Components were evaluated according to this scale from two perspectives: first, the value of the component in serving the immediate neighborhood, and second, its value to the entire community. Next, amenities that relate to and enhance the component were evaluated. The setting for a component and the conditions around it affect how well it functions, so in addition to scoring the components, each park site and indoor facility was given a set of scores to rate its comfort and convenience to the user. This includes such things as the availability of restrooms, drinking water, shade, scenery, etc. Lastly, the overall design and ambiance of the facility or park was recorded as a part of the inventory. Characteristics such as, overall layout, attention to design, and functionality inform the design and ambiance score. The assessment findings from each location were entered into a master inventory database/spreadsheet (GRASPAppendix 1!).The database serves as a record of the inventory and was also used to perform the GRASP analysis that follows. Inventory Description Existing Infrastructure The parks and recreation system in Iowa City can be thought of as an infrastructure that serves the health and well-being of people. This infrastructure is made up of parts and pieces that are combined in various ways to provide service. This system serves the residents by providing active and passive recreation and incorporating connecting trails wherever possible. Diversity in the park infrastructure is evident in the variety of park sizes, locations, components, and functions. The result is a system of parks, trails, open space, and other facilities. The current inventory includes the following main features: 67 Map 13: Inventory This map shows where the existing parks, trails, and open spaces are located. In addition, schools, landmarks, and barriers to pedestrian access are shown for reference. (See Appendix It for a complete list of parks and facilities. A larger park system map can be found in Appendix!!!: Maps and Perspectives. ) Other Pra~iders Located within the City are other providers of recreational facilities that have some impact on the services provided by the City. A majority of these other providers are somehow associated with the University of Iowa or cater to university students. Included in the other providers is the University itself, which currently provides bath indoor and outdoor recreation opportunities to students, faculty, and staff at the University. Housed in seven separate locations, facilities include aquatics, fitness, gyms, indoor courts, indoor track, equipment rental, outdoor fields, and natural areas. The University is currently in the process of constructing a new recreational center that will combine many of the current services and provide new opportunities. Currently it is believed that this facility will be open to the general public for a fee. In addition to the university facilities, apartment complexes also provide some recreational opportunities such as tennis, playgrounds, and clubhouses. These facilities, however, are often open only to the residents of the complex and act a supplementary services not considered to provide service to the community as a whole. 68 F. Level of Service As part of the Iowa City Parks, Recreation, Trails Master Plan, one tool that was utilized is the examination of Levels of Service (LOSJ. This tool allows for analysis of the inventory, quantity, location, distribution, and access to recreation components. Levels of Service (LOS) are typically defined in parks and recreation plans as the capacity of the system's components to meet the needs of the public. Two methods were used in this analysis. One method uses a traditional capacities approach that compares quantity to population. The other analysis uses the GRASP Method, which records quantity, quality, and location information about the components and displays it in chart and map form. A more detailed description of the history of G RASPO and its relationship to N RPA standards can be found in Appendix ! GRASP' History and Methodology. The GRASP Analysis GRASP Methodology is a unique way of looking at LOS because it considers not only the quantity and distribution of parks and facilities but also quality, comfort and convenience, and overall design and ambiance. It is also unique in that it applies to individual recreation components to create acomponent- based model for evaluating LOS. After scoring each component as outlined in the inventory description, GIS software was used to create graphic representations that allow for easy visual and numerical analysis of the recreation system. Some of the representations show raw data collected through the inventory process or received from other sources. These are referred to as resource maps. Other representations emerge from the processing of data within the GIS using composite values analysis. These analyses can look at both general and specific aspects of the system. Each of these representations is called a GRASP®Perspective. The following maps and Perspectives were prepared for this report, and can be found in Appendix!!! GRASP Maps and Perspectives. Map A: Regional Context Map B: System Perspective A: Neighborhood Access to All Camponents Perspective B: Walkable Access to All Camponents Perspective C: Neighborhood Access to Indoor Recreation Perspective d: Walkable Access to Trails For each GRASP® Perspective, each inventoried component shows its GRASP scare as applied to a service area, (or buffer), based on a radius from the component. Perspective C: Neighborhood Access to Indoor Recreation applies the components' qualitative score to both one-mile and one-third mile buffers. One-mile buffers represent a distance from which convenient access to the component can be achieved by normal means such as driving or bicycling. The one-third mile buffer shows the distance that a resident can reasonably walk in 10 minutes. Scores are doubled within the one-third mile buffer to reflect the added accessibility of walking, since almost anyone can reach the location on their own by walking, even if they don't drive or ride a bicycle. When buffers with associated scores are plotted on a map, a picture emerges that represents the cumulative LOS. Where buffers for multiple components overlap, a darker shade results and indicates locations that are "served" by a combination of more components and/or higher quality ones. In other 69 words, where there are darker shades the level of service is higher for that particular Perspective. It is important to note that the shade overlaying any given point on the map represents the cumulative value offered by the surrounding park system to an individual situated in that specific location, rather than the service being provided by components at that location to the areas around it. GRASP® Target Scores Analysis Within the GRASP® Perspectives, the buffers and associated scores are presented in two ways -with infinite tone ranges (orange} and in two tones based on target values (purple and yellow}. The larger scale map in each of the Perspectives shows the GRASP buffers with an infinite tone range that portrays the nuances of service that are being provided to the community. At this scale, it is easier to see the differences in services provided by parks and individual components. The complete Perspective series is set to the same tone scale so the different Perspectives can be compared side-by- side. The inset map shows the GRASP score ranges grouped into categories that represent either Below Target Minimum Score or Above Target Minimum Score. In the inset, you can see clearly, which areas fall into each of the categories for a summarized look at the service that is being provided. Different score breaks were used on the inset maps so that each set of components is evaluated based on what the target minimum score is far each Perspective. Far this reason, these maps cannot be compared but are specific to each Perspective. The section below reviews the Perspectives and highlights where higher and lower levels of service are being provided from a given set of components. Maps and Perspectives for Iowa City Thumbnails of the target scores inset and excerpts from some of the maps and Perspectives are shown here far reference only -the reader should refer to the full maps in Appendix!!! for complete information and clarity. GRASP Perspectives Descriptions and Analysis Perspective - _"." -~. -- -~' Access to all Components " This Perspective utilizes all components (indoor and outdoor} within the dataset to give a picture of haw the system is serving the overall parks and recreation needs of Iowa City. This perspective shows how the City is providing service at a neighborhood level. This is defined by having services within one-mile radius from your home with a higher value placed on the services that are available within walking distance, or one-third mile. The Neighborhood Score from the inventory has been used, along with the modifiers identified for each site, to derive GRASP scores for each of the ~a components as described before. This score is then applied to the buffers. As with many communities, Iowa City provides service that meets or exceeds residential targets in the majority of the community, with gaps appearing only at the edges of the City. Concentrations in service are focused around some of the city's major parks, including City Park and Kiwanis Park, and in areas that are well served by a variety of parks and schools such as the areas around Court Hill and Wetherby Parks. Lower levels of service appear around the edges of the City are generally a result of lower levels of development and also reflect industrial or commercial areas that are not expected to receive the same amount of service. Table 9 shows the numerical break down of the service by area that is being provided to the residents of Iowa City. The average GRASP® score for the City is 285.6, which represents a high number and quality of recreational components overall. In addition, 85.1% of the city's area is receiving service that is meeting or exceeding expectations. This shows that not only are parks distributed throughout the community, but that the quality, setting and comfort of the parks is also excellent. This indicates a high dedication on the part of the City to providing high quality park and trail facilities. It also indicates that a significant amount of resources have been, and must continue to be, dedicated to the upkeep and maintenance of these facilities to continue to meet the expectations of the community. Table 9: Perspective A -Neighborhood Access to All Components, Overall Statistics ~ L ~ C ~ ~ C ~ ~ Q 4- ~ ~ ~ N ~ O ~ C_ ~ O y C_ V ~ N ~ N ~ ~ a-+ ~ ~ ~ a-~ ~ Q C ~ ~ ~ C CO +J ~ ~ C Q ++ ~ +~-+ V y ~ ~ V ~ b .lJ O V ~ bap O O aJ d ~ v N ~ ro V d 41 ~ tC U d Neighborhood LOS for all components 16,332 98.0% 285.6 12.9% 85.1% Perspective B: Walkable Access to al! Components This Perspective shows the level of service provided to the community at a walkable level. All components are shown and each has only aone-third mile buffer, which equates to about a 10-minute walk. These buffers have been truncated at the primary barriers. Scores within the buffers are equal to the base score for the components, calculated as described in Appendix 1 and doubled to reflect the walkable access, as was done on Perspective A. In a sense, this is Perspective A with the one-mile buffers removed. With the one-mile buffers removed, more gaps in service begin to appear. Again, some of these gaps, such as the area between Highway 6 and the railroad, are areas that contain land uses where walkable 71 access to parks and recreation is not a priority. In addition, some residential areas have lower levels of service, which may reflect the presence only of schools within walking distance. Schools, while providing some service, often do not have the access or comfort and convenience features that parks provide. Other residential areas with service below residential targets are found at the edges of the community in developing areas that do not yet have the population that requires services at the same rate as the rest of the community. Although there are some gaps as mentioned above, overall, more than 94°t of the community has walkable access to some recreational components. Fable 10 shows the levels of service by percentages for the City. Table 10: Perspective B -Walkable Access to All Components, Overall Statistics ~ ~ a~ '`~ ~ ~, a ~ ~ - o o ~ ~ s= - O ~ ;` ~ s= ~ `Z ~ ~ ~~ I- v . c v I- ~ 'c ~ +.~ s y , v cn c m ~ ~ V c '~ ~ ~ V +~-' N . j (~0 i) U v ~ In V ~ ~ (.f) H d ~ Q ~ Q iA ~ Q bLA Q t0 tp Walkable LOS for 16,332 91. 6% 148 37. 9% 53. 6% all components Perspective C: Neighborhood Access to Indoor Recreation Facr'litr'es This Perspective shows the LOS that is being provided by the indoor components to residents in Iowa City. Because these facilities are more likely to draw from a larger area, three-mile and one-third mile buffers were used. This represents a 14-minute walk or drive within the city. Again, the scores within the one-third mile buffer have been weighted to represent the added value of being close to home. For this Perspective those that have service that is meeting or above targets have access to at least the equivalent of a gym, fitness area, aquatics, and a multipurpose room. In Iowa City, the centrally located Robert A. Lee Center combines with the facilities at Mercer Park to provide consistent service aver almost the entire community. Only the very western portion of Iowa City is beyond a 14-minute drive. Table 11 below shows the complete statistics for how the City is serving the residents of Iowa City with indoor recreational components. 72 Table 11: Perspective C: Neighborhood Access to Indoorfacilities, Overall Statistics v Q i n ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ a ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~n ~ ` _ o . c v ~ ~ ~ "~ ~ +J t v v~ v c CO ~ o v c Q~ Q U Q ~ +, V ~ ~ U V ~ ~ In ~ L ~ l1') ~ a ~ ~[ a ¢ ~ a at Q ~ ~ Access to indoor 16,332 $9.7°t° 1Q2.8 d.$% $8.8°t components Perspective D: Walkable Access to Frails Far this Perspective, trails that are located on a significant right-of-way, offer recreational value, added comforts such as benches, and interpretive signs are scored at a value equal to that of three park components with normal modifiers and ambience. This is because these types of trails function much like a park with a combination of active and passive components, and because of the high value that was placed on trails in the needs assessment process. Other trails were scored according to the service they provide and how well they met the expectations far their intended purpose. A detailed explanation of scoring can be found in Appendix 1. The score for a given length of trail was assigned cone-third mile buffer paralleling the trail along both sides. Aside from greenways, trails exist as components within parks. These are also shown on this map if they meet the following criteria. Trails as components in parks typically provide access to a natural area or are a part of a larger trail network probably geared to multi-modal use. In addition, the distinction can be made that trails in parks are often accompanied by interpretive signage and other features that make them destinations within the park. Sidewalks that exist purely to provide access to park components or are a circuit (counted elsewhere as loop walks) are not included in this map. Trails that are shown as a component of parks receive both one-third and one-mile buffers, just as components do in the other maps. This Perspective shows that Iowa City has a strong and growing trail network. The Iowa River Trail corridor is one of the featured trails in the community and provides both recreation and transportation service to the core of the community. Aside from this trail, a majority of the trails in the community exist within larger parks and provide primarily recreational opportunities for users. Many areas of the City show service that is not meeting residential targets although is showing some service. In many cases, the service that is being provided is lacking both comfort and convenience features and is not appealing for passive uses such as bird watching or wildflower identification. This includes both the wide sidewalks and on-street connections in the trail systems, which are geared mare as transportation connections. Please refer to Table 12 for information on how the community as a whole is being served by Iowa City's trail system. 73 Table 12: Perspective D -Walkable Access to Trails, Overall Statistics ~ ~ ~ ~ v a~ ¢` ~ vai ~ }' 3 E ~ ~ ~ `L ~ ~ OO i? ~ v :c_ v ~ ~ :c_ v s y.l ~ in c C0 ~ o V ~ c '~ ~ o V ~~ ~ O ~~ ~ ~ ~ v v ~ Q `° `° Walkable access to 16,332 93.5°t 42.1 36.3% 57.2/° ° trails Other Taals for Measuring Level of Service (LOS} Besides the GRASP perspectives and associated L05 numbers, this plan also uses capacities based analysis tools. One tool determines capacity by comparing GRASP® scoring to population, and the other tool models traditional methods of determining LOS by using straight quantity as compared to population. Communitywide LOS The Community Components GRASP Scores and Population Ratios in Table 13 Shaw numerical indices far LOS that account far bath quantity and quality of components in Iowa City. The table shows the community GRASP Index far each component, as well as the number of GRASP paints needed to maintain the current indices as the population grows. 74 Kiwanis Bike Trai! Table 13: Community Components GRASPS Scores and Population Ratios Current Projected Population 66,177 Population Aquatic feature, spraypad Aquatic feature, Outdoor pool Ba Ilf field bog Park Multi-Purpose Field Playground Shelter -large (group} Shelter -small (individual} Skate Park Tennis Recreational Trails (Mi.}, Paved and Primitive TOTAL Total GRASP° GRASPS score Community per 1000 Score per population component GRASP© type Index) 0.0 0.00 11.7 0.18 195.5 2.95 7.2 0.11 141.6 2.14 178.6 2.70 206.8 3.12 67.0 1.01 7.2 0.11 99.0 1.50 26.0 0.39 940.60 14.21 69,274 Total GRASP° score Additional needed at GRASP® projected score population needed 0 4.0 12 0.5 205 9.1 8 0.3 148 6.6 187 8.4 216 9.7 70 3.1 8 0.3 104 4.6 27 1.2 984.fi2 44.02 When looked at from this perspective, ballfields and shelter facilities have the greatest need to be improved or added to continue to provide a high level of service to keep up with the projected population growth. This is due to the already high LOS that the City is providing to the community and may be expected to continue to provide. While requiring some improvements, other components will require less work in the future because the expectation or need is lower for these items. This information can be used to plan for future improvements to the parks and recreation infrastructure to accommodate growth. GRASP® scores are a blend of quantity and quality, making it possible to increase them by adding components or improving the quality of existing ones. In most case, a combination of the two will be recommended. Used in conjunction with the Capacities LOS Table, the best combination of quantity and quality can be determined for planning purposes. The GRASP® Indices also allow the community to benchmark its combined LOS for quality and quantity of service over time and measure its progress. 75 Capacities Levet of Service For some components, the quantity needed is proportional to the population that will be served by that component. This is a fairly easy calculation when components are programmed for use. The programming determines how many people will be using the facilities aver a period of time. Sports fields and courts fall into this category. For other components, the ratio of components to the population may vary, depending upon the size or capacity of the component and the participation levels within the community for the activity served by the component. Skate parks and group picnic facilities fall into this category. Table 14 represents the current level of service and projected needs for community components far Iowa City. This table closely resembles a traditional LAS analysis and shows haw the quantities of certain park and recreation components compare to population. For each component, the table shows the current quantity of that component on a "per-1000 persons" basis {referred to as the Capacity LQS) and the pro-rata number of persons in the community represented by each component. This kind of analysis can be used to show the capacity of the current inventory - in other words, how many people are potentially being served by park components. When looked at from this purely quantitative perspective, based on its current LOS, Iowa City will need to provide two each of multipurpose fields, playgrounds, and shelters to keep up with the demand of the growing population. It is important to note that this table is simply one tool that is used to make final recommendations and establish budgets. The numbers of facilities shown on this table may differ from the final recommendations due to availability of land, ability to upgrade existing facilities, and the possibility of partnerships. Braaktand Park !Neighborhood Celebration 76 a nx}xuxi.~d pug pa~~rd ~ ,.fl °r ~ i. ii?uoi}i?a.~~au STUlla1, ~ o o ~ ~ ,, j ~ r-i o ~ ~i ~i ' l'iL' [I a}L~' lS '~ O O ri N O ~ c-~ O •-i O O ~ {i~npxnxpux) ~ ~ ii~uls - .la}ialis r o a ~ o ~ cn r, ,-~ tdll0~~ ~ ~ a~,rei - .la}ialig ~ punox~~i~id ~ N ~ I~f) 0 O 6` N ~ N N piai3 aSOd.lll~-I}illy ~ `~ ~ ~ Ct7 o C~ ~ ~ N ~iF'~ ~OQ ~ O o c-i C? C\ `'i r' O o ~o pia13iiYS ~, m o ~~., o ~ ~~,, Q-+ N i00d ~IOOp}li0 N ~ `a.lll}~a; ~p~nb~ --~ o o r-+ ~? o ~ ---~ O .., p~drt~.ids o to O `aall}~a~ ~pl?nb~ o0o c ~ o o o O 7 ~ ~ N L v ~ ~ ~ 0 O ~ a, W O ~ o Qi ~ w ~Va ~ * Lam, Q ~ O w ~T'~ ~ ~, '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 v ~ Z o ~ ~~~ c ~, ~ ~ V ~ O ~ R. ~ ~ o F-+ H ° ~ C ~ C qo W [~.~ v v ~ ~ ~~• v to ~ +~ G P ~ V p °'"' h ~ ~ ~ 'y" ' a '~ G ^~~i N as ~ x v ~ v o ~ .~ ~ ~~,~~ o ~o ~ o o ~,o~ o ~ ~ o ..~:~ r` V. How We Manage-An Analysis of Administrative Findings A. Funding Fees/Charges The Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department relies on fees and charges for major revenue generation to offset program expenses. The bepartment stays market-driven with reasonable, affordable fees and is consistent with national trends relating to public park and recreation agencies, which generate an average 35% to SO% of operating expenditures. Reservations This revenue source comes from the right to reserve specific public property for a set amount of time. The reservation rates are usually set and apply to group picnic shelters, meeting rooms for weddings, reunions and outings or other type of facilities for a special activity. Partnerships Partnerships are joint development funding sources or operational funding sources between two separate agencies, such as two government entities, anon-profit and a City department, or a private business and a City agency. Two partnersjointly develop revenue producing park and recreation facilities and share risk, operational costs, responsibilities, and asset management based on the strengths and weaknesses of each partner. Iowa City has developed partnerships with the School District, the University and a number ofnon-profit groups from small scale to large scale. Dedication/Development Fees These fees are assessed for the development of residential subdivisions with the proceeds to be used for parkland acquisition and/or development. Since its inception in 1994, a year hasn't gone by when either land or fees have not been received by the City. Genera! Obligation Bonds Bonded indebtedness issued for capital improvements and general public improvements. This funding source is utilized every year for a variety of capital projects. Depending on the size and nature of the project, public approval may be required through an election. Hotel, Motel and Restaurant Tax Tax based on gross receipts from charges and meals services, which may be used to build and operate sports fields, regional parks, golf courses, tennis courts, and other special park and recreation facilities. The Parks & Recreation Department receives a portion of this every year to support the operations of the Mercer Park Aquatic Center. In 2008 this will amount to approximately $185,000. Grants The department pursues grants whenever appropriate. Several REAP Grants {Resource Enhancement and Protection) have been awarded in recent years from the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. 78 Currently, the department is pursuing a CAT Grant (Community Attraction and Tourism) in the amount of $2,000,000 from the Iowa Department of Economic Development. Several smaller grants have been awarded through programs offered by the National Recreation and Park Association. We also anticipate pursuing another REAP Grant and at least one trails grant in the upcoming year. Bond Referendum A bond referendum requires a vote by the citizens for general obligation bonds initiated through City Council approval prior to the citizen vote. A 60% approval is required. The most recent Parks & Recreation project constructed utilizing this method was the Mercer Park Aquatic Center, which opened in 1988. Volunteerism The revenue source is an indirect revenue source in that persons donate time to assist the department in providing a product or service on an hourly basis. This reduces the City's cost in providing the service and it builds advocacy into the system. While the Department utilizes volunteers for many activities, an upgraded comprehensive volunteer program could be pursued more vigorously. FoundationJGifts These dollars are raised from tax-exempt, non-profit organizations established with private donations in promotion of specific causes, activities, or issues. They offer a variety of means to fund capital projects, including capital campaigns, gifts catalogs, fundraisers, endowments, sales of items, etc. The department is affiliated with the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Foundation, which is not active on an ongoing basis, but rather reactive to needs, typically of a capital development nature. Equipment Rental The revenue source is available on the rental of equipment such as tables, chairs, tents, stages, bicycles, roller blades, boogie boards, etc. that are used for recreation purposes. This is currently being done by the Department, but on a very small scale. Community Gardens Many city and county agencies will permit out food plots for community gardens as a small source of income. The Department currently offers about 70 plots in Wetherby Park at $19 each. Membership and Season Pass Sales Cities sell memberships to specific types of amenities to offset operational costs. These membership fees can apply to recreational and fitness centers, tennis centers, golf courses, pools, ice-rinks, etc. Iowa City does not sell memberships, but they do sell season passes to the pools and dog park. Lighting Fees Some cities charge additional fees for the lighting charges as it applies to leagues, special use sites, and signature type facilities that require lighting above a recreational level. This includes demand charges. Program Contractor Fees Cities and counties receive a percentage of gross contractor fees for contractor programs held on City or county facilities. The percentages range from 25% to 40°t° depending on space, volume, and the amount 79 of marketing the City does far the contractor. Jazzercise is a good example; other possibilities could be pursued. Booth Lease Space In some urban cities, they sell booth space to sidewalk type vendors in parks or at special events. For a flat rate based on volume received. The booth space can also apply to farmers markets, art schools, and antique type fairs. This is done with the Farmers Market and occasional food vendors in the parks. Ticket SatesjAdmissions This revenue source is on accessing facilities for self-directed activities such as pools, ice-skating rinks, ballparks and entertainment activities. These user fees help offset operational costs. In Iowa City this is done primarily at the swimming pools and the dog park. Concession Management Concession management is from retail sales or rentals of soft goods, hard goods, or consumable items. The City either contracts far the service or receives a set of the gross percentage or the full revenue dollars that incorporates a profit after expenses. This is not currently a large source of revenue for Iowa City. Any such revenue comes from privately operated vending machines and occasional vending carts. Affiliate groups are allowed to sell concessions as fund raising mechanisms for their respective organizations. Friends Associations These groups are formed to raise money typically for a single focus purpose that could include a park facility or program that will better the community as a whole and their special interest. Friends of Hickory Hill Park and Concerned Citizens for Sand Prairie Preservation are two examples of how this is working in Iowa City. Advertising Sales This revenue source is for the sale of tasteful and appropriate advertising on park and recreation related items such as in the City's program guide, on scoreboards, dasher boards and other visible products or services that are consumable or permanent that expose the product or service to many people. This is currently being done, but not to a large scale, partly due to "censorship" restrictions. lltaming Rights Many cities and counties have turned to selling the naming rights for new buildings or renovation of existing buildings and parks for the development cost associated with the improvement. Iowa City has used this for the Scanlon Gym, Thornberry Off-Leash Dog Park and parkland acquisitions such as Kiwanis Park and Frauenholtz-Miller Park. Cost Avoidance The Department must take a position of not being everything far everyone. It must be driven by the market and stay with the Department's core businesses. By shifting its role as direct provider, the City will experience savings by deciding whether or not to provide that facility or program. This is cost avoidance. The estimated savings listed could be realized through partnering, outsourcing, or deferring to another provider in the provision of a service and/or facility. Iowa City works with a number of "affiliate groups" to jointly provide services and facilities. The more prominent examples include the SO Kickers Soccer Club, Girls Softball, Boys Baseball, Babe Ruth Baseball, Swim Club, DogPAC, Riverside Theatre and the local disc golf organization. Land Trust Many cities have developed land trusts to help secure and fund the cost for acquiring land that needs to be preserved and protected for greenway purposes. This could be a good source to look to far acquisition of future lands. Iowa City Parks and Recreation has worked with both the Johnson County Heritage Trust and the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation for this purpose. Inter-local Agreements Contractual relationships entered into between two or more local units of government and/or between a local unit of government and anon-profit organization for the joint usage/development of sports fields, regional parks, or other facilities. The Department currently has six such agreements, three with the Iowa City Community School District, two with the University of Iowa and one with Riverside Theatre. Corporate Sponsorships This revenue-funding source allows corporations to invest in the development or enhancement of new or existing facilities in park systems. Iowa City has used this in the past, most notably with the Scanlon Gymnasium project where two areas bear the names of corporate donors. This should continue to be used when appropriate opportunities arise. Surplus Sale of Equipment by Auction Cities have surplus auctions to get rid of old and used equipment that generates same income on a yearly basis. The Department does sell items on occasion through an auctioneer as required by the City. The revenue generated is minimal and goes into the general fund. Inter-modal7ransportation and Efficiency Act This funding program, commonly called TEA-21 Grants was authorized by the Federal Government in 1991. Funds are distributed through the state. There are several million dollars in enhancement revenues available for transportation related projects, including bicycle and pedestrian trails, rail depot rehabilitation, landscaping, and beautification projects. The department has used this source of funding for trail projects on a number of occasions, and should continue to do so. Land Swaps The city trades property to improve their access of protection of resources. This could include property gain by the city for non-payment of taxes or where a developer needs a larger or smaller space to improve their profitability. The city or county typically gains more property for recreation opportunities in exchange for the land swap. Although not on a large scale this has been done in the past, and the City should be open to future opportunities. S1 The following are funding sources that could easily be used by the City of Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department to create the existing budgets for capital and operational expenditures. Security and Clean-Up Fees Cities will charge groups and individuals security and clean-up fees for special events other type of events held in parks. Iowa City does this on a small scale, and does it as an incentive to groups to take care of facilities and clean up after their event, not as a revenue source. Recreation Service Fees This is a dedicated user fee, which can be established by the City Council, upon recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission, far the purpose of constructing and maintaining recreation facilities. The fee can apply to all organized activities, which require a reservation of some type, ar other purposes as defined by the local government. Examples of such activities include adult basketball, volleyball, and softball leagues, youth baseball, soccer, and softball leagues, and special interest classes. The fee allows participants an opportunity to contribute toward the upkeep of the facilities being used. Such a fee has never been used in Iowa City, but could be implemented. The fallowing funding sources are potential funding opportunities the City of Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department should considerfar additional funding of capital and operational expenditures. Revenue Bonds Bonds used for capital projects that will generate revenue for debt service where fees can be set aside to support repayment of the bond. Revenue Bonds have not been used for Parks and Recreation projects in the past, but should be considered for an appropriate facility. Sales Fax The revenue source is very popular for funding park and recreation agencies either partially or fully. The normal sales tax rate is one cent for operations and one half cent for capital. This tax is very popular in high traffic tourism type cities and with counties and state parks. This requires a referendum, and has been attempted only once, but did not pass. If considered again it will be a City Council decision to do so. Utility Roundup Programs Some park and recreation agencies have worked with their local utilities an a round up program whereby a consumer can voluntarily pay the difference between their bill up to the even dollar amount and they then pay the department the difference. Ideally, these monies are used to support utility improvements such as sports lighting, irrigation costs and HVAC costs. 82 Gift Catalogs Gift catalogs provide organizations the opportunity to let the community know on a yearly basis what their needs are. The community purchases items from the gift catalog and donates them to the city. This was considered by the Foundation many years ago, and is an opportunity to increase resources for the Department. Catering Permits and Services This is a license to allow caterers to work in the park system on a permit basis with a set fee or a percentage of food sales returning to the City. Additionally, many cities have their own catering service and receive a percentage of dollars off the sale of their food. Iowa City has not pursued this in the past, but could in the future. Special Fundraisers Many park and recreation agencies have special fundraisers on an annual basis to help cover specific programs and capital projects. This is not currently being done by the Department, but could be pursued by the foundation to increase revenue. Credit Card Surcharge Fees on Sports and Entertainment Fickets, Classes, etc. This fee is a surcharge on top of the regular sports revenue fee or convenience fee for use of MasterCard and Visa. The fee usually is no mare than $5.04 and usually is $3.00 on all exchanges. The money earned is used to help pay off the costs of improvement or far operational purposes. Life Estates This source of money is available when someone wants to leave their property to the City in exchange for them to live on their property until their death. The City usually can use a portion of the property for park purposes and then all of it after the person's death. This revenue source is very popular for individuals who have a lot of wealth and their estate will be highly taxed at their death and their children have to sell of their property because of probate costs. This allows the person to receive a good tax deduction yearly on their property while leaving a life estate. It is good for the City because they do not have to pay for the land. Maintenance Endowments Maintenance Endowments are set up for organizations and individuals to invest in ongoing maintenance improvements and infrastructure needs. Endowments retain money from user fees, individual gifts, impact fees, development rights, partnerships, conservation easements, and for wetland mitigations. Reverse Sponsorships This revenue source allows agencies to receive indirect revenue from cross promoting their current sponsors with professional sporting events such as in racing with cars and drivers and significant sports heroes. Indirect sponsorships provide up to 15% of the sponsorship value back to the City for linking their parks and recreation sponsors with professional sports. If the opportunity presents itself in Iowa City, it could be considered. Recycling Centers Some cities operate recycling centers for wood, mulch, and glass as profit centers for their systems. Iowa City currently offers wood and mulch free to the public. 83 Hospitality Centers These types of recreation facilities are developed by cities for use by the public for wedding, reunions, and special gatherings. The recreation facilities are not subsidized but operate at a profit. Some facilities are surprisingly managed by outside caterers. Iowa City is currently do this, but not at a profit. New facilities would need to be developed to create profit. Cell7owers Cell towers attached to existing light poles in game field complexes is another source of revenue the City could seek in helping support the system. To date, the Department has not permitted such apparatus in city parks, but proposals have been considered in the past and likely will be again. Hospital -Rehabilitation Contracting Cities will contract with hospitals for their rehab patient's work that can be provided at local recreation centers with their therapists overseeing the work. This provides a steady level of income for the fitness center and encourages patients after rehab to join. Payments are made by health insurance companies Film Rights Many cities permit out their sites such as old ballparks or unique grounds or sites far film commissions to use. The film commission pays a daily fee far the site plus the lass of revenue the city will incur if the site generates income. Manufacturing Product Testing and Display This is where the city works with specific manufacturers to test their products in parks, recreation facilities and in program services. The city tests the product under normal conditions and reports back to the manufacturer haw their product is doing. Examples are in lighting, playgrounds, tires on vehicles, mowers, irrigation systems, seed & fertilizers (etc.). This city gets the product far free but must pay for the casts of installation and for tracking results. Fishing License for City or County Lakes Some cities they have their own put and take fish operation and safe fishing laws for their own lakes for trout and specialty fish. This may be mare feasible in the future. Capital Improvement Fees These fees are on top of the set user rate for accessing facilities such as golf, recreation centers and pools to support capital improvements that benefit the user of the facility. The Parks and Recreation Department has nat use this source, but same affiliate groups in Iowa City have done so with success. Land and Water Conservation Fund These funds are awarded for acquisition and development of parks, recreation, and supporting facilities through the National Park Service and State Park System. Iowa City has received funding from this program in the past, but not for many years. The City has chosen not to pursue this funding in recent years due largely to the many strings attached. 84 The following funding sources are potential funding opportunities the City of Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department could considerfor additional funding of capital and operational expenditures. These funding sources may not be available currently in the state or an intergovernmental agreement may be necessary for implementation. These funding sources may meet with some resistance and be more difficult to implement therefore more research is recommended. Private Concessionaires Contract with a private business to provide and operate desirable recreational activities financed, constructed, and operated by the private sector with additional compensation paid to the City. Patron Cards This allows patrons of a specific recreational facility to purchase patron cards for a month or a year that allows them special privileges above the general public. These privileges include having rights to early tee times, reservations, and special tours, shows or events. The patron cards can range in price from $15.00 a month to $150.00 a year. Establish a Greenway tltiGty Greenway utilities are used to finance acquisition of greenways and development of the greenways by selling the development rights underground for the fiber optic types of businesses. This is currently not covered in the state code and would likely require a code amendment. Private Developers These developers lease space from City-owned land through a subordinate lease that pays out a set dollar amount plus a percentage of gross dollars for recreation enhancements. These could include a golf course, marina, restaurants, driving ranges, sports complexes, equestrian facilities, and recreation centers and ice arenas. Merchandising Sales This revenue source comes from the public or private sector on resale items from gift shops and pro shops for either all of the sales or a set grass percentage. Iowa City currently doesn`t have the types of facilities that would make this source very appealing although future facilities may. Subordinate Easements -Recreation /Natural Area Easements This revenue source is available when the City allows utility companies, businesses or individuals to develop some type of an improvement above ground or below ground on their property for a set period of time and a set dollar amount to be received by the City on an annual basis. Irrevocable Remainder Trusts These trusts are set up with individuals who typically have more than a million dollars in wealth. They will leave a portion of their wealth to the City in a trust fund that allows the fund to grow over a period of time and then is available for the City to use a portion of the interest to support specific park and recreation facilities or programs that are designated by the trustee. This has never been done with the Parks and Recreation Department, but could be considered. 85 Permits (Special Use Permits) These special permits allow individuals to use specific park property for financial gain. The City either receives a set amount of money or a percentage of the gross service that is being provided. Other than food vendors, the current practice has been not to allow this. Sale of Mineral Rights Many cities sell their mineral rights under parks far revenue purposes to include water, oil, natural gas and other by products for revenue purposes. Integrated Financing Act This legislation creates an alternate method for collecting assessments levied under the Landscaping and Lighting Act, the Vehicle Parking District Law and the Park and Playground Act. This act applies to all local agencies. This act can be used to pay the cost of planning, designing, and constructing capital facilities authorized by the applicable financing act, pay for all or part of the principle and interest on debt incurred pursuant to the applicable financing act and to reimburse a private investor in the project. It serves two unique properties: (1j it can levy an assessment which is contingent upon future land development and payable upon approval of a subdivision map or zone change or the receipt of building permits; (2) it allows the local agency to enter into an agreement with a private investor whereby the investor will be reimbursed for funds advance to the agency for the project being financed. More research and information would need to be obtained before determining the feasibility of this funding source. Wheel Tax on CarsjVehicles Many cities have a City sticker tax on vehicles based on the type of vehicle. This allows for park agencies to receive a portion of this money to cover the costs of roads, hard surface paths and parking lots associated with parks. This funding source is not currently allowed, although it has been mentioned in the past. Parkr'ng Fee This fee applies to parking at selected destination facilities such as beach parking areas, major stadiums and other attractions to help offset capital and operational cost. Traditionally, parking has been free at all the Park and Recreation facilities except the downtown recreation center. The adjacent parking lot falls under the jurisdiction of the Parking Division. Leasebacks on Recreational Facilities Can Produce Revenue Many cities do not have capital dollars to build revenue-producing facilities but they will hire a private investor to build the facility according to the specifications they want and the investment company will finance the project and the City will lease it back from them over 20 years. This can be reversed where by the City builds the facility and leases to private management to operate it for a percentage of gross dollars to pay off the construction loans through a subordinate lease. This funding source may be possible in Iowa City although public bidding may be required. 86 Family Tree Pragram Many cities have worked with local hospitals to provide cash to the parks system to buy and plant a tree in honor of every new born in the City. The hospitals invest $250 to $300 and receive the credit from the parents of the newborns. The parks system gets new trees of ample size. Iowa City currently has a memorial tree program that is not affiliated with the hospital or in recognition of new barn babies. Seli Devefapment Rights Some cities and counties sell their development rights below park ground or along trails to fiber optic companies or utilities. The park agency detains a yearly fee on a linear foot basis. This may be possible. Agricultural Leases In some City and county parks, they lease low land property along rivers or excess land to farmers for crops. The City or county typically get one-third of the value of the craps or they lease it on a per acre basis. Iowa City has utilized this funding source in the past, but currently there is no parkland that would lend itself to this. Camping Fees & Nook-tlp Fees City and county parks along with state parks permit camping for RV's, tents, and primitive Camping. Fees range from a high of X18 to X20 a night per site to $b or $7 for primitive space. Additional fees will be added for water, electricity, sewer, and cable T.V. access. The Department does not currently have campsites, but one may be considered at Sand Lake in the future. Signage Fees This revenue source taxes people and businesses with signage fees at key locations with high visibility for short-term events. Signage fees range in price from $25.00 per signs up to $100.00 per sign based on the size of the sign and location. This has never been done, but could be a possibility. Product Sales This is where the city sells specific products for purchases or consumption by the public. This would include trees, food, maple syrup, livestock animals, fish, plants, etc. This is a potential revenue source, although the Department would need to be careful to minimize any perceived competition with the private sector. B. Analysis of Benchmarking Limits of Comparative Data and Analysis Benchmarking is an important tool that allows the comparison of certain attributes of the city's management of public spaces (parks, recreation, aquatics, and related services) with other similar communities. For this plan, benchmarking data was collected from comparable agencies including: Cedar Rapids, IA, Cedar Falls, IA, Ames, IA, Bloomington, IN, Bend, DR, Bolingbrook, IL, Fort Collins, CD, Lawrence, KS, and Terre Haute, IN. It is very difficult to find exact comparable communities because each has its awn unique identity, its own way of conducting business, and differences in what populations it serves. It is important to keep in mind that while many park and recreation departments serve primarily its residents, others serve a large portion of non-residents. 87 Additionally, organizations typically don't break down the expenditures of parks, trails, facilities, and maintenance the same way. Agencies also vary in terms of how they organize their budget information and it is sometimes difficult to assess whether or not the past year`s expenses are typical for the community. This being said, the benchmarking information presented here should be used as a catalyst for the City of Iowa City to continue to research best practices for more specific areas when they are needed. Benchmarking Data Sought The communities were chosen primarily due to the perceived similarities and geographic proximity to Iowa City. Requested benchmarking data includes: • Population • Median income levels • Total full time equivalencies (FTE) • Total park and recreation acres managed by agency • Total operating budget • Breakdown of the sources and allocation of the budget • Number and types of parks, trails, outdoor and indoor facilities Additionally benchmarking data looks to weigh pertinent data along with comparing against a "per thousand" population calculation in some cases. Comparing data on a "per thousand" population basis is more accurate than averaging or generalizing. For this analysis, population information and median household income was derived from ESRI Business Information Solutions. As indicated, some of the data is 2006 numbers, while other data is 2007 figures. Summer Campers at Clty Park Poo! 88 g V O I O N .~ Q V tlq C m L d CG d ? w ~ `m ~ ~ '= -~ ,~ ,n `m 9 ~ m o o o n ~ ~ m v ,n rn `w s E N = Z - -, ' ~-~ ~ ~ Cn " z ~ h o Z O o ~ ~L h ~ ~ ain Q Z 3 Z p `p O O O n a m N N 0 ~ m N O a .~ 0 V ~ ~ .~ O O O O ~ N H vJ O N r ~ vJ O N `^ N a ~ V~ N n O N y ~ N z C~] a 'a `' d z ~ h ,'i, O ~O ~ ~ U, ~ U O ~ ao _ d z ~Y i0 r O ti s N h N ,/1 CQ Z ti h O~ N N v) N .y O O ~ O N ~ O N ~ Vii V ~ N O N OV d d n CQ rJ - - d = E a~ a ~ J E -Y o o, ° ' o N ~ ° ~ ~ ~ o '4 E io ^ o ~ 3 Z `o m ?' ~ s ti ti ~+ 3 2 `o v h in o 3 ~ ~Y n^ v ~ o~ IX~ ~ a o rn ~ ~ 3 z o ~ h m ui n ~ m Co m m ~ N ~ a a o .-~ ,n •7 o `~ v~ m N ~ m m a m N .-, m p p 0 N ;~ p 0 N n ~ r ;r, .,n ai d' rv v: o N J W ~ n ° O G ~ o ~ ~ E ~ '- - ^ ~J ~ ~ Q Z Q Z E ~ ~ ~r , ~ h O y O ° O N ~ m c o p ~ a o O ~ a~ ,r, _ E ~ IZw i~ ~ N ~ 'y ,D `7 ~ ry ry i/1 •S ~ ~ h Ol O .-i ~ m ti N a Z m ~-I O O O L .O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ul' /1 N 4 V} O O m N N ,D N =K V 4 E a 'a IX? a N ti ~ 9 ~ C,] ~ t c O ~ ~ ~ G ~ W o rn ~ ~ ao ~ p 4 E rn v, .~~ R] N N E r N O N O O N O O N O O N ti O ~ N < ~ a N ~ ~, ~, ~ ^ . m ~ N ~ N ~ ti [n Vr YI] Vt O N m CQ a ~ z ~- v ~ = ti ,~~ ~ z ~ V O ~ ~ O o ~ ~ V O °: d~ ~ ~ O o ~ ai N ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~' ~ N ° ~ m o 0 o rn N o ° o .~ o o .-~ E a ,p N ,p N .y "' M1 N Z - ` W j L o w ~ ~ ° cv~ r, a m 9 ~ O t C O n N rn O ,~ G N 3 d' ai ° W 4 E a~~ W z ; a ~ z ~ ~ a h n ~ o o n h p n N ^ •-+ z °, a ~ d' N m ~ o N N N o N rn .-i o m o 0 'E O O m .p ~ N s ~ r~ ~ w 00 N v m ~ N h [n W V' m ~N,~ n, r tmir ~ ~ N a _ v ? Z ^~ ~ai '_: - ~_, 'a a ~ .P m o ,n ~ a P; `rn ~ ~, m m a ° ° ^ a ° c°. °. v E Z c~i i~ ~ ~ o W r`nn o ~ ~ ~ o ,-i '~ ~ .-, N o .~ ~ -p y V n O O N N ~ N N ~ N ~ N r n O O N d ~o- N E a ~ r N ' , ,n m ~ ,n o N ~ N ~ ro ° ., ~~ N E ~n s z n ~r ` c i s O ~ ~ CO ~ /1 ~ ~ ~ , ~ h z h o ^ ~ N N v m n ~ a o ~ o ,n ° m .-i o o N -O d V O O N iG Vr V' Q N V. th O O N a v ~ E h r a ~ N N N ,n m v ~ m as r -; ° m N ° m v .o ~ a m ~ ! N o ~ Z , N n ~ ni `n O `" n . cri h . o ~ ~ . m ri `~ ' r Z O1 N ~ ~ h 7 ~ r h ~, o o .-i o m ,n 7 N N N o .-~ o 3 h 0 ,D ~ .ti N cf N „i f+ v, ti a ~ vi 0 i ^ M1 o 0 - 0 N .n v, o N T a, ~ 23 ~ ~ N N , - .-. rn O n to N to d R. d T `~ i ~ o w~ O U N F ~ V .. ~ . ~i ~ ~a~ O OO W y N L p a ~ n~ ~ v +~ L O 6 N ~ c d t t - ' 3 " ~? ' ° a~ V a _ cv v ~ ~ ~ > i. v o m o a te a' W . ~ ~ v '~ -oo ~ o m o o o Y ~ ~ G P w w t U " R ft N O CO O lL aM O. ' LL ~ v 2 ~ ai N ~ n ~ N ~ O - M1 k aj = v ~N -C ~ ~ ^ ~ N ~. ~ C ~ a U ~ E _ m S r ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 v v C ~ N C C O r ,ll \ (G V ~ ~ ~ ~ n W O n - .- ON £ d rn ` 4 ~ U n l~ syZ r~ ~ {ri ` 'J- , , tm'1. O ~ E s.t u N ~ 1 s .o o - 0q ~ ~ ~ o ~ a, U N ~ N 2; ~ a` > 1° O i ~ - v ,~ O "~ O ~ E '_` `~ ,T, o •~ o = m 1 ~' ~ on ' o C ~ c ~ N rc ~ c f V u ~ ~ Q G LL LL p ~ i-. F- Cfi C[ ,1 CC a ,i Q a H C~ a J ~ F- F- F- Z Ci CG O UI p Lt U Z Q 2 Ci U1 C~ V Z Z C] K Analysis of Benchmarking The communities chosen for this analysis were chosen based on perceived similarities to the City of Iowa City; the communities either are within a close geographical proximity to Iowa City or have similar demographic make-ups. Many of the communities were chosen because they house large universities and therefore have similar populations as Iowa City. The average population of all ten responding communities is 79,342. Iowa City, at 66,177 is lower than this average; however the median population 71,114 is a better representative of the disbursement. The average median household income for all respondent communities is $50,735 (MHI for Iowa City is $42,412) and the median value of all the communities' median household incomes is $47,346. Iowa City has the lowest total acres managed by the agency per 1,000 (24.22}. Fort Collins, CO has the highest acres per 1,000 (117.37), followed by Terre Haute, IN (61.86}.Iowa City is in the mid-range in terms offull-time employees per 1,000 (0.52}. The highest full-time employees per 1,000 is Bend, OR (1.07} and the lowest is Cedar Rapids (0.41}. Of the respondent communities, Ames, IA has the highest cast recovery, recovering 58% from fees and charges. Terre Haute, at 5% is the lowest; Iowa City recovers 18% from fees and charges. Iowa City is in the mid-low range for Capital Improvements Budget of the respondent communities, averaged over the proceeding five years, {$1,926,793}. The lowest average CIP is Bloomington, IN {$301,994}, the highest is Bend, OR {$7,407,819}. Iowa City is in the high range for total miles of agency maintained trails (51.4}. Lawrence has the most miles of trails (65); Terre Haute has the least miles of trails {10}. Most of the respondent agencies had at least one dog park and one skatepark. C. Guiding Themes Based on the findings in the previous sections of this plan, some guiding themes have emerged and provide the framework far the City of Iowa City's approach toward parks and recreation facilities and services. lava City should capitalize on its great assets and focus on taking care of what they have, as a priority. A strong parks and recreation component is central to the quality of life goals of Iowa City. This Parks, Recreation, and Trails Master Plan promotes the enhancement and expansion of parks and recreation opportunities for the community. There are several guiding themes and findings expressed through the community planning processes that are summarized below: • Build on Iowa City`s natural and recreational outdoor assets • Increase trails to support apedestrian-friendly, connected, "walkable" community, including bicycling • Enhance the "quality of life" for residents through parks and recreation • Create new funding mechanisms for increased resources to sustain the level of standards the community supports • Increase Partnerships and Collaborations • Balance Cast Recovery and Affordability • Improve Communication and Marketing 90 • Plan for Growth • Balance passive, self-directed, and active recreational opportunities through goals and strategies • Maintain and upgrade the existing assets and expand park and recreation opportunities as opportunities arise • Increase or Realign Programming for Youth, Teens, Seniors, Disabled, Arts, Cultural, Non-Sports for the changing demographics • Expand citywide events • Increase Indoor Recreation Facilities -Recreation and Aquatic Center as a long range goal VII. Great Things to Come- Recommendations and Action Plans The previous sections have provided findings and analysis of the various management and planning issues for the City of Iowa City. This section provides recommendations for improvements for Iowa City based on the information gathered from the demographics, survey results, the public input process, program analysis, organizational review, and the level of service analysis. The information gathered has aided in identifying community issues, analyzing future needs, and addressing how to implement them. The recommendations in this section are not necessarily prioritized, although the capital improvement recommendations in the table within this section are prioritized within the timeframe indicated. It is understood that these priorities may change or shift based on funding opportunities, political climates, etc. and is intended to provide guidelines as to what is needed to keep up with the growth, development, and change that is occurring in Iowa City. Recommendations for the next twelve years address the needs of the community and can be implemented with the funding sources identified. The recommendations are guidelines based on current information and planning. Planning beyond these twelve years is not ascertain, as the community will change drastically. It is recommended that another Parks and Recreation Master Planning process begin within the next six to eight years to more accurately plan for the future. Most communities conduct a new Master Planning process every six to eight years to maintain their ability to receive grants with a current long-range plan in place. A. Recommendations GOAL 7: MAXIMIZE THE PLANN/NG PROCESS Strategy: Incorporate the action iter recommendatians of this Action Steps: • Assign responsibility and time frame, and allocate resources necessary to complete each action identified in annual work plans. 91 Action Steps: • Inform all levels of staff of the direction of the Plan, allow far staff input, encourage buy-in, and encourage input from all staff members. • Provide cross-departmental staff teamsJteam members, as appropriate, with education development opportunities, necessary equipment, and supplies. ',: 'L 2 TRA C PERFDRI ~IA~~E MEA LIRE Action Steps: • Establish service standards for all community services activities. Suggested criteria far service standards include: • Programs: participation levels, revenue, instructors, customer satisfaction, cast per experience {or per hour, per class), customer retention • Instructors: experience, knowledge, friendliness, recruiting, rewarding, training, standards • Volunteers: experience, knowledge, friendliness, recruiting, rewarding, training, standards • Facilities: cleanliness, aesthetics, comfort • Staff: Experience, knowledge, friendliness, rewards, training, trends Action Steps: • Identify all major maintenance tasks including such things as: o Turf JMowing o Plantings o Restrooms o Sidewalks and paths o Irrigation o Weed and insect control o Curb appeal o Playground and picnic equipment o Courts and fields o Litter control • Evaluate and develop a scaring system far each task to meet desired and consistent service levels. • Involve staff in the development of the standards and scaring system. • Conduct maintenance standards training for all staff. • Establish and monitor recordkeeping procedures to document the actual hours and materials costs for each maintenance operation. • Apply appropriate maintenance standards and define set up/tear down requirements for all special events, tournaments, ar other activities that currently stress resources. Assure adequate staffing and funding to take on the task, prior to making a commitment. 92 GDAL 3: ENHANCE PRt?CRA1~1 DfVELOPMEI The Department has a strong reputation for being responsive to community desires within budget constraints. The citizen survey and public input sessions highlighted areas of additional programming desire including: • Opportunities to connect people to the natural environment • Additional learn-to-swim, water fitness and outdoor swimming • Outdoor leisure pool opportunity • Additional special events and familyjcommunity gathering opportunities • Expansion of art, dance and performing arts opportunities • Expansion of fitness and wellness programming Action Steps: • Evaluate the development of new programs based on community interests. It is very easy to focus on programs that have worked for a number of years, especially if they are still drawing enough interested participants to justify the program's continuation. Starting new programs, based on community demand and/or trends, can be risky due to the inability to predict their success. If the program interest seems great, as with those identified in citizen survey, then the programs should be considered for expansion. • Establish criteria forthe implementation of new programs (based on research and feedback}. The Department should pursue program development around the priorities identified by the survey, using the following criteria: • Need: outgrowth of a current popular program, or enough demonstrated demand to successfully support a minimal start (one class far instance) • Budget: accounting for all costs and anticipated (conservative) revenues should meet cost recovery target established by Department within two seasons • Location: appropriate, available and within budget • Instructor: qualified, available and within budget • Materials and supplies: available and within budget • Marketing effort: adequate and timely opportunity to reach intended market, within budget (either existing marketing budget or as part of new program budget) • Develop program evaluation criteria for existing offerings and implement annually. Using historical participation levels to determine program popularity and participant feedback can be helpful in deciding if programs should be continued. Annually all current programs should be evaluated to determine if they should be continued, changed (market segment focus, timejday offered, etc.) or discontinued. A few simple questions should be asked about each program that include: • Is participation increasing or decreasing? If participation is increasing then it could clearly mean that the program should be continued. If participation is decreasing are there any steps to take to increase interest through marketing efforts, change the time/day the program is offered and change the format or instructor? If not, it may be time to discontinue the program. 93 • Is there information contained in the participant feedback that can be used to improve the program? • Are cost recovery goals being met? If not, can fees be realistically increased? • Is there another provider of the program that is more suitable to offer it? If yes, the Department could provide referrals for its customers for the program it does not or is not willing or able to offer. • Is this program taking up facility space that could be used for expansion of more popular programs or new programs in demand by the community? The City should continue its leadership in this area by developing facilities and programming that are on the cutting edge in parks, recreation, and cultural arts. Continuing to diversify recreational opportunities will enable the department to attract revenues through fees and charges that will support the desires of residents. Action Steps: • Focus on the enhancement of fitness and wellness components at recreation centers. Regularly update fitness equipment to stay current with fitness trends and public demand and seek opportunities to expand the size of the fitness facilities through renovation and new facility development. • Prepare for the fitness and wellness desires of the aging baby boomers. This group is also known as the group entering into the traditional "senior" age group of 55 and over, who do not identify with the term "senior." This cohort is seeking a continued active lifestyle and is not likely to partake in traditional "senior" offerings. • Provide concurrent youth and adult programming as a way to increase participation. There are many successful youth programs offered by the Department for which adults are bringing and picking up children. The Department should offer more adult programming, such as fitness and wellness, concurrently with youth programming as a way to entice parents and guardians to stay and participate in programs. At 4 PURSUE COMPREHENSI VE SERVICE DEL/VER} As a tax supported operation, it is important that efforts are made to reach underserved segments of the population. Action Steps: • Review the existing financial assistance program to maximize use. Seek assistance from other providers oflow-income services to help promote the opportunity. Assure that use of the program is available in the most dignified manner possible. • Research transportation accessibility issues and work with other community groups and private entities (such as public transit or the school bus systemy to develop options to 94 address needs. Transportation for low-income families was identified in the focus group sessions as a significant barrier to participation. Strategy: Assure programming opportunities are reasonably available to al! geographic sectors of the City. The facilities and programming offered should be thought of as a system. Some of the components in the system, due to their expense, should be available to serve the whole community (such as indoor swimming pools), and some should be available to serve local neighborhoods (such as after school programming). Action Steps: • Investigate ways that facilities and programs can be accessible to more people through connectivity of the trail system for pedestrian and bike use, better public transit, parking availability and general awareness of opportunities. • As growth continues in the west part of town, pursue an indoor multi-purpose recreation facility to serve that geographic sector. SAL 5: SOLICIT COMMUNITYINVOLVEMENTANDFEEDBACI The Department has an excellent reputation for responsiveness to the community. The opportunity exists to become more pro-active in this regard. Regularly solicit community input in program and facility planning efforts. Action Steps: • Implement a Standard Practice for Customer Program Feedback, Program Evaluation and Program bevelopment. Customer feedback will help improve programming by being able to respond to customer needs in a timely matter. Information sought from participants should include: • Satisfaction levels and supporting reasoning • Suggestions for improvements to programs • Suggestions far new programs • Solicit youth input through future surveys and other opportunities. Soliciting youth feedback is a challenging proposition for parks and recreation entities. Working with other service providers may also provide important information and opportunities to attract this age group. • Create a "Mystery Shopper" program where secret shoppers evaluate services anonymously and results are tracked. 95 Strategy: Expand Department volunteer opportunities. Action Steps: • Seek volunteer effort to support expansion of programming into opportunities to connect people to nature. Many individuals and groups are interested in sharing their expertise andJor sweat equity with a goal of promoting stewardship of our natural resources. • Harness the energy of seniors and the retiring baby boomer generation as instructors and program leaders. Across the country, interest is being expressed in sharing expertise and hobbies. • Consider the addition of a volunteer coordinator in the department, ar a shared volunteer coordinator in the City. A successful volunteer program must be well organized and advertised, with specific, rewarding, and recognized opportunities that allow individuals and groups to feel they are contributing to a larger goal. • Create a "Park Ambassado-" program where residents living adjacent to parks are trained to inspect parks and then file a weekly report in exchange for a nominal fee or pass. DAL 6: INCREASE AWARENESS OF PROGRAM OFfERING~ In the citizen survey, `not being aware of the department program offerings' was one of the top reasons given for not participating. Action Steps: • Enhance the branding and identity of the Department. Providing a consistent look to department advertising in the brochure, on the web site, on flyers, maps, etc., will help the community become aware of what is available to them and of the breadth of the offerings. • Celebrate the accomplishments of the department in promotional materials. Focus groups and public meetings brought to light that many existing participants in department activities, programs and use of facilities are unaware of the variety and expanse of what is available. Most participants have a relatively narrow view of what is available and outcomes achieved based on their limited use of department offerings and facilities. It is a suggestion of the community that the department "tact its own horn," in order to gain support for future endeavors. • Coordinate Department of marketing and communication opportunities with citywide efforts. • Create an annual marketing plan for the Parks and Recreation Department. • Update and expand website marketing efforts. The web site can serve as a one stop shop for everything in which the department is involved, including program offerings, facility information, trail and facility maps, opportunities through volunteerism and the Foundation, financial assistance, etc. • Develop an evaluation process far marketing media such as newspaper, seasonal brochures, website, direct mail, targeted e-mails, radio, and television advertising to continuously determine effectiveness of marketing dollars. 96 L ~ ASSURE F/NANC/A~ SUSTA/NABIL/T~ Diversity in the department's funding and revenue portfolio is as important in the public sector as in the private sector. The City has the ability to use these mechanisms to enhance the quality of life in Iowa City and expand recreation, park, open space, trails, programs, and services to the community. Action Steps: • Work with the City, residents and partners to establish additional revenue through a combination of the following sources to implement the recommendations of the Master Plan: • Potential redirection of existing City funds • Alternative Funding options {see Section ~ • Strategic partnerships • Fees and charges • Further investigation of suppart for an education campaign for a ballot initiative to pass a bond referendum for future capital improvements. Strategy: Pursue alternative funding to implement the Master Plan Many departments within Iowa City have experienced challenging times in the recent past, with limited funding and staffing levels, and the Department should explore the best means of achieving its funding goals. Alternative funding methods may be instrumental to the operations of the City's recreation programs and facilities on an ongoing basis. Allocating resources {assigning staff time, matching funds, etc.) to pursue alternative funding should be considered an investment in the future, with an outlined and expected positive rate of return. Action Steps: • Identify opportunities to increase community suppart and revenue opportunities such as grants, partnerships, sponsorships, volunteers and earned income (see Section Vfor Alternative Funding Resources). • Assign staff resources and/or investigate the possibility of utilizing volunteer efforts to apply far such funding. • Develop a "Wish List" to identify philanthropic opportunities that align with these needs. Once identified, aggressively apply for grant funding and Foundation assistance. • Expand and formalize a volunteer program to include standards, recruiting, training, retaining, and rewarding volunteers in all program areas. • Create new and formalize existing Sponsorships see Sample Sponsorship Policy in Appendix!!!) with equity agreements that are reviewed annually. • Create an annual "Sponsorship Manual" listing all the opportunities for the year and distribute within the community in a menu format that creates a sense of urgency within the business community. 97 • Work with Parks and Recreation Foundation to facilitate the receipt of grant funds and other fundraising activities. • Seek collaborations with developers forfuture development projects to include recommended parks and recreation facilities and standards It is suggested that the City employ a cost recovery policy that provides the foundation for setting fees and charges based on the organizational vision, mission, and values of the City, and who in the community benefits. This will help determine the cost recovery and subsidy level of each program and facility and serve as a tool to monitor these goals aver time. Action Steps: • Clarify the Department's Pricing Policy and Strategy. If a pricing policy exists, even loosely, it should be fine-tuned to provide expanded detail in guiding management decisions. If a written policy is not in existence, one should be created. • Refine Cost Tracking. Review direct and indirect costs assigned to specific programs and facilities in order to assure consistency in balancing costs with revenues. Assure that the accounting system is capable of providing information monthly, quarterly, and annually to inform management decisions. • Identify citywide participant categories. Participant category examples for use of facilities and programs include resident and non-resident, age, partners identified through various inter-governmental agreements, non-profit organizations, and private organizations, as well as many others. • Determine fee schedule and subsidy levels. Based on the Pyramid Methodology for resource allocation and cost recovery (see Appendix iVy, for each programJactivity and facility, determine the subsidy/cost recovery target level incorporating participant categories. • Partial Cost Fee: recovers something less than full cost. This partial cast fee could be set at a percentage of direct costs, all direct costs, all direct costs plus a percentage of indirect costs, or some combination. • Full Cast Fee: recovers the total cast of a service including all direct and all indirect costs. • Market Rate Fee: based on demand for a service or facility. Determine the market rate by identifying all providers of similar services (e.g., private sector providers, other municipalities, etc.) and setting the fee at the highest level the market will sustain. Consider policy revisions to increase revenue generation potential. • Use discounted fees as a special promotion such as reduced fee hours during off peak times. • Reconsider the current alcohol policy to allow for limited and appropriate alcohol use to make rental opportunities more attractive. 98 GOAlB~ COlL4BORAfEWIiHCOAIMUNIfYORGANIZ4ilONSANUBUSINESSES Action Steps: • Investigate partnerships with local medical and health organizations to increase fitness and health programming particularly for the aging population and youth population within the community. • Create new and formalize existing partnerships {see Sample Partnership Policy in Appendix V} with equity agreements that are reviewed annually. • Strengthen and expand Intergovernmental Agreements {IGAs}with schools for use of fields, gyms, and multipurpose spaces. • Explore the possibilities of revising and promoting adopt-a-park/trail programs to help with park maintenance, beautification, and civic pride. • Investigate, where appropriate, collabaratians with entities suggested by the community during the public input process of this master planning effort • Large businesses and local businesses • Chamber of Commerce, Visitors and Convention Bureau, ICCCBB Sports Authority for the promotion of sporting events • Iowa City Area Development Group {ICAO} • University of Iowa and Kirkwood College, public schools • Neighborhood Groups • Support Groups {dog park group, Friends of the Iowa River Scenic Trail {FIRST), sports groups, Project GREEN, Friends of Hickory Hill, Backyard Abundance, I- WATER,Johnson County Heritage Trust, Master Gardeners, Future Perfect • City Council, City Commissions, Public Art Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, other City Departments • I-DOT, Johnson County, neighboring cities • Local associations of service providers: sports, martial arts, private/non-profits, UAY Strategy: Pursue a dynamic and mutually beneficla! relatlonshlp with the Senior Center. The existing Senior Center serves the traditional "senior population" in a limited facility, by today's standards. As the baby boomer cohort moves into the 55 and over age group, its members will be looking for non-traditional and highly active physical and social opportunities. Action Steps: • Provide crass marketing between the existing senior and recreation programs in order to assure a comprehensive approach to serving the older adult population. • As new facility development opportunities present themselves seek ways to encourage participation by the older adult population through a comfortable setting with shared access to activity centers such as swimming pools, therapy pools and light weight fitness equipment. 99 Strategy; Fxplore a community access relationship with the University of Iowa at its new Student Wellness Facility currently under construction. At this time, the University has intentions of community access with options of daily admission fees and annual fee for use of the pool, gym, and fitness facilities. The facility will provide the only indoor leisure pool in this part of the state. Fees are anticipated to be high in relation to fees at the existing recreation center, albeit for a higher service level offering. Community use times will be a second priority to all University uses and student needs. Action Steps: • Continue discussions with the University to maximize community use times. • Seek to maximize the use of bath pawls to the extent passible in a complementary fashion. • Upon opening of the facility, monitor and evaluate community use opportunity. GOA! 9t CONTINUE i0 PROVIDE EQUI1ABlElOS IN EMISiING PGRNS AND FdCIlIiIES Action Steps: • Strive to replace or renovate all components scoring below community expectations. See list below for specific components that scored below community expectations. Playgrounds should be prioritized for renovation/replacement. City Park ~. Playground ,. ... 1 Upper playground City Park Playground 1 Upper playground City Park Playground 1 Upper playground Court Hill Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair Court Hill Park Natural Area _ 1 Small and littered Court Hill Park Educational Experience 1 Sign in disrepair Creekside Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair Creekside Park Playground 1 Older Creekside Park Water Access, General 1 Creek is hidden Happy Hollow Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair Highland Park Playground 1 Older Mercer Park Playground 1 Swings and climber older Mercer Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair North Market Square Park Basketball 1 Needs surface repair 100 Peninsula Park Water Access, General 1 Visual access only to water Scott Park Sturgis Ferry Park Open Water Water Access, Developed 1 Creek is hidden 1 Access to water is steep unless via boat trailer Terrell Mill Park Shelter 1 Needs repair Terrell Mill Park Volleyball 1 Needs surface repair Tower Court Park Playground, Local 1 Older Add comfort and convenience features to parks where missing, such as benches, drinking fountains, and restrooms. It is recommended that at least 7 out of the 14 listed comfort and convenience features listed in the park inventory data report be provided in each park. (Refer to park inventory data for a list of missing comfort and convenience features by park.) Consider adding restrooms to mare neighborhood parks to increase the length of stay far families at parks. Parks in locations that are not in proximity to other parks with restrooms include: East Iowa City o Pheasant Hill Park o Court Hill Park West laws City o Benton Hill Park o Brookland Park or o Harlocke Hill Park • Continue to make the development of Sand Lake Recreation Area a priority. • Either upgrade all basketball courts to a playable level ar remove same courts and concentrate efforts on a few that will get the mast use overall. System wide, basketball courts are in conditions that are below community standards. The community survey reports that the small need for courts in the community are being largely unmet. • Continue to upgrade playgrounds as funding is available. The list of components in the first strategy of Goal 9 lists the playgrounds that are priorities for replacement. • Continue to work with the City to find construction techniques that increase maintenance efficiencies along the Downtown Pedestrian Mall. • Pursue plans to build out ballfields in Kicker's Park. This is currently the best location for new ballfields in the City. Although the need for new fields is not eminent the City can expect to see increased demand in the next 5-7 years as the community grows. • Add more shelters to I.C. Kickers Park to increase the comfort of park users • Add loop walks to parks as funding is available and opportunities exist. • Continue to upgrade and improve small neighborhood parks. These facilities ranked highly for need among the community • Improve Creekside Park to address law levels of walkable service in that part of town. Improvements can include: o Upgrade the basketball court or replace with a component selected by residents o Upgrade or replace the playground o Improve security lighting 101 _ _ _ Strategy: Fi!! gaps in walkable service Action Steps: • Work with the School District to provide adequate recreational amenities at schools that are the singular providers of recreation in a neighborhood. Priorities include: o Henry Longfellow Elementary School o Helen Lemme Elementary School o Irving Weber Elementary School o Shimek Elementary school • Work with other city departments to increase walkability throughout the community by adding sidewalks, pedestrian crossings, and bridging barriers. • Improve parks that lie in low service area (as shown in Perspective B, Appendix V!) to increase walkable recreational opportunities. Strategies outlined in Strategy 1.1 should be employed in park improvement. Access to nature and natural areas ranked highly as a need in the community survey. The City has a great base of resources from which to respond to this need. As parks and properties are being developed a priority should be placed on natural areas enhancement and creation Action Steps: • Continue to maintain and enhance natural areas throughout the system. • Enhance natural drainages, waterways, and native areas in developed parks. • Work with friends groups to improve and maintain soft surface trails within parks. • Increase interpretive signage at natural areas throughout the system. • Work to maintain a diversity of natural areas within the system including prairie, woodland, riparian areas, and wetlands. • Ensure that maintenance staff is trained in natural areas management techniques. • Partner with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to create canoe access to the Iowa River. • Conduct a feasibility study forthe construction of a nature center. new trends in parks and recreation Diversifying recreational opportunities in Iowa City's existing parks by adding exciting new recreational facilities will ensure the creation of a system that will attract both new and old residents. Such facilities will continue to help make Iowa City unique in the region and will foster a positive image of the City for residents and non-residents alike. Action Steps: • Look for opportunities to add a "destination playground" to an existing park. Destination Playgrounds usually include special features such as a climbing wall, spray feature or adventure play. Often they involve special theming and opportunity to teach children and parent something of the local history, culture, or ecology of an area. 102 Look for opportunities to add a "boundless playground:' Boundless playgrounds are designed to be fully accessible to children with disabilities and represent a growing trend in parks and recreation. While built to serve the local community, both may potentially attract visitors from the region. Laak far opportunities to build spray grounds in parks. These can be added to existing parks or suggested as features of new park. They provide opportunities far water play without the staffing and maintenance needed for outdoor pools Consider adding a climbing feature to the next playground renovation. Climbing walls would be an addition to the parks that could be a unique draw to Iowa City Parks. GOAL 10. PIONFORCONTINUEDEQUITABlElOSAS COMMUNIflGROWS Action Steps: • Wark with surrounding developments to bring utilities to Future Parks. • Plan and budget far park development based an development trends. Currently new development is concentrated in the western part of the community. Consider developing one of the future parks as the development continues. • Add park maintenance resources as additional park, trails, and facilities are added to the system as needed. • Review land dedication and impact fees for new development to ensure that the department is getting the needed resources to provide parks and recreation to new residents. • Wark with interest groups to add new dog parks to serve the southern and central part of Iowa City. The high density of the central core of Iowa City may justify the need to add an additional dog park to aid with the high number of residents without yards or transportation. The southern part of Iowa City is another likely location for the addition of a new dog park to serve this area of the community. 103 Strategy: increase Action Steps: • Wark with the University of Iowa to gain access to new recreation centerfacilities. • Conduct a feasibility study far the construction of an indaar recreation/aquatic facility an the west side of Iowa City that includes multi-purpose program space, gymnasiums, walking track, fitness, aquatics, cardio and weight rooms • If feasible, design and construct a new indaar recreation/aquatic center an the west side of lava City GOAL 11; INCRE~SELEVEL OFSERVICEFOR TRAILS Action Steps: • Increase neighborhood connections tomulti-use trails • Add small shelters along trails to provide shelter during extreme weather conditions and sudden weather changes. • Create rest stations along all multi-use trails and wide sidewalks to encourage recreational use • Track trail maintenance tasks, hours, and expenses to determine actual trail maintenance casts • Modify the trial maintenance budget to reflect actual trail maintenance costs. Trail maintenance efforts should be balanced between available budget and user expectations. • Work to improve trails within parks to make them safe and enjoyable • Increase walking opportunities in parks by adding loop trails as allowable Action Steps: • As a priority in park and facility construction, prioritize trail construction in capital improvement spending. • Continue to build proposed trails as funding allows. Priorities for trail construction include: o Connections between existing trails o Connections between trails that create large loops o Connections to parks and greenspace o Connections to schools and other public facilities o Neighborhood connections to the larger network • Pursue projects to add a bridge to cross the Iowa River bridging Peninsula Park and Crandic Park. • Pursue funding to create a pedestrian underpass across Highway 218 at Hunters Run Park. 104 B. Recommendation Cost Estimates The following table includes recommended capital projects and additional items that significantly impact the annual operational and maintenance budgets and are above and beyond what is currently funded in the City's FYO9-FY12 CIP Budget and the City's operating budget. All cost estimates are in 2008 figures. Funding sources listed are suggested methods of funding and can be enhanced with additional methods of funding. Overall staffing cost projections are included in the annual operational and maintenance cast estimates. Table 16: Cast Estimates and Funding Sources far 2009-2020 Recommended Priorities Upgrade or replace playgrounds at Creekside, Highland, Mercer, and Tower court Parks (4 totaly Add restrooms to one west side park Add two small shelters to multi-use trails Construct Planned Trail P rajects Create a renavatian master plan far Creekside Park Addition of one maintenance worker Kickers Soccer Park improvements Butler Bridge Pedestrian Trail City Park Trail lighting Frauenholtz-Miller Park devel a pm ent Hickory Hill Bridge Napoleon Softball Field renavatian North Market Square Park redevelopment Outdoor ice rink Pedestrian bridge- Reninsula/Rocky Share $240,000 CIP N/A N/A $150,000 CIP $5,000 General Fund $30,000 CIP $2,000 General Fund $3,000,000 CIP, Partnerships, $10,000/mile per General Fund Grants year $10,000 General Fund N/A N/A N/A N/A $38,000 General Fund $890,500 CIP N/A N/A $550,000 CIP, Grants $1,000 General Fund $240,000 CIP $2,500 General Fund $280,000 CIP, N.O.S. Fees $5,000 General Fund $50,000 CIP N/A N/A $180, 000 CIP N/A N/A $280, 000 CIP N/A N/A $400,000 CIP $20,000 General Fund $1,300,000 CIP $1,000 General Fund 105 Peninsula Park $300,000 deve I a pm e nt Recreation center $225'000 improvements Sand Lake Recreation $5,900,000 Area Waterworks Prairie $115,000 Park Hospice Memorial Wetherby Park $200,000 splashpad Total 2009-2012 CIP $11 500 340 (in 2008 dollars) , , Replace upper playgrounds at City $750,000 Rork with aDestination/ Adventure Playground Construct Planned Trail $8,000,000 Projects Implement Creekside Rork Master Plan $300,000 Add restraoms to one east side park $150,000 Add two small shelters to multi-use trails $30,000 Addition of two N/A maintenance workers Sand Prairie $260,000 development Scott Park development $450,000 Total 2013-2016 CIP (in 2008 dollars) $9,940,000 CIP CIP CIP, Grants, Donations CIP, Donations CIP, CDBG, N.O.S., Grants, Donations CIP, Partnerships, Sponsorships, Grants CIP, Partnerships, Grants CIP CIP CIP, Grants N/A CIP, Grants CIP $2,500 General Fund N/A N/A $50,000 General Fund $1,000 General Fund $5,000 General Fund $10,000 General Fund $10,000Jmile per General Fund year N/A N/A $5,000 General Fund $2,000 General Fund $76,000 General Fund $5,000 General Fund $2,500 General Fund 106 Construct Planned Trail $10,000,000 CIP, Partnerships, $10,000/mile per General Fund Projects Grants year Acquire and Construct New Park in West part unknown Dedication Fees, unknown General Fund Bond, CIP of City Construct additional $75,000- CIP, Partnerships, large dog park in south- $150 000 Grants $8,000 General Fund central part of City , feasibility Study for Recreation/Aq uati c $70,000 General Fund N/A N/A Center an West side of community Design and Construct a new Recreation / $15,000,000- Band $500,000 General Fund AquaticCenter an West $20,000,000 side of City Total 2017-2020 CIP +/- (in 2008 dollars) $30,220,000 Total 12 Year CIP +/- (in 2008 dollars? $42,880,000 107 Appendix I Community Attitude and Interest Survey Executive Summary of Citizen Survey Results Overview of the Methodology The City of Iowa City conducted a Community Attitude and Interest Survey in January and February 2008 to establish priorities far the future improvement of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the community. The survey was designed to obtain statistically valid results from households throughout Iowa City. The survey was administered by a combination of mail and phase. Leisure Vision worked extensively with Iowa City officials in the development of the survey questionnaire. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future system. In January 2008, surveys were mailed to a random sample of 2,500 households throughout Iowa City. Approximately three days after the surveys were mailed, each household that received a survey also received an electronic voice message encouraging them to complete the survey. In addition, about two weeks after the surveys were mailed, Leisure Vision began contacting households by phone, either to encourage completion of the mailed survey or to administer the survey by phone. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 500 completed surveys. This goal was far exceeded, with a total of 676 surveys having been completed. The results of the random sample of 676 households have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least +J-3.8%. The fallowing pages summarize major survey findings: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 1 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Visitation of Jowa City Parks During the Past Year Respondents were asked to indicate whether any members of their household visited any of the Iowa City parks during the past year. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Ninety-two (92%) of respondent households visited a park in Iowa City over the past year. ~3.4N'hether Respondent Household Members Visited Any Parks in Iowa City ever the Past Fear by percentage of respondents ~~8 92°!0 _ hrJ o $°fo Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 2 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Now Often Respondent Households Visited Parks During the Past Year Respondent households who visited Iowa City parks during the past year were asked to indicate approximately haw often they visited parks during that time. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Of the 92% of respondent households who visited laws City parks over the past year, G9% visited parks at least 6 times during the year. Thirty-seven percent (37%} of respondent households have visited parks 2Q ar mare times aver the past year. +L`,~3. V~'hether Respondent Househoid IlJlembers Visited Any Perks in [~owa pity osier the Pest Year by pereentoge of respondents Q3a. flow [)fken Respondent kiausehold Members Visit Parks in Iowa Cit~r Over the Past Year 1 to ~ visits 6 to 10 visits 31 % 17% hJ a Yes $°~° 92°~° 11 to 19 vsite 15% 20 ar mare visits ~~a~o .,, !i.•I~tEC'.c.r.ril ~ Lr141',lft ',,.p,i.. ~ ,~ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 3 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Physical Condition of All Iowa City Parks Visited Respondent hausehalds who visited lawn City parks during the past year were asked to indicate haw they would rate the physical condition of all the laws City parks they visited. The fallowing summarizes key findings: ^ Of the 92°fo of respondent households who visited Iowa City parks over the past year, 92% rated the physical condition of all the parks as either excellent (26°l0~ or goad (66%). Additionally, 8% rated the conditions as fair, and less than 1% of respondents rated the parks as poor. ~Q3. V4lhether Respondent Household I~+lembers V'isite~d Array Parks in Iowa City over the Bast Year by percentage of respondents Q31a. Overall4 How Respondents Would Rate the Physical) Condifion of ALL the lava City Parks Visited Excellent 2C% Na _ _ Yes 8%~ 92°l, ~- ~` Fair - $% ~ODCI -- - --- -~6°l$- - _ ~~,~~~,~ ~a~~n1f3~'i~n~UU.~i~~1~._I,r~+rn,'~n~','~ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 4 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Participation in Recreation Programs During the Past Year Respondents were asked to indicate if they or any members of their household participated in any recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Thirty-percent (3Q%) of respondent household memtaers participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year. C,. 'V~Ihether Respondent iHausehold I'Vlembers Parkicipated In Any Recreation Programs Offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation C?epartment During the Past Year by percentage of respondents Y@S 7{)%a ;~~au~. r L~ira.ur '~~ra~a~ T~l~~ ' L«iihrtr ~ Prhrurul _~ ~~ r; Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 5 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Number of Recreation Programs Participated In Respondent households who have participated in recreatian programs offered by the Iowa City Barks and Recreation Department during the past year were then asked to indicate approximately haw many different recreatian programs they have participated in aver the past year. The fallowing summarizes key findings: ^ Of the 30% of respondent household members that have participated in any recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year, 68% have participated in at least 2 different programs. Additionally, 24°lo have participated in at least different 4 programs. Q4. Whether Respondent Household Members Participated In Any Recreation Programs Olffered by the IowaCity Parks and Recreation Department During the Past Year by percentage of respondents Q4a. How Many different Recreation Programs £~FFered by the Iowa Crifir Parks and Recreation Department Have Respondent Household Members Participated In Over the Past Year 1 program 32% No Yes 70°'!0 30% 2 to 3 prograrr~ 11 or more pragra ~ to 10 r AA ,A1 -- 4%-- -- -- p .. _ _ _ 'tY~l4 _ t ~!0 - -- - - -- - - - -t to ~i programs 21 °!b ti,>~>rce Lri,:t~e'~ isi~ti~~ E°l t' ~ti~hhi1r 11~i'I'+nA~il'1~ ~~ re~5~} Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 6 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Overall Quality of Programs Participated In Respondent households who have participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year were asked to indicate how they would rate the overall quality of programs they have participated in. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Of the 3d% of respondent household members that have participated in recreation programs offered by the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department during the past year, 90% of respondents rated the overall quality of programs as either excellent (27%} or goad (63!°}. In addition, 8% rated the programs as fair, and only 1°l° rated them as poor. C~4, Whether Respondent F~ousehold I~Jlembers Participated In Any Recreation. Programs offered by the lovwra City Parks and Recreation Department During the Past Year by percentage of respondents p4b. How Respondents Would Rate the t~verall Quality of Programs that Respondent Flousehold Members lave Participated In Excellent 27% No 'Yes 70°l® 3p°la ~ Not providec~oor i F alT -- 'h% -- ~% '~ - - - - - -- - - - ~~1!0~ _ _ 63/0 ~~,~tun 1_usur~ ~,~iwE~~ti L"C~ ' utatit~ttc ~ Fcl•~r~t.~r: '~ r ~~ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - '7 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Ways Respondents Learn About Iowa City Programs and Activities Respondents were asked to indicate all the ways they learn about Iowa City Parks and Recreation Qepartment programs and activities. The following summarizes key findings: ^ ParksJRecreation program guide (65%) had the highest percentage of respondents indicate it as the way that they learn about Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department programs and activities. Other frequently menitoned ways respondents learn about programs and activities include: newspaper articles (50%}and from friends and neighbors (46%}. Q5. ALL the Vl+ays Respondents Learn About Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department Programs and Acti~rities by percentage of respondents (mulkiple choices could be made) ParkslReereation program guide CSDdo Newspaper articles ~~a/p From friends and neighbors 4~°/a Iowa Gity kr}!eb sits 32% ': Newspaper advertisernants ~ 1 °fo Flyers at ParkslRec. facilities I'~ ~% Flyers distributed at school ~ ~% Radio 14°/t Cable access television ~J% Conversations with ParkslRee sta ~D/o Parks Departrtient e-mail bulletin ~% .=•~.atrt c Let,crarr `~ e,t~_nt L`1' • lit«rt~ttr.J'',•I-r!l;ir•, A~ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 8 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Survey for Iowa City Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 9 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Organizations Used for Recreation and Sports Activities Respondents were asked to indicate all the organizations their household has used for indoor and outdoor recreation and sports activities during the last 12 months. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Iowa City Rublic Library (6410} is the organization used by the highest percentage of respondents for indoor and outdoor recreation and sports activities during the past year. Other frequently mentioned organizations include: Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department (54%}, State of Iowa parks (47%), and County parks (46%}. Cam. ALL the Qrganizatians that Respondent Hausehald Members Have Used far Indoor and ~utdaar Recreation and ~par~s Activities During the Past Year by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Iowa Gity Public Library 64a/u Iowa City Parks and Recreation Departmen ~~% State of Iowa parks 47°/a County parks 1~~°fa University of Iowa recreation faeiHtie ~8°fo School Uistrictfacilitie 36% Private clubs (tennis, health, fitness, goI 2~°Ia Ch~irches ' 20% Kickers Soccer 'g% Boys BasehalllBabe Ruth ~°/o Girls Softba[I 7°/a Homeowners associationsfapartment comp) 5% Swim Club ~°/s~ ether 10°1o I None. Da not use any organization "~ '~ °fp ', ', 0% 20% 40% 60°/° $0% ,`=A 41f'i r Lrc;~tl'<' ~,'ea~=91 L'~t'. ' Il.l`<CI[11[C ~l'r_`I71'll;ii',' ~~ ~ iF Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 10 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Organizations Respondent Household Members Apes 17 and Under Use the Most From a list of 13 organizations, respondents were asked to indicate which two organizations household members ages 17 years of age and under use the most for sports and recreation programs and services. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Based on the sum of their top two choices, the organizations respondent household members ages 17 years and under use the most for sports and recreation programs and services include: Iowa City Rarks and Recreation Department (15%}, school district facilities (12%}, and Iowa City Public library (11%}, 7. Which TWO Organizations Respondent Household Members 1 ~ Years of Age and Pounder USE THE MOST for Sports and Re~creatian Pragrams and Services by percerrtage of respondents lava City Parks and Recreation Dept. 15% School Disirictfacilities 12% Iowa City Public .Library ~ ~ %° Kickers Sgccer 4°f° l lniwersity of Iowa recreation facilitie. ~.%, Girls Soktball ~°/4 ; Pri+rate clubs Stennis, I~ealth. fitness, yol ~°f° ; 6vys BaseballlBahe Ruth 3% Gaunty parks ~°f° State of Iowa parks 2°r6 ~C:hrirches ~% Swim Club '~ % ; Homeowners associationsJapartment eornple . Q% ~~ Other ~% ~4r4 5~r4 ~ o~ro ~ ~~i4 ~a4r4 Agency Used Most^Agency lased 2nd Most Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 11 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Organizations Respondent Household Members Apes 18 and Older USE THE MOST From a list of 13 organizations, respondents were asked to indicate which two organizations household members ages 18 years and older use the most for sports and recreation programs and services. The following surnrnarizes key findings: ^ Based an the sum of their top two choices, the organizations respondent household members ages 18 years and alder use the most far sports and recreation programs and services include: Iowa City Public Library (33%y and Iowa City Parks and Recreation 7. Which TWO Organizations Respondent Household Members Ages 18 gears and Older USE THE MOST fur Spurts and Recreation Programs and Services by percentage of responderds Iowa City Public Library 33% laws Gity Rarks and Recreation Dept 32% University of Iowa recreation facilitie 18% Private clubs {tennis, health, fitness, gol 16% County parks 13% State of Iowa parks '~ 1 °/a s'chaal District facilities 5% Churches rJ% Homeowners associations/apaRment comp) ~ 1 Swim Laub ~ % i goys BasebatllBak~e Muth 0% Kickers Soccer Q% Girls Softball Q% ', Other ~J% hdana. Do not use any organizations. 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40°~0 Agency Used MostOAgency Used 2nd Most n ~r Lc~:,ui~ ',~e.~~ ao ~ L ~ in.~lllu[c ~ ~c ~iuar. '~ Department (32%). Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 12 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 13 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Reasons that Prevent Respondent Household Members from Using Facilities and Programs More Often Respondents were asked to indicate all the reasons that prevent their household from using parks, recreation, trails, and sports facilities or programs of the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department more often. The following summarizes key findings: ^ "1 do not know what is being offered" (21%) and "program times are not convenient (21%y have the highest percentage of respondents indicate them as the reasons presenting household members from using parks, recreation trails and sports facilities or programs of the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department more often. Q8. ALL the Reasons that Prevent Respondent Household Members From Using Parks, Recreation Traits and Sports Facilities or Programs of the Iowa City Parts and Recreation Department More Often by percontago ofi respondents (multiple choices could be made) do nat know what is being afferPd ~ ~ % Program times are not convenient ~~ °/~o Use sen+ices of other agencies ~ ~°,/° Too far from our residence '~ ~% Program ar facility not offered ~% Facilities lack the right equiprnen $°~0 Class full 6% Lack of parking by facilities.an~i park._ Ij°/© Facility operating hours not convenien ~°f° Lack of quality programs 4% do not know locations of facilitie 4°/fa Security is insufficient 4% Use facilities in othrer cities $% Fees are too high 3q/° Registration for programs is difficul $% Facilities are not well n~aint~air~e ~%° Poor customer service by staff ~ °fo Not accessible for people with disabilitue '~ '~/a CSther 2 rJ% ~% 10/0 2'0% 31;.1n1o .'.aq,.~~ rrvi_nti`~i>.r,~nl~i~'re.nn_i~r~l~s~hrirrr,_ _~~ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 14 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Need for Recreation Facilities From a list of 26 recreation facilities, respondents were asked to indicate all of the ones that they and members of their household have a need for. The following summarizes key findings: ^ There are six facilities that aver 60% of respondent households have a need for: walking and biking trails (79%}, nature center and trails (68%}, small neighborhood parks (68°f}, large community parks (66%}, wildlife and natural areas (64%},and riverfront parks (62%}. Q9. Percenta±ge of Respondent Households That Have a Need for Various Parks and Recreation Facilities ~Y percentage of respondents (multiple choices could tae made) Walkiny and biking trails Nature cantor and trails Q$% Small neighborhood parks Q$% Large community parks $6% Wildlife and natura9 area, B4% Riverfront parks 62% Outdoor swimniiny pao€s/water park. ~~i% Indoor swimming paalslleisure paa 5~o/q Indoor runninglwalkingtrock 4~% Indoor fitness and exercise facilitie 46% Playground equipment ~$%i Off-leash dng park 31 `3f, Indoor lap lanes for exercise swimmin ~'~ % Outdoor tannis courts 29% Golf course 27°l0 Indoear basketballlvolleyball courts 25%° Indoor ice arena 2Q% Senior renter 17°/a 4utdaar ba6kPtball courts '~ G°fo Gisc gall 1$% Youth baseball aid softball field- 15°l0 Youth soccerfields 12% Indoor sports fields (baseba.ll, soccer, etc. 12°fa Adult softball fields 9% Skateboarding park 7% Yout17 football fields 79b 0°Jo 20% 40°fo 60°~0 i~u!~i Lcc-:urr'`r-i:r; '~_'L<t!tutciP~a'ntCU' $Q% 100% Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 15 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Need For Parks and Recreation Facilities in the Iowa City From the list of 26 parks and recreation facilities, respondents were asked to indicate which ones their household has a need for. The graph below shows the estimated number of households in Iowa City that have a need far various parks and recreatian facilities, based an 25,242 households in the City. Q9a. Estimated dumber of Households in lava City That Have a Need for Various Parrs and Recreation Facilities by number afi hauseholcis based on 25.202 households in laws City walking and biking trail Nature center and 4rails SmaVl neiyhhorbood parks Large community parks Wildlife and natural area: Rivertront parks Outdoor swimming poolsJwater park Indoor swimming pools/leisure poc Indoor runninglwalking track Indoor fitness and exercise facilities Playcdround equipment Utt-leash clog park Indoor lap lanes far exercise swimmin Outdoor tennis courts Golf course Indoor basketballlvolleyball courts Indoor ice arena Senior center Qutdaar backethall courts Disc golf Youth baseball and softball fields Youth soccer fields Indoor sports fields {baseball, soccer, etc. Adult softball fields Skateboarding park Youth football fields ticuucc Lcssum'4"dsiias ETr" L>5idutc 17,1 17.11 ~ 16,230 15,726 14,113 11.618 - ~,~$? ~ ~,~s~ ~ 6.80 6,401 4,990 1$4 1.865 1.638 0 5,4aa ~ o,aoa 15,oaa 2a,4ao 25,Oao Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 16 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Now Well Parks and Recreation Facilities Meet Needs From the list of 26 parks and recreation facilities, respondent households that have a need for facilities were asked to indicate how well these types of facilities in lawn City meet their needs. The following summarizes key findings: ^ There are three facilities that completely meet the needs of over 5Q% of respondent households: youth soccer fields [66%}, youth baseball and softball fields [55%}, and adult softball fields [51%}, 9b. How Well Parks and Recreation Facilities in Eowa City Meet the Needs of Res~aondent Hvusehold~ lay percerrtage of respondents with a need far facilities Youtlisoccerfields .:', 25°!° "~ °, Youth haseball and safthall field. 3=~°% g°.'o1 0 Large community parks ~+' . 3 ~ °ro I 1 _'% o Adult softball fields ?-~DJ° 1 ~ °io Playground equipment 39°./a 1~°f° 5° ° Small neighborhood. parks 3r3% 1 ~~°-:, b°/a. Senir~r center 32°fo 1 ~ °a f3% Q~utdoor Tennis Donets '~-~4'0 1 r "0 10a/o Indnarswimrrringpor~lslleisure{aoc~ 3~"a ~~°,'a r'a/o Skateboarding park X41 L/o 1 A% 14a1o 'V'Valking and biking trails ®' 3~'%`° ?A°% 84/° u Gutdoor swimminn pooEslwater park 3''°ib 25"'0 ~ 7°% Indoor basketballlvolleyballeaur#s ;ice`:/o '?1°/n 11% Off-leash dog park 3~4°fo 23% 1D°jo Riverfront parks 2;'a% ~1% 1~°%0 Indoor lap lanes for exercise facilities ?g°~a 24% 13°r'o Nature center anti trails :i4al° 26°!a 11 °~° Jutdoor basketball cour#, 31 % '?1 °fo 12°fo tiNildlife anci natural area, 33°-~ 2G°.b 13°/o f °/a Golf course ~-0 0 ~~% 6°fo °!o _ Lisa golf ~' ~ ='~afa '?Golo 17°/a 1% Youth football fields 1 y°fo ~`'~°%. t °fo Indoor ice arena 17°in 1 Ci°~o ~3a/a Indoor sports fieids (Iyaselaall, soccer, etc. : ' . 28°r`o 1 :"~0 15°(° Inc€oor fitness anci exercise facrlitie_ .%2°/a 2r % 2~°fa Indoor runningJwalking track 1 ~•°l0 21 °fa 'I$%° ~°io 20% 4fl°ln 6Q°/a 80% 1 C1E}°fa ^100°~, Meets Needs^75°lo Meets Needs^50°~ Meets Needs^25°~, Meets Needs^~°~ Meets Neecls ,;. ~irrc i_rr, ins ': isn •n i' u ' lr~:;nt~u~~. i c hn~a7,, .:; Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 17 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Iowa City Householats with Their Facility Needs Being 50°° Met or Less From the list of 26 parks and recreation facilities, respondent households that have a need for facilities were asked to indicate how well these types of facilities in Iowa City meet their needs. The graph below shows the estimated number of households in Iowa City whose needs for facilities are only being 50% met or less, based on 25,2a2 households in the City. IQ9c. Estimated Number of I-~ouseF~olds in lov+va pity ~'Vhose Needs for Parks and Recreation Facilities Are {only Being ~~%~ Met or Less by number of households based on 25.202 households in laws Ci4~r Indoor nrnninglwalking f.rack Wildlife and natural areas Nature center and trails Indoor fitness and exercise facilitie Walking and biking trails. Riverfront parks ~?utdaar swimrniny poolsfwater park Indoor swimming poolslleisure pas Small ne€ghborhaod parks Indoor lap lanes for exercise swirnmin•: Goff course ()ff-leash dog park Large community parks Indoor ice arena C?utdoar tennis courts _ Indoor basketballlvalleyball counts Disc golf Playground eyuipmant outdoor basketball courts Indoor sports fielc€s (baseball, soccer, etc. Senior center i 1 Youth football fields 7~• Skateboarding park ~~~ Adult softball fields 'JA'I Youth baseball and softball field ~$~ Youth soccer fields 1 'AFi 7.' a 2,aaa 4,00o s,aaa s,aaa ~a,oao t~50°i4 Meets Needs 025% Meet deeds C~4% IUleets deeds `;,nitre Ld•€:arrr'+r~,r,a-,ha.'Im;ruurc~~lrl-~racu~'~e~\. Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 18 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Most Important Parks and Recreation Facilities From the list of 26 parks and recreation facilities, respondents were asked to select the four facilities that are most important to their household. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Based an the sum of their tap four choices, the parks and recreation facilities that are mast important to respondent households include: walking and biking trails [53%}, small neighborhood parks [30%), wildlife and natural areas [26%y, and nature center and trails [25%). It should also be noted that walking and biking trails had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important facility. Q'la. Parks and Recrea#ion Facili#ies Tha# Are Mos# Important #o Responden# Households by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top four choices Walkined and bikincd trails Small neighborhood parks Wildlife and natural areas (`tature center and trails Large community parks Outdoor swirnminy poolslwater park, Indoor swimming poolslleisure poe Playground equipment Indoor runninglwalking track Indoor fitness and exercise facilifie: ~Dff-leash dog park Golf course Indoor lap lanes fOr AXArCl6B SWImn1111f Youth baseball and softball field= Outdoor tennis courts Riverfront parks Youth soccer fields Senior oenter Indoor basketballlvolleybal6 court<_ Disc golf Adult softball fields Indoor ice arena Qutdoor basketball courts Indoor sports fields (baseball, soccer, etc. Youth football fields Skateboarding park Other 0%© 20°fa 40% 60% 'Most Important 2nd Most Important O3rd Most Important 04th Most Important S~~ui~< Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 19 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Need for Recreation Programs From a list of 23 recreation programs, respondents were asked to indicate all of the ones that they and members of their household have a need for. The following summarizes key findings: ^ There are three programs that over 45% or more of respondent households have a need for: Farmers' Market [72%}, adult fitness and wellness programs [50%}, and special events [48%}. Q'I'I. Percentage of Respondent Households That Have a deed for Various Recreation Programs by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Farmers' Market Adult fitness and wellness program Special events, i e. concerts, movies, etc Nature prograrrvslenvirorimental educatio Adult continuing education program_ WVater fitness programs Travel program Adult programs far 50 years and alder Adult art, dance performing s rt:~ Programs with your pec: Youth Learn to Swig program~> Youth sports programs Adult sports program= Tennis lessons and leayuea Golf lessens and leagues You#h art, dance, performing arts Youth summer camp programs Birthday parties Prayrar77s far teens Youth fitness and wellness prograrro•~ Prescl7aol program Before and after school programs Programs for people wikh disabilitie p% x~iu~;k L~.r~rrrc•`•.r>r~nFll~'lnr:r_itulri~l~chrrs:u,, ,~~•~x~ _ 30% 28% 27°~ . 25 °k, 22% 22°f° 1 ~ 14°/a 14°/a' ~ ~ 4°~ 12 °lo 12 °~ I9% g°~ '' 7°/O GVd/0 - 50% _ 48% 41% , 40% 60% 72a~ $~% Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 20 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Need for Recreation Programs in Iowa City From the list of 23 recreation programs, respondents were asked to indicate which ones they and members of their household have a need for. The graph below shows the estimated number of households in Iowa City that have a need for recreation programs, based on 25,202 households in the City. Q~ 1 a. Estimated Number of Households in Iowa City 'I•hat Have a Need for Various Recreation Programs by number of households based vn 25.202 households in Iowa City Farmers' Market Adult fitness and wellness program Special events, i.e. concerts, movies, etc Nature programsfenvironmental educatio Adrilt continuing education program Water fitness programs Travel programs Adult programs for 50 years anrt older Adult art. dance, performing arts Programs with your pets Youth Learn to Swim prac~rams Youth sports programs Adult sports programs Tennis lessons and leagues Golf Lessons and leagues Youth art, dance, performing arts Youth surnrner camp programs Birthday parties Programs far teens Youth fitness and wellness program Prescl7aol programs Before anr! after school prayrarns Programs for people with disabilitie 0 ~'~~.NfCC L.cl'itlfC `~ t>nl~~'ll~'~~1~'~.~ L71;un.rr,' i.rrhrrr,r-., ~: ~~ ~y i - 12,62 12,198 10.297 _ 7:511 ~ 7,132 ~ 6.679 6,260 5.519 5,469 ~ 3,12 2.974: 2.319 2.1.67 1.$65 5, 000 10,000 15,000 20,000 Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summa><y - 21 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Now Well Recreation Programs Meet Needs From the list of 23 recreation programs, respondent households that have a need for programs were asked to indicate how well those programs meet their needs. The following summarizes key findings: ^ There is only one program that over 50°! of respondents indicated completely meet the needs of their household: Farmers' Market (54%x. Q11 b. How Well Recreation Programs in Iowa City Meet the Needs of Respondent Households by percentage of respondents with a need far programs Farmers' fJdarket ' ~ q Birthday parties q ~, Youth sports programs o Youth Learn to Swim pracgrams 'l, Special events, i.e. concerts. movies. etc q o q Preschool programs o o a Yautlo sumro7er camp programs o q q Programs with your pets n n n' Programs for people with disat~ilitie : ' q Adult sports programs a o a _ ~ ~la Youth art, dame, performing arts 'l„, ° © ° ~'r,-' BeFore and after school programs , " o a q _ n Tennis lessons and leagues ~ ' ~ o o q _ __ _! _p Travel programs 1 "1, _ q _ g q Water fitness proyrams ~ Adult continuing education pruyram- ~ '1. Adult art. donee, performing arts q q q ~q Adult fitness and wellness program.- 0 0 0 ° Nafure procgramslenviranmental educatic o o a u Youth fitness and wellness program_ q r, p ,' Adult programs for 5Q years and oid~ q r, Programs for teens ' ' o q q I /r, Golf lessons and leagues Y Q°!° 2D% 40°l0 6D°lo $D°lo 1 DD% ^140°fo Meets Need~f5%a Meets Needs^5Q%a Meets NeedsO25% Meets Needs•0% Meets Needs . ~!.IC~.t' .ri~-di.lc' ~'•~1'-~b-It L: i' ~ Ii1rIlU.1[~"I~cl'glr,,P. ~~.`.~ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 22 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 23 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Iowa City Households with Their Program !Needs Being 50°° Met or Less From the list of 23 recreation programs, respondent households that have a need for programs were asked to indicate how well those programs meet their needs. The graph below shows the estimated number of households in Iowa City whose needs for programs are only being 54% met or less, based on 25,242 households in the City. Q1'Ic. Estimated Number ~f Households in IQ~nr~a City V'Vtno~se Needs for Recreation Programs Are Only Being 50~~'o Met ar Less by number of households based on 25.202 households in lava City Adult fitness anti wellness prograi7~ _ $,156 P~ature programslenvironmental educat : 6.737 special e~rents, i_e_ concerts, movies.-~~ _ 5,74$ ' Adu-t cantinuing education progr~r: ~ 5,337 Adult programs Por 50 years and old 14,7$2 ylVater fitness pragrar-~•~ 4,708 Travel program; 4,379 Adult art, dance, performing a r _ 3,982 half lessons and leargu~- , 1~~ 3.'i 24 Programs with you pcr. _ 2,942. Farmers' Mark~i ~ .2.512 Tennis lessons and leayu~_ 2,443 Programs for teens 2,391 Adult sports prograrn~ 2.376 Youth Learn to Svrim program. 2,324 Youth art, Glance, performing art 2,D47 Youth fitness anti wellness proc)ram 2,011 Youth sports programs 1,761 Youth srsmmer camp program I 1.684 Before and afker school program 1,27 Preschool programs 1,115 Birthday parties 1,D75 Prograrras #ar people wvith disabilitie 1.{136 0 2,ooa 4,aaD 6,DDa s,DDD 1a,aao i50% Meets 1*leedsC25°/a Meet Needs ^Q% Meets hleeds Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 24 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Most Important Recreation Programs From the list of 23 recreation programs, respondents were asked to select the four that are most important to their household. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Based on the sum of their tap four choices, the recreation programs that are mast important to respondent households include: Farmers' Market (58%}, adult fitness and wellness programs (29%}, and special events (2&%}. It should also be noted that Farmers` Market had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important program. Q12. Recreation Programs That Are Most Important to Respondent Households by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top four choices Farmers' Market Adult fitness and wellness programs Special events, i.e. concerts, movies, etc. Nature programs/environmental education Adult continuing education programs Youtl7 Learn to Swim programs Adult programs for 50 years and older Adult art, dance, performing arts Youth sports programs Programs with you pets Water fitness programs golf lessons and leagues Youth summer camp programs Tennis lessons and leagues Adult sports programs Preschool programs Programs for teens Travel programs Youth arf, dance, performing arts Youth fitness and wellness programs Birthday parties Before and after school programs Programs for people with disabilities Other 14 ~ 11'% ® 11'% ~ 10~% ID 9`% ID 8'% ID 6% 6 %, ~] 6 ID 6{>ro ID 5%, rJ"/r. j] 5'L. ~~ _ 4 /~ ] 3%~ 3!% 2~1~ i °/u 19'% J 29t% 26~% I^Most Important O2nd Most Important t~3rd Most Important t~4th Most Important S~xure' Leisure ~7srorr'EI'C Instihite (Febniar~~ '0(.rS) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 25 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Programs Currently Participated in Most Often From the list of 23 recreation programs, respondents were asked to select the four that they currently participate in the most often at Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department facilities. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Based on the sum of their top four choices, the programs that respondents currently participate in mast often at Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department facilities include: Farmers' Market (57%} and special events (24%}. It should also be Hated that the Farmers' Market had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the program respondents currently participate in most often. Q13. Programs That Respondents Currently Participate In MOST OFTEN at Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department Facilities by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their tap four cl~oices Fanners' Market Special events, i.e. concerts, movies, etc. Adult fitness and wellness programs Youth sports programs Youth Learn to Swim programs Nature programs/environmental education Adult continuing education programs Programs with you pets Adult art, dance, performing arts Adult programs for 50 years and older Youth summer camp programs Water fitness programs Adult sports programs Youth art, dance, performing arts Preschool programs Tennis lessons and leagues Birthday pasties Programs for teens Golf lessons and leagues Youth fitness and wellness programs Travel programs Before and after school programs Programs for people with disabilities Other Most Often 2nd Most Often O3rd Most Often t]4th Most Often ~~ourie Leia~ure ~-r?iouET~' Iuc:hhite iFel~~nrin- BOOS) Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 2& o~>i~ ~a~ra 4o~~r~. 6o~1r~ so~~i~ Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Potential Indoor Programming Spaces Respondent Households Would Use Respondents were asked to indicate all the potential indoor pragramming spaces that they and members of their household would use if the lawn City Parks and Recreation Department developed a new indaar pragramming space. The fallowing summarizes key findings: ^ Walking and jagging track (67%} had the highest percentage or respondents indicate it as the potential indoor pragramming space their household would use if the Iowa City Rarks and Recreation Department developed new indoor programming spaces. Other frequently mentioned potential indoor pragramming spaces include: weight room/cardiovascular equipment area {43%}, exercise facility for adults 50 years and older {39!°}, nature center {37/0}, and aerobics/fitness/dance class space {35%}. Q14. ALL the Potential Indoor Programming Spaces Respondent Household Members VNould Use if the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department Developed New Indoor Programming Spaces by percentage of respondents (tnuiCiple choices could be made) Waikina and ~oyying #rack Weight roornlcardiovaseular equip. are; Exercise facility for adults 50 yearslolde REature renter Aerobicslfitness/dance class span Leisure pool (water slides. sprays, etc Lanes for lap swimminc Warm water for therapeutic purpose: Arks and crafts room Rock climbingfbouldering weal Space far meetings, parties, banquet; Multi-court gymnasiumlfiefct housr Indoor tennis Racquetballlhandball courts Child care area Space fior teens Preschool program space Classroom staace Indoor soccer/lacrosse 25 meter competition pool Deep water far di~snglwater polo Other a°r° ~ ~2% 2$% 26% ~ 22% 20% - 15% - 15% 15°/a ~ 12 °!o X11% ~% ~ S% ~ 7% ~ ~%0 ~% 4% La°r6 S<a~vc~ L,:rSLUC 1'r5rtxr ET+:' LLtitrllrtc ~ Fcbar:uti '_Or?i~ i 43% ~7°l0 ~a°~~ so°r° sa°r© Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 27 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 28 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Indoor Spaces Respondent Households Would Use Most Often From a list of 21 potential indoor programming spaces, respondents were asked to indicate which four they ar members of their household would use the mast often. The fallowing summarizes key findings: ^ Based an the sum of their top four choices, the indaar spaces respondent household members would use most often include: walking and jagging track (59%}, weight roam/cardiovascular equipment area (29°!°}and exercise facility for adults 50 years and older (28%}. It should also be noted that walking and jogging track had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the indoor space respondent household members would use most often. Q'15. Indoor Spaces Respondent Household Members Would Use Most often by percentacje of respondents who selected the item as one of their top four choices Walking and jogging track weight roomlcardiavascular equip. area Exercise facility for adults 5D years/older Leisure pool (water slides, sprays, etc.) Nature center Lanes for lap swimming Aerobics/fitness/dance class space warm water for therapeutic purposes Arts and crafts room Rock cliinbinglboulderingwoll Indoor tennis Space for meetings, parties, banquets Multi-court gymnasium/field house Racquetballmanclball courts Child care area Space for teens Preschool program space IndoorsoccerAacrosse Classroom space 25 meter competition pool Deep water for divingMrater polo Other 29% 28% ~~~/:~ LL ~J 11 ~/o 9% 0 S'% ] ~ ~/n 7% 6`1° 5% 5%, 4~% L°/O 1 %~ 0% Source Leisure Ci~iourETC' liitrtute (Febnrar}' _'003) 20% 40% 60% 80% 1st Choice 2nd Choice 03rd Choice 04th Choice Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 29 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Level of Agreement with Potential Benefits Respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with various benefits being provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities. The following summarizes key findings: ^ All 10 of the benefits have aver 50% of respondents indicate that they either strongly agree or agree that the benefits are provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities. Q16. Respondents Level of Agreement with Benefits Being Provided by Parrs, Trai Is, and Recreation Facil i~ties by percentage of respanclenks Improve physical health and fitne~ ~ ° Madre Iowa Gity a more desirable place to ii'r Preserve oopen space and the environn,er~ Improve mental health and reduce strF;~._ Increase property values in surrounding a,ra~ ° Help attract new residents and busine~aa f7pportunities far dill cultures to intera~: 'o F'intect historical attributes of the C;ir o Help reduce crime Rramate tourism t© the City a 0% 20% 40% 60"/0 $~1o/a ~ 00% Strongly Agree Agree CNeutral OQisagree iStrangly Disagree 31% • ~" , 33% 7° 30% 10°fa ~,~ °/% 1 ~ °Io ~8% 23% 41 °~ 2~°1° 39% JV°!° 6°fd ~ ' ~ 36°la 5°fa 3 bolo ~ ~ . ?.R°~U ~y y J[i 61° ~°~° Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 30 Commurut~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City THREE Most Important Benefits From a list of 10 benefits that could be provided by parks, trails, and recreation facilities and services, respondents asked to indicate which three are most important to them and members of their household. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Based on the sum of their top three choices, the lenefits most important to respondent households include: improve physical health and fitness {71%}, preserve open space and the environment (49%}, and make Iowa City a more desirable place to live (49%}. It should also be noted that improve physical health and fitness had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the benefit they feel is most important to their household. C~17.11Vhich THREE BENEFITS Are Mast Important to Respondent Household IVlembers Iry percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices Improve physical health and fitnes ~ 1 a/o Preserve open space and the environmen 1~~°/a Make Iowa City a more desirable place to liv QQaf° Imporve mental health and reduce sires- 3fj~`/q Hefp reduce crime ~ ~jb/o Increase prop~erfy values in surrounding are ') 3°/6 Opportunities for dill. cultures to interac ~ "~ °/a Protect historical attributes of the Cit 1 Qafa Hefp attract new residents and businesse 7°/P Promote tourism to the City ~°fa Qtiler ~ ~~p ~7,~y / Qa~O LLQ/8 ~Q°/° ClU°lU OU°~O 1st Choice 02nd Choice 03rd Choice Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 31 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Support for Actions to Improve the Parks, Recreation, Trails and Green Space System Respondents were asked to indicate how supportive they would be of various actions lawn City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system. The following summarizes key findings: ^ For all 12 actions, aver 40% of respondents indicated being either very supportive or somewhat supportive of actions Iowa City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system. G~1 S, How Supportive Respondents ~4-re to ~-ctions that the City of Iowa City Could Take to Improve the Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Green Space System by percentage of responderrts Uae greenways to develop traits & recreational f< Dev. new walkia7yliyikingtrails E connect existii Fix-upfrepair older park buildings and facilitie Upgrade existing neighborhood and community parl Purchase land to preserve open & green spec Uevelop new nature trans an<:! cente Upgrade existing yauthladult athletic field Dev. a new indoor recreation center Purchase land for dev ~~thletic fields & rec_ fa~ Develop a new outdoor aquatic facilitylwater pa De~selop new youth and adult athletic fielc O~eve-lap new off-leash dog park 22 °r° 7 % ° 22 °r° 9°ra ° 35°~ 1 D°/ 37°~r 13% ° 2~°!0 14°/a °1 33°I° 18°!° 7°I° se°r° z~°r° ~°~ ~a°r° ~©°?° 11 37% 24% 10°/a ~s°r° 3o°ra I ~ ~°ia s~°r° 36°,~ ~ 6°i° ~3% 29°ro 31 % 0°,~0 20% 40% 60°r`o 80°la 100% t^Very Supportive i~Somewhat Supportive !]Not Sure ONat Supportive t,~ur~_~• La ~.~~rc ~l;.a~~a71=: 1~' lirr;lth,ra~ ,} ~Lin:~r, :~ ~~~~; Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 32 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Most Willing to Fund with City Tax Dollars From a list of 12 actions Iowa City could take to improve the parks, recreation, trails, and green space system, respondents were asked to indicate which four of the actions they would be most willing to fund with their City tax dollars. The following summarizes key findings: ^ Based on the sum of their tap four choices, the actions that respondents would be mast willing to fund with their City tax dollars include: develop new walking and biking trails and connect existing trails (55%}, use greenways to develop trails and recreational facilities (50%}, and purchase land to preserve open space and green space (44%}. It should also be Hated that purchase land to preserve open space and green space had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first chaise as the action respondents would be mast willing to fund with their City tax dollars. Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 33 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Gt19. Which FC-UR ~rctions Respondents Would Be Most Willing to Fund With Their City Tax Dollars by percentage of respondents who selected rt as one of their top four choices Dev_ new walkinyJhikiny trails & connect existin 55% Use greenways to develop trails & recreational fa rJQrr~ Purchase land to preserve open ~ greei7 spat 44% Fx-upfrepair older park buildings and facilitie ~5% Develop new nature trails and cente ~Q°/o Dev_ a new indoor recreation center 30a~p Upgrade existing neighborhood and community par 28% Dovslop a new outdoor aquatic facilityfwatar ~}ar "I ~b/o Develop new off-leash dog park ~ 3%° Upgrade existing youthladult athletic field '~ ~ °/a; Purchase land for elev. athletic fields & rec. fs3~ '~ "I u/a develop new youth and adult athletic field 5°/a Ether 4% 0°/a 20°l0 40°l0 6d% 8a% Most Willing 2nd Most Willing ^3rd Most Willing~4th Most Willing ~~~~ I ~ .nr~',i ~. __ ' in.d~i~u~ ,_ .I~ni,ir~. _ .,_ Satisfaction with the Overall ~/alue Household Receives Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the overall value their household receives from the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department. The fallowing summarizes key findings: ^ Seventy-six percent (7b%} of respondents indicated that they are either very satisfied (28%} or somewhat satisfied (48%} with the overall value their household receives from the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department. In addition, only 5% indicated that they were very dissatisfied (1%) ar somewhat dissatisfied (4%). Additionally, 5% indicated don't know and 14% indicated neutral. Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 34 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Q~Q. Respondent Satisfaction with the overall Value Their Household Receives From the Iowa City Parks and Recreation Department by percentage of respondents Very Satisfied ~8% r~ r f,. i ,~__, _-_ Somewhat Satisfied D©n't Know 48% - 5% - ._ __Very Dissatisfied 1% Somewhat Dissatisfied Neutral 4% 14°f° Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 35 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Demographics Q1. Demographics: Amount of People in Household by percentage o1 respondents Two 40°io i One ~/ 19% i V 1 '- Four or More 23%u Three 19 ~o i , ~~ Q2. Demographics: Ages of Those Living in Household by percentage of household occupants 15-1 y years 7% 20-24 years 10-14 years 25-34 years 3^.r° 8% 9°Gi /~~ ~ 5-9 years 6`/. 35-44 years \\ 15% Under 5 years 'd 6°r~ 75+ / S% 65 '4 45-54 years 8°~ 19% 55-64 years 15~/ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 36 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Demographics Continued Q21. Demographics: Age of Respondent by percertage of respondents 35 to 44 22~% ~~ ~~ ~ Under 35 ~ 13% 45 to 54 ~ 25°1° / \\ / \\ 65+ 19% 55 to B4 21 °/i ii i Q22. Demographics: Gender of Respondent by percentage of respondents Male Fernale 57% `,i ~llf~.' I.cI~Wi ~: ~lvl~~lt H~r' ~ IINIIUI~~i r~I~, Jlll\' '_~~~~\ Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 37 Commurlit~r Attitude and Interest Surveyr for Iowa City Demographics Continued Q24. Dempgraphics: Whether Respondent i~ ~ Full-Time Student at the Llniuersity of lovva by percerrtage of responders YeS 4°f~+ Na Not PrhVided 95%n ~ "/a Q25. Demographics: Respondent's Household Income by peraerdage aF respanders ~25,U~0~1-:~49~,999 $5a,©0~-$74,995 37°! 25% Under $25A00 B ~'fo Not Provided 10% $75A04-$99.999 9 8% 1UCl flflfl ur more 24"/° Leisure Vision/ETC Institute Executive Summary - 38 Appendix II GRASP® History and Level of Service Methodology A. Level of Service Analysis Analysis of the existing parks, open space, trails, and recreation systems are often conducted in order to try and determine how the systems are serving the public. A Level of Service (LOS} has been typically defined in parks and recreation master plans as the capacity of the various components and facilities that make up the system to meet the needs of the public. This is often expressed in terms of the size or quantity of a given facility per unit of population. Brief History of Level of Service Analysis In order to help standardize parks and recreation planning, universities, agencies and parks and recreation professionals have long been looking for ways to benchmark and provide "national standards" far how much acreage, haw many ballfields, pools, playgrounds, etc., a community should have. As examples, in 1906 the fledgling "Playground Association of America" called for playground space equal to 30 square feet per child. In the 1970's and early 1980's, the first detailed published works an these tapirs began emerging (Gold, 1973, Lancaster, 1983). In time "rule of thumb" capacity ratios emerged with 10 acres of parklands per thousand population becoming the mast widely accepted standard application. Other normative guides also have been cited as "traditional standards," but have been less widely accepted. In 1983, Roger Lancaster compiled a bank called, "Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and Guidelines," that was published by the National- "-°'~ ---' "--°-- -- Association (NRPA). In this publication, Mr. Lancaster centered an a recommendation "that a park system, at minimum, be composed of a care system of parklands, with a total of 6.25 to 10.5 acres of developed open space per 1,000 population (Lancaster, 1983, p. 56). The guidelines went further to make recommendations regarding an appropriate mix of park types, sizes, service areas, and acreages, and standards regarding the number of available recreational facilities per thousand population. While the book was published by NRPA and the table of standards became widely known as "the NRPA standards," far Level of Service Analysis, It is important to note that these standards were never formally adopted for use by NRPA. Since that time, various publications have updated and expanded upon possible "standards," several of which have also been published by NRPA. Many of these publications did benchmarking and other normative research to try and determine what an "average LOS" should be. It is important to note that NRPA and the prestigious American Academy for Park and Recreation Administration, as organizations, have focused in recent years an accreditation standards far agencies, which are less directed towards outputs, outcomes and performance, and more on planning, organizational structure, and management processes. The following table gives some of the more commonly and historically used "capacity standards". ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II- Level of Service History and Methodology Common Historically-Referenced LOS Capacity "Standards" •~, Baseball 3.0 to 3.85 acre % to % mile 1 per 5,000; Official minimum Unlighted part of neighborhood complex; lighted lighted 1 per 30,000 fields part of community complex Little League 1.2 acre minimum Basketball %<ta % mile Youth 2,400 -3,036 vs. Usually in school, recreation center ar church 1 per 5,000 facility; safe walking or bide access; outdoor courts High Schaal 5,040 -7,280 s.f, in neighborhood and community parks, plus active recreation areas in other park settings Football Minimum 1.5 acres 15 -30 minute travel time 1 per 20,000 Usually part of sports complex in community park or adjacent to Schaal Soccer 1.7 to 2.1 acres 1 to 2 miles 1 per 10,000 Youth soccer on smallerfields adjacentto larger soccer fields or neighborhood parks Softball 1.5 to 2.0 acres %4 to % mile 1 per 5,000 (if also used for May also be used for youth baseball youth baseball} Swimming Varies on size of 15 -30 minutestravel time 1 per 20,000 (pools should Pools pool & amenities; accommodate 3°l° to 5°l° of usually %to 2-acre Poalsfor general community use should be planned total population at a time} site far teaching, competitive & recreational purposes with enough depth (3.4m} to accommodate lm to 3m diving boards; located in community park or school site Tennis Minimum of 7,200 %~ to % mile 1 court per 2,000 s.f. single court Best in groups of 2 to 4 courts; located in area (2 acres per neighborhood community park or near Schaal site complex Volleyball Minimum 4,000 s.f. % to 1 mile 1 court per 5,000 Usually in school, recreation center or church facility; safe walking or bide access; outdoor courts in neighborhood and community parks, plus active recreation areas in other park settings Total land Various types of parks -mini, neighborhood, 10 acres per 1,000 Acreage community, regional, conservation, etc. Sources: David N. Ammons, Municipal Benchmarks -Assessing Local Performance and Establishing Community Standards, 2°d Ed., 2002 Roger A. Lancaster (Ed.}, Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards and 6uidetines (Alexandria, VA: National Recreation and Park Association, 1983}, pp. 56-57. James D. Mertes and James R. Hall, Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenways Guidelines, (Alexandria, VA: National Recreation and Park Association, 1996}, pp. 94-103. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEaWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II - Level of Service History and Methodology In conducting planning work, it is important to realize that the above standards can be valuable when referenced as "norms" for capacity, but not necessarily as the target standards for which a community should strive. Each community is different and there are many varying factors which are not addressed by the standards above. For example: • Does "developed acreage" include golf courses"? What about indoor and passive facilities? • What are the standards far skateparks? Ice Arenas? Public Art? Etc.? • What if it's an urban land-locked community? What if it's a small town surrounded by open Federal lands? • What about quality and condition? What if there's a bunch of ballfields, but they haven't been maintained in the last ten years? • And many other questions.... B. GRASP~Composite-Values Level of Service Analysis In order to address these and other relevant questions, a new methodology for determining Level of Service was developed. It is called aComposite-Values Methodology and has been applied in many communities across the nation since 2001, to provide a better way of measuring and portraying the service provided by parks and recreation systems. Primary research and development on this methodology was funded jointly by Green Play, LLC, a management consulting firm for parks, open space and related agencies, Design Concepts, a landscape architecture and planning firm, and Geawest, a spatial information management firm. While Composite-Values Methodology can be utilized by anyone, the proprietary trademarked name far the composite-values methodology process that these three firms use is called GRASP (Geo-Referenced Amenities Standards Process}. The GRASPS methodology for analysis is proprietary, but the software used is common and typical for most agencies, and the data and information collected is owned and can be updated and managed by the agency for ongoing usage. For this methodology, capacity is only part of the LOS equation. Other factors are brought into consideration, including quality, condition, location, comfort, convenience, and ambience. To create GRASP® inventory and analysis, parks, trails, recreation, open space and any other relevant amenities and properties being studied are looked at as part of an overall infrastructure for a community made up of various components, such as playgrounds, multi-purpose fields, passive areas, etc. The methodology inventories characteristics that are part of the context and setting of a component. They are not characteristics ^f the component itself, but when they exist in proximity to a component they enhance the value of the component. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology The characteristics of components include: Quality - The service provided by anything, whether it is a playground, soccer field, or swimming pool is determined in part by its quality. A playground with a variety of features, such as climbers, slides, and swings provides a higher degree of service than one with nothing but an old teeter-totter and some "monkey-bars." Condition -The condition of a component within the park system also affects the amount of service it provides. A playground in disrepair with unsafe equipment does not offer the same service as one in good condition. Similarly, a soccer field with a smooth surface of well-maintained grass certainly offers a higher degree of service than one that is full of weeds, ruts, and other hazards. Location -To receive service from something, you need to be able to get to it. Therefore, service is dependent upon proximity and access. All companents are geographically located using GPS coordinates and GIS software. Comfort -The service provided by a component is increased by having amenities. For example, outdoor components are often enhanced by attributes such as shade, seating, and a restroom nearby. Comfort enhances the experience of using a component. Convenience -Convenience encourages people to use a component, which increased the amount of service that it offers. Easy access and the availability of trash receptacles, bike rack, or nearby parking are examples of conveniences that enhance the service provided bya component. Ambience -Simple observation will prove that people are drawn to places that "feel" goad. This includes a sense of safety and security, as well as pleasant surroundings, attractive views, and a sense of place. For example, awell- designed park is preferable to poorly-designed one, and this enhances the degree of service provided by the companents within it. Capacity is still part of the LOS analysis and the quantity of each component is recorded as well. By combining and analyzing the composite values of each component, it is possible to measure the service provided by a parks and recreation system from a variety of perspectives and for any given location. Typically this begins with a decision an "relevant components" for the analysis, collection of an accurate inventory of those companents, analysis and then the results are presented in a series of maps and tables that make up the GRASP analysis of the study area. Data for Analysis and Making Justifiable Decisions All of the data generated from the GRASP® evaluation is compiled into an electronic database that is then available and awned by the agency for use in a variety of ways. The database can help keep track of facilities and programs, and can be used to schedule services, maintenance, ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology 4 and the replacement of components. In addition to determining LOS, it can be used to project long-term capital and life-cycle costing needs. All portions of the information are in standard available software and can be produced in a variety of ways for future planning or sharing with the public. It is important to note that the GRASP methodology provides not only accurate LOS and facility inventory information, but also works with and integrates with other tools to help agencies make decisions. It is relatively easy to maintain, updatable, and creates easily understood graphic depictions (analysis maps and/or "Perspectives"} of issues. Combined with a needs assessment, public and staff involvement, program and financial assessment, GRASP®allows an agency to defensibly make recommendations on priorities for ongoing resource allocation along with capital and operational funding. C. Inventory Data Collection Process A detailed inventory of relevant components for the project is conducted. The inventory locates and catalogues all of the relevant components far the project, and evaluates each one as to how well it was serving its intended function within the system. The planning team first prepares a preliminary list of existing components using aerial photography and the community's Geographic Information System (GIS}. Components identified in the aerial photo are given GIS paints and names according to the GRASP list of standard components. Next, field visits are conducted by the consulting and project team staff to confirm the preliminary data and collect additional information. Additionally indoor facilities are scored and for the purposes of this study, each relevant space is considered a component and is scored based on its intended function. During the field visits and evaluations, any missing relevant components are added to the data set, and each component is evaluated as to how well it meets expectations for its intended function. During the site visits the following information is collected: • Component type and location • Evaluation of component condition • Evaluation of comfort and convenience features • Evaluation of park design and ambience • Site photos and general comments After the inventory is completed, it is given to the project team for final review and approval for accuracy. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology D. Standardized Process for Scoring Components Component Scoring The approved inventory is the basis for the creation of values used in the GRASP analysis. Each campanent received a functional score that is related to the quality, condition, and ability of the space to meet operational and programming needs. The range of scares for each component is as follows: • Below Expectations (BE} -The component does not meet the expectations of its intended primary function. Factors leading to this may include size, age, accessibility, or others. Each such campanent is given a score of 1 in the inventory. • Meeting Expectations (ME} -The component meets expectations for its intended function. Such components are given scores of 2. • Exceeding Expectations (EE} -The campanent exceeds expectations, due to size, configuration, or unique qualities. Such components are given scores of 3. • If the feature exists but is not useable because it is unsafe, obsolete, ar dysfunctional, it may be listed in the feature description, and assigned a score of zero (0}. If a feature is used far multiple functions, such as a softball field that is also used far T-Ball or youth soccer games, it is scared only once under the description that best fits the use that far which the campanent is designed. fVeighborhood and Community Scoring Components are evaluated from two perspectives: first, the value of the component in serving the immediate neighborhood, and second, its value to the entire community. Neighborhood Score Each campanent is evaluated from the perspective of a resident that lives nearby. High scoring components are easily accessible to pedestrians in the neighborhood, are attractive far short and frequent visits, and are unobtrusive to the surrounding neighborhood. Campanents that do not have a high neighborhood scare may not be located within walking distance of residents, may have "nuisance features" such as sports lighting, ar may draw large crowds for which parking is not provided. Community Score Additionally each campanent is evaluated from the perspective of residents in the community as a whale. High scoring Campanents in this category may be unique components within the parks and recreation system, have a broad draw from throughout the community, have the capacity and associated facilities far cammunity- wide events, ar are located in areas that are accessible only by car. Jndoor Components Indoor components are generally thought to be accessible to the entire community, partially because it is often not financially feasible to provide indoor facilities at a walking distance from every distance from each residence. Additionally indoor facilities often provide programs and facilities that are geared to the community as a whale, or in ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology larger communities, are intended far a region of the community. For these reasons, unless a detailed indoor analysis is completed, indoor facilities are given only one score. Modifiers (Comfort and Convenience Features) Scoring Outdoor Modifiers Besides standard components, this inventory also evaluates features that provide comfort and convenience to the users. These are things that a user might not go to the parks specifically to use, but are things that enhance the users' experience by making it a nicer place to be and include: drinking fountains, seating, BBQ grills, dog stations, security lighting, bike parking, restraams, shade, connections to trails, park access, parking, picnic tables, and seasonal and ornamental plantings. These features are scored as listed above with the 1-3 system. In this case it is not important to get a count of the number or size of these campanents; instead the score should reflect the ability of the item to serve the park. Indoor Modifiers For indoor facilities the comfort and convenience features change slightly to reflect the characteristics of the building. Building modifier categories include: site access, setting aesthetics, building entry function, building entry aesthetics, overall building condition, entry desk, office space, overall storage, and restrooms andjor locker rooms. Activity and Sports Lighting This modifier accounts for lighting that allows for component use in the eveningJnight hours and is applied to the quantity of the component as it affectively expands the capacity of the component. This modifier does not apply to security lighting. Shade Like Activity and Sports lighting, shade can be added to outdoor components to extend use beyond normal hours or seasons. Design & Ambience Scoring Using the same rating system that is used for components and modifiers, the quality of Design and Ambience is scored. Good design not only makes a place look nice, it makes it feel safe and pleasant, and encourages people to visit more often and stay longer Trails Scoring Trails can be scored as independent parks or greenways ar as individual campanents within another park. The former type of trail receives its awn set of scares far modifiers and design and ambiance. The trail in the latter situation takes on the modifiers and design and ambiance of the larger park in which it resides. Multi-use trails are assumed to consist of 3 components including one active component, one passive component, and the parcel itself. Because traveling the length of any given trail is time consuming, trail information is often collected with the aid of staff. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology Ownership Modifier This modifier is generally weighted with a percentage that is applied to the GRASP score after other modifiers have been applied. It accounts for access and control of components that are provided by alternative providers. Far example, in most cases components that are owned and managed by schools are given a 50°~ weighted ownership modifier, which halves the GRASP® score to account for the limited access that the neighborhood has to school facilities (it's only open to the public outside of school hours). E. Calculating GRASP Functional Scores Once the components are inventoried and scared, calculations can be made far any combination of components to derive average scores, scares per combinations of various components, scores per sub-areas, etc., depending an the key issues being studied and objectives for the project. These are very helpful for analyzing area comparisons and setting of target scores for component service and agency target standards. For example, a total composite GRASP® score for each individual component is determined by using the following formula: (total component score} x (adjusted modifier score} x (design and ambiance score} x (ownership modifier} =Composite GRASP Score These individual scores can be additively combined in various ways to examine service from various subsets of the agency's system. F. GRASP Perspectives and Target Scores GRASP® scores are often used to create analysis maps, called Perspectives, to show the cumulative level of service available to a resident at any given location in the community service area. The scores provided blended quantitative values based on the number and quality of opportunities to enjoy an experience (ar level of service) that exist in a reasonable proximity to the given location. Tables and charts are created along with the Perspectives to help provide quantitative and graphic analysis tools. If a philosophy is adapted wherein the Baal is to provide same minimum combination of opportunities to every residence, a GRASP score can be calculated that represents this minimum. These scares can be used to create standards set far the agency to maintain a measurable level of service aver time. A variety of Perspectives are created t^ analyze and depict the communities LOS through a variety of combinations and composites, depending on the key issues being studied. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology Typical and Standard GRASP Perspectives Often Perspectives are created that analyze the actual level of service being obtained as compared to a "standard" target. Neighborhood Composite This Perspective depicts service from a neighborhood point of view. The target for analysis is that each resident will have access within 1/3 mile of their home to 4 recreation components and one recreational trail. Further expanded, the goal is to offer a selection of active and passive recreation opportunities (indoor or outdoor) to every residence, along with access to a recreational trail of which components, modifiers, and design and ambiance are meeting expectations. Walkability (same as Neighborhood Composite but with only 1/3 mile buffers} The idea far this target scare and Perspective is that each resident will have access within 1/3 mile of their home to 4 recreation components and one recreational trail. Perspectives showing Neighborhood LOS for one component The target here is that each resident will have access within 1/3 mile of their home to the selected components of which the component, modifiers, and design and ambiance are meeting expectations. Active (or Passive} Components This target evaluates if each resident will have access within 1/3 mile of their home to 3 active (ar passive) components. Further expanded, the goal is to offer at least 3 components, which equates to roughly half ^f the components provided in the minimum neighborhood composite scenario. These components can be either indoor or outdoor and will be provided within walking distance to every residence and have scores that meet expectations. Note: Aside from meeting this goal, the mix of components also needs to be considered. For example, a home that is within 1/3 mile of four tennis courts and na other amenities would meet the basic numeric standard, but not the intent of the standard. Based on this, it is recommended that the target be to provide the minimum score to as many homes as passible, but also to exceed the minimum by some factor whenever possible. G. GRASP® Project Technical Standards for GIS Data The GRASP® Team utilizes the mast up to date computer hardware and software to produce and enhance project-based GIS data. The fallowing technical details are standard with all GRASP' Team projects. • All GRASP° Team GIS workstations employ Microsoft® Windows® operating systems. All project files conform to PC-based architecture and extension naming standards. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology • The GRASP° Team employs ESRI® ArcGIST"' 9.x for all GIS applications. Final project GIS data is submitted to the client in Microsoft® AccessT""-based Geadatabase {*.mdb} Feature Class format andJor Shapefile {*.shpJ*.dbfJ*.shx) format. ArcMap'"" Layer files {*.lyr} are submitted to ease client replication of all project map legend formats. The GRASPS Team will not resubmit original client source data that has not undergone enhancement. All final GIS datasets {deliverables) area submitted to the client using the geographic coordinate system{s) from the original client source data. The GRASPS team will assign a coordinate system that is most appropriate far the client location if the client does not require a predetermined standard coordinate system. Most GRASP® project data is submitted in State Plane Coordinates {Feet) with a NAQ83JNAD83 HARN datum. The GRASP® Team employs Trimble®GPS units for all {spatial) field data collection. All data is collected with sub-foot andjorsub-meter accuracy when possible. All GPS data is post processed with Trimble® Pathfinder Office®software. All GPS data will be submitted to client as an ESRI®-based Geodatabase Feature Class or Shapefile. All GRASP® Perspectives and Resource Maps {deliverables} are submitted to the client in standard PQF and JPEG formats. The project PDFs are high resolution, print-ready files far scalable print operations. Mast project map-based PQFs are 300dpi, 36"x24" images. The project JPEGs are lower resolution digital presentation-ready files for insertion into Microsaft® Office® productivity suite applications - MS Word®, MS Power Point®, etc. Most project map-based JPEGs are 300dpi 4x6" images. H. Project Deliverables and Future Use All information and deliverables described above are transmitted "as-is" to fulfill specific tasks identified in the scope of services for this contract. While these may be useful for other purposes, no warranties or other assurances are made that the deliverables are ready for such use. The database can be modified to add, change, or delete information as needed by personnel trained in use of these standard software applications. For example, if new parks or facilities are constructed, the components of these may be added to the database to keep it current. The database may also be queried in a variety of ways to produce tables, charts, or reports for use in operations, management, and planning or other agency tasks. Such modification, updating, reformatting, or other preparation for use in other purposes is the sole responsibility of the client. Similarly, the database information can be used to prepare a variety of maps and analysis perspectives using GIS software. Such use by the client is beyond the scope of this contract, and no warranties or assurances are made that the deliverables are ready or intended for such future use. If desired, the GRASP Team can make such modifications, andJor prepare additional ar updated maps or Perspectives upon request for a negotiated fee. ~3ir° nn DESIGN CONCEPTS GEOWEST GREENPLAY Appendix II -Level of Service History and Methodology 10 Filename: GRASP History and Level of Service Methodology Directory: C:\Users\A1uta\Documents\Projects\Iowa City, IA\Findings\GRASP Appendices Template: C:\Users\Anna\ AppData\ Roamillg\ Microsoft\ Templates \ Norinal.dotm Title: GRASPTM Level of Service Analysis Subject: Author: Teresa Penbrooke Keywords: Continents: Creation Date: 4J 25/ 200812:26:00 PM Change Number: 2 Last Saved C>n: 4 j25/200812:26:00 PM Last Saved Pv: Anna Kimbrell Total Editing Time: 2 Minutes Last Printed On: 4J25/200812:27:00 PM As of Last Complete Printing Number of Pages: 10 Number of Words: 4,"175 (approx.) Number of Characters: 22,462 (approx.) SAMI'~,~' XX Parks & Recreation Department Sponsorship Policy .~-. ~3`r .y C~°~ated for XX by: GREENPLAY« Fhe 4eading Edge ~n Pans, ReGrealion And Open Space Cnnsulling 3050 Irlclustrial Lane, Suite 200, Broomfield, CG 80020 'Fe.l: (303) 439-8369 Fax: {303) 439-0628 Toll Free: 1 (866) 849-9959 E-mail: InfoG~GreenPlayLLC.com Web: www.GreenPlayLLC.com Produced Uy Gre~nPlay, LLC ~'~ March ?007 ~CX Parks & Recreation Department Sponsorship Policy Note, 7'errrts in this docurrient n~a~ need to be changed to directly reflect the terms used by anti that are speeifee to the agency/organization, e.g. city, county, district, department, etc, Introduction The fallowing guidelines in this Sponsorship Policy have been specifically designed for the XX Parks & Recreation Department, tivhile considering that these guidelines may be later adapted and implemented on a city-wide basis. Some assumptions regarding this policyT are: Partnerships for recreation and parks facilities and program de~relopment may be pursued based on the XX Partnership Policy, encouraging the development of partnerships for the benefit of the city, its citizens, and potential partners. Sponsorships are one type of partnership, and one avenue of procurement for alternative func~il~ resources. T11e Sponsorship Polio- may evolve as the needs of new are of sponsors and approval levels are currently acceptable for the XX Parks & Recreation Department. • The policy should ensure that the definition of potential sponsors may include non- commercial community? organizations (for example: YMCA's and Universities), but does not include a forum for non-commercial speech or advertising. • Sponsorslips are clearly defined and are different from advertisements. Advertisements are one type of benefit that may be offered to a sponsor in exchange for cash or in-kind sponsorship. • The difference between sponsors and donors must be clarified, as some staff and the public often confuse and misuse these terms. Stnlcture Part ~ of this document gives the Sponsorship Policy Part B gives the Levels of Sponsorship Tiers and Benefits Part C provides the vocabulary and Glossary of Sponsorship Terms Produced by GreenPlay, LLC C) March ?007 Part A. Sponso~cship Policy XX Parks & Recreation Department I. Purpose In an effort to utilize and maximize the communit~T's resources, it is uz t11e best interest of the City's Parks & Recreation Department to create and enhance relationship-based sponsorships. This may be accomplished by providing local, regional, and national commercial businesses and non-profit groups a method for becoming involved with the many opportunities provided by the Parks & Recreation Department. The Department delivers quality, life-enriching activities to the broadest base of the community-. This translates into exceptional visibility far sponsors and supporters. It is the goal of the Department to create relationships and partnerships ~nTith sponsors far the financial benefit of the Department. advertising highlighting the conhibution of the sponsor andJor the sponsor's name, logo, based on the sponsorship, andJor quite often, the right to be the exclusive sponsor in a specific category of sales. The arrangement is typically consummated by a letter of agreement or contractual arrangement that detai]s t11e particulars of the exchange. hi contrast, a donation comes with no restrictions on llow the money or in-kind resources are used. This policyT specifically addresses sponsorships, the agreements for the procurement of the resources, and the benefits provided in return for securing those resources. Since donations or gifts came with no restrictions or expected benefits far the donor, a policy is generally not needed. II. Guidelines for Acceptable Sponsorships Sponsors should be businesses, non-profit groups, or individuals that promote mutually beneficial relationships for the Parks & Recreation Department. All potentially sponsored properties (facilities, events or programs) should be reviewed in terms of creating synergistic working relationships with regards to benefits, community canhibutions, knowledge, and political sensitivity. All sponsored properties should promote the goals and nussion of the Parks ~ Recreation Department as follows: Produced by GreenPlay, LLC ~'~ March ?007 NEf;D SPECIFIC MISSION STATEMENT SarrzpTe XX Parks & Recreation Mission Statement: NEED SPECIFIC GOALS Scxrnf~le Goals of the Park & Recreation Department: III. Sponsorship Selection Criteria A. Relationship of Sponsorship to Mission and Goals The first major criterion is the appropriate relationship of a sponsorship to the above outlined Parks & Recreation Department's Mission and Goals. While objective analysis is ideal, t11e appropriateness of a relationship may= sometimes be necessarily subjective. This policy addresses this necessity by= including Approval Levels from various levels of Agency= management staff and elected officials, outlined uz Section B, to help assist with decisions involving larger amounts and benefits for sponsorship. The following questions are the major guiding components addressed prior to soliciting potential sponsors: • Is the sponsorship reasonablyT related to the purpose of the facility exemplified by the Mission Statement and Goals Department? • Will the sponsorship 11e1p generate more revenue and jor less cast per participant than the Agency can provide without it? • What are the real casts, including staff time, for procuring the amount kind resources that come with the generation Sponsorships which shall NOT be considered are those which: • Promote environmental, work, or other practices that, if they took place in the Agency, would violate U.S. or state law (i.e. -dumping of hazardous waste, exploitation of child labor, etc.), or promote drugs, alcohol, or tobacco, or that constitute violations of law. • Duplicate or mimic the identity or programs of the Parks & Recreation Department or any of its divisions. • Exploit participants or staff members of the Department. • Offer benefits which may violate other accepted policies or the Sign Code. B. Sponsorship Plan and Approval Levels Each project or program that involves solicitation of Sponsors should, PRIOR to procurement, create a Sponsorship Plan specific to that project or program t11at is in line with the Sponsorship Levels given in Part S. This plan needs to be approved by the Management Team Members supervising the project and in accordance to Agency Partnership, Sponsorship and Sign Code policies. In addition, each sponsorship will need separate approval if they exceed pre-specified linuts. The Approval Levels are outlined as follows: of the sponsorship? of the of this policy and should be or programs as of cash or in- Produced by GreenPlay, LLC C) March ?007 Under $1,000 The program or project staff may approve this level of Agreement, with revietiv bar their supervising Management Team Member. $1,001 to $10,000 The Agreement needs approval of a Management Team Member. $10,001 to $25,000 The Agreement needs approval of the entire Senior Management Team and Department Director Over $25,000 The Agreement needs approval by City Council. C. No Non-Camrnercial Forum is Permitted This criterion deals with the commercial character of a sponsorship message. The Agency intends to create a linnited forum, focused on advertisements incidental to commercial sponsorships of Parks & Recreation facilities and programs. While non-commercial community organizations or individuals may iaTish to sponsor Department activities or facilities for various reasons, no non-commercial speech is permtted in the ]invited forum created by this policy: incidental to services ~a~llicln the sponsor sells. the The reasons for this portion of the Policy include: or • The desirability of avoiding non-commercial proselytizing of a "captive audience" of event spectators and participants; • The constitutional prohibition an an~J view-point related decisions about permitted ad~rertising coupled with the danger that the Agency and the Parks & Recreation Department would be associated with advertising anyway; • The desire of the Agency to maximize income from sponsorship, weighed against the likelihood that commercial sponsors titiTould be dissuaded from using the same forum commonly used by persons wishing to communicate non-commercial messages, some of which could be offensive to the public; • The desire of the Agency to maintain a position of neutrality on political and religious issues; • hn the case of religious advertising and political advertisilg, specific concerns about the danger of '" violations) and propose a commercial respectively. Guideliles for calculatvng the Levels of Sponsorship Tiers and Benefits are provided and outlined in Part B. IV. Additional Guidelines for Irnplernentation A. Equitable Offerings It is important that all sponsorships of equal levels across divisions within Parks & Recreation yield the same value of benefits for potential sponsors. Produced by GreenPlay, LLC ~'~ March ?007 B. Sponsorship Contact Database A desig~lated staff person or representative of the Parks & Recreation Department will keep an updated list of all current sponsors, sponsored activities, and contacts related to sponsorship. I''zzrpose of Maintaining the Database; • Limit duplicate solicitations of one sponsor • Alloti~T management to make decisions based on most appropriate solicitations and levels of benefits offered • Keep a current list of all Department supporters and contacts • Help provide leads for new sponsorships, if appropriate Far staff below Management Team level, access to the database will be limited to printouts of listings of names of sponsors and their sponsored events. This limited access will provide information to help limit duplicated solicitations, and tivill also protect existing sponsor relationships, ~nThile allowing the evaluation of future sponsorships to occur at a management level. If a potential sponsor is already fisted, staff should not pursue a sponsorship without researchuig t11e sponsor`s history= jvith t11e mast recently sponsored division. If more than one division wishes to pursue sponsorship by the same company-, the Management Team shall make a decision based on several variables, including but not limited to • History of sponsorship, relationships, and types of sponsorship needed • Amount of fundiYlg available • Best use of fu7lding based on departmental priorities. C. Sponsorship Cornrnittee A committee consisting of the supervisors of each program using sponsorships and other management team desig~lees shall meet twice per year to review the database, exchange current contract samples, and recommend adjusting benefit levels and policy as needed. Changes shall not take effect before approval by the Management Team. Part B. Levers of Sponsorship Tiers and Benefits The following tiers are presented as a guideline for types of benefits that may be presented as opportunities for potential sponsors. Each sponsorship will most likely need to be individually negotiated. One purpose far these guidelines is to create equity in exchanges across sponsorship arrangements. While for the sake of ease the examples given for levels are based on amount of sponsorship requested, the level of approval needed from Agency staff is really based on the amount of benefits exchanged for the resources. The levels of approval are necessary because the costs and values for different levels of benefits may vary, depending on the sponsorship. It is important to note that these values may be very different. Sponsors t~Jpically will not offer to contribute resources that cost them more than the value of resources that they will gaiYz Produced by GreenPlay, LLC C) March ?007 and, typically=, seek at least a t~To to one return on their investment. Likewise, the Agency should not pursue sponsorships unless the total value the Agency= receives is greater t11an the Agency`s real costs. A hierarchy of Sponsors for events, programs, or facilities ~nTith more than one sponsor is listed below fiom t11e Highest level to the lowest. Not all Levels will necessarily be used irn each Sponsorship Plan. Note that the hierarchy is not dependent on specific levels or amounts of spansarship. Specific levels and amounts should be designed for each property before sponsorships are procured caTithin the approved Sponsorship Plan. Complete definitions of terms are included in Part C. I~ierarehy of Sponsorship Levels (trighest to lowest) Parks and Recreation Department-Wide Sponsor ~ Facility/Park Title or Primary Sponsor ~ Event/Prograrn Title or Primary Sponsor ~ Presenting Sponsor (Facility, Event or Program} ~ Facility/Park Sponsor ~ Program/Event Sponsor ~ Media Sponsor ~ Official Supplier ~ Co-sponsor This hierarchy tivill help decide the amounts to ask various sponsors for, and determine what levels of benefits to provide. It is important to build flexibility= and choice into each level so that sponsors can have the ability= to choose options that jvill best fit their objectives. Note that the benefits listed under each level are examples of value. The listing does not mean that all of the benefits should be offered. It is a menu of options for possible benefits, dependiig on t11e circumstances. These are listed primarily as a guideline for maximum benefit values. It is recommended that each project create aproject-specific Sponsorship Plan for approval in advance of Sponsorship procurement, based on the benefits available and the values specific to the project. I. Sponsorship Assets and Related Benefits Inventory TO BE DETERIVIINED FOR EACH AGENCY BASED ON OFFERINGS (PROPERTIES), VALI.iA'I'ION, AND DE'I-E'RIVIINED SENEFlFS A tiered structure of actual values and approval levels should be determined as part of a Sponsorship Plan. Produced by GreenPlay, LLC ~'~ March ?007 Part C. Glossaraf of Sponsorship T'errns Activation The marketing activity a company conducts to promote its sponsorslup. Money spent on activation is over and above the rights fee paid to the sponsored property. Also k~lawn as leverage. Advertising The direct sale of print or some other types of City communication medium to provide access to a select target market. Ambush Marketing A promotional strategy whereby anon-sponsor attempts to capitalize on the popularity/prestige of a property by= givilg the false impression that it is a sponsor. Often employed by the competitors of a property's official sponsors. Audio Mention The mention of a sponsor during a TV ar radio broadcast. Business-to-Business Sponsorshi Programs intended to influence corporate purchase/awareness, as opposed to individual consumers. Category Exclusivity The right of a sponsor to be the only company= is=ithin its product or service category associated jvith the sponsored property. Cause Marketing Promotional strategy) that finks a company's sales campaig~l directly to a non-profit organization. Generally includes an offer by the sponsor to make a donation to the cause with purchase of its product or service. Unlike philanthropy, money spent on cause marketing is a business expense, not a donation, and is expected to show a return on investment. Cosponsors Sponsors of the same property. CPM (Cost Per Thousand} The cost to deliver an ad message to a thousand people. Cross-Promotions A joint marketing effort conducted by to or more cosponsors using the sponsored property as the cenhal theme. Produced by GreenPlay, LLC C) March ?007 Donations Cash or in-kind gifts that do not include any additional negotiated conditions in return. Syrnanyms: Philanthropy, Patronage. Editorial Coverage Exposure that is generated by media coverage of the sponsored property= that includes mention of the sponsor. Emblem A graphic symbol unique to a property. Also called a mark. Escalator An annual percentage increase built into the sponsorship fee for multi-year contracts. Escalators are typicallyT tied to ilflatian. Exclusive Rights A company= pays a premium or provides economic benefit in exchange for the right to be the sole advertised provider, at the most competitive prices, of goods purchased by consumers within Parks & Pecreation Department facilities and parks. Fulfillment The deli~reryT of benefits promised to the sponsor ii the contract. Hospitality Hosting key customers, clients, government officials, employees and other VIPs at an event or facility=. Usually= involves tickets, parking, dining, and other amenities, often in a specially designated area, and may include interaction with athletes. In-Kind Sponsorship Payment (full or partial} of sponsorship fee in goods or services rather than cash. Licensed A~Ierchandise Goods produced by a manufacturer (the licensee) who has obtained a license to produce and distribute the official Marks on products such as clothing and souvenirs. Licensee Manufacturer which has obtained a license to produce and distribute Licensed Merchandise. Licensing Right to use a property's logos and terminology on products far retail sale. Note: While a sponsor will typically receive the right to include a property's marks on its packaging and advertising, sponsors are not automatically licensees. Mark AnyT official ~Tisual representation of a property, ilcluding emblems and mascots. Produced by GreenPlay, LLC ~'~ March ?007 Mascot A graphic illushation of a character, usually a cartoon figure, used to promote the identity of a property. Media Equivalencies Measuring the exposure value of a sponsorship by adding up all the coverage it generated and calculating t~That it would have cost to buy a like amount of ad time or space u1 those outlets based on media rate cards. Media Sponsor TV and radio stations, print media and outdoor advertising companies that provide either cash, or more frequently advertising time or space, to a property in exchange for official designation. Municipal Marketing Promotional shategy 1i11ki1g a company to community services and activities {sponsorship of parks and recreation programs, libraries, etc.) Option to Renew Conhactual right to renew a sponsorship on specified terms. expected. Synonym: Perimeter Advertising Stationary advertising around the perimeter of an arena or event site, often reserved for sponsors. Premiums Souvenir merchandise, produced to promote a sponsor's involvement with a property {custonnized with the names/logos of the sponsor and the property). Presenting_Sponsor The sponsor that has its name presented just below that of the sponsored property. In presenting arrangements, the event/facility name and the sponsor name are not full~T integrated silce the word{s) "presents" or "presented b3~` always come between them. Primary Sponsor The sponsor paS=ing the largest fee and receiving the most prominent identification {Would be namilg rights or title sponsor if sponsored propertyT sold name or title). Pro e A unique, commercially exploitable entity {could be a facility, site, event, or program) Synonyms: sponsee, rightsholder, seller. Produced by GreenPlay, LLC C) March ?007 Right of First Refusal Contractual right granting a sponsor the right to match any offer the property receives duri~lg a specific period of time in the sponsor's product category. Selling Rights The ability of a sponsor to earn back some or all of its sponsorship fee selling its product or service to the property or its attendees or members. Signage Banners, billboards, elechonic messages, decals, etc., displa~Ted on-site with sponsors ID. Sole Sponsor A company that has paid to be the only sponsor of a property. Sponsee A property available for sponsorship. Sponsor An erltit5r that pays a property for the right to promote itself and its products or services in association Frith the property. Sponsor ID Visual and audio recognition of sponsor in property`s publications and advertising; public- address and on-air broadcast mentions. ~onsorship The relationship between a sponsor and a property, in which the sponsor pays a cash or in- kind fee in return for access to the commercial potential associated with the property. Sponsorship Agency A firm which specializes in advising on, managvig, brokering, or organizing sponsored properties. The agency may be employed by either the sponsor or property. Sponsorship Fee Payment made by a sponsor to a property. Sports Marketing Promotional strategy linkvig a company to sports {sponsorship of competitions, teams, leagues, etc.) Supplier Official provider of goods or services in exchange for designated recognition. Tlus level is below official sponsor, and the benefits provided are limited accordingly. Title Sponsor The sponsor that has its name incorporated into the name of the sponsored property. Produced by GreenPlay, LLC ~'~ March ?007 Venue A~Iarketin~ Promotio11a1 strategy li~lking a sponsor to a physical site {sponsorship of stadiums, arenas, auditoriums, amphitheaters, racetracks, fairgrounds, etc.) Web Sponsorship The purchase (in cash or trade) of the right to utilize the commercial pote7ltial associated with a site on the World Wide Web, including integrated relationship building and branding. VI~C,C/M~Lf~1 ~ILLC The L eading Edge In Parks, Recreation f~' L ~~ And Rpen Space Consulting Produced by GreenPlay, LLC C) March ?007 APPENDIX IV -COST RECOVERY PYR<~NIID METHODOLOGY The creation of a cost recovery philosophy and @ ~ policy is a key component to maintaining an fiy XIC~FILY INDIVIDUAL ~m Cost `~<Q~,m° Benefit agency's financial control, equitably priced Recovery ~~4a<' offerings, and identifying core programs, facilities Pyramid and services. ~MDSTLY IN DwIDUAL Benere ~ Critical to this philosophical undertaking is the m ~ y~ m support and buy-in of elected officials and advisory ~ INDIVIDUAL 1 Community q k;=o Benefit boards, staff and ultimately of citizens. Whether or not significant changes are called for, the ~ ~/ COMMUNITY !Individual organization wants to be certain that it is ~o b~ ' Benefit philosophically aligned with its constituents. The vy a ~~ CQMMUNITY development of the cost recovery philosophy and =~~~ Benefit policy is built upon a very logical foundation, using U+2001 GreenPlay. LLC the understanding of ~vho is benefiting from the parks and recreation service to determine hoTV that service should be paid for. The development of the cost recovery philosophy can be separated into the following steps: Step 1 -Building on Your 11-fission - V1'hat is Your h-fission? The entire premise far this process is to fiilfill the Community mission. It is important that organizational values are reflected in the mission. Often mission statements are a starting point and firrther work needs to occur to create a more detailed common understanding of the interpretation of the mission. This is accomplished by involving staff in a discussion of a variety of Filters. Step 2 -Understanding Filters anti the Pyramid Filters are a series of continuums covering different ways of viewing service provision. The Priynary Filters influence the final positioning of services as they relate to each other and are summarized below. The Benefits Filter, however, forms the foundation of the Pyramid Model and is used in this discussion to illustrate a cost recover`° philosophy and policies for parks and recreation organizations. The other filters are explained later. Filter Definition Benefit Who receives the benefit of the service? (Skill development, education, physical health, mental health, safety} Commitment What is the intensity of the program? Trends Is it tried and true or a fad? Obligation Is it our role to provide? (Is it legally mandated, e.g. ADA) Market What is the effect of the program in attracting customers? Relative Cost to Provide What is the cost per participant? Erivirorirnental Impact What is the impact to the resource or other visitors? Political What out of our control? Wlio We Serve Are we targeting certain populations? THE BENEFITS FILTER The principal foundation of all the filters is the Benefits Filter. It is shown first as a continuum and then applied to the Cost Pecovery Pyramid model. Conceptually, the base level of the pyramid represents the mainstay of a public parks and recreation program. Programs appropriate to 11ig11er levels of the pyramid should only be offered when the preceding levels below are full enough to provide a foundation for the next level. This foundation and upward progression is intended to represent the public parks and recreation core mission, while also reflecting the growth and maturity of an organization as it enhances its program and facility offerings. It is often easier to integrate the values of the organization `with its mission if they- can be visualized. An ideal philosophical model for this purpose is the pyramid. In addition to a physical structure, pyramid is defined liy Webster`s Dictionary as "an immaterial structure built on a broad supporting base and narrowing gradually to an apex." Parks and recreation programs are built with a broad supporting base of core services, enhanced with more specialized services as resources allow. Envision a pyramid sectioned horizontally into five levels. COMMUNITY Benefit The foundational level of the pyramid is the largest, and includes those programs, facilities, and services that benefit the CO1VII~IUNTTY as a whole. These programs, facilities, and services can ce quality of life for residents. The ally pays for these basic services and taxes. These services are offered to A large percentage of ould firnd this level of the ,~ '~ ~ j~ i CaMMUNITY i / Benefit Examples o f these ser-vices could include the existence of the community parks and recreation system, the ability for° yoar.ngsters to visit facilitties on ran, infor~ar~a1 basis, development and distribution o f nr~arketirrg hrbchures, tow-income or scholarship programs, park and facility plarrnirrg and design, park nzcairatertanee, or Others. NOTE: Atl examples are generic - Jour programs and services may be very different based on your agencies mission, demographics, goals, etc. COMMUNITY/ Individual Benefit ; The second and smaller level of the pyramid represents i COMMUNITY /Individual programs, facilities, and services that promote individual 6enetit l~ physical and mental well-being, and provide recreation skill de~relopment. They= are generally the more traditionally expected services and beginner instructional levels. These programs, services, and facilities are typically assigned fees based on a specified percentage of direct and indirect costs. These costs are partially offset by both a tax subsidy to account for the COMMUNITY Benefit and participant fees to account for the IIVDIt?IDUAL Benefit. Examples of these services could include the ability o f teems and adults to visit facilities on an informal basis, r°anger led interpretive programs, and beginning level instr"2lCtZOna1 programs and classes, etc. INDIVIDUAL/Comnninity Benefit i\ The third and even smaller level of the pyramid represents services that INDIVIDUAL 1 Community i\~ promote individual physical and mental well-being, and provide an % Benefit more IlVDIVIDUAL Benefit and less COMNIUNITY Benefit and should be priced accordingly. The individual fee is higher than for programs and services that fall in the lo~Ner pyramid levels. Examples of these services could include. summer recreational day camp, summer sports leagues, year-round swim Learn, etc. MOSTLY INDIVIDUAL Benefit ~~ (MOSTLY IN~IVIOUAL The fourth and still smaller pyramid level represents specialized ser~rices / Benefit generally for specific groups, and may have a competitive focus. In this level ~ programs and services maybe priced to recover firll cost, including all direct and indirect expenses. Examples of t1~r~se services might include specialty classes, golf; and outdoor ud~enture programs. Examples of these facilities might iraclrcde carne sites with power hook-reps. HIGHLY INDIVIDUAL Benefit ~'~ At the top of the pyramid, the fifth and smallest level represents activities that have a HiGr~venDtc D ~ profit center potential, and may e~ren fall outside of the core mission. In this level, programs and services should be priced to recover full cost plus a des `grated profit percentage. Examples of these activities could include elite diving teams, golf lessons, food concessions, company picnic rentals artd other facility rentals, such as for weddings, or other^ services. Step 3 -Sorting Services It is critical that this sorting step be done with staff, and with governing bodies and citizens in mind. This is where ownership is created for the philosophy, while participants discover the current and possibly varied operating histories, cultures, missions, and values of the organization. It is the time to develop consensus and get everyone on the same page, the page you write together. Remember, as well, this effort must reflect the community and must align with the thinking of policy makers. Surnpte PoticyLangua~e: XXX community brought together staff from across the department to sort existing programs into each level of the pyramid. This vas a challenging step. It was facilitated by an objective and impartial facilitator in order to hear all viewpoints. It generated discussion and debate as participants discovered what different staff members had to say about serving culturally and economically=different parts of the community=; about historic versus recreational parks; about adults versus youth versus seniors; about weddings and interpretive programs; and the list goes on. It was important to push through the "what" to the "why" to find common ground. This is all what disco~rering the philosophy is about. Step 4 - Understanding the Other Filter Inherent in sorting programs into the pyramid model using the benefits filter is the realization that other filters come into play. This can result in decisions to place programs in other levels than might first be thought. These filters also follow a continuum form however do not necessarily follow the five levels like the benefits filter. In other words, the continuum may fall totally within the first t~~o levels of the pyramid. These filters can aid in determining core programs versus ancillary programs. These filters represent a layering effect and should be used to make adjustments to an initial placement in the pyramid. THE 11f1ARKETING FILTER: What is the effect of the program in attracting customers? Loss Leader Popular -High Willingness to Pay THE C011i1\1IT10-TENT FILTER: What is the intensit~T of the program, what is the commitment of the participant? - - ,~~.~ Drop-In Instructional - Instructional - Competitive -Not Specialized Opportunities Basic Intermediate Recreational THE TRENDS FILTER: Is the program or service tried and true, or is it a fad? Traditionally Staying Current Basic Expected with Trends Cool, Cutting Edge Far Out THE OBLIGATION FILTER: Is it our role to provide? Is it legally mandated? Must Do - Le al Traditionally Should Do -No Could Do - Sorneorie Highly Questionable g Expected To Other Way To -Someone Else Is Obligation Do Provide Else Could Provide Providing THE RELATIVE COST TO PROS%IDE FILTER: What is the cost per participant? -~ ~ y~i- Low Cost per Medium Cost per High Cost per Participant Participant Participant THE ENS%IRONNIENTAL I1IIPACT FILTER: What is the impact to the resource or other ~risitors? Low Impact to Resource or Others WHO WE SERVE: Are ZNe t Children and Local Families Residents ~~~~~. Higli Impact to Exceeds Park Resource or Others Capacity argeting certain populations? County Regional Non-residents of the Residents Residents Coriununity THE POLITICAL FILTER: Wl1at is out of our control? This filter does not operate on a continuum, but is a reality, and tivill dictate from time to time where certain programs fit in the pyramid. Step 5 - Determining Cixrrent SubsidyJCost Recovery Levels Subsidy and cost recovery are cornplelnentary. If a program is subsidized at 759, it has a 2590 cost recover~r, and vice-versa. It is more potiverful to tivork through this exercise thinking about where the tax subsidy= is used rather than tivhat is the cost recovery. When it is complete, you can re~rerse thinking to articulate the cost recovery philosophy, as necessary. The overall subsidyJcost recovery level is comprised of the average of everything in all of the levels together as a whole. Determine what the current subsidy level is for the programs sorted into each level. There may be quite a range in each level, and some programs could overlap with other levels of the pyramid. This will be rectified in the final steps. Step 6 -Assigning Desired Subsidy/Cost Recovery Levels Ask these questions: Who benefits? Who pays? No~nr you have the answer; who benefits -pays? The tax subsidy is used in greater amounts at the bottom levels of the pyramid, reflecting the benefit to the Cornrnlrriity as a whole. As the pyramid is climbed, the percentage of tax subsidy decreases, and at the top levels it may not be used at all, reflecting the Individual benefit. So, what is the right percentage of tax subsidy for each level? It ~~vould be appropriate to keep some range ~~vithin each level; however, the ranges should not overlap from level to level. Again, this effort must reflect your commmunity° and must align with the thinking of your policy makers. In addition, pricing must also reflect `vhat your community thinks is reasonable, as well as the value of the offering. Examples Murry times categories at tl~~e bottom level will be eotnpletely or mostly subsidized, but you may leave a small cost recovery to convey value for the experience. ?'ire range for subsidy tnay be 90-100 % -but it tray be higher, depending on yoaar overall goats. The top level may range from 0% subsidy to 50% excess revenues above all costs, or more. Or, your organization. aura y rtot heave arry ractivities or^ ser°vices i.n the top level. Step 7 -Adjust Fees to Reflect Your Comprehensive Cast Recovery Philosophy Across the country, ranges in Your organization sets your t circumstances. This exercise you may have needed to incr targets. Sometimes just implt concerted effort to increase fe articulate where it has been a adjusted accordingly. 10~ to o~~Ter 100QO. l~/r, can s can be Step S -Use Your Lfforls to Your Advantage in the Future The results of this exercise may be used: ^ To articulate your comprehensive cost recovery philosophy-; ^ To train staff at all levels as to why and how things are priced the way they are; ^ To shift subsidy to tivhere is it most appropriately needed; ^ To recommend program or service cuts to meet budget subsidy targets, or show how revenues can be increased as an alternative; and, ^ To justify the pricing of new programs. This Sample Cost Recovery Pliilosophz~ and Policy Outtine is provided by: GREEIVPLAY« The Leading Edge In Parks, Resrealion And Open Space Consulting GreenPlay, LLC, 3050 Industrial Lane, Suite 200, Broomfield, CO 80020 (303) 439-83(19; Toll-free: "1-86b-849-9959; Info~?~sGreerii'layLLC.com; ww`v.GreenI'lay Sample Partnership Policy and Proposal Format Created By: ~~~IV LAYL~ The Leading Edge In Parks, Rncreation And Open Space Consulting www. green playllc. com 3050 Industrial Lane, Suite 200 Broomfield, CO 80020 303-433-8363 ar Toll Free: 1-866-849-3353 Fax: 303-439-0628 Email: info~a greenplayllc.cam © 2003 GreenPlay, LLC -updated 2008 Sample Parks and Recreation Department Partnership Policy And Proposal Format Table of Contents Part One The Sample Parks and Recreation Department Partnership Policy Pale A. Purpose 3 B. Background and Assumptions 4 C. Partnership Definition 5 D. Possible Types of Partners 6 E. Sponsorships 7 F. Limited Decision-Making Partnerships 7 G. Benefits of Partnerships 8 II. The Partnering Process 9 111. The Partnership Evaluation Process A. Mission and Goals 11 B. Other Considerations 11 C. Selection Criteria 13 D. Additional Assistance 14 Part Two The "Proposed Partnership Outline Format" 15 Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 2 I. Sample Parks and Recreation Department Partnership Policy A. Purpose This policy is designed to guide the process far Sample Parks and Recreation Department in their desire to partner with private, non-profit, or other governmental entities for the development, design, construction and operation of possibly partnered recreational facilities andjor programs that may occur on City property. Sample Parks and Recreation Department would like to identify for-profit, non-profit, and governmental entities that are interested in proposing to partner with the City to develop recreational facilities andjor programs. A major component in exploring any potential partnership will be to identify additional collaborating partners that may help provide a synergistic working relationship in terms of resources, community contributions, knowledge, and political sensitivity. These partnerships should be mutually beneficial for all proposing partners including the City, and particularly beneficial for the citizens of the community. This policy document is designed to: • Provide essential background information, • Provide parameters far gathering information regarding the needs and contributions of potential partners, and • Identify how the partnerships will benefit the Sample Parks and Recreation Department and the community. Part Two: The "Proposed Partnership Outline Format", provides a format that is intended to help guide Proposing Partners in creating a proposal for review by Sample Parks and Recreation Department staff. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 3 B. Background and Assumptions Partnerships are being used across the nation by governmental agencies in order to utilize additional resources far their community's benefit. Examples of partnerships abound, and encompass a broad spectrum of agreements and irnplementatian.The mast commonly described partnership is between a public and a private entity, but partnerships also occur between public entities and non-profit organizations and/ar other governmental agencies. Note on Rri~atization: This application is specific far proposed partnering far new facilities ar programs. This information does not intend to address the issue of privatization, ar transferring existing City functions to a non-City entity far improved efficiency andJar competitive cast concerns. An example of privatization would be a contract far a landscaping company to provide mowing services in a park. The City is always open to suggestions for improving services and cost savings through contractual arrangements. If you have an idea far privatization of current City functions, please call ar outline your ideas in a letter far the City's consideration. In order far partnerships to be successful, research has shaven that the fallowing elements should be in place prior to partnership procurement: ^ There must be support far the concept and process of partnering from the very highest organizational level - i.e.: the Board or Trustees, a council, and jar department head. ^ The most successful agencies have high-ranking officials that believe that they owe it to their citizens to explore partnering opportunities whenever presented, those communities both solicit partners and consider partnering requests brought to them. It is very important to have a Partnership Policy in place before partner procurement begins. This allows the agency to be proactive rather than reactive when presented with a partnership opportunity. It also sets a "level playing field" for all potential partners, sa that they can know and understand in advance the parameters and selection criteria for a proposed partnership. ^ A partnership policy and process should set development priorities and incorporate multiple points for ga/no-ga decisions. The partnership creation process should be a public process, with both Partners and the Partnering Agency well aware in advance of the upcoming steps. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 4 C. Partnership Definition For purposes of this document and policy, a Proposed Partnership is defined as: "An identified idea or concept involving Sample Parks and Recreation Department and for- profit, non-profit, and/or governmental entities, outlining the application of combined resources to develop facilities, programs, and/or amenities for the City and its citizens." A partnership is a cooperative venture between two ar mare parties with a Gammon goal, who combine complementary resources to establish a mutual direction or complete a mutually beneficial project. Partnerships can be facility-based ar program-specific. The main Baal for Sample Parks and Recreation Department partnerships is enhancing public offerings to meet the mission and goals of the City. Sample Parks and Recreation Department is interested in promoting partnerships which involve cooperation among many partners, bringing resources together to accomplish goals in a synergistic manner. Proposals that incorporate such collaborative efforts will receive priority status. Partnerships can accomplish tasks with limited resources, respond to compelling issues, encourage cooperative interaction and conflict resolution, involve outside interests, and serve as an education and outreach tool. Partnerships broaden ownership in various projects and increase public support for community recreation goals. Partners often have flexibility to obtain and invest resourcesjdollars an products ar activities where municipal government maybe limited. Partnerships can take the form of {1} cash gifts and donor programs, {2} improved access to alternative funding, {3} property investments, {4} charitable trust funds, {5) labor, {6) materials, {7} equipment, {8} sponsorships, {9} technical skills and(or management skills, and other forms of value. The effective use of volunteers also can figure significantly into developing partnerships. Some partnerships involve active decision making, while in others, certain partners take a more passive role. The following schematic shows the types of possible partnerships discussed in this policy: ~ Types of Partnerships ~'.,', Active Partnerships Management Agreements Semi-Limited Decision Limited Decision Makine Partnerships Makine Partnerships Program Partnerships Sponsorships Grant Programs Facility Leases ~ Donor Programs ~~ ~' Intergovernmental Volunteer Programs >; Agreements (IGAs1 Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenptayllc.com Page 5 D. Rassible Types of Active Rartnerships Sample Parks and Recreation Department is interested in promoting collaborative partnerships among multiple community organizations. Types of agreements far Praposed "Active" Partnerships may include leases, contracts, sponsorship agreements, marketing agreements, management agreements, joint-use agreements, inter-governmental agreements, ar a combination of these. An innovative and mutually beneficial partnership that does not fit into any of the following categories may also be considered. Praposed partnerships will be considered far facility, service, operations, andJor program development including associated needs, such as parking, paving, fencing, drainage systems, signage, outdoor restraarns, lighting, utility infrastructure, etc. The following examples are provided only to illustrate possible types of partnerships. They are not necessarily examples that would be approved and/ar implemented. Examples of Public/Private Partnerships • A private business seeing the need for more/different community fitness and wellness activities wants to build a facility on City land, negotiate a management contract, provide the needed programs, and make a profit. • A private group interested in environmental conservation obtains a grant from a foundation to build an educational kiosk, providing all materials and labor, and is in need of a spat to place it. • Several neighboring businesses see the need far a place far their employees to work out during the work day. They group together to fund initial facilities and an operating subsidy and give the facility to the City to operate for additional public users. • A biking club wants to fund the building of a race course through a park. The races would be held one night per week, but otherwise the path would be open for public biking and in-line skating. • A large corporate community relations office wants to provide a skatepark, but doesn't want to run it. They give a check to the City in exchange far publicizing their underwriting of the park's cost. • A private restaurant operator sees the need far a concessions stand in a park and funds the building of one, operates it, and provides a share of revenue back to the City. • A garden club wants land to build unique butterfly gardens. They will tend the gardens and just need a location and irrigation water. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 6 Examples of Public/Non-Profit Partnerships • A group of participants far a particular sport or hobby sees a need for more playing space and forms anon-profit entity to raise funds for a facility for their priority use that is open to the public during other hours. • Anon-profit baseball association needs fields for community programs and wants to obtain grants for the building of the fields. They would get priority use of the fields, which would be open far the City to schedule use during other times. • A museum funds and constructs a new building, dedicating some space and time for community meetings and paying a portion of revenues to the City to lease its land. Examples of Public/Public Partnerships • Two governmental entities contribute financially to the development and construction of a recreational facility to serve residents of both entities. One entity, through an IGA, is responsible for the operation of the facility, while the other entity contributes operating subsidy through a formula based on population or some other appropriate factor. • Two governmental public safety agencies see the need for more physical training space for their employees. They jointly build a gym adjacent to City facilities to share for their training during the day. The gyms would be open for the City to schedule for other users at night. • A school district sees the need for a climbing wall for their athletes. The district funds the wall and subsidizes operating costs, and the City manages and maintains the wall to provide public use during non-school hours. • A university needs meeting rooms. They fund a multi-use building on City land that can be used far City community programs at night. E. Sponsorships Sample Parks and Recreation Department is interested in actively procuring sponsorships for facilities and programs as one type of beneficial partnership. Please see the Sample Parks and Recreation Department Sponsorship Policy for more information. F. limited-Decision Making Partnerships: Donor, Volunteer, and Granting Programs While this policy document focuses on the parameters for more active types of partnerships, the City is interested in, and will be happy to discuss, a proposal for any of these types of partnerships, and may create specific plans for such in the future. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 7 G. Benefits of Partnerships with Sample Parks and Recreation Department The City expects that any Proposed Partnership will have benefits far all involved parties. Same general expected benefits are: Benefits for the City and the Community: ^ Merging of resources to create a higher level of service and facility availability far community members. ^ Making alternative funding sources available far public community amenities. ^ Tapping into the dynamic and entrepreneurial traits of private industry. ^ Delivering services and facilities mare efficiently by allowing for collaborative business solutions to public organizational challenges. ^ Meeting the needs of specific groups of users through the availability of land far development and community use. Benefits for the Partners: ^ Land and/or facility availability at a subsidized level for specific facility and/ar program needs. ^ Sharing of the risk with an established stable governmental entity. ^ Becoming part of a larger network of support for management and promotion of facilities and programs. ^ Availability of professional City recreation and planning experts to maximize the facilities and programs that may result ^ Availability of City staff facilitation to help streamline the planning and operational efforts. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 8 II. The Partnering Process The steps far the creation of a partnership with the Sample Parks and Recreation Department are as follows: A. Sample Parks and Recreation Department will create a public notification pracess that will help inform any and all interested partners of the availability of partnerships with the City. This will be done through notification in area newspapers, listing in the brochure, or through any other natificatian method that is feasible. B. The proposing partner takes the first step to propose partnering with the City. Ta help in reviewing bath the partnerships proposed, and the project to be developed in partnership, the City asks far a Preliminary Proposal according to a specific format as outlined in Part Two -Proposed Partnership t7utline Format. C. If initial review of a Preliminary Proposal yields interest and appears to be mutually beneficial based on the City Mission and Goals, and the Selection Criteria, a City staff or appointed representative will be assigned to work with potential partners. D. The City representative is available to answer questions related to the creation of an initial proposal, and after initial interest has been indicated, will work with the proposing partner to create a checklist of what actions need to take place next. Each project will have distinctive planning, design, review and support issues. The City representative will facilitate the pracess of determining haw the partnership will address these issues. This representative can also facilitate approvals and input from any involved City departments, providing guidance for the partners as to necessary steps. E. An additional focus at this point will be determining whether this project is appropriate for additional collaborative partnering, and whether this project should prompt the City to seek a Reauest far Proposal (RFP) from competing/ collaborating organizations. Request for Proposal (RFP~ Truer: In order to reduce concerns of unfair private competition, if a proposed project involves partnering with a private "far-profit" entity and a dollar amount greater than $5,OQ0, and the City has not already undergone a public process far solicitation of that particular type of partnership, the City will request Partnership Proposals from other interested private entities far identical and/or complementary facilities, programs ar services. A selection of appropriate partners will be part of the pracess. For most projects, a Formal Proposal from the partners for their desired development project will need to be presented for the City's official development review processes and approvals. The project may require approval by the Legal, Planning, Fire and Safety, Finance and/or other City Departments, Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, Planning Board, The Board of Trustees, and/or the City Supervisor's Office, depending on project complexity and applicable City Charter provisions, ordinances ar regulations. If these reviews are necessary, provision to reimburse the City for its costs incurred in having a representative facilitate the Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 9 partnered project's passage through Development Review should be included in the partnership proposal. G. Depending on project complexity and anticipated benefits, responsibilities far all action paints are negotiable, within the framework established by law, to assure the mast efficient and mutually beneficial outcome. Some projects may require that all technical and professional expertise and staff resaurces came from outside the City's staff, while same projects may proceed most efficiently if the City contributes staff resaurces to the partnership. H. The partnership must saver the costs the partnership incurs, regardless of how the partnered project is staffed, and reflect those costs in its project proposal and budget. The proposal for the partnered project should also discuss how staffing and expertise will be provided, and what documents will be produced. If City staff resources are to be used by the partnership, those costs should be allocated to the partnered project and charged to it. I. Specific Partnership Agreements appropriate to the project will be drafted jointly. There is no specifically prescribed format for Partnership Agreements, which may take any of several forms depending on what will accomplish the desired relationships among partners. The agreements may be in the form af: ^ Lease Agreements ^ Management and/or Operating Agreements ^ Maintenance Agreements ^ Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs} ^ Or a combination of these and/ar other appropriate agreements Proposed partnership agreements might include oversight of the development of the partnership, concept plans and project master plans, environmental assessments, architectural designs, development and design review, project management, and construction documents, inspections, contracting, monitoring, etc. Provision to fund the costs and far reimbursing the City for its casts incurred in creating the partnership, facilitating the project's passage through the Development Review Processes, and completing the required documents should be considered. If all is approved, the Partnership begins. The City is committed to upholding its responsibilities to Partners from the initiation through the continuation of a partnership. Evaluation will bean integral component of all Partnerships. The agreements should outline who is responsible for evaluation, the types of measures used, and detail what will occur should the evaluations reveal Partners are not meeting their Partnership obligations. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page TO III. The Partnership Evaluation Process A. Mission Statements and Goals All partnerships with Sample Parks and Recreation Department should be in accord with the City's and the Parks and Recreation Department's Mission and Coals to indicate haw a proposed partnership far that Department would be preliminarily evaluated: SAMPLE MISSION STATEMENT The Sample Parks and Recreation Department will provide a variety of parks, recreation facilities and program experiences equitably throughout the community. Programs will be developed and maintained to the highest quality, ensuring a safe environment with exceptional service while developing a lifetime customer. Services will demonstrate a positive economic investment through partnerships with other service providers, bath public and private, ensuring a high quality of life for citizens of Sample. (Sample) GOALS - • Promote physical and mental health and fitness • Nourish the development of children and youth • Help to build strong communities and neighborhoods • Promote environmental stewardship • Provide beautiful, safe, and functional parks and facilities that improve the lives of all citizens • Preserve cultural and historic features within the City's parks and recreation systems ^ Provide a work environment far the Parks & Recreation Department staff that encourages initiative, professional development, high morale, productivity, teamwork, innovation, and excellence in management B. Other Considerations 1. Costs for the Proposal Approval Process For most proposed partnerships, there will be considerable staff time spent an the review and approval process once a project passes the initial review stage. This time includes discussions with Proposing Partners, exploration of synergistic partnering opportunities, possible RFP processes, facilitation of the approval process, assistance in writing and negotiating agreements, contracting, etc. There may also be costs for construction and planning documents, design work, and related needs and development review processes mandated by City ordinances. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 11 Successful Partnerships will take these casts into account and may plan for City recovery of some or all of these costs within the proposal framework. Some of these costs could be considered as construction expenses, reimbursed through a negotiated agreement once operations begin, or covered through some other creative means. 2. Land Use andjor Site lmprovements Same proposed partnerships may include facility and/or land use. Necessary site improvements cannot be automatically assumed. Costs and responsibility far these improvements should be considered in any Proposal. Some of the general and usual needs far public facilities that may not be included as City contributions and may need to be negotiated for a project include: ^ Any facilities or non-existent infrastructure construction ^ Roads or street improvements ^ Maintenance to specified standards ^ Staffing ^ Parking ^ Snow removal ^ Lighting ^ Outdoor restrooms ^ Water fountains ^ Complementary uses of the site ^ Utility improvements {phone, cable, storm drainage, electricity, water, gas, sewer, etc.} ^ Custodial services ^ Trash removal 3. Need The nature of provision of public services determines that certain activities will have a higher need than others. Some activities serve a relatively small number of users and have a high facility cost. Others serve a large number of users and are widely available from the private sector because they are profitable. The determination of need far facilities and programs is an ongoing discussion in public provision of programs and amenities. The project will be evaluated based on how the project fulfills a public need. 4. Funding Only when a Partnership Proposal demonstrates high unmet needs and high benefits for City citizens, will the City consider contributing resources to a project. The City recommends that Proposing Partners consider sources of potential funding. The more successful partnerships will have funding secured in advance. In most cases, Proposing Partners should consider funding and cash flow for initial capital development, staffing, and ongoing operation and maintenance. The details of approved and pending funding sources should be clearly identified in a proposal. For many partners, especially small private user groups, non-profit groups, and governmental agencies, cash resources may be a limiting factor in the proposal. It may be a necessity for partners to utilize alternative funding sources for resources to complete a proposed project. Obtaining alternative funding often demands creativity, ingenuity, and persistence, but many forms of funding are available. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page T2 Alternative funding can come from many sources, e.g. Sponsorships, Grants, and Donor Programs. A local librarian and/or Internet searches can help with foundation and grant resources. Developing a solid leadership team for a partnering organization will help find funding sources. In-kind contributions can, in same cases, add additional funding. All plans for using alternative funding should be clearly identified. The City has an established Sponsorship Policy, and partnered projects will be expected to adhere to the Policy. This includes the necessity of having an Approved Sponsorship Plan in place prior to procurement of sponsorships for a Partnered Project. C. Selection Criteria In assessing a partnership opportunity to provide facilities and services, the City will consider (as appropriate} the following criteria. The Proposed Partnership Outline Format in Part Two provides a structure to use in creating a proposal. City staff and representatives will make an evaluation by attempting to answer each of the following Guiding Questions: • Haw does the project align with the City and affected Department's Mission 5taternent and Goals? • How does the proposed facility fit into the current City and the affected Department's Master Plan? • How does the facility/program meet the needs of City residents? • How will the project generate more revenue and/or less cost per participant than the City can provide with its own staff or facilities? • What are the alternatives that currently exist, or have been considered, to serve the users identified in this project? • How much of the existing need is now being met within the City borders and within adjacent cities? • What is the number and demographic profile of participants who will be served? • Haw can the proposing partner assure the City of the long-term stability of the proposed partnership, both for operations and for maintenance standards? • How will the partnered project meet Americans with Disabilities Act and EEOC requirements? • How will the organization offer programs at reasonable and competitive casts for participants • What are the overall benefits for both the City and the Proposing Partners? Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page T3 Additional Assistance Sample Parks and Recreation Department is aware that the partnership process does entail a great deal of background work an the part of the Proposing Partner. The fallowing list of resources may be helpful in preparing a proposal: • Courses are available through local colleges and universities to help organizations develop a business plan and/ar operational pro-farmas. • The Chamber of Commerce offers a variety of courses and assistance for business owners and for those contemplating starting new ventures. • There are consultants who specialize in facilitating these types of partnerships. Far one example, contact GreenPlay, LLC, tall free at 1-866-849-9959 ar www.greenplayllc.com. • Reference Librarians at libraries and Internet searches can be very helpful in identifying passible funding sources and partners, including grants, foundations, financing, etc. • Relevant information including the City of Sample Comprehensive Ptan, the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, site maps, and other documents are available at the _____ These documents may be copied ar reviewed, but may not be taken off-site. • The Sample Parks and Recreation Department Web Site (www.XXXX.com} has additional infarmatian. • If additional help or information is needed, please call 000-000-0000. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page T4 Part Two Sample Proposed Partnership Qutline Format Please provide as much information as possible in the fallowing outline form. Description of Proposing Organization: • Narne of Qrganizatian • Years in Existence • Contact Narne, Mailing Address, Physical Address, Phane, Fax, E-mail • Purpose of Organization • Services Provided • Member/User/Customer Profiles • Accomplishments • Legal Status Decision Making Authority Who is authorized to negotiate on behalf of the organization? Who or what group {i.e. Council/Commission/Board} is the final decision maker and can authorize the funding carnmitrnent? What is the tirneframe for decision making? Summary of Proposal {10D words or less} What is being proposed in terms of capital development, and program needs? II1. Benefits to the Partnering Organization Why is your organization interested in partnering with the Sample Parks and Recreation Department? Please individually list and discuss the benefits {monetary and non-monetary} far your organization. IV. Benefits to the Sample Parks and Recreation Department Please individually list and discuss the benefits {monetary and non-monetary} for the Sample Parks and Recreation Department and residents of the City. V. Details {as currently known} The following page lists a series of Guiding Questions to help you address details that can help outline the benefits of a passible partnership. Please try to answer as many as possible with currently known information. Please include what your organization proposes to provide and what is requested of Sample Parks and Recreation Department. Please include (as known} initial plans for your concept, operations, projected casts and revenues, staffing, and/or any scheduling or maintenance needs, etc. Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page 15 Guiding Questions Meeting the Needs of our Community: ^ In your experience, haw daes the project align with park and recreation goals? ^ Haw daes the proposed program ar facility meet a need far City residents? ^ Who will be the users? What is the projected number and profile of participants who will be served? ^ What alternatives currently exist to serve the users identified in this praject? ^ Haw much of the existing need is now being met? What is the availability of similar pragrams elsewhere in the carnrnunity? ^ Do the pragrams provide opportunities far entry-level, intermediate, and jar expert skill levels? ^ How daes this project incorporate environmentally sustainable practices? The Financial Aspect: ^ Can the praject generate mare revenue and/ar less cast per participant than the City can provide with its awn staff ar facilities? If not, why shauld the City partner an this praject? ^ Will your organization offer programs at reasonable and competitive costs for all participants? What are the anticipated prices for participants? ^ What resources are expected to came from the Parks & Recreation Department? ^ Will there be a monetary benefit far the City, and if so, how and haw much? Logistics: ^ How much space do you need? What type of space? ^ What is critical related to location? ^ What is your proposed timeline? ^ What are your projected hours of operations? ^ What are your initial staffing projections? ^ Are there any mutually-beneficial cooperative marketing benefits? ^ What types of insurance will be needed and who will be responsible for acquiring and paying premiums an the policies? ^ What is your organization's experience in providing this type of facility/program? ^ How will your organization meet Americans with Disabilities Act and EEC requirements? Agreements and Evaluation: ^ How, by whom, and at what intervals should the project be evaluated? ^ How can you assure the City of long-term stability of your organization? ^ What types and length of agreements should be used for this project? ^ What types of "exit strategies" should we include? What shauld be done if the praject daes not meet the conditions of the original agreements? Sample Partnership Policy- ©2008 GreenPlay, LLC www.greenplayllc.com Page T6 u w ~R O F' W z ~, !n F ~ ~ r ~/ a ~^ S F ~. ` ~ ~.. ~ ~^ ~ C { H (I') ~ Q ~ v ~ '~ o N ~ ~= ~ ~ C7 s Lry c y G ~ ~ FX-E' c w~ } w V f} ~ ~ ~ m~ .. ` ~ ~ ~ .~ a G v. . ~,J W ~ ~ ~ I1 m a. ~ C m U m ~~ ¢ u 1~ ~1 ' _ ~ o a m :,F ~ ~o~o~~ m ~_ ~ o .{ ~ V v N ~ ~ C 'S _ ~ ~ t o o ~' o ~ m ~ > o i'n. V V N c m ~ V ~ K x ~. ~ ~ rr~'~ V C .. 9. ~ ' G ~ ~ a C U '~ ~ a G 1 a ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ z v ,~, = u 'r II^'' r - ~'~ a a ~ n ~ I I I 1 1 ~ a M ~_ :c ~ ~ ~ E W I/-- I~ r ~ Z G ~_ H a U /~ ~ ' ]^' D r D O U z z J {~ (~ H (7 m T 1 W ~/~ ~t 0 c~ c~ w z 0 ~I MAP C -RECOMMENDATIONS REPLACE UPPER PLAYGROUNDS WITH A DESTINATION OR ADVENTURE PLAYGROUND IN UPPER CITY PARK. THE NEED IN THE NEXT SYEARS. ~~ ~~utureiPa Lving ~ _ ~'' ~ ,' d n ~i~, ~~ •~~.-~s~ nuv nnroinwim iv ONE WEST IOWA CITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARK, LEGEND !;: `+~ Corporate Boundary Recreation Locations Park _ Future Park Open Space School Other Indoor Faalities Trails -Trail, Existing - - - -Trail, Proposed - tiVide Sidewalk, Existing _ _ ..Wide Sidewalk, Proposed - On Street Trail Connection = University of Iowa Barriers Limiting Pedestrian Access Railroad VELOP PLANNED BALLFIELDS LC. KICKERS PARK. 0 1 2 Map Sale In Miles Nlap Ponduced For The Cih~ Of Iowa a'ty -Iowa- By The GE p5 P~ Term This Map Is I mended Por Plannigq Ex Discussion Purpoae> Only -Please Refer To The Prnjecf DoeumentFor Map Details Legend Elements Pul ay `Tary SIlghlly In Slze, Colcr Fnd Transparency F rom Those 5 Mwn On Map GIS DataSources May Include: The City Of to mra City, US Census, ESRI, GA.4SP~ Teen- Februmy 2008 Copyright® 20081owa Ctfy IR -Map Re v(sed - March 2008 DRAFT -AUGUST 2008 THE CITY OF IOWA CITY - IOVITA PARKS, RECREATION, TRAILS MASTER PLAN Future Park 4 ~~ , ~~ ~ '~ Shrcnek ES' •~ ' / y- ~ ~ t ~L~ THE } ~ } CityPark ~1, ~I I ~ ~ ~ Hickory Hill Park ~ ~~ ~I Peninsu~ Ia Park ~~ HaPPy Hollow Park I a ~~~ ~ •,~~,;= vv~~ rT Hor -P.lann ES Keno Street Pa~ ~'~Cr~nd e Pack i Lincoln ES , ~ I -- ~ plorth Marl efSquare Park if r i ~~ _ i' •~ ------ - ~rr ^` ,~ ~1end~Ie raL Pheavnnti ~. _ ~~~ _ Utlt J>Irv OI lOWa ~ ' , . ~, Colle eGreen Pa Im HST B I - 1/ Pedestrian Mall -- Raber+:9Lea,^, 7vnmv+N fter•~donC ~' ~ ~ I a-w.wapaoa _ _ _ _ _ - _ Hu~uS rc k9 ~. I~ ~~' ~ ' 6 I `, - ~, ' -- -~niversityHeights fir... ~~, ~Henr, Longfellomi~6S ~ ~ ~ B v klend Parl'~ VillaPai~ly TourerGou'ttPail; ~;~ "`!-,..,~ ~ _ t ~ ~ yJ Oak Grove Park ~ Creekv_d$La,rk ~ aenw f -I+ES N r IitonPazk rn~~~ae _ ~Een~tHacr,.ES! 5 rt nHih Park ed~ .~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ !./ C'~ ~ Harloeke"Hill Pack _ ~ ~ ~ ~ >I od Park ~Ilo?~GeeekP - -"--'--- ~ L • ^~ *Jy~~ HjgMand Pazk $° Fut`ure~arkb'` ~ +~ lovm City Municipal Aixpor~ ' ~' ~ South Bwt JRHS Me,v Kin~d~ Park ~ , ~t~ Tate HS Hyiry ~ I ~ A4arkTwain ES _ ` . 1 , Sturgis Ferry Park \ ~ •~ ~ i~ `_.___ ~~1 -%`'~ - .. r • I~ - -- ---- - " .~ ~r ,~ • DESIGN CONCEPTS ~~'k llrhu Lrwur KS ~, 1f ~} ~ - r_'~ ';" t 1 7ioliail ~'~ hti 5. CON DUCTA FEASABILITY STUDY FOR THE ADDITION OFANATURE CENTER. 6. CONSIDERADDING DOG PARKS IN THE DO1nM- TOUVN COREAND IN THE SOUTHERN PARTS OF THECTY 1. CONDUCTAFEASIBILITY STUDYFOR THE CONSTRUCTION OFAN INDOOR RECREATION CENTER ON THEUVESTSIDE OF THECTY Cmred4Wod &ittm(Qm.~nLm:n FaiPlNeadows Puk r'pazg Grmit Wood-E9 a~ ~_._ We~hePny Pazk ~ 1 ~• /~Sar~d Prrsirie ~, ~ Whispering Meadovds Wetlands "~ S ~ 1 ~'' ~_ ~ ~'~I ~- - -,r-- --- '' ! _. Lake Park ~ ~ CONTINUE TO DEVELOP SAND LAKE PARKASA REGIONAL PARK IN THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE CITY. WORK WITH SCHOOLS TO INCREASE WALKABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE TO UNDER SERVED NEIGHBDRHODDS 1. RENOVATE OR REPLACE OLDER PLAYGROUNDS ATHIGHLAND A4RK,I~AERCER PARK,CREEKSIDE PARKAND T01M1lER COURT PARK. FEATURES TO GRASP ®PERSPECTIVE A: NEIGHBOP~HOOD ACCESS TO ALL COMPONENTS \~ r ~$~lll - _._._ _ u.P~Lin_sdt E. ~` ~. 1, l' d~ ~Il ~io'r ty flfowa '' ~ ~i s L~' --. J~~~~oe tl H -9r4 ViE~Pae. P ]uW Cvr ' ~l~s.rt H~ ~ ~ TI V] '~ ~ 8atweC h3H tErsR SUk E t Hem E~ rt ~FUi - 7l --~ ~ H I I Flill[vl Evk aW.rfaN,odl k Is11 _ F.. - _• --. living eberE~Ev(ur-T `ssk6Lr b.r nhai leil,a ~~ ~ Pack - ~ _~ ! ~ 1 LEGEND -" `.Corporate Boundary Recreation Locations OPark OFuture Park DOpen Space School I~Other p Indoor Facilities Trails -Trail, Existing ---Trail, Proposal - Wide Sidewalk, Existing .. _ .Wide Sidewalk, Proposed On Street Trail Connection DUniversity of Iovra Barriers Limiting Pedestrian Access .-.-_ Railroad GRASP? Perspective - AI I Values Lass Access L/lOra ttCCe99 bTo Service T vl~Ea,~~,~ m,ayx;PPnkL ~c YYl HO tlone~k -__ - - -~~•- / - l E: ke ~~fil.et Par~3 ,`- .- ~,t:[v l 'vk J - P tur k1 arL TIW u,tHillkvk Helm L~nue,e ES . -. it h `: d tau..-~ ~ ~..r.x , ...o..u ___ ~~^-"- ~ Hov aE {{ P `P_ka rTt`Il~rESt:]{il1~Paek'. .nttPnd ~RG Cask yr _ 1..,x~_PV1.-- t=hLacz ES -.-~ i`- s - i HtSla ,f ca,k~~rea;t IFHS ,~.:.,a', A, cy.: nrdx. ^<a Ma w S ~ am EO Tate HS~t n.erPazk 4 ~ -ir, r +~,,, '~ 11 } IJ y Iko~.vk f l Ada L k :k,.t t 13 ES ~ ~k ~ ~ 'si..KR~`4 ~ Sa'P ~-`v'-~1.~ s.-1 ~1 .•r~M1''S dLake PUkh~O.~ ,Vt~ -- - •• ~"~•~""~"'- ~ soausy<nd6 cree;,wayrTr,a ~ . .. ~ .._. i I:~~ lc wx~ asoex 4Pnk_} v n.. ~....L..---~ LEGEND GR.ASP~Perspective Target Values Below Target Sefinimum At or Above Target Minimum 1Qo Service 0 1 2 Mep Scale In Miles -Prima ~ Fxame Map Pmdssced Por Tlw Cdyof Iowa City-Iowa-sy TIU GP.ASPR~Tean~ This Map Is Inkrded Por PlassruvEy ~ Duv~ussinn Psssyoses Os6y- P4ux Fefer To Ttsx PmXct Dosvment Por Map Details LegesW ELemenC Flay'•'v„ Slig]sllyly See, Color.~tvd Trvasyvxswy Frvsn Tlwse Slwwn OnMap G6 Dnta Seur<es May h,vl~adx: il,e Cit:~Of [e~M1~ a~itj. US Cxsss~ss. ESkt,GP.A8Pd5 Tenn-FeLSssa J2o08 CopyaeNtro ]00'd Icvra City [A-t.[ap kxui:ed -I.]uxh20(~6 THE CITY OF IOWA CITY -IOWA PARKS, RECREATION, TRAILS MASTER PLAN DESIGN CONCEPTS GRASP® PERSPECTIVE B: WALKABLE ACCESS TO ALL COMPONENTS J, i~ r i 18' ~ ~, 4Nest i Future Park 2 '' ~\ Hunters ~ftivoParly 'r, 4 ~..-,~ r~'Frt Ca k,7' n Nalde~~. Irving Weber ES ~~~~ - - -- : llniversdyHeight ~ }+ -. ,. 1, I t.._. Ville Park t ~ Brookla~}(Park TOWer CouEt Park 4 t " Poosevelt ES -~ Ernes,Horn.fiE ~~~~~~~~~Benton Hill Park Park - Park .., LEGEND "" ':Corporate Boundary 4.... Recreation Locations 0 Park 0 Future Park 0 Open Space School _I ~~' ~ Indoar Facilities Trails -Trail, Existing - • • -Trail, Proposed -Wide Sidewalk, Existing - - - -Wide Sidewalk, Proposed Dn Street Trail Connection 0 University of Iowa Barriers Limiting Pedestrian Access .~-~ Railroad GRASPS Perspective- All Values Less Access L~ More Access Na Service i , ........................., ....,.....,. +m r Puture Park 9 • I~ 5hirnek ES arrall P~I Park ,.say ~ - J ~ic Happy Hollova Park Horacelv(enn ES Rerm Srr'eet I'a orth MarketSgrtaze Paz~k -_--,-{ Glenda n-Tafall College Green Pazk - „ - - - ;`v4-FnER~~Gr111..ee Comrturt'fij Ferait, Henry L.m~,g[ellot~ ~O~ak Gt~~o-vie P rk Ek ~~'t'hy H iglilaHrl Purl: Pulure Park 1 Park PheasanhHill Park Helen Lemme Ciej4zdie Srrm1 g ~Cfh~ HS c~~ x»~•er E~s ~', ES CouttNill'~N,ark ,J~ Creek9ide Park Rob rt Laczs ES M azk T wain ES cro,n wooasenoa a~:at~a,a, ~~ BVetherby Park ~~ r,. . r,.,.a~ ,._ ..-, ?~~ ~~~ ~~~ ___ ~~~ ...111..'1 d sd Lek? Parl: ~~} ~, , Tate HS k s k r, 0 1 2 hlap Scale In Miles - Prunatgr Frdme Mep Produced For The City Of Iowa City -Iowa- ByThe GRPSP®Temn This Map Is Intended For Planning Fr Discussion Purposes Only- Please ReferTo The Project Document For Map Details Legend Elementr Po{ay `Tart' Slightly In8l~, Color And Trat>sparency From Those Shown On Map GIS Data Sources Nlay Incbade~ The City Of Iowa City, US Censru, BSR I, Gf:PSP~ Team -Fe6 ruary ?003 Copyrights 20081ouva Cify I A- P.Iap Revised - &(arch 20~ THE CITY OF IOWA CITY -IOWA PARKS, RECREATION, TRAILS MASTER PLAN -~ -~ 4 r^` ~ 'Future-P~ark:5 '~~t' '• •.I.. t 1`t .r li , d Swtt Park• ~'•VVin ~... LEGEND GRASP® Perspective -Target Values Below Target Minimum At or AboveTarget Minimum No Service nas rarrK t,,l, ./..... ~.. .. _ .. .. ,. w G ' • DESIGN CONCEPTS GRASP® PERSPECTIVE C: NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS TO INDOOR RECREATION J'~ i,. K, i ' 18~~ ~ 4~Vest HS i FuturePark2 a' ~~ ? - 'Hunters P.rmpail 4s~•Fit r Pa~k7 '~ n Wald e~Wo~ Irving Weber E5 ., „y ,,,I~•V~Y - - : llniversityHeight ~ } ~-' `~ r-. Ville bark i ~ Brookla S.}(Puk Tower Coiut Pak "4,~~ ~~ ~ ~ ItooseveltES Ernest Horn.fiS e:mo~s~ Benton HiII Park _~ .. ~ Harlockr'Hill Park ..meek Park ------• Park .., LEGEND "'':Corporate BouLUlary 4.... Rea~eation Locations 0 Park 0 Future Park 0 Open Space School ~ Other ~ Indoor Facilities Trails -Trail, Existing - - - ~ Trail, Proposed -Wide Sidewalk, Existing - - - .Wide Sidewalk, Proposed On Street Trail Connection ~ University of Iowa Barris Limiting Pedestrian Access ~-~ Railroad GRASPS Perspective -All Values Less Access ~ More Access Na Savice ........................., ....,.....,, -m __ , Future Park 9 "~ Shknek ES ~ ~4 arrali Prtill Par4- ,s~f I -~ ( ~ic f Happy Hollow Park Horaeelv(enn E5 Aerm Sir'eet I'a u' - -orth MarketSquae Pink --__--a Glenda rrNtall College Greenpark '.. - - - - - ~Ro6erE!4 Lre CommunMf Re: mrt Henry L~nglello~ 1 OkG~ove Par& ~~/ H~hland Part: Future Park 1 park PheasanUHill Park Helen Lemme Clef Y ~'r, S~ mi A `'~ City H9 Ca&er H~acer E9 1- ES Cou~bHill~Park _ r Creek9iae Park Rob-rt Luca ES Mark Twain ES rGmrH WrodSekad O~~rn~xc;nmi I UVetherby Perk U ~,. y„w.-y.. .,,,.a~ , ~ ..-, .~ w sd Lek? Parl: ~~} ~, , Tate HS k S k r, 0 1 2 htap Scale In Miles - PrrmarSr Frdme Mep Produced For The City Of Iowa City -Iowa- ByThe GFPSP®Temn This Map Is Intended For planning Cr Discussion Purposes Only- Please IteferTo The project Document For Map Details Legend Elementr Po{ay `Tart' Slightly In8l~, Color And Tra~uparency From Those Shown On Map GIS Data Sources Nlay Incbade~ The City Of Iowa City, US Censsu, ESR I, Gf:PSP~ Team -Fe6 ruary ?003 Copyrights 20081ouva Cify I A- Paap Revised - &(arch 20~ THE CITY OF IOWA CITY -IOWA PARKS, RECREATION, TRAILS MASTER PLAN 'F'uture-Park:S ~~ ~r~ ~~• ••r... '`i .r fir fs/ . Smtt Pule ~ - /! ~ y, ~J( ~•VUiridsor'Rid Par e , 8,... ~.. ~ , LEGEND GRASP® Perspective -Target Values Below Target Minimum At or AboveTarget Minimum No Service nas i arrK t,,l, ./..... ~.. .. __~~ -. ;v w G ' • DESIGN CONCEPTS GRASP® PERSPECTIVE D: WALKABLE ACCESS TO TRAILS J'~ i~ s i u' 18' 1 4Nest i Future Park,2 Hunt~r ar Pail s~•Pi.f e~k7' n Wald e~~ IrvmfWebee ES Y y -- - :llniversityHeight Ll :.,. .,. ~ Villz Lark i Brooklan~d Park r ~ Tower Coitit Pruk '"+w ~ ~ ~ Boosevelt ES Ernest Horn.ES afro°"a Benton Hill Park _~ .. Harlocke"Hill Park ..keek Pml: ----' Park ..~ LEGEND "" ':Corporate Boundary 4.... Rea~eation Locations 0 Park 0 Future Park 0 Open Space School I ~ Other {~ Indoor Facilities Trails -Trail, Existing - - • .Trail, Proposed -Wide Sidewalk, Existing - - - ~ Wide Sidewalk, Proposed On Street Trail Connection ~ University of Iowa i , .........................,... _ .,, +m + Future Park 9 ~ • Shknek E6 errall Prtill Park ,.soy ~"~~ ~ ~/i -. -~'- ~ ~. c" v „^ i ' H~ry H111 Perk w ' C -_---__-..'~. &appy Hollow Part, i. __...-.___--- . - , _ (- 4 ~~ J - I Horace.Ta(ann ES Reno Sf eet Parl: _ •' ~•. •i 4 A T .•- , u ~ - 1 --- , r North Markets uaiv Park ~ - Future Parkl 1 ~- r'--..------4-( --_ '• r.. iFuture Pa~kb r~'~ Glendal~ Park PheasenUHill Park Hele» Lemme ES "i • - _- Crnj 4¢gk ScRa a arzklall CollegeGree^Park ~Cih~Ha ~i~ - - - - - ~Ro6erEl4lve Com+iunN,y Ren `aatisa CertEer Future Peek,3 - ~ Hoocer EB , ~Swtt Park. .. 1 Henry Longfellow ES CowtH7l~Pm~k. - I Robe rt Lucas ES ~ Oak Gioee Park Creeksid~~Pazk ~ '"• V.~ ..i ,z '~ M"`°°"`~" `' LEGEND ~'VViridsbi'Ridge t',ark - -Smxlox flrm:lrtarrer Purk Agsntx Centn GRASP®PerspeCtlV9-Target VahleS H~hlafid Park Aouth"'East JRHS~'~ I ' Mercer Park BelOW Target Mlnunum Tate HS Polazk T~,~ai» Es - J At or Aboue Target Minimum park -----------. ', NoSelvice GmrH WrodSckoel (Vjrwaun~m r~Fnu;lvte Bows Parl 1 [apolean Prvi: ~~ G ncl ns o18S +~ ~'. } ~,~~` BVetherby Park I f ,1lnspering lAeado nrs Jdetlands Park t,~ do 1 Prau\~~'~~j 1. ~.a~,,.. ~ ..-.,... r k .•~ _ - ~~ ~. r •Sand ~Lak?Part: R~` ~~ -- ------ r _- •~ ~ ~, , '1 --,.... ... ~;~ ... SouthSycu lore Greenway/Trail ' ~a ` ; II ,r ,ill i _ „ .• a 0 1 2 y n~lwv ~^kerr so•.^ c fce~r rar~ Map Sale In Miles - PrunarS+ Frame IIIILL Map Producad Por The Cily Of l owa City -Iowa- By The GB.ASP~Tearn j Thie Map Is Irrtended Por Planning dr Discuseinn Purposes Only- Please ItelerTo The Project Docrvnent Por Map Deteils S Legend Elements May Vary Slightly Inffiae, Color A»d Tra~>sparency From Those Shown On Map q GIS Data Sources AAay Include: The City Of Iowa City, US Census, 85R I, GRASP®Team -February 20J8 y Copyright® 20081ouva Cify I A- blap Revised - Pu(arch 20~ Barriers Limiting Pedestrian Access < +rr Rallmad Ryersons Woods-ark , GRASPO Perspective - All Values ~..,r '"•' Less Access ,. ,,.., More Access Na Service k S k r, THE CITY OF IOWA CITY -IOWA PARKS, RECREATION, TRAILS MASTER PLAN GT ' • DESIGN CONCEPTS „ CATION PE AIDS MPONEFIT ner P ID ~'. ~ d d c c ~ z t - C C u o ~ ° ° - v a ~ w U V ¢ ~ m V W ~ a ) Z w u '~' ¢ > 2 w Z Z O V ~ ~ m Y a > 2 w 7 ~' .i Q K > 0 ~ 0 O C ~ ~ C w y O w ~ U o Z U' w m ~ ¢ ~ l7 ? Y Z en z ¢ rwn ~ w m V~ m m ~ ¢ ~ O m N > V ~ G V m Y U ~ = m z m a z` O C ~ s w ~ S m 0 ~ Z O u i V ¢ 7 Z ¢ a z ¢ a ¢ rwn i ¢ a G O m Q U V n ~ _ V - _ - E m ~ - - ~ Zi u o ~ - - ~ c Vi u o ~ m ~ _ ~ o m « ~ V ~ « r p Z 0 w ~« F _ e 2 QQ C to ~ ~ 0 ~ q C c2 ¢ - O a q C c2 ~ a raa/ C t7 A V ~ e~ fL m ~ Z ~ O u Bent[m Hill Park 1-PARCEL Er ntin_ c 3' U 2 0 U 2 U U 3 1 2 0 U 2 U 12 1.2 700% 79.2 39.6 96.8 86,4 Benton Hlll irk 2-PARCEL Pla~~gNUnd, tn[al - 792 - - 3 1.2 100% 1.0 2.O Y PI 2.0 4.0 7.2 7.2 0.0 14,9 structure ADA access ADA tut no mrn rots it Benton Hill irk 2PARCEL 5reltrs L3 1 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 3.0 j.0 10.8 U.0 10.8 10,8 B en[on Hill Fork R~PARGEL IVaDral Area 194 1 2 2 3 1.2 ID0% 1.0 1.O N Y ZO 2D 7.2 0.U 7.2 7.2 Benton Hill Park 2PARCEL Plar~gvur~d, La[al [ 195 I 3 3 3 1.2 1oU% 1.0 1.0 Y N 1.0 J.0 10.8 N.8 0.1] 10.8 tree house Ben[rm Hill Park 2-PaRCFL Puhlir Art [ 314 Y 2 2 3 1.2 lUU% 1.U 1.U N Y 2.G 2G 7.2 U.0 72 7,2 Benton HillPark L~PARGFL Eduratirnal Elrrerlen[e c 320 7 2 5 12 100% LO LO Y N 20 20 7.2 7.2 0.U 7.2 'inter retlves oepe Benton Hlll Park 2PARCEL Passive Node c 364 1 2 2 3 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2.0 2.0 7.2 U.0 7.2 7.2 Benton Hill Fork 2PARCEL Trail, Prtrnlfrve c 365 I 2 2 3 1.3 ll70% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.17 2.0 7."[ 7.2 0.U 7.2 Benton Hlll Faro: k~PARrTL Passive Node c 397 1 2 2 3 1.2 070% 1.0 1.O N Y 20 20 7.2 0.U 7.2 72 Benton Hill Part: 7-PARCEL P.gRCEL c P001 1 2 2 3 1.2 100% 1.U 1.U Y Y "[.U 2G 7.2 7.2 7.2 7~2 Bla[k rings Cirtie Park 1kARCEL Eruting [ 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 2 7 1.1 1A0% 4.4 4.4 4.4 9.9 Bla[k. rn:s Circle Fark 3fARCEL PARCEL [ P0U2 1 2 2 2 1.1 IOU% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.17 20 4.9 4.4 4.4 4,4 BNOkland Park 1-PARCEL B~~ktlnq [ 3 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 2 0 14 1.2 100% 69.8 36.0 93.2 612 BNOkland Park 2PARCEL Shelter [ 196 1 3 2 3 1.3 ll70% 1.0 1.O N Y 3.17 2.0 10.8 U.0 10.8 7.2 Bmukland Fork ~~PARCEL Oen Turf [ 197 1 2 2 3 1.2 1017% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 2.0 7.2 7.2 7.2 72 B2ok laird Park 2PARCEL Plar~gvund, LU[al [ 198 I 2 3 1.2 10p% 1.D 1.0 Y N 2G 2U 7.2 72 0.U 7~2 B2okland Park 2PARCEL -en 6'Vat~.r [ 194 I 1 I 1.2 100% 1.U 1.U N Y 1.G 1.G 3.6 U.0 3.6 7fi Brook land Fork L~PARCEL Luo ~'Hdalk c 366 1 2 2 3 L2 IOU% LO LU Y N 2U 2,p 7.2 7.2 0.U 72 B~nokland Park 2-PARCEL Poents a~ [ 367 1 2 2 3 1.2 100% 1.U 1.U Y N 2.G 2.0 7.2 7.2 U.0 7~2 S[ul Wre laze BNOkland Park 2PARCEL NNWx Feature [ 368 1 2 2 3 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.17 2.0 7."[ U.0 7.2 7.2 Bmukland Fork L~PARCEL Fassite Nade [ 369 1 2 2 3 1.2 IOU% 1.0 1.U N Y 20 2,0 7.2 0.0 7.2 72 Memorial hen[h B2okland Park 7-PARCEL P4RCEL_ [ P003 1 2 2 3 12 100% 1.U 1.U Y Y 2U 2G 7.2 7.2 7.2 7~2 Gralm[e~~s'tuan Perk SfARCEL Etlstinq [ 2 2 3 0 0 3 0 0 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 24 1.3 100% 10.9 5.2 10.4 20.8 Chaun[esll,mn Park L~PARCEL Fassirle Node [ I 3 2 2 2 l.3 IOU% LO 3.O N Y 2.U 6.0 5.2 U.U 5.2 75,5 arn[e~Sran Park Cu P-PARCEL PARCEL [ P009 1 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.U 1.U Y Y 2.0 2.0 5.2 5.2 5.2 5~2 Cih+Par}: 1-PaRCFL EHistln [ 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 34 l3 100% 353.0 224.3 163.8 7235 CiN Fork ~~PARGEL A ua Feat, Pool [ 28 9 2 2 1 3 1.3 700 % 1.5 1.5 Y IV 3.0 30 11.7 17.7 0.U 11,7 larce Cih+ Par4~. 2PARCEL 3halWr, Grou [ 29 1 2 2 3 13 100% 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2U 20 7.8 0.U 7.8 7.8 Cih+Fark 2PARCEL 5relrrr, 6TOLI [ 30 1 2 2 3 1.3 UJU% 1.U 1.U N Y 2.G 2G 7.8 0.0 7.8 78 L7t1~ PAW ~~PARGEL Flarl vnd, Lo[al c 52 1 2 2 3 l.3 IOU% LO LU Y N 2.U 2,D 7.8 7.8 0.17 7.B not ADAt no access CiN Park 2PARCEL wol Howe [ 33 1 0 0 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 0.0 O.o 0.0 U.0 U.G 0,0 CiN Park 2PARCEL Rastmom [ 34 1 0 0 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 0.G 0.0 O.U 0.U 0.17 0.0 CiN Park ~~PARGEL 9reller, Grou [ 3fi 1 2 2 3 1.3 700 % 1.0 1.0 N Y ZO 20 7.8 0.U 7.0 7,8 Cih+Fark 2PARCEL n-en TUrf [ 36 I 2 3 13 ]OU% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 20 2.0 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Cih+ Park 2PARCEL NiaWa' Aaess, Derel ed [ 37 I ~ ~ 3 1.3 100% 1.U 1.U Y IV 2-0 2.0 7.8 7.8 0.0 78 L7t1~ PAW L~PARGFL - en Watt' [ 38 1 2 2 3 l.3 IOU% LO LO N Y 2.G 20 7.8 U.U 7.8 7.B CiN Park ~ PARCEL Bad~st~[ ,Practice [ 90 3 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 3.0 Y PI 2.G 6.0 7.8 7.8 0.0 23,9 CiN Park 2PARCEL PoentS ace [ 42 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 217 [.0 7.8 7.8 0.U 7.8 stage in the round Cttl~ Park L~PARGEL li en Vuarz [ -03 I 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y ZD 20 7.8 0.U 7.8 7,8 also ice skstin Cih+Fark 2PARCEL 5reltnx~ Grou [ 49 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 M Y 2U 20 7.8 0.0 7.8 7.8 Cih+Fark 2-PARCEL ~-an 6'Vater [ 45 I 1.3 UJU% 1.U 1.U N Y 2.G 2.0 7.8 0.0 7.6 79 City Fah, ~~PARCEL Resdoom [ 46 1 U U 3 l.3 IOU% LO LO Y N 0.17 U,p OA U.U 0.U 0.0 CiN Park 2PAkCEL 5reltx, Grou [ 97 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2.G 20 7.8 U.0 7.8 7,8 CiN Park 2PARCEL Bone Ball [ 48 9 2 2 1 3 1.3 100% L5 6.O Y N 3.17 12-0 11.7 11.7 0.U 46,A new Ctto PaW R~PARGEL 9reltar, Grou [ -09 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O N Y &0 20 7.8 0.U 7.8 7,8 Cih+Park~ 2PARCEL Pla~~g2und, br[al [ 50 I 1 I 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y N LU 1.0 3.9 3.9 U.0 3.9 not ADA Cih+Fark 2-PARCEL Went Ride Amwer [ 51 9 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.U 4.0 Y IV 2A Elo 7.8 7.8 0.0 31.2 Gita PaW 2-PARCEL Reshnom [ 59 1 0 0 3 L3 IOU% LU LU Y N 0.17 DO U.U 0.0 U.G U,0 CiN Perk 2-PARCEL 4olle~~ball [ 54 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.U 1.U Y PI 2.G 2U 7.8 7.8 U.0 7,8 CiN Park 2PARCEL Plar~grnund Lo[al [ 55 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% LU LU Y N 2.17 [.0 7.8 7.8 0.U 7~A not ADA Clp~ Park ~~PARCEL 9raller, Grou [ 56 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y ZD 2.0 7.8 0.U 7.8 7,8 Cih+Fark 2PARCEL Horaeshges [ 57 9 3 3 1 3 1.3 100% 1.5 13.S Y N 4.5 4D.5 17.6 17.6 0.0 158.0 Cih+Fark 2PARCEL -rnrlex, Horseshoes [ 58 I 3 3 1 3 1.3 100% 1.5 1.S Y IV 4.5 4,5 17.6 17.6 0.0 17.6 GitJ Park L~PARGEL en Tort [ 59 1 2 2 3 l.3 IOU% l.0 l.0 Y Y 2.17 20 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.B CiN Perk 2PARCEL 9relter, Grou- [ 60 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.G 2.0 7.8 U.0 7.8 7,8 CiN Park 2PARCEL Pla~~gvur,d La[al [ 6l 1 1 1 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 1.17 1.0 3.9 3.9 0.U 3.9 ADA Clte PAW L~PARGEL 9reltar, Grou [ 62 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y &0 20 7.8 0.U 7.8 7,8 Cih+Fark 2PARCEL Water ACess, General [ 63 1 3 3 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y N SU 3.0 11.7 11.7 0.0 11.7 Cih+Fark 2-PARCEL IJlaintenanCe [ 65 1 0 0 3 1.3 100% 1.U 1.0 Y IV 0.G Uo 0.U 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cite PaW 2-PARCEL 'nn: ~i:urs [ 66 1 U 0 3 l.3 IOU% LU LU Y N U.U U,0 U.0 0.U U.0 0,0 CiN Perk 2-PARCEL Ballfield [ 69 1 2 3 1 3 1.3 100% 1.5 1.5 Y N ZG 4.5 11.7 11.7 U.0 17,fi CiN Park 2PARCEL Ballfeld [ 71 7 2 3 3 1.3 100% LU 7.0 Y N 2.0 21.0 7.8 7.8 0.U 81.9 Ctto PaW R~PARr~L Com lez, Ballfeld [ 75 9 2 3 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y IV 2.0 3.0 7.8 7.8 0.0 11,7 Cih+Fark 2PARCEL Taxmis [ 76 6 2 1 3 1.3 100% 1.5 9.O N N 3.0 18.17 11.7 0.0 0.0 70.2 Cih+Fark 2-PARCEL N;aWx ACTeW, Oesel ed [ 78 1 2 3 1.3 100% 1.U 1.0 Y IV 2.G 2.U 7.8 7.8 0.0 79 6oat ram Cite Park ~~PARCEL Loo ~'kdalk e 80 1 3 3 3 l.3 IOU% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 3.U 3,0 11.7 17.7 11.7 11,7 CiN Perk 2PAkCEL Tril, Multiuse [ 81 I 3 3 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y Z.G 3.0 11.7 11.7 11.7 IL7 CiN Park 2PARCEL 5relCer, GNU- [ 84 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% LU LU N Y 2.17 2.0 7.8 0.U 7.6 7~A Ctto PaW L~PARGEL 9reltar,Grmir [ 350 1 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 20 7.8 0.U 7.8 7.8 P.esa'ooms -xludad Cih+Fark 2PARCEL PubIIC Art [ 351 2 2 2 3 1.3 100% 1.0 2.0 P7 Y 2.p 4.0 7.8 0.0 7.8 15.6 Cih+Fark `PARCEL Ba;4~.ethall [ 352 0.5 2 2 3 1.3 100% 0.5 O.S Y IV 1.G 1.0 3.9 3.9 0.0 3,9 Cite Park ~~PARCEL Fla V: round, Inral [ 361 1 1 1 3 l.3 IOU% 0.5 1.O Y N 0.5 10 2.0 2.U 0.0 3,9 CiN Perk 2PAkCEL SYiu[ture [ 370 1 0 0 3 1.3 100% 0.5 1.0 N N LtG U.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NSmtenarce hulldt CiN Park 2PARCEL EiuCational E~:-erlen[e [ 371 1 2 3 1.3 100% 0.5 LU Y N 1.17 2.0 3.9 3.9 O.p 7~A LO cabins Ctto PaW 3PARGEL R4RCEL [ P0U5 1 2 2 3 1.3 700% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 7.8 7.8 7.8 7,8 College Grern Park 1-R4RCEL Etrtinq [ 2 2 3 2 0 3 0 0 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 22 1.2 100% 16.8 12.0 9.6 16.8 Collae Green Park Z-P4RCEL PIa~n Rued La[al [ 2 I 2 1.2 100% 1.U 1.U Y IV 2A 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 49 no PDAassesa e._e Green Park 2-PARCEL 9relRr [ 9 1 2 2 2 L2 IOU% 1.U 1.U N Y 2U 2,0 4.8 0.0 4.6 4,B Samll azebo sf le College Green PaW 2fARCEL Basketball [ 4 OS 2 2 2 1.2 100% 0.5 0.5 Y PI S.G 1.0 2.4 2.9 U.G 2,9 -- e. Green Park u eq 3-P4RCEL P4RCEL [ POU6 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.U 1.0 Y Y 2.0 20 4.8 4.B 4.8 4.8 r_uurt Hill Park 1-PARCEL EI etirl [ 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 IU LL 900% 55.0 20.4 37.4 59,4 Eourt HIII Part[ ~ PARCEL :halter, Gnni [ 105 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 Pl Y 2.U 2.0 4.4 0.0 4.4 4,9 Pnurt Hill Part[ 2PARCEL Ehel~r Grau [ 106 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.U 1.U N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 4.4 4.9 GaurtHillPark ~~PARGPL 3aake[hall [ l0J 1 l 1 2 Ll IOU% LU 1.O Y N 1.17 LO 2.2 2.2 0.0 2.2 Kurt HIII Perk t`PAkCEL en Turf 0 [ 108 I 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 4.9 4.4 9,9 curt HIII Park 2PARCEL Plarnamun~, LO[al [ 109 1 2 2 1.1 100% LU LU Y N 2.D 2.0 4,9 4.4 0.U 4,9 ~uurt Hill Fark 2-PAREEL 9reller, Grau [ 110 1 2 2 2 i.l 100% i.U i.U N Y 2.0 20 -0.4 U.U 4.4 -0,4 rourt Hill Park 2PARCEL Eheltyr, Grou [ 111 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2G 2.0 9.4 0.0 4.4 4,9 I.nurt HIII Park 2PARCEL MP Field tare [ 112 1 2 2 1.1 100% 1.U 1.U Y IV 2.0 2U 4.4 4,4 0.0 4.9 Court Hill Park 2-PARCEL en Watt' [ 713 1 2 2 2 Ll IOU% LO LO N Y 2.G 20 4.4 U.U 4.4 4,4 Kurt HIII Park t`PARCEI en Watr 0 [ 321 I 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2.G 20 9.4 U.0 4.4 9,9 Court Hill Parlc 2PARCEL Nlako'Aaeas, General [ 322 2 2 2 2 1.1 100% LU 2.O Y N 217 4.0 4,4 4.4 O.p 8.A Guurt HIIIPaY1: ~~PARGEL IVaNral Area [ 323 1 1 1 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 1.0 L.D 2.2 0.U 2.2 2.2 Court Hill Part[ 2PARCEL Educational EA erieiue [ 324 I 1 I 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y N S.U 1.0 2.2 2.2 0.G 2~2 8traam restoration sign IEOUrt HIII Parlr ;PARCEL P4RCEL [ P007 1 2 2 1.1 UJ0% 1.U 1.U Y Y 2.G 2.0 4.9 4.4 4,4 4.9 iandk Fark 1-P4RCEL Er 4stin_ [ 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 I7 1.2 70000/n 26.4 14.4 19.2 26,4 Erendlc Perk 2-P4RCEL 5relter [ 85 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2.G 2.0 9.8 U.0 4.8 9,8 ~randlc Park Z-PARCEL - en 6~Vater [ 86 1 3 3 2 1.2 100% lA LU N Y 3.17 20 7.2 0.U 7.2 7.2 ~randlcFark a-FARGiL lti'aWi ~4rr ss, General [ 325 1 3 3 2 1.2 100% lA 1.U Y IV 30 30 7.2 7.2 U.0 7~2 Erendlc Park 2-P4RCEL n-en TUrF [ 326 I 1 I 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y LU 1.0 2.4 2.4 24 2,9 Erendlc Park 3-PARCEL PARCEL [ P008 1 2 2 2 1.2 U7U% 1.U 1.0 Y Y 2-0 20 4.8 4.8 4,8 49 Greekside--Park 1-PARCEL Ea~n'tin C 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 19 12 ICUI 30.0 21.4 19,4 30,0 Cree4',sitle Park 2-PPACEL Svelter, Gina- C 119 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.8 2.0 9.8 0,0 4.8 9.8 Csee4~.sitle Park 2-PPACEL Baaket'Uall C 115 0.5 1 1 2 1.2 100% 0.5 O.S Y N 0.5 0.5 1.2 12 0.0 1.2 Lkrak',sitle Fark 2f'PACEL Bad:stU Fracti[e C llfi 1 2 2 2 1.2 107% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 9,8 0.0 4.8 Cree4~sitle Park 2-PPACEL MP Field, Large G 117 1 2 2 1.2 100% lA 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 4.8 0.0 4.8 Cree4~sitle Park 2-PARCEL Pla~~'q~ountl, Ln[al C 118 1 1 1 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 1.0 1.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 Crvek',sitle Park 2fPACEL en iPo'aror C 119 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.8 Uee4~.sitle Park 2-PPACEL NIa~rATw'as General C 120 1 1 1 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 1.0 1.0 2.4 2,9 0.0 2.4 Csee4~.sitle Park 3-PPACEL R4RCEL C F009 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 4,8 4.8 4,0 Fair P~Ieatlovds Fark 1-PPACEL Biu'tIh [ 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 1 2 0 0 2 0 17 1.2 100% 28.8 24,0 14A 28.8 Fair P~leatlova=Park 2fPRCEL Pla~'gmund, tUCal [ 121 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.9 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 4.8 no ADA access Fair P~leatlovas Park 2fPACEL S~eltzr c 122 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 20 2A 4,8 0,0 4.8 4,8 Fair Pkeatlovds Park 2fPACEL en TUrf c 123 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 4,8 4.8 4.8 Fair P~leadgx~s Park 2-PPACEL 4'olle'+Lsall c 129 1 2 2 2 1.2 iCm% 1.0 1.O Y N 20 2.U 9.8 9,8 0.0 9.8 sand Fair P~leadovla Park 2-PPACEL MP Fleld, Small c 327 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2A 4.8 9.8 0.0 4.8 Fair Nleadnvds Park 3fPACEL P,4RGEL c P010 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 ~n 4.8 98 4.8 4.8 wm~ePekl rPARCEL wtu~ c I a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o Ll loo% zz 2z 2.z Fatale Pekl 3-PPACEL PARCEL c P064 1 2 2 1 1.1 10096 1.0 lA Y Y 2A 20 22 22 2.2 wm~>; FaR:2 rPARwL Hrmre c I a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o 1.1 lon% 2.z z2 z.z wm~eFe+~ 3-PP,RCEL aaaea c ease 1 z z 1 1.1 IM% 1.0 1.o v v z.o ae 2.z zz - zz wm~ePek3 rPARCEL wru~e c I a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o 1.1 lou% 2.z 2z z2 z.z H~m~> FaR 3 3-PARwL RnRceL c ~lfi; 1 2 z 1 1.1 loo% l.o l.o v r z.u z3 2.z zz z2 z.z wm~ePek4 rPARCEL wtwe c I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o G 1.1 loo% z2 2z az Fatale Pek4 3-PPACEL PARCEL [ P068 1 2 2 1 1.1 10096 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 2.2 22 2.2 2.2 H~m~> FaR 6 rPARwL Hrmre c l a a a a o o o a a a a a o o 0 1.1 lon% 2.z z2 2.2 2.z wm~eFeks 3-PP,RCEL eaACa c ea62 1 z z t 1.1 1M% 1.0 1.o v v z.o 20 2.z zz z.z z.z wm~ePeke rPARCEL wrwe c l o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1 lou% 2.z 2z za z.z Fatlaiy Fark 6 3-PPACEL PARCEL t R]Si 1 2 2 1 1.1 I00% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.2 2,2 2.2 2.2 wm~ePek7 rPARCEL wture c I a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o L1 loo% z.2 z.z z.2 2.z Fatale Pek7 3-PPACEL ARCEL c P061 1 2 2 1 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 9lentlala Part: rPPACeL E,an~, c 2 a 2 a 2 a a a 2 1 1 a a a 2 l0 1.1 loo% 13.z 13,2 a.e 13.z Glendale Park 2fARCEL Fr~rgmun~, total c 5 1 2 1.1 iM% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 20 9.4 9.9 0.9 9.4 no DAA or azeess Glendale Park 2-PPACEL en TUrf ~ c 329 I ~ 2 2 1.1 100% 1-0 1-0 Y Y 2.0 2.u 4.4 4.4 4A 4.4 "lendale Fark 3-PPACEL P,4RCEL c P171S 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.'L~ ~p q,q q,y q,4 q,q Ha--~+HOllo';9~Park 1fPRCEL E,rntinq c 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 0 0 2 14 12 100% 252 20.4 14.4 25.2 Ha--~+HOIIaN~Park. 2fPACEL 8allfeld c 6 1 2 2 2 1.2 10096 1.0 lA Y N 2.0 2.0 9.3 4,8 d.0 9.8 Ha v HUIIUw Part: 2PJACEL SselLr', Grou c 1 2 2 2 L2 IW % 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.6 Res7oorrti Included Ha--~+HOllo'wt~ Park CvPRCEL Pla~'gmund, local c 8 1 ~ 2 1.2 1M% 1.0 1.0 '/ N - Lu 2.0 9.8 98 U,0 9.8 nol At).4 nn access Ha--+~HOllo';9~Park 2fPACEL --en iorf ~ c 9 I ~ 2 2 L2 100% 1-0 1-0 Y Y 2,0 2u 4.8 9.8 4.8 4.8 Ha 'v HUIIuU+Park 2PPACEL BaslPthall c 10 0.5 1 1 2 1.2 100% 0.5 O.S Y N d.5 rc5 1.2 1.2 0.0 1.2 Ha--~+HOllo';9~Park 3fPRCEL R4RCEL c P012 1 2 2 2 12 1009ti 1.0 1.O Y Y - 2.0 4.8 9.8 4.8 4.8 Harlod:e HIII Park SfPRCEL E,rntinq c 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 8 1.1 10096 132 13.2 8.8 8.8 HarlUd:e HIII Park 2-PPACEL Flar'gmund, LOCaI c 330 1 2 1 2 1.1 IW% 1.0 1.O Y N 0 1.0 4.4 4,4 0.0 2.2 no ADA access or shvcNre Harlod:e HIII Park 2-PPACEL --en 7urt c 331 I 2 I 2 1.1 lOl% 1.0 1.O Y Y -0 10 9.4 4,9 4.9 2.2 Harlod:e HIII Park 3-PPACEL P,4RCEL c Po13 1 2 2 2 1.1 IW% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 2.6 4,4 4,4 4.9 4,4 Hidorv Hlll Park 1fPACEL Br4stin_ c 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 0 2 2 0 2 2 26 1.3 100% 57.2 23,4 57.2 ~.fi Hidor+HIII Perk 2-PPACEL 55eltzr, grou c 11 1 2 2 2 1.3 ID]% lA 1.0 N Y 2,0 e.0 52 0,0 52 5.2 Hidor+HIII Perk 2-PPACEL Loo-k'Jelk [ 12 1 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 52 52 5.2 5.2 Hi~orl~Hlll Fark 2-FJACEL Nahiral 4rea c 13 1 3 3 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 3.0 3.0 7.8 0,0 7.8 7.B Woodland Hidor+HIII Perk 2-PPACEL Shelt?r, Gi+CU- c 17 1 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 5.2 0,0 52 5.2 Hi~or+HIII Park 2-PPACEL -en Turf c 18 I 2 2 2 1.3 IW% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 5.2 5.2 52 5.2 Hidorv Hlll Park 2-PPACEL Trai4; Frimifive c 332 4 3 3 2 1.3 100% 1.0 4.O Y Y 3.0 12.0 7.8 7,8 7.8 31.2 Hidor+HIII Park 2-PPACEL Pessii~e klmle c 333 1 2 2 2 1.3 100% lA 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 5.2 0,0 52 5.2 Hidor+HIII Park ?-PPACEL Na4iral Area c 372 1 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 52 0,0 5.2 5.2 Pravie Hidorv Hlll Fark 2-PPACEL Nahiral Area c 373 1 2 2 2 1.3 irA% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 5.2 0,0 5.2 5.2 Butterf! Hidor+HIII Park 3-PPACEL PARCEL c Po19 1 2 2 2 1.3 IN]% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 52 52 5.2 5.2 Highland Park 1fPRCEL E~:Utlnq c 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 2 10 1.1 100% 6.6 6.6 4,9 6.6 HI_hJand Fark 2PPACEL Plat round, Local 125 1 1 I 2 1.1 300% 1.0 1.0 Y N 1.0 1.0 2.2 2,2 0.0 2.2 not PDA no access Highland Pan: BfPRCEL R4RLA c PO15 1 2 2 2 LI 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 44 9A 4,9 4.4 Hunts RUn Palk 1~4RCEL 6tvtksg c 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 12 1.2 100% 38.4 L.2 33.6 43.2 Hunters Run Palk 2-F,4RCEL Plao'gmrv~d, LOC31 [ 200 2 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 2.O Y N 2A 4.0 4.8 9,9 OA 9.6 no ADA access, arlHOm an new HunLrs A,un Palk ~4RCEL - en 7urt ~ c 201 I 2 ~ 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 9,8 9,8 45 9.8 Hundss RUn Patk 2-P,4RCEL Loo-Walk 202 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 9.8 4.8 4,8 Hunters P,un Falk 2-F,4RCEL ~Fn 6~'aNr t 203 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.8 Hundss Run Palk 'E-P~4RCEL 55eIWj, Giau- c 204 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.U 4.8 0.0 4.8 4.6 Hundss Run Palk ~4RCEL SIeINx. Ginu~ c 205 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4,8 Hunters P,un Paik 2-F,4RCEL Nyhiral4rea c 20fi 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.t7 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.8 HunLrs A,un Rsik 3-P,4RCEL F4RCA c Polio 1 2 2 2 12 1N]% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2-0 2U 9.8 9,8 4,8 9.8 ICKi~era Aaer eazk 1~4RCEL E,:p7ing c 2 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 22 1.2 100% 45.6 312 19.2 74.4 Ir0 Killers *~~:sar Park 2-F,4RCEL :halter, Grou t 127 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 Wn q,g p,0 4.8 4.8 Il"Kidera Ter Park ~4RCEL Ehelw,r, Giau- c 128 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 20 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.8 IC Kid - _er Park ?-P,4RCEL a c 129 1 0 0 2 12 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 0,0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 O.O R~tronms inducted IC Kid ~. rnr Fmk 2-F,4RCEL c 130 1 0 P 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 0.0 n,p 0.0 0,0 0.0 O.O Res7ooms Included IC Killer; ~Ccer Park ~4RCEL MP Field, Small c 131 6 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 6.O Y N 2,0 12.0 9.8 4,8 0.0 28.8 IC Kidera ~crer Pan: ~4RCEL MP Fleltl, k9aiiu rn c 376 6 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 6.O Y N 2,0 12.U 0.0 0.0 0.0 OA IrO Killers ~r~r Fark 2-F,4RCEL MF Field, Lm_e 377 5 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 S.O Y N 2.0 10,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 IC Kid er Park 'E-P~4RCEL _ dex, MP Field c 132 1 3 3 2 12 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N - 7.0 7.2 7.2 0.0 7.2 IC Kid - -er Park ~4RCEL Pl.~~q-rsnd, Local c 133 I 2 2 1.2 10096 1.0 1.O Y N 1 2.0 4.3 9,8 0.0 4.8 no ADA access IC Kid cur Perk 2-F,4RCEL Ballfieltl [ 334 2 2 2 2 L2 IG095 1.0 2.O Y N 0 2 4.0 4.8 4,8 OA 9.6 IC Kid - er Park ~4RCEL Pu'UII[,4rt c 335 1 2 2 2 1.2 10096 1.0 1.O N Y - U 2.0 9.8 0,0 4.8 9.8 soa?r scU Aira IC Ki~eas ~C~r Pan: 2-P,4RCEL Ballfieltl c 374 1 2 2 2 L2 10096 1.0 1.O Y N 2,0 2.U 4.8 9,8 0.0 4.8 IrO Kid ~ ~r Fark 2-F,4RCEL T I I'I_iltiuse L 375 I 2 2 12 1009'a 1.0 1.O Y N 20 2,0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 IC Kidera ~cer Park 3-P,4RCEL P4RCEL c P017 1 2 2 2 12 100% lA 1.O Y Y 20 20 4.8 9.8 4.8 4.8 Kivaanis Part: 1-PPACEL 6rntinq c 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 3 2 2 0 2 2 25 1.3 100% 54.6 33.8 41.6 59.6 K nwanis Farl: 2-PPACEL EheILr, Genus c 20i 1 2 2 2 1.3 IrA% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 20 5.2 0,0 5.2 5.2 Kirwanis Pan: 2-PPACEL Loo-k'Jelk ~ 208 1 2 2 1.3 107% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 5.2 52 52 5.2 Kirwanis Pan: 2-PPACEL -en Turf 0 c 209 I 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 52 52 52 5.2 KiVaanis Fark 2f'PACEL Plav_mund, Destesatlon 210 1 3 3 2 1.3 107% 1.0 1.O Y N 3.0 3.0 3.8 7,8 0.0 3.8 PDA OY, AiVaanis Pan: 2-PPACEL --en llb'arer c 211 I 2 2 1.3 ID]% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.9 2.0 52 0,0 52 5.2 AiVaanis Pan: 2fPACEL Nahiral,4rea c 212 1 2 2 2 13 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2A 2.0 5.2 0,0 52 5.2 Knwanis Farl: 2-PPACEL en TUrf c 213 1 2 2 2 13 177% 1.0 1.O Y Y Z.0 2.0 5.2 52 5.2 5.2 Kiwanis Pan: 2-PPACEL Pasei~aeNOde c 378 1 2 2 2 1.3 10]% 1.0 1.O N Y -~ 20 5.2 0,0 52 5.2 KiVaanis Pan: 2-PPACEL Trail MUlGUZ [ 379 I 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 20 5.2 5.2 0.0 5.2 KiVdanis Farl: 3-PPACEL P,4RQi t PO18 1 2 2 2 1.3 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2,n 5.2 5,2 5.2 5.2 Mercer Park 1~4RCEL E,rutinq c 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 0 23 12 100% 49.4 39,8 14.9 75.6 Mercer Park ~4RCEL Pla~'gmunQ LUCaI c 134 1 1 1 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N L.0 1.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 Mercer Fark 2-F,4RCEL 5'selLr, Gina c 135 1 2 2 2 1.2 1rA% 1.0 1.0 N Y 0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.8 Merps Park ~4RCEL --en TUrf c 136 2 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 2.O Y Y -0 40 9.8 4,8 4.8 9.6 Manes Park 2f,4RCEL Bads-to ,Practice [ 137 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2,0 2u 4,8 4.8 0.0 4,8 Mercer Park 2-F,4RCEL Tennls c 138 1 2 2 2 1.2 iD7% 1.0 1.O N N i1 2,0 4.8 0,0 0.0 4.8 Mercer Park ~4RCEL Ballfeltl c 140 4 2 2 1 2 12 ID7% 1.5 6.O Y N 7,0 12.0 7.2 7.2 0.0 28.8 Herres Park 'E-P~4RCEL Batting Cage c 193 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 2.O Y N -0 4.0 4.3 9,8 0.0 9.6 Mercer Fark 2-F,4RCEL a ns c 145 1 2 2 2 L2 IGO% 1.0 1.O Y N Zu 2.0 4.8 4,9 OA 4.B Res7ooms Included Herres Park ?-P,4RCEL Ba;kEtball c 196 0.5 1 1 2 1.2 1M% 0.5 O.S Y N 0.` 0.5 1.2 1.2 0.0 12 Merr~Park ~4RCEL MalnrrvaranW c 147 1 o n z is 100% Lo Lo Y N o.u un o.u oo u.o o.o n~er~rFark aF4RCEL R4RCCC c aal9 1 2 z 2 1.z 100% l.0 1.o Y r z.o 2.0 9s 4,e a.a 9s NanleenPafi rPARCEL E,rusnr c z z z o o z o z z 3 z z a z o 14 2z loo% so.4 95a z3.e 86.4 Na-olenn Park 2-PPACEL 8allfeltl c 151 4 2 2 1 2 1.2 10096 1.5 6A Y N 3.0 12.0 72 7.2 0.U 28.8 NapUlenn Pmk z-PARCEL aaimem c lsa 9 z z z 1.2 1E~9a l.0 9.o v N z.o s.o 9s as o.o le.z Na-oleon Paiic ?-PPACEL Corn dz`,c, B~allfield c 157 1 2 2 1.2 iM% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2A 2.0 9.8 9.8 0.0 9.8 Na-olenn Park 2-PPACEL EhelWx GIDU' c 159 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0.0 4.8 4.8 Na Ulenn Falk 2fPACEL GhUltzr, Gnsu t 1fi0 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 20 2,n 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.6 Na-olean Paik ?-PPACEL Pla~'gnnind, Local c 161 1 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N - 2.0 4.8 9.8 0.0 4.3 ADA OK Na-oleon Paik ?-PPACEL Loo- Walk c 162 I 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 4.3 9,8 4.8 4.8 Na Uleun Palk 2fPACEL essions c 362 1 2 2 2 1.2 1rOJ% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 20 2.0 4.8 4,8 4.8 4.8 Res7ooms Included Na-oleos Pak ?-PPACEL Trail, P~lultiuse c 380 I 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 9.8 4,8 4.8 9.8 Na-oleos Pak 3-PPACEL R4RCEL c F020 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 4,8 4.8 4,8 Netl Fshmn Fark 1f4RCEL BM1Stin_ c 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 2 3 2 0 2 2 2 17 1.2 100% 1fi.8 16,8 4.8 1fi.8 ttailhead Netl .dshmn Part. 2-P,4RCEL Waror Asses, General [ 214 1 1 1 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 1.0 1.0 2.9 24 0.0 2.4 Netl .dshmn Part. 2-P,4RCEL Surational E;: eren[e [ 381 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4,8 4,8 0.0 4,8 Netl ,dshmn Par4, 2-F,4RCEL Trail, PUUIh'use c 382 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 4.8 Netl .dshmn Part. 3-P,4RCEL PPACEL [ Po21 1 2 2 2 1.2 1CG% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 9.8 9,8 4.8 9.8 North PAart~.etS Uare Park 1-PPACEL F:ntinq [ 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 2 13 1.2 100% 21.6 16.8 14,9 21.6 Nortli hrlar4,ets uara Fark 2fPACEL Flav'-mood, LOCai 19 I 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4R 9,9 0.0 4.6 attess ok, hulnOYdm,AOA Ok On shu[tu'e, but notewins North PAarketS Uare Park 2f4RCEL Bask~ettlall [ 20 1 1 1 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N I{i 1.U 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 North PalarketS Uare Park 2f4RCEL Seltea', Giou~ [ 21 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.3 0.0 4.8 4.8 North Market ~_u3rP Fark 2fPACEL en iorf c 22 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 4.9 4.A 4.8 North Palarket'usre Park 3-PPACEL Ro'RCEL c F022 1 2 2 2 12 10]% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.U 9.8 9,A 4.8 4.8 Oak Gr[rve Park 1~4RCEL F:ntinq [ 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 13 1.2 100% 24.0 192 14.9 24.0 Oak 6rasa Fak 2-F,4RCEL 9relLr c 153 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.6 Oak Girrve Park 2-P,4RCEL Pla~~gnsund, Lacal c 164 I 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.U 4.8 4.8 0.0 4.8 no ADA access Oak Grove Park 2-P,gRCEL Ba,kethall [ 165 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4.3 9,8 0.0 4.8 Oak 6rova Fmk 2-F,4RCEL " yen i~~rf c 15n 1 2 2 2 1.2 IrA% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2A 't.0 4.8 4,8 4.8 4,fl Oak Grove Pak 3-P,4RCEL PPACEL c P023 1 2 2 2 12 iN]% 1.0 1.O Y Y -0 2.0 9.8 4,8 4.8 4,8 Pedsnian P~lall Sf4RCEL E,:Rttlnq c 3 2 2 0 2 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 15 1.2 100% 46.8 18,0 ~.0 100.5 Pedestrian Nlall 2-PPACEL ror Featun; t 345 1 2 2 3 1.2 I00% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2n 7.2 0.0 7.2 ~ L hsunlain Pedsnian P~lall 2-PPACEL Pla~'gNUnd, Destination c 3A7 I 3 3 3 12 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 3.0 7.0 10.8 10.8 0.0 10.5 40A ok Pedsnian PUali 2f4RCEL Passive Natle [ 348 3 3 3 3 1.2 10095 1.0 3.0 N Y 'u v.0 10.3 0.0 ll7,e '~2.4 Padestrlan PUaII 2f'PRCEL FuhII~Art [ 349 4 3 3 3 12 16096 1.0 4.0 N Y 3,l 120 10.8 0.0 iit.f:'~ 93 e,' Pedsnian Pull 3-PPACEL R4RLR c FO56 1 2 2 3 1.2 10096 1.0 1.0 Y Y -0 20 7.2 7.2 7,2 7.G Peninsula Pak 1-PPACEL F:ntinq c 2 2 2 0 2 0 0 1 2 1 2 1 0 0 1 14 1.2 10095 33.6 29.0 26.4 33.E Fanlnsula Park 2fPACEL Doq Park t fl7 I 3 3 2 L2 10095 1.0 1.O Y Y 3.0 3.0 7.2 72 - ?.2 Peninsula Pak 2f4RCEL Dis Golf [ 88 1 2 2 2 L2 10096 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.U 4.8 4.8 0.O 4.8 peninsula Pak 2f4RCEL a~Water c 89 I 2 2 1.2 1009a 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0.0 4.8 4.8 Peninsula Falk 2fPACEL NIaA;r As4as, General c 90 1 1 1 2 L2 16095 1.0 1.0 Y N IA 1.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 Peninsula Park 2-PPACEL Puhlls,4rt [ 3A3 1 2 2 2 1.2 10095 1.0 1.O N Y 2,0 2U 4,8 0.0 4'3 4.8 Peninsula Pak 2-PPACEL Loo-U'Jelk 384 I 2 2 1.2 10096 1A lA Y Y 2.0 20 48 4.A 4,5 4.F Fanlnsula Park 3-PPACEL R4RCEL t 8724 1 2 2 2 1,2 10095 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 ~0 4.8 9..9 4.8 4.A Pheasairt Hlll Rarf; 1-PPACEL F:ntinq c 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1G 1.1 10096 17.6 13.2 L32 17.6 Pheasant Hlll Park 2f4RCEL Pla~~gNUnQ LUCaI ~ 23 1 2 1.1 1009a 1.0 lA Y N 2.0 20 44 4A 0.0 4.4 noE QD.4 a¢ass or struRure Pheasant Hill Fark 2fPACEL en iorf c 24 1 2 2 2 1.1 16095 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 Pheasant Hlll Park 2-PPACEL Seltx c 336 1 2 2 2 1.1 1OU96 1.0 1.O N Y 20 20 4.4 0,0 44 4.4 Pheasant Hlll Park 3-PPACEL R4RCEL [ P025 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2u 20 4.4 9,4 4.4 4,4 Rena Street Fark 1-PPACEL 6iu'th_ [ 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 0 3 0 2 0 2 2 2 18 l.2 100% 24.0 19,2 14.4 24.0 keno 57eet Park 2-PPACEL Pla~~gnsuM, Lgca c 25 I 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 20 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 4.8 nke slrucAlre AOA, no AOA a¢ess Reno 57eet Park 2f4RCEL 0-en TUrf c 26 1 ~ 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y ru 2U 4.8 9,8 4.8 4.8 Reno5traetPak 2f'PRCEL Flavgmund LOCaI [ 27 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 4.8 swn sandslfde, ro ADAa[mss Reno 57eet Park 2-PPACEL Seltex [ 337 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 9.8 0,0 4.8 9.8 Reno Street Park 3-PPACEL R4RCEL c F026 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 4,8 4.8 4.A RVarons Waads Falk 1f4RCEL Brktin_ c 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 13 1.2 100% 24.0 9,fi 19.2 2A.5 R~~ersons Woods Palk 2-P,4RCEL 55eltar [ 215 1 2 2 2 12 100% lA 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 4,5 R~~ersoru 6VOOds Palk 2-P,4RCEL Nahiral Area c 216 1 2 2 2 12 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 0,0 4.8 4.5 PVarSC '. ands Falk 2-F,4RCEL T Flmitde c 353 2 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 2.O Y N 2.0 4.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 a -~lOth: sartrn AOA xcess R~~ersoru-6VOOds Pak 2-P,4RCEL NaeirelArea c 385 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 9.8 0,0 4.8 4.5 restorad reirie R~~ersoru-6VOOds Pak 3-P,4RCEL PPACEL c Po27 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 4,8 4.8 4b~ Snd Lake Parl: 1-PPACEL 6r4stin_ c 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 7 1.1 100% 13.2 4,4 13.2 13,2 Sntl Lake Part: 2-PARCEL Nadiral,4rea [ 338 1 2 2 2 1.1 ID]% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0,0 4.9 4,4 Sntl Lake Part: 2-FpACEI -en I,b'aror O [ 339 1 ~ 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0,0 4.4 4.4 end Lake Parl: 3-PARCEL P,4RCEL c Po28 1 2 2 2 1.1 1rA% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 4,4 4A 4.4 Sntl Praise Fark 1-PPACEL F:rstinq [ 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1.1 100% 11.0 9.9 11.0 11.0 Sntl Prairie Pak 2-PPACEL Nahiral,4rza c 342 1 3 3 2 1.1 IW% 1.0 1.O N Y 3.0 3.0 6.6 0.0 6.6 6.E 9nd Praha Park 3~PPRCEL P,4RCEL c F029 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 9,4 4A 4.4 r2att Park 1-PARCEL E:6tP [ 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 8 1.1 100% 37.4 22,0 242 50.6 Stitt Park 2-PPACEL Pla~~grounu', Lgcal ~ 167 I 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 4,4 4,4 0.0 4,4 Satt Fark 2fPACEL ehalror [ 168 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0,0 4A 4.A Stitt Park 2-PPACEL - -en 7urt ~ c 169 I 2 ~ 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 9.4 4,9 4.9 9.4 Stitt Park 2-PPACEL Iv9P Fleld, Large 170 4 2 2 2 1.1 IW% 1.0 4,0 Y N 2.0 8.0 4.4 9,4 0.0 17.E Satt Fark 2fPACEL rFn 6h'aror t lli 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0.0 4A 4.4 Stitt Park 2-PPACEL Nadiral,4rea [ 172 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 D.0 4.9 4.4 Stitt Park 2-PPACEL MP Feld, Snrall c 343 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 4,4 4,4 0.0 4.4 Satt Fark 2fPACEL en Waror [ 344 1 1 I 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 1.0 1.0 2.2 0,0 2.2 2.2 ~sott Park 2-PPACEL Tree NUrserv c 386 1 0 0 2 1.1 iCm% 1.0 1.O Y Y 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 Stitt Perk 3-Fn.RCEI R4RCEL c F030 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2A 4.4 9.4 4.9 4.4 2uth S~ramma Gl'eerr a/rrail S-PARCEL Eke[Lh [ 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 6 1.1 100% 4.4 9,4 4.4 4.4 Suth S+samoie GlYanm ~Trall 2-P6.RCEL Putllis,4rt [ 387 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0,0 4.9 4.4 Bads In Fli ht Such 4~~samoie Greenw ~/rrail 2~ARCc1 Surational E:; erkn[e [ 388 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4,4 0,0 4.4 4,4 8krmvuater FllVat~wn SuHi S,~~more 67eanw /frail 3-FPA[EL PPACEL c Pofi0 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2A 2.0 4.4 4,4 4A 4.A Eturgrs Feary~Paik 1~4RCEL F:rstinq [ 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 1 8 1.1 100% 5.5 3,3 4.9 6.6 Eturgrs Fan~Paik ~4RCEL Waror Awes, Oeve ed c 217 I 1 2 1 1.1 IW% 1.0 1.O Y N 1,u 20 1.1 I.1 0.0 22 boat ram Ehir_4s Fenv'Faik 2-F,4RCEL "pan 60'aLr t 218 I 2 2 1 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.i1 ~n 2,2 p,0 2,2 2,2 Eturgrs Fani Paik 3-P,4RCEL PPACEL [ Po31 1 2 2 1 1.1 100% lA 1.0 Y Y 20 2A 22 2.2 22 2.2 T ro=ll k9ill Part: 1~4RCEL F:ntinq c 3 0 2 2 0 1 2 0 3 2 2 2 0 1 2 19 1.2 10095 72A 46,8 32.9 R.0 Tanell k9ill Fah: 2-F,4RCEL 4[ate Fark c 9i 1 2 2 3 1,2 IG095 1.0 1.O Y N Z.0 2.0 7.2 72 0.0 7.2 T well kgill Park 2-P~4RCEL Sieltar [ 92 1 1 1 3 1.2 10095 1.0 1.0 N Y 1,0 10 3.6 0,0 3.E 3.6 T well k9ill Fart: 'E-P~4RCEL Volle+hall [ 93 1 1 1 3 1.2 10096 1.0 1.0 Y N 1,0 1.U 3.6 3.6 0.0 3.E Terrell Nlill Parl: 2-F,4RCEL en iorf L 94 I 2 2 3 1.2 10A 95 1.0 1.O Y Y 2U ~D 7.2 7,2 J.2 7.2 T well k9iil P1r '2-P~4RCEL - -en liti~arer [ 95 I 2 2 3 12 10096 lA 1.0 N Y 20 2.U 72 0,0 7.2 7.2 T well k9itl Fark 2-P~4RCEL VUa~r Ascws, General c 96 1 2 2 d 1.2 1009b 1.0 1.0 Y N 20 2-0 72 7,2 0.0 72 Terrell NIIII Fark 2-F,4RCEL Fuhll~,4rt [ 9i 1 2 2 3 1.2 1W% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 7.2 0,0 7.2 7.2 T well kgill Fark 2-P~4RCEL Trail, P~lultiuse c 389 I 2 3 1.2 1D7% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 7.2 72 0.0 72 T well k9itl Part: ~4RCEL Sutatienal Ex-eriarce 390 1 2 2 3 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 72 7.2 0.0 72 Terrell Mlll mill stows Terrell k9ill Parl: 2-F,4RCEL Stru~a~i>; c 391 1 2 2 3 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N N 2.0 2.0 7.2 0,0 0.0 7.2 FUMe boat lmuse furU Of Iowa T well k9ill Part: 3-P,4RCEL PPACEL [ P032 1 2 2 3 12 100% lA 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 T n~er COUrt Park 1~4RCEL B:VStkr c 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 12 1.2 100% 12.0 12,0 9.6 12.0 Tawer C.aurt Fark 2-F,4RCEL Plavgmrvid, LGtai [ 221 1 1 1 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 1.0 1.0 2.4 24 0.0 2A not ADA ,rot man Ia o IlOns T rv'sr COUrl Park 2-P~4RCEL O-[~n 7urt [ 345 I 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 9.8 4,8 4.8 9.8 T rv'er Cwrt Pa& 3-P,4RCEL PPACEL [ Po33 1 2 2 2 1.2 Id]% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 9,8 4.8 4,6 Villa Fark 1-PPACEL 6inth_ [ 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 8 1.1 100% 17.5 17,fi 13.2 ll.6 Villa Park 2f4RCEL Pla~rgrprmd total [ 222 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4,4 4.4 0.0 4,4 nol ADA a[[ess 'ilia Park 2f4RCEL _~n Turf c 223 1 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 44 9,4 4.4 4,4 Villa Fark 2fPACEL Dan TUrf [ 224 1 2 2 2 1.1 IW% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 4A 4A 4.4 'ilia Park 3-PPACEL PARCEL c Po34 1 2 2 2 1.1 10096 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 9.4 4,4 4.4 VUaldar Wood Park 1-PPACEL F:pYln c 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 9 1.1 100% A.8 8,5 8.8 8.6 Walden Wood Fark 2fPACEL err Turf c 299 I 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 9.4 4A 4.4 VUaldar Wood Park 3-PPACEL Ro~RCA [ F062 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 4A 4,9 4.4 VUarorr~aorks Pralrie Park 1-PPACEL B:VStkr c 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 0 0 0 9 1.1 100% 33.0 24.2 ~.8 41.6 ilrlaronwarks Prairie Palk 2fPACEL en Waror [ 98 2 2 2 2 1.1 1rOJ% 1.0 2.O N Y 2.0 4.0 4.4 0,0 4A 9.6 VUaron~aorks Pralrie Pak 2-PPACEL Nahiral Area [ 99 2 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 2.O N Y 2.0 4.0 9.4 0,0 4.9 A.8 VUaron~aorks Prairie Pak 2-PPACEL VUaror,4,,ses, GSaleral c 102 1 1 1 2 1.1 Id]% 1.0 1.O Y N 1,0 1A 2.2 2.2 0.0 2.2 JUaron 4 Fslrie Palk 2fPACEL L Ir~alk 103 I 2 2 2 1.1 107% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 ~n q,q q,q 4A 4.4 VUaron~aorks Prairie Pak 2f4RCEL 55eIWj, Giau- [ 104 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 2.0 4,4 4.4 4.9 4.4 VUarrn~aorks Prairie Fark 2-PPACEL Nehiral Area c 392 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y r.u 20 44 4.4 4.4 4.4 Pra~'ie rzaWraWn,3locatiore JUaron k.F-31rie Paik 2f'PRCEL Ei .t snal Ex erlmue r ~J3 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 4.4 4A 4.4 4.4 1tistorlc Butler house VUarorvaorks Preirie Fmk 3-PPACEL R4RCR c Po35 1 2 2 2 1.1 iC0% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2,U 9.4 9.4 44 4.4 Wetherh~ Patk 1~4RCEL FCptinr [ 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 19 1.2 100% 57.6 90.A 3L2 E72 VUethardv'Park 2-F,4RCEL Loa NJalk lli I 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.u Ln 4.8 9,fl 4.8 4.A Wetherd~~Park 2-P~4RCEL 55eIWj, Gmu [ 174 1 2 2 1 2 12 100% 1.5 1.5 N Y 3,0 0 72 0,0 7.2 7.2 VJetherd~~Park 2-P~4RCEL Ca;kethall c 175 0.5 2 2 2 1.2 100% 0.5 0.5 Y N L,0 l.u 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 VUethardv Fark 2-F,4RCEL Flavground, tncai [ 17fi 1 2 2 2 1.2 1rA% 1.0 1.O Y N Zl 2p 4.8 4,8 0.0 4.8 NleNerd~'Park 2-P,4RCEL Pla~'gmund, Lxal [ ll7 I 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 9.8 4,8 0.0 9.8 VJeNerb~~Park ~4RCEL Ba?sto ,Practice c ll8 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 4,8 VUetlrerbV Fark 2-F~4RCEL M11F Fie Id, Lar_e [ ll9 9 2 2 2 1.2 IdJ% 1.0 3.O Y N 2.0 6.0 4.8 9,8 0.0 14.4 WeGrerb~' Park 2-P,4RCEL ~;anien, Comnxinib~ c 180 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 4.8 0.0 4.8 VJeNerh~'Park 2-P,4RCEL n-en 7urf c 181 1 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 9,8 4.8 4.8 JJetlrerdb~ Fark 2-F,4RCEL Puhlla 4rt c 394 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.8 0,0 4.8 J leatll?r oa~1 antl shei~r railin s VJeNerb~'Park 2-P,4RCEL NapiralAnve c 395 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 9.8 0.0 4.8 4.H Prole resNretncn, ser~erel locatlona We&~erb~~Park 3-P,4RCEL P4RC~fl c Po36 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 4,8 4.8 4.8 JJhle ~~ f l 1 ".. Wetlands Park 1f P EL Etn'th_ c 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 5 1.1 100% 22.0 8,8 22.0 22.0 Whi.--el'Inq PAeadoovs Wetlands Fark 2-PPACEL - -en kNa@r c 182 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% lA 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4.9 0,0 4.9 4.4 Whi. -erinq Meatlo~NS Wetandq Park 2-PARCEL Loo- V'Jalk [ 183 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2A 4,4 9A 4.4 4,4 JJhIW~ fl 1 =. Nletl rds Park 2-PPACEL IJ hral Area c 184 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0,0 4A 4.A Nlhi.-el'Inq Palealows Nletlande Park 2-PPACEL Passive Node c 396 1 2 2 2 1.1 1N]% 1.0 1.O N Y 2~0 2.U 9.4 0,0 4,9 9.4 0hcenato~n Deck Whi.--exlnq Nlvadowa Nletlan 3-PPACEL P4RCFi c Po37 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.u 2A 4.4 9,4 4.9 4.4 ',1JI orv Creek Fark 1-PPACEL 6dstRL c 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 0 0 2 29 1.2 100% 53.6 39,6 ~.4 57.6 Willoov Creak: Part. 2fPRCEL Pla~'gmuM, Local e 225 1 2 2 2 1.2 ID]% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 4.8 4,8 0.0 4.8 Willoov Creek Park 2fPACEL Srel~a, 6ivu- c 226 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 4,8 0,0 4.8 4,8 ',1JI orv Creek Fark. 2f'ARCEL Rsail~eAlode c 227 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 20 LO 4.8 0,0 4.8 4.8 Willoov Creak: FSrh' 2-PPACEL Nadiral Area e 228 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O N Y - ~.J 3.0 9.8 0.0 4.8 9.8 Willow Creek Pain 2-PPACEL MP HeIA Small c 229 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y N 20 2.U 4.8 9,8 0.0 4,8 :reek Fark uili rnv i 2f'PACEL Bad:stn,Prectica c 230 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.O Y N ZO ~n 4.8 9,fl 0.0 4.A Willoov Creak. Pain 2-PPACEL -en surf ~ c 231 I ~ 2 2 12 100% lA 1.O Y Y 2~0 2D 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 Willoov Creek Pain 2-PARCEL MP Field, Sna4 c 232 1 2 2 2 1.2 10096 1.0 1.O Y N 0 20 4,8 9,8 0.0 4,8 uili rnv Creek Fark. 2fPACEL en iorf c 233 I 2 2 2 L2 10095 1.0 1.0 Y Y ~ 0 2.0 4.8 4,8 4.8 4.8 Willoov Creek Par4~, 2-PPACEL -ten pMa%r ~ c 239 1 2 2 2 1.`t 1M% 1.0 1.O N Y -0 L. 20 9.8 0~0 4.8 48 Willow Creek Part'. 2-PPACEL Publlr,Rt c 397 1 2 2 2 LZ 100% 1.0 1.0 N Y 20 2U 4,8 0,0 4.8 4.A I orv Creel Fark 3f'ARCEL R4RCEL c Fl738 1 2 2 2 1.2 100% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.'Li ? 0 4.8 9.8 4.8 4.A Windsor Ridge Fait: 1~4RCEL Er:utinq c 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 8 1.1 100% 17.6 132 17.6 26.4 Windsor Ridge Fait: 2-P,4RCEL 0-en i,b'a%r c 186 1 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.0 PI Y 2.0 2.0 4.4 0,0 4.4 4.4 'JJlndsnr RN_e Parl: 2-F,4RCEL Loo vValk [ 187 1 2 2 2 1.1 1G0% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2A 2.0 4.4 4,4 4A 4.A VUmdsor Ridge Fed; 2-P,4RCEL -en 7urt ~ c 188 3 2 2 2 1.1 1M% 1.0 3.O Y Y -7 u b.0 9.4 9.9 4.9 132 e WmdaorRldge Pad: 3-P~4RCEL P~4RCEL c Po39 1 2 2 2 1.1 100% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 2U 4,4 4,4 4.9 4,4 Citd HS 1fPACEL 2 0 1.2 50% 7.2 9,8 2A 19.2 Cih+HS 2-PPACEL Tennis 282 6 2 2 2 12 50% 1.0 6.O N N 2,0 12.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 14,4 Cih+HS 2-PPACEL ea0feld 283 1 0 0 2 1.2 5796 1.0 1.O Y N O.U 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 0.0 Citd HS 2fPACEL M19P FIeId, Lar_8 ~4 1 0 0 2 1.2 50?5 1.0 1.0 Y N OA 0,0 0.0 0,0 OA 0.0 Cih+HS 2-PPACEL Try, Corn retittml 285 1 2 1.2 SU96 1.0 1.0 '/ N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 CiN Hs 2-PPACEL MP FIeId, Lm ne 286 2 0 0 2 1.2 SU% 1A 2A Y N 0.0 u.u 0.0 0.0 0.0 OA Citd HS 3fPACEL P~4RCEL Fl74o 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 ~0 2.4 2.4 2.9 2.4 EmestHmn E5 1-FORCEL 2 0 12 50% 19.2 16.8 72 19.2 Emr•;t Ham E5 2fPACEL Pla~'gmunQ Local 300 I ~ 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N ru 20 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Ernest Hom E3 2-PPACEL Bad~sto r, Fra[tl~ 307 1 2 2 2 1.2 SJ% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.A Emet HOm E5 2-PPACEL Pla~'gmund, Local 302 I 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.9 0.0 2.4 Eme;t HOin ES 2-PPACEL Multiuse COUr[ 303 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.4 Prnes[HUm E5 2fPACEL dr en Turf 304 1 2 2 2 1.2 9]% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 2A 2.4 Emest HOm ES 2fPACEL 55e1t 305 1 2 2 2 12 W% 1.0 1.O N Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 0.0 2.9 2.4 Eme;t HOm ES 2-PPACEL Multiuse COUrt 306 1 2 2 2 1.2 9J% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.4 Ernes[HUm E5 3fPACEL P4RCR Po4i 1 2 2 2 1.2 `A% 1.0 1.0 Y Y Z.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 2A 2.A ~ran[',NOOd~ 1f~4RCEL 2 0 1.2 W% 9.6 9.6 2.9 12.0 ~ran['~NOOd 6 2f~4RCEL Pla~~'gmund, Lo[at 241 I 2 2 2 1.2 9J% 1.0 1.0 Y N 20 20 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Hran['~Nood Es 2-F~4RCEL Bas4Pthall 242 2 2 2 2 1.2 4J% 1.0 2.O Y N 271 4n S,q 2,q 0.0 4.A ~ran['~NOOd ~ 2-P~4RCEL M19P Field, Emlt 243 1 2 2 2 12 ~% lA 1.0 Y N 20 2.U 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 ~ran['~NOOd ~ 3-P~4RCEL P~4RCEI_ Po42 1 2 2 2 12 W% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 0 20 2.4 2,4 2.4 2.4 HelenLemmeES rPARwL z 9 1.z ~% 2zs zzfl 4.a ns Helaar lem rneB 2-PPACEL Pla~'gmund, Local 254 1 2 1."[ 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2d~ 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Helaar lem rneB 2-PPACEL Multiuse Caur[ 255 1 2 2 2 12 S~ii% 1A lA Y N 2.0 20 2.4 ZA 0.0 2.4 Helm Lemme ES 2-PPACEL Plav-mood, Local 256 I 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 "[.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 HeIrlr Lem rneB 2-PPACEL Basketball 257 1.5 2 2 2 12 509a LS LS Y N 3.0 3.0 3.6 3.6 0.0 3.6 Helen Lem rneB 2fPACEL 8a?'sto-,Prctice 258 1 2 2 1.2 5095 1.0 lA Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Helm Lem me ES 2fPACEL MF Field, Lar_e 259 1 2 2 2 1.2 5-95 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Helaar lem me B 2-PPACEL - _~ 7urt ~ 260 I 2 ~ 2 1.2 SU96 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.9 2.4 2.9 2.4 Helen ~mmea z~4,RCEL Pia~~gmnnd, Local 261 1 z 2 z 32 w% l.o l.o v N z.o 2.o z.4 z4 o.o z.4 Helm Lemme ES 3fPACEL P~4RCEL Po43 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 2A 2.4 Hermi LOngfelloov ES 1~4RCEL 2 U 12 Sll% 9.6 46 2.9 9.6 Henri Longfelloov ES ?P,4RCEL Pla~'gmund, Local 292 I 2 1.2 5096 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 Henri Lon_tallorv E5 2f~4RCEL M19u14'usp, [sot 2&3 1 2 2 2 L2 5-95 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 Her~ni Longfello~rv E5 2-P,4RCEL MP Field, Lane 294 1 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.U 2.9 2.4 0.0 2.4 Herm+Lrmgfallow ES 3-P,4RCEL P4RCfL Po44 1 2 2 2 1.2 ~% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2A 2.4 2.4 2.9 2.4 Hodder ES 1-PPACEL 2 0 1.2 9]% 14.4 14,4 4.8 14.4 Hoo'dar ES 2fPRCEL Pla~'gmund, Local 287 1 2 2 2 12 Yl% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.4 Hooaar ES 2fPACEL Multiuse Cawt 288 1 2 2 2 1.2 ~% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.4 Hoover ES 2fPACEL M19P Field, Snlall 289 1 2 2 2 L2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.A Hoover ES 2-PPACEL U En Turf 290 I 2 2 1.2 SLRS 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.9 2R 2.4 Hoo'dar E5 2-PPACEL Multiuse COUrt 291 1 2 2 2 1.2 5096 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2A 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Hoederes 3-PARwL P~4RCx a~L4s 1 z z z 1.z sow 1.0 1.o v r z.u z.n 2.4 24 zs 2.a HOIa@Palann ES 1-PPACEL 2 0 12 50% 72 72 2.9 Horao=Palann ES 2-PPACEL Pla~'gmund, local 295 I 2 1.2 5096 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 20 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 Hora~P+lann ES 2fPACEL MuIU'usE Crnnt 29fi 1 2 2 2 L2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 Horao=PAann ES 3-PPACEL P4RB P046 1 2 2 2 1.2 :A% 1.0 1.0 '( Y 2.0 20 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 IrY'inq N'ebere 1~4RCEL 2 0 L2 SU% 16.8 16.8 2R 19.2 Irv'inq Weber Es 2-F,4RCEL Plat YorPid, LGtal Z6? I 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.u 2.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 IrY'inq N'eber ES 2-P,4RCEL Multiuse Court 268 1 2 2 2 1.2 So 9a 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.U 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 1rY'inq N'eber ES ?P,4RCEL Multiuse COUrt 269 1 2 2 2 1.2 509b 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Irv~inq Weber EE 2-F,4RCEL Multiuse Ernut 270 1 2 2 2 1.2 `P 95 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.A Irving lN'eher ES 2-P,4RCEL Badsto',Pra[tire 271 I 2 2 1.[ `.U 96 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0~0 2.4 IrY'inq N'eber ~ 'C-P~4RCEL MP FIeId, Small 272 2 2 2 2 LZ 5096 1.0 2.0 Y N 2.0 4.0 2.4 2A 0.0 4.8 Irv~inq Weber ES 3-F,4RCEL P~4RCEL Po47 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2H 2.9 2.4 ^nm In ES 1-PPACEL 2 0 12 50% 14.4 14.4 7.2 14.4 Llnm In Eu 2-PPACEL Jnkno~rvn 262 1 2 2 2 1.2 5796 1.0 lA Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2A 2.4 2.4 Llnmin ES 2fPACEL Plao~gmund, Ldcal 263 1 2 2 2 L2 5095 1.0 1.O Y N Z.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Llnm In ES 2-PPACEL Multiuse Cawt 264 1 2 2 2 1."[ `.U9G 1.0 1.O Y N -0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Llnm In ES 2-PPACEL -en 7urf C 265 I 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 Llnmin ES 2~PPACEL Flav_mund, LOCaI Z66 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 271 Wn 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Llnm In ES 3-PPACEL P4RCEL Po48 1 2 2 2 12 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 2A 2.4 2.4 2.9 2.4 Mark Tvaain ES 1-PPACEL 2 0 1.2 50% 24.0 21.6 72 26.4 Mark Tddain ES 2fPACEL MF Fie Id, Lar_e 273 1 2 2 2 1.2 `,1J% 1.0 1.O Y N 2A 2.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 Mark Tvaain ES 2-PPACEL Pla~'gmund, Loral 279 I 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N 20 2.0 2.4 2.9 0.0 2.4 Mark Tvaein ES 2-PPACEL Multiuse COUr[ 275 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.4 Mark Tvaain ES 2-PPACEL Multiuse tnurt 27fi 1 2 2 2 1.2 97% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2,4 0.0 2.4 Mark Tvaain ES 2fPRCEL Pla~'gmuM, Loral 277 1 2 2 2 1.2 Jl% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Mark Tvaain E5 2-PPACEL Basketball 278 2 2 2 2 12 50% 1.0 2.0 Y N 2.0 4.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 4.8 Mark Tvaain ES 2fPACEL en Turf 239 1 2 2 2 L2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2A 2A 2.4 Mark Tvaein ES 2-PPACEL 5'relter 200 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 N Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 0,0 2.9 2.4 M19ark Tvaain ES 2-PPACEL 8ads[u ,Practice 281 I 2 2 2 1.2 SU% 1.0 1.0 Y N 20 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 Mark Tvaain EE 3fPACEL PARCK 8749 1 2 2 2 1.2 5096 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 2A 2.4 RnhertLUra;a 1-PPACEL 2 U 12 SORB 26.4 26.4 4.8 28.8 FtohertLU[as ES 2-PPACEL Pla~iground, lo[al 244 I 2 1.2 5095 1.0 lA Y N 20 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 RuhertLU[as EE 2fPACEL MF Field, Sfnall 245 1 2 2 2 L2 5-95 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 RnhertLUC.r, ES 2-PPACEL Oen 7urf 246 1 2 2 L2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 2A 2.4 2.4 2,9 2.4 RnhertLUCas~ 2-PPACEL Bad'sty ,Practice 247 I 2 2 2 1.2 9]% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 RuhertLU[a:ES 2fPACEL MultiuseCOwt 248 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.71 ~n 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.4 Rnhertlucas EE 2-PPACEL Basketball 240 2 2 2 2 12 50% 1.0 2.O Y N 2.0 4.0 2.4 2A 0.0 4.8 rohertLU<a;ES 2fPACEL Play' round Local 250 I 2 2 12 aN% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 2.4 2A 0.0 2.4 RuhertLUrasE 2-PPACEL Multiu2 Calnt 257 1 2 2 2 1.2 `,1J% 1.0 1.O Y N ~0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.A koha"t Wca; ES 2-PARCEL I/lultiuse COmi 252 1 2 2 2 1.2 90% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.9 koha"t WCa; ES 2-PARCEL Tot LOt 253 1 2 2 2 12 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 20 2.4 2.9 0.0 2.9 Rohert WCas ES 3FARCEL F4RGEL PO50 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 2.4 2.4 2.4 2,9 kauseY'elt ES 1-PAk~EL 2 0 1.2 50% 12.0 12.0 4.8 14.4 kouseY~elt Es 2-PARCEL Pla~~gmund, Incal 235 1 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y IJ 2.0 2,0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2,9 Roosevelt ES ~~PARCEL en Tura 23e 1 2 2 2 1.2 50'Y~ 1.0 1.0 Y Y 2.0 20 2A 2.A 2.4 2,4 koosevelt ES 2-PARCEL Ba;4~.ethall 277 2 2 1.2 5P3;~ 1.0 2.O Y IV 2.0 4,0 2.4 2,4 0.0 49 koosevelt ES 2-PARCEL Multiuse COUrt 238 1 2 2 2 12 5P% 1.0 1.O Y M 2.0 2.0 2.4 24 0.0 2.9 Roo-sevelt ES 3FARCEL P4RGEL P053 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 2.4 2.4 2.4 2,9 5~Irr~ek ES 1-PAk~EL 2 0 1.2 50`k 9.6 9.E 2.4 9.6 9llmak B 2-PARCEL Pla~oaround, Local 237 1 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 20 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2,9 5rlmek ES 7~ARGEL INUltluce COwt 298 1 2 2 2 L2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 20 20 2A 2.4 0.0 2,4 9~Irrrk ES 2-PARCEL I/IP Field fare 299 1 2 1.2 90% 1.0 1.O Y IV 2-0 2.0 2.9 2.4 0.0 2.9 5iirr~ek ES :-.`PARCEL R4RCEI_ P052 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.9 2.4 2.9 ~u[h East JRH9 1-PARCEL 2 0 1.2 50% 7.2 7.2 2.4 7.2 ~4ruth East JRH5 2-PARCEL IJ~P Field Large 239 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.0 Y N 2.0 20 2.9 2.4 0.0 2.9 Sruth Eat 7RH5 2-PARCEL IVIP Field, lame 240 1 2 2 2 11 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 2.9 ~u[h East JRH9 3FARGEL FVRCEL P053 1 2 2 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y Y 20 20 2A 2.A 2.4 2.A Tate HS 1-R4RCEL 2 0 L2 50% 7.2 7.2 4.8 7.2 Tate HS 2-R4RCEL Ba;4~.ethall 317 1 2 2 2 12 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 20 20 2.4 24 0.0 2.9 Tate HS 2-F4RCEL en Tura 318 1 2 2 2 1.2 50Y~~ 1.0 1.0 Y Y ZO 2.0 2.4 2.4 2.4 2,9 Tate HS 3-R4RCEL R4RCEL P054 1 2 2 2 1.3 50'n~ 1.0 1.O Y Y 2.0 20 2.4 2.4 2.4 2,9 Nlest HS 1-PAk~EL 2 0 1.2 50% 9.8 4.A 2.4 16.8 Nlest HE 7~AREEL Ballheld 30i 1 0 0 2 L2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N OA 0.0 0.0 OA 0.0 0,0 6tiest HS 2-PARCEL I/IP Field Lane 308 1 0 0 2 1.2 90% 1.0 1.O Y N 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 bu'est HS 2-PARCEL Try, Conretitian 309 I 0 0 2 12 50% 1.0 1.O Y PI 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 lMest HE ~~PARCEL Ballheld 310 1 0 0 2 1.2 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 0.0 0,0 d0 0.0 0.0 0,0 bu'et HS 2-PARCEL I/IP Fieltl, Large 311 I 0 0 2 12 50% 1.0 1.O Y N 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 Nest HS 2-PARCEL MP Field, Large 312 1 0 0 2 12 50% 1.0 1.O Y N P.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 U~'est HE 7~AREEL MP Fieltl, Lar_e 313 1 0 0 2 L2 50°% 1.0 1.O Y N OA 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 6tiest HS 2-PARCEL I/IP Field Ernall 319 1 0 0 2 1.2 SPY; 1.0 1.O Y N 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nest HS 2-PARCEL Tenn6 315 6 2 2 2 1.2 50~R~ 1.0 6.O Y N 2.0 12.0 2.4 2.4 0.0 14,9 lMest HE 2~AREEL en Tura 316 7 0 0 2 1.2 50'Fc 1.0 1.0 Y Y 0.0 0,0 0.0 OA 0.0 0.0 N'et FiS 3PaR[`FL PARCSi P055 1 2 2 2 1.2 50?5 1.0 lA Y Y Z.0 20 2.4 24 2.4 2,9 Mercer Falk Ar ~atu Ce~~teri5canlon Gym 1-IN06uR. 1001 Y 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 23 12 10D% 15.4 Mer~rF h _.t'_Eenp enl_r arm Fb .~~Oance ROOm 1 l 1.1 100°% i.0 1.1 .Il mom th r 11., ~~erc ,.-id c3idloa ui scent MerTerP rk., aet_xnte ' -I -Gy rn -rasiurn 1 3 1.1 ll70% 3.0 3.3 - Iti court L 9, tb II E~aolle hell ~-tions;dFetder curtaKl 6etaoeen bballcourts I/lersr Falk PruatR Center~6canlon Gy rn NIF R00111 I 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 IncNtleeesink and rnoveehle wall Mer~rF P _.t_Eenp I i~ PooLL 1 3 1.1 100% 3.0 33 rl tles2 6le bulkhead r_allowt irn~3AlRetant ml fiore MerwrP k.. t ante -I -~ uerne RAOrff I 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2."[ tt-d~ai to PlP- -rdutles f~odall, in on and TV I/lersr Palk Aruatic Center~~scenlon Gyre ~-aMat TU6 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 1fi-arson Ca acib~ M~~rFa .t~_Eenr :In,ym ~adingPCOi t 1 1.1 1ao% 1.o t.1 ~mnnre kohxtF Le keaeation Center 1-II~dDO 1002 Y 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 21 1.2 100% 23.6 koha"t.. le.k sentur Center NIFROOm 2 2 1.1 100% 9.0 9.4 ~ru~rn,srre a-e '..7 wr fur 4~.i~Yer ettaded Ruherr L -. R ation Center r tl _ratts Room 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 'nulti Iu. u= A rietd of arc, ] ytt4 activities kaha"t.L .k reatun Center Ptters.;hid to 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 22 -1utly241,t Lrk .[heel-,-l f~sJ~tric.rheele koha"t.. L . k etion Center Carl: koorn 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 - deo~elo bl k ntl wk~lre - t I Aar, ~vttu Ruherr L , R _aHon Centex In_ Fool I 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 _ I. ~e, 2s t rl ditlt ~:t ] d 1 ~ waters pace koha"tF lee ke[reation Center '8datlmq POOI 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 22 Indoors Mtadretl to the,Nimnlnq -ool koha"t..L ~k~ret on Center I 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 one full so 6L Est u--arrell r~u cob rts;?voile+6all courts; divider curtain Ruherf L -.R. eation Center P._ _ _thall 7 1 1.1 100% i.0 7.1 rot the 6e°rtl ~:_ [ I .a n &ie huildln iGn RahextF les Reoeation Center - nastrs ROOm I 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2."[ attad~ed to the q~~mnasium koha"tF ~ keoeation Center --rne Roan I 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 Indutlr'; table Pnnu tadles, -ool tables, (oosball t,a61e, bum er ool, TV aM a vending area Ruherr L R _ah'on Center ~cial Hall 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 .- I. n.e m ~ .ned for a va N Y_yentu aivJ acTnYles koha"t.. ~: k.r radar Center E..iaa FCUrI 1 1 1.1 UJO% 1.0 1.1 , Hall trocr#vateree [Yet rJades :,ergs. artrardo machlnB6 koha"tF ~ ke[reation Center Kitdreo 1 2 1.1 100% 2.0 2.2 multi uae kitchen pTintr~ attachad W the 2 PaIP nTOm6 ,rant INOOd Ghoul Gr~mnaium liNDO i003 Y 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 1 IS 7 L 100 % 6,fi -rant WOOd ~hool G~~mnaslum - nwium I 1,1 10035 2.0 one Nllsw dl7 court or?smaller crosc+:ow'ts; 2valle~~6all courts; divider airtaln -rant WOOd aihool ~; rnnasium Halllwa+_ace 1 2 1.1 100#. 2.0 2.'[ ee~ntledhallwa~~[oac[ommoda@lar~~er nrou eof users infrmt of the rrnasum Phi HI_h rhoM 1-IN000 1004 Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 7.1 100% 22 Cih+High 3hool - 1 2 1.1 1-0'Y; 2.0 U6ed fm aiut roll ball r ~~`~,®~,~, CITY OI= IOWA CITY ~~ ~~~~~ ~ E ~ ~ RA ~ D [~ 1VI DATE: January 22, 2009 TO: Pastor Jacob Butler FROM: Marian K. Karr, City Clerk ~ RE: FY10 -Request for Community Event Funding Council has requested that you address these questions in your presentation on January 28tH Back 2 School Picnic 2009 How are you involved with To Gather Together? How would you plan to contact families? Feed the Needy for the Holidays: How are you collaborating with other food distribution programs? t~~ ~2tu~~- Church gives Thanksgiving meals ~~ ~4 ~ # yhy ~; r? ik 4' .. 'I. ~~~: - E ~ ~. } `Y fW a~.., ~~ _ ': ~i. Press-Citizen /Matthew Holst Volunteer Ken McKinnie, right of Iowa City, and New Life and Destiny Christian Fellowship Pastor Jacob Butler, left, fill boxes with food for a Thanksgiving food basket giveaway Monday at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center in Iowa City. _ ... ROB DANiEI. • IOWA CITY PRESS-CITIZEN • NOVEMBER 25, 2008 Pastor Jacob Butler said he remembers growing up in a poor neighborhood in Chicago, his mother working two jobs to support the family. However, every year around Thanksgiving and Christmas, neighbors and others brought the family boxes of food to have for the holiday meal. It was a sight he said he grew accustomed to seeing. Years later, as co-founder of the 2-year-old New Life and Destiny Christian Fellowship in Coralville, along with his wife Pastor Jeannie Butler, he and his congregation gave back with boxes of food. On Monday afternoon at the Robert A. Lee Recreation Center in Iowa City, they distributed more than 60 boxes of everything needed to make Thanksgiving dinner, except forthe turkey. This included boxed mashed potatoes, stuffing, macaroni and cheese, cranberry sauce and cake mix. Butler said the program is part of its overall ministry. He said the Bible commands Christian believers to be charitable to the less fortunate, something it did in August with a picnic that gave out backpacks and school supplies to about 250 area school children. Butler said the program is part of its overall ministry. He said the Bible commands Christian believers to be charitable to the less fortunate, something it did in August with a picnic that gave out backpacks and school supplies to about 250 area school children. "It's a commandment to feed the needy, clothe the naked," he said. "It's something God has placed on our hearts to do." Most of the food came from the roughly 30 members of his congregation, Butler said, though some came from a collection box that was set up at the Iowa City Wal-Mart. "They went over and beyond as they usually do," he said of his congregation. "It's the members that made this happen." Those receiving fhe baskets, some of whom Butler said were lined up an hour before the distribution began, said they were thankful for the help, Leslie Barber of Iowa City said the food would help him stretch the $117 a month disability check he receives from the U.S. Navy. "It helps in the holidays," said Barber, who planned to use some of the food for a communal meal Thursday with others in his apartment complex. "I try to get what I can for help." Tasheba Johnson of Iowa City said the food basket would help make a meal at home for Thanksgiving. However, she also said the giveaway was beneficial for others in the community who are struggling this year. "1 think it's good because it's a blessing because a lot of people got flooded," she said. Butler said he hopes to expand the program next year, including providing turkeys or hams for the meal and have food giveaways for Christmas. "VUe just look forward to doing this year after year," he said. Reach Rob Daniel at 339-7360 or rdaniel a~press-citizen.com.