Below is a memo I wrote to the Public Works Committee after seeing last night’s first presentation of the latest Quarry Park Concept plan. This outlines some topics and items I hope to discuss at future planning meetings. As stated in the memo, while I felt synthetic fields weren’t the best investment in our park system now that the issue has been settled we need to now focus on the best design possible.
WFMZ has a photo and article here.
2/24/15
Manager & Public works committee,
Here are some thoughts after listening to discussion from last night on the latest concept plan.
First, now that decision has been made to move forward although I disagree that synthetic fields are the best way to spend taxpayer dollars to address field use issues that issue is settled. I am now motivated to have the best project possible. I think the latest plan is an improvement over the initial sketch. That being said here are some concerns and items I feel strongly about.
BIG PICTURE
1. As far as configuration and number of fields and design I want to see the math that justifies certain designs. If the problem is field usage then we should be sure design addresses that problem. To demonstrate this: What is the usage now, what is the current deficiency (sport specific) and how many more playable hours (sport specific) would new/different configurations of park provide? 2. I’m sure this has already been discussed but security must be a part of a concept plan. This should include video monitoring. We have to protect our 600,000 investment. A fully designed security plan should be a part of the concept plan.
3. I don’t support any additional volume of scheduled use at Quarry above and beyond what is currently scheduled until the Saurkraut punch through is finished. This would allow for signalized access to Rt. 100. I’m not interested in delaying the build. We can design and build the project, but scheduling should be kept at current levels until the punch through is complete. Any major tournaments or additional usage based on synthetic fields is inappropriate as long as the primary access is an offset un-signalized intersection on Rt. 100.
PROCESS
4. I feel strongly that “task force” meetings should be public and would request that the planning commission, EAC , LMYA and Parks and Recreation board have a formal chance to review and weigh in on the concept plan before we get to deep into it as a courtesy.5. Any future public vetting of plans Astroturf/consultants should have two copies one for the Board/committee and one for the public which can be displayed on a easel. It was impossible last night for anyone in attendance to see the plan.
INITIAL CONCEPT PLAN COMMENTS
5. I don’t know if room permits but establishment of a Greenway trailhead should be considered. (Since this is a recommendation of of the Parks Comprehensive plan specifically for Quarry Park)
6. Reduction of the amount of proposed impermeable parking. I know we need some additional and that’s fine. But the amount proposed seems excessive. Have we considered overflow parking in designated grass areas? We should build parking to handle normal park usage accounting for increased volume of synthetic fields. Tournament or other highest intensity usage should utilize overflow parking in non paved areas. (stone or grass) We should also consider the potential to design more parking, but not build it right away. We can “bank” future lots and build as justified.
Since this parcel is next to the river we should include best practice greening and sustainable storm water management of new parking areas.
7. What is justification for additional storage buildings.
8. Are we addressing deficiencies? I remember during parks comp plan mtg’s it was stated we are:
Deficient one baseball diamond currently.
Have a surplus of Soccer and “rectangular” Fields
Since the current plan increases playing hours on rectangle fields but loses one diamond at Quarry where are we gaining at lest 2 diamonds? And can that location be lit with natural grass diamonds.9. The concept plan should account for potential acquisition of the Muse parcel. I think this was stated last night. Just want to ensure. Should maybe include a sketch of possible muse layout.
10. I agree with the Dog Park group, Sara and the Parks board that the first Dog Park should be at Olympic. But we should if space allows sketch in location for potential 2nd park at Quarry. This can be on future muse acquisition of existing park. Ron
