CCP 02242025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

32 Adding parking where the wading pool is currently located (a general site layout is 33 included in attachment 1). 34 The Council was amenable to the proposed changes and encouraged staff to proceed with 35 community engagement regarding the proposal. Additionally, the Council encouraged staff 36 not to limit the conversation to the items identified in the CIP, but to be mindful of other 37 opportunities to improve the park that may come out of the engagement process. 38 39 In the year since that conversation, staff have engaged residents in multiple ways about the 40 proposal. 41 42 A neighborhood meeting was held on December 13, 2023 to discuss the proposal. 43 Invitations were sent to more than 500 residents within walking distance of the park. The 44 meeting was attended by 17 residents. In general, the neighborhood was excited about the 45 prospect of adding a splash pad but somewhat concerned about it bringing additional traffic 46 to the already heavily used park. There was also some nostalgia about how the pool had 47 been a part of the neighborhood for many years. Some residents asked staff to explore 48 whether there was a way to have a combined pool and splash pad option or the cost 49 difference between a splash pad and a wading pool. In addition to the proposed 50 modifications, the residents asked staff to explore a couple of other possible modifications 51 to the park (full meeting minutes are attachment 4): 52 The addition of lights to the bituminous path that encircles the park, as many 53 residents walk in the park during seasons when daylight is limited. 54 Adding more parking to the north parking lot, near the soccer field. 55 Updates to the soccer fields, which are frequently wet due to a "bowling effect" 56(where the center of the field is lower than the perimeter) from years of play. 57 Following the initial meeting, staff developed a survey to empower a broader group of 58 residents to submit their feedback. Without the context of cost or the current condition of 59 the wading pool, there was a slight preference for the city to keep a wading pool (51% favor 60 the wading pool) as opposed to putting in a splash pad. In the qualitative section, there 61 were several comments submitted that strongly encouraged staff to consider a way to 62 preserve the wading pool. Also, in the survey, there is consensus that the playground is 63 badly in need of upgrades. The results of that feedback are included as attachment 5. As a 64 note, the survey did not indicate any price difference between splash pads and wading 65 pools and was not scientific in its methodology. 66 67 Finally, at summer recreation events, staff and Parks and Recreation Commissioners 68 handed out flyers and discussed the proposal with residents. Generally speaking, there 69 was more support for a splash pad than a wading pool (perhaps three to one) and general 70 support for the other proposed modifications. 71 72 In conjunction with the ongoing engagement, over the past year, staff have further explored 73 pricing and construction details of the various items proposed as part of this project. 74 Water Feature: a more refined estimate suggests that a modern wading pool could 75 cost approximately $1.6 million. However, a simpler, more basic version might be 76 installed for closer to $1 million. A recirculating splash pad (one in which the water is Page 2 of 5 Qbhf!249!pg!354