Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Recreation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff outlines Addison Circle Park vision plan; recommends dedicated operations team, security and activation strategy
Summary
Consultants and parks staff presented a vision plan for Addison Circle Park emphasizing year‑round activation, two dedicated parks maintenance staff, contracted unarmed security for a visible 24/7 presence initially, and options to fund operations through sponsorships, naming rights and program partnerships.
Town parks staff and OJB Landscape Architecture presented a vision and operations plan for Addison Circle Park and asked council whether to advance schematic design and plan for operations and potential revenue strategies.
Janet Tidwell, Director of Parks and Recreation, introduced the presentation and turned the floor to Tara Green of OJB Landscape Architecture, who described the vision statement: “encourage community connections, embrace innovation, and celebrate nature.” The presentation focused on how operations, security and programming would need to expand if the town pursues a highly activated year‑round park.
The consultants recommended a dedicated park team: roughly two additional full‑time maintenance staff assigned to the park, a recreation manager and one to two coordinators as programming expands. For safety and welcoming presence they proposed contracted, unarmed private security working in tandem with the police department; consultants recommended a visible 24/7 presence during at least the first year to establish brand and behavioral expectations, with the option to scale back to high‑need hours later.
The plan also recommends adding about 1,000 square feet of on‑site flexible space fronting the park to serve as storage, volunteer check‑in, an events operations command center or small community center. Staff emphasized movable furniture, shade, playgrounds and infrastructure (power outlets, tech pods) as low‑barrier ways to increase daily use.
On revenue, the consultants laid out a menu of options: naming rights for assets (typically capital gifts), sponsorship packages for year‑round programming, third‑party event rentals (weddings, corporate activations), curated food‑and‑beverage opportunities and public‑private partnerships. Consultants noted that naming gifts typically fund capital and that a portion of large gifts (for example, 5–20%) can be earmarked to support annual operations.
Council members asked about sequencing and affordability. Staff clarified that the presentation was not a request for immediate positions; instead staff asked permission to include schematic design funding in the next budget cycle so planners can produce an opinion of probable cost. Janet Tidwell said she expects to request at least one recreation coordinator soon to help manage current programming and to involve a park operations manager in construction documents so operations needs (power, storage, staging) are resolved in design.
Timeline staff described: Council adoption of the vision plan is planned in the near term; staff will return in March with budget requests for schematic design. Schematic design would run through the following months with an opinion of probable cost in January; construction timing and phasing will depend on funding sources, which may include a capital giving campaign, parkland dedication funds or a development fee.
Next steps: council consented to moving forward with schematic design inclusion in the budget process and asked staff to continue stakeholder outreach; staff will return with cost estimates and funding options during the budget cycle.
