Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Playground topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Palatka commissioners review playground replacements, approve exploring larger centerpiece and funding options
Summary
City staff recommended Game Time equipment to replace four deteriorated playground pieces at a riverfront park. Commissioners approved a motion to explore adding a larger centerpiece and to pursue funding options including CRA, ARPA and unused budgeted funds; no final vendor selection or purchase was approved.
City commissioners on May 20 discussed replacing four aging playground pieces at a riverfront park and directed staff to pursue funding options to add a larger centerpiece while proceeding with replacement planning.
The discussion centered on three vendor proposals and a riverfront-phase concept. Joe, a city staff member presenting the project, said the staff recommendation was the Game Time package (the blue option) and noted it would replace the four existing pieces while leaving the park’s zipline in place. "Game Time. Yes. That's the blue one," Joe said when presenting the recommendation.
Commissioners and residents pressed for details about safety, accessibility and cost. Commissioners asked whether the replacement equipment would include ADA components; Joe confirmed an ADA portion was included for the swing set and that the proposed age range for most pieces is 5 to 12 years. He said the city’s playground mulch is a splinter‑free playground mulch used previously and that the project could use different colors.
Staff gave timing and cost estimates: delivery of replacement pieces could occur “rather quickly within 4 to 6 weeks,” Joe said, but permitting and site work (excavation and concrete footings) could extend the schedule to “a couple of months.” The project as proposed was budgeted at about $110,000. Commissioners were told an additional, larger focal piece discussed during the meeting would cost roughly $135,000; staff estimated a full, non‑phased completion including that piece would bring the total to about $240,000. The commission was also shown that a rubberized safety surfacing option would be substantially more expensive (a quoted figure of about $250,000 for the rubberized flooring for that area was discussed).
Commissioners debated whether to replace only the four broken pieces that were budgeted or to expand the project to include the larger centerpiece so the park would reflect broader revitalization efforts in the district. After discussion about budget sources and timing, a commissioner moved that staff pursue adding the additional piece and examine funding options including Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) funds, American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds and other budgeted amounts not yet used. The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote; commissioners indicated unanimous support when asked, "all in favor. Aye. Any opposition?" The meeting record does not show a separate roll-call vote on vendor selection or an order placement.
Staff said the city had budgeted last year to replace the four pieces and could proceed on that basis; if the commission decides to add the larger centerpiece, staff will return with funding and procurement options and revised cost estimates. Joe told commissioners the vendor‑supplied lead time could allow installation in summer if permitting and procurement proceed promptly.
Next steps: staff will provide more detailed cost and funding options, include surfacing alternatives and return to the commission with recommendations. No final procurement or contract award was recorded during the meeting.
