Huntersville park planned at Fire Station 4 could cost $4.6 million from fund balance; splash pad, covered pickleball cited as key drivers
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Sign Up Free
Summary
Town staff said a park planned at the site of Fire Station 4 will likely require about $4.6 million from fund balance under current design options; the splash pad and a covered pickleball court were identified as the largest cost drivers and staff said alternates could be used if bids are higher than estimates.
Town staff told the board that the master plan for a park at the Fire Station 4 site envisions higher‑cost amenities than previously budgeted and that the FY‑26 draft funding plan currently relies on a proposed $4.6 million contribution from general fund balance. "That $4,600,000 is proposed to come directly out of fund balance," Jackie Huffman said. "So if you're uncomfortable about the size of that park or building that expensive a park at this pace, now would be an awesome time to throw the plug and say, wait, let's do it in phases."
Staff identified two specific cost drivers: a splash pad and covering a pickleball court. MJ, a staff presenter, provided cost estimates: "I think they're estimating around 250 to 300,000" for covering the pickleball court, and a later estimate for the splash pad was stated at about $1.1 million to $1.2 million. Huffman and project staff said typical procurement practice would include alternates so the town could remove or defer elements if bids exceed available funds. "Anytime we do a park project, we usually have alternates," MJ said.
Staff also said the town has submitted an application to the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund (PARTF) for a $500,000 grant; awards are typically announced in late August. The town has already issued parks bonds in the prior bond program; staff said some elements of the park could be funded with those previously authorized bonds, with the remainder proposed from fund balance.
Why it matters: the park is a visible community amenity in an area where residents often rank parks and greenways highly on town surveys; using fund balance for park construction reduces reserves otherwise available for fiscal contingencies. Board members asked about possible grant funding and phasing approaches; staff encouraged the board to decide whether to proceed at the proposed scope or to phase the project.
Project next steps: staff said they will obtain bids; if bids come in high, staff will present alternates for board selection. The PARTF grant decision will be known in late August under the schedule staff described. No formal vote was recorded at the pre‑meeting.
Ending: Staff asked the board for direction if members wished to reduce scope or phase the park; absent additional direction, staff will continue design, submit grants and proceed to procurement with alternates included.