Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Recreation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Duvall weighs RCO and county levy grants to fund Big Rock Park development
Summary
Public works staff outlined multiple near-term grant opportunities and levy options to fund design and construction of the proposed Big Rock Park; staff sought council consensus to submit a $1.2 million RCO application with a four-year use window and discussed levy timing and phasing options.
Public works staff asked Duvall council members on March 4 whether to pursue a short-round Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) grant and described other county and levy funding options for the proposed Big Rock Park.
Steve Lanashevsky, public works director, said the pre-design estimate for the park currently sits around $8 million and that several grant streams are available. He asked council for direction on a special RCO round with a $1.2 million maximum award and a four-year spending requirement; the deadline for that round was March 13. Lanashevsky said the city already has about $100,000 remaining on an earlier grant for design and that pursuing the RCO opportunity this year may be more competitive than waiting for the standard two-year cycle.
Councilmembers and staff discussed other sources: the King County parks levy (deadline discussed as March/April) with $1 million maximum for that piece, regular RCO cycles (May deadline mentioned), and the county's community partnerships and grants (CPG), which have historically provided larger awards for acquisition and development. Lanashevsky said the city has an outstanding construction note for existing ball-field infrastructure that is due at the end of 2025 and that future capital will likely require a combination of grants, county support and possibly borrowing (renewing or replacing a sunsetting levy) to close the gap.
Councilmembers favored a pragmatic approach that would combine grant pursuit with phasing. Councilmember Williamson and others urged phasing the project so portions (for example, parking and one field) could be built earlier while protecting future phases from damage during subsequent construction. Lanashevsky cautioned that some infrastructure (stormwater and subsurface work) should be done in coordination with later phases because rework is costly.
On next steps staff asked for a consensus to submit the RCO application; councilmembers signaled support, noting staff capacity and coordination with lobbying/legislative outreach would matter. Councilmembers also asked staff to engage King County parks staff about the county levy process and to pursue community-partnership opportunities where feasible.
Ending: Council gave informal consensus to pursue the RCO application and asked staff to return with financing/phase plans and further coordination with King County and other funders.
