Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Pickleball Pavilion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Work session weighs pickleball courts, pavilion and impact-fee funds for park upgrades
Summary
Participants discussed using roughly $90,000 in park-impact fees plus par-tax receipts to build two pickleball courts and renovate or replace an existing pavilion; council members asked staff to gather sketches, bids and measurements and consider timing for a larger tennis/pickleball project.
At a May 8 work session, participants discussed options for using park-impact fees and par-tax receipts to fund park improvements, focusing on two-court pickleball facilities and a replacement pavilion.
Why it matters: Officials said roughly $90,000 in impact-fee funds is available now, with additional par-tax receipts of about $24,000 expected, and that some of the impact-fee balance has been held for five years and must be spent or returned. Participants said the funding must be used on a “new product” to meet impact-fee rules.
Discussion details: Speaker 3 opened the item and said a community survey and prior grant work had identified park improvements as a priority. Participants discussed three options: a small two-court pickleball installation, a larger tennis court or tennis/pickleball combination, and replacing the town’s old pavilion. Speaker 3 noted “90,000 is available right now,” and later described par-tax receipts of “about 24,000.”
Cost and timeline estimates discussed included:
- Two-court pickleball bids: Speaker 3 said she had three recent bids for a two-court installation and quoted a $59 figure for one bid (discussed in transcript as “59,” interpreted in context as $59,000). Participants also discussed a second bid at about $65 (interpreted as $65,000). One vendor estimated roughly a four-week concrete construction schedule.
- Tennis/tennis-pickleball combo: Participants said estimates from two years earlier put a tennis project at about $150,000 to start and that current prices are likely higher; speakers suggested a full tennis court footprint could fit four pickleball courts or require higher fencing (6-foot versus 10-foot), increasing costs.
Speakers raised site constraints and maintenance concerns. Multiple participants said an existing large tree near the proposed site would likely block a full tennis installation, and that the old pavilion is in poor condition and may be better replaced than repaired. Speaker 1 said volunteers and staff have been maintaining the area but described the existing pavilion area as “a nightmare.”
Partnerships and user groups: Participants discussed school use; Speaker 1 said school coaches email annually seeking court space and that schools might contribute funds toward construction. Several speakers suggested getting visuals and sketches to evaluate footprint and fencing needs.
Directions and next steps: Speakers asked staff to gather sketches and measurements (Speaker 3 offered to look for prior grant sketches), to obtain vendor estimates and to site-mark the area in person. Speaker 3 suggested putting the two-court pickleball bid on the council agenda; Speaker 1 and others supported approving the pickleball project first and returning with pavilion plans and tennis/pickleball sketches later.
No formal vote occurred during the work session; participants agreed to pursue bids, schedule measurements and place the pickleball item on the next council agenda for approval.
