Bay City presents Parks & Recreation five‑year capital plan with pavilions, playgrounds and boat‑ramp work

Bay City Parks and Recreation staff presented a five‑year capital plan at the council workshop that lists multiple park projects — new pavilions and playgrounds, trail surfacing, boat‑ramp engineering, repairs to the historic USO building and planning for a future aquatic center.

Kelly (Parks and Recreation staff) summarized projects by park and explained likely funding sources, timelines and how projects tie to the city’s parks master plan. The presentation reiterated that the master plan is a living document used for grant applications and scoring with state programs.

Key projects and cost estimates

- Performance pavilion at Little Park: staff presented options for a new performance pavilion on the east side near the LCRA canal, showing wood/native designs and saying a single pavilion could be approximately $150,000; a larger performance pavilion in 2027 was estimated at about $280,000 depending on finish and engineering.

- Playgrounds: the plan includes two new playgrounds (one on the east side and another), with combined estimated cost in the presentation near $360,000 for both; staff said the higher costs reflect accessible surfacing, ramps instead of stairs and playground components that meet ADA standards.

- Restroom and accessibility upgrades: Riverside/Lake area restroom expansion, relocation of an existing restroom to Amistad Park and family restroom installation were flagged as priorities to support larger rentals and events.

- USO and Train Depot: the Train Depot roof was replaced recently and the USO roof project identified a chimney that is beginning to separate from the building. Kelly said repairs to the chimney were priced at about $40,000. Staff also noted the USO’s National Register status and said that designation can increase grant or tax‑credit eligibility for major rehabilitation projects.

- Boat ramp and Latoya Park work: staff said engineering grants from Texas Parks and Wildlife are available and that an engineering grant would strengthen a future construction grant application for a safer and less maintenance‑intensive boat launch site.

- Skate park and recreation center studies: the plan notes the city’s skate park is aging and that replacement could cost $100,000–$250,000, and that a future municipal recreation center concept remains a long‑term, costly item the plan keeps on the radar.

Council reaction and community input

Multiple council members and public commenters praised the comprehensive plan but flagged the cost estimates as high and urged staff to present phased, prioritized cost breakdowns. One council member said costs for a pavilion seemed excessive compared with local private construction; another council member emphasized the need to protect maintenance capacity and volunteer contributions while pursuing improvements.

Jessica Hartman, a Little League representative, urged transparency about maintenance and storage arrangements and asked whether leagues would retain maintenance responsibilities if the city moved to shared facilities. Kelly said the city would work to preserve current agreements where feasible and to discuss shared maintenance and scheduling with leagues.

Funding and next steps

Staff emphasized that several projects would be phased, grant‑dependent and subject to available hotel/motel tax revenues and other grant opportunities. Kelly said staff will take council feedback, present prioritized phases and seek greater community input through the parks board, which plans regular monthly meetings.

Ending: Council members did not take action at the workshop but asked staff to return with a prioritized, phased five‑year plan, detailed per‑phase cost estimates and outreach summaries to support grant applications and budget planning.