Eureka councilors discuss applying for Outdoor Rec grant, consider park master plan

Councilman Jeremy Snell said Eureka staff and councilors are exploring a state Outdoor Recreation grant and have scheduled a meeting with an architecture firm to discuss redesign options for the town park and related outdoor-recreation projects.

Snell said he reviewed other communities’ projects to gather ideas and arranged a Teams meeting with a firm that worked on Millcreek’s ice rink and Enterprise City’s park. “They talked about 3 or 4 different funding sources that I had never heard of,” Snell said, adding he will meet with “one of the principal architects next week to just kind of talk through” how a scaled proposal might work for Eureka.

The council discussed two practical approaches: submit a narrowly scoped application this funding cycle (for example, a pavilion footprint) or pursue a larger master plan and apply in a future round. A program representative from the Outdoor Recreation/CPR program told the council the program has about $2,000,000 this year and that communities may request up to $200,000 in the current Tier 1 funding, with the program encouraging projects from rural counties where funded work has been sparse.

Snell described existing problems at Eureka’s park — sprinkling issues, inaccessible surfaces and insufficient parking — and proposed a ‘‘clean slate’’ master plan to address parking, utilities and accessibility rather than incremental fixes. He said the Enterprise City example is long and narrow, similar to Eureka’s parcel, and could offer transferable design ideas.

Councilors discussed potential project elements raised by Snell, including walking paths, kiosks with historical information, picnic pavilions, small restroom and parking hubs, archery and shooting ranges, and trail hub amenities that could serve mountain bikers and UTV users. Snell suggested beginning with a pavilion if the council needs to prioritize a single, timely application: “Even if we just started with the pavilion this year and had an expanded plan for other things in years to come, that might be the place to start,” he said.

The Outdoor Recreation representative cautioned the council that the program is competitive and recommended meeting quickly if the city intends to apply for the current cycle. The representative also noted some matching requirements (examples discussed included a 70/30 or 80/20 match tier, with in‑kind matches sometimes accepted) and said applicants can request a match exemption though it may weaken competitive standing.

Snell said he scheduled a Teams meeting with the architecture team for the following week and offered to forward the invite to any councilor who wished to join. No formal application decision or motion was made at the work meeting; councilors asked staff to pursue the meeting, gather cost estimates and return with a narrower scope or a concept plan for future action.