Council reviews plans for Mountain Ridge 10-acre public park, discusses splash pad, parking and trail connections

Riverton council members on the work‑session agenda reviewed preliminary plans for a 10‑acre public park that will be part of the Mountain Ridge residential development and heard from the developer’s representative about timing, amenities and connections to nearby trails.

The plan shown to the council places formal amenities on the southern and middle portions of the site — two scaled soccer fields with adjacent parking, a playground and a splash pad near the center, and lit pickleball courts — while reserving the irregularly shaped north end for informal passive space and walking trails along the canal. The clubhouse and pool for Mountain Ridge would be private to the development and sit outside the public park acreage; the public portion totals 10 acres (the full development area would be roughly 12 acres if the private clubhouse and pool are included).

Council members and parks‑committee representatives urged clarity about who will own and operate which features, asked about restroom locations, and pressed the developer and staff for more detail on parking and water use. Council member Broeker asked whether parking is adequate for tournaments; the developer said the design team and the Parks & Trails Committee reviewed parking and expect additional on‑street parking will be used for peak events. Staff confirmed two restroom locations are included in plans. Council member McDougall asked whether soccer fields were proposed on the south end; staff confirmed that is the intent, and that the fields are planned to be programmable for organized play.

Several council members raised questions about the proposed splash pad given the city’s desert climate and the staffing and public‑health requirements tied to recirculated water systems. Parks Committee members told the council they recommended a splash pad to serve West and Southwest neighborhoods; staff noted the city historically has not used recirculating water for splash pads because of health‑department testing and maintenance obligations, and said the design team will study whether a splash pad is feasible and how it would be operated. Council member Perucci said demand from families for splash‑type amenities is high but acknowledged water availability concerns raised by colleagues.

On funding and schedule, the developer reported plan submittals for Greenford Lane — the roadway that provides park frontage — are in and that the developer intends to build the road once those plans are approved, with the goal of starting park construction this year if permits and approvals proceed. The developer also told the council impact fees already paid by the project will help finance the park improvements, and that some park area will be used for storm‑water retention. Staff noted the park design has gone through the Parks & Trails Committee and that the item is early in the design phase; the project has not yet been submitted to the Planning Commission for approval.

Council members applauded the overall layout and asked staff to return with more detail on parking counts, splash‑pad water and operations, restroom locations, accessibility and the exact timeline for Greenford Lane and related phases. Several council members emphasized the intent to maintain a clear physical separation on the plans between private clubhouse/pool amenities and the public park.

The developer and parks staff said they will incorporate council feedback into the next design iteration and bring revised plans back to the council and planning staff for formal review and subsequent Planning Commission consideration.