Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears parks CIP: Ontario Park phase‑1 placeholder, playground replacement and pool solar considered
Summary
Parks staff presented a multi‑page parks and recreation CIP that includes a $1.3 million placeholder for initial Ontario Park improvements, ongoing playground replacements (about 13 planned in the five‑year plan) and a proposed solar installation at the Fitch natatorium estimated to save about $23,000 annually and eligible for an AIMS electric rebate.
Keith (parks and recreation staff) summarized parks and recreation projects in the five‑year CIP, starting on page 147. He described Ontario Park development as a phased approach with an initial Phase 1 placeholder of $1,300,000 for parking, a shelter, restroom and access pathways, while noting the city will complete a master plan and that the precise siting and amenities could change after public input and consultant work. "We are not going to — it is kind of a placeholder. We're going to wait until the master plan is done," Keith said.
Keith also reviewed park system projects (about 16 projects totaling roughly $2,200,000 in the immediate plan), the schedule for playground replacements (the city has about 45 playgrounds with a roughly 20‑year expected lifespan and 13 replacements programmed in the five‑year plan), and ADA upgrades at community facilities that used a memorial donation to add new bottle fillers and accessible drinking fountains.
On the Fitch family indoor aquatic center, staff proposed installing solar on the natatorium roof, estimating annual operational savings of about $23,000 and anticipating roughly $115,000 in electric rebates; staff characterized the $700,000 figure in the CIP as an engineered placeholder arrived at after consultation with electric utility and sustainability staff and consultant input. Council members asked how the CIP placeholder was developed and whether a consultant could provide a refined cost opinion before design; staff said an RFP for design will go out and that the consultant's cost estimate will be brought back to the council for consideration.
Council discussion also focused on broader portfolio questions — including whether the city has too many parks and how to prioritize maintenance and operations under possible future budget constraints — and on plans to hire a master‑plan consultant and to obtain public input before final decisions are made. No formal votes were taken on parks projects at this meeting; staff said final CIP/budget decisions will occur at the scheduled February meeting.
