Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Master Plan topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

First-pass master plan renderings prioritize reinvestment and flood‑resilient Tucker Park designs

Goochland County Parks & Recreation · January 20, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Parks staff presented conceptual (not final) master plan ideas focusing on reinvesting in existing parks, securing adjacent expansion opportunities, and specific concepts for Tucker Park and Matthews Park including flood mitigation, ADA features and parking improvements.

Tom Cocke, Parks & Rec, presented first‑pass conceptual renderings from master plan consultants and emphasized these were early ideas meant to prompt discussion rather than final designs. Key themes staff highlighted included prioritizing reinvestment in existing parks (noting Goochland’s acreage per 1,000 residents is above the national average) and considering a 'first right of refusal' on adjacent properties to facilitate future expansion of parks such as Matthews, Hidden Rock and Leakes Mill.

For Tucker Park, concepts include returning portions of the park to a more natural state with native vegetation and flood mitigation measures while retaining the concert area, dog park and parking; staff proposed improving the kayak and canoe launch, adding a small playground, pavilions designed for flood resistance, an ADA fishing pier, an elevated wood‑deck overlook and relocating the archery range to Leakes Mill. Cocke characterized flood‑proof restrooms as a possible long‑term project but noted utilities present challenges.

Matthews Park concepts included adding roughly 15 parking spaces to improve ADA access, a hard‑surface ADA trail loop, a natural‑style playground, an archery bridge/walking trail with targets, and the possibility of a half‑acre dog park. Cocke and staff framed these as priorities and tradeoffs to guide further public engagement; the presentation did not include final costs or implementation timelines and no formal board decisions were made at this meeting.