Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks board to begin phased update of 2000 master plan, staff recommends park-by-park review
Summary
Board members agreed to a phased, park-by-park approach to updating the city’s 2000-era parks master plan; staff said converting hard copies to editable files and starting with a small park (Honor Park suggested) would let the board produce timely grant-ready materials for the October budget cycle.
A staff member told the Parks and Urban Forestry Board that the city’s existing master plan — completed around 2000 and supplemented by student and consultant work in the 1990s and 2000s — remains useful but is dated, and that updating it would strengthen future grant applications and capital planning. The staff member said single-park plans can be done for “tens of thousands” of dollars while more comprehensive, citywide updates can reach the low-to-mid hundreds of thousands, and recommended a phased approach to avoid the cost and time of commissioning a full new plan.
The staff member proposed converting the paper plan into editable files, breaking the work down by park and sharing one park’s materials at a time with board members by email for review. Board members would visit the park, note missing or outdated items (for example, trail segments, playground changes or parking), and return recommendations at the next meeting. “Let’s pick one part and cover one park at a time so we’re not here for hours,” the staff member said, arguing that a series of small, visible projects would better position the board to ask for increased council funding during the October budget process.
Members debated priorities: several favored starting with a smaller park that can be reviewed quickly so the board can deliver an early win, while others urged focusing on parks most in need. A committee member said updated master-plan materials would help the board compete for grants and would make it easier to justify capital requests to council. The chair and board members discussed possible local funding strategies — including using portions of the hotel/motel fund or packaging park work in larger CIP bids to reduce contractor mobilization costs.
The board asked staff to begin by scanning and sharing one park’s materials (members suggested Honor Park as a pilot) and to bring back a feasible schedule so staff can prepare budget-ready requests for the manager and council. The board did not vote on contracting for a full new plan at the meeting; staff said they will continue compiling existing documents, test electronic conversions, and, if needed, consider limited professional services later.
