Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Director recommends scaled approach to parks master plan; committee presses for maintenance cost estimates and county coordination
Summary
Parks and Recreation Director Scott Michaelson urged the committee to consider a scaled, 3–5 year implementation plan instead of an immediate full master plan; members requested asset maintenance schedules, cost estimates and clearer coordination with Nassau County on youth‑sports funding.
Scott Michaelson, the city’s Parks and Recreation director, told the advisory committee on March 10 that the commission had pushed back the master plan and that staff is weighing whether to proceed with a full master plan or a scaled, near‑term implementation plan.
"I am thinking through this and, obviously, I would like to have discussions with you," Michaelson said, noting the city had budgeted $100,000 for an initial master‑plan phase and an additional $85,000 for a second phase in the next fiscal year. He said staff would re‑evaluate priorities and return with recommendations for the city manager’s office.
Members pressed for operational detail. One member asked for a near‑term asset‑maintenance schedule and cost estimates — for example, how often soccer or baseball fields should be refurbished and the expected dollar amounts — to avoid surprise capital needs. The member said such a list would help the city plan within a 3–5 year window rather than deferring all planning until a more expensive full master plan is funded.
Michaelson and others emphasized a heavy near‑term project list: MLK fields redevelopment, beach harmonization, Ybor Alvarez sports complex decisions and a columbarium. Michaelson suggested completing high‑priority projects and then returning to a comprehensive facilities master plan.
Committee members also raised county coordination for youth sports, noting many players live in unincorporated Nassau County and that county contributions already include an interlocal commitment (noted in the discussion as $1.7 million). Members urged staff and the city manager to work with county officials to clarify cost sharing before the committee adopts long‑range plans.
The committee did not take a formal vote on the master plan; staff will return with more detailed cost estimates and recommendations on whether to phase or proceed with a comprehensive plan.
What’s next: staff will compile maintenance schedules, estimated refurbishment costs and a proposed 3–5 year implementation plan for committee review and will coordinate with the city manager on county engagement.
