Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks staff unveil Halloween Point Park master plan; residents prioritize paved trail network and improved fields
Summary
Parks and Recreation presented a long-overdue master plan for Halloween Point Park based on ~2,500 survey responses; priorities include a paved trail network, improved field surfaces (some residents suggested synthetic turf), added pavilions and accessibility upgrades. Staff outlined costs and phasing options and flagged trade-offs between one synthetic turf field and multiple smaller improvements.
Get email alerts on the Parks Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parks and Recreation presented an updated master plan for Halloween Point Park, the first comprehensive update since the late 1990s. The department said it received about 2,500 survey responses and identified recurring priorities: a network of paved, accessible trails to connect amenities; improved and more resilient field surfaces; additional shaded pavilions and a new playground; and options such as a skate park that had vocal supporter groups.
Amanda Stowwagen, division chief, and consultant Stephanie Tincher explained the plan phases and cost considerations. Staff said synthetic-turf fields rank highly among public requests but noted the cost trade-offs: a single synthetic field can cost in the low millions and, in the department's analysis, could consume the budget for many smaller, community-requested improvements. Park staff recommended maintaining existing facilities while phasing improvements (trails, dugouts, pavilion locations and targeted field upgrades) and exploring partners and funding sources before committing to large-scale conversions.
Commissioners asked about ownership and leased parcels within the park footprint, irrigation and maintenance constraints; staff confirmed some fields are on leased land and explained the department’s caution about investing heavily on acreage the county does not own. The board did not vote on funding; staff will return with costed implementation options and potential funding/phasing scenarios.
