#1 BOARD OF PARK COMMISSIONERS REGULAR MEETING AND WORKSHOP Park and Recreation Department Conference Room, 11th Floor, City Hall Monday, January 9, 2006 3:30 p.m. Present: Dennis Brunner, Glen Dey, Doug Leeper, Janet Miller and Mick Tranbarger Absent: Cherylane Adams Also Present: Sharon Fearey - City Councilwoman; John Schlegel, Dave Barber and Scott Wadle - Wichita/Metropolitan Area Planning Department; Nancy Boewe - Schweiter East Neighborhood Association; Kathy Dittmer and M.S. Mitchell - Riverside Citizens Association; Larry Ross - Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (MAPC); Rosemary Weber, Debra Foster and Carol Cumberland - GreenWay Alliance; Elizabeth Bishop; H. Tom Gray; and Doug Kupper, Karen Walker, Larry Hoetmer, Larry Foos, Tim Martz and Maryann Crockett (staff) President Miller called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. PUBLIC AGENDA No items. REGULAR AGENDA 1. On motion by Dey, second by Brunner, the minutes of the November 14, 2005, regular meeting were reviewed and approved unanimously. 2. District III Park Board Member. President Miller reported that John Kemp, Councilman Jim Skelton's District III appointment to the Park Board, officially resigned. She commented that Mr. Kemp anticipated becoming employed at one of the municipal golf courses and that was a conflict of interest. She asked if Board members had any suggestions for a replacement to please contact staff. 3. Director's Update. Director Kupper reported briefly on the following items. * Land Acquisition - reported that the City had acquired approximately 15 acres east of Greenwich off of Central. He said a dedication would be held around July or August, 2006. He said staff would be developing design concepts for the property using Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funds for review and presentation to the City Council. He explained that the $1,069,000 purchase price for the property was split between Park and Recreation and the Police Department. He said if the frontage property along Central was not used to develop a Police Sub-Station, it might be sold at a later date to recoup some of the purchase price. * City Council Agenda Items - reported that several items were being prepared to be presented to the City Council for approval within the next few weeks. He mentioned Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects such as paving the parking lot at Stryker Soccer Complex and submission of the 2006 Ice Center Budget and review of a proposal for a management company to operate the facility. * Moratoriums on Replats of Private Property along the Arkansas - reported that staff was preparing a draft agenda item and resolution requesting the moratorium and requesting City Council direction. President Miller commented that the applicant had building materials stacked in his yard awaiting a decision from the City. She requested that the Board discuss the item again at the February meeting. She said it didn't feel right to make the applicant wait a year for a decision. Brunner asked if the Board had any recourse, legally. Director Kupper commented that the final decision rested with the City Council. It was noted that the applicant has not gone back to the Planning Commission for a decision. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned into the Workshop Session at approximately 3:45 p.m. ___________________________________ Janet Miller, President ATTEST: _____________________________________ Maryann Crockett Recording Secretary Workshop Session (Workshop Discussion Outline Attached) Workshop Discussion Outline 01-09-06 3:45 p.m. Vision/Dream for Parks and Recreation Master Plan (10 minutes) Answer this question in a group discussion: "If our parks, open space, greenways, paths, and recreation opportunities were all that we wanted them to be, how would we describe them?" Brainstorm and list ideas/responses on a chart pad or computer/projection screen. * Bike path and trail integration throughout the parks * Greater utilization of the river * Utilization and access to the river * Accessible and promoted * Appropriate acreage for metropolitan area population * Dependable and adequate funding sources for maintenance and acquisition * System that persons would point to with pride and evaluate as indispensable * High use of native plant species * Open and utilized recreation centers * Appropriate cost recovery - use of partnerships and networking (don't necessarily expect 100% cost recovery) * Open space, pocket parks that serve as identity factors for the small communities in the County. As Wichita grows - have sense of leaving one place (open space buffers) * Utilize riparian and flood control areas for open space * Increase recreational access to the Big Ditch\ * Well lit recreational and parking areas and paved (or improved) parking lots - good quality parking) no chipped rock or clay) * Utilization of rail banked and non-rail banked to create linear corridors for trails * Pedestrian access from development * Integrated system with City, County and neighborhoods - green space, pathways, and open space * Sound urban forestry practices * Further integration or connection to regional attractions * Further maintain current facilities * Emphasize community health and fitness * Development and renovation of existing facilities, etc. * Improve perception of public safety in parks * Continue limited use and elimination of pesticides and herbicides * Attributes that promote green space inviting, casual and routine movement and exercise * Encourage walkability within subdivisions 3:55 p.m. Review of Tables (15 minutes) Review selected 1996 Master Plan Tables (shown below by number) and compare to updated 2005 numbers: Table # 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 14. * Info on outdoor recreation activities participated in park year: trend data * 2002 SDA structure and population projections - Table 3 * Table Wichita Park Service Areas 4 - WPD Maintained Open Space - eliminate Wichita/Valley Center Floodway - also eliminated Drainage ways and storm water retention ponds * Add Burlington Northern rail banked properties category - insure all #'s are updated * 2004 and 2005 Revenue sources for the Wichita Park Department - Page 19 0ld plan) * #12 - Page 24 Sedgwick County Municipalities Park Inventory * Wichita park Service Areas - map DK reviewed piece of parkland within 2 miles walking for every citizen in Wichita - 2 mile appropriate #? * Wichita Park Service Areas - map 2 - Playground 1/4 mile; neighborhood - 1-mile; regional parks 5-mile service area - several strips within the City not being served - Pawnee Prairie - no playground equipment. SW areas in Wichita are being serviced by smaller communities in Sedgwick County (Hayesville given as an example). Pag 14 and 15 in the old plan - new plan decide on classifications. DK nationwide standards. * MM Homeowners association, playground, paths, where does it fit in the process? DK - fit into the new play, i.e., Greenwich and Central - area already has a pool * DL - actively solicit landowners for parkland 10 year out? Get a cooperative going - for buffers purchased by county of City of Wichita * Wichita in Small Cities 2030 Growth Areas (2005 Update) - Scott Wadle - Janet Miller - preparing resources and tools. SW brief glimpse of where development is going in Wichita - redirecting growth - East, west and northeast. DK need of buffers (yellow areas). Agreed to in Sedgwick County Comp Plan - Butler County needs to be included in discussions. Visioneering document - Sedgwick County has asked Park Director to spearhead effort. * 3 acres per 1,000 - 4 acres per 1,000 for pathways 1996 existing 4,128 pathways 34 miles (103 acres open space 878 - 2010 demand 3,797 - 1,380 pathways & open space 2010 - 331 short 339 AC Current 2005 4,328; 87 miles of pathways doubled miles of pathways 348 acres park property. Janet Miller - look at standard that was used in 1996 Plan? Good # or no? DK 15 acres per 1,000 instead of 11 acres. Dave Barber - over supplied in some park categories but undersupplied in other park categories. Doug Leeper add medians into open spaces - riverbanks. JM Page 31 - table 15 - issue different kinds and sizes of parks per population. * Bike Path - existing - LH. Current BP - purple new bike paths - North Grove Park to K-96, Chisholm; funded paths south purple - Joyland hooks up with Gypsum Creek; recent funding cycle - 21st St.; 2 close Brooks and Buckner schools - link schools to pathways; rest station in Grove Park along Chisholm - 21st St. bike path. Make connection (application) between Grove Park and Canal route; trailhead project in grove Park - users park vehicles and get on bike path. Debra Foster - Prairie Travelers rail banked line from Garden Plain to Goddard - City work on part of that rail banked area. Larry Ross- rail banked 100 foot wide 8 acres per mile. Terminology - trails more common terminology than paths. * Janet Miller pathways plan good model for strategic plan for all park and open space - identified trails - gaps - worked each year to develop sections of it - involved citizen groups - advocate groups, etc. 4:10 p.m. Review the 1996 Master Plan Goals, Objectives, and Strategies (20mins) Review all goals, objectives, and strategies and receive a staff report indicating which: have been completed, are in progress, have not been started, are no longer planned Due to time - this item was delayed. 4:30 p.m. Assess the Content of the 1996 Master Plan (15 minutes) What's good and what's bad about the 1996 Master Plan? Discuss as a group and hear from parks/recreation and planning staff members. List ideas/responses on a chart pad or computer/projection screen. Good * Charts and numerical #'s area good - easy to grasp * Comparisons of Wichita to other areas of similar population * Formatted - strategies, recommended actions, funding, etc. easy read * Main goal 15 years - paths and parkways - good job - funding source not local Bad * Arbitrary goal 15 acres per 1,000 * Did not get County involved as equal partner in parks - price tag * Costs put in plan - no way to fund it * No community or political "buy into the plan' - both in development and implementation * Goals and objectives - blurring guiding principals or park development and projects - (fewer pesticides - opposed to add 16 miles of pathways) - organization of plan - guiding principals, etc. * No mechanism to measure success or failure (and progress) * Set review goals * Building a rationale that parks and recreation and open space is part of an essential service for governmental activities * Public needs to have perception that parks are safe and well maintained * Misleading - bike trails have been developed under Federal Transportation Enhancement Program (funding 80/20) - no commitment has to be a working dynamic document - dedicated funding source * Developers donating land - all voluntary - no incentive * More thorough job of implementation. Needs to be advocacy for plan implementation "rubber hits the road" * Plan did not address need to get out in front of development - planning ahead * Lack of guidelines for acquisition and disposition of parkland 4:45 p.m. Designing the Master Plan for the Next 10 Years (40 minutes) Discuss organizational/funding model of Master Plan Who might we want to bring in as major partners/sponsors? What other government entities might we want to invite to participate? Funding - currently available. DK CIP $250,000 Master Plan and analysis of existing facilities. Two Plan - one type of parks and where they should be - another to review recreation facilities. Planning recommends do both at one time. 21st Revitalization $349,000 - cost. Visioneering - involve 6 other counties. Sedgwick County - comprehensive - more than double money that is available for study. Maize, Hayesville, etc. - solicit funding, projected growth area through 2030. Dr. Dey - Internet research from other communities. Concepts - two possible alternative ways of how we approach this project. Parks & Rec - open/green space - planning and assessment and accountability. COW/County government driven - how do we involve people so that plan has support. How is it going to be paid for - taxes Supporter's coalition. Movers and players in the community - this makes economic sense and in terms of recruitment possibilities, retaining staff - parks are an economic driver. This has not been communicated within this community. Founders - people make contact with substantial contacts and groups - provide matching funding up front to carry out study. (Logo on all material that goes out - commitment). Patron's category, supporter's category - $100 or in-kind services (doing brochures, etc). Other coalition members (i.e., WIN - tremendous resource getting information out - community approach (Ann Arbor, MI - bring in individuals to do presentations - newer trends, new ways of looking at issues and aspects). Video taped - City's Web site, etc. - Health and Wellness Coalition of the COW. Census Tracts. JS - building support, particularly financial - founder do I get a seat at the table - to influence or shape the plan or just get people to make contributions. Later - nucleus of support - decision made - leave that open. Debate and instructional charettes - public committed, endorse idea - keep report off the shelf - making it an essential service. MT - community that used this template - engage business community - the way to go in the future. DL - YMCA does this. Dr. D - general in term of concepts. MT - lack of knowledge and communication - knocking on some doors extremely successful. JM - web sites of communities that have done this. Potential way to solve biggest problems of last plan - no buy in, sat on shelf, lack of financing, etc. JS anticipate inviting some of the groups that may not be necessarily recreation friendly - gain political support in adoption of plan. Dr. D - redefine recreation. Example: 1 out of 8 persons in NYC is diabetic...unless you exercise - expend all kinds of resources to cure problem. Safe park areas - less incidents of obesity, etc. Broader coalition effort as opposed to government entity driven. DL - Cessna - adopting programs; Vulcan adopted a school, etc. Signage - showing on-going support. Support partnerships rather than just one time. Involving corporate partnerships - on-going. Adopt a park etc. Major corporations or community groups and orgs - buy into the plan (not where is my name going to be) Park staff figure out where funding should go in the process. Zoo good model for business donations - coordination - GreenWay Alliance talking to Visioneering groups - six groups. GW Alliance to lead a Park alliance - government agencies, schools, etc. 6 county-side. Also, private fundraising effort mechanism some non-profit organization to coordinate with some degree or coordination to avoid redundancy. DB - affect on government grant application. Funding conflict? DK - actually helps in the process - show partnerships. EB - securing buy in- great idea (school bond issue. 100-member committee. Fundraising concurrent can be confusing. Global effort - Visioneering - city, county, Kansas Health Foundation, Wichita Community Foundation and Chamber of Commerce. Check Open Space in Seattle. Review diagram of proposed Master Plan Development Process Discuss and consider the possible benefits of a Steering/Implementation/Oversight Committee Discuss at what points we seek public input Discuss inclusion of Recreation Center Study in Master Plan Discuss possible timeline Scott Wadle, Planning, referred to a hand out of what other communities have done. Good factors from others and tailoring it for Wichita. Two reports previously - Recreation and Park and Open Space Plan. Overlapping and didn't relate very well. Community Involvement, Trends Analysis, Technical Analysis, Parkland Open Space Analysis, Pathways Analysis, Recreation Facilities/Program Analysis, Financial Analysis - Community PROS resources and Needs Assessment Report, Summarizes resources and needs. Vision and goals; Objective and Strategies; Performance Measures; Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Comprehensive Plan. Project Facility, and Program specific - project and priority plan; Policy Modification and Adoption; other Reports and Initiatives. Phases I through VI. JM Timeline for phases - RFP development issue. DK buy format - meet with staff - how much can be done in-house. Hiring consultant for work that staff cannot accomplish. 2-3 RFP's depending on what we need help with. Help collect data - based on "buy ins". Potential Community Involvement Process - surveys, survey of youth, stakeholder interviews with identified community leaders, Internet survey, display at the River Festival with questionnaires, focus groups. Potential Trends Analysis Process 1-8. JM plan be aware of drainage studies and recommendations of Drainage Task Force. Potential Plan Technical Analysis Process - Park and Open Space Analysis; Pathways; Recreation (facilities and programs) Program Analysis; Financial Analysis. 6 - Potential Plan Technical Analysis Process. 7 - Potential Pathways Analysis. WAMPO - bike paths - where connections are lacking, Prioritization process. 8 - 9 - 10. Plan Outline/Table of Contents 1-8. 11. Potential Steering Committee Formations 12. Involvement of other Sedgwick County municipalities - benefits - park and recreation transcends boundaries. Minimum participation benefits - contributing municipalities benefits. JS - moving toward a joint workshop - cc and Park Board February 28. Proposal to be presented to CC at workshop. Would you agree with this approach? What is your feedback? One workshop agenda item. SW - Dr. Dey what other communities do in terms of partnering with other entities. Start immediately to approach entities to gather support - outreach such as press releases, other activities, educational sessions, getting people engaged, meetings, buzz in the community. Dr. Dey - assessment any mechanism for holding other part of the city structure accountable for achieving the goals for this, i.e., safe parks - WPD. SW implementation matrix - WPD provide so many controls, etc. Part of evaluation - annual report, performance measures. JS if in doing the needs assessment - safer parks to WPD for info. It is a perception or fact? JM timeline is too aggressive. To CC - RFP development. #3 community input - maintain credibility and get good #'s and do a quality job - look seriously at contracting out those services. Time consuming and "poorly constructed surveys". Financial sense - capitalize on in-house staff expertise. Careful that all pieces are pulled together so that there is continuity to them. Make sure all pieces tie together. JS do you want staff to go ahead and initiate contact with Sedgwick County about utilizing the process. Sooner start dialogue the better. OK as a draft - show them, invite them to participate. DL, DB, MT, Dr. D - OK. 5:30 p.m. RESTROOM BREAK and GET FOOD for WORKING DINNER Take up items VI and VII at the February Park Board Meeting. Ask staff and/or Dr. Dey to add to diagram of community involvement approach. CC-Sharon Fearey contact respective CC members. Quote - John Ruskin. 5:45 p.m. Major Components of the Strategic Master Plan (20 minutes) Create list of major components of the plan. What do we want the Master Plan to include and address? Here are some possibilities: Status Report on 1996 Master Plan Community input Guiding Principles for the Future Standards for park access/acreage/types/paths/open space/rec opportunities Recreation Center Study Maintenance Standards River Use and Access Bike Paths and Trails Forestry/Reforestation Open Space and Greenways Consideration of and coordination with Drainage Task Force Recommendations Specific Project Consideration Dog park(s) Community gardens Wildlife corridors Planning for Growth of the Metropolitan Area (getting ahead of development) Guidelines for Acquisition/Disposition of Park Land Long Term Funding Mechanisms Implementation Plan and Timeline 6:05 p.m. Master Plan RFP (20 minutes) Discuss Board of Park Commissioners' involvement. Review one or two samples of good RFP's for Parks Master Plans. Discuss philosophy and content of RFP. Should the selected vendor subcontract for certain portions of the plan? Define skill set and experience needed by successful vendor. 6:25 p.m. Adjourn Park Board 1/9/06 (Contd.) Page 9 of 9 1 9