Item 2b- Walter E. Long Master Plan briefing — original pdf

Backup

WALTER E. LONG METROPOLITAN PARKMaster Plan Review –City CouncilOctober 2019PARK MASTER PLAN3,695 ac. (overall)Develops an overall vision for the park for current and future guidance Identifies types of recommended recreation uses Prioritizes initial development phase(s) Serves as a reference for future developmentZilkerParkRoy G. Guerrero ParkWalter E. Long Park+/-350 ac.Technical Advisory Group Community Stakeholder Focus GroupsLocal/citywide individuals/entitiesMeetings with area communityPublic Events and Public InteractionIn-person intercept survey Four public meetings at Decker Middle School (March to December 2018)Online EngagementThree opinion surveysMap blogWorkshops with PARD StaffElected/Appointed Officials and BoardsBoards and CommissionsCity CouncilPUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROCESSHISTORY OF THE PARKInitial Master Plan 1966Federally FundedInteresting SimilaritiesUses, Zones, AccessPOTENTIAL FUTURE SUPPLY OF RETAIL & OFFICE/COMMERCIAL USES (EPS)(1)Captures emerging development; may not represent all development within a 5-mile radius.Sources: ESRI; CoStar; Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.(# of res. units)(sq. ft.)(sq. ft.)(# of rooms)Development PotentialHigh developability –potential for extensive construction (e.g., buildings, surface parking, athletic fields, infrastructure, etc.)Moderate developability –potential for condensed construction (e.g., playgrounds, picnic areas, etc.)Low developability –potential for low impact construction (e.g., trails, boardwalks, pavilions, etc.)Very limited development –very limited construction, if any (e.g., wetlands, trails, etc.)BACKGROUND –ANALYSISActiveActive sports and amenities, organized events, more significant infrastructure, often greater costPassiveLess development/infrastructure, casual activities & hobbies, often less costEnvironmental/NaturalPreservation of vegetation/wildlife, nature-based activities, less development/infrastructure, often less costArts and CulturalCommunity enrichment amenities, activities, and programs, infrastructure and costs range from very little to extensiveTYPES OF RECREATION (PARK USE ZONES)PREFERRED FRAMEWORK PLANILLUSTRATIVE MASTER PLANAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances.CIRCULATION AROUND THE PARKMASTER PLAN –AREA DETAILSAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances.DAY USE / EXISTING LAKESIDE PARK AREAAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances.Any proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances.EXPO CENTER AREAAny proposed park development will comply with applicable City codes and standards or will seek necessary variances.PROJECTED OVERALL DEVELOPMENT COST RANGES(1)POTENTIAL PHASE 1 (SOUTH SHORE) DEVELOPMENTPotential Cost Ranges:(1)Initial Phase 1(A) $10 to $20 millionCould include:Gate, Parking, Restrooms, Picnicking Facilities, Initial Infrastructure for Rowing Events Phase 1(B) $15 to $25 millionCould include: Play area, boathouse, day use facilities, Additional Event/Water Activities InfrastructurePhase(s) 1(C) and beyond Cost to TBDCould include: Central recreation area, pier, Lakeside Boardwalks, Events Lawn, Infrastructure Overall Potential Cost Range (South Shore Parks):$90 to $120 million (significant portions may be funded privately)PHASE 1Total Area:+/-270 acres (7% of total park land area)NEXT STEPSApproval of master plan as overall guiding planPARB -June 25 –Recommended approval Environmental Commission -July 17 –Recommended approval•City Council -Planned for October 3rd•Identify funding & timing for initial phase•Confirm initial phase partners•Determine management structure (City managed, partial or complete conservancy, etc.) •Develop design for initial phase(s)