Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 02-10-2009 - 1ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORKSESSION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: February 10, 2009 Action Agend~a- Item No. SUBJECT: Parks /Lands Legacy CIP Follow-Up Discussion DEPARTMENT: ERCD, P&R, Budget PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) No ATTACHMENT(S): Twin Creeks Trail -Issue Paper/Map Project Prospectus -Potential Twin Creeks Family Recreation Center Synthetic Turf -Issue Paper Emerging/Future Issues -Issue Paper INFORMATION CONTACT: David Stancil, 245-2598 Lori Taft, 245-2673 Donna Coffey, 245-2151 Pam Jones, 245-2652 PURPOSE: To 1) consider and discuss identified follow-up items from the November 13 and December 11 Board discussions on parks and Lands Legacy projects, as related to the Manager's Recommended Capital Investment Plan 2009-2019, and 2) receive and discuss a proposal for a possible public-private partnership at Twin Creeks. BACKGROUND: At a work session and regular meeting in late 2008, the Board discussed the Manager's Recommended Capital Investment Plan 2009-19. As part of the discussion, the Board identified several topics related to park projects and/or Lands Legacy for discussion at a future work session. Staff has organized these topics into three categories for this follow-up discussion, and has prepared issue papers (attached) for each: 1. Potential Twin Creeks Linear Park (Morris Grove School Trail) -along with a related alternative proposal regarding a possible public-private partnership at the same site that has been received. 2. Potential for Collaboration on Synthetic Turf Field Installation 3. Emerging Issues and Future/Other Topics Twin Creeks - In late 2008, the Board asked staff to investigate the potential for a linear park along the newly-installed sewer easement at Twin Creeks that runs along Jones Creek and connects to Morris Grove Elementary School. Subsequently, a letter was received from the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools apprising the County of interest expressed by Morris Grove parents regarding a similar trail concept. Several persons attended the January 22"d Board meeting and commented in support of this concept. The attached issue paper provides background information about the proposed trail concept(s). There are two primary options for proceeding with a trail or linear park (although there are no 2 doubt various hybrid options as well). One option, recognizing cost limitations of existing funds and the cost estimate for a paved greenway trail with span pedestrian bridge, proposes to construct an interim unpaved trail with ales-expensive bridge over Jones Creek within existing funds. This may require the Town of Carrboro to accept and approve an interim trail design (if possible), which could be pursued and accomplished by interlocal agreement. This option could likely be constructed in a quicker fashion using only a potion of the available funds. A second option would be more of a true linear park, a 10-foot paved greenway with subsurface base, landscaping, benches and a larger pedestrian bridge that spans the Jones Creek floodplain. The engineering consultant hired for Twin Creeks has estimated the cost of this trail on the County's property to be approximately $850,000. if a natural surface trail were an option, the cost would be lessened. Town financial assistance for this type of trail, which fits into the Town's larger pedestrian transportation scheme for the northern transition area, might be solicited. The paper also notes several important issues related to the trail concept - 1) there are intervening properties between the County's Twin Creeks property to Lake Hogan Farms that will need to provide a connection, 2) the aforementioned cost issues and the question of Town willingness or ability to approve an interim trail, 3) maintenance, safety and security issues. Finally, the County has recently been approached by the firm of Recreation Partners (RP) about the potential for apublic-private partnership at the Twin Creeks site - to build a sports, recreation and child care/activity center, which could be a combination indoor/outdoor facility. A Project Prospectus prepared by Recreation Partners, which manages the Triangle Sportsplex, is attached. Synthetic Turf Field - A $650,000 portion of the 2001 Parks and Open Space bonds dedicated as `Soccer Superfund" monies was appropriated to the Twin Creeks project in 2005. However, the cost of constructing phase I of the park (with four soccer fields) is beyond available funds. In recent months, the concept of using these funds (current balance of $625,000) to construct a synthetic turf field at an alternate location has been discussed. The attached issue paper reviews the history of these discussions and focuses on two alternatives: 1) Smith Middle School field and 2) Cedar Falls Park.. Key issues to be addressed to pursue one of these options include the availability of funding if needed to install the field, issues related to Town approval processes and timing, and health and safety issues associated with synthetic turf fields. Emerging Issues and Future/Other Topics -During the CIP discussions and at subsequent meetings, there have been several other new or emerging topics the Board has identified for further discussion, as well as wording changes needed to the CIP. The attached issue paper on this subject lists several of these matters, some of which are proposed for future work sessions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There are several potential financial impacts associated with the different topics in this report. The cost of designing and constructing a trail at Twin Creeks along the Jones Creek sewer easement may vary dramatically depending on whether an interim or permanent trail is constructed, the type of trail surface used, and the design of the pedestrian bridge. The paved permanent trail with engineered span pedestrian bridge is estimated at approximately $850,000 -with the interim and natural surface costs considerably less (an estimate for this option is not yet calculated and requires additional discussions with the Town of Carrboro). The installation of a synthetic turf field at either Cedar Falls or Smith Middle School field may also vary depending on the degree of Town collaboration. Available funds from the former Soccer Superfund portion of Twin Creeks project budget total approximately $625,000. The total remaining funds in the Twin Creeks project budget stand at approximately $1.48 million. Recreation Partners has provided preliminary economic impact and development costs for the proposed Twin Creeks Family Recreation Center. The County would be asked to subsidize year one start-up costs in the amount of $175,000, which could be foregone in the event of outdoor programming. The County would also contribute the land at Twin Creeks for the center. The impact of pursuing this partnership on funding the other Twin Creeks activities outlined herein (trail, synthetic turf field) will require additional research and assessment by staff. There are also costs associated with the topics listed in the Emerging Issues section. Moving park projects up in the CIP will require exchanges to be made with other planned capital investments. Additional- discussion will be needed on the potential for additional flexibility in the use of Lands Legacy funds from the 2001 bond (if issued as alternative. financing). RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board discuss each of the three topical areas in this report, and provide direction to the Manager and staff on the desired next steps. The Manager further recommends that the Board consider and discuss the public-private partnership proposal from Recreation Partners, and direct staff on whether to continue additional dialogue and conversation about this possible project. 4 Issue Paper Linear Park /Interim Trail to Morris Grove Elementary via Twin Creeks February 10, 2009 Backuround In late 2008, the Board asked staff to look into a linear park concept using some of the existing funds for Twin Creeks Park from the 2001 Parks and Open Space bond. In January 2009, a letter was received from the Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) supporting the improvement of a "dirt trail" or path that exists for walkers but not for children on bikes or in strollers. There is no trail, but staff believes what is being referenced in the letter is the OWASA sewer line easement, which was cleared several months back and is just now starting to come back in grass. On January 22"d, several citizens spoke at the Board meeting in support of a trail connecting to the school. It should be noted that the two concepts above may not be the same. A linear park typically connotes a more "finished" feel, with a paved trail over graded subsurface base, landscaped shoulders and benches and/or picnic tables. A natural surface, mulch or gravel trail may or may not involve the same components. The adopted Twin Creeks Master Plan (May 2005) envisions two eventual trails in this area - 1) a trail along the west side of Jones Creek that would be part of a future Carrboro greenway system, and 2) a more formal school-to-neighborhood connector trail (known as the "redline" trail), which conforms to the OWASA easement in the middle of the property -but veers away from the easement at both ends as it moves north to the school, and south towards to the planned park entry road. The Town of Carrboro's Parks and Greenways Master Plan reflects a greenway trail along Jones Creek. This plan was developed prior to Morris Grove Elementary (and the Twin Creeks master plan), and does not reflect a connection there. The Town currently has a consultant looking at connecting existing trails in Lake Hogan Farms through intervening properties to Twin Creeks. Approximately $1.48 million is unencumbered from the Twin Creeks project budget. This includes prior appropriations for the Phase I park project design and engineering, and stabilization work to the farmstead approved in June 2008. Some of the remaining design and engineering funds could be redirected to a trail project (if changes to the approved project contract scope can be negotiated), possibly increasing the available funds. The total amount includes funds added to the Twin Creeks project budget from the Soccer Superfund. Approximately $625,000 of that amount is included in the $1.48 million figure above. 5 The Newly Proposed Trail on Twin Creeks Property A trail on the Twin Creeks property to connect from the property's southern terminus to Morris Grove Elementary within the sewer easement would span approximately 3350 feet (or 2/3 mile). A trail that conformed to the Twin Creeks master plan "redline" trail would run west of the Jones Creek sewer easement on the southern potion of the site and then east of the easement as it nears the school. A small portion of the middle of the two trails are in the same location, but most of the "redline" trail would be outside of the sewer easement. The total distance of the two trails is nearly identical. The attached map shows these _ different trail concepts. There appear to be two basic options for construction of such a trail either as requested by the schools and/or proposed by Commissioner Gordon (pending Town of Carrboro review and agreement). 1. Option 1 - An interim natural surface or aggregate trail that could provide for bike and stroller traffic until a more permanent trail is constructed. 2. Option 2 - A permanent 10-foot greenway trail, probably paved. It should be noted that both trails will require a pedestrian bridge crossing over Jones Creek. A permanent structure would likely be a substantial bridge, potentially in terms of both span and thus cost. The Town's greenways plan envisions a greenway trail to serve both transportation purposes as well as leisure use, and discussions will be needed with the Town as to whether an interim bridge is acceptable. Town ordinances (and FEMA regulations for stream crossings) may preclude the possibility of an interim, less-costly bridge -more information on this possibility will be provided as it becomes available. The long- term vision in the Town's plan for this trail is one that requires grading, paving, subsurface base and other work. This, plus the bridge, will make the permanent version (Option 2) a more costly measure -although the trail surface selection will affect the degree of that cost. It is possible that Option 1 could be at least partially constructed by staff and volunteers (with coordination and oversight), with perhaps an Eagle Scout or community project for the bridge - if this is permissable. Even a rough estimate of the cost for this option is difficult to determine, pending clarification from the Town of Carrboro on the standards and grading that would be required (and whether other federal floodplain certifications may be needed for the bridge). The cost will greatly hinge on what type of bridge and associated grading is required, if this version would be permitted in the sewer easement and stream buffer at all. Option 2 would require construction by a professional firm, grading and subsurface work and edging along the trail, and a more permanent bridge. If the surface is a paved trail, this type of trail on the Twin Creeks site would cost an 6 estimated $850,000 (including the permanent bridge spanning the floodplain as a substantial part of the cost). If the permanent trail could be a natural or fine gravel surface instead, this could reduce the cost. There may also be some potential for community or volunteer assistance in this project, although at a considerably lesser degree than the interim trail option. Park benches and trash receptacles placed along the route would add to the cost - but these are not substantial costs and may be accomplished for less than $10,000. Note: nth the installation of the sewer line and the possible willingness of the Town to consider a greenway in the sewer easement, an opportunity now exisfs to revisit whether the "redline" trail and a greenway trail inside the sewer easement are both needed, or whether one will suffice. Preliminary conversations with OWASA staff indicate the potential for location of the trail within the sewer easement, pending further discussion, with the understanding that provision for repairs to the sewer line will be needed -which could impact or damage the trail. Key Issues, Questions and Potential Benefits There are three basic issue categories that must be addressed to implement this idea: 1. Connection/Parking Issues 2. Cost/Town Approval Issues 3. Operation, Maintenance, Security and Safety Issues Questions /Issues Lack of Connection to South/Parking -The County's Twin Creeks property does not connect to Lake Hogan Farms. Any trail would need to traverse and have the legal agreement of other properties (as shown on the attached map). The Town of Carrboro indicates they are currently engaged in greenway planning that could result in discussions with these property owners, but the timing of this is not currently known. Until there is legal access and a trail on one of these properties, any trail built on the County's land would terminate onto private property and not connect to the south. A possible interim solution could involve a looped end to the trail at the southern end of the Twin Creeks site, where benches and perhaps signage might be situated, with trail users then returning to Morris Grove School along the trail. It is assumed that any parking needed for the trail use would come from the school parking lot. Cost /Town Approval Issues -Sufficient funding may exist to construct the linear park as a 10-foot paved trail with span pedestrian bridge on the Twin 7 Creeks site -and still allow for the potential use of Soccer Superfund monies elsewhere. As noted above, a paved version of a permanent greenway trail is estimated to cost approximately $850,000. However, the Town of Carrboro will need to answer several questions in order to evaluate this further. • Will the Town insist on this type of paved trail, or allow for the less- expensive Option 1 (an interim trail in the easement and stream buffer)? Either option may require waiving some stream buffer rules and other ordinance provisions (and perhaps federal floodplain exemption). • How much additional grading and subsurface work will be required (which significantly increases costs) for anon-paved interim trail? Will the trail be required to be ADA-accessible (this affects the trail surface decision)? • Will the Town allow for an interim (Eagle Scout-type) bridge in the short- term? • Can this be accomplished in advance of the future approval process for the park? An interlocal agreement for this project may be an option. Operation, Maintenance Security and Safety Issues - An assessment will be needed to determine whether sufficient staff exist to monitor and maintain the trail on the Twin Creeks site. This assessment would also need to address the operational costs and expectations. Additionally, the trail is considerably removed from Old 86 and is in a wooded, undeveloped natural corridor -with no road connections at present. Will this create safety issues? Finally, a trail in the sewer easement would link in the middle of the site to the old farm road, which leads to the barn and outbuildings (where stabilization work is underway). Will this create security concerns for the buildings, or liability and increased vandalism potential? Possible Benefits Showing Results from the 2001 Parks and Open Space Bond - As recently noted, Twin Creeks is the one project from the 2001 bond where no activity is underway toward construction or opening of the facility (there is work underway on building stabilization). Constructing a linear park and trail within the sewer easement would show results from the bond funds, likely within the currently available funds. Coordination with the Master Plan - A trail in the sewer easement is not inconsistent with the master plan, but was not envisioned to be the main connection to the school. However, the sewer easement may have presented an opportunity to revise the plan. If a trail is not within the sewer easement, the northernmost and southernmost segments of the trail must be designed in a way mindful of the future school facility and park construction on the site, to ensure the trail is not located in a way that constrains future plans. 8 Town and/or Community Participation -The construction of a permanent trail (designed for transportation as much as leisure) connecting Lake Hogan Farms to Morris Grove Elementary is a broader function than serving Twin Creeks Park and educational campus, and more a pedestrian corridor serving a larger northern Carrboro community need. Should the Town participate in the cost and construction of such a greenway? Should the Town maintain and operate the trail? Additionally, there appears to be community sentiment toward volunteer assistance in the trail construction, which could lower the project cost. Possible Options for Linear Park 1. Ask Town to Allow Approval and Construction of an Interim Trail (using existing funds -Option 1)? 2. Pursue Permanent Greenway Project (perhaps with Town financial assistance requested -Option 2)? A recommendation on the type of trail surface for both options will substantially affect cost, and help inform discussions/negotiations with the Town. "No-Build" /Deferral Options 3. Construct Original Trail (Redline Trail) at a Future Date as Shown on Master Plan (when full funding exists)? 4. Defer Project to Phase I of the Park (when additional funds exist)? 0 5 ~; O ~ ~_, ~r ~7~\ >tdd e c _N I I J ~L ~ ~ ~ I ~ -y~ ~s~nnnni ,% ~~ I1 - `--~IUL~LJU ```.~ --__ f O lementa Sch ~~_;\~ i ~~ ~~ ~~ \\ \ / ~11~ ~~/ r5~~`r~ I I \\ ~~ _1 ~~ ,~,~~ Future ~ 111 '`~.. ~ ~ 1 Shoot Srte I n MI Homes l Subdivision ; ti 1 -~, Jone ~' ~` ~ ~abdivisiop'( i 1, , ;,~ _ --l ~,~! Twin Creeks Park ~ ` and Surrounding Area Proposed Connector Road . Duke Forest LEGEND ~~Exlsting Greeenway ~~~Proposed Greenway Link Carrboro's Proposed~Gros~enway Sewer Easerrlent ~.~. ~Propoaed Greenway Proposed Redline FL'n Master Plan ~~r~Posslble Greenway --- Sewer Line - _, __~ --- '11 11 ~~' 11 ' II ' ~ 11 fl Future II School Facility r i Leak V 1 '~.., ll 11 l II l i 11 t I I -' 11 I1 I 1V 44 11 .. 11 11 $ l II O° t 11 11 II li li Hogan __ It ` 11 1 ~1 1 II II 1 l l !,! ' . Hogan ~ i ~ ~~ ~~ i~ 1 `' ,~ _ . ~:. \ ~~~._ TaLLy6o it Exisring ' Townhomes r ~~ '`~_ _"oa ~'~ - ~ /`• Existing Lake Hogan Farms Subdivision 10 Project Prospectus prepared for Orange County Twin Creeks Family Recreation Center Executive Summary Purpose To build a sport, recreation and child carelactivity center utilizing aprivate/public partriership between Orange County and Recreation Partners on the County owned Park Property known as Twin Creeks. This could be a combination outdoor and indoor facility. Back4round It is assumed that there is a strong demand for quality recreation, child care and activity based services for the growing needs of Orange County residents. Outdoor fields can support some of this demand but there remains a need for seasonal infrastructure as well as providing a safe and environmentally protected environment for the needs of young children. The indoor facility also contemplates a hardwood gym for related activities under the assumption this type of space is also in scarce supply throughout Orange County. Recreation Partners (RP) has a proven track record operating the Triangle Sportsplex without seeking additional County fundslsubsidies to sustain operations. RP has a long history of being NC's leading provider of quality recreational sports and programming in a family friendly, safe and clean environment. Programming includes early childhood development programs, youth and adult training and leagues across multiple sports. RP facilities offer a wide range of sports activities: Soccer programs for youths starting at the age of eighteen months and adults, lacrosse, basketball, volleyball and baseball programs. After school, summer camp and intersession programs provide an active alternative to traditional day care programs. Proiect Scope RP Deliverables: • 60,000 Square feet in-door Turf, Court and child camp facility. • Building constructed by a RP partner builder of commercial buildings in the Triangle for over 35 years. • Building, Up fit and Sports Equipment provided as a complete Turnkey. County Deliverables: • Orange County to subsidize $175,000 Year One Start-up Costs. Project fully breakeven Year two onward. • Contribute land to the project. Optional Synergies: Potential further synergy with RP providing all outdoor programming (it is projected that if the Outdoor programming were to be part of the publidprivate partnership that the incremental revenue from the outdoor fields to the venture would make the project breakeven at year one and not require the $175,000 first year subsidy. Potential to add a seasonal outdoor ice rink as a major Oranae County destination attraction. This could be operational by Fall 2009. 11 Location Twin Creeks Park. The indoor facility use would be approximately five acres on the Park site plus shared parking. Residents would have access to state-of-the-art in-door recreation amenities in their own community creating a less intensive use than previously planned for the si#e. The proposal is to place a 60,000 sq.ft. concrete tilt up building with an attractive fagade and to provide all required fit up and sports infrastructure equipment, all as a tum key recreation facility. Since the majority of the use is after school and on weekends this use encourages less traffic impacts at peak hours. We would expect additional synergies to be created with the County's planned outdoor park facilities on the same site, including the feasibility of RP managing the recreational facilities (soccer fields and baseball/softball) to maximize staffing and site synergies. Economic Impact New employment with RP 6- 8 Full Time 40 Part Time 45-60 Contractor Employees Estimated Annual Payroll for Twin Lakes Estimated Annual Contract Employee Compensation Estimated Capital Investment $250,000 $250,000 $4.85million funded by RP secured by long term lease with OC Economic Impact of Special Events and Tournaments (optional depending on traffic and parking constraints) (does not reflect restaurant and other spending) Participants Adult Soccer Toumaments 300 Football Combines 200 Soccer District Tournament 500 Independent Youth Soccer Toumaments 750 Soccer/Basketball Development Camps 300 Regional or Sectional Soccer Events 400 Private Soccer Camps 400 Private Basketball Camps 400 Spectators Hotel Rooms Duration 600 200 3 days 400 200 6 days 2000 500 5days 2000 500 3 days 600 300 3 days 2,000 500 5days 400 n/a 5days 400 300 5days Benefits to the Community Fitness and Health - Activity and sport related programs for all ages, ranging from teaching children good fitness and health habits to developing plans for adults for an active lifestyle and healthy aging and longevity. Publiclprivate partnership -for local residents to use the facility and use of County owned land for recreation First class recreation, child care and sports competition opportunities -After school care, summer camp and early childhood development based Lil Kickers soccer and Lil bunkers basketball. Soccer, basketball, lacrosse, volleyball, ball hockey, baseball, flag football; Tumble Bees intro gymnastics and cheerleading, triathlon, and disabled sports. Opportunities for partnership with US Paralympics, USA Baseball, US Soccer, local Basketball Camps and Clinics, Soccer Tournaments, Kids Gym and Gymnastics programs, Football Combines, Cheerleading Camps ,and local Colleges. 12 Issues/Concerns 1. Traffic • For similar facilities, we have performed in depth studies through Kimley Hom and Associates as to traffic patterns. For all non tournament activities, traffic is uniform, steady and limited to activity participants. Hourly participation is generally limited to those engaged in the specific activity and if there are spectators, they typically travel in the same vehicle as the participant. Allowing for all those engaged in hourly particpation, plus those coming and going, the maximum amount of traffic per hour for the indoor facility is 120 cars. If traffic (and parking) is a concern, the only activity in excess of the above comes from tournaments where there are additional spectators. Tournament activity replaces the normal hourly activities at the. indoor center and is only contemplated if the community desires this type of activity for the economic impact on neighboring restaurants and hotels or for the high community profile from hosting such events. However it does not significantly impact the revenue for the facility since the time allotted can be substituted for routinely scheduled sports and recreational activities. If the community is concerned about the extra traffic, or if the facility has parking limitations, approval for construction of the facility can restrict use for tournaments (and no outdoor seasonal rink). 2. Parkin It is assumed that the existing site plan allowed for parking for the contemplated four outdoor fields. The revised plan to include the indoor field replaces two outdoor fields with two indoor fields. While an indoor field significantly extends the possible uses and season length of fields, its existence just substitutes the already required parking for outdoor use. However, it is conceded that the indoor facility has more flexible usage and will attract additional participants and therefore based on Kimley Horn traffic analysis for similar facilities, maximum parking required for the indoor facility is 125 paces. As noted, since parking was already required for the outdoor field, it is estimated that the incremental parking for changing the use from outdoor fields to indoor is a modest 65 parking spaces. It is offered that the incremental cost of this parking can be absorbed in the overall site and construction costs as presented. Timeline TBD. If approved Construction could commence Q 3 2009. Q3 2010 Occupancy Page 1 of 2 13 UpOATES & t1/EIVTS: Adult Soccer Leagues start 2!15!!1 Adult Flag Football Leagues start 2H9!!1 More Special Events Register ordine loday!~~ ~ ..rv e~. „,# e~ w ~ __ ~: 7 _ of _.. w _- _. ~ _-, a _ .._ ~ t-err.r .: s .SE r,,~,~ .,.._..,.,-.,~ ~ , '. ~ ~ - .. , ~ --- e~~) ~ ~~,E. E~w,.,~, _ ~. - ~~ 1 H . -• -__ ,- qr~,t _ _ -_ _ ~~ ~-- .~ J .. ~ ~. http://v~~vw.charlottesportscenter. com/about/touresc. shtml 1 /29/2009 Page 2 of 2 14 r~ ~ f ~` ~ ~ ~` it r~K ~ ~ \..^fY ~•~ ~ ~~ ~~ _~ a~R~"V S ~ ~ ~ , ~ ,~ _ Li4' `~~. f~f: ..a t~ 't ~~ _y it . ~ u .r r i ,• +k'! Jet fl - ', ~ ~Vn ~~ Ilr ~ 4.: ~'! y ~• h ~•~ ®2001-2009 Chadotle Sport Center (704) 597-7311 ~ ~ "";.f.J~ ('~ Designed 8 Developed by Metheney Consulting JrS,It 1 3! ,!!~l htt„•//~xn7acx7 ~harlnttvcrtnrtcrantPr rnm/ahnnt/tnnrrcr chtml ~ /~4/~nn4 15 Outdoor Seasonal Covered Ice Rink 9l ~~. 17 18 Issue Paper Synthetic Turf Soccer Field Development at Cedar Falls Park or Smith Middle School February 10, 2009 Background In late 2008, the Board asked staff to look into a synthetic turf soccer field project using the remaining soccer superfund money from the 2001 Parks and Open Space bond. In 2007, members of the soccer community brought the idea of synthetic turf fields to the attention of .the board and staff was asked to look into the possibility of such a project at the Smith Middle School field(s.) At that time there was a potential private partner who had offered up to $600,000 in assistance. Additional sources of funds for the estimated $1.624 million dollar (two field) project had not yet been identified. Estimates for just the one municipal field were $856,000. The potential partner wished to have usage fees waived in exchange for their donation. The Town of Carrboro is responsible for issuing permits and collecting fees for field usage at Smith. The project, within the Towns jurisdiction, would also have been subject to the Town CUP process and the likely requirement for engineering drawings and water quality studies. In February of 2008, the Board of Aldermen decided to take no action on approval of the requested fee waiver, waiver of applicable town fees and general approval of the project. This decision was brought to the attention of the BOCC and served to effectively stop work on the project at that time. Since 2007, the funding offered by the private partner has been designated for use elsewhere. No other source of funding has been identified. Continuing Discussions with Carrboro about the Smith Middle School rp olect• Renewed interest may have arisen among members of the Carrboro Town board and Town staff. In fall 2008, at a meeting of the Board Chair, Vice-Chair and Manager with the Mayor and Manager of Carrboro, the potential for revisiting the concept of synthetic turf at Smith field was discussed, and the Town expressed willingness to receive another presentation and reconsider the topic. If the Town is willing to enter into a partnership with the County in some way, the idea could be further developed. 19 Providing a Soccer Superfund Grant to the Town of Chapel Hill for conversion of softball fields at Cedar Falls Park to a synthetic surface soccer field. Providing the remaining soccer superfund money to Chapel Hill for this project would fall in the category of matching grants within the BOCC approved Soccer Superfund Policy and Guidelines. Technically, the Board would have to return the funds to the Soccer Superfund, and then allocate them to Chapel Hill. If the $625,000 remaining funding were made available, Chapel Hill would be required to match this funding. The majority of additional guidelines or conditions within the Soccer superfund Guidelines document could most likely be met if an application were to be submitted by the Town. Key Issues, Questions and Potential Benefits There are three issue categories that must be addressed to implement this idea: 1. Available funding 2. Town Approval Issues 3. Health Issues Questions /Issues Available funding -What would the source of funding be for the amount above remaining soccer superfund money ($625,000) needed for the Smith option? ($250,000-1 field or $1,050,000-both fields.) Can the grant match be met by the Town of Chapel Hill for the Cedar Falls option? The 2009 PARTF grant application deadline has past. Chapel Hill proposes to submit an application with the next cycle. Town Approval Issues -Would the County receive assurance of a commitment to timely development of the project by either jurisdiction? Would permitting and required studies add to Orange County's cost? In 2007 Carrboro was reluctant to cover/waive required fees and studies for the Smith project. Chapel Hill proposes engineering be completed in-house and states that they are not required to pay their own fees. Health/Safety Issues -Last spring, an alarm was raised throughout the country regarding certain health risks associated with synthetic turf products. A study of several fields was conducted in New Jersey, and two were found to be potentially hazardous due to the age of the fields. Over time, the recycled rubber tire infill used breaks down into smaller particulate matter, which can be inhaled or ingested. In addition, a study conducted by the Connecticut Agricultural 20 Experimental Station concluded that the tire crumbs release chemical compounds into the air and ground water. Many studies conducted by the CDC and others have determined that inhalation or ingestion of this material is dangerous. High levels of lead were found in the older fields studied, which if inhaled or ingested can cause adverse health effects including developmental delay and behavior problems. The CDC also stated "The risk for harmful lead exposure is low from new fields with elevated lead levels in their turf fibers because the turf fibers are still intact and the lead is unlikely to be available for harmful exposures to occur." They also added that " At this time, CDC does not yet understand the potential risks associated with exposure to dust from worn artificial turf." The June 2008 CDC Health advisory does not recommend discontinued use of synthetic turf facilities, but instead recommends precautions for the field manager and the user. Alternative infill options have not been found. The use of recycled tire material appears to be standard in the industry. Each manufacturer claims that its product is "safe" and installations continue to occur all over the country. UNC recently replaced the turf on its Fetzer Field with a product containing recycled rubber tire infill. It seems likely that these products can be safely used with responsible management and with a commitment to replacement close to warranty expiration, which is typically 8-10 years. Continued use often occurs well beyond the expiration of manufacturers warranty periods. It would seem prudent that testing should be undertaken at this point to determine whether the infill products or the turf itself is breaking down to the point that it might pose a health hazard. Replacement costs typically run about half of the cost of the original installation. Potential Benefits Showing Results from the 2001 Parks and Open Space Bond - As recently noted, the Soccer Superfund is one of the projects from the 2001 bond where funding remains unspent. A portion of the funds was allocated and has been spent on the West Ten fields. Using the remaining funds for the most viable project that is closest to shovel ready would benefit the soccer community. Possible Town Involvement - Either project would require full approvals and partnerships to some degree with the respective town. 21 Possible Options for Remaining Soccer Superfund Money 1. Provide a Soccer Superfund Grant of $625,000 to the Town of Chapel Hill for the Cedar Falls project. The transfer of funds would not occur until the conditions of the grant application as determined by the BOCC were met. 2. Allocate $625,000 for the development of one or two synthetic surface soccer fields at Smith Middle School. Determine source(s) of additional funding required to complete the project. 3. Reserve remaining Soccer Superfund money for Twin Creeks or the next soccer project ready for development. 22 Issue Paper Emerging Issues and Future/Other Topics February 10, 2009 During the Board CIP discussions in late 2008, there were several other emerging issues, CIP additions and future topics for discussion that were identified by the Board. These include: 1. Timing in the CIP of Bingham Park and Hollow Rock /New Hope Preserve Some Board members expressed interest in revisiting the timing of these projects in the recommended CIP. Moving the projects up will require exchanges with other capital investments in the Plan. 2. Funding Source for Future Farmstead Stabilization and Renovation at Future Park Sites At a previous worksession, some Board members identified the need to look at the appropriate funding source for future stabilization and renovation work at the Twin Creeks and Blackwood farm future park sites. 3. Prioritization of the Mountains to Sea Trail for Lands Legacy Program Agreement on the trail corridor, and prioritization of the MST project for the Lands Legacy Program is needed, and will be programmed for a future Board discussion. 4. Future Use of Remaining Lands Legacy Bond Funds The possibility of additional flexibility in the use of Lands Legacy 200'( bond funds (if issued as alternative financing) was noted by Board members at a recent meeting. This discussion may also include consistency with the 2001 bond educational materials. This topic would also be scheduled for a subsequent worksession. 5. Wording Changes to CIP Items At the two discussions in late 2008, the Board asked that two CIP line items, "Reserve for Future Land Purchases" and "Mountains to Sea Trail" be adjusted to read "Lands Legacy/Reserve for Future Land Purchases" and "Lands Legacy / Mountains to Sea Trail," respectively, and that the project description reflect the change. These changes have been made to the Recommended CIP and will be reflected in future editions. 6. Discussion of the New Hope Park at Blackwood Farm Master Plan The Board asked for this master plan, which has been received but not discussed, to be brought back for worksession discussion. The item was tentatively slated for this worksession, but has been shifted to a subsequent 23 worksession due to the timing and complexity of the other topics. The master plan will be scheduled for a future Board discussion. 7. Appropriation of Remaining (leftover) Funds at 2001 Parks Bond Projects Remaining funding is expected to exist for the Smith Middle School (field lighting) project and perhaps other sites, where final project construction has or is expected to come in under budget. Discussion of appropriation of these funds would be scheduled for a subsequent Board worksession, once exact amounts are finalized.