HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP Work Group agenda 092195 eceir� e ��:
SEP 181995
Managers Of... F
AGENDA
RECREATION AND PARKS WORK GROUP
THURSDAY, September 21 , 1995
3 : 30 PM
Chapel Hill Municipal Building
Town Council Conference Room
I . Presentations of Subcommittee Work
A. School/Government Coordination
(Mr . David Carter, Wake County Recreation and Parks Director will
make a presentation on Wake County/Wake Schools School-Park
Agreement)
B . Public/Private Recreation Service Providers
C . Park Standards and Local Ordinance Comparison
II . Discussion of Future Direction
III . Set October 19 , 1995 Meeting Agenda
IV . Adjournment
Recreation and Parks Work Group (Master Mailing List)
WORK GROUP
Hank Anderson, Member Gary T. Barnes, Chair Bill Crowther, Member
Carrboro Board of Aldermen Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Orange County Board of County Commissioners
103 Morningside Drive 109 Oldham Place 372 Saint Mary's Road
Carrboro,NC 27510 Chapel Hill,NC 27516 Hillsborough,NC 27278
(h)929-4580 (fax)968-7737 (w)962-4591 (h)962-2751 (h)732-7537 (w)732-6886
Bea Hughes-Werner, Member Jim King,Athletic Director Doris Murrell, Chair
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Board of Education Orange High School Carrboro Recreation and Parks Commission
2447 Honeysuckle Road 500 Orange H.S. Road 110 Williams Street
Chapel Hill,NC 27514 Hillsborough,NC 27278 Carrboro,NC 27510
(h)942-2941 (w)732-7253 (h)942-2547 (w)966-2173 (fax)968-7737
Lorraine Parker, Chair Rosemary Waldorf, Member Ann Wilkerson, Director
Orange County Rec. and Parks Advisory Council Chapel Hill Town Council Orange Community Schools
3804 Laws Store Road 200 Hunting Drive 200 E. King St.
Hurdle Mills,NC 27541 Chapel Hill,NC 27514 Hillsborough,NC 27278
(w) 732-8181 (h)732-7426 (h)929-7556 (w)968-2882 (fax)967-8406 (w)732-4166
MAIL ALL INFO TO
Keith D. Cook Martin Feinstein, Chair Dr.William C. Harrison, Superintendent
419 Calvary Court Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Commission Orange County Schools
Hillsborough,NC 27278 400 Collidge St. 200 E. King Street
(w)782-0033 (h)644-1657 Chapel Hill,NC 27516 Hillsborough,NC 27278
(h)933-3089 (w)962-3869 (fax)962-5664 (w)732-8126 (fax)732-8120
Cal Horton, Town Manager John Link, County Manager Robert Morgan,Town Manager
Chapel Hill Town Hall Orange County Manager's Office Town of Carrboro
306 N. Columbia Street P.O. Box 8181 P.O. Box 829
Chapel Hill,NC 27514 Hillsborough,NC 27278 Carrboro,NC 27510
(w)968-2743 (fax)967-8406 (w)732-8181 (fax)644-3004 (w)968-7706 (fax)968-7737
Lee M. Pavao, Council Member Dr.Neil Pedersen; Superintendent Eric Swanson, Town Manager
Town of Chapel Hill Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Town of Hillsborough
306 N. Columbia Street Lincoln Center, 750 S. Merritt Mill Road P.O. Box 429
Chapel Hill,NC 27516 Chapel Hill,NC 27516 Hillsborough,NC 27278
(w)968-2743 (fax)967-8406 (w)967-8211 (fax)933-4560 (w)732-2104 (fax)644-2390
STAFF SUPPORT
Bob Jones, Director Richard E. Kinney, Director Mike Loveman, Director
Orange County Recreation and Parks Dept. Carrboro Recreation and Parks Dept. Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Dept.
300 W. Tryon Street P.O. Box 829 200 Plant Road
Hillsborough,NC 27278 Carrboro,NC 27510 Chapel Hill,NC 27514
(w)967-9251 (w)968-7703 (fax) 968-7737 (w)968-2785 (fax) 932-2923
REPORT TO THE
RECREATION AND PARK WORK GROUP
" PARK STANDARDS AND LOCAL ORDINANCE COMPARISONS "
Subcommittee Members : Report Date :
Hank Anderson, Jr . September 21 , 1995
Gary Barnes
Keith Cook
Doris Murrell
Richard E . Kinney, Staff Support
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I . Introduction
II . Local Land Use Ordinances
III . Park Classification and Land Area Requirements
IV . Standards for Public Recreation Facilities
V . Population and Effect on Recreation and Parks
Appendix 1 Park Classification and Land Area Requirements Chart
Appendix 2 Standards Comparison for Public Facilities Chart
Appendix 3 Graphic Representations of Park Types
I. Introduction
• In setting standards for recreation and park facility and service needs in the coming
years , it is necessary to recognize the unique impact of the University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill on this process . This is because the institution accounts for a
large part of the population of Orange County, while at the same time offering a
range of facilities and services to its students and employees . There are , for
example , about 8 , 000 students living in dorms and another 3 , 000 living in fraternities
and sororities whose recreation and park needs are largely met by the University .
• A related factor to consider is that the portion of the projected growth in population
for Orange County that comes from the University will continue to decrease steadily .
Put differently, a growing proportion of the population in Orange County will come
from immigrants whose jobs are located throughout the Triangle Area and this group
of residents will look to the three governmental jurisdictions to meet their needs for
recreation and parks .
• Another factor to consider is that the population growth that is projected for Orange
County will come primarily from the towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill . The
unincorporated areas of the county are becoming more urbanized with the additional
subdivisions that are being approved. Often, these subdivisions are not annexed into
the municipal limits causing a more increased urbanization of Orange County as
well . This means that the demand for recreation and parks will increase as the
population becomes more urbanized across Orange County .
• Taken together, these factors point to the need to expand recreation and park
facilities and services at an accelerating rate over the coming years .
II . Local Land Use Ordinances
• All three jurisdictions (Carrboro , Chapel Hill and Orange County) have historically
recognized the significance of requiring " set aside " requirements for recreation
within their subdivision ordinances .
Page 1
• All have the provision to accept a cash payment in lieu of providing lands or
facilities within the subdivision . This provides the flexibility to serve needs of the
subject subdivision and the broader community .
• The three jurisdictions can allow for off- site improvements or donations of land to
provide for large , planned park sites contributed to by more than one subdivision .
• All three jurisdictions have flexibility in requiring land, developed facilities , or both .
• Chapel Hill and Orange County regulations are written to be land intensive while
Carrboro basically requires recreation facilities .
• Although the three ordinances use different formulae to define their requirements ,
the philosophy and intent of all three ordinances are the same .
• The same ordinance requirements could be considered for all jurisdictions since the
net effect of each " set aside " ordinance provision is to allow new development to
shoulder their impact on existing and Riture recreation and park facilities .
• Carrboro is presently considering a change to their recreation requirements to
become more land intensive due to pressure existing on undeveloped sites in its
planning jurisdiction . Total build-out of Carrboro' s planning jurisdiction is projected
to occur by the year 2010 .
III. Park Classification and Land Area Requirements
• Please refer to Appendix 1 for a full comparison of the adopted park classifications
for each jurisdiction .
• Park types are broken into six types ; Regional, District, Community, Neighborhood,
Mini Park, and Linear Park .
• There are national and state standards for park classification and all three
jurisdictions considered both of these standards in compiling their local standards .
Page 2
• Population number relative to acres of park types is the most common method to
determine standards . All of the jurisdictions standards are established using
acreage/population ratios (x acres/ 1000 persons) .
• Most of the standards are very close . There appears to be no overriding factor
against making the standards the same .
• Carrboro' s standards are the most recently researched and evaluated . The only wide
gap in the local standards is Carrboro' s standard for a Community Park set at 60
acres per park . This contrasts with 21 + acres proposed by Chapel Hill and the
Colnity' s 25 + acres .
• A linear park or greenway is an area where conformity to a standard is difficult, if
not impossible . This type of park is usually predicated upon the need for stream
buffering, transportation, scenic hiking, etc . A more serious effort would be fruitful
in developing standards for the type of construction on common greenways so that a
paved trail does not end at one jurisdiction' s limits and a beaten path extend along
the same corridor into the adjoining jurisdiction .
IV. Standards for Public Recreation Facilities
• Much of what has been said in the forgoing section is the same for development of
standards for public recreation facilities . These are "population driven" and national
and state averages are used as a base line upon which to determine local standards .
• Program demands unique to one locale may drive a standard to a higher or lower
level than national and state averages .
• All three jurisdictions considered UNC-CH and school facilities but did not factor
them into the standards . National and state standards do not reflect these types of
quasi-public facilities . The school teams , after- school and summer programs at the
schools eliminate much of the availability of school recreation facilities for public
programs . However, the subcommittee was concerned with the uniqueness of
UNC - CH and the impact of their recreation facilities on the development of
standards . The subcommittee determined that in applying standards to the
population of Orange County, that 11 , 000 (students living on campus) could be
subtracted from the total to give some acknowledgment for their facilities and
recreation services .
Page 3
• Again, the standards for public recreation facilities adopted by each jurisdiction are
very similar . The same is evident in the park classification standards discussed in
the preceding section .
• Chapel Hill and Orange County did not provide local standards in many areas where
standards do not exist on the national and state level . Carrboro held public
workshops and community-wide hearings during development of their
Comprehensive Recreation and Parks Master Plan . It was decided to implement
standards for the facilities even if national and state standards were not available .
• Standards for both park types and recreation facilities might be difficult to make
generic for an entire county . Often, urban and rural perceived needs of the number
of parks and facilities differ in that the urban demand is greater . This may or may
not be a concern for Orange County .
• The last statement underscores the need for & public involvement in the setting of
standards .
• Orange County has a "Master Recreation and Park Plan " that was adopted in July
1988 . Chapel Hill established standards as part of their " Community Facilities
Report" updated and adopted in June of 1989 . Carrboro adopted a " Comprehensive
Recreation and Parks Master Plan " in March of 1995 .
V. Population Growth and Effect on Recreation and Parks
• The importance of establishing standards is recognized because they are :
an expression of minimum acceptable facilities for the citizens of urban and rural
communities .
a guideline to determine land requirements for various kinds of park and
recreation areas .
a basis for relating recreational needs to spatial analysis within a community wide
system of parks and open space areas .
Page 4
one of the major structuring elements that can be used to guide and assist
regional park and recreation development ,
a means to justify the need for parks and open space within the overall land-use
pattern.
• Parks are for people and therefore , population is the major driving force in
determining the sufficiency of a community' s park and recreation inventory .
• The following chart represents population projections for Carrboro , Chapel Hill , and
Orange County through year 2010 .
POPULATION PROJECTION
las
:::
o
66
: ::
pel Hill 32 , 038 38 , 872 46 , 419 53 , 810 62 ,381 M1319747
oro 7 ,336 12 , 136 14 , 505 16 , 874 20 ,39 77, 066 939861 106 , 585 1159066 1239574
Source : NC Office of State Planning, Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro Planning Departments
• Due to the proximity of Eno State Park, Umstead State Park, Jordan and Falls
Lakes , it can be assumed that Orange County is served well on the regional, state
level . Therefore regional parks will not be evaluated in this report .
• If one accepts the standards that have been previously adopted and that population
can determine the number of park types and facilities needed, then population
projections can determine the number of parks and facilities required to serve the
minimum recreation and park needs at any given year . For purposes of the following
calculations , Carrboro standards will be used since they are the most recently
revised .
• The NC Office of State Planning certifies the population of counties and
municipalities on July 1 for the past calendar year .
Page 5
• The following chart represents the most updated information on population in
Orange County .
STATE OF NC CERTIFIED POPULATION
;:
: :
< 0Is*. : . offie
48,04
e* 006140�
' .
::. . : :: : 060
�.:
E
a el Hill 41 , 524 42 , 918 44 , 470
rrboro 129786 139052 149037
County 999674 1019599 1049668
Source : NC Office of State Planning
• Orange County had a total population of 104 , 668 in 1994 . Discounting the 11 , 000
student residents on the UNC -CH campus would bring this total down to 93 , 668 . A
brief evaluation of needs by park types (Appendix 1 ) based on this population
follows :
: : i: :: : ` :: : : ::,: :::? :: : :::
.:
:Me
6144VII go6046
: 6P
log 4*
Dee 4
'.Mee*0
, '
District Parks 446044
68 0
Communitywoo
44
04060
Parks 749 398
Neighborhood Parks 187 86
Mini Parks 23 45
. . . . . ME 0
• The above chart reflects approximately how far the entire County is behind in
maintaining a immnum standard of park types . Perhaps by as much 897 acres .
• Between 1993 and 1994 , County population grew by 3 , 069 ; all residential growth
off- campus . During July 1 , 1994 to July 1 , 1995 , municipal planners project the
combined growth in Carrboro a11d Chapel Hill to total 2 ,417 . These two
municipalities , in order to meet standard for this projected year, would need to
acquire and develop an additional 19 acres of community parks , 4 . 8 acres of
neighborhood parks , and the standard for mini-parks is presently met . The County
would need to bring on-line 12 acres in District Parks .
• For this one year, just to stay abreast of our annual growth, a total of 35 . 8 acres
county-wide is needed . At a conservative $ 20 , 000/acre, a total of $ 716 , 000 would
be required to purchase the land . This does not include a cost for developing
recreation facilities .
Page 6
• At even a decreased standard level, this underscores the over-riding need to update
all recreation and park planning documents , develop consensus over standards and
begin immediately developing strategies to overcome this exponentially increasing
deficit .
Page 7
Appendix 1
PARK CLASSIFICATION AND LAND AREA REQUIREMENTS COMPARISON
PARK TYPE ACRES/ 1000 POPULATION SERVICE
STANDARD POPULATION ACRES SERVED AREA
Re -gional Park*
State 20 1000 multi-county region < 1 hour driving time
County 5 to 10 200+ 40-801000 < 1 hour driving time
District Park*
State 10 200+ 1 or more communities < 1 hour driving time
County 5 75 + 10-501000 < 1 / 2 hour driving time
_Community Park
National 5 to 8 25 + Several Neighs. 1 -2 mile radius
State 8 25 + 20, 000 1 -3 mile radius
County 2 . 5 25 + 10, 000 1 -2 mile radius
Chapel Hill 5 21 + 150000 5 mile radius
Carrboro 8 60 61000 1 mile radius
Neighborhood Park
National 1 to 2 15 + 51000 1 /4 to 1 / 2 mile
State 2 6 to 8 4 , 000 1 /4 to 1 / 2 mile
County 2 . 5 5 to 20 2-8 , 000 1 /4 to 1 / 2 mile
Chapel Hill 2 . 5 5 to 20 51000 none given
Carrboro 2 10 41000 1 / 2 mile
Mini Park
National 0 . 25 1 Adjacent Neigh . 1 / 4 mile
State none given none given 500- 2 , 500 none given
County none given 1 none given 1 / 4 mile
Chapel Hill none given 1 500-27500 none given '
Carrboro 0 . 25 1 Adjacent Neigh. 1 / 4 to 1 / 2 mile
Linear Park
Natiorial Varies Varies Varies Varies
State 30 Varies Varies Varies
County none given none given none given none given
Chapel Hill none given none given none given none given
Carrboro Varies Varies Varies Varies
* Because of size and service radius , responsibilty usually w/ county or state only -- ( Regional stateonly ; District-county only)
Appendix 2
STANDARDS COMPARISON FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES
NATIONAL STATE COUNTY CARRBORO CHAPEL HILL .
FACILITY STANDARD STANDARD STANDARD STANDARD STANDARD
1000 POP . 1000 POP , 1000 POP . 1000 POP . 1000 POP .
FIELDS
Adult Baseball 1 / 12 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 1 /30, 000 1 / 2 , 500 1 / 5 , 000
Youth Baseball none given none given none given 1 /2 , 500 1 / 5 , 000
Softball 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 2 , 500 1 / 3 , 000
Football 1 / T0 , 000 1 / 20, 000 1 /20, 000 1 / 8 , 000 none given
Soccer 1 / 10 , 000 1 / 10, 000 1 / 10, 000 1 / 8 , 000 1 / 5 , 000
COURTS
Basketball 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 2 , 000 1 / 2, 500
Tennis. 1 / 2 , 000 1 / 2 , 000 1 /2 , 000 1 /2 , 000 1 / 2 , 000
Volleyball 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 none given 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 5 , 000
Shuffleboard none given none given none given 1 / 5 , 000 none given
Horseshoe none given none given none given 1 / 5 , 000 none given
OUTDOOR AREAS
Picnic Tables none given none given none given 1 /400 none given
Picnic Shelters none given none given 1 / 3 , 000 1 / 5 , 000 none given
Playgrnd . Activities none given 1 / 1 , 000 1 / 2 , 000 1 / 1 , 000 none given
Trails :
Hiking 1 / region . 4 mile / 1 , 000 1 / region 1 mile/ 2 , 000 none given
Interpretive 1 /region . 2 mile/ 1 , 000 none given 1 mile/ 5 , 000 none given
Archery 1 / 50, 000 1 / 50 , 000 1 / 50 , 000 1 / 50 , 000 none given
Amphitheater none given none given 1 / 50 , 000 1 / 20 , 000 none given
SPECIALIZED
Community Center none given none given 1 / 20 , 000 1 / 20, 000 1 / 20 , 000
Neighborhood CentE none given none given 1 / 5 , 000 1 / 10 , 000 none given
Swimming Pool 1 /20, 000 1 / 20 , 000 1 / 251000 1 / 20 , 000 1 / 10, 000
Golf Course 1 / 25 , 000 1 / 25 , 000 1 / 50 , 000 1 / 25 , 000 none given
Bicycling .
Urban none given 1 mile/ 1 , 000 none given 1 mile/ 1 ,000 none given
Appendix 3 ( 1 of 6 )
Too �
• ✓ ' �- tU
. � 40
r
, : / p1CN 1G
(. Pay �G
ct& Arm
�'r � t � iNtsroRtC ,��
5IT !✓
•` , : , �
. , 4
O
7
J
�---- VAM
ov � wD �
TYPICAL
REGIONAL
PARK
( 2 of 6 )
MQ � o � TNo � o � � Ni�A �. J= •
7EJJ ?.� 15
00ac (oil
BUJc_.vl ��
qfD
�--.
U,uv
• Amp ToT wwr
PICUIC ` ' � oc,� � �tq , •
Ae= 4 PATH
ar �
�H PJJ.1C1 � i
o - ,
r
r
u ATV JzC r
v lklT 54pztMVE
4 C C.�j KCIIo
Ci 1whY ' � � �► , 0VTPOOz BALL 1`IELD
�( ct .d � Sfmo+-t MULTI - pvepcoS ?to
ILrK BY, r., Te - FZY) NC�
WOT v � .
TrwA It
*00
00 *000 i t
�• OUT'VOOZ cZ Qoor�
/01 c )1VICOJ JMMIILTA L 5TUP'(
TYPICAL
DISTRICT
KPAR
( 3 of 6 )
. al
5e � v� c� JogC11 �i C{ Tall L
o ` ` PIC �II cC 4C=A
p 5N >= LTtIr
-
Lo4k
J �
- ' ' ' '
05VIII ALL
0
e �
e
1 �
its
ri
� 1
1
!
( 1
! if ALL Fl �P5 i
Y �r
1 r.11e, see. rr all • Torl
' /
.� . Pc�YCeouuA
0 lit
PACkiUG
ColJ.CE55iou BU ( LpI1l1C
TYPICAL .
. COMMUNITY
PA4RK
c4 of 6 �
Lp
o � -fp v
��� ._--
fa-rtd, L..
r
v
N
N
r
v �
X4 '
h 1 !
V
AV
GOt- L� GT
PIC
"130 OOD
N VIG
1
tu\tQi 3
f w AMAb
I lit
f rt S
- • 5N �
`44
..
e
aIIe .,.-
IIIIIIIIIIo
woo
. IIIIII.IIN )
1 .
I .
G
ARy,1N
R �
t ;
11
R :
11 �
to
to
to
to
11 v Fo
11 � .
04
to
41
tl
� .
111
1 . .
�E1..7ER
1es
gage