The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutIPWG agenda 120700 I Memorandum To : Inter- Governmental . Parks Work Group From : Bob Jones , Orange County Recreation and Parks Director Richard Kinney, Carrboro Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Director David Stancil , Environment and Resource Conservation Director Date : November 30 , 2000 Re : Initial Meeting — December 7 , 2000 Please find attached the agenda for our initial meeting of the Inter- Governmental Parks ( IP ) Work Group . As noted in our correspondence of November 16 , the meeting will be held : Thursday, December 7 5 : 30 p . m . Southern Human . Services Center 2505 Homestead Road , Chapel Hill Please find attached several reports and other materials relevant to the meeting . We have also added an updated roster for your review ( please note any corrections or revisions to Carol Melton at ccrawford@co . orange . nc . us ( 245 - 2597 ) . I look forward to seeing you on the 7tn . . Copies : John Link, County Manager Cal Horton , Chapel Hill Town Manager Robert Morgan , Carrboro Town Manager Eric Peterson , Hillsborough Town Manager INTERGOVERNMENTAL, PARKS WORK GROUP AGENDA DECEMBER 7 , 2000 5 : 30 P . M . Southern Human Services Center 2505 Homestead Road Chapel Hill , NC 5 : 30 1 . WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS 5 : 45 2 . MISSION AND CHARGE I JOINT CAPITAL FUNDING FOR PARKS REPORT The mission and charge to the Work Group , along with the information presented and items referred at the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting on joint capital funding ( report attached ) . 60015 S . SOCCER SYMPOSIUM TASK FORCE REPORT Attached , as referred from Orange County Commissioners . Brief review of report and initial task of addressing need for adequate soccer fields and facilities . 6 : 45 4 . PROPOSED CHAPEL HILL AQUATIC FACILITY Attached , as referred from Chapel Hill Town Council . Brief review of report - collaboration opportunities and facility need . 7 : 15 5 . PLANS FOR NOVEMBER 2001 PARKS BOND Work group of elected officials to identify potential projects by 1 /31 /01 . 7 : 50 6 . ADJOURNMENT ( NEXT MEETING � FEB . 1 ? ) If first Thursdays are acceptable , the winter meeting could be scheduled for 2/1 /01 . : : r . _ . - INTERGOVE RNMENTAL PARKS WORK: GROUIP w - - - - -November 2912000 Itt ttI - ,_ It - _. - - NAME OF MEMBER APPOINTMENT BUSINESS TOWNSHIP of HOME ADDRESS / TELEPHONE / E - MAIL RESIDENCE TELEPHONE Margaret Brown Orange County 929 - 6460 Chapel Hill Twp 1509 Smith Level Road Commissioners mb@mindspring . com Chapel Hill , NC 27516 Ken Chavious Hillsborough Board of ( H ) 732 - 3469 Hillsborough Commissioners / 401 N . Nash Street Hillsborough Recreation Hillsborough , NC 27278 Board Mark Dorosin Carrboro Board of 929 - 7799 Chapel Hill Twp 113 Creekview Circle Aldermen 942 - 3299 (fax) Carrboro, NC 27510 abmd minds rin . com Kevin Foy Chapel Hill ( H ) 9324923 Chapel Hill Twp 19 Oakwood Drive Town Council kcfoy@aol. com Chapel Hill , NC 27514 Bill Strom Chapel Hill ( H ) 933 - 2711 Chapel Hill Twp 714 Greenwood Road Town Council (Alternate ) ' BiUStrom@nc .rr. com Chapel Hill , NC 27516 Keith Cook Orange County Board of 919 - 6444884 Hillsborough 419 Calvery Court Education kdc52@aol . com Hillsborough , NC 27278 Judson Edeburn Duke Forest Resource 613 - 8014 Duke University Manager iudeburn@duke . edu Nicholas School of Environment PO Box 90328 Durham , NC 27708- 0328 Joe Herzenberg Chapel Hill ( H ) 929 -4053 Chapel Hill Twp 6 Cobb Terrace Greenways Commission Chapel Hill , NC 27514 Susie Holloway Orange Water & Sewer ( H ) 968 - 0832 711 W . Main Street Authority Bd . Of Directors ( Fax) 968 - 0832 (start) Carrboro , NC 27510 Beth Huskamp Chapel Hill Parks & ( H ) 929 -4053 Chapel Hill Twp 109 Chesley Court Recreation Commission bah@abpeds . org Chapel Hill , NC 27514 C� L: \Carol\IGPWG\IGPWG-ROSTERfinal2 . docRevised 11/30/00 Page 1 of 2 LF P47 IF OVERNMENTAL A _ - mm IF IF I I FF : WO I IF - IF - . N _ _ ore V niber , +15 200 4II FFA _ - - _ vIF n FF : . _ : , _ NAME OF MEMBER APPOINTMENT BUSINESS .. TOWNSHIP of HOME ADDRESS / TELEPHONE / E - MAIL RESIDENCE TELEPHONE Doris Murrell Carrboro Parks and (W) 96 & 8191 Chapel Hill Twp 110 Williams Street Recreation Commission Carrboro, NC 27510 Lee Rafalow Orange County 254-4455 Chapel Hill Twp 4512 Powder Mill Rd . Commission for the rafalow@mindspring . com Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Environment ronment Jeffrey Schmitt OC Recreation & Parks 732 - 9852 Cedar Grove 2101 Schley Road Advisory Council Hurdle Mills NC 27541 Patrick Sullivan OC Recreation & Parks 919 - 684 - 2800 Chapel Hill Twp 8108 Reynard Road "Advisory Council psullivan@duke. edu Chapel Hill, NC 27516 94M727 Alternate Fax 684 - 65144 Gordon Warren Eno River Association EQwarren@mindspring. com Eno Twp PO Box 1252 Hillsborou h , NC 27278 TBA Mebane City Council TBA Chapel Hill - Carrboro Schools Board of Education TBA University of North Carolina TBA Triangle Land Conservancy Staff: David Stancil, Orange County ERC Director, Kathryn Spatz , Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Director, Richard Kinney, Carrboro Parks and Recreation Director, Bob Jones , Orange County Recreation and Parks Director L : \Carol\IGPWG\IGPWG-ROSTERfinal2 . docRevised 11/30/00 - Page 2 of 2 03 Executive Summary Report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group June 11 , 1999 Introduction On November 19 , 1997 , the Board of Commissioners created a Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group . The Work Group was. developed to follow up on two reports : a 1996 Assembly of Governments report " Recreation and Parks Issues in Orange County, NC", and a May 1997 report entitled " Coordination of Parks and Recreation Services for Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County", developed by the area Managers . The charge to the Work Group was to : "update and modify the Master Recreation and Parks Plan to be a joint long- range capital facilities plan for Orange County, Carrboro and Chapel Hiil. . . " Although ° not listed in the charge, Town of Hillsborough and OWASA representatives participated in the work group effort . In accomplishing this task the Work Group was asked to address the following topics : ➢ An update of recreational facilities countywide ➢ An update of local recreation and parks needs ➢ Develop standards for park facilities and design ➢ Joint siting , design and management of school and park sites ➢ Tangible and realistic parkland acquisition goals ➢ Reassess payment- in - lieu of dedication programs (and service area boundaries for programs) ➢ Dedication provisions for greenways in the Joint Planning Area The Work Group began on December 17, 1997 . The group met monthly over the next 17 months ( including six months of additional subcommittee work) to . produce a report . While the Work Group reviewing a great deal of research and discussed a wide variety of topics, a summary of the report may best be considered in the following six topical categories : 1 . Where Are We Now? In evaluating the status of recreation and parks in the County, the Work Group created two committees . The Resource Inventory Committee worked during the spring and summer of 1998 to develop * a template for tracking all existing recreational facilities, and discuss a map or brochure to convey these facilities to V � • " fee- the public . The inventory of facilities (including quasi - public and private based " locations) is included as Appendix C to the report . * The inventory would be maintained for future use , and contains information on the type of activities available at each location . The Needs Assessment Committee met during the spring and summer of 1998 to update recreation and parks needs from each jurisdiction . These needs are found on pages 411wi7 of the report, and run the gamut from active recreation facilities to community parks, greenways and " low- impact" recreation . In summary, the rima needs identified for each jurisdiction were . Jurisdiction Alt Carrboro Acquire/develop Northern Community Park, communi mnasium Chapel Hill Complete Northern Community Park, Southern Community Park Hillsborough River Walk Fairview Park Occoneechee Park go Orange County Complete Efland -Cheeks Park, Northern Human Services Center Park, acquire parkland in Bingham/ Little River Tw s An evaluation of previous bonds and projects constructed with those monies is also provided on pages 71mioo10 of the document. A summary of needs appears on page 19 . The Work Group discussed the concept of a Countywide set of standards for facilities and park design . The development of a common set of standards was recognized as important, but because of time considerations was deferred by the Work Group . Recommendation B on page 35 addresses this topic . 2 . Where Do We Go From Here With knowledge of needs and facilities, the Work Group then turned its attention to future concerns . One such area was a set of goals and criteria for future land acquisition and facility sitings . In general , the goals and criteria ( pages 1244) encourage joint siting of schools and parks, preservation of resources in conjunction with parks development, awareness of environmentally-sensitive lands , the existence of matching funds, considering the intensity of use, and locations for linear parks . The work of the Schools and Land Use Councils was recognized as an important piece of the recreation picture , and the idea of joint management of school and park sites (as well as possible joint acquisition ) is a theme throughout the report. One topic that the report notes regards impediments to locating new active recreation facilities . These impediments exist primarily in the context of lighting , intensity, traffic and noise . In defining both active and low- impact recreation , it is important to be consistent with surrounding land uses . Ideas on ways to mitigate the impacts of larger active facilities include co- location of schools and parks, combiningactive and low- im act recreation in larger park settings to buffer p residential areas, and the need for a proactive land . acquisition program to purchase lands for long -term use as parks ( and/or schools) . The potential for coordinating parks planning exists beyond the scope of the local governments involved in this effort . In particular, the report notes the significant potential for coordination with UNC, OWASA and Duke University in meeting long -term needs of mutual interest. While UNC provides . many facilities used by students (and local residents) , there is also an undefined , impact on local recreation facilities from faculty and staff of the University . Programs such as the Carolina Outdoor Recreation Center offer a means for sharing resources, and the potential exists for collaboration on future recreational facilities with UNC . Likewise , OWASA currently provides recreation facilities at both University Lake and Cane Creek Reservoir . OWASA holds over 3 , 000 acres of land in the County. , some of which appears to offer the opportunity for coordinated recreational use . A memo from the OWASA Board (Appendix F) indicates a willingness to discuss certain parcels for future public use . And finally, Duke Forest also provides a recreational resource to . County citizens . While concerns about protecting the integrity of the forest resources will be paramount, opportunities exist to " work with Duke in the future , particularly in terms of carefully- located trails that fit with the University's plans . 3 . Adequate Provision of Parkland and Natural Corridors One of the most prominent needs identified is to preserve green corridors, whether in an urban or rural setting . This section of the report addresses the potential for linking some existing and proposed greenway networks. in Chapel Hill , Carrboro and Hillsborough to future parks and ' regional open space such as Eno River State Park and Duke Forest. The importance of existing and future greenways in the Towns is noted , as well as the existence of a schematic plan for greenways extending from the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area into the Rural Buffer, developed in 1986 as part of the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan . Wildlife corridors in the rural areas were introduced into County planning efforts through the 1988 Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitat, and are important to the overall County and regional ecosystem as part of the " green infrastructure . " These corridors are undeveloped riparian stream corridors or overland connectors that exist in a natural state . Any trails would exist only as they have evolved over time by use of wildlife or humans . However, as the County and Towns continue to grow , it will become important to link - Town parks to regional corridors such as Eno River State Park, nodes of l open space such as Duke4 Forest, and future County parks and open space . Linking future rural parks and open space to Town parks via a few unpaved trails could greatly expand low- impact recreational opportunities , The identification of strategic corridors that might tie together these recreation facilities is suggested as a practical long -term goal . * Using criteria and a classification scheme, the potential for a select few woodland trails as part of a Countywide ( and eventually) regional corridor scheme is noted . , Three examples of such trail links are offered (two within the Towns or Rural Buffer, one in the rural areas linking Cane Creek and Eno River State Park) are offered . 4 . Coordinated Land Acquisition for Parks The 1996 and 1997 reports point to the need for coordinated capital funding , and this is one of the goals of this project . In discussing parks needs and goals , the work Group placed a strong emphasis on the need to Abegin land acquisition for long -term park needs now . Orange County has taken steps in 1999 to create a mechanism that could be ' used in this fashion . . The new Department of Environment and Resource Conservation began operation on January 4, with a primary focus on acquisition/easements of critical land resources . A Land Acquisition Program for. Orange County is currently being developed for discussion in the fall of 1999 . This program will develop and/or use inventories, criteria and a management structure for the acquisition and stewardship of land resources deemed critical to the public interest, working with other existing land trusts and entities . The program will involve the preservation of natural areas and wildlife habitat, farmland , riparian buffers, and the acquisition of lands for long -term parks use . The County is hiring a Land Resources Conservation Manager, with expertise in site evaluation and land acquisition this summer . This position will coordinate land acquisition efforts, and would use the criteria developed in the Master Recreation and Parks effort to evaluate land purchases for parks ( please see the Recommendations section for additional details) . The outline of the Land Resource Acquisition Program may be found in the report on page 26 . Funding for long -term parkland acquisition would likely involve local bonds and allocations, and grants from programs such as the state Parks and Recreation Trust Fund , Information on this program is provided on pages 27-28 . so Payment= i n - Lieu Programs All of the jurisdictions in the County have provisions in their development ordinances addressing dedication or provision of recreation facilities . Carrboro and Orange County also have payment- in -.lieu of dedication programs, which allows for the payment of a fee based on the number of lots in lieu of providing recreation facilities . Orange County has special legislation that would allow for 67 the use of an impact fee for public uses including recreation , but this proviso has not been utilized to date . As of 1999 , Carrboro has collected $ 453 , 000 through its paymeriNrimlieu program . Orange County currently has $488 , 000 available, allocated by four districts in which the money must be spent. The County has also received land dedications totaling 44 acres since 1986, although this land is in small pieces exclusively in Bingham and Chapel Hill Townships , The Work Group found that difficulties exist with the existing payment" mmlieu programs . The funds must be geographically earmarked and spent within the area collected . They must also be supplemented with matching funds for use . Considerable research was performed to explore programs in other jurisdictions,. and a special meeting with Richard Ducker from the Institute of Government was held to review paymenNn - lieu possibilities . 6 . Recommendations ' Using the research and deliberations of 17 months , and with the charge and goals of the project in mind , the Work Group developed nine recommendations, summarized as follows (these recommendations also appear on pages 34-40 ) . A . Create a Parks and Resource Lands Council As we move to coordinate long -term recreation and parks , planning , the need for a permanent joint council (to meet quarterly) was identified , building on the useful nature of the Work Group itself. Possible duties might include : ➢ Develop and review standards ➢ Develop future parks bond proposals ➢ Provide a coordinating mechanism for parks plan updates ➢ Make recommendations on allocations of future bond moneys ➢ Coordinate acquisitions . though the County Land Resource Acquisition Program . A resolution asking the local boards to create the Parks and Resource Lands Council is attached as Appendix L. Be Inter jurisdictional Standards As previously noted , impediments exist to the creation of common standards that could be used Countywide for recreation and parks facilities . If coordinated funding were pursued , the need for some coordinated standard would be important. The Parks and Resource Lands Council is recommended as a mechanism to accomplish this goal . C. Joint Siting, Design and Management of School and Park Sites Coordinating efforts and responsibilities with the Schools and Land Use Councils will be important, given the emphasis from both groups on the benefits of joint school/ park development. As discussed in the section on land acquisition , it Is recommended that Orange County, with dedicated staff resources, a program for land acquisition , and a role in school siting , should take the lead role . D. Public/Private Partnerships One of the most exciting prospects is the potential for partnerships . Coordination between the local governments on future parks, such as , a large district park between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill/Carrboro , will be paramount . Opportunities also exist with OWASA, and it is recommended that the Parks and Resource Lands Council work to identify properties for partnership and meet to explore these possibilities . Coordination with UNC on future parks also appears practical and should be pursued . While Duke Forest is a different type of , recreational entity, it plays . an important role in the County's open space network and future discussion of less- sensitive portions of the Forest as links in the open space network should be pursued . Finally, opportunities for coordination with the state, . other land trusts and private firms offer many possibilities for future needs . E. Joint Capital Facilities Planning / Coordinated Land Acrlulsition A meeting of the Managers of each jurisdiction is recommended to develop a plan for coordinating long -term land acquisition : With land prices continuing to escalate and little land available for parks within the Town jurisdictions, action is needed now to identify . and acquire future park sites . Use of the individual Capital Improvement Plans could be a fundamental part of this funding mechanism . By timing and matching fund availability, the Towns and County will be able to work together more effectively, .with the County serving in a lead role in site in and acquisition , working with the Parks and Resource Lands Council and the individual elected boards . F. Open Facilities Policy In the spirit of Inter- governmental coordination , the Work Group feels that all County citizens should , have the opportunity to use facilities within the County, regardless of their jurisdiction of residence . Attempts to restrict use will be cumbersome administratively and not constructive in the collaborative future of parks planning . A resolution to this end for consideration by the elected boards is found as Appendix F . Pursuit of a similar policy with UNC and OWASA is recommended , as is a review of hours of operation at Cane Creek/ University Lake., G. Payment-/n-Lieu Changes After considerable discussion and review, the Work Group finds that the existing ON payment- in - lieu programs are not likely to produce sufficient funds to meet long term needs . It is recommended that Orange County and Carrboro develop plans to match other funding with the current payment- in - lieu funds to use these resources . Even with its limitations , the existing payment- in - lieu program should be kept and modified where possible . The potential for an impact fee or impact tax should be explored , using existing legislation . H. Address Existing Needs While more thorough standards are needed , a population - based standard from the 1996 Assembly of Governments report was used to determine needs for parklands . Using this standard , the County as a whole has a current deficit of 645 acres of parkland . With expected population growth , this is County and Towns combined with have a deficit of 1, 265 acres by the year 2025 . Based on average land sales (weighted for urban and rural lands ) and existing bond funds , the cost of purchasing lands to erase the long -term deficit is $ 10 . 12 million in 1999 dollars . Since this will unquestionably rise in the future, the Work Group again recommends immediate action in terms of land acquisitions . L Use of Current Funds and Future Funding Needs While it may be more practical to develop recreation facilities over time as the population increases, a more - proactive approach to land acquisition is needed to identify and purchase sites that offer both active and low- Impact recreation potential . Matching funds from the different jurisdictions (coordinated through the aforementioned joint capital funding , mechanism ) should be an important component, and an acreage threshold and additional standards for joint school/ park sites are also warranted . To address long -term needs, the Work Group recommends that the following actions occur : ➢ The remaining $ 2 . 89 million for land acquisition from the County parks bond should be used for acquisition of lands identified as sites for long -term acquisition as soon as possible . ➢ The remainder of the $ 10 million in long -term land acquisition should be addressed through an $ 8 million parks bond placed before the voters in November 2000 , The Parks and Resource Lands Council should develop the specifics of the bond proposal . 11 1 i ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date : October 30 , 2000 Action Agenda j Item No . 1 SUBJECT : Report -- Potential Joint Capital Funding for Parks I DEPARTMENT : Joint Town /County PUBLIC HEARING : (Y/N ) lNo ATTACHMENT ( S ) : INFORMATION CONTACT : Report David Stancil , 245 -2590 PURPOSE : To consider a report on Potential Joint Funding for Parks , as a follow- up to the 1999 Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group report . BACKGROUND : In May of 1999 , the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group , comprised of elected and appointed officials of each jurisdiction and both school boards , issued its report . Among the recommendations of the report was a call for the Town and County Managers to prepare a report on opportunities for joint capital funding for parks projects . In resolutions adopted during the spring and summer of 2000 , each jurisdiction authorized the creation of this report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting . The attached report explores the identified capital funding needs for parks from each jurisdiction ' s Capital Improvements/ Investment Plan , the current sources of funding , use of the County' s Lands Legacy program for acquiring parkland , and observations on additional steps that could be taken toward collaboration for parks and recreation . A two- page summary of the report is provided following the cover page . FINANCIAL IMPACT : There is no financial impact associated with receipt of the report . However, funding decisions and potential collaboration for parks would have a financial impact on each jurisdiction either collectively or individually , depending on the method of coordination pursued (as identified in the report) . RECOMMENDATION (S ) : The Managers recommend that the elected boards discuss the . report and provide direction on follow- up actions that are desired . 1 `� oft p otential � ° � �t parks cap►tad vuvlain9 for Ocotob er 30 2000 n Potential Joint Capital Funding for Parks Summary -- October 30 , 2000 i Earlier this year, each elected board adopted resolutions asking that; in follow-up to the 1999 Joint Master Recreation and Parks (JMRP) Work Group Report, the Managers from each jurisdiction develop a report on potential for joint capital funding for parks needs . Three reports in the past five years have explored different aspects of parks and recreation facilities and service in the County. All of the reports have pointed to a mechanism that establishes Orange County in a coordinating role for parks and recreation initiatives . In addition, the Memoranda of Agreement between the school boards and the ide an important precedent for collaboration in this area. local governments prov Having identified parks needs in the 1999 JMRP report, the current park projects in the Capital Improvement Plans (CIP ' s) for each jurisdiction were examined. In general , while significant headway has been made, there are identified - parks and recreation needs in the , County and Town CIP ' s totaling $ 63 million . Only 25 % of those projectso are funded at this point in time, leaving $ 47 million in unfunded parks projects . There are several potential sources of funding for parks needs, ranging from bonds to . State and Federal grants to special reserve funds and even impact fees (not currently implemented, but authorized by the General Assembly) . Orange County ' s new Lands Legacy Program was developed concurrently with the 1999 JMRP report, and the potential may exist for using the County' s Lands Legacy Annual Action Plan process to 1 ) identify parks projects that are collaborative opportunities for multiple jurisdictions and 2) pursue acquisition of parkland needed for the project in question. The Memoranda of Agreement on co4ocation between the schools and local governments , and the new School Capital Funding Policy, offer significant opportunities to explore joint projects . In considering parks projects that are most appropriate for joint ventures , the previously. mentioned Memoranda of Agreement provides a frame of reference in determining when co4ocation may be desirable . In addition, the Board of Commissioners has noted that the most- appropriate types of joint park ventures are larger- scale parks that provide a broad range of opportunities and can serve both rural and Town populations . In reviewing the parks and recreation . reports , there may be an emergent delineation of roles for joint park projects . The Towns currently expend substantial capital and operating funds on an annual basis to operate and maintain existing parks , and are often challenged to provide capital funds for new park facilities . Orange County, in its 1997 Parks bond, attempted to address both Town and County by allocating bond money to parks projects inside Chapel Hill and in western Orange County. Even so , the County' s burgeoning population (currently estimated at 111 , 000) makes the need for land-banking for parks a pressing one, as illustrated by the unfunded parks needs . With this being the case, the County may be in the best position to provide capital funding for parkland acquisition and facility development for larger- scale joint parks . I I In order to operationalize a system of planning for joint park projects , a consensus will be needed on where these parks should exist . If the Lands Legacy Annual Action Plan process is the vehicle to identify and pursue land acquisition for joint parks efforts , a map is needed to show where these park needs are . A Conceptual Future Park Sites map is proposed to show current facilities , and the general area where joint parks projects have been agreed to by elected boards . Such a map could be incorporated into the County' s Recreation and Parks Element of the Comprehensive Plan, due for update in 2001 , to create a Countywide master plan. The map might also be adopted by reference into each of the Town parks and recreation plans . In conclusion, the report notes the many positive actions that have occurred in the past five years in coordinating and sharing parks and recreation plans . An Inter- Governmental Parks Work Group is poised for an initial meeting ' m November to continue the sharing and coordinating function . At the same time, however, the County and Towns are faced with a number of significant challenges in coming years . The Towns often must sacrifice capital funding for new parks in order to operate and maintain existing ones, and over $ 47 million in identified projects stand unfunded . Good park sites are lost each year to development as the area continues to grow, making parkland acquisition a high priority. The 1999 JMRP report has called for a bond referendum to address parks needs . To address these issues, the report offers the following ideas . 1 . Develop a Memorandum of Agreement among the local governments on capital funding for future joint parks . The Memorandum could explore the nature of joint parks ventures (larger- scale parks serving both rural and Town populations) , the method for identifying and acquiring park sites , the County" s potential roles in capital funding, land acquisition and facility development, the Town ' s potential roles in operation and maintenance, and the inter-relationships with school/park co -location. Funding equity issues might also be explored in this Memorandum . 2 . Create and Adopt a Conceptual Future Park Sites map . To support the Memorandum above, an agreed-upon map showing the conceptual area in which joint rojects have been identified might be developed, with input from all park p jurisdictions and adopted by all elected boards . This map could be used annually as parks funding is considered by the jurisdictions . 3 . Develop Plans for a Parks and Open Space Bond . As noted above, unfunded parks needs (both for parkland acquisition . and facility development) exist among the jurisdictions , and the . 1999 JMRP report noted the need for a bond referendum . While not all of these projects would be joint ventures , some would likely be appropriate collaborative efforts . The County and Town elected boards may . wish to discuss this need and arrive at a mutually agreeable timetable for a bond referendum, or discuss other funding options . M II I . Introduction and Purpose Earlier this ear, the elected boards of Carrboro Chapel Hill Hillsborough and v p , Orange County considered the report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks (JMRP) Work Group . i One of the recommendations of the JMRP report asked the Managers from each jurisdiction to prepare a report for an Assembly of Governments meeting addressing the potential for joint County/Town collaboration on parks acquisition and development . In resolutions adopted in the spring and summer of 2000 , each jurisdiction asked the Managers to prepare this report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting . The concept of a joint mechanism for parks funding and planning is not a new idea , and has roots in a trio of reports developed between 1996 and 1999 : • The Report of the Recreation and Parks Work Group ( 1996 ) , which developed recommendations to " establish principles for coordinated county-wide recreation and park facility planning , foster greater cooperation in use of existing facilities, and support private recreation providers and public/ private partnerships . " The work group developed a number of recommendations presented to the Assembly of Governments , Including the setting of standards , an inventory of park and recreation facilities, and planning for the inclusion of park facilities in selecting new school sites . • The Report on Coordination of Recreation and Parks Services in Orange County( 1997 ) described different options for the improvement of services to the community through intergovernmental coordination of parks and recreation functions. Recommendations were divided into four major categories : capital development, coordination of operations, consolidation approaches , and voluntary coordination and commitment . In summary, the report called for : • a long - range plan for parks and recreation , • acquisition and projection of good park sites , • a lead role for Orange County in funding , acquisition , development, ownership, and maintenance of new facilities, • coordination and work * toward partial consolidation of selected functions, and • a countywide bond proposal • The Report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks (JMRP ) Work Group ( 1999 ) , which followed up on many of the recommendations from the 1996 and 1997 reports . As a part of this report, an inventory of facilities and 2 community parks needs was developed for each jurisdiction , and recommendations were forwarded ' on a variety of issues, including , • Formation of an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group to share information and explore collaboration opportunities , • Possible funding mechanisms , • Use of the County's Lands Legacy program as a vehicle for coordinated parkland acquisition , and • The need for a bond referendum to address the current parkland deficit. Note : For purposes of this report, the three previous reports are referred to in the following manner : Report of the Recreation and Parks Work Group (1996 � = 1996 Work Group report, Report on Coordination of Recreation and Parks Services in Orange County ( 1997) = 1997 Coordination Report Report of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group (.19991 = 1999 JMRP report Both the 1997 Coordination Report and the 1999 JMRP Report suggest that parks collaboration be pursued , with the County as lead entity for coordination and administration . At the 1997 Assembly of Governments meeting , staffs were asked to further develop ideas for joint parks efforts by the jurisdictions and report back at a future Assembly of Governments meeting , In addition to these reports, there is a related document worthy of note . The Memoranda of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning ( originated by the Schools and Land Use Councils) provide an impetus for co- location of public facilities where possible . The Memoranda of Agreement are provided as Appendix 5 . With these efforts as a backdrop , this report will attempt to address the following issues , , „ } _ . ' ><.+i ' ,>�.L .. 1ii4? 'r r' :;ad `'1} ` i S =i,'e3i"y;l x: ':3rc tyy,s.i:�: - ' tt.�ilt ' Y :icy tk• , ! '7GT . ,1Xf • APC i1 :t . e t 4K y e •; it: , , . ,e # r :•. .. yy, ' {ft } i , r.1tn tb 4 ` "1P� ..; t. �_ (t� a., i t k,t a } i r s jA>. t - :t1}.!"P ` , t $,, i!. . �fRt Nj . rg, P .i i'r itjr.t��t.},-t. •l . }:t: `r!' 'i {4#})1 +` it If ^' ' S # I' -. t y { {f'..: ,� "` .Y y'• idi- i ii c 77 f T. i i 'I aOr ' . 0ll: f! k t _ .TT ¢ N,,? . ,.1, #p. . 4 . . .I .tat .t[�r)t {x:S1k? f€`tl,f:t<(,Tt.-f ,:}:r ..t . .,J,-+r.?'.i/..�I•ttAt}i?1irs4at: ,O>i;is { llM.i`-.,•ter+ : ! ,.t•f� t .!" i ' =.: t•.i� = 3 -tl { }�Ifiaftt4r.514' s4kSt 'itt;irt,.,,t '' 71:`ttl#}"f� `� , t , = '� 9._ r si 4. �, , 3# h! ,r s }• o '}4; Ly`s . } • x+ - '+� �` r /.'t�} ,��•l- t r." -� 1+}� fg M ,. i, t •\.,yf,7 . ii pIJ,I '4t li�' 1 r[Y ' �Y.R; # . ! l't• i Liar ; ill�Y • -� �j' tii° � . ' < � t .` . :Y . ;S '. ?' sh. ` r }ttc. --- (' t,�" ' -Y {'Rt � . 4'' , ' , ?f.tz ' t' ri# Eq{ b {, 4 r?+f ,L •: • ��t f, Y t t r q y _ tt• C- - ,T : f'€€ +{j, t;{ j;,ess : k { �" _ �.�,q+ rE" t{ r ° '''r! #' 4�tf-tt. ' T {, ` 1 f 3 }z a ,,��rttttti .,}Ycs . � .1,1T °k,t•' , + .> ` , T 1; 't�+#' � `4 -:"ir`_ 9;Inj ' ` $s}� , „� - ,'.v„�. t ;c':, p' 2I< jtzf ?! . �• feYi„ - 7"? , t, yj( i�` _ 3ra t ftk{;{k�q t YI n. U!' 3� t • -: ( ,} . $ !' : jt •- ! 1 to i it l�' I �y - .f;�r = d, 'r.�: ; � "ii ' '�}'ft''f � •', � r�"66 ?f,r5 tfie '�, . e t �� ,� �� j� t '�; . t� .�t .��•: � , � °�� ' :�: .><� � , t�T�� `],� FnlF��, =7n �t1�'�-1cs,r.; i :rt�.µ� � - . � -,.;„-:'rii . ?,•{as'. , t�� h� t� � " j��l.. r ` � � .v y-• , :.r;�`.t;st,, : � 3' v, t��, =��'l '" 1f'i F` C+ t �;f1F:• �+ t,d t .,c ` . # a + r?. } i" "`-y4 �-f'L�7 � 5. ,f, �-:. - �`l�dr, � � - , � � � ._ ta, : �.. : �i f.� yy _� � {�?��y! ,{ ��]]yy,, h �� /'�� ] /} } ] -'c:,* f�:;, i`. '. �'�i�'¢ " is .t pk ..��j,''j T'j ' ��'3� n • �•�.+k�—, ,��'" i" ' - �t�t• x � [ . '• ai r--` �•'/_ A : d+ i`• . ;G'• '� n} .,SI " ' .'/ (, 7+ . ' 4'' ' : i`` . .4 , ` fir i `1 ' �i, � ;lii, ., �; 1� , zS:t a - {. ��i ,�i:,t = . � (y� (] /�i�� (�J �..t�� • .� ,4 t� �� ' :� . i�S`O,'�t} t/�� .. :� ��j , �y�, ` -t r 1i ��-ji;��s �kryj ' � � '� ] s, s, , ,. ' t ,:,i, ji'{{"fit:.-i 4' :i} r: .t+:ktf :•;at . :frai r;,: k ° t`id' tc'.th:x, ' r2U+ t# rF `ri`_tt,,: .t -ir tSro t i ' S �t , . :- v *xz �. r 'xit ;:?t� � . , . _ . 4 7.7" t' c �'-i Y � ��!,�.��;'_ t `!'1�4`�t t a"1=. `t: s - -x _rah.�.,.,�t , �: t'�• ;y'• ysY= ,, � ,l,t'9�r§� �i !'9 : '�xt i. C k �" : �r i ' f. ;91*., � �;5 j .} •.-ii - , � #� �i?>%jY ' }., .5 F 4 - ( • '�` ., , . :��;, t.tt .f, t- - . , .a:�� i�i-n� �Y. .�. •,a:,�`�" ` .,: , ,rt# � �f � � tr �� a . , 31`��- �,•� a .: # 3 z. � - r stay _� . 71 �=, � �e ��. C�t t,� F � � _gig• � :a,l:m: '�h��! '��.�m: �� , . � _ i _ �' ILI [ � = 78s;.q'??!�i �..." :�14- : 75 ; . � . .�,rt p �r 3t : • 'x a"' i _ �, ,. ' �,: ; � ', . ti��= 7 1 .. _ � � , r a z _.�, : , , y �a. ;,74a . +: '• ��` 'c " .1 .. - t rY ;Y, .i'.irL ' 7 • a t. A= ,.r A.t-, f i ! . � li }tl .. T i �+-.Y{ -•tA, t _ r _ 1 '� ' -; 3,�,',t! y4' ;��r5 • `!3 ��,',',�I� tni '#� 4�'5 �� g4�a•,""li, 1� , '�! , .r� z �7 - 1�t 7F ct ! } tu-.. � �' 4' � 't�� • ' r�y{r �' �7 t -!� } � � $ t� .;,{. ,9l . i:-; � ,,.�� i• � <�-}... x 0 •y KK # ' 't ; ` r :t ' � �i 'F : �y y F� 'z- r i }t•(' " r;t}'� �l s h �('t � ;k. � -x;��t:�{{{9 �'�::;;.� %'' � �:��}.��`` y2,. .! a� 5iflt'�.t �' I '�? ��' � � s��.' ;. s� < �� + .�. � -. C r. • . a � }P1 � °� � + @` ::4- {;� ly.� � i • 't� � #. . �''�yt�qu�� ,q, ' +• �b 3 i i3 ,.,4 e ai' t , : i . ,� ( 1 ads , u 4 is O.AItF1�; . _f 1 ; f .. k. ''�tt �i �.TS £S} iL ' `t y - 1S - �# ; }:� . A U,.,t �, , j • ( � . ' � a ?•T f ,, Z�ky {�, `d � � ,� �` t {�r � F n, + �e t.;_� , , • t �� F i � rk _;,>s,� i T . ,,� ct' i:rtif}at -.. -• +p.- �r'5- 4: .4'tj . kF :ti . F rt: ; - 1 ,. , t� i_-.ter r < ;v".. I4 r u.. ii ; . t' f .iI � tll°- 4n .� `d ,.� ' -t} . � s - } r it i:"• }�t '17� F��'�� , �tl• s �' � Li' ��.�rf�/,�V . 17 , � L' s , �� .j'' it .-i , ��,. ' ri. �' t't ,� t�#3� ��1�, ' ,'� . ` r+s'`t -; t; ia'�?��, �� , �:-� T ! •� •� ,�t, � i, r � T"a tu2ieF�r �� £� >• �.3 ,r, t t � ' 3:= �`i �i,:": � �� =6 � ,, .� - •� }t� `, �: ' � „�� , � ,.r; �s t �{ ,;�t �:rr� >,� 1�„ t � � ,x �" i � i t�,.., !• , � t ;§, ; ;� ' �. ` � tL � 'N � � &� �� .,�' zf ' ...q. = �i�;• {3 , 5.{ "��_ 3x,�a� ttna T� -K ,t �.r t�� z t{�•t;,,{�TFSc,. t"� t t: ��„t'�' "fir'., . -1.�n1`S" ' itx " trK`fyt<f� � �rT�=t,r{�: t• � C�l�i` $ vfF'�'�+ 'e� ri ( J •t �� Nd. } ��.Tai . A , `e .i , '} v ,' �t{ t.i: �4 ,_,rp, .> ..� �i':�}� Y 'f �y t,t , ` � e- ,•s;: . �}a. ;�'t s��4� "'; F`s, a � 3}.�, _ !' . �'' :tgg#'.f; �" ! ._� . -'E � t± .l ,. � 'Y� ' t3Z$ t&�� ' it s.- ! - "'sf . •� � r 9�.! •�!', i. t ,F . �,, - ,, t, t . ? .Y ' tp.. . ��# 4t.- 1� r ; ,x f � `•sTr�c:"-.: } n � �T,' j r. � � 4} a ., 4 x t '�},4 � . Y `s4 •:9' . Cur':� :.t 1 ,} i { rt 31H t � 3• } { 'Yt r•'+T. t49r. : ':}.. t ,r>. xt fa . � 4.Et .�}3f .. - rr v €. E •s:ac•: ' - '� '.{.:.(.i': : y •jkt . :y ,. !J i r :: .c ; •,l f ,, a rR ,i?- f .� 'ti " S ', M.r ' ,ri5 • ! . , £ i<., i cat'a r, T ,i,.TS ' :: 1C', Y J 3 II . Current Capital Improvement Plans and Available Funding At present, each jurisdiction has varying levels of funding available for parkland acquisition and facilities development — whether part of currently- available funds from bonds and other sources, or programmed as part of long -term capital improvement plans (CIP 's) . Note. While the following parks projects are in current Town and County CIP s, it does not automatically follow that each project is funded. The actual appropriation of funds to projects is done annually through the budget process. The following sections provide an overview of current available , programmed or planned parks ( Note : More complete information submitted from the jurisdictions may be found as Appendix 1 ) : A . Carrboro - Capital Parks and Recreation Proiects As shown in Appendix 1 , the Town of Carrboro is currently engaged in planning for a number of parks projects, some of which are or could be multi jurisdictional in scope . The first two projects have some limited funds previously, committed ; the rest remain unfunded at this time . Smith Middle School Community park, in conjunction with Orange County and Chapel Hill and the Chapel Hill- Carrboro City Schools . Cost of $ 465, 000, over two fiscal years (00 and 01 ) . The Town . and County have committed $75, 000 each toward a soccer field within this project. Hillsborough Road Park Small park to serve several north Carrboro neighborhoods . Could include outdoor swimming pool (see below) . Cost of $ 1 . 245 million over three fiscal years ( FY00 -02) . The land has been purchased, and master planning funded . The master plan is due January, 2001 . Outdoor Swimming Pool Proposed for location at Hillsborough Road Park. Cost of $4 . 86 million over four fiscal years (00 -03 ) . Playground Equipment at Existing Parks New playground equipment for Wilson, Baldwin, Carr Court and Anderson parks , proposed for FY 2009- 2010 at total cost of $ 362, 000 . Northern Community Park Proposed park to meet needs in northern area of Carrboro . Planned to include playing fields, playgrounds and picnic areas . Cost of $ 6 . 4 million in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 . Note; Orange Counoy Chapel Hill Township District Park may also serve this need. got • • • • • ' • • IUM Project Estimated Existing ` E ' Existing nde0. Total Cost . Town County Portion Funds / other .. ■ . ands F , rr. � � �! F'? • • • •11O ' • . • ' • • i 111 _ _ • • ' • • • • • • m • : / '- • � • i • • ' . • • 1 „ =41A• Inj • I • • • • r . • • • • • • ' • • • • r • r . • • • • r • • • • • • • r • i ' • • • • • • ' • • • r • ' IF • • • • • 0 0 • • • • • • • • • • ' / • • i Southern Community Park The 1997 County Parks bond allocated $ 1 million for this park, $ 105 , 000 of which has been used for lighting and irrigation of the playing field at Scroggs Elementary . An additional $ 100 , 000 has been authorized for disbursement for a design and concept plan . No other funds are identified or appropriated for this park. Total cost of the park is estimated at $4 to $ 5 million . Pritchard Park This project would develop the area surrounding the Chapel Hill Public Library known as Pritchard Park. The Pritchard Park Conceptual Plan Committee presented its report on September 25 . The report was accepted and referred to all Town boards and commissions and staff for comment. The item is scheduled to return to the Town Council on November 13 for action . Potential amenities - ide tifie 'n din the report include trails, a small playground , art benches, a gazebo/ belvedere, a picnic area , and an art garden . Funding for the project totaling $ 167, 000 is from a gift to the Town, interest, and rental fees from properties the Town owned . Booker . Creek Linear Park j This project would establish a trail and park between Elliott Road and Franklin Street and along Booker Creek . Cost 'of the project is estimated at $438 , 000, and a NCDOT grant has been awarded . A Town match of $ 87, 000 will be required . Erwin Road Open Space / Greenway Land Acquisition The Town has proposed working with Orange County on open space land banking via acquisition of another large tract of open space between New Hope Commons and Erwin Road . The Town has $ 200, 000 in Clean Water Management Trust Fund money to put toward such an acquisition . This is part of the Dry Creek Greenway project. �I Merritt Pasture Access This project would establish access to the Town -owned property known as Merritt Pasture . The Merritt Pasture Access Committee's report was presented to the Council on September 25 . The report was accepted and referred to all Town boards and commissions and staff for comment. It is scheduled to return to the Council on November 13 for action . Four identified options for access range in cost from $ 254, 000 to $ 398, 000 . Two potential sources of funding are payments- in -lieu funds from two neighboring developments : Southern Village ( $ 116, 000 ) and Culbreth Ridge ( $ 76, 000) . Greenways Several greenway projects are listed in the Town 's plans . Dry Creek Greenway Sufficient funds exist to construct this greenway from East Chapel Hill High School to Perry Creek Road, * but no funds exist to link the Eastowne and New Hope Commons areas to this greenway . Cost estimates for completion of the greenway ( not including land acquisition) are $ 75M00, 000 . Lower Booker Creek Greenway: Bids were awarded for this project in June, at a cost of $ 500, 000 , State and local funds totaling $468,000 will cover most of this cost. Bolin Creek Greenway : Joint project with OWASA to replace sewer interceptor and install greenway to Umstead Park and beyond to the Carrboro border. To be built in phases, the total project is expected to cost $ 1 . 15 million . • Tomb ' 11 111 • 1 111 • - • - • . • • • - 11 111 • - . • . • • • • - . • . • 111h : • • ` PROJECT Estimated Exiisting (t,� Existing Unfunded ( 2 V . IV TV , E _ ESL t � IT i �t ' • f 1 ' i.IT ,. y T a�■r ■/� t !i �rr' i11 Ctt;La trti ItV } v t � . ya fi IV If to otal Cos own ounty/Other Portion its e ; _, IV ' <., . t a a .. a':i` e &t 4 * .r ( n ,. 1lar . 7• VVTTV Cie TI ,... .. ! . . l, . 3 r it uti. _,+L s t t. t I t '. r". .r . ( 3 it E, z , < y : . FundsUnd. . � . ' . . . f ' , . TIT Homestead • "$442 millionIi ill : 111 • . million Aquatics Center depending on • - of • • Park 111 111 1 ', : i 1 1 Anew CommunityHargraves Center Renovations - • - • • • • . 111 1 1 • 11 111 Pritchard Park off Booker Creek Linear Park- s ilINIVINNIF of Lower Booker CreeK I rail off To on : • ( Phase $ 350, OOOM1 i • 1 / 11 Dry Creek Trail ( Phase II & 111) $ 750, 000 0 111 organ IreeK • - ' 11 111 111 i 111 / 111 ' , ' 11 111 0 • C i • ion M1 ion • • 0 • • - • • - • • • � • • • f ` 7 immediate area with walking trail , play equipment and future picnic area . Riverwalk/ Eno River buffers Riverwalk would create a greenway/walkway connecting the proposed River Park ( near the County Courthouse) to Occoneechee Mountain Park to serve the greater county population . This project has not undergone a feasibility study. yet . The buffer project is funded through the town ' s CWMTF grant . The town is seeking ownership or conservation easements alorIg the Eno River. The buffer depth in the grant is 100 feet. RiverPark In conjunction with Orange County, this would create a small park near the County Courthouse and the Eno River with walking trails, benches and a gazebo . A joint committee is currently developing plans . Fairview Active Sports Park Proposed as a joint venture, this would be a soccer complex that would serve the Town , County and greater region by providing a location for soccer clubs to play and hold tournaments . It is unclear whether the site would be acceptable as "soccer only" or whether a broader range of activities would be planned . Table C — Town of Hillsborough Summary of Projects and Cost Estimates * Occoneechee Park $ 32,448 $ 32, 448 Completed Overlook MurrayStreet Park 33 000 $ 33 000 - 0 - Riverwalk/ Eno River $ 300, 000 $ 86, 000 $ 2141000* * -0- buffers $ 200, 000 $ 25, 000 . $ 101000 $ 165, 000 RiverPark Fairview Park feasibili 5 000 5 000 -0- TOTAL 570 448 181 448 1 224 000 165 000 * - Cost estimates do not include facility development. * * - Clean Water Management Trust Fund grant DE- Orange County — Capital Parks and Open Space Projects Orange County parks activities are ongoing in two programs — previously- planned parks in the adopted 2000 - 2010 Capital Investment Plan and via the new Lands Legacy program , adopted in April 2000 . Funding for both methods are shown through the CIP . Over the next 10 years, Orange County has identified the following expenditures for parklands : Chapel Hill Parks Projects A total of $ 2 million was approved in a 1997 County parks bond for use toward the Town "s Homestead ( Northern ) Community Park and Southern Community Park. Some of 241 8 these funds have now been disbursed for both parks . The funds are projected for expenditure in fiscal year 2000 (also listed in Chapel Hill parks projects above) . Efland - Cheeks Park This is a school - park combination in conjunction with Efland -Cheeks Elementary School, which was funded through the 1997 parks bond . New picnic areas, basketball courts, playing fields and a walking track ( Phase I ) opened in May of this year. The cost of Phase I was $ 859 , 000 , Phase II of the park, including additional parking , nature trails and athletic field lighting , will bring the total - project cost to $ 1 . 6 million . Phase II is not currently reflected in the 2000-2010 CIP . Cedar Grove Community Park ( Northern Human Services Center) Forty acres adjacent to the Northern Human Services Center was purchased in 1998 . A total of $ 190,000 is shown for this project for land acquisition ( previously disbursed ) and design in FY 02 . Funding for land acquisition is from a combination of 1997 parks bond and sales tax revenues . The projected total cost for the park is $ 1 . 4 million . Note: Further land acquisitions at this park site are ongoing through the Lands Legacy program, Fairview Park This park was acquired in 1987, with playground equipment and picnic areas provided through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG ) funds . Portions of the site are on an old Town of Hillsborough landfill . A total of $ 75, 000 for geo -technical evaluation was appropriated in FY 2000 ( estimated actual cost is $ 40, 000 ) . Geo-technical evaluations have recently verified that the site is safe for recreation facilities . Total cost estimate to complete the park is $ 725 , 000 . RiverPark In conjunction with the Town of Hillsborough , this park would be located on County- owned land between the Courthouse and the Eno River, and would feature walking trails, benches and a gazebo . A joint committee is currently working on a plan for the park. ( Funding needs for this park shown in Town of Hillsborough section ) . New Hope Creek Corridor This project provides funding to the Triangle Land Conservancy to preserve land along New Hope Creek. Funding of $ 75, 000 in FY 2000 and $ 15, 000 in FY 2001 is from a combination of payment- in - lieu funds and sales tax revenues . Triangle Sportsplex The Triangle Sportsplex in Hillsborough contains an indoor swimming pool , ice rink, fitness center and meeting rooms . As part of the operational agreement, Orange County provides $ 400, 000 per year during the 10 -year period ( $ 4 . 0 million total ) for programming of the pool facility . Parks and Recreation Facilities A total of $ 955,000 for pay-as-you -go repairs and improvements at existing parks and recreation facilities . Other Parks Projects ( Lands Legacy program ) A total of $ 2 . 91 million remains from the 1997 County parks bond , $ 2 . 84 million of which is targeted for parkland acquisition via the 2000- 2001 Lands Legacy Action Plan adopted May 3 , 2000 by the Board of Commissioners . The County's new Lands Legacy program is a comprehensive resource acquisition program designed to acquire; conserve and protect 9 important natural areas, cultural resources and parklands . As part of the 2000=2001 Annual Action Plan , the County is currently pursuing acquisitions of key parcels for parkland with remaining County Parks Bond funds in the following areas . Chapel Hill. Township District Park : Parkland of 100 -200 acres in Chapel Hill Township, north of Chapel Hill and/or Carrboro . Note : This park may also meet needs identified * by Carrboro for a Northern Community Park and could serve both towns and much of the County. Projected total park cost for the district park ( land and facility development) is estimated at $ 7 . 5 million . i Bingham Township Community Park : In conjunction with OWASA, the County is pursuing 25- 74 acres for a community park for the 7, 000 residents of Bingham Township . Projected total park cost is $ 1 . 6 million . Eno/Schley area Community Park : A park of 25-74 acres east or northeast of Hillsborough, to serve east Hillsborough and the areas between Hillsborough and Durham . Projected total park cost is $ 2 . 1 million . Expansion of Cedar Grove District Park : Additional acquisitions at existing site (see above) Little River Regional Park and Natural Area : In conjunction with Durham County, Triangle Land Conservancy and the Eno River Association , this regional park and natural area will be primarily low- impact recreation . Due to the awarding of three State and federal grants, only about $ 44, 000 of parks bond funds are projected _ for expenditure for this project. Projected total park costs are $ 1 . 5 million . New Hoe Corridor Rustic Woodland Trail : A u '- e p m Iti y ar project, this would tie together Duke Forest and other open space areas in the New Hope Creek area north of Chapel Hill . Estimate cost of trail acquisition and development is $ 500, 000 , j G Z 10 Table D — Orange County Summary of Projects and Cost Estimates - Chapel Hill arks ' See Table B $ 2 . 0 million See Table B See Table B Eflarid -Cheeks Parke $ 1 . 6 million 859 000 -0- 750 000 Cedar Grove Park $ 1 . 4 million $ 190 000 -0 - $ 1 . 21 million Fairview Park 725 000 75 000 -0- $ 650 000 New Hope Creek Corridor 90 000 90 000 - 0 - -0 - Triangle S orts lex $4 . 0 million $ 4 . 0 million -0 - -0- Existing Parks Improvements $ 955, 000 $ 955 , 000 -0- -0- McGowan Creek Preserve $ 370, 000 157 000 143 000 70 000 Chapel Hill Township District $7 . 5 million -0- $ 1 . 8 million $ 5 . 7 million Park Bingham Community Park $ 1 . 6 million -0 - -0 - $ 1 . 6 million Eno/Schley Eno/ Schley Community Park $ 2 . 1 million -0- $444 000 $ 1 . 66 million Little River Regional Park $ 1 . 5 million $ 89 , 000 $ 1 , 186, 000 $ 225, 000 and Natural Area New Hope Rustic Woodland $ 500 , 000 -0- - 0- $ 500, 000 Trail TOTAL $ 22 . 35 $ 8 . 42 $ 157 $ 12 . 37 million million million million 1 — The Town funds and unfunded portion are shown in the Town of Chapel Hill parks table . 2 - Phase II (approximately $750,000) not reflected in current CIP. 3 — Includes estimate of facility development costs. 4 — Joint project with Durham County, Triangle Land Conservancy and Eno River Association . r 11 Table E - Summary of Major Projects Note, Projects are a mix of arkland ac uis ' on and faaZ d, /i men as shown on re j vious a es o Fill � - . i li Y•'d< ', .. c{ .a:: i=F1 : +=x.•: ;is';4Hi:' "t _ ''Lit' by ' Vi'- :#:i., ' k ' �.j, + Ix' - { '� ,dt>"�q'.. t . i - Frr1lF .'i `9 t=i. u {, l,. :"r :: y 3A F; t1' ! ;� ' • z ;• ,,, , hi"'I t 1 . i@�.*` S t.`} e:}' +Fj-,tt3�? i' "• 3F tr,�� t' -d .k l.0 ri li [ th M .? .t, tc w(. r`}'' -�t' e !� # j . '-t ' l ;tt17' {a•. Jt; iS'•/ t: : •' S {{ }t 1: �( is.''. ws ``' ft,rr. } F'.; }r�>! . ,iy4tt t .fr - 6ttu .i •�, ,j + , x � 1 � ,� 'f r 14 S r a'z +ty}i� , I } tFF tits .x �;r �i t �I it t i is ! sill i } t ti ' _ - ! .. t . t{t ;...};,il1.i,. i • . �l'.. t ,f �:'. F•,� , ri.i { -YrJt tri,Y��;ti;rAlK"(Cdim•�i'I� r•. �l ;i.�: ** Smith Middle School $465 , 000 $315 , 000 ** Hillsborough Road Park $ 1 . 25 million $663, 137 ** Outdoor Swimming Pool $4 . 86 million $4 . 86 million * * Playground' Equipment 362 398 362 398 * * Northern Community Park $ 6 . 36 million 6 . 36 million * * Gymnasium $ 3 . 79 million $3 . 79 million Fi r� tr h• i'P at F L' Ar- < .+t}• i� PM1r } �. :i:11i ; sirfd jtt t « L1.,. 1!i .} .yyt`�'�(ty�t_•,P�{a .` C'yPs X' i,�}'.j� i : t� .v > , �i„` {:a.Y'r' i . `} ¢t F; 'i:iE�pjr�u}•; 'q ' 3 `�i},:i h '�y{.(r t i fi "5�:•� .'Y.t ' r<�Y'' j9 6 �j�,•tY-jl" } ��'{jiij -� 'K?{ ! - ' '; b �i` :t4) #u.� ilu`! . .i't. t^'f i .3'd' y ' '<1�Irtl L. . . ;� `t ..})t 'P(._ {'� s1 ,. - ? •. t#� Fy ,: dsft�t�...tr, .I.,? s"�-5=�, I, r '., . I,kta ;!i(4N#>•. t *- - ' I}i" 'r4;�<i `t'- F { :.�F. •i ! `. § 'n -sr : � .fir rf ?�tl . .F %1 . ; �;�,.. 14 2, S9rt f , � f ;,E . • Y, , t $ :1 ? 7,3 t- C„ . :i 1 :lI' =7E . 1: snPftS r + t . 5t •t !f"( J 3i, } . n' ,i •+I ;, . i. ? i ri,rF# ?f tssatt'�� cl•pi . zf ,' r }: �<; a • s5� 1 ** Homestead Park/Aquatics Center Up to 12 million $ 9 . 96 million ** Southern Community Park 5 million $4 . 11 million * * Pritchard Park $ 167 , 000 -0 - * * Hargraves Center Renovations $ 500f 000 500 000 ** Community Center Renovation $ 1 . 2 million 1 . 2 million * * Booker Creek Linear Park $ 438 , 000 87 000 * * Greenwa s projects $ 3 . 35 million 2 . 59 million ** Merritt Pasture Access 400 000 $208, 000 ** Open Space Acquisitions Unknown Unknown y:'tr`3ic'i<+' .`,{jf • r', :t, ' ur " tl j'}i 'h ° } :r ! rt• , a ; i t : 't. t!4 4 h v :;a ? { Il - it 3 +� . 3 t; vd , ggl at§[ ;: err #�t� ppf _ �5 1p . . a i. tr e 1, r(t . ft . .J ;, b, )<. j t , ;A' 3 } i 1' 1;E"t411t T'r fi ={ ;. 7 Y3d; ,�pq Fi f a3� t s11 g3C�'j (} y 5 {� A �� „ ': ", 5 r : • (?t Ittj ., q jy,1,}7( . Yyp} q' �i 1 IQ ,F • q __ s r'-t .�i t i G a yq p{}{ tlis df 11 �rF I�'p .{! a '3 f'} {CI1 ty �t7} - '�! •, I� { jj _�j hy: Ill t< , .irOyrll. .. ri t,;s . rif h.}�,t t:r.Slft+�, <d3 Y3f�ie}sli:l� -' '4a' i t-{r_H{ IiE .sl; tk t.7 `.i...'fk.11r �if5' �l A��{b. ailtl+ .},:) fj§ E;s Y: �pp ir:.,s { <. £Y {3 t t�yy.::`i t .ivtt-1:,'htP,! ... it< fl i 1 1 tt 1 .i . } . 7tt ..F' t 4 S` i f .in * * Occoneechee Park overlook 32 448 -0- * * MurrayStreet Park $ 33 , 000 111110411111 Eno RiverWalk and Buffers $ 300 , 000 -0- * * RiverPark $ 200 , 000 165 000 * * Fairview Park feasibility stud 5 000 -0 - arYP'. r{;41:ji " !: 'i " 1 f ' Ga .id;f,- ht;� , ;-ur1 ' t !s:: 5�-' - iii i;;-`a?a ,i' R5'i " L, "l: Y . i% i • .`.'ii` 3.1 i . .i r1� 1 ;� , z{ ,Ft. . 1�• .IIc3'`" ifJt',.� , %.f; ""t; �,. yF3 '!M1' i < r , iF1'�t. t_ . nr, . a. ii; l t .{ , _ t: .{ 3 R ! ! i tr< 1 ;. , 9 gt 1 t N f <Y`� ( S ill {yyS � till } # 1 �j I " }�'4• .� F Y � 1 y;'t7 if rh[ >fr ,{, " f �i .:ib ., ,F:� �' [ r.F�i; r :f t }'tom, . t� IS9 �'�'• G�• F. � 51 ' O; n l y .; 4t;i.v•.;t� ' i i . aF p )� ,{ r'+;_ f`t, •'y{�( xp : ,. 1Lli l{ � °;1, F )}t vt Ps• , { t� #ti ,. .i'+vi; t.'.{ . .e:f. tl' v. xl�M h�?� ilA .i`.r>� : iit�t{iy) }i SSFtFtili ..; F } ( } Jt'.i {.� b Li hia: t �1 $ •ik: l'1 ! ilil>: :l.i ) 4i•±M r t ri * * Cha el Hill Parks ro ' ectsl See above See above * * Efland Cheeks Park $ 1 . 6 million $750, 000 * * Cedar Grove Park 1 , 4 million 1 . 21 million * * Fairview Park 1111111 725 000dINIM 650 000 * * New Hope Creek Corridor2 90 000 -0- * * Triangle S orts lex 4 000 000 -0- ** Existing Parks Improvements $ 955 000 111111011110 McGowan Creek Preserve $ 370 000 $ 70 ,000 * * Cha el Hill Township Park $ 7 . 5 million $ 5 . 7 million * * Bingham Communi ParkMIN 1 . 6 million 1 . 6 million ** Eno Schle Park 2111 million $ 1 . 66 million ** Little River Regional Par Natural Area' $ 1 . 5 million 225 000 * * New Hope Rustic Woodland Trail $ 500 , 000 $ 500 000 <'f'Y,,.II(t}:vit173tt;:l;''XijG`. :'Y,.' f ' f ( i'." k' _ r� _ . Al i�!r .{r k .:rti�{ . LL; :r 4; .tzt t ` i "r:: '� : u,ad}r� L Mkt 5t1 . .t r 1 1 aS,.�r. < 1ii. ? eb ACl7 `; it 1r S wkg } . lC�'4: I i, 1 : 1. . t ! r. • ' ;' ftT , 1, 'I .: . a'• < <{.'•a� .4 . ,1f ??jwS :+Tt t '7_, ,. )cEE .€#CII, Ft n tid}?ot z t33�syv(6 ,t aij,,tatLfi' i Sk t'Jt 't,t " 5`k( Y: .: h�x�.:�• .. '�h - TOTAL $ 63 . 05 million 1 $ 47 . 58 million 1 - 1 million each for Homestead Community Park and Southern Community Park (also listed under Town of Chapel Hill) 2 - Includes contributions toward New Hope Corridor work of TLC. 3 - Total project cost Including projected park development, includes funding from Durham County, Triangle Land Conservancy, Eno River Association, two State grants and one Federal grant. Orange County cost = $ 89,000 4 - Upper end of cost range used for estimates. Totals are rounded. V ^ 12 III . Sources of Funding As we explore potential collaboration on joint funding for parks, it might be useful to consider the variety of funding sources that either currently exist or could exist in the future . A more complete listing of funding sources may be found in the 1999 JMRP report . A. CI P 's Each of the local governments in Orange County has a Long -term capita { plan , often known as a Capital Improvement Plan or Capital Investment Plan ( CIP) . Each CIP contains the local government's 5 -year or 10 -year plan for expending funds for capital projects, including parks and recreation facilities . The principal advantage of using CIP 's as a funding source for joint parks funding is that each government has a capital plan that is generally similar in method and process . However, there are some differences in timing of the different CIP 's that would need to be addressed in order to develop a joint funding plan . ggested " synchronizing " CIP 's, to ensure that sufficient The 1999 JMRP report su funds are available at the appropriate time for joint parks projects . Current schedules for Town and County CIP 's may be found as Appendix 4 . B . General Obligation (GO ) Bonds Three of the four local governments have passed bonds for parks and recreation in the past 22 years . However, only Chapel Hill ( 1996) and Orange County ( 1997 ) have bond funds available now . Carrboro 's bond was in 1978 . General obligation bonds require voter approval , but also require approval of the Local Government Commission , C . Installment Purchase Financing Installment financing is another option available to local governments, where an annual amount is financed each "year toward land purchases or facility development . Installment Purchase (also termed private placement funding ) is financing secured through a bank. This type of financing does not require voting approval . t 9 � 13 D . Grants A number of rant programs exist to provide funding for arks at the State and 9 9 p 9 P p Federal level . Additional detail on these programs may be found in the 1999 ] MRP report — a brief summary of the programs is provided below : Clean Water Management Trust Fund ( CWMTF) : The Clean Water Management Trust Fund is a State trust fund designed to fund projects that protect water quality across the State . With a semi-annual grant cycle, the Trust Fund has $ 30 million this fiscal year and $ 40 million in FY 2001 -2002 to assist with projects for acquisition and protection/ restoration of water supplies . Acquiring land for parks ( particularly parks with a low- impact recreation theme) are one means of protecting water quality. The CWM Trust Fund has funded several projects in Orange County in recent years, j awarding grants for the watershed protection through the preservation of open space to Chapel Hill , OWASA, Hillsborough and Orange County (twice), most recently for the joint Orange County/ Durham County Little River Regional Park and Natural Area . Parks and Recreation Trust Fund ( PARTF) : The Parks and Recreation Trust Fund ' is another State trust fund set up in 1996 and administered by the N . C . Department of Environment and Natural Resources through a Board of Trustees . . The PARTF grant program assists local governments with parks purchases and facility development . The maximum grant amount Is $ 250 , 000, with a $ 1 : $ 1 local match . PARTF has awarded two grants in Orange County during its existence one to Hillsborough for the Occoneechee Mountain Park with N . C . Division of Parks, and most recently to Orange County and Durham County for the Little River Regional Park and Natural Area . Land and Water Conservation Fund ( LWCF) : The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a Federal fund administered through the National Parks Service and channeled through the N . C . Department of Environment and Resource Conservation , The LWCF was established in 1964 to provide funds for the purchase of public lands for open space and outdoor recreation . Legislation in Congress this session would have allocated $ 900 million annually in offshore oil and gas revenues to LWCF, with approximately $43 million of that for North Carolina grant programs . However, compromise legislation recently approved has greatly lowered that amount . Orange County was awarded a grant of $ 262, 000 this year for Little River, Regional Park and Natural Area , Trails Funding : There are other funds that provide money for parks acquisition and development that have not been listed here, such as the National Trails Program , which is administered through the NC DENR and provides funds for trails open to the public . E .. Pay-As -You - Go Pay- as-you - go revenues are non - debt revenue . For Orange County and the school systems, these revenues are comprised of one- half cent sales taxes, earmarked property tax revenue , and Public School Building Funds . 14 F . Orange County School / Park Reserve Fund In the early- 1990 's , the County established a capital fund equivalent to one cent on the tax . rate for future school/ park land acquisitions . The fund currently receives 1 /3 cent of the County tax rate, and stands at $ 2 . 57 million . In the last 18 months, fostered by the work of the Schools/ Land Use Councils, the County, Towns and both school systems have adopted memoranda of understanding that address the desire to co - locate, where feasible and appropriate, future schools and park sites . To, clarify the use of the School/ Park Reserve Fund , the Board of Commissioners in May of 1999 appointed a School/ Park Reserve Committee (SPRC) to address guidelines and criteria for use of the fund . The SPRC report ( including criteria and guidelines ) were adopted by the BOCC on December 7 , 1999 , and provides for additional flexibility in use of the funds and changes in allocation of future revenues . In general , the guidelines provide for the following uses of the fund : • When deemed appropriate, the fund may be used on a . $ 1 : $ 1 matching basis to assist Towns in meeting parks needs ' • The land in question must be owned by a governmental entity before funds are committed • The fund should not be used for parks design or parks planning , unless the funds are used to complete the project • Accumulated interest in the fund may be tapped for facility development needs not addressed through bonds or other means . • The existing funds ( $ 2 . 24 million at that time) should be retained for future land acquisition , with bond funds . and other sources used for facility development . • To provide flexibility, the school/ park co - location need not be readily apparent at the time of acquisition . G . Acquisitions via Development ( Land Dedications Payments- in - Lieu ) Each jurisdiction has provisions in its development ordinances for the dedication of land for recreation and open space via new development . In general , the Town of Chapel Hill has provisions for recreation and open space dedications for new projects . Land dedicated for these purposes by new developments may be used for recreation and open space uses, as agreed to by the developer and approved by the Town Council . s 15 3 Orange County and Carrboro have recreation and open space dedication provisions in their respective ordinances . The County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro also have an alternative to land dedication where dedication is not desired or warranted . In these cases, a payment- in - lieu of dedication is allowed : To date, the following money has been raised from this funding source : ✓ Carrboro $ 574, 000 ✓ Chapel Hill - $ 611 , 000 ✓ Orange County- $ 603 , 000 In the 1999 JMRP report, a number of problems were outlined with the existing payment- in - lieu programs . While the payment- in - lieu program has raised money for parks projects, the amount has often been insufficient to provide for needed recreation land or facilities . Principal among the6 limitations of payment- in - lieu cited in the JMRP report were : • Payment- in - lieu is not intended to fund facilities of countywide significance • Fees must be geographically earmarked and . spent within the area • Time limitations • Fees must be supplemented with matching funds for use H . Potential for impact Fees Orange County has special legislation allowing impact fees to be levied on new development for a variety of purposes . Specifically, the County may "provide by ordinance for a system of impact fees to be paid by developers to help defray the cost of the County constructing certain capital improvements" . These improvements include " the acquisition of land for open space and greenways, capital improvements to public streets, schools, bridges, sidewalks , bikeways, or and off street surface water drainage ditches, pipes, culverts , other drainage facilities, water and sewer facilities and public recreation facilities . " Currently, the only impact fees enacted under this legislation are for public school facilities in both school systems . However, as shown above, the legislation also provides for impact fees for open space , greenways and recreation . i The potential for application of a recreation and open space impact fee was examined in 1996 . In order to implement such a fee, the County ( and the Towns ) would need to 1 ) establish a current baseline of parks and open space provision , 2 ) develop a schedule of parks needs over a specified timeframe ( 20 years has been suggested ) , and 3 ) identify a clear expectation of the cost of j those recreation and open space needs . This cost might then be extrapolated to a cost per new dwelling unit and collected along with the public school impact fees at the time a building permit is issued for new residential units . 3 16 The 1999 JMRP report recommended that the new Inter- Governmental Parks Work Group explore establishment of an impact fee or tax . IV . Orange County Lands Legacy Program Both the 1997 Coordination report and the 1999 JMRP report note the role that the County could play as a lead entity in coordinating future parks and recreation land acquisitions . As noted in the 1999 report, if the County and Towns wish to pursue joint capital funding for parks, a vehicle now exists at the County level to provide for coordinated parkland acquisitions . On April 4, 2000 , the Orange County Commissioners adopted a new voluntary program designed to provide for a comprehensive approach to the conservation of priority resource lands in the County . The Lands Legacy program has five areas of emphasis : 1 . Parkland ( active and low- impact) 2 . Natural areas and wildlife habitat 3 . Prime Farmland 4 . Cultural resource lands ( containing historic, archaeological or visual sites of significance) 5 . Riparian buffers in water supply watersheds The Lands Legacy approach uses a GIS " comprehensive resource database " to evaluate and prioritize critical resource lands , and also includes criteria to evaluate lands for each of the resource variables listed above . Funding for Lands Legacy acquisitions comes from a Lands Legacy fund in the Orange County CIP , bond funds, and aggressive pursuit of outside grant sources . The Lands Legacy program was developed concurrent with the completion of the JMRP report . With this in mind , the program is designed to function countywide, if desired , to facilitate conservation of important resource lands . Management structures were explored that could , in the long -term , be of a joint County/town nature . As discussed in the JMRP report, the County's role as lead entity for parkland acquisitions for all local governments could become operational through : • the methods described above for synchronizing capital funding sources, and • the Annual Action Plan program for Lands Legacy The 1999 JMRP report saw this program as a coordinating mechanism for parkland acquisition by both County and Towns — recognizing that the broader definition of parks in the report brings the inter- relationship between natural resources and recreation facilities into focus . 17 ". . . Many of the goals and objectives of resource preservation and recreation are intertwined. Since the County's resources are located in all quadrants of the County, irrespective of planning jurisdiction, the program offers an opportunity for coordinated acquisition with the Towns and OWASA . " The 1999 JMRP report saw a direct relationship between this program and the immediate need to begin land - banking for future parks . This relationship was later strengthened by the incorporation of parkland evaluation criteria from the JMRP report into the adopted Lands Legacy program . There are two methods that Lands Legacy uses to consider parks and resource conservation acquisitions : the Annual Action Piano and inquiries made by landowners . Examples of both exist in the acquisitions and work of Lands Legacy to date . Each fall , an Annual Action Plan for the upcoming fiscal year is compiled using initial guidance from the Board of Commissioners , Discussion and evaluation of priorities by each of several advisory boards occurs for relevant program priority categories (for example, the County's Recreation and Parks Advisory Council discusses and recommends priority projects for parkland acquisition in the coming fiscal year) , followed by incorporation of the recommendations from advisory boards into a draft action plan . After review and deliberation , the Board of Commissioners adopts the Annual Action Plan concurrent with the CIP process in the spring . Both the 1997 and 1999 reports highlight the need to land - bank now for future park sites, in order to ensure that good park sites are acquired and to maximize local funding for parkland acquisition in a market with steadily- increasing land costs . The Lands Legacy program offers a means to accomplish this need . V . Capital Funding for Parks As the local governments explore methods of collaboration , there are several existing policies that support coordination and/or offer a framework for how joint efforts are pursued : First, as an overarching theme, the Schools and Land Use Councils ' Memoranda of Agreement between the school systems and local governments provides a precedent and a basis for collaboration among local governments and schools . The Agreements call for coordination in the siting and development of public facilities, exploring opportunities for co- locating parks with school sites and other public facilities when new facilities are planned . 1s In . addition to the Memoranda , there are other policies and frameworks of note : 1 . In adopting the JMRP report recommendations ( revised ) in May of this year, the County .Commissioners noted that the appropriate focus for joint parks collaboration is on larger-scale parks that can meet multiple needs and serve multiple jurisdictions . While recognizing the important role of " neighborhood " parks and smaller mini - parks, the Commissioners indicated interest in focusing joint efforts on community, district and regional parks ( generally, parks of 25 acres or more that offer a wide variety of activities, including both active and low- impact recreation ) . 2 . The County and both School Systems have agreed to a Capital Funding Policy that addresses coordination in selecting and acquiring new school sites . The potential for co - location of schools and parks has been widely- recognized as a goal worth pursuing . Consistency between the School Capital Funding Policy and a joint parks capital funding agreement would be very important . A. Observations Three reports have been produced in the past four years on coordinating parks and recreation in the County and Towns . In reviewing these reports , and the current status of parks and recreation funding , the following observations are offered on directions in which we could collectively move in future years . Through these reports and the joint work of the schools and local governments, many positive actions have occurred , a few of which are : 1 . The sharing of information on parks projects ( current and future) that has occurred through the 1999 JMRP report, and will occur in the future with the new Inter-Governmental Parks Work Group , 2 . Orange County's Lands Legacy program , which offers opportunities to use this shared information to jointly identify and plan for future parks . that serve both Town and County populations . 3 . Substantial progress in the co - location of schools and parks in the future Regarding the relationship between . the local governments on parks planning and development, as well as the current and future roles of the Towns and the County, we offer the following thoughts : 1 . The Towns, with many competing resource needs , are challenged to find funding to operate and maintain their parks . As a result, the Towns have limited opportunities to provide capital funding for new parks that may serve Town residents - and residents beyond the Town boundaries . 19 2 . The County in 1997 passed a bon d referendum that addressed a mixture of County and Town needs , both in terms of active recreation ( playing fields, programmable facilities) and low- impact recreation (walking and hiking trails, picnic areas , etc . ) . 3 . However, even with this bond referendum , we have not been able to address Town and County parkland needs pointed up by the 1999 JMRP report, such as the need for one or two district/ regional scale parks that can serve the whole County . 4 . To make these and other park needs reality, the County is in the best position to take the lead in identifying and funding new parks that serve larger populations in both urban and rural areas . 5 . While many potential park sites have been lost in the areas near the Towns, there remain opportunities for the Towns and the school . systems to collaborate on co - locating needed school and park sites . 6 . As shown in Table E on page 11 , there are $ 63 million of park needs that have been identified, with little money programmed for parkland acquisition and/ or facility development . VL Map with General Areas of Consensus for Parks Needs Whether for identified but unfunded parks , or new park opportunities, a general consensus is desirable on where joint parks projects are needed . As previously noted , these joint park projects would generally be larger parks (community, district and regional scale parks of 25 acres and up) that would provide a range of recreation offerings that serve both rural and urban populations . A combined map that illustrates both existing parks and new joint opportunities would be .a valuable tool for planning and identifying collaborative park projects . Carrboro , Chapel Hill , Hillsborough and Orange County each have an adopted parks plan in place . Orange County will be updating Its Master , Recreation and Parks Element of the Comprehensive Plan in 2001 . The Town of Chapel Hill is currently undertaking its first Parks and Recreation Master Plan process . The report is scheduled. to be completed in the spring of 2001 . To pave the way for collaborative park efforts, a countywide map of conceptual park needs ( a " Conceptual Future . Park Sites Map ') could be developed and agreed to by each elected board . This map would illustrate conceptually (via a " bubble " approach ) : 1 . Current Town and County park facilities 2 . The general locations where parks are needed , and 3 . Projects where there is an identified joint park need , and collaboration on park acquisition and development is warranted . 3 � zo As a starting point, the initial Conceptual Future Park Sites Map could be generated using existing plans and the 1999 JMRP report. Creation of such a map would be an important first step in identifying parks needs and prioritizing opportunities for collaboration . If, as suggested in the 1997 and 1999 reports, the County is to play a coordinating role in future parkland acquisitions, an appropriate vehicle to incorporating this Map into local policies may exist next year, with the County's update to its Master Recreation and Parks Element of the Comprehensive Plan . This possibility was suggested in both the 1997 Coordination report and the 1999 JMRP report. In this scenario , the County Master Recreation and Parks Element would be expanded to address Town parks and recreation needs, the linkages between Town and County parks, and the inter- relationships between Town and County parks systems (for both active and low- impact recreation ) . VII . Where Do We God From Here , Conclusions The positive activities of the past four years in parks coordination and planning have enabled Carrboro , Chapel Hill , Hillsborough and Orange County to make progress in several key areas : • We have moved forward from the 1997 Coordination report, and now have an inventory of facilities and a much clearer understanding of parks needs and funding mechanisms • We now have a process for coordinated land acquisitions that can be used Countywide in the Lands Legacy program . • We have an Inter-Governmental Parks Work Group prepared for an initial meeting in November, to ensure sharing of information and exploration of opportunities for joint projects . • We have been able to identify key principles for action , including recognition of the need to acquire good park sites now before they are gone . • The need for facility development and the specific facility needs are more clearly- defined . • The local governments and school systems are poised to begin coordinating school and park siting , via the Memoranda of Agreement, to maximize opportunities to co-- locate compatible public facilities . • In the 1997 and 1999 reports, a clear consensus emerged that Orange County is best poised to provide a coordinating mechanism with " a major role in funding , acquisition and development" for larger joint parks . At the same time, while we have learned a great deal about of current status of parks and recreation and our needs , we as local governments face a number of pressing challenges in the years to come : I 21 �t • The Towns face a . continuing challenge to fund capital land acquisition and facility development for new parks, while still providing adequate operation and maintenance of existing parks . • There are substantial identified parks needs for all jurisdictions — totaling $ 63 million in all — but available funding for only 1/4 of these needs • The need to coordinate quickly on funding for land acquisition is immediate, as land is not getting cheaper and good park sites disappear each year . • The 1999 JMRP report calls for a parks and open space bond referendum to land - bank for future park needs and address the deficit of parkland at the present. • The Town of Chapel Hill has identified a number of concerns regarding the level of County contribution to Town parks and recreation operating budget, the location of facilities based on contribution , and the need for individual jurisdiction parks standards ( please see Appendix 6 for additional information ) . With the substantial knowledge gained from the work. of the past five years, the Managers would jointly suggest consideration of the following steps to address current and future needs : 1 . Develop and Adopt a Memorandum of Agreement between the County and Towns on Capital Funding for Joint Parks Projects From the many findings from the reports of the last five years, we have learned that : • There is a deficit of parkland in the County, as identified in the 1999 JMRP report, and $47 million in identified parks projects are currently unfunded, • There is an immediate need for begin land - banking for parks, to ensure adequate sites for future park needs, • Orange County has the greatest opportunity to raise funds countywide for parks needs, and the 1997 County Parks bonds illustrate a precedent for a County bond serving rural and Town needs, • The Towns are limited in their ability to raise capital funding for new, large parks needs, but have a longstanding experience in operation and maintenance of parks . If Orange County's optimal role in joint parks projects is oriented toward capital funding , land acquisition and facility development, and the Towns optimal role is in operation , programming and maintenance , a mechanism to address how these roles will be fulfilled may be needed . If the County and Towns are interested in pursuing an arrangement along these lines, a Memorandum of Agreement ( MoA) may be desirable . This Memorandum could address : • The nature of joint parks to which the Memorandum is applicable (larger- scale park endeavors to serve all residents , for example) , 22 • The method in which joint park projects are identified and agreed upon (the Lands Legacy Annual Action Plan , for example) , • The County's role in capital funding , acquisition and facility development for joint parks . • The Town 's role in operation and maintenance of joint parks • The means of programming for joint parks projects, and • The inter- relationship and coordination with the Schools co- location Memoranda of Agreement and the Schools Capital Funding Policy, and • Other topics as needed 2 . Create and Adopt " Conceptual Future Park Sites Map " In support of the proposed MoA, a consensus on joint parks projects should be developed . Potential joint projects could be identified through the Inter- Governmental Parks Work Group and land acquisition pursued through the County"s Lands Legacy Program Annual Action Plan to address short-term and long -term joint land acquisitions . Once identified , the general location and nature of these joint parks projects may be reflected on the proposed " Conceptual Future Park Sites Map , " showing both joint and local parks plans . This map could then be reviewed and adopted by each elected board as the " plan " for joint parks projects . To incorporate the map into County and Town policy, it may be then incorporated into the existing parks plans of each jurisdiction along with the individual jurisdiction plan . This process is similar to that used for the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan . 3 . Develop Plans fora Parks and Open Space Bond Almost $47 million of unfunded parks needs exist among the jurisdictions in the County, both for land acquisition and facility development. A bond referendum has been suggested to address parks needs in the County . The County and Town elected boards may wish to discuss this need , and arrive at a mutually-agreeable timetable for a bond referendum , or discuss other funding options . 23 AiDiDendices Appendix 1 CIP and Parks Project Funding Information from each Jurisdiction Appendix 2 Town of Chapel Hill Supplemental Information Appendix 3 Executive Summary — 1999 JMRP, report Appendix 4 Comparison of CIP Schedule - All 3urisdictions Appendix 5 Memoranda of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning (Schools/ Land Use Councils) Appendix 6 Chapel Hill Town Manager Memorandum ( 8/ 28 / 00) o i i i Appendix 1 i I CIP and (Parks Project Funding h urisdictionInformation fr® m Eat , ORANGE COUNTY Summary Recreation and ' Parks t 200040 Capital Investment Plan Zoos- o6 , Through Through Project Costs 199940 2000- 01 2001 - 02 200243 2003A4 200445 200940 Total Chapel Hill Park Projects $ 2 , 0001000 $ 0 $ 0 so $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 2 , 0001000 Efland Cheeks Park $ 858 , 690. SO $ 0 SO $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 858 , 690 Equipment and Vehicles $ 85 , 050 $ 11NO $ 30 , 000 $ 35 , 000 $40 , 000 $ 50 ,000 $ 2501000 $ 501 , 050 Fairview Park $75 , 000 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 75 , 000 New Hope Creek Corridor $75 ;000 $ 15 , 000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 90,000 Other Park Projects (Bond) $ 22000 , 000 S1 , 070 , 560 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 3 , 070 , 560 Park at Northern . Human Services Center $ 110 , 000 $ 0 $ 80, 000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 190 ,000 Parkland & Recreation Facilities $ 155 ,000 $ 25 , 000 $ 25 , 000 $ 50 ,000 $ 1001000 $ 100 , 000 $ 500 ) 000 $ 9553000 Triangle Sportsplex 52 , 100 ) 000 $4003000 $400 , 000 $40 % 000 $400 , 000 $300, 000 $ 0 S4, 000 ,000 Total Recreation and Parks Project Costs $ 7, 458, 740 $1, 521, 560 $535, 000 $485, 000 $5401000 $450, 000 $ 750, 000 $11, 740, 300 200546 Through Through Funding Sources 1999-00 200041 200142 200243 2003 = 04 200445 200940 Total CIP Pay-As-You-Go Funds $2 ; 4537300 S436 , 000 $ 535 , 000 S485 , 000 S540 , 000 $450 ) 000 $ 750 , 000 $5 , 649 ,300 Bond funds $ 4, 929 , 440 $ 1 , 0702560 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 6 ,0003000 Grant Funds $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 • $ 0 f Fees $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Other $ 76 , 000 $ 15 , 000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 91 , 000 Total Recreation and Parks Funding Sources $ 7, 4581740 $115211560 . $535, 000 $485, 000 $540, 000 $450, 000 S7501000 $ 11, 740, 300 s ' Chapel Hill Park. Projects 2005-06 Through Through 1999 -00 2000 -01 2001 -02 2002 -03 2003 -04 200445 20094 0 Total Project Costs Land/Building $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 Design $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Construction $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $2,0001000 0 0 0 0 0 0 VM01000 Total Costs $2, 000, 000 $ o $o $0 $o $o $o $2, 000, 000 Funding Sources Sales Tax $0 $0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $0* Bond Funds $2100%000 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 $2 , 000 ,000 Private Placement $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Grant Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Fees $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Other $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Total Funding $23P000, 000 $o $0 $ o $o $ o $o $2, 000, 000 Project Description Proceeds from the Recreation and Parks bond provide $ 3 million for the purchase of parkland and $ 3 million to develop park facilities . Of this total , $2 million was designated for two parks in Chapel Hill the Northern Chapel Hill Community Park and the Southern Chapel Hill Community Park . This project provides for the payment of these funds to the Town of Chapel Hill . Efland Cheeks Community - School Park 200546 Through Through 1999- 00 2000-01 200142 2002 -03 200M4 2004 -05 2009A 0 Total I Project Costs Land/Building $ 5 , 000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 5 , 000 Design $ 1402390 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 140, 390 Construction $ 7135300 0 0 0 0 0 $713 , 300 Other $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Total Costs $858, 690 $0 $ 0 $0 s0 $0 $0 $858, 690 Funding Sources Sales Tax $ 28 ,250 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 , $ 0 $ 0 $287250 Bond Funds $ 819, 440 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 81 %440 Private Placement $ 0 0 ' 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Grant Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Fees $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $ 11 , 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 11 , 000 Total Funs ing $8581 690 $ 0 $0 . $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $858, 690 , r Project Description Originally opened in 1992 , this park was built in coordination with the Efland Cheeks Community Center and Efland Cheeks Elementary School . Located adjacent to the school , the original phase of this project included picnic areas and a children ' s playground . Currently, phase two of this park is occurring . Planned improvements in the second phase include walking, fitness and nature trails , available for community and school use . In addition , activity areas for sports such as basketball and soccer are planned for this second phase . A picnic shelter is also planned . This phase , funded mainly with 1997 park bond funds , is scheduled for completion by summer 2000 , Annual operating costs for this park are estimated at $ 15 , 000 including maintenance and gate personnel , maintenance supplies and utilities . The Recreation and Parks ' s annual operating budget for fiscal year 2000 - 01 will reflect the increased operational costs for the park . Equipment and Vehicles - Recreation and Parks zoos-06 Through Through 199940 200M1 2001 -02 2002 -03 2003 -04 200445 2009A 0 Total Project Costs Land/Building $ 0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Design $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 Construction $0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 Other $ 85 ,050 $ 11 ,000 $30 , 000 $ 352000 $403000 5 % 000 2503000 $ 5012050 Total Costs $85, 050 $11, 000 $3 0, 000 $35, 000 $40, 000 $50, 000 $250, 000 $501, 050 Funding Sources Sales Tax $ 851050 $ 11 ,000 $302000 $ 35 , 000 $40 , 000 $ 50 , 000 $ 2505000 $ 5012050 Bond Funds - $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Private Placement $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Grant Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Fees $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Total Funding $85, 050 $ 119000 $30, 000 $35, 000 S401000 $50, 000 $250, 000 $501 , 050 Project Description This project provides funds to purchase vehicles and major equipment for the Recreation and Parks department . During fiscal year 2000 - 01 the department will replace aged equipment including ball field maintenance items . Beginning in fiscal year 200041 , staff will explore options of purchasing Low Emission Vehicles (LEV ' s) . The cost difference of LEV ' s and present vehicles is unclear at this time . The number of vehicles that can be replaced , is dependent upon the cost difference . The impact on operating budgets is dependent upon the types of vehicles purchased in the future , ide funds to continue scheduled equipment and vehicle. Future years ' capital allocations prov replacements and purchases . 9 e i • it i Fairview Park 2005 -06 Through Through 1999 =00 200041 2001 -02 200243 200344 2004 -05 2009- 10 Total ' Project Costs Land/Building $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $0 Design $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Construction $ 75 , 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 751000 Other $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Total Costs $ 7 1000 $0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $0 $ 75, 000 Funding Sources Sales Tax $ 75 , 000 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $753000 Bond Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Private Placement $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Grant Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Fees $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Total Funding $ 75, 000 $0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 75, 000 Project (Description In October . 1987 , the County opened this park located in the Fairview community . • The park was developed using Community Development Block Grant funds . It provides surrounding neighborhoods with play apparatus , p0 Olt icnic areas, and benches . The park was developed on an old landfill that the County acquired from the Town of Hillsborough . A geotechnical evaluation is currently being conducted to determine the extent and depth of the landfill . F Before furtherdevelo ment of the staff recommends that the evaluation be completed and the � P park, Board receive a report from the engineers concerning potential uses of the land . Staff anticipates results of the evaluation before the end of the 1999 - 00 fiscal year Otto It � tie o 1 l New Hope Creek Corridor 200546 Through Through 199940 200041 200142 2002 -03 200344 200445 200940 Total Project Costs Land/Building $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 Design $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Construction $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Other $752000 159000 0 0 0 0 0 $90 , 000 Total' Costs $ 75, 000 $15, 000 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $90, 000 Funding Sources Sales Tax $202000 $0 . $ 0 $0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $209000 Bond Funds $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Private Placement $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SO Grant Funds $ 0 0 0 Q 0 0 0 $0 Fees $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $ 55000 152000 0 0 0 0 0 $703000 Total Funding $ 75, 000 $15, 000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 90, 000 Project Description This project provides subdivision payment- in4ieu - funds to preserve land along New Hope Creek . in Orange County . In February 1992 , Orange County adopted the "New Hope Corridor Space Master Plan The master plan proposed creating a wildlife habitat including hiking and biking trails along a twenty- three mile protected corridor from rural Orange County to Jordan Lake . Jointly funded by Orange and Durham Counties , Town of Chapel Hill , City of Durham, and various private donors , this effort " is coordinated through the Triangle Land Conservancy (TLC) . TLC is currently working with landowners in . both counties regarding donating and selling land or easements to fulfill the master plan . Orange County' s Recreation and Parks Department and Planning Department will work with f�_ TLC in developing an annual work plan and strategy for acquiring land , The impact of this project on future operating budgets will be developed as land is acquired . t • II d t 1t� iii 'Other Park Pro' ects (Bonds) 2005,06 Through Through 199940 2000-01 2001 -02 200243 200M4 2004-05 200940 Total Project Costs Land/Building $2, 000,000 $ 1 , 0701560 $ 0 $ 0 $0 . $ 0 $0 $310701560 Design $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Construction $0 0 ; 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other . $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Tbtal Costs $2, 000, 000 $I, 070, 560 $0 $0 S0 $0 $0 $3, 070, 560 Funding Sources - Sales Tax $0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 $ 0 Bond Funds $2, 000, 000 * 110703560 0 0 0 0 0 $ 3 , 070 , 560 Private Placement $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Grant Funds $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 ' Fees $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Total Fun(I ,; $2, 000, 000 $1, 0701560 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3, 070, 560 Project Description ' Proceeds from the 1997 Parks Bond provide $ 3 million for the purchase of parkland and $3 million to develop park facilities . A work group consisting of representatives from Orange County, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro is in the process of updating and revising the Master Recreation and Park plan that was originally adopted in 1988 . Recommendations from this group will identify community and large district park sites 0%.t are conveniently located and easily accessible to all county residents . 4 h fiscal year 1999 - 00 , a portion of the bond funds have been used for construction of the second Bk *he Efland Cheeks Community and School Park and for the purchase of land adjacent to the oft 1man Services Center . Additional detail on these two projects is located on the individual ' vi this document . %rd of Commissioners has pledged $ 2 million to the Town of Chapel Hill for Southern ` ark and the Chapel Hill Northern Community Park . Each park is designated to • e (see Chapel Hill Parks Projects located in the Recreation and Parks section of B +a Park: at Northern Human Services Center _ 2005-06 Through Through 199940 2000-01 2001 -02 2002 -03 200344 2004A5 . 200940 Total Project Costs . Land/Building $ 1101000 $0 $ 0 $0 $0 $ 01 $ 0 $ 1102000 Design $0 0 80, 000 0 0 0 0 $ 80, 000 Construction $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Total Costs $110, 000 $0 $800000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $190, 000 Funding Sources Sales Tax $ 0 $ 0 $ 801000 $0 $0 $0 $ 0 $ 80, 000 Bond Funds $ 1102000 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 1102000 Private Placement $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Grant Funds $ 0 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 .Fees $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Total Funding $ 110, 000 SO $80, 000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $ 190, 000 Project Description In May 1998 , the County purchased forty acres of property adjacent to the Northern Human Services Center in Cedar Grove . Funding for the purchase came from proceeds from the 1997 Parks and Recreation Bonds , Development plans forthe park are anticipated to be part of the revised Master Recreation and Park plan that is currently being updated , Funds allocated in fiscal year. 2001 - 02 provide for a feasibility study for the park , 51 r Parkland and Recreation. Faci it es 200546 Through Through 1999-00 MOM 2001 - 02 200243 2003 • 04 200 .1 -05 2009- 10 Total Project Costs LandBuildin oil' g $ 0 $ 4 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $0 $ 0 Design $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Construction $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $ 155 , 000 25 , 004 250000 50 , 000 100, 000 1007000 500 , 000 $ 955 , 000 Total Costs $155, 000 525, 000 $25, 000 $50, 000 $100, 000 $100, 000 $5 00, 000 $955, 000 Funding Sources Sales Tax $ 1 45 , 000 $25 , 400 $25 , 000 $ 50, 000 $ 100, 000 $ 100, 000 $ 500, 000 $945 ,000 Bond Funds $0 0 0 0, 0 0 0 $ U Private Placement $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Grant Funds $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 Fees $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 Other $ 10 , 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 10 , 000 Total Funding $ 155, 000 $25, 000 25, 000 $50, 000 $1001 000 $100, 000 $500, 000 $955, 000 Project Description This pay- as -you- go project provides funds for improving and repairing existing parks and recreation facilities . Possible uses of these monies include replacing aged playground equipment or replacing protective ground covers in play , areas . Allocations for specific future projects will be based on departmental and community needs . Examples of improvements funded from this project in prior years include : Northern Human Services Center — Resurface play areas with protective covering and replace broken playground equipment Whitted Human Services Center Resurfacing the walking track located at the rear of the Whiffed Human Services Center . . As new parks come on - line, staff anticipates the need for playground and facility maintenance to increase in the future . A , rJangIe Sportsplex 2005-06 Through Through 1999 -00 2000 -01 2001 -02 2002 -03 2003 -0 .4 2004 -05 2009A 0 Total Project Costs ,and/Building ' $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 ) esign $0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 construction $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 ) then $2 , 100, 000 400, 000 400, 000 40010W 4002000 300 , 000 0 $41000 , 000 total Costs $2, 100400 $400, 000 $400, 000 $400, 000 $400, 000 $300, 000 $0 $4, 000, 000 Funding Sources Sales Tax $ 2 , 100, 000 $4003000 $ 4009000 $ 400 , 000 $400 , 000 $3009000 $ 0 $ 41000, 000 3ond Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ' ?rivate Placement $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 3rant Funds $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 ?ees $ 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 $0 )then $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 total Fundlnh $2, 100, 000 $400, 000 $400, 000 $400, 000 $400, 000 $300, 000 $0 $4, 000, 000 Project Description "he Sportsplex activity center, located in the Meadowlands Business Park near I- 85 and N . C . Highway 86 � nterchailge in Hillsborough , opened in April 1995 . The activity center includes an indoor swimming pool acility along with an ice rink, fitness center, community meeting rooms , sports shop , and a snack bar. owl 'ursuant to an operational agreement between the County and the Sportsplex, . Orange County will provide the activity center with a total of $ 4 , 000 , 000 over a ten-year period ( annual installments of $400 , 000 each) . In eturn , Sportsplex staff consults the County in the programming of the pool facility . In addition , the Board of 10ounty Commissioners appoints one less than a4majority of the Sportsplex . Cnn 3ecause Orange County does not operate the facility, there is no significant impact on the County' s operating ) udget . L a MEMORANDUM TO : Dave Stancil FROM : Kathryn Spatz RE : Planned Chapel Hill Capital Projects DATE : July 19 , 2000 This is in response to the recent meeting regarding planned parks and recreation projects an various jurisdictions , including Chapel Hill . The following is a narrative list of proj ects , funded and unfounded in Chapel Till , Homestead Park/Proposed Aquatics Facility : The Board of County Commissioners agreed to provide $ 145 , 000 toward completion of the Chapel Hill Skate Park at Homestead Park . Funds were used to construct the restroom/concession building * and to extend utilities to the site . Utilities were extended in a manner that could allow easy accessibility for the proposed aquatics center, if that facility is constructed . This leaves $ 855 ; 000 remaining 4of the $ 1 million originally committed to Homestead Park by the County . Margaret Brown was appointed by the Commissioners to serve as the County representative on the Homestead Park Aquatic/Community Center Conceptual Plan Committee . We anticipate that approximately $ 1 . 2 million of the Town ' s 1996 Parks bonds will remain after completion of Homestead Park. If the balance of both Town and County bond funds were combined we would have approximately $2 million for any future project . We believe this is well short of the funding necessary to design and construct a quality aquatic/community center . We are not far enough along in the planning stage of this project to provide cost estimates . However, our consultants have noted that regional figures for aquatic facility construction range from $ 150 to $ 200 per square foot . Our experience has shown that, in the past several years , our construction costs tend to be on the high end ( or beyond) of most standard ranges . Based on an assumption that an aquatics facility could occupy up to 15 , 000 square feet of a 30 , 000 square foot facility , we would assume that the design and construction of this proposed building could cost approximately $ 4 - 6 million , not allowing for inflation . Southern Community Park: The County has provided $ 105 , 000 for the lighting and irrigation of the athletic playing field at Scroggs Elementary School . The remaining $ 895 , 000 committed by the County is the only current funding anticipated for the Southern Community Park project . In September 1998 the Council forwarded a suggested timeline for a bond sale to the County Commissioners , The timeline included $ 100 , 000 in 1999 for the conceptual design phase of the project . I am aware that the County Commissioners have recently approved the use of up to $ 50 , 000 for developing a master plan for the park, Although we have not started a conceptual plan process for the Southern Community Park, we believe that our experience at Homestead Park can be a guide in estimating the cost of this project . We estimate that $ 4 to $ 5 million play be a realistic estimate for complete buildout of the site . This assumes that the site would be used primarily for playing fields . Any buildings - - other than picnic shelters , concession stands or restrooms (which would require extending water and sewer lines to , the site) - - and major roadwork would significantly increase this rough estimate . Renovating Existing Facilities : Renovations of the Hargraves Center and Community Center are essential . While renovation is often not as exciting as new construction, these a buildings are currently the backbone of recreation opportunities in Chapel Hill . The Town recently contracted with a consultant to examine Town facilities and formulate cost estimates for necessary repairs . The consultant ' s report places total renovation costs for Hargraves at $ 416 , 000 , This includes maintenance deficiencies of $ 173 , 000 at the Hargraves building and $ 243 , 000 for the A . D . Clark Pool , including bath house and mechanical room repairs . The $ 416 , 000 figure represents about 18 % of the replacement value of the facilities . Unfortunately the consultant did not visit the Community Center on Estes Drive this fall . The consultants working on the building assessments are scheduled to review the Community Centerlater this month . The budget for the assessment project was increased by the Town Council , so that all Town buildings not yet studied will be surveyed this summer and estimates developed of the costs of repair and renovations . For each . Estimates for repair and renovation of the Community Center are based on Public Works staff input . We believe that maintenance needs are probably in the range of $ 580 , 000 . This figure would not address important items—chiefly air conditioning and adequate ventilation --that were not included in the original design . The Center ' s ventilation system is extremely poor . Humidity and lack of sufficient circulation have led to substantial corrosion and rust of mechanical and electrical systems throughout the building . Major problem areas include the roof and gym floor . The replacement value of the Community Center at $ 125 per square foot is about $2 . 9 million . Twenty percent of replacement value is approximately $ 580 , 0000 The figures listed above for Hargraves and the Community Center represent hard costs for construction . They do not include project development and construction management and contingency. Public Works' staff suggests that another 15 -20 % should be added to reflect total costs . Booker Creek Linear Park: This project is proposed to include a. trail and park in the area between Franklin Street and Elliott Road and along Booker Creek . We have applied for an enhancement grant this spring through the NCDOT for the Linear Park project . The cost projection for the entire project is approximately $ 500 , 000 , If the State grant is not secured we would have to find some other source of funding for this project . Lower Booker Creek Greenway : In June the Council awarded the project to the low bidder for approximately $ 500 , 000 . State and local funds will cover a large portion of the cost . The recreation requirement of a planned development in the area will also contribute . . Dry Creel: Greenway : We expect to have sufficient fiends to complete the sections from East Chapel Hill High School to Perry Creek Road . However, we do not have any fiends identified 'for the sections that would link the .Eastowne and New Hope Commons areas with the trail . We face unique challenges due to some wet conditions that could drive up costs . Very preliminary cost estimates place completion of this project at around $ 750 , 000 - $ 800 , 000 , not counting land acquisition . }. Bolin Creek . Greenway : We are interested in a joint planning exercise with OWASA to engineer the best possible solution to both replace the Bolin Creek interceptor sewer upstream of Airport Road as well as designing an extension of the Bolin Creek Trail that would link the current trail to Uffistead Park and beyond to the Carrboro line . This is probably the most challenging section of greenway trail identified in the Town ' s Master Plan . Engineeringo costsare likely to be around $ 100 , 000 - 150 , 000 . Constrtiction costs are likely to approach $ 12000 , 000 . The trail could, be built in phases . This trail would eventually extend the existing Fan Branch Morgan Creek Greenway : ( Southern Village) Trail tinder Culbreth Road, over Morgan Creek and on to Smith Level Road . Portions of the trail are likely to be important if access to Merritt Pasture is to be secured . We have a commitment for $ 100 , 000 from the Southern Village developer , however costs for, the project are likely to range from $ 400 , 000 to $ 750 , 000 depending on the scope . of improvements . A possible first phase may be identified once the Merritt Pasture Access Committee finishes its work . is important to note that the Joint Master and PaiAks Land Acquisition : It Plan TVor°k Group Report seems to suggest that any future County bond referendum be used to purchase land for open space and future recreation needs (land banking) . We could work with the county to identify and purchase at least one more large tract of land suitable for active recreation ' before the last opportunities are gone . We believe that any such purchase could likely serve open space and greenways needs as well : One immediate joint project that may be possible is the purchase of land between Erwin Road and New Hope Commons . We have a $ 200 , 000 Clean Water Management Trust Fund grant that could be, combined with County funds to purchase several properties north of I - 40 . These properties could serve as an important trail link as well as a possible park site . Another possible site is the American Legion property. Below, please find a comprehensive chart listing all projects named in this memorandum . POTENTIAL PROJECT ESTIMATED EXISTING EXISTING (including desi n) RANGE TOWN FUNDS COUNTY FUNDS Homestead Park Aquatics Center $ 4 - 6 , 000 , 000 $ 1 ,200 , 000 $ 8454000 Southern Connmunity Park $ 4 — 55000 , 000 - 0 - $ 895 , 000 Hargraves Center Renovations $ 500 , 000 $ 50 , 000 -0 - Community Center Renovations ' $ 696 , 000 — 11200 , 000 - 0 - Booker .Creek Linear Park $ 250 , 000- 50000 $ 2 , 000 - 0 - Lower Booker Creek Trail $ 61185000 - 768 , 000 $468 , 000 - 0 - Bolin Creek Trail (Phase III) ' $ 3501000413150 , 000 - 0 - - p - DI Creek Trail (Phase II & III) $ 750 , 000 - 800 , 000 - 0 - - p _ Morgan Creek Trail (Phase I) $ 4009000 - 7501000 $ 100 , 000 - 0 - Open Space Acquisitions Unknown 1 . The upper end of the range would include non-maintenance items such as improved ventilation , expansion of locker rooms , air-conditioning, and a new foyer. 2 . The lower range would represent the smallest portion, of the overall project that could result in significant improvements . This would allow extension of the trail including a new bridge over Booker Creek , 3 . This project could be split into a number of phases . 4 . This project could be done in at least 2 phases .& 5 . We have no basis for estimating ultimate land acquisition costs. These costs are ultimately parcel specific . 1 trust this addresses the items raised in Mayor Waldorf s email . We would be pleased to assist should you need additional information regarding parks and recreation projects and projected needs . i ! ' ♦ . • � }{ ( vim^. Ii��t'u��i�,>�:R j ,<xx:.a>.7•if.Si r<•: 'f t��j� � � �� :. fit Of it �j _ Rtt9' V744 y !Rgo if f i£( , t� a'f7i{• kl i'•: 1T 1 3 n 'fi �,sfijF �1r 4 3 .! . . :i nf��. i(i s �.: • go Sw%i1:9!%ii:lik�. i5rl�yn(i y 04 AMIL W 14 5 Dud EXPLANATION NATION OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES AND OPERATION BUDGET IMPACTS FY2000 - 2011 ♦ Item: Playground Equipment ♦ Item: Smith Middle School Carrboro's existing parks (Wilson, Baldwin, Carr Court, and Anderson) have serve The Smith Middle School project is envisioned as a Iarge community park developed the community well. However, the parks are in need of expansion and improvemen� in joint effort by Chapel Hill, Orange County, and Carrboro. Operating Impact: If to adequately serve the community into the next century. The New Century/New fully funded by Carrboro, operating costs are estimated at$406,475, requiring a Carrboro committee recommends purchasing new playground equipment for all total of 6positions to maintain grounds. existing parks. Operating Impact:No estimate given since the type of playground Cost: $465,000 Year: FY2000 -2001 affects operating impact. Cost: $362,398 Funding Source: Installment Financing, Payment in Lieu, Intergovernmental Year: FY2009—2010 Revenue Funding Source: Capital Reserves ♦ Item: Small Park ♦ Item: Northern Community Park The New Century/New Carrboro Committee recommends a small park to serve . This project will satisfy the demand for outdoor recreation services in the northern several town neighborhoods including Fair Oaks, Cates Farm, Cobblestone, area of Carrboro. A community park will allow for the development of more Webbwood, Barington Hills, Bel Arbor, Plantation Acres, and Spring Valley. It is . intensive facilities providing athletic fields, play equipment areas, and picnic areas. possible this park could accommodate an outdoor swimming pool (see narrative Operating Impact: Six public works staff and associated operating costs, inclzcdi��g below). Operating Impact. $73,000 for grounds maintenance. purchase of equipment such as a riding mower will be required to maintain park Cost: $1,245,137 FY20 Year: FY2001 —2002 grounds Total anticipated operating impact is S406,675, same as for Smith Afiddle . School Project Funding Source: Payment in Lieu, Installment Financing Cost: $6,359,307 ect • Year: FY2010 —2011 ♦ Item: Outdoor Swimming Pool Funding Source: GO Bound The New Century/New Carrboro committee recommends an outdoor swimming pool, a suggestion from residents in a community-wide brainstorming session held by the Town to invite citizen input on the Town's capital needs on May 22, 1999. The committee suggests building the pool at the proposed Small Park. Operating Impact: TEX require I full-time pool technician and various recreation staff for summer months and operating costs to maintain pool at total cost of$93,000. Cost: $4,855,315 Year: FY2002—2003 Funding Source: Installment Financing and GO Bond L� Item: Gymnasium The Town's Comprehensive Recreation and Master Park Plan strongly recommends the construction of a gymnasium inclusive'of two basketball courts, meeting room, and office and storage spaces. The New Century/New Carrboro committee also endorses this project as critical to meeting general and athletic programming needs in the community. Operating Impact: It is anticipated that an equivalent of 2.5 positions will be needed to operate the gymnasium. Other operating costs will support contracted services for a Facility Supervisor, maintenance contractors, computers, desks, and other office supplies. Total operating cost is estimated at $135,122. Cost: $3,788,688 Year: FY2010—2011 Funding Source: GO Bond LISTED BELOW ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE ONGOING AND MULTI- YEAR IN SCOPE: Item:, Sidewalks, Bikeways, and Greenways The New Century/New Carrboro committee, honoring the Town's reputation for being pedestrian and bike-friendly, recommends engaging iA concerted program of sidewalk, bikeway, and greenway improvements. Operating Impact.None. Cost: $5,580,228 Year: FY2000—2011 Funding Source: Capital Reserves, GO Bond, and Intergovernmental Revenues PI.IOJECT: This project, an intergovernmental cooperative effort, creates the opportunity for the Town to create a community park with amenities including playground equipment, tracks, and `�° • • - • " ,} " , r. other athletic fields. Project Description: The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City PROJECT COST ESTIAiA-TFS Schools are presently designing a new middle school, ELENIENT5 FY99-20 FY20-0I FY01-02 FY0243 FY03-04 FV04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT recentlynamed Smith Middle School which will adjoin Planning/ArcliEng - SIS0,W0 S150,000 J Lam►&ROw $_ Sewell Elementary and Chapel H-UI High Schools. coamc(ion S236,250 $78,750 $315,000 Certain portions of land owned by UNC-CH will be Eq"ipTurn ing $_ Other $ Ieased by the school system to site this middle school. Contingencies s- The school buildings and its associated-improvements, athletic fields, outside educational areas,etc. are located TOTAL SM,250 $78,750 S- S- s- s- S465,a00 on Sewell Road and Homestead Road. The Carrboro FUNDING SOURCES and Chapel Hill planning jurisdiction separate the site REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY20-01 FY01-02 FY03-03 FY03-04 FY0445 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT l� p gJ Installment Financing 'I119.125 1119,125 and new athletic fields are slated for Carrboro jurisdio- GO Bond S_ tion, while the buildings and other athletic fields will be cap"'R"" S- rntgovt.Revenues S193,125 S39,375 S232,500 under Chapel Hill's planning jurisdiction. G.F.Operating Revenues $39,375 $39,373 Misc.-P"cut in Lieu S75,000 $75,000 Define Problem: The Town needs additional athletic TOTAL FUNDING $386,230 S79,750 s S. S- S_ S- sus,wa fields and assured access to school sites in general to augment available park and open ace ava ilable ailable to the OPERATING BUDGET EFFECT p ELEMENTS FYW20 FY2MI FYDI-02 FY0243 FY03-U FY04-0 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT public. Chapel Hill-Carrboro officials have been very P--maet Costs S156,475 S156,475 receptive to working with the Town on a joint arranga Operating and M,untenance S37,000 S37,000 went. Also, the Orange County Board of Capital Outlays $213,000 $213,000 Commissioners have committed funding to encourage TOTAL OPERATING COSTS sto6,4175 S- s- S+ S- S- 54%,475 Net Operating Eifel 5406,475 S- S- S- S• S- S406,475 "value engineering"concepts in development of the site. New Perrxtnel (FTE) 6-0 This arrangement could provide infinite benefits since the site,when considering all three schools together, jointly develop the site among the following government •Agreement for expanded public use of all three school presently offer amenities such as playground equipment; agencies: Town of Canboro, Chapel Hill-Carrboro sites and their park type amenities so that a full school- tracks,other athletic fields,trails and a cross country Schools, Orange County and the University of North park concept can be realized. course. Carolina at Chapel Hill. -Additional Town funds earmarked toward this project. The Recreation and Parks Comprehensive Master plan -Agreement with Orange county on future County calls for Community Parks at approximately 60 acres Recommended Solution:In the initial phase of the involvement and the site combined presently has developed many of athletic fields a formal agreement for use is being devel• the park amenities normally associated with community oiled, and$75,000 from Canboro's payment in lieu fund Operating Impact:The Town, in anticipation of having or city-wide parks. A full utilization agreement could has been committed.Also,The Orange County Board of full responsibility for maintenance of the park,will satisfy many of the requirements of the master plan at Commissioners has committed S75,000 to match require six (6)positions, mowers, a tractor, and other great cast savings. Carrboro's share toward the development of an addition, capital equipment and operating costs to maintain park al, third field on the site. Discussions on thee-first phase grounds.Projected operating costs do not take into Project AIternatives: The alternatives for this project of construction include the provision of conduits for h6 account new programs that may be decided upon open- are very limited if not non-existent. Because the project gation and lights,which is of special interest to the ing of the park.The facility, however, does not inherent is on-going,the opportunity for participation exists and . Town for community use of the facilities. The total pro. ly create program costs. The operating impact projected the potential for substantial savings is a very real possi- • J should Include the foIIowing criteria: is for 12 months. The Town's commitment, however, is bility. Also,this project provides for an opportunity to ,Agreement for expanded public use of this site only three months. Capital Improvement Program Town of Carrboro Page 2- its Project: This project serves the northern area of Carrboro with a park that will meet the demand °' , alr • - for additional recreational services. Project Description: This project will satisfy the PROJECT COST ESTIMATES ., demand for outdoor recreation services in the north- ' ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY20-01 IY01-02. FY02-03 FY03-04 FY0 -OS AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT ern area of Carrboro. A community ark Planning/Arrh/Eng $365,100 $365,100,,. geographic ty P Land/ROw SI.M0,000 51,500,000 will allow for the development of more intensive Construction $3,651.000 $3,651.000 facilities with light versus the smaller neighborhood EquipJFurnishing $- Other $943,207 S 843,207 park types_This project would provide additional a.th- Contingencies s $ letic fields, play equipment areas and picnic areas. TOTAL Si,38o,00o S- S- S- S- S4,959,307 S039,307 Define problem: The population of the northern FUNDING SOURCES Carrboro community has increased over the fast ten to REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY20.01 FYDI-02 FY0243 FY03�-04 FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT Installment Financing S1,500,000 S1,500,0W fifteen years. There is a.need for a recreation facility GO Bond. S4,859,307 s4,a59,307 to accommodate the growth in this area. -It has Capital Reserves $- Intergovernmental Revenues S_ become more of a practice for schools to rely on near- General Fund Operating Revenues S- by park sites versus development of school athletic Miscellaneous S_ facilities. Current facilities at Community Park are TOTAL FUNDING S1,S60,000 $- $- S= $- $4,959,307 $6,359,307 fully used and further development of the park is not possible due to watershed regulations. This limits the OPERATING BUDGET EFFE P g ELEMENTS FY99420 FY2D-0I FY01-02 FrYOZ43 FYC3-44 FY04-03 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT ability to meet growing demands for outdoor athletic Personnel costs $156,475 3136,475 programs. Sixty acres of land is needed in a few years wing and Maintenance S37,000 $37,000 to reserve the land for the development of the new Capital outlay: s213,200 s113,200 community park during the next ten years_ TOTAL OPERATING COSTS S- S- S- S- S406,675 $406,675 Net Operating Effect S- S- S- S- S- S406,675 S406,675 New Personnel ffM 6.0 6.0 The location of service area of a community park would allow for collaborative efforts between Carrboro and Orange County governments to mutual- would probably not have a water/pond facility but ly fund a northern community park, which would may include large picnic shelter facilities, soccer serve many county residents who do not reside in the fields, etc. This would allow for the greatest use of incorporated areas of Carrboro. Therefore, the loca- both.facilities and providing for varied and extension tion may need to be outside of our planning jurisdio- availability of outdoor recreation opportunities. tion. Operating Impact:The Town, in anticipation of hav- Projert Alternatives: A stronger relationship with Ing full responsibility for maintenance of the park,willl the public school system may alleviate_some acreage require six(6)positions,mowers, a tractor, and other need in the dual use of available lands provided for capital equipment and operating costs to maintain park school functions, i.e. parking lots, school athletic grounds. Projected operating costs do not take into fields, etc. account new programs that may be decided upon open ing of the.park. The facility,however, does not inherent Recommended Solution: This park could be similar ly create program costs.. to Anderson Park but could be modified depending on program needs and facilities provided by other juris- dictions. An example would be that the second park Page 2- U Town of Carrboro Capital Improvement Program Pro"eGt: This project creates a neighborhood ark in the.Hillsborou h Road area. J P .l g P g Project Description:.The Recreation and Parks PROJECT COST ESTIMATES Comprehensive Master Plan advises that a neighbor- ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY20-01 FY0142 FY02-03 FY03-N FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT hood ark be located in the Hillsborough Planning/Arch/Eng $17,464 s32,557 $12,074 S62,095 p g Land/ROW $500,000 ssoo,000 Road/Pathway Drive area. A neighborhood park is Construction s137,988 S482,959 $620,947 defined as a park suited for intense development, eas- CEgquiip/Famishing ther $ - ily accessible to neighborhoods and geographically Contingencies SG2,095 $62,095 centered with safe walking and biking access. A TOTAL S517,464 $170,345 $557,128 S S- $- s- S- SI,245,137 neighborhood park is typically 10 acres and may pro- vide land for recreation centers, pools and other inten- FUNDING SOURCES sive use facilities beyond the normal facilities such as REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY20-01 FY01-02 FY0243 FY03-04 FY04-03 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT y Installment Financing $17,464 $170,545 $557,129 $745,137 play fields, playground equipment, picnicking, etc. GO Bond S- Oital Reserves S- ra Dene Problem: The Master Plan identifies a park G.F.Operating a ng Rcv.fi . $43,250 $ 3,250 site on Pathway Drive due to the fact that the Town Miscdlancous $456,750 $456,750 owns some acreage there. However, if the Horace TOTAL FUNDING S317,464 $170,345 5557,123 S S- t- s- S- s1,245,137 Williams Property owned by UNC makes available a for a larger ark farther north, a neighbor- OPERATING BUDGET EFFECTS acreage � P g ELEMENTS FY99-20 FYI041 FY01-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT hood park should be located in the Hillsborough Road Personnel Costs $53,232 $53,232 area to accommodate the surrounding neighborhoods. Operating and Mainlenance S- C:piw Outlays S20,000 $20,004 Wilson Park is the closest Neighborhood Park in this TOTAL OPERATING COSTS $73,232 S- s- s- s- $73,232 area which has a service radius of% mile which ends Net Operating Erred s- $73,232 $- s-• $- S- $73,232 New Personnel (FrE) 2.0 2.0 in the area of the intersection of Blueridge Road and Hillsborough Road. There is no park available for the northern area of Town, making the Hillsborough Road Williams Tract, severely limiting it usefulness and seasonal help along with mowers will be needed to Park a suitable project. also.retaining its t/.mile service radius. Wilson maintain the park grounds. Projected maintenance Park's service radius does not serve the neighborhood costs do not include any unfoiseen facility that may Also, there is a treed to locate a swimming pool or that the proposed park project is intended for nor will come into the discussion. gymnasium complex close to Town so that public it accomodate the ultimate growth north on transit may be available. A neighborhood park in this Hillsborough Road from the Old Fayetteville to area could provide land to locate such a facility. Calvander intersections. Project Alternatives: The Recreation and Parks Although, the most recent indication through the Comprehensive Plan calls for a mini-park on Pathway Recreation and Parks Commission another evalul� Drive, located primarily because the Town owns some Lions is to provide large, city-wide or Community dedicated lands there. At the same time, the master Parks so that diverse and lighted facilities might be plan accepts that the park would have only a V4 mile provided. The location of a neighborhood park in this - service radius and facilities would be limited. There location would be extremely valuable. is no guarantee that•the park would adjoin any land . i set aside for park or open space within the Horace Operating Impact: Two (2) full-time positions and page 2 -4 Town of Carrboro Capital Improvement Program Project: This project allows for the acquisition of land for and the construction of a public outdoor . t� swimming pool for the citizens of Carrboro. Project Description: This project, situated on 12 PROJECT COST ESTIMATES acres, includes the development of three pools, a ELEMENTS ' FY"-20 FY2 -0I FY01-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 FYWS AND BEYOND TOTAL P ROJECT competition pool, wading pool and recreation pool, in ptanning/Arch/Eng $68,240 S163,775 S95,535 S327,550 Land(ROw $6001000 s6M.DW addition to surrounding decking,bathhouse amenities, Construction $3,275.501 $3,275,50 t office and associated areas. Equip/Furnishing $- Othcr $324,714 $324,714 Contingencies $327,550 S327,550 Define Problem: The vast expansion of aquatics in TOTAL $600.000 S63,240 S163,775 S4,023,300 S. s- S4,H5,315 the United States during the past decade places new demands on providers of facilities for athletics, physi FUNDING SOURCES REVENUE SOURCE FY49-20 FY2041 FY01-02 FY02-03 FY0344 FYU-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT cat education and leisure services. Also, it is impera- Installment Financing S600,000 S600,000 tive that all citizens are provided the opportunity to GO Bond $69,140 S163,775 S4,023,300 $4,255,315 learn how to swim and access to a public pool is the Capital Reserves $- Intergovcrnmcntal Revenues $- best assurance of this life-saving skill. The Town's General Fund Operating Revenues S_ Recreation and Parks Master Plan call for one public hfiscettaneous s pool for 25,000 population. For that reason, this TOTAL FUNDING s600,000 S69,240 S163,773 S4,023,300 S- s- s4,ass�ls would be the only pool substantiated by this standard for the entire build-out of Carrboro's planning juris- ELEMENTS BU ErFY99-20 FY20-01 FY01-02 FY02-03 FY03- 4 FY04-03 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT diction. Personnel Costs 597,433 S87,453 operating and Maintenance S13,000 Sig,000 — S- Those members of the community who are pool users Capita10u11nrs must now travel to the Triangle Sportsplex,near TOTAL OPERATING COSTS S- S- S103,453 S= S_ S105,453 Nct Operating Effect S- S $93,453 S- S- S93,453 Hillsborough or visit one of the two pools operated New Persottael ) 1.0 t.o by the Town of Chapel Hill or the Chapel Hill- Carrboro YMCA. There is a lot of competition for use in all pools within Orange County and present and accepted as a type of facility provided by public Recommended Solution: It is recommended that an conflicts at each facility. This could become a crucial park systems, its need and subsequent public view as outdoor swimming pool be funded. Although not the issue for Carrboro residents if denied access to a governmental responsibility is not likely to go away. best alternative (compared to an indoor, year-round Chapel Hill's public pools because of already over- facility), it is more economically feasible. crowded conditions. Certain collaborative efforts could be made with the.. Exploration with other governmental bodies should Town of Chapel Hill, Orange County,school systems take place to determine if there is willingness for a The University of North Carolina,.with its pool facili- or combination thereof. If funding were provided, joint venture and to perhaps increase the project to ties on campus and at the UNC Faculty/Staff Club, these avenues should be explored. Earlier discussion include an indoor, enclosed facility- serve a portion of this community need, but are with the private sector in regards*to a public-private restrictive since users must be affiliated with the venture has not been positive. This has mainly been Operating Impact: The Recreation Department University. It is reported that with all present swim for two reasons. The Triangle Sportsplex is consid- anticipates that the pool will need a total count of 8 (5 facilities are fully utilized. There is an immediate erect as depleting the market share for paid pool users people all times, 8 for shift changes)programmatic need for an additional facility at the present time. and if one were feasible, the most attractive location staff to operate the facility in the summer months. would be on the Raleigh-Durham side of the The Public Works Department will also need to hire a Project Alternatives: There always exists the alter Carrboro-Chapel Hill area. It is a private market certified pool technician to maintain the pools. native to not provide this type of recreation facility. analysis that has hindered this alternative. Anticipates operating expenses include chemicals and Because swimming pools are commonly recognized supplies associated with maintaining the pools. Capital Improvement Program .. Town of Carrboro Page 2 -7 Project: This project will provide Carrboro parks and recreation facilities with playground equip- k ': . a a „ r= meat to improve the physical and social environment of children. r� � �, MIT ! :. _ . 'Z Project Description: Playground equipment compris- pROJECTCOSTE5T1htATES es one of the most important features inherent in any ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY20-0I FY01,02 'FY02-03• FY03-04 FY04-OSA.ND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT park setting. This type of active recreation provides Planning/Arch/Eng S30,200 S30,200 for both diversity in the physical and social environ• Constmccdon $301,998 S301,998 ment of the child utilizing the equipment. As well, EquipTurnishing , $- er s- play equipment should be designed to enhance the o(;a tingencics S30,200 $30 700 potential for a child to make choices, take on chal- lenges, learn and have fun within the participation of TOTAL S. s- S. S. s- x�62,39g s36Z,3gs a group setting. Safety, accessibility and creativeness FUNDING SOURCES are three major components that all play equipment REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY20-01 FYOI-02 FY02-03 IrY03-04 FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT Installment Fin acing S- areas should provide. This project would include new GO Bond s- or additional play areas at Wilson, Carr Court, Capital Reserves $362,399 S362,398 Into governmental Revenues $_ Baldwin and Anderson parks. General Fund Operating Revenues S- m3ccIlaneous t- Define Problem: Most of the play equipment in the TOTAL FUNDING S- S_ s- s- S- S362,398' SJ62,398 above parks was installed prior to 1990. Carr Court had minimal older equipment that was removed when OPERATING BUDGET EFFE ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY2MI FYOI-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT the Head Start building and parking facilities con- Personnel Costs t- surned most of the open space. Play equipment Operating and Maintenance s_ Capital Outlays S_ design and development has radically changed over' the last twenty years and safety issues have become TOTAL OPERATING COSTS s- S- , S- S- S- S- s- aramount. All equip ment has been inspected b ce1=• Net Pemoing (FIE) Sr S- S- $- $- s- s- P q P P Y New Personnel (FTE) tified outside inspectors and the Town continues to maintain a program of internal and external safety inspections. costs. Although, this park is designed to serve a Operating Impact: It is estimated that after instAlla- town-wide radius, the equipment can only accommo tion, additional play equipment will affect operational One of the most requested improvements to all parks -date numbers more commonly found in a very small, costs in the area of maintenance. Playground equip- by the citizens, the need for additional play equip- neighborhood park. ment has so many possibilities, it is impossible to ment is quite evident in all parks associated with ' summarize without more specific information.' more up-to-date designs and separated between the Recommended Solution: The inclusion of additional ages of 2=S and 6— 12 year old groups, play structures at each of these parks will allow for more integration of varied play experiences for the Project Alternatives: There are few alternatives to community's youth. The addition of equipment, with the additional installation of equipment beyond accep-' the orderly maintenance of present equipment if tance of the status quo. There is a glaring deficit of already available, will provide for a larger number of this type of equipment in the Town's park system users at one time, especially when large, organized with a prime example being Anderson Community groups visit these facilities. This equipment will pro- Park. The existing equipment represents less than vide opportunity for diversity in type of equipment .�+ 50% of the equipment initially designed for the park and age appropriateness. tt� during its initial construction phase. These items were cut along with other facilities because of bid Capital Improvement Program Tovm of Carrboro Page 2 - 13• Project: This project serves the northern area of Carrboro with a park that will meet the demand IIIW MO 1 for additional recreational services. c: :_. Project Description: This project will satisfy the PROJECT COST ESTIIt ,-I demand for outdoor recreation services in the north- ELEMENTS FY99-20 Fr2o-Dl FYOI-02 FYOI-03 FY03-04 FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT area of Carrboro. A community ark Planning/ArchlEng $36s,I00 $365,100 ern geographic- tY P Land/Row s 1,500,000 s 1,500,000 will allow for the development of more intensive Construction S3,651.600 S3,651,000 facilities with light versus the smaller neighborhood Equip/Furnishing s- Other $943,207 $843,207 park types. This project would provide additional ath- Contingencies S S letic fields, play equipment areas and picnic areas_ TOTAL s1,500,000 s- s- s- :s- s4,859,307 s6,359,307 Define problem: The population of the northern FUNDING SOURCES REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY20-01 F7Y01-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 FY04-OS AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT Carrboro community has increased over the last ten to Installment Financing $1,500,000 S1,500,0W fifieen.years. There is a need for a recreation facility GO Bond $4,359,307 $4,859.307 to accommodate the growth in this area. It has Capital Reserves Intergovernmental Revenues become more of a practice for schools to rely on near- General Fund Operating Revenues S- by park sites versus development of school athletic NUscellaneous $- ' facilities. Current facilities at Community Park are TOTAL FUNDING S1,sw,wo S- S- s- S- S4,859,307 $4,359,307 fully used and further development of the park is not possible due to watershed regulations. This limits the OPERATING BUDGET EFF£ P g ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY20-01 FY01-02 FY0243 FY03-Oi FY04-03 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT ability to meet growing demands for outdoor athletic Personnel Costs S156,475 $156,475 programs. Sixty acres of land is needed in a few years Operating and Maintenance s37,000 s37,000 Capital Outlays S213,200 $213,200 to reserve the land for the development of the new' community park during the next ten years_ TOTAL OPERATING COSTS s- s- s- S- $406,67S $406,673 Net Operating Effect S- S- S- S- S-, $406,675 $406.675 New Personnel (FTE) 6.0 • 6.0 The location of service area of a community park would allow for collaborative efforts between Carrboro and Orange County governments to mutual would probably not have a water/pond facility but ly fund a northern community park, which would may include large picnic shelter facilities, soccer serve many county residents who do not reside in the fields, etc. This would allow for the greatest use of incorporated areas of Carrboro. Therefore, the loca- both facilities and providing for varied and extension_ tion may need to be outside of our planning jurisdio- availability of outdoor recreation opportunities. tion. Operating Impact: The Town, in anticipation of hav- Project Alternatives: A stronger relationship with ing full responsibility for maintenance of the park, willl the public school system may alleviate some acreage require six(6)positions,mowers, a tractor, and other need in the dual use of available lands provided for capital equipment and operating costs to maintain park school functions, i.e, parking lots, school athletic grounds.Projected operating costs do not take into fields, etc. account new programs that may be decided upon openo ing of the park. The facility, however, does not inherent Recommended Solution: This park could be similar ly create program cosh. to Anderson Park but could be modified depending on program needs and facilities provided by other juris- dictions. An example would be that the second park Page 2 - 14 Town of Carrboro Capit-al Improvement Program 1c," Jill Project: This project entails the acquisition of land for and the construction of a gymnasium for s. � . the community. an ■s - .��"" ` Project Description: This project entails the acquisi- PROJECT COST ESTIMATES tion of land for and development of a gymnasium ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY20-01 FYOI-02 FY02-03 FY03-04 Ft'04-OS AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT .inclusive of two basketball courts, meeting room Planning/Areh/F.ng $241,279 $241,279 Land/ROW S200,000 S200,D00 Office and storage spaces. Cosst ue6on $2,412,777 $2.412,777 Equip/Furnishing $217,150 $2I7,150 Other S476,205 $476,205 Define problem: The Town's Comprehensive contingencies $241,279 S24I,278 Recreation and Parks Master.Plan strongly recom- mends that the Town implement this facility. The TOTAL s204,000 S- S• S- s• S3�ga,61a 53,718,681 need for a community center with multipurpose FUNDING SOURCES - rooms, serving both athletic and general programming REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY2041 FY01-ft FY02-03 FY03.04 BY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT InstalltnentNuancing $200,000 53,599,681 13.788,688 needs, was identified as the top priority for Carrboro GO Bond S- by those citizens attending the public input process. Capitsl Rasmes S- IntergovernmenW Revenues S- The proposed community center included two gyms General Fund Oprnting Revenues and multipurpose rooms for general programming. Miscellaneous S- The new Community Center, to be housed TOTAL FUNDING S200,000 5- S- S- S- S3,538,68S 13,7118,688 in the former CwTboro Baptist Church, will met some general programming needs,but will not serve OPERATING BUDGET EFFECTS g p g g ELEMENTS FY99-20 F Y20-01 FY01-02 F'Y02-0J FY03-04 FY04-05 AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT existing athletic programming needs. Personnel Costs $123,804 $123,804 Operxdng and LWatenance $35,890 $35,890 Also identified in the plan are neighborhood centers. CAPitu outl;�ys $7.423 S7,428 To meet this need the gymnasium project includes a TOTAL OPERATING COSTS s- s S- S167,122 5167,122 meetingroom for activities that would serve as a Net Operating Mcd S- S- S- S- $135,122 $135,122 New Persannd (FTE) 2.5 2.5 neighborhood meeting room for the adjacent neigh- borhood in addition to a gymnasium. that the community Operating impact: Primary costs associated with the Mie Recreation and Parks Commission.also requested park site location may need to be farther north than gymnasium include staff to conduct recreation.pro. as part of their annual master plan update that the may be appropriate to locate a recreation gymnasium. grams and to oversee the facility during open flours. Board of Aldermen implement this facility as a top Minimal staffing levels require 2.5 permanent post- priority in the overall context of need for outdoor and Recommended Solution: A recreation gymnasium tions including a facilities operations officer, account- indoor recreation facilities. The town presently uses could be physically located on potential sites for a fire ' ing clerk, a part-time facility specialist as well as all accessible gymnasiums and large multi-purpose substation, public works site, or other town and or part-time program and facility supervisors. Included rooms of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools for public school projects. The location would be in the with Ongoing operating costs associated with operat• athletic programming. Town's northern planning area because of less expels , ing a facility, a significant portion of operating costs sive land values than in town. Four acres of land will be needed for major repairs and renovations Project Alternatives: This project was initially con- needs to be purchased in the next few years to reserve including refinishing the floors, replacing worn carpet sidered to be a part of a northem community park space for the construction of the gymnasium. and repairing other routine facility damages. This would enable a reduction in land cost and posse Construction of the facility is scheduled for FY04-05 ble dual use of some facilities, i.e.parking, etc. In and beyond. Upon construction of the facility, athla requesting consideration of using Orange County Park ie programming will be expanded. Bond Referendum Funds to support the acquisition of land for a northern community park, it is anticipated Capital Improvement Program Toir-m of Carrboro Page 2- 15 Project: This project will create trails along major creeks in Carrboro. These trails will also link communities and parks. ` '` j � Project Description: The objective of this project is PROJECT COST ESTINIATES to provide a system of trials along major creeks in ELEMENTS FY99-20 FY20-01 FY01-02 FY0243 FY0" FYC"S AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT Planning/A.rcb/Eng S_ Carrboro's Planning Area and to coordinate these L2nd/ROW S_ improvements to link with existing and planned trails Construction $2,997,952 $2,997,952 in Chapel Hill and Orange County and to link neigh- OOther urn'slnng S borhoods and park facilities. Contingencies S- TOTAL; S- S- S- S- S_ 52,997,952 S2,997,952 Define Problem: The town has.acquired a number of properties or public access easements along major FUNDING SOURCES REVENUE SOURCE FY99-20 FY20-01 FYCI-02 FY0243 FY03-04 FY04-0S AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT creek corridors and has adopted as an element of the InstallmcutFinancing $- Parks and Recreation Master Plan a plan for green- GO Bond S2.997.952 $2.997,952 If the town wishes to establish a stem of Capital Agues s- ways.• $Y Intergovernmental Revenues ` S- trails along these corridors then the activities pro- Gcnaal Fund Opazting Revenues S- posed by this project should be implemented. rJtscenaaeons TOTAL FUNDING S- 5- S_ S- S- S2,997,952 S2,997,952 Project Alternatives: An alternative to creating a OPERATING BUDGET EFFE CIl system of greenways is to create selected linear parks ELEMENTS FY99-38 'FY20-01 FY01-01 FY02-03 'FY03-04 FYO"S AND BEYOND TOTAL PROJECT or to simply continue without greenway facilities. In Personnel Costs S either event the town may wish to continue accepting Opastmg and Maintenance s_ Y P g CapitA Outlays S_ the donation of easements and/or property along It r streams for evironmental protection and flood TOTAL OPERATING COSTS S• s- S_ S- S. S_ major n S- � p Net Operating Effort S- S- S- S- S- S- 5- control purposes. NewPermtnel (FIE) Recommended Solutions: Two separate trail systems are proposed by the"Carrboro Recreation and Parks Comprehensive Master Plan", the"Morgan Creek GR£ENWAYS LOCAL SHARE STATE SHARE Greenway" and the"Bolin Creek Greenway". Tile FY2004-2003 MORGAN CREEK S438,786 so Morgan Creek Greenway is 3 miles in length, con- FY2W: -20os BOLIN CREEK $921,450 so nects with Chapel Hill's system at the Smith Level F�t2oas-2ao7. SUNSET RIVCREEK OHo HOG a6 9SR so Road and continues west to Iink with the University BRANCH (BOLIN CREEK AT HORACE WILLIAMS TO SUNSET Lake Property. The Bolin Creek Greenway system CREEK SUBDIVISION FY2009-201O -BOLIN CREEK 33581753 so also has the potential to link with Chapel Hills system (HOGA.N FARM TO UNION GROVE CH:ROAD) and will eventually stretch 7 miles throughout FY2010-2011 JOKES CREEK S392,010 so BRANCH(BOLIN CREEK AT HOGAN FARMS TO EUBANKS Carrboro's northern planning area. The implements- ROAD) tion of the following project activities will provide. the town with a primary greenway system. GREENwAYS s2,99�,9sz so nel for added security.-The cost will vary depending . Operating Impact: The creation of a greenway sys- on how greenway is designed. (i,e. paved or tem will over time require additional personnel and unpaved). equipment for maintenance as well as police person Capital Improvement Program Towtl of Carrboro Page 2 - 17 r. - SccnnnaY3� of Capital Projects .F — FYI through Y2004- 05 The Town, due to limited resources over the next five years , must prioritize the capital needs identified in the Capital Improvement Program that was submitted to the Board on November 4 , 19996 ts remain unfunded over the next five years . The following projec �- S 797 , 635 Fire Department Renovations p $ 257000 Fiber Optic Cabling — Seed money for long- range plan a $ 4 , 855 , 315 Outdoor Swimming Pool -- $ 3 ,2421671 Town Hall Renovations $ 72 , 114 Sculpture Project $ 76 , 643 Tree Planting Project $ 2 , 9971952 Greenways �- $ 769 , 341 Local Road Improvements 3627398 Playground Equipment $ 33788 , 688 . Gymnasium $ - 645359 , 307 Northern Community Park $23, 347, 064 TOTAL UNFUNDED Several projects have been modified in scope until future revenue streams can be identified . The projects and their funded scope include : Smith Middle School — Funded initial phase of athletic field construction . 'Town has submitted draft of a formal joint arrangement with the schools and is awaiting its return . Small Park (Hillsborough Road) — Land purchase and design study for future development of the park (in the event that grant funding or other funding becomes available) Public Works Facility - .Land purchase only . Sidewalks At Board � direction, sidewalk fiunding includes contribution to Hannah St. 1sidewalk and fands for a sidewalk on Autumn Drive when a connector road is built Bikeways — Entire project funded ; increased intergovernmental share anticipated for Roberson Place bikepath project Town* Parking Lots — Purchase of one parking lot versus three requested Park and Open Space Expehdituresco CD Town of HillsboroughCD N N m m - Gl tD P ro j ct FY99 FY00 FYO 1 F`02- F` 03 M W 01ch"Per Overlook LO contruction complete-total cost $32,448LD M Murrvy satw Pam co CD Design $85 = Construction estimate - $25,000 River Warne River Viers CWMTF Grant $30,£ $2141000 Grant Administration $62 $10,000 Feasibility Study $20,000 - r z Acquisition,partial $207 m FaI' ew Active Sports Park z Feasibility Study $53 $53000 � r D ' m tJ J�L r�VW0 oa 71 pendix 2 ToW � o{ CbaP elSuPplemeo f ormation PP ��FCTS PRIORITIES 3 ' OR SELECTING CIP FO.� CAP.ITAL IMPR0VEM NTS FUNDING i Priori y # 1 : Projects that have a Council mandate. Priority #2 : Projects that we have a legal requirement to perform or ' complete . Priority #3 : Projects for which we have a binding contractual agreement. Priority # 4 : . Projects that tivould repair . ,or maintain existing Town facilities/infrastructure above and beyond ordinary maintenance . Priority # 5 : Projects involving public safety. Priority # 6 : Projects which are part of an adopted master plan. Priority47 : Other projects . ec�buimended funding through the Capital Repair and Maintenance Fund in 2000 -2005 is as follows : FISCAL YEAR kle- Priority Project =200mi2001 =02 2002 -03 2003-04 2004=05 Appr6priation 'I'O'm Level Project PARKS AND RECREATION AND GREENWAYS Number PWI-6-OU Sidewalk/Bic cle Facilitles 100 , 000 100 ,000 125 , OOU 125 , 000 125 , 000 SO , OOO b25 . U0i) 1 . E Construct sidewalk and bicycle facilities at locations to be selected b > the Council . PRG- 1 -00 Small Park Maintenance Projects 50 , 000 50 ,000 50 , 000 75 , 000 75 ,000 609000 360sO0011 1 P t Regain' and re lace equipment at Town parks. PRG -? -UU Greenwa s ** 93 , 000 95 ,OOU 97 , 000 lU0 ODU lU2 ,000 0 487 ,000 1 E Inn plentent 1998 Greenways Master Plan ollowintpriorities set by the Council. PRG -3 -OO Community Center Renovations. 30 , 000 40 , 000 58 , 000 75 ,000 75 ,000 O 278 * 000 4 AI Reline pool, replace sliding roof with fired roof, replace gent floor, install ventilation system in gylit , re lace g3lin divider, renovate locker roosts and rebuild retainin %valls . ♦ PRG4-00 Hargraves Center Renovations 33 ,000 66 ,000 66 , 00U 66 , U00 66 , 000 0 297 * 000 4 Ivi Renovate attic ,/Ioorin t, ceilings, plaster, tile, ndntdows, Soffit, 11 Ming and drains. Add acoustic panels : ♦ A . D . Clark Pool and Bathhouse 4 M 1' RG -5 -00 T Rehabilitation 30 , 000 60 ,000 601000 60 , 000 60 000 U 2701000 Renovate bathhouse and pool, PRG -6-00 Tenths Court Reconstruction 60 , 000 60 , OU0 60 , OUO 0 U U 180 , OU0 4 M Reconstruct/renovate cot irts at Ephesus, Cedar Falls, Hargraves, and Phillips Parks. TOTAL 396,0 )01 471 ,0001 516 .000 501 ,000 5039000 110 , 000 2 , 497 , 000 Key : M = Maintenance * * ( acludes revenues froin' cell tower leases . Funding reduced by $ 12 ,000/year pending resolution of issues concerning Cleland Ave . pole site . I = Improvement E = Expansion e Items to be financed by 10 year installment plan . Total estimated renovation cost is $ 1 ,3 � 5 , 000 . 2000 -2005 CIP Proposed Funding 7 u CAPITAL REPAID. AND MAINTENANCE ENA.NCE FUND - UNFUNDED PROJECTS 7/ 19 / 00 I go Priority Project FISCAL YEARS 2000-2005 Numbers Type Project PARKS AND RECgrog ATION-rAND : GREE.NyVAYS :: ,;:,> : : ,.... . x.: .., ..y: :4 ';` 14*4 :: : : .: :> .,� :; .`:. S,y «it : e i• Number , r�s:•• •� :' gg grog I MAN At PRG- 6-00 Ballfield Improvements 1160 , 000 over two years , 2001 -02 and 2002-03 . 4 I 1 Description : Reconstruct ballfields #1 and #2 at Cedar Falls Park, Repaving Parking Lots at PRG-7-00 Recreational Facilities 40 , 000 in 2000rog 1 14 NI . Description : Repave Hargraves Park and Parks & Recreation Adininistrative Building arkll7g lots . grotto PRG - 8 - 100 Culbreth Park Playground 35 , 000 in 2000&,w0 1 q 7 E Description : Build playground structure . PRG -9 -00 Umstead Park F25 , 000 in 2000wmg 0 , 7 I Description : Add poured-in place resilient sinface to existing play structure, • . . ...i. . ..go t . : I % ' • . . Y i ' or If I ti s � or I qpro,. . 4 1 to IV I.Ntlt to it t r E• ir t : 7 % go it or t . . or i:;.-r , "i a Amounts are estimates . Key : M = Maintenance/ I = Improvement/ E = Expansion Recommended fu nding tllrougll bond funds in 2000- 2005 is as follows : Funding Schedule Adopted by Town Council PROJECTS BY BOND CATEGORY Funding Funding Funding Phase I Phase II Phase III ( 1997- 98 & ( 1999-00 & (2001 -02 & BOND PROJECTS 1998 -99) 2000-01) 2002 - 03) TOTAL 1996 Streets & 3 . Sidewalks /Bikeways 200 , 000 2001000 100 , 000 500 , 000 1996 Open Space & Greenmra s 1 . Open Space / Greenways 265 , 000 11550r000 11185 , 000 37000 , 000 1996 Parks and 1 . Northern Community Recreation Park 312602000 0 0 34260 , 000 2 . Hargraves Gym 425 , 000 0 0 4259000 3 . Northern Community Center/Pool 0 0 19315 , 000 1 , 315 , 000 TOTALS : 41149 , 000 117505000 21600 , 000 8 , 500 , 000 I pri Reeommended funding through grant/other funds in 2000-2005 is as follows , FISCAL YEAR Priority Project FUNDING 2000- 01 200142 2002-03 2003-04 200445 TOTAL Level Type SOURCE Project PARKS AND RECREATION AND, GREENWAYS Aquatics/Community PRG- 11 -00 Center TO 0 855 ,000 0 0 855 ,000 1 E 1997 Orange Bond Proposed 20, UUU - 30, 000 square foot aquatic and cone nu my center located at Homestead Park. Additional filmls re t tared, PRG - 12-00 Open Space Ac uisition 225 , 000 01 01 0 0 225 , 000 3 E CWMTP . Local Match Purchase of land for open space, greemmys and entranceways , Nos eci c locations identified Southern PRG- 13-00 Community Park 0 895 , 000 0 0 0 8959000 1 E 1997 Orange Bond Improvements to Town owned park property, located south of Southern Village and west of I5-501 , TOTAL 2251000 395 , 000 855 , 000 0 14 0 1 , 975 , 000 7s 40 Appendix 3 Executive Summary 1999 point Master Recreation and Parks ( JMRP ) Report 2 i i • ® i .^i Executive Summary . RePort ofthe Joint Master Recreation and Perks Work Group I June 11 , 1999 Introduction On November 19 , 1997, the Board of Commissioners created a Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group , The Work Group was developed to follow up on two reports : a 1996 Assembly of Governments report " Recreation and Parks Issues in Orange County, NC", and a May 1997 report entitled " Coordination of Parks , and Recreation Services for Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County p tY developed by the area Managers . The charge to the Work Group was to : "Update and modify the Master Recreation and Parks Plan to be a joint long- range capital facilities plan for Orange CountyCarrboro and Chapel hill. . . " P 9 P Alt 'hou h not listed i n g t d n the charge, Town of Hillsborough and OWASA representatives participated in the work group effort: In accomplishing this task . the Work Group was asked to address the following topics : ➢ An update of recreational facilities countywide ➢ An update of local recreation and parks needs ➢ Develop standards for park, facilities and design ' ➢ Joint siting , design and management of school and park sites ➢ Tangible and realistic parkland acquisition goals ➢ Reassess payment- in- lieu of dedication programs (and service area boundaries for programs) ➢ Dedication provisions for greenways in the Joint Planning Area The Work Group began on December 1,7, 1997 . The group met monthly over the next 17 months ( including six months of additional subcommittee work) to . produce a report. While the Work Group reviewing a great deal of research and discussed a wide variety of topics, a summary of the report may best be considered in the following six topical categories : 1 . Where Are We Now? In evaluating the status of recreation and parks in the County, the Work Group created two committees . The Resource Inventory Committee worked during the spring and summer of 1998 • to develop a template for tracking all existing recreational facilities, and discuss a map or brochure to convey these facilities to ' a the public, The inventory of facilities ( including quasi - public and private "fee- based " locations) is included as Appendix C to the report. The inventory would be maintained for future use, and contains information on the type of activities available at each location . The Needs Assessment Committee met during the spring and summer of 1998 to update recreation and parks needs from each jurisdiction . These needs are found on pages 4-7 of the report, and run the gamut from active recreation facilities to community parks, greenways and " low- impact" recreation . In summary, the rima needs identified for each ' urisdiction were : 7Carrboro77777 Acquire/develop Northern Community Park, community • mnasium * Chapel Hill Complete Northern Community Park, Southern Communitv Park Hillsborough River Walk Fairview Park Occoneechee Park " Orange ' County Complete Efland-Cheeks Park, Northern Human Services Center Park, acquire parkland in Bingham/ Little River Tw s An evaluation of previous bonds and projects constructed with those monies is also provided on pages 740 of the document. A summary of needs appears on page 19 , The Work Group discussed the concept of a Countywide set of standards for facilities and park design . The development of a common set of standards was recognized as important, but because of time considerations was deferred by the Work Group , Recommendation B on page 35 addresses this topic. 2 . Where Do We Go From Here With knowledge of needs and facilities, the Work Group then turned its attention to future concerns . One such area was a set of goals and criteria for future land acquisition and facility sitings . In general , the goals and criteria ( pages 12- i4) encourage joint siting of schools and parks, preservation of resources in conjunction with parks development, awareness of environmentally-sensitive lands, the existence of matching funds, considering the intensity of use, and locations for linear parks . The work of the Schools and Land Use Councils was recognized as an important piece of the recreation picture, and the idea of joint management of school and park sites (as well as possible joint acquisition ) is a theme throughout the report. One topic that the report notes ' regards impediments to . locating new active recreation facilities . These impediments exist primarily in the context of lighting , intensity, traffic and noise . In defining both active and low- impact, recreation , it is 4' important to be consistent with surrounding land uses . Ideas on ways to mitigate the impacts of larger active facilities include co- location of schools and parks, combining active and low- impact recreation in larger park settings to buffer residential areas, and the need for a proactive land . acquisition program to purchase lands for long -term use as parks (and/or schools) .. The potential for coordinating parks planning exists beyond the scope of the local governments involved in this effort. In particular, the report ' notes the significant potential for coordination with UNC, OWASA and Duke University in meeting j long -term needs of mutual interest. While UNC provides many facilities used by students (and local residents) , there is also an undefined . impact on local recreation facilities from faculty and staff of the University. Programs such as the Carolina Outdoor Recreation Center offer a means for sharing resources, and the Potential exists for collaboration on future recreational facilities with UNC. Likewise, OWASA currently provides recreation facilities at both University Lake and Cane Creek Reservoir. OWASA holds over 3 ,000 acres of land in the County, some bf which appears to offer the , opportunity for coordinated recreational use . A memo from the OWASA Board (Appendix F) indicates a willingness to discuss certain parcels for future public use . And finally, Duke Forest also provides a recreational resource to County citizens . While concerns about protecting the integrity of the forest resources will be paramount, opportunities exist to work with Duke in the future, particularly in terms of carefully-located trails that fit with the University s plans . Adegluate Provision of Parkland and Natural Corridors identified is to preserve green corridors, One of the most , prominent needs whether in an urban or rural setting . This section of the report addresses the Potential for linking some existing and proposed greenway networks in Chapel Hill , Carrboro and Hillsborough to future parks and " regional open space such • as Eno River State Park and Duke Forest. The importance of existing and future greenways in the Towns is noted , as well as th e existence of a schematic plan for greenways extending from the Chapel Hill/Carrboro area into the Rural Buffer, developed in 1986 as part of the Joint Planning Area Land Use Plan . Wildlife corridors in the rural areas were introduced into County planning efforts through the 1988 Inventory of Natural Areas and Wildlife Habitat, and are important to the overall County and regional ecosystem as part of the " green infrastructure . " These corridors are undeveloped riparian stream corridors or overland connectors that exist in a natural state . Any trails would exist only as they have evolved over time by use of wildlife or humans . However, as the County and Towns continue to grow, it will become important to link Town parks to regional corridors such as Eno River State Park, nodes of open space such as Duke Forest, and future County parks and open space . Linking future rural parks and open space to Town parks via a few unpaved trails could greatly expand low-impact recreational opportunities . The identification of strategic corridors that might tie together these recreation facilities is suggested as a practical long -term goal . Using criteria * and a classification scheme, the potential for a select few woodland trails as part of a Countywide ( and eventually) regional corridor scheme is noted . Three examples of such trail links are offered (two within the Towns or Rural Buffer, one in the rural areas . linking Cane Creek and Eno River State Park) are offered . 4 . Coordinated Land Acquisition for Parks The 1996 and 1997 reports point to the need for coordinated capital funding , and this is one of the goals of this project. In discussing parks needs and goals, the Work Group placed a strong emphasis on the need to begin land acquisition , for long -term park needs now. Orange County has taken steps in 1999 to create a mechanism that could be ° used in this fashion . The new Department of Environment and Resource Conservation began operation on January 4, with a primary focus on acquisition/easements of critical land resources . A Land Acquisition Program for Orange County is currently being developed for discussion in the fall of 1999 . This program will develop and/or use inventories, criteria and a management structure for the acquisition and stewardship of . land resources deemed critical to the public interest, working with other existing land trusts and entities . The program will involve the preservation of natural areas and wildlife habitat, farmland, riparian buffers, and the acquisition of lands for long -term parks use . The County is hiring a Land Resources Conservation Manager, with expertise in site evaluation and land acquisition this summer . This position will coordinate land acquisition efforts, and - would use the criteria developed in the Master Recreation and Parks effort to evaluate land purchases for parks ( please see the Recommendations section for additional details) . The outline of the Land Resource Acquisition Program may be found in the report on page 26 . Funding for long -term parkland acquisition would likely involve local bonds and allocations, and grants from programs such as the state Parks and Recreation Trust Fund . Information on this program is provided on pages 27-28 . 5. Payment- in - Lieu Progr� ams All of the jurisdictions , in the County - have provisions in their development ordinances addressing dedication or provision of recreation facilities . Carrboro and Orange County also have payment-in - lieu of dedication programs , which allows for the payment of a fee based on the number of lots in lieu of providing recreation facilities . Orange County hasA special legislation that would allow for Y Si I the use of an impact fee for public uses including recreation but this proviso p 9 p o has not been utilized to date . As of 1999 , Carrboro has collected $453 , 000 through its payment-in - lieu program . . Orange County currently has $ 488 , 000 available, allocated by four districts in which the money must be spent. The County has also received land dedications totaling 44 acres since 1986, although this land is in small pieces exclusively in Bingham and Chapel Hill Townships , The Work Group found that difficulties exist with the existing payment-in - lieu programs . t The funds must be geographically earmarked and spent within the area collected . They must also be supplemented with matching funds for use . Considerable research was performed to explore programs in other jurisdictions, and a special meeting with Richard Ducker from the Institute of Government was held to review payment-in- lieu possibilities . 6 . Recommendations Using the research and deliberations of 17 months, and with the charge and goals of the project in mind , the Work Group developed nine recommendations, summarized as follows (these recommendations also appear on pages 34=40 ) . A. Create a Parks and Resource Lands Council As we move to coordinate long -term recreation and parks planning , the need for a permanent joint council (to meet quarterly) was identified, building on the useful nature of the Work Group itself. Possible duties might include : ➢ Develop and review standards ➢ Develop future parks bond . proposals ➢ Provide a coordinating mechanism for parks plan updates ➢ Make recommendations on allocations of future bond moneys ➢ Coordinate acquisitions though the County Land Resource Acquisition Program A resolution asking the local boards to create the Parks and Resource Lands Council is attached as Appendix L. B. Inter jurisdictional Standards As previously noted , impediments exist to the creation of common standards that could be used Countywide for recreation and parks facilities . If coordinated funding were pursued , the , need for some coordinated standard would be important. The Parks and Resource Lands Council is recommended as a mechanism to accomplish this goal . 8 E C. Joint Siting, Design and Management of School and Park Sites Coordinating efforts and responsibilities with the Schools and Land Use Councils will be important, given the emphasis from both groups on the benefits of joint school/ park development. As discussed in the section on land acquisition , it is recommended that Orange County, with dedicated staff* resources, a program for land acquisition , and a role in school siting , should take the lead role . D. Public/Private Partnerships One of the most exciting prospects is the potential for partnerships . Coordination between the local governments on future parks, such as a large district park between Hillsborough and Chapel Hill/Carrboro , will be paramount. Opportunities also exist with OWASA, and it is recommended that the Parks and Resource Lands Council work to identify properties for partnership and meet to explore these possibilities . Coordination with UNC on future parks also appears practical and should be pursued . While Duke Forest is a different type of recreational entity, it plays . an important role in the County's open space network and future discussion of less-sensitive portions of the Forest as links in the open space network should be pursued . Finally, opportunities for coordination with the state, other land trusts and private firms offer many possibilities for future needs . E. Joint Capital Facilities Planning / Coordinated Land Acquisition A meeting of the Managers of each jurisdiction is recommended to develop a plan for coordinating long -term land acquisition . With land prices continuing . to escalate and little land available for parks within the Town jurisdictions, action is needed now to identify and acquire future park sites . Use of the individual Capital Improvement Plans could be a fundamental part of this funding mechanism . By timing and matching fund availability, the Towns and County will be - able to work together more effectively, with the County serving in a lead role in slte identification and acquisition , working with the Parks and Resource Lands Council and the individual elected boards . F Open Facilities Policy In the spirit of inter-governmental coordination , the Work Group feels that. all County citizens should have the opportunity to use facilities within the County, regardless of their jurisdiction of residence . Attempts to restrict use will be cumbersome administratively and not constructive in the collaborative future of parks planning . A resolution to this end for consideration by the elected boards is found as Appendix F . Pursuit of a similar policy with UNC and OWASA is recommended , as is a review of hours of operation at Cane Creek/University Lake , G. Payment-in-Lieu Changes After considerable discussion and review, the Work Group finds that the existing payment-in - lieu programs aret not likely to produce sufficient funds to meet long - 8r i term needs , It is recommended that Orange County and Carrboro develop plans to match other funding with the current payment- in -lieu funds to use these j resources . Even with its limitations, the existing payment in- lieu program should be kept and modified where possible . The potential for an impact fee or impact tax should be explored , using existing legislation . i H. Address Existing Needs While more thorough standards are needed , a population- based standard from the 1996 Assembly of Governments report was used to determine needs for parklands . Using this standard , the County as a whole has , a current deficit of 64� 5 acres of parkland . With expected population growth , this is County and Towns combined with have a deficit of 1, 265 acres by the year 2025 . Based on average land sales (weighted for urban and rural lands) . and existing bond funds, the cost of purchasing lands to erase the long -term deficit is $ 10 . 12 million in 1999. dollars . Since this will unquestionably rise in the future, the Work Group again recommends immediate action in terms of land acquisitions . L Use of Current Funds and Future Funding Needs While it may be more practical to develop recreation facilities over time as the population increases, a more- proactive approach to land acquisition is needed to identify and purchase sites that offer both active and low-impact recreation potential . Matching funds from the different jurisdictions (coordinated through the aforementioned joint capital funding mechanism) should be an important component, and an acreage threshold and additional standards for joint . school/ park sites are also warranted . To address long -term needs, the Work Group recommends that the following actions occur : ➢ The remaining $ 2 . 89 million for land acquisition from the County parks bond should be used for acquisition of lands identified as sites for long -term acquisition as soon as possible . ➢ The remainder # of the $ 10 million in long -term land acquisition should be addressed through an $ 8 Million parks bond . placed before the voters in November 2000 , The Parks and Resource Lands Council should develop the specifics of the bond proposal . r ' M Q a 4 i I I I i i I Appendmix 4 Comparison of CI Schedule All r � sd c i tion ' t� 91 Comparison of Capital Investment/ Improvements Plan Timetables Orange County Hillsborough * Chapel Hill Carrboro CIP Kick - Off Early. October December 1 November 1 Mid - Nov/ December Requests due from Early December Mid -January Mid - December February/March Departments CIP Presentation to Board Mid - March Mid - Late March ' April February/Marc h CIP Public Hearing_ Aril Mid - Late May Early- Mid May May CIP Adoption June (along with June June (along w/ June Annual Budget Budget) Adoption ) The Towns of Hillsborough and Carrboro do not have separate CIP submission timetables ; both municipalities have the CIP and the annual operating budget process kick-off at the same time and requests are due at the same time . b 9 I� Appendix 5 � Memoranda of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning ( Schools/ Land Use Councils ) 2 ( 1 of 4) DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR PROVIDING COORDINATED SITE AND FACILITY PLANNING This agreement between the Orange County and Chapel Hill / Carrboro Boards of Education and . the governing Boards of Orange County and the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough is intended to establish and implement a coordinated site and facility planning process for schools and compatible government facilities. The purpose of the coordinated planning process is to share : information among the parties to the agreement; optimize the collocation and use of schools and other public facilities in a way that builds community, provides public services where they are most needed, assures the compatibility of collocated services, and efficiently uses public resources. This agreement recognizes the existence of two school districts - the Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District and the Orange County School District - and a Schools and Land Use Council for each district. Decisions on collocation of facilities in the Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District may 4 involve the Chapel Hill/Carrboro Board of Education and any or all of the following units of local Hi the Town of Carrboro, and Orange . County. Decisions on government: the Town of Chapel H collocation of facilities in the Orange County School District may involve the Orange County Board of Education and one, or both, of the following units of local government: the Town of Hillsborough and Orange County. Wherever possible, agreement/cooperation across school district lines shall be pursued. To fiuther these goals, the County Orange and el IEIV * Carrboro Boards of Education and the tY Chapel governing Boards of Orange County and* the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough do hereby agree to the following separate and shared responsibilities for coordinated facility planning to the extent that it does not delay time critical construction of either school or government facilities. These statements of responsibilities are intended to be consistent with aJ1 applicable laws lations ; where they are not, they are superseded by those applicable laws and regulations. and regu Specifically, this agreement is ' not intended to supersede the statutory authority of either Board of , Education to. select school sites or to build, maintain or' repair school, facilities or the other governing Boards to approve the amounts to be spent for sites and to determine the funds available for school and county or municipal facilities . This agreement does not supersede local government planning and zoning authority and/or land use planning and zoning requirements. I. The Orange County and/or Chapel HilUCarrboro Boards of Education will : A. Identify appropriate site criteria for public school facilities ; and B . Identify interior and exterior space and exterior site requirements for school facilities ; and C . Begin a - planning process after the internal/external space needs for collocated facilities are determined ; and 3 (2 of 4) D . Recommend school facility priorities, timetables. for completion, and related funding needs % and E . Determine the most appropriate means of managing *the construction, renovation, or repair of public school facilities, within the funding available for these activities ; and F . Whenever possible, address joint collocation of facilities on each parcel of land being considered for development; and G. Assign to the superintendent the responsibility of providing the necessary staffing and other resources to participate in a joint facility planning process . He When joint development (or cooperative development) of facilities are planned for a school site, the Governing Boards of Orange County and/or the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Iillsborough will, as appropriate and in their respective interests : A. Identify appropriate site criteria for .county and municipal government facilities and facilities in which contracted county or municipal services are provided ; and Be Identify interior space and exterior site requirements for county or municipal government facilities and facilities in which contracted county or municipal services are provided ; and C . Determine priorities, timetables for completion, and related funding requirements for county or municipal government facilities ; and D . Determine the most appropriate means of managing the construction, renovation, or repair of county or municipal government facilities ; and E . Determine the funding available for school and county or municipal government facilities ; and F . Assign to the County and/or Town Managers the responsibility of providing the necessary staffing and other resources to participate in a coordinated facility planning process ; and G. Whenever possible, address joint collocation of facilities on each parcel of land being considered for development . III. The Orange County and/or Chapel HilUCarrboro Boards of Education and the governing Boards of Orange County and/or the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and/or Hillsborough will jointly : A. Identify opportunities for collocating compatible public facilities on sites, including facilities for schools, county government, municipal governments, state and federal government, and other public authorities providing complementary public services ; and 9 l" 4 . I (3 of 4) B . Developmaster site laps on which public facilities will be collocated; and P C . Determine the most appropriate means of relating various public services on sites, considering all program needs, and including opportunities for sharing spaces; and i D . Designate a lead -jurisdiction in designing common facilities and include other jurisdictions in design; and E . Determine the most appropriate and effective means of coordinating the construction of shared facilities located on common sites ; and F . Determine the most appropriate and effective means of coordinating maintenance of shared public . facilities located on common sites ; and G. Determine the most appropriate and effective means of scheduling and establishing fees for usage of any shared public facilities on common sites ; and H. Determine the most appropriate and practical means of sharing operating costs for shared public facilities on common sites ; and I . Determine the most appropriate and practical means of providing public ownership of sites and site improvements where public facilities are collocated. Public ownership of sites will be implemented in the following manner; 1 . School sites will be owned in fee simple by the Orange County School Board and/or Hill= Carrboro City Schools Board or Orange County in those instances the Chapel where the financing of the purchase of the site or the financing of the cost of the facilities on the site requires Orange County ownership . 2 . Park sites will be owned in fee simple by the appropriate jurisdiction (i . e. , . County, town) unless otherwise agreed. ill be signed between the appropriate parties setting f A joint lease agreement w orth the conditions of the joint use area and facilities . sLanguage will be included in the agreement to address review and approval of. joint use facilities and who bears the cost of installation/ construction and maintenance. IV . The Orange County and Chapel Hi1UCarrboro Boards of Education and the governing Boards of Orange County and the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Hillsborough will, as appropriate, jointly develop any interlocal agreements or understandings needed to allow participation of other units of government in the collocation of public facilities, V. This Memorandum of Agreement shall become effective upon approval by each governing board and school board . It shall remain in effect until terminated by all parties to it . A party may * not withdraw from this agreement until it holds a public hearing on the proposed withdrawal followed by written notices to the other parties within thirty (30) days of the public hearing . The withdrawal shall be effective one ( 1 ) year following receipt by the other parties of the written notice . Withdrawal of one party shall not invalidate the Memorandum J 5 - (4 of 4) of Agreement with respect to the remaining parties . SCHOOLS AND LAND USE COUNCIL FOR SCHOOLS AND LAND USE COTJNCIL CHAPEL MIJCARRBORO SCHOOL FOR ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT DISTRICT CHAPEL HILWCARRBORO ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION BOARD OF EDUCATION ORANGE COUNTY ORANGE COUNTY TOWN OF CARRBORO TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL H:SCHOOLLUMOADRMMOC gc di Appenx 6 C apel 0tAeMOraoi dum CS / 28100) r ATTACHMENT 1 AGENDA Fr4f MEMORANDUM TO : Mayor and Town Council Y FROM : W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager SUBJECT : Proposed Intergovernmental Parks Work Group j DATE : , August 28 , 2000 The attached resolution would respond to a proposal from the Board of Orange County Commissioners to establish an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group . The attached resolution would stipulate representation of both the Town ' s Parks and Recreation. Commission and Greenways Commission, rather than one or the other. BACKGROUND After receiving comments from the Manager, Parks and Recreation Commission, and Greenways Commission regarding the Joint Master Plan Work Group Report, the Council adopted the Report as a general planning document at itse April 10 , 2000 meeting. At that time the Council . also adopted the following recommendations related to the report : : • Adopt an Open Facilities Policy • Spend the remaining $ 2 . 89 million in Orange County Parks land acquisition bonds for the purchase of park lands ' as soon as possible in order to maximize value of existing funds and options for selection of sites • Promote inter jurisdictional work on joint siting, design, and management of school and park sites across jurisdictions • Pursue partnerships with groups such as OWASA and UNC in order to expand parks ' and recreation opportunities ' • Pursue opportunities for coordinated expenditures for land acquisition on a case-by- case basis until such * time as the idea for more formalized coordination of land acquisition funds can be explored The Council ' s adopted April 10 resolution also orecommends to the County that a Working Committee be established to draft recommendations concerning the following issues . Consider a proposed Inter Governmental Task Force : • Examine the issue of adopting County-wide standards • Investigate how to assure equitable distribution of land purchases and facilities commensurate to contributions 2 • Examine the level of County funding to support the Towns . Parks and Recreation Department operating budget compared to County ' s use of Town programs and facilities A copy of the resolution adopted by the Council on April 10 , 2000 is attached. After the presentation of the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report this spring, County. Board of Commissioner' s Chair Moses Carey wrote to Mayor Waldorf in May to request that the Town Council : I . Adopt a resolution establishing an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group (IP Work Group) and appoint members for a first meeting in September. • 2 . Authorize the Town Manager to meet with his counterparts in the County and other municipalities , for the purpose of developing a report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting on ways that the County and municipalities might coordinate and synchronize capital funding for future park development. A copy of the letter from Chair Moses Carey to Mayor Waldorf is attached . The Intergovernmental Parks . Work Group ' s primary charge would be to continue the information sharing and inventory updating processes of the Joint Master Plan Work Group . The proposed Work Group " s charge also recognizes that parks and recreation standards may vary among the jurisdictions . In June, the Council referred the County requests to the Manager and the Parks and Recreation Commission for reply at the Council ' s August 28 meeting. DISCUSSION We believe that the charge of the proposed Intergovernmental Parks Work Group would continue the positive steps in County-wide cooperation on leisure issues begun by the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group and the completion of its report. We agree .with the report ' s central message that the best hope for a strong parks and recreation program lies in partnerships , be it inter jurisdictional or otherwise . In addition, the completed inventory- of existing facilities and parklands is an important component of the document, which should be updated annually. The proposed IP Work Group could be a logical group to continue this process . We believe the proposed charge for the Work Group is . consistent with the Council ' s comments in its April 10 resolution. The IP Work Group ' s primary charge would be information sharing at least initially, and the Group "s charge acknowledges flexibility for each jurisdiction ' s parks values and standards . The proposed composition of the IP Work Group includes one member and one alternate of the Town ' s Parks and Recreation Commission or Greenways Commission . We believe that the needs of Chapel Hill must be fairly represented by any such body and recommend that one member of both Town commissions be appointed to the IP. Work Group . C 3 �. Q Both an examination of how to assure equitable distribution of land purchases and facilities commensurate to contributions and an examination of the level of County funding to the Town ' s Parks and Recreation Department ' s operating budget compared to the County ' s use of Town programs and facilities are important tasks . We believe these issues can best be initially analyzed by the Manager with his counterparts in the County and other municipalities, for the purpose of developing a report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting. RECOMMENDATION MENDA Manager ' s Recommendation : That the Council adopt the attached resolution, which would establish an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group with representatives from both the Parks and Recreation and Gzeenways Commissions , direct the two Commissions to appoint* representatives for a September meeting, and authorize the Manager to meet with his counterparts in the County and other municipalities for the purpose of developing a report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting. The report would address ways that the County and municipalities might coordinate capital funding for future parks , the distribution of land purchases and facilities commensurate to contributions , and the level of County funding to the Town ' s Parks and Recreation . Department operating budget compared * to County' s use of Town programs and facilities . Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation : The Commission met on August 16 , 2000 , and voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend that the Council request that both the Town ' s Greenways and Parks and Recreation Commissions be represented on the Intergovernmental Parks Work Group . The Commission also believes that the IP Work Group ' s charge should be clarified and should include development of a report to respond to these issues , that all parties should consider accommodations for multi-uses of facilities and land to include lighting, after- hours access to restrooms , phones , and first aid supplies , and that the proposed . Work Group should meet as least 3 times per year. Please see attached the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission. ATTACHMENTS 1 . April 10 , 2000 resolution (p . 5 ) 2 . May 19 , 2000 letter from Moses Carey (p . 7 ) 3 . Memorandum from Parks and Recreation Commission (p . 14) . No I 4 A RESOLUTION RESPONDING TO THE BOARD OF ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ' PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL PARKS WORK GROUP (2000-08-28/R-5) HEREAS , the Mayor received a May 19 , 2000 , correspondence from the Chair 'W of the Orange County Board of Commissioners requesting that the Council adopt a resolution establishing an . Intergovernmental Parks Work Groups and WHEREAS , the Board of Commissioners also requested that the Council appoint Chapel Hill representatives for an initial meeting in September; and WHEREAS , the Board of Commissioners also requested that the Council authorize the Town Manager to meet with his counterparts in the County and other municipalities , for the purpose of developing a report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting on ways that the County and municipalities might coordinate and synchronize capital funding for future parks , and . WHEREAS , these requests were reviewed by the * Manager and the Parks and Recreation Commission, NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council concurs in the establishment of an Intergovernmental Parks Work Group with one j representative each from the Town' s Parks and Recreation and Greenways Commissions included, and directs the two Commissions to appoint representatives to be ready for a first meeting in September. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager is authorized to meet . with his j counterparts in the County and other municipalities, for the purpose of developing a report for the October 30 Assembly of Governments meeting . The report would address ways that the County and municipalities might coordinate capital funding for future parks , the distribution of land purchases and facilities commensurate to contributions , and the level of County funding to the Town ' s Parks and Recreation Department operating budget compared to the County' s use of Town programs and facilities . ,I This the 281h day of August, 2000 . 5 ATTACHMENT 1 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE JOINT MASTER RECREATION AND PARKS PLAN WORK GROUP REPORT AS A GENERAL PLANNING DOCUMENT ! (2000- 0440/R-14a)) WHEREAS , the Town of Chapel Hill Council recognizes the importance of inter jurisdictional coordination and its importance to the provision of recreation and park services and facilities within Orange County; and WHEREAS , representatives from all governmental jurisdictions in Orange County have worked toward and developed a report on issues surrounding the provision of recreation and park services within the County; and WHEREAS , this report provides recommendations for the Chapel Hill Town Council to consider in regard to future improvement of recreation and park services for the Town; and WHEREAS , the Greenways and Parks and Recreation Commissions have reviewed the report and provided comment to the Council; NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the Joint Master Recreation and Parks Flan Work Group Report as a general planning document . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill hereby adopts the following recommendations of the report : • Adoption of an Open Facilities Policy • Expenditure of the remaining $ 2 . 89 million in Orange County Parks land acquisition bonds for the purchase of park lands as soon as possible in order to maximize value of existing funds and options for selection of sites • Inter jurisdictional work on joint siting, design, and management of school and park sites across jurisdictions • Pursuit of partnerships with groups such as OWASA and UNC in order to expand parks and recreation opportunities in the area • Pursuit of opportunities for coordinated expenditures for land acquisition on a case- by- case basis until such time as the idea for more formalized coordination of land acquisition funds can be explored BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council recommends to the County that a Working Committee be established to draft recommendations concerning the following issues : • Consideration of a proposed Inter- Governmental Task Force . • Re- examination of the issue of adopting County-wide standards r � � CIA -IV I x kI It h z i h s # r x e t ; x a - ^i st + x f4 rVA AL at r I Am h h At or Ab I " LI r - mellow , f .. -y - -z6 k At A a1 F ; - A %VV r^ r< ' aAm A 3 or r41 r r y j xr + ;r f 'fi xs ; gIS � � h hs .p- -? f'r a, . r . � 4 I'm t Are : : > s 4A, mor � . T AIR It 11 A it h w a ` z 1� • ° ' 7 ar : �` ' 4 ISr' Arm VISS, VA, "Iry loi y#... ; fR+. cr `,, : €� ^"" All'A �`!', 3Yx``s• v ' t t is tx* i t Y ' ,sr,Y.+ v VIsa r ,,, i } ar So •, A Arms' VIA ,� r -4 a + c �� . ;zatr, 9rr+>'a�'e �rsd j. r } a s y: :z �. �� m •�Yla ` 'is r` t j ell'' G,+r hz i ,art 'xn Y jJ /{5 F 1- t kMT JViNtIVI t ry . 4, # ' '2 + 3 '' •p4`.N ^, .1* ,.d w t 2 * Sc r 3., : `. IISt n r �7 1oA xi yo r r h i _ u b i rz d h a fiv 1 rsr r # ^`IoI zM # sz x , r a wry y�` a z3I 7&� s re ! e ? 'S arr�SY S ' + [ ,l Y. '� �,� .5* . f Pf .�1w#— 'T -> x� '' s» r ., y , J^ 'T ` s ' tw T; �`,"_�''•unt r '_ _ w ��fsya f'h^r ''"rcf f t1 -.Yw tier +, s. sW d : f f. C° '.s �f y ` + j( S-4' : " x+r 6 b x7*" " ' �y1 ' t`" - , *v a ice ,' "' ',@•. jiv'.s+ a `` lot rl?V Y k -z+,t, :" yi'} n, - ycwF ' ss-. '*. ,w5•�,,�j N .a �' •" x_ a 4 , f . �.s $E` e .a. " x z v "'z v� 6 uh -Y..tr 1 K + A "man . at: +. ., , 'f.... ,4MW,S - ,t 7 %� h rtY ., ?� 'mil F a P oIN r� 7.,�„ .fi '[ Ya h ,{�J .sKk� et ��y S r �agn7` f 1.'.. t „ v: ✓« )1, '' ' `#, i))�.�51 'kv. iF,r.X4 1 - t.. )i„h � f XT. s.r . mSu - '> a r,, r' AVAA` ff r�{i°(R AtI- %i4 o fi- wa "• f.� fi 6 , . rir•�, .,s %' ;: » "� s kry'• ' -"n` .,. .. $; : :. e`� ar t'y"m` r�r% 4 ¢ s*f ry ; bT +'• -.�ar� S�F'e...Y...""d� y 'x r a,. ,�,}.f t ±!' .,.y� - "lv-ra *s, 'r .sa s s r fit- ..r..r.k - ` k'IT' ,. � t. - T �4 v f� �` s� ,a. �' f5 3 v� s �' . "`k r f . j,.+ `r�w` y.�-#;f, ; ' yh:+ r z's` sAAtUvfta z i .� yri ..f ^t-r4 � e�31; . $4 ".c ,cY .�,^ , >? �"„ y ,C f `t'.'�+. �Ft '.r oIt. b �"v 'aX t'Y� Ar tr # wn tF fstw " ua ' , * i ! fi '� -� �u �_b y d+ aA It wJ ' ` a r ' 1" zpA a pA ' ,�f+ •1m$ . , �tf '� Yk ,. nab * mot_ rS r` 1 VA J . . . �`- ?,• °`33rAa`t" l ,: L �.,upN. f;"- . , , II fAVIrw roll � si r y. w c'�7„r, ' + . ,t ' Jim a t, t •n - ...k..,a+r* ya+4`t+' .•; t ^: .�#` ` •, Art �asP!S? tt•� s` i.af ' Ni ^b�, � :r E r " h- t "�v. ._ : f+ hq Irv `+1 , "' ok ± k'� „' 'J'r < z $ `a� r' �'f'Y.*i ?T"4.•. "" ':R �. � '" lots teoa „_to�jr '4d '3IF low S �2 r. aOr a a a sui 2 :� a-Nr rVOW r r ' r � x r 35 +� + ' v r. , fir¢ v z Gc +��r E t �� r, x < -+Yca 'rt .tea ., "h5 £ tit fF1'i x { < < Ls �, a r sr : 5 K� y♦. +'S,r F xfi £ c- 3 -° "# op �, r.�-y �� ,ArT _::`5•stt+ ` # �£ . ., k '. f, '° ,tiq' a ttTi`k't' 7 r�"'All , -3v� iIt rz<' '' itvs sf .... :� .r`, Y- 3� . `+:., > i; + i _"'.s' _ k` , ' a .b. k ^`, , 4 'it 'y+�3i.4."F*''- .Y f . F.;_ u T.. . • • • Arm • J, • • ' 0 • I ' • • i • orm . / / a / / , . / / / / AP / all • . . . / 1 REPORT TO THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM THE SOCCER SYMPOSIUM TASK FORCE Background Over the last three decades , there has been growing interest and participation in the sport of soccer in Orange County . Spurred by the development of instructional programs and league play , inspired by the unmatched success of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill women ' s soccer program , and boosted by new immigrants to the area for whom soccer is an integral part of the culture , competition has intensified for the use of limited fields within the county . In the fall of 1999 , the Orange County Board of County Commissioners received several requests to address the need for improved soccer facilities . Further, the county ' s Economic Development Commission and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council endorsed the idea of ittee to promote a meeting of various interest groups to discuss establishing an organizing comm soccer interest and needs . Accordingly , in November the Board of County Commissioners authorized the creation of a task force that would be responsible for hosting a soccer symposium at which all interested parties could express their needs and concerns . The working charge of the task force provided a broad framework for discussing the issues at the symposium , including : ■ current private and public soccer resources and facilities ; ■ demand for additional resources by type and location within the county , ■ alternatives for public/private coordination , cooperation and funding for additional resources that are identified ; ■ means for broadening participation ; and ■ the possibility for multi - purpose fields . 0. The Soccer Symposium Task Force was also charged with summarizing and organizing what was presented at the symposium and making recommendations to the Commissioners , to the towns of Carrboro , Chapel Hill and Hillsborough , to the school boards for the Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Schools and the Orange County Schools , and to advisory boards such as the Orange County Economic Development Commission and Recreation and Parks Advisory Council . As specified in the resolution authorizing creation of the task force , membership was to include representatives from at least the following groups: * Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council * Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Commission '" Carrboro Recreation and Parks Commission '` Hillsborough Recreation Board * Orange County Economic Development Commission * Orange County School Board * Chapel Hill - Carrboro School Board * Rainbow Soccer * Durham = Chapel Hill Strikers * Liga Hispana ( now disbanded ) * Carolina United ( now Triangle Futbol ) r- 2 * Carrboro Board of Aldermen * Chapel Hill Town Council * Hillsborough Board of Commissioners * Orange County Board of Commissioners *Three to five interested citizens at- large After an extended recruitment effort directed by the County Clerk ' s office , a total of twenty individuals agreed to serve on the task force . A full list of members and the agenda abstract authorizing creation of the task force are shown in Attachment A . Two task force planning meetings were held in March and the symposium was held on April 26th . After the symposium , the group has held five follow- up meetings of the entire task force , as well as subcommittee meetings dealing with the specific policy issues of access , public/private partnership models and economic development , and inter- league cooperation . Task force members hope that the information and recommendations contained herein will be useful to the Board of County Commissioners in planning for the provision of sports facilities for all the citizens of Orange County . Soccer Symposium Summary As noted previously , the Task Force charge included sponsoring a symposium to disseminate basic information on soccer programs , on available facilities in Orange County , and to solicit input from citizens about their needs and concerns relating to soccer. We briefly summarize each below . Soccer Programs Prior to the symposium , staff (working with representatives of the soccer leagues ) gathered data on existing soccer programs , using a survey instrument shown in Attachment B . The data revealed that there are three major instructional and league programs in which large numbers of Orange County residents participate -- Rainbow Soccer, Carolina United ( now Triangle Futbol ) , and the Durham - Chapel Hill Strikers , Rainbow Soccer has a total of 1 , 600 - 1 , 800 participants per season (fall and spring ) . Approximately 90 percent of these participants are Orange County residents and roughly 97 percent are white . Of the total participants : 20 percent are underage 6 ; 35 percent are & 10 years old , 18 percent are ages 11 - 1 20 4 percent are teens ; and 23 percent are adults . Approximately 70 percent of all participants are male . The program has 6 paid staff and about 225 volunteers . Fees are $ 50 per player (with a reduction for multiple children in the same family and for volunteers ) ; scholarships are available to all that apply . The program uses 4 adult fields owned by UNC (which become 8 youth fields ) , plus two youth fields at a local church and school when available . Triangle Futbol has a -. total of 1 , 000 participants , approximately 35 percent of whom are Orange County residents . All participants are between the ages of 4 and 18 ; about 60 percent of participants are male and 91 percent are white . The program has three paid staff and 40 volunteers . Fees are $ 50 to $ 600 , with 10 scholarships available . The organization uses 15 practice and 8 game fields , all of which are leased . In Orange County , they lease fields , as available , from the4 town of Chapel Hill , and from both school systems ; most practice_ s and games are in other counties . 3 Durhamm,Chapel Hill Strikers has a total of 450 participants , with about 44 percent of these residing in Orange County , Approximately 70 percent of participants are male and 90 percent are white . The program has no paid staff and 50 adult volunteers . Fees average $ 68 per season . The group rents six fields for practices and four for matches ; in Orange County , the Strikers lease Scroggs and Homestead fields . In addition to these larger programs , instructional soccer is offered by the Orange County Recreation and Parks Department and by the Chapel Hill/Carrboro YMCA. Orange County Recreation and Parks offers Micro Soccer in the fall to Orange County residents aged 12 and under ; the program had 143 participants last fall and currently has 166 enrolled . In 1999 , . approximately 54 percent were females and 91 percent were white . The program has two paid staff and 12 volunteers and uses a softball field at the Northern Recreation Center. Fees are $ 30 per person . The Chapel Hilt -Carrboro YMCA offers lessons and league play to approximately 300400 youth in Fall and Spring . The cost is $ 55 for members and $ 70 for nonmembers . Available Facilities The task force also completed an inventory of all available soccer fields in Orange County , as shown in Table 1 . The inventory reveals a severe shortage of fields available for public use . As of mid -summer 2000 , there is only one full -size field that is generally open to the public , and this field ( at Efland Cheeks Community Center) is reserved at times for recreation department programs . The other three fields currently open to the public on a regular basis are one mid - sized , multi - purpose field ( at Hank Anderson Park ) , one partial/mid - sized field ( at Scroggs Elementary School ) , and one undeveloped play area ( at the Northern Human Services Center) . Another full -size field that will be available to the public is under development with funds from the county and the town of Carrboro at the site of the Smith Middle School ; this field will not be available until Fall , 2002 . There are five privately owned or leased full -sized soccer fields available for play , including one at the Kantner School and four fields at Glen Lennox which are owned by the University of North ear basis to Rainbow Soccer . Private entities own four Carolina and leased on a to ear b � Y Y partial/ mid -sized fields and one undeveloped play area . Only one of these nine privately controlled fields is generally available to the public . The remaining soccer fields in the county are owned by the school systems , which have : ■ three full-sized soccer fields currently constructed and another two under development ; ■ nine multi - purpose/football fields ; and ■ two partial/mid -size fields . Because the school systems operate soccer in both Spring and Fall , and for both boys and girls , the school fields are generally not open to the public . Eleven of the school -owned soccer fields are conditionally available , either by contracted use or prior arrangement , solely at the discretion of the school principal and athletic staff. Looking at the entire inventory of soccer fields , apart from the issue of public availability , research conducted by the Task Force also showed that fields are not in good shape . Of the thirty fields ( two of which are simply level playing areas ) in the county , most are overused , only fourteen are irrigated , and only five currently have lights . TABLE 1 4 INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE SOCCER FIELDS IN ORANGE COUNTY , 2000 Full Multipurpose/ : Partial/ Undeveloped ' Open ' Conditional ` irrigated Lights Football Mid -Sized Jo Public j Use by I ! Public i PUBLIC FIELDS I I I 1 COUNTY RECREATION & PARKS Northern Human Services Center Efland - Cheeks Community & 1 School Park I CARRBORO RECREATION & PARKS Hank Anderson Park ( C ' boro ) Smith Middle School - 1 Carrboro/Orange County CHAPEL HILL PARKS & RECREATION Homestead Community Park - - 2 - - 2 2 2 Scroggs Elementary TOTAL PUBLIC FIELDS 1 /1 * 1 3 1 4/1 * 2 4/1 * 3/2* PRIVATE FIELDS PRIVATELY OWNED OR LEASED Kantner School ( St . Marys ) 1 - 2 - - YMCA UNC at Glen Lennox ( Rainbow) 4 - - - - - 3 - Orange United Methodist Church - - 1 1 - 2 - - Ephesus Church TOTAL PRIVATE FIELDS 5 0 4 1 1 5 3 0 * Under Development ** Owned /operated jointly by school and recreation department Definitions. Full Full - sized Soccer Field ( Can be converted to 2 youth / mid -sized fields ) Partial Not full -sized , can be used for soccer Open to public Available for general use if not reserved for recreation program or leagues Conditional Use Certain entities have first priority fn : Soccer Grid 8/31 /2000 TABLE I '° b 1 INVENTORY OF AVAILABLE SOCCER FIELDS IN ORANGE COUNTY , 2000 p , 2 Full Multipurpose/ ; Partial / Undeveloped ; Open ': Conditional Irrigated Lights Football : Mid - Sized ; To Public ; Use by Public SCHOOL FIELDS CHAPEL HILL/CARRBORO CITY SCHOOLS Chapel Hill High School 1 1 - - - - 2 i 1 East Chapel Hill High School - 1 2 - - 3 1 3 1 Phillips Middle School - 1 _ - - - 1 I 1 - McDougle Middle School - 1 - - - 1 1 - Culberth Middle School - 2 - - - 2 - - Lincoln Center Smith Middle School -- Carrboro 1 * - - - - 1 * 1 * 1 ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOLS Orange High -Stanford Middle Sch 1 1 Hillsborough Elementary Stanback Middle School - 1 - - - 1 - - New Orange High 1 * - - - - 1 * 1 * 1 TOTAL SCHOOL FIELDS 3/2* 9 2 0 0 11 /2* 7/2* 2/3* TOTAL ALL FIELDS 9/3* 10 9 2 5/1 * 18/2* 1413 5/5* * Under Development Definitions: Full Full -sized Soccer Field ( Can be converted to 2 youth / mid -sized fields ) Partial Not full -sized , can be used for soccer Open to public Available for general use if not reserved for recreation program or leagues Conditional Use Certain entities have first priority fn : Soccer Grid 8/31 /2000 { 6 Citizen Input In order to solicit citizen input and participation in the Soccer Symposium , the Task Force developed a flyer that served the dual purposes of advertising the symposium and permitting individuals to express their interest in and support for soccer ( see Attachment C ) . These were distributed by task force members in the weeks prior to the . symposium . Press releases were also developed and sent to the media to encourage citizen participation at the symposium . Task Force members returned flyers containing a total of 598 names . Of these 598 individuals , 496 expressed interest in youth soccer and 156 expressed interest in adult soccer. Specific comments included the following . ■ Create more/better fields with lights ■ Would improve soccer standards at OHS and help win games ■ Would help people improve their soccer skills ■ More practice makes for better skills ■ Free up practice/game space for other team sports ■ To have a place of your own to be proud of ■ ( It ) can be more convenient for soccer players - reduce travel ■ Need more sports facilities for youth in Hillsborough and Northern Orange County ■ Spend money now for the future of youth sports ■ People are interested in playing sports - don ' t deny them that ■ I have always wanted to play soccer in a real soccer complex ■ Orange County deserves the same support and facilities as other systems ■ Soccer promotes health , cooperation and teamwork - requires little equipment and appeals to all economic levels ■ Need safer and better maintained fields -- will reduce injury and save knees ■ Numerous youth comments ( " Soccer kicks grass , " " Soccer is cool , " " Soccer rules " ) ■ More grass on fields ■ Put $ to good use ■ Indoor soccer dome ■ Soccer is critical to the character and integration of the community ■ Just don 't raise taxes to do this As mentioned previously , the symposium was held the evening of Wednesday , April 26th at the A . L . Stanback Middle School . ( The program is shown in Attachment D . ) Rick Kennedy , a member of the Orange County School Board whose interest and preliminary research helped lead to the establishment of the task force , moderated the program . Opening remarks were presented by the following elected officials , who spoke about how they got involved with this effort : Jim Ward , Chapel Hill Town Council Diana McDuffee , Carrboro Board of Aldermen Mark Sheridan , Hillsborough Board of Commissioners Barry Jacobs , Orange County Board of Commissioners Other elected officials in attendance at the symposium included Commissioner Moses Carey , Commissioner Steve Halkiotis , and Carrboro Alderman Jacquie Gist . Fj . Anson Dorrance , coach of the multiple NCAA champion UNC - CH women ' s soccer team , presented a brief history of soccer in the region . According to Dorrance , soccer in Orange County dates to the birth of Rainbow Soccer in the early 1970 ' s . In fact , as Dorrance noted , " . . . all soccer in the state of North Carolina stems from Chapel Hill . " But , he argued , the local preeminence has faded as the Capital Area Soccer League and other organizations developed the practice fields and, game complexes to support the growing demand . He noted that the annual " Raleigh Shoot Out" soccer tournament generates $ 6 . 5 million direct )9 g y ( in hotel and restaurant revenues , admissions , visitor purchases , etc ) and another $ 2 . 5 million indirectly ( in support services for the event) . " Chapel Hill and Orange County have name recognition as pioneers in the field of soccer , " Dorrance noted . " Now we need to step up and build fields to support the game . " He argued that the sport has tremendous economic development impact potential and that as many fields as could be built would be fully utilized . Following Dorrance and the presentation of information gathered to date , a panel of representatives from the soccer leagues addressed the audience , which included approximately 75 attendees , Patrick Sullivan , filling in for Vicky Brawley of Rainbow Soccer , noted that , in the past , the county has not been asked to address soccer needs because private organizations have been filling the gap . That is no longer feasible ; given current demand , Rainbow has an immediate need for 15 -20 practice fields . Fred Kull H spoke on behalf of the Durham /Chapel el it p p I Strikers .. He noted that the Strikers rent fields wherever available , spending approximately $ 20 , 000 per year on rentals and contributions to maintenance . He stated that the critical need is for lighted practice fields available between the hours of 6 p . m . and 8 * 30 . He also noted that there are no fields of high enough quality to serve as match fields in either Orange or Durham County , George Alley spoke for Carolina United ( now Triangle Futbol ) . Alley pointed out that the Capital Area Soccer League has become the " sole proprietor . of soccer in Wake County . While not supporting the creation of one single entity , Alley argued that the private soccer groups in the county should be given a chance to develop a tournament complex , consisting of & 16 fields . He suggested that the county might assist in that effort by providing the land . Mauricio Castro spoke on behalf of various Latino teams in the county -- teams no longer organized as a league . According to Castro , there is such a tremendous demand for fields that they all tend to be in very poor shape from overuse . He stated that there are & 7 Latino teams in the county and that they are forced to drive long distances to play ( if, indeed , they have access to a car) . He also stated that there are about 40 Hispanic teams in Chatham County . According to Castro , soccer can help bridge cultures through sport and provides an inexpensive recreational opportunity . The last portion of the program was an open mike session , in which audience members were permitted to express their views on the sport . One speaker pointed out that the statistics on participation are somewhat misleading because a large number of people ( adults as well as children ) are not in organized soccer programs but still love the game and want to play . Another speaker pointed out that adult women need fields on which to play recreationally . Yet another speaker addressed the fact that he had gotten to know a large number of Latinos through soccer; "These individuals are no longer the other , " he said . He argued that soccer is a democratic sport because it doesn ' t require a great deal of expensive equipment . 11 � s Commissioner Barry Jacobs concluded the symposium by thanking everyone for participating . He pointed out that the task force represented a broad - based coalition , bringing together the schools , the towns , the county , the private soccer organizations , and the public at large . He noted that a solution to the identified need for additional facilities would require the continued support of all these entities . He also encouraged participants to make their desires for additional soccer facilities known to their elected officials . Recommendations At a meeting held after the Soccer Symposium , task force members concluded that additional work was needed in three areas , and formed subcommittees to develop draft recommendations for the entire group to consider. The three identified areas were . Access Issues — Specifically this subcommittee was charged with identifying ways to make programming available across various racial , ethnic , gender , and age groups . Rick its report is shown in Attachment E . Kennedy chaired this committee ; Models/ Economic Development — This subcommittee was to look at models of public/private partnerships in various locations across the state and region and to estimate the potential economic impact of soccer in Orange County .under select scenarios . Dianne Reid chaired the committee ; its report is shown in Attachment F . Inter- league Cooperation — This subcommittee focused on ways to ensure cooperation among the soccer leagues , including ways to share practice fields and any complex for soccer matches that might be developed . The group also examined public/ private partnership models in relation to cooperative arrangements . Patrick Sullivan chaired this committee ; its report is shown in Attachment G . Based upon the work of the subcommittees and the task force as a whole , the group has reached consensus on the following findings of fact . ➢ Facilities do not currently meet the demand for soccer fields . ➢ Due to the limited number of fields , fields are overused , resulting in poor ( and potentially dangerous ) field conditions . ➢ Latino teams have great difficulty securing fields due to the lack of language fluency , limitations of available transportation , and a lack of knowledge about procedures for securing fields . ➢ . Relative to many other sports , soccer has low equipment costs and is thus relatively inexpensive to play . (As one citizen said at the symposium , "You only need a ball and some level ground . " ) ➢ Soccer deserves promotion because it is a " clean industry" that has positive net economic benefits , while promoting teamwork and a healthy life -style . ➢ Positive economic development impacts ( in terms of tourism expenditures ) result from hosting tournament play . Task force members also conducted research on the average cost of construction for fields , excluding design cost and the cost of land . Based upon data supplied by the Capital Area Soccer League ( CASL ) for the development costs of two fields in Raleigh and twelve proposed fields in the southern part of Wake County , basic field development ( clearing , grading , sedimentation and erosion control , seeding , provision of gravel roads and parking , basic signage , and some landscaping ) appears to average between $ 71 ; 000 and $ 95 , 000 per field ( 1998 dollars ) . In Orange. County , we have actual cost data for development of one full - size field (which is a combination soccer and softball field ) at the Efland - Cheeks Community Center . For this field , costs for clearing , environmental testing , grading , seeding , and storm drainage totaled $ 290 , 000 . The irrigation system cost $ 40 , 000 and lighting with underground wiring ) cost an additional $ 80 , 000 - 100 , 000 . Presumably there - are economies of scale ( lower per unit costs ) in developing multiple fields at one site . We also have budget estimates for the athletic fields at Smith Middle School (where two full - size soccer fields are to be constructed , one exclusively for school use and the other to be available to the public after 4 p . m . ) . According to the budget , the cost of a basic field ( grading , seeding , storm drainage ) is approximately $ 53 , 000 , the cost for irrigation is $ 25 , 00 & per field and the cost for lights is $ 70 , 000 per field . In addition , the Soccer Symposium Task Force reached consensus on the following recommendations : ➢ Fields should be located in a disbursed fashion throughout the county in order to improve accessibility for all and to reduce travel time . ➢ There should be multiple fields at each field site so that parents can drop off children of different ages . 4 . . . ➢ Fields should be irrigated and lighted , and sited in an environmentally- sensitive manner. ➢ A promising model for field development is one in which public entities provide basic fields and soccer organizations finish the facilities . ➢ A public- private partnership should be established to explore development of a soccer complex in Orange County , with established soccer interests to take the lead in fundraising for construction . ➢ All soccer organizations in the county should collaborate to provide coordinated soccer programming throughout the county . In this scenario , the county would supply facilities , the private organizations would provide programming . ➢ If county funding is involved , including providing land , scholarships will have to be available to county residents who cannot afford programming fees . ➢ Consistent with the Master Recreation and Parks Work Group Report , the acquisition of land for soccer fields should be included in active recreational areas developed pursuant to future bond issues . As mentioned previously , the Soccer Symposium Task Force is committed to help provide ilities for all county residents . Further , the members of the Task Force stand adequate sports fac ready to assist the Commissioners in further refining and /or implementing the findings and recommendations contained herein . AttaNnent A Soccer Symposium Task Force Members George Alley Victoria Brawley Dan Costa 431 US Hwy 70A East 915 Greenwood Road 311 Avalon Court Hillsborough , NC 27278 Chapel Hill , NC 27514 Chapel Hill , NC 27514 Representing Carolina United Representing Rainbow Soccer Representing Chapel Hill Recreation Board Anson Dorrance Juan Echeverria Kenneth Hardy P . O . Box 2126 321 Hawkins Road 6632 Mebane Oaks Road Chapel Hill , NC 27515 Cedar Grove , NC 27231 Mebane, NC 27302 Representing At- Large Representing Liga Hispana Representing At- Large Newton Holden George Horton John Hunter 311 Stagg Road 4500 Schley Road 2515 Shadetree Road Hillsborough , NC 27278 Hillsborough , NC 27278 Hillsborough , NC 27278 Representing At- Large Representing Economic Development Representing Durham/Chapel Hill Strikers Commission Barry Jacobs Richard Kennedy David Klein 2201 Moorefields Road 1219 Blackwood Mtn , Rd . 111 Butternut Drive - Hillsborough , NC 27278 Chapel Hill , NC 27516 Chapel Hill , NC 27514 Representing County Commissioners Representing Orange County Representing At- Large - School Board Peter Matischak Diana McDuffee Bruce G . Murray 100 Bel Arbor Lane 2226 Pathway Drive 222 Old Fayetteville Rd . E202 Carrboro, NC 27510 Chapel Hill , NC 27516 Carrboro, NC 27510 Representing At- Large Representing Carrboro Board Representing At- Large of Aldermen Marianne Nicholson Mark T. Sheridan Patrick M . Sullivan 431 S . Greensboro Street P . O . Box 248 8108 Reynard Road Carrboro, NC 27510 Hillsborough , NC 27278 Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Representing Carrboro Recreation Representing Hillsborough Board Representing Recreation & Parks Advisory of Commissioners Council James L . Ward Fred Kull Staff to Task Force 131 Windsor .Circle 506 Brookwood Drive Dennis Joines, Director Chapel Hill , NC 27516 Durham , NC 27707 Carrboro Recreation Department Representing Chapel Hill Town Council Representing Durham/Chapel Hill Strikers Bob Jones, Director Orange County Recreation & Parks Commission Dianne Reid , Director Orange County Economic Development Commission 1 ��1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF CONMSSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date_ November 3 , 1999 Action Agenda Item No. SUBJECT : Creation of a Task Force to Organize a Soccer Symposium i DEPARTMENT : Recreation and Parks PUBLIC 1W, LMG; (YIN) No Economic Development Commission ATTACRU{EITk1a) INFORMATION CONTACT: Commissioner Barry Jacobs TELEPHONE NUM 3ERS V Hillsborough 7324181 Chapel Hill 9684501 Durham 68&7331 Mebane 336-227 2031 PURPOSE : To consider establishing a charge for, and appointing a task force to organize and focus community interest in promoting soccer and soccer facilities. BACKGROUND : Considerable anecdotal information indicates there is great interest in playing soccer in Orange County. There are a number of leagues operating within the county, and sporadic . efforts have been made to secure fields by these leagues. The Board of County Commissioners recently received a letter from Rick Kennedy, a contended crtmzen and member of the Orange County Board of Education, . outlining the demand for improved soc= facilities, and earlier this month the Catrboro Board of Aldermen forwarded a request to the county to address this need. While the Master Pa rks and Recreation Plan spoke to general needs, it did not focus on provision of facilities to matt county demand for specific sports facilities. Both the co unty' s Economic Development Cnm,r ; zc; on and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Council endorse the idea of establishing an organizing committee to promote a meeting of various interest groups to discuss soccer interest and needs. Among the issues to be explored are what facilities are currently available, what is needed, where and how much is the demand, what is the possibility of diverse soccer leagues working together, what sorts of arrangements are required to share usage of fields, and what private and public funding sources are available. Since many soccer players must currently leave the county or otherwise travel great distances to Participate, the possible provision of additional soccer facilities in Orange County is seen as meeting economic development as wcli as recreational needs. 12 Therefore, the Board of County Commissioners is requested to authorize creation of a task force (with a working charge, membership composition, and time line) , that would be responsible for hosting a soccer symposium at which all interested parties could express their needs and concerns. The working charge would provide a broad framework for discussing the issues at the symposium, to include . ( 1 ) current private and public soccer resources and facilities (2) demand for additional resources by type and location within the county (3) alternatives for public/private coordination, cooperation and funding for additional resources that are identified.. (4) possibility for multi purpose fields (screen, baseballlsoflball, football, lacrosse, frisbee, etc.} The task force would also be charged with summarizing and organizing what was presented at the symposium and making recommendations to the Orange County Commissioners, including advisory boards such as the EDC aad RPAC; The towns of Carrboro , Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough; and the school boards for the Chapel Dill-Carrboro City Schools and the Orange County Schools . The committee to organize the meeting and coordinate commtmica#ion should include representatives from at lust the following groups: * Orange County Recreation and Parks Advisory Council * Chapel Hill Recreation Board * Carrboro Recreation Board * Hillsborough Recreation Board * Orange County Economic Development Commission * Orange County School Board * Chapel IEU Caraboro School Board * Rainbow Soccer *Durhaaa-Chapcl Hill Strikers *Liga Hispana * Carolina united - . . * Th= to five interested citizens at4arge * County Commissioners * en FINANCIAL MWAMe The direct financial impact of creating this ad hoc committee will be relatively small. Depending on the organization and complexity of developing a symposium, there could be siPIfiicant allocation of time for one or more county staff members in support of this effort, RECOM ENDATION(S) : If the Board of County Commissioners authorizes the creation of the task force, the working charge, membership composition, and time line would come back at a later meeting for approval . . ` Attachment B INVENTORY OF SOCCER PROGRAMS, RESOURCES, AND FACILITIES IN ORANGE COUNTY The Board of Orange County Commissioners , in response to concerns expressed by citizens , formed a task force to gather information about soccer 'g r Inform r Interest and facilities within the county . The survey below is a component of that effort . j Survey information may be used to formulate Orange County policies regarding soccer and potential public/private partnerships . A completed inventory of soccer programs , resources , and ,I ill be available upon compilation of the survey data. Thanks in advance facilities in Orange County w for your cooperation . Please return by April 14t , 2000 . I . Name of Organization/Association : Contact Person/Title , Mailing Address :, Daytime Phone : Fax : E-Mail : II . Description of your Soccer Program : (Add Attachments if necessary) A . I ?s this anon- rofit organization? . If not how are you organized . p g � Y g How long have you been in operation? B . Do you offer activities other than soccer? Please specify : C . Is your organization associated with any other business or sponsor? If so , please specify : D . Staff information : Male Female White African-American Hispanic Other 1 . Number of volunteer staff: 2 . Number of paid staff: 3 . Salary range of paid staff: i E . Is your program :. Instructional League Play Select F . Season of play : Spring Fall Both G . Participant information : 1 . Total number of participants in your program : 2 . Total number of participants from Orange County : 3 . Age, sex, and race of participants : i Leaee Mad Female White African-American Hispanic t e Under 6 years: Under 10 years . Under 12 years : Teens : Adults , H . List participant fees for youth & adult per season : Youth $ Adult $ Other fees associated with program : $ over 12 � 14 I . Do you provide scholarships ? If so , how many? For what amount ? $ How long have you provided scholarships ? What are criteria for scholarships ? J . What are total seasonal costs ( equipment, travel , fees ) of participating in your program? $ III . Facilities Available : A . How many fields do you use ? Practice Sites Game Sites How many lighted fields do you use ? B . Please give a brief location and description of each field (include whether public, private, county, or school sites) : C . If sites are private, who owns them? D . Do you lease/rent fields from another organization? If so , name agency . Amount of rental fee you pay : $ E . Who maintains each field? F . What type of insurance does your organization have ? What type of insurance do you offer participants ? Thank you again for your participation. Orange County Recreation & Parks Department P . O . Box 8181 Hillsborough, N . C . 27278 919m245 -2660 or (fax) 91M44m3042 Fn : Soccer Inventory Survey Attachment C15 12t , SUPPORT SOCCER7. Come and tell us what you think Orange County Soccer Symposium , April 26 at 7 p . m . A . L . Stanback Middle School Tell Us Now Too : Interest : Name/Address Youth Adult Comments : For more information, contact Orange County Recreation and Parks , 245 - 2660 or 7324181 , ext. 2660 P . O . Box 8181 , Hillsborough, NC 27278 Soccer Symposium Task Force ti Orange County Soccer Last Noyember the Orange County Board of Commissioners authorized the creation of a task force that would be responsible for Symposium hosting a soccer symposium at which all Interested parties could express their needs and concerns. Task Force members included: Patrick Sullivan Orange County Recreation&Parks Advisory Council Dan Costa Chapel Hill Recreation Board Marianne Nicholson Carrboro Recreation Board George Horton Orange County Economic Development Commission Rick Kennedy Orange County School Board Victoria Brawley Rainbow Soccer John Hunter Durham-Chapel Hill Strikers George Alley Carolina United Anson Dorrance At-large Juan Echeverria At-large Kenneth Hardy At-large Newton Holden At-large David Klein At-large Bruce Murray At-large Peter Matischak At-large Diana MCDuffee Carrboro Board of Aldermen James Ward Chapel Hill Town Council Mark Sheridan Hillsborough Board of Commissioners �► � Barry Jacobs Board of County Commissioners D C+ ct 0) Wednesday, April 26 :- A.L. Stanback Middle School m Sponsored by the Orange County Board of Commissioners o:- PROGRAM Welcome and Opening Remarks Moderated by Rick Kennedy, Orange County School Board Speakers Jim Ward, Chapel Hill Town Council Diana McDuffy, Carrboro Board of Aldermen Mark Sheridan, Hillsborough Town Commission Barry Jacobs, Orange County Board of Commissioners Development of Soccer in the Region Anson Dorrance, UNC Women's Soccer Coach Available Facilities, Survey Results Bob Jones, Director of Recreation and Parks Dianne Reid, Economic Development Director Perspectives of Soccer Leagues _ Panel Discussion Open Mike Attendees Closing Remarks Barry Jacobs s Drawing for Door Prize- . tV v Y Attachment Subcommittee on Access Issues : Expanding Participation in Soccer in Orange County Orange County can choose from a number of viable strategies in order to expand the diversity of residents participating in recreational soccer leagues . These strategies include increasing the number of fields and widening their distribution throughout the county ; controlling the costs of participation ; reaching out specifically to minority communities ; adding field lighting to extend hours of usefulness ; improving the coordination of activities ; and decreasing the size of team rosters . This report addresses each of these approaches . Transportation : .Transportation to practice fields is a major problem for many in our community , especially young people and segments of the Latino population . If practices could be held at local school soccer fields , and new practice fields could be built in neighborhoods that are on bus lines , transportation problems could be reduced . Orange Public Transportation could also be enlisted to provide service in certain areas . For the most part , current league play isn 't a realistic option for families with working parents because practice and games .are often during normal working hours . Special consideration should also be given to placing some new fields in the northern part of Orange County . Presently , most residents of northern Orange must travel to Chapel . Hill to play. This creates a situation where travel time is greater than time spent on the field . Cost : The cost of enrollment in a soccer program is often a barrier to participation . Many of the existing leagues charge hundreds of dollars to participate , and even with scholarships the cost is too high for many families . If Orange County could help minimize fees , leagues could attract players who otherwise can ' t participate and currently aren ' t represented . Outreach : The demographic mix might be improved by more active, outreach to minority communities . Working through schools , community organizations , neighborhood resource centers and other established groups could be effective in increasing minority participation . Opportunity Better and more numerous fields would attract players who have either chosen not to play , or have decided to play elsewhere . Many children and adults travel to other counties to find adequate facilities . Lighted fields increase the number of games and practices possible per field . Lighted fields extend playing time and offer a.. chance to many who currently can ' t get to a game or practice due to their daytime responsibilities . Smaller team rosters occasioned by more playing options would mean more time participating and an improved experience , likely attracting more players . As it is now , teams often have more than twenty players , resulting in much sideline time for individuals . 19 AttaW& ment i f2 c. Coordination : Coordination of game times and locations might improve participation by easing the logistical difficulties for families with multiple players , or for players with multiple games . Without coordination , some families must spend a considerable part . of the day shuttling players back and forth . Players with multiple games or players who also coach for other teams often must do the same . New fields should be sized to accommodate a variety of ages and experience levels at the same location . i i �I I IL 3C` 20 Attachment F Subcommittee on Economic Development : Models of Public/ Private Partnerships in Soccer and Estimates of the Sport' s Economic Development Impact The Soccer Symposium Task Force Subcommittee on Economic Development was charged with examining how other areas had capitalized on the growth of soccer to secure economic benefits for the local community and specifically how those areas had developed soccer complexes for tournament play . Over the past two decades , soccer has been the fastest growing sport in America . The pattern holds in North Carolina , and particularly for girls . According to the North Carolina High School Athletic Association , in 1986 , 50 schools had women ' s soccer ; in 1999 , 234 schools had women ' s soccer teams . In most localities , responsibility for the development of ' soccer programming , playing fields , and soccer complexes has been given to a non - profit soccer association . These associations have been able to secure land through below- market land leases or outright gifts . In Fayetteville , for example , the local soccer association has a long -term land lease from Methodist College . The association then pursued private funds to build multiple fields onftthe land . Greensboro Youth Soccer Association Soccer in Greensboro began in the early 1970s with about 350 payers . In 1978 , the Greensboro Parks and Recreation Department ' dropped its sponsorship and the Greensboro Youth Soccer Association ( GYSA) was formed as a non - profit group . GYSA helped develop , in addition to the recreation teams , challenge teams which play teams from neighboring cities , and classic teams which travel throughout the state . The Association held its first soccer tournament in 1980 , with a net loss of income . By the second tournament , 144 teams participated from 17 states , and the GYSA had a net profit of $ 7 , 500 and the association began a program of fund raising for a field complex . In 1983 , Joseph Bryan donated money for the expansion of Bryan Park and the City of Greensboro agreed to lease GYSA land for fields if the association paid for development of the land . Private individuals and corporations were asked to donate funds . Those donating enough money to pay for the development of one complete field got that field named in their honor . As of 1999 , 11 fields had been built . ' The GYSA also raised enough money to build a concession stand , a restroom , and to pave the parking lot at the GYSA Soccer Complex at Bryan Park , Capital Area Soccer League In Raleigh , the Capital Area Soccer League ( CASL ) dominates the sport . CASL began in 19741. According to its statistics , the number of players doubled in the last decade to more than 12 , 000 . Players start at age 5 — including 15 percent of all Wake school children — and include adults . The league owns or controls 60 fields , uses 40 Wake public school fields , and is building or designing 25 more . In the fiscal year ending in July 1998 , CASL reported revenue of $ 1 . 6 million and assets totaling $ 3 . 2 million . The fields managed and maintained by CASL include the WRAL Soccer Center , one . of the largest soccer complexes in the country , with 25 Bermuda grass soccer fields in a 118 - acre complex . As suggested by the name , the land was donated ( to the City of Raleigh ) by Capital Broadcasting . The complex includes three lighted fields , parking for 1 , 250 and seating for 3 , 000 . Attachment F Just this summer , CASL obtained commitments from the City of Raleigh and Wake County for $ 5 million from the countywide motel and meals taxes to serve as seed money for the first phase of the State Capital Soccer Park in Cary . The league plans to build a 5 , 000 - seat stadium , eight soccer fields , including six that meet international standards , a three - story field house , concession areas , restrooms , 2 , 000 parking spaces , and a cross - country course , at a cost of $ 14 . 5 million . The park will be constructed on a 131 -acre state - owned site for which CASL secured a lease in March 1999 . According to an economic impact analysis prepared by an assistant professor of parks , recreation and tourism management at N . C . State University , CASL projects the facility will attract 31 events each year, with a total paid attendance of 141 , 358 . The report forecasts that 16 , 447 out-of-town visitors will stay overnight . CASL leaders contend they have a proven track record of attracting people to the Triangle and claim an annual economic impact of $ 18 . 7 million . Last year , according to CASL , 14 , 000 rooms were booked with people who attended league events and tournaments . Projecting Local Economic Im ac To project the economic impact of a potential soccer complex in Orange County , the subcommittee took a conservative approach , assuming only three tournaments would be held annually . We looked at the impact for a four-field and eight-field complex , and assumed that some preliminary matches would be held on existing fields . With a four-field complex , 24 teams would be accommodated , an eight-field complex would accommodate 48 teams . We further assumed that each team would account for 40 - 50 participants and spectators ( 20 players and coaches and 20 = 30 family member spectators ) and that the tournaments would last two days . Therefore , the total number of people projected to attend would be : With 4 Fields With 8 Fields @40/team 960 total 1 , 920 total @50/team 1 , 200 total 2 , 400 total The subcommittee used typical daily expenditure data for sporting -event tourists ( supplied by the Chapel Hill/Orange County Visitors Bureau ) of $ 125 per room night and $ 50 per day for day-trippers . Assuming that room nights equal one- half the total number of participants and spectators , the formula for economic impact would be . Direct Economic Impact = %2 Total number attending x $ 125 + %2 Total number attending x $ 50 x 2 days This results in the following projected direct economic impact , per tournament . With 4 Fields With 8 Fields @40/team $ 78 , 000 $ 156 , 000 @50/team $ 97 , 500 $ 195 , 000 Thus , total direct economic impact per year, assuming three tournaments , would range from a conservative $ 234 , 000 (4 fields @ 40 people/team ) to $ 585 , 000 ( 8 fields @ 50 people/team ) . 22 �- 13 Attachment G Subcommittee on Inter- League Cooperation : Developing a Public - Private Partnership and Ensuring Cooperation Subcommittee . Charge : 1 . How to make public- private partnerships work in Orange County with regard to soccer fields . 2 . How to ensure cooperation among the various soccer organizations . 1 . Public- Private Partnerships Public entities : The public entity in this case is Orange County . To the degree that the Orange County Parks and Recreation Department or other government agencies must be involved , they may act as agents , but ultimately funding must come through the Orange County budget . Private entities : Rainbow , Triangle Futbol , Durham - Chapel Hill Strikers , YMCA , Hispanic league , and corporate sponsors . A . Model of Public Private Partnership One model of a public- private partnership is found in Wake County , where the county contracts with the Capital Area Soccer League ( CASL , a non - profit organization ) to run soccer in the county . The county makes the land available for fields and CASL develops the fields . CASL runs leagues for age groups ranging from small children through adults ( total about 17 , 000 participants ) and finances its activities through fees from players , numerous tournaments at its various soccer complexes , and fundraising from corporate sponsors . B . Model for Orange County We suggest a modified model for Orange County . While large soccer complexes for match play and tournaments would be the responsibility of private organizations , the county would make land available for practice soccer fields ( as near as possible to population centers ) . The private soccer organizations would jointly and cooperatively agree to lease these practice field sites for a nominal fee , develop these fields , and manage their use . 2 . Private soccer organization cooperation . We envision cooperation among the private organizations as being similar to a model currently in use , the " Mid -states Challenge Soccer League . " This league was formed three years ago by the Durham - Chapel Hill Strikers and Carolina United ( now Triangle Futbol ) , but all local soccer organizations were invited to send representatives to cooperatively manage the league . The league is not owned by any of the local organizations . Each soccer organization provides teams to play in the league and commits fields for league use on Sundays . Each organization sends representatives to set policy , to direct the scheduling of league games , and to coordinate with referees . We propose that soccer , organizations in Orange County be invited to send a representative to a body ( Joint Orange County Soccer) that would be responsible for coordination with the county on the development of practice soccer fields and in exchange for that development , obtain the right to the management and scheduling of those fields with reference to guidelines agreed to by the county . . 3 L PHASE 2 COUNCIL WORK SESSION AQUATICS /CO .M-. MUNITY CENTER at HOMESTEAD PARK TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL -l_a^ �- ` ':4:i_;`�•' '• -?Fr- e�?i--• : : rV.:'• .. .ram-�-. 1. . ?•:- Y�� _ j:1n ::Y::::E ._ r�7'. - ... _ - a':1:•.._. �.:'�W .L::,LS�11i:]3f 1.?W..- ' . : -�' r}e_ •-`: -__f�:� ; ' a4 ri'`•s .:+� „y... j``y'Iv -' vFtiar... .:n u.'r_r th`iii: v. .:t_ 1" �`-'�'.i k�.• ` gs '_ t�ya'a'.r .3 rt'�-:r 'as:-•F?:ii'�;J=w^"' i... •. rr'�" j '�'irci%� "-'�''' .Y:.'—rt' 3+.� .0�Ll—•'-41-�� ii•�r-• , �SCd u�r1}" sLIZ3'.. GGA ARCHITECTS COUNSILMAN/HUNSAKER BILL WARREN CHAPEL HILL , NORTH CAROLINA October . 18 , 2000 Town of Chapel Hill Aquatics/Community Center October 18 2000 _ CONTENTS I NEEDS REPORT ENERGY REPORT PROGRAM SUMMARY PROGRAM SUPPORT BUDGET OPTIONS ATTACHMENTS GGA ARCHITECTS COUNSILMAN / HUNSAKER BILL WARREN ENERGY CONSULTANT A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO WORX. WITH STAFF AND A CONSULTANT TO DEVELOP A CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR THE AQUATIC/COMMUNITY CENTER FACILITY TO BE LOCATED IN HOMESTEAD PARK (99 = 8 -23 /R-22) VvTMREAS , the Council has allocated up to $ 53 , 000 for a conceptual plan study for the proposed Aquatics/Community Center facility ; and, WHEREAS , a conceptual plan process will allow the community and the Council to fully explore potential programs for an indoor swimming pool and community center, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council establishes the Homestead Park Aquatics/Community Center Advisory Committee with . the following charge : • Sponsor public forums to solicit community input and identify recreational needs . • Invite the Green Building Council of the Carolinas Recycling Association to make a presenatation to the Committee on "green" building to include , .but not be limited to building environment (such as indoor air quality and toxics free environment) , materials , waste, environmental landscaping. • Establish "green" goals for the aquatic/community center facility. • Study *different types of pools and enhancements . For example; options considered by the to Committee might include a standard lap pool, wave pool, side-by-side tanks, lap pools with some play enhancements, differing levels o handic fap accommodation, dive tanks , or other possible options. • Investigate adding other needed elements to the building, such *as a gymnasium, meeting ° space, arts and dance space, offices, or other amenities . • Develop planning level cost estimates ' for the various options to help in setting priorities and developing financing plans. • Evaluate each option on the basis of operational costs , compliance with the Chapel Hill Energy Ordinance, environmentally friendly or "green" building goals, potential V revenues recreational needs and effect on programs . • . The * Committee meet with the Town Council for Council review and comment before . a . 6 Go a a a . . final recommendations. • Make recommendations for the consideration of the Town Council . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Advisory Committee will consist of: • Two representatives of the Parks and Recreation Commission • One representative 'appointed by. the Orange . County. Board of Commissioners 4 • One representative of the Citizens Energy • Task Force and one alternate • • One representative appointed by the Chapel Hill-Carrboro •School 'System • Three representatives from adja:cent -neighborhoods ' • Three * or more citizens ' at large 2 • .• 1 . . . 0 • V 4 at 4 a a BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Manager is authorized to advertise for applicants for the Advisory Committee . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council shall appoint the Homestead Park Aquatic/Community Center Advisory Committee and that it shall be disbanded after the Council receives an application for a special use permit. This the 23 `d day of August, 1999 . VIEW ot so do do old 6 do do 0 a do • Y HOMESTEAD PARK AQUATICS FACILITY AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN COMMITTEE ( At least 12 members ) Citizens At-Large Belinda Caldwell Appointed : 9 / 13 /99 600 Church Street Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (H) 942- 5867 ; (0) 962 - 6395 Judith Cameron Appointed: 9/ 13 /99 214 Glenmore Road Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (H) 933 - 6613 ; (0) 684-3786 ext . 251 Y Mary McCarthy Appointed : 9/ 13 /99 507 Lonebrook Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (H) 933 - 6599 (W ) 933 - 6599 (cell) 6564185 Macker84(a ,mindspring com Dan Murphy Appointed : 9/ 13 /99 216 Spring Lane Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (H) 929 - 8950 _ - MIJRPHSWIM7 (@,CS .com Don Shea Appointed : 9/ 13/99 • • 162 Northwood Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27516 . Adjacent Neighborhood Representatives 4 Cherie Page Appointed ; 9/ 13 /99 203 Treemont Circle Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (H) 967-7467 Rlpage(a�IBM. net Richard Valenti - Appointed : 9/ 13 /99 107 KenilWorth Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (H) 942-3080; (0) '942 - 3Q80 RVAWI@aol . com . . x HOMESTEAD PARK AQUATICS FACILITY AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN COMMITTEE Rob Wilson Appointed : 9/ 13 /99 113 Glenmore Road Chapel Hill , NC 27516 (H) 968 - 6790 ; (0) 968 - 2728 Rwilson(ctown. ci . chaD.el-hill . nc . us Parks and Recreation Commission Representatives John Covach 207 Chesapeake Way Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (H) 929 -2861 ; (0) 9624039 jeovach(@,email . une . edu Dianne M . Lemasters , Chair 106 Priestly Creek Drive Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (H) 967 -2872 DianneL.erA(@, aol . com Orange CountYBoard of Commissioners Representative (appointed by the County) Commissioner Margaret Brown 1509 Smith Level Rd. Chapel Hi11, NC 27516 (H) 929 * 6460 mwbrown(a ,mindspring com Citizen' s Energy Task Force Representative Roger E . Hayes Joyce Brown, Council Member, Alternate 3221 Winfield Drive 306 Ransom Street Durham, NC 27707 Chapel Hill , NC 27516 (H) 489 - 7591 ; (0) 9624722 (H) 929 -7781 Reh(a .fac .unc . 6du Jovicebrownnu ,mindsnring . com i I HOMESTEAD PARK AQUATICS FACILITY AND CONCEPTUAL PLAN COMMITTEE i . i Chapel Hill- Carrboro School System Representative (appointed by School System) Nick Didow Spring Hill Forest Road 117 Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (H) 92M388 YMCA Representative Maureen Rosen Withdrew, no new appointment from Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA YMCA 980 Airport Road Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (W) 932-3865 _ MODOR06 aol . com ore s PHASE ONE PHASE TWO PHASE THREE LNATL STANDARDS NAIL STANDARDS COMMITTEE INPUT COMMITTEE INPUT COMMITTEE INPUT PUBLIC FACILITY PROGRAM COUNCIL CONCEPT RECOMMEND. HEARING NEEDS REPORT BUDGET OPTIONS REVIEW DESIGN TO COUNCIL CONSULTANT TINPUT NSULTANT PUBLIC INPUT INTERVIEWS NEEDS REPORT PROGRAM & BUDGET CONCEPTUAL PLAN Town of Chapel Hill Aquatics / Community Center j April 5 , 2000 SO So Ob I l . . REPORT 4 . . • ; . . t . . Chapel Hill Aquatic/Community Center. Needs Analysis to : Advisory Committee Chapel Hill Aquatic/Community Center Homestead Park Summary The Aquatic/Community Center Advisory Committee is charged . with overseeing . a conceptual plan study for a proposed Aquatic/Community center . The first phase of this study is a needs analysis : The Aquatic/Community Center Advisory Committee has met regularly over the past 6 months and during that time has commissioned several initiatives designed to identify community needs . These initiatives are described In this report. The committee found that the Town of Chapel Hill runs a wide variety of recreational programs that are heavily used and • current aquatic facilities are among the most popular . This has resulted in competition for limited aquatic facilities by several user groups . There are insufficient aquatic facilities in the number of lanes available for lap swimming . There is also insuff cient leisure arid/or children 's pool area . Other areas of deficiency include public meeting space , space•for crafts •classes and dance space . This report will be followed by a set of program and cost options for Council consideration based on the needs defined here . o. Charge/Goat . 4 . . , . . . . . in summer of 1999 the Cliape! Hill ' Tov�m Council• adopted •a on lution• tbat •established an advisory :committee to work with (town) . staff and a consultant to develop a conceptual plan for the aquatic/community center to be located in Homestead Park. • - . Among the other charges given this committee is . a charge to : : . "Sponsor public:forum to Solicit community Input and identifX recreafiional needs" and ; : . ".investigatd. adding other needed elements to the@ building , :such as a . gymnas.ium ,. meting44 space , marts and dance space , - offices or other. amenities:" . a to • r The% advisory committee , town staff and the consultant, have prepared . this . needs. analysis ' report' vto address '• these . two * charges An , specific. -in• • addressing these charges to . "identify . recreational needs" and to " investigate .. . otherneeded elements . " yve will • be laying the foundation . ' `f6r :a4buitdingprogram9that Meets ••the' expressed deeds of-Cha9 pe[ Hili : • we • 4 ' The goal -of this . .Needs ~Analysis is • to provide . a needs .based source . for . program . development . 06 6 9 . . . . . . . • It Vo . 0 Aquatic/Community Facility 4 14 � Background Homestead Park is the newest active recreation park to be developed by the Town of Chapel Hill . It is located in the north -west quadrant of the town and is served by Airport Road ( a north - south arterial ) and Homestead Road (an east-west collector road ) . Homestead Park is located in rapidly growing sector of Chapel Hill . This sector includes single family subdivisions , a large office/retail component and a large ( 950 acres ) undeveloped tract owned by the University of North Carolina . The University has been actively involved in planning and programming for the future use of this tract . The Greene tract is located north and west of Homestead# Park and represents a second large undeveloped tract whose future is not now known . • To date the' town has created softball diamonds , 'an outside basketball court , a skateboard ' facility , athletic playing fields and trails in Homestead Park . There is now also parking for 270 cars , ° including 10 handicapped spaces , in two locations . 3 Booker Creek , and it's associated Resource Conservation District, bisects the park and the At town has provided a footbridge connection between the two halves . In the future , the town may create a batting cage facility. A site has been reserved for the facility under consideration here . Process • • . • • . . - • • This report utilized several methods of information gathering . These include a public forum cil Chambers and broadcast on cable T. V. , with phone-in held in the Town of Chapel Hill Coun capability, a series of interviews with representatives of different • community sectors , a series of individual interviews with Parks and Recreation Department staff; and a , total of • 7 , commiftee • meetings devoted to discussing program and needs issues . This . process was intended' to reach . as many Chapel Hill citizens as possible and to � v stimulate input from a variety of interest gro It ups . We feel comfortable that it has and that we have 9 Ago AAA 0 reddivtddvaluable comments : fror`n'fr any user groups and' also from peoplewio° do not use parks and recreation facilities . - long Public Forum : On February 3'd1 02000 , a Public Forum was held in Chapel Hill Town • Council .0 It or 0 A"s short- Chamber . resen t_ . . • : • .�.:.' . . p , tatiQ �t was r�tade.�by Scot Hunsaker. , aquatic consultant, followed • by, comments and questions., from the apublic. The " forum lastdd * from • 7 : 00 PM through 9 : 30 . . PM and was attended by about 50 people . The *forum Amwas also • broadcast via ramble with call �in capability. Several • people called in comments and questions. . . . . . j.:. . . . . . _ . wo 6 Interviews : An February 3"d and 4 h , 2000 , a series of interviews was held in the Chapel ° Hill Town• Hall : These interviews Were hosted ey *G°GA aridoSdot Hunsaker.' Specific interest groups were 'identi`f�ed' by the advisory committee' "an members invited to attend at • predetermined time slots :• Included in• ti•iese interviews. wereiseniors ; Eitizens with :disabitities . including developmental 4sab0litles ; high school • swim coaches ; ' business Jeaders a " ` • of • ' ' • ' newspaper editor; town Parks and Recreation staff, town douncil mort`ibers; and others. Interviews with Parks and Recreation Staff: Seven ° meetings were held;witli presentatives, " of the following departments : Administration ; Office Managements Aquatic.,s ; Athletics ; •. . _ & A a Special Populations.; • 0rogramm A& ' Events . -Two or three staff were present at each meeting . * '. � ;is iidea ix ;�epoA summary of oommdnis rcudinr . appedto .thisc r At ' . . 9 660 406 . a ' ' _ • ', a . " . ' do - A � Ask _ — te _ �+ — — — Needs Analysis The Council resolution identified several areas of possible need and these areas are the basis of this report . These include . Aquatic facility Gymnasium Meeting Space Arts and Dance Space Offices Below we describe our projection of need for the identified uses . These projections are based on the information gathering described above . 11 Aquatic Facility There is general consensus that an aquatic facility is a need in Chapel Hill . Anecdotal. , comments from almost every participant indicated that existing facilities are used to their maximum potential@ and that the potential is inadequate for community needs . This team visited , and discussed utilization with the staff of, other aquatic venues that serve Chapel Hill citizens . These included Sportsplex, the Chapel Hill YMCA, the Chapel Hill Tennis and . Swim - Club , the existing Chapel HIII Community Center, Hargraves Center and. Koury Natatorium . Sportsplex has a• 25 yard 0 by 25 meter indoor tank and a recreational tank and seating for about 450 spectators . It is used by some teams , but only because other venues are too crowded . It is perceived as too far from Chapel Hill , especially by seniors . The pool component of this facility is not heavily used by Chapel Hill citizens . • The Chapel Hill YMCA has ,a 25 yard indoor tank. It is heavily used by, teams , lap swimmers . and . recreational swimmers . There is, no designated recreational swim component. and no designated childrens component. The aquatic director of the YMCA gave testimony that his . facility is used to capacity and would welcome additional aquatic capacity it fown . The • • .YVICA . also sponsors:% c swim tears. The Chalel Hill Swim . arid Tennis Club is a ' .large outdoor facility . ' It has a rectangular , ' • component with lap lanes and a small . "kids".. pool : . The .Swim and Tennis •Club sponsors a swim * team . Koury Natatorium is a UNC, facility -with a 50 meter pool and seating for 750 spectators : The pool is used prindp'ally by UNC . We do know *thatvsome meets& are * held in - this facility. We do not know • if this _facility is available for team practice . •" ' 1 410 ot " ' 'The existing Chapel Hill Community Center has a 25' meter9X 25 yard".pool that is"const6ntly9 0 ' . scheduled .... (Appendec :to this . report . is. a typical . .daily schedule for : this facility) . Principal . users are lap swimmers ; school teams and seniors : The A: D . Clark Pbol , at Hargraves. Center is an outside facillty, ' open from Memorial Day , 4 to Labor Day, it is frequently leased by. *the * Chapel Hill.=Carrboro Schoots and the YMCA. . . Aqugtle/Comnlunity Fa ility,13 : . ; - •) There are nearly 1 , 000 children who annually actively participate in league swim teams . . This does not include school based teams . Facility managers for the YMCA , for the Chapel Hill Swim and Tennis Club and for the Community Center were interviewed . Each manager identified a deficit of practice lanes as being the single most critical need in the Chapel Hill area . During the public forum held at Chapel Hill Town Hall additional testimony was given that identified a major need to be more lanes for lap swimming and team practice . This testimony was repeated during the citizen interviews . Please see the summary of both the public forum and the citizen interviews appended to this document . Summary Conclusion : We conclude that the principal aquatic needs are : 't ) Lanes to 'serve lap swimmers , recreational swimmers and team practice . too 2) A combined leisure/therapeutic facility that will serve families , children and citizens that require warmer water temperatures to comfortably swim . . More detailed attributes can be found in appendix 2 to this report. Gymnasium . Currently the . town operates three gymnasia . The gymnasium at the Community Center now serves basketball , wall climbing and other - standard gym functions : It supports league basketball with a small amount of free play time . The gymnasium at Hargraves Center has six baskets . One full court and two cross-courts . This facility has pull out bleachers and * a pull-out stage for community events. This facility Is used for league and free play. ' The gymnasium at Linco(h Center has six basketbai ( goals and is used for adult and youth , programs evenings and weekends . On weekdays 1t # 1s• used° # by the scl�tool�s�rstem for the special needs programs . : . : ;A11 town facilities are fully programmed , with Hargraves programmed for community use space as well as for athletic events . The pull-out stage is rarely used . Summary Conclusion : 6 to The main thrust of publicity and• committee concern has been the aquatic functions of this : faciility . because of this there h * 6been {ass focus on needs `for a gymnasium : Town staff, especia It 4 lly ` those. involved with programming, 6 believe that . ari :additional gymnasium: is . . : a needed . • . . . . . : ' � 04 Our conclusion is * that if a new gymnaslufn is a part of this facility , the gym. should be modeled around the Hargraves Center. : : • ; • of : • • • " . 4 . : o It More detailed attributes for a. proposed gymnasium .facility can be found in appendix 2 to _ this report. • Aquatic/Gomminity Fa to 0 ' . Meeting Space All those interviewed agreed on the need for meeting spaces that could be used by a variety of programs and clients . Existing meeting space dedicated to Parks and recreation use is too small , noisy and lacking in privacy . Summary Conclusion : 1 ) Provide a divisible meeting space for up to 125 people . This could divide into smaller spaces for 25 and 50 people . More detailed attributes are appended to this document . More detailed attributes for a meetingspace facility can be found in appendix 2 to this P Y pp report . 4� Arts and Dance Space do The need for several multipurpose rooms was cited by each group . Existing rooms are booked to capacity. Staff felt that the current programs under serve the existing needs in these areas primarily due to a lack of space . Summary Conclusion : 1 ) ' Provide arts and other " classroom" type spaces for active multi - purpose capabilities . • 2 ) Create the meeting rooms to accommodate dance , . Tai Chi , etc. More detailed attributes for these community use functions can be found in appendix 2 to " this report . 5 Offices The need for adequate , secure health workjn . space was identified b each staff q Y 9P . Y member interviewed . Current office space is • described as cramped , and poorly organized with deficient light and ventilation.. Safety frowe m intottruders a .secure area for 0 6 So on handling money were cited as critical . Summary Conclusion : 'I ) "Provide offices at 'this facility adequate * formanaging % this* facility: 2 ) Provide 'main offices for Parks and Recreation at this facility: More detailed attributes for administrative office space can be found , in appendix 2 to this report . . . . . .. . . _ At . . . ~ 69 . o 0 G . o to . > . 0 04 • Aquatic/Comm-un1ty ' Facility-5 Town of Chapel Hill Aquatics / Community Center April 5 , 2000 IS • ' At •. g Oo APPENDIX61 " : . INS 4 go • GREEN * OBJECTIVES 15 APPENDIX 1 GREEN OBJECTIVES Environmentally Based Design A major area for consideration in the conceptual planning / needs analysis for the proposed Aquatic/Community Center is the issue of environmentally responsible design & construction . Some of the issues discussed are . 1 ) Land Use & Site . - organize & develop to foster community - reduce the need for automobiles for transportation to the site - let the sites natural resources help develop the design - build structures disturbing as little of the green space as possible - utilize alternative water management systems, to handle stormwater on site a - use existing vegetation to reduce heating and cooling loads - reduce impact on trees and other vegetation during construction - utilize chemical free treatments for eliminating insects 2) Building Design - design to get the most use of the smallest space - use all insulation materials possible to reduce heating and cooling needs - avoid over-design and waste in the 6 construction process - use renewable energy - use sustainable landscaping - easy recycling consider graywater recycling - - build durable , timeless structures that are adaptable for many uses , - use daylighttng ' wherever possible ' : . = reduce • waste: in the. building process , recycling whenever possible 03) Materiatt use energy efficient and highly durable products ' = select building materials that are easy to maintain - . - use materials with low embodied' energy when possible - incorporate locally produced materials when possible . - use recycled materials - use safe ,. salvaged materials when possible : . - use wood from companies involved in reforestation or engineered wood products . . . . . t . . . . . . . . . . - avoid materials that. offgas . . . . : •• 4 VV4 - use . piastic • in place of• press uramtreated lumber when possible 4) Equipment 0 0 ot - install only high -efficiency RVAC systems . - use products free of ozone -depleting chemicals - use only high =efficiency lights & appliances = install water conserving* plumbing . two = install : mechanical ven# iiatiion . equipment . for healthy indoor air quality. : : Town of Chapel Hill Aquatics/ Community Center April 5 , 2000 :i 7��O * ..04 ' i 04 �•. , 9 . . G 0 . . . of 9 0 go 4 0 to • • • • 0 0 0 APPENDIX92• = - a gFUNCTION6ATTRIBUTE * : • . . . . • . 139 APPENDIX 2 FUNCTION ATTRIBUTES AQUATIC FACILITY i i Three separate tanks , one for competitive swimmers , one for recreational use for adults & children ( slides , fountains , space for water gamest'; Water Resistance River with changeable degrees of motion . one for therapeutic programs (children with special needs , the elderly , brain injured etc . ) This pool would require features such as warmer water, " O " entry & ramp entries . Lift for pool 'entry & exit Maximum ventilation -using fresh air when possible . Separate heating systems for each tank . Automated filtrated system / vacuum Internal access to chemical & pump rooms . Pool roof that will not corrode . Anti - bacterial surfaces . Adequate storage for pool equipment Swim Coach offices Spectator seating Ample deck space around pool . Diving for recreational purposes . GYMNASIUM Maximum / excellent acoustics / ceiling baffles . Maximum ventilation and Air Conditioning . Ability to use outside air as seasonable . Dividers , padding & baffles . 6 mePermanent stage only- no convertible stages , The "right" type'•of wood floor (see Hargraves Center) woo, s 00 • • too • • 6 • - . • . Size• gym for full court & cross-court play. - Room for bleachers and spectators . Operable windows high up for a sense of openness . Good supervision . •. • _ Good storage for equipment & supplies . Adequate office space • with visibility into gym . 1 • • • • • • • • • •• • More space for athletic & nohi mathletic programs . Large lobby with sewing for toams . waiting , .display cases for ribbons.:& .trophies , lots of windows , Sound System =. . .. . . . , : Weight .roorn. /•cardio;vascular room . . Reception desk & attendant. First-aid t�oom with cabinets , counter, sink &.. cots ,. .• No glass at floor level . Adequate exterior lighting : Easy • tnaintenance . Good security system Quality hardware . .• . . • Walking track around . 9Ym floor. . : . a i � wo i� LOCKER ROOMS Need to be able to accommodate many groups at one time ( swimmers , day camp , soccer etc . ) . Locker rooms large enough to accommodate more than one wheelchair at a time . Sinks , toilets , benches etc . sized for children as well as adults . Family Locker room areas . Diaper changing stations in men & women ' s areas . Children sized toilets & sinks . More than one shower or locker room per sex. Anti-bacterial surfaces , Janitorial closets need water & sinks -( talk with Janitorial Staff re : their needs ) MULTI - PURPOSE MEETING / CLASSROOMS ROOMS Space large enough for 20 -30 people Space for Tai Chi , gymnastics ; pottery, photography, arts & crafts , sewing , etc, Instruction space with sinks & a lot of storage , Large space with resilient wood floor for dancing . } Some rooms with a waiting area with one way mirrors for parents . Rooms with dividers . Excellent acoustics Storage for multiple programs carried out in the space Adaptations for hearing impaired . Game room for children Kitchen large enough to be rented out with storage space for pots , pans , utensils . PROGRAM SPACE Track for running Additional space for basketball Weight lifting and exercise equipment Dance Aerobics - Arts & Crafts _ Events Climbing Wall - to 1 . 1. Large need for more room for Camps (pre-school , day camps , after school) . Nurs, .pryjacility . ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES or 104, .A facilitythat uniformly works • for patrons & 'staff 0 • . • ` Pit .. • . • - • to Security area for making out deposits and locking up money . Counter taps that are * handicap accessible: ' ' "' . All surfaces & furniture ergonomically sensitive , Keep .administrative & recreational areas •separate ' but * easily accessible to *one ' another. Mailbox & sign• ln 'stations : . SOAt 0 . . ' Map Rgom . . .� .,. ?<, jw ,: .., , r:. Conference Room to seat, 20•-25 :coomfortably. • • Office Manager . Work Room. Network Room , Library . . t . . . to_ . to to . . . . .. . . . y Lounge/ kitchen area for staff Room with copiers , fax , computers , network etc . centrally located with adequate room for storage . Operable windows . Data networking within administration and throughout facility Design space for increase in staff throughout entire facility. GENERAL ISSUES Climate Control . Environmental issues & Mechnical Issues HVAC Zones-individual climate controls for each office/space Separate environmental zones for pools., gym , classrooms & administrative offices . Prevent pool chemicals from permeating other areas . Use day lighting in as much of the space as possible . Weather buffer at reception entrance Special attention to design of mechanical & plumbing systems- current -facility grossly inadequate . s Pool chemicals vs . Ozone- what is best?-Want to use a proven technology only. Environmental Issues- Make choices in building materials , day lighting , photovoltaics . Fire & Alarm Systems should be well thought out. Some type of vapor barrier between wet & dry areas Entrance Lobby & Reception Make all entrance areas as welcoming as possible . # * Entry should be welcoming with a security barrier between public & staff. Play space for children in reception area . Bicycle storage Designated Recycling & Garbage area outside of the building . A set of rest rooms in front for patrons . Space for patrons to fill out forms . Space4for posting information , placing & storing brochures . • Hospital C Vending areas for staff & the public that do - not share a meeting room space . 4. Commercial kitchen4 . t • . Facility Services . Large storage area near. loading dock for cartons of paper & other supplies . Maintenance & Repair Shop- mote than Just* a janitorial closet ; need a; workbench & - place to store tools . 446 ., Janitorial closets need water & sinks ( talk with Jefrili rial Staff te : 'their needs ) Diaper Changing Stations in men & women 's rest rooms . 9 • Primary / 4CriticatoNeed - should *not -be sacrificed . ' . 0466 . . o • A . great deaf. of storage .. . Storage for chairs , tables ; supplies , seasonal & year round equipment; summer camp . . • • • o 00 * Some storage *VAIl need 6to be climate controlled . 6 . Event equipment Day camp equipment : . . Building Exterior Concrete rather than asphalt where ever possible . Use any large boulders unearthed in excavation to build an outdoor climbing area . Decks to overlook wooded areas at the site . Water reclamation ? Gray water? Operating costs for pool , for the rest of structure . Public transportation that supports the facilities programs . Separate staff parking . Special Populations Multi-component recreational / therapeutic pool Higher water temperature in pool Heating system that keeps the water temperature constant . Covered walkway & drop off area large enough to accommodated a school / activity bus with a lift. Access to spaces in all areas . 0 V to 0 : . : . so • _ . 6 ' • 9 At 4 . 4 to • to 4 0 0 4 6 _. & d 0 V to to • : At 40 to to 0 or to . . . . . V 0 ' • tot . . do 163 Town of Chapel Hill Aquatics /Community Center April 5 , 2000 I IV .. 49 44 4 . . APPE NsD IX 3 ' MEETING SUOMMARIES ' APPENDIX 3 MEETING SUMMARIES INTERVIEW SUMMARY FEBRUARY 3 & 41 2000 9 : 30 AM Chapel Hill Town Hall with the Parks and Recreation staff. The following were in attendance . Andrea Judge Lelia Ghassemein Bernard Leach Colleen Lanigan Bill Webster Kathryn Spatz Lisa Baaske Josh Gurlitz Sonya Reddick- Holley Darryl Dunlap Catherine Dorwart Scot Hunsaker i Josh . Gurlitz and Scot Hunsaker presented an overview of the process for completing the study and . the approach that will be taken during the first series of meetings . ' Staff reviewed component preferences for the facility as . outlined below: Transportation access Kids and low income ❑ Janitorial space Clean facility Antibacterial carpeting Adequate. space " ❑ Separate vending area Q , . Two separate pools to .. Zero depth pool : . Lap swim pool Dive-in movies to to • t t 9 — • Security surveillance Storage Internal access to .chemical room Automatic systems ❑ Reception area Welcoming space Lots of natural light Iq too * , Safe layout Vestibule f . 166 Existing programming in the community for aquatics was discussed . ❑ Chapel Hill Town Swim Team Fall / spring session 55 swimmers Summer session 70 + swimmers Dual meet spectator seating requirements 500 Championship meet held at UNC Age group range 6 to 18 Fee $ 84 per session on same schedule as UNC Fees 20 % more for non-residents ❑ Swim Lesson Program 10 - 45 minute classes per session Lessons at capacity Need for adult classes .s ❑ Community Center Pool 25-meter, six-lane , One-meter diving board 82 degrees . ❑ High School Swim Teams Both high schools practice at the Community Pool• Practice 4 to 5 : 30PM Men = s and women = s teams have the same season High schools have different coaches High schools rent space at 50% normal pool rental High school uses facility for three meets per. year Hamilton site considered preferred for high schools _ Swim season December to February Currently. no P . E . programming ❑ Financial operation for Parks and Recreation is% usually a subsidy format: 10 : 30 AM Chapel Hill Town Hal with Ted Vaden . . . The next meeting was with Mr. Ted Vaden , Editor and Publisher of the Chapel Hill News . Mr. Vaden has just completed a 6-year term on the Chapel Hill YMCA Board . ' The Y has recently completed a fund raising campaign for the expansion of the Y into 3 phases . The first two phases have been funded and include a new gym and fitness area . The 31d phase is a new pool that is not funded at present. The Y currently has 2 , 500 members and it is felt that there would be an _interest in using ' a new aquatic facility if the town •developed it. 4 4 0 4 04 . Mr. Vaden . suggested• that the Y might be a potential operator *of the facility . Them Y features .an indoor- six lane 2&yard pool . ' tort 1 0 ot 0 0 I � 7 11 : 30 AM Chapel Hill Town Hall with Lap Swimmers . We were next scheduled to meeting with the lap swimmers from the Community Pool . While no one attended the meeting , the committee did receive several letters outlining considerations and ideas for the project . information was received from : Allen Daugird Marie Pauwels Pat Beyle Barb & John Howarth Mary Brown Dan Shiegars Comments included : ❑ Minimum 25-yard pool ❑ indoor critical ❑ As many lanes as possible U . Convenient lap lane time ❑ Well-controlled environment ❑ 56-meter pool ❑ Prefer meters to yards ❑ Adequate locker room space ❑ Good acoustics ❑ Natural light ❑ Spinners for swimsuits ❑ . Wider outside lanes ❑ Ladders recessed into walls ❑ Bright colors ❑ Showers that provide privacy ❑ 25-meters by 25-yards 0 Wave reduction lane lines 0 Electronic timing system ❑ Gutters on all sides. a Increased . spectator. seating ❑ Handicap access ramp ❑ ; ` Ladders that don =t take up .lanes space . ❑ Removable @starting blocks ❑ . . : Clock in dressing area ❑ Aquatics. should be required in school• curriculum ❑ Concern over existing site of the Community Pool The design team visited a number of area facilities to gather information and make observations . These included " Koury * Natatorium : . . Sportsplex YMCA The Farm Community Center Pool Chapel Hill Tennis Club US 3 : 30 PM Chapel Hill Town Hall with the Parks and Recreation staff. The design team was next scheduled to meet with the high school swim coaches . No one was available to meet during this time , but the following programming information was gathered for this . user group . ❑ The current site being considered for the aquatic center is desirable in relation to the distance between both schools . ElEach high school has their own swim coach . ❑ High schools currently compete using 25 yards as the preferred field of play-, ❑ Men =s and women = s teams compete during the same season ❑ Currently , both high schools share the Community Pool . . ❑ The school district compensates the Town of Chapel Hill for pool time based on 50 % of the published fee schedule . ❑ Three to four meets are held at the Community Pool each season . ElThere are no plans to develop aquatic facilities on school property in the near future . ❑ The swimming season is from December until the end of February. ❑ Currently , there is no aquatic physical education programming as part of the curriculum . 6 : 00 PM Chapel Hill Town Hall with the Advisory Committee. The design team next met with the steering committee for the Chapel Hill Aquatic Center. Josh Gurlitz and Scot Hunsaker presented an overview of the scope of the work being completed and approach in completing the assigned tasks . Scot Hunsaker then reviewed information gathered and presented several ideas for consideration in the study. It was discussed that a 50-meter pool configuration was a , common request in the community to provide for long -course swimming and increased number of short-course lanes . Discussion then took place regarding the difference of a venue facility (one with spectator seating ) or training facility ..for the community, to compete. at other l %ocations . A second concept of;a 2&yard by 25-meter pool was also presented and discussed for study. The 25 x 25 concept provides 10 25-yard lanes and 8 25-meter lanes . : The ability to provide multiple fields of play was -discussed . A leisure facility with increased recreation value was also discussed . The ability .of_. _ this space to accommodate lesson , Wellnessaand recreation programming was discussed - as a benefit. . 7 : 00 PM d Chapel Hill Town Hall , Council Chambers , Public Forum . At 7PM on February 31 , a Public Forum was held at the Town Hall and broadcast live on cable . Cable viewers were invited to call . in with . questions and comments . .The meeting was video taped , and reportedly, copies are available . Those in attendance are as follows :did . John King Russell Weiner Lisa Baaske Susan . Frost David Scott Molly Beacham David Miles Lynne Bresler Terry Gunnels Paul Fashell I ' r g i Joyce Brown John Crouch Ray Gronberg Dan McCaulithe Flicka Bateman Jane Sheaus Bob Riley Stephanie London Tom High Cynthia Wise Robin Robinson Bill Webster The forum began with an introduction . and overview by John Kovach , chairmen of the committee . Josh Gurlitz and Scot Hunsaker provided an overview of the project and aquatic trends for consideration and discussion . Issues raised during the meeting include the following : ❑ What will happen to the existing pool? ❑ The high school programming exceeds the supply of the Community Pool i ❑ Summer swim league is not at capacity ❑ Concern expressed about drawing revenue away from the existing Sportsplex ❑ Provide family changing rooms ❑ Provide suit dryer j ❑ Consider expending aquatic program to include competitive diving ❑ Consider outsourcing the management of the facility ❑ Consider 50-meter pool with separate warm- up , warm-down pool ❑ Consider outdoor aquatic element in conjunction with the natatorium ❑ Provide a family aquatic center for year-round aquatic programming II February 4 , 2000 8630 AM ' Chapel Hill Town Hall , Bob Woodruff. The first meeting- of the day was with Bob Woodruff representing business in the local community. Items discussed included - the following . ❑ The YMCA recently completed a capital .campaign in the community with limited . . business and individual donations . It may be difficult to initiate a capital campaign for this project. sell ❑ Little interest for a corporate wellness program for employees , * , ❑. . geed for • meeting space in the community 9 : 30 AM Chapel Hill Town Half , Senior Center Representatives . The following were in attendance : Jackie Martinez , C . H . Senior Center. Janice Tyler , O . C . Dept . on Aging Sarah Tomlinson , C . H . Senior Center Don McChesney , O .C . Dept. on Aging Betty Tucker, C . H . Senior Center Josh Gurliti and Scots Hunsaker presented an overview of the project and the objectives of this . . phase : The following points were made by the attendees % 170 ❑ A warm pool is necessary ❑ A therapeutic pool should be provided ❑ Facility needs to be safe ❑ Other warm , therapeutic pools are too far away (V . A . Hospital ) ❑ Sportsplex is too far away , and does not really have a therapeutic pool . ❑ Need to be able to swim without conflict with High School (read teenager) conflict. ❑ Clean , easy to use , locker rooms 11 : 00 AM Chapel Hill Town Hall , Special Populations , the ARC . . Pat Hurlman Ginny Wolpin Mary Frances Eldrige Darryl Dunlap (GGA) Colleen Lanigan Lauren Binger Facility programming in the community was discussed . Host sites included : Community Pool Spa Health Club Duke Center for Living Senor Center in Salisbury Lenox Baker Therapy Pool Homes Edison Johnston Meadowmont Issues discussed : ❑ Site makes sense for seniors . . . . ❑ , , Public transportation a must Q , ' Ramp access a Handicapped aquatic classes were discontinued at the Community Pool ❑ Convenient parking a must - . .❑ . . . . Sportsplex in - Hillsboro is perceived too far away for •senior use .. ❑ o Non -skid surfaces preferred ❑ Y fee structure limits usage by seniors . ❑ Funding source B Arthritis Foundation ❑ Other amenities Exercise equipment . Fitness room 4 Big strength training program 4.i 1 : 30 PM Chapel Hill Town Hall , Open meeting with Town Council Members . i Council members Pat Evans , Flicka Bateman and Mayor Rosemary Waldorf met during j this time period . Josh Gurlitz and Scot Hunsaker presented an overview of the project and the objectives of this phase . They then briefed the council members on the comments and suggestions heard during this two day period . 2 : 30 PM Chapel Hill Town Hall , Final meeting with Parks & Rec, Staff nd The last meeting was a 2 meeting with Parks and Recreation Staff. Requested information was provided to the design team and a review of the project was completed . r 173 Aquatics / Community Center at Homestead Park Town of Chapel Hill Energy Conservation Evaluation The purpose of this evaluation is to review basic requirements and identify options to utilize energy efficient and renewable energy source components in the new aquatic center being studied for the Town of Chapel Hill (Town ) . This information , which should be considered in all designs options to be developed for the new facility, focuses on the natatorium space , which is the room that will house one or more indoor swimming , recreation and therapeutic pools . Included in this overview are responses to relevant comments listed in the March 23 , 2000 , Phase One Needs report , indoor air quality concerns , moisture control , building durability and operation and maintenance issues . Particular attention is given to demonstrating compliance with the Town 's building energy conservation ordinance . Newer indoor swimming pools are generally the highest operating cost facilities operated by local governments , in terms of annual operating costs per square for energy and maintenance costs . The pool water must be heated year round to temperatures in the 78 to 85 degree and higher temperature range . Similar space temperatures must be maintained in the winter heating season . Large pumps run continuously to filter the pool water volumes . High rates of moisture evaporation from the water surface translate into high costs for mechanical ventilation , dehumidification , and cooling of the room space. Added to these energy costs , are significant chemical treatment and make up water costs . Because of these high energy, water and treatment costs , most. aquatic centers utilize a variety of energy saving and renewable measures not only to save money, but to make these buildings last longer . Popular natatorium measures include pool covers , solar pool heating and waste heat recovery . The - potential energy savings are large enough that the U . S . Department of Energy developed a program area specifically to promote saving energy in swimming pools . Information and results from this - - program , which is called Reduce Swimming Pool Energy Costs ( RSPEC ) is available from the websito www . eren . doe .gov/rspec . COMPLIANCE WITH THE TOWN ENERGY EFFICIENCY ORDINANCE In Chapel Hill , an energy efficient design for the new aquatic facility is mandated by a town ordinance : Energy -Conservation in Design and Construction of New and. Renovated Town Buildiftgs Section 57108 • of thee Chapel Hill . ordinance states that, 'Any buildings built with Town funds shall •be designed to. achieve a goal of using at least 30 % less energy than required by the North Carolina State Building Codes ' (NCSBC's) ._ The relevant part of the NCSBC is Volume X, Energy Code* for Commercial and Residential. • . Buildings . Demonstrating a 30 % efficiency performance over Volume X requirements of a proposed natatorium design is somewhat problematic . The available building energy analysis tools . such . as DOE 11 , BLAST , TRACL and HAP 4 target people oriented • buildings such as offices , schools and . stores : Therefore a customized analysis would be * required utilizing one of the above tools , coupled with spreadsheet analysis of * the pool performance . characteristics . This • level of analysis will add significant cost to the *design * of the facility white producing results of debatable accuracy . Consequently, a more pragmatic . • analysis is proposed - here to satisfy the 30 % design performance requirement . This method involves quantitatively or qualitatively improving the significant Volume X provisions that affect aquatic center designs . The proposed method is described below in items 1 through 1 7 . 174 1 . All thermal components can be quantitatively improved . For example , Volume X , ACP Table IV ( for Orange County ) requires a maximum Root U value of 0 . 068 . A compliant roof design for this project would have a U value that is 30 % less than this Table IV value or : 0 . 068x ( 1 . 0 - 0 . 3 ) - 0 . 0476 . Using this method , the upgraded values for envelope compliance are listed below . ACP 30 % Component Table IV Improved Roof U value 0 . 068 0 . 048 Wall U value 0 . 121 0 . 085 ( For all walls . Higher U values allowed for mass walls ) Slab R value 7 . 0 9 . 1 (24 inches vertical ) 2 . Volume X limits the amount of glass area (Window Wall ratio ) for aquatics buildings from 14 to 48 % , based on the' amount of window overhang , glazing shading coefficient, and window U value . Once the maximum Table IV value is established , the Town ordinance value will be 30 % less . Volume X allows extra glass area . for buildings that install qualifying daylighting systems (See daylighting section below) . 3 . An alternate compliance method would allow the designer to use energy code tradeoff compliance s software ( ENVSTD or COMCheck ) to demonstrate thermal compliance . Trade -off methods , which are authorized by the U . S . Department of Energy, allow designers more flexibility in designing buildings . In an aquatic facility example , higher levels of wall insulation in the natatorium could be traded off against allowing more window area in the dry side of the facility. The proposed method to use a trade off compliance in conjunction with the Town ordinance would be as follows . The designer would establish a baseline total heat transmission value ( Ua Total ) for the building using the proposed envelope surfaces areas multiplied by the appropriate values listed in ACP Table IV . Then the designer would re-calculate the total envelope condition using the proposed design thermal values . The design would comply with the Town ordinance when the building Ua Total value of the proposed components is 30 % less than the baseline value . - - 41 Where there are limits on efficiency improvements , such as fuel-fired heating system and . motor efficiencies , the 30 % multiplication will require a modification . Take for example an energy efficient motor. For a 25 Horsepower, 2-Pole motor, Volume X requires a minimum efficiency of 89 . 5% , whereas .the maximum efficiency fo'r the required motor may be 95 % . Increasing 89 . 5 % by 30 % 4 results . 10 11 6 . 35% 9 which is an impossible requirement to achieve since motor efficiencies must be less than 100 % . The prcpmed method to demonstrate compliance in this case follows . The Town ordinance efficiency value is determined I by the minimum Volume X value plus 30 % of the difference between the minimum value and what is the highest value availableAn1he ' marketplace . An example of this would be a gas boiler with an available efficiency range of 80 to 96 % . In this case , the 30 % improved value would be : _ . . ': 80 %• + 903 * (96-80)%- 84 . 8 % . . ' . t' . 5 . Where quantifiable improvement$•• are not * possible in significant energy conservation areas , the . 60 designer should propose a number of qualitative efficiency improvements to comply with the intent of Town ordinance . A good example of this case would be pool covers. Volume X requires a pool cover on all pools ( unless 70 % of pool water . heating is provided by solar heating ) . By minimizing surface water evaporation , pool covers are one of .the. largest energy , saving , features for swimming pools (if they are used on a daily basis ) : The qualitative improvement here would be to install . semi or automatic . covers instead of manual cover0 . s . Manually rolling in and . out the , large covers required for big commercial 4pools is •often strenuous work . Daily cover use by the . pool operators w il' I ' be ° far more' likely 4 if this process is substantially accomplished at the push of a - button .' I old i Any natatorium design that expects to comply with the intent of the Town ordinance should include detailed consideration of these qualitative improvements : Waste heat recovery for dehumidification reheat , outdoor air preheat , and pool water heating . • Automated controls for economizer , ventilation , filtration pumping and space and water temperature control . • Solar pool water heating . Automated pool covers to ories of energy efficiency features under Sec . 5A 1 1 , 6 . The Town ordinance lists thirteen ca g 9y Y items (a . - g . ) . The designer for the new aquatic facility must provide written documentation that explains , how . these features are incorporated into the design , or if not, justify why these features were not included in the design . 7. If installed together , .some of the potential energy features will result in competing interactions , particularly waste heat recovery from dehumidification and solar pool water heating . This interaction will most occur in the . summer months when maximum amounts of wheat energy will be produced by both types of systems and the demand for pool water heating is lowest . This interaction will require additional analysis to insure that potential energy savings are not overestimated . SOLAR AND RENEWABLE ENERGY DESIGN OPTIONS The Town energy efficiency ordinance specifically requires the designer to evaluate the ' Use of renewable energy for heating and swimming pools' . ' Note that any solar technology included' in ' the design helps the Town meet a partnership commitment to the U . S . Department of Energy's Million Solar Roofs initiative program (website ; www . eren . doe . gov/millionroofs ) o Further, low/no cost technical assistance is available to the designer and the Town through the NC Solar Center in Raleigh . Available services include pre-design analysis and consultations (website : www. ncsc . ncsu . edu ) . 1 . Solar pool water heating Pool water heating with roof-mounted solar panels is , likely the most cost effective , renewable energy ' application available for • this facility. Indoor swimming & pa do ools require low 'temperature ; heat and no :. separate storage systems : All collected solar heat is transferred directly into the pool water. A simplified calculation performed with . the U . S . Department of Energy's , Energy Smart Pools software : . program estimates that , for a 25 meter by 25 yard pool , an unglazed collector - system will save the new. , aquatics: center *.$4 ,400 per .year on water heating. . costs: See *,attached repo to*. * . *6900 • 0 • • Consequently solar pool water heating is likely one of the two most used solar building. technologies , in the U . S . 2 . Transpired solar collectors Transpired . solar collectors are used, on commercial . buildings with large , outdoor . air ventilation requirements such as natatoriums . The transpired solar collector is a simple concept Take a sheet of metal ; perforate it with numerous small holes , paint it black or some other dark .color that fits the building ' design , • mount It on a sunny, south . wall , I'eaving space between ' the main building wall and the metal ; and use fans • to suck wair through the small holes . The dark metal• absorbs the solar heat . The fans pull - the fresh air • into the plenum , heating it and drawing it into the building' s vent ilation • system . On. . , sunny days , this - solar air preheating system can significantly contribute to the swimming pool ventilation requirements . 176 The main utilization issues for this application would be the availability of a large unshaded , south facing wall , and ducting integration between the collector and an outdoor air intake for the natatorium . 3 . Photovoltaics ( PV' s ) PV panels convert sunlight directly into low voltage DC electrical power . The use of photovoltaics . in this facility applies mostly to areas outside the natatorium . Applications include sign* and outside Lighting and small lighting or equipment loads within the building . Due to the high cost of PV panels , batteries , transformers and controls , the payback for these types of building PV systems generally will significantly exceed 20 years without demonstration grant funding . 4. Waste heat recovery It is very likely that the majority of new commercial pools use one of two forms of waste heat recovery. Waste heat recovery involves capturing heat from warm air or liquids that would normally be rejected from the building . ' Very few new and renovated natatoriums use conventional heating and cooling systems . This is because conventional systems are high energy users that do a poor job of dehumidification . Instead in these facilities , designers increasingly specify packaged dehumidification systems that several ' companies manufacture ( PoolPak and Dectron ) . These systems are energy efficient because they use captured waste heat from the dehumidification process to heat pool water or air . These systems also . utilize computerized controllers and sensors to optimize the space conditioning conditions using the minimum amount of energy. A second method of waste heat recovery associated with indoor pools tends * to be used in more northern climates . in this case waste heat is captured from the building exhaust air. A run around coil or similar heat transfer device is installed to preheat outdoor ventilation air with waste heat extracted from the warm building exhaust * air . 5 . Methane gas recovery from the dCounty landfill Currently, the County passively vents landfill gases into the atmosphere at the Eubanks Station landfill , it is technically possible to extract methane from these exhausted gases . if extracted methane was • piped to the site ; the new aquatic center could use -this wasted fuel to partially or completely heat the building and hot water. A large number of issues and costs would have to be addressed to evaluate this option further; includin �_ . . ,., ". , . 9 .: Costs..of building and operating the processing plant and pipeline . 4 IF Meet 4 0 Gas quality; years of • availability, price . 4 0 ' 0 0 9 . t %40 • Grants availability to study feasibility and to subsidize implementation costs . ve ENERGY EFFICIENCY FEATURES 1 . Thermal shell Additional 1nsulat16n , is needed in thetwalls and roof of the natatorium for .two reasons : • . .The building will be . heated to high space temperatures (82-88 degrees) during * the, winter .; • The extra insulation is needed to keep ' surface ande cavity temperatures . above* dewpolnt temperatures to "preve,h moisture condensation problems . II t • i The wall and roof designs need to provide for continuous layers of insulation without thermal breaks , particularly by metal framing . Complete air and vapor barriers are mandatory to minimize moisture build up within wall and roof frame assemblies . Given the amount of moisture , no organic materials should be used in these assemblies that will support mold growth or insect infestation . These materials include wood , cellulose , paper faced gypsum , plant and animal fibers . i The perimeter slab edge needs rigid insulation installed on the exterior surface , also without thermal j breaks . CC To avoid window moisture condensation problems , any designed natatorium windows and skylights will have to be double glazed *at a minimum . 2 . Pool covers Volume X , mandates that pool covers be included for all heated pools designed for this facility. The U . S . Department of Energy states that up to 95 % of. the heat loss from swimming pools results from evaporation of moisture off the surface water . Consequently covering a pool when it is not in use is the single, most effective way to save money on : • Water purchase , heating and chemical costs 3 • Space heating , cooling and dehumidification costs , • Building moisture maintenance and facility replacement costs . Pool cover savings are significant. The unoccupied time period expected for this pool is approximately 3 ,400 hours per year, assuming the pool is closed from 9 PM to 6 AM daily and on eight holidays per year . For a 25 meter by 25 yard pool , the Energy Smart Pools software estimates a pool cover will save the new aquatics center $ 5 , 700 per year on energy and water costs with an efficient heat pump water heater . • Covers must be used on a daily basis to produce savings . • Because manually operated covers for large commercial pools are labor intensive , the tendency is for pool operators nbt to use them : ' ^:« Motor driven , automatic covers cost significantly more money to install . Manufacturer choices appear to be limited . This evaluation identified: only one manufacturer that makes automatic pool covers for commercial sized , swimming pools . • Pool design layouts should be developed to accommodate the efficient daily use of large cover blankets . Design guidelines include pool . shape , minimizing the number of . permanent obstructions in the pool (water features , ladders , ramps , etc . ) , provisions for wall - mounting of cover rollers (or storage space for movable roller catts ) and competitive swim lane direction layout . 3. Daylighting CC With regards to indoor swimming pools , daylighting with windows , clearstories and .skylights must be carefully designed to minimize visual glare. spots on .the . pool water surface for lifeguards , swimmers -and . spectators . Glare control is more stringent for competitive pools versus recreational pools . An excellent article on this subject ; * entitled ` Getting ' Pool Light Right' is available on the Counsilmari/Hunsaker website ; ' www . chah2o . cam /publications/poolight2'. htmi'. Daylighting system design is promoted but not required by Volume X . Designers that include a qualifying system can significantly increase window and skylight areas . Qualifying daylighting systems must be automatically controlled with photo cells , and they must be able to reduce fighting fixture electricity use by 50 % within a defined zone when daylight is available . Current design practice in natatoriums appears to prefer the use of manual light controls on indoor pools with daylighting sources . The preference for manual controls is likely due to the predominance of metal halide lighting use in these spaces . Metal halide lights have a long cool -down and warm - up time when they are turned off and on . If natural daylighting is included , at a minimum there should be a reduced manual light setting that will allow pool staff to reduc electric fighting use during the daytime . A qualifying automatic system will insure reduced lighting use , but will require careful design consideration to realize adequate lighting performance . 4. Energy efficient motors Indoor commercial swimming pools have two large motor loads : Pool water filtration and space ventilation . Volume X requires the use of energy efficient motors for these types of loads . As was stated above , a non -tradeoff compliance with the Town ordinance would require efficiencies 30 % higher than the Volume X values . Commercial pools have varying . levels of activity. The highest level takes place at pool meets when spectators fill the stands ; medium activity levels occur during other times when the pool is in use; and the lowest- level is nighttime and holidays when the pool is unoccupied ( particularly when a pool cover is in use ) . These varying levels of occupancy may provide significant opportunities to saving energy with variable levels of pump and fan motor ' use . Variable levels can be accomplished with multiple motors , multi-speed motors or variable speed motors , operated by manual or automatic controls . Note that none of the information obtained on the packaged dehumidification systems for natatoriums lists options for energy efficient or variable speed motors . 5 . Energy management controls In natatoriums , indoor and outdoor environmental conditions vary constantly . indoor conditions vary based on occupancy, activity level and , when unoccupied , whether a pool cover is used . The outdoor variable is the her, particularly concerning the air temperature and relative humidity . Automatic energy and environmental controls should strongly be considered for the new facility. These controls wilt allow the room humidity, temperature and ventilation conditions to be maintained using the minimum amount of energy: The. main features to consider include : • DehC� midiftcation reset to maintain space conditions and to minimize wall and roof condensation . • Economizer control too- maximize the use of dryer outdoor air *between the outdoor air temperatures of 60 •and 82 degrees :' • Waste heat recovery optimization between pool water heating and dehumidification reheat. • Unoccupied temperature , pump and fan energy control . • Pressurization control of ventilation and exhaust fans to maintain the building at a slightly negative pressure to outdoors on • a continuous basis : This prevents air moisture movement from the* space into wall and roof assemblies . 6. Energy utility metering ' A metering strategy should be developed that will allow the Town to purchase electricity and natural • (and/or landfill methane ) gas at the lowest possible rate . Generally. this means single, point metering for each utility to maximize volumes of fuel. units purchased through the metering point . 17s It is likely that .the lowest cost electricity available from Duke power will be from their OPT commercial rate schedule , which is a Time- Of- Use electric rate . The least expensive natural gas service would be a brokered gas contract . This type of service is available to larger volume natural gas users . It is not clear at this time whether the new aquatic center would require enough annual natural gas use to allow the Town to negotiate a brokered natural gas contract . 7 . Water heating The potential water heating loads are pool water heating , shower use , other domestic hot water use , And space heating for all areas . High efficiency, direct fired , gas water heaters are a popular energy efficiency choice for aquatic centers . This type of heater has steady state efficiencies as high as 97 % . 8 . Automatic shut off valves for showers Low flow shower heads will ' be required by Volume X . Shower energy and water use often runs very high in pool facility because showers are often left running after use . Motion sensing or timed switches can be used to minimize wasted energy and water use due to this behavior pattern . 9 . Pool water treatment When water evaporates from indoor pools , water treatment chemicals that are used to chlorinate the water enter the breathing air . To maintain acceptable indoor air quality for the staff and . pool users , large amounts of outdoor air are brought into the building to dilute these air borne chemicals . This often amounts to two-to-three air changes per hour of outdoor air exchange . Current water treatment technology should be reviewed to determine if code approved options are available to reduce pool chemical use or4 to use alternative systems. Treatment options should be considered that will result in maintained indoor air quality at reduced outdoor air ventilation rates . BUILDING COMMISSIONING Commissioning is a quality assurance process that oversees the conception , design and installation of building systems . Its purpose is to insure that the completed building meets the design intent and requirements of the owner. Successful commissioning includes the preparation of manuals and training of operational and maintenance personnel . The result should be fully operational systems that can be properly operated and maintained throughout the useful life of the building . This evaluation initiates a building energy commissioning process for the potential new aquatic facility. Commissioning efforts will need to be continued through the design , . bid processing , construction , start- up phases and in the firsf year of building operation . The most important commissioning goals for this project include . • Clearly. establishing the design intent " of the owner. One of the key ' issues will be ' balancing ' . manual versus automatic building components for pool covers ; energy ' management and daylighting controls . Manual systems cost less to install but require skilled operators . • Selecting the optimum package of energy and renewable features to invest in . An objective evaluation will be required to compare the performance , operating , maintenance and useful life factors of competing features . • Envelope construction of the natatorium : Regular site inspections Will be required to insure the thermal , moisture and air barriers are meticulously installed . • Equipment start up oversight : This will involve days of field work . making sure that individual and combined pool and space . conditioning • equipment and controls. work as designed and respond faithfully to automatic and manual control changes . V � • Operation and maintenance training : The building will have sophisticated mechanical systems and controls serving a high moisture content space with constartt indoor air quality management needs . A complete documentation and training program is required to train current and future Town maintenance and pool staff in all aspects of the systems operation and maintenance responsibilities . SUMMARY The inclusion of energy efficiency and renewable energy features will result in additional commissioning and construction costs that need to be incorporated and maintained in the project budget. Depending on the package of features incorporated , the energy features can be roughly expected to add 4-7 % to construction costs . In large part this added cost is mandated by the Town energy ordinance . Much of this investment will be paid back to the Town in less than ten years in avoided energy and water costs . The Town will also realize comparable savings from reduced maintenance and # facility replacement costs ' in the decades to come . s i 181 Compilation of Town of Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Staff comments i The following points have been identified for the4 proposed Parks & Recreation I Facility to be constructed at Homestead Park . AQUATICS Three separate tanks one for competitive swimmers , one for recreational use for adults & children ( slides , fountains , space for water games ) , and one for therapeutic programs (children with special needs , the elderly , brain injured etc . ) This pool would require features such as warmer water , " O " entry & ramp entries . Maximum ventilation -using fresh air when possible . Separate heating systems for each tank . Pool . roof that will not corrode . Anti - bacterial surfaces . Separate vending / concession area ( snack bar w/ real food ) Dive- in • movies . Security Adequate storage Swim Coach Internal access to chemical & pump rooms . Room for dual swim meets Spectator seating More * deck space around pool . Diving for recreational purposes . Automated filtrated system / vacuum . - GYMNASIUM Make similar to existing gym at Carrboro Parks & recreation . Maximum / excellent acoustics I ceiling baffles . Maximum ventilation . 6 - . ., V o Air Conditioning . . . . . Ability to use outside air as seasonable . . Dividers , padding & baffles . Permanent stage only- no convertible stages . The " right" type of wood floor (see Hargraves Center) Size gym for full . court & cross-court play.. Room for bleachers & personal stuff for spectators . BleaQhers must be easy to use , pull bout & not so heavy' & slow it takes an army to operate them : Operable windows high . up for a sense of openness. gOffices with windows overlooking the . gym for supervisions & to the outside : Video camera for supervision . Storage for equipment & . supplies . . :�! . 182 Climbing Wall Walking track intertwining property . STORAGE Primary / Critical Need — should not be sacrificed . A great deal of storage . Storage for chairs , tables , supplies , seasonal & year round equipment , summer camp . Some storage will need to be climate controlled . Event equipment Day camp LOCKER ROOMS Need to be able to accommodate many groups at one time ( swimmers , day, camp , soccer etc . ) . Family Locker room areas . s Diaper changing stations in men & women ' s areas . Children sized toilets & sinks . More than one shower or locker room per sex . Anti- bacterial surfaces . ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES A facility that uniformly works for patrons & staff . Space for new programs Use daylighting in as much of the space as possible . Reception - Entry should be welcoming with a* security barrier between public & staff. Play space for children in reception. area . Weather buffer at reception entrance . ' Space for , atrons@ :to fill out forms .. .> : : :: Space for posting information , . placing & .storing. brochures . Security area for making out , deposits and locking up money. Counter tops that is handicap accessible . . . . , - • All surfaces & furniture • ergooiclly sensitnma ive. A set : of rest rooms in for patrons . Keep administrative & recreational areas separate but. easily accessible to one another . Mailbox & sign in stations . Map Room Conference .Room to :seat 20-25 comfortably . , 4 Office Manager _ . Work Room . Netuvork Room Library Lounge/ kitchen area for , staff . Vending areas for staff & the public not sharing a meeting room space . 6 i 3 Adequate office space . More space for athletic & non - athletic programs . Large lobby with seating for teams waiting , display cases for ribbons & trophies , lots of windows . Sound System Multiple water fountains . r i Snack room . Adequate wiring . Weight room / cardio-vascular room . Racquet ball courts Reception desk & attendant . First- aid room with cabinets , counter , sink & cots . Adequate " parking - centrally located . Separate staff parking . No glass at floor level . t Lockers in locker room Adequate exterior lighting . Easy maintenance Good *security system Quality hardware Walking track around gym floor. MULTI - PURPOSE MEETING / CLASSROOMS ROOMS Space large enough for 20m30 people Space for Tai Chi , gymnastics , pottery , photography , art , sewing , craft etc .', ` ' instruction. with sinks & a lot of storage . Large space • with• resilient wood floor for dancing . ' ' Some . rooms with. a waiting area with one way mirrors for parents . ' Rooms with dividers : ; • *Excellent acoustics - I . Storage Ifor multiple programs carried out in the space Adaptations for hearing impaired . 4 to Game room for children . . ;• . . . . . Ito 4 Kitc44 hen - large . enough to be& rentedt out• with storage space for pots ; pans', utensils . PROGRAMS Outdoor volleyball court . Track for running Soccer Fields. 41 4 _ . . . . Additional space for- basketball 44 0 . Weight lifting Dance Aerobics 4 : . Arts & Crafts Events 4 U HVAC Zones - individual climate controls for each office/ space Separate environments for pools , gym , classrooms & administrative offices . Prevent pool chemicals from permeating other areas . Operable windows . Data lines Bicycle storage Designated Recycling & Garbage area outside of the building . Room with copiers , fax , computers , network etc , centrally located with adequate room for storage . Large storage area near loading dock for cartons of paper & other supplies . .Maintenance & Repair Shop- more than just a janitorial closet , need a , workbench & place to store tools . Janitorial closets need water & sinks ( .talk with Janitorial Staff re : their needs ) Diaper Changing Stations in men & women ' s rest rooms . Think out Fire & Alarm Systems before building is designed . Concrete rather than asphalt where ever possible . Use any large boulders unearthed in excavation to build, an outdoor climbing area . Make all entrance areas as welcoming as possible . Commercial kitchen Areas for Exercise equipment Large need for more room for Camps ( pre-school , day camps, after school ) . Decks to overlook wooded areas4at the site . Water reclamation ? Gray water? Operating costs 'for pool , for the rest of structure . Pool chemicals vs , * Ozone- what is best? -Want to use a proven technology only. , Environmental Issues- Wise choices in building materials; daylighting, , photovoltics - sp? ? ?? Public transportation that supports the facilities programs . Facility that doesn't leach costs after completion . , : ; . � :. . * Design to increase broad appeal of the facility. . Special attention to design of mechanical & plumbing systems- current facility grossly inadequate . Some type aof vapor *barrier betweEn wet & dry aariaag . . Design space for increase in staff4throughout entire facility . SPECIAL POPULATIONS Multi-component recreational / therapeutic pool Lift for pool entry & exit 4 W& f 4 ' 0 4 0 . , Higher water temperature in pool Heating system that keeps . the. water temperature constant. . " o : .. Locker rooms large enough too accommodate more than one wheelchair ate a =� time . . . 4 is Sinks , toilets , obenches6etc , sized* fQr children as well as adults . Covered walkway & drop off area large enough to accommodated a school / 1S5 activity bus with a lift . Water Resistance River with changeable degrees of motion . Access to spaces in all areas OTHER i Nursery facility . . of 06 so 0 60 I 187 i F I I� I 50 METER POOL ; VENUE FACILITY A natatorium featuring a 50 - meter competition swimming pool with two 1 - meter diving boards will be developed . The width of the pool will be 25 yards . The pool will feature one moveable bulkhead . Depth of the pool will range from nine feet at one . end to thirteen feet in the diving area . The, shallow end of the pool will include a moveable floor that will allow water depths to be adjusted from zero to nine feet . Permanent spectator seating will accommodate 750 people with an additional capacity of 500 temporary seats at deck level . The pool will include all amenities required for competitive meets , including automatic timing and touchpads . The deck will be a minimum of thirteen feet wide around the perimeter of the pool . The facility will also include a wet classroom , lifeguard room , meet management room , dedicated restrooms for participants and spectators , and required mechanical and storage spaces . Gender specific locker rooms and family locker rooms are located within the core facility . . l 1 I I I • 0 O O O O � I� i • � o 0 0 o a Oo 0 0 0 0 II � � o • o 0 0 o AMMEJ3 � o 0 0 0 0 �I 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 _1 jo 0 0 0 0 - W J Lio c o 0 0 a om 0 0 0 0 0• . o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 t=c= 0 � i if 46 at 9 u $ —_'u Y Sdfill_ •: r . k . 3 Wit . L . tit ems' r it Y F }NOW to - A as • . - > L o ir �.,� Al �' w - •. run+ _ L' .� 'r a .. . ^ c ceR^f' :7 .. �. F+✓ M ' .i f . t y S F - .c. ; . i _?`i 4 ' , — On No velost Ar in ZINN, fw not a No le IN ffw � 'rs "� C .s. �r•_� :j. . 3 -i' . . . I . e-_Z s: .. 1 i.""� ' - Y SY.� y". .__ -- � .. ., . . Y ti A Witt1. r. ' tJ= _• . . _ 1 Y.1 ^'ffi '�.[ v_' A owl .". • :. ,L.- a:= •i: •c c_. wif • �.:': x"; •.. " -� ` ..... .- k.w. 1 �► a LL...tr+rr'a� d'Fi.L t.w •l fn a -• ar. vair.uw.w+swr w •4 { .. ._..�" ..emuVANI Y � , r r i t At MINION IV I fit k -A * ;AINNIVAMMAJOW s M. mow. '�.. . �rwon ,_r�r — t r rr .7+Z ' r+l' w SwNo _c e c -flits wf� INN `vwwam N No wr. s.a� �rre Toma inANN ' "� �� i _ �- statist I Now. tot I v�}n•. = s_ !� ' dpip Not aftime ' A VItW i; ., y w w.n a of, e ; ?' �, ;= . . . N1 . . �M law.. . _ aloof .� - NialWIN Olt opliff New �tw,w . E}ps i nmr i w ,�, es� '' _ ice p"s w�ae �a+la+.n . ." aaaa dvrs� a.un As or vin- Ill. IN ar-m— V Itim%trea I tvAt Name A et ,am,a- Ill * . A- A ' . A. .4 INN. Iow rasa ..,M w Min 1. ..-_ . �r-''f- _ `.< r,...,.4 ! Baca• _ ' _ ._ T _ G+-_ . ... _ III WNF1 -es mom m. "_ �^ �y,l __ 4EY0... .....- ,�flsSA• •. •-: _ '�. " +67lltlt il40NL� fear Was posa ` i • 3 - AaII ."RAMC _ . sari - p e�+rs ' aa+� +atoms _2 _; Ia r. wN, t UA - WIN _ ._ iR.•'t% - .'7 �? ,fir 1 .j tit_ - _ F ^ w.. o+.:cwitcu. -,.r. '`=, —�.7+,.;.=` ' r+w-�-4'K.trG+S '`"".. -.<•,...r� " c S - .r. I" - s. �k _ f If -fir NrV S r _AN VNII - i :ff a.,�el�y +N4 a- � d �4 'Sl. D.nEYYw 1�.1FYiic r �i; VAN •r. • ^Y. one . _ xmietims: �.- Oil w lolm{ row, ' _ yI Am _ - aw " t .0 � y.. 'AA 0�'i 4ST iiflu 'i y,�l i .. •q- LN_ iu� S-'NA� '_' b _w/w'fii- - "4We I It '.. C ijtT C ?ff I jr !y £ VfA Cn...:ea` .ra- yyy `�,if d'_rlt d - r�i�t�^c o jam 11 .%�': VIA ••w E t i hf�`iZT'' "t17'3 Sti %�'h i. IF lon - III Am . of F VVA( valleme1. r 44wob If FA I t f . - ` 4 , i fWI fwa' ail - +' av+ , ' �. v II IV . ) ..: vim., • _ !- L.`�". S ' . I . m %. `''.y,c•..'r' f �P 3` } Vim It r^III 1 1, . . WVV Y.a.3'. - _ pte * qIIA.. IfS ... k�an I it w .✓ ¢ 3 ? z� ti y s ! y s i 't1 "ns taw 't S, r' .,-I IV 0 �, .Y fA.Wl s TF . , '..+ � . k jon I off nr + f _. i t F, 3' _ S bIf 'i'S� . �''i •f- i w-.'r� t.. f4v- � r!",1�I life 1 { ' . J . III On I ." ff Or I •`tom _ - a ` rN V. NIMPAIIIAL} fo Also NOW ir A- f� -IV I sr _,♦r . �' _ l • ..' i ` i -NOW Ithr, -- :r 9 .1r �-� kt Sr1 i S ,ft "� 11 r. IV III VNIN AWN 4Ae 1 If . -AWAw VIA . lit, I so Lam - - _ P`>G 1 ` .0 r c ` ' - _mot r ...s - ' ' iI asr :c i•t;mY•- v } R aa0 r y, n1R!' S r ® M 7 h ' - . . �-' .aft x � ./at I t y✓ £o`frkYl . 1t�( }i so t �• . . - ip het-.tt �+- _ '7 �;i' ;; >tiIV kr-r-S },.. .> �T -. t s' S"'}� am � ~ z5 Ism . s fi *�".�'s = to c N. ., th Alto a off : I if kiA in All- -AN it im It if C'tAn CIA t �.Maab } fi S ' . of a r." y r '+ ` i_ :N. _I, ANN tw. : j . .I "Wz:;•a�s _. . IV Imam ram- V y earFIVOL-r*NsA `w_ : . 1 _ NIN IN - � �� i�b_r� !waN;A' a�Y-: An. :aw: li{ t t#� "et.. •t "lonesome r '"_ks_ T•. ro �+f_±1� `�� ..1 t`WWI r �� ♦ Ste.- aA . . ts . y-�' NRi. K y � r t '11'Y�=may No AY ' No I IN.VI a� _ is ;y JL -TV rK saw etion / r 1 ��mil , 'ICY' q ray 4 sel lin ILIA v fy If we me rlOsion AN fi t}sfL'`s#1T c Is- a�W t t !S+ . Fat 0" AN ... Vt y / f t41 'o' � ,..._ � . 1. damelp t sty I * f l i• } r " If- 164, .1PA A TOWN - — kw G ". Of 6 ''fie',.i' Aim I I "Nowsi 5i . 93 i i 25 METER X 25 YARD POOL ; COMMUNITY FACILITY j A natatorium featuring a 25 - meter x 25 yard training and competition swimming pool with two 1 - meter diving boards will be developed . This facility would sufficiently host high school and USA dual meets and some triangular meets , and would accommodates most of the training requirements currently required . Necessary support space would be provided for storage and staff requirements . Spectator seating will accommodate 125 to 150 people with temporary seats at deck level . Automatic timing and touchpads would be roughedAn but not provided unless requested . . The deck will be a minimum of thirteen feet wide around the perimeter of the pool . Gender specific locker rooms and family locker rooms are locatedwithin the core facility . trot• 0 Q Op Q Q 0 © p p p p o ��' p Q p p` •0 Q /p� -• 0 .JpOf a• Q �" Q �-'' D 19 • LEISURE /THERAPEUTIC FACILITY A natatorium featuring a stand - alone indoor leisure/therapeutic swimming pool to will be developed . This facility would feature typical recreational and therapeutic elements such as a free -form construction with zero -depth entry , the warmer water temperatures necessary for water therapy and a variety of, participatory play features . This facility can be added to either the 25 Meter facility or the 50 Meter facility . Ample deck space will be provided around this pool . Necessary support space would be provided for storage and staff requirements . Gender specific locker rooms and family locker rooms are located within the core facility . • r t ion T 0.PLAT�ORM EL. 26.9 Ft. • �._cr POOL MECHANICAL i & CHEMICAL :-o- r-s- o-a- BUILDING MECHANICAL do de 41 1PY Vunk IL Add A �:"'�. so Aliyak .', " : . _ AQ or to bIv Ix,wr It 1pddmo �i►, . _ d Eff J, VIA, of Voo"kIA Y , • ;• - 4 .♦7Sh��` _ �� WA a {. , _.__s .._ ly Yti y , f((FL3 . 2 _ For If� ' ? r)r �` R I c ' It _ : ::,.-� ti•- ,n. .. -. ._ o d �c,ntoofl>oo_�VIC �� •r.do, AI.a F ';, 0. { �� . . . IStI. r `b _ r Ys�j_ - MI�4 .: � t Ir'�a q � A At ' mrs... 5 S _ mmamm, bsN � -:s Add i � ` ri �j � �i: ✓'r .` p:eerk� 4' ttc,l;•u .. 'x' T ti ' > � 1 w a!4- ' . , M .: ` ,. A �i . 4`+S•Y �F.to F :'4� ' Yi`'qIt r @c JT. . a �R > .Pr —• ar Pa a : p + qqq .r. e.+ r t'13FAt It ,j.�${C y �) ; - a ,c;+'uy "G": r C``XC,> - G�•i, F1 . c •y `!! ,may VIP IF-Ow -r Vote : old «s� � `p L Ito ' rpoo.s Ad Id to I d I & W I i ! aF k . I t2z u _ XF F or Im IV old +To. 1 bill V do so 4 ._ I tAlto d } . I f • a . .do I IF t bow, Itz WA'. ..,,)`F . ( +•fit hid mw Idiot do d it or Pill oft do Io qqq Y i F.� . ) M,• ' � v3F j,—•�s 'twodo F"tof 1r ` 7 .. ♦: VA V . do .' s Y - ' Old I ; 14 to I 'S do IV u • C go m III Add IV ._ - so if 444 AWAN t� y��. 1 A- ' • r ! . ✓fof <s,', hx"' xsCS-r -X."j .,�< : ' - p • A . ? Tr=_ fir' , . It�� MaP o! i ' .a006 '..•:.. I or . ; � ��►,+ . cot' M? 1� . . t , iAlto no 6 * a ' a.0 am O .age Z . �L 1 tmn'/ •,rYL no As r . . 6 As As 9 , . IRA AM Is ��dd (( [y ♦ a501 ALM • oneon •, t �end, 1� rl'.of t • • i '��OF • ....vial, • . yx Amej own so ° :;; • ' `,� ,,,� i t ,1 ,in "1 ;f ax; t; �,^Z Ad law I Ila na i z�.[ � ^kAn;" . ♦ . � t .: : J} }l, yy. e,.Fi.a : t=;F5 4 1.. tff an fx'%a'J-,•''%..r;'i• , ! �yt p} � L9ii► A I . ih7wa gt�! sr .cr t o e2 ?-y'An a:'et 0:4 't<<, '/ '. • As I qv� so on now 0 me It OP :1. we '' a: f i,. . a . a> NNW •a�rf '(.pri•tY . !n�,�. s,a • G.3.:rYA � ' . N . .Va t, _ :,� 0 %�r ,�I "Y'+•. T t::•• �f • �. . ..eA �.. i`,. '1!_y1r`..?• .y T,..lfi�. in,.c. 7'•� • } y: ...tiN • 7 • `• '' , .-r As :;n' .r. !.� tJLL.rs :.•isl+s c. . ' 'i`.5.�>2• l,� � �r• "..ia' t, c::, ' .J 7 .ya :a:at.a. ? '1' 'r�r"go m'r ac rALL If Ad - } ;' , r 'r j ; � = i {r tr fir• 6' Qra ta • (�j�•� � vroll" �Xith ;a . &ab� 'y ) .. rtY � t,� ,'a'-a No Y� t,a ..�..a . ,,'t_r .•^S+F _ �. . .�+ t� !a , ti>v•£ . k > . •vim` • •.r�q. : �i, it .r<00' Old . +. I . a\ a6ac+.a4K> • •, >y;:j. 1 3�3 w1 dpdpddfi�•r .•t .. ' , %' 4 4= - 1::` -_ o •• "' NO ' • S• t% . t is + '♦ *41 �f t kz{ rpw3 G�we .� w�-�.,�YI .�+ ♦,b Y� •Yj „ •i S+Q+Qi'r. '•+ 'j<.1: ' 0,0 ,;):ii t �F7�.lg�4l�•�-� ,:.x A, of �t '1.yEi3": • I'�'�"�.+ 3 •. ! .y . . f ,, '' y ti!^•♦; .rw•. = <�i:;i�•.� of Add : I: v '�SJr as 1'i' :• �. '1 t rj(� '1 • y-v j,'{ '1 ,� . ic..� �•'?�,•'..;:,:;.! tS i ii' s3rn ^i 1Aid Y t � Y t:' �a i !� ` a 1 .s to t ".Iz : mome ` , .:J: i. t .� •a ':3 `i,, ad k, ; � .;•a •: < •t S a r; , .' y! 'g+' ;c.i_""y! .Sb �,.»'"'� ' :•At Af♦ •t .• /1"'T;• .s �i 7 i6All •as wo t cl;ix}•;rk•;•: t Lot om • +•:� ,at^t@02 + n � K••4ow S > )= c} :, ta+'" Jis � >. � r i i a ` a " � r" t fr�a '� u}'fir Ti l A, •PJ:L►: vi< - _ kvi' N i; . �hv - : 1• 4 3 .as * , a? ° :�` ;, ;. a � • c '• d� •;f , . ': I dol •. 7 a 7g.d �kt�`t`> r� A, toi 1` t . �, }',,f tt r i, Sl'1 <:I ..� , jvil `1i. 7Y ;.,r/. � `1 ;1 _Sv{", ,'••'y'tliaL'�: ' �t••.•C T. as .i �r>t• M;lG; t:: i , i L 4t ,!-11 . < t 3 .. '�;- • •�. � �`'.! :E:�i ,,� . •�' - ':S`'t ' t., via;'• '" t ` i1' .1 �••. LL ` „i , , _ � � : 1 _• � 1t • tit •i w. v vI'f•.,-. s., :�Sl! ; •+ t {, . Y a 'r;,•?�' i •T •� i C ,,P. ♦ t `.: :'•7r>�; t/ 'iA � ti _ +'' Lt:' S � .%4' r ,• ' I. too I ••'` ire, oi ,, .N. �.; fee T.ex i�` a �_:6'?i/`;tla Ir• �.:. L.',.� � ' -?• , 3 C;1,; t �j:(�f 9FF tAd � :' .f( � {' � '.t `1•'.'� i+?�.•7a .? .Of Istror ��r:{ ,�'c . > t 1,ro 'l: . i tt, t .1 A. JrL:. `;f.- x .V [`4:*� C :>. .5'i. . _ wsm, t i.) � ..31 �<-, rp •a Y r' •.% ? a tl` . :- dii'•. ii J Or We 5�- .e . � yc'fol 'f` led �'t5 ��.."♦tt rAd,� ; _ a :Kkoff; ;.�? .., � ;t: . � *-i" a .f� : %ai: .f :" tt ( i. ., � .i i ' <t <; -�. i - .+ �j;tom' ``77 -.a:i..:..:.:i�S:,r:r3rs�... v..a�S - yy i ; �ryq; t : : - .t r , a ..� U RAW Ad 0 , �\ �r1 . .' '� - t • _rc: •i+ 1 -�`.. vi, .✓1 , �' 1 s Ajv > ,t , 1r �f } } 4 } t ti,.. t•: +J' ..f er7` • ' 1t t v. : ti ?��> "M ice. w� !.K. � . b. . x � . i \�1 ` ..•+.�57 oi'• ,FS 2';p We O Aw ;• s'• �L6 t1 1 4 1 `,'.• ' . ! 1 = i , ... •'�i •.�F" '.ri:, 1 11 �ag?f .';i• S a. • Sr L,. .''Q a , .. ,:: ,•< a r i! j.i 11 � ..•o . . �;..,Y. • ,.� :i " x ' io 12 sQ[[,,�� g 1 y ♦ s < y - . w aa, ..+>�` .�.rw� aa�' >F: ` . . . , , L t '+i �' '. • 9 ,T r < :. ' ♦ - / t `�� ♦ > t�' y .- fit ra;J1 . .�-; : �1p� t' J; i 't<`<I tv ,y Al=� '?j � J •� !�� . ;• Ys <�t 1 r • t r. `t_ ';�� Y, +'• ?K� r�� i_, A. ,4^RtP : if . 1 yr_ v .t ' '' ^ :'•' Y . f ia:�: _ .r1 3��• -'•' \ z i. :l irf} � : ,] „A %,I `: ?��cc A...,.;i� � t�. :t. #:;�:�:'. fff,`•j .� ° }::' •' A' V " P A . ffCaRY"Id ;Ael it Ad so ff do no ILL •r; 1law -�::. • '�a` :.l •. a �.t. r Fy r,,'!•: Zvi �J 1Ogm: V': .. S.L In4 ) _ , .1}•Y,..! :.•`. : ✓. - _ • t;,'�:: _ ,:,: �. r:_I t_ ? y � 'ii• ''• 'i '. a :.>♦' n:�•�'•':.ira:.'"J .7 ' ft� ��: .> ). 'T�• 3'aa % a4. • i• ,} . ; :•% j:� 'T` �>...;r kn, :,"l. :' _ _ _ >� i: .. t.�. ' f ; ,ff to „r c• 5 ! t } : e';' T • fig' • T , } �i�' ial ` . � ' ti 4i �:' t.t L f•: ;! is N- ,Y,• w /<' � 7 , •♦x ! a... !T :/ 'J �',,`� ; . 0 ' ;r ,. t .=� . - :4ta• , .� ' 0�..- .•+r - �- n `1 �. t,,.••at t -M: 1 .'i es F S "? ^ r J: .ry) ! _ �a.:.Y 1.�...oi•..:_.••t_;+,<Se. . _ • , vile ! `�. 1 a - :. ; v a:r• - � t t ' . '•a y ` !a< .. <..Y.', >' . j . o♦ V! _� a.',;:• .?:i=�. !, • < 1... , +t - '3:i-'.-' .� , Q. u:1 to aai 'i i:^ .� 7_ .' h ✓ !^ t' t . _ _ ?• q NO Y . t -, , )• iz.., y J` "-+, z: 'T' . 7 •1:: �. 4't1 'L ' i + *'J .�`>4C 1 ! f +., •t••:• ' In ' ) ? '..i`% - �<yy Z: , _ 'a •N ; t . + j . . ..Sf•'R'1+.a.�:: .�•. + 1�::. , „ i:'.. : .: •. :� �` i :.ur: / S �( r :� a. da ..t �_ � - . •' � 1 is t, _.a , ♦ : .. .f ; • r � 1 t • •t• t< �h r a. r f 'S -'t - -: . r•r,7 0. :: .,�'�" �: '"` .a ''rP' * `l` • 15rt.'i`'e•� _ .,+�t:. ?:••:i '�t,? ['j f:-• �i::�: f'. .' p , : .r .. ;': S < j;. . < ?1 •gri'1,•,..••Ad, fr. _ _! viL' Ji ' �.;• ...ttt t/' � . ttB: +3 %}t'�t +•sk1a � . y _ Gill l �� on -� 1.LOWI's < $ •�:: n Mx� . GO. H.• i : k [ f�fp4 . 'vi �a f1 .- •Y ^ 1 :' / r _-! r < >y5. •aj _ ♦ `� 1>^ ' ' ..�f♦. ::L.ij 1 '.:: % 4 'r Y�"^T . � i' ' ,1�.7jt a h y x�y.> .. r j"i� It i. . i . f G :Q •.� . �t s /' r Li•''i4 .'` i� }' Los, WILL ^• s ! t!!�,• i,`e". c. .,.0 d'f' ° L,x c'J+• ,. ., _ `�1 '�: N�4 - - Y 's:. a•Y. ':.. � 1 •<� �•Jt K�: : N! 2 ,( +Ci.�' ; �ia, .�I•r '. . • Y Wool � r i . ya •� : iY /� . aat i •.,� :a: Y" l C !� ! • 't'.♦Ls/ - .a;� ..�7.J..t , , .. `fit > F . t' �f, l ;i. :'..of do Lui ;w �. "t- -,;.+: tt } z, 'i. � ) 'r := ,��.• �.-y�' ' / - 3 rA'4s',�•,',s• <',,•'Y U • ' .. ti... :,. i� . r_. . _ . �Y [ ' . �.>.. i. i - '{16!ai?Y�� ,' ; •.r.: *x: ' ••n ,"1, sit Ad •. �. :'� a ' •i• ? : r %• a. � ' , • 1 , I 'r J =:,►_ tt � ` 2 �S>! . >ti' ',3.II :. }},, .:;. . \ ] 3 • \ she 1 .i. v.y . .� i. 't tr �> ;r'! t �. w i•x 1. < •14 r •.... ew z ``' \ ? ♦ . �> '.�r.'-�L • ; i• ' sal::«w> • ta>-aM t. • f -aL� {?.•. a V'1 ..�trs•�•^�"�a"":• !, f .v • o-sr• k 1 . +f`. . i • . t _ .. f. .n v< .. .. , q *vf - t .,ti�_lµ of Ad wC - _. . ♦} ff i 4 rr;•n+?.5. !.noff`, * :``' 11 of� - r'w}�1 lef;.'<� i .. c_ V: nod •.='«- r:< y:CIA • ; ++� < , 1•. � rfs :'n;.�a Iwo�:h"i Assoc s,j �!' 1: 3•, , VAR t y. eY ! \KY _ � H �. � � : t� • 4i '� I �.� :. H _t> : �l 3 3 vi1 too f 4�.. � tt�,{ �. A- a :� t` `"�i� ,::f ••:' =;yt 1i:1. . .(•�*••>. . t '; "j., h aYtell i.. . .Y. «f,�! ;1� •:' e" ts•t r k As-f-� •. z 7<<r j :l, .ROL �• ' '.! r < . V:]:^.:: ' if.e:r.� • :�� _ �.^ Y;, . t , . g .ce .. � S ' . go S ¢ (r,ju, r. - Ia, •` ar .+' . i As � a� '{�, r x,r.• ;, Y.2 of A0 '.aA• > to . 2 •i. :: _Vast 2 !!! rt' .. ; ; ,w^ . trA ''1;: :: . z '}•:,..; ' a: tx ci::� da. 'i::`.S- { • to .i 1ti• ltdo; do C1.. t,_..�.�.' ' 2 u on jk-o to " did > • ti% ♦ a hY.♦.a �e - 9:: :'• � '• _ ,::H :.s "'� i « ! fib - `v u i �`a li :�''.�,�r ;. • : \ .�.�e ' ..�•r L ;a iH:.: � -f ' ,• .� .: ,. ' RAW, WAR , . --got•. . , . } -7 S, �Ira• :• :;•; it :r '1 ~ ] � ,�`:. .:�`�- ill b-,S .off . k:M, old V Is A~ � was COCA r• �� :.ilir �' .a•. , JrJj y,• • Q' w ✓ y •fin . ..•.'�., + 5 . , :. jp. nor so t . :^j}'. xti "'-% •A - ► ' ' Mai.: 4 ✓ ',C'•. r ,' f i 'r:a: '•S'z', ' / ! ..'�.r. i'` : t .: : tl,, • •,•_r^+. *? !: * yt.' r Z- e . r. .', •�: 1, , `` : -AT' s;[Ltz,' :t•r ' �' , •'n gt}gyd ,t � , �/ :.:MIC�,' '•�` 3,A fi t� f ,> : t [ • ..> w:•Ay •� y4 e>•.i ` It 4 •,ft % t % . )� L' '� fier�'. .i•' . 't' i� t f;~ > !JJ/y. ri• • et: ' •n• fl7s an:•. �I� : S . !, O• tt f tZ. : Vic. y(.•��VL♦•g t. . i l- � ti - ;: . Oldi. 'i: :} trl .,Y ;1 _ i. •b1 rS y7� �• 1� <ly a of '� I `' 'lAL E ' v.+' •w�t-ia r � %^t •'•ta• `'� L .•ter r.�lr,� t � N..x. • u ( 12� VpV -j1 M,4.tN' : 2• •'). -` t. 4Pt a•'• ) ?gIII V -al it no f,s•<. Y+". ' �� t0 we ` ♦•=' �"<l Jl*Lom f of C- _ / . ""C"; ). s.j Wallace' _: . 1}1 �. >' �'►y . . • - - r• • •w.,Ka. f. i . a- ft • `�. 1 .Yi+ rTt = } >' ♦V IV a do f• • .st �✓}"'.5 , �• ' = r.... �.. •• t 1 ✓ L `' -- ! ' on • S� • _ ;% % %, ' -:;AA . its ^ at GO E Uvr • Jar �.be ,,• '�%•MI- _. . Alt .:: : : , y1 % I So - ALL . . ,t,• a. .i• ,_% tt7 + • . 'y LOW It z '.�.ataur. ` j -• �OCRs''.• . ; f . R�.r1 t r., �Lt � as - 0 ♦ < ff i v a- • . Sty:::: • . •'� ' $sa .r •� i t t. iiirv. If 0 :N ,- t '�', . • e4'� wff � ; ._ •a .�.• �^-.'�'��.,.;-.•--,•��' . ��:iti off6 * y i'r , }t g r! •1, , . r , } a . ' t rir. ' % �[��qr� t C ^ is :: 27,' ; ; . NO 8 } ! ` �' tt �� -,�.•"'� •i�•: � , ` Cj ► ? t13` I yvIdd i .�:w.Y:.:S'.JL-:v ' vi!n ,�'do 7 !!I: �11H 1.. tC)a _ �C. , ; � ,+ f�, i t.nor,CIt 'al �i • 11rr„`d`dll ."3' 9^. �..�'YRl,ta : � , . • rs 1A1� ta4 � •..f < . . . r •, _ : : Good r• ' a �`� :. �.)# 9 to • :i � on 4 f.�. . .'06 �r aJ:. . n NOW ��. a 1 JI% A sr ,,it tr> !r li �i •"' � � ?{i:� (. :r . r a ld 46. •:, „ _ t'• i S�� 60 'Io po As 6y. a '. ZO` . �y �� '. �, • •J.•Y jl • :,`- . one 4-g*v ff* „; I%'m ." a,:; a . .i :. : �•• : . � . r 1 ?. •_:i'- a�'� . 'w � ..w.G ,via r .. 7;�VAR a IGe :, j Y • i0 111 * I Nepali alto Go jA`A AlOCAL .]� : • `N�z ( or ,•:tr• r >,.1.� (�'� �i w' `c If i: �`..�i � i 'lab do do p • •. • �' il. •1a• 'C:ZS'9 y';�r;.:.•, . . . . y� . rr ' •• .*v AM oil il' ar off�:; to f ART :tilff ',.� rtiv >�` • etarl • A � cti t.(•.l, =` ., -G rid'-via f, .• � sl 3 j •a FACK� a: • •two • �.,...n 1. '"' th] ` ' vt �♦ ` .., -. �1`: 'ii :t r_ ` Y . `J.:.l'.�.:;y, `;3'>«w. I• . 7 ' b.:!t.. r •✓ Wolof •� < •. ria'`:j,' y l i�. • A' `�'f ..il;. r . taC�St?!M!"_'••'�•�; ka:i % v, .� "t_rr'M: �.••r! ' li :",t,. I� �•til,,, t 'r t.,a..,+if, tf,�v,A'S•51`. . a ��" • _Ff �Y ♦3:�: ! i- c: > `t Ff_ a, , v^c .'a +.r: .r Ery,•i y _� Ed r f<,., AG r )r . ;, 4 , i. • - : r .~'-rtwo" �'r` ;'-fir ' ; ♦ :� t 4 do 3~me oi•� �:�` jl~N,�•Y. r .`so INti,,t • � I i b"'`�L}} 'i.'a `•" Is .' i ...v l;:k ;i . •.t� to 11 .0 r .?,.':i ate! "�'t., 3t[ . - ;� m:.A •v ' ,>:a4•. '.' "�.'>a+ 205 t : _ � � Go til Nav^P(a,t 01 . It It TO41N OF CHAPEL HILL • � �, ... V r W A M, , *It \ to COMMUNITY- & AQUATIC CENTER SITE PLAN G A ARCHITECT ► � : to o fe to v� U P:opul.atio-n T ren ds .' Average Annual Change 1990 1999 2004 1990-1999 1999-2004' Distance from Number Percent' Number Percent Number Percent Number -Number Proposed Site (000's) of Total 000's of Total (000'sh, of.Total 000's) Percent 000's Percent 01to.3-Miles- 37.1 ' &20W 44.4 5.9% 46.7 .5.7% 0.8 2.0% 0.5 •1.0% w 3..to:.5.Miles. 26.3 4.4% 31.6' 4.2% 33.3 4.1% 0.6 2.1% 0.3 1.1% Subtotal 63.4: :10..6%• 76.0 10.1% 80.0 . 9.8% 1.4 2:0% 0.8 1.0% 5-to:lU Miles •127.0 21.2%. 145.9 19.4% 151.2 . 18.6% 2.1 1.6% : 1.1 _0.7% 1019 15 Miles 89.S•. ••16.7%- 100.3: 14.8% .103.3 1.4.1% 1.2 1.3% 0.6 0.6% 15 to 25 Miles.. •319.3 " 53.3°/o 430.0 57.2% 479.3 58.9% 12.3 3.4%' 9-9 2.2% Subtotal. : 535:8 i' :89.4% 676.29.9%. 733.8 90.2% 15.6 2:6% 11.5 1.6% Total(0-25 Miles) =:599.2 1,00:0%. 752.2 100.0% 813.8 100.0% 17.0 2.6°l0 12.3 1.6% -A e Gr, oU.PS ,.' 0=3 3-5 .5-10 10-1-5 15-25 U.S. - Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Under 5 .4.5% :4.7% 6.5% .7.6% 6.2% 6.9%-- 5 t09 4.8% 5.1% • 6.8%'.. 7.3% 6.4% 7.3%. 1.0 to.14 . 4.9% 4.9% 6.3% 711% 6.3% 7.2% 1.5 to 1 10.2% 8.7% 7.1% 6.4% 6.5% 7.3% -Subtotal: -. 24.4% 23.4% 26.7% 27.8% 25.4% 28.7% 20 to.24 : 15.2% 15.7%. 7.8% 5.9% 7.�%- 6.6% 2.5 to 29 8.2% 8.5% 7.9% 7.2% 8.0% 6.6% . 30 to 34 8.26/o 8.0% 8.5% 7.2% 8.1% 7.2% 8.3% �8.9/0 9.3/0 8.7% 8.8%0 8.2% �35.fo39 . o o - .. 40 to 44 7.56>/o -8.2% - 8.6% 8.9% 8.8% 8.2% . 45 to 54 12:6% 12.3% 12.8% 14.0% 14:3% 13.3% .55 to 64 : 6.7% .6.8% 7.3% 8.5% 8.8% 8.6%.- 65 acrid over•: 8.9% 8.2%. - 11.1% . 11..8% 10.3%. 12.6% TOTAL .100.0% 100.0% 100.0%'- 10.0.00/c'' 100-00% 100.0% Median..-e 3.1.4* 31.5 34.6 36.1 35.6 32.8 - Inco-me . C h,,a ra cte ri s i cs Per_Calpita-Incomes Median Household Incomes MV rket Area : Dollars Index* Dollars. Index* . 0 to-3:Miles $27A8.1 1.37 $48,548 1.25 3 to 5 Miles: $25-1818 1.28 $42792 1.10. M 5'to 10 Miles $24'638 1.22 = $42ffl3 1.10 10 to 1.. 1Miles $19-546 0.97 $40,781• 1.05 15 to 25 Mikes: 27;508 1.37 $ 531084 1.37 TOTAL U:S. $20;120 1.�00 $38,885 1.00: ' Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 - : WET SIDE CAPACITY TRAINING (Available 25 Yd. Lames) TFacioll Indoor Competition Pool T 22 10 3 ` -e-c-ond Ot Total 22 - 10 3 Estimated Trai•Wing Holding,Capacity, .110 , 50 15 I T Daily Training Capacity r 330 150 45 RECREATION (Surface Area Sq.Ft.) Indoor Competition-Pool 12;640 6,165 0 Leis. : : 4 .Q 61700 Total 12,640 6,165 6,700 Shallow Water, 4.,298 21096 63,700 Deep Water 82342 4,069 0 Estimated Recreation Holding Capacity •285 125 268 Daily Recreation Holding Capacity 713 311 670 Therapy(Number of Patients) I _ 01, a 30 Total 0 0 . 3 0 Estimated Therapy Holding Capacity 0 0 : 3 0 Daily Therapy Capacity . 0 0 210 Total Daily.Fcility Capacity 12043 461 925 • `. :. N DI 9-00 - 2002 20.Q3. ZQLL4 2�L15 0"to •3 Miles ; 4.51,320' 45,780 ' 462240 46;700 47,160 3 to *5 Miles 32,280 32,620 322960 33;300 33,640 T 5 to 110 Miles 147,500.. ;148,300 14%100 .1492900 150,700 10 4o,15 Miles - 1012500 •102,100 .1022700 `103 300 103,900 1*5 to 25 Miles 449720 -459,580 : 46%440 479300 48%160 O ' Market Penetration Rate `0 to.`3-Miles 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55-.0% 55.0% 3 'to 5.Miles 45.0%• 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% •5 Ao 1.0 Miles 15.0% 15.0% 15.1 % 15.0% 15.0% 1*0 to 1-5 Miles 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% •10% 3.0% 15 to 25 Miles •0.5% . 0.5% 0.5% -0,5% 0.5% Projected Attendance 0 to 3 Miles 2431926 252-179 25,432 25,685 25,938 3 to 1.5 Miles 14,526 14,679 14,832 149995 152138 5 :to 10 Miles 222125 22,245' 22,365 22248-5 22,605 10*to I.S.-Miles 3,045 33,063 3,081- 32099 3111.1 15 to 25 Miles 2,249 2,298 2,347 2,397 21446 Experience Factor Lo TOTAL 662871 67,464 68,057 ::v=: 6.8,651 69,244 41,1� y It2. ' .JC t•a.'N a��.. plc:� • ,?' .d • x�` 1 t t.. x'Y i r. t..t7'.:�„♦y+i`na S♦ "1 ,1. pr";♦ Y '•.li:.: j Y [t 1�. a.`'r'I r. �,`.< °t, Ja4i�. '. r,"'`L r t` �° "�ht eT�+� �' }jt t r 3 r •{/,kij?.t S t.,t.[ r ♦a ram•;.F:•�Y♦ 4:.r .• ¢ 1. 7il♦ E7�a{{yyt<� r t.} �:4 a i'�„ty tV"e[ d' T ; � ` ��I✓41`slr.. I h r�li!11$a)1 E 1 r ' I' 1 r k �,.,,+t>s•.•♦t '• [ 'M'.r 3 t •'t r t yy'fa' y�l-I:r Fy.{_ _ . r�� ,f,K� '2•`t,,.7 •n..t'i•..y`a Y. f ��t n. : � �txt Cn�,rl� C r ,(rP. tt.r�M�♦, f.,,•'�::cr;'`c ail F..-.i •► e ly 7 � '� � ' '' ;rrr V Tt t"� , iY ��',a. fi yl � Y •• )r ,. '�,'} tC r t•r4' E�' fi4Ei �� .♦ rr.+! o .rb x.•• aol{; y-. '� ... iRoo'+r3 + t•' v+v P�. '•" ;u+ a r,•x» .+. -:r r.. r �� ' •r • r[ty 'r' �"�••pti:t{ .t s '" .,�a�Y a•.:,�•y � I[�:�?' .+.'3oSJt'o.r ..•tl,•f ��t(. — �♦ .t��y rwt ` q �° e�r.Sra�'z/�'M1 r` Y`.`. _;,.r�". .. ��':'`o.�rY 1 ,:' a• it �, 7 •, airs, 1'' ti•, ( �+�. 'F` y'�' rrl 'Nw ...:,.1. .i. .` F ,�,•y = ,. �`'f '� ;:•� E�i12�'� � It�,rs'�"ti r J.�yr�•, '�'w'1''r,).,w,'^iw•.,w.'ti�� y •.. .W,,,� �r:. v'"` eA. M �G•: i` ri��tx [ a �Sa ti. +'• •ciki't ;> r r"''r r" v +- #��fiA'�a'�� .��•r i[ ��Yr�r' F'�'177"ter( tyr+ t .t � �� t"YcwJv.r`,' _',�5't¢ .,.'i,,.� } �,W y.uTgl+lt ,•r;.. jJ.tF, �tt't• J' err -a- t Z I., 7 r[T :�.•'>,.�.�... {.w �� •.fir .F1 :r ......[' ;;,+may +i. t 1�4 5 `}2'' ^L.�`4 I �• l`t [♦ CG2- G�, a XLtct 7 a ti 1).. r ♦. c ��I�-.f�i 1 6 r r - � •T• • [ Aft !��ya i sq d a l ac M w., r�♦�`►►h t F :^9j �, � 9 r r ;t r pS j 1 p�P .14, .. ;G `,_S � rM rvF1b 1'7 �' - ..yet �•+l`71' nr'K' 7''• - •'•' ' 1 w`�rU:" 1+.�♦ y 1y. J > t; 'c .. ti � "'-:�k.��',"•x. . r{`o[r .. . r %M�"K":1r�I r� � M}.�♦ '71Cld��l"k 7�"•A' � � ti r�e 'll•�i` ,♦ta v �,irr � t +•t.txf=w.v�Y• f>tf x t ik4&`JTy � :.1. w` n. ��ii+ a I' r t{ ♦�y i t['ti v `f` e «`�.` •<�["i t`S? r •a �y:.1j'�,,�'it._ lvtir�.\. �'jLr'v��.4 e�� '3•rY t a`-�•.-.'..yL'�� }'�I �Cf.i`c ... rfi r�:�"a� �'S, r 1Z. i • i • i � i d � i � i • I.1 C ! 1 � C q `�Nei�.��,3�IJ 1J!� _ ,,. ♦ �. �1 r �7 I SEi�'.�:'1* � F i rt ! � ( 1 ��_ =`fi,�r '�'�� 1 -�;•z� a�; ' � ,'.� 'I �f 'dry�4 � � ! t ! 7 .7•� • r • I I '•I y i}T � :^ t r3.1�[M1��M � .�I.r`•'x'-r••.w(.n.�wF ' ♦ --•�_�.a''C�1„ 1~i t�; tY 1�S•6��,r.° � _ - ... s•,. F � �''�,j�• t - . All . r•.,r 1 -! 11 "r,. .+,,f�y�.3'l, it•"♦„1�';F7 fi`pLf`•.3 .� - y :!':.trten.• e• .,.'r^••"""'•`"�""�u { 1 I I^ r ` 157 • •. �,i l�z!S ,.c`'(,,tl�r*��. !'• t ..-; '[/ry 4�.{r.t a-1 [1S'e a �f� �jn ,� Z"J'1^jfr'v � '•:LLr, t"� . A `t' 1 f '•e-t�S'�• 'K''r"�E'4"�"^•��Y.•3,'�+i`"'7°�3's,{•� •��•rl .ry.q y�1yp,�� n.'»•�,,,.� '1. j .,�v r.rus 1 .tSS - i t,rt. 14 p ' rr9 �•r r�,�tt4 {�r ,nE+��'•o lnl?' �.'c naF"n[r'r��• 14;,` a r r r, c j r 1sl J' 4,.r �,,, i• �< ,, r I Tt;`J fE/+.'.s' �I7rr / Y: r^. 'r• t._ l�c 7 � 'yet I. �•'t-: - JJ � xr! k'�Y 4� i �6 Il 1 �' •• ~ er �a l t �y; a,hr i. x ' p✓� a"=t. •.^t cl 'W tr,� J�kk.. 1 1 ' •a;rsq�t I. � I ., 1� 7 t.tJ� ! y 4 � ,l ..�i '.;yy e, ♦1�y t+ )..I!+, S y .s r 1 i JI. ��t`:'nl ��ri t 1 eiy♦{ [♦ r >,'h°'f �� ♦Sr"- :%� d. -,.t r•t+ '••^P Alt>y,�,c K'„21 l ,y:�♦ t♦ ri'S1'+,c`. kv frr 7 "_•'.' .•... S�1+ f a.i '! I tyrr.., 1 [� 1 i�t`r..• + �'E' ��°VV:•. .,y,rJ.. 1 r Y t •. o �� ♦ tt o t r [ � hr Y ♦. > �::•': • `Lf"':lii.ttl.!il'•' 1 sy- a� i�.r,r 4t '{ t �kF/ 3 S rl�7r} �j IS"r,7lt IF awy, " 'tfS'`♦ ta.;�:�;�''..,..,..: r,l .. t .�•,s. .., h liner:•'�Yt�•' t t fih19 ()��xf r (� �y Ff�ltt' o-, ,- . yi• [ .} .r ' ti': �..+.•..•lt � a � i:" t "W i Yr,. tli � j K`X''1.�1 t♦i �3� Ee is ,... t' 16 1 Y �� ! �.fzr't'�.i 4.+7•...�''"'-t�C � •!�q't'ln.� � 47• _ >` 1� •' '-''M I►''�... . fsf• ul •^� t ...`�'. ,-_ • I •',r•!� 4•, z,,%' t.. ''','^^,_ i,� 4? trttitJr • ( „� Fq1 t .hl: .,.a ^ IJ:.e"y.�i y `W •� .r .,ri+ _ - . • �• r • 'h r .. .'/ [ ' .. SV.Lt ) .J:w M j 4.�/� '�M•1Y `1' 1 '.+ntt.. J .i '' .... .ir.., _\.••v.��. •ro.px�t� C RSayr...-i�t Z4M• n�✓r"�''w•..i'! �,1�'M�.w� ' �_ � i;�'__l i�.n��r`v...16��It -. r"'y.y �� •'♦1' ••. ' in w �fWf('ii�� "YY'• 11t '•...�..,.. �h (aj l6f:MQ1,_1.• pr ••...LIJr.... !i• !�`��?':� '[.. it • r si t tr �is Y , 4 �f , + trix *if tw; rt t* y �f At �3 ' 6 & ' yj VT ire `. v' yy�� • it 1 elf w still as I is IT v a didy� . #so�• Of •ptr• ? S6 ! t t t �'; �( ... +i " * '0 3 swift i A � 1; r . z t L,, % L ; / e dt }tea r� , r in IF - < >p.� .i,. � . r 1 •t< ,stro •�'. 7 •- r .{ . 1 •. / . 3 .. in t c y 4 �•jlt� �Ea� t }aTV M i ;t i; ++� I l. " y ) 1 ! r_ �'Tf111 .1,i6 eT i, ,�i{�¢♦iztA ^� .Y:A�[ ' a 1 r 1 Is �t ais IN, md. ; a ( aa _ �.. " F`tit, Y_ j - � li. Is do. • TV y r % �� f t it , r a a 1 a ifw is �� bc r N ' IN at •r ar .� 4 it s •li y �c I .' �tdt r (•As r _ t � :�� qt f 7 T�� 414�V sy . 1� � �a f , ,t r ' T s q t � a • � n } e I 1 U (� , - + 3 t t , . 4 ,- `f 14 7 r It Its a M a '. i j t r ie `\y v .Y t i Yf . 74, F: ,•„ ; t �� e t _ f-r 7 w ,S •s ^ t. t r'y t'wV•e, YJt . j�` •s ! nZ t 01 ` :. t (•�I, �• y • i.. -. T 0 for a,t 1 •:. t .� •. didu f .t.• K f yb t I V a ( i a ; a< 3 _ . t +n1 y r � • , r, t ea , do 5 . as d; i3 •. ' -r � � 1�-.' � 4 �v /rh/ � f�' ,* yr -fL, 1 '- Vt i �_i.Wit ) rT ' t t'• s • ° r J�j . i ? . 1 a r e ,»?,s 1 'i5 r;. •1� ; ? •S • t� u A. r 1 • 4r } y t r w� a u}}vs. tvr S.pdid tid VO AIt . Lt r.- a la -w `3 . • o i. •r cY • � d s `E n1. 5 ^• •�I y +, AA l.: • , - r f Y a k 1 .+c t'L r- ";p i .,�'- j rd $• `4•' Y � , �• : 4 ; f t / C j • fM • sM. s.. t * I* . a `' 9 , � ny . ,. T ' f4 �' tt•, yn . ' it. < ; f t' • 1 - a' N • _i ',t; . 3 � -.. ;;r. F lli - C rs . �j• e -i d • a `la i '% I` ' i .i, r t � �,* '3 1 v r ` 1 �Y ,` 3 ay l . S4:.e AA, 3 _ . ,'Wtc_s- -7.F j , r .� t t : fy . . 1,. / s' ' R! �` _ yJ fE * 3� sS >' r:. ti ate,, i Y'as c z '.. , : r 5 . .. C r . . . " - . 1 .: ; $ ...fj,'. • Y/`r.-'F l • I ^ 1• l3 J' . _ •n'.;;�`•\ rl4�.t„j. fir.' ^ `t .L _ 0 5f Ad d'%str f�� i xc : j s"rfib t 3 : c } � �do « 1. t 4 i " . 7NF �� y ! ? fir `4 � 1 V4. � t , a �, _ra. 01 'I '� ♦ ., ` � " . .�� r y6 : . ~ -•..ta73 . rk 'b 4 j �. Wrt['" t' a- ` yIt III: i ` t 3 . r .r t { 3 �?!ya .fl `,ra`..•�c ,[ f Z" S _ •f s. z t; 9' . • 1t• r..`'d . y , r ' ' •a t t . ♦ t< �: % ! - � �� .�'�i .. din t' M { . '✓Y s .� • t ' 4 r ; �*rt• +''t � Jr� ! 1 t F : ' t t �- 'L'• Ems ' ^R !` 1 { s �. :• ,n .f a ,4, al'. rftt 7C ;"` C• S ' t rNe 1-sr� i a... �` � ; 4Et�0 _. IN CT ,,, r t. . y- r�.� r -fr�r` YEke , 19 1 + �+ to 4 .: - - 1 • •f 1. t . F � i �, 'S 1 F+�` `S� iy .a t2 �'r i.-0 k .r 13..E To f Idd it tim, ` � 8 a t . -` � t' r r �J ; � � � ?... { it TO, Vt It k. . {,'hts is( !z rt .•: ifVI I = . :j. dt do IF I It te IF 14, dF; Is 5� faa • 3L- i �'.'. �� . � f k n P • • • di ts did Id Ir It AWN IMP s • � r r 4 i ISM low f ♦ •! • • • • � ! • Ads • • �j - - • • r all US _ I � t • • • • • " • " • lei a . " + • • A . , . . • • . Ogramming Grou Per Capita Spending(Ne#) Swim Meets 1500.00 1000.00 0.00 High School Swim Team 2.50 2.50 0.00 Summer Swim Lessons 2.50 2.50 2.50 Winter.Swim Lessons 2.50 2.50 2.50 US Swim Team 2.50 2.50 2.50 Masters Swim Team 2.50. 2.50 2.50 Aquana.stics 2.50 2.50 2.50 Therapy 12.00 12.00 12.00 School District 0.25 0.25 0.25 Opinion-of Revenue(Net) . Swim Meets 302000 163000 - Nigh School Swim Team 302000 _ 222500 - Summer Swim Lessons 62875 . 6,875 11,688 Winter-Swim Lessons 15,000 153,000 15,000 US•S Swim Team 2042000 892250 : - Masters Swim Team 16,000 8,000. 42000 Aquanastics ; 83,000 ' 82000 17,000 _ Therapy - - 247000 schoo,.Disidet " 43250 4,250 1,020 _ Tjser Group Revenue $ 3142125 $ 1693,875 $ 72,708 r� :. ,er C,apit end. ing . n.d. Percent of Per Capita Percent-of Per Capita Category Rate Attendance Admission Category Rate Attendance Admission .��..� General-Admission Residents General Admission Residents Adult(18 & Older) 4.50 34% . 1.53 Adult(18 & Older) 5.00 : -38% 1.90 Children (3-17) .3.50 16% 0.56 Children (3-17) 4.00 20% 0.89 Free - 5% - Free - 5% . - General Admission' N©n-Residents General Admission Non-Residents Adult 5:50 10% 0.55 Adult 6.00 6% 0.36 Child . 4.50 8% 0.36 Child 5.00 4% 0.20 Free Free - -2% - • Annual Pass Year Around Resident Resident Individual 200.Q0 5% 0.25 Individual 225.00 5% 0.28 Family 500.00 10% 0.31 Family 550.00 10% 0.34 •Npri-Resident Non-Resident ; Individual , 300.00 3% 0.23 Individual 350.00 :3% 0.26• Family 600.00 7% 0.26 Family. 650.00 7% 0.28. Subtotal/Average : 100% $ 4.05 Subtotal/Average 100% $ 4.43 Total $. 4.05 Total $ 4.43 ' Option 1 . Option 2 Option 3 Base : . Facility Staff : Summer Employment $125.-551 :$111,361 .$64,659 pinion Winter Employmgnt 270,970 240,345 1391,551 - _ 000 6000. ' 6,000 Total Labor -402 52.1 3573,706 210,210 - O Contractual Services x ens-es Insurance 667996 3%755 292978 292'801. Repair and Main4nai3ce 5000 20,000 12,000 1,5,000- Total Contractual Services 913,996 59,755 -41,978 44;801 Commodities Operating Supplies:.• 25,000 18,000 15,000 12,0010' Chemicals 252000 142000 173,000 - Advertising 50,000 15,000 . 10,,000 5,000 : Total Commodities 100,000 47,000 .422000 17,000 Utilities H'VAC 139,094 49,993 582637 29,111 Electricity 8805 43,573 819783 30,042 Trash Service ' 9,500 72500 2,500 2,000 Telephone 12,000 8,000 3,000 - 2,000 »nnn 45� _9,b12 �;500 W Total utilities 2612.308 1173,016 1552531 70,653 Total Operating Expenses .$$55;825 $5813,478 $449,720 $J322455 Building Sinking Fund .37,319• 18,585 162142• 29,801 Total Expense $ 893,.144 $ 600,063 $,465,862 $ '162,256 : I It * OPINION OF REVENUE & CASHFLOW On the following pages we show our opinion . of. revenues and our opinion of cashflow . These are opinions based on national averages and our experience with many facilities across the United States . We recognize that public sector owners establish revenue policy based on their own policies regarding the provision of services to othe public: ' Some public sector owners charge no fees ` while others charge the fees necessary to: osupport a facility. Most charge fees in between - fees thatmill cover :some operating costs but that require some level of subsidy to operate . Needless to say , changes in revenue will have an. effect on the cashflow projections . ; The revenues shown in our , opinion of revenue are hypothetical and are included to allow readers to complete the .fiscal picture of .this facility land to show what types of revenue possibilities exist . We fully expect Chapel Hill to develop a revenue policy unique to our town that will differ from the numbers included in - this report . 0 It Poo * It It 09 It It It It to go 0 0 It r 0 It 0 9 . . pinion Re : Option 1 Option-2 Option 3 Attendance 2001 66,871 53,496 82,925- 2002 671464 535971 83,701 ` 2003 68,057 5431446 -843477 2004 68,651 54,920 85,254 2005 693244 55,395 861030 _ : Per Capita Spending $ 4.05 $ 4005 $ 4.43 Special.User Croup Spending $ 314,1125 $ 169;875 $ 72,708 2001 $ 584,951 $ 38631536 $4405220 2002 $ 587,354 $ - 388•1458 $443,660 2003 $ 589,757 $ 390;380 $447,101. 2004 $ 5921160 $., 392�303 $450,542 • 2005 $ 594,562 $ 3945225 $453,983. - • LV • N p 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Option 1 Revenue 1 584,951 $ 58793-54 $ 58%757 $ 592,160 $ 594,562 Expense 855.,825 877,220 899,151 921,629 944,670 Operating Cashflow (270,874) (289,866) (309,394) (329,470) (350,108) Recapture Rate 68.35%. 66.96% 65.59% 64.25% 62.94% Option 2 Revenue $ 386,536 $ 388,458 $ 390.1380 $ 392,303 •$ 394.1225 Expense 581,478 5963015 610,915 626,188 641,842 Operating Cashflow .(1942942) (207,557) (220353-5) (233,885) (2472618) Recapture Rate 66.5% •65.2% 63.9% 62.6% -61.4% Option 3 Revenue $ 4402220 $ 4432660 $ 447,101 $ 450,542 $ 453,983 : Expense $449,720 460,963_ 472,487 484,299' 496,406 Operating Cashflow (91500) (17,302) (25,386) (332757) (422424) = Recapture Rate 97.9% 96.2% 94.6% 93.0% 91.5% Base Revenue $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Expense 132,455 135,766_ 139,160 142 639 146,205 Operating Cashflow .(132.9455) (135,766) (139-160) (142-639) (1462205) Recapture Rate 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% U% r t I w � 1 OPINION OF COST On the following pages we show our opinion of cost for the component , parts of this facility . We also show aggregate costs fora variety of facility configurations . We have expressed these costs conservatively for the following reasons : 1 ) The plan and scope of a facility is not yet determined and the actual plan will have an effect on the cost . s 2 ) These costs represent the high quality of construction necessary for a facility that will be easy to maintain and that will give the town service for many years . 3 ) Each of the component parts It programmed to be , complete and with quality and functional attributes that are not compromised . - The actual costs of construction will depend on , among other variables , the design of the facility , the quality level designated by the town , the quantity and quality of program components included in the building and economic conditions at the time of construction . _ . 4 4 . : or 4 Al 64 go do go f . . 04 It Ak 06 go to 0 .. . > . _ As to , . 61 40 222 CORE BUILDING AREA Function Size Efficiency gross factor I sofa ENTRANCE LOBBY/ RECEPTION 2510 1 . 25 3137 . 5 Reception Desk 400 Lounge/Seating 1500 Childrens Game Room 0 Snacks/Vending 60 Restrooms 550 MULTI -PURPOSE, MEETING ROOM AND COMMUNITY SPACE 4200 1 .25 5250 Multi- purpose Room 1200 Kitchen 400 Instructional Space 1400 Meeting Room 1200 . i ADMINISTRATIVE SPACE 3440 1 .25 4300 Offices , 11 total 1410 2 Workstations 250 Conference Room 300 Workroom 270 Maillsign-in 150 Library/Map Room 160 ' Restrooms/Break Room 700 Network/Computer * 100 Storage . 100 LOCKER ROOMS 2300 1 . 25 2875 Men 1000 Women . 1000 ,f Family 300 CUSTODIAL AND SUPPORT 0 1300 • . 11.25 too 0 1625 Offices 100 Work space/storage 300 . . Sprinkler room : 100 Sp Mechanical • 4.00 Bulk Storage 400 • GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 171.87 . 5 to Opinion of Costlpsf : $ 110 . 00 Ret Cost a 4 of • . .. $ 1•;8901625. 00 Energy/Sustainable attributes $ 94 , 531 . 25 : • _ SITE CO.STS/TOTAL • • $ 32* 51000 . 00 ' Subtotal Building & Site IF 4 $2 ;310 ;156 . 25 Indirect Costs @ 8 .5% $ 196 ; 363 . 28 Furnishing $t Equipment . . $ 150 , 000 . 00. 9 . . OPINION OF • COST1CORE • BUILDING • 0 64 • 1 ' $20656 , 519 . 53 : 6 . 2. 2 3 II GYMNASIUM COMPONENT I AREA Function Size Efficiency gross factor s , f• GYMNASIUM 9800 1 . 25 12250 Lobby/sign in 600 Gym Floor 8400 First Aid Room 150 Management 350 Storage 300 GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 12250 Opinion of Cost/psf $ 120 . 00 Net Cost $ 1 ,470 , 000 . 00 Energy/Sustainable attributes $ 73 , 500 * 00 Indirect Costs @ 8 . 5 % $ 124 , 950 * 00 Furnishing & Equipment $ 25 , 000 . 00 OPINION OF GYM COMPONENT COST $ 1 , 6939450 . 00 to . , a 4 • • • wo • • • • too • a , • • • ' • • . • • • I ' . 5 . • . . • • , to • 9 a a a 9 0 0• 0 too a At • • . .% ' • . . a on . a W *4 a&* at v 0 9 4*9 a 600 • • • . • ' • 4 j.• a - •. at 4 0 .. • • . . • ` • • • . at, I A 1 69 6 0 , LEISURE POOL/COMBINED 224 AREA Function Size Efficiency gross factor s .f: NATATORIUM 7400 1 7400 $ 19480 , 000000 Leisure Pool 3600 Play Feature Play Feature Vortex Current Channel Spa 200 Pool Deck 3600 NATATORIUM SUPPORT ( DECK LEVEL; 1600 1 1600 $ 192 , 000 00 Pool Mech . and Equipment 800 Building Mechanical 800 EFFICIENCY FACTOR 1 .25 2250 $ 2259000 . 00 . GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 9000 $ 118971000 . 00 Energy/Sustainable attributes $ 104, 335 . 00 Subtotal $2 , 001 , 335 . 00 Indirect Costs @ 8 . 5 % $ 1.70 , 113 .48 Furnishing & Equipment $20 , 000 . 00 OPINION OF COST/LEISURE COMPONENT $291919448.48 LEISURE POOUSTAND ALONE • AREA Function Size Efficiency gross " .. factor s .f: NATATORIUM 0 0 10200 1 10200 $2 , 040 , 0000*00 Leisure Pool 5000 Swim lanes Play Feature Vortex Current Channel : . we . . . . . _ . Spa , 2006 : . • * PoolDecke Otto . . . . . . 5000 a . • . _NATATORIUM SUPPORT ( DECK LEVEL; 1600 . 1 1600 . ° $ 192 , 000 :00 ' Pool Mech , and * •Equipment 800 ' • too ' ' ' Building too Mechanical W to 800• to 4 ..a • • to eq• EFFICIENCY FACTOR 1 .25 6 4 2950 $295; 00.0 . 00 GRASS SQUARE FOOTAGE . . •11 HID 4 to • .• $29527 , 000 . 00 ' Energy/Sustainable attributes $ 138, 985 . 00 Subtotal $2 ;665;985. 00 6 to So Indirect Costs @ $ . 5% . : . . $226;60.8 .73 ... s�' . . Furnishing & Equipment _ ' . . . . 0 $20 , 000. 00 • OP,1N10N OF COSTIL F.W. RP., COMPONENT _ . 9 . . . .$2s912, 593 .73 4 , . , 25 METER x 25 YARD 229 AREA Function Size Efficiency gross factor s . f. own NATATORIUM 12065 1 12065 $ 2 , 413 , 000600 25 Meter X 25 Yard 6165 Pool Deck 5900 . NATATORIUM SUPPORT ( DECK LEVEL, 3170 1 3170 $ 332 , 850 . 00 Pool Storage 700 Pool Mech , and Equipment 1000 Building Mechanical 1200 Lifeguard/Timing 200 Janitor 70 EFFICIENCY FACTOR 1 . 25 3808 . 75 $ 380 , 875 . 00 MEMO GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 15235 i $ 3 , 126 , 725 .00 Energy/Sustainable attributes $ 156 , 336 . 25 Subtotal $ 3 , 283 , 061 . 25 Indirect Costs @ 8 . 5 %0 $ 279 , 060 . 21 Furnishing & Equipment $ 90 , 000 * 00 OPINION OF COST/25 METER COMPONENT $ 3 , 652 , 121 A6 ow . 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 It 90 40 to Iso 226 50 METER POOL AREA ' Function Size Efficiency gross factor sofa NATATORIUM 21140 1 21140 $ 4 , 2289000 . 00 50 Meter X 25 Yards 12640 Moveable Floor Bulkhead Pool Deck 8500 NATATORIUM SUPPORT ( DECK LEVEL; 8150 1 8150 $ 978 , 000000 Pool Storage 1500 Pool Mech , and Equipment 1200 Building Mechanical 2300 Lifeguard/Timing 250 Janitor 200 Additional Locker space 2700 EFFICIENCY FACTOR 7. 322 . 5 $732 , 250 .00 GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 36612 . 5 $ 5 , 938 , 250 . 00 Energy/Sustainable attributes $296 , 912 . 50 Subtotal $ 6,235;162 . 50 Indirect Costs @a 8 . 5 % $ 5291988 .81 Furnishing & Equipment $ 120 , 000 . 00 OPINION OF COST/50 METER COMPONENT $ 69885 , 151 .31 . . 9 _ . . go 0 . 0 4 g a 0 , . .. . . . . 50 METER POOL-VENUE FACILITY AREA Function Size . Efficiency gross factor s . f. NATATORIUM 21140 1 21140 $4 , 228 , 000400 Main 50 Meter X 25 Yards 12640 Moveable Floor Bulkhead Pool Deck 8500 NATATORIUM SUPPORT ( DECK LEVEL, 8950 1 8950 $ 190749000 .00 Pool Storage 1500 Pool Mech . and Equipment 1200 Building Mechanical 2300 Lifeguard/Timing 250 Janitor 200 Additional Locker space 2700 Meeting Room 800 R .J CONCOURSE LEVEL 7025 1 7025 $ 737. , 625 . 00 Monte Public Restrooms 450 Snack bar 200 Spectator Seating 6375 . EFFICIENCY FACTOR 1 .2 7423 $ 593 , 840 *00 GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE 44538 $ 61633 ,465 .00 Energy/Sustainable attributes $331 , 67125 _ Subtotal $ 63965, 138o25 Indirect Costs @ 8 . 5 % lot $ 592, 036 .75 Furnishing & Equipment $ 120, 000 *00 OPINION •OF COST/50, ME TAR VENUE COMPONENT $7 , 67711 '75 .00 • • • • • • ' • to r . . . . 4 V a a 00 IF 4 . 228 SUMMARY OF OPINIONS OF COST/MULTIPLE COMPONENTS June 27 , 2000 CORE + LEISURE $ 2 , 656 , 519 . 53 $ 2 , 912 ,593 . 73 $ 5 , 5699113 .26 CORE + 25 METER $2, 656 , 519 . 53 $ 3 , 652 , 121 .46 $ 6 ,308 , 640 .99 CORE + 25 M + LEISURE $29656 , 519 . 53 $3 , 652 , 121 .46 $2 , 1919448 .48 $ 895009089 .46 l CORE + 25 METER+ GYM $ 2 , 656 , 519 . 53 $ 3 , 652 , 121 . 46 $ 1 , 693 ,450 . 00 $ 890029090 . 99 CORE + 25 METER + LEISURE+ GYM $29656 , 519 . 53 $ 3 , 652 ; 121 .46 $ 29191 ,448 .48 $ 1 ,693 ,450 . 00 $ 10 , 193 , 539 .46 CORE + 50 METER $2 , 656 , 519 . 53 $79677 , 175000 $ 109.333 , 694. 53go CORE + LEISURE+50 METER $296561519 . 53 $2 , 191 ,448 .48 $796779175 .00 - $ 129525, 143 .01 . go 0 1 4 .. • i • . . . f FROM Chapel Hi 1 1 Parks Recreation FAX NO . Oct . 10 2000 11 : 56AM P2 CUniCal Center for the Study of Development and Lear ** ng The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill i September 21 , 20W i The Honorable Mayor Town Hall 306 N. Columbia Street Chapel Hill, NC 27516 'ne : 'r0*omCsteac�' u'K"t� rluatic FdCIFALUeS . Dear W. Waldorf On behalf of the members of ouIr community with disabilities, we would like to bring a particular need to your attention, We are practicing physical therapists in the Chapel Hill community, associated with the DNC.-CH Physical Therapy Department and the Clinical Center for the Study of Development and Learning. We work with an increasing number of citizens of all ages who would benefit greatly from an aquatic facility that is therapeutically heated. and accessible. We urge you to consider such a facility for the Homestead Park ,Aquatic Center that is currently in the planning Phase. A "therapeutic" pool would afford all community residents the benefit of warmer watez temperatures, which is an unportaut factor im pain relief due to muscle spasms. In addition, warmer water temperature aides to improve flexibility and circulation, decrease excessive muscle tone, and allows it idividuals wM cold sensitivity to participate in aquatic recreationult activities . Aquatic programs' are benefimal for people of all ages and* abilities to improve flexibility and strength, increase end�ce, improve balance, increase range ofmotioti, decrease pain, decrease swelling; ina*gyc cRculation, improve muscle tone, reduce tension caused by stress; and ' iucnproveinobility. . Currently, Raleigh has at therapeutically heated pool at Pullen Aquatic Center. The pool is. to accessible and is kept at a temperature of approxinnatcly. 8849°F. .The pool is used for marry, aquatie _programs ' including: Triangle Aquatic Specialists (classes focusing on sports iztjuries, car accidents. occupational injuries, reco �rery From surgery, strokes, ;fibrrnmyalgia, and back problems) ; 'Wake Mod (arthritis program); Infant Toddler Program (beginning swimming lesions and therapy for children with disabilides) ; and Special Pops (includes persons with a variety of disabilities including Multiple Sclerosis). In addition, the Pullen Aquatic Center' s therapeutic Pool is used daily by the senior population that 'includes individuals recoveririg from total joint replaccmerits or strokes; or coping �vitti arthritis of multiple sclerosis: Finally fa=riitres with u young'.children are primary, users, as yo �tg :chxldren .et�joy the vc�az�oac�r water. It •is obvious •that therapeutic pools benefit. a wide range * of individuals wi* different abilities �• acrrossethe fife sparL A :specific concern of ours is • that children with disabilities residing in •our S4i;6M Address 466 190barsm S66eC Ccciboro; 96 ti Cax6fta 27610 :�a�9F`Md center,sor �De�'v�eto i card S�:isnq. tM 7255 Tho vaiveristy aC xorth ccQoi� Cbar�1 �i. Noith Cao�o� 27599 .7255 . =a 99 . . 669i ' FAX4 2 . . • . . . . . 2 . 11 MdvijisitgAf HatedA09; m't FROM : Chapel Hill Parks u Recreation FAX NO * ; Oct . 10 2O0F3 11 : 57At1 P3 230 community not be isolated from their peers during recreational pursuits . A principle focus of our research efforts has been the positive benefits that are achieved when children of all abilities can participate together in community recreational activities . It is important that all children feel a part of their community and are able to participate in activiti m es with their families and peers . Inclusive recreational activities help enhance self-esteem among individuals with disabilities , promote understanding and acceptance among peers , improve socialization skills , and prevent disruptions in the family' s daily routine . All participants benefit from the exchange . An accessible, therapeutically heated pool at -lomestead Park will greatly improve the quality of life for our citizens by promoting optimal health, fostering understanding, and allowing positive social interactions among a broader range of populations . We appreciate your time and effort in• this matter, and we hope that you will consider funding jj1Vj y .s / a +tee ,.. a . . r . � �► ♦ ♦ A � � ��• q ins r o�• • • � ytv� �: �. �r L = Ahappy W 3�5r�S ► ua Fiiiy ri+ ..y �iO .Sai to #� �aaf3aa 4uJ p . S�rvJ��. need ln. ::t... community. Sincerely, S Q4cr�. K • �� Anna Edwards, MPT An a Rosenberg, Dr T Debbie Thorpe, PT, PhD, _ CS CC : Poonam Pande, PhD Susan A,ttermeier, PT, PhD . . . • r• . :q;i • , ?G • t. .d : . t• ti ,n.. v + 4. 5• a , rl• .>. r�'Y:\ . n. r`: . •SS - r ?i;-},o + . •aa 5• Fr+� p• , x'i . ., tT • . r sa . * t. . . AGENDA # 3b ( 2 ) Poonam Pande, Ph. D . 303 Perry Creek Drive, Chapel hill, NC 27514 . TeUFax : ( 919 ) 408 -3335 31 August 28 , 2000 The Honorable Mayor Town Hall 306 N. Columbia Street j Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Re : Pool at Homestead Park Dear Ms . Waldorf My name is Poonam Pande and I am a resident of Chapel Hill in Orange County. It has come to my attention that planning of an aquatic facility � at Homestead Park is in progress . I would like to emphasize the need for the pool to be therapeutically heated and accessible, At present, there are no pools in this area that are heated and maintained at therapeutic temperatures. .) There is a great need in this community for such a pool. It can benefit a wide range of population including adults and children with disabilities, senior members of the community and persons with physical injury (such as back pain and . art-hritis) . The therapeutically heated pool would give •families of kids with special needs an option for swimming as a recreational activity. So far, family swim has not been a choice for such families if the child with special needs is sensitive to the cooler temperature that pools are traditionally maintained at. It is also easier to introduce young children to water if the . temperature is warmer. Health maintenance is a major issue for adults with * disabilities,, adults with physical impairment and for seniors. Therapy in warm water is an excellent method to maintain the body in good working condition in this population of the community . _ Attached is an example of at therapeutically heated pool that has been a success and m existence since the 1970s . I do Understand ,that maintaining the suggested pool at 92�'may, not be realistic for a leisure pool but temperatures in the high 80s would cater to a broad range• of populations and serve the purpose , The support in out coda 6nity for this type ' of pool is eviderlf from the attached list of " individuals : • • • I appreciate your• time :and .'effort in this matter•• . If I can provide any . additional information or you : . `would ' like• t'o arrange' a meeting, Please feel free to �1 me anytime at • 91940$ -3335 . Sincerely, , . . 06 id . . : . • . r Poonam: Pande, Ph . D. : ' 06 doe 4 do 1 CC : : •FUcka Bateman1 Lee , Pavan : to Pat Evans W Bill Strom 6 go _:to : :Joyce Brown 9 • ' Jim • Ward . get .. . . . . . 0 . . . . It I gKeviii Foy Edith •Wiggins • . . 4 be • • •. of 0 Kathryn Spatz 231 WELCOME to the _ _ - 1 • _ • . - Charles Hulme �, . CommunityTherapyPoolstoat Charles ]Hui the " - Charles Hulme Community Therapy Pool 420 N. J Community Therapy Pool Falconer Road Escondido , Calif. 92027 (760) 432 -2474 The Charles Hulme Community Pool is located next to the Nicolaysen Center. The pool is wheelchair accessible and is maintained at 92 degrees at all times. The warn water has proven to be extremely beneficial -+ �J in relieving pain, joint stress, muscle spasm and for , improving flexibility, circulation, mobility, strength, and endurance. The pool is also ideal for young. children ` • Al being acclimated to water. • Programs include: - ARTHRITIS AQUATIC PROGRAM = This class a with provides exercises that are specificaily designed to increase mobility and d� par of people arthritis. This class is approved by the Arthritis Foundation. WATER AEROBICS - This class is designed to increase cardiovascular endui�nce, muscle tone, reduce every * day stress and increase overall physical fitness: son 0 • SWIM CESSIONS ' = Swim lesions ofor '3 = r0 year otd : Also" aldult ' swim" lesions. ' ' • • exercises to 0 do : BACK STRENGTHENING - Overall body conditioning class with an emphasis on : :.. strengthen back mo on so uscles. = : ! . • • ; . .. 4 : . " .. .so 9 to : • : . - LAP . SWIM - 8 : 30-9: 00 am Mon, Wed, Fri. Is a so 4 too so so Please call for days and times on all . classes: (760) 432�2474 . b This : of Charles Hul�me Conu00 nunityy TVhe�apy Pool.so as at . ' . . . .. , : ` • • . • • _�: . - . . . . • A►sserrib�led by John: Grosso: • : Questions?.. . . 11 ai1 n3e ' at: E -11s * 11 .) hn Grasso. . : . htt :!/ .ublic:csusin.+edu� ublid sso/theraPY_ P Lhtml : ' : ' : • . . 8/c2$ 4 • . . P P . P. _ 3 I support the idea that the hew pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Si Mature: Ptinted.Name Address Tel # Comments c •lo- 4.-1ca h eree a -'off • y tr PI n s 1 G 4'G2 C to l20 l� qQ- 1619 vff � • r - . ..: . : . .. . . Via; o --o 13 mi�m 4 ��et. I I OJL fit 40 s 40< ee-yey%A. CY-ectco 4M 30 cu) • " r0 1 ' P � .� . �.. • IM -- . r r 3 OOP t4 I Li -� Ldp ffr� C, K It. ., P.rr Creek D r. Q-S q '•' ;3 -po fir ' f . 1-{• L.�: . 3 Qom. efr k �} - 713 3 : . . s; :. • . d accessible. . n ' eUtically heated a '; > j• : : :. r' mestead Park be therap Comments • . .yew fool at H° 'Cet # M • : . the idea that the . • i supo . Address • : • Printed Name � H 0110I. -Will , 1 . ERR 01 . Owl Ac old 071 Cto CIL . •: • .•'. : : . N " ,� ` . .� � ��.� ark �,.� o ... q !•� � r:. r a • y • " • - �. . e. • . • • •�111d Oylercon �� r • I•. •L •� • • • • ,rt1 , ' I support the Mee that the.neW pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and-accessible. Sign lure Printed Nainer;:. Address Tel # Comments pyi • QAC PICA UerkOttM ��-o 0 167- 016 qO 5 24C agm6do; 10ZofW .lAvAlkvP7 P (14ce 3 104A to 3 •p Lill Gx V.. CU C(Y 4-08--.m Ani d .M k% OS-3 -c 7� c � ;.� Quo �-� fag—o9 •. .: . 'T ,,,�;, : of r► L. N� ..a� �-'f �fo�- god►, .Tns k support the idea that'the new pool at Homestead.Paik be therapeutically heated and accessible. f ..Signature. . • Printed Name Address Tel# Comments Ow A)11 �g Aortu &&A Pr lbu-/SAW ;. .�,a'si Lim ' ear- 9� Pe &ree r �1��0'�?6 e1, JAL, ,� ��i:z�-J'• 1-fwq �o z O rc� ��2 o 6:? t� a(0 6. y - ��s 0� �.��2�.�. yew• ��. C6--- he,4oi Ak IIA if-OL94 PCIV1 ' • .• • • .• ;.. ` arc sera . wo� a0 _ dooming 0 f T + 04, a 1 0 r4av nS 4 40 0 Wl es c 4J6 19 4OW WWI) sr WIA y Nm � a em 4� :v . .• �4' ° t t ' too go .::: V4 t 4 Fvv 0 10 v000v dor to at SO move we low 7 & r e 6 0 Alf 000 we ' 0) . : : . Ammak F # a 0 0* 1 f PAY 00 & 0 AF411 7(7 r1wj.I oll lo 0. 0 too, qo 6%0% iN 0 * 0 0 go 1 low do 64010 �+. . P . D�4 ASS • • . > . sluawwoa a '# ippv awEK paluud aialm8iS. . •ai tssmov u� a Ba tiicai nadwa u� aq d P� � `a satuo $ Iood au a B� l a � oddnsat 00 0 go AO as es I 7 + 0 90 00 to Y y7de eq . . . • . • to 4 to go IF N , ` and acceSsibte• ' . eut;�aliy heard �. to d park be their c�"�nts s 1. :1 • of at lA°tnes a Tel # " Ott t1�e !a Addre5S .. 3 3 k j : • :;{ . 1 Sapp • . • Da Name r printed Na OOT low • ' 4.0 e ; 0— a ! eo 3 m;dd AJOI j oOl . . �t t•to Mr dip ` k- Ub 7 rr t •- • •• • � •. • :.� accessible• } ' heated and •. therapeuttcalty Tel# •. .•• •. �• - . ' • - :• • � . ' • - � .. ; .. �. eStead park be at Aonl at.the new p ,. Addre ss • .: - support;the Ides th t supp �Xpert�se \rj • •. . . �• � •: -. :,. . • � � .and�est�nat�o _,,,,,...,..,-.--•-'" . 7.,`� ,( S : . Name f� q33 YeON r 00, 0. . ns J� G�/' -1 6 6 IVA . ..�. � yin.- •� .:::-. t 'C`� � /� �, �_,,,,,�_ . ,;�A(kt A ..I support:the idea that the new pool at.Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. • S[gnature •, Printed:Tame Address Tel# Comments qq y y Oa zb . _ . Oh CA Vt,*, Z. • d r e h PA a.�..f-•tom 04 ct - 3-70 • TooGotivIVm0d, or AP+ 38.61 /1-L 1 r - t �1Co8-q5 t Q�Q e r 6 r-o ffe. ay /v 74 C-dw�Af I-CdyX 1t4A, lies S+* � a 171VA/I • sys6 R2.* s►Bb�-o sr- q(oU: 3Q'� s _ • -:. 30l est .ar a.rcf LN . 1 ia o i#14. �52 TZ�9 6 V-1 A r CE c� ' ctlr� 2 zA. ads- dz i rip -t� c, z--�- . Za 7 Aro I support the idea that the new pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Signature Printed Name' Address Tel# Comments • : .-:. '�,„�'•,'�;;:, .e,i� /�l7,�7L,:/rlf+o 'If t✓iA!T?fitOP /2D. ��o'o/�C/N P' J JI h C�w Y6 3a 7-46 � : : A r J•� { �� 4 �NO �5fAS : r r • L4AtIe.-u o ` \on//:A))c/ RD ffo C 4 g 6 F • =hK Ir •.:' :C �S nt , eoA4.4 LAM ns 4. 1 at � . .90 to. C dou .,. �/; • re 9 �� • r support the•idea:that the nevi pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. 0. Sigatpre . Printed Name :; Address Tel# Comments A9 -f(X A 1 0 ` L.V_:•L t.+:. ��; ,<< IL :V�1c��st�i..E. �i8i� Lesl:�D,. C��c� I�I�cz 7s ib �4'• 1 Le ' 6 fea 4W ry fry► - 0l ►�_u to Aij LAN- i r 001, 11 - . . - l f OCR LGGsYJ'1 t � � Z./f Neona n I b d o a-8-a tee 1w ;�..�. d5G ntc abe P t_ Bo o N.G: 2'1 IV f3 L t L !! << NGoh -lYSi�i n 1 ear }�� -q(O ay a�ri�ia�n. qd-7 379 'A:��A&,tge • .. ,;;,,� dY1 1.40 19b(a-653 ,c,� "Y support,the idea that the tiew pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. W Printed Address Tel # Comments Signature SQ-ti 1 v I. A r-6 f 1! - . ' • .•• • • : 70LCf � jq 6 •" ••{�. t. •• ... . . 4if4-1 9 qc) y L. � DL p4*1 4t4i (Z-b N .art:MGH Zl � ICE Ot 6 '�2 D W .o ;2GG6-v .7 ici •� I/h^ •• •' .r ---' � ' � 1�' .Li-1� lam, �.-�S t•i AP 0 as VO to of st so , . It so � s4 0ytoo b . r 0 % Star . t; / 14 60 emb • J- �;. 7D DO Ole Is • a .•� S(Hy� Wall 0 . to es cp Ty 0 * 4 go op 00 dop Not C i I Ills Qr Ift 0000 cat CD M4000am go Pouliot , 00 � or „ ,H CDW� . Q fD N 4 AP . : I support the idea that the new pool •at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible . _ . - . Signature ' • Printed Name * • Address Tel # • Comments It C) Coot k A Gres1 Aso Conner © i R • v11 C. On r rbrand *4 - 7 70 r-a 1:r �'4 V S O - to r`11ea J t te: .LAo N.0 a �5 jy 9 a 9 - 9 `tto 1 l ► d 5a . . °d S '� 0 : W Ab . c e, ✓ r6 -- I/Comoe Ar '? z.- t �; I oeela � u -3god Ct IM I . . � tCIto ©� . . ton Soo do • • : ' 00 we NMI town oop to too H y I i $M V � oil � e� _ . ACr �1 - S o- cr cr- yr _�► ' - ff �- •� L - J -� ANEW V LO ' ftolommo J �Nl 44 41 1 .71 so Mom V •loft L mom .� •d • ,..� z . • ^ • J I� to go . . • _ 046IV. op ,. to We 62 pw • • •' • • • ' • ' �. •' •i( • •0 * 1 • • ' • • • • • •Ak. • r. ' • ♦ • ' •. • i • • At � • . • • � • ' Most 64 to • • • • ' • • •� • . `• . Y ' ' • . ' • • • • i '. • • • •• • ' • I�i 9 to to 7' ' • • . ' . • ' • 09 to . ..( • . • I I support the idea that the-new pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. . : : . Signature Printed Name Address Tel # Comments 'i"1• eue .Ioo iA I I-ebrook �. area-4- �dgA, too �—R id03� S" DOVA- : . blo SY%AWAw06 � O'G - C0066 14 ems. d 8'C J {�-. s. AKH c�iU q .•° u - 4J. I support the idea that new pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. . : Signature Printed Name and Des ignatioi4xpertise Address Tel # 0 Wes. b - c! G' r c S •�� end 60 %n kcr b�z I( CH -2 7 514 Q C?-7?6 p �.k J ��ONJPILL I Old ►4U-IG.}' ' e v 5 �pfc':l.K.. �EDuc r7 dn! �/1 l�iQ/TZ �'Je Ave- G. �7 5/� �J'�9—D 9 o a �s�.• ��N�— to L ZISVA `L33-o ��. II P�• e,, Pa,-e�-� Prod N1 /l z nJ/C .i <-A n� .Qs/. G/��7Sy+�t4w 1LAi�� LC��b •i /11atwor -N(L, 9G 7'.�S'S 1Qr - a7-7S'o 3 t , 'Rft vetsAr-I : �rt e0.1 n s �`:��•. L-: .v I1•� �' (��. '! S I�'�� ' 4:�'t Ct? �tt:ds;.� l:i ��-7? ---- '. •: .' CA ;.; t support the idea that the new pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Signature = Printed Name and Designation/Expertise Address Tel # CA2C. -W- Od 6 • : Ate: rua a o deueloom, ` hu e, i. , • I AM. Ti. EIi04106M SL Alt. CL fi I Q!o0- bZ131 . :.'� .: . � r . ' S�-�.�eK�� ;_ r r c $ona -� A�•l-��l�sj�or- � Zn� 6�'�-15o t • 12.`1Ytal o.sn rta, f cn V �i .c to u w h c Lev# E-+ ` 4 h N , Coo Cd a� seesr-••we Jv • cCd 'vo) AreIN CIO OMNI t be . : = : � r .. 04 Is �° : ,AM � . a on � . cy\A, 4 all : ' . . _ . • i of • • . 4 c& r • . e . . . a IF lb a • . . e . • . . . • go ad w IF at do d 0 do so 40 widened *0 • . .HIP 0 f PRO 0 IF to ° . • ap added i IWAS , , x do a ad 40 44 evill ire w do of 0 ad s mom da + ., 101all r Al , eso go ffr waloolow OR dove Kh b 0141, lat. Rog IF ;at la goo . T ad — 192I gap • . ow a Aft 0 go add sluammoj ssarppd owuf4 & palutJd aanieuSis • , 64 • a � q �ssaaag puB p y Alleminadeaayj aq yaed peaisawon le food Mau ayl; 110y ) eapt ay . lioddns 1 ' �nova 4 0 POP c�aa • . 00 Go do 44 dis .. • • • ` . • t • go ' •. 5 • , . ., ` . v! r..• • • ♦ . 4 Volt, . • t , age • . ••• ` it• • rT • •. . I O too go a to v I,` Fd G. • A � ' w, 0 cam - ^* 2 ` o- A Z 4114 ,Jot T � � L Joss. CD of 0 4. • . • 2Y • . . • •• C • IF ti• • O Nf• go, O , • • � . . • • • •• •: • ' • NEW Sol 0 , soloist x Gc . o too kCD co fools p . tl�► CL . b a. • • ; CD y Cr W �. . o.+ y cu ` t N , O o. • Z A n H cr c CD K cn • CA to • I support the idea that the new:pool .at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible . Signature'' Printed Name Address Tel # Comments 7 > 9000 00 4 ow 4;V4, . 4 15 3 43dod 3420 to 0 . to cG l�lr l n ; . ti 4 Zf- Z 93� . : • r It L. ,,,•�• .. . 04 00 6 Io troy Op t a 0 Jc, '0 . . . , • •, do so ' • . • - • • • • . . -p - do 0 • • �. do wood 0 Its, do ♦ - • 00 40 MONO • ° • ° - 9 MA 40 do • to Ad 0 .t 4 • . . • . 4 • . • • • • • r 0 • . . • • •• . : • • do go a 4 go to : 0 0 . . ; - I. supporto the ides that the new' pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. • to 4 • . . Signature Printed 'Name and Designation/Expertise Address Tel # • r: - ,rcrk S ' � o- b • ; r 0 21 pro • - �� ' L0 • !, 1�SbQpat 1R - ,�, a f'� ti 3 a s * 00 a 47 A 4a� h2 0 'k ()Ie �7 3 2 0 be MEN "Ind • • rFa ;� A* UJI & A ' rem. �.V Cho Loop r'r 4oro V4 2 a � �� V at Pam . K +e r- 14.rA) atz" A 373 • .. . . .: 0 Z40M 0 A, ► f • _ . ' . . a— PROVISIONS aft . go .. It too '. r . _ 1 . 4 so 6 r . ♦ ' . . • • B Con •• i ♦ . , 4 • go I a I . _ • r V _ r d ace esi0e0 • a11y heated ane0ts • . • theta�eut�c G0m �' atkbe Tel # t r ie new o �ddtess the Q 'L . . . . • u port .,� _ ' • � �51a ,,,, DO . acute • r v"o7 Gm Juf f 7r we 41 . v� s 07L . we � • • . • . f jfZ 44 . :• . t 4 44 ..1 .. Als .to 0aw Owe! t It se we we we se we e At 9 we so IV If so • ' . • .. . • • • /T •. • •.. / ' • I support the idea that the n6w. pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Signature " Printed, Name and Designation/Expertise Address Tel # t o Teizg M- 1 0 0 Mle. �e r USdh cP. C' 27TI6 q 29' 7can 3 2 T?IL SZ\OX —A i", dt� SLYU Et"'j, NC LkOOO CIO • - • , • • '. Gr COD d aeeesjib . . . eutteal�Y ,eated an e1 # . k be t�►e�ap 6 Stead 4at dC ss IAOme P+d e D t at (O & teat two use CG the ,de j . : sup'poc attorJ < 1 d pests' •n • At 0e an �;4k , • • at�,�e / v stun r c� �� ti • � � c e • . a- tie A to .401W , t . � A A . ARA At • I It It ' Itt o ' ` a .. . •i s• It A VA • i • toAN It ,. .40 At It es At 44 IAA It 16 NO • I support the idea that the now pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible . Signature ' Pr � inted Name: Address Tel # bottom MON 44 JUT 10 ke me ft OWN I C Comments NAME AL I s • A f a A 1 bee • , • - .•b f • • Y• • • . ` Y a Ceesitblel . . . ,• heated and meets •' • ra euti1eally Gom Abe the '� del� .. �� • • esteadpat . • ,atom _5S-00 u .deatbat � xovess a151u - , . . . - - • 90xt the� , . �,, ��'��'cY� �� t,�•k�r�t ��,1 S�$oatiure. L14S •'•- -•• . . • • • • I • - . _may/"' • r •.. -•' . • • ••• • • r... A • . I support the idea that the new pool•at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Sigrtatur� Printed Name Address Tel# Comments .� �. S. i/Aa1 .2�JrXOk C&I .as� `6�-- 09J, 3 ' ram.�7v Sue ' 1 .t �- Lt-- _ C�a� -� �. Cj to 0 obor 00 1..,, •ra. .» ••••^•—gor..•. r••• r». ..riN .r•.. r+ ra•w.• store •• •ffig. . .,.s . .� «... r ••`+.,.� . . Montour •�� .»r. ��r•.�•..,./r'� • r « or 1. r .. • . »' • »+ go 0 00 at sp Allow r _ - �.�rv.n�.•r�w�•..•.r..•� ' F 00 41 OP or to grow. W •yy .mar .. arms � .��rr� Yr�� r r•�•.r•♦ rotator • ��w•• rwo • sommagatow w 0' • • r • 0 aft •• • or • gross r ..•• N . to a •ti•�. • • • . •N. . •. ,• as arr.• w .• « • . . • .r • • • ♦ • do go • • •Alt, • • • � . . •�•. .Yr � •► ♦4•� • � �•• ♦». • go •. • slope • .• •♦ ♦ • ,• N�•� •• • Alt •. • • ' t to o•�•r•w. r. .• • �...•r� •...•.r.• • . • • .. r.•r� ' ••�♦r „• _ - • . • ..»"rw�r..w•rr ..�.rr » • .•r. ♦»'r•.�r.•»r�rr•.. . . .. . . • �•� . grammar Igloo . • wa . �..r,.• tow . . r . • . .•. » ..... . - — • ..r•rr•.r» •r • r. wr• • » . •.+ • • .� . r• �r Sr• .r. • . • • . •••r•••LL�r I go 0 oft .r...r,•rr •..rr.r.M.w.�Y•ir r�i wr r •u • , .0 • , 40 • • • I I •. IMP r - AW At OW gooses 0 Am, go r 0 aw Omma . _ do 00 _ �. go 61 4 It r AIL or . 1,108 04 • ' r r I support the idea that the*neu' pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Signature ;Printed Name Address Tel # Comments I support the idea that the new pool at Homestead Park be therapeutically heated and accessible. Signature Printed Name Address Tel# Comments Q It ne- Ma t rehcSyr, Ch. J t 266 Mayor and the Chapel Hill Town Council 306 North Columbia Street Chapel Hill , NC 27514 October 16 , 2000 Mayor Rosemary Waldorf and Members of the Chapel Hill Town Council : Please find enclosed 469 signatures in support of a lap pool in Chapel Hill . In that our original intent had been to present these at your November meeting , I believe this to be a partial listing , # and expect that many more signatures are forthcoming . In general , I think the signatories of this petition agree that lap swimming options are very limited in Chapel Hill . The Community Center' s multi - purpose pool is too shallow (for flip turns ) , too warm , and is a non- regulation length for indoor competition . The Carrboro. Chapel Hill YMCA swim team is forced to send its teen members to neighboring Hillsborough for daily swim workouts due to lack of pool space in its own facility , and UNC ' s Koury Natatorium is becoming increasingly crowded and costly . Lest one infer that I am speaking only on behalf of competitive swimmers , I can tell you that in coordinating the collection of these signatures , I was most impressed with the commitment of the recreational adult swimmers . I met with countless swimmers ( retirees and workers alike ) who swim laps on a daily or almost-daily basis . I can 't help but believe that this is the population that will best sustain , and benefit from , a new aquatic facility in Chapel Hill . Please consider us in your deliberations . Respectfully yours , cc : Ms . Kathryn Spatz Y • Y 17 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a tap poolA over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well . as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel I-1111 High , School , East ' Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical abiiityldisability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hilt community . SIG 1ATURE NAPA. ( please -print) ADDRESS 7401 Ault nm too ow � , It A. Sh blo kyt coo root ' � - auc�" so ?.S'iz . Ja c . W � is Wont VIA is 1 �.- c� soot 7� -- 6 . r (C'a �a had 64h is to 4 3 �U ' Z,4 cf4. sr �. . r pit) 5 Zoo J 0,^ 0s Zsacwn ' N e viiLe 0 Ow27.J1�/ 4oZ Now 269 We the undersigned , urge the Chapel H Town Council to prioritize a lap u 9 d , g e Ch p 111 pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is Insufficlent tap pool space available In Chapel Mill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous 1 competitive swim teams (Chapel Hill YMCA, 4 North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team) . Furthermore, we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical abiiity/dtsabi�tty barriers, making a lap pool an attractive ;holes to serve the greatest proportion , of the - Chapel Hill community. N.SlGNATURE . NAME (plow print) ADDRESS . 1,c.P ROS 'S u S(1 C.c�v , r �. 5 5 1-l�w-� � S-�t �� cl c� - tnc��0 ( J ) c4u is CA too 3<i d I a { 14to 0 WIN toot #41 UN 0 No WON ry / IN <�•- V /W`NWN Nis NO to to WIN ell eo Jbi ON, Y to ZNO No )OWN , f5 � Now) S\aj / /• �"� / / C.•VL/ •� j4 Nor 9 11 !� v toot y L1 G� �"' � a f Coto tv NO ;r Not Wo ON) LWONO Nov �� „� vi; ti- > : c�. �i a L tevvja r , v ( F 5 101 j . . _ �1 . ONG . . ., • , � ', • • • , mil • . We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap Pool over that of any other aquatle facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is lrrauffictent lap pool spacf avallabi • In Chapel H111 to meet the needs of local recreadonal lap swimmers as well as the numerous competltive SWIM tome {Chapel HID YMCA, forth Carolina Aquatic. Club, Chapel Hill High School , East Chapsi Hill High Schools and the Community Center summer team}, furtheraws, we tee! strongly that tap swung cuts across 4ge and physical aWltyldisaWllty barders, emaicing a lap pool an atbraave choice to serve the greatest proWlon of the Chapel Hilt community. moSIG" UBENAME Weess . on RE / e 3 wen toc ao K U0 I tj Le rg G I Q f (1,2 A: L_ �r ��` 0 100101001 Cx 2LA411 Nc Mo & q ' -f- Z ) p en, rliore� ZOE VLLe poop off fe Vt saw Off ' LAP Jeff offf 20 otyp VV' ('000F0 J , s 271 We .the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to nontize a la 9 g P P P pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel H611 YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , I Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill * Heigh School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore, we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and , physical abiiityldisability barriers, making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest , proportion of the Chapel H0111 community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS Sc2,�1� GJ�h �o f T1*oej; ,Op & C .*de < ,41.27S le Af I I\j 2,07 T14% C L/Vh�, ten Chen a3 sorb u6A RO ua S , D,F , C,�- M9 � - Yl u �nl i/U 14 M /VF OT i , � tooto 900t, lo5 C;Z4 zold il � � ,ems n � ��R . � �. � N fo e> 7 �- r6 a7sr � w 646/4(" ly z last • • - ,� �'�n't/V �Z it � l - too � . . > . do _ 2,o7%P1 to �- C7CY�ytju�e �. -- Lam. v� ` �- one a C L Gtoo Sli U H (JAA/ 06 0 C A47 X( 4900 W do *CHO C ff � • NswArfS 4zpLOe & � -r s ,,, i ! f r Was the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there Is Insufficient lap pool space available in Chap aof Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous comsdt vs swim teams (Chapel Hill YMCA, Nodh Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill . High School East Chapel Hill Hlah Schools and the Community Center summer team). Furthermore, we feel strarmly that lap swimming cuts acro".. age and physical ability/dWaWltty barrlems 0141dnq a lap pool an a� ve choice to serve the greatest propodlon of the Chapel Hill community. *.SIQ.NAYUM . NAME (please , print) ADDRESS � gE � '5LA c6 LF=wls 1gEcc,,a� gt tc t.ewtS t c •tA�t..oR StREE7 ct� • !-t t t KO M LDOyjp%*tcJ D Kan qS lidds Cf. Air GrJSrS zoo J tJ�w�Gk . c ?- . cKAP.Ec. Nla� 6C9 !ems/ie rl�i �- o cctjv era pre c :t . (-k .d l Z u P� IG `toe� q � c► � 1' ( Cl ` �v SCCcctF'�Z Si UZ C 10 whh I CAA b �1 � o f - 91 & � e aaa& e . ke� a�k JoeGd • /� Grai� �t6/ ,4r,.�+aa� �` • " ell, /wlc V06 14 0 tj Or ' . l.4 ' cam, J '1�J �.�.. C7 - iti1 IVY Cv4ql t � . �,. - - - 273 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic Facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams (Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel H111 High School , East Chapel Hill High School, and the Community Center summer team). Furthermore, we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers, making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. aME (please .print) _ . _. _ .. .. .. . ADMSS tqi ! NT(SeT !zb+xtiL t 1 OU J 14t I V ( CiZO3 It fmd�gifa ail C4 c cat wit, � (, /. psi;c e /�- v �-- 14 12C Mal 04009 ' � 1 , � .CM z �Cie tm OLD 9 kit% OIL Q 0 � c � * 7 We, the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. . We believe there is Insufficient lap pool space available In Chapel # Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCX North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team),, Furthermore, we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical abilityldlsability bardem , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the. Chapel Hlll community. Sl_GNATURE. MAME ( niise arint) ADDRESS _ ?I Ira 113 Zoc4 y Si <� _ GwL �' ' Y2 0/ J00% 00( coo (< • l� a D r3AM NOPTQ/q .ok l . � r fl—es-1 ,� �. -- 1 �T • ri•.+w' .,:. ':. ."fr•*N1�-.y-::::`•.w • _ » . V j �•-�C/ V •+- '1 �� S ' w� tv� ,,,,... � -!� tl-(�. A-rl t C' t, rL .v thJ(� � � • � � � oc &1A �14 J VOLc'A Se ccc � 'co\ z7s Y . loilL �J Air/ '04000 't "h ' O1'V ' 4 2, i. hvs � h14 //14 ..? � • i 275 We, the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there 1s Insufficient lap pool space available In Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational tap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams (Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School, East Chapel Hill High School , And the Community Center summer team), Furthermore, we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. _ . SSIGNATURE. NAM_, F ( Manse print) ADORE S n �� ore Mow Tio 04 AooAA too , �r' � ! LT ! j-i/ c l •e/ 7iq / V pt 4 �21, ��•'�' - �/ ` cvd AAA AD 01 elf Ole r _ .. _.. _ �, („ ._.._ ' 1A OA44 J c MA f No NAM fic . f � 276 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at • Homestead Park. We believe there Is insufficient lap pool space available In Chapel Hill to most the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams (Chapel H111 YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team) . Furthermore, we feel strongly that , lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability bardem, making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve: the . greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community, . . . .. - - SIGNATURE . - MAW ( plea_se prINI _ ADDRESS 1 : 0 > OR ) 1 q_�, IRA \ i '1, � I. T •��/ �•.3a�% t�•. .�... mil/ I . ii ' 1 -yam- .� i - ./ Rapp sc"" ( offcom Nor 044� Attar Sat it doo saw _ a � 71 at 4woo � J L aotoakc Ll reor" 41 �V�t 4 64 0 4 1 44 Ai FA J99 at to Car Rat a to • ' f —y :l ' /: ._� f-c_ -�L - — ,`i—{ t - t� ?-mac _ �L . j '� , r, c;r\ , r' S i VV � Raw lk •i : � �' (00 ��✓!C GG � / 0 Rap L LCGL ' v��(i�� lj ! /i' � ��/�� C dL �•4/y ,�r 6940, �L 7S % v �(� \ `��_ `tZ,N `i\ ; S . .. �• 4 277 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is ilable in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local insufficient lap pool space ava recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High , School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , 1 we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of thev Chapel Hill community . r� S ! ;*SVNATLJRE NAME ( ; 1Fa3e print) ADDRESS t0 84VL SPAc. Y 278 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hiil High. School , . East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical abilityldisability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hitl community . S . GNA T URE NAME ( p ' ease print) ;,uOFtESS ra T )r ( I Y oZ 10 U) V 0 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , tand the Community Center summ"br •te'am ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/ disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS C ' D ,nlc>le � l AQ1 nt, , Anne- Ci -eevee Qtdo � P7j10 rL Ties L km (, c �� WII oA 0 9 va�lle /&WI a rcv LA) JAO�; -3 eL AIOG POO � G � � � Q g�G S)9o41iOAo4wI dPG . L ( AcLl pC�J V 6 To hC S � 84 r • d We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool ic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is over that of any other aquat insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. S GNA UR . NAME . ( PLEASE . PRINT ) ADDRESS Q1q K4FRZ -!NIS V'j TImG t 12 Ly /y6 J. 0 a 7 0 i� Z.i- S q y - V4V 4 X. Wsl)e 1 (26 f lc400011 Z oe7577� , C 5or� 5� � z� 41 �s� 281 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hilt Town Council to prioritize a lap pool 9 over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is . insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the - numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hilt YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , j we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/ disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS d s r717�( P �/ (f.j� oZ731 Nit AwalM ZL "A ' L WOK GL ., - 144,4n eoo 0�� IV � . . . C Tet f (( , zoo ' C woo a L'40' off, Af C � gwls . f �N 6 �-� t 4 5 b 6 1 V—t7 t C S a . c L �� Aid * Ct 282 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool ity at Homestead Park . We believe there is over that of any other aquatic facil insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hilt YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hilt High School , and the Community Center summer team ) , Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/ disability barriers ,- making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNAT E NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS %� - �„ few000l YK 2o4i 7 VJ �U ;at e4 ac c. Of 0 6,j 309 f1w y o �v Z. AM t� ju I CL T f MarL � • . y ol Uj fu % W 0 * e. Uck-K e,.: • L e. so 00 r ° d" C�r .N ?!.t a �. �ZY ft. � — „ t (a� '4'F00000tat t ' � too 19 (7 WMAXoolltj Uk AtA I Ck ��ff 11 Lon CAYYkiOrO [ J4o �� c � G{ VC a. �� •�- 4 coo > c JO a c � L; } 283 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational' lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print)* ADDRESS ZeeL ,vt c4NXMK I • Ja Lj ►*tL M - 5' t V�•-' 1315 {7a;Q,w,4 . 6* ve, GGt H' b o ro 1� 2� 278 �r D l � y , � 284 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park, We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel HiII community. SIGNATUR NAM IE ( please print) ADDRESS an /VC00000 Kute ,;! /* A 1 � S' -t'�--Q �S-, fie .; lv � � d?d t Z 1S^C�� D . to cc 2 e� c c 2 s� Y 6 too �.,, Otmom P ( 04104� CCZ55 * GLWCOOv Z52r to 2 At000) ax) mono 40� 7 k �Woo� rld7 CC, 7 )- • •toot < � 00000 - Cox. I N ( bLOOOFO' 0 t / ' =' 7 % +4 l to, 1� i i oto top too, t to dotter emm" 4 got Mai �=to ,4Z I �' 7:; ' �y e x.V � 1. o Qz:)t/ - ti�� •�1 �, it;{ c 2 t�i'ts-C.t_ . b ! yak k e s . (4 +• 12 Z Z S-t .� We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the . numerous j competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , j Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore, we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS (,lJit� S•. CJ c � � � � � ct�� Its v � r �, ?.up rb � t� u.r'n �S l � � ° t - C �� . 5t/ yyt. . �T' �' �.l�A � ��zt rn E �..._ Eta t t ��. '• . /Va h it ben s d & D 3 , a 7S"l �— iav�A. �rn� �°rSTt,c.Y�QD !0 3 8 C.c�t 1 t ` - �ir . C �{ TAt011 Ph o� ' r . y Sri llc r O; aj )afm 0 . C P 33 2 ! 1 rV rl or 07 & � i � c � Coif 7J�slL ,! . . . . • Iry Vt i CSC ucas 1�+ Gi,( �C Cr C ,'vt�Scoo k on � J(14 i�� - :2L75'11 286 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool . an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS f r00 1M.5 r oalrteeAV < a )J40 ' ere / ' / iL0 /I CW / 1 . 281 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is . insufficient lap pool space available. in Chapel Hill to meetthe needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS Y'',L 194 t' We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park: We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive , swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High. School , East Chapel . Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE DAME ( please print) ADDRESS tee "oe C or te'i •- �� settee 4 %he lei AL � A� Aga A At eque ?A Vle Jt •• 1` Not /'� •l' J, ,11 1 i !^ it i r . �� ., , ^ ('• • . -••�JT ice, too \ _ `� ✓ 1 {2 \• , ��r { ti.✓ � " '"�•_ mot' .... ' l.J • �, '� ; I .. r • �� tote 9 Otte/ too OLOwnsomoo letters, low Njode 4 ogre ZA, &0 ... ✓� Q She lC �C,;' c�r. . r . s . for . 0� . . JJ/Stoo � /�_ COC er C . rOe` y ti re 63 flu 0� VOYN LQ Oq ifO L ov%i kv I Come i - c I1 C� 14 . _ t#41 Loe4000ie V LAC l � . � coot A - 54 , C �� s � We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is , insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High School , ,East �{ Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNAT E NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS n A p 0(a r 110A Iwo AClot GV , �7s� � , N12 8 C�i�v s 4 Zbs y - Ot -z c ) ��. � - �� .� 111 � lea' t c g �� sky � t . • � � �y � � t tee. goon 9 0X . d 1—�-i l Is r too &*x cot (, outs S � v we � I aOil took No \ Cook CC7 C U Uj C� 2 tv L - C 1-4 �Zt ZZ 5l r t{�e�-cam V\ tote Zo 1 Lost ZS + L 290 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient tap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local 4' recreational lap swimmers as . weil as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel ' HIII • High • School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making . a tap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS < h ( � 711 ter C`'�Y1 )ax �-- Vcf � r p AVI OFF W, QS (lay C �,,�, I°`'� rl l N e 275 / q � � �- III 4 .1 9V6 oy t.,..r�v � iZci� G� �� u - wcau �t'SS ;-tt- 3 � 3 urik, �C OJC..No Z� S� � Nakao haA41 Lae & 144. Va\ Vj c..., Pow%," clolwr�� k Cf�7 :� 6a d 7 MQ too � c , :t . L�� aye . 0 - (, c b 5, n �Common J4 V1 n Le Coff ook � - �� • 9 . !� nn � Sj � / LA 10 * v V1 leir ep" ' ,,Aq ! . U we %kmo 14 fj [,,�"/ G✓ JS SC � �� v mac{ Dr- � �• -� C t,.,� �;, ( (�� o � Z7 •�l � ( A _ sit I 29 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel ' Hill -High ' School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS yy ,,do told ` _ d 4 Q41ao Video C dood Cat h L1.1 ('' �, . JC. 1 �. ( � { �i �t r� 1'll I G : `�LJ . (A G �. i° 1 'li_ 1 ,I �.. old ` dOdd a - . Al , - ti 1 � Y^ � � K ; .`� . ��It #C. i C'�� :� 1 1 �� ` 1 .�: �- Zen / i w ho diddo at 0 411 P 75 y' 1 lCi7 ) Sv `1 q44 0 1 door LOr� 1 • r S w �4d, �5 �� COL M -C 0, cti e pu e (Z G �� aG Z �75" � orb 292 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool ity at Homestead Park . We believe there is over that of any other aquatic facil , Insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel tHill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as •the numerous competitive sto 0wim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill ' High School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS 2-1 to Con �- ✓� 2. c� 3 pv � 7 Ho i f Lq ri t, C P I bq Vh 1 e te ( se C rkvk� (A k A- ) u"r, GXWvA - A . Nk a.Lt.V v- "r •e,,,� . %7 $-lell � W - 1 RetoeA0,0, y1n / 0 / 16 T Al - 1`�ri♦. 1h . m �. u f L, 1�1a. ri n sl�,�. w J � tI �,,L �,� ��, C it z � �, � y �- � �.- Cxi �rc,t .� � � G- �e � v, ram- 46 to Wit, too , c:�e c.�� acc�� Al v l vv0 Sfa ;&U - ;^�e. G # .27V C U d-t., Gl'vvL I st 6 ems& �%toa nn e ( s ovus L*A. . �.CK�:- C' h A 1 c � oc 7cur "'7 'OL CAA IS I 44 o o� It000 5 FCC eo AA �b ; /7 s E 9 00 /� ;L a � 4� Vim-,: �- c - J O n i Ce � C� ill CuLr ►1 C 't • CH N C. L 7 tlor� a - - - � � i _ ilol . �. , _ k 2o9 3 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is , insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel * Hill • HighsSchool , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME ( please print ) ADDRESS . - A/0 ALL �� P att i t )vwa / Z ZAn , 30 :3 o Co bk 4tyAec rp, C jq S�I(o Shuz MA7 s 14 eA �� C otoo .� LclUe� Svc / a � c� E- �-� . G{� S / 4 r�ez,0c eo 4/vA C3 Icy. 2a Zi . oo, a 30 S p ACLVe� (ZV C 4 0171 Q [ffh U LJ I . � LCA * C h G . J, —,� YORrT/� E� 3a� COopP � INC 44 0 4 0 e? 7 / Oj/ �2 , P �4� / i�� / e . . 175 , 294 OL S r. We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility, at Homestead Park . We be there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreati6nal ! ap • swimmers as well as the numerous cortipLetitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hiii High , School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Comrnuniny C . nter sumr;ler feam ) . Furthermore , eve feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability harriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the g, r;: atest proportion of the Chapel Hill community , � ic" Ni UR Niti.n�iE ( please print ) ADDRESS,{ ice f1 r'�\ • (14 • �-.�` ' `►L/ . % • 1C .14 ,• 1 / " ./ 4 � '� ✓ ` � 1. ( �� µ- "t. + Z �` l I1 • to \��III✓✓✓ a. J 1 ` 5 i It IA t VT ago J; 100 /40� onto Alto toot to two too PA twoomis oor i.• �� _ , to 'ttott ( t lso f� a too f � fr 1 ow to I of to 295 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is ilable in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local insufficient lap pool space ava recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High . School , East Chapel Hill - Hi m gh School , and the Community Center sumer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming , cuts across age and physical abilityidisabiiity barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE NAME ( please print; ADDRESS 1 UP Lewc. +<2re $-AJ � l ` Qom , CIc �c o � LAI its t AZA TA19t 'c PuI4 elr etreooQ 4L (i�oe ; qI go or of A . ��s go 0 go 0 too gog it `Y I . _ , or Oak .. , , . , t! ilomow ` ' ,A . 236 We, tha undersigned , urge the Chapel Hitt Town Council to prioritize a lop pool over ftt of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is tnsufohrnt lap pool space available In Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational tarp swimmers as woll as thO numerous competitivO *swim warns (Chatpet Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hilt High, fchooll East Chapel Hill High fthool, and the Communhy Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we fo*l strongly that lap swimming cuts across► ago a "d physlral abliltyfdlsa►bptty barriers , making a top pool an a&ocgve choice to "rvf the greatest pmpordon of the Chapel Hill coMMIMity. SIGNATURE NAME (please print) ADDRESS quo &L h 1 J n 1 I C , S Farms Oct . C O rct C ro c, i n Cl �Q � (f A n G � �� :� jZ9 0 zr G � JI(M LOA C�Ou* 14 ! k � Y Cr1 CR/Vl ✓'7 zrt • TOTAL P . O� 297 1!1le, the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park, We Relieve thero is itmufficisnt lap pool space available In Chapel Hill to roset the ne$ds of local a ft nsl lap swirnmom as well as the numerous competitive swim teams' ( C t 614111 YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Mill High; School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer teem). Furthermore, we feel strongly that tap swhnrWng cuts acroaa ago and phyal al ability/disability barriars, making a lap pool an attmative choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. SIGNATURE NAME (please print) ADDRESS /0 /Ur- W OAST�E�Ldk �� A Nf 27L5i4L, 17h5 3q6q+ IAA72 y M 467/? 4R �o � M I c U3 ,e . 6 A4,v C94 t2 1ot < < t IVa 5 � � P K4 Aare � 1, � 1 t I ' P ^ram 49 �-, I" ,,, a.��- , � e.{ O c- r�� . �r +C( G 7a Ca,.t -ro A i 15 C, r (e� x "\4Yd o a c c� e (` C VCL/ *) 9 Af Zoe r 4"60TAL ? . 02 ;•. t.. 1rKtIv �5P SCHH a i g 966C805 F . Z1a 99 We, the undersigned , ur*o tho Chapel Hill Town Council to prloftze a leap p*ol overt that of any other aquatic fteolity at Homestead Park. We believe th*rs is tnsut#lclent bap pool space available In Chapel Hilt to most the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as wall as the numerous comostit!" .Awim gams (Chapl1 Hilt YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club, Chapel Hill High. School, Eamt Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer %am) . purthormore, we feel strongly that tap swimming nuts across age and physical 2biiityldlsabi ty barriers, nuking a lap pool an attractive Mole* to servt the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community. S142NATURE NAME (please print) ADDRESS � / 4o s�.d arr t Q 1�n i ,Q � SGt � 4 p .DaneS �� c. l C� . :? ape 9Z9 � q9 23 11 a UJ , Osborn �71 ��. NW4 ' Jk rn Dawo 50 n rn Da Lo :)On 70 l 4 ZM � 101 os i �" e �� ' M A j�t aLi 13 woo � �y �t /�j � J G IV 16 le ! l J ep �„S 0 / ! (ZllI�� Id e Iz o �,hG !"� 10 % 6 C 2*1 CGw rL e LE et- 257 ,E i�t 1G LLv Y'jo F12Z ck /v AIJC / ft O3 . c l PeeW40V Ldtt AaA 1310974 3X -671 LC� rst far �� vAe unZ� r a, � of _ -. .1 ( ^ MOM TOTRL P . O� ep 4amm>*L Of 0 I I VWIA 4"r too WOO We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive .swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High, School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summergteam ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical abilityldisability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATU NAME ( please print) ADDRESS ( � G y Ave Gary r✓ 4 � 2,0 ho ►' � men hy S�' • � a � Ybar� t� L. a5'1n avow / 4� 6 6A4 dal � E fir- a p� Ilan- fag 0 0 ilk v AfF l �. s-� , Lh � � zl 1 � to �,� Su s c:. ctoo 'S IC . I er- s w � < b5 Swoo- ST 04 of otoor ? r / sit ? wy g1 r�j 300 000.9 AP a form ON f f4 0 k cLcl 1pwrecY m 44 AL C � chc Lc Q.�. vYw\ N L ` J CmO esswor 46 IV _ � ck t4 a r r ti� . . iovo �� r Al C �s � . r 301 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive . swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High , School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical abl.lityldisability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest , proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS r r1 3 �� 74A 30,. 2 ,. We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Councll to prlorlttze a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We bslleve thoro Is InsuMcl*nt Iqp pool spans available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local racroatlond lap swlmmen a wNl ss the numerous comp.atlye swim a.m. (ch.pd Hen YMca Nort1, caraUa Aayaaa Clubs Chaps! HIII High School , East Chq »I Hllf High Schoais and the Community Center summer team). Furthermaras we tw1 sUonOIY that f&P swtmmina cuts across gas and physical abllltytdiabll [ty burUrs, mtldng a lap pool a�n �w choice to serve the t ProPortIan at the Chapel Hill oommuMly. go a �w�-; N �� Oct 18 00 08 : 31 a child care services assoc 919967706 .83 3 05o 2 L nn l fv G We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park. We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA, North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High. School , East. Chapel Hill High School , and the Community &Center summer team . Furthermore , we feel *teongly that lap swimming cuts across, age and* physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of. the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE NAIVE ( please print) ADDRESS 4V Vu ICH t f vvl t � lyutc �c Sato LOU I 304 We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel Hill YMCA , North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High . School , East Chapel Hill High School , and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a lap pool an attractive choice to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel Hill community . SIGNATURE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS chyCt_,t K, r'�-- Carson l a o vrt a �' �-�'' 1 4p+� q A ��. Nc C -► We , the undersigned , urge the Chapel Hill Town Council to prioritize a lap pool over that of any other aquatic facility at Homestead Park . We believe there is insufficient lap pool space available in Chapel Hill to meet the needs of local recreational lap swimmers as well as the numerous competitive swim teams ( Chapel H : : s YMCA; North Carolina Aquatic Club , Chapel Hill High , School , East Chapel Hill High School ; and the Community Center summer team ) . Furthermore , we feel strongly that� lap swimming cuts across age and physical ability/disability barriers , making a - lap pool an attractive choice_ to serve the greatest proportion of the Chapel dill community . N . RE NAME ( please print) ADDRESS 51 P 1 107 * P6tt&n -)n PI B PZ 9 M6 ND KA 13 l C T ( N G 10 a S�►c�� N N� �f �"�R9�grc-� �'T�1/C�/ C�s � � � os s A ✓� ��1 � �.r err 2 � c�- f . I Vefl 115 7:: 0 & Job to NOO Oct Wy � *P4 147V Of r4w41d J j Oro �1 �; two, � L U- PALI Coe c C