Minutes 01/25/1977 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 2~, 1977 this inventory will provide the basis for a rational and equitable provision of services. No attempt has been made to provide identical facilities within each community. Each community differs in terms of age groups, recreational preferences, existing land uses, etc. Many facilities, because of cost or other factors, must be located and designed for use by more than the residents of the immediate area~ While provision of identical services is neither practical nor desirable, a primary objective of the study is to establish a means of providing for an equal level of recreational services. In evaluating the proposed five-year Capital Improvement Plan, we must recognize that in past years recreational facilities were not given a high priority. Last year we were able to increase the capital budget for recreation to $814,000. For 1975-76 the capital budget was $355,894. The proposed 1977-82 Capital Improvement Plan includes expenditures of $5,421,000 (including $450,000 proposed using C.D. funds), or an average annual expenditure of approximately $1,080,000. Approval or acceptance of the Recreation and Open Space Study does not conmlit the City to the specific dollar amounts in the plan or to any project included therein. It must be understood that with the limited financial resources available to the City, implementation of the proposed plan would r~e~'aSme=evaluation of our Capital Improvements priorities. One option that should be.considered is the re-evaluation of the expend~e~priorities for Revenue Sharing. We have appropriated to date approximate] $4.6 million of Revenue Sharing funds for drainage, curbs and gutters, and street improvement~ compared to $500,000 for capital expenditures in the area of Recreation. Since the City is limited in its financial resources, I believe that a re-evaluation of our capital priorities is justified in order to project a level of funding in various categories that over a period of time will produce an acceptable level of service. Acceptance of this plan by the City Council does not imply approval as submitted; but, will require a commitment to serious reconsiderations of existing capital priorities. My recommendation is that City Council accept the Recreation and Open Space Study and authorize the City Manager to utilize the report as a guide for preparing a five- year Capital Improvements Program for Recreation. In recommending the study for your acceptance, I view it as a realistic, but flexible plan. The five-year plan will be subject to annual review and re-evaluation. It may be necessary to delay certain expenditure: because other projects take a higher priority or because the City is unable to provide the funds proposed within the plan. If our financial picture does not improve over the next year or so, the proposed five-year plan may become a six or seven-year plan. The lack of State or Federal funds may require that certain projects be deleted entirely. Final action on the Lawrence Stadium Task Force Report may require some significant changes in the five-year plan. Due to the above, and a myriad of other unknown conditions, I want to emphasize that acceptance of the study does not commit the City to fund $5,421,000 over the next five years or to fund any specific project proposed within the plan. The study, however, does serve as a very valuable, essential planning tool." Motion of Mr. Oast and seconded by Mr. Barnes, to concur in the recommendation of the city Manager and that the~iistudy to be used as a plan, was adopted by unanimous vote. 76-478 - The following letter presented on the Stadium Report reviously submitted to City Council by the Frank Lawrence Stadium Com~ttee was presented: "At the November 9, 1976 meeting, City Council referred th~ Lawrence Stadium Task Force Report to the City Manager for reeo~~. ~i~n~i~e~e raised by members of City Council regarding (1) use of the stadium for baseball, (2) need fOr the stadium given a standard of "on~ stadium" per city in the Open Space and Recreation Study, and (3) possible relocation of the stadium. Although not detailed in the written report, the Task Force did examine these questions. My recommendation is that City Council authorize the City Manager to include funds in the 1977-78 Capital Improvements Program for preliminary design and cost estimates for renovation of Frank D. Lawrence Stadium. The architect selected should be re~-e~a~!it~~' provide two designs for consideration. One design would encompass the recommendations of the Task Force, and the other design would encompass a multi-purpose stadium, to include baseball. Before any decision is made regarding discontinuance of baseball in the stadium, I feel we need the opportunity to evaluate the two options in terms of cost and maintenance/ programmatic effects of a dual football-baseball design. I also request the opportunity to explore in detail the need -- current and future -- for baseball in the stadium. The architect would also be required to explore and make recommendations as to phasing various improvements over a three to five year period with the City making every effort to secure avail-able financial assistance from Federal or State sources. During ~he past year, the Buck Childs Athletic Association used the stadium for basebal on six occasions, portsmouth Catholic High SChool played six baseball games in the stadium and held a number of practices there. Also, as indicated in the report, other baseball uses were: semi-pro baseball, Big League baseball, Tide-water Baseball League, Babe Ruth Tournament, and the State Little League Tournament. The Task Force recommended that other facilities be made available for baseball uses, and specifically recommended that Churchland Park include a baseball/softball complex sufficient for statewide tournaments. As an alternz tire to using the stadium, the Buck Childs Athletic Association could use the lighted ballfi( at the Park View Sports Complex and Portsmouth Catholic High School Could use either ~he field at Park View or the one at Wilson High School. The proposed five year Capital Improve~ ment Plan calls for upgrading and improving existing facilities, i.e., adding lights to Y Id