HomeMy WebLinkAboutR14-319194
RESOLUTION NO. R14-319
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PLAINVIEW, TEXAS ADOPTING AN
UPDATED PARK, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES (PROS)
COMPREHENSIVE MASTER PLAN FOR THE CITY PARKS SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, in 1967, the City of Plainview, Texas developed and adopted the
first Park Master Plan with successive Plans being updated and adopted in 1997 and in
2007; and
WHEREAS, the City of Plainview, Texas, established a Park's Advisory Board
by adopting Ordinance No. 95-3035; and
WHEREAS, one of the duties of the Park's Advisory Board is to develop and
submit to the City Council of the City of Plainview an updated Park Comprehensive
Master Plan for the future of parks, open space, recreation use and recreation land
planning; and
WHEREAS, the Park's Advisory Board held public hearings to obtain citizen's
input on the proposed Park, Recreation, and Open Spaces (PROS) Comprehensive
Master Plan, and after such hearings, the Board recommended approval of this Plan to
be presented to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the updated PROS Comprehensive Master Plan is to be studied,
implemented and funded as the City Council determines is most beneficial in respect to
time and budget constraints; and
WHEREAS, the updated PROS Comprehensive Master Plan contains general
policies, suggestions and guidelines that are proposed to be used by the City of
Plainview to guide the orderly growth, development and redevelopment of parks, open
space, recreation use and recreation land in conjunction with the City's Comprehensive
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Park's Advisory Board has submitted to the City Council the
updated PROS Comprehensive Master Plan through the year 2035; and
WHEREAS, the Park's Advisory Board's progress in the implementation of the
Plan shall be reviewed annually and updated every five years.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Plainview that:
The updated Park, Recreation, and Open Spaces Comprehensive Master Plan
for the City Parks System as presented by the Park's Advisory Board is hereby adopted.
R14-319 Parks Comprehensive Master Plan to 2035
Page 1 of 3
195
The adoption of this updated PROS Comprehensive Master Plan supersedes
and replaces previous park, recreation, and open space master plans to the extent the
provisions of the update are in direct conflict with such other park, recreation, and open
space master plans for the City of Plainview.
The updated PROS Comprehensive Master Plan for the City of Plainview, Texas
is officially adopted as the guide for allocation of resources for the improvement and
continued development of City of Plainview's Park, Recreation, and Open Space
System.
IV.
This PROS Comprehensive Master Plan is to be updated every five years and
these updates shall be presented to the City Council.
V.
The updated PROS Comprehensive Master Plan for the City of Plainview, Texas
as adopted this date by the City Council is hereby incorporated as part of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 8th day of July, 2014.
Wen ell Dun ap, Mayor
ATT ST:
e�
Belinda Hinojosa, City Se
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
( Qp,c,--e-
Rutty Ree e, Parks Superintendent
R14-319 Parks Comprehensive Master Plan to 2035 Page 2 of 3
196
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Les ie Spear, City ttorney
R14-319 Parks Comprehensive Master Plan to 2035 Page 3 of 3
Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces (PROS)
Comprehensive Master Plan
Revised
2014
2006
1997
Developed
1967
1
City of Plainview
Parks, Recreation, and Open
Spaces
Comprehensive Master Plan
RUSTY REESE, SUPERINTENDENT
PARKS DEPARTMENT
BUILDING MAINTENANCE
CELL: 806.774.2893
E-MAIL: rreese@plainviewtx.org
CITY OF PLAINVIEW
901 BROADWAY STREET
PLAINVIEW, TEXAS 79072
PHONE: 806.296.1156
FAX: 806.296.1125
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
1.The Realization Page 4
2.Plan Development Process Page 5
3.Introduction Page 6
4.Population Projection Page 7
5.Goals and Objectives Page 7
6.Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces (PROS) Standards Pages 8
7.Inventory of Areas and Facilities Page 11
8.Park Capital Improvements Page 14
9.Plan Implementation and Prioritization of Needs Page 15-19
10.District Map and Parks System Plan Pages 20
11.Summation Page 22
12.References Page 23
3
1.THE REALIZATION
As a city grows and a balance in development is determined, a plan for parks, recreation, trails and
open spaces becomes crucial to the vitality and well-being of a community and its citizens. A
strategy should be developed and used as a guide to enhance existing areas and to plan for
projected future development. Plainview’s Parks Advisory Board along with the Park Superintendent
has developed a 20-year comprehensive plan for your consideration. As you read through these
pages, it is our desire for you to hear the voice of our great community, see its needs, and perceive
its thoughts, ideas and desires. In order to accomplish future development, we must learn from data
what will be expected. So travel with us as we share a look into where we desire to be in the years
ahead.
It shall be the mission of the City of Plainview Parks Department to:
Protect the natural beauty of Plainview through the development of a system of parks,
recreation, trails and open spaces.
Provide citizens of all ages positive recreational opportunities in clean, safe and accessible
facilities.
Preserve the city’s quality living environment for future generations.
City of PlainviewWendell Dunlap Mayor
City of Plainview Council Members
District 1 Charles Starnes
District 2 Larry Williams
District 3 Norma Juarez
District 4 Teressa King
District 5 Susan Blackerby
District 6 Lionel Garcia
District 7 Eric Hastey
City of Plainview Greg Ingham City Manager
City of Plainview Jeffrey Snyder Assistant City Manager
City of Plainview Leslie Pearce City Attorney
City of Plainview Rusty Reese Parks Superintendent
City of Plainview Parks Advisory Board
District 1 Ruby Riggins
District 2 Carlene Kirby
District 3 Barbara Ramirez
District 4 Phyllis Wall Vice-Chair
District 5 Joani Chapman
District 6 Gabriel Rodriguez
District 7 Vacant
Mayor Representative Lucile Davis Chair
4
2.PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
As members of the 2014 Plainview Parks Advisory Board (PPAB) sensed a growing responsibility to
ensure adequate parks, recreation, trails and open spaces for projected development of Plainview,
they, along with the Park Superintendent, began discussions in early 2014 concerning a
comprehensive plan to provide for the future. The PPAB partnered with the Park Superintendent to do
an in-depth assessment of existing parks, facilities and equipment. In addition, surveys, both verbal
and written, were conducted in each district in order to involve the citizens in the community. After
compilation and evaluation of all the information, the needs of the community began to emerge.
Thus, the comprehensive plan was developed and presented in open hearings for consideration and
further input by the citizenry. The plan was approved by the PPAB and given to the City
management to continue the process of formal adoption.
Meetings
Tuesday, March 18, 2014 PROS revision begins
reviewed first copy of plan
reviewed and prioritized existing plan listings
Tuesday, March 25, 2014 Reviewed PROS updates
Saturday, April 5, 2014, 1:30-3:00 p.m. Public hearing/First Christian Church
Tuesday, April 15, 2014, 6:30-8:00 p.m. Public hearing/Broadway Park Shelter House
Thursday, April 24, 2014 Finalization and approval of plan
Provided list of improvements to City Council
Presented copies of Texas Parks & Wildlife
Department (TPWD)
December 21, 2005 District Survey
District 1 1
District 2 3
District 3 4
District 4 2
District 5 2
District 6 2
District 7 1
Total Returned 14
April 2014 Realtor Survey
Total Comments 2
May 13, 1996 Survey
District 1 3
District 2 12
District 3 7
District 4 26
District 5 13
District 6 14
District 7 7
Total Returned 82
3.INTRODUCTION
5
PHYSIOGRAPHY
The City of Plainview is comfortably nestled in West Texas on the Llano Estacado, a high flat plateau
covering a large area of the Panhandle of Texas and eastern New Mexico. The Llano Estacado
Plateau is bound by the Caprock Escarpment, a major physical feature of the State of Texas. This
escarpment is caused by surface erosion and rises from 200 to 1,000 feet above the lower rolling
plains to the west. These high plains are typified by flat, treeless expanses dotted with numerous wet-
weather playa lakes. Although a large part of the area is under irrigated farming, native grasses
cover a primary portion of the high plains. The entire area is underlain by the Ogallala Aquifer, one of
the largest water bearing strata in Texas.
TOPOGRAPHY
With elevations ranging from 3,250 to 3,375 feet above sea level the topography of the Plainview
area is best described as flat. The only evident changes in topography are the slight localized
variations caused by playa lakes and the broad flat drainage course of the Running Water Draw.
The general slope across the area is eastward at an average of approximately 4 feet per mile.
SOILS
Consisting of primarily brown to reddish brown and reddish deep to moderately deep sandy clay
loams, the soils of Plainview are moderately permeable. Free lime and caliche are present under
many soils at various depths. The main soil series in the area include the Pullman, Mansker, Richfield,
Amarillo, Portales, Brownfield, Tivoli and Potter. These soils are productive and the flat surface lends
itself to irrigation and mechanization. Limited rainfall, poor drainage and the constant danger of wind
erosion are handicaps, but the area is one of the most productive crop areas of the state.
RECREATION
The City of Plainview has numerous parks, recreation, trails and open space areas.
PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT
The first settlements in Plainview consisted of the homesteads of Z.T. Maxwell and E.L. Lowe in 1886.
These two homesteads were located across Running Water Draw from one another in the vicinity of
Broadway Park. Plainview has gone through many stages of development through the years. This
community of roughly 22,500 offers many of the amenities more often found in larger sister cities while
maintaining a hearty hometown feel. Plainview adjoins I-27, which connects various Texas
metropolitan cities, such as Amarillo to the North and Lubbock to the South.
PURPOSE
It has long been realized and discussed that the area along the banks of the Running Water Draw
(RWD) is an excellent landmass that can be used for both active and passive types of recreation for
the entire city. The landmass area is sufficient in size to meet almost any desired recreational facility
or program point. It seems reasonable and cost effective to develop this landmass into a
recreational area to conserve and or develop nature and wildlife habitats. The clean up and
development of usable areas along the draw will increase the property values in the immediate area
while providing enjoyment for our citizens and visitors alike.
Within our city we maintain developed parks of considerable acreage, neighborhood parks, small
parks, trail parks and open space acreage. The City of Plainview is consistent in its belief that our
parks should be well groomed, recreational equipment and facilities maintained and provide a
welcoming environment for current and future residents. In order for the City of Plainview to maintain
our current population level and attract a future population to our community we must place a
6
priority on new developments within our park, recreation, trail and open space (PROS) areas. It has
been documented that diverse well-maintained park areas increase property values
In general, the objective of this plan is to develop a continuing program to cover the anticipated
recreational needs for the citizens of Plainview until the year 2035. Planning should be a continuous
process involving constant evaluation of the recommendations. As part of this process, it is
recommended that a proper study and assessment of Plainview’s parks, recreation facilities, trails
and open spaces be conducted as well as a demographic study of our community to determine
community investment priorities. In addition, it is recommended that a continuous program of
evaluation through “Needs Assessment Review” for all parks and community areas be developed.
When all data and goals are determined, it is proposed to approach prioritization of community
PROS needs by establishing three time periods of evaluation and implementation; one to five years,
six to ten years, and eleven to twenty years.
4.POPULATION PROJECTION and DEMOGRAPHICS
Please reference the City of Plainview Comprehensive Plan for Population Projections and
Demographics.
5.GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Purpose and Relationship
The purpose of the Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Master Plan is to provide goals and policies
to guide the acquisition and development of parks, recreation facilities, trails and open spaces
throughout the city.
We believe that:
All people should have access to activities and facilities regardless of interest, age, sex, income, cultural
background, housing environment or handicap.
Public recreation must be integrated with all other public services, such as education, health, water,
light and roads.
Facilities should be adaptable to future requirements.
Land conservation and the economic impact of natural land protection should remain a priority.
Impacting property values through ongoing PRTOS improvements and development is vital to
advancing economic strategies.
The Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Master Plan is developed in accordance with the Texas
Park, Recreation and Open Space Master Plan Guidelines and with consideration of the City of
Plainview’s current and future passive and active recreational needs.
Organization of the Element
This Master Plan begins by listing the Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces goals for the City of
Plainview. The goals are followed by standards necessary to support the City’s need for desirable
parks, recreation facilities, trails and open spaces. The Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Master
Plan provides information on population trends, public participation, park facilities and categories,
inventories of existing parks, trails, open spaces and projected demands and needs. Cost and
strategies for implementing the goals and policies of the Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Master
Plan are located within this document.
7
(G)
Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Goals
PROS-G1 The City of Plainview should build, operate and maintain a system of parks, recreational
facilities, trails and open spaces that are distributed throughout the City and responsive to the needs
of Plainview residents.
PROS-G2 The City of Plainview should, as much as practical, develop and maintain public access to
available natural land through direct purchase and public/private partnerships.
PROS-G3 The City of Plainview should build and maintain a system of public exercise trails that
provide recreational and mobility opportunities for Plainview residents.
PROS-G4 The City of Plainview should provide opportunities for varied recreation activities and
programs that are responsive to the needs of a wide range of Plainview residents.
PROS-G5 The City of Plainview should promote opportunities for public participation in planning parks,
recreation facilities, trails and open spaces.
PROS-G6 The City of Plainview should create and promote opportunities for private contributions and
volunteerism in the acquisition, construction, operation, and maintenance of parks, recreation
facilities, trails and open spaces.
PROS-G7 The City of Plainview should participate with other jurisdictions and public sector entities in
promoting a region-wide parks, recreation, trails and open spaces system, for recreational as well as
educational purposes.
6.PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES STANDARDS
(SP = Standards, Parks)
PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
PROS-SP1The City of Plainview establishes the following categories for existing and planned parks
and recreation facilities; mini-parks, neighborhood parks, community parks, resource parks and
recreational facilities.
PROS-SP2 The City of Plainview shall provideplanned parks are based on the projected year 2035
population:
a. Mini-parks: 0.5 acre per 1,000 population
b. Neighborhood parks: 2.0 acres per 1,000 population
c. Community parks and recreational facilities: 5.0 acres per 1,000 population
d. Trails: 1.1 miles per 1,000 population
e. Resource (OS) parks: no pre-established level of service standard
The City of Plainview shall meet the park needs of the City by providing planned parks and facilities
through the 20-year planning period to adequately serve Plainview’s population.
PROS-SP3 The City of Plainview shall prioritize and implement parks and recreation projects through
diverse funding opportunities as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan.
PROS-SP4 The City of Plainview shall seek to develop athletic fields, a skateboard park and other
described courses.
PROS-SP5 The City of Plainview should take advantage of opportunities to secure property for parks
and recreation facilities. Through grant funding, private donation, easements, availability and
purchase of public lands for parks use and dedication of private land as part of the development
review process, this goal will be accomplished.
PROS-SP6 Developers shall be required to develop and dedicate parks or pay an impact fee or
provide mitigation for parks in new development in accordance with the adopted Parks, Recreation,
Trails and Open Spaces Master Plan and consistent with applicable City development standards.
PROS-SP7 The City of Plainview should pursue opportunities to acquire adjacent properties of
developed parks as they become available.
PROS-SP8 The City of Plainview shall focus on enhancing and retaining the natural qualities of
Running Water Draw.
8
PROS-SP9 The City of Plainview should strive to negotiate and enter into written joint-use agreements
for park development with the Plainview Independent School District.
PROS-SP10 The City of Plainview should identify opportunities for partnerships with other public sector
entities and with private groups in order to expand parks and recreation opportunities for Plainview
residents.
PROS-SP11 The City of Plainview shall ensure that development adjacent to parks and recreation
facilities are designed to minimize impact on these parks and recreation areas and vice versa.
PROS-SP12 The City of Plainview shall maximize where possible the retention of existing native
vegetation in new parks while meeting the purpose of the park.
PROS-SP13 The City of Plainview should situate or buffer active play facilities in new parks and
recreation facilities to protect the privacy of adjacent property.
PROS-SP14 The City of Plainview shall consider the level of use, ease of maintenance and longevity in
the selection and design of parks and recreation facilities.
PROS-SP15 The City of Plainview shall design parks and recreation improvements to maximize
sustainability through the preservation of a site’s natural systems, the use of recycled materials when
possible and the application of best management practices for the maintenance of land and facility
improvements.
PROS-SP16 The City of Plainview shall assign a level of maintenance to parks and recreation facilities
appropriate to sustain them as attractive and useful facilities. Before acquisition or construction, a
funding plan for long-term operation and maintenance shall be established.
PROS-SP17 The City of Plainview shall pursue opportunities to acquire/develop one or more parks that
take advantage of existing water or territorial views.
PROS-SP18 The City of Plainview shall appropriately sign all parks. Signage may include interpretive
and historical information.
PROS-SP19 The City of Plainview shall provide park facilities for all age groups and where feasible,
shall conform its park facilities to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
(ST = Standards, Trails)
TRAILS
PROS-ST21 The City of Plainview establishes the following criteria for trails: 1.1 miles per 1,000
population.
PROS-ST22 The City of Plainview shall provide/maintain exercise trails. These planned trails are based
on the community need, natural land flow and population. The City of Plainview shall prioritize the
acquisition and development of segments needed to complete planned trails based on land
availability, projected trail usage and opportunities through the development review process. The
City shall develop these planned trails incrementally through the 20-year planning period to
adequately serve Plainview’s growing population.
PROS-ST23 The City of Plainview shall prioritize and implement trail projects through diverse funding
opportunities as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan.
PROS-ST24 Developers shall be required to develop and dedicate trails in new development in
accordance with the adopted Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Spaces Master Plan and consistent
with applicable City development standards. The City shall develop a procedure to credit such
development and dedication costs against a project’s park impact fees consistent with applicable
state law.
PROS-ST25 The City of Plainview shall establish, maintain and update appropriate design and
construction standards for nature trails which shall be based on the Texas Department of
Transportation Trail standards.
PROS-ST26 Trails and trailheads shall be located so as not to unduly interfere with the privacy of
residents.
PROS-ST27 Trail access shall be an integral part of the planning and construction of parks and
recreation facilities.
9
PROS-ST28 The City of Plainview shall ensure that development adjacent to trails is designed to
minimize impact on the trails.
PROS-ST29 The City of Plainview shall coordinate trails planning with existing facilities and in the street
right-of-way patterns.
PROS-ST30 The City of Plainview shall appropriately sign all trails. Signage may include interpretive and
historical information.
PROS-ST31 The City of Plainview shall assess the feasibility of equestrian use of trails on an individual
basis. Equestrian use shall be allowed where needed to serve Plainview residents and where
practicable, taking into consideration additional cost of development, maintenance and potential
conflicts with pedestrians and cyclists.
PROS-ST32 The City of Plainview shall route and design trails to maximize sustainability through the
preservation of a site’s natural systems, the use of recycled materials when possible and the
application of best management practices for the maintenance of land and facility improvements.
PROS-ST33 The City of Plainview shall assign a level of maintenance to trails appropriate to sustain
them as attractive and useful facilities. A funding plan for long-term operation and maintenance
shall be established before development.
PROS-ST34 Trail routes on private lands are not classified as official trails until the City has legal use
authority and all other City trail guidelines are met.
(SR = Standards, Recreation)
RECREATION PROGRAMS
PROS-SR35 The City of Plainview shall strive to assure that citizens of all ages and abilities are offered
recreation opportunities that are comprehensive, enriching and affordable in clean, properly
maintained, safe and accessible facilities.
PROS-SR36 The City of Plainview should provide a balance of recreation facilities including athletic
facilities for competitive, organized sports as well as facilities for non-competitive, non-organized,
active recreation pursuits.
PROS-SR37 The City of Plainview residents should be given priority or preference in reserving
recreation facilities and use of park facilities. The City should also consider establishing a non-resident
fee to help offset City expenses for park and recreation services and facilities.
PROS-SR38 The City of Plainview shall promote historical, environmental and cultural education
through special event programs, the preservation of historical sites and the support of festivals and
events reflecting the cultural heritage of the City.
PROS-SR39 The City of Plainview shall encourage the development of a comprehensive, diverse and
enriched public art program throughout the City, including the display of a variety of artwork in the
PRTOS system.
(SV = Standards, Volunteerism)
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND VOLUNTEERISM
PROS-SV40 The City of Plainview shall provide, publicize and direct opportunities for public
participation in the planning of new or upgraded parks, recreation facilities, trails and open spaces.
PROS-SV41 The City of Plainview shall publicize and direct volunteer expertise, labor and contribution
opportunities for operation and maintenance of parks, recreation facilities, trails and open spaces.
PROS-SV24 The City of Plainview should consider establishing an “Adopt-a-Park” or “Adopt-a-Trail”
program to assist in the operation and maintenance of parks, recreational facilities, trails and open
spaces.
10
7.INVENTORY OF AREAS AND FACILITIES
CITY OF PLAINVIEW PARK LAND INVENTORY
By Name, Location, Size and Type
PARK NAME PARK ADDRESS ACRES TYPE TOTALSUGGESTED
NEIGHBORHOOD 2.0 per 1000
City “Broadway” Park 100 South Broadway Street 60.00 NP
Lloyd C. Woods Park 5th & Joliet Streets 15.00 NP
Edgar & Essie Givens Park Campbell & Walter Griffin Streets 50.00 NP
John D. Stoneham Park 32nd & Lexington Streets 10.00 NP
Lakeside School Park 1801 Joliet Street 3.00 NP
Frisco Park Winchell & Drake Streets 2.00 NP
M. B. Hood Park 16 & Ennis Streets 10.00 NP
th
Thomas Blvd Park 312 Irene Street 2.00 NP
Utica Street Park 12 & Utica Streets 1.00 NP
th
Sub Total 153.00
Neighborhood Parks153 52 acres
COMMUNITY5.0 per 1000
Regional Running Water Draw Park 3400 West 4 Street 80.00 CP
th
Regional Park South-Driving Range 3200 Kirchwood Street 44.00 CP
Travis Trussell Park 10th & Ennis Streets 3.00 CP
Chamber of Commerce Park 711 West 6 Street 4.00 CP
th
5.0 per 1000
Sub Total/ 131.00
Community Parks131 130 acres
MINI PARKS ( UNDER .5 ACRES)0.5 per 1000
11th & Columbia Park 11th & Columbia Streets 0.50 MP
Thunderbird Park 101 Thunderbird Street 0.50 MP
Little Thomas Park 101 Aileen Street 0.50 MP
Sub Total/
Small Parks2 13 acres
N/A
OPEN SPACES
Joliet West Quincy-Joliet Streets 49.00 OS
Joliet East Joliet-Columbia Streets 55.00 OS
Astro South Columbia Street 1.00 OS
Splat 34th &Joliet Streets 5.00 OS
Regional West 80.00 OS
1.1 miles per
TRAILS 1000
2.5 miles, 3.3 acres
in total of 244 acres
TXDOT Hike and Bike Trail Kirchwood-Date Streets in 4 land blk TR
3
Running Water Draw West/Equestrian 4 miles, 5 acres in 80
Trail 210 Kirchwood Drive acre land blk TR
3
Lakeside Trail 1800 Lexington Street TR
5
Sub Total ---
/Open Spaces including Trails28.6 miles
TOTAL PROS 286 195
11
City of Plainview – Park Inventory
PARK COMMUNITY SPORTS FIELD PICNIC PLAY RESTROOM MULTI-USE WALKING MISC. USE
BUILDING AREA GROUND COURT TRACK OPEN SPACE
Broadway 1 1-practice/ 6 2 1 0 1 3
6-sports field
Stoneham 0 2-baseball/ 1 1 1 1-lighted 1 1
Softball practice
fields
Hood Swimming Pool 1-baseball 1 1 0 1-no lights 1 1
softball/practice
field
Woods0 1-5 1 1 0 0 2
baseball/softball
practice field
Givens 1-open pavilion 1-soccer field 2 1 1 1-lighted 1 2
2
baseball/softball
practice field
Frisco0 0 1 1 0 1-half court 0 1
basketball
Lakeside 0 1-junior soccer 0 1 0 0 0 1
field
2-baseball
practice fields
Utica 0 1-1 1 0 1-half court 0 1
baseball/softball basketball
practice field
Trussell 1-gazebo 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Thomas0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
Chamber0 0 1 .5 0 0 0 1
Regional 1-community 3-softball 3 4 1 1-no lights 1 4
1-open pavilion fields/lighted
1-gazebo 3-baseball
practice fields
1-soccer field
1-golf driving
range
8. PARK CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
12
2013 - METAL PICNIC SHELTERS: 13 SINGLE, 3 DOUBLE & 3 TRIPLE TABLED SHELTERS; 19 TOTAL
\[$25,000.00\]
2012 - 12 ADDITIONAL ADA DRINKING FOUNTAINS WITH CONCRETE PADS, UPDATE SPORTS
& UTICA PARK \[$25,000.00\]
LIGHTING 12
TH
2011- SKATEBOARD PARK DONATION \[$25,000.00\]
2010 – FRISBIE GOLF COURSE DONATION BY ROTARY CLUB
2010 - 8 AGGREGATE STONE ADA DRINKING FOUNTAINS WITH CONCRETE PADS, TWO
PRACTICE BACK STOPS \[$25,000.00\]
2009 - THOMAS AND FRISCO PARK PLAY STRUCTURES \[$25,000.00\]
2008 - JOHN D. STONEHAM PARK PLAY STRUCTURE, SMYTHE STREET PARK HORSE SHOE
PITCHING COURT \[$25,000.00\]
2007 - M.B. HOOD PARK PLAY STRUCTURE \[$22,224.00\] PLUS INSTALLATION ($25,000.00
BUDGETED)
2006 - 12 & UTICA PARK PLAY STRUCTURE \[$19,000.00\] BUDGETED \[$20,000.00\] INCREASED TO
TH
\[$25,000.00\] IN 2007
2005 - NO FUNDING; LLOYD C. WOODS FLAG MEMORIAL DONATED BY KIWANIS CLUB
2004 - PATRIOT’S WALKWAY COMPLETED, \[$10,500.00\]
2003 - PATRIOT’S WALKWAY \[$12,500.00\], JOHN D. STONEHAM WALKING TRACK \[$12,500.00\]
TOTAL \[$25,000.00\]
2002 - BROADWAY AND E. E. GIVENS PARKS PLAY SRUCTURES \[$32,000.00\]
2001 – E. E. GIVENS WALKING TRACK \[$8,058.00\], TRAVIS TRUSSELL DUCK POND AWNING &
BENCHES \[$3,000.00\] REMAINDER CARRIED OVER INTO 2002
2000 - LLOYDS C. WOODS PLAY STRUCTURE \[$33.000\], M.B.HOOD WALKING TRACK
\[$13.000.00\], PARK BENCHES IN FRISCO AND LAKESIDE PARKS - TOTAL OF 7 AT \[$4,000.00\] FOR
TOTAL BUDGET OF \[$50.000.00\]
13
9. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND PRIORITIZATION OF NEEDS
The Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Comprehensive Master Plan is intended to serve as
a tool to help guide future decisions regarding park facilities and leisure opportunities for the
City of Plainview. Pages 16-19 of this document provide the prioritization of the needs
Identified through the development process as addressed on page 5. Plainview’s Parks
Advisory Board (PPAB) was concerned with providing the parks with up-to-date facilities and
adding needed equipment. Also, a number of priorities were determined by activities
enjoyed and engaged in by the citizenry, i.e., practice ball fields, skateboard park and
others. In addition to all of this, the PPAB always had in mind to continue conservation of the
land and to conserve and develop wild life habitats by protecting all of our natural
resources. Based on the criteria of Demand Based (DB), Standard-based (SB) and Resource-
based (RB) as shown on page 20, these priorities were then divided into three time periods of
one to five years, six to ten years, and finally, eleven to twenty years.
14
STAGE I: ONE TO FIVE YEARS (2014-2019)
PV-PROS-S1-P1 SKATEBOARD PARK (DB)
Develop an interchangeable skateboard park
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, D\]
$300,000.00
PV-PROS-S1-P2 RESTROOMS (SB)
M. B. Hood Park (1 M/F/HC)
$85,000.00
Joliet Park Site (1 M/F/HC)
$85,000.00
PROJECT TOTAL COST \[CF, IHL\]
$170,000.00
PV-PROS-S1-P3 DRIP IRRIGATION (RB)
Create a drip irrigation system in the following parks: Lloyd Woods, M.B. Hood, Regional Running Water, Broadway, Givens, and Stoneham.
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL\]
$779,000.00
PV-PROS-S1-P4 DOG PARK (DB)
Develop one community park that is dog friendly.
PROJECT TOTAL COST \[CF, IHL, D\]
$100,000.00
PV-PROS-S1-P5 TRAVIS TRUSSELL DUCK POND & PLAINVIEW FISHING AREA (RB)
Improve appearance and operation of area to include fishing area and running windmill.
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, G, D\]
$200,000.00
PV-PROS-S1-P6 BALL FIELDS IMPROVEMENTS (DB)
26 Field Light Sets (poles w/lights)
$200,000.00
4 Field Scoreboards
$12,000.00
8 Benches in Dugouts
$7,200.00
PROJECT TOTAL COST \[CF, IHL, G, D\]
$219,200.00
PV-PROS-S1-P7 NATURE PARKWAY (RB)
Create a nature trail and walkway connecting Joliet Park site with the Hike and Bike Trail working with a community development
committee.
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, G, D\]
$200,000.00
PV-PROS-S1-P8 PRACTICE BALL FIELDS (DB)
4 Backstops and trash receptacles with locations to be determined
PROJECT PROPOSED BUDGET \[CF, IHL, D\]
$20,000.00
PV-PROS-S1 ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL (SB)
Involve two additional employees for parks and trail upkeep
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF\] appropriate city pay scale
STAGE I TOTAL PROPOSED COST $1,988,200.00
15
STAGE II: SIX TO TEN YEARS (2020 - 2025)
PV-PROS-S2-P1 WALKING TRAIL & HIKE & BIKE TRAIL EXPANSION (DB)
Create a marked walking trail in Regional Park and connect existing trail to Regional Park
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, G, D\]
$2,000,000.00
PV-PROS-S2-P2 WALKWAY LIGHTING (SB)
Install lighting along existing walking tracks
1. M.B. Hood Park
$100,000.00
2. E. E. Givens Park
$100,000.00
3. John D. Stoneham Park
$100,000.00
4. Regional Park
$150,000.00
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL\]
$450,000.00
PV-PROS-S2-P3 BIRD SANCTUARY (RB)
Enhance and develop the E. E. Givens Park/“Plainview Lake” area for a bird sanctuary and signage.
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, D\]
$100,000.00
PV-PROS-S2-P4 PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT (SB)
Evaluate, replace, and consider additional playground structures and amenities in the following parks
1Broadway Park
$90,000.00
2J D Stoneham Park
$85,000.00
3Edgar & Essie Givens
$90,000.00
4Lloyd Woods Park
$125,000.00
PROJECT TOTAL COST \[CF, IHL\]
$390,000.00
PV-PROS-S2-P5 KIDSVILLE (RB)
Evaluate, enhance and further develop the KIDSVILLE playground.
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, D\]
$500,000.00
PV-PRTOS-S2-P6 SPLASH SPOT (DB)
Install/construct a water activity play area (PROS Document 12/page 44)
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, D\]
$250,000.00
PV-PROS-S2-P7 PRACTICE BALL FIELDS (DB)
6 Backstops and trash receptacles with locations to be determined
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, D\]
$40,000.00
PV-PROS-S2 ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL (SB)
Involve one additional employee for parks and trails upkeep
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF\] appropriate city pay scale
STAGE II TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $3,730,000.00
STAGE III ELEVEN TO TWENTY YEARS (2026 - 2035)
16
PV-PRTOS-S3-P1 PARK DEVELOPMENT OF “JOLIET STREET” PARK (RB)
Construct an all weather road through the park area from Joliet Street to Columbia Street following the natural contour of the native land
area. Provide parking space to support the usage at a cost of approximately
Construct a bridge over Running Water Draw for walking traffic only (must be ADA compliant) at a cost of
Construct concrete curbed gravel walking path approximately 6,000 liner feet at a cost of
Install electrical system with lighting along perimeter areas and night lights in playground areas at a cost of
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL\]
$1,500,000.00
PV-PRTOS-S3-P2 LANDSCAPE OF PARK DEVELOPMENT OF JOLIET STREET PARK (RB)
Install an automatic sprinkler system for 37 acres, both sides of Joliet Park at a cost of
$374,000.00
Landscaping materials at a cost of
$50,000.00
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL\]
$424,000.00
PV-PRTOS-S3-P3 RECREATIONAL PLAYGROUND DEVELOPMENT OF JOLIET STREET PARK (RB)
Develop small playground area to include 6 swing sets, 4 merry-go-rounds, 2 slides (one 10 foot & one 6 foot) and 6 drinking fountains (3
ADA)
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL\]
$120,000.00
PV-PRTOS-S3-P4 ATHLETIC COMPLEX PARK DEVELOPMENT OF JOLIET STREET PARK (DB)
Construct 4 baseball/softball practice fields
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL\]
$500,000.00
PV-PRTOS-S3-P5 PLAINVIEW FISHING AREA (RB)
Enhance run-off area on I-27 and 24 Street for fishing area.
th
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF, IHL, G, D\]
$350,000.00
PV-PRTOS-S3 ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL (SB)
Involve two additional employees for parks and trails upkeep
appropriate city pay scale
PROJECT PROPOSED COST \[CF\]
STAGE III PROPOSED ESTIMATED COST $2,894,000.00
17
TOTAL PROPOSED COST FOR STAGE I, II, & III $8,612,200.00
Plus Additional Personnel Cost
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This plan is not intended to exclusively list all improvements to be undertaken by the City of Plainview’s Park
Department, but rather a prioritization of suggestions.
PV = Plainview
PROS = parks, recreation, open spaces
S (1, 2, 3) = Stage 1, 2 or 3
P (1, 2, 3, etc.) = priority 1, 2, 3, etc.
CF = City Funding
D = Donation
G = Grant
IHL = In House Labor
Demand-based (DB) – this approach relies on information gathered from participation rates, surveys and other information
that indicates how much of the population wants certain types of facilities.
Standard-based (SB) – this approach uses established standards to determine facilities and park areas needed to meet the
needs of a given population size. The standards may be based on demand studies, the professional judgment of park and
recreation planners, designers, etc.
Resource-based (RB) – this approach examines the assets and resources of the area for parks, recreation facilities, trails and
open spaces and defines how these resources can be utilized.
18
10. PLAINVIEW TEXAS DISTRICT MAP
19
Plainview Parks Map
20
11.
SUMMATION
Plainview’s Parks Advisory Board (PPAB) believes that where there is a cared-for park, you are more likely to find
a community that enjoys a reduced crime rate and a higher real estate value. It is our duty as a community to
protect and improve those resources we hold in common. Through community involvement, education and
awareness, we feel that our PROS vision will find the pride of “ownership” by each individual, family and friend.
The PPAB strongly believes that we must find a way to fund these areas, their maintenance, improvements and
additions.
We would like to thank all who have provided information and insight into the development of our City of
Plainview’s Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces (PROS) Comprehensive Master Plan. To our city leadership we
give accolades for your hours of guidance to the City of Plainview and for sharing in the vision of the
importance of parks, recreation, trails and open spaces. Working together we can ensure the future of this
great community.
Signed this day: May 1, 2014
Lucile Davis, Chair
Phyllis Wall, Vice-chair
Joani Chapman
Carlene Kirby
Barbara Ramirez
Ruby Riggins
Gabriel Rodriguez
21
12. REFERENCES
Economic Benefits of Parks and Open Space References
Sam Howe Verhovek, "Austin Rides A Winner: Technology," New York Times (January 31, 1998), A7. See also John Burnett, NPR
Weekend All Things Considered, National Public Radio (January 10, 1999); and "The Dark Side of the American Dream: The Costs
and Consequences of Suburban Sprawl" Report (San Francisco,CA: Sierra Club, August 1998), 18.
Deb Brighton, "Community Choices: Thinking Through Land Conservation, Development, and Property Taxes in Massachusetts"
(Boston, MA: Trust for Public Land, 1998). Also see http://www.tpl.org/tech.
Robert W. Burchell, et al. Impact Assessment of the Interim State Development and Redevelopment Plan. Report prepared for the
New Jersey OSumce of State Planning, Trenton, 1992.
David Bollier, "How Smart Growth Can Stop Sprawl: A Fledgling Citizen's Movement Expands," (Washington, DC: Essential Books,
1998), 12.
1000 Friends of Minnesota, "Joint Senate Committee Listen to Report on Costs of Sprawl," Minnesota Land Use \[electronic
newsletter\], (St. Paul, MN: 1000 Friends of Minnesota, February 2, 1999).
Nantucket Land Council, Inc., "Balancing Today's Development & Tomorrow's Taxes" (Nantucket, MA: Nantucket Land Council,
1989). Included in "Land Trust Alliance InfoPak Series: Economic Benefits of Open Space," compiled by Ted Jackson and edited by
Rosemary Infante (Washington, DC: Land Trust Alliance, April 1994).
National Park Service, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program, "Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and
Greenway Corridors," 4th ed. (Washington, DC: National Park Service, 1995), 8-4.
Elizabeth Brabec, "On the Value of Open Spaces," Scenic America, Technical Information Series, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Washington, DC:
Scenic America, 1992), 2.
Jeff Lacy and Randall Arendt, "An Examination of Market Appreciation for Clustered Housing with Permanently Protected Open
Space," Center for Rural Massachusetts Monograph Series (Amherst, MA: August 1990), http://www-
unix.oit.umass.edu/~ruralma/LacyMarket. html.
Patricia Ryan, "The Positive Economics of Conservation," Technical Bulletin No. 112, (Brunswick, ME: Maine Coast Heritage Trust,
June 1991), 2. Included in "Land Trust Alliance InfoPak Series: Economic Benefits of Open Space."
Lauren Brown, "It May Be Cheaper Just to Let Land Alone," New York Times (Connecticut Weekly), (January 28, 1996), sec. 13cn,
pg. 1.
Holly L. Thomas, "The Economic Benefits of Land Conservation," Duchess County Planning Department Tech Memo,
(Poughkeepsie, NY: 1991), 1.
Jennifer Preston, "In New Jersey, Tax Increases Get a 2nd Look: Spending to Save Land and Slow Development," New York Times
(November 2, 1998), B1.
Tom Daniels, When City and Country Collide: Managing Growth in the Metropolitan Fringe, (Washington, DC: Island Press, 1999),
244-245. Statistics updated by interview.
Thomas, "The Economic Benefits of Land Conservation," 2.
ERE Yarmouth and Real Estate Research Corporation, "Defining New Limits: Emerging Trends in Real Estate," (New York, NY: ERE
Yarmouth and RERC, 1998).
State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection, "The Green Acres Mission,"
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/greenacres/mission.htm. See also Phyllis Myers, State Resources Strategies, "Livability at the Ballot Box:
State and Local Referenda on Parks, Conservation, and Smarter Growth, Election Day, 1998" (A report for The Brookings Institution
Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy, January 1999), http://srsmyers.org/srsmyers/elections.htm; and Land Trust Alliance,
"November 1998 Open Space Acquisition Ballot Measures," http://www.lta.org/refernda.html.
Statistics from Chattanooga News Bureau and Hamilton County, Tennessee, tax assessor.
Peter Pollack, "Confronting Sprawl in Boulder: Benefits and Pitfalls," LandLines, (Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy,
January 1998), 1. See also Alexander Garvin and Gayle Berens, Urban Parks and Open Space (Washington, DC: Urban Land
Institute, 1997), 22.
Mark Correll, et al. "The Effects of Greenbelts on Residential Property Values: Some Findings on the Political Economy of Open
Space," Land Economics, May 1978. Cited in "Economic Impacts Protecting Rivers, Trails, and Greenway Corridors," 3rd Edition,
National Park Service, 1992, 1-3. See also Brabec, 1992, 3, 5.
Garvin and Berens, Urban Parks and Open Space, 27. (American LIVES, Inc. 1996 survey). See also June Fletcher, "Home Buyers are
Shunning Developers' Pricey Extras," Wall Street Journal (November 21, 1997), B16. (Market Perspectives Inc. 1997 survey) and
Homebuyers Survey Update, October 1998. (American LIVES, Inc. 1998 survey).
Brabec, "On the Value of Open Spaces," 5.
Brabec, "On the Value of Open Spaces," 4.
National Park Service, 1995, 1-9.
Brabec, "On the Value of Open Spaces," 5.
National Park Service, 1995, 1-8.
Garvin and Berens, 1997, 28.
"The Value of Parks," Testimony before the California Assembly Committee on Water, Parks, and Wildlife, May 18, 1993.
National Park Service, 1995, 7-3.
John L. Crompton, Lisa L. Love, and Thomas A. More, "An Empirical Study of the Role of Recreation, Parks and Open Space in
Companies' (Re) Location Decisions," Journal of Park and Recreation Administration (1997), 37-58.
The President's Commission on Americans Outdoors, Americans Outdoors: The Legacy, The Challenge, The Report of the
President's Commission (Washington, DC: Island Press, 1987), 24.
Timothy Egan, "Drawing a Hard Line Against Urban Sprawl," New York Times (December 30, 1996), A1.
Garvin and Berens, Urban Parks and Open Space, 27.
22
Bank of America Corporation, "Beyond Sprawl: New Patterns of Growth to Fit the New California,"
http://www.bankamerica.com/community/comm_env_urban1.html.
Center for the Continuing Study of the California Economy, "Land Use and the California Economy: Principle for Prosperity and
Quality of Life," (San Francisco, CA: 1998), 16.
ERE Yarmouth and Real Estate Research Corporation "Defining New Limits: Emerging Trends in Real Estate."
Phyllis Myers, GreenSense, Vol.3, No.1 (Washington, DC: Phyllis Myers and Trust for Public Land, Spring 1997), 1.
Sierra Business Council, "Planning for Prosperity: Building Successful Communities in the Sierra Nevada," (Truckee, CA: 1997), 7.
Phyllis Myers, http://srsmyers.org/srsmyers/elections. htm. See also Land Trust Alliance, "November 1998 Open Space Acquisition
Ballot Measures," http://www.lta.org/ refernda.html.
Peter Harnik, "The Park at Post OSumce Square," in Garvin and Berens, 1997, 150.
Charles Lockwood, "Urban Oasis: City Parks Reborn," Hemispheres (Greensboro, NC: Pace Communications, Inc., September
1996), 20.
David Mulvihill, "Flagstar Corporate Plaza and Jerome Richardson Park, Spartanburg, South Carolina," in Garvin and Berens, 101-
107.
Jerry Ackerman, "Waterfront World: Planners Envision a Network of Waterfront Neighborhoods Revitalizing the City's Economy,"
Boston Globe (September 24, 1995), 77.
Daniel Gibson, "Back on Track," Land & People, Vol. 8, No. 1 (San Francisco, CA: Trust for Public Land, Spring 1996), 11.
Ernest Cook, "Memo from Ernest Cook to Rand Wentworth," (April 7, 1994). Annotated Bibliography: "The Benefits of Open Space,"
http://www.tpl.org/tech.
Andrew C. Revkin, "For Urban Wastelands, Tomatoes and Other Life," New York Times (March 3, 1998), 1A. See also project
descriptions at http://www.epa.gov/ swerosps/bf.
Bobbi Reichtell, "Park Partnerships," Urban Land (Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute, November 1998).
Tom Fox, "Urban Open Space: An Investment that Pays," A Monograph Series (New York, NY: Neighborhood Open Space
Coalition, 1990), 11-12.
National Park Service, Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program, "Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and
Greenway Corridors," 3rd ed. (Washington, DC: National Park Service, 1992), 5-6.
Craig Webb, "Liquid Assets: West Virginia's Whitewater Rafting," Hemispheres (Greensboro, NC: Pace Communications, Inc., April
1998), 34.
National Park Service, 1995, 3-5.
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America, "Economic Benefits of Outdoor Recreation," State of the Industry Report (1997),
http://www.outdoorlink.com/orca/ research/97SOI.
National Park Service, 1995, 4-5.
National Park Service, The Economic Benefits of Visitation to Our National Parks, http://www.nps.gov/
pub_aff/issues/econbene.html.
U.S. Forest Service FY 1998 Statement of Receipts, ASR-04, 1998. The information on indirect economic contribution comes from U.S.
Forest Service (1995) "The Forest Service Program for Forest and Rangeland Resources--A Long Term Strategic Plan" (draft).
Land Trust Alliance, "Summary of Data from the National Land Trust Census," http://www.lta.org/censum.html.
Steve Lerner, "Side by Side: New Approach Aims to Protect Jobs and the Environment," AMC Outdoors (Boston, MA: April 1997), 14.
Phyllis Myers, http://srsmyers.org/srsmyers/elections.htm. See also The Rural Legacy Program, http://www.dnr.
state.md.us/rurallegacy.html; and Annual Report North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund, August 1998.
Associated Press, "Study: Open Space Bolsters State Economy," Concord (NH) Monitor (February 7, 1999).
Moab Chamber of Commerce, http://www.moab.net/ chamber1.html. See also John B. Loomis and Richard G. Walsh,
"Recreation Economic Decisions: Company Benefits and Costs," (State College, PA: Venture Publishing, 1997), 261.
Steve Lerner, "Unpaving the Way," Land & People, Vol. 9, No. 2, (San Francisco, CA: Trust for Public Land, Fall 1997), 11.
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Trails and Waterways Unit, "Benefits of Trails: Cooperative Trail Development Series,"
(St. Paul: Minnesota DNR, July 1996), 4.
Maryland Greenways Commission, "Analysis of Economic Impacts of the Northern Central Rail Trail," (Annapolis, MD: Maryland
Greenways Commission, Maryland DNR, June 1994), http://www.bts.gov/smart/ cat/430.html.
Roger L. Moore, et al. "The Impacts of Rail-Trails: A Study of the Users and Property Owners from Three Trails," (Washington, DC:
National Park Service with the Pennsylvania State University, 1991).
Alexander Garvin, The American City: What Works, What Doesn't (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996), 53-54. See also Mike Greenberg,
"Downtown San Antonio Returns to Prosperity," Urban Land (Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute, April 1995). New statistics from
the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce.
Vishwanie Maharaj and Janet E. Carpenter, "The 1996 Economic Impact of Sport Fishing in the United States," (Alexandria, VA:
American Sportfishing Association, 1996), 1.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, "1996 National and State Economic Impacts of Wildlife Watching," (Arlington, VA: U.S. Fish & Wildlife,
April 1998), 3-5.
Trust for Public Land, "Examples of Local Park Funding," http://www.tpl.org/tech.
Phyllis Myers, "Arizona Chic: Flagstaff 'BBB' Tax a Boon for Open Space and Trails," GreenSense, Vol. 1, No. 2, (Washington, DC: Trust
for Public Land, Spring 1995), 6. Updated by interview with Rick Tanner, City of Flagstaff, January 1999.
National Park Service, 1995, 2-8.
National Park Service, 1995, 2-8.
National Park Service, 1995, 2-8.
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America, "Economic Benefits of Outdoor Recreation," State of the Industry Report (1997),
http://www.outdoorlink.com/orca/ research/97SOI.
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America, http://www. outdoorlink.com/orca/research/97SOI.
Vishwanie Maharaj and Janet E. Carpenter, "The 1996 Economic Impact of Sport Fishing in the United States," (Alexandria, VA:
American Sportfishing Association), 10.
Natural Resources Defense Council, "Why We Need Public Lands," http://www.nrdc.org/bkgrd/laplval.html.
23
Natural Resources Defense Council, http://www.nrdc.org/bkgrd/laplval.html.
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America, http://www.outdoorlink.com/orca/research/97SOI.
Andrew Laughland and James Caudill, "Banking on Nature: The Economic Benefits to Local Communities of National Wildlife
Refuge Visitation," (Washington, DC: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Department of Economics, July 1997), v.
Laughland and Caudill, v.
Laughland and Caudill, v.
Valerie Berton, "The Mavin of Marin County," American Farmland, (Washington, DC: American Farmland Trust, Spring 1998), 8.
"Marin Agriculture," 1998 Marin Agricultural Land Trust News, Vol. 14, No. 3, (Pt. Reyes Station, CA: Fall 1998), 3.
The Growth Alternatives Alliance, "A Landscape of Choice: Strategies for Improving Patterns of Community Growth," (Fresno, CA:
The Growth Alternatives Alliance, April 1998), 7-8.
Ann Sorensen, Richard P. Greene, and Karen Russ, "Farming on the Edge," American Farmland Trust Center for Agriculture in the
Environment, DeKalb: Northern Illinois University, http://farm.fic.niu.edu/foe2/.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1997 Census of Agriculture, "Highlights of Agriculture: 1997" http://www.nass. usda.gov/
census/census97/highlights/ usasum/us.txt.
Phyllis Jacobs Griekspoor, "Kansas is Losing Farms," Wichita (KS) Eagle (February 2, 1999).
Associated Press/Grand Rapids (MI) Press online, 2/3/99. Cited in Greenwire, National Journal Group (February 4, 1999).
American Farmland Trust, "Farming on the Edge."
Daniels, 243.
Great Outdoors Colorado, http://www.aclin.org/other/ environment/goco. Figures updated by interview with Will Shafroth of
Great Outdoors Colorado.
Daniels, 182-183.
Browne, Bortz & Coddinton Inc. (updated by William S. Devenney Consultants), "Model Economic Impact of Hunting and Fishing"
Colorado Division of Wildlife Economic Impact, 1997, 10-11.
American Farmland Trust, "Alternatives for Future Urban Growth in California's Central Valley: The Bottom Line for Agriculture and
Taxpayers," http://www.farm.fic.niu. edu/fic/ft/cv/.
William Poole, "Corralling the Boom," Land & People (San Francisco, CA: Trust for Public Land, Fall 1996), 9.
Joanne Ditmer, "Open Space the Mantra for Planning," Denver Post (December 13, 1998).
American Farmland Trust, "Saving American Farmland: What Works," (Washington, DC: American Farmland Trust, 1997), 150.
Timothy Egan, "For a Flood-Weary Napa Valley, A Vote to Let the River Run Wild," New York Times (April 25, 1998), A1. Statistics
updated by Howard Siegel, project planner, Napa River Flood Control Project.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Total Damages Suffered in FY 1997. http://www.usace.army.mil/inet/functions/cw/
cecwe/table2.htm.
Misganaw Demissie and Abdul Khan, "Influence of Wetlands on Streamflow in Illinois," (Champaign, IL: Illinois State Water Survey,
October, 1993).
Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions (ANJEC), "Open Space Is a Good Investment: The Financial Argument for
Open Space Protection," (Mendham, NJ: ANJEC, 1996), 7.
Virginia Department of Forestry, "Forest Facts," 1998, http://state.vipnet.org/dof/facts.htm.
Pacific Forest Trust, Annual Report 1997 (Boonville, CA: Pacific Forest Trust, 1997), 3.
Kathie Durbin, "A Legacy of Trees," Land & People, Vol. 10, No. 1 (San Francisco, CA: Trust for Public Land, Spring 1998), 21. Also see
http://www.tpl.org/newsroom.
National Wildlife Federation, "Wetlands Provide Tremendous Economic Benefits for People,"
http://www.nwf.org/wetlands/facts/wetben02.html.
Association of State Wetland Managers, Association of Floodplain Managers, National Park Service, "A Casebook in Managing
Rivers for Multiple Uses," 1991, 13-17.
Association of State Wetland Managers, Association of Floodplain Managers, National Park Service, 1991, 29.
Bruce Watson, "A Town Makes History by Rising to New Heights," Smithsonian, (Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute, June 1996).
See also Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development, "Success Stories: Valmeyer, Illinois,"
http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/success/ valmeyer.htm.
Phyllis Myers, State Resources Strategies, http://srsmyers. org/srsmyers/elections.htm.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, "Costs and Benefits of Natural Hazard Mitigation; Acquisition, Elevation and Relocation
of Residential Structures: The Midwest Floods (City of Arnold, Missouri)," http://www.fema.gov/mit/cb_aqres.htm.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, http://www. fema.gov/mit/cb_aqres.htm.
Tom Horton, "A Prairie Called Katy," Land & People, (San Francisco, CA: Trust for Public Land, Spring 1998), 8. Also at: "Guiding
Growth," http://www.tpl.org/about.
American Forests, "The State of the Urban Forest Report: Assessing Tree Cover and Developing Goals," (Washington, DC: American
Forests, September 1997), http:// www.americanforests.org/ufc/uea/stateof.html.
Monte Williams, "In Sterling Forest, Joy at Sparing Trees," New York Times (October 8, 1996). See also Richard M. Stapleton, "Deep
Woods and Clear Waters: What Price Sterling Forest," Land & People (San Francisco, CA: Trust for Public Land, Fall 1996), 2.
Trust for Public Land, "Protecting the Source: Land Conservation and the Future of America's Drinking Water," (San Francisco, CA:
Trust for Public Land, 1997), 5.
Trust for Public Land, "Watershed Initiatives, Introduction," http://www.tpl.org/tech.
Trust for Public Land, 1997,6.
John Tibbetts, "Open Space Conservation: Investing in Your Community's Economic Health," (Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of
Land Policy, 1998), 24.
National Wildlife Federation, "Wetlands Provide Tremendous Economic Benefits for People,"
http://www.nwf.org/wetlands/facts/wetben02.html.
National Wildlife Federation, http://www.nwf.org/ wetlands/facts/wetben02.html.
Worldwatch Institute, "Imperiled Waters, Impoverished Future: The Decline of Freshwater Ecosystems," (Washington, D.C.:
Worldwatch Institute, 1996), 10.
24
Stephen Miller, "The Economic Benefits of Open Space," Islesboro Islands Trust, (Islesboro Islands, ME: Islesboro Islands Trust, May
1992), 3. See also ANJEC, 1996, 9; and National Wildlife Federation, http://www.nwf.org/wetlands/facts/wetben02.html.
John Monahan, Worcester (MA) Telegram & Gazette (December 13, 1998).
Robert Costanza, et al. "The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital," (May 15, 1997), 253. See also William K.
Stevens, "How Much is Nature Worth? For You, $33 Trillion," New York Times (May 20, 1997), C1.
American Forests, "The State of the Urban Forest: Assessing Tree Cover and Developing Goals," September 1997,
http://www.americanforests.org/ufc/uea/stateof. html.
Fred Bayles, "Cape Cod Fighting for its Soul," USA Today (August 18, 1998). See also Phyllis Myers, http://srsmyers.
org/srsmyers/elections. htm.I.
Oregon Rivers Council, "The Economic Imperative of Protecting Riverine Habitat in the Pacific Northwest," Report No. V (Oregon
Rivers Council, 1992).
Carol Kaesuk Yoon, "A 'Dead Zone' Grows in the Gulf of Mexico," New York Times, Science Times Section (January 20, 1998), 1.
25