The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutParks Needs Assessment & Development Strategy PlanPARKS NEEDS ASSESSMENT & DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A MASTER PLAN FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM December 2, 2025-City Council Meeting Michael Kirschman, Director •Process •Parks system & standards •Equity-based needs analysis •Recommendations •Estimated costs •Request for City Council approval AGENDA 2 PROCESS INTRO EXISTING CONDITIONS ASSESSMENTS ANALYSIS STRATEGY REPORTING department background and history importance of parks and rec equity and LOS workshop existing plans and related studies peer city benchmarking demographics un-/under- developed park site evaluation planning document review stakeholder interviews 2017, 2021, & 2023 survey evaluation LOS evaluation recreation trends park assessments LOS/equity gap analysis mapping spending evaluation 10-20 year vision plan outline implementation plan and prioritization capital improvement plan final report and mapping executive summary final presentation 3 PARKS THROUGH THE LENS OF EQUITY Environmental Equity Design Equity Economic Equity Access Equity 4 PARKS INVENTORY 5 PARKS CLASSIFICATION •Reclassify the current 16 park types to 5 categories •Reclassification will aid in planning, management, and level of service evaluation 6 ACCESS EQUITY – POPULATION LOS •Park land and amenities are unevenly distributed through the City •Significant shortfall of City-wide park acreage, and City-wide park amenities •Shortfalls of nearly every amenity •Gaps in amenity types offered compared to similar municipalities 7 TYPE Meets Standard/ Shortfall Exists Meets Standard/ Shortfall Exists Amenities Basketball Shortfall -11 Sites Shortfall -17 Sites Basketball (half court)Meets Standard 0 Sites Meets Standard 0 Sites Boat Ramp Shortfall -4 Sites Shortfall -5 Sites Canoe/Kayak Launch Shortfall -6 Sites Shortfall -8 Sites Diamond Field Shortfall -1 Sites Shortfall -9 Sites Dog Park Shortfall -4 Sites Shortfall -5 Sites Field Hockey Meets Standard 0 Sites Meets Standard 0 Sites Fishing Piers Shortfall -5 Sites Shortfall -6 Sites Golf Course2 Meets Standard 2 Sites Meets Standard 2 Sites Outdoor Fitness Shortfall -1 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Outdoor Stage Meets Standard 0 Sites Meets Standard 0 Sites Paved Trails (miles)Shortfall -47 Miles Shortfall -56 Miles Pickleball 3 Shortfall -23 Sites Shortfall -25 Sites Playground Shortfall -17 Sites Shortfall -30 Sites Pump Track Shortfall -2 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Rectangular Field Shortfall -12 Sites Shortfall -15 Sites Shelters (large)Shortfall -12 Sites Shortfall -15 Sites Shelters (small)Shortfall -2 Sites Shortfall -13 Sites Skate Park Shortfall -1 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Skate Spot Shortfall -8 Sites Shortfall -9 Sites Soccer4 Shortfall -24 Sites Shortfall -25 Sites Soft Trails (miles)Shortfall -38 Miles Shortfall -42 Miles Tennis Meets Standard 1 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Tennis/Pickleball dual striping Meets Standard 0 Sites Shortfall -1 Sites Volleyball Meets Standard 0 Sites Meets Standard 0 Sites Nature Center Shortfall -2 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Cricket Field Shortfall -1 Sites Shortfall -1 Sites Archery Range Shortfall -2 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Community Gardens Shortfall -4 Sites Shortfall -5 Sites Outdoor Pools Shortfall -2 Sites Shortfall -2 Sites Splash Playground Shortfall -9 Sites Shortfall -10 Sites 2021 Standards Shortfall/ Surplus 2036 Standards (est. pop. 475,072) Shortfall/ Surplus Total Park Acreage Shortfalls Local Park Acreage Shortfalls City-Wide Park Acreage Shortfalls Council Districts with Park Acreage Shortfalls *shaded = shortfall EQUITY MAPPING 8 CDC – Social Vulnerability Index Access Equity: 10- Minute Walk Quality Equity: Conditions Assessment Economic Equity: Capital Spending per Capita COMPOSITE EQUITY ASSESSMENT •SVI + Park Access + Park Funding + Park Condition Scoring •Districts 4, 7, and 10 stand out for large areas of High Need •Areas within each district with more need based on these factors are also shown. •Map is a tool for prioritization of resources 9 RECOMMENDATIONS •Address deferred maintenance •Invest in Under-Developed parks •Build out Undeveloped parks •New park land acquisition and development in underserved areas •Fund planned projects •(Virginia Beach Trail) 10 PRIORITIZED UN/UNDERDEVELOPED PARKS Underdeveloped Parks •Level Green Park* (CW*) •Oak Springs Park •Salem Village Park •Seatack North Park •Salem Woods Park (CW) •Marshview Park (CW) •Carolanne Farms (CW) * Completed a $4.5M renovation, and reclassification as City-Wide park Undeveloped Parks •Margate Ave. Park •Amhurst Park •Thalia Trace Oaks Park •County Haven •Woodbridge Park (CW) 11 Priority City-Wide ParksPriority Local Parks PRIORITIZED PARK LAND ACQUISITION Local Parks •Estimated purchase need of 121 acres by 2036. •Districts 4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 face shortfalls. City-Wide Parks •Estimated purchase need of 992 acres by 2036. •Districts 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 face shortfalls. •Potential for District 3 to address shortfalls with current park land.12 City-Wide Park Land Priority Areas Local Park Land Priority Areas PRIORITIZED WATER ACCESS POINTS Providing equitable water access is a priority. Underdeveloped parks •Salem Woods Park •Oak Springs Park •Lamplight Manor Park •Rosemont Forest Park Undeveloped parks •Margate Ave. Park 13 Priority Water Access Points *Note: Currently have 5 new or soon to be improved water access points under design or construction. (Historic Kempsville, Owl Creek Boat Ramp, Pungo Ferry Landing, Elbow Road, Pleasure House Point) PRIORITIZATION 14 priority equity feasibility cost need City goals invest in existing resources •Mapping •Level of service •Public survey results •Stakeholder input •Demographics •Cost assessments •Park standards TOTAL RECOMMENDATIONS COST 15 Recommendation Cost Existing facility improvements 18,440,000$ Lifecycle Replacement 227,810,000$ Amenity construction 268,410,000$ Undeveloped Parks 57,310,000$ Underdeveloped Parks 14,130,000$ New park land acquisition and development 191,550,000$ Planned Project: Virginia Beach Trail*TBD$ Grand Total Cost of Recommendations 777,650,000$ *Note: 2 of 4 phases of the VB Trail project is currently funded. Virginia Beach Park Recommendations Estimate of Probable Cost Recommendation Short-Term (0-5 years) Mid-Term (6-10 years) Long-Term (11-15 years) Existing facility improvements 7,090,000$ 4,460,000$ 4,090,000$ Lifecycle Replacement 79,110,000$ 79,110,000$ 69,590,000$ Amenity construction 11,410,000$ 44,530,000$ 72,180,000$ Undeveloped Parks 5,040,000$ 11,450,000$ 16,930,000$ Underdeveloped Parks 2,820,000$ 3,030,000$ 1,560,000$ New park land acquisition 14,230,000$ Planned Project: Virginia Beach Trail*TBD$ $ $ Total Cost of Recommendations 105,470,000$ 142,580,000$ 178,580,000$ Grand Total Cost of Recommendations Virginia Beach Park Recommendations Estimate of Probable Cost - Phased Prioritization 426,630,000$ PRIORITIZED RECOMMENDATION COST Short-term •Safety and accessibility •Lifecycle replacement •High priority amenities •Priority local parks Mid-term •Park appearance •Lifecycle replacement •High and medium priority amenities •Invest in local and city- wide parks Long-Term •Mid-term actions continue •Park land acquisition 16 TBD *Note: 2 of 4 phases of the VB Trail project is currently funded. TBD REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL •Adopt Parks Needs Assessment & Development Strategy as an amendment to the current (and upcoming) Comprehensive Plan •The Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) requires that a parks and recreation master plan be approved by the governing body 17 THANK YOU QUESTIONS? 18