Elizabeth Township


Page ii

The contributions of the following groups and individuals were vital to the successful development of Elizabeth Township’s Recreation Complex Feasibility Study. They are commended for their interest in the project and the input they provided. Township Supervisors/Staff Mrs. Joanne Beckowitz Mr. Robert Keefer Key-Person Interviews Emily Albeck Emil Burek Kathy Dainty Dave Firda Walter Gibbons Dennis Kampas Steve Meir Kara Miles Harry Morrison Eric Pakala Carl Rogers Keith Shaffer Terrie Stefanko Mark Verosky

Feasibility Study Steering Committee Mr. Timothy Guffey Ms. Judy Marshall Mr. Drew Mueller Mr. John Paylo Mr. Dennis Pohoclich Mrs. Robin Poirer

In addition, we would like to thank: Mr. Andrew Baechle, Director Allegheny County Parks Department Mr. Mike Piaskowski, Grants Project Management Division Pennsylvania Department of Conservation & Natural Resources Ms. Kathy Frankel, Recreation and Parks Supervisor Pennsylvania Department of Conservation & Natural Resources

This project was financed in part by a grant from the Keystone Recreation, Park, and Conservation Fund, under the administration of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Bureau of Recreation and Conservation.



Elizabeth Township

Feasibility Study TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page iii

Page I. II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................1 PROJECT GOALS............................................................................................................2 Feasibility for a Recreation Complex.............................................................................. 2 III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION .............................................................................................3 Steering Committee .......................................................................................................... 3 Public Surveys and Public Involvement ......................................................................... 3 IV. SITE ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................15 Alternative Site Evaluation Results............................................................................... 16 Alternative Analysis........................................................................................................ 19 V. VI. LEGAL FEASIBILITY...................................................................................................20 USAGE FEASIBILITY ...................................................................................................21 Population Analysis ........................................................................................................ 21 Developing a User Profile............................................................................................... 26 National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Standards ................................. 26 Determining Park Facility Needs and Program Demand Analysis............................ 29 Recreation, Park, and Open Space Standards and Guidelines .................................. 29 Site Topography and Roadway Impact Analysis......................................................... 32 VII. VISION FOR THE FUTURE .........................................................................................33

VIII. FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATION CONSIDERATIONS ................................40 Proposed Annual Park Operation and Maintenance Budget ..................................... 40



Elizabeth Township

Feasibility Study

Page iv

LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16A Table 16B Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table 20 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Elizabeth Township Survey Return Results Percent of Respondents’ Disposition for Types of Recreation Funding Site Location Analysis Inventory of Recreation Facilities within Elizabeth Township Elizabeth Township Population Statistics Elizabeth Township General Demographics (2000) Percentages of Ethnic Groups within Elizabeth Township Elizabeth Township General Demographics (2000) School Enrollment in Elizabeth Township (2000) Educational Attainment in Elizabeth Township (2000) Household and Family Income in Elizabeth Township (1999) Family and Household Income (2000) Marital Status/Grandparent Care in Elizabeth Township (2000) Recreation Facilities: Existing versus Need Fiore Property III Quantity Takeoff Fiore Property III Preliminary Cost Estimate Fiore Property: Roadway and Parking Access Cost Estimate Church Property III Quantity Takeoff Church Property III Preliminary Cost Estimate Church Property/Fiore Property: Total Costs Estimated Ten Year Budget for Park O&M and Revenues LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Age Distribution of Survey Households Locations of Survey Respondents Preferred Recreation Facilities Adult’s Favorite Activities (Top 10) Youth’s Favorite Activities (Top 10) Additional Space Needed in Twp. for Recreation/Nature/Sports Fields Preferred Type of Recreational Facility Park Usage – Group Size Frequency of Use Preferred Trail Use Preferred Trail Amenities Areas of Concern Method for Funding Recreation Center Recreation Facility Comparison in Elizabeth Twp. to National Standards LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D – – – – Park Survey Plan Sheets for Alternatives Location Map of Recreation Facilities Fiore/Church Property Alternatives



Elizabeth Township

Feasibility Study

Page 1



The need to undertake a feasibility study to develop an indoor/outdoor recreation facility in Elizabeth Township, Pennsylvania, was identified in the 2005 draft of the Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan. Elizabeth Township, via the aid of a Keystone Recreation, Park and Conservation Fund Grant, hired PBS&J to perform a feasibility study within the Township. The study was initially scoped to take place in Round Hill Park, but was expanded to the entire Township due to public concerns. The feasibility study was conducted from March 2006 to January 2007. It included the formation of a steering committee, field views, public surveys, public meetings, engineering practices and proposed recreation facility designs, and the generation of a feasibility study report. The feasibility study report summarizes the project goals, public survey results, site analyses, legal feasibility of indicated sites, and the usage feasibility of a newly constructed recreation facility within the community in comparison to demographic needs and the number and type of current recreational facilities available to Township residents. The report also includes a vision for the future of the recreation complex in the Township, as well as financial considerations that Township officials must take into account, when considering implementing the complex. A proposed project cost and ten (10) year operation and maintenance budget were developed. The goal of the feasibility study was to determine the need, legal feasibility, and economic feasibility of developing a recreation center. The study uncovered that residents were interested in generating more space within the Township for recreation needs. Most residents preferred that these spaces remain natural and undeveloped. There was documented support for an organized sports tournament complex. A majority of residents agreed that a mixed-recreation complex with multiple recreational amenities was desired. The need was emphasized on a centralized location for residents to access within the Township. Township residents also expressed concern in regards to additional taxes. The feasibility study included multiple alternative locations and scenarios for a recreation complex. After considerable research and cost/benefit analysis, it was determined that the Fiore Property and the Church Property were the most feasible options to house a recreation complex. The project costs were approximately $2.3 million and could be financially feasible for the Township over a ten-year period, if the Township decides to go forward with the project. Additional grants and sources of funding should be sought to alleviate the potential development costs of the recreational complex on the Township.



Elizabeth Township

Feasibility Study

Page 2



Feasibility for a Recreation Complex
The Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan identified a need to study the feasibility to develop an indoor/outdoor recreational facility in Elizabeth Township. The initial goal of the project was to identify an area in Round Hill Park. Round Hill Park is a park and demonstration farm owned and operated by the Allegheny County Department of Parks and Recreation. However, areas outside of Round Hill Park were also analyzed. The capacity and feasibility of a recreation facility was examined at eight (8) different locations to determine an optimal site. A “No-Build” alternative was also included within the project study. The purpose of this study was to determine the need and feasibility to develop a recreation complex in Elizabeth Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The capacity of the Township was studied via community support, market characteristics, physical/structural requirements, and the Township’s financial capability to acquire, develop, and sustain an indoor/outdoor recreational facility. The goal was to determine the need, legal feasibility, and economic feasibility of developing a recreation center. To determine the feasibility, a planning level intensity estimate was developed for each site.



and the key-person interviews. (PBS&J) served as a technical expert on the project and answered questions about the feasibility study for concerned citizens. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The public involvement campaign involved a three (3) tier approach: public surveys. The third and final public meeting was conducted to receive public input on the several alternative sites identified as potential recreation complex sites. P. Joel Shodi. public surveys were sent to each Township household.E. The second public meeting presented the survey results. The public involvement process also included three (3) public meetings and key-person interviews. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . 2006 at the Elizabeth Township municipal building. This photo was taken during a public meeting held on July 25. In addition to a project steering committee. The first was a “kick-off” meeting to introduce the purpose and need for the project to the community. Public Surveys and Public Involvement Three (3) public meetings were conducted throughout the duration of the study. Ten (10) regular steering committee meetings were conducted from March 2006 through December 2006. Meeting minutes were recorded by PBS&J and provided for the steering committee members each month. Steering Committee The steering committee met monthly to discuss issues as they arose and directed the progress of the project.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 3 III. public meetings.

Elizabeth Township residents were questioned about the street locations of their residences.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 4 In the spring of 2006. other questions were designed to provide input pertinent to the preparation of the Feasibility Study of a Recreation Complex in Elizabeth Township. (A copy of the survey is provided in Appendix A.763 Public Opinion Surveys were mailed to each Elizabeth Township residence. 4. in addition to the size and age distribution of their households. The survey asked several questions related to the existing community recreation facilities. The middle age groups (20-59 years) made up about 50 percent of the surveys and 51. The total number of surveys returned was 1. These statistics reveal both a very good survey return and a representative sample of the Township residents.) The age distribution of the survey responses is quite similar to the demographic profile of the Township presented in Table 2 – Elizabeth Township General Demographics (2000). This very good return rate demonstrates genuine community-wide interest in the future parks and recreation efforts in the Township.6 percent of the 2000 population.576 (or 35 percent). JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Seniors (60 years and older) totaled approximately 25 percent of both the 2000 population and the recent survey responses. The youth population (19 and under) comprised 25 percent of the surveys and about 23 percent of the population in the 2000 census.0% Survey Results: Demographics The first questions of the survey were geared toward determining household demographics. Responses were sent to the Township municipal building on Rock Run Road. The survey was also publicized and posted on the Elizabeth Township webpage. The results of the survey were made available at public meetings and were also posted online along with public meeting announcements and other project milestones. these surveys were compiled from a database of addresses for the entire community of Elizabeth Township. Table 1 – Elizabeth Township Survey Return Results SURVEY RETURNS TOTAL SURVEYS SENT VIA REGULAR MAIL TOTAL RETURNED AS UNDELIVERABLE TOTAL SURVEYS RETURNED THROUGH WEBSITE TOTAL SURVEYS RETURNED VIA REGULAR MAIL GRAND TOTAL RECEIVED SURVEYS SENT AND DELIVERED % RESPONSE OF ELIZABETH TOWNSHIP 4763 266 110 1466 1576 4497 35.

The twelve (12) most frequently selected street locations are illustrated in Figure 2 below.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Figure 1 – Age Distribution of Survey Households 4% 8% 4 years and under Page 5 25% 6% 5-10 years old 11-14 years old 7% 15-19 years old 20-39 years old 40-59 years old 60 and older 18% 32% Township residents were asked to identify their street of residence to determine any trends in the survey participation of households. Figure 2 – Locations of Survey Respondents 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 SCENERY DR LINCOLN HALL RD KAREN DR DUNCAN STATION RD OBERDICK DR GREENOCK BROADLAWN BUENA VISTA DR ST HIGHLAND DR HIGH ST SIMPSON OLD HILLS RD HOWELL RD RIDGE RD JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .

Figure 3 – Preferred Recreation Facilities 700 600 500 400 Votes 300 200 100 0 Sw W im al ki m ng in N g at /X ur -C e ou W nt al ry k Sk iT Fi ra tn il es sS R ta ec tio re at ns io n C en te Pl r ay gr ou nd Pa vi lio ns Bi cy cl in g Fi sh in g Ba ll Fi el Pi ds cn ic Sh el A te m r ph ith ea te Pi r Bcn ba ic ll/ A St re re a et H oc Te ke y nn is C ou rt s Ic e Sk at in So g cc er Fi el ds V ol le yb al Sk l at eb oa rd Eq ue C ha st ri lle an ng e C ou rs e The five (5) recreation facilities most preferred by Elizabeth Township residents are: a swimming pool. and a recreation center. but to a lesser degree. Certain areas of organized sports were indicated. Residents agreed these facilities would be the most useful in a recreation center complex. Survey Results: Recreation Interests Based on the survey results. a walking/cross country ski trail. fitness stations. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Elizabeth Township residents were provided with the opportunity to indicate the types of recreation they enjoy and what they foresee as the future needs of recreation facilities within the Township. charts and tables were developed to graphically represent the responses to the community recreation interest survey. Scenery Drive had the largest number of responses due to its proximity to the proposed improvements to Round Hill Park near SR 0048 and length of the roadway and single-family residences along the route. The most preferred facilities focus on activities that are undertaken via community recreation. the most commonly indicated streets in the survey are relatively evenly distributed throughout the Township. with large groups of people being able to enjoy the activities together.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 6 According to the Township map. nature walks. as well.

and swimming are also very popular activities amongst the adult population. by far. both adults and children were asked to indicate their favorite recreational activities. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . and basketball were the three (3) activities most frequently selected by the Elizabeth Township youth. rather than team sport interaction. Swimming. golfing. The responses differed greatly between the two demographic groups. Walking is. baseball and/or softball. or within small groups. the most favored activity within the adult community. especially adults reflect the most preferred facilities in Figure 3. Adult responses were also geared more toward fitness and leisure. Organized sports are much more popular among the community youth than adults.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 7 Figure 4 – Adult’s Favorite Activities (Top 10) 650 600 550 500 Adult's Favorite Activities (Top 10) 450 400 Responses 350 To determine the most popular forms of recreation within the community. 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Walk Bike Fish Golf Swim Exercise Gardening Camp/Be Outdoor Outdoors Shows Hunt Walk/Bike theYRT Figure 5 – Youth’s Favorite Activities (Top 10) 60 Youth's Favorite Activities (Top 10) 50 40 Responses 30 20 10 Swim Baseball/Softb B-ball all/T-Ball Soccer Bike Playground Fish Exercise Skate(board) Football The types of activities enjoyed by community members. Biking fishing. Adults seemed to favor activities that can be performed individually.

JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . sports fields. are needed within the community. as well as areas of minimal development (76 percent agree). Figure 6 – Natural Areas/Sports Fields/Park & Recreation Space: Additional Space Needed in Township 100% 8% 20% 11% 90% 16% 8% 80% 70% 27% 37% 60% 43% Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 50% 40% 31% 30% 44% 20% 33% 22% 10% 0% Natural Areas Sports Fields Park & Rec Space Many Elizabeth Township residents place high importance for the allotment of space for recreational areas within the community. The Township is relatively divided on whether new sports fields are needed.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 8 Survey recipients were questioned about their disposition for the allotment of additional space in the Township to be utilized for park and recreation. 53 percent of respondents agreed. no broad consensus was reached on constructing more sports fields in Elizabeth Township. or natural areas with minimal development. many residents agree that more space for park and recreation (81 percent agree). Organized sports did not spark as much of an interest in the adult population in comparison to the youth population in Elizabeth Township. athletic fields only. nature areas only. Responses favored more areas for park and recreation and natural areas. Though there is relatively split agreement on whether additional space is required in the Township for sports fields. while 47 percent disagreed. Respondents could choose between a mixed-use complex. or an indoor/outdoor court that could be used for tennis and basketball. Elizabeth Township residents were also questioned about what type of recreation complex that they would most prefer in the community. However.

most likely for the use of passive recreation. a recreation building. Elizabeth Township residents indicated how often they utilized the community parks and if their visits tended to be in large or small groups. A small number of residents indicated that they wish to have athletic fields only or an indoor/outdoor court be built for the community. Most residents stated that they visit the parks in small groups. a new toddler playground. type of recreation preferences. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . and frequency of recreation use are good indicators of both the extent and the types of recreation interest within a community. Some residents (20 percent) prefer that nature areas should be emphasized in the Township.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 9 Figure 7 – Preferred Type of Recreational Facility 9% 20% 3% 68% Mixed Use Complex Area Athletic Fields Only Nature Areas Only Indoor/Outdoor Court (tennis. nature walks. basketball) The majority of respondents (68 percent) prefer that a mixed-use complex be implemented into the Township. Figure 8 – Park Usage-Group Size 20% 80% Small (6 or Less) Large (Greater than 6) Group sizes. The mixed-use complex could consist of trails. athletic fields. and other amenities to be addressed by the Township.

Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 10 Figure 9 – Frequency of Use 2% 6% 22% 21% 18% 31% Every Day 1-2 Times per Week Infrequently 3-5 Times per Week Once per Week (Summer) Only for Team Sports The planned frequency of use was quite varied. Trails. However. and only a small fraction intend to use the facility for sports teams only. such as nature walks and walking and cross country ski trails. Few plan to use it everyday. were indicated as highly preferred facilities within the Township (see Figure 3). Figure 10 – Preferred Trail Use 1200 1000 # of Votes 800 600 400 200 0 Motorized Bicycles Yes No Animals JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . One third of the respondents stated that they would use the proposed recreation facility one to two times per week. many respondents commented that group size and frequency of use were highly dependent upon what types of amenities would be offered at the facility. The next two figures (Figure 10 and Figure 11) illustrate the types of preferred trail activities and amenities that Elizabeth Township residents wish to see develop on the future trails of the area. Small groups of people utilizing the proposed recreation facility once or twice a week should be expected in the Township.

188 Votes 100 80 60 40 20 Maintain Existing Facilities/Already Have the Facility. The top ten (10) concerns or comments covered the following subject areas are shown on Figure 12. There was much more support for bicycles and animals. 45 Preserve Nature/ Maintain Country Setting. 69 Any Improvement Welcome. 31 No Improvements/ Use Funds Elsewhere. A physical fitness trail with exercise stations and distance markers was also favored. 31 JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Figure 12 – Areas of Concern 180 160 140 120 No New Taxes. 39 Concern about Site Location. 65 Need Activities for Children. Survey respondents were also asked to add their comments or concerns to the survey. 68 Safety/Security/ Vandalism. 61 No New Township Building.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 11 Figure 11 – Preferred Trail Amenities 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Mile Markers Exercise Stations Yes # of Votes Equestrian The majority of the respondents (90 percent) did not favor motorized vehicle use on trails. 42 Pool Needed.

and other games or activities at the park at no cost could change the attitude of these respondents that is contrary to the majority of Township residents. A need for children’s activities was the sixth concern. horseshoes. A building to house recreation programs. Funding is obviously a consideration. Several additional financial options will need to be examined by the Township. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . The eighth concern was geared toward the preservation of nature and maintaining the country atmosphere of the Township. This trend is typical of communities and points to the need to have programs for seniors. The fifth concern was issues regarding safety. To mitigate for instances of vandalism. These concerns were often addressed by the older age group respondents.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 12 “No new taxes” is the primary concern of the Elizabeth Township residents. No new administrative Township building is being considered. Giving them a reason to come to the park and participate in activities may change their attitude about recreation. The need for natural areas to meet passive recreation needs become an integral part of the alternatives analysis. A trail at grade level that is easy to walk and is visible to the public can attract the 60 and over age group. This is a typical response in most recreation surveys. “Any improvements to the park are welcome!” was the comment that ranked fourth in the survey. The “No-build” alternative examines the modification of existing facilities to meet recreation needs for all age groups. concessions. and donations. Maintaining existing facilities was the third concern. such as grants. The second concern came from those who were not in agreement with the necessity of park improvements. “No new Township building” was the seventh concern. Consideration is also placed on community growth and demographics. Seniors participating in a gardening club can help plant and beautify the park. These types of funding sources can relieve the tax burden placed on residents due to recreational activities. They want their tax dollars paying for services other than recreation. It is also understandable if they are on a fixed income. A Township-owned building that houses activities for senior citizens may be attractive to this growing age group. Planned facilities will be ADA compatible. a “vandal resistant” design is evaluated at each site. and is a legitimate one. Having picnics. A review of the demographics displays an increasing number of residents in the 60 and over age cohort. The purpose of this study is to determine which site alternative (including the “No-build” alternative) will be the most feasible and practical for Elizabeth Township residents. and maintenance equipment is part of the alternatives analysis. security. bonds. They stated no park improvements should occur and funds should be used elsewhere. This process identifies current and future needs for all age groups. Most families are concerned with an increase in taxes. and vandalism. This is understandable if they feel that they would not use the park. Site access for emergency vehicles and site visibility were considered in the designs. Current recreation facilities and programs for all age groups is examined.

As a result of the public survey and public meetings held. Elizabeth Township is compared to the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) for municipalities of similar size and demographics. The preliminary site location in Round Hill Park adjacent to Scenery Drive was indicated as the tenth concern. eight (8) site alternatives are being studied.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 13 The comment that a pool is needed in the Township ranked as the ninth concern. Existing facilities are identified and examined in the area. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .

3% 56. and municipal bonds. Municipal bonds.7% 68.4% 1.0% 62.0% 37. 25 percent strongly disagreed with their use.0% 5. Even though the majority of respondents favored municipal bonds.0% 21.0% 50. Table 2 – Percentage of Respondents’ Disposition for Recreation Funding Types Method of Funding Taxes Fees Grants Donations Endowments/ Donations Municipal Bonds Strongly Agree 2. Taxes were the least favored with almost 90 percent of respondents being in disagreement with their use (65 percent strongly disagreed). grants.1% 6.0% 40.3% Agree 10. Funding was organized into the following categories: taxes.0% Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly Agree Responses Taxes Fees & Memberships Grants Donations Endowments/ Municipal Donations Bonds (Capital Improvements) Funding Type Methods for funding the facility were geared toward grants.0% 90. fees.3% 62. with over 90 percent of respondents being in favor of utilizing these funding resources.0% Subtotal (Disagree & Strongly Disagree 87. endowments/corporate donations.4% Disagree 22.5% 1.7% 4.0% 7.0% 94. donations.0% 95.7% 43.6% Figure 13 – Method for Funding Recreation Center 100.6% Strongly Disagree 65.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 14 Survey Results: Funding Options Township residents were asked to indicate the preferable types of funding that would be accessed for the construction.8% 14.2% 1.3% 33.3% 61. administration.5% 3.2% 23.0% 10.8% 5.3% 20.0% 0. programming and maintenance for the addition of any recreational facilities that would be implemented into the area.0% 30. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . fees and memberships were favored by over half of the respondents.1% Subtotal (Agree & Strongly Agree) 12.7% 21.7% 29. donations.0% 20.0% 60.0% 80. Table 2 and Figure 13 serve as illustrations to the response from residents on their level of agreement with these various sources of funding. and endowments.4% 24.4% 93.0% 70.7% 32.0% 36.7% 32.

as a result of the community involvement. photographed. Church Property. A second public meeting was conducted to present the survey results and alternative sites chosen for additional study. at the former Nike missile site. several other potential sites were indicated for further study. and evaluated for compatibility to meet the Township need for a recreation center. recreation and open space property. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) hazardous waste cleanup. privately owned and is comprised of approximately 20 acres. A portion of the property is currently under the U. in the northern section near SR 0048 and Scenic Drive. The following eight (8) sites were identified. centrally located in the community behind the municipal building. No-Build Alternative. Boston Riverfront. modification of existing facilities to better meet the recreation needs of the community. in the public survey and in verbal and written reply during the public project kick-off meeting. This property is presently owned by Elizabeth Township and is designated as park. The Softball Association was looking at a portion of it for a softball field. the property was posted for sale. • • • • • • • • Each site/alternative was visited. Round Hill Park. riverfront recreation area and regional trail head. Seven Springs. located off Lincoln Road which is approximately ninety (90) acres. additional facilities.S. Round Hill Park. This sight has recently become available due to the desire of the owner of Higher Grounds Gospel Church to disband and sell the property.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 15 IV. SITE ANALYSIS Round Hill Park was originally identified in the Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan (2002) as being the best potential location for a recreation complex that would fulfill the recreation needs of Elizabeth Township. • Howell Property. Round Hill Park. The original scope of work involved identifying a site within Round Hill Park at selected locations previously identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Fiore Property. At the time of the study. However. mapped. privately owned. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . in addition to a “no-build” alternative. at the current soccer field site. does not include constructing new.

This site offers several vistas of the river valley. the following conclusions were made regarding each of the alternatives: • Howell Site This 90 acre site is located along Lincoln Road and is currently owned by the Township. open space and the Township should look into developing nature trails and other forms of passive recreation on the site as opposed to active recreation facilities. (See Appendix B. The site is adjacent to both a golf course and residential properties. Oak Street.. Figure 3B for a property site location map. site visits. A public involvement campaign would be needed to convince parents it was a safe site for recreation. there is sufficient acreage to develop a recreation complex.) Fiore Site The Fiore Property has much potential. Figure 2B for a property site location map. the site location. Another advantage to this site is that it contains a possible connection to the Youghiogheny River Trail.) • Seven Springs Site At the time of the study. and has a fairly even terrain. contains an existing road. Consequently. wetlands. this twenty (20) acre property was for sale. A recreation complex could be developed upgradient and distant from the clean-up area. This problem can be alleviated. If this site were chosen. Utilities and roadway access are not readily accessible. and safety concerns at the intersection of Buena Vista and Henderson Road. PBS&J • JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 . it has the stigma attached to it as a hazardous waste dump.e. and drainage issues). and public comments received during the second public meeting. the cut and fill requirements associated with parking lot and ball field development would be less intensive than most of the indicated sites. its acreage and topography are not conducive to the building of athletic fields. Also. Though part of the property is under USEPA and PADEP cleanup. The traffic could create problems with residents along Henderson Road. Though there are many walking trails in the area. Though it contains twenty (20) acres. but could be made available. Mitigation would involve over half of a mile of new roadway extended from Henderson Road in addition to the extensive upgrades needed on Henderson Road approaching the site. orientation. perennial streams. and size are not conducive to active recreation development. The Howell Property has considerable environmental constraints towards its development (i. additional trails were sited as a need in the public survey. The major disadvantage of this site is that recreation development and associated traffic could create additional noise and increased traffic due to sporting events. The site is also advantageous because of the property owner’s willingness to negotiate to make the property acquisition more feasible. This location is better suited to be left as wooded.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 16 Alternative Site Evaluation Results Based on map review. The area is along the 100-year floodplain and is relatively flat. Development of a master plan is necessary to determine the future development of this 90 acre area. (See Appendix B.

(See Appendix B. Fields located in the area are not presently part of the farm operation and could be converted to recreational use with reasonable cut and fill limits. Figure 4B for a property site location map. parking. There are also conflicts with the existing agricultural operations. This site will receive no further consideration. and other amenities is likely to be too great for this area. During the public involvement process. However. (See Appendix B. along with utility availability. No further study or consideration for this site to house a recreation complex will be conducted. The site is accessible from Skyline Drive off of Pine View Drive. Figure 6B for a property site location map. it is almost fully developed with little potential for additional recreational development. Set back requirements from the roadway and stream location limit the site’s development for a recreation complex. utility service to this high elevation property would also prove to be costly. Figure 8B for a property site location map. the site is not compatible with a Council of Government (COG) operated shooting range for local police officers that is currently located in this area. This site is located adjacent to the high school football stadium. will need to be studied in further detail. Figure 5B for a property site location map. but a point of access and close proximity to the intersection of SR 0048 and Scenery Drive is a concern. expansion for further recreational needs would be expensive due to the growth of grading necessary for additional parking. However. and storm water management. Topography issues also exist as narrow hillsides prevent a cohesive complex and require extensive roadways. There is water and electricity accessible to the site.) • • • JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . A perennial stream runs through the site. The required amount of acreage for a building. immediate trail access.) • Boston Riverfront The Boston Riverfront Park has utilities. Access and egress issues. storm water management.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 17 Site distance and set back requirements from the highway create potential driveway access safety concern. (See Appendix B. Set back and permit requirements are a hindrance. (See Appendix B. and is a conducive site for recreation. It is not desirable to make significant changes to the site to meet current recreation needs. (See Appendix B.) Round Hill Park – Soccer Site This site currently hosts the area soccer fields. However. While this section of Round Hill Park is isolated from other land use.) Round Hill Park – Nike Site This site is isolated from other recreation land use and is compatible with the farm use of Round Hill Park. Figure 7B for a property site location map. site drainage. considerable discontent was registered among adjacent property owners.) Round Hill Park – Northern Site This site is located near the intersection of SR 0048 and Scenery Drive. Portions of the property are included in the 100-year floodplain.

stressed vegetation. etc. a recreation complex will likely not be detrimental to the roadway’s level of service (LOS). rather than adding more facilities to an area. Also.Elizabeth Township • Feasibility Study Page 18 The Higher Ground Gospel Church (“Church”) Property The Church Property was a late consideration in the feasibility study. property acquisition is an issue. planned development. and event area. • The following criteria were utilized to evaluate the feasibility of the properties with regard to their use as a recreation center: Zoning Capability • Recreation center complex is compatible with surrounding land use. level sites for building(s) and athletic fields are practical and feasible without excessive engineering or cut and fill requirements. • Environmental constraints (floodways.” This concept addresses areas to improve in order to better meet Township recreation needs. electric. Environmental • Overall environmental condition of the site is good with no visual signs or odors of hazardous material releases. It is recommended that this lot be developed into a baseball complex with a recreation building. and zoning capabilities. etc. access. but seems viable. (See Appendix B. its lack of acreage makes the construction of soccer fields to be virtually impossible. • If developed. It is centrally located within the Township. on-site storm water runoff is manageable. and comprehensive plans. Area is large enough to meet current demand and future needs (20+ acres are required).) No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative is another consideration within a feasible study. wetlands. It is utilized if all of the other sites and recreation ventures are determined to “not be feasible. and sewage) are on-site or nearby. Utility • Utilities (gas. streams. Topography • Availability and access to flat. trail. or surface water discoloration. Acreage • Acreage is sufficient for a multi-purpose building.) would not restrict development. recreation fields. storm water management. Access/Traffic • Site is centrally located. parking. • Adjacent properties show no visual signs of contamination. • As a potential traffic generator. water. behind the municipal building and has an existing baseball field with utility. the existing church can serve as a very capable multi-purpose recreation building. While the property has sections of favorable topography. Figure 9B for a property site location map. Also. with good roadway access and potential site drives can be placed with good sight distance. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .

Boston Riverfront 5. Topography Acreage SITE LOCATION Environmental Access/Traffic Utility JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Round Hill Park .Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 19 The site analysis of the aforementioned properties is illustrated in Table 3 below. an existing building. While more limited in size and scope. The Fiore Property offers substantial acreage of flat lands. an existing baseball field.Soccer Site (Existing) 6. Round Hill Park . The next step of the feasibility study was to determine if there were legal restrictions on the two selected properties. the Church Property offers a centralized location. scenic views. off Lincoln Road) 2. and is linked to the municipal building. the Fiore Property and Church Property were determined to be the most conducive to recreation center development. Table 3. Seven Springs Site (20 ac.Nike Site 7. Fiore Property 3. Round Hill Park . Church Property Alternative Analysis After analyzing the project study sites. a recreation need study was required to determine what recreation facilities are best suited to meet local demands and how these properties were best suited for recreation sites. In addition. These sites will be carried forward for detailed study in accordance with the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PADCNR) Feasibility Study requirements.) 4.Northern 8. and a natural connection with the Youghiogheny River Trail. Site Location Analysis EVALUATION CRITERIA Poor Zoning Compatibility Land Use Fair Good 1. Howell (90 ac.

The owner(s) have interest in developing the remainder of the property. In recent years it has become common practice across Pennsylvania for municipal governments to request that property be set aside for recreation when developers create plans for residential properties. Discussions have occurred with owners of the Fiore Property. There is also the possibility of the Township to obtain a 25-year lease. There may be conflicts among heirs or caveats attached to the sale or disposition of property. The parish has been dismantled.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 20 V. A resolution merits consideration of adoption by Township officials. LEGAL FEASIBILITY The Church Property is currently for sale and is listed by Howard Hanna Realty. If this were the case. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . there are no known reasons as to why the Township could not purchase and develop the property. the Township officials should consider a Township ordinance regarding the preservation of open space and setting aside land for recreation. sections of the property along the western border are not contaminated and are available for use. While parts of the property are under reclamation by the PADEP. As the Township continues to develop. Residential developments increase the need for local government to provide recreation spaces and services. it would be recommended the Township only place soccer fields on the property with no buildings. Accordingly.

and the types of recreational facilities being considered to meet the recreation needs of the community. as well as to project these age groups into the future.3 years in 2000. This type of age group typically forms the backbone of a community.488 2020 12. This concept is based upon both the current demographics of the area. so that the Township can effectively plan recreation centers that are the most practical and feasible for its residents. family status. With an increasing median age and a large “middle-aged” group. it is critical to identify the following characteristics listed above. health. income level. There is often a high percentage of homeowners in this age cohort. The Township’s population has slightly decreased in size over the past forty (40) years and is projected to do so in the future. USAGE FEASIBILITY The usage feasibility explores how practical the addition of recreational amenities would be in the Township.26% Population Projections 2010 12.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 21 VI. Therefore. Population Sizes Table 5 .967 Elizabeth Township is also an aging community.Elizabeth Township Population Statistics Current Statistics 2000 Population 13. especially the present predominant age groups within Elizabeth Township. the recreation facilities that are currently available to the public.839 residents.4 percent of the population.839 % Change in Population from 1960-2000 -2. The median age increased from 39. Elizabeth Township must plan accordingly for the future of the area. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Elizabeth Township’s population as of 2000 is 13. The largest age group is the 35-54 year olds comprising 41. with higher incomes and less demand of public services. Residents age 35 and older comprise almost 73 percent of the Township’s population. and other variances in demographics. It also helps determine the best use of the preferred alternative sites. Population Analysis People have different recreation interests due to differences in age.3 years in 1990 to 43.

839 100.1% 6 0. while another one third of households consists of at least one individual over 65 years old.2% 25 to 34 years 1. 0.273 16.712 100.5 percent are married couple families.3 years 43.1% Total Female 7.3% Hispanic 53 0.7 percent African American.3% 85 years and over 297 2.Elizabeth Township General Demographics (2000) POPULATION Demographic Number Percent Under 5 years 664 4. 0.4 percent Hispanic.3% 65 to 74 years 1. Table 7 .6 percent).1% 75 to 84 years 1.4% African American 334 2.391 10.1% 88 0.0% Median Age in 1990 Median Age in 2000 39.093 15. 1. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .0% Asian 46 0.6 percent from 1990 to 2000.0% 13.0% White 14.6 percent versus 14.6 percent “Other.8% 5 to 9 years 824 6. One third of the households have individuals younger than 18 years old.3% 13.4 percent white.7% Native American 10 0.4% 55 to 59 years 825 6. In 2000.0% 60 to 64 years 739 5.473 97.3 years Elizabeth Township has a relatively homogeneous population with a much lower percentage of minorities than the state (2.4% 51 0.1% 45 to 54 years 2.Percentages of Ethnic Groups Within Elizabeth Township 1990 2000 Demographic Number Percent Number Percent Population 14.198 52. and 0.0% Total Male 6.0% 10 to 14 years 913 6.6% 15 to 19 years 852 6.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 22 Table 6 . Three quarters of the households in Elizabeth Township are families of which 62.312 97.9% 35 to 44 years 2.4% Other 10 0.2% 20 to 24 years 581 4.375 9. the racial make-up of the Township consisted of 97.6% Elizabeth Township is comprised of primarily family households. living in owner-occupied housing units with married couples.012 7.3% 38 0.3% 234 1.641 48.0% Total Population 13.839 100.3 percent Asian.” It should be noted that the African American population declined 0.

3% Vacant Housing Units 211 3.105 75.467 96. Attracting a strong labor base needs to include young people with diverse backgrounds and educations...With own children <18 years 224 4.467 100.419 62.2% Total Housing Units 5. The highest percentage of students is enrolled in elementary school.2% Total households 5. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Elizabeth Township needs to develop a recreation facility to accommodate teams or groups that will be multicultural in gender.618 84.547 28..1% .678 30.3% Married-couple family 3.5% . The percentages of students enrolled in the various levels of education correspond well with the demographics of the area.5% Total occupied housing units 5.1% Non-family households 1.9% …Householder living alone 1.7% Female householder.50 Average family size 2.0% Average household size (owners) 2. most.3% HOUSING TENURE Owner-occupied housing units 4.7% Households w/individuals >65 years 1.1% . Education Elizabeth Township school enrollment is illustrated in Table 9.213 22. children in the area are enrolled in some level of education. if not all.3% Rental Vacancy Rate 4.5% Renter-occupied housing units 849 15.With own children <18 years 1.0% Average household size 2.5% Households w/individuals <18 years 1.. and ethnicity. age.467 100.14 A key to the continual growth of Elizabeth Township is to attract businesses and develop a labor base.Elizabeth Township General Demographics (2000) HOUSEHOLDS Demographic Number Percent HOUSEHOLD BY TYPE Family households 4.With own children <18 years 1.56 Average household size (renters) 2..0% Homeowner Vacancy Rate 1.362 24.92 HOUSING OCCUPANCY Occupied Housing Units 5.243 22.7% Seasonal/Rec/Occasional Use 12 0. no husband 499 9.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 23 Table 8 .817 33.678 100. Thus.2% …Householder >65 years 629 11..

3% 14.0% 17.189 100.1% $25.0% 55 1.000 375 6.382 43.6% $15.8% 101 2.4% 380 9.Household and Family Income in Elizabeth Township (1999) HOUSEHOLDS FAMILIES INCOME IN 1999 Amount Percent Amount Percent Total Households/Families 5. but had less than Allegheny County.463 Median family income $50.4% $10. preschool 259 8.3% 150 3.School Enrollment in Elizabeth Township (2000) Demographic Number Percent Nursery school.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 24 Table 9 .484 100.000 or more 55 1. Elizabeth Township holds higher numbers than both the county and state in the percent of high school graduates and Associate’s Degree holders.4% $200.0% Table 11 .000 to $14. Less than half of these residents are high school graduates.3% Median household income $42.2% 59 1. Table 10 – Educational Attainment in Elizabeth Township (2000) Percent of persons 25 Percent of persons 25 Percent of persons 25 and older that are and older with their and older with their high school graduates Associate's Degree Bachelor's Degree Elizabeth Township Allegheny County Pennsylvania 42.999 347 6.000 to $99.2% 474 11.000 to $24.1% 10.3% 33.5% $150.740 PBS&J JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 .0% Less than $10.999 1.999 627 11.000 to $49.999 370 6.000 to $74.6% 1.3% High school (grades 9-12) 879 27.0% 4.999 68 1. Elizabeth Township was equal to the state in the percentage of residents with their Bachelor’s Degree (14.7% 352 8.6% College or graduate school 494 15.348 24. However.4% 608 14.0 percent).1% 5.999 788 14.6% $35.6% $75.000 to $34.5% Elementary school (grades 1-8) 1.999 560 10.0% $50.999 946 17.5% Total population (>3 yrs.000 to $149.4% $100.) enrolled in school 3.000 to $199.3% 790 19.158 100.1% Kindergarten 175 5.0% The level of education accomplished consists of much smaller percentages of the “over 25” age group.9% 38.189 28.0% 7.9% 14.

334 $18.106 Marital Status Elizabeth Township has a dominant population of married couples (see Table 12).999 annually. Only a fraction of households receive either supplemental security income or public assistance.112 $52.898 2.” while over one third of the population receives Social Security income.385 108 $2. The Township’s median income is relatively higher at $50. Three quarters of the Township is categorized as “earnings.463 Pennsylvania $40.0% 24.184 Median Household Income Elizabeth Township $42.3% $20.Elizabeth Township Per capita income Median earnings: Male full-time. and another quarter receive a retirement income.145 $25.904 $41. However.0% 2.151 1.041 75.740 Pennsylvania $49.740 annually.552 109 $5.2% 2. year-round workers Female full-time..Mean Supplemental Security income Public assistance income …Mean public assistance Income Retirement income …Mean retirement income Feasibility Study 4. with approximately 42 percent of households earning between $35. year-round workers Households with… Earnings …Mean earnings Social Security income .Mean Social Security income Supplemental Security income .. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .0% 37. Both the median family and household incomes are slightly higher than the state’s median income level.000 and $74. Table 12 – Family and Household Income (2000) Median Family Income Elizabeth Township $50.463.988 - Page 25 - Elizabeth Township’s median household income in 1999 was $42.042 $12. even a small amount of single-parent households can have a significant impact on the ability of a family to partake in recreational activities. The median income for male full-time workers is substantially higher than females (men earn 37 percent more than women in Elizabeth Township).

age 65 and older. Currently this age group only accounts for 14. Several key-person interview respondents indicated the Township needed to develop a recreation center to make the Township more attractive to young adults. Appendix C includes an illustration that indicates the location of each of these facilities in the Township. Single parents generally have less time to get children to and from recreation facilities and programs.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 26 Table 13 .. as well as the young.8% Population 15 years and older 11. which affect recreation needs.Female 440 3. Less free time available for single parents and the location of facilities and programs can impact how often a single parent can transport children to and from activities and sites.…Female 766 6.2 percent separated and 6.0% GRANDPARENTS AS CAREGIVERS Grandparent living in household with one or 13 more own grandchildren <18 years Grandparent responsible for grandchildren 7 With 1. Some children cannot walk or bike to facilities or program sites. representing 19.7% Separated 139 1.1 percent of the Township population. Table 4 provides a summary of Elizabeth Township recreation facilities.2 percent divorced. A recreation center was also cited as an attraction to retain or attract the 20 to 34 year old cohort into the Township.1% Now married (except separated) 7.Marital Status/Grandparent Care in Elizabeth Township (2000) Demographic Number Percent MARITAL STATUS Never married 2.452 100. the recreation center must meet the needs of these age groups.2% Widowed 893 7.299 20.406 64. Therefore. The large amount of area that Elizabeth Township makes up also has an impact. National Recreation Standards and Park Association (NRPA) A comparison of available recreation facilities in the Township to the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Standards is illustrated below in Figure 17.5 percent of this statistic.. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .7% Divorced 715 6. with seniors.8% . Developing a User Profile A review of Township demographics revealed that residents age 35 and older comprise almost 75 percent of the Township.2% …. there are 854 single-parent homes in Elizabeth Township.

JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . The purpose of the publication is to underscore the most important objectives of the park and recreation planning process. land for parks and recreation is often at a premium and needs to be acquired in a timely manner before land is lost forever.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 27 The “National Standards” have been adopted by the NRPA as the current means to determine a recommended ratio of acreage of open space in comparison to population or per capita. to ensure that a community knows how to go about securing enough of the right kind of land to provide the scale of recreation space system the majority of the citizenry desire. The same is true for those elements of the community landscape which should be protected through some kind of community open lands preservation program. In growth impacted communities such as Elizabeth Township.

Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 28 Table 4 .000. 653-K-174 N/A PARKLET Yes 7 8 Central School Playground Victory School Rock Run Road Douglas Run 1129-B-275 1733-M-219 N/A N/A SCHOOL OTHER Yes Unknown 9 Round Hill Park 2 N/A N/A 1101 REGIONAL Yes 10 11 12 13 14 15 Stoneybrook Industry Ballfield Twele Ballfiled Lucas Butler Memorial Field Boston Mehodist Church Field McHenry Ballfield Andover Maria St. The EFSA Soccer Association reserves it for 8 Sundays at approximately $2. 2 Only one full-size field at this site. 3 The turf football field is available for soccer in the spring only and at a cost of $300 for the season plus $30 to $38 per hour. Scenery Drive 1270-D-342 1266-B-58 651-F-325 652-H-118 653-G-194 1130-C-54 367 N/A 3.93 N/A N/A N/A PARKLET OTHER OTHER OTHER OTHER OTHER Yes Unknown Yes Yes Yes Yes 16 Blaine Hill Recreation Area Kendall Way 1132-G-230 232 OTHER Unknown 17 Elizabeth Forward HS Fields 3 Weigles Hill 1417-C-43 N/A OTHER Yes 18 19 Timothy Drive Tot Lot Municipal Field Jefferies Drive Rock Run Road 1269-D-317 1129-L-251 N/A N/A OTHER Unknown Yes 20 Mt.0424 OTHER Unknown Facility Inventory BASEBALL BASKETBALL PARKING PICNIC PLAYGROUND 2 PARKING 2 PICNIC 2 RESTROOM BASKETBALL TENNIS BASKETBALL PARKING PLAYGROUND BASKETBALL PARKING BASEBALL BOATING FISHING 3 PARKING PICNIC PLAYGROUND RESTROOM SOCCER PLAYGROUND BASKETBALL PARKING NATURE 9 PICNIC 3 RESTROOM 4 SOCCER 3+ PLAYGROUND PARKING PLAYGROUND BASEBALL BASEBALL PARKING PICNIC BASEBALL PARKING BASEBALL PARKING BASEBALL PARKING BASEBALL PARKING PICNIC RESTROOM BASEBALL FOOTBALL RESTROOM SOCCER BASKETBALL PLAYGROUND BASEBALL BASKETBALL PARKING BASEBALL PARKING PLAYGROUND TENNIS Data Source: Allegheny County Comprehensive Plan NOTE: The following comments on soccer fields were made by Drew Mueller. is not large enough for a full-size field. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Twele Road Greenock Buena Vista Road E. EFSA. President. Smithfield St. Vernon Youth Association Georgetown 997-B-98 0.Inventory of the Recreation Facilities within Elizabeth Township Site # Site Name Site Address Block & Lot / Tax / Property ID # Total Acreage Type of Parcel Handicap Accessible 1 Blythedale Playground Parkview 1569-D-78 3. N/A 1127-A-269 651-J-58 653-G-231 N/A N/A N/A N/A TRAIL OTHER OTHER PARKLET OTHER Yes Unknown Yes Yes 6 Boston Tot Lot 1 Donner St. 1 One small field as listed. The cost makes it prohibitive to use for practices.651 PARKLET No 2 3 4 5 Youghiogheny River Trail Buena Vista Greenock Playground Boston Basketball Court N/A Wildcat Hollow Lutheran Lane E. Smithfield St.

Community needs assessment (survey). and public meetings to obtain public input on need for facilities and programs. Program analysis identifying recreation participation. and the park and recreation activities in which they currently participate. 2. A national expression of minimum acceptable facilities for citizens of urban and rural communities. 4. primarily at the community level. Demographic analysis. recreation. Provide an opportunity for community input and participation in the planning process. These standards were viewed and used solely as a guide for this study. Determine facility updates. Steering Committee. A major reference to guide and assist regional park and recreation development. and development of park. A guideline to determine land requirements for various types of park and recreation areas and facilities. 3.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 29 Determining Park Facility Needs and Program Demand Analysis The demand analysis involved a five-pronged approach for determining what citizens currently desire. and program needs. Comparison of facilities to National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Standards. 2. and open space lands. Recreation. A basis for relating recreational needs to spatial analysis within a community-wide system of parks and open space areas. goals to be achieved. Guidelines Park. Park & Recreation Board. and Open Space Standards and The NRPA recognizes the importance of establishing and using park and recreation standards as: 1. new facilities needed. Determine current trends or changes in the desires of residents. The purpose of the NRPA guidelines is to present park and recreation space standards that are applicable nationwide for planning. The demand analysis consisted of performing: 1. 3. NRPA standards address minimum. A means to justify the need for parks and open space within the overall land-use pattern of a region or community. The standards were interpreted according to Elizabeth Township’s specific local needs. acquisition. 5. not maximum. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . The purpose of the demand analysis is to: • • • • • Determine current activities and the most popular park resources. 5. 4. Establish a database of important facts for the Township. what they want in the future.

which are used throughout the country. the figure of 10 acres per 1. soccer. the residents of Elizabeth Township. Other standards adopted include the “percent of area” approach. The fact that some of the standards have changed substantially is not an indication of their obsolescence. and area use based on the carrying capacity of the land. needs determined by user characteristics and participation projections. While the standards do not dictate a need for sports fields (football. baseball. The basic standards were derived from early studies of park acreages located within metropolitan and rural areas. Over time. Changes are a measure of the growing awareness and understanding of both participant and resource (land. Figure 14 .000 people came to be the commonly accepted standard used by a majority of communities. water. softball).Recreation Facility Comparison in Elizabeth Township to the National Standards 16 14 Present Facilities Minimum 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 B aseb all/ Sof t b all B asket b all B o at ing A ccess Designat ed Fishing A rea Fo o t b all Nat ure Facilit y Picnic Pavillio n Playground So ccer/ Hockey Tennis Figure 14 and Table 14 provide a summary of facilities that are needed according to the NRPA standards. etc. a recreation complex for sports tournaments was cited as a need in the public comment forms and by key-person interviews. and in this study. Parks are for people.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 30 A variety of standards have been developed by professional and trade associations. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .) limitations.

000 0/1 Trails N/A N/A 1 system per region 1/0 JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . 1 per 10.5 A Minimum Football 1. Recommended Size and Dimensions 46-50' x 84' 50' x 84' with 5' unobstructed space on all sides Recommended Orientation No. both sides 21' clearance.2 A minimum Pitching distance .000 sq. 5. Minimum 6' clearance on all sides Baselines – 60’ 1. Park Needs Existing/Need Long axis north-south 1 per 5.840 sq. tennis) 9.200'-250' Baselines .200' Center field .46' min.0 A Minimum Same as baseball 1 per 5.40 hikers/day/mile.200 sq. if 5.600.depends on climate 1 court per 2.000 (if also used for youth baseball) 0/0 Field Hockey 1. 180' x 300' with a minimum of 6' clearance For longer periods.46' Foul lines .000 2/2 Ice Skating 22.90 hikers/day/mile. ft.000 6/0 Fitness Trail 4.7 . 160' x 360' with a minimum of 6' clearance on all sides 195' to 225' x 330' to 360' with a minimum 10' clearance on all sides Overall width . Youth 2.long axis northwest to southwest.02' Track width for 8 to 4 lanes is 32' 120' x 80' Well defined head maximum 10' width.1 per 100.000 sq. including support area Minimum of 7. of Units per Population Elizabeth Twp.000 0/1 Multiple Recreation Court (basketball. 40' 250' to center field Long axis north-south 1 per 5.036 sq.Recreation Facilities: Existing versus Need Page 31 Activity/ Facility Basketball 1. 1 per 20.000 0/0 Tennis Long axis north-south 0/6 Volleyball 30' x 60' Minimum of 4. Capacity rural trails .5 A Soccer 1. ft.000 Outdoor . ft.040-7. northon all sides south. support area outdoor 36' x 78' 12' clearance.3 A 1 per 20.276' Length . ft.5 to 2.1 A Fall season . Urban trails .000 sq.60' Pitching distance . single court (2 acres for complex) Rink 85'x200' (minimum 85'x185') Additional Long axis north-south. maximum average grade is 5% not to exceed 15%. both ends Indoor . ft. ft.000 0/2 Baseball 0/0 Softball 1.000 6/0 Same as field hockey 1 per 20.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Table 14 .400-3. High School Recommended Space Requirements 2.280 sq.2. ft. volleyball.000 1/0 Same as field hockey Long axis in sector from north to south to northwest-south-east with finish line at northerly end Long axis of courts with primary use is northsouth 1 per 10.

Elizabeth Township has a considerable number of ball fields. the Township has no centralized active park. These properties were studied to determine what facilities they were best suited for based on the topography. utilities. As this study reveals. 5. two (2) properties were examined in further detail: the Fiore Property and the Higher Ground Gospel Church Property. and potential development cost. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . as well as preserving unique landscapes and open spaces. but lacks a centralized community park for both passive and active recreational pursuits. Recreation and Greenway Guidelines. There is currently no existing Township park typical of the description for a “community park” as provided in the NRPA. The purpose of a community park is to focus on “meeting community based recreation needs. acreage.467 households) population density.” Demographic profiles (13. and recreation demand within the service area are the primary determinants for the size of the community park. Other than Round Hill Park.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 32 Site Topography and Roadway Impact Analysis The topography and roadway network of the Township is such that all available facilities are scattered. Based on the public involvement results and an initial alternative site analysis. It is here that the need lies. resource availability.839 residents.

Fiore Property The Fiore Property cost estimate has been developed under the assumption that the property will be donated to the Township. Rather than simply produce “bubble drawings. runs programs for linear regression and polynomial regression. Costs were determined through national standards. contour and block diagrams).Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 33 VII. Geopack is a comprehensive software package that allows users to undertake geostatistical analyses of spatially correlated data. variance. VISION FOR THE FUTURE The initial scopes of work for this project called for the consultant to only provide “bubble drawings” of a potential site within Round Hill Park for a possible recreation center and develop a cost estimate of this endeavor. The earthwork costs associated with all of all the other sites rendered them unfeasible to develop. The program generates graphics (linear plots. calculates linear estimations and nonlinear estimations. and utility excavation. to determine quantities of earthwork required for recreation field pads. it was determined these two (2) sites were topographically the best suited for a recreation complex. Given the topography of the other sites. and determines sample semivariograms and cross-semivariograms. Geopack. Input from the public involvement process and study committee recommendations resulted in nine (9) various scenarios with four (4) properties: • • • • Higher Group Gospel Church Property Fiore Property Nike Property at Round Hill Park Northern Section of Round Hill Park The Higher Ground Gospel Church Property and Scenario #3 of the Fiore Property were determined to be the most feasible and practical sites to meet the recreation needs of the Township. Site Advantages: • Convenient to the Youghiogheny River Trail • Relatively flat terrain with panoramic view of river • Compatible with surrounding land use JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . computes basic statistics (mean. skew). buildings. roadway improvements. Geopack also allows users to incorporate additional programs at a later date without having to later pervious programs or recompile the entire system. Volume quantities are calculated on a threedimensional model. median.” PBS&J utilized the software package.

unless a longer lease or acquisition occurs. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . At the present time. A small concession stand/restroom building would be necessary for tournaments. No permanent large structures (buildings) are recommended. Access improvements are necessary. The recommendation is to obtain a 25-year lease (minimum) to develop a soccer complex. the property is under private ownership.Elizabeth Township Site Disadvantages: • Roadway access • Utility availability • Private Ownership Site Layout: • Area for restrooms and concession • Three (3) soccer fields Feasibility Study Page 34 Tables 15 and 16 provide the preliminary cost estimate to develop the project for recreation. which includes a soccer complex.

1 13.5 0.2 3.8 2. Fiore Property III Quantity Takeoff Earthwork Clearing and Grubbing 3.3 1.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 35 Table 15.9 SUM 457 942 4 5 951 8 7608 1547 8 12376 733 537 2245 6339 9854 Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre Acre CUT 40000 LY LY LY LY LY SY LY LY LY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY Acre Acre Acre Acre SF Inside Complex Inside Complex FILL 39543 CY Large Soccer Field (Park1) Parking Lot (Park3) Small Soccer Field (Park 5) Large Soccer Field (Park6) Complex (Park 7) All New Roads + Excavation Roads New Roads + * Total Excavation Upgrade Existing Roads Parking Parking (Minimum 9680 SY) * + Soccer Fields Sod 7534 11733 + 11733 31000 1.8 2 3.7 7.3 560 Small Soccer Field Large Soccer Field Large Soccer Field Seeding + Building Footprints Restroom/Concession Building Small Soccer Field Large Soccer Field Large Soccer Field Building Size JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .8 2.

Water. An estimate of these incurred costs is provided in Table 16B.9 40000 700 380 7 31000 3 7.905 $837.400 $14.256 $53.060 $55.67 Total $55.978 $236.50 $12.3 560 Unit Acre CY LF LF Each SY Fields Acre SF Unit Price $4.939 *Goals.00 $7.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 36 Table 16A.358 $731.500 $36.256 $152.000.00 $2.50 $7.000.5" Wearing 6" BCBC 6" 2A Subbase Total Costs 7608 7608 7608 7608 12376 12376 9854 9854 9854 SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY $7. Table 16B.00 $166.00 $7. would need to be supplied by the Soccer Association.5" Milling 1. Contingency (15%) Roadway and parking improvements would need to come from the Township road program.50 $53.600 $320.50 $4.160 $57.074 $43.00 $2.5" Wearing Parking 1.000 $77.000 $30. Sewage) TOTAL Quantity 13.00 $80.00 $7. 4 ft.692 $86. benches. bleachers. scoreboards. etc.496 $73.435 Higher Ground Gospel Church Property The Church Property is displayed in Appendix B. Roadway and Parking Access Cost Estimate New Roads 1. Site Advantages: • Existing building adaptable to recreation • Existing utilities PBS&J JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 . Chain Link (1 per field) Seeding Building Footprints/Utilities Super Secure Restroom Building Kit Base/Utilities (Electric.632 $68.000 $1.00 $7.217 $30.717 $95.00 $20.00 $24.00 $8.000 $49.000. Figure 9B. Fiore Property III Preliminary Cost Estimate Description Earthwork Clearing and Grubbing Class 1 Excavation Drainage 12" RCP 18" RCP Inlets Soccer Fields* Sod Fencing.000 $635.864 Escalation (6%/Year) $774.00 $70.5" Wearing 2" Binder 4" BCBC 6" 2A Subbase Existing Roads 1.000 $22.

The site has much to offer. but for sale • Topography for soccer is inhibitive Tables 17 and 18 provide the quantities and associated cost estimated to develop the property for recreation. Church Property Quantity Takeoff Earthwork Clearing and Grubbing 4 Acres Excavation Roads New Roads * SUM CUT FILL 1 14663 14662 CY 275 4 1100 LY LY SY Parking Parking Baseball Field Sod Seeding 10327 SY 2.Elizabeth Township • • • Feasibility Study Page 37 Roadway access Proximity to the Township municipal building and maintenance garage Vegetative buffer between property and adjacent homes Site Disadvantages: • Under private ownership. Table 17.1 Acre 3226 SY JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . but soccer fields are better suited for the Fiore Property site.

000.00 $2.00 $3.700 $7.439. drainage (where necessary).750 $7.250 $22.00 $25.800 $36.000 $20.50 $2.525.00 $8.200.818 $6.500. 4 ft.355 $1.400. i.00 $1.582 $77.000 $150.000 $25. stairs.00 $7.000.304 $7.200 $350 $5.00 $7.00 $166.5" Wearing (Roads) 2" Binder (Roads) 4" BCBC (Roads) 6" 2A Subbase (Roads) Parking 1.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 38 Table 18.00 $2.500 $6.606 *** *** *** *** *** *** ***Unit prices derived from Washington Square Job Costs Note: Cost estimate does not include many factors.400 $14.50 $70.00 $12. Galv ( 1 per field) Dugouts (2 per field) Bleachers (2 per field .000 $117.000 $4.000 $1.700 $22.00 $30.50 $7.000 $40. lighting.251.e.850.251 $86.424 $24. Building cost. guardrails.000 $500. Chain Link.00 xxx Total $24.00 $19.67 $22. Chain Link (1 per field) Scoreboard (1 per field) Seeding Utilities Electric/Phone (2 .). trails. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . landscaping.700 $20.00 $2.00 $2.195 $70.00 $20.00 $80.523 $187.00 $7.5" Wearing (Parking) 6" BCBC (Parking) 6" 2A Subbase (Parking) Drainage 12" RCP 18" RCP Inlets Baseball Fields Sod Backstop. and other characteristics of the built environment (sidewalks.00 $24.6" Schedule 40) Electric Company Gas (3" Schedule 40) Water (4" DI) Sewage (6" SDR 35) Sanitary Manholes Other Costs Property Acquisition Mobilization TOTAL Contingency (15%) Escalation (6%/Year) Quantity 4 14663 1100 1100 1100 1100 3226 3226 3226 1000 500 10 10327 3 6 8 3 3 2. Church Property III Preliminary Cost Estimate Description Earthwork Clearing and Grubbing Class 1 Excavation Roads 1.1 250 1 250 250 250 2 19.000. etc.250 $5.4 for HS Field) Fencing.000 $8.400.000 $7.00 $7.1 Unit Acre CY SY SY SY SY SY SY SY LF LF EACH SY Each Each Each Fields Each Acre LF LS LF LF LF EACH Acre Unit Price $6.600 $20.80 $20.000.728 $1.

or other events including private rentals. the need was placed on areas to have centralized baseball/softball and soccer tournaments. Tournaments can also provide a means to raise funds for capital improvements and maintenance. Locating both a baseball and soccer complex in one (1) area to meet Elizabeth Township needs requires a minimum of twenty (20) acres of flat. developable land. Given the physiograpic terrain of the Township. Though the number of play fields may be adequate according to current NRPA standards. holding events. and Steering Committee comments. The existing building is easily adaptable for senior citizen usage. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Converting the Church Property into a recreation center with a baseball complex seems logical. there is a need to have fields centralized for tournament play. while the Fiore Property can be developed into a soccer complex. as well as for areas for senior citizens to gather.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 39 As a result of the survey process. The existing Church Property can also host a basketball/tennis court complex. and trails. key-person interviews. that is not a feasible endeavor at a reasonable cost. summer day/nature camps.

Cost does not include new roadway improvements to the access road.597. the per capita expenditure for parks and recreation for municipalities this size is $19.670 without inflation or population increases or decreases. Over the ten (10) year period. Over a ten (10) year period. Proper construction specifications.03. It is a decision that ultimately lies within the hands Township supervisors. While the results of the survey indicated 87.7 percent of the respondents did not want to see any new taxes to fund the recreation complex. Grants would help reach the goal before the ten (10) year period concludes. FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATION CONSIDERATIONS The difficulty herein lies in the fact as to whether or not acquisition and development of the Church Property and Fiore Property are economically feasible for Elizabeth Township. Proposed Annual Park Operation and Maintenance Budget Projected Operating and Maintenance Expenses Administration Some general administrative cost increases will occur as the park develops. Elizabeth Township falls within the middle of those Pennsylvania municipalities between 10. The annual allocation for Elizabeth Township should be around $229. recreation development could be feasible. techniques.999 residents.545 Total Elizabeth Township Park and Recreation Allocation With a total population of 13. some funds from the Township general fund are inevitable.525. that would amount to $2. Table 19. and continued preventive maintenance will prevent accidents and keep insurance premiums at a respectable level. Whether funds come from the Township general fund without raising the bottom line is a decision on the part of the Board of Supervisors.839 residents.300. According to the latest Budget and Salary Survey provided by the PADCNR and the Pennsylvania Recreation and Park Society (PRPS).Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 40 VIII.606 $2. Blanket insurance coverage will increase as facilities and programs are developed and added.939 Church Property $1. Table 19 provides the projected total costs of developing both the Church Property and the Fiore Property.295.000 and 14. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . planning. Church Property/Fiore Property: Total Costs Subject Cost Fiore Property (Recreation) $774.

graffiti removal. A capital equipment maintenance budget should be established to purchase mowing equipment. Maintenance will involve as a minimum: 1. equipment lubricants. These would include fertilizer for the fields. Part-time college students. carpentry repairs JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Training of staff and volunteers must keep pace with current trends in the leisure services and related fields. paint for play equipment. Periodic – ball field/in-field dragging. mailing. and phone bills are anticipated during the early development years.” group awards. as well as other programs such as “volunteer of the year. or physical education interns from local colleges could be hired under the management and supervision of the Township supervisors. signs. 2. An ongoing commitment by Township officials will be needed to maintain the park in peak condition. storm damage repairs and plumbing. etc. court/building/pavilion cleaning. trail wood chipping. drinking fountain and plumbing maintenance. leaf raking/blowing. fertilizer. litter and waste receptacle pickup. Park. cleaning agents needed for restrooms and buildings. and minor tools. hoses. recreation. Public relations expenditures should involve the dedication of various facilities as they are added. and special events if so directed by the Township. sign maintenance. These would be part-time Township employees with no fringe benefits. pruning. 3. etc. Seasonal – flower bed planting and weeding. program offerings. “Co-ops” and free labor for college credit can come from local colleges to assist with creating and administering programs. Some overtime could be expected on weekends. inspections of playground equipment/fences/gates. or previously retired individuals may be desirable as employees under the direction of the Township supervisors. Regular – grass mowing. high school students. pest control. tractor fuel. advertisements.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 41 Other general increases in office supplies. Programming The organizing for special events and programs will require staff and volunteer hours. Much of this effort can be provided by volunteers. restroom cleaning and maintenance. Considerable on-going administrative effort is imperative to foster good planning. Personnel Part-time seasonal recreation position(s) and maintenance position(s) should be created. Maintenance Keeping the recreation center in good repair so people want to use the facilities is important. sprinkler maintenance (grassy areas). painting. acknowledgment for corporate donations. holidays. Materials/Supplies These supplies are necessary to carry out the maintenance program for the park when the park is completely developed.

concessions can be controlled by the individual sports group with a percentage of sales going to the park fund. etc. organizations. families. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . Privately run week-long summer sports camps can create modest park revenue. Concession stand operation could be contracted out by the Township during holiday and special events. and other foundations. periodic newsletters or a calendar of upcoming events. lessons. or possibly first-preference for picnic permits. They may choose to sponsor various parks and recreation programs as well as provide significant funding for new projects. The Township should consider the establishment of a Parks and Recreation Foundation.Elizabeth Township Recreation Center Revenues Feasibility Study Page 42 Daily admission or entrance fees can be charged for arts and crafts shows. Seasonal permits can be offered for ball field use or picnic areas. and programs including art and nature or sports camps can include modest maintenance fees. Tax advantages for corporate gifts to the community service agencies provide additional motivation for gifts. corporations frequently provide funds for special projects or competitions. ball games. One such project. This foundation would provide the Parks & Recreation Board with a formal method of receiving gifts and endowments from individuals. Individuals. clubs. Facility rental costs can be set by the Township annually to keep pace with rising maintenance costs. is the “Adopt-A-Park” program in which a corporate group agrees to pay the operation and maintenance costs of a park for a specific period of time as a contribution to the local community. clubs. or organizations may join the Recreation Program through the purchase of a yearly or lifetime membership. If volunteers cannot be found. local businesses. and other philanthropic organizations are excellent sources of financing for local programs. A foundation or trust fund established with the interest in building and improving recreation can attract donations from citizens. or associations and corporations should be formally encouraged. private foundations. invitation to special events. Classes. flea markets. businesses. Donations from individuals. Also. Corporations. tournaments. Such membership would provide special benefits. Establishing a regular line item in the Township Council Fund Budget is necessary for daily operation and maintenance of a recreation center. such as free entry to a facility or event. etc. and tournaments and revenue could be used to offset maintenance costs. antique car shows. and businesses interested in assisting the Township. successful nationwide.

Clinics/sports camps with volunteers.430 $214 $857 $536 $1.120 $6.637 $6.598 $5.099 $4.245 $3.029 $3.391 $3.324 $6.872 $15.382 $11.492 $6.950 Equip.061 $1.758 *Summer College Intern: Spring .132 $10.026 $14.240 $6. Lube.492 $14. Elizabeth Township residents enjoy green open spaces and recreation activities for all ages.118 $195 $779 $487 $1.935 $3.462 $1.897 $4.000 Season Permits $1.452 $1. acknowledges the interests of all residents.508 $24.013 $12.200 $2. recreation.960 $1.577 $161 $644 $403 $966 $564 $5.550 E.180 $1.815 $1.956 $3.700 TOTAL OPERATING $46.004 $2.420 $2. Events $750 Supplies $850 Costs $950 Subtotals $2. assist in preparation of summer special events.080 $47.338 $2.821 $7.270 COSTS F.720 $18. Equipment $2.728 $42.823 $13.315 Year 7 $2.500 Year 2 $1.905 $15.221 $3.Nature activities at parks.131 $1.710 $6.849 $6.196 $11.391 $1.328 $13.168 $1. Fall .036 $2.069 $38.373 $16.656 $1.716 $1.997 $2.785 $8.757 $1.572 $2. Survey results revealed that parks.191 $5.909 $7.124 $5.750 $13.369 $1.126 $4.506 $1.996 $69.368 $54.200 Subtotals $7.600 Prof.295 $74.928 $3.131 $3.392 Year 5 $2.800 C.438 $10.025 $13.077 $7.697 $51.601 $20. Clinics.320 $8.500 Subtotals $31. Summer .208 $1.227 $2.768 $2.100 Concession Sales $3.662 $2.800 Recreation (1) Maintenance (1) $3.429 $14.608 $1.286 $750 $7.473 $61.394 $1.431 Year 9 $3. Equipment $950 Fuel.830 $9.995 Subtotals $8.284 $1.822 $4.434 $7.895 $13.041 $6.244 $3.395 $4.107 $1.539 $4.500 Camps.415 $825 $7.838 $12. and open space contribute to Elizabeth Township’s high quality of life.543 $3.822 $2.800 $45.319 $4.846 Year 8 $3.851 $2.150 $64.413 $1.392 $10.392 $1. Membership (PRPS) $100 Office Supplies $400 Phone $250 Public Relations $600 Training (PRPS) $350 Subtotals $3.503 $8.253 $32. Maj.098 $1.910 $18.564 $6.317 $5. residents and Elizabeth Township officials should support this system as the Township recreation efforts continue to be a defining feature of the community.215 $3.588 $48.570 $3.290 $4. REVENUES Entrance Fees $2.900 TOTAL REVENUES $10.484 $3.150 $1.650 $1.926 $4.818 $15. PROGRAMMING Camps.993 Year 4 $2.517 $1.196 $2.287 $4.456 $6.720 D.343 $146 $586 $366 $878 $512 $4. Clinics.226 $5. Events $3.993 $5.600 $14.805 $908 $1.705 $13.751 $5.573 $37.656 $3.600 $8. Purchase Facility (General) $12.388 $3.063 $620 $5.657 $2.080 $4.359 $15.058 $5.420 $9.200 $6. recreation.359 $15.597 $1.906 $40.300 B.834 $177 $709 $443 $1.158 $35.781 $3.733 $1.029 $1.960 $5.845 $825 $935 $1.025 $79.659 $5.126 $2.895 $16. Over the next ten (10) years.800 Contracted Services $1.749 $6.850 $4.310 $4.732 $7.500 Equip.506 $3.602 $4.936 $121 $484 $303 $726 $424 $3.360 $9.645 $7.630 $3.405 $8.036 $5.095 $16.537 $3.200 $16.554 $1. MATERIALS/SUPPLIES Concessions. MAINTENANCE $12.420 $12.026 $14.146 $8.405 $17.683 $1.933 $2.025 $13.851 $4.509 $4. Capital Reserve $3.530 $4.923 $3.719 $5. ADMINISTRATION Insurance $1. This Feasibility Study identifies parks.086 $998 $1.150 $3.235 $4.710 $220 $242 $266 $293 $322 $354 $390 $429 $472 $4.773 $236 $943 $589 $1.328 $13.410 $3.944 $11.416 $2.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 43 Table 20 – Estimated Ten Year Budget for Park Operation & Maintenance and Revenues Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study for a Recreation Complex Year 1 A.727 $4.550 $12.130 $133 $532 $333 $799 $466 $4. PBS&J JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 .074 Year 10 $3.264 $1.281 $6.832 Year 6 $2.683 $4.462 $22.Recreation Program/Camp.369 $3.834 $5.530 $1.240 $2.580 Year 3 $1.303 $57.872 $15.760 $110 $440 $275 $660 $385 $3. and provides a guide for future recreation to be administered efficiently. and open space needs.244 $1.850 Tools/Minor Equipment $725 Utilities $200 General Construction $3.045 $2.750 Site Maintenance/Repairs $2.751 $4.Nature Program.976 $15.264 $3.329 $1. reflects the Township’s demographic trends.870 $34.004 $798 $877 $965 $1.169 $682 $6.660 $14.969 $1.045 $1.466 $1.002 $6. PERSONNEL (Seasonal) $2.562 $13.564 $9.

Location. C. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . The finished grade shall have a slope of 4 percent or less. H. E. A sample resolution would read as follows consideration and merits consideration of adoption by Township officials. D. Shall be centrally located within the development site. Size and shape shall be suitable for development as a park and no single side of the land shall amount to more than 35 percent of the perimeter. Residential developments increase the need for local government to provide recreation spaces and services. Shall be free from encumbrances or liens which would prevent. G. have adequate ingress and egress including meeting applicable site distance and other standard requirements.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 44 Recreation Open Space Recommendation As the Township continues to develop. the Township officials should consider a Township ordinance regarding the preservation of open space and setting aside land for recreation. Utilities and Vegetation. on one parcel of land with no intervening land. and have a minimum of 250 feet of frontage on a public or proposed public street. Use Limitations. Maximum Finished Slope and Land Disturbance. or restrict its use in any way. Vehicular Access. sanitary sewer. Shall be easily and safely accessible from all areas of the development. and shall have established vegetation thereon. Size and Shape. except those of five or less dwelling units or lots. A fee in lieu of property donation can go toward developing existing park land and implementing the master plan. the following standards: A. As a condition precedent to final approval of any subdivision or land development intended for residential use. Recreation open space should meet. the developer shall dedicate for public use recreation open space meeting the design standards in the ordinance of this Chapter. at a minimum. B. Shall be in reasonable proximity to utilities including water. pay a recreation fee. F. or upon agreement with the Township. 2. limit.185 square feet per dwelling unit or lot. Pedestrian Access. Minimum Size. Shall be accessible to each dwelling unit in the development via pedestrian easement or dedicated right-of-way within which sidewalks shall be built by the developer prior to acceptance by the Township. and electric. In recent years it has become common practice across Pennsylvania for municipal governments to request that property be set aside for recreation when developers create plans for residential properties.

Contents of a resolution are as follows: A. Recreation Fees To offset recreation fees. If a plat is developed and constructed in phases. J. Wetlands. the Township should enact a resolution to set park rental fees.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 45 I. The Supervisors should establish by resolution or ordinance a recreation fee schedule. Upon request of any person who paid any fee under this Section. Shall have all land proposed for dedication as recreation open space and be suitable for the use intended and be located and designed in accordance with the recreation plan. or the applicant shall pay the recreation fees prior to release of the final plat for recording. Conformity with Township Park. Shall not have more than 15 percent can be encumbered by utility easements other than those servicing the parcel. Recreation fees shall be deposited into the recreation fees fund. When a recreation fee is required. C. providing for payment of the recreation fee at the time of issuance of a building permit for development pursuant to the final plat as approved. K. Shall not include any areas defined as floodplains including floodway and floodway fringe areas. Shall not include areas defined as wetlands by either the Army Corps of Engineers or the PADEP. Floodplains. Recreation. the Supervisors may waive any of the above criteria if such land fits within the Township’s Comprehensive Plan for linear parks and greenways. The recreation fees fund shall be used solely for the purpose of providing land and facilities for recreation uses in the Township. M. L. The Township shall establish the recreation fees fund. by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. final approval of a final application shall be conditioned upon the execution of an agreement between the Township and the applicant. the land proposed for dedication to the public shall be deeded to the Township together with the recording of the final plat containing the land being dedicated and shall be dedicated and deeded to the Township not later than the phase when the total cumulative percentage of lots or dwelling units approved for recording in the phases of the plat reaches 35 percent of the total lots or dwelling units in all phases of the plat or land development granted preliminary approval. and Open Space Plan. Timing of Dedication. Refunds. Modifications for Sites Less Than Five Acres. If the land to be dedicated to the Township is less than five (5) acres. Shall be deeded to the Township at the time of recording of the final plat. B. Utility Easements. N. the JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . on a form provided by the Township. D.

upon receipt of a written request from the payer who paid the recreation fees. but are also an excellent funding opportunity to promote community stability and the quality of life in an area. oversee park development. The Department provides grant funding at a level not to exceed 50 percent of eligible costs except for Small Community Development types (see below). The Acquisition and Development Grants are: “Municipalities are the only eligible applicants. then. The Board would meet monthly. Park Rehabilitation and Development – grants for the rehabilitation of existing parks.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 46 Township shall refund such a fee. The Community Conservation Partnerships Program is the grant funding available through the PADCNR. Projects include: Acquisition – grants for the purchase of land for park. plus interest accumulated thereon from the date of payment. programs. The Board would also assist as volunteers to help create programs. Grants are limited. or the applicant shall pay the recreation fees prior to release of the final plat for recording. If the Township does not use the recreation fees to provide land and facilities for recreation use within three (3) years from the date of the recreation fees. upon receipt of a written request from the payer who paid the recreation fees. in holdings or expansion of existing sites. recreation and conservation purposes. Park and Recreation Board The Supervisors should also consider forming a Township Park and Recreation Advisory Board. A Municipality may submit one application per project type per funding period. The Board would be a seven (7) member board with two (2) representatives from the ElizabethForward School District. assist with grants. like Redbank Township. the Township shall refund the recreation fees plus interest earned from the date of payment approved. The Board should become members of the Pennsylvania Recreation and Park Society which offers volunteer training and great assistance and guidance. Projects may include acquisition of land for new areas. Applying for federal and state grants to aid in completing the park will be vital to improving Elizabeth Township’s overall budget for the project and giving the Township the ability to create a recreation complex that is most desirable to its residents. and encouraging park use through creative programs. if the Township had failed to utilize the fee paid for the purposes set forth in the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code within three (3) years from the date such fee was paid. then. acquiring grants will dictate how the park will develop over the next ten (10) years. There are many grants available for municipalities. etc. light maintenance. Grant Funding Given the cost of park improvements and a limited tax base. indoor and outdoor recreation facilities and development of new park and recreation areas.” JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J .

especially the community building near the park office.Elizabeth Township Feasibility Study Page 47 The Department of Community and Economic Development may be an excellent governmental entity to apply for grants. Round Hill Park – Contains 1.100 acres and is not used intensely.000. JTC-jrs:\A04355\Jan-07 PBS&J . There are multiple purposes for funding opportunities.000 and $25. The County needs to explore the potential of joint use facilities. Both are grants that are available for municipalities and non-profit organizations. The amount received via the CRP varies. typical grants via the LMRDP are between $5. Other Recommendations Howell Property – Development of a master Site Plan as a natural park is needed to determine the future development of this approximately 90 acre area of wooded land. one being recreation for both of them. Two such grant programs advertised within this sector are the Community Revitalization Program (CRP) and the Local Municipal Resources and Development Program (LMRDP).

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer: Get 4 months of Scribd and The New York Times for just $1.87 per week!

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times