sectv city-wide recommendations - vbgov.com · each watershed. the following recommended public...

93

This section of the Plan summarizes the comprehensive outdoor recreational system analysis for the entire City in terms of providing the following: • City-Wide Open Space/Parkland Statistical Analysis • City-Wide Ten-Minute Walk Zone Park Analysis by Equity Mapping • City-wide Outdoor Recreational Amenity Statistical Analysis • City-wide Recommendations by Outdoors Recreation System Components The results of all the comprehensive outdoor recreational system analysis will be considered along with the Athletic Field Capacity Demand Standards Model Recommendations to form the Overall Funding Recommendations and Implementation Strategies, which will include a general phasing plan.

Summary of City-Wide Recommendations

94

*Homeowners Association (HOA) Property are not counted toward meeting the public park and open space need because they are not accessible to all Virginia Beach residents. However, HOA should be considered as recreational assets for the residents of the planning area that have legal access to them. ** To a limited extent some of these state and federally-owned properties may not be fully accessible to the general on a year-round basis.

City-wide Open Space/Parkland Statistical Analysis - The following table applies the City’s new park designation service standards to the planning area’s 2000 census population as well as the projected theoretical build-out for the year 2026. Open Space needs are addressed with the Overall Funding Recommendations.

Site Type and Virginia Beach

Standard

Park Standard Applied to 2000 Population and Existing Park

Inventory

Park Acreage Results for

2000 Population

Park Standard Applied to 2026 Population and Existing Park

Inventory

Park Acreage Results for

2026 Population

Neighborhood Parks

.25-15 Acres 2.0 Acres/1,000

754.53 Acres Existing 850.52 Acres Standard

Need 95.99 Acres

754.53 Acres Existing 1,036.36 Acres Standard

Need 281.83 Acres

Community Parks 15-50 Acres

3.0 Acres/1,000


Need 972.66 Acres


Need 1251.42 Acres

Metro Parks 50-100 Acres

3.0 Acres/1,000


Need 897.75 Acres


Need 1176.51 Acres

Signature Parks 100+ Acres

3.0 Acres/1,000


Need 987.42 Acres


Need 1266.18 Acres

Natural Resource Areas 1.0 Acres/1,000

1,340.17 Acres Existing 425.26 Acres Standard

Surplus 914.91 Acres



General Open Space 1.0 Acre/1,000





School Park 1.0 Acre/1,000


Need 18.75 Acres


Need 111.67 Acres

Special Use Facility 1.0 Acre/1,000





*Beach (Acres) No Standard 191.6 Acres Existing 191.6 Acres

Existing 191.6 Acres Existing 191.6 Acres Existing

City-wide Park Acres Standard

16.0 Acres/1,000


Need 343 Acres based on 2000

Population


Need 1,829.72 Acres based on 2026 Population

Additional Non-City-owned Parkland and Open Space Located Throughout the City Virginia Beach Home Owner Association*

Property (Acres) 1,320 Acres Existing n/a 1,320 Acres Existing n/a

State Parks** within Virginia Beach (Acres)

8,000 Acres Existing n/a 8,000 Acres Existing n/a

Federal Parks** within Virginia Beach (Acres)

10,073 Acres Existing n/a 10,073 Acres Existing n/a

Linkage 1.0 Acre/1,000


Need 407.91 Acres


Need 500.83 Acres

95

* Indicates subject site is addressed with an Outdoors Plan recommendation.

City-Wide Ten Minute Walk Zone Park Analysis By Equity Mapping The following map depicts walk-able service areas based upon a ten-minute walk, at a three mile-per-hour walking pace, to parks throughout Virginia Beach. Areas highlighted in green are within a ten minute walk of a park utilizing the City’s existing rights-of-way. The shaded areas show areas that are currently served by City parks, while those that are not shaded may be areas that require additional focus of resources. However, before an area is accurately determined to be underserved by parkland, based on the 10-minute walk-time criteria, the following three considerations should be made: 1) Is a public elementary school

within the service area? 2) Does the resident belong to a

homeowners association (HOA)? If so, are there adequate HOA park sites that are within the service area?

Conclusions: After taking into account the three considerations, the following areas of the City appear to be within park walk-able service area gaps: Arrowhead, Avalon Woods*, Diamond Springs, North London Bridge Road Corridor*, Oceana Gardens East*, Pembroke Meadows, Shadowlawn*, and Washington Square*. These areas should be addressed through potential park dedications associated with infill development; through reshaping opportunities or other collaborative City acquisition or neighborhood improvement projects.

3) Is it a large non-residential area where having a park within a 10-minute walk may not be practical or desir-able?

96

Asset Type and Virginia Beach

Standard

Asset Standard Applied to 2000 Population and Existing Park

Inventory

Asset Results for 2000

Population

Asset Standard Applied to 2026 Population and

Existing Park Inventory

Asset Results for 2026

Population

Tennis Courts 1 Court/5,000

161 Courts Existing 85 Courts Standard

Surplus 76 Courts


Surplus 57 Courts


Surplus 66 Courts


Surplus 29 Courts

Playgrounds (Parks & Schools)

1 Site/2,000

208 Sites Existing (Parks)

56 Sites Existing

(Schools) Surplus 52 Sites

208 Sites Existing (Parks)

56 Sites Existing

(Schools) Surplus 5 Sites

212 Sites Standard 259 Sites Standard

Picnic Pavilions 1 Site/2,500

170 Sites Existing 170 Sites Standard

Need 0 Sites

170 Sites Existing 207.28 Sites Standard

Need 37 Sites

Baseball 200' Outfield 1 Field/3,125

115 Fields Existing 136Fields Standard

Need 21 Fields

115 Fields Existing 166 Fields Standard

Need 51 Fields

Baseball 300' Outfield 1 Field/18,000


Need 4 Fields


Need 9 Fields

Softball Fields (Youth Competitive)

1 Field/5,000


Surplus 25 Fields


Surplus 6 Fields

Softball Fields (Adult Competitive)

1 Field/18,000


Need 5 Fields


Need 10 Fields

Soccer Fields (Youth+Competitive+Practic

e) 1 Field/4,000


Need 18 Fields


Need 42 Fields

Soccer Fields (Regulation+Competitive)

1 Field/6,000


Surplus 17 Fields


Surplus 2 Fields

Football Fields (Competitive+Practice)

1 Field/6,000


Need 5 Fields


Need 20 Fields

Lacrosse/Field Hockey Fields (Overlay) 1 Field/50,000


Need 4 Fields


Need 6 Fields

Dog Parks 1 Site/50,000


Need 6 Sites


Need 8 Sites

Skate Parks (Inline, Skateboard)

1 Site/50,000


Need 6 Sites


Need 8 Sites

Outdoor Basketball 1 Court/2,500

City-Wide Outdoor Recreational Asset Statistical Analysis - Similar to the Open Space/Parkland Statistical Analysis, the table below applies the City’s outdoor recreational site type service standards that are unique to Virginia Beach to the City’s 2000 census population as well as the projected theoretical build-out population for the year 2026. Outdoor recreational asset needs are proposed to be addressed with the Overall Funding Recommendations or through future adjustments to current asset programming.

97

Summary Recommendations: Cultural & Natural Areas

• Open Space Preservation: Acquisition of approx. 1,200 acres on 10 sites and the designation of 467 acres on two existing sites of City property as future parkland. The ten recommended sites include: Avalon Woods (13 acres)*, Camp Pendleton (200-acre portion), Indian River Road South (820 acres), Lake Lawson Phase II (18 acres)*, Marshview (82 acres)*, Pleasure House Point (11-acre portion), Shore Drive preservation opportunities (3 acres), Virginia Power Right-of-way (35 acres)*, Washington Square (6 acres), and Witchduck Lake (12 acres). * Approximately $4.466 million previously identified for these sites through existing CIP funds.

• Future Signature Parks: Camp Pendleton, City View Expansion, Mount Trashmore and Little Island Master Plan Implementation and the enhancement of Princess Anne Athletic Complex and

• Future Metro Parks: Marshview and Wolfsnare Pit

• Future Community Parks: Providence, Three Oaks, Williams Farm and Woodbridge

• Future Neighborhood Parks: Service area gap areas in Bayside, south Great Neck, and Kempsville

Summary Recommendations: Parks and Athletic Facilities

• Master Plan Development and Implementation for: Lake Lawson and Lake Smith Natural Area, Stumpy Lake Natural Area, West Neck Creek Natural Area and provide planning and design assistance with Lynnhaven House, Thoroughgood House, and Virginia Aquarium and Marine Science Center Master Plan

Providence Park (During Construction)

Providence Park Conceptual Plan

Lake Lawson/Lake Smith Natural Area

Implementation of Recommendations of the adopted Bikeways and Trails Plan with consideration of minor modifications as may be recommended by the City Council appointed Bikeways and Trails Advisory Committee. Pedestrian System Gap Improvements through the Departments of Parks and Recreation and Public Works Capital Improvement Programs.

Summary Recommendations: Trails

98

Greenways A greenway is a linear vegetated or open space which provides for a continuous nature corridor. Greenways can be designed for recreational use and non-motorized transportation, while providing bio-diversity, scenic beauty and serving as a habitat for wildlife. The goal is to develop a comprehensive corridor feasibility and green infrastructure study for the following potential greenways: • Elizabeth River • London Bridge Creek/Canal #2 • North Landing River • Stumpy Lake to Back Bay

Summary Recommendations: Greenways, Beaches, and Scenic Waterways

Thalia Creek Greenway Implementation Acquire necessary land and easements necessary to preserve the greenway corridor in accordance with the Master Plan.

Kayaking on Thalia Creek within the master planned greenway

Beaches Beaches are simply the sand, and other natural areas, located along the City’s shoreline that is valued by the public for such activities as sunbathing, fishing, and a variety of water sports. The goal is to provide enhanced public access and supporting infrastructure to the City’s Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Ocean beaches, with the most significant recommendation being to acquire a significant portion of Camp Pendleton, including the areas currently leased by the City, to continue their current leased use and to expand use on the property as a future beachfront park.

Camp Pendleton/Croatan Beach Use Facility

99

Summary Recommendations: Greenways, Beaches, and Scenic Waterways Public Access to Scenic Waterways Opportunity Areas Scenic waterways are tidal and non-tidal oceans, bays, rivers, tributaries, streams, and lakes available for public (primarily non-motorized) water craft access. The goal is to enhance existing and provide new public access improvements to the City’s scenic waterways as identified below or in other opportunity areas which may present themselves for each watershed. The following recommended public water access opportunities have been identified by watershed: • Elizabeth River Watershed

1. Hunts Pointe 2. Woods of Avalon

• Lynnhaven River Watershed 1. Adam Thoroughgood House 2. Pleasure House Point 3. First Landing State Park, partnership with DCR 4. Thalia Creek 5. Potters Road 6. Wolfsnare 7. Lynnhaven Road/Brookwood Elementary 8. Potential partnership with Lynnhaven River Now

• Owl Creek Watershed/Rudee Inlet Watershed 1. Marshview 2. Camp Pendleton

• North Landing River Watershed 1. Windamere 2. Salem Woods 3. North Landing River at Indian River Road 4. Stumpy Lake 5. Potential Partnerships with United States Fish

and Wildlife Service

• Back Bay Watershed 1. Lotus Gardens, partnership with United States

Fish and Wildlife Service 2. Lovitts Landing, partnership with United States

Fish and Wildlife Service

Adam Thoroughgood House and adjacent expansion property

Lovitts Landing

Marshview Site - Lake Rudee Public Water Access

100

City Map of Diamond Fields on Park and School Sites

The map below depicts existing diamond/ball field locations throughout the City. Green diamonds indicate fields on school sites and purple diamonds indicate fields located on park properties. As shown by the map, diamond fields are relatively equitably spread throughout the City, however there is a heavier concentration of fields in the Princess Anne Commons and Kempsville areas of the City.

Athletic Field Capacity Demand Standards Model

101

City Map of Rectangular Fields on Park and School Sites The map below depicts existing rectangular/multi-purpose field locations throughout the City. Green rectangles indicate multi-purpose fields on school sites and the purple rectangle indicates the complex of multi-purpose fields at the Princess Anne Athletic Complex. indicate fields located on park properties. As shown by the map, rectangular fields are also relatively equitably spread throughout the City, however there is a heavier concentration of fields in the Holland and Courthouse areas of the City. It should be noted that smaller multi-purpose fields may not be formally programmed at parks, but they are routinely used by youth athletics for practice at several parks throughout the City.

102

In order to comprehensively evaluate how effectively Parks and Recreation programs its athletic fields located on park and schools property, it needed to have an objective third-party, expert in athletic field programming take an in-depth look at its approach and practices. PROS Consulting has been noted in the industry for their trademarked Capacity-Demand Standards Model, which takes a multi–pronged approach toward estimating the programming capacity of fields based on every factor from how the field was constructed, to the climate it is located within, to the ages and types of activities that are being played on it, to the availability of a fields capacity based on times of participants’ preferred use. Simply put, the purpose of the model is to assist in the managing and planning of assets to meet the demand of its users. PROS was selected to assist Parks and Recreation with its athletic field programming analysis. PROS interviewed Parks and Recreation programming staff and had them complete in-depth field usage tables to determine, by each of the three playing seasons, who are using the fields; for what purposes and during what times; whether they were used for games or practice; practice only; or games only. Field characteristics were used in the programming evaluation formula based on their material type and quality of construction. In general the diamond and rectangular fields are characterized as either synthetic, engineered/irrigated, engineered/non-irrigated, non-engineered/irrigated and non-engineered/non-irrigated. The results of the evaluation of both diamond and athletic fields for their characteristics and programmed use for each of the three seasons were as follows: Season 1—January through May • Twenty-two (22) additional multi-purpose fields are required to meet the current demand, based on: - The seven assets that were inventoried - A total of 29 assets are required to meet current demand - Large, multi-purpose fields may provide additional capacity and should be considered to accommodate additional assets if there is adequate area Season 2—June through August • Ten (10) additional small multi-purpose fields are required to meet the current demand - A total of 7 assets were inventoried - In order to meet current demand, a total of 17 assets are required • Four (4) additional large softball fields are required to meet the current demand - Two (2) assets were not being programmed during this period - Small softball fields have excess capacity, it is recommended that all usage not requiring large softball fields be shifted to the non-used softball fields Season 3– September through December • Twenty-six (26) additional small multi-purpose fields are required to meet the current demand - A total of 7 assets were inventoried - To meet current demand, at total of 34 assets are required - One (1) asset was not being programmed during this period The overall recommendation of the findings were that 26 small, rectangular multi-purpose fields are needed to meet current demand and four (4) additional large softball fields are needed to meet current demand. Those recommendations were based on the maximum number of fields, by type, needed during any one season. The capital, maintenance and operational costs associated with the athletic field demand recommendations are provided on the following pages.

Athletic Field Capacity Demand Standards Model Recommendations

103

Overall Funding Recommendations and Implementation Strategies

Capital Improvement Program Funding Need - Land Cost Estimates (FY 08-09 Dollars)

Capital Improvement Program Funding Phasing Land Cost Estimates (FY 08-09 Dollars)

Funding Existing Funding Programmed Recommended Funding Recommended Funding FY 07-08 FY 08-09 - FY 2013-14 FY 2014-15 - FY 2019-20 FY 2020 - 21 - FY 2025 - 26 $7,100,000 $3,008,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Based on past experience with land acquisitions associated with the Open Space Acquisition Program, the tim-ing of the real estate acquisition is dependant on willing sellers and circumstantial opportunities and therefore difficult to forecast.

Open Space Acquisition Program Capital Improvement Program Funding Recommendations and Implementation

Land Cost Estimates - Based on Fiscal Year 2008-09 City Real Estate Assessment Open Space Sites Size (acres) Cost Estimate 9 sites 1,200 acres $17,171,600* Considerations 1) Amount does not include the $4,466,000 of existing Open Space Acquisition Program funding for 4 of 10 sites, equaling 148 acres, previously identified based on past City Council direction. 2) Navy to deed 82-acre Marshview site, which is included as one of the ten sites, to the City as credited value for a restrictive easement on other land the City has acquired as part of the Oceana Land Use Conformity Plan. City-owned Sites Proposed for Future Outdoor Recreational Use Size (acres) Minimum End Use Timeline City View Metro Park -phased expansion to Signature Park 400 acres 25+ years Wolfsnare Pit - future Metro Park 67 acres 10 years Considerations 1) The length of time Landfill #2 and the Wolfsnare Pit remains active depends on several factors and is

uncertain at this time. 2) Negligible capital costs anticipated assuming land management responsibilities from other City departments

As of May 2008, $7,100,000 remained unencumbered for future open space acquisitions. In addition, there is another $3,800,000 programmed in the Parks and Recreation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) through FY 2013-14. The target revenue is Pay-As-You Go funding from the Meals Tax. It is recommended that the existing $500,000/year continue to be funded through two additional CIP cycles to the FY 2026, which would bring the total appropriations to $16,200,000. Over the past 8 years, nearly $1,1000,000 has been appropriated to the Open Space Acquisition Program from private sources. An additional $600,000 is pending in open space-related grants. While the land costs are in FY 08 dollars and do not account for escalation, private donations and grants may be reasonable to consider, based on past experience, to account for the difference.

104

Capital Improvement Program Funding Need - Recommended Outdoor Recreational Asset, Supporting Infrastructure and Amenity Improvements and Associated Cost Estimates in FY 08-09 Dollars

Table 1: Recommended Park Assets By Type Asset Type Park Location Land

Need (Acres)

Cost per Asset

Recommended Amenities

Surface Quantity Recommended

Subtotal Asset Cost

Diamond Field CP or >,SUAC or School Park

4 $300,000 Parking, Restroom, Lighting, Irrigation

Grass 4 $1,200,000

Rectangular Field CP or >,SUAC or School Park

4 $225,000 Parking, Restroom, Lighting, Irrigation

Grass 26 $5,850,000

Dog Park CP or > 2 $50,000 Parking Grass 4 $200,000

Skate Park CP or > .25 $600,000 Parking, Restroom Concrete 3 $1,800,000

Waterway Access CP or > and SUWA

1 $120,000 Parking Wood or other

17 $2,040,000

Total Estimated Costs for Recommended Assets Not Including Supporting Infrastructure and Amenities

$11,090,000

Asset Type Amenity Type Unit # Per Amenity

Cost per Amenity

Amenity Quantity Needed

Asset Quantity Needed

Subtotal Asset Cost

Diamond Field Parking Spaces Restroom Facility Lighting System Irrigation System

50 $2,000 1,500 4 $3,000,000

Rectangular Field 1 $350,000 7.5 26 $2,625,000

1 $40,000 30 $1,200,000

1 $100,000 30 $3,000,000

Dog Park Parking Spaces

10 $2,000 40 4 $80,000

Skate Park Attendant Booth

1 $15,000 3 3 $45,000

Parking Spaces

50 $2,000 150 3 $300,000

Waterway Access Parking Spaces

5 $2,000 85 17 $170,000

Total Estimated Costs for Recommended Amenities $10,420,000

Total Estimated Costs for Recommended Assets and Amenities $21,510,000

Table 2: Optional Supporting Infrastructure and Amenities Recommended for Park Assets

Table 1 below summarizes the park assets that are recommended throughout the Plan to meet the 26-year projected outdoor recreational needs of Virginia Beach residents. Recommended park assets include diamond and rectangular playing fields, dog parks, skate parks and waterway access improvements.

Table 2 below summarizes the infrastructure and amenities recommended to support the park assets listed in Table 1 to meet the 26 year projected outdoor recreational needs of Virginia Beach residents. Recommended infrastructure and amenities include parking, restroom facilities, lighting, and irrigation improvements.

105

As summarized in Table 1 and Table 2 of the previous page, the estimated capital costs for the outdoor recreational assets and amenities recommended in this Plan are $21,510,000 in FY 08-09 dollars. In addition to those new park assets and supporting amenities, there are six priorities that have been identified as open space and outdoor recreational planning and development capital projects as outlined in Table 3 below. The estimated costs for those projects is $13,900,000 in FY 08-09 dollars.

Existing and Programmed Funding Recommended Funding Recommended Funding FY 2008-2009 through FY 2013- 14 FY 2014-2015 through FY 2019 - 20 FY 2020–21 - FY 2025 -26 $11,400,000 $11,400,000 11,400,000

Total Programmed and Recommended Funding from Open Space Development and Maintenance Pay-As-You-Go Through Next Three CIP Cycles = $34,200,000

The total estimated costs to provide the outdoor recreational assets, supporting infrastructure and amenities as well as planning and development related projects is a combined $35,410,000. The total programmed and recommended funding from the Open Space Development and Maintenance Pay-As-You-Go funding for the current and next two CIP cycles is $34,200,000 and is recommended to be allocated toward the recommended open space planning and development capital projects. The remaining $1,210,000 is recommended to be dispersed over the next 18 years and funded through the Outdoor Initiative, which is the primary Parks and Recreation-related funding source for capital maintenance and improvements.

Priority Project Name Quantity Estimated Cost Per Project

Subtotal Estimated Capital Costs

1 Stumpy Lake Natural Area Master Plan 3 phases $500,000 $1,500,000

Lake Lawson & Lake Smith Natural Area Project

2 phases $750,000 $1,500,000

2 Marshview Master Plan Implementation 1 phase $1,500,000 $1,500,000

3 Thalia Creek Greenway Master Plan Implementation (without I-264 Crossing

1 phase $2,000,000 $2,000,000

4 Greenway Feasibility Studies 5 $100,000 $500,000

5 Osprey Park and Expansion of Lynnhaven Boat Ramp and Beach Use Facility

1 phase $1,900,000 $1,900,000

6 Indian River Road Southside - Active and Passive Recreational Improvements

1 phase $5,000,000 $5,000,000

Total Estimated Costs for Planned Special Projects $13,900,000

Table 3: Summary of Outdoors Plan Recommended Special Projects and Cost Estimates

Capital Improvement Program Funding Recommendations and Implementation Phasing of Planned Special Projects Associated with Past and Planned Open Space Site Acquisitions in FY 08-09 Dollars (Pay-As-You-Go - Open Space Park Development & Maintenance)

106

In summary, the community’s priorities are: increased walking and biking trails; enhanced maintenance and renovations of existing parks and playgrounds; more large community parks; acquisition of land for passive recreation; and development of new athletic fields for youth sports. This Plan addresses those priorities in balance with needs identified for specific areas as identified through the qualitative feedback during the community involvement workshops. The Plan recommends the acquisition of nearly 1,200 acres of priority open space sites at a FY 2008-09 cost of $17,200,000. On the 20-year horizon, master planning may begin to transition an additional 467 acres of existing City-owned property to outdoor recreational use. Combined, the 1,667 acres nearly fully addresses the projected 2026 need for an additional 1,830 acres, as identified through the City-wide Open Space/Parkland Statistical Analysis. In addition, the City-Wide Outdoor Recreational Asset Statistical Analysis, combined with the Capacity Demand Standards Model, recommend a 20-year phased development of the following: • 26 rectangular fields • 4 diamonds (large softball) fields • Supporting amenities including parking and restrooms as well as higher quality playing surfaces and

increased programmability through the inclusion of lighting and irrigation on the 30 playing fields • 4 new dog parks • 3 new skate parks • 17 non-motorized watercraft access sites The costs of these capital improvements are in FY 08-09 dollars is $21,500,000, all of which is proposed to be funded within projected targeted Pay-As-You-Go funding through the Open Space Park Development and Maintenance capital project.. In addition, six priority special projects and studies have been identified in the plan, such as the implementation of the Stumpy Lake Natural Area Master Plan, which provides public access improvements to this 1,422-acre, $13,200,000 asset that was acquired in 2001. The estimated cost of the six projects is $13,900,000, the majority of which is proposed to be funded within projected targeted revenue of the Open Space Park Development and Maintenance Pay-As-You-Go project. The revenue to fund the Open Space Park Development and Maintenance Pay-As-You-Go project is provided by $.44 of the Restaurant Tax. The operating and maintenance costs are difficult to project given the uncertainties surrounding the schedule of open space acquisitions or the future construction costs associated with development projects, however, estimates are provided herein as a baseline guide for future operations budget planning purposes. The projected annual maintenance and management costs at the end of the 20-year capital build-out are provided in Table 4.

Site Type Quantity Area in Acres

Area Cost

Annual Maintenance Costs

Annual Operational Costs

Natural Areas N/A 1,200 $30 $42,000 $69,000

Grass Turf Playing Fields

30 120 $4,500 $540,000 $450,000

Concrete (i.e. skate parks)

3 45,000 sq. ft. $.50 $22,500 $90,000

Other Park Turf Areas N/A 347 $4,500 $1,651,500 $1,376,250

Water Access Sites 17 $.25 sq.ft. $21,130 $0

Total Annual Estimated Maintenance and Operational Costs

$2,277,130 $1,985,250

Table 4: Estimated Annual Maintenance and Operational Costs to Support Recommendations

sectv city-wide recommendations - vbgov.com · each watershed. the following recommended public...

Documents