Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, March 24, 1993 TAG: 9303240066
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV-2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: RICK LINDQUIST CORRESPONDENT
DATELINE: RADFORD LENGTH: Medium
SITE NEEDED FOR PARK FUNDS, BUT FUNDS NEEDED FOR SITE
City Council has found itself in a potential "Catch-22" involving plans to build a new riverfront ballpark.The city can't get state money to begin work until it has secured access to the site. And it can't begin work until it has the money.
In fact, the city could lose state grant money altogether if the project doesn't get off the dime soon.
Not only that, but City Engineer Jim Hurt told council during a work session Monday that the project already appears headed for a cost overrun of about $71,000.
The city had wanted to begin construction this spring on 32 acres of land on the New River that DMI Corp., a development firm, has agreed to donate to the city. The property is just downstream from the city's popular Bisset Park, which also fronts on the river.
Hurt said technical problems have slowed the transfer of the property to the city. However, figuring out how to fund a complete access road to the site continues to be a problem.
"Without it, we don't have a project," said Assistant City Manager Bob Lloyd.
Hurt said Virginia Department of Recreation money may be used only to develop part of an access road. An 800-foot section between that road and Hunters Ridge Road is not eligible for state funding. City Manager Robert Asbury suggested the city dip into unspent new road funds to finance the work, estimated at $89,000.
To reduce the costs, council suggested shaving any "gold plating" from the park plans. That could mean cutting out plans to include lights at the two ball fields.
Recreation Commission Chairman Rick Underwood suggested the city consider wooden light poles at $400 apiece instead of aluminized lighting standards that cost $2,000 each.
Councilman Bobby Nicholson suggested the city set firm dates to start construction this summer.
"If we're not careful, we'll be sitting here next fall still trying to decide where the money's coming from," he said. The project must be completed by July 1994.
Council and Recreation Commission members also ironed out some problems in their relationship. Not entirely settled was a controversy over an implied city residency requirement for Recreation Commission members.
Council recently requested that Recreation Commission member Jack Johnson resign after he moved out of the city, which Underwood called "a poor decision."
But council members said that, although there was no written policy, it was customary that members of boards and commissions be city residents.
Commission member Jack Tynan said if residency is really important it should be written policy.
Recreation commission members said Johnson, a Radford native and property owner who has been involved heavily in recreation activities, at least should have been allowed to serve out his term.
"He had so much to offer, and now, at a critical time, we have lost him," commission member Betty Craig said. The commission is in the process of hiring a new director to replace Bob Dowless, who resigned.
Mayor Tom Starnes said council took no official vote on Johnson's resignation. But, he told commission members that both council and the Recreation Commission would "come under considerable criticism" if the new recreation director lived "in Roanoke or somewhere like that."