Costa Mesa
Etyo/tAJb
PARK ASSESSMENT
2025
DprVeDpaCrree"atibyve eves
Attachment 7
PARK ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION
Overview of Park Assessment Masterplan
Park Assessments were conducted at all public parks within the City of Costa Mesa and have been documented herein.
The report identifies physical condition of amenities, structures, pathways, playgrounds, and existing program elements in each park. This park assessment is essential for the City of Costa Mesa in identifying and prioritizing improvements, allowing for safe, functional and enjoyable spaces for the community to recreate and enjoy.
This Park Assessment is informed by extensive site analysis which documents, quantifies, and considers existing site conditions to provide a thorough account of each park. Only limited accessibility deficiencies are identified where paths are not provided to existing improvements. The primary focus of this assessment is to identify and provide an unbiased report highlighting essential improvements. This assessment does not identify under-programmed parks. �� Cost� Mesa
ll:, ,/1]�,4•
ti,
f
l/)
0:::
:::)
:r: :::,,::
0 0
0:::
co
ADAMS AVE
0 Balearic Park
<tosJ: '1ty
@
0 @
®
@
©
VICTORIA ST @ ®
@ ®
@) Jordan Park
@)
@
0 @
®
BAKER ST
0 0:::
0 � � co
0:::
®
:r:
@
�
4. �«
<,
@ Perez Park
0 Brentwood Park @ Ketchum-Libolt Park @) Pinkley Park
0 Canyon Park @ Lindbergh Park @ Shalimar Park
© Del Mesa Park @ Lions Park @ Shiffer Park
© Estancia Park @ Marina View Park @ Smallwood Park
® Fairview Park @ Mesa Verde Park @ Suburbia Park
(D Gisler Park @ Moon Park @ Tanager Park
© Harper Park @ Neth Park @ Tewinkle Park
® Heller Park @ Paularino Park @ Vista Park
Park Assessment
CITY OF COSTA MESA
co
©
@ Wakeham Park
@ Wilson Park
@) Wimbledon Park
@ Bark Park
@ Raleigh Park
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Goal 1: Prioritize parks with the greatest need for improvement • Visit each park site and compile photographic documentation of park conditions • Evaluate park conditions
• Assign priority ranking for each park to guide improvements Goal 2: Identify and assess existing playgrounds
• Assess playground conditions for safety, accessibility, and usability • Identify outdated or damaged equipment needing repair or replacement • Provide recommendations for upgrades, renovations, or new installations Goal 3: Identify facilities/buildings where improvements are needed • Assess the condition of all park facilities and buildings • Assess the priority of the improvements
• Provide suggestions on how the facilities can be improved Goal 4: Improve safety and site access
• Identify and address potential safety hazards
• Ensure all walkways and paths have safe and accessible circulation • Ensure all playgrounds meet or exceed current safety standards • Identify site furnishing in need of repair and/or replacement Goal 5: Evaluate long-term maintenance needs
• Identify areas where maintenance needs to be up-kept
• Provide suggestions on how the park can be maintained Goal 6: Identify sustainable opportunities
• Identify areas where landscape and irrigation need improvement • Provide suggestions on how certain areas in the park can be used for sustainable practices
� Park Assessment
Costa Mesa CITY OF COSTA MESACuy,/.'k,.:/rJ;
PARK CRITERIA
Overview of Park Criteria
The evaluation of key aspects includes safety, quality, and usability. Each park has been reviewed for seven categories:
Playgrounds, Structures, Fields & Courts, Amenities, Hardscape, Landscape/Irrigation and Maintenance. Each category will be scored on a 1 to 5 scale and weighted to aid prioritization. Together, these categories provide a comprehensive snapshot of how well a park serves its community and where improvements are needed.
Category Score Description
Playgrounds 1-5 Variety, condition, safety, inclusivity, surfacing, age (45% of score) Structures 1-5 Restrooms, gazebos, shade structures, walls, bridges (20% of score) Fields/Courts 1-5 Quality and usability of sports fields, courts, surfacing (10% of score) Amenities 1-5 Barbecues, benches, lighting, drinking fountains, waste receptacles, (10% of score) monument signs, fitness equipments
Hardscape 1-5 Condition of walkways, accessibility to maintain features (5% of score) La ndsca pe/1 rrigation 1-5 Health and variety of plants, shade, and visible irrigation equipment (5% of score) Maintenance 1-5 Overall cleanliness, repairs, graffiti control (5% of score)
SCORING SYSTEM
Overview of Scoring System
The park scoring system uses a 1 to 5 scale for each category to evaluate different aspects of a park's quality, function, and condition. It ensures a comprehensive, consistent, and objective approach to assessing and comparing parks. 0809
Very Poor Poor Fair Good Excellent
Major issues, Functional, limited Usable and safe, but In good condition, High-quality, clean, broken, unsafe, use, or in noticeable could be improved; functional, inclusive, fully unusable, or disrepair some wear and tear accessible, and functional severely neglected well-integrated
Park Assessment
CITY OF COSTA MESA
PRIORITY RANKING SYSTEM
Overview of Priority Ranking System
The priority ranking system is used to determine which parks are in immediate need for improvements, repairs, or investment. Each park is assigned a priority level from A to E.
This ranking is based on the total scores from the park criteria categories. Parks that score lower across multiple categories are given higher priority ranking (e.g. Dor E), signaling a greater need for improvements. This system will guide the City of Costa Mesa to objectively compare parks and allocate resources more effectively.
Very Low Priority /
minimal or no
intervention
needed
Low Priority
Overall Park Priority Ranking
Ranking Park Name
B Balearic Park
C Brentwood Park
B Canyon Park
B Del Mesa Park
C Estancia Park
C Fairview Park
C Gisler Park
C Harper Park
C Heller Park
B Jordan Park
C Ketchum-Libolt Park
C Lindbergh Park
B Lions Park
C Marina View Park
B Mesa Verde Park
C Moon Park
B Neth Park
� ParkAssessment
Costa � CITY OF COSTA MESA Lilg o{.'f.s.J/y,jJ
Medium Priority
Ranking
B
·lLUl!I
B
C
C
B
11:lillll
B
C
B
C
B
C
II f � Ill
High Priority Highest Priority
for improvement /
funding/ repair
Park Name
Paularino Park
Perez Park
Pinkley Park
Shalimar Park
Shiffer Park
Smallwood Park
Suburbia Park
Tanager Park
Tewinkle Park
Vista Park
Wakeham Park
Wilson Park
Wimbledon Park
Bark Park
Raleigh Park
Park Project Title Priority
Fiscal
Year Total Costs
Harper Park Playground Replacement 1 26-27 400,000$
Moon Park Playground Replacement 2 26-27 700,000$
Lindbergh Park Playground Replacement 3 28-29 692,350$
Heller Park Playground & Restroom Improvement 4 28-29 1,535,400$ Marina View Park Playground Replacement 5 30-31 871,600$ Wakeham Park Playground & Restroom Improvement 6 Future 2,171,800$ Canyon Park Playground Replacement 7 Future 1,311,300$
Mesa Verde Park Playground Replacement 8 Future 580,200$ Vista Park Playground & Restroom Improvement 9 Future 1,353,420$ Smallwood Park Playground Replacement 10 Future 1,024,000$ Gisler Park Playground Replacement 11 Future 783,500$
Wilson Park Playground Replacement 12 Future 961,000$
Del Mesa Park Playground Replacement 13 Future 778,220$ Wimbledon Park Playground Replacement 14 Future 578,000$ Shiffer Park Playground & Restroom Improvement 15 Future 1,272,160$ Balearic Community Center Playground Replacement 16 Future 888,000$ Balearic Park Playground Replacement 17 Future 1,095,200$ Estancia Park Hardscape & Seat Walls 18 Future 230,500$ Fairview Park Restroom Renovations & Hardscape Repairs 19 Future 547,900$ TeWinkle Park Restroom Building 20 Future 389,000$
18,163,550$
Park Assessment - Estimated Costs