RIVER FALLS — City Conservation and Parks Manager Brooks Ostendorf presented Glen Park’s second phase to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board June 17, with the board deciding to make some changes to the plan, including the removal of a youth ball field and a potential size increase to a proposed sport court/ice rink. The board is set to revisit the plan at a future meeting to determine finer details before the phase reaches the council.

“I come to you today with good news in regard to park impact fees and currently available funds. We last reviewed this in January of 2026, and since reviewing, more funding has become available,” Ostendorf said.

Ostendorf said it is informal practice for the city to allocate fees to parks located near the developments that generated the fees. An example is that fees collected from The Preserve development go toward improvements at Collins Park across the street.

“This has resulted in disparities in available funding between newer and older neighborhoods,” Ostendorf said. “Westdale Park for example, which is an established neighborhood park that likely won’t receive substantial redevelopment, will seldom receive funds for improvements to that park. Not that there aren’t other methods to improve the park, but as far as park impact fees, it would not receive those.”

The recommended transition from staff in January, which was approved by the park board, was to collect fees into a single fund and disperse them from there. The December 2024 fund balance, which was reviewed at the January meeting, was $7431,32. That figure has grown to $950,000 currently.

Phase two of the Glen Park project involves the removal of the bathroom building, picnic shelter, sand volleyball court, play structures constructed prior to 2019 and the basketball court. Constructed items would be a multi-use sport court, open-air pavilion, play area, youth ballfield and improved Cascade Avenue trail connection.

The Cascade trail improvements would reroute the West Cascade Avenue intersection, widen the trail and connect up to the Swinging Bridge. Ostendorf said it would improve safety as well as access from Winter Street. Parking improvements on the east side of the parking lot were no longer deemed necessary because of the west parking lot construction, allowing for a focus on other amenities.

Due to the increase in funds, there is a possibility to take on further proposed Glen Park improvements. While they would not be included in phase two, a north trail loop, pool reconstruction, overlook, nature trail improvements and picnic shelter are up for future consideration. Phase two projects at Glen Park are expected to cost $850,000, funded by the park improvement fees.

The main topic of conversation was the youth ball field.

“It’s not the best location. Part of the reason is, people can hit those balls into those neighboring buildings,” Park Board and City Council member Sean Downing said. “I do have some thoughts on how we could potentially improve this.”

Downing said the Glen Park proposal including a smaller ice rink on the sport court during the winter takes a “minimalist” approach due to the smaller size than a full hockey rink.

“In the past, we have agreed that we were going to do an ice rink that would be a high quality one,” Downing said. “If we were to take the youth softball [field], with the understanding that we would absolutely do a field somewhere else later where we’d actually hit more demographics so it would actually bring down spending, and instead put that money and then judiciously use it, you could use it for another thing too I’m thinking of, where we expand that [multi-use] court, what would happen is you’d be able to target more basketball, more pickleball, more tennis in that [multi-use] court, saving the city a boatload of money while meeting those goals.”

Downing said some of the money could also be used for a focus on horticulture and pollination goals at Glen Park. Downing discussed pursuing a grant for a softball field elsewhere that could be used by residents of all generations rather than solely youth. The city relies on the school district for youth field space, causing the push to create some space of their own. Ostendorf did mention that the pollinator gardens can be implemented, but they would be covered through operational funds rather than the park fees.

Other board members expressed concerns about safety with the ball field, parking space and the distances from some park locations to the pavilion bathroom. Ostendorf said they could incorporate a portable restroom similar to that of DeSanctis Park.

The board approved the reallocation of the $70,000 that would have gone toward a ball field to the rest of the projects. The finer details, including what the sport court/ice rink and playground will look like and where they will be located are to be sorted out at a future meeting.