As Costs Rise, Two Durham Park Projects Delayed

Renovations at East End Park and Long Meadow Park are being delayed due to increasing costs. Durham Parks and Recreation is seeking $15 million in federal grants to close the funding gap for construction at both parks, which were approved by voters via bond referendum in 2024.

East End Park and Long Meadow Park received $42 of the $85 million earmarked in 2024 for parks; the other $43 million went to the new Merrick Moore aquatic center. The expansive scope of the two park renovations includes a new pool house and pool at East End, pickleball, tennis and basketball courts, playgrounds, and a quick-service restaurant, among other amenities across both parks. The renovation also includes lead remediation for East End, and funding for the R. Kelly Bryant Trail, which will run through East End and Long Meadow parks.

Construction was originally scheduled to begin this fall. Staff told Durham City Council members during a recent meeting that rising construction costs, updates to the plans following community engagement, and other unforeseen design challenges have added to the overall cost of the updates planned for East End Park and Long Meadow Park, and delayed the start time for construction by two years.

A $15 million federal grant would be used to close the funding gap for the projects, not as additional funding. Staff said during the work September 24 session that they feel confident they will win the grant, though a timeline wasn’t immediately available. 

East End Park is one of five city-owned parks found to have lead-contaminated soil. Remediation of the lead in the park is part of the construction process funded by the 2024 bond. “Right now we are moving to develop remediation options with the design consultant on the bond project team so that we can understand the recommended remediation option and what sort of recreational features can serve as those remediation pieces,” said Denise Chaplick, Assistant Director of Park Planning and Project Development & Management, at the work session.

Staff also said that the lead remediation at East End Park would have to take place before aspects of construction there could move forward, adding to park improvements greenlit by the bond being delayed. According to the city website, a remediation plan from the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality is still at least a year away.

At the work session, council members raised concerns about the additional cost of the park projects, and how it would impact the project’s delivery timeline. Council member Chelsea Cook asked if staff could have anticipated some of the additional costs.

“I am concerned about the change in scope that is so great that it necessitates us going after a $15 million grant to sort of make it happen, especially given that we did know about several of these things ahead of time,” Cook said during the meeting.

Staff told the city council that based on the city’s process, some aspects of the design could not have happened prior to voters approving funding through the bond referendum, and even with the rough estimate, projects always incur unforeseen challenges. 

“The development has shifted a little bit from what was presented to the public in November [2024] because we’ve brought on a design team and we’ve gone through full vetting of the program,” said one of the staff members. “The features are all the same as far as what the program was—pool, courts, all those types of elements—but the placement of them and what that impact is has driven the cost of construction up.”

Mayor pro tem Javiera Caballero said that the city has to do better by its residents and deliver projects in a timely manner. Seeking federal funding can slow down the process and the juice may not always be worth the squeeze, Caballero said. She cited three trail projects—the Durham Rail Trail, the Durham to Roxboro Rail Trail, and the R. Kelly Bryant Trail—as examples of projects that have been delayed by the federal grant process.

“We’ve learned very painfully that the three trail projects that we still haven’t completed, one of which is through [East End], those federal dollars quite frankly weren’t worth it because we would have already had the thing built,” Caballero said.

Project delivery is a persistent concern amongst Durham residents. One of the early takeaways staff learned during the participatory budgeting process was getting projects turned around quickly; the goal is within two years. In the fall of 2024, bike and public transportation advocates presented a list of recommendations to the city’s transportation department that emphasized moving faster from concept to concrete on transit infrastructure build outs like the Durham Rail Trail.

“I would rather get five things done and they’re done than have 20 things in a plan,” Callabero said.

City manager Bo Ferguson assured city council at the September work session that staff was working to improve project deliverability. One of the first actions that Ferguson took when he became city manager was realigning city departments and staff to better streamline collaboration.

“The primary objective that staff has in bringing this proposal forward is to execute the project at the scope that the community saw,” Ferguson said at the meeting. “This project and the lack of clarity around some of these questions is not reflective of the fact that there is a lot of work going into how to address these questions going forward. But as the council is well aware, the process for conceiving, budgeting, planning, executing, building and christening new projects is a long project. In the meantime, I think we have an obligation to be as clear as we can about what we got right, what we got wrong, where we’re at and how to move forward.”

Staff is looking at alternative funding sources in case the city does not receive the federal grant, while also considering ways to limit the scope of the park reconstruction should budget cuts be needed.

Comment on this story at [email protected].