HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/06/2000, 1 - COMMUNITY CENTER/THERAPY POOL NEEDS STUDY councit �°(_
j agenda Report 1�N. 1
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
FROM: r4aul LeSage, Director of Parks and Recreation
SUBJECT. COMMUNITY CENTER/THERAPY POOL NEEDS STUDY
CAO RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission endorsing the
Community Center and Therapy Pool Needs Study. (Attachment 1)
2. Direct staff to bring this project forward at such time as adequate funding exists.
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND
As part of the 1999-01 fiscal plan, the Council adopted Continued Implementation of the Parks
and Recreation Element/Master Plan as a Major City Goal. As a part of this goal, staff was
directed to study the need for a Community Center and Therapy Pool. $20,000 was allocated to
hire a consultant team to conduct the study.
After the issuance of a Request for Proposals and a thorough review of proposals, the team of
Crawford Multari Clark &Mohr/Sara Kocher was selected to conduct the study.
The team was charged with the task of gathering public input on the need for a Community
Center/Therapy Pool, analyzing that information, and making recommendations on the need for
the facilities.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Two avenues of public participation were incorporated into the study. Three public meetings
were held to allow citizens to provide input on the need for a Community Center and Therapy
Pool, the types of activities that might occur at these facilities, who would use the facilities, and
where the facilities should be located. In addition to the public meetings, a Community
Preference Survey was sent to a random selection of San Luis Obispo residents. Over 550
households returned the survey, which included ratings of existing indoor and outdoor activities
and identified unmet recreational needs.
1-1
Council Agenda Report—Community Center/Therapy Pool Needs Study
Page 2
OUTCOME
The results of the meetings and the surveys indicated that there is strong community support for
the development of both a Community Center and a Therapy Pool.
Over 200 residents attended the public meetings. They indicated that facility users would come
from most segments and age groups of the community. Seniors were identified as primary center
users. Potential center programs included athletics, fitness, arts & crafts, dance, social activity,
meetings, and lectures. There was strong support for kitchen facilities in the center, capable of
supporting a senior nutrition program.
Participants also supported the need for a therapy pool that would offer rehabilitation, exercise,
swimming lessons, and water safety.
Several locations around the community were identified as potential facility locations.
Participants were split on whether a Community Center and Therapy Pool should be combined in
one facility.
As a result of the public meetings, a list of 17 indoor and 22 outdoor recreational activities was
developed. These activities are the main recreational pursuit of the community, at least those that
take place in City facilities.
Note: The outdoor activities, while not part of the actual Community Center/Therapy Pool Study,
were included to gather information on the recreational practices of the community. The
information will be used in updating the Parks and Recreation Element, which begins this
summer.
The Community Preference Survey was mailed to a random selection of 3200 households in the
City. There were 561 responses received. The margin of error for a response of this size is t5%.
Over 80% of the survey respondents indicated that the City should provide more opportunities
for trails, exercise, and fitness. Seniors chose health screening, indoor fitness, exercise and
outdoor relations as their favorite programs. The most popular indoor activities, likely to be
found in a community center, include fitness and exercise, basketball, theater, music, fine arts,
lectures, assemblies, meetings, volleyball, billiards, and dance.
There was also wide based support for a therapy pool. Possible programs were identified as:
swim lessons, treatment for disabilities and chronic illnesses, rehabilitation, relaxation, exercise,
and as a warm up pool for swim meets. Overall, 78% of those surveyed indicated support for the
therapy pool.
While no single location emerged as the site for the center, a site with ample parking was
preferred.
1-2
Council Agenda Report—Community Center/Therapy Pool Needs Study
Page 3
The survey included several demographic questions. The main purpose of this information was
to indicate how well the survey represents the residents of San Luis Obispo. The results were
remarkably similar to current census data. As might be expected survey respondents included
numbers of seniors, families with children, and homeowners that are slightly more than numbers
found in the census. In general, those respondents represent a cross section of the community.
OTHER INFORMATION
The recommendations of this study also take into consideration 144 responses to a questionnaire
distributed to users of the existing Senior Center by local officials from the American
Association of Retired Persons. (Attachment 2) Information gathered includes the response that
most users drive to the Mitchell Park Center and combine their trips with activities such as
grocery shopping and medical appointments. This type of use would support a facility near these
services, such as the Downtown. Some seniors voiced concerns about sharing facilities with
other age groups. As with the Citywide Survey,parking was a major concern.
The study recommends both a Therapy Pool and Community Center.
Regardless of where a Community Center is located, a Therapy Pool facility is recommended for
construction at Johnson Park near the City pool. The Therapy Pool itself needs to be in the 2,000
square foot range to meet the needs identified in the study. While not indoor, it should be
covered and surrounded by fencing. While some of the support needs can be met by the existing
pool, the Therapy Pool facility would include toilets, showers, and space for changing clothes.
Therapy pools, typically, are shallow, with a zero depth entry area, constant water temperature of
90F and moving current channel for Aqua Aerobics.
The Community Center is envisioned as being in the 20,000 square foot range. A major feature
would be a gymnasium for active recreation programs such as basketball and volleyball. The
nature of the other indoor activities identified in the survey calls for a number of multi purpose
space with flexible room dividers and wood floors in some rooms. Other rooms would include a
fitness facility, stage and ramped seating, and full kitchen facilities. A separate space and
entrance for senior activities is also recommended.
Each of the three recommended Community Center sites features adequate space for parking and
convenient access to public transit. The locations are also the ones preferred by citizens at the
Community Meeting and are adjacent to multi-use trails — the single most desired recreational
feature by respondents to the Community Survey.
The sites are: Johnson Park
Madonna Plaza
Prado Road -Near the Damon/Garcia Sports Fields
In summary, the data compiled from both sources, the public meetings and survey, was •
complementary. Issues raised and services requested in the meetings also appeared in the survey.
The need for both facilities has clearly been demonstrated.
1-3
Council Agenda Report—Community Center/Therapy Pool Needs Study
Page 4
FISCAL IMPACT
The construction cost for the pool and all associated features is estimated at $100 - $120 per
square foot. A 2,000 square foot pool, with 2,000 square feet of support facilities should cost
about $480,000 plus $50,000 for parking.
The total construction cost for the Community Center is estimated at$200 - $230 per square foot.
A 20,000 square foot facility should cost about$4.6 million, plus $150,000 for parking.
Based on the recently prepared 10 year fiscal forecast, it is not likely that $5.3 million worth of
facilities can be funded from existing city resources.
If at a future time, the City considers a revenue ballot measure, a Community Center could be
part of that proposal. Staff can continue to pursue other sources of funding such as grants and
private sponsorships. For example, a$500,000 request for assistance in funding these facilities is
included in the proposed 2000-01 budget of the State of California.
CONCURRENCES
This study was unanimously endorsed by the Parks and Recreation Commission at their May 3,
2000 meeting.
ALTERNATIVES
Remodel the Santa Rosa Street Recreation Center.
While this study has shown the need for new facilities, it will likely be several years before
funding will be available. Because of the study, there is a heightened awareness and demand for
senior programs. A remodel of the Recreation Center would meet some of those needs until a
new center was constructed.
The annual City Budget Review, scheduled for June 20, will contain a request for $30,000 to
design a facility remodel.
If the Recreation Center were renovated, most, if not all, of the programs at Mitchell Park Senior
Center would be shifted over. The Mitchell Park building would be retained as a recreation
facility with an emphasis on dance and aerobic activities. Some classes from the Recreation
Center can also be shifted to Mitchell Park. The current schedules of the two facilities are
compatible to such a switch.
The Recreation Center would function as a Community Center, with a primary focus on senior
programs during the morning and afternoon hours. The additional space would allow for the ,
expansion of traditional senior center activities such as: card playing, bingo,pool, exercise,
potlucks,bridge, crafts, and meetings. It would also allow for new programs including: health
screening, tax assistance, office hours by state and federal representatives, a travel club, pottery,
ceramics, and athletics.
1-4
Council Agenda Report—Community Center/Therapy Pool Needs Study
Page 5 .
The recently passed State Proposition 12 contains $150,000 that will be allocated to the City in
July of 2001 for facility renovations. The funding requires a full match, making $300,000
available for a project such as this. In order to be ready in July of 2001, the renovations need to
be designed this coming fiscal year.
Proposed renovations include: (Attachment 3)
1. Replace the flooring in Room C, Room A, and the lobby with a vinyl tile.
2. Add a kitchen to Room C that would have: double ovens, double sinks,
microwave, refrigerator, icemaker, double coffee maker, 4-burner stove, dry food
and an equipment storage space, and a warming counter for food serving.
3. Convert the lobby to an assembly room with new flooring, better lighting, and the
removal of all equipment in the area. This room can handle groups of up to 100.
4. Remodel front lobby storerooms for table and chair storage.
5. Move the pool tables into Room A, making it a full-time pool room.
6. Purchase a portable floor covering for the gymnasium that will allow the room to
be used for non-athletic events. The gymnasium can accommodate groups of up
to 200.
7. Convert the (by that time) former Boy Scouts office into a senior service office
with new carpet, paint, and furnishings.
A review of these possible renovations, by a construction management specialist, indicate that
the project can be completed for approximately$300,000.
Parking at the Recreation Center, while not totally adequate, is certainly better than at the
Mitchell Park Senior Center. There are 30 spaces and other parking opportunities in the area. In
addition, because of the center's closeness to the Downtown, public transportation can serve the
Center. It has even been suggested that the trolley could be rerouted-to include a stop at the
Center.
Reactions to this alternate proposal from the seniors has been generally favorable. In fact, it is
possible that new senior programs could be started up at the Recreation Center in advance of the
remodel.
Build the Therapy Pool first. State funding for the project could be applied to the Therapy Pool
portion of the project as opposed to waiting for full funding of both facilities. Of course, this
funding still must be approved by the Legislature and signed by the Governor.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Community Center& Therapy Pool Needs Study
2. Survey compiled by AARP members
3. Diagram of Recreation Center improvements.
1-5
� I
m m
® ® iso AMA ®
m ® � s
vd —
iAL
_ r j..... � ^moi;._ s .1f���`__✓ 1J��r=-,. _ ._ice
I-A
c
a
r R
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations ATTR C H IM IM"- "
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLEOF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................................................................i
ExecutiveSummary.....................................................................................................................................................................1
Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................................2
PublicInvolvement......................................................................................................................................................................2
Outcomeof the Public Meetings............................................._...............................................................................................3
Outcome of the Community Preferences Survey.....................................................................................................................4
Alternatives................................................................................................................................................................................10
TherapyPool..........................................................................................................................................................................10
CommunityCenter.................................................................................................................................................................l l
CommunityCenter Sites........................................................................................................................................................I I
OtherIssues............................................................................................................................................................................12
Appendix A.Results of the Public Workshops..........................................................................................................................13
Appendix B:Results of the Community Preferences Survey....................................................................................................25
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
i 1-7
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Executive Summary
ATTACHMENT I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Community Center and Therapy Pool Needs Study was initiated to identify unmet recreational
needs in the City Of San Luis Obispo. A Community Center and Therapy Pool had been identified as a
potential unmet need of the City. While this need was the focus of the study,the community had the
opportunity to express their opinions about a wide range of recreational opportunities through public
meetings and a community preference survey.
The results of the meetings and the survey indicated that there is strong community support for the
development of both a Community Center and a Therapy Pool. Meeting and survey participants
identified the most important activities a Community Center could support as fitness programs,
basketball courts, lecture and meeting rooms, dance programs, and crafts activities. Residents believe
the Community Center and Therapy Pool should accommodate a wide range of user groups, but
providing separate programming for specific age groups was also strongly emphasized. The public
would like the Community Center to be centrally located,but providing adequate parking and access to
public transportation were the most important siting factors.
The Alternatives section of this report outlines preliminary recommendations for the layout of the
Therapy Pool and the configuration of the Community Center. Preliminary cost data is included as well.
The recommended location for the Therapy Pool is east of the Sinsheimer Sports Complex in Johnson
Park The recommended configuration of the Therapy Pool is L-shaped configuration,with a 60-by-33
ft. main area,and a 10-by-20 ft. entry area perpendicular to the main area. The Therapy Pool should be
surrounded by a stretched membrane cover about 10 feet above the water and surrounding deck to
shelter users from both rain and sun.
The Community Center should include a gymnasium,various multi-purpose rooms, and some
functionally separate Senior spaces. Five alternative locations for the Community Center were
identified. Three of these locations are recommended for further study,based on the public input and
other practical considerations. The three preferred sites are Johnson Park, Madonna Plaza, and Prado
Road between Broad and Higuera Streets.
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
1 1-8
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Public Involvement
ATTACHMENT 1
COMMUNITY CENTER AND THERAPY POOL NEEDS STUDY
INTRODUCTION
The Community Center and Therapy Pool Needs Study was initiated to identify unmet recreational
needs in the City Of San Luis Obispo. A Community Center and Therapy Pool had been identified as a
potential unmet need of the City. While this need was the focus of the study,the community had the
opportunity to express their opinions about a wide range of recreational opportunities through public
meetings and a community preferences survey.
The results of the meetings and the survey indicated that there is strong community support for the
development of both a Community Center and a Therapy Pool. Over 200 residents attended the public
meetings,which indicated a strong interest in development of the facilities. Over 85%of the survey
respondents indicated at least moderate support for the development of a Community Center, while 80%
of the respondents indicated at least moderate support for the development of a Therapy Pool.
The outcomes of the public meetings and survey were used to determine what facilities were needed and
to suggest where the facilities should be located. This information was used to develop preliminary
recommendations.
The Alternatives section of this report outlines preliminary recommendations for the layout of the
Therapy Pool and the configuration of the Community Center. Preliminary cost data is included as well.
The recommended location for the Therapy Pool is east of the Sinsheimer Sports Complex, in Johnson
Park. Five alternative locations for the Community Center were identified. Three of these locations are
recommended for further study,based on the public input and other practical considerations. The three
preferred sites are Johnson Park,Madonna Plaza, and Prado Road(between Broad and Higuera). The
advantages and disadvantages of these locations are discussed in the Alternatives section.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
An important objective of the Community Center and Therapy Pool Needs Study was to involve the
public in the decision making process. Two avenues of public participation were incorporated into the
study. Three public meetings were held to allow citizens to provide input on the need for a Community
Center and Therapy Pool, the types of activities that might occur at these facilities,who would use the
facilities, and where the facilities should be located. In addition to the public meetings,a community
preferences survey was sent to a random selection of San Luis Obispo residents. Over 550 households
returned the survey,which included ratings of existing indoor and outdoor activities and identified
unmet recreational needs. The respondents provided need and use data for a Community Center and a
Therapy Pool and indicated factors that should be considered in locating the facilities.
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
2 19
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Public Involvement
Outcome of the Public Meetings ATTACHMENT 1
The City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department held three public meetings to gather
input regarding a potential new Community Center and Therapy Pool. Two meetings focused on
identifying potential user groups,the preferred activities and the possible locations of a Community
Center and Therapy Pool. The first meeting was held in the evening and attracted about 80 participants.
The second meeting was held in the afternoon to better accommodate Senior attendance and attracted
about 35 participants. A third meeting was held in the evening and focused on review of the results of
the previous meetings and discussion of how a Community Center and Therapy Pool should be
integrated with other Parks and Recreation Facilities. About 75 citizens attended the third meeting. The
outcomes of the meetings are summarized below. The complete list of ideas from the three Community
Center and Therapy Pool meetings appears at the end of Appendix A.
Asked who would use indoor and outdoor areas at a new Community Center,the participants
identified potential users from most segments of the local community. All groups named Senior
Citizens as primary users, and most groups suggested teenagers and families would frequent the center.
Several groups believed the facility would be used by both non-profit and private entities for gatherings,
meetings and special events.
All groups suggested Therapy Pool users would include disabled and injured persons,regardless of
age,while most groups believed Seniors would use it for exercise and young children would learn to
swim there.
Gymnasium games, fitness,tennis,arts and crafts,music,and dance facilities were among the identified
recreational, educational and social activities that would occur at a new Community Center. Several
groups felt the facility would be an appropriate place for cooking meals,perhaps as part of a nutrition
program.
Participants thought Therapy Pool activities would include rehabilitation and exercise programs,
swimming lessons, water safety training and a variety of water sports.
Topping the list of existing unmet needs in the community were Senior,teen, computer,multipurpose,
gymnasium,meeting,cooking, quiet exercise,performance and practice, arts and crafts,and computer
facilities. Two groups each saw the need for a community garden,a billiard/game room, and a bowling
lawn.
When asked where a Community Center/Therapy Pool should be located,all groups wanted the
facilities to be easily accessible to everyone, especially by public transit. Participants favored locating
the facilities at an existing developed park site.
At the final meeting 75 participants were given a summary of responses from the previous meetings, and
then divided into four groups to expand on those ideas. The participants were asked whether a
Community Center and Therapy Pool should be combined in one facility. Two groups felt the
resources should exist in separate locations, while one group wanted to see a combined complex with
multiple buildings. The fourth said they just wanted to see the facility built.
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher 1-10
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Public Involvement
Outcome of the Community Preferences Survey ATTACHMENT 1
The survey respondents rated 17 indoor activities and 22 outdoor activities on the basis of supply and
frequency of use, identified the unmet needs of their household,provided need and use data for both a
Community Center and a Therapy Pool,indicated what factors should be considered in locating the
facilities, and provided information on the demographic characteristics of their household.
The community preferences survey was mailed out to a random selection of 3200 households in March
2000. A total of 561 residents responded to the survey. With a response of this size,the margin of error
is plus or minus 5%. That is,the percentages reported are expected to be within 5%of the percentages
that would be obtained if all community residents had responded to the survey. The outcomes of the
public meetings are summarized below. Complete tables of results appear in Appendix B.
Resource Supply and Frequency of Use
Indoor and outdoor activities that currently take place at City Parks and Recreation facilities were rated
on the basis of resource supply and frequency of use. Supply was evaluated by indicating how much of
the resource the City should provide. The response choices were "no more/none," "a little more,"
"more," and"a lot more." Frequency of use was evaluated by indicating how often the household uses
City facilities for the activities. The response choices were "never," "seldom," 'once a month," 'once a
week," or"more than once a week"
Resource supply is reported in Table 1 by the percent of the households that indicated a need for more of
the activity. The activity ratings are reported for the citywide sample and two demographic groups,
Seniors and households with children.
Over 80%of the survey respondents indicated that the City should provide more opportunities to
participate in pathway use, hiking, and indoor exercise and fitness, suggesting that there is strong
community support for facilities to support these types of activities. The pattern of results is somewhat
different for Seniors,with health screening, indoor fitness and exercise, and outdoor relaxation receiving
the most support. In the households with children,pathway use,hiking, swimming, and indoor fitness
and exercise received the most support. The support for providing more recreational opportunities was
high for many other activities as well (see Table 1).
ver, In the context of determining the need for a Community Center,the
list of activities was divided into outdoor and indoor activities to
3 help determine how the support for indoor activities compared to the
support for outdoor activities.
z
5
6 s` Figure 1.Survey Respondents by Area
(of those who identified their home)
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
4 1-11
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations ATTA C H MEIM401vement
Table 1.
The results indicate that the community supports How much should the City provide:Percent more
both types of activities. At least half of the
community supported providing more Indoor Activities Citywide Seniors HH w/Child
opportunities to participate in 12 of the 17 indoor Fitness and exercise 83% 68% 83%
activities,which is 70%of the activities on the Health screening 75% 70% 75%
indoor list. In comparison,at least half of the Music 72% 59% 75%
community supported providing more Basketball 70% 56% 73%
opportunities to participate in 17 of the 22 Fine arts 69% 59% 75%
outdoor activities,which is 77%of the outdoor Theater 67% 53% 72%
activities listed Much of the difference between Dance ' 66% 46% 76%
the ratings of the need for additional activities is Nutrition 62% 55% 62%
accounted for by the popularity of two of the progamAitchen
outdoor activities: use of pathways and hiking. Crafts 61% 51% 71
Pottery/ceramics 600/c 46% 69%
Frequency of use was also rated for the indoor volleyball 59% 40% 67%
and outdoor activities. The numbers presented in Lectures/assemblies/mee 58% 58% 59%
tings
Table 2 are the percent of the respondents who Billiards and pool 48% 46% 46%
used City facilities for the activity at least Banquet and receptions 42% 45% 43%
monthly. Community-wide,the activities that Bingo 37% 42% 43%
most often take place at City Parks and Cards 31% 46% 29%
Recreation facilities are pathway use,hiking, Bridge 31% 45% 31%
outdoor relaxation, open play on lawn areas,and
indoor fitness and exercise. outdoor Activities Citywide Seniors HH w/Child
Multi-use paths 84% 62% 89%
Hiking 80% 59% 89%
Unmet Needs Children's playgrounds 77% 63% 81%
Swimming 76% 62% 84%
The survey listed activities already provided by Open play lawn areas 75% 52% 81%
the Parks and Recreation Department. Following Outdoor community 73% 61% 79%
eventhis listing,the survey respondents were invited to Outdoor relaxation 72% 65% 73%
identify the biggest unmet recreation needs of picnicking 72% 57% 81%
their household. Two hundred and fifty-eight Basketball 66% 47% 71%
households identified over 330 unmet needs. In Barbee 66% 53% 70%
many cases,households requested more Softball/baseball 65% 47% 73%
opportunities to engage in existing activities. Tennis 63% 51% 69%
Additional paths for walking,hiking,and Mountain biking 60% 27% 68%
bicycling top the list of unmet needs,with 53 Soccer 59% 39% 67%
households requesting additional paths. Skateboarding 55% 38% 71%
Sand volleyball 53% 29% 59%
Swimming was identified by 47 households,with Gardening 51% 48% 55%
comments that indicated that high use levels and Roller hockey 46% 21% 58%
the lack of access to an sheltered or indoor pool Golf 44% 38% 47%
are the primary drawbacks to the current facilities. Fishing 43% 38% 47%
Other unmet needs identified by between 10 and Horseshoes 39% 41% 39%
25 of the respondents include sports fields,a dog Sailing 36% 31%1 40%
park,youth programs,basketball courts, fitness
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
5 1-12
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations AYTAC H M M-c6volvement
programs,and skateboard parks. Other needs Table 2.
identified by at least five households included Frequency of Use:Percent at least monthly
tennis facilities, a Therapy Pool, an indoor multi-
purpose gymnasium,places to in-line skate and Indoor Activities Citywide Seniors HH w/Child
more park space for outdoor relaxation. Fitness and exercise 39% 24% 36%
Basketball 26% 9% 37%
Theater 23% 23% 18%
Community Center Music 23% 17% 21%
Fine arts 23% 13% 22%
Two questions on the survey directly addressed Lectures/assemblies/ 16% 18°x° 15%
support for the Community Center. Respondents meetings
reported the two most important activities that a volleyball 14% 5% 16%
Community Center could provide and indicated Billiards and pool 13% 9% 10%
the strength of their support for a Community Dance 13% 12% 16%
Center. Health screening 10% 14% 4%
Crafts 9% 3% 15%
A wide range of potential activities were Pottery/ceramics 8% 6% 10%
identified by the respondents. Table 3 reports the
Nutrition Itchen 7% 6% 6%
activities as a percent of the total responses for Banquets and receptions 6% 8% 5%
the citywide sample, Seniors,and households _ Bingo 4% 9% 3%
with children. Only activities identified by 15 or Cards 40/o 11% 2%
more respondents are included in Table 3. Bridge 4% 10%
The six most frequently identified activities for Outdoor Activities Citywide Seniors HIi w/Child
each group are shown in bold type in the table. Multi-use paths 58% 29% 67%
The six most important activities, according to . . 9 53% 31% 54%
the citywide sample,are basketball(11%), fitness Outdoor relaxation 5No 31% 62%
(10%), lectures, assemblies and meetings (9%), Open play lawn areas 45% 14% 65%
youth activities (7%), swimming(7%)and dance Outdoor community 36% 18% 45%
events
programs(6%).
Swimming 35% 20% T20-/-o
Picnicking 35% 15% 52%
For Seniors, the two most frequently identified Children's playgrounds 34% 16% 69%
activities were lectures, assemblies and meetings Mountain biking 31% 5% 31%
(12%)and Senior activities (7%). Other Basketball 30% 8% 37%
activities mentioned by more than 5%of the Barbecuing 26% 100/0 25%
Seniors include swimming, dance, Bridge/cards, softball/baseball 25% 5% 34%
and youth activities. In the case of Senior Golf 240/6 23% 29%
activities and youth activities,the responses Soccer 21% 7% 37%
emphasized providing a variety of activities Tennis 20% 9% 27%
tailored to specific age groups. Gardening 13% 7% 18%
Skateboarding 12% 3% 18%
Households with children were most likely to Sand volleyball 12% 4% 13%
identify basketball,youth activities,and dance as Fishing 11% 7% 15%
important activities a Community Center could Roller hockey 8% 4% 8%
provide. Other activities identified by over 5% Horseshoes 8% 3%1 12%
of the households with children include lectures, Sailing 6% 5% 6%
assemblies and meetings, and volleyball.
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher 1
ATTACHMENT i
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Public Involvement
he citywide sample, Seniors, and households with children identified many of the same activities.
Basketball,youth activities, dance, and lectures,assemblies and meetings are important to both the
citywide sample and households with children. Lectures,assemblies and meetings, youth activities,
swimming and dance were important to both the citywide sample and the Seniors.
The respondents were asked to indicate their support for the development of a new Community Center.
Citywide, 86%of the respondents indicated that their support for a new Community center was at least
moderate. Over 55%indicated high or very high levels of support. In the Senior sample, 81%of the
respondents indicated at least moderate support for the center, with 48%indicating high or very high
levels of support. In the households with children, 92%of the respondents were at least moderately
supportive of the development of a Community Center(see Table 3).
Table 3. Community Center Activities and Support for Development
Activity Citywide Seniors HE w/Child
Basketball 73 11% 1 1% 30 17%
Fitness 67 10% 5 5% 8 5%
Lectures,Assemblies&Meetings 56 9% 11 12% 12 7%
Youth Activities 46 7% 6 6% 22 13%
Swimming-indoor 45 7% 6 6% 6 3%
Dance 39 6% 6 6% 19 11%
Crafts 28 4% 3 3% 9 5%
Senior Activities 27 4% 7 7% 6 3%
Volleyball 19 3% 1 1% 10 6%
Therapy pool 17 3% 5 5% 3 2%
Table Games 17 3°/1 2 01 2 1%
Fine Arts Programs 17 30 00 7 4%
Nutrition&Cooking 171 3NI 51 5016 61 3%
The City is considering the construction of a new community center to enlarge its indoor recreation capacity.
How strong is your support for the development of a new Community Center?
Total Very low Low Moderate High Very high
Citywide 522 35 41 150 139 157
1000/0 7% 8% 29% 27% 30%
Seniors 101 13 7 33 23 25
100% 13% 7% 33% 23% 25%
HH with Child 138 3 81 39 39 49
1000/0 20/6 6%1 28% 28% 36%
Crawford Multan Clam&Mohr/Sara Kocher 1-14
ATTACHMENT 1
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Public Involvement
Therapy Pool
Two of the questions on the survey directly addressed community support for a Therapy Pool. The
respondents indicated the importance of six potential uses of a Therapy Pool and their level of support
for development of a Therapy Pool. The responses to these questions are presented in Table 4.
Citywide, the three mostly highly rated uses are rehabilitation for people with injuries (66%),treatment
for people with disabilities or chronic illnesses(62%), and exercise programs (54%). These three uses
were also rated as most important by Seniors and households with children. In addition, swimming
lessons were important to households with children(62%).
Community support for the development of a Therapy Pool is high. Nearly 80%of the respondents
citywide indicated at least moderate support for development of a Therapy Pool. Among Seniors, 71%
indicated at least moderate support for the Therapy Pool and in households with children, 82%indicated
at least moderate support(see Table 4).
Table 4. Therapy Pool Activities and Support for Development
The City is considering adding a therapy pool to its Park and Recreation facilities. The water temperature of a
swimming pool is about 80 degrees,while the temperature of a therapy pool is about 90 degrees. The pool could
be designed to accommodate a variety of uses. How important are these potential uses? Percent high and very
high reported.
Citywide Seniors HH w/Child
Swimming lessons 46% 24% 62%
Treatment for people with disabilities or chronic illnesses 62% 52% 63%
Rehabilitation for people with injuries 66% 54% 66%
Relaxation 44% 33% 50%
Exercise vrograms 54% 38% 600/9
Warm-up pool for swim meets 25% 13% 31%
How strong is your support for the development of a therapypool?
Total Very low Low Moderate High Very high
Citywide 509 50 60 168 116 115
1000/0 10% 12% 33% 23% 23%
Seniors 99 14 14 35 14 22
100% 140/c 14% 35% 14% 22%
HH with Child 139 9 15 39 381 38
1000/a 6%1 II% 28% 27% 27%
Location of the Facilities
During the course of the public meetings,participants identified factors that should be considered when
locating a Community Center or Therapy Pool. Four factors were listed on the survey. The respondents
were asked to indicate how important each factor should be in determining the location. According to
the citywide sample,the Seniors,and the households with children,the most important factor in locating
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
8 1-1.5
ATTACHMENT i
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Public Involvement
Community Center is availability of parking,with 79%of the citywide sample indicating that this
factor was important or very important. Over 50%of the citywide sample indicated that it was
important or very important for the Community Center to be located near public transportation and in a
central location,with Seniors and households with children concurring.Ample parking,then,is more
important than the actual location of the facilities.
Demographic Characteristics
Demographic information such as age and number of people per household was collected from the
survey respondents. In part this information was used to identify special interest groups, such as Seniors
and households with children. The other function of the information is to indicate how well the survey
sample represents the residents of San Luis Obispo as a whole. This is accomplished by comparing the
demographics of the sample respondents to 1990 Census data.
The average length of residence in San Luis Obispo of the survey respondent was 18 years. The City
was divided into six areas so respondents could indicate the location of their residence. The survey
respondents were distributed as expected throughout the City. The average persons per household was
2.39. In the survey sample,27%report children under 18 years of age in the home. In terms of age,
13%of the respondents are under 24 years of age, 34%are between 25 and 45 years of age, 32%are
between 45 and 65 years of age,and 21%are over 65 years of age. Sixty-three percent of the
respondents own their home.Fifty-eight percent are female.
In regards to working status, 57%work full or part-time,25%are retirees, 12%are students, 6%are
full-time homemakers and 1%are unemployed The majority of the respondents (85%)are
Anglo/White/Caucasian. Hispanic respondents account for 6%of the sample, Asian or Pacific Islanders
for 3%,and multi-racial for 2%. African Americans and Native Americans each account for I%of the
sample. In regards to income,23%report incomes under$25,000 per year, 50%report incomes
between$25,000 and$70,000 per year,and 27%report incomes over$70,000 per year.
The demographic data from the survey was compared to 1990 Census data. For most of the
demographic categories,the survey data is within 5%of the Census data,as would be expected in a
sample of at least 500 households.
Households with children are somewhat over-represented m the survey data. In regards to age, there are
fewer 18-24 year olds and more 45-55 year olds than would be expected. Homeowners are also over-
represented in the sample and women are somewhat over-represented in the sample. The incomes
reported by the survey sample are higher than those reported on the 1990 Census, and this is expected,
given that the 1990 Census data is ten years old. In general the respondents to the survey are
representative of a cross section of the City, although there is some indication that households with
children were more likely to return the survey.
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher 1-16
ATTACHMENT i
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Alternatives
ALTERNATIVES
The following recommended alternatives are based on the clear and consistent support for both a
Therapy Pool and a new Community Center that emerged from the community meetings and survey.
Recommended locations are based primarily on availability of land for parking,and ease of access,
including via public transit—the features most desired by City residents.
These recommendations also take into consideration 144 responses to a questionnaire distributed in
March to users of the existing Senior Center by local officials from the American Association of Retired
Persons (at the suggestion of Vice Mayor Kenneth Schwartz). Key information gathered includes the
suggestion that most users drive to the center and combine their trips with activities such as grocery
shopping and medical appointments. This type of use pattern would tend to support a site near these
services, such as Downtown or Madonna Plaza(see p. 12). Some Seniors voiced uneasiness about
sharing facilities with other age groups (especially teens), and as with the citywide survey,parking was a
major concern.
Therapy Pool
Regardless of where a Community Center is located, a 4,000-sq.ft. Therapy Pool facility should be
constructed east of the existing city swimming pool at Johnson Park.
The facility should include:
• The Therapy Pool (as described below)
• A stretched membrane cover about 10 feet above the water and surrounding deck(to shelter
users from both rain and sun).
• A 6-foot-high chain-link fence with wooden slats (for wind protection and privacy).
• Four unisex stalls with toilets, showers and space for changing clothes in an enclosed building
(in addition to the existing pool changing areas).
• About 40 parking spaces.
The Therapy Pool should have:
• An L-shaped configuration,with a 60-by-33 ft. main area, and a 10-by-20 ft. entry area
perpendicular to the main area.
• A depth of 3 feet, except along one 60-ft. side, where a depth of 4.5 feet could accommodate flip
turning for swim meet warm-up.
• A ramp in the entry area that slopes from zero grade to a depth of 3 feet over its 20-ft. length.
• A water surface flush with the surrounding deck for easy entry and exit.
• A constant temperature of 90°F,except during limited times when the pool is used for swim-
meet warm-up.
• A moving-current channel along one side for aqua-aerobics.
The total construction cost for the pool and all associated features,including finishes, fixtures, furniture,
design, site development and permitting is estimated at$100-120/sq. ft. Therefore a 4,000-sq.R facility
should cost about$480,000,plus $80,000 for parking. The membrane cover and slatted fence would
ensure a comfortable temperature for swimmers. A fully enclosed building is not recommended as it
would require a significant additional investment in air conditioning and building maintenance.
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
10 1-17
ATTACHMENT i
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Alternatives
Community Center
A 20,000-sq. ft. Community Center should be constructed that includes:
• 1,000 sq. ft for administration and office space.
• A 7,000 sq. ft. wood floor gym with fixtures for basketball, volleyball and other recreation
activities.
• 10,000 sq. ft of multi-purpose space,with flexible room dividers and wood floors in some rooms
to accommodate aerobics, quiet exercise, dance and other activities.
• A fitness facility including free weights,weight machines and cardiovascular machines.
• A stage and pull-out ramped-seating area to accommodate music,lecture,drama and assembly
events.
• A separate space and entrance,and perhaps even a separate building for specific Senior
programs.
• Full kitchen facilities.
• bobby/waiting area,restrooms,water fountains, etc.
• About 75 parking spaces.
The total construction cost for the Community Center and all associated features,including finishes,
fixtures, furniture, design, site development and permitting is estimated at$200-230/sq. ft Therefore,a
20,000-sq.ft. facility should cost about$4.6 million,plus$150,000 for parking.
Community Center Sites
Each of the three recommended sites features
adequate space for parking and convenient access to �•,=. � '.:' 1
public transit. The three locations also are the ones
preferred by citizens at the community meetings,and
they are adjacent to multi-use trails—the single most
desired recreational feature identified by respondentsto the community survey. Figure 2 shows the
approximate locations of the alternative sites. r r
Johnson Park
Advantages: This location would allow the City to '' '' � "'°00 �
combine the Therapy Pool and Community Center -='�
projects to optimize site development efficiencies,
including construction of parking and access. Figure 2:Alternative Sites
Constraints: Pedestrian access from a parking area off of Augusta Street would require permitting and
engineering to allow crossing of the creek.
Madonna Plaza
Advantages: This site contains a number of locations where the Community Center could be
constructed,with ample parking already in place.Building the facility at this location might catalyze
Crawford Multa i C]ark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
11 1-18
TTACHMIENT J
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Alternatives
redevelopment of portions of the surrounding shopping center into desired neighborhood commercial
uses.
Constraints: Downtown merchants might perceive this location as unfairly benefiting their competition,
and parking conflicts could occur during peak shopping periods.
Prado Road Site
Advantages: This approximately 7-acre site along the Prado Road extension(between South Higuera
and Broad Street) could accommodate additional fields,tennis courts and other outdoor facilities.
Constraints: Siting would require approval from the Airport Land Use Commission.
Other Sites Considered
Future Downtown Parking Structure
Although this site is centrally located near shopping and at the planned transit hub,additional
automobile traffic in this location could detrimentally affect air quality in an area with a high existing
level of emissions. Due to the limited size of the site, the Community Center facility would likely have
to be built atop the parking structure, creating engineering difficulties and requiring a variance from the
height limit.
Bishop/Johnson Avenue Intersection
The county owned site northwest of the intersection of Bishop and Johnson Avenue(directly behind the
County Health Department)would meet the key criteria,but site acquisition could add significantly to
project cost. In addition,potential exists for strong opposition from neighbors regarding traffic impacts.
Other Issues
The community workshop and survey indicated a need to provide both active and quiet exercise
activities in separate spaces simultaneously,particularly during peak use hours (6-9am and 4-8pm).
Although many users have grown accustomed to the current Senior Center location, a need exists for a
new center with adequate parking. In keeping with the desire among some Seniors for a separate
facility, the existing City Recreation Center(scheduled for$300,000 worth of renovations in 2001)
could serve as a temporary Senior Center while the new Community Center(including Senior Center
facilities) is under construction.
Workshop input and survey responses clearly suggest the need for added lap swimming opportunities in
San Luis Obispo. Options for the City to consider include additional hours at the City pool and shared
use of the future high school pool.
Finally,citizen input pointed to a need for public education about"indoor" versus 'outdoor" swim
facilities. Specifically, the Parks and Recreation Department should provide information about the
ability of a sheltered,outdoor Therapy Pool to ensure warm and comfortable conditions for users.
Crawford Muttan Clar 2& Mohr/Sara Kocher 1-19
ATTACHMENT `i
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
APPENDIX A
RESULTS OF THE PUBLIC WORKSHOPS
Crawford Multari Clark& Mohr/Sara Kocher 1-20
ATTACHMENT
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
Community Center and Therapy Pool Public Meetings
Meedng#1
On February 9,2000,the City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department held a public meeting
to gather input regarding a potential new Community Center and Therapy Pool. About 80 citizens attended
and were divided into four groups to respond to a series of six questions.
Asked who would use indoor and outdoor areas at a new community center,the participants identified
potential users from most segments of the local community. All four groups named Senior citizens as
primary users,and three groups suggested teenagers and families would frequent the center. Two groups
believed the facility would be used by both non-profit and private entities for gatherings,meetings and
special events.
All groups suggested therapy pool users would include disabled and injured persons,regardless of age,
while three groups believed Seniors would use it for exercise and young children would learn to swim
there.
Gymnasium games,tennis,and arts,crafts,music and dance facilities were among the identified
recreational,educational and social activities that would occur at a new community center.Two groups
felt the facility would be an appropriate place for cooking meals,perhaps as part of a nutrition program
Participants thought therapy pool activities would include rehabilitation and exercise programs,
swimming lessons,water safety training and a variety of water sports.
Topping the list of existing unmet needs in the community were Senior,teen,computer,multipurpose,
gymnasium,meeting,cooking,quiet exercise,performance and practice,arts and crafts,and computer
facilities.Two groups each saw the need for a community garden,a billiard/game room,and a bowling
lawn.
When asked where a community center/therapy pool should be located,all groups wanted the facilities
to be easily accessible to everyone,especially by public transit.Participants favored locating the facilities at
an existing developed park site.
Meeting#2
On February 21 the City conducted another meeting in the same manner as Meeting#1,but held it at 3PM
especially to accommodate Senior citizens. Ideas offered at this meeting generally echoed those from the
previous one. About 35 citizens participated in two discussion groups,adding some new ideas,including
■ homeless people might use a new community center.
• art exhibits,cultural education,childcare,and movies might occur at a new community center.
■ off-leash dog patios are among current unmet needs.
Meeting#3
At 7PM on February 21 about 75 participants were given a summary of responses from the previous
meetings,and then divided into four groups to expand on those ideas.
Three of the four groups identified the need for exercise rooms at a new community center.One group
thought job training would be an appropriate use. Popular ideas for unmet needs included proper and safe
exercise space(4 groups),a skate park/rink(2 groups),and a BMX bike park(1 group).
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
14 1-21
ATTACHMENT -1
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
Finally,participants were asked whether a community center and therapy pool should be combined in
one facility. Two groups felt the resources should exist in separate locations,while one group wanted to
see a combined complex with multiple buildings. The last said it just wanted to see the facility built.
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
15 1-22
,"ACHMENT !
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
WHO WOULD USE INDOOR AND OUTDOOR AREAS AT A NEW
COMMUNITY CENTER?
MEETING#1 RESPONSES
Group f (Sara)
• Students • Multigenerational
• Seniors • People Who Have Transportation
• Adolescents • People Who Have Health Problems
• Adults from 18-55 • Adults 16-60
• Families
Group 2(Jeff)
• Seniors • Visitors
• Handicapped • Families
• Disabled
Group 3(Nicole)
• Seniors • Adult Education
• Whole Community • Theatre
• Organized Groups • College Students
• Volunteers • Disaster Victims
• Private Groups • Tennis Players
• Youth/Teens • Inline Skaters and Skateboarders
• Wedding Parties
Group 4 (Susan)
• Teens • Families
• After School Teachers/Organized • Seniors (congregate meals, in-
Groups house activities,games, etc.)
• Indoor Exercise/Dance Groups • Craft Instructors
• Evening Tennis Players • Private Events/Meetings
• Non-Profit Groups for Events
MEETING#2 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Whole Town • Teenagers
• Children • Visitors
• Elderly • Homeless
Group 2 (Jeff)
• Seniors • Teenagers
• Scouts/Mentor . Multi-Use Center
• Providers of Special Services (i.e. • Families
Nutrition Programs,Arthritis • Everyone/Inclusive
Foundation) • Transit Users
• All Age Groups • Medical Needs
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
16 1-23
ATTAC
Community Curter&Therapy Pool Recommendations ppen A
Lifeguards • Homeless/Shelter
• Actors • Relaxation Place/Nap
. Musicians • Physical Therapists
WHO WOULD USE A THERAPY POOL?
MEETING#1 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Rehab Patients • Arthritis Rehab
• Chronic Disability • People Who Like to Stay Healthy
• Aqua Aerobics Groups
Group 2(Jeff)
• Seniors (if warm and indoors) • Families
• Handicapped/Disabled(all ages) . Teens
• Visitors • Younger People(outdoor pool)
Not many Young Kids
Group 3(Nicole)
• Seniors • Infant Swim Program
. Mentally/Physically Disabled (all • Prenatal Swim Program
ages) • Arthritis/Stroke Classes
• Injured/Accident Victims (all ages) • Non-Impact Exercise
• Swim Students
Group 4(Susan)
• Intergenerational • Swim Classes/Students
• Health Needs • Swimmers
• Exercise • Polo Players
. Instruction • Special Needs/Rehab
• Preschooler • Health Screening (indoor)
MEETING#2 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Seniors(Aging Population) • People Who Want Regular Exercise
• Handicapped . People Who Prefer Indoor Pool
• People Who Don't Drive . Doctor Prescribed
• Arthritis • Reasonable Price
• Back Problems • Women
Group 2 (Jeff)
• Medical Needs • Seniors
• Ufeguards • All Age Groups
Physical Therapists
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
17 1-24
4TTACF ��EI�F
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
WHAT WOULD PEOPLE DO AT A NEW COMMUNITY CENTER THAT THEY
CAN'T DO AT EXISTING FACILITIES?
MEETING#1 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Activities . Senior Nutrition
• Performance Area • Commercial Kitchen
• Childcare . Integrated Family Areas
• Meeting Space . Full Size Gym
• Billiards . Weight Room
• Computers . Adult Sized Facilities
• Wood Working . Basket Ball Facilities
• Art Studio (darkroom) . Adult Indoor Recreational Sports
• Adult Day Care • Custom Designed Gym
• Exercise Programs
Group 2(Jeff)
• Lecture Hall . Shuffle Board
• Dance Hall • Lawn Bowling
• Weight Room . Picnic Areas w/BBQ
• Administration Space . Outdoor Lighting
• Fire Place . Sound System
• Music Room . Tennis Courts/Lighted
• Screen/Movies(International Films) . Acoustic Quiet Room
Group 3(Nicole)
• Good Gym Space . Tennis Courts w/Lighting
• Conference Rooms
Group 4(Susan)
• Gymnasium . Ice-Skating Rink
• Lighted Tennis Courts . Golf Course
• Walking/Running Track . Disneyland
• Meal Facility/Ktchen • Croquet
. Nutrition Program . Crafts
• Classroom w/Permanent Storage . Dancing/Music
• Exercise Room • Large Rooms
• Skate Facilities (park w/designated . Theatre w/pull out stage
time)
• Skate Rink
MEETING#2 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• More Room to Move Around . Poetry Readings
• Better Parking • Square Dancing
• Place to View Art • Other Dancing
• Place to do Arts and Crafts . Kitchen
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
18
1-25
AiTTAGHMENT 1
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
• Senior Nutrition • Drop-ln Center for Children
• Business Meetings • Meeting Room Flexible Size
• Non-Profit Organization Meetings • Multi-Purpose (150-200 People)
• Enough Water Fountains and • Underground Parking
Restrooms • Near Transit Accessible to All (ADA)
• Library
• Gym
Group 2 (Jeff)
• Health • Slanted Movie Floor
• Wellness Clinic • Lawn Bowling
• Rehearsal Space/Performance • Horse Shoe Pits
Small Scale • Softball
• Eating/Dining . Soccer
• Games(Billiards,Cards) • Shuffle Board
• Commercial Kitchen . Volleyball
200 Person Meeting Room . Small Meeting Rooms
• Dancing • Mufti-Use Design
• Art Exhibits . Safe Vehicle Parking
• Movies • Settlement House
• Lectures • Learning Center
• Transit Stop(ADA Access) . Literacy Council
• Internet Connection • Sun Porches
• Computer Classes
MEETING#3 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Nadia)
• Kitchen/Lunch Program • Volleyball
• Senior Activities • Softball
• Teen Weekend Rooms • Multi-Purpose Field
• Skate Rink • Exercise Classrooms
• Job Training/Career Center(Head • Weight Lifting
Start Program) . Physical Therapy
• Park Advisers • Pathway System to Connect to
• LecturefVideo/Screening Room Other Facilities
• Parking Facilities
Group 2 (Jeff)
• BMX Bike Park • Staffed 24 hours a day
• Skateboard
• Combine With YMCA
Group 3 (Sara)
• Gym • View Performance
• Volleyball • Planned Interactions between Age
• Indoor Soccer Groups
• Rehearsal and Training Rooms (not • Comprehensive Senior Service
cement) • Rehabilitation Programs
• Sound Proof Rooms • Health and Nutrition
• Skateboarders • Social Activities
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
19
1-26
,ATTACHfilENT
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
Group 4 (Wynee)
• Attach Housing to Senior Center • Parking
• Be Logical"No More Dreaming" • Lawn Bowling
• Separate Aerobic Facilities for • Horse Shoe Pits
Safety • BBQ Area
• Aerobic Facilities with Proper • Meeting Rooms
Equipment and Floors
• Commercial Kitchen
WHAT WOULD PEOPLE DO AT A THERAPY POOL?
MEETING#1 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Aqua Aerobics • Water Polo
• Arthritis • Water Sports
• Rehab • Children Swim Lessons
• Lap Swimming • Senior Masters Swimming
Group 2(Jeff)
• Aqua Kinetics • Structured Therapy Program
• Socialize (Children and Adults with
• Restrooms disabilities)
• Showers • Wet Bar
• Drinking Fountain • Certified Instructors
• Lap Swimming
Group 3(Nicole)
• Arthritis Movement Classes • Individual Therapy(therapists on
• Med-Hi Intensity Aerobics staff)
• Deep Water Aerobics • Classes for All Ages
• Stroke Classes
Group 4(Susan)
• Learn to Swim • Exercise Class
• Pregnancy Exercise • Scuba Class
• Water-Safety Programs • Injury Rehab Programs
• Lifeguard Programs
MEETING#2 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Arthritis Relief • Osteoporosis
• Recuperation from Surgery • Heart Surgery Recuperation
• Guided Exercise • Aerobics
• Stroke Victims • Nurse Supervised
• Handicapped (need lift)
Group 2 (Jefl)
• Aqua Aerobics • Swim Team
• Handicapped(lifts needed) • Swim Warm-Up Pool
• Therapy Pool (90-92)
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
20
1-27
ATTACHMENT J
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
MEETING#3 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Nadia)
Group did not specifically answer this question
Group 2 (Jeff)
Therapy Pool at Sinsheimer • Shallow ends at least 3 1h ft.deep
Location . Deep end at least 61h ft.deep
• 25 yards long • Nearby Changing Rooms
• Gradual Ramp
Group 3 (Sara)
• Variety of Temperatures • Salt Water
• Jets • Sauna/Steam Room
Group 4 (Wynee)
• Have Therapy Pool activities pay for the facility
• Adequate Protection from Weather if outdoors
R'HAT OTHER UNMET RECREATIONAL NEEDS EXIST IN THE
COMMUNITY?
MEETING#1 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Theatre for Children • Other Types of Information
• Full Size Gym Technology
• Meditation Circle • Serene Place for Seniors
• Grow Vegetables • Students After School Program
• Bigger Area for Senior Activities • Theatre Education and
• Yoga and Tai Chi Rooms Entertainment
• MuRFPurpose Rooms • Mud Bath
• New Senior Center • Skateboard Park
• Nutrition Programs • Integrated Family Programs
• Health Screening
• Broadcast Area
Group 2(Jeff)
• Landscaping • Shop Area for Equipment
• Parking Convenience • Exercise Room
• Available Transportation • Billiards/Game Room
• Nutrition Programs • Library w/Computers
• Large Rooms for Meetings • Equipped Large Kitchen
• Well Planned Multi-Purpose Area • Public Art
• Arts and Crafts
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
21
1-28
ATTACHMENT
ENT
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
Group 3(Nicole)
• Display Area for Art of all Ages • Afternoon/Latchkey Programs
(Multi-Cultural) . Facilities for Meetings w/Kitchens,
• Adult Competitive Sports(leagues) etc.
• Kitchens • Lawn Bowling
• Youth Sports • Climbing Gym
• Pool Tables • Stage (production size
• All Affordable w/equipment)
• Tennis Courts- Lighted(>10) • Gym (low cost and affordable)
• Lighted Basketball Cqurts • Group Synthesis Programs(Hi-Lo
• Skate Park Course)
• Parking • BBQ Facilities
• Indoor Meeting Space (art, drama, • Computer Room (classes and
etc.) individual use)
• Teenage Evening Activities
Group 4 (Susan)
• Sailing Classes • Horse Shoes
• Casting Pond • Special Needs Programs
• Bowling and Lawn Bowling • Massage
• Dog Obedience • Tai Chi
• Preteen (10-15) Facilities • Multi-Lingual Center
• Computer Technology/Homework • Include Parking and Transportation
Room • Community gardens
• Childcare Facilities • Specialized User Center(senior,
• Cooking Class Facilities children campus w/different
• Computer/Multimedia/Intemet buildings)
Surfing Virtual Room • Music Practice Rooms (sound proof)
• Video Games
MEETING#2 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Off Leash Dog Park
• Happy About New Diamonds
Group 2 (Jeff)
Group did not specifically answer this question
MEETING#3 RESPONSES
Group 3 (Sara)
• Exercise Room with Weights • BBQ/Picnic Areas
• Attractive Grounds for Relaxation • Band Shelter
• Activities for Homeless Children
• Trail Network/Open Space Network
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
22
1-29
ATTACHMENT I
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
WHERE WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE A COMMUNITY CENTER/THERAPY
POOL AND WHY?
MEETING#1 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Centrally Located • In a Park Setting
• On Transportation Lines • Near Water
• Where There is Space and Easy • Centrally Located or South
Parking
• Accessible for All
Group 2(Jeff • Transit Ready
• Close to Town • Parking
• Middle of Town
Group 3(Nicole)
Group did not specifically answer this question
Group 4 (Susan)
• Further Out of Town Convenient Bus Service
MEETING#2 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Sara)
• Centrally Located Where There is Plenty of Room
• On Transit Lines (possibly underground)
• Where Parking is Available
Group 2(Jeff)
• Central • Community Center with Future
• Not Downtown: Parking/Traffic Transit Center
• Sinsheimer:Weather/Outdoor Pool • Multiple Locations
• Sinsheimer has better weather than • Downtown Good for Transit
Laguna • Therapy Pool Next to Sinsheimer
• Garcia Property Pool
• Sinsheimer:Tough because of bus • Cost of implementation should be
routes. greater than cost of property.
MEETING#3 RESPONSES
Group 1 (Nadia)
• Therapy Pool is incidental to center.
• Use existing facilities and expand.
• Several Centers dispersed throughout the community.
Group 2 (Jeff)
• Large facility may not fit in one • All day activities.
place. • Need activities for all ages.
Crawford Muultan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
23
1-30
ATTACHMENT 1
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix A
• Schedule times and uses • Garcia Property
• Transit routes may determine • Bus from Senior Center
location • Shuttle to recreational facilities
• Pool at Sinsheimer • Centrally located
• Spot where parking is available
• Near large park
Group 3 (Sara)
• Locate with intensive outdoor • Separate cultural activities from
activities. physical
• Stays might be longer • Requires big property
• Decrease traffic1travel • Lots of Parking
• May require less parking if activities • Therapy may not be near lap pool
are phased properly.
• Convenient for seniors
Group 4 (Wynee)
• Prado Road: Drive-In Theater • Adhere to Architectural style of
• Consider 5-7 acres surrounding area
• Just build something • Across from Post Office on
• Look at the advantages with locating Madonna
at Sinsheimer • Therapy Pool is an amenity of the
• Complex Style:multiple buildings Community Center
• All in one building multi-story
• Must have elevators
Crawford Mult m Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
24
1-31
AffTACHMEHT
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
APPENDIX B
RESULTS OF THE COMMUNITY PREFERENCES SURVEY
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
25
1-32
AMA 1
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
Community Preferences Survey: Results
How much should the City Total No more A little More A lot
provide? more more
1) Indoor Activities
a) Banquets and receptions 382 222 91 52 17
b) Basketball 401 120 126 98 57
c) Billiards and pool 377 196 94 56 31
d) Bingo 371 233 961 29 13
e) Bridge 369 255 82 23 9
f) Cards 365 251 73 28 13
g Crafts 370 145 117 80 28
h) Dance 378 130 108 94 46
i) Fine arts 389 119 94 109 67
') Fitness and exercise 4121 71 100 143 98
k) Health screening 384 95 100 113 76
1) Lectures/assemblies/meetings 375 158 101 79 37
M) Music 394 109 96 120 69
n) Nutritionprograms/kitchen 367 139 102 83 43
o) Pottery/ceramics 381 152 117 751 37
P)Theater 383 128 101 1051 49
Volleyball 3721 151 103 82 36
r)Other:
2)Outdoor Activities
a Barbecuing 384 131 125 94 34
b) Basketball 383 129 107 94 53
c)Children's playgrounds 400 93 108 132 67
d) Fishing 372 211 67 531 41
e Gardening 375 182 97 60 36
f) Golf 3811 214 73 54 40
g) Hiking 405 79 84 134 108
h) Horseshoes 364 221 95 39 9
i) Mountain biking 386 154 83 71 78
Multi-use paths 418 66 78 136 138
k)Open play lawn areas 389 97 100 117 75
1)Outdoor community events 382 105 103 108 66
m)Outdoor relaxation 3761 105 95 107 69
n Picnicking 372 106 109 109 48
o) Roller hockey 360 195 90 46 29
p)Sailing 361 232 71 34 24
q)Sand volleyball 361 170 101 551 35
r)Skateboarding 372 167 77 64 64
s Soccer 365 151 81 73 60
t) SoftbaNbaseball 3831 134 101 89 59
u)Swimming 405 96 87 112 110
v Tennis 379 140 103 92 44
w Other:
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
26
1-33
A TITACHMENTI
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
How often does your household Total Never Seldom Once a Once a More
use City facilities for these month week than once
activities? a week
1) Indoor Activities
a Banquets and receptions 431 243 163 22 1 2
b Basketball 446 218 113 45 43 27
c) Billiards and pool 431 283 90 29 22 7
d Bingo 423 371 33 8 8 3
e) Bridge 423 380 28 3 8 4
f) Cards 417 367 34 7 5 4
g)Crafts 424 290 97 261 8 3
h) Dance 434 278 101 27 21 7
i) Fine arts 427 213 117 77 11 9
j) Fitness and exercise 450 167 106 55 43 79
k) Health screening 430 270 115 34 5 6
1) Lectures/assemblies/meetings 427 222 136 53 13 3
M) Music 431 195 138 72 14 12
n Nutrition programs/kitchen 420 309 82 20 4 5
o Pottery/ceramics 428 316 77 24 8 3
p)Theater 430 204 127 78 16 5
q)Volleyball 422 288 76 36 14 8
r Other:
2)Outdoor Activities
a Barbecuing 420 136 174 75 26 9
b Basketball 424 178 120 57 40 29
c Children's playgrounds 433 178 109 63 43 40
d) Fishing 405 284 76 27 11 7
e) Gardening 414 299 63 22 14 16
f) Golf 418 255 61 49 35 18
g) Hiking 433 1041 98 118 62 51
h) Horseshoes 409 304 73 21 11 0
i) Mountain biking 429 223 731 57 42 34
Multi-use paths 450 83 104 104 79 80
k)Open play lawn areas 418 115 116 94 48 45
1 Outdoor community events 420 119 148 104 30 19
M)Outdoor relaxation 413 102 103 108 53 47
n) Picnicking 415 122 148 109 24 12
o) Roller hockey 407 331 44 18 6 8
p)Sailing 411 335 51 18 3 4
Sand volleyball 406 281 77 345 9
r)Skateboarding 411 319 43 12 13 24
s) Soccer 408 256 65 31 26 30
t)Softball/baseball 415 218 95 421 30 30
u)Swimming 426 168 109 58 36 55
Iv)Tennis 415 225 1061 441 22 18
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
27
1-34
PiTTAGHMENT I
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
What are the biggest unmet recreation needs of your household? Paths 53
Swimming, 47
Total number of responses:330 Sports fields 21
None 19
Dog park 18
Youth programs 13
Basketball 12
Fitness 11
Skateboarding 10
Tennis 7
Therapy pool 7
Indoor gym 6
Rollerblade 6
Outdoor relaxation 5
Bowling 4
Dance 4
Golf 4
Meetings 4
Childcare 3
Concerts 3
Family Activities 3
Fishing 3
Parking 3
Playgrounds 3
Transportation 3
Volleyball 3
Classes 2
Community Center 2
Control costs 2
Evening programs 2
Neighborhood parks 2
open ace 2
Outreach 2
Raquetball 2
Restrooms 2
Senior activities 2
Teen Activities 2
xOther 24
xBenches 1
XCrafts 1
xice rink 1
xkitchen 1
xOpen play lawn 1
xpicnics 1
xpottery 1
xSingles 1
xSkating Rink 1
xspa 1
xTable games 1
xtheater 1
Grand Total 330
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
28
1-35
ATTACHMENT I
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
Please list the two most important activities that a Community Center
could provid&
[Da
ivity Citywide Seniors HH w/Child 55-64
ketball 73 11% 1 1% 30 17 5
ess 67 10% 5 5% 8 5% 15 17°
tures, Assemblies& Meetings 56 9% 11 12% 12 7° 9 10°
th Activities 46 7°k 6 6% 22 13% 11 12%
mming- indoor 45 7°� 6 6% 6 3% 10 11
nce 39 6°k 6 6% 19 11° 3 3%
fts 28 4% 3 3% 9 5% 1 1014
ior Activities 27 4% 7 6 3% 9 1leyball 19 3% 1 1°/ 10 6% 0 0%
rapy pool 17 3% 5 5% 3 2% 4 40/
Table Games 17 3°/ 2 2% 2 1% 2
Fine Arts Programs 17 3% 0 0% 7 4% 1 19�
Nutrition&Cooking 17 3°/ 5 5% 6 3� 0
Musical events&classes 14 2°/ 2 2% 3 29' 3 3�
Classes 14 2°/ 1 1% 4 2% 1 10
Theater 13 2°/ 5 5% 1 1% 0 0�
Social Activities 10 2% 5 5% •2 1°/ 1 1%
Cards& Bridge 9 1% 6 6% 0. 0% 3 30/
Ceramics 9 10 01 0% 1 1% 1 1%
Racquetball 9 1°/ 01 0 0 0°/ 0 00/
LTotal
school 8 1° 1 1° 3 2° 1 1uets& Receptions 8 1° 0 0% 3 2°/ 1 1ities 8 1°/ 3 3°/ 1 1°/ 1 1
h screening 7 1°/ 0 0% 2 1°/ 2ds& Pool 7 1 0 0° 2 1% 1 1 7 1% 4 4% 0 0% 1 1er 7 1% 1 1% 2 1�° 0 0°ts Gymnasium 6 1 1 1% 2 1°/ 0 0°care 5 1% 0 0°/ 1 1� 1 1puters 4 1 0 0° 1 1° 1 1ing 4 1°/ 1 1% 1 1°/ 0 0r rink 4 1°/ 1 1°/ 1 1°/ 0 eless services 1 0°/ 0 0°/ 0 0° 0 0r 27 4°/ 6 6% 6 3°/ 2d Total 649 100° 95 100 176 100 90 100°
Crawford Multari Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
29
1-36
ATTACHMENT t
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
7)The City is considering the construction of a new community center to enlarge its indoor recreation
capacity. How strong is your support for the development of a new Community Center?
Total Very low Low Moderate High Very high
5221 351 411 1501 139 157
100% 7°/a 8%1 29%1 270/6 30%
8)The City is considering adding a therapy pool to its Park and Recreation facilities. The water
temperature of a swimming pool is about 80 degrees,while the temperature of a therapy pool is about
90 degrees. The pool could be designed to accommodate a variety of uses. How important are these
potential uses?
Total Very low Low Moderate High Very high
a)Swimming lessons 471 110 50 96 80 135
b)Treatment for people with 485 47 43 92 99 204
disabilities or chronic illnesses
c) Rehabilitation for people with 487 42 36 87 115 207
injuries
d Relaxation 481 76 54 139 92 120
e Exercise programs 495 55 50 121 123 146
f)Warm-up pool for swim meets 458 153 80 110 56 59
g)Other(please describe):
9) How strong is your support for the development of a therapy pool? Please check(❑)one
Total I Very low I Low Moderate High Very high
509150 601 1681 116 115
100°/a 1 100/0 12% 33% 23% 23%
10)The table below lists several factors that could influence where a new Community Center and/or
Therapy Pool would be located. How important are these factors?
Total Very low Low Moderate High Very high
a) In a central location 478 38 46 132 98 164
b)Where sufficient parking is 500 21 16 69 123 271
available
c Near public transportation 475 37 46 98 128 166
d In an existing City park 4661 114 87 1141 74 77
e Other(please describe
Crawford Mult m Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
30
1-37
1TTACHMENT i
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
City of San Luis Parks and Recreation
Community Preferences Survey
Demographic Data
In the tables below,the survey data is compared to 1990 Census data. For several of the demographic
categories,the survey data is within 5%of the Census data, as would be expected. The exceptions are
discussed below. The sample is a moderately good match for the Census data.
Households with children are somewhat over-represented in the survey data. In regards to age,there are
less 18-24 year olds and more 45-55 year olds than would be expected. Homeowners are over-represented
in the sample. Women are somewhat over-represented in the sample.The incomes reported by the survey
sample are higher than those reported on the 1990 Census, and this is normal.
The sample is expected to be within 50/6 of the Census data because this is the confidence interval for a
sample of 500.With a sample of 500, confidence interval is plus or minus 4.5%,that is, If a second sample
were collected, one would expect the results to be within plus or minus 4.5%of the current sample. (The
confidence interval increases slowly with sample size:for a sample of 700,the confidence interval is plus or
minus 4%).
11 About how many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo?
Average 18 ears
12) In which area of the City do ou live?Please place an"X"in your neighborhood.
Count Percent
Total 482 100%
1 110 23%
2 84 17%
3 96 20%
4 80 17%
5 67 14%
6 45 -9%
13)How many people live in your household?
Average Census
Persons per household 2.38 2.39
Count Percent Census
Households w/children 144 26% 18%
14) How old are u?
Count Percent ICensus
Total 521 1000/0 100%
18-24 70 130/6 26%
25-34 75 14% 20%
35-44 103 20% 170/6
45-54 97 190/0 10%
55-64 66 130/6 8%
65-80 79 15%1 100/0
80+ 31 6% 9%
Crawford Mul=Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
31
1-38
ATTACHMENT I
Community Center&Therapy Pool Recommendations Appendix B
15) Do you own or rent your housing?
Count Percent Census
Total 525 100% 100%
Own 331 63% 44%
Rent 194 37% 56%
16)Are you:
Count Percent Census
Total 510 100% 100%
Male 215 42% 51%
Female 295 580/0 49%
17)What is your current working situation?
Count Percent ICensus
Total 527 100%
Working full time 220 42% 57%
Working part-time 63 12°k
Unemployed 8 2% 3%
Full-time homemaker 33 6% 39%
Retired 134 25%
Student 64 12%
Other 51 1%
18)What is your racial or ethnic background?
Count Percent ICensus
Total 503 100% 100%
Hispanic(Latino/Latina) 30 6% 89%
Anglo/White/Caucasian 422 847Y6
African-American 6 1% 1%
Native American 3 1% 1%
Asian or Pacific Islander 15 3% 5%
Other ill 29'0 4%
19)What is the approximate annual income (before taxes)for your household? Households include
domestic partnerships, married cou les,and oarents li%Anq with children.
Count Percent Census
Total 460 100% 100%
Less than$10,000 a year 44 10% 18%
$10,000-$24,999 62 13% 31%
$25,000-$39,999 97 21% 21%
$40,000-$54,999 78 179'0 120/0
$55,000-$69,999 54 120/6 9%
Over$70,000 125 270/6 9%
Crawford Multan Clark&Mohr/Sara Kocher
32
1-39
ATTACHMENT 2
SENIOR CENTER RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE REPORT March 24,2000
4. HOW DO YOU GET TO THE SENIOR CENTER:
GOOD WEATHER? BAD WEATHER?
a walk 13 12
b. ride bike 2 0
c. public transportation 7 6
d. drive 111 109
e. car-pool 17 13
d. others drop off&pick up 5 8
e. stay home 5
Question#4 Total Good Weather 156' Bad Weather 153'
'Some Seniors checked more than one method of transportation
5. WHEN YOU TRAVEL TO OR FROM THE CITY SENIOR CENTER, DO YOU STOP AT
OTHER PLACES TO DO SHOPPING OR FULFILL OTHER CHORES?
sometimes 73
never 16
ahnra
Total Affirmative 123
Question#5 total responses 139
6. IF YOU ANSWERED QUESTION#5 AS 'SOMETIMES' or 'ALMOST ALWAYS°,
CHECK AS MANY PLACES LISTED BELOW THAT YOU MIGHT OCCASIONALLY STOP:
a. Downtown 52
b. Grocery Shopping 102
c. Movies 13
d. Restaurant 33
e. Clothing Shopping 28
f. Place of religion 11
g. Visit Friends 14
h. Medical appointments 32
i. Hospital 19
j. City Hall 5
k. County Building 3
t. Library 36
m. School 3
n. Swimming Pool 2
o. Post Office 53
p. Bank 67
q. Sports Facility 0
r. Gas Station 5o
s. Barber/Beauty Shop 23
t. Other locations
Question#6 Total Stops 549
549 stops by 123 Seniors who answered affirmatively in question 5 (Average 4.46 stops)
1-42
ATTACHMENT 2
SENIOR CENTER RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE REPORT March 24, 2000
7. IF A THERAPY POOL WERE AVAILABLE IN THE CITY,WOULD YOU USE IT?
Yes 72
No 53
Maybe 5
Question Mark 2
Question#7 Total responses 132
"ADDrrIONAL COMMENTS' Responses: A total of sody-seven comments received are
included in Attachment 1.
A sample copy of the questionnaire is included as Attachment 2.
1-43
• ATTACHMENT 2
SENIOR CENTER RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE REPORT March 24,2000
ATTACHMENT
'ADDITIONAL COMMENTS'
1. Need more handicapped parking
2 Would use regular pool
3. Like to the Community Center built here. (at present location)
4. Need exercise equipment
5. If conveniently located, I do not think it advisable to include teenagers.
6. Present location is ok with a few changes to it.
7. Proposal is far too costly
S. Parking is a problem for me. If I have to walk over 12 block, I go back home.
9. ft is a total mistake to mix the leen Center,with the Community Center.
10. Sometimes this present center requires some hectic situations to fit everyone into
their various individual programs.
11.Will use facilities. I Ike it
12. 1 think the center is adequate for the purpose it's used. But,day trips would be a nice
thing to have every couple of weeks. Also, bi-weekly Sunday brunch trips to a different
restaurant and a side visit to a museum,or a winery,so many...social....things, ...and to
go in as a group sometimes.
13. Difficult to park
14. Call Sarasota, Florida and ask what they do! They ve got a great plan.
15. Parking is a huge problem.
16. We need parking spaces very badly or a parking lot. Most of us have to walk ten blocks
or so-so some seniors cannot come.
17. Parking is the problem. Use some of the park here. It will not harm anyone, would
help seniors.
18. Need Senior Center, NOT COMMUNITY CENTER.
19. We have needed attention for so long-thanks.
20. Need a parking lot
21. We need parking.
22. Senior Center is not used enough to be replaced. Most of excess food goes to
seniors or bridge dub.
23. Seniors should have a building of their own.
24. Parking is lousy.
25, Bider place is needed for parking places.
26. Re therapy pool. Yes, yes, yes,yes&yes.
27 Please stop spending money on the studies and start building. We need it built
now. Why are you wasting money?
28. Use shuttle bus to pick up seniors with no transportation.
29. Should be centrally located.
30. We need more parking space-especially for handicapped seniors.
31. Based on current use-center is strained to capacity now. Sorely need bigger
facility,more parking.
32. 1 have belonged to other senior centers that have better facilities than this.
33. We're in need of a new Senior Center with more parking.
34. We may need larger space, but we need the center to be near downtown and
more available to us.
35. Keep at same location. Why not use old USO building.
36. Our Senior Center now is in an excellent location-ft needs an additional large room
for the large exercise class which gets stuck in the pool room haft the time. Wiry
couldn't a senior parking lot be built behind it in Mitchell Park which is not used much.
1-44
ATTACHMENT
SENIOR CENTER RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE REPORT March 24, 2000
Attachment 1 - Page 2 of 2
37. We need parking.
38. Rent is too high, but current building is adequate.
39. 1 think we need a center that is exclusive for seniors rather than a ushered facility.
40. This situation seems to be getting muddied with too many uses dumped together.
Right now, I would like to see a new Senior Center. Period.
41. I'm new here and will visit the center to meet other seniors and make friends
and socialize as much as possible.
42. 1 use to come 5 days a week before my stroke.
43. Pool very much needed. Many seniors went to CAL POLY indoor heated pool three
times a week for many years until the college kicked out the old people,or canceled
an agreement with the arthritis foundation that makes it possible.
44. Build a new center with adequate parking. Plan to have a nutrition area for daily lunches.
45. I'd prefer a separate building for senior citizens. I think some of the wealthy people in
SLO would be wtlfmg to donate money for it,like was done for the PAC. Especially,
if the center was named after the largest donor, 'Alex Madonna Senior Center'or
Copeland Senior Center,or perhaps after the mother of the Copeland brothers.
46. 1 come 66 miles and pay local taxes for little use.
47. Let's get with dl
48. 1 only use the center for bridge, and I live in Arroyo Grande, so I would only be using
the center for bridge once a week
49. A pool would be great!!!
50. Need more parking, more activities. Members are very nice in exercise class.
Thank you for being there.
51. ! rchen facilities are crucial. Ranges, ovens, and microwaves need to be upgraded.
52. 1 like it where it is. We just need a parking area
53. Parking should be available for the exercise class.
54. Don't know about the pool
55. 1 think the Center needs to offer many, many more activities for Seniors, in one location,
and in better facilities with sufficient parking and ADA considerations. It needs to have a pool
where arthritic seniors can exercise comfortably(85 degrees).
56. 1 feel a Senior Center promotes good health, acquaintance&friendly atmosphere for all.
57. We need more room for exercises, dancing and other entertainment.
58. We have a facility for seniors,and our seniors come to activities, and it is very hard to find
Wig •
59. 1 am a disabled person and need parking as dose as possible, but there are never handicapped
spaces available at the center. PRIORITIE
60. Yes, I am disabled person&find it hard to find a parking space to drop me off and pick me up.
61. 1 use a walker and the people who help me find it very hard to find a parking space.
62. Would use Senior Center often if parking was available.
63. Need more parking spaces and more spacious building for more aotivtty.
64. Parking at Senior Center is horrible. More would come it there was better parking.
65 Would use a therapy pool Ill
66. 1 know others who would also use a therapy pool-I would use it 3x per week.
67. A therapy pool would be an excellent thing. We could have an adapted aquatics class again.
Seniors are very interested.
�s
1 .
n I I we ci intl1 i oci
' ATTACHMENT 2
Questionnaire for those oemana at the San Lois Obispo chy Senior Center
on(dy,_month-Year)
The purpose of this questionnaire is to assist the Parks&Recreation Department and it's
consultants in determining the best location for the proposed Community Center and Therapy Pool.
By answering the following questions,you are saying that"the current building now need as a
Senior Center is inadequate,and should be replaced."H you disagree with this premise, please state
your reasons in the space provided after question 7.
1. How frequently do you visit the City Senior Cerner?
a. at least once every month of the year.
b. at least once every week of the year.
c. If you visit the Senior Center weekly,circle how many days a week: 1 2 3 4 5
2 What is your"Zip Code?" 934_ Name(optional)
3. How far do you travel(one way)to reach the City Senior Center9
less than 1/2 mile; 2-4 miles; 4-6 miles; more than 6 miles.
4. How do you get to the City Senior Center?
In good weather- in bad weather_?
a. 1 walk. a. I walk.
b. I ride my bike. b. 1 ride my bike.
C. I use public transportation. C. I use public transportation.
d, 1 dmre my own automobile. d. I drive my own automobile.
e. I car-pool with others. e. I car-pool with others
f. Others drop me off and pick me up. f. Others drop me off and pick
me up.
g. 1 stay home.
5. When you travel to or from the City Senior Center,do you stop at other places to do shopping
or fitlfiIl other chores? never. sometimes. almost always.
6. Ifyou answered question 4 5 as"sometimes"or"almost always,"check as marry of the places
listed below that you might occasionally stop:
a. Downtown_ b. Grocery shopping. C._Movies.
d. Restaurant e. Clothing shopping f. Place of religion.
g. Visit Friends h. Medical appointment. i. Hospital.
j. City Hall. k. County Building. 1. Library
UL School n. Swimming pool. o. Post Office
P. Bank q. Sports facility. r. Gas station.
S. -Barber/Beauty shop. t.Other locations.
7. If a Therapy pool were available in the city.would you use it? des. no.
Additional Comments:
Thank you for taking time to help us compile information necessary to support the Senior needs in
the city of San Luis Obispo.
AARP Chapter 3213,Bill Storm,President-San Lois Obispo Senior Citizens Center,Dewey Gro President
(Questions selected are with the help of material received from San Luis Obispo Vice Mayor Ken STw2M
ATTACHMENT 3
i
W �
I
� 2 �
i
W t
d
� J •
°C E
to
n a' a
i
lox
N 5e
0
L `
i1
� I
V
J
G ' i
4 s
Y �
• I
I i
�✓ ! v. wr ta7 Cr01 chiMao
v.
d
d �
• I �
I z
1-47