Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-05-18 PRC Agendadi - Agenda ff ■r! PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 5:30 p.m. Wednesday, December 5, 2018 REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER Chair Greg Avakian Parks and Recreation Conference Room 1341 Nipomo Street San Luis Obispo, CA ROLL CALL: Commissioners Kari Applegate, Susan Olson, Keri Schwab, Robert Spector, Shay Stewart, Vice Chair Rodney Thurman, and Chair Greg Avakian PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, people may address the Committee about items not on the agenda. Persons wishing to speak should come forward and state their name and address. Comments are limited to three minutes per person. Items raised at this time are generally referred to staff and, if action by the Committee is necessary, may be scheduled for a future meeting. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Committee of October 3, 2018. (Note, there was not meeting of November 7th due to a lack of a quorum, therefore the most recent minutes to review and approve are from October, 2018) CONSENT ITEMS 1. Update on Therapy Pool Hours of Use and Santa Rosa Softball Field. Recommendation: Receive and update from staff regarding hours of use of the Therapy Pool by age and continued shared use by adults and children. Receive an update on the maintenance work completed by Public Works to mitigate Dust at Santa Rosa Softball Field. Parks and Recreation Committee Agenda for December 5, 2018 2. Directors Report. Recommendation: Receive written Director's Report briefly summarizing community events and activities. 3. Proposed Goals for 2019-21 Financial Plan Recommendation: Receive the proposed PRC Goals for the 2019-21 Financial Plan and Forward to Council. 4. Reschedule the regular meeting of January 2, 2019 to January 9, 2019 due to school and other winter break closures. Recommendation: Reschedule the meeting of January 2, 2019 to a week later, January 9, 2019, to be held at the Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, so that additional public space is provided to discuss themes emerging from the Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan update. (Note no report with this recommendation). BUSINESS ITEMS 1. Update on Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan Project (Stanwyck/Scott - 60 minutes) Recommendation: 1. Review, discuss, and approve (as amended if needed) the Community Needs Assessment Engagement Memorandum (refer to Attachment 1). 2. Review, discuss, and approve (as amended if needed) the City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey Findings Report (refer to Attachment 2). 3. Identify topics for further discussion and public input at the January and February 2019 Parks and Recreation Commission meetings. 2. Review and Take Action of San Luis Ranch Park Plans (CDD— 30 minutes) Recommendation: Review and approve the proposed Final Design of the park required in the San Luis Ranch project. 2 1 P a g e Parks and Recreation Committee Agenda for December 5, 2018 SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS 1. Subcommittee Liaison Reports (Chair Avakian —15 minutes) 2. Communication ADJOURNMENT To the rescheduled Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee as approved by the PRC to Wednesday, January 9, at 5:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California. Whe City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the Parks and Recreation Department at (805) 781-7300 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (805) 781-7107. Meeting audio recordings can be found at the following web address: h :Ilo cn ov.slocit .or WebLink/IIfollb1014/Rowl.as x 3 1 P a g e I ray 1 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 03 October 2018 Regular Meeting of the Advisory Body Commission CALL TO ORDER A Regular Meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission was called to order on the Third day of October 2018 at 5:30 p.m. in the Parks and Recreation Administration Conference Room located at 1341 Nipomo Street, San Luis Obispo, California, by Chair Avakian. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Avakian, Vice Chair Thurman, Commissioner Spector, Commissioner Applegate, Commissioner Stewart, Commissioner Schwab Absent: Commissioner Olson Staff: Parks and Recreation Director Shelly Stanwyck Recreation Manager Devin Hyfield Recreation Manager Lindsey Stephenson Associate Planner, Shawna Scott PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Fran Edwards: City resident since 1969; SLO Swim Center Therapy Pool Hours. Would like to see a year-round extension of the summer noon lap policy where the deep end of the therapy pool is reserved for adult use only from 11:30 a.m. — 1:30 p.m. Staff will get more information on numbers and usage of Therapy Pool and return to the Commission with the data. CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES ACTION: APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR AUGUST 01, 2018. 1. Consideration of Minutes CARRIED 6:0:0:1 to approve the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Body for the regular meeting of 08/01/18 as motioned by Stewart and second by Thurman. AYES: AVAKIAN, THURMAN, SPECTOR, APPLEGATE, STEWART, SCHWAB NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: OLSON 2. Review and Take Action. Parks Associated with West Creek Project Planner, Dave Watson presented an overview of the final park design for the Westcreek Park associated with the Righetti Development. The development featured a Creek Park on Lot 72 and Linear Park on Lot 69. PRC determined the final design of the park and the improvements proposed should receive a credit. Parks: Linear Park Lot 69, Creek Trail Park Lot 72 — request for Parkland Improvement Fee Credit not to exceed $143,500. Public Comment APPLICANT Aaron Abbott, Robbins Reed: Request for potential credit on two areas of the project; scale reduced due to the connectivity of the park and amenities as discussed at previous PRC meeting. Commission Comments followed Chair Avakian asked about pedestrian access from different access points of the park and responsibility for maintenance of the park. Commissioner Applegate inquired about surface of the play structure, the rubber tire piece chips or wood chips. Commissioner Spector asked about benches in relation to the proposed parks and if the more lighting is needed for the safety of the park. Vice Chair Thurman commented that request for trees is confirmed from last presentation and that the adjacent house porch lights will be the lights on the park. Commissioner Stewart asked about the addition of shade structures above the play structure and hydration stations. MOTION: APPROVE OR CONDITIONALLY APPROVE FINAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR THE LOT 72 CREEK PARK AND LOT 69 LINEAR PARK. CARRIED 6:0:0:1 as motioned by Stewart and second by Thurman. AYES: AVAKIAN, THURMAN, SPECTOR, APPLEGATE, STEWART, SCHWAB NOES: NONE DRAFT Minutes — Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of October 03, 2018 Page 2 ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: OLSON MOTION: APPROVE THE FEE CREDIT NOT TO EXCEED $143,500 TO BE APPLIED TO LOTS 72 AND 69 IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR GENERAL PUBLIC USE. CARRIED 6:0:0:1 as motioned by Stewart and second by Thurman. AYES: AVAKIAN, THURMAN, SPECTOR, APPLEGATE, STEWART, SCHWAB NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: OLSON 3. Review and Recommend Approval by Council of Update of Irish Hills Conservation and Open Space Plan inclu(fina Waddell Ranch �- Natural Resources Manager Bob Hill discussed the additions to the Irish Hill Open Space, along with the Waddell Ranch regarding the proposed trails and impact to use and maintenance of the new property, 154 acres. The Planning Commission approved the project on September 26, 2018. Public Comment NONE Commission Comments followed Chair Avakian asked if the boardwalk planned or in place, and any planned signage to explain the interesting history and education of the property. Vice Chair Thurman asked for clarification regarding the term "negative declaration" and if there is any additional planned fuel reduction beyond the eucalyptus grove. Commissioner Stewart inquired about the other structures on the property in addition to the windmill. Commissioner Schwab asked if there will be mountain biking on the entire property. ACTION: RECOMMEND TO COUNCIL THE APPROVAL THE UPDATE OF THE IRISH HILLS CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN TO INCLUDE WADDELL RANCH. CARRIED 6:0:0:1 as motioned by Spector and second by Stewart. DRAFT Minutes — Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of October 03, 2018 Page 3 CARRIED 6:0:0:1 as motioned by Stewart and second by Thurman. AYES: AVAKIAN, THURMAN, SPECTOR, APPLEGATE, STEWART, SCHWAB NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: OLSON 4. Discussion: Discuss September 13, 2018 Bright Ideas public workshop for Master Plan and Element Update. Associate Planner Shawna Scott debriefed on the Public Workshop held on September 13, 2018 at the Ludwick Community Center. Staff discussed the highlights of the event with some brief preliminary feedback. Next steps for the Master Plan and Element Update to include a recommendation of using November and December meetings to discuss various topics from the data collected so far. Public Comment None. Commission Comments followed Chair Avakian likes the idea of "block parties" within parks and mobile "party" trailers at parks connecting communities within the parks. Commissioner Applegate would like to see separating the topics at the meetings — 2 per meeting, break out the topics including new ideas within the existing parks. Commissioner Spector asked if there are any surprises in the ideas taken from the Workshop and noted the need for more trees in parks, and quiet spaces within the parks. Would like to see family activated events in the parks. Vice Chair Thurman agrees with the focus of the 4 topics: Programs & Activities, Parks & Facilities, Parks in Need of Love, Connecting to Parks and Events in Parks. Commissioner Stewart would like to see continued follow up, especially since this is a 20 -year plan and continue the community engagement and the movement forward. Having back to back meetings in November and December will be difficult given the timeframe and holidays. Would like to see future public workshops held at other venues, other than Ludwick Community Center. 5. Goal SettinE: Identify Potential Goals to Recommend to Council for the 2019-21 Financial Plan. Director Stanwyck lead a discussion regarding the goals of the Parks and Recreation Commission to recommend to Council for the upcoming 2019-21 Financial Plan. DRAFT Minutes — Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of October 03, 2018 Page 4 Public Comment None. Commission Comments followed Chair Avakian asked about the status of the CIP projects Sinsheimer tennis court lights and pickleball courts. Commissioner Spector wanted to make sure that services are not decreased and would lie to identify two to four areas to focus goals, i.e. community building activities. Would like staff to identify areas the Commission would want to push for, logical, defensible and hold up. Vice Chair Thurman asked about the status of North Broad St Park. COMMITTEE COMMUNICATIONS 6. Director's Report Director Stanwyck provided a brief update of current Parks and Recreation programming. Revitalize the Strategic Plan September Scramble on Saturday, September 29th a great success! LIAISON REPORTS 7. Subcommittee Liaison Reports • Adult and Senior Programming_ Commissioner Spector. Seniors are busy and active with many classes. • Active Trans ortation Committee: Commissioner Olson. Absent. • CAy Facilities Damon Garcia Golf Pool & Joint Use Facilities : Commissioner Applegate. Back to Pool Night, High School Water Polo Boys and Girls, Kikuyu Grass holding, Jack House Wedding season ends, Turf fields start closure for reseeding and maintenance, Vlandemir Cruz is the new maintenance coordinator, and a new irrigation system is being installed. • Jack House Committee. Commissioner Schwab. Meeting in October discussed the survey of community events at the Jack House. • Tree Committee: Vice Chair Thurman. No report. • Youth Sports Association: Youth Sports Association did not meet. No report. 8. Commission Communications ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. to the next regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission held on November 07, 2018 at 5:30 p.m., at the Council Chambers, 990 Palm St, San Luis Obispo, California. DRAFT Minutes — Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of October 03, 2018 Page 5 APPROVED BY THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION: 11/07/18 DRAFT Minutes — Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting of October 03, 2018 Page 6 Meeting Date: Dec 05, 2018 Parks and Recreation Commission Item Number: Consent#1 AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THERAPY POOL HOURS OF USE AND SANTA ROSA SOFTBALL FIELD Prepared by: Devin Hyfield, Recreation Manager RECOMMENDATION Receive an update from staff regarding hours of use of the Therapy Pool by age and continued shared use by adults and children. and on the maintenance work completed by Public Works to mitigate dust at Santa Rosa Softball Field. DISCUSSION Background During the Public Comment portion of the Parks and Recreation Commission meetings held in August and October, items were discussed that required follow-up. In August, Richard Russel addressed the commission on the conditions of the Santa Rosa Softball Field, maintained by the City's Public Works Parks Maintenance division. In October, Fran Edwards addressed the commission regarding the potential of extending the summer noon lap policy at the SLO Swim Center where the deep end of the therapy pool is reserved solely for adult use from 11:30 AM through 1:30 PM. Staff were tasked to return to the PRC at a later meeting to provide updates for both topics. Report Highlights Santa Rosa Softball Field The softball field at Santa Rosa Park is utilized for most of the year for Adult Softball, a league operated by the SLO City Parks and Recreation's Community Services Division which has been held at Santa Rosa Park for over four decades. At the PRC meeting in August of 2018, it was brought to the attention of the PRC commission that dust created from the softball fields was affecting the neighbors adjacent to the fields, specifically the properties located on Ellen Way. Additionally, the lack of trees separating the fields from the properties were allowing for foul balls to enter the backyards of the Ellen Way residents. UPDATE ON THERAPY POOL HOURS OF USE AND SANTA ROSA SOFTBALL FIELD Page 2 Representatives from the SLO City Parks Maintenance division, specifically Interim Parks Maintenance Supervisor Adam Basden and retired Parks Maintenance Supervisor Jeff Hendricks have meet and spoken with Mr. Russel over the years to discuss the fields and the steps maintenance takes on an annual basis to mitigate the impact of the fields on the residents surrounding Santa Rosa Park. During the maintenance shut down of the Softball fields (mid-November through mid-February) Parks Maintenance developed a process of scraping and off -hauling the powdery material that was determined to be the main cause of the dust. The process proved to be very effective and has become a part of the annual maintenance for the fields at Santa Rosa Park. In July 2018, Park Maintenance staff added two tons of field conditioner to the fields to decrease the creation of dust. Park Maintenance has determined that these two processes combined with regular maintenance of the fields should sufficiently decrease the dust created by the fields. A row of pine trees used to be along the fence line separating the Santa Rosa Softball fields from the homes on Ellen Way. Due to the long-term drought conditions between 2010 and 2015 the trees became diseased and had to be removed between 2015 and 2016. The trees provided significant coverage from foul balls entering the homes adjacent to the softball fields. Parks Maintenance has meet with the City Arborist to discuss the types of trees that could be planted along the property and, as a result, 24 -inch box Raywood Ash trees were planted as part of the Arbor Day celebration on November 3, 2018. The Raywood Ash trees are fast growing and will help with both foul balls and dust as they continue to mature. UPDATE ON THERAPY POOL HOURS OF USE AND SANTA ROSA SOFTBALL FIELD Paae 3 SLO Swim Center - Therapy Pool In 2016, to meet the needs of the community during the busy summer months (June through August), management staff at the SLO Swim Center decided to restrict access to the deep end of the therapy pool during the noon lap hours (11:30 am - 1:30 pm) to adults only because at that time of year the Therapy Pool is open for all uses during recreation swim. At the conclusion of summer, recreational swim ends, and the Therapy Pool deep end is limited to adults only during the first hour, 11:30am - 12:30 pm. In response to public comment, and to determine the nature of use during the second hour of noon lap (I2:30pm to 1:30pm) staff have analyzed the uses between August 27 and November 30. Staff tallied the amount of pool users (parent, child, or other) in the deep, middle, and shallow areas of the therapy pool at randomly generated times. The average therapy pool users were calculated per day as a result of the data collected. On average, the day of the week that presented parent or child use of the deep end of the therapy pool were Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. Monday through Thursday did not show significant uses by parents or children in the deep portion of the pool. Avg Total Per Day Deep End Mid Shallow 12:30-1:15 PM Dates Parent Child Other Users Parent Child Other Users Parent Child Other Users Monday 14 0 0 7.07 2.21 4.50 0.14 1.43 2.57 0.00 Tuesday 13 0 0 6.31 1.08 1.38 0.46 0.77 1.46 0.08 Wednesday 14 0 0 4.14 0.71 0.86 0.21 0.71 0.86 0.00 Thursday 11 0 0 7.00 1.91 2.36 0.82 1.09 1.55 0.00 Friday 13 0 0.08 7.00 2.54 3.46 0.00 0.46 0.85 0.00 Saturday 11 0.09 0.18 7.45 2.91 4.09 0.18 1.36 1.55 0.36 Sunday 11 0.55 0.73 5.73 3.55 4.45 0.36 0.91 1.82 0.00 Given the limited number of children using the deep -end staff does not recommend eliminating their use from 12:30 to 1:30pm at this time. Staff will continue to monitor the use in the spring to determine if the warmer months result in a change in use patterns. Aquatics •High School Water Polo concluded. •Great Gobbler November Swim Meet •Holiday Closures; December 24-26 Community Services •Gobble Wobble a success! •Fall softball season concluded. •Youth Basketball Season starts in January lots of prep work. •SLO Skatepark and Gardens looking great and well used. Facilities •Holiday Closures: LCC and Senior Center December 17th to New Year. •Annual renovations of various fields. •AYSO Season concluded and Damon Garcia open for lots of play unless closed due to weather. •Spring Scheduling in progress. Golf *Hiring complete for maintenance staff. ■Aeration preceded ra€ns - greens getting slushed naturally, yay rain. +Annual winter work and rules. RMgem • ' Youth Services ■ , p' m -W h � 9f' .S' *Had wanderfuI minimurn days. r *Closed during school Winter Break last week of December and first week of January_ R Parks and Recreation Commission AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: PROPOSED GOALS FOR 2019-21 Prepared by: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director RECOMMENDATION Approve Goals to be Considered by Council for 2019-21 Financial Plan. DISCUSSION Meeting Date: Dec 05, 2018 Item Number: Consent #3 City Advisory Bodies provide input to Council in preparation for its two-year financial plan. The PRC discussed this opportunity at its October meeting and asked staff to return with short and long-term goals focused on addressing the update to the Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan. The proposed goals below represent a synthesis of what the PRC discussed and should be reviewed, discussed, amended, and if possible approved for recommendation to Council. Timing Goal 2019-21 Provide Funding to Parks and Recreation for the Acquisition of Equipment to be used for Pop Up Events that are community building in nature. Support and implement the funding for the acquisition of an event trailer and materials (tables, chairs, sound system, etc) necessary for the Parks and Recreation department to lead events such as pop up events, movies, concerts in Parks and the Mission Plaza and for delivery and use to neighborhoods for neighborhood events like block parties. 2019-21 Continue to support Parks and Recreation staff, programs, facilities, and parks in the 2019-21 Financial Plan. Longer Term Upon adoption, identify funding for the implementation of the Parks and Recreation f. 2020 -and beyond I Master Plan in priority order. Parks and Recreation Commission Agenda Report Meeting Date: 12/05/2018 Item Number: Business Item #1 DATE: December 5, 2018 FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director Prepared By: Shawna Scott, Senior Planner, Community Development SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Review, discuss, and approve (as amended if needed) the Community Needs Assessment Engagement Memorandum (refer to Attachment 1). 2. Review, discuss, and approve (as amended if needed) the City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey Findings Report (refer to Attachment 2). 3. Identify topics for further discussion and public input at the January and February 2019 Parks and Recreation Commission meetings. DISCUSSION Background In 2017, the City Parks and Recreation and Community Development Departments initiated the update to the City's Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan and the Master Plan (the "Update"). The Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) reviewed and provided feedback on the Project Plan for the Master Plan and Element on September 6th and October 4th of 2017 and recommended the City Council approve the Project Plan. On November 7, 2017, the City Council approved the Project Plan, and a consultant team led by WRT was selected in February 2018 to support the Master Plan and Element Staff team. Since that time, the team has implemented the foundational stages of the Project Plan by conducting extensive initial community outreach as outlined below and summarized in the Community Needs Assessment Engagement Memorandum (Attachment 1) and as planned in the approved Community Engagement Plan (Attachment 3). In addition, the statistical survey conducted by ETC Institute has concluded, and the results are available for review in the Needs Assessment Survey Findings Report (Attachment 2). Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update Page 2 Actions completed and ongoing include: Date October 2017 Action PRC approves Update Project Plan November 2017 Council approves Update Project Plan April 2018 PRC approves Community Engagement Plan S rin Summer 2018 Staff hosts pop -ups promotiM September Workshop September 13 2018 Bright Ideas Public Workshop August -October 2018 ETC — Needs Assessment Survey Ongoing Comment cards and email interested list gathering Ongoing E-Newsletter/Email blasts Ongoing Social media: education, meeting announcements OLagoing Neighborhood meetings staff available for Ongoing Ongoing Public input and communications to staff I Oen City Hall PRC Approval of Community Needs Assessment Engagement Memorandum ("WRT's Memorandum") The review and approval of WRT's Memorandum by the PRC is needed as the document will be incorporated into WRT's Community Needs Assessment report. That report will contain other inputs that the PRC will also consider at future meetings. Additional public input to the Needs Assessment Report will include: public comments received in person, via email, via comment cards, as well as public testimony at hearings, neighborhood meetings, and Open City Hall; the results of the statistically -valid survey; the results of the open online survey; and an anticipated spring public workshop. The WRT Memorandum attached to this staff report is the first of many inputs for the PRC to review and consider leading up to a comprehensive report on the community's future parks, facilities, and recreational needs. Consistent with the Community Needs Assessment Engagement Plan (designed to ensure our community's values and aspirations are taken in to create a solid foundation for the Update) staff conducted a diverse set of outreach activities to inform, engage, and collect input from community members. These activities included pop-up events at City parks, facilities, and events; the Bright Ideas Public Workshop use of comment cards; a statistically -valid survey; an open online survey (ongoing); Open City Hall (ongoing); use of social media including Facebook and Instagram (ongoing); and additional opportunities for community input including conversations with staff, neighborhood meetings, and submitted correspondence (ongoing). These efforts — and what we learned from them — are the subject of the attached Community Needs Assessment Engagement Memorandum. PRC Approval of Needs Assessment Survey Findings Report from ETC Institute ("ETC Survey") The review and approval of ETC's Survey by the PRC is needed as mentioned above, the report will be incorporated into WRT's Community Needs Assessment report, in addition to other information as Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update Page 3 summarized above. The attached ETC Survey will be used in addition to all other public input to identify residents' priorities for parks and recreation in the City. A brief summary of the ETC Survey is presented below, and the full report is available for review as attached. ETC Survey Summary ETC administered a parks and recreation needs assessment survey specific to the City of San Luis Obispo, which started late summer and concluded in the early autumn of 2018. A survey packet containing a cover letter, a copy of the survey, and a postage -paid return envelope was mailed by ETC to a random sample of households in the City. Residents who received the survey were given the option of returning the survey by mail or completing it on-line. To encourage participation, ETC sent follow-up emails and placed phone calls to the households that received the survey. A total of 507 residents completed the survey, which exceeded the goal to obtain completed surveys from a minimum of 400 residents. As shown in the graphical excerpts from the Findings Report, the respondents represent a good cross-section of the community (see Figure 1. Respondent Individual Age and Figure 2. Respondent Household Ages). Q21. Demographics: What is your age? bype—sage of-ponderas 45 -54 years 16°5 9—: EIC isst (2016) 35 - 44 years 21% 55 - 64 years 21% x 35 years 22% Q22. Demographics: Ages of People in Household bypmenbge ofho—hold m upaMs 20-24 years 15-1596e� 9% 25-34 years 10-14 years 13% 6% 5-9 years S% T 546 years 0% 4554 years 9% 9a : EIC I.It.(2016) Under 5 years 7°$ rs• 4 °I. 65.78 years 1:56 34 1ews 1.11t Figure 1. Respondent Individual Age Figure 2. Respondent Household Ages The responses to the survey questions provide an additional source of data that sheds a light on resident's values, hopes and dreams, and unmet needs. Based on responses to survey question 31, the top four unmet amenity needs are swimming pools, nature park/botanical garden, adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline), and shaded play area. Responses to survey question 15, which requested identification of the top four actions the City could take to "improve, repurpose, and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities" identified: acquiring or repurposing existing land to be used for open space and trails; conducting renovations or developing new facilities for designated area for walking and biking; acquiring or repurposing existing land to be used for small neighborhood parks; and incorporating park design, materials, and programs that are sustainable (refer to the Findings Report for the complete results). 1 Question stated: "Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each amenity listed below by circling either "Yes" or `No". If "Yes", please rate how well your need for amenities of this type are being met using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met". Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update Page 4 ETC's Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was used to equally weigh the importance respondents place on specific amenities., and how many respondents have unmet needs related to the identified amenity. Based on ETC's PIR, the following amenities or facilities were rated the highest: swimming pools, open space trails, park trails, passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas, shaded play areas, dog park, and nature parkibotanical garden (refer to the Findings Report for the complete results). An important thing to note is that while there were a few questions about open space in the survey and many of the survey responses reflect residents' longstanding high value of open space and access to open space (including existing trails) this data is intended to be used solely for the purposes of the update of the City's Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan. The City's adopted Conservation and Open Space Element and conservation plans' for each of its open space and natural preserve areas are not a part of the scope of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update; the Update will not include any amendments or modifications to the adopted Conservation and Open Space Element or conservation plans. Residents were asked questions about "trails" and passive recreation as the City has both in its parks and in its open spaces. The questions attempted to gather data about both and to avoid confusion and overlap by residents. Also, initial input from focus groups demonstrated an interest by residents about passive recreation and open spaces in City parks. The data from residents that relates specifically to parks will be what is used in developing the final Community Needs Assessment report. PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION CONSIDERATION As noted in the Project Plan for the Update, the PRC is the primary advisory body whose purview is to review and make recommendations for changes that could have an impact on the City's parks and park facilities. The PRO's approval of both the WRT Memorandum and the ETC Survey is sought so that they can be used as foundational documents for the Community Needs Assessment report. In determining to approve these documents the PRC may want to discuss the following as well: 1. Are there any questions about the WRT Memorandum and/or the ETC Survey? 2. Are there additional issues and/or opportunities that should be identified for further discussion and evaluation during the community engagement process to compliment or supplement the findings so far? 3. Are there any questions about the next steps forward? In addition to the questions above, Staff is seeking input from the PRC regarding specific topics/themes for discussion at the upcoming January and February 2019 PRC meetings so that the meetings will be focused and stakeholders can be notified of each meeting's focused topics. Staff recommends the following umbrella topics with specific themes to be identified by the PRC for each. Staff suggests reading the unsolicited comments provided by residents at the workshop and in the survey as there are many ideas contained in each. 2 Open Space and Conservation Plans available for review online: h_ttps://www.slggity.or overnrncnt/department- directo /ci -administration/natural-resourceslo en -s acc- laps Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update Page 5 Parks and Park Amenities a. Which parks would PRC members like to discuss more specifically? b. Are there park amenities PRC members would like to discuss? c. Other? 2. Facilities (Includes the SLO Swim Center, Damon Garcia, etc) a. What facilities would the PRC like to discuss? b. What topics related to the facilities would the PRC like to discuss? 3. Programs a. Are there programs that the PRC would like to focus on? 4. Community Partnerships a. Are there community partnerships the PRC would like to focus on? S. Other a. What other topics would the PRC like to discuss? NEXT STEPS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR FURTHER PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT As described in the Community Engagement Plan, there will be many, many more opportunities for public input prior to preparation of the draft Master Plan and Element. As outlined below, all reports will be provided to the PRC and additional advisory bodies and the City Council, as applicable. Staff encourages the public to review these documents, as well, and provide comments throughout the Master Plan and Element update process. Highlights of next steps include the following: January, February, PRC Meetings — March 2019 1 Workshop Items March or April 2019 Draft Community Needs Assessment Spring 2019 Community Needs Assessment Public Workshop 1. PRC and public discussion 2. Focused topics of discussion 3. January meeting held at SLO Swim Center, 900 Southwood Drive, to encourage public input 4. February and March meetings held at Council Chambers, 990 Palm, to encourage public input 5. Extra outreach and public notification 6. March meeting to be determined if needed 1. PRC review of Draft Community Needs Assessment report by WRT 2. Public review and input 1. Discussion of Community Needs Assessment 2. WRT present 3. Engagement and discussion of themes Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update Page 6 Late Spring 2019 Advisory Body and 1. Upon recommendation by PRC and other advisory Council approval of bodies review and recommend approval of Community Needs Assessment — Assessment 2. Council consideration 3. Public meetings and engagement for ALL As noted above, prior to the adoption of the Community Needs Assessment report, the January and February PRC meetings will include conversations about emerging trends with the public. Staff will support the PRC with the facilitation of these two meetings. The January 9, 2019 PRC meeting will be held at the SLD Swim Center (900 Southwood Drive, San Luis Obispo) and the February 6, 2019 and March 6, 2019 PRC meetings will be held in the City Council Chambers (City Hall, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo) to accommodate the public. ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Community Needs Assessment Engagement Memorandum 2. Draft Needs Assessment Survey Findings Report 3. Community Engagement Plan (approved April 2018) ATTACHMENT 1 WRT) MEMORANDUM To: Shelly Stanwyck, Director Date: October 30, 2018 City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department From: Peter Winch Associate Planner Shawna Scott, Senior Planner Ref. No.: 08143.01 City of San Luis Obispo Project: Update: San Luis Obispo Parks + Community Development Department Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Re: Summary of Public Outreach and Engagement CC: John Gibbs Background In 2017, the City, as directed by Council, funded and initiated the update of the Parks and Recreation General Plan Element and Master Plan update (the "Update"). The purpose of the update of the Element and Master Plan is to address current and future needs for the City of San Luis Obispo's parks, recreation facilities, programs, and services consistent with the objectives outlined in the adopted 2017-2019 financial plan and 2020 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan (2020 Strategic Plan). The creation of a prioritized Master Plan is intended to provide a comprehensive statement of the City's parks and recreation, priorities, goals, and implementation actions for the next 20 years. The Element and Master Plan policies and programs will serve as a blueprint, guiding the City and its various entities in priority setting and resource allocation. It is understood that the availability of financial resources can and will affect the timing of implementation but will not change the goals and intent. The Parks and Recreation Commission was assigned the duty of being the primary advisory body to for this project. A project plan and request for adjunctive consultant services was approved by Council, November 7, 2017. In February 2018, WRT was selected as the City's lead consultant to provide support during this process. In April 2018, WRT, held focused meetings with key community partners and stakeholders. In May 2018, the PRC reviewed the community engagement plan for this project included here as an attachment. Community engagement is vital to identifying, understanding, and incorporating San Luis Obispo residents' needs, values, and aspirations into the update of the City's Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan and a Master Plan. During the first phase of the Update, City Staff and the Consultant Team conducted a diverse set of outreach activities intended to inform community members about the process and collaborate with on their needs and vision for parks and recreation. These efforts—and what we learned from them—are the subject of this memorandum. WRT, LLC 1 478 Tehama Street, Suite 28 1 San Francisco, CA 94103 wrtdesign.com 1 415.575.4722 James Stickley CA LA -4251 John Gibbs CA LA -4417 T:\Ady1soryF1odyUP1oads\Parks and Recreation Commission\Agendas\Parks and Rec Update\31-7-1g WRT Community Needs Assessment -Engagement Memoyubllc door ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 12 WRT) MEMORANDUM Foundational Public Outreach and Community Engagement As identified in the Project Plan for the Update, determining community needs has four primary components: • Community Engagement Park and Facility Analysis Recreation Services Analysis Management and Operations Analysis Following the PRC's approval of the Community Engagement Plan in April 2018, staff developed a comprehensive public engagement effort for the Community Engagement component of the "determining community needs" phase of the Update process. Because it is such a critical component of the Update, the Community Engagement Plan identifies goals and a preferred series of outreach components to inform, consult and collaborate. The kit of tools builds on the existing community engagement culture in San Luis Obispo, consistent with the City's Public Engagement and Noticing Manual. Staff took the approach of informing the public about the project itself, and the opportunity it presented for the community to share hopes and dreams about the future of parks and recreation in San Luis Obispo. With this in mind, outreach efforts conducted June through August focused on two foundational questions: What do you love about City of SLO Parks, Activities, and Recreational Facilities? What do you wish to have in 20 years for City of SLO Parks, Activities, and Recreational Facilities? Pop -ups. Over the course of the summer (May through August), City Staff conducted over 25 "pop-up" events with the Parks and Recreation "Bright Ideas" bicycle to reach San Luis Obispo residents and visitors in parks, facilities, programs, and events. During these pop -ups, the public had an opportunity to provide commenLs un portable white boards and take photos with the "Bright Ideas" bicycle for sharing on the Parks and Recreation Instagram account. Comment cards were also provided, which included the two foundational questions identified above, as well as City contact information, and space for the commenter to provide contact information. These cards could be handed to City staff, mailed to the Parks and Recreation Department, or dropped into comment card collection boxes and Parks and Recreation facilities. Additional marketing materials included "Bright Ideas" stickers and a "Save the Date" magnet for the public workshop held in September 2018. ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 13 WRT ) MEMORANDUM Neighborhood Meeting. At the request of the Las Praderas neighborhood, City Staff met with interested neighbors to discuss the Update and the hopes and dreams for the Las Praderas Park and city as a whole. Staff continues to be available to go out into San Luis Obispo neighborhoods at the request of residents. Social Media and Website. To foster engagement in the process, Parks and Recreation Staff maintained and updated the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update website with new information, and posted updates and photos on the Department's Facebook page. Photos from pop-up events and meetings were posted to the Department's Instagram. At all events, Staff collected contact information, allowing individuals to add their names and email addresses to the growing interested parties list in order to receive all email updates regarding workshops, key Parks and Recreation Commission meetings, and opportunities for input and engagement. Other Opportunities for Outreach and Engagement. Staff also received comments by email and on the Open City Hall online portal. Additional pipelines for public comments included direct communications with Staff via phone and email, distribution of comment cards at the Parks and Recreation Department office, facilities, and events, and through the Open City Hall online portal. In addition, a survey was conducted August to October 2018 to establish residents' priorities for parks and recreation in the City of San Luis Obispo. The survey was mailed to a random sample of San Luis Obispo households. A total of 507 surveys were returned, allowing the survey to exceed its response rate goal and achieve a high level of statistical confidence. This will be discussed in a separate memo. "Bright Ideas" Public Workshop Supported by this extensive outreach, including multiple emails to a list over 6,000, over 600 people attended a participatory three-hour drop in interactive engagement workshop held at the Ludwick Community Center on September 13, 2018. Utilizing a drop-in format yielded great results. The extended timeframe allowed people to come for as brief or long a period as desired. Both main entrances of the Ludwick Center were open and staffed, and the gym was set up with one informational and seven interactive "stations," each designed to get different types of input on parks, facilities, and recreation in San Luis Obispo. At sign -in stations, Staff gave members of the public Passports to be stamped (encouraging attendees to stop at each interactive station) and returned for eligibility for entrance in a drawing for a FitbitT"^. The first station, in the main foyer, was informational about the Update process itself and staffed by Community Development planners. Those staff were able to address general questions about the Update and the overall planning process. Within the main gym were six activity stations where workshop attendees could address focused questions or complete various exercises; a seventh "station" was provided for children. Each of these activities, and the resulting feedback, is summarized below. ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 14 WRT) MEMORANDUM Comments, Pop -Up, and Workshop Public Input Summary Community input received during the workshop, the pop -ups, emailed responses, and received comment cards, and open City Hall are condensed to a series of key topics as they were presented at the workshop Assessing Parks and Facilities At the "Parks in Need of Love" station, attendees were given an opportunity to fill out a "report card" on the condition of one or more parks and provide comments on specific needs at those parks or facilities. Generally the community rated the condition of San Luis Obispo's parks facilities as average to slightly above average. Ten parks received the greatest share of report cards. Average "grades" for each of these parks, along with the number of report cards received, is shown in Table 1 "Report Card" Grades; r San Lu-;- Obispo forks and Facilities. V Sinsheimer Park was both the most -often graded park and the one that attendees gave the highest ratings, with a B average. Sinsheimer was noted for its "wonderful" play area and hill slide; several people noted the need for more shade. Sinsheimer Stadium, a facility within Sinsheimer Park, however, was given poor marks (a D- average). The Stadium's restrooms and public address system were especially identified for improvements. Other parks that received substantial feedback included: • Laguna Lake Park (average grade: D+) was described by several commenters as needing a fully - fenced or otherwise improved dog park. Some called for dredging of the lake. • Meadow Park (average grade: B-) was described as pretty and serene, but noted that the community building, the paths, bridges, and workout stations all needed updating, and others commented on the park's negative uses by homeless. • At French Park (B-), many commenters requested dedicated pickleball courts, and some felt maintenance had slipped. ■ Islay Hill Park (D) was described as a park with a great location in need of updated equipment and new ground material, as well as better signage for the trailheads. • Anholm Park (C+) was the subject of affectionate comments, and is well -liked for its shade, but some felt that the neighborhood needs a "real" park. • Emerson Park (C+) is well -liked but needs restrooms. • Mitchell Park (C) is well -liked as a gathering place near downtown, with a nice combination of facilities; homeless activity and trash are reported as problems. • SLO Swim Center (C) also received many positive comments; people wanted shade over the seating area and longer operating hours. WRT l MEMORANDUM Table 1: "Report Card" Grades for San Luis Obispo Parks and Facilities Park Sinsheimer Park Meadow Park DeVaul Park French Park Santa Rosa Park Damon -Garcia S Cuesta Park Throop Park Anholm Park SLO Swim Center Mitchell Park Johnson Park Emerson Park Mission Plaza Complex Laguna Lake Park Islay Hill Park Sinsheimer Stadium Las Praderas Mini Park Programs and Activities Average Grade Report Cards B 47 B- 21 B- 4 18 6 5 6 4 11 10 10 2 10 3 25 16 13 F 3 ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 15 The "Dreams of Programs and Activities" workshop station gave participants a chance to express their priorities for programs and activities. A presentation board at the station showed a range of examples of people engaging in activities at parks and recreation facilities. Workshop participants were asked to write, using sticky notes, what types of activities they felt should be the focus in the coming years. Children at the "Parks, Jr." station also got a chance to express their preferences, responding to images of different types of facilities and activities using "dots" to communicate their favorites. People of all ages cited a diverse array of programs and activities. Programs identified by the most people at the "Dreams of Programs and Activities" included swimming, pickleball, yoga, kids' programs, environmental education, gardening, and others shown on Table 2 Programs and Activities that Should be a Focus in the Years to Come. ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 16 WRT ) MEMORANDUM Table 2: Programs and Activities that Should be a Focus in the Years to Come Activity Responses Activity Responses Swimming 32 Bike education 5 Pickleball 23 Clean up events 5 Yoga 15 Fitness 5 Kids' programs 14 Hiking 5 Environmental education 11 Camps 4 Gardening 10 Chess 4 Aqua aerobics 8 Community activities 4 Biking 7 Dance classes 4 Dogs 7 Kayaking 4 Youth programs 7 Language classes 4 Youth sports 7 Martial arts 4 Family activities 6 Tai chi 4 ATTACHMENT 1 WRT) MEMORANDUM The programs and activities may be seen as "clumping" into a number of broad core program areas: aquatics, health/fitness/wellness, enrichment and life skills, environmental education and stewardship, outdoor recreation, youth, and special events. Children expressed many specific requests that could loosely be grouped into a few broad categories. The most popular of these was new/improved play equipment, both indoor and outdoor, including unique features like ziplines, foam pits, climbing trees, and giant chess sets. Most of the remaining responses fell into one of these categories: recreational classes (e.g. dance, Spanish, karate), events and excursions (e.g. overnight camping, outdoor movies, visits to the zoo), activities related to video games, requests for more shade at parks and the pool, and improvements to the Sun and Fun and Club Star facilities and resources (e.g. more food, splash pad, dodgeball). WRT, LLC 1 478 Tehama Street, Suite 28 I San Francisco, CA 94103 James Stickley CA LA -4251 wrtdesign.com 1 415.575.4722 John Gibbs CA LA -4417 T:\Advlsory Body Uploads\Parks and Recreation Commlsslon\Agendas\Parks and Rec Update\11-7-18 WRT Community Needs Assessment -Engagement Memo_publlc.dm ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 18 W RT ) MEMORANDUM Events in Parks Special events were the subject of the Responses Event Type Responses "Events in Parks" workshop station, where 60 Outdoor exercise 8 participants were asked to indicate what 29 Games, obstacle courses 7 parks are good locations for events, and what type of events they wanted to see, '-1 n.3, , PAC , Aya �cHgei7_ Environmental education 5 Movies .I' Farmers' markets 5 . using dots to identify parks and sticky notes to summarize events. � �' �',•. Kids' events -- Events for families,. kids ,� Biking, c cy locross 4 Cultural festivals v1C Organized work days 4 Concerts and other ideas for music in parks were by Far the most popular type of i event based on workshop feedback. Other , . . Weddings 4 top event categories were food trucks and ` ..� events, sports tournaments and events, movies, arts events and fairs, cultural !k ,• festivals, and community picnics and barbeques, among others (see Table 3 Ideas for Events in Parks). Table 3: Ideas for Events in Parks Event Type Responses Event Type Responses Music concerts 60 Outdoor exercise 8 Food trucks, events 29 Games, obstacle courses 7 Sports tournaments, events 24 Environmental education 5 Movies 17 Farmers' markets 5 . Arts & crafts fairs, arts events ^16 Kids' events 5 Events for families,. kids 14 Biking, c cy locross 4 Cultural festivals 11 Organized work days 4 Community picnics, BBQs, _gatherings g Weddings 4 Mitchell Park (15 dots), Laguna Lake Park (12), Mission Plaza (11), French Park (6), Sinsheimer Park (6), and Jack House and Gardens (6) were most -cited as places where events should take place. When comments about events at Sinsheimer Stadium and SLO Swim Center are included, ten responses described events at Sinsheimer. ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 19 WRT) MEMORANDUM Dreams of Parks and Facilities At the "Dreams of Parks and Facilities" station, the presentation board showed a variety of types of amenities and facilities in parks, including a range of sports facilities as well as passive recreation, cultural and sustainable features. Using these examples as a starting point, workshop attendees were asked to use sticky notes to share ideas for new park facilities or amenities. A great diversity of ideas were shared. Pickleball and some variation on a water park or splash pad were the subject of the most responses (44 and 40, respectively). Many people also weighed in on the need for enhancements to the SLO Swim Center; a new dog park or fenced dog area; new facilities for diamond sports and field sports; new neighborhood and pocket parks; and a new indoor recreation center/community center. I-�Ril'r�t5 f r iS A" - . AV -r• rm� AW ; � • i„ ,,, �► 1 Table 4 Dreams for Parks and Facilities identifies facility types that garnered the most responses; in many cases, responses were more detailed and specific (i.e., shade over playgrounds; zip lines). Table 4: Dreams for Parks and Facilities Facility Type Responses Pickleball 44 Waterpark,, slash pad 40 Swim Center enhancements 33 Do pap rk _ 28 Baseball, softball 24 New parks 23 Recreation or community center 22 Soccer, rugby 18 Shade 17 Bike park 16 New pool 16 Facility Type Responses Bike paths 14 Adventure park 13 Walking trails 13 Play equipment 11 Swim Center operating hours 11 Stadium enhancements 10 Water refill stations 10 Charging stations 9 Community gardens 9 Trees 9 ATTACHMENT 1 W RT ) MEMORANDUM Getting to Parks At the "Getting to Parks" station, community members were asked to indicate where they'd like to see improvements that make it easier and safer to get to parks, and to say what those improvements would be. People's comments showed an overwhelming desire to access the parks and recreation system by biking and walking. Among the many references to biking, there were numerous requests for safer biking routes for all ages, more robust bike infrastructure, and system -wide bike networks linking parks throughout the city. The location most often cited as needing access improvements was Sinsheimer Park (28), where parking, trail connections, transit access, and the railroad tracks are consistent challenges. Completion of the Bob Jones Trail (11) also emerged as a top priority among responses. Other priority sites include the Railroad Trail (10), Meadow Park (9), Laguna Lake Park (8) and French Park (7). Table 5 Getting to Parks -Sites Needing Improvements shows the ranked list of sites where access improvements were indicated. Table 5: Getting to Parks - Sites Needing Improvements Location Sinsheimer Park Bob Jones Trail Railroad Trail Meadow Park Laguna Lake Park French Park General Bike/Multi-Use Trail Other Bright Ideas Responses 28 11 10 At the "Your Ideas Here" station, residents were asked to share ideas for how they'd like to see the parks system and recreation programs change in the years ahead. This station was open- ended. While responses varied widely, several themes emerged among the residents' ideas. Comments pertaining to bike lanes (27), pools/aquatic programs (22), and children's programs and trails (18) were the most commonly mentioned. Other standout themes included walking/biking paths and trails (14), pickleball (13), a "splash pad" water feature (12), and concerns about the homeless population (11). 9- 4R WRT, LLC 1 478 Tehama Street, Suite 213 1 San Francisco, CA 94103 lames Stickley CA LA -4251 wrtdesign.com 1 415.575.4722 John Gibbs CA LA -4417 T:\Advlsery Body Uploads\Parks and Recreation Commlssion\Agendas\Parks and Rec Update\31-7-18 WRT Community Needs Assessment -Engagement Memoyubllc.dorx ATTACHMENT 1 WRT) MEMORANDUM Next Steps A survey with a statistically -valid sample of San Luis Obispo residents was conducted during August and September 2018, and the results are now being analyzed. It is expected that the survey report will be presented to the Parks & Recreation Commission in December. Meanwhile, the planning team is completing its analysis of San Luis Obispo's demographics and population projections, the existing parks system, current level of service standards, and comparison to benchmark cities. Both the survey results and the existing conditions analysis will be presented to the PRC. All of this information will be pulled together into a Community Needs Assessment Report by WRT. This report is anticipated to be presented to the PRC in March and then the Planning Commission in April, with a focus on a limited number of themes and strategic priorities. In April 2019, we will conduct a community workshop to present the needs assessment and foster continued dialogue. WRT, LLC 1 478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B I San Francisco, CA 94103 wrtdesign.com 1 415.575.4722 James Stickley CA LA -4251 John Gibbs CA LA -4417 T:\Advlsory Body Uploads\Parks and Recreation Com misslon\Agendas\Parks and Rec Update\31-7-19 WRT Community Needs Assessment -Engagement Memo publlcAm WRT) MEMORANDUM This page intentionally left blank. ATTACHMENT 1 November 27, 2018 Page 112 City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey Findings Report ...helping organizations make better decisions since 1982 t 2018 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 The City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Executive Summary Overview ETC Institute administered a parks and recreation needs assessment survey for the City of San Luis Obispo during late summer/early fall of 2018. The survey was administered as part of a comprehensive update to the its Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan. The survey and its results will be used to identify residents' priorities for parks and recreation in the City of San Luis Obispo. Methodology ETC Institute mailed a survey packet to a random sample of households in the City of San Luis Obispo. Each survey packet contained a cover letter, a copy of the survey, and a postage- paid return envelope. Residents who received the survey were given the option of returning the survey by mail or completing it on-line at www.slosurvey.org. Ten days after the surveys were mailed, ETC Institute sent emails and placed phone calls to the households that received the survey to encourage participation. The emails contained a link to the on-line version of the survey to make it easy for residents to complete the survey. To prevent people who were not residents of the City of San Luis Obispo from participating, everyone who completed the survey on-line was required to enter their home address prior to submitting the survey. ETC Institute then matched the addresses that were entered on-line with the addresses that were originally selected for the random sample. If the address from a survey completed on- line did not match one of the addresses selected for the sample, the on-line survey was not counted. The goal was to obtain completed surveys from at least 400 residents. The goal was far exceeded, with a total of 507 residents completing the survey. The overall results for the sample of 507 households have a precision of at least +/-4.4% at the 95% level of confidence. This report contains the following: v Charts highlighting the overall results of the survey; • Priority Investment Rating (PIR) that identifies priorities for facilities and programs from the survey participants; • Benchmarking analysis comparing the City's survey results to national results; and • Tabular data showing the overall results for all questions on the survey. Open ended survey comments have been provided as a separate appendix to this report. The major findings of the survey are summarized on the following pages. i iwi ETC Page ETC San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Park/Facility Use, Ratings, and Importance From the list of 39 San Luis Obispo parks/facilities, respondents were asked to indicate all of the parks/facilities their household has used in the past 12 months. There are five parks/facilities that at least 50% of households have used in the past 12 months: Mission Plaza (70%) a Meadow Park (53%) Sinsheimer Park (60%) ■ Mitchell Park (50'1) a Laguna Lake Park (569/6) Respondents were then asked to rate their overall satisfaction with the parks/facilities their household has used in the past 12 months. The overall level of satisfaction with City parks/facilities is very high. There are 30 parks/facilities that at least 70% of respondents gave a rating of "very satisfied" or "satisfied". The parks/facilities that received the highest satisfaction ratings are: a Sinsheimer Park (90%) a Anholm Park (87%) ■ Historic Jack House & Gardens (90%) 0 Jack House Gardens (86%) S_-nta Rasa Park: SLO Skate Park (90"/0) Histtpric J Santa Rosa R � Senior Santa Rosa P� Damon -Garcia Ludwick Laguna Q1. Level of Satisfaction with Facilities by percentage of respondents *fio have used facilities during the p&A 12 rrrtrntlia 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source- ETC Instihtie(24I5) Very Satisfied ❑Satisfied ❑Neutral ®Dissatisfied(Very Dissatisfied From the list of 39 parks/facilities, respondents were then asked to rate which four parks/facilities are the most important to their household. Based on the sum of their top four choices, the parks/facilities that households rated as the most important are: Mission Plaza (37%) a Laguna Lake Park (239,66) * Sinsheimer Park (33%) a SLO Swim Center (19%) Meadow Park (269/6) Page ii San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Program Use, Ratings, and Importance From a list of 34 San Luis Obispo recreation programs, respondents were asked to indicate all of the programs their household has participated in during the past 12 months. There are three programs that about 25% of households have participated in during the past 12 months: • Community special events (27%) • Recreational swimming (27916) • Lap swimming (249,6) Q6. Recreation Programs Respondent Households Have Used in the Past 12 Months by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Community special events?"• Recreational swimming M 27` Lap swimming 2a"4, SWIm lessons 15% Yoga 14% Personal training & fitness classes 13°k Tennis 12°� Sun n' Fun & Club Star 11 Music lessons 11% Historic Jack House & Gardens tours 10% Ranger -led hikes �% Aqua aerobics & Pifates 9°Io Adult softball 9NO Triathalon 9% Adult soccer 8°/ Kidz Love Soccer 80� Gymnastics classes & camps 8% Warm water exercise class 7% Youth basketball 6% Senior Center classes & activities 6% Lifeguard training & Junior Guards 6% Pickleball 6% Golf instruction 5% LEGO camps 5% Skate park camps, clinics. & activities 5% Golf tournaments 5% Youth futsal 4% Tennis lessons & training 4% Ludwick drop in sports 4% Junior Ranger Activity Camp 4% Surfing lessons 4% Youth fitness & wellness programs 3% Junior giants 3°Je Ultimate pick-up Other 2% -: ETC Instinitz (2013) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Respondents were then asked to rate their overall satisfaction with the recreation programs their household has participated in during the past 12 months. The overall level of satisfaction with programs is high. There are 17 programs that over 60% of respondents gave a rating of "very satisfied" or "satisfied". The programs that received the highest satisfaction ratings are: • Triathlon (8694o) • Sun n' Fun Club Star (79%) • Community Special Events (789,16) • Kidz Love Soccer (78%) ki ETC Page iii San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 From the list of 34 programs, respondents were then asked to rate which programs are the most important to their household. Based on the sum of their top four choices, the programs that households rated as the most important are: • Recreational Swimming (20%) • Community Special Events (189,1o) Lap S,r.,imming (17%) Ql, Programs That Are Most Important to Households by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top four choices Recreational swimming Community special, events Lap swimming Sun n' Fun & Club Sfar Swim lessons Personal training & fitness classes Tennis Music lessons Adult softball Ranger -led hikes Adult soccer Aqua aerobics & Pilates 1' nathalon Senior Center classes & ac(nrnies Historic Jack House & Gardens tours Warm water exercise class Picklcball Youth basketball Kidz Love Soccer Ludwick drop to sports Lifeguard training & Junior Guards Goff instruction Golf tournaments Junior Ranger Activity Camp LEGO camps Gymnastics classes & camps Youth futsal Junior ggiants Skate park camps clinics. & ac, ties Tennis lessons & training Ultimate pick-up Surfing lessons Youth fitness & wellness programs Uther 0% 10% 20% 30% ■Most Important W2nd Most Important I]3rd Most Important Wth Most Important Source: ETC Gi=t:tu:e {_ ] i ETC Page iv ETC San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Amenity Needs and Priorities Amenity Needs: Respondents were asked to indicate if their household has a need for 28 various recreation amenities. There are four recreation amenities that at least 50% of households have a need for: 1. Swimming pools — 71% 2. Nature park/botanical garden — 63% 3. Adventure area — 60% 4. Shaded play area — 50% The chart below shows the percent of households that have a need for each of the 28 recreation amenities. Q3. Amenities That Respondent Households Have a Need For by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Open space trails Park trails Passive enjoyment of open space Swimming pools Nature parklbotanical garden Shaded play area Dog park Playgrounds Adventure area Enrichment classes Outdoor exercise/fitness area Indoor exercise facility Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Environmental education center Sports complex Tennis courts Community center Splash pads Soccer fields Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts BasebaIVSoftball fields Disc golf Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Additional garden plots Pickleball courts Table tennis FootballfRugby fields Lacrosse fields Other 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Source ETC Institute (2018) Respondents were also asked to identify if their household had an unmet need for each of the 28 various recreation amenities. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to estimate the number of households in the City of San Luis Obispo that had the greatest "unmet" need for various amenities. The recreation amenities with the highest level of unmet need were: 1. Swimming pools 2. Nature park/botanical garden 3. Adventure area 4. Shaded play area Page v San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Amenity Importance: In addition to assessing the needs for each recreation amenity, ETC Institute also assessed the importance that households placed on each amenity. Based on the sum of respondents' top four choices, the four most important recreation amenities to households were: 1. Open Space Trails (53%) 2. Park Trails (35%) 3. Swimming Pools (32%) 4. Passive enjoyment of open space (28%) The percentage of respondents who selected each recreation amenity as one of their top four choices is shown in the chart below. Q4. Amenities That Are Most Important to Households by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top four choices Open space trails Park trails Swimming pools Passive enjoyment of open; space Dog park Playgrounds Shaded play area Nature paik:botanical garden Splash pads Soccer fields BasebalUSoftball fields Adventure area Outdoor exercise/fitness area Sports complex Enrichment classes Tennis courts Indoor exercise facility Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Disc golf Pickleball courts Outdoor basketbalUvolleyball courts Environmental education center Additional garden plots Community center FootbalURugby fields Table tennis Indoor basketballivolleyball courts Lacrosse fields 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% ■Most Important 02nd Most Important 03rd Most Important 04th Most Important Source: FTC Institute (21418) I&K ETC Page A San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Priorities for Facility Investments: The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to provide organizations with an objective tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on parks and recreation investments. The PIR equally weights: (1) the importance that residents place on facilities; and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the facility. Based on the PIR, the following seven facilities were rated as high priorities for investment: 1. Swimming Pools (PIR=161) 2. Open Space Trails (PIR=154) 3. Park Trails (PIR=129) 4. Passive Enjoyment of Open Space Conservation Areas (PIR=124) 5. Shaded Play Areas (PIR=110) 6. Dog Park (PIR=109) 7. Nature Park/Botanical Garden (PIR=105) The chart below shows the Priority Investment Rating for each of the 28 facilities/amenities that were assessed on the survey. Top Priorities for Investment for Recreation Amenities Based on the Priority Investment Rating Swimming pools Open space trails Park trails Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas Shaded play areas Dog park Nature park/botanical garden Adventure area Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment Enrichment classes Indoor exercise facility Splash pads Environmental education center Playgrounds Community center Sports complex Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Tennis courts (lighted) Soccer fields Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Baseball/softball fields Disc golf Pickleball courts Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Additional garden plots Table tennis Football/rugby fields Lacrosse fields Source: ETC Institute (2018) ETC 0 40 80 120 160 200 Page vii San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Parks and Facilities That Could Be Improved, Repurposed, or Expanded From a list of 26 choices, respondents were asked to indicate the parks and recreation facilities they feel it's most important for the City to improve, repurpose, or expand. Based on the sum of their top four choices, households rated the following as the most important: 1. Existing land to be used for open space & trails (44%) 2. Designated areas for walking & biking (32%) 3. Existing land to be used for small neighborhood parks (28%) 4. Park design, materials and programs that are sustainable (26%) 5. Existing land to be used for pools (22%) Listed below are the percent of respondents who rated each of the 26 options as one of their top four most important. Q'15. Respondents' Top Four Choices for Improving, Repurposing, or Expanding Parks and Facilities by percentage of respondent households that selected the item as one of their top four choices Used for open space & trails Designated areas for walking & biking Used for small neighborhood parks Are sustainable Pools Dog park Are welcoming to a diverse population Used for athletic fields Playgrounds & similar play facilities Incorporate public art Nature & environmental interpretive areas Connect people with cultural heritage Additional park bathrooms Adding lights to existing athletic fields Enhancements to park landscaping Picnic areas Used for mufti -sport indoor gymnasium Synthetic turf fields Fitness circuit stations Pickleball courts Golf course improvements Bocce ball courts BIVIX/Pump track Sand volleyball courts Hockey rinks Golf clubhouse improvements Other AMEL - 44% 32% 28% - 26% 22°0 15% 12% C] 11% 10% goo 81% 6% 6% 5% 3°!0 % 1% 1% 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Most Important 02nd Most Important =3rd Most Important ®4th Most Important "ETC Page viii •i. ETC San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Conclusions Overall the City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department is doing an excellent job providing services to the community. Most survey respondents (79%) are either "very satisfied" or "satisfied' with the overall value their household receives from the City of San Luis Obispo's Parks and Recreation Department. This is significantly higher than the national average of 59%. The City is experiencing extremely high usage of its parks and recreation facilities. In the past 12 months, 97% of households have visited at least one of the 39 parks and recreation facilities listed in Q1, which is significantly higher than the national average of 81%. The City's parks and recreation facilities also received very high satisfaction ratings; for 30 of the 39 parks/facilities, at least 70% of respondents indicated they are "very satisfied" or "satisfied". The types of programs that households have the most need for are: community special events, recreation swimming, and lap swimming. These are also the programs that are the most important to survey respondents. The types of amenities with the highest level of unmet need in the City are: swimming pools, nature parks/botanical gardens, adventure areas, and shaded areas. The types of amenities that are the most important to households are: open space trails, park trails, swimming pools, and passive enjoyment of open space. In order to ensure that the City of San Luis Obispo continues to meet the needs and expectations of the community, the Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan should focus on sustaining and/or improving performance in areas that were identified as "high priorities" by ETC Institute's Priority Investment Rating (PIR). Based on the PIR, the amenities that should be the City's highest priorities are: swimming pools, open space trails, park trails, passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas, shaded play areas, dog parks, and nature park/botanical gardens. Page ix San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Section 1 Charts and Graphs (66 ETC Page 1 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q1. Parks/Facilities Respondent Households Have Used in the Past 12 Months by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Laguna OffLea; hog APrera Laguna Hll s Park Johnson Park Santa Rosa Santa Rosa Source: ETC Institute (2018) Histpdc J Santa Rosa Santa 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Q1. Level of Satisfaction with Parks/Facilities by percentage of respondents who have used facilities during the past 12 months Damon -Garcia Ludwick Laguna Source: ETC Institute (2018) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% every Satisfied ®Satisfied ONeutral ElDissatisfiedNery Dissatisfied ETC Page 2 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q2. Parks/Facilities Most Important to Households by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top four choices Laguna Duna [at Sins eimeer Jack Hous Historic Jack House 9 Santa 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% taMost Important ®2nd Most Important 03rd Most tmportant ®4th Most Important Source: ETC Institute (2018) Q3. Amenities That Respondent Households Have a Need For by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Open space trails Park trails Passive enjoyment of open space Swimming pools Nature park/botanical garden Shaded play area Dog park Playgrounds Adventure area Enrichment classes Outdoor exercise/fitness area Indoor exercise facility Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Environmental education center Sports complex Tennis courts Community center Splash pads Soccer fields Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Baseball/Softball fields Disc golf Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Additional garden plots Pickleball courts Table tennis Football/Rugby fields Lacrosse fields Other 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% pn:b ETC Page 3 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q3. Estimated Number of Households That Have a Need for Various Amenities by number of households based on 19,907 households in the City of San Luis Obispo Open space trails Park trails Passive enjoyment of open space Swimming pools Nature park/botanical garden Shaded play area Dog park Playgrounds Adventure area Enrichment classes Outdoor exercise/fitness area Indoor exercise facility Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Environmental education center Sports complex Tennis courts Community center Splash pads Soccer fields Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Baseball/Softball fields Disc golf Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Additional garden plots Pickleball courts Table tennis Football/Rugby fields Lacrosse fields Other 12,452 11,944 - 8,441 7,067 ",987 5,97 2 s,828 5,932 5.813 15,335 5,096 4,121 3,961 3.265, 08 z,5o8 2,130 2,090 1,175 986 5,000 10,000 15,000 Q3. How Well Amenities Meet the Needs of Respondent Households by percentage of respondents with a need for amenities Open space trails Lacrosse fields Playgrounds Park trails Passive enjoyment of open space Soccer fields Baseball/softball fields Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Disc golf Tennis courts (lighted) Sports complex Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Swimming pools Nature park/botanical garden Dog park Shaded play areas Football/rugby fields Enrichment classes Indoor exercise facility Additional garden plots Community center Outdoor exercisetfitness area with equipment Environmental education center Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Pickleball courts Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) Table tennis Splash pads Source: ETC Institute (2018) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1100% Met M75% Met M50% Met ©25% Met 00% Met S& ETC Page 4 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q3. Estimated Number of Households Whose Needs for Amenities Are Being Met 50% or Less by number of households based on 19,907 households in the City of San Luis Obispo Swimming pools Nature park/botanical garden Adventure area Shaded play area Outdoor exercise/fitness area Dog park Passive enjoyment of open space Enrichment classes Indoor exercise facility Park trails Splash pads Environmental education center Open space trails Community center Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental Sports complex Tennis courts Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Playgrounds Pickleball courts Disc golf Soccer fields Additional garden plots Baseball/Softball fields able tennis Football/Rugby fields Lacrosse fields 5,132 5,004 `] 4,763 4,441 4,270 4,240 4,188 3,921 _..-J 3.569 i 3.565 3,246: 3,137 2.527 2,445 ] 2,331 2,039 1 2,029 1,844 ME- - 1 1,706 + 1.614 ' FT --1 1-sw tQ7 1.592 1 1,000 6:50 5.971 1 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 X50% Met X25% Met 1710% Met Source: ETC Institute (2018) Q4. Facilities That Are Most Important to Households by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top four choices Open space trails Park trails Swimming pools Passive enjoyment of open space Dog park Playgrounds Shaded play area _ Nature park/botanical garden 10%Splash pads 9°/° Soccer fields 9% Baseball/Softball fields 8% Adventure area _ Q 8% Outdoor exercise/fitness area 8% Sports complex 7% Enrichment classes 7% Tennis courts 7% Indoor exercise facility n 70/6 Covered picnic areas &BBQ pits for Tanta! - 5°/ Disc golf 5% Pickleball courts 5% Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 5% Environmental education center 4% Additional garden plots 40% Community center 4% Football/Rugby fields 2% Table tennis 2% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 2% Lacrosse fields 0% 16% 16°{0 35°/d 513% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% II■Most important M2nd Most Important 1:13rd Most Important 114th Most Important Source: ETC Institute (2018) ETC Page 5 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q5. Organizations Households Use For Indoor/Outdoor Recreation & Sports Activities by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Health clubs or gyms School programstfacilities Private clubs City sports programs Neighboring cities Club sports programs for youth Other youth -oriented organizations Drop-in adult sports Masters Sports Adult Other None Source: ETC Institute (2018) 46°/d t i 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Q6. Recreation Programs Respondent Households Have Used in the Past 12 Months by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Community special events Recreaalionai swimming 119P= ap swimming Swim lessons Personal training & fitness classes Tennis Sun n' Fun & Club Star Music lessons Historic Jack House & Gardens tours Ranger -led hikes Aqua aerobics & PI [ales Adult softball Triathelon Adult soccer Kidz Love Soccer Gymnastics classes & camps Warm water exercise class Youth basketball Senior Center classes & activities Lifeguard training & Junior Guards Pickleball Golf instruction LEGO camps Skate park camps, clinics, & activities Golf toumaments Youth futsal Tennis lessons & training Ludwick drop in spoils Junior Ranger Activity Camp Surfing lessons Youth fitness & wellness programs Junior plants tflttmate pick- Othup er Source: ETC Institute (2018) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 9& ETC Page 6 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q6. Level of Satisfaction with Recreation Programs by percentage of respondents with a need for programs Tdathalon Sun n' s=un & Club Star community special events 1 dz Love Soccer Jllntnr gl8nts Warm water exercise Cfass Ranger4ed hikes Historic Jack House & Gardens tours Lifeguard training & Junior Guards Youth basketball Lopowimminqq Adult safiball Skate parkcamps, clinics, & activities Senior Center classes & activities Recreational swimming Aqua aerobics & PIWes Junior Rangor Activ'�y Cemp Aduif soccer Golf tournaments Swim lessons Tennis Yoga Golf instnlctlon LEGO Camps Ludwick drop In sports Pickleball Ultimatefcle•up Youth futsat Gymnastics classes & camps P0M.nal trainEng & fEtnegs rlasstS Tennis lessons & training Music lessons Youth fitness & wellness programs Surfing lessons 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% MVary Saftffed MSaUeMd ONeutral LJ aissattatiedNery pissatlsfied Source: ETC Tnstitute (2018) Q7. Recreation Programs That Are Most Important to Households by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top four choices Recreational swimming Community special events Lap swlmmlinga Sun n' Fun & Club SS"ar Swim lessons Personal training & fitness classes Tennis Aqua sen Son lor Center class Hislodc Jack House & Warm water Lifeguard training &( Gol Junior Ranger Gymnastics cle Skate park camps, cllnti Tennis Ioce IJI 9 Youth fitness & walin 0% 10% 20% 30% Most Important 092nd Most Important 03rd Most Important 134th Most Important Source: HTC Institute (2018) ETC Page 7 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q8. Reasons Preventing Households From Using Parks, Recreation Facilities, or Programs More Often by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Do not know what is being offered 33°Io Too busy 22% Feel unsafe 21% Program times are not convenient 20% Facilities are outdated 18% Operational hours don't match my schedule 17% Facilities are not well maintained 17°,6 Lack of restrooms 17% Do not know location of facilities 15% Desired program or facility not offered 14% Too far from residence 13% � Facilities lack the right equipment 13% Lack of parking 12% � Facilities don't match my age/interest 12% Fees are too high 11% Use services from others 10% Not interested 110% ' Online registration is difficult 6% � Drop in activity not available 6% ' Classes full 5% , Facility not available due to permit use 5% ' Lack of transportation 3% i Poor customer service 3% ' Other 1 j % 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Source: ETC Institute (2018) Q9. Ways Respondents Learn About Programs and Activities by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) From friends & neighbors City website/Recreation Dept. webpage Activity guide Newspaper Flyers/newsletters Street banners City Emails/E-blasts Promotions at San Luis Obispo events Facebook Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities Conversations with staff Instagram Smart phone application Parks & Recreation Commission meetings Twitter Other Source: ETC Institute (2018) ETC 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 8 55%1 P9% ' I , 36% 30% ' I I , 30% 25% 23% ' 22% I dg% 10% I I 1 7% I I 2% 1% I I I I I I 0% 1 I 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 8 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q10. Sources of Information Respondents Most Prefer by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top four choices City Emails/E-blasts City website/Recreation Dept. webpage Activity guide Flyers/newsletters Facebook Newspaper Street banners Promotions at San Luis Obispo events From friends & neighbors Smart phone application Instagram Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities Conversations with staff Twitter Parks & Recreation Commission meetings Other 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% [l■Most Preferred JZ12nd Most Preferred 03rd Most Preferred [gl4th Most Preferred Source: ETC Institute (2018) Q11. Most Frequently Method to Arrive at San Luis Obispo Parks & Recreation Facilities by percentage of households Carpool 2% Source: ETC Institute (2018) ,L -i ETC Drive 61% L0 /O Bike °Public transportation 11% 0% Page 9 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q12. Offerings Respondents Would Most Like to See in San Luis Obispo by percentage of households Arts & cultural, visual or performing arts facilities & programs 13% Classes, lessor community ev( 18% Passive recreation 31% Source: ETC institute (2018) )orfs facilities rograms 5% Volunteer Projects 5% tnvlronmental eaucation, stewardship & preservation Q13. Event Concepts Respondents Households Would be Most Interested in by percentage of respondents who selected the items as one of their top three choices Food event 51% Entertainment Cultural Celebration 41% r i r HeaElh &wellness events 31°/° r r r Environmental event 29°% r r Food trucks 25% • r i Competitions 1$%a r r i Sports tournaments 11% i r r i Special events 6% i r r None 3% ; 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Source: ETC Institute (2018) fit ETC Page 10 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q14. Level of Support for the City Acquiring or Repurposing Existing Land to be... by percentage of households Used for open space & trails Used for small neighborhood parks Pools Used for athletic fields Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium Source: ETC Institute (2018) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% IMVm Supporfivo C38upportive EJNeutral IMNotSupportive/Not at AllSuppnrtive Q14. Level of Support for the City Conducting Renovations or Developing New Facilities for... by percentage of households Designated areas for walking & biking Additional park bathrooms Playgrounds & similar play facilities Picnic areas Enhancements to park landscaping Nature & environmental interpretive areas Adding lights to existing athletic fields Dog park Fitness circuit stations Synthetic turf fields Bocce ball courts Sand volleyball courts Pickleball courts Golf course improvements BMX/Pump track Horkey rinks Golf clubhouse improvements 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very SUpportive USupportive ONeutral 461 Not Supportive/Not at All Supportive Somce: ETC Institute (2018) ETC Page 11 32% 10% ....... 40°/is.::i� ... - - — — 39% = 20% 6%% Al ti 29% 1616. 29% 9% 34% 28% 11% ' .-- 29% 28%. 14% 29% 14% 29% 34% 20% 210J. ./ 34° 25% X20°1 W 38% 23% 2B/. 41% 19°h 19% 46% 22% 12°I° 38% 40%. 14% 1 40°/. 3899 41% 39% .Q°f6 36% 43% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very SUpportive USupportive ONeutral 461 Not Supportive/Not at All Supportive Somce: ETC Institute (2018) ETC Page 11 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q14. Level of Support for the City Incorporating Park Design, Materials, and Programs That... by percentage of households Are sustainable Are welcoming to a diverse population Incorporate public art Connect people with cultural heritage Source: ETC Institute (2018) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% ■Very Supportive ®Supportive ONeutral DNot Supportive/Not at All Supportive Q15. Most Important Actions That Could Be Taken to Improve, Repurpose or Expand Facilities by percentage of respondent households that selected the item as one of their top four choices Used for open space & trails 1 1 44% Designated areas for walking & biking 32% Used for small neighborhood parks Y 28 Are sustainable i jW26% Pools 22% Dog park _ 18% Are welcoming to a diverse population 15% Used for athletic fields 15% " Playgrounds & similar play facilities 12% Incorporate public art 12%0 Nature & environmental interpretive areas 11 % Connect people with cultural heritage �. 10% 1 Additional park bathrooms 19% ' Adding lights to existing athletic fields 9% ' Enhancements to park landscaping Picnic areas _ B% I Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 8% t ' Synthetic turf= 6% Fitness circuit stations 6%, r Pickleball courts 5% 1 Golf course improvements 1 5% Bocce ball courts 4% _ BMX/Pump track 3% 1 Sand volleyball courts 2% I Hockey rinksL-1 % 1 Golf clubhouse improvementsIo ' Other4% ; 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% =Most Important 102nd Most Important 03rd Most Important 04th Most Important Source: ETC Institute (2018) .QRETC. Page 12 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q18. Most Important Recreation $ Leisure Opportunities by percentage of households (multiple choices could be made) Physical fitness, health & well-being 71 % i Personal fulfillment Opportunities to gather & socialize Leaming opportunitles Opportunities to give back 0% Source: ETC Institute (2018) 20% 40% 60% 80% 020. Overall Value Household Receives From the City of San Luis Obispo Parks $ Recreation Department by percentage of households Somewhat satisfied 45% i i Source: ETC Institute (2018) 11% satisfied 34% Wt know 4% Very dissatisfied 1% Somewhat dissatisfied 4% ETC Page 13 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q21. Demographics: What is your age? by percentage of respondents 45 - 54 years 16% 35 - 44 years 21% 55 - 64 years 21% ier 35 years 22% + years 20% Q22. Demographics: Ages of People in Household by percentage of household occupants 20-24 ears 25-34 ---- 13 35-44 years 15% 45-54 911/0 Source: ETC Institute (2018) 15-19years y 5% 9% 10-14 years 5-9 years 8% 55-64 years 13% Under 5 years 7% 75+ 4% fears 12% ETC Page 14 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q23. Demographics: Your gender: by percentage of respondents Male 49% Female 51% Source: ETC institute (2018) I Q24. Demographics: How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo? by percentage of respondents 11 to 15 years 9% 16 to 20 years 14% Source: ETC Institute (2018) rid rid ETC 6 to 10 years 16% 21 to 30 years 14% 5 years 23% years 0/ - Page 15 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q25. Demographics: Which of the following best describes your race? by percentage of households White/Caucasian Hispanic, Latino Asian African American/Black Native American Other 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source: ETC Institute (2018) 026. Demographics: What is your total annual household income? by percentage of respondents $70,000 to $99,999 19% $40,000 to $69,999 12% $100,000 to $129,999 22% $130,000 to $149,999 10% $20.000 to $39,999 8% Under $20,000 5% -P lau,uuu UI muiu 24% (6& ETC Page 16 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Section 2 Priority Investment Rating (66 ETC Page 17 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Priority Investment Rating San Luis Obispo, California The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to provide governments with an objective tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on parks and recreation investments. The Priority Investment Rating was developed by ETC Institute to identify the facilities and programs residents think should receive the highest priority for investment. The priority investment rating reflects the importance residents place on items (sum of top 4 choices) and the unmet needs (needs that are only being partly or not met) for each facility/program relative to the facility/program that rated the highest overall. Since decisions related to future investments should consider both the level of unmet need and the importance of facilities and programs, the PIR weights each of these components equally. The PIR reflects the sum of the Unmet Needs Rating and the Importance Rating as shown in the equation below: PIR = UNR + IR For example, suppose the Unmet Needs Rating for playgrounds is 26.5 (out of 100) and the Importance Rating for playgrounds is 52 (out of 100), the Priority Investment Rating for playgrounds would be 78.5 (out of 200). How to Analyze the Charts: • High Priority Areas are those with a PIR of at least 100. A rating of 100 or above generally indicates there is a relatively high level of unmet need and residents generally think it is important to fund improvements in these areas. Improvements in this area are likely to have a positive impact on the greatest number of households. Medium Priority Areas are those with a PIR of 50-99. A rating in this range generally indicates there is a medium to high level of unmet need or a significant percentage of residents generally think it is important to fund improvements in these areas. Low Priority Areas are those with a PIR below 50. A rating in this range generally indicates there is a relatively low level of unmet need and residents do not think it is important to fund improvements in these areas. Improvements maybe warranted if the needs of very specialized populations are being targeted. The following pages show the Unmet Needs Rating, Importance Rating, and Priority Investment Rating for facilities and programs. k,'. ETC Page 18 O CL m cr c w E v N a Z c W z v o = "U m �QV N C L V C m r7: Wo L- 0 N Q a) a) co C L O =' 'p .N% c�C .O w cn fn fn `~ cn fn fA fn N CD CU CM (MA- O C U .� (d ®N U O CU p ccccC®'a. 'O a coE a� c a a) = p o >aO rnE> O _ v cj)CD E om�°m`�a o-0 -C O � °U) oo c cn LL W cu cu 0 acn U c a) N~aY Qm C cu cu cncu O (C Z a •> C O O c O W U a -o O Q C O a) c N > O -°0 U C, O ° (1) > U) CO) cu CL O O O T— I • I I 0 c, w 0o m CL t O O_ G! K c a E w N �Z l W z v `0 2 a, u w r Q m `m fL O CL M 0 J H c 0 cu W U L N U C co r.O Q c O C1 E CO E L co ca cC A� W L 04- 0 OA' r W C C1 (C E O 0 O C1 0 E co EL U L O 0� U � C 0 E •E 0 0 L > CM ; rr L_ co U N N co O L 0 m 0 C7 r CO O O W C) ,C6 Y ) VJ ti Cel O � M O M O L(7 co ti ti O U -CO -CO N N N M M r r r O O M M O aj 0 CO co co r� co CO �cv)aio 0 T cn N N Y N N c N N N cC — x^ N A— "-- N N" N" N N N N O N CL C -0 O N O (C O C. 0- N co V c CA 7 7 C c 0 CCL :3 C O O L v% O cm O O >� _� L ` O' O cm E -c O `� L' _O v v C C) >� O U O 0 O c cO m N a) CO 7 O U �� _ CD O p c C) >, - N N a >, C CC O cn cn cu 0 0�is c (Dv+� c ,ui CO ca .0 aO 70 := Qi O cn c E Z a ami ccC U) N> O S E a) a �c c L) rn E H -2 cu a �cn �0 Q3cnco)0a) a�-�vcuEca o� Q C L m (C N i L- co 0 0 0 0 0 C N C W O m (C (C U O C O O O O -0 od - c 'O LL .0 0 C- m N co Y O Q N N O C C C co C C � C +' +. O m U O Z 4--- O> O Cl.N c O c O O T5 .0 a W -o o m CL c c c N N o > >, O U O C, O O cn N cC IL O O O T- I I O O N 0 cc cq0 0 R 4 U E- 0 0 cn t 0 CL w z c w E v N N a v z w W w Z o = �� U �Q u w �a CL O LA L. 0 4- 4-0 E cn L. 0 cn .L a .L- n 0- 0 cm C� ry 4-0 E cn C- 0 Ia Q cn cu m W cn ,C C 2a) 1 2 �>N L ` n n n n mn anm� X cE'-a) a 0 0 a2 2ma - m O m E s0 m Ycaco0) c0) Cu OL 4T= Qcvv '= vLo� m° CU as Cn c w >% Z, a)— cp— — a 0 co or O >+ = U a .0 a cu CL C co rncn c ` oIt o> , - Z y> �d cn ai � ai rn Cc X Q H CL C/) c- c �o a 3 L m ami o co 0 0 o a o � -j c o � o O U C W cu U m e � N �i v a cn m ac 06 H a) m a) v a m ami E co CD c a �' � o c cu m cu L a) z > `o Lo CL An c C O O o L w v a o m a O c Q) L0 ai O� O m O CD cn cc a 0 CDN O 0 N N 0 C7 00 0 U H w 0 On N w m as a H W San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Section 3 Benchmarking Analysis (" ETC Page 22 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Benchmarking Summary Report San Luis Obispo, California Since 1998, ETC Institute has conducted household surveys for needs assessments, feasibility studies, customer satisfaction, fees and charges comparisons, and other parks and recreation issues in more than 400 communities in 49 states across the country. The results of these surveys has provided an unparalleled data base of information to compare responses from household residents in client communities to "National Averages" and therefore provide a unique tool to "assist organizations in better decision making." Communities within the data base include a full -range of municipal and county governments from 20,000 in population through over 1 million in population. They include communities in warm weather climates and cold weather climates, mature communities and some of the fastest growing cities and counties in the country. "National Averages" have been developed for numerous strategically important parks and recreation planning and management issues including: customer satisfaction and usage of parks and programs; methodsfor receiving marketing information; reasonsthat prevent members of households from using parks and recreation facilities more often; priority recreation programs, parks, facilities and trails to improve or develop; priority programming spaces to have in planned community centers and aquatic facilities; potential attendance for planned indoor community centers and outdoor aquatic centers; etc. Results from household responses for San Luis Obispo, California were compared to National Benchmarks to gain further strategic information. A summary of all tabular comparisons are shown on the following page. Note: The benchmarking data contained in this report is protected intellectual property. Any reproduction of the benchmarking information in this report by persons or organizations not directly affiliated with San Luis Obispo is not authorized without written consent from ETC Institute. ir,�, ETC Page 23 \ E » 04 Z ©W p ; u Q w m I \ G An U � W � co � O N 0 CL � � � c m � S a A a M a R a 0 R$$& ■ �� a�.-o 0.0 e k a�001 V- co) $ tko m � Q / / / / / a a / � 03 r-- 04 It LO U) m© � N�»�© m 't m� m — q N m N LO CN_ c m . z 2§�k k k 2 k r k k ® § B\ B f m 0@% 0 o e CO 2 c 2 o\ 0 9 c 2± a§ c t@ e 2 $§ 3 0 c ca a o 2 © o m g U) Cl) o � / --,e k \ t a) B IL k 4)f / \ k \ E § @ 06 0 o % R 0 v , — o $ 0 Z 2 E 2 q& a f a 2 f Z m m A 2 k_ 2 CD ' 7 e _ In E k k m Cl. 3 3 § m LL CLc & k � � 2 2 &n e � c ■ � IV 2 c CL g E ® k o U � W � c O CL ai 0: r c v E 0 N a N Z a w LLJ Z o= mU a aV al C r A IL O CL N_ O J r Ln 00 O N 0 CL AA c m wN �W^ �Y m A� W o�a0000����� C 0 m • • Z N N N G w +? U C > = C • .c - N Y m C N y O = j> C N `� 'q 7 O O O N O c N C N C c V E 0 y O N C V C E O (0 O_Q •N 0 O L V O O Lo rte-. 41 V! � O E L U O C '� > N cx U N N ` O Y LL _ U .. 00 Y .:•. E W N +. C O C O CL C :_ r O C co O O c 0 LTL -0LD a M — a & 2 cc L u �o '• c 0 m M c m Y A CL 0 d v, a� r c c d d CL N c O eo d Ln ry ar 00 m a u F— W t 0 CL w at Y C w E a N N a Z w uJ z o= m ro u Qu w v Q m A w rl O N O CL IA O MON1A V ti10rr0WW1-i0M rLn N J C m N L Q0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r O r ti O r N 1n O r N M O r M° LO V Mq, d' g N M N N N r r N CM r C O 1p m Z V1 Y- Y W Y-0 N w m L` m p E-0 m m y v 0 o N o O y co c N O N �_ • d N j= O` N .r C p N LL _N LL 0 U 'y - m Ii m Y N V U O m LL t 7 O (� O. y m — m y Q p c N y d N 7 r� 0 Z N N a m C y OL? +. N ++ U O y m E 'C p O Q N .y - c0 y O m f0 O. 7 p N y U' 7 LL U Co y °' x w `0U �u) QC40 E mLL �, E E o o O Q' m mono • 0 LL m U E U V .C Vl V a N cc m = fC ami E E_ c E E m m3 LL 0 O o > m co `O O' m r O c O a � p Y � O t O fC m � . • uul O C t ++ C m M c O CL FA 0 r d 'u C O m v M c m N f0 a W i 0 CL w ¢ c v E w N v �Z v W z 0 2 m m a)Q u cc v r m Y m CL 0 CL a O N J C m N rl N aw m m CL V L W 4 t O CL w ac .. c a E a L N N r Q Z a W z o u QV al C m co N ai m m a co e—I O N O CL H G IA J c m M,* LO e e v W ba m A� W Q O O O G GO N N Ch m Ch C O p m • Z m v m v CD 3 y N y N C M N Z cam ,+ C U) U) ++ M N N N c O 0 m a o00 t > N L 0 10 > CL ai '° O U) N o . c r � m u V c m CL .. w r 0 V d u N io m W O d t t �3 c 0 .o w co N ai m m a San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Section 4 Tabular Data r66 ETC Page 29 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 01. Please indicate if you or any member of your household have used each of the following Parks and Recreation facilities in the past 12 months. (N=507) Q1-1. Anholm Park 12.2% 87.8% Q1-2. Buena Vista Park 3.7% 96.3% Q 1-3. Cheng Park 2.6% 97.4% Q1-4. Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 27.0% 73.0% Q1-5. De Vaul Park 5.1% 94.9% Q1-6. Ellsford Park 1.0% 99.0% Q1-7. Emerson Park 24.1% 75.9% Q1-8. Eto Park 5.5% 94.5% Q1-9. Exposition Park 6.3% 93.7% Q1-10. French Park 39.3% 60.7% Q1-11. Historic Jack House & Gardens 14.2% 85.8% Q1-12. Islay Hill Park 42.0% 58.0% Q1-13. Jack House Gardens 13.2% 86.8% Q1-14. Johnson Park 18.1% 81.9% Q 1-15. Laguna Hills Park 21.1% 78.9% Q1-16. Laguna Lake Park 56.4% 43.6% Q 1-17. Laguna Lake Golf Course 17.4% 82.6% Q1-18. Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 22.7% 77.3% Q1-19. Las Praderas Park 2.2% 97.8% Q1-20. Ludwick Community Center 24.9% 75.1% Q1-21. Meadow Park 53.1% 46.9% ii. ETC Page 30 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 1. Please indicate if you or any member of your household have used each of the following Parks and Recreation facilities in the past 12 months. -; ETC Page 31 Yes No Q1-22. Meadow Park Center 10.8% 89.2% Q1-23. Mission Plaza 70.0% 30.0% Q 1-24. Mitchell Park 49.9% 50.1% Q1-25. Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 10.3% 89.7% Q1-26. Priolo-Martin Park 1.2% 98.8% Q1-27. Rodriguez Adobe Park 2.2% 97.8% Q1-28. SLO Senior Citizens Center 7.3% 92.7% Q1-29. SLO Swim Center 34.3% 65.7% Q1-30. Santa Rosa Park 42.2% 57.8% Q1-31. Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 5.3% 94.7% Q1-32. Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 11.4% 88.6% Q1-33. Sinsheimer Park 59.6% 40.4% Q1-34. Sinsheimer Stadium 36.3% 63.7% Q1-35. Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 12.4% 87.6% Q 1-36. Stoneridge Park 7.1% 92.9% Q1-37. Throop Park 21.5% 78.5% Q1-38. Triangle Park 3.9% 96.1% Q1-39. Vista Lago Park 3.2% 96.8% -; ETC Page 31 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Ql. if "Yes," please rate your overall satisfaction with that parklfacilitY (N=497) ETC Page 32 Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Q1-1. Anholm Park 47.5% 39.3% 13.1% 0.0% 0.0% Q1-2. Buena Vista Park 31.6% 42.1% 26.3% 0.0% 0.0% Q1-3. Cheng Park 15.4% 15.4% 53.8% 15.4% 0.0% Q1-4. Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 32.3% 45.9% 15.0% 4.5% 2.3% Q 1-5. De Vaul Park 28.0% 44.0% 24.0% 4.0% 0.0% Q1-6. Ellsford Park 40.0% 20.0% 40.0% 0.0% 0.0% Q1-7. Emerson Park 19.3% 39.5% 23.5% 16.8% 0.8% Q1-8. Eto Park 25.0% 42.9% 28.6% 3.6% 0.0% Q1-9. Exposition Park 22.6% 48.4% 22.6% 6.5% 0.0% Q1-10. French Park 33.8% 44.6% 17.4% 3.1% 1.0% Q1-11. Historic Jack House & Gardens 61.2% 28.4% 7.5% 0.0% 3.0% Q1-12. Islay Hill Park 35.6% 43.8% 13.5% 7.2% 0.0% Q1-13. Jack House Gardens 50.8% 34.9% 11.1% 0.0% 3.2% Q 1-14. Johnson Park 42.9% 28.6% 22.0% 5.5% 1.1% Q1-15. Laguna Hills Park 39.4% 45.2% 11.5% 2.9% 1.0% Q1-16. Laguna Lake Park 27.6% 47.0% 19.7% 4.3% 1.4% Q1-17. Laguna Lake Golf Course 32.2% 44.8% 18.4% 4.6% 0.0% Q1-18. Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 34.5% 30.1% 23.9% 10.6% 0.9% Q1-19. Las Praderas Park 9.1% 27.3% 27.3% 27.3% 9.1% Q1-20. Ludwick Community Center 23.3% 46.7% 24.2% 4.2% 1.7% Q1-21. Meadow Park 34.9% 42.9% 14.6% 6.9% 0.8% ETC Page 32 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 1. If "Yes," please rate your overall satisfaction with that park/facility, i's. ETC Page 33 Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q1-22. Meadow Park Center 36.5% 28.8% 25.0% 7.7% 1.9% Q1-23. Mission Plaza 43.3% 38.9% 11.7% 5.0% 1.2% Q1-24. Mitchell Park 31.1% 41.9% 18.3% 7.5% 1.2% Q1-25. Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 43.5% 39.1% 10.9% 4.3% 2.2% Q1-26. Priolo-Martin Park 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% Q1-27. Rodriguez Adobe Park 36.4% 18.2% 36.4% 9.1% 0.0% Q1-28. SLO Senior Citizens Center 52.9% 29.4% 14.7% 2.9% 0.0% Q1-29. SLO Swim Center 38.5% 44.4% 8.3% 6.5% 2.4% Q1-30. Santa Rosa Park 31.1% 43.1% 21.5% 2.9% 1.4% Q1-31. Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 50.0% 30.8% 11.5% 7.7% 0.0% Q1-32. Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 57.9% 31.6% 8.8% 1.8% 0.0% Q1-33. Sinsheimer Park 53.6% 36.2% 6.8% 2.7% 0.7% Q1-34. Sinsheimer Stadium 44.2% 36.5% 11.0% 7.2% 1.1% Q1-35. Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 28.3% 46.7% 20.0% 5.0% 0.0% Q1-36. Stoneridge Park 34.3% 34.3% 25.7% 2.9% 2.9% Q1-37. Throop Park 24.8% 55.2% 15.2% 2.9% 1.9% Q1-38. Triangle Park 36.8% 36.8% 15.8% 10.5% 0.0% Q1-39. Vista Lago Park 28.6% 50.0% 7.1% 14.3% 0.0% i's. ETC Page 33 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 2. Which FOUR of the facilities listed in uestion 1 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? 2. Top choice Number _ Percent Anholm Park 10 2.0% Buena Vista Park 1 0.2% Cheng Park 1 0.2% Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 27 5.3% De Vaul Park 4 0.8% Emerson Park 8 1.6% Eto Park 3 0.6% Exposition Park 1 0.2% French Park 20 3.9% Historic Jack House & Gardens 4 0.8% Islay Hill Park 24 4.7% Jack House Gardens 1 0.2% Johnson Park 5 1.0% Laguna Hills Park 10 2.0% Laguna Lake Park 29 5.7% Laguna Lake Golf Course 10 2.0% Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 17 3.4% Las Praderas Park 3 0.6% Ludwick Community Center 2 0.4% Meadow Park 41 8.1 % Meadow Park Center 2 0.4% Mission Plaza 42 8.3% Mitchell Park 13 2.6% Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 1 0.2% Priolo-Martin Park 1 0.2% Rodriguez Adobe Park 3 0.6% SLO Senior Citizens Center 4 0.8% SLO Swim Center 37 7.3% Santa Rosa Park 11 2.2% Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 2 0.4% Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 3 0.6% Sinsheimer Park 56 11.0% Sinsheimer Stadium 11 2.2% Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 7 1.4% Stoneridge Park 3 0.6% Throop Park 21 4.1% Vista Lago Park 2 0.4% None chosen _ _ 67 13.2% Total 507 100.0% 141 ETC Page 34 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 2. Which 1+OUR of the facilities listed in Question I are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q2. 2nd choice _ Number Percent Anholm Park 7 1.4% Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 18 3.6% De Vaul Park 4 0.8% Emerson Park 8 1.6% Eto Park 2 0.4% French Park 17 3.4% Islay Hill Park 23 4.5% Jack House Gardens 4 0.8% Johnson Park 7 1.4% Laguna Hills Park 8 1.6% Laguna Lake Park 30 5.9% Laguna Lake Golf Course 9 1.8% Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 14 2.8% Las Praderas Park 1 0.2% Ludwick Community Center 1 0.2% Meadow Park 32 6.3% Meadow Park Center 6 1.2% Mission Plaza 54 10.7% Mitchell Park 20 3.9% Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 4 0.8% Priolo-Martin Park 1 0.2% Rodriguez Adobe Park 1 0.2% SLO Senior Citizens Center 8 1.6% SLO Swim Center 29 5.7% Santa Rosa Park 16 3.2% Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 1 0.2% Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 6 1.2% Sinsheimer Park 47 9.3% Sinsheimer Stadium 16 3.2% Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 9 1.8% Stoneridge Park 5 1.0% Throop Park 4 0.8% None chosen 95 18.7% Total 507 100.0% U ETC Page 35 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 2. Which FOUR of the facilities listed in uestion 1 are MOST IMPORTANT to our household? 2. 3rd choice Number Percent Anholm Park 4 0.8% Buena Vista Park 2 0.4% Cheng Park 2 0.4% Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 14 2.8% De Vaul Park 3 0.6% Emerson Park 14 2.8% Eto Park 1 0.2% Exposition Park 3 0.6% French Park 14 2.8% Historic Jack House & Gardens 2 0.4% Islay Hill Park 18 3.6% Johnson Park 7 1.4% Laguna Hills Park 7 1.4% Laguna Lake Park 33 6.5% Laguna Lake Golf Course 6 1.2% Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 11 2.2% Ludwick Community Center 7 1.4% Meadow Park 30 5.9% Meadow Park Center 3 0.6% Mission Plaza 55 10.8% Mitchell Park 27 5.3% Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 5 1.0% Priolo-Martin Park 1 0.2% SLO Senior Citizens Center 4 0.8% SLO Swim Center 22 4.3% Santa Rosa Park 17 3.4% Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 1 0.2% Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 3 0.6% Sinsheimer Park 34 6.7% Sinsheimer Stadium 17 3.4% Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 8 1.6% Stoneridge Park 3 0.6% Throop Park 1 0.2% None chosen 128 25.2% Total 507 100.0% !6& ETC Page 36 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 z. Which FOUR of the facilities listed in Ouestion 1 are MOST IMPORTANT t® your household? Q2. 4th choice _ Number Percent Anholm Park 5 1.0% Buena Vista Park 2 0.4% Cheng Park 1 0.2% Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 20 3.9% Emerson Park 7 1.4% Exposition Park 1 0.2% French Park 10 2.0% Historic Jack House & Gardens 3 0.6% Islay Hill Park 15 3.0% Jack House Gardens 6 1.2% Johnson Park 4 0.8% Laguna Hills Park 10 2.0% Laguna Lake Park 27 5.3% Laguna Lake Golf Course 5 1.0% Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 6 1.2% Ludwick Community Center 7 1.4% Meadow Park 31 6.1% Meadow Park Center 1 0.2% Mission Plaza 38 7.5% Mitchell Park 21 4.1% Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 9 1.8% Rodriguez Adobe Park 1 0.2% SLO Senior Citizens Center 1 0.2% SLO Swim Center 10 2.0% Santa Rosa Park 15 3.0% Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 1 0.2% Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 6 1.2% Sinsheimer Park 29 5.7% Sinsheimer Stadium 20 3.9% Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 4 0.8 Stoneridge Park 1 0.2% Throop Park 13 2.6% Triangle Park 1 0.2% None chosen 176 34.7% Total 507 100.0% U ETC Page 37 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 2. Which FOUR of the facilities listed in Ouestion I are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? to 4) Q2. Top choice Number Percent Anholm Park 26 5.1% Buena Vista Park 5 1.0% Cheng Park 4 0.8% Damon -Garcia Sports Complex 79 15.6% De Vaul Park 11 2.2% Emerson Park 37 7.3% Eto Park 6 1.2% Exposition Park 5 1.0% French Park 61 12.0% Historic Jack House & Gardens 9 1.8% Islay Hill Park 80 15.8% Jack House Gardens 11 2.2% Johnson Park 23 4.5% Laguna Hills Park 35 6.9% Laguna Lake Park 119 23.5% Laguna Lake Golf Course 30 5.9% Laguna Off Leash Dog Area 48 9.5% Las Praderas Park 4 0.8% Ludwick Community Center 17 3.4% Meadow Park 134 26.4% Meadow Park Center 12 2.4% Mission Plaza 189 37.3% Mitchell Park 81 16.0% Poinsettia Creek Walk & Park 19 3.7% Priolo-Martin Park 3 0.6% Rodriguez Adobe Park 5 1.0% SLO Senior Citizens Center 17 3.4% SLO Swim Center 98 19.3% Santa Rosa Park 59 11.6% Santa Rosa Park -Hockey Rink 5 1.0% Santa Rosa Park-SLO Skate Park 18 3.6% Sinsheimer Park 166 32.7% Sinsheimer Stadium 64 12.6% Sinsheimer Tennis Courts 28 5.5% Stoneridge Park 12 2.4% Throop Park 39 7.7% Triangle Park 1 0.2% Vista Lago Park 2 0.4% None chosen 67 13.2% Total 1629 (666 ETC Page 38 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 3. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each amenily listed below. (N=507) (61A ETC Page 39 Yes No Q3-1. Additional garden plots 10.7% 89.3% Q3-2. Park trails 62.7% 37.3% Q3-3. Open space trails 70.6% 29.4% Q3-4. Dog park 35.1% 64.9% Q3-5. Baseball/softball fields 17.2% 82.8% Q3-6. Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 25.6% 74.4% Q3-7. Football/rugby fields 4.7% 95.3% Q3-8. Lacrosse fields 1.6% 98.4% Q3-9. Soccer fields 18.1% 81.9% Q3-10. Tennis courts (lighted) 21.1% 78.9% Q3-11. Pickleball courts 10.5% 89.5% Q3-12. Table tennis 5.9% 94.1% Q3-13. Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 18.1% 81.9% Q3-14. Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 12.6% 87.4% Q3-15. Swimming pools 49.5% 50.5% Q3-16. Splash pads 19.9% 80.1% Q3-17. Playgrounds 34.3% 65.7% Q3-18. Shaded play areas 35.5% 64.5% Q3-19. Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails 60.0% 40.0% Q3-20. Sports complex (many fields at one location) 21.9% 78.1% (61A ETC Page 39 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 03. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for each amenity listed below. 4'i ETC Page 40 Yes No Q3-21. Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) 20.7% 79.3% Q3-22. Enrichment classes 29.8% 70.2% Q3-23. Environmental education center 22.5% 77.5% Q3-24. Nature park/botanical garden 42.4% 57.6% Q3-25. Disc golf 16.4% 83.6% Q3-26. Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) 30.0% 70.0% Q3-27. Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 29.2% 70.8% Q3-28. Indoor exercise facility 26.8% 73.2% Q3-29. Other 7.3% 92.7% 4'i ETC Page 40 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 3. If "Yes," please rate how well lour need for amenities of this Win are being met using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5_means they are "100% met" and 1 means "0% met." (N=481) (66 ETC Page 41 100% met 75% met 50% met 25% met 0% met Q3-1. Additional garden plots 12.5% 12.5% 37.5% 8.3% 29.2% Q3-2. Park trails 26.1% 43.7% 22.7% 5.8% 1.7% Q3-3. Open space trails 32.5% 44.4% 16.4% 6.1% 0.6% Q34. Dog park 17.9% 21.0% 33.3% 17.3% 10.5% Q3-5. Baseball/softball fields 23.8% 29.8% 23.8% 17.9% 4.8% Q3-6. Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 12.4% 38.0% 31.4% 15.7% 2.5% Q3-7. Football/rugby fields 8.7% 21.7% 26.1% 39.1% 4.3% Q3-8. Lacrosse fields 25.0% 50.0% 12.5% 12.5% 0.0% Q3-9. Soccer fields 18.4% 36.8% 32.2% 9.2% 3.4% Q3-10. Tennis courts (lighted) 13.1% 31.3% 28.3% 14.1% 13.1% Q3 -l1. Pickleball courts 8.2% 10.2% 42.9% 22.4% 16.3% Q3-12. Table tennis 0.0% 14.8% 14.8% 22.2% 48.1% Q3-13. Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 19.1% 24.7% 36.0% 16.9% 3.4% Q3-14. Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 6.8% 11.9% 28.8% 35.6% 16.9% Q3-15. Swimming pools 19.2% 20.1% 29.9% 23.9% 6.8% Q3-16. Splash pads 3.3% 6.6% 6.6% 8.8% 74.7% Q3-17. Playgrounds 37.1% 35.8% 18.2% 6.9% 1.9% Q3-18. Shaded play areas 8.9% 23.7% 37.9% 18.3% 11.2% Q3-19. Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails 25.3% 39.2% 26.4% 7.3% 1.8% Q3-20. Sports complex (many fields at one location) 13.1% 30.8% 23.4% 16.8% 15.9% (66 ETC Page 41 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 03. If "Yes," please rate how well your need for amenities of this type are being met using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means they are "1.00% met" and 1 means "0% met." ti ETC Page 42 100% met 75% met 50% met 25% met 0% met Q3-21. Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) 7.6% 16.3% 33.7% 26.1% 16.3% Q3-22. Enrichment classes 3.0% 26.3% 43.6% 19.5% 7.5% Q3-23. Environmental education center 2.9% 17.5% 32.0% 26.2% 21.4% Q3-24. Nature park/botanical garden 11.1% 28.1% 35.2% 16.6% 9.0% Q3-25. Disc golf 19.5% 28.6% 31.2% 14.3% 6.5% Q3-26. Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) 7.7% 8.5% 16.9% 21.8% 45.1% Q3-27. Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 5.9% 17.6% 27.9% 30.9% 17.6% Q3-28. Indoor exercise facility 9.9% 16.5% 25.6% 21.5% 26.4% Q3-29. Other 9.7% 9.7% 9.7% 29.0% 41.9% ti ETC Page 42 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q3-29. Other 03-29. Other Number Percent Adventure park with loose parts building/creating/risk taking for kids 1 2.7% All-weather fields 1 2.7% An indoor facility where kids could play on a rainy day 1 2.7% Areas all around mission 1 2.7% Bike course for kids (like a pump track) 1 2.7% Bike skills park 1 2.7% Bike trail off road 1 2.7% Bike trails 1 2.7% Climbing wall 1 2.7% Covered hockey rink 1 2.7% Dedicated lap pool 1 2.7% Dog parks 1 2.7% Fishing 1 2.7% Golf course 1 2.7% Historic parks 1 2.7% Indoor trampoline for kids 1 2.7% Lighted fields for sports/rugby use, all-weather fields 1 2.7% Lighted fields for use by adult clubs (I.e. rugby club) 1 2.7% Lighted rugby fields 1 2.7% Lights on fields 1 2.7% Mini golf & roller rink 1 2.7% More bike lanes 1 2.7% More bike trails -Irish Hills 1 2.7% More trails with shade trees 1 2.7% Off leash dog trails 1 2.7% Open mown grass space for frisbee, etc 1 2.7% Outdoor senior activities 1 2.7% Outdoor tennis court no lights 1 2.7% Paved trails away from road traffic 1 2.7% Practice fields (with lights) i 2.7% Racquetball courts 2 5.4% Rugby 1 2.7% Safe place for seniors 1 2.7% Stretching area 1 2.7% Turn abandoned gas stations into temporary pop up parks 1 2.7% Universal accessible piU areas and equipment far wheelchairs 1 2.7% Total 37 100.0% (16 ETC Page 43 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 4. Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? 04. To choice Number Percent Additional garden plots 7 1.4% Park trails 43 8.5% Open space trails 115 22.7% Dog park 36 7.1% Baseball/softball fields 17 3.4% Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 4 0.8% Football/rugby fields 4 0.8% Soccer fields 16 3.2% Tennis courts (lighted) 14 2.8% Pickleball courts 11 2.2% Table tennis 3 0.6% Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 3 0.6% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 2 0.4% Swimming pools 53 10.5% Splash pads 12 2.4% Playgrounds 22 4.3% Shaded play areas 19 3.7% Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails 24 4.7% Sports complex (many fields at one location) 8 1.6% Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) 4 0.8% Enrichment classes 3 0.6% Environmental education center 4 0.8% Nature park/botanical garden 5 1.0% Disc golf 5 1.0% Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 6 1.2% Indoor exercise facility 4 0.8% Other 15 3.0% None chosen 48 9.5% Total 507 100.0% ritS ETC Page 44 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 4. Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? 04. 2nd choice Number Percent Additional garden plots 4 0.8% Park trails 57 11.2% Open space trails 81 16.0% Dog park 33 6.5% Baseball/softball fields 12 2.4% Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 6 1.2% Football/rugby fields 5 1.0% Soccer fields 16 3.2% Tennis courts (lighted) 4 0.8% Pickleball courts Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Swimming pools Splash pads Playgrounds Shaded play areas Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails Sports complex (many fields at one location) Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) Enrichment classes Environmental education center Nature park/botanical garden Disc golf Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment Indoor exercise facility Other None chosen Total ETC 6 1.2% 3 0.6% 4 0.8% 38 7.5% 16 3.2% 26 5.1 % 23 4.5% 28 5.5% 9 1.8% 5 1.0% 8 1.6% 1 0.2% 11 2.2% 8 1.6% 9 1.8% 6 1.2% 7 1.4% 4 0.8% 77 15.2% 507 i00.0 % Page 45 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 04• Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? 04. 3rd choice Number Percent _ Additional garden plots _ 4 0.8% Park trails 51 10.1% Open space trails 48 9.5% Dog park 20 3.9% Baseball/softball fields 10 2.0% Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 9 1.8% Football/rugby fields 1 0.2% Soccer fields 6 1.2% Tennis courts (lighted) 9 1.8% Pickleball courts 3 0.6% Table tennis 3 0.6% Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 11 2.2% Swimming pools 44 8.7% Splash pads 9 1.8% Playgrounds 20 3.9% Shaded play areas 19 3.7% Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails 44 8.7% Sports complex (many fields at one location) 9 1.8% Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) 4 0.8% Enrichment classes 11 2.2% Environmental education center 7 1.4% Nature parkibotanical garden 12 2.4% Disc golf 4 0.8% Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) 13 2.6% Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 13 2.6% Indoor exercise facility 7 1.4% Other 1 0.2% None chosen 115 22.7% Total 507 100.0% (664 ETC Page 46 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 4. Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q4. 4th choice Number Percent Additional garden plots 6 1.2% Park trails 25 4.9% Open space trails 22 4.3% Dog park 12 2.4% Baseball/softball fields 3 0.6% Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 8 1.6% Football/rugby fields 2 0.4% Soccer fields 7 1.4% Tennis courts (lighted) 6 1.2% Pickleball courts 5 1.0% Table tennis 4 0.8% Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 8 1.6% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 2 0.4% Swimming pools 27 5.3% Splash pads 9 1.8% Playgrounds 15 3.0% Shaded play areas 20 3.9% Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails 45 8.9% Sports complex (many fields at one location) 11 2.2% Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) 7 1.4% Enrichment classes 11 2.2% Environmental education center 10 2.0% Nature park/botanical garden 22 4.3% Disc golf 10 2.0% Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) 17 3.4% Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 14 2.8% Indoor exercise facility 15 3.0% Other 5 1.0% None chosen 159 31.4% Total 507 100.0% ETC Page 47 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 4. Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? to 4) 04. Sum of Top 4 Choices Number Percent Additional garden plots 21 4.1% Park trails 176 34.7% Open space trails 266 52.5% Dog park 101 19.9% Baseball/softball fields 42 8.3% Covered picnic areas & BBQ pits for rental 27 5.3% Football/rugby fields 12 2.4% Soccer fields 45 8.9% Tennis courts (lighted) 33 6.5% Pickleball courts 25 4.9% Table tennis 10 2.0% Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts 25 4.9% Indoor basketball/volleyball courts 8 1.6% Swimming pools 162 32.0% Splash pads 46 9.1% Playgrounds 83 16.4% Shaded play areas 81 16.0% Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails 141 27.8% Sports complex (many fields at one location) 37 7.3% Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) 20 3.9% Enrichment classes 33 6.5% Environmental education center 22 4.3% Nature park/botanical garden 50 9.9% Disc golf 27 5.3% Adventure area (e.g. ropes course, zipline) 39 7.7% Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 39 7.7% Indoor exercise facility 33 6.5% Other 25 4.9% None chosen 48 9.5% Total 1677 rod ETC Page 48 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 S. From the following list lease CHECK ALL of the organizations you or members of your household have used for indoor/outdoor recreation andsports activities durinz the past 12 months. Q5. Organizations you have used for indoor/ outdoor recreation & sports activities during past 12 months _ Number Percent School programs/facilities 189 37.3% City sports programs 143 28.2% Neighboring cities 113 22.3% Other youth -oriented organizations (e.g. 4-H, religious, Boy/Girl Scouts) 64 12.6% Club sports programs for youth 70 13.8% Health clubs or gyms for specialized classes (e.g. yoga, barre, pilates, weights, martial arts) 232 45.8% Private clubs (e.g. tennis, rowing, swim, health/fitness, golf) 156 30.8% Drop-in adult sports at Ludwick Community Center 21 4.1% Masters Sports Adult 14 2.8% Other 53 10.5% None 79 15.6% Total 1134 ii ETC Page 49 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 05-10. Other Q5-10. Other _ Number Percent ADULT SCHOOL CLASSES 1 1.9% ADULT TENNIS LEAGUES 1 1.9% Adult ED athletic classes 1 1.9% Adult over 40 basketball 1 1.9% BIKING/WALKING THROUGH PARK 1 1.9% Beach 1 1.9% Biking 2 3.8% Blues baseball 1 1.9% CAL POLY GYM 1 1.9% CC SOCCER 1 1.9% Cal Poly facilities (gym, pool, tennis, etc) 1 1.9% Cycling group 1 1.9% DANCE LESSONS AND RAD ELKS LODGE POOL 1 1.9% Drop in play at Damon Garcia 1 1.9% Drop in play at Damon Garcia & Meadow Park 1 1.9% Drop-in Soccer at Damon -Garcia 1 1.9% I'M 67 SO PAST ALL THESE 1 1.9% Johnson Ranch running trail 1 1.9% LULU LEMON RUN CLUB 1 1.9% MORRO BAY AND ARROYO GRANDE PICKLEBALL COURTS 1 1.9% Men's adult league baseball 1 1.9% Mountain biking 1 1.9% OUTSIDE NOW SUN N FUN 1 1.9% Old Boys Rugby 1 1.9% Old Fellows Vets Hall 1 1.9% PARK TRAILS 1 1.9% PICKLEBALL COURT 1 1.9% PICKLEBALL COURTS IN ARROYO GRANDE 1 1.9% PUBLIC GOLF 1 1.9% Private dojo and dance studio 1 1.9% Rugby 1 1.9% SINSHEIMER SWIM 1 1.9% SLO Rugby Club (adult) 1 1.9% SLO SWIM CENTER SWIM LESSONS 1 1.9% SLO Triathlon 2 3.8% SLOBC 2 3.8% Science/STEM for kids 1 1.9% Senior center 1 1.9% Sinsheimer Pool 1 1.9% Soccer 1 1.9% Strava Club 1 1.9% Swim lessons 1 1.9% Swimming 1 1.9% TRAILS/OPEN SPACE 1 1.9% Water aerobics at Sinsheimer Pool 1 1.9% Work meetings/parties 1 1.9% YMCA 3 5.7% Yoga, jazzercise in public buildings, not_gyms or_clubs 1 1.9% Total 53 100.0% 06. Please indicate if you or any member of your household have used each of the City recreation programs listed below in the past 12 months. r6&ETC Page 50 (N=507) Yes Q6-1. Adult soccer 7.9% Q6-2. Adult softball (leagues & boomer) 8.7% Q6-3. Aqua aerobics & pilates 8.9% Q64. Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) Q6-5. Golf instruction (private & first tee) Q6-6. Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) Q6-7. Gymnastics classes & camps Q6-8. Historic Jack House & Gardens tours Q6-9. Junior giants Q6-10. Junior Ranger Activity Camp Q6-11. Kidz Love Soccer Q6-12. Lap swimming Q6-13. LEGO camps Q6-14. Lifeguard training & Junior Guards Q6-15. Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) Q6-16. Music lessons Q6-17. Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) Q6-18. Pickleball (drop-in) Q6-19. Ranger -led hikes 27.2% 5.3% 4.5% 7.7% 9.7% 3.0% 3.7% 7.9% 2 4. 3 o 4.9% 5.9% No 72.8% 94.7% 95.5% 92.3% 90.3% 97.0% 96.3% 92.1% 75.7% 95.1% 94.1% 3.9% 96.1% 10.5% 89.5% 12.6% 87.4% 5.7% 94.3% 9.1% 90.9% San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 4-i ETC Page 51 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 6. Please indicate if 3:ou or any member of your household have used each of the City recreation programs listed below in the past 12 months. '� ETC Page 52 Yes No Q6-20. Recreational swimming 26.6% 73.4% Q6-21. Senior Center classes & activities 6.1% 93.9% Q6-22. Skate park camps, clinics, & activities 4.7% 95.3% Q6-23. Sun'n' Fun & Club Star 10.7% 89.3% Q6-24. Surfing lessons 3.7% 96.3% Q6-25. Swim lessons (classes & private) 14.6% 85.4% Q6-26. Tennis (recreational) 11.8% 88.2% Q6-27. Tennis lessons & training 4.1% 95.9% Q6-28. Triathlon 8.7% 91.3% Q6-29. Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) 2.2% 97.8% Q6-30. Warm water exercise class 6.9% 93.1% Q6-31. Yoga 13.8% 86.2% Q6-32. Youth basketball 6.3% 93.7% Q6-33. Youth fitness & wellness programs 3.4% 96.6% Q6-34. Youth futsal 4.3% 95.7% Q6-35. Other 2.4% 97.6% '� ETC Page 52 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 06. If "Yes." please rate your overall satisfaction with that programs. (N=382) Very Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q6-1. Adult soccer 24.1% 34.5% 31.0% 6.9% 3.4% Q6-2. Adult softball (leagues & boomer) 17.9% 51.3% 15.4% 12.8% 2.6% Q6-3. Aqua aerobics & pilates 28.1% 34.4% 34.4% 3.1% 0.0% Q64. Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) 25.2% 53.0% 20.0% 0.9% 0.9% Q6-5. Golf instruction (private & first tee) 27.3% 22.7% 45.5% 4.5% 0.0% Q6-6. Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) 19.0% 38.1% 28.6% 14.3% 0.0% Q6-7. Gymnastics classes & camps 6.7% 40.0% 46.7% 6.7% 0.0% Q6-8. Historic Jack House & Gardens tours 48.6% 22.9% 22.9% 0.0% 5.7% Q6-9. Junior giants 76.9% 0.0% 23.1% 0.0% 0.0% Q6-10. Junior Ranger Activity Camp 15.4% 46.2% 38.5% 0.0% 0.0% Q6-11. Kidz Love Soccer 28.1% 50.0% 21.9% 0.0% 0.0% Q6-12. Lap swimming 32.4% 37.1% 19.0% 7.6% 3.8% Q6-13. LEGO camps 37.5% 12.5n710 43.8% 0.0% 6.3% Q6-14. Lifeguard training & Junior Guards 42.9% 28.6% 23.8% 0.0% 4.8% Q6-15. Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) 12.5% 37.5% 43.8% 6.3% 0.0% Q6-16. Music lessons 21.2% 15.2% 48.5% 12.1% 3.0% Q6-17. Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) 24.0% 22.0% 44.0% 8.0% 2.0% Q6-18. Pickleball (drop-in) 25.0% 25.0% 33.3% 16.7% 0.0% Q6-19. Ranger -led hikes 41.0% 33.3% 23.1% 2.6% 0.0% lh'� ETC Page 53 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 QW. -If "Yes," please rate spur overall satisfaction with that programs. iti ETC Page 54 Very Very satislie(f Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied dissatisfied Q6-20. Recreational swimming 19.7% 43.6% 17.9% 14.5% 4.3% Q6-21. Senior Center classes & activities 34.8% 30.4% 34.8% 0.0% 0.0% Q6-22. Skate park camps, clinics, & activities 40.9% 27.3% 27.3% 4.5% 0.0% Q6-23. Sun'n' Fun & Club Star 43.5% 34.8% 13.0% 4.3% 4.3% Q6-24. Surfing lessons 7.1% 14.3% 57.1% 7.1% 14.3% Q6-25. Swim lessons (classes & private) 14.8% 39.3% 26.2% 18.0% 1.6% Q6-26. Tennis (recreational) 18.0% 34.0% 38.0% 10.0% 0.0% Q6-27. Tennis lessons & training 25.0% 18.8% 31.3% 12.5% 12.5% Q6-28. Triathlon 35.1% 51.4% 13.5% 0.0% 0.0% Q6-29. Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0.0% Q6-30. Warm water exercise class 37.5% 37.5% 16.7% 8.3% 0.0% Q6-31. Yoga 21.2% 30.8% 44.2% 3.8% 0.0% Q6-32. Youth basketball 44.4% 25.9% 14.8% 11.1% 3.7% Q6-33. Youth fitness & wellness programs 7.1% 21.4% 50.0% 14.3% 7.1% Q6-34. Youth futsal 23.5% 23.5% 41.2% 11.8% 0.0% Q6-35. Other 16.7% 33.3% 33.3% 16.7% 0.0% iti ETC Page 54 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q6-35. Other 06-35. Other Number Percent DOG PARKS 1 8.3% Dance and art classes for kids 1 8.3% Drop in Zumba class 1 8.3% GOLF PLAY-LAGUNA 1 8.3% Parental participation 1 8.3% RECREATIONAL SWIMMIMG 1 8.3% Rugby 1 8.3% Running trail -Johnson Ranch 1 8.3% ULTIMATE DAY CAMP SUMMER TIME 1 8.3% Volleyball 1 8.3% Youth and adult touch rugby 1 8.3% Youth sports 1 8.3% Total 12 100.0% ETC Page 55 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 07. Which FOUR of the urograms listed in Question_6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? 07. Top choice Number_ Percent Adult soccer 17 3.4% Adult softball (leagues & boomer) 23 4.5% Aqua aerobics & pilates 12 2.4% Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) 33 6.5% Golf instruction (private & first tee) 4 0.8% Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) 6 1.2% Gymnastics classes & camps 2 0.4% Historic Jack House & Gardens tours 2 0.4% Junior giants 2 0.4% Junior Ranger Activity Camp 2 0.4% Kidz Love Soccer 2 0.4% Lap swimming 44 8.7% LEGO camps 2 0.4% Lifeguard training & Junior Guards 2 0.4% Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) 4 0.8% Music lessons 6 1.2% Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) 13 2.6% Pickleball (drop-in) 11 2.2% Ranger -led hikes 9 1.8% Recreational swimming 30 5.9% Senior Center classes & activities 11 2.2% Skate park camps, clinics, & activities 1 0.2% Sun'n' Fun & Club Star 32 6.3% Swim lessons (classes & private) 14 2.8% Tennis (recreational) 11 2.2% Tennis lessons & training 1 0.2% Triathlon 6 1.2% Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) 1 0.2% Warm water exercise class 10 2.0% Yoga 14 2.8% Youth basketball 3 0.6% Youth fitness & wellness programs 2 0.4% Youth futsal 1 0.2% Other 4 0.8% None chosen 170 33.5% Total 507 100.0% ETC Page 56 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 7. Which FOUR of the programs listed in Ouestion 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to Vour household? Q7. 2nd choice Adult soccer Adult softball (leagues & boomer) Aqua aerobics & pilates Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) Golf instruction (private & first tee) Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) Gymnastics classes & camps Historic Jack House & Gardens tours Junior giants Junior Ranger Activity Camp Kidz Love Soccer Lap swimming LEGO camps Lifeguard training & Junior Guards Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) Music lessons Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) Pickleball (drop-in) Ranger -led hikes Recreational swimming Senior Center classes & activities Skate park camps, clinics, & activities Sun 'n' Fun & Club Star Surfing lessons Swim lessons (classes & private) Tennis (recreational) Tennis lessons & training Triathlon Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) Warm water exercise class Yoga Youth basketball Youth fitness & wellness programs Youth futsal Other None chosen Total Number 7 6 7 21 3 3 4 2 5 6 24 7 5 14 9 11 35 8 2 8 2 12 11 2 7 3 5 13 2 Percent 1.4% 1.2% 1.4% 4.1% 0.6% 1.0% 0.6% 0.8% 0.4% 1.0% 1.2% 4.7% 0.2% 1.4% 1.0% 2.8% 1.8% 1.2% 2.2% 6.9% 1.6% 0.4% 1.6% 0.4% 2.4% 2.2% 0.4% 1.4% 0.6% 1.0% 2.6% 0.6% 0.4% 3 0.6% 4 0.8% _ 241 47.5% 507 100.0% &i. ETC Page 57 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 7. Which FOUR of the prozrams listed in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q7. 3rd choice Number Percent Adult soccer 4 0.8% Adult softball (leagues & boomer) 5 1.0% Aqua aerobics & pilates 7 1.4% Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) 26 5.1 % Golf instruction (private & first tee) 3 0.6% Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) 1 0.2% Gymnastics classes & camps 5 1.0% Historic Jack House & Gardens tours 6 1.2% Junior giants 2 0.4% Junior Ranger Activity Camp 4 0.8% Kidz Love Soccer 4 0.8% Lap swimming 12 2.4% LEGO camps 1 0.2% Lifeguard training & Junior Guards 2 0.4% Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) 4 0.8% Music lessons 9 1.8% Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) 12 2.4% Pickleball (drop-in) 3 0.6% Ranger -led hikes 6 1.2% Recreational swimming 24 4.7% Senior Center classes & activities 5 1.0% Skate park camps, clinics, & activities 3 0.6% Sun'n' Fun & Club Star 5 1.0% Swim lessons (classes & private) 9 1.8% Tennis (recreational) 13 2.6% Tennis lessons & training 2 0.4% Triathlon 8 1.6% Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) 1 0.2% Warm water exercise class 3 0.6% Yoga 13 2.6% Youth basketball 8 1.6% Youth futsal 3 0.6% None chosen 294 58.0% Total 507 100.0% (&y ETC Page 58 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 07. Which FOUR of the programs listed in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? 7. 4th choice Number Percent Adult soccer 3 0.6% Aqua aerobics & pilates 5 1.0% Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) 12 2.4% Golf instruction (private & first tee) 4 0.8% Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) 1 0.2% Gymnastics classes & camps 1 0.2% Historic Jack House & Gardens tours 9 1.8% Junior giants 2 0.4% Junior Ranger Activity Camp 1 0.2% Kidz Love Soccer 5 1.0% Lap swimming 4 0.8% LEGO camps 8 1.6% Lifeguard training & Junior Guards 6 1.2% Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) 4 0.8% Music lessons 6 1.2% Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) 8 1.6% Ranger -led hikes 7 1.4% Recreational swimming 13 2.6% Senior Center classes & activities 3 0.6% Skate park camps, clinics, & activities 1 0.2% Sun'n' Fun & Club Star 1 0.2% Surfing lessons 4 0.8% Swim lessons (classes & private) 10 2.0% Tennis (recreational) 4 0.8% Tennis lessons & training 2 0.4% Triathlon 8 1.6% Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) 2 0.4% Warm water exercise class 3 0.6% Yoga 7 1.4 o Youth basketball 5 1.0% Youth fitness & wellness programs 1 0.2% Youth futsal 2 0.4% Other 2 0.4% None chosen 353 69.6% Total 507 100.0% li ETC Page 59 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 7. Which FOUR of the programs listed in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? to 4) 07. Sum of Top 4 Choices _ Number Percent Adult soccer 31 6.1% Adult softball (leagues & boomer) 34 6.7% Aqua aerobics & pilates 31 6.1% Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble) 92 18.1 % Golf instruction (private & first tee) 14 2.8% Golf tournaments (adult, junior, & senior) 13 2.6% Gymnastics classes & camps 11 2.2% Historic Jack House & Gardens tours 21 4.1% Junior giants 8 1.6% Junior Ranger Activity Camp 12 2.4% Kidz Love Soccer 17 3.4% Lap swimming 84 16.6% LEGO camps 12 2.4% Lifeguard training & Junior Guards 17 3.4% Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis & dodgeball) 17 3.4% Music lessons 35 6.9% Personal training & fitness classes (adult & youth) 42 8.3% Pickleball (drop-in) 20 3.9% Ranger -led hikes 33 6.5% Recreational swimming 102 20.1% Senior Center classes & activities 27 5.3% Skate park camps, clinics, & activities 7 1.4% Sun 'n' Fun & Club Star 46 9.1% Surfing lessons 6 1.2% Swim lessons (classes & private) 45 8.9% Tennis (recreational) 39 7.7% Tennis lessons & training 7 1.4% Triathlon 29 5.7% Ultimate pick-up (drop-in) 7 1.4% Warm water exercise class 21 4.1% Yoga 47 9.3% Youth basketball 19 3.7% Youth fitness & wellness programs 5 1.0% Youth futsal 9 1.8% Other 10 2.0% None chosen 170 33.5% Total 1140 4-I ETC Page 60 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 8. Please CHECK ALL of the followina reasons that prevent y1ju or other members of your household from using the parks, recreation facilities, or programs of the City MORE OFTEN. Q8. Reasons that prevent you from using City arks recreation facilities or programs more often Number Percent Facilities are not well maintained 86 17.0% Facilities lack right equipment 64 12.6% Facilities are outdated 92 18.1 % Lack of restrooms 84 16.6% Lack of parking 60 11.8% Too far from residence 68 13.4% Lack of transportation 14 2.8% Do not know location of facilities 75 14.8% Feel unsafe 107 21.1% Desired program or facility not offered 71 14.0% Classes full 25 4.9% Fees are too high 57 11.2% Do not know what is being offered 165 32.5% Program times are not convenient 103 20.3% Poor customer service 13 2.6% Online registration is difficult 32 6.3% Use services from others 49 9.7% Operational hours don't match my schedule 87 17.2% Facilities don't match my age/interest 60 11.8% Facility not available due to permit use 24 4.7% Too busy 111 21.9% Not interested 49 9.7% Drop in activity not available 30 5.9% Other 54 10.7% Total 1580 ETC Page 61 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q8-24. Other Q8-24. Other Number Percent Afraid of the homeless 1 1.9% BELONG TO A PRIVATE FACILITY 1 1.9% DISABILITIES 1 1.9% DOG RESTRICTIONS 1 1.9% DON'T HAVE KIDS YET 1 1.9% DRUGS 1 1.9% Dog park not fenced (Laguna) 1 1.9% Facilities lack shade, trails are too crowded 1 1.9% HEALTH ISSUES PREVENT USE 1 1.9% HOMELESS CAMPS 1 1.9% HOMELESS PEOPLE 1 1.9% HOMELESS PEOPLE LURKING 1 1.9% HOMELESS/RESIDENT CAR CAMPERS IN LAGUNA LAKE PARK 1 1.9% HOMELESS/TRANSIENT POPULATION OVERTAKES/CHASES OFF PEOPLE 1 1.9% Homeless people sleeping in parks 1 1.9% Homeless population needs to be dealt with by removal 1 1.9% I am satisfied with the offerings 1 1.9% LARGE GATHERINGS OF HOMELESS 1 1.9% Lack of fenced -in dog park 1 1.9% Lack of shade on the playgrounds 1 1.9% Laguna Park often filled w/homeless people that smoke near playground 1 1.9% Light availability for Rugby 1 1.9% Limited recreational swim times. Outdated/in disrepair park benches in French Park 1 1.9% MISSION PLAZA UNSAFE 1 1.9% NEED INFO IN MAILINGS 1 1.9% NEED OUTDOOR SKATE PARK 1 1.9% NO SHADE 1 1.9% Need linear trails, not easy to access without car 1 1.9% Need more 1 1.9% No fish 1 1.9% No off road biking 1 1.9% No shade at the park playground 1 1.9% Not enough dog parks 1 1.9% Not enough shade 1 1.9% Pool closed too often 1 1.9% RESTROOMS LOCKED DURING DAYTIME 1 1.9% SICK HOME BOUND 1 1.9% Satisfied with what I use now 1 1.9% Swimming with a child on a vent is difficult when we are not allowed to use floaty 1 1.9% THERE IS NO SHADE AT THE PARKS MAKING IT TOO HOT 1 1.9% (M. ETC Page 62 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 08-24. Other Q&-24. Other T Number Percent TOO MANY HOMELESS 2 3.7% TOO MANY HOMELESS IN PARKS 1 1.9% TOO MANY HOMELESS PEOPLE IN THE PARKS 1 1.9% TOO OLD 1 1.9% TRANSIENTS AROUND YOUTH AREA 1 1.9% TRANSIENTS DOING DRUGS 1 1.9% The homeless an issue 1 1.9% Too crowded 1 1.9% Too many homeless in parks 1 1.9% USE FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS AT CAL POLY 1 1.9% Use open space for hikes/bikes 1 1.9% WE ARE LAZY 1 1.9% Work too hard at mob and didn't know about them 1 1.9% Total 54 100.0% (666 ETC Page 63 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 49. Please CHECK ALL the ways you learn about San Luis Obispo Recreation programs and activities. Q9. Ways you learn about San Luis Obispo Recreation programs & activities _ Number Percent Activity guide 181 35.7% City website/Recreation Dept. webpage 197 38.9% City emails/E-blasts 116 22.9% Newspaper 151 29.8% Conversations with staff 43 8.5% Facebook 94 18.5% Instagram 35 6.9% Smart phone application 12 2.4% From friends & neighbors 278 54.8% Promotions at San Luis Obispo events 113 22.3% Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities 49 9.7% Parks & Recreation Commission meetings 3 0.6% Flyers/newsletters 151 29.8% Street banners 124 24.5% Other 33 6.5% Total 1580 C&, ETC Page 64 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q9-16. Other 09-16. Other _ Number Percent Adult Ed brochure 1 3.1% CC Soccer website 1 3.1% Email 2 6.3% FLYERS AT CLUB STAR 1 3.1 % GOOGLE MAPS 1 3.1 % Google search for activity specific events 1 3.1% I LIVE CLOSE TO SINSHEIMER AND RECEIVE SOME INFO 1 3.1 % I LIVE ON MEADOW PARK 1 3.1 % I RECEIVE NO INFO AT HOME 1 3.1 % I don't really hear about programs from the parks dept 1 3.1% I rarely hear about things 1 3.1 % KCBX and KSBY 1 3.1% KSBY news 1 3.1 % MAIL 2 6.3% MAILED FLYERS/BOOKS 1 3.1% NEED MAILINGS ON PARKS 1 3.1 % NEXTDOOR APP 5 15.6% PERSONAL EXPERIENCE 1 3.1% POST CARDS 1 3.1% SCHOOL FLYERS 1 3.1 % School 1 3.1 % THIS SURVEY THANKS 1 3.1% TV 1 3.1% TV OR RADIO 1 3.1% This form 1 3.1 % WEBSITE FOR NEWSPAPER 1 3.1 % Total 32 100.0% rK ETC Page 65 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 410. Which FOUR of the information sources listed in Question 9 would you MOST PREFER the Ci use to communicate withyou? Q10. Top choice NUniber Percent Activity guide 85 16.8% City website/Recreation Dept. webpage 63 12.4% City emails/E-blasts 95 18.7% Newspaper 34 6.7% Conversations with staff 1 0.2% Facebook 35 6.9% Instagram 13 2.6% Smart phone application 14 2.8% From friends & neighbors 8 1.6% Promotions at San Luis Obispo events 5 1.0% Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities 2 0.4% Flyers/newsletters 43 8.5% Street banners 16 3.2% Other 6 1.2% None chosen 87 17.2% Total 507 100.0% 010. Which FOUR of the information sources listed in Question 9 would ,you MOST PREFER the City use to communicate with you? Q10. 2nd choice Activity guide City website/Recreation Dept. webpage City emails/E-blasts Newspaper Conversations with staff Facebook Instagram Smart phone application From friends & neighbors Promotions at San Luis Obispo events Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities Flyers/newsletters Number Percent 38 7.5% 63 12.4% 50 9.9% 35 6.9% 2 0.4% 35 6.9% 15 3.0% 24 4.7% 10 2.0% 16 3.2% 8 1.6% 42 8.3% Street banners 21 4.1% Twitter 1 0.2% Other 3 0.6% None chosen 144 28.4% Total 507 100.0% 4°i ETC Page 66 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Q10. Which FOUR of the information sources listed in Question_9 would you MOST PREFER the City use to communicate with you? Q 10.3 rd choice Activity guide City website/Recreation Dept. webpage City emails/E-blasts Newspaper Conversations with staff Facebook Instagram Smart phone application From friends & neighbors Promotions at San Luis Obispo events Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities Flyers/newsletters Street banners Twitter Other None chosen Total Number Percent 28 5.5% 25 4.9% 26 5.1 % 21 4.1% 4 0.8% 26 5.1 % 8 1.6% 16 3.2% 23 4.5% 33 6.5% 9 1.8% 37 7.3% 25 4.9% 1 0.2% 3 0.6% 222 43.8% 507 100.0% 10. Which FOUR of the information sources listed in Question 9 would you MOST PREFER the City use to communicate withyou? Q10, 4th choice Number Percent Activity guide 23 4.5% City website/Recreation Dept. webpage 25 4.9% City emails/E-blasts 15 3.0% Newspaper 15 3.0% Conversations with staff 2 0.4% Facebook 17 3.4% Instagram 7 1.4% Smart phone application 11 2.2% From friends & neighbors 26 5.1 % Promotions at San Luis Obispo events 16 3.2% Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities 7 1.4% Flyers/newsletters 22 4.3% Street banners 23 4.5% Other 5 1.0% None chosen 293 57,8% Total 507 100.0% ETC Page 67 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 410. Which FOUR of the information sources listed in Question 9 would you MOST PREFER the City use to communicate with -you? to 4 Q10. Sum of Top 4 Choices Number Percent Activity guide 174 34.3% City website/Recreation Dept. webpage 176 34.7% City emails/E-blasts 186 36.7% Newspaper 105 20.7% Conversations with staff 9 1.8% Facebook 113 22.3% Instagram 43 8.5% Smart phone application 65 12.8% From friends & neighbors 67 13.2% Promotions at San Luis Obispo events 70 13.8% Materials at Parks & Recreation facilities 26 5.1 % Flyers/newsletters 144 28.4% Street banners 85 16.8% Twitter 2 0.4% Other 17 3.4% None chosen 87 17.2% Total 1369 ii ETC Page 68 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 011. What is your MOST FREQUENTLY used method to arrive at San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation facilities? Q 11. What is your most frequently used method to arrive at San Luis Obispo Parks & Recreation facilities Number Percent Drive 301 59.4% Carpool 8 1.6% Walk 123 24.3% Bike 55 10.8% Public transportation 2 0.4% Other 4 0.8% Not provided 14 2.8 `_Vo Total 507 100.0% 011.Other 411_. Other Number Percent Drive by with friends 1 33.3% Running 2 66.7% Total 3 100.0% 4& ETC Page 69 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 01_2. Thinking about the needs of your household, which ONE of the fallowingtypes of offerings would you MOST LIKE to see in San Luis Obispo? Q12. Which ONE of the following types of offerings would you MOST LIKE to see in San Luis Obispo? _ Number Percent Active sports facilities & programs 119 23.5% Arts & cultural, visual or performing arts facilities & 254 50.1% programs 64 12.6% Classes, lessons, & community events 87 17.2% Passive recreation & enjoyment of natural environment 145 28.6% Environmental education, stewardship & preservation 37 7.3% Volunteer projects 23 4.5% Not provided 32 6.3% Total 507 100.0% 13. The Parks and Recreation De artment is in the orocess of evaluating the special events programs. With that in mind lease check the THREE event concepts that ou and members of your household would be MOST INTERESTED in. Q13. What event concepts you would be most interested in Number Percent Cultural celebration (food/performances/history/art) 206 40.6% Food event (farmer's market, tastings, beer/wine) 256 50.5% Entertainment (music, movies, performers) 254 50.1% Health & wellness events (bike, walk, run) 155 30.6% Environmental event (Earth Day, creek cleanup) 148 29.2% Food trucks 126 24.9% Competitions (triathlon, bike, run, adventure) 98 19.3% Sports tournaments (e.g. basketball, football, soccer) 56 11.0% Special events at Ludwick Community Center 24 4.7% None. 1 don't think City should sponsor special events _ 15 3.0% Total 1338 (W& ETC Page 70 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 0140-5) Please indicate how supportive ou would be of the CitV of San Luis Obispo doing each of the following if the City had the funds/space to im rove repurpose, and/or ear and Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. (acquiring or repurposing existing land) (N=507) Q14-1. Used for small neighborhood parks Q14-2. Used for athletic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) Q 14-3. Used for open space & trails Q144. Pools Q 14-5. Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium Very Supporti- Not Not at all supportive ve Neutral supportive su _portive Not sure 50.3% 25.8% 12.2% 2.4% 1.4% 7.9% 25.8% 24.7% 26.8% 6.1% 4.1% 12.4% 64.7% 18.3% 6.9% 1.2% 0.6% 8.3% 35.5% 20.7% 20.3% 7.7% 3.6% 12.2% 17.0% 21.1% 30.4% 10.5% 6.5% 14.6% 0140-5) Please indicate how supportive you would be of the City of San Luis Obispo doing each of the following if the City had the -funds/space to improve, re ur ose and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. (acquiring or repurposing existing land) (without "not sure") (N=507) 4•b ETC Page 71 Very Not Not at all supportive Su ortive Neutral su ortive supportive Q14-1. Used for small neighborhood parks 54.6% 28.1 % 13.3% 2.6% 1.5% Q14-2. Used for athlctic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) 29.5% 28.2% 30.6% 7.0% 4.7% Q14-3. Used for open space & trails 70.5% 20.0% 7.5% 1.3% 0.6% Q14-4. Pools 40.4% 23.6% 23.1% 8.8% 4.0% Q14-5. Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 19.9% 24.7% 35.6% 12.2% 7.6% 4•b ETC Page 71 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 414{6-22) Please indicate how supportive you would be of the City of San Luis Obispo doing each of the following if the City had the funds/space to improve, repurpose, and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. (conducting renovations or developing new facilities (N=507) i'& ETC Page 72 Very Supporti- Not Not at all supportive ve Neutral supportive supportive Not sure Q14-6. Hockey rinks 6.1% 10.5% 33.3% 15.2% 15.6% 19.3% Q14-7. Sand volleyball courts 9.3% 22.9% 33.5% 9.3% 6.1% 18.9% Q14-8. Fitness circuit stations 14.8% 23.9% 28.2% 10.7% 5.7% 16.8% Q14-9. BMX/Pump track 7.1% 11.0% 32.0% 17.6% 13.2% 19.1% Q14-10. Dog park 24.5% 24.5% 24.5% 6.7% 4.9% 15.0% Q14-11. Designated areas for walking & biking 49.3% 28.2% 8.7% 1.6% 0.8% 11.4% Q14-12. Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 25.2% 24.1% 24.1% 5.9% 5.5% 15.2% Q14-13. Synthetic turf fields for year-round sports & activities 17.0% 17.4% 28.0% 9.9% 10.5% 17.4% Q14-14. Nature & environmental interpretive areas 22.7% 28.0% 23.5% 5.7% 3.7% 16.4% Q14-15. Playgrounds & similar play facilities 24.5% 33.1% 21.9% 2.8% 2.6% 15.2% Q14-16. Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 21.1% 34.7% 24.3% 3.0% 2.0% 15.0% Q14-17. Enhancements to park landscaping 23.1% 29.4% 24.9% 5.3% 2.8% 14.6% Q14-18. Additional park bathrooms 24.5% 33.9% 22.9% 3.4% 0.8% 14.6% Q14-19. Golf course improvements 9.3% 9.9% 29.4% 16.0% 16.4% 19.1% Q14-20. Golf clubhouse improvements 7.1% 7.7% 31.0% 16.6% 18.3% 19.3% Q14-21. Bocce ball courts 11.6% 20.5% 30.2% 9.9% 8.3% 19.5% Q14-22. Pickleball courts 10.8% 15.4% 37.5% 8.5% 9.9% 17.9% i'& ETC Page 72 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 014(6-22) Please indicate how supportive you would be of the Ci of San Luis Ubis o doiniz each of the following if the City had the funds/space to improve, re ur ose and/or ex and Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo.(conducting renovations or developing new facilities without "not sure" (N=507) Q14-12. Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) Very 28.4% 28.4% Not Not at all 014-13_ Synthetic turf fields for y ear -round supportive Supportive_ Neutral supportive supportive Q14-6. Hockey rinks 7.6% 13.0% 41.3% 18.8% 19.3% Q14-7. Sand volleyball courts 11.4% 28.2% 41.4% 11.4% 7.5% Q14-8. Fitness circuit stations 17.8% 28.7% 33.9% 12.8% 6.9% Q14-9. BMX/Pump track 8.8% 13.7% 39.5% 21.7% 16.3% Q14-10. Dog park 28.8% 28.8% 28.8% 7.9% 5.8% Q14-11. Designated areas for walking & biking 55.7% 31.8% 9.8% 1.8% 0.9% Q14-12. Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 29.8% 28.4% 28.4% 7.0% 6.5% 014-13_ Synthetic turf fields for y ear -round sports & activities 20.5% 21.0% 33.9% 11.9% 12.6% Q14-14. Nature & environmental interpretive areas 27.1% 33.5% 28.1% 6.8% 4.5% Q14-15. Playgrounds & similar play facilities 28.8% 39.1% 25.8% 3.3% 3.0% Q14-16. Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 24.8% 40.8% 28.5% 3.5% 2.3% Q14-17. Enhancements to park landscaping 27.0% 34.4% 29.1% 6.2% 3.2% Q14-18. Additional park bathrooms 28.6% 39.7% 26.8% 3.9% 0.9% Q14-19. Golf course improvements 11.5% 12.2% 36.3% 19.8% 20.2% Q14-20. Gulf clubhouse improvements 8.8% 9.5% 38.4% 20.5% 22.7% Q14-21. Bocce ball courts 14.5% 25.5% 37.5% 12.3% 10.3% Q14-22, Pickleball courts 13.2% 18.8% 45.7% 10.3% 12.03' 1iz ETC Page 73 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 014(23-27) Please indicate how supportive Vou would be of the Ci of San Luis Obispo doing each of the following if the City had the funds/space to improve, repulMose, and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. (incorporating ark design, materials and programs) (N=507) Q14(23-27) Please indicate how supportive you would be of the 011 of San Luis Obis o doing each of the following if the City had the funds/space to improve, reyuEpose, and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. incor oratin ark desi n materials and ro rams without "not sure" (N=507) Very Supporti- Not Not at all _ _supportive supportive ve Neutral supportive supportive Not sure Q14-23. Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 66.4% landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 61.1% 19.7% 8.3% 0.8% 2.2% 7.9% Q14-24. Are welcoming to a diverse population 55.8% 20.1% 10.1% 2.0% 1.6% 10.5% Q14-25. Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 46.4% 25.5% 21.1% 4.2% 2.9% adobe structures) 41.6% 22.9% 18.9% 3.7% 2.6% 10.3% Q14-26. Incorporate public art 46.0% 27.8% 11.8% 2.4% 2.2% 9.9% Q14-27. Other 91.2% 5.9% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 0.0% Q14(23-27) Please indicate how supportive you would be of the 011 of San Luis Obis o doing each of the following if the City had the funds/space to improve, reyuEpose, and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. incor oratin ark desi n materials and ro rams without "not sure" (N=507) 1 ETC Page 74 Very Not Not at all _ _supportive Supportive Neutral supportive supportive_ Q14-23. Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 66.4% 21.4% 9.0% 0.9% 2.4% Q14-24. Are welcoming to a diverse population 62.3% 22.5% 11.2% 2.2% 1.8% Q14-25. Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 46.4% 25.5% 21.1% 4.2% 2.9% Q 14-26. Incorporate public art 51.0% 30.9% 13.1% 2.6% 2.4% Q14-27. Other 91.2% 5.9% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 1 ETC Page 74 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 014-27. Other Q14-27. Other Number Percent AVOID RUBBER TIRE CHUNKS 1 3.0% BIKE FRIENDLY 1 3.0% CONNECT PEOPLE W/ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS 1 3.0% COVERED PLAYGROUNDS 1 3.0% Do something about the homeless 1 3.0% ENCOURAGE LOCAL ARTIST PARTICIPATION 1 3.0% I think all park designs should fit different age groups 1 3.0% 1 would like to offer my landscape design expertise 1 3.0% Improve swimming facilities for our youth teams 1 3.0% Increase STEM kids' opportunities 1 3.0% Keeping our children safe on trails as they are getting run over by bicyclists 1 3.0% Long distance bike trails 1 3.0% MORE DOG FRIENDLY AREAS 1 3.0% Maintain a disc golf course 1 3.0% Maintenance of facilities, homeless problem (mission, meadow facilities) 1 3.0% Make the parks safer from loiterers 1 3.0% More classes/bike lanes and open space 1 3.0% NEED PARKING DESIGNATED FOR PLAYGROUND 1 3.0% NEIGHBORHOOD TENNIS COURTS 1 3.0% Off road biking, rental bikes 1 3.0% PAID HOMELESS TRASH PICK UP 1 3.0% PASSIVE RECREATION 1 3.0% Pet friendly 1 3.0% Plant fruit trees 1 3.0% REQUIRE MAINTENANCE 1 3.0% Reforestation and wildlife 1 3.0% SKATEBOARD PARK OUTDOORS 1 3.0% Safe places for seniors 1 3.0% Shade, shade and more shade in parks 1 3.0% Shelter on Reservoir Canyon Trail for hikers 1 3.0% Support intergenerational interaction 1 3.0% Supportive 1 3.0% Take care of the homeless sleeping in narks 1 3.0 o u Total 33 100.0% k ETC Page 75 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 15. Which FOUR of the actions from the list inQuestion 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to you and members of your household? O15. Top choice Number Percent Used for small neighborhood parks 48 9.5% Used for athletic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) 26 5.1% Used for open space & trails 99 19.5% Pools 42 8.3% Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 10 2.0% Hockey rinks 1 0.2% Sand volleyball courts 1 0.2% Fitness circuit stations 7 1.4% BMX/Pump track 5 1.0% Dog park 29 5.7% Designated areas for walking & biking 30 5.9% Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 12 2.4% Synthetic turf fields for year-round sports & activities 10 2.0% Nature & environmental interpretive areas 7 1.4% Playgrounds & similar play facilities 9 1.8% Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 5 1.0% Enhancements to park landscaping 6 1.2% Additional park bathrooms 6 1.2% Golf course improvements 8 1.6% Golf clubhouse improvements 1 0.2% Pickleball courts 14 2.8% Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 27 5.3% Are welcoming to a diverse population 16 3.2% Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 6 1.2% Incorporate public art 5 1.0% Other 14 2.8% None chosen 63 12.4% Total 507 100.0% (66 ETC Page 76 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 15. Which FOUR of the actions from the list inQuestion 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to ou and members of your household? i 5. 2nd choice Number Percent Used for small neighborhood parks 39 7.7% Used for athletic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) 24 4.7% Used for open space & trails 59 11.6% Pools 26 5.1 % Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 10 2.0% Sand volleyball courts 3 0.6% Fitness circuit stations 8 1.6% BMX/Pump track 3 0.6% Dog park 36 7.1% Designated areas for walking & biking 55 10.8% Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 8 1.6% Synthetic turf fields for year-round sports & activities 13 2.6% Nature & environmental interpretive areas 10 2.0% Playgrounds & similar play facilities 17 3.4% Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 9 1.8% Enhancements to park landscaping 12 2.4% Additional park bathrooms 15 3.0% Golf course improvements 4 0.8% Bocce ball courts 5 1.0% Pickleball courts 2 0.4 Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 27 5.3% Are welcoming to a diverse population 21 4.1% Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 10 2.0% Incorporate public art 8 1.6% Other 1 0.2% None chosen 82 16.2% Total 507 100.0% '� ETC Page 77 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 15. Which FOUR of the actions from the list in Ouestion 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to you and members of your household? _Q15. 3rd choice Number Percent Used for small neighborhood parks 32 6.3% Used for athletic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) 10 2.0% Used for open space & trails 43 8.5% Pools 24 4.7% Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 10 2.0% Hockey rinks 4 0.8% Sand volleyball courts 3 0.6% Fitness circuit stations 9 1.8% BMX/Pump track 6 1.2% Dog park 12 2.4% Designated areas for walking & biking 49 9.7% Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 13 2.6% Synthetic turf fields for year-round sports & activities 3 0.6% Nature & environmental interpretive areas 20 3.9% Playgrounds & similar play facilities 16 3.2% Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 13 2.6% Enhancements to park landscaping 12 2.4% Additional park bathrooms 12 2.4% Golf course improvements 9 1.8% Bocce ball courts 5 1.0% Pickleball courts 3 0.6% Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 40 7.9% Are welcoming to a diverse population 19 3.7% Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 15 3.0% Incorporate public art 21 4.1% Other 4 0.8% None chosen 100 19.7% Total 507 100.0% (66& ETC Page 78 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 15. Which FOUR of the actions from the list in Question 14 are MUST IMPORTANT to you and members of your household? Q 15. 4th choice Number Percent Used for small neighborhood parks 25 4.9% Used for athletic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) 15 3.0% Used for open space & trails 21 4.1% Pools 17 3.4% Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 8 1.6% Hockey rinks 2 0.4% Sand volleyball courts 3 0.6% Fitness circuit stations 7 1.4% BMX/Pump track 3 0.6% Dog park 16 3.2% Designated areas for walking & biking 28 5.5% Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 10 2.0% Synthetic turf fields for year-round sports & activities 6 1.2% Nature & environmental interpretive areas 17 3.4% Playgrounds & similar play facilities 20 3.9% Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 12 2.4% Enhancements to park landscaping 13 2.6% Additional park bathrooms 14 2.8% Golf course improvements 4 0.8% Golf clubhouse improvements 4 0.9 Bocce ball courts 12 2.4% Pickleball courts 6 1.2% Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 40 7.9% Are welcoming to a diverse population 22 4.3% Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 17 3.4% Incorporate public art 26 5.1 % Other 1 0.2% None clioscii _ 138 27.2% Total 507 100.0% ,i ETC Page 79 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 015. Which FOUR of the actions from the list in question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to you and members of your household? to 4 015. Sum of Too 4 Choices Number Percent Used for small neighborhood parks 144 28.4% Used for athletic fields (baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) 75 14.8% Used for open space & trails 222 43.8% Pools 109 21.5% Used for multi -sport indoor gymnasium 38 7.5% Hockey rinks 7 1.4% Sand volleyball courts 10 2.0% Fitness circuit stations 31 6.1% BMX/Pump track 17 3.4% Dog park 93 18.3% Designated areas for walking & biking 162 32.0% Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse) 43 8.5% Synthetic turf fields for year-round sports & activities 32 6.3% Nature & environmental interpretive areas 54 10.7% Playgrounds & similar play facilities 62 12.2% Picnic areas (e.g. barbeques, tables, benches, & party areas) 39 7.7% Enhancements to park landscaping 43 8.5% Additional park bathrooms 47 9.3% Golf course improvements 25 4.9% Golf clubhouse improvements 5 1.0% Bocce ball courts 22 4.3% Pickleball courts 25 4.9% Are sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping, recycled materials in playgrounds) 134 26.4% Are welcoming to a diverse population 78 15.4% Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash history, interpretation of adobe structures) 48 9.5% Incorporate public art 60 11.8% Other 20 3.9% None chosen 63 12.4% Total 1708 �[ ETC Page 80 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 18. When choosine recreation and leisure opyortunities, which of the following benefits do you feel are MOST IMPORTANT to members of your household? Q 18. What benefits of recreation & leisure opportunities are most important to members of our household Number Percent Learning opportunities for physical well being, hobby, self-improvement, etc. 185 36.5% Opportunities to give back to community through volunteer work 177 34.9% Physical fitness, health, & well-being 359 70.8% Opportunities to gather & socialize with others 262 51.7% Personal fulfillment 'o & fun 322 63.5% Total 1305 20. Please rate your satisfaction with the overall value that 3Lour household receives from the CLq of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department. Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks & Recreation Department Number Percent Very satisfied 171 33.7% Somewhat satisfied 230 45.4% Neutral 57 11.2% Somewhat dissatisfied 20 3.9% Very dissatisfied 7 1.4% Don't know 22 4.3% Total 507 100.0% Q20. Please rate your satisfaction with the overall value that your household receives from the City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department. (without "don't known Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks & Recreation Department Number Percent Very satisfied 171 35.3% Somewhat satisfied 230 47.4% Neutral 57 11.8% Somewhat dissatisfied 20 4.1% Vejy dissatisfied 7 1.4% Total 485 100.0 it ETC Page 81 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 021. What is your age? Q21. Your age N umbei- _ _Percem 18-34 107 21.1% 35-44 100 19.7% 45-54 76 15.0% 55-64 102 20.1% 65+ 97 19.1% Not provided _ _ 25 4.9% Total 507 100.0% 021. What is your age? [without "not provided"] 021. Your age Number Percent 18-34 107 22.2% 35-44 100 20.7% 45-54 76 15.8% 55-64 102 21.2% 65+ 97 20.1% Total 482 100.0% Q22. Counting yourself., how many people in your household are... Mean Sum number 2.75 1351 Under age 5 0.20 100 Ages 5-9 0.21 102 Ages 10-14 0.17 85 Ages 15-19 0.13 63 Ages 20-24 0.25 124 Ages 25-34 0.36 176 Ages 35-44 0.40 197 Ages 45-54 0.26 130 Ages 55-64 0.35 172 Ages 65-74 0.32 155 Ages 75+ 0.10 47 023. Your Bender: 66 ETC Page 82 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 23. Your gonder Number Percent Male 247 48.7% Female 257 50.7% Not provided 3 0.6% Total 507 100.0% 1 1 23. Your ender: without "notprovided") Q23. Your gender Number Percent Male 247 49.0% Female 257 51.0% Total 504 100.0% 24. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo? Q24. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo _ Nnm_ ber Percent 0-5 114 22.5% 6-10 77 15.2% 11-15 46 9.1% 16-20 67 13.2% 21-30 69 13.6% 31+ 118 23.3% Not provided 16 3.2% Total 507 100.0% 24. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo? without "notprovided") Q24. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-30 31+ Total 25. Which of the followin best describes your race? Number Percent 114 23.2% 77 15.7% 46 9.4% 67 13.6% 69 14.1% 118 24.0% 491 100.0% Q25. Your race Number Percent ri& ETC Page 83 White/Caucasian Asian African American/Black Hispanic, Latino Native American Other Total Q25-6. Other San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 424 83.6% 32 6.3% 12 2.4% 80 15.8% 8 1.6% 6 1.2% 562 _Q25-6. Other _ Number Percem BASQUE 1 16.7% Mixed 5 83.3% Total 6 100.0% ETC Page 84 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 026. What is your total annual household income? 26. What is your total annual household income Number _ Under $20K 23 $20K to $39,999 36 $40K to $69,999 55 $70K to $99,999 89 $100K to $129,999 98 $130K to $149,999 43 $150K+ 110 Not pro�icid 53 Total 507 026. What is your total annual household income? (without "not provided") Percent 4.5% 7.1% 10.8% 17.6% 19.3% 8.5% 21.7% 100.0% 26. What is our total annual household income Number Percent Under $20K 23 5.1 % $20K to $39,999 36 7.9% $40K to $69,999 55 12.1% $70K to $99,999 89 19.6% $ l OOK to $129,999 98 21.6% $130K to $149,999 43 9.5% $150K -F Total 110 24.2% 454 100.0% �,i, ETC Page 85 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Section S Survey Instrument rW&ETC Page 86 car } :0" til S L7 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Parks 6 Recreation 1341 Nipufmilu Street, Sail Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 805. 781. 7300 s)ocity ung August 2018 Dear San Luis Obispo Resident, Congratulations you've been randomly selected to participate in an important local survey! The City of San Luis Obispo is conducting a comprehensive update to its Parks and Recreation Element and Master Plan. The purpose of the update is to provide prioritized policy guidance about the future of parks, facilities and recreational activities, amenities, and programs in the City of San Luis Obispo for the next 20 years. To get the most out of this initiative, the Parks and Recreation Department, as supported by the ETC Institute, is conducting a community interest and opinion survey. The survey results will be used to establish our residents' hopes, dreams and priorities for parks and recreation in San Luis Obispo We expect this survey to take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete, and each question is critical to this process. The time you take in completing this survey will help the City make decisions about the future of parks and recreation in San Luis Obispo to enrich our community and positively affect the lives of all of its residents. Please complete and return your survey within the next two weeks. The ETC Institute, an independent consulting company, is the administrator of this survey. They will compile the data received and present the results to the City's Parks and Recreation Commission in Fall 2018. Please return your completed survey in the enclosed postage -paid envelope addressed to ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061. If you would like to take the survey online, the website address is: www.slosurvey.org. Please note, that your participation and responses are confidential. Your household was one of a limited number selected at random to receive this survey; therefore, it is very important that you participate. We greatly appreciate you taking the time to provide the City with your insights. If you have questions, please feel free to contact Shawna Scott, at sscott@slocity.org or (805) 781-7176. Thank you for your participation in this important parks and recreation activity defining our community's future. Sincerely, Lw , Shelly Stanwyck Parks and Recreation Director Page 87 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report ATTACHMENT 2 Parks & Recreation 1341 Nipomo Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 805 781.7300 sluctly ury agosto 2018 Estimado Residente de San Luis Obispo, lFelichaciones usted ha sido seleccionado al azar para participar en una importante encuesta local! La Ciudad de San Luis Obispo este Ilevando a cabo una abarcadora actualizaci6n integral de su Elemento y Plan Maestro de Parques y Recreaci6n. EI prop6sito de la actualizaci6n es proveer direcci6n priorizada en polfticas sobre el futuro de parques, instalaciones y actividades recreativas en la Ciudad de San Luis Obispo por los pr6ximos 20 atios. Para sacarle el maximo a esta iniciativa, el Departamento de Parques y Recreaci6n, apoyado por ETC Institute, estd Ilevando a cabo una encuesta de interes y opini6n en la comunidad. Los resultados de la encuesta serdn usados para establecer las esperanzas, suenos y prioridades para parques y recreaci6n en San Luis Obispo. Estimamos que esta encuesta toma aproximadamente 10-15 minutos para completarse, y cada pregunta es crftica para este proceso. EI tiempo que tome en completar esta encuesta ayudara a la Ciudad a tomar decisiones sob re el futuro de parques y recreaci6n en San Luis Obispo para enriquecer nuestra comunidad y of ectar de manera positiva las vidas de todos sus residentes. Favor de completar y enviar su encuesta en las pr6ximas dos semanas. ETC Institute, es una empresa independiente de consultorla, y es el administrador de esta encuesta. Ellos compilaran los datos recibidos y presentaran el resultado a la Comisi6n de Parques y Recreaci6n de la Ciudad en el Otono del 2018. Por favor devuelva su encuesta completa en el sobre con direcci6n de remitente y franqueo que se incluye dirigido a ETC Institute, 725 Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061. Si desea tomar la encuesta en linea, la direcci6n del sitio web es : www.slosurvey.ora. Por favor note que su participaci6n y respuestas son confidenciales. Su hogar fue uno de un numero limitado seleccionado al azar para recibir esta encuesta; por to tanto es muy importante que usted participe. Apreciamos enormemente que tome su tiempo para proveerle a la Ciudad de sus percepciones. Si tiene preguntas, por favor contactar a Shawna Scoff al sscott0slocitv.orci o al (805)781-7176. Gracias por su participaci6n en esta importante actividad de parques y recreaci6n que definira el futuro de nuestra comunidad. Atentamente, 01. al Shelly Stanwyck Directora, Parques y Recreaci6n Date Page 88 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report 2018 San Luis Obispo Community Interest and Opinion ciurvey ENT 2 Let your voice be heard today! The City of San Luis Obispo would like your input to help determine parks, facilities, programs and recreational priorities for our community. This survey will take 10.15 minutes to complete. When you are finished, please return your survey in the enclosed, postage -paid return envelope. We sincerely appreciate your time and input! Please indicate if you or any member of your household have used each of the following Parks and Recreation facilities in the past 12 months by circling either "Yes" or "No." if "Yes," please rate your overall satisfaction with that parklfaciliity. Facilities 01. Anholm Park Have you Yes used No Very Satisfied 5 Satisfied 4 -d are you Neutral 3 with this facility? Dissatisfiedfacility? 2 Very Dissatisfied 1 02. Buena Vista Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 03. Cheng Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 04. Damon -Garcia Sports Complex Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 05, De Vaul Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 06.1 Ellsford Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 07.1 Emerson Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 08. Eto Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 09. Exposition Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 10. French Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 11. Historic Jack House and Gardens Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 12.1 Islay Hill Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 13. Jack House Gardens Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 14. Johnson Park Yes No 1 5 4 3 2 1- 15. Laguna Hills Park 16. La una Lake Park Yes Yes No No 5 5 4 4 3 1 3 2 2 1 1 17. Laguna Lake Golf Course Yes NO 5 4 3 2 i 18.1 Laguna Off Leash Dog Area Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 19.1 Las Praderas Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 20. Ludwick Community Center Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 21. Meadow Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 22. Meadow Park Center Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 23. Mission Plaza Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 24, Mitchell Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 25. Poinsettia Creek Walk and Park 26. Priolo-Martin Park Yes Yes No No 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 27. Rodriguez Adobe Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 28. SLO Senior Citizens Center Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 29. SLO Swim Center Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 30, Santa Rosa Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 31. Santa Rosa Park: Hockey Rink Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 32. Santa Rosa Park: SLO Skate Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 33. 1 Sinsheimer Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 34. Sinsheimer Stadium Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 35. Sinsheimer Tennis Courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 36 Stoneridge Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 37. Throop Park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 38. Triangle Park 39. Vista Lao Park Yes Yes No No 5 5 4 4 1 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 2. Which FOUR of the facilities listed in Question 1 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 1, or circle "NONE.'] 1st: 2nd: 3rd: 4th: NONE ETC Page 89 San Luis Obispo Parks and crReecrecattion Needs Assessment Report 3. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need for eaN MNKl le?d below by circling either "Yes" or "No." /f "Yes," please rate how well your need for amenities of this type b t I f 1 5 h+&, " t 5 t100°/ t" nd 1 means " nO/ Met " are eiln me usin a 0%,=o w a e o, erm W means VV ara o e o M 4. Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 3, or circle "NONE.'] 1 st: 2nd: 3rd: 4th: NONE 5. From the following list, please CHECK ALL of the organizations you or members of your household have used for indoor/outdoor recreation and sports activities during the past 12 months. (01) School programs/facilities (07) Private clubs (e.g. tennis, rowing, swim, (02) City sports programs health/fitness, golf) (03) Neighboring cities (08) Drop-in adult sports at Ludwick Community (04) Other youth -oriented organizations (e.g. 4-H, Center religious, Boy/Girl Scouts) (09) Masters Sports Adult (05) Club sports programs for youth (10) Other: (06) Health clubs or gyms for specialized classes (11) None (e.g. Yoga, Barre, Pilates, Weights, Martial Arts) % ETC Page 90 Do you have a Amenities need for this If "Yes," 00, e how well are your needs 0, being met? 0, Met 01. Additional garden plots Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 02. Park trails Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 03. Open space trails Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 04. Dog park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 05. 1 Baseball/Softball fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 1 06. Covered picnic areas and BBQ pits for rental Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 07. Football/Rugby fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 08. Lacrosse fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 09. Soccer fields Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 10.1 Tennis courts (lighted) 11. Pickleball courts Yes Yes No No 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 12. Table tennis Yes No 5 1 4 3 2 1 13. Outdoor basketball/volleyball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 14. Indoor basketball/volleyball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 15. 1 Swimming pools Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 16. 1 Splash pads Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 17. Playgrounds Yes No 5 1 4 3 2 1 18. Shaded play areas Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 19. Passive enjoyment of open space conservation areas/trails Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 20. S orts complex (many fields at one location Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 21 Community center (classrooms, rentable multi-purpose space up to 200 people) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 22. Enrichment classes Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 23. Environmental education center 24. Nature ark/botanical garden Yes Yes No No 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 25. Disc golf Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 26. Adventure area e.. ropes course, zi line Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 27. Outdoor exercise/fitness area with equipment 28. Indoor exercise facili 29. Other: Yes Yes Yes No No No 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 4. Which FOUR facilities from the list in Question 3 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 3, or circle "NONE.'] 1 st: 2nd: 3rd: 4th: NONE 5. From the following list, please CHECK ALL of the organizations you or members of your household have used for indoor/outdoor recreation and sports activities during the past 12 months. (01) School programs/facilities (07) Private clubs (e.g. tennis, rowing, swim, (02) City sports programs health/fitness, golf) (03) Neighboring cities (08) Drop-in adult sports at Ludwick Community (04) Other youth -oriented organizations (e.g. 4-H, Center religious, Boy/Girl Scouts) (09) Masters Sports Adult (05) Club sports programs for youth (10) Other: (06) Health clubs or gyms for specialized classes (11) None (e.g. Yoga, Barre, Pilates, Weights, Martial Arts) % ETC Page 90 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report 6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household have used ea&Tbf at�e V Tegreation programs listed below in the past 12 months by circling either "Yes" or "No." If "Yes," please rate your overall satisfaction with that oroaram. ProgramsIf 01. Adult soccer this Yes • ••Satisfied No "Yes, " I 5 how satisfied 4 are 3 you with this 2 program? Very -. Dissatisfied 1 02. Adult softball (leagues and boomer_) 03. Aqua aerobics and Pilates Yes Yes No No 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 Community special events (Movies at the Mission, Bike 04. Rodeo, Egg Hunt, Family Camp Out in the Park, September Scramble, Gobble Wobble Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 05. Golf instruction(private and first tee Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 1 06. Golf tournaments adult, junior, and senior Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 07. Gymnastics classes and cams Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 08., Historic Jack House and Gardens tours Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 09. Junior giants Yes No 5 4 3 1 2 1 10. Junior Ranger Activity Camp Yes No 5 1 4 3 2 1 11, Kidz Love Soccer Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 12. Lap swimming Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 13. LEGO cams 14. Lifeguard training and Junior Guards 15. Ludwick drop in sports (volleyball, table tennis and dod eball 16. Music lessons Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 17. Personal training and fitness classes adult andyouth) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 18. Pickleball (drop-in) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 19. Ranger -led hikes Yes No 5 1 4 3 2 1 20. Recreational swimming Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 21, Senior Center classes and activities Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 22. Skate park camps, clinics, and activities Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 23. Sun'n'Fun and Club Star Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 24. Surfing lessons Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 25. Swim lessons classes andprivate) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 26. Tennis recreational Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 27. Tennis lessons and training Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 28. Triathlon YesNo 5 4 3 2 1 29. Ultimatepick-up (drop-in) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 30. Warm water exercise class Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 31. Yoga Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 32. Youth basketball 33. Youth fitness and wellness procg ms 34. Youth futsal 35. Other: Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 1 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 7. Which FOUR of the programs listed in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 6, or circle "NONE.'] 1 st: 2nd: 3rd: 4th: NONE I1 ETC Page 91 8. 9. San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report Please CHECK ALL of the following reasons that prevent you or other mek41TAsgF XN o&ehold from using the parks, recreation facilities, or programs of the City MORE OFTEN. (01) Facilities are not well maintained (02) Facilities lack the right equipment (03) Facilities are outdated (04) Lack of restrooms (05) Lack of parking (06) Too far from residence (07) Lack of transportation (08) Do not know location of facilities (09) Feel unsafe (10) Desired program or facility not offered (11) Classes full (12) Fees are too high (13) Do not know what is being offered (14) Program times are not convenient (15) Poor customer service (16) Online registration is difficult (17) Use services from others (18) Operational hours don't match my schedule (19) Facilities don't match my age/interest (20) Facility not available due to permit use (21) Too busy (22) Not interested (23) Drop in activity not available (24) Other: Please CHECK ALL the ways you learn about San Luis Obispo Recreation programs and activities. (01) Activity guide (02) City website/Recreation Dept. webpage (03) City Emails/E-blasts (04) Newspaper (05) Conversations with staff (06) Facebook (07) Instagram (08) Smart phone application (09) From friends and neighbors (10) Promotions at San Luis Obispo events (11) Materials at Parks and Recreation facilities (12) Parks and Recreation Commission meetings (13) Flyers/newsletters (14) Street banners (15) Twitter (16) Other: 10. Which FOUR of the information sources listed in Question 9 would you MOST PREFER the City use to communicate with you? (Write in youranswers below using the numbers from the list in Question 9, or circle "NONE.'] 1 st: 2nd: 3rd: 4th: NONE 11. What is your MOST FREQUENTLY used method to arrive at San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation facilities? (1) Drive (3) Walk (5) Public transportation (2) Carpool (4) Bike (6) Other: 12. Thinking about the needs of your household, which ONE of the following types of offerings would you MOST LIKE to see in San Luis Obispo? (1) Active sports facilities and programs (4) Passive recreation and enjoyment of natural (2) Arts and cultural, visual or performing arts environment facilities and programs (5) Environmental education, stewardship and preservation (3) Classes, lessons, and community events (6) Volunteer Projects 13. The Parks and Recreation Department is in the process of evaluating the special events programs. With that in mind, please check the THREE event concepts that you and members of your household would be MOST INTERESTED in. (01) Cultural Celebration (food/performances/history/art) (02) Food event (farmer's market, tastings, beer/wine) (03) Entertainment (music, movies, performers) (04) Health and wellness events (bike, walk, run) (05) Environmental event (Earth Day, creek cleanup) (06) Food trucks (07) Competitions (triathlon, bike, run, adventure) (08) Sports tournaments (e.g. basketball, football, soccer) (09) Special events at the Ludwick Community Center (10) None; I don't think the City should sponsor special events i ETC Page 92 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Report 14. Please indicate how supportive you would be of the City of San Luis 06TIS�'�diFijUA of the following if the City had the funds/space to improve, repurpose, and/or expand Parks and Recreation facilities in San Luis Obispo. To what extent would you support the City... Very SupportiveNot ...acquidng or repurposing existing land to be... 01. Used for small neighborhood parks 5 4 Not N..� ..•Supportive 3 2 1 Sure 9 02. Used for athletic fields baseball, soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc. 5 4 3 2 1 9 03. Used for open sace and trails 5 4 3 2 1 9 04. Pools 5 105.1 Used for multi -s ort indoor gymnasium 5 -conducting - • • or developing new facilities f• 06. Hockey rinks 5 4 3 2 1 9 4 4 1 3 2 1 1 3 2 1 9 9 07. Sand volleyball courts 5 4 3 2 1 9 08. Fitness circuit stations 5 4 3 2 1 9 09. BMX/Pump track 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 9 9 9 10. Dog park 11. 1 Desi mated areas for walking and biking Adding lights to existing athletic fields (e.g. baseball, soccer, 12. softball lacrosse)5 13. Synthetic turf fields for ear -round sports and activities 4 3 2 1 9 5 4 3 2 1 9 14. Nature and environmental interpretive areas 5 4 3 2 1 1 9 15. Playgrounds and similar play facilities 5 4 3 2 1 9 16. Picnic areas e.. barbs ues, tables, benches, and party areas 5 4 3 2 1 9 17. Enhancements to park landscaping 5 4 3 2 1 9 18. Additional park bathrooms 5 4 3 2 1 9 19. Golf course improvements 5 4 3 2 1 9 20. Golf clubhouse improvements 21, Bocce ball courts leball courts sustainable (e.g., drought -tolerant landscaping; recycled t3.erials in playgrounds) 5 4 3 2 1 9 5 4 3 2 1 9 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 9 9 9 welcoming to a diverse population Connect people with cultural heritage (e.g. honoring Chumash 25. history, interpretation of adobe structures 5 4 3 2 1 9 26.1 Incorporate public art 5__P4 5 4 3 2 1 9 9 27. Other: 3 2 1 15. Which FOUR of the actions from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to you and members of your household? (Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 14, or circle "NONE.'] 1st: 2nd: 3rd: 4th: NONE 16. What is the ONE Parks and Recreation park, facility, or open space that makes San Luis Obispo a desirable place to live? 17. What ONE change or improvement would you like to make to San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation facilities, programs, parks, or open spaces? rW& ETC Page 93 San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation MMNeeds �Assessment Report 18. When choosing recreation and leisure opportunities, which of the follovfriri�"Ci�iie'�i01 iou feel are MOST IMPORTANT to members of your household? [Check all that apply.] (1) Learning opportunities for physical well (3) Physical fitness, health, and well-being being, hobby, self-improvement, etc. (4) Opportunities to gather and socialize with others (2) Opportunities to give back to the community (5) Personal fulfillment, joy, and fun through volunteer work 19. What is the ONE Parks and Recreation facility you would MOST LIKE to see added in San Luis Obispo to meet the needs of your household? 20. Please rate your satisfaction with the overall value that your household receives from the City of San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation Department. (1) Very satisfied (3) Neutral (5) Very dissatisfied (2) Somewhat satisfied (4) Somewhat dissatisfied (9) Don't know 21. What is your age? years 22. Counting yourself, how many people in your household are... Under age 5: Ages 15-19: Ages 5-9: Ages 20-24: Ages 10-14: Ages 25-34: Ages 35-44: Ages 65-74: Ages 45-54: Ages 75+: Ages 55-64: 23. Your gender: (1) Male (2) Female (3) Other 24. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo? years 25. Which of the following best describes your race? [Check all that apply.] (1) White/Caucasian (3) African American/Black (2) Asian (4) Hispanic, Latino 26. What is your total annual household income? (1) Under $20,000 (4) $70,000 to $99,999 (2) $20,000 to $39,999 (5) $100,000 to $129,999 (3) $40,000 to $69,999 (6) $130,000 to $149,999 (5) Native American (6) Other: (7) $150,000 or more This concludes the survey — Thank you for your time! Please return your completed survey in the enclosed return -reply envelope addressed to: ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061 Your responses will remain completely confidential. The address information to the right will ONLY be used to help identify areas with special interests. Thank you. ik ETC Page 94 a Submitted to the City of San Luis Obispo: ETC Institute 725 W. Frontier Lane, i Dlatha Kansas 66061 IY.oveM.be.,r 7ni Q �.v ����✓ce wiaa ETC INSTITUTE City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpQ&TiT&6NA4EftTn8nts 16. What is the ONE Parks and Recreation park, facift. ora ens ace that makes San Luis Obispo a desirable Glace to live? ■ All of the hiking trails. ■ All of the open spaces. But I really love Bowden Ranch/Reservoir Canyon. • All of them, difficult to pick one. • All the hiking trails. • All the open space, Islay Hill, Terrace Hill, Cerro Sun Lis. ■ All the open spaces combined make SLO a desirable place to live. • All the trails in town. ■ All the walkable outdoor areas. • Anholm and walking/bike paths. • Anholm Park. (Mentioned four times.) • Anholm Park and all the open space. • Beach. • Bike lanes. • Bike trails. • Bishop Peak. (Mentioned eleven times.) • Bishop Peak or Madonna. • Bishop Peak Reserve. • Bishop Peak Trails. (Mentioned eight times.) ■ Bishops Peak open space. • Bob Jones trail. (Mentioned four times.) • Buena Vista Park. • Can't name just one. I guess DeVaul since I use it most. ■ Cerra San Luis open space/Bishop Peak. • Cerra San Luis. (Mentioned four times.) • Cerro San Luis for hiking and biking. • Cerro San Luis hiking. • Cerro San Luis open space. (Mentioned three times.) • Cerro San Luis trails, • City does not have a signature park. • City pool. • Custa Park. (Mentioned five times.) • Damon Garcia. (Mentioned eleven times.) ■ Damon Garcia and Sinsheimer. • Damon Garcia Field. (Mentioned twice.) • Damon Garcia Sports Complex. • Elimination of homeless at Santa Rosa and Michell Park. • Emerson Park. (Mentioned twice.) • Facilities evenly distributed throughout town, too many are concentrated at few locations. • Firefighter, high school hill, Bowden Ranch. • For me personally, it's French Park only because it's closest to my house. More tennis courts, lighted at that park would be awesome. • French Park. (Mentioned five times.) • Froom Ranch Trails. ETC Institute (2018) Page 1 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: 0p1b-fiTAG*dAFx4TnPnts • Golf course. • Golfing/bike/hike/trail. • Hiking trails. (Mentioned three times.) • I do not have sufficient SLO parks and recreation exposure. ■ I love Irish Hills, a couple more trails would be great. • I mostly enjoy Avila -Bob Jones Trail. Would love to see something like this in SLO. In SLO-Madonna, Bishops, Terrace Hill. • If money was spent on upkeep of SLO's only lake, then it would definitely be Laguna Lake Park. • Irish Hill, Johnson Ranch. • Irish Hills. (Mentioned ten times.) • Irish Hills hiking area. • Irish Hills open space. (Mentioned four times.) • Irish Hills Preserve. • Irish Hills/ETO Park. • Islay Hill Park. ■ Islay Hill Park and trails behind houses. • Islay Park. (Mentioned four times.) • Islay Park and French Park walking pathways. • Jack House. ■ Johnson Hike. ■ Johnson Ranch. • Johnson Trails. • Laguna Dog Park, only one in town. • Laguna Golf Course. • Laguna Lake Dog Park. (Mentioned six times.) • Laguna Lake Dog Park and Cuester Dog Park. Laguna Lake Golf Course. ■ Laguna Lake Golf Course. ■ Laguna Lake is close, but it is missing facilities to support large cultural events. • Laguna Lake Park. (Mentioned twenty-nine times.) • Laguna Lake Park, specifically the disc golf course. • Laguna Lake Santa Rosa Park Skate Park. • Laguna Open Space. • Like the new playground. • Ludwick Community Center • Madonna Mountain. (Mentioned three times.) • Maino/Cerro San Luis. ■ Meadow Park. (Mentioned twenty times.) • Meadow Park, central and diverse activities. • Meadow Park is beautiful. • Meadow Park, just wish you could get homeless out. ■ Meadow Park/South Street Hills open space. • Mission Plaza. (Mentioned forty times.) • Mission Plaza/Bishops Peak. • Mission Plaza and Creek. • Mission Plaza area with creek downtown to walk next to. ETC Institute (2018) Page 2 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpP&_iT dT*dWF5NTn2nts • Mission Plaza better with redesign though. ■ Mission Plaza but should be cleaner. • Mission Plaza events. ■ Mission Plaza for tourist, Johnson Ranch Trail. • Mitchel Park in downtown. • Mitchell Park. (Mentioned three times.) • Most are not known, so it is hard to define, and the most popular ones have a large homeless population/unsafe feeling. • Natural areas. • Neighborhood Park. • Neighbors are friendly. • New Sinsheimer Child Playground. • New Sinsheimer Park. • New Sinsheimer Park is fantastic, thank you, we love it. • Open space. (Mentioned three times.) • Open space, South Hills, city. Madonna Mt, City. • Open space and trails. (Mentioned twice.) • Open space hikes. ■ Open space is not recreation, but for preservation of natural resources. Parks should never take over management of open space. • Open space, South Hills, and Irish Hills. • Open space trails. (Mentioned four times.) • Open space trails at Cerro San Luis (Madonna Mt.). • Open space trails, Terrace Hill. • Open spaces. ■ Open spaces Irish Hills and Bishop Peak. • Park and open space trails. • Pave trail along tracks. • Playgrounds and similar play facilities. • San Luis Creek Parkway. ■ San Luis Creek walk. • San Luis Mountain. (Mentioned twice.) ■ San Luis Mountain and other trails for hiking in town. • San Luis Obispo itself is desirable because of all outdoor/scenery weather, health food. Santa Rosa Park. (Mentioned eight times.) • Santa Rosa Park is the most all-encompassing useful park, I mostly use Meadow and love it. The hiking trails around SLO are unmatched and very well maintained. • Santa Rosa Skate Park. • Sinsheimer Park. (Mentioned forty-six times.) • Sinsheimer and French Park. • Sinsheimer Bike Path. • Sinsheimer Complex. (Mentioned twice.) ■ Sinsheimer disc golf course. ■ Sinsheimer facilities. • Sinsheimer Park and pool. (Mentioned three times.) • Sinsheimer Park and stadium. ETC Institute (2018) Page 3 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpQ&-fi- 6kd\4F hTn2nts Sinsheimer Park playground. Sinsheimer park tennis, pool, and stadium. * Sinsheimer Park, Mission Plaza ranks high also. ■ Sinsheimer Park/swim center. ■ Sinsheimer Pool. (Mentioned six times.) • Sinsheimer pool, couldn't live without it. Sinsheimer stadium and park. • Sinsheimer stadium for baseball. 0 Sinsheimer stadium/park/swim. s Sinsheimer tennis courts/park. • SLO Swim Center Sinsheimer. • SLO Senior Center and Sinsheimer Swim Center are tied. • SLO Swim and YMCA. • SLO Swim Center. • SLO Swim Center and open space and playgrounds. Can't give just one. • South Hills open space. (Mentioned four times.) a South Hills Trails Overlook. ■ Swim Center. (Mentioned twice.) ■ Terrace Hill. ■ That is a tough question. Cerro San Luis Open Space. ■ The bike path by the railroad. ■ The close proximity to a park near my home. • The golf course. ■ The hiking trails. ■ The Mission. (Mentioned twice.) Y The Mission downtown. a The nature trails that allow me and my children to enjoy nature without fearing that my children are going to be run over. ■ The new slides and play structures at Sinsheimer. The open trails for hiking. • The trails and hikes cannot specify one. S The variety of open spaces and trails for hiking, Johnson Ranch my current favorite. There is not one. It is the fact that there is more than one open space/park that makes SLO desirable. • Too hard to pick one. Sinsheimer Park, SNF and Club Star at schools, activities throughout the year. Too many to say. • Trail to Bishop Peak. ■ Trails Bishops Peak and Cerro San Luis. ■ Trails on Bishop Peak, Felsman Loop. ■ Triangle Park. • Troop Park. We go every day walk to it. ■ Walkability. ■ We love the Poinsettia walk area. We moved close to French park mostly because of the park and the walking paths, Greenbelt areas. It is lovely, and we love seeing neighbor as they walk by. • YMCA. ETC Institute (2018) Page 4 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%Ti1A6WAAk*Tn2nts 17. What ONE change or improvement would you Iike to make to San Luis Obispo Parks and Recreation facilities, prolzrams, parks,oro ens aces:' • 8 Pickleball Courts. • A dedicated facility for the thriving adult softball community. Could be shared with soccer. • A durable sports complex. • A fenced dedicated off leash dog park. • A larger indoor, multi -use gymnasium has been needed for years. • A park with play structure by Prada road nearby the 2 newest housing developments in SLO. • A pool facility designed for families. Not only senior citizens. BMX and pump tracks. • A well -lit practice field for multiple use. ■ Add fenced in dog park. • Add lighting to the Meadow Park walk/bike path. • Add long distance and short distance bike trails. • Add more native landscaping to parks. • Add more parks. We don't have a park in our new Serra Meadows Subdivision, why? ■ Add splash pads. (Mentioned twice.) • Add tennis court to one or two more parks. • Add tennis courts to French and Islay Parks. • Adding a baseball field complex. • Adding a body weight exercise station (pull up bars, dip bars, etc.) at parks. Seems like a relatively small investment and would be awesome. • Adding access to South Hills and Trails. ■ Additional pools, swim times, and splash pad. ■ Adopt a park/trail to make community more involved in maintenance and upkeep. ■ Adventure areas. ■ Allow after dark access if no additional rules are being violated. ■ Allow more off -leash dogs. Yeah dogs. Nature's best friend? The dog. • Allow night use of open spaces. • Allow use of the empty field next to the dog park. It gets crowded at times and the field allows folks playing with their dogs to spread out. Please do not fence and/or fill with bark. The small population of dog owners with poor behaviors (don't pick up after dog and/or don't pay attention to their dog so it interferes with play or training of other dogs) and there is no escaping them, such as at El Chorro. • Another swimming pool or current one open more. • Baseball Field Complex, would free up more parks for other sports. ■ Bathroom improvements at Sinsheimer Park Stadium bike paths. • Bathroom maintenance needs work. ■ Bathrooms with mirror and soap. ■ Better cleanliness of trash cans. Parking lots, picnic tables, trails, and Laguna Lake Shoreline. ■ Better enforcement of transient population at neighborhood parks. ■ Better facility maintenance. • Better golfing and softball/finish the bike trail from Orcutt Road to Calpol, this is the #1 task. • Better hours to open swim time at the pool. ■ Better interest promotion. • Better lighting for softball. ■ Better lighting/safety. • Better maintenance of facilities/open spaces. • Better promotion of opportunities. • Better road biking conditions and places for families. ETC Institute (2018) Page 5 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%TiTAEkd hTn2nts ■ Better safety focus. a Better swimming facilities, expanded hours for kids for recreation swimming. ■ Better turf with more availability. ® Bike lanes separated from traffic. ® Bike path that is continuous. Available rental bikes. Bright lights for nighttime use. Build a city 18 -hole full length golf course. Build a new community athletic facility to include Olympic size pool, multipurpose gym, fitness area, and track. Everything is so fragmented currently. a Build baseball fields, get homeless not to hang at the parks. City finances are broke, too many employees and too high benefits and salaries. Stop spending money. a Clean and safe public restrooms. 3 Clean and updated facilities. ra Clean up Laguna Lake and enhance the playground area there. a Clean up Mission Plaza. I would never use those restrooms. Like in Europe, pay to enter/ a Cleaner facilities. a Cleanliness, vagrant control, regular cleaning of pet food waste disposal and trash cans. Y Close gate to Laguna Lake Park at night to keep regulars from sleeping in cars there. ■ Compost and recycling at each park. Encourage our community to keep our community clean. ■ Connect people with cultural heritage. a Connect trails. ■ Consistent upkeep and maintenance. a Control the homeless population, don't feel safe going to parks and downtown. Put them on a bus with a one-way ticket. a Control the transient population. • Covered shade for play structures. ■ Create a dog park like the one in Templeton off Vineyard. a Create access, then leave things alone. a Cycling Without Age chapter. • Damon Garcia is too one dimensional. Add other uses. a Deal with the homeless situation at public parks. a Dedicated pickleball courts. a Directional bike only trails. a Discourage presence of homeless. a Diversity and update facilities. a Diving facilities. a Dog park. • Dog park at Sinsheimer. a Dog park by the Arbors/French Park. ■ Dog park improvement, larger area, completely fenced. ■ Dog park, reduce restrictions. ■ Dredge Laguna Lake to increase capacity to help prevent lake going dry again and mitigate flood hazard during rainy season. ■ Dredge the lake and make it user friendly. ■ Drought tolerant landscaping. No more golf. a Emerson. Encourage people at parks to not smoke, especially near kids playground. a Enforce dog leash law. ETC Institute (2018) Page 6 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpU-MMEA mints ■ Enforce hiking on trails. We have people walking on South Hill behind houses down drainage ditches instead of the trails. a Everything is good. a Expand pool for recreational swimming. • Expand the swim center to a proper aquatic center like what Santa Maria has or better. ■ Expanded lap swimming hours. a Facilities are great, but they are poorly maintained. a Fence in Laguna Lake dog park, not all can use it as is. ■ Fence in the dog park please. a Fence in the existing Laguna Lake Dog Park or allocate a space somewhere else for a fenced in space (El Chorro is too far to go if you live in SLO). a Fenced and enclosed dog parks, not available anywhere in the city. a Fewer homeless people at playgrounds. * Fix Laguna Lake Park. a Fix up Mitchell Park and make it a gem. a French Lake. a Gated and fenced dog park. Get homeless away from Mitchell Park. a Green grass and green landscaping. a Have a baseball field complex like five cities and every valley and most every other city has. a Have access to Sun N Fun, too limited space, and bike paths. ■ Have more patrols of parks. ■ Have more pools and more times to swim. ■ Have places for homeless so public parks are safer. Last week, a homeless man urinated right in front of me at a downtown park. 0 Have pool open more hours. • Have staff that do their job. a Help homeless population relocated to places other than parks. • Helping people feel safer/more comfortable. a Hiking trails, off -leash dog parks. ■ Hire the homeless to clean the parks. ■ Homeless camping at Mission Plaza. ■ Homeless folks can be a problem, but complicated issue to solve and not a parks and recreation issue. ■ Homeless out of park. • Homeless problem. (Mentioned twice.) 0 Homeless situation. ■ I think you need more information access. a I would like extended hours of lap swim and recreation swim at the pool, especially lap swim in the morning. a I would like to focus on water conservation when designing or improving our sports facilities. • I'd like to see more protected bike lanes and a public swimming pool that is limited to so few hours. a Implement the Laguna Lake plan. ■ Improve and upgrade swim center. ■ Improve dog park at Laguna Lake. ■ Improve Emerson Park. ■ Improve existing facilities when needed. a Improve the state of the soccer fields at Damon Garcia, lots of holes and sand patches make it dangerous. a Improved open space trails behind SLO High School. ETC Institute (2018) Page 7 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%TiTA%�Tn2nts • Improved softball/baseball fields. • Incorporate more environmental education programs. I'm sure Cal Poly students would help. • Increase areas for outdoor climbing. • Increase the number of parks and/or park space. Create more bi-model park and open space connections. • Increased maintenance, decreased homelessness. • Increased Ranger presence to patrol, educate, and advise the public. a Increased safety. • Increased sustainability. • Indoor pool. (Mentioned three times.) ■ Is there a facility in the Laguna Lake area where some adult ED classes can be taught? I'd love to see classes in that part of town. • Islay Park is in dire need of updates. • Just want more dog parks. ■ Keep families safe from adult male harassment in parks. • Keep homeless from playground area. ■ Keep out the homeless. • Keep the bathrooms cleaner. • Keep the homeless and transients out of the parks more. I understand that is difficult, but at Meadow and Mitchell is a little much, especially since they usually hang out very close to the playgrounds. I personally have never had a problem with them and am not put off, but I think a lot of people don't use the parks as much as they would if there were less transients at those parks. That being said, I don't have a good alternative solution and my family still loves all the parks. • Keep the transients and their public drug use and public defecation away from these places. • Keeping the homeless from hanging out at the parks. It is uncomfortable when the kids want to play, and they are hanging around and using the tables to camp out. They need their own park. • Keeping trails for safe, passive use, and build cycle park in new annexed areas. • Kid safe. ■ Laguna Lake Park. (Mentioned three times.) • Landscape enhancements. • Less homeless or none please. • Less homeless people and cleaner bathrooms. • Less homeless people and day drinkers. More bathrooms near playgrounds. • Less time dedicated to sports teams so that people can use their neighborhood parks. • Lighted fields and courts for public use. • Lighted fields should be made available to adult athletic clubs (like the rugby club). • Lighted tennis courts. (Mentioned twice.) • Lighting. (Mentioned three times.) • Lighting at DeVaul Park BB court. • Lighted field for teams to use at night. • Lights on Sinsheimer Park Tennis and convert at least one tennis court to four pickleball courts. • Like the parks to be more family friendly and less frequent/slept in by homeless and transients, the parks should not be used as a campground. • Linear bike trails that connect parks and open spaces to bike/walk without dealing with busy roads. Safety. ■ Love our open spaces. SLO rocks. No changes needed. • Lower cost. • Maintain facilities better, such as well-groomed landscaping, clean bathrooms, and more lights. • Maintain material around play structures. • Maintain the facilities you have before adding new ones. ETC Institute (2018) Page 8 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Opp Tn9nts • Make Damon Garcia open to the public. • Make it easier to register. Make more swim times available. More scholarship available. • Make night hiking in open spaces legal. No $500 fines. • Make running trails not paved, but dirt, so we can train for marathons. • Make sure they are clean and safe. ■ Make the bums, homeless, drug users, and pedophiles not welcome. No loitering and sleeping or camping. More patrols. • Make them safe. Too many homeless are in our parks and Mission Plaza. • Management or homeless. • Mitchell Park is our city's central park. The landscaping is very dull. I would like for them to improve the landscaping. ■ Monitoring the homeless population. Laguna Lake is so pretty, but I often don't go with my kids unless I'm with my husband. We've found drug needles and suspicious activity. It's a bummer as many of these places are not monitored for this. ■ More accessible and traversable as a collective city space. • More accessible to seniors and more senior friendly activities. • More activities for adults and seniors, i.e. low impact games, Bocce Ball, horseshoes, cornhole. • More athletic fields and recreation parks. • More bike accessibility. Many dangerous road crossings with children. ■ More bike paths. (Mentioned seven times.) • More bike trails, just being able to cruise around town on a bike. ■ More citizen indolent of historical places. • More city parks. ■ More classes (a class on planting fruit trees). • More coastal walking paths. • More community involvement. ■ More convenient hours at the swim center. • More dog friendly. • More dog parks. (Mentioned twice.) • More emphasis on environment preservations. • More emphasis on natural and cultural history and preservation of these open resources. • More entertainment (music, movies, performers). • More events. • More exercise facilities and equipment. • More Farmer's Market on Sundays since so many new homes are being built. • More fields for sports. • More hiking and biking trails. • More hiking trails and better bike lanes/paths. ■ More hiking trails. • More hours for lap swimming. ■ More information easily available on classes offered. • More lighted fields for sports programs to rent/use. • More lighting and smoother paved pathways so parks with paths are safer day and night. ■ More lights for night time. ■ More lights on volleyball courts. • More mini/neighborhoods parks, especially downtown. • More nature larger areas. • More of them. (Mentioned three times.) • More off -leash and dog poop bags at Triangle Park. ETC Institute (2018) Page 9 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%TVk6HMFDNTn2nts ■ More open space. (Mentioned three times.) 0 More open space designed for hiking/biking. • More open space trails. (Mentioned three times.) ■ More open space/green belt. More police at Santa Rosa Park because of homeless people. It is scary. a More pool hours at SLO Swim Center. More pool hours for lap swim. i More pools. (Mentioned twice.) • More pools or water facilities. The small pool at Sinsheimer doesn't cut it for our children. We need to get wet. Many of us don't have AC either, so we're off to the beach or just home, being too hot. • More programs during evening hours. 6 More public pools. s More publicity. ■ More rain. • More recreational swim hours. More recycle and trash cans as well as better lighting. • More recycling bins, garbage cans, green waste. More restrooms. Y More restrooms downtown. Cleaner, safer, and better maintained. • More security homeless in our area is a big problem. I don't feel safe taking my granddaughters to the park on our street. ■ More shade at the playground. s More shade in parks for kids play. ■ More shaded areas at park. (Mentioned twice.) ■ More soccer fields, some synthetic. ■ More supervision. My family and I avoid many public places. ■ More swimming facilities and times. • More technical mountain bike only trails. ■ More tennis courts. ■ More trail running options. More trails. (Mentioned three times.) More trails for multi -use. • More trails for running/biking/walking through open areas connected to bike lanes/sidewalks. More trails for running/hiking. d More trees. (Mentioned twice.) More trees and shade in the kid play areas and across the parks, because no one is at a hot park in the summer, no one. And there are so many awesome parks with just ugly grass and no trees. Also, greenhouse gas reducer, it's a win win to plant a forest at all our parks. • More trees, lots more trees. • More trees/shade. • More walking and running trails. • More walking/hiking trails. • More water filling stations. • More water fountains. • More, longer trails. Keep walkers and runners off the roads. • More/better parking. • More/better softball fields. • Mountain biking after dusk. ETC Institute (2018) Page 10 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpUTAGih1L Tn2nts ■ Natural Resources Manager should administer the Rangers and take open space management out of parks. Preservation of OS is more important than human recreation. Night hiking is a travesty. • New basketball nets, repave courts (gravel area). Emerson Park. • New park at Serra Meadows. • New trees and landscaping for the Laguna Lake Dog Park. • Night hiking and more softball fields. ■ No more night lights at parks, daytime use only, a dog park far from homes would be nice. ■ No night biking, eliminate it, the trails are being degraded. • Number one priority: continue to expand open spaces, preserve nature, protect our area's beauty. • One large pickleball facility. ■ Open Damon Garcia for daily use. Remove "no trespassing" signs. • Open or fenced dog parks, more trash facilities at trailheads. • Open Rodriguez Adobe to public. • Opportunity to swim long lanes for lap swimming (besides early in the morning). • Our parks are a disgrace. Islay Park needs tons or work done. It's embarrassing. • Outdoor skate park for teens. ■ Overall improved drainage, turf, field conditions of baseball and softball fields. • Parking. (Mentioned twice.) • Patrol parks and clean up homeless problem. • Pedestrian only area of downtown, larger than Mission Plaza. • Permanent pickleball courts. (Mentioned three times.) • Permanent pickleball courts, not re -marked, temporary nets like French is now. • Pickleball courts. • Place containers for those who smoke and use needles so that others are not affected. • Place barn owl nesting boxes for gopher control. More for your staff than for me. Good Eagle Scout or class proiect. • Plant some fish. ■ Please make them pesticide free. • Pools. • Problems with the homeless at the parks. • Public access to soccer fields with goals and nets. • Recycle/compost ability. ■ Recycling facilities. • Reduce homeless encampments/loitering. • Reduce loitering by transientsihomeless at parks/playgrounds. • Regular patrols in park to reduce drug use, hanging out in bathrooms and sleeping and camping in parks. • Relax on reservations for group facility. • Remove golf. • Remove homeless population from parks. • Remnve homeless/vagrant population. • Renovate existing parks. • Repair bridges and walkways. • Replanting all trees that have been cut down. • Respect environment. ■ Restrooms. (Mentioned twice.) • Retain open spaces within the city. • Running track. • Safety. (Mentioned twice.) ETC Institute (2018) Page 11 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpQ*VMGHMENTn2nts ■ Safety and a splash pad at Laguna Lake, please. • Safety in parks. There tends to be a large homeless population in our parks. • Safety in terms of homeless/transient management. • Safety. Reduce the transient population hanging out in public parks. • Security at parks. • Semi -enclosed gated playgrounds to help keep the little ones contained. • Shade at parks. • Shade at parks and water features. It's not getting any cooler. The trash and cardboard at Sinsheimer Park needs to be fixed. • Shade in the parks. ■ Sinsheimer Park needs more seating with cover for watching the kids play. • Sinsheimer Stadium has great potential but is falling apart, literally boards are falling off walls. ■ Soap in the restroom. • Splash pad at Laguna Park. • Splash pads. More pool/recreational swim options. Open swim is only a couple hours a day in the summer. Seriously. We live in a beautiful area and climate so why aren't there more options for pools and water activities. • Sports complex for baseball and softball is much needed. ® Stop ticketing night hiking and mountain bike riding. ® Stop transients from living in every park and open space. • Sun N Fun Club Star needs huge improvements. ® Sunday midday opening at pool. Sustainable landscaping. • Synthetic Turf Fields. (Mentioned twice.) • Take care of the homeless people sleeping in the parks. • Take out sand volleyball courts at Islay and Sinsheimer Parks and add more playground structures. I only see the sand court at Meadows Park being used. • Thank you for continuing to provide after school childcare. • That people will not clean up after their dogs. ■ The golf course is very sad. The driving range is horrific. With the very affordable price to play, making them look nicer would be awesome. • The homeless have taken over the park. I am afraid to go there. • The hours at the Parks and Recreation office, I mean seriously, who can get there between 9-3 if they work outside of SLO? I would like to see more offerings after school for kids who have parents that work and can't get them to enrichment programs after school. I love SNF and Club Star, but would like to have other options for after school activities on campus. • The pool. It's very poorly run. • There are safety issues at the parks. These limit the usability of the parks. • There has been a big loss of trees due to poor pruning disease and drought really which to see some tree replacement it is not remotely keeping pace with the loss. • They would feel safer if there were less homeless but that is a larger issue. • Too many homeless at parks and trails, feel unsafe. ■ Too many spaces are home to the "homeless". They are taking over some spaces like the Mission and Laguna Lake Park. • Too much money spent on bicycle lanes, but green was a good idea. • Transportation to get to activities. • Trash pick-up, cardboard collection. Pet waste bags, it is always empty. • Upkeep of existing areas, equipment, landscaping. Islay Park for an example. Play structure is needing replacement. ETC Institute (2018) Page 12 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpUTAGHMENTrPints ■ Updated playground at Islay. ■ Updated, clean restrooms and showers. • Updates, shade, and bathrooms. • Upgrade tennis courts and/or work to get a tennis stadium built at Sinsheimer Park (work with tennis community to help raise funds). ■ Use of recycled water and sustainable upkeep. • Used to like to go to Mitchell Park, one time there were a group of homeless hanging in the gazebo and one of them was puking everywhere, there was also feces spread all over the walls or the bathrooms, all the parks seem to be invoking with homeless and their dogs. • Very good now, enjoyable trails and open space well maintained. I don't use any indoor or sports facilities. ■ Water feature for kids to play in like the Melt Box Plaza Fountain in Manhattan Beach. ■ Water the grass at Meadow. • Water the grass in parks. Flat spaces are used by a lot of people for soccer, frisbee, football, etc. It should be watered and maintained for people to use, not a weed and dirt patch. • We need another pool. • We need more dog parks. Trash cans for dog waste. ■ We need more paved walking and biking trails. • We use and enjoy the open space trails. • Wheelchair accessible equipment (for example: swing) at parks. ETC Institute (2018) Page 13 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%Ti,f A%*AE hTn@nts 019. What is the ONE Parks and Recreation facility you would MOST LIKE to see added in San Luis Obispo to meet the needs of your household? • A better dog park. More open space. Less developments. ■ A bike path from SLO to Avila. • A couple of tennis courts in Meadow Park. • A cross town bike path, not bike lane, for safety and alternate transportation from Orcutt to Col Poly. • A dedicated physical fitness facility that offers classes. • A fiber arts facility (sewing, quilting, weaving, etc.). • A music park. Incorporated into playground equipment. • A neighborhood park. + A neighborhood park where my daughter and grandson live on Margarita near Serra Meadows. • A park close to South Higuera Street. • A park in the new part of town. • A pool that's separate from the high school. • A pool with hours where children are allowed. • A safe place for seniors to walk, no bikes, no homeless. • A shelter built on the reservoir canyon trail marking the site of Francis Hastings, the hermit "goat man". • A splash pad would be great for %Z of the year. More dog parks. • Access to the creek more better, would be awesome. • Additional lighted tennis courts (French and Islay). ■ Additional off -leash dog parks. • Additional open space. • Additional trails for biking and hiking. • Adult softball facilities. Could be shared with soccer and youth baseball. • Adventure area. • Affordable gym. • All use indoor gymnasium (soccer, flag football, basketball, etc.). • An enclosed leash -free dog park in downtown area. • An expanded recreational pool slide/diving boards/swim areas for kids to use and hang out at in the summer. ■ An indoor facility that can be used during in climate weather, after dark, possible rented for parties. • Another city park near downtown. • Another lap pool. • Another pool in SLO. • Another public pool. • Anything related to helping special needs community. Check out League of Dreams in Bakersfield. • As much open space and access thereto as possible. ■ As stated before, redesign of Mitchell Park. • Athletic fields/improvements to existing fields. + Ballroom dance classes for kids. + Baseball complex. • Baseball field complex. • Baseball fields. (Mentioned twice.) • Baseball/fast pitch softball complex. • Baseball/softball complex. • Better and more senior activities and center. • Better dog parks. • Better maintenance of existing parks and restrooms. ETC Institute (2018) Page 14 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OplbVE%GNUEWTn2nts Better pool hours. Schedule maintenance during winter? Bicycling facility. Bigger indoor gym like Ludwick. Bike and walk run trail through S60 connecting our parks and open space. Bike park. Bike park for all ages. Bike paths. Bike pump track. Bike skills park. Bike trails. Bike trails in the city that are safer, and link up to a bigger system to encourage commuting. Bike/walking paths. BMX racing and dirt track. BMX track. BMX track for my grandkids. Bob Jones bike connection. Bocce ball courts. (Mentioned twice.) Body weight/calisthenic stations (pull up bars, dip bars, etc.) at SLO parks. Bowling alley. Build an indoor public swimming pool. City/county historical museum. Community center/parks and recreation facilities. Community center. Community park with community events. Community pool. Complete aquatics center. Concert area. Cuesta Park. Dedicated music venue. Dedicated off -leash dog park. Dedicated pickleball courts. Diving facility. Docent led hikes for education. Dog park. (Mentioned five times.) Dog park at Sinsheimer. Dog park in town. Dog park, off -leash. Dog park with grass or bark. Downtown parks. How about 350 Higuera, across from Ben Franklin's Sandwiches. Emerson. Emerson restroom. Enclosed dog park. Event spaces throughout the neighborhood parks. Expanded senior center with exercise rooms. Expanded senior center. Extend railroad safety walking/biking path. Facility for social events, dancing, table tennis, pool for drop -ins. Feeling more secure. Staff that is professional and responsive. Fenced in dog park. (Mentioned twice.) ETC Institute (2018) Page 15 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: OpWfil�h6iWENTngnts Fenced in small dog park. Fishing. Fishing at Laguna Lake. Flat, protected, kid friendly bike path. Game arcade, i.e. Dave and Busters, not sure this is a parks and recreation facility. Gardens. Gather and socialize. Heated pool. Hike/running trails. Hockey rink ice. Horse riding trails. Hours for dogs to be off -leash in parks. I am happy with current facilities. Ice hockey rink. Improved swim center. Improved swim facility with slides, lazy river, hot tubs, etc. Improvements to Laguna Lake and park. Indoor and outdoor multi -use sports complex. Indoor basketball. Indoor basketball/volleyball. Indoor exercise facility. Indoor food market. Indoor gym. Indoor pool. (Mentioned three times.) Indoor skating rink. Indoor swimming pool. Indoor toddler play area. Indoor turf field for soccer/softball. Indoor, multi -use gymnasium. Indoor/outdoor fitness center. Islay. Just to be better notified about events. Laguna Lake Golf Course Expansion. Laguna Lake Park. (Mentioned twice.) Laguna Lake sediment removal facility. Large community swimming pool. Large multi -use space like Barney Schwartz Park. Large outdoor swim complex. Large pickleball facility at French Park. Learning opportunities. Lighted fields for adult athletic clubs. Lighting and other field improvements to the softball field at Santa Rosa Park. Linear trails, connectivity. Longer paved bike trails. Maintain our existing facilities. Maybe a place for Tai Chi. Meadow Park. Mission Plaza improvements. More bike paths. ETC Institute (2018) Page 16 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%TiTRoGHFAkKTn2nts • Model airplane area. • Modify SLO swim pool with less chemicals in pool. • More affordable activities for kids. • More and better bike paths. • More bike paths, another pool. Better free swim hours for families. • More bike paths across town. • More community garden space. ■ More community gardens. (Mentioned twice.) • More cultural events. • More disc golf. • More dog parks. (Mentioned twice.) • More dog parks and open space. ■ More events at Mission Plaza. • More Farmers Market type events. • More fenced dog parks. • More hiking trails. • More hospitable swimming pool. • More hours for lap and open swimming. • More landscaping improvements at city parks. ■ More lighted tennis courts. • More natural areas. ■ More natural reserves and quiet place to hike. ■ More neighborhood/public pools with amenities. ■ More open space. ■ More open space trails that are well maintained. • More pickleball courts. ■ More pools or pool access. • More public pools, Sinsheimer is too busy. • More road biking trails that go places like downtown and other fun places. • More shade trees and spaces at campground (El Chorro). • More sidewalks, bike lanes. • More soccer fields. • More softball fields. ■ More swimming opportunities. • More trails. • More trails to run/hike. • More walking and biking trails. • More walking trails in parks. • More water fountains along trails. • More/better exercise equipment like at Laguna Lake. • Multi -spurts gyin complex. Where there are basketball courts, soccer fields, indoor swimming pool for winter, etc. Other cities we have lived in generally have a community center which not only includes those things but also hold classes and special events. • My needs are well met. A splash pad would be fim to see though. • Neighborhood park, Lakewood. • New or upgraded park that is accessible for disabled seniors and children. • Nice basketball court. • Non -chlorinated pool for kids. • None that come to mind at the moment. ETC Institute (2018) Page 17 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op1b-fi-IA%ff\&*+Tn2nts i North Board Park is a good site. ■ Off -leash dog park in town. i Off -leash trails. • Open space. Y Open space and trails, bike, and walking. a Open space/trails. a Open up the grassy space above the city pool for sitting and lounging. More comfortable family dark space. • Opportunities to give back to community through volunteer work. • Outdoor gym equipment. s Outdoor natural history museum/interpretation center. ■ Outdoor night sports facility lighted. 4 Outdoor skate park for teens. 6 Outdoor workout equipment like Cuesta College. a Parent and child activities. • Park in South Higuera/Margarita area. + Park serving special needs children. e Park south of South Hills. • Park with play structure near Prada Road by the 2 newest housing developments. • Permanent pickleball courts at French Park, four on the tennis court. • Permanent pickleball courts. (Mentioned twice.) Y Physical exercise equipment. • Pickleball courts. (Mentioned six times.) • Pickleball permanent courts with lights for evening play. • Playgrounds with shade. • Pool. (Mentioned four times.) • Pool in my neighborhood. Lap time. • Pools and splash pads. • Preserving open space before all the new housing eats the city alive. • Public art. i Public gym or exercise facilities that is affordable. ■ Public pool. (Mentioned twice.0 ■ Public pool in San Luis Obispo. o Racquetball courts. R Raised bed space for every home to garden vegetables. Y Recreation pool and/or improved pool, shower room facilities. • Renovate basketball hoops and repave area in Emerson Park. • Rodriguez Adobe as a local cultural center. • Roller skating rink. • Rope climb and obstacle course. • Running facility. 0 Running track. ■ Safe walking trails. ■ Safer bike lanes and routes. ■ Shaded playgrounds. Sinsheimer Park and pool. • SLO already has a great pool complex. If not another pool, then a well maintained (with volunteers) dog park like at Chorro Park. ■ Soccer field. ETC Institute (2018) Page 18 City of San Luis Obispo 2018 Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey: Op%TT&E NTnRnts • Soccer fields indoor and outdoor with goals and nets. • Softball fields that are kept up for all to use (not just adult leagues). There is not a single youth softball field to use in the city. Meadow Park is not kept up unless rented. • Splash pad. (Mentioned six times.) • Splash pad and rec pool that is shaded. • Splash pad for kids would be awesome. • Splash pad for the hot days. • Splash pad with gray water used for landscaping. ■ Splash pad, shaded play area. • Splash pads or more interactive type parks would be great. More things for older children to do. • Splash pool. • Sports plex. ■ STEM center with focus on environmental science for youth and other members of the community. • Swimming pool in SW SLO. • Synthetic turf fields. • Table tennis court. • Tennis courts. ■ Tennis courts at Meadow Park. • Tennis stadium located at Sinsheimer Park. • Tent only campground with privacy. • The high school needs its own pool, or the city needs another one. ■ The recreation center on Mill Street used to have a pottery program for adults and children. • Throop. (Mentioned twice.0 • Tournament level pickleball permanent courts. French Park basketball court is not compliant. • Trail running. • Trails. • Training gym. • Trampoline park. • Turf fields. (Mentioned twice.) • Upgrade ETO Park. Make registration and scholarship available. ■ Useful playground, swimming pool, at Emerson Park. • Very large pool complex. • Volunteer opportunities. • Walking paths (splash pads sound fun too). • Walking trails throughout the city. • Walkingibiking paths away from automobile traffic. • Walking/running track. • Water park, slides, and splash pad. • We need another pool. • We need more paved walking and biking trails. • Weight room. • Well lit practice space for rugby. ■ Yoga. (Mentioned twice.) • Ziplining or ropes facility. ETC Institute (2018) Page 19 ATTACHMENT 3 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PLAN FOR SAN LUIS OBISPO PARKS + RECREATION MASTER PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN ELEMENT UPDATE OVERVIEW Community engagement will be vital to understanding and incorporating San Luis Obispo residents' values and aspirations into the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update— and creating champions for its implementation. This Community Engagement Plan identifies goals and a preferred series of outreach components to inform, consult and collaborate. The kit of tools aims to build on the existing community engagement culture in San Luis Obispo, consistent with the City's Public Engagement and Noticing Manual. The Plan assigns responsibilities for each component; identifying roles for City Staff and the WRT team. Parks and Recreation Commissioners, user groups, neighborhood residents and other engaged stakeholders will be expected to help disseminate information and assist during workshops. Finally, a schedule shows how each of these Plan elements weaves into the overall Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update. GOALS FOR THIS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORT San Luis Obispo's Public Engagement and Noticing Manual (PEN) provides a set of "Starting Line" questions to guide our approach to outreach. These are addressed here. What is the project you need to communicate? The Parks and Recreation Master Plan and Parks and Recreation Element Update, referred to hereafter as "Master Plan and Element", will guide the City's capital improvement projects in its beloved parks, facilities, recreational and cultural programs and activities, and open space over the next 20 years. Who makes the final decision on the item? Ultimately, at the conclusion of this project, the City Council will adopt the Master and Element. On the Public Engagement and Noticing Manual's Action Plan Matrix, this suggests a complex decision-making structure meriting a greater degree of communication with the public along the way. The Parks and Recreation Commission will serve throughout this project as the advisory body for the Master Plan and Element, providing a public forum for input and discussion on the Project at is monthly meetings. What type of community interaction is desired? Robust engagement is needed to tailor the Master Plan and Element to community priorities and build support for implementation. The Engagement Plan will use all methods of communications and community engagement in the PEN as well as new methods to provide communications that are: informative, consultative, and collaborative. Who needs to be informed? The Master Plan and Element will engage residents and the community at large. There is particular emphasis on key stakeholders and existing and new user groups as well as individuals who do not use the City's parks and recreation facilities. Stakeholders will include representatives from City advisory and decision-making bodies, other public agencies, and advocacy organizations whose interest overlaps with parks and recreation, including open space. Important park and open space user groups include but are ATTACHMENT 3 Community Engagement Plan for the San Luis Obispo Parks + Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update / 04.04.18 not limited to youth and adult athletic leagues, contract class instructors and participants, golf course clubs, senior center users, aquatics program users, before and after school childcare programs, parties interested in the City's cultural and open space resources, facilities, and amenities, dog park supporters and others. It will also be important to hear from members of the community who enjoy parks and open space casually/informally, and in particular to reach non-English speakers and others who are least likely to be included in public decision-making processes. The preliminary stakeholder list was approved as a component of the Project Plan, and has since been expanded (see Attachment A, Initial Stakeholder Table). The City considers this table a living document, and the stakeholder and interested parties list in will grow throughout implementation of this Community Engagement Plan. When does the outreach need to happen? Outreach will occur throughout the planning process and will be most concentrated during the Community Needs Assessment phase (April to October 2018).1 The community's input will be critical during this time to shape the Master Plan and Element. As the Master Plan and Element is developed there will be additional engagement points, including a mobile workshop and presentations to a variety of committees. The Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) and attending interested members of the public will receive regular status updates of the Plan and Element Update during monthly PRC meetings. What needs to be done? In addition to the outreach components described below, the Community Needs Assessment includes an assessment of existing facilities, including a summary of features and amenities and their condition, and how these facilities are being used; analysis of the City's current park standards and practices; consideration of recreational trends; and identification of community priorities. All of this information needs to be synthesized into the Master Plan and Element. The Master Plan and Element will establish goals, and identify and prioritize park acquisition, improvement, maintenance, and financing actions to meet those goals over the next 20 years. This information will be shared with the public during engagement opportunities, including public meetings, workshops, and events as a component of the Community Needs Assessment. What does success look like? Successful outreach will uncover and clarify the community's greatest needs, preferences, and priorities related to parks, facilities, programs and activities, including active and passive recreation. It will also cultivate stakeholders and residents as supporters of the Master Pian and Element and champions of specific implementing actions that follow. OUTREACH COMPONENTS Proposed outreach components are presented below, arranged into three categories based on primary communication objectives. A table follows this discussion, summarizing the timeframe and the roles and responsibilities for each element. WRT or WRT Team responsibilities are distinguished from City Staff responsibilities; these may be further delegated to the Project Manager, Project Sponsor, Project Steering Committee, or Project Team. Last, a schedule shows how these outreach components are expected to occur throughout the life of the Master Plan and Element. 1 Identified as Phase 2 in WRT's approved Scope of Work. ATTACHMENT 3 Community Engagement Plan for the San Luis Obispo Parks + Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update / 04.04.18 Communication Objective: Inform Notifications City Staff will notify the public about all public meetings and opportunities to comment on the Master Plan and Element, following City of San Luis Obispo protocol. Public meeting notices and agendas are published on the City's website one week prior to the meeting date. Meeting agendas are posted at Parks and Recreation and City Hall. Flyers and posters about the Master Plan and Element events and online survey will be posted approximately 3 to 4 weeks in advance at all Parks and Recreation facilities and parks. Notices will be emailed to all individuals who have previously contacted the City requesting to be included on the Master Plan and Element interested parties list.' Social Media and Website City Staff will provide regular updates about the Master Plan and Element process via City of San Luis Obispo social media (Facebook and Instagram) and the City's website and/or a project page. In particular, web -based information will promote participation in the online survey, community workshops, and online Open City Hall. Stakeholders may also play a role in raising awareness among specific groups about the Master Plan and Element and opportunities to be involved. Events will be posted on social media sites 4 weeks in advance as outlined in the social media posting schedule below. • Facebook Event listed 4 weeks out ■ Leading up to event: 2 posts on each social site (Facebook/Instagram) every week (photo with logos/dates/link to site) ■ Week of event: every other day (boost the post) • Day of: 1 post morning ■ Day after/week after: thank you post Email Outreach An email list will be maintained by City staff for the project, and E-updates—email outreach to generate interest and maintain participation—will be sent at key stages. Similar to the social media posting schedule, email outreach will be initiated 4 weeks in advance of a scheduled event with notifications increasing closer to event. Media Outreach City Staff will provide news releases on key project milestones and key elements of the update through local newspapers, television and radio. In particular, promoting participation in online survey, community workshops, and online Open City Hall. Staff will develop press releases for review and approval by the City's Public Relations consultant approximately 3 to 4 weeks in advance of a scheduled event. For larger events, postcards can be provided as an insert in the newspaper. Regularly scheduled radio announcements on KVET will be recorded and aired to inform the community about upcoming events, workshops and the online survey. Targeted Outreach The Master Plan and Element will also be publicized through special event cross -marketing to reach stakeholders and interested parties that may not have easy access to online resources and social media, including, but not limited to, outreach to schools for youth participation and the San Luis Obispo Senior Center, facility users, and recreational program participants for older -active adult engagement. This will ' Alternative communications will be arranged as needed to ensure information is accessible. 3 ATTACHMENT 3 Community Engagement Plan for the San Luis Obispo Parks + Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update / 04.04.18 involve staff distributing project materials like postcards and intercept surveys at pop-up events to ensure those without computer access are reached. Communication Objectives: Inform and Consult Foundational Meetings with Council, PRC and Stakeholders Engaging City Council and PRC members and stakeholders from diverse backgrounds early in the process is essential to gain a broad understanding of issues and priorities for the park system. The first meetings with WRT will begin on April 11th. This will provide foundational information for the Master Plan and Element. Throughout the process interested parties will continue to be identified and included as stakeholders. Parks & Recreation Commission The Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) will serve as the project advisory body for the Master Plan and Element. There will be a standing project update at each monthly PRC meeting to keep the Commission apprised of project tasks and upcoming deliverables, as well as serve as an additional opportunity for public input. Approximately every other month the PRC will review project deliverables and provide more detailed input and direction as necessary. WRT will attend three PRC meetings at key stages of the process. On April 11, 2018, WRT will present the project to the PRC, laying out the scope and schedule and leading a "visioning" exercise. WRT will present a second time to the PRC following completion of the Draft Community Needs Assessment and coinciding with a public workshop; this is anticipated to occur in October 2018. Third, WRT will join staff to facilitate PRC review of Draft Plan components and conduct an exercise to help set project priorities. This is envisioned for December 2018. WRT will also prepare materials for staff to use to present the Draft and Final Master Plan and Element to the Commission at critical recommendation points. Review by Other Advisory Bodies The Planning Commission is the Advisory Body responsible for reviewing and recommending the City's long-range plans to the City Council, most notably the City's General Plan. As such, the Planning Commission and City Council will each have the opportunity to review and provide input on components of the project three times — to review the Draft Community Needs Assessment, to review the Draft Master Plan and Element Update, and at the end of the project for final review and adoption. Other City advisory bodies will also review and provide input on the draft plan, including but not limited to the Cultural Heritage Committee, Jack House Committee, and Active Transportation Committee. Additional meetings will be scheduled as necessary. Staff will present the Master Plan and Element to these advisory bodies at key stages throughout the project. Communication Objectives: Inform, Consult, Collaborate Pop -Up Events and Community Workshops Taking the planning process to the community is an effective way to bolster engagement. Early in the process, there will be informal "pop-up" booths from May to October in community settings like the City's weekly Thursday Night Activities and Farmers' Market, summer Parks and Recreation Events, programs, and activities including but not limited to such as the SLO Triathlon, youth summer camps and playgrounds. 4 ATTACHMENT 3 Community Engagement Plan for the San Luis Obispo Parks + Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update / 04.04.18 The project will also include a focused, interactive community workshop in October 2018 to inform the Community Needs Assessment, and an open house to present and get feedback on the Draft Master Plan and Element and celebrate the City's parks and their future improvements, in June 2019. Survey and Online Engagement Online engagement will have two distinct components. First, an online survey will be conducted to achieve a statistically -valid sample of San Luis Obispo residents' priorities for the park system, recreation programs and cultural facilities. Statistically -valid community surveys are a critical component of the Master Plan and Element process—particularly for communities such as San Luis Obispo where the profile of the population is diverse and involved. These surveys are critical because they capture with a degree of certainty the needs of all residents, not just those who choose to participate in other forms of public engagement. Statistically -valid surveys validate input that is provided through other forms of engagement. The WRT team will work with City Staff to draft survey questions; ETC Institute will administer the survey itself, which may occur both online and as a mail -in piece. The survey instrument will be developed in April and conducted shortly thereafter, with a report on results by the end of June 2018. Second, staff will mirror the pop-up outreach, community workshop, and community open house with online options through the Open City Hall platform. To a great extent, the online option will be designed to offer the same opportunities for feedback as are provided at the in-person events. 5 ATTACHMENT 3 Community Engagement Plan for the San Luis Obispo Parks + Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update / 04.04.18 Table 1. Outreach Elements Element Roles & Responsibilities Timeframe i Inform Social Media and • Staff: Create and manage social media and Throughout; emphasis on Website City website postings Community Needs Assessment • WRT: paragraph briefs and images to be phase, April — November 2018 incorporated into a City led campaign • Stakeholders: help to share information { with community/constituents Email Outreach Staff: create and manage e -mailing list and e - updates; promote participation in online survey, community workshops, Open City Hall Throughout; emphasis on Community Needs Assessment phase, April — November 2018 Media Outreach Staff: draft and distribute news releases, partner Throughout with BCA/AMF as needed Targeted • Staff: distribute materials and lead targeted Outreach uulreach efforts; promote participation In online survey, workshops, Open City Hall • WRT: paragraph briefs and images to be incorporated into a City led campaign Throughout; emphasis on Community Needs Assessment phase, April — November 2018 Inform and Consult At Community Needs Assessment Stakeholder ■ Staff: identify stakeholders and schedule April 2018 Meetings meetings Master Plan and Final Master Plan and • WRT: conduct stakeholder meetings over 2 - General Plan Element day period, and follow-up interviews by • Attend Cultural Heritage Commission phone as needed. Incorporate feedback (CHC), Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC), into Community Needs Assessment, Master Tree Committee, and Jack House Plan PRC Meetings • Staff: provide standing project update at Throughout Draft Master Plan development monthly meetings, and get input on • WRT: provide materials and presentation deliverables templates; integrate input into Master Plan • WRT: present work and conduct exercises with the PRC at 3 key points; incorporate guidance into Master Plan documents; provide presentations for Staff at Draft and Final Plan stage; integrate input into Master Plan Review by Other • Staff: lead study sessions for the Planning At Community Needs Assessment Advisory Bodies Commission (PC) and City Council (CC) on phase, meetings expected to occur Draft Community Needs Assessment, Draft in October 2018. At Master Plan Master Plan and Final Master Plan and Development & Element Update General Plan Element phase, meetings to occur in June • Attend Cultural Heritage Commission 2019. At Master Plan & Element (CHC), Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC), Adoption phases, hearings to occur Tree Committee, and Jack House in October 2019. Committee, to brief these bodies during Draft Master Plan development • WRT: provide materials and presentation templates; integrate input into Master Plan 11 ATTACHMENT 3 Community Engagement Plan for the San Luis Obispo Parks + Recreation Master Plan and General Plan Element Update / 04.04.18 Element Roles & Responsibilities Inform, Consult, Collaborate Pop -Up Events • Staff: conduct "pop-up" outreach at and Community community events; help to plan and Workshops conduct community workshop and open house • WRT Team: provide templates and graphic support for pop-up outreach; conduct community workshop and community open house; integrate input into Community Needs Assessment, Master Plan Survey and o Staff: help to develop survey questions; Online conduct pop-up and workshop activities on Engagement Open City Hall WRT Team: help to develop survey questions; administer statistically -valid survey; integrate survey findings into Community Needs Assessment and Master Plan Schedule Timeframe At each phase. Pop-up events anticipated for May -July 2018; community workshop planned for October 3, 2018; and mobile workshop/open house to introduce Draft Master Plan and Element expected to occur in June 2019. Survey to be developed and conducted between April and June 2018. Open City Hall will be active in conjunction with each of the community workshops/open houses listed above. The Master Plan and Element will take place in four overlapping phases over approximately 21 months. • Phase 1: Setting the Stage and Planning Framework consists of project kick-off, review of background information, and the development of a Community Engagement Plan (this document) and an Initial Planning Framework report. This phase will occur during March and April 2018. • Phase 2: Determining Community Needs covers the critical work of understanding the issues relevant to San Luis Obispo's park system and its development over the next decade. Community engagement is a central part of this, and many of the engagement activities described here will take place during this phase, between April and November 2018. • In Phase 3: Developing the Plan and Conducting Environmental Review, community needs will be translated into a draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan, including background, vision and goals, policies, and implementing actions. A companion Parks & Recreation Element for the General Plan will also be drafted. These documents will be reviewed for potential environmental impacts. Phase 4: Adopting the Plan and Element, includes final hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council, and incorporating the input of these bodies into a final Master Plan for adoption, anticipated for October 2019. Please refer to the overall project schedule for more detail. 7 CITY OF SfM LUIS OBISPO Meeting Date: November 7, 2018 Item Number: 1 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT SUBJECT: Review of Final Design required park for the San Luis Ranch project (VTM #3096), for public park use and consistency with the approved San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and adopted Development Agreement. PROJECT ADDRESS: 1035 Madonna Road FILE NUMBER: SPEC/ANNX-1502-2015 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: BY: John Rickenbach, Contract Planner Phone Number: 805-610-1109 Email: JFRickenbach@aol.com FROM: Shelly Stanwyck, Parks and Recreation Director Review and approve the proposed Final Design of the park required in the San Luis Ranch project. SITE DATA Applicant MI San Luis Ranch, LLC Representative Marshall Ochylski General Plan and Specific Plan Area (various land Zoning use designations including— residential, commercial, office, open space and agriculture consistent with the Land Use Element) Site Area 131.3 acres Environmental Status A Final EIR and Final Supplemental EIR for the approved Specific Plan have been certified. 1.0 BACKGROUND AND COMMISSION'S PURVIEW The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan was adopted in July 2017. The Specific Plan called for various park amenities as directed by the City's existing General Plan. Notably a 2.8 -acre central park was proposed (which was less than the required acreage in the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan) within the proposed single-family neighborhood. The San Luis Ranch Specific Plan articulates a variety of amenities for that park, and includes conceptual design features, which had been previously reviewed and conceptually approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission SPEC-ANNX-1502-2015; 1035 Madonna Road (San Luis Ranch Project) November 7, 2018 Page 2 (PRC) on February 3, 2016. (The minutes of that meeting are included as Attachment 3.) At the time, of its initial review the PRC also determined that any shortfall in General Plan required onsite parks acreage would be more effectively addressed through payment of in -lieu fees, which could be applied to areas that might more appropriately serve the greater community. Since the General Plan required at least 5.8 acres of parks in the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan area, the 3 - acre shortfall was determined to be most appropriately addressed through the payment of in -lieu fees. The PRC also determined that such fees would be appropriately be directed at making improvements to Laguna Lake Park, to the extent possible, given its proximity to this residential development. Mitigation Measure REC-1 of the Final EIR for the San Luis Ranch project calls for the payment of in -lieu fees to address onsite parkland shortage. Subsequently, a Development Agreement for the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan and project was approved by the City Council in July 2018. Section 7.03 of the Development Agreement codifies the parkland dedication requirements and in -lieu fees to be paid, confirming that the project will include a 2.8 -acre central park as credit against the 5.8 -acre park requirement, and that in -lieu fees will be paid to the City to address the 3 -acre onsite shortfall (a total of $3,175,026). The Development Agreement also notes that the 2.8 -acre central park must be for public use, even though it will be maintained privately. The magnitude of the parks credit and fee payment are not under consideration for this agenda item, as these issues have been already settled through the Development Agreement. The Commission's purview is to review the proposed design of the central park to determine whether it conforms with previous PRC direction and the intent of the Specific Plan. 2.0 FINAL DESIGN REVIEW Based on guidance from the adopted Specific Plan, the project applicants have prepared a Parks Plan for the central park for inclusion in the Final Tract Map for the project. This is included as Attachment 1 to this staff report. In evaluating the proposed design, the following relevant information from the Conditions of Approval and Specific Plan should be considered. The PRC should also consider the minutes of the meeting of February 3, 2016, which provided conceptual direction for the park (Attachment 3). Conditions of Approval. Three Conditions of Approval associated with the approved Tentative Tract Map address parklands within the area. These include: * Condition 34 calls for private maintenance of onsite parks, either through a Homeowners Association (HOA) or a Community Facilities District (CFD). Subsequently, staff has worked with the developers on the specific maintenance mechanisms to be used, and it will include an HOA and CFD to provide the necessary funding. A formal agreement between the City and developer is currently being drafted to that effect. SPEC-ANNX-1502-2015; 1035 Madonna Road (San Luis Ranch Project) November 7, 2018 Page 3 • Condition 37 addresses the payment of park in -lieu fees, which are due at the recordation of the Final Map. The condition also establishes the amount of such fees per residential unit, which is subsequently carried forward in the Development Agreement. • Condition 54 states that private street lighting may be provided along the private pocket parks and linear parks per City Engineering Standards and/or as approved in conjunction with the final ARC approvals. Of these three, only Condition 54 is directly relevant to the design of the park, as it relates to lighting. San Luis Ranch Specific Plan. Section 4.4.1 of the Specific Plan includes the following guidance for the design of the central park: "A large neighborhood park will provide recreational amenities to all age groups. Centrally located in the San Luis Ranch community, this park can be easily accessed by all residents, serve as a community gathering space, provide active recreational amenities such as sport courts and play activities for children, as well as passive recreational areas. Figures 4.8 and 4.9 illustrate the Central Neighborhood Park Concept. " Figure 4.9 of the Specific Plan is included as Attachment 2 to this staff report, in order to establish the intent of the Specific Plan for the park concept. Additional guidance for the park design is included in the following text adjunct to Figure 4.8 in the Specific Plan: "A large neighborhood park centered in the heart of San Luis Ranch will provide a sanctuary and leisure opportunities for all ages. Young children and their neighborhood friends can create fun adventures on the inspired play structures. Basketball courts for the young and young at heart, yoga with the neighbors, sitting and gazing at the view, or a community gathering in the barbecue area are all possible. Social activities are encouraged with picnic benches, outdoor community oven and barbecues. The central park is easily accessible from home through pedestrian friendly walking paths and Pocket Parks. " 3.0 STAFF ANALYSIS Staff has met with the developer's team many times both before and after the approval of the Specific Plan in July 2017. The input received from the PRC at its meeting of February 3, 2016 was instrumental in helping to finalize both the Specific Plan and the parks plan in terms of functionality and programming of the central park. In the original draft parks plan submitted by the developer in August 2018, City staff provided areas that would likely result in discussion between the PRC and the developer during the review of the final park design: 1. Potential inconsistencies between the park amenities and what was called for in the approved Specific Plan; SPEC-ANNX-1502-2015; 1035 Madonna Road (San Luis Ranch Project) November 7, 2018 Page 4 2. A lack of detail on some of the recreational equipment proposed; 3. The play equipment appeared to be minimalist and not sufficiently age-appropriate for the younger families likely to live in the neighborhood; 4. Insufficient detail on the landscaping and lighting plan for the park; 5. Insufficient trash cans and dog waste stations; 6. Insufficient information on fence design; 7. Insufficient information on park furnishings and ground cover. The developer then addressed these concerns in its resubmittal of October 12, 2018 (Attachment 1). The PRC should discuss whether the applicant's resubmitted parks plan sufficiently addresses the previously -anticipated concerns as well as any others members of the PRC may have. Staff's analysis of how the applicant addressed potential concerns in the proposed park for PRC consideration are as follows: Potential inconsistencies between the park amenities and what was called for in the gMroved Specific Plan. The approved Specific Plan indicates there will be a bocce ball court, but this element is not included in the construction plans. Similarly, the Specific Plan indicates a tractor/hay bales, spinner, and flower maze, none of which are shown on the construction plans. However, subsequent discussions with PRC staff and previous input from PRC indicated a desire for more similar but more easily implemented features in this park. The basketball court, bean bag toss, and ping pong were more consistent with this direction. These features are appropriate for a park of this size and location. Bike racks are included. 2. A lack of detail on some of the recreational eguipment proposed. The revised submittal included as Attachment 1 shows additional detail on the various recreational elements, providing clearer direction, especially with respect to the design and intent. 3. The play equipment appeared to be minimalist and not su tciently- age-appt•opriatefor the you families likely to live in the neighborhood. Various active play features for kids (spinner, tot swings, toddler swings) were added to the previously -shown tot play, tractor play, and play tower structures. These playground elements are appropriate for the younger kids who will likely use the park. 4. Insufficient detail on the landscaping and lighting plan for the park. Additional detail on park lighting was provided, including intent ("low lighting at shade structures"), energy use (solar power), and design (downward focused to minimize offsite glare). There is more detailed information about landscaping as well, especially with respect to the use of drought -tolerant landscaping. These features are consistent with direction in the Specific Plan, Final EIR, and previous discussion with PRC staff. However, the PRC may want to clarify the design of the lighting, especially along paths, and ensure that these will not create offsite glare that affects nearby homes. SPEC-ANNX-1502-2015; 1035 Madonna Road (San Luis Ranch Project) November 7, 2018 Page 5 5. Insa JItcient trash cans and doz waste stations. The original construction plans did not show trash receptacles near the shade structures. The resubmitted plans have added these, consistent with what is shown in photo examples provided. A second dog waste station was also added so there is one near both shade structures. 6. Insuf icient information onfence desrgn. The originally submitted plan indicated a "low fence" on the eastern and part of the northern perimeter of the park, but did not include details about its design. The resubmittal does not shed additional light on this issue. The PRC may wish to clarify issues related to the design of the fence (including materials, both for aesthetics and safety), and what features within the park should be fenced. Although the developer proposes a split rail fence on the playground side of the park to prevent kids from leaving the park in this way, staff is concerned that a split rail fence is less than ideal for this purpose. They do not last, they come apart, children get splinters, and children can get through. Staff recommends that a short decorative metal or light metal/redwood type fencing be used for this purpose. Given road proximity and open nature of playground area it is important for safety. 7.—ffitient information on park furnishings and ground comer. As revised, the park furnishings (such as tables and shade structures) are appropriate, and there is sufficient direction in the parks plan to understand the design of these features. The central portion of the park would be covered with turf, while some of the play areas (near the ping-pong table) are proposed as decomposed granite. It is unclear from the submittal what the surface under the playground area would be, but from the illustration appears to be wood chips and/or rubber chips. The PRC may want to discuss and clarify the surface materials that should be provided in this area. 4.0 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Commission consider the following on the San Luis Ranch Final Design Review: a. Review and approve the San Luis Ranch central park proposal as is; or b. Review and approve the San Luis Ranch central park proposal, with the following conditions, which would need to be implemented as part of Public Improvement Plans for the project: 1. Use a short decorative metal or light metal/redwood type of fencing near the playground that provides a higher degree of safety for children; 2. Modify the lighting plan to provide low intensity downward directed lighting along pathways to ensure sufficient safety; 3. Use surface materials near the playground areas that ensure the highest degree of safety, which could include wood chips and/or rubber chips. SPEC-ANNX-1502-2015; 1035 Madonna Road (San Luis Ranch Project) November 7, 2018 Page 6 5.0 ATTACHMENTS 1. San Luis Ranch VTM#3096 Illustrative Central Park Plan 2. Figure 4.9 from the San Luis Ranch Specific Plan 3. PRC Minutes of February 3, 2016 meeting f -I i 0) 4-1 G> LA 00 t" I C) N N r -I 1X Ik rc.uj .H a) w� >a m Q O L O Q) U 1� ate--+ — — a--+ H S Q) Allk 0 m f; a -j E =^^ a -J M 'in N O a-1 = M �[ }' U QJ L Q O O O — — i 6 N N U C O 1 L 1 _ — Qj L � I >` L Q) E OO -- u E U ani 4- v v fB N m k m u A N 7 C 7 72 m m u v IF, 41 ` C GJ i m V u Ln u �I U E Uf0 J N t,. ___._ J _ . N S 1 a+ 1w✓' 0 C O 0 0 c + '_ 1 a Ln _' m m u v IF, U 41 C GJ u u �I U U w W m 0 m a 00 -4 O N N li 0 L 4 (Q Ll MD M OJ4b L �� 0 3- N N F- N W m 0 m a 00 -4 O N N li 0 CL U LM L 0 N Q) Q u U L J R 00 0 N N 1- 0 13 , r AL, W r ■ L %WOO a Q u U o � N aj Q m 1 U 3: m J 00 0 N N 1- 0 00 L N C C �CLLM 4A Qi Q. LL V1 L LJ N ii U U LLL L m N N i Cu � V 00 #+ •Q C m 4-+ C fa a ru . U. 01 W N L � L Ln E Ln V1 Qi N U L M L+ Ln a Qu 00 C U o o c J `• � cn CL a L 3 O C 0� co -0 L N � � N c O L N4-J�-�+ .N U O W aaQQv� 4-j 4-1 cv 4-1 to m m m m a 4J � CL W O CID m m m m Q i� L N 40 v a a v a +, o LL W ch 00 0 N N O -4 IA 13 m mc IA Q a) a N t U 4J L 4.d Y N X O N-0 M OJ Lnv i N to 4J 4-J .> U 4-1 •U U a N N C _U w �a m O O L M 4a 0 L L � cuQ L U U O Q -D N U c� m +_+ Q O .3 4 U U L •L U � L O O S O L V) cc 0 ■ 0 N r-1 i a M P'I ae O t Q X GA X U- L 4 LL 4••+ O O C vi •J O N p 4J m C Z J J 2 I L 4-j L` L ' 41 0 O1 E � O Ln C a \ U "O Q Ln ca m t U LnNn ■ O ■ m LA 0 0 m 'O t � � N m m :3 • m U 0 0-4- CL GO GJ m m •3 Q c 3 � c o s 413 tw t O � — O N O N '�^ m O Q '0 +' � �� N L. Q O 4- V) m O m L U t 4-1 +v+ U L�+ v1 Q JUA O M P'I ae O N Q X X U- «O LL 4••+ O O L vi •J O J4a U p Z J J 2 I L 4-j L` ` ' 41 0 O1 E L �••� O Ln a \ H "O Q Ln p m t U LnNn ■ . ■ M P'I IA a L LL 4) 401 •� tA I L L v Qi 3 3 . :}J- -he -c 3: s i U m m v N (n m C C m OA bD L Q) a) OD O 1 O N N N N 4A m co CCS,,,_ oA G) N O O N O H H H Y U- U w U_ U U 00 U m U U w m M. = d CL m m e : r 00 0 N N r -I 0 IA _cn a S IA L iz Ln M O O L O m N C � � — () �� J a1 S a U Q cc a CU N N 0 a -j Q O L CU Ytko N c 3 oCU a) U W U 4-J � (D U W CC Q Ln Q C .O CL) dA aa)i (=U Y m L CN �u C7 41CC J D Ln r E cr W r 0 a� CL MC a C cu m E cr W r 0 a� m-� CL MC a C cu m -0 m 0-0 C CO 1 m O N �U � 4-1O 06 M N O N -0 -0 — v ai -0 v v tn o 3 M }' 2 ° 3 aiL O V m p V Mca Do 4., Q Y U 4-1 CL N CO y-- M W N + Uai CO .i a) Q t]A O 4+- W aJN a) 'i Q 4-J0 c � -0 .> -0 o cu -0 CL ° N . 7n ° O O N " Q O U 2m O m " � dA F O 0 = f� C m N N CL }' O C M a1 4-J b.0 m a 0o m 0 m-� Flower maze Split rail fence yr�r Figure 4.9 Neighborhood Park Concept PERIMETER PATH WITH DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPING HALF BASKETBALL COURTS 'A^T GREENROOF PICNIC SHELTER WITH BBQ TRACTOR, WAGON AND HAY BALES (2-5 YRS OLD) FLOWER CANOPY MAZE AND BOULDERS (2-12 YRS OLD) SWINGSET. SPINNER 5••12 YRS OI.C7) DRY STORMWATER RETENTION AREA, BOULDERS, AND LANDSCAPING .TURF r TURF '1 CROSSWALK TO LINEAR PARK AND OPEN SPACE DRY STORMWATER RETENTION AREA, BOULDERS, AND LANDSCAPING I BOCCE BALL C" I COURT AGRARIAN GREENROOF PICNIC SHELTER AND BBQ Spinner a^ ■ Bocce ball court Half basketball courts 4-16 SAN LUIS RANCH I SPECIFIC PLAN I City of San Luis Obispo, CA I July 18, 2017 Adopted I August **, 2018 Revised Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting Minutes Council Chambers 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Wednesday, February 3, 2016, 5:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Whitener called the meeting to order at 5:30p.m. ROLL CALL: Chair Jeff Whitener, Vice -Chair Ron Regier, Commissioners Ryan Baker, Susan Olson, Michael Parolini, Douglas Single, Susan Updegrove ABSENT: None COUNCIL: None STAFF: Shelly Stanwyck, Melissa Mudgett, Rich Ogden, Devin Hyfield, Chris Woods, Matt Nowlen, John Rickenbach (Contract Planner) Public Comment Cheryl McLean, reside on Mission Lane, waiting for 50 years for a neighborhood park. Urged the Commission to support the City's purchase of the 71 Palomar property as a designated community park. Lydia Mourenza is a SLO resident and neighbor of the Sanford House located at 71 Palomar. She said this parcel is used as a pedestrian by -way. She asked the Commission to support the City Council in considering the purchase of the 71 Palomar property as a designated community park. She added that the historic farm house on the property could be used for events. Mila Vujovich-LaBarre is a teacher and SLO resident. She also supports 71 Palomar as a great location for a new City park and urged the Commission to advocate for a park in this neighborhood. Director Stanwyck responded that many of our community neighborhoods were constructed before park planning was integrated into community designs. Currently, the City process is not structured for pursuing pursuing property acquisition. She added that the Financial Plan does not have the budget to support this purchase, nor has the City Council provided the direction to pursue this option. The typical process would include City Council direction to staff to pursue acquisition and then allocation of funding. Director Stanwyck added that the property at 71 Palomar is currently in escrow with a developer. Nicholas Lester, a SLO recreational advocate, shared with the Commissioners information about Remote Control (RC) car racing. He identified Laguna Lake Park as an ideal location to build an RC Track. Director Stanwyck urged Mr. Lester to meet with City staff to share his proposal. Staff could then return to Commission with an update. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 2016. MOTION: (Regier/Updegrove) Approve the Minutes of January 6, 2016 as amended. Approved: 7 yes: 0 no: 0 absent 2. COMMUNITY INPUT FOCUS: LAGUNA LAKE GOLF COURSE (Ogden/Hytield/W ood s/Now len) Director Stanwyck introduced the Laguna Lake Golf Course team, Devin Hyfield (Recreation Supervisor — Facilities & Maintenance), Rich Ogden (Recreation Supervisor — Sports), Chris Woods (Recreation Coordinator — Golf Operations), and Matt Nowlen (Recreation Coordinator — Golf Maintenance) for an overview of the Laguna Lake Golf Course programs and practices. City staff provided an overview of the Laguna Lake Golf Course which includes a 10 -hole golf course, putting practice green, pro -shop with concessionaire and a driving range. The Ciolf Course is operated and maintained by Parks and Recreation Department. Staff Hyfield discussed the annual operating budget expenses and revenues for the Golf Course in 2014-15 which resulted 57% Cost Recovery. Staff Nowlen summarized the routine maintenance needs and ongoing efforts for water conservation at the course. Staff Woods summarized the operations at the course. He added that the Golf Course's part-time staff and volunteers are essential to the course operations and are responsible for making the course such a special place to play. He shared updates about minor capital projects and upgrades to the facility, such as the ADA Restroom construction project and design study for the Pro -shop facility. Staff Woods shared with the Commission results of the 2015 Golf Course survey and some of the partnerships (Cal Poly and Laguna Middle School), programs (such as Gobble -Wobble Fun Run on Thanksgiving Day and Night Golf) and Pro -Shop improvements that have been implemented as a result of this feedback. Golf Course has recently implemented social media in effort to increase community outreach with a Facebook page and Instagram account. Commission Comments Vice Chair Regier asked for clarification about the Pro -Shop study. Director Standwyck responded that the City has embarked upon the effort to study aging facilities (examples, Sinshiemer and Golf Course Pro -Shop). Currently there is a capital project approved in 2015-17 Financial Plan to study to determine what improvements could or should be made to the pro -shop facility. Commissioner Single said the Golf Course is not operating at 100% capacity (he calculated 63%) and what is being done to make the golf course sustainable. Director Stanwyck provided some history on the golf course as an Enterprise Fund and that Council -adopted Fiscal Policies direct a capped cost recovery when serving youth and seniors to 0-30% cost recovery. Course fees will be reviewed as part of the City's Fees Study this year. As always, the course strives for a balance of operations, maintenance, and new opportunities that might capture new golfers; but remaining a place for seniors and youth to golf. Commissioner Parolini asked if there were any ideas for foot golf at Laguna Lake Golf Course. Staff Woods responded that staff was currently researching options for this type of programming at the Course. Commission Olson asked if there was any flooding due to the storms. Staff Woods responded that there was flooding around the Pro -Shop but that the new restroom design should address this issue. Staff Nowlen said that currently the course is able to handle the rain. Public Comment Marshal Helski, CEO of the Special Heroes program for disadvantaged youth, said their organization's annual fund raiser was recently held at the Laguna Lake Golf Course. He thanked the golf course staff for their support and a great event. 3. CONCEPTUAL REVIEW OF PARK PROPOSALS FOR THE SAN LUIS RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN (Rickenbach) John Rickenbach, contract staff planner, presented on the development of a Specific Plan for the proposed San Luis Ranch project. This project is seeking conceptual input by the Commission as posed by the applicant, 2 Coastal Community Builders. Coastal Community Builders has proposed the San Luis Ranch project which includes several entitlements that will ultimately lead to the development of the 131.3 acre infill site. The project could include a mixture of residential and non-residential uses, as well as the preservation of agricultural uses and open space. The project is currently outside the City, but within its "Sphere of Influence" and would require annexation for development. The project as proposed is envisioned to implements the policies as articulated in the recent Land Use and Circulation Elements (LUCE) update and be consistent with the development parameters set forth in the LUCE. Applicant has proposed the following questions for Commission discussion and direction: 1) Are there any significant concerns regarding the general site layout, park design and recreation facilities use? a. Commission Feedback, Accepting of conceptual design as presented. 2) Provide feedback regarding how San Luis Ranch Specific Plan meets the city-wide priorities for parks and recreation. a. Commission Feedback: Explore if preferred option is collection of in -lieu fees to augment other park amenities. 3) What types of active recreation would the Commission like to see incorporated on-site? a. Commission f e&)g : Explore incorporation of passive recreation (i.e. trails) on-site. 4) Would the Commission like to see community gardens or orchards incorporated to serve city-wide residents? a. Commission f ecdbuck: Supportive of community gardens and dog park at Laguna Lake park. 5) The applicants would like to receive Parks and Recreation Facilities Credit for the integrated community -wide and regional recreational facilities. a. The Specific Plan as proposed is intended to meet the LUCE requirement for 50% of the project site to remain in Open Space/Agriculture, utilizing on and off-site open space. LUCE requires 5.8 acres of parks, integration of recreational facilities within the open space areas. Does the Commission consider these areas as "parks"? Are these public amenities eligible for a credit? Application build money could go farther, but in -lieu fees could be used at Laguna Lake Park. Some amenities could count for something and be given some credit along the way. b. Crurrm+issiort P' 1U, Explore if preferred option is collection of in -lieu fees to augment other park amenities. 6) Would the Commission like to see improvements added to Laguna Lake Park as an offset to the on- site parks and recreation requirements? a. Commission Feedback: Explore options of dog park improvements at Laguna Lake park. Explore options of adding more pocket parks. 7) Would the Commission like to see the payment of in -lieu Parks and Recreational fees for use in other areas of the community as an offset to the on-site Parks and Recreation requirements? a, Commission Feedback: Explore if preferred option is collection of in -lieu fees to augment other park amenities. Marshal Helski, the project representative, provided the Commission with greater details of the proposed project. He reviewed the proposed project's site constraints as it is completely surrounded on all sides by development and Highway 101 with a drainage channel and adjacent to Prefumo Creek. The applicant stresses core guiding principles in their development designs which include agriculture, outdoor recreation, diverse housing and multimodality. The proposed project would include 500 residential units, commercial space, a 4 - story hotel, an agriculture learning center, active recreational opportunities, parking and an extension from the Bob Jones Trail to the Laguna Lake Park. Public Comment Steve Davis, a SLO resident, asked about the calculation for the requirement of acres/per resident. Staff Rickenbach responded that the acre calculation follows the annexation policy for this parcel. Greg Apian, a SLO resident, asked if the agricultural area as presented is a requirement for the project. Staff Rickenbach responded affirmative and added that half the area designated must remain park or open space. Mr. Apian asked if it was possible to have the learning center be located across the street at Laguna Lake Park. commission Comments Commissioner Updegrove asked for clarification regarding the location of Prefumo Creek to the proposed sight. Commissioner Parolini said that space would be needed for storage of agricultural equipment. He added that Open Space is for passive recreation that is not maintained (i.e., trails). Commissioner Parolini felt that the proposed development is a "park" and not Open Space as it is defined by the City. He added that there could be opportunity for a flat, maintained, open space area for walking groups with less mobility. He asked about the timeline for the development. Mr. Helski said it is dependent upon the approval process and annexation, but the goal is to build the family residences as the first phase. Commissioner Parolini asked if in -lieu fees could be dedicated for use on a specific project. Director Stanwyck said the Commission could ask for City Council approval of specific use for in -lieu fiends. Commissioner Single asked if the pocket parks are included in the acreage calculation of 3.88 acres, Staff Rickenbach responded no, pocket parks are currently not a part of the proposal. Commissioner Single said the proposed trails took very narrow; not providing for multi -modal traffic (dogs, pedestrians and bicycles), He would like to see an area provided for dogs. Staff Rickenbach shared that the Bicycle Advisory Committee was supportive of fast and narrow trails for bicycles. Commissioner Single urged the applicant to consider incorporating dedicated Pickleball courts at this project site. Vice -Chair Regier asked about the connectivity from the Bob Jones Trail to the Laguna Lake Park and would there be community access to the neighborhood park for some regional park amenities to address unmet community needs. He encouraged multi -modality over additional parking and supported the idea of a fitness loop for walking groups who look for well-maintained walking paths. Commissioner Olson said fitness loop would be used primarily by the neighborhood families and not by long- range bicyclist. She is in support of dog parks, but there is one located across the street at Laguna Lake Park. Commissioner Olson was not in support of a parking within this development. Commissioner Updegrove was concerned about the street between residential and the agricultural areas and asked that the developers are doing to protect the residential area from these challenges (i.e., spraying, dust and wind) and other potential problems. She supports proposed ideas of community garden or community orchard. She would be in support in -lieu fees to do some infrastructure improvements in Laguna Lake Park. Commissioner Baker supported in -lieu fees for this project redirected back to Laguna Lake Park amenity improvements. He does not envision the park amenities being used regionally because of how the parks arc isolated. He is in support of a community garden or orchard as a part of this development. Chair Whitener asked for clarification on the acreage calculation. Staff Rickenbach responded that 50% of the acreage must be dedication to agriculture or open space to meet that requirement. Staff Rickenbach added that parks are not a part of this acreage calculation (P -OS is 7 acres, Ag land 53 acres, 3.39 of parks). Chair Whitener said he was in support of community gardens but not at the expense of a new park. He added that consideration of open space amenities as part of the park requirement would be dependent on its use. 4. SELECTION OF PUBLIC ART MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP DATE (Mudgett) Melissa Mudgett, Recreation Manager, recapped the Commission's feedback following the January 6 presentation of the draft Public Art Master Plan. The Commission was asked to select a date for a public 4 workshop to receive input regarding the proposed plan recommendations. The Commission tentatively selected Tuesday, March 81h at 5:30pm as the workshop date. 5. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director Stanwyck presented a quick overview of Parks and Recreation Department upcoming items which included next month's Agenda on Pickleball pilot program update, summary of results and enthusiastic advocates. Staff is currently recruiting staff and planning for spring break camps, minimum days and summer. The SLO Swim Center pool ribbon cutting ceremony is on Monday, February 8'h at 11:00am. The Sinsheimer playground project is in its final stages with a bid for purchase of playground equipment. Playground construction is anticipated to start in September 2016. The Public art Box Art program has opened call for artists. 6. SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON REPORTS ■ Adult and Senior Programming_ Commissioner Baker reported on Adults Sports Softball started registration started February I" and February 29`' starts play. Youth Sports basketball is ongoing. April 23`a registration opens for the SLO Tri which is held on July 23`x. There was no report for the Senior Center. ■ Bicycle Advisory: Vice Chair Regier said BAC did not provide meeting minutes and he was not in attendance. No report. • City Facilitics (Damon Garcia. Golf. Pool & Joint Use Facilities): Commissioner Parolini said Field B closed for maintenance and Public Works staff is rotating fields for renovation. The Spring term for AYSO is starting this weekend. ■ lack I-lousc Committee: Commissioner Updegrove reported that the Jack House is currently closed. The docents helped prepare for the Jack House elevator removal project by safely removing interior collections prior to construction. Elevator restoration project scheduled to start Monday, February 8`h. Jack House will host an "Art after Dark" this Friday, February 51h. • Tree Committee: Commissioner Olson said there was a regular tree committee meeting with four removal applications and one new committee member. • Youth Sports: Commissioner Single said YSA did not meet and is rescheduled for February 171h There was no report. 7. COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Parolini would like urge the Commissioners to agendize discussion a community wide master plan and parks element update. He urged his fellow Commissioners to provide a statement to Council for the need for a Parks Master Plan, funding for which would be in alignment of budget supplement process. The Commission provided consensus to agendize this topic for March. Adjourned at 8:17pm to the March 2, 2016 Regular Meeting in Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo. Approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on March 2, 2016. Melissa C. N dgett, Parks and Rccreatio/ Departntu t Manager