The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About7. PLN-16-00248 Parks & Rec Open Space Master PlanPC Agenda Page 1 PC Agenda Page 2 PC Agenda Page 3 PC Agenda Page 4 January 2016 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN THE CITY OF DOWNEY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 5 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 6 Prepared for Prepared by City of Downey 11111 Brookshire Avenue Downey, CA 90241 www.downeyca.org/ 2016 Parks and Open Space Master Plan CITY OF DOWNEY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 7 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 8 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plani Acknowledgements CITY COUNCIL Alex Saab, Mayor, District 5 Fernando Vasquez, Mayor Pro Tem, District 4 Sean Ashton, Council Member, District 2 Roger C. Brossmer, Council Member, District 3 Luis H. Marquez, Council Member, District 1 CITY OF DOWNEY Gilbert A. Livas, City Manager John Oskoui, Assistant City Manager Mohammad Mostahkami, Director of Public Works Arlene Salazar, Former Director of Parks and Recreation Edwin Norris, Deputy Director of Public Works Sonya Meacham, Recreation Manager/ Interim Director of Parks and Recreation Dan Mueller, Principal Civil Engineer CONSULTANT TEAM Robert Mueting, Principal, RJM Design Group, Inc. Dania Castro, Job Captain, RJM Design Group, Inc. Caitlin Keathley, Job Captain, RJM Design Group, Inc. Greg Moeser, Project Manager, RJM Design Group, Inc. Timothy Gallagher, Senior Associate, RJM Design Group, Inc. Pamela Wooldridge, Senior Associate, RJM Design Group, Inc. Christine Coman, Senior Associate, RJM Design Group, Inc. James Mickartz, Architect Lisa Williams, Associate, LSA Associates, Inc. Ashley Davis, Associate, LSA Associates, Inc.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 9 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Planii Executive Summary 1 Section One: Introduction 9 1.1 Purpose of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan 9 1.2 Approach and Document Organization 10 1.3 Physical Setting 11 1.4 Demographic Context 13 1.5 Relationship to Other Documents 13 Section Two: Existing Recreation Resources 19 2.1 Park Deﬁ nition 19 2.2 Downey Park Types 20 2.3 Existing and Planned Recreation Facilities 21 2.4 School Facilities 26 2.5 Other Recreational Facilities 26 2.6 Trails and Connectivity 27 Section Three: Recreation Facility Needs Assessment 35 3.1 Community Participation 36 3.2 Recreation Facility Need Calculations 48 3.3 Program Needs Analysis 56 3.4 Facility Needs Summary and Prioritization 56 3.5 Existing Recreation Facilities Maintenance Condition 58 3.6 Building Maintenance and Accessibility 60 3.7 Service Area Analysis 60 3.8 Acreage Analysis 63 Section Four: Recreation Program Needs Assessment 67 4.1 Existing Programs and Services 67 4.2 Program Needs Assessment 68 4.3 Program Needs Summary 73 4.4 Program Recommendations 75 Section Five: Facility Recommendations 85 5.1 Overall Concept 85 5.2 Types of Facility Recommendations and Prioritization 86 5.3 Maintenance & Operations Recommendations 94 5.4 Opportunity Sites 99 5.5 Community Needs Assessment Recommendations 100 Section Six: Funding/Implementation 119 6.1 Current Funding and Stafﬁ ng 119 6.2 Funding Sources for Parks and Recreation 121 6.3 Capital Project Budget 128 6.4 Capital Costs for Proposed Recommendations 137 Appendix (separate document) Table of Contents DR A F T PC Agenda Page 10 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Planiii List of Exhibits 1.3-1 Physical Setting Map 2.2-1 Existing/Planned Parks and Recreation Facility Inventory 2.3-1 Existing/Planned Parks and Recreation Facilities/Schools Map 2.4-1 Existing School Facility Inventory 2.6-1 Existing and Planned Trails 2.6-2 Connectivity Inventory 3.1-1 Telephone Survey, Recreation Participation 3.1-2 Telephone Survey, Recreation Facilities Desired 3.1-3 Summary of Comments From Downey Sports Organization Questionnaire 3.2-1 Facility Demand Analysis Based on Participation Rates, 2015 Levels 3.2-2 Facility Demand Analysis Based on Participation Rates, 2035 Projection 3.2-3 Recreation Facility Needs Analysis, 2015 3.2-4 Recreation Facility Needs Analysis, 2035 Projection 3.2-5 Change in Demand for Recreation Facilities by Type, 2015-2035 3.2-6 Facility Requirements for Recreation Needs, 2015-2035 Change 3.4-1 Facility Needs Summary 3.5-1 Current Maintenance Needs of Downey Parks 3.6-1 Building Maintenance and Site/Building Accessibility Needs 3.7-1 Service Area Analysis 3.8-1 Acreage Analysis 4.1-1 Program Inventory 4.2-1 Telephone Survey, Programs Desired 4.3-1 Program Needs Summary 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary 5.4-1 Opportunity Sites Map 5.4-2 Opportunity Sites Table 5.5-1 Apollo Park Proposed Field Layout 5.5-2 Discovery Park Proposed Field Layout 5.5-3 Columbus High School Field Layout 5.5-4 Existing and Potential Playground Locations 6.1-1 Summary of Full-time Positions 6.1-2 Parks and Recreation & Public Works Maintenance Budget Summary 6.2-1 Funding Sources by Project Type 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations 6.4-1 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan SummaryDR A F T PC Agenda Page 11 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Planiv DR A F T PC Agenda Page 12 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan1 Executive Summary The Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan (Master Plan) is a guide and implementation tool for the management and development of parks and recreational facilities and programs within the City of Downey. The Master Plan will be used by the City to determine how to best meet the future park and open space needs of its citizens through development, redevelopment, expansion, and enhancement of the City’s parks system, open spaces, trails, recreational facilities, and programs. The following table summarizes the costs to develop the facility needs identiﬁ ed in the Master Plan: Maintenance and Operations Improvements: $58.6 Million Opportunity Sites: $21.5 Million Additional Community Needs - Site Yet to Be Deﬁ ned: $28.9 Million Total: $109 Million Key Findings •Downey’s park system suffers from aging infrastructure. Downey’s level of maintenance is currently in the lower range of Mode III, a below average operating standard for municipal parks and recreation systems the size of the City of Downey established by the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA). While City staff does a great job with limited resources, maintenance has been deferred throughout the park system. The Master Plan determined that there are $58.6 Million* needed maintenance upgrades and improvements to Downey’s existing park system closer to a Mode I or state of the art maintenance system. •Maintenance improvements are a concern to the community. Maintenance related items were often cited by residents as needed improvements to the park system during the Master Plan’s community engagement process. •The community’s need for additional (new) facilities was also identiﬁ ed by the Master Plan process. The Master Plan recommendations seek to accommodate identiﬁ ed needs with existing facilities, school sites, and acquisition targets. The Master Plan determined that the cost to develop needed facilities beyond current site maintenance costs is $36.5 Million* (Opportunity Sites-$21.5 Million, Additional Community Needs-$28.9 Million). •Additional ﬁ nancial resources and funding strategies will be required in order for the City to bring facilities up to date and to meet the community’s needs for recreational facilities and have been investigated in the Master Plan. •Realization of the recommendations of the Master Plan would transform the City’s Park system and its ability to meet the recreational needs of residents now and into the future. *Note, for a summary of all of the facility recommendations in this Master Plan, please see Exhibit 5.2-1 on page 86. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 13 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan2 Master Plan Report Sections The various sections of the Master Plan are summarized as follows: Section One: Introduction This section summarizes the Master Plan’s purpose and process, and outlines the physical and demographic context of the City. A list of related documents that were reviewed as part of the Master Plan is identiﬁ ed. The Master Plan seeks to: •Acquire, develop, redevelop, and maintain quality parks and trails that support equity of access by users, connectivity, and create a positive sense of place for all residents in the City. •Improve the overall existing condition of parks and community facilities that will encourage greater positive use by residents in the City. •Update community facilities both indoor and outdoor to maximize their use and appreciation by the community for people of all ages; to enhance the value of sports and ﬁ tness, quality of life, arts and social places for the community to gather; and celebrate healthy living in Downey. Section One Highlights: •Physical Setting: Within the City of Downey, and the surrounding area, several signiﬁ cant natural and man-made features help shape neighborhoods and provide both opportunities and constraints with respect to parks, recreation, circulation, and community life: Interstate 5, 105, 605, and 710 freeways, The San Gabriel and Rio Hondo Rivers, Union Paciﬁ c Railroad Line, and a grid network of major, primary, and secondary arterial roads. •Demographics: Population growth in the City during the 2000 to 2010 time frame grew from just over 107,000 residents to nearly 112,000 residents, reﬂ ecting a 4.1% increase; the greatest growth in population by age group was evidenced among City residents 55 to 64 years (36%) and those 45 to 54 years of age (17%). •Relationship to Other Documents: Several documents set the stage for the development of the Master Plan: City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan, the Bicycle Master Plan, the Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan, the Downey Civic Center Master Plan, the Downey Energy Action Plan, the Downey Parks and Recreation: Draft Master Assessment, Cal Poly Pomona, the Downey Uniﬁ ed School District Master Plan, The Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan, and the Los Angeles County Study. Section Two: Existing Recreation Resources Section Two provides inventory and classiﬁ cation of existing Downey Parks and Recreation Department facilities, and key recreational resources available to the community. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 14 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan3 Section Two Highlights: •The City has added one park to its inventory since the development of the General Plan, Discovery Sports Complex. •This Master Plan identiﬁ es three major park facility classiﬁ cation types: pocket park, neighborhood park, and community park in Downey; the Master Plan provides new deﬁ nitions for each in addition to other potential recreation facility classiﬁ cations, joint- use facilities and special use-facilities. Please refer to Exhibit 2.2-1. •The City of Downey has 117 acres of parkland consisting of 12 parks. The Master Plan inventories all existing recreational facilities and amenities at existing parks. One additional park facility, Civic Center Park is planned for development as part of the Downey Civic Center Master Plan. •The City currently has 5.7 miles of Class I bike trails. The City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan identiﬁ es and proposes an additional 11.52 miles of Class II and 18.9 miles of Class III bike trails. •The Master Plan provided an inventory of park connectivity which looked at a park’s: location on a Metro bus/DowneyLink bus stop, amount of internal walking paths, % of park accessible by walking paths, amount of parking spaces/handicapped spaces, proximity to bike paths, proximity to residential areas, and barriers to pedestrian access within and surrounding the park. Most of Downey’s parks have barriers to pedestrian access in the form of arterial streets, freeways, river channels, or train tracks. •The City has long standing agreements with Downey Uniﬁ ed School District that allows the City to utilize all school facilities, Downey High School pool and Columbus High School Sports Fields. Section Three: Recreation Facility Needs Assessment Section Three provides an assessment and outlines the methods used to identify the speciﬁ c parks and recreation facilities needed in the City of Downey including: •Community Involvement: provides direct responses from the community and stakeholders and includes focus groups, community workshops, and an online questionnaire. •Telephone Survey: provides statistically valid information regarding the types of recreation facilities most often utilized by residents. •Recreation Demand and Needs Analysis: estimates current and future facility needs based on the City of Downey Telephone Survey responses. •Sports Organization Questionnaire: provides information on how sports organizations utilize City parks and schools and provides supplemental information for the Demand and Needs Analysis. •Service Area Analysis: evaluates how parks and recreation facilities are distributed throughout residential areas in the City. •Acreage Analysis: evaluates the parkland acreage needs in City based on established standards and speciﬁ c facility needs of the City. •Program Needs Analysis: evaluates recreation program needs and applicable facility requirements. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 15 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan4 •Assessment of Current Maintenance Conditions: evaluates park maintenance conditions to determine any maintenance or rehabilitation that may be needed to bring each facility to an appropriate level of repair or to meet Federal and state requirements. •Building Maintenance, and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis: evaluates park building maintenance conditions, and evaluates park site and building accessibility requirements to determine improvements needed to bring each facility to an appropriate level of repair and meeting State and Federal accessibility requirements. Section Three Highlights: •Lack of crime and safety were frequently cited as a top feature that makes Downey a desirable place to live. However, safety was also cited as a top issue of concern. •Maintenance and infrastructure improvements were frequently cited as a top issue of concern. •The Demand and Needs Analysis found signiﬁ cant deﬁ cits in the number of playgrounds and trails available to the community. •Priority needs identiﬁ ed by the Needs Assessment include: trails for walking/jogging, softball ﬁ elds, trails for biking, soccer, baseball ﬁ elds, indoor basketball courts, multi- use recreation facility, playgrounds, bathrooms and children’s accessible bathrooms, exercise/ﬁ tness facilities, open space/green space, a swimming pool, and a soccer complex. •The City has signiﬁ cant maintenance and accessibility needs due to aging infrastructure and updated code requirements. •Signiﬁ cant portions of City residents lack convenient access to a park. •The City currently has a parkland deﬁ cit of 53 acres based on a standard of 1.5 acres/1000 residents from the City’s General Plan. Section Four: Recreation Programs Section Four provides an inventory and assesses the need for Parks and Recreation Department programs and services. Section Four Highlights: •Downey offers a full range of classes and recreation activities for all age groups. •In 2014/2015, over 12,416 registered resident and 2,240 non-resident participants enjoyed recreation classes, camps, and education enrichment classes. •The highest priority program needs identiﬁ ed by the Master Plan process include aquatics/swimming, arts & crafts classes, basketball, cooking, dance instruction, ﬁ tness, martial arts, music instruction, reading/language/writing classes, soccer, yoga/ meditation/stress relief classes, and youth and teen programs. •Demographic data indicates that due to the high rate of growth in the senior population, senior programming will be in high demand over the next several decades. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 16 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan5 Section Five: Recreation Facility Recommendations Section Five provides facility recommendations, which are intended to address the needed recreation facilities identiﬁ ed in Section Three. Section Five Highlights: •Maintenance and Operations recommendations have been prioritized before Community Needs Assessment recommendations. •Realization of the Bicycle Master Plan will meet most of the City’s need for bicycle trails. •Opportunity sites have been identiﬁ ed that can help alleviate the City’s need for walking/jogging trails. •Much of the City need for playgrounds (currently 31 playgrounds) may be able to be accommodated with existing School District playground facilities and development of new playgrounds at opportunity sites. Use of School District sites would be through a joint use agreement that covers issues such as safety, liability, and hours available to the general public. •Many of the City’s ﬁ elds suffer from overuse; conversion of existing highly-used grass sports ﬁ elds to synthetic turf provide additional playing time and a higher quality ﬁ eld of play. •The City will not be able to meet the acreage standard noted in the City’s General Plan without the acquisition of additional park space, which will be challenging as the City is built-out. •It will be challenging for the City to meet the needs of youth and adult sports teams with existing facilities. Section Six: Funding and Implementation Section Six discusses funding strategies for proposed recommendations discussed in Section Five. Section Six Highlights: •Two major cost centers require funding in order to implement the Master Plan: costs to develop long-term sustainable resources for operations and maintenance of existing and new facilities, and capital costs for potential acquisition and development of new park lands and facilities and renovation of existing park and school district properties. •With difﬁ cult ﬁ nancial constraints and diminishing resources, it will be challenging to ﬁ nd the resources needed to build or renovate parks and facilities as well as maintain existing parks and infrastructure. •It will be challenging to sustain the affordability of recreation fee supported classes to meet needs and demands for residents. •Funding for maintenance and operation of Downey’s park and recreation facilities and programs are currently provided by user fees for recreation programs and facility use, and the City’s General Fund. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 17 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan6 •The current level of resources available for park maintenance is strained and/or inadequate to fully fund both operation/maintenance, and long-term capital upgrades and development. •The Master Plan provides information on funding sources including non-proﬁ t foundation development, grants, development impact fees, development agreements, bonds, Certiﬁ cates of Participation, and fund raising events, user fees, corporate sponsorship of events, adopt-a-park programs, volunteer labor, sales tax increases, Special District Assessments, taxes, concessions, user group contributions, joint use agreements with the School District, and sale or lease of surplus lands. •The Master Plan provides a summary of the various funding sources for the most appropriate project type. •Currently, funding for capital improvements, renovations, and additions to park and recreation facilities in the City of Downey comes from several sources. For the Fiscal Year 2015/16 Downey has allocated $1.2 million in funds for capital improvement and renovation of park facilities. •In coordination with the Public Works Maintenance Division and Park and Recreation staff, this Master Plan identiﬁ ed master planned facilities, capital replacement, and capital outlay requirement over a ﬁ ve-year period to assist with planned cash and debt management. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 18 INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 19 Rio San Gabriel Park Dedication DR A F T PC Agenda Page 20 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan9 Section One: Introduction Parks and recreation facilities and programs are important resources with signiﬁ cant community beneﬁ ts, that can strengthen community identity and sense of place, serve to protect important places for future generations (environmentally, historically, aesthetically), foster human development and education, support economic activity, promote health and wellness through physical activity, strengthen families by providing places and programs for families, and increase vitality and quality of individual neighborhoods by creating opportunities for social interaction (adapted from California Parks and Recreation Society). The Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan is guided by an understanding of the importance of parks and recreation facilities to the community, and the value of involving the community in the process of planning recreation programs and facilities. Key questions discussed in this Master Plan include: What parks, recreational facilities, and programs does the City have? Who uses parks, facilities, and programs? What role do parks, facilities, open space, and recreation programs have in the lives of residents? What types of parks, facilities, and programs does the City need and which are the most important? What changes should be made to existing parks and facilities? Where will new parks, facilities, and programs be placed and how will they be funded and maintained? 1.1 Purpose of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan The Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan (Master Plan) is a guide and implementation tool for the management and development of parks and recreational facilities and programs within the City of Downey. The Master Plan will be used by the City to determine how to best meet the future park and open space needs of its citizens through development, redevelopment, expansion, and enhancement of the City’s parks system, open spaces, trails, recreational facilities, and programs. The Master Plan seeks to: •Acquire, develop, redevelop, and maintain quality parks and trails that support equity of access by users, connectivity, and create a positive sense of place for all residents in the City. •Improve the overall existing condition of parks and community facilities that will encourage greater positive use by residents in the City. •Update community facilities both indoor and outdoor to maximize their use and appreciation by the community for people of all ages; to enhance the value of sports and ﬁ tness, quality of life, arts and social places for the community to gather; and celebrate healthy living in Downey. The entire process, from data gathering to development of the Master Plan has been based on identifying the values of the community and providing a clear vision for the City’s parks and open space. The Master Plan Process provided opportunities for the community to share issues and concerns regarding improvements to facilities and services, fostered public dialogue regarding expectations, solutions, and vision for parks and recreation, and allowed the community to author recommendations regarding program and facility priorities. The Master Plan builds on previous planning efforts and provides an up-to-date understanding of current and future recreation needs and opportunities in the City of Downey. INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 21 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan10 The Master Plan is intended to be ﬂ exible, and presents ﬁ ndings and recommendations that should be evaluated, validated, and/or modiﬁ ed periodically as the Downey Parks and Recreation Department responds to unforeseen opportunities and constraints as well as changes in residents’ needs and demands in the context of other City priorities. 1.2 Approach and Document Organization The Master Plan document is organized into the following sections: Section One: Introduction This section summarizes the Master Plan’s purpose and process, and outlines the physical and demographic context of the City. A list of related documents that were reviewed as part of the Master Plan is identiﬁ ed. Section Two: Existing Recreation Resources Section Two provides inventory and classiﬁ cation of existing Downey Parks and Recreation Department facilities, and key recreational resources available to the community. Section Three: Recreation Facility Needs Assessment Section Three provides an assessment and outlines the methods used to identify the speciﬁ c parks and recreation facilities needed in the City of Downey including: Community Involvement: provides direct responses from the community and stakeholders and includes focus groups, community workshops, and an online questionnaire. Telephone Survey: provides statistically valid information regarding the types of recreation facilities most often utilized by residents. Recreation Demand and Needs Analysis: estimates current and future facility needs based on the City of Downey Telephone Survey responses. Sports Organization Questionnaire: provides information on how sports organizations utilize City parks and schools and provides supplemental information for the Demand and Needs Analysis. Service Area Analysis: evaluates how parks and recreation facilities are distributed throughout residential areas in the City. Acreage Analysis: evaluates the parkland acreage needs in City based on established standards and speciﬁ c facility needs of the City. Program Needs Analysis: evaluates recreation program needs and applicable facility requirements. Assessment of Current Maintenance Conditions: evaluates park maintenance conditions to determine any maintenance or rehabilitation that may be needed to bring each facility to a appropriate level of repair or to meet Federal and state requirements. Building Maintenance, and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis: evaluates park building maintenance conditions, and evaluates park site and building accessibility requirements to determine improvements needed to bring each facility to an appropriate level of repair and meeting Federal accessibility requirements. INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 22 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan11 Section Four: Recreation Programs Section Four provides an inventory and assesses the need for Parks and Recreation Department programs and services. Section Five: Recreation Facility Recommendations Section Five provides facility recommendations, which are intended to address the needed recreation facilities identiﬁ ed in Section Three. Section Six: Funding and Implementation Section Six discusses funding strategies for proposed recommendations discussed in Section Five. Appendix (separate document) The Appendix contains detailed reports (workshop summaries, trends analysis, demand and needs analysis, etc.), which have been developed in the preparation of this Master Plan. 1.3 Physical Setting Within the City of Downey, and the surrounding area, several signiﬁ cant natural and man- made features help shape neighborhoods and provide both opportunities and constraints with respect to parks, recreation, circulation, and community life. These include: ◦Interstate 5, 105, 605, and 710 freeways, which surround the City connect residents to other cities and employment centers in the region, but can provide barriers to pedestrian access to park space. ◦The San Gabriel and Rio Hondo Rivers, approximate southeastern and northwestern boundaries for the City. The rivers physically divide and separate portions of the City, and river trails also serve as the City’s only existing bike lanes. ◦Union Paciﬁ c Railroad Line, a physical barrier that crosses and divides the City running approximately in the middle of the City east-southeast and west- northwest. ◦A grid network of major, primary, and secondary arterial roads provide access to parks, but primarily favor the automobile. Exhibit 1.3-1 illustrates a map of the signiﬁ cant physical features that impact parks and recreation in Downey. INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 23 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan12 0120.5 Miles Exhibit 1.3-1 Physical Setting Map INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 24 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan13 1.4 Demographic Context Population growth in the City during the 2000 to 2010 time frame grew from just over 107,000 residents to nearly 112,000 residents, reﬂ ecting a 4.1% increase, with approximately 445 new City residents documented each year on average. The volume of households in the City during the 2000 to 2010 time frame declined from 33,989 to 33,936 reﬂ ecting a 0.2% drop, with approximately 53 City households lost during the decade. •Average household size in the City has grown from 3.11 persons per household in 2000 to 3.27 persons per household in 2010. •During the 2000 to 2010 time frame, the greatest growth in population by age group was evidenced among City residents 55 to 64 years (36%) and those 45 to 54 years of age (17%). •During the 2000 to 2010 time frame, the greatest decline in population by age group was evidenced among City residents 5 to 9 years of age (-15%), those less than 5 years of age (-9%), and among residents 25 to 34 years of age (-7%). Thus, the volume of children less than 10 years declined, a harbinger of potential change in needs for programs and facilities for this age group. •Examining the City population by race and ethnicity, declines in the share of residents identifying themselves as white occurred from 2000 to 2010 (from 29% to 18%) while increases were noted among those identifying themselves as Hispanic (from 58% to 71%). •A 2010 3-Year Estimate from the American Community Survey revealed that 61% of the City population age 5 years or older speak Spanish and 37% of these Spanish speakers do not speak English “very well” (described as linguistically isolated.) In total, 27% of Downey residents are estimated to be linguistically isolated. •Less than half of City households (46%) in 2010 were households with children less than 18 years. A more detailed demographic analysis is included in the Appendix, tab A1.4. 1.5 Relationship to Other Documents City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan Each city in California is required by State law to adopt a comprehensive, long-term General Plan for its physical development. The General Plan consists of mandatory and discretionary elements including land use, housing, circulation, conservation and open space, safety, noise, air quality, and economic development. California State law requires that the day-to-day decisions of a city should follow logically from, and be consistent with, the General Plan. The Master Plan is intended to be used in conjunction with the General Plan to provide a coordinated program of recreational facility development and management. The goals for Open Space from the General Plan include: INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 25 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan14 •Augment the availability of open space areas with other open spaces besides public parks. •Optimize the use of established public parks to meet the needs of residents. •Increase the amount of park acreage. •Combine efforts by the local school districts and the city towards enhancing the community. The current version of the City’s General Plan was adopted in 2005. Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan The Downtown Downey Speciﬁ c Plan guides growth and development in Downtown, and seeks to encourage economic revitalization, and the creation of a lively center of activity for the City. The Speciﬁ c Plan establishes 131 acres as mixed use and looks to create unique districts with speciﬁ c development standards and design guidelines. The Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan is envisioned as a vibrant urban center providing a wide array of dining, working, living, shopping, entertainment, and cultural opportunities. The Speciﬁ c Plan guides growth by dividing the downtown area into ﬁ ve land use districts: Downtown Core, Downtown Residential, Firestone Boulevard Gateway, Paramount Boulevard Professional, and Civic Center. Included in the vision for the Speciﬁ c Plan are a number of potential open space opportunity areas that have the potential to add recreational areas to the City’s existing park inventory as well as opportunities for creation of pedestrian corridors. Downey Civic Center Master Plan The Downey Civic Center Master Plan was developed to enact the ﬁ rst phase of the Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan for the Civic Center District. The Master Plan was developed in collaboration with a panel of key stakeholders from the community, and reorganizes the layout of the district to meet the following goals and opportunities: •Reintroduce vehicular and pedestrian linkages to the downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. •Reallocate surface parking lots to maintain capacity while better utilizing Civic Center property to create a centralized civic open space for community festivals, fairs, and events. •Repurpose excess roadway for pedestrian and bicycle access, curbside parking, and usable open space while enabling convenient automobile access at speeds that complement these modes. •Enhance the design of all open spaces, including streets, parks, plazas, courts, and paseos— the “outdoor rooms” in which the life of the community may thrive. •Phase the Master Plan into a series of strategic, incremental projects with public and private investment in order to feasibly implement the Vision. •Serve as a catalyst for community and City discussion regarding ﬁ nancial mechanisms and strategies to both implement and maintain these improvements for the future. The Civic Center Master Plan proposes a 1.16 acre central park gathering space, which includes a band shell and a playground. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan deﬁ nes this space as a “planned” facility in Section 2.3. INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 26 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan15 Bicycle Master Plan Concurrently with the development of this report, the City of Downey has ﬁ nalized a Bicycle Master Plan (approved July 2015). Based on the context of transportation and bicycling within Downey, along with the beneﬁ ts of encouraging bicycling within the City of Downey, the Downey Bicycle Master Plan aims to maximize connectivity by bicycle to the assets already in place within the city. The primary goals of the Bicycle Master Plan are to provide a safe, efﬁ cient, and connected network of bicycle facilities that residents and stakeholders can enjoy for a variety of purposes. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan is intended to be used with the Bicycle Master Plan to provide increased access to the recreational opportunities within the City and beyond its borders. Downey Uniﬁ ed School District Facilities Master Plan The Downey Uniﬁ ed School District Facilities Master Plan identiﬁ es a strategic vision for the School District for facilities infrastructure for the next 10-15 years. The City currently has joint-use agreements with the School District for the use of all school facilities, the Downey High School Pool and the Columbus High School sports ﬁ elds (see Section 2.4). Through continued and expanded collaborative efforts, both the School District and the City can appreciate beneﬁ ts through shared resources. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan provides recommendations for additional joint uses, which are in agreement with the current Downey Uniﬁ ed School District Facilities Master Plan, dated June 2014. Los Angeles Countywide Comprehensive Park and Recreation Needs Assessment As of the date of this report, the County of Los Angeles is developing comprehensive assessment of county-wide park, infrastructure, and recreational needs and opportunities. The City of Downey is one of the 189 Study Areas included in the assessment, which establishes a transparent and best approach to engage all communities within the County in a collaborative process to gather data and input for future decision-making on parks and recreation. The ﬁ ndings of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan can assist the City to better reﬁ ne the needs identiﬁ ed in the County study and identify potential projects for funding. Energy Action Plan In January 2015, Downey’s City Council approved an Energy Action Plan. The main goal of the Energy Action Plan is to provide a roadmap for the City of Downey to reduce greenhouse emissions through reductions in the energy used in facility buildings and city operations. This Energy Action Plan identiﬁ es current and future opportunities that will contribute to the City’s energy reduction goal. The Energy Action Plan included energy audits of several recreation facilities to assess energy savings potential including: Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center, Discovery Sports Complex, Rio San Gabriel Park, and Wilderness Park. The recommendations included in the Energy Action Plan have implications to parks and park buildings and have been incorporated into this Master Plan. INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 27 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan16 Downey Parks and Recreation Assessment, Cal Poly Pomona In 2013, graduate students from the Department of Urban and Regional Planning at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona prepared an assessment for Parks and Recreation for the City of Downey as part of their studies. The Cal Poly Pomona study included a community engagement process, vision, capital ﬁ nancing, opportunities and recommendations, identity branding and programming, green infrastructure concept and vision, park programming, and park concept plan development. The Cal Poly Pomona study provided the background information necessary to garner interest in the development of this Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan. The Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan The Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan establishes a comprehensive and strategic guide to creating a network of parks and public open spaces along the Los Angeles and San Gabriel watersheds and their rivers and tributaries. The City of Downey is an Emerald Necklace Coalition member which includes 24 cities, three school districts, three homeowners associations, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles and Mountain Conservancy and the Sierra Club. Coalition members have pledged to work collaboratively to preserve the Los Angeles and San Gabriel watersheds and their rivers and tributaries for recreational, open space, environmental education and job training, native habitat restoration and conservation, and non-vehicular transportation. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan supports the Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan by encouraging and expanding recreational space within the City and along the San Gabriel and Rio Hondo Rivers (tributary of the Los Angeles River). INTRODUCTION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 28 EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 29 The recent addition of a group picnic area at Apollo Park. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 30 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan19 Section Two: Existing Recreation Resources Section Two provides an inventory and classiﬁ cation of existing parks, recreation facilities in Downey. Section Two Highlights: •The City has added one park to its inventory since the development of the General Plan, Discovery Sports Complex. •This Master Plan identiﬁ es three major park facility classiﬁ cation types: pocket park, neighborhood park, and community park in Downey. •The City has one planned park facility, Civic Center Park, which is part of the Downey Civic Center Master Plan. •The City of Downey has 117 acres of parkland consisting of 12 parks. •The City currently has 5.7 miles of Class I bike trails. •The City has a long standing agreement with Downey Uniﬁ ed School District that allows the City to utilize Downey High School pool and Columbus High School Sports Fields. 2.1 Park Defi nition Public Park or Park Land: An outdoor area owned by a public entity generally available for public passive and/or active recreation usage and containing public access and/or recreation improvements. Areas not generally considered as “parkland” include: street medians and parkways; natural preserved or conserved open space or other green space areas without public access; unimproved or improved land zoned for uses other than recreation. This Master Plan report will use the term “park” and “recreation facility” interchangeably, the terms refers to the park types described in Section 2.2. Rio San Gabriel Park EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 31 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan20 2.2 Downey Park Types The City’s General Plan includes classiﬁ cations for three park types, but it does not include park classiﬁ cation deﬁ nitions. The Master Plan deﬁ nes the current park classiﬁ cation system of Pocket, Neighborhood, or Community Park to identify uses and acceptable features of each type of facility. According to the General Plan, Independence Park, Apollo Park, and Furman Park are identiﬁ ed as neighborhood parks. Based on the following deﬁ nitions, these parks will change from a Neighborhood Park to Community Park classiﬁ cation. Also deﬁ ned by the Master Plan are two subcategories of Community Park, Community Sports Park and Civic Center Community Park, as well as two other facility types, joint use school facilities and special use facilities. Deﬁ nitions include: •Pocket Park: these are typically urban open park space at a very small scale. Usually only a few house lots in size or smaller, pocket parks can be tucked into and scattered throughout the urban fabric where they serve the immediate local population. These parks act as scaled-down neighborhood parks and often offer a variety of amenities including turf, planters, walkways, plazas, play areas for children, and picnic facilities. Pocket Parks do not provide restroom facilities nor on-site parking. These are less than approximately 2 acres. Pocket Parks generally: ◦Small parks where neighborhood involvement in activities and programming is most appropriate ◦Small public spaces or beauty spots which are small islands within the urban environment and present opportunities to enhance the City’s character and identity. •Neighborhood Park—typically these parks serve the surrounding neighborhood for multiple uses. Park development may include play areas, small ﬁ elds, benches, picnic tables, and improved paths but may not have restroom facilities or parking. Geographic range of users is up to one-half-mile. Downey Neighborhood Parks are approximately 2-8 acres. •Community Park—meets the recreational needs of several neighborhoods and may also preserve unique landscapes and open spaces. These parks serve multiple uses and provide recreational facilities, restrooms, and accommodate group activities not provided in Neighborhood Parks. Community Park sites should be accessible by arterial and/or collector streets and include parking. Community Parks in Downey provide may provide activities that serve the entire City. Downey Community Parks are typically greater than 8 acres. Additional sub-categories include: ◦Community Sports Park: Community Sports Parks primarily function as dedicated facilities for group sports. Community Sports Parks may have soccer ﬁ elds, baseball and softball ﬁ elds, basketball courts, and other sports facilities, and typically provide parking and restroom facilities; they also may provide other support facilities such as concessions stands. EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 32 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan21 ◦Civic Center Community Park: Civic Center Park is a planned facility does not easily ﬁ t in typical classiﬁ cations. Its small size is similar to a pocket park, and during typical days it will be utilized in a similar manner as a pocket park only by the immediate population. However, it may host events for the entire community, functioning more like a community park. The Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan identiﬁ es smaller spaces that may in the future be developed into smaller open space areas/plazas. Due to their proximity to the downtown area, many of these spaces may also fall into this category of park. •Joint Use Facilities: these parks supplement Community Parks, serving broader City-wide recreation needs. The parks contain various assets, often for active recreation, and are programmed accordingly. Restroom facilities and parking are generally provided for users. The geographic range of users for joint-use facilities is City-wide. •Special Use Facility: this category refers to stand-alone facilities that are designed to serve one particular use such as a golf course. These facilities may serve a second or third use such as trails, but the primary use is prioritized with regard to design, maintenance, and funding decisions. (Not part of this report but included within the deﬁ nitions are Special Use Facilities such as the City golf course.) Exhibit 2.2-1 is a matrix that describes size and features of existing and planned public parks and recreation facilities within the City of Downey, including each of the park’s classiﬁ cation. 2.3 Existing and Planned Recreation Facilities Unique and diverse recreational opportunities are available throughout the City of Downey, including numerous facilities for active and passive recreation such as baseball ﬁ elds, basketball courts, soccer ﬁ elds, tennis courts, a dog park, and a skate park. City facilities have developed over several decades and as a result many of the park sites such as Apollo and Wilderness Parks are well-known institutions within the community. Downey has continued to move forward to meet the needs of the community with the development of newer facilities such as Discovery Sports Complex. Exhibit 2.3-1 is a map showing the location of each existing and planned public park and recreation facility within the City of Downey. EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 33 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan22 Exhibit 2.2-1 Existing/Planned Parks and Recreation Facility Inventory DO W N E Y P A R K A N D RE C R E A T I O N FA C I L I T I E S Parkland Acreage Barbeques BandShell Benches (stand alone) Bike Rack Concession Building Community Building Dance Room Dog Park Drinking Fountain Exercise Equipment Kitchen Lake Open Passive Turf Parking Playground / Tot Lot Picnic Shelters / Gazebos Picnic Tables (includes two benches) Restroom Trails - Internal Park Trail - Linkage Baseball Basketball (indoor-in Gymnasium) Basketball (outdoor) Football Field Handball Court Softball Skate Park Soccer Field Swimming Pool Tennis Court Volleyball KE Y FA C I L I T Y A D D R E S S / L O CA T I O N P A R K T Y P E 1 Ap o l l o P a r k ( i n c l u d e s e x t e r i o r el e m e n t s o f B a r b a r a J . R i l e y Co m m u n i t y & S e n i o r C e n t e r & Mc C a u g h a n G y m n a s i u m ) 12 5 4 4 R i v e s A v e Co m m u n i t y P a r k 17 . 2 1 0 3 1 3 1 Y Y 4 Y 29 8 1 56 2 Y 3 P 1 1 P 2 L 1 O P 3 P 1 1 O P 5 L P 2 Br o o k s h i r e C h i l d r e n ' s P a r k 12 5 2 0 B r o o k s h i r e A v e . P o c k e t P a r k 1. 2 2 6 1 0 1 27 Y 3 Cr a w f o r d P a r k 70 0 0 D i n w i d d l e Ne i g h b o r h o o d P a r k 2. 3 4 3 1 Y 61 5Y 1/ 2 c t 4 De n n i s t h e M e n a c e P a r k 91 2 5 A r r i n g t o n A v e . Ne i g h b o r h o o d P a r k 6. 2 49 1 2 Y 4 9 2 12 3 1 5 Di s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x 12 4 0 0 C o l u m b i a W a y C o m m u n i t y S p o r t s P a r k 12 . 7 41 3 13 7 1 2 L P 11 1 O P 2 L P 11 2 L P 6 Fu r m a n P a r k 10 4 1 9 R i v e s A v e . Co m m u n i t y P a r k 14 . 4 11 1 5 1 1 3 6 5Y Y Y 49 2 2 2 9 1 Y 2 P 7 1 f u l l P 1 O P 4 7 Go l d e n P a r k 88 4 0 G o l d e n A v e Co m m u n i t y P a r k 8. 1 54 1 1 21 Y Y 78 1 3 2 1 2 3 Y1 1 f u l l P 1O 1 8 In d e p e n d e n c e P a r k 12 3 3 4 B e l l f l o w e r B l v d . C o m m u n i t y P a r k 10 . 2 52 4 1 2 1 3 1 4 5 1 4 2 2 P L 4 18 L 9 Ri o S a n G a b r i e l P a r k 96 1 2 A r d i n e S t . Co m m u n i t y P a r k 15 . 7 51 2 1 1 Y 4 Y 1 4 4 1 4 1 2 2 Y 2 1 f u l l 1 O L P 2L 5 1 L O P 5 10 Te m p l e P a r k 71 3 2 C o l e S t . Po c k e t P a r k 0. 4 2Y 01 11 Tr e a s u r e I s l a n d P a r k 93 0 0 B l u f f R d . Ne i g h b o r h o o d P a r k 3. 8 48 1 Y 26 1 2 1 2 Y Y 12 Wi l d e r n e s s P a r k 10 9 9 9 L i t t l e L a k e R d . C o m m u n i t y P a r k 24 . 6 81 4 1 5 Y 2 Y 1 3 3 1 3 3 6 2 3 YY 13 Ci v i c C e n t e r P a r k ( P a r t o f C i v i c Ce n t e r M a s t e r P l a n ) 3r d S t r e e t / C i v i c C e n t e r D r i v e C i v i c C e n t e r C o m m u n i t y P a r k 1. 2 Y Y Y Y Y Y Ex i s t i n g C o m m u n i t y C e n t e r s 14 Ba r b a r a J . R i l e y C o m m u n i t y & S e n i o r Ce n t e r ( R e f e r t o A p o l l o P a r k f o r Ex t e r i o r F a c i l i t i e s ) 78 1 0 Q u il l D r i v e Sp e c i a l U s e F a c i l i t y 11 Y Y YY DE F I N I T I O N S L = L i g h t e d P = P r a c t i c e F i e l d / C o u r t O = O v e r l a y F i e l d Us e d f o r G a m e s b y O r g a n i z e d Y o u t h S p o r t s L e a g u e s (1 ) T h r e e F i e l d s ; O n e F i e l d L i g h t e d . A d d i t i o n a l T e e B a l l F i e l d . U s e d f o r s o f t b a l l / b a s e b a l l . (2 ) W a l k i n g t r a i l c o m p l e t e d d u r i n g a s s e s s m e n t . (3 ) R e s t r o o m s i n s i d e b u i l d i n g . (4 ) O n e o f t w o s o f t b a l l f i e l d s l i g h t e d . T w o a d d i t i o n a l s m a l l f i e l d s . (5 ) O v e r l a y s o c c e r a n d f o o t b a l l p l a y e d o n s a m e f i e l d . (1 6 ) T e e b a l l b a c k s t o p , g r a s s f i e l d . (1 7 ) G r a s s V o l l e y b a l l . (1 8 ) P l a y g r o u n d i n c l u d e s s w i n g s e t s o n l y . (8 ) P a r k i n g a v a i l a b l e a t t h e H i g h S c h o o l . (9 ) O p e n t u r f w i t h s p a c e f o r t h r e e l a r g e f i e l d s ; 1 3 f i e l d s u s e d o f v a r y i n g s i z e s f o r di f f e r e n t a g e g r o u p s . (6 ) F i v e s t r u c t u r e s o n s i t e : T w o m o d u l a r Y M C A b u i l d i n g s , o n e m a i n b u i l d i n g n o t i n u s e ( p r o p o s e d t o b e u s e d b y YM C A ) , o n e c l a s s r o o m b u i l d i n g , o n e m u l t i p u r p o s e m e e t i n g r o o m b u i l d i n g . (1 4 ) B a l l f i e l d h a s b a c k s t o p / t e a m b e a n c h e s w i t h g r a s s i n f i e l d . (1 5 ) B a l l f i e l d h a s g r a s s i n f i e l d . SP O R T S F A C I L I T I E S PA S S I V E F A C I L I T I E S (1 3 ) O p e n g r a s s a r e a c o u l d b e u s e d f o r s o c c e r . (7 ) A d d i t i o n a l T e e B a l l F i e l d s ( 2 ) . Pl a n n e d P a r k F a c i l i t i e s Ex i s t i n g P a r k s (1 0 ) T e n s m a l l f u l l c o u r t s a n d t w o l a r g e f u l l c o u r t b a s k e t b a l l c o u r t s . T w o o f f o u r s o c c e r f i e l d s a r e o v e r l a y . (1 1 ) T w o b a l l f i e l d s u t i l i z e d b y b a s e b a l l a n d s o f t b a l l . (1 2 ) L i m i t e d P a r k i n g A v a i l a b l e . EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 34 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan23 Exhibit 2.3-1 Existing/Planned Parks and Recreation Facilities/Schools Map EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 35 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan24 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 36 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan25 Exhibit 2.4-1 School Facilities Inventory DOWNEY SCHOOL FACILITIES Op e n P a s s i v e T u r f Pa r k i n g Pl a y g r o u n d / T o t L o t Ba s e b a l l Ba s k e t b a l l ( i n d o o r - i n Gy m n a s i u m ) Ba s k e t b a l l ( o u t d o o r ) Fo o t b a l l F i e l d Ha n d b a l l C o u r t So f t b a l l Sk a t e P a r k So c c e r F i e l d Sw i m m i n g P o o l Te n n i s C o u r t Vo l l e y b a l l KEY FACILITYADDRESS/LOCATION Existing Schools 15Alameda Elementary School8613 Alameda Street Y Y 2 2 full 2 1 13 16Carpenter Elementary School9439 Foster Road Y Y 1 18 1 14 6 full 3 1 13 2 17 17 Columbus High School/Downey Adult School 12330 Woodruff Ave.N Y 13 P 1 L 3 O P 18 Doty Middle School aka East Middle School 10301 Woodruff Ave.N Y 12 2 P 12 full 10 1 O 4 O10 19 Downey High School (Pool also called Downey Community Aquatics Center ) 11040 Brookshire Ave N Y 8 3 14 full 1 L1 O 18 20Gallatin Elementary School 9513 Brookshire Avenue Y Y 2 1 15 6 full 2 1 13 21Gauldin Elementary School 9724 Spry Street Y Y 11 2 full; 4 half 1 13 22Griffiths Middle School9633 Tweedy LaneN Y 2 P 4 - full + 8-1/2 ct 3 O P 9 23Imperial Elementary School 8133 Imperial Highway Y Y 3 6 half 2 1 13 24Lewis Elementary School 13220 Bellflower Blvd.Y Y 3 3 full 4 1 13 25Old River Elementary School11995 Old River School Road Y Y 1 1 16 4 full 3 1 13 26Price Elementary School 9525 Tweedy Lane Y Y 3 1 15 5 full; 2 half 2 1 13 27Rio Hondo Elementary School7731 Muller St N Y 12 3 2 P 2 - full + 4 - 1/2 ct 2 28Rio San Gabriel Elementary School9338 Gotham Y Y 2 1 15 4 full 4 1 13 2 17 29 Stauffer Middle School aka West Middle School 11985 Old River School Road N Y 1 4 P 9 full 30 Sussman Middle School aka South Junior High School 12500 Birchdale Avenue N Y 2 10 full 1 3 31Unsworth Elementary School9001 Lindsey Avenue Y Y 2 1 14 2 full 2 1 13 32Ward Elementary School 8851 Adoree Street Y Y 3 1 15 2 full 1 1 13 33Warren High School 8141 De Palma Street N Y 2 1 6 - full + 2 - 1/2 ct 1 L 28 34Williams Elementary School7530 Arnett St Y Y 2 1 15 3 full 2 1 13 DEFINITIONS L = Lighted P = Practice Field/Court O=Overlay Field Used for Games by Organized Youth Sports Leagues (1) Three Fields; One Field Lighted. Additional Tee Ball Field. Used for softball/baseball. (2) Plans in place for walking trail. (3) Restrooms inside building.(12) Limited Parking Available. (4) One of two softball fields lighted. Two additional small fields. (5) Overlay soccer and football played on same field.(14) Ballfield has backstop/team beanches with grass infield. (15) Ballfield has grass infield. (16) Tee ball backstop, grass field. (17) Grass Volleyball. (18) Playground includes swingsets only. SPORTS FACILITIESPASSIVE FACILITIES (11) Two ball fields utilized by baseball and softball. (13) Open grass area could be used for soccer. (7) Additional Tee Ball Fields (2). (8) Parking available at the High School. (9) Open turf with space for three large fields; 13 fields used of varying sizes for different age groups. (10) Ten small full courts and two large full court basketball courts. Two of four soccer fields are overlay. (6) Five structures on site: Two modular YMCA buildings, one main building not in use (proposed to be used by YMCA), one classroom building, one multipurpose meeting room building. EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 37 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan26 2.4 School Facilities In almost every Downey neighborhood, school facilities play an important role in family life and routine, providing civic gathering places and important resources in the community. The City has a long standing agreement, since 1978 with Downey Uniﬁ ed School District that allows the City to utilize all school facilities under a joint use agreement. In June 1986 the City and Downey Uniﬁ ed School District entered into an agreement to build a swimming pool at Downey High School. The two agencies proportionally share the costs to operate the pool. Under the terms of the Joint Use Agreement the City has the opportunity to utilize the pool during the week of spring break and on the ﬁ rst day of summer break following the last day of school in June through the last day of summer break prior to the ﬁ rst day of school in September. Due to budget limitations, the City reduced the aquatics program to just six weeks starting in ﬁ scal year 2012/2013. The City and District also entered into an agreement for the Columbus School Sports Fields in July 2001. Under the terms of the agreement, the City receives full use of the facility during non-school hours in exchange for providing maintenance to the facility. The District pays for all utilities. Many campuses have outdoor play areas, sports ﬁ elds, and swimming pools that are not directly used by the City, but by the sports and community organizations of Downey. In recent years, schools have become more concerned about security and unauthorized access to school campuses and have restricted public access during after school hours through measures such as fencing and locked gates. Exhibit 2.3-1 displays identiﬁ es the location of Downey schools. Exhibit 2.4-1 identiﬁ es the existing facilities at Downey Schools. 2.5 Other Recreational Facilities Non-public facilities play a large role in meeting the recreational needs of the residents of Downey. The array of programs and facilities they provide is substantial. There is a limited network of additional private facilities within the City, made up of businesses, churches, clubs, private schools, and golf courses such as Los Amigos Golf Course operated by the County of Los Angeles. Numerous private ﬁ tness and dance businesses operate in Downey such as LA Fitness, Downey Dance Studio and Nifty after Fifty, a ﬁ tness club aimed at the older generation. Some programs are offered through cooperative agreements with the City, while others are not. The City offers a variety of ice skating recreational programming utilizing Paramount Iceland, a privately operated ice rink near Downey. This Master Plan does not provide a detailed inventory of private and commercial facilities since the City neither owns, operates, nor maintains them. These recreation resources are therefore not credited toward satisfaction of the City’s acreage or facility goals for public parks or recreation programming. However, as they do ﬁ ll a recreation role, these facilities may individually be able to address certain speciﬁ c identiﬁ ed needs in the Downey area. EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 38 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan27 2.6 Trails and Connectivity In an urban environment the vision of connectivity is to develop and enhance connections between places, parks, schools, and the business community. Beyond a mere vehicle for trafﬁ c, urban streets have the opportunity to connect City parks and other public facilities to the emerging cultural and business centers in Downey. In the Master Plan, connectivity can be viewed primarily as the amount of pedestrian and bicycle access available to parks within the community as well as the walkability of a park’s internal trail system. The City of Downey is shouldered by the San Gabriel River Bike Path, the Rio Hondo Bike Path, and Los Angeles River Bike Path, all Class I facilities. The City currently has 5.7 miles of Class I bike trails. The City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan (adopted 2015) identiﬁ es and proposes an additional 11.52 miles of Class II and 18.9 miles of Class III bike trails. The City has an excellent opportunity to design trails to double as transportation routes for bicycles. Exhibit 2.6-1 identiﬁ es existing and planned trails within the City of Downey from the Bicycle Master Plan. The City has also initiated several projects to develop circular walking trails around major park facilities, partially funded by Los Angeles County 4th District Supervisor Don Knabe. The completed additional development of a circular park pathway of decomposed granite surface provides the opportunity for both the casual walker and runners, promoting Downey’s Healthy program. Exhibit 2.6-2 provides a summary of the Connectivity Inventory, which looked at: ◦Location on a Metro bus/DowneyLink bus stop ◦Amount of internal walking paths; % of park accessible by walking paths ◦Amount of parking spaces/handicapped spaces ◦Proximity to bike paths ◦Proximity to residential areas ◦Barriers to pedestrian access within and surrounding the park The Service Area Analysis in Section 3.7 expands this analysis providing a graphic that shows the proximity of residential areas to park space, and the impact of the barriers to residential access on the service area of a park. EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 39 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan28 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 40 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan29 Exhibit 2.6-1 Existing/Planned Bicycle Trails (from City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan) !( !! !!!! !! ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' Rives Ave Bro o k s h i re A v e Old Ri v e r S c h ool Rd Down e y A v e Flore n c e Ave Suv a St Lakewo o d Blv d Wo od ru ff Ave Firestone B lvd G a lla t i n R d Gar d e n d a l e St 5th St Imp e r i a l Hwy Te l e g ra p h R d La ke wo o d Bl v d Stewart and Gra y R d Be ll f l o we r Blv d Foster Rd Do w n e y A ve Para mou nt Blvd Pat t o n R d Co l u m b i a W a y Alam e d a S t Twe e d y Ln Firestone Blvd Wood r uff A v e Florence Ave Dinwiddie St 4th St Gu atema l a Ave Quill D r Washburn Rd Haledon A ve Lem ora n Ave Passo n s Blv d Ha n w ell A ve Adoree St Blod g ett Ave Dono van St Downey Norwalk Pico Rivera South Gate Bell Commerce Bellflower Lynwood Santa Fe Springs Paramount Bell Gardens Cudahy !! !! !! !! !! §¨¦5 WarrenHigh School DowneyCivic Center §¨¦605 §¨¦105 DowneyHigh School ! ! ! M Metro Green LineLakewood Blvd N Gateway Cities Bike Project Idea Corridor n School Park Bike Path (Class I) Bike Lane (Class II) Bike Lane with Road Diet (Class II) Buffered Bike Lane (Class II) Existing Bicycle Facilities Planned Bicycle Facilities !!Under/Overpass Bike Lane with Road Diet (Class II) Gateway Cities Bike Project Idea Location 'Existing Bicycle Path Access Points Phase II Bicycle Improvements Bike Route (Class III) Potential Eco-Rapid Line Station Gardendale Street !M Note: This graphic is conceptual in nature, and is dependent on availability of funding and further study of alignments. EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 41 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan30 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 42 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan31 Me t r o B u s S t o p Do w n e y L i n k S t o p Di s t a n c e t o N e a r e s t M e t r o B u s (A p p r o x . ) Di s t a n c e t o N e a r e s t Do w n e y L i n k B u s ( A p p r o x . ) In t e r n a l W a l k i n g P a t h D i s t a n c e (l i n e a r f e e t ) * Re c r e a t i o n a l W a l k i n g / J o g g i n g Pa t h D i s t a n c e ( l i n e a r f e e t ) * To t a l P a r k i n g S p a c e s o n S i t e (i n c l u d i n g H a n d i c a p p e d ) Ha n d i c a p p e d S p a c e s Bi k e P a t h A d j a c e n t Si d e w a l k s A d j a c e n t t o P a r k % P a r k A c c e s s i b l e b y W a l k i n g Pa t h s ( 0 % , 0 - 2 5 % , 2 5 - 5 0 % , 5 0 - 75 % , 7 5 % - 1 0 0 % , 1 0 0 % ) Lo c a t e d W i t h i n / A d j a c e n t t o Re s i d e n t i a l A r e a Ba r r i e r s t o P e d e s t r i a n A c c e s s KEYFACILITY CONNECTIVITY/ACCESS CONNECTIVITY AND ACCESS 1 Apollo Park (includes exterior elements of Barbara J. Riley Community & Senior Center & McCaughan Gymnasium) YY006,500'3,650'29823NY 75%- 100%Y Arterial Streets: Imperial Highway, Paramount Blvd., Old River School Road 2 Brookshire Children's Park NY0580'700'000NY50-75%Y Arterial Streets: Imperial Highway, Lakewood Blvd., Brookshire Ave. 3 Crawford Park NN3,250'3,250'250'060YY1-25%YTrain tracks to south; Rio Hondo to the west. 4 Dennis the Menace Park NN1,625'1,625'1,250'0492NN25-50%Y 5 Freeway to north; Lakewood Blvd. to the west; Internal park fencing limits access to the west; Shopping center limits access from the south. 5 Discovery Sports Complex NY1,250'300'725'01378NY50-75%N Arterial Streets: Lakewood Blvd, Imperial Highway, Bellflower Blvd. Kaiser Permanente to the east. 6 Furman Park NY1,400'05,050'3,750'493NY 75%- 100%Y Arterial Streets: Old River School, Florence Ave., Paramount Ave. Residential backyards to the west; school (fencing) to the south. 7 Golden Park NY1,400'02,046'1,400'784NY50-75%Y 105 Fwy; Arterial Streets: Downey, Rosecrans, Lakewood Blvd. 8 Independence Park NN850'850'2,125'01458NY50-75%Y Arterial Streets: Bellflower, Woodruff, Imperial Highway. Tennis courts are internal park barrier. Commercial buildings to the south and north; park maintenance to north. 9 Rio San Gabriel Park NN700'1,550'1,000'01446YY1-25%Y Arterial Streets: Firestone Blvd. San Gabriel River to the east; provides access and also limits neighborhood connectivity; commercial to the south. 10 Temple Park NN2,500'2,500'325'000NY 75%- 100%Y Arterial Streets: Stewart & Gray, Old River School. Rio Hondo to the west. Golf Course to south. 11 Treasure Island Park NY1,600'02,150'2,150'261YN100%Y 5 Fwy to the northeast. Rio Hondo: provides access to bike path, but also limits neighborhood connectivity. Suva Street crossing provides some access to communities to southeast of river. 12 Wilderness Park NY800'07,500'6,000'1337YY 75%- 100%Y San Gabriel River to the east, provides access and also limits access to communities to the west. 605 freeway is partial barrier to the east, but access provided via Cecilia St. underpass. Note: All distances are approximate. *Internal path distance reflects all internal park pathways including those used for recreational walking/jogging; recreational walking/jogging paths only reflect pathways used for recreational walking/jogging. Exhibit 2.6-2 Connectivity Inventory EXISTING RECREATION RESOURCES DR A F T PC Agenda Page 43 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan32 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 44 FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 45 Interpretive signage is featured at Treasure Island Park, which runs along the Rio Hondo River. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 46 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan35 Section Three: Recreation Facility Needs Assessment The recreational facility needs assessment is central to the Master Plan process and identiﬁ es the current and future recreation facility needs of the community and the relative priority of each facility. A variety of methods of community engagement were used to determine the recreational habits, desires, and opinions of community members to develop a thorough analysis of the community. The process provides insight into views of community members, and measurable data that can be used to quantify the type and quantity of parks and recreation facilities needed in the City of Downey. Section Three outlines the methods used as part of the needs assessment and provides an analysis of the results. Section Three Highlights: •Community participation included 2 focus groups, 3 public workshops, a City-wide telephone survey, an online survey, and a sports organization questionnaire. •Lack of crime and safety were frequently cited as a top feature that makes Downey a desirable place to live. However, safety was also cited as a top issue of concern. •Maintenance and infrastructure improvements were frequently cited as a top issue of concern. •The Demand and Needs Analysis found signiﬁ cant deﬁ cits in the number of playgrounds and trails available to the community. •Priority needs identiﬁ ed by the Needs Assessment include: trails for walking/jogging, softball ﬁ elds, trails for biking, soccer, baseball ﬁ elds, indoor basketball courts, multi- use recreation facility, playgrounds, bathrooms and children’s accessible bathrooms, exercise/ﬁ tness facilities, open space/green space, a swimming pool, and a soccer complex. •The City has signiﬁ cant maintenance and accessibility needs due to aging infrastructure and updated code requirements. •Signiﬁ cant portions of City residents lack convenient access to a park. •The City currently has a parkland deﬁ cit of 53 acres based on a standard of 1.5 acres/1000 residents identiﬁ ed in the City’s General Plan. David R. Gaﬁ n Dog Park FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 47 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan36 3.1 Community Participation The community participation portion of the Facility Needs Assessment provided a number of opportunities to obtain perspective from residents, users of facilities and programs, and providers of facilities and programs. Within this section, the community outreach effort has been organized into separate “needs identiﬁ cation tools”: ◦Stakeholder Focus Groups ◦City-wide Telephone Survey ◦Online Questionnaire ◦Community Workshop #1 – Community Characteristics and Issues ◦Community Workshop #2 – Sports User Groups ◦Community Workshop #3 – Program and Facility Needs Prioritization ◦Sports Organization Questionnaire A brief summary of each of the tools used as part of the community participation is provided below. The complete summaries are included in the Appendix. Stakeholder Focus Groups A total of thirty-one (31) stakeholders attended two focus group sessions. Participants included City residents and City Staff as well as representatives from Northwest Downey Little League, Downey Razorbacks, the Planning Commission, Kiwanis Club, Boy Scout Troop 441, LA County Department of Public Health, Downey Futsal Program, and Downey Tennis Club. Appendix tab A3.1-1 According to focus group participants, the most important issues related to the parks, open space, recreation facilities, and services currently provided are: ◦Maintenance/Infrastructure/Amenity Improvements ◦Safety ◦Sports Needs/Sports Facilities/Sports Programming ◦More Space/Allocation of Park Space/Space Utilization Parks, open space, recreation facilities, programs, and services can be improved with: ◦Appearance / Maintenance (Improvements) ◦Funding ◦Stafﬁ ng / Increase Staff Hours / Staff Training FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 48 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan37 The recreation facilities participants would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of the community are: ◦Indoor Multi-use Recreation Facility / Community Center ◦Sports Complex ◦Teen / Youth Center Community-wide Telephone Survey A total of 200 interviews representing nearly 700 residents were completed with adult household heads living in the City of Downey. The following section highlights some of the key information from the Survey. Detailed information regarding the Community-wide Survey is provided in the Appendix, tab A3.1-2 Community Attitudes About 87% of residents included “Lack of Crime/Safe,” “Proximity to Shopping,” “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Access to Freeways,” “Schools, Quality Education, Good Education,” Quality of Life,” “Centrally Located,” “Clean,” “Feeling a Part of Community,” “Close to Work,” and “Parks and Recreation Facilities and Trails” as the feature that makes Downey a desirable place to live. About seven of ten residents (68%) identiﬁ ed “Crime/Personal Safety,” “Population Growth,” “Education,” “Growth Management,” “Gangs,” “Fire and Police Protection,” “Road Improvements,” “Trafﬁ c Congestion on Surface Streets,” and “Drug and Alcohol Abuse” as the issue of greatest concern. Facilities Use More than four in ten residents polled (45%) stated they were Frequent Users (at least 3 times per month) of parks and recreation facilities in the last year. In contrast, more than one in ten residents (13%) stated they had not used parks and recreation facilities in that time frame. The recreation facilities responses most often identiﬁ ed as most used included: Furman Park, Apollo Park, Parks Outside Downey, Dennis the Menace Park, Wilderness Park, Independence Park, Golden Park, San Gabriel River Bike Path, and the YMCA. 2% 4% 4% 6% 9% 17% 37% 63% 0%20%40%60% Youth Football Youth Baseball Youth Basketball Youth Soccer Softball Tot Lots Bicycling Walk/Hike/Jog/Run Recreation Activities Participation Share of Downey Population Participating Exhibit 3.1-1 Telephone Survey, Recreation Participation FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 49 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan38 Of the eight recreation activities tested, the largest participation by residents included “Walking/ Jogging/ Running/Hiking on Public Trails Use,” “Bicycling on Public Trails or Paths,” “Use of Play Equipment, Tot Lots in Public Parks,” “Organized Softball,” “Organized Youth Soccer,” “Organized Youth Basketball,” “Organized Youth Baseball,” and “Organized Youth Tackle Football.” See Exhibit 3.1.1. Facilities and Programs Satisfaction Nine of ten residents polled (90%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisﬁ ed with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. Improvements Desired More than 90% of City of Downey households identiﬁ ed a desired new recreation facility. One in ten (9%) stated they desired no new recreation facilities. The recreation facility response categories garnering at least 2% of the responses and the share of responses each received are charted in Exhibit 3.1-2. Online Questionnaire A Questionnaire was posted on the City website and 279 questionnaires were completed. The following section highlights some of the key information from the responses. Detailed information regarding the Online Questionnaire is provided in the Appendix, tab A3.1-3. Demography Comparing the demography of On-Line Questionnaire respondents to 2010 Census data for Downey revealed that the proﬁ le of respondents is substantially different. On-Line Questionnaire respondents are nearly twice as likely to be households with children under 18. Respondents were also twice as likely to report household members between the ages of 5 and 14 years and far less likely to report members 55 years or older. Based on the known links between demography and recreating patterns, it is reasonable to conclude that the Questionnaire responses regarding parks and recreation attitudes, usage and preferences are not statistically representative of the overall City of Downey population. Downey Strengths When asked what one feature makes Downey a desirable place to live, the ten response categories cited most often included “Access to Freeways,” “Lack of Crime/Safe,” “Feeling a Part of Community,” “Schools, Quality Education, Good Education,” “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Family Oriented,” “Open Space,” “Quality of Life,” “Parks and Recreation Facilities and Trails,” and “Proximity to Shopping.” Note:AggregatingallTrails(walking/jogging,biking,multiͲuse)responsesnetsatotalof16%. AggregatingallPools(outdoorandindoorrecreationpool),responsesnetsatotalof9%. 4% 4% 5% 6% 6% 11% 0%5%10%15% Community Center Senior Facilities/ Programs Gymnasium Fitness Center Outdoor Recreation Pool Walk/Jog Trails Recreation Facilities Desired Downey Residents Exhibit 3.1-2 Telephone Survey, Recreation Facilities Desired FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 50 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan39 Downey Changes When asked what one change they would make in Downey, the six response categories cited most often included “Parks and Recreation Facilities,” “Crime/Personal Safety,” “Retail Stores/ Services,” “Road Improvements,” “Fire and Police Protection,” and “Education.” Recreation Facilities Use Seven of every ten respondents (72%) reported recreating more than once a week. Frequent Users (those who recreated at a facility at least three times a month) comprised 83% of those completing the Questionnaire. Non-users of parks and recreation facilities represented 1% of the responses. Most Used Facilities Parks or recreation facilities mentioned most often by respondents included Apollo Park (25%), Furman Park (17%), Discovery Sports Complex (10%), Grifﬁ ths Middle School (5%), Wilderness Park (4%), Rio San Gabriel Park (3%), and Dennis the Menace Park (3%). Recreation Activities Recreation activities at the most used facility that were mentioned most often by respondents included Soccer Fields (51%), Open Space (12%), Walking/Jogging Paths/Trails (10%), Baseball Fields (6%), Playground/Tot Lots (6%) and Community Center (4%). Recreation Services Satisfaction Six of every ten respondents (60%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisﬁ ed with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. This compares with a ﬁ gure of 90% from the Community-wide survey. Recreation Facilities Safety Satisfaction Three of every four respondents (75%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisﬁ ed with park and recreation facilities safety in the City of Downey. Facility Changes Desired More than half of respondents (55%) identiﬁ ed a desire for Soccer Fields. The next largest response group was Walking/Jogging Paths/Trails (3%) and Bike Trails, Paths (3%). Preferred City Emphasis Seven in ten respondents (72%) identiﬁ ed Active Sports Facilities and Programs as their preferred improvement. Open Space and Trails Enjoyment and Preservation was chosen by 15% of residents completing the Questionnaire while 8% chose Classes and Events. The tested option that received the smallest response was for Arts and Culture Facilities and Programs (5%). FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 51 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan40 Community Workshop #1 – Community Characteristics and Issues The ﬁ rst community workshop was held on December 13, 2014 at Apollo Park. Nine (9) residents attended the workshop. The purpose of Workshop #1 was to identify what community characteristics make Downey a great place to live, work, and play, what issues or trends may negatively impact those important community characteristics, and what role can parks and recreation play in addressing those issues. Appendix tab A3.1-4. According to the workshop participants, the most important community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work, and play are: ◦Safety ◦Youth Sports / Programs ◦Close-Knit Community / Small Town Feel The issues or trends that may be negatively impacting those important community characteristics and should be considered in the Park and Recreation Master Plan are: ◦Crime / Safety of Parks ◦Lack of Green Space / Residential Density ◦Facility Maintenance / Upgrades The role that parks and recreation can play in addressing those issues and support the community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work and play are: ◦New Programs / Increase Activities ◦Improve / Maintain Facilities ◦Value of Recreation / Master Plan Community Workshop #2 – Sports User Groups The second community workshop was held on January 21, 2015 at the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center. Forty-Three (43) sports group representatives and residents attended this workshop. This workshop identiﬁ ed the best and worst sports facilities in Downey, the most important sports facility needs, and helped to identify opportunities to address those needs, and the most important improvements to parks, recreation, trails, and open space. Appendix tab A3.1-5. According to participants, the best sports facilities in the City of Downey (and the reasons why) are: ◦Furman Park (popular, walking trails, varied programming, tennis, baseball) FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 52 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan41 ◦Downey & Warren High Schools (best facilities, pool, sports ﬁ elds, weight room, jogging trail) ◦Apollo (variety of sports programming) The worst sports facilities in the City of Downey (and the reasons why) are: ◦Rio San Gabriel (uneven ﬁ elds, maintenance/irrigation, lighting, parking, basketball) ◦Discovery Sports Complex (design, soccer ﬁ eld size/drainage, infrastructure, storage, no meeting rooms) ◦Golden (safety/security, maintenance, poor ﬁ elds) The top sports facility needs in the City of Downey are: ◦Upgrade / Maintain Facilities ◦Soccer ◦Multi-Function Sports Complex ◦Lighting ◦“Club” Sports The opportunities for meeting current and future sport facility needs in the City of Downey include: ◦Vacant [land] – Riverbed, City- Owned Land, Rockwell, County, Florence, Studebaker, Lakewood Blvd. and Gallatin Rd. Intersection Old Rancho Los Amigos* ◦Repurposing / Reconﬁ guration of Land ◦Joint Use Agreement *Note, the sites indicated by the community in Workshop #2 were evaluated with City staff as part of the Master Plan process and are not currently being considered as opportunity sites. While the Master Plan does not necessarily eliminate the possibility of these sites being considered for recreation if available, Section 5.4 discusses candidate opportunity sites for potential recreation facilities. The most important improvements participants would make in Downey to parks, recreation programs, trails, and/or open space are: ◦Lighting ◦Safety ◦Walking Trails ◦Staff [additional] ◦Maintenance FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 53 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan42 Community Workshop #3 – Needs Summary and Prioritization On February 28, 2015, twenty-eight (28) members of the community and participants from previous workshops attended the third workshop, which included an overview of the Master Plan process, a summary of the recreation facility and program needs in the City, and group discussions and individual activities focusing on the relative priority of program and facility needs. Appendix tab A3.1-6 According to participant consensus, the top three recreation facilities needed in the City of Downey are: ◦Soccer ◦Lighting ◦Maintenance Sports Organization Questionnaires To supplement the information regarding participation in organized sports which was obtained from the telephone survey, a questionnaire was designed and distributed to the organized sports groups that use City facilities. This questionnaire obtained information regarding the number of players and teams in the league or sports organization, age ranges of the players, what seasons they play, if they travel outside Downey to play, if they participate in tournaments, ratings of ﬁ eld/facility maintenance and scheduling, projections of growth and facilities they have the greatest need for both now and in the future. Information such as the number of players, size of teams, and the facilities where games are played, is used in the calculation to determine the quantity of facilities (# of ﬁ elds, courts, etc.) that are presently needed in the City of Downey, and in the projections of the number of facilities needed for the future. This is discussed further in Section 3.2 and in the Appendix. Additional, more qualitative, information regarding respondents rating and comments on facility maintenance and scheduling, assessment of usage fees and the perceived needs for additional facilities both currently and in the future as well as desired enhancements in future facilities are summarized in 3.1-3. These responses will be used by City staff and the Consultant team to better understand the usage patterns and needs of the active sports groups. FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 54 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan43 Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 SU M M A R Y O F C O M M E N T S F R O M D O W N E Y S P O R T S O R G A N I Z A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h B a s e b a l l No r t h w e s t D o w n e y L i t t l e Le a g u e Fa i r - F u r m a n P a r k - gr a s s c u t s h o r t e r ; b e t t e r ir r i g a t i o n ; u n e v e n g r o u n d in a r e a s P o o r - Ri o H o n d o - p o o r wa t e r i n g ; n o ma i n t e n a n c e s p e c i f i c t o ba s e b a l l f i e l d s . Wa t e r r e g u l a r l y ; c u t gr a s s s h o r t e r ; f i x ir r i g a t i o n s y s t e m ; l e v e l pl a y i n g f i e l d i n o u t f i e l d . Ab o u t R i g h t S u b m i t u s a g e a p p l i c a t i o n t w i c e pe r y e a r t o S o n y a M e a c h a m ; pr o c e d u r e s e e m s s a t i s f a c t o r y a s we h a v e n o t e x p e r i e n c e d a n y di f f i c u l t i e s . Cu r r e n t N e e d : a l l f i e l d s a t F u r m a n Pa r k a n d R i o H o n d o E l e m e n t a r y . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : F u r m a n P a r k - li g h t s ; p e r m a n e n t c o v e r e d sp e c t a t o r / b l e a c h e r s e a t i n g ; u p d a t e d ba c k s t o p s f o r b o t h f i e l d s ; u p g r a d i n g of s e c o n d s m a l l f i e l d t o m a t c h f i e l d ad j a c e n t t o b a s k e t b a l l c o u r t . Po s s i b l e n e e d f o r 1 - 2 f i e l d s fo r g a m e s d e p e n d i n g o n gr o w t h . We s t D o w n e y L i t t l e L e a g u e Ex c e l l e n t - S t a u f f e r Mi d d l e S c h o o l . Up d a t e d e q u i p m e n t f o r al l t y p e s o f s p o r t s . Do n ' t P a y Fe e s Fi e l d P e r m i t i s r e q u e s t e d f r o m sc h o o l P r i n c I p a l , M r s . M i r , p e r m i t is r e n e w e d e v e r y s e a s o n . Cu r r e n t N e e d : N / A Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : S t a u f f e r M i d d l e Sc h o o l - b l e a c h e r s , t e a m b e n c h e s , st o r a g e , b a c k s t o p s , f e n c i n g , m o r e pa r k i n g , l i g h t s . Fo r t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y t o in t r o d u c e m o r e p a r k s w i t h pl a y i n g f i e l d s f o r a l l t y p e s o f sp o r t s . DJ A A B a s e b a l l Ex c e l l e n t - D i s c o v e r y Sp o r t s C o m p l e x . Fa i r - A p o l l o P a r k & Co l u m b u s . Li g h t i n g a t A p o l l o n e e d s ma j o r i m p r o v e m e n t s . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m , K e v i n E l l i s - th e y d o a f i n e j o b . Cu r r e n t N e e d : We h a v e e n o u g h b a l l di a m o n d s , j u s t n e e d s o m e b e t t e r li g h t s a n d n e w l i g h t s t o b e i n s t a l l e d a t Ap o l l o P a r k . A m e n i t i e s De s i r e d : A p o l l o P a r k - b e t t e r l i g h t s fi e l d 1 a n d l i g h t s i n s t a l l e d o n f i e l d 2 an d 3 . Sh o u l d b e O K f i e l d w i s e . Yo u t h S o f t b a l l Ex c e l l e n t - I n d e p e n d e n c e Pa r k A t t h e c u r r e n t ti m e , w e a r e i n s t a l l i n g sp r i n k l e r s y s t e m s o n a l l 4 fi e l d s . Ab o u t R i g h t A l l c o o r d i n a t i o n a n d s c h e d u l i n g is d o n e b y t h e C i t y . S o n y a Me a c h a m - t h e y a r e s a t i s f a c t o r y . (S h e d o e s a g r e a t j o b ) . Cu r r e n t N e e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e Pa r k - a d d e d r e s t r o o m s f o r p a r k . No t k n o w n a t t h i s t i m e . Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 S u m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m t h e D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 55 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan44 Pa g e 2 Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h S o f t b a l l ( C o n t i n u e d ) Ne m e s i s E l i t e Go o d - D i s c o v e r y a n d In d e p e n d e n c e Re g u l a r s p r i n k l e r ma i n t e n a n c e , b o t h g r a s s an d i n f i e l d . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m - E x c e l l e n t - we l l o r g a n i z e d Cu r r e n t N e e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k an d D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e Pa r k - l i g h t i n g a n d s p r i n k l e r s . Di s c o v e r y - b u l l p e n s . Li k e t o h a v e v e r y n i c e f o u r fi e l d 2 0 0 f t f e n c e s o f t b a l l co m p l e x d e d i c a t e d t o g i r l s fa s t p i t c h s o f t b a l l . W i t h ad e q u a t e t r a i n i n g s p a c e a n d bu l l p e n s . N i c e d u g o u t s a n d Sn a c k S h a c k . L i t . Ad u l t S o f t b a l l Ma j o r L e a g u e S o f t b a l l , I n c . Fa i r - M u l t i - u s e f a c i l i t i e s , so c c e r a n d f o o t b a l l , ma k e t u r f m a i n t e n a n c e po o r . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m a n d K e v i n E l l i s do a g r e a t j o b o f a d v o c a t i n g f o r th e C i t y ' s A d u l t S o f t b a l l P r o g r a m . We d o n ' t p r o j e c t a n y i n c r e a s e o r de c r e a s e i n e n r o l l m e n t u n l e s s mo r e f i e l d s p a c e i s m a d e av a i l a b l e . W e a r e c u r r e n t l y se l l i n g t h e a d u l t f i g u r e s o u t t o ca p a c i t y a n d e x p e c t t o c o n t i n u e do i n g s o . Cu r r e n t N e e d : I f y o u b u i l d i t t h e y w i l l co m e . I n a l l s e r i o u s n e s s , w e c o u l d in c r e a s e p a r t i c i p a t i o n b y 3 6 t e a m s i f ju s t o n e a d d i t i o n a l f i e l d c o u l d b e al l o c a t e d p e r d a y . Se e p r e v i o u s . Yo u t h F o o t b a l l Do w n e y M u s t a n g s Y o u t h Fo o t b a l l a n d C h e e r Fa i r - G o l d e n P a r k N e e d be t t e r l i g h t i n g , m o r e sp a c e a n d b e t t e r s a f e t y . Li g h t i n g . L e s s t r e e s a n d be t t e r s a f e t y . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a - S a t i s f a c t o r y Cu r r e n t N e e d : F o o t b a l l f i e l d w i t h be t t e r l i g h t i n g a n d m o r e s p a c e . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : G o l d e n P a r k - Sn a c k b a r u s a g e , m o r e l i g h t s , m o r e sp a c e , l e s s t r e e s , s t o r a g e s p a c e a n d be t t e r s a f e t y . Mo r e p r a c t i c e s p a c e . Do w n e y P o p W a r n e r Fo o t b a l l , I n c . , Th e R a z o r b a c k s Po o r - s u r f a c e i s n o t st a b l e o r l e v e l Ir r i g a t i o n . B 4 6 So m e w h a t Lo w We b o o k d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e C i t y un d e r t h e i r c u r r e n t r e s e r v a t i o n pr o c e s s f o r N o n - P r o f i t C i t y Or g a n i z a t i o n s . W e n e e d m o r e sp a c e . Cu r r e n t N e e d : C u r r e n t l y u s i n g R i o Sa n G a b r i e l P a r k . N e e d a d d i t i o n a l pa r k s p a c e f o r p r a c t i c e t o g e t e a c h te a m t h e r e q u i r e d p r a c t i c e s p a c e t o en a b l e t o b e c o m p e t i t i v e . A m e n i t i e s De s i r e d : R i o S a n G a b r i e l P a r k - mo r e t r a s h r e c e p t a c l e s , b e n c h e s , ta b l e s , a n d g r a s s m a i n t e n a n c e . Se e C u r r e n t N e e d . Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 S u m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m t h e D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( C o n t i n u e d ) FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 56 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan45 Pa g e 3 Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h S o c c e r Do w n e y A Y S O Fa i r - G r a s s i s i n p o o r co n d i t i o n . L a c k o f pa r k i n g . Fi x s p r i n k l e r s , l e v e l g r a s s an d r e s e e d . Ab o u t R i g h t W e w o r k m a i n l y w i t h S o n y a a n d Ke v i n E l l i s . T h e y a r e h e l p f u l a n d tr y t o a c c o m m o d a t e o u r n e e d s as t h e y c o m e u p Cu r r e n t N e e d : D S C , A p o l l o a n d R i o Sa n G a b r i e l f o r c u r r e n t u s e . F u r m a n du r i n g t h e F a l l s e a s o n . AY S O w o u l d l i k e t o s e e t h e Ci t y p r o v i d e o n e s p o r t s co m p l e x t h a t c o u l d h o s t a l l ou r g a m e s a n d p r a c t i c e s . Th i s w o u l d t a k e 6 f u l l s i z e d fi e l d s , 4 s h o r t s i z e f i e l d s f o r 9 vs 9 g a m e s a n d 4 s h o r t s i d e d fi e l d s f o r 5 v s 5 g a m e s . Li g h t s a n d a p e r m a n e n t s n a c k sh a c k f a c i l i t y w o u l d b e re q u i r e d a s w e l l . Do w n e y F C Fa i r - A p o l l o - I r r i g a t i o n , gr a s s , l i g h t i n g n e e d s im p r o v e m e n t . Po o r - D i s c o v e r y - N o gr a s s , p o o r d e s i g n , p o o r dr a i n a g e , b u t l i g h t i n g i s ex c e l l e n t . Ne e d i r r i g a t i o n a n d li g h t i n g a t A p o l l o up g r a d e d . G r a s s a n d dr a i n a g e a t D i s c o v e r y ov e r h a u l e d . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e c h a m , K e v i n E l l i s - th e y d o a f i n e j o b . Ne e d b e t t e r m o n i t o r i n g o f u s e r gr o u p s . Cu r r e n t N e e d : W e a r e h a p p y w i t h ou r c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n . W e w o u l d l o v e to g r o w b i g g e r b u t h a v e a v e r b a l ag r e e m e m t t o k e e p n u m b e r s ma n a g e a b l e - w o r k s f o r u s . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : D i s c o v e r y - pa r k i n g / f e n c i n g / d r a i n a g e / g r a s s . Ap o l l o - i r r i g a t i o n / g r a s s / l i g h t i n g . Be t t e r , s a f e r f i e l d s . G r a s s an d L i g h t i n g . Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 S u m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m t h e D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( C o n t i n u e d ) FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 57 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan46 Pa g e 4 Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h S o c c e r ( C o n t i n u e d ) Do w n e y U n i t e d F C We d o n ' t c u r r e n t l y u s e Do w n e y F a c i l i t i e s Ve r y H i g h C u r r e n t N e e d : S o c c e r f i e l d s w i t h li g h t s t o a l l o w f o r p r a c t i c e e a r l y af t e r n o o n a n d w e e k e n d g a m e s . In d o o r f a c i l i t i e s d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r t i m e la r g e e n o u g h t o h a v e a l l o u r p l a y e r s an d f a m i l i e s t o c e l e b r a t e t e a m ac h i e v e m e n t s a n d h o l i d a y p a r t y . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : W e d o n ' t cu r r e n t l y u s e D o w n e y f a c i l i t i e s , ho w e v e r , w e s e e a g r e a t n e e d o f a de d i c a t e d , s t a t e o f t h e a r t s p o r t s co m p l e x t o a c c o m m m o d a t e t h e g r e a t ne e d o f t h e c o m m u n i t y , e s p e c i a l l y f o r so c c e r p l a y i n g . As t e a m s g e t a d d e d t o t h e cl u b , m o r e t r a i n i n g f i e l d s . Ad u l t S o c c e r To q u e t e o S o c i a l F u t b o l Cl u b ( T S F C ) We d o n ' t c u r r e n t l y u s e Do w n e y F a c i l i t i e s Ve r y H i g h W e c u r r e n t l y d o n o t u s e a n y fa c i l i t i e s i n D o w n e y * b u t o n e o f th e i s s u e s w e e n c o u n t e r w h e n no t p l a y i n g o n s y n t h e t i c s u r f a c e s ar e p o o r p l a y i n g f i e l d s ( m u d , un e v e n s u r f a c e s e t c . ) Cu r r e n t N e e d : S o c c e r f i e l d s w i t h li g h t s t o a l l o w f o r p r a c t i c e e a r l y af t e r n o o n a n d w e e k e n d g a m e s . In d o o r f a c i l i t i e s d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r t i m e la r g e e n o u g h t o h a v e a l l o u r p l a y e r s an d f a m i l i e s t o c e l e b r a t e t e a m ac h i e v e m e n t s a n d h o l i d a y p a r t y . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : W e b e l i e v e t h a t a c e n t r a l i z e d , s p e c i a l i z e d s o c c e r co m p l e x m a d e o f s y n t h e t i c t u r f ca p a b l e o f a c c o m m o d a t i n g h i g h - in t e n s i t y s o c c e r u s e w o u l d a l l o w so c c e r d e v e l o p m e n t t o b l o s s o m wi t h i n t h e c i t y o f D o w n e y . Ou r o r g a n i z a t i o n m a y n e e d ad d i t i o n a l s y n t h e t i c t u r f f i e l d s as t h e g r o u p g r o w s i n s i z e an d m o r e p r o g r a m m i n g t o of f e r t o t h e c i t y i s p l a n n e d . Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 S u m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m t h e D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( C o n t i n u e d ) FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 58 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan47 Pa g e 5 Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h B a s k e t b a l l DJ A A B a s k e t b a l l Ex c e l l e n t - M c C a u g h a n Gy m Go o d - A p o l l o P a r k Fa i r - G o l d e n P a r k a n d Fu r m a n P a r k Li g h t i n g a t G o l d e n a n d Fu r m a n F i e l d s n e e d s im p r o v e m e n t s . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m , K e v i n E l l i s - th e y d o a f i n e j o b . Cu r r e n t N e e d : W e h a v e h a d t o de c r e a s e t h e n u m b e r o f g a m e s f o r ea c h t e a m , w e c o u l d r e a l l y u s e an o t h e r g y m ( i n d o o r c o u r t ) . Am e n i t i e s N e e d e d : G o l d e n a n d Fu r m a n - b e t t e r l i g h t s . Mo r e C o u r t S p a c e Ba s k e t b a l l A c a d e m y D- L e a g u e O n l y Ex c e l l e n t - A p o l l o P a r k Ne e d S h o t c l o c k s . Do n ' t P a y Fe e s In - h o u s e C u r r e n t N e e d : A p o l l o P a r k Am e n i t i e s N e e d e d : A p o l l o P a r k - Le v e l s h u f f l e b o a r d c o u r t . I n d o o r fi e l d h o u s e . St o r a g e b i n s . Ba s k e t b a l l A c a d e m y Ac a d e m y T r a i n i n g P r o g r a m Ex c e l l e n t - A p o l l o P a r k Ne e d S h o t c l o c k s . Do n ' t P a y Fe e s In - h o u s e C u r r e n t N e e d : A p o l l o P a r k Am e n i t i e s N e e d e d : A p o l l o P a r k - Le v e l s h u f f l e b o a r d c o u r t . I n d o o r fi e l d h o u s e . St o r a g e b i n s . So u r c e s : D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n S u r v e y , N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 4 - J a n u a r y 2 0 1 5 . Ex h i b i t 3 . 1 - 3 S u m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m t h e D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e ( C o n t i n u e d ) FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 59 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan48 3.2 Recreation Facility Need Calculations This section provides a basic description of the calculations used to determine the number of facilities that are needed within the City of Downey to support the recreational activities of residents. A detailed description is included in the Appendix entitled “Facility Demand Analysis,” tab A3.2. The Downey City-wide telephone survey poses a question to residents regarding how often they participate in a pre-determined list of recreational activities. By determining how often residents participate in the activity, it is possible to make an evaluation of the number of facilities that will be needed to accommodate them. Exhibit 3.2-1 lists the recreational activities investigated in the telephone survey and the calculations that are discussed below. The speciﬁ c question of the survey follows the following format: “How many times in the past year have you and each of the members of your household participated in: bicycling on public trails or paths for active recreation or ﬁ tness (excluding sidewalks)?” The answer to the question noted above provides the number of times the activity was conducted in a year, which is divided by the total population of residents in the households surveyed (including those members who did not participate in the activity), and yields the average number of days per year that survey respondents participate in each activity (“per capita participation days/ year”). Multiplying this number by the total population of the City of Downey yields the total annual days that residents participate in the activity (the number is further adjusted based on a number of factors discussed in the Appendix). The result is the “peak day demand” for the activity, or the number of people who will take part in the activity during the most intensive times of use (Exhibit 3.2-1). Generally speaking, the adjustments accommodate all but 3 to 8 days per year of the highest levels of activity in order to avoid overbuilding facilities, while still accommodating most of the busiest days of the year, such as holiday weekends. (Organized youth sports game ﬁ elds utilize information derived from the sports organization survey to determine the peak day demand numbers). The “turnovers per day,” or the average number of times per day that a facility can be expected to experience turnover of participants, is based on studies conducted by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, U.S. Department of the Interior regarding the “optimum carrying capacity” of a facility. (For the sports ﬁ elds/courts used for organized games, this is calculated using speciﬁ c information provided in the sports organization survey). Column 5 indicates the number of participants that the facility can accommodate at any one time based on similar standards. Anyone who has experienced an overly-crowded concert, game, or event, can understand “optimum carrying capacity;” at some point during the event, the overcrowding causes the lines for the snack bar to get a little too long, and the garbage begins to pile up outside of garbage cans faster than staff can remove it. The carrying capacity of the facility has been exceeded. In the case of sports ﬁ elds, this may be reﬂ ected in ﬁ elds that have turned from grass to dirt from overuse. FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 60 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan49 In order to determine the number of facilities that are needed (Number of Facilities Demanded) the peak day demand (number of participants) is divided by the turnovers per day in Column 4 and then divided by the capacity of the facility shown in Column 5. The result is the number of facilities needed to meet “peak day demand” or the number of facilities that are currently needed for the activity. The relationship of the current need for facilities in Downey to the current population level is the basis for the “facility need ratio” or the measure of the level of population in Downey that creates the demand for one facility or one unit of measure such as miles or acres. This ratio for each of the types of facilities analyzed is also presented in Exhibit 3.2-1 (column 7) and is calculated by dividing the total population by the number of facilities demanded. Similar calculations were carried out to determine the demand levels in 2035, when the community will reach a projected population of 118,994. These calculations are shown in Exhibit 3.2-2. Adjustments were made to some of the participation rates for the 2035 projection based on the trends in the demographic proﬁ le of the City of Downey. It is anticipated that there will be a somewhat smaller percentage of youth under 14 years, a larger percentage of retirees and a more diverse ethnic mix. The adjustments are based on the same data base which was used to estimate the current year participation rates – the cross-tabulations of telephone survey data regarding participation rates and demographic measures. Recreation Facility Requirements The needs analysis presented in Exhibit 3.2-3 indicates existing deﬁ cits in several of the types of facilities that were analyzed. The facilities showing deﬁ cits of 0.5 facility or greater are adult softball game ﬁ elds (1.2 ﬁ elds), tot lots/playgrounds (31.0 facilities), walking/jogging paths (35.5 miles), and bicycling paths (34.2 miles). The need for facilities was projected to 2035 and these projections together with the current supply of facilities (no adjustments were made for any planned facilities) are presented in Exhibit 3.2-4. The deﬁ cits in the facilities in the projection year include youth softball game ﬁ elds (0.5 ﬁ eld), adult softball game ﬁ elds (1.7 ﬁ elds), youth soccer game ﬁ elds (0.8 ﬁ elds), tot lots/playgrounds (30.7 facilities), walking/jogging paths (42.0 miles), and bicycling paths (40.1 miles). Exhibit 3.2-5 summarizes the change in demand between 2015 and 2035 or the demand resulting solely from the growth expected to occur during this period. This Exhibit describes the number or size of facilities by type that will be required just to accommodate the future growth in the City of Downey. The existing 2015 surplus or deﬁ cit in facilities is combined with the growth projections in Exhibit 3.2-6 to provide the cumulative estimate of the additional number or size of facilities by type that will be required in the City of Downey between 2015 and 2035. FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 61 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan50 EXHIBIT 3.2-1 FACILITY DEMAND ANALYSIS BASED ON RESIDENTS' PARTICIPATION RATES City of Downey - 2015 Levels Per CapitaPeak DayDesignNumber ofFacility Need ParticipationDemandTurnoversStandardFacilitiesRatio - City of Activity Days/Year (Participants) Per Dayfor FacilityDemanded*Downey Softball: Organized Youth2.05154x26 players/field6.2 fields1/18,350 pop. Organized Adult4.04763x38 players/field5.2 fields1/21,750 pop. Baseball: Organized Youth 1.61,163 4x26 players/field14.0 fields1/8,125 pop. Football Organized Youth 1.6 390 6x54 players/field1.5 fields1/75,500 pop. Soccer Organized Youth 5.61,846 5x23 players/field20.1 fields1/5,650 pop. Tot Lots/Playgrounds 15.15,280 6x20 persons/hour44.0 areas1/2,600 pop. Indoor Basketball: Organized Youth 2.4 302 8x20 players/court1.9 courts1/60,050 pop. Walking/Jogging/ Running-Public Trails59.33,933 1x90 persons/mile43.7 miles1/2,600 pop. Bicycling-Public Trails 19.95,980 5x30 bicycles/mile39.9 miles1/2,850 pop. *Demand for ball fields includes an adjustment to allow for resting of fields. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015. Exhibit 3.2-1 Facility Demand Analysis Based on Participation Rates, 2015 Levels FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 62 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan51 EXHIBIT 3.2-2 FACILITY DEMAND ANALYSIS BASED ON RESIDENTS' PARTICIPATION RATES City of Downey - 2035 Projection Per CapitaPeak DayDesignNumber ofFacility Need ParticipationDemandTurnoversStandardFacilitiesRatio - City of Activity Days/Year (Participants) Per Dayfor FacilityDemanded*Downey Softball: Organized Youth Games2.05404x26 players/field6.5 fields1/18,350 pop. Organized Adult Games4.25233x38 players/field5.7 fields1/20,750 pop. Baseball: Organized Youth Games1.61,2184x26 players/field14.6 fields1/8,125 pop. Football Organized Youth Games1.94856x54 players/field1.9 fields1/63,550 pop. Soccer Organized Youth Games5.82,0045x23 players/field21.8 fields1/5,450 pop. Tot Lots/Playgrounds14.35,2416x20 persons/hour43.7 areas1/2,725 pop. Indoor Basketball: Organized Youth Games2.83708x20 players/court2.3 courts1/51,500 pop. Walking/Jogging/ Running-Public Trails65.04,5191x90 persons/mile50.2 miles1/2,350 pop. Bicycling-Public Trails21.86,8655x30 bicycles/mile45.8 miles1/2,600 pop. *Demand for ball fields includes an adjustment to allow for resting of fields. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015. Exhibit 3.2-2 Facility Demand Analysis Based on Participation Rates, 2035 Projection FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 63 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan52 EXHIBIT 3.2-3 CITY OF DOWNEY RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS - 2015 ESTIMATE Facility NeedExistingSchoolTotalTotal Ratio - City of2015CitySurplus/FacilitiesFacilitiesSurplus/ Facility Downey NeedsFacilitiesDeficit(-)Avail.*Avail.Deficit(-) Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/18,350 pop.6.26-0.206-0.2 Organized Adult Games1/21,750 pop.5.23-2.214-1.2 Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/8,125 pop.14.09-5.06151.0 Football Fields Organized Youth Games1/75,500 pop.1.50-1.5220.5 Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games1/5,650 pop.20.13-17.118210.9 Tot Lots/Playgrounds1/2,600 pop.44.013-31.0013-31.0 Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games1/60,050 pop.1.920.1020.1 Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)1/2,600 pop.43.78.2-35.508.2-35.5 Bicycling Paths (mi.)1/2,850 pop.39.95.7-34.205.7-34.2 * School facilities other than ballfields/courts are counted at 50 percent to allow for time not available to the public. School facilities that are never available for use by outside sports leagues or the general public are not counted in the supply and are shown as 0 for purposes of the needs analysis. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015. Exhibit 3.2-3 Recreation Facility Needs Analysis, 2015 FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 64 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan53 EXHIBIT 3.2-4 CITY OF DOWNEY RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS - 2035 PROJECTION Facility Need Existing SchoolTotalTotal Ratio - City of2035CitySurplus/FacilitiesFacilitiesSurplus/ Facility Downey NeedsFacilitiesDeficit(-)Avail.*Avail.Deficit(-) Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/18,350 pop.6.5 6-0.50 6-0.5 Organized Adult Games1/21,750 pop.5.7 3-2.71 4-1.7 Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/8,125 pop.14.69-5.66 150.4 Football Fields Organized Youth Games1/75,500 pop.1.9 0-1.92 20.1 Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games1/5,650 pop.21.83-18.818 21-0.8 Tot Lots/Playgrounds 1/2,600 pop.43.713-30.70 13-30.7 Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games1/60,050 pop.2.3 2-0.30 2-0.3 Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)1/2,600 pop.50.28.2-42.00 8.2-42.0 Bicycling Paths (mi.)1/2,850 pop.45.85.7-40.10 5.7-40.1 * School facilities other than ballfields/courts are counted at 50 percent to allow for time not available to the public. School facilities that are never available for use by outside sports leagues or the general public are not counted in the supply and are shown as 0 for purposes of the needs analysis. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015. Exhibit 3.2-4 Recreation Facility Needs Analysis, 2035 Projection FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 65 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan54 EXHIBIT 3.2-5 CHANGE IN DEMAND FOR RECREATION FACILITIES BY TYPE, 2015 TO 2035 City of Downey Change in Number of Facilities Demanded*Surplus/Deficit (-) Facility201520352015-2035** Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games6.2 fields6.5 fields-0.3 fields Organized Adult Games5.2 fields5.7 fields-0.5 fields Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games 14.0 fields 14.6 fields -0.7 fields Football Fields Organized Youth Games 1.5 fields 1.9 fields -0.4 fields Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games 20.1 fields 21.8 fields -1.7 fields Tot Lots/Playgrounds 44.0 areas 43.7facilities 0.3 areas Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games 1.9 courts 2.3 courts -0.4 courts Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)43.7 miles 50.2 miles -6.5 miles Bicycling Paths (mi.)39.9 miles 45.8 miles -5.9 miles * Demand for ball fields is adjusted by approximately 20 percent to allow for resting of fields. **Demand resulting from growth and changing demographics. Does not include allowance for any deficits or surpluses existing in 2015. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015. Exhibit 3.2-5 Change in Demand for Recreation Facilities by Type, 2015-2035 FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 66 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan55 EXHIBIT 3.2-6 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECREATION NEEDS IN DOWNEY 2035 ESTIMATE (Total of 2015 Surplus/Deficit and 2015 to 2035 Change in Demand) 2015Change in Cumulative Facility Surplus/2035 Surplus/Deficit (-)Facility Surplus/ Deficit (-)2015-2035Deficit ( -) Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games-0.2 fields-0.3 fields-0.5 fields Organized Adult Games-1.2 fields-0.5 fields-1.7 fields Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games1.0 fields-0.7 fields0.4 fields Football Fields Organized Youth Games0.5 fields-0.4 fields0.1 fields Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games0.9 fields-1.7 fields-0.8 fields Tot Lots/Playgrounds-31.0facilities0.3facilities-30.7facilities Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games0.1 courts-0.4 courts-0.3 courts Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)-35.5 miles -6.5 miles -42.0 miles Bicycling Paths (mi.)-34.2 miles -5.9 miles -40.1 miles Source: Coman Consulting, Inc Exhibit 3.2-6 Facility Requirements for Recreation Needs, 2015-2035 Change FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 67 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan56 3.3 Program Needs Analysis A complete recreation program analysis is included in Section Four of this Master Plan. Some of the recommendations have implications for facilities and are included here, since many programs require facilities for operation. Facilities or improvements potentially needed to address program needs include: ◦Baseball Fields ◦Basketball Courts ◦Basketball Courts (Outdoor) ◦Classrooms ◦Exercise/Fitness Facility ◦Football Field ◦Multipurpose Indoor Community Center ◦Performing Arts Center/Music Hall ◦Soccer Fields/Soccer Complex ◦Softball Fields ◦Swimming Pool ◦Tennis Courts 3.4 Facility Needs Summary and Prioritization The Master Plan brings together information from various public and staff input, as well as other relevant studies and analysis, and to provide a broad overall picture of recreation in the form of recreation facilities that can support the needs of the Downey Parks and Recreation Department in delivering high quality parks and recreation facilities and programs. Since all of the needs identiﬁ cation tools are directly or indirectly based on community input, it is fair to say that all of the needs identiﬁ ed are signiﬁ cant and important to some portion of the community. However, it is generally helpful to attempt to determine which needs have the highest priority as perceived by the largest number of residents. The Facility Needs Summary (Exhibit 3.4-1) uses a numerical ranking system to establish relative priorities; the more needs identiﬁ cation tools that indicate a particular need, the higher the ranking. For instance, “Trails, Walking/Jogging” is indicated as a need by seven (7) tools and therefore has a higher relative priority than, “Youth/Teen Facility,” which is indicated by two (2) tools. In determining the overall numerical total, the Exhibit gives greater weight to quantitative tools (statistically valid) by counting each as double the value of a qualitative tool. This is reﬂ ected in the top header (Quantitative x2 versus Qualitative x1). Based on the Exhibit 3.4-1 and for the purposes of this summary, “high priority” needs are color highlighted. The colors also reﬂ ect a relative ranking of priority; green indicates that the need was identiﬁ ed by nine or more identiﬁ cation tools, suggesting the highest priority, blue indicates that the need was identiﬁ ed by between six and eight tools (Priority 2), and orange indicates that a need identiﬁ ed by four or ﬁ ve tools (Priority 3). FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 68 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan57 Identified Recreation Facility Need Re s i d e n t T e l e p h o n e S u r v e y De m a n d - N e e d s A n a l y s i s ( c u r r e n t n e e d ) De m a n d - N e e d s A n a l y s i s ( f u t u r e n e e d ) Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 1 Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 2 Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 3 Fo c u s G r o u p s On l i n e S u r v e y Pr o g r a m N e e d s S u m m a r y Sp o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e To t a l # o f T o o l s t h a t I d e n t i f i e d N e e d Trails,Walking/Jogging333 3333 10 SoftballFields 333 333 9 Trails,Bike 333 333 9 SoccerFields(typenotspecified)ͲAlsoseeothersoccerresponses 3 333333 8 BaseballFields 3 3333 6 BasketballCourts(Indoor)/Gymnasium 3 3 333 6 MultiͲuseRecreationFacility(Indoor)/CommunityCenter 3 3333 6 Playgrounds 33 3 3 6 Bathrooms/Children'sAccessibleBathroom 33333 5 Exercise/FitnessCenterͲFacility 3 333 5 OpenSpace/GreenSpace 3 3 33 5 SwimmingPool 3 333 5 SoccerComplex 33 33 4 BasketballCourts(Outdoor)3 33 3 CommunityGardens 333 3 Irrigation 33 3 3 Lighting,GeneralPark 333 3 Lighting,SportsField 33 3 3 MultiͲuseSportsComplex 333 3 Parking 33 3 3 PerformingArtsCenter/MusicHall 3 33 3 PicnicShelters/Facilities 3 3 3 Soccer(Indoor)333 3 SoccerFields(Synthetic)333 3 TurfFieldUpgrades 33 3 3 Youth/TeenFacility 3 3 3 GolfCourse 3 2 IceSkatingFacility 3 2 SeniorFacilities 3 2 Skatepark 33 2 SoccerFields(Grass)3 3 2 TrashCans 3 3 2 Volleyball 3 2 Backstops 3 1 Benches 3 1 Bikeracks 3 1 Bullpens 3 1 Classrooms 3 1 ConcessionsBuilding 3 1 DogPark 3 1 Fencing,SportsField 3 1 FootballField 3 1 InternetCafé 3 1 MaintenanceBuilding 3 1 MeetingRooms/Facilities 3 1 MultiͲpurposeEntertainmentArea(Outdoor)3 1 ObstacleCourse(Outdoor)3 1 PicnicShelterswithFireRings 3 1 PicnicTables 3 1 RollerSkatingRink 3 1 Seating,ParkBenches 3 1 Seating,Spectator/Bleachers 3 1 Seating,TeamBenches 3 1 SplashPark 3 1 Storage 3 1 TennisCourts 3 1 WorkoutStations 3 1 NEEDS IDENTIFICATION TOOLS QUALITATIVEQUANTITATIVE (X2) Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan Facility Needs Summary Exhibit 3.4-1 Facility Needs Summary Priority Priority 1 - Highest Priority Priority 2 - High Priority Priority 3 - Moderate Priority Priority 4 - Lower Priority FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 69 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan58 PRIORITY 1 Trails, Walking/Jogging Softball Fields Trails, Bike PRIORITY 2 Soccer Baseball Fields Basketball Courts (Indoor)/Gymnasium Multi-use Recreation Facility (Indoor)/Community Center\ Playgrounds PRIORITY 3 Bathrooms/Children’s Accessible Bathroom Exercise/Fitness Center-Facility Open Space/Green Space Swimming Pool Soccer Complex It should be noted that while maintenance and operations were often cited as issues of concern in the community engagement process, the Facility Needs Summary only reﬂ ects needs identiﬁ ed by the community that would require new facilities. Since “maintenance” is not a measurable facility, it would not be included on the list. It should not be interpreted that maintenance and operations improvements are a lower priority to the community, only that speciﬁ c facility maintenance improvements may not have been identiﬁ ed. 3.5 Existing Recreation Facilities Maintenance Condition Park and Recreation facilities within the City of Downey were found to be suffering from an aging infrastructure but maintained in generally clean and safe conditions. Brookshire Children’s Park is an example of a facility found to be visually attractive and in good condition. Others, such as Rio San Gabriel Park were maintained in fair to poor condition with obvious signs of deferred maintenance within park grounds and landscaping, need for capital upgrades, and safety considerations. Additionally, substantial deferred maintenance needs were found within park structures, facilities, irrigation systems and buildings. The NRPA Maintenance standards are thru CAPRA— Commission for AccreditaƟ on of Park and RecreaƟ on Agencies (CAPRA) MODE I • State of the art maintenance applied to a high quality diverse landscape. MODE II • High level maintenance associated with well-developed park areas with reasonably high visitaƟ on. MODE III • Moderate level maintenance-associated with agencies that, because of budget restricƟ ons, are unable to maintain at a high level. MODE IV • Moderately low level of maintenance. FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 70 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan59 Based on observations and discussions with staff, it appears that the level of maintenance is currently in the lower range of Mode III, a maintenance category established by the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) which is considered a below average operating standard for municipal parks and recreation systems the size of the City of Downey. A partial cause of the lower level of maintenance is the aging infrastructure of Downey’s park system. The City is not faced with large future population increases but is facing a demand for new and upgraded park facilities. Exhibit 3.5-1 shows the current maintenance needs for the City of Downey based upon conducted park tours. This does not include potential upgrades, renovations, or redesign of park facilities. The Appendix includes a report for each park on inventory, needs, and recommended maintenance improvements, renovations, and capital projects. Maintenance and Operations Recommendations are identiﬁ ed in Section 5.3, which if implemented, will serve to move the City to Mode I. ParkSite Tu r f Ir r i g a t i o n Sh r u b Be d s Tr e e s Co n c r e t e Wa l k w a y s Pa r k i n g Lo t AD A Is s u e Bu i l d i n g Ne e d s Pl a y g r o u n d s Sp o r t Co u r t s Sp o r t Fi e l d s Pi c n i c Ar e a s Dr i n k i n g Fo u n t a i n s Re s t r o o m ApolloParkXXXXXXXX BarbaraJ.RileyCenterX BrookshireChildren’sParkXX CrawfordParkXXXXX DennistheMenaceParkXXXXXXXXX DiscoverySportsComplexX FurmanParkXXXXXX GoldenParkXXXXXXXXX IndependenceParkXXXXXXXXX RioSanGabrielParkXXXXXX TempleParkX TreasureIslandXXXX WildernessParkXXXXXXX Exhibit 3.5-1 Current Maintenance Needs of Downey Parks FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 71 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan60 3.6 Building Maintenance and Accessibility An analysis of the current condition of park buildings as well as building and site accessibility was included as part of the Master Plan. Many park buildings have deferred maintenance issues and many will need improvements to meet ADA regulations. Exhibit 3.6-1 identiﬁ es the needed improvements that were identiﬁ ed as part of this analysis. A detailed evaluation is included in the Appendix document, tab A5.3-2. Speciﬁ c costs for these needed improvements are included in Exhibit 5.2-1. 3.7 Service Area Analysis In addition to providing appropriate quantities and types of recreation facilities, the City of Downey strives to provide them in useful and appropriate locations. A Service Area Analysis was conducted with respect to all Downey parks and recreation facilities. Proximity to parks is more than a convenience issue. It helps to establish an excellent Downey park system by providing improved air quality, circulation, social opportunities, community identity, and community health beneﬁ ts. Proximity to parkland is one of the elements identiﬁ ed as predicting levels of physical activity in the community. One-half (.5) mile is approximately a 15-minute walk for most people. It is generally considered a signiﬁ cant threshold in distance, beyond which some segments of the population will tend to decline walking opportunities. Therefore, most residences should be within one-half mile, a convenient walkable distance for most people, of a neighborhood park or other park that may satisfy common recreation needs. This .5 mile radius around parks and recreational facilities is deﬁ ned as a neighborhood park “service area”. This service area emphasis is noteworthy in a community in which families, neighborhoods, and active-living are central issues. To analyze the distribution of existing Downey park facilities, a service area radius map is provided (see Exhibit 3.7-1). A one-half (.5) mile radius is shown around the park boundary, indicating the residential areas, which are within the one-half (.5) mile service area of the park. The service area boundaries also reﬂ ect the physical obstructions to pedestrian travel created by freeways, arterial roadways, railroad lines, and river channels which limit easy access to the park, and are reﬂ ected by truncated shapes in the service areas in the exhibit. When areas zoned for residential use fall outside graphic service area designations, it can be said that those areas may be underserved by the existing parks. The Exhibit identiﬁ es that signiﬁ cant portion of City residents do not have convenient access to a park facility. FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 72 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan61 Exhibit 3.7-1 Service Area Analysis FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 73 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan62 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 74 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan63 3.8 Acreage Analysis In the City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan (2005), the City references a National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) standard of a minimum park acreage of 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents. At the time of its publication, the General Plan indicated an acreage shortfall of 50 acres in meeting this goal. Since the development of the General Plan, the City has developed Discovery Sports Complex, adding 12.7 acres to the park system. Utilizing current City-provided GIS data on park acreage, the City currently has a total of 117 acres of parkland. In 2010, the City had a parkland ratio of 1 acre per 1,000 residents based on 117 existing acres of parkland and a population of 111,772. This is a deﬁ cit of 51 acres based on the 1.5 acre standard. Based on a 2015 estimate of population of 113,543, this deﬁ cit increased to 53 acres. By 2035 if no new parkland is added and the community continues to grow as anticipated (to 118,994 by 2035), there will be a parkland deﬁ cit of 61 acres. Since the development of the General Plan, the NRPA has discontinued providing acreage standards for communities. So the question must be asked, is 1.5 acres/1000 residents still a reasonable standard? The Master Plan provides an alternate strategy to consider Downey’s parkland acreage standard: community needs. Exhibit 3.8-1 provides a simple illustration of facility needs based on the Demand and Needs Analysis and an approximation of the size of a given facility. In Section 3.2, the Master Plan determined the number of facilities needed to meet the communities demand, the “Facility Demand.” If we know how many facilities are needed by the community and how big they are, we can determine a minimum amount of park space to accommodate those facilities. 2015 2035 Facility FacilityDemandSize/facility (Acres)* TotalAcreage FacilityDemandSize/facilityTotalAcreage YouthSoftball 6.2 3.0 18.6 6.5 3.0 19.5 AdultSoftball 5.2 3.5 18.2 5.7 3.5 19.95 YouthBaseball 14 3.0 42.0 14.6 3.0 43.8 YouthFootball 2 3.0 6.0 1.9 3.0 5.7 YouthSoccer 20 3.0 60.0 21.8 3.0 65.4 TotLots/Playgrounds 44 0.5 22.0 43.7 0.5 21.85 IndoorBasketball 2 1.0 2.0 2.3 1.0 2.3 Walking/JoggingTrails**43.7 1.0 42.4 50.2 1.0 48.7 Total 211.2 227.2 CurrentParkAcreage:117 117 CurrentDeficit:94.2Acres FutureDeficit:110.2Acres 2015Pop.113,543 2035Pop.118,994 Need/1000pop.1.9Acres Need/1000pop.1.9Acres *Facilitiesincludeareaforsupportfacilities,pathways,etc. **MilesofpathconvertedtoacresͲAssumes8'widepath. Note:Bicyclepathswerenotincludedintheanalysisasitwasassumedthatbicyclepathscould beaccommodatedonͲstreet,resultinginnoadditional needforparkspace. Exhibit 3.8-1 Acreage Analysis FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 75 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan64 For example, in 2015, 6.2 youth softball ﬁ elds are required to meet current demand. Each of these ﬁ elds require approximately 2 acres of space, which means that 12.4 acres of parkland will be required to accommodate youth softball. Exhibit 3.8-1 provides this calculation for each of the facilities in the Demand and Needs Analysis with the exception of biking trails, as these could potentially be accommodated on public roads and not require park space. The analysis concludes that there is a current need of 189 acres of parkland to meet the current demand for park space, which will grow to 205 acres by 2035, a deﬁ cit of 72 acres for 2015 and 88 acres for 2035. This calculation would yield a 1.9 acre/1000 resident need for park space, which is higher than the 1.5 acres/1000 residents established in the General Plan. For the purpose of comparison, the Los Angeles Countywide Comprehensive Park and Recreation Needs Assessment indicates a county average of 3.3 acres/1,000 residents, a much higher ratio. Regardless of the measurement considered, the City of Downey clearly needs additional park space. Given the lack of available space for development, the City of Downey will have a difﬁ cult time meeting the standard developed in the General Plan or the Demand and Needs Acreage calculation. Section Five provides some recommendations, which include the utilization of existing park space, expansion of park space, and acquisition opportunities. It should be noted that: ◦The General Plan also included “Dempster Park” in its 2005 analysis. This .2 acre parcel, which is owned by the City does not have any recreation elements, and therefore is not included in the inventory of parks and calculation of acreage. ◦Facilities and populations outside the City boundary not included in this analysis. ◦Private recreation facilities, such as homeowner association parks, are not credited. FACILITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 76 PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 77 Billiards at the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 78 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan67 Section Four: Recreation Program Needs Assessment Section Four Highlights: ◦Downey offers a full range of classes and recreation activities for all age groups. ◦In 2014/2015, over 12,416 registered resident and 2,240 non-resident participants enjoyed recreation classes, camps, and education enrichment classes. ◦The highest priority program needs include aquatics/swimming, arts & crafts classes, basketball, cooking, dance instruction, ﬁ tness, martial arts, music instruction, reading/language/writing classes, soccer, yoga/meditation/stress relief classes, and youth and teen programs. ◦Demographic data indicates that due to the high rate of growth in the senior population, senior programming will be in high demand over the next several decades. 4.1 Existing Programs and Services The City of Downey through the Parks and Recreation Department provides a wide range of services and programs geared towards meeting the recreation needs and interests of various age levels. (Downey Civic Theater, and Golf Course Operations are not included within the scope of this master plan.) The services and programs provided through the Facilities and Events and the Fee Supported Recreation Program Divisions include: ◦Recreation Classes and Activities - In addition to those classes geared towards recreation and ﬁ tness, Downey offers a variety of cultural and special interest classes and activities including music, dance, art, computer technology, and science. ◦Organized Team Sports Activities - Numerous organized sports groups such as Little League and soccer teams, utilize Downey facilities and ﬁ elds. The aquatics program offers swim lessons and water activities at the joint City/Downey Uniﬁ ed School District pool. ◦Community Programs - Downey provides accessible programs geared towards assisting individual age and special needs groups such as seniors and after-school programs. ◦Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center--Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center offers programs, classes and services for both adults’ ages 50+ and community members of all ages. ◦Special Events - Downey works with other jurisdictions and community organizations to provide seasonal, special, and educational events for the community such as Kid’s Day at Apollo Park and Healthy Downey events. ◦Day Camps and Sports Camps - Downey’s recreation programs include numerous special interest or activity day camps, as well as sports oriented camps. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 79 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan68 Downey has a history of providing community services and activities to meet the needs of various age groups often in cooperation with other agencies. The City of Downey and the Downey Uniﬁ ed School District collaborate to administer a State grant to provide the After School Program Information Recreation Education (ASPIRE) at several schools throughout the community. The goal of the program is to provide a fun, positive, and safe learning environment. Downey offers a wide variety of sports activities and classes for all ages. There is an extensive programming at both the Barbara J. Riley Senior and Community Center and the Gary P. McCaughan Gymnasium. Additionally, a summer aquatics program is conducted at the joint City/Downey High School pool. In addition, numerous organized sports groups and leagues for soccer, softball, and baseball utilize park ﬁ elds on a regular basis. The recreation budget provides a variety of programs that include before and after school opportunities for youth, contract classes, teen programming, youth and adult sports, family programs, special events and volunteers. The Downey Parks and Recreation Department staff takes a proactive approach in providing recreational and leisure programming for the City. Through effective partnerships with community groups, sports leagues, and DUSD an array of active and passive recreation programs are offered, which directly impact the overall physical and mental well-being of the community. In 2014/15, over 12,416 registered resident and 2,240 non-resident participants enjoyed recreation classes, camps, and education enrichment classes. This does not include ﬁ gures for sports leagues. A summary listing of programs by category is shown below. The highest enrollment was for swimming with over 2,000 enrolled. Most exercise and dance programs also saw high enrollment ﬁ gures. Exhibit 4.1-1 Recreation Program Inventory lists all program offerings for 2014/2015. Appendix tab A4.1 4.2 Program Needs Assessment In the Master Plan process, a variety of methods and processes were utilized in obtaining public input. The purpose of gathering community input through a variety of methods is to ensure that the Parks and Recreation Master Plan is as inclusive as possible and that it reﬂ ects the views, preferences, and recreating patterns of City of Downey residents. The data derived from the public input process was the foundation upon which the program analysis and recommendations were developed. Those methods included: ◦Recreation Trends Analysis: Current demographics are compared with regional and national recreation trends. ◦Information gathered from Downey residents through City-wide telephone survey. ◦Three community workshops. ◦Focus Groups ◦Online Questionnaire PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 80 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan69 ProgramProgram AARPDriverSafetyLilSportsandExercise AdultExcursionsLineDancing ArtforAdultsMartialArts AspireMe&Mom/Dad BalloonDecorPerformingArtsCamp BaseballͲYouthPersonalTraining BasketballͲYouthPiano BasicArtPlaygroundAdventurers BootCampPolynesianDance Bricks4KidzReadySetLearn BunnyBreakfastRhythm,RhymeandFun CABAAdultBasketballRunningClubͲYouth CampWildernessSalsaClubDancing CardioKickboxingSoccerͲYouth CardioTennisSoftballͲYouth CircuitTrainingSpanishforKids CommunityStepperStrengthTraining CoreFusionSwimLessons DanceAerobicsTaiChi FashionSketchingTap Fitness–AdultTeachMeToo FitnessͲYouthTeenMarioCart FolkloricoDanceTennisͲAdult FootballͲYouthTennisͲYouth FunNMessyTheatreDance FutsalͲYouthTinyTotProgramming GolfTotalBodyProgramming GuitarTotsofFun IntrotoPhotographyTumbling JazzDanceVolleyballͲYouth KidsLoveMusicWeeThree KidsBodySculptureW.O.N.TrainingCamp LearntoSkateYoga Let’sCookYoungChefs LifeguardTrainingYouth/TeenExcursions LilChefs Exhibit 4.1-1 Recreation Program Inventory PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 81 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan70 Recreation Trends Analysis Today, our country and the world has become more transient, fast paced, with consistent, rapid, and dramatic changes. Therefore, understanding the trends that affect the park and recreation industry is very important as the City moves through the process of developing a Parks and Recreation Master Plan to ensure sustainability and to meet the future community service needs of residents. An awareness of trends affecting the future economy, facility operation, and program participation will not only enhance the ability to meet growing and changing needs but open doors to new opportunities. Paying attention to current issues and understanding future issues will assist Downey in achieving sustainability and positioning parks and recreation as an essential service to the community. Please also refer to the detailed report in the Appendix, tab A4.2, entitled Recreation Trends Analysis. Based on those trends and the implications that are indicated, there are a number of Recreation Programs that should be highlighted, for the City of Downey. Emerging trends can be organized into ﬁ ve major subject areas: ◦Demographic Shift—Americans are aging, and becoming more culturally diverse. ◦Changing Life Styles—the changing world of electronics and communication is having a major impact on our lifestyle and our recreational pursuits. ◦Society and Economy-- Nationally, there is an emerging recognition that parks and recreation services play a signiﬁ cant role in improving the quality of life of the City, and that parks and open space are catalysts for both community building and economic development. Americans continue to be concerned with economic growth and crime within their community. ◦Sustainability-- There is a renewed awareness and sensitivity to the preservation of our natural environment. Many cities such as Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco have developed best practices and strategies to address open space and urban forest preservation, wildlife habitat and natural area restoration, invasive plant management and shoreline/wetland/critical area management. ◦Park and Recreation-- Urban parks are on the rise to address open space and leisure walking needs within the compact built environment. At the same time, traditional sports such as baseball continue to see decline in participation rates while emerging sports such as lacrosse and pickleball are experiencing tremendous growth. As these emerging trends are explained and discussed, it will become clear that there will be signiﬁ cant impacts on current facilities and the development of new park and recreation programs. Foremost among these changes are: ◦“Intergenerational” programs that address needs of all of the community’s population regardless of age. ◦Programs that provide positive, safe, and secure recreational alternatives for healthy lifestyles and to combat obesity. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 82 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan71 ◦Programs that promote personal connections, and allow the community to highlight and share their cultural heritage. ◦Programs that allow for increased community connectedness. ◦Programs that support increased multi-cultural family and art events. ◦Access to programs, with ﬂ exible hours to accommodate user needs. ◦Facilities in which teens can call “home,” program, and operate under teen leadership. ◦Programs in which children can experience, learn, and develop an appreciation for nature and open space. Citywide Telephone Survey As mentioned in Section 3.1, as part of the Master Plan, a telephone survey was used to better understand the needs of the community. The following includes some of the phone survey highlights related to programming. Please refer to the Appendix for a detailed telephone survey report entitled Resident Survey. For recreational programming, nearly one of three residents polled (31%) stated they were frequent users (at least 3 times per month) of programs in the last year. In contrast, more than four in ten residents (41%) stated they had not used programs in that time frame. Nearly nine of every ten City of Downey households (87%) identiﬁ ed a desired new program, class, or lesson. More than one in ten (13%) stated they desired no program additions. The most often reported desired recreation programs were “Arts and Crafts,” “Cooking,” and “Fitness,” “Music,” and “Swimming.” Please refer to Exhibit 4.2-1. Another question in the telephone survey asked which one of the following types of improvements would you most like to see added in the City of Downey? Nearly one of every three City of Downey households (32%) identiﬁ ed a preference for Fine Arts or Performing Arts Facilities and Programs improvements. Programs, Classes, Lesson, and Community Events was identiﬁ ed by 23% of the population with Open Space Preservation and Enjoyment identiﬁ ed by 20%. 4% 4% 5% 6% 6% 7% 7% 8% 0%5%10% Basketball Facility Mentions Reading/Language Swimming Music Fitness Cooking Arts/Crafts Recreation Programs Desired Downey Residents Exhibit 4.2-1 Telephone Survey, Programs Desired PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 83 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan72 Focus Groups As part of the planning process, two focus groups were held with a total of thirty-one (31) stakeholders attending. The programs, classes, or activities participants would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of the community are: ◦Programs Accessible to Adults / Parents ◦Teen / Youth Programs ◦Evening Programs On Line Questionnaire An On-Line Questionnaire was one of the methods undertaken to involve the community in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan process. When asked what new recreation programming was desired nearly half of respondents (49%) identiﬁ ed Soccer, followed by Aerobics/Fitness (8%), Aquatics (4%), Yoga/Meditation and Stress Relief (2%), and Music Instruction or Classes (2%). Community Workshops – Needs Summary and Prioritization (Workshop #3) According to the group consensus results from the workshop, the top recreation program needs in the City of Downey are: ◦Soccer ◦Club Sports ◦Fitness ◦Youth / Teen Programs The full reports on the community workshops are included in the Appendix. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 84 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan73 4.3 Program Needs Summary The Master Plan brings together information from various public and staff input, as well as other relevant studies and analysis, and to provide a broad overall picture of recreation in the form of recreation programs. Exhibit 4.3-1 is a listing of all of the program needs identiﬁ ed through the community process. While all of the needs on the table were identiﬁ ed by the community as needed, the programs and/or services with a higher priority of need were identiﬁ ed in three or more of the assessment processes. The highest priority recreation program needs, listed alphabetically, in Downey are: ◦Aquatics/Swimming ◦Arts and Crafts Classes ◦Basketball ◦Cooking ◦Dance Instruction ◦Fitness ◦Martial Arts ◦Music Instruction ◦Reading/Language/Writing ◦Soccer ◦Yoga/Meditation/Stress Relief ◦Youth/Teen Programs Based on qualitative and quantitative data collected during the Master Plan process and the review and analysis of current programs, there are a limited number of gaps in programming. Staff has responded well to meeting the program interests of the community. However, it is timely to review program offerings, eliminate any duplication, focus on core programs, and strengthen existing program offerings to respond to changing demographics and recreation preferences. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 85 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan74 Identified Recreation Program Need Re s i d e n t T e l e p h o n e S u r v e y ( x 2 ) Fo c u s G r o u p s Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 1 Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 2 Co m m u n i t y W o r k s h o p # 3 On l i n e S u r v e y To t a l # o f T o o l s t h a t I d e n t i f i e d N e e d FitnessͲAerobics/Spinning 33 33 5 Arts/Crafts33 3 4 Cooking 33 3 4 Soccer(agenotspecified)3 333 4 Aquatics/Swimming 3 3 3 Basketball 3 3 3 DanceInstruction 3 3 3 MartialArts 3 3 3 MusicInstruction 3 3 3 Reading/Language/Writing 3 3 3 Yoga/Meditation/StressRelief 3 3 3 Youth/TeenPrograms 33 3 3 ClubSports 33 2 Concerts 3 2 Cultural(artexhibits/performances)3 3 2 DayCare,Children 3 3 2 Gymnastics 3 2 PersonalDevelopment/BusinessInstruction 3 2 PreschoolCare 3 2 Soccer,Adult 3 3 2 Baseball 3 1 Camps,SchoolRecess/VacationPeriods 3 1 CaseResourceManagement 3 1 Childcare 3 1 ClimateChange/EcologicalAwareness 3 1 CommunityBeautification 3 1 ComputerClasses 3 1 EarlyChildhoodDevelopment 3 1 EveningPrograms 3 1 Football 3 1 Gardening 3 1 LegoProgram 3 1 MentoringProgram 3 1 MommyandMeToddlerPrograms 3 1 Science/NatureInstruction/Classes 3 1 SeniorLeagues 3 1 SeniorPrograms 3 1 Soccer,Youth 3 1 Softball 3 1 SpecialNeeds 3 1 Tennis 3 1 NEEDS IDENTIFICATION TOOLS Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan Program Needs Summary Exhibit 4.3-1 Program Needs Summary Priority Priority 1 - High Priority Priority 2 - Moderate Priorit Priority 3 - Lower Priority PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 86 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan75 4.4 Program Recommendations The following program recommendations address the top program needs based on the assessment process. These may address needs of a speciﬁ c age group or the community in general. There may be some overlap or interdependency among the recommended actions. There is also a relationship between program needs and park and facility needs discussed in other sections of the Master Plan. Aquatics Due to budget limitations, the City reduced the aquatics program to just six weeks starting in ﬁ scal year 2012/2013. For the most recent swimming season over 965 residents and 184 non- residents participated in swim lessons. Recreational swimming accounted for over 2,099 uses during the summer session, and there were 26 resident and 4 non-resident junior lifeguard participants. Downey’s Aquatics Program currently provides opportunities for: ◦Learn to swim (ages 6-15) ◦Mommy/Daddy and Me ◦Introduction to Water ◦Junior Guards and Water Safety Instructor (WSI) ◦Adult Lessons ◦Recreation Swim ◦Lap Swim ◦Family Twilight Nights at the Pool The Aquatic programs showed revenue of $101,150 for ﬁ scal year 2010/2011 dropping to $77,126 for ﬁ scal year 2014/2015 with the shorter program. Payment to Downey Uniﬁ ed School District for the shared cost of the pool is budgeted at $48,862 for ﬁ scal year 2014/15. The aquatics program is supported by part-time staff including a Pool Manager, Senior Lifeguards, Lifeguards, Swim Instructors, and Cashiers. It is typical for community swim pools to be subsidized, especially due to the high cost of stafﬁ ng, water, and utilities. Aquatics/ Swimming was identiﬁ ed both in the Resident Telephone Survey and Online Survey as a high priority recreation need. Recommended Actions ◦Evaluate options and work with YMCA, Rancho Los Amigos, Downey Uniﬁ ed School District and private ﬁ tness business providers to expand swimming programs for city residents especially learn to swim and water awareness programs. ◦Explore the opportunity to partner with a private business to program advanced aquatic programming including level 4 swimming lessons and up, lifeguard training classes, SCUBA, water polo, and kayaking. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 87 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan76 Children and Youth Services Downey offers recreation activities and classes, special events and childcare services geared towards a variety of grade levels: preschoolers, elementary, middle, and high school. Youth programs are a signiﬁ cant component of Downey services, highlighted by the ASPIRE after school program. While children and youth services remain important, Downey saw a declining number of young people during the 2000-2010 period. The greatest decline in population by age group was evidenced among 5 to 9 years of age which declined by 15% while those less than age 5 declined by 9% or a total of 2,101 children. Between 2010 and 2013 the age 5 to 9 years of age was estimated to have dropped by an additional 296 children. Childcare needs are increasing and serve a valuable community and recreation service. A needs assessment prepared by the Los Angeles County Child Care Planning Committee, 2013 found that there is a particular need for before and after school childcare services for school aged children both within Downey and Los Angeles County. Downey runs extensive programming in Children and Youth Services including the ASPIRE Program at 12 school sites, the Tiny Tot program with 393 residents and 83 non-residents registered for 2014/15, and Me and Mom/Dad with 205 residents and 10 non-residents registered. Recommended Actions ◦Expand the role of the Youth Commission and involvement from Department staff so that they advise the City Council on all matters affecting the youth of Downey. Examples of additional programs or activities could include joint meetings with Youth Commissioners from adjoining cities and hosting a Youth Town Hall with the City Council. ◦Consider expanding Downey’s role in teen programs offering an array of programs that might include social recreation, tutoring, mentoring, and non-sports activities. ◦Work with health care associations, to incorporate healthy eating and exercising habits into after-school recreation programs and camps for young children that model healthy living. ◦Consider providing healthy snacks at City sponsored programs, day camps, and special events that meet state nutritional standards. ◦Explore the creation of alternative sports programming that is of interest to youth such as laser tag and rock climbing. ◦Collaborate with Downey Uniﬁ ed School District to ensure state standards for physical education are implemented and supplement school programs with physical activity and skill development in recreation offerings. ◦Provide indoor and outdoor spaces for supervised but unstructured free play for youth. ◦Develop ﬁ nancial assistance support for youth who cannot afford program fees. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 88 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan77 ◦Continue cooperative efforts with youth sports organizations to provide safe and accessible programs that develop sports skills, good sportsmanship and provide youth experiences in organized sports such as the popular baseball, soccer, softball, basketball and football. ◦Consider programming “high risk” adventure activities such as kayaking, mountain biking, scuba diving, and rock climbing. ◦Develop a training and volunteer program of Play Stewards who would receive training and instruction on the aspects of play and recreation. ◦Encourage Play Stewards to coordinate with city staff on the delivery of recreation programming for youth and teens. Classes Downey offers a full range of classes and recreation activities for all age groups. Class and activity sessions occur year round. Downey provides activities, programs and special events in over 50 topic areas, including arts and crafts, science, music, language, and various sports programs and activities. Most classes and programs are fee based. In order to offset costs, it is and has consistently been a goal of the City that programs be self-supporting to the greatest extent possible, through user fees as well as nontraditional funding methods. Classes and programs are funded primarily through the fees they generate, as well as grants, and donations. Partnerships with other public and private entities, such as the Downey Uniﬁ ed School District, a local ice rink, Paramount Iceland, and other community organizations and businesses, have also helped to offset cost and provide services. Several classes were identiﬁ ed as high priority during the Master Planning process including Cooking, Dance, Arts and Crafts, Martial Arts, and Yoga. Martial Arts had 307 residents and 26 non-residents registered for 2014/15. Currently the City offers an extensive and popular martial arts programming, dance, and a variety of cooking classes for both children and adults. Also identiﬁ ed as a high need were art and music programs. The City also offers a number of Art and Performing Art classes including the popular Performing Arts Camp with 152 residents and 31 non-residents registered. The City also offers a variety of music classes including guitar and piano. Recommended Actions ◦Provide greater access to arts programs by offering them through joint-use agreements at venues close to home: neighborhood facilities, parks, churches, museums, the library, and shopping malls. ◦Strive to maintain high quality and diverse recreation classes and programs. ◦Downey should continue to monitor demand for programs and classes to determine and address changing needs and usage patterns. ◦Develop a line of healthy eating cooking programs in conjunction with the local business community. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 89 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan78 ◦Develop multi-cultural arts programs and activities that promote personal connections among participants and allow the community to highlight and share its diverse customs, celebrations, and diversions. ◦Survey current participants and non-participants to determine their preferences for additional kinds of classes, and determine if there are any deterrents to their participation, such as transportation or child care. ◦Collaborate with local and regional arts organizations to maximize resources and expertise to bring additional cultural programs to residents. ◦Expand cultural events and creative experiences through community partnerships with merchants, businesses, Chamber of Commerce, and other community organizations. ◦Showcase different cultures in special event programming to enhance cultural understanding and unity. Organized Team Sports In addition to youth sports programming provided by the City, there are organized sport groups that regularly utilize Downey area playing ﬁ elds and facilities throughout the year. These include: ◦Downey Junior Athletic Association (baseball/basketball/ﬂ ag football) ◦Downey Ponytail Athletic Association ◦American Youth Soccer Organization ◦Major League Softball ◦Nemesis Elite (youth softball) ◦Northwest Downey Little League ◦Downey Futbol Club ◦Downey Pop Warner Football – Razorbacks ◦Downey Dolphins Swim Team ◦Downey Mustangs Youth Football & Cheer It should be noted that additional sports groups exist in Downey, but do not use Downey facilities. These include: ◦Downey United FC ◦Toqueteo Social Futbol Club (TSFC) ◦West Downey Little League While enrollment among the various groups has ﬂ uctuated over the last ﬁ ve years, most groups have maintained, if not increased, enrollment. According to Downey staff, there is a consistently high demand for playing time on all sports ﬁ elds and facilities. The Needs Assessment for programming identiﬁ ed soccer and basketball as high priority needs with Downey, with an emphasis on club sports. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 90 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan79 Recommended Actions ◦The City should work to correct the lack of ﬁ elds available for all sports including emerging sports such as off-season soccer by entering into discussions with the Downey Uniﬁ ed School District for the joint use development of synthetic ﬁ elds at Columbus High School ﬁ elds. ◦All weather synthetic turf ﬁ elds can support substantially more play than grass ﬁ elds. Further, synthetic ﬁ elds can easily be lined for several different sports. When a system considers the cost of land and the cost of sports ﬁ elds they should consider all weather synthetic ﬁ elds as an alternative and do a cost beneﬁ t analysis on the options in order to determine the best alternative for them to follow. ◦Development and use of design standards and guidelines needs to be put in place for future development to limit maintenance costs. Standards to consider are trafﬁ c and pedestrian circulation, parking, athletic use areas, restroom/ concession location and design. ◦Establish policies appropriate for the installation and management of synthetic playing ﬁ elds including: ◦Synthetic ﬁ elds should be installed only at facilities which also have lights for night-time play. ◦A policy that states synthetic ﬁ elds will be open for play except under extreme weather conditions. Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center Demographic data for Downey during the 2000 to 2010 time frame, showed the greatest growth in population among City residents in the 55 to 64 age group, increasing by 36%. Related to future senior services, the 45 to 54 age group increased by 17%. This trend mirrors many California and Los Angeles County communities. The high rate of growth in this age group in Downey is an indication that senior services and facilities will be in high demand over the next several decades. The Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center functions as both a senior center offering programs and services for ages 50+, and as a Community Center for the entire City of Downey. Recommended Actions •Work with Los Angeles County and other public agencies to determine the needs of older adults in the Downey area and initiate planning to take a more active role in programming and service needs for older adults. •The City of Downey should develop a Senior Strategic Plan for 2015-2025 to guide future programs, services and stafﬁ ng levels, and established goals in four planning areas: ◦Programs and services ◦Outreach to seniors ◦Communication with a larger community ◦Interaction at the Center. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 91 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan80 •Address the needs of an aging population by expanding programming and encouraging participation in physical activity with an emphasis on the gentler aerobic activities. •Identify partners or collaborators to assist in developing an increase in programs for older adults. Possible partners may include AARP, faith based organizations, health care providers, and educational institutions. •Offer additional lifelong learning programs such as creative arts, technology classes, lectures, short courses, and leisure classes that cater to the adults and particularly the aging baby boomer cohort. •In conjunction with local health providers evaluate potential roles for the City in helping meet the needs of the growing population of 85+ seniors. As reported by the California Department of Aging, the fastest growing population is those over the age of 85 which quadrupled between 1990 and 2010, and projected to increase by 143% by 2020. •Offer educational travel opportunities and cultural outings with an emphasis on “off the beaten path,” scheduled to attract the working retiree. •Provide more “inter-generational programming” to bring various age groups together to enjoy recreation events and activities. Healthy Downey The Healthy Downey program is aimed to encourage residents to ﬁ nd opportunities to participate in events and activities. The City and their partners are supporting physical, social, and economic environments that promote well-being, residents have the opportunity to maintain a productive, high quality of life, including access to healthier ways to eat and exercise, nutrition, and ﬁ tness, and to use community parks and facilities to use towards a healthier lifestyle. Currently the City provides an extensive array of ﬁ tness programming in 2014/15 including Total Body, Sports Fitness (Strength Training, and Cardio Kickboxing with a total of 2,192 residents and 308 non-residents registered for these programs. However, the highest identiﬁ ed need with the Program Needs Assessment was ﬁ tness programming. In order to meet these needs, the City will implement the recently completed Healthy Downey Strategic Plan. Recommended Actions •Develop multi-disciplinary health partnerships with schools, local hospitals, and health care providers, private health clubs, and other agencies to bring public information and educational programs that prevent obesity and successfully promote physical activity across entire communities. •Report on an on-going basis to the public and policy makers the health and wellness outcomes of the City’s programs and facilities. •Collaborate with Los Angeles County agencies and the Audubon Society to maximize opportunities to share resources in providing outdoor recreation and health and wellness programs. •Expand ﬁ tness class offerings at existing facilities. PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 92 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan81 Special Events Special events are a unique community service that generate revenue through facility rental, admission fees, and concessions and revenue to the community through increased business activities and tourism. The Parks and Recreation Department working in conjunction with numerous civic organizations, businesses, and other public agencies provides facilities, staff support, and miscellaneous services for a number of special and seasonal events in the community. The largest of these special events are the annual Kidsday event with over 8,000 in attendance and the annual Halloween event with 9,000 in attendance. Other seasonal events include Kidsday Hall of Fame, summer concerts at Furman Park, annual Memorial Day event, Dia De Los Muertos, and the International Food Festival. Other events included the annual Bunny Breakfast, Teen Forums, and Movie Night for Middle School Students. Recommended Actions •The City should continue to play a role and work in cooperation with the Chamber of Commerce, School District, civic organizations, and businesses, to produce community- wide special events. •Downey should conduct and report to governing bodies economic proﬁ le reports of major tournaments and swim meets held at City facilities. Bubble artist at Bunny Breakfast Mobile Skate Park Unit at Golden Park PROGRAM NEEDS ASSESSMENT DR A F T PC Agenda Page 93 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 94 FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 95 Downey Community Aquatics Center at Downey High School. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 96 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan85 Section Five: Facility Recommendations This Section presents potential opportunities to meet the recreation needs identiﬁ ed in the Recreation Facility Needs Assessment (Section Three) of this Master Plan. Key Issues •Maintenance and Operations recommendations have been prioritized before Community Needs Assessment recommendations. •Most of the City’s need for bicycling trails can be met through the realization of the Bicycle Master Plan. •Opportunity sites have been identiﬁ ed that can help alleviate the City’s need for walking/jogging trails. •Much of the City need for playgrounds can be accommodated with existing School District playground facilities and development of new playgrounds at opportunity sites. •Many of the City’s ﬁ elds suffer from overuse; conversion of existing highly-used grass sports ﬁ elds to synthetic turf provide additional playing time and a higher quality ﬁ eld of play. •The City will not be able to meet the acreage standard noted in the City’s General Plan without the acquisition of additional park space. •It will be challenging for the City to meet the needs of youth and adult sports teams with existing facilities. 5.1 Overall Concept The facility recommendations seek to: •Promote equitable distribution of recreational opportunities throughout the community and provide the greatest amount of service to the widest range of the public. •Utilize existing resources to maximum potential for greatest public beneﬁ t. ◦Signiﬁ cant improvements are needed to update park system facilities to an acceptable maintenance standard. ◦The limited space for development of new parkland requires maximizing recreation use to the greatest extent practicable within existing park space. ◦Financial constraints necessitate a methodical strategy for funding facility improvements or park acquisitions [Funding is covered in Section 6]. •Provide long-term sustainability to the park system through prioritization of improvements. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 97 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan86 5.2 Types of Facility Recommendations and Prioritization The Master Plan identiﬁ es two broad categories of facility recommendations, maintenance and operations improvements to existing facilities and community needs recommendations. They are deﬁ ned as follows in order of priority. •Maintenance & Operations Recommendations to Existing Facilities 1. Health and Safety: eliminate a condition that poses an imminent or potential threat of injury. 2. Code Requirements: bring a facility or element up to federal, state, local code requirements or other legal requirements. 3. Facility Integrity: help keep the facility operational and extend its life cycle by repairing, replacing, and renovating systems and elements of the facility. 4. Improve Operating Efﬁ ciency: result in reduction of operating and maintenance costs, including energy and water costs, or improved operational effectiveness. 5. Revenue Generating: generate revenue to the City equal to or greater than operating costs and have a three year construction pay-back. 6. 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements: summary of recommended improvements and costs, for example: ◦New accessible curb ramp ◦Parking lot renovation ◦Improved ﬁ eld lighting See Appendix Tab A6.4 for full details. •Community Needs Recommendations 7. Deﬁ ned through the Master Plan Community Engagement and Recreation Needs Assessment process. These improvements are intended to provide additional needed recreational facility opportunities beyond what currently exists. These categories provide a means through which to look at the recommendations in this chapter to determine a relative means of prioritization. When looking at the City’s ability to provide services, Operations and Maintenance projects generally take priority over community needs recommendations. The City has a responsibility to protect the safety and welfare of the community, comply with appropriate codes, maintain its facilities, and maintain operations before developing new projects, which may otherwise burden a system and potentially exacerbate existing problems. While this method of categorization provides a way to discuss and prioritize recommendations, many of the recommendations ﬁ t into more than one category. Exhibit 5.2-1 summarizes all of the facility recommendations included in the following sections by type of improvement (and relative priority) as well as the costs associated with the improvements. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 98 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan87 Exhibit 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary He a l t h an d Sa f e t y Co d e Re q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y In t e g r i t y Im p r o v e Op e r a t i n g Ef f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e Ge n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y Ne e d s Re c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d Ac q u i s i t i o n Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * Im p r o v e m e n t Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * * Bu d g e t Am o u n t 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a110,100$110,100$ InfiltrationBasinDevelopment X n/a 3,725,000$3,725,000$ ShuffleballtoMultipurposeFitness X X Xn/a 20,000$20,000$ CommunityCenterSeismicStudy XX n/a 100,000$100,000$ RecycledwaterͲwatermainimprovements X n/a 300,000$300,000$ RecycledwaterͲirrigationsystemreplacement X n/a 450,000$450,000$ ConversiontoSyntheticturf X Xn/a 2,500,000$2,500,000$ Turfrenovation X Xn/a 300,000$300,000$ OutdoorStorage X Xn/a 15,000$15,000$ Ballfieldlighting X Xn/a 500,000$500,000$ Replacefencearoundplayground X n/a 10,000$10,000$ Replacenorthrestroomor XX n/a 300,000$300,000$ NorthRestroomnewroof X n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ Northrestroompaint X n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ NorthRestroomADA XX n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ Parkinglotrenovation X n/a 70,000$70,000$ EasternparkinglotADAaccess X n/a 3,500$3,500$ SouthRestroomADA X n/a 4,000$4,000$ NorthparkinglotADA X n/a 4,500$4,500$ NortheastparkinglotADA X n/a 5,000$5,000$ Converttoiletstallsforchilduse X n/a 3,000$3,000$ ExteriorDrinkingfountains X n/a 7,500$7,500$ Playgroundrenovation*XXn/a150,000$150,000$ SubTotal 8,577,600$ TYPEOFFACILITYRECOMMENDATION COSTS APOLLOPARK EXISTINGFACILITIES * Grant Awarded FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 99 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan88 Exhibit 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary (Continued) He a l t h a n d S a f e t y Co d e R e q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y I n t e g r i t y Im p r o v e O p e r a t i n g E f f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e G e n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y N e e d s R e c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d A c q u i s i t i o n C o s t ( E s t i m a t e ) * I m p r o v e m e n t C o s t ( E s t i m a t e ) * * B u d g e t A m o u n t TYPE OF FACILITY RECOMMENDATION COSTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Xn/a2,000$ 2,000$ Add Wi Fi X Xn/a 15,000$ 15,000$ Exterior Light Retrofit to LED X n/a 16,338$ 16,338$ Install Cool roof X n/a 56,198$ 56,198$ Replace Rooftop HVAC X n/a 143,205$ 143,205$ Install Solar X n/a 300,612$ 300,612$ Parking lot renovation X n/a 80,000$ 80,000$ Sub Total 613,353$ 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Xn/a20,000$ 20,000$ Recycled Water - water main improvements X n/a 500,000$ 500,000$ Recycled Water - irrigation system improvements X n/a 150,000$ 150,000$ Accessible picnic tables X n/a 3,000$ 3,000$ Accessible drinking fountain X n/a 2,500$ 2,500$ Sub Total 675,500$ 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Xn/a230,700$ 230,700$ Slurry parking lot X n/a 12,000$ 12,000$ Playground renovation X n/a 150,000$ 150,000$ Twenty foot trail access Xn/a 10,000$ 10,000$ Turf/Irrigation Renovation XX Xn/a 300,000$ 300,000$ ADA parking/redesign entry X n/a 22,500$ 22,500$ Sub Total 725,200$ Soccer to synthetic X Xn/a 4,500,000$ 4,500,000$ Install lights sports fields X Xn/a 600,000$ 600,000$ Sub Total 5,100,000$ BARBARA J. RILEY COMMUNITY AND SENIOR CENTER BROOKSHIRE CHILDREN'S PARK CRAWFORD PARK COLUMBUS HIGH SCHOOL FIELDS FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 100 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan89 Exhibit 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary (Continued) He a l t h a n d S a f e t y Co d e R e q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y I n t e g r i t y Im p r o v e O p e r a t i n g E f f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e G e n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y N e e d s R e c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d A c q u i s i t i o n C o s t ( E s t i m a t e ) * I m p r o v e m e n t C o s t ( E s t i m a t e ) * * B u d g e t A m o u n t TYPE OF FACILITY RECOMMENDATION COSTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Xn/a446,500$ 446,500$ Infiltration Basin Development X n/a 3,700,000$ 3,700,000$ Slurry parking lot/ADA XX n/a 10,000$ 10,000$ Replace chain link to wrought iron X n/a 50,000$ 50,000$ Interior Light Retro X n/a 5,000$ 5,000$ Park lighting X X n/a 250,000$ 250,000$ Playground Hardware/surfacing X X n/a 51,000$ 51,000$ Remove community bldg or XX n/a 20,000$ 20,000$ Replace community bldg or XX n/a 175,000$ 175,000$ Community bldg new roof/paint X n/a -$ -$ Garage X n/a -$ -$ Community bldg ADA entry ramp X n/a -$ -$ Community bldg--interior ADA X n/a -$ -$ Replace restroom or X n/a 300,000$ 300,000$ Restroom--new roof wood repairs/paint X n/a -$ -$ Restroom--drainage X n/a -$ -$ Restroom--ADA X n/a -$ -$ Restroom --sidewalk X n/a 3,500$ 3,500$ Sub Total 5,011,000$ 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Xn/a3,500$ 3,500$ Infiltration Basin Expansion X n/a 7,250,000$ 7,250,000$ Soccer fields to synthetic X Xn/a 5,000,000$ 5,000,000$ Lights at new synthetic fields X Xn/a 500,000$ 500,000$ Barrier Poles and netting X Xn/a 90,000$ 90,000$ New accessible curb ramps X n/a 8,000$ 8,000$ Restroom/Concession ADA X n/a 14,500$ 14,500$ Sub Total 12,866,000$ DENNIS THE MENACE PARK DISCOVERY SPORTS COMPLEX FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 101 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan90 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary (Continued) He a l t h an d Sa f e t y Co d e Re q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y In t e g r i t y Im p r o v e Op e r a t i n g Ef f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e Ge n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y Ne e d s Re c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d Ac q u i s i t i o n Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * Im p r o v e m e n t Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * * Bu d g e t Am o u n t TYPEOFFACILITYRECOMMENDATION COSTS 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a84,500$84,500$ InfiltrationBasinDevelopment X n/a 7,250,000$7,250,000$ RecycledwaterͲwatermainimprovements X n/a 580,000$580,000$ RecycledwaterͲirrigationsystemreplacement X n/a 450,000$450,000$ Turfrenovation X Xn/a 400,000$400,000$ Parkinglotrenovation X n/a 60,000$60,000$ ParkinglotADA X n/a 4,500$4,500$ InteriorLightRetro X n/a 5,000$5,000$ Child'srestroomtodayͲcare X n/a 20,000$20,000$ Fieldlighting X Xn/a 350,000$350,000$ SportsfieldsͲbleachers/backstops X Xn/a 50,000$50,000$ Improve2ndballfield**Xn/a 100,000$100,000$ SubTotal 9,354,000$ 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a290,500$290,500$ RecycledWaterͲwatermainimprovements X n/a 500,000$500,000$ RecycledWaterͲirrigationsystem improvements Xn/a275,000$275,000$ Turfrenovation X Xn/a 300,000$300,000$ Renovategrouppicnic X n/a 30,000$30,000$ Parkinglotrenovation X n/a 60,000$60,000$ Communitybldgredesignfrontplaza X n/a 400,000$400,000$ CommunitybldgͲͲdrainage X n/a 5,000$5,000$ ParkinglotADAramp X n/a 18,000$18,000$ WesterlyaccessADAredesign X n/a 3,000$3,000$ RestroomADA X n/a 25,000$25,000$ Improvedfieldlighting X Xn/a 350,000$350,000$ ConversionofSoftballFieldtoGameField X Xn/a 150,000$150,000$ Storagespaceforsportsequipment X Xn/a 15,000$15,000$ SubTotal 2,421,500$ FURMANPARK GOLDENPARK * Grant Awarded ** Project Completed FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 102 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan91 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary (Continued) He a l t h an d Sa f e t y Co d e Re q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y In t e g r i t y Im p r o v e Op e r a t i n g Ef f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e Ge n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y Ne e d s Re c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d Ac q u i s i t i o n Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * Im p r o v e m e n t Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * * Bu d g e t Am o u n t TYPEOFFACILITYRECOMMENDATION COSTS 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a32,500$32,500$ Turf/irrigationrenovation X n/a 750,000$750,000$ Parkinglotrenovation X n/a 110,000$110,000$ Tenniscourtrenovation X n/a 600,000$600,000$ Playgroundrenovation*Xn/a150,000$150,000$ StoragebldgͲͲdrainage X n/a 4,000$4,000$ Lighteasterlyballfield X Xn/a 275,000$275,000$ TennisbldgͲͲreplacetrellis X n/a 4,500$4,500$ PathwayredesignͲͲADA X n/a 17,500$17,500$ EastRestroomͲͲADA X n/a 9,000$9,000$ Replaceexistingrestroom XX n/a 300,000$300,000$ SubTotal 2,252,500$ 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a70,500$70,500$ SlurryPicoVistalot X n/a 35,000$35,000$ BallfieldRestroomͲͲpaintandroof X n/a 3,500$3,500$ DecomposedGraniteWalkingTrail X 18,750$18,750$ ConversiontoPassivePark X n/a 2,000,000$2,000,000$ Removecommunitybldgor X n/a 25,000$25,000$ CommunitybldgͲͲroof X n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ CommunitybldgͲͲpaint X n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ CommunitybldgͲͲwindowframes X n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ CommunitybldgͲͲbrickveneer X n/a Ͳ$Ͳ$ SubTotal 2,152,750$ 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a7,300$7,300$ Turf/irrigationrenovation X n/a 125,000$125,000$ FlagPolewithlighting Xn/a 7,500$7,500$ SubTotal 139,800$ 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a28,000$28,000$ RecycledwaterͲwatermainimprovements X n/a 1,000,000$1,000,000$ RecycledwaterͲirrigationsystem improvements XXn/a 300,000$300,000$ ADAparkingpathredesign X n/a 7,500$7,500$ SubTotal 1,335,500$ TEMPLEPARK TREASUREISLANDPARK RIOSANGABRIELPARK INDEPENDENCEPARK FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 103 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan92 Exhibit 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary (Continued) He a l t h an d Sa f e t y Co d e Re q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y In t e g r i t y Im p r o v e Op e r a t i n g Ef f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e Ge n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y Ne e d s Re c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d Ac q u i s i t i o n Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * Im p r o v e m e n t Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * * Bu d g e t Am o u n t TYPEOFFACILITYRECOMMENDATION COSTS 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements Xn/a652,000$652,000$ InfiltrationBasinDevelopment X n/a 3,975,000$3,975,000$ Pondrenovation X n/a 1,700,000$1,700,000$ Irrigationupgrade X n/a 400,000$400,000$ ExteriorLightRetro X n/a 46,303$46,303$ CommunitybldgͲredesigninterior XX Xn/a 300,000$300,000$ CommunitybldgͲͲADAparkingramp/path redesign Xn/a5,000$5,000$ CommunityBuildingHVACSystem X n/a 35,000$35,000$ SecondaryparkingADAramp/slurry X n/a 22,000$22,000$ CommunitybldgADAimprovements X n/a 25,000$25,000$ Southrestroomrenovation/ADA X n/a 6,500$6,500$ Grouppicnicrenovation X n/a 15,000$15,000$ AccessibleStalls/rampatSouthRestroom X n/a 3,000$3,000$ BikeTrailAccessImprovements X Xn/a 200,000$200,000$ SubTotal 7,384,803$ ExistingFacilitiesTotal 58,609,506$ WildernessParkExpansion X n/aͲlease 600,000$600,000$ LaReinaProperty3Xn/a 1,100,000$1,100,000$ OrangeStreetProperty X 348,480$450,000$798,480$ FormerWellSiteͲ7217AdwenSt.X n/a 450,000$450,000$ FormerWellSiteͲ8201Stewart&GrayRoad.X n/a 450,000$450,000$ FormerWellSiteͲ9501GuatemalaAve.X n/a 450,000$450,000$ ConsueloSt./ParamountBlvd.X 2,221,560$1,500,000$3,721,560$ RegionalSportsComplex@SouthRancho X 6,786,815$7,144,000$13,930,815$ SubTotal 9,356,855$12,144,000$21,500,855$ OPPORTUNITYSITES WILDERNESSPARK FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 104 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan93 Exhibit 5.2-1 Facility Recommendations Summary (Continued) He a l t h an d Sa f e t y Co d e Re q u i r e m e n t s Fa c i l i t y In t e g r i t y Im p r o v e Op e r a t i n g Ef f i c i e n c y Re v e n u e Ge n e r a t i n g Co m m u n i t y Ne e d s Re c o m m e n d a t i o n La n d Ac q u i s i t i o n Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * Im p r o v e m e n t Co s t (E s t i m a t e ) * * Bu d g e t Am o u n t TYPEOFFACILITYRECOMMENDATION COSTS AdultSoftballFieldͲlighted X Unknown 1,150,000$1,150,000$ BicyclingTrails(4Miles)****X Unknown 740,000$740,000$ Gymnasium X Unknown 3,700,000$3,700,000$ Playgrounds(21Playgrounds)*****X Unknown 9,450,000$9,450,000$ SoccerComplex X Unknown 5,000,000$5,000,000$ SprayPlay/SplashPad(1)X Unknown 500,000$500,000$ Walking/JoggingTrails(42Miles)X Unknown 8,400,000$8,400,000$ SubTotal 28,940,000$ TOTAL 109,050,361$ *****Playgrounds:TheDemandandNeedsAnalysisreflectstheneedfor31additionalplaygroundstomeettheCity'scurrentandfutureneeds. Thiscalculationassumesthatall10playgroundswouldbeconstructedattheopportunitysitesidentified,whichhavebeencalculatedseparately. Alternatively,theSchoolDistricthas30playgrounds;ifsomeoralloftheplaygroundswereopened,theplaygroundcalculationinthissection wouldbereducedbythenumberofschoolfacilitiesopened. *AcquisitionCostshavebeenapproximatedandarebasedoncostpersquarefootoflandplusanapproximatevalueofanyonͲsitebuildings.Costs usedinclude:$100persquarefootforcommerciallots,$50persquarefootforvacantlotonmainstreet;$35persquarefootforvacantlotona **ImprovementCostsshouldonlybeconsideredasapproximationsandarebasedonpotentialfacilitiesidentifiedandpreliminarysiteconditions; actualcostswilldependonsitedesign,sizeoffacilities,gradeofmaterials,changesininconstructionmarketconditions,andspecificsite conditionsandrequirements,whichwillrequireadditionalstudy,andhavenotbeenevaluatedintheMasterPlan.Developmentcostsincludean estimationfordesign/engineeringfees(10%oftheapproximatedcostofconstruction),whichwillalsobedependentonthespecificproject requirementsandthespecificdisciplinesinvolvedintheproject'sdevelopmentandwillrequireadditionalevaluation. ****BicyclingTrails:ThiscalculationassumestherealizationofthebicyclelanesindicatedbytheBicycleMasterPlan;thequantityoftrails reflectedhereinareinadditiontothoseindicatedbytheBicycleMasterPlan.PleaserefertotheBicycleMasterPlanformoreinformationabout ***Thecostsreflectedunder"AdditionalCommunityNeedsͲSiteYetToBeDefined"reflectthecostoftheimprovementonly.Acquisitioncosts, siteͲspecificimprovementcosts,anddesign/engineeringfeeshavenotbeenfactoredintothecalculations. ADDITIONALCOMMUNITYNEEDSͲSITEYETTOBEDEFINED*** FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 105 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan94 5.3 Maintenance & Operations Recommendations The City of Downey has the opportunity to improve on the level of park maintenance and recreation services while modernizing and improving current practices and procedures. As an example, development of sustainable practices will help to maximize available resources and create a more sustainable City for the future while demonstrating to the public the practices, duties, and tasks associated with environmentally sound park maintenance. The City of Downey currently has some park maintenance standards and practices in place. These standards can, with modiﬁ cations and improvements, form the foundation for the development of enhanced operations and maintenance practices. System-wide Improvements/Changes The City of Downey should work towards implementing and developing the following system- wide improvement/changes: •A lifecycle maintenance plan for buildings and park amenities. This should be built into daily operations, yearly capital improvement plans, and budgetary requests to maximize the value and useful life of these assets. •A soil management plan which includes regular soil testing in order to avoid issues with plant die-back and sparse or soggy turf conditions. •A volunteer park adoption/maintenance program such that it includes training for the volunteers as Park Stewards. The program could include regular ﬁ x up/clean-up days and enlist the help of community organizations such as scouts, park users, sports clubs, etc. to maintain and enhance various elements of the park system. Currently, the City has a limited volunteer program with approximately 55 teens from middle school through high school age. The teens work with youth at the park programs, summer day camps and special events. They also volunteer for various City departments in City Hall, City special events such as the Healthy Downey-TLC 5K, Street Faire, Hall of Fame, Kids Day, Pumpkin Patch, Tree Lighting, and many more. •Evaluate opportunities to “naturalize” many existing facilities including the elimination of turf in areas of little public use and development of native demonstration gardens. •Establish policies appropriate for the installation and management of synthetic playing ﬁ elds including: ◦Synthetic ﬁ elds should be installed only at facilities which also could have lights for night-time play. ◦Synthetic ﬁ elds should be budgeted as a ﬁ xed asset and fully depreciated over the life of the “carpet.” ◦A policy that states synthetic ﬁ elds will be open for play except under extreme weather conditions. •Continue to expand the “Yellow Swing Program” for those with disabilities, as seen at Brookshire Children’s Park, Rio San Gabriel Park, Temple Park, and Treasure Island Park, to additional neighborhood and community parks as part of the regular playground maintenance/replacement program. The Yellow Swing is a swing seat designed to help meet the American Disabilities Act guidelines for playground equipment in public applications. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 106 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan95 •Installation and operation of a centrally-controlled irrigation system such as the Rainbird IQ irrigation central control system. This system provides cost-effective, multiple-site centralized irrigation control from a single computer and will allow staff to monitor and control irrigation operation at multiple remote sites. IQ communication capabilities eliminates travel to remote sites for programming changes or adjustments. Manual operation and programming functions that were performed only at the site irrigation controller can now be completed from the IQ central computer. Purchase of the system should be incorporated into the future park system upgrades. •Develop a Maintenance Manual detailing park maintenance and operation tasks on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis. The Maintenance Manual should include existing speciﬁ cations as well as: ◦Clear written maintenance objectives and frequency of care for each amenity is needed based on the desired outcomes for a quality visitor experience in maintaining the parks for aesthetics, safety, recreation and sustainability including: ◦Landscape bed design, planting and maintenance standards ◦Landscape turf and right of way mowing and maintenance standards ◦Tree and shrub planting and maintenance standard ◦Equipment maintenance and replacement standard ◦Chemical application standard ◦Formalized and scheduled park facility inspections including playgrounds, specialized facilities such as skate parks, high use visitor areas and buildings ◦Design standards for the development of park features such as sports ﬁ elds, trails and buildings ◦Preventative maintenance plan developed for all park locations •Establish an Estimated Annual Water Use (EAWU) for various hydrozones such as turf, sports ﬁ elds and shrub beds utilizing the Water Use Classiﬁ cations of Landscape Species (WUCOLS IV) developed through the California Department of Water Resources and University of California, Davis. •Consider development of a Community Garden program to provide opportunities for City residents to participate in the program and to reduce on-going operation and maintenance costs for developed parkland. •Convert park irrigation systems to recycled water when practicable to reduce demand on the potable water supply. (Speciﬁ c park conversions have been evaluated by City staff and have been included in park plans for development, see Exhibit 5.2-1). Appendix tab A3.5-1 •Develop a process of evaluation and reﬁ nement to measure park maintenance success through established performance standards. Examples of what this should include are: ◦Established park maintenance standards and frequency rates and tracking over several years ◦Establish and track the cost per acre for each park and park type and tracking over several years ◦Establish a minimum of training hours per year per employee with re-evaluation of success of training and new requirements due to legislative changes ◦Establish and track replacement schedules for equipment and other ﬁ xed assets FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 107 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan96 •Develop a Sustainable Performance System with responsibility for the program potentially handled by a dedicated Conservation Coordinator. The performance system should include at a minimum: ◦Native Plant Policy ◦Track Utilities—Partnership with utilities ◦Recycling Program ◦Green Waste Composting ◦Demonstration Gardens ◦Use of Alternative Energy Sources ◦Integrated Pest Management Program reﬂ ective of consistently changing needs of an urban park system ◦Habitat Development beyond mitigation sites ◦Community Gardens ◦Public Education and Outreach ◦Stormwater retention* ◦Drought-tolerant/Water-wise plants and irrigation systems As of the development of this Master Plan, the City is currently developing a Sustainable Performance System. *It should be noted that there is a stormwater inﬁ ltration and detention system currently under Discovery Sports Park. There are plans to develop stormwater inﬁ ltration/detention systems at: Apollo Park, Dennis the Menace Park, Furman Park, and Wilderness Park; these improvements have been incorporated into Exhibit 5.2-1. Park Speciﬁ c Maintenance and Operations Recommendations As part of the Master Plan, the current condition of each park and park building was evaluated. Park speciﬁ c operations and maintenance recommendations are identiﬁ ed in the Current Maintenance Conditions and the Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations Reports included in the Appendix, tab A5.3-2 Please refer to Exhibit 5.2-1 for a summary of all facility recommendations including maintenance and operations recommendations. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 108 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan97 Exhibit 5.4-1 Opportunity Sites Map FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 109 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan98 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 110 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan99 5.4 Opportunity Sites While the City has limited opportunities for new parkland, the Master Plan process identiﬁ ed a number of potential locations to be considered for future park development. Along with existing parks and school locations, these sites should be considered with respect to additional park and recreation facility locations. Exhibit 5.4-1 illustrates the locations of the opportunity sites identiﬁ ed in the Master Plan process. Exhibit 5.4-2 provides additional information on the opportunity sites including acreage, potential uses, potential amenities, and location relative to areas that are underserved by park space (See Exhibit 3.7-1), as well as estimated acquisition costs and costs for development. It should be noted that while these opportunity sites will provide additional park space and amenities for the community, the sizes of the parcels limit their development potential. It should be noted that while these sites have been identiﬁ ed by the Master Plan, additional sites should also be considered as opportunities when available. This data has also been included on the Facility Recommendations Summary, Exhibit 5.2-1. Exhibit 5.4-2 Opportunity Sites Table OpportunitySite Acres PotentialUses PotentialAmenities UnderservicedArea AcquisitionCosts (Estimated) CostofDevelopment (Estimated) TotalCostofDevelopment (Estimated) 1WildernessParkExpansion1.8ACExistingPark Expansion Rivertrailaccesspoint, pathway,greenspace, potentialbikepumptrack N/A lease 600,000$500,000$ 2LaReinaProperty3.53ACPocketParkPlayground,seating,shade structure,pathway, tables/benches,greenspace YES Ͳ$1,100,000$1,100,000$ 3OrangeStreetProperty.16ACPocketParkPlayground/benches,green space YES 348,480$450,000$798,480$ 4FormerWellSiteͲ7217Adwen St. .17AC PocketPark Playground/benches,green space YES Ͳ$450,000$450,000$ 5FormerWellSiteͲ8201Stewart &GrayRoad. .19ACPocketParkPlayground/benches,green space YES Ͳ$450,000$450,000$ 6FormerWellSiteͲ9501 GuatemalaAve. .14ACPocketParkPlayground/benches,green space NO Ͳ$450,000$450,000$ 7ConsueloSt./ParamountBlvd.1.7ACLinear Neighborhood Park Walkingtrail,playground, shadestructure,exercise stations,greenspace Adjacentto Underserviced Area 2,221,560$1,500,000$3,721,560$ 8RegionalSportsComplex@South RanchoSite 18ACRegionalSports Complex MultiͲpurposesportsfields, concession,restrooms,offices, meetingrooms NO 6,786,815$7,144,000$13,930,815$ **InformationprovidedbyCitybasedontheLosAngelesCountywideComprehensiveParkandRecreationNeedsAssessment. DevelopmentCostsshouldonlybeconsideredasapproximationsandarebasedonpotentialfacilitiesidentifiedandapreliminaryreviewofsiteconditions;actualcostswilldependonsitedesign,sizeof facilities,gradeofmaterials,changesininconstructionmarketconditions,andspecificsiteconditionsandrequirements,whichwillrequireadditionalstudy,andhavenotbeenevaluatedintheMasterPlan. Doesnotincludedesignandplanpreparationfees. AcquisitionCostshavebeenapproximatedandarebasedoncostpersquarefootoflandplusanapproximatevalueofanyonͲsitebuildings.Costsusedinclude:$100persquarefootforcommerciallots, $50persquarefootforvacantlotonmainstreet;$35persquarefootforvacantlotona"non"mainstreet." ** FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 111 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan100 5.5 Community Needs Assessment Recommendations The Community Needs Assessment recommendations were identiﬁ ed by the Master Plan Recreation Needs Assessment process. The top priority facility needs identiﬁ ed by the Recreation Needs Assessment include: ◦Trails, Walking/Jogging ◦Softball Fields ◦Trails, Bike ◦Soccer ◦Baseball Fields ◦Basketball Courts (Indoor)/Gymnasium ◦Multi-use Recreation Facility (Indoor)/Community Center ◦Playgrounds ◦Bathrooms/Children’s Accessible Bathroom ◦Exercise/Fitness Center-Facility ◦Open Space/Green Space ◦Swimming Pool ◦Soccer Complex Each of these needs will be addressed below: Please refer to Exhibit 5.2-1 for a summary of all facility recommendations including Community Needs Assessment Recommendations. Trails and Connectivity The Demand and Needs Analysis reﬂ ected a signiﬁ cant need for trails both for walking and jogging, as well as for bicycling. Currently the City has approximately 8 miles of walking/jogging paths. These include the class I bikeways along the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers as well as dedicated walking/jogging paths in existing parks. The Demand and Needs Analysis indicated approximately 44 miles of walking/jogging trails are needed to meet current needs; this is projected to increase to approximately 50 miles by 2035 (a current deﬁ cit of approximately 36 miles and a future deﬁ cit of 42 miles). Currently the City has 5.7 miles of bicycling paths, which includes class I bike paths along the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers. The Demand and Needs Analysis indicated that 39.9 miles of bike paths are needed to meet current needs; this is projected to increase to 45.8 miles of bike paths by 2035 (a current deﬁ cit of approximately 34.2 miles and a future deﬁ cit of 40.1 miles). Meeting the needs for both walking/jogging and bicycling trails will be a signiﬁ cant challenge for the City. Addressing these needs will need to be part of a broader vision of connectivity for the City, which enhances connections between places, parks, schools, cultural institutions, and the business community. Urban streets and regional bike trails have the opportunity to provide pedestrian connections to city parks, public facilities and cultural and business centers in Downey including downtown. Currently, connectivity within Downey is based on the urban system of roads, Class I bike trails along the San Gabriel River, Los Angeles River, and Rio Hondo Channel, and future Class II and III bike trails. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 112 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan101 Speciﬁ c recommendations to improve connectivity with the City of Downey include: •Implementing the Downey Bicycle Master Plan, which will add 11.52 miles of Class II and 18.9 miles of Class III bike trails to the City. By implementing the Bicycle Master Plan, the City would increase its total amount of bike paths to 30.4 miles. This would be a signiﬁ cant step toward the 39.9 miles identiﬁ ed by the Demand and Needs Analysis to meet current need for bike paths. Exhibit 2.6-1 illustrates existing and planned trails identiﬁ ed by the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. •The Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan identiﬁ es Downey Avenue and Third Street as primary candidates for street “greening” to create pedestrian corridors with provisions for seating areas. The Speciﬁ c Plan states that adding a variety of street trees and other greenery along these downtown streets will identify the downtown streets as essential elements of the open space system and as tree-lined open spaces and continuous recreational paths. Both the Downtown Speciﬁ c Plan and the Parks and Open Space Master Plan identify the need for additional recreational paths. Given the lack of potential space for additional recreational paths, providing pedestrian corridors on Downey Avenue and Third Street will be an essential step towards meeting the community’s fundamental needs for recreational activity in an urban environment. •Downey should examine existing City parks to determine those, such as Rio San Gabriel Park, where additional loop trails could be developed as was recently completed around Apollo and Furman Parks. The Furman Park facility also includes ﬁ tness stations; ﬁ tness stations are also planned for Apollo Park. The additional development of a circular park pathway of decomposed granite surface will provide the opportunity for both the casual walker and runners, promoting Downey’s Healthy Parks program. •The City should also improve access points to San Gabriel and Rio Hondo bike trail sites from existing parks. As an example, several social trails have developed at Wilderness Park leading to the San Gabriel River bike trail, which should be closed and re- landscaped or considered for an ofﬁ cial entrance location. •Implement Safe Routes to Schools and Parks via a joint Downey/Downey Uniﬁ ed School District project to encourage walking to and from schools and parks. A goal of the program is to increase the outdoor activities of families by providing incentives for non- automotive transportation and providing additional opportunities to interact with the natural environment. •The LA City Department of Water and Power (LADWP) utility corridor, which runs along the Rio Hondo River provides some potential for walking/jogging path and passive park development. The City should consider working with LADWP to explore future development of passive park space along this corridor where feasible. However, limited new potential for trail connectivity would result from development of it already adjacent to an existing trail. Permanent structures (such as playgrounds or shade structures) may not be permitted in this location. While providing additional open space and passive recreation opportunities would provide beneﬁ ts to the community, the City may want to consider giving projects which increase connectivity in the community a higher priority. Exhibit 5.4-1 shows the location the LADWP utility corridor that runs adjacent to the Rio Hondo River. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 113 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan102 Downey Sports Fields The City is largely meeting the needs of the youth sports community, however, ﬁ elds typically show signs of overuse, and adult and club sports are often unable to obtain ﬁ eld times. The recommendations seek to maximize the availability of existing facilities for youth and adult leagues. Youth Softball The City currently has six youth softball game ﬁ elds. Independence Park is home to four ﬁ elds, which are used for both games and practices for Downey Girls Ponytail Athletic Association. Nemesis Elite also uses the two ﬁ elds at Discovery Sports Park, which are also used for youth baseball (Downey Junior Athletic Association). The Demand and Needs Analysis reﬂ ects a need for six ﬁ elds to meet current and future needs for youth softball, which are the number of ﬁ elds currently available. However, the spatial limitations and layout of the four ﬁ elds at Independence Park preclude having four games played at the same time safely. These ﬁ elds should be reconﬁ gured for safety and, the City should consider providing an additional two ﬁ elds to meet the current needs for youth softball games. Recommendations for Youth Softball Apollo Park: Conversion of the main ﬁ eld area to synthetic turf. These improvements would beneﬁ t youth softball and baseball, while providing a ﬁ eld that is large enough to accommodate adult softball. Exhibit 5.5-1 illustrates the possible ﬁ eld layout for Apollo Park and allocation for an adult ﬁ eld, youth ﬁ eld and potential soccer overlay. Golden Park: Conversion of the ﬁ eld at Golden Park to a youth softball game ﬁ eld. Development of the ﬁ eld may require netting/fencing around the playground area to ensure safety. Discovery Sports Complex: Converting the ﬁ elds at Discovery Sports Complex would beneﬁ t youth softball and baseball by improving ﬁ eld conditions while also reducing water demand. Exhibit 5.5-2 illustrates a potential layout for Discovery Sports Complex, which includes an overlay ﬁ eld on one ﬁ eld for adult soccer (see Adult Soccer). Close coordination with the sports leagues prior to development of the projects will ensure their success. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 114 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan103 Exhibit 5.5-1 Apollo Park Proposed Field Layout FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 115 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan104 Exhibit 5.5-2 Discovery Sports Complex Proposed Field Layout FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 116 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan105 Adult Softball Adult softball is currently accommodated with the use of one ﬁ eld at Columbus High School, two ﬁ elds at Rio San Gabriel Park, and one ﬁ eld at Apollo Park. The Demand and Needs Analysis determined that there is the need for one additional game ﬁ eld to meet the current needs for adult softball with an additional ﬁ eld needed by 2035 (1.7 ﬁ elds total needed by 2035). Rio San Gabriel Park, which hosts two of the ﬁ elds currently in use has signiﬁ cant issues related to ﬁ eld subsidence, which makes maintaining level ﬁ elds a signiﬁ cant challenge, in addition to impacts on the irrigation equipment and support facilities and buildings. Providing a playing surface that is not level also creates issues regarding player safety, and can be the cause of potential injuries. Development of a permanent solution that ameliorates the ﬁ eld subsidence is beyond the scope of this Master Plan. However, it is recommended that the City consult with a geotechnical engineer to determine if the ﬁ eld subsidence can be permanently corrected. The cost of ﬁ xing the ﬁ elds will need to be weighed against the cost of providing the same opportunities elsewhere within the City’s park system, or through the acquisition of additional park space. If Rio San Gabriel Park cannot accommodate adult softball, two additional adult softball ﬁ elds will need to be developed in addition to the ﬁ elds identiﬁ ed by the Demand and Needs Analysis. It will be challenging for the City to accommodate the current and future needs of adult softball if Rio San Gabriel Park cannot accommodate adult softball. (Note that Rio San Gabriel Park also serves as youth football practice ﬁ elds (Razorbacks Pop Warner), which would also have to be relocated). However, if the ﬁ elds are beyond repair, the City may want to consider conversion of Rio San Gabriel Park into a passive park. Recommendations for Adult Softball An additional four ﬁ elds will need to be developed to comfortably accommodate current and future needs for adult softball. Sports ﬁ elds in Downey generally display indications of overuse. Fields are heavily programmed and this scheduling does not provide for adequate resting of ﬁ elds for maintenance. Conversion of turf ﬁ elds to synthetic, eliminates ﬁ eld resting time, allowing for greater utilization of ﬁ elds; considering resting time, a synthetic ﬁ eld is roughly the equivalent of 1.2 grass ﬁ elds (or 1.5 grass ﬁ elds if lighted). In addition to reduced water consumption, synthetic ﬁ elds provide additional playing time and reduced impact to the ﬁ elds and reduced maintenance. Apollo Park: Conversion of the main ﬁ eld area to synthetic turf. These improvements would beneﬁ t youth softball and baseball, while providing a ﬁ eld that is large enough to accommodate adult softball. Note that if the smaller ball ﬁ eld opposite the main ﬁ eld were completely synthetic turf, the ﬁ eld could also accommodate an adult soccer overlay ﬁ eld. Exhibit 5.5-1 illustrates this ﬁ eld layout of for Apollo Park. Columbus High School: The City should work with the School District to convert the existing ﬁ elds to synthetic turf. This will allow greater utilization of the ﬁ elds for both youth and adult softball, in addition to youth/adult soccer and practice football. Two of the ﬁ elds could be used for adult softball games; one for youth softball games. Exhibit 5.5-3 illustrates a potential layout for Columbus High School. Acquisition: The City may want to consider acquisition of park space to accommodate additional ﬁ elds. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 117 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan106 Exhibit 5.5-3 Columbus High School Proposed Field Layout FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 118 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan107 Baseball (youth) The Demand and Needs Analysis reﬂ ected a small surplus of youth baseball ﬁ elds. It is not anticipated that the City will require additional youth baseball ﬁ elds, now or in the future as long as existing facilities are well maintained and remain available for use. Soccer Youth Soccer Downey currently provides facilities for youth soccer at Apollo Park and Discovery Sports Complex for games. Additionally, the soccer organizations utilize ﬁ elds at Grifﬁ th Middle School, Doty Middle School, Downey High School, and Sussman Middle School for organized youth games. In addition to practicing at these facilities, practices are also held at Rio San Gabriel Park, Furman Park, and Columbus High School. The Demand and Needs Analysis reﬂ ected a small surplus in supply of youth soccer ﬁ elds. While there is anticipated to be a small increase in the needs for ﬁ elds by 2035, this need can easily be accommodated through the additional ﬁ elds developed through conversion to synthetic turf. The City may want to consider converting the overlay ﬁ elds at Apollo Park and the ﬁ elds at Discovery Sports Complex to synthetic turf. As previously mentioned, the City should consider working with the School District to convert the ﬁ elds at Columbus High School to synthetic turf. Adult Soccer Adult soccer ﬁ elds were identiﬁ ed as a need in the community engagement process during the focus groups and community workshops. The City currently does not provide any adult soccer ﬁ elds to organizations in the community, organizations need to go outside of the City to play/practice. The following are potential strategies if the City desires to accommodate adult soccer: Rio San Gabriel Park: As previously mentioned, the soil conditions at Rio San Gabriel Park are an unknown variable in determining the park’s most appropriate uses. If the previously mentioned soil issues at the ﬁ elds at Rio San Gabriel can be corrected, Rio San Gabriel Park can accommodate adult soccer. If the soil conditions cannot be ﬁ xed and the ﬁ elds at Rio San Gabriel Park are removed, the City will not have the room for additional adult soccer ﬁ elds other than those identiﬁ ed below. Apollo Park: Conversion of the ball ﬁ eld/overlay ﬁ elds to synthetic turf would permit an adult soccer overlay ﬁ eld at Apollo Park. This would require that one of the ﬁ elds, including the inﬁ eld to be completely synthetic turf. Discovery Sports Complex: The City may consider developing one of the ball ﬁ elds at Discovery Sports Complex completely with synthetic turf, including the inﬁ eld. This would allow an adult size soccer ﬁ eld overlay to occur if the fencing of one of the ﬁ elds were removed. Exhibit 5.5-2 illustrates a potential layout of Discovery Sports Complex Columbus High School: If the City were to realign the southeastern ﬁ eld at the school, both of the ball ﬁ elds were converted to synthetic turf (including one of the inﬁ elds), an adult soccer overlay ﬁ eld could be accommodated at Columbus High School. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 119 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan108 Converting ballﬁ eld inﬁ elds to synthetic: The City will need to determine the level of support in which to attempt to provide adult soccer. The above examples necessitate conversion of a ball ﬁ eld to synthetic turf, including the inﬁ eld. Adult sports in general will be more difﬁ cult to accommodate as they require larger ﬁ eld sizes than youth sports. Spatial limitations dictate where these ﬁ elds can occur. The recommendations for adult softball and soccer attempt to provide potential solutions, which provide additional ﬁ elds for adult sports without reducing the amount of youth sports ﬁ elds. Continued close coordination with the sports leagues will determine playability of various ﬁ eld layouts for multiple uses. Schools: An alternative strategy may be to determine availability of ﬁ elds at the School District for youth sports, possibly freeing up park ﬁ elds for adult sports. The existing school ﬁ elds at the middle schools and high schools are typically already being used for youth organized games and/or practices. The City may want to consider working with the School District to determine how these ﬁ elds are used and if some, particularly at the elementary schools, might be improved and utilized for youth game ﬁ elds. Soccer Complex Providing soccer at existing facilities as well as the facilities identiﬁ ed above will satisfy the needs identiﬁ ed for youth soccer, and potentially adult soccer. However, a soccer complex was one of the needs identiﬁ ed by the Recreation Needs Assessment. Development of a soccer complex would require acquisition of a large amount of land, at a considerable cost to the City, which is unlikely given current ﬁ nancial constraints. Consideration for a soccer complex should only be made after more immediate needs are met. Basketball Courts (Indoor/Gymnasium) Indoor basketball courts were identiﬁ ed by the Recreation Needs Assessment as a priority need. The City’s only facility is the indoor court at Gary P. McCaughan Gymnasium at Apollo Park. The City may want to consider coordination with the School District to utilize school gymnasium space when available. The City may want to consider future development of a second gymnasium to accommodate indoor recreation needs including basketball. Given the limited availability of space at existing Downey Parks, this would likely require the acquisition of additional park space. Multi-use Recreation Facility (Indoor) A multi-use recreation facility was identiﬁ ed by the Recreation Needs Assessment as a priority need. The City’s main facility is Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center, with ancillary smaller facilities provided at Furman Park, Golden Park, and Wilderness Park. The City may want to consider renovation of the entry at Golden Park community building and expand programming of the building. The City should consider renovation of community building at Wilderness Park and expand programming of the building. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 120 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan109 The City of Downey will be leasing the main building at Furman Park to the Downey Family YMCA for the purpose of creating an Arts, Enrichment and Leadership Center. The YMCA will provide visual and performing arts programming, as well as serve as the home for the YMCA Youth and Teen Leadership program. While not speciﬁ cally run by the City the YMCA will provide additional programming, which can serve to offset some of the needs identiﬁ ed in Section Four. Playgrounds The Demand and Needs Analysis indicates that the City has a signiﬁ cant deﬁ cit of playgrounds. The City needs an additional 31 playgrounds to meet current and future needs. While there are a signiﬁ cant number of playgrounds at school facilities throughout the City, they are not open to the public after school hours and cannot be counted towards the City’s inventory. The City should consider negotiation with the School District to make some, if not all of these playgrounds available to the public after school hours. Playgrounds should be observable from adjacent streets rather than isolated within the center of school property and out of view. If the School District deems it necessary, the playgrounds can be separated from the school by locked fencing. There are currently 30 existing playgrounds at school facilities. A few City-owned well sites have been identiﬁ ed as potential locations for playgrounds. It should be noted that these locations are directly adjacent to residences; further investigation will be required to determine if adjacent/nearby residents will be accepting of a playground in these areas. Living in close proximity to a playground would be a desirable feature for a resident with children. However, this might be considered a nuisance for residents without children or seniors. Exhibit 5.5-5 identiﬁ es existing locations of playgrounds at parks and schools and potential locations for new playgrounds at opportunity sites. The City should consider acquisition of parcels in park poor areas of the City, which are illustrated by Exhibit 3.7-1. A number of identiﬁ ed opportunity sites are in areas underserved by parks. Development of small pocket parks in densely developed areas of the City would help alleviate the deﬁ cit of playgrounds identiﬁ ed in the Needs Assessment, and not require a signiﬁ cant amount of land. Considering the signiﬁ cant cost of land and lack of available resources, development of City-owned parcels may take priority. Furman Park Playground Dedication FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 121 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan110 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 122 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan111 Exhibit 5.5-4 Existing and Potential Playground Locations FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 123 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan112 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 124 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan113 Bathrooms/Children’s Accessible Bathrooms Bathrooms and Children’s Accessible bathrooms were identiﬁ ed by the Needs Assessment as priority need. Chapter 11 of the California Building Code and CALDAG (California Disabled Accessibility Guidelines) deals with the requirements for making all buildings accessible to those members of the community that have physical limitations. The standards of these two documents is based on the concept of “Universal Design” which is deﬁ ned as follows: Universal Design involves designing products and spaces so that they can be used by the widest range of people possible. Universal Design evolved from Accessible Design, a design process that addresses the needs of people with disabilities. Universal Design goes further by recognizing that there is a wide spectrum of human abilities. Everyone, even the most able- bodied person, passes through childhood, periods of temporary illness, injury and old age. By designing for this human diversity, we can create things that will be easier for all people to use. With this direction, the suggestions for improvements to the buildings in the Downey Master Plan are based upon the Universal Design standards that are established in the California Building Code and CALDAG, and therefore satisfy the needs for children’s accessible bathrooms. Restroom accessibility improvements are recommended at the following parks: ◦Apollo Park ◦Dennis the Menace Park ◦Discovery Park ◦Furman Park ◦Golden Park ◦Independence Park ◦Rio San Gabriel Park ◦Wilderness Park Detailed information regarding the restroom renovation improvements is included in the Appendix under Building Maintenance, and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis. Exercise/Fitness Center – Facility An exercise/ﬁ tness facility was identiﬁ ed as a priority need in the Recreation Needs Assessment. The City should consider expanding classes at existing facilities and the potential of programming spaces not presently used for exercise/ﬁ tness classes. The City should consider removing the shufﬂ eboard courts at Apollo Park, improving drainage an renovating for outdoor exercise programs, ie Zumba. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 125 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan114 Open Space/Green Space The City of Downey lacks open space. The City has no undeveloped parcels of native open space. In addition to the City’s parks, the General Plan identiﬁ es utility easements, river corridors, cemeteries, and golf courses as the City’s open space. Unfortunately, the City has been largely built out and most open space within the City has been developed. The City’s most promising avenue to provide access to open space is through the development of the trail and bicycle network identiﬁ ed in the Bicycle Master Plan (Exhibit 2.6-1). While Downey may not be able to expand its existing open space, it can provide additional access to open space beyond its borders. Downey is currently adjacent to two major regional trail networks, the Rio Hondo/Los Angeles River Trail and the San Gabriel River Bicycle Trail. Both of these trails connect to the open spaces of the beaches of Long Beach and as well as the mountains of the Angeles National Forest. As previously mentioned, few existing trail linkages within Downey exist currently, which limit this potential. Southern California Edison (SCE) and LA City Department of Water and Power (LADWP) utility corridors, which run along the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers provide some potential for walking/jogging path and passive park development. The City should consider working with SCE and LADWP to explore future development of passive park space along these corridors where feasible. However, permanent structures (such as playgrounds or shade structures) may not be permitted by these agencies. While providing additional open space and passive recreation opportunities would provide signiﬁ cant beneﬁ ts to the community, the City may want to consider giving projects which provide more recreational opportunities in the community a higher priority. Exhibit 5.4-1 identiﬁ es provides the location of the SCE Easement that is part of the Wilderness Park Expansion Area and the LADWP utility corridor. The development of the remaining opportunity sites identiﬁ ed in Exhibit 5.4-1 would provide an approximately 39 acres of park/green space. Swimming Pool The City currently has one public pool at Downey High School. The Recreation Needs Assessment indicated a need for an additional swimming pool. Additionally, Rancho Los Amigos is building a pool that will be open to the public and will help alleviate some of the need for a swimming pool. In lieu of providing an aquatic facility, the City may want to work with Downey Uniﬁ ed School District, Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center, and private ﬁ tness businesses providers to expand swimming programs for residents. Additionally, the City may want to consider development of smaller spray play elements at park facilities, which can be turned off during winter and periods requiring water conservation. These elements are not as expensive and do not require as much maintenance or water as a swimming pool. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 126 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan115 Additional Development at Opportunity Sites Exhibits 5.4-1 and 5.4-2 identify the Opportunity Sites that were identiﬁ ed through the Master Plan process. While most of the sites have been discussed previously, two additional sites are discussed here as they are not speciﬁ cally tied to other recommendations. Wilderness Park Expansion Area: The City has recently expanded Wilderness Park into the Southern California Edison utility easement that runs along the southern portion of Wilderness Park. (Note that this acreage has been included in the parks inventory.) While this area presents an opportunity to expand the park’s boundary and increase its size, the area will be challenging to develop for recreation due to its size and location out of the line of sight from the rest of the park. Expanding the existing parking lot into this area would increase the visibility and viability of this area to serve as a new area of the park. Potential uses for this area could include a native plant garden with strolling paths and interpretive signage, or a bmx course or pump track. Incorporating an entrance to/from the adjacent San Gabriel River bike trail would allow the park to serve as a pleasant detour for trail users. Consuelo St./Paramount Blvd: This is currently owned by the County, but has the potential for park development in a park poor area of the community. The City may want to consider working with the County to acquire this area for the development of a linear park. While extensive recreation uses are not feasible at the site due to its size, the site may be able to accommodate a playground, a walking path, and exercise stations. Note on Recommendations: It should be noted that the ﬁ eld alignment recommendations included herein are preliminary and are based on ﬁ eld size requirements and available space. Detailed studies incorporating topographic/site surveys are beyond the scope of this project. Each recommendation will need to be evaluated on a project by project basis to evaluate its feasibility given existing conditions and with the continual input of appropriate stakeholders and community members. The recommendations included in the Master Plan are intended to be ﬂ exible guidelines that are adaptable to changing conditions and not an exacting set of rules to be followed. Further, with new park development by land acquisitions, cooperative agreements, or joint- use agreements, actual costs are unknown at this time and will be inﬂ uenced by a number of factors including appraisals, scope of the project, environmental review, and other project related costs. FACILITY RECOMMENDATIONS DR A F T PC Agenda Page 127 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan116 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 128 FUNDING/ IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 129 Skate park at Independence Park.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 130 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan119 Section Six: Funding/Implementation The cornerstone of the success of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan is Downey’s ability to secure stable funding for the development and operation of parks, recreation facilities, and programs. Two major cost centers require funding in order to implement the Master Plan. One is capital costs which includes: potential acquisition and development of new required park lands and facilities and renovation of existing park and Columbus High School. The second major cost center is to develop long-term sustainable resources for operations and maintenance of existing and new facilities. With difﬁ cult ﬁ nancial constraints and diminishing resources, it will be challenging to ﬁ nd the resources needed to build or renovate parks and facilities as well as maintain existing parks and infrastructure within existing city resources. Another vexing task will be sustaining the affordability of recreation fee supported classes to meet needs and demands for residents. This section of the Master Plan provides information on funding options for park development, maintenance, and operations to assist Downey in preparing for plan implementation. It discusses current funding mechanisms and identiﬁ es future possibilities and identiﬁ es key resources to meet future goals or strategic directions and guides the city staff in accomplishing the vision and goals of the Master Plan. Meeting these challenges will require equal amounts of vision, resourcefulness, partnership, and hard work. 6.1 Current Funding and Staffi ng The Parks and Recreation Department is comprised of ﬁ ve divisions: Administration (including grants and contract services), Facilities & Events, Fee Supported Recreation Programs, Golf Course Operations and Transit. Maintenance of City parks and facilities is handled through the Public Works Department Maintenance Division. The Division is responsible for maintaining parks, public facilities, and buildings. The Division is also responsible for repairing of 211 miles of streets and for maintenance of the City’s vehicle ﬂ eet. Exhibit 6.1-1 shows the stafﬁ ng level for both Parks and Recreation and Public works Maintenance for the last four ﬁ scal years. Funding for maintenance and operation of Downey’s park and recreation facilities and programs are currently provided by user fees for recreation programs and facility use, and the City’s General Fund. Overall, the current level of resources available for park maintenance is strained and/or inadequate to fully fund both operation/maintenance, and long-term capital upgrades and development. The Parks and Recreation Department working in conjunction with the Public Works Department, which provides support in park and building maintenance in addition to the skilled trades, is currently backlogged in their ability to deliver on all elements of park maintenance, deferred maintenance, and public safety. Since the Great Recession, which started in late 2007, the City of Downey has added Discovery Sports Complex and renovated Brookshire Children’s Park, Treasure Island Park, and Temple Park. Exhibit 6.1-2 displays the three previous ﬁ scal year actuals and current ﬁ scal year approved budget for Parks and Recreation and the Public Works Maintenance Services Division. This Division manages and maintains the City’s buildings and public facilities, vehicle and equipment ﬂ eet, streets, alleys and parking lots, trees, parks and public grounds. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 131 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan120 Parks&Recreation Positions Actual FY2011Ͳ12 Actual FY2012Ͳ13 Actual FY2013Ͳ14 Approved FY2014Ͳ15 Administration,Grant&Contracts DirectorofParksandRecreation1111 ExecutiveSecretary2111 ProgramCoordinators3333 Secretary(Aspire)1111 ProgramSupervisor(Aspire)1111 SocialServicesManager1000 FacilitiesandEvents RecreationCoordinator1111 RecreationManager1111 RecreationSupervisor3433 FeeͲSupportedRecreationPrograms NoFullͲTimePositions TotalParksandRecreation14141212 PublicWorksMaintenance Positions Superintendent1011 EquipmentMaintenanceSupervisor1111 EquipmentMaintenanceLeadworker1111 MaintenanceLeadworker6688 MaintenanceWorkerII11111313 Mechanic2222 PublicWorksSupervisorII3323 PublicWorksTechnician1100 Secretary1011 TreeTrimmer1000 TotalPublicWorksMaintenance29262930 ParksandRecreationFY12/13 Actual FY13/14 Actual FY14/15 Budgeted FY15/16 Actual Admin,Grants&Contracts$2,757,783$2,544,992$2,685,433$2,806,389 Facilities&Events$1,179,285$1,379,501$1,633,411$1,989,452 FeeSupportedPrograms$868,293$769,906$783,091$908,902 Total$4,805,361$4,694,399$5,101,935$5,704,743 PublicWorks MaintenanceDivision$6,554.877$6,261.292$6,261.292$8,849,261 Exhibit 6.1-1 Summary of Full-time Positions Exhibit 6.1-2 Parks and Recreation and Public Works Maintenance Budget Summary FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 132 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan121 6.2 Funding Sources for Parks and Recreation The following listing of funding sources have been categorized according to the appropriate application of the funding they provide - Capital Funding, Operation and Maintenance or a combination of both. These explanations of funding options are provided to give deﬁ nition to alternative funding programs which the City may elect to employ. These sources will be evaluated and applicable sources will be matched to the speciﬁ c projects which are recommended in this Park and Open Space Master Plan. Capital Funding Programs 1. Non-Proﬁ t Foundation - such as a 501(c) (3). This would provide a vehicle for a capital fund drive and a means to build community support. There should be well deﬁ ned facilities and speciﬁ c costs to be funded. The foundation acts as a conduit for receiving private donations from entities that might otherwise be reluctant to donate to a City. In addition, the donor can receive tax beneﬁ ts. The City can use the foundation to solicit private foundations, corporations and other businesses, local organizations and individuals (gifts, bequests, trust funds, etc.). The foundation also provides an organization that can partner with other non-proﬁ ts (such as churches, service clubs and organizations) as well as private companies to jointly develop park and recreation facilities. 2. Grants - (County, State and Federal agencies). While these sources have been declining in recent years, they do provide funding to many projects. Many require matching funds from the City which can be a barrier. Such funds, however, could come from sources such as a Non-Proﬁ t Foundation. There is usually strong competition for such grants and the City needs to compete aggressively. Some examples of such funding are: c. The California Department of Parks and Recreation administers grants which have been established by State propositions or are provided for by other State programs such as the Habitat Conservation Fund Grant Program under the California Wildlife Protection Act of 1990 and/or the Recreational Trails Program. d. Caltrans provides for on- or off-street bike trails and some foot trails through such funding mechanisms as ISTEA Transportation Enhancement Activities and Bicycle Lane Account Funds. e. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding is available for upgrading parks for ADA requirements and other improvements. These funds which have been declining, are also used for some limited program funding. f. The California Department of Resources manages many grant programs, through several departments such as the Department of Conservation, Wildlife Conservation Board, State Coastal Conservancy and others, that can be used for open space acquisition, habitat restoration, trails, etc. Much of the funding comes from State Bond Act Propositions 50 and 84. g. Foundation Grants – There are some private foundations and non-proﬁ ts that support park and recreation developments and programs. These entities can be solicited for donations to support speciﬁ c projects which meet their criteria. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 133 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan122 3. Quimby Act - The Quimby Act is a widely used source of funding which enables local government to exact dedication of land or in-lieu fees from new residential development to maintain a minimum ratio of park land to population. This applies only to residential subdivisions and does not address additional park demands created through the construction of new units on existing lots or to condominium conversions. As Downey is essentially built-out, the Quimby Act presents limited opportunity for future funding opportunities. 4. Development Impact Fees: Development Impact Fees (AB 1600 fees) on development is another option for local agencies. The fees or exactions are based on the premise that new development generates new demand for park and recreation facilities. The fees only apply to new development and may only be assessed for new capital cost related to the development. A deﬁ ned nexus or beneﬁ t/beneﬁ ciary relationship must be established. The fees are paid by the developer to offset costs for the infrastructure caused by new development. The fees are not limited to the cost of land and can be assessed for improvements. Some cities have used this fee mechanism to assess a capital equipment fee to acquire the equipment needed to maintain the new parks. The fees are often used in combination with development agreements. The advantages of impact fees, sometimes called mitigation fees, are that they can be assessed for non- subdivision land uses. Fees can be assessed under the premise that tourists, employers, and employees all beneﬁ t from and use community parks. This allows for assessment of commercial and industrial development. Once the nexus is established that proves the need for additional facilities because of new development, a fee program can be implemented. The fee cannot be assessed to subsidize existing shortfalls or beneﬁ t existing residents. Park in-lieu fees have been minimal for several years. The low amount is reﬂ ective of the residential build-out of Downey. The build-out will result in Development Impact Fees presenting a limited opportunity for funding in the future. 5. Development Agreements (DA’s) are another mechanism through which park and recreation improvements can be acquired or provided. As part of an agreement specifying the type and density of development that will be allowed, the City can negotiate conditions and considerations in return for concessions. These types of incentive programs can also be used in the provision of parks and other open spaces in commercial areas. One such program would allow extra ﬂ oor space in exchange for public recreation facilities such as a plaza, a mini-park or an amphitheater. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 134 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan123 6. Bonds - Most bond issues require a two-thirds vote of the electorate and are therefore used with great preparation, research and care to predict voting outcome. Some of the most common forms of these bonds are as follows: a. General Obligation Bonds - These bonds are issued subject to a two-thirds majority vote of the electorate and pledge the full faith and support of the borrower. G.O bonds would be paid out of the City’s General Fund. Only cities with excess General Fund capacity are able to use G.O. bonds for park facility development today. Another method of implementing park and recreation facility development by use of a type of G.O. bond is by gaining voter approval for an additional property tax assessment to pay for the debt of park bonds. The issuer is authorized by the vote of a two-thirds majority of the electorate to levy an ad valorem tax on all taxable property within its jurisdiction at whatever rate is required to service the debt. Because of the high level of security, these bonds command the lowest interest rate. This type of ﬁ nancing requires strong community support and involves much time and effort to study community attitudes and promote acceptance in order to be successful. b. Revenue Bonds - These bonds are secured by a pledge of revenues from a tax or non-tax source such as assessments or fees. Because the revenue from a particular facility is the only security, these bonds usually carry a higher interest rate than general obligation bonds. The direct issuance of revenue bonds without the formation of a funding district, as described in more detail below, may not be feasible for park and recreation purposes due to limited income streams from these types of activities. However, revenue bonds have been used to partially fund such development as an aquatic facility where a feasibility study veriﬁ ed the revenue generating capability of the development. 7. Certiﬁ cates of Participation - This is a form of lease purchase agreement that does not constitute indebtedness under the State constitutional debt limit and does not require voter approval. In a typical case, a local government entity decides to acquire a new or renovated public facility. This facility is purchased or constructed by a vendor corporation and the local government signs a lease agreement with the corporation to use the facility. An underwriting ﬁ rm then buys the lease obligation from the vendor corporation and divides it into small units called “C.O.P.’s”. Each C.O.P. represents a share of the lease payment revenue stream. The underwriter then places the C.O.P. issue with a bank which, in turn, sells the certiﬁ cates to individual investors. The local government makes the lease payments to the bank which makes payments to the certiﬁ cate holders. At the end of the lease period, title to the facility passes to the local government entity at nominal cost. Interest paid the certiﬁ cate holders is tax exempt. 8. Fund-Raising Events - (concerts, rafﬂ es, etc.) While these are not a major source of funds, such events could contribute to an overall effort toward capital funding for a speciﬁ c facility. Funds raised from such events could be channeled through a non-proﬁ t foundation as described above. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 135 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan124 Sources of Operation and Maintenance Funds 1. User Fees - Such fees provide some contribution toward maintenance, but are not sufﬁ cient to provide any capital funds. It is strongly recommended that the City examine the current fee structure and make adjustments so that the fees collected are in line with the costs of maintenance and operation of the facilities and/or programs for which the fees are levied. Some of the sources of such fees include: ◦Participation fees for classes and special programs. ◦Field Rental Fees for the use, maintenance and lighting costs associated with using a sports ﬁ eld. ◦Facility Rental Fees for meetings, parties and special events. ◦Charges for play, such as for tennis court reservations and/or golf green fees. ◦Group picnic shelter use charges. ◦Charges for the use of park sites for special events such as arts & crafts fairs, tournaments, antique shows, auto shows, weddings, concerts, carnivals, Christmas tree sales, etc. ◦Joint-Use with non-proﬁ t organizations is also included in this category, where sports teams would renovate ﬁ elds and/or provide ﬁ eld maintenance (labor or costs) in exchange for guaranteed use of the ﬁ eld during the season. 2. Corporate Sponsorship of Events - This is most popular for sports teams and other various activities, and should be actively pursued. 3. Adopt-a-Park Programs - This type of program could generate funds or volunteers to provide maintenance for City parks or facilities. 4. Volunteer Labor - Useful for certain programming and/or maintenance tasks, however does not constitute a large portion of funding needs. Sources for Both Capital and Operation and Maintenance Funding 1. Sales Tax Increase – The cornerstone of the state/local revenue system in virtually every region of the country, the sales tax is the second largest source of income for state and local governments and typically the most popular tax among voters. Sales taxes are either general or speciﬁ c in form. General sales taxes are levied on the sale of goods or services at the retail level. Speciﬁ c or selective sales taxes are imposed on speciﬁ c items such as alcohol, tobacco and gasoline and sometimes earmarked for speciﬁ c projects. As an example the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District is funded through ¼ cent sales tax and the City of Pico Rivera passed a 1 percent increase to implement their Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 2. Special District Assessments - These include Beneﬁ t Assessment Districts (under state law AB1600), Landscape and Lighting Act Districts, and Mello-Roos Districts. A special assessment or levy is placed on a property to ﬁ nance improvements and/or maintenance that speciﬁ cally beneﬁ t that property. The legislation requires a vote of the residents in order to form such districts or in order to change the level of assessment. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 136 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan125 3. Taxes - Some examples of taxes used by other cities to pay for park and recreation include Transient Occupancy Tax, Real Estate Transfer Tax and Admissions Tax. A portion of such tax revenue could be dedicated for speciﬁ c park and recreation uses, either to provide funding for a bond issue or to cover deﬁ ned maintenance and operating costs. 4. Concessions - By contracting with a concessionaire to build and/or operate a facility, the City can generate income which could cover the capital costs and maintenance of the facility. Examples of such concession-operated facilities include: baseball or softball diamonds, equestrian facilities, handball courts, tennis courts, miniature golf, roller hockey facilities and food and beverage concessions. In most cases, the City provides a site for the facility and either the City or the concessionaire funds the construction of the facility. The lease terms are determined accordingly. 5. User Group Contributions – Sports groups sometimes have an interest in constructing and maintaining ﬁ elds for their use if the City would provide a nominal lease of land for a reasonable time span so that they can capture the value of the improvements. This relieves the City of the associated costs; however, it precludes the use of the ﬁ elds by other user groups unless that is made a condition of the lease. 6. Joint-Use Agreements with School Districts – Joint-Use Agreements with local School Districts can provide for reciprocal use of facilities by both parties. They deﬁ ne responsibilities for capital improvements and maintenance of the facilities. Problems sometimes arise when expanding school sports programs create inequalities in the amount of time the City has access to the facilities. Agreements need to be deﬁ nitive and speciﬁ c as to allowed usage. 7. Sale or Lease of Surplus Lands - The sale or lease of land or other capital facilities for which the City has no further use can sometimes be a major source of revenue. One- time receipts from the sale of land can be used for the acquisition of new park lands, recreation facilities, or the development of new community service facilities. Revenues from long-term leases can be used to provide maintenance or underwrite programs. Surplus parcels also may provide opportunities for trading land elsewhere in the City with other agencies that own land more suitable for park purposes. Potential Funding Sources by Facility Type A summary of the various funding sources for the most appropriate project type is presented in Exhibit 6.2-1. The City should look at developing new sources beyond those currently in use. Funding needs can be satisﬁ ed for each improvement through a variety of potential sources. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 137 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan126 The speciﬁ c funding source to be considered will depend partly on the timing of the development and the funding sources which may be available or which are more easily pursued at that time. For major improvements which include such facilities as community centers, soccer complexes, gymnasiums, senior centers, teen centers, ball ﬁ eld complexes, etc., the use of a fund raising effort to be conducted on behalf of a City’s non-proﬁ t foundation could be beneﬁ cial. Sponsorships/ naming rights for major corporate or other private donors can be offered. In some cases, the use of a professional fund raising ﬁ rm should be considered once a facility or project for which the funding will be used is identiﬁ ed. Other sources of funding for such projects could include public/private partnerships, partnerships with private sector through website advertising, user group contributions, joint use with the School District and public or private grants. Use of bonds, sales tax increase, or special districts require a vote by the residents and have been used successfully in some California communities. The City of Pico Rivera passed a sales tax increase to implement their Park and Recreation Master Plan. The speciﬁ c facilities and improvements to be paid for need to be identiﬁ ed and a public relations effort is required to enlist the support of the electorate. The greater the demand and recognition of the need by the public, the greater will be the chance of success. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 138 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan127 1 The grant requirements will specify what functions are eligible for funding. PROJECT TYPE Funding Source Acquisition Improvement Operations Programs Non-Profit Foundation – i.e. 501 (c)(3) x x State and Federal Grants 1 x x Foundation Grants 1 x x Quimby Dedication/In-lieu Fee x x Development Agreements/Impact Fees x x General Obligation Bonds x x Revenue Bonds x x Certificates of Participation x x Sales Tax Increase x x x x Fund Raising Events x x Sponsorship (Naming Rights) x x x x User Fees x x Corporate Sponsorship of Events x x Adopt-a-Park Program x x Volunteer Labor x x Public/Private Partnerships (Concessions) x x x x Benefit Assessment District x x x x Mello Roos District x x x Transient Occupancy Tax x x x x Real Estate Transfer Tax x x Admissions Tax x x x x User Group Contributions x x x x Joint Use with School District/Public Agency x x x x Sale/Lease of Surplus Lands x x x x General Fund x x x x Exhibit 6.2-1 Funding Sources by Project Type FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 139 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan128 6.3 Capital Project Budget Currently, funding for capital improvements, renovations, and additions to park and recreation facilities in the City of Downey comes from several sources. For the Fiscal Year 2015/16 Downey has allocated $1.2 million in funds for capital improvement and renovation of park facilities. In a built-out community, fees on new development (development impact fees and developer special agreements) are a minor source of funding to provide parks and recreation facilities for the residents of Downey. Aside from the General Fund, recent sources of funding include grant funds from Los Angeles County 4th District Supervisor, State of California Habitat Conservation Fund, and a grant from the Kiwanis. As an indication of the facility renovation, maintenance, and safety needs the Department has requested $2.66 million in funding for 2015/16 for capital projects ranging from playgrounds replacement, parking lot repairs, irrigation system upgrades, security cameras, and general park beautiﬁ cation projects. Exhibit 6.3-1 identiﬁ es recommended projects by park sites for the City of Downey and identiﬁ es potential funding sources which could be utilized to fund each of these projects. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 140 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan129 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations A. General Fund B. Non-profit Organization C. Public/Private Partnerships, Concessions D. Grants-CDBG E. Grants-Public Agencies & Private Foundations F. Corporate Sponsorships G. Certificates of Participation H. Bonds I. Sales Tax J. Sale/Lease of Surplus Land K. User Group Contributions L. School District Joint-use Contributions M. Dedicated Taxes N. Developer Impact Fees O. Developer Special Agreement 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Infiltration Basin Development Shuffleball to Multipurpose Fitness Community Center Seismic Study Recycled water - water main improvements Recycled water - irrigation system replacement Conversion to Synthetic turf Turf renovation Outdoor Storage Ballfield lighting Replace fence around playground Replace north restroom or North Restroom new roof North restroom paint North Restroom ADA Parking lot renovation Eastern parking lot ADA access South Restroom ADA North parking lot ADA Northeast parking lot ADA Convert toilet stalls for child use Exterior Drinking fountains Playground renovation POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE KEY A,B,C,D,E,F,H,I,K8,577,600$ FACILITY TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS APOLLO PARK EXISTING FACILITIES FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 141 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan130 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A. General Fund B. Non-profit Organization C. Public/Private Partnerships, Concessions D. Grants-CDBG E. Grants-Public Agencies & Private Foundations F. Corporate Sponsorships G. Certificates of Participation H. Bonds I. Sales Tax J. Sale/Lease of Surplus Land K. User Group Contributions L. School District Joint-use Contributions M. Dedicated Taxes N. Developer Impact Fees O. Developer Special Agreement POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE KEY FACILITY TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Add Wi Fi Exterior Light Retrofit to LED Install Cool roof Replace Rooftop HVAC Install Solar Parking lot renovation 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Recycled Water - water main improvements Recycled Water - irrigation system improvements Accessible picnic tables Accessible drinking fountain 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Slurry parking lot Playground renovation Twenty foot trail access Turf/Irrigation Renovation ADA parking/redesign entry Soccer to synthetic Install lights sports fields A,B,C,D,E,F,H,I,K A,H A,D,E,H,I H,K,L BARBARA J. RILEY COMMUNITY AND SENIOR CENTER BROOKSHIRE CHILDREN'S PARK 613,353$ 675,500$ 725,200$ 5,100,000$ CRAWFORD PARK COLUMBUS HIGH SCHOOL FIELDS FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 142 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan131 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A. General Fund B. Non-profit Organization C. Public/Private Partnerships, Concessions D. Grants-CDBG E. Grants-Public Agencies & Private Foundations F. Corporate Sponsorships G. Certificates of Participation H. Bonds I. Sales Tax J. Sale/Lease of Surplus Land K. User Group Contributions L. School District Joint-use Contributions M. Dedicated Taxes N. Developer Impact Fees O. Developer Special Agreement POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE KEY FACILITY TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Infiltration Basin Development Slurry parking lot/ADA Replace chain link to wrought iron Interior Light Retro Park lighting Playground Hardware/surfacing Remove community bldg or Replace community bldg or Community bldg new roof/paint Garage Community bldg ADA entry ramp Community bldg--interior ADA Replace restroom or Restroom--new roof wood repairs/paint Restroom--drainage Restroom--ADA Restroom --sidewalk 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Infiltration Basin Expansion Soccer fields to synthetic Lights at new synthetic fields Barrier Poles and netting New accessible curb ramps Restroom/Concession ADA A,D,E,H,I5,011,000$ 12,866,000$ DENNIS THE MENACE PARK DISCOVERY SPORTS COMPLEX A,B,D,E,H,I,K,L FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 143 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan132 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A. General Fund B. Non-profit Organization C. Public/Private Partnerships, Concessions D. Grants-CDBG E. Grants-Public Agencies & Private Foundations F. Corporate Sponsorships G. Certificates of Participation H. Bonds I. Sales Tax J. Sale/Lease of Surplus Land K. User Group Contributions L. School District Joint-use Contributions M. Dedicated Taxes N. Developer Impact Fees O. Developer Special Agreement POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE KEY FACILITY TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Infiltration Basin Development Recycled water - water main improvements Recycled water - irrigation system replacement Turf renovation Parking lot renovation Parking lot ADA Interior Light Retro Child's restroom to day-care Field lighting Sports fields-bleachers/backstops Improve 2nd ball field 9,354,000$ FURMAN PARK A,B,C,D,E,F,H,I,K,N FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 144 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan133 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A. General Fund B. Non-profit Organization C. Public/Private Partnerships, Concessions D. Grants-CDBG E. Grants-Public Agencies & Private Foundations F. Corporate Sponsorships G. Certificates of Participation H. Bonds I. Sales Tax J. Sale/Lease of Surplus Land K. User Group Contributions L. School District Joint-use Contributions M. Dedicated Taxes N. Developer Impact Fees O. Developer Special Agreement POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE KEY FACILITY TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Recycled Water - water main improvements Recycled Water - irrigation system improvements Turf renovation Renovate group picnic Parking lot renovation Community bldg redesign front plaza Community bldg--drainage Parking lot ADA ramp Westerly access ADA redesign Restroom ADA Improved field lighting Conversion of Softball Field to Game Field Storage space for sports equipment 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Turf/irrigation renovation Parking lot renovation Tennis court renovation Playground renovation Storage bldg--drainage Light easterly ballfield Tennis bldg--replace trellis Pathway redesign--ADA East Restroom--ADA Replace existing restroom 2,421,500$ INDEPENDENCE PARK A,B,C,D,E,H,I,K A,B,C,D,E,H,I,K2,252,500$ GOLDEN PARK FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 145 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan134 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A. General Fund B. Non-profit Organization C. Public/Private Partnerships, Concessions D. Grants-CDBG E. Grants-Public Agencies & Private Foundations F. Corporate Sponsorships G. Certificates of Participation H. Bonds I. Sales Tax J. Sale/Lease of Surplus Land K. User Group Contributions L. School District Joint-use Contributions M. Dedicated Taxes N. Developer Impact Fees O. Developer Special Agreement POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCE KEY FACILITY TOTAL COST OF IMPROVEMENTS 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Slurry Pico Vista lot Ballfield Restroom--paint and roof Decomposed Granite Walking Trail Conversion to Passive Park Remove community bldg or Community bldg--roof Community bldg--paint Community bldg--window frames Community bldg--brick veneer Field/park lighting 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Turf/irrigation renovation Flag Pole with lighting 5 Year CIP Anticipated Maintenance Improvements Recycled water - water main improvements Recycled water - irrigation system improvements ADA parking path redesign 1,335,500$ RIO SAN GABRIEL PARK A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I TEMPLE PARK TREASURE ISLAND PARK 2,152,750$ 139,800$ A,D,E,H,I FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 146 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan135 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A.GeneralFund B.NonͲprofitOrganization C.Public/Private Partnerships,Concessions D.GrantsͲCDBG E.GrantsͲPublicAgencies& PrivateFoundations F.CorporateSponsorships G.Certificatesof Participation H.Bonds I.SalesTax J.Sale/LeaseofSurplus Land K.UserGroup Contributions L.SchoolDistrictJointͲuse Contributions M.DedicatedTaxes N.DeveloperImpactFees O.DeveloperSpecial Agreement POTENTIALFUNDINGSOURCEKEY FACILITY TOTALCOSTOF IMPROVEMENTS 5YearCIPAnticipatedMaintenance Improvements InfiltrationBasinDevelopment Pondrenovation Irrigationupgrade ExteriorLightRetro CommunitybldgͲredesigninterior CommunitybldgͲͲADAparkingramp/path redesign CommunitybuildingHVACsystem SecondaryparkingADAramp/slurry CommunitybldgADAimprovements Southrestroomrenovation/ADA Grouppicnicrenovation AccessibleStalls/rampatSouthRestroom BikeTrailAccessImprovements ExistingFacilitiesTotal 58,609,506$ WildernessParkExpansion 600,000$ LaReinaProperty3 1,100,000$ OrangeStreetProperty 798,480$ FormerWellSiteͲ7217AdwenSt.450,000$ FormerWellSiteͲ8201Stewart&GrayRoad.450,000$ FormerWellSiteͲ9501GuatemalaAve.450,000$ ConsueloSt./ParamountBlvd.3,721,560$ RegionalSportsComplex 7,144,000$ SubTotal 14,714,040$ WILDERNESSPARK A,B,C,D,E,H,I,K OPPORTUNITYSITES 7,384,803$ A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,B,C,D,E,F,H,I,K,N A,B,C,D,E,F,H,I,K FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 147 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan136 Exhibit 6.3-1 Potential Funding Sources for Facility Recommendations (Continued) A.GeneralFund B.NonͲprofitOrganization C.Public/Private Partnerships,Concessions D.GrantsͲCDBG E.GrantsͲPublicAgencies& PrivateFoundations F.CorporateSponsorships G.Certificatesof Participation H.Bonds I.SalesTax J.Sale/LeaseofSurplus Land K.UserGroup Contributions L.SchoolDistrictJointͲuse Contributions M.DedicatedTaxes N.DeveloperImpactFees O.DeveloperSpecial Agreement FACILITY TOTALCOSTOF IMPROVEMENTS POTENTIALFUNDINGSOURCEKEY AdultSoftballFieldͲlighted 1,150,000$ BicyclingTrails(4Miles)****740,000$ Gymnasium 3,700,000$ Playgrounds(21Playgrounds)*****9,450,000$ SoccerComplex 5,000,000$ SprayPlay/SplashPad(1)500,000$ Walking/JoggingTrails(42Miles)8,400,000$ SubTotal 28,940,000$ TOTALOppSitesandAddtnlCommNeeds43,654,040$ ADDITIONALCOMMUNITYNEEDSͲSITEYETTOBEDEFINED*** A,B,C,D,E,H,I,K A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I A,B,C,D,E,H,I,K A,D,E,H,I A,D,E,H,I FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 148 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan137 6.4 Capital Costs for Proposed Recommendations The ﬁ ve-year Capital Budget is integral to sound ﬁ nancial planning, debt management, and reserve development. In coordination with the Public Works Maintenance Division and Park and Recreation staff, this Master Plan identiﬁ ed master planned facilities, capital replacement and capital outlay requirement over a ﬁ ve-year period to assist with planned cash and debt management. Exhibit 6.4-1 displays recommended summary of ﬁ ve year plan for minor park maintenance and capital improvements for the City of Downey. The complete Capital Improvement Plan is included in the Appendix. This plan is broken down by maintenance and site speciﬁ c CIP’s. This ﬁ ve year program is based upon a continuation of City funding at existing levels for capital replacement, renovation, and upgrades and the City moving forward with a voter approved funding measure in the 2018/2019 Fiscal Year. It is recommended that the City take the next step in the development of a proposed voter approved funding measures, sales tax increase, bond, etc. and conduct polling to determine the public’s willingness to pay for park improvements and new park development at identiﬁ ed opportunity sites, potential Green Streets, or joint use of school playgrounds. If the City decides to move forward with a voter approved funding measure after conducting polling on willingness to pay, new park development should be included as a single line item listing potential projects and total dollar amount that would be available to begin work on those projects on a priority basis. Appendix tab A6.4. FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 149 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan138 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/172017/182018/192019/202020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 15 $ 2,000 $ 8,000 $ - $ 8,000 $ - $ 76,000 $ 92,000 Individual Barbeque 15 $ 500 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,500 $ 10,500 Drinking Fountains 15 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 15,000 $ - $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 60,000 Garbage Cans 15 $ 500 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000 $ 63,000 $ 64,000 Benches 15 $ 1,500 $ 15,000 $ 9,000 $ 13,500 $ 10,500 $ 18,000 $ 66,000 Bike Rack 15 $ 2,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Play Area 15 $ 75-250k $ - $ 250,000 $ 600,000 $ 250,000 $ 1,100,000 Basketball Court 10 $ 85,000 $ - $ - $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 60,000 Sand Volleyball 15 $ 10,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Dog Park 20 $ 30,000 $ - $ - $ - $ 15,000 $ - $ 15,000 Restroom 20 $ 100-500k $ - $ - $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ 300,000 Path--Concrete 30 $160 sq yard $ 54,200 $ 20,000 $ - $ 20,000 $ 4,800 $ 99,000 Path—DG 15 $45 sq yd $ - $ 4,500 $ - $ - $ 27,000 $ 31,500 Asphalt Area Parking 15 Varies* $ - $ - $ 4,000 $ 6,000 $ - $ 10,000 Trees 30 $300 24" box $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 2,100 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 8,100 Building/Structure 20 Varies $ - $ 25,000 $ - $ 25,000 $ - $ 50,000 Sub Total MM $ 83,700 $ 325,000 $ 647,600 $ 419,000 $ 502,800 $ 1,978,100 MAINTENANCE 2016/172017/182018/192019/202020/21 5 Year Apollo $ 19,000 $ 8,000 $ 7,600 $ 29,000 $ 46,500 $ 110,100 Barbara J. Riley $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Brookshire $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Crawford $ 7,700 $ - $ 220,000 $ - $ 3,000 $ 230,700 Columbus $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Dennis the Menace $ 15,000 $ - $ 403,000 $ 5,000 $ 23,500 $ 446,500 Discovery $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000 $ 2,500 $ 3,500 Furman $ 1,500 $ 26,500 $ 1,500 $ 26,500 $ 28,500 $ 84,500 Golden $ 20,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ 20,500 $ 290,500 Independence $ 8,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 15,500 $ 32,500 Rio San Gabriel $ 1,500 $ 5,000 $ 1,500 $ 21,500 $ 41,000 $ 70,500 Temple $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,300 $ 7,300 Treasure Island $ 8,000 $ 4,500 $ 8,000 $ - $ 7,500 $ 28,000 Wilderness $ 3,000 $ 28,000 $ 3,000 $ 333,000 $ 285,000 $ 652,000 Sub Total CIP $ 83,700 $ 325,000 $ 647,600 $ 419,000 $ 502,800 $ 1,978,100 SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S 2016/172017/182018/192019/202020/21 5 Year Apollo $ 4,017,500 $ - $ 4,450,000 $ - $ - $ 8,467,500 Barbara J. Riley $ 152,536 $ 15,000 $ 443,817 $ - $ - $ 611,353 Brookshire $ 5,500 $ - $ 650,000 $ - $ - $ 655,500 Crawford $ 194,500 $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 494,500 Columbus $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 Dennis the Menace $ 3,789,500 $ 300,000 $ 475,000 $ - $ - $ 4,564,500 Discovery $ 7,362,500 $ - $ 5,500,000 $ - $ - $ 12,862,500 Furman $ 7,339,500 $ 50,000 $ 1,880,000 $ - $ - $ 9,269,500 Golden $ 216,000 $ 90,000 $ 1,825,000 $ - $ - $ 2,131,000 Independence $ 31,000 $ 260,000 $ 1,925,000 $ - $ 4,000 $ 2,220,000 Rio San Gabriel $ 2,082,250 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,082,250 Temple $ - $ - $ 132,500 $ - $ - $ 132,500 Treasure Island $ 7,500 $ - $ 1,300,000 $ - $ - $ 1,307,500 Wilderness $ 6,017,803 $ 15,000 $ 300,000 $ 400,000 $ - $ 6,732,803 Sub Total CIP $ 31,216,089 $ 730,000 $ 24,281,317 $ 400,000 $ 4,000 $ 56,631,406 MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY MAINTENANCE PARK SUMMARY PARK SUMMARY Exhibit 6.4-1 Major Maintenance/Capital Improvement Summary FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 150 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan139 Exhibit 6.4-1 Major Maintenance/Capital Improvement Summary (Continued) CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY MAINTENANCE/ SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S TOTAL 2016/172017/182018/192019/202020/21 5 Year Apollo $ 4,036,500 $ 8,000 $ 4,457,600 $ 29,000 $ 46,500 $ 8,577,600 Barbara J. Riley $ 152,536 $ 15,000 $ 443,817 $ - $ 2,000 $ 613,353 Brookshire $ 5,500 $ - $ 650,000 $ - $ 20,000 $ 675,500 Crawford $ 202,200 $ - $ 520,000 $ - $ 3,000 $ 725,200 Columbus $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 Dennis the Menace $ 3,804,500 $ 300,000 $ 878,000 $ 5,000 $ 23,500 $ 5,011,000 Discovery $ 7,362,500 $ - $ 5,500,000 $ 1,000 $ 2,500 $ 12,866,000 Furman $ 7,341,000 $ 76,500 $ 1,881,500 $ 26,500 $ 28,500 $ 9,354,000 Golden $ 236,000 $ 340,000 $ 1,825,000 $ - $ 20,500 $ 2,421,500 Independence $ 39,000 $ 263,000 $ 1,928,000 $ 3,000 $ 19,500 $ 2,252,500 Rio San Gabriel $ 2,083,750 $ 5,000 $ 1,500 $ 21,500 $ 41,000 $ 2,152,750 Temple $ - $ - $ 132,500 $ - $ 7,300 $ 139,800 Treasure Island $ 15,500 $ 4,500 $ 1,308,000 $ - $ 7,500 $ 1,335,500 Wilderness $ 6,020,803 $ 43,000 $ 303,000 $ 733,000 $ 285,000 $ 7,384,803 TOTAL $ 31,299,789 $ 1,055,000 $ 24,928,917 $ 819,000 $ 506,800 $ 58,609,506 MAINTENANCE/ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 2016/172017/182018/192019/202020/21 5 Year Park Ballfield Improvements $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 Hot Coal Bins/BBQ $ 17,500 $ 17,500 $ 17,500 Park Security Cameras $ 218,827 $ 218,827 $ 218,827 Parks Lighting $ 161,767 $ 161,767 $ 161,767 TOTAL $ 488,094 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 488,094 NON-PARK SPECIFIC PARK SUMMARY FUNDING/IMPLEMENTATION DR A F T PC Agenda Page 151 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 152 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 153 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY DR A F T PC Agenda Page 154 January 2016 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN THE CITY OF DOWNEY APPENDIX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 155 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 156 City of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan C Prepared for Prepared by City of Downey 11111 Brookshire Avenue Downey, CA 90241 www.downeyca.org/ 2016 Parks and Open Space Master Plan CITY OF DOWNEY CITY OF DOWNEY Parks and Open Space Master Plan APPENDIX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 157 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 158 ECity of Downey • Parks and Open Space Master Plan A1.4 Demographic Analysis 1 A3.1-1 Stakeholers Focus Group Summary 9 A3.1-2 Resident Survey, Summary 17 A3.1-2 Resident Survey, Data 43 A3.1-3 Online Questionnarie Summary 99 A3.1-4 Community Workshop #1 Summary Report 127 A3.1-5 Community Workshop #2 Summary Report 133 A3.1-6 Community Workshop #3 Summary Report 141 A3.2 Facility Demand Analysis 145 A3.5 Assessment of Current Maintenance Conditions, Existing Park and Recreation Facilities/Park Inventory Descriptions 165 A4.1 Assessment of Current Recreation Programming 183 A4.2 Recreation Trends Analysis 201 A5.3-1 Recycled Water Use Locations 215 A5.3-2 Maintenance, Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations 217 A6.4 Major Maintenance and Capital Improvement Plan Summary 291 Tab/Section Content Appendix Page # Table of Contents **This document is the Appendix to the Parks and Open Space Master Plan. It provides detailed information on a variety of topics covered in the Master Plan report. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 159 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 160 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS Understanding the demographic context of the City can create a valuable perspective for understanding current parks and recreation facility and program requirements and, moreover, for anticipating parks and recreation facility and program needs in the future. Demographic characteristics such as age, presence of children, ethnicity and income have been demonstrat- ed in past research to have a relationship to recreating patterns and needs. For those reasons, historical change and emerging directions of the resident population and demography of the City are important considerations as the City plans for and moves forward into its preferred future. Four demographic analyses have been prepared as a foundation for understanding City residents’ recreation needs and preferences now and in the future.  A review of historical population growth for residents of the City and for residents of the County as a whole for perspective, examining data as of 2000 and 2010. This data describes the actual size of the resident population base and how it has changed over time. An updated estimate of growth for population in the City and the County as of 2013 is provided by the American Community Survey and, as of 2014, by the California Department of Finance.  A review of historical household (occupied housing unit) growth for the City and County as a whole for perspective, examining data as of 2000 and 2010. This data describes the actual size of the resident household base and how it has changed over time. An updated estimate of growth for households in the City and the County as of 2013 is also provided by the American Community Survey and, as of 2014, by the California Department of Finance.  A review of historical demographic trends for residents of the City and County as a whole for perspective, examining data as of 2000 and 2010. The data describes the actual make-up of the community and how it is changing over time, using many demographic factors, such as age, presence of children, household size, ethnicity, and income. Estimates from the 2013 American Community Survey are also included.  A forecast of population and household growth to 2035 for the City, relying upon the Draft 2016 SCAG Regional Transportation Plan Growth Forecast. The forecast is an important element in the Defensible Needs Assessment because facility and program needs today must be viewed in the context of future needs to effectively and sustainably plan for future facilities and programs. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 161 HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH Exhibit 1, Demographic Trends in the City of Downey presents a fourteen-year history of population growth within the City and County. As Exhibit 1 and Figure 1 illustrate, population growth in the City during the 2000 to 2010 time frame grew from just over 107,000 residents to nearly 112,000 residents, reflecting a 4.1% increase, with approximately 445 new City residents documented each year on average. The City growth rate of 4.1% between 2000 and 2010 compares with a 3.1% rate of growth for the County as a whole. Thus, the City population growth during this time frame was greater than the rate in the County overall. HISTORICAL HOUSEHOLD GROWTH Exhibit 1 also presents a fourteen-year history of household growth within the City and County. As Exhibit 1 and Figure 2 illustrate, the volume of households in the City during the 2000 to 2010 time frame declined from 33,989 to 33,936 reflecting a 0.2% drop, with approximately 53 City households lost during the decade. The City household decline between 2000 and 2010 107,323 111,772 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 2000 2010 Figure 1 Population Growth City of Downey: 2000 to 2010 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 162 compares with a 3.4% rate of growth for the County as a whole. Thus, while the City household volume declined during this time frame, the County experienced growth overall.. 33,989 33,936 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 2000 2010 Figure 2 Household Growth City of Downey: 2000 to 2010 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 163 HISTORICAL DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS To enhance the analysis of population and household growth previously provided, a collection of demographic characteristics for the resident population was compiled for 2000 and, for comparison, 2010. This collection of characteristics has been prepared for the City and the County and is presented in Exhibit 1. Exhibit 1 highlights the following demographic trends.  Average household size in the City has grew from 3.11 persons per household in 2000 to 3.27 persons per household in 2010, while the trend observed in the County (from 2.98 in 2000 to 2.98 in 2010) revealed no change.  The median household income in the City was 5% above the median figure for the County in 2010. However, the median income figure in the City grew slower during the 2000 to 2010 period (26% vs. 30% in the County.)  As Figure 3 reveals, during the 2000 to 2010 time frame, the greatest growth in population by age group was evidenced among City residents 55 to 64 years (36%) and those 45 to 54 years of age (17%). This trend mirrors that evidenced in many communities, a reflection of the aging of a group known as the Baby Boomers. Growth in this age group in the City suggests consideration be given to assuring that senior facilities and services are adequate to serve this burgeoning population group. -9% -15% 4% 12%13% -7% 5% 17% 36% -2% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% < 5 5-9 1 0 -14 1 5 -19 2 0 -24 2 5 -34 3 5 -44 4 5 -54 5 5 -64 65 + Figure 3 Population Change by Age Group City of Downey: 2000 to 2010 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 164 The pattern of growth in the City’s population by age group was comparable to the pattern among County residents where the highest rates of population growth were documented among residents 55 to 64 years of age (up 46%).  Figure 3 also reveals that during the 2000 to 2010 time frame, the greatest decline in population by age group was evidenced among City residents 5 to 9 years of age (-15%), those less than 5 years of age (-9%), and among residents 25 to 34 years of age (-7%). Thus, the volume of children less than 10 years declined, a harbinger of potential change in needs for programs and facilities for this age group. Similar age group declines were noted Countywide.  Examining the population of the City by age, residents 5 to14 years of age (the primary youth sports population group) declined from 16% in 2000 to 15% in 2010. Adult recreation consumers aged 20 to 54 years constituted 50% of City residents in 2000, remaining at 50% in 2010. Seniors 55 and over comprised more than 18% of City residents in 2000 and grew to nearly 20% in 2010.  As a result of the changes in the distribution by age, the median age in the City grew from 32 years in 2000 to 33.3 years in 2010.  Examining the City population by race and ethnicity, declines in the share of residents identifying themselves as White occurred from 2000 to 2010 (from 29% to 18%) while increases were noted among those identifying themselves as Hispanic (from 58% to 71%). These share changes were a reflection of differing population growth rates by race and ethnicity that are presented in Figure 2. Similar race or ethnic diversification was also noted in the County trends. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 165  A 2010 3-Year Estimate from the American Community Survey revealed that 61% of the City population over 5 years speak Spanish and 37% of these Spanish speakers do not speak English “very well” (described as linguistically isolated.) Further, 6% of City residents are estimated to speak an Asian or Pacific Island language and 52% of these Asian/Pacific Island language speakers are linguistically isolated. In total, 27% of Downey residents are estimated to be linguistically isolated.  Less than half of City households (46%) in 2010 were households with children less than 18 years. A similar pattern (36%) was noted Countywide.  The City’s proportion of homeowners has declined somewhat over the ten-year period between Censuses (from 52% to 50%), similar to the County trend. As of 2010, half of City households are homeowners while less than half (46%) are homeowners County-wide.  The median housing value of $463,600 in the City in 2010 is somewhat below the median value of $465,400 in the County as a whole.  The 2010 median rental rate in the City is slightly above that in the County. 27%3% -8%-36% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% Hispanic Black Asian White Figure 2 Change in Population by Race/Ethnicity City of Downey: 2000 to 2010 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 166 FORECAST POPULATION GROWTH Exhibit 2 presents a forecast of population growth within the City extending to 2035 based on the 2016 Draft SCAG Regional Transportation Plan Growth Forecast with linear estimates for intervening years. As Exhibit 2 illustrates, population growth in the City between 2020 and 2035 is expected to occur at a 0.3% rate per year, with approximately 300 new City residents anticipated each year on average, less than the volume documented between 2000 and 2010. FORECAST HOUSING UNIT GROWTH Exhibit 2 also presents a forecast of housing unit growth within the City. As Exhibit 2 illustrates, housing unit growth in the City during the 2020 to 2035 period is expected to occur at approximately 94 units per year, on average, compared with a trend of decline documented between 2000 and 2010. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 167 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 168 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN STAKEHOLDER’S FOCUS GROUP SUMMARY REPORT Wednesday, November 19, 2014 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of two focus group workshops conducted as part of the Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan project. The following lists the various steps in the process. WORKSHOP INTRODUCTION As part of the planning process, two focus groups were held on Wednesday, November 19th, the first from 10:00 a.m.‐12:00 p.m., and the second from 1:30 p.m. ‐ 3:30 p.m. A total of thirty‐one (31) stakeholders attended the two workshops, eighteen (18) participated during the morning session and thirteen (13) participated during the afternoon session. Participants included City residents and City Staff as well as representatives from Northwest Downey Little League, Downey Razorbacks, the Planning Commission, Kiwanis Club, Boy Scout Troop 441, LA County Department of Public Health, Downey Futsal Program, and Downey Tennis Club. Arlene Salazar, Director of Parks and Recreation, welcomed the participants, and provided an overview of the project during the morning and afternoon sessions respectively. Robert Mueting of RJM Design Group reviewed the process for the focus group activities. Bob divided individuals into three groups during both the morning session and afternoon sessions before commencing the focus group workshops. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 169 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 2 of 8 PROCESS Initially, participants were asked to individually respond on forms that were distributed before the presentation of each topic. They were encouraged to list as many responses that came to mind. A group discussion then began with individual members of each group sharing their responses with the entire group. Time was allotted for the groups to gain consensus on their top answers on the particular topic. Following each topic discussion, the group’s presenter reported their findings to all of the workshop participants. WORKSHOP SUMMARY After the presentations were given, the consultant team identified the top responses of all groups for each of the topics presented. They are listed below: TOPIC #1 What are the most important issues related to the parks, open space, recreation facilities, and services currently provided? Maintenance / Infrastructure / Amenity Improvements Safety Sports Needs / Sports Facilities / Sports Programming More Space / Allocation of Park Space / Space Utilization TOPIC #2 How can parks, open space, recreation facilities, programs, and services be improved? Appearance / Maintenance Funding Staffing / Increase Staff Hours / Staff Training TOPIC #3 What is the one program, class, or activity you would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of the community? Programs Accessible to Adults / Parents Teen / Youth Programs Evening Programs TOPIC #4 What is the one recreation facility you would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of the community? Indoor Multi‐use Recreation Facility / Community Center Sports Complex Teen / Youth Center TOPIC #5 What is your vision for parks, open space, facilities, and recreation services in the future (5‐10 years out)? To plan and secure funding to maintain and update existing facilities, and provide safe parks and programs that meet the needs of all residents of the community. TOPIC #6 What needs to be done to accomplish the priorities? Secure Resources / Funding Community Support / Involvement DR A F T PC Agenda Page 170 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 3 of 8 The following charts represent the exact wording provided by each group on large format paper. They are aggregated here and color‐coded to show the workshop consensus responses. TOPIC #1 What are the most important issues related to the parks, open space, recreation facilities, and services currently provided? AM FOCUS GROUP PM FOCUS GROUP GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 SPACE – More facility space, park/ Safety & Security ‐Lighting Infrastructure Renovation 1. Irrigation 2. Restroom upgrades 3. Turf maintenance Infrastructure Improvements Safety Safety grass/open space to accommodate sports and other Lighting community programs MAINTENANCE – General upkeep needed, repairs and/or replace aged equipment and facilities. Groundskeeping / Park Maintenance ‐Green Turf ‐Irrigation Sports Needs 1. Soccer 2. Baseball Fields (13‐14 yr. olds) 3. Bike paths Funding $ Allocation of Park Space Maintenance/ Cleanliness PROGRAMS – Additional youth and senior programs, Designating parking Amenities Improvements 1. Bike racks 2. Trash 3. Picnic Shelters 4. Parking Space Utilization Irrigation Are there programs for all ages team/sports programs & areas for sports What programs are offered at each facility Other Group Responses:  Programs – Youth / Seniors / All Ages / at Each Facility  Irrigation  Lighting  Parking  Funding $ TOP 3 ISSUES Maintenance / Infrastructure / Amenity Improvements Safety Sports Needs / Sports Facilities / Sports Programming More Space / Allocation of Park Space / Space Utilization DR A F T PC Agenda Page 171 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 4 of 8 TOPIC #2 How can parks, open space, recreation facilities, programs, and services be improved? AM FOCUS GROUP PM FOCUS GROUP GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 FUNDING – Additional funding for improving facilities, open space, restrooms, etc. Lighting ‐More ‐Mindful of when ‐by timer? Appearance 1. Esthetics 2. Maintenance Prioritize adequate funding for Park services applicable to all age groups. (similar to Apollo) Staffing – Increase hours ‐ add Staff to smaller parks 3. Security routine maintenance 4. Parking DESIGNATED AREAS – Have additional space, and clearly designated areas to accommodate all programs; Parking ‐More spots Communication 1. Local groups 2. Surveys 3. Community park (Friends of Park) Standardization of maintenance and amenities Less contracted services – More City Staff, in‐ house maintenance Longer hours of operation Promotion by City as well. PLAN – Need a clear plan to approach all needed improvements and repairs and maintenance. Staff ‐Training – improvement in their knowledge Funding 1. Better allocation 2. Donations Additional parks and facilities to allow for all programs to expand Safety – Updating systems – HVAC, lighting, water, irrigation, etc. Lighting, ‐Marketing patrolling of law, City Park Staff Ease of use of rental – make it easier to reserve Other Group Responses:  Lighting  Communication / Outreach / Promotion / Marketing  Parking  Safety / Security  Programs / Facilities for All  Additional Park Space  Longer hours of operation  PLAN – Need a clear plan to approach all needed improvements  Ease of use of rental – make it easier to reserve TOP 3 IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED Appearance / Maintenance Funding Staffing / Increase Staff Hours / Staff Training DR A F T PC Agenda Page 172 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 5 of 8 TOPIC #3 What is the one program, class or activity you would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of the community? AM FOCUS GROUP PM FOCUS GROUP GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Teen program/ facility Teen programs ‐adventure challenge ‐place to hang out ‐ Center ‐ Supervised PM Youth Programs Programs that meet all needs of community Fine arts Adult soccer ‐Daycarefor parents so can do things up to 8:00 pm Exercise programs/ facility and Senior & Community computer classes/learnin g Senior Leagues More sports fields Climate change / ecological awareness Increase adult outdoor fitness programs additional programs in evening hours. Mentoring program – Big Brother Case Resource Mgt. Childcare available for parents while taking classes “Mommy & Me” – Toddler programs offered at times that are accessible to working parents Special needs Other Group Responses:  Adult Soccer / Sports  Seniors Classes / Senior Leagues  Daycare / Childcare  Exercise Fitness ‐ Facility / Programs  Programs that meet all needs of community  Fine arts  Climate change / ecological awareness  Mentoring program – Big Brother  Case Resource Mgt.  Mommy & Me” – Toddler programs  Special needs TOP 3 PROGRAMS Programs Accessible to Adults / Parents Teen / Youth Programs Evening Programs DR A F T PC Agenda Page 173 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 6 of 8 TOPIC #4 What is the one recreation facility you would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of the community? AM FOCUS GROUP PM FOCUS GROUP GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Teen or Recreation Complex for fitness, classes, gathering (Indoor Facility) Indoor multi‐ use facility Sports Complex Sports Complex / Splash Park multi‐use facility / building Community Center: ‐Kitchen for cooking classes ‐Green space for recreation and walking trails ‐Rooms for meetings, classes, tutoring Soccer / More walking trails ‐lit Indoor Turf (Soccer) Teen Center ‐Community garden for Downey residents Teen Center/ Internet Café Sports Complex Fitness Center / Complex Roller skating rink Youth Facility Shelters w/fire ring Indoor Pool Indoor Soccer Field or Artificial Turf Soccer Fields Music Hall Other Group Responses:  Soccer / Indoor Soccer / Artificial Turf Fields  Walking Trails / Greenspace for Recreation  Splash Park  Community garden for Downey residents  Roller skating rink  Shelters w / fire ring  Indoor Pool  Music Hall  Fitness Center / Complex TOP 3 FACILITIES Indoor Multi‐use Recreation Facility / Community Center Sports Complex Teen / Youth Center DR A F T PC Agenda Page 174 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 7 of 8 TOPIC #5 What is your vision for parks, open space, facilities, and recreation services in the future (5‐10 years out)? AM FOCUS GROUP PM FOCUS GROUP GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 To renovate and maintain current facilities, Providing full service parks To create standardized facilities that are safe, Comprehensive plan Parks and green spaces Fixedoutdoor stage and all included amenities. and secure a plan to at least the four different districts of Downey. active & inclusive for all ages, abilities and funding to build new that are connected to neighborhoods, Updated infrastructure in place and resources for Maintain variety of classes and programs and unique to Downey by offering services and activities that improve the quality of life and maintain existing facilities that offer a well‐lit, safe and inviting environment Decreased vandalism Criminal activity future facility development to for all citizens now and in the future. to meet the various and evolving needs of the community with services accessible to residents of all ages. meet community needs. VISION To plan and secure funding to maintain and update existing facilities, and provide safe parks and programs that meet the needs of all residents of the community. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 175 925‐01 Downey – Parks and Open Space Master Plan –Focus Group Workshop Summary Page 8 of 8 TOPIC #6 What needs to be done to accomplish the priorities? AM FOCUS GROUP PM FOCUS GROUP GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Secure Resources: ‐Funding ‐Space ‐Full‐time Staff Securing, identifying funding sources. Build community pride and better relation with schools $$Seek funding – be creative when looking for funding resources Corporate funding / sponsorship Create plan and stick to it!! Committees of volunteers ‐Planning events Taking advantage of non‐civic groups Educate – Create Community awareness through outreach Grants Get community involvement and support from residents, businesses and community groups. Communication to and from community for support of projects and Increase City Sales Tax – This $ goes back into the City improvements / facilities. Look at surrounding Cities as an example (Pico Rivera) Mandated percentage of funding set aside each year – untouchable funding solutions. Get City Council on board (an advocate) Community involvement Other Group Responses:  Build community pride and better relation with schools  Create plan and stick to it!  Committees of volunteers – Planning events  Taking advantage of non‐civic groups  Grants  Increase City Sales Tax – This $ goes back into the City improvements / facilities. Look at surround Cities as an example (Pico Rivera)  Mandated percentage of funding set aside each year – untouchable  Get City Council on board (an advocate) HOW TO ACCOMPLISH Secure Resources / Funding Community Support / Involvement DR A F T PC Agenda Page 176 RESIDENT SURVEY DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA February 2015 Prepared for: City of Downey DR A F T PC Agenda Page 177 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 1 CONTENTS 1 Project Overview 2 1.1 Project Goals 2 1.2 Project Methodology 2 2 Key Findings 3 3 Community Attitudes 5 3.1 One Feature that Makes the City of Downey Desirable 5 3.2 One Issue Facing the City of Downey of Greatest Concern 6 4 Recreation Benefits and Behavior 7 4.1 Most Important Recreation Benefit 7 4.2 Frequency of Recreation Facility Usage 9 4.3 Recreation Facility Most Often Used 11 4.4 Recreation Activities Participation 12 4.5 Frequency of Recreation Programs Usage 15 5 Facilities and Programs Satisfaction 17 5.1 Recreation Facilities and Programs Satisfaction 17 6 Improvements Desired 19 6.1 One Recreation Facility Improvement Desired 19 6.2 One Program Improvement Desired 20 6.3 Preferred Community Improvements 21 7 Respondent Demography 23 APPENDIX Questionnaire Response Tabulations DR A F T PC Agenda Page 178 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 2 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 PROJECT GOALS The resident survey was part of the preparation of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan. The purpose of the survey was to obtain statistically valid, community-wide input on a variety of issues. The resident survey is one of several methods being undertaken to involve the community in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan process. The purpose of gathering community input through a variety of methods is to ensure that the Parks and Open Space Master Plan is as inclusive as possible and that it reflects the views, preferences, and recreating patterns of City of Downey residents. 1.2 PROJECT METHODOLOGY  Telephone Survey of 200 City of Downey households, representing nearly 700 residents.  Overall margin of error of + 7.1% at the 95% Confidence Level.  Interviewing took place between December 17 and December 23, 2014. Subjects explored in the context of the resident survey included:  One Feature that Makes the City a Desirable Place to Live  One Issue Facing the City that is of Greatest Concern  Benefits Sought When Recreating  Frequency of Recreation Facility and Programs Usage  Park or Recreation Facility Most Often Used in Last Year  Frequency of Recreation Activities Participation  Satisfaction with Recreation Facilities and Programs  Preferred Improvements in the City of Downey  One New Recreation Facility and Program Desired  Selected Demographic Characteristics DR A F T PC Agenda Page 179 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 3 2 KEY FINDINGS  About 87% of residents identified “Lack of Crime/Safe,” “Proximity to Shopping,” “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Access to Freeways,” “Schools, Quality Education, Good Education,” Quality of Life,” “Centrally Located,” “Clean,” “Feeling a Part of Community,” “Close to Work,” and “Parks and Recreation Facilities and Trails” as the feature that makes Downey a desirable place to live.  About seven of ten residents (68%) identified "Crime/Personal Safety," “Population Growth,” “Education,” “Growth Management,” “Gangs,” “Fire and Police Protection,” “Road Improvements,” "Traffic Congestion on Surface Streets," and “Drug and Alcohol Abuse” as the issue of greatest concern. .  More than four in ten residents (43%) chose "Physical Fitness, Health and Well-being" as the most important benefit when seeking recreation.  More than four in ten residents polled (45%) stated they were Frequent Users (at least 3 times per month) of parks and recreation facilities in the last year. In contrast, more than one in ten residents (13%) stated they had not used parks and recreation facilities in that time frame.  The nine recreation facilities responses most often identified as most used included Furman Park, Apollo Park, Parks Outside Downey, Dennis the Menace Park, Wilderness Park, Independence Park, Golden Park, San Gabriel River Bike Path, and the YMCA.  Of the eight recreation activities tested, the largest participation by residents included "Walking/Jogging/ Running/Hiking on Public Trails Use," "Bicycling on Public Trails or Paths," "Use of Play Equipment, Tot Lots in Public Parks," “Organized Softball,” “Organized Youth Soccer," “Organized Youth Basketball,” “Organized Youth Baseball,” and “Organized Youth Tackle Football.” Community Attitudes Recreation Benefits and Facilities Use DR A F T PC Agenda Page 180 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 4  Nearly one of three residents polled (31%) stated they were Frequent Users (at least 3 times per month) of programs in the last year. In contrast, more than four in ten residents (41%) stated they had not used programs in that time frame. .  Nine of ten residents polled (90%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisfied with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. .  More than 90% of City of Downey households identified a desired new recreation facility. One in ten (9%) stated they desired no new recreation facilities.  Nearly nine of every ten City of Downey households (87%) identified a desired new program, class, or lesson. More than one in ten (13%) stated they desired no program additions. Facilities and Programs Satisfaction Improvements Desired Recreation Programs Use DR A F T PC Agenda Page 181 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 5 3 COMMUNITY ATTITUDES 3.1 ONE FEATURE THAT MAKES THE CITY DESIRABLE The eleven response categories with the largest share of responses are presented in Figure 1. Remaining categories received less than 3% of the responses. 3% 3% 4% 7% 7% 7% 8% 8% 8% 10% 22% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Recreation Near Work Community Clean Central Location Quality of Life Schools Freeway Access Small Town Near Shopping Lack of Crime Figure 1 One Feature that Makes Downey Desirable Downey Residents About 87% of residents identified “Lack of Crime/Safe,” “Proximity to Shopping,” “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Access to Freeways,” “Schools/Quality Education/Good Education,” Quality of Life,” “Centrally Located,” “Clean,” “Feeling a Part of Community,” “Close to Work,” and “Parks and Recreation Facilities and Trails” as the feature that makes Downey a desirable place to live. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.5 What is the one feature that makes the City of Downey a desirable place to live? DR A F T PC Agenda Page 182 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 6 3.2 ONE ISSUE FACING THE CITY OF GREATEST CONCERN The nine response categories with the largest share of responses are presented in Figure 2. Remaining categories received less than 3% of the responses. About seven of ten residents (68%) identified "Crime/Personal Safety," “Population Growth,” “Education,” “Growth Management,” “Gangs,” “Fire and Police Protection,” “Road Improvements,” "Traffic Congestion on Surface Streets," and “Drug and Alcohol Abuse” as the issue of greatest concern. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.6 W hat issue facing the City of Downey is of greatest concern to you as a resident? 3% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 6% 32% 0% 10% 20% 30% Drug/Alcohol Abuse Street Traffic Road Improvements Fire/Police Gangs Growth Management Education Population Growth Crime Figure 2 One Issue Facing City of Greatest Concern Downey Residents DR A F T PC Agenda Page 183 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 7 4 RECREATION BENEFITS AND BEHAVIOR 4.1 MOST IMPORTANT RECREATION BENEFIT The benefits tested and the share of responses each received is presented in Figure 3. 11% 22% 24% 43% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Volunteer Learning Social Fitness Figure 3 Most Important Recreation Benefit Downey Residents More than four in ten residents (43%) chose "Physical Fitness, Health and Well-being" as the most important benefit when seeking recreation. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.7 Reflecting upon the recreation patterns of those in your household, which of the following benefits do you feel is most important when you or the members of your household seek recreation or leisure opportunities? W ould it be…  Physical Fitness, Health and Well-being  Opportunities to Gather and Socialize with Others  Learning Opportunities for Hobby, Self-Improvement or Career Development  Opportunities to Give Back to the Community Through Volunteer Work DR A F T PC Agenda Page 184 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 8 Table 1 below compares these recreation benefit responses from City of Downey residents to statistics derived from twenty-four other California municipalities where similar work has been conducted. Because each survey questionnaire is custom -designed for each agency, the number of comparison surveys varies by question. A smaller share of residents of the City of Downey reported an interest in Physical Fitness, Health and Well-Being benefits than the average of communities previously surveyed. The share of residents choosing Opportunities to Gather and Socialize with Others as most important was also below the average posted historically. However, the two remaining benefit categories received higher than average response from City of Downey residents polled. Table 1 Most Important Recreation Benefits City of Downey vs. Twenty-four Selected California Municipalities City of Downey Twenty-four Selected California Municipalities Lowest Response Highest Response Median Health/Fitness 43% 31% 54% 47% Gather/Socialize 24% 19% 36% 29% Learning 22% 12% 28% 17% Volunteer 11% 6% 16% 9% Communities Compared DR A F T PC Agenda Page 185 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 9 4.2 FREQUENCY OF RECREATION FACILITY USAGE The facility use categories tested and the share of responses each received is presented in Figure 4. 13% 4% 18% 20% 20% 24% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% No Use Once/Year Several/Year 1 to 2/Month 3 to 4/Month >Once/Week Figure 4 Frequency of Recreation Facility Use Downey Residents More than four in ten residents polled (45%) stated they were Frequent Users (at least 3 times per month) of parks and recreation facilities in the last year. In contrast, more than one in ten residents (13%) stated they had not used parks and recreation facilities in that time frame. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.8 Thinking about the past year, what best describes how often you or other members of your household used indoor or outdoor parks and recreation facilities in or outside of the City of Downey? More than Once a Week Several Times a Year Once a W eek or 3 to 4 Times Per Month Once a Year Once or Twice a Month No Use DR A F T PC Agenda Page 186 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 10 Table 2 below compares these recreation facility usage responses from City of Downey residents to statistics derived from forty-four other California municipalities where similar work has been conducted. Table 2 Frequency of Recreation Facility Usage City of Downey vs. Forty-four Selected California Municipalities City of Downey Forty-four Selected California Municipalities Lowest Response Highest Response Median Frequent Users 45% 19% 67% 44% Non-Users 13% 5% 40% 14% As the table illustrates, the share of residents polled in the City of Downey who were Frequent Users of parks (at least 3 times per month) was average among other cities surveyed. The share of City of Downey residents who reported no recreation facility use in the past year was also average compared to the forty-four municipalities previously surveyed. Communities Compared An examination of reported recreation facility use among City of Downey residents revealed the following statistically significant differences in the overall 45% share of Frequent Users among examined subgroups of the total sample:  Respondents reporting a head of household less than 45 years (62%).  Households with any members less than 18 years (60%). Subgroup Responses DR A F T PC Agenda Page 187 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 11 4.3 RECREATION FACILITY MOST OFTEN USED The nine response categories with the largest share of responses are presented in Figure 5. Remaining categories received less than 2% of the responses. 2% 2% 2% 3% 9% 9% 9% 24% 27% 0% 10% 20% 30% YMCA San Gabriel River Golden Independence Wilderness Dennis the Menace Outside Downey Apollo Furman Figure 5 Most Used Recreation Facility Downey Residents The nine recreation facilities responses most often identified as most used included Furman Park, Apollo Park, Parks Outside Downey, Dennis the Menace Park, Wilderness Park, Independence Park, Golden Park, San Gabriel River Bike Path, and the YMCA. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.9 During the last year, what park or recreation facility did you and your household most often use? DR A F T PC Agenda Page 188 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 12 4.4 RECREATION ACTIVITIES PARTICIPATION The eight recreation activities tested and the share of the population in surveyed City of Downey households who reported participation in the past year are presented in Figure 6 on the following page. Of the eight recreation activities tested, the largest participation by residents (in order or participation) included "Walking/Jogging/Running/Hiking on Public Trails Use," "Bicycling on Public Trails or Paths," "Use of Play Equipment, Tot Lots in Public Parks," “Organized Softball,” “Organized Youth Soccer," “Organized Youth Basketball,” “Organized Youth Baseball,” and “Organized Youth Tackle Football.” Finding Question Analyzed: Q.10 In the past year, how often have you and each of the members of your household participated in: Organized Youth Soccer League Games Organized Youth Baseball League Games Walk/Jog/Hike/Run on Public Trails Organized Softball League Games Play Equipment, Tot Lots in Public Parks Bicycling on Public Trails for Recreation Organized Youth Basketball League Games Organized Youth Tackle Football Games Each respondent was queried regarding whether any of the members of their household had conducted each activity during the past year. Further, they were asked to estim ate how often in the past year each member engaged in the activity. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 189 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 13 2% 4% 4% 6% 9% 17% 37% 63% 0% 20% 40% 60% Youth Football Youth Baseball Youth Basketball Youth Soccer Softball Tot Lots Bicycling Walk/Hike/Jog/Run Figure 6 Recreation Activities Participation Share of Downey Population Participating The data presented in Figure 6 may appear counter intuitive to representatives of organized sports leagues for youth and to agency officials who regularly host comments or testimony from them. To confirm the validity of the Figure 6 participation levels, it is important to recognize the demography of the area population. Specifically, youth ages 5 to 14 (the prime ages for youth sports) constituted approximately 14% of the total City population as of the 2013 American Community Survey. Thus, if every child in this age group were enrolled in, for instance, youth soccer, the percent of participation on Figure 6 would be at least 14%. However, not all children in this age group are participating in all sports, some participate in none, and some children outside of this age group also participate. Note DR A F T PC Agenda Page 190 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 14 It is also relevant to compare the activity participation rates outlined in Figure 6 to similar “benchmark” data collected periodically by the California State Department of Parks. Table 3 presents selected data from the most recent State Parks Survey, conducted in 2012 for the entire State as well as data from the current City of Downey resident survey. Although not identical methods (or question phrasing), the California State Parks Survey provides contextual benchmark evidence of recreation participation trends that can be valuable in understanding Downey resident recreating patterns and underscore the fact that local recreating patterns can be very disparate from State or National norms. Table 3 Percent of Population Participating in Selected Recreation Activities in the Past Year California State Parks Survey, 2012 and Downey Resident Survey State Parks Activity Description California State Parks 2012 City of Downey Walking for Fitness or Pleasure 74% 63% Day Hiking on Trails 47% See Walking Jogging and Running for Exercise 40% See Walking Bicycling on Paved Surfaces 36% 37% Use Play Equipment, Structures, Tot Lots 33% 17% Organized Team Sports (Adult or Youth) 26% 2% to 9% Bicycling on Unpaved Surfaces and Trails 16% See Bicycling Above Source: Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation in California – 2012 State Comparison DR A F T PC Agenda Page 191 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 15 4.5 FREQUENCY OF RECREATION PROGRAMS USAGE The facility use categories tested and the share of responses each received is presented in Figure 7. 41% 3% 21% 4% 13% 17% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% No Use Once/Year Several/Year 1 to 2/Month 3 to 4/Month >Once/Week Figure 7 Frequency of Recreation Programs Use Downey Residents Nearly one of three residents polled (31%) stated they were Frequent Users (at least 3 times per month) of programs in the last year. In contrast, more than four in ten residents (41%) stated they had not used programs in that time frame. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.12 Thinking about the past year, what best describes how often you or other members of your household used recreation programs, classes or lessons in or outside of the City of Downey? More than Once a Week Several Times a Year Once a W eek or 3 to 4 Times Per Month Once a Year Once or Twice a Month No Use DR A F T PC Agenda Page 192 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 16 Table 4 below compares these recreation programs usage responses from City of Downey residents to statistics derived from twenty-seven other California municipalities where similar work has been conducted. Table 4 Frequency of Recreation Programs Usage City of Downey vs. Twenty-seven Selected California Municipalities City of Downey Twenty-seven Selected California Municipalities Lowest Response Highest Response Median Frequent Users 31% 13% 33% 23% Non-Users 41% 31% 82% 48% As the table illustrates, the share of residents polled in the City of Downey who were Frequent Users of programs (at least 3 times per month) was above average (31% frequent users vs. 23% on average among other communities surveyed.) The share of City of Downey residents who reported no recreation programs use in the past year was below the average (41% vs. 48% median.) Communities Compared Examining the total sample of responses by selected subgroups of residents, the following significant differences in response patterns were noted:  Residents most likely to report frequently using recreation programs included households with a head less than 45 years (43%) and those with children under 18 years (45%). Subgroup Responses DR A F T PC Agenda Page 193 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 17 5 FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS SATISFACTION 5.1 PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS SATISFACTION The response categories and share of responses each received are charted in Figure 8. 3% 7% 52% 37% 0% 20% 40% 60% Not At All Satisfied Not Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Figure 8 Recreation Facilities and Programs Satisfaction Downey Residents Nine of ten residents polled (90%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisfied with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.15 How would you describe your overall satisfaction with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey? Would you say you are…  Very Satisfied  Somewhat Satisfied  Not Very Satisfied  Not At All Satisfied DR A F T PC Agenda Page 194 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 18 Table 5 below compares these overall parks, recreation facilities and programs satisfaction responses from City of Downey residents to statistics derived from eleven other California municipalities where similar work has been conducted. Table 5 Parks, Recreation Facilities and Programs Satisfaction City of Downey vs. Eleven Selected California Municipalities "Satisfied" City of Downey Eleven Selected California Municipalities Lowest Response Highest Response Median Very 37% 30% 77% 48% Somewhat 52% 21% 55% 44% Not Very 7% 1% 17% 6% Not At All 3% 1% 4% 1% As the table illustrates, the share of residents polled in the City of Downey who stated they are Very Satisfied with parks, recreation facilities and programs was below average (37% vs. 48% on average among other cities surveyed.) Communities Compared DR A F T PC Agenda Page 195 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 19 6 IMPROVEMENTS DESIRED 6.1 ONE RECREATION FACILITY IMPROVEMENT DESIRED The recreation facility response categories garnering at least 3% of the responses and the share of responses each received are charted in Figure 9. 4% 4% 5% 6% 6% 11% 0% 5% 10% 15% Community Center Senior Facilities/ Programs Gymnasium Fitness Center Outdoor Recreation Pool Walk/Jog Trails Figure 9 Recreation Facilities Desired Downey Residents More than 90% of City of Downey households identified a desired recreation facility. One in ten (9%) stated they desired no new recreation facilities. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.11 Now that we have discussed many recreation possibilities, what is the one recreatio n facility you would most like to see added in the City of Downey to meet the needs of your household? Total Pools = 9% Total Trails = 16%  Aggregating all Trails (walking/jogging, biking, multi-use) responses nets a total of 16%.  Aggregating all Pools (outdoor and indoor recreation pool), responses nets a total of 9%. Figure 9 Note DR A F T PC Agenda Page 196 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 20 6.2 ONE RECREATION PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT DESIRED The program response categories garnering at least 4% of the responses and the share of responses each received are charted in Figure 10. 4% 4% 5% 6% 6% 7% 7% 8% 0% 5% 10% Basketball Facility Mentions Reading/Language Swimming Music Fitness Cooking Arts/Crafts Figure 10 Recreation Programs Desired Downey Residents Nearly nine of every ten City of Downey households (87%) identified a desired program, class, or lesson. More than one in ten (13%) stated they desired no program additions. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.13 W hat is the one recreation program, class, or lesson your household would most like to see added in the City of Downey to meet the needs of your household? DR A F T PC Agenda Page 197 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 21 6.3 PREFERRED COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENTS The program response categories and the share of responses each received are charted in Figure 11. 20% 23% 24% 32% 0% 20% 40% Active Sports Classes, Events Open Space Fine Arts Figure 11 Preferred Community Improvements Downey Residents Nearly one of every three City of Downey households (32%) identified a preference for Fine Arts or Performing Arts Facilities and Programs improvements. The remaining response categories each received comparable response volumes. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.14 Thinking about the needs of your household, which one of the following types of improvements would you most like to see added in the City of Downey? Active Sports Facilities and Programs Fine Arts or Performing Arts Facilities and Programs Classes, Lessons, and Community Events Open Space Preservation and Enjoyment DR A F T PC Agenda Page 198 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 22 Table 6 below compares these overall preferred community improvement responses from City of Downey residents to statistics derived from four other California municipalities where similar work has been conducted. Table 6 Preferred Community Improvements City of Downey vs. Four Selected California Municipalities City of Downey Four Selected California Municipalities Lowest Response Highest Response Median Active Sports 20% 14% 22% 18% Fine Arts 32% 18% 29% 23% Classes/Events 23% 14% 19% 17% Open Space 24% 34% 48% 44% As the table illustrates, the share of residents polled in the City of Downey who stated they prefer Fine Arts or Performing Arts Facilities and Programs was above average (32% vs. 23% on average among other cities surveyed) and represented the highest share of residents preferring such improvements. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 199 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 23 7 RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHY 7.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents Table 7 on the following page presents the detailed comparison of selected demographic characteristics from the Survey and the 2013 American Community Survey. A comparison of the demographic profile of respondents to the benchmark 2013 American Community Survey profile for the City of Downey confirmed the reliability of the survey sample. Finding Questions Analyzed: Q.2, 3, 4, 16, 17, 18, 19 A collection of demographic questions was included in the survey questionnaire to enable validation of the reliability of the survey sample of respondents as well as for use in response analysis.  Age of Household Members  Number of Household Members  Race/Ethnicity of Respondent  Annual Household Income DR A F T PC Agenda Page 200 City of Downey Resident Survey January, 2015 Page | 24 Table 7 Community-W ide Telephone Survey Demographic Characteristics City of Downey 2013 ACS Survey Percent of Population by Age: Under 5 years 8% 5% 5 to 14 years 14% 15% 15 to 19 years 7% 8% 20 to 24 years 9% 8% 25 to 34 years 15% 12% 35 to 44 years 15% 14% 45 to 54 years 12% 15% 55 to 64 years 10% 11% 65 years and over 11% 13% Median Age 33.4 37.0 Household Description: 1 adult w-o children 17% 17% 2 or more adults w-o children NA 37% Subtotal Households w-o children 54% 54% 1 adult w/children NA 2% 2 adults w/children NA 20% 3 or more adults w/children NA 23% Subtotal Households w/children 46% 46% Ethnicity (ACS data is for population; survey data is for respondents): Non-Hispanic White 17% 17% Hispanic/Latino 71% 72% Non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander 7% 7% Non-Hispanic Black/African American 4% 4% Non-Hispanic Other 1% 1% Mean Household Size (people per household): 3.47 3.48 NA = Data not available Source: 2013 American Community Survey DR A F T PC Agenda Page 201 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 202 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS BANNER 1 Table ZIP Page 1.........WHAT IS YOUR ZIP CODE? Table QS1 Page 2.........S1. GENDER BY OBSERVATION Table Q1 Page 3..........1. PLEASE TELL ME YOUR HOME ZIP CODE. Table Q2 Page 4..........2. HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD, INCLUDING YOURSELF? Table Q3A Page 5.........3. AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD Table Q3B Page 6.........3. AGES OF TOTAL HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS Table Q4 Page 8..........4. WHICH OF THESE CATEGORIES BEST DESCRIBES YOUR HOUSEHOLD? Table Q5 Page 9..........5. WHAT IS THE ONE FEATURE THAT MAKES THE CITY OF DOWNEY A DESIRABLE PLACE TO LIVE? Table Q6 Page 11.........6. WHAT ISSUE FACING THE CITY OF DOWNEY IS OF GREATEST CONCERN TO YOU AS A RESIDENT? Table Q7 Page 13.........7. REFLECTING UPON THE RECREATION PATTERNS OF THOSE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BENEFITS DO YOU FEEL IS MOST IMPORTANT WHEN YOU SEEK RECREATION OR LEISURE OPPORTUNITIES? Table Q8 Page 14.........8. THINKING ABOUT THE PAST YEAR, WHAT BEST DESCRIBES HOW OFTEN YOU OR OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USED INDOOR OR OUTDOOR PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY? Table Q9 Page 15.........9. DURING THE LAST YEAR, WHAT PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY DID YOU AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD MOST OFTEN USE? PLEASE INCLUDE ALL TYPES OF RECREATION FACILITIES WHETHER LOCATED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY OR NOT. INCLUDE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITIES. Table Q10A1 Page 17......IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOCCER: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) Table Q10A2 Page 19......IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BASEBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) Table Q10A4 Page 21......IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED ININDOOR BASKETBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) Table Q10A5 Page 23......IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN USE OF PLAY EQUIPMENT, TOT LOTS IN PUBLIC PARKS (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES, NO HOMEOWNER´S ASSOCIATION USE) Table Q10A8 Page 26......IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN WALKING/JOGGING/RUNNING/HIKING ON PUBLIC TRAILS FOR RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON STREETS OR SIDEWALKS) Table Q10A9 Page 29......IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOFTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR ADULT OR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) Table Q10A10 Page 32.....IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BICYCLING ON PUBLIC TRAILS OR PATHS FOR ACTIVE RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON SIDEWALKS) Table Q10A12 Page 35.....IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN TACKLE FOOTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) Table Q11 Page 37........11. NOW THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED MANY RECREATION POSSIBILITIES, WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION FACILITY YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 3 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table Q12 Page 40........12. THINKING ABOUT THE PAST YEAR, WHAT BEST DESCRIBES HOW OFTEN YOU OR OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USED RECREATION PROGRAMS, CLASSES OR LESSONS IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY? Table Q13 Page 42........13. WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION PROGRAM, CLASS OR LESSON YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? Table Q14 Page 45........14. THINKING ABOUT THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD, WHICH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS WOULD YOU MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? Table Q15 Page 46........15. HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH EXISTING PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? Table Q16 Page 47........Q16. HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? Table Q17 Page 49........17. WOULD YOU PLEASE TELL ME THE RACIAL GROUP WITH WHICH YOU IDENTIFY? Table Q18 Page 50........18. PLEASE TELL ME IF YOU ARE OF SPANISH/HISPANIC ORIGIN OR DESCENT? Table Q17/18 Page 51.....17/18. RACE/ETHNICITY Table Q19 Page 52........19. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING RANGES INCLUDES YOUR HOUSEHOLDS ANNUAL INCOME BEFORE TAXES? DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 4 Table ZIP Page 1 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 WHAT IS YOUR ZIP CODE? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% * 90240 38 19 19 19 8 10 23 13 11 15 8 9 5 19 20 12 26 9 24 19% 21% 17% 23% 19% 14% 26% 14% 18% 18% 21% 14% 11% 19% 20% 20% 19% 10% 23% * 90241 90 37 53 37 20 32 41 45 30 36 19 32 20 48 42 32 57 40 44 45% 40% 49% 44% 46% 46% 47% 50% 50% 43% 47% 51% 42% 48% 42% 56% 40% 48% 43% * 90242 72 36 37 28 16 28 23 32 19 33 13 22 22 34 37 13 59 35 34 36% 39% 34% 33% 35% 40% 26% 36% 32% 39% 33% 35% 47% 34% 38% 23% 41% 42% 33% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 5 Table QS1 Page 2 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 S1. GENDER BY OBSERVATION BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% MALE 95 47 48 50 16 29 38 45 30 37 21 29 23 51 44 30 66 31 58 48% 51% 44% 59% 37% 41% 44% 50% 50% 44% 54% 46% 48% 51% 45% 52% 46% 37% 57% FEMALE 105 45 60 35 28 42 49 45 29 47 18 34 24 49 54 28 77 53 43 52% 49% 56% 41% 63% 59% 56% 50% 50% 56% 46% 54% 52% 49% 55% 48% 54% 63% 43% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 6 Table Q1 Page 3 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 1. PLEASE TELL ME YOUR HOME ZIP CODE. BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90240 40 19 22 17 9 14 21 11 8 18 7 9 7 17 23 12 29 10 25 20% 20% 20% 20% 21% 19% 24% 12% 14% 21% 18% 14% 14% 17% 24% 21% 20% 12% 24% 90241 87 34 54 37 20 31 42 47 32 33 20 32 17 49 38 32 56 34 48 44% 37% 50% 43% 45% 44% 48% 53% 54% 39% 51% 51% 37% 49% 39% 55% 39% 40% 48% 90242 72 39 33 31 15 26 24 32 19 34 12 22 23 34 37 14 58 41 28 36% 43% 30% 37% 34% 37% 28% 36% 32% 40% 31% 35% 49% 34% 38% 24% 41% 48% 28% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 7 Table Q2 Page 4 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 2. HOW MANY PEOPLE LIVE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD, INCLUDING YOURSELF? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPOMDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1 34 - 34 5 2 27 14 10 10 16 6 8 7 8 26 19 15 22 8 17% 31% 6% 4% 39% 16% 11% 17% 19% 16% 13% 15% 8% 26% 33% 11% 27% 8% 2 21 - 21 4 2 15 6 5 1 15 6 2 6 5 16 9 12 13 7 11% 20% 5% 4% 21% 8% 6% 2% 18% 15% 3% 13% 5% 16% 16% 8% 15% 7% 3 41 13 27 20 10 11 20 22 14 17 6 21 10 28 13 10 31 12 27 20% 14% 25% 23% 23% 15% 23% 25% 23% 20% 15% 33% 20% 27% 13% 17% 22% 15% 26% 4 53 35 19 29 18 6 22 31 14 20 11 16 16 28 24 11 43 20 30 27% 38% 17% 34% 40% 9% 25% 34% 24% 23% 29% 26% 34% 28% 24% 18% 30% 24% 29% 5 31 26 6 17 8 6 16 15 10 12 4 13 6 20 11 6 25 10 20 16% 28% 5% 20% 18% 8% 19% 17% 18% 14% 9% 21% 12% 20% 11% 11% 17% 12% 20% 6 15 15 - 7 3 4 8 5 8 4 5 3 2 8 7 2 12 6 9 7% 16% 8% 7% 6% 10% 5% 14% 4% 12% 4% 5% 8% 7% 4% 9% 7% 9% 7 4 4 - 2 1 - - 1 1 - - - - 1 2 - 4 - 1 2% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2% 3% 1% 11 1 - 1 - - 1 - - - 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - 1% 1% 2% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% MEAN 3.5 4.6 2.5 3.9 4.0 2.6 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.2 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.9 3.1 2.7 3.8 3.1 3.8 STANDARD DEVIATION 1.7 1.0 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.9 1.5 1.4 1.7 1.7 2.1 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.9 1.4 MEDIAN 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 8 Table Q3A Page 5 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 3. AGE OF HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 18-19 2 1 1 2 - - - 1 - 1 1 1 - 1 1 - 2 - - 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 20-24 4 1 2 4 - - 3 3 - 2 2 2 1 1 3 - 4 2 1 2% 2% 2% 5% 4% 3% 3% 4% 2% 2% 1% 3% 3% 3% 1% 25-34 33 20 13 33 - - 7 14 10 12 5 11 8 17 16 3 29 13 18 16% 21% 12% 38% 8% 15% 18% 15% 14% 18% 17% 17% 16% 6% 21% 15% 17% 35-44 47 40 7 47 - - 25 35 25 12 8 18 16 41 6 7 40 9 36 23% 43% 7% 55% 28% 39% 43% 14% 19% 28% 35% 41% 6% 13% 28% 11% 35% 45-54 44 19 25 - 44 - 21 21 8 19 6 15 10 24 19 18 26 19 25 22% 21% 23% 100% 24% 23% 13% 23% 15% 23% 22% 24% 19% 31% 19% 23% 25% 55-64 33 8 25 - - 33 16 6 9 10 7 5 8 8 25 13 21 14 17 17% 9% 23% 47% 19% 7% 15% 12% 17% 8% 17% 8% 26% 22% 14% 17% 17% 65+ 37 3 34 - - 37 15 10 6 28 11 12 4 9 28 16 21 27 5 19% 3% 32% 53% 18% 12% 10% 33% 29% 20% 8% 9% 29% 28% 15% 32% 5% MEAN 49.7 42.2 56.1 34.5 50.2 67.8 51.8 45.1 45.4 54.2 52.6 48.3 46.0 45.1 54.5 58.2 46.3 54.4 45.4 STANDARD DEVIATION 16.5 10.8 17.7 6.8 3.0 9.8 15.9 14.2 14.4 18.8 18.9 16.7 14.6 12.6 18.6 15.9 15.5 17.7 12.5 MEDIAN 49.0 42.0 57.0 35.0 50.0 65.0 50.0 43.0 42.0 54.0 50.0 45.0 44.0 42.0 57.0 55.0 44.0 54.0 43.0 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 20 9 Table Q3B Page 6 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 3. AGES OF TOTAL HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% HOUSEHOLD WITH KIDS 92 92 - 61 19 11 45 55 41 29 20 29 23 64 26 8 84 30 56 46% 100% 72% 43% 16% 53% 62% 69% 35% 51% 45% 49% 64% 27% 14% 59% 35% 55% W/KIDS UNDER 5 27 27 - 21 3 3 11 16 10 10 5 8 9 22 5 5 21 9 18 13% 29% 24% 6% 4% 12% 18% 17% 12% 14% 12% 20% 22% 5% 10% 15% 11% 18% W/KIDS 5-14 64 64 - 45 12 7 37 40 33 16 14 23 12 48 14 4 60 20 40 32% 69% 52% 27% 10% 43% 45% 57% 19% 36% 36% 26% 48% 14% 7% 42% 23% 40% W/KIDS 15-17 31 31 - 18 9 4 18 15 9 12 5 11 8 15 16 3 28 12 17 16% 34% 21% 20% 6% 20% 16% 16% 14% 14% 17% 18% 15% 16% 5% 20% 14% 17% <5 36 36 - 28 3 5 12 19 15 14 9 10 13 31 5 6 29 11 25 5% 9% 9% 2% 3% 4% 6% 7% 5% 7% 4% 8% 8% 2% 4% 6% 4% 7% 5-14 101 101 - 71 21 10 55 63 57 25 26 29 19 79 20 4 97 25 72 15% 24% 21% 12% 5% 18% 19% 26% 9% 19% 13% 12% 21% 7% 3% 18% 10% 19% 15-17 36 36 - 21 9 6 20 15 10 13 5 11 8 16 20 4 32 14 17 5% 9% 6% 5% 3% 7% 5% 5% 5% 4% 5% 5% 4% 7% 2% 6% 6% 4% 18-19 18 14 4 9 9 0 7 8 5 9 4 9 4 8 8 0 18 9 5 3% 3% 1% 3% 5% *% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 2% 2% 3% *% 3% 3% 1% 20-24 53 21 32 17 26 10 25 19 9 12 6 20 7 26 27 21 32 30 18 8% 5% 12% 5% 15% 6% 8% 6% 4% 5% 4% 9% 5% 7% 9% 14% 6% 12% 5% 25-34 80 48 32 50 15 16 28 42 23 34 22 19 19 49 31 14 66 30 47 12% 12% 12% 15% 8% 9% 9% 13% 11% 13% 16% 9% 12% 13% 11% 9% 12% 12% 12% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 0 Table Q3B Page 7 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 3. AGES OF TOTAL HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 35-44 95 80 14 82 4 9 46 65 48 30 16 33 31 74 21 11 84 22 66 14% 19% 5% 25% 2% 5% 15% 20% 22% 12% 11% 15% 20% 19% 7% 7% 16% 9% 17% 45-54 100 45 55 13 72 15 42 43 19 40 14 37 19 50 47 33 66 39 55 15% 11% 20% 4% 41% 8% 14% 13% 9% 15% 10% 17% 13% 13% 16% 21% 13% 15% 15% 55-64 77 18 59 17 9 51 36 27 17 28 16 25 18 20 57 30 47 26 46 11% 4% 22% 5% 5% 29% 12% 8% 8% 10% 11% 11% 12% 5% 19% 19% 9% 10% 12% 65+ 89 17 72 24 9 56 32 22 15 58 19 26 17 27 62 31 58 50 30 13% 4% 27% 7% 5% 32% 11% 7% 7% 22% 14% 12% 11% 7% 21% 20% 11% 19% 8% MEAN 37.1 27.4 52.0 29.2 36.9 52.0 35.8 32.5 30.0 42.3 35.7 37.4 36.7 30.9 44.9 47.3 34.0 40.3 34.3 MEDIAN 37.0 25.0 54.0 27.0 45.0 57.0 36.0 32.0 30.0 42.0 32.0 39.0 37.0 30.0 50.0 51.0 32.0 40.0 35.0 STANDARD DEVIATION 22.8 19.2 19.8 20.4 19.1 23.2 22.8 20.2 20.7 24.5 24.3 21.5 23.0 20.5 23.3 22.9 21.9 24.1 21.4 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 1 Table Q4 Page 8 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 4. WHICH OF THESE CATEGORIES BEST DESCRIBES YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% HOUSEHOLD WITHOUT 108 - 108 24 25 59 41 34 18 55 19 34 24 36 72 50 59 55 45 CHILDREN UNDER 18 54% 100% 28% 57% 84% 47% 38% 31% 65% 49% 55% 51% 36% 73% 86% 41% 65% 45% (SUBTOTAL) ONE ADULT WITHOUT 34 - 34 5 2 27 14 10 10 16 6 8 7 8 26 19 15 22 8 CHILDREN UNDER 18 YEARS 17% 31% 6% 4% 39% 16% 11% 17% 19% 16% 13% 15% 8% 26% 33% 11% 27% 8% TWO OR MORE ADULTS 74 - 74 18 24 32 27 24 8 39 13 26 17 28 46 31 43 32 37 WITHOUT CHILDREN UNDER 37% 69% 22% 53% 46% 31% 27% 14% 46% 32% 42% 36% 28% 47% 54% 30% 38% 37% 18 YEARS HOUSEHOLD WITH CHILDREN 92 92 - 61 19 11 45 55 41 29 20 29 23 64 26 8 84 30 56 UNDER 18 (SUBTOTAL) 46% 100% 72% 43% 16% 53% 62% 69% 35% 51% 45% 49% 64% 27% 14% 59% 35% 55% ONE ADULT WITH ONE OR 4 4 - 4 - - 2 2 2 2 - 4 - 4 - - 4 2 2 MORE CHILDREN UNDER 18 2% 5% 5% 3% 2% 4% 3% 7% 4% 3% 3% 2% YEARS TWO ADULTS WITH ONE OR 41 41 - 36 4 -0 20 28 19 12 13 9 17 36 5 4 37 11 30 MORE CHILDREN UNDER 18 20% 44% 43% 10% -0% 24% 32% 33% 15% 32% 15% 35% 36% 5% 7% 26% 13% 29% YEARS THREE OR MORE ADULTS 47 47 - 21 15 11 23 25 19 15 8 15 6 24 22 4 43 17 24 WITH ONE OR MORE 23% 51% 24% 34% 16% 26% 28% 32% 18% 19% 24% 14% 24% 22% 7% 30% 20% 24% CHILDREN UNDER 18 YEARS VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 2 Table Q5 Page 9 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 5. WHAT IS THE ONE FEATURE THAT MAKES THE CITY OF DOWNEY A DESIRABLE PLACE TO LIVE? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 189 88 101 83 42 64 83 87 54 79 39 61 44 97 91 54 136 79 97 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% (BASE: THOSE RESPONDING) 189 88 101 83 42 64 83 87 54 79 39 61 44 97 91 54 136 79 97 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% LACK OF CRIME/SAFE 42 19 24 10 15 17 18 14 9 18 12 7 11 23 19 10 33 23 16 22% 21% 23% 12% 36% 26% 21% 16% 17% 22% 31% 12% 25% 24% 21% 18% 24% 29% 17% PROXIMITY TO SHOPPING 20 5 15 7 7 6 8 5 4 7 2 10 6 8 11 11 9 14 5 10% 6% 14% 8% 17% 9% 10% 6% 8% 9% 5% 16% 14% 9% 12% 20% 6% 17% 5% SMALL TOWN ATMOSPHERE 16 7 9 8 2 6 7 9 1 7 3 8 0 7 8 4 11 5 10 8% 8% 9% 9% 4% 10% 8% 10% 1% 9% 8% 14% 1% 8% 9% 8% 8% 7% 11% ACCESS TO FREEWAYS 15 11 4 10 2 4 6 6 4 7 3 3 9 8 8 4 12 5 10 8% 13% 4% 12% 4% 6% 7% 7% 7% 9% 7% 5% 19% 8% 9% 7% 9% 6% 10% SCHOOLS/QUALITY 14 11 3 11 1 2 11 12 4 4 4 3 5 10 5 3 11 5 9 EDUCATION/GOOD EDUCATION 8% 13% 3% 13% 3% 4% 13% 14% 8% 5% 10% 5% 11% 10% 5% 6% 8% 7% 9% QUALITY OF LIFE (PROBE 14 8 6 7 - 8 5 5 0 8 1 5 3 4 10 3 11 7 5 FOR SPECIFICS) 7% 9% 6% 8% 12% 6% 6% *% 10% 3% 8% 6% 4% 11% 5% 8% 9% 5% CENTRAL LOCATION/CLOSE 14 10 4 10 4 - 10 10 10 4 - 9 3 13 1 5 9 - 14 TO EVERYTHING 7% 11% 4% 12% 10% 12% 11% 18% 6% 14% 7% 14% 1% 10% 6% 15% CLEAN 13 5 8 2 4 6 6 5 4 6 3 2 1 7 6 3 10 3 10 7% 6% 8% 3% 10% 9% 8% 6% 8% 8% 8% 3% 3% 7% 7% 6% 7% 4% 10% FEELING A PART OF 8 4 5 3 1 3 3 5 0 7 6 2 1 3 3 2 6 5 3 COMMUNITY 4% 4% 5% 4% 3% 5% 4% 5% 1% 8% 14% 3% 3% 4% 4% 4% 5% 6% 3% CLOSE TO WORK 5 1 5 3 2 1 2 3 3 0 1 2 - 3 3 1 4 3 2 3% 1% 5% 4% 4% 1% 3% 4% 6% *% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 4% 2% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 3 Table Q5 Page 10 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 5. WHAT IS THE ONE FEATURE THAT MAKES THE CITY OF DOWNEY A DESIRABLE PLACE TO LIVE? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- PARKS AND RECREATION 5 3 2 3 2 0 3 3 2 0 1 - 4 5 0 2 3 5 0 FACILITIES AND TRAILS 3% 3% 2% 3% 5% *% 4% 3% 4% 1% 2% 10% 5% *% 4% 2% 6% *% FAMILY ORIENTED 3 3 0 2 - 1 - 3 2 1 - 2 - 2 1 0 3 - 0 2% 4% *% 3% 2% 4% 4% 1% 4% 2% 1% *% 2% *% BEACHES/OCEAN 1 - 1 - - 1 - - - 1 1 - 0 - 1 0 1 1 0 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% *% 1% *% 1% 2% *% CLIMATE/WEATHER 1 - 1 - - 1 1 - 0 0 - 0 - - 1 1 - - 0 *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% RECREATION PROGRAMS/ 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 - - - - 0 0 - - - CLASSES *% *% *% *% *% *% OPEN SPACE 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - *% *% *% *% *% *% *% OTHER (SPECIFY) 17 2 15 8 1 8 3 7 9 8 3 9 0 4 13 4 13 3 12 9% 3% 14% 10% 2% 13% 4% 8% 17% 10% 7% 14% *% 4% 15% 8% 9% 4% 12% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 4 Table Q6 Page 11 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 6. WHAT ISSUE FACING THE CITY OF DOWNEY IS OF GREATEST CONCERN TO YOU AS A RESIDENT? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 15 3 12 6 3 5 4 6 3 10 6 1 2 4 11 5 9 3 10 9% 4% 13% 9% 9% 9% 6% 9% 7% 15% 20% 2% 4% 4% 14% 11% 8% 4% 11% NO ANSWER 15 8 7 5 2 8 6 9 4 9 4 8 2 8 7 3 12 9 4 9% 10% 8% 7% 5% 15% 8% 12% 9% 15% 13% 15% 3% 9% 9% 7% 10% 12% 5% REFUSED 2 - 2 - - 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - - 2 - 2 2 - 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 1% 2% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 168 81 88 74 39 56 76 73 51 64 30 53 43 88 79 49 120 71 87 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% CRIME/PERSONAL SAFETY 54 23 31 17 21 17 31 19 13 25 12 15 12 30 23 14 41 24 28 32% 29% 36% 23% 52% 31% 41% 26% 25% 39% 41% 29% 27% 34% 30% 28% 34% 34% 32% POPULATION GROWTH 10 3 7 3 4 2 5 1 3 2 1 7 1 7 3 6 3 6 4 6% 4% 7% 4% 11% 4% 6% 1% 6% 3% 4% 13% 2% 7% 4% 13% 3% 8% 4% EDUCATION 9 6 3 6 0 3 2 4 1 3 - 2 3 6 3 3 6 2 7 5% 8% 3% 8% 1% 5% 3% 5% 2% 5% 5% 7% 7% 4% 5% 5% 3% 8% GROWTH MANAGEMENT 8 6 2 3 1 3 4 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 6 2 6 4 4 5% 8% 2% 5% 4% 6% 5% 3% *% 5% 5% 5% 3% 3% 7% 4% 5% 6% 5% GANGS 8 - 8 3 2 3 1 3 4 2 1 0 4 2 6 4 4 8 0 5% 9% 4% 5% 6% 1% 4% 9% 3% 2% 1% 9% 2% 8% 8% 3% 11% *% FIRE AND POLICE 7 3 4 4 0 3 2 1 - 2 - 2 3 0 7 2 5 3 1 PROTECTION 4% 4% 4% 5% 1% 5% 3% 2% 2% 3% 7% *% 8% 5% 4% 4% 1% ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 7 2 4 3 1 2 1 2 3 3 - 2 3 2 5 3 4 3 3 4% 3% 5% 5% 4% 4% 1% 3% 6% 5% 4% 7% 2% 6% 6% 3% 4% 4% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 5 Table Q6 Page 12 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 6. WHAT ISSUE FACING THE CITY OF DOWNEY IS OF GREATEST CONCERN TO YOU AS A RESIDENT? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TRAFFIC CONGESTION ON 6 3 3 4 0 2 2 4 2 0 3 2 1 4 2 2 5 1 5 SURFACE STREETS 4% 4% 4% 5% 1% 3% 2% 6% 3% 1% 10% 4% 3% 5% 3% 3% 4% 1% 6% DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE 5 4 0 4 - 0 0 2 2 3 0 2 2 4 0 0 4 3 2 3% 5% *% 6% 1% 1% 3% 4% 4% 1% 4% 5% 5% *% 1% 4% 4% 2% HOUSING GROWTH 2 - 2 - 0 2 - 1 - 2 - 2 0 2 0 1 1 2 - 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% 3% HIGH COST OF LIVING 1 1 0 - 1 0 - 2 0 1 - -0 1 - 1 0 1 2 -0 1% 2% *% 4% *% 2% *% 2% -0% 3% 2% *% 1% 2% -0% AFFORDABLE HOUSING 1 - 1 - - 1 - - - 1 - - 0 - 1 1 - 1 - 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% WATER 0 - 0 - - 0 0 0 0 - 0 - - - 0 0 - 0 - *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% OPEN SPACE 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - - - *% *% *% *% *% *% *% PARKS AND RECREATION 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 - 0 - - - 0 0 - - - FACILITIES *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% SENIOR SERVICES 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% OTHER (SPECIFY) 49 27 22 26 6 17 27 31 22 16 11 15 10 29 20 10 39 13 34 29% 34% 25% 35% 16% 30% 35% 42% 43% 26% 36% 29% 24% 33% 26% 22% 32% 18% 39% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 6 Table Q7 Page 13 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 7. REFLECTING UPON THE RECREATION PATTERNS OF THOSE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BENEFITS DO YOU FEEL IS MOST IMPORTANT WHEN YOU SEEK RECREATION OR LEISURE OPPORTUNITIES? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% PHYSICAL FITNESS, HEALTH 86 45 41 34 21 32 86 43 26 36 19 24 17 45 40 33 54 35 48 AND WELL-BEING 43% 49% 38% 40% 46% 45% 100% 48% 44% 43% 47% 39% 37% 44% 41% 57% 38% 41% 47% OPPORTUNITIES TO GATHER 48 18 31 18 11 20 - 21 17 17 11 10 15 20 28 11 38 27 18 AND SOCIALIZE WITH 24% 20% 28% 21% 24% 28% 24% 29% 20% 27% 16% 31% 20% 29% 18% 27% 33% 18% OTHERS LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES 44 18 25 23 10 10 - 16 12 16 5 20 10 24 19 10 33 14 24 FOR HOBBY, SELF- 22% 20% 24% 28% 23% 14% 17% 20% 19% 12% 32% 21% 24% 20% 18% 23% 16% 24% IMPROVEMENT OR CAREER DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES TO GIVE 22 10 11 10 3 9 - 9 4 15 5 8 5 11 10 4 18 8 11 BACK TO THE COMMUNITY 11% 11% 10% 11% 6% 13% 11% 7% 17% 14% 13% 11% 11% 10% 7% 12% 10% 11% THROUGH VOLUNTEER WORK VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 7 Table Q8 Page 14 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 8. THINKING ABOUT THE PAST YEAR, WHAT BEST DESCRIBES HOW OFTEN YOU OR OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USED INDOOR OR OUTDOOR PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% FREQUENT USERS (NET) 90 55 34 52 21 17 43 90 37 32 22 31 23 55 34 18 72 31 53 45% 60% 32% 62% 46% 24% 50% 100% 63% 38% 57% 49% 49% 54% 34% 32% 50% 36% 52% MORE THAN ONCE A WEEK 49 35 14 33 10 6 25 49 27 15 12 16 13 34 15 5 44 16 31 24% 38% 13% 39% 22% 8% 29% 54% 46% 18% 31% 25% 28% 34% 15% 9% 31% 19% 31% ONCE A WEEK OR 3 TO 4 41 20 21 19 11 11 19 41 10 17 10 15 10 21 19 13 28 15 22 TIMES PER MONTH 20% 22% 19% 22% 25% 15% 21% 46% 17% 20% 26% 24% 21% 20% 19% 23% 19% 18% 22% MODERATE USERS (NET) 76 30 46 29 18 29 33 - 18 25 9 24 18 35 41 26 50 33 38 38% 32% 43% 34% 40% 41% 38% 30% 30% 23% 38% 38% 35% 42% 45% 35% 39% 37% ONCE OR TWICE A MONTH 40 15 25 13 14 13 19 - 11 9 2 18 6 22 18 16 24 16 23 20% 16% 24% 16% 30% 19% 22% 20% 10% 4% 29% 12% 22% 18% 28% 17% 19% 23% SEVERAL TIMES A YEAR 36 15 21 16 4 16 14 - 6 16 7 6 12 13 23 10 26 17 15 18% 17% 19% 19% 9% 22% 16% 11% 19% 19% 9% 25% 13% 23% 17% 18% 20% 15% INFREQUENT USERS (NET) 34 7 28 3 6 25 10 - 4 27 8 8 6 11 24 13 21 20 11 17% 7% 26% 4% 14% 35% 12% 7% 32% 20% 13% 13% 11% 24% 23% 15% 24% 11% ONCE A YEAR 9 4 5 2 2 5 3 - 2 5 2 2 5 3 6 3 5 7 1 4% 4% 5% 3% 4% 7% 3% 4% 6% 4% 4% 10% 3% 6% 6% 4% 8% 1% NO USE 26 3 23 1 5 20 8 - 2 22 6 6 2 8 18 10 16 14 9 13% 3% 21% 1% 10% 28% 9% 3% 26% 16% 9% 3% 8% 18% 17% 11% 16% 9% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 8 Table Q9 Page 15 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 9. DURING THE LAST YEAR, WHAT PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY DID YOU AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD MOST OFTEN USE? PLEASE INCLUDE ALL TYPES OF RECREATION FACILITIES WHETHER LOCATED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY OR NOT. INCLUDE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITIES. BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 174 89 85 84 40 51 79 90 57 62 33 57 45 93 80 47 127 70 92 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON'T KNOW 12 6 6 6 - 6 6 5 0 11 6 4 - 8 4 0 12 11 - 7% 7% 8% 8% 13% 8% 6% 1% 21% 20% 8% 10% 5% 1% 10% 19% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 162 83 79 78 40 45 73 84 56 52 28 53 45 84 77 47 115 59 92 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% FURMAN PARK 10419 44 19 25 18 15 10 26 25 18 14 5 17 8 23 21 15 29 11 26 RIVES AVE. 27% 23% 31% 24% 39% 23% 36% 29% 31% 27% 19% 33% 19% 27% 27% 33% 25% 19% 29% APOLLO PARK 12544 39 19 19 13 15 11 15 17 12 6 9 15 6 20 19 11 28 15 23 RIVES AVE 24% 23% 24% 17% 37% 24% 21% 20% 21% 12% 34% 28% 14% 23% 25% 23% 24% 26% 25% PARKS OUTSIDE DOWNEY 15 8 7 8 0 7 6 9 6 5 2 7 6 6 10 6 9 4 11 9% 9% 9% 11% 1% 15% 8% 10% 11% 10% 7% 12% 14% 7% 12% 14% 8% 6% 12% DENNIS THE MENACE PARK 14 9 5 9 2 3 4 5 8 5 0 1 8 11 3 1 14 - 14 9125 ARRINGTON AVE. 9% 11% 7% 12% 4% 7% 6% 5% 14% 9% 1% 3% 18% 13% 4% 1% 12% 15% WILDERNESS PARK 10999 14 8 6 9 1 4 5 4 3 7 1 5 5 8 7 4 10 8 6 LITTLE LAKE RD. 9% 10% 7% 12% 2% 8% 6% 5% 5% 13% 4% 10% 12% 9% 9% 9% 9% 13% 7% INDEPENDENCE PARK 6 4 2 2 3 - 0 6 0 2 2 - 3 2 3 0 5 3 3 12334 BELLFLOWER BLVD. 3% 4% 3% 3% 9% 1% 7% 1% 3% 8% 7% 3% 4% 1% 4% 5% 3% GOLDEN PARK 8840 4 1 2 2 1 - 1 4 - 1 1 - 2 2 - - 4 4 - GOLDEN AVE 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% 5% 5% 3% 3% 6% SAN GABRIEL RIVER BIKE 4 1 3 4 - - 1 3 3 - - 1 - - 4 1 3 3 1 PATH ADJACENT RIO SAN 2% 1% 3% 5% 1% 3% 5% 2% 5% 2% 2% 4% 1% GABRIEL AND WILDERNESS PARKS VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 21 9 Table Q9 Page 16 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 9. DURING THE LAST YEAR, WHAT PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY DID YOU AND YOUR HOUSEHOLD MOST OFTEN USE? PLEASE INCLUDE ALL TYPES OF RECREATION FACILITIES WHETHER LOCATED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY OR NOT. INCLUDE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITIES. BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- YMCA 11531 DOWNEY 3 3 1 3 - 1 3 3 3 - 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 AVENUE 2% 3% 1% 4% 2% 5% 4% 5% 8% 1% 1% 3% 1% 3% 2% 2% 2% DISCOVERY SPORTS COMPLEX 2 2 - 2 - - 2 2 - - - - 2 2 - - 2 2 - 12400 COLUMBIA WAY 1% 3% 3% 3% 3% 5% 3% 2% 4% RIO SAN GABRIEL PARK 1 - 1 - - 1 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 - 1 1 - 0 0 9612 ARDINE ST. *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% RIO HONDO ELEMENTARY 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - - - SCHOOL 7731 MULLER ST *% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% DOWNEY COMMUNITY 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - - - - - - 0 0 - - - AQUATICS CENTER 11040 *% *% *% *% *% BROOKSHIRE AVE OTHER (SPECIFY) 16 8 8 6 2 9 7 7 4 11 4 5 2 8 8 6 10 8 5 10% 10% 10% 8% 5% 19% 10% 8% 7% 22% 13% 9% 5% 9% 11% 13% 9% 14% 5% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 0 Table Q10A1 Page 17 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOCCER: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 255 - DAILY 2 2 - 2 - - - 2 2 - 2 - - 2 - - 2 - 2 *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 26 26 - 16 7 3 12 16 19 5 6 7 2 17 8 1 26 8 16 WEEK 4% 6% 5% 4% 2% 4% 5% 9% 2% 5% 3% 1% 4% 3% *% 5% 3% 4% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 7 7 - 7 - - 5 5 - 2 - 5 2 4 3 - 7 5 2 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% YOUTH 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 1 1 - - - 1 - 1 - 1 - - - - 1 - 1 - - MONTH *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 3 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 YEAR *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR 2 2 - 1 - 2 2 1 2 -0 1 -0 - 1 2 -0 2 2 -0 *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% -0% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 131 131 - 94 23 14 67 70 56 44 32 38 35 100 31 14 117 35 91 19% 31% 28% 13% 8% 22% 22% 26% 17% 23% 17% 23% 26% 10% 9% 22% 14% 24% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% ADULT 0 - NO USE 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 1 Table Q10A1 Page 18 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOCCER: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL POPULATION 255 - 2 2 - 2 - - - 2 2 - 2 - - 2 - - 2 - 2 DAILY *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 26 26 - 16 7 3 12 16 19 5 6 7 2 17 8 1 26 8 16 6 TIMES / WEEK 4% 6% 5% 4% 2% 4% 5% 9% 2% 5% 3% 1% 4% 3% *% 5% 3% 4% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 7 7 - 7 - - 5 5 - 2 - 5 2 4 3 - 7 5 2 WEEKLY 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 36 - 3- 1 1 - - - 1 - 1 - 1 - - - - 1 - 1 - - 4 TIMES / MONTH *% *% 1% *% *% *% *% TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 3 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 11 TIMES / YEAR *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 2 2 - 1 - 2 2 1 2 -0 1 -0 - 1 2 -0 2 2 -0 ONCE A YEAR *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% -0% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 643 374 269 306 166 171 284 296 192 255 127 209 150 353 285 155 488 241 358 USE 94% 90% 100% 92% 94% 97% 93% 91% 88% 97% 93% 94% 97% 93% 95% 100% 92% 94% 94% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 5.6 9.3 - 8.0 4.5 2.2 5.4 8.0 12.1 2.7 9.2 4.7 2.3 6.8 3.7 0.5 7.1 4.5 6.3 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 5.6 9.3 - 8.0 4.5 2.2 5.4 8.0 12.1 2.7 9.2 4.7 2.3 6.8 3.7 0.5 7.1 4.5 6.3 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 2 Table Q10A2 Page 19 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BASEBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 7 7 - 4 3 - 5 4 5 2 - 2 - 7 - - 7 3 4 WEEK 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 2 2 - 2 - - 2 2 - - - - 2 2 - - 2 2 - *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% YOUTH 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 3 3 - - - 3 3 2 2 - - - - 1 2 - 3 - 3 MONTH *% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 4 4 - 4 - -0 4 2 4 -0 2 2 - 4 -0 -0 4 - 4 MONTH 1% 1% 1% -0% 1% 1% 2% -0% 2% 1% 1% -0% -0% 1% 1% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 3 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 YEAR *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 3 3 - 3 - - - 2 3 - - 3 - 2 1 1 2 - 1 YEAR *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% *% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR 2 2 - - - 2 2 - 2 - - - - - 2 - 2 2 - *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 149 149 - 106 27 16 71 82 63 50 39 43 37 106 41 14 135 43 99 22% 36% 32% 15% 9% 24% 25% 29% 19% 29% 19% 24% 28% 14% 9% 26% 17% 26% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 3 Table Q10A2 Page 20 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BASEBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ADULT 0 - NO USE 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 7 7 - 4 3 - 5 4 5 2 - 2 - 7 - - 7 3 4 6 TIMES / WEEK 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 2 2 - 2 - - 2 2 - - - - 2 2 - - 2 2 - WEEKLY *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 36 - 3- 3 3 - - - 3 3 2 2 - - - - 1 2 - 3 - 3 4 TIMES / MONTH *% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 18 - 1- 4 4 - 4 - -0 4 2 4 -0 2 2 - 4 -0 -0 4 - 4 2 TIMES / MONTH 1% 1% 1% -0% 1% 1% 2% -0% 2% 1% 1% -0% -0% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 3 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 11 TIMES / YEAR *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 4 - 2-6 3 3 - 3 - - - 2 3 - - 3 - 2 1 1 2 - 1 TIMES / YEAR *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% *% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 2 2 - - - 2 2 - 2 - - - - - 2 - 2 2 - ONCE A YEAR *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 661 392 269 318 170 173 288 308 199 262 135 214 152 360 295 155 506 249 366 USE 96% 94% 100% 96% 97% 98% 95% 95% 91% 99% 98% 97% 99% 95% 99% 99% 96% 97% 96% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 1.6 2.6 - 2.1 1.8 0.5 2.8 2.1 3.2 0.9 0.3 1.3 0.7 2.7 0.2 0.0 2.1 1.7 1.7 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 1.6 2.6 - 2.1 1.8 0.5 2.8 2.1 3.2 0.9 0.3 1.3 0.7 2.7 0.2 0.0 2.1 1.7 1.7 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 4 Table Q10A4 Page 21 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED ININDOOR BASKETBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 10 10 - 4 6 - 8 4 5 1 2 4 - 6 2 0 10 6 5 WEEK 2% 2% 1% 3% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 9 9 - 9 - - 7 7 4 2 - 7 2 9 - - 9 4 4 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% YOUTH 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 1 1 - 1 0 - 1 1 1 - 0 1 - 1 0 1 - 1 0 MONTH *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% *% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 3 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 YEAR *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR 2 2 - 2 - -0 - 2 2 -0 2 -0 - 2 -0 -0 2 - 2 *% 1% 1% -0% 1% 1% -0% 2% -0% 1% -0% -0% *% 1% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 148 148 - 104 24 20 71 81 67 48 37 39 37 105 42 13 134 39 100 22% 35% 31% 13% 11% 24% 25% 31% 18% 27% 18% 24% 28% 14% 9% 25% 15% 26% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% ADULT 0 - NO USE 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 10 10 - 4 6 - 8 4 5 1 2 4 - 6 2 0 10 6 5 6 TIMES / WEEK 2% 2% 1% 3% 3% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 5 Table Q10A4 Page 22 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED ININDOOR BASKETBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 9 9 - 9 - - 7 7 4 2 - 7 2 9 - - 9 4 4 WEEKLY 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 18 - 1- 1 1 - 1 0 - 1 1 1 - 0 1 - 1 0 1 - 1 0 2 TIMES / MONTH *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% *% TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 3 3 - - 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 11 TIMES / YEAR *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 2 2 - 2 - -0 - 2 2 -0 2 -0 - 2 -0 -0 2 - 2 ONCE A YEAR *% 1% 1% -0% 1% 1% -0% 2% -0% 1% -0% -0% *% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 660 391 269 316 167 177 288 307 202 260 133 210 152 359 296 155 505 245 367 USE 96% 94% 100% 95% 95% 100% 95% 95% 93% 99% 97% 95% 99% 95% 99% 99% 95% 96% 96% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 2.4 3.9 - 2.8 3.8 -0.0 4.1 2.4 3.5 1.0 1.5 3.7 0.7 3.1 0.9 0.3 3.0 3.4 2.0 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 2.4 3.9 - 2.8 3.8 -0.0 4.1 2.4 3.5 1.0 1.5 3.7 0.7 3.1 0.9 0.3 3.0 3.4 2.0 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 6 Table Q10A5 Page 23 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN USE OF PLAY EQUIPMENT, TOT LOTS IN PUBLIC PARKS (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES, NO HOMEOWNER´S ASSOCIATION USE) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 255 - DAILY 13 13 - 12 1 - 6 13 11 1 6 2 - 13 - - 13 1 12 2% 3% 3% 1% 2% 4% 5% 1% 5% 1% 3% 2% *% 3% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 44 44 - 28 13 3 24 31 24 13 14 12 1 33 11 1 43 15 26 WEEK 6% 11% 8% 7% 2% 8% 9% 11% 5% 10% 6% 1% 9% 4% 1% 8% 6% 7% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 30 30 - 29 1 - 20 16 14 4 1 18 11 27 3 2 28 9 21 4% 7% 9% 1% 7% 5% 7% 2% 1% 8% 7% 7% 1% 1% 5% 3% 6% YOUTH 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 8 8 - 6 - 2 4 6 7 - 1 2 3 6 2 2 6 4 4 MONTH 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 18 18 - 18 - - 11 9 7 9 - 9 9 14 4 5 13 1 17 MONTH 3% 4% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 4% 6% 4% 1% 3% 2% *% 5% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 3 3 - - 3 - - 1 3 - 1 - - 1 1 - 3 1 1 YEAR *% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% *% YOUTH 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 3 3 - 1 1 - - 1 - 1 - - 1 3 - 1 1 1 1 YEAR *% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR -0 -0 - - - -0 - - - -0 - -0 - - -0 -0 - - -0 -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 55 55 - 26 13 15 21 19 16 23 17 7 14 29 24 4 51 18 30 8% 13% 8% 8% 9% 7% 6% 7% 9% 13% 3% 9% 8% 8% 2% 10% 7% 8% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 7 Table Q10A5 Page 24 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN USE OF PLAY EQUIPMENT, TOT LOTS IN PUBLIC PARKS (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES, NO HOMEOWNER´S ASSOCIATION USE) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% ADULT 0 - NO USE 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% TOTAL POPULATION 255 - 13 13 - 12 1 - 6 13 11 1 6 2 - 13 - - 13 1 12 DAILY 2% 3% 3% 1% 2% 4% 5% 1% 5% 1% 3% 2% *% 3% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 44 44 - 28 13 3 24 31 24 13 14 12 1 33 11 1 43 15 26 6 TIMES / WEEK 6% 11% 8% 7% 2% 8% 9% 11% 5% 10% 6% 1% 9% 4% 1% 8% 6% 7% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 30 30 - 29 1 - 20 16 14 4 1 18 11 27 3 2 28 9 21 WEEKLY 4% 7% 9% 1% 7% 5% 7% 2% 1% 8% 7% 7% 1% 1% 5% 3% 6% TOTAL POPULATION 36 - 3- 8 8 - 6 - 2 4 6 7 - 1 2 3 6 2 2 6 4 4 4 TIMES / MONTH 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 18 - 1- 18 18 - 18 - - 11 9 7 9 - 9 9 14 4 5 13 1 17 2 TIMES / MONTH 3% 4% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 4% 6% 4% 1% 3% 2% *% 5% TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 3 3 - - 3 - - 1 3 - 1 - - 1 1 - 3 1 1 11 TIMES / YEAR *% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% *% *% 1% 1% *% TOTAL POPULATION 4 - 2-6 3 3 - 1 1 - - 1 - 1 - - 1 3 - 1 1 1 1 TIMES / YEAR *% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% *% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - -0 -0 - - - -0 - - - -0 - -0 - - -0 -0 - - -0 ONCE A YEAR -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 567 298 269 238 156 172 238 245 152 235 113 178 129 282 279 145 421 224 297 USE 83% 72% 100% 72% 89% 97% 78% 76% 70% 89% 82% 80% 84% 74% 93% 93% 80% 87% 78% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 15.1 24.8 - 24.3 10.4 2.3 18.7 24.6 29.8 8.3 23.9 13.9 6.2 23.3 4.8 2.3 18.8 9.7 19.9 CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 8 Table Q10A5 Page 25 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN USE OF PLAY EQUIPMENT, TOT LOTS IN PUBLIC PARKS (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES, NO HOMEOWNER´S ASSOCIATION USE) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 15.1 24.8 - 24.3 10.4 2.3 18.7 24.6 29.8 8.3 23.9 13.9 6.2 23.3 4.8 2.3 18.8 9.7 19.9 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 22 9 Table Q10A8 Page 26 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN WALKING/JOGGING/RUNNING/HIKING ON PUBLIC TRAILS FOR RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON STREETS OR SIDEWALKS) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 255 - DAILY 20 20 - 18 1 - 6 11 7 12 4 7 4 16 2 - 20 13 4 3% 5% 5% 1% 2% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 3% 4% 1% 4% 5% 1% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 54 54 - 37 12 5 33 35 30 10 11 17 11 42 13 1 54 14 40 WEEK 8% 13% 11% 7% 3% 11% 11% 14% 4% 8% 7% 7% 11% 4% *% 10% 5% 11% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 20 20 - 9 7 3 12 15 10 2 4 3 9 9 11 2 18 10 9 3% 5% 3% 4% 2% 4% 5% 4% 1% 3% 1% 6% 2% 4% 1% 3% 4% 2% YOUTH 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 6 6 - 5 1 - 5 5 6 - - 1 - 6 - 1 6 2 4 MONTH 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% 3% *% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 21 21 - 19 1 - 19 8 8 9 4 11 7 17 4 2 19 - 21 MONTH 3% 5% 6% 1% 6% 2% 4% 3% 3% 5% 4% 5% 1% 1% 4% 5% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 2 2 - 2 - - - 2 2 - - 2 - 2 - - 2 - 2 YEAR *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR -0 -0 - - - -0 - - - -0 - -0 - - -0 -0 - - -0 -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 50 50 - 29 9 12 13 22 19 19 18 11 9 34 16 9 41 11 34 7% 12% 9% 5% 7% 4% 7% 9% 7% 13% 5% 6% 9% 5% 6% 8% 4% 9% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 0 Table Q10A8 Page 27 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN WALKING/JOGGING/RUNNING/HIKING ON PUBLIC TRAILS FOR RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON STREETS OR SIDEWALKS) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ADULT 255 - DAILY 48 26 22 29 4 15 20 29 10 22 13 12 12 24 22 9 39 19 22 7% 6% 8% 9% 2% 8% 7% 9% 5% 8% 9% 5% 8% 6% 8% 6% 7% 7% 6% ADULT 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 97 63 34 44 30 23 53 61 39 33 17 30 21 56 40 8 89 40 50 WEEK 14% 15% 13% 13% 17% 13% 17% 19% 18% 12% 13% 14% 14% 15% 13% 5% 17% 16% 13% ADULT 52 - WEEKLY 67 42 25 27 19 22 36 22 15 28 13 21 20 40 27 25 42 39 25 10% 10% 9% 8% 11% 12% 12% 7% 7% 11% 10% 10% 13% 10% 9% 16% 8% 15% 7% ADULT 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 22 11 11 5 5 12 8 4 11 5 7 8 4 11 11 2 20 8 14 MONTH 3% 3% 4% 2% 3% 7% 3% 1% 5% 2% 5% 4% 3% 3% 4% 1% 4% 3% 4% ADULT 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 41 14 26 14 20 7 27 27 4 21 6 26 3 28 13 27 14 10 31 MONTH 6% 3% 10% 4% 11% 4% 9% 8% 2% 8% 4% 12% 2% 7% 4% 17% 3% 4% 8% ADULT 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 11 4 6 7 - 4 1 7 4 1 - 5 6 7 4 1 10 6 5 YEAR 2% 1% 2% 2% 2% *% 2% 2% *% 2% 4% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% ADULT 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 20 4 16 5 14 1 15 5 5 1 3 2 1 4 16 15 5 1 18 YEAR 3% 1% 6% 2% 8% 1% 5% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 1% 5% 9% 1% *% 5% ADULT 1 - ONCE A YEAR 2 -0 2 - 2 -0 - 2 - 2 - -0 2 0 2 0 2 2 -0 *% -0% 1% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% 1% *% 1% *% *% 1% -0% ADULT 0 - NO USE 205 78 127 82 50 73 59 70 47 100 36 67 45 83 120 55 149 82 103 30% 19% 47% 25% 29% 41% 19% 22% 22% 38% 27% 30% 29% 22% 40% 35% 28% 32% 27% TOTAL POPULATION 255 - 67 45 22 47 6 15 27 40 17 34 17 18 17 40 25 9 58 32 26 DAILY 10% 11% 8% 14% 3% 8% 9% 12% 8% 13% 12% 8% 11% 11% 8% 6% 11% 12% 7% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 152 118 34 81 42 28 85 96 69 43 28 47 32 98 52 8 143 54 90 6 TIMES / WEEK 22% 28% 13% 24% 24% 16% 28% 30% 32% 16% 21% 21% 21% 26% 17% 5% 27% 21% 24% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 86 62 25 36 26 25 47 37 24 31 18 24 30 48 38 27 59 49 33 WEEKLY 13% 15% 9% 11% 15% 14% 16% 11% 11% 12% 13% 11% 19% 13% 13% 17% 11% 19% 9% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 1 Table Q10A8 Page 28 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN WALKING/JOGGING/RUNNING/HIKING ON PUBLIC TRAILS FOR RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON STREETS OR SIDEWALKS) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL POPULATION 36 - 3- 28 17 11 10 6 12 13 9 18 5 7 9 4 18 11 2 26 10 18 4 TIMES / MONTH 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 7% 4% 3% 8% 2% 5% 4% 3% 5% 4% 2% 5% 4% 5% TOTAL POPULATION 18 - 1- 62 35 26 33 21 7 45 35 12 30 9 37 9 45 16 29 33 10 51 2 TIMES / MONTH 9% 8% 10% 10% 12% 4% 15% 11% 6% 11% 7% 17% 6% 12% 5% 18% 6% 4% 13% TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 13 7 6 9 - 4 1 9 7 1 - 7 6 9 4 1 12 6 7 11 TIMES / YEAR 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% *% 3% 3% *% 3% 4% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% TOTAL POPULATION 4 - 2-6 20 4 16 5 14 1 15 5 5 1 3 2 1 4 16 15 5 1 18 TIMES / YEAR 3% 1% 6% 2% 8% 1% 5% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% 1% 1% 5% 9% 1% *% 5% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 2 -0 2 - 2 -0 - 2 - 2 - -0 2 0 1 0 2 2 -0 ONCE A YEAR *% -0% 1% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% 1% *% *% *% *% 1% -0% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 254 128 127 111 59 84 71 91 66 118 55 78 54 117 136 64 190 92 136 USE 37% 31% 47% 33% 34% 48% 23% 28% 30% 45% 40% 35% 35% 31% 46% 41% 36% 36% 36% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 59.3 69.7 43.2 71.6 46.0 49.5 65.8 72.9 64.7 59.6 64.0 54.4 62.1 65.7 49.3 34.1 66.7 66.9 52.5 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 18.4 30.3 - 29.2 12.2 4.3 21.0 23.7 27.0 17.2 18.9 17.4 18.8 25.4 8.6 1.5 23.3 21.4 17.1 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE 40.9 39.4 43.2 42.4 33.8 45.3 44.8 49.2 37.7 42.4 45.2 37.1 43.3 40.4 40.7 32.6 43.4 45.6 35.4 PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 2 Table Q10A9 Page 29 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOFTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR ADULT OR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 10 10 - 4 6 - 6 6 10 - 1 2 - 9 1 - 10 4 4 WEEK 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 2% 5% 1% 1% 2% *% 2% 2% 1% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 4 4 - 4 - - 4 - 4 - - 4 - 4 - - 4 - 4 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - - - - 1 - - 1 - 1 YEAR *% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% YOUTH 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 1 1 - 1 - - - - 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - - 1 YEAR *% *% *% *% *% *% 1% *% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR -0 -0 - - - -0 - - - -0 - -0 - - -0 -0 - - -0 -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% -0% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 156 156 - 110 26 20 76 90 65 52 40 43 40 112 43 14 142 46 104 23% 37% 33% 15% 11% 25% 28% 30% 20% 29% 19% 26% 29% 14% 9% 27% 18% 27% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% ADULT 255 - DAILY 4 4 - 4 - - 4 4 - - - 2 2 4 - - 4 2 2 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ADULT 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 9 6 4 8 1 0 7 8 8 1 3 0 - 6 4 0 9 1 8 WEEK 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 4% *% 2% *% 2% 1% *% 2% 1% 2% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 3 Table Q10A9 Page 30 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOFTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR ADULT OR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ADULT 52 - WEEKLY 6 3 3 - 2 5 5 2 1 3 5 - 0 5 2 0 6 4 2 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 2% 1% ADULT 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 3 - - - - - - 3 - 3 - 3 MONTH *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ADULT 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 8 1 7 5 3 -0 3 3 5 2 1 5 0 0 6 0 8 1 7 MONTH 1% *% 2% 1% 2% -0% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% *% 2% *% 1% 1% 2% ADULT 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 2 2 - 1 1 - 1 2 1 - 1 - - 2 - - 2 1 1 YEAR *% 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% *% *% ADULT 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 5 5 0 3 - 2 4 2 3 2 - 1 - 2 3 1 4 2 3 YEAR 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ADULT 1 - ONCE A YEAR 4 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 2 1 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% ADULT 0 - NO USE 470 220 250 191 130 149 188 199 115 201 84 162 110 232 235 139 331 193 239 69% 53% 93% 58% 74% 84% 62% 62% 53% 76% 61% 73% 71% 61% 78% 89% 63% 75% 63% TOTAL POPULATION 255 - 4 4 - 4 - - 4 4 - - - 2 2 4 - - 4 2 2 DAILY 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 19 16 4 12 7 0 13 14 18 1 5 2 - 14 5 0 19 6 11 6 TIMES / WEEK 3% 4% 1% 4% 4% *% 4% 4% 8% *% 4% 1% 4% 2% *% 4% 2% 3% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 11 7 3 4 2 5 10 2 6 3 5 4 0 9 2 0 10 4 7 WEEKLY 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 3% 1% 3% 2% *% 2% 1% *% 2% 2% 2% TOTAL POPULATION 36 - 3- 3 - 3 - 3 - 3 3 - - - - - - 3 - 3 - 3 4 TIMES / MONTH *% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 18 - 1- 8 1 7 5 3 -0 3 3 5 2 1 5 0 0 6 0 8 1 7 2 TIMES / MONTH 1% *% 2% 1% 2% -0% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% *% *% 2% *% 1% 1% 2% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 4 Table Q10A9 Page 31 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN SOFTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR ADULT OR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 4 4 - 1 3 - 1 4 3 - 1 - - 4 - - 4 1 3 11 TIMES / YEAR 1% 1% *% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 4 - 2-6 6 6 0 4 - 2 4 2 4 2 - 2 - 2 4 2 4 2 4 TIMES / YEAR 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 4 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 3 1 1 2 2 2 1 4 2 1 ONCE A YEAR 1% *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% *% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 625 375 250 301 156 169 264 289 180 253 124 205 149 344 277 152 473 238 343 USE 91% 90% 93% 91% 88% 95% 87% 89% 83% 96% 91% 93% 97% 91% 93% 98% 89% 93% 90% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 6.0 7.9 3.0 8.3 6.0 1.4 10.6 8.8 11.2 1.2 5.8 5.1 3.8 8.4 2.9 0.3 7.6 5.6 6.3 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 2.0 3.2 - 2.1 3.6 -0.0 3.1 2.0 6.2 -0.0 1.2 2.1 - 3.1 0.5 0.0 2.5 1.8 1.6 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE 4.0 4.7 3.0 6.2 2.4 1.4 7.5 6.9 5.0 1.2 4.7 2.9 3.8 5.3 2.4 0.3 5.1 3.8 4.6 PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 5 Table Q10A10 Page 32 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BICYCLING ON PUBLIC TRAILS OR PATHS FOR ACTIVE RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON SIDEWALKS) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 255 - DAILY 1 1 - 1 - - 1 1 1 - - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 - *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 32 32 - 19 11 2 14 17 15 10 7 10 - 25 7 - 32 11 18 WEEK 5% 8% 6% 7% 1% 5% 5% 7% 4% 5% 5% 7% 2% 6% 4% 5% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 11 11 - 7 5 - 5 6 2 - 2 2 7 7 4 0 11 7 4 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 5% 2% 1% *% 2% 3% 1% YOUTH 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 8 8 - 2 - 5 5 - 2 4 2 - 2 4 4 - 8 5 2 MONTH 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% YOUTH 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 24 24 - 22 - 3 19 10 8 9 - 16 7 20 5 2 22 5 19 MONTH 4% 6% 7% 2% 6% 3% 4% 3% 7% 4% 5% 2% 1% 4% 2% 5% YOUTH 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 13 13 - 9 4 - 7 12 13 - 5 - - 10 3 - 13 1 12 YEAR 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 4% 6% 4% 3% 1% 2% 1% 3% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR 1 1 - - 1 -0 - 1 - 1 - -0 1 - 1 -0 1 1 -0 *% *% 1% -0% *% 1% -0% 1% *% -0% *% 1% -0% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 83 83 - 61 11 11 37 51 42 29 26 21 22 60 22 12 71 18 59 12% 20% 18% 6% 6% 12% 16% 19% 11% 19% 10% 14% 16% 7% 7% 13% 7% 16% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 6 Table Q10A10 Page 33 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BICYCLING ON PUBLIC TRAILS OR PATHS FOR ACTIVE RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON SIDEWALKS) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ADULT 255 - DAILY 6 6 1 3 2 1 2 5 3 3 4 1 1 3 2 2 5 2 3 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% *% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% ADULT 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 42 33 8 15 20 7 28 25 20 16 8 13 4 26 16 3 39 14 25 WEEK 6% 8% 3% 4% 12% 4% 9% 8% 9% 6% 6% 6% 3% 7% 5% 2% 7% 5% 6% ADULT 52 - WEEKLY 25 10 15 9 15 1 9 10 5 2 0 14 8 24 1 15 10 19 6 4% 3% 6% 3% 9% 1% 3% 3% 2% 1% *% 6% 5% 6% *% 10% 2% 7% 2% ADULT 36 - 3-4 TIMES / 7 5 2 2 4 0 4 4 3 2 3 - 2 - 7 0 7 2 4 MONTH 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% ADULT 18 - 1-2 TIMES / 42 26 16 27 5 10 20 15 11 14 9 20 3 21 21 12 31 14 27 MONTH 6% 6% 6% 8% 3% 6% 7% 5% 5% 5% 7% 9% 2% 6% 7% 7% 6% 6% 7% ADULT 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 7 1 5 - 3 4 - - - - - - 6 3 4 2 5 5 2 YEAR 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% ADULT 4 - 2-6 TIMES / 29 10 19 14 9 6 12 10 12 7 6 5 9 10 19 8 22 9 20 YEAR 4% 3% 7% 4% 5% 3% 4% 3% 5% 3% 5% 2% 6% 3% 6% 5% 4% 3% 5% ADULT 1 - ONCE A YEAR 5 1 4 2 3 -0 3 3 - 2 - 2 3 3 1 1 4 2 3 1% *% 2% 1% 2% -0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% ADULT 0 - NO USE 349 150 199 140 81 128 138 152 82 166 65 116 79 163 184 100 250 140 177 51% 36% 74% 42% 46% 72% 45% 47% 38% 63% 48% 52% 51% 43% 61% 64% 47% 55% 47% TOTAL POPULATION 255 - 7 6 1 4 2 1 2 6 4 3 4 2 1 3 2 2 5 3 3 DAILY 1% 2% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 74 65 8 33 32 9 42 42 35 26 15 23 4 52 22 3 71 25 43 6 TIMES / WEEK 11% 16% 3% 10% 18% 5% 14% 13% 16% 10% 11% 10% 3% 14% 7% 2% 13% 10% 11% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 36 22 15 15 20 1 14 16 6 2 2 17 16 31 5 15 21 26 10 WEEKLY 5% 5% 6% 5% 11% 1% 5% 5% 3% 1% 1% 7% 10% 8% 2% 10% 4% 10% 3% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 7 Table Q10A10 Page 34 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN BICYCLING ON PUBLIC TRAILS OR PATHS FOR ACTIVE RECREATION OR FITNESS (EXCLUDING ACTIVITIES ON SIDEWALKS) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL POPULATION 36 - 3- 14 13 2 4 4 5 10 4 4 6 4 - 4 4 10 0 14 8 7 4 TIMES / MONTH 2% 3% 1% 1% 3% 3% 3% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 3% *% 3% 3% 2% TOTAL POPULATION 18 - 1- 66 50 16 49 5 13 39 25 19 23 9 36 10 41 25 14 53 19 46 2 TIMES / MONTH 10% 12% 6% 15% 3% 7% 13% 8% 9% 9% 7% 16% 6% 11% 9% 9% 10% 8% 12% TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 7 1 5 - 3 4 - - - - - - 6 3 4 2 5 5 2 11 TIMES / YEAR 1% *% 2% 2% 2% 4% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% TOTAL POPULATION 4 - 2-6 42 23 19 23 13 6 18 22 25 7 11 5 9 20 22 8 34 10 31 TIMES / YEAR 6% 6% 7% 7% 7% 3% 6% 7% 11% 3% 8% 2% 6% 5% 7% 5% 7% 4% 8% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 6 2 4 2 5 -0 3 5 - 4 - 2 4 3 3 1 5 3 3 ONCE A YEAR 1% *% 2% 1% 3% -0% 1% 2% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 432 233 199 202 92 138 175 203 124 195 91 137 101 223 205 111 321 158 237 USE 63% 56% 74% 61% 52% 78% 58% 63% 57% 74% 67% 62% 65% 59% 69% 71% 61% 62% 62% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 19.9 27.4 8.5 19.8 30.2 10.0 23.1 23.7 26.6 16.0 22.2 20.3 11.4 23.9 14.1 12.7 22.1 21.0 19.0 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 7.3 12.0 - 9.3 8.6 2.3 8.2 7.8 10.0 5.1 7.0 7.6 3.7 10.1 3.9 1.4 9.1 7.9 7.0 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE 12.6 15.3 8.5 10.5 21.6 7.7 14.9 15.9 16.6 10.9 15.2 12.7 7.7 13.8 10.2 11.3 13.0 13.1 12.0 PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 8 Table Q10A12 Page 35 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN TACKLE FOOTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 685 416 269 332 176 177 303 323 217 264 137 221 154 380 299 156 529 256 381 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YOUTH TOTAL 173 173 - 120 33 20 87 97 82 52 41 51 40 126 45 15 158 50 114 25% 42% 36% 19% 11% 29% 30% 38% 20% 30% 23% 26% 33% 15% 9% 30% 20% 30% YOUTH 110 - 2-6 TIMES / 7 7 - 3 4 - 7 3 7 - - 1 - 7 - 1 6 5 2 WEEK 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% *% 2% *% 1% 2% 1% YOUTH 52 - WEEKLY 6 6 - 4 1 - 2 4 1 2 - - 4 4 2 - 6 4 1 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% YOUTH 9 - 7-11 TIMES / 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - - - - 1 - - 1 - 1 YEAR *% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% YOUTH 1 - ONCE A YEAR 2 2 - 2 - - 2 2 2 - 2 - - 2 - - 2 - 2 *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% YOUTH 0 - NO USE 156 156 - 110 26 20 76 87 70 50 39 50 35 112 43 14 142 41 107 23% 38% 33% 15% 11% 25% 27% 32% 19% 29% 23% 23% 29% 14% 9% 27% 16% 28% ADULT TOTAL 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% ADULT 0 - NO USE 512 243 269 212 143 157 216 226 136 212 96 171 115 254 254 141 371 206 267 75% 58% 100% 64% 81% 89% 71% 70% 62% 80% 70% 77% 74% 67% 85% 91% 70% 80% 70% TOTAL POPULATION 110 - 2- 7 7 - 3 4 - 7 3 7 - - 1 - 7 - 1 6 5 2 6 TIMES / WEEK 1% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 3% *% 2% *% 1% 2% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 52 - 6 6 - 4 1 - 2 4 1 2 - - 4 4 2 - 6 4 1 WEEKLY 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% *% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 23 9 Table Q10A12 Page 36 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 IN THE PAST YEAR, HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU PARTICIPATED IN TACKLE FOOTBALL: ORGANIZED LEAGUE GAMES FOR YOUTH (NON-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES) BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL POPULATION 9 - 7- 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - - - - 1 - - 1 - 1 11 TIMES / YEAR *% *% 1% *% 1% *% *% *% TOTAL POPULATION 1 - 2 2 - 2 - - 2 2 2 - 2 - - 2 - - 2 - 2 ONCE A YEAR *% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% *% 1% TOTAL POPULATION 0 - NO 668 399 269 323 169 177 292 313 205 262 135 221 150 365 297 155 513 247 374 USE 98% 96% 100% 97% 96% 100% 96% 97% 94% 99% 98% 100% 97% 96% 99% 100% 97% 96% 98% PARTICIPATION RATE PER 1.6 2.6 - 1.6 3.1 - 3.0 1.5 4.0 0.4 0.0 0.3 1.5 2.6 0.4 0.5 1.9 3.0 0.8 CAPITA PER YEAR YOUTH PARTICIPATION RATE 1.6 2.6 - 1.6 3.1 - 3.0 1.5 4.0 0.4 0.0 0.3 1.5 2.6 0.4 0.5 1.9 3.0 0.8 PER CAPITA PER YEAR ADULT PARTICIPATION RATE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PER CAPITA PER YEAR VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 0 Table Q11 Page 37 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 11. NOW THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED MANY RECREATION POSSIBILITIES, WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION FACILITY YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 19 7 12 6 3 9 5 8 6 8 3 7 3 11 9 8 11 7 9 11% 8% 13% 8% 9% 17% 7% 10% 12% 12% 7% 13% 7% 12% 10% 17% 9% 9% 10% NO ANSWER 7 3 4 - 3 4 4 4 2 3 - 0 1 - 7 2 5 2 5 4% 4% 4% 8% 7% 6% 5% 3% 4% *% 2% 8% 5% 4% 2% 5% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 174 82 92 79 38 57 77 78 51 73 37 56 43 90 83 47 127 76 88 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% WALKING/JOGGING PATHS/ 19 14 5 10 6 3 10 12 3 8 3 4 11 6 12 1 18 12 7 TRAILS 11% 17% 5% 12% 16% 6% 13% 15% 6% 12% 9% 7% 24% 7% 14% 2% 14% 16% 8% SWIMMING POOL FOR 10 4 7 7 2 2 1 4 2 6 3 0 3 7 4 1 9 4 6 RECREATION OR LESSONS 6% 4% 7% 9% 5% 3% 1% 5% 4% 9% 9% 1% 6% 7% 4% 2% 7% 5% 7% FITNESS CENTER 10 4 7 2 6 2 2 5 0 5 2 7 2 8 2 5 5 8 2 6% 4% 7% 3% 15% 4% 3% 7% *% 7% 6% 12% 4% 9% 3% 11% 4% 11% 2% GYMNASIUM 9 8 1 7 1 1 6 4 3 1 4 2 - 6 4 1 9 - 6 5% 10% 2% 9% 4% 1% 8% 5% 6% 2% 12% 4% 6% 4% 1% 7% 7% SENIOR FACILITIES AND 8 - 8 1 - 6 3 2 1 7 0 2 1 - 8 5 3 4 1 PROGRAMS 4% 8% 2% 11% 4% 2% 1% 9% *% 4% 2% 9% 10% 2% 6% 1% COMMUNITY CENTER FOR 8 2 5 2 4 1 5 3 1 2 0 2 1 2 5 5 2 0 7 CLASSES (DANCE, CRAFTS, 4% 3% 6% 3% 12% 2% 6% 4% 1% 3% 1% 4% 1% 2% 6% 11% 2% 1% 8% GYMNASTICS, ETC.) INDOOR SWIMMING POOL – 5 1 4 3 - 2 3 1 3 2 1 4 0 1 4 1 4 3 2 RECREATION 3% 1% 5% 4% 3% 3% 2% 6% 3% 4% 6% *% 1% 5% 3% 3% 3% 3% VOLLEYBALL FACILITIES 5 2 3 5 - - 2 5 5 - - - 2 2 3 - 5 5 - 3% 3% 3% 6% 3% 6% 9% 5% 2% 3% 4% 6% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 1 Table Q11 Page 38 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 11. NOW THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED MANY RECREATION POSSIBILITIES, WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION FACILITY YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- SOFTBALL FIELDS 5 2 3 5 - - 2 5 5 - 3 - - 2 3 - 5 - 5 3% 3% 3% 6% 3% 6% 9% 7% 2% 3% 4% 5% PLAYGROUNDS/TOT LOTS 5 2 2 2 - 2 2 - - 5 2 - - 3 1 - 5 5 - 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 3% 6% 7% 4% 1% 4% 6% BIKE TRAILS/PATHS 5 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 2 3 - 4 0 - 5 1 4 1 3 3% 2% 3% 1% 5% 3% 2% 1% 3% 4% 8% *% 6% 1% 3% 1% 4% PICNIC FACILITIES 4 - 4 1 - 3 - - 2 - - - 4 - 4 1 3 3 1 3% 5% 1% 6% 3% 10% 5% 2% 3% 4% 1% SOCCER FIELDS 4 4 0 3 - 1 1 4 2 1 3 0 - 3 1 0 4 1 3 2% 5% *% 4% 3% 1% 5% 4% 2% 8% 1% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% 3% TEEN AND YOUTH CLUB 4 3 1 3 - 1 2 3 - 4 1 2 - 4 - 1 3 3 1 FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS 2% 3% 1% 4% 2% 3% 4% 6% 3% 4% 4% 1% 3% 4% 1% BASEBALL FIELDS 4 4 - 2 1 - 1 - 4 - - - 2 4 - - 4 1 2 2% 4% 3% 4% 2% 7% 5% 4% 3% 2% 2% ICE SKATING FACILITY 3 3 - 3 - - 2 - 3 - - 3 - 2 1 1 2 - 3 2% 4% 4% 3% 6% 6% 2% 1% 2% 2% 4% GOLF COURSE 3 - 3 - - 3 - - 2 1 - 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 2% 3% 5% 3% 2% 3% 1% 1% 3% 3% 1% 2% 2% OPEN SPACE 3 1 1 - 1 1 - 1 - 3 - 1 2 1 2 0 3 3 - 2% 2% 1% 4% 2% 2% 4% 2% 4% 1% 2% *% 2% 4% MULTI-USE TRAILS 3 2 0 2 0 - 3 3 0 - - 2 - 2 0 0 2 - 3 1% 3% *% 3% 1% 3% 3% 1% 4% 2% 1% 1% 2% 3% MEETING FACILITIES 2 - 2 - - 2 - - - - - - 2 - 2 - 2 2 - 1% 2% 4% 5% 2% 2% 3% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 2 Table Q11 Page 39 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 11. NOW THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED MANY RECREATION POSSIBILITIES, WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION FACILITY YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- SKATEBOARD PARK 2 - 2 - - 2 2 - - - - - - - 2 2 - - 2 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 4% 2% FOOTBALL FIELDS 2 2 0 - - 2 2 0 - 2 2 - 0 2 0 0 2 2 0 1% 2% *% 3% 2% *% 2% 4% *% 2% *% *% 1% 2% *% ICE HOCKEY FACILITY 2 1 1 2 - - 2 2 - 1 1 1 - - 2 - 2 1 1 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% PERFORMING ARTS CENTER 1 1 - - 1 - - 1 1 - 1 - - - 1 - 1 - 1 (THEATER FOR MUSIC, 1% 2% 4% 2% 3% 4% 2% 1% 2% PERFORMING ARTS) OUTDOOR BASKETBALL 1 -0 1 - - 1 1 - 1 -0 - 1 - 1 -0 1 - 1 -0 COURTS 1% -0% 1% 2% 2% 2% -0% 2% 1% -0% 3% 2% -0% FINE ARTS CENTER (ART 1 - 1 - - 1 - - - 0 1 0 - - 1 1 - 1 - GALLERY, EXHIBITIONS) 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% TENNIS COURTS 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - - 0 0 - 0 - *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% OTHER (SPECIFY) 33 16 16 16 6 10 12 18 11 12 5 9 14 24 9 11 22 12 20 19% 20% 17% 21% 16% 18% 15% 22% 21% 17% 14% 15% 32% 26% 11% 22% 17% 15% 23% NONE 15 4 10 2 6 7 11 6 2 9 3 9 0 9 6 8 7 4 10 9% 5% 11% 2% 16% 13% 15% 8% 3% 13% 9% 16% *% 10% 7% 16% 6% 5% 11% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 3 Table Q12 Page 40 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 12. THINKING ABOUT THE PAST YEAR, WHAT BEST DESCRIBES HOW OFTEN YOU OR OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USED RECREATION PROGRAMS, CLASSES OR LESSONS IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% NO ANSWER 7 - 7 - 4 2 4 0 - - - 0 0 2 5 5 2 - 6 3% 6% 11% 3% 6% *% *% *% 2% 5% 9% 1% 7% REFUSED 2 2 0 2 - 0 2 - - - - 2 - 2 0 0 2 - 2 1% 2% *% 3% *% 3% 4% 2% *% *% 2% 2% BASE: TOTAL RESPONDING 191 90 102 83 40 68 80 90 59 84 40 61 47 96 94 53 138 84 93 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% FREQUENT USERS (NET) 59 41 18 36 8 15 26 37 59 - 13 19 12 34 25 11 48 14 41 31% 45% 18% 43% 20% 22% 33% 41% 100% 34% 32% 27% 35% 27% 20% 35% 17% 45% MORE THAN ONCE A WEEK 33 25 8 19 6 8 14 25 33 - 12 10 3 20 13 7 26 4 28 17% 28% 8% 23% 15% 12% 18% 28% 56% 31% 16% 7% 21% 14% 13% 19% 5% 31% ONCE A WEEK OR 3 TO 4 26 15 11 17 2 7 12 12 26 - 1 9 9 14 12 4 22 10 13 TIMES PER MONTH 13% 17% 10% 20% 4% 11% 15% 13% 44% 3% 15% 19% 14% 13% 7% 16% 12% 14% MODERATE USERS (NET) 48 20 29 20 13 16 17 20 - - 8 14 18 23 26 18 31 22 23 25% 22% 28% 24% 32% 23% 22% 23% 20% 23% 39% 23% 27% 33% 22% 26% 25% ONCE OR TWICE A MONTH 8 5 3 5 - 3 3 4 - - 2 4 1 2 6 3 5 3 4 4% 5% 3% 6% 5% 4% 4% 5% 7% 2% 2% 7% 6% 3% 4% 4% SEVERAL TIMES A YEAR 40 15 25 15 13 12 14 17 - - 6 10 17 21 20 14 26 18 19 21% 17% 25% 18% 32% 18% 18% 19% 16% 16% 37% 22% 21% 27% 19% 22% 21% INFREQUENT USERS (NET) 84 29 55 27 19 38 36 32 - 84 18 28 16 40 43 25 59 48 28 44% 33% 54% 33% 49% 55% 45% 36% 100% 46% 46% 34% 41% 46% 47% 43% 57% 31% ONCE A YEAR 7 -0 7 2 0 4 2 3 - 7 - 2 3 0 6 2 5 5 1 3% -0% 7% 3% 1% 6% 3% 3% 8% 4% 7% *% 7% 3% 4% 6% 1% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 4 Table Q12 Page 41 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 12. THINKING ABOUT THE PAST YEAR, WHAT BEST DESCRIBES HOW OFTEN YOU OR OTHER MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USED RECREATION PROGRAMS, CLASSES OR LESSONS IN OR OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- NO USE 77 29 48 25 19 34 34 29 - 77 18 25 13 39 37 23 54 43 28 41% 33% 47% 30% 47% 49% 43% 33% 92% 46% 42% 27% 41% 39% 44% 39% 51% 30% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 5 Table Q13 Page 42 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 13. WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION PROGRAM, CLASS OR LESSON YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 24 5 19 8 7 10 8 8 8 8 3 12 3 9 15 14 10 10 10 14% 6% 22% 10% 18% 16% 10% 10% 17% 10% 7% 24% 6% 10% 19% 32% 8% 14% 11% NO ANSWER 2 2 0 - - 2 2 2 2 0 0 - - - 2 0 2 - 2 1% 2% *% 3% 2% 2% 3% *% *% 2% *% 1% 2% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 174 85 89 77 38 59 77 80 49 76 37 51 44 91 81 43 131 74 90 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% ARTS OR CRAFTS 13 5 8 5 1 6 4 1 5 6 1 4 2 5 8 4 9 7 5 INSTRUCTION OR CLASSES 8% 5% 10% 7% 4% 11% 6% 1% 10% 7% 3% 8% 3% 5% 10% 10% 7% 9% 6% COOKING INSTRUCTION OR 13 4 9 7 6 0 6 2 4 2 - 0 4 8 5 5 8 4 9 CLASSES 7% 4% 10% 9% 16% *% 8% 3% 7% 3% *% 10% 9% 6% 11% 6% 5% 10% AEROBICS, SPINNING, OR 11 1 11 2 4 5 8 5 2 6 0 6 4 6 5 9 2 5 6 FITNESS INSTRUCTION OR 7% 1% 12% 2% 12% 9% 11% 6% 4% 8% 1% 13% 9% 7% 7% 21% 2% 7% 7% CLASSES MUSIC INSTRUCTION OR 11 6 5 5 3 3 2 6 4 4 2 5 1 5 6 0 10 6 5 CLASSES 6% 6% 6% 6% 8% 5% 2% 8% 9% 5% 5% 9% 3% 6% 7% 1% 8% 7% 6% SWIMMING LESSONS 11 7 4 9 - 1 5 5 3 6 2 2 7 8 2 1 10 4 7 6% 8% 4% 12% 2% 6% 6% 6% 7% 6% 4% 15% 9% 3% 2% 8% 6% 7% READING, LANGUAGE, 9 4 4 4 2 3 6 2 - 9 2 4 - 7 2 0 8 8 0 SPELLING OR WRITING 5% 5% 5% 6% 4% 5% 8% 3% 11% 7% 8% 8% 2% 1% 6% 11% *% INSTRUCTION OR CLASSES FACILITY MENTIONS 8 5 3 4 1 3 3 0 0 5 3 -0 3 3 5 3 4 3 5 4% 5% 3% 6% 2% 4% 4% 1% 1% 7% 8% -0% 6% 3% 6% 8% 3% 4% 5% BASKETBALL 7 5 2 2 1 3 5 1 - 5 1 2 - 2 4 2 5 5 2 4% 6% 2% 3% 4% 6% 6% 2% 6% 4% 4% 2% 5% 4% 4% 6% 2% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 6 Table Q13 Page 43 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 13. WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION PROGRAM, CLASS OR LESSON YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- DANCE INSTRUCTION OR 6 4 2 5 - 1 2 6 2 4 3 3 - 4 2 1 5 3 3 CLASSES 3% 5% 2% 7% 1% 2% 7% 5% 5% 8% 6% 5% 2% 2% 4% 4% 4% PRE-SCHOOL CARE 6 2 4 1 3 2 2 4 - 1 - - 3 1 5 1 5 3 2 3% 2% 4% 1% 8% 3% 2% 5% 1% 8% 1% 6% 2% 4% 5% 2% YOGA, MEDITATION, OR 5 1 4 - - 5 4 3 0 1 2 2 - 3 2 1 4 1 3 STRESS RELIEF 3% 1% 4% 8% 5% 4% 1% 2% 6% 3% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 4% INSTRUCTION OR CLASSES PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT OR 5 5 - 4 0 - 0 2 2 - - 2 - 2 2 0 4 - 2 BUSINESS INSTRUCTION OR 3% 5% 6% 1% *% 3% 4% 5% 3% 3% 1% 3% 3% CLASSES GYMNASTICS INSTRUCTION 4 4 - 4 - - 4 4 4 - 2 - 2 4 - - 4 - 4 OR CLASSES 2% 5% 6% 6% 5% 9% 6% 5% 5% 3% 5% CONCERTS 4 2 2 2 - 2 4 4 2 2 2 - - 2 2 - 4 2 2 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 5% 5% 4% 2% 4% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% EARLY CHILDHOOD 3 1 2 1 - 2 2 1 1 2 2 - 1 - 3 1 2 2 1 DEVELOPMENT CLASSES 2% 1% 3% 1% 4% 3% 1% 2% 3% 7% 2% 4% 2% 2% 3% 1% MARTIAL ARTS CLASSES 3 1 2 - 1 2 - 1 1 - - - - 3 - - 3 - 3 2% 2% 2% 4% 3% 2% 3% 4% 3% 4% VOLLEYBALL 2 2 - 2 - - 2 2 2 - - - 2 2 - - 2 2 - 1% 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 5% 2% 2% 3% DRAMA INSTRUCTION OR 2 - 2 - - 2 0 - 0 2 1 1 - 1 1 1 1 2 0 CLASSES 1% 2% 4% *% *% 2% 4% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% *% SOCCER 2 - 2 - 2 - - 2 - 2 - 0 2 0 2 0 2 2 - 1% 2% 5% 2% 3% 1% 4% *% 2% 1% 1% 3% ADULT DAY CARE 2 - 2 - 2 - - - - - - - 2 2 - 2 - 2 - 1% 2% 4% 4% 2% 4% 2% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 7 Table Q13 Page 44 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 13. WHAT IS THE ONE RECREATION PROGRAM, CLASS OR LESSON YOU WOULD MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- PARENTING CLASSES 1 1 - - - 1 - 1 - 1 - - - - 1 - 1 - - 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% GOLF 1 - 1 - - 1 - - - 1 - - - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 1% FOOTBALL 0 - 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 - - 0 - 0 0 - 0 - *% *% 1% *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% TENNIS 0 - 0 - - 0 0 0 - 0 - - 0 - 0 0 - - 0 *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% BEFORE OR AFTER SCHOOL 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - - - 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 DAY CARE *% *% *% *% *% *% *% PLAYS 0 - 0 - - 0 - - - 0 0 - - - 0 0 - 0 - *% *% *% *% *% *% *% *% OTHER (SPECIFY) 22 11 11 8 8 7 5 15 9 10 8 7 5 5 17 4 18 4 17 13% 13% 12% 10% 20% 11% 6% 19% 18% 13% 23% 14% 11% 6% 21% 10% 14% 5% 18% NONE 23 13 10 10 3 9 13 11 5 8 3 12 6 15 8 6 17 9 11 13% 16% 11% 13% 9% 16% 17% 14% 11% 11% 9% 23% 14% 17% 9% 14% 13% 13% 13% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 8 Table Q14 Page 45 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 14. THINKING ABOUT THE NEEDS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD, WHICH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS WOULD YOU MOST LIKE TO SEE ADDED IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON'T KNOW 4 2 2 - 0 3 3 3 2 2 - - - - 4 1 3 2 2 2% 2% 2% 1% 5% 4% 4% 4% 2% 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% NO ANSWER 1 - 1 - - 1 0 - - 1 - - - - 1 1 - 1 0 1% 1% 2% *% 2% 1% 3% 1% *% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 195 90 105 85 44 66 83 87 57 81 40 63 47 100 93 55 140 82 99 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% ACTIVE SPORTS FACILITIES 40 20 19 15 6 18 19 22 13 18 40 - - 19 20 6 33 15 22 AND PROGRAMS 20% 23% 18% 18% 14% 28% 22% 26% 24% 22% 100% 18% 21% 12% 24% 19% 22% FINE ARTS OR PERFORMING 63 29 34 31 15 17 24 31 19 28 - 63 - 40 23 21 42 23 35 ARTS FACILITIES AND 32% 32% 33% 37% 33% 26% 30% 36% 34% 34% 100% 40% 25% 39% 30% 28% 35% PROGRAMS CLASSES, LESSONS, AND 45 18 27 13 13 19 22 10 12 19 - - - 19 27 15 30 16 24 COMMUNITY EVENTS 23% 20% 26% 16% 30% 29% 27% 12% 21% 24% 18% 29% 27% 22% 19% 24% OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION 47 23 24 25 10 12 17 23 12 16 - - 47 23 24 12 35 28 18 AND ENJOYMENT 24% 26% 23% 30% 23% 18% 21% 27% 22% 20% 100% 23% 25% 22% 25% 34% 19% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 24 9 Table Q15 Page 46 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 15. HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE YOUR OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH EXISTING PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 2 - 2 - 0 2 1 0 - 2 1 0 1 0 2 1 1 2 0 1% 2% 1% 3% 2% *% 2% 3% 1% 1% *% 2% 2% 1% 2% *% NO ANSWER 2 1 0 - 1 0 - 1 - 0 0 - 1 - 2 0 1 1 - 1% 2% *% 3% *% 2% *% *% 3% 2% *% 1% 2% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 196 90 106 85 43 69 85 88 59 82 38 63 45 100 95 56 140 81 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% VERY/SOMEWHAT SATISFIED 176 85 91 75 37 65 79 83 52 72 35 56 40 92 83 52 124 73 90 (NET) 90% 94% 86% 88% 86% 94% 93% 94% 88% 88% 92% 89% 89% 92% 87% 93% 88% 90% 89% 4 VERY SATISFIED 73 33 40 30 19 24 35 35 19 33 13 30 14 43 30 23 50 30 38 37% 37% 38% 35% 45% 35% 41% 40% 32% 40% 35% 48% 32% 43% 32% 41% 36% 37% 37% 3 SOMEWHAT SATISFIED 103 52 51 45 17 41 45 47 33 39 22 26 26 49 53 29 74 42 53 52% 57% 48% 53% 41% 59% 52% 54% 56% 48% 56% 41% 57% 49% 55% 52% 53% 52% 52% NOT VERY/NOT AT ALL 20 6 15 10 6 4 6 5 7 10 3 7 5 8 12 4 16 8 11 SATISFIED (NET) 10% 6% 14% 12% 14% 6% 7% 6% 12% 12% 8% 11% 11% 8% 13% 7% 12% 10% 11% 2 NOT VERY SATISFIED 14 4 10 8 3 2 2 2 5 5 1 6 4 7 6 1 13 7 6 7% 4% 10% 10% 7% 3% 3% 3% 9% 6% 4% 10% 10% 7% 7% 1% 9% 8% 6% 1 NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 6 2 4 2 3 2 4 3 2 5 2 1 1 1 6 3 3 2 5 3% 2% 4% 2% 7% 2% 4% 3% 3% 6% 5% 1% 1% 1% 6% 6% 2% 2% 5% MEAN 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.2 STANDARD DEVIATION 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8 MEDIAN 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 0 Table Q16 Page 47 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 Q16. HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 1 1 - - 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 - - - - - 1 1 - 1% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 4% 1% 2% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 199 90 108 85 43 71 85 88 59 83 38 63 47 100 98 57 141 83 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 1 YEAR OR LESS 2 2 - 2 - - - 2 - 2 - 2 - 2 - - 2 - 2 1% 2% 3% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2-3 YEARS 13 3 10 4 6 3 7 7 3 10 - 6 0 13 - 8 4 3 9 6% 3% 9% 4% 15% 4% 9% 8% 5% 12% 10% 1% 13% 15% 3% 4% 9% 4-5 YEARS 18 14 4 15 2 1 6 11 4 6 6 3 7 18 - 2 16 6 12 9% 16% 4% 18% 4% 2% 7% 12% 7% 7% 16% 4% 14% 18% 4% 11% 8% 11% 6-9 YEARS 24 14 11 15 6 4 7 11 9 6 2 11 7 24 - 8 17 12 10 12% 15% 10% 18% 14% 5% 8% 12% 15% 7% 5% 18% 15% 24% 13% 12% 15% 10% 10-15 YEARS 43 32 11 24 10 9 25 24 18 16 11 18 9 43 - 4 39 16 26 22% 35% 10% 28% 23% 13% 29% 27% 30% 19% 28% 28% 19% 43% 7% 27% 20% 26% 16-20 YEARS 25 8 17 5 12 8 10 10 7 8 5 5 5 - 25 7 18 13 11 13% 9% 16% 6% 28% 11% 12% 11% 13% 10% 14% 8% 10% 25% 11% 13% 15% 10% 21-25 YEARS 22 6 16 4 5 13 11 10 1 11 7 3 2 - 22 6 16 8 10 11% 7% 14% 5% 11% 18% 13% 11% 1% 14% 20% 4% 5% 22% 10% 11% 10% 10% 26 YEARS OR MORE 52 12 40 17 2 33 19 14 17 24 7 15 17 - 52 23 29 24 22 26% 13% 37% 20% 4% 47% 23% 16% 29% 29% 17% 24% 36% 53% 40% 20% 29% 22% MEAN 16.8 13.4 19.6 13.8 13.5 22.4 16.7 14.4 16.6 17.0 16.9 15.0 17.8 8.3 25.4 18.7 16.0 17.6 15.4 STANDARD DEVIATION 9.7 8.4 9.9 9.5 7.4 8.7 9.3 9.2 9.6 10.4 8.6 9.9 10.3 4.0 5.2 11.0 9.1 9.5 9.7 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 1 Table Q16 Page 48 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 Q16. HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A RESIDENT IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- MEDIAN 12.5 12.5 23.0 12.5 12.5 23.0 12.5 12.5 12.5 18.0 18.0 12.5 18.0 7.5 30.0 18.0 12.5 18.0 12.5 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 2 Table Q17 Page 49 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 17. WOULD YOU PLEASE TELL ME THE RACIAL GROUP WITH WHICH YOU IDENTIFY? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 2 2 - 2 - - - - - 2 - - 2 - 2 - 2 2 - 1% 2% 3% 3% 5% 2% 2% 3% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 198 90 108 83 44 71 86 90 59 82 40 63 45 100 96 57 140 82 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% WHITE 45 11 34 14 3 28 20 16 10 21 6 13 17 13 32 34 11 16 22 23% 13% 31% 17% 7% 39% 23% 18% 17% 26% 15% 21% 38% 13% 34% 59% 8% 20% 21% BLACK OR AFRICAN 11 2 8 2 2 7 6 2 1 6 - 5 2 7 4 8 2 7 4 AMERICAN 5% 2% 8% 3% 4% 10% 7% 2% 2% 7% 7% 4% 7% 4% 15% 2% 8% 4% ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLANDER 15 2 13 2 13 - 11 7 2 4 - 9 2 11 4 13 2 4 11 8% 2% 12% 3% 30% 13% 7% 4% 5% 14% 5% 11% 5% 23% 2% 5% 11% HISPANIC/MEXICAN 120 72 48 58 26 36 48 61 44 45 33 34 21 66 53 - 120 51 61 AMERICAN 61% 80% 45% 70% 59% 51% 56% 68% 75% 55% 84% 53% 48% 66% 55% 86% 63% 61% OTHER (SPECIFY) 7 2 5 7 - 0 1 4 1 5 1 3 2 4 2 2 5 3 3 3% 2% 4% 8% *% 1% 5% 3% 6% 2% 5% 5% 4% 2% 3% 3% 4% 3% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 3 Table Q18 Page 50 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 18. PLEASE TELL ME IF YOU ARE OF SPANISH/HISPANIC ORIGIN OR DESCENT? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 80 20 60 27 18 35 38 29 15 39 6 29 25 35 45 57 22 33 40 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% NO ANSWER 1 - 1 - - 1 1 - - - 1 - - - 1 1 - - - 1% 1% 2% 2% 10% 1% 1% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 79 20 59 27 18 34 37 29 15 39 6 29 25 35 45 57 22 33 40 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% YES 22 12 10 16 - 6 5 11 4 14 - 8 13 12 10 - 22 8 13 28% 61% 17% 60% 18% 14% 37% 29% 37% 27% 53% 35% 23% 100% 24% 32% NO 57 8 49 11 18 28 32 18 11 25 6 21 12 22 34 57 - 25 27 72% 39% 83% 40% 100% 82% 86% 63% 71% 63% 100% 73% 47% 65% 77% 100% 76% 68% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 4 Table Q17/18 Page 51 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 17/18. RACE/ETHNICITY BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- TOTAL ANSWERING 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 2 2 - 2 - - - - - 2 - - 2 - 2 - 2 2 - 1% 2% 3% 3% 5% 2% 2% 3% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 198 90 108 83 44 71 86 90 59 82 40 63 45 100 96 57 140 82 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% WHITE NON-HISPANIC 34 6 28 9 3 22 17 12 8 16 6 10 10 7 27 34 - 13 16 17% 6% 26% 11% 7% 31% 20% 13% 13% 19% 15% 15% 23% 7% 28% 59% 16% 15% BLACK NON-HISPANIC 8 - 8 - 2 7 6 - 1 4 - 2 2 5 4 8 - 7 2 4% 8% 4% 10% 7% 2% 5% 4% 4% 5% 4% 15% 8% 2% ASIAN/PI NON-HISPANIC 13 - 13 - 13 - 9 4 - 4 - 9 - 9 4 13 - 4 9 7% 12% 30% 10% 5% 5% 14% 9% 5% 23% 5% 9% HISPANIC 143 84 59 74 26 42 54 72 48 59 33 42 35 78 63 - 143 59 74 72% 94% 54% 90% 59% 59% 62% 80% 82% 73% 84% 66% 78% 78% 66% 102% 72% 73% OTHER 2 2 0 2 - 0 1 2 1 1 1 1 - 2 0 2 - 1 1 1% 2% *% 2% *% 1% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% *% 3% 1% 1% VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 5 Table Q19 Page 52 RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 19. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING RANGES INCLUDES YOUR HOUSEHOLDS ANNUAL INCOME BEFORE TAXES? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- (TOTAL ANSWERING) 200 92 108 85 44 71 86 90 59 84 40 63 47 100 98 57 143 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% DON’T KNOW 11 6 5 7 - 4 2 5 2 5 2 3 1 3 8 2 9 - - 6% 7% 5% 9% 7% 2% 6% 4% 7% 4% 6% 2% 3% 10% 4% 7% NO ANSWER 1 - 1 - - 1 - 0 - 1 - 0 - - 1 1 - - - *% 1% 1% *% 1% 1% 1% 1% REFUSED 3 - 3 - 0 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 - 0 2 3 - - - 1% 3% 1% 4% 2% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2% *% 3% 5% BASE: THOSE RESPONDING 186 86 100 78 44 63 83 84 56 77 37 58 46 97 87 52 133 84 101 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% LESS THAN $25,000 37 12 24 10 5 21 14 10 3 28 11 12 7 17 19 9 28 37 - 20% 14% 25% 13% 12% 33% 17% 12% 6% 36% 31% 20% 14% 18% 22% 16% 21% 43% $25,000 - $49,999 48 17 30 14 14 20 20 21 11 21 4 12 21 21 25 16 31 48 - 26% 20% 30% 18% 31% 31% 24% 25% 20% 27% 10% 20% 46% 22% 29% 31% 23% 57% $50,000 - $74,999 42 20 22 24 6 12 19 18 21 6 7 16 6 20 22 12 31 - 42 23% 24% 22% 31% 15% 18% 23% 21% 37% 7% 19% 27% 12% 20% 26% 22% 23% 42% $75,000 - $99,999 14 5 9 2 6 6 6 5 4 5 2 3 2 6 8 1 13 - 14 8% 6% 9% 3% 13% 9% 7% 6% 7% 7% 5% 6% 4% 6% 9% 3% 9% 14% $100,000 - $149,999 29 21 8 19 10 1 14 16 9 14 5 10 10 24 5 10 20 - 29 16% 25% 8% 24% 22% 1% 18% 19% 17% 19% 14% 17% 21% 25% 6% 19% 15% 29% $150,000 AND ABOVE 16 9 6 8 3 4 9 15 8 3 8 6 1 8 7 4 11 - 16 8% 11% 6% 11% 7% 6% 11% 17% 14% 4% 21% 10% 2% 9% 8% 8% 8% 15% MEAN 69.0 80.5 59.1 80.5 74.6 50.8 73.8 84.3 82.9 58.6 80.3 72.2 62.1 76.4 61.3 69.5 68.8 29.9 101.4 STANDARD DEVIATION 47.1 49.5 42.7 48.7 46.5 40.0 49.7 54.0 48.0 46.3 60.0 48.5 41.9 49.0 44.0 47.8 46.9 8.7 40.8 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 6 Table Q19 Page 53 (Continued) RESEARCH NETWORK LTD - DOWNEY CITY CA PARKS AND RECREATION STUDY DECEMBER, 2014 19. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING RANGES INCLUDES YOUR HOUSEHOLDS ANNUAL INCOME BEFORE TAXES? BANNER 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CHILDREN AGE Q7 Q8 Q12 Q14 RESIDENCE ETHNICITY INCOME ---------- ----------------- ---- ---- ----------- ---------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- WITH PUNCH FREQ FREQ NON FINE OPEN NON TOTAL WITH OUT <45 45-54 55+ 1 USER USER USER SPORT ARTS SPACE <15 >15 HISP HISP <50K 50K+ ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- MEDIAN 62.5 62.5 37.5 62.5 62.5 37.5 62.5 62.5 62.5 37.5 62.5 62.5 37.5 62.5 37.5 62.5 62.5 37.5 87.5 VPR#141436\TC\JD\JS DRAFT PC Ag e n d a Pa g e 25 7 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 258 ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA February 2015 Prepared for: City of Downey DR A F T PC Agenda Page 259 CONTENTS 1 Project Overview 1 1.1 Project Goals 1 2 Key Findings 2 3 Community Attitudes 5 3.1 One Feature that Makes Downey Desirable 5 3.2 One Change Would Like to Make in Downey 6 4 Recreation Information and Benefits 7 4.1 Most Important Recreation Benefits 7 5 Recreation Behavior 8 5.1 Frequency of Parks and Recreation Facility Use 8 5.2 Frequency of Recreation Programs Use 9 5.3 Park or Recreation Facility Most Used 10 5.4 Activity, Facility, or Amenity Most Used at Favorite Facility 11 6 Facilities and Programs Satisfaction 12 6.1 Recreation Facilities and Programs Satisfaction 12 6.2 Recreation Facilities Safety Satisfaction 13 7 Improvements Desired 14 7.1 One Recreation Facility Improvement Desired 14 7.2 One Recreation Program Desired 16 7.3 Preferred Improvements in the City of Downey 17 8 Respondent Demography 18 8.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents 18 APPENDIX Questionnaire DR A F T PC Agenda Page 260 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 1 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW 1.1 PROJECT GOALS The On-Line Questionnaire was part of the preparation of the City of Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan. The purpose of the Questionnaire was to provide an opportunity for public involvement in the Master Plan and to solicit community input on a variety of issues. The On-Line Questionnaire is one of several methods being undertaken to involve the community in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan process. The purpose of gathering community input through a variety of methods is to ensure that the Parks and Open Space Master Plan is as inclusive as possible and that it reflects the views, preferences, and recreating patterns of Downey residents. 1.2 PROJECT METHODOLOGY  Questionnaire was posted on City website from January 6 to January 20, 2015.  On-Line Questionnaire completions by Downey residents totaled 282. Subjects explored in the context of the On-Line Questionnaire included:  One Feature that Makes Downey Desirable  One Change or Improvement Desired in Downey  Benefits Sought in Parks and Recreation Choices  Overall Frequency of Parks and Recreation Facilities Use  One Park or Recreation Facility Most Often Used  Most Used Activity, Facility or Amenity in Favorite Park  Overall Satisfaction with Parks and Recreation Facilities in Downey  Satisfaction with Parks and Recreation Facilities Safety in Downey  One New Recreation Facility Desired  One New Recreation Program Desired  Types of Improvements Would Most Like to See in Downey  Selected Demographic Characteristics DR A F T PC Agenda Page 261 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 2 When asked what one feature makes Downey a desirable place to live, the ten response categories cited most often included "Access to Freeways," "Lack of Crime/Safe," "Feeling a Part of Community," "Schools, Quality Education, Good Education," “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Family Oriented,” “Open Space,” “Quality of Life,” “Parks and Recreation Facilities and Trails,” and "Proximity to Shopping." Comparing the demography of On-Line Questionnaire respondents to 2010 Census data for Downey revealed that the profile of respondents is substantially different. On-Line Questionnaire respondents are nearly twice as likely to be households with children under 18. Respondents were also twice as likely to report household members between the ages of 5 and 14 years and far less likely to report members 55 years or older. Based on the known links between demography and recreating patterns, it is reasonable to conclude that the Questionnaire responses regarding parks and recreation attitudes, usage and preferences are not statistically representative of the overall City of Downey population. When asked what one change they would make in Downey, the six response categories cited most often included "Parks and Recreation Facilities," "Crime/Personal Safety," "Retail Stores/Services," "Road Improvements," “Fire and Police Protection,” and "Education." Seven of every ten responses (70%) cited seeking "Physical Fitness, Health and Well-Being" benefits from their recreation choices. One in seven (14%) identified Opportunities to Gather and Socialize with others while one in ten (10%) stated "Learning Opportunities for Hobby, Self-Improvement or Career Development" as the most important benefit they seek. 2 KEY FINDINGS Downey Strengths Demography Downey Changes Recreation Benefits DR A F T PC Agenda Page 262 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 3 Seven of every ten respondents (72%) reported recreating more than once a week. Frequent Users (those who recreated at a facility at least three times a month) comprised 83% of those completing the Questionnaire. Non-users of parks and recreation facilities represented 1% of the responses. Nearly seven of every ten respondents (66%) reported using recreation programs more than once a week. Frequent Users (those who used recreation programs at least three times a month) comprised 78% of those completing the Questionnaire. Non-users of parks and recreation programs represented 7% of the responses. Parks or recreation facilities mentioned most often by respondents included Apollo Park (25%), Furman Park (17%), Discovery Sports Complex (10%), Griffiths Middle School (5%), Wilderness Park (4%), Rio San Gabriel Park (3%), and Dennis the Menace Park (3%). Recreation activities at the most used facility that were mentioned most often by respondents included Soccer Fields (51%), Open Space (12%), Walking/Jogging Paths/Trails (10%), Baseball Fields (6%), Playground/Tot Lots (6%) and Community Center (4%). Six of every ten respondents (60%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisfied with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. This compares with a figure of 90% from the Community-wide survey. Recreation Facilities Use Recreation Programs Use Most Used Facilities Recreation Activities Recreation Services Satisfaction DR A F T PC Agenda Page 263 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 4 Seven in ten respondents (72%) identified Active Sports Facilities and Programs as their preferred improvement. Open Space and Trails Enjoyment and Preservation was chosen by 15% of residents completing the Questionnaire while 8% chose Classes and Events. The tested option that received the smallest response was for Arts and Culture Facilities and Programs (5%). Three of every four respondents (75%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisfied with park and recreation facilities safety in the City of Downey. More than half of respondents (55%) identified a desire for Soccer Fields. The next largest response group was Walking/Jogging Paths/Trails (3%) and Bike Trails, Paths (3%). Nearly half of respondents (49%) identified Soccer, followed by Aerobics/Fitness (8%), Aquatics (4%), Yoga/Meditation and Stress Relief (2%), and Music Instruction or Classes (2%). Preferred City Emphasis Facilities Safety Satisfaction Facility Changes Desired Program Changes Desired DR A F T PC Agenda Page 264 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 5 3 COMMUNITY ATTITUDES 3.1 ONE FEATURE THAT MAKES DOWNEY DESIRABLE The ten response categories most often cited by respondents and the share of the respondents who offered these responses are presented in Figure 1. All remaining answer categories garnered less than a 3% response rate. For comparison, the top five responses received from the Community-wide Survey were “Lack of Crime/Safe,” “Proximity to Shopping,” “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Access to Freeways,” and “Schools, Quality Education, Good Education.” 3% 3% 4% 5% 5% 7% 10% 11% 18% 19% 0%5%10%15%20% Proximity to Shopping Parks and Recreation Quality of Life Open Space Family Oriented Small Town Feel Schools Community Lack of Crime Freeway Access Figure 1 Feature that Makes Downey Desirable The ten response categories cited most often included "Access to Freeways," "Lack of Crime/Safe," "Feeling a Part of Community," "Schools, Quality Education, Good Education," “Small Town Atmosphere,” “Family Oriented,” “Open Space,” “Quality of Life,” “Parks and Recreation Facilities and Trails,” and "Proximity to Shopping." Finding Question Analyzed: Q.3 What is the one feature that makes the City of Downey a desirable place to live? This question required a write-in response. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 265 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 6 3.2 ONE CHANGE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IN DOWNEY The six response categories most often cited by respondents and the share of the respondents who offered these responses are presented in Figure 2. All remaining answer categories garnered less than a 3% response rate. A similar question posed in the Community-wide Survey resulted in top responses being “Crime, Personal Safety,” “Population Growth,” “Education,” “Growth Management,” “Gangs.” 3% 3% 4% 5% 6% 61% 0%20%40%60%80% Education Fire and Police Road Improvements Retail Stores/Services Crime/Personal Safety Parks and Recreation Facilities Figure 2 One Change Would Make in Downey The six response categories cited most often included "Parks and Recreation Facilities," "Crime/Personal Safety," "Retail Stores/Services," "Road Improvements," “Fire and Police Protection,” and "Education." Finding Question Analyzed: Q.4 What one change or improvement would you like to make in the City of Downey? This question required a write-in response. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 266 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 7 4 RECREATION BENEFITS 4.1 MOST IMPORTANT RECREATION BENEFITS The four response categories and the share of the respondents who selected each are presented in Figure 3. Comparing responses from the Community-wide Survey, the order of response categories was the same. However, the distribution of responses was markedly different, anchored by 43% choosing the category of “Physical Fitness, Health and Well Being.” 6% 10% 14% 70% 0%20%40%60%80% Volunteer Learning Gather/Socialize Physical Fitness Figure 3 Most Important Recreation Benefits Seven of every ten responses (70%) cited seeking "Physical Fitness, Health and Well- Being" benefits from their recreation choices. One in seven (14%) identified Opportunities to Gather and Socialize with others while one in ten (10%) stated "Learning Opportunities for Hobby, Self-Improvement or Career Development" as the most important benefit they seek. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.5 Reflecting upon the recreation patterns of those in your household, which of the following benefits do you feel is most important when you or the members of your household seek recreation or leisure opportunities?  Learning Opportunities for Hobby, Self-Improvement or Career Development  Opportunities to Give Back to the Community Through Volunteer Work  Physical Fitness, Health and Well-Being  Opportunities to Gather and Socialize with Others DR A F T PC Agenda Page 267 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 8 5 RECREATION BEHAVIOR 5.1 FREQUENCY OF PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITY USE The recreation usage frequency categories tested and the share of the respondents falling into each are presented in Figure 4. For comparison, the share of Frequent Users reported in the Community-wide Survey was 45% while non-users constituted 13% of those polled. 1% 1% 6% 9% 11% 72% 0%20%40%60%80% No Use Once a Year Several Times/Year 1-2 Times/Month 3-4 Times/Month > Once/Week Figure 4 Frequency of Recreation Facility Use Seven of every ten respondents (72%) reported recreating more than once a week. Frequent Users (those who recreated at a facility at least three times a month) comprised 83% of those completing the Questionnaire. Non-users of parks and recreation facilities represented 1% of the responses. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.6 Thinking about the past year, which of the following categories best describes how often you or other members of your household used indoor or outdoor parks and recreation facilities in or outside of the City of Downey? More than Once a Week Several Times a Year 3 to 4 Times Per Month Once a Year Once or Twice a Month No Use DR A F T PC Agenda Page 268 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 9 5.2 FREQUENCY OF RECREATION PROGRAMS USE The recreation programs usage frequency categories tested and the share of the respondents falling into each are presented in Figure 5. For comparison, the share of Frequent Users reported in the Community-wide Survey was 30% while non-users constituted 41% of those polled. 5 7% 4% 5% 5% 12% 66% 0%20%40%60% No Use Once a Year Several Times/Year 1-2 Times/Month 3-4 Times/Month > Once/Week Figure 5 Frequency of Recreation Programs Use Nearly seven of every ten respondents (66%) reported using recreation programs more than once a week. Frequent Users (those who used recreation programs at least three times a month) comprised 78% of those completing the Questionnaire. Non-users of parks and recreation programs represented 7% of the responses. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.9 Thinking about the past year, which of the following categories best describes how often you or other members of your household used indoor or outdoor recreation programs, classes or lessons in or outside of the City of Downey? More than Once a Week Several Times a Year 3 to 4 Times Per Month Once a Year Once or Twice a Month No Use DR A F T PC Agenda Page 269 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 10 5.3 PARK OR RECREATION FACILITY MOST USED The seven parks and recreation facility categories most often reported in response to Question 7 and the share of the respondents falling into each are presented in Figure 6. All remaining answer categories garnered less than a 3% response rate. The top two response categories from the Community-wide Survey were Furman Park and Apollo Park. 3% 3% 4% 5% 10% 17% 25% 0%5%10%15%20%25%30% Dennis the Menace Park Rio San Gabriel Park Wilderness Park Griffiths MS Discovery Sports Complex Furman Park Apollo Park Figure 6 Most Used Parks and Recreation Facility Parks or recreation facilities mentioned most often by respondents included Apollo Park (25%), Furman Park (17%), Discovery Sports Complex (10%), Griffiths Middle School (5%), Wilderness Park (4%), Rio San Gabriel Park (3%), and Dennis the Menace Park (3%). Finding Question Analyzed: Q.7 During the last year, what park or recreation facility did you and your household most often use? Please include all types of recreation facilities whether located in the City of Downey or not. Include public or private facilities. This question required a write-in response. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 270 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 11 5.4 ACTIVITY, FACILITY, OR AMENITY MOST USED AT FAVORITE FACILITY The response categories most often reported and the share of the respondents falling into each are presented in Figure 7. All remaining answer categories garnered less than a 3% response rate. This inquiry was not a part of the Community-wide Survey. 4% 6% 6% 10% 12% 51% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% Community Center Tot Lots Baseball Fields Trails Open Space Soccer Fields Figure 7 Most Used Activity, Facility or Amenity Recreation activities mentioned most often by respondents included Soccer Fields (51%), Open Space (12%), Walking/Jogging Paths/Trails (10%), Baseball Fields (6%), Playground/Tot Lots (6%) and Community Center (4%). Finding Question Analyzed: Q.8 Within that park or recreation facility you just described, what one recreation activity, facility or amenity did you and household most often use? This question required a write-in response. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 271 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 12 6 FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS SATISFACTION 6.1 RECREATION FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS SATISFACTION The response categories and share of responses each received are charted in Figure 8. Six of every ten respondents (60%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisfied with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. This compares with a figure of 90% from the Community-wide survey. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.13 Please describe your overall satisfaction with park and recreation facilities and programs in Downey? Would you say you are…  Very Satisfied  Somewhat Satisfied  Not Very Satisfied  Not At All Satisfied 12% 29% 50% 10% 0%25%50% Not At All Satisfied Not Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Figure 8 Rec Facilities and Programs Satisfaction DR A F T PC Agenda Page 272 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 13 6.2 RECREATION FACILITIES SAFETY SATISFACTION The response categories and share of responses each received are charted in Figure 9. This area of inquiry was not included in the Community-wide Survey. Three of every four respondents (75%) stated they are Very or Somewhat Satisfied with park and recreation facilities safety in the City of Downey. Finding Question Analyzed: Q.14 Which of the following phrases best describes your satisfaction with the safety of park and recreation facilities in Downey?  Very Satisfied  Somewhat Satisfied  Not Very Satisfied  Not At All Satisfied 5% 20% 56% 19% 0%25%50% Not At All Satisfied Not Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Very Satisfied Figure 9 Recreation Facilities Safety Satisfaction DR A F T PC Agenda Page 273 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 14 7 IMPROVEMENTS DESIRED 7.1 ONE RECREATION FACILITY IMPROVEMENT DESIRED The recreation facility response categories garnering at least 2% of the responses and the share of responses each received are charted in Figure 10. 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 55% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% Community Center Indoor Basketball Indoor Rec Pool Fitness Center Open Space Baseball Fields Bike Trails Walk/Jog Trails Soccer Fields Figure 10 Recreation Facilities Improvements Desired More than half of respondents (55%) identified a desire for Soccer Fields. The next largest response group was Walking/Jogging Paths/Trails (3%) and Bike Trails, Paths (3%). Finding Question Analyzed: Q.11 What is one recreation facility you would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of your household? This question required a write-in response. Total Trails = 6% DR A F T PC Agenda Page 274 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 15 Table 1 below compares the ranking of the top nine recreation facilities responses to this question from those participating in the On-Line Questionnaire with those households polled through the Community-Wide Survey. Table 1 One Desired Recreation Facility Improvement On-Line Questionnaire Community-Wide Survey Soccer Fields 1 13 Walk/Jog Trails 2 1 Bike Trails/Paths 3 11 Baseball Fields 4 15 Open Space 5 18 Fitness Center 6 3 Indoor Pool for Recreation 7 7 Indoor Basketball Courts 8 4 Community Center 9 6 . Response Comparison DR A F T PC Agenda Page 275 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 16 7.2 ONE RECREATION PROGRAM DESIRED The recreation program response categories garnering at least 2% of the responses and the share of responses each received are charted in Figure 11. Top responses to this inquiry from residents participating in the Community-wide Survey included Arts/Crafts, Cooking, and Fitness. 2% 2% 4% 8% 49% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% Music Yoga Aquatics Fitness Soccer Figure 11 Recreation Programs Desired Nearly half of respondents (49%) identified Soccer, followed by Aerobics/Fitness (8%), Aquatics (4%), Yoga/Meditation and Stress Relief (2%), and Music Instruction or Classes (2%). Finding Question Analyzed: Q.12 What is the one program, class or activity your household would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of your household? This question required a write-in response. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 276 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 17 7.3 PREFERRED IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF DOWNEY The four tested response categories and the share of responses each received are charted in Figure 12. Respondents to the Community-wide Survey most often preferred Arts and Culture Facilities and Programs (32%), Open Space and Trails (24%), Classes and Events (23%) and Active Sports Facilities and Programs (20%). 5% 8% 15% 72% 0%20%40%60%80% Arts/Culture Classes/Events Open Space/Trails Active Sports Figure 12 Improvements Preferred in Downey Seven in ten respondents (72%) identified Active Sports Facilities and Programs as their preferred improvement. Open Space and Trails Enjoyment and Preservation was chosen by 15% of residents completing the Questionnaire while 8% chose Classes and Events. The tested option that received the smallest response was for Arts and Culture Facilities and Programs (5%). Finding Question Analyzed: Q.10 Thinking about the needs of your household, which one of the following types of improvements would you most like to see in Downey?  Active sports facilities and programs  Arts and cultural, museum, or performing arts facilities and programs  Classes, lessons, and community events  Open space and trails for enjoyment and preservation DR A F T PC Agenda Page 277 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 18 8 RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHY 8.1 Demographic Profile of Respondents Table 2 on the following page presents the detailed comparison of selected demographic characteristics from the On-Line Questionnaire and the 2010 Census. Comparing the demography of On-Line Questionnaire respondents to 2010 Census data for Downey revealed that the profile of respondents is substantially different. On-Line Questionnaire respondents are nearly twice as likely to be households with children under 18. Respondents were also twice as likely to report household members between the ages of 5 and 14 years and far less likely to report members 55 years or older. Based on the known links between demography and recreating patterns, it is reasonable to conclude that the Questionnaire responses regarding parks and recreation attitudes, usage and preferences are not statistically representative of the overall City of Downey population. Finding Questions Analyzed: Q.2, 16, 17, 18 A collection of demographic questions was included in the On-Line Questionnaire to enable analysis of the reliability of the sample of respondents as well as for use in response analysis.  Age of Household Members  Number of Household Members  Length of Residence in Downey  Race/Ethnicity of Respondent  Annual Household Income DR A F T PC Agenda Page 278 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 19 Table 2 On-Line Questionnaire Demographic Characteristics City of Downey 2010 Census On-Line Questionnaire Percent of Population by Age: Under 5 years 8% 4% 5 to 14 years 14% 28% 15 to 19 years 7% 9% 20 to 24 years 9% 6% 25 to 34 years 15% 10% 35 to 44 years 15% 21% 45 to 54 years 12% 14% 55 to 64 years 10% 4% 65 years and over 11% 3% Household Description: 1 adult w-o children 17% 2% 2 or more adults w-o children NA 15% Subtotal Households w-o children 54% 17% 1 adult w/children NA 4% 2 adults w/children NA 47% 3 or more adults w/children NA 32% Subtotal Households w/children 46% 83% Ethnicity (Census data is for householders; questionnairedata is for respondents): Non-Hispanic White 17% 20% Hispanic/Latino 71% 75% Non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander 7% 5% Non-Hispanic Black/African American 4% 0% Non-Hispanic Other 1% 0% Source: 2010 Census DR A F T PC Agenda Page 279 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 20 APPENDIX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 280 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 21 FINAL City of Downey Parks and Recreation Master Plan On-line Questionnaire The City of Downey is interested in your opinions on existing park facilities and future recreation priorities. We hope you will answer a few questions. 1. In which zip code do you live? (Choose one.) 90240 90241 90242 Other (PROGRAM TO TERMINATE) 2. Beginning with yourself, write in the age of each person living in your household. Respondent _____ Other Member _____ Other Member _____ Other Member _____ Other Member _____ Other Member _____ Other Member _____ Don’t know (PROGRAM TO TERMINATE) No answer (PROGRAM TO TERMINATE) Refused (PROGRAM TO TERMINATE) 3. What is the one feature that makes the City of Downey a desirable place to live? (Write in your one response below.) ______________________________________________________________ 4. What one change or improvement would you like to make in the City of Downey? (Write in your one response below.) ______________________________________________________________ 5. Reflecting upon the recreation patterns of those in your household, which of the following benefits do you feel is most important when you or the members of your household seek recreation or leisure opportunities? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) DR A F T PC Agenda Page 281 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 22 Learning opportunities for hobby, self-improvement or career development Opportunities to give back to the community through volunteer work Physical fitness, health and well-being Opportunities to gather and socialize with others 6. Thinking about the past year, which of the following categories best describes how often you or other members of your household used indoor or outdoor parks and recreation facilities in or outside of the City of Downey? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) More than once a week Once a week or 3 to 4 times per month Once or twice a month Several times a year Once a year No use (PROGRAM TO SKIP TO Q.9) 7. During the last year, what park or recreation facility did you and your household most often use? Please include all types of recreation facilities whether located in the City of Downey or not. Include public or private facilities. (Write in the name or location of the facility below. ) _________________________________________________________________ 8. Within that park or recreation facility you just described, what one recreation activity, facility or amenity did you and your household most often use? (Write in one activity, facility, or amenity below. ) _________________________________________________________________ 9. Thinking about the past year, which of the following categories best describes how often you or other members of your household used indoor or outdoor recreation programs, classes or lessons in or outside of the City of Downey? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) DR A F T PC Agenda Page 282 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 23 More than once a week Once a week or 3 to 4 times per month Once or twice a month Several times a year Once a year No use 10. Thinking about the needs of your household, which one of the following types of improvements would you most like to see in Downey? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) Active sports facilities and programs Arts and cultural, museum, or performing arts facilities and programs Classes, lessons, and community events Open space and trails, enjoyment and preservation 11. What is the one recreation facility you would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of your household? (Write in your one response below. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) ______________________________________________________________ 12. What is the one program, class, or activity your household would most like to see added in Downey to meet the needs of your household? (Write in your one response below.) ______________________________________________________________ 13. Please describe your overall satisfaction with park and recreation facilities and programs in Downey using the following categories. (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not very satisfied Not at all satisfied DR A F T PC Agenda Page 283 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 24 14. Which of the following phrases best describes your satisfaction with the safety of park and recreation facilities in Downey? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not very satisfied Not at all satisfied And now a few questions about your household so we can match needs to types of households. 15. What is your gender? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) Female Male 16. How long have you lived in Downey? (Choose one from the following list. PROGRAM TO ALLOW ONE) Three years or less Four to six years Seven to nine years Ten years or more 17. Please tell me the racial or ethnic group with which you identify? (Choose one from the following list.) White Hispanic/Mexican American Asian/Pacific Islander Black or African American Other DR A F T PC Agenda Page 284 City of Downey On-Line Questionnaire February, 2015 Page | 25 18. Which of the following ranges includes your household’s annual income before taxes? (Choose one from the following list.) Less than $50,000 $50,000 - $99,999 $100,000 and above THANK YOU ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 285 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 286 925‐01 Downey – Workshop No. 1 Summary Page 1 of 6 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #1 SUMMARY REPORT December 13, 2014 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of the first of three (3) workshops to be conducted as a part of the public outreach effort to assist in the preparation of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan for the City of Downey. The workshop was held Saturday, December 13th, from 9:30 AM to 12:00 PM at Apollo Park, located at 12544 Rives Avenue in Downey. The Consultant Team worked with City Staff to develop and coordinate the workshop. Nine (9) residents attended the workshop. Arlene Salazar, Director of Parks and Recreation, welcomed participants and introduced the Project Team which included staff and the consultants. Robert Mueting, RJM Principal, reviewed the overall process for the development and creation of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Bob also presented the workshop objectives and proceeded to facilitate the process. WORKSHOP GOALS . The goals presented during the workshop were as follows: Provide an overview of the process. 1. Identify the most important community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work and play. 2. Identify issues or trends that may be negatively impacting those characteristics. 3. Determine how parks, recreation and community services can best address these issues and support the community characteristics. 4. Hear and listen to the community’s voice. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 287 925‐01 Downey – Workshop No. 1 Summary Page 2 of 6 WORKSHOP PROCESS Participants were divided into three (3) working groups for the workshop process. Each member of the group sat at a table of no more than three (3) participants with materials that included a flip chart, and markers to record their discussions. Groups were requested to select a recorder/presenter. During the course of the workshop, three topics were presented for individual consideration and group discussion. Below is a list of the topics discussed. Topic I: What are the most important community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work, and play? Topic II: What current issues or trends may be negatively impacting those important community characteristics and should be considered in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan? Topic III: What role can parks and recreation play in addressing those issues and support the community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work and play?? Initially, participants were asked to individually respond on forms that were distributed before the presentation of each topic. They were encouraged to list as many responses that came to mind. A group discussion then began with individual members of each group sharing their responses with the entire group. Fifteen minutes was allotted for the groups to gain consensus on their top three answers on the particular topic. Following each topic discussion, the group’s presenter reported their findings to all of the workshop participants. WORKSHOP SUMMARY After the presentations were given, the consultant team identified the top three (3) answers of all groups for each of the topics presented. They are listed below: TOPIC 1 What are the most important community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work, and play?  Safety  Youth Sports / Programs  Close‐Knit Community / Small Town Feel TOPIC 2 What are the issues or trends that may be negatively impacting those important community characteristics and should be considered in the Park and Recreation Master Plan?  Crime / Safety of Parks  Lack of Green Space / Residential Density  Facility Maintenance / Upgrades DR A F T PC Agenda Page 288 925‐01 Downey – Workshop No. 1 Summary Page 3 of 6 TOPIC 3 What role can parks and recreation play in addressing those issues and support the community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work and play?  New Programs / Increase Activities  Improve / Maintain Facilities  Value of Recreation / Master Plan CONCLUSION Upon presentation of the top three responses for each topic and the collection of all individual topic response forms, the workshop participants were thanked for their involvement and invited to attend the next workshop scheduled for this project. The second Community Workshop is scheduled for Wednesday, January 21, 2015 to be held at the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center, located at 7810 Quill Drive from 6:30 PM to 9:00 PM. The workshop adjourned. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 289 925‐01 Downey – Workshop No. 1 Summary Page 4 of 6 The following charts represent the exact wording provided by each group on large format paper. They are aggregated here and color‐coded to show the workshop consensus responses. TOPIC #1 What are the most important community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work, and play? Community Characteristics Safety Youth Sports / Programs Close‐Knit Community / Small Town Feel Other Group Responses:  Strong traditions  Centrality  Community Participation GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Safe Place to Live Strong traditions Centrality Extensive Recreational Programs / Youth Sports Safety Community Participation Close‐Knit Community/ Sense of Community Big Town –Small Town Feel/ Architecture Youth Programs DR A F T PC Agenda Page 290 925‐01 Downey – Workshop No. 1 Summary Page 5 of 6 TOPIC #2 What current issues or trends may be negatively impacting those important community characteristics and should be considered in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan? Issues or Trends Crime / Safety of Parks Lack of Green Space / Residential Density Facility Maintenance / Upgrades Other Group Responses:  Loss of School Programs  Jobs – High Paying (needed)  Social Media GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Crime / Safety of Parks Newcomers ‐ (not) identifying (with) local community pride / tradition (or) ‐ Bringing with them negative social / cultural norms Facility Maintenance / Upgrades Lack of Green Space Residential / Community Density Loss of School Programs Jobs –High Paying Social Media DR A F T PC Agenda Page 291 925‐01 Downey – Workshop No. 1 Summary Page 6 of 6 TOPIC #3 What role can parks and recreation play in addressing those issues and support the community characteristics that make the City of Downey a great place to live, work and play? Parks and Recreation Role New Programs / Increase Activities Improve / Maintain Facilities Value of Recreation / Master Plan Other Group Responses:  Maximize use of existing facilities  Keep parks safe  Accessibility – Sidewalks / Streets GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Create new programs / diverse programs Increase activities/ physical facilities i.e. Skateparks, cultural experiences, art/performance ‐ contributes to culture awareness Improve facilities / maintain Maintain facilities and fields Social PR campaign i.e. Value of Recreation Maximize use of existing facilities Keep parks safe Accessibility –Sidewalks / Streets Ongoing master planned DR A F T PC Agenda Page 292 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 SPORTS GROUPS AND ORGANIZATIONS SUMMARY REPORT January 21, 2015 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of the second of three (3) workshops conducted as a part of the public outreach effort to assist in the preparation of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan. The workshop was held Wednesday, January 21st from 6:30 PM to 9:00 PM at the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center, located at 7810 Quill Drive in Downey. The Consultant Team worked with City Staff to develop and coordinate the workshop. Forty‐Three (43) residents attended the workshop. Arlene Salazar, Director of Parks and Recreation, welcomed participants and introduced the Project Team. Robert Mueting, RJM Design Group, reviewed the overall process for the development and creation of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan. Bob also presented the workshop purpose and proceeded to facilitate the process. WORKSHOP GOALS The goals of the workshop were presented before the launch of the workshop. The goals were as follows: 1. Provide an overview of the process. 2. Identify and discuss the best and worst sport facilities in the City of Downey. 3. Identify sports facility needs. 4. Determine opportunities that may help to address the identified sport facility needs. 5. Begin to determine priorities for programs, services, and facilities. 6. Hear and listen to the community’s voice. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 293 WORKSHOP PROCESS Participants were divided into five (5) working groups for the workshop process. Each member of the group sat at a table of no more than nine (9) participants with materials that included a flip chart, and markers to record their discussions. Groups were requested to select a recorder/presenter. During the course of the workshop, 5 topics were presented for individual consideration and group discussion. Below is a list of the topics discussed. Topic 1: What are the best sports facilities in the City of Downey? Why? Topic 2: What are the worst sports facilities in the City of Downey? Why? Topic 3: What are the top sports facility needs in the City of Downey? Topic 4: What opportunities can you think of for meeting current and future sport facility needs in the City of Downey? Topic 5: What are the most important improvements you would make in Downey to parks, recreation programs, trails, and/or open space? Initially, participants were asked to individually respond on forms that were distributed before the presentation of each topic. They were encouraged to list as many responses that came to mind. A group discussion then began with individual members of each group sharing their responses with the entire group. Fifteen minutes was allotted for the groups to gain consensus on their top responses on the particular topic. Following each topic discussion, the group’s presenter reported their findings to all of the workshop participants. WORKSHOP SUMMARY After the presentations were given, the consultant team identified the top answers of all groups for each of the topics presented. They are listed below: TOPIC 1 What are the best sports facilities in the City of Downey? Why?  Furman Park – popular, walking trails, varied programming, tennis, baseball  Downey & Warren High Schools – best facilities, pool, sports fields, weight room, jogging trail  Apollo – variety of sports programming TOPIC 2 What are the worst sports facilities in the City of Downey? Why?  Rio San Gabriel – uneven fields, maintenance/irrigation, lighting, parking, basketball  Discovery – design, soccer field size/drainage, infrastructure, storage, no meeting rooms  Golden – safety/security, maintenance, poor fields DR A F T PC Agenda Page 294 TOPIC 3 What are the top sports facility needs in the City of Downey?  Upgrade / Maintain Facilities  Soccer  Multi‐Function Sports Complex  Lighting  “Club” Sports TOPIC 4 What opportunities can you think of for meeting current and future sport facility needs in the City of Downey?  Vacant – Riverbed, City‐Owned Land, Rockwell, County, Florence, Studebaker, Lakewood, Gallatin, Old Rancho Amigos  Repurposing / Reconfiguration of Land  Joint Use Agreement TOPIC 5 What are the most important improvements you would make in Downey to parks, recreation programs, trails, and/or open space?  Lighting  Safety  Walking Trails  Staff  Maintenance CONCLUSION Upon presentation of the top consensus items for each topic and the collection of all individual topic response forms, the workshop participants were thanked for their involvement and invited to attend the next workshop scheduled for this project. The third and final Workshop will be held on Saturday, February 28, 2015, from 9:30 AM to 12:00 PM at Golden Park, located at 8840 Golden Avenue. The workshop adjourned. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 295 The following charts represent the exact wording provided by each group on large format paper. They are aggregated here and color‐coded to show the workshop consensus responses. TOPIC #1 What are the best sports facilities in the City of Downey? Why? Other Group Responses:  YMCA  Independence Park  Discovery Baseball  None – By Permit Only GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 Furman Park YMCA Downey & Warren Furman–Walking Trails Apollo Downey H.S. High Schools Furman Apollo–Variety Sports / Facilities Independence Independence Park Furman YMCA None –By Permit Only Discovery TBD Discovery Baseball Furman Best Sports Facilities Furman Park Downey & Warren High Schools Apollo DR A F T PC Agenda Page 296 TOPIC #2 What are the worst sports facilities in the City of Downey? Why? Other Group Responses:  Dennis the Menace  Independence  Apollo Park  Wilderness  General Irrigation – All Parks  Treasure Island  All of Them – Permit Use GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 Dennis the Menace Rio San Gabriel Rio San Gabriel Discovery– Upkeep / Planning Rio San Gabriel Rio San Golden Discovery Golden Park– Environment Independence Discovery Apollo Apollo Park Rio San Gabriel – Upkeep / Dog Park Wilderness Wilderness General Irrigation – All Parks Treasure IslandAll of Them – Permit Use Worst Sports Facilities Rio San Gabriel Discovery Golden DR A F T PC Agenda Page 297 TOPIC #3 What are the top sports facility needs in the City of Downey? Other Group Responses:  Specialized Facilities (Maintenance Building)  Basketball Courts  Re‐Purpose  Better Parks Programming  Indoor Facility / More Park Space (Long Term)  Outdoor Obstacle Course  Dedicated Sport to Each Park  Parking  Variety of Surfaces GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 Maintenance of Fields Synthetic Turf Soccer Club–Comprehensive Multi‐Function Sports Complex Maint. of Existing Facilities (Short Term) All Purpose (w/Lights) Dedicated Soccer Complex – Year Round Specialized Facilities (Maintenance Building) Improve Existing Indoor/Outdoor Soccer Facilities Upgrade Facilities– i.e. Furman Trails, Etc. (Intermediate) Lighting Basketball Courts Re‐Purpose Better Parks Programming Indoor Facility / More Park Space (Long Term) Upgraded Facilities Multi‐Use Facility Outdoor Obstacle Course “Club” Sports Basic Amenities – Irrigation Dedicated Sport to Each Park Lighting, and Parking Lights! Parking Variety of Surfaces Sports Facility Needs Upgrade / Maintain Facilities Soccer Multi‐Function Sports Complex Lighting “Club” Sports DR A F T PC Agenda Page 298 TOPIC #4 What opportunities can you think of for meeting current and future sport facility needs in the City of Downey? (I.e. vacant land, joint use agreement, existing park renovation and/or reconfiguration)? Other Group Responses:  Better Community Awareness  Seeking Partnerships (Nat. Assc., Soccer Clubs)  Tournaments ‐ $$  Bonds  Think Smaller GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 Repurposing Parks – Large Areas Vacant Land – Riverbed, City‐ Owned Land, Rockwell, County Old Rancho Amigos RepurposingOld Land Better Community Awareness Vacant – All American, Rancho Joint‐Use SPPP (Schools, Private, Public Partnerships) Re‐Purposing Parks and Schools Seeking Partnerships (Nat. Assc., Soccer Clubs) Joint Use Agreement/Joint Powers Cities/School Dist/ Public Agencies Flor/Studebaker, Lakewood / Gallatin Reconfiguration of Existing Layouts Florence & Studebaker (Sam’s Lot) Joint Use Agreements (Schools / Pro‐ Teams) Rancho Los Amigos World of Décor/ Sams/Florence/ Studebaker Tournaments ‐ $$ Bonds Think Smaller Opportunities Vacant – Riverbed, City‐Owned Land, Rockwell, County, Florence, Studebaker, Lakewood, Gallatin, Old Rancho Amigos Repurposing / Reconfiguration of Land Joint Use Agreement DR A F T PC Agenda Page 299 TOPIC #5 Think about Downey’s parks, recreation, and open space network in total. What are the most important improvements you would make in Downey to parks, recreation programs, trails, and/or open space? Other Group Responses:  Parking  Better Understanding of Community  Bike Lanes  Improvements (i.e. turf, irrigation)  Community Beautification Projects  Outdoor Multi‐Purpose Ent. Area  Astro Turf  Drought Resistant Landscape  Mindset Change  Cooperation  Playgrounds w/ Rubberized Surface GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 Parking – Multi‐purpose pkg. Better understanding of Community (Analytics, Demographics, Sampling Strategies) Bike Lanes Walking Trails at all Parks Lighting/ Fulltime Staff – Safety Maintenance/ Improvements (i.e. turf!) Irrigation, Community Beautification Projects ‐Community Gardens ‐Color Projects Outdoor / Multi‐ Purpose Ent. Area Astro Turf / Drought Resist, Landscape Safety – Bathrooms Maintenance, Lighting Mindset Change Cooperation Safety / Educated, Focused, Passionate Staff Walking Trails/ Workout Stations @ all Parks Lighting Playgrounds w/ Rubberized Surface Improvements Lighting Safety Walking Trails Staff Maintenance DR A F T PC Agenda Page 300 925‐01 City of Downey – Workshop No. 3 Summary Report CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #3 SUMMARY REPORT February 28, 2015 THE PROCESS Residents of the City of Downey, including participants from previous workshops, were invited to an overview of the Master Plan process, and summary of the recreation program and facility needs in the City. Twenty‐Eight (28) attendees participated in the morning’s workshop discussions in one of three separate groups. An overview of the Master Plan process and a summary of community outreach findings were presented, followed by a brief outline of the morning’s workshop agenda. WORKSHOP GOALS Attendees were presented with a list of all the recreation facility and program needs identified through interviews, community workshops, sports organization questionnaire, and the community‐ wide phone survey. Participants individually prioritized the facility needs. Each individual then identified their top 10 priorities on large format paper utilizing color dots. Then, each group discussed individual responses until a group consensus on the top priorities was reached and recorded on large format paper. The group’s conclusions were presented to all workshop participants and posted on the wall. Then a list of all recreation program needs identified throughout the process was presented, reviewed and discussed in the same manner. The results of the workshop were recorded in order to be included in the Master Plan documentation. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 301 925‐01 City of Downey – Workshop No. 3 Summary Report OVERVIEW OF RESULTS Following are the two topics discussed and the associated consensus results. 1. What are the Top Recreation Facilities Needed in the City of Downey?  Soccer  Lighting  Maintenance 2. What are the Top Recreation Programs Needed in the City of Downey?  Soccer  Club Sports  Fitness  Youth / Teen Programs DR A F T PC Agenda Page 302 925‐01 City of Downey – Workshop No. 3 Summary Report The following charts represent the exact wording provided by each group on large format paper. They are aggregated here and color‐coded to show the workshop consensus responses. TOPIC #1 What are the Top Recreation Facilities Needed in the City of Downey? Other Group Responses:  Children’s Restrooms  Trails  Community Gardens  Multi‐Use Sports Complex  Skate Spot GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Soccer Complex Lighting Sports Field Lighting / Maintenance Soccer Grass Fields Soccer Indoor Bathrooms / Children Lighting Soccer Complex Soccer Community Gardens Lighting General Park Trails Trails – Walking / Jogging Multi‐Use Sports Complex Skate Spot at Each Park TOP RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS Soccer Lighting Maintenance DR A F T PC Agenda Page 303 925‐01 City of Downey – Workshop No. 3 Summary Report TOPIC #2 What are the Top Recreation Programs Needed in the City of Downey? TOP RECREATION PROGRAM NEEDS Soccer Club Sports Fitness Youth / Teen Programs Other Group Responses:  Gardening Programs  Cultural Programming  Football  Lego Program  Cooking GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 Soccer Adult Soccer Adult Club Sports Club Sports Soccer Youth Youth / Teen Programs Fitness Fitness Soccer Gardening Programs Youth Program Fitness Cultural Programming Football Lego Program Cooking DR A F T PC Agenda Page 304 CITY OF DOWNEY FACILITY DEMAND ANALYSIS This section analyzes the demand for recreation and park facilities and programs by the residents of Downey. A key element in any planning strategy is an understanding of the nature of demand for parks and recreation facilities. Without this understanding, policy can only be based on general standards of supply and demand, such as population ratios (acres per thousand population) or service area (distance to park facility). Such standards are useful guides but the demand analysis ensures that the needs assessment reflects the character of Downey. The citywide telephone survey provides the basis for determining how the residents of Downey participate in recreation activities. The nature of growth and population change establishes trends in demand for recreation and leisure services. The survey, workshops and interviews provide the qualitative aspect of demand - the perceptions of the residents toward recreation and the prioritization of need for facilities and programs. Sports Organization Questionnaire To supplement the information regarding participation in organized sports which was obtained from the telephone survey, a questionnaire was designed and distributed to the organized sports organizations that use the City facilities. This questionnaire obtained information regarding the number of players and teams in the league or sports organization, age ranges of the players, what seasons they play, if they travel outside Downey to play, if they participate in tournaments, ratings of field/facility maintenance and scheduling, projections of growth and facilities they have the greatest need for both now and in the future. The questionnaire was distributed by the City staff and thirteen sports organizations responded. Some of the factual information is summarized in Exhibit 1. The information regarding the number of players, size of teams, seasonality and turnover of facilities for both games and practice are used to better define peak day demand and convert that to the number of facilities required to meet the needs of this segment of the recreation market. Information regarding which of the facilities are currently being used by the sports groups provides input to the inventory of sports facilities regarding usage for adult sports, youth sports and practices. Another question addresses the percentage of the players in each organization that live within the City of Downey. This varies widely by type of sport and in Downey reflects the large number of participants in these sports who reside outside of Downey. The results are tabulated below: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 305 Organization Percent of Players from Downey Northwest Downey Little League 95+ West Downey Little League 90 Downey Junior Athletic Association (DJAA) - Baseball 90 Downey Girls Ponytail Athletic Association 65 Nemesis Elite 50-60 Major League Softball, Inc. 35 Downey AYSO 83 Downey FC 69 Downey Mustangs Youth Football 71 Downey Pop Warner Football, Inc. 85 Downey Junior Athletic Association (DJAA) - Basketball 90 Basketball Academy – D-League Only 85 Basketball Academy – Academy Training Program 85 The impact of non-resident use of City facilities is one of the considerations in assessing facility needs. Balancing this is the fact that teams in five of these organizations also use facilities in surrounding cities. Additional, more qualitative, information regarding respondents rating and comments on facility maintenance and scheduling, assessment of usage fees and the perceived needs for additional facilities both currently and in the future as well as desired enhancements in future facilities are summarized in Exhibit 2. These responses will be used by City staff and the Consultant team to better understand the usage patterns and needs of the active sports groups. Demand Analysis The participation rates in each of the active recreation activities analyzed (based on the telephone survey) provide a basis for calculating demand for active recreation facilities in relationship to the population served. These participation rates are shown in the first column of Exhibit 3 and are taken directly from the participation rates as reported in the survey. In order to convert these demand estimates into facility requirements, it is necessary to make some assumptions regarding design standards for the peak level of demand. Calculation of peak day demand involves multiplying the population estimates (current population and population projected to 2035) by the participation rate in each activity. These estimates of gross demand are then adjusted to allocate part of the demand to private recreation facilities and part to government or public facilities, if applicable, using California Department of Parks and Recreation data regarding patterns of facility usage. Similarly, a locational adjustment is made to account for those activities which participants would normally engage in at locations outside of Downey. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 306 Peak day demand is determined on the basis of the seasonality of participation in each of the various activities and, within peak seasons, the peak days of usage. The calculations of peak day demand included in Exhibit 3 (excluding those for fields or courts used for organized games) are designed to accommodate all but three to eight days per year of peak activity for most of the activities analyzed. The actual facility requirement, however, is less than the aggregate of peak day demand to allow for daily turnover in the use of recreation facilities. Peak day demand was modified as shown in Exhibit 3 by the anticipated turnover and capacity for each type of facility. These estimates of daily turnover and capacity on peak day usage periods are derived from studies conducted by the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, U.S. Department of the Interior regarding optimum recreation carrying capacity as well as from sports group surveys, discussions with City staff and other park studies in which the Consultants have been involved. For sports leagues operating within the City of Downey, allowance is made to calculate demand from the entire league, regardless of where the players are living. The calculations in Exhibit 3 are based on the current (2015) population level in the City of Downey of 113,543. Included in the Exhibit is an estimate of the number or size of facilities required to accommodate peak day demand in the context of the peak day design standards discussed above. Similar calculations were carried out to determine the demand levels in 2035, when the City reaches the projected population of 118,994. These calculations are shown in Exhibit 4. Adjustments were made to some of the participation rates for the 2035 projection based on the trends in the demographic profile of the City. It is anticipated that there will be a somewhat smaller percentage of youth under 14 years, a larger percentage of retirees and a more diverse ethnic mix. The adjustments are based on the same data base which was used to estimate the current year participation rates – the cross-tabulations of telephone survey data regarding participation rates and demographic measures. The relationship of the current need for facilities in Downey to the current population level is the basis for the “facility need ratio” or the measure of the level of population in Downey that creates the demand for one facility or one unit of measure such as miles or acres. This ratio for each of the types of facilities analyzed is also presented in Exhibits 3 and 4 and is calculated by dividing the total population by the number of facilities demanded. This will be the basis for the needs analysis presented in the following section. Comparisons of Downey’s current “facility-need-ratios” to those found in selected other cities in California are presented in Exhibit 5 in order to add perspective to the analysis. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 307 FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS Methodology The level of population in Downey that creates the demand for facilities is derived from the telephone survey data as described in the previous section. This “facility need ratio” is shown again in Exhibit 6. The current facility needs are determined by multiplying the current population by the “facility needs ratio.” These needs, in terms of the number or size of facilities demanded, are then compared with the total of existing City and school district facilities to determine whether the existing inventory of facilities is adequate in terms of demand conditions. As an example of the analytical process, the needs ratio for organized youth softball fields for games in Downey is one field for every 18,350 residents (as shown in Exhibit 6). Based on the 2015 population of Downey, the required number of fields is an estimated 6.2. The existing inventory of fields is 6.0 leaving a deficit of 0.2 fields, if the inventory of organized youth softball fields for games in Downey were to match the peak day requirement as defined. Facility Requirements The needs analysis presented in Exhibit 6 indicates existing deficits in several of the types of facilities that were analyzed. The facilities showing deficits of 0.5 facility or greater are adult softball game fields (1.2 fields), tot lots/playgrounds (31.0 facilities), walking/jogging paths (35.5 miles), and bicycling paths (34.2 miles). The need for facilities was projected to 2035 and these projections together with the current supply of facilities (no adjustments were made for any planned facilities) are presented in Exhibit 7. The deficits in the facilities in the projection year include youth softball game fields (0.5 field), adult softball game fields (1.7 fields), youth soccer game fields (0.8 fields), tot lots/playgrounds (30.7 facilities), walking/jogging paths (42.0 miles), and bicycling paths (40.1 miles). Exhibit 8 summarizes the change in demand between 2015 and 2035 or the demand resulting solely from the growth expected to occur during this period. This Exhibit describes the number or size of facilities by type that will be required just to accommodate the future growth in the City of Downey. The existing 2015 surplus or deficit in facilities is combined with the growth projections in Exhibit 9 to provide the cumulative estimate of the additional number or size of facilities by type that will be required in the City of Downey between 2015 and 2035. The analysis does not address the need for practice sports fields or basketball courts. To provide some insight into these needs, the Consultant analyzed the ratio of demand for practice fields to game fields in studies performed in other cities. Averages were calculated after eliminating extreme cases. Only youth game field demand was used in DR A F T PC Agenda Page 308 the ratios, as in most cases adult sports do not hold practices except at game time. The demand in Downey for additional practice facilities for each sport was then calculated and the results are shown below. It is assumed in the analysis that all game fields/courts are also used as practice fields/courts, so that the needs shown represent only additional fields/courts required for practices. Ratio of Demand for Game Facility Add’l Practice Sport Practice/Game Facilities Demand in Downey Facilities Needed 2014 Softball 2.7 6.2 10.5 Baseball 2.0 14.0 14.0 Soccer 1.8 20.1 16.0 Basketball 1.5 1.9 1.0 2035 Softball 2.7 6.5 11.1 Baseball 2.0 14.6 14.6 Soccer 1.8 21.8 17.4 Basketball 1.5 2.3 1.2 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 309 Ex h i b i t 1 TA B U L A T I O N O F I N F O R M A T I O N F R O M D O W N E Y S P O R T S O R G A N I Z A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E Sp o r t / T e a m ( % o f P a r t i c i p a n t s f r o m D o w n e y ) # P l a y e r s S e a s o n A g e s G a m e F i e l d s / C o u r t s U s e d P r a c t i c e F i e l d s / C o u r t s U s e d Yo u t h B a s e b a l l No r t h w e s t D o w n e y L i t t l e L e a g u e ( 9 5 % + ) 47 5 M a r c h - J u l y 4 - 1 8 Fu r m a n P a r k - 4 F i e l d s Fu r m a n P a r k - 4 F i e l d s J u n i o r 50 13 - 1 4 Ri o H o n d o E l e m e n t a r y - 2 f i e l d s Ri o H o n d o E l e m e n t a r y - 2 f i e l d s M a j o r s 60 10 - 1 2 Do t y M i d d l e S c h o o l - 2 f i e l d s M i n o r 32 5 4- 1 0 Di s c o v e r y P a r k - 1 f i e l d C h a l l e n g e r ( s p e c i a l n e e d s ) 40 4- 1 8 Gr i f f i t h s M i d d l e S c h o o l - 1 - 2 f i e l d s We s t D o w n e y L i t t l e L e a g u e ( 9 0 % ) 32 4 M a r c h - J u n e 4 - 1 4 S t a u f f e r M i d d l e S c h o o l - 4 f i e l d s S t a u f f e r M i d d l e S c h o o l - 4 f i e l d s J u n i o r D i v i s i o n 3 6 1 3 - 1 4 M a j o r s 4 8 1 1 - 1 2 M i n o r A 4 8 1 0 - 9 M i n o r B 4 8 8 - 7 M i n o r C 7 2 6 - 5 T b a l l 7 2 4 DJ A A - B a s e b a l l ( 9 0 % ) 38 0 M a r c h - J u n e 4 - 1 4 D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 2 f i e l d s A p o l l o P a r k - 1 f i e l d P e a n u t 5 0 4 - 5 A p o l l o P a r k - 3 f i e l d s C o l u m b u s P a r k - 2 f i e l d s P e e w e e 5 0 6 - 7 D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 1 f i e l d T . I . 5 0 7 - 8 M i t e y M i t e 5 0 8 - 9 M u s t a n g 5 0 9 - 1 0 P i o n e e r 4 5 1 0 - 1 1 M i d g e t 4 5 1 1 - 1 4 F r o s h S o p h 4 0 1 2 - 1 4 Yo u t h S o f t b a l l Do w n e y G i r l s P o n y t a i l A t h l e t i c A s s o c . ( 6 5 % ) 26 0 A u g . - D e c . 5 - 1 9 I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k - 4 f i e l d s I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k - 4 f i e l d s 6 U 2 0 F a l l S e a s o n 5 - 6 P l u s a l l G r a s s A r e a 8 U 3 9 7 - 8 1 0 U 5 9 J a n u a r y - J u l y 9 - 1 0 1 2 U 6 3 S p r i n g S e a s o n 1 1 - 1 2 1 4 - U 5 2 4 0 0 p l a y e r s 1 3 - 1 4 H i g h S c h o o l 1 5 1 4 - 1 9 Ne m e s i s E l i t e ( 5 0 - 6 0 % ) 12 0 Y e a r A r o u n d 1 1 - 1 8 D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 2 f i e l d s D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 2 f i e l d s 1 2 U 3 0 1 1 - 1 2 I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k - 2 f i e l d s 1 4 U 3 0 1 3 - 1 4 A l s o p l a y a t m o s t m a j o r s o f t b a l l 1 6 U 3 0 1 5 - 1 6 c o m p l e x e s i n S o . C a l i f . I n t y p i c a l y e a r . 1 8 U 3 0 1 7 - 1 8 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 310 Pa g e 2 Ex h i b i t 1 Ta b u l a t i o n o f I n f o r m a t i o n f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Sp o r t / T e a m ( % o f P a r t i c i p a n t s f r o m D o w n e y ) # P l a y e r s S e a s o n A g e s Ga m e F i e l d s / C o u r t s U s e d Pr a c t i c e F i e l d s / C o u r t s U s e d Ad u l t S o f t b a l l Ma j o r L e a g u e S o f t b a l l , I n c . ( 3 5 % ) 28 5 0 * Y e a r A r o u n d 1 8 a n d O v e r A p o l l o P a r k - 1 f i e l d N . A . M e n ' s 1 , 5 0 0 R i o S a n G a b r i e l P a r k - 2 f i e l d s C o e d 1 , 3 5 0 C o l u m b u s H i g h S c h o o l - 1 f i e l d Yo u t h S o c c e r Do w n e y A Y S O ( 8 3 % ) 1, 7 0 0 S e p t . - J u n e 4 - 1 5 G r i f f i t h M i d d l e S c h o o l - 1 3 f i e l d s A p o l l o P a r k - O p e n S p a c e u 5 & u 6 n . a . 4 - 5 D o t y M i d d l e S c h o o l - 4 f i e l d s R i o S a n G a b r i e l P a r k - O p e n S p a c e u 8 6- 7 S u s s m a n M i d d l e S c h o o l - 3 f i e l d s G r i f f i t h M i d d l e S c h o o l - 8 f i e l d s u 1 0 8- 9 D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 2 f i e l d s D o d y M i d d l e S c h o o l - 4 f i e l d s u 1 2 10 - 1 1 F u r m a n P a r k - O p e n S p a c e u 1 4 12 - 1 3 D o w n e y A d u l t S c h o o l - 3 f i e l d s u 1 6 & u 1 9 14 - 1 5 ( w h e n a v a i l a b l e ) Do w n e y F C ( 6 9 % ) 15 0 S e p t . - D e c . 9 - 1 9 A p o l l o P a r k - 1 f i e l d A p o l l o P a r k - 1 f i e l d ( J u n e - D e c . ) G i r l s U 9 1 5 9 G i r l s U 1 1 1 5 1 1 J u l y - A u g . : D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 1 f i e l d G i r l s U 1 3 1 5 1 3 D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x - 1 f i e l d ( J a n . - J u n e ) G i r l s U 1 6 1 5 1 6 G i r l s U 1 9 1 5 1 7 - 1 9 J a n . - J u n e : B o y s U 1 2 1 5 1 2 D o w n e y H i g h S c h o o l - 1 f i e l d B o y s U 1 4 3 0 1 4 B o y s U 1 5 1 5 1 5 Bo y s U 1 7 1 5 1 6 - 1 7 Do w n e y U n i t e d F C ( 2 0 % ) 42 8 - 1 3 C a l S o u t h R e g i o n 1 - 7 B e l l G a r d e n s F o r d P a r k U 9 1 2 8 - 9 B a k e r s f i e l d t o S a n D i e g o U 1 0 1 2 9 - 1 0 U 1 3 1 8 1 2 - 1 3 Yo u t h T a c k l e F o o t b a l l Do w n e y M u s t a n g s Y o u t h F o o t b a l l ( 7 1 % ) 12 9 J u l y - D e c . 5 - 1 5 W a r r e n H i g h S c h o o l - 1 f i e l d G o l d e n P a r k - 5 f i e l d s T i n y M i t e 2 1 5 - 6 M i g h t y M i t e 2 4 7 - 9 J r . P e e W e e 2 6 1 0 - 1 2 P e e w e e 2 4 1 0 - 1 3 M i d g e t 2 1 1 2 - 1 5 C h e e r l e a d e r s 1 3 5 - 1 2 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 311 Pa g e 3 Ex h i b i t 1 Ta b u l a t i o n o f I n f o r m a t i o n f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Sp o r t / T e a m ( % o f P a r t i c i p a n t s f r o m D o w n e y ) # P l a y e r s S e a s o n A g e s G a m e F i e l d s / C o u r t s U s e d P r a c t i c e F i e l d s / C o u r t s U s e d Do w n e y P o p W a r n e r F o o t b a l l , I n c . ( 8 5 % ) 26 5 A u g u s t - D e c . 5 - 1 4 D o w n e y H i g h S c h o o l - 1 f i e l d R i o S a n G a b r i e l P a r k - E n t i r e P a r k " T h e R a z o r b a c k s " Wa r r e n H i g h S c h o o l - 1 f i e l d T M 3 0 7 - 8 M M 3 0 7 - 9 J P W 3 0 8 - 1 0 P W 3 0 9 - 1 1 J M 3 0 1 0 - 1 2 M 3 0 1 1 - 1 4 Yo u t h B a s k e t b a l l DJ A A - B a s k e t b a l l ( 9 0 % ) 58 0 D e c . - M a r c h 4 - 1 4 M c C a u g h a n G y m - 2 c o u r t s A p o l l o P a r k - 2 c o u r t s P e a n u t 7 0 4 - 5 G o l d e n P a r k - 1 c o u r t P e e w e e 6 0 6 - 7 F u r m a n P a r k - 1 c o u r t T . I . 6 0 7 - 8 ( o u t d o o r c o u r t s ) M i t e y M i t e 6 0 8 - 9 M u s t a n g 7 0 9 - 1 0 P i o n e e r 7 0 1 0 - 1 1 M i d g e t 7 0 1 1 - 1 4 F r o s h S o p h 1 2 0 1 2 - 1 4 Ba s k e t b a l l A c a d e m y ( 8 5 % ) 15 0 3 S e a s o n s / Y r . 4 - 1 8 A p o l l o P a r k - M c C a u g h a n G y m - 1 c o u r t A p o l l o P a r k - M c C a u g h a n G y m D - L e a g u e O n l y Fa l l , W i n t e r , Fu l l G y m / b o t h s i d e s E l i t e ( B e g i n n e r s ) D L e a g u e 4 0 S p r i n g 9 - 1 1 E l i t e ( I n t e r m e d i a t e ) D - L e a g u e 4 0 8 w e e k 1 2 - 1 4 E l i t e ( A d v a n c e / H S ) D - L e a g u e 4 0 s e a s o n s 1 4 - 1 8 P r e m i e r L e a g u e ( E l i t e P l a y e r s ) 3 0 1 2 - 4 Ba s k e t b a l l A c a d e m y ( 8 5 % ) 18 5 3 S e a s o n s / Y r . 4 - 1 8 A p o l l o P a r k - M c C a u g h a n G y m - 1 c o u r t A p o l l o P a r k - M c C a u g h a n G y m A c a d e m y T r a i n i n g P r o g r a m Fa l l , W i n t e r , P r e m i e r L e a g u e 6 0 S p r i n g 1 2 - 4 B e g i n n e r / I n t e r m e d i a t e 9 0 1 2 w e e k 5 - 1 4 A d v a n c e 3 0 s e a s o n s 9 - 1 8 E L I T E 5 1 4 - 1 8 So u r c e s : D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n S u r v e y , N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 4 - J a n u a r y 2 0 1 5 . C o m p i l e d b y C o m a n C o n s u l t i n g , I n c . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 312 Ex h i b i t 2 SU M M A R Y O F C O M M E N T S F R O M D O W N E Y S P O R T S O R G A N I Z A T I O N Q U E S T I O N N A I R E T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h B a s e b a l l No r t h w e s t D o w n e y L i t t l e Le a g u e Fa i r - F u r m a n P a r k - gr a s s c u t s h o r t e r ; b e t t e r ir r i g a t i o n ; u n e v e n g r o u n d in a r e a s P o o r - Ri o H o n d o - p o o r wa t e r i n g ; n o ma i n t e n a n c e s p e c i f i c t o ba s e b a l l f i e l d s . Wa t e r r e g u l a r l y ; c u t gr a s s s h o r t e r ; f i x ir r i g a t i o n s y s t e m ; l e v e l pl a y i n g f i e l d i n o u t f i e l d . Ab o u t R i g h t S u b m i t u s a g e a p p l i c a t i o n t w i c e pe r y e a r t o S o n y a M e a c h a m ; pr o c e d u r e s e e m s s a t i s f a c t o r y a s we h a v e n o t e x p e r i e n c e d a n y di f f i c u l t i e s . Cu r r e n t N e e d : a l l f i e l d s a t F u r m a n Pa r k a n d R i o H o n d o E l e m e n t a r y . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : F u r m a n P a r k - li g h t s ; p e r m a n e n t c o v e r e d sp e c t a t o r / b l e a c h e r s e a t i n g ; u p d a t e d ba c k s t o p s f o r b o t h f i e l d s ; u p g r a d i n g of s e c o n d s m a l l f i e l d t o m a t c h f i e l d ad j a c e n t t o b a s k e t b a l l c o u r t . Po s s i b l e n e e d f o r 1 - 2 f i e l d s fo r g a m e s d e p e n d i n g o n gr o w t h . We s t D o w n e y L i t t l e L e a g u e Ex c e l l e n t - S t a u f f e r Mi d d l e S c h o o l . Up d a t e d e q u i p m e n t f o r al l t y p e s o f s p o r t s . Do n ' t P a y Fe e s Fi e l d P e r m i t i s r e q u e s t e d f r o m sc h o o l P r i n c I p a l , M r s . M i r , p e r m i t is r e n e w e d e v e r y s e a s o n . Cu r r e n t N e e d : N / A Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : S t a u f f e r M i d d l e Sc h o o l - b l e a c h e r s , t e a m b e n c h e s , st o r a g e , b a c k s t o p s , f e n c i n g , m o r e pa r k i n g , l i g h t s . Fo r t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y t o in t r o d u c e m o r e p a r k s w i t h pl a y i n g f i e l d s f o r a l l t y p e s o f sp o r t s . DJ A A B a s e b a l l Ex c e l l e n t - D i s c o v e r y Sp o r t s C o m p l e x . Fa i r - A p o l l o P a r k & Co l u m b u s . Li g h t i n g a t A p o l l o n e e d s ma j o r i m p r o v e m e n t s . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m , K e v i n E l l i s - th e y d o a f i n e j o b . Cu r r e n t N e e d : We h a v e e n o u g h b a l l di a m o n d s , j u s t n e e d s o m e b e t t e r li g h t s a n d n e w l i g h t s t o b e i n s t a l l e d a t Ap o l l o P a r k . A m e n i t i e s De s i r e d : A p o l l o P a r k - b e t t e r l i g h t s fi e l d 1 a n d l i g h t s i n s t a l l e d o n f i e l d 2 an d 3 . Sh o u l d b e O K f i e l d w i s e . Yo u t h S o f t b a l l Ex c e l l e n t - I n d e p e n d e n c e Pa r k A t t h e c u r r e n t ti m e , w e a r e i n s t a l l i n g sp r i n k l e r s y s t e m s o n a l l 4 fi e l d s . Ab o u t R i g h t A l l c o o r d i n a t i o n a n d s c h e d u l i n g is d o n e b y t h e C i t y . S o n y a Me a c h a m - t h e y a r e s a t i s f a c t o r y . (S h e d o e s a g r e a t j o b ) . Cu r r e n t N e e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e Pa r k - a d d e d r e s t r o o m s f o r p a r k . No t k n o w n a t t h i s t i m e . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 313 Pa g e 2 Ex h i b i t 2 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h S o f t b a l l ( C o n t i n u e d ) Ne m e s i s E l i t e Go o d - D i s c o v e r y a n d In d e p e n d e n c e Re g u l a r s p r i n k l e r ma i n t e n a n c e , b o t h g r a s s an d i n f i e l d . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m - E x c e l l e n t - we l l o r g a n i z e d Cu r r e n t N e e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e P a r k an d D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : I n d e p e n d e n c e Pa r k - l i g h t i n g a n d s p r i n k l e r s . Di s c o v e r y - b u l l p e n s . Li k e t o h a v e v e r y n i c e f o u r fi e l d 2 0 0 f t f e n c e s o f t b a l l co m p l e x d e d i c a t e d t o g i r l s fa s t p i t c h s o f t b a l l . W i t h ad e q u a t e t r a i n i n g s p a c e a n d bu l l p e n s . N i c e d u g o u t s a n d Sn a c k S h a c k . L i t . Ad u l t S o f t b a l l Ma j o r L e a g u e S o f t b a l l , I n c . Fa i r - M u l t i - u s e f a c i l i t i e s , so c c e r a n d f o o t b a l l , ma k e t u r f m a i n t e n a n c e po o r . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e a c h a m a n d K e v i n E l l i s do a g r e a t j o b o f a d v o c a t i n g f o r th e C i t y ' s A d u l t S o f t b a l l P r o g r a m . We d o n ' t p r o j e c t a n y i n c r e a s e o r de c r e a s e i n e n r o l l m e n t u n l e s s mo r e f i e l d s p a c e i s m a d e av a i l a b l e . W e a r e c u r r e n t l y se l l i n g t h e a d u l t f i g u r e s o u t t o ca p a c i t y a n d e x p e c t t o c o n t i n u e do i n g s o . Cu r r e n t N e e d : I f y o u b u i l d i t t h e y w i l l co m e . I n a l l s e r i o u s n e s s , w e c o u l d in c r e a s e p a r t i c i p a t i o n b y 3 6 t e a m s i f ju s t o n e a d d i t i o n a l f i e l d c o u l d b e al l o c a t e d p e r d a y . Se e p r e v i o u s . Yo u t h F o o t b a l l Do w n e y M u s t a n g s Y o u t h Fo o t b a l l a n d C h e e r Fa i r - G o l d e n P a r k N e e d be t t e r l i g h t i n g , m o r e sp a c e a n d b e t t e r s a f e t y . Li g h t i n g . L e s s t r e e s a n d be t t e r s a f e t y . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a - S a t i s f a c t o r y C u r r e n t N e e d : F o o t b a l l f i e l d w i t h be t t e r l i g h t i n g a n d m o r e s p a c e . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : G o l d e n P a r k - Sn a c k b a r u s a g e , m o r e l i g h t s , m o r e sp a c e , l e s s t r e e s , s t o r a g e s p a c e a n d be t t e r s a f e t y . Mo r e p r a c t i c e s p a c e . Do w n e y P o p W a r n e r Fo o t b a l l , I n c . , Th e R a z o r b a c k s Po o r - s u r f a c e i s n o t st a b l e o r l e v e l Ir r i g a t i o n . B 4 6 So m e w h a t Lo w We b o o k d i r e c t l y w i t h t h e C i t y un d e r t h e i r c u r r e n t r e s e r v a t i o n pr o c e s s f o r N o n - P r o f i t C i t y Or g a n i z a t i o n s . W e n e e d m o r e sp a c e . Cu r r e n t N e e d : C u r r e n t l y u s i n g R i o Sa n G a b r i e l P a r k . N e e d a d d i t i o n a l pa r k s p a c e f o r p r a c t i c e t o g e t e a c h te a m t h e r e q u i r e d p r a c t i c e s p a c e t o en a b l e t o b e c o m p e t i t i v e . A m e n i t i e s De s i r e d : R i o S a n G a b r i e l P a r k - mo r e t r a s h r e c e p t a c l e s , b e n c h e s , ta b l e s , a n d g r a s s m a i n t e n a n c e . Se e C u r r e n t N e e d . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 314 Pa g e 3 Ex h i b i t 2 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h S o c c e r Do w n e y A Y S O Fa i r - G r a s s i s i n p o o r co n d i t i o n . L a c k o f pa r k i n g . Fi x s p r i n k l e r s , l e v e l g r a s s an d r e s e e d . Ab o u t R i g h t W e w o r k m a i n l y w i t h S o n y a a n d Ke v i n E l l i s . T h e y a r e h e l p f u l a n d tr y t o a c c o m m o d a t e o u r n e e d s as t h e y c o m e u p Cu r r e n t N e e d : D S C , A p o l l o a n d R i o Sa n G a b r i e l f o r c u r r e n t u s e . F u r m a n du r i n g t h e F a l l s e a s o n . AY S O w o u l d l i k e t o s e e t h e Ci t y p r o v i d e o n e s p o r t s co m p l e x t h a t c o u l d h o s t a l l ou r g a m e s a n d p r a c t i c e s . Th i s w o u l d t a k e 6 f u l l s i z e d fi e l d s , 4 s h o r t s i z e f i e l d s f o r 9 vs 9 g a m e s a n d 4 s h o r t s i d e d fi e l d s f o r 5 v s 5 g a m e s . Li g h t s a n d a p e r m a n e n t s n a c k sh a c k f a c i l i t y w o u l d b e re q u i r e d a s w e l l . Do w n e y F C Fa i r - A p o l l o - I r r i g a t i o n , gr a s s , l i g h t i n g n e e d s im p r o v e m e n t . Po o r - D i s c o v e r y - N o gr a s s , p o o r d e s i g n , p o o r dr a i n a g e , b u t l i g h t i n g i s ex c e l l e n t . Ne e d i r r i g a t i o n a n d li g h t i n g a t A p o l l o up g r a d e d . G r a s s a n d dr a i n a g e a t D i s c o v e r y ov e r h a u l e d . Ab o u t R i g h t S o n y a M e c h a m , K e v i n E l l i s - th e y d o a f i n e j o b . Ne e d b e t t e r m o n i t o r i n g o f u s e r gr o u p s . Cu r r e n t N e e d : W e a r e h a p p y w i t h ou r c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n . W e w o u l d l o v e to g r o w b i g g e r b u t h a v e a v e r b a l ag r e e m e m t t o k e e p n u m b e r s ma n a g e a b l e - w o r k s f o r u s . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : D i s c o v e r y - pa r k i n g / f e n c i n g / d r a i n a g e / g r a s s . Ap o l l o - i r r i g a t i o n / g r a s s / l i g h t i n g . Be t t e r , s a f e r f i e l d s . G r a s s an d L i g h t i n g . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 315 Pa g e 4 Ex h i b i t 2 Su m m a r y o f C o m m e n t s f r o m D o w n e y S p o r t s O r g a n i z a t i o n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e T y p e o f F a c i l i t y : Ra t i n g / C o m m e n t s Ra t i n g C o m m e n t s C o n c e r n i n g Cu r r e n t N e e d a n d Ad d i t i o n a l F a c i l i t i e s Sp o r t / T e a m r e : M a i n t e n a n c e of F e e s Fi e l d U s a g e Im p r o v e m e n t s / A m e n i t i e s D e s i r e d N e e d e d - N e x t 5 Y e a r s Yo u t h S o c c e r ( C o n t i n u e d ) Do w n e y U n i t e d F C We d o n ' t c u r r e n t l y u s e Do w n e y F a c i l i t i e s Ve r y H i g h C u r r e n t N e e d : S o c c e r f i e l d s w i t h li g h t s t o a l l o w f o r p r a c t i c e e a r l y af t e r n o o n a n d w e e k e n d g a m e s . In d o o r f a c i l i t i e s d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r t i m e la r g e e n o u g h t o h a v e a l l o u r p l a y e r s an d f a m i l i e s t o c e l e b r a t e t e a m ac h i e v e m e n t s a n d h o l i d a y p a r t y . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : W e d o n ' t cu r r e n t l y u s e D o w n e y f a c i l i t i e s , ho w e v e r , w e s e e a g r e a t n e e d o f a de d i c a t e d , s t a t e o f t h e a r t s p o r t s co m p l e x t o a c c o m m m o d a t e t h e g r e a t ne e d o f t h e c o m m u n i t y , e s p e c i a l l y f o r so c c e r p l a y i n g . As t e a m s g e t a d d e d t o t h e cl u b , m o r e t r a i n i n g f i e l d s . Ad u l t S o c c e r To q u e t e o S o c i a l F u t b o l Cl u b ( T S F C ) We d o n ' t c u r r e n t l y u s e Do w n e y F a c i l i t i e s Ve r y H i g h W e c u r r e n t l y d o n o t u s e a n y fa c i l i t i e s i n D o w n e y * b u t o n e o f th e i s s u e s w e e n c o u n t e r w h e n no t p l a y i n g o n s y n t h e t i c s u r f a c e s ar e p o o r p l a y i n g f i e l d s ( m u d , un e v e n s u r f a c e s e t c . ) Cu r r e n t N e e d : S o c c e r f i e l d s w i t h li g h t s t o a l l o w f o r p r a c t i c e e a r l y af t e r n o o n a n d w e e k e n d g a m e s . In d o o r f a c i l i t i e s d u r i n g t h e w i n t e r t i m e la r g e e n o u g h t o h a v e a l l o u r p l a y e r s an d f a m i l i e s t o c e l e b r a t e t e a m ac h i e v e m e n t s a n d h o l i d a y p a r t y . Am e n i t i e s D e s i r e d : W e b e l i e v e t h a t a c e n t r a l i z e d , s p e c i a l i z e d s o c c e r co m p l e x m a d e o f s y n t h e t i c t u r f ca p a b l e o f a c c o m m o d a t i n g h i g h - in t e n s i t y s o c c e r u s e w o u l d a l l o w so c c e r d e v e l o p m e n t t o b l o s s o m wi t h i n t h e c i t y o f D o w n e y . Ou r o r g a n i z a t i o n m a y n e e d ad d i t i o n a l s y n t h e t i c t u r f f i e l d s as t h e g r o u p g r o w s i n s i z e an d m o r e p r o g r a m m i n g t o of f e r t o t h e c i t y i s p l a n n e d . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 316 EXHIBIT 3 FACILITY DEMAND ANALYSIS BASED ON RESIDENTS' PARTICIPATION RATES City of Downey - 2015 Levels Per CapitaPeak DayDesignNumber ofFacility Need ParticipationDemandTurnoversStandardFacilitiesRatio - City of Activity Days/Year (Participants) Per Dayfor FacilityDemanded*Downey Softball: Organized Youth2.05154x26 players/field6.2 fields1/18,350 pop. Organized Adult4.04763x38 players/field5.2 fields1/21,750 pop. Baseball: Organized Youth 1.61,163 4x26 players/field14.0 fields1/8,125 pop. Football Organized Youth 1.6 390 6x54 players/field1.5 fields1/75,500 pop. Soccer Organized Youth 5.61,846 5x23 players/field20.1 fields1/5,650 pop. Tot Lots/Playgrounds 15.15,280 6x20 persons/hour44.0 areas1/2,600 pop. Indoor Basketball: Organized Youth 2.4 302 8x20 players/court1.9 courts1/60,050 pop. Walking/Jogging/ Running-Public Trails59.33,933 1x90 persons/mile43.7 miles1/2,600 pop. Bicycling-Public Trails 19.95,980 5x30 bicycles/mile39.9 miles1/2,850 pop. *Demand for ball fields includes an adjustment to allow for resting of fields. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 317 EXHIBIT 4 FACILITY DEMAND ANALYSIS BASED ON RESIDENTS' PARTICIPATION RATES City of Downey - 2035 Projection Per CapitaPeak DayDesignNumber ofFacility Need ParticipationDemandTurnoversStandardFacilitiesRatio - City of Activity Days/Year (Participants) Per Dayfor FacilityDemanded*Downey Softball: Organized Youth Games2.05404x26 players/field6.5 fields1/18,350 pop. Organized Adult Games4.25233x38 players/field5.7 fields1/20,750 pop. Baseball: Organized Youth Games1.61,2184x26 players/field14.6 fields1/8,125 pop. Football Organized Youth Games1.94856x54 players/field1.9 fields1/63,550 pop. Soccer Organized Youth Games5.82,0045x23 players/field21.8 fields1/5,450 pop. Tot Lots/Playgrounds14.35,2416x20 persons/hour43.7 areas1/2,725 pop. Indoor Basketball: Organized Youth Games2.83708x20 players/court2.3 courts1/51,500 pop. Walking/Jogging/ Running-Public Trails65.04,5191x90 persons/mile50.2 miles1/2,350 pop. Bicycling-Public Trails21.86,8655x30 bicycles/mile45.8 miles1/2,600 pop. *Demand for ball fields includes an adjustment to allow for resting of fields. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 318 EX H I B I T 5 CO M P A R I S O N O F C I T Y O F D O W N E Y N E E D R A T I O S T O O T H E R A R E A S Fa c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d F a c i l i t y N e e d Ra t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f R a t i o - C i t y o f Fa c i l i t y Do w n e y O n t a r i o S a n t a C l a r i t a P a s a d e n a S a n J u a n C a p . C h i n o H i l l s T e m e c u l a D a n a P o i n t L a g u n a N i g u e l R i v e r s i d e D i a m o n d B a r So f t b a l l F i e l d s : O r g . Y o u t h 1/ 1 8 , 3 5 0 p o p . 1 / 2 4 , 4 5 0 1 / 1 5 , 8 5 0 1 / 3 1 , 5 0 0 1 / 1 2 , 1 5 0 1 / 1 3 , 8 5 0 1 / 7 , 3 0 0 1 / 9 , 5 0 0 1 / 9 , 2 0 0 1 / 1 1 , 2 0 0 1 / 1 2 , 7 0 0 O r g . A d u l t 1/ 2 1 , 7 5 0 p o p . 1 / 2 6 , 8 0 0 N. A . 1 / 6 7 , 7 0 0 N. A . 1 / 1 4 , 9 0 0 1 / 5 , 5 0 0 1 / 1 9 , 2 5 0 1 / 2 4 , 3 5 0 1 / 1 8 , 6 0 0 1 / 1 6 , 8 0 0 Ba s e b a l l F i e l d s : O r g a n i z e d Y o u t h 1/ 8 , 1 2 5 p o p . 1 / 8 , 5 0 0 1 / 2 0 , 9 0 0 1 / 1 9 , 4 0 0 1 / 6 , 0 5 0 1 / 5 , 1 5 0 1 / 4 , 5 0 0 1 / 9 , 5 5 0 1 / 2 , 9 5 0 1 / 9 , 6 0 0 1 / 6 , 3 0 0 Fo o t b a l l F i e l d s : O r g a n i z e d Y o u t h 1 / 7 5 , 5 0 0 p o p . 1 / 6 2 , 2 0 0 1 / 3 5 , 6 5 0 1 / 6 4 , 4 0 0 N. A . 1 / 6 2 , 4 0 0 1 / 1 1 , 6 0 0 N. A . 1 / 3 1 , 3 0 0 1 / 1 2 4 , 4 5 0 1 / 4 0 , 1 0 0 So c c e r F i e l d s O r g a n i z e d Y o u t h 1/ 5 , 6 5 0 p o p . 1 / 1 4 , 0 5 0 1 / 6 , 2 5 0 1 / 9 , 6 5 0 1 / 2 , 1 5 0 1 / 3 , 4 5 0 1 / 2 , 6 0 0 1 / 4 , 4 0 0 1 / 3 , 0 5 0 1 / 8 , 8 0 0 1 / 3 , 4 0 0 To t L o t s / P l a y g r o u n d s 1 / 2 , 6 0 0 p o p . 1 / 2 , 2 0 0 1 / 5 , 0 0 0 1 / 2 , 1 5 0 1 / 2 , 2 5 0 1 / 2 , 1 5 0 1 / 1 , 3 5 0 1 / 2 , 6 0 0 1 / 2 , 3 0 0 1 / 3 , 3 0 0 1 / 5 , 8 0 0 In d o o r B a s k e t b a l l C o u r t s O r g a n i z e d Y o u t h 1 / 6 0 , 0 5 0 p o p . 1 / 2 6 , 6 5 0 1 / 2 2 , 3 5 0 1 / 3 6 , 8 0 0 1 / 1 5 , 2 5 0 1 / 1 3 , 6 0 0 1 / 2 7 , 7 0 0 1 / 1 2 , 4 0 0 1 / 4 7 , 6 0 0 1 / 1 8 , 4 0 0 1 / 6 5 , 6 0 0 Wa l k i n g / J o g g i n g ( m i . ) 1 / 2 , 6 0 0 p o p . 1 / 3 , 3 5 0 1 / 3 , 7 0 0 1 / 2 , 0 0 0 1 / 2 , 5 5 0 N. A . 1 / 1 3 , 9 0 0 N. A . N. A . 1 / 5 , 0 0 0 1 / 8 , 7 5 0 Bi c y c l i n g P a t h s ( m i . ) 1 / 2 , 8 5 0 p o p . 1 / 2 , 8 0 0 1 / 3 , 4 0 0 1 / 2 , 5 0 0 N. A . N. A . 1 / 6 1 0 N. A . 1 / 3 , 6 0 0 1 / 4 , 0 5 0 1 / 4 , 2 0 0 So u r c e : C o m a n C o n s u l t i n g , I n c . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 319 EXHIBIT 6 CITY OF DOWNEY RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS - 2015 ESTIMATE Facility NeedExistingSchoolTotalTotal Ratio - City of2015CitySurplus/FacilitiesFacilitiesSurplus/ Facility Downey NeedsFacilitiesDeficit(-)Avail.*Avail.Deficit(-) Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/18,350 pop.6.26-0.206-0.2 Organized Adult Games1/21,750 pop.5.23-2.214-1.2 Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/8,125 pop.14.09-5.06151.0 Football Fields Organized Youth Games1/75,500 pop.1.50-1.5220.5 Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games1/5,650 pop.20.13-17.118210.9 Tot Lots/Playgrounds1/2,600 pop.44.013-31.0013-31.0 Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games1/60,050 pop.1.920.1020.1 Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)1/2,600 pop.43.78.2-35.508.2-35.5 Bicycling Paths (mi.)1/2,850 pop.39.95.7-34.205.7-34.2 * School facilities other than ballfields/courts are counted at 50 percent to allow for time not available to the public. School facilities that are never available for use by outside sports leagues or the general public are not counted in the supply and are shown as 0 for purposes of the needs analysis. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 320 EXHIBIT 7 CITY OF DOWNEY RECREATION FACILITY NEEDS ANALYSIS - 2035 PROJECTION Facility Need Existing SchoolTotalTotal Ratio - City of2035CitySurplus/FacilitiesFacilitiesSurplus/ FacilityDowney NeedsFacilitiesDeficit(-)Avail.*Avail.Deficit(-) Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/18,350 pop.6.56-0.506-0.5 Organized Adult Games1/21,750 pop.5.73-2.714-1.7 Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games1/8,125 pop.14.69-5.66150.4 Football Fields Organized Youth Games1/75,500 pop.1.90-1.9220.1 Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games1/5,650 pop.21.83-18.81821-0.8 Tot Lots/Playgrounds1/2,600 pop.43.713-30.7013-30.7 Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games1/60,050 pop.2.32-0.302-0.3 Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)1/2,600 pop.50.28.2-42.008.2-42.0 Bicycling Paths (mi.)1/2,850 pop.45.85.7-40.105.7-40.1 * School facilities other than ballfields/courts are counted at 50 percent to allow for time not available to the public. School facilities that are never available for use by outside sports leagues or the general public are not counted in the supply and are shown as 0 for purposes of the needs analysis. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 321 EXHIBIT 8 CHANGE IN DEMAND FOR RECREATION FACILITIES BY TYPE, 2015 TO 2035 City of Downey Change in Number of Facilities Demanded*Surplus/Deficit (-) Facility201520352015-2035** Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games6.2 fields6.5 fields-0.3 fields Organized Adult Games5.2 fields5.7 fields-0.5 fields Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games14.0 fields14.6 fields-0.7 fields Football Fields Organized Youth Games1.5 fields1.9 fields-0.4 fields Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games20.1 fields21.8 fields-1.7 fields Tot Lots/Playgrounds44.0 areas43.7facilities0.3 areas Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games1.9 courts2.3 courts-0.4 courts Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)43.7 miles50.2 miles-6.5 miles Bicycling Paths (mi.)39.9 miles45.8 miles-5.9 miles * Demand for ball fields is adjusted by approximately 20 percent to allow for resting of fields. **Demand resulting from growth and changing demographics. Does not include allowance for any deficits or surpluses existing in 2015. Source: Coman Consulting, Inc., based on data from California State Department of Parks and Recreation and the City of Downey Resident Survey, January 2015.DR A F T PC Agenda Page 322 EXHIBIT 9 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECREATION NEEDS IN DOWNEY 2035 ESTIMATE (Total of 2015 Surplus/Deficit and 2015 to 2035 Change in Demand) 2015 Change in Cumulative Facility Surplus/2035 Surplus/Deficit (-)Facility Surplus/ Deficit (-)2015-2035 Deficit ( -) Softball Fields: Organized Youth Games -0.2 fields -0.3 fields -0.5 fields Organized Adult Games -1.2 fields -0.5 fields -1.7 fields Baseball Fields: Organized Youth Games 1.0 fields -0.7 fields 0.4 fields Football Fields Organized Youth Games 0.5 fields -0.4 fields 0.1 fields Soccer Fields Organized Youth Games 0.9 fields -1.7 fields -0.8 fields Tot Lots/Playgrounds -31.0facilities 0.3facilities -30.7facilities Indoor Basketball Cts.: Organized Youth Games 0.1 courts -0.4 courts -0.3 courts Walking/Jogging Paths (mi.)-35.5 miles -6.5 miles -42.0 miles Bicycling Paths (mi.)-34.2 miles -5.9 miles -40.1 miles Source: Coman Consulting, IncDR A F T PC Agenda Page 323 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 324 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 1 Assessment of Current Maintenance Conditions Existing Park and Recreation Facilities City of Downey Parks and Recreation Department Parks and Open Space Master Plan March 2015 Executive Summary Park and Recreation facilities within the City of Downey were found to be suffering from an aging infrastructure but maintained in generally clean and safe conditions. Brookshire Children’s Park is an example of a facility found to be visually attractive and in good condition. Others, such as Rio San Gabriel Park were maintained in fair to poor condition with obvious signs of deferred maintenance within park grounds and landscaping, need for capital upgrades, and safety considerations. Additionally, substantial deferred maintenance needs were found within park structures, facilities, irrigation systems and buildings. Based on observations and discussions with staff, it appears that the level of maintenance is currently in the lower range of Mode 3, a maintenance category established by the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) which is considered a below average operating standard for municipal parks and recreation systems the size of the City of Downey. A partial cause of the lower level of maintenance is the aging infrastructure of Downey’s park system but with improved practices and additional resources the City could achieve a higher level. The City is not faced with future population increases but is facing a demand for new and upgraded park facilities. The Parks and Recreation Department maintains a dozen parks with primarily general fund dollars. Overall, the current level of resources available for park maintenance is strained and/or inadequate to fully fund both operation/maintenance, and long‐term capital upgrades and development. The Parks and Recreation Department working in conjunction with the Public Works Department, which provides support in park and building maintenance in addition to the skilled trades, is currently backlogged in their ability to deliver on all elements of park maintenance, deferred maintenance, and public safety. Since the Great Recession, which started in late 2007, the City of Downey has added Discovery Sports Complex and renovated Brookshire Children’s Park. Since Fiscal Year 2011/2012, the “parks budget,” found within the Department of Public Works Maintenance Division, appears to be stabilized and has increased. Table 1 displays the four previous fiscal year actuals and current fiscal year approved budget for Public Works Maintenance Services Division. The Division manages and maintains the City’s buildings and public facilities; vehicle and equipment fleet; streets, alleys and parking lots; trees, parks and public grounds. The NRPA standards are thru CAPRA— Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) MODE I • State of the art maintenance applied to a high quality diverse landscape. MODE II • High level maintenance associated with well‐developed park areas with reasonably high visitation. MODE III • Moderate level maintenance‐ associated with agencies that, because of budget restrictions, are unable to maintain at a high level. MODE IV • Moderately low level of maintenance. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 325 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 2 Table 1 Public Works Maintenance Budget Summary Fiscal Year Budget Fiscal Year 11/12 $7,217,831 Fiscal Year 12/13 $6,554.877 Fiscal Year 13/14 $6,261.292 Fiscal Year 14/15 Fiscal Year 15/16 $6,522,247 $8,849,261 Between 2013 and 2015, the City completed several park projects and received several grants. This includes: Grants  $600,000 from Los Angeles County 4th District Supervisor Knabe trails grant for Apollo and Furman Park.  $200,000 from State of California Habitat Conservation Fund grant for Wilderness Park Pond Restoration.  $263,000 playground renovation grant from Kiwanis Foundation for Furman Park.  $218,000 grant from Housing Related Parks Program for Civic Center Phase I development that will include redevelopment of open space area between City Hall and Library. Projects  Installation of decomposed granite at Apollo Park picnic table area.  Resurfaced indoor basketball court at Apollo Park’s McCaughan Gymnasium.  Installation of new picnic tables and trash receptacles at parks city‐wide.  Installation of new playgrounds at Temple and Rio San Gabriel Parks.  Tennis court resurfacing at Independence and Furman Parks.  Completion of walking/jogging trails at Apollo and Furman Parks.  Outdoor fitness equipment from Kiwanis Los Amigos installed. The 2015/2016 fiscal year includes $1,216,000 in park related capital projects including:  Furman Park Walking Trails‐‐$154,000  Apollo Park Walking Trail Phase II‐‐$166,000  Citywide Playground Repair and Replacement‐‐$100,000  Furman Park Building Improvements‐‐$80,000  Wilderness Park Improvements‐‐$400,000 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 326 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 3  BJR Community & Senior Center AC/HVAC and Web Based Control‐‐$22,000  Civic Center Park‐‐$218,000 The City is faced with significant issues over the next few years, changing demographics, needed upgrades to existing infrastructure, and increased demand for additional sports fields to meet emerging recreational activities. Despite these and other issues, the City has the opportunity to improve on the level of park maintenance and recreation services while modernizing and improving current practices and procedures. As an example, development of sustainable practices will help to maximize available resources and create a more sustainable City for the future while demonstrating to the public the practices, duties, and tasks associated with environmentally sound park maintenance. The City of Downey currently has some park maintenance standards and practices in place. These standards can, with modifications and improvements, form the foundation for the development of enhanced operations and maintenance practices. The City of Downey should work towards implementing and developing the following:  A lifecycle maintenance plan for buildings and park amenities. This should be built into daily operations, yearly capital improvement plans, and budgetary requests to maximize the value and useful life of these assets.  A soil management plan which includes regular soil testing in order to avoid issues with plant die‐ back and sparse or soggy turf conditions. The plan should include at a minimum: o Soil type and texture o Infiltration rate o pH o Soluble salts and sodium o Identification of limiting soil characteristics o Planned soil management actions to remediate limiting soil characteristics  A volunteer park adoption/maintenance program such that it includes training for the volunteers as Park Stewards. The program could include regular fix up/clean‐up days and enlist the help of community organizations such as scouts, park users, sports clubs, etc. to maintain and enhance various elements of the park system. Currently, the City has a limited volunteer program with approximately 55 teens from middle school through high school age. The teens work with youth at the park programs, summer day camps and special events. They also volunteer for various City departments in City Hall, City special events such as the Healthy Downey 5K, Street Faire, Hall of Fame, Kids Day, Pumpkin Patch, Tree Lighting, and many more.  Evaluate opportunities to “naturalize” many existing facilities including the elimination of turf in areas of little public use and development of native demonstration gardens.  Establish policies appropriate for the installation and management of synthetic playing fields including: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 327 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 4 o Synthetic fields should be installed only at facilities which also have lights for night‐time play. o Synthetic fields should be budgeted as a fixed asset and fully depreciated over the life of the “carpet.” o A policy that states synthetic fields will be open for play except under extreme weather conditions.  Expand the “Yellow Swing Program” for those with disabilities, as seen at Brookshire Children’s Park, to additional neighborhood and community parks as part of regular scheduled equipment repair/replacement. The Yellow Swing is a swing seat designed to help meet the American Disabilities Act guidelines for playground equipment in public applications.  Installation and operation of a centrally‐ controlled irrigation system such as the Rainbird IQ irrigation central control system. This system provides cost‐ effective, multiple‐site centralized irrigation control from a single computer and will allow staff to monitor and control irrigation operation at multiple remote sites. IQ communication capabilities eliminates travel to remote sites for programming changes or adjustments. Manual operation and programming functions that were performed only at the site irrigation controller can now be completed from the IQ central computer. The system can be incorporated into planned park irrigation system upgrades.  Develop a Maintenance Manual detailing park maintenance and operation tasks on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis. The Maintenance Manual should include existing specifications as well as: o Clear written maintenance objectives and frequency of care for each amenity is needed based on the desired outcomes for a quality visitor experience in maintaining the parks for aesthetics, safety, recreation and sustainability including:  Landscape bed design, planting and maintenance standards  Landscape turf and right of way mowing and maintenance standards  Tree and shrub planting and maintenance standard  Equipment maintenance and replacement standard  Chemical application standard o Formalized and scheduled park facility inspections including playgrounds, specialized facilities such as skate parks, high use visitor areas and buildings o Design standards for the development of park features such as sports fields, trails and buildings o Preventative maintenance plan developed for all park locations  Establish an Estimated Annual Water Use (EAWU) for various hydrozones such as turf, sports fields and shrub beds  Consider development of a Community Garden program to provide opportunities for City residents to participate in the program. Many underutilized areas of parks could be potential sites for a Community Garden such as the undeveloped land at Crawford Park or at several park locations underneath power lines DR A F T PC Agenda Page 328 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 5  Develop a process of evaluation and refinement to measure park maintenance success through established performance standards. Examples of what this should include are: o Established park maintenance standards and frequency rates and tracking over several years o Establish and track the cost per acre for each park and park type and tracking over several years o Establish a minimum of training hours per year per employee with re‐evaluation of success of training and new requirements due to legislative changes o Establish and track replacement schedules for equipment and other fixed assets  Develop a Sustainable Performance System with responsibility for the program handled by a dedicated Conservation Coordinator. While Downey has already begun to make developments in many of these areas, the performance system hould include at a minimum: o Native Plant Policy—Defined by ecoregion such as California Coastal, Mexico border to San Francisco o Track Utilities—Partnership with utilities o Recycling Program o Green Waste Composting o Demonstration Gardens o Use of Alternative Energy Sources o Integrated Pest Management Program reflective of consistently changing needs of an urban park system o Habitat Development beyond mitigation sites o Community Gardens o Public Education and Outreach o Stormwater retention o Human health, well‐being and community values DR A F T PC Agenda Page 329 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 6 Introduction The following report is an assessment of current maintenance conditions at existing park and recreation facilities within the City of Downey. The report also details possible changes in maintenance and operations standards, practices, procedures, and the recommended development of a Sustainability Performance System. Each type of facility and area will be addressed separately in the report with supporting photos, as appropriate, and comments. This assessment and accompanying recommendations are based on the following: o December, 2014 and March 2015 tours of park and recreation facilities within the City of Downey guided by Parks and Recreation and Public Works Department personnel and by the author. o Interviews and communications with Parks and Recreation and Public Works personnel. o Review of standards, policies and procedures as provided by personnel from the Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments. The objective and outcome of the park site assessment and maintenance assessment were to evaluate, assess, and make recommendations on the maintenance operations of the City of Downey as part of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan process. Further, recommendations were to be prepared for specific sustainability practices for both new and rehabilitation projects, including ongoing sustainable operation and maintenance practices for incorporation into future bid documents, as well as design and construction guidelines for proposed new projects or project improvements that address environmental and economic sustainability goals. Several of the following areas of maintenance operations were assessed:  Maintenance standards  Asset management of City parks and recreation facilities  Budget availability to meet desired outcomes  Staffing levels to achieve desired outcomes  Contract management of park elements  Facility management  Cost of services  Data management  Performance measures DR A F T PC Agenda Page 330 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 7 Park Grounds and Amenities Existing Conditions The park tour was completed in December 2014, during a time of the year with cooler temperatures and early winter precipitation. Turf areas were beginning an inactive growth period. The following are significant findings regarding the condition of park grounds and turf areas with recommendations for improving conditions where appropriate.  Most sports fields and open turf areas were in poor to fair condition with thin growth mass and extensive broadleaf invasion. Several areas, of high intensity use exhibited poorer conditions with significant bare spots, uneven surfaces, and adjacent thinning areas.  Poorer conditions were observed at some locations including Apollo and Rio San Gabriel Parks.  Gopher issues were present at almost all parks with significant long‐term rutting of the park turf as was clearly visible at Independence Park.  A limited number of turf areas appeared to be overwatered with very spongy soil and standing water. An example of this was found at Treasure Island Park.  Soil compaction was evident at several parks including Apollo and Independence Parks with heavy sports league play appearing to be a contributing factor. Regular turf aeration does occur throughout the park system.  Shrub beds for the most part appeared to be well maintained and weeded although some areas, such as at Dennis the Menace Park, were found in need of renovation.  As a whole, park grounds were free of litter with obvious signs of park staff paying immediate attention to grounds clean‐up.  The City has begun a process of standardizing picnic tables, benches, and trash cans. Recommendations  Monitor soil moisture conditions and irrigate turf areas to provide adequate moisture for healthy growth while maintaining a playable surface that is not muddy, spongy or over saturated. This will help to prevent tearing and uprooting of the turf and topsoil under normal playing conditions.  Annually (October/November) test soil to assess nutrient deficiencies, following with an application of appropriate fertilizer and/or soil additives to promote healthy root growth. Soil fertility fluctuates throughout the growing season with the quantity and availability of mineral nutrients altered by the addition of fertilizers, sulfur, lime, etc. and the removal of nutrients from soils as a result of plant DR A F T PC Agenda Page 331 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 8 growth and development. Soil tests should be taken at various locations dependent on the plant material and its ability to grow in various soil conditions.  Develop a Maintenance Manual detailing park maintenance and operation tasks on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis.  Increase efforts at gopher eradication and/or control.  Improve type and number of park amenities such as benches, bike racks, drinking fountains, recycling containers, and trash cans. Sports Fields Existing Conditions At the majority of park locations, sports turf was maintained in a fair playable condition, although a number of locations showed turf in poor condition. Generally, sports fields and multi‐use turf play areas tended to be dryer rather than soggy and wet. With the State of California requirement to reduce water consumption by 20%, dryer conditions will be the new standard. Gophers were universally a problem resulting in bare spots, uneven turf, and ruts which have developed over time. Additionally, soil compaction and broadleaf weeds were problems also found throughout the park system. The park tours were conducted during daylight hours. Therefore, lighting systems on sports fields could not be checked for proper illumination including 1) alignment of luminaries to avoid dark spots on the playing fields, and 2) proper functioning of light fixtures such as burnt out bulbs. In general, fences, backstops, bleachers and benches were in good repair showing evidence of regular and on‐going maintenance. Some benches were in need of upgrade or replacement as was evident at Apollo Park. The city does not currently utilize synthetic fields within the park system. Recommendations  If the City moves in the direction of all‐weather/ synthetic fields, these should be handled in the budgetary process as a fixed asset with the “carpet” fully depreciated over the anticipated life of the product. With high levels of scheduled play and difficulty in managing unscheduled play, synthetic fields would eliminate field closures and extend play opportunities. All‐weather fields typically cost more than regular grass fields but they achieve payback against the costs as a result of increased DR A F T PC Agenda Page 332 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 9 field usage and reduced maintenance costs, thus showing a good return on investment. A typical well‐maintained synthetic field will have a life of 10‐12 years.  If the City determines a move in this direction, the budget should fully depreciate the cost of replacement over a 10 year period. The dollars saved on maintenance could be used to partially offset the cost of depreciation of the fields.  Establish policies appropriate for the installation and management of synthetic playing fields including: o Synthetic fields should be installed only at facilities which also have lights for night‐time play. o A policy that states synthetic fields will be open for play except under extreme weather conditions.  All weather synthetic turf fields can support substantially more play than grass fields. Further, synthetic fields can easily be lined for several different sports, thus helping to meet the needs of new emerging sports. When a system considers the cost of land and the cost of sports fields, they should consider all weather synthetic fields as an alternative and do a cost benefit analysis on the options in order to determine the best alternative for them to follow.  Sports field design standards should be developed. Development and use of these design standards and guidelines needs to be put in place for future development to limit maintenance costs especially when sports fields may double as a drainage basin. Standards to consider are traffic and pedestrian circulation, parking, athletic use areas, restroom/concession location and design.  Annually test soil to assess nutrient deficiencies, following with an application of appropriate fertilizer and/or soil additives to promote healthily root growth.  Monitor soil moisture conditions and irrigate turf areas to provide adequate moisture for healthy growth while maintaining a playable surface that is not muddy, spongy or over saturated. This will help to prevent tearing and uprooting of the turf and topsoil under normal playing conditions.  Lighting systems should be inspected on a regular basis for proper alignment and functioning to avoid dark spots at night that could be hazardous to players and light spill to surrounding neighborhood. Park Roads and Parking Areas Existing Conditions Overall, park roads and parking areas were found to be in poor to fair condition. Some deterioration was found partially from overspray of adjacent turf and shrub beds and the subsequent ponding in the parking lot. This was most obvious at Rio San Gabriel Park where the Ardine Street parking lot was in serious stages of deterioration. If the City had a lifecycle maintenance plan in place, parking lot resurfacing DR A F T PC Agenda Page 333 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 10 could be addressed in a timely fashion rather than when the pavement is in serious levels of deterioration. Recommendations  Regularly inspect for overspray and soil moisture, adjusting watering levels as necessary at all landscaped areas adjacent to paved parking areas, park roads and paved trails.  All paved parking areas, park roads, and paved trails should be inspected on a regular basis to detect cracks in their surfaces. Cracks should be sealed as early as practical to minimize moisture damage and halt surface deterioration, thus minimizing damage as well as maintenance, repair, and replacement costs.  Regularly remove organic material from parking lots to prevent deterioration.  Immediately repair damaged areas by either cold crack fill, hot rubberized crack fill, or cold asphalt patch.  The life expectancy of each paved surface should be estimated and each paved area should be included in the capital improvement reserve budget for (1) periodic sealing and (2) repaving at the end of the usable life of the surface. Deferred maintenance on paved surfaces should be minimized by following these recommended practices to reduce maintenance costs and prolong their usable life. Park Sidewalks and Walkways Existing Conditions Park sidewalks, generally concrete, were in fair to good condition with some evidence of cracking and uplifting from tree roots. Examples of problem areas include Furman Park and sidewalks to and in front of the park buildings and future home of the YMCA. Concrete issues at this location are complicated by several mature trees, including ficus, were roots are resulting is lifting of concrete panels. Despite the fact that the City regularly inspects sidewalks and repairs raised surfaces by either ramping or “smoothing” raised concrete, sidewalks and walkways were found to be a significant safety issue. Recommendations  Continue to conduct regular inspections of park sidewalks to identify settlement and or up lifting, exposed edge, and cracks that may pose a safety hazard to park users. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 334 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 11  Develop a planting list of tree species that are acceptable for planting close to sidewalks, as well as identifying species such as liquidambar (Liquidambar styraciflua), which has roots that grow near the surface, commonly causing uplift to sidewalks.  Specific repairs to Furman Park should include an evaluation of the trees by an arborist prior to removal of the lifted panels.  Much like parking areas, immediately repair damaged asphalt areas by either cold crack fill, hot rubberized crack fill, or cold asphalt patch. Trails Existing Conditions The City of Downey is shouldered by the San Gabriel River Bike Path, the Rio Hondo Bike Path, and Los Angeles River Bike Path, all Class I facilities. The City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan Draft 2014 identifies and proposes an additional 11.52 miles of Class II and 18.9 miles of Class III bike trails. The City has an excellent opportunity to design trails to double as transportation routes for bicycles. The City has also completed circular walking trails around Furman and Apollo Parks, partially funded by 4th District Supervisor Don Knabe. The additional development of a circular park pathway of decomposed granite surface will provide the opportunity for both the casual walker and runners, promoting Downey’s Healthy Parks program. The downtown area of Downey is park poor. To help counter that the City should consider the development of Green Streets or Linear Parkways. 3rd Street between Brookshire and Paramount presents an opportunity to develop a Linear Parkway. This could be accomplished with the elimination of street parking along one or both sides of the road and replacement with public walkways, patios, and greenery. Several examples of Green Streets or Linear Parkways exist, most notably in San Francisco and Seattle. Recommendations  Continue to work with County of Los Angeles and other public agencies to explore further opportunities for opening of waterways/drainage areas for trail use. In many cases, these routes would best be served as a paved surface.  Implement the City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan Draft 2014 which identifies 30.42 miles of additional Class II and III Bicycle Trails.  Explore opportunity to work with Union Pacific Railroad and the County of Los Angeles to utilize existing rail corridor through the City of Downey as a potential regional trail. Rail line extends from Orange County through Downey west to the City of South Gate.  Continue with the development of circular loop trails around major parks such as that completed around Apollo Park. These trails should be surfaced with decomposed granite, include distance signage, and fitness stations.  Explore opportunities to develop Green Streets or Linear Parkways within the park poor sections of downtown.  Improve access points to San Gabriel and Rio Hondo bike trail sites from existing parks when possible. Several social trails have developed at Wilderness Park leading to the San Gabriel River bike trail, which would benefit from formal entrances. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 335 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 12  The City should develop design standards and incorporate these into existing City standards and specifications similar to those developed by the National Park Service or American Trails. Staff should ensure that these standards are required of all contractors and include at a minimum: o Trail tread widths designed for 36 inches minimum and are widened only to mitigate conditions affecting accessibility. o Layout of trail minimizes side hill construction to provide a fuller native trail bench for better durability, drainage and sustainability. o Trail structures such as retaining walls and bridges are kept to a minimum and are used to protect resources and maintain good linear grades. o Edge protection is provided only when conditions warrant it. Native vegetation and natural features such as rocks and logs can serve as edge protection. Further, edge protection is installed in a manor to facilitate sheet flow. o Trail surfaces need to be firm, stable and have a good coefficient of friction. Ball Courts Existing Conditions Numerous ball courts were visited during the maintenance tour including tennis and basketball. Tennis courts and basketball courts were found to be in good condition with fencing, surface, nets, and lining all in a well maintained condition. The sand volleyball courts at Apollo Park were well maintained but the court at Rio San Gabriel was in need of a net and creation of a sand playing surface. The city has scheduled resurfacing and other improvements to many tennis courts including those at Furman Park. The courts at Independence Park were recently resurfaced and painted but showing evidence of new cracking. These courts should be renovated with a concrete surface. Recommendations  Coated playing surfaces should be regularly inspected for cracks or other surface damage and promptly repaired when these are detected. When cracks begin to appear in the surface of the courts, moisture can seep below the surface resulting in accelerated deterioration.  Outside basketball courts should be maintained on a regular basis. Each court should be scheduled for resurfacing every five to seven years. This schedule could be staggered so that one‐third of the courts are resurfaced every two to three years, thus reducing the workload on maintenance personnel each year. In addition, one standard color should be used for all similar types of structures and records of that color should be kept by the maintenance staff for small repairs or removal of graffiti.  Renovate the Independence Park tennis courts with a concrete surface. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 336 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 13 Park Structures and Buildings Existing Conditions Many of the City parks structures and buildings were found to be in fair to poor condition, some in need of major renovation, and a general backlog of required maintenance. Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center was a facility in good condition with evidence of regular maintenance and upgrading. Most park buildings should be scheduled for renovation suffering from age, facility deterioration, and unusable space including those buildings at Furman Park, Dennis the Menace Park, and Golden Park. Some park restrooms which had suffered from bouts of graffiti, while clean and well maintained, could have used upgraded facilities and a fresh coat of paint to improve their appearance. Recommendations  Park buildings should be regularly inspected for vandalism, safety issues and proper operation of equipment.  Facilities in need of immediate renovation include the buildings at Furman Park, Golden Park, and Dennis the Menace Park.  Graffiti should be immediately painted over or removed and tracked for potential use by local law enforcement agencies. Playgrounds Existing Conditions Overall, the playground equipment at each park area was creative, generally well maintained, and in a good state of repair, with attractive and well‐maintained safety surfaces. Brookshire Children’s Park features newer and very creative play equipment while facilities at other locations generally were older and should be scheduled for replacement over the next few years. Landing areas in some rubberized surfacing, such as the playground at Furman Park, had deteriorated and are in need of attention. Equipment at Rio DR A F T PC Agenda Page 337 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 14 San Gabriel Park and Crawford was in need of repair and some features at Dennis the Menace Park should be scheduled for removal. The City utilizes a variety of surfaces including rubberized, sand, and bark. To counter the continual problem of surface migration below swings the City should daily rake safety surface or consider the utilization of a tile surfacing under the swings in combination with sand or bark. When used this seems to be a positive move correcting the on‐going maintenance problems associated with surfacing under swings. The variety of safety surfaces utilized throughout the City was also in good condition, with little to no evidence of overspray from irrigation systems. New playground criteria was recently adopted by a subcommittee of American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). The potential change to ASTM standards reduces the Head Injury Criterion from 1000 to 700. The implications of this new standard if adopted, will mean that some playground safety surfaces will need to be replaced. It is unknown at this time the full impact to the City of Downey. (NRPA, Parks and Recreation, February 2015, “New Playground Criterion Adopted Amid Controversy.”) Recommendations  Regularly inspect for overspray and overflow from adjacent sprinklers, adjusting watering levels and or spray patterns as necessary.  While park staff reports they regularly inspect safety surface for compaction, additional attention should be given to areas under swings and play equipment landing areas.  The City should take an active role to follow the proposed changes to ASTM standards. Park Trees and Landscaping Existing Conditions Park landscaping which includes trees, shrub beds, turf, and landscaped drainage areas were found to be in good condition. The City prunes all trees on an every two year cycle. Therefore, most evergreen and deciduous trees appeared to be healthy, with little need for thinning and structural pruning. Several redwoods at Wilderness Park were dead or in a serious state of decline. Young trees were staked in a variety of fashions, some caged and some with weed growth underneath. Compaction around tree wells was poorly managed with no evidence of bark/mulch around the drip line. Several young trees at Crawford Park were properly mulched while others were not. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 338 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 15 Shrub beds were also in good condition with little evidence of dead or declining vegetation due to soil conditions, age of the planting, and/or watering issues. Shrub beds at Dennis the Menace Park were aged and leggy and in need of renovation. Independence Park shrubs were overrun with weeds. Overall, the City maintains over 16,000 street and park trees within the City limits and they are pruned on an every two year cycle. Recommendations  The City should develop a park tree inventory to track species, age, location, and maintenance history. This will assist with workload and help to develop a tree replacement program as older trees reach the end of their lifecycles.  Evaluate the cause of decline in the redwoods at Wilderness Park and remove those trees that have died.  Pruning should occur on park trees only as necessary for structural health and thinning.  Bark/mulch should be regularly placed around the drip line to reduce compaction and water evaporation.  Soils around the roots of trees should be aerated to reduce soil compaction that can smother the roots of some trees. Metal grates around the bases of tree trunks must be periodically checked and broken outward to prevent the tree trunk growing into the metal.  Renovate shrub beds at Dennis the Menace Park and Independence Park.  Have an Arborist evaluate the declining redwoods at Dennis the Menace Park and several mature trees including the ficus around the buildings at Furman Park.  Regularly inspect for overflow and soil moisture, adjusting watering levels as necessary at all landscaped areas adjacent to paved parking areas, park roads and paved trails.  Annually (October/November) test soil to assess nutrient deficiencies, following with an application of appropriate fertilizer and/or soil additives to promote healthily root growth. Soil fertility fluctuates throughout the growing season with the quantity and availability of mineral nutrients altered by the addition of fertilizers, sulfur, lime, etc. and the removal from soils as a result of plant growth and development. Soil tests should be taken at various locations dependent on the plant material and its ability to grow in various soil conditions. Specialized Facilities/Skate Parks/Community Garden/Dog Parks Existing Conditions The skate park at Independence Park was found to be in well‐maintained and safe condition. Cracking within the surface concrete was limited with little debris collection evident at the corner and lower locations of the skate park. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 339 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 16 Downey currently has no program in place for Community Gardens and features only one Dog Park at Rio San Gabriel Park. Several parks contain sites with limited public use that would be suitable for the development of either a Community Garden or Dog Park. The skate park at Independence Park was found to be in well‐maintained and safe condition. Cracking within the surface concrete was limited with little debris collection evident at the corner and lower locations of the skate park. Downey currently has no program in place for Community Gardens and features only one Dog Park at Rio San Gabriel Park. Several parks contain sites with limited public use that would be suitable for the development of either a Community Garden or Dog Park. Community gardens are collaborative projects on park sites or other publically owned locations where participants share in the maintenance and products of the garden, including healthful and affordable fresh fruits and vegetables. Gardens may offer physical and mental health benefits by providing opportunities to:  Eat healthy fresh fruits and vegetables  Engage in physical activity, skill building, and creating green space  Offers opportunities for people‐people social interaction  Beautify vacant lots  Revitalize communities in industrial areas  Revive and beautify public parks  Decrease violence in some neighborhoods, and improve social well‐being through strengthening social connections  Increase in property values to those located within 1000 feet of a community garden The City currently does operate a Dog Park at Rio San Gabriel Park. Much like Community Gardens, Dog Parks continue to grow in popularity and the City is encouraged to evaluate the park system for underutilized areas of parks which could serve as potential Dog Parks. These parks also offer benefits to the users including:  Excellent source of dog‐dog social interaction  Excellent source of dog‐people social interaction  Opportunities for people‐people social interaction  Excellent source of off‐leash exercise for active dogs  Dog parks allow dogs to get adequate physical and mental exercise, thereby lessening destructive and annoying behaviors in general which can benefit society as a whole  Dog parks which are designed for dogs only, lessen the chance of owners letting their dogs off‐ leash in on‐leash parks Recommendations  Develop a Community Garden program for City residents. Many underutilized areas of parks could be potential sites for a Community Garden on undeveloped land or at park locations underneath power lines, such as Crawford Park.  Explore opportunities for the development of at least one additional Dog Park utilizing existing parkland that is underutilized and would not result in the displacement of a current recreational use. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 340 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 17 Potential Dog Park location could be at several park locations underneath power lines such as Crawford or Wilderness Parks.  The skate park should be regularly inspected and maintained to limit debris collection within the facility which can present a hazard to park users.  Cracking in the concrete at the skate park should be immediately identified through a regular inspection program and immediately sealed to prevent further damage from moisture within and under the concrete.  Develop a Community Garden program to provide opportunities for l City residents to participate in the program. Many underutilized areas of parks could be potential sites for a community garden. Park Signage Existing Conditions The City should move toward a standardized signage program which includes the development of a more visible and colorful park entry sign. Informational signage throughout the park should also be standardized and include verbiage in a positive context. Recommendations  Park signage should be regularly inspected for theft, damage, and graffiti.  Park name signs could be enhanced with limited landscaping of native species selected to display seasonal colors.  The City should maintain a formalized signage system that is uniform in terms of sign types, a positive approach toward rules, colors, and materials. Effort should be made to ensure that park signs exhibit rules and regulations in a positive context. This will help residents better identify parks and make maintenance replacement and repairs less complicated. Fencing Existing Conditions Park and decorative metal fencing was found at various locations throughout the system utilized both as decoration and pedestrian control. Overall this fencing appeared to be well maintained and in good condition with limited damage and little rust. Many areas of chain link fencing especially around tennis courts was in need of replacement. Recommendations  Metal fencing should be regularly inspected for damage and broken or damaged components (posts, top rails, bottom rails and vertical members) should be promptly repaired or replaced. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 341 City of Downey Park Assessment March 2015 18  City should develop a timeline for the regular repainting of metal fencing to prevent rust and improve overall appearance.  City should remove chain link fencing around playgrounds and replace with a more visibly attractive split rail type fence. Irrigation Systems Existing Conditions Numerous examples of poor irrigation practice including over or under watering were found throughout the system, including sport fields, open turf areas, and shrub beds. The irrigation systems appeared to be antiquated and in need of total replacement. Several broken lines were seen including Dennis the Menace Park. Over‐spray was also an issue as evident at Rio San Gabriel and Treasure Island Parking lots. Recommendations  City staff should continue with a regular inspection program of the irrigation system including operation to determine coverage and to identify overspray issues.  City should fund the complete replacement of park irrigation systems with a centrally‐controlled irrigation system city‐wide with soil sensors and an automated evapo‐transpiration (ET) based irrigation control and scheduling system that allows control of multiple sites to exact specifications and daily changes.  Monitor soil moisture conditions and irrigate turf areas to provide adequate moisture for healthy growth while maintaining a playable surface that is not muddy, spongy or over saturated. This will help to prevent tearing and uprooting of the turf and topsoil under normal playing conditions.  City should explore opportunities to further utilize available treated water for irrigation of shrub beds, landscaping, and other park amenities as permitted under State law. Public Art Existing Conditions The City of Downey Parks and Recreation Department currently has little public art within the park and recreation system. Potential art projects include the recreation building front plaza and entry at Golden and Furman Parks. The Community Needs Assessment for the Parks and Open Space Master Plan found that nearly one of every three City of Downey households (32%) identified a preference for Fine Arts or Performing Arts Facilities and Programs improvements. Recommendations  The City should consider developing a 1% to 2% budget for an art program as part of future capital development. This percentage of funds could be “pooled” to fund the design and development of public art components of future park development. Currently many public agencies State‐wide and nationally successfully operate such a program. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 342 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 1 Assessment of Current Recreation Programming City of Downey Parks and Recreation Department Introduction The City of Downey 2014/2015 fiscal year budget states the functions of the Parks and Recreation Department as: “Comprised of five divisions: Administration (including grants and contract services), Facilities & Events, Fee Supported Recreation Programs, Golf Course Operations and Transit. The Department enhances the quality of life for Downey residents and positively influences neighborhoods through the provision of quality recreational opportunities, parks, and facilities for all residents of Downey. The department is committed to providing services that strengthen the community’s image and provide a sense of place, thereby supporting economic development, increasing public engagement, and promoting health and wellness.” In addition to providing open spaces, parks and historic facilities for recreation, the City of Downey through the Parks and Recreation Department also provides a wide range of services and programs geared towards meeting the recreation needs and interests of various age levels. (Downey Civic Theater, and Golf Course Operations are not included within the scope of this master plan.) The services and programs provided through the Facilities and Events and the Fee Supported Recreation Program Divisions include:  Recreation Classes and Activities ‐ In addition to those classes geared towards recreation and fitness, Downey offers a variety of cultural and special interest classes and activities including music, dance, art, computer technology, and science.  Organized Team Sports Activities ‐ Numerous organized sports groups such as Little League and soccer teams, utilize Downey facilities and fields. The aquatics program offers swim lessons and water activities at the Downey Unified School District pool.  Community Programs ‐ Downey provides accessible programs geared towards assisting individual age and special needs groups such as seniors and after school programs.  Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center‐‐Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center offers programs, classes and services for both adults’ ages 50+ and community members of all ages.  Special Events ‐ Downey works with other jurisdictions and community organizations to provide seasonal, special, and educational Downey events for the community such as Kid’s Day at Apollo Park and Healthy Downey events.  Day Camps and Sports Camps ‐ Downey’s recreation programs include numerous special interest or activity day camps, as well as sports oriented camps. Downey has a history of providing community services and activities to meet the needs of various age groups often in cooperation with other agencies. The City of Downey and the Downey Unified School District collaborate to administer a State grant to provide the After School Program Information Recreation Education (ASPIRE) at several schools throughout the community. The goal of the program is to provide a fun, positive, and safe learning environment. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 343 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 2 Existing Programs and Activities As part of the Community Needs Assessment Survey data for the Parks and Open Space Master Plan, more than four in ten residents (43%) chose "Physical Fitness, Health and Well‐being" as the most important benefit when seeking recreation. Further, more than four in ten residents polled (45%) stated they were Frequent Users (at least 3 times per month) of parks and recreation facilities in the last year. In contrast, more than one in ten residents (13%) stated they had not used parks and recreation facilities in that time frame. Nine of ten residents polled (90%) stated they are very or somewhat satisfied with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey. For recreational programming, nearly one of three residents polled (31%) stated they were frequent users (at least 3 times per month) of programs in the last year. In contrast, more than four in ten residents (41%) stated they had not used programs in that time frame. Nearly nine of every ten City of Downey households (87%) identified a desired program, class, or lesson while just over one in ten (13%) stated they desired no program additions. When asked “how would you describe your overall satisfaction with existing park and recreation facilities and programs in the City of Downey,” 37% responded very satisfied and 52% said somewhat satisfied. Comparing Downey residents to statistics derived from eleven other California municipalities where similar work has been conducted revealed that the share of residents who stated they are very satisfied with parks, recreation facilities and programs was below the average (37% vs. 48%) found among other cities surveyed. Downey offers a wide variety of sports activities and classes for all ages. There is an extensive programming at both the Barbara J. Riley Senior and Community Center and the Gary P. McCaughan Gymnasium. Additionally, a summer aquatics program is conducted at the Downey High School pool. A wide variety of classes is offered for all ages. In addition, numerous organized sports groups and leagues for soccer, softball, and baseball utilize park fields on a regular basis. Aquatics A recent study commissioned by the USA Swimming Foundation and conducted by the University of Memphis found that nearly 70% of African American children and nearly 60% of Hispanic children have low or no swim ability, compared to 40% of Caucasians, putting them at greater risk for drowning. Participation in formal swimming lessons can reduce the risk of drowning by 88 percent among children aged one to four years. (Source: Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 2009) Results from the Community Needs Assessment Survey for the Parks and Open Space Master DR A F T PC Agenda Page 344 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 3 plan showed that more than 90% of City of Downey households identified a desired recreation facility. One in ten (9%) stated they desired no new recreation facilities. For those respondents who identified a facility, 9% identified swimming pools as their preferred facility. Swimming pools was the second most desired facility behind walking/jogging trails, the most desired facility at 16%. When asked “what is the one recreation program, class, or lesson your household would most like to see added in the City of Downey to meet the needs of your household,” 6% identified swimming. In June 1986 the City and Downey Unified School District entered into an agreement to build a swimming pool at Downey High School. The two agencies proportionally share the costs to operate the pool. Under the terms of the Joint Use Agreement the City has the opportunity to utilize the pool during the week of spring break and on the first day following the last day of school in June through the last day prior to the first day of school in September. Due to budget limitations, the City reduced the aquatics program to just six weeks starting in fiscal year 2012/2013. For the most recent swimming season over 965 residents and 184 non‐residents participated in swim lessons. Recreational swimming accounted for 2,099 uses during the summer session, and there were 26 resident and 4 non‐resident junior lifeguard participants. Downey’s Aquatics Program currently provides opportunities for: •Learn to swim (ages 6‐15) •Mommy/Daddy and Me •Introduction to Water •Junior Guards and Water Safety Instructor (WSI) •Adult Lessons •Recreation Swim •Lap Swim •Family Twilight Nights at the Pool The Aquatic programs showed revenue of $101,150 for fiscal year 2010/2011 dropping to $$77,126 for fiscal year 2014/15 with the shorter program. Payment to Downey Unified School District for the shared cost of the pool is budgeted at $48,862 for fiscal year 2014/15. The aquatics program is supported by part‐time staff including a Pool Manager, Senior Lifeguards, Lifeguards, Swim Instructors, and Cashiers. It is typical for community swim pools to be subsidized, especially due to the high cost of staffing, water, and utilities. Recommended Actions  Evaluate options and work with Downey Unified School District and private fitness businesses providers to expand swimming programs for city residents especially learn to swim and water awareness programs.  Explore the opportunity to partner with a private business to program advanced aquatic programming including level 4 swimming lessons and up, lifeguard training classes, SCUBA, water polo, and kayaking. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 345 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 4 Children and Youth Services Downey offers recreation activities and classes, special events and after school programs geared towards a variety of grade levels: preschoolers, elementary, middle, and high school. Youth programs are a significant component of Downey services, highlighted by the ASPIRE after school program. While children and youth services remain important, Downey saw a declining number of young people during the 2000‐ 2010 period. The greatest decline in population by age group was evidenced among 5 to 9 years of age which declined by 15% while those less than age 5 declined by 9% or a total of 2,101 children. Between 2010 and 2013 the age 5 to 9 years of age was estimated to have dropped by an additional 296 children. Childcare needs are increasing and serve a valuable community and recreation service. A needs assessment prepared by the Los Angeles County Child Care Planning Committee, 2013 found that there is a particular need for before and after school childcare services for school aged children both within Downey and Los Angeles County. Preschool Downey offers a wide variety of parent‐participation classes and programs for preschool children between 1 and 6 years. Currently these programs are at the Gary P. McCaughan Gymnasium and the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center. The preschool program is fee‐based and self‐supporting. Also offered are the popular Wee Three and Tot Time programs. The program is designed for ages 3 and 4 and held during the school year at Furman Park and the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center. Pre‐school instruction is provided to a total of 120 toddler aged youth during the school year at Furman Park and at the Barbara J. Riley Community & Senior Center. Preparation for school is the focus of these 16‐week sessions focusing on numbers and alphabet recognition, developing the attention span, small motor skills, learning to follow instructions, crafts, and music. Parent participation is required at least once a month. Attendance reaches 240 students. A Me and Mom/Dad Fitness Club is held at the Gary P. McCaughan Gymnasium. The program is designed around learning activities and play experiences with other children, helping them to develop social, cognitive, and physical skills. An extensive pre‐school sports program is offered by the department at Apollo Park. This includes sport academies and leagues for ages 3‐5. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 346 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 5 The Downey City Library also offers a variety of reading programs including Preschool Story Time, Story Time for Babies and Toddlers, and Family Story Night. Although the Parks and Recreation Department does not offer any licensed childcare programs, the YMCA offers five programs city‐wide with one located at Furman Park. These programs run both before and after school hours. ASPIRE The City of Downey and the Downey Unified School District collaborate to administer a State grant to provide the After School Program Information Recreation Education (ASPIRE). The program is currently located at Alameda, Carpenter, Gauldin, Griffiths, Lewis, Old River, Stauffer, Sussman, Price, Unsworth, Ward, and Williams Schools. The goal of the program is to provide a fun, positive, and safe learning environment. The program operates on school days from school dismissal until 6:00pm. Enrollment averages near 1,500 students. ASPIRE students are provided with a daily snack prepared by the Downey Unified School District Food Services. Daily Activities include homework assistance for approximately one‐hour per day. The program includes enrichment components surrounding the development of educational skills and encouraging healthy life choices. This past April, Downey’s ASPIRE program participated in the 6th Annual Teen Adventure Challenge which was held at Bonelli Regional Park in San Dimas. This was the fourth consecutive year in which ASPIRE brought home first place in the middle school bracket. Representatives were sent from Griffiths, Sussman, and Stauffer middle schools. Teen/Youth Activities/Events Downey provides a limited number of special activities, classes, and events specifically for teens. In addition to the ASPIRE program at middle school locations, programming includes ice skating, golf, movie night, and middle school age dances. In 2014 the City hosted the first annual Teen Forum for middle and high school students. This event featured food and games and the ability for teens to tell city officials what they would like to see in terms of programs, services, and facilities. Activities programmed by the Parks and Recreation Department are complimented by the Library which offers a variety of teen programming including:  Using Databases for Research.  Creating a Modern Language Association (MLA) Works Cited List.  Teen Summer Reading Program.  Fieldtrips such as to the Long Beach Aquarium. Youth Commission The City sponsors the Downey Youth Commission. Downey City Council Members each appoint three Youth Commissioners annually from a pool of applicants. Youth Commissioners must be enrolled in high school and reside in the City of Downey and serve one‐year terms. The Commission’s purpose is:  Leadership development.  Civic/local government education (including planning for Student in Government Day).  Provision of youth input to the City Council.  Completion of annual assignments/priorities from the City Council. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 347 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 6 The Youth Commission brings together youth and adult, private and public sectors of the community to address responsibility for the care, health, safety, welfare, and education of Downey's young people. The Commission promotes youth involvement in the Downey community and communication between City leadership and the young people of the City. Examples of programs Youth Commissioners are involved in include Kid’s Day and Student Government Day. Further, the opportunity exist for the Commission to be a forum for ideas and concerns, and providing a vehicle for concerns and interests of youth to be communicated to City Council. The Downey Youth Commission is scheduled to hold regular meetings during the October through June period and annually host the Student in Government Day. Recommended Actions  Expand the role of the Youth Commission and involvement from Department staff so that they advise the City Council on all matters affecting the youth of Downey. Examples of additional programs or activities could include joint meetings with Youth Commissioners from adjoining cities and hosting a Youth Town Hall with the City Council.  Consider expanding Downey’s role in teen programs offering an array of programs that might include social recreation, tutoring, mentoring, and non‐sports activities.  Work with health care associations, to incorporate healthy eating and exercising habits into after‐school recreation programs and camps for young children that model healthy living.  Consider providing healthy snacks at City sponsored programs, day camps, and special events that meet state nutritional standards.  Explore the creation of alternative sports programming that is of interest to youth such as laser tag and rock climbing.  Collaborate with Downey Unified School District to ensure state standards for physical education are implemented and supplement school programs with physical activity and skill development in recreation offerings.  Provide indoor and outdoor spaces for supervised but unstructured free play for youth.  Continue/develop financial assistance support for youth who cannot afford program fees.  Continue cooperative efforts with youth sports organizations to provide safe and accessible programs that develop sports skills, good sportsmanship and provide youth experiences in organized sports such as the popular baseball, softball, basketball and football. New sports interests to be addressed include cricket, badminton, rugby, and lacrosse.  Consider programming “high risk” adventure activities such as kayaking, mountain biking, scuba diving, and rock climbing.  Develop a training and volunteer program of Play Stewards who would receive training and instruction on the aspects of play and recreation. Play Stewards would then coordinate with city staff on the delivery of recreation programming for youth and teens. Classes Downey offers a full range of classes and recreation activities for all age groups. Class and activity sessions occur year round. Downey provides activities, programs and special events in over 50 topic areas, including arts and crafts, science, music, language, and various sports programs and activities. The Community Needs Assessment Survey for the Parks and Open Space Master Plan found that nearly nine of every ten City of Downey households (87%) identified a desired program, class, or lesson, while just over one in ten (13%) stated they desired no program additions. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 348 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 7 Most classes and programs are fee based. In order to offset costs, it is and has consistently been a goal of the City that programs be self‐supporting to the greatest extent possible, through user fees as well as nontraditional funding methods. Classes and programs are funded primarily through the fees they generate, as well as grants, and donations. Partnerships with other public and private entities, such as the Downey Unified School District, a local ice rink, Paramount Iceland, and other community organizations and businesses, have also helped to offset cost and provide services. Recommended Actions  Provide greater access to arts programs by offering them through joint‐use agreements at venues close to home: neighborhood facilities, parks, churches, museums, the library, and shopping malls.  Strive to maintain high quality and diverse recreation classes and programs.  Downey should continue to monitor demand for programs and classes to determine and address changing needs and usage patterns.  Develop a line of healthy eating cooking programs in conjunction with the local business community.  Develop multi‐cultural arts programs and activities that promote personal connections among participants and allow the community to highlight and share its diverse customs, celebrations, and diversions.  Survey current participants and non‐participants to determine their preferences for additional kinds of classes, and determine if there are any deterrents to their participation, such as transportation or child care.  Collaborate with local and regional arts organizations to maximize resources and expertise to bring additional cultural programs to residents.  Expand cultural events and creative experiences through community partnerships with merchants, businesses, Chamber of Commerce, and other community organizations.  Continue to showcase different cultures in special event programming such as the International Food Festival, to enhance cultural understanding and unity. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 349 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 8 McCaughan Gymnasium The McCaughan Gymnasium, built in 1998 includes a 12,942 square foot building hosting a full‐sized basketball facility. The multi‐purpose gymnasium provides room for classes, and is available for a variety of uses, including adult and youth sports activities, basketball and volleyball leagues and clubs, and special events. The gym is also available to community groups for special uses. Recommended Actions  Establish standards requiring all future concession operations and vending machines sell at least 75% of the product that meets state nutritional standards.  Downey should conduct and report to governing bodies economic profile reports of major tournaments held at city facilities. Organized Team Sports Within the city limits there are 9 organized sport groups that regularly utilize Downey area playing fields and facilities throughout the year. This includes:  Downey Junior Athletic Association  Downey Ponytail Athletic Association  American Youth Soccer Organization – Downey Region #24  Northwest Downey Little League  West Downey Little League  Downey Futbol Club (Cal‐South)  Downey Youth Football – Razorbacks  Downey Dolphins Swim Team  Downey Mustangs Youth Football & Cheer While enrollment among the various groups has fluctuated over the last five years, most groups have maintained, if not increased, enrollment. According to Downey staff, there is a consistently high demand for playing time on all sports fields and facilities. The sports organization questionnaire and demand analysis, a portion of this master plan process, found a shortage of adult softball fields and practice fields for all sports within Downey. Further, the local soccer organizations expressed a desire for a single complex to host all games. Downey staff has also indicated that there is limited available space to accommodate additional or new sports groups such as lacrosse. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 350 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 9 Downey has added field acreage with the development of the Discovery Sports Complex with two softball/baseball fields and two soccer fields. Many Downey residents have voiced the opinion that they would like to see a new sports park facility within Downey’s jurisdiction that would provide playing fields to augment the perceived shortfall and accommodate a mix of uses. One of Downey’s biggest challenges over the timeframe of this Master Plan is finding an appropriate and available location (and funding) to create additional playing fields to meet this specialized demand. Recommended Actions  The City should work to correct the lack of fields available for all sports including emerging sports such as lacrosse and off‐ season soccer by entering into discussions with the Downey Unified School District for the joint use development of synthetic fields at Columbus High School fields.  All weather synthetic turf fields can support substantially more play than grass fields. Further, synthetic fields can easily be lined for several different sports, thus helping to meet the needs of new emerging sports such as lacrosse. When a system considers the cost of land and the cost of sports fields they should consider all weather synthetic fields as an alternative and do a cost benefit analysis on the options in order to determine the best alternative for them to follow.  Sports field design standards should be developed. Development and use of these design standards and guidelines needs to be put in place for future development to limit maintenance costs especially when sports fields double as a drainage basins. Standards to consider are traffic and pedestrian circulation, parking, athletic use areas, restroom/concession location and design.  Establish policies appropriate for the installation and management of synthetic playing fields including: o Synthetic fields should be installed only at facilities which also have lights for night‐time play. o A policy that states synthetic fields will be open for play except under extreme weather conditions. Outdoor Recreation Programs Active learning and adventure can take place outdoors in a variety of environments, rural and urban, local, and more remote. Outdoor education, recreation, and training involves both young people and adults in a wide range of experiences, including adventurous activities on land and water and activities with an environmental focus. Methods used include skills‐focused learning, problem solving, team building, and self‐reliant journeys and activities. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 351 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 10 Use of the outdoors in an urban setting, such as at Wilderness Park, makes a major contribution to physical and environmental education and enhances many other curriculum areas. It contributes to personal growth and social awareness, health and fitness, and develops skills for life and the world of work. Wilderness Park provides an excellent opportunity to base an environmental education program with the unique nature of the park and the Wilderness Center building. Although not operated by the Parks and Recreation Department, the Columbia Space Center, a City facility, currently offers Science Workshops for ages 8‐13 and Explores Academy for 3‐6 year olds. The Columbia Memorial Space Center is adjacent to Discovery Sports Complex. The fees generated by an outdoor recreation program could provide funding for most of the operating costs. Additionally, the National Park Service and California Department of Parks and Recreation also offer various grants for habitat conservation with an educational or interpretive component (for example, the Land and Water Conservation Fund and Habitat Conservation Fund). These potential funding sources should be investigated as a means of augmenting the program or possibly implementing planned facilities. The City is already utilizing the Habitat Conservation Fund to renovate the ponds at Wilderness Park. Recommended Actions  Adopt as part of this master plan an objective to “develop and expand a comprehensive Environmental Education Program using Wilderness Park and other Downey parks as part of the nature and day camp programs.”  Expand passive and active outdoor programs for families, neighborhood oriented walks, foot races, or bicycle events to provide safe venues for physical activity.  Collaborate with Downey Unified School District, Cerritos College, Audubon Society, and other organizations to offer programs in environmental education and interpretation to develop stewardship for natural resources and instill an appreciation for the natural environment.  Develop low‐cost/free programs for families in neighborhood parks to encourage children and families to get out and play.  Develop a Park Steward Volunteer Program where individuals can provide environmental enhancements, clean‐up, and coordinate other volunteers within local parks.  Implement Safe Routes to Schools and Parks via a joint Downey/Downey Unified School District project to encourage walking to and from schools and parks. A goal of the program is to increase the outdoor activities of families by providing incentives for non‐automotive transportation and providing additional opportunities to interact with the natural environment.  Adopt the Outdoor Bill of Rights connecting children with the outdoors and California history.  Utilize other recreational programming to promote the City’s sustainability actions and outdoor recreation programming. California Children’s Outdoor Bill of Rights Every child should have the opportunity to:  Discover California’s Past  Splash in the water  Play in a safe place  Camp under the stars  Explore nature  Learn to swim  Play on a team  Follow a trail  Catch a fish  Celebrate their heritage Adopted by the CA Roundtable in 2007 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 352 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 11 Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center Demographic data for Downey during the 2000 to 2010 time frame, showed the greatest growth in population among City residents in the 55 to 64 age group, increasing by 36%. Related to future senior services, the 45 to 54 age group increased by 17%. This trend mirrors many California and Los Angeles County communities. The high rate of growth in this age group in Downey is an indication that senior services and facilities will be in high demand over the next several decades. The Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center functions as both a senior center offering programs and services for ages 50+, and as a Community Center for the entire city of Downey. Programs and activities include:  Café Quill‐‐ a festive themed dinner.  Kaiser Fitness Center—Supported by Kaiser Permanente of Downey the Fitness Center is open to all 50+ during the centers regular operating hours.  Computer Lab & Library‐‐ open for patrons 50+ during regular operating hours the library features a reference section and a collection of books including Spanish and large‐print. In addition the computer lab is equipped with 6 computer stations and 2 table‐top printers.  Billiards Room‐‐Features three tournament size billiards tables. Each summer a Billiards Tournament is held in the Billiards Room for both novice and advanced level.  Senior Clubs & Organizations‐‐The Center is home to various independent senior citizen clubs including Bocce Ball Club, Downey Senior Citizens Recreation Club, and Senior Californian’s of Downey.  Senior Congregate Meal Program‐‐Administered by Human Services Association of Bell Gardens, approximately 35‐70 daily meals are served on site with another 30 via Downey Meals on Wheels.  Health & Wellness Workshops and Programs—The Center offers an array of workshops and programs including regular blood pressure checks, strength training and conditions, and special workshops such as Living with Diabetes, Medicare Special Needs Plans, and Medicare Open Enrollment/Dessert Social.  Resources and Referrals—A variety of regular programming is offered including tax, Medicare, and legal assistance, and a caseworker from a local congressional office to assist with immigration, Internal Revenue Service, United States Postal Service, social security, veteran affairs and other federal issues.  Excursions—A variety of excursions are offered. Upcoming trips include Pumpkin Junction, Julian, Route 66/Tam O’Shanter, and Tournament of Roses Parade.  Facility Rentals—Several rooms are available including the Diane Boggs Auditorium, kitchen facility, or the Downey, Rio Hondo, Gallatin, and Crawford meeting rooms. The Auditorium can seat up to 160 in banquet style seating. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 353 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 12  50+ programming—The City offers a variety of programming including 50+ special events, First Mondays, Summer Concert Series, seasonal events, and special interest leisure programs.  Halloween Pumpkin Patch.  Community fee‐based classes for all ages. Since opening, the center has continued to expand and include more recreation activities and services to meet a growing need within the community. Department figures show that approximately 180,000 residents utilize the Center annually with close to 950 rentals. Further, there are 140 senior enrichment classes each year with over 9,300 in attendance. Based primarily out of the Center, the City offers 26 excursions with 1,400 participants. Recent demographic analysis from 2010 reveals that seniors 55 and over comprised nearly 19.8% of City residents with a median age of 33.3. Similar aging of the population Countywide was also noted. Recommended Actions  Work with Los Angeles County and other public agencies to determine the needs of older adults in the Downey area and initiate planning to take a more active role in programming and service needs for older adults.  The City of Downey should develop a Strategic Plan for 2015‐2025 to guide future programs, services and staffing levels, and established goals in four planning areas: o Programs and services o Outreach to seniors o Communication with a larger community o Interaction at the Center  Address the needs of an aging population by expanding programming and encouraging participation in physical activity with an emphasis on the gentler aerobic activities.  Expand marketing to older adults with an emphasis on well balanced fitness programs including gentler aerobics such as yoga, Tai Chi, and Pilates that offer a variety of benefits for health and disease prevention.  Continue to explore future opportunities to collaborator to assist in developing an increase in programs for older adults. Possible partners may include AARP, faith based organizations, health care providers, and educational institutions.  Offer additional lifelong learning programs such as creative arts, technology classes, lectures, short courses, and leisure classes that cater to the adults and particularly the aging baby boomer cohort.  In conjunction with local health providers evaluate potential roles for the City in helping meet the needs of the growing population of 85+ seniors. As reported by the California Department of Aging, the fastest growing population is those over the age of 85 which quadrupled between 1990 and 2010, and projected to increase by 143% by 2020.  Offer educational travel opportunities and cultural outings with an emphasis on “off the beaten path,” scheduled to attract the working retiree.  Provide more “inter‐generational programming” to bring various age groups together to enjoy recreation events and activities. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 354 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 13 Healthy Downey The Healthy Downey program is aimed to encourage residents to find opportunities to participate in events and activities. The City and their partners are supporting physical, social, and economic environments that promote well‐being, residents have the opportunity to maintain a productive, high quality of life, including access to healthier ways to eat and exercise, nutrition, and fitness, and to use community parks and facilities to use towards a healthier lifestyle. The mission statement for Healthy Downey is: “Healthy Downey is a community collaborative that focuses on health and nutrition, creating a sustainable approach to wellness that will positively impact current and future generations through forming partnerships with committed community stakeholders.” The Areas of Focus of Healthy Downey as defined by Downey City Council resolution includes:  Community empowerment and education o Supporting the community to make healthy choices.  Family individual and citywide engagement o Engaging youth and families through schools, sports, and community activities. o Promoting sharing and enhancing community resources which improve the wellness of residents. o Advocating resources from Downey stakeholders both the business and non‐profit sector.  Evaluation and Sustainability o Collaborate with and educate the community on health based initiatives to sustain a healthy Downey for the future. o Establish performance measures to evaluate impact and sustainable efforts. Current partnerships for the program include:  City of Downey  Applecare  CareMore  Coca Cola Bottling  County of Los Angeles Department of Public Health  Downey Chamber of Commerce  Downey Unified School District  Downey YMCA  Downey Patriot  PIH Downey  Health Net  Human Services Association – Choose Health LA DR A F T PC Agenda Page 355 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 14  Kaiser Permanente  Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center The program features a number of activities and events such as the Rock‐N‐Ride bike event, Healthy Downey 5K, and Walk to School Events. Other related health related cultural events include the International Food Festival, Summer Sunset Rooftop Movies and Music Events, FIFA World Cup Event, International Food Festival, and the Mayor’s Healthy Heart Award. Recommended Actions  Develop multi‐disciplinary health partnerships with schools, local hospitals, and health care providers, private health clubs, and other agencies to bring public information and educational programs that prevent obesity and successfully promote physical activity across entire communities.  Work with Los Angeles County and other public agencies to determine the needs of the Downey community and initiate a strategic planning effort for the Healthy Downey program.  Report on an on‐going basis to the public and policy makers the health and wellness outcomes of the City’s programs and facilities.  Collaborate with Los Angeles County agencies, Cerritos College, Audubon Society to maximize opportunities to share resources in providing outdoor recreation and health and wellness programs. Special Events Special events are a unique community service that generate revenue through facility rental, admission fees, and concessions and revenue to the community through increased business activities and tourism. The Parks and Recreation Department working in conjunction with numerous civic organizations, businesses, and other public agencies provides facilities, staff support, and miscellaneous services for a number of special and seasonal events in the community. The largest of these special events are the annual Kidsday event with over 8,000 in attendance and the annual Halloween event with 9,000 in attendance. Other seasonal events include Kidsday Hall of Fame, summer concerts at Furman Park, annual Memorial Day event, Dia De Los Muertos, and Tour de Downey. Other events included the first annual Bunny Breakfast, Teen Forums, and Movie Night for Middle School Students. Recently the City of Downey was selected to participate in the 2015 Special Olympics World Games Host Town program from July 21 – 24, 2015. Prior to the start of the World Games, more than 7,000 athletes from 177 countries will be welcomed to Southern California through the Host Town program. One hundred communities from San Luis Obispo to San Diego will have the honor of being selected as an official Host Town. Several local organizations and community members will be partnering up with the City to welcome the Special Olympics athletes. Some of the confirmed community organizations include: Coca‐Cola, Kaiser Permanente, Downey Chamber of Commerce, Downey Association of Realtors, Kiwanis, and the Soroptimist. Communities are evaluated on the availability of lodging accommodations, sports practice facilities and recreation/entertainment offerings for the athletes, among other criteria. Host Towns are also DR A F T PC Agenda Page 356 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 15 responsible for planning activities for the athletes to introduce them to the community and help spread the word about the Games. Recommended Actions  The City should continue to play a role and work in cooperation with the Chamber of Commerce, School District, civic organizations, and businesses, to produce community‐wide special events.  Downey should conduct and report to governing bodies economic profile reports of major tournaments and swim meets held at city facilities. Support Functions Support Functions relate to how programs and operations are implemented by the City of Downey including the operation and/or development of facilities and policies or procedures to support the delivery of the recreational programming. These may relate to support services or facilities and how they may impact many of the programs. Fiscal and Coordinated Planning To minimize duplication and/ or competition the City should coordinate fiscal and planning with the School Districts and with other public and non‐profit agencies to provide for the best use of public and private resources to meet recreation demands. The partnership between the City and Downey Unified School District is a model for cooperation and joint utilization of public facilities for public benefits. Regardless, staff from both organizations should continue to meet and discuss agreement modifications required to meet the changing needs and demands of the community. Creation of a Downey Park Foundation A Foundation is a nonprofit “501c3” organization that works with and supports Downey and other community organizations to develop interpretive, educational, environmental, recreation, and community service programs for the community. The primary mission of a Foundation could be based on:  To aid, sponsor, promote, advance and assist in the provision of public parks, recreation and community services in the Downey Area.  To cooperate with and support the Downey Parks and Recreation Department and other community organizations in the development of interpretive, recreational, educational, environmental and community service programs throughout the city for the benefit and enjoyment of people in the service area.  To receive, invest, and manage funds acquired through dues, donations, grants, gifts, bequests, and solicitations in furtherance of the purposes and goals of the City. Marketing Marketing and communication of public information in both print and electronic media is essential to increase public awareness about programs and facilities to reach all ages, non‐users and the underserved. While the City provides an excellent level of service in many areas, improvement can be gained in some aspects of marketing, branding, and facility rental. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 357 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 16 Providing Services for a Growing and Ethnically Diverse Population that are Convenient and Equitably Distributed Providing services to a growing and ethnically diverse population should be an emphasis of the City due to the changing demographics. Further, these services should be convenient, accessible, and equitably distributed to all residents in terms of recreation programs, support services, and facilities needed close to home and/or centrally located. For the 2000‐2010 period Downey residents identifying themselves as White declined from 29% to 18% while increases were noted among those identifying themselves as Hispanic from 58% to 71%. A similar trend is also seen within Los Angeles County. Providing services for a growing and ethnically diverse population will continue to challenge the City as the areas demographics continue to change and increase in diversity. Downey is a changing community as the white population of the city continues to decline with minority populations, especially Hispanic, have grown at a much faster rate than the population as a whole. Volunteers Programs In a time of reduced tax funding opportunities and heavier reliance on alternative sources of funding, the use of volunteers is considered a valuable component of maintaining quality service levels. Last year the Department recorded 2,510.6 volunteer hours for Fiscal Year 14/15. Volunteers are used in some aspects of Downey’s operations including Keep Downey Beautiful through the Public Works Department, the Downey Theatre has volunteers for their shows, and the Parks and Recreation Department uses volunteers at special events as well as the ASPIRE program. Volunteer recruitment and training is a new challenge to community agencies as the volunteer pool diminishes because of working parents and aging WWII generation of steadfast, community volunteers. Offering meaningful volunteer opportunities to baby boomers and instilling volunteerism in youth will facilitate new volunteer support. Many agencies state‐wide have initiated programs of Park Stewards who foster leadership and partial management of park sites in conjunction with city‐staff. This program could be expanded to develop Play Stewards who would foster the same leadership qualities but within recreation programming. Recommended Actions  Work to develop a “501c3” organization that works with and supports Downey and other community organizations to develop interpretive, educational, environmental, recreation, and community service programs for the community. The primary mission of a Foundation could be based on: o To aid, sponsor, promote, advance and assist in the provision of public parks, recreation and community services in the Downey Area. o To cooperate with and support the Downey’s Parks and Recreation Department and other community organizations in the development of interpretive, recreational, educational, environmental, and community service programs throughout the city for the benefit and enjoyment of people in the service area. o To receive, invest, and manage funds acquired through dues, donations, grants, gifts, bequests, and solicitations in furtherance of the purposes and goals of the City.  Continue to meet on a regular and on‐going basis to review and consider changing terms of the Joint Facility Use Agreement with Downey Unified School District to improve and expand use of indoor and outdoor school and city facilities. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 358 City of Downey Recreation Programming May 2015 17  Compare Fee Policies of other jurisdictions with the City’s and establish an updated policy that supports established revenue generation goals for each program taking in consideration equity, cost recovery and consistency.  Pursue additional public‐private partnerships with fitness clubs, golf courses, dance studios or other private recreation providers to provide recreation programs.  Downey should conduct and report to governing bodies economic profile reports of major tournaments and swim meets held at city facilities.  Expand public awareness of programs for persons with disabilities, and child and adult day care opportunities.  Create challenging and meaningful volunteer opportunities for all age segments in the community. This could include: o Park Stewards who with city leadership and cooperation lead the volunteer maintenance and restoration work in a city park, bringing together the needed volunteers, materials, technical knowledge, and other resources necessary to provide maintenance and to make on‐the‐ground improvements a reality. o Play Stewards who with city leadership and cooperation lead the volunteer recreation programming work within park sites and or facilities, bringing together the needed materials, technical knowledge of play, and other resources necessary to provide additional play and recreational opportunities to the youth of the city. o Develop a Park and Play Steward training and certification program that includes aspects of park maintenance, play, city procedures, and etc. o Park and Play Stewards would be coordinated and lead by City Staff and operate consistent with City policies.  Work cooperatively with local service clubs to recruit volunteers for special projects or events.  In cooperation with schools and youth groups e.g. Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts engage youth in the design of and completion of volunteer work.  Complete a comprehensive marketing plan that gives consideration and identifies potential promotional strategies for each of the following: o Networking ‐ go where your market is; o Direct marketing ‐ sales letters, brochures, flyers; o Advertising ‐ print media, directories; o Training programs ‐ to increase awareness; o Write articles, give advice, become known as an expert; o Direct/personal selling; o Publicity/press releases; o Trade shows, health/wellness fairs and similar events; o Web site.  Develop a Social Media marketing plan that includes web site improvements and increased online visibility based on establishing a brand for the City through a variety of social media sites including: o Facebook; o Twitter; o Blogs; o Events sites; o Video sites. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 359 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 360 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 1 RECREATION TRENDS ANALYSIS Emerging Trends Today, our country and the world has become more transient, fast paced, with consistent, rapid, and dramatic changes. Therefore, understanding the trends that affect the park and recreation industry is very important as the City moves through the process of developing a Parks and Open Space Master Plan to ensure sustainability and to meet the future community service needs of the community. An awareness of trends affecting the future economy, facility operation, and program participation will not only enhance the ability to meet growing and changing needs but open doors to new opportunities. Paying attention to current issues and understanding future issues will assist Downey in achieving sustainability and positioning parks and recreation as an essential service to the community. Emerging trends can be organized into five major subject areas:  Demographic Shift  Changing Life Styles  Society and Economy  Sustainability  Park and Recreation As these emerging trends are explained and discussed, it will become clear that there will be significant impacts on current facilities and the development of new park and recreation facilities. Foremost among these changes are:  “Intergenerational” facilities that address needs of all of the community’s population regardless of age.  Facilities that support programs, and provide positive, safe, and secure recreational alternatives for healthy lifestyles and to combat obesity.  Facilities that support programs and activities, promote personal connections, and allow the community to highlight and share their cultural heritage.  Neighborhood parks and facilities that allow for increased community connectedness.  Facilities that support increased multi‐cultural family and art events.  Access to facilities, with flexible hours to accommodate user needs.  Facilities in which teens can call “home”, program, and operate under teen leadership.  Facilities in which children can experience, learn, and develop an appreciation for nature and open space. Benefits of Parks and Recreation The California Park and Recreation Society (CPRS) Vision Insight and Planning Project—Creating Community in the 21st Century identified the mission of California’s park and recreation agencies as: To create community through people, parks and programs. The plan also identified benefits of park and recreation services including: o Foster Human Development. Parks and recreation services foster social, intellectual, physical and emotional development. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 361 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 2 o Promote Health and Wellness. Participation in recreation improves physical and emotional health. o Increase Cultural Unity. Parks and recreation increases cultural unity through experiences that promote cultural understanding and celebrate diversity. o Facilitate Community Problem‐solving. Park and recreation professionals have skills in facilitation and leadership that can be applied to resolve community problems and issues. o Protect Natural Resources. By acquiring and protecting valuable resources such as open space, such as rivers, streams, greenways, view sheds, forests and other habitat areas, natural resources are protected and habitat required for the survival of diverse species is preserved. o Strengthen Safety and Security. Park and recreation professionals provide safe environments for recreation and design programs and services specifically to reduce criminal activity. o Strengthen Community Image and Sense of Place. Parks, recreation facilities, programs and community events are key factors in strengthening community image and creating a sense of place. o Support Economic Development. Recreation programs and facilities attract and retain businesses and residents, as well as attract tourists. Parks and recreation provides jobs and generates income for the community and for local businesses. A study funded by National Park and Recreation Association (NRPA) and conducted by Geoffrey Godby of Pennsylvania State University, "The Benefits of Local Recreation and Park Services ‐ A Nationwide Study of the Perceptions of the American Public," compiled a listing of the benefits of local recreation and park services as perceived by the American public. The survey involved a nationwide survey of individuals over the age of 15 and divided participants into two groups: users of local recreation and park services and non‐users. Surprisingly, 71% of those who identified themselves as non‐users said they received some benefit from their communities' parks and recreational services. Individual and family benefits identified by users of local parks and recreation services: o Personal ‐ 42% o Social ‐ 38% o Facility/Activity ‐ 12% o Environmental ‐ 6% o Economic ‐ 2% Conclusions of the study included: o The vast majority of the American public uses local recreation and park services. o Playground use is the most common use. o Park and recreational service use continues throughout the individuals life. Recreational participation declines with age, but park use does not. In fact, people between the ages of 65 and 74 use local parks more frequently than any other age group except those 14 and under. o The majority of people that do not use parks and recreational services still perceive substantial benefit from them. o Sixty percent of the study's respondents perceive a "great deal" of community benefit from such services. o Seventy‐five percent of study’s respondents said that "local recreation and park services are worth $45.00 or more per member of their household" per year. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 362 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 3 o Local parks and recreation are associated with a sense of community. Community level benefits are considered more important than individual or household level benefits. Demographic Shift • Our Nation is aging, as is the state and the city of Downey. The median age of Americans today is 37 years. By 2030, it is projected to be 39 years. Downey currently holds a younger population with a median age of 33.4 in 2013 and only 10.6% of the population over 65. Between 2000 and 2013, the age group 55‐64 was projected to experience the largest increase in share, growing from 7.2% to 10.2%. The age groups expected to experience the greatest decline, by share, is projected to be the age groups under 5 and 5‐9, decreasing 9.2% and 14.5% respectively. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • For Downey, the age group 55‐64 is expected to add the most population, with an increase of 3,736 people between 2000 and 2013. The US Census Bureau projects that California’s population for those over 65 will increase by 130% by 2030. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • Households are shrinking nationwide, while Downey’s population per household will increase to 3.32 by 2014 according to a California Department estimate. This is significantly higher than Los Angeles County’s 3.00 person per household. California currently has the second highest average in the nation for owner‐occupied at 2.93. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • Our Nation is becoming more culturally diverse. By 2020, the Hispanic population will reach 80 million, comprising one in five US residents. English as the language used at home has dropped from 87% in 1990 to 84.3% in 2000. Within the Downey City boundaries between 2000 and 2012, the share of Hispanic population in the city increased from 57.9% to 73.5%. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • While the Hispanic population of Downey continues to experience increasing numbers, other races show the opposite. Between 2000 and 2012, the share of Non‐ Hispanic White population in the city decreased from 28.7% to 15.2% and, the share of Asian population in the city decreased from 7.6% percent to 6.5%. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • There will continue to be a growing population of individuals with special needs. In 2005, almost 22 million of older adults in our nation had a functional deficit, and 12 million of this group had an activity limitation. This percentage is projected to grow over time as the population ages. While growth rates have stabilized, by 2030, the number of individuals with functional or activity limitations are projected to grow to 38 million and 22 million respectively. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) Changing Life Styles • Both “Generation X’s” and “Generation Y’s” crave fun, fast‐paced and action‐packed experiences; seek the pursuit of pleasure and the stimulation of the senses. While they both prefer collective activities, media and technology‐based leisure, and extreme sports, there are basic differences: There are now an estimated 10.5 million health club members in the US who are over age 55. International Council of Active Aging DR A F T PC Agenda Page 363 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 4 o Generation X” is the generation born after the baby‐boom ended, generally between 1961 and 1979 and are highly educated, active, and family oriented. Technologically speaking, Generation X has witnessed the rise of cable TV, video games, and the internet. Their political experiences and cultural perspectives were shaped by the end of the cold war, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and a series of US economic calamities such as the 1973 oil crisis, the 1979 energy crisis and the early 1980’s economic recession. (Wikipedia.org) o “Generation Y”, also known as the Millennial Generation or Generation Next, were born roughly between mid‐ 1970 and 2000. Expression and acceptance are highly important to this generation. They are very familiar with digital technologies, media and communications, including texting, tweeting, YouTube, and Facebook. They often find comfort in on‐line gaming. Their economic outlook has been hard hit by the late 2000’s economic recession. (Wikipedia.org) • The high‐tech world has given birth to a generation of sedentary lifestyles. The high‐tech/high‐touch generation shares common leisure activities such as internet surfing, computer and video games, social networking and TV watching. As a result, obesity prevalence for adults increased from 10% in 1990 to 24% in 1996, and is projected to rise to 35% by 2015. (Center for Disease Control) • The electronic world continues to expand. In 2009, 438 million new consumer electronics were sold in the United States. By 2012, 78.9% of the nation’s population had a computer at home and 74.8% internet access. This is up dramatically from 51% and 41.5% respectively in 2000. Further, there is a direct correlation with educational achievement and use of a computer. Data from the 2010 census revealed that for those with a BA, 89.7% had a computer at home. For those with less than a high school education that figure dropped to 39.3%. (Huffington Post—www.statisticsbrain.com) • Situated within Los Angeles County, Downey has convenient access to scenic mountains, natural areas, and the Pacific Ocean. This provides opportunities for people both seeking both access to natural areas and the urban environment for walking, and bicycling, two of the most popular activities statewide. Walkscore.com gave Downey a 54 score meaning a somewhat walkable city. In contrast, San Francisco was the second most walkable city in the United States receiving a score of 83.9. Local comparisons include Norwalk at 56, La Mirada at 44, and Bell Gardens with a score of 63. In 2008, California State Parks research found that 74% of Californians walk for fitness or pleasure. • The 2000 National Survey on Recreation and the Environment (NSRE) estimated that walking would grow 23% and 34% in the next 10 and 20 years respectively. Blessed with the great outdoors, and a push in California to make communities more walkable, one can expect even a higher rate in California. Society and Economy • Unemployment will continue to remain high in the foreseeable future. The Great Recession, technically ended in mid‐2009, but has many lingering effects. The Congressional Budget Office in a report titled “Budget and Economic Outlook Fiscal Year 2011‐21,” projects that the unemployment rate will gradually fall to 5.3% by 2016. A higher than “normal” unemployment rate ranging from 7‐10% will likely stick around in California for at least another three to five years. For March 2015, the unemployment rate in Downey has fallen to 6.4%, California is at 6.5% and the nation declining to 5.8%. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 364 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 5 • Nation‐wide the gap between those who “have” resources and “have‐not” is getting wider. Within the Downey area the percentage of those living in poverty is over, 14.0% as recorded by the American Community Survey 2006‐10. For California, 13.3% are below the poverty level with the largest percentage being families headed by a single female. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) •Downey has a high number of foreign born citizens with 34% of the population being foreign born compared to California at 27%. Of Downey’s foreign born population, 78% are from Mexico and other Latin American countries. Correspondingly, 53% of Downey’s households speak at least one other language than English while 12% of the households have no residents over the age of 14 who speak English. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • The median household income for Downey in 2013 was $60,041 while the County of Los Angeles average was at $54,244. In 2012, 44% of Downey’s households earned less than $50,000 annually while 34% of the households earned between $50,000 and $99,999. From 2000 to 2013, the median household income increased by $14,374 annually, an increase of over 34%. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • The median value for owner occupied homes in Downey in 2013 was $393,100, close to $410,500 for Angeles County overall. This is compared to $383,900 for California. Between 2000 and 2013, the median home sales price increased 53% from $209,700 to $393,100 despite a decline in value between 2010 and 2013. (American Community Survey and California Department of Finance) • Crime continues to be a concern. According to neighborhoodscout.com the crime rate in Downey is considerably higher than the national average across all communities in America. The chance of becoming a victim of either violent or property crime in Downey is 1 in 29. Based on FBI crime data, Downey is not one of the safest communities in America. Relative to California, Downey has a crime rate that is higher than 78% of the state's cities and towns of all sizes. (City‐data.com) • Violent crime in Downey occurs at a rate higher than in most communities of all population sizes in America. The chance that a person will become a victim of a violent crime in Downey such as armed robbery, aggravated assault, rape or murder is 1 in 298. This equates to a rate of 3 per one thousand inhabitants. (City‐data.com) • Downey is a place where there is an above average chance of becoming a victim of a property crime, when compared to all other communities in America of all population sizes. Property crimes are motor vehicle theft, arson, larceny, and burglary. Your chance of becoming a victim of any of these crimes in Downey is one in 32. (City‐data.com) • City‐data.com utilizes a slightly different format to score cities crime index, counting more heavily serious crime and violent crime. City‐data.com gave Downey a score of 293.9 for 2012, improving from a score of 354.4 in 2008. This compares with a national average of 257.0 and locally with a 575.4 for Santa Fe Springs, 269.7 for Bellflower, 255.0 for Pico Rivera, and 254.6 for Norwalk. • Technology will continue to shape the way we live and do business. In the U.S., in 2013 high speed internet was found in 70% of the homes, up from 47% in 2007. In 2015 the average American spent 7.6 hours on social networking, with Facebook accountin for 56% of that time. In 2014 there were a total of DR A F T PC Agenda Page 365 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 6 316 million cell phone subscribers, up from 184 million in 2004. In 2010 Twitter processed more than 55 million tweets a month increasing to 88 million per month by 2012. Over 25% internet page views occurred at one of the top social networking sites, up from 13.8% a year before. (Huffington Post— www.statisticsbrain.com) • In an article from the LA Times, Los Angeles officials plan to roll out a free public Wi‐Fi service at six public city parks, as well as a mobile service to handle service requests sent in from the field. Visitors to Cabrillo Beach, Echo Park Lake, Griffith Observatory, Pershing Square, Reseda Park and Venice Beach will be able to access the wireless network at designated hotspots, according to the city. Meanwhile San Francisco has partnered with Google to roll out free Wi‐Fi at a number of public spaces in the city. Google donated $600,000 to the city to help buy and install Wi‐Fi equipment and cover maintenance costs at 32 parks. • Nationally, there is an emerging recognition that parks and recreation services play a significant role in improving the quality of life of the City, and that parks and open space are catalysts for both community building and economic development. “The Role of Parks in Shaping Successful Cities” released in 2014 by the American Planning Association (APA) and NRPA, directly associate well‐maintained parks and greenways with a strong sense of place and community identity, enhanced property values, and business, future homeowner, and tourist attractions. • In 2011, California was ranked as the 12th least obese state in America (38 states are more obese) although obesity rates had increased by over 78%. Obesity in California has almost doubled over the last 15 years, and currently is at 24.8% for adults. In addition, nationwide diabetes has also almost doubled to 8.7% and 25.5% of the people are reporting high blood pressure. (Center for Disease Control) • According to the Center for Disease Prevention and Control more than two thirds of Americans are overweight and one‐third is obese. Obesity prevalence in 2013 varies across states and regions: o No state had a prevalence of obesity less than 20%. o 7 states and the District of Columbia had a prevalence of obesity between 20% and <25%. o 23 states had a prevalence of obesity between 25% and <30%. o 18 states had a prevalence of obesity between 30% and <35%. o 2 states (Mississippi and West Virginia) had a prevalence of obesity of 35% or greater. o The South had the highest prevalence of obesity (30.2%), followed by the Midwest (30.1%), the Northeast (26.5%), and the West (24.9%). • A recent study by the Trust for America’s Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation projected a nation‐wide obesity rate of 42% by 2030 with California increasing from the current level of 24.8% to 47%. • While recent studies indicate declining obesity rates among 2‐5 year olds another study indicated opposite results for older children. Over 250 California cities were analyzed by UCLA Center for Health Policy Research and the California Center for Public Health Advocacy. The study was based on children in 5th, 7th, and 9th grades. Around 38.4% of the children in California are overweight or obese. Huntington Park in Los Angeles County topped the list with 53.0%. Locally, Downey was at 40.1% and California Center for Public Health Advocacy estimates that in 2012, Californian’s spent $21 Billion resulting from the health consequences of obesity. California was number one for all states in total expenditures. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 366 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 7 Los Angeles County was also above the state average at 42.6%, Compton 50.8%, Bell 47.1%, and Norwalk 46.5%. Manhattan Beach in Los Angeles County had the lowest rate in the state, with just 11.3% of children obese. (http://www.publichealthadvocacy.org/) • Economics also plays a large role in the likelihood of a person being obese. One‐third of adults who earn less than $15,000 per year are obese, compared with one‐quarter of the population who earn at least $50,000. (Center for Disease Control) • Research in the Journal of Transport and Health says cities with a more compact street network had reduced rates of obesity, diabetes, and heart disease, while wider streets and more lanes were tied to higher disease levels. "This research is one more in a long line that demonstrates the myriad advantages of fostering walkable places," researcher Norman Garrick said. • A Doctor from the District of Columbia has started to write prescriptions for outdoor play. About 40 percent of Dr. Robert Zarr's young patients are overweight or obese, which has led the doctor to come up with ways to give them very specific recommendations for physical activity. Zarr writes park prescriptions on a special prescription pad, in English and Spanish, with the words "Rx for Outdoor Activity" on top, and a schedule slot that asks, "When and where will you play outside this week?" In the San Francisco area, UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland and the East Bay Regional Park District have partnered on a Park Prescriptions Program. The goal is to reduce chronic obesity and promote physical activity among children. Similar examples have occurred in Portland, Oregon and Seattle, Washington. (http://centerforactivedesign.org/prescriptionforphysicalactivity) • According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), health care expenditures in 2007 represented 16.7% of gross domestic product (GDP) and are projected to grow to 19% of GDP by 2017. Medical costs associated with obesity were estimated at $147 billion per year; on average, annual medical costs for people who are obese were $1,429 higher than for individuals of normal weight. (http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult/causes/index.html) Sustainability • There is a renewed awareness and sensitivity to the preservation of our natural environment. Many cities such as Seattle, Portland, and San Francisco have developed best practices and strategies to address open space and urban forest preservation, wildlife habitat and natural area restoration, invasive plant management and shoreline/wetland/critical area management. • Another fast growing trend is the construction of “green” buildings using Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified strategies to improve energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emission reductions and stewardship of resources. Since the inception of the LEED certification system in 1998, the U.S. Green Building Council has grown to encompass more than 14,000 projects in the United States and 30 countries covering 1.062 billion square feet (99 km²) of development area. (http://www.usgbc.org/) • There is a trend to utilize ecologically sound management practices in park and facility maintenance and operation. This would include recycling programs, reduced use of pesticides, energy‐efficient lighting installations, water conservation and bio‐swale additions in park design to reduce water runoff. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 367 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 8 • Contra Costa County in the San Francisco Bay area has started a Green Business Program based out of Contra Costa County Health Services, Hazardous Materials Program. The program works with businesses to conserve resources and prevent pollution, possibly becoming Green Business certified using sector‐specific criteria. (http://www.co.contra‐costa.ca.us/depart/cd/recycle/greenbuilding.htm) • According to a recent (2013) report by the Urban Lands Institute, Ten Principles for Building Healthy Places changes in physical design over the past 50 years have led to lifestyle changes, which have led to health impacts. Communities designed in a way that supports physical activity—wide sidewalks, safe bike lanes, accessible recreation areas— encourage residents to make healthy choices and live healthy lives. • Sustainable development has been gaining momentum since late 1980’s in response to the growing awareness of climate change and the need to reduce carbon footprint. The park and recreation profession has a huge role to play to comprehensively promote the three pillars of sustainability, economic, social and environmental. Parks, open space and recreation services generate a host of community benefits and outcomes in each of the three pillars of sustainability. Park and Recreation Industry • Urban parks are on the rise to address open space and leisure walking needs within the compact built environment. Urban parks are commonly expressed in the form of paved plazas or courtyards adorned with public art and water features, or linear urban trails with widened boulevard, city streetscapes and bike facilities. Sometimes, these urban parks are interspersed with community gardens to replace lost backyards in high‐density living. •An article by Kristen Copeland, “Societal Values and Policies May Curtail Preschool Children’s Physical Activity in Child Care Centers”, published in Pediatrics February, 2012 claimed that because of stricter licensing codes, playgrounds are now less physically challenging and more boring to children. Participants in the study felt that state inspections of their playground and strict licensing codes helped them feel confident about the safety of the equipment. Despite this participants also felt that the guidelines had become so strict they were actually limiting rather than promoting children’s physical activity due to play equipment being rendered unchallenging and uninteresting to the children. The new play equipment that was safe per these standards soon became boring to the children. "The emphasis on pre‐academics, concerns about safety, and limitation in budgets and space have created the perfect storm for young children to get less than the desired amount of physical education and exercise," Dr. Andrew Adesman, Chief of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics at the Steven and Alexandra Cohen Children's Medical Center of New York. Ten Principles for Building Healthy Places  Put People First  Recognize the Economic Value  Empower Champions for Health  Energize Shared Spaces  Make Healthy Choices Easy  Ensure Equitable Access  Mix It Up  Embrace Unique Character  Promote Access to Healthy Food  Make It Active Urban Lands Institute ‐‐2013 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 368 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 9 • There is an increasingly vocal group of play experts (including environmental psychologists, child development specialists, educators and landscape architects) who see creative play as serious work providing time for kids to learn, discover and be creative. They advocate the creation of a play environment open to manipulation. They see the addition of familiar swings and slides as only offering repetitive gross‐motor play activities often isolated from other activities. Instead, they recommend adventure playgrounds made up of “loose parts,” such as water, sand, balls and other manageable materials, for children to work, explore, create, and make‐believe. • As reported by the Tri‐City Herald the School District of Richland, Washington, is removing their swing sets, with school officials claiming they are under pressure from insurance companies to keep liabilities from playground injuries to a minimum. A report from the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) estimates over 200,000 playground equipment‐related injuries are treated every year in U.S. hospital emergency rooms, with about 17 of these accidents resulting in death. In Vancouver, Washington, a 7‐ year‐old girl died after falling off a swing set. The girl had not told anyone of her fall and complained to her father about feeling dizzy after walking home from school that day. After her brother later found her sick in her room, the family rushed the girl to Vancouver hospital where she was diagnosed with traumatic brain injury. (http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Newsroom/CPSC‐RSS‐Feed/Playground‐Injury‐ Statistics/) • The CPSC reports that just under half (about 45 percent) of all playground injuries occurred on equipment at schools and about 31 percent in public parks, while a quarter involved other children, such as when a child walks in front of a swing. Falls accounted for about 81 percent of the injuries on home equipment and 79 percent of the injuries on public equipment. And, virtually all of the falling injuries, whether public or private, occurred from distances of less than 10 feet. According to United Educators, most playground injury lawsuits cite negligence, which allows for an injured party to seek compensation if a school or staff member fails to act reasonably under the circumstances. (http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Newsroom/CPSC‐RSS‐Feed/Playground‐Injury‐Statistics/) • Figures released by the Sporting Goods Association of America (SGMA) in 2012 continue to show changes in sport participation rates. SGMA reported dramatic a dramatic increase in lacrosse up 29.1%. Other increases included ice skating (16.4%), trail running (10.9%), field hockey (1.9%), ultimate frisbee (12.2%), Rugby (2%), downhill skiing (2.1%), cross‐country skiing (10.5%), and snowboarding at (8.2%). Significant decreases of over 16% were experienced by in‐line skating, skateboarding, and softball. Smaller declines, less than 5%, was found in traditional sports such as tennis, baseball, basketball, and soccer. • The Sports Fitness Industry Association (SFIA) released the “2013 Sports, Fitness and Leisure Activities Topline Participation Report” which found that participation among 6‐18 year olds in four youth sports, basketball, soccer, baseball, and football all experienced decline in numbers, although participation in youth lacrosse was up 158%. The report examined data from youth leagues, school sports groups, and industry associations from 2008 to 2012. Significant findings included:  Combined participation in the four most‐popular team sports listed above fell among boys and girls aged 6‐17 by about 4%. For all ages aerobic exercising showed a 16.3% increase while yoga had the highest increase in participation up by 28% in 2010 but slowing to less than 5% by 2012. Ironically, the sale of “yoga pants” was up by 78%. NSGA Survey DR A F T PC Agenda Page 369 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 10  The population of 6‐17 year‐olds in the U.S. fell just 0.6 percent during that same time period, according to the U.S. Census.  Participation in high school basketball was down 1.8%.  Little League baseball reports U.S. participation in its baseball and softball leagues was down 6.8%.  Participation in organized football by players aged 6 through 14 was 4.9% below that in 2008.  Basketball participation fell 6.3% in the 6‐14 group.  The percentage of inactive 6‐12 year‐olds — youths involved in no physical activities over a 12 month period — rose to near 20% in 2012 from 16% in 2007.  Inactive 13‐17 year‐olds rose from 17% to 19%. • Bocce Ball, a sport which has been around for centuries is now experiencing a growth in participation rates, especially in Northern California and the San Francisco Bay Area. The United Stated Bocce Federation states that there are about 1 million players currently in the United States. Within Downey courts are found at Apollo Park near the Barbara J. Riley Community & Senior Center supports a Bocce Ball league. In nearby Orange County, Irvine and Fountain Valley each have courts and Tustin is planning to build two courts. • Pickleball was invented the summer of 1965 on Bainbridge Island, Washington, at the home of Joel Pritchard, then a state representative and later a congressman. Pritchard and a couple of friends tried to get a game of badminton together for their families but couldn’t find a shuttlecock. They improvised with a whiffle ball, lowered the net, and made paddles from some plywood. Currently, the sport of pickleball is exploding in popularity. The number of places to play has nearly doubled since 2010. There are now well over 2,000 locations on the USA Pickleball Association’s Places to Play map. The spread of the sport is attributed to its popularity within community centers, physical education classes, YMCA facilities and retirement communities. The sport continues to grow worldwide as well with many new international clubs forming and national governing bodies now established in Canada and India. (World Pickleball Federation) • Community gardens have grown in popularity over the last decade, as people have become more aware of the value of eating organic local food. Furthermore, fruit and vegetables have grown more expensive due to climate changes. Community gardens generally provide fresh produce as well as flowers, and they can be a lovely sight in an urban neighborhood if properly maintained. The United States Department of Agriculture claims that approximately 15% of food today is grown in urban areas, in backyards, on apartment balconies and in community gardens. Community gardens can improve nutrition for a neighborhood, particularly for low‐income persons. • Bike advocates argue that separation is key to driving up cyclist participation. PeopleForBikes, an advocacy group in Colorado working with Portland State University is researching the benefits of bike US Youth Soccer player registration decreased by over 50,000 and was projected to drop by an additional 164,590 in 2012, leaving an overall total of less than three million for the first time in more than 12 years. It would be easy to attribute the decrease in registration to economic concerns or even a lower birth rate. However, when you look at organizations like US Club Soccer, were forecasting growth of more than 15% in 2012. Similarly, other sports like US Lacrosse, the governing body for Lacrosse in the United States, showed an increase in youth registration by more than 35,000 from 2010 to 2013 with further growth expected. US Soccer Key Statistics and US Lacrosse Facts & Figures DR A F T PC Agenda Page 370 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 11 lands. Across six cities, the study finds a rise of ridership between 21% and 171% after bike lanes were installed. The report from Portland State University looks at eight "Green Lane" projects sponsored by. Researchers tracked the impact of the new lanes in Austin, Chicago, Portland (Oregon), San Francisco, and Washington, D.C., by analyzing camera footage, interviewing cyclists, and sending out surveys to local residents. Almost half of riders said they were cycling more frequently as a result of the new lanes, with those on Dearborn Street, in Chicago, reporting the biggest increase. Most importantly, the research found that the lanes increased participation in cycling generally. The City of Downey recently completed a Bicycle Master Plan. • San Francisco is focusing on community‐building through play as a way to hold onto the roots of diverse neighborhoods in a time of rapidly changing demographics. The city is increasing playspaces to activate surrounding communities and is installing new innovative playground models to encourage active play and facilitate healthy and successful child development. Playful City USA is a national recognition program sponsored by the Humana Foundation, honoring cities and towns that champion efforts to make play a priority through establishing policy initiatives, infrastructure investments and innovative programming. (http://kaboom.org/take_action/playful_city_usa/stories) • Nationwide, new community center design and construction has placed more emphasis on the scale of development, the use of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles, and the pursuit of LEED certification. • Forming partnerships and engaging volunteers have become efficient ways of doing business. Today, nearly 85% of park and recreation agencies have formed some kind of partnerships to extend their reach, increase programming capabilities and expand funding ability. According to a 2014 Recreation Management article, the most common partners include local schools (56.9%), other local government agencies (46.6%), nonprofit organizations (42.8%), colleges and universities (32.8%),state government (32.3%), private corporations, service clubs, or local businesses (30.5%), federal government (19.6%), YMCA, Boys and Girls Clubs, etc. (16.8%), and health care providers (18.7%). • As reported by the Dallas Morning News, Dallas recently privatized its zoo and is considering carrying out a similar plan for a 277‐acre park compound that includes museums and historic buildings and which hosts the annual State Fair of Texas. The process could be more complicated because there are multiple tenants and organizations, according to supporters. The proposal grew out of a mayoral task force recommendation that the park be privately managed as a way to realize its maximum potential. The task force recommended that the city increase funding for the park but turn over governance to a private, nonprofit board — the model used for the city’s 2009 agreement with the Dallas Zoological Society. • Many Park and Recreation agencies have begun to extensively search for solutions to create and sustain healthy finances. They aggressively pursue alternatives to expand funding sources beyond general fund tax dollars, improve cost‐recovery and explore park facilities as self‐sufficient revenue centers. 35.6 million Americans age seven and older were estimated to have ridden a bicycle six times or more in 2013, according to the National Sporting Goods Association. This number was down 9.4% from 2012 that had 39.3 million participants. The peak participation year was 1995, with 56.3 million participants. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 371 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 12 • Funding measures continue to find a difficult sell with the voters. Los Angeles County’s proposed parks tax, Measure P, failed to win voter approval in the November 2014 election. Measure P needed two‐thirds of the vote countywide to pass, but it received 62 percent. Measure P would have implemented a 30‐year tax of $23 a parcel per year on county properties to fund park and recreation projects countywide. In contrast, park measures in Santa Clara County, Berkeley, and Woodland passed. • To be more accountable, transparent, responsive and effective, today more and more cities and their parks and recreation departments are using business models to gain better efficiencies. Current California examples include the City of Rocklin, Livermore Recreation and Park District and Pleasant Hill Park and Recreation District. This requires a paradigm shift towards a business mindset in planning and managing services, with emphasis on core business, best practices, smart operation, performance management and customer service. Today, the park and recreation industry faces the on‐going challenges of meeting or exceeding the expectations of their diverse and aging population and stiffer competition for tax dollars. Bibliography American Community Survey, http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ American Planning Association (APA) and NRPA, “The Role of Parks in Shaping Successful Cities”, 2014. California Department of Finance (2014 E‐5 Estimates). California Park & Recreation Society, (1999) VIP Action Plan (Vision, Insight and Planning), Creating Community in the 21st Century. Center for Disease Control http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/index.html City Data http://www.city‐data.com/ Congressional Budget Office, “Budget and Economic Outlook Fiscal Year 2011‐21” Consumer Product Safety Commission, http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Newsroom/CPSC‐RSS‐ Feed/Playground‐Injury‐Statistics/ Contra Costa County, http://www.co.contra‐costa.ca.us/depart/cd/recycle/greenbuilding.htm Copeland, Kristen, “Societal Values and Policies May Curtail Preschool Children’s Physical Activity in Child Care Centers”, Pediatrics February, 2012. Dallas Morning News, “Fair Parks Privatization May be Trickier than Zoo’s,” November 2014. E. Fuller‐Thomson, (2009) “Basic ADL Disability and Functional Limitation Rates Among Older Americans from 2000–2005: The End of the Decline?,” University of Toronto. Eitler, Thomas, “Ten Principles for Building Healthy Places,” Urban Lands Institute, 2013. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 372 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 13 Fiester, L., “Analyzing the Potential Health and Economic Impact for States of Reducing Obesity Rates,” Trust for America's Health, January 14, 2014. Godby, Geoffrey, Alan Graefe and Stephen James (1992). “The Benefits of Local Recreation and Park Services: A Nationwide Study of the Perceptions of the American Public,” Alexandria, VA: NRPA. Holmes, Julia, Ph.D., “Aging Differently: Physical Limitations Among Adults Aged 50 years and Over: United States, 2001–2007,” US Department of Health and Human Services, 2009. Huffington Post www.statisticsbrain.com Journal of Transportation and Health, “Active Transport: Why and Where do People (not) Walk or Cycle?,” August 2014. LA Times, “Free Wi Fi to Debut at LA Parks, Beaches on Thursday,” August 2014. National Survey of Children’s Health, http://childhealthdata.org/learn/NSCH People for Bikes, http://www.peopleforbikes.org/green‐lane‐project/pages/about‐the‐project Playful City USA, http://kaboom.org/take_action/playful_city_usa/stories Prescription for Physical Activity, http://centerforactivedesign.org/prescriptionforphysicalactivity Sports and Fitness Industry Association 2013 Sports, Fitness and Leisure Activities Topline Participation Report. Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association, “2012 Sports, Fitness and Leisure Activities Topline Participation Report.” Tipping, Emily, “State of the Managed Recreation Industry, 2014”, Recreation Management, 2014. Tri‐City Herald, “Richland Schools Removing Swings from Playgrounds,” October 2014. UCLA Center for Health Policy Research and the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, http://www.publichealthadvocacy.org/ United States Bocce Ball Federation, http://www.usbf.us/ U.S Green Building Council, http://www.usgbc.org/ US Lacrosse Facts and Figures, http://www.uslacrosse.org/Events/NewsandMedia/MediaInformation/FactsandFigures.aspx US Soccer Key Statistics, http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/media_kit/keystatistics/ Wikipedia, http://www.wikipedia.org/ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 373 City of Downey Trends Analysis May 2015 Page 14 Woods, Ronald, “A Closer Look at Some Trends in Youth Sport Participation”, Social Issues in Sport, Second Edition, by Ronald B. Woods, PhD. World Pickleball Federation, http://www.worldpickleball.com/pickleball‐history/ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 374 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 375 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 376 CITY OF DOWNEY PARK MAINTENANCE, SITE AND BUILDING ACCESSIBILITY ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS May 2015 Prepared for: City of Downey DR A F T PC Agenda Page 377 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 1 CONTENTS XX 1 Project Overview 1.1 Goals 3 1.2 Methodology 3 2 Building Maintenance Assessment 2.1 Apollo Park 4 - 8 2.2 Dennis the Menace Park 9 - 11 2.3 Discovery Park 11 - 12 2.4 Furman Park 12 - 14 2.5 Golden Park 15 - 16 2.6 Independence Park 17 - 19 2.7 Rio San Gabriel Park 20 - 22 2.8 Wilderness Park 22 - 24 3 Accessibility Assessment 3.1 Apollo Park 25 - 27 3.2 Brookshire Park 28 3.3 Crawford Park 29 3.4 Dennis the Menace Park 29 - 31 3.5 Discovery Park 32 - 33 3.6 Furman Park 33 - 34 3.7 Golden Park 35 - 36 3.8 Independence Park 37 - 39 3.9 Rio San Gabriel Park 40 - 42 3.10 Temple Park 43 3.11 Treasure Island Park 43 - 44 3.12 Wilderness Park 44 - 47 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 378 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 2 4 Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations 4.1 Apollo Park 48 - 54 4.2 Brookshire Park 54 - 55 4.3 Crawford Park 55 - 56 4.4 Dennis the Menace Park 56 - 59 4.5 Discovery Park 59 - 61 4.6 Furman Park 61 - 63 4.7 Golden Park 63 - 64 4.8 Independence Park 65 - 66 4.9 Rio San Gabriel Park 67 - 68 4.10 Treasure Island Park 69 4.11 Wilderness Park 69 - 72 The analysis included in this report assumes that individual buildings are to be maintained in functional condition. In order to satisfy programming needs/financial conditions of the park system, other reports in the Parks and Open Space Master Plan may make recommendations to remove or alter buildings, which may supersede the recommendations contained herein. Please refer to the Parks and Open Space Master Plan document for a complete review of Master Plan recommendations for the entire park system. ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 379 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 3 1 PROJECT OVERVIEW XSSSXX 1.1 GOALS XX The first goal of this report is to summarize the physical condition of the buildings at the eight parks in the Downey Park System that contain buildings. The physical condition of these buildings vary widely and generally are a reflection of their use and age. The information and photos on the following pages are a brief description of the condition of the materials and detailing of these buildings that can be seen and do not include a structural analysis of the buildings or an evaluation of the electrical, plumbing or mechanical systems of the buildings. XXSSX The other goal of this report is to give a brief explanation of the issues related to accessibility to members of the community that have physical limitations for the following: XX XX • Site accessibility from the Public Right of Way • On site access from the accessible parking stalls to the buildings as well as the playgrounds, walking tracks, ball fields, etc. • Entrance access and clearances to the buildings • Restroom access limitations • Exterior and Interior accessibility issues X XX 1.2 METHODOLOGY X The information in this report was generated by James Mickartz Architect (JMA) in association with RJM Design Group (RJM) utilizing the following methods: X • Personal visitation by JMA to all 12 parks • Photographic Documentation • Documentation from site and building plans provided by the City of Downey • Field Documentation • Aerial investigation using Google Maps X XXX X X X XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 380 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 4 2 BUILDING MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT 2.1 APOLLO PARK XXX 2.1.1 North Restroom Building Apollo Park has three separate buildings that were built at three different times. The oldest structure is the small restroom building on the north end of the park which has a small men’s restroom, a women’s restroom and small concession area. This is a painted concreter block building with low pitched gable form roof with composition shingle roofing. This building is approximately 325 s.f. The structure seems to be intact but the following are needed maintenance issues: XX • Repaint the exterior walls, fascias and overhangs • Install new composition shingle roofing. • Partition doors are in poor condition and should be replaced • The flooring is in poor condition and should be refinished XXXX North Restroom Exterior View North Restroom Exterior View XX 2.1.2 South Restroom Building XX The south restroom building at Apollo Park is on the east side of the single story flat roof concrete block building adjacent to the Downey Historical Society Office. This building appears to have been updated sometime in the recent past with new tile on the walls, waterless urinals and a stainless steel dual sink wall mounted lavatories. The structure seems to be intact but the following are needed maintenance issues: XX • Partition doors are in poor condition and should be replaced • The flooring is in poor condition and should be refinished XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 381 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 5 XXXXXXXX South Restroom Exterior ViewXXXXXXXSouth Restroom Interior View ZZZZZZ 2.1.3 Gymnasium BuildingZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ XX The Gymnasium Building at Apollo Park was completed in 1998 and consists of one full size basketball court, a large community room, restrooms and staff offices as shown on the floor plan below. This building appears to be well maintained but the partitions at the restrooms should be replaced. XXZZ ZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZApollo Park Gymnasium Building Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 382 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 6 XXXXZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ XX XXXX Gymnasium Exterior Gymnasium Lobby XX XXXX Community Classroom XX Gymnasium Bleachers XXX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 383 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 7 2.1.4 North Community Center and Office Buildings XX The area on the north end of this park contains several buildings that were formerly an elementary school that have been converted into the following uses: • Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center • City of Downey Parks and Recreation Offices • SCRS – IL Offices • A Day Care Facility • Dance Hall • Bocce Courts • ASPIRE Offices • Food Pantry All of these buildings and the surrounding site areas are well maintained and do not show any signs of significant need for improvement at this time. z.. z.. XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 384 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 8 Apollo Park Northwest Buildings Floor Plans DR A F T PC Agenda Page 385 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 9 2.2 DENNIS THE MENACE PARK XXXX 2.2.1 Community Building XX The Community Building at Dennis the Menace Park is a single story, wood framed building set on a raised wood framed floor. The area of this building is approximately 528 s.f. and contains a classroom, office and storage room. It appears from the style and detailing that this building was probably built in the 1960s. There are several maintenance issues that need to be addressed if this building is expected to remain functional for the future, such as: XXXX • New roof and flashing • Repaint the exterior • Provide an area drain system around all sides of the building for positive water away from the building XX ZZZZZZ ZZZ ZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZDennis the Menace Community Building Floor Plan XXXX ZZZZZZ XX ZZZZZZZCommunity Building South Entry Community Building Rear Side XXXXXX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 386 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 10 ZZZZZZ XX zzZZzz ZCommunity Building Classroom ZZZZZZGrade and Drainage Problems XXXX 2.2.2 Restroom Building XXXX The Restroom Building at Dennis the Menace Park appears to have been built prior to the Community Building with a wood framed garage addition. The area of this building is approximately 440 s.f. XXXX There are several items that need to be addressed if this building is expected to serve the residents of the community in the future. The most significant issues is related to the accessibility to those with physical impairments and wheelchair access to the restrooms. Refer to section 3.4 for additional information. Assuming that the accessibility issues can be resolved within the existing structure, there are several maintenance issues that need to be addressed, such as: XX • New Roof and Flashing • Repair of the deteriorating wood members • There are open screened vents from the restrooms to the garage that need to be filed in for privacy • A mechanical ventilation system needs to be installed for the movement of air in the restrooms. • Repaint the exterior • Provide an area drain system around all sides of the building for positive water slope away from the building XXXXX X XX Restroom Building Entry and Garage Restroom Building Rear DR A F T PC Agenda Page 387 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 11 zzzzzzz X zzzzzzzzVents at Garage need to be closed Deteriorating Garage Door Jambs XXX X Deteriorating Door Jambs Roof and Flashing XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX 2.3 DISCOVERY PARK XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 388 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 12 2.3 DISCOVERY SPORTS COMPLEX 2.3.1 Restroom / Concession Building XX The Restroom / Concession Building at Discovery Park is a single story, concrete block set in the center of the plaza between the two ball fields. The area of this building is approximately 528 s.f. and contains restrooms, a small concession room and maintenance garage. Due to the type of construction and the age of this building, there does not appear to be maintenance issues that need to be addressed at this time. XX xx zzz zzzzzzzzzzzzView from Parking Lot View from Courtyard XX xx Restroom Screen Wall Outdoor Drinking Fountains XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 389 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 13 XXX 2.4 FURMAN PARK XX 2.4.1 South Multi Purpose Building XX The South Building at Furman Park is a single story concrete block building with Plaster exterior. The area of this building is approx. 1,540 s.f. This building has a large Multi Purpose Hall as well as staff offices and a kitchen as seen in the floor plan below. The interiors of this building appear to be well maintained. XX Furman Multi Purpose Building Floor Plan XXXX 2.4.2 West Classroom Building XXXX The West Building at Furman Park is a single story concrete block building with plaster exterior. This building has a large Classroom and as well as public restrooms as seen in the floor plan below. The approximate area of this building is 1,584 s.f. The interiors of this building appear to be well maintained however the restroom partitions are in poor condition and should be replaced. Furman Classroom Building Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 390 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 14 2.4.3 North Museum Building XX The North Building at Furman Park is a single story concrete block building with plaster exterior that was the former Downey Museum of Arts. This building has several fixed wall exhibit spaces. The power has been turned off in this building and the interiors have not been maintained. Many of the old exhibit boards and panels are being stored in in this building as well as other items such as chairs, tables and play equipment. The area of this building is approximately 3,594 s.f. This building is planned to be rehabilitated by the YMCA as part of a lease agreement with the City of Downey. Improvements to this building are anticipated to include new painting, new flooring, new restrooms and the required fire suppression system by December 2015. XX North Museum Building Floor Plan X xx z Typical Museum Interior Typical Museum Interior DR A F T PC Agenda Page 391 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 15 2.4.4 Maintenance Issues at all Three Buildings XX Although these buildings are less than 30 years old, there are several maintenance issues that need to be addressed before other more serious issues develop. The most significant issue that needs to be addressed is related to the surface elevation of the exterior grades along all sides of these buildings. This site is relatively flat and drainage away from the buildings is poor or in some places runs back toward the buildings. The grades that are adjacent to these building should be a minimum of 6” below the building slab line, but in some locations the grade is actually higher than the building slab line. XX xx zzzzzzXX The roof drainage system will also contribute to the deterioration of the exterior plaster. All of the roof drains simply exhaust the roof rain water onto the surface without any type of system to carry it away from the buildings. The overflow scuppers flashing does not direct the water from the surface. XX xx The grade to floor line problems have lead to the deterioration of the plaster, plaster screeds and door jambs. xxx DR A F T PC Agenda Page 392 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 16 2.5 GOLDEN PARK XX 2.5.1 Community Building XX The Community Building at Golden Park was built in two phases. The initial building on the left side of the plan below consisted of the Small Restrooms, Kitchen, Office, Lobby and Activity Room. The large Multi Purpose Room and Large Restrooms were added in 1983. The interiors of this building appear to be well maintained by the City of Downey. The total area of this building is approximately 5,120 s.f. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz ZZZZZ ZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZGolden Park Community Building Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 393 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 17 2.5.2 Community Building Exterior Maintenance Issues XX The Community Building at Golden Park has several maintenance issues that need to be addressed before other more serious issues develop. The most significant issue that needs to be addressed is related to the surface elevation of the exterior grades along all sides of these buildings. This site is relatively flat and drainage away from the buildings is poor or in some places runs back toward the buildings. The grades that are adjacent to these building should be a minimum of 6” below the building slab line, but in some locations the grade is actually higher than the building slab line. XX xx XX XX xx XXXX The exterior trellis and supporting posts are also showing signs of deterioration due to water penetration into the wood members. All of these wood members should be replaced and proper flashing installed where the beams penetrate the buildings. XX xx DR A F T PC Agenda Page 394 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 18 2.6 INDEPENDENCE PARK XX There are four separate buildings at Independence Park that appear to have been built at different times and are of different architectural styles and detailing. Due in part to the age of the buildings and material selections, the conditions of these buildings vary widely. XXXX 2.6.1 Storage Building XXXX The small storage building on the south side of the park appears to be the oldest structure and has the most maintenance related issues that need to be addressed. This building is wood framed with a simple gable roof. The most significant issue that needs to be addressed is related to the surface elevation of the exterior grades along all sides of this building. This site is relatively flat on the north and west side and drainage away from the building is poor. The grades that are adjacent to these building should be a minimum of 6” below the building slab line. Although this building is not open to the public, it needs corrective measures if the city wants it to remain on the site and serve the storage needs of the park. XX xx XX 2.6.2 Concession Building XX The Concession Building at Independence Park is split faced concrete block with a sloping metal roof and appears to have been built within the last 20 years. Due to the materials that were used and low usage of this building, it shows very little signs of aging or deterioration and therefore has very low priority for maintenance repairs. The only maintenance issue that should be addressed is for the wood fascia boards to be scraped, sanded and repainted. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 395 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 19 2.6.3 Tennis / Skate Park Building XX The newest building at Independence Park is located between the skate park and tennis courts that was built in 2003. This building consists of an office / lounge, concession area, storage rooms and four independent restrooms which are accessible from the exterior plaza. The total area of this building is 1,152 s.f. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZIndependence Park Tennis / Skate Park Building Floor Plan XX The Tennis Building has concrete block exterior walls with a prefinished sloping metal roof that are in relatively good condition. There are however some exterior materials that are in need of replacement such as the wood trellis members. X xx XXX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 396 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 20 Some of the trellis members are either missing, split or warped. The other detail that needs attention is at the precast concrete bullnose sill piece that separates the lower split face concrete block walls from the upper burnished concrete block. XX XX ZzzzzzZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZ 2.6.4 East Restroom Building XX The restroom building on the east side of the park serves the needs for the adjacent ballfields. This is a concrete block structure with a painted metal roof and is approximately 842 s.f. The floor plan and issues related to accessibility are shown in section 3.6 XX XX XXXX zzzzzzzz XX XX XX XX XXXX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 397 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 21 2.7 RIO SAN GABRIEL PARK XX There are four separate buildings at Rio San Gabriel Park that appear to have been built at different times in the past and are of different architectural styles, finishes and material. Due to the age and use of these buildings, the need for maintenance varies as described below: XX 2.7.1 Ball Field Restroom Building XX The single story restroom building at the northern end of the park serves the ball fields and appears to be the oldest of the buildings in this park. This building is painted concrete block construction with simple gable roof forms. These restrooms do not meet current accessibility. This building is in need of a new composition shingle roof as well as new paint throughout. Refer to section 3.6 for additional information related to accessibility issues. XX XX XX 2.7.2 Storage Building XXXX There is a single story concrete block storage building with a corrugated sheet metal roof at the southwest side of the park that is in relatively good condition as seen in the photos below. The grade around this building however should be lowered and the plaster repaired in the areas where water migration has occurred. The wood fascia boards need to be scraped, sanded and repainted. XX xx XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 398 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 22 2.7.3 Restroom Building There is a single story wood framed restroom building that appears to have built within the last 20 years that is in relatively good condition. The roof however has shingles that are missing. The entire roof should be replaced. Refer to section 3.6 for additional information related to accessibility issues. xx XX 2.7.4 Community Building XX There is a single story brick faced Community Building that appears to have been built in 1966. This building serves as the hub for the park and contains an office, classroom and storage room as shown on the floor plan below. The area of the community building is approximately 1,052 s.f. XX zzzz Rio San Gabriel Park Community Building Floor Plan XX XX XX XX XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 399 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 23 Given the age of this building and the service it provides, this building needs maintenance and selected replacement for the following areas: XX • Brick Veneer • Exterior Painting • Window frame and glass replacement • New Roof XX xx xx XX 2.8 WILDERNESS PARK XX 2.8.1 South Restroom Building XXXX The single story restroom building at the south end of Wilderness Park also houses a garage for service vehicles and equipment. The area of this building is approximately 964 s.f. XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 400 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 24 2.8.2 Community Building XXXX The single story community building at the northern end of the park has painted slump block exterior walls and composition shingle roof. This building is in very good condition and there does not seem to be any maintenance issues that need to be addressed at this time. XX xx XX The Community Building at Wilderness Park contains offices, workroom, classroom, restrooms and an exhibit hall. The area of the building is approximately 3,276 s.f. Refer to section 3.6 for additional information related to accessibility issues. ZZ XZZ XZZXxxxxxxxxxxxxxWilderness Park Community Building DR A F T PC Agenda Page 401 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 25 3 BUILDING and SITE ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT 3.1 APOLLO PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES XX 3.1.1 North Parking Lot XX There currently are two accessible parking stalls at the north parking lot area adjacent to the North Restroom Building as shown in the photo below. The access to these spaces and the building from the public right of way however is only provided via the entry drive area: XX XX XX North Parking Lot Accessible Stalls XX North Parking Lot Sidewalk Access XX 3.1.2 North Restroom Building XX The North Restroom Building has restricted access for members of the community that have physical limitations inside the restroom areas, the drinking fountains and concession window as seen in the floor plan and photos below: XX North Restroom Floor Plan North Restroom Interior DR A F T PC Agenda Page 402 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 26 3.1.3 South Parking Lot XX There currently are three accessible parking stalls at the South parking lot area adjacent to the South Restroom Building as shown in the photos below however the striping and signage at these spaces is faded or non existent. The access to South Restroom and Gymnasium building from the public right of way is provided from Rives Ave. via an on grade sidewalk as shown below: XX X South Parking Lot Accessible Stalls South Sidewalk access to Rives Ave 3.1.4 South Restrooms XX The South Restrooms have signage that indicates that they are fully accessible to the members of the community that have physical impairments but they are lacking in full compliance with current building codes. These restrooms also do not have adequate visual screening as viewed from the exterior. South Restroom Floor Plan South Restroom Drinking Fountains XX XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 403 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 27 3.1.5 Gymnasium Building XX The Gymnasium Building appears to be compliant with current building code standards for accessibility. The photos below are depictions of the existing restrooms and drinking fountains: XX XXX XX XXXXGymnasium Restroom Interior Gymnasium Drinking Fountains XX 3.1.6 Eastern Parking Lot The eastern parking lot that is adjacent to Smallwood Ave. currently has one accessible parking stall however the only access to the new adjacent walking path is over turf. XX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XX XX Eastern Parking Lot Accessible Stall XX Refer to Section 4.1 for recommendations for improvements that should be made For the conditions listed above. XX XX XX XXXX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 404 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 28 3.2 BROOKSHIRE PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES XZ XX Brookshire Park appears to have been recently improved with new stabilized walking paths that connect this park to Brookshire Ave and Bellder Drive. All parking for this park is located on the street and there are no adjacent designated accessible parking stalls. XX XX ZZ There are however a few conditions that do not provide full access to those members of the community with physical limitations, such as: • Access to picnic tables and benches • Access to drinking fountains ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ Refer to Section 4.2 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 405 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 29 3.3 CRAWFORD PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES XZ XX Crawford Park is a small neighborhood park located at the intersection of Dinwiddie Street and Rio Hondo Drive. There are no buildings at this park but there is a play structure, basketball court, BBQ and open lawn area. There are six on site parking stalls but none are set up as accessible with a loading zone. XX Z.. mm This park poses significant challenges for providing compliant accessibility due to the topography at the park entrance and limited width of the public sidewalk. The drive approach creates an unacceptable cross slope at the sidewalk crossing. ZZ Z.. ZZ The entry ramp and adjacent plaza are more steep than allowed by the building codes and they lack sufficient landing areas and handrails. ZZ Z.. Z Refer to Section 4.3 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 406 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 30 3.4 DENNIS THE MENACE PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.4.1 Site Accessibility The site access for wheelchair patrons at Dennis the Menace Park from the public right of way at the entrance is not compliant with current accessibility codes because there are no sidewalks along Arrington Ave. as seen in the photos below. This is the only point of access to this park. Anyone traveling to this park by wheelchair will need to travel in the street. Patrons of the park that come by car will be able to use the two recently renovated accessible parking stalls. ZZ ..Z ZZ Once on site, access to the various locations throughout the park is attained because the park is relatively flat. There are however significant limitations to the access at the restrooms and community building as see below. The path of travel at the restrooms is insufficient for wheelchair access and the community building has three steps that restrict access. ZZ Z.. ZZZ Z.. 3.4.2 Community Building Accessibility DR A F T PC Agenda Page 407 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 31 The Community Building at Dennis the Menace Park does not provide access for wheelchairs to the office and classroom due to the raised wood floor, concrete steps and lack of a ramp. The interior of this building has a compliant work surface at the office desk, but building cabinetry exceeds the maximum allowable height of 34”. The access to the storage room and interior sink is also restricted. ZZ Z.. ZZ ZZ ZZ Dennis the Menace Community Building Floor Plan ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ Z Z’ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 408 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 32 3.4.3 Restroom Building Accessibility The Restroom Building at Dennis the Menace Park has significant issues related access as seen in the photos and floor plan for the physically impaired such as: • Restricted site access • Door restrictions • Clearance issues • Drinking Fountains ZZ ZZZZZZZZ ZZ ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzDennis the Menace Restroom Floor Plan ZZ Z.. Z.. Refer to Section 4.4 for recommendations for improvements that should be made For the conditions listed above. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 409 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 33 3.5 DISCOVERY PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.5.1 Site Accessibility The site access for Discovery Park is nearly acceptable for some of the parking stalls but will require modification to be compliant. The area around the restroom building and between the ball fields is a level concrete plaza that appears to be in compliance with all applicable building codes. ZZ Z.. ZZ Z.. ZZ 3.5.2 Building Accessibility ZZ The site access to the building is within acceptable code standards however the interiors of the restrooms and the concession area will need some modifications to be fully compliant with current accessibility codes. The drinking fountains are acceptable as hi-lo type but protective railings are required for the sight impaired. ZZ Z. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 410 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 34 Discovery Park Restroom Floor Plan ZZZZ ZZ Refer to Section 4.5 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. ZZ 3.6 FURMAN PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.6.1 Site Accessibility The site access for Furman Park is nearly compliant for both the access from the parking lot as well as the public sidewalk. The accessible ramp at the parking stalls however will need modification to provide access from the loading area on the left. The remainder of the site is relatively flat and provides access to all three buildings. ZZ Z.. Z.. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 411 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 35 3.6.2 Building Accessibility ZZ All of the building entrances are close to being compliant with modifications needed as some of the thresholds. The restrooms however as shown in the enlarged floor plans below will need modification to be fully compliant with current accessibility codes. ZZ Z…. ZZ. Furman Enlarged Restroom Layout Typical Restroom Photo ZZ. The exterior drinking fountain is a single unit and needs to be replaced with an exterior quality Hi/Lo type of drinking fountain. The protective rails will need to be modified. ZZ Z. Refer to Section 4.6 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above DR A F T PC Agenda Page 412 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 36 3.7 GOLDEN PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.7.1 Site Accessibility ZZ There are three site access issues for Golden Park. The parking stalls loading areas do not have a direct connection to the sidewalks. Wheelchair patrons are forced to traverse thru the drive aisle, which is unacceptable. The sloping sidewalk that leads from the sidewalk to the plaza around the building is too steep and it exceeds acceptable standards. The westerly access to the park from the public sidewalk is too steep and has a pull box cover that is not slip resistant. Z Z.. ZZ ZZ Z.. ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ Z ZZ ZZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ Z ZZ ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 413 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 37 3.7.2 Building Accessibility ZZ There are two sets of restrooms in this building. The restrooms at the original building shown in the photos below are not accessible. Fortunately the new restrooms can be made compliant with a few minor modifications. The original restrooms are only opened when the new restrooms are open and therefore accessibility can be attained for this building. The counters in the kitchen will need minor modification to be compliant with accessibility codes. ZZ ZZ Old Restrooms Floor Plan New Restrooms Floor Plan ZZ ZZZZZ Z.. Z… Z.. ZZ ZZZZZ Z.. Refer to Section 4.7 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 414 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 38 3.8 INDEPENDENCE PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.8.1 Site Accessibility ZZ There are four separate buildings and a variety of uses at Independence Park. In some situations accessibility is provided but in other areas there are issues that need to be addressed. The skate park, parking and adjacent building were completed in 2003 and appear to be in compliance with current accessibility codes for access from the parking stalls as well as access from the public right of way as seen in the photos below: ZZ Z.. ZZ The restroom and concession building on the east side of the park appears to have adequate parking stalls provided as well as public right of way access from Dunrobin Ave. which is to the east of this area. ZZ Z.. Z.. ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 415 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 39 The west and east sides of this park meet current accessibility requirements but accessible path of travel is restricted or in some cases are not provided. The concrete sidewalk on the south side of the tennis courts does not connect to the ball field. The sidewalk along the west side of the tennis courts does not connect to the skate park plaza, is not enough for wheelchairs and serves as a drainage channel with depressions. ZZ Z.. ZZ The sidewalk along the west side of the tennis courts serves as a drainage channel and is not adequate width. The sidewalk along the north side of the tennis courts is not wide enough for wheelchairs. The sidewalk at the concession building ties into the asphalt driveway. ZZ Z.. ZZ Z.. ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 416 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 40 3.8.2 East Building Accessibility The restroom building on the east side of the park is capable of providing code compliant accessibility with some modifications. Z. Z ZZ ZZ Independence Park East Restroom ZZ Refer to Section 4.8 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 417 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 41 3.9 RIO SAN GABRIEL PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.9.1 Site Accessibility ZZ There is a parking space designated as being accessible in the north parking lot, but as seen in the photos below there are no stabilized paths or concrete walks leading from these spaces. Z.. ZZ The other three buildings are located on the south end of this park and they are supported by four spaces designated as accessible. The two spaces on the left are acceptable but the two spaces on the right require modification to allow the loading zone to transfer patrons to the plaza around the community building. The remainder of the site area around these buildings is relatively level ZZ Z.. ZZ The site area around these building has access to the public sidewalks at Newville Ave. via curb ramps as shown below. Z.. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 418 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 42 3.9.2 North Restroom Accessibility Issues ZZ The North Restroom Building appears to be the oldest building on the site and is significantly deficient for accessibility as seen in the floor plan and photos below. ZZ Z.. ZZ ZZ North Restroom Interior North Restroom Exterior ZZ ZZ ZZ North Restroom Floor Plan ZZ ZZ 3.9.3 South Restroom Accessibility Issues ZZ The South Restroom Building appears to be the newest building on the site and appears to be compliant for accessibility as seen in the floor plan and photos on the next page. ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 419 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 43 Z. ZZ ZZ South Restroom Exterior South Restroom Interior ZZZ ZZZZZZZZ ZZZZ ZZ Refer to Section 4.9 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. 3.10 TEMPLE PARK SITE ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.10.1 Site Accessibility ZZ There are no accessibility issues at Temple Park because it is located on a flat site and is directly adjacent to public sidewalks. ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 420 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 44 3.11 TREASURE ISLAND PARK SITE ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 3.11.1 Site Accessibility ZZ The north end of this park does not have any parking stalls but it does provide access to the adjacent public sidewalk at Bluff Road as seen in the aerial view below: ZZ ZZ ZZ ZZ The south end of this park has several pedestrian walkway connections to the adjacent streets but does not have accessible access from the public right of way because there are no public sidewalks in the adjacent neighborhoods. The south end has 22 parking spaces. This parking lot also has one space designated as being accessible but this space does not provide safe passage from the loading area to the park entrance as seen in the aerial photo below and photos on the page. ZZ ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 421 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 45 Z.. Refer to Section 4.10 for recommendations for improvements that should be made For the conditions listed above. ZZ 3.12 WILDERNESS PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZZZ 3.12.1 Site Accessibility Issues The Community Building and majority of the parking are located on the north end of this park. Site accessibility is provided by a sidewalk connection north of the driveway entrance. The sidewalk connection is maintained with curb ramps. ZZ Z. There are 4 accessible parking stalls near the Community Building but the loading area forces wheelchairs into the drive aisle, which is unacceptable. ZZ Z.. ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 422 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 46 There is a secondary parking area with four spaces designated as being accessible but these spaces have grades that are beyond acceptable levels and the loading zones do not provide direct access to the park sidewalks. ZZ .. Z 3.12.2 Community Building Accessibility ZZ The restrooms at the Community Building do not provide the required clearances at the doors and fixtures and will need modification to be in compliance. ZZ Wilderness Community Building Restroom Floor Plan ZZ ZZZ Z.. Z.. ZZ Wilderness Community Building Restroom Images 3 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 423 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 47 3.12.3 South Restroom Building Accessibility.12.3 South Restroom Building Accessibility ZZ The south end of this park has restroom building with attached maintenance garage. The restrooms currently do not provide compliance with current accessibility codes, but these areas can be modified for compliance without major structural modifications to the building. ZZ ZZ Wilderness Park South Restroom Building Floor Z Z.. Z.. Wilderness Park South Restroom Images Refer to Section 4.11 for recommendations for improvements that should be made for the conditions listed above. DR A F T PC Agenda Page 424 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 48 4 BUILDING and SITE ACCESSIBILITY ANALYSIS and RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 APOLLO PARK SITE ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES XX 4.1.1 Required Site Improvements XX The majority of the site at Apollo Park is relatively flat, but there are four areas on the site that require modification for accessibility to the accessible parking stalls and public right of way as shown and noted on the site plan below: Apollo Site Plan with required modifications Apollo South Accessible Parking Stalls DR A F T PC Agenda Page 425 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 49 Apollo North Accessible Parking Stalls Apollo East Accessible Parking Stalls Apollo Northeast Accessible Parking Stalls DR A F T PC Agenda Page 426 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 50 4.1.2 North Restroom Building XX The North Restroom Building has restricted access for members of the community that have physical limitations, the drinking fountains and concession window as seen in the floor plan below: XX Existing North Restroom Floor Plan The analysis of the North Restroom Building illustrates that the minimum clearances are not provided in several locations. Suggestions for the North Restroom Building for accessibility compliance is illustrated in the floor plan below: North Restroom Floor Plan with Renovations DR A F T PC Agenda Page 427 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 51 4.1.3 South Restroom Building XX The South Restrooms are accessible to the members of the community These restrooms do not have adequate visual screening as viewed from the exterior. New Screen Walls should be provided as shown in the floor plan below. South Restroom Existing Floor Plan with new screen walls XX X 4.1.4 North Child Care Center XX The children at the existing child care center at the classroom building on the north end of Apollo Park must use the restrooms at the Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center. A solution to this problem would be to install a new unisex restroom inside the classroom for convenient access by the children and staff as shown on the floor plan below. North Child Care Center Floor Plan with new restroom DR A F T PC Agenda Page 428 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 52 4.1.5 Gymnasium Building XX The Gymnasium Building appears to be compliant with current building code standards for accessibility. The floor plan below is the current layout that was built in 1998. XX XX Apollo Park Gymnasium Building Floor Plan XX XX XX DR A F T PC Agenda Page 429 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 53 4.1.6 Senior Center and Associated Buildings XX The existing Barbara J. Riley Senior Center was built in 1998 and appears to be in compliance will all current accessibility requirements as shown in the floor plan below: Barbara J. Riley Community Center and Associated Buildings Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 430 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 54 4.1.7 North Classroom Building Restroom XX There is a multiple stall restroom in the former classroom building that has locked doors that are only accessible by remote key locks. The majority of this restroom is in compliance with current accessibility standards as shown in the floor plan below: North Building Multiple Stall Restroom Existing Floor Plan The accessible toilet stall however requires modification as shown in the floor plan below: North Building Multiple Stall Restroom Existing Floor Plan with renovations 4.2 BROOKSHIRE PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES XZ XX Brookshire Park appears to have been recently improved with new stabilized walking paths that connect this park to Brookshire Ave and Bellder Drive. All parking for this park is located on the street and there are no adjacent designated accessible parking stalls. XX There are however a few conditions that do not provide full access to those members of the community with physical limitations, such as: • Access to picnic tables and benches • Access to drinking fountains ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 431 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 55 Z Z 4.3 CRAWFORD PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES XZ XX Crawford Park is a small neighborhood park located at the intersection of Dinwiddie Street and Rio Hondo Drive. There are no buildings at this park but there is a play structure, basketball court, BBQ and open lawn area. There are six on site parking stalls but none of them are set up as accessible with an adjacent loading area. XX This park poses significant challenges for providing compliant accessibility due to the topography at the park entrance and limited width of the public sidewalk. The drive approach creates an unacceptable cross slope at the sidewalk crossing Z The entry ramp and adjacent plaza are more steep than allowed by the building codes and they lack sufficient landing areas and handrails. Z DR A F T PC Agenda Page 432 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 56 ZZ 4.4 DENNIS THE MENACE PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.4.1 Site Accessibility The site access for wheelchair patrons at Dennis the Menace Park from the public right of way at the entrance is not compliant with current accessibility codes because there are no sidewalks along Arrington Ave. as seen in the photos below. This is the only point of access to this park. Anyone traveling to this park by wheelchair will need to travel in the street. Patrons of the park that come by car will be able to use the two recently renovated accessible parking stalls . DR A F T PC Agenda Page 433 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 57 Once on site, access to the various locations throughout the park is attained because the park is relatively flat. There are however significant limitations to the access at the restrooms and community building as see below: The path of travel at the restrooms is insufficient for wheelchair access and the community building has three steps that restrict access. 4.4.2 Community Building Accessibility The Community Building at Dennis the Menace Park does not provide access for Wheelchairs to the office and classroom due to the raised wood floor, concrete steps and lack of a ramp. The interior of this building has a compliant work surface at the office desk, but building cabinetry exceeds the maximum allowable height of 34”. The access to the storage room and interior sink is also restricted. Dennis the Menace Community Building Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 434 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 58 4.4.3 Restroom Building Accessibility The Restroom Building at Dennis the Menace Park has significant issues related access as seen in the photos and floor plan for the physically impaired such as: • Restricted site access • Door restrictions • Clearance issues • Drinking Fountains Z ZZZZZZZ Dennis the Menace Existing Restroom Floor Plan ZZ Dennis the Menace Restroom Floor Plan with Renovations DR A F T PC Agenda Page 435 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 59 Z.. Z.. ZZ Dennis the Menace Existing Restroom Images ZZ 4.5 DISCOVERY PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.5.1 Site Accessibility The site access for Discovery Park is nearly acceptable for some of the parking stalls but will require modification to be compliant as shown in the photos below. The area around the restroom building and between the ball fields is a level concrete plaza that appears to be in compliance with all applicable building codes. ZZZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 436 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 60 4.5.2 Building Accessibility ZZ The site access to the building is within acceptable code standards however the interiors of the restrooms and the concession area will need some modifications to be fully compliant with current accessibility codes as shown on the floor plan below: Discovery Park Existing Restroom Floor Plan Discovery Park Restroom Floor Plan with Renovation DR A F T PC Agenda Page 437 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 61 The drinking fountains are acceptable as Hi/Lo type but protective railings are required for the sight impaired as shown in the photo below: ZZZ. 4.6 FURMAN PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.6.1 Site Accessibility The site access for Furman Park is nearly compliant for both the access from the parking lot as well as the public sidewalk. The accessible ramp at the parking stalls however will need modification to provide access from the loading area on the left as shown in the photo below: The remainder of the site is relatively flat and provides access to all three buildings. Z ZZ DR A F T PC Agenda Page 438 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 62 4.6.2 Building Accessibility ZZ All of the building entrances are close to being compliant with modifications needed at some of the thresholds. The restrooms however as shown in the enlarged floor plans below will need modification to be fully compliant with current accessibility codes. The community has also requested a restroom to be added to the existing child care center. Furman Park Existing Restroom Floor Plan Furman Park Restroom Floor Plan with renovations DR A F T PC Agenda Page 439 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 63 The exterior drinking fountain is a single unit and needs to be replaced with an exterior quality Hi/Lo type of drinking fountain. The protective rails will need to be modified. ZZ Z.. 4.7 GOLDEN PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.7.1 Site Accessibility ZZ There are three site access issues for Golden Park. The parking stalls loading areas do not have a direct connection to the sidewalks. Wheelchair patrons are forced to traverse thru the drive aisle, which is unacceptable. New Curb Ramps need to be installed on both sides as shown below: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 440 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 64 The sloping sidewalk that leads from the sidewalk to the plaza around the building is too steep. New steps and ramp are needed in this area as shown below ZZ. The westerly access to the park from the public sidewalk is too steep and has a pull box cover that is not slip resistant. ZZ 4.7.2 Building Accessibility ZZ There are two sets of restrooms in this building. The restrooms at the original phase one building are not accessible. Fortunately the new phase two restrooms can be made compliant with a few very minor modifications. The original restrooms are only opened when the new restrooms are open and therefore accessibility can be attained for this building. ZZ ZZ Phase One Restrooms Floor Plan Phase Two Restrooms Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 441 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 65 4.8 INDEPENDENCE PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.8.1 Site Accessibility ZZ The west and east sides of this park meet current accessibility requirements but accessible path of travel is restricted or is some cases are not provided. The concrete sidewalk on the south side of the tennis courts does not connect to the ball field. The sidewalk along the west side of the tennis courts does not connect to the skate park plaza. Sidewalk connections need to be made in the locations shown on the site plan and photos below: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 442 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 66 4.8.2 East Restroom Accessibility Issues ZZ The east restroom building adjacent to the ball fields currently does not meet accessibility standards and will need to be modified as shown in the floor plans below: Independence Park East Restroom Existing Floor Plan Independence Park East Restroom Floor Plan with renovations DR A F T PC Agenda Page 443 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 67 4.9 RIO SAN GABRIEL PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.9.1 Site Accessibility ZZ There are a few site access issues that need to be addressed as shown on the photos below: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 444 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 68 4.9.2 North Ball Field Restroom Accessibility Issues ZZ The restroom building at the north ball fields currently does not provide access to those in the community that have physical limitations. The plans below indicate the changes that need to be made. The walls of this building do not provide adequate clearances as required by the building code as noted below. This plan will require special consideration by the Head Building Official or a new restroom building will need to be built to meet all of the building code requirements. Rio San Gabriel Park Existing North Restroom Floor Plan Rio San Gabriel Park North Restroom Floor Plan with Renovations DR A F T PC Agenda Page 445 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 69 4.10 TREASURE ISLAND PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.10.1 Site Accessibility ZZ The accessible parking stalls at the south entrance to Treasure Island Park requires wheelchair patrons to enter the site by traveling through the parking lot drive aisle. This is not acceptable in the building code. Therefore, a new sidewalk and ramps need to be installed as shown on the aerial site plan below. 4.11 WILDERNESS PARK ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES ZZ 4.11.1 Community Building Site Accessibility The accessible parking stalls at the entrance to Community Building at Wilderness Park requires wheelchair patrons to enter the site by traveling through the parking lot drive aisle. This is not acceptable in the building code. Therefore, new sidewalks and ramps need to be installed as shown on the photos below: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 446 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 70 4.11.2 Secondary Site Accessibility There currently are accessible parking stalls near the middle of Wilderness Park that requires wheelchair patrons to travel through the drive aisle to gain entrance into the park. This is not acceptable in the building code. Therefore, new sidewalks and ramps need to be installed as shown on the photos below: DR A F T PC Agenda Page 447 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 71 4.11.3 Community Building Restroom Accessibility The restrooms at the Wilderness Park Community Building do not provide all of the clearances required by the Building Code and there is a significant visual privacy problem with the two opposing doors. These restrooms need to be remodeled as shown on the plans below. Wilderness Park Existing Community Building Restroom Floor Plan Wilderness Park Community Building Renovated Restroom Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 448 City of Downey Building Maintenance and Site and Building Accessibility Analysis and Recommendations May 2015 Page | 72 4.11.4 South Building Restroom Accessibility The restrooms at the Wilderness Park South Restroom Building do not provide all of the clearances required by the Building Code and there is a significant visual privacy problem with the two opposing doors. These restrooms need to be remodeled as shown on the plans below. Wilderness Park Existing South Restroom Floor Plan Wilderness Park Renovated South Restroom Floor Plan DR A F T PC Agenda Page 449 DR A F T PC Agenda Page 450 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 YEAR TOTAL Individual Tables 56 15 $ 2,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Individual Barbeque 10 15 $ 500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Drinking Fountains 4 15 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 10,000 Garbage Cans 64 15 $ 500 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Benches 31 15 $ 1,500 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 15,000 Bike Rack 3 15 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Basketball Court 2 10 $ 85,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Sand Volleyball 5 15 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Path--Concrete 30 $ 160 sq yd $ 16,000 $ 16,000 Path—DG 15 $ 45 sq yd $ 9,000 $ 9,000 Asphalt Area Parking 15 Varies* $ 4,000 $ 6,000 $ 10,000 Trees 30 $300 24" box $ 600 $ 600 Sub Total MM $ 19,000 $ 8,000 $ 7,600 $ 29,000 $ 46,500 $ 110,100 Infiltration Basin Development $ 3,725,000 $ 3,725,000 $ 3,725,000 Shuffleball to Multipurpose Fitness $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Community Center Seismic Study $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Recycled water - water main improvements $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Recycled water - irrigation system replacement $ 2,500,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 Conversion to Synthetic turf $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 Turf renovation $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Outdoor Storage $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Ballfield lighting $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Replace fence around playground $ 10,000 $10,000 $ 10,000 Replace north restroom or $ 300,000 $300,000 $ 300,000 North Restroom new roof $ 3,000 $ - North restroom paint $ 3,500 $ - North Restroom ADA $ 25,000 $ - Parking lot renovation $ 70,000 $70,000 $ 70,000 Eastern parking lot ADA access $ 3,500 $3,500 $ 3,500 South Restroom ADA $ 4,000 $4,000 $ 4,000 North parking lot ADA $ 4,500 $4,500 $ 4,500 Northeast parking lot ADA $ 5,000 $5,000 $ 5,000 Classroom toilet stall $ 3,000 $3,000 $ 3,000 Exterior Drinking fountains $ 7,500 $7,500 $ 7,500 Child's restroom to day-care $ 20,000 $20,000 $ 20,000 Playground renovation $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Sub Total CIP $ 4,037,500 $ - $ 4,450,000 $ - $ - $ 8,487,500 TOTAL $ 4,056,500 $ 8,000 $ 4,457,600 $ 29,000 $ 46,500 $ 8,597,600 APOLLO PARK SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S MAINTENANCE DR A F T PC Agenda Page 451 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 YEAR TOTAL Garbage Cans 4 15 $ 500 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Sub Total MM $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Add Wi Fi $ 15,000 $15,000 $ 15,000 Interior Light Retrofit to LED $ 48,321 $48,321 $ 48,321 . $ 16,338 $16,338 $ 16,338 Install Cool roof $ 56,198 $56,198 $ 56,198 Replace Rooftop HVAC $ 143,205 $143,205 $ 143,205 Install Solar $ 300,612 $300,612 $ 300,612 Parking lot renovation $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ 80,000 $ - Sub Total CIP $ 659,674 $ 200,857 $ 15,000 $ 443,817 $ - $ - $ 659,674 TOTAL $ 200,857 $ 15,000 $ 443,817 $ - $ 2,000 $ 661,674 BARBARA J. RILEY COMMUNITY AND SENIOR CENTER MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 452 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 YEAR TOTAL Individual Tables 7 15 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Individual Barbeque 2 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Garbage Cans 8 15 $ 500 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Benches 6 15 $ 1,500 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Path—DG 15 $45 sq yd $ 13,500 $ 13,500 Sub Total MM $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Recycled Water - water main improvements $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Recycled Water - irrigation system improvements $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Accessible picnic tables $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Accessible drinking fountain $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Sub Total CIP $ 655,500 $ 5,500 $ - $ 650,000 $ - $ - $ 655,500 TOTAL $ 5,500 $ - $ 650,000 $ - $ 20,000 $ 675,500 BROOKSHIRE CHILDREN'S PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 453 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 5 15 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Individual Barbeque 4 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Garbage Cans 3 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Benches 3 15 $ 1,500 $ 4,500 $ 4,500 Play Area 1 15 $ 75-250k $ 200,000 $ 200,000 Basketball Court 1 10 $ 85,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Path--Concrete 30 $160 sq yard $ 3,200 $ 3,200 Sub Total MM $ 7,700 $ - $ 220,000 $ - $ 3,000 $ 230,700 Slurry parking lot $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 Turf/Irrigation Renovation $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 ADA parking/redesign entry $ 22,500 $ 22,500 $ 22,500 Sub Total CIP $ 334,500 $ 34,500 $ - $ 300,000 $ - $ - $ 334,500 TOTAL $ 42,200 $ - $ 520,000 $ - $ 3,000 $ 565,200 CRAWFORD PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 454 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Sub Total MM $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Soccer to synthetic $ 3,000,000 $ 4,500,000 $ 4,500,000 Install lights sports fields $ 650,000 $ 600,000 $ 600,000 Sub Total CIP $ 3,650,000 $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 TOTAL $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 $ - $ - $ 5,100,000 COLUMBUS HIGH SCHOOL FIELDS MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 455 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 23 15 $ 2,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Individual Barbeque 4 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Drinking Fountains 2 15 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Garbage Cans 18 15 $ 500 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Benches 9 15 $ 1,500 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 6,000 Play Area 1 15 $ 75-250k $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Path--Concrete 30 $160 sq yard $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Sub Total MM $ 15,000 $ - $ 403,000 $ 5,000 $ 23,500 $ 446,500 Infiltration Basin Development $ 3,700,000 $ 3,700,000 $ 3,700,000 Slurry parking lot/ADA $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Replace chain link to wrought iron $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Interior Light Retro $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Park lighting $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Playground Hardware/surfacing $ 51,000 $ 51,000 $ 51,000 Remove community bldg or $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Replace community bldg or $ 175,000 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 Community bldg new roof/paint $ 10,500 $ - Garage $ 2,500 $ - Community bldg ADA entry ramp $ 8,500 $ - Community bldg--interior ADA $ 500 $ - Replace restroom or $300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Restroom--new roof wood repairs/paint $ 6,500 $ - Restroom--drainage $ 4,000 $ - Restroom --sidewalk $ 3,500 $ 3,500 $ 3,500 Restroom--ADA $ 27,500 $ - Sub Total CIP $ 4,324,500 $ 3,789,500 $ 300,000 $ 475,000 $ - $ - $ 4,564,500 TOTAL $ 3,804,500 $ 300,000 $ 878,000 $ 5,000 $ 23,500 $ 5,011,000 DENNIS THE MENACE PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 456 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Garbage Cans 16 15 $ 500 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 2,000 Benches 4 15 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 Sub Total MM $ - $ - $ - $ 1,000 $ 2,500 $ 3,500 Infiltration Basin Expansion $ 7,250,000 $7,250,000 $ 7,250,000 Soccer fields to synthetic $ 2,500,000 $ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000 Lights at new synthetic fields $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Barrier Poles and netting $ 90,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000 New accessible curb ramps $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 Restroom/Concession ADA $ 14,500 $ 14,500 $ 14,500 Sub Total CIP $ 10,362,500 $7,362,500 $ - $ 5,500,000 $ - $ - $12,862,500 TOTAL $7,362,500 $ - $ 5,500,000 $ 1,000 $ 2,500 $12,866,000 DISCOVERY SPORTS COMPLEX MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 457 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 29 15 $ 2,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Individual Barbeque 11 15 $ 500 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Drinking Fountains 5 15 $ 5,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Garbage Cans 36 15 $ 500 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Benches 15 15 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 7,500 Building/Structure 5 20 Varies $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 50,000 Sub Total MM $ 1,500 $ 26,500 $ 1,500 $ 26,500 $ 28,500 $ 84,500 Infiltration Basin Development $ 7,250,000 $ 7,250,000 $ 7,250,000 Recycled water - water main improvements $ 580,000 $ 580,000 $ 580,000 Recycled water - irrigation system replacement $ 450,000 $ 450,000 $ 450,000 Turf renovation $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Parking lot renovation $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Parking lot ADA $ 4,500 $ 4,500 $ 4,500 Interior Light Retro $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Field lighting $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 Sports fields-bleachers/backstops $ 50,000 $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Improve 2nd ball field $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Sub Total CIP $ 1,999,500 $ 7,319,500 $ 50,000 $ 1,880,000 $ - $ - $ 9,249,500 TOTAL $ 7,321,000 $ 76,500 $ 1,881,500 $ 26,500 $ 28,500 $ 9,334,000 FURMAN PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 458 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 21 15 $ 2,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Individual Barbeque 5 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Garbage Cans 16 15 $ 500 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Play Area 1 15 $ 75-250k $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Path--Concrete 30 $160 sq yard $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Sub Total MM $ 20,000 $ 250,000 $ - $ - $ 20,500 $ 290,500 Recycled Water - water main improvements $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Recycled Water - irrigation system improvements $ 275,000 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 Turf renovation $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Renovate group picnic . $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Parking lot renovation $ 60,000 $ 60,000 $ 60,000 Community bldg redesign front plaza $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Community bldg--drainage $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Parking lot ADA ramp $ 18,000 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 Westerly access ADA redesign $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Restroom ADA $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Improved field lighting $ 350,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 Conversion of Softball field to Game field $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Storage space for sports equipment $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Sub Total CIP $ 2,101,000 $ 216,000 $ 90,000 $ 1,825,000 $ - $ - $ 2,131,000 TOTAL $ 236,000 $ 340,000 $ 1,825,000 $ - $ 20,500 $ 2,421,500 GOLDEN PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 459 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENT ORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 4 15 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Individual Barbeque 5 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Drinking Fountains 3 15 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 10,000 Garbage Cans 44 15 $ 500 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Benches 24 15 $ 1,500 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 15,000 Sub Total MM $ 8,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 15,500 $ 32,500 Turf/irrigation renovation $ 750,000 $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Parking lot renovation $ 110,000 $ 110,000 $ 110,000 Tennis court renovation $ 600,000 $ 600,000 $ 600,000 Playground renovation $ 150,000 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Storage bldg--drainage $ 4,000 $ 4,000 $ 4,000 Light easterly ballfield $ 275,000 $ 275,000 $ 275,000 Tennis bldg--replace trellis $ 4,500 $ 4,500 $ 4,500 Pathway redesign--ADA $ 17,500 $ 17,500 $ 17,500 East Restroom--ADA $ 9,000 $ 9,000 $ 9,000 Replace existing restroom $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Sub Total CIP $ 2,220,000 $ 31,000 $ 260,000 $ 1,925,000 $ - $ 4,000 $ 2,220,000 TOTAL $ 39,000 $ 263,000 $ 1,928,000 $ 3,000 $ 19,500 $ 2,252,500 INDEPENDENCE PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 460 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 12 15 $ 2,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Individual Barbeque 5 15 $ 500 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Drinking Fountains 4 15 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 10,000 Garbage Cans 20 15 $ 500 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Benches 13 15 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 4,500 Basketball Court 1 10 $ 85,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Dog Park 1 20 $ 30,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Sub Total MM $ 1,500 $ 5,000 $ 1,500 $ 21,500 $ 41,000 $ 70,500 Slurry Pico Vista lot $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Ballfield Restroom--paint and roof $ 3,500 $ 3,500 $ 3,500 Decomposed Granite Walking Trail $ 18,750 $ 18,750 $ 18,750 Conversion to Passive Park $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 Remove community bldg or $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Community bldg--roof $ 3,000 $ - Community bldg--paint $ 2,500 $ - Community bldg--window frames $ 3,000 $ - Community bldg--brick venee $ 3,000 $ - Sub Total CIP $ 2,068,750 $ 2,082,250 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,082,250 TOTAL $ 2,083,750 $ 5,000 $ 1,500 $ 21,500 $ 41,000 $ 2,152,750 RIO SAN GABRIEL MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 461 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Garbage Cans 2 15 $ 500 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Benches 2 15 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 Path--Concrete 30 $160 sq yard $ 4,800 $ 4,800 Sub Total MM $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,300 $ 7,300 Turf/irrigation renovation $ 125,000 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 Park Lighting $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Sub Total CIP $ 125,000 $ - $ - $ 225,000 $ - $ - $ 225,000 TOTAL $ - $ - $ 225,000 $ - $ 7,300 $ 232,300 TEMPLE PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 462 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 12 15 $ 2,000 $ 8,000 $ 8,000 $ 16,000 Individual Barbeque 4 15 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Garbage Cans 12 15 $ 500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 Path—DG 15 $45 sq yd $ 4,500 $ 4,500 $ 9,000 Sub Total MM $ 8,000 $ 4,500 $ 8,000 $ - $ 7,500 $ 28,000 Recycled water - water main improvements $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 Recycled water - irrigation system improvements $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 ADA parking path redesign $ 7,500 $ 7,500 $ 7,500 Sub Total CIP $ 1,307,500 $ 7,500 $ - $ 1,300,000 $ - $ - $ 1,307,500 TOTAL $ 15,500 $ 4,500 $ 1,308,000 $ - $ 7,500 $ 1,335,500 TREASURE ISLAND PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 463 CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN MAJOR MAINTENANCE AND CIP SUMMARY Feature INVENTORY Max Life Average Costs** each 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 5 Year Total Individual Tables 36 15 $ 2,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Individual Barbeque 8 15 $ 500 $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Drinking Fountains 5 15 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 10,000 $ 15,000 Garbage Cans 32 15 $ 500 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Benches 14 15 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 7,500 Play Area 1 15 $ 75-250k $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Restroom 1 20 $ 100-500k $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Path--Concrete 30 $160 sq yard $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 40,000 Trees 30 $300 24" box $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 7,500 Sub Total MM $ 3,000 $ 28,000 $ 3,000 $ 333,000 $ 285,000 $ 652,000 Infiltration Basin Development $ 3,975,000 $ 3,975,000 Pond renovation $ 1,700,000 $ 1,700,000 $ 1,700,000 Irrigation upgrade $ 400,000 $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Exterior Light Retro $ 46,303 $ 46,303 $ 46,303 Community bldg-redesign interior $ 300,000 $ 300,000 $ 300,000 Community bldg--ADA parking ramp/path redesign $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Community bldg HVAC System $ 35,000 $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Secondary parking ADA ramp/slurry $ 22,000 $ 22,000 $ 22,000 Community bldg ADA improvements $ 25,000 $ 25,000 $ 25,000 South restroom renovation/ADA $ 6,500 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 Group picnic renovation $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Accessible Stalls/ramp at South Restroom $ 3,000 $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Bike Trail Access Improvements 200,000$ 200,000$ 200,000$ Sub Total CIP $ 6,017,803 $ 15,000 $ 300,000 $ 400,000 $ - $ 6,732,803 TOTAL $ 6,020,803 $ 43,000 $ 303,000 $ 733,000 $ 285,000 $ 7,384,803 WILDERNESS PARK MAINTENANCE SITE SPECIFIC CIP’S DR A F T PC Agenda Page 464 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THE CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: City of Downey 11111 Brookshire Avenue Downey, California 90241 Prepared by: LSA Associates, Inc. 20 Executive Park, Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614 (949) 553-0666 August 2016 PC Agenda Page 465 P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» i TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I - INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT ............................................................................................ 1 DEVELOPMENT OF THE MASTER PLAN .............................................................................. 3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................. 3 CITY CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................................................ 6 OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (E.G., PERMITS, FINANCING APPROVAL, OR PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT) ...................... 8 SECTION II - ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ................................. 9 SECTION III - INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION ......... 10 AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................................. 11 AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES ............................................................................. 12 AIR QUALITY ........................................................................................................................... 13 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................... 18 CULTURAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................................... 22 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ............................................................................................................ 25 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ........................................................................................... 28 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ....................................................................... 32 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ................................................................................ 35 LAND USE/PLANNING ............................................................................................................ 39 MINERAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................... 43 NOISE ......................................................................................................................................... 44 POPULATION AND HOUSING ............................................................................................... 48 PUBLIC SERVICES ................................................................................................................... 49 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................ 51 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC ................................................................................................ 52 UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................. 55 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE..................................................................... 58 SECTION IV - REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 60 SECTION V - MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ............................. 63 MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS .................................................................. 63 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES ....................................................................... 64 FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location ...................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Existing Parks and Opportunity Sites ..................................................................................... 5 TABLES Table A: Opportunity Sites ..................................................................................................................... 7 Table B: City of Downey Acceptable Noise Levels for Land Uses ..................................................... 45 Table C: City of Downey Maximum Permissible Noise Levels .......................................................... 45 Table D: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program .................................................................... 65 PC Agenda Page 466 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 1 SECTION I - INTRODUCTION DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT The proposed project consists of the adoption of the City of Downey Parks and Open Space Master Plan (Master Plan). The Master Plan is intended to serve as a guide and implementation tool for the management and development of parks and recreational facilities and programs within the City of Downey (City) (Figure 1). The Master Plan does not include any site-specific designs, grant any entitlements for development, or change any land use designations or zoning. The proposed Master Plan would be used by the City to determine how to best meet the future park and open space needs of its citizens through development, redevelopment, expansion, and enhancement of the City’s parks system, open spaces, trails, recreational facilities, and programs. The proposed Master Plan seeks to:  Acquire, develop, redevelop, and maintain quality parks and trails that support equity of access by users, connectivity, and create a positive sense of place for all residents in the City.  Improve the overall existing condition of parks and community facilities that will encourage greater positive use by residents in the City.  Update community facilities both indoor and outdoor to maximize their use and appreciation by the community for people of all ages; to enhance the value of sports and fitness, quality of life, arts, and social places for the community to gather; and celebrate healthy living in the City. The Master Plan was developed over the course of 16 months. The development process of the Master Plan provided opportunities for the community to share issues and concerns regarding improvements to facilities and services, fostered public dialogue regarding expectations, solutions, and vision for parks and recreation, and allowed the community to author recommendations regarding program and facility priorities. The proposed Master Plan builds on previous planning efforts, including the City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan, the Bicycle Master Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan, the Downey Civic Center Master Plan, the Downey Energy Action Plan, the Downey Parks and Recreation: Draft Assessment, the Downey Unified School District Master Plan, the Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan, and the Los Angeles Countywide Comprehensive Park and Recreation Needs Assessment. The Master Plan is intended to be flexible, and presents findings and recommendations that should be evaluated, validated, and/or modified periodically as the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Department responds to unforeseen opportunities and constraints as well as changes in residents’ needs and demands in the context of other City priorities. As such, the recommendations in the Master Plan are intended to be flexible guidelines that are adaptable to changing conditions, not an exacting set of rules to be followed. PC Agenda Page 467 SOURCE: Bing Maps (2014); SCAG (2010) I:\RJM1402\GIS\ProjectLocation_Streets.mxd (5/18/2016) FIGURE 1 Downey Parks and OpenSpace Master Plan Project Location LEGEND City of Downey Boundary OrangeCounty LosAngelesCounty £¤101 ÃÃ1 ÃÃ72 ÃÃ2 ÃÃ42 ÃÃ47 ÃÃ22 ÃÃ39 ÃÃ19 ÃÃ60 ÃÃ91 ProjectLocation§¨¦105 §¨¦10 §¨¦110 §¨¦210 §¨¦10 §¨¦710 §¨¦605 §¨¦5 §¨¦405 Project Vicinity 0 0.5 1 MILES PC Agenda Page 468 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE MASTER PLAN The City conducted a thorough outreach and research campaign to identify existing conditions and prioritize future investment in parks and open space in the City. The City relied on a recreational facility needs assessment to identify the current and future recreational facility needs of the community and relative priority of each facility. In addition, the City took an inventory of recreational programs offered through the Parks and Recreation Department. Based on findings, the Master Plan provides facility recommendations, which are intended to address the needs identified through earlier research efforts. The City’s General Plan includes classifications for three park types (Pocket Park, Neighborhood Park, and Community Park), but does not include definitions for the park classifications. The proposed Master Plan defines the existing park classification system to identify uses and acceptable features of each park type. The Master Plan also defines two subcategories of Community Park; Community Sports Park and Civic Center Community Park, as well as two other facility types, Joint Use School Facilities and Special Use Facilities. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS Increase in Park Acreage The City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan (2005) references a National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) standard of minimum park acreage of 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents. At the time of its publication (2005), the General Plan indicated an acreage shortfall of 50 acres in meeting this goal. Based on a 2015 estimate of population of 113,543 and a total of 117 acres of parkland, this deficit has increased to 53 acres. By 2035, if no new parkland is added and the community continues to grow as anticipated (to 118,994 by 2035), a parkland deficit of 61 acres is predicted. The NRPA no longer provides acreage standards for communities. The proposed Master Plan provides community needs as an alternate strategy to consider for the City’s parkland acreage standard. The Master Plan analysis concluded that there is a current need for 211.2 acres of parkland to meet the current demand for park space, which will grow to 227.2 acres by 2035, a deficit of 94.2 acres for 2015 and 110.2 acres for 2035. In order to meet the demand for park space identified in the Acreage Analysis, the City would adopt a 1.9 acres per 1000 residents need for park space, which is higher than the 1.5 acres per 1000 residents established in the General Plan. Recreational Facility Recommendations The proposed Master Plan identifies two broad categories of recreational facility recommendations: maintenance and operations improvements to existing facilities; and community needs recommendations. Recreational facility recommendations by park site are summarized below and shown in Figure 2. Maintenance and Operations Improvements Apollo Park. Facility recommendations include various upgrades to existing facilities, including conversion to synthetic turf, improvements to the north bathroom, compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, and playground renovations. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. PC Agenda Page 469 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 4 Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center. Facility recommendations consist of operational and maintenance upgrades with new sustainability upgrades, such as retrofitting exterior lighting to LED, and installing a cool roof and photovoltaic panels. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Brookshire Children’s Park. Facility recommendations consist of operational and maintenance upgrades, including recycled water improvements, picnic tables, and drinking fountains. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Crawford Park. Facility recommendations include playground renovation, slurry parking lot, ADA parking and accessible entry, and turf and irrigation renovation. A 20-foot trail access is also proposed. Columbus High School Fields. Facility recommendations for Columbus High School Fields include converting the soccer field to synthetic turf and installing lights at the sports fields. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Dennis the Menace Park. Facility recommendations include various upgrades to existing facilities, new park landscape lighting, resurfacing the playground, bathroom upgrades, community building upgrades, and replacing fencing. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Discovery Sports Complex. Facility recommendations consist of operational and maintenance upgrades including converting soccer fields to synthetic turf, ADA accessibility upgrades, and new sports field lighting. An expansion to the infiltration basin is also recommended. Furman Park. Facility recommendations consist of operational and maintenance upgrades, including recycled water improvements, parking lot improvements, field lighting, and interior lighting retrofits. New bleacher seating for sports fields and backstops are also proposed. Golden Park. Facility recommendations include various operation and maintenance upgrades such as recycled water improvements, renovations to turf, picnic areas, and parking lot, new ADA ramps and improved field lighting. Other recommendations include renovations to the front plaza of the community building, new storage space for sports equipment, and the conversion of the softball field to a game field. PC Agenda Page 470 SOURCE: Bing Maps (2014); SCAG (2010) I:\RJM1402\GIS\Parks_OppSites.mxd (5/18/2016) FIGURE 2 Downey Parks and OpenSpace Master Plan Existing Parks and Opportunity Sites 0 1750 3500 FEET LEGEND !(Opportunity Sites City of Downey Boundary Proposed Improvements for Existing Parks Upgrades Only Change in Use and Upgrades New Facilities and Upgrades PC Agenda Page 471 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 6 Independence Park. Facility recommendations consist of operational and maintenance upgrades to existing facilities. Recommendations include turf and irrigation improvements, parking lot, and tennis court renovations, ADA accessibility upgrades, and replacing existing restrooms and trellises connected to the tennis facility. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Rio San Gabriel Park. Facility recommendations for Rio San Gabriel Park include converting the existing park to passive use, and upgrades to the ballfield restroom and the community building. A new decomposed granite walking trail is also proposed. Temple Park. Facility recommendations include turf and irrigation renovation, maintenance improvements, and a new flag pole with lighting. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Treasure Island Park. Facility recommendations include recycled water and maintenance improvements and an ADA parking path redesign. No new or expanded facilities are proposed. Wilderness Park. Operational and maintenance improvements include irrigation upgrades, various upgrades to the community building ADA improvements throughout the site, and picnic area renovations. Other proposed recommendations include infiltration basin development, pond renovation, and bike trail access improvements. Community Needs Recommendations The proposed Master Plan also identifies Community Needs Recommendations that were derived from the Master Plan Community Engagement and Recreation Needs Assessment process. Community needs recommendations include an additional softball field, 4 miles of bike trails, a new gymnasium, 21 additional playgrounds, a new soccer complex, a spray play/splash pad, and 42 miles of additional walking and jogging trails. Specific sites have not yet been defined for any of the Community Needs Recommendations listed in the Master Plan. The proposed Master Plan also identifies a number of potential locations to be considered for future park development, termed Opportunity Sites. Figure 2 illustrates the locations of the opportunity sites identified in the proposed Master Plan. Table A provides additional information on the opportunity sites including acreage, existing use, potential use, and potential amenities. CITY CHARACTERISTICS The City of Downey is a 12.57 square-mile community located in southeast Los Angeles County (County). The City is surrounded by the cities of Pico Rivera to the north, Paramount and Bellflower to the south, Santa Fe Springs and Norwalk to the east, and Bell Gardens and South Gate to the west. Regional access to and from Downey is provided by the Santa Ana (Interstate 5 [I-5]) Freeway; the Glen Anderson (Interstate 105 [I-105]) Freeway; the San Gabriel River (Interstate 605 [I-605]) Freeway; and the Long Beach (Interstate 710 [I-710]) Freeway; as well as the Metropolitan PC Agenda Page 472 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 7 Table A: Opportunity Sites No. Site Name Address Acres Existing Use Potential Use Potential Amenities 1 Wilderness Park Expansion 10999 Little Lake Road 1.8 Parkland Existing Park Expansion River trail access point, pathway, greenspace, potential bike pump track 2 La Reina Property 3 10910 La Reina Avenue 0.53 Vacant Lot Pocket Park Playground, seating, shade structure, pathway, tables/ benches, green space 3 Orange Street Property 8000 Orange Street 0.16 Vacant Lot Pocket Park Playground/benches, green space 4 Former Well Site 7217 Adwen Street 0.17 Vacant Lot Pocket Park Playground/benches, green space 5 Former Well Site 8201 Stewart & Gray Road 0.19 Vacant Lot Pocket Park Playground/benches, green space 6 Former Well Site 9501 Guatemala Avenue 0.14 Vacant Lot Pocket Park Playground/benches, green space 7 Consuelo Street/ Paramount Boulevard Consuelo Street/ Paramount Boulevard 1.7 Utility Easement Linear Neighborhood Park Walking trail, playground, shade structure, exercise stations, green space 8 Rancho Los Amigos South Campus 7601 Imperial Highway 18 Former Sanitorium/ Hospital Regional Multi-Sports Complex Multi-use fields Transportation Authority (MTA) Green Line Light Rail passenger train services at the Lakewood Boulevard station. According to California Department of Finance estimates, on January 1, 2015, the population of the City was 113,900.1 According to the 2010 United States Census, Downey has grown at a greater rate (4.1 percent) than the County as a whole (3.1 percent) since 2000. Median household income in the City is 5 percent higher than the median household income for the County. Similar to the County, the highest rates of population growth are among residents between the ages of 45 and 64. Hispanic and White are the two most commonly cited ethnicities in the City, representing 71 percent and 18 percent of the population respectively.2 There are 12 parks (117 acres) and one community center within the City of Downey. The City currently has 5.7 miles of Class I bike trails. The City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan 2015 identifies and proposes an additional 14.7 miles of Class II and 18.9 miles of Class III bike trails. The City also 1 California Department of Finance. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the Sate – January 1, 2014 and 2015. Website: http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/view.php (accessed on March 2, 2016). 2 City of Downey. 2016. Parks and Open Space Master Plan. January. PC Agenda Page 473 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 8 has a long-standing agreement with Downey Unified School District that allows the City to utilize the Downey High School pool and the Columbus High School Sports Fields. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (E.G., PERMITS, FINANCING APPROVAL, OR PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT)  Downey Unified School District (for Joint-Use Facilities) PC Agenda Page 474 PC Agenda Page 475 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 10 SECTION III - INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST AND ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts, which may result from the proposed project. For the evaluation of potential impacts, the questions in the Initial Study Checklist are stated and answers are provided according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. They outline the following issues: 1. Aesthetics 10. Land Use and Planning 2. Agriculture Resources 11. Mineral Resources 3. Air Quality 12. Noise 4. Biological Resources 13. Population and Housing 5. Cultural Resources 14. Public Services 6. Geology and Soils 15. Recreation 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 16. Transportation and Traffic 8. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 17. Utilities and Service Systems 9. Hydrology and Water Quality 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance The analysis considers the project's short-term impacts (construction-related), and its operational or day-to-day impacts. For each question, there are four possible responses. They include: 1. No Impact. Future development arising from the project's implementation will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment, and no additional analysis is required. 2. Less Than Significant Impact. The development associated with project implementation will have the potential to impact the environment; these impacts, however, will be less than the levels or thresholds that are considered significant, and no additional analysis is required. 3. Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. The development will have the potential to generate impacts, which will have a significant effect on the environment; however, mitigation measures will be effective in reducing the impacts to levels that are less than significant. 4. Potentially Significant Impact. Future implementation will have impacts that are considered significant, and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. PC Agenda Page 476 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 11 AESTHETICS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Discussion: a) No Impact. A scenic vista is typically defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly valued landscape for the benefit of the general public. Aesthetic components of a scenic vista generally include (1) scenic quality, (2) sensitivity level, and (3) view access. The City of Downey, which is located in southeast Los Angeles County, is an urban environment. The Vision 2025 General Plan Update (2005) does not designate any scenic corridors or vistas within the City boundaries. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would have no impacts related to a scenic vista. b) No Impact. The City is located in an urban environment in southeast Los Angeles County. There are no designated scenic highways or scenic resources within the City boundaries.1 Therefore, no impacts to scenic resources would occur. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Improvements made based on the recommendations of the proposed Master Plan would occur in currently developed areas throughout the City and involve the provision of additional park and open space that would enhance the visual character of park sites and surrounding community. Any future development would be subject to the applicable City regulations and requirements, to ensure that improvements do not impact aesthetic values of the site and surrounding character. Therefore, potential impacts to aesthetic resources would be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. New or upgraded park lighting would comply with Municipal Code Section 9520.06(c), which requires shielding and prohibits light to spill off the site. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Future projects that could result in an increase in light intensity would be considered at the development review stage to ensure that the visual character and quality of sites is maintained either through zoning code requirements. Therefore, potential impacts related to light and glare would be less than significant. 1 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft EIR. July 2004. p. 8-1. PC Agenda Page 477 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 12 AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non forest use? Discussion: a) No Impact. The City is located in an urbanized area that is mostly built out. There are no agricultural lands, important farmland, or lands subject to a Williamson Act contract within the City’s boundaries. Similarly, the City does not contain any forestland or timberland or any land zoned for such uses. The City’s General Plan (Vision 2025) does not include provisions for agricultural uses in the future. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural or forest resources would occur. b) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan does not include the development of land designated for agricultural production or zoned for agricultural use, and would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act contract or contribute to environmental changes that would result in the conversion of farmland to a nonagricultural use. The zoning code does not include provisions for agricultural uses. Therefore, no conflicts regarding zoning for agricultural resources would occur. c) No Impact. There is no farmland within the City’s boundaries. Furthermore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in the conversion of farmland to another use. The City’s General Plan (Vision 2025) does not include provisions for agricultural uses in the future. Therefore, no impacts related to the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use would occur. d) No Impact. The Master Plan would not contribute to environmental changes that could result in conversion of forest land to a non forest use, and no impacts would occur. PC Agenda Page 478 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 13 AIR QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors? Introduction: The project area is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), and is within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are responsible for formulating and implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the Basin. Every 3 to 4 years, SCAQMD prepares a new AQMP that updates the previous plan and has a 20-year horizon. The 2012 AQMP includes the new and changing federal requirements, implementation of new technology measures, and the continued development of economically sound, flexible compliance approaches. The SCAQMD adopted the Final 2012 AQMP in February 2013. Both the State of California (State) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have established health-based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for air pollutants. These “criteria” air pollutants for which AAQS have been established are considered by the EPA to be the most harmful to public health and the environment. The criteria pollutants of concern that are related to the proposed project include carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur oxides (SOx). PM includes fine particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5) and coarse particulate matter less than 10 microns in size (PM10). Regional air quality is defined by whether the area has attained or not attained State and federal air quality standards, as determined by air quality data from various monitoring stations. The Basin is designated as nonattainment for ozone (O3), PM10 and PM2.5 under the California AAQS, and nonattainment for O3, PM2.5, and lead (Pb) (Los Angeles only) for the National AAQS. The various types of pollutants monitored within the vicinity of the project area are described below. PC Agenda Page 479 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 14  Carbon Monoxide (CO): The entire Basin is in attainment/maintenance for the federal CO standard and in attainment for the State CO attainment standard. State and federal standards were not exceeded between 2012 and 2014.  Ozone (O3): The Basin is a nonattainment area for both the federal and State O3 standards. The State 1-hour O3 standard was exceeded 2 to 4 times per year in the last 3 years. The State 8-hour O3 standard was exceeded 5 to 10 times per year in the last 3 years. The federal 8-hour O3 standard was exceeded 1 to 5 times per year in the last 3 years.  Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2): The entire Basin has not exceeded either federal or State standards for NO2 in the past 3 years with published monitoring data. It is designated as a maintenance area under the federal standards and as a nonattainment area under the State standards.  Sulfur Dioxide (SO2): The entire Basin has not exceeded either federal or State standards for SO2 in the past 3 years with published monitoring data. The entire Basin is in attainment with both federal and State SO2 standards.  Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10): Neither the State 24-hour PM10 standard nor the federal 24- hour PM10 standard was exceeded in the last 3 years. The State annual average was also not exceeded in any of the past 3 years.  Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5): The 2006 federal 24-hour standard was not exceeded in the last 3 years. The annual average concentrations did not exceed the State or federal standards in the past 3 years.  Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) or Reactive Organic Gases (ROGs): There are no specific State or federal VOC thresholds because they are regulated by individual air districts as O3 precursors. Discussion: a) No Impact. The City of Downey is located within the South Coast Air Basin. The Basin is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD, which is the local agency responsible for ensuring that federal and State ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the Basin. The California Air Resources Board (ARB) has primary oversight regarding vehicle-related emissions. A network of ambient air quality monitoring stations is located in the Basin to characterize the air quality environment. Pollutants monitored include O3, CO, NO2, PM, SO2 and Pb. The proposed project is located in an area designated as nonattainment for the State’s O3, PM less than 10 microns in aerodynamic diameter (PM10), PM less than 2.5 microns in aerodynamic diameter (PM2.5), and Pb standards. The federal area designations are extreme nonattainment for 8-hour O3, serious nonattainment for PM2.5, nonattainment for Pb, and maintenance for PM10, CO and NO2. In federal nonattainment areas, the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires preparation of a State Implementation Plan (SIP), detailing how the State would attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) within mandated time frames. As part of the SIP requirement, each air quality regulatory district in California is required to submit an AQMP to the ARB for incorporation into the SIP. The SCAQMD developed the 2003 AQMP to demonstrate attainment of the federal PM10 and 1-hour O3 standards by 2010, and also included an NO2 maintenance plan (SCAQMD 2003). The 2007 AQMP for the Basin was developed to demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS for PM2.5, PM10, 8-hour O3 and 1-hour O3, which was subsequently revoked but is still being tracked towards attainment. The United States Environmental Protection Agency PC Agenda Page 480 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 15 (EPA) partially approved the 2007 AQMP PM2.5 plan, and fully approved the 8-hour O3 plan. Although the 2007 AQMP has supplanted the 2003 AQMP for O3 attainment planning, the 2003 AQMP remains the federally approved AQMP for PM10. In 2012, SCAQMD developed the 2012 AQMP to demonstrate attainment of the 24-hour PM2.5 standard and updated the EPA-approved O3 control plan. The 2012 AQMP also builds on approaches in the 2007 AQMP for regional attainment of the federal PM2.5 and O3 standards. The 2012 AQMP also includes a demonstration of the 1-hour O3 standard attainment and vehicle-miles traveled offsets. A Supplement to the 2012 AQMP was prepared to demonstrate attainment of the 24-hour PM2.5 standard by 2015. The SCAQMD Governing Board approved the Supplement on February 5, 2015, and submitted to ARB/EPA for approval as part of the SIP (SCAQMD 2016). The 2012 AQMP identifies emission reduction measures designed to bring the Basin into attainment of the State ambient air quality standards and the NAAQS. AQMP strategies include mobile source control measures and clean fuel programs that are enforced, through subsequent regulatory actions, at the State and federal level, on engine manufacturers and petroleum refiners and retailers. The proposed project’s construction and operations would comply with AQMP control measures by virtue of local, State, and federal enforcement and, therefore, would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. The SCAQMD is currently developing the 2016 AQMP, which focuses on the Basin’s attainment of the federal 2008 8-hour O3 standard, and the 2012 annual PM2.5 standards, as well as updates to the attainment demonstration of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5, the 1-hour O3, and the 1997 8-hour O3 standards. The AQMP is based on projections from local General Plans; therefore, projects that are consistent with the local General Plan are considered to be consistent with the AQMP. The AQMP contains a number of land use measures and goals that are considered air quality positive. These include intensification of land uses near points of multiple transportation system access, mixed land uses to encourage nonvehicular mobility between homes, jobs, and goods/services, and economic revitalization of depressed and blighted urban core areas. Park facility improvements constructed pursuant to the needs of the proposed Master Plan would be approved in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Code and in consistency with the General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP, and no impacts would occur. b) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Park facility improvements constructed pursuant to the needs of the proposed Master Plan would be evaluated for each project to ensure that air quality issues are addressed. Future projects would also be required to comply with SCAQMD regulations for both operational and construction emissions. Construction activities produce emissions from off-road construction vehicles exhaust, asphalt off-gassing, and fugitive dust, as well as exhaust from on-road vehicles associated with construction workers and material deliveries. These emissions would all vary daily as construction activity levels change. The park improvement projects are not expected to exceed SCAQMD construction emissions thresholds. While the development of the opportunity sites would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with local, State, and federal standards, each has the potential to produce construction emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Reduction of daily emissions can be achieved through modifications to construction schedules and use of low emissions construction equipment. These types of project controls may be required for the opportunity sites in order to reduce construction emissions to below SCAQMD thresholds. As part of environmental review, an air quality analysis will be required for each opportunity site to PC Agenda Page 481 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 16 determine the types of project controls that will be required for the project. This requirement is included in Mitigation Measure AQ-1. It is not anticipated that, once construction is completed, any of the park improvements or opportunity sites would produce air emissions that are substantially different than before the improvements. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed Master Plan would not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. c) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. The park facility improvements constructed pursuant to the Master Plan are all located in a nonattainment area for O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The development of the opportunity sites has the potential to produce construction emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Reduction of daily emissions can be achieved through modifications to construction schedules and use of low emissions construction equipment. These types of project controls may be required for the opportunity sites in order to reduce construction emissions to below SCAQMD thresholds. As part of environmental review, a construction air quality analysis will be required for each opportunity site to determine the types of project controls that will be required for the project. This requirement is included in Mitigation Measure AQ-1. It is not anticipated that, once construction is completed, any of the opportunity sites would produce air emissions that are substantially different than before the improvements. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed Master Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is designated as non-attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Park facility improvements constructed pursuant to the needs of the proposed Master Plan may expose the surrounding land uses to airborne particulates and fugitive dust, as well as to a small quantity of construction equipment pollutants (i.e., usually diesel-fueled vehicles and equipment). These impacts would not be considered significant because the construction contractor would implement measures to reduce or eliminate emissions by following standard construction practices and complying with SCAQMD rules. The development of the opportunity sites has the potential to produce construction emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Reduction of daily emissions can be achieved through modifications to construction schedules and use of low emissions construction equipment. These types of project controls may be required for the opportunity sites in order to reduce construction emissions to below SCAQMD thresholds. As part of environmental review, a construction air quality analysis will be required for each opportunity site to determine the types of project controls that will be required for the project. This requirement is included in Mitigation Measure AQ-1. It is not anticipated that, once construction is completed, any of the opportunity sites would produce air emissions that are substantially different than before the improvements. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed Master Plan would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. PC Agenda Page 482 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 17 e) Less Than Significant Impact. Some objectionable odors may emanate from the operation of diesel-powered construction equipment during project construction. These odors, however, would be short-term and limited to the construction period, and are not expected to affect a substantial number of people. Operation of the future projects implemented under the Master Plan would not introduce any new sources of odor and is not expected to result in objectionable odors in the long term. Therefore, impacts related to objectionable odors are less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure AQ-1 Air Quality Analysis. Prior to approval of any opportunity site development pursuant to the Parks and Open Space Master Plan, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall verify that an air quality analysis is conducted to ensure that project controls are identified in order to meet South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds. PC Agenda Page 483 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 18 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources? (i.e., tree preservation ordinance)? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? PC Agenda Page 484 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 19 Discussion: a) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Each existing park site and opportunity site identified in the Master Plan is located in a fully developed area of the City and is surrounded by residential, industrial, or commercial land uses. Existing habitats that occur on City park lands and opportunity sites identified in the Master Plan can be classified as ruderal, ornamental landscaping, developed, and disturbed or barren. 1 A California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) records search conducted in July 2016 did not identify any special-interest plant or animal species with a high likelihood of occurrence on each of the sites identified in the Master Plan. Furthermore, each of the Master Plan recommendations, if implemented, would not likely result in substantial habitat modifications. While no special-status wildlife or plant species were identified as having a high potential for occurrence on the identified sites, there is a potential for trees and other vegetation and structures adjacent to the identified sites to support special-status species, including nesting birds. Nesting birds are protected under both the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the California Fish and Game Code and cannot be subjected to take (as defined in the California Fish and Game Code) during the active nesting bird season, which typically runs from February 15 through August 15. If any construction activities, including tree removal and ground disturbance, are planned during the active nesting bird season, such activities could directly or indirectly affect native and nongame birds and their nests through increased noise and other disturbances. In order to mitigate potential impacts to special-status species, each future project would need to comply with State and federal regulations. Mitigation Measure BIO-1 requires a preconstruction survey by a qualified biologist to determine if special-status species are present as well as agency coordination for addressing special-status species. Mitigation Measure BIO-2 requires compliance with regulations for nesting birds. Therefore, with implementation of these two mitigation measures, there would be no potential for a substantial adverse effects, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). b) No Impact. None of the existing park sites and opportunity sites contains riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW or the USFWS in the City. Moreover, the three river channels that are located within the boundaries of the City (the Rio Hondo Channel, the Los Angeles River, and the San Gabriel River) are concrete- or riprap-lined (north of Firestone Boulevard, the San Gabriel River has an earthen bottom and riprap banks) and support limited vegetation. Therefore, no impacts related to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities identified in local or regional plans would occur. c) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Two existing parks in the City of Downey contain potentially jurisdictional waters as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Discovery Sports Complex has Freshwater Ponds and Freshwater Emergent Wetlands and the Wilderness Park has Freshwater Ponds Wetland.2 Expansion of the infiltration basin at the sports 1 Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1993. Methods Used to Survey the Vegetation of Orange County Parks and Open Space Areas and The Irvine Company Property. February 10. 2 Ibid. PC Agenda Page 485 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 20 complex and pond renovation and the Wilderness Park would be subject to the requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 1 Therefore, these waters would need to be evaluated to see if they meet the requirements of federally protected wetlands prior to any disturbance in these areas. Mitigation Measure BIO-3 includes the requirement for a jurisdictional delineation and adherence to any applicable agency permitting. No other Master Plan recommendations have the potential to impact federally protected waters. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-3, a substantial adverse effect on federally protected waters as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means would not occur. d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Each park site and opportunity site identified in the Master Plan is located in a fully developed area of the City and is surrounded by residential, industrial, or commercial land uses. As such, none of the identified sites connect significant open spaces or bodies of water. The movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or established native resident migratory wildlife corridors or the uses of native wildlife nursery sites have not been identified in the City of Downey.2 In addition, the park facility recommendations contained in the Master Plan would not result in the removal of native wildlife habitat. However, use of existing vegetation on the identified sites may be used as native or migratory bird-nesting sites. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, which includes procedures to avoid impacts to migratory birds, potential impacts to wildlife movement would be less than significant. e) No Impact. Future projects could result in the removal of mature trees located on public recreational facilities, some of which may be considered “significant trees” according to the Chapter 4, Conservation Element, Vision 2025 General Plan. Therefore, any future project that would implement the proposed Master Plan would replace “significant trees” where feasible. Therefore, implementation of the Master Plan would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and no impacts would occur. f) No Impact. The City does not contain an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or any other local or regional conservation plan. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in impacts related to conservation plans. Mitigation Measures BIO-1 Special-Status Species. The City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall retain a qualified biologist to perform focused preconstruction surveys to determine the presence/absence of special-status species with potential to occur in and adjacent to the proposed impact area of each project component. The qualified biologist shall provide the City Parks and Recreation Director with documentation of the results of each survey prior to the authorization to proceed with construction activities for each project component. 1 United States Fish and Wildlife Services National Inventory Map. Website: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/ Data/Mapper.html (accessed on May 10, 2016). 2 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft EIR Initial Study. March 2004. p. C-19. PC Agenda Page 486 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 21 If any State or federally protected plant or animal species is detected in or adjacent to the proposed impact area of each project component, the final mitigation strategy for directly impacted species shall be determined in conjunction with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (if appropriate) through a mitigation plan approval process. BIO-2: Migratory Birds and Raptors. If construction activities occur within the active nesting bird season (February 15 through August 15), the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a preconstruction nesting-bird survey no more than 3 days prior to the start of construction. The nesting survey shall include the project site and areas immediately adjacent to the site that could potentially be affected by project-related construction activities such as noise, human activity, and dust, etc. If active bird nests are found within 500 feet of the designated construction area on the project site, the qualified biologist shall establish an appropriate buffer zone around the active nests. The appropriate buffer shall be determined by the qualified biologist based on species, location, and the nature of the proposed activities. Project activities shall be avoided within the buffer zone until the nest is deemed no longer active by the biologist. BIO-3: Federally Protected Wetlands. The City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall retain a qualified professional to conduct a jurisdictional analysis of the two freshwater ponds at the Wilderness Park, as well as the infiltration basin at the Discovery Sports Complex prior to any disturbance in these areas. The results of the jurisdictional analysis shall be used to determine whether additional permitting and mitigation is required for these project components. If the results of the analyses identify federally jurisdictional waters with the potential to be impacted by Master Plan recommendations, the City Parks and Recreation Director shall ensure that no project component shall result in a net loss of federally protected waters by adopting impact avoidance measures, impact minimization measures, and/or compensatory mitigation measures, as specified in Clean Water Act Section 404 and 401 permits and/or the 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. PC Agenda Page 487 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 22 CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? e) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code 21074? Discussion: a) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Two of the City’s major cultural resources, as identified in the Design Element of the General Plan, include: The Downey Museum of Art: Located in Furman Park, the Downey Museum of Art is the only art museum located between downtown Los Angeles and Long Beach. Its permanent collection includes hundreds of items donated and acquired over the years with a special emphasis on the artwork of Southern California. The Downey Historical Society: The Downey Historical Society is located in Apollo Park and includes artifacts, periodicals, original records, and a library collection focusing on the history of the Downey area from its beginnings as an agricultural community to the present. The proposed park improvements in the Master Plan are not expected to involve the demolition or renovation of either identified major cultural resource; however, other historical resources may be present at the existing park sites. Most of the opportunity sites in the Master Plan are vacant; however, there is the potential for historical resources to be directly or indirectly impacted during development of these sites. Prior to implementation of any projects, a cultural resources record search and survey would be required to determine the potential to impact historical resources. A qualified historian/cultural resources specialist would then determine if protection measures, project modifications, monitoring, or recovery would be necessary to avoid substantial adverse changes to a historical resource. Mitigation Measures CULT-1 includes these requirements prior to project development. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1, no substantial adverse changes in the significance of a historical resource as defined in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines §15064.5 would occur. PC Agenda Page 488 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 23 b) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Any project under consideration in the Master Plan that involves ground disturbance must be evaluated to determine whether development of that project will impact archaeological resources. A professional archaeologist would conduct this evaluation, which may consist of a record search and literature review, and field survey, as appropriate, and determined by the archaeologist. The archaeologist would make recommendations as to the need for protection measures, monitoring, or recovery on a project- specific basis. By following these steps, substantial impacts to previously undiscovered archaeological resources can be avoided. These requirements are specified in Mitigation Measures CULT-2 and CULT-3. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measures CULT- 2 and CULT-3, no substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 would occur. c) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Depending on the geological conditions of the project sites and the specific development plans, the projects included in the Master Plan have the potential to impact paleontological resources. Therefore, any project under consideration in the Master Plan must be evaluated to determine whether development of that project would impact paleontological resources or unique geologic features. A professional paleontologist should be contacted to conduct this evaluation, which may consist of a fossil locality search, literature review, and field survey, as appropriate and determined by the paleontologist. The paleontologist will make recommendations as to the need for and type of mitigation on a project-specific basis. These requirements are included in Mitigation Measure CULT-3. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-3, the Master Plan would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Future construction pursuant to the Master Plan recommendations may involve grading activities that have the potential to encounter previously unidentified human remains. If previously unidentified human remains are encountered during construction, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. This requirement is specified in Mitigation Measure CULT-4. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-4, potential impacts to unidentified human remains would be less than significant. e) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. The City received letters from the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (letter dated July 5, 2015) and the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians (letter dated July 2, 2015) requesting formal notification of future projects within the City pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52). The City sent a letter notifying both tribes of the proposed Master Plan on March 15, 2016. Responses were received from both tribes. In its response letter dated April 12, 2016, the Soboba Band of Mission Indians requested a Native American Monitor during ground-disturbing activities but deferred tasks to the Gabrieleño Tribal Consultants. In its response letter (undated), the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation also requested a Native American Monitor during ground-disturbing activities. In an email dated April 7, 2016, the City responded to the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation indicating that the City is proposing a Master Plan and would notify the tribe for each future project under the Master Plan. This notification is included in Mitigation Measure CULT-5. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-5, the Master Plan would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in PRC Section 21074. PC Agenda Page 489 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 24 Mitigation Measures CULT-1 Historical Resources. Prior to approval of each park project, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall retain a qualified cultural resources specialist/ historian to conduct a cultural resources review and literature search at the South Central Coastal Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System. The record search shall establish the status and extent of previously recorded sites, surveys, and excavations within and immediately adjacent to the project area. After site evaluation, the qualified cultural resources specialist/historian shall determine if protection measures, project modifications, monitoring, or recovery would be necessary to avoid substantial adverse changes to a historical resource. CULT-2 Archaeological Resources. Prior to approval of each park project, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall retain a professional archaeologist to conduct a cultural resources review and literature (record) search at the South Central Coastal Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System to establish the status and extent of previously recorded sites, surveys, and excavations within and immediately adjacent to the project area. The professional archaeologist shall make recommendations as to the need for field surveys, protection measures, monitoring, or recovery. CULT-3 Paleontological Resources. Prior to approval of each park project, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall retain a professional paleontologist to evaluate the project site, which may consist of a fossil locality search, literature review, and field survey, as appropriate and determined by the professional paleontologist. The paleontologist shall make recommendations as to the need for protection measures, monitoring, or recovery. CULT-4 Human Remains. In the event human remains are encountered during construction at any of the project sites, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall immediately notify the County Coroner. No further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be Native American, the County Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which shall determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the City Parks and Recreation Director, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD shall have the opportunity to offer recommendations for the disposition of the remains. CULT-5 Native American Tribal Notification. For each project to be implemented under the Master Plan, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall notify the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation in writing and include a brief project description and location map. Project review activities, such as Native American Monitoring of ground-disturbance activities shall be evaluated on a project-by-project basis among the City Parks and Recreation Director, tribal representatives, and a professional archeologist. PC Agenda Page 490 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 25 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? PC Agenda Page 491 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 26 Discussion: a) i, ii, iii) Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Downey is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, as indicated on the zone map issued by the State Geologist for the area. The City of Downey is located in an area considered to be seismically active, as is most of Southern California. Major active fault zones are located southwest and northeast of the City, with the Whittier fault being the fault with the greatest potential to impact the planning area. Additionally, all future projects would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with the existing seismic standards of the Uniform Building Code. Therefore, impacts related to the rupture of a known earthquake fault as depicted on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map would be less than significant. a) iv) Less Than Significant Impact. Landslides are most common where slopes are steep, soils are weak, and groundwater is present. Landslides are not considered a potential hazard since the City of Downey has a relatively flat topography with no steep hills or slopes. Future development pursuant to recommendations in the proposed Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with current City Code and California Building Code requirements and would not affect foundations or result in other structural or engineering modifications that could increase exposure of people or structures to risk associated with expansive soils. Therefore, impacts related to landslides would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Any future project proposed in accordance with the Master Plan recommendations that disturbs soil would be required to adhere to standard erosion-control practices specified in the City of Downey Municipal Code (Section 8730.17, as amended). During construction, standard practices include compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting process and the use of Best Management Practices (BMP) included in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Future projects would be required to comply with the Municipal Code with respect to Source Control and Treatment BMPs for controlling urban runoff. Therefore, impacts due to soil erosion would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The State Division of Mines and Geology designated all areas within the City a liquefaction hazard zone, which would require geotechnical reports for new structures. The proposed Master Plan does not include approval of any specific project. Per Public Resources Code Section 2693(c), individual development geotechnical/soils reports would include recommendations to reduce seismic risk to acceptable levels to address potential impacts related to liquefaction.1 Impacts related to unstable soils would be less than significant. d) Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils generally consist of clay materials that occupy more volume when wet or hydrated. Volume changes associated with moisture content in expansive soils can cause uplift in the ground when they become wet, or less commonly, cause settlement when they dry out. . All of the soil types in the City of Downey can be compacted to a degree that does not hinder site development.2 Therefore, no significant impacts would occur related to expansive soils. 1 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft EIR Initial Study. March 2004. p. C-21. 2 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft EIR Initial Study. March 2004. p. C-21. PC Agenda Page 492 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 27 e) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan improvements do not include construction of, or connection to, septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. The City of Downey is an urban area that is served by a sanitary sewer system. New septic tanks are prohibited within the City as per Section 7220.10 of the City’s Municipal Code. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in any impacts related to the capability of the soils to adequately support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. PC Agenda Page 493 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 28 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Discussion: Global climate change (GCC) is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other significant changes in climate (e.g., precipitation or wind) that last for an extended period of time. The prevailing scientific opinion on climate change is that “most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.”1 Increased amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the primary causes of the human-induced component of warming. The observed warming effect associated with the presence of GHGs in the atmosphere (from either natural or human sources) is often referred to as the greenhouse effect.2 GHGs are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced GCC include:3  CO2  Methane (CH4)  Nitrous oxide (N2O)  Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) 1 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis. Website: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html (accessed January 25, 2013). 2 The temperature on Earth is regulated by a system commonly known as the “greenhouse effect.” Just as the glass in a greenhouse lets heat from sunlight in and reduces the amount of heat that escapes, greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere keep the Earth at a relatively even temperature. Without the greenhouse effect, the Earth would be a frozen globe; thus, although an excess of greenhouse gas results in global warming, the naturally occurring greenhouse effect is necessary to keep our planet at a comfortable temperature. 3 The greenhouse gases listed are consistent with the definition in Assembly Bill 32 (Government Code 38505), as discussed later in this section. PC Agenda Page 494 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 29  Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)  Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) Currently, neither the CEQA statutes nor the CEQA Guidelines prescribe specific quantitative thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing a GHG emissions impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. The discussion below provides an overview of the regulatory considerations and methodological approach related to GHGs for this Initial Study. California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the “Global Warming Solutions Act,” passed by the California State legislature on August 31, 2006. AB 32 requires the ARB to:  Establish a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, based on 1990 emissions, by January 1, 2008  Adopt mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHG emissions by January 1, 2008  Adopt an emissions reduction plan by January 1, 2009, indicating how emissions reductions will be achieved via regulations, market mechanisms, and other actions  Adopt regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHGs by January 1, 2011 To assist public agencies in the mitigation of GHG emissions or analyzing the effects of GHGs under CEQA, including the effects associated with transportation and energy consumption, Senate Bill (SB) 97 (Chapter 185, 2007) required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines on how to minimize and mitigate a project’s GHG emissions. On February 16, 2010, the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) approved the CEQA Guidelines Amendments and filed them with the Secretary of State for inclusion in the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The Amendments became effective on March 18, 2010. The Amendments encourage Lead Agencies to consider many factors in conducting a CEQA analysis, but preserve the discretion granted by CEQA to Lead Agencies in making their determinations. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 states: (a) The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in section 15064. A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate, or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use. The lead agency has discretion to select the model it considers most appropriate provided it supports its decision with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use; or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards. PC Agenda Page 495 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 30 (b) A lead agency may consider the following when assessing the significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment: (1) The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting. (2) Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project. (3) The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must include specific requirements that reduce or mitigate the project’s incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(b) provides that the “determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data,” and further states that an “ironclad definition of significant effect is not always possible because the significance of an activity may vary with the setting.” As such, currently the CEQA statutes, the OPR guidelines, and the CEQA Guidelines do not prescribe specific quantitative thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. As with most environmental topics, significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. When assessing a project’s GHG emissions, Lead Agencies must describe the existing environmental conditions or setting without the project and determine what constitutes a significant impact “consistent with available evidence and current CEQA practice.” Not every project that emits GHGs will necessarily contribute to a significant cumulative impact on the environment. If it is determined a project will contribute to a significant GHG impact, mitigation should be implemented. a) Less Than Significant Impact.An individual project does not generate enough GHG emissions to significantly influence GCC. Rather, GCC is a cumulative impact. This means that a project may contribute to a potential impact through its incremental change in emissions when combined with the contributions of all other sources of GHGs (AEP 2007; SCAQMD 2015). In assessing cumulative impacts, it must be determined if a project’s incremental effect is “cumulatively considerable” (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064(h)(1) and 15130). To make this determination, the incremental impacts of the project must be compared with the effects of past, current, and probable future projects. To gather sufficient information on a global scale of all past, current, and future projects in order to make this determination is a difficult, if not impossible, task. PC Agenda Page 496 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 31 The AB 32 Scoping Plan mandated by AB 32 includes the main strategies that California will use to reduce GHG emissions. As part of its supporting documentation for the Draft AB 32 Scoping Plan, the ARB released the GHG inventory for California. One of the most effective strategies to reduce GHG emissions is to make California’s transportation system more efficient. The highest levels of CO2 from mobile sources (e.g., automobiles) occur at stop-and-go speeds (i.e., 0–25 miles per hour [mph]) and speeds over 55 mph. The most severe emissions occur from 0–25 mph. To the extent that a project relieves congestion by enhancing operations and improving travel times in high-congestion travel corridors, GHG emissions (particularly CO2) may be reduced. Future development pursuant to recommendations in the proposed Master Plan would be required to comply with current GHG regulations. Because the proposed Master Plan encompasses upgrades to existing parks and recreational facilities and future sites for parks and recreational facilities (primarily passive recreation that does not have a significant transportation component), it is expected that the proposed Master Plan’s impact to long-term regional GHG emissions would be negligible, and a less than significant impact would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, the principal State plan and policy adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions is AB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Statewide plans and regulations, such as GHG emissions standards for vehicles, are being implemented at the statewide level, and compliance at the specific plan or project level is not addressed. The City of Downey is a member of the Gateway Cities Council of Governments (COG), which has adopted a Subregional Sustainable Communities Strategy in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 375. This Strategy includes transportation projects as well as land use recommendations to reduce GHG emissions in the Gateway Cities subregion. As discussed in the Strategy, parklands and open space resources are an integral part of the planned urban development pattern for the subregion as depicted on the general plans of the Gateway cities. These resource areas contribute to the sustainability of the subregion by the various functions they perform, including meeting the recreational needs of the subregion’s residents, and thereby contributing to their health and well- being through the provision of parks, golf courses, and other recreational facilities. The proposed Master Plan is consistent with the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, and the Gateway Cities COG Subregional Sustainable Communities Strategy and does not conflict with AB 32, SB 375, or any plans or programs that have been adopted to achieve these legislative mandates. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purposed of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and impacts would be less than significant. PC Agenda Page 497 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 32 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? PC Agenda Page 498 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 33 Discussion: a) Less Than Significant Impact. Future Master Plan development projects would be subject to environmental review and would be required to adhere to applicable federal, state, and local regulations, including, but not limited to, Titles 8 and 22 of the CCR, the Uniform Fire Code, and Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code. Hazardous materials regulations, which are codified in Titles 8, 22, and 26 of the CCR, and their enabling legislation set forth in Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code, were established at the State level to ensure compliance with federal regulations to reduce the risk to human health and the environment from the routine use of hazardous substances. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not create a potentially significant hazard to the public or the surrounding environment through the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities or long-term operation. b) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Future development pursuant to the proposed Master Plan could involve the use of hazardous materials and would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with existing government regulations. In addition, existing park sites and the opportunity sites may contain hazardous building materials that could be released into the environment during renovation, demolition, and redevelopment. To avoid impacts regarding the release of hazardous building materials, surveys are completed and the materials are removed by qualified personnel. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 includes these requirements with respect to hazardous building materials. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, the proposed Master Plan would not create a significant hazard to the public or the surrounding environment through foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Master Plan is a planning and policy action and would not produce any significant amount of hazardous materials or emissions. Future projects would be subject to environmental review and would be required to adhere to applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Therefore, impacts related to hazardous materials, substances, or waste would be less than significant. d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the State of California Department of Toxic Substance Control to maintain a list of known sites that contain hazardous waste and substances; and this list is regularly updated. Based on a review of the State Water Resources Control Board database (Geotracker) and CalRecycle Solid Waste Information System (SWIS) Facility/Site Listing database, no potential hazardous sites are reported to be at the site or adjacent to the opportunity sites.1 Two leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites, the Shell Station and K&M Lexus-Toyota Service, are both located northeast of Opportunity Site No. 5. The Shell LUST site is reported to be “case closed,” and the K&M Lexus- Toyota Service is reported to be open and a site assessment is currently underway. Hazardous waste concerns change over time, and there is the potential for the opportunity sites to contain hazardous materials and/or be impacted by hazardous waste prior to conversion to parks and recreational facilities. Therefore, prior to development at the opportunity sites, a qualified professional needs to determine the potential for contamination at the site and to determine 1 CalRecycle. Website: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/directory/Search.aspx; State Water Resources Control Board. Website: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/; and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: https://www.epa.gov/enviro/cerclis-search (accessed July 7, 2016). PC Agenda Page 499 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 34 courses of action such as sampling, avoidance, monitoring, and/or remediation. This requirement is specified in Mitigation Measure HAZ-2. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-2, potential hazardous materials releases at or on the opportunity sites would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. e) No Impact. The City of Downey is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. Therefore, no impacts would occur. f) No Impact. The City is not located within 2 miles of a private airstrip, and as a result, the proposed Master Plan would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. Therefore, no impacts would occur. g) No Impact. The proposed Maser Plan does not include any revisions to roadways, access points, or land uses that would interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impacts would occur. h) No Impact. The City of Downey is in an urbanized area of the County, no wildlands exist in the project vicinity, and the project site is not designated as a Special Fire Protection Area or a Fire Hazard Severity Zone on the Statewide CalFire Map. Therefore, no impacts related to wildland fires would occur. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 Hazardous Building Materials. Prior to renovation or demolition at each project site, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall ensure that a qualified professional conducts surveys for hazardous building materials including, but not limited to: asbestos, lead, polychlorinated biphenyls, and mercury. Any hazardous building materials shall be removed, transported, and disposed of by a qualified abatement contractor consistent with local, State, and federal regulations. HAZ-2 Hazardous Waste Assessment. Prior to approval of development of each opportunity site, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall ensure that a qualified professional conducts a Hazardous Waste Assessment to determine if hazardous waste is present on the site. Additional actions may involve sampling, avoidance, monitoring, and/or remediation. All work shall be conducted consistent with local, State, and federal regulations. PC Agenda Page 500 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 35 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? PC Agenda Page 501 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 36 h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Discussion: a) Less Than Significant Impact. Future Master Plan development would be required to adhere to existing regulations and standard conditions that require implementation of BMPs to reduce pollutants in urban runoff consistent with the City’s Local Implementation Plan. No significant impacts would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Downey is located in a highly urbanized setting and is mostly built out. There is little opportunity for natural replenishment of groundwater within the City, and the proposed Master Plan does not replace such opportunities. Groundwater recharge for the Central Basin is accomplished through the import of purchased water from the Metropolitan Water District and recycled water from the Whittier and San Jose Treatment Plants to the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel River Spreading Grounds upstream of the City. As part of the Master Plan, grass will be replaced with artificial turf at some park locations, which would reduce water use in these areas. The proposed Master Plan identifies seven potential locations to be considered for future park development, referred to as Opportunity Sites. Two of the identified opportunity sites are located on former well sites that are currently abandoned. However, according to the State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker website, the opportunity site located at 9501 Guatemala Avenue, abuts a water supply well still in operation. 1 Future development at this location would comply with regulatory requirements to protect water supply wells if this well is still in operation. All future projects implemented under the Master Plan are subject to environmental review and compliance with federal, State, and local regulations. Therefore, adoption of the proposed Master Plan would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Future project proposals resulting from adoption of the Master Plan would be required to comply with regulatory requirements related to runoff control such as the SWPPP and Low Impact Development (LID) ordinances to ensure that there is no substantial change to a site or area drainage that would result in substantial erosion on or off the site. Potential siltation would be addressed at the time of project development through retention and infiltration on the project site, where necessary. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. 1 State Water Resources Control Board. Geotracker. Website: http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/gama/ gamamap/public/default.asp?CMD=runreport&myaddress=7217+adwen+st%2C+downey%2C+ca (accessed March 9, 2016). PC Agenda Page 502 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 37 d) Less Than Significant Impact. Future project proposals resulting from adoption of the Master Plan would be required to comply with regulatory requirements related to runoff control such as the SWPPP and LID ordinances to ensure that they would not substantially change the rate or amount of surface runoff or result in flooding on or off the site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The recommendations contained in the proposed Master Plan would not create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Future project proposals resulting from adoption of the Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with existing federal, State, and local regulations to ensure that there is no substantial increase in the amount of runoff or increased pollutants in runoff. Therefore, potential impacts related to substantial sources of polluted runoff would be less than significant. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Future project proposals resulting from adoption of the Master Plan would be required to comply with regulatory requirements related to runoff control such as the SWPPP and LID ordinances to ensure that they would not otherwise degrade water quality. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. g) No Impact. Adoption of the proposed Master Plan would not result in any housing being placed in a 100-year flood zone. Thus, the proposed Master Plan would have no impact relative to the risk of property and life resulting from construction within the 100-year flood plain. h) i) No Impact. According to the Design Memorandum for Rio Hondo Channel Improvements (October 1997) produced by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Rio Hondo Channel has a 133-year design discharge capacity of approximately 50,300 cubic feet per second (cfs). Furthermore, the channel’s minimum top of walls and levees were designed to contain 500- year flood return frequency events. For the San Gabriel River, the 100-year flood is completely contained within the channel without exceeding channel capacity downstream to the Pacific Ocean. Its design capacity for the reach of the river adjacent to the City is 19,500 cfs, based on the Los Angeles County Drainage Area (December 1991) study prepared by the Corps. There have not been previously identified, unresolved risks due to levee failure noted in previous studies of the City’s two adjacent flood control channels, the Rio Hondo and the San Gabriel River. In addition, no other dam/levees in the vicinity of the City (i.e., Whittier Narrows) present a potential for failure or impact to the City. As such, no properties within the City are considered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to be within a 100-year flood zone. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not place a structure within a 100-year flood hazard area, and no flooding impacts would occur. j) No Impact. Seiching is a phenomenon that occurs when seismic groundshaking induces standing waves (seiches) inside closed bodies of water such as reservoirs and water tanks. Such waves can cause retention structures to fail and flood downstream properties. There are no substantial water retention facilities located in close proximity to existing and proposed recreational facilities. Park ponds have the potential to cause some flooding, but not inundation associated with a large body of water. The risk associated with possible seiche waves is, therefore, not considered a potential constraint or a potentially significant impact. PC Agenda Page 503 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 38 Tsunamis are generated wave trains generally caused by tectonic displacement of the sea floor associated with shallow earthquakes, sea floor landslides, rock falls, and exploding volcanic islands. The City is located approximately 10 miles from the ocean shoreline. According to the Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, State of California - County of Los Angeles, Long Beach Quadrangle (California Emergency Management Agency [Cal EMA], the California Geological Survey, and the University of Southern California, March 1, 2009), the City is not within the tsunami inundation area. The risk associated with tsunamis is, therefore, not considered a potential hazard or a potentially significant impact. Mudslides and slumps are described as a shallower type of slope failure, usually affecting the upper soil mantle or weathered bedrock underlying natural slopes and triggered by surface or shallow subsurface saturation. The City site is located within a relatively flat area. The risk associated with possible mudflows and mudslides is, therefore, not considered a potential constraint or a potentially significant impact. PC Agenda Page 504 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 39 LAND USE/PLANNING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Discussion: a) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan sets forth recommendations and findings that are intended to guide the development of parks and recreational facilities and programs in the City. As such, the Master Plan will not provide for new land uses or infrastructure systems such as new roadways or flood control channels that would divide or disrupt neighborhoods. All proposed Opportunity Sites are within currently vacant and undeveloped land. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Master Plan would not result in the physical division of any established community. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Master Plan is consistent with pertinent planning documents regulating land use for the planning area as discussed below. Future projects developed under the Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and may require general plan amendments or zoning changes from existing uses to proposed uses, which would be approved along with future project and environmental document approval. Therefore, impacts related to land use conflicts would be less than significant. City of Downey Municipal Code, Article IX-Land Use, Chapter 3- Zones and Standards The City of Downey Municipal Code divides the City of Downey into 17 different zones. The following two zones are applicable to the Master Plan. The Master Plan will be consistent with the intent and purpose set forth in the Zoning Code.  Section 9322 Open Space Zone o The intent and purpose of the Open Space Zone is to: (a) Provide for permanent open space in the community by limiting development in areas which are so located, or having a configuration, or possessed of such geologic features that the residential or other structural use of the land might PC Agenda Page 505 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 40 endanger the health, safety, and welfare of residents from possible flood, fire, subsidence, or erosion. (b) Prevent incompatible development in areas that should be preserved or regulated for scenic, recreational, conservation, aesthetic, or health and safety purposes.  Section 9320 Public Zone o The intent and purpose of these Public Zone regulations is to: (a) Encourage orderly and harmonious development of public facilities. (b) Provide adequate space to meet the needs of public facilities, including off-street parking and loading. City of Downey Vision 2025 General Plan. Each city in California is required by State law to adopt a comprehensive, long-term General Plan for its physical development. The General Plan consists of mandatory and discretionary elements including land use, housing, circulation, conservation and open space, safety, noise, air quality, and economic development. California State law requires that the day-to-day decisions of a city should follow logically from, and be consistent with, the General Plan. The Master Plan is intended to be used in conjunction with the General Plan to provide a coordinated program of recreational facility development and management. The proposed Master Plan recommendations are consistent with the goals set forth in the Open Space Element of the General Plan, including:  Goal 7.1: Augment the availability of open space areas with other open spaces besides public parks.  Goal 7.2: Optimize the use of established public parks to meet the needs of residents.  Goal 7.3: Increase the amount of park acreage.  Goal 7.4: Combine efforts by the local school districts and the city towards enhancing the community. Downtown Specific Code. The Downtown Downey Specific Plan guides growth and development in Downtown, and seeks to encourage economic revitalization and the creation of a lively center of activity for the City. The Specific Plan establishes 131 acres as mixed use and looks to create unique districts with specific development standards and design guidelines. The Downtown Specific Plan is envisioned as a vibrant urban center providing a wide array of dining, working, living, shopping, entertainment, and cultural opportunities. The Specific Plan guides growth by dividing the downtown area into five land use districts: Downtown Core, Downtown Residential, Firestone Boulevard Gateway, Paramount Boulevard Professional, and Civic Center. Included in the vision for the Specific Plan are a number of potential open space opportunity areas that have the potential to add recreational areas to the City’s existing park inventory as well as opportunities for the creation of pedestrian corridors. Downtown Civic Center Master Plan. The Downey Civic Center Master Plan was developed to enact the first phase of the Downtown Specific Plan for the Civic Center District. The Master Plan was developed in collaboration with a panel of key stakeholders from the community, and reorganizes the layout of the district to meet the following goals and opportunities: PC Agenda Page 506 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 41  Reintroduce vehicular and pedestrian linkages to the downtown and surrounding neighborhoods.  Reallocate surface parking lots to maintain capacity while better utilizing Civic Center property to create a centralized civic open space for community festivals, fairs, and events.  Repurpose excess roadways for pedestrian and bicycle access, curbside parking, and usable open space while enabling convenient automobile access at speeds that complement these modes.  Enhance the design of all open spaces, including streets, parks, plazas, courts, and paseos— the “outdoor rooms” in which the life of the community may thrive.  Phase the Master Plan into a series of strategic, incremental projects with public and private investment in order to feasibly implement the Vision.  Serve as a catalyst for community and City discussion regarding financial mechanisms and strategies to both implement and maintain these improvements for the future. The Civic Center Master Plan proposes a 1.16-acre central park gathering space, which includes a band shell and a playground. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan defines this space as a “planned” facility in Section 2.3. Bicycle Master Plan. Concurrently with the development of the Master Plan, the City of Downey has finalized a Bicycle Master Plan (approved July 2015). Based on the context of transportation and bicycling within the City, along with the benefits of encouraging bicycling within the City of Downey, the Downey Bicycle Master Plan aims to maximize connectivity by bicycle to the assets already in place within the City. The primary goals of the Bicycle Master Plan are to provide a safe, efficient, and connected network of bicycle facilities that residents and stakeholders can enjoy for a variety of purposes. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan is intended to be used with the Bicycle Master Plan to provide increased access to the recreational opportunities within the City and beyond its borders. Downey Unified School District Facilities Master Plan. The Downey Unified School District Facilities Master Plan identifies a strategic vision for the School District for facilities infrastructure for the next 10–15 years. The City currently has joint-use agreements with the School District for the use of all school facilities, the Downey High School Pool, and the Columbus High School sports fields. Through continued and expanded collaborative efforts, both the School District and the City can appreciate benefits through shared resources. The Parks and Open Space Master Plan provides recommendations for additional joint uses, which are in agreement with the current Downey Unified School District Facilities Master Plan (dated June 2014). Los Angeles Countywide Comprehensive Park and Recreation Needs Assessment. As of the date of this report, the County of Los Angeles is developing comprehensive assessment of countywide park, infrastructure, and recreational needs and opportunities. The City of Downey is one of the 189 Study Areas included in the assessment, which establishes a transparent and best approach to engage all communities within the County in a collaborative process to gather data and input for future decision-making on parks and recreation. The findings of the Parks and Open Space Master Plan can assist the City to better refine the needs identified in the County study and identify potential projects for funding. PC Agenda Page 507 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 42 Energy Action Plan. In January 2015, Downey’s City Council approved an Energy Action Plan. The main goal of the Energy Action Plan is to provide a roadmap for the City of Downey to reduce greenhouse emissions through reductions in the energy used in facility buildings and City operations. This Energy Action Plan identifies current and future opportunities that will contribute to the City’s energy reduction goal. The Energy Action Plan included energy audits of several recreation facilities to assess energy savings potential, including: Barbara J. Riley Community and Senior Center, Discovery Sports Complex, Rio San Gabriel Park, and Wilderness Park. The recommendations included in the Energy Action Plan have implications to parks and park buildings and have been incorporated into the proposed Master Plan. The Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan. The Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan establishes a comprehensive and strategic guide to creating a network of parks and public open spaces along the Los Angeles and San Gabriel watersheds and their rivers and tributaries. The City of Downey is an Emerald Necklace Coalition member, which includes 24 cities, 3 school districts, 3 homeowners associations, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles and Mountain Conservancy, and the Sierra Club. Coalition members have pledged to work collaboratively to preserve the Los Angeles and San Gabriel watersheds and their rivers and tributaries for recreational, open space, environmental education, job training, native habitat restoration and conservation, and nonvehicular transportation. The Master Plan supports the Emerald Necklace Expanded Vision Plan by encouraging and expanding recreational space within the City and along the San Gabriel and Rio Hondo Rivers (tributary of the Los Angeles River). c) No Impact. There is no adopted HCP, NCCP, or other habitat conservation plan within the City. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in an impact related to any applicable HCP or NCCP. PC Agenda Page 508 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 43 MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Discussion: a) No Impact. The City does not contain oil extraction operations, and there are no other known mineral resources with local, regional, or statewide importance within the City. Therefore, there would be no impacts on mineral resources. b) No Impact. The City is not known to contain locally important mineral resources. Therefore, no impacts related to delineated mineral resources would occur. PC Agenda Page 509 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 44 NOISE Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Local Regulations: City of Downey Noise Standards. The City of Downey’s Noise Element of the General Plan specifies the exterior and interior noise standards for each land use category.1 Table B summarizes the City’s acceptable noise levels for land uses. As shown in Table B, the City has an established an exterior and interior noise standard of 60 A-weighted decibel (dBA) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and 45 dBA CNEL and below, respectively, for residential and park land uses. Noise levels are expressed in CNEL. The CNEL is the energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring over a 24-hour period, with a 10 decibel (dB) penalty applied to A-weighted sound levels occurring during the nighttime hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., and a 5 dB penalty applied to the A-weighted sound levels occurring during evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. 1 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 General Plan. Noise Element. January 25, 2005. p. 6-4. PC Agenda Page 510 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 45 Table B: City of Downey Acceptable Noise Levels for Land Uses Land Use Interior1 Exterior Residential 45 dBA CNEL and below 60 dBA CNEL and below Schools, parks, and other non- residential noise-sensitive land uses 45 dBA CNEL and below 60 dBA CNEL and below Commercial 65 dBA CNEL and below -- Industrial 70 dBA CNEL and below -- Source: City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 General Plan. Noise Element. January 25, 2005. 1 Interior noise levels based on windows closed. 2 Exterior areas for residential areas limited to rear yards of single-family uses, and patios/balconies and common recreational areas of multiple-family uses. Exterior areas for schools limited to playgrounds areas, picnic areas and other areas of frequent human use. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level dBA = A-weighted decibel City of Downey Municipal Code. The City regulates maximum permissible noise levels by sound sources across property boundaries through Section 4606.3 in the Municipal Code. Table C shows the maximum permissible noise levels for each land use. As shown in Table C, the maximum permissible noise levels for residential land uses is 55 dBA for 60 minutes, 60 dBA for 12 minutes per hour, 65 dBA for 3 minutes per hour, and 70 dBA for 3 minutes per hour. Table C: City of Downey Maximum Permissible Noise Levels Land Use 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Residential 55 dBA – 60 minutes 45 dBA 60 dBA – 12 minutes per hour 65 dBA – 3 minutes per hour 70 dBA – 1 minute per hour Commercial 65 dBA – 60 minutes 65 dBA 70 dBA – 12 minutes per hour 75 dBA – 3 minutes per hour 80 dBA – 1 minute per hour Manufacturing 70 dBA – 60 minutes 70 dBA 75 dBA – 12 minutes per hour 80 dBA – 3 minutes per hour 85 dBA – 1 minute per hour Source: City of Downey, Municipal Code. dBA = A-weighted decibel In addition, the City regulates construction noise through Section 4606.5 in the Municipal Code. As specified in the City’s Municipal Code Section 4606.5, construction activities are prohibited between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., and noise levels generated from construction shall not exceed 85 dBA maximum instantaneous noise level (Lmax) across any property boundary at any time during the course of a 24-hour day. PC Agenda Page 511 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 46 Discussion: a), c), d) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated. As the various improvements to existing facilities under the Master Plan are not anticipated to generate a substantial amount of traffic, a substantial traffic noise increase is not anticipated. In addition, the implementation of these improvements would be conducted outside of the prohibited hours between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. and would not require intense site preparation, construction, or personnel. Noise levels generated from these improvements are not anticipated to exceed 85 dBA Lmax across any property boundary. Therefore, noise levels generated from operation and construction activities would be considered less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required. The park expansion and the new pocket parks and linear neighborhood park would be frequented by residents who live nearby. Therefore, as these amenities are not anticipated to generate a substantial amount of traffic, a substantial traffic noise increase is not anticipated. Similarly, the implementation of these improvements would be conducted outside of the prohibited hours between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. and would not require intense site preparation, construction, or personnel. Noise levels generated from these improvements are not anticipated to exceed 85 dBA Lmax across any property boundary. The multi-sports complex and multi-use fields at the Rancho Los Amigos South Campus has the potential to increase traffic noise and exceed the City’s noise standards for off-site noise-sensitive land uses. Also, the operations of new multi-sports complex and multi-use fields have the potential to exceed the City maximum permissible noise levels across property boundaries. Although construction activities for the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields would be conducted outside of the prohibited hours between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., the noise level generated from construction activities could exceed 85 dBA across property boundaries due to the type of development. In order to reduce potential significant noise impacts during construction and operation to less than significant levels, a Noise Impact Analysis would be required prior to project approval. The Noise Impact Analysis would determine the construction and operational noise levels at nearby receptors such as residents and park visitors and identify noise attenuation measures to be included during construction and as part of the project such as noise barriers (i.e., sound walls), as applicable. The Noise Impact Analysis will also specify additional construction noise reduction measures such as: (1) routing construction-related truck traffic along roadways that cause the least disturbance to nearby residents; (2) equipping all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, with properly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers’ standards; (3) placing all stationary construction equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from receptors nearest the project site; and (4) locating equipment staging in areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and receptors nearest the project site during all project construction. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires preparation of a Noise Impact Analysis that meets the requirements above for the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields at the Rancho Los Amigos South Campus. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1: noise level standards established in the General Plan or Municipal Code would not be exceeded, and no substantial permanent or temporary increases in noise would occur. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the future projects under the Master Plan would not require intense site preparation, construction, or personnel. No heavy construction equipment that would generate ground-borne noise and vibration would be used. Therefore, short-term construction of future projects under the Master Plan would not generate ground-borne noise and vibration levels that would result in community annoyance or structural damage. In addition, PC Agenda Page 512 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 47 short-term construction haul trips and worker commutes would not increase ground-borne noise and vibration on any roadways leading to the future project. Once operational, the future projects implemented under the Master Plan would not generate ground-borne vibration. Therefore, ground-borne vibration and noise impacts generated by the future projects implemented under the Master Plan would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required. e) No Impact. The City is not located within an airport land use plan, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. The closest airport, the Compton/Woodley Airport, is located approximately 5 miles southwest of the City. Therefore, no impacts related to excessive airport noise are anticipated. f) No Impact. The City is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, there are no impacts related to this issue. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 Noise Impact Analysis. Prior to project approval, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall ensure that a Noise Impact Analysis is prepared by a qualified professional for the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields. The Noise Impact Analysis shall evaluate both construction and operational noise impacts consistent with the General Plan and Municipal Code and identify project features such as noise barriers that would be constructed as part of the project. The Noise Impact Analysis shall also include construction noise reduction measures to minimize impacts on surrounding residents and other sensitive receptors. PC Agenda Page 513 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 48 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Discussion: a) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan provides only concept plans for park and recreation facilities and improvements intended to serve as guidance for the City in implementing these types of improvements in the future. Future improvements would not include the development of any new housing or employment centers that would impact the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of populations within the City. Therefore, no impacts related to population growth would occur. b) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan would not result in the displacement of any existing housing. The park upgrades would not displace any housing, and the opportunity sites would not be developed with housing. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in impacts related to the displacement of housing. c) No Impact. The adoption of the proposed Master Plan would not result in the displacement of any number of people. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in an impact related to the displacement of people. PC Agenda Page 514 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 49 PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i)Fire Protection? ii)Police Protection? iii)Schools? iv)Parks? v)Other public facilities? Discussion: a) i) Less Than Significant Impact. The Downey Fire Department provides fire protection services for the City. The proposed Master Plan would not include the development of any new housing or employment centers that would introduce new people into the service area or increase the demand on fire protection services. The City Fire Department has indicated that implementation of the Master Plan would not require the construction of new or altered facilities. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur. ii) Less Than Significant Impact. Police services in the City are provided by the Downey Police Department, except for properties owned by the County of Los Angeles in the southwest part of the City, which are patrolled by the County Sheriff Department, based in Lynwood. The Downey Police Department (DPD) is located at 10911 Brookshire Avenue. The DPD is comprised of 150 total employees, including 111 sworn officers. These include a Chief of Police, 2 Captains, 6 Lieutenants, 16 Sergeants, 33 Detectives, and 6 motorcycle officers.1 Some parks and trail expansions, as well as new parks at the opportunity sites, would require periodic patrols to ensure safety, which is expected to be handled by Park Rangers. The Park Ranger Program is currently in the early stages (preparing to process applicants), and implementation of the Master Plan would likely require an increase in the number of Park Rangers in the program to provide an adequate protective presence at the parks. As part of the environmental review of future Master Plan projects, the number of Park Rangers required would be incorporated into the capital and maintenance budgets for each project. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur. iii) No Impact. The City is served by the Downey Unified School District (DUSD), which houses approximately 22,742 students in grades kindergarten through 12 within 13 1 City of Downey. FY 2015–2016. Adopted Budget. Website: http://www.downeyca.org /documents/FY2015-16_Approved_Budget.pdf (accessed March 2, 2016). PC Agenda Page 515 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 50 elementary, 4 middle schools, and 3 high schools.1 In addition, the DUSD operates a continuation high school/adult school and several specialized facilities for students with special needs. The proposed Master Plan would not include the development of any new housing or employment centers that would introduce new people into the service area or result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered school facilities. The Master Plan does identify Joint Use Facilities, which would increase the recreational facilities available to DUSD. Therefore, there would be no impacts on school services and facilities. iv) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan includes recommendations to acquire, develop, redevelop, and maintain parks within the City. As such, the proposed Master Plan would add to and have a positive effect on the public recreation amenities available in the City. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in park impacts. v) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan is an implementation tool for the improvement of existing parks and recreational facilities and development of new recreational facilities to support the existing community and future development. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not impact other public facilities within the City. 1 Downey Unified School District. About DUSD. Website: http://www.dusd.net/about-dusd/ (accessed March 2, 2016). PC Agenda Page 516 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 51 RECREATION Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Discussion: a) Less Than Significant Impact. In total, there are 12 parks and one community center, totaling 117 acres, within the City of Downey. The City currently has 5.7 miles of Class I bike trails. The City of Downey Bicycle Master Plan (2015) identifies and proposes an additional 14.7 miles of Class II and 18.9 miles of Class III bike trails. The recreational facility and operation and maintenance recommendations presented in the Master Plan could increase usage at existing parks in the City. The Master Plan aims to bring more residents and employees to park facilities; however, recommended improvements are intended to improve the overall existing condition of parks and community facilities that will encourage greater positive use by residents in the City. The proposed Master Plan also seeks to acquire, develop, redevelop, and maintain quality parks and trails that support equity of access by users, and update community facilities both indoors and outdoors to maximize their uses and appreciation by the community for people of all ages. Future projects implemented under the Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with the standards set forth in the Municipal Code and the 2025 General Plan. Therefore, impacts related to increased use and deterioration of recreational facilities would be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the Master Plan recommendations could result in construction or expansion of recreational facilities that would expand park resources. Future projects implemented under the Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with the standards set forth in the Municipal Code and the 2025 General Plan. Therefore, impacts related to increased use and deterioration of recreational facilities would be less than significant. PC Agenda Page 517 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 52 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Discussion: a) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. The Master Plan improvements to existing facilities are not anticipated to generate a substantial amount of traffic. In addition, implementation of these improvements would not require intense site preparation, construction, or personnel. Therefore, operational and construction traffic attributed to the existing facilities would be less than significant, and no mitigation would be required. Although development of the opportunity sites includes several new amenities such as green space, trail access, pathways, playgrounds, benches, shade structure, and seating, these amenities are not anticipated to generate a significant amount of traffic. The park expansion would provide additional space for current Wilderness Park visitors, and the new pocket parks and linear neighborhood park would be frequented by residents who live in close proximity and can walk to PC Agenda Page 518 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 53 and from each potential location. The multi-sports complex and multi-use fields, however, have the potential to increase traffic and congestion at roadways and intersections. A Traffic Impact Analysis would be required to determine if this project would need off-site improvements in order to meet City standards. Any needed improvements would then be incorporated into the project. These requirements are included in Mitigation Measure TRA-1. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, development of the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields would not cause an increase in traffic, which would be substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. b) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. The County Metropolitan Transportation Authority adopted the Congestion Management Program (CMP) in 2010. This CMP establishes a standard of level of service (LOS) E for CMP system highways, roadways, and intersections in the County. Future projects implemented under the Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with the standards set forth in the Municipal Code and the 2025 General Plan. Improvements to the 14 existing facilities and future park development of seven opportunity sites would not generate a substantial amount of traffic exceeding standards on an individual or cumulative basis. However, development of the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields has the potential to increase congestion and impact CMP locations on an individual or cumulative basis. A Traffic Impact Analysis would be required to determine if this project would need off-site improvements in order to meet City standards. Any needed improvements would then be incorporated into the project. These requirements are included in Mitigation Measure TRA-1. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, development of the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields would not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. c) No Impact. The closest airport, the Compton/Woodley Airport, is located approximately 5 miles southwest of the City. The proposed Master Plan does not include the development of structures that would be of sufficient height that would potentially change air traffic patterns or development located within the immediate vicinity of airfields or airports. Therefore, the Master Plan would not impact air traffic patterns. d) No Impact. The proposed Master Plan does not include or involve any sharp curves, dangerous intersections, or incompatible uses. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would not result in any potential hazards associated with a project design feature. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The General Plan Safety Element establishes policies to provide adequate emergency response.1 In addition, the City requires that proposals for new development be submitted to the Fire Department for review to ensure that site design allows adequate access for Fire Department personnel in case of structural fire. All future development proposals pursuant to the Master Plan recommendations would be subject to environmental and Fire Department review. Emergency access would continue to be a primary consideration in the design of all future improvements to the City’s transportation network. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. 1 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft EIR. July 2004. p. 5- 233 – 5-239. PC Agenda Page 519 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 54 f) No Impact. None of the recommendations or implementation measures contained in the proposed Master Plan conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative modes of transportation (e.g., bus turnouts or bicycle racks). Therefore, no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measure TRA-1 Prior to approval of the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields, the City of Downey Parks and Recreation Director shall ensure that a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is prepared by a qualified professional. The TIA shall be prepared consistent with the requirements of the City and the Congestion Management Program (CMP) in order to identify potential impacts to regional/local circulation and site access. Based on the results and findings of the TIA, the City shall construct any identified roadway, intersection, driveway, signal, and signing improvements required to offset any operational and level of service deficiencies related to implementation of the multi-sports complex and multi-use fields. PC Agenda Page 520 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 55 UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment or collection facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid wastes. Discussion: a) Less Than Significant Impact. The Los Angeles County Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) administers the municipal NPDES permit requirements in the City. Under the NPDES permit issued to the County, all development and significant redevelopment projects are obligated to implement structural and nonstructural nonpoint source pollution control measures known as BMPs to limit urban pollutants reaching the waters of the United States to the maximum extent practical. The regulations require facilities that discharge storm water to obtain a NPDES permit. In addition, the NPDES storm water management program also calls for the implementation of PC Agenda Page 521 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 56 BMPs to the “maximum extent practicable…” in dealing with nonpoint sources of pollution such as: urban runoff, including automotive by-products, trash, food wastes, landscape and agricultural runoff, including pesticides and fertilizers, and runoff from construction sites. Both point sources, such as direct drainage sources, and nonpoint sources of water pollution, such as urban runoff, are usually discharged via separate storm drains to “waters of the United States” and are, therefore, regulated under the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). The proposed Master Plan is a planning and policy document and, as such, would not require an individual wastewater discharge permit from the RWQCB. The City of Downey must, therefore, comply with federal water quality, waste discharge, and total maximum daily load standards defined by the CWA. Future recreational development pursuant to the Master Plan recommendations would be required to comply with existing water quality standards and waste discharge regulations set forth by the RWQCB as well as LID and infiltration standards set forth in Section 5707, Source Controls for Specific Development Categories (as amended), of the City of Downey Municipal Code. Therefore, the proposed Master Plan would have less than significant impacts on wastewater treatment requirements. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Downey gets 100 percent of its water from groundwater. Specifically, the City pumps groundwater from the Central Groundwater Basin, an adjudicated basin that limits the amount of water each purveyor can pump on an annual basis. The limit to the amount of groundwater that each pumper is allowed to extract from the basin on an annual basis is referred to as the “Allowed Pumping Allocation” (APA), which corresponds to 80 percent of the party’s total water rights. The Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) prepared by the City has factored in future growth within the City of Downey and anticipates the City has a reliable water source to supply future development based on the availability of groundwater resources in addition to the availability of Metropolitan Water District (MWD) water for purchase. As part of the Master Plan, grass will be replaced with artificial turf at some park locations, which would reduce water use in these areas. Sewage is collected by City collector facilities and conveyed to trunk sewers owned and maintained by the Sanitation District of Los Angeles County, District No. 2. Wastewater generated by the City is treated at the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) located in the City of Carson, which has a design capacity of 385 million gallons per day (mgd) and currently processes an average flow of 321.6 mgd, and the Los Coyotes Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) located in the City of Cerritos, which has a design capacity of 37.5 mgd and currently processes an average flow of 32 mgd. Future development pursuant to the proposed Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with existing limitations for water use and sewage disposal. Based on the proposed upgrades and the passive use of most of the opportunity sites, significant impacts to water supply are not expected. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. Future development pursuant to the proposed Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and would be required to comply with drainage requirements as well as LID and infiltration standards set forth in Section 5707, Source Controls for Specific Development Categories (as amended), of the Downey Municipal Code. Therefore, impacts related to the expansion of new storm water drainage facilities or the expansion of existing facilities would be less than significant. PC Agenda Page 522 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 57 d) Less Than Significant Impact. As described above, the City gets 100 percent of its water from groundwater, although emergency sources of water are available for purchase from the MWD.1 The proposed park improvements in the Master Plan include features to reduce the use of water, such as artificial turf. The multi-sport complex opportunity site would increase the use of water when compared to the existing vacant facility and would be required to comply with local and State water conservation regulations. No new or expanded entitlements are expected, and no significant impacts would occur. e) Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the opportunity sites pursuant to the proposed Master Plan would be subject to environmental review and may be required to pay a sewerage connection fee to the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts for any new connections. However, based on the limited nature of the projects identified in the Master Plan, requirements for additional capacity are not anticipated. Therefore, impacts to wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Future development resulting from adoption of the proposed Master Plan would comply with existing and future statutes and regulations mandated by the City, State, or federal law. Therefore, impacts related to generation and disposal of solid waste are less than significant. g) Less Than Significant Impact. The California Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) (PRC Section 41780 [1989]) changed the focus of solid waste management from landfill to diversion strategies such as resource reduction, recycling, and composting. The intent of these diversion strategies is to reduce dependence on landfills for solid waste disposal. AB 939 established mandatory diversion goals of 25 percent by 1995 and 50 percent by 2000. Pursuant to AB 939, the City adopted the Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE), which identifies policies and waste diversion programs to ensure that Downey is in compliance with the requirements of AB 939. Future development resulting from adoption of the proposed Master Plan would be required to comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid wastes. 1 City of Downey, Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update Draft EIR Appendix A. July 2004. p 5–248. PC Agenda Page 523 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 58 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Discussion: a) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. As described throughout the preceding checklist sections, the proposed Master Plan has the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Mitigation Measures have been provided to reduce potential impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions/climate change, and transportation as a result of ground disturbance and existing park sites and development of the opportunity sites. With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, CULT-1, CULT-2, CULT- 3, CULT-4, CULT-5, HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and TRA-1 potential impacts related to the quality of the environment, fish or wildlife habitat or populations, plant or animal communities, special-status species, or historical or prehistoric resources, would be less than significant. PC Agenda Page 524 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «08/12/16» 59 b) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. As described throughout the preceding checklist sections, the improvements to existing parks would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. Development of the opportunity sites has the potential to result in cumulatively considerable impacts without incorporation of mitigation measures. With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, CULT-1, CULT-2, CULT- 3, CULT-4, HAZ-1, HAZ-2, and TRA-1, no cumulatively considerable impacts would occur. c) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigated. As described throughout the preceding checklist sections, the improvements to existing parks would not result in substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Development of the opportunity sites has the potential to result in substantial adverse direct or indirect effects on human beings, without incorporation of mitigation measures. With implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, HAZ- 1, HAZ-2, NOI-1, and TRA-1, no substantial adverse direct or indirect effects on human beings would occur. PC Agenda Page 525 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «» 60 SECTION IV - REFERENCES Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP). March 5, 2007. Recommendations by the Association of Environmental Professionals on How to Analyze GHG Emissions and Global Climate Change in CEQA Documents. Website: http://www.pcl.org/projects/ 2007symposium/proceedings/MCLE1-Handout.pdf (accessed December 2015). California Air Resources Board. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. April. California Department of Conservation. California Geological Survey Website. http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs (accessed March 3, 2016). California Department of Finance. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the Sate – January 1, 2014 and 2015. Website: http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/ estimates/e-1/view.php (accessed March 2, 2016). California Emergency Management Agency. 2009. Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, State of California - County of Los Angeles, Long Beach Quadrangle (the California Geological Survey, and the University of Southern California). March 1. CalRecycle. Website: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/directory/Search.aspx (accessed July 7, 2016). City of Downey. General Plan. 2025. Downey Vision 2025 General Plan. ———. General Plan. 2025. Downey Vision 2025 – Comprehensive General Plan Update EIR. ———. General Plan. 2016. Parks and Open Space Master Plan. January. ———. General Plan. 2015. Bicycle Master Plan. July. ———. General Plan. 2015. Energy Action Plan. January ———. General Plan. 2005. Conservation Element. ———. General Plan. 2005. Land Use Element. ———. General Plan. 2005. Noise Element. ———. General Plan. 2005. Open Space Element. ———. General Plan. 2005. Safety Element. PC Agenda Page 526 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «» 61 ———. Zoning Code. 2016. FY 2015-2016 Adopted Budget. Website: http://www.downeyca.org/documents/FY2015-16_Approved_Budget.pdf (accessed March 2, 2016). Department of Toxic Substances Control. Envirostar Database. Website http://www.envirostor. dtsc.ca.gov/public/ (accessed May 10, 2016). Downey Unified School District. About DUSD. Website: http://www.dusd.net/about-dusd/ (accessed March 2, 2016). ———. 2014. Facilities Master Plan. June. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis. Website: http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ ar4/wg1/en/contents.html (accessed January 25, 2013). Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1993. Methods Used to Survey the Vegetation of Orange County Parks and Open Space Areas and The Irvine Company Property. February 10. South Coast Air Quality Management District. 2016. Air Quality Management Plan Development. The 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (2016 AQMP or Plan). ———. 2012. Air Quality Management Plan. December. ———. 2011. Air Quality Significance Thresholds. March. ———. 2003. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. June. Website: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance- thresholds/final-lst-methodology-document.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed December 2015). ———. 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. State of California. 2016. California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. State of California Water Resources Control Board. GEOTRACKER. Website: http://geotracker. waterboards.ca.gov/gama/gamamap/public/default.asp? CMD=runreport&myaddress= 7217+adwen+st%2C+downey%2C+ca (accessed July 7, 2016). United States Army Corps of Engineer (Department of the Army, Los Angeles District, Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles, California). 1999. Los Angeles River Improvements Project Including Rio Hondo and Compton Creek, Final Design Memorandum No. 5, (Rio Hondo Confluence to Century Freeway), (Firestone Blvd. to Los Angeles River). June. ———. 1991. Los Angeles County Drainage Area Study. December. PC Agenda Page 527 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «» 62 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Website: https://www.epa.gov/enviro/cerclis-search (accessed July 7, 2016). United States Fish and Wildlife Services. National Inventory Map. Website: http://www.fws.gov/ wetlands/Data/Mapper.html (accessed on May 10, 2016). PC Agenda Page 528 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «» 63 SECTION V - MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MONITORING REQUIREMENTS PRC Section 21081.6 (enacted by the passage of AB 3180) mandates that the following requirements shall apply to all reporting or mitigation monitoring programs:  The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a Responsible Agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the Lead Agency or a Responsible Agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program.  The Lead Agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based. A public agency shall provide the measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment that are fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. Conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents which address required mitigation measures or in the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other project, by incorporating the mitigation measures into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.  Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft Environmental Impact Report or MND, a Responsible Agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, shall either submit to the Lead Agency complete and detailed performance objectives for mitigation measures which would address the significant effects on the environment identified by the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, or refer the Lead Agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents. Any mitigation measures submitted to a Lead Agency by a Responsible Agency or an agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project shall be limited to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are subject to the statutory authority of, and definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance by a Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project with that requirement shall not limit that authority of the Responsible Agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project, or the authority of the Lead Agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects as provided by this division or any other provision of law. PC Agenda Page 529 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. A UGUST 2016 PROGRAMMATIC INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CITY OF DOWNEY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN CITY OF DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA P:\RJM1402\ISMND.docx «» 64 MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES The mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the proposed project was prepared in compliance with PRC Section 21081.6. It describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of Downey to ensure that all mitigation measures adopted as part of the proposed project would be carried out as described in this IS/MND. Table D lists each of the mitigation measures specified in this IS/MND and identifies the party or parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each measure. PC Agenda Page 530 LS A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . A UG U S T 2 0 1 6 PR O G R A M M A T I C I N I T I A L S T U D Y / M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y P A R K S A N D O P E N S P A C E M A S T E R P L A N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y , C A L I F O R N I A P: \ R J M 1 4 0 2 \ I S M N D . d o c x « » 65 Ta b l e D : M i t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g a n d R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s Re s p o n s i b l e Pa r t y Ti m i n g f o r Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Completion Date Ai r Q u a l i t y AQ - 1 Ai r Q u a l i t y A n a l y s i s . Pr i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f a n y o p p o r t u n i t y si t e d e v e l o p m e n t p u r s u a n t t o t h e P a r k s a n d O p e n S p a c e Ma s t e r P l a n , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r s h a l l v e r i f y t h a t a n ai r q u a l i t y a n a l y s i s i s c o n d u c t e d to e n s u r e t h a t p r o j e c t c o n t r o l s a r e i d e n t i f i e d i n o r d e r t o m e e t So u t h C o a s t A i r Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t D i s t r i c t ( S C A Q M D ) th r e s h o l d s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f op p o r t u n i t y s i t e de v e l o p m e n t Bi o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s BI O - 1 Sp e c i a l - S t a t u s S p e c i e s . T h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l r e t a i n a q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t t o pe r f o r m f o c u s e d p r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s u r v e y s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e pr e s e n c e / a b s e n c e o f s p e c i a l - s t a t u s s p e c i e s w i t h p o t e n t i a l t o oc c u r i n a n d a d j a c e n t t o t h e pr o p o s e d i m p a c t a r e a o f e a c h pr o j e c t c o m p o n e n t . T h e q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t s h a l l p r o v i d e t h e Ci t y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r w i t h d o c u m e n t a t i o n o f t h e re s u l t s o f e a c h s u r v e y p r i o r t o t h e a u t h o r i z a t i o n t o p r o c e e d wi t h c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s f o r e a c h p r o j e c t c o m p o n e n t . If a n y S t a t e o r f e d e r a l l y p r o t e c t e d p l a n t o r a n i m a l s p e c i e s i s de t e c t e d i n o r a d j a c e n t t o t h e p r o p o s e d i m p a c t a r e a o f e a c h pr o j e c t c o m p o n e n t , t h e f i n a l m i t i g a t i o n s t r a t e g y f o r d i r e c t l y im p a c t e d s p e c i e s s h a l l b e d e t e rm i n e d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e Ca l i f o r n i a D e p a r t m e n t o f F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e ( C D F W ) a n d t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s F i s h a n d W i l d l i f e S e r v i c e ( U S F W S ) ( i f ap p r o p r i a t e ) t h r o u g h a m i t i g a t i o n p l a n a p p r o v a l p r o c e s s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o p a r k p r o j e c t ap p r o v a l PC Agenda Page 531 LS A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . A UG U S T 2 0 1 6 PR O G R A M M A T I C I N I T I A L S T U D Y / M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y P A R K S A N D O P E N S P A C E M A S T E R P L A N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y , C A L I F O R N I A P: \ R J M 1 4 0 2 \ I S M N D . d o c x « » 66 Ta b l e D : M i t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g a n d R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s Re s p o n s i b l e Pa r t y Ti m i n g f o r Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Completion Date BI O - 2 : M i g r a t o r y B i r d s a n d R a p t o r s . If c o n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s oc c u r w i t h i n t h e a c t i v e n e s t in g b i r d s e a s o n ( F e b r u a r y 1 5 th r o u g h A u g u s t 1 5 ) , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l r e t a i n a q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t t o co n d u c t a p r e c o n s t r u c t i o n n e s t i n g - b i rd s u r v e y n o m o r e t h a n 3 da y s p r i o r t o t h e s t a r t o f c o n s t r u c t i o n . T h e n e s t i n g s u r v e y sh a l l i n c l u d e t h e p r o j e c t s i t e a n d a r e a s i m m e d i a t e l y a d j a c e n t to t h e s i t e t h a t c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y b e a f f e c t e d b y p r o j e c t - r e l a t e d co n s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s s u c h a s n o i s e , h u m a n a c t i v i t y , a n d du s t , e t c . I f a c t i v e b i r d n e s t s a r e f o u n d w i t h i n 5 0 0 f e e t o f t h e de s i g n a t e d c o n s t r u c t i o n a r e a o n t h e p r o j e c t s i t e , t h e q u a l i f i e d bi o l o g i s t s h a l l e s t a b l i s h a n a p p r op r i a t e b u f f e r z o n e a r o u n d t h e ac t i v e n e s t s . T h e a p p r o p r i a t e b u f f e r s h a l l b e d e t e r m i n e d b y th e q u a l i f i e d b i o l o g i s t b a s e d o n s p e c i e s , l o c a t i o n , a n d t h e na t u r e o f t h e p r o p o s e d a c t i v i t i e s . P r o j e c t a c t i v i t i e s s h a l l b e av o i d e d w i t h i n t h e b u f f e r z o n e u n t i l t h e n e s t i s d e e m e d n o lo n g e r a c t i v e b y t h e b i o l o g i s t . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o a n d d u r i n g co n s t r u c t i o n BI O - 3 : F e d e r a l l y P r o t e c t e d W e t l a n d s . T h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s an d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l r e t a i n a q u a l i f i e d p r o f e s s i o n a l to c o n d u c t a j u r i s d i c t i o n a l a n al y s i s o f t h e t w o f r e s h w a t e r po n d s a t t h e W i l d e r n e s s P a r k , a s w e l l a s t h e i n f i l t r a t i o n b a s i n at t h e D i s c o v e r y S p o r t s C o m p l e x p r i o r t o a n y d i s t u r b a n c e i n th e s e a r e a s . T h e r e s u l t s o f t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n a l a n a l y s i s s h a l l b e us e d t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a d d i t i o n a l p e r m i t t i n g a n d mi t i g a t i o n i s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e s e p r o j e c t c o m p o n e n t s . I f t h e re s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s i d e n t i f y f e d e r a l l y j u r i s d i c t i o n a l w a t e r s wi t h t h e p o t e n t i a l t o b e i m p a c t e d b y M a s t e r P l a n re c o m m e n d a t i o n s , t h e C i t y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r sh a l l e n s u r e t h a t n o p r o j e c t c o m p o n e n t s h a l l r e s u l t i n a n e t lo s s o f f e d e r a l l y p r o t e c t e d w a t e r s b y a d o p t i n g i m p a c t Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o c o n s t r u c t i o n a t Wi l d e r n e s s P a r k a n d Di s c o v e r y S p o r t s Co m p l e x PC Agenda Page 532 LS A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . A UG U S T 2 0 1 6 PR O G R A M M A T I C I N I T I A L S T U D Y / M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y P A R K S A N D O P E N S P A C E M A S T E R P L A N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y , C A L I F O R N I A P: \ R J M 1 4 0 2 \ I S M N D . d o c x « » 67 Ta b l e D : M i t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g a n d R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s Re s p o n s i b l e Pa r t y Ti m i n g f o r Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Completion Date av o i d a n c e m e a s u r e s , i m p a c t m i n i m i z a t i o n m e a s u r e s , a n d / o r co m p e n s a t o r y m i t i g a t i o n m e a s u r e s , a s s p e c i f i e d i n C l e a n Wa t e r A c t S e c t i o n 4 0 4 a n d 4 0 1 p e r m i t s a n d / o r t h e 1 6 0 2 St r e a m b e d A l t e r a t i o n A g r e e m e n t . Cu l t u r a l R e s o u r c e s CU L T - 1 Hi s t o r i c a l R e s o u r c e s . P r i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f e a c h p a r k p r o j e c t , th e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l re t a i n a q u a l i f i e d c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s s p e c i a l i s t / h i s t o r i a n t o co n d u c t a c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s r e v i e w a n d l i t e r a t u r e s e a r c h a t th e S o u t h C e n t r a l C o a s t a l I n f o r m a t i o n C e n t e r o f t h e Ca l i f o r n i a H i s t o r i c a l R e s o u r c e s I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m . T h e re c o r d s e a r c h s h a l l e s t a b l i s h t h e s t a t u s a n d e x t e n t o f pr e v i o u s l y r e c o r d e d s i t e s , s u rv e y s , a n d e x c a v a t i o n s w i t h i n an d i m m e d i a t e l y a d j a c e n t t o t h e p r o j e c t a r e a . A f t e r s i t e ev a l u a t i o n , t h e q u a l i f i e d c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s s p e c i a l i s t / h i s t o r i a n sh a l l d e t e r m i n e i f p r o t e c t i o n m e as u r e s , p r o j e c t m o d i f i c a t i o n s , mo n i t o r i n g , o r r e c o v e r y w o u l d b e n e c e s s a r y t o a v o i d su b s t a n t i a l a d v e r s e c h a n g e s t o a h i s t o r i c a l r e s o u r c e . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o p a r k p r o j e c t ap p r o v a l CU L T - 3 Pa l e o n t o l o g i c a l R e s o u r c e s . P r i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f e a c h p a r k pr o j e c t , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r sh a l l r e t a i n a p r o f e s s i o n a l p a l e on t o l o g i s t t o e v a l u a t e t h e pr o j e c t s i t e , w h i c h m a y c o n s i s t o f a f o s s i l l o c a l i t y s e a r c h , li t e r a t u r e r e v i e w , a n d f i e l d s u r v e y , a s a p p r o p r i a t e a n d de t e r m i n e d b y t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l p a l e o n t o l o g i s t . T h e pa l e o n t o l o g i s t s h a l l m a k e r e c o mm e n d a t i o n s a s t o t h e n e e d f o r pr o t e c t i o n m e a s u r e s , m o n i t o r i n g , o r r e c o v e r y . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o p a r k p r o j e c t ap p r o v a l PC Agenda Page 533 LS A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . A UG U S T 2 0 1 6 PR O G R A M M A T I C I N I T I A L S T U D Y / M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y P A R K S A N D O P E N S P A C E M A S T E R P L A N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y , C A L I F O R N I A P: \ R J M 1 4 0 2 \ I S M N D . d o c x « » 68 Ta b l e D : M i t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g a n d R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s Re s p o n s i b l e Pa r t y Ti m i n g f o r Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Completion Date CU L T - 4 Hu m a n R e m a i n s . I n t h e e v e n t h u m a n r e m a i n s a r e en c o u n t e r e d d u r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n a t a n y o f t h e p r o j e c t s i t e s , th e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l im m e d i a t e l y n o t i f y t h e C o u n t y C o r o n e r . N o f u r t h e r di s t u r b a n c e s h a l l o c c u r u n t i l t h e C o u n t y C o r o n e r h a s m a d e a de t e r m i n a t i o n o f o r i g i n a n d d i sp o s i t i o n p u r s u a n t t o P u b l i c Re s o u r c e s C o d e ( P R C ) S e c t i o n 50 9 7 . 9 8 . I f t h e r e m a i n s a r e de t e r m i n e d t o b e N a t i v e A m e r i c a n , t h e C o u n t y C o r o n e r s h a l l no t i f y t h e N a t i v e A m e r i c a n H e r i t a g e C o m m i s s i o n ( N A H C ) , wh i c h s h a l l d e t e r m i n e a n d n o t i f y a M o s t L i k e l y D e s c e n d a n t (M L D ) . W i t h t h e p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e C i t y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r , t h e M L D m a y i n s p e c t t h e s i t e o f t h e d i s c o v e r y . T h e ML D s h a l l c o m p l e t e t h e i n s p e c t i o n w i t h i n 4 8 h o u r s o f no t i f i c a t i o n b y t h e N A H C . T h e M L D s h a l l h a v e t h e op p o r t u n i t y t o o f f e r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r t h e d i s p o s i t i o n o f th e r e m a i n s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Du r i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n CU L T - 5 Na t i v e A m e r i c a n T r i b a l N o t i f i c a t i o n . F o r e a c h p r o j e c t t o b e im p l e m e n t e d u n d e r t h e M a s t e r P l a n , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l n o t i f y t h e G a b r i e l e ñ o Ba n d o f M i s s i o n I n d i a n s – K i z h N a t i o n i n w r i t i n g a n d in c l u d e a b r i e f p r o j e c t d e s c r i p t i o n a n d l o c a t i o n m a p . P r o j e c t re v i e w a c t i v i t i e s , s u c h a s N a ti v e A m e r i c a n M o n i t o r i n g o f gr o u n d - d i s t u r b a n c e a c t i v i t i e s s h a l l b e e v a l u a t e d o n a p r o j e c t - by - p r o j e c t b a s i s a m o n g t h e C i t y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r , t r i b a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , a n d a p r o f e s s i o n a l ar c h e o l o g i s t Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o p a r k p r o j e c t ap p r o v a l PC Agenda Page 534 LS A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . A UG U S T 2 0 1 6 PR O G R A M M A T I C I N I T I A L S T U D Y / M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y P A R K S A N D O P E N S P A C E M A S T E R P L A N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y , C A L I F O R N I A P: \ R J M 1 4 0 2 \ I S M N D . d o c x « » 69 Ta b l e D : M i t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g a n d R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s Re s p o n s i b l e Pa r t y Ti m i n g f o r Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Completion Date Ha z a r d s a n d H a z a r d o u s M a t e r i a l s HA Z - 1 Ha z a r d o u s B u i l d i n g M a t e r i a l s . P r i o r t o r e n o v a t i o n o r de m o l i t i o n a t e a c h p r o j e c t s i t e , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l e n s u r e t h a t a q u a l i f i e d p r o f e s s i o n a l co n d u c t s s u r v e y s f o r h a z a r d o u s b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s i n c l u d i n g , bu t n o t l i m i t e d t o : a s b e s t o s , l e a d , p o l y c h l o r i n a t e d b i p h e n y l s , an d m e r c u r y . A n y h a z a r d o u s b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s s h a l l b e re m o v e d , t r a n s p o r t e d , a n d di s p o s e d o f b y a q u a l i f i e d ab a t e m e n t c o n t r a c t o r c o n s i s t e n t w i t h l o c a l , S t a t e , a n d f e d e r a l re g u l a t i o n s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o r e n o v a t i o n o r de m o l i t i o n a t e a c h pr o j e c t s i t e HA Z - 2 Ha z a r d o u s W a s t e A s s e s s m e n t . P r i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f de v e l o p m e n t o f e a c h o p p o r t u n i t y s i t e , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l e n s u r e t h a t a q u a l i f i e d pr o f e s s i o n a l c o n d u c t s a H a z a r d o u s W a s t e A s s e s s m e n t t o de t e r m i n e i f h a z a r d o u s w a s t e i s p r e s e n t o n t h e s i t e . Ad d i t i o n a l a c t i o n s m a y i n v o l v e s a m p l i n g , a v o i d a n c e , mo n i t o r i n g , a n d / o r r e m e d i a t i o n . A l l w o r k s h a l l b e c o n d u c t e d co n s i s t e n t w i t h l o c a l , S t a t e, a n d f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f de v e l o p m e n t o f e a c h op p o r t u n i t y s i t e No i s e NO I - 1 N o i s e I m p a c t A n a l y s i s . P r i o r t o p r o j e c t a p p r o v a l , t h e C i t y o f Do w n e y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r s h a l l e n s u r e t h a t a No i s e I m p a c t A n a l y s i s i s p r e p a r e d b y a q u a l i f i e d p r o f e s s i o n a l fo r t h e m u l t i - s p o r t s c o m p l e x a n d m u l t i - u s e f i e l d s . T h e N o i s e Im p a c t A n a l y s i s s h a l l e v a l u a t e b o t h c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d op e r a t i o n a l n o i s e i m p a c t s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e G e n e r a l P l a n an d M u n i c i p a l C o d e a n d i d e n t i f y p r o j e c t f e a t u r e s s u c h a s no i s e b a r r i e r s t h a t w o u l d b e c o n s t r u c t e d a s p a r t o f t h e p r o j e c t . Th e N o i s e I m p a c t A n a l y s i s s h a l l a l s o i n c l u d e c o n s t r u c t i o n no i s e r e d u c t i o n m e a s u r e s t o m i n i m i z e i m p a c t s o n su r r o u n d i n g r e s i d e n t s a n d o t h e r s e n s i t i v e r e c e p t o r s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f th e m u l t i - s p o r t s co m p l e x a n d m u l t i - u s e fi e l d s . PC Agenda Page 535 LS A A S S O C I A T E S , I N C . A UG U S T 2 0 1 6 PR O G R A M M A T I C I N I T I A L S T U D Y / M I T I G A T E D N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y P A R K S A N D O P E N S P A C E M A S T E R P L A N CI T Y O F D O W N E Y , C A L I F O R N I A P: \ R J M 1 4 0 2 \ I S M N D . d o c x « » 70 Ta b l e D : M i t i g a t i o n M o n i t o r i n g a n d R e p o r t i n g P r o g r a m Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e s Re s p o n s i b l e Pa r t y Ti m i n g f o r Mi t i g a t i o n M e a s u r e Completion Date Tr a f f i c a n d T r a n s p o r t a t i o n TR A - 1 P r i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f t h e m u l t i - s p o r t s c o m p l e x a n d m u l t i - u s e fi e l d s , t h e C i t y o f D o w n e y P a r k s a n d R e c r e a t i o n D i r e c t o r sh a l l e n s u r e t h a t a T r a f f i c I m p a c t A n a l y s i s ( T I A ) i s p r e p a r e d by a q u a l i f i e d p r o f e s s i o n a l . T h e T I A s h a l l b e p r e p a r e d co n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e C i t y a n d t h e Co n g e s t i o n M a n a g e m e n t P r o g r a m i n o r d e r t o i d e n t i f y po t e n t i a l i m p a c t s t o r e g i o n a l / l o c a l c i r c u l a t i o n a n d s i t e ac c e s s . B a s e d o n t h e r e s u l t s a n d f i n d i n g s o f t h e T I A , t h e Ci t y s h a l l c o n s t r u c t a n y i d e n t i f i e d r o a d w a y , i n t e r s e c t i o n , dr i v e w a y , s i g n a l , a n d s i g n i n g i m p r o v e m e n t s r e q u i r e d t o of f s e t a n y o p e r a t i o n a l a n d l e v e l o f s e r v i c e d e f i c i e n c i e s re l a t e d t o i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e m u l t i - s p o r t s c o m p l e x a n d mu l t i - u s e f i e l d s . Ci t y o f D o w n e y Pa r k s a n d Re c r e a t i o n Di r e c t o r Pr i o r t o a p p r o v a l o f th e m u l t i - s p o r t s co m p l e x a n d m u l t i - u s e fi e l d s PC Agenda Page 536