Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
Attachments A
Parks • / Open Space Master r March 2014 -TEM • a ,�, Ito 1960 ;` 7E: .6 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Acknowledgements Temple City Council Members Mayor Cynthia Sternquist Mayor Pro Tem Carl Blum Council Member Fernando Vizcarra Council Member Tom Chavez Council Member Vincent Yu Temple City City Manager's Office 'Vacant',City Manager Brian Haworth,Assistant to the City Manager Temple City Planning Commission John Cordes Albert Leung Tom O'Leary Patrick Horton Steve Curran Temple City Parks & Recreation Commission Donna Georgino Kristel Haddad Nanette Fish Robert Lopez Joanne Rosso Temple City Parks& Recreation Department Cathy Burroughs, Parks and Recreation Director Mike Koski, Parks and Recreation Coordinator Frances Manzo-Pimentel, Parks and Recreation Coordinator Roman Rodriguez, Community Services Specialist Project Lead Consultants Doug Grove, Principal, RHA Landscape Architects-Planners, Inc. Neelay Bhatt, Principal Consultant, PROS Consulting Sarah Durham,Consultant, PROS Consulting Project Sub-Consultants Ron Vine, President, ETC. Leisure Vision Tim Cragoe, Realtor, RE/MAX Premier Properties • pros; ACKNOWELDGEMENTS consul ting 9*6 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER ONE -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................5 1.1 PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................................................5 1.2 RESEARCH AND COMMUNITY INPUT....................................................................................................................6 1.3 RECREATION PROGRAM AND SPECIAL EVENT ASSESSMENT...................................................................14 1.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PARKS&OPEN SPACE.......................................................................15 1.5 FACILITY/AMENITY AND PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS.........................................................................-16 1.6 STRATEGIES..............................................................................................................................................................19 CHAPTER TWO-COMMUNITY OUTREACH&PARTICIPATION........................................................20 2.1 COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT......................-......:...................................................................................20 2.2 GENERAL FINDINGS.............................................................................................................--................................21 2.3 STATISTICALLY VALID MAIL SURVEY RESULTS..............................................................................................22 CHAPTER THREE-DEMOGRAPHICS AND TRENDS ANALYSIS.....................................................45 3.1 DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................45 3.2 CITY OF TEMPLE CITY POPULACE......................................................................................................................47 3.3 TRENDS ANALYSIS...................................................................................................................................................51 CHAPTER FOUR-RECREATION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT.............................................................58 4.1 RECREATION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................................58 4.2 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT AND OVERVIEW.......................................................................................................59 4.3 SUMMARY PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................59 4.4 LIFECYCLE ANALYSIS..................................._........................................................................................................60 - 4.5 AGE SEGMENT DISTRIBUTION..............................................................................................................................62 4.6 CORE PROGRAMS.......................................................................................................................................-..........62 4.7 MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS.................. .................... ............................63 4.8 WEBSITE/ONLINE MEDIUMS................................................................................................................................64 4.9 CUSTOMER FEEDBACK..........................................................................................................................................65 4.10 SERVICE CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION............,:........................................................-............................66 4.11 SERVICE CATEGORIES AND LEVELS OF PUBLIC BENEFIT........................................................................67 CHAPTER FIVE-PARK AND FACILITY ASSESSMENT......................................................................68 5.1 TEMPLE CITY PARK AND OPEN SPACE ASSESSMENT..................................................................................68 CHAPTER SIX-FACILITY/AMENITY AND PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS..............................72 6.1 METHODOLOGY.........................................................................................................................................................72 6.2 FACILITY/AMENITY PRIORITY RANKINGS............................................................................................_..........73 6.3 PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS..........................................................................................................................74 CHAPTER SEVEN-RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE....................75 7.1 POTENTIAL FUTURE OPEN SPACE LOCATIONS...............................:..................................:.........................75 proms',." TABLE OF CONTENTS consulting 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.1: SCHOOLS-JOINT USE......................................................................................................................................76 7.1.2: SCHOOLS-PROPOSED TCUSD MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS........................................................77 7.1.3: TRAILS-EATON WASH&ARCADIA WASH..................................................................................................79 7.1.4: POSSIBLE SITES..................................................................................................................................................80 7.1.5: POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE...........................................................................................-....................................81 7.1.6: COMMERCIAL PROPERTY FOR SALE..........................................................................................................82 T1.7: PARKING CONVERSIONS..................................................................................................................................83 7.1.8: PARKLETS..............................................................................................................................................................84 CHAPTER EIGHT-ACTION PLAN..........................................................................................................88 8.1 ACTION PLAN.............................................................................................................................................................88 8.2 COST IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT....................................................................................................................91 8.3 FUNDING AND REVENUE STRATEGIES..............................................................................................................97 8.3.1 EXTERNAL FUNDING............................................................................................_..............................................97 8.3.2 LAND LEASING.......................................................................................................................................................98 8.3.3 USER FEES............................................:.................................................................................................................99 8.4 FRANCHISES AND LICENSES................................................................................................................................99 8.5 NAMING RIGHTS......................................................................................................................................................100 CHAPTER NINE-CONCLUSION.............................................................................I...............................101 CHAPTER TEN -EXHIBITS..........................................................I..........................................................102 EXHIBIT 01 -LIVE OAK PARK.....................................................................................................................................103 EXHIBIT 02-LIVE OAK PARK COMMUNITY CENTER...........................................................................................104 EXHIBIT 03-TEEN CENTER AND ADMINISTRATION BUILDING.......................................................................105 EXHIBIT 04-TEMPLE CITY PARK.............................................................................................................................106 EXHIBIT 05-TEMPLE CITY HIGH SCHOOL............................................................................................................107 EXHIBIT 06-TEMPLE CITY HIGH SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN........................................................108 EXHIBIT 07-OAK AVENUE INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL.........................................................................................109 EXHIBIT 08-OAK AVENUE INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN.....................................110 EXHIBIT 09-LONGDEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL..................................................................................................111 EXHIBIT 10-LONGDEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN.............................................112 EXHIBIT 11 -CLOVERLY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL................................................................................................113 EXHIBIT 12-CLOVERLY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN............................................114 EXHIBIT 13-LA ROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL....................................................................................................115 EXHIBIT 14-LA ROSA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN................................................116 EXHIBIT 15-CLEMINSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL..............................................................................................117 EXHIBIT 16-EMPEROR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.................................................................................................118 EXHIBIT 17-EMPEROR ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN.............................................119 EXHIBIT 18-PACIFIC FRIENDS SCHOOL................::.......::...::........................:.............-.....................................120 ®• pros0,': TABLE OF CONTENTS consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 19-ST.LUKE'S ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.................................................................................................121 EXHIBIT 20-GOLDEN WEST BAPTIST CHURCH..................................................................................................122 EXHIBIT 21 -FIRST LUTHERAN CHURCH AND SCHOOL....................................................................................123 EXHIBIT 22-ROSEMEAD PARK................................................................................................................................124 EXHIBIT 23-BALDWIN STOCKER PARK.................................................................................................................125 EXHIBIT 24-RIO VISTA PARK...................................................................................................................................126 EXHIBIT 25-TANNER PARK.......................................................................................................................................127 EXHIBIT 26-PIONEER PARK.....................................................................................................................................128 EXHIBIT 27-FLETCHER PARK..................................................................................................................................129 EXHIBIT 28-SANTA ANITA PARK...................................:........................................................................................130 EXHIBIT 29-TI ERRA VERDE PARK..........................................................................................................................131 EXHIBIT 30-CAMINO GROVE PARK........................................................................................................................132 EXHIBIT 31 -ARCADIA COUNTY PARK..................................................................................................................133 EXHIBIT 32-TRAIL: LONGDEN AVE TO LAS TUNAS DR.....................................................................................134 EXHIBIT 33-TRAIL:LAS TUNAS DR TO ROSEMEAD BLVD................................................................................135 EXHIBIT 34-TRAIL:ROSEMEAD BLVD TO ENCINITA AVE................................................................................1336 EXHIBIT 35-TRAIL: ENCINITA AVE TO LOWER AZUSA RD................................................................................137 EXHIBIT 36-TRAIL: LOWER AZUSA RD TO ELLIS LN.........................................................................................138 EXHIBIT 37-TRAIL: LIVE OAK AVE TO FAIRVIEW AVE.......................................................................................139 EXHIBIT 38-POSSIBLE SITES:5925 TEMPLE CITY BLVD..................................................................................140 EXHIBIT 39-POSSIBLE SITES:RELOCATE SHERIFF STATION.......................................................................141 EXHIBIT 40-POSSIBLE SITES:4848 ENCINITA AVE...........................................................................................142 EXHIBIT 41-POSSIBLE SITES:5522 GRACEWOOD AVE...................................................................................143 EXHIBIT 42-POSSIBLE SITES:POST OFFICE......................................................................................................144 EXHIBIT 43-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:CITY MAINTENANCE YARD.............................................................145 EXHIBIT 44-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE: LIVE OAK&MCCULLOCH................................................................146 EXHIBIT 45-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE: EATON WASH&HERMOSA.............................................................147 EXHIBIT 46-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:6499 ROSEMEAD BLVD....................................................................148 EXHIBIT 47-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:8606 LONGDEN AVE..........................................................................149 EXHIBIT 48-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:9936 OLIVE ST....................................................................................150 EXHIBIT 49-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:5922,28,40 PRIMROSE AVE...........................................................151 EXHIBIT 50-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE: SCE EASEMENT.................................................................................152 EXHIBIT 51 -POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:5634-5662 HALIFAX RD.................--...............................................153 EXHIBIT 52-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:9442 LIVE OAK ROAD.........................................................................154 EXHIBIT 53-POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE:5800 TEMPLE CITY BLVD.................................................................155 EXHIBIT 54-COMMERCIAL PROP:5336 ROSEMEAD BLVD..............................................................................156 EXHIBIT 55-COMMERCIAL PROP:5604 ROSEMEAD BLVD..............................................................................157 EXHIBIT 56-COMMERCIAL PROP:9100 E LAS TUNAS DR...............................................................................158 EXHIBIT 57-COMMERCIAL PROP:9410 GIDLEY ST...........................................................................................159 pros: TABLE OF CONTENTS consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 58-COMMERCIAL PROP:9436 LAS TUNAS DR...................................................................................160 EXHIBIT 59-COMMERCIAL PROP:9226 LAS TUNAS DR...................................................................................161 EXHIBIT 60-PARKING CONV:TCUSD PARKING LOT.........................................................................................162 EXHIBIT 61 -PARKING CONV: LAS TUNAS DR&CAMILLIA AVE......................................................................163 EXHIBIT 62-PARKING CONV: LAS TUNAS DR&TEMPLE CITY BLVD............................................................164 EXHIBIT 63-PARKING CONV:5911 TEMPLE CITY BLVD.........-.......................................................................165 R � I pros-., :- TABLE OF CONTENTS consulting _7E¢ Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER ONE - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The City of Temple City has placed a premium on its parks and recreation system. The parks and recreation system is integral to the City's sense of community, place and high quality of life. This Parks and Open Space Master Plan will enable the City to recalibrate its goals and actions as a result of evolving community needs,constantly changing trends and the new economic normal that exists in light of the economic downturn that occurred in after the initial Master Plan was completed. The plan's recommendations will focus on meeting the needs of the changing demographics and ensure sustainable operations of the City's parks,open spaces and programs. By determining the current needs,strengths, and gaps in the system this document will serve as a guiding document reflecting true community needs and vision for the future. This Parks and Open Space Master Plan will serve to continue the outstanding tradition of the City and leverage the economic and commercial development to further enhance the livability of the City and make it an attractive place for tourists,future residents and businesses alike. Strategies • Engage the community, leadership and stakeholders in meaningful and varied public input to build a shared vision • Utilize a wide variety of data sources and best practices including statistically-valid ones to predict trends and patterns of use • Proactively meet community needs and enhance the City's offerings • Develop a dynamic and realistic action plan that can ensure long-term success and financial sustainability for the City • Ensure the City's parks and open spaces continue to be the key reason for current and future residents and businesses to call Temple City home • Update the Open Space element of the City's General Plan. 1 pros-;Ic' CHAPTER consulting w� WE Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 1.2 RESEARCH AND COMMUNITY INPUT Update Park Standards and Inventory Analyze Existing Conditions A complete and current inventory and assessment of all City used and/or managed public and private parks, facilities and trails was conducted. The plan recognizes alternative providers (i.e. schools, other governmental agencies, for profit and not-for-profit organizations, etc.) and facilities. The inventory denotes the site location, names, unique facilities as well as the specific components(i.e. ball fields, playgrounds, play courts, etc)for all properties identified. City Parks • Live Oak Park and Community Center • Temple City Park Public Schools • Temple City High School • Oak Ave Intermediate School • Longden Elementary School • Cloverly Elementary School • La Rosa Elementary School • Cleminson Elementary School • Emperor Elementary Private Schools& Churches • Pacific Friends School • St. Luke Elementary School • Golden West Baptist Church • First Lutheran Church &School Parks Outside City Limits • Rosemead Park ,5an Gabriel • Baldwin Stocker Park • Rio Vista Park • Tanner Park • Pioneer Park _ Ei Maria • Fletcher Park • Santa Anita Park • Tierra Verde Park • Camino Grove Park • Arcadia County Park Existing Park and Open Space Temple City and surrounding cities pros CHAPTER 1 consul ting `. Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Strengths and Opportunities Strengths • General park maintenance • Clean and safe parks • High levels of use • Parks appearto be family friendly • Concrete walks throughout Opportunities for Improvement • Parking at Temple City Park is limited • Live Oak Park turf takes a lot of abuse but appears to hold up fairly well • Play equipment at Live Oak Park is older and worn in places • Play equipment at Temple City Park is small and needs improvement Park, Open Space and School Facility Inventory Matrix A complete matrix of all park, open space and school facilities can be found in Chapter Five. Potential Parkland Inventory The RHA/PROS team began the process of identifying undeveloped land, not necessarily owned by the City, which may have potential for recreation purpose. The results of this study can be found in Chapter Seven. pros,"> CHAPTER 1 consul ting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Community Needs Assessment A Community Needs Assessment was conducted to ensure that the public's perceived needs for parks and open space was documented and prioritized. The results of this assessment can be found in Chapter Two,Section 1. Master Plan Advisory Committee A Master Plan Advisory Committee was formed that included City Council members, Parks and Recreation Commission members, city staff, school district staff, sheriff department staff and residents-at-large. The committee members were: • Cynthia Sternquist Mayor Pro Tem • Fernando Vizcarra Councilmember • Donna Georgino Parks and Recreation Commissioner • Nanette Fish Parks and Recreation Commissioner • Cathy Burroughs Director of Parks and Recreation • Mike Koski Parks and Recreation Coordinator • Frances Manzo-Pimentel Parks and Recreation Coordinator • Roman Rodriguez Community Services Specialist • Dale Shaffer Temple City USD- Director of Maint.and Operations • Rick Adams Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department • Peter Choi Temple City Chamber of Commerce • Jorge Martinez Temple City resident The desired outcomes of the study were discussed: ✓ Identify park and open space needs based on current gaps and future trends ✓ Develop priorities for CIP and land acquisition based on community values ✓ Provide a guide for balanced parks, open space and program offerings ✓ Develop measurable strategies to achieve goals and recommendations Focus on a sustainable approach for the next 20 years The RHA/PROS team then reviewed the work plan, timeline and details of the Master Plan and the group identified stakeholders, partners, and user groups to be included in the process. CHAPTER 1 ® consulting .BiQ+E Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Community Input From March 1"-27`h, 2013,the RHA/PROS team conducted multiple "Caught-in-the-Act' surveys at both city park locations,four key leader and focus group meetings, and two public forums. All of the feedback received constituted the subjective input process that sought respondent opinion for parks, facility and program needs, and their vision for the future. The participants were asked to respond to three questions: 1. What do you like about the Parks and Recreation system in Temple City? 2. What are the opportunities for the Parks and Recreation system in Temple City? 3. What is the one need that could be addressed through this Needs Assessment? The following is a general summary of the responses Strengths • Camellia Festival,Summer Concerts and other community events • Clean, Well-maintained facilities and parks • Diverse types of programs/classes for all ages/affordable • After-school program—S.T.A.R.S. is affordable and high quality • Good volunteers from community in the parks-city values the volunteers Opportunities for Improvement • Community Aquatic Center • Open green space • Joint Use Agreement w/TCUSD • Review Eaton Wash&how it can be used for open space • Pet friendly park/space Most Important Things • Community Aquatic Center • Gymnasium • Joint Use with TCUSD and City • More basketball courts • Open field space for organized sports/sports complex Additional information about community outreach and participation can be found in Chapter Two. FRI pros-, CHAPTER 1 consul ting Si Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Statistically Valid Survey Methodology Leisure Vision/ETC Institute conducted a Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey between August and September of 2013 to help establish usage and satisfaction for current parks and facilities and to determine priorities for the future development of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the City of Temple City Parks and Recreation Department.The survey was administered by mail and phone. The RHA/PROS team worked extensively with Temple City officials in development of the survey questionnaire. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future parks and open space system. Surveys were mailed to a random sample of 2,500 households in Temple City. The same day the surveys were mailed, each household that was to receive a survey also received an electronic voice message encouraging them to complete the survey. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 300 completed surveys. A total of 338 surveys were completed. Results of the random sample of 338 households have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least+/-5.3%. Key Findings Quality of Facilities (see chart below) -The majority of respondents (35%) say that the quality of parks, recreation facilities and sports fields are "above average". Thirty-two percent (32%) state that the parks, recreation facilities and sports fields are "average'. Twenty percent (20%) stated that the parks, recreation facilities and sports fields are of"excellent'quality. 02.Respondent Rating of the Overall Quality of Parks, Quality of Programs - Thirty-nine Recreation Facilities and Sports Fields They Have Visited percent (39%) of respondents Over the Pas[12 Months ny oa�roza o,re.00�ew participated in programs over the past 12 months. Of those 39% who AbvreAverage participated in programs, 38% rated M% C4% 20% zo;e the quality of the programs as "above average". Twenty-nine percent (29%) rated the overall quality of the Poor programs as "excellent' and 29% rated n% ow the quality as"average". 7% Average 32 semen reaavxmwc,w;wu is.w'w`*'mzi pros;' CHAPTER 1 r consulting 0 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Use of School, Private and Neighboring City Facilities - Thirty-seven percent (37%) of respondents used school facilities for 06.Organiutions That Respondents Have Used for Indoor and Outdoor indoor and outdoor recreation and Recreation and Sports Activities During the Past 12 Months sports activities. Twenty-one percent 'r P° `a—,.,d°°'•'°'°°"e'^°^°°°°°° (21%) used churches for both indoor G� ""o 1r% and outdoor recreation and sports % activities. Twenty percent (20%) used Pd..d°'„o°""'"""`""°°'pe 20% private clubs and 20% used N WM15 °vauw 20% neighboring cities for these types of activities. X 9°n a Gms Dub 116 HOP f.:: r% Oa°� BX Facility Unmet Needs - Seventy „ �„ H° ; 12% percent (70%) of respondents have a 0% 5% IM 15% 20% 25% 10% 35% d0% 0.5% 50% need for walking and biking trails. Sixty-four percent(64%)have a need for small family picnic areas and shelters. Fifty-one percent (51%) have a need for Wi-Fi access in parks. Forty-nine percent (49%) have a need for playground equipment. Facility Met Needs - Seventy-two 06a.How Well Temple City Parks and Recreation Department percent (72%) of respondents with a Facilities Meet the Needs of Respondent Households need for youth baseball and softball M1r pea�g°°�revmxnm,wia°reee ar fe W i4n1 .,.It fields is being met 75% or more. a� Similar met needs include: Youth soccer fields 69%, playground equipment 66% and adult baseball and softball fields 63%. imw Hmewm°cared 0vrwwm 9MkbfNlflMXpaxp WGvpnl P{FM1IgUM SpSW I WYFIPRl6a PNr Program Unmet Needs-Based on the o% _W% eo% aa% e0% ,om sum of respondent choices (multiple choices could be made) the top need Ql5%MMiMWt Vk Maeatbe0f for programs is summer concerts 51%. Other needed programs include:Adult fitness and wellness programs 49% cultural events 39% city-wide special events 39%and lap swim 38%. pros,." CHAPTER t consulting -�E- Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 06.How Well Parks and Recreation Pronouns Offered by the City Program Met Needs - Sixty-three percent of Temple Meet the Needs of Respondent Households (63%) of respondent households need for q��mn.d,E:P�a.m,(wro,.regia R.r ivasl summer concerts is being met 75% or „ more. Similar met needs include: Youth .e vm sports programs 56%, city-wide special events 51% and before and after school w.. programs 49%. ro.xuumlYe�arWo.,r,w•Y I .e.elwo-..wiae YnwlNp�uM°aNpW�^ a.emm..wa,,.aw>.a BYawW Ayua M 0% 20% 40% 60% BO% t0a,6 I�ionueaaww oux n.nww ww ozuwcex.e. Fav w..rvwn xw.e Ia...m.sm m,r�s,..,,m„vew Most Important Actions-Based on the sum of respondent top four choices,the most important action that city could take is walking and biking trails 46%. Twenty-six percent (26%) say that WI-FI access in parks is the most important action the City of Temple could 012.Actions That Are Most Important to Respondent Households take. Twenty-five percent (25%)state that ,a� wa. a as xva aavn an outdoor pool is the most important lrv�Wv�1arivvaop3e�srVw,ROY+�viwwn�,„aneGv6aQpodv�ar�iMwlaMPurv.oGr%ekGKww�P.l�talmvNw,amgMllwr6w.finawlamv,nlncn�egSlmawaYMwagb�YnnaK�pandMwanpy+v�l^�epnau,nacMYibmpm..,PWaIM,cn.Rda°lklv.mun..NMaaarsrymuaaapnsea X : : Xes x 46% action to them. am aX npa.o®em.aenwxea.mmne.nrwa sr.I..m.,e,PaxPw 0% to<x 2,% 30% sox a0% GA 401<6xvWxElCbNve,4P,mSV I,1 Q115.If an Additional$100 Were Available for Temple City AlloeationofAdditlOnalFunds- Parks,Cultural,Sports and Recreation Facilities,how Would Thirty-six percent (36%) of respondents You Allocate the Funds? would use the additional funds to improve mYw Um m¢mrc a. o ac or provide maintenance to existing parks. Twenty percent (20%) would support the wwlawa+iwww�mm.arMr��e. zoX development of walking and biking trails. Sixteen percent (16%) would support the acquisition of new park land and open ca.mFamana,nwnrwa ra space. Imy4W aydlygrypBplN 6% The complete results of the statistically o� ex valid survey can be found in Chapter Two, Section 3. pros;,; CHAPTER 1 consu og f E ��NN Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Demographics and Trends Analysis The demographic analysis utilizes data obtained from Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI), the largest research and development organization dedicated to Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and specializing in population projections and market trends. All data was acquired in 2013, and reflects the actual numbers as reported in the 2000 and 2010 Census and estimates for 2012 and 2017 as obtained by ESRI. The City of Temple City geographic boundary was utilized as the demographic analysis boundary. All projections should be utilized with the understanding that unforeseen circumstances during or after the time of the projections could have a significant bearing on the validity of the final projections. Additional information on demographic and trend analysis can be found in Chapter Three. Total Population The Temple City population has increased at a moderate pace since 2000. From 2000 to 2010, the population increased by 6.1%from 33,377 to 35,558. From 2010 to 2012, the population is estimated to slightly increase to 35,806 persons. Ten year projections reflect a continued moderate increase in the populace. From 2022 to 2027, it is projected the population will rise to 37,414 in 2022 and 38,296 in 2027. Age Segment Evaluating the distribution by age segments, the City has a rapid aging trend that is only poised to accelerate in the years to come. The fastest growing population segment is the 55+ age group that is projected to grow from 23%in 2000 to 38% by 2027. Race From a race standpoint, the City has an extremely high diversity index and a significantly higher than average racial and ethnic demographic that is projected to increase in the years to come. The majority Asian Alone population is expected to increase from 39% in 2000 and 55% in 2012 to 69% by 2027. At the same time,the While Alone Population will reduce from 49% in 2000 to 33%in 2012 and 21% by 2027. Households and Income Income characteristics certainly exhibit growth trends after accounting for inflation. The median household income is currently estimated at $57,783 and is projected to continually increase to $68,336 by 2017. The per capita income is also projected to increase from $24,360 currently to $27,552 by 2017. pros�,'<' CHAPTER 1 consul ting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 1.3 RECREATION PROGRAM AND SPECIAL EVENT ASSESSMENT The RHA/PROS team worked with City staff to prepare the program assessment matrix. Staff selected core program areas which were assessed through using the PROS program matrix templates provided to the staff. PROS' analysis is based on data provided by staff, staff discussions, community input, demographics, and trends nationwide. Additional information on recreation program assessment can be found in Chapter Four. Programs Assessed • Stars Club—After School Programs • Seniors • Volunteers • Youth Sports • Special Events-Concerts in the Park • Special Events-Lights on Temple City • Fees and Charge Classes Strengths and Opportunities Strengths • Good diversity in types of program offerings • Special events are a great strength • Variety of program promotions mechanisms utilized • Good value for money for program offerings • Successful use of volunteers for several programs Opportunities for Improvement • Program lifecycles imbalanced ✓ Few programs in the Introduction Stage (5%)—innovation pipeline limited ✓ Over 60% programs in the Mature,Saturated or Decline stage • Age Segments served by existing programming are not aligned with community demographics ✓ 48% programs targeting population under 18 which comprises only 20% of the population;Only 24%programs for those 45+in age pros,.:- CHAPTER 1 MI consulting 5S1)TemplZbily High School .rmediale School(9098 F Calllta St) '" y(' »�` f1., u • f..(p OS4,L 9 Rnseme 7d Blvd n S a' � 'p � � II 4Jlaa Ilvr 0 p (POS5)P,NOG I ongu,. /tv. ,„,,.,� -��- j JiSS71 Pacific Friends School �. SCE E SeillBntSS3�j•.I angden-?<le mertary Scheoll s z rail at 'n9 Ealon Wash Ir pCd 5 i11 Te{iln le Cit Blvd y ( ) V y POS-3) L-ilon b"lasli &"Hermosa Drive (p9 2 Live_•ak.& SCI ' 1 • F 44 E as upas f,; 1 f C;6 D Parkucy Lal ) t Piu�,l 9 •Pp5'11 504,5 62 Halifax Rd �—��. " C-�}SCi04.R�semeacl BlvciSSB) SL Luke Eltary Scnoul 510 i�t• Lulhe Ctlurth x�S'>h ool� �.- "' - p 6) Fr{{{ail along Arc `I � (lLy Trall along Calan t Vash - ) 1' 346bR{ot Rosemead Blvtlt utf ll!POSGy 993G4t',Olive Sl �155�)Cleminson �1 \�. I 1 I IT3)Trail along Talon %'dash_ ` y,•�'✓/ S1) Cil Mao enarice)Yand Conversicin a• i ` - .. T\ fSS5� L3-Rosa Llementary School f(SS91 Go den %,'e'st 3apuslS_hurch (T4)Trail along Eaton 1 rash •' y . �._.._ 13410Oidley,sl dTSy"^T rail along _atony dasn 04C earth Nills I a.i .�• drrC�y r .:i • • r 15 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 1.5 FACILITY/AMENITY AND PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS The purpose of the facility/amenity and program priority rankings is to provide an ordered list of facility/amenity needs and recreation program needs for the community served by the City. This rankings model evaluated both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data includes the statistically valid community survey, which asked Temple City residents to list unmet needs and rank their importance. Qualitative data includes resident feedback obtained through community input,demographics,and trends. The scoring system considers the following: • Community survey o Unmet needs for facilities and recreation programs o Importance ranking for facilities • Consultant evaluation o Factor derived from the consultant's evaluation of program and facility priority based on survey results, demographics,trends,facility and program assessment, levels of service and overall community input. The weighted scores were as follows: • 60 percentfrom the statistically valid community survey results • 40 percent from consultant evaluation using demographic and trends data, community focus groups, public meetings,and levels of service. The combined total of the weighted scores is the total score based on which the facility/amenity and program priority is determined. Additional information on facility, amenity, and program priority rankings can be found in Chapter Six. ® pros;,,:' CHA-PTER 1 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Facility/Amenity Priority Rankings The top five facility and amenity priorities as determined by the community were family walking and biking trails, 'bike lanes, outdoor pool, Wi-Fi access in parks, and small family picnic areas and shelters. Temple City Facility/Amenity Priority Rankings Ove ra I I Ranking Walking and Biking Trails Bike Lanes Outdoor Pool Wi-Fi Access in Parks Small Family Picnic Areas and Shelters Pet Friendly Spaces Playground Equipment Large Group Picnic Areas and Shelters t Large Indoor Social Event & Meeting Room 9 Pocket Parks/Small Neighborhood Parks 10 Skateboard/BMX Park 11 Indoor Recreation Center/Gymnasium 12 Outdoor Basketball Courts 13 Outdoor Badminton Courts 14 Outdoor Tennis Courts - Performing Arts Facility Disc Golf Course Youth Soccer Fields Youth Baseball and Softball Fields Year Round Artificial Turf Sports Fields Adult Soccer Fields Adult Baseball and Softball Fields proms-,. CHAPTER 1 consul tmg in (9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Program Priority Rankings The top five program priorities as determined by the community were adult fitness and wellness programs, lap swim programs, cultural events, summer concerts,and city-wide special events. Temple City Program Priority Rankings Overall Ranking Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs Lap Swim Programs Cultural Events Summer Concerts City-Wide Special Events Senior Health and Fitness Programs Aqua Aerobics Bike Events Culinary Programs 9 Youth Sports Programs 10 Youth Summer Camp Programs 11 Senior Leisure Enrichment Classes 12 Tai Chi 13 Adult Sports Programs 14 Visual and Performing Arts Programs 15 Before and After School Programs 16 Youth Fitness and Wellness Programs Pre-School Programs Badminton Lessons and Leagues Tennis Lessons and Leagues Youth Life Skill and Enrichment Programs Ping Pong Lessons and Leagues Teen Programs Martial Arts Programs pros CHAPTER consu(tmg Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER TWO - COMMUNITY OUTREACH & PARTICIPATION 2.1 COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT There has been extensive public input and participation as part of this Parks and Open Space Master Plan process from January to September 2013. The RHA/PROS team conducted multiple "Caught-in-the-Act" surveys at both city park locations, four key leader and focus group meetings, and two public forums. All of the feedback received constituted the subjective input process that sought respondent opinion for parks, facility and program needs; and their vision for the future. The participants were asked to respond to the following three questions: 1. What do you like about the parks and recreation system in Temple City? 2. What are the opportunities for the parks and recreation system in Temple City? 3. What is the one need that could be addressed through this needs assessment? This interaction played an important part in establishing priorities for the future planning, land acquisition, park improvement and program development for the City's parks and recreation department. In addition to the leadership interviews, focus groups, and community meetings, the public input process included an online survey and statistically valid community needs assessment survey of residents. A summary of the public input received is provided below. Note: The findings listed below are solely the opinion of the individual attendees at these meetings and may not reflect the overall community,staff or the consultant's opinion. Qualitative Data • Stakeholder group interviews and focus groups were conducted to be representative, but not exhaustive of interests affecting parks and recreation in the City of Temple City. These sessions included: o Administration and leadership o Stakeholders o Users and non-users of the parks and recreation system o Business and community leaders o Staff • Two Community Forums were conducted to gather input from the community-at-large. • An online survey was conducted using www.surveymonkey.corn pros < CHAPTER 2 i consul ting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Quantitative Data • Leisure Vision/ETC Institute conducted a Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey between August and September of 2013 to help establish usage and satisfaction for current parks and facilities and to determine priorities for the future development of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the City of Temple City Parks and Recreation Department.The survey was administered by mail and by phone. 2.2 GENERAL FINDINGS Stakeholders and Community Forums Strengths • Camellia Festival,Summer Concerts and other community events • Clean,well-maintained facilities and parks • Diverse types of programs/classes for all ages/affordable • After-school program—S.T.A.R.S. is affordable and high quality • Good volunteers from community in the parks-city values the volunteers Opportunities for Improvement • Community aquatic center • Open green space • Joint Use Agreement w/TCUSD • Review Eaton Wash &how it can be used for open space • Pet friendly park/space Most Important Things • Community aquatic center • Gymnasium • Joint Use with TCUSD and City • More basketball courts • Open field space for organized sports/sports complex Online Survey • Temple City Park and Live Oak Park are by far the most visited parks;Arcadia County Park and Santa Anita Park are ones visited by over half of respondents. • Very high program and event participation (78%) and high quality ratings • Facilities with highest unmet needs: o Outdoor pool/Aquatic Center o Skateboard and BMX parks o Bike lanes o Indoor recreation center o Walking/biking trails o Year-round synthetic turf fields o Wi-Fi in the parks o Outdoor badminton courts •111.3. proms;'; CHAPTER 2 consulting 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan • Programs with highest unmet needs: o Aquatics related programs o Ping-pong lessons and leagues o Badminton lessons and leagues o Visual and performing arts programs • Single biggest reason for lack of participation—Desired program not offered followed by program times not convenient • One out of four people walk to the park • Saturdays and Wednesdays are the most preferred days for people to participate in programs and activities • 8-11 am and 5-8 pm are the most preferred time slots • The city Connect magazine,word-of-mouth and the city website are the most popular methods of accessing information • Park and facility development/Rehabilitation followed by Children and Teen Activities are the areas respondents want the Department to emphasize on • High support for non-resident fees for programs and facility rentals(78%Support or Strongly Support) 2.3 STATISTICALLY VALID MAIL SURVEY RESULTS Methodology Leisure Vision/ETC Institute conducted a Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment Survey between August and September of 2013 to help establish usage and satisfaction for current parks and facilities and to determine priorities for the future development of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the City of Temple City Parks and Recreation Department.The survey was administered by mail and by phone. The RHA/PROS team worked extensively with Temple City officials in the development of the survey questionnaire. This work allowed the survey to be tailored to issues of strategic importance to effectively plan the future parks and open space system. Surveys were mailed to a random sample of 2,500 households in Temple City. The same day the surveys were mailed, each household that was to receive a survey also received an electronic voice message encouraging them to complete the survey. The goal was to obtain a total of at least 300 completed surveys. A total of 338 surveys were completed. The results of the random sample of 338 households have a 95%level of confidence with a precision of at least+/-5.3%. The results of the survey are presented on the following pages. pros;,0 CHAPTER 2 consulting 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Visitation of Temple City Parks, Facilities or Sports Fields The majority of respondents, thirty-five percent (35%), visited parks, recreation facilities, or sports fields at least once a week. Twenty-four percent (24%) of clients visited parks, recreation facilities or sports fields a few times a year. Eighteen percent (18%) of households visited parks, facilities orfields a few times per month. Q1. How Often Respondents Visited Parks, Recreation Facilities or Sports Fields in Temple City Over the Past 12 Months by percentage of respondents At least once a week 35% A few times/year 24% A few times per month 18% Less than oncelyear 13% At least once/month 9% Don'tknow 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Saurre: Leisure Vision,ETC Institute(SepIcmber N II ! . pros'ICHAPTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Rating of the Overall Quality of Parks, Recreation Facilities and Sports Fields in Temple City The majority of respondents (35%) say that the quality of parks, recreation facilities and sports fields are "above average." Thirty-two percent (32%) of respondents state that the City of Temple City parks, recreation facilities and sports fields are "average." Twenty percent (20%) of respondents stated that the parks, recreation facilities and sports fields are of "excellent" quality. Q2. Respondent Rating of the Overall Quality of Parks, Recreation Facilities and Sports Fields They Have Visited Over the Past 12 Months by percentage of respondents Above Average 35% Excellent 20% Poor 2% Don't Know 7% Below Average 4% Average 32% Somm Leisure VisioNC'rC Institwe(Septcndrer 2013) pros CHAPTER 2 consulting E Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Participation in Temple City Programs over the Past 12 Months Thirty-nine percent(39%)of respondents participated in programs over the past 12 months. Q3. Have Respondent Households Participated in any City of Temple Programs Over the Past 12 Months? by percentage of respondents Yes 139% No 61% So.,. Leisure Vision,ETC InstiWte(Ssptennber 2013) Mpros,I:' CHAPTER 2 consulting w� Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Quality of Temple City Programs Of those thirty-nine percent (39%) who participated in programs, thirty-eight percent (38%) of respondents rated the quality of the programs as "above average." Twenty-nine percent (29%) of respondents rated the overall quality of the programs as "excellent' and twenty-nine (29%) rated the quality as "average." Q4. How Would You Rate the Overall Quality of Programs Your Household Has Participated in Over the Past 12 Months? by percentage of respondents Excellent 29% Above Average 38% Poor 2% Below Average 4 2% Average 29% Source: Leisure Vision,ETC Institute(September 2013) pros';: CHAPTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Organizations that Respondents Have Used for Indoor and Outdoor Recreation and Sports Activities Thirty-seven percent (37%) of respondents used school facilities for indoor and outdoor recreation and sports activities. Twenty-one percent (21%) of respondents used churches for both indoor and outdoor recreation and sports activities. Twenty percent (20%) used private clubs and twenty percent(20%) used neighboring cities for these types of activities. Q5. Organizations That Respondents Have Used for Indoor and Outdoor Recreation and Sports Activities During the Past 12 Months by percentage of respondents(excluding"none chosen") School facilities 37% Churches 21% Private clubs(tennis,health,fitness,golf) 20% Neighboring Cities 20% Private youth sports leagues 11% VMCA 7°/ Private adult sports leagues 50% Boys&Girls Club 3% HOA facilities 2% Other 9% None. Do not use any organization. 32% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Source: Leisure V¢ioNETC Institute(Septcmber2013) pros CHAPTER2 consul ting SQ1.( Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Need for the Following Parks and Recreation Facilities Seventy percent (70%) of respondents have a need for walking and biking trails. Sixty-four percent (64%) of respondents have a need for small family picnic areas and shelters. Fifty-one percent (51%)of respondents have a need for Wi-Fi access in parks. Forty-nine percent (49%) of respondents have a need for playground equipment. Q6. Respondents Need for the Following Parks and Recreation Facilities by percentage of respondents Walking and biking trails 70% Small family picnic areas and shelters 64% Wi-Fi Access in Parks 51% Playground equipment 49% Large group picnic areas and shelters 45% Pocket/Small neighborhood parks 43% Indoor Recreation Center I Gymnasium 43% Bike lanes 42% Outdoor pool 40% Outdoor basketball courts 32% Outdoor tennis courts 32% Large indoor social event/meeting roam 29% Pet4riendly spaces 28% Performing Arts facility 26 Youth soccer fields 22 Outdoor badminton courts 21% Youth baseball and softball fields 19% Year-round artificial turf sports fields 15% Disc golf course 11 Skateboard f BMX parks 11% Adult baseball and softball fields 8% Adult soccer fields 8% Other 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source: Leisure VieiodETC Institute(September 2013) pros-. 'c� CHAPTER 2 consuling Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan How Well Temple City Parks and Recreation Department Facilities Meet the Needs of Residents Seventy-two percent (72%) of respondents with a need for youth baseball and softball fields is being met seventy-five percent (75%) or more. Similar met needs include: Youth soccer fields sixty-nine percent (69%), playground equipment sixty-six percent (66%), and adult baseball and softball fields sixty-three percent(63%). 06a. How Well Temple City Parks and Recreation Department Facilities Meet the Needs of Respondent Households by percentage of respondents(with a need for facilities) Youth baseball and softball fields 40% 1 14% 9% Youth Wooer fields 33% 1 Playground equipment 38% 1 20% 9% Adult baseball and softball fields 46% 1 17 Small family picnic areas and shelters 35% 1 26% 10% Outdoor basketball courts 34% 1 27% 11 Outdoor tennis courts 25% 1 29% B Large group picnic areas and shelters 38% 1 23% 1 12 Adult soccer fields 1 20° 1 16% Pocket/Small neighborhood parks 30% 25% 15% Year-round artificial turf sports fields 1 19% 7% Walking and biking trails 23% 1 23% 14% Large indoor social event/meeting room 22% 1 29% 1 16% Outdoor badminton courts 21% 21% 7% Indoor Recreation Center/Gymnasium 19% 1 27 Y. 1 20% Bike lanes 17% 1 17% F_19% Skateboard/BMX parks 1 9% 1 15% Outdoorpool 13% 15% 7% Pet-friendly spaces 11% 1 17% 1 21% WFFi Access in Parks 9% 13% 1 9% Performing Ads facility 8% 34% 10% Disc golf course 14% % 1 11 Other 1 331A 1 33% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% X100%Meets Needs 075%Meets Needs E50%Meets Needs 025%Meets Needs M0%Meets Needs Souse: Leisure Vision/ETC lmm to(September 2013) Epros;, CHAPTER 2 consulting f E: Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Temple City Parks and Recreation Facilities That Are Most Important to Residents Based on the sum of respondent's top four choices, the most important facility to respondent households is walking and biking trails. Other important facilities to respondent households include: Small family picnic areas and shelters twenty-nine percent (29%), Wi-Fi access in parks twenty-five percent(25%),and playground equipment twenty-three percent(23%). Q7. Temple City Parks and Recreation Facilities That Are Most Important to Households by percentage of respondents(top four choices) Walking and biking trails 49% Small family picnic areas and shelters 29% WI-Fl Access in Parks 25% Playground equipment 23% Indoor Recreation Center/Gymnasium 18% Outdoor pool 1$% Large group picnic areas and shelters 16% Pet-friendly spaces 16% Bike lanes 15% Pocket parks I Small neighborhood parks 14% Outdoor basketball courts 14% Outdoor tennis courts 11% Youth soccer fields 9% Large indoor social event&meeting roam $% Youth baseball and softball fields $% Performing Arts facility $% Outdoor badminton courts 5% Year-round artificial turf sports fields 4% Disc golf course 3% Adult baseball and softball fields 2% Skateboard/BMX parks 20/1. Adult soccer fields 2% Other 1% None chosen 17% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Source: L¢isuce VkiaNEI C Institute(September 2013) mpros;':' CHAPTER 2 r consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Need for the Following Parks and Recreation Programs Based on the sum of respondent choices (multiple choices could be made) the top need for programs is summer concerts fifty-one percent (51%). Other needed programs include: Adult fitness and wellness programs forty-nine percent (49%), cultural events thirty-nine percent (39%), city-wide special events thirty-nine percent (39%) and lap swim thirty-eight percent (38%). Q8. Respondents Have a Need for the Following Parks and Recreation Programs by percentage of respondents(multiple choices could be made) Summer concerts 051% Adult fitness and wellness programs 49% Cultural events 39% City-wide special events 39% Lap swim 38% Senior health&fitness programs 34% Before and after school programs 31% Youth sports programs 31% Culinary programs 29% Senior leisure enrichment classes 28% Visual and performing arts programs 27% Youth summer camp programs 26% Youth fitness and wellness programs 26% Adult sports programs 25% Bike events 25% Aqua aerobics 24% Tai Chi 24% Youth Life skill and enrichment programs 22% Tennis lessons and leagues 21% Ping pong lessons and leagues 20% Badminton lessons and leagues 20% Martial arts programs 19% Teen programs 18% Pre-School programs16% Other 1 0% 20% 40% 60% Source: Leisure V6imVETC IMOrlte(September 2013) pros,.- CHAPTER 2 consulting 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan How Well Parks and Recreation Programs Offered by the City of Temple City Meet the Needs of Residents Sixty-three percent (63%) of respondent households need for summer concerts is being met seventy-five percent (75%) or more. Similar met needs include: Youth sports programs fifty-six percent (56%), city-wide special events fifty-one percent (51%) and before and after school programs forty-nine percent(49%). Q6. How Well Parks and Recreation Programs Offered by the City of Temple Meet the Needs of Respondent Households by percentage of respondents(with a need for facilities) Summer concerts 26° 9° r' Youth sports programs 8 City-wide special events 32° Before and after school programs 4 1 �'. Senior health&fitness programs 2 6° Youth summer camp programs 17° r'. Cultural events 6° Pre-School programs 26° 3° ° Youth fitness and wellness programs 22° 26°° 26° a,' Senior leisure enrichment classes 24° Adult fitness and wellness programs 3° 6° Martial arts programs 37° a13%Ping pang lessons antl leagues Youth Lire skill and enrichment pragrems 22° 17°Teen programs 17°Tai Chi 9° ° 3Tennis lessons antl leagues S °Visual and pertorming arts programs Badminton lemons and leagues r'. 2 Adult sports programs Lap swim Bike events 0'� 7° 16° 40% . Aqua aerobics 6KFARFLU 57% 9 Culinary programs ' 8I'M NEWM, IMIMIMVZ.V�NEW Other 1 33° 33% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% M100%Meats Needs E375%Meets Needs E360%Meets Needs 025%Meets Needs 00%Meets Needs Source: Leisure Vism/ETC Institute(September 2013) ® pros;,. CHAPTER 2 consulfllo'g �' Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Programs Offered by the City of Temple City Parks and Recreation Department That Are Most Important to Residents Based on the sum of respondents top four choices,the most important program to respondent households is summer concerts twenty-six percent (26%). Other important programs to respondent households include: Adult fitness and wellness programs twenty-six percent (26%), lap swim twenty-six percent (26%), and senior health and fitness programs nineteen percent (19%). Q9. Programs Offered by the City of Temple Parks and Recreation Department That Are Most Important to Respondent Households by percentage of respondents(top four choices) Summer concerts 26% Adult fitness and wellness programs 26% Lap swim 20% Senior health&fitness programs 19% City-wide special events 18% Cultural events 18% Youth sports programs 16% Before and after school programs 16% Aqua aerobics 11% Youth summer camp programs 11% Culinary programs 11% Senior leisure enrichment classes 11% Tal Chi 9% Preschool programs 9% Bike events 9% Adult sports programs 8% Visual and performing arts programs6% Badminton lessons and leagues 6% Youth Life skill and enrichment programs 6% Youth fitness and wellness programs 5% Teen programs 5% Tennis lessons and leagues 5% Ping pong lessons and leagues 46/6 Martial arts programs 4% Other 0% None chosen 122% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Source: Leisure VismmfETC Institute(September 2013) pros-.', CHAPTER 2 consul ting 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Reasons Why Respondents do not Participate in City of Temple City Parks, Recreation Facilities or Programs More Often Thirty-two percent (32%) of respondents state that they are too busy to participate in City of Temple City programs more often. Other reasons why respondents do not participate in programs offered by the City of Temple City Parks and Recreation Department more often include: Desired program or facility is not offered thirty percent (30%), program times are not convenient twenty-eight percent (28%) and respondents do not know what programs are being offered twenty-four percent(24%). Q10. Reasons Why Respondents do not Participate in City of Temple Parks, Recreation Facilities or Programs More Often by percentage of respondents Too busy 32% Desired program or facility not offered 30°/ Program times are not convenient 28% Do not know what is being offered 24% Lack of parking 15% Fees too high 13% Not interested 12% Facilities lack the right equipment 11% Use services from other agencies 9% Too far from our residence 8 Facilities are not well maintained 7% Lack of restrooms 7% Do not know locations of facilities 6% Difficult to navigate the city website 5% Poor customer service 4°/ Class full 3% Registration for programs is difficult 3% Feel unsafe 2% Lack of transportation 2% Other 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Source_ Leisure VisimilETC Lutitult(September�Oli) . pros,, CHAPTER 2 consul ting 91 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Level of Support Residents Give to Improve and Expand Parks and Recreation Facilities Eighty-eight percent (88%) of respondents are either "very supportive", sixty-eight percent (68%), or "somewhat supportive", twenty percent (20%), for the city to improve and expand walking and biking trails. Seventy-four percent (74%) of respondents are either "very supportive", fifty-nine percent (59%) or "somewhat supportive", twenty-five percent (25%), to improve or expand small family picnic areas and shelters. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of respondents are either "very supportive", fifty-four percent (54%), or "somewhat supportive", twenty-five percent(25%),to improve or expand playground equipment. Q11. Level of Support Respondents Give to Improve and Expand Parks and Recreation Facilities by percentage of respondents (excluding"don't know"responses) Walking and biking trails 20% 1 8% Small family picnic areas and shelters 25% 1 10% 6% Playground equipment 25% 1 13% 7% Indoor Rec Center/Gym 30% 1 16% 7% Large group picnic areas and shelters 27% 114% 9 Packet/Small neighborhood parks 290/ 1 147. 1 11% Outdoor pool 26% 1 16% 1 11% Wi-Fi Access in Parks 18% 18% 9% Bike lanes 24% 17% 10% Outdoor tennis mutts 30% 1 21% 1 13% Performing Arts facility 311 1 24% 1 13% Large indoor event meeting room 33% 22% 16% Youth soccer fields 34% 1 24% 1 14% Outdoor badminton courts 30% 1 26% 1 15% Youth baseball and softball fields 28% 1 27% 1 is./. Pet-friendly spaces 23% 1 26% 1 16% Year-round artificial turf sports fields 26% 30% 21 Adult baseball and softball fields W28% 34% 20% Adult soccer fields J!Lym28% 1 36% 20% Disc Golf Course 23% 1 39% Skateboard/BMX parks 22% 1 42% 180/6 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% everySupportive Momewhat Supportive Mot Supportive Not Sure Source: Leisure VisimJBTC Institute(September 2013) Npros,,': CHAPTER 2 consulting -1 i, Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Actions That Are Most Important to Residents Based on the sum of respondent top four choices, the most important action that Temple City Parks and Recreation Department could take is walking and biking trails forty-six percent (46%). Twenty-six percent (26%) of respondents say that WI-FI access in parks is the most important action the City of Temple City could take. Twenty-five percent (25%) of respondents state that and outdoor pool is the most important action to them. Q12. Actions That Are Most Important to Respondent Households by percentage of respondents(based on top four choices) Walking and biking trails 46% Wi-Fl access in parks 26% Outdoor pool 25% Playground equipment 22% Small family picnic areas and shelters 22% Indoor Recreation Center/gymnasium 19% Pocket parks/small neighborhood parks 16% Bike lanes 17% Large group picnic areas and shelters 16% Pet-friendly spaces 16% Outdoor tennis courts 11% Outdoor badminton courts 1100 Youth soccer fields 11% Performing arts facility 6% Youth baseball and softball fields 7% Large indoor social event&meeting room 71/76 Year-round artificial turf sports fields 5% Disc Golf Course 4% Skateboard/BMX parks 4% Adult baseball and softball fields 2% Adult soccer fields. 2% None chosen 16% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% So,vice: Leiaz,e VisioNCTCrnsdune(September'_013) pros,0-:- CHAPTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Ways Residents Learn About the Services That the City of Temple City Parks and Recreation Department Offers The majority of respondents learn about services the City offers through the quarterly magazine (Connect), sixty-eight percent (68%). Thirty-seven percent (37%) of respondents learn about services from friends and neighbors. Thirty-six (36%) percent learn about services through banners. Q13. Ways Respondents Learn About the Services that the City of Temple Parks and Recreation Department Offers by percentage of respondents(excluding"non chosen") Quarterly Magazine(Connect) 68% From friends and neighbors 37% Street Banners 36% Flyers/newsletter 30% City Website 25% Materials at Live Oak Park Community Center 23% Newspaper 21% Promotions at events 11°/ Conversations with staff 7% Emails 6% Chamber of Commerce 6% Online and through social media 5% Facebook 4% Other 3% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Souroe: Leisure Visiun/ETC Institme(September^_0137 Mpros,:' CHAPTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan How Would Residents Allocate the Funds if an Additional $100 Were Available for Temple City Parks, Cultural, Sports and Recreation Facilities Thirty-six percent (36%) of respondents would use the additional funds to improve or provide maintenance to existing parks. Twenty percent (20%) of respondents would support the development of walking and biking trails. Sixteen percent (16%) of respondents would support the acquisition of new park land and open space. Q15. If an Additional $100 Were Available for Temple City Parks, Cultural, Sports and Recreation Facilities, how Would You Allocate the Funds? by percentage of respondents Improvements/maintenance of existing parks etc. 36% Development of walking and biking trails 20% Acquisition of new park land and open space 16% Construction of new sports fields 9% Improve cultural program facilities 60% Develop new cultural program facilities 4% Other 8% Source: Leisure Vi,ioNETC Institute(September 2013) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% pros CHrTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Agreement with Additional Taxes to Fund the Types of Parks and Recreation Improvements Most Important to Their Households Twenty-nine percent (29%) of respondents would vote in favor of the measure. Twenty-nine percent (29%) were not sure if they would vote in favor of the measure or not. Twenty-four percent (24%) stated that they might vote in favor of the measure and sixteen percent (16%) would vote against the measure. Q16. Respondents Agreement with Additional Taxes to Fund the Types of Parks and Recreation Improvements Most Important to Their Households by percentage of respondents Might vote in favor 24% Vote in favor 29% None chosen Not sure 2% 29% Vote against 16% Source Leisure Visiorc ETC Institute(September 2013) • pros-.,,' CHAPTER z consuling 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Support for Charging Non-residents the Full Cost of Programs to Help Fund Low Cost or Free Programs for Low Income Residents Forty-five percent (45%) of respondents would "strongly support" charging non-residents the full cost of programs in order to help fund low cost or free programs to low income residents. Twenty-six percent (26%) of respondents said that they "might support" this measure. Fifteen percent (15%) were "not sure" whether they would or would not support this measure and fifteen percent (15%) of respondents stated that they "would not support' charging non residents the full cost of the program to help affordability to low income residents. 017. Would You Support Charging Non-residents the Full Cost of Programs to Help Fund Low Cost or Free Programs for Low Income Residents? by percentage of respondents Strongly Support 45% None Chosen 2% Might Support Will Not Support 26% 13% Not Sure 15% Seurce: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute(September 2013) pros=,':> CHAPTER2 t consulting STemple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan DEMOGRAPHICS OF RESPONDENTS Q18. Demographics: Ages of People in Household by percentage of(household occupants) Under 5 years 5-9 years 6% 10-14 years 6% 6% 75+years 15-19 years 6% 9% 65-74 years 6% 20-24 years 6% 25-34 years 55.64 years 15% 9% 3544 years 12% 45-54 years 18% mune: Lekore ViooNETC i nAi tit(Scprember 3013) Q19. Demographics: Gender by percentage of respondents Male 45% 41 Female 55% So.e Leisure VinieNETC lru�irute(SeprendRr 3013) Pros CHAPTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Q20. Demographics: Age of Respondents by percentage of respondents 18-29 years 30-39 years 9% 16% Over 70 years 8% 60-69 years 14% 40-49 years 30% 50-59 years 22% Souae: Leisure V'aivnlETC lns[nvta(September 2013) Q21. Demographics: Number of Years Lived in Temple City by percentage of respondents 10 to 14 20% 5 to 9 13o/a Under 5 14% 15 to 24 25% 25+ 29% Source: rxisu®Visbnl TC❑udtute(Septeml:er 2013) prom;;: CHAPTER 2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Q23. Demographics: Household Income by percentage of respondents(without"not provided') $40,000-$69,999 18% Under$40,000 $70,000-$99,999 16% 22% Not provided 10% $100,000-$129,999 $250,000 or more 15% 2% $130,000-$149,999 $200,000-$249,999 6% $150,000-$199,999 3% Soutce: Leisure VisieNEfClmtitute(September20ll) 7% Q24. Demographics: Are You or Members of Your Household of Hispanic or Latino Ancestry? by percentage of respondents(without"not provided") Yes 20% Not Provided 2% No 78010 llIl Source:leisure VisioWETC Institute(September 2013) r . ! pros:It'.;> CHAPTER2 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Q25. Demographics: Race/Ethnicity by percentage of respondents(multiple choices could be made) Asian 59% White Alone 20% Native American 1% Prefer Not to Answer9% Other 13% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Source: Leisure VisioNETC Insr¢ute(September 2013) ®proff' CHAPTER2 consulting 9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER THREE - DEMOGRAPHICS AND TRENDS ANALYSIS The Demographic Analysis provides an understanding of the population within the City of Temple City, California. This analysis is reflective of the total population, and its key characteristics such as age segments, income levels, race, and ethnicity. It is important to note that future projections are all based on historical patterns and unforeseen circumstances during or after the time of the projections could have a significant bearing on the validity of the final projections. 3.1 DEMOGRAPHIC OVERVIEW The total population of Temple City had an increase of approximately 6.5%from 33,377 in 2000 to 35,558 in 2010. The current estimated population for 2012 is 35,806, and it is projected to reach 36,266 in 2017,and total 38,296 by 2027. According to the U.S. Census reports, the total number of households in the City has increased by approximately 2.4%from 11,338 in 2000 to 11,606 in 2010. Temple City is estimated to have 11,646 households in 2012, and is expected to grow to 12,039 households by 2027. The target area's median household income of $57,783 is above state and national averages, while per capita income($24,360) is lower than both averages. Based on the 2010 Census, the population of Temple City is older (42 years) than the median age of the U.S. (37.2 years). Projections show that Temple City will undergo an aging trend,with the 55+group being the only age segment experiencing growth, representing 38% of the total population by 2027. The majority of the estimated 2012 population for Temple City is Asian (55.66%),with the White Alone (33.31%) segment representing the largest minority. From 2000 to 2010,the City's racial composition underwent a large shift, as the Asian population surpassed the White Alone as the majority,growing from 38.89%to 55.69%of the total population. In the same 10-year span,the White Alone group became the largest minority, reducing its representation from 48.73% in 2000 to 33.58% in 2010. The City also has a significant Hispanic/ Latino population, accounting for 19.84% of the 2012 estimate. Future projections show that Temple City will continue to witness a rapid rise among the Asian race, as they grow to represent 69.03% of the total population in 2027, and the White Alone population will be decreased to 20.84% of the total. The Hispanic/ Latino group will remain constant, representing an estimated 20.21% of the population by 2027, METHODOLGY Demographic data used for the analysis was obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau and Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRD, the largest research and development organization dedicated to Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and specializing in population projections and market trends. All data was acquired in December 2013 and reflects actual numbers as reported in the 2000 and 2010 Censuses, and estimates for 2012 and 2017 as obtained by ESRI. Straight line linear regression was utilized for projected 2022 and 2027 ® � pros,; CHAPTER 3 consu(fing 0 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan demographics. The geographic boundary of the City of Temple City was utilized as the demographic analysis boundary shown in the Figure 1 below. —W Nl .,W AY_ � - A' ;4 I Pall nla Rd L pUDY1e Rd .°.r Inl _ W Cimuar.Rrai - �1Ava -- 1 al r.C>em1' -W Norman A,, -- 1 \ m �lN L mOn AVB Q W lYsUria Ave n W L39 r — loris PVe 4 W Longden AVD r � ---tio�t7tlen Ave - Nraleul 1,v„ .n _ Pcseniarlal�r w P�hrz Lv— c \ 4 C � dj _ _ � _ bl h'nodrul9f'U Las Tulms Qf Temo a Qty -a .n oak A Elrn - m c q _ r - 2 fldllu�jl a 2 _ Sl - `aa'y ydita E 8roaiv::y VsJ v. U. Pro Fennenl _ . m v a v 3 c -Crr �VleY^AEJ541 _ 51 -r _ _m T v m C n04 ml `\.P p-5cnu d6 "km:19� - �o� . 6. ...:91 Figure 1-Target Area Boundaries Race and Ethnicity Definitions The minimum categories for data on race and ethnicity for Federal statistics, program administrative reporting, and civil rights compliance reporting are defined as below. The Census 2010 data on race are not directly comparable with data from the 2000 Census and earlier censuses; caution must be used when interpreting changes in the racial composition of the US population over time. The latest (Census 2010) definitions and nomenclature are used within this analysis. • American Indian—This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America),and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment pros-.',0,:, 3> CHAPTER consulting 0 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan • Asian—This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India,Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan,the Philippine Islands,Thailand, and Vietnam • Black—This includes a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa • Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander—This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii,Guam,Samoa,or other Pacific Islands • White—This includes a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe,the Middle East,or North Africa • Hispanic or Latino —This is an ethnic distinction, a subset of a race as defined by the Federal Government; this includes a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, South or Central American,or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race 3.2 CITY OF TEMPLE CITY POPULACE Population Temple City has witnessed gradual growth in recent years. From 2000 to 2010, the City's total population experienced an increase of 6.5% or an annual rate of growth of just over 0.6%. This is below national growth averages which were just over 1%annually. Projecting ahead,the total population of Temple City is expected to grow at a slow pace over the next 15 years. Based on predictions through 2027, the target area is expected to have approximately 38,296 residents living within 12,039 households. See Figure 2. Temple City: Total Population 40,000 35,558 35,806 36,266 35,000 - — - 30,000 - -- — 25,000 - 20,000 ❑Total Population 15,000 — 10,000 5,000 -- — 2000 2010 2012 2017 2022 2027 Census Census Estimate Projection Projection Projection Figure 2-Total Population proms,' CHAPTEB3 consulfing Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Age Segment Evaluating the distribution by age segments,Temple City is somewhat balanced between youth, young adult, family, and senior populations. In 2010, the highest segment by population is the 35-54 age group representing 31%, and the lowest is the 18-34 segment which constitutes 19% of the population. Over time, the overall composition of the population is projected to undergo an aging trend. The Census results from 2000 and 2010 show a slight decrease in the <18 (from 24%to 21.2%), 18-34 (from 20.6% to 19%) and 35-54 (from 31.9% to 31%) segments. In the same 10 year period, the City experienced a large increase in the 55+ (from 23.6% to 28.7%) population. Future projections through 2027 show that each age segment, except the 55+ group, will undergo small, but steady,decreases in size as compared to the population as a whole. The 55+ group is expected to gradually grow to represent approximately 38%of the population by 2027, which will make it the single largest age segment at 36.9%. This is consistent with general national trends where the 55+ age group has been growing as a result of increased life expectancies and the Baby Boomer population entering that age group. See Figure 3. Temple City: Population by Age Segments 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% ■55+ 50% ■35-54 40% ■18-34 30% ■<18 20% 10% 0% 2000 2010 2012 2017 2022 2027 Census Census Estimate ProjectionProjectionProjection Figure 3-Papulation Age by Segments • pros;,: CHAPTER 3 consuffing Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Race and Ethnicity In analyzing race and ethnicity,Temple City is fairly diverse. The 2012 estimate shows that the majority of the population falls into the Asian(55.66%) category, with the White Alone (33.31%) as the largest minority. Those of Hispanic/ Latino descent represent 19.84% of the estimated 2012 population. In the time between Censuses of 2000 and 2010, the City recognized a substantial shift as the White Only category reduced significantly from 48.73%to 33.58%, while the Asian segment became the majority, increasing from 38.89% to 55.69%. Predictions for 2027 expect the Asian population to continue to grow to 69.03%, while the White Alone group will reduce to 20.84%of the total population. The Hispanic/Latino ethnicity will remain steady, representing 20.21%of the projected 2027 population. See Figure 4 and Figure S. Temple City: Population by Race 100% 90% 80% 70% _ ©Two or More Races 60% ®Some Other Race 50% ■Pacific Islander ■Asian 40% ®American Indian 30% ■Black Alone 20% ■White Alone 10% 0% 2000 2010 2012 2017 2022 2027 Census Census Estimate ProjectionProjection Projection Figure 4-Population by Race 100% 90% 80% El All Others 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% ■Hispanic/ Latino Origin 20% (any race) 10% 0% 2000 2010 2027 Figure 5-Hispanic/Latino Population ® pros;:' CHAPTERS consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Households and Income Temple City's income characteristics demonstrate rapid growth trends. The median household income was$48,696 in 2000 and$57,783 in 2012. It is projected to grow to$77,031 by 2027. The median household income represents the earnings of all persons age 16 years or older living together in a housing Temple City:Household Income Characteristics unit. The per capita income, is also $100,000 ■Median projected to increase $90,000 Household from$20,267 in 2000 $80,000 income and$24,360 in 2012 $70;000 — ■Average to$31,210 by 2027 $60,000 Household (Figure 6). This 550,000 Income includes an $40,000 ®Pet Capita adjustment for Income inflation at $30,000 approximately 2.5%. $20,000 $10,000 $ 2000 2012 2017 2022 Census Estimate Projection Projection Figure 6-Household Income Characteristics As seen in Figure 7, Temple City's median household income ($57,783) is above the state ($57,287) and national ($50,502) averages. Per Capita Income ($24,360) is lower than state ($27,859) and national ($26,708) averages. Future predictions expect that both Median Household Income and Per Capita income for the area will increase to $77,031 and $31,210, respectively, by 2027. A low per capita income and a high household income Temple City:Comparative Income Characteristics indicates that there are a higher $70,000 number of individuals living together though they may be individually earning $60,000 less. This could result in lower levels of disposable income and a higher $50,000 preference for activities that have ■Temple City multi-generational appeal as well as $40,000 that demonstrate good value for ■California money, $30,000 $20,000 ■U.S.A. $10,000 $_ Median Per Capita Household Income Income Figure 7-Comparative Income Characteristics pros CHAPTER 3 t Consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 3.3 TRENDS ANALYSIS Information released by Sports & Fitness Industry Association's (SFIA) 2012 study of Sports, Fitness, and Leisure Participation reveals that the most popular sport and recreational activities include, walking, bowling,treadmill, running/jogging,free weights and bicycling. Most of these activities appeal to both young and old alike, can be done in most environments,can be enjoyed regardless of level of skill, and have minimal economic barriers to entry. These popular activities also have appeal because of the social aspect. For example, although fitness activities are mainly self-directed, people enjoy walking and biking with other individuals because it can offer a degree of camaraderie. Walking has remained the most popular activity of the past decade by a large margin. Walking participation during the last year data was available(2011), reported over 112 million Americans had walked at least once. From a traditional team sport standpoint, basketball ranks highest among all sports, with more than 24 million people reportedly participating in 2011. Team sports that experienced significant growth in participation are lacrosse, rugby, ultimate Frisbee, gymnastics, ice hockey, and beach volleyball—all of which have experienced double digit growth over the last five years. Most recently, gymnastics, ultimate Frisbee and lacrosse were the only team sports that underwent growth from 2010 to 2011. Ultimately, the greatest growth of participation in recreational activities has occurred in activities that have low barriers to entry, can be undertaken within close proximity to home,and can be completed in a limited amount of time. The Sports& Fitness Industry Association (SFIA)Sports, Fitness & Recreational Activities Topline Participation Report 2012 was utilized to evaluate national sport and fitness participatory trends. SFIA is the number one source for sport and fitness research. The study is based on online interviews carried out in January and February 2012 from more than 38,000 individuals and households. NOTE: In 2012,the Sports& Fitness Industry Association (SFIA) came into existence after a two- year strategic review and planning process with a refined mission statement-- "To Promote Sports and Fitness Participation and Industry Vitality". The SFIA was formerly known as the Sporting Goods Manufacturers Association (SGMA). National Trends Analysis Basketball, a game originating in the U.S., is actually the most participated in sport among the traditional "bat and ball' sports with more than 24 million estimated participants. This popularity can be attributed to the ability to compete with relatively small number of participants, the limited amount of equipment needed to participate, and the limited space requirements necessary—the last of which make basketball the only traditional sport that can be played at the majority of American dwellings as a drive-way pickup game. As seen in Figure 8, since 2007, lacrosse and other niche sports like rugby have seen strong growth. Based on survey findings, lacrosse is experiencing continued growth over the last five years (41.9%). From 2007-2011 Rugby has grown 37.8% overall, but it did see a decrease from 2010-2011 of 9.2%. Other sports with notable growth in participation over the last five years ti pros;,:- CHAPTER3 consulting .� Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan were Ultimate Frisbee (20.6%), gymnastics (18.6%), ice hockey (15.8%) and beach volleyball (14.8%). From 2010 to 2011, the only team sports that underwent growth were gymnastics (9.2%), ultimate Frisbee(6.5%)and lacrosse (5.5%). National Participatory Trends; by Activity-Gene ml Sports 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Change Change Change Change 110.11 109-11 108-11 '07-11 Baseball 16,058 15,539 14,429 14,198 13,561 -4.5% -6.0% -12.7% -15.5% Basketball 25,961 26,108 25,131 25,156 24,790 -1.5% -1.4% -5.0% -4.5% Cheerleading 3,279 3,192 3,070 3,134 3,049 -2.7% -0.7% -4.5% -7.0•1A Football,Flag N/A 7,310 6,932 6,660 6,325 -5.0% -8.8% -13.5% N/A Football,Tackle 7,939 7,816 7,243 6,850 6,448 -5.9% -11.0% -17.5% -18.8% Football,Touch N/A 10,493 9,726 8,663 7,684 -11.3% -21.0% N/A Gymnastics 4,066 3,975 3,952 4,418 4,824 a Ice Hockey 1,840 1,871 2,018 2,140 2,131 -0.4% Lacrosse 1,058 1,092 1,162 1,423 1,5014,611Racquetball 4,229 4,6 4,784 4,603 4,357 -5.3% -8.9% -5.5% Rugby 617 654 720 940 850 -9.63, Socce r(I nd nor) 4,237 4,487 4,825 4,920 4,631 -5.9% -4.0% SocceriOutdoor) 13,708 13,996 13,957 13,883 13,667 -1.6% -2.1% -2.4% -0.3% Softball(Fast Pitch) 2,345 2,331 2,476 2,513 2,400 -4.5% -3.1% Softball(Slow Pitch) 9,485 9,660 9,180 8,477 7,809 -7.9% -14.9% -19.2% -17-75/D Tennis 16,940 1 17,749 18,546 1 18,719 1 17,772 -5.1% -4.25. Track and Field 4,691 4,604 4,480 4,383 4,341 -1.0% -3.1% -5.7% -7.5% Ultimate Frisbee 4,038 4,459 4,636 4,571 4,868 Volleyball(Court) 6,986 7,588 7,737 7,315 6,662 -8.9% -13.9% -12.2% -4.6% Volleyball(sand/Beach) 3,878 4,025 4,324 1 4,752 4,451 -6.3% IS% 10k%. 148% NOTE:Participation figures are in 000'sforthe US population ages 6 and over Legend; Mode,a,e oe�rea.e (ovc co-zsysl Traditional youth "powerhouse' sports, including outdoor soccer and baseball, have both experienced declines in participation over the study period; however, the sheer number of participants (13.7 million and 13.6 million, respectively) demands the continued support of these sports. The growth in youth team sports is now being driven by America's 13 and 14 year olds,these are the peak ages of sports participation for children. Nearly 70%of children (age 6-17) in the U.S. are playing team sports and three out of four teenagers are now playing at least one team sport according to the SGMA annual participation study on team sports - U. S. Trends in Team Sports (2011 edition). According to the SFIA, only three team sports have had moderate increases in participation since 2010.They are Gymnastics (up 9.2%), Ultimate Frisbee (up 6.5%), and Lacrosse (up 5.5%). Four traditionally mainstream team sports experienced single-digit declines in overall participation across the United States: Tackle Football (down 5.9%), Baseball (down 4.5%), Outdoor Soccer(up 2.8%),and Basketball (down 1.5%). proms;: CHAPTERS consu(t'ing Figure 8-National Sports Participatory Trends STemple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Aquatic Activity Swimming is unquestionably a lifetime sport. Participation rates in swimming have remained steady over the years, although as with most recreational activities, participatory rates have dipped slightly. However, recreational swimming is the absolute leader in multigenerational appeal with nearly 17 million estimated participants per year(Figure 9). National Participatory Trends; 2000 2007 2008 2009 2010 Change Change Change Change by Activity '0310 108-10 '07-10 100-10 Aquatic Exercise 9,303 9,757 9,267 8,662 9,231 -0.4% -5.4% -0:$% Swi rami ng(Fitness/Competit!on) 16,144 18,368 19,041 17,443 17,145 -1.7% NOTE:Participation figures are in 000's for the U5 population ages 6 and over Legend: nrodera<e Decrease {oxro-zsssi Figure 9-Aquatic Participatory Trends Aquatic exercise has paved the way for a less stressful form of physical activity, allowing similar gains and benefits to land based exercise, including aerobic fitness, resistance training, flexibility, and better balance. Doctors have begun recommending aquatic exercise for injury rehabilitation, mature patients, and patients with bone or joint problems due to the significant reduction of stress placed on weight-bearing joints, bones, muscles, and also the affect that the pressure of the water assists in reducing swelling of injuries. proms, CHAPTER 3 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan National trends in general fitness National participatory trends in general fitness have experienced strong growth in recent years. Many of these activities have become popular due to an increased interest among people to improve their health by engaging in an active lifestyle. These activities have very few barriers to entry, which provides a variety of activities that are relatively inexpensive to participate in and can be performed by nearly anyone with no time restrictions. The most popular fitness activity by far is fitness walking, which had over 112 million participants in 2011. Other leading fitness activities based on number of participants include treadmill (over 53 million participants), running/jogging (over 50 million participants), and hand free weights (nearly 47 million participants). From 2007-2011, the activities that are growing most rapidly are high impact aerobics (increased by 39.6%), group stationary cycling (increased 38.4%), and the elliptical motion trainer(increased 26.1%). Yoga, running/jogging,step aerobics, and low impact aerobics have also seen significant growth in recent years. See Figure 10. National Participatory Trends; % % % 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Change Change Change Change by Activity-Gene ral Fitness '10-11 '09-11 '08-11 '07-11 Aerobics(High lm act) 11,287 11,780 12,771 14,567 15,755 8.2% Aerobics(Low Impact) 22,397 23,283 24,927 26,431 25,950 -1.8% Aerobics(Step) 8,528 9,423 10,551 11,034 10,273 -6.9% -26% Elliptical Motion Trainer 23,586 24,435 25,903 27,319 29,734 8-8% 14.80 Fitness Walking 108,740 110,204 110,882 112,082 112,715 0.6% 17% -2.8% 37le Free Weights(Barbells) 25,499 25,821 26,595 27,194 27,056 -0.5% 1.7% 4.8% 6.1% Free Weights(Dumbells) 32,371 33,381 35,068 36,565 36,470 -0.3% 4.0% 9.3% 1266% Free Weights(Hand Weights) 1500'73 43,409 44,466 45,928 46,944 2.2% S. SAY, Pi lates Training 9,039 8;770 8,404 8,507 -3.0% -5.9% Running/Jogging41,097 42,511 46,650 50,061 21.9% Stair Climbing,Machine 13,863 13,653 13,269 13,409 -1.8% -3.3% Stationary Cycling(Group) 6,504 6,762 7,854 8,738 _ Stationary Cycling(Recumbent) 11,104 11,299 11,459 11,933 Stationary Cycling(Upright) 24,918 24,916 24,578 24,409 Tai Chi 3,424 3,315 3,193 2,975 Treadmill 49,722 50,395 52,275 53,260 6.4% Weight/Resistant Machines 39,290 38,844 1 39,075 39,185 39,548 ID(6fi% Yoga N/A 17,758 1 18,934 20,998 22,107 N/A NOTE:Participation figures are in 000's forthe US opulation ages 6 and over Legend: mnderaee oeaaasz (o%m-ss%) Figure 10-General Fitness National Participatory Trends pros;,,: CHAPTER3 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan National Trends in General Recreation Results from the SFIXs Topline Participation Report demonstrate increased popularity among Americans in numerous general recreation activities. Much like the general fitness activities, these activities encourage an active lifestyle, can be performed individually or with a group, and is not limited by time restraints. The most popular activities in the general recreation category include road bicycling (nearly 40 million participants), freshwater fishing (nearly 39 million participants), day hiking (over 33 million participants), and golf (over 25 million participants). From 2007-2011, general recreation activities that have seen the most rapid growth are adventure racing (increased by 72.21%), recreational kayaking (increased by 44.91%), white water kayaking (increased by 40.35%), and trail running (increased by 27:44%). In-line roller skating and skateboarding have seen a substantial drop in participation, decreasing by 31.1% and 25.04%respectively from 2007-2011. See Figure 11. National ParticipatoryTrends; % % % % 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Change Change Change by National ty-Geneml Recreation Change 10-11 '09-11 108-11 Adventure Racing 698 809 1,005 1,214 1,202 -0.99% }, Anchery 5,950 6,180 6,368 6,323 6,471 2.34% 1. Bicycling(Mountain) 6,892 7,242 7,367 7,152 6,989 -228% -5.13% -3.49% Bicyding(Rdad) 38,940 38,527 39,127 39,730 39,834 026% 1.81% 3.397r Bicycling-BW 1,887 1,896 1,858 2,090 1,958 -6.32% 5.38% 3.27% Canoeing 9,797 9,866 9,997 10,306 10,170 -1.32% 173% 3.08% 7-7.616Y. Climbing(Spart/Indoor/Boulder) 4,514 4,642 4,541 4542 4,445 -2.14% -2.11% -4.24%Climbing(Taditional/Ice/Mountaineering) 2,062 2,175 2,062 2,01] 1,904 -5.60% -7.66% -12.46% Fishing(Fly) 5,756 1 5,849 5,755 1 5,523 5,581 1.05% 1 -3.02% 1 -4.58% -3.04% Fishing(Freshwater) 43,859 42,095 40,646 39,911 38,864 -2.62% -4.38% -7.68% -11.39% Fishing(Saltwater) 14,437 14,121 13,054 12,056 11,896 -1.33% -8.87% -15.76% -17.60% Gulf 29,528 28,571 27,103 25,M 25,682 -1.68% -5.24% -10.11% -13.02% Hiking(Wy) 29,965 31,238 32,542 32,534 33,494 Horseback Riding 121098 11,457 10,286 9,782 9,335 -4.57% -9.25% -18.52% -22.84% Kayaking(Recreational) 5,0M 5,655 6,226 6,339 7,347 Kayaking(White Water) 1,207 1,225 1,306 1'eR6 1,694 -5i. Roller Skating,ln-Line 10,814 10,211 8,942 1 1 7,451 -8.33% -15.67% Sailing 3,786 4,006 4,281 4,106 3,797 7.53% -11.37% -5.22% Skateboarding 8,429 8'ns 7,580 7,080 fi,318 -10.76% -16.65% -22.17% Tail Running 4,216 4,537 4,845 4,985 5,373 1.38 WM%. 18.43%. Wakeboarding 3,521 3,532 3,561 3,611 3,517 -2.60% -124% -0.42% -0.11% Water Skiing. 5,918 1 5,756 5,228 4,849 4,626 -0.60% 1-UM% -19.63% -21.83% NOTE:Participation figures are In 000's for the US population ages 6 and over Mga(O%teneorea:e Legend: omm asxi Figure 11-General Recreation National Participatory Trends Local Sport and Market Potential The following charts show sport and leisure market potential data from ESRI. A Market Potential Data (MPI) measures the probable demand for a product or service in Temple City. The MPI shows the likelihood that an adult resident of the target area will participate in certain activities when compared to the US National average, The National average is 100, therefore numbers below 100 would represent a lower than average participation rate, and numbers above 100 would represent higher than average participation rate. The City is compared to the national average in four (4) categories — general sports by activity, fitness by activity, outdoor activity, and money spent on miscellaneous recreation. Temple City shows higher than average market potential for participation in tennis and yoga especially and is also high for general recreation spending. pros;,: CHAPTER 3 consulting (9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan As seen in the tables below, the following sport and leisure trends are most prevalent for residents within Temple City. Cells highlighted in yellow indicate the top three scoring activities based on the purchasing preferences of residents. General Sports Market Potential Participatory Trends;by Activity- Temple City(MPI) General Sports Participated in Baseball 83 Participated in Basketball 86 Participated in Football 51 Participated in Golf 73 Participated in Soccer 86 Participated in Softball 75 Participated in Tennis 115 Participated in Volleyball 67 Fitness Market Potential Participatory Trends;byActivity- Temple City(MPI) Fitness Participated in Aerobics 73 Jogging/Running 87 Participated in Pilates 85 Participated in Swimming 66 Participated in Walking for Exercise 89 Participated in Weight Lifting 77 Participated in Yoga 143 Outdoor Activity Market Potential Participatory Trends;by Activity- Temple City(MPI) Outdoor Activity Participated in Archery 105 Participated in Backpacking/Hiking 87 Participated in Bicycling(mountain) 70 Participated in Bicycling(road) 71 Participated in Canoeing/Kayaking SO Participated in Fishing(salt water) 75 Participated in Horseback Riding 93 pros;.7- CH"TER3 WI consul ting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Money Spent on miscellaneous recreation Participatory Trends;by Activity-Money Spent on Temple City(MPI) Miscellaneous Recreation Spent on High End Sports/Recreation Equipment<$250 49 Spent on High End Sports/Recreation Equipment>$250 44 Attend sports event:baseball game 101 Attend sports event:basketball game (college) 82 Attend sports event:basketball game (pro) 118 Attend sports event:football game(college) 62 Attend sports event:football-Monday night game (pro) 113 Attend sports event:football-weekend game (pro) 123 Attend sports event:golf tournament 103 Attend sports event:ice hockey game 104 Attend sports event:soccer game 123 Visited a theme park in last 12 months 132 Visited Disney World (FE)/12 mo:Magic Kingdom 114 Visited any Sea World in last 12 months 132 Visited any Six Flags in last 12 months 133 Went to zoo in last 12 months 71 pros,> 3 CIIAPTER consulting (a Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER FOUR - RECREATION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT 4.1 RECREATION PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PROS Consulting conducted an assessment of the Temple City Parks and Recreation Department's program offerings and other special events. The aim of the assessment is to identify core program areas, gaps and overlaps in services as well as system-wide issues such as customer feedback, performance measures and marketing that is vital to the success of the Department's program growth. The consulting team based their findings on information derived from: • Discussions with staff members • Program assessment forms • Community inputfrom focus groups and public workshops • Website review The City Parks and Recreation staff selected the core programs /facilities to be evaluated and entered the data into the program assessment matrix provided by PROS. The following are the areas chosen for evaluation based on staff and consultant team input. The program areas evaluated as a part of this assessment are: • Youth Sports • Senior Programs • STARS Club • Fee&Charge Class Program • Volunteers Program y i1 • Lights on Temple City ' • Summer Concert Series =r:: pros-.',z- CHAPTER 4 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 4.2 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT AND OVERVIEW • There exists very good diversity in types of program offerings • Special events are a great strength and much appreciated by the community • Program lifecycles are imbalanced in their lifecycles ✓ Few programs in the Introduction Stage (5%), which indicates that the innovation pipeline may be limited ✓ Over 60% programs in the Mature, Saturated or Decline stage which means programs are limited by space or not aligned with community needs • Age segments served by existing programming are not aligned with community demographics ✓ 48% programs targeting population under 18 which comprises only 20% of the population; Only 24%programs for those 45+in age • Variety of program promotions mechanisms are utilized by the staff which is a good practice 4.3 SUMMARY PROGRAM RECOMMENDATIONS • Create a core program area—Fitness and Wellness that targets all ages • Rebalance offerings to increase those in Introduction stage to at least 10% of program offerings while reducing programs in Decline and Saturated Stage • Increase focus on customer feedback using a wide variety of sources (online surveys, lost customer surveys, caught-in-the-act surveys etc.) • To enhance marketing and communications efforts,add a smart-phone website and also an app, if possible • Undertake additional multi-lingual marketing through English and foreign-language social media • Add Wi-Fi at the parks and facilities • Continue expanding volunteer support through online platforms such as www.volu nteermatch.ort pros:' CHAPTER 4 consulfing Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 4.4 LIFECYCLE ANALYSIS The program assessment included a lifecycle analysis completed by staff members. The listing of programs is included in the chart on the following page. This assessment was not based on quantitative data, but based on staff's knowledge of their program areas. These lifecycles can, and often do,change from year to year or over time depending on how the programs fare. The following list shows the percentage distribution of the various lifecycle categories of the Department's recreation programs: • Introduction stage(New program; modest participation) =5% • Take off stage(Rapid participation growth)= 12% • Growth stage(Moderate, but consistent participation growth)=21% • Mature stage(Slow participation growth)=40% • Saturation stage(Minimal to no participation growth;extreme competition)= 11% • Decline stage(Declining participation)=11% These percentages were obtained by comparing the number of programs listed in each individual stage with the total number of programs listed in the program worksheets. The PROS team recognizes that while there is no statistically sound method for obtaining the percentage breakout of all programs by lifecycle stages, the overall pattern and trends are apparent in the Program Lifecycle table. The lifecycles depict areas of opportunity. Over 60% of the programs (40% Mature, 11% Saturated, and 11%Decline stage) have slow or minimal participation growth which is an area of opportunity. It is understood that five percent of programs (5%) in the introduction stage indicate a limited opportunity for innovation which is an area for focus. Recommendations The PROS team recommends that the City Recreation staff track program lifecycles on an annual basis to ensure there are a decreasing number of programs in the Mature to Decline stage while ensuring an increased number of programs in the Introduction stage. It is recommended that programs from Mature to Decline should be 40%or less of the total program mix. It is recommended that the recreation team implement an annual program innovation audit to identify programs that are stagnating or slowing down. The assessment may identify whether those programs should continue in their current state or be repositioned in order to further drive participation. A performance metric can be established to have at least 10% of programs annually in the introduction stage and less than 10%of all programs in the Saturated to Decline stage. The City could also conduct a regional program and partnership innovation summit with the neighboring agencies or stakeholders. The objective would be to identify new and upcoming program trends, avoid program duplication and partner together in order to maximize the available space. pros;,:' CHAPTER 4 consulting el Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Stage in Program JfidWle Introduction Take-DH Growth Mature Saturated Dedine lam to Hardball Concert Series Lights on TC Senior Lunch STARS drip Sevier Wanness Series Jr.Hgh Flag Football Senior&ercise Senior Special&ant, Co'rinter Adventures for Jr-Jilsu&front Adi Sign Ups AIIA es Jr.Hgh Voneyball Adi Jaza/fap Teen Sign Ups Senior Support Services Chldrehs Widest Theater Little Knickers Ju-JXsu Bance CompolYllon Style Little stars Senior Health Screenings Ukulele Lessons Gymnastics B Tranpolme Hip-lbp Bance Toy Tots Senior Tax Services Nippon Kenpo Karen, Nool gym Jazz Bricks 4 Ni Card dubs Hag Feel T-Ball Link Rcasso COIYputers for Seniors- Senior&cursions for Conputers for Seniors- MandarinlCantonese Adi Translators Debate and[Bible Ballet&Tap Bance Speaking 50+Stronger Baader Core Lina Dance Ridess Kids Music M cation 45+Cardio Lance and Strength Training Basketball Total Yoga Beal Stress and Tone Kickboxing Cardio Dance Challen Senior Final Seating to the Oldies Sim&Toro Renal Resistance Bard Tramin Suo-Nbod Yoga Group Inere Lessons Rano.Rano Hal Kos In to Kitchen Tsai Tennis Academy Soccer 5% 12% 21% 40% 11% 11% but Ni program;modest Rapid pa rtici ration Moderate, 5ldw participation Minimal to no participation growth sistent growth partlcipatlon growth; Declining participation articl ation groMh exVeme competition pros:; CHAPTER 4 consul ting (9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 4.5 AGE SEGMENT DISTRIBUTION In addition to the lifecycle analysis,staff also assessed age segment distribution of programs. The demographics is heavily skewed towards an aging population with G ' currently 40% made up of those who are 34 years and younger. Based on the ; program list provided by the staff, 59%of x all programming is geared towards ages 24 and below even though that age segment comprises a much small percentage of Temple City's population demographics. It is typical nation-wide for agencies to focus heavily on youth and families while often under serving active / adults,seniors and the middle-aged. The Department does have programs for the 55+ population as well but as the population ages it would be appropriate for the staff to view the age segment distributions on an annual basis to ensure continued rebalancing among skewed categories. Also, if possible, given the differences in how the active adults (55+) participate in recreation programs, the trend is moving toward having at least two different segments of older adults. The Department could evaluate further splitting program offerings into 55-74 and 75 plus program segments. 4.6 CORE PROGRAMS The PROS team believes in the importance of identifying core programs based on current and future needs and prioritizing resource allocation to meet those needs. This assists in creating a sense of focus around specific program areas of greatest importance to the community. It does not mean that non-core programs are not important—it simply allows the City and the staff to establish priorities. Programs are categorized as core programs if they meet a majority of the following categories: • The program has been provided for a long period of time(over 4-5 years). • Offered 3-4 sessions per year. • Wide demographic appeal. • Includes 5%or more of recreation budget. • Includes a tiered level of skill development. • Requires full-time staff to manage the program. • Has strong social value. • High level of customer interface exists. • High partnering capability. • Facilities are designed to support the program. pros,," CHAPTER 4 consulting (9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Existing Core Programs • Youth Sports • Senior Programs • STARS Club • Fee&Charge Class Program • Volunteers Program • Lights on Temple City Special Event IFNPLEC/I1'PAKI"S!RECRFAI/ON • Summer Concert Series Recommended Core Program Based on nationwide trends and the community input feedback received, PROS recommends introducing a new core program area focused on Fitness and Wellness. This would include youth fitness and wellness programs as well as adult fitness and wellness programs. Types of programs may already be included in the overall Fee and Charge Class Program but it would be important to create a separate area to manage and promote them effectively. 4.7 MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS This section reviews the Department's marketing and promotions as gleaned from the program worksheets and discussions with staff as well as the survey responses. As can be seen in the survey response, respondents chose "I don't know what is being offered" as one of the top 5 biggest reasons preventing them from using parks, recreation and cultural offerings more often. This clearly indicates that marketing and promotions are is an area of improvement and one Q10. Reasons Why Respondents do not Participate in City of Temple Parks, Recreation Facilities or Programs More Often by percentage of resporemme Too busy 32% Desired program or facility not offered 30% Program flame are not convenient 28% Do not know what is being offered 24% Lack of parking 15% Fees loo high 13% Not interested 12% Facilities lack the right equipment 11% Use services from other agencies 9% Too far from our residence 8% Facilities are not well maintained 7/0 Lack of restrcoms Do not know locations of facilities 6% D'dficull to navigate the city website 6% Poor customer service 4% Class full 3% Registration for programs is difficult 3% I Feel unsafe 2% l Lack of transportation %% Other 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Su—e; 1,e,eVisibaluc].sfihre(sepremher2e137 proms;.=' CHAPTER 4 consulting 9 a, Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan that will have a significant impact on increasing participation and consequently revenue for the Department. Given the limited marketing dollars available, it would be helpful for the Department to undertake a marketing return on investment (ROI) assessment to evaluate the effectiveness of the marketing mediums undertaken and tailor future marketing spending to focus on the most effective mediums. This could be done by ensuring every registrant and as many on-site users as possible are asked 'How did you hear about usT Tying the participant responses to marketing mediums would allow for a better understanding of marketing spending and enable greater effectiveness of existing ones while eliminating non-effective mediums. Additionally, cross promoting at Special Events such as Concerts in the Park etc. would help the Department take advantage of the presence of a large existing audience in the special event environment to promote its other offerings and programs. The use of Web 2.0 technology could be increased beyond Facebook,Twitter and Nixle to other mediums such as Instagram, Pinterest and YouTube as well. • Allowing controlled 'user generated content' by encouraging users to send in their pictures from the Department or the City's special events or programs • Introducing Facebook-only promotions to drive greater visitation to Facebook 4.8 WEBSITE / ONLINE MEDIUMS The Temple City Parks and Recreation Department website (as shown below) presents a clean look on the Home Page. The Contact Us info is visibly listed which is a very user-friendly practice. The site's home page boxes make it easier for access various sections including youth sports, volunteer opportunities, special events etc. However, the images are not visually appealing and often small in size. The Department's commitment to diversity and the reflection of the diverse audience base they serve should be reflected through the images as well. It is good to see the direct website link to RecConnect thus making it easy to find the desired program offerings and register. It would be good to provide an easily accessible link to the Parks and Open Space Master Plan as well once it is completed. Leveraging the website to obtain customer feedback for programs; parks and facilities and customer service through online surveys would be another useful option. Any opportunities to utilize multi-lingual channels or provide a linkto Google Translate that can allow users to translate the page into a language of their choice would be helpful for Temple City's multilingual audience. From a navigational standpoint, the tool bar on the left panel continues to show various City Departments versus Parks and Recreation Department sections. It would be useful to provide individual sections of the program guide in PDF to view and download, thus making it easier for the users to access pertinent information as required. Overall, the site is designed for information and not inspiration and the Department must evaluate updating the site to make it more of a marketing tool or create a separate stand-alone website that could be linked to the City website. r, PFOB; CHAPTER 4 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CC or Hone alCamel(ins xome Parks and Rvueation Department _ �maa ua cry ea meniumduamne.wp.m.mrsa nerau.ca:amrz.a.wpama Na.m.mN..p,.I........m,aasam ane Wa.mpma. mm Tnepamaaaaa.aam.oaW�.mm.,m,a,cu.em W�Nm.rWbx,.w,manan xe.Amme pa.nrnr....alemra^a pRea..mxx,a�.aes..o�w..a.a Ciry Manager wsaee(v ywuaneaeuln.Inb,mmmmeM1eamemairvrtrwa.wNd—AndAo co—r, vmpma.egeclry'swwme u,,redddrd�kalmmbdenea dM AAdoe"dooere.a mmmonlN4 r .nalhW.Npmpa—vend bax,ra.epuWM M.ianetlfrtee SNhwese¢t Ory FVunleY deal ON, Ory CIeM tru'u' eneep.nmmralnapeare.a.amaldnrmuencimes:tuwm� Foirdlft,..orvizsa �NadaT«..q.ciryaa.t Fa.illH xa.rs: B em- pm Com.ddv nde FarfurNer inhrmaeen disk below: kmpy ➢Iers n9Om axb ,d"d ur. �nk an /.wNW elnlmmetlean aP tlrltlu Spec.Prye As. ...Tmd.d, ryory SpoN Ivnke.opW,wn� uve once. ran Wond.do.amlmmation Oak York Anne.(T bn.) wm¢ ryHodrurs aedr ttl on,Cv 9 ]Pm Pub. Safety PV Pore m10Wm0ae°' eddue—No4m. MW Stltri Pe. w Gmm Aaadisi- 4.9 CUSTOMER FEEDBACK Customer service is at the root of the success of any organization. A true community-service organization prides itself on identifying its customers' preferences and acting in accordance to help fulfill their needs. In orderto do this, an ongoing and system-wide feedback mechanism is of vital importance. trau[oa5ananm parvRalpumatgidr, Le[CuiNn 4sAnelly Nitl Onrne"""[Mnpa, ko,ortslle Cuvdls.aY.mMamim,oa. irk m.arva p.aua sr.ov, wmmr sprm .s [orn xa..e,a , ome,:almw SurvM Survry and WUPoo Cur,erl Aem=end Ad rent Rerommena Current le[omrz.°1a Cnef Aevomrrcntl[ur,ml AxmeM Crv,m:Pcommend(ment Peommena Current Rxommmtl C,eene Pemmrand [t,m[ onuummend Cuaent A¢ommm CyM1keniC W N/A W NIA No N/A No N/A Na N/A W WA Na N/A No N/A W N/A W N/A No N/A Serio,p,og,ams W Add W Atn Candrue No btl Ma . Add N. Add No Add No Ada W Oda No M1/A summer Iran series W WA It mmmae uo N/A No N/A No WA No WA W N/A No Ada res c.mmue w N/A No WA sraAs Orb No N)A Noma ve: Commee re: C.nmue - Corrine W µA No Ada A. .Wa No N/A W N/A No v/A vulumeOs No N/A N@ No '/A xo WA No NIA xo N/A No u/A No IJIA No N/A No W,tae It 6erdhoemZa : No Aad Ada re. mNo Aaa No Ma xp Aaa W Asa No Add W A No Add No WA u r.m io^Nr Nu N/A No N/A W — No WA W N/A No WA No Aaa Ne N/A W Aaa xo N/A M1'. WA Currently, the Department does not have a system-wide approach but rather a program-based approach towards garnering customer feedback. As seen in the table above, there is a limited opportunity for on-going customer feedback that is provided to the users. Maximizing the use of the website, utilizing online survey tools such as www.surveymonkey.com and incorporating pre-program feedback system-wide are recommended tactics for the Department staff to implement. Lost customer surveys (for past participants)would be a useful addition to identify true needs or causes of attrition,where applicable. None of these methods are cost-intensive, besides the staff time to implement it. In order to supplement staff time, it may be useful to tap into the volunteer force as well. pros CHAPTER 4 consulting � ' Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan At the start of each season the Department should continue to conduct an "Open House" to allow current and potential users to preview the upcoming program offerings and also suggest the types of programs they would be most interested in. This provides a constant input mechanism for programming ideas and ensures that offerings are truly serving the community needs. Additionally, users are more likely to participate in programs that they have had a chance in which to provide input. As the resources permit, it would be beneficial for Temple City Parks and Recreation Department to capture customer feedback data and develop a database that can be used over the years to track trends and changes. Feedback obtained must be communicated between the staff and users to ensure an open and transparent process to assist the Department in improving as a team without focusing on individual blame. 4.10 SERVICE CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION The service classification matrix below was developed as a guide for Department staff to follow when classifying services and for how that program needs to be managed with regard to cost recovery. By establishing clarification of what constitutes a "Core Essential Public Service', "Important Public Service", and "Value Added Service" will provide the Department and its stakeholders a better understanding of why and how to manage each program area as it applies to public value and private value. Additionally, the effectiveness of the criteria linked to performance management expectations relies on the true cost of programs (direct and indirect cost) being identified. Where a program falls within this matrix can help to determine the most appropriate cost recovery rate that should be pursued and measured. This includes being able to determine what level of public benefit and private benefit exists as they apply to each program area. Public benefit is described as, "everyone receives the same level of benefit with equal access". Private benefit is described as, "the user receives exclusive benefit above what a general taxpayer receives for their personal benefit'. Lights on Txi l.Qty Senior wellness Serle GTARG pub AMrnlna Gare STAR sub Rogrerra Special Even a Youth Sports-L.H,h Ape Group VolunRer Support for 0 pwr xnl Saff Support Services Youth Sports-Fele Specific YouN Sports H IN Screenings Tax Sery Grtl pubs Senior&curslans Summer Gonaert Series STARS Andem Tutoring � • promsHA ,' CHAPTER 4 ® consulting *W1., M . Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 4.11 SERVICE CATEGORIES AND LEVELS OF PUBLIC BENEFIT Core Essential Public Services (Public Services) The cost for providing mission-aligned services is solely or largely supported by tax revenue. Public services offer all users the same level of opportunity to access the service. The level of benefit is the same to all users. • Core Essential Public Service Example: ✓ Open public access to use a park, playground,trail or non-reservable picnic area or park space Important Public Services (Merit Services) Services identified as important and help support the organization's mission. The user receives a higher level of benefit (such as instruction or an organized staff-directed program) than the general taxpayer; and yet the taxpayer benefits as a whole because the service provides a more livable community and the service has a good public benefit as well. Pricing for these services could include partial overhead pricing or variable cost pricing. Partial overhead pricing recovers all direct operating costs and/or a portion of fixed indirect costs. The portion of fixed costs not recovered by price represents the tax subsidy. • Important Public Service Examples: ✓ After-school youth programs, and activities and events that promote healthy nature-based outdoor lifestyles Value Added Services (Privates) Includes services that only users or visitors benefit. Pricing of private services should recover all direct and indirect costs associated with the service. • Value-Added Service Examples: ✓ Rental space for events, parties and special use permit events, food concessions,and exclusive use of park amenities pros-.,, -cCHAPTER 4 consuling Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER FIVE - PARK AND FACILITY ASSESSMENT 5.1 TEMPLE CITY PARK AND OPEN SPACE ASSESSMENT A complete and current inventory and assessment of all City used and/or managed public and private parks, facilities and trails was conducted. The plan recognizes alternative providers (i.e. schools, other governmental agencies, for-profit and not-for-profit organizations, etc.) and facilities.The inventory denotes the site location, names, unique facilities as well as the specific components (i.e. ball fields, playgrounds, play courts,etc)for all properties identified. City Parks • Live Oak Park and Community Center • Temple City Park Public Schools • Temple City High School • Oak Ave Intermediate School • Longden Elementary School • Cloverly Elementary School • La Rosa Elementary School • Cleminson Elementary School • Emperor Elementary Private Schools &Churches • Pacific Friends School • St.Luke Elementary School • Golden West Baptist Church • First Lutheran Church &School Parks Outside City Limits • Rosemead Park • Baldwin Stocker Park • Rio Vista Park • Tanner Park • Pioneer Park • Fletcher Park • Santa Anita Park • Tierra Verde Park • Camino Grove Park • Arcadia County Park pros;c' CHAPTER5 consulting �r ParksTemple City Open , Space Plan sa Existing n 1 �. vE P - C mino Crpve PdK. Tmpl I(Y XigIi SCA.00ly Tien Vertle.PStk Arcadia Oak AvenuB'_Y P[rOr Elv'm{nlary glltlmn SWtlier Pprl Santa ABpa Parlt _, long&n PadllC MondS � ElnmptRery $epppl ' TembR '" CIIY PLk ,u � . _ 51 wkov EI Monte ! _ CBIXcIic Skfiuol ' _ 1 •r uYB o,l Parw - FrseLuNeran Clprmiaon. cnuana 5cnool 'CIwMY - Ele�°ntary -� , San Gabriel � E�B,BB�rsrY � toE� 'i -- ner - •; �Rasemead r , r e e RIO Vi4a Park ' e S ' \ • / Spa IY7 ( Tem1 1 surrounding cities CHAPTER569 consultigg Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Strengths and Opportunities Strengths • General park maintenance • Clean and safe parks • High levels of use • Parks appear to be family friendly • Concrete walks throughout Opportunities for Improvement • Parking at Temple City Park is limited • Live Oak Park turf takes a lot of abuse but appears to hold up fairly well • Play equipment at Live Oak Park is alder and worn in places • Play equipment at Temple City Park is small and needs improvement Park, Open Space and School Facility Inventory Matrix A complete matrix of all park, open space and school facilities can be found on the next page. Aerial photographs of both city parks with existing park inventory and aerial photographs of schools and parks outside city limits can be found in Chapter 9- Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. ; 7 • pros-.,, CHAPTER s i consul tt Qg r >r � � I a nbH3HNstle HlnOA wnlrvrvwm � em]sabssloarosa313b x]bH IOD atl38tl11roao 3sna3x3 y Nnbd 3lbN UN011 31 M000 U, 9NIMMODWN3.1V - v R 9NIQ11n9]3tl ONtl3xtltl 9NIOIIOH ADWIN WOJ WOOalSin - WODHMN/39tla015/3NO13s3]NO (031H9n1ON)1HMNNN3 IO31H9nI1tln0.951NN31 lanooanvH - ntleorvbx (O31H9n ION)MW rnd IIVA3MW9 (a31H9nllnnasnn3llbe33xme (O31H9n ION)1HnorllbH n GAMS .'l (a31x9n11anmntlH ntiv3xstl9 39tlaO1s1N3WdII1D3/I1tl233tl9 (031H9111ON1 O131311tiH 103ll19nI Q13HlNH (O3ll191110N1OVH tl3J]O 031H9111O13x H3J]O IO31H9n1O13Hlltl910o3 3tl M.o SlltllStlntlC/SlItl15>1P19NINtltld -� ZT53 V-MV And 5Y39tl..VAnd H31tl3HLHdWtl - 3anDnalsOtl3HHM - N3dnnH - mO9nO = Moa s-sH3x]tlne - mom, ll3H]tl319 MOtl F-Stl3HJtl3lB _ O13H 53NIH 30X-M]tltl 3Ml0 = NItl1NnO39NNNING 3N39Htl9 ' 3 Vid3J3tllbOJ1OH - — 3vb1dn3ane»]u3tl 3ntlle3]3n xstl o E HIM sllwn A1D..Nd.1w ( WnNcl MA 8tld N103L51A Y. 39b3tlJ '9n Y119HX3 ri w X Y Q ; wog � ouw Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER SIX - FACILITY / AMENITY AND PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS 6.1 METHODOLOGY The purpose of the facility/amenity and program priority rankings is to provide a prioritized list of facility/amenity needs and recreation program needs for the community served by the City of Temple City Parks&Recreation Department. This rankings model evaluated both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data includes the statistically valid community survey, which asked residents to list unmet needs and rank their importance. Qualitative data includes resident feedback obtained in community input and demographics and trends. A weighted scoring system was used to determine the priorities for Parks & Recreation facilities /amenities and recreation programs. This scoring system considers the following: • Community survey o Unmet needs for facilities and recreation programs o Importance ranking for facilities • Consultant evaluation o Factor derived from the consultant's evaluation of program and facility priority based on survey results,demographics,trends,facility and program assessment, levels of service and overall community input. The weighted scores were as follows: • 60 percent from the statistically valid community survey results • 40 percent from consultant evaluation using demographic and trends data, community focus groups and public meetings and levels of service. These weighted scores were then summed to provide an overall score and priority ranking for the system as a whole. The results of the priority ranking were tabulated into three categories: high priority(top third), medium priority(middle third)and low priority (bottom third). The combined total of the weighted scores for community unmet needs, community importance, and consultant evaluation is the total score based on which the facility/ amenity and program priority is determined. pros;;; CHAPTER 6 consulting -rWr Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 6.2 FACILITY / AMENITY PRIORITY RANKINGS The top five facility and amenity priorities as determined by the community were family walking and biking trails, bike lanes, outdoor pool, Wi-Fi access in parks, and small family picnic areas and shelters. Temple City Facility/Amenity Priority Rankings Ove ra I I Ranking Walking and Biking Trails Bike Lanes Outdoor Pool Wi-Fi Access in Parks Small Family Picnic Areas and Shelters Pet Friendly Spaces Playground Equipment Large Group Picnic Areas and Shelters Large Indoor Social Event & Meetin Room Pocket Parks/Small Neighborhood Parks Skateboard/BMX Park Indoor Recreation Center/Gymnasium Outdoor Basketball Courts Outdoor Badminton Courts Outdoor Tennis Courts Performing Arts Facility Disc Golf Course Youth Soccer Fields Youth Baseball and Softball Fields Year Round Artificial Turf Sports Fields Adult Soccer Fields Adult Baseball and Softball Fields IM pros;,. CHAPTER 6 consul ting $1� Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 6.3 PROGRAM PRIORITY RANKINGS The top five program priorities as determined by the community were adult fitness and wellness programs, lap swim programs,cultural events, summer concerts,and city-wide special events. Temple City Program Priority Rankings Overall Ranking Adult Fitness and Wellness Programs Lap Sw im Programs Cultural Events Summer Concerts City-Wide Special Events Senior Health and Fitness Programs Aqua Aerobics Bike Events Culinary Programs Youth Sports Programs Youth Summer Camp Programs Senior Leisure Enrichment Gasses Tai Chi Adult Sports Programs Visual and Performing Arts Programs Before and After School Programs Youth Fitness and Wellness Programs Pre-School Programs Badminton Lessons and Leagues Tennis Lessons and Leagues Youth Life Skill and Enrichment Programs Ping Pong Lessons and Leagues Teen Programs Martial Arts Programs • pros',:' CHAPTER 6 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER SEVEN - RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PARK AND OPEN SPACE 7.1 POTENTIAL FUTURE OPEN SPACE LOCATIONS The RHA/PROS team has identified locations and developed strategies for acquisition of new park land. The recommendations include a prioritization of both land acquisition and facility construction, including how the City of Temple City might partner with other agencies, including schools, to maximize its resources for the citizens and programs. A large variety of potential sites are listed in Section 7.1. Although not all sites may be viable at this time or in the future, they have been included as an example of the types of areas that could be obtained and used for parks and open space. They will serve as a guide for Council, Commissioners and staff as future sites come on the radar so that the potential for acquiring the sites is not missed. It is also recommended that the potential locations be reconsidered on an annual or bi-annual basis. This Chapter contains information on: 7.1 Potential Future Open Space Locations 7.2 Action Plan 7.3 Cost Impacts of Development 7.4 Revenue and Funding Strategies All of the information has been documented in Google Earth and by hard copies included in this document. By utilizing Google Earth,the Master Plan document can be modified as current sites are chosen to be removed and new sites are identified in the future. This creates a fluid document that can be modified as the city changes. �ily High School9 131 d r Friends ! !! 13 1 k ! ! - 0 .t• . a Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. pro CHAPTER 7 consu(t'ing (972? Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.1: SCHOOLS - JOINT USE TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Schools-Joint Use SCHOOL LOT SIZE F ACRE SF Cr v o W W 0 [L H1 O O l7 Y fL u c] w w O m Y Q d Z U H Y Y y Z Z U a z x W o Z o a o x u a a o o a a a 3 a W o w t0 W u, o m 0 SS3 5 Temple City High School TC 15.96 695,000 3 2 1 6 1 1 SS2 7 Oak Ave Intermediate School TC 3.54 154,000 1 2 1 3 6 SS3 9 Longden Elementary School TC 4.22 183,700 1 2 3 2 2 554 11 Cloverly Elementary School TC 2.75 120,000 1 4 1 1 1 ss5 13 La Rosa Elementary School TC 1.91 83,000 1 1 1 2 SS6 15 Cleminson Elementary School EM 1.91 83,000 1 2 2 1 1 SS7 16 Emperor Elementary School TC 1.96 85,350 1 2 1 1 1 SS8 1S Pacific Friends School - 0.54 23,400 1 SS9 19 St.Luke's Elementary School - 2.85 124,000 1 2 2 2 1 S510 20 Golden West Baptist Church - 0.39 16,800 1 SS11 21 First Lutheran Church&School - 1.13 49,100 1 1 1 1 1 TOTALS: 37.13 1,617,350 9 6 4 1 11 9 10 6 7 12 1 2 Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. prof CHAPTER 7 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.2: SCHOOLS — PROPOSED TCUSD MASTER PLAN IMPROVEMENTS TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Schools-Proposed TCUSD Master Plan Improvements SCHOOL LOT SIZE u, ACRE SF z w o a o F y LL L N_ ❑ 2 6 K 2 Z N _ y N \ i z a z ❑ a u, u, zc p a x x c z a z ❑ 0 0 w oa F- r 0 c 0 _ g o w z 0 fG O U N Q Ca J V V❑1 w Q LL a .n Z z a OO a o l7 m a a LL a o o = x3 ¢ 3 3 3 3 3 U' W I V I I z w z C U' z K z 2 2 Z z 551 6 Temple City High School TC 15.96 695,000 X X X X X X X X X SS2 8 Oak Ave Intermediate School TC 3.54r120,000 X X X SS3 30 Longden Elementary School TC 4.22 X X X SS4 12 Cleverly Elementary School TC 2.75 X X X SS5 14 La Rosa Elementary School TC 1.91 X X X SS6 - Cleminson Elementary School EM 1.91 83,000 NO PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS IDENTIFIED SS7 17 Emperor Elementary School TC 1.96 85,350 X X X TOTALS: 32.23 1,404,050 *New Stadi um and Track includes: Synthetic Track Natural Turf Field Bleachers Pressbox Field Lighting Perimeter Fencing Concessions/Restroom Fieldhouse Storage Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. pros:;: '' CHAPTER 7 mi consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan There are several possibilities for the city to work with the Tempe City Unified School District (District) in regards to the improvements planned at Temple City High School that will help the city meet some of the needs expressed in the priority rankings. New Tennis Courts The District is relocation the tennis courts and expanding from 4 to 6 courts. However, the courts will not be lighted. There is a potential for the city to contribute funds to have the courts lighted so they can be used by residents after school hours and into the evening. This could allow the tennis courts at Live Oak Park to be removed or reduced in number and create additional open space at the parkfor other uses. This project is scheduled for planning and drawings from June 2015 - January 2016 and construction from August 2016—March 2018. New Aauatic Center The District is planning on constructing a new aquatic center that will include a 33 meter pool, ticket booth, lifeguard/coaches office, restrooms and pool equipment storage. There is potential for the city to contribute fund to have this facility include a recreational element such as water slides,etc.that would help to satisfy the need for a community aquatics facility. This project is scheduled for planning and drawings from June 2015 - January 2016 and construction from August 2016—March 2018. New Athletic Center The District has future plans to construct a new athletic center that will include a 3-Cross court gymnasium (w/3,500 bleacher capacity), concessions,ticket booth, practice gym,shower/locker room, equipment storage, training/weight room, and uniform storage. The project is not in the current bond money budget but the space for the facility is included on the campus master plan. There is potential for the city to contribute funds to have all or a portion of this facility constructed and help to satisfy the need for a new gymnasium. The project is budgeted at$18-$20 million dollars by the District Architect. New Performing Arts Center The District has future plans to construct a new performing arts center that will include facilities for a Music and Drama Program and a full Theater. The project is scheduled to be constructed in 2031-32. There is potential for the city to contribute funds to have all or a portion of this facility constructed and help to satisfy the need for a new performing arts center. The project is budgeted at$13.7 million dollars by the District Architect. This information has been referenced in the Action Plan Matrix for Facilities / Amenities in Chapter 8,section 8.1. pros;;:- CRAPTER 7 consulting 0If Y Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.3: TRAILS — EATON WASH & ARCADIA WASH TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Trails = LOCATION MILES NOTES c a J W f (7 Y m O a Z a 0 � w T1 32 Longden Ave to Las Tunas Or 0.74 Eaton Wash T2 33 Las Tunas Drto Rosemead Blvd 0.48 Eaton Wash T3 34 Rosemead Blvd to Encinita Ave 0.42 Eaton Wash T4 35 Encinita Ave to Lower Azusa Rd 0.34 Eaton Wash T5 36 Lower Azusa Rd to Ellis Ln 0.50 Eaton Wash T6 37 Live Oak Ave to Fairview Ave 0.87 Arcadia Wash TOTALS: 3.35 Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. mpros;,:' CHAPTER 7 consulting *7�2 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.4: POSSIBLE SITES TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Possible Sites = ADDRESS/LOCATION LOT SIZE NOTES z ACRE SF a J W F Q Y m 0 a x a w Alpha Beta site,currently being planned Psi 38 5925Temple City Blvd 0.66 28,875 as Mixed-Use and city is workingwith developer PSZ 39 Relocate Sheriff Station 3.17 138,000 Convert buildingsto Community Center PS3 40 4848 Encinita Ave 0.23 9,900 Open lot nextto commercial business Purchase Santa Anita Convalescent PS4 41 5522 Gracewood Ave 7.67 334,000 Hospital and Retirement Center PS5 42 Post Office 0.87 37,700 Purchase Post Office property TOTALS: 12.59 548,475 Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. pros CHAPTER 7 : r consulting V ,Mw Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.5: POTENTIAL OPEN SPACE TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Potential Open Space = ADDRESS/LOCATION LOT SIZE NOTES s a ACRE SF W y � (D W F lJ Y m O a a = 0 2 W PO51 43 City Maintenance Yard 1.38 60,000 Convertto open space Ward Tree Service has service trucks and POS2 44 Live Oak&McCulloch Ave 0.49 21,450 equipment on site as well as stacked wood POS3 45 Eaton Wash&Hermosa Drive 0.06 2,750 Adjacent to Eaton Wash Trail Not in city boundary(East San Gabriel). POS4 46 6499 Rosemead Blvd 0.27 11,900 Possibly incorporate into city.Possibly install city entry monument POSS 47 8606 Longden Ave 0.56 24,500 Water Company property POSE 48 9936 Olive St 0.49 21,200 Water Company property City owned parking lot,city owned POS7 49 5922,28,40 Primrose Ave 1.00 43,560 residential lot,city working on purchase of residential lot Unincorporated East San Gabriel POSE 50 SCE Easement 16.59 722,500 property. Possibly incorporate into city and lease propertyfrom SCE POS9 51 5634-5662 Halifax Rd 0.36 15,800 Water Company property POSIC 52 9442 Live Oak Road 0.52 22,500 Water Company property POST 53 5800Temple City Blvd 0.43 18,600 Mortuary property owned by city TOTALS: 22.15 1 964,760 Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9—Exhibits. Referto the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. I pros;,:- CHAPTER 7 consulting d�c= Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.6: COMMERCIAL PROPERTY FOR SALE TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Commercial Property Search Date: 9/18/13 = ADDRESS TYPE LOT SIZE BUILDING YR BUILT PRICE WACRE SF SIZE a W Y � J W f l7 Y m 0 a Q = L07 5 W Cl 54 5336 Rosemead Blvd COM 0.58 25,256 1,100 1951 $600,000 c2 55 5604 Rosemead Blvd COM 0.21 9,148 3,050 1948 $1,200,000 C3 56 9100 E Las Tunas Dr COM 0.22 9,430 2,400 1946 $1,500,000 C4 57 9410 Gidley St COM 1.21 52,708 21,000 1957 $1,975,000 C5 58 9436 Las Tunas Dr COM 0.25 10,799 7,200 1946 $2,199,999 C6 59 9226 Las Tunas Dr COM 0.41 18,000 7,000 1948 $2,698,000 TOTALS: 2.88 125,341 41,750 $10,172,999 Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. Note that these sites were available when the property search was completed on September 9, 2013. Some or all of these sites may not be available now or in the future. They are included in this report as an example of what type of commercial sites are viable for potential parks and open space and to provide an idea of what the potential property values are. pro$.,I,> CHAPTER 7 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.7: PARKING CONVERSIONS TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Potential Future Open Space Locations Parking Conversions = ADDRESS/LOCATION LOT SIZE NOTES z ;0.39 00 a0w PCl 60 TCUSD Parking Lot 17SF,000 PC2 61 Las Tunas Dr&Camellia Ave 0.22 9,450 PC3 62 Las Tunas Dr&Temple City Blvd 0.28 12,200 PC4 63 5911Temple City Blvd 0.35 15,150 TOTALS: 1.24 53,800 Aerial photographs of all sites can be found in Chapter 9 — Exhibits. Refer to the Table of Contents for page numbers of specific sites. Mpros,,`: CHAPTER 7 consul ting s? -y, Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 7.1.8: PARKLETS The following is an excerpt from "RECLAIMING THE RIGHT OF WAY: A Tool for Creating and Implementing Parklets" by the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs. A complete copy of the toolkit can be obtained at: www.its.ucia.edu/research/parklettoolkit.pdf The term "parklet" was first used in San Francisco toR1�♦±� ({IMING" ' HE represent the conversion of \ an automobile parking space into a mini-park for passive E:I(al-I i OF INAY recreation. This concept has been expanded to include !P ,hl other spaces formerly occupied by cars as well as spaces that can also facilitate active recreation. r A Toolkit for Creating and Implementing Parklets UCLA Lu.kin SrM1nul.l I'uLlla dttui+ n Parklets are typically created by building a platform on the pavement to extend the sidewalk space, and retrofitting it with benches, planters,tables and chairs, umbrellas, and bike racks. In the case of active recreation parklets, exercise machines can be bolted to the platform. I Boulder Lopes _ _\Low Planners l Ing Woodi Bench\ `\"Steel Men.,B..d Relocated' \Lava POnbn City Rook wood la1Rw Bike Parking - Locking ' Low Plenlen PaveFigure L Rendering from 401h Sheet,Oakland,CA. Credit:Andrea Gafiney and Justin Viglianti Hied Holder � / \Bbd E0gll9 Phwmlulna Bayburd prov,' CHAPTER 7 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Parklets vary based on the following characteristics: • Location: Parklets can occupy former parking spaces, street medians, traffic triangles, repurposed travel lanes and parking lots or excess asphalt space at angled or irregular intersections • Surrounding land uses:Commercial or residential • Size: From a couple of parking of spaces to spaces extending along the length a block, to larger spaces occupying entire parts of a block • Shape; Linear,square, rectangular,triangular,or irregular • Duration: From a few hours, to one day (Park(ing) Day), to part of the year (during spring and summer),to year-around installations • Type of activity:Passive or active recreation. Road space comprises a significant amount of acreage in US cities, and at least since the last century, this space has been the domain of the private automobile. Indeed, US cities are characterized by widertraffic lanes and more surface parking lots than cities in other countries. Recently, some US cities have started to rethink the use of street space and convert formerly automobile occupied spaces into multi-use spaces for pedestrians in the form of parklets. While converting large swaths of land in central and inner city neighborhoods is often unfeasible or very expensive, an advantage of parklets is their low installation and maintenance costs for cities. This is due in part to their relatively small size, less permanent nature, and partnerships with adjacent businesses. A leading organization in the parklet movement, San Francisco Great Streets Project, describes parklets in the following way: "Parklets are built out of semi-permanent materials and are installed in a way that does not require reconfiguring the roadway or pouring concrete. They are usually hosted or sponsored by a local business or organization that pays to design and build them and agrees to keep them maintained." Applicability to Temple City Although not specifically requested in the community surveys, Parklets can help provide "general open space" that was expressed throughout the community input process. It is recommended that the City of Temple City consider the use of parklets in various places in the downtown area through the incorporation into the Las Tunas Avenue d project that is currently underway. The following images are examples of other parklets that have been developed in cities throughout the United States. Figure 37.Terrasse,Monir6al,Quebec. Credit:Alain Quevillon pros;,: CHAPTER 7 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan f. Figure 3l.Cafe Abir,San Francisco,CA. Credit:Daveed Kapoor/utopiad.org Figure 32. Devil's teeth parklet,San Francisco, CA. Credit:San Francisco Pavement to Parks i i- Figure 48. Berlin parklet, Long Beach, CA. Credit: Daniel Faessler pros;,:- � consulting cxarTEx� Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan Figure 87 Bombay/FIKA edge, Now York City,W. - Credit:NYC Department of Transportation A i _ Figure 88.Haight Street parklet, - San Francisco,CA. Credit:SF Bicycle Coalition/sfblke.org Figure W,Coos' oor B¢O pod els of dlllaeog Woof, Pdt oa.>Qtl loop.l uloft nias+ceern�v[c��\axwrenwx ` \ j t 6 r,z�wiswn �¢rnJ uz.w-rrcsn r_ Fgure&.Sel wb stoofto.San Fra fwa,CA Fox.W.Oivlm PN platoon,San Fow.,X colt Marna T6, CretliHV 9igGeWhim/siDila', ® Pros-.'z- CHAPTER 7 consulting STemple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER EIGHT — ACTION PLAN 8.1 ACTION PLAN The matrices on the following two pages represent a summary of the Temple City Parks and Open Space goals over the next 20 years. The goals have been segmented into three sections: • Ongoing Goals • Short Term Goals (0-2 years) • Mid Term Goals (3-7 years) • Long Term Goals (8-20years) The goals are separated into three categories: • Facilities and Amenities • Programs • Operations and Marketing The goals are based on data gathered and documented in: • Community Outreach and Participation Chapter 2 • Demographics and Trends Analysis Chapter 3 • Recreation Program Assessment Chapter 4 • Park and Facility Assessment Chapter 5 • Facility/Amenity and Program Priority Rankings Chapter 6 • Recommendations for Future Park and Open Space Chapter 7 ! . pros-,,z- CHAPTER consuling \ � E \ » - - - - - - \ - . \ A \ > ( < \\; \; \ \{ I ; ■ ! i ] | � | � ; i U saw/ d } . - \ \ \ \ . \ \ § ( ! 7 \ � :E { \ \ _- - _ _ - _; • � . . : , �, • ,,, \ f} / / \ \ / - I - % § /! \\/S / / � _eod &¥§eyy pem _ao (qlgwr Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 8.2 COST IMPACTS OF DEVELOPMENT The costs of acquisition, development, and maintenance of the Potential Future Open Space Locations have been roughly estimated based on current market prices and the size of the sites. As specific sites are determined by the City to be of interest in developing a more thorough cost analysis and due diligence should be performed. Land Lease options are discussed in Section 7.4 The chart below is a summary of the costs for all sites combined. The following pages contain detailed breakdowns of each site. TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development - Summary SITE LOT SIZE TOTAL ANNUAL ACRE SF Ou DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE O COST COST `0 N w ui v 5 rCr � u School Sites 37.13 1,617,350 $0 $1,020,317 $313,286 Trails 3.35 NA $6 $3,685,006 $10,050 Possible Sites 12.59 548,475 $52,883,264 $61,065,743 $125,913 Potential Open Space 22.15 965,042 $10,400,695 $24,851,301 $486,924 Commercial Properties 2.88 125,341 $10,172,999 $11,755,587 $28,774 Parking Conversions 1.24 53,800 $1 $679,294 $12,351 TOTALS: 75.99 3,310,008 $73,456,965 $103,057,248 $977,298 Referto individual charts foreach categoryfora description of how the maintenance costs have been estimated pros,:' CHAPTER 8 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development -School Sites SITE LOTSIZE o r TOTAL ANNUAL r ACRE 5F n W Z DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE OH COST COST F o w j J W f ✓ r U o Lia o a = Cr X a - SSI 5 Temple City High School 15.96 695,000 $0 $0 $0 $207,415 552 7 Oak Ave Intermediate School 3.54 154,000 $0 $0 $0 $17,677 SS3 9 Longden Elementary School 4.22 183,700 $0 $0 $0 $21,086 SS4 11 Cloverly Elementary School 2.75 120,000 $0 $0 $0 $13,774 SS5 13 La Rosa Elementary School 1.91 83,000 $0 $0 $0 $9,527 SS6 15 Cleminson Elementary School 1.91 83,000 $0 $150,000 $285,813 $9,527 SS7 16 Emperor Elementary School 1.96 85,350 $0 $0 $0 $9,797 SS8 18 Pacific Friends School 0.54 23,400 $0 $150,000 $80,579 $2,686 SS9 19 St.Luke's Elementary School 2.85 124,000 $0 $150,000 $426,997 $14,233 SS10 20 Golden West Baptist Church 0.39 16,800 $0 $150,000 $57,851 $1,928 5511 21 First Lutheran Church&School 1.13 49,100 $0 $150,000 $169,077 $5,636 TOTALS: 37.13 1,617,350 $0 $1,020,317 $313,286 Development Cost is based on 50/50 split with School District/Church Organization TCUSD has obtained bond money for their school improvements so it is assumed there will be no costforthe city. If the city decides to add additional improvements beyond whatthe District is planningthen improvement costs will be incurred by the city. Maintenance costs are based on 50/50 split with School District/Church Organization High School= $26,000/acre/year(total shown is for City portion only) Schools/Churches= $10,000/acre/year(total shown is for City portion only) Development and maintenance costs are provided for informational purposes only. All development and maintenance costs are rough estimates based on information gathered for similar sites in other cities and school districts. Numbers mayvary depending on the types of improvements and maintenance planned. MI pros ,> CHAPTER 8 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development -Trails SITE LOTSIZEo TOTAL ANNUAL F MILES SF u '�: E n w DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE OLL W COST COST p ($3000/mile) > m = E a Z a a Q 2 a = 7 w Tl 32 Longden Ave to Las Tunas Dr 0.74 NA $1 $1,100,000 $814,001 $2,220 T2 33 Las Tunas Drto Rosemead Blvd 0.48 NA $1 $1,100,000 $528,001 $1,440 T3 34 Rosemead Blvd to Encinita Ave 0.42 NA $1 $1,100,000 $462,001 $1,260 T4 35 Encinita Ave to Lower Azusa Rd 0.34 NA $1 $1,100,000 $374,001 $1,020 T5 36 Lower Azusa Rd to Ellis Ln 0.50 NA $1 $1,100,000 $550,001 $1,500 T6 37 Live Oak Ave to Fairview Ave 0.87 NA $1 $1,100,000 $957,001 $2,610 TOTALS: 3.35 NA $6 $3,685,006 $10,050 Development and maintenance costs are provided for informational purposesonly. All development and maintenance costs are rough estimates based on information gathered for si mi lar sites in other cities. Numbers may vary depending on the types of improvements and maintenance planned. FBI ;, prosCHAPTER 8 consul ting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development - Possible Sites SITE LOTSIZE TOTAL ANNUAL ACRE SF u i w DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE Z COST COST > O u O ($10,000/acre) �}++ o 0 6 a = j Q 5 w a PSI 38 5925 Temple City Blvd 0.66 28,875 $2,784,091 $450,000 $3,082,386 $6,629 PS2 39 Relocate Sheriff Station 3.17 138,000 $13,305,785 $650,000 $15,365,014 $31,680 PS3 40 4848Encinita Ave 0.23 9,900 $954,545 $300,000 $1,022,727 $2,273 PS4 41 5522 Gracewood Ave 7.67 334,000 $32,203,857 $700,000 $37,571,166 $76,676 PSS 42 Post Office 0.87 37,700 $3,634,986 $450,000 $4,024,449 $8,655 TOTALS: 12.59 548,475 $52,883,264 $61,065,743 $125,913 Acquisition cost is based on$4,200,000/acre which is an average of all real estate listings studied in preparation of this report Development and maintenance costs are provided for informational purposes only. All development and maintenance costs are rough esti mates based on information gathered for similar sites i n other cities. Numbers may vary depending on the types of improvements and maintenance planned. pros CHAPTER 8 consulting (9 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development- Potential Open Space SITE LOTSIZE vr'i r TOTAL ANNUAL s ;1.3 Oui Z DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE O H ° w COST COST E > uU; u o 5 zaa o a = aL7POST 43 City Maintenance Yard 60,000 $5,785,124 $550,000 $6,542,700 $13,774 POS2 44 Live Oak&McCulloch Ave 0.49 21,450 $2,068,182 $450,000 $2,289,773 $4,924 POS3 45 Eaton Wash&Hermosa Drive 0.06 2,750 $1 $400,000 $25,254 $631 POS4 46 6499 Rosemead Blvd 0.27 11,900 $1,147,383 $450,000 $1,270,317 $2,732 POS5 47 8606 Longden Ave 0.56 24,500 $1 $450,000 $253,100 $5,624 POS6 48 9936 Olive St 0.49 21,200 $1 $450,000 $219,009 $4,867 POS7 49 5922,28,40 Primrose Ave 1.00 43,560 $1,400,000 $650,000 $2,050,000 $10,000 POS8 50 SCE Easement 16.59 722,500 $1 $700,000 $11,610,423 $431,244 POS9 51 5634-5662 Halifax Rd 0.36 15,800 $1 $450,000 $163,224 $3,627 POS10 52 9442 Live Oak Road 0.52 22,500 $1 $450,000 $234,001 $5,200 POSll 53 5800 Temple City Blvd 0.43 18,600 $0 $450,000 $193,500 $4,300 TOTALS: 22.15 964,760 $10,400,695 $24,851,301 $486,924 Acquisition cost is based on$4,200,000/acre which is an average of all real estate listings studied in preparation of this report City Maintenance Yard cost is based on assuming acquiring another site of similar size for new yard $1 acquisition costs are for Water Company and SCE propertythat assumes a$1/year lease agreement City already owns 2/3 of POS7 so acquisition cost is based on acquiring the final 1/3 Maintenance costs are based on$10,000/acre/year with$26,000/acre/year for SCE Easement Development and maintenance costs are provided for informational purposes only. All development and maintenance costs are rough estimates based on information gathered for similar sites in other cities. Numbers may vary depending on the types of improvements and maintenance planned. pros:;: '' CHAPTER 8 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development - Commercial Property for Sale as of 9/18/13 SITE LOTSIZE o r TOTAL ANNUAL r ACRE SF u a ¢ w DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE z 2 COST COST a o w 4 u ¢ �_ > ($10,000/acre) 17 Y m z a a o a 4 a g 0 w a - C1 54 5336 Rosemead Blvd 0.58 25,256 $600,000 $550,000 $918,889 $5,798 C2 55 5604 Rosemead Blvd 0.21 9,148 $1,200,000 $550,000 $1,315,505 $2,100 C3 56 9100 E Las Tunas Dr 0.22 9,430 $1,500,000 $550,000 $1,619,066 $2,165 C4 57 9410 Gidley St 1.21 52,708 $1,975,000 $550,000 $2,640,505 $12,100 C5 58 9436 Las Tunas Dr 0.25 10,799 $2,199,999 $550,000 $2,336,350 $2,479 C6 59 9226 Las Tunas Dr 0.41 18,000 $2,698,000 $550,000 $2,925,273 $4,132 TOTALS: 2.88 125,341 $10,172,999 $11,755,587 $28,774 Development and maintenance costs are provided for informational purposes only. All development and maintenance costs are rough estimates based on information gathered for similar sites in other cities. Numbers may vary depending on the types of improvements and maintenance planned. TEMPLE CITY PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN Cost Impacts of Development- Parking Conversions SITE LOT SIZE 0 P TOTAL ANNUAL = ACRE SF a c Z DEVELOPMENT MAINTENANCE G p o > COST COST J w F N u z 0 ($10,000/acre) U' 6 m C Zaa o a = 0 2 w a PCI 60 TCUSDParking Lot 0.39 17,000 $1 $550,000 $214,647 $3,903 LPC2 J62 Las Tunas Dr&Camillia Ave 0.22 9,450 $0 $550,000 $119,318 $2,169 LasTunas Dr&Temple City Bl 0.28 12,200 $0 $550,000 $154,040 $2,801 5911Temple City Blvd 0.35 15,150 $0 $550,000 $191,288 $3,478 TOTALS: 1.24 53,800 $1 $679,294 $12,351 Development and maintenance costs are provided for informational purposes only. All development and maintenance costs are rough estimates based on information gathered forsimilarsites in othercities. Numbers may vary depending on the types of improvements and maintenance planned. pros;,':- CHAPTER 8 consulting Y�E Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan 8.3 FUNDING AND REVENUE STRATEGIES The purpose of developing funding and revenue strategies is to help staff prepare for the plan's implementation by identifying viable funding opportunities, including fees, charges, and partnerships, and to pursue and share examples from other agencies that may have been in a similar place. In order to continue to build and maintain a great park system, the following are some of the funding sources that are available and used by many other public agencies throughout the United States. New, sustainable funding sources are essential to implementing the needs assessment and action plan. The city has been good stewards of public dollars and has managed well with the revenues generated from taxes and user fees to support the system. The key for future growth is to diversify funding sources which will help support the development and sustenance of the initiatives recommended in this plan. The sources listed below are meant to serve as recommendations and guidelines and do not commit the city or the staff to pursue them. 8.3.1 EXTERNAL FUNDING The following examples provide external funding opportunities to consider for the future. Each of these sources can be evaluated in more detail to determine the level of funding they would yield if pursued aggressively. Corporate Sponsorships This revenue funding source allows corporations to invest in the development or enhancement of new or existing facilities in park systems. Sponsorships are also highly used for programs and events. Many of the City's special events including the Camellia Festival & Carnival or Camp-A- Palooza may have individual sponsorship support but there is not an overall strategy to garnering sponsors based on packaging all offerings. There are a number of agencies nationwide and in California that have done an excellent job in securing corporate sponsorships and assigning dedicated staff resources to it as well as establishing frameworks for sustained sponsorship opportunities by providing packaged choices of offerings. Charleston County Parks and Recreation http://www.cci)rc.com/index.aspx?NID=5 City of Santa Barbara http://www.santabarbaraca.gov/eov/depts/parksrec/recreation/sponsor ooportunities.asp Partnerships Partnerships are joint development funding sources or operational funding sources between two separate agencies, such as two government entities, a nonprofit and a public agency, or a pros-,,,c' CHAPTER 8 consul ting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan private business and a public agency. Two or more partners could jointly develop a trail or a park area or even a facility share risk, operational costs, responsibilities and asset management, based on the strengths and weaknesses of each partner. A relevant example includes the Muskingum Recreation Center being developed in Zanesville, Ohio which is a partnership between the Muskingum County Community Foundation (MCCF), the Muskingum Family Y(MFY),Genesis Healthcare System and Ohio University Zanesville(OUZ) http://www.muskingumrecreationcenter.org Volunteers Volunteerism is an indirect revenue source that can help any agency offset its operational cost as well as build greater advocacy for the system. The city provides volunteer identification opportunities and it does have a committed group of volunteers who assist on a number of areas or programs. A source to consider would be utilizing www.volunteermatch.org that allows agencies to list their volunteer offerings and for interested individuals to be matched to that source. Besides maintenance and program offerings, there are potential opportunities to utilize volunteers as a part of a knowledge workforce as well. The City of San Jose Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services has leveraged a very unique volunteer relationship by utilizing graduates from The Harvard Business School to identify potential sponsorship value of its inventory and craft a compelling message for potential sponsors — all on a pro-bono basis htto://www.hbsanc.org/co home.htmRaid=1142. There could certainly be potential opportunities of this sort with any of the educational institutions including Pasadena City College and California State University,Los Angeles. 8.3.2 LAND LEASING Land leasing is typically done by park and recreation departments in the following manner: City Owned Land is Leased Out: Lease of park land is done to help support operational costs such as leasing golf courses to a private operator to manage or a sports complex to a private club to manage. However,since Temple City does not own a golf course or a sports complex and is it looking to lease its park land,this is not a realistic scenario. Leasing of park land for someone to develop on is also done. Typically the land is leased for recreation or hospitality purposes such as the development of as restaurant, concessions or some other type of recreation purpose.The agency typically leases the land for 15%of the value of the property on an annual basis plus 2%to 6% of the gross from the entity who developed the improvement on site. The land leases vary by how much the improvement costs but typically range from 10 to 20 years. After the lease is completed the city can renew the lease for a series of five year increments. Once the lease is terminated the city owns the property and can manage it themselves or put the lease out again for another 10 years. The leasee must pay all capital and operating costs while the lease is in place. pros;,;-- CHAPTER 8 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan City Leases Land from External Owner: These are more realistic scenarios for Temple City in light of the discussions forthe Parks and Open Space Master Plan. As far as the city leasing a building or park for recreation purposes this is typically done in three ways. Public to Public Lease: A school district will lease surplus property to a city for recreation purposes with the intent the city will use the site for recreation programs and services.The city would pay the operational costs and the school district would pay a percentage of the capital costs since they own the building. This happens quite often with school districts, colleges and other government entities. Not-for-profit to Public Lease: The city can lease a facility from a YMCA or not-for-profit like a church on a year-to-year basis or for a set period of time.The city pays the not-for-profit a lease amount and the operational costs with the not-for-profit paying for the capital costs. Private to Public Lease: The city can lease from a for-profit developer where the developer builds the facility for the city because the city lacks the cash to develop it all at once. The city pays the developer a set lease amount over a period of years and pays all of the operational costs. Roanoke County,Virginia recently built the Greenridge Recreation Center in this manner. 8.3.3 USER FEES Fees/Charges The department must continue to position its fees and charges to be market driven and based on the classifications for core essential, important and value added as determined in the plan. Permits (Special Use Permits) These special permits allow individuals to use specific park property for financial gain. The city receives either a set amount of money or a percentage of the gross service that is being provided. This is a fairly established practice nationwide and in California. The City of Malibu has issued special use permits to rent a picturesque park (Malibu Bluffs Park) to the National Football League for a promotional event. A similar structure could be adopted for Live Oak Community Park as well. Reservations While the City is currently generating revenues from reservations, it would be beneficial to maximize the use of differential pricing strategies commonly employed by airlines, hotels and even public golf courses — vary prices based on weekday/weekend, prime time/non-prime time, holidays versus non-holidays, residents versus non-residents etc. 8.4 FRANCHISES AND LICENSES Concession Management Concession management is from retail sales or rentals of soft goods, hard goods,or consumable items.The department could either contract for the service or receive a set amount of the gross ® pros,:' CHAPTER 8 consulting 46 Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan percentage or the full revenue dollars that incorporates a profit after expenses. There are many examples of this nationwide, be it for a single agency such as Chicago Park District (http://www.parkconcessions.com/) or for multi-park vendors such as Xanterra (http://www.xanterra.com) which specializes in operating hotels, restaurants and stores in several state parks and national parks within the United States. The key to success with private concession managers is to build in facility repair and maintenance responsibilities as a part of the concessionaire's overall role in managing the facility. Private Management Contract with a private business to provide and operate desirable recreational activities financed, constructed and operated by the private sector,with additional compensation paid to the agency. This is similar in some ways to how the concession management process is undertaken except here the private provider, e.g. a developer, is often also responsible for facility construction along with long term operations and maintenance support. 8.5 NAMING RIGHTS Many cities and counties have turned to selling the naming rights for new constructions of facilities or parks as a way to pay for the development and, occasionally, costs associated with the project. A great example of this was in Lewisville, Texas where the city signed a 10 year naming rights deal with a local Toyota dealership for their signature community park which opened in 2009 and includes multiple sports fields, a dog park, skate park, walking and jogging trails, three lakes for irrigation etc. (hftp://www.citvofiewisville.com/index.aspx?page=538). This could potentially be a model that may have relevance for Live Oak Community Park which is the signature park in Temple City and serves a wide audience. '• pros:' CHAPTER 8 r r consulting STemple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER NINE - CONCLUSION Temple City continues to be a place with a very active and diverse community and residents who have called it home for many years. The current Master Plan recognizes the limited availability of land and financial resources and focuses on shaping a vision that enables the Department to continue flourishing and enriching the Temple City community in a sustainable manner. While the community has indicated a high level of appreciation with the staffs responsiveness and the variety of the offerings,they also have high expectations for the future. Going forward, the Consultant team is confident that the Department with its focus on quality, customer service,and innovation, combined with the support of the City leadership, will continue to offer memorable parks, recreation and open space experiences while preserving the values that make Temple City what it is today. ! . prov.;� CHAPTER 9 0 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan CHAPTER TEN - EXHIBITS pros CHAPTER 10 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 01 — LIVE OAK PARK (L) a a a' f,r���•• �x CL Y Y I w ft MMMM Y � x J M h � • 4 t e ■ 1 ■ ■ r rY e ■ pros;;;- CHAPTE io consulting `. Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 02 — LIVE OAK PARK COMMUNITY CENTER a) I z Q ° rn ca - Ca ci £S oo m c IL E Cog c o r � � U i u w W a I I a I I I � I - L i I o b p r / i 5 1 I I 1 I I I I I l I 1 I pros;,,:' CHAPTER 10 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 03 — TEEN CENTER AND ADMINISTRATION BUILDING a� fl o a I � a =CL o �m a � a 0> > y mc� ' tiE _ N w L W Q a U � sal owall o i o U _ 0 Lu �I — m � 0 N EIoO I � I ~ on� U O O p w XN w 6J aL ~Li XO L 10 0! Lu pros;,:' CHAPTER 10 consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 04 — TEMPLE CITY PARK Q. o CL - F3Fo0a N m o i a w w �®® � •x�� �oLL �j -3u I las , k r I { c pros CHAPTER Io . consulting Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 05 — TEMPLE CITY HIGH SCHOOL Co � o 0 0 0 (*IwilsQ � 75 Co Co d �. R w_ rn � a LJ w 2 N 'a M, pros;'c> CHAPTER 10 consul ring �'ggo QNN Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 06 - TEMPLE CITY HIGH SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN r -0 43018-A11 aldwal o�o o I I 3d i N O_ I g �z i N . . e � I liftu a �V' iIr 1 ...................... 1 . L_ ;._J. :.JW e E 1 00 �O 4 V O 0 m 7.y ci ESo of c¢ 3mmva a° L° d c E rn nuc Emv c4 m � e a U �iznm • Z a pros CHAPTER 10 1 consul ting R Temple City Parks and Open EXHIBIT 1 1 • • 0Cu � I • • l�1 � ,= ,,� F���K✓�--/�, .ids' 11 9 4 f � v w • • 109 consultigg `fjiA�'E. ��� Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 08 - OAK AVENUE INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN v oAK AVE. V � O W V R N U V V E d C U 6 N v iy p 'z > 6 u z a = 'm f z z 0 U u N Z v � s� a3 ;7 w A of Lu S7 1 1, r LL J _ V� • t I _ • c a c a � V ' a LL e J No a- •• m E . � N � --------------- a V V � 1\ � 1 \t l pros.,, CHAPTER 10 i consulting 7E. Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 09 - LONGDEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL C m C N c ai Q d r ? u = IL Qa n 4 pros-., CHAPTER 10 consulting ,,PE Temple City Parks and Open Space Master Plan EXHIBIT 10 — LONGDEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROPOSED MASTER PLAN pP05=,,c CHAPTER 10 consultlog