Item 15 - Final Needs Assessment for Community Park — Poway City Council, January 18, 2022

January 18, 2022, Item #15
DATE:

TO:

FROM:

CONTACT:

SUBJECT:

Summary:

AGENDA REPORT CityofPoway
January 18, 2022
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
Robert Manis, Director of Development Services {)I\
David De Vries, City Planner \)~\)
(858) 668-4604 or [email protected]
Final Needs Assessment for Community Park

CITY COUNCIL
This action is a review of the Final Needs Assessment for Community Park (Assessment) prepared by PROS Consulting. PROS Consulting was contracted by the City to prepare a usage and needs assessment of Community Park. At the meeting, the consultant will provide a brief overview of the Final Needs Assessment and priorities for Community Park for consideration.

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council adopt the Final Needs Assessment for Community Park (Attachment A).

Discussion:

Following a City Council initiated item introduced by Councilmember Leonard and Councilmember Grosch, the City Council directed the preparation of this Assessment in December 2019 to complement the recent renovation of the Swim Center and the new Mickey Cafagna Community Center. The City Council also acknowledged that, with the adoption of the Poway Road Specific Plan in 2017 and recently entitled housing projects, there would be many new families in the area using the park. The Assessment was prepared based on a robust outreach program and research analysis.

Outreach included discussions with City staff, the City Council, and community stakeholders including the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC), representatives from the Poway Valley Senior Citizens Corporation, Poway Sports Association (PSA), and contract instructors. This outreach program, the research analysis, and resulting considerations are discussed further in the Assessment.

At the November 16, 2021 City Council meeting, the City Council supported the Draft Needs Assessment Executive Summary and noted that adding bike access, increasing park visibility and creek renovations should also be prioritized. The City Council then directed the consultant to prepare the Assessment for adoption. PROS Consulting will present an overview of the Assessment and priorities for consideration at the City Council meeting (presentation available online at PlanCommunityPark.com). If adopted by the City Council, the assessment will be used to prioritize future improvements to Community Park as a part of future capital improvement program (CIP) 1 of 60
January 18, 2022, Item #15
project programming. The results of this Assessment will be used to prioritize projects and develop a long-term concept plan for implementing improvements. This concept plan would be used to match up prioritized projects with available funding each year with the CIP budget process.

Environmental Review:

This action is not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

Fiscal Impact:

None.

Public Notification:

A Notice of this meeting was posted on the designated webpage (PlanCommunityPark.com).

Notification was provided to news and social media outlets, all website registrants, and noted stakeholders.

Attachments:

A. Final Needs Assessment for Community Park
Reviewed/ Approved By:

Wendy Kaserman
Assistant City Manager
2 of60
Reviewed By:

Alan Fenstermacher
City Attorney
Approved By:
c~
City Manager
January 18, 2022, Item #15

COMMUNITY PARK

NEEDS ASSESSMENT
DRAFT
DECEMBER 2021
PLANCOMMUNITYPARK.COM
January 18, 2022, Item #15
4 of 60

COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
City of Poway
Chris Hazeltine, City Manager
Wendy Kaserman, Assistant City Manager
Audrey Denham, Community Services Director
Bob Manis, Development Services Director
Will Wiley, Assistant Director of Public Works, Maintenance and Operations David De Vries, City Planner
Carrie Sanchez, Recreation Area Manager
Rene Carmichael, Community Outreach Coordinator
Bob Hahn, Parks and Trails Manager
PROS Consulting. INC.

Neelay Bhatt, Vice President and Principal Consultant
Jason Elissalde, Senior Project Manager
pros;,';>
consultiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE --EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................... 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

1.2 PROJECT PROCESS .............................................................................................. 1

1.3 KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................... 2

1.4 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................ 3

1.5 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER TWO -PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT ....................................................... 5

2.1 KEY STAKEHOLDER AND USER GROUPS SUMMARY .......................................................... 6

2.2 PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS ...................................................................................... 11

2.3 ELECTRONIC SURVEY .......................................................................................... 13

2.4 WEBSITE ANALYTICS ........................................................................................... 32 CHAPTER THREE -RECREATION TRENDS AND BENCHMARKING ............................................. 33

3.1 RECREATION TRENDS .......................................................................................... 33 CHAPTER FOUR -STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 38

4. 1 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 38 CHAPTER FIVE -CONCLUSION ••••.••••••••••••••.•.•.•••..•..•••••••..•.•••••••••••••••••.••••.••••..•.•.....••.•. 39 APPENDIX A -NON-PARTICIPANT INTEREST BY AGE SEGMENT .............................................. 41 APPENDIX B -NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PROGRAMMING TRENDS .......................................... 42 APPENDIX C -CORE VS. CASUAL PARTICIPATION TRENDS ................................................... 45 APPENDIX D -PUBLIC INPUT MEETING POLL RES UL TS .•••••.••.••.••••••••.•••..••.•.••...••••..•••.•.....•.. 51 APPENDIX E -PUBLIC INPUT MEETING CHAT COMMENTS ••••.•.•.•.••..••••..••..•••..•••.•.••.•••••.•..•..•. 55 5 of 60 ii
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER ONE --EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Poway selected PROS Consulting to assist in developing a Needs Assessment for Community Park ("Assessment"). The purpose of the Assessment is to serve as a usable "blueprint" to the City staff, Parks & Recreation Advisory Committee, and the City Council in planning for the needs of Community Park for the growing population using it.

This document is intended to be an identification of community needs based on:
• Recreation Trends
• Key Leader, Stakeholder, and User Group Input
• Virtual Public Meetings and Community Survey
• Benchmarking Data
• Staff Visioning Process
The next step in this process is recommended to be a Site Master Plan to help design and identify the best placement and location of the approved needs identified through this assessment.

1.2 PROJECT PROCESS
The Assessment followed a process of data collection, public input, on-the-ground study, assessment of existing conditions, market research, and open dialogue with local leadership and key stakeholders. The project process followed a planning path, as illustrated below:

Where Are We
TODAY? ....................
• Site Tour
• Benchmark Analysis
6 of 60
Where Are We Going
TOMORROW? .............................
• Community Engagement
• Demographic and Trends
• Level of Service Standards
• Online Survey
1 How Do We Get
THERE? . ..................... .
• Needs Prioritization
pros~,';>
consuttiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

CITY OF POWA V

1.3 KEY FINDINGS

1.3.1 RECREATION TRENDS
These were developed for Poway using data from Environmental Services Research Institute (ESRI) using participation data based on Market Potential Index (MPI) measures (the probable demand for a product or service within a defined service area).

It shows the Fitness MPI
likelihood that an
adult resident will
-Poway -National Average
160 147
participate in 140
certain activities 120
when compared to J 100
the U.S. National 80
average which is ~ 60
denoted as 100. 40
Thus, numbers 20
below 100 0
Yoga Jogging/ Pilates Swimming Weight Walking for Aerobics Zumba represent lower Running Lifting Exercise
than average participation rates (lower demand) and numbers above 100 represent above average participation rates (higher demand). MPls were developed for General Sports, Fitness, and Outdoor Activity. As seen below, a variety of fitness activities including jogging, running, and walking for exercise are all very high priorities compared to the national average.

1.3.2 COMMUNITY INPUT
This included a variety of key leader
(City Council, Committee members,
staff etc.), stakeholder, and user
groups (partial list shown) who shared
Stakeholders and User Groups
their input on strengths,
opportunities, and their top
priorities/vision for Community Park.

Two virtual public meetings were also
conducted in June 2021 and had over
30 attendees participated in them.

City of Poway
Poway City Council
Poway Valley Senior Citizen Corporation
Board of Directors
Valley Elementary
June 9, 2021
Parks and Recreation Advisory
Committee
Trail Advisory Board
SD Skate Life
Poway Sports Association
In additional, the Consulting team, in conjunction with City staff, administered an online survey via Survey
Virtual Public Meeting #2 ·-COMPLETED
Monkey and the project website
www.plancommunityparks.com. The survey was
launched in English and Spanish and City staff help
market and promote the survey to the broader
community.

The survey was live from August 2 -September 4, 2021
and had a total of 1, 171 responses which is an
exceptionally high response rate.
7 of 60 2

6.00pm - 7.00pm PST
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

1.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on an iterative visioning process with staff combined with the community input, benchmarking, and analysis of recreational trends, the Consulting Team identified the following considerations and top priorities.
1-4-1 CONSIDERATIONS: UPDATE EXISTING AMENITIES
The following considerations are tied to updating already existing facilities and/or amenities:

1. Add additional trees and/or shade structures to areas including, but not necessarily limited to:
• Tot lots
• The Splash Pad
• Grass areas
• Baseball field areas
• Parking lots

2. Improve Signage (Directional/Wayfinding and Informational):
• Entrance (e.g., archway, on entry fences/walls)
• Amenities
• Facilities and Rooms
• Trail Information and Mile Markers
• Parking

3. Connect Pedestrian loops (e.g., bridges, circle paths) and bicycle paths and enhance ADA accessibility

4. Upgrade/add play structures for all-abilities playgrounds

5. Increase park visibility and safety lighting in and around the park (e.g., reduce fencing, relocate operational yards)

1.4.2 CONSIDERATJONS: NEW AMENITIES
The following considerations are for potential new amenities that could be added to Community Park:

1. Add outdoor adventure elements

2. Add dedicated pickleball courts

3. Add restroom by northerly play area

4. Introduce interpretive learning and art opportunities and creek renovation to activate the creek

5. Provide fitness equipment / exercise stations along the trail

1.4.3 CONSIDERATIONS: OPERATIONS
These considerations are going to be tied to the operations or processes of the City.

1. Invest in additional marketing to create greater awareness of park offerings

2. Focus on maintenance Improvements
• Enhance existing landscape
• Relocate maintenance yard
• Add dedicated staff / contract support

3. Ensure consistency in branding and aesthetics

4. Determine consistent hours of operations
8 of 60 3 pros~,';>
consuttiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY

5. Utilize technology to enhance the user experience
• Wi-Fi in park
• App for accessible maps / parking counts / workout trackers etc.

1.4-4 TOP PRIORITIES

1. Shade (shade structures/sails and trees) -Create more shaded areas around the park and trails as well as around amenities where people congregate.

2. Accessible Trails and Connectivity -Connect pedestrian loops and make the trails more universally accessible. Provide bike access through the park with adequate bicycle parking.

3. Signage and Park Visibility -Enhance visibility (e.g., reduce tennis court fencing, relocate operational yard) and signage into and throughout the park, for awareness, directional, and educational purposes.

4. Park Amenities and All-Abilities Playground -Improve play areas to include all-abilities playgrounds and introduce pickleball and adventure amenities such as zip-lines, obstacle courses etc. to expand the park's usability.

5. Additional Resources for Awareness and Maintenance (Staff and/or Contract Support) -Invest additional resources to keep up with the park maintenance as additional amenities are added; also grow marketing and communication efforts to create greater awareness about the offerings particularly at the community recreation center (e.g., website App).

1.5 CONCLUSION
This Assessment is meant to be a needs assessment as the City continues to plan its future to meet the needs of its growing and very engaged population. As the area grows, Community Park will require a higher level of service for indoor and outdoor offerings while creating enjoyable, safe spaces for community members of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds to recreate comfortably. City leadership can take this Assessment into consideration for future CIP projects and/or consider funding for specific park designs and/or a park master plan.

The City's staff is a group of passionate, skilled professionals, and their dedication to the community's well-being is apparent. The Consulting Team is confident that staff in conjunction with the City's leadership will do everything in their power to ensure Community Park meets the needs of the Poway community in the years to come.
9 of 60 4
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER TWO -PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
The planning process incorporated input from City key leaders, stakeholders and residents through a variety of mediums. This included:
• Series of key leader and stakeholder interviews and focus user group discussions • Two (2) virtual public meetings
• Key leader site tour
• An online survey
• Crowd-sourcing project website www.plancommunitypark.com.

The public outreach program included a designated website (plancommunitypark.com) with information about community park, key findings, and ways to participate (e.g., notification sign-ups, comment cards, forthcoming surveys, and public meetings). The outreach for surveys and public meetings included:

1. Notifications on the City website and the PlanCommunityPark.com website

2. A banner image on the homepage directing potential participants to the PlanCommunityPark.com page

3. Postings on most of our social media channels (e.g., Nextdoor, Facebook, Twitter, and lnstagram)

4. Electronic email notifications (Eblast) to 14,516 recipients

5. Direct notice to interested registrants and prior stakeholder, user group, and public meeting participants using a consolidated list

6. Posters at Community Park in English and Spanish

7. Flyers for PeachJar (Poway Unified School District email list) distribution

8. Flyers that Community Park staff to hand out at the Summer Movies in the Park event

9. Printed Surveys provided at Cafagna Center in English and Spanish The following sections summarize and highlight the key findings from each stage of the extensive public input process. These mediums helped engage 1300+ participants representing a broad cross section of interests Citywide.
10 of 60 5 pros~,';>
consulf i[)g
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY

2.1 KEY STAKEHOLDER AND USER GROUPS SUMMARY
Over the course of three days in 2021, the consulting team convened the following groups to gain insight into the current strengths, opportunities and priorities for Community Park, and to better understand future recreational needs of its users.

I
Stakeholders and User Groups
City of Poway Parks and Recreation Advisory
Committee
Poway City Council Trail Advisory Board
Poway Valley Senior Citizen Corporation SD Skate Life
Board of Directors
Valley Elementary Poway Sports Association
Note: The Stakeholder and User Group list above excludes recreational instructors and organizational representatives (e.g., baseball, tennis, soccer, lacrosse, flag football, rugby, dog trainer, water aerobics, swim) and reserve park rangers who also participated. Invitees included Poway Kiwanis, Poway Rotary Club, Poway Bocce Club, Poway Library, Poway Boys & Girls Club, Pacific Swim, and Poway Unified School District representatives.

2.1.1 STRENGTHS
Based on feedback from key stakeholder and user
group interviews, common themes arose in many
conversations related to the strengths of
Community Park. These themes included the
knowledge and quality of City of Poway staff, the
facilities / amenities, overall aesthetics, and the
variety of activities provided at Community Park.

STAFF
Stakeholders noted that staff's knowledge,
service and passion contributed greatly towards
providing an exceptional user experience. Many
stakeholders highlighted the exemplary service
and communication provided by staff. Others
stated that quality leadership played a key role in
high employee morale, noting the passion and
Figure 1: Word Cloud of all comments collected for
"strengths"
enthusiasm of City employees. Sentiments shared regarding the strengths of staff include:
• "Communicative and professional"
• Customer service by staff including the recreation supervisor at Community Park • Highly organized
11 of 60 6
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
• Staff addresses issues that are brought forward and stay current on community's needs

FACILITIES AND AMENITIES
Community Park offers a diverse array of amenities and facilities, with activities for all ages. Many see the park as a resource that reflects a sense of community and brings people together.

Stakeholders are generally supportive of the facilities and amenities at Community Park and mentioned the following components contributing to the park's uniqueness:
• "Beautiful pool"
• "Best dog park in San Diego area"
• Baseball fields
• New Community Center
• Picnic areas
• Playgrounds
• Skateboard Park
• Tennis courts
• Walking paths, trails, and pathways

OVERALL AESTHETICS
Many stakeholders communicated their appreciation of the overall aesthetics and layout of Community Park. Residents enjoy the space and natural beauty the park provides and appreciate the effort put forth to maintain it. Comments and specifics mentioned by stakeholders regarding the aesthetics and layout of Community Park include:
• "Flagship of our park system"
• "Keep the Creek -inspires a lot of play and kids really enjoy it" • "Love the pathways in the park and how they look"
• "Picturesque, pretty and attractive"
• Built in a way to attract more people
• Facilities are generally clean and taken care of
• Family Friendly
• Improved view corridors
• Location
• Nice open space
• Park accessible from multiple sides
• Park maintenance
• Spacious
• Trees
• Walkability

VARIETY OF ACTIVITIES
The vast amount of recreation options was continuously mentioned as a strength in the focus groups.

Stakeholders praised the variety of programs, services, and opportunities available to users of all ages.

Highlights of their comments include:
• "Diverse recreation opportunities"
12 of 60 7 pros-;,';>
consulti[lg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
• Activities for low-income families
• Adventure Playground
• Events and Activities
• Great programs including senior programs
• Mix of uses
• Offerings for kids / teens (kids / teen hang out) with opportunities to hang out and make new friends
• Summer programs
• Wide variety of activities

2.1.2 OPPORTUNITIES
Stakeholder and user groups shared their
perspectives on the opportunities that could
impact the future of Community Park.

Opportunities that were listed include parking,
public awareness of the park, shade, park layout,
and the accessibility and connectivity of
Community Park.

PARKING
The most mentioned opportunity in the focus
group and key stakeholder meetings were
concerns with the parking. Stakeholders would
like to see improvements made to not only to the
amount of parking, but to the layout and lighting
of the existing lots.

Recommendations and comments tied to parking
that were provided by stakeholders include:

Figure 2: Word Cloud of all comments collected for
"opportunities"
• "Need more parking especially with some parking areas taken over with new condo development" • Current parking area design and two separate lots being connected is a little confusing • No parking available during tournaments
• Poor lighting in the parking lot
• Use Boys and Girls Club for parking
• Add directional signage to available parking areas

PUBLIC AWARENESS
Stakeholders stated concerns stated about portions of the population that are unaware of Community Park's facilities, amenities, services, programs, and even the location. Many attendees value the park and want others to be aware of and support the City's efforts.

The following ideas and comments to increase the awareness of Community Park included:
• "Need ways to make folks more interested in using the park" • "Not much community awareness"
• Communication and outreach
• Community awareness of park
13 of 60 8
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
• Senior center signage much better than community signage • Wayfinding and Directional Signage
• Social Media
• Would like an app to track usage
SHADE
Many stakeholders mentioned the lack of shade as a major concern. The lack of trees and shade structures, especially around high use park amenities, combined with the warm climate has a negative impact on users' enjoyment of the park.

Focus groups mentioned the following in regards to the shade at Community Park:
• "Better shade for the parking area and vehicles too would be helpful" • "Lack of shade an issue"
• Benches with shade
• Increased availability of shaded spaces
• More shade structures especially around Dog Park and play areas • More shade trees
LAYOUT
Stakeholders verbalized opportunities within the layout of Community Park. Concerns included space allocation, restroom placement, the park's "first impression", and how areas are utilized.

Specific comments and recommendations included:
• Closer entrance
• Creek serves as natural dividing line between park
• Need restrooms on northwest corner
• Need walking paths around fields and the park
• Public works yard "unsightly"
• Space adjustment due to development
• Tennis court placement
• Additional recreational facilities (e.g., pickleball courts, accessible and inclusive playground equipment, and multi-generational facilities and amenities) Some creative ideas for a new layout included an American Ninja course, batting cages, a BMX pump track, a beginner skate park, a roller skate rink, volleyball courts, water features, trail markers, a walking loop around the park, workout stations, a maze, Wifi-stations, indoor play stations for teens and adults, disc golf, swing and climbing logs, zip lines, ping pong tables, bbq grills, a pedestrian bridge from Oak Knoll Rd to dog park, wayfinding signs, monitoring surveillance systems, joint-use facilities, and a parking lot reconfiguration.

ACCESSIBILITY AND CONNECTIVITY
Stakeholders had multiple concerns with the accessibility and connectivity of Community Park. "Accessibility" in terms of individuals ability to utilize the park and all its' amenities and connectivity in its' ability to connect users with other parts of the City. 14 of 60 9 prosi,';>
consutti[)g
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
The City's ability to keep up with the growth and expanding needs of the community, while remaining accessible to all, were consistent themes.

As provided by stakeholders, recommendations and comments for consideration regarding the accessibility and connectivity of Community Park include:
• Accessibility for Dog Park
• Concern with entrance from creek bed pathway
• Create loop around park with mile markers
• Disconnect between north and south side of park
• Need to look for ways to "open things up"
• Park, specifically the playground, is not inviting
• Poor access from Poway Road
• More trails and trail enhancements

2.1.3 TOP PRIORITY
Stakeholders and user groups shared many
priorities to enhance Community Park. Those
themes that were mentioned the most were
improvements to the park entrance / first
impression, better trails and connectivity,
maintaining usable open space, and adding
recreational facilities and shade.

PARK ENTRANCE / FIRST IMPRESSION
Multiple stakeholders and user groups mentioned
Community Park's entrance as a top priority. They
would like to see the entrance be more open with
better sightlines and believe it would improve the
first impression of the park. Many park facilities
need to be rehabilitated and enhanced landscape
and maintenance were recommended to be
prioritized.

TRAILS & CONNECTIVITY
Figure 3: Word Cloud of all comments collected for "top priorities"
More trails and better connectivity throughout the park was another top priority. Participants mentioned wanting more trails, pathways, and walking paths as well as better connectivity to the natural areas.

Wayfinding and directional signage and mile markers were also be recommended to be prioritized.

OPEN SPACE
Stakeholders and user groups were interested in ensuring that there is plenty of open space available at Community Park. They would like to see more space available for unstructured or free activities that allow users to enjoy the natural beauty of the park.

RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Many participants wanted to see the addition of recreational facilities including pickleball courts, accessible and inclusive playground equipment, and multi-generational facilities and amenities. 15 of 60 10
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
SHADE
More shade was a top priority for many stakeholders. They would like to see both shade structures and more trees to make visiting the park more enjoyable.

2.2 PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS
In tandem with the stakeholder and user group
interviews, the consulting team also hosted 2 (two)
virtual public input meetings designed to further
engage residents of the City. The public input
meetings spanned two days and provided attendees
with a presentation of the project, process, initial
demographic findings, as well as an opportunity for
residents to off er feedback on the parks system
through live polling via Zoom.

Throughout the presentation, attendees asked
questions and shared feedback to identify the
strengths, opportunities, and top priorities they see
and envision for Community Park.

Close to 30 participants, representing a variety of
interests, participated in the public meetings. Each
public input meeting is combined and summarized in
the following sections that include the live polling,
combined results to each question asked, and
summarized open discussion of the public input. Both
of these meetings were done virtually.

LIVE POLLING
One key approach for soliciting feedback from
June 8, 2021
Virtual Public Meeting #1 -COMPLETED

6.00pm -7.00pm PST
June 9, 2021
Virtual Public Meeting #2 -COMPLETED

6.00pm -7.00pm PST
attendees of the public forum was through live polling of the audience. Using the responses to focus group and key leadership interview questions, the consulting team developed questions within a PowerPoint presentation to gain an understanding of park needs, barriers to participation, communication preferences and others.
16 of 60 11 pros~';>
consultiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
CITY
OF
POWAY
2 .2.1
LIVE
POLLI
NG

RESULTS
This
exercise
was
facilitated
using
a
live
polling
software
that
allowed
for
attendees
to
share
their
input
in
real-time
during
the
meeting.

These
results
were
then
displayed
to
the
attendees
immediately
after
all
the
respondents
had
provided
their
input.

The
following
is
a
synopsis
of
the
demographics
who
participated,
and
some
key
findings.

The
full
results
are
shown
in
Appendix
D
and
E.
•
•
• •
~
t f
Gender:

Age:

Zip
Code:
57%-
Female
50%
-Ages
55-74
85%-92064
40%-Male
34%
-Ages
35-54
15%
-92128
3%
-Prefer
not
to
answer
11%
-Ages
75 +
5%
-Ages
18-34
Regularly
used
amenities:
71%
-Trails
and
pathways
st
imp
a t
im
rovements:
62%
-Expand
walking
paths/trails
52%
-More
shade
structures/trees
48%
-Playground
33%
-Dog
Park
52%
-Innovative,
all
ability
playgrounds
17 of
60 12
-••• IIIIIIP'"-~
Participation: 66%-Alone 29%
-One
other
person
3%
-Two
other
people
2%
-Three
or
more
people
Preferred
communication
55%
-Poway
Chieftain
45%
-Facebook
45%-Email
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

2.3 ELECTRONIC SURVEY

2.3.1 METHODOLOGY
The consulting team conducted an online survey (powered by SurveyMonkey) to gain a better understanding of the characteristics, preferences, and satisfaction levels of Community Park users and stakeholders. The survey was open for approximately three weeks, from August 12th through September 4th, 2021, and received a total of 1,171 responses, which speaks to an exceptional participation rate among the community. This was one of the highest response rates per capita witnessed amongst similar surveys.

2.3.2 FINDINGS
Q1: WHEN DO YOU OR ANY MEMBER OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD TYPICALLY VISIT COMMUNITY PARK? (SELECT ALL THAT APPLY)
Weekend afternoons (40%) and weekend mornings (38%) were the most popular times to visit Community Park indicated by respondents. Weekday usage was very evenly distributed between mornings (30%), afternoons (31%), and evenings (31%). Sixteen percent (16%) of those surveyed indicated they do not use Community Park.

Park Visitation
18 of 60 13
■ Weekday mornings
■ Weekday afternoons
■ Weekday evenings
■ Weekend mornings
■ Weekend afternoons
■ Weekend evenings
■ I do not use Community Park
pros-;,';>
consulti[)g
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
Q2: WHO DO YOU USUALLY GO TO THE COMMUNITY PARK WITH: (SELECT ALL THAT APPLY) Over half of survey participants indicated they visit Community Park with kids (54%) or other family members (50%). About one in four (26%) visit the park alone.

Who You Visit With
■ Kids
■ Other family members
■ Friends
■ Alone
■ Sports Teams
■■
■ Other (please specify)
Q3: HOW LONG, ON AVERAGE, DO YOU STAY AT COMMUNITY PARK WHEN YOU VISIT? Only 19 percent stated that they stay less than an hour while a majority (61 %) spend between 1 to 2 hours when they visit Community Park.

Length of Stay
■ Less than one hour
■ 1-2 hours
■ 2-4 hours
■ 4-6 hours
■ More than 6 hours
19 of 60 14
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Q4: PEOPLE USE COMMUNITY PARK IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS. PLEASE INDICATE IF YOU OR ANY

MEMBER OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING AMENITIES AND/OR FUNCTIONS OF COMMUNITY PARK REGULARLY BY SELECTING EITHER "YES" OR "NO".

Trails and pathways (78%) are the most used amenity by survey respondents and any member of their household followed by playground (68%), swim center (68%), and open space for children to play (66%).

Amenity Use -"Yes"
Trails and pathways (paved, unpaved, etc.)
Playground
Swim center
Open space for children to play
Exercise on your own
Dog park
Picnic areas
Open space for passive recreation
Large community events
Community center
Recreation classes or camps
Swim programs
Youth programs (e.g., Kids Night Out, In The Park Series) Tennis courts
Skate park
Meeting new people
Athletic multi-use field (e.g., soccer, rugby, lacrosse, football) Basketball court
Baseball fields
Older adult programs and services (e.g., Line Dancing, Feeling Fit, Mahjong)
45%
40%
34%
30%
28%
25%
24%
24%
18%
18%
16%
Private outdoor rental space --11%
Bocce courts -11%
Pickleball court (overlayed on basketball court) -10%
Private indoor rental space -9%
Teen programs (e.g., Teen Program Series, Teen Volunteer Program) -9% 20 of 60 15
68%
68%
66%
64%
61%
60%
57%
56%
78%
pros-;,';>
consultiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

CITY OF POWA V
IF "YES," PLEASE RATE THE OVERALL QUALITY
Community center (46%) received the highest percentage of "excellent" votes from respondents who have utilized the amenity. The swim center was next at forty-two (42%). The only amenity with a percentage of "poor" responses over nine percent was the baseball fields (29%), however, they were only indicated to be used by eighteen percent (18%) of respondents.

If Yes, Rate Overall Quality
Trails and pathways (paved, unpaved, etc.)
Playground
Swim center
Open space for children to play
Exercise on your own
Dog park
Picnic areas
Open space for passive recreation
Large community events
Community center
Recreation classes or camps
Swim programs
Youth programs (e.g., Kids Night Out, In The Park Series) Tennis courts
Skate park
Meeting new people
Athletic multi-use field (e.g., soccer, rugby, lacrosse, football) Basketball court
Baseball fields
Older adult programs and services (e.g., Line Dancing, Feeling Fit, Mahjong)
Private outdoor rental space
Bocce courts
Pickleball court (overlayed on basketball court)
Private indoor rental space
Teen programs (e.g., Teen Program Series, Teen Volunteer Program) 21% 53% 22%-
42% 49%
22% 57% -19%1
19% 56% 23%~iv:
15% 53%
10% 43% 41% "6%
21% 51% 25%-
25% 61% 14%1
46% 38% ■14%■
34% 55% l0%1
42% 49% 9%
35% 57% 7%
% 62% 27%-.-5%
20% 55% •11% ,' 7%
15% 52% 32%
10% 35% 26% -29%
27% 46% •20% .. 7%
8% 67% 21% 5%
13% 47%
7% 40%
32% 53% 1-12% ,
■ Excellent ■ Good ■ Fair ■ Poor
21 of 60 16
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Q5: WHICH FOUR OF THESE AMENITIES AND/OR FUNCTIONS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT TO YOUR HOUSEHOLD?
Swim center (271 top four selections) was mentioned the most as a top four important amenity or program, even though it received the third most "1st choice" votes (93). Dog park (244 top four selections) received the most "pt choice" votes (113), and Playground was selected as the "1st choice" 107 times.

Most Important Amenity/ Program
Swim center
Dog park
Playground
Trails and pathways (paved, unpaved, etc.)
Open space for children to play
Open space for passive recreation
Exercise on your own
Picnic areas
Large community events
Community center
Recreation classes or camps
Athletic multi-use field (e.g., soccer, rugby, lacrosse, football) Tennis courts
Older adult programs and services (e.g., Line Dancing, Feeling Fit, Mahjong)
Skate park
Baseball fields
Swim programs
Youth programs (e.g., Kids Night Out, In The Park Series) Pickleball court (overlayed on basketball court)
Basketball court
Teen programs (e.g., Teen Program Series, Teen Volunteer Program) Meeting new people
Bocce courts
Private indoor rental space
Private outdoor rental space
■ 1st Choice ■ 2nd Choice
22 of 60 17
26 25
24 86
79 6
6 70
8 6
122
99 3rd Choice ■ 4th Choice
163
145
207
244
240
37 271
pros~,';>
consuttiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
Q6: HOW OFTEN DO YOU OR ANY MEMBER OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD USE THE FOLLOWING FACILITIES AT COMMUNITY PARK?
Trails and pathways are the most often used facility on a daily (14%) and weekly (27%) basis by survey respondents. Those facilities with the highest percentage of "I do not use" selections were Boys and Girls Club (96%), bocce courts (88%), rooms/halls for rent (87%), and pickleball court (87%), though it must be noted that the current pickleball courts are overlaid on the basketball court (as noted in the choices) and many respondents were not aware the pickleball courts existed.

Frequency of Use
Athletic multi-use field (e.g., soccer, rugby, lacrosse, football) Baseball fields
Basketball court
Bocce courts
Boys and Girls Club (operated by the Boys and Girls Club of San Diego County)
Community center
Dog park
Pickleball court (overlayed on basketball court)
Picnic areas
Playgrounds
Rooms/halls for classes and/or programs
Rooms/halls for rent
Skate park
Swim center
Tennis courts
Trails and pathways (paved and unpaved)
9°0 • •· 73%
0 0 0 76%
I • 88%
ll 96%
0o O 17° 0 1 53%
% 17% u O ' 0 0 ~':l 43%
I -■ 87%
19% •1 %~ 1 ° 1 ° ~ 32%
I O '.:! 87%
0 0 %• 75%
14% 10% 13% 17% 11%1· 30%
o o 00 o %l 71%
■ Daily ■ Weekly ■ Monthly ■ At least six times per year ■ Two to five times per year Once per year or less ■ I do not use 23 of 60 18
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT
Q7:

PLEASE
CHECK
ALL
OF
THE

FOLLOWING

REASONS
THAT

PREVENT
YOU
OR
OTHER

MEMBERS
OF
YOUR

HOUSEHOLD
FROM
USING

COMMUNITY
PARK
MORE
OFTEN.
(PRE-COVID-19

PANDEMIC)
"I
am
too
busy"
(37%)
was
the
most
mentioned
barrier
as
to
why
respondents
or
other
members
of
their
household
do
not
use
Community
Park
more
often.
"I
do
not
know
what
is
offered"
(34%),
"lack
of
shade"
(29%)
and
"use
of
other
parks"
(25%)
were
the
other
options
selected
by
at
least
one
in
four
participants.

Barriers
I am
too
busy
I do
not
know
what
is
being
offered
Lack
of
shade
Use
other
parks
Lack
of
parking
Lack
of
amenities
in
park
Lack
of
restrooms
Park
does
not
have
right
equipment
(features/facilities)
Facilities
operating
hours
not
convenient
Too
busy/crowded
Too
far
from
residence
Park
is
not
well
maintained
Lack
of
programming
I do
not
feel
safe
Lack
of
open
space
18%
15%
14%
11% 10% 10% 10%
8% 7% 7% 6%
Too
expensive
-
4%
Poor
signage/direction
-
4%
I do
not
feel
welcome
•
2%
Other
(please
specify)
12%
24 of
60 19
29%
25%
37%
34%
pros
i,';>
consulf
i!)g
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
QB: PLEASE RATE YOUR LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MANAGEMENT / OPERATIONS OF COMMUNITY PARK?
Over sixty-one percent (61 %) of those surveyed were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the management/operations of Community Park. Only seven percent (7%) of respondents indicated a level of dissatisfaction.

Satisfaction Level -Management/Operations
1%
■ Very satisfied
■ Satisfied
No opinion
■ Dissatisfied
■ Very dissatisfied
Q9: PLEASE RATE YOUR LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH THE MAINTENANCE OF COMMUNITY PARK? In terms of park maintenance, over seventy percent (70%) of respondents indicated they were "satisfied" of very satisfied" with the work done by staff. Less than one out of every ten surveyed selected the dissatisfied at some level.
25 of 60
Satisfaction Level -Maintenance
1%
20 ■ Very satisfied
■ Satisfied
■ No opinion
■ Dissatisfied
■ Very dissatisfied
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Q10: HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CURRENT LEVEL OF OVERALL SECURITY AND PUBLIC SAFETY FOR USERS OF FACILITIES OR PROGRAMS (ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 5, WITH 5 BEING "FEEL VERY SAFE" AND 1 BEING "DO NOT FEEL SAFE AT ALL")?
"Feel safe most of the time" (43%) and "feel very safe" (32%) were the most selected option by respondents in terms of how safe they feel at Community Park. Only one percent (1%) indicated they "do not feel safe at all."
26 of 60
User Security/Safety
1%
21 ■ Feel very safe
■ Feel safe most of the time
■ Neutral
■ Sometimes feel unsafe
■ Do not feel safe at all
pros-;,';>
consuttiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
Q11: PLEASE INDICATE THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE FOR THE CITY OF POWAY TO PROVIDE OR IMPROVE THE FOLLOWING AMENITY TO COMMUNITY PARK OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. "More trees/vegetation" (45%) and "more shade structures" (43%) received the highest percentage of "very important" responses from those surveyed when asked to indicate the level of importance of amenities for Community Park for the next 10 years.

This emulates what we heard in the public input process in which the community wants more shade. "Improve/expand walking/biking paths, loop trails, and/or trial markers" (42%) and "improve safety measures (lighting, cameras, patrol, etc.)" (40%) were the other amenities in which at least two out of five respondents deemed "very important."
Proposed Action Support
More trees/vegetation
More shade structures
Improve/expand walking/biking paths, loop trails, and/or trail markers Improve safety measures (lighting, cameras, patrol, etc.) Enhance creek area
Improve/expand restroom facilities
Add innovative all abilities playgrounds
Add adventure amenities (obstacle course, rock wall, swing and climbing logs, maze, etc.) Enhance outdoor space for events
More parking
....u~
~
27 of 60
Improve ADA accessibility ---♦~
Improve/expand open space
Improve picnic/outdoor cooking areas ---1~
Add outdoor amphitheater/stage ..-,iw
Improve/expand dog park -1 ·.

Add indoor fitness facilities (gym, studio, etc.) lllllrt"~ Improve park entrance and "first impression" _..-; · .

Improve signage (wayfinding and directional signage and place signage) Ila{~.

Provide Wi-Fi access
Add outdoor fitness equipment ~
Add BMX pump track
Build or upgrade existing baseball/softball fields
Add roller skating park/rink
Add pickleball courts
Add disc golf course
Upgrade existing tennis courts
Improve/expand indoor space for events
Improve/expand skatepark 111:~:I. ••0•1111::::::::::,.~~ Add artificia I turf field
Add sand volleyball courts •;Wi
Upgrade existing basketball courts
Improve/expand indoor gaming and media stations and social areas Add outdoor ping pong table(s)
Upgrade existing football/soccer field
Add outdoor chess table(s)
More loading zones
■ Very important ■ Somewhat important
22 i: ..

Not sure ■ Not important
w.;.
)ffl, Uil"tl
-~ \VAi
l'i~ •il"111
::::::lT~. w..-
=~
ffr:1111111
v.Blii:lil-fjl"/.111111
C:::11-~'..l:~
:ffl
~~iilll-11'1::V.-...
,:·.

January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT
Q12:

WHICH
FOUR
OF
THESE

IMPROVEMENTS
ARE
THE
MOST

IMPORTANT
FOR
THE
CITY
TO

ADD/EXPAND/RENOVATE
(RANK
IN
ORDER
1 TO
4 WHERE
1ST
IS
MOST
IMPORTANT)?
Survey
respondents
indicated
that
the
most
important
improvements
for
the
City
to
add,
expand,
and/or
renovate
were
"add
adventure
amenities"
(206
votes),
improve
and/or
expand
walking
and
biking
paths,
loop
trail,
and/
or
trail
markers
(194
votes),
and
"improve
safety
measures"
(169
votes).

Most
Important
Improvements
Add
adventure
amenities
{obstacle
course,
rock
wall,
swing
and
climbing
logs,
maze,
etc.)
---------
-----•
===
=---206
28 of
60 Improve/expand
walking/biking
paths,
loop
trails,
and/or
trail
markers
194
Improve
safety
measures
{lighting,
cameras,
patrol,
etc
.)
169
Enhance
creek
area
--
-
----IC
====
---•
155
More
shade
structures
148
More
trees/vegetation
123
Add
outdoor
amphitheater/stage
•--
----=:
===
=--•
123
Add
innovative
all
abilities
playgrounds
115
Improve/expand
dog
park
112
Add
BMX
pump
track
-----
----=:::::I-
107
Improve/expand
restroom
facilities
98 More
parking
96 Add
indoor
fitness
facilities
{gym,
studio,
etc.)
•----r.::::::a-
86 Improve
picnic/outdoor
cooking
areas
82 Add
pickleball
courts
80 Add
disc
golf
course
77 Improve
ADA
accessibility
68 Add
outdoor
fitness
equipment
67 Improve/expand
open
space
-
••==
::1111
■
66 Add
roller
skating
park/rink
60 Enhance
outdoor
space
for
events
59 Build
or
upgrade
existing
baseball/softball
fields
52 Upgrade
existing
tennis
courts
46 Add
sand
volleyball
courts
44 Improve
park
entrance
and
"first
impression
"
43 Add
artificial
turf
field
42 Improve/expand
skatepark
•1111:=:1•
40 Provide
Wi-Fi
access
39 Improve
signage
{wayfinding
and
directional
signage
and
place
signage)
26 Add
outdoor
ping
pong
table(s)
21 Add
outdoor
chess
table(s)
19 Improve/expand
indoor
space
for
events
15 Upgrade
existing
football/soccer
field
12 Upgrade
existing
basketball
courts
11 Improve/expand
indoor
gaming
and
media
stations
and
social
areas
11 More
loading
zones
1117
■
1st
Choice
■
2nd
Choice
3rd
Choice
■
4th
Choice
23 pros
-;',->
consutti
f)g
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

CITY OF POWA V
Q13: THE CITY OF POWAY IS COMMITTED TO ENSURING THEIR PARKS ARE INCLUSIVE AND ACCESSIBLE. DO ANY MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD HAVE A DISABILITY AS DEFINED BY THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA)?
Fifteen percent (15%) of survey respondents indicated a member of their family has a disability as defined by the Americans with Disability Act (ADA).

Households Members with a
Disability
■ Yes
■ No
Q14: IF YES WAS INDICATED FOR Q13, WHAT TYPE OF ACCOMMODATION IS NEEDED TO SERVE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD (PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)? "More accessible walkways and pathways" (77%) was by far the most selected accommodation to serve those with disabilities.

Accommodation Needs
More accessible walkways and pathways 77%
Adaptive playground equipment -23%
Additional staff • 7%
Sign language interpretation • 7%
Non-verbal assistance (Braille) I 2%
Other (please specify) 29%
29 of 60 24
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT
Q15:

IF
YES
WAS

INDICATED
FOR
Q13,
WHAT
TYPES
OF

PROGRAMS
ARE

DESIRED
TO
SERVE

INDIVIDUALS
WITH

DISABILITIES
IN
YOUR

HOUSEHOLD
(PLEASE
CHECK
ALL
THAT
APPLY)?
Of
the
options
given,
"social
activities"
(29%)
were
the
most
selected
desired
program
to
serve
individuals
with
disabilities,
followed
closely
by
"outdoor
adventure
program"
(28%)
and
"arts
&
crafts"
(27%).

Prefer
not
to
answer
Social
activities
(dances,
etc.)
Outdoor
adventure
programs
Arts
&
Crafts
Organized
sports
Other
(please
specify)
30 of
60 Programs
Desired
21% 20%
25 34%
29% 28% 27%
pros
~,';>
consulting
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY

2.3.3 DEMOGRAPHICS
Q16: USING THE MAP OF THE CITY AS A GUIDE, WHICH PART OF POWAY DO YOU CURRENTLY LIVE IN?
While the smallest in size, Area 2 (37%) was the most represented area in the online survey.

Respondent Location
Area 1 (generally, north of Twin Peaks
Road/Poway Road)
Area 2 (generally, south of Twin Peaks Road,
west of Community Road)
Area 3 (generally, south of Poway Road, east of
Community Road)
Not applicable
Prefer not to answer
31 of 60 26
24%
34%
37%
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Q17: COUNTING YOURSELF, HOW MANY PEOPLE IN YOUR HOUSEHOLD ARE AGES ... (INDICATED BELOW)?
When compared to 2020 demographics, we see online survey participants (households) were overrepresented substantially in the 0-17 age group and slightly over in 35-54. This indicates a larger than City average amount of families with children filled out the survey.

Population by Age Segment
■ 0-17 years: ■ 18-34 years:
7%
27%
26%
19%
21%
2020 Demographics
Q18: WHAT IS YOUR AGE (IN YEARS)?
The average age of survey
respondents was 51, the median
age was 48. The youngest
respondent was 13 and the oldest
was 87.
32 of 60
35-54 years: ■ 55-74 years: ■ 75+:
27 23%
Online Survey Results
Respondents Age
4%
■ 0-17
■ 18-34
■ 35-54
■ 55-74
■ 75+
pros~,';>
consultiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
Q19: HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED IN POWAY (IN YEARS)?
Nearly half (46%) of survey
respondents have lived in Poway
for over 20 years, with the longest
recorded tenure being 66 years.

The average length of residence
was 19 years. The median of
respondents was 17.

Years in Poway
Q20: YOUR GENDER:

Females made up 55 percent of
the survey respondents.
33 of 60
Gender
0%
28 ■ Female
■ Male
■ 0-2
• 3-9
10-19
• 20+
■ Prefer not to answer
■ Prefer to self
describe
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Q21: WHAT IS YOUR HOUSEHOLD INCOME?
With one in four respondents choosing not to answer, $150,000+ (38%) was the largest household income demographic selected by survey participants. Less than one percent claimed under $30,000 a year.

Household Income
1%
■ Under $30,000
■ Between $30,000 and $59,999
■ Between $60,000 and $89,999
■ Between $90,000 and $119,999
■ Between $120,000 and $149,000
■ Over $150,000
■ Prefer not to answer
Q22: WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR RACE/ETHNICITY [CHECK ALL THAT APPLY]?
"White/Caucasian" (72%) was the most represented race by those that filled out the survey followed by "Asian/Pacific Islander" (11%), which is in line with demographic data for the City. 34 of 60
Respondent Race/Etnicity
White/Caucasian 72%
Asian/Pacific Islander 11%
Hispanic -5%
Native American I 1%
Black/African American I 1%
Prefer not to answer 15%
Other (please specify) I 3%
29 pros-;,';>
consulti,0g
January 18, 2022, Item #15
CITY
OF
POWAY
Q23:

PLEASE

INDICATE
HOW
YOU
OR
ANY
MEMBER
OF
YOUR

HOUSEHOLD
TRAVEL
TO

COMMUNITY
PARK
BY

SELECTING
EITHER
"YES"
OR
"NO."
Nearly
all
survey
respondents
utilize
a
car
(97%)
to
travel
to
Community
Park.

A
little
more
than
half
walk
(52%),
forty-four
percent
(44%)
bike,
and
two
percent
(2%)
use
the
bus.

Travel
Modes 2%
IF
YES
TO
Q23
PLE
ASE
LET
US
KNOW
HOW
LONG
IT
TAKES.
•
Car
•
Walk
■
Bike
•
MTS
Bus
stop
located
at
Ii bra
ry
Of
those
who
walk
to
Community
Park,
only
forty
percent
(40%)
live
within
a
10-minute
walk.

Seventy
one
percent
(71
%)
of
those
who
drive
take
10 minutes
or
less
to
get
to
Community
Park.

Travel
Time
Car
30%
41%
Walk
17%
23%
17 32%
12%
Bike
22%
25%
27%
23%
MTS
Bus
stop
located
at
library
25%
50%
25%
■
Up
to
5 minutes
■
6-10
minutes
11-15
minutes
■
16-30
minutes
■
Over
30 minutes
35 of
60 30
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT
Q24:

HOW
WOULD

MEMBERS
OF
YOUR

HOUSEHOLD
PREFER
TO
RECE
IVE

INFORMAT
ION
ABOUT
FUTURE
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK

PROGRAMS
AND

SERVICES
(PLEASE
CHECK
ALL
THAT
APPLY)?
In
terms
of
preferred
ways
to
receive
information
about
future
Community
Park
programs
and
services,
Email
newsletter
(64%)
was
the top
selection
by
respondents
and
was
the
only
one
selected
by
more
than
half
of
those
surveyed.

Word
of
mouth
(10%),
posters
and
announcements
(12%),
and
lnstagram
(13%)
were
the
least
popular
options.

Preferred
Marketing
Methods
Email
newsletter
Poway
Chieftain
Poway
website
Direct
mailing
notices
from
the
City
35%
City
of
Poway
Community
Services
Guide
34%
Facebook
24%
Nextdoor
23%
lnstagram
13%
Posters
and
announcements
12%
Word
of
mouth
10%
Other
(please
specify)
■
2%
36 of
60 31
42% 41%
64%
pros
-;,';
>
consulf
i[Jg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
CITY
OF
POWAY

2.4 WEBSITE

ANALYTICS
From
June
1,
2021
through
December
1,
2021,
www.plancommunitypark.com
engaged
almost
1500
users
who
accounted
for
close
to
3,500
pageviews
in
less
than
6 months.
•
Users
200 100 Users 1,493
Jun
2021
at
L.
___
_
Nu
m
be
r of
Sessions
per
User
Avg.

Sess
ion
Duration
00:01
:24 l
I
•
37 of
60 July
2021
New
Users
1,492 __,.,J.

Pagev
iews
3,441 ~ Bounce
Rate

69.45% ~
~
Aug,1st
2021
September
202
I
Sess
ions
Pages
/ Sess
ion

1.81 ~
32 ~
October
2021
November
202.1
■
New
Visitor
■
Returning
Visitor
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

CHAPTER THREE -RECREATION TRENDS AND BENCHMARKING

3.1 RECREATION TRENDS
The Trends Analysis provides an understanding of national, and local recreational trends. Trends data used for this analysis was obtained from Sports & Fitness Industry Association's ("SFIA"), National Recreation and Park Association ("NRPA"), and Environmental Systems Research Institute ("ESRI"). All trends' data is based on current and/or historical participation rates and, while it may not all be relevant to a specific site, will shed some insights on future trends that will impact recreation offerings at Community Park.

3.1.1 LOCAL SPORT' AND LEISURE MARKET POTENTIAL
The following charts show sport and leisure market potential data for City of Poway residents, as provided by ESRI. Market Potential Index (MPI) measures the probable demand for a product or service within a defined service area. The MPI shows the likelihood that an adult resident will participate in certain activities when compared to the U.S. national average. The national average is 100; therefore, numbers below 100 would represent lower than average participation rates (lower demand), and numbers above 100 would represent above average participation rates (higher demand). For example, an index of 120 implies that demand in the area is likely to be 20 percent higher than the US average; an index of 85 implies a demand that is 15 percent lower. The service area is compared to the national average in four (4) categories -general sports, fitness, outdoor activity, and commercial recreation. The City does not have the ability to meet demand for many of the activities shown (e.g., visiting a museum, theme park, indoor water park or salt water fishing).

MPI scores are a tool that the Department can use for consideration of keeping existing offerings at Community Park and/or evaluating modifications and new additions. The market potential gives the Department a starting point for estimating resident attendance and participation for a broad set of recreational activities.

Only six total activities assessed (4 of which were General Sports) had MPI scores below the national average, which suggests the local population is very inclined to participate in a variety of recreational activities and are heavily engaged in Fitness and Outdoor activities in particular.

The following charts compare MPI scores for 42 sport and leisure activities that are prevalent for residents within the City. The activities are categorized by activity type and listed in descending order, from highest to lowest MPI score. High index numbers (100 or more) are significant because they demonstrate that there is a greater likelihood that residents within the service area will actively participate in offerings provided by the Department.
38 of 60 33 prOS-;',
1 ;>
consu/tiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
CITY
OF
POWAY

GENERAL
SPORTS
MARKET

POTENTIAL
The
General
Sports
category
has
some
high
MPI
figures,
with
three
activities
well
above
the
national
average.

The
activities
that
are
ranked
the
highest
based
on
MPI
are
Tennis
(141
),
Golf
(133),
and
Soccer
( 116)
which
are
significantly
higher
than
national
averages
indicating
a
high
popularity
for
those
activities
in
Poway.

General
Sports
MPI
-
Poway
-
National
Average
160
141
140 120
V, C1'
100
~ 0
----
;89
---
84 u
80 V) c..
60 ~
40 20 0
Tennis
Golf
Soccer
Basketball
Baseball
Volleyball
Softball
Football
39 of
60 34
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

FITNESS MARKET POTENTIAL
Assessing the Fitness Activity category, every activity has an above average MPI score indicating a high interest for participating in these activities. The top activities based on MPI are Yoga (147), Jogging / Running (135), and Pilates (135), however, there is also high demand for the other Fitness Activity categories shown.

Fitness MPI
-Poway -National Average
160 147
140
120
"' a, 100 ...
0 u 80 V)

0..
~ 60
40 20
0 Yoga Jogging/ Pilates Swimming Weight Walking for Aerobics Zumba Running Lifting Exercise

OUTDOOR ACTIVITY MARKET POTENTIAL
All but one activity in the Outdoor Activity category have above average MPI scores. The top three activities in this category include Hiking (139), Bicycling (road) (138), and Canoeing / Kayaking (136).

V,
160
140
120
~ 100
0 ~ 80
0:: 60
~
40 20
0 40 of 60
139
Hiking
138
Bicycling
(road)
Outdoor Activity MPI
-Poway -National Average
136
Canoeing/
Kayaking
Bicycling Backpacking Fishing
(mountain) (salt water)
35 Horseback
Riding
86 Fishing
(fresh water)
pros~,';>
consuttiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY
I

COMMERCIAL RECREATION MARKET POTENTIAL
The Commercial Recreation category also reveals all but one activity have MPI scores above the national average, with 3 activities scoring over 150. Those activities were Went to Museum (155), Attended Classical Music / Opera Performance (152), and Went to Live Theatre (151 ).

Commercial Recreation MPI
(Last 12 Months)
■ Poway
Went to museum
Attended classical music/opera performance
Went to live theater
Went to art gallery
Attended sports event
Spent $250+ on sports/rec equip
Visited an indoor water park in last 12 months
Did photography
Spent $100-249 on sports/rec equip
Attended dance performance
Played musical instrument
Visited a zoo in the last 12 months
Visited a theme park in last 12 months
Did painting/drawing
Did photo album/scrapbooking
Went overnight camping in last 12 months
Spent $1-99 on sports/rec equip
Danced/went dancing
National Average
129
126
126
126
122
120
-
120
116
115
114
i 112
106
103
98 155
152
151
149
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
MPI Scores
41 of 60 36
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT
3 .1.2
KEY

FINDINGS
Based
on
the
information
presented
in
the
Trends
Analysis,
the
following
key
findings
are
of
particular
interest
and/or
have
significant
implications
for
Community
Park:
•
Local
Participatory
Trends:
42 of
60 o
Local
recreation
trends
show
strong
participation
across
all
categories
assessed,
with
only
6 out
of
42 activities
having
MPI
scores
below
the
national
average.
o
The
high
Outdoor
Activity
scores,
coupled
with
the
larger
participation
rates
of
fitness
activities
that
could
take
place
outdoors
(yoga,
jogging
/
running,
pilates,
walking
for
exercise)
express
potential
for
multiple
programming
opportunities
as
well
as
trail
connectivity
that
could
be
utilized
within
Community
Park.
o
The
community's
high
participation
numbers
in
Tennis,
plus
the
rapid
increase
in
participation
numbers
for
pickleball
should
be
monitored
by
the
City
as
they
indicate
potential
for
the
need
of
additional,
and/
or
multi-use
court
space.
o
These
numbers
are all
very
promising
for
the
City,
as
market
potential
data
suggests
that
City
residents
are
more
inclined
to
participate
in
a wide
variety
of
recreational
activities
related
to
sports,
fitness,
outdoor
recreation,
and
commercial
recreation.
37 pros
-;,'f>
consult
iQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWA V

CHAPTER FOUR-STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on an iterative visioning process with staff combined with the community input, benchmarking, and analysis of recreational trends, the Consulting Team identified the following considerations and top priorities.
,4-1.1 CONSIDERATIONS: UPDATE EXISTING
The following considerations are tied to updating already existing facilities and/or amenities:

1. Add additional trees and/or shade structures to areas including, but not necessarily limited to:
• Tot lots
• The Splash Pad
• Grass areas
• Baseball field areas
• Parking lots

3. Connect Pedestrian loops (e.g., bridges, circle paths) and bicycle paths and enhance ADA accessibility

4. Upgrade/add play structures for all-abilities playgrounds

5. Increase park visibility and safety lighting in and around the park (e.g., reduce fencing, relocate operational yards)

4.1.2 CONSIDERATIONS: NEW AMENITIES
The following considerations are for potential new amenities that could be added to Community Park:
1 . Add outdoor adventure elements

2. Add dedicated pickleball courts

3. Add restroom by northerly play area

4. Introduce interpretive learning and art opportunities and creek renovations to activate the creek

5. Provide fitness equipment / exercise stations along the trail

4.1.3 CONSIDERATIONS: OPERA TIO NS
These considerations are going to be tied to the operations or processes of the City.

1. Invest in additional marketing to create greater awareness of park offerings

2. Focus on maintenance Improvements
• Enhance existing landscape
• Relocate maintenance yard
43 of 60 38
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
• Add dedicated staff / contract support

3. Ensure consistency in branding and aesthetics

4. Determine consistent hours of operations

5. Utilize technology to enhance the user experience
• Wi-Fi in park
• App for accessible maps / parking counts / workout trackers etc.

4.1.4 TOP PRIORITIES

1. Shade (shade structures/sails and trees) -Create more shaded areas around the park and trails as well as around amenities where people congregate.

2. Accessible Trails and Connectivity -Connect pedestrian loops and make the trails more universally accessible. Provide bike access through the park with adequate bicycle parking.

Additional Resources for Awareness and Maintenance (Staff and/or Contract Support) -Invest additional resources to keep up with the park maintenance as additional amenities are added; also grow marketing and communication efforts to create greater awareness about the offerings particularly at the community recreation center (e.g., website App).

CHAPTER FIVE -CONCLUSION
This Assessment is meant to be a needs assessment as the City continues to plan its future to meet the needs of its growing and very engaged population. As the area grows, Community Park will require a higher level of service for indoor and outdoor offerings while creating enjoyable, safe spaces for community members of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds to recreate comfortably. City leadership can take this Assessment into consideration for future CIP projects and/ or consider funding for specific park designs and/or a park master plan.

CITY OF POWAY
Appendices

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
45 of 60 40
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX A -NON-PARTICIPANT INTEREST BY AGE SEGMENT
In addition to participation rates by generation, SFIA also tracks non-participant interest. These are activities that the U.S. population currently does not participate in due to physical or monetary barriers, but is interested in participating in. Below are the top five activities that each age segment would be most likely to partake in if they were readily available.

Overall, the activities most age segments are interested in include: Camping, Bicycling, Fishing, and Swimming for Fitness. All of which are deemed as low-impact activities, making them obtainable for any age segment to enjoy.
6-12 Year-Olds
Fishing
Camping
Soccer
Martial Arts
Basketball
35-44 Year-Olds
Fitness Swimming
Camping
Bicycling
Fishing
Hiking
46 of 60
, 13-17 Year-Olds
I
Fishing
Camping
Working Out w/ Weights
Volleyball
Running/ Jogging
45-54 Year-Olds
Bicycling
Fishing
Camping
Fitness Swimming
Hiking
41 18-24 Year-Olds
Camping
Fishing
Martial Arts
Volleyball
Kayaking
55-64 Year-Olds
Bicycling
Fishing
Fitness Swimming
Camping
Hiking
25-34 Year-Olds
Camping
Fitness Swimming
Bicycling
Fishing
Kayaking
65+ Year-Olds
Fishing
Fitness Swimming
Bicycling
Birdwatching/Wildlife
Viewing
Working Out Using
pros~,'f>
consulti(Jg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
CITY
OF
POWAY

APPENDIX
B
-NATIONAL
AND

REGIONAL

PROGRAMMING
TRENDS
Programs
offered
by
Park
and
Recreation
Agencies
(Pacific
Southwest
Region)
NRPA's
Agency
Performance
Review
2020
summarize
key
findings
from
NRPA
Park
Metrics,
which
is
a
benchmark
tool
that
compares
the
management
and
planning
of
operating
resources
and
capital
facilities
of
park
and
recreation
agencies.

The
report
contains
data
from
1,053
park
and
recreation
agencies
across
the
U.S.
as
reported
between
2017
and
2019.

Based
on
this
year's
report,
the
typical
agency
(i.e.,
those
at
the
median
values)
offers
187
Pacific
■
Southwest
Region
programs
annually,
with
roughly
64 percent
of
those
programs
being
fee-based
activities/events.

According
to
the
information
reported
to
the
NRPA,
the
top
five
programming
activities
most
frequently
offered
by
park
and
recreation
agencies,
both
in
the
U.S.
and
regionally,
are
described
in
the
table
below.

A
complete
comparison
of
regional
and
national
programs
offered
by
agencies
can
be
found
on
the
following
page.

When
comparing
the
Pacific
Southwest
Region
agencies
to
the
U.S.
average,
team
sports,
themed
special
events,
social
recreation
events,
and
fitness
enhancement
classes
were
identified
in
the
top
five
most
commonly
provided
program
areas
offered
regionally
and
nationally.
-
Top
5 Most
Offered
Core
Program
Areas
(Offered
by
Parks
and
Recreation
Agencies)
Pacific
Southwest
(%
of
agencies
offering)
U.S.
(%
of
agencies
offering)
•
Themed
Special
Events
(91%)
•
Themed
Special
Events
(88%)
•
Team
Sports
(90%)
•
Team
Sports
(87%)
•
Social
Recreation
Events
(90%)
•
Social
Recreation
Events
(87%)
•
Fitness
Enhancement
Classes
(89%)
•
Fitness
Enhancement
Classes
(82%)
•
Health
&
Wellness
Education
(88%)
•
Health
&
Wellness
Education
(81%)
47 of
60 42
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Overall, Pacific Southwest Region parks and recreation agencies are above the U.S. average for many program offerings. When utilizing a discrepancy threshold of +/-5 percent (or more), Pacific Southwest agencies are currently offering Fitness Enhancement Classes, Health & Wellness Education, Aquatics, Safety Training, Martial Arts, Trips and Tours, Performing Arts, Cultural Crafts, and Visual Arts at a higher rate than the national average, while Natural & Cultural History Activities and Running / Bicycle Races are below average.

Core Program Areas Offered by Parks and Recreation Agencies (percent of agencies)
Themed Special Events
Team Sports
Social Recreation Events
Fitness Enhancement Classes
Health & Wellness Education
Aquatics
Safety Training
Martial Arts
Trips & Tours
Individual Sports
Racquet Sports
Performing Arts
Cultural Crafts
Visual Arts
Natural & Cultural History Activities
Golf
Running/Cycling Races
48 of 60
·.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-91% 88% ·.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.-90% 87% 82%
81%
90%
87%
89%
88%
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::---83% 71%
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::--78% 72%
75%
60%
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::--· 72% 63%
·.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-70% 74%
•·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.-70% 67%
•·:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.--69% 64%
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.--67% 61%
·.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.--64% 59%
• ·::::::::::::::::::.■•■ .................. _5-4% 59%
-------------46% -------------■ 47%
---------30% ----------35% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% ■ Pacific Southwest ■ U.S.
90% 100%
43 pros-J,'f>
consuttiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWA V
Targeted Programs for Children, Older Adults, and People with Disabilities For a better understanding of targeted programs (programs that cater to a specific age segment, demographic, etc.), NRPA also tracks program offerings that are dedicated specifically to children, older adults (seniors), and people with disabilities. This allows for further analysis of these commonly targeted populations on a national and regional basis.

Based on information reported to the NRPA, the top three targeted programs offered by park and recreation agencies, nationally and regionally, are described in the table below, followed by a chart that shows the complete comparison of regional and national targeted program offerings.

Top 3 Most Offered Core Program Areas
(Targeting Children, Seniors, and/or People with Disabilities) Pacific Southwest (% of agencies offering)
r----------------------------------~-----
U.S. (% of agencies offering)
• Summer Camp (92%) • Summer Camp (83%)
• Senior Programs (84%) • Senior Programs (78%)
• Teen Programs (82%) • Teen Programs (65%)
Agencies in the Pacific Southwest Region tend to offer targeted programs above the national average rate. Pacific Southwest agencies are currently offering Summer Camps, Senior Programs, Teen Programs, After School Programs, Programs for People with Disabilities, Preschool, and Before School Programs at a significantly higher rate than the national average.

Core Program Areas Targeted for Children, Seniors, and/or People with Disabilities (precent of agencies)
Summer Camp
83%
Specific Senior Programs 84%
Specific Teen Programs
After School Programs
Programs for People with Disabilities
49 of 60
STEM Programs
Preschool
Before School Programs
10%
Full Daycare -S¾
0% 10%
36%
26%
20%
20% 30% 40%
■ Pacific Southwest ■ U.S.
44 49%
50%
57%
54%
54%
60%
78%
82%
65%
71%
69%
62%
70% 80% 90%
92%
100%
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX C -CORE VS. CASUAL PARTICIPATION TRENDS

GENERAL SPORTS
National Core vs Casual Participatory Trends -General Sports Activity Participation Levels
2014 2018
# % # %
Basketball 23,067 100% 24,225 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 7,321 32% 9,335 39%
Core{l3+ times) 15,746 68% 14,890 61%
Golf (9 or 18-Hole Course) 24,700 100% 24,240 100%
Tennis 17,904 100% 17,841 100%
Baseball 13,152 100% 15,877 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 4,295 33% 6,563 41%
Core (13+ times) 8,857 67% 9,314 59%
Soccer (Outdoor) 12,592 100% 11,405 100%
Casual (1-25 times) 6,622 53% 6,430 56%
Core (26+ times) 5,971 47% 4,975 44%
Softball (Slow Pitch) 7,077 100% 7,386 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 2,825 40'6 3,281 44%
Core(13+ times) 4,252 60% 4,105 56%
Football, Fla2 5,508 100% 6,572 100%
Casual ( 1-12 times) 2,838 52% 3,573 54%
Core{l3+ times) 2,669 48% 2,999 46%
Core Age 6 to 17 (13+ times) 1,178 52% 1,578 54%
Volleyball (Court) 6,304 100% 6,317 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 2,759 44% 2,867 45%
Core(13+ times) 3,545 56% 3,450 55%
Badminton 7,176 100% 6,337 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 5,049 70% 4,555 72%
Core{l3+ times) 2,127 30% 1,782 28%
Football, Touch 6,586 100% 5,517 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 3,727 57% 3,313 60%
Core{l3+ times) 2,859 43% 2,204 40'6
Soccer (Indoor) 4,530 100% 5,233 100%
Casual {1-12 times) 1,917 42% 2,452 47%
Core(13+ times) 2,614 58% 2,782 53%
Football, Tackle 5,978 100% 5,157 100%
Casual (1-25 times) 2,588 43% 2,258 44%
Core(26+ times) 3,390 57% 2,898 56%
Core Age 6 to 17 (26+ times) 2,590 43% 2,353 44%
Gvmnastics 4,621 100% 4,770 100%
Casual ( 1-49 times) 2,932 63% 3,047 64%
Core(50+ times) 1,689 37% 1,723 36%
Volleyball (Sand/Beach) 4,651 100% 4,770 100%
Casual ( 1-12 times) 3,174 68% 3,261 68%
Core{l3+ times) 1,477 32% 1,509 32%
NOTE: Participation figures are in OOO's for the US o ulation ages 6 and over Participation Growth/Decline
llloderale lncNM•
(1)11,to25"'>
Core vs Casual Distribution
More Core Participants (56-
74%)
50 of 60 45
% Change
2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend # %
24,917 100% 8.0% 2.9"
9,669 39% 3.6%
15,248 61% -3.2% 2.4"
24,271 100% -1.7% 0.1"
17,684 100% -1.2% -0.9%
15,804 100% 20.2% -0.5%
6,655 42% 1.4"
9,149 58% 3.3" -1.8%
11,913 100% -5.4% 4.5"
6,864 58% 3.7% 6.7%
5,050 42% -15.4% LS%
7,071 100% -0.1% -4.3%
3,023 43% 7.0% -7.9%
4,048 57% -4.8% -1.4%
6,783 100% 23.1" 3.Z"
3,794 56%
~

6.2"
2,989 44% -0.3%
1,590 56'6 0.8"
6,487 100% Z.9" 2.7"
2,962 46% 7.4" 3.3"
3,525 54% -0.6% 2.2"
6,095 100% -15.1% -3.8%
4,338 71% -14.1% -4.8%
1,756 29% -17.4% -1.5%
5,171 100% -21.5% -6.3%
3,065 59% -17.8% -7.5%
2,105 41% -4.5%
5,336 100% 17.8" 2.0%
2,581 48% 5.3%
2,755 52% 5.4" -1.0%
5,107 100% -14.6% -1.0%
2,413 47% -6.8% 6.9"
2,694 53% -20.5% -7.0%
2,311 47% -10.8% -1.8%
4,699 100% 1.7" -1.5%
3,004 64% 2.5% -1.4%
1,695 36% 0.4% -1.6%
4,400 100% -5.4% -7.8%
2,907 66% -8.4% -10.9%
1,493 34% 1.1" -1.1%
Mo .. •<•D=•~• ~ (0%10 -25%1
EvenlyDivided(45-55%Core More Casual ::..,~-
and CasuaQ Participants (56-74'11,) . i ., ... ,
pros-J,';>
consultit)g
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWA V

GENERAL SPORTS (CONTINUED)
----
National Core vs Casual Participatory Trends -General Sports Activity Participation Levels % Change
2014 2018 2019 5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend
Track and Field 4,105 100% 4,143 100% 4,139 100% -0.1%
Casual (1-25 times) 1,797 44% 2,071 50% 2,069 50% 15.1% -0.1% Core(26+ times) 2,308 56% 2,072 50°/4 2,070 50% -10.3% -0.1% Cheerleadin 3,456 100% 3,841 100% 3,752 100%
Casual (1-25 times) 1,841 53% 2,039 53% 1,934 52%
Core(26+ times) 1,615 47% 1,802 47% 1,817 48%
Pickleball 2,462 100% 3,301 100% 3,460 100%
Casual (1-12 times) 1,459 59% 2,011 61% 2,185 63%
Core(13+ times) 1,003 41% 1,290 39% 1,275 37%
Rae uetball 3,594 100% 3,480 100% 3,453 100% -3.9% -0.8% Casual (1-12 times) 2,435 68% 2,407 69% 2,398 69% -1.5% -0.4% Core(13+ times) 1,159 32% 1,073 31% 1,055 31% -9.0% -1.7% Ice Hockey 2,421 100% 2,447 100% 2,357 100% -2.6% -3.7% Casual {1-12 times) 1,129 47% 1,105 45% 1,040 44% -7.9% -5.9% Core(13+ times) 1,292 53% 1,342 55% 1,317 56% 1.9% -1.9% Ultimate Frisbee 4,530 2,710 100'/4 2,290 100% -15.5%
Casual (1-12 times) 3,448 1,852 68% 1,491 65% -19.5%
Core(13+ times) 1,082 858 32% 799 35% -6.9%
Softball (Fast Pitch) 2,424 2,303 100% 2,242 100% -7.5% -2.6% Casual (1-25 times) 1,158 48% 1,084 47% 993 44% -14.2% -8.4% Core(26+ times) 1,266 52% 1,219 53% 1,250 56% -1.3% 2.5% Lacrosse 2,011 100% 2,098 100'/4 2,115 100% o.

Casual (1-12 times) 978 49% 1,036 49% 1,021 48% 4.4% -1.4% Core(13+ times) 1,032 51% 1,061 51% 1,094 52% 6.0% 3.1% Wrestlin 1,891 100% 1,908 100% 1,944 9"
Casual {1-25 times) 941 50% 1,160 61% 1,189 .5%
Core{26+ times) 950 50% 748 39% 755 0.9%
Roller Hockey 1,736 100% 1,734 1,616 -6.8%
Casual (1-12 times) 1,181 68% 1,296 1,179
Core(13+ times) 555
Boxin for Competition 1,278
Casual (1-12 times) 1,074
Core(13+ times) 204
Ru by 1,276
Casual (1-ltimes) 836
Core(B+ times) 440 562 36% 557 -0.9%
S uash 1,285 100% 1,222 -4.9%
Casual (1-ltimes) 796 62% 747 -6.2%
Core(B+ times) 489 38% 476 39% -2.7%
NOTE: Participation figures are i
Participation Growth/Decline Moderate Inc-• Moderate Decrease <O"to~ (0%to -25%)
Core vs Casual Distribution
Mo re Core Participants (56-Evenly Divided (45-55% Co re 74%) and Casual)
51 of 60 46
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT

GENERAL

FITNESS
I
-
-
.
-
-
'.

National
Core
vs
Casual
Participatory
Trends
-General
Fitness
Participation
Levels
Activity
2014
2018
#
%
#
%
Fitness
Walking
112,583
100°/4
111,001
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
35,694
32%
36,139
33%
Core(SO+
times)
76,889
68%
74,862
67%
Treadmill
50,241
100°/4
53,737
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
22,525
45%
25,826
48%
Core(SO+
times)
27,716
55%
27,911
52%
Free
Weights
(Dumbbells/Hand
Weights)
56,124
100°/4
51,291
100%
Casual
(1-49
times)
18,195
32%
18,702
36%
Core(SO+
times)
37,929
68%
32,589
64%
Running/Jogging
51,127
100°/4
49,459
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
23,083
45%
24,399
49%
Core(SO+
times)
28,044
55%
25,061
51%
Stationary
Cycling
(Recumbent/Upright)
35,693
100°/4
36,668
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
18,255
51%
19,282
53%
Core(SO+
times)
17,439
49%
17,387
47%
Weight/Resistant
Machines
35,841
100%
36,3n
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
14,590
41%
14,893
41%
Core(SO+
times)
21,250
59%
21,479
59%
Elliptical
Motion/Cross
Trainer
31,826
100°/4
33,238
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
15,379
48%
16,889
51%
Core(SO+
times)
16,448
52%
16,349
49%
Yoga
25,262
100°/4
28,745
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
14,802
59%
17,553
61%
Core(SO+
times)
10,460
41%
11,193
39%
Free
Weights
(Barbells)
25,623
100°/4
27,834
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
9,641
38%
11,355
41%
Core(SO+
times)
15,981
62%
16,479
59%
Dance,
Step,
Choreographed
Exercise
21,455
100°/4
22,391
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
13,993
65%
14,503
65%
Core(SO+
times)
7,462
35%
7,888
35%
Bodyweight
Exercise
22,390
100°/4
24,183
100°/4
Casual
(1-49
times)
8,970
40%
9,674
40%
Core(SO+
times)
13,420
60%
14,509
60%
NOTE
: Participation
figures
are
in
OOO's
for
the
US
population
ages
6 and
over
Participation
Growth/Decline
Moderale
rnc-e
(~to25'6)
Core
vs
Casual
Distribution
More
Core
P
■rtic1pant
s
(56-
74%)
52 of
60 47
%
Change
2019
5-YearTrend
1-YearTrend
#
%
111,439
100%
-1.0%

0.4"
36,254
33%

1.6%

0.3%
75,185
67%
-2.2%

0.4%
56,823
100°/4

13.1%

5.7"
28,473
50%

10.2%
28,349
50%

2.3%

1.6%
51,450
100°/4
-8.3%

0.3"
19,762
38%

8.6%

5.7"
31,688
62%
-16.5%
-2.8%
50,052
100%
-2.1%
L2"
24,972
50%

8.2%

2.3%
25,081
50%
-10
.6%

0.1%
37,085
100°/4

3.9%
L1"
19,451
52%

6.6%

0.9"
17,634
48%

1.1%

1.4%
36,181
100°/4

0.9%
-0.5%
14,668
41%

0.5%
-1.5%
21,513
59%

1.2%

0.2%
33,056
100°/4

3.9%
-0.5%
17,175
52%

11.7%

1.7%
15,880
48%
-3.5%
-2.9%
30,456
100°/4
Z0.6"

6.0%
18,953
62 %

8.0%
11,503
38%

10.0%

2.8"
28,379
100%

10.8"

2.0%
11,806
42%

22.5%

4.0%
16,573
58%

3.7%

0.6%
23,957
100°/4

11.7%

7.0%
16,047
67%

14.7%

10.6%
7,910
33%

6.0%

0.3%
23,504
100°/4

5.0%
-2.8"/4
9,492
40%

5.8%
-1.9%
14,012
60%

4.4%
-3
.4%
M,a,,..
,D~•-
•
~
(0%
to
-25
%)
Evenly
Divided
(45
-55%Core
M
oreC•ual
lt.~'c.i.-i
P~
and
Casual)
P■rtic1pa
nts (56-
74%)
• )
~~~
,,
,,,
pros
~,';>
consu/tiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
CITY
OF
POWAY

GENERAL

FITNESS
(CONTINUED)
-
:

National
Core
vs
Casual
Participatory
Trends
-General
Fitness
Participation
Levels
%
Change
Activity
2014
2018
2019
5-YearTrend
1-Year
Trend
#
%
#
%
#
%
Aerobics
(High
Impact/
Intensity
Training)
19,746
100%
21,611
100°/4
22,044
100%
1L6%
Z.0%
Casual
(1-49
times)
10,242
52%
11,828
55%
12,380
56%

20.9%

4.7"
Core(SO+
times)
9,504
48%
9,783
45%
9,665
44%

1.7%
-1.2%
Stair
Climbing
Machine
13,216
100°/4
15,025
100°/4
15,359
100°/4

16.2"
Z.2"
Casual
(1-49
times)
7,679
58%
9,643
64%
10,059
65%

4.3%
Core(SO+
times)
5,537
42%
5,382
36%
5,301
35%
-4
.3%
-1.5%
Cross-Training
Style
Workout
11,265
100%
13,338
100°/4
13,542
100°/4

20.2%

1.5%
Casual
(1-49
times)
5,686
50%
6,594
49%
7,100
52%

24.9%

7.7"
Core{SO+
times)
5,579
50%
6,744
51%
6,442
48%

15.5%
-4
.5%
Trail
RunninJ[
7,531
100°/4
10,010
100°/4
10,997
100%

9.9"
Stationary
Cycling
(Group)
8,449
100°/4
9,434
100°/4
9,930
100°/4

17.5%

5.3%
Casual
(1-49
times)
5,353
63%
6,097
65%
6,583
66%

23.°"

8.°"
Core{SO+
times)
3,097
37%
3,337
35%
3,347
34%

8.1"

0.3%
Pilates
Training
8,504
100°/4
9,084
100°/4
9,243
100%

8.7"

1.8%
Casual
(1-49
times)
5,131
60%
5,845
64%
6,074
66%

18.4"

3.9%
Core(SO+
times)
3,373
40%
3,238
36%
3,168
34%
-6.1%
-2.2%
Cardio
Kickboxlng
6,747
100°/4
6,838
100°/4
7,026
100°/4

4.1"
Z.7"
Casual
{1-49
times)
4,558
68%
4,712
69%
4,990
71%

9.5%

5.9%
Core(SO+
times)
2,189
32%
2,126
31%
2,037
29%
-6.9%
-4.2%
Boot
Camp
Style
Training
6,774
100°/4
6,695
100°/4
6,830
100°./4

0.8%
Z.0%
Casual
{l-49
times)
4,430
65%
4,780
71%
4,951
72%
1L8"

3.6%
Core(SO+
times)
2,344
35%
1,915
29%
1,880
28%
-19.8"/4
-1.8%
Martial
Arts
5,364
100°/4
5,821
100°/4
6,068
100%

4.2"
Casual
(1-12
times)
1,599
30%
1,991
34%
2,178
36%

9.4%
Core(13+
times)
3,765
70%
3,830
66%
3,890
64%

3.3%
1 i%
Boxing
for
Fitness
5,113
100°/4
5,166
100°/4
5,198
100%

1.7"

0.6%
Casual
{1-12
times)
2,438
48%
2,714
53%
2,738
53%

12.3"

0.9%
Core(13+
times)
2,675
52%
2,452
47%
2,460
47%
-8.0%

0.3%
Tai
Chi
3,446
100°/4
3,761
100°/4
3,793
100°./4

10.1"

0.9"
Casual
{l-49
times)
2,053
60%
2,360
63%
2,379
'II
15,9"
(.
1%
Core{SO+
times)
1,393
40%
1,400
37%
1,414
37%

1.5%

1.°"
Barre
3,200
100°/4
3,532
100°/4
3,665
100°/4

14.5%

3.8"
Casual
(1-49
times)
2,562
II
2,750
Ill
2,868
-

11.9"
.::i%
Core(SO+
times)
638
782
797
2 ,9"
__ 9%
Triathlon
(Traditional/Road)
2,203
100'
2,168
l00"11t
2,001
100'
-
.7"/4
Triathlon
(Non-Traditional/Off
Road)
1,411
100°/4
1,589
100°/4
1,4n
100°/4

4.3%
-7.4%
NOTE:

Participation
figures
are
in
OOO's
for
the
US
popul
tion
ag
s 6
and
over
Participation
Growth/Decline
Modenltelncnae
•oa-,o~•n•
~
(°"to25'61
(0%to-25%)
Core
vs
Casual
Distribution
More
Cor
e Partlcrpant
a (56-
EvenlyD
ivided(45-55%Core
More
Casual
-
-~
:~
74%)
and
Casual)
Partrcrpant
a (56-74%)
~
-•
,.
<t;;,
~,.
!f
53 of
60 48
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT

OUTDOOR/

ADVENTURE

RECREATION
,
National
Core
vs
Casual
Participatory
Trends
-Outdoor/
Adventure
Recreation
Activity
2014
2018
2019
#
%
#
%
#
%
36,222
100"/4
47,860
100"/4
49,697
39,725
100"/4
39,041
100"/4
39,
Casual
{1-25
times)
19,269
49%
20,777
53%
20,796
Core(26+
times)
20,456
51%
18,264
47%
18,592
47%
Fishin
Freshwater
37,821
100"/4
38,998
100°/4
39,185
100"/4
Casual
(1-ltimes)
19,847
52%
21,099
54%
20,857
53%
Core(B+
times)
17,973
48%
17,899
46%
18,328
cam
in
(<
1/4
Mile
of
Ve
hide/Home)
28,660
100"/4
27,416
100"/4
28,183
Cam
in
(Recreational
Vehide)
14,633
100°/4
15,980
100"/4
15,426
Casual
{1-7
times)
9,103
57%
8,420
Core(B+
times)
6,877
Fishin
(Saltwater)
Casual
(1-ltimes)
13,179 10,101 8,044
Casual
(1-12
times)
3,707
Core(13+
times)
4,336
Arche
Casual
(1-25
times)
Core(26+
times)
Fishin
(Fl
)
Casual
(1-7
times)
Core(B+
times)
2,204
2,479
36%
2,521
Skateboardin
6,582
100"/4
6,500
100"/4
6,610
Casual
(1-25
times)
8 2
%
3,989
61%
4,265
Core(26+
times)
2,700
41%
2,511
39"
2,345
Roller
Skatin
ln-Une
6,061
100°/4
5,040
100°/4
4,816
100"/4
Casual
(1-12
times)
4,194
69"
3,680
73%
3,474
72%
Core{13+
times)
1,867
31%
1,359
27"
1,342
2,350
100°/4
3,439
100°/4
3,648
Casual
(1-12
times)
1,205
51%
2,052
60%
2,257
Core(13+
times)
1,145
49%
1,387
40%
Climbin
(Traditional/lce/Mountaineerin
)
2,457
100°/4
2,541
100"/4
2,368
100°/4
2,215
100"/4
Casual
(1
times)
1,004
42%
581
26%
Core(2+
times)
1,365
1,595
NOTE:

Participation
fi
ures
are
in
OOO's
for
the
U
Participation
Growth/Decline
Moc1eratelncree1e
M
oder
■te
Decrease
(0..to~
(0%10
-25%)
Core
vs
Casual
Distribution
M
ore
Co
re
P1rticip1
nt
1 (56-
Evenly
Divided
(45-55%Core
74~)
and
Casual)
54 of
60 49

2.0% 16.5" -0
.8%
-11.7% -10
.1%
-17.2%
1-Year
Trend
-4.4% -5
.6%
-5.5% -2.4%
pros
~'f>
consultiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWAY

AQUATICS
l . -.
;1 National Core vs Casual Participatory Trends -Aquatics Activity 2014 2018 2019
# % # % # %
Swimming (Fitness) 25,304 100% 27,575 100% 28,219 100%
Casual (1-49 times) 16,459 65% 18,728 68% 19,480 69%
Core(SO+ times) 8,845 35% 8,847 32% 8,739 31%
Aquatic Exercise 9,122 100% 10,518 100% 11,189 100"/4
Casual (1-49 times) 5,901 65% 7,391 70% 8,006 72%
Core(SO+ times) 3,221 35% 3,127 30% 3,183 28%
Swimming (Competition) 2,710 100% 3,045 100% 2,822 100% Casual (1-49 times) 1,246 46% 1,678 55% 1,529 54%
Core(SO+ times) 1,464 54% 1,367 45% 1,293 46%
NOTE: Participation figures are in 000's for the US population ages 6 and over Participation Growth/Decline
Core vs Casual Distribution

WATER SPORTS/ ACTIVITIES
Moderate tnae■1e
I°" to 25"1
Moderate Decrease
(0% to-25%)
More Core Participants (56-Evenly Divided (45-55% Core
74") and Casual)
' National Core vs Casual Participatory Trends -Water Sports/ Activities i
Activity 2014 2018 2019
# % # % # %
Kayaking (Recreational) 8,855 100% 11,017 100% 11,382 100"/4 Canoeing 10,044 100% 9,129 100% 8,995 100"/4
Snorkeling 8,752 100% 7,815 100% 7,659 100%
Casual (1-7 times) 6,935
•
6,321
■
6,192
fl Core(B+ times) 1,818 1,493 1,468
Jet Skiing 6,355 100% 5,324 100% 5,108 100%
Casual (1-7times) 4,545 72% 3,900 73% 3,684 72%
Core(B+ times) 1,810 28% 1,425 27% 1,423 28%
Sailing 3,924 100% 3,754 100% 3,618 100%
Casual (1-7times) 2,699 69% 2,596 69% 2,477 68%
Core(B+ times) 1,225 31% 1,159 31% 1,141 32%
Stand-Up Paddling 2,751 100% 3,453 100% 3,562 100%
Rafting 3,781 100% 3,404 100% 3,438 100"/4
Water Skiing 4,007 100"/4 3,363 100% 3,203 100"/4
Casual (1-7 times) 2,911 73% 2,499 74% 2,355 74%
Core(B+ times) 1,095 27% 863 26% 847 26%
Surfing 2,721 100% 2,874 100% 2,964 100%
Casual (1-7 times) 1,645 60% 1,971 69% 2,001 68%
Core(B+ times) 1,076 40% 904 31% 962 32%
Wake boarding 3,125 100% 2,796 100% 2,729 100"/4
Casual (1-7times) 2,199 70% 1,900 68% 1,839 67%
Core(B+ times) 926 30% 896 32% 890 33%
Scuba Diving 3,145 100% 2,849 100% 2,715 100"/4
Casual (1-7 times) 2,252 72% 2,133 "~I 2,016 74%
Core(B+ times) 893 28% 716 •• 699 26%
Kayaking (Sea/Touring) 2,912 100% 2,805 100% 2,652 100% Kayaking (White Water) 2,351 100% 2,562 100% 2,583 100% Boardsailing/Windsurfing 1,562 100% 1,556 100% 1,405 100% Casual (1-7 times) 1,277 82% 1,245 'ft: 1,112 ~i
Core(B+ times) 285 18% 310 .20K, 292 21tl1
NOTE: Participation figures are in OOO's for the US population a es 6 and over Participation Growth/Decline (°"to 25,.. (0%to -25%)
5-Year Trend 1-Year Trend

11.5" 2.3"

18.4% 4.0%
-1.2% -1.2%

22.7" 6.4"

8.3%
-1.2% 1.8%

4.1" -7.3%

22.7% -8.9%
-11.7% -5.4%
5-YearTrend 1-YearTrend

3.3"
-10.4% -1.5%
-12.5% -2.0%
-10.7% -2.0%
-19.3% -1.7%
-19.6% -4.1%
-18.9% -5.5%
-21.4% -0.1%
-7.8"/4 -3.6%
-8.2% -4.6%
-6.9% -1.6%

3.2"
-9.1% LO%
-20.1% -4.8"/4
-19.1% -5.8%
-22.6% -1.9%

8.9% 3.1"

21.6% 1.5%
-10.6% 6.4%
-12.7% -2.4%
-16.4% -3.2%
-3.9% -0.7%
-13.7% -4.7%
-10.5% -5.5%
-21.7% -2.4%
-8.9% -5.5%

9.9% 0.8"
-10.1% -9.7%
-12.9% -10.7%

2.5% -5.8%
Core vs Casual Distribution
··--....... ,~-·· ~
MoreCorePartic,pants(56-EvenlyDrv1ded(45-55%Core MoreCasualPartic1pant1 Molli,c.utlP .... 74'111) and Casual) (56-74'111) {11911trtflllln,lt
55 of 60 50
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX D -PUBLIC INPUT MEETING POLL RESULTS
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE PARTICIPATING WITH YOU IN THIS VIRTUAL MEETING? Three out of every ten participants attended
the meeting with at least one other person
with them.

HOW OFTEN DO YOU USE COMMUNITY PARK?
Over half of participants use Community Park
at least weekly (52%). Only five percent said
they do not use the park at all.

Virtual Meeting Participants
70%
Just myself One other person Two other people Three or more people
Visitation Frequency
52%
1%
At least At least At least 6 At least two Once per I do not use weekly monthly times per to five times year or less it
year per year
DO YOU LIVE WITHIN A 10-MINUTE WALK TO COMMUNITY PARK?
Approximately 62 percent of participants
indicated they do not live within a 10-minute
walk of Community Park.
56 of 60 51
10-Minute Walk
■Yes
■No
prOS-i,';>
consu/ti,Qg
January 18, 2022, Item #15
I

CITY OF POWA V
WHICH PARK AMENITIES DO YOU USE REGUARLY?
"Trails and pathways" (71%) were the most
regularly used amenity by public input meeting
attendees, followed by "playground" (48%) and
"dog park" (33%).

Regularly Used Park Amenities
Trails and pathways
Playground
Dog Park
Swim Center
Picinic areas
Athletic Fields
Sports courts
Skate Park
Other
------------· 71% 48%
110%
5~
24r
24'(o
i 24%
19%
I !
33%
HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE OVERALL QUALITY OF COMMUNITY PARK AND ITS AMENITIES? More than four out of five attendees rated the
overall quality of Community Park and its
amenities as "good" or above. Only five
percent rated them as "poor."
HOW DO YOU TRAVEL TO COMMUNITY PARK?
By a substantial margin, "I drive" (71 %) was
the most preferred method of transportation
to Community Park by attendees. This
correlates with the high percentage of
attendees who do not live within a 10-minute
walk of the park.
57 of 60
Excellent
71%
I drive
52 Overall Quality of Park and
Amenities
Good Fair Poor
Travel
19% 19%
0%
I do not use
I bike,
skateboard or
scooter
I walk I carpool I do not go to I use transit
Community
Park
January 18, 2022, Item #15

POWAY COMMUNITY PARK NEEDS ASSESSMENT

WHAT ARE THE THREE MOST PREFERRED WAYS TO LEARN ABOUT COMMUNITY PARK'S PROGRAMS, EVENTS, FACILITIES, AND AMENITIES?
The top three preferred ways to learn
about what Community Park has to
offer were the Poway Chieftain (55%),
Facebook (45%), and Email (45%).

Most Preferred Communication
Poway Chieftain
Facebook
Email
Website
Community Services Guide
Word of mouth
lnstagram
Nextdoor
Other
-
~
-~5%
-;
_Jo%
I
I
i
7 19%
I ; I
1 i l
! 451
45''-'o
!
41%
I
3S%
I
I I
18%
:
!
'
I i
!
I
55'¼

WHAT IS THE LARGEST BARRIER THAT PREVENTS YOU FROM USING COMMUNITY PARK MORE OFTEN?
Lack of amenities (27%) was the most
selected barrier by participants,
followed by I am too busy (18%), lack
of parking (14%), and lack of restrooms
(14%). "I do not feel welcome" and
"lack of accessibility" both received
zero votes.
58 of 60
Largest Participation Barrier
Lack of amenities
I am too busy
Lack of parking
Lack of restrooms
I do not feel safe
Lack of signage
Too far from residence
I do not feel welcome
Lack of accessibility
Other
53 -I
i
1 !
I
~k% -Is%
!
is%
0 10%
.J
I
' !
l
1f%
1k%
i
1 I
14%
i
i
r
18¾
pros-J,';>
consultiQg
January 18, 2022, Item #15

CITY OF POWA V
WHICH THREE AMENITIES ARE YOU AND MEMBERS OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD MOST INTERESTED IN? The top three types of amenities participants and
members of their household would be the most
interested in are "trails, fitness trails and
pathways" (67%), "playgrounds" (52%) and
"pool/water features" (38%).

Amenities-Most Interested
Trails, fitness trails and pathways
Playgrounds
Pool/Water Features
Dog Park
Sports courts
Picinic areas
Skate park
Open space
Sports fields
Other
-------· 67% 5~% I
:38°0
I I
---29o/y
---2~% 19J ,
1•1 I
19%
'

WHAT ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT IMPROVEMENTS THE CITY OF POWAY CAN MAKE AT COMMUNITY PARK OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS?
The top three most important improvements
participants would be interesting in adding to
existing parks over the next 10 years are "expand
walking paths/trails" (62%), "more shade
structures/trees" (52%), and "innovative, all
ability playgrounds" (52%).
10-Year Improvements
Expand walking paths/trails
More shade structures/trees
Innovative, all ability playgrounds
Improve and expand restroom facilities
Improve ADA accessibility
New or upgrade sports fields
New or upgrade skate park
New or upgrade sports courts
More parking
Improve signage
7 !
.....19%
~ I
~19%
bl1~1•¾
7 r
JO% I
29%
' I
I
i s2r
52%
I
62 0

PLEASE RATE YOUR SATISFACTION WITH THE OVERALL VALUE YOU RECEIVE FROM COMMUNITY PARK?
Nearly 72 percent of participants were
"somewhat satisfied" or above with the overall
quality at Community Park. Only five percent
were "somewhat dissatisfied" and there were no
selections for "very dissatisfied".
59 of 60 54
Overall Satisfaction-Community
Park Value
5%
-
0% 0%
Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very Don't Know
Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied
January 18, 2022, Item #15
POWAY

COMMUNITY
PARK
NEEDS

ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX
E
-PUBLIC
INPUT

MEETING
CHAT

COMMENTS
•
Love
to
see
gardens
added
to
the
park.
especially
since
the
community
center
is
there
to
be
able
to
host
or
help
maintain.
•
Garden
space.
but
community
garden
is
a
good
idea
too.

I know
there
is
a
couple
garden
clubs
in
Poway
that
could
benefit
from
a
space.
•
Planting
more
natives
plants
and
butterfly
gardens
is
great.
•
Hello,
resident
here
for
about
4 years.

Looking
forward
to
hearing
about
the
park
plans
and
appreciate
you
putting this
on.
•
Me,
my
wife,
and
my
two
daughters
are
participating
tonight.

My
kids
are
big
fans
of
BMX
and
would
like
to
see
a
BMX
track
in
Poway.
• I
would
like
to
add
playing
near
the
creek
to
activities
•
Thanks
Neelay
and
David.

My
family
would
love
to
see
a
BMX
track
at
Community
Park
or
anywhere
else
in
Poway.

The
sport
of
BMX
is
fun,
family-friendly
and
fast-growing.

Unfortunately,
there
are
no
tracks
in
North
County.

Poway
residents
would
be
well
served
with
a
track
in
the
model
of
"San
Diego
BMX"
in
Kearny
Mesa
that
features
programming
including
racing.
•
General
upgrading
and
upkeep
for
the
look.

Chain
link
fences
are
not
so
nice
looking.
•
ADA
accessibility
is
not
just
a
want,
but
a
must
I think.
• I
think
it's
really
important
to
differentiate
between
a
skate
park,
which
Community
Park
already
has,
and
a
BMX
track.

The
skate
park
is
a
concrete
area
without
organized
programming
while
a
BMX
track
is
a
dirt
track
with
organized
practices,
classes,
and
races.
•
Would
love
to
make
it
more
upscale
to
match
the
aesthetic
of
the
City
Hall,
Lilac
Courtyard,
Library
60 of
60 55
pros
~,';
>
consuttiQg

Poway City CouncilJanuary 18, 2022

Poway City Council
January 18, 2022