Data Collection and Analysis

(1)

Data Collection and Analysis

OVERVIEW OF DATA COLLECTION

The primary data collection efforts of the 19-member Task Force were to gather as much public input as possible on the strengths and weaknesses of, and recommended improvements to, the Upper Arlington Parks & Recreation Department facilities and programs. The information gathering efforts focused on key community

constituencies including:

• General Public – Approximately 13,800 households in Upper Arlington

• Recreational User Groups – those who use Parks & Recreation fields and facilities for organized team play and competition.

• Allied Community Organizations – i.e. UA Public Library, schools (public and private), and organizations that seek to provide a service to the people of Upper Arlington.

• Park & Recreation Staff • Miscellaneous Contacts

Information was gathered from these key constituencies through a variety of research methodologies that are discussed in further detail in the following sections. The conclusions from the data are summarized in the next section.

In addition, all Task Force meetings were open for residents to attend and participate with the dates/times publicized in advance. These Task Force meetings were held at various public locations around the community. All data has been retained in its unprocessed form for independent, public analysis should a resident wish to examine it firsthand.

CONCLUSIONS

Information collected from the public forums, allied community organizations, focus groups, the Citywide survey and other meetings was compiled to produce a group of common requests and recommendations that are most important to Upper Arlington residents. This list is grouped by timeframe for implementation and capital

expenditure requirements. Items requiring significant amounts of capital and/or long timeframes for completion include:

• Providing indoor recreation facilities to serve the entire community, including an indoor pool

• Improving Senior Center facilities • Enhancing access to parks

(2)

70 Focus on the Future Strategic Plan—March 2007

(3)

INPUT FROM THE GENERAL PUBLIC

Three general public forums were held in May 2006 at various public locations

throughout the community. The meetings were held during a one-week timeframe and occurred in the morning, afternoon and evening to encourage resident attendance. The dates, times and meeting places were publicized in advance via the Upper Arlington City Web site, the City Manager’s weekly column in the Upper Arlington News, advertisements and mailings such as the City Insightresident newsletter.

A follow-up set of five neighborhood forums was held in early June 2006 at the Upper Arlington elementary schools. In addition to being announced via various public media, computerized telephone invitations were made to all households within close proximity of the schools. The schedule of meetings was as follows:

Tuesday, May 30, 2006 7 p.m. Greensview Elementary

Tuesday, May 30, 2006 6:30 p.m. Tremont Elementary

Wednesday, May 31, 2006 6:30 p.m. Barrington Elementary

Wednesday, May 31, 2006 6:30 p.m. Windermere Elementary

Thursday, June 1, 2006 6:30 p.m. Wickliffe Elementary

Saturday, June 3, 2006 11a.m. Reed Road Water Park

Attendees at all forums were given the opportunity to verbalize their opinions during open discussion, as well as to complete short survey cards. No demographic

information was collected, except the closest park to the respondent’s residence. These forums were supplemented by the presence of Task Force members at various civic functions throughout the summer such as Summer Celebration, A Taste of UA, the Upper Arlington Labor Day Arts Festival, and Movies in the Park.

The following questions were asked at all of the public forums: • What are the strengths of the UA Parks & Recreation Department? • What are its weaknesses?

• What would you like to see in the future? • Where do you recreate most frequently?

Task Force members at each meeting recorded input of all of the attendees. In addition, all attendees were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the input that resulted from the group discussion. Survey cards were also collected at the conclusion of each meeting.

At the public venues, whiteboards were set up at the event and event attendees were encouraged to record their thoughts about the questions noted above. (NOTE: Due to the qualitative nature of this input and the inability to accurately track the number of respondents, this data is not included in the following analysis.) However, the comments collected at these public events were in line with the results obtained from the public forums and the completed short survey forms.

I think one of the biggest

problems is connecting the

people who are looking for

a particular activity to the

program that is out there.

The information may exist,

but you have to be looking

in the right place to find it.

If there were a more

interactive way for a person

to list their interests and be

shown a list of potential

activities offered by UA.

(4)

A written survey, created by the Task Force, was made available to the residents of the City of Upper Arlington at:

• Seven public meetings, conducted in May 2006

• Parks & Recreation sponsored events in June, July and August • Reed Road Water Park

Residents were encouraged to submit follow-up comments by completing the survey and also encouraged to take surveys to distribute to other interested individuals. The survey was intended to provide an introduction to issues concerning the Upper Arlington Parks & Recreation Department. This data has been tabulated

quantitatively, and is reflected in the tables in the Appendix. A modified version of this survey was available to residents via the City’s Web site throughout the summer. With the input collected from the public forums, the comment cards and the written survey, a Meta analysis was conducted. The Meta analysis combines the data from the various sources into a meaningful summarization of input from the general public. Although the data collected from the general public is not statistically significant, it reflects opinions voiced most often by the residents who participated in the process detailed above. The results shown in detail below are consistent and reinforcing — meaning commonly identified weaknesses match commonly identified recommended improvements and needs.

Data Collected from Public Forums & Comment Cards

The results below are a summary of the comments of the 180 attendees at the public forums and the 83 survey cards collected at those meetings. Recurring responses were tabulated and are reflected in the quantitative data tables in the exhibits below, as well as in the Appendix.

Strengths of Upper Arlington Parks & Recreation

#1 Strength - Facilities

Other most commonly mentioned strengths included:

• Pools

• Open/green space

• Variety/quality of programs • Family activities

(5)

Weaknesses of Upper Arlington Parks & Recreation

#1 Weakness - No recreation/community center

Other most commonly mentioned weaknesses included:

• Limited parking and walkway access to parks • Bike-path connectivity • Lack of ball fields and

courts

(6)

Most Like to See in Upper Arlington

#1 Recreation/community center

Other most commonly mentioned requests included:

• Dedicated dog park area and maintain current leash laws • More bike-path connectivity

• Senior Center enhanced • Winter activities and programs

(7)

The results below are a summary of the data collected from 49 written surveys completed by residents. Recurring responses were tabulated and are reflected in the quantitative data tables in the Appendix.

#1 Strength - Facilites

Other most commonly mentioned strengths included: • Green space

• Park safety • Pools

• Appearance of parks and recreational facilities

#1 Maintenance issue - Dog waste and weeds

Other weakness mentioned with frequency included: • Water drainage problems

• Some facilities in need of repair • Limited accessibility to parks • Lack of parking

Survey Data: Weaknesses

14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 0 2% 4% 6% 8%10% 12% 14% 16% Cleanliness/ dog waste/ weeds Water

drainage Facilitiesin need of repair

Access to

(8)

#1 Indoor recreation space

Other most commonly mentioned requests included:

• Dog park

• Baseball fields • Skate park

• More recreational programs

Additional Feedback From General Public Input

In the written survey residents were asked their opinion of any new or additional recreational facilities that should be available in Upper Arlington. The most popular responses were community center and indoor facilities. Specifically, residents would like to see an indoor pool, recreational facilities and a senior center as part of a community center. There were also numerous requests to beautify the parks with flowers and provide a “decent senior center.”

Feedback regarding programming (Cultural Arts, Lifelong Learning, Recreation Programs and events), was generally positive. No one suggestion received more than one response. Highly regarded community programs included the Upper Arlington Labor Day Arts Festival, Fourth of July events, and Music in the Parks. Programming-related comments are noted below:

• Need more access to programs • Publicize programs more • More teen programs

• More physical activities for children and teens • Provide classes at Scioto River

• Provide facility for indoor swim lessons

• Provide more active programs for adults over 55 • Increase the number of cultural arts activities • Provide programs over a larger variety of times

Provide increased services

and facilities connected

with the library and schools

(9)

Residents were asked in both the survey cards and the written surveys for information about their recreational usage of Upper Arlington facilities and parks, as well as participation in programs and events. The following data was collected from both the survey cards and the written surveys.

Most Commonly Mentioned Recreational Activities

#1 Most Popular - Walking/running

Other popular activities included:

• Swimming/pools

• Tennis

• Baseball/softball

(10)

Most Popular Events in Upper Arlington

#1 Upper Arlington Labor Dday Arts Festival

Other events mentioned frequently included: • Movies in the Parks

• LifeLong Learning programs • Fourth of July Fireworks • Taste of UA

(11)

Other Recreational Sites Used by UA Residents

Residents responding to the written survey indicated they use facilities and programs at Dublin Parks and Recreation, MetroParks, City of Columbus Parks, Grandview, Gahanna, Westerville and Worthington.

Upper Arlington residents were most likely to recreate at recreation/community centers located in other Central Ohio communities such as Dublin, Worthington, Westerville and Hilliard. Private recreation facilities used by residents include Sawmill Athletic Club, McConnell Center, Northwest Swim Club, Olympic Pool, OSU Golf Course, Swim & Racquet, YWCA, Fitness First, Lifestyle Fitness, Midwest Gymnastics, Universal Gymnastics, Vertical Adventures, Ice House and Chiller.

Suggested Improvements to Programs and Facilities

Residents were also asked what improvements they would like to see related to Upper Arlington recreational facilities and programs. Comments made by residents

responding to the written survey included the following:

Walking and Bike Path Improvements

More walking and bike paths Bike lanes on McCoy Rd.

Need sidewalks and reduced speed limits Need bike path on Kenny Rd.

Pool Improvements

Need more adult time at Reed Road Water Park Need an indoor pool

Upgrades to Devon Pool including a water fountain, changing rooms and renovation of the pool building

Green Space and General Park Space Improvements

Increase access to parks, including parking and sidewalks Add restroom facilities

Address swampy areas of parks Improve skate park facility Dog issue improvements

Maintain opportunities for walking and running pets Increase water supply for dogs at parks

Develop a dog park or fenced dog areas Provide waste bags

Not enough off-leash time for dogs

Senior Center Improvements

Increase parking space

Increase and improve space at the Senior Center Maintain a separate identity for the Senior Center Provide bus transportation

Provide comfortable movie chairs

Field Sports and Other Sports-Related Improvements

Increase field space availability Improve condition of fields Provide indoor basketball facilities

Help bring the Scioto Trail

to UA and improve

connectivity to parks and

schools through

(12)

Tennis Improvements

Longer outdoor tennis season

Do not enclose Northam Park Tennis Courts Park-Specific Comments

META Analysis

The results of the meta analysis below are a compilation of the data collected from comments generated by the public forums, comment cards and written surveys completed by residents. Recurring responses were tabulated and are reflected in the quantitative data tables in the Appendix. Total sample size was 305.

#1 Strength - Facilites

Followed by green space, pools, programs, LifeLong Learning.

Miller Park

Northam Park

Burbank Park

Langston Park

Keep it a green park, for walking dogs, flying kites, playing ball

Parking is a problem Need bags for dog waste Sunday sports cause parking problems in residential areas

Develop creek area For the Tremont Pool area, residents would most like to see a fitness center and an indoor pool

Signage request for Langston Drive to allow parking only on one side during congested times

For the Sunny 95 Park, proper maintenance of wetland

conditions and adequate parking were of major concern

A specialized use frequently cited for this location was for a dog park

(13)

#1 Weakness - Lack of indoor recreational facility

Followed by access to parks, lack of restroom and changing rooms, water drainage problems in playing fields, lack of ball fields and courts.

#1 Wish - Indoor recreational facility

Followed by dog park, improved access to parks, enhanced Senior Center and winter activities.

A recreation center will be

very beneficial to the

community. Due to the

rejection at the polls, a

different funding method is

needed.

(14)

CITYWIDE SURVEY

Several questions were included in the 2006 Community Survey that directly addressed Upper Arlington’s park and recreation facilities and programs, as well as the Task Force’s efforts. The online survey was fielded during September 2006. Key findings of the survey are detailed below:

• 91.7% of respondents said that they were aware the City had completely reconstructed the City pool at Reed Road Park. n=552

• For Devon Pool, 62.2 percent of the respondents felt the current facility should be maintained with only minor improvements. 33.7 percent would like to see the pool fully renovated. n=466

• For Tremont Pool, 51.4 percent of the respondents felt that the current facility should be maintained with only minor improvements. 45.8 percent would like to see the pool fully renovated. n=467

• 49.9 percent of respondents were aware of the efforts to gather citizen input for the 2006 Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan. n=552

• 69.6 percent of respondents felt their opinions were at least somewhat represented during this information gathering process. n=194

Respondents were also asked to write open-ended responses to the question: In your opinion, how could the City improve the parks, recreation and leisure facilities it offers to residents. The following comments were noted most often among the 607 responses obtained (additional comments listed in Appendix):

• Indoor recreation facilities • Better access to parks • Indoor pool

As part of the 2006 Community Survey, residents were also asked if they participate in activities mostly inside Upper Arlington, outside of Upper Arlington or about 50/50. Residents were also asked if, in their opinion, Upper Arlington needed more specific activities. Residents were allowed to indicate a response for each category; there was no ranking or indication of preference for one category over another (the sum of the percentages will not equal 100). The results are shown on the following page.

I would love to see Tremont

or Devon Pool rehabbed

with a focus on simply a

large swimming pool with

kid-safe areas and a full

meal service snack bar

similar to Northwest Swim

Club's. I think the UA parks

are second to none - they

are UA's treasure.

(15)

Recreation Participation Inside Upper Arlington

#1 Biking/walking/running paths

• Green space • Field sports

• Children’s recreation programs

Provide safe access from

the high school area to the

Olentangy Bike trails. The

only way to access it at this

point is either biking down

Lane or going down Kenny

to Ackerman, both of which

are very dangerous during

rush hour.

(16)

Recreation Participation Outside of Upper Arlington

#1 Fitness/weightlifting

• Indoor swimming • Indoor court sports • Biking/walking/running

Respondants Seeking This Activity/Facility Outside of UA 29.9% 27.5% 12.9% 10.1% 8.3% 8.3% 8.2% _7.6% 6.5% _6.0% Biking /walk ing/ runnin g Gree n spa ce Field sport s Child ren'sr ec Dog p ark Adult rec Indoo r cou rt spo rts Olde r adu lt rec Indoo r Swi mming Fitne ss

(17)

Would Like to See More in Upper Arlington

#1 Indoor swimming

• Biking/walking/running • Indoor fitness facilities • Field space

Residents Would Like to See More of This in UA

38.8% 33.7% 23.9% 23.9% 18.8% 18.5% 18.5% 18.1% _17.4% 13.0% Biking /walk ing/ runnin g Gree n spa ce Field sport s Child ren'sr ec Dog p ark Adult rec Indoo r cou rt spo rts Olde r adu lt rec Indoo r Swi mming Fitne ss

(18)

ALLIED COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOCUS GROUPS

Methodology

A list of community groups that have a vested interest in the future of Upper

Arlington’s park and recreational facilities and programs was developed by the Upper Arlington Parks & Recreation Department. A written survey, created by the Task Force, was sent to a spokesperson identified for each group. The surveys were filled out with background information and returned to the Task Force. This information provided input for the series of focus groups that were conducted during October 2006. The purpose of the meetings was to develop a prioritization of items resulting from data collected from the Upper Arlington community at large.

Organizations were invited to complete a questionnaire and submit it prior to

attending the focus group. The intention of that document was to assist the Task Force in identifying concerns.

Based on general public input, the Focus of the Future Task Force developed a

“shopping wish list” of desires of the community (see chart below). Through this set of focus groups, the Task Force hoped to determine the most important items on the “wish list” of the general public and to understand the trade-offs inherent in fulfilling the “wish list.” The goal of the focus groups was to generate a dialogue about trade-offs and to understand how various items related to other organizations. Secondly, the focus groups sought to generate input on how ideas could be realistically implemented.

COMMUNITY WISH LIST EXERCISE

PARK IMPROVEMENTS NEW FACILITIES

$ More parking $ Dog park

$ Better bike and pedestrian access $ Lacrosse fields

$ More restrooms $ More field & park space

$ Better field drainage $ Ice rink

$ Renovate Tremont Pool Indoor recreation space:

$ Renovate Devon Pool $ -Public meeting rooms

$ Enhance natural areas $ -Indoor pool

$ Enhance visual & performing arts $ -Gymnasium

$ Baseball/softball field improvements $ -Auditorium $ -Fitness facility $ -Senior facilities $ -Teen facilities

The groups were invited to one of three focus groups held during October 2006. To get at each organization’s thoughts on tradeoffs and priorities, each attendee was assigned an imaginary dollar total of $100. As a way to think about priorities, each attendee was allowed to allocate the $100 to the items on the “wish list” that were most important to their represented group. No more that $50 could be allocated to any one item. At the end of the exercise, attendees were invited to revise their total allocations based upon the discussion generated throughout the focus group proceedings.

I'm very happy with the

City's parks, rec and leisure

options.

(19)

Allied Organization Commentaries

The groups participating in these focus groups and their thoughts on the future of Upper Arlington’s park and recreation facilities and programs are summarized below. Upper Arlington Swim Club

Our young people are limited to how much pool time and access they have. They are swimming pretty late into the evening . . . We are in great need for more indoor water space. Not just for the high school but for the community as a whole. Currently, the Upper Arlington Swim Club is using the high school pool. The club currently has about 335 kids and serves as a feeder system for the high school kids who want to compete.

Pool space is the group’s primary problem, with the lack of an indoor facility being the Swim Club’s biggest concern. A spokesman for the group noted that many swim clubs in Central Ohio face this issue. The Upper Arlington Swim Club previously trained at OSU, but that facility is no longer available for use by the Upper Arlington Swim Club. An additional issue noted by Swim Club representatives is having younger children swim until 9 p.m.

Currently, the Upper Arlington Swim Club uses the Northwest Swim Club in the summer to train at a 50-meter pool. This pool is heated year-round. The rental budget is privately supported by the Swim Club and is about $3,000 for the summer. Representatives mentioned the possibility of using Devon pool for training in the summer if it was properly heated.

A Swim Club representative noted that USA Swimming, the sanctioning arm of all swimming in the US, is involved in helping communities develop pools. The trend is toward pool facilities that incorporate many things such as water therapy and rehabilitation. These are all-encompassing facilities the whole community can utilize.

According to a Swim Club representative, “If you were looking to do something like that, probably strategically from a location standpoint, it [Tremont pool and the Senior Center] is probably the best location. With the Senior Center you have a central hub for activity and the schools could take advantage of it during the day. It would be a 50- meter pool. You can have different activities. So you can have the concept of utilizing the pool so the seniors can use it and the schools can use it at the same time. Even a membership could be used with a nominal fee. Financially, the only way to keep a facility up and running is to have multiple uses. You have to have a lot of different activities going on. Otherwise, the cost to run the facility is going to be overwhelming.”

Representatives of the Swim Club expressed interest in working with the Parks & Recreation Department to redevelop the pools in Upper Arlington. They further noted the Swim Club has worked with an architect regarding the high school pool. They have looked at tearing down the existing natatorium and angling it differently to allow a separate entrance that would provide full access during the day for the community.

The parks suit my purposes

very well so I don’t have

suggestions for change. I

do believe, however, that

the City should not take on

the responsibility of

(20)

Bear Cub Baseball

When I first started as Director in 2004 . . . we had roughly 650 kids in the program. We are now over 900 . . . Regarding the baseball fields, we use as many as we can. We are just trying to figure out what all we can do to accommodate kids for pre-K through 6th grade.

Bear Cub Baseball currently serves over 900 kids. In order to accommodate growth, the group has done several things including: pushing the season back a couple of weeks to accommodate JV softball which uses Northam Park fields; sharing Northam fields with the girls’ softball program; sharing diamonds with the old-timers league; and renting fields from St. Agatha. The group is also trying to work with the travel programs to find more field space playing time. Bear Cub Baseball has had to increase the size of its teams to 13-14 from the 12 kids that it would optimally like to have. Northwest Counseling Services

We serve all ages as a non-profit . . . We feel that the community would be more supportive and welcoming if there was place, especially where kids in grades 5 through 8, could kind of hang out with wholesome activities like a pool with adult supervision . . . There is large group of people who are entering their 50s and 60s. There is tons of interest in more recreational activities . . . Whenever you talk about frail elderly you have to talk about transportation. . . I don’t think it makes a lot of sense to have programming for people in their 80s until we address as a

community—the need for transportation.

Northwest Counseling Services serves all ages of the community as a non-profit organization. One of its key desires is to have a space in the community where children could come on a regular basis. A representative noted, “It would be great to have a place where they could come for homework help and to play games. If there was a free community center, I could see them doing all sorts of things on a drop-in basis.” The representative further noted that the older adult realm is becoming more complex. With a large group of people entering their 50s and 60s, there is increased interest in recreational activities. Additionally, in the opinion of the Northwest Counseling representative, Upper Arlington has lost ground in the services it provides to the frail elderly, particularly in the area of transportation. Currently, the elderly have no reliable way to get to the Senior Center. She further noted, “I would like to see our community have a senior center with a facility that is better equipped to deal with that age group. I don’t think it makes a lot of sense to have programming for people in their 80s until we address as a community—the need for transportation.”

Upper Arlington Lacrosse Association

Our major concern is improving field size and quality . . . A lot of kids aren’t able to participate in those programs because of the numbers. Our biggest concern is field space.

The UALA currently serves about 360 kids—200 boys and 160 girls. They also support the middle schools. The major concern of the group is improving field size and quality, due to increased pressure to expand programs to 3rd through 6th grade. Growth is expected to continue as lacrosse grows in popularity. A representative of the group also noted there is a need for expanding the middle school program into the high

Increase number of soccer

and lacrosse fields…

Transform Tremont pool to

an indoor facility

(21)

school program. There is talk about a girls’ club team at the high school this year and a club team for the boys at the high school.

Many kids aren’t able to participate in existing programs because of the numbers and lack of field space, particularly in the spring. The group used to compete with baseball but they have moved back their season so that both groups can be accommodated. The group currently uses two fields for 14 boys’ teams in the spring and one field for eight girls’ teams.

The group has looked at Hilliard and Ohio State for fields to use. However, there are no fields available. In addition, the parents want to stay in Upper Arlington.

Historical Society

If someone wants to see something in the archives they get hold of me . . . and then we go to the firehouse. It would be nice to have our history in an open space. I would like to see a museum or something and rotate things through.

The Historical Society sponsors a number of different activities including a Wall of Honor and a Home and Garden Tour. The Historical Society currently maintains archives at the fire station. However, these archives are not open to the public. If someone wants to see something in the archives, they must contact the Historical Society to get a key to go to the firehouse. The Historical Society representative noted, “I would like to see a museum or something and rotate things through. We do programs through LifeLong Learning. We go into the schools and give a slide show. I would like someplace to display things. We have sports photos in the archives that people would enjoy seeing.”

The Commission on Aging

Our need is primarily meeting space. If we want to have a meeting or an educational forum and have 100 people attend, it’s really tight to have it at the Senior Center.

The Commission on Aging dovetails with the issues of the Senior Center. The

commission’s primary concern is the lack of meeting space in Upper Arlington for large groups. The group has had to rent spaces in churches. The Commission on Aging is currently conducting a survey of adults age 80 and older which includes questions about activities and transportation. Survey results are indicating that water sports for older adults like swimming and aqua-fitness are desired. Transportation is an issue as well.

Senior Center

I think a great scenario would be to mix kids and older adults for other activities. I think it’s unfortunate that the kids come at about 4 o’clock and the Senior Center closes at 4. There is no inter-generational programming that can take place.

The representative from the Senior Center was interested in integrating children into the Senior Center. Currently, children come to the Senior Center for 10th period for the after-school program. The 10th period program has been well received at the Senior Center.

(22)

No inter-generational programming is currently taking place at the Senior Center. The representative noted, “I think a great scenario would be to mix kids and older adults for other activities. [However], from the surveys that we get back, there is a group, a pretty concentrated group, but they’re loud, that say they just want senior space. They don’t want to share their space. But I think there is a much less vocal group that would welcome it and there are more of them. But you don’t hear from them as much. You have to deal with that core that doesn’t want anything taken away from them.” Ice Hockey

There is just a huge number of kids . . . This is the first year we may have cuts . . . During the season I pay almost $1,800 per week and during games we pay over $2,000 per week. I would rather pay that to us rather than to the Chiller.

Currently, Upper Arlington Ice Hockey has two high school squads with 20 kids on each squad. The number of children involved in ice hockey continues to grow. Two years ago triple A teams started in Columbus. Columbus now has triple A teams 18 years and under, triple A teams 16 and under, as well as bantam and sport teams. There are at least 30 travel teams. The house program has over 40 teams. This is the first year that the group may have to make cuts due to the increasing number of participants. Additionally, this year an Upper Arlington-based bantam team of 7th and 8th graders was formed. Upper Arlington also has enough kids in the community to have a travel and a select team.

Their biggest problem is renting time at a reasonable hour and cost. Upper Arlington Ice Hockey currently books ice for practice and games at privately owned facilities around central Ohio. During the season, the group pays $1,800 per week for practice time and over $2,000 per week for games. The group noted that they would rather pay this money to a facility based in Upper Arlington than to other facilities in Central Ohio.

A representative of the group noted that there may be partnership opportunities. An example is in Strongsville, OH where a new rink was built as a partnership between private entities and the city. The group noted that an ice rink could be used by children and adults for school skates, private lessons, school lessons and tournaments.

Field Sports

How do you solve the lack of space for field sports? . . . We’re just starting different things . . . I really think lights would solve a lot of our problems.

Representatives for various field sports groups in Upper Arlington noted that there is a lack of field space. Several things that the groups are doing to improve the situation include: renting fields from St. Agatha; doubling up on games by starting play at 5:30; and using the fields at Hastings and Jones and possibly the high school.

Representatives noted that they would like to extend practice time and enable girls’ teams to play on dirt. Various groups have looked at renting OSU fields but all of their baseball diamonds are rented to traveling teams. The group noted that lighting existing fields and diamonds would solve a lot of problems.

Our soccer fields are an

embarrassment compared

to other cities. Good

drainage and parking

would be an improvement.

(23)

Senior Volleyball

We need to improve the Reed Road Park volleyball courts.

A representative for Upper Arlington Senior Volleyball noted that the group plays volleyball at Reed Road Park in summer and Burbank School in the gym in winter. The representative noted there is a need to improve the Reed Road Park volleyball courts which are also used by other groups at various times. A specific hazard noted was the fact that the courts are above the level of the ground with a change of elevation outside of the court.

Friends of the Arts

We are a fund-raising group . . . We fund grants and find a way to make things happen for the visual arts.

The Friends of the Arts is a fund-raising group that financially supports the Cultural Arts Commission. The group obtains grants and other sources of many for the visual arts. A representative noted, “I would like to see sculpture in the parkettes but I believe we can raise money for those as needed . . . I would love to see some sculptures here.”

Public Library

Each of the three library locations is near our Upper Arlington parks. We would like to work closely with Parks & Recreation as far as not duplicating services such as LifeLong Learning.

UA Civic Association

We would like to see improvement in the shelters.

The Upper Arlington Civic Association has an operating budget of about a quarter of a million dollars a year and supports about 12 events at the parks annually. A

representative of the group noted that they would like to see improvement in the shelters including heating the south shelter at Thompson Park and improvements in the electricity in both facilities at Thompson Park.

Wellington School

Hopefully you can still assist us with our needs and in the future we can assist you with your needs.

A representative from Wellington School noted that the school shares fields and tennis courts with Upper Arlington. He noted that usage needs will most likely shrink with the completion of the school’s new facility. However, the school will still have needs for some practice facilities and was hopeful that they could still work with Upper Arlington to meet those needs.

(24)

Upper Arlington Basketball

We are trying to get more space for us and for multi-purpose space. I would like outdoor court space. We don’t have any.

The representative for Upper Arlington Basketball noted that the group runs a

kindergarten–3rd grade program and a 4th grade–6th grade program. Indoor facilities in Upper Arlington are very limited and the group uses the school gyms.

The high school gym is the only good facility; all of the other school gyms are small and overbooked. The representative also noted that he would like to have outdoor court space. Several years ago the group raised about $8,000 and replaced the baskets at Hastings.

Roundtable Points of Discussion

At the end of the focus group meetings, roundtable discussions were held to generate ideas for implementing the residents’ “wish list.” The following areas were discussed in some detail:

Partnering Opportunities

• Building relationships between the Schools and the City. The challenge is the transitory nature of the leadership of the sports programs was noted. A council of field sports representatives was suggested to share ideas and brainstorm with the City and Schools. It was suggested a field sports coalition could be formed to meet once a year to discuss the upcoming year. • Forming a joint recreational district (JRD) concept between field sports. For

example, every year the field sports groups would be allocated a certain amount of money to work with to make sure that mowing gets done,

electricity get paid for, etc. An annual fee could be instituted for such things as overseeing part of the fields. It was also suggested that a certain amount of the fee could be dedicated to a fund that was set aside for continued improvements to City fields.

• Working cooperatively with a private vendor or some other group to provide indoor recreational services.

Bike and Pedestrian Access to Parks

• Improving access through biking and sidewalks would reduce parking requirements at the parks. It was noted that there is a Transportation Plan that encompasses the entire City in many different ways with actual bike paths, sidewalks and sidewalk improvements. Through the Transportation Plan, every point in Upper Arlington would have some organized structure to get from point A to point B. It was further noted that the plan was initiated following the Master Plan process.

• Utilizing programs such as Safe Access to Schools. If road improvements provide access to a school, federal funds may be available to help fund the improvements.

Integrate programming at

Tremont to include the

library and the parks

together. Same with Lane

Road/Thompson Park.

More family events like

outdoor movies but at more

locations. Bike path

through city with lines

painted on streets and

through paved parts of the

parks? Keep pristine and

maintained.

(25)

Field Drainage

• Improving field drainage problems at Northam Park and Thompson Park. It was noted that the fields the City owns in the southern part of Northam Park have very little drainage problem. The areas in the northern area of the park near the Senior Center owned by Upper Arlington schools and/or by St. Agatha have drainage problems. The problem is caused by the presence of an underground bog. The importance of partnering was again raised as a way to address this issue.

Indoor Recreational Facility

• Increasing public meeting room space. The need for a gymnasium was also discussed as a place for organized leagues and for children. It was noted that Upper Arlington currently has nothing comparable.

• Assessing the need for a fitness facility. It was noted that private businesses in Upper Arlington and surrounding communities provide fitness options to residents. However, others noted that a fitness component could be financially self-sustaining and should be made available to residents. • Developing an indoor facility with a minimal loss of green space. It was noted

that the issue of indoor recreation space is not a question of demand, but one of available land. Residents do not want to take green space.

• Locating an indoor recreation space in a central part of the community. It was noted that the Northam Park area has the advantage of being centrally located with the Senior Center, the library, a pool, and tennis courts currently located there. From a site-planning perspective, the Northam Park area is a logical place to provide a campus of park and recreational facilities. However, some green areas and playing fields might be lost.

STAFF INPUT

Methodology

A series of interviews were held during October 2006 to gather input from the various division heads of the Upper Arlington Parks & Recreation staff including: Steve Cothrel, Parks Superintendent; Ginny Houghton, Recreation Superintendent; Jennifer Woodman, Lifelong, Learning, & Leisure Director; Sally Gard, Senior Center

Administrator; Lee Spitzer, Aquatics Manager; and Lynette Santoro-Au, Arts Manager. Prior to meeting with members of the Strategic Task Force, these individuals were given a discussion guide that contained the topics to be covered during the interview. The following summaries were drawn from those discussions.

Meeting with Senior Center Administrator – Sally Gard

Sally is the Senior Center manager and has worked for the City for 20 years. The Center provides programs and services to those 55 years and older, at all times trying to respond to outside trends and issues such as the Medicare drug benefit and advancing technology.

The Senior Center moved into one of the old school buildings in 1978 and gradually began to occupy all the current buildings. These building were originally constructed

(26)

in 1958 to accommodate overflow students from the elementary school. At this time the facility has to turn people away from many programs because of the limitations of the facility. Deficient areas include electricity, plumbing, meeting space, parking and restrooms (no lockers or showers). They have in the past utilized money from the Older Americans Act to fund, for example, parking. They have a study by an architect that delineates the deficiencies of the building. The building structurally cannot

accommodate a second story. Recently, money was spent on all new hot water heaters, a new roof and other improvements.

At the moment the Senior Center is “bursting at the seams.” Staff would like to see possibly private fundraising with public match (recognizing voters have indicated they do not wish to support a facility that is completely funded publicly).

With a new Senior Center, some critical areas would include fitness and movement, locker rooms/showers, arts, social gathering areas, meeting/education rooms. The current location works well.

The 2005 Older Adults Needs Assessment noted lack of transportation for seniors, a lack of housing in UA such as assisted living. Sally feels that money to purchase a van might come from private donors but her concern is for long term costs for maintenance, insurance and staff to schedule and drive a van. This would then put it outside the division’s cost recovery requirement.

National trends lean toward shared community space in recreation centers for all ages but it is well known that teens and older adults need their own space and programs. For older adults they are most comfortable doing fitness activities with their peer group. A main goal of the Center is to create socialization opportunities so people don’t become isolated, so enhancing socialization is at the core of the programming. This is directly related to health and well-being.

Sally is optimistic about being able to raise funds for a new Senior Center/recreation center with some public match. Using Hilliard YMCA as an example—it took five years but people loved watching the graphic of the goal being met.

An indoor pool would be useful; currently the Senior Center partners with the OSU Wellness Center.

Meeting with Parks & Forestry Superintendent - Steve Cothrel

Steve has been with the City for about 17 years, and currently serves as supervisor of Parks & Forestry. As such, he is responsible for park maintenance and facilities as well as the urban forestry component.

Steve feels as though park development is currently in good shape, but he would like the City to be in the position to take advantage of other parcels if they come available and are suitable (such as the purchase of Sunny 95 Park). Some ideas were “The Ranch” on Lane Road, partnerships with the City of Columbus along Riverside Drive, and partnering with OSU along the eastern border.

Recently parkland under his supervision has been expanded by 10 percent, stretching the staff and particularly the mowing cycle to capacity. The City aims to mow once-a-week, with the City mowing the big spaces and contracting out the smaller spaces.

We need restroom facilities

at more of the parks. Also,

wellness should be a main

concern for our youth and

adults of this community.

Adding walking/biking

paths and exercise

equipment around them

will show we are committed

to keeping our residents

healthy.

(27)

They only have one large “bat-wing” mower; two would be great but in addition to the mower a trailer and a truck would be required.

There is a fleet maintenance group for City-wide use. Right now though it is hard to find the time to maintain the mowers, and the new Burbank Park will increase demand further.

Some user groups help by doing their own lining (e.g. Lacrosse lines their own field and provides the goals).

Equipment storageis a huge problem. They have facilities on Roberts Road and rent

three-four storage garages on Dublin Road. There is a small garage in Fancyburg but a lot of equipment is left outside most of the year. The Reed Road Park shelter is used in winter as a garage, however it has fireplaces and could be rented out in the winter. There could be room at Roberts Road for a pole barn on the west side, but this is an area primarily used by Public Services.

• Fancyburgwould be more convenient but it is not as compatible a use there. Hard to get a cost efficient facility that is pleasing to the eye in a residential neighborhood.

• Different facility—one other possibility hinges on the future of the fire stations on Reed and Coach roads. If Reed is expanded and Coach no longer needed, some storage uses could go up at Coach Road.

Litter: Littering is not a signficant issue, although there is a lot of wind-blown litter that gets into wooded areas. The biggest problem is trash left by sports teams. It slows down the mowing. More trash cans might help in parks at different times of the year. Staff has tried to encourage better behavior, stopping short of on-the-scene enforcement.

Sunny 95/Langston:Similar to other parks, this park could accommodate a shelter

with restrooms, perimeter pathways, small parking lot. Steve would like to see it accommodate needs in the community that are currently not addressed, such as a nicer facility that could be rented out, such as for wedding receptions, classes, etc. This wouldn’t take another facility out of commission during construction. A performing arts facility makes sense, and it could be the best place for a dog park— couldn’t really squeeze in one of any appreciable size anywhere else. Taking away existing facilities is not a possibility and we have no unused space. If it is too small, the turf really suffers and you get a bad mix of mud and dog waste.

Steve sees Sunny 95 and Langston as one big park under a single name. There are plans to rebuild the old tennis courts into a facility that has two tennis courts and an area striped for both volleyball and basketball (with volleyball nets put up for programs or scheduled games).

Horticulture–This area is in its infancy but has made great strides since hiring a full-time horticulturist. Right now the division has just one horticulturalist position, with some summer help with watering.

(28)

As we expand the park system, the division may need to choose an alternative: • To not expand horticulture

• To contract the work out • To hire more help

• To develop a friends group of volunteers

The existing garden clubs are limited in what they can offer – they are mostly comprised of older female members, and memberships are decreasing.

Irrigation—Steve is leery of installing too much irrigation due to increased

maintenance demands which can be significant. At Burbank, the school will maintain the irrigation. Irrigation limits usage at a site because heavy use is not compatible with spray heads and water lines. The division does have a water cannon to keep fields green.

Staffing—The division could use more but needs to balance staff with the available

vehicles. The division has asked for one more permanent full time maintenance worker in response to the additional parkland. Both the park system and expectations have grown. This would take the division from three to four permanent maintenance workers (plus one crew chief).

Right now Steve is in the process of restructuring existing personnel. Looking at positions and needs may result in some adjustments.

Forestry—This program is in good shape, with no changes recommended at the

present time.

Budget—The division operates within a three-tiered budget

• Operating—salaries, material, supplies. In decent shape, has asked for increase due to fuel cost increases.

• Capital equipment—City Council has been supportive of requests in the past.

• Capital improvement—A $350,000 annual line item has satisfied the needs for upgrades and new projects.

Fundraising—Contributions can be deposited with the Upper Arlington Foundation, a

subsidiary of the Columbus Foundation, and can be specifically earmarked for various Parks & Recreation services, so this “infrastructure” is in place.

Vandalism—Biggest source lately is kids using pop machines as ladders to get up on

roofs of shelter houses and kick in vents, etc. The soda machines have also exacerbated the litter problem. Possibly include a recommendation in the plan to remove soda machines from the parks.

Pools: The division’s role in the pools is mostly with horticulture.

Senior Center: The division responds when called on for maintenance but lost

its plumber so is less able to take on that type of work. The Senior Center does have a custodian.

Reed Road—The fire station issue makes it impractical to plan much there, or to alter

the volleyball court at this time. Ideally, if the fire station was rebuilt, it would be in a better part of the lot and the remainder could be used for park uses.

We could use indoor pools,

and tennis courts,

racquetball, fitness, no

basketball please....

(29)

Meeting with Aquatics & Facilities Manager - Lee Spitzer

The handout is accurate with regard to the condition of the pools at Tremont (50 y.o.) and Devon (30 yr. since last renovation). Both are deteriorating; Tremont is in most need of a renovation/rebuild with a three-five year useful life, and Devon (as long as the pool tank integrity remains OK) has a five-eight year window.

Tremont: Seeing new deterioration with the concrete which has required repairs each

of the last two years.

Devon—This pool is in pretty good shape, with some problems with the stainless steel

walls along the guttering. The diving bay is excellent; the filter system needs to be replaced. The maintenance buildings are a big concern – they were built in the 1930s and are functional but have no adequate storage, and there are some employee safety issues, particularly the ability to evacuate in case of a problem. The bathhouse is also 1930s vintage, has no changing facilities, and the restrooms are deteriorating.

Indoor Pool—Lee sees a real need for an indoor pool to serve demand within the City’s

recreation system. Such a facility could offer lessons year round, adult lap swimming, water aerobics, some help for the swim club (although desired times might conflict and water temperature is an issue).

When asked if an indoor pool could/should replace Tremont, the answer was yes. An all-year facility with an open air side could be built, possibly integrating the tennis courts into a swim and racket type facility. It should be designed with phased additions in mind, maybe with extra rooms for meeting/social events.

Spray Park—Lee believes a spray park would be an asset to the City. They are great fun,

and required minimal staffing.

Biggest current challenge—Biohazards in the pools require shutting down the

facilities in the event of human waste in the water (chlorine must be raised to a high level and then decreased again before letting people back in).

Meeting with Cultural Arts Manager - Lynette Santoro-Au

Cultural Arts has no specific facilities; they take advantage of what becomes available such as the lobby of the MSC, loaning out artworks to local businesses.

For performing arts, the division currently uses the north lawn of the Municipal Services Center for summer concerts, the Council Chamber for chamber music in the spring and fall, some music in the park programs in parks. Some parks can’t accommodate concerts for a variety of reasons (e.g. Miller Park has no restrooms or parking but does have electricity). Such facilities also need to be disabled accessible. Some sort of permanent outdoor performing space would be very useful. It would have to be accessible, have parking, restrooms, electricity, space for a permanent or temporary stage to be set up, could be covered (tent) or not.

A performing arts facility would not necessarily require more staff. Overall, Lynette believes the department could use one more full-time staff person, and Cultural Arts

Changing the weeknights

that the summer concerts

are played would be good.

Some family members do

activities and teams in the

summer and if they are also

on Thursday night then you

miss every single concert.

By moving them to

different nights you can get

more people to attend that

otherwise couldn't.

(30)

Possible locations for a performing arts facility would include Thompson Park,

Langston Park (goes with Sunny 95 and its vision), or Northam Park. It probably would not work at the Mallway, Miller or Northwest parks. Such a facility could attract some sort of Shakespeare, touring acts, UACT performances (UAHS theater enthusiasts). UA probably couldn’t/wouldn’t support a theater group, especially year-round.

Things we DON’T do now: Currently nothing is offered with film but there is a lot of potential such as travel films and lectures, student productions such as those for senior theses, other local talent, etc.

More could be offered in the literary arts such as book discussions, a film and book project, a “community read” project where whole community is encouraged to read a book and then there are programs and discussion groups around it. Possible

partnerships wouyld include local bookstores and the Library.

Lynette would like to be better able to measure the value of what the division provides to the community—what they are doing versus what the public would like to see, to bring more of the community into programming.

Another challenge is reaching multicultural groups—it is often a challenge to get people to “cross over”—they have had some success with Asian shows at the Municipal Services Center and the Upper Arlington Labor Day Arts Festival.

Lynette would like to partner more with business and higher education (e.g. student organizations, Vet school art display, OSU dance).

Ideas for an indoor space—Lynette believes a 250-seat “black box” theater would be an easily managed space. The stage could be elevated or not, and it would be a very versatile space.

At this time an outdoor space is a higher priority than an indoor one.

Another area is technology. The division needs to keep up digitally and is now getting new computers and monitors to improve work and space efficiency. As a whole, the department offers more online registration, and the process of jurying art shows is rapidly evolving toward digital rather than film. Keeping up with changing technology to further the division/department mission is important.

The Upper Arlington Labor Day Arts Festival takes the largest part of the division’s program budget, about one third of the $90,000 allotted. The artists and food vendors rent space so the department does garner some income from the event, which is not affected by the weather.

Other fundraising occurs by Friends of the Arts — donating scholarships, artwork, fund visiting lectures, performances by e.g. the Upper Arlington Community Orchestra. In general, support from Council is good. The Cultural Arts Division is somewhat unique in Central Ohio.

I would like there to be

theatre activities for our

youth

(31)

Meeting with Director of LifeLong Learning and Leisure – Jennifer Woodman

Jennifer has been with the City for six years and currently serves as the Director of LifeLong Learning. She is responsible for all aspects of adult programming. LifeLong Learning is the largest adult program in the Central Ohio area and is self-supporting. Non-residents make up 65 percent of the 6,000-7,000 registrations per year. Biggest Challenges:

• Lack of a facility - Currently, the division uses the Senior Center, high school, Municipal Services Center, Ursus and Bartelt Studio.

• Lack of Staff – The division is comprised of one full-time and two part-time positions and a site supervisor.

Jennifer sees LifeLong becoming a stop on a national speaking circuit, E-learning and private bookings as viable short-term additions to the program. Extended office hours and increased marketing are also needed. An analysis needs to be done using

customer input to determine a strong marketing piece.

She believes a long-term vision should include developing certificate programs, travel programs and programs that make a connection with generations X & Y.

Changes that would benefit the entire department include designated facilities, recognition that customers are not specifically UA residents, shared part-time staff and an elimination of duplicate programs in the community.

Meeting with Recreation Superintendent - Ginny Houghton

Ginny is the Recreation Superintendent for the Recreation Division. The division has a program assistant, a youth recreation supervisor and several seasonal day camp positions. The annual budget is $897,000. The division is responsible for youth and teen programming, adult sports and four signature special events. A new format for the program brochure was launched in 2006, with a 22 percent increase in revenue. Ginny sees short-term visions as working closer with the Board of Education for more class space, more community field times, more middle school and special needs middle school programming.

Her long-term visions include facilities for birthday parties, putting a bubble/cover over the Tremont Pool, a land swap with the Board of Education for a small recreation center site, and moving soccer fields from Thompson Park to Sunny 95 Park.

Changes include using part-time staff or an intern to complete mundane activities, and an increase park access with walking paths and better marketing.

(32)

MISCELLANEOUS

Methodology

Members of the Strategic Task Force met with several community members with an interest in the future of Upper Arlington’s park and recreational facilities. The goal of these meetings was to generate a dialogue about their concerns and wishes for the future direction of Upper Arlington’s park and recreational facilities. Key points brought out during these sessions are detailed below:

Upper Arlington Realtors

Steve Bock, The Arlington Company, and three other realtors interviewed by Nikki McNary and John Simpson, October 18, 2006

The focus of the discussion was the relationship between homebuyer preferences (i.e. property values) and park and recreation facilities and programs offered in the community.

• Potential homebuyers who are considering Upper Arlington and peer communities in Central Ohio clearly respond to the quality and type of park facilities available. Specifically, families note that Upper Arlington does not have a recreation center, as do Dublin, Westerville, etc. and that Upper Arlington has poor “connectivity” (sidewalks, and bikeways). The realtors felt the addition of these amenities would enhance home sales and, by implication, property values.

• Although homebuyers still prefer Upper Arlington schools over those in other communities, that advantage is narrowing.

• Despite Reed Road Water Park, the condition of the other Upper Arlington pools is a negative among new homebuyers.

• Homes in close proximity to parks generally enjoy a modest price advantage over homes that are not near parks (although this can also be affected by other factors such as proximity to schools, shopping, etc.). The general condition of our parks in comparison to those in other communities is neither a competitive advantage nor a disadvantage,

• The existence and condition of Upper Arlington’s Senior Center does not usually impact homebuyer decisions since few buyers seeking homes in Upper Arlington are in that age group. It was the opinion of the realtors that the addition of a new senior-specific center would have no positive affect on home sales.

• The condition of Kingsdale and the lack of a town center are also factors that negatively affect in-coming buyer preferences.

• Most current buyers in the Upper Arlington housing market are long-time residents, as well as second and third generation buyers. For them, “family tradition” is the most important community attribute. They are less likely to comparison shop in other Central Ohio communities. While these “legacy buyers” are less likely to be concerned about the lack of indoor recreational facilities, they also are likely to respond affirmatively to questions about their interests in participating in specific activities if available.

Down the road Upper Arlington’s competitive disadvantage in community amenities will become more pronounced as Upper Arlington’s advantages in legacy, location, and schools wane.

(33)

Swim Club Meeting

Meeting held November 27 and attended by Tim King, Joy Peterson and Tim Moloney

Several representatives (primarily members of their Core Committee) of the Upper Arlington Swim Club (UASC) meet with a delegation from the Task Force and presented the business plan for demonstrating the viability of collaborating with the Upper Arlington School Board in building a new aquatic center at the High School. UASC has hired a consultant and created a business plan that includes site maps and drawings of a 50-meter competitive pool. The business plan also includes an overview of the current aquatic situation, products and services aquatic centers provide, a brief history of the UAHS Aquatic Program, community analysis, detailed proposal of the new facility and services that could be offered, an organizational structure and finally a financial plan.

UASC has met with the UA School Board including Dr. Weaver, Superintendent and presented its business plan. The core committee believes they have the support of the school board and related a very aggressive timeline (new pool open September 2009) to develop the project. Additionally discussion ensued regarding UASC’s plan for raising the funds to pay for the $7,000,000 pool project.

Discussion then moved to the possibility of locating the pool at Northam Park and UASC members voiced flexibility in location and design. UASC believes there needs to be community support for an aquatic center where school, community and swim team could join forces, but are very focused on their desire for a competitive pool. UASC members also expressed the belief that UA residents would support a single indoor pool, but not two.

From the meeting the Task Force learned:

• The community could not support two indoor pool facilities.

• The timeline set forth by UASC is too aggressive to be part of the Strategic Plan. • Locating the pool at the high school could have security issues and concerns. • Both the city and UASC could not compete for fund raising.

• UASC Core Committee has very strong desire for an indoor pool facility to be constructed as soon as possible.

We need an indoor

recreation center--I must

now take my two young

boys to Dublin and

Westerville. Plus I pay

yearly dues to a health club

outside of Upper Arlington.

I would MUCH rather have a

community center IN U.A.

and pay my dues to them.

(34)

Pedestrian Access to Parks & Recreation Facilities

Requests/Recommendations Barriers/Concerns Opportunities to Consider

• More parking at Langston, Tremont, Thompson, and Fancyburg

• More sidewalks for safer pedestrian access to parks

• More bike-friendly access to UA parks and connectivity to Columbus city parks • Improve access to the

Municipal Services Center • More lighted and landscaped

pedestrian walkways in parks • Make bike and walking paths

available to every neighborhood & connecting to parks

• Provide adequate handicap parking to handle large meetings for senior citizens

• Green space would need to be converted to asphalt for parking • Current sidewalk policy is property

owner-driven, sidewalks are not considered City infrastructure • UA residents are not aware of a

comprehensive, long-range plan for additional bike paths and sidewalks

• Grants available for funding bikeway construction

• Unused areas in and adjacent to parks might be used for parking • Improving bike paths and sidewalks

may reduce traffic problems and the need for additional parking

• Improving access to parks/green space outside of UA (i.e. Griggs Reservoir, OSU) may functionally increase parkland

• Use parking meters as a means to raise funds to support park and rec facilities/programs

• Review the existing community transportation plan created several years ago for concepts and ideas on placing bike paths and sidewalks

Outdoor Pools

Requests/Recommendations Barriers/Concerns Opportunities to Consider

• Renovate or refurbish Devon and Tremont pools

• Address staffing problems at the pools

• Extend the swimming season if possible

• Keep restrooms clean • Return high dives to the pools • Provide outdoor facilities for the UA

Swim Club

• Make UA pools available to UA residents only to reduce crowding • Enact stricter policies on summer

camps/daycare use of facilities

• Lower the cost for Reed Road Water Park for occasional users—cost is prohibitive to some families in UA • Maintain Devon and Tremont as

regular pools. Do not make them into water parks.

• Heat Devon pool to provide additional practice opportunities for Swim Club

• Renovate Tremont pool as part of an indoor recreational facility