Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutINS-12-003 - Skatepark Planning Study1 Staff Report KI~'cH~.~T~R InfrastrucrureServrcesl~epart°men~ W~ktrcHeneFCo REPORT TO: Community & Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: April 16, 2016 SUBMITTED BY: Jim Witmer, Director of Operations (ext. 4657) PREPARED BY: Dan Ritz, Supervisor of Design & Development (ext. 4348) WARD(S) INVOLVED: All DATE OF REPORT: April 4, 2012 REPORT NO.: INS-12-003 SUBJECT: SKATEPARK PLANNING STUDY RECOMMENDATION: That Fischer Park and Southwest Optimist Park be approved as skatepark locations and; That staff be directed to implement the design/construction of the Fischer Park skatepark in 2014/15 and the Southwest Optimist Park skatepark in 2016/17 subject to final capital budget approval. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to update the Community & Infrastructure Services Committee on the skatepark Planning Study (circulated under separate cover), provide a brief overview of the consultation and evaluation matrix with respect to potential skatepark sites and make recommendations regarding two additional permanent skatepark sites. This planning study addresses skatepark site selection only, not future design and configuration. BACKGROUND: In 2005, the Leisure Facilities Master Plan recommended that additional skatepark facilities be developed in Kitchener to provide more opportunities for youth to participate in this type of activity. (Recommendation 28, Item 8) In 2010, the Parks Strategic Plan further recommended that the City complete a site selection study for two proposed skatepark locations and implement design/construction of the skateparks through the ten-year capital budget. (Implementation Action 4.1.6) Currently there are two permanent skateboard parks located in Kitchener (Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex and McLennan Park) and one portable unit (Skatium) that is rotated to Community Centers throughout the summer (Centreville-Chicopee, Chandler Mowat, Country Hills, Doon Pioneer Park, Downtown, Forest Heights, Kingsdale and Victoria Hills). Council has approved capital budget for two more skateparks to be designed/constructed in 2014/15 and 2016/17, with a budget of $550,000 for each additional skatepark. 14-1 On June 21, 2010 staff provided an update to Community Services Committee on the status of the skatepark Planning Study. (Report CSD-10-039) The skatepark site selection study and community consultation process was introduced and a site selection criteria matrix was presented to Committee. The site selection criteria included four major categories: ^ Location (potential users, existing skateparks, surroundings, proximity to residential) ^ Physical Site Conditions (existing topography, vegetation) ^ Access & Security (public transportation, pedestrian access, parking, surveillance) ^ Supporting Infrastructure (washrooms, drinking water, lighting, etc.) REPORT: The Site Selection Process Staff began the skatepark site selection study by evaluating all city owned sites to identify potential skatepark locations throughout Kitchener. From this review, 19 potential sites were then evaluated against the established site selection criteria and assigned a grade value of A, B or C. Four sites received an "A" grade and were shortlisted for further detailed review and public and stakeholder feedback. Through a weighted matrix analysis reviewing the site selection criteria in more detail, staff is now recommending two sites as approved skatepark locations. 14-2 The Site Selection Process. Potential Skatepark Sites Each of the 19 potential sites was visited by the staff review committee in the summer of 2010. While at the sites, staff noted possible locations for the skatepark on each site and observed the surroundings to consider whether a skatepark could be integrated at the desired scale with the existing features and have appropriate visibility, accessibility and supporting amenities. Staff also examined the physical site conditions such as topography and existing vegetation to determine if the site would lend itself well to a skatepark. Taking into account the observations from the site visits, each potential site was evaluated against the established criteria and assigned a point value and an overall letter grade of A, B or C. 2 South West C)ptirnist Park A 3 YNidsan Park A ~3 Gtasvski Park A 5 Farest Heights CC B 6 Oaan Park Pioneer CC B 7 d2asenburg Park, 6 $ Filsinger Park B 9 QueensmountArena B ld Margan Park B 11 'South pistrict Paek B 12 Budd Park B 13 Biehn Park B 14 Peter Mailman Bald Yard C 15 idlewload Park C 15 Victoria Park C 17 Breithaupt Park C 18 Kis~ranis Park C 19 Lions Park C Zd I'~cLennan Skatepark -- 21 Auditorium5katepark - Skatepark Shortlisted Sites Once all site selection criteria were taken in to consideration, only the sites that received a letter grade of `A' were selected as sites that warranted presentation to the public for further consideration and input. These shortlisted sites were: ^ Fischer Park (Fischer Hallman Road -Queens Boulevard) ^ Southwest Optimist Park (Pioneer Drive -Homer Watson Boulevard) ^ Gzowski Park (Chopin Drive - Westmount Road West) ^ Wilson Park (Wilson Avenue -Fourth Avenue) 14-3 Demographic Analysis One of the key criteria in the site relationship to the shortlisted sites primarily between the ages of 0 census data by demographic dish walking (or skateboarding) distan users. Legend Percentage of youth 4.19 O-~ i% -o'e F~ Number of youth within 2.5 km radius of shortlisted parks 6VIIsan Par:< ~ GS1D SLNO ~ 37417 Gzo v: ~~ci Park ~ 3193 Fischer Park 12393 N ,~ Mcxra Country HiIL'd; est Heritage Park ddlewood 2.896 .Forest H i II 2. £9° Grand RWer North i.79'o Stanley Park 2.59° Rosemount 2.190 Southdale 2.19'o- Country Hilh 2.D9o- LVestrnount 1.99b Mt. Hope Huron Park 1.996 Ceni ral Frederick Y.39'° Mill CCUrtlantl N.`ootlsitle Park 1.59'° 4.Ipine 1.390 Victoria Park 1.396 Hidden Valley,! Pioneer Tov;er 1.196 Fairtie3tl 1.190 Cherry Hill 1.09a Grand River Scuth Y:G96 Er4dgepart East 0.99o- P.u Cixoriurn u'.99a K-~'J Hcapital 7.996 Meinzirger Park-Lakeside 0.996 EriCgepart North 089o- St. Mary"s Hospital 0.£9a King Eas[ 0.396 Cedar Hill D.£?6 Southwest 0.79~o- Virtoria North 0.59b Eastv.~cod 0.5°.6 Rockway CA96 Northward 0.39.0 Civic Centre 0.396 City Commercial Care D.396 CITk'-WIDE 3,996 Public Communication & Consultation The shortlist of preferred skatepark locations was posted on the City's skatepark website (www.kitchener.ca/skatepark) beginning in September 2010 along with an online survey. An email account (skatepark@kitchener.ca) was also set up to allow people to direct questions and suggestions to staff. During the summer of 2011, each of the Skatium locations was visited weekly by staff and a portable tablet skatepark survey was available to all of the youth in attendance. In order to receive feedback from the broader community, two public open houses were held in September 2010. Staff also attended a "Go Skateboarding Day" at the AUD skatepark in June 2010 to be on hand to answer questions and hand out skatepark survey cards. Adjacent businesses/organizations were also interviewed with respect to the shortlisted skatepark sites. selection matrix was the consideration of potential users in .Current and future users of the skatepark were considered and 19 years. This age group was mapped through 2006 ~ibution based on planning community and a 2.5 km radius ~e applied to determine the number of potential skatepark 14-4 Online Survey Results -Summary Of 355 surveys completed, 80% of respondents identified themselves as skateboarders or parent of a skateboarder. The majority of these respondents currently use sidewalks or streets to skateboard. The most common response given by skateboarders for not using the existing skateparks was that these were too small (e.g. Skatium) or too far away and difficult to access. The respondents also ranked Fischer Park and Southwest Optimist Park as the best location for a skatepark. Wilson Park ~ . X72 151 S1N0 Park ,. • 2[3{3 1$3 Gzowski Park 1?9 t6~ Fischer Park ~ X13 ~®~ o ~~oa ano ,too a€~o s~~o eoo Sao arrn 9flc~ xoQ~A Number of Responses irr Support ^ CEuestian d ~ Que..=tign G ^ Question 7 ^ C7,ue5tian 9 ~ Quastienn 'A .'_ Weighted Matrix The weighted matrix is organized under the same headings as the "site selection criteria" that was used earlier in the site selection process to determine the four shortlisted sites. Each criterion was weighted and graded by the staff technical team for each of the 4 shortlisted sites. The final "Percentage Success" results again demonstrate that the four shortlisted locations are our best potential skatepark locations with Fischer Park (88%) and South West Optimist Park (86%) ranking marginally above Gzowski Park (73%) and Wilson Park (77%). Skaf~epark Plarrrnin~ Stu+d~r '''+eigh~+e~l i'+~lla~ri Lc~catio n Physical Site Cc~ncitians ~5,,ccess anc! Sect~rity+ Su~ppc~rting Infrastrt.i~cture TCJts3f '~hl~l/~Ig~lt~f~ }~kS5~55ill~Flt Pe~reentcxgre Sucecess of 5,fivrt-bested Srte .~ L {~ V ~C L }, L Q ~ ~ if 24Q 168 2077 158 1iD8 86 1Q~6 1f}7 149 125 135 135 36 32 36 32 493 411 484 432 88°0 73°f 86°.0 77f 14-5 Study Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve Fischer Park and Southwest Optimist Park as the skatepark locations to be developed as per the Skatepark Planning Study evaluations and conclusions and as recommended by the Leisure Facilities Master Plan (2005) and Parks Strategic Plan (2010) documents. Staff further recommends the design/construction of the Fischer Park skatepark in 2014/15 and the Southwest Optimist Park skatepark in 2016/17 subject to final capital budget approval. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: The development of the skateparks coincides with the community vision, "Together, we will build an innovative, caring and vibrant Kitchener with safe and thriving neighbourhoods" by providing valued services to the skateboarding youth and young adults of our community by enhancing their "Quality of Life" through investment in leisure facilities. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 2011-2020 Capital Budget allocation: Skatepark A: 2014 - $50,000 (design), 2015 - $500,000 (construction) Skatepark B: 2016 - $50,000 (design), 2017 - $500,000 (construction) COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: See public consultation and communication above. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO Infrastructure Services Department 14-6 Prese~tat~~on [3utline Background Why Build More Skateparks? Addressing Common Concerns ~° Site Selection Process Potential Skatepark Locations °~ Public Communication ~~° Demographic Analysis ~, online Survey Results e Shortlisted Site Assessment Weighted Matrix Next Steps Recommendations Questions ~~.. J~0' '~tfltil IN 1.~{ 14-7 APPENDIX A -PRESENTATION Background Leisure Facilities Master Plan ~~005} Recommends that additional skateboard facil ides be developed in Kitchenerto provide more oppor[unitiesfor youth to partidpate in skateboarding. Parks Strategic Phan [2010] Recommends that the Clty complete a site selection study for Z proposed skateboard park locations and implement through the ten-yearcapital budget. Existing Skateparks Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex McLennan Park ~apened5umrnerZ011} SKATIUM mobileskatepark 10-Year Capital Budget 2 additional skateparksto he constructed in 214/15 and 2Q16/2~17 with budget of $55©,DDO forthe design / construction of each additional skatepark. bite Selection Process This skatepark pla n ni ng study will recommend two sites for the two future skateparks. Style/Size/Shape will be determined at thefinal design stage of the process. Why I~uild More 5kateparks? Popularity is Growing 3rd largest participantsport in Narth America far 1D-18 age group 4-7°f of total population are potential skateboarders 8,70f1-15,~CDU skateboarders iru Kitchener r 5 Benefits Unstructured apportunitiesfargouth & young adults to develop and master skills Engage in physical exercise and activity Socialize in a constructive environment Appealingto a youth & youngadults not typically drawn to more traditional (team) sports r ~~~ ~;: s J~0' '~tfltil IN 1.~{ 14-8 Addressing Common +~oncerns Crime Prevention Portland. studyshowsthatthereisnocorrelationbetween a skateboardparksandseriouscrime. ~`-'" .~ London,©ntarioexperience no higher degree of issues associated ~*~ withskateparksthan?•:+ithotherparkamenitiesrhatser?yeas ~ ~' ,, .. t gathering points. w ~ r,~ C~ ~y " 7 ~~ ~~ff5e ~ 5kateparks generate noise levels between o5 70 decibels Noise levels comparable to basketball courts and children playing on playground equipment. Injuries Less than 0.3% of people avho skateboardsuffer i njuries that require hospita I media I attention. Sport safer than ice hockey, baseball, basketball, footba I I, soccer, golf, snowboardi ng, volleyball and fishing. Less than 5!n of skateboard. injuriestake place in skateboard parks, while roads accountfor more than 1/3 of these injuries. Site Selection Process Staff began the skatepark site selection study gay evaluating all city awned sites. 19 potential sites were eualuatf against t8~e site selection criteri assigned a grade value of A, B c 4 sites received an "A" grade ar s}~ortlisted for furCher detailed public and stakeholder feedbae Through a weighted matrix ana recommending 2 sites as appro locations. J~0' 'rtfltil IN 1.~{ 14-9 Pater~tal Ska~epari~ Lvcatior~s i Fischer Park A 7 Sourhwes. Optimist Park A 3 lkilsnn Park A & Gxowski Park A 5 Forest HelyhS CC n boon Park Pkoneer Ct S 7 Rosen'Gurg Park S & Fi ls:nker Rark ~ $ 9 4~eenamrort~ Arena S ii South pts[rict Park B i2 Budd Park 13 13 Biehn Park $ la Peter trallman Ball Yard. C 15 IElewobd Park C i6 Victoria Park C i7 BretUaupt Park C b8 Kiwanii Park C 19 Lions Park C 2p fNCtannan Ska[epark 21 Aud!torium Skafepark Public ~ammun~atic~n How did w~ get the ward out? Events Attended/Held Go Skateboard Day at the AL1D {summer 2010} Two Public C1pen Houses for residents and users {fall 2010} All Skatium Locations {summer 2011} A4JD & McLennan si<atepark~isits {summer 2011) Infiorrnational Handouts Handouts at Slcatium mobile skate ark, AUD & McLennan Handouts with Kitchener Youth Action Council {KYAC) Handouts & Posters for local sisateboard businesses Advertising & Media Coverage Kitchener's Leisure Magazine Advertisement J~ Posters at Community Centers, AUD, McLennan frJ Media Release & Your Kitchener Article Adjacent Businesses & Organizations Handouts to & Consultation with Affected Groins Web,/Internet Interaction 4Vebsite, Faeebook, Email Account Online & Portable Digital Surrey ^ 14 - 10 Demographic Analysis 6egend Percentage of youth d•59 r CJUmher of youth w4lhln 2.5 km rad4us of ShdRICStRd parks wdxn a,r. cs ma 5W4 r- aJ40 Urn 4,faik RxA¢r Gai 1~39a online Survey Results SURVEY RESPONDENTS a,~e, ~ 355 surveys completed ^ ar ® 80% of respondents identified themselves as a skateboarder, ® or parent of a skateboarder WHERE SKATEBOARDERS SKATE .. . 1 Sid¢walk r SCrecC Aud [1o0n $kal¢park Qthgr Skatepark SkaEuum autsrde Kitchener Many skateboarders currently use sidewalks or streets to skateboard on USE OF EXISTING SKATEPARKS Most common response given by skateboarders for not using the existing skateparks was that they were too small [e.g. 5katium) or too far away & difficult to get to SURVEY RESPONDENTS :~ 2Q3 1~ 's 153. ' ~ '~ 15d~ n 213 ~ 290 6 1 J'J 1 J7 s' m o Fischer VaM Gkewski Park Sw6 Rark wil3en Dark ShonVisred Parks •~,...r~,,. •.~...,,,.. r, o~„~,.r •c.,~.ra..9 u..~~r,..,,, .. Respondents ranked i`ischer Park and Southwest Optimist Park as highest number in support for a skatepark location ^ ,J0' '~tfltil IN l.l{ 14 - 11 (refer to page 13 of shady) 5~artl~Sted Site Ass+~s~ment Fischer Park • Corner of Fischer Hallman Road 8 queen's Blvd_ • Adjacent to Forest Heights Collegiate, KFL ~ Library • Two soccerfields and one baseball diamond on the site • Short distance to Forest Heights G.G. • Highestyauth demographics within 2.5km radius. 12,398 at 0-19 years age • 7 bus routes within one block of site Wilson Park • Located on tiNilson Ave- (Fourth Ave-Shelley Drj • Three baseball, one T-ball and one soccer field an the site • Adjacent to Kingsdale C-C. • Closest to AUD & McLennan skateparks • 6510 youth at 0-19 age within 2.5km radius • Fewest Skatium visits in 2011 • 1 bus route services the site • Corner of Homer }R+atson Blvd. & Pioneer Dr. • Four baseball & one T-ball diamond on the site • Short distance to Daon Fioneer Park G.C. • Furthest from AUD & 147cLennan skateparks • Lowest youth demographics within 2.5km radius. 3748 at 0-19 age • highest Skatium usage • 2 bus routes senfice the site Gzvwski Park • Corner of }Nestmount Rd. & Chopin Dr. • one baseball diamond and large earth hill on the site • Site lacks youth attractors such as adjacent retail selling food drink • 8198 youth at 0-19 age within 2 akm radius • 2 bus routes service the site Y11 ~1~~t4~ 1'l~ti ~~ [refei-tnsectinn4.2, pages 17-19afshidy) Skatepark Planning Study 1Neighted Matrix Location Physical Site Conditions Access arrd 5~eurity Su~apcarting Infrastructure Tatai Weighted Assessment Percen#age Success of Short-Listed Site a .~ ~. Y a a a -~ © 3 ~ ll N ~ {/~ 2Ot? 168 2a7 158 108 $6 106 107 14'9 125 135 135 36 32 36 I 32 493 411 484 432 88~ 73% $6Yo 77! r ~~~ ~;: s J~0' '~trltil IN l:~{ 14 - 12 l~ext Steps Final Design & Consultation furtherconsultatian prinrto final design with: • AQJACENTBUSINESSESANQRESIDENTS {to gain additional feedback) • SKATEPARK USERS {for early input in the design process) Size & Style of skatepark Ska#epark should be appropriately sized & designed to meeta variety of: • USER TYPES {boarders, bikers.. bladders, scooters, etc.) • SKILL LEVELS{beginnertoadvance) Site Location Design to Crime Prevention Through En~rironmental Design {CPTED~ principles: • POSITIONkNGON SITE{consultation with nearby businesses & residents) • GOOQVESi'BILlTYCNC3ESIGN{helps promote positive aspects ofthe sport) SkatEparKa Recommendatlv~s Recommendation #1 That Council approWe Fischer Park and Southwest C}ptimist Park as skatepark locations. Rec©mmendatian #2 That Council direct staff to implement the design/construction of: -the Fischer Park skatepark in 2014J15, and -the Southwest Qptimist Park skatepark in 2t]16~`17, suhyect to final capital budget approval. --_ _~ ~ ~;. 9rr#{ - 'i ~ 14 - 13 14 - 14