The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04 CHAPTER 3 · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Chapter 3 Public Involvement Determining Recreation Needs More than You Imagined Parks are intended to serve the residents, workers and visitors of the city, it is vital their input be sought in the planning process. This insures implemented facilities and programs will be used. Data gathered in the planning process can be used as a foundation for future actions, eliminating the likelihood of arbitrary decisions. This section will detail how public input was obtained, and how it influences the decision-making process. This chapter is divided into four sections: I. Recreation Needs Assessment II. Park Land Needs III. Facility Needs IV. Summary Section I, the Recreation Needs Assessment, describes the procedure used in determining what recreational opportunities our community needs. Its analysis of recreation participation rates and the top 25 preferred recreation activities of residents. Section II, Park Land Needs, analyzes the quantity of park land needed to meet the needs of the present and future population. Section III, Facility Needs, describes the type of facilities most desired by Auburn residents, and the number of facilities required to meet this demand. "Facilities" refers to physical features such as a basketball court or classroom. · Finally, Section IV provides a Summary of Park Land Needs. 3-1 Auburn '* More Than You Imagined CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON Public Participation Several methods were used to assure public guidance, participation and awareness of the park planning process in the Park and Recreation Plan. They include: · · Auburn Web Page Survey · Questionnaire/Survey sent in Utility Billings · A Community Attitude & Interest Survey · Newspaper Articles · Public, Park Board, Planning Commission and City Council Meetings The purpose of these activities was to determine community attitudes use of existing facilities, and the demand for additional recreational facilities and programs. Recreation Standards Recreation standards are guides communities follow to estimate in quantifiable terms the number of acres or facilities required to meet the recreation demand in the area. By attaching the standard to a population variable, it is easy to forecast future needs as the population grows. National standards, developed by the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA), are very general guidelines. Auburn, like most cities, develop recreation standards specific to our community. · Standards express minimum acceptable level of recreation facilities and park land. Meeting or exceeding the standards is our goal of the planning process for future park acquisition and development. 1. Recreation Needs Assessment In December 2003 and January 2004 a park and recreation survey and a Community Attitude & Interest Citizen Survey was conducted by the City of Auburn Parks Department and Leisure Vision for the City of Auburn. The purpose of this work was to identify the demand for recreation programs and facilities in Auburn. · 3-2 · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN The Community Attitude & Interest Citizen Survey produced by Leisure Vision consisted of: 1. A survey of Auburn residents 2. Analysis of survey results compared to National Benchmarks to gain further strategic information 3. Analysis of existing park land needs and forecasting future needs by the community and Parks and Recreation department staff 4. Analysis of existing recreation facilities and forecasting of future needs, created by the Parks and Recreation department and out comes of Community Attitude and Interest Survey For study purposes an estimated 2004 population of 46,141 was used as a base for current needs. The 2010 population is forecast at approximately 68, 696 and the 2020 population at 85,556. These figures are used in the study to calculate how much park land and what facilities will be needed in the future. The Community Attitude & Interest Citizen Survey conducted in 2004 will be used as a base line with additional surveys to be done every 2 years to give the parks department a true read of the community needs. By statistically comparing the difference in survey results that might occur with the intervening population increase, it will guide the City as an indicator of the needs and desires of Auburn residents. Although this Park, Recreation & Open Space Plan Update does not look at the city's ultimate development, it is good to keep in mind the impact a population this size would have on recreational resources. Providing sufficient park land is an obvious concern for the long term, as vacant land is converted to commercial, residential, and industrial uses. 3-3 Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Current Population and Population Forecasts: 2004: 46,141 2010: 68,696 2020: 85,556 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON National Trends in Recreation Participation Recreation patterns are continually changing. Some changes are due to new work schedules and habits, concerns about health, and other factors. The end result is the public continues to demand access to more facilities and activities. Recreation shifts occur from time to time because of new technology or fad activities or because the old standby activities such as softball, basketball and tennis go through their own interest cycles. . Some of the recreational trends experienced on a national level are: 1. General Changes in Recreation interests: According to recent recreational reports, Americans now prefer more "back to nature" or "extreme sports" types of activities. Activities such as bicycle touring, camping, hiking skate parks, rock climbing and boating have shown significant increases over previous years. These activities correspond with an increasing interest in open space and trail development. Conversely, there have been slight declines in some of the popular individual oriented "body image" activities such as aerobics and weight lifting. . 2. Recreation Participation Trends: Some of the trends of recent years include: Walking: sharp increase in participation Health CIubs;Work-out Gyms: Significant increase Golf: a steady increase through the 1990 and 2000 Jogging/Running: increased Skateboarding/In-line Skating: Steady increase continues Volleyball: increased significantly in the last several years Aerobics: changing from high-impact to low-impact exercise Competitive Sports: have remained constant Tennis: a slight decline continues in the last decade 3. Increase in Leisure Time Continues: The number of hours worked per week continues to decrease for certain segments of the population. The concept of flex time now makes it possible for more people to participate at non--peak hours of the week. This, coupled with multiple work shifts, means that recreation facilities can be utilized at a more constant level. This is especially true in Auburn where Boeing and other large employers . have multiple work shifts. 3-4 · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 4. Increased Interest in Women's Sports: With the passage of the Title Nine, women are offered equal access to sport facilities. The result has been a dramatic increase in recreation interests and a nearly doubling of demand for some types of facilities. 5. Changes in Technology: Better equipment technology has had a significant impact on recreation participation. In-line skating, skateboarding, snowboarding, and mountain biking are four sports, which have developed recently, in direct response to the availability of new equipment. Local Recreation Interests Climate, availability of facilities, and specific interests of one individual or group will often influence local participation in certain activities. For example, Auburn is one of the few cities that has pickleball courts, a facility not common in most areas although it has declined in recent years statewide. Also added to the parks inventory are Bocce courts at Les Gove Park and future disc golf course at Game Farm Wilderness Park. The Public Opinion Survey Results The survey specific questions were tailored to issues of strategic importance for park planning and development and national benchmarking comparisons to Auburn. Leisure Vision and the City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Department were designed to elicit information concerning: · current participation in programs offered by the City · current use of park facilities · participation by gender, household size, and household type · percentage of respondents households that have a need for various recreational facilities · how well existing recreational facilities in Auburn meet the needs of respondent households. 3-5 Auburn '* More Than You Imagined CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON Overview of the Methodology The City of Auburn parks and recreation department conducted a Community Attitude and Interest Survey during January and February 2004 to help establish priorities for the continued development of parks and recreation facilities, programs and services within the community. The survey was designed to obtain statistically valid results from households throughout the city of Auburn. The survey was administered through a combination of mail and phone. The goal of the survey was to obtain 400 completed surveys. This goal was accomplished, with 407 surveys being completed. The results of the random sample of 407 households have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least +/- 4.8%. Summary of Survey Results 1. Visitation of the City of Auburn Parks 71 % of the respondent households have visited the City of Auburn Parks during the past year, and the other 29% have not visited the parks. . 2. Frequency of Visits to the City of Auburn Parks . 36% of respondent households have visited the City of Auburn Parks in the past year have made 20 or more visits to parks during that time. In addition, 12% have visited parks 11 to 19 times, 24% have visited parks 6 to 10 times and 28% have visited parks 1 to 5 times. Q1. Respondent Households that Have Visited City of Auburn Parks in the Past Year by percenlage of re~ondents Q1b. How Rescondent Households Rate the Phvsical Condition of All the Citv of Auburn Parks Thev Have Visited No 29% Excellent 33% Yes 71% Fair 8% 3-6 Sourœ Leisure Vi~ionfETC Institute (lvlan;h 2004) ---~.._,~- ---"._~------- .__m....J -"-_.------~,,- . · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 3. Physical Condition of The City of Auburn Parks 92% of respondent households rated the quality of parks they have visited as either excellent (33%) or good (59%). The remaining 8% rated the parks as fair. It should also be noted that less than 1% rated the parks they have visited as poor. 4. Participation in City of Auburn Programs 32% of the respondent households have participated in programs offered by the City of Auburn during the past year, and the other 68% have not participated in City of Auburn programs. 5. Quality of City of Auburn Programs Q2. Respondent Households that Have Participated in Programs Offered by the City of Auburn During the Past Year by percentage of respondents No 68% Sourœ: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (March 2004) Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Q2a. How ResDondent Households Rate the Qualitv ofthe Proarams Thev Have ParticiDated in Excellent 39% Yes 32% Poor 1% Fair 8% 3-7 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 6. Where Respondents Learned About City of Auburn Programs . Q2. Respondent Households that Have Participated in Programs Offered by the City of Auburn During the Past Year by percentage of re:pondents C2b, How ResDondents learned About City of Auburn Proarams Parks & Recseasonal brochur Wordofmout Radio 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Source: LeisureVîsionlETC fnstitute(t.fard:J.2004) 7. Use of Organization's Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities . The City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Department (50%) is the organization used by the highest percentage of respondent households. There are two other organizations that at least 30% of respondent households indicated they use, including: neighboring cities/counties/state parks (30%); and the school district (30%). Q3. Organizations That Respondent Households Use for Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities by percentage of respondenls(multiple choices could be made) YMCA 50% Oty of Auburn Parks and Recreation Neighboring cities/counties/state parks School District Olurches Private youth sports leagues Horreow ners assoc/apt corrplex A"ivate clubs local University/Corrm.Jnity College A"ivate schools I ,_' Boy, &<.", ~~:, None, do not use any organization 0% Source: _ ~sure_Y¡s¡on!~TC mstitute (March 2004) 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% . 3-8 · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 8. Organizations that Respondents Households Use the Most The City of Auburn parks and Recreation Department (41 %) had the highest percentage of respondents select it as one of the two organizations they use the most. Q4. Organizations Whose Parks and Recreation Programs and Facilities Respondent Households Use the Most by percentage of re!pondents(two choices could be made) Qty of Auburn Parks and Recreation School District Neighboring cities/counties/state parks Churches R"ivateclubs Private youth sports leagues I-brreow ners 8S$oc.lapt. corrplex Local Lk1iversity/Comrunity College Boys & Girls Oub Private schools Sourœ' Leisure Vision/ErC _I~~tí~~te (March 2():)4) YMCA Othec 0% 20% 40% 30% 10% II!!!IIUse fll\:¡st EmIUse 2nd I'\obst 9. Need for recreational Facilities Six of the 25 recreational facilities had over 50% of respondents households indicate they have a need for facility. The facilities that the highest percentage of respondent households indicated they have a need for include: small neighborhood parks (63%): paved walking and bike trails (61 %); large community parks (59%); picnic shelters/ areas (58%); natural areas/ nature parks (55%); and indoor swimming pools/water parks (54%). Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-9 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · 10. Need for Recreational Facilities in Auburn From the list of 25 existing recreational facilities, respondents were asked to indicate which ones they and members of their household have a need for. The graphic below summarizes key findings on the previous page by the number of households having a need for various recreational facilities in the City of Auburn, based on 16,321 households in Auburn. - Q5. PercentaQe of Respondent Households that Have a Need for Various Parks and Recreational Facilities by percentage of re~ondents{multiple choiœscould be made) Srral neighborhood parks Paved w aldng & biking trails Large cormuniy parks Flcni: shelters/areas t-btural areas/nature parks hdoor sw irming poolslw ater parks Playgrounds tbJ-paved w arking & biking trails Indpor ITIJIli-purpose conm.mity centers Indoor fitness & exercise fac~ities CUltural center for arts classes, dance, etc. Outdoor sw ill'fl'ing pools Arrphitheaterltheater Outdoor basketball courts Youth baseball fields Golf courses GyrTTlasiurrs Soccer fields Tennis courts Off-leash dog parks Youth softball fields Adult softball fiek:ls Skateboarding area Ice-skatilglhockey FootbalVlacrosselfield hockey fields 0% 63% 61% 9% 58% 55% 54% 4% 40% ~40% 3,% 31% I 31% I 30% : 28% I 27% ' 27% 22% 21% 20% 20% 19% 18% 15% 14% 13% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% · Sourœ: Leisure Visiol1''ETC Institute (Ma-ch 2004) 11. How Well Existing Facilities Meet Needs Two of the 25 recreational facilities had over 40% of respondents indicate that the facility 100% completely meets the needs of their household. The facilities with the highest percentage of respondent households indicate the facility completely meets their needs includes: large community parks (42%); and amphitheater/theater (42%). It should be noted that none of the 25 facilities had 50% or more of respondent households indicate that their needs are being 100% completely met. 3-10 Q5. Number of Households in Auburn that Have a Need for Various Recreational Facilities by number of households based on 16,321 households in Auburn Sræ8 neighborhood parks Paved walking & biking trails Large cOrTITUnity parks Acnic shelters/areas Natural areas/nature parks Indoor sw irming pools/water parks Aaygrounds I'bn-paved walking & biking trails "'door rrult¡"purpose cOllTTlJnity centers Indoor fitness & exercise facilities Cultural center for arts classes, dance, etc. Outdoor sw irming pools AfIl)hitheaterftheater OJtdoor basketball courts Youth basebal fields Golf courses GYlTnasiums Soccer fields Tennis courts Off-leash dog parks Youth softbal fields Adutt softball fields Skateboarding area Ice-skating/hockey Football/lacrosse/field hockey fields 10,201 9,940 9,564 9,466 9,026 8,814 7,671 6,594 6,447 6,039 5,0111 4,978 4,913 4,57<) 4.4561 4,3421 3,623 : 3,444 I 3,232 I 3,183 I 3,068 : 2,987 I 2,497 I 2,?52 : 2 0 3,000 o 6,000 9,000 12,000 · So=: Leisure Vi5io!!,¡ET~~~litute {JI-tarch 20Q4} · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 12. Households in Auburn Whose Needs for Various Facilities Are Only Being Partially Met or Not Met at All From the list of 25 existing recreational facilities, respondents were asked to indicate how well each facility meets the needs of their household. The graphic below shows the number of households in the City of Auburn whose needs are either being partially met or are not met at all. (Note: partially met or not met at all is defined as households where only 50% or less of needs are being met) Q6. Households in Auburn Whose Needs Are Only Being 50% Met or Less by number of households based on 16,321 households in Auburn hdoor sw imring pools/water parks Natural areas/nature parks Indoor fibless & exercise facilities Outdoor sw irrrring pools Srrall neighborhood parks Paved wallOng & bilOng trails Indoor rrulti-purpose comrunity centers Non-paved wallOng & bilOng trails OJltural center for arts classes, dance, etc. Acnic shelters/areas Aaygrounds Large corrrrunity parks Outdoor basketball courts Gyrmasiurrs Off -leash dog parks Ice-skating/hockey ArTpMheaterltheater Youth baseball fields Golf courses Skateboarding area Tennis courts Soccer fields Youth softball fields Adull softball fields FootbalVlacrosselfield hockey fields ~,887 , 4,116 4,064 3,823 3,724 3,578 3,30, 3,297 3,203' 2,982 :2,900 2,639 2,304 2,217' 2,181 : 1,947 1.778 1,590 1.!Ï77 1,541 1,5(J6 1,430 1,39Þ 1,351 1081 ' o 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 1_0% Meets Needs (5) EIITl25% Meets Needs (4) EillJ50% Meets Needs (3) 1 Sourœ: Leisure VisioniETC Institute (March 2004) --------- Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-11 Cl1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · 13. Most important recreational facilities From the list of 25 existing recreational facilities, respondents were asked to select the four most important to them and members of their household. The following summarizes key findings. Small neighborhood parks (355) and paved walking and bike trails (35%) had the highest percentage of respondents select them as one the four most important facilities to their household. There are four other facilities that over 20% of respondents selected as one offour most important, including: indoor swimming pools/ water parks (28%); natural areas/ nature parks (24%); large community parks (22%); and playgrounds (21 %). Small neighborhood parks had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important facil ity. Q6. Recreational Facilities that Are Most Important to Respondent Households by percentage of respondents (four choices could be made) Small neighborhood parks Paved walking & biking trails Indoor swimming poolslwater parks Natural areas/nature parks Large community parks Playgrounds Picnic shelters/areas Non-paved walking & biking trails Indoor fitness & exercise facilities Indoor multi-purpose community centers Golf courses Youth baseball fields Outdoor swimming pools Cultural center for arts classes, dance, etc. Off-leash dog parks Soccer fields Amphitheater/theater Outdoor basketball courts Tennis courts Adult softball fields Skateboarding area Gymnasiums Youth softball fields Ice-skating/hockey Football/lacrosse/field hockey fields Other 0% 10% 20% I II1II Most Important 111112nd Most Important 1EiiJ3rd Most Important Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (March 2004) 3-12 19~ · 30% 40% 111114th Most Important I · · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 14. Importance of Functions Performed by the Parks and Recreation Department From a list of nine functions performed by the City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Department, respondents were asked to indicate the importance of each one. The following summarizes key findings: Three of the nine functions had over 70% of the respondents rate them as being very important. The functions with the highest very important ratings are: operations and maintain City parks and facilities (82%); provide programs for residents of all ages and families (74%); and provide places for outdoor sports programs (72%). All nine functions had over 80% of respondents rate them as being either very important or somewhat important. Q7. Importance of Various Functions Performed by the Auburn Parks and Recreation Department by percentage of respondents Operate & maintain city parks & facilities Provide programs for residents of all ages & family Provide programs for specific ages Preserve the environment & provide open space Provide places for outdoor sports programs Allocate resources equally Provide places for indoor ree. & fitness activity Provide trails & linear parks Provide places for cultural programs 82% 111'1· ---=---''iiir"1 ~;$0hh'!iI·' ' ----::;:---.IjR. ----- 69% a.$~A~1'I y(If;,+~1 ---;:----¡¡;~ iÞ1~AIIf "I ---~~ 57% riila!¡:[úRo/ifj --;:-~~I¡~ 1.11~~iitilljt ¡m1 / II -:;-~~I· _liit,i~./ --~-I 43% _~'f0':,. ;'. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100 I_very Important . Somewhat Important _Not Important [illNot Sure I Source: Leisure VisioniETC mstitute (March 2(04) Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-13 15. CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · Most Important Functions Performed by the Parks and Recreation Department Operate and maintain City parks and facilities (52%) had the highest percentage of respondents select it as one of the four most important functions to provide. There are two other functions that at least 40% of the respondents selected as one of the four most important to provide, including: provide programs for residents of all ages and families (43%); and provide places for outdoor sports programs (40%). Provide places for outdoor sports programs had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as the most important function to provide. Q8. Most Important Functions For the City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Department to Provide by percentage of respondents (three choices could be made) Operate & maintain city parks & facilities Provide programs for residents of all ages & family Provide places for outdoor sports programs Preserve the environm ent & provide open space Provide programs for specific ages Provide places for indoor fee. & fitness activity Allocate resources equally Provide trails & linear parks Provide places for cultural programs · 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% I_1st Most Important _2nd Most Important CTIJ3rd Most Important I Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (March 2004) 3-14 · · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 16. Satisfaction with Parks and Recreation Services From a list of eight various parks and recreation services, respondents were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with each one. The following summarizes key findings. Four of the eight services had at least 50% of respondents indicated being either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with them. The services with the highest satisfaction ratings are: ease of registering for programs (68%); City's youth athletic programs (61 %); fees that are charged for recreation programs (53%); and other City recreation programs (50%). Q9. Satisfaction With Various Parks and Recreation Services by percentage of respondents (excluding "don't klow" responses) Ease of registering for prograrrs aty's youth athletic prograrrs Fees that are charged for recreation programs Other aty recreation prograrrs aty's Art O:"TTrission prograrrs aty's teen prograrrs aty's adult athletic prograrrs aty's special population prograrrs 40% 60% !!!!I Sorrew hat Satisfied .Very Dssatisfied 100% 0% 20% !!!IVery Satisfied I!IIISoræw hat Dssatisfied 80% D Neutral Source: ~~~'e Vision/E.!~!nstîtute (March 2q~) Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-15 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 17. Current Participation of Various Programs and Activities From a list of 24 various programs and activities available to City of Auburn residents, listed below are the percentage of respondent households who currently have at least one person in their household participate in each program and activity. The following summarizes key findings: · Five of the 24 programs and activities had over 40% of respondents indicate at least one person in their household currently participates in them. The programs and activities with the highest percentage of respondent households participate in include: running or walking (66%); visiting nature areas (57%); attending live concerts/ concert performances (49%); attending community special events (46%); and bicycling (41 %). Q10. Percentage of Respondent Households that Currently Participate in Various Programs/Activities by percentage of respondents (multiple choices could be made) Running or walking Visiting nature areas Attending live theater/concert perforrrances Attending conm.mity special events Bicycling Recreational sw inYTing/sw im lessons Adu~ fitness/aerobics classes Goff Using gyrrs for basketball, volleyball Sw irrrring for exercise/water fitness classes Youth baseball Skateboardinglrollerfon-line hockey Participating in theater, dance, visual arts Youth soccer Senior citizen programs Youth classes Adu~ classes Su"""r carrp prograrrs Tennis k;e-skating/hockey Adu~ softball Youth softball FootbalVlacrosse/field hockey Corrpetitive sw irrrring 0% 6t'j% ,49% 46% 41% : 35% 31% : 30% 26% 26% 24% 23% 22% 22% 21% 21% : 20% :190/0 '19% 19% 17% 16% 14% 11% ' 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% · Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (March 2004) , I I 70% I --~ · 3-16 · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 18. Programs / Activities Respondents Would Participate in More Often From a list of 24 various programs and activities available to respondents were asked to select the top four programs/activities they and members of their household would participate in more often if more programming were made available by the City. Running or walking had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice. Q11. Activities Respondent Households Would Participate in More Often if More Programming Was Available by percentage of respondents (four choices could be made) RJnning or w al~ng Visiting nature areas Attending live theater/concert perforrœnces Attending Gomrunity special events Adult fitness/aerobics classes Recreational sw irming/sw im lessons Swimring for exerciselwater fitness classes Adun classes GoW Bicycling Senior citizen progralTS Youth baseball Participating in theater, dance, visual arts Youth soccer Using gyrrs far basketball, volleyball Surrrœr carr¡¡ prograrrs Skateboardinglrollerfln-line hockey Y auth classes Ice-s katinglhockey Tennis Adult softball Youth softball FootbalVlacrosselfield hockey OJrrpet~ive sw irming Other 0% I!!! 1 st More Often Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (March 2004) Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 30% 10% 20% 30% !!!I2nd More Often E'ill3rd More Often !!!!!14th More Often 3-17 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · 19. Frequency of Use of Potential Programming Spaces From a list of 14 various programming spaces that could be included in a new indoor recreation facility, respondents were asked to indicate how often they and members of their household would use each programming space. The following summarizes key findings:(Note : The graph below does not show the percentage of respondents who indicated "less than once/ month" or" seldom or never".) Fifty-eight (58%) of the respondent households indicated they would use an indoor family swim center at least once a month. There are three other programming spaces at least 40% of respondent households would use at least once a month, including: an indoor running/walking track (44%); weight room/ cardiovascular equipment area (43%); and an outdoor family swim center (40%). Indoor family swim center (18%); and weight room/ cardiovascular equipment area (18%) are the programming spaces that the highest percentage of respondent households indicated they would use several times per week. Please note that the City of Auburn and the YMCA of Auburn have teamed up and indoor swimming will be available for the citizens of Auburn at the new YMCA facility along with other indoor facilities. Q12. How Often Respondents Would Use Potential Programming Spaces if Included in a New Indoor Facility by percentage of respondents (graph does not SlOW percentage of respondents who indicated "'ess than once/month" or"ældom or never") Indoor fanily sw im center Indoor running/walking track Weight room'cardio equiprrent area Outdoor fanily sw im center Lap lanes for exercise sw imring Aerobics/fitness space Gathering spaces Gyrmasium Arts & crafts rooms . . MJftipurpose space for classes Activity areas for teens Early childhood/pre-school area Dance room Meeting rooms · 0% 10% IIISeveraltirres per week Source: Leisure VisionlETC Institute arch 2004 3-18 20% 30% III!I A few tirres per rmnth 40% 50% mAt least oncelrmnth 60% · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN 20. Support for New Programs with Tax Dollars From a list of 14 various programming spaces that could be included in a new indoor recreation facility, respondents were asked to select the top three that they and members of their household would be most willing to support with tax dollars. The following summarizes key findings: An indoor family swim center (51 %) had the highest percentage of respondents select it as one of the three programming spaces they would be most willing to support with tax dollars. There are three other programming spaces that at least 20% of respondents selected as one of the three they would most support with tax dollars, including: indoor running/ walking track (30%); weight room/cardiovascular equipment area (23%); and an outdoor family swim center (20%). It should also be noted that an indoor family swim center had the highest percentage of respondents select it as their first choice as to programming space they would be most willing to support with their tax dollars. Q13. Programming Spaces Respondent Households Would be Most Willing to Support With Tax Dollars · by percentage of re'Pondents (three choices could be made) Indoor famly sw im center Indoor runninglw alking track Weight room/cardio equipment area Outdoor famly sw im center Aerobics/fitness space Lap lanes for exercise sw imring Gyrmasium Activity areas for teens Early childhood/pre-school area Arts & crafts roolTS Muijipurpose space for classes Gathering spaces 03nce room Meeting roOITS Other · Source: Leisure Vision/ETC Institute (March 2004) 23% 20% 17:% 15% 14% 12% 11% , !ì% 8Þ/. , 0% 10% 20% 30% ¡_MJst Willing .2nd MJstWilling 40% 50% E] 3rd MJst Willing Auburn * More Than You Imagined 3-19 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 21. Allocation of $100 Among Various Parks and Facilities Respondents were asked how they would allocate $100 among seven categories of funding for parks and recreation facilities. The following summarizes key findings: · Respondents indicated they would allocate $27 out of every $100 to the renovation of the City owned old YMCA into a new community center. The remaining $73 were allocated as follows: improvements to neighborhood parks ($25); improve/expand walking and biking trails and non motorized- vehicle trails ($13); acquisition of new parkland and open space ($9); improve and expand community parks ($9); construction of new extreme sports facilities ($7); and expand cultural arts programs ($6). The remaining $4 were allocated to "other". Q14. Allocation of$100 Among Various Parks and Recreation Facilities by percentage of re~ondents 1m prove/Expa nd com m unity parks $9 $9 !'cquisition of new parkland and open space · Expand cultural arts programs Improvements to $25 neighborhood parks Construction of new extreme sports $7 facilities, ImproveÆxpand walking & biking trails $13- & non-m otorized vehicle trails $27 Renovation of City owned old YMCA into a new communitycenter Source: Leisure VisionlETC Institute (March 2004) · 3-20 PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN · II. Park Land Needs The determination of park land needs begins with an inventory of existing parks. There are currently 44 park sites owned by the City of Auburn, totaling 829.34 acres. Table 3-1 below is an inventory of existing park land, by type. The park types are a classification system used to group parks of similar size and function. Beyond the City limits, but within the City's urban growth boundary are additional park and open space sites managed by King County, the Department of Fisheries, and the Department of Wildlife. These may be important considerations in the future if these areas are annexed into the City. Table 3-1 Existing Park Inventory · Park Type No. of No. Acres Sites Acres Dev'd Dev'd Neighborhoodl Mini-Parks 16 60.60 16 60.60 Community Parks 14 237.53 14 237.53 Trails 22 23.37 mi* 17 23.37 mi Open Space** 2 246.57 0 0.0 Special Use Areas 11 284.64 10 284.24 TOTALS 44 829.34 39 536.72 * Acreage already included **Included in Other Community Parks · Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-21 Table 3-2 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON City of Auburn Park Inventory . }N"e~g~hoJ'h(j~1i ParkS SpêçÎªIJJse ÁJ'el!.s T Acres Acres B. Street Plaza * 0.1 Auburndale Park 9.64 Bieeutennial Park 0.99 Auburndale II Park 9.34 Centennial Y_~_~:wpointPaTk 0.7 Ballard Park 0.66 Clark Plaza 0.26 Cameron Park 3.83 Environment~l Park 85 Cedar Lanes Park 8.27 Golf Course 148.73 Dykstra Park 1.78 Lea Hill Tennis Courts 1.18 Forest Villa Park 0.23 Morningcrest 0.42 Gaines Park 1.34 .Mountain View Cernetel2:~__ 46.57 Indian Tom Park , 0.43 Pioneer Cemetery 0.77 Jornada Park 1.89 Slaughter l\'lemorial 0.02 Lake]and Hîlls (nndeveJ.) . 8 Total 284.64 Lakela_l\(]Hîlls Park 5.05 * Maintained by· the Parks Department Rntar}' Park , 4.14 ()P~I1Sp\l:e Aci't!s Scootie HrownPark i 1.34 Clark Property 19.93 Shaughnessy Park , 3.46 Fenster/Green River Access 11.27 Tem!nal Park 1.2 Game Farm Open Space 86.17 Total - 60.60 Golf course 41.11 Lake]and Nature Area 37.48 ~ Mary Olson Farm Park 50.61 T T ~ Total 246.57 ~~~~rk 26.63 Fulmer Parli 5.]3 TT ¡;T;. Traìl$ ...... ... Miles Game Farm Park 53 Auburndale Park 0.4] Game Farm \Vilderness 10 !l.i'Á Trails (Futnre) 0 GSA Park .~:!3 Brannan Park I---- 2.19 Isaac Evans Park 19.87 Cameron Park 0.33 .. Jacnbsen Tree Farm (undevel.) 29.04 Cedar Lanes Park 0.25 -=- . Lea HîII Park 9 Fulmer Park (Future) 0.00 ... ----- -- Les Gove Park 20.86 Game Farm Park 3.3 MîII Pond Park 1-. 3.97 Game Itarm \Vilderness Park* 1.00 - Mary Olson Farm Park 10 Green Rher Trail (Fut':lE~t 0 ... Roegner Park 21.25 ~r!J.""._Trail 4.5 --...---.., ¡Sunset Park 15 Isaac Evans Park 1.07 - ------- ~~_s JVIemorial Park 7.65 Jornada Park --......JI,! Total 237.53 Lakeland Hills Linear 0.73 - Lakeland Hills Park Trail 0.39 Lake Tapps Blvd. Trail 1.62 iC<i ··C Aài$E Les Gove Park Trail 0.5 --- Parlis 592.16 Mill Pond Park Trail 0.29 ..- Golf Course 189.84 ~~gne~_~Park* 1.00 ---. [--.--..- Cemeter:r 47.34 Rotary P"rk (Future) 0 Total 829.34 Shaughnessy Pack (Future) 0 -- -- ------ ----- Sunset Park 1.19 '''hite River Truil* 4.5 Total 23.37 3-22 · · · """ ''', -'" 1 " ,:¡ -/ J ," I : " : -'-"I I " %~ " r~/ , I. 67) " "\ I , /' ~ i , jl S i;!m ST KENT -KANGLEY RD' , " I , ¡ ¡ ~ ~i i , I , ! , 37q-J 5T filE , ! I 1 , .: " , ) 1 - ~ Vi " I '[' " ;¡ , , , ----- " ~ ~ ~ , ~ , , , I I " 'C" 5lau¡¡hter '" G; - I ! "~--! t -¡, '-, ~~ ! , ì , G.$,A,'''\, parkß$i Brown rkjV "o, ','<#V1dndlan '% ,h","' .,.nomP<u'k. 't R.¡lm ,\" p¡¡ "'C'. , '<\,- "Auburn ' i;¡ N<irrows " ' á, ' -'1'-,: ' '1/" , ,:âil~g;0'""AV-0i' ,(;"'!í,+'f;f[¡~"i" AlJb(Jm .-",~\!i?' j)," "'-" ~ªrrows fenster/4;,> ; "-,", "-",/Xh" _',' ."","' fj, ",'0{' """-~i ' ""'L,p 0' ;-,c'J"'',--';:'' ,-.H'lhr; "''of' . T<'0" ,,;. ""',' -'F".;: "",'" "',', :::, ",0..: '"s, ',"S, ,"" \\,<, EM ST , " ",," ! stre& " 4TH Sf SE ,,'1" ~X/"HatdJery " , p", iœllnnl<\'" w ~ j J jEWNGSON F!,D ""'3"',;;,"4>:,1" ) #,,':-.-c-p'-'>'''''''''''' ,,', "~" ' , "f'" ~me -í!fj:}i,,3¡Y¡;Y;f¿jlJ;f$ì!{¡~~:'!Game Farm F&nTI ¡J\0-'í'fj&Z?Afí.\"¡ '£ìhJil,/@ p~"" 0;<t0Ü'TI(~fu¡\>}fttiR~¡1¡}ji\\¿~'#í,WUdeme$ Park ':Vr 'M'_';'h1!+'P,'tp"&\):j\g,f'.; ,",'N'F-\','0,,,,,,,,,v I;; 'è·".,\'V.')\-'F"'''~ '"<J''f''--''''->''''' \~':{fA;,,·:<;tß <>: ';j!k:iþ~r 6<!lIardPa ''"'-':;;\",,';'''' __i!,,/_\V2c;,. ,,,,Y¡\'á,'\i;--' --' *,w, , ".<fJii> _ "''q' ~et: "'<!6" '-0 Si>'j¡,Wi 'X:1Ø" 'jÌ-IIJJ¡;'0W~¥',' <f;' K&Biefu oer: I¥o\§t;;/' Property :__ ;éf;,i>~-' ¡ ill JAúii' c4¡Pond -'..r8ffff!'ff" ,rk .';),W" ,,/Jf ;;0" ' ",i;o , "-" "" 'iT ,j" y:f ,4' §i ß: ':r,þ ''i¡(\ '-''f "-"h'"". \),("'" ">1%~4&it,\-. "'"''W/". ''''It- <SÚ,____ ", , '¡-, @, '1Ú < 'Y" , ''+".. NEE!.. Y BRIDGE "-",,,.,,'.' ";fdÆMf'j/ .1#' PARK /¡ 1';, '0' " \«\- % k;.., 'iZk- ~ ~-..- - .. ---- -"'!'",%""", "1,'1-"" ,",v",-,,, '''''''\' --'Q¡',{;,\1"'" "'WR1;~-,,> "\'" I;; . J.5TH ST SW I ), 1..- j J " i i , " ß .í 17TH $I Sf , I , -" 21ST ST SE flJre$tVUla", M!nil';>rK I '\ +~~~~~h~,----~, WAYS ' w ~ ~ AUBURN I;; I;; u < cedar, Lan~{èX1 Park."jŒ:ÒJ 29TH $T SE ",.-RQt:¡;¡ry >.-,;,JP;:¡rk I " I , , ~NA ",,' ¡ , , ( " , ~ , , , , , ! , '''¡<---" .I~'''''''' , "--,"h, '<"'1\,_, A¡:;! \f~ì::(~g):¡;\C_' '1'%'," <,'. -- , \';. -"", ,'Ii%:; 'Ø~> :t-e'1ii;'0- " ~," ," ' d \ ~" ,j/ If Y / 1 , , , 1 , l' LakeJ¡¡nd 4i<j:;,H!iJs '9" ,p~ 53RD ST SE , ~\ " I, '''I \\ "'- ',I,I i;;:", ,'f'''''''''---';''' \ t, \~\ \'0$,';:-- --"..~: 'I I" )- \,1:\ ':' I L_ " ;- 1 W, '\ ,,' èi \1\ ;< \ :$:\ 11\ 0-- II" é'" I I :;¡:I \r----.?<h"H Sf ~_itV _L\ ~I! I II r '0, I ¡:; \ ¡:!:j I \\ I\,,,~ i ~~S¡- \ "'I 1\:\1'1/ ~~'~¡;!I I " , " ''0 :E / \\ ¡ j 1 / ~.~) '\'( II ,~ \, "'/ ' ,,\ ! ;;:¡. ~ I' II í jf ~ ¡ I 011 t!1 \ i16(1~ (\\ \, I " "'I," \, .......... " i\ ¡( j~ -,j \ ~(: 8THSTE~-- _ i' ~ ~)~ ,,~ - "-~'-PVI';;'-:;){ I r'_~"lt-> ' ;¡ " ~ V -- -, \ \ \ \ LEGEND III M SW LEA HILL ANNEXATION AR CITY UMITS POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA CITY PARKS PAVED TRAIL SPECIAL USE AREA KING COUNTY PARK STATE PARK PROPOSED PARK !~I L_.! ""F2''''''¡¡'j''' '';,þ-"F'' -Y."'''''''' l1li C0\,:¿'/ h';'.y:"~,, ¡ î , , ! " , ""...I ,~ l1li ¡ CITY OF AUBURN PARKS SO'IŒ1"_2GD" · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Neighborhood Park Inventory and Needs Analysis Definition Neighborhood parks are a combination playground and park designed primarily for non-supervised, non-organized recreation activities. Neighborhood parks are usually small in size (less than five acres) and serve an area of approximately 1/2 mile radius. Since these parks are located within walking and bicycling distance, the activities they offer become a daily pastime for neighborhood children. Typical facilities are listed in the side-bar. Existing Inventory Currently there are 16 neighborhood parks category. Most neighborhood parks are fully developed. Table 3-3 contains a list of all existing neighborhood parks. In addition to the City inventory, there is one neighborhood park site located outside the city limits, but within the urban growth area. This one site accounts for 9.34 acres of land. Determination of the Neighborhoodl Mini-Park Standard 1. Comparison to other standards: The NRPA recommends 1 to 2 acres per 1,000 population. Auburn's current ratio of 1.32 totalacres/1,OOO is within this standard. The ratio of developed neighborhood parks is 1.32 acres/1000. 2. Service area: Most residential areas of the City are served by neighborhood parks. Exceptions are the West Hill, the central downtown area, and undeveloped residential zones. 3. Present city policy: In recent years the City has developed larger sized neighborhood parks over one to two acres. Parks of more than five acres are easier to maintain and can serve a wider range of ages and interests. Current City standard for neighborhood parks is 1.32 acres per 1,000 residents. Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Neighborhood Parks Size: Less than 5 acres Service Area: '/2 mie radius Typical Features: Children's Play Structure Picnic Facilities Trails Open SpaceiNature Areas Tennis Courts Outdoor Basketball Court Multi-use play fields Table 3-3 Existing Neighborhood Park Inventory: Park Auburndale Park Auburndale II Ballard Park Cameron Park Cedar Lanes Park Dykstra Park Forest Villa Park Gaines Park Indian Tom Park Jornada Park Lakeland Hills (und.) Lakeland Hills Park Rotary Park Scootie Brown Park Shaughnessy Park Terminal Park Acres 9.64 9.34 0.66 3.83 8.27 1.78 0.23 1.34 0.43 1.B9 8.00 5.05 4.14 1.34 3.46 1.20 TOTAL: 60.60 Acres 3-25 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 4. User trends: Users of small neighborhood parks tend to be children. As neighborhoods grow older and children mature, these parks tend to get less use. Users of the larger neighborhood park tend to be older children and adults who visit it on a non-structured basis. These parks have open space and visual value for the neighborhood. In recent years some smaller parks have incorporated walking trails around the perimeter. Neighborhood Park Conclusionsl Recommendations: 1. Recommended Standard: The recommended standard for neighborhood parks is 1.32 acres per 1,000 residents. Neighborhood parks should be developed in response to new residential growth. 2. Current and Future Need: The City is meeting its current need for Neighborhood Parks. Approximately 30.08 acres of additional neighborhood park land will be needed by 2010. This number will rise to 52.26 acres by 2020. 3. Future Neighborhood Park Development: Future development of neighborhood parks at the recommended standard should be sufficient. In some cases community parks or other facilities may take the place of neighborhood parks. 4. Park Development: The development of more mini-parks (under one or two acres) is not encouraged. Mini-parks have not been found to be as successful, they tend to serve very small populations and are difficult and expensive to maintain. Developers may have the opportunity to develop neighborhood parks that are maintained by the local homeowners association but meet the park standards. · Table 3-4 Recommended Neighborhood Park Standard Recommended Standard: 1-2 Acresi1,000 Existing Ratio: Total: 1.32 Acres/1,000 Developed: 1.32 Acresi1,OOO Existing Inventory: 60.60 Acres Current Need: 0.25 Acres · Future Need: 2010: 30.08 Acres 2020: 52.26 Acres · 3-26 · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Community Park Inventory and Needs Analysis Definition A community park is planned primarily to provide active and structured recreation opportunities for young people and adults. They often exceed 10 acres in size and may have sports fields, water bodies, gardens, nature trails or similar features as the central focus of the park. Community parks can also provide indoor facilities to meet a wide range of recreation interests. They require more support facilities such as parking and restrooms than neighborhood parks. Community parks serve a much larger area than neighborhood parks and offer more facilities. Where there are no neighborhood parks, the community park can also serve the neighborhood park function. The community park service area covers a one to two mile radius. · Existing Inventory Currently there are 14 community parks in Auburn, with a total area of 237.53 acres. There is one community park site, Jacobsen Tree Farm, located outside the city limits, within the urban growth area. The existing community park sites are listed in Table 3-5. · Determination of the Community Park Standard 1. Comparison to other standards: The NRPA recommends 5 to 8 acres per 1,000 population. Auburn's current ratio of 9.61 total acres/l,OOO is above the standard. Our developedland equals 5.15 acres/l,OOO and undeveloped land (open space) at 4.45 acres/l,OOO. 2. Service Area: The location of existing community parks serve residential areas reasonably well. Downtown, which serves a dual residential and employment role, is not directly served by a community park. Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Community Parks Size: 10+ acres* Service Area: 1-2 mile radius Typical Features: Children's Play Structure Picnic Facilities Sport Fields Nature Trails Tennis Courts Bodies of Water Gardens Parking Restrooms * Size exceptions occur for single purpose parks serving the entire CDmmunity. Table 3-5 Existing Community Park and Open Space Inventory: Park Brannan Park Fulmer Park Game Farm Park Game Farm Wilderness GSA Park Isaac Evans Park Jacobsen Tree Farm (und.) Lea Hill Park Les Gove Park Mill Pond Park Olson Canyon Farm Roegner Park Sunset Park Veterans Memorial Park Subtotal other Open Space Acres 26.63 5.13 53.00 10.00 6.13 19.87 29.04 9.00 20.86 3.97 21.39 21.25 15.00 7.65 237.53 194.07 TOTAL: 442.99 acres 3-27 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 3. Present city policy: In recent years the City placed emphasis on developing the larger community parks. They have more recreation choices, are cheaper to maintain on a per acre basis, serve more people and are easier to program for activities. 4. User 'IYends: The larger multi-service community parks have become popular because they provide a wide range of activities. Community parks can often meet the recreation needs of all members of the family in one location. Community Park Conclusions! Recommendations 1. Recommended Standard: A recommended standard maintaining 4.5 acres of developed park land per 1,000 population is recommended. This reflects both the relative importance Auburn residents place on this type of facility and the economies that can be achieved by focusing on larger, multiple-use facilities. 2. Current and Future Need: The City currently is meeting its existing standard of 9.61 acres per 1,000 residents for total community park land. A decrease in the recommended standard to 4.5 acres per 1,000 will maintain the same amount of developed community park space we now have. If residential development proceeds as expected by 2010 no additional acreage is needed, and no acres by 2020. 3. Future Community Park Development: Future community park sites should be selected to serve downtown, newly developing areas, and to help fill large gaps between existing parks. Other residential areas, while within the two mile radius, are toward the edge of existing service areas. These areas include the northeast and southeast corners of the City, and the West Hill area. Populations in these areas are not sufficient to warrant community park development now, but with increased residential development, new community park acquisition and development should occur. · Table 3-6 Recommended Community Park Standard · Recommended Standard: 4.5 Acres/1,000 Existing Ratio: Total: 9.61 Acres/1,000 Developed: 5.15 Acres/1,OOO Undevel.: 4.46 Acres/1,000 Existing Inventory: Community Parks 237.53 Acres Open Space 205.46 acres Current Need: 0.0 Acres Future Need: 2010: 0 Acres 2020: 0 Acres · 3-28 · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Trails Inventory and Needs Assessment Definition Trails/linear parks usually follow elongated features such as stream corridors, abandoned railroads, or power line easements. These parks may be used for trail systems, interpretive areas, open space or landscaped areas. Trail/Linear parks often contain limited benches or picnic tables may be all that occur. However, in cases such as a wide power line easement, more extensive development is possible. · Existing Inventory In Auburn the Interurban Trail and the continuation of the White River Trail fall into the trail park category. The Interurban Trail is a 4.5 mile path along the puget Sound Energy right-of-way. The trail travels from north to south through the city and is part of a larger regional system that runs from Tukwila to Pacific. Development consists of a paved trail used for walking, running, biking and skating. Similar trail development occurred along the White River. In addition to a paved trail, a soft surface trail suitable for equestrians or hikers parallels the paved trail along part of its length. Determination of the Standard L Comparison to other standards: The NRPA does not have a standard for this park classification. Auburn's current ratio of 0.19 total miles/l,OOO developed trail park land is near the top when compared to other cities. 2. Service area: Depending on the facilities, trails may serve a local neighborhood, or in the case of the Interurban Trail, serve the entire community. There are additional opportunities in Auburn to develop this type of park area. 3. User Trends: Walking and other trail related activities have become very popular. The vision to build regional trail systems connecting communities has become a reality in southern King County. · Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Trails/Linear Parks Size: Wide Variation Service Area: Local to Regional Typical Features: Traiis Tra ii heads Nature Trails Picnic Facilities Interpretive Signage Benches River Access Table 3-7 Existing Trail Inventory: Park Aubumdale Brannan Park Cameron Park Cedar Lanes Park Game Farm Park Game Farm Wilderness* Interurban Trail Isaac Evans Park Jornada Pa rk Lakeland Hills Linear Lakeland Hills Park Trail Lake Tapps Blvd. Trail Les Gove Park Trail Mill Pond Park Trail Roegner Park Trail* Sunset Park Trail White River Trail* Miles 0.41 1.77 0.33 0.25 3.30 1.00 4.50 1.07 0.10 0.73 0.39 1.62 0.50 0.29 1.00 1.19 4.5 *Combine for a 4.5 mile trail loop TOTAL: 23.37 miles 3-29 Table 3-8 Recommended Trail Standard Recommended Standard: 0.19 milell,OOO Existing Ratio: Total: 0.50 mile11,000 Existing Inventory: 23.37Miles Current Need: 0.0 Miles Future Need: 2010: 0 Miles* 2020: 0 Miles * * Additional miles will be added based on residental development and the transoortation olan. Special Use Areas Size: Generally very small, CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON Trails/Linear Parks Conclusions/ Recommendations: 1. Recommended Standard: Because unique opportunities exist, and interest in trails is high, the standard for trails is recommended to stay at the current ratio of 0.19 miles developed trail park land/lOOO residents. 2. Future Linear Park Development: There are several opportunities to develop additional trail parks in Auburn providing a local or regional trail systems. These are worth pursuing, considering the interest in trail activities as demonstrated by the survey and national recreation trends. Identified locations for potential linear parks or extension of existing linear parks include: · BPA Power Line Easement · Fulmer Park · Green River · Lakeland Trail · Mill Creek Corridor · Rotary Park · Shaughnessy Park · White River Trail . . Needs Assessment Definition Special use areas are miscellaneous public recreation areas or land Service Area: Not occupied by a specialized facility. Some of the uses that fall into this applicable classification include small landscaped areas, community gardens, Typical Features: Landscaped Areas streetscapes, Environmental Park, viewpoints, historic sites and other Community Gardens specialized areas. Viewpoints Historic Sites Existing Inventory Traffic Islands Specific Park or Recreation Special use areas in Auburn include unique sites such as Bicentennial Areas Park and Pioneer Cemetery. These areas in the City total 284.64 acres. In addition to these, the Parks and Recreation Department maintains trees and landscaping at more than 30 small beautification areas throughout the City. Most ofthese beautification areas provide valuable green space along streets, but are not intended for recreation purposes. The horticultural maintenance crew also tends all the . hanging baskets and planters downtown and at several sites 3-30 · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN throughout Auburn. The survey states that 34 percent of the households want to preserve the environment and provide open space. · Conclusions/ Recommendations 1. . No Standard Recommended: No standard for development of special use areas is recommended. It is expected that additional acreage will continue to be acquired as development occurs, and as small areas unusable for other purposes become part of the public right-of- way. 2. Aesthetic Improvements: Survey comments reveal that residents have a strong interest in the aesthetic improvement of the City through additional plantings of street trees, flowers and other plantings. These special use and beautification areas are good opportunities for incorporating aesthetic improvements into the community. 3. Design Guidelines: The Parks and Recreation Department has a goal to develop design gUidelines for special use areas. These should address the different types of special use areas and their particular design and maintenance requirements. Low maintenance plantings are recommended. 4. Public Green Spaces: Opportunities for incorporating additional green space into public settings should be explored. The following activities should be undertaken to achieve this goal: · Work with the Traffic Engineering Department to ensure parking strip and landscaping standards are sufficient to meet the cultural needs of street trees and other landscaping. · Encourage development of boulevard style streets in significant locations. · Develop a street tree program. Inventory trees and plants in existing public rights-of-way, and prepare a long-term care and replacement plan. Maintain Tree City/Urban Tree Board status. 5. Historic Properties: Identification of historic sites and buildings, and potential methods for their preservation should be undertaken through development · Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Table 3-9 Area Inventory: Park B Street Plaza Bicentennial Park Centennial Viewpoint Park Clark Plaza Environmental Park Golf Course Lea Hill Tennis Courts Morningcrest Mountain View Cemetery Pioneer Cemetery Slaughter Memorial Acres 0.10 0.99 0.70 0.26 85.00 148.73 1.18 0.42 46.57 0.77 0.02 TOTAL: 284.64 Acres Table 3-10 Recommended Standard Recommended Standard: None Existing Inventory: 198.46 Acres Current Need: 0.0 Acres Future Need: 2010: 0 Acres ** 2020: 0 Acres ** **Based on availability 3-31 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON of a Historic Preservation Plan. Both existing and potential park sites should be examined for their ability to contain or interpret historic sites, buildings, and events. See Chapter 6 for more on historic preservation. · Continue to work with King County Cultural Resources Division to identify sites and funding opportunities for historic properties. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Table 3-11 Existing Park Land Inventory: Park Neighborhood Parks Community Parks Trails Special Use Areas Open Space TOTAL: Acres 60.60 237.53 23.37 Miles 284.64 246.57 829.34 Acres Definition and Inventory: Auburn's total park land inventory equals 829.34 acres. This complete inventory includes all the park types discussed earlier in this chapter: Neighborhood Parks, Community Parks, Linear Parks, Open Space, and Special Use Areas. For the purposes of assessing the amount of park land needed for the future, our plan focuses on the Neighborhood, Community and · park system. It is still desirable to continue adding space to the Open Space and Special Use Areas, but these lands are often acquired incidentally, and will not be pursued through developer impact fees. Auburn's Total Park Land Standard is based on the core parks. In most cases existing parks are well-developed and can be considered complete. Several parks, however, contain open areas that can absorb additional recreational facilities or development. These parks were analyzed to determine the amount of fully developed acreage they recommended standard. · 3-32 · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Table 3-12 lists the existing ratios for parks, showing these for both the developed acreage. In fairness toward those who may pay impact fees in the future, the Recommended Standard is based on the ratio for only developed park areas for the Core Parks. This plan assumes that future park land will be fully developed in order to meet the recommended standard. Previous Standards As illustrated in Table 3-12, this is a change from the approach of the previous park plan, which established a standard for undeveloped park acreage for Neighborhood and Community Parks. Any park land or development acquired through developer contribution was a negotiated amount, and held no certainty for the City of Auburn or developer alike. This approach should be discontinued, with the future recommendation to incorporate impact fees. Determination ofthe Standard: Neighborhood and Community park sites should range from 6.25 to 10.5 acres per 1,000 population. For Auburn the present ratio of Neighborhood and Community parks is 10.93 acres per 1,000. The new recommended standard, which includes Linear Parks, is 6.03 acres per 1,000. The recommended standard of 6.03 acres per 1,000 will apply to all new residential developments required to mitigate impacts on the community by paying impact fees or providing developed park land or fee in lieu of park development. Table 3-12 Recommended Park Land Standards Exist. Exist. Exist. Ratio Ratio Std. Parks Neighborhood Parks Community Parks* Open Space Areas* Trails Subtotals: Special Use Areas 1.32 5.15 None None 6.03 4.2 1.32 4.46 None None 5.78 None 1.32 9.61 None 0.19 mi 10.93 4.2 * Open Space is ca1eulated with Community Parks Auburn '* More Than You Imagined Recommended Standard 1.32 4.50 None 0.21 mile 6.03 None 3-33 3-34 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON Total Park Land Conclusions! Recommendations: 1. Recommended Standard: The recommended standard of 6.03 acres per 1,000 population will ensure that Auburn residents will continue to have access to the same level of Community, Neighborhood and Linear Park land as the community continues to grow. · No standard is established for Open Space Areas or Special Use Areas, although the City will continue to pursue acquisition of these types of park land as opportunities arise. The recommended standard of 6.03 acres/1000 shows new development will be expected to pay for these types of park land. 2. Park Use by Non-Residents: Several county parks are located near Auburn, but most of these have minimal development or are completely undeveloped. Park Department records show county residents participate frequently in Auburn recreation programs. It can be assumed they also visit the City's parks with equal frequency. Non-resident use does not show up in the survey data, since only City residents were interviewed. · The fee to participate in Auburn's programs and classes is discounted to Auburn residents, while non-residents pay full price. This fee system does not compensate the City for the actual cost of providing these services or facilities. The City also receives some funding from sources outside the City, including King County. 3. Potential Annexation Areas This plan will evolve as areas within Auburn's Potential Annexation Area (PM) are annexed into Auburn. Auburn continues to work with King County toward acquisition and development of park land for those citizens within Auburn's PM. · · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN III. Facility Needs Establishing needs for specialized facilities such as sport fields, trail systems, swimming pools, and gymnasium space was determined by using several analytical approaches. These included: · Present recreation participation levels and needs as expressed in the survey ( Leisure Vision dated March 2004) · NRPA standards · Input from staff concerning user groups · Number and type of sport teams · Play requirements · Mathematical models Information derived from the survey and input from user groups via City staff was taken into account when goals were developed for specific types of recreation facilities. Also considered were existing school district, County and private facilities located within the City of Auburn. These other facilities satisfy a certain need, but they do not completely make up for the shortfall of public need. The following pages provide a short description and analysis of each e: · Baseball Fields · Softball and Youth Baseball Fields · Football Fields · Soccer Fields · Tennis Courts · Gymnasium Space · Community Center · Swimming Pools · Recreation Trails Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-35 Table 3-13 Recommended 1 Field/6,000 residents Existing Ratio: 1 Field/3,549 residents Existing Inventory: 13 Fields o Fields CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON Existing Baseball Field Inventory: City Fields Brannan Park Game Farm Park Lea Hill Park School Fields Auburn High Auburn Riverside High School Auburn Mountain View High School Cascade Middle School Mt. Baker Middle School Olympic Middle School Rainier Middle School Community Fields YMCA 1 Field, Lighted 1 Field, Lighted 1 Field 1 Field 1 Field 1 Field 1 Field 3 Fields 1 Field 1 Field 1 Field . Analysis: Baseball fields in Auburn parks are suitable for adults and youth . ages 13 and over. At present most baseball teams are for youth, although adult leagues continue to grow. The City, Auburn Little League and the Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle leagues administer Youth baseball programs. 1. Survey: Auburn. 2. User Trends: Youth baseball participation has decreased since 1997. 3. Field Demand: Demand for baseball fields is currently created by 27 teams. These include: 16 City Sponsored Youth Baseball Teams, age 13+ 6 Auburn Little League, age 13+ 4 Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle 2 Adult Teams 28 Total Teams 3-36 . · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Using the field demand assumptions from the Park and Recreation Needs Assessment, and updating for the increase in number of teams, the following supply and demand can be calculated: Supply: Fields provide 90 games/practices per week Demand: 54 games/practices per week Conclusions! Recommendations: The current number of fields are adequate to meet the future needs of the Parks Department. A priority system has also been established that ensures that Auburn residents have the highest priority for field use. Existing Softball/Youth Baseball Field Inventory: City Fields Brannan Park Fulmer Field Game Farm Park GSA Park Les Gove Park Scootie Brown Park Sunset Park School Fields West Auburn High Auburn Riverside High School Auburn Mountain View High Cascade Middle School Mt. Baker Middle School Olympic Middle School Rainier Middle School Community Fields YMCA 3 Fields 2 Fields 3 Fields 2 Field 2 Fields 1 Field 2 Fields (1 Lighted) (2 Lighted) (2 Lighted) 1 Field 3 Fields 2 Fields 1 Field 3 Fields 1 Field 1 Field 1 Field Analysis: The demand for softball and youth baseball fields is strong, with · over 300 teams currently using City fields. Table 3-14 Recommended 1 Field/2,200 residents Existing Ratio: 1 Field/l,648 residents Existing Inventory: 28 Fields o Fields Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-37 3-38 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON In Auburn, the City manages the adult softball, youth softball, youth baseball and T-Ball programs. In addition, school teams, a local Little League and two church leagues use City fields. In Auburn, adult softball, youth baseball and sometimes even soccer are played on the same fields. When these leagues play at the same time it makes scheduling very difficult and requires more field space. . 1. Survey: 25 activities. 2. User Trends: interest in softball has remained nearly constant. 3. Field Demand: Demand for softball and youth baseball fields is created by the following number of teams: 74 City Men's Slow Pitch . 12 City Women's Slow Pitch 40 City Coed Slow Pitch 21 City Youth Baseball (grades 3-6) 13 City Youth Softball 47 City T-BalIjCub Clinic 46 Little League 253 Total Teams The City is able to provide enough fields only by restricting practice time once the season begins and by playing on substandard school fields. Teams practice before the season, on weekends or use elementary school facilities. Demand for practice time exceeds the availability at school fields. Only four school fields are used for league play and some are not available until after the school year is over. The heavy demand for organized play and practice allows little opportunity for informal play at most of these fields. Supply: Fields provide 190 games/practices per week Demand: 240 games/practices per week Conclusions! Recommendations: The current number of fields are adequate to meet the future needs . of the Parks Department. · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN · Football Fields Existing Football Field Inventory: City Fields Brannan Park 3 Seasonal Fields Fulmer Field 1 Seasonal Field School Fields Auburn High 1 Field, Lighted, Synthetic Auburn Riverside High 1 Field, Lighted, Synthetic Auburn Mountain View High 1 Field, Synthetic Cascade Middle School 1 Field Olympic Middle School 1 Field Mt. Baker Middle School 1 Field Rainier Middle School 1 Field Analysis: Eleven football fields currently serve several football programs. The City-sponsored adult flag football program has 39 teams that play on three seasonal fields at Brannan Park. The Auburn Junior Football League is privately sponsored and has five age divisions which play tackle football (8 Youth). The Parks Department sponsors a youth flag football league which has nine teams. As the existing inventory list shows, seven fields are on school property, so these must also be available for school events. 1. Survey: Although survey ran kings for football were not very high, this sport remains very popular for certain age groups and individuals. · activities. 2. User Trends The number of football teams playing in Auburn has remained constant for the past few years. 3. Demand: 31 City Adult Flag Football 6 Auburn Junior Football League (5 age divisions) 8 City Youth Flag Football 45 Total Teams Conclusions/Recommendations: The current need for these teams is for games and practice time. The existing ratio reflects sufficient football fields. Table 3-15 Recommended 1 Field/4,000 residents Existing Ratio: 1 Field/4,194 residents Existing Inventory: 11 Fields o Fields Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-39 Table 3-16 Recommended 1 Field/2,OOO residents Existing Ratio: 1 Field/4,614 residents Existing Inventory: 10 Fields 13 Fields 3-40 Soccer Fields CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · Existing Soccer Field Inventory: City Fields Brannan Park Game Farm Park School Fields Auburn High Auburn Riverside High Auburn Mountain View High West Auburn High Community Fields YMCA 1 Field, Unlighted 2 Fields, Lighted 1 Field, Unlighted 1 Field, Lighted 1 Field, Lighted 1 Field, Lighted 1 Field, Unlighted 2 Fields, Unlighted Analysis: There are only two Auburn Parks fields actually designated for soccer. In addition to these, one field is used on a seasonal basis at Brannan Park, and eight mini-fields are set up at Game Farm Park for youth soccer. 1. Survey: · and was not in the top 16 preferred activities. However, interest is very strong in particular age groups, such as 10 to 12 years, 15 to 17 years, and 25 to 40 years. 2. User «ends: Soccer has shown a steady increase in popularity nationally, and a dramatic increase in the Northwest in the last 10 years. 3. Demand: Currently, demand for soccer field use is created by the following number of teams: 88 City Youth Soccer 40 Auburn Soccer Club 2 Green River College 130 Total Teams The 88 youth soccer teams sponsored by the City of Auburn Parks and Recreation Department practice and play their games at 20 micro-fields at Game Farm Park and Brannan Park. The 20 micro- · · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN fields are equal in size to four regulation size soccer fields. These teams play modified soccer, which permits play on a smaller field. The adult soccer program sponsored by the City is also a modified program and plays on a smaller field at Brannan Park. The remaining youth soccer teams sponsored by the Auburn Soccer Club and Green River Community College play at Game Farm Park and Brannan Park. Assumptions and calculations found in the Community Attitude and Interest Citizens Survey were used to determine demand. This demand assumes that City sponsored programs will play on temporary fields, and demand for the other four fields is created by 29 teams. Supply: Demand: Fields provide 105 games/practices per week 195 games/practices per week Conclusions/Recommendations: Analysis of the figures indicates a need for 13 additional fields at this time. The recommended goal reflects the growing trend in soccer. Tennis Courts Existing Tennis Court Inventory City Courts Game Farm Park Lea Hill Tennis Courts Shaughnessy Park Lea Hill Park 4 Courts, Lighted 1 Court 1 Court 2 Courts School Courts Auburn High Auburn Riverside High Auburn Mountain View High 8 Courts, Lighted 8 Courts, Lighted 8 Courts, Lighted Analysis: There are 32 tennis courts in Auburn located at school sites or city parks. Four of these are in poor condition. There are no public or private indoor tennis facilities in the Auburn area. 3-41 Auburn * More Than You Imagined Table 3-17 Recommended 1 Courtj2,500 residents Existing Ratio: 1 Courtjl,441 residents Existing Inventory: 32 Tennis Courts o Courts CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON 1. Comparison to Other Standards: Auburn has a higher ratio than the NRPA standard or the other representative communities. This is accounted for in part because school facilities are used in calculating the ratio. 2. Survey: participation, and was not in the top 20 preferred activities. 3. User 7rends: Although interest in tennis on a national scale has remained about the same for the past twenty years, Auburn's participation rate is lower than average. Conclusions/Recommendations: Because of Auburn's relatively low interest and participation rates, a No additional courts are needed at this time. 3-42 · · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Existing Gymnasium Inventory: Table 3-18 Recommended I Auburn Schools Alpac Elementary 1 Youth Gym Chinook Elementary 1 Youth Gym Dick Scobee Elementary 1 Youth Gym 1 Gym/5,OOO residents Evergreen Hts. Elementary 1 Youth Gym Existing Ratio: Hazelwood Elementary 1 Youth Gym Gildo Rey Elementary 1 Youth Gym 1 Gym/11,535 residents IIalko Elementary 1 Youth Gym Existing Inventory: Lakeview Elementary 1 Youth Gym 4 Gyms * Lea Hill Elementary 1 Youth Gym Pioneer Elementary 1 Youth Gym 5 Gyms Terminal Park Elementary 1 Youth Gym Washington Elementary 1 Youth Gym Cascade Middle School 1 Adult Gym Public School Gymnasiums Mt. Baker Middle School 2 Adult Gyms and 0 Auburn Parks Olympic Middle School 1 Adult Gym Department Gyms. Rainier Middle School 2 Youth Gyms · Auburn High School 4 Adult Gyms Auburn Mountain View High 2 Adult Gyms Auburn Riverside High School 2 Adult Gyms West Auburn High 1 Adult Gym Analysis: Table 3-19 Recommended indoor soccer and gymnastics programs that utilize gymnasiums. Community Center Because the City has no gymnasium space of its own, it borrows space from the Auburn School District. The primary limiting factor in gym space is when school and park programs overlap. During the school year access to the school gyms is unpredictable and they are 1 Community Center/ usually not available until after 7 p.m. This eliminates their usability 40,000 residents for children's programs or for any type of use during the day, such Existing Ratio: as for aerobics classes. In addition, several groups, such as the 1 Senior Center/ YMCA, scouts,churches and the City, compete for use of school 40,000 residents gymnasiums, which makes scheduling more difficult. Existing Inventory: Based on the information above, school district facilities are available 1 Senior Center * ratio and recommended standard. Analysis reveals the use of school 1 Community Center · basketball programs. Cancellations of games are frequent, due to school programming. Free court time or court use for other programs is limited. Due to a scarcity of gyms available during the day, the Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-43 Table 3-20 Recommended .286 SF/l,OOO residents Existing Ratio: .286 SF/lOOO residents Existing Inventory: 12,600 SF 596 SF CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON City is renting space from churches to meet some of its needs (senior volleyball). . Determination of Standard: Since many different activities use gymnasiums, the standard is on many sports. 1. SUlvey: Survey results show the following rankings for activities commonly occur in gymnasiums. Sport Participation Activity Live Concert! Theather Exercise/Aerobics Sports Events - Spectator Basketball Volleyball Preferred Rate 2. Demand: . The seasons with the greatest demand occur from September through May. During this season basketball and volleyball programs sponsored by the City, YMCA and the School District take place simultaneously. At peak season the following number of teams play: 92 City Adult Basketball 36 YMCA Youth Basketball 4 City Youth VOlleyball 12 Auburn Youth Basketball 144 Total Teams Using the assumptions and calculations in the Park and Recreation Needs Assessment, the following supply and demand was determined. Supply: Demand: Additional Demand: A substantial number of other dance and fitness classes per week would be offered if additional gymnasium space was available. . 3-44 · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Conclusions/ Recommendations: Both the number of gymnasiums and the hours they are available point to a strong need for additional gym space. For maximum scheduling availability and operating efficiency, it would be beneficial to have facilities constructed, owned and operated by the City. City-owned gymnasium space would add much needed daytime hours to the program schedule and enable the City to serve populations such as young children and seniors. Additionally, survey results reveal a community center (which would include indoor gym space) is need of Auburn residents choosing from a list of proposed recreational facilities. The parks department will be looking into using the old YMCA site for a potential Community Center in the Les Gove Park. The recommended goal of one gym per 5,000 residents is the same as the NRPA standard, and also reflects the local demand for these facilities. Using this standard, an additional five gymnasiums are needed. Existing Swimming Pool Inventory: Auburn School District 1 Indoor Pool YMCA 2 Indoor Pool (Natatorium) Analysis: Auburn has a higher ratio of pool water than most cities analyzed. Swimming was 6th in either the top 24 current recreation activities and 6th-preferred activities. 1. Comparison to Other Cities: Auburn has a higher ratio of pool water than most cities analyzed. 2. Survey: Swimming was in the top 20 current recreation activities and did show up in the top 20 preferred activities. 3. User Trends: Swimming is usually one of the top recreation activities in a community and the need is covered at the new YMCA Natatorium. Table 3-21 Recommended 159 sq. ft./l,OOO residents Existing Ratio: 257 Sq.Ft.jl,OOO residents Existing Inventory: 7,000 Sq. Ft. YMCA 4,859 Sq. Ft. ASD Pool None Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-45 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · 4. Demand: The schools do use the pool for their physical education programs and competitive swim programs. Conclusions/Recommendations: Based on the demand above, there is an excess of pool space currently available. The recommended goal shows no additional indoor pool area is presently needed. The addition of the new Auburn YMCA pools will cover the need of the community by way of park department use of the facility on a regular basis. Recreational Loop Trails and Recreation/Transportation Trails Existing Recreational Loop Trails: Auburndale Park Brannan Park Cameron Park Cedar Lanes Park Game Farm Park Game Farm Wilderness Isaac Evans Trail Jornada Park Lakeland Hills Linear Lakeland Hills Park Lake Tapps Blvd. Trail Les Gove Park Mill Pond Trail Roegner Park Sunset Park White River Trail 0.41 Mile 2.19 Miles 0.33 Mile 0.25 Mile 3.30 Miles 1.00 Mile 1.07 Miles 0.10 Mile 0.73 Mile 0.39 Mile 1.62 Miles 0.50 Mile 0.29 Mile 1.00 Mile 1.19 Miles 4.50 Miles · Recreation/Transportation Trails: Interurban Trail 4.20 Miles TOTAL: 23.37 Miles Future Recreational Loop Trails and Recreation/Transportation Trails Future Trails: A Street SE Trail BPA Trails Mile Mile · 3-46 · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN C Street SE Trail Dogwood South Fulmer Park Green River Trail Mill Creek Corridor/Auburn Environmental Park Rotary Park Shaughessy Park Mile Mile Mile Mile Mile Mile Mile Analysis: National recreation trends show a substantial increased interest in trail related activities in the last five years. Auburn's survey shows the same surge in interest, with walking for pleasure and bicycling the top five preferred recreation activities. The two different types of trails listed above provide means for residents to recreate close to home, or to travel a little farther when they choose to. · 1. Comparison to other cities: Auburn has a similar ratio to other valley cities. 2. Survey: Walking for pleasure and bicycling were in the top five current recreation activities. These two activities were the top two preferred recreation activities, if facilities were available. 3. User Trends: Trail related activities continue to shown a remarkable increase in interest in the last five years. In Auburn there is also a strong interest in equestrian activities. . 4. Opportunities: With the many linear features in Auburn such as the Green and White Rivers, Mill Creek and several utility easements, Auburn has an unmatched opportunity for continued development of recreation/ transportation trails. Conclusions! Recommendations: Auburn has unique opportunities for further trail development. Locations along rivers, creeks and powerline easements are well- suited to trails and are explored for future use. The recommended standard reflects a current need of more than 14 miles of recreational loop trails and 16 miles of recreation/transportation trails as per the city council recommendation to complete the Green River, White River trails and cross-city transportation trails. · Table 3-22 Recommended Recreational Loop .21 miles/1,000 residents Existing Ratio: .19 miles/1,000 residents Existing Inventory: 23.37 miles 30 miles Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-47 Existing Major Public Art Projects Artist Tom Teitge Meg Pettibone Richard Beyer 1989 1989 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2000 2001 2001 2003 2004 2004 Brad Rude Michele Van Slyke Nancy Hammer Garth Edwards Timothy Siciliano Gerald Tsutukawa Timothy Siciliano Deborah Merksy Kulzer & Spitzer Evans & Mee Ries Niemi Phillip Levine Ries Niemi Paul Sorey Sidney Genette Piece City Centennial Mural Steel head Children Playing Train at the Switch City Hall, 25 West Main St. The Long Look Centennial Viewpoint Park, Mt. View Dr. Every Year the Salmon Return Roegner Park, Oravetz Rd. Burlington Northern Railroad Bridge Auburn Way S & Hwy 18 B Street Plaza E Main & B St. SE Bus Shelter Murla 15th St SWat the Supermall Sun Circle Game Farm Park, 3030 R St. SE The Equine Amusement 15th St. NE at Metro Park & Ride Pioneer Cemetery Entryway Auburn Way N & 8th St. NE Auburn Skate Park, 26th & M St. NE King County Library, Auburn Way S Les Gove Park, 11th & Auburn Way S Les Gove Park, 11th & Auburn Way S Senior Center, Les Gove Park Sound Transit Plaza, A St. SW & W Main St. Lakeland Hills Way & Evergreen Way Auburn Justice Center, 340 E Main Mnemosyne's Opus Sundial Threshold 5 Moments Running Figures Sighting Blue Neutron 3-48 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON · Location E Main & B St. NE Isaac Evans Park, SE Green River Rd. · · · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN Insert Art Map Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-49 CI1Y OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON This page is the back of the map 3-50 · · · , \ ~,~'" , ~I' ~'I" ,~. , "-l l t l ~ , ¡ , I I~ ~',,- ¡ í , í < " " ) , '''~ " ¡,j, .. \\ f, I· ~ ". i·a ,! , . " . , I r '~ ~ , , ~! I . . 0" ~ " , M , i'! ¡ , . , IF It,';:: . .'\, , , .. if, ",,"" - , , -""- I I c,- , , J "rlW ,0 , .,- s , j ~ __, , L, \ . ·1 ~.._. , " I , ~ -=4¡¡ I , "I-----!, , , , ¥~ \ I \ '''^'' " i f. ~. "r" ,,, . ¡,' - ~.--""wiof-":¡ , i ,: I , , ~I I \ , , , \, , , I t~,--- I I I , , I I ¡ SOILE""_>OO' L._ " " . " ' ., ,- ; ,- .' i ,"""'. " ,--'---j-. i ' , , , , , , \, , .. -, .. ,,~ , f , , I -¡ '" " "h' --------- "0, .. " /"'L>"\/""-',J'-"^,,__ 'j/ " ,;,., / 'i , :'.-1 .' 1y i¿_ ;'/":,1~-' ,/ ¿Park " . / ~~'. J1- -""" \'\ . Î' , , !" , .". ( 'c I 1 au~sy ""J'i"ark,,',--- ~ >('" ~ '¡-~., . c____, . /:=::::."> ' "'" ,~ -, \ ~- /"r'~ :,:.. . ,p« "-',,, di ""G<lmefarm "'<"',,- . ~.-~ ( ilderTIess Park '""". -'~\, ^'-''''\, - '.> "" "·á" -'. ,,-J~'-..._. _, ""''':. ". " I' ~ \" , ..::,\'" "-"'- , "-, ',~, \ -', "~~ " ',:'~ "'- .....'. "~----' ' \, \ " , .' 'I' , , , ! I , ' , , , , , " , '\\" , ' I' , \ "-, " '.... '-,." . , .. '. -.' '. ". '- ' -'"" \ .. " .~, " ' "----'-"_.~ \. '" ÁlJbum '__'-,'-Ni!!,:~S "' -~ "1 " $f'''' ,t",,__ -"',' ","," " ~>-- "" 'W' r->- ,/ , . ~i , J , " , , 'I 't-""- ,. , I .. -, - , ,. 'i 1 I , , ~ L_ 'I ~ (1- NEELY~RIDGE ,. - PARK - - - ~~ "'.'" _.~:'-'.;~:.:~ '..~ "-"',:':,~ --~ I , , .....".. . ' , -.-- ¡ \ , , , I ¡ I \ -..1._.; '\ ;~' K-... < ,~ --J L {\ I / , I I ~ ~ iI!III . , , "-- ~~ , I' EA CITY OF AUBURN PARKS · · · PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE PLAN IV. Summary of Park and Facility Needs Table 3-23 below summarizes the information described and analyzed in the previous pages. It includes: · New recommended standards · Inventory of existing park land · Inventory of specialized recreation facilities · Current and future needs · Amount of land and facilities that will be required to meet needs in 2010 and 2020. Table 3-23 Summary of Park and Facility Needs Future Future Recommended Existing Existing Cu rrent Need: Need: Standard Inventory Inventory Unmet 2010 2020 (in developed (Total (Dev'd Need (Pop (Pop Park Types acres!1000 res.) Acres) Acres) 68,696) 85,556) Neighborhood Parks 1.32 60.6 43.26 0.31 30.08 52.26 Community Parks * 4.5 237.53 198.49 0 0 0 Open Space Areas * as acquired 246.57 0 0 0 0 Trails 0.21 23.37 miles 23.37 0 0 0 Subtotals: 6.03 Special Use Areas as identified 284.64 199.64 0 0 0 6.03 Acres! Total Park Land 1000 Residents 829.34 464.76 0.31 30.08 52.26 cxu":lng cXlsung !-Ulure !-Ulure Recreation Recommended Inventory Inventory Need Need: Need: Facilities Goal (Total (Dev'd 2010 2020 Baseball 1 Fieldi6,000 13 Fields NA o Field o Field 1 Field Softball/youth Baseball Fields 1 Fieldi2,200 28 Fields NA o Field 4 Fields 11 Fields Football Fields 1 Fieldi4,000 11 Fields NA o Field 6 Fields 10 Fields Soccer Fields 1 Field/2,000 10 Fields NA 13 Fields 24 Fields 32 Fields Tennis Courts 1 courti2,500 32 Courts NA o Courts o Courts 2 Courts Gymnasium Space 1 Gym/S,OOO 4 Gyms NA 5 Gyms 10 Gyms 13 Gyms Community Center 1 cc/40,000 0 NA 1 Senior Center .286 SF/lOOO 12,600 SF NA 596 SF 7047 SF 11869 SF Swimming Pools 159 sq ft/1000 11,859 SF NA 0 0 1744 SF Recreation/ Transportation Trails .21 mile/lOOO 23.37 miles NA 0 0 0 Auburn '* More Than You Imagined 3-51