Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy

Transcription

Community Development | Public Engagement | Wellness Infrastructure
RC Strategies Inc
10315 – 109 St NW
Edmonton, Alberta
Can ada
T 5 J 1N3
T
7 8 0. 4 4 1 . 4 2 6 2
F
780.426.2734
W rcstrategies.ca
Tri-Municipal Region
Final
19 August 2009
August 19, 2009
City of Spruce Grove
Attn: Ken Luck, Director of FCSS and Recreation
315 Jespersen Avenue
Spruce Grove, Alberta T7X 3E8
Canada
Re:
Mr. Luck,
Randall Conrad
M.Sc.
Partner
Michael Roma
Please accept this document as the final version of the aforementioned
strategic document. At this point in time we consider this a working
document that will provide guidance for the Region in the provision of
indoor recreation and culture facilities for years to come.
MBA
Partner
Thank you for the opportunity to work with your unique and exciting
Region.
Sincerely,
Michael Roma, Partner
RC Strategies
10315 – 109 St NW
Edmonton, Alberta
Can ada
T 5 J 1N3
T
7 8 0. 4 4 1 . 4 2 6 2
F
780.426.2734
W rcstrategies.ca
Acknowledgements and Credits
Great communities are built through active citizen involvement and engagement in the
planning process.
Many thanks go out to those residents, group representatives and community
stakeholders who responded to surveys, attended Council presentations and took the time
to talk with study team members.
Many thanks also go out to Tri-Municipal Councils and administration who assisted in this
planning effort, recognized the importance of investing in long range planning and
displayed the fortitude to make decisions in the best interest of the community and region.
Of most importance, thanks go out to the:
• Residents of Parkland County, Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and Region for
participating in the household survey;
•
Representatives of volunteer groups who answered questionnaires and attended
meetings to discuss their needs, and;
•
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre visitors who took time during their visit to the TLC to
participate in a survey.
The Project Steering Committee:
• Ken Luck, City of Spruce Grove
•
Lawrie Seligman, City of Spruce Grove
•
Ken Van Buul, Parkland County
•
Kim Neill, Town of Stony Plain
•
Deborah Larsen, TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre
And last but not least the Consulting Team:
• Mike Roma, RC Strategies
•
Randy Conrad, RC Strategies
•
Rob Parks, RC Strategies
•
Kyle Snihurowych, RC Strategies
•
Megan Jones, RC Strategies
•
Leah Wilson, RC Strategies
•
Brian Bengert, Architecture | ATB
•
Kevin Osborne, Architecture | ATB
•
Shane Laptiste, Architecture | ATB
Summary
Summary
Indoor recreation and culture facilities provide the necessary environments in which individuals
can engage in physical and mental activities. The respective governments within the TriMunicipal Region, comprised of the City of Spruce Grove, Town of Stony Plain and Parkland
County, realizes that these facilities add to the quality of life of residents as well facilitate regional
tourism and other important economic drivers.
Municipalities within the Tri-Municipal Region have a track record of working together on a
number of joint initiatives in municipal service provision. With respect to indoor recreation and
culture facilities, the ownership and operations of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre is a prime
example of this regional collaboration.
The Purpose of this Tri-Municipal Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy is to build upon
the successes of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre and outline future strategies for the provision of
recreation and culture facilities in the Region for years to come. This Strategy, once adopted by
the three Councils, will form the basis of all future regional level indoor leisure facilities and will
provide specific direction as to when, and how, to conduct further feasibility analysis in line with
priority need and regional planning initiatives.
The Strategy is based upon a needs assessment process which included:
•
a review of regional population demographics,
•
a review of trends in recreation and culture participation,
•
consideration to existing municipal planning documentation and other regional initiatives
already underway,
•
a review of how recreation and culture indoor facilities are provided in comparable Alberta
regions,
•
an analysis of the physical state and use of existing recreation and culture indoor facilities in
the Tri-Municipal Region and, of course,
•
an extensive public consultation process.
This consultative process has been instrumental in developing both future facility priorities and
general philosophies of provision central to municipal mandates. The consultation included:
•
a statistically representative household survey sent to household in each of the three partner
municipalities,
•
a student survey conducted in regional schools,
•
a stakeholder group survey sent to over 270 regional volunteer groups which was
supplemented by 18 individual interviews with stakeholder group representatives,
•
four public input open houses and one public review open house, and
•
an intercept survey conducted at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
i
Summary
The Strategy is designed to provide future direction for indoor recreation and culture facility
priorities as well as management tools for the operation and planning of new facilities. Both
components are based upon the following Strategic Vision and associated Goals.
Strategic Vision
Indoor recreation and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal Region are the centerpieces of
community spirit and pride throughout the Region. These facilities, enjoyed by regional
residents, non-local users and tourists alike, contribute to the quality of life in the region
and position the region as one of the best in Western Canada. Indoor recreation and
culture facilities of the future will build upon past successes and continue provide quality,
diverse environments for regional residents to enjoy.
In order to achieve this vision, the following goals have been developed to help shape the
Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy:
1) To provide quality indoor recreation and culture facilities for residents of the Tri-Municipal
region, thereby contributing to overall community wellness and quality of life.
2) To build upon the successes of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, its ownership, operating
structure and presence in the Tri-Municipal Region.
3) To ensure that existing service levels and facility provision within the region is maintained
prior to exploring the development of new facilities.
4) To ensure that all opportunities for leveraging public, private and non-profit funding
sources are explored in building, operating and maintaining publicly-funded recreation and
culture indoor facilities.
5) To outline a transparent and consistent recreation and culture indoor facility needs
assessment, feasibility, design and development process so that all new initiatives can be
assessed and associated decisions can be made on an equitable basis.
6) To provide overall direction as to future recreation and culture indoor development
priorities and associated development options in the Region.
Using this Vision and these Goals as a guideline, the Strategy provides regional administrators
and decision makers the following management tools:
•
a transparent and standardized 18-30 month process for recreation and culture indoor facility
development based on sound logic and due diligence,
•
feasibility planning triggers that help decision makers determine whether or not any specific
facility initiative should be further analyzed in terms of market need and affordability,
•
a funding framework outlining how public funds should be levered, if at all, in the provision of
different types of recreation and culture indoor facilities based upon the markets for said
facilities and public accessibility, and;
•
a facility classification to help the region organize and manage existing and new recreation
and culture indoor facilities.
ii
Summary
The Strategy also includes in-depth discussion about the future siting of new or expanded
regional recreation and culture indoor facilities with consideration to when to plan for, and how
to acquire, land sufficient for future facility development. Detailed site requirements are also
presented to provide a basis for site assessment when future sites are analyzed and ultimately
recommended for development. Four potential locations for future facility expansion are
identified as well as direction for the future siting of new facilities on new sites within the region.
Prior to discussing specific priorities for future recreation and culture indoor facility development,
four key considerations are outlined to help guide overall decision making for future recreation
and culture indoor facility development. These four considerations include:
1) Recreation and Culture
Reviewing the merits of promoting and achieving recreation and culture facility and program
integration in all new, or expanded indoor facility projects
2) Spontaneous and Structure Use
Understanding that recreation and culture facilities service two distinct user markets,
scheduled activities and spontaneous activities, and that all new or expanded facility
development need to provide outlets for both types to occur
3) Stand Alone versus a “Multiplex” Approach
Promoting the concept of the “leisure mall”, or including many recreation and culture indoor
facilities at one location, not only to capitalize on operational economies of scale but also to
promote cross marketing of programs and added convenience for the end user.
4) Expansion and Enhancement versus Building New
Realizing that the region has a valuable built infrastructure of recreation and culture indoor
facilities and that in order to sustain existing facility service levels the region must invest in
and protect existing facilities, where possible, prior to building new facilities on new sites.
By incorporating the aforementioned considerations, the Strategy outlines future priorities for
indoor leisure facility development. In total, 27 different facility types have been identified and
measured with the top ten receiving detailed market analysis (present and future) and
recommended options for future spatial components of facilities. The 27 priorities, in rank order,
are as follows:
iii
Summary
Regional Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Priorities
*As Identified Through the Strategy Process
Rank
Facility Component
1
Fitness/Wellness
2
Gymnasium
3
Child-play Space
4
Community Meeting Rooms
5
Social Banquet Spaces 500+
6
Leisure Pools
7
Climbing Wall
8
Gymnastics Facilities
9
Performing Arts Theatre Space
10
Arenas/Ice Surfaces
11
Track
12
Program/Combatives Rooms
13
Program Pools
14
Library Space
15
Field House
16
School Gymnasiums
17
Art Display Spaces
18
Museum Spaces
19
Outdoor Pools
20
Spectator Ice Arena
21
Arts and Crafts Studios
22
Social Banquet Spaces <500
23
Leisure Ice
24
Racquet Court Sports
25
Agri-Recreation Spaces
26
Curling Rinks
27
50m Pools
Finally, next steps for the regional provision and development of recreation and culture indoor
facilities in the short- and mid-term have been presented. These next steps include:
iv
Summary
Short Term Action Items (2009-2012)
1) Conduct a detailed feasibility study, in conjunction with the TransAlta Tri Leisure Board, to
explore the potential of including, but not limited to, the following facility components in
expanding the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre (Type 1: Major Regional):
•
Fitness/wellness spaces/expansion,
•
Child-play space expansion,
•
Additional community meeting rooms/volunteer resource centre,
•
Additional program/combatives rooms,
•
Art display spaces,
•
Arts and crafts studios,
•
Indoor climbing wall facilities,
•
Indoor gymnastics facilities, and
•
Retrofits/upgrades suggested by the facility assessment (approximately $435,000).
*Timing: 2009
2) Begin regional discussion/planning immediately for land acquisition to support two sites
for Type 1: Major Regional or Type 2: Minor Regional facilities of no less than 15 acres
(Type 2) and 25 acres (Type 1).
3) Conduct a detailed feasibility study to explore the potential of additional facility
components at the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena including, but not limited to:
•
Additional indoor ice facilities (considering spectator arena),
•
Fitness/wellness spaces,
•
Child-play space,
•
•
Program/combatives rooms,
•
•
•
Leisure ice.
*Timing: 2011
v
Summary
Medium Term Action Items (2013-2017)
4) Conduct a detailed feasibility study to explore the potential of the development of a new
indoor recreation and culture venue at an agreed to site including but not limited to:
•
500 seat performing arts venue,
•
Social banquet spaces with capacity of at least 500, and
•
Arts and cultural amenities including display spaces and program rooms.
*Timing: 2014
indoor aquatics venue at an agreed to site including but not limited to:
•
Leisure aquatics components,
•
Program aquatics components,
•
•
Child-play space,
•
Community meeting rooms/volunteer resource centre,
•
Program/combatives rooms, and
•
Indoor climbing wall facilities.
*Timing: 2016
This Strategy has been based upon sound research and thorough public engagement. The
Strategy outlines management tools and priorities for the future provision of regional level
recreation and culture indoor facilities as well as the strategic next steps to help achieve the
strategic Vision and the Goals presented herein. It is now time for municipal decision makers,
regional administrators and recreation and culture indoor facility stakeholders to take this
information, in principle, and allow it to guide future decision making in meeting public demands
for indoor recreation and culture facilities within the Tri-Municipal region.
vi
Table of Contents
1.0
Introduction............................................................................................................ - 1 -
2.0
Regional Profile ....................................................................................................... - 2 -
3.0
Strategy Purpose and Methodology......................................................................... - 6 3.1.
4.0
5.0
Reliability of Survey Data .................................................................................. - 7 -
Strategy Background ............................................................................................... - 8 4.1.
A Long Term View and Strategic Plan: Parkland County (2008) ........................ - 8 -
4.2.
Stony Plain Community Sustainability Plan (2008)............................................ - 9 -
4.3.
Spruce Grove Core Strategies (2005).............................................................. - 10 -
4.4.
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Business Plan 2009-2011 ................................... - 11 -
4.5.
Regional Leisure Services Master Plan ............................................................ - 11 -
4.6.
Other Initiatives Underway in the Tri-Municipal Region ................................. - 12 -
4.6.1.
Stony Plain Multicultural Centre .................................................................. - 12 -
4.6.2.
Aerials Gymnastics....................................................................................... - 12 -
4.6.3.
Stony Plain Exhibition Park........................................................................... - 12 -
4.6.4.
Agridome Society......................................................................................... - 13 -
Needs Assessment ................................................................................................ - 14 5.1.
Population Analysis and Projections ............................................................... - 14 -
5.2.
Trends Analysis and Participation ................................................................... - 15 -
5.2.1.
Economic Trends ......................................................................................... - 16 -
5.2.2.
Societal Trends ............................................................................................ - 17 -
5.2.3.
Recreation and Culture Participation Trends ................................................ - 18 -
5.3.
Public Engagement ......................................................................................... - 22 -
5.3.1.
Household survey........................................................................................ - 23 -
5.3.2.
Student Survey............................................................................................. - 24 -
5.3.3.
Stakeholder Group Survey ........................................................................... - 24 -
Table of Contents
6.0
5.3.4.
Stakeholder Group Interviews...................................................................... - 25 -
5.3.5.
Public Input Open House Results ................................................................ - 26 -
5.3.6.
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Intercept Survey............................................... - 27 -
5.4.
Comparative Analysis ..................................................................................... - 28 -
5.5.
Inventory and Assessment of Indoor Facilities ................................................ - 30 -
5.6.
Usage of Indoor Recreation and Culture Facilities........................................... - 31 -
5.7.
Needs Assessment Summary.......................................................................... - 32 -
Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy ..................................................... - 36 6.1.
Vision and Goals............................................................................................. - 36 -
6.2.
The Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Development Process .................. - 37 -
6.2.1.
Feasibility Planning Triggers......................................................................... - 40 -
6.2.2.
Funding Framework ..................................................................................... - 41 -
6.3.
An Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Classification System..................... - 42 -
6.4.
A Regional Approach to Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Provision....... - 47 -
6.4.1.
Existing Situation.......................................................................................... - 47 -
6.4.2.
Future Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Delivery ................................ - 47 -
6.5.
Land
............................................................................................................ - 48 -
6.6.
Future Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Development........................... - 49 -
6.6.1.
Recreation and Culture ................................................................................ - 49 -
6.6.2.
Spontaneous and Structured Uses ............................................................... - 50 -
6.6.3.
Stand Alone Versus a “Multiplex” Approach ................................................ - 52 -
6.6.4.
Expansion and Enhancement Versus Building New ...................................... - 53 -
6.6.5.
Potential Sites .............................................................................................. - 53 -
6.7.
Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Component Priorities.......................... - 64 -
6.7.1.
Fitness/Wellness - Priority #1 ...................................................................... - 65 -
6.7.2.
Gymnasiums - Priority #2 ........................................................................... - 66 -
6.7.3.
Child-Play Space - Priority #3 ...................................................................... - 67 -
6.7.4.
Community Meeting Rooms - Priority #4.................................................... - 68 -
6.7.5.
Social Banquet Spaces - Priority #5 ............................................................. - 69 Table of Contents
6.7.6.
Leisure Pools – Priority #6........................................................................... - 71 -
6.7.7.
Climbing Wall - Priority #7.......................................................................... - 71 -
6.7.8.
Gymnastics Facilities - Priority #8 ............................................................... - 72 -
6.7.9.
Performing Arts Theatre Space - Priority #9................................................. - 73 -
6.7.10. Arenas/Ice Surfaces - Priority #10................................................................ - 74 6.7.11. Other Facility Component Priorities............................................................. - 77 6.8.
Next Steps For Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Development .............. - 78 -
6.8.1.
Short Term Action Items (2009-2012).......................................................... - 78 -
6.8.2.
Medium Term Action Items (2013-2017)..................................................... - 79 -
7.0
Stakeholder Review............................................................................................... - 79 -
8.0
Summary .............................................................................................................. - 82 -
Appendix ......................................................................................................................... - 88 Appendix A:
Household Survey Report .................................................................... - 88 -
Appendix B:
Student Survey Report ......................................................................... - 88 -
Appendix C:
Stakeholder Group Survey Report........................................................ - 88 -
Appendix D:
Stakeholder Group Interview Report.................................................... - 88 -
Appendix E:
Public Input Open House Report ......................................................... - 88 -
Appendix F:
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Intercept Survey Report ........................... - 88 -
Appendix G:
Facility Usage Analysis Report ............................................................. - 88 -
Appendix H:
Preliminary Facility Massing Models .................................................... - 88 -
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction
The Tri-Municipal Region is a unique area that offers residents the best of both rural and urban
living, as well as lifestyle. Working together, the Region’s municipalities have developed an
extraordinary compliment of programs and services for residents through a broad range of up to
date leisure facilities and outdoor parks and open spaces. The level of municipal commitment in
developing and sustaining culture and recreation infrastructure is supported by complimentary
policies, which promote well-being, sustainability and economic viability. These policies will
serve as key value statements in creating and measuring the applicability and conformance of any
strategies or strategy alternatives.
Properly planned recreation
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, Spruce Grove
and culture facilities and
outdoor community spaces
can add value to community
quality of life, community
economic development and
can be a major drawing factor
for new residents and industry.
Recreation facilities and spaces
are used by—and are exposed
to—all municipal residents,
visitors and other community
stakeholders. As such, their
appearance, state of upkeep,
operations,
efficiency
and
effectiveness
are
under
constant surveillance. For this
reason, optimizing operations and maintenance are keys to ensuring stakeholder satisfaction.
Development and planning for change require a municipality or region to have an accurate and
up-to-date inventory of culture and recreation facilities, an associated classification system for
such facilities and spaces and a framework to handle new components and incorporate them into
the Region’s leisure services spectrum.
We are mindful of the varied cultural lifestyles in the Region and realize that a planned approach
to the development and operations of leisure resources will require flexibility and an appreciation
for differing needs as we move from one area and one community group to another.
-1-
2.0 Regional Profile
Located in north-central Alberta immediately adjacent to Edmonton’s west-end, the Tri-Municipal
Region is an urban/rural area consisting of the City of Spruce Grove, the Town of Stony Plain and
the portion of Parkland County north of Township Road 520 and east of Range Road 280.
Together, the three municipalities cover a broad geographical area and are home to over 40,000
residents. Population density in both Spruce Grove and Stony Plain as well as within several
outlying subdivisions exceeds 100 people per square kilometer1.
Figure 1: Tri Municipal Market Area
The area has been growing between 3% and 5% per annum for several years, with similar growth
expected in the foreseeable future2. The majority of growth has taken place in the two urban
centres, with Spruce Grove experiencing a 22% population increase and Stony Plain growing by
29% during the last (2001-2006) census period. Growth has also been strong within the many
subdivisions developed on County land surrounding the two municipalities. Most of this
population growth is the result of net migration from other parts of Alberta and Canada with
many people moving into the region for work as well as for lifestyle reasons. While the net
migration rate within Parkland County hovered between -0.9% and 1% for the 2001 to 2006
1
Statistics Canada, 2006
Tri-Municipal Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy 2010-2020 Request for Proposal,
Feb 14, 2008
2
-2-
census period, migration to the two urban centres as well as to select subdivisions within
Parkland County exceeded 3% for the period3. Immigration to the region was also strong.
Subdivision areas within the County realized an immigration rate of between 11.9% – 25.9%
between 2001 and 2006 while areas within Stony Plain and Spruce Grove saw immigration rates
of between 4.4% and 11.8% over the same period4.
The Tri-Municipal Region has a relatively young population when compared to the Province of
Alberta. The median age is 34.4, 36.8 and 40.2 years for Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and Parkland
County respectively. This young population is serviced by public, separate and charter schools.
Parkland School Division No. 70 serves 9,454 K-12 students in 22 schools, including two senior
high schools, one located within each urban centre5. Construction of a replacement facility for the
aging Memorial Composite High School in Stony Plain is underway and is expected to open in
February 2010. Evergreen Catholic Separate Regional Division No 2 oversees four schools within
the region for students K – 12, while Francophone children can attend kindergarten through
grade six at Notre Dame School before being bussed to Edmonton for junior high and high
school. Christian/charter schools also service the region.
The Tri-Municipal region enjoys low unemployment with a reported (2006) 3.6%, 3.8% and 3.2%
unemployment rates for Parkland County, Spruce Grove and Stony Plain respectively6. Top
occupations include:
• Trades, Transport and Equipment Operations,
• Sales and Service, and
• Business, Finance and Administration.
TransAlta Power Plant, Parkland County
Broken down by industry, top
employment sectors are:
• Business and other
services,
• Agriculture and other
resource-based industries
(especially among County
residents),
• Construction,
• Retail,
• Healthcare and Social
Services, and
• Manufacturing.
3
5
http://www.psd70.ab.ca/psd/index.shtml
6
4
-3-
Workers living within the Tri-Municipal Region tend to commute a significant distance to work,
with median travel distances being greater than 15 km for Stony Plain, Spruce Grove and several
County subdivisions. Many of these workers commute to jobs within Edmonton or to various
locations within the Province’s oil patch network.
Recreational needs of Tri-Municipal Area residents are met by a number of indoor and outdoor
facilities. The large influx of people to the area however, has stretched many of these facilities to,
or beyond, capacity. New/improved facilities with a capacity to deal with larger population
numbers are needed to maintain an adequate level of recreational services for regional residents.
A hub for indoor recreation is the recently built TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre which stands as a
hallmark of cooperation among the three municipalities. This multiplex contains two NHL size
rinks, leisure ice, a 10 lane 25m pool, a leisure pool, a hardwood gymnasium, two indoor soccer
pitches, a running track, a fitness centre, two fitness studios, a children’s play centre and meeting
rooms. Economies of scale as well as growing area population counts justify continued
cooperation in this type of Tri-Municipal cost sharing for major regional recreational and cultural
projects.
Outdoor
recreational
West District Park, Spruce Grove
opportunities abound within
the
Tri-Municipal
area.
Outdoor swimming pools,
baseball
and
softball
diamonds, skateboard parks,
bmx tracks, bicycle jump
parks, tennis courts, sports
grounds, parks, playgrounds,
skating rinks, campgrounds
and
various
community
centres and halls are available
for both active and passive
recreational
pursuits.
The
majority of these resources are
owned and/or operated by the
individual municipalities in
which they are located, unlike the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre which is owned and operated
through a partnership. One major venue is Stony Plain’s Exhibition Park which hosts many of the
region’s larger outdoor festivals. Plans are underway to expand this facility because of continued
high demand. Another major facility, West District Park (seen above), an outdoor field sport
centre, has just been opened next to the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre in Spruce Grove to
accommodate the City of Spruce Grove’s need for expanded soccer / football facilities.
-4-
Other regional partnerships outside the realm of recreation and culture indoor facilities include
the Regional Waste Authority and the Alberta Capital Region Waste Water Commission. There
are also bi-lateral agreements in place for school gymnasium and municipal sports field use.
Group and club activities are popular in the Tri-Municipal region with various organizations
offering residents opportunities for community involvement. These include numerous minor
sport teams, clubs such as
Canada Day Celebration, Spruce Grove
Scouts and 4H, slo-pitch
teams and other groups.
Festivals held within the
region attract participants
from
all
three
municipalities.
Major
regional events include
rodeos,
the
Blueberry
Bluegrass and Country
Music
Festival,
music
festivals and trade shows.
Tri-A-Taste,
a
festival
celebrating the restaurants
and cafes from Stony Plain,
Spruce Grove and Parkland
County, is a collaborative
event which gives participants the opportunity to sample fare from all three municipalities. It is a
continuing challenge for the governments of all three area municipalities to maintain a feeling of
community spirit as well as a strong sense of neighborhood in the face of a fast-rising population.
Housing expansion within the Tri-Municipal region has been brisk with developers building a
substantial number of single and multi-family dwellings to accommodate the area’s swelling
population.
Priorities for the Tri-Municipal region include developing a safe, sustainable, active, affordable
and environmentally responsible community where residents are adequately serviced by family
friendly public facilities. To this end the three municipal councils have given precedence to
regional partnerships and alliances which help meet the needs of their citizenry. Other top
priorities include offering affordable housing and expanded recreational and cultural opportunities
including a greater number of multi-use social venues where residents can meet and interact as a
community.
-5-
3.0 Strategy Purpose and Methodology
The Tri-Municipal Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy will outline future strategies for
the provision of recreation and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal Region for years to come. In
order to sustain the lifestyle of its residents and provide healthy lifestyle choices within the
Region, this Strategy outlines a cooperative approach to planning for and meeting indoor
recreation and culture facility needs.
The following chart describes the process undertaken to complete the overall strategy.
Figure 2: Project Methodology
-6-
Primary research for the needs assessment portion of the strategy included:
•
A household survey with questionnaires mailed directly to over 12,000 households in the
Town of Stony Plain, City of Spruce Grove, and the Tri Leisure portion of Parkland County;
•
A student survey administered at local schools (grades 6+);
•
A stakeholder survey with questionnaires sent to organized groups in the Region;
•
A series of interviews with representatives of community organizations in the Region;
•
Various telephone and personal interviews and/or meetings with municipal administration,
elected officials and community group stakeholder representatives, and;
•
Assessments of existing recreation and cultural facilities in the Region.
Secondary research for the project included:
•
Recreation and culture facility and
participation trends analysis based on
industry publications;
•
Analysis of population statistics from
municipal, provincial, and federal sources;
and
•
A review of visitation and usage statistics for
some regional recreation and culture
Blueberry Bluegrass and Country Music Festival
Stony Plain
facilities.
3.1.
Reliability of Survey Data
The findings of the household survey are considered representative of the households in the
region. In total, 12,000 questionnaires were sent out and 2,197 returned. This level of response
provides a regional margin of error of +1.89% nineteen times out of twenty.
Municipality
Returns
Sent
%
Reliability
Parkland County
714
4,000
18%
+/- 3.32%
Stony Plain
757
4,000
19%
+/- 3.21%
Spruce Grove
726
4,000
18%
+/- 3.29%
Total Region
2,197
12,000
18%
+/- 1.89%
The results of the stakeholder group survey and the student survey provide insight into the
priorities of these respective segments of the community but are not considered representative of
the entire user group and / or student communities.
-7-
4.0 Strategy Background
The intent of this Strategy is to build upon the goals, policies and standards presented in existing
municipal/stakeholder planning documentation. Information provided in existing studies and
plans has been developed based upon sound research and thorough public input and as such, the
intent of this Plan is to build upon existing information as opposed to “reinventing the wheel”.
That being said, the following sections provide an overview of pertinent regional plans/documents
that compliment this Strategy.
4.1.
A Long Term View and Strategic Plan: Parkland County (2008)
Adopted in May of 2008, the Parkland County
Strategic Plan identifies five areas of interest
including economic development, quality of life,
infrastructure, governance and intergovernmental
relations. Although all five of these areas could
arguably have implications for recreation planning,
three: economic development, quality of life and
infrastructure, have direct implications on future
recreation and parks services.
The Mission:
A County that provides high quality sustainable services that enable residents and
businesses to work toward their potential.
The Vision:
Parkland County prospers and develops as a viable, sustainable community where people
can live, work, and raise families in a safe and secure environment.
Parkland County is also in the process of completing a Recreation, Parks and Open Space Master
Plan. Although this plan will deal with indoor recreation and culture facilities, as well as outdoor
facilities and parks, early indications suggest that no significant changes to existing cost sharing
arrangements and partnerships will be recommended. The plan is expected to be complete in
summer of 2009.
-8-
4.2.
Stony Plain Community Sustainability Plan (2008)
The Town of Stony Plain Community Sustainability Plan identifies four
main Core Strategies each with direct implications for recreation and
culture planning within our region. These Core Strategies and the
relevant action items are as follows:
1 Social Equity
To develop and maintain a community focused on creatively meeting the needs of residents
through the promotion of equality, wellbeing, safety, citizen participation and involvement.
Strategic Action Item 1.3
Create social linkages in the community through the promotion of structural and physical
infrastructure connectivity in neighborhood development.
Complete a recreation master plan including a regional component.
2 Economic Viability
To promote economic security and equity through the efficient and innovative use of
resources that considers the needs of current and future generations.
Develop a 10 year capital plan to address facility, physical infrastructure and trail system
requirements.
3 Cultural Vitality
To preserve our culture and heritage while strengthening our sense of connectedness by
fostering community support, hospitality and harmony.
Increase the presence of other artistic endeavors to compliment and enhance the murals
program.
Establish plans to promote community health and wellness.
4 Environmental Responsibility
To protect our natural resources and promote responsible consumption patterns that
encourages living within our ecological limits.
Implement the Environmental Stewardship Strategy.
-9-
4.3.
Spruce Grove Core Strategies (2005)
The City of Spruce Grove adopted five core strategies in 2005. These strategies
help to guide the City’s decision making process and are the product of a thorough
community engagement process. Four of the five core strategies have direct
Implications for indoor recreation and culture facility planning in the region. These
core strategies and the relevant goals and objectives associated with each are as
follows:
1. Providing Affordable Choices
Goal: To ensure that Spruce Grove continues to offer a range of affordable housing,
business and recreation choices.
Objectives:
• To broaden partnership options to ensure quality services at affordable prices.
2. Building Community
Goal: To ensure that Spruce Grove remains a vital, attractive and caring community.
Objectives:
• To foster residents' civic spirit, pride and active community commitment in Spruce
Grove.
• To contribute to a culture that cares for and respects all citizens - regardless of age,
income or background.
• To maintain and enhance civic and community facilities, parks, open spaces and services
that contribute to an outstanding quality of life.
3. Planning for Growth
Goal: To plan new growth so that it retains the current sense of community while
enhancing the urban experience offered to Spruce Grove residents.
Objectives:
• To ensure adequate infrastructure and services to meet current and projected growth
demands.
5. Delivering Sustainable Services
Goal: To ensure that City services contribute to a safe, clean and appealing quality of life
reflecting a sustainable balance between community needs, environmental impacts and
civic resources.
Objectives:
• To be responsive to emerging priorities.
• To balance the needs of the entire community.
The City of Spruce Grove is currently undertaking the development of a new strategic plan.
Although this plan is not yet finalized, the fundamental values and beliefs associated with it are
not expected to be dramatically different than those mentioned above.
- 10 -
4.4.
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Business Plan 2009-2011
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, the centerpiece of TriMunicipal Region recreation and culture facilities,
operates under the following vision and missions
statements (as outlined in its 2009-2011 business plan):
VISION STATEMENT
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre will be a regional leader in healthy and active lifestyles.
MISSION STATEMENT
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre is committed to promoting and fostering health and wellbeing through dynamic and innovative recreational facilities and programs for people of all
ages and abilities.
As the facility is a product of a strong and vibrant regional partnership between the three regional
municipalities, its operating model and ownership structure will be paramount in considering
future regional recreation and culture indoor facility planning, development and operations.
More specifically, the 2009-2011 business plan includes some significant insight as it relates to
future indoor recreation and culture facility provision in the region. The key strategic initiative in
the 2009-2011 Plan that is most relevant to future regional indoor recreation and culture facilities
is:
#4 Facility expansion
1. Explore facility expansion opportunities to meet future needs of the tri-community
2. Prepare a business case for stakeholders based on the findings of Goal 1.
The facility is the most heavily utilized indoor recreation and culture facility in the region and the
only facility built and operated by the three regional municipalities in partnership. The future of
the facility in a physical state (expansion) as well as the continued success of operations and
programming will motivate regional decision makers to partner again in the future for new or
enhanced regional indoor recreation and culture facilities.
4.5.
Regional Leisure Services Master Plan
The Town of Stony Plain, the City of Spruce Grove and the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre are
currently undertaking the development of a regional Leisure Services Master Plan. Although the
Plan will focus mainly on programs in the region, the relationship between indoor recreation and
culture facilities, how they are owned and how they are operated with have a major impact on
the regional service delivery model recommended in the Leisure Service Master Plan. For this
reason it is expected that strategic direction presented in this program focused Plan, once
completed, will be closely related to the findings and recommendations of the Recreation and
Culture Indoor Facility Strategy.
- 11 -
4.6.
4.6.1.
Other Initiatives Underway in the Tri-Municipal Region
Stony Plain Multicultural Centre
In 2007, recognizing that the current multicultural Heritage Centre made up of three facilities
(Museum, Oppertshauser House and P.E.R.C. School) were too small to sustain operational
requirements, the Stony Plain Heritage Agricultural Society commissioned a future Master Plan.
The architectural concept and Master Plan prepared by Avi Friedman Consultants Inc. was to use
the museum on one end and the school on the other as two poles between which a promenade
would be proposed. The interior street would pass through a series of functions including a civic
square for exhibition and festive gatherings; a contemporary Art Gallery, the Stony Plain public
library, store, restaurant, museum, education facility, performing arts centre and experimental
farm.
A cost for capital construction with all elements included was estimated in February of 2008 at
just over $59 Million (Architecture | Arndt Tkalcic Bengert).
The status of this project remains on hold at the present time, but reveals a facility alternative to
be considered in meeting the future cultural demands of the entire Region.
4.6.2.
Aerials Gymnastics
The Aerials Gymnastics Club, currently located in the Spruce Grove Industrial Park, provides
recreational and competitive gymnastics programs and training to regional residents, including
participants from Parkland County, Stony Plain and Spruce Grove. The group represents close to
1,700 annual registrants.
The current facility not only lacks the space to accommodate the growing demands of the Club, it
also faces termination of their current lease agreement in October of 2009. This has prompted
the Club to investigate alternatives for a new facility on a new site and a feasibility assessment is
now underway. This initiative may have impact to the Region should decision makers choose to
assist with land, funding or both.
4.6.3.
Stony Plain Exhibition Park
Stony Plain Exhibition Park represents an 18 acre park area in the northwest corner of Stony Plain.
It is the home of the Stony Plain Pioneer Museum and the Toby Kaziel Pavilion. Other than the
Museum, which operates as a heritage Museum attraction, the grounds and the Pavilion are
programmed in the spring, summer and fall for major events such as the Kinsmen Rodeo, the
Blueberry Bluegrass and Country Music Festival, Cowboy Poetry and smaller but important one
or two day events. From May to October, the Stony Plain Heritage Agricultural Society operates a
Farmer’s Market at the Pavilion on Fridays and Saturdays.
- 12 -
The Pioneer Museum is becoming increasingly popular for regional residents and tourists as the
Society continues to increase and improve upon its agricultural heritage collection, historic
buildings and hospitality services. The Society is planning to operate on a full year basis.
Central to this Strategy is a recent decision by the Town to transform Exhibition Park into a
complete public day-use park and event centre on a year-round basis. This includes a
comprehensive retrofit of the town owned Toby Kaziel Pavilion to allow social gatherings and
activities throughout the winter months.
This is an important development for the Tri-Municipal Region as it will expand the capacity of
facilities suited to host large indoor (and outdoor) social gatherings, special events and
programming. There will be parking capacity at the site for close to 500 vehicles and a Pavilion
capacity of around 1,000 people. The project is due for completion in spring of 2010.
4.6.4.
Agridome Society
In spring of 2005, individual volunteers and representations of twenty organizations who operate
within the Region and represent equestrian recreationalists, 4-H groups, business groups,
agricultural societies and youth groups formed the Agridome Society.
Their purpose was to undertake market research and prepare a feasibility/viability analysis
surrounding a regional agri-recreation facility to serve the Region. Ultimately, they would
develop and operate a facility and grounds designed to meet regional needs for broader public
events, spectator and special show needs, rodeos, equestrian events, festivals, large banquets,
indoor riding and camping.
Upon completion of the “Business Plan” the Society presented findings to the three Councils of
the Region seeking financial assistance and land (100 acre site) to begin the development
process. The estimated capital cost was in the order of $12 million (excluding land and servicing)
and the Business Plan identified that the facility could operate without the need for annual public
subsidy.
The Region’s elected officials applauded and encouraged the continued work of the Society,
which is currently inactive7, but remained reluctant to provide capital funding for land and
facilities at the time of presentation, referring decisions to await the outcomes of the TriMunicipal Region Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy which will ultimately outline
public priorities for future indoor recreation and culture facilities in the Area.
7
As of April, 2009
- 13 -
5.0 Needs Assessment
The following needs assessment has been developed to position the current state of indoor
recreation and culture facilities, how the region compares to other similar regions in the Province
of Alberta and, considering public input and trends in recreation and culture facility provision,
what future facility components should take priority when contemplating facility development in
the Tri-Municipal region.
5.1.
Population Analysis and Projections
The population of the Tri-Municipal Region totals an estimated 40,000+ residents with median
ages varying across the three municipalities8. The median age is 34.4, 36.8 and 40.2 years for
Spruce Grove, Stony Plain and Parkland County respectively. This compares with a provincial
median of 36.0 years.
As illustrated in Figure 1, the proportion of the population under 20 years within the TriMunicipal Region is 29.1%. The three municipalities are quite similar in this regard varying from
28.4% in Stony Plain to 29.4% in Spruce Grove. Provincially 26.4% of the population is younger
than 209. The region as a whole hosts less people 60 and over (13.7% of the population) than the
provincial average (14.8% of the population). There is however, a sizeable range among the three
municipalities with Stony Plain having 17.6% of its population 60 years and older compared with
14.4% of Parkland County and 12.7% of Spruce Grove.
Figure 3: Regional Demographic Comparison
Regional Demographic Comparison
(source: Statistics Canada, 2006)
12.0%
Parkland County
Town of Stony Plain
City of Spruce Grove
Regional Total
10.0%
8.0%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
8
85 years and over
80 to 84 years
75 to 79 years
70 to 74 years
65 to 69 years
60 to 64 years
55 to 59 years
50 to 54 years
45 to 49 years
40 to 44 years
35 to 39 years
30 to 34 years
25 to 29 years
20 to 24 years
15 to 19 years
10 to 14 years
5 to 9 years
0 to 4 years
0.0%
For demographics analysis, the entire population of Parkland County has been assessed as data
specific to the portion of the County included in the Tri-Municipal region is limited.
9
Statistics Canada, 2006.
- 14 -
The population of the Tri-Municipal Region was projected using three different growth rates.
Based on these growth projections (Figure 2), the population in 2024 could range from
approximately 51,000 to 70,000. The three different growth rates utilized were annual growth
rates of 1.5%, 2.5%, and 3.5%10.
Figure 4: Regional Population Projections
Population Projections for the Tri-Municipal Region
Low Growth (1.5%)
Medium Growth (2.5%)
High Growth (3.5%)
70,000
65,000
60,000
55,000
50,000
45,000
40,000
35,000
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
Clearly, planning must be able to sustain existing recreation and culture facilities as well as have
the capacity to meet projected growth in the region.
5.2.
Trends Analysis and Participation
Trends in the provision of community facilities include the delivery of spontaneous-use
recreational opportunities (as opposed to scheduled use), as well as the opportunity for all family
members to take part in different recreation opportunities simultaneously (i.e. the leisure mall
concept or “multiplex” facilities) at locations much like the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre. These
development ideologies are based on trend information indicating decreases in
structured/organized activities such as team sport and increases in spontaneous activity
participation such as walking/jogging and fitness/wellness activities. As well, an increasing
number of activity choices for all ages suggest there is a need to provide multi-use spaces that
accommodate as many different types of activities as possible.
Other activities that are showing increasing rates of participation include arts and culture
programming, attendance at fairs/festivals/events as a spectator, and low impact/therapeutic
recreation pursuits such as visiting leisure aquatics and hot pools, and horseback riding.
10
The low rate of 1.5% matches the annual population growth rate of Parkland County from 2001 to 2006 – the lowest
of the three municipalities. The 3.5% annual growth rate is the highest of the three municipalities and was the rate of
growth for Stony Plain from 2001 to 2006. The medium rate of 2.5% was chosen as a midpoint between the high and
low.
- 15 -
In terms of overall service delivery, a growing focus and reliance is being placed on partnerships
in development involving the public, private and non-profit sectors. These partnership
arrangements have obvious benefits in capital and operational cost savings; they also enable
increased service provision to a wide range of users. Additionally, they have become a catalyst in
attracting external funding (grants from other level of government).
The 2008 Alberta Recreation Survey11 identifies the top 10 recreational activities undertaken by
Alberta households:
1. Walking for pleasure,
2. Gardening,
3. Attending a fair or festival,
4. Attending a sporting event as a spectator,
5. Doing a craft or hobby,
6. Playing video games,
7. Attending a museum or gallery,
8. Bicycling, and,
9. Swimming (in pools).
Trends indicate that leisure facilities must cater to a number of different programs and activities:
•
Spontaneous use areas now must be considered as much a priority as dedicated user
group spaces.
•
Activities demanded will not only include traditional sports such as hockey, curling,
baseball and soccer, but also trail-based activities, arts and culture programming, low
impact physical activity such as walking, spectating and therapeutic pursuits.
5.2.1.
Economic Trends
While Alberta’s economy is expected to decline in 2009 by over 2%, it is expected to rebound in
2010 growing by 2.7% according to RBC12. Accompanying this, Alberta’s unemployment rate is
expected to reach 5.8% in 2009 a level last experienced in the late 1990s prior to the recent
economic boom13. Both international and inter-provincial migrations have been strong; however,
the inflow of temporary foreign workers is expected to slow in 2009. Interprovincial migration is
expected to remain largely unchanged (Alberta Finance and Enterprise).
The demand for indoor recreation and culture facilities will continue. Increased investment in
such amenities is possible, particularly if leaders recognize their ability to enhance quality of life
and expand Alberta’s value added economy14.
11
Alberta Tourism, Parks and Recreation. www.tpr.alberta.ca/recreation.ars/default.aspx
12
Financial Post, March 13 2009
13
2009 Economic Update. Alberta Finance and Enterprise.
14
Alberta Capital Plan, p 56
- 16 -
The economic significance of recreation and culture is on the rise. Recreational and cultural
pursuits already inject $2.239 billion into Alberta’s Gross Domestic Product and provide direct
employment of 22,000 full-time equivalent jobs. Privately-provided recreation and culture
experiences are likely growing faster than public ones, but both are growing; the demand for
facilities which remain primarily within the public sector is also on the rise. Growth is expected to
continue and even increase over the next decade. More community recreation and culture
facilities are needed to meet the expectations of a population which is placing increasing
importance on recreation and culture and their contribution to quality of life15.
Provincial government funding of parks, recreation and culture has declined more than 40% over
the past 15 years (1990-2005), leaving municipalities to spend roughly 2.5 times as much as the
province.
Alberta is seeing epidemic increases in the incidence of chronic and costly illnesses such as
obesity and diabetes even as evidence mounts that recreation and active living can significantly
ameliorate such conditions. Alberta’s health depends on enriched investment in prevention and
wellness services and opportunities for the fitness and wellness afforded by parks and open
spaces.16
Albertans enjoy high household income. With median income $5,000 higher than the Canadian
norm, individual households increased their recreation spending by 26% between 1997 and
2001. Heightened awareness of the importance of physical activity will continue to put pressure
on community parks and recreation facilities. Public sector recreation and parks must be vigilant
in identifying and responding to diverse recreation needs, including the needs of those who are
economically disadvantaged despite Alberta’s booming economy.17
The gap between haves and have-nots continues to grow. Across North America, people older
than 50 hold more than 50% of the wealth—this reality is softened in Alberta by young, largely
urban professionals and skilled workers. The proportion of households living under the Low
Income Cut-off (LICO) has gone down in some communities (e.g., Edmonton has gone from 21%
in 1995 to 16% in 2000). Yet many individuals face continuing financial pressure, and the shift of
wealth to the elderly continues. Seniors traditionally receive the deepest discounts for recreation
and culture services; it is equally important to respond to the needs of low-income younger
Albertans.
5.2.2.
Societal Trends
An Aging Society
While the average age of the resident Canadian population (average age of 40) is older than the
Alberta average (average age of 36), the provincial population is aging. Due to this factor as well
15
Alberta Capital Plan.
A Place to Grow, Alberta’s Rural Development Strategy, Page 3, February 2005
17
www.premier.alberta.ca/address, 2007
16
- 17 -
as overall population aging, the next twenty-year period will result in a greater number of middleaged and senior adults that will seek leisure lifestyle outlets that keep them healthy and involved.
This leads to a number of planning requirements including: more adult-oriented low-impact
sports such as indoor soccer; walking trails (inc. indoor tracks); low impact fitness/wellness
outlets; increased social activities; cultural/performing arts activities; and nature activities.
The Benefits of Recreation
“In Alberta… Recreation and Parks Matter” is a research document commissioned by the ARPA
(Alberta Recreation and Parks Association) to study public perception on the value of local
government recreation services and how it has changed between 1996 and 2007. The study
clearly indicates that the majority of Albertans (68%) feel that their respective communities
benefit a “great deal” from local government recreation and parks services.
Further, the study found the following:
•
47% of Albertans place leisure as a priority over work (up from 27% in 1996)
•
40% of Albertans have participated in a recreation or leisure activity that was sponsored by, or
took place in, parks or facilities managed by their local government
•
64% of Albertans would pay increased annual property taxes if improved parks and recreation
services were made available.
•
97% of Albertans feel that the community benefits “a great deal” or “somewhat” from local
government parks and recreation services
•
97% of Albertans feel that recreation participation is a major contributor to overall quality of
life
•
78% of Albertans feel that recreation participation will make people less reliant on the health
care system
•
97% of Albertans feel that playgrounds and play facilities are integral to children’s
development and welfare
•
71% of Albertans feel that recreation participation is a major factor in crime prevention
5.2.3.
Recreation and Culture Participation Trends
From Structured/Organized Participation to Unstructured/Spontaneous Pursuits
Statistics Canada, through the 2005 research document entitled “Sport Participation in Canada,
2005”, relates a number of key trends in sport participation occurring in the nation. In the period
between 1992 and 2005, participation rates in organized sport dropped from 45% to 28% of the
population. This drop was consistent across all age groups, but was less apparent in the
Maritime Provinces than in the west. Other key findings showed significantly-higher participation
rates in sport from Canadian-born residents as compared to immigrants; and higher sportparticipation rates amongst students than any other age demographic. The most popular sports
- 18 -
identified in the study included golf, ice hockey, swimming, soccer, basketball, baseball,
volleyball, skiing, and cycling. The study also related that there has been a drop in active
participation in sport, yet an increase in volunteerism in sport (i.e. as coaches, league
administrators, referees, etc).
It is clear that participation in structured activity, such as some traditional team sports, has
declined in the recent past. Citizens are demanding more flexibility in timing and activity choice,
moving away from structured team sports to spontaneous activities such as fitness/wellness,
leisure swimming, walking, and open gymnasiums for spontaneous activities. People are seeking
individualized, informal pursuits that can be done alone or in small groups, at flexible times, often
near or at home. This does not, however, eliminate the need for venues that accommodate
structured activities and the user groups that utilize them. Instead, this trend suggests that
planning for the general population is as important as planning for traditional structured-use
environments. Analyzing the issue further, if recreation budgets do not increase to accommodate
this expanded scope of spontaneous-use planning, it may be necessary for municipalities to
partner with dedicated-use team-sport organizations in the development and operations of
existing or new facilities in order to ensure optimal use of public funds.
Children’s Participation in Sports
In its Summer 2008 edition of Canadian Social Trends, Statistics Canada examines trends in
regular sports participation of children aged 5 to 14 from 1992 to 2005. In the article entitled,
“Kids’ sports”, participation in sports is described as having declined from 57% to 51%. Sports
participation is most prevalent among children from high-income households and lowest among
children from lower income households. Children of recent immigrants are less likely to
participate in sports than children of Canadian born parents (55%).
In 2005, 24% of children participated in sports if their parents were not involved in sports in any
way. If parents were involved, even just as spectators of amateur sports, children’s participation
rates more than doubled (62%). Family structure as well can influence the sports participation of
children, particularly among girls. Boys’ sports participation was almost the same for all family
types (ranging from 54% to 58%). In contrast, girls in lone-parent families (39%) are less likely to
be sport participants than girls from intact families (48%).
The top organized sports of 5 to 14 year olds in 2005 were:
•
Soccer (20% from 12% in 1992),
•
Swimming (12% from 17%),
•
Hockey (11% from 12%), and
•
Basketball (8% from 6%).
The Alberta Recreation Survey
The Alberta Recreation Survey is a research instrument developed by Alberta Community
Development to analyze recreation participation patterns of Albertans. The survey has been
- 19 -
conducted approximately every four years since 1981. The results of the latest survey, the 2008
Alberta Recreation Survey, were released in 2009 and provide interesting insight as to recreation
and leisure participation trends throughout the Province.
Increasing Popularity of the Internet and Video Games
Access to the Internet and the prevalence of video games in the home has risen sharply, showing
a rise in participation ranking from 13th in 1981 to 6th in 2008. Improved technology and
affordability are the significant reasons for this increase in popularity. It is estimated that use will
continue to grow.
Notable Participation Rates Decreasing
The 2008 Alberta Recreation Survey provides some insight as to changing levels of participation
in the Province of Alberta over the past 20 years. The most notable decreases since 1988 include
(percent of households claiming participation):
•
Attending educational courses (45% in 1988 to 23% in 2008),
•
Fishing (50% to 28%),
•
Softball / baseball (34% to 12%),
•
Ice skating (not hockey) (46% to 23%),
•
Attending live theatre (65% to 45%), and
•
Dancing (47% to 27%).
Declines in participation do not necessarily mean that provision for an activity should be
discontinued. For example, while the number of households attending live theatre has declined,
the participation levels remain relatively high18.
While some of the decreases are a result of an actual decrease in interest in those activities, some
of the reduction is a result of access to a greater variety of activities, hence more choices
available.
As well, Albertans felt that they had less time available and switched to those activities which
were more time-efficient or easier to fit into already busy schedules, or they stopped participating
in those activities which required more structured environments, such as court sports, team
sports, or special playing areas.
Some activities (e.g. tennis, fishing, hunting) may have lost their mass appeal with only the most
committed individuals continuing to participate.
18
In terms of theatre attendance, the participation rates appear to be cyclical with an increase in
participation anticipated based on the historical trends noted in the Alberta Recreation Survey.
- 20 -
Notable Participation Rates Increasing
Increases in household participation were noted as well in a number of activities from 1988 to
2008. These included:
•
Playing video games (37% in 1988 to 54% in 2008),
•
Attending a fair or festival (50% to 62%),
•
Aerobics/fitness (30% to 45%),
•
Weightlifting/body building (27% to 34%), and
•
Day hiking (31% to 38%).
Favorite Activities in 2008
The 2008 Alberta Recreation Survey identified the most frequently mentioned favorite recreation
activities as follows:
•
Walking
•
Swimming
•
Reading
•
•
Golf
•
Hiking
•
Bicycling
Camping
The respondents indicated the following reasons for their participation:
•
For pleasure
•
For a challenge
•
•
To relax
•
To be with friends
For physical health or
exercise
As well, 41 % of respondents identified a desire to take up a new activity. It is surmised that
participation in these activities will be on the rise as demands increase.
•
Gym/fitness
•
Dancing
•
Curling
•
Swimming
•
Canoeing/kayaking
•
Yoga
The high level of interest in walking and cycling for leisure is also supported through research
conducted by the Canadian Fitness and Lifestyle Research Institute (Local Opportunities for
Physical Activity: Trends from 1999 to 2004. 2004). One out of five adults in Alberta reported
bicycling and walking during the study period. This trend has not changed since 1998/99.
Women were more likely to cite walking, and men were more likely to cite bicycling, with
bicycling cited less often in older age groups.
Barriers to Participation
There are a number of issues that can be categorized as barriers to participation in recreation
programs. These include: economic barriers, time commitments, demographics, perceived
ability, and family income.
- 21 -
Information from the Alberta Recreation Survey 2008 investigated 15 barriers to participation.
The top six barriers were:
1) Economic barriers (entrance or registration fees) indicate the potential impact of these
increasing costs on participation. There is a growing trend of increasing registration fees
by municipal recreation departments as a form of revenue generation,
2) Time commitments associated with work, other activities, and family is a possible
reflection on the baby-boom generation having their own families,
3) The cost for equipment, material and supplies, just to participate in the activity (e.g.
hockey equipment) is the most significant barrier,
4) There is a growing importance of the quality of facility maintenance (aging infrastructure)
as a limitation on the quality of participation,
5) Recreation facilities or areas are overcrowded, and
6) No opportunity near their home/cost of transportation.
5.3.
Public Engagement
Public engagement for this Master Plan included a household survey, a student survey, a
stakeholder group survey, interviews with stakeholder group representatives, a public open
house, and an intercept survey with patrons of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre. The following
sections present the key findings of each element of the public engagement process. The detailed
findings, along with a description of the methodologies utilized, can be found in the Technical
Appendix19.
Contacts
Reponses
Response
Rate
Regional
Representation
Household survey: Spruce Grove
4,000
726
18%
2,084
Household survey: Stony Plain
4,000
757
19%
2,007
Household survey: Parkland County
4,000
714
18%
2,095
Intercept survey: TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre
222
222
100%
222
Stakeholder group interviews
41
18
44%
2,500+
Stakeholder group survey
270
40
15%
6,000+
Student survey
741
741
100%
741
Public input open houses (4)
20+
~10
n/a
20+
13,294+
3,228
n/a
15,669+
Method
Total
19
The Technical Appendix contains the separate reports composed for each element of the
consultation process.
- 22 -
The following sections outline the salient features of each of the public engagement techniques
used. For more detailed consultation results, please refer to the technical appendices.
5.3.1.
Household survey
Key findings from the household survey included:
•
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre (73%) and the Horizon Stage (50%) were utilized by the
greatest proportion of survey respondents.
•
Priorities for indoor recreation and culture facility development are:
•
Fitness/wellness facilities (49%),
•
Walking/jogging track (39%),
•
Leisure swimming pools (36%),
•
Leisure ice surfaces (27%), and
•
Indoor climbing wall (25%).
•
Preferences for facility amenities included transportation services (58%) and food &
beverage services (51%).
•
Considering a list of identified indoor recreation and cultural facility priorities, indoor
fitness/wellness facilities (66%) and indoor swimming pools – leisure and program use
(62%) received the greatest support from respondents.
•
Less than half (46%) of respondents had a location preference for any future regionally
funded indoor recreation and cultural facility. Of this group with a preference,
approximately two-thirds (63%) identified Stony Plain as their preferred location. Location
preferences were correlated with the respondents’ residence.
•
Respondents generally viewed increased recreation and culture opportunities (65%) and
improved community health (61%) as the predominant benefits that would be accrued
with a new facility in the community. Approximately three-quarters (74%) of respondents
were concerned with the cost/increase in taxes that may come about with the
development of a new facility.
•
In terms of recuperating costs, grants (81%) and sponsorship (74%) were considered a
good source to fund the building costs. Sponsorships (64%) and user fees (61%) were
identified by respondents as the appropriate source to recuperate the operating costs of a
new facility.
•
Fifty-four percent (54%) of respondents indicated their households could not support any
increase in annual property tax to ensure that community needs for regional recreation
and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal Region are better met. One-third (33%) indicated
they could afford up to a $100 increase.
- 23 -
5.3.2.
Student Survey
Key findings from the student survey include:
•
94% of respondents said they were physically active (62%) or somewhat active (32%).
•
Approximately half (51%) are physically active at least four times per week.
•
Homework (60%) and transportation issues (41%) were the most commonly cited barriers
to participation in physical activity.
•
Preferences for indoor facility components included:
•
Swimming pools (72%),
•
Indoor climbing wall (67%), and
•
Gymnasium type spaces (47%).
5.3.3.
Stakeholder Group Survey
Key findings from the stakeholder group survey include:
•
•
The most utilized facility in the region by respondent groups is the TransAlta Tri Leisure
Centre (50%). The other facilities most often mentioned included:
•
The Horizon Stage in Spruce Grove (23%),
•
Spruce Grove Arena (20%), and
•
Stony Plain Multicultural Centre (20%).
The priorities for indoor recreation and culture facility components were:
•
Fitness/wellness facilities (48%),
•
Community gathering spaces (38%),
•
Gymnasium type spaces (30%),
•
Community meeting rooms (28%), and
•
A walking/jogging track (28%).
•
Priorities for facility amenities were transportation services (53%), community group
storage space (53%), and food and beverage services (50%).
•
Considering a list of identified priorities, the most support was expressed for:
•
Indoor gymnasium facilities (55%),
•
Large (500+ seats) social/banquet facilities (53%),
•
Indoor child-play areas (50%), and
- 24 -
•
Indoor fitness/wellness facilities (50%).
•
The primary benefit that could be accrued with any new indoor recreation and culture
facility was seen to be the increase in recreation and culture opportunities (85%). The
most oft cited concern with any new facility was cost (50%).
•
Government grants (90%) and sponsorship (90%) were viewed as the primary sources of
capital funding for a new facility.
•
User fees (100%) were considered a primary revenue source to pay operating costs.
Sponsorship (75%) was also seen as important.
•
Over half (60%) of respondents were willing to pay up to 10% more in user or facility fees
to support new facility development. Over one-quarter (28%) of respondents were
unwilling to support any increase.
5.3.4.
Stakeholder Group Interviews
Key findings from the stakeholder group interviews are grouped into two categories:
•
Facility Needs, and
•
Organizational Challenges.
Facility Needs
There were a number of facility needs expressed by those interviewed that could be addressed in
a manner benefiting more than a single organization. These needs included:
•
Large Event Space. Organizations indicated that there is a need for large event space in the
region. Uses for this kind of facility space include large banquets, conferences, and
performances.
•
Meeting Rooms. Some groups expressed a need for additional meeting spaces for
community organizations to use.
•
Office Space. The need for office space for community organizations was identified during
the interviews.
•
Storage. A number of groups expressed their need for storage. They stated that they are
unable to properly house the equipment and material required to conduct their activities.
•
Additional Gymnasium Space. A few of the sport groups suggested there is a need for
additional gymnasium space. They indicated that the growth of their groups have been
limited due to the availability of gym space.
- 25 -
Organizational Challenges
During the interviews, the community groups spoke about the challenges encountered while
attempting to achieve their objectives. The most commonly cited challenge focused on space
limitations for program activities. Other challenges identified included:
•
Recruiting and attracting program participants/athletes and coaches.
•
Attracting and retaining sufficient volunteers.
•
Publicizing and communicating with the public about the group – its purpose, activities
and programs offered.
•
Financial challenges were identified as being significant by a number of groups. Some
specifically spoke about the costs of securing space.
5.3.5.
Public Input Open House Results
Thirty-two feedback forms were completed as a result of the four open houses convened in June
2008.
The preferences of attendees in terms of spontaneous use recreation, arts, and culture facility
components included:
•
Indoor gymnastics facility,
•
Fitness/wellness facility,
•
Community gathering space,
•
Gymnasium-type space, and
•
Indoor climbing wall.
The preferences of attendees in terms of scheduled use recreation, arts, and culture facility
components included:
•
Gymnasium-type space,
•
Indoor gymnastics facility,
•
Social banquet space,
•
Walking/jogging/running track,
•
Indoor climbing wall, and
•
Community gathering spaces.
In terms of amenities that people felt should be included in future facility development, public
transportation services was the top preference. Other amenities included:
- 26 -
•
Major spectator seating; and
•
Community-group storage space.
5.3.6.
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Intercept Survey
Key findings from the intercept survey include:
•
The typical Centre visit lasts greater than one hour.
•
41% of respondents’ visits are between 61 to 90 minutes.
•
29% of visits are more than 90 minutes.
•
Over half (55%) of respondents visit the Centre at least 3 times per week.
•
Visitation occurs throughout the day with the low period between 8:00 and 9:00 a.m.
(Only 5% of respondents said they typically visit the Centre during that hour.)
•
•
•
Peak visitation time is from 9:00 a.m. to noon with 25% of respondents indicating this
was their typical time to visit the Centre.
•
After 6:00 p.m. was the typical visitation time for 24% of respondents.
Spontaneous use areas with highest visitation rates were:
•
Fitness/wellness area – 55% of respondents stated a visit includes this area
•
Hot tub – 51%
•
Leisure pool – 49%
•
Walking track – 44%
•
Lap pool – 42%
At the time they were surveyed, 30% of respondents described the area they were in as
“too busy”.
•
“too busy” is defined as having to wait for equipment (42% of respondents) or unable
to move around freely (30%).
•
44% of respondents do not have the option of changing the time they visit the Centre to
avoid times that are “too busy”.
•
In their previous 5 visits, 40% said the area has never been “too busy”. However 37% said
it had been “too busy” 2 or more times out of their last 5 visits.
•
25% of respondents said the Centre becomes busy enough for them to consider going
elsewhere.
•
The most positive comments made by respondents about the Centre were reserved for the
staff. Almost one-quarter (22%) of respondents commented on the helpful, positive, and
competent staff.
- 27 -
5.4.
Comparative Analysis
The following chart provides insight as to how the Tri-Municipal Region provides indoor recreation and culture facilities in
comparison to similar regions across the Province. Facility sizes and utilization were not taken into consideration.
Tri-Municipal Indoor Recreation Facility Inventory/Provincial Comparison
3
3
2
42
18
1
2
1
1
23
19
0
0
Spectator Arenas (2000+)
Indoor Arts and Crafts
Studios
1
5
27
1
0
2
0
31,730
22
0
0
0
0
5
2
4
1
44,395
42
1
0
1
0
3
2
3
6
2
45,747
46
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
26,000
19
0
0
0
0
Spectator Arenas
(2000+)
Indoor Program /
Combatives Rooms
13
40,000
Raquet Courts
1
105,632
28,175
2
Raquet Courts
4
2
18%
20%
Indoor Climbing Walls
(Adult)
2
1
82%
80%
1
4
(Adult)
3
1
Sturgeon Region (inc. Ft Sk)
(Child)
2
19
4
2
(Child)
3
10
School Gymnasiums
(Public Access)
1
2
Libraries (ft²)
10
3
2
Libraries (ft²) - Square
feet per person
3
3
2
2
4
2
Curling Rinks
2
Curling Rinks
2
1
Performing Arts Theatre
Space
1
2
Performing Arts Theatre
Space
1
1
Indoor Child Play Space
Indoor Leisure Pools
2
22
Indoor Child Play Space
Indoor Arts and Crafts
Studios
23
35
Indoor Leisure Pools
Indoor Program /
Combatives Rooms
47
1
Indoor 50m Pools
11
1
2
Indoor Program Pools
97,468
4
Indoor Gymnasium
26%
2
Dedicated Public Social
Banquet Spaces 500+
(non arena / fh)
74%
Social Banquet Spaces
<500
Strathcona Region (inc. Ft Sk)
Community Meeting
Rooms
7
Indoor Track
9
Indoor Fitness / Wellness
47,818
53,460
Indoor Field House
27%
37%
Indoor Leisure Ice
Arenas/Indoor Ice
Surfaces
73%
63%
% Rural
Leduc Region
Okotoks/High River Region
% Urban
Total Population
Population*
Population Ratio
School Gymnasiums
(Public Access)
Indoor Program Pools
Indoor Gymnasium
Dedicated Public Social
Banquet Spaces 500+
(non arena / fh)
Social Banquet Spaces
<500
Community Meeting
Rooms
27%
47,818
5,313
23,909 11,955 47,818
1,017
2,079
23,909
47,818 47,818 23,909 11,955 23,909 11,955 47,818
0.59
1,771
47,818
23,909
63%
74%
82%
37%
26%
18%
53,460
97,468
105,632
7,637
26,730 53,460
8,861 48,734 32,489 32,489 48,734
8,126 105,632 35,211 35,211 52,816
1,527
9,747
2,515
2,430
5,130
5,868
53,460 26,730
48,734 32,489
52,816 35,211
53,460 26,730 26,730
26,730 13,365 26,730
9,747 97,468 32,489 19,494 48,734 24,367 97,468
52,816 26,408 35,211 52,816 35,211 17,605 52,816
0.59
0.46
0.43
2,430
2,321
2,296
97,468
97,468
105,632 105,632
80%
20%
40,000
8,000
40,000 20,000 40,000 40,000
1,739
2,105
40,000 40,000
20,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 20,000 40,000
0.65
2,105
Average
74%
26%
68,876
7,587
64,789 27,902 29,277 48,566
3,309
3,523
36,768 47,685 31,668 31,066 34,917 17,458 52,966
0.54
2,185
72,643
-
-
-
-
?
Deficit
-
-
-
1
-
Indoor 50m Pools
Arenas/Indoor Ice
Surfaces
73%
Okotoks/High River Region
Strathcona Region (inc. Ft Sk)
Sturgeon Region (inc. Ft Sk)
Indoor Track
Total Population
Leduc Region
Indoor Fitness /
Wellness
% Rural
Indoor Field House
% Urban
Indoor Leisure Ice
Population*
48,753 31,668
?
-
1 (?)
?
-
-
1 (?)
1 (?)
1 (?)
1 (?)
-
75,670 105,632
?
?
?
The Leduc Region includes the County of Leduc, the City of Leduc, Thorsby, Devon, Calmar, Beaumont, and New Sarepta.
The Okotoks/High River Region includes Okotoks, High River, Turner Valley, Black Diamond, Nanton, and the M.D. of
Foothills No. 31. The Sturgeon Region includes Sturgeon County, St. Albert, and Fort Saskatchewan. The Strathcona Region
includes Strathcona County (including Sherwood Park), and Fort Saskatchewan.
- 28 -
As can be seen, the Tri-Municipal Region provides a large array of recreation and culture facilities.
The areas in which the Region offers facilities to its residents in better proportions than does the
average of the other “comparable” communities includes:
•
Indoor leisure ice,
•
Indoor field house,
•
Indoor track,
•
Community meeting rooms,
•
Indoor gymnasium,
•
Indoor program/combative rooms, and
•
Gymnastics facilities.
It should be noted that for some of the facilities noted above, some of the compared
communities do not offer that amenity. For example, two communities do not have leisure ice,
one does not have an indoor field house, and one does not have an indoor gymnasium.
The areas where the Region rates lower than the average of the other communities includes:
•
Fitness/wellness,
•
Indoor program pools,
•
Indoor leisure pools,
•
Indoor child-play space,
•
Performing arts theatre space,
•
Curling rinks, and
•
Library space.
It is important to note that one community does not have any indoor child-play space. Also of
note is that the Tri-Municipal Region does not have an indoor climbing wall for children while
two other regions do. Nor does the Region have any racquet courts compared with three of the
other communities which do. Finally, while the Sturgeon region has a 2,000+ spectator arena,
the Tri-Municipal Region does not.
Although the above-noted information provides some insight as to how the Region compares to
other similar regions, it is important to note that all communities are unique and that comparative
provision ratios are only one source of information that can be utilized to determine community
needs for recreation and culture facilities.
- 29 -
5.5.
Inventory and Assessment of Indoor Facilities
The following list of recreation and culture facilities underwent a preliminary assessment.
Parkland County
• Entwistle Outdoor Pool
• Parkland Village Community
Centre
• Rosenthal Hall
• Garden Valley Community
Centre
• Muir Lake Community Hall
Spruce Grove
•
•
•
•
•
•
Horizon Stage
Agrena
Trans-Alta Tri Leisure Centre
Log Cabin
Elks Hall
Spruce Grove Art Gallery /
Library
Stony Plain
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Outdoor Pool
Stony Plain Multicultural Centre
Glenn Hall Centennial Arena
Community Centre
Toby Kaziel Pavilion
Pioneer Museum Building
Stony Plain Golf Course
Stony Plain Public Library
The assessments included architectural and structural elements specifically looking at the site,
building envelope, interior finishes, mechanical systems, and electrical systems. Each element
was assigned a rating from 1 (critical) to 6 (excellent).
In addition, estimates were provided to indicate the cost to make the upgrades. It is important to
note that the scope of the assessment was to examine the existing facility only and not to
consider any service or programming issues. For example, if a facility is deemed too small to
properly deliver a program, but is in excellent physical condition, then there will be no cost
estimates associated with it.
In total the estimated cost to upgrade all facilities is $3.1 M. No costs were associated with the
Horizon Stage, the Agrena, Toby Kaziel Pavilion20 or the Stony Plain Public Library. Facilities with
sizeable estimated upgrade costs included:
•
Stony Plain Community Centre ($805,000)
•
•
•
Rosenthal Hall ($685,000)
•
•
•
•
Building envelope – rated marginal to acceptable ($450,000)
Site – rated marginal ($75,000)
Walls – rated poor ($300,000)
Interior finishes – rated marginal to acceptable ($145,000)
Site – rated marginal ($150,000)
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre ($435,000)
•
•
Mechanical – rated acceptable ($150,000)
Site – rated acceptable ($100,000)
20
As it is part of the Exhibition Park redevelopment project, costs associated with this facility have
been considered outside the scope of this assessment. The estimated costs of upgrading
enhancing this facility through the project are between $2.3-$3.0M and are expected to begin in
2009.
- 30 -
5.6.
Usage of Indoor Recreation and Culture Facilities
Utilization figures and capacity rates were determined considering bookings and visitation
numbers. However for some facilities this information was not available making it difficult to
reach a conclusion about facility utilization. In some instances, anecdotal information from facility
staff was considered. The following facilities are at, or nearing, capacity.
•
•
Spontaneous use areas at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre:
•
129,721 fitness/wellness centre visits in 2007 (average of 10,810 per month)
•
28,704 walking track visits in 2007 (average of 2,392 per month)
•
319,000 aquatics centre visits in 2007 (average of 26,583 per month)
•
30,052 gymnasium visits in 2007 (average of 2,504 per month)
•
51,610 child-play space visits in 2007 (average of 4,301 per month)
Indoor fields (prime time availability):
•
•
•
Arenas/ice surfaces (prime time availability):
•
Spruce Grove Agrena East Arena – 87% capacity
•
Spruce Grove Agrena Grant Fuhr Arena – 85% capacity
•
Glenn Hall Centennial Arena (Stony Plain) – 94% capacity
•
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre ice arenas (2) – 94% capacity
Outdoor pools:
•
•
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre indoor fields (2) – 65% capacity
Stony Plain – approximately one-third of available time is structured program time,
while the other two-thirds is scheduled for spontaneous public use (spontaneous use is
highly subscribed).
Library facilities:
•
Spruce Grove – library staff commented that the space is adequate.
•
Stony Plain – staff commented that the facility is undersized for the public demand that
exists.
- 31 -
5.7.
Needs Assessment Summary
Facility priorities were determined based upon the information presented in this report. The
following table identifies the priorities, in order of importance. Each facility component is
accompanied by a score which quantifies its relative ranking. The top five facility priorities
include:
1. Fitness/wellness,
2. Gymnasium space,
3. Child-play space,
4. Community meeting rooms, and
5. Social banquet spaces to accommodate 500 or more people.
Please refer to the table below for the complete ranking of all facility components.
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility Component
Fitness/Wellness
Gymnasium
Child-play Space
Leisure Pools
Climbing Wall
Arenas/Ice Surfaces
Track
Program Pools
Library Space
Field House
School Gymnasiums
Art Display Spaces
Museum Spaces
Outdoor Pools
Spectator Ice Arena
Leisure Ice
Curling Rinks
50m Pools
- 32 -
Total Score
34.5
33.0
31.5
30.0
30.0
28.5
27.0
27.0
27.0
27.0
25.5
25.5
19.5
19.5
19.5
18.0
18.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
15.0
13.5
12.0
12.0
The large table/matrix presented on the following page provides a summary of the information
compiled and presented throughout this report. Four of the last five columns in the table
represent the broad ranking of each facility element by the members of the Steering Committee.
RCS (RC Strategies) along with Spruce (Spruce Grove), Stony (Stony Plain), and Parkland
(Parkland County) independently reviewed the information compiled for each facility component
and determined whether that information suggested the component was a low, medium, or high
priority. For example, RCS, Spruce, and Stony each interpreted the information and concluded
that a fitness/wellness component is a high priority while Parkland’s interpretation led it to
conclude this facility component was a medium/high priority.
The final column in the table synthesizes the ratings from the Steering Committee members into
a single rating. The numerical scores were determined by assigning 3 points for a low rating, 6
points for a medium rating, and 9 points for a high rating.
- 33 -
Provision
Based Deficit
Now
Proj. Pop.
Provision Deficit
2015
Usage Analysis
Trends Based
Priorities (high /
med / low)
Household Survey (Regional
Perspective)
Arenas/Ice Surfaces
-
1
85% - 94% PT Capacity
(2007)
Med
53% support
Leisure Ice
-
-
n/a
-
Low
#4 (27%)
Field House
-
-
65% PT Capacity
#8
*used by 15% of spont visitors
-
-
High
#12 (16%)
Fitness / Wellness
1
2
Track
-
1 (?)
129,721 visits (2007)
*Intercept survey
28,704 visits (2007)
*Intercept survey
#1
#3
?
1 (?)
-
High
?
1 (?)
-
High
-
-
14% - 78% Capacity
-
-
1 (?)
-
-
n/a
-
-
1 (?)
?
?
n/a
-
-
1 (?)
Gymnasium
-
1 (?)
30,052 visits (2007)
*Intercept survey
#6
?
1 (?)
-
High
#15 (12%)
46% support
1 (?)
1
319,000 visits (2007)
*Intercept survey
#4
*lap pool
?
1 (?)
-
Med
#20 (6%)
50m Pools
-
?
n/a
n/a
-
-
-
Low
Program / Combatives Rooms
-
-
n/a
#7
-
-
-
High
-
1(?)
3,600 visits (2007)
-
-
-
Leisure Pools
1 (?)
1
319,000 visits (2007)
*Intercept survey
?
1 (?)
-
High
#3 (36%)
62% support
#11
Child-play Space
1 (?)
2
?
-
-
High
#6 (24%)
52% support
#7
1 (?)
2 (?)
-
?
-
-
Med
#8 (18%)
47% support
Curling Rinks
1 (?)
2 (?)
n/a
-
-
-
-
Low
#14 (13%)
Spectator Ice Arena
?
?
n/a
-
-
-
-
Med
Library Space
-
More Space (?)
Spruce – Under
Capacity
Stony – Over Capacity
-
Stony (?)
-
-
Med
-
-
n/a
-
-
1 (?)
-
Low
Outdoor Pools
-
-
2,400 visits – Entwistle
90% Capacity - Stony
-
1 (?) – Stony
-
School Gymnasiums
-
1
n/a
-
-
1 (?)
-
Med
#15 (12%)
1 (?)
1 (?)
n/a
-
-
1
-
Med
#5 (25%)
39% support
Museum Spaces
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Med
Art Display Spaces
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Program Pools
Climbing Wall
51,610 visits (2007)
*Intercept survey
80% PT Capacity
1,195 hrs and 10,280
visits in 2007)
Intercept Survey Findings
*Ranking based on utilization
#10
#9
#2
*including hot tub
#5
Usage Based
Deficit
Input Public Open
House Results
Preliminary
1 (?)
-
-
-
-
Facility
Assessments
Group Survey and
Interviews
Student Survey
RCS
Spruce
Stony
Parkland
#4 (40%)
Med
Med
High
Med
Low
Low
Med
Low
Med/
Low
Med
(19.5)
High/Me
d
Med/
Low
High
(34.5)
Med
(25.5)
High/
Med
(30)
Low
(15)
Med
(27)
Low
(15)
#9
*interview
priority
#5 (39%)
Med
Med
Low
#1
#6 (30%)
High
High
High
#5
#7 (29%)
High
High
Low
High
Med
High
Med
Med
Low
Low
Low
High
Med
High
Med
High/
Med
(30)
High
High
Med
High
High
(33)
Low
Med
Med
Med/
Low
Med
(19.5)
n/a
Low
Low
n/a
Low
(12)
Med
High
Med
Med/
Low
Med
(25.5)
Low
Med
Low
Med
High
High
Med
Med/
Low
High
High
Med
High/Me
d
High
Med
Med
Med
Low
Low
Low
Low
*interview
priority
Low
Low
Med
Low
#7 (21%)
#10
Low/
Med
Med
Med
Low
#10 (17%)
#6
Med
High
High
Low
Low
Med
Low
Low
Low
Med
Low
Med
High
High
Med
Low
#16 (9%)
Low
Med
Low
Low
Med
#17 (8%)
Low
Med
Low
Med
-
Med
#18 (8%)
Low/
Med
Low
Low
Low
-
Low
-
Low
Low
Med
Low
Med
-
Low
Med
#1 (49%)
66% support
#2 (39%)
48% support
#9 (18%)
*”Community Spaces”
#11 (16%)
*”Social banquet spaces”
#19 (8%)
*”Community meeting rooms”
32% support
#13 (15%)
#4
*interview
priority
#2
*”Community
#8
*interview
priority
#3
*interview
priority
#4
*interview
priority
#3 (49%)
#8 (24%)
Med
#1 (72%)
#9 (22%)
Med
- 34 -
Total
#2 (65%)
#10 (19%)
Med/
Low
(15)
High/
Med
(28.5)
High
(31.5)
Med
(27)
Low
(12)
Low
(15)
Med
(19.5)
High
(27)
Low
(15)
Med/
Low
(18)
High
(27)
Low
(15)
Med/
Low
(18)
Low
(13.5)
Low (15)
It is important when developing a strategy or an approach to deal with the identified priorities, to
fully consider the perspectives of residents of the Tri-Municipal Region. Their thoughts dealing
with the financing of any new indoor recreation and cultural facilities, as well as its location are
particularly important. The following statements can be made based upon input received
throughout the needs assessment process.
Willingness to Pay
Just over half of household survey respondents were unwilling to see an increase in their annual
property taxes to support the development of any new facilities. While one-third of those
surveyed did suggest they could afford an increase in their annual property taxes, they identified a
ceiling of $100.
Capital Financing Sources
There are significant costs associated with the construction and operation of any facility. Over
three-quarters of household survey respondents suggested that grants should be used to finance
the construction of new facilities, while approximately three-quarters of those surveyed suggested
capital costs could be financed through sponsorships and donations. Approximately one-third of
those surveyed did suggest that property taxes could play some role when paying for the
construction of any new indoor recreation and cultural facilities.
New Facility Location
Less than half of household survey respondents identified a preference for the siting of any new
facility. Approximately two-thirds of those with a preference suggested Stony Plain. Perhaps not
surprisingly, a large majority of Stony Plain residents who suggested location was important
indicated Stony Plain was their preferred location. Almost three-quarters of Parkland County
respondents agreed that Stony Plain should be the site of future facility development, while
almost half of Spruce Grove respondents indicated that Spruce Grove was their location
preference for a new facility.
- 35 -
6.0 Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy
The following recreation and culture indoor facility strategy is meant to provide guidance for the
Tri-Municipal Region decision-makers when contemplating future recreation and culture indoor
facility provision. The scope includes the ownership and operations of existing facilities as well
as the potential development of new facilities. The strategy logically progresses from an overview
of the ideal facility development process to a regional facility classification system and a
discussion on a regional approach to facility provision. In terms of potential new facility
development, the strategy addresses issues dealing with the acquisition of land for future facility
development, the potential future expansion of existing facilities and options for meeting the
prioritized facility needs of the tri-municipal region. It is important to note that this strategy will
ultimately lead to a more detailed level of feasibility planning prior to any actual facility
development (expansion of existing or new) in the Tri-municipal Region.
6.1.
Vision and Goals
The Vision Statement for the Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy has been based upon
the needs assessment findings, existing municipal strategic documentation and the overall intent
of this recreation and culture indoor facility strategy. The vision statement has been developed to
reflect indoor recreation and culture facilities in the year 2015.
sources are explored in building, operating and maintaining publicly-funded recreation
- 36 -
The following sections build upon these goals in ultimately achieving the Strategy Vision. Each of
the elements discussed hereafter will aid regional decision-makers in making diligent and
responsible decisions for the future provision of indoor recreation and culture facilities
throughout the Tri-Municipal region.
6.2.
The Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Development Process
Municipalities and other public agencies have a responsibility to relate decision-making regarding
the disposition of public funds to sound, diligent protocol and process. This means that all
decisions with implications for public generated funds (namely, through taxes) should be made
based on sound research, public engagement and with the most up-to-date, pertinent information
as possible.
More specifically, with regards to the development of public indoor recreation and culture
facilities, the ideal public decision making process has a number of steps outlined as follows:
- 37 -
Figure 5: The Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Development Process
- 38 -
The process outlined above can take between 18 and 30 months depending on the ability for
decision-making to occur in a timely fashion and the propensity of the general public in engaging
in constructive feedback.
No major public investments in indoor recreation and culture facility infrastructure should occur
without undertaking market feasibility analysis and business planning. This applies not only to
initiatives forwarded by the municipality, but also to those projects led by not-for-profit groups
and associations wherein public funds are required for the capital and/or ongoing operations of
facilities.
The market feasibility and business-planning process typically pre-empts decisions on investment
and sourcing of capital well in advance of development – often up to two years prior. As such,
timing for major development initiatives could take between two and four years in the making,
recognizing the need for: public engagement, concept planning, detailed planning, tendering and
construction.
The following discussion relates to technical requirements for municipalities to engage in
feasibility analysis and for the justification of public funding support for recreation and culture
resource delivery.
Guidelines for undertaking market feasibility and business planning:
a)
There must be public engagement in the planning process.
b)
A market assessment for component service delivery functions must be completed.
c)
A thorough and transparent site/locational analysis must be completed.
d)
There must be a biophysical/environmental impact statement.
e)
There must be a concept development plan including infrastructure planning, costs and
impacts of ongoing operations.
f)
The project must conform to the broader regional/municipal strategic planning
g)
Business planning outlining capital partners, operating partners, sources of capital,
capital amortization and projection of operating costs must be completed.
- 39 -
6.2.1.
Feasibility Planning Triggers
The following “triggers” outline when regional municipalities should undertake (or facilitate in the
case of a non-profit-based project) feasibility analysis and business planning.
Market feasibility analysis and business planning could occur when one or more of the following
criteria are met:
a) Facility spaces currently being offered approach 90% to 100% utilization on a sustained
basis.
b) Facility or facility spaces currently being used have less than 25% remaining lifecycle as a
functional resource (as determined by ongoing lifecycle planning).
c) Current demands and future demands as impacted through expression of needs market
growth can be proven.
d) The facility in question and program services proposed provide equal access for all
residents as a public service.
e) Facility type and function conform to core recreation service functions of the regional
municipalities or new functional areas as contained within the broader strategic planning.
f) Facility type and function are not currently and adequately provided through other
agencies or private sector services.
g) Operational or capital partners of any development proposed are established as registered
societies and collectively represent sufficient membership or market members to sustain
use of the development for the life of the development (typically set at 40 years for public
buildings).
h) Proposed public investment is contained on publicly-owned or long-term lease lands
(leases beyond 50 years).
i) The external volunteer and/or non-profit group leading a facility development initiative has,
or has access to, significant capital and/or operating resources.
- 40 -
6.2.2.
Funding Framework
The following funding opportunity spectrum is presented to guide future municipal expenditure
on parks and facility development. In a nutshell, the spectrum explains that facilities accessible
by the entire community and that are within the regional municipal base level of service (such as
walking trails, playgrounds, etc) should be funded solely through public taxes. As parks and
facilities become more specialized and less accessible by the general public (i.e. major sports
field facilities, ice arenas, etc) funding should come from a combination of public taxes, user fees
and private/non-profit investment.
Figure 6: Public Investment Focus
- 41 -
6.3.
An Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Classification System
Indoor recreation and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal region range in size and use from
social community halls to major multi-use recreation complexes much like the TransAlta Tri
Leisure Centre.
The following proposed classification system for indoor recreation and culture facility service
delivery has been developed to help understand and manage indoor Regional recreation and
culture facilities both now and in the future. The classification system has been developed to
reflect both Regional and Local use facilities in the Tri-Municipal area. Those facilities considered
local remain the responsibility of the local municipality or non-profit group and those considered
Regional are to be managed through more involved regional partnership models.
Type 1: Major Regional Facilities
Facilities or facility clusters, that serve a broad
Regional markets (40,000+ market populations)
from all three partner municipalities and are key
leisure destinations for indoor recreation and
culture activities.
These facilities are branded “Regional” and as
such do not have affiliation with any one of the
partner municipalities.
These facilities are primarily funded through
regional shared funding arrangements between
all three partner municipalities.
They evolve and are funded as a result of P3
investment (public and private partnerships),
where capital funding for facility development is
supported through lease revenue, involved
recreation user groups and private operators.
Current Examples:
• TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre
- 42 -
Indoor Venue examples:
• Wellness centres (including indoor
walking/jogging tracks)
• Ice arenas/pads (regulation and leisure)
• Aquatics (program tanks and leisure)
• Culture (studios, exhibits, performing
arts)
• Social (banquet, dance)
• Meeting/multi-use programs
• Multi-use/court sports
• Indoor field activities
• Community resource center
• Retail
• Food/beverage
• Leisure amusements
Land/Space Requirement:
• Minimum 25 acres ideal for leisure
infrastructure
• 75-100 hectares ideal for entire regional
hub
Type 2: Minor Regional Facilities
These are facilities that serve both Regional
and Local level market populations of 5,000+
from at least two of the partner municipalities.
These facilities are branded “locally” and are
typically affiliated with one of the partner
municipalities.
These facilities are primarily funded through a
local municipality or community organization
although regional cost-sharing agreements
may exist with other regional partner
municipalities.
Facility development is supported primarily
with public investment and user group
contributions with less reliance upon
sponsorships and private-sector donations.
• Indoor ice arena
• Curling
• Banquet/social
• Meeting rooms
• Wellness facilities
• Arts and crafts
• Active play space (e.g. gymnasium space)
• Concession services
• Social foyers incorporating culture and
heritage displays
• Multi-use meeting / program rooms
Land / Space Requirement:
• Minimum 15 to 30 acres
Current Examples:
• Stony Plain Glenn Hall Centennial Arena
• Spruce Grove Agrena
• Horizon Stage
• Stony Plain Multi-cultural Centre*
• Pioneer Museum*
*These facilities are regionally funded but are operated by non-profit organizations (they are not
directly operated by a partner municipality).
- 43 -
Type 3: Local Facilities
Facilities that serve local market populations
of up to 5,000 within one of the partner
municipalities.
These facilities are branded “locally” and are
affiliated with one of the partner
municipalities.
These facilities are primarily funded through a
local municipality or community organization
and typically no direct regional cost-sharing
agreements exist with other regional partner
municipalities.
• Multi-use program and Stage
• Kitchen
• Chair storage
• Possible separate meeting/arts and crafts
room
• Possible games room
• Active use sports areas
• Local museum/display spaces
• Offices
Land/Space Requirement:
• 0.5 to 1.5 hectares
Facility development is supported primarily
with public investment and user group
contributions with less reliance upon
sponsorships and private sector donations.
Current Examples:
• Community Halls (Muir Lake, Parkland
Village, Blueberry, Garden Valley and
Rosenthal)
• Stony Plain Community Centre
• Spruce Grove Library*
• Stony Plain Library*
• Toby Kaziel Pavilion
• Spruce Grove Art Gallery
• Elks Hall
• Grain Elevator (Spruce Grove)
• Stony Plain Golf Course Clubhouse
*These facilities receive regional cost sharing through the Parkland County Library Board. The
Parkland County Library Board is directly supported by Parkland County.
- 44 -
Special Purpose or Themed Facilities (Types 1, 2 or 3)
Special purpose, or themed facilities are those
that serve Regional populations (40,000+)
with services and opportunities that are
centered around a core theme or activity.
While the types of programs and services
provided could be part of Type 1, Type 2 or
Type 3 facilities, these facilities specialize in
core services that require specified, more
focused program services and most often rely
upon proximity to surrounding environments.
Wilderness facilities, sports parks, golf
courses, gymnastics facilities, arts and crafts,
heritage museums, interpretive centres and
performing arts theatres are examples.
• Museums
• Art galleries/studios
• Interpretive displays
• Multi-use program space
• Group meeting rooms
• Special equipment rentals
• Food/beverage services
• Banquet services
• Retail sales
Land/Space requirements:
• Variable depending upon facility type,
market concentration and proximity to
associated outdoor program environments.
Leisure investment can be public, or a mix of
public and private, depending upon the special
type of venue and the services offered.
Examples:
• Horizon Stage (Spruce Grove)
• Pioneer Museum (Stony Plain)*
*Not operated directly by either regional municipality
- 45 -
Figure 7 Existing Regional Type 1: Major Regional and Type 2: Minor Regional Facilities
- 46 -
6.4.
A Regional Approach to Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Provision
The following discussion on a regional approach to indoor recreation and culture facility provision
provides an overview of the existing situation, a review of indoor recreation and culture facility
delivery and a presentation of options for the future of regional indoor recreation and culture
facilities in the Tri-Municipal Region.
6.4.1.
Existing Situation
Indoor recreation and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal region are operated under a number
of different arrangements. The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre is operated by a Part 921 corporation,
which is comprised of equal representation from all three regional municipalities. This approach
is unique in the Province and is one of a few successful examples of this approach in an intermunicipal context in Western Canada.
Other facilities, such as the Spruce Grove Agrena and Horizon Stage, are operated by the City of
Spruce Grove with cost-sharing assistance from Parkland County (Stony Plain does not have a
financial commitment). Likewise, the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena in Stony Plain is operated by
the Town of Stony Plain with cost sharing assistance from Parkland County (Spruce Grove has no
financial commitment).
More localized facilities in each of the municipalities are operated independently with no intermunicipal cost-sharing agreements. These facilities include the Stony Plain Community Centre
and the Elks Hall in Spruce Grove.
Throughout the region there are also non-profit/volunteer organizations that operate facilities and
receive cost sharing from one or more regional municipalities and in some cases, grants from
senior levels of government. Examples of these types of facilities are the Elevator in Spruce Grove
and the Pioneer Museum and Multi-cultural Centre in Stony Plain.
6.4.2.
Future Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Delivery
Due to the success of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre and the ability demonstrated by the Part 9
corporation in the planning, development and operations of the facility in serving a regional
market, the exploration of a regional approach to new, or existing, regional indoor recreation and
culture facilities (Type 1 or Type 2) is warranted.
Although the details of any further regional management and operations of existing Type 1 or
Type 2 facilities would have to be assessed in a more focused audit, the concept of regional
management of recreation and culture indoor facilities would be expected to have, but not be
limited to, the following tangible and intangible benefits:
21
Agreement found under separate cover.
- 47 -
•
Optimization of resources (staff, supplies, etc),
•
Economies of scale in operations (purchase of supplies, outsource contracts, etc),
•
Convenience for facility renters (one stop access to all regional facilities, etc), and
•
Convenience for facility users (single access fee to use all regional facilities, etc).
If it is the intent of all three partner municipalities to further explore the potential of regional
facility management, a feasibility study and action plan should be developed (either internally or
externally). This study would need to outline the details associated with regional management of
existing and potential new Type 1: Major Regional and Type 2: Minor Regional facilities, as well
as identify any other logical resources that would fit into the regional management model.
6.5.
Land
Land banking is a term used by individual investors, or in this case, Municipal corporations. It is
the strategy of purchasing a parcel (or parcels) of land and holding it (or ‘banking’ it) for typically
five or more years for future sale or development. It is an important, if not crucial, aspect of
strategic planning, as it ensures sufficiently sized lands to develop future public facilities.
In 1999, when the three municipalities agreed to partner in developing what has now become the
Region’s flagship facility, the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, sufficiently-sized publicly-owned
parcels were not available for development. This resulted in a lengthy site-selection process,
much debate amongst leaders of the communities and the need to purchase a sufficiently-sized
parcel which came to be 6 hectares. Since that time, the site is suggested to be of insufficient
size for expansion and parking, suggesting the need to secure between 10 and 12 hectares to
accommodate a future facility of similar size to the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre and perhaps
more, if a major spectator venue (requiring parking) is envisioned.
Currently within the Region and particularly the central area including the urban areas of Stony
Plain and Spruce Grove, there are no publicly-owned parcels of size to accommodate a major
facility. Furthermore, public reserve lands (up to 10% of developed area as per the Municipal
Government Act) will be insufficient for Type 1 Major Regional facility development, as they will
be required for neighbourhood park and school needs.
This suggests that the creation of larger publicly owned parcels will have to occur through land
purchase and/or a combination of land purchase, the taking of public reserve, or reserve-land
swapping, as is often the case when industrial subdivision reserves are allocated.
To ensure for an adequate future template of public facility development lands, the Tri-Municipal
Region Municipalities are encouraged to undertake cooperative land banking which means:
- 48 -
•
Municipal planners must prepare land use plans under a broad regional lens and in doing so,
select key lands of sufficient size for potential regional level recreation infrastructure,
•
Cooperatively purchase said sites to hold for the potential of development. Note: The existing
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Part Nine Corporation may be an excellent vehicle for this
purpose as it forms a cooperative business of the three municipalities to develop and operate
regional recreation facilities, and
•
Identify potential matches for selected regional Multiplex models (see Appendix) and sites.
In all cases, the fundamental aspects of ideal site selection are (site selection criteria is also
discussed later in Section 6.5.5):
•
adjacent to collector roads,
•
high visibility to attract sponsorship investment and way finding by visitors to the Region,
•
coordinated with pedestrian routes and existing or planned public transportation,
•
size and adaptability for a combination of indoor and outdoor functions,
•
adjacent to compatible developments including retail, hospitality and higher density zones,
and
•
centrally located in the Region with balanced access by residents of all three municipalities.
Of note is that recreation and culture infrastructure expansion in the future need not be totally
driven by the acquisition of new lands as existing sites exist and present opportunities for
expansion and/or redevelopment over the next fifteen to twenty years.
6.6.
Future Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Development
The future of indoor recreation and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal Region must consider a
number of choices including expansion or enhancement of existing facilities versus the
development of new, potentials sites / location of new or expanded facilities and development
options for actual facility component priorities.
6.6.1.
Recreation and Culture
Recreation and culture are relevant and significant contributors to quality of life in the TriMunicipal region. Traditional perspectives regarding recreation being sports and physical activity
and culture primarily encompassing creativity and artistic expression have defined these two
important components of quality of life as mutually exclusive. Debates surround big “C” culture
- 49 -
and small “c” culture further complicate the definition of culture, how it relates to quality of life
and have distanced cultural activity even further from the public perception of recreation.
Although this is commonplace in Alberta communities, it can’t be ignored that recreation and
culture, in their traditional senses, share a number of common characteristics:
•
Each allow participants to differentiate and express themselves,
•
Each are products of participant choice in how to spend leisure time,
•
Each have been proven to have positive benefits to personal development for all ages,
•
Each have been proven to promote community pride and cohesiveness, and
•
Each promote and improve overall quality of life.
As this is the case, the separation of recreation and culture should be avoided, especially when
planning, designing and operating environments in which both recreation and culture activities
can occur. This is not to suggest that cross-programming of recreation and culture activities can,
or will ever, occur. It does, however, suggest that if the use of already limited public funds for
recreation and culture are to be optimized, the provision of environments that support and
integrate recreation and culture as much as possible is necessary.
The concept of included elements for both recreation and culture activities in facility development
and operations does not only hold true for the development of future new regional recreation and
culture facilities, but it can also be applied to existing facilities. Opportunities to showcase local
artists should be explored at existing traditional recreation facilities in the region. Exposure to
recreational pursuits, perhaps in themed performances or exhibits, should be hosted at existing
traditional culture venues. As programming of existing facilities is not within the scope of this
Strategy, further detail in the opportunity to integrate recreation and culture is not warranted, but
providing environments where such can occur in new and existing regional recreation and culture
facilities should be a priority for both existing and future facility provision in the Tri-Municipal
Region.
6.6.2.
Spontaneous and Structured Uses
The popularity of spontaneous use recreation and culture opportunity is well documented
throughout the needs assessment. Areas that offer spontaneous use in the region are well
utilized, there has been a significant drop in structured recreation participation over the past 15
years22, and the abundance of shift workers and busier lifestyles in the region all lead to a need to
increase the provision of spontaneous use recreation and culture outlets for regional residents.
22
“Participation rates in organized sport have dropped from 45% to 28% between 1992 and 2005”
Sport Participation in Canada (Statscan, 2005)
- 50 -
This is not to say that traditional team sports/structured activities and the environments that
support them should be ignored. Conceptually, the provision of traditional recreation and culture
facilities such as ice arenas and performing arts theatres has been focused on structured rental
use, and thus a large portion of the population, those demanding spontaneous use outlets, have
not been considered in major indoor facility development.
Prudent planning for indoor recreation and culture should consider both structured/scheduled
use areas as well as unstructured/spontaneous use areas. Defining requirements and parameters
around the planning and provision of traditional schedule use venues is relatively straightforward,
as standards exist for most environments, and there is an abundance of comparable facilities to
look at in the Province and beyond. Spontaneous use areas, however are a relatively new
concept, and the supply/demand relationship of these areas is not as straightforward as is the
case with programmable/rentable spaces. This is primarily due to the fact that capacities cannot
be clearly identified for spontaneous use areas as the point at which a facility is “too busy” and
thereby prohibitive of participant use is subjective and based on individual perception.
That being said, there are two main types of spontaneous users. The first is the spontaneous user
who participates in the activity as his/her primary intent in visiting the respective facility. For
example, Jenny visits the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre to use the
fitness centre. The second is the user who participates in the activity even though it was not the
initial intent in visiting the facility. For example, Jenny uses the fitness centre at the TransAlta Tri
Leisure Centre because she has to bring her child to play ice hockey. This
user can also participate in other spontaneous use activities. For example, Jenny visits the
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre to use the fitness centre, but also uses the hot tub and walking track
(secondary activities).
Recognizing that spontaneous users are comprised of both user types, future planning for
spontaneous use facilities should consider the following:
•
Spontaneous use areas provide users the opportunity to participate at irregular times, thereby
enabling users to partake in physical activity or creative/social endeavors even if they cannot
commit to signing up for a scheduled team or program. Therefore spontaneous use areas
must provide optimal flexibility in hours of operation.
•
Spontaneous use activities are best offered in clusters depending on the type of activity and
the adjacent facility amenities. Therefore spontaneous use opportunities must be provided in
clusters that work well together.
•
Spontaneous use activity-clusters must consider cross use and convenience of potential users.
Clusters that seem to work well include:
• Fitness/wellness and child minding,
• Fitness/wellness and major scheduled use activity (i.e. arenas, field houses, etc),
• Fitness/wellness and therapeutic aquatics, and
- 51 -
•
•
Leisure skating and ice arenas.
Considering these points, it is apparent that many future spontaneous use spaces should
piggy-back major programmable/rentable spaces. As well, many of the existing facilities that
offer spontaneous use in the Region may warrant expansion.
If these things are considered in the expansion/enhancement of existing, or in the development of
new, indoor recreation and culture facilities the disparity amongst structured uses and
spontaneous uses and associated participants in Regional facilities will be minimized.
6.6.3.
Stand Alone Versus a “Multiplex” Approach
The tangible and intangible benefits associated with a “Multiplex” approach, or the leisure mall
concept, are well documented.
Economies of scale in facility operations, in staffing,
administration, purchase of supplies, contracted services, utilities and marketing have been
proven in existing facilities such as the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
Operationally, multiplex facilities have proven to be excellent in terms of staff efficiency. The
large number of activities under one management system versus a separate management system
for independent facilities provides cost-reduction opportunities. Energy conservation with
respect to sharing of systems between the facilities and making use of cold and warm systems to
develop energy transfers provides operational savings compared to stand alone facilities of a
similar size.
Perhaps the most important aspect of facility development, however, is both client/public
satisfaction with the variety of activities available in the facility and how they enhance family
cohesiveness and quality of life. Users of multiplex facilities have opportunities to partake in a
variety of recreation and culture activities while other family members and friends are using other
portions of the facility. Facility use is extended by the opportunities to not only partake in the
recreation or culture activity of choice but also share in other social activities such as food, retail
and professional health services and common public/social gathering areas.
The overall capital cost of multiplex facilities is also expected to be less than the comparative cost
of building a number of stand-alone facilities. The efficiencies of scale and the attractiveness of
the size of multiplex projects to construction industry stakeholders have resulted in excellent
bidding and construction services related to these types of projects. Several millions of dollars
are typically saved on the overall capital construction compared to a series of stand-alone
facilities. Capital cost is, however, crystallized within a two to three year period as opposed to
being phased out over a number of additional years if carried out as separate projects.
The disadvantages of the multipurpose all-in-one concept relates to the scale of the facility, its
cost to construct and the amount of land that it occupies. Options looked at with respect to the
Tri-Municipal Region indicate that there are relatively few existing sites that would be capable of
- 52 -
accommodating the overall scale of a multiplex facility. Fortunately, in the case of planning for
indoor recreation and culture facilities in the Tri-Municipal region, there are no immediate
requirements for new Type 1 or Type 2 facility development and as such the planning for and
acquisition of site parcels large enough to accommodate multiplex facility development can occur
in a timely and diligent fashion.
Preliminary approaches to facility massing have been provided in the appendix. It is important to
note that these approaches have been included for discussion purposes only.
6.6.4.
Expansion and Enhancement Versus Building New
Considering that the region currently has a wide variety of indoor recreation and culture facilities,
with an estimated replacement value of between $109M and $159M23, it is important to focus on
maintaining existing infrastructure and sustaining existing services prior to developing new
facilities on new sites. Maintaining existing facilities first will ensure that existing service levels
are sustained and that programs currently subscribed to can continue to be offered. In
considering the development of new facility components, if new facility components can be
added to existing facilities significant costs savings in site acquisition, servicing and administrative
and common-area development can be achieved. Adding to existing facilities can also promote
the multiplex approach at those sites, thereby enabling the benefits of this approach to facility
development, as discussed in the previous section, to be realized.
This strategy is based upon maintaining and expanding/enhancing existing sites where possible,
prior to developing new facilities. Rationalization for this approach includes both protecting and
enhancing existing infrastructure investment of between $109M and $159M and ensuring that
existing service levels and programs are sustained prior to offering new ones.
6.6.5.
Potential Sites
The following sections provide an overview of potential facility enhancement/expansion sites in
the Tri-Municipal Region. Although these sites may not be appropriate for all types of future
facility development, consideration of facility expansion at each may promote increased usage,
cross marketing of programs and all of the other benefits associated with the Multiplex Approach.
The following site assessments have been completed by Architecture|ATB.
23
Estimate provided by Architecture|ATB (2009) based on the replacement value of all Type 1, 2
and 3 facilities assessed in the study process
- 53 -
6.6.5.1.
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre
Site Description
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre site is a 3 000m2 area which would accommodate expansion to
the existing multiplex. The multiplex lies just off of Highway 16A in the center of the TriMunicipal Region and contains two regulation-sized ice surfaces with leisure ice, a twin field
house, a gymnasium, a fitness/wellness facility, an aquatics facility, a lounge, lease space, childplay space and meeting rooms. The site sits adjacent to the arena, gymnasium, lease space, and
parking, and has the potential to have its own separate entrance from the TransAlta Tri Leisure
Centre.
Site Constraints
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre site does not have room for expansion of its parking area. Any
uses that are added to the site should not have a large impact on the overall parking count.
Potential Future Site Components
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Climbing Wall
Gymnastics
Art Display Spaces
Museum Spaces
Arts & Crafts Studios
Fitness/Wellness
Child-play Space
Gymnasium space
- 54 -
Figure 8 Site Overview: TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre
- 55 -
6.6.5.2.
Stony Plain Glenn Hall Centennial Arena
Site Description
The Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site is approximately 12 000 m2 and is located on the western
side of the Tri-Municipal Region. The site does not provide for easy access from Highway 16A.
The existing arena would connect to any new facility, which would be in close proximity to an
existing curling rink and outdoor playing fields.
Site Constraints
Any expansion would use space currently occupied by either an outdoor rink or a baseball
diamond. Depending on the new use, the existing parking area may not be sufficient.
•
•
•
•
•
Fitness/Wellness
Child-play Space
Single Arena/Ice Surface
Program/Combative Rooms
- 56 -
Figure 9 Site Overview: Stony Plain Glenn Hall Centennial Arena
- 57 -
6.6.5.3.
Stony Plain Memorial Composite High School Site
As of April, 2009 the existing Stony Plain Memorial Composite High School site is owned by
Parkland School Division #70. Since the construction of a replacement for this high school
facility is underway in the community (at a new site) the existing site is expected to be vacant by
February 2010. The Town of Stony Plain has the first right of refusal to purchase the site from
Parkland School Division #70 and therefore exploration into the ability of the site to
accommodate future regional recreation and culture indoor facilities is warranted.
Site Description
The Stony Plain Memorial Composite High School site lies adjacent to the Glenn Hall Centennial
Memorial Arena on the western edge of Stony Plain approximately 2 kilometers from Highway
16A. The site is well-served by parking and sits next to several outdoor playing fields. There is
the possibility to adapt the school building to new uses; this option would provide a site area of
approximately 2 hectares.
Site Constraints
As is, there is a minimal amount of buildable area on the site. To maximize its potential, major
demolition or renovation to the existing high school would be required.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fitness/Wellness
Gymnasium
Child-Play Space
Social Banquet Space - any size
Climbing Wall
Field House
Track
- 58 -
Figure 10 Site Overview: Stony Plain Memorial Composite High School
- 59 -
6.6.5.4.
Spruce Grove Agrena
Site Description
The Spruce Grove Agrena lies in the heart of Spruce Grove just off of Highway 16A. The likely
expansion area to the Agrena is 4 000 m2. This would add new uses to the existing two
regulation sized ice rinks and the six-sheet curling facility.
Site Constraints
As the site sits adjacent to residential areas and parkland, there is a limited amount of land to
devote to parking adjacent to the site.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fitness/Wellness
Gymnasium
Child-Play Space
Social Banquet Space (Less than 500 person capacity)
- 60 -
Figure 11 Site Overview: Spruce Grove Agrena
- 61 -
6.6.5.5.
New Sites
There are currently no major regional parcels of land identified for future indoor recreation and
culture facility development. Depending on what type of facility is being contemplated (Type 1:
Major Regional or Type 2: Minor Regional) the site requirements for future regional indoor
recreation and culture facilities (including associated outdoor amenities and parking) will range
between 15-100 acres (Type 1: 25-40 acres and Type 2: 25-100). Aside from the overall size of
the site, there are a number of site criteria associated with locating these two types of facilities
that must be considered. The following eight site criteria should be considered in planning future
regional indoor recreation and culture facility development:
1) Accessibility to principal users by vehicle/bus/pedestrian.
This criteria relates to the ease and safety with which community members can both access and
egress the site. Access to population centers in the Region’s urban centres are favored as is
access via a major transportation route for both vehicular and potential bus transportation (if
applicable). Pedestrian access for a facility of this nature is considered viable within 300 m.
2) Adjacent complementary uses.
The type of uses directly adjacent to the site can positively influence quality of this site and of the
facilities contained upon it. Existing or planned facilities for adjacent sites, which assist in the
development of the recreation, leisure and community nature of the facility, are favored.
3) Site services installed or planned.
By their nature indoor recreation and culture facilities are substantial consumers of water, sewer
and power. Sites should already have these services installed or planned for installation during
the projected timeline for construction of major recreation facilities.
4) Site use matches Zoning/Area Structure Plans (ASP).
Indoor recreation and culture facilities should be located on sites, which are planned for such
activities or are consistent with Area Structure Plans (either approved or in draft form). Where no
Zoning or Area Structure Plans are currently in place, the recreation and culture facility should be
reviewed as to whether it is a consistent utilization of the site.
5) Site development suitability.
This criteria takes into account the physical characteristics of the site including soil suitability, site
contouring and amount of developable area for a recreation facility. Large flat open sites are
favored for indoor recreation and culture facilities.
- 62 -
6) Site ownership; municipal/public/private.
Site ownership will have an impact on development timing and cost. This will also be affected by
the potential for partnering and its impact on program capability within indoor recreation and
culture facilities.
7) Economic growth potential.
It is acknowledged that an adjacent indoor recreation and culture facility can act as a stimulator
for a variety of growth types – commercial, institutional and major residential (high, medium or
low).
8) Site visibility and impact.
An indoor recreation and culture facility becomes a major identifier and focal point in the
community and the site should reflect this community importance.
Although these criteria should be considered and measured prior to selecting a site for regional
indoor recreation and culture facility development, diligent planning in a context specific to the
Tri-Municipal Region must appreciate geographical coverage/provision of existing regional
facilities. For instance, the City of Spruce Grove and the East side of Parkland County are wellserviced in terms of regional recreation and culture facilities. Considering only geographical
provision of regional recreation and culture facilities, the next Type 1 or Type 2 regional facility
should likely be located either in Stony Plain or the west side of the Tri-Municipal region. This
logic is supported by the respondents of the household survey who indicated that 46% had a
preference for location of new regionally-funded indoor recreation and culture facilities and of
those that did, 63% were in favor of future facility development in Stony Plain. This is not to say
that the next facility must be located in Stony Plain or in the west side of the Region, but that
location is a significant factor in decision making for the Tri-Municipal region and that land
planning, acquisition and site selection should consider geographic provision, as well the other
site criteria presented previously.
Another consideration in the development of future recreation and culture indoor facilities is
access to available user-markets. Although regional facilities are expected to be built primarily to
serve Tri-Municipal Region residents, the feasibility of facility development and sustainability in
some cases may depend upon access to user-markets24 beyond the Tri-Municipal region.
24
External markets may include the City of St Albert, City of Edmonton and other Capital Region
municipalities.
- 63 -
6.7.
Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Component Priorities
The following ranking of indoor recreation and culture components have been developed through
a thorough and detailed needs assessment process and associated interpretation by the project
steering committee. Although the following priorities have been presented in order of priority,
the future development of these facility components are impacted by various other factors and
may not align with the ranking presented.
Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Priorities
As Identified Through the RCIFS Study Process
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility Component
Fitness/Wellness
Gymnasium
Child-play Space
Leisure Pools
Climbing Wall
Arenas/Ice Surfaces
Track
Program Pools
Library Space
Field House
School Gymnasiums
Art Display Spaces
Museum Spaces
Outdoor Pools
Spectator Ice Arena
Leisure Ice
Curling Rinks
50m Pools
- 64 -
The following sections outline the current situation, expected future demand and potential future
development options associated with the top 10 indoor recreation and culture priorities.
Although the following provides an overview of future facility development options, it should be
noted that further feasibility analysis in each area should be compiled prior to facility
development in any specific area as outlined in the facility development process (Section 6.2).
6.7.1.
Fitness/Wellness - Priority #1
Current Situation
Publicly-funded fitness and wellness services are currently provided at one location in the region:
the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, which accommodated over 129,000 visits in 2007.
As outlined in the needs assessment, the fitness/wellness facility at the TransAlta Tri Leisure
Centre is utilized by 55% of spontaneous facility users and was the number one priority for future
development of TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre users, households (49% of survey respondents
indicated fitness as a priority), the most frequently-mentioned priority of stakeholder groups, and
the sixth highest development priority of students (mentioned by 30% of students as a priority).
Comparable data also suggests that other regions have more publicly funded fitness centres, on
average.
There are a number of private
fitness/wellness providers in the TriMunicipal Region as well as an
abundance in the broader Capital Region
market25. However the target markets
(i.e. women, body builders, etc) differ
throughout the market. Consideration to
these regional providers, their respective
target markets, and expected impacts of
new development to existing facilities
should be considered in future feasibility
analysis.
Fitness/wellness Centre, TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre
25
Although outside the scope of this Strategy, the community nature of regional residents suggests
that facilities in the broader Capital Region would service the needs of some Tri-Municipal
residents.
- 65 -
Future Demand
Based on expected growth in the region, public priorities, trends, comparables and usage at the
existing fitness/wellness facility at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, future fitness/wellness spaces
are considered to be required in the Region. As a case for a deficit can be made currently,
exploration of developing new fitness/wellness environments is suggested.
Options for the Future
The following options should be explored for the future provision of indoor fitness/wellness
services in the Tri-Municipal region:
1) Expansion of the existing fitness/wellness centre at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
2) Addition of fitness/wellness services at the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site in Stony Plain.
3) Addition of fitness/wellness services at existing rural community hall facilities (where available
without requiring structural facility retrofit).
4) Development of new stand-alone facilities, at an agreed to site, somewhere in the Region.
6.7.2.
Gymnasiums - Priority #2
Current Situation
Gymnasium spaces in the Tri-Municipal Region are currently offered by both the local school
boards as well at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
The gymnasium at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre is primarily used for spontaneous use (only
available for booking after 9 p.m. on weeknights) and had 30,052 spontaneous visits in 2007.
The spontaneous use gymnasium was the 6th most heavily utilized spontaneous use facility at the
TLC (used by 24% of spontaneous users). Unfortunately detailed school gymnasiums usage data
was not attainable at the time of the study process.
Gymnasium, TransAlta Tri- Leisure Centre
Gymnasiums were identified as the fifteenth-ranked
priority of households (12% of survey respondents
indicated fitness as a priority), the third highest
priority of stakeholder groups and the third highest
development priority of students (mentioned by
49% of students as a priority). Comparable data
suggests that current provision of gymnasiums
(school or publicly provided) is comparable to the
average in the other regions studied (comparable
Region average of 1 gymnasium per 2,185
residents, provision in the Tri-Municipal Region is 1
gymnasium per 2,105 residents).
- 66 -
Future Demand
Based on the needs assessment data collected, including population growth, public priorities,
trends comparables and usage data (where available), the future requirement for increased
community use of gymnasium spaces is apparent. Due to the nature of service provision, being
primarily associated with schools, demand for gymnasium access by the broader community is
likely a function of actual facility provision and associated capacity, but also of accessibility of
gymnasiums by external (community) users. As this is the case, the future development of
gymnasiums should be pre-empted by detailed analysis to differentiate between access issues
and actual capacity issues. As well, the potential for partnership with the local school boards in
developing new or innovative gymnasiums facilities that could piggyback traditional school
development may be the most effective means in developing new regional gymnasiums that can
be access by the general public.
The following options should be explored for the future provision of indoor gymnasium spaces in
the Tri-Municipal region:
1) Addition of gymnasium space at the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site.
2) Retrofit, or purchase of, the existing high school site (thus enabling community use of
associated gymnasium) in Stony Plain once a new high school facility is developed.
3) Partnering with local school boards to expand planned gymnasium facilities in new school
projects to accommodate community use.
4) Development of new stand alone facilities, at an agreed to site, somewhere in the Region.
6.7.3.
Child-Play Space - Priority #3
Current Situation
Child-play spaces, or indoor child playgrounds, in the Tri-Municipal region are currently only
offered at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
The child-play space at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre is primarily used for spontaneous use and
had 51,610 spontaneous visits in 2007. The child-play space was the 5th most heavily-utilized
spontaneous use facility at the Centre (used by 27% of spontaneous users).
Child-play space was mentioned by 24% of household survey respondents (sixth most frequently
mentioned priority) and the 7th highest priority of stakeholder groups. Comparable data suggests
that current provision of child-play space in the region is lower than the average in the other
regions studied.
- 67 -
Future Demand
Trends, population, comparable and consultation data suggest that child-play spaces be
considered in future development. As these types of spaces are flexible in terms of size and
location, it is recommended that their inclusion in existing facilities as well as potential new
facilities (either through retrofit of existing or new development) be assessed.
The following options should be explored for the future provision of child-play spaces in the TriMunicipal region:
1) Addition of child-play space to the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site.
2) Expansion of the existing indoor child-play space at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
3) Retrofit, or purchase of, the existing high school site in Stony Plain once a new high school
facility is developed (thus enabling spaces in the facility to be retrofitted as an indoor child
playground).
4) Addition of indoor child-play areas at existing rural community hall facilities (where available
without requiring structural facility retrofit).
5) Development of new stand-alone facilities, at an agreed to site somewhere in the Region.
6.7.4.
Community Meeting Rooms - Priority #4
Current Situation
There are a number of community meeting rooms offered in the Tri-Municipal region by both
private and public sector providers.
Community meeting rooms were identified by 32% of household survey respondents as
important facilities to consider and they were the 4th
highest priority of stakeholder groups. Comparable
Community Meeting Room,
TransAlta Tri- Leisure Centre
data suggests that current provision of publiclyoperated community meeting rooms (and thus
meeting facilities that are affordable to the volunteer
sector) in the region is higher (better) than the
average in the other regions studied.
The needs assessment data collected confirms an
ongoing requirement for accessible community
meeting
rooms
for
non-profit,
volunteer
organizations. As these facilities support the nonprofit/voluntary sector, access is typically granted at
- 68 -
discounted rates. That being said, affordability of access to existing publicly-offered community
meeting rooms was one aspect of unmet community demands for these types of facilities. Some
groups could not afford the already subsidized rentals rates in the region. Other groups indicated
a need for associated support facilities beyond actual meeting rooms including storage,
administrative areas and services and other support facilities.
Future Demand
As community meeting room demand is a product of both affordability/accessibility and actual
provision, prior to providing new meeting-room-specific facilities, more detailed research should
be undertaken to look at the potential of readdressing accessibility of existing facilities. If the
development of new meeting room facilities is required, including other support services at the
same location, the provision of storage and administrative services (i.e. photocopying, computer
access, etc) is recommended.
The following options should be explored for the future provision of community meeting rooms
in the Tri-Municipal region:
1) Inclusion of community meeting rooms when any major renovation project (either at the
TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre or the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena is contemplated).
2) Retrofit, or purchase of, the existing high school site in Stony Plain once a new high school
facility is developed (thus providing classroom space for community meetings as well as
opportunities to develop a volunteer support service centre26).
3) Development of new stand alone facilities, at an agreed to site somewhere in the Region.
6.7.5.
Social Banquet Spaces - Priority #5
Current Situation
There are a number of social banquet spaces, varying in both capacity and quality, offered in the
Tri-Municipal region by both private and public sector providers. These facilities typically are
used for hosting large special events such as banquets, weddings and dances. Regional facilities
include the Stony Plain Community Centre, Stony Plain Exhibition Park, areas within the TransAlta
Tri Leisure Centre, the Elks Hall in Spruce Grove, community halls throughout Parkland County
and others. Access to venues in the broader capital region is also an option for regional
residents.
26
The concept of a volunteer support services centre would include meeting room spaces, storage
spaces and common/shared administrative spaces potential including a photocopier, computer
access, filing, etc. This volunteer support service centre would be accessible to all volunteer/nonprofit groups in the Region that provide recreation and culture service delivery for Regional
residents.
- 69 -
“Social gathering areas” and “community spaces“ were identified by 8% (#9 priority) and 16%
(#11 priority) of household survey respondents respectively as important future facility priorities
and were the second and fourth highest priorities (respectively) of stakeholder groups.
The needs assessment data collected confirms a market gap for dedicated social banquet
facilities27 that can accommodate 500 people or more. The largest social banquet facilities in the
Region are the Holy Trinity Catholic Church with a seating capacity of 400 and the Blueberry
Community Hall with a seating capacity of 320. Although the market for these large events is
limited, the need for a banquet facility for over 500 people was raised by many group
representatives and residents alike. Although a demand has been identified, further exploration
of the Regional market for banquets over 500 people is warranted and should consider the
following:
•
Provision of these types of facilities in the broader Capital Region.
•
Detailed consultation with regional groups to see how many events would be hosted, the size
of events and operational costs associated with event hosting as well as defining exactly what
amenities would be required in a useable facility (i.e. commercial kitchen, breakout room,
etc).
•
Facility marketing and management required to sustain operations of this type of facility as
well as potential associated amenities.
•
Definition of a critical mass of population in the Region at which the development of a 500+
seat banquet facility becomes viable.
Future Demand
As the Region grows, population will undoubtedly reach a level at which a critical mass for social
banquet facilities that can host over 500 people is achieved. At that point in time, due to the
nature of these banquet facilities, private or public sector provision will be considered.
The following options should be explored for the future provision of social banquet facilities in
1) Addition/retrofit of existing social banquet facilities to be able to accommodate 500+ person
banquets.
27
Banquets of 750-1,000 people can be accommodated at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre, the
Agrena, the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena and the Curling Club, however substantial set up and
take down is required.
- 70 -
2) Exploration of potential private-public partnerships in development of a 500+ banquet facility
potentially associated with a planned conference centre or hotel development.
3) Development of a new stand alone facility, at an agreed to site somewhere in the Region.
6.7.6.
Leisure Pools – Priority #6
Current Situation
The TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre includes the only indoor leisure pool in the region which was
visited by over 319,000 visits in 2007. The leisure pool at the Centre was the second most
frequently utilized spontaneous use area (used by 42% of spontaneous users surveyed) and was
the number three priority for future development of regional households (36% of survey
respondents indicated leisure swimming as a priority), the eleventh most frequently mentioned
priority of stakeholder groups, and the highest development priority of students (mentioned by
72% of students as a priority). Comparable data also suggests that other regions have slightly
more leisure pools per capita, on average. Of note, is that the Town of Stony Plain also has an
outdoor pool.
Future Demand
Based on expected growth in the region,
public priorities, trends, comparables and
usage at the leisure pool at the TransAlta Tri
Leisure Centre, future indoor leisure aquatics
spaces are considered to be required in the
Region.
The following options should be explored for
the future provision of indoor leisure aquatics
services in the Tri-Municipal region:
Leisure Pool,
1) Addition of leisure pool spaces at the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site in Stony Plain.
6.7.7.
Climbing Wall - Priority #7
Current Situation
Currently there is no indoor climbing-wall facility in the Tri-Municipal Region and there are only
two in the broader Capital Region (University of Alberta, a post secondary institute, and Vertically
Inclined, a private operation). A climbing-wall facility was the number four priority for future
development of regional households (25% of survey respondents indicated a climbing wall as a
priority) and the second highest development priority of students (mentioned by 65% of students
- 71 -
as a priority). Comparable data suggests that only two other regions have an indoor climbing
venue, both of which would be considered beginner or intermediate in nature.
Important considerations that need to be measured in further exploration of climbing-wall
development include: who would hold operating responsibility and associated liability as well as
future expansion/enhancement opportunity (as the wall features should be changed periodically
to retain interest and promote skill development).
Future Demand
The demand for the activity in the region is apparent
and although none of the comparable regions
currently have indoor climbing venues, many new
facility projects in the Province are contemplating
inclusion of this facility component in new
construction projects. This trend towards offering the
activity in public recreation facilities, as well as
increased population growth, would suggest a future
demand for an indoor climbing venue in the TriMunicipal Region.
The following options should be explored for the
future provision of an indoor climbing wall in the TriMunicipal region:
Unidentified climbing
wall facility
1) Addition of climbing wall facilities at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
2) Addition of climbing wall spaces at the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site in Stony Plain.
6.7.8.
Gymnastics Facilities - Priority #8
Current Situation
Gymnastics are currently offered to residents of the Tri-Municipal region by the Aerials
Gymnastics Club which operates out of a leased, privately-owned facility in Spruce Grove. The
organization is currently undergoing a detailed feasibility process to address upcoming facility
needs and is considering the potential of expansion at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre as well as
a stand-alone development. As the nature of the club is arm’s length from municipal operations,
and considering the Club currently receives no municipal support for operations now, any
decision to subsidize the activity, in any way, would require a significant change to how each, or
any, of the three municipalities currently support recreation and culture user groups. That being
- 72 -
said, a gymnastics facility was the tenth highest priority for future development of regional
households (17% of survey respondents indicated a gymnastics facility as a priority) and the 6th
highest development priority of stakeholder groups. The Aerials have an ongoing participant
base of over 1,700 registrants. Comparable data suggests that all of the other regions identified
have gymnastics facilities, two of which receive public subsidy (to some degree) for activity
delivery.
It is important to note that the Aerials Gymnastics Club’s need to define a future facility is
imminent and that a decision as to the future strategic direction associated with gymnastics
facility development in the Region needs to made in the short term.
Future Demand
It is a fact that the Aerials group has to define and move toward a new facility strategy in the near
future. Whether that future evolves to include regional municipalities or not remains to be seen.
It is, however, expected that the future demand for gymnastics will sustain existing levels, if not
increase, in the future. If municipal support is intended, it is expected that the support would be
in the form of subsidized access to facility spaces, be they in municipally-owned and operated
facilities or spaces offered by other organizations (i.e. the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre or other
private organizations).
The following options should be explored for the future provision of gymnastics in the TriMunicipal region if municipal support for such facilities is intended by regional municipalities:
1) Addition of gymnastics facilities at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
2) Addition of gymnastics facilities at the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena site in Stony Plain.
6.7.9.
Performing Arts Theatre Space - Priority #9
Current Situation
The Region currently has one performing arts venue. The Horizon Stage is located in Spruce
Grove and is on the same site as (attached to) the Spruce Grove Composite High School. The
facility, which seats an audience of 318, is owned jointly by the City of Spruce Grove and
Parkland County and operated by the City of Spruce Grove and is utilized to approximately 80%
capacity28.
A performing arts facility was the eighth priority for future development of regional households
(18% of survey respondents indicated a performing arts facility as a priority) and the ninth highest
28
2007 utilization of 1,195 hours and 10,280 visits
- 73 -
development priority of students.
Comparable data suggests that all of the other regions
identified have performing arts facilities, and that the Tri-Municipal Region is slightly below
average per capita provision of these types of facilities when compared to those other regions.
The public provision of performing arts facilities is typically determined based on size of
community, size of performance/event (facility capacity) and operational model (partnership,
municipal, private or non-profit). Performing arts facilities can be categorized into three main
sizes, community (250-350 seats), medium (~500 seats) and large (1,000+ seats). Each of these
facilities has specific usage characteristics and each serve specific market regions. In the case of
the Tri-Municipal Region, any future performing arts facility development would likely focus on
the medium sized facility size (as the Region already has a community sized facility). Further
exploration as to the need for and cost impacts of development should include, but may not be
limited to, consideration of expected market draw, other facilities in the region and detailed
consultation with potential facility users.
Future Demand
The data collected in the needs assessment, including public consultation, trends and population
data, suggest that the demand for performing arts venues, and for arts and culture program
environments in general, is expected to grow. The determination as to whether or not the
existing facility suits the Tri-Municipal market region needs to be further explored. This
exploration could be initiated immediately based on the needs assessment data and provision in
comparable regions.
The following options should be explored for the future provision of performing arts venues in
1) Addition to existing Horizon Stage facility to accommodate increased seating capacity.
2) Development of a new stand-alone facility, at an agreed to site, somewhere in the Region
(potentially as the core of a Type 1: Major Regional arts and culture complex for the region29).
6.7.10.
Arenas/Ice Surfaces - Priority #10
Current Situation
Currently there are 5 indoor ice sheets in the Tri-Municipal Region. There are four sheets located
in Spruce Grove (two at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre and two at the Agrena) and one in Stony
Plain (the Glenn Hall Centennial Arena). These facilities are utilized by a variety of regional youth
and adult groups including, but not limited to, minor hockey, figure skating, adult hockey, Junior
29
Potential planning for this type of facility in the Region is being contemplated, to some degree,
by the Stony Plain Multicultural Heritage Centre.
- 74 -
“A” hockey (Spruce Grove Saints) as well as for public leisure skating30.
utilized between 85% and 94% “prime time” capacity.
The 5 ice sheets are
Public demand or need for more ice time and additional indoor ice facilities is a function of both
facility capacity and standards of ice participant access. Standards of ice participant access
include both hours of ice access per week as well as expectation regarding appropriate times of
use. For instance, a community may have a goal of enabling ice users to access facilities on
average 3 hours of “prime time” ice per participant per week. That same community could
define “prime time” as weekdays 5p.m.-11p.m. and weekends 9a.m.-11p.m. and could
accommodate approximately 580 users per ice sheet while another community could have the
same goal, but have a broader definition “prime time” including weekday mornings between 6am
and 8am and thus accommodate 680 users per ice sheet. As can be seen, it is difficult to
standardize and compare ice provision across regions as there are a number of criteria that need
to be factored in, some of which are intangible (i.e. the impacts to quality of life of not having to
participate in ice hockey before school on weekdays). Considering the level of service that is
provided to ice users in the Tri-Municipal region today, excess demand does not warrant
immediate exploration of new ice facility development.
Indoor ice arenas were the fourth
highest
priority
for
future
development of students and were
indicated as a future priority by
both regional households31 and
stakeholder groups. Comparable
data suggests that that the TriMunicipal Region is comparable to
the average per capita provision of
indoor ice arenas in the regions
studied.
Leisure Ice,
Another
consideration
when
contemplating the future of indoor
ice arenas is the potential of a regional spectator arena of over 2,000 seats. The demand for such
a venue has been expressed by some regional stakeholder groups, however it was not mentioned
as a high priority of either regional households or students. Although the level of demand might
not be apparent in the needs assessment findings, the provision of spectator arenas is typically
contemplated once populations reach a critical mass necessary to sustain the operations
associated with these types of facilities. Exploration of the development of a regional spectator
ice arena should be included when contemplating future indoor ice facility development and
30
Of note is that public leisure skating needs are primarily met by the leisure ice at the TransAlta
Tri Leisure Centre.
31
Indoor ice arenas were not in the top 20 indoor recreation and culture facility priorities as
indicated by the regional household survey.
- 75 -
should consider market size, detailed conversations with potential users (including a primary
tenant such as a hockey team) and operational modeling (ownership, operations and potential
partnerships).
Future Demand
As mentioned, excess demand observed by Regional user groups does not warrant immediate
exploration of new ice facility development. However, if the regional population continues to
grow and existing participation levels are sustained or increased, such exploration may be
required. Based on the feasibility planning triggers presented, increased demand for indoor ice
would have to be accommodated through the development of new ice sheets and/or the
reassessment of prime-time ice allocation and regional service levels/goals.
The following options should be explored
for the future provision of indoor ice
facilities in the Tri-Municipal region:
1) Addition of indoor ice facilities at the
Spruce Grove Agrena.
2) Addition of additional indoor ice
facilities at the Glenn Hall Centennial
Arena site in Stony Plain.
3) Development of new stand alone
facilities, at an agreed to site,
somewhere in the Region.
Ice Arena,
- 76 -
6.7.11.
Other Facility Component Priorities
Although detailed discussion about the current situation, future demand and potential options has been completed for the top
ten regional indoor recreation and culture facility priorities, the following summary chart outlines the remaining 17 priorities
listed and briefly provide future strategic direction for the provision of these facility elements in the future of the TriMunicipal Region.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
New, Agreed to
Site
•
•
•
•
Expansion at
Other Existing
Facilities
Potential
Retrofit of
Stony Plain
Memorial
Composite
High School
Track
Program Pools
Library Space
Field House
School Gymnasiums
Art Display Spaces
Museum Spaces
Outdoor Pools
Spectator Ice Arena
Leisure Ice
Curling Rinks
50m Pools
Expansion at
the Glenn Hall
Centennial
Arena
Facility Component
Expansion at
the Trans Alta
Tri Leisure
Centre
Location / Site to Be Further Explored
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Priority
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med/Low
Med/Low
Low
Low
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Timeline for
Further
Feasibility
Analysis
Potential
Timeline for
Construction
and Operations
2017
2012
2017
2017+
2017+
tbd
2009
2017+
2017+
2015
2009
2017+
2017+
2017+
tbd
2017+
2017+
2018+
2013+
2018+
n/a
n/a
tbd
2010
n/a
n/a
2016+
2010
n/a
n/a
n/a
Tbd
n/a
n/a
Low
*tbd: to be determined as feasibility for these types of facilities would be initiated by other potential partners (i.e. school division or non-profit
societies/volunteer organizations)
- 77 -
6.8.
Next Steps For Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Development
As outlined in previous sections, the next steps to recreation and culture facility development
would entail the completion of more detailed feasibility analysis for facility components requiring
immediate attention (of highest priority). The following action plan has been developed based
upon the previous discussion on facility priorities as well as the needs assessment findings
related to facility assessments and associated maintenance required.
6.8.1.
• Fitness/wellness spaces/expansion,
• Child-play space expansion,
• Additional community meeting rooms/volunteer resource centre,
• Additional program/combatives rooms,
• Art display spaces,
• Arts and crafts studios,
• Indoor climbing wall facilities,
• Indoor gymnastics facilities, and
• Retrofits/upgrades suggested by the facility assessment (approximately $435,000).
*Timing: 2009
• Additional indoor ice facilities (considering spectator arena),
• Fitness/wellness spaces,
• Child-play space,
• Additional community meeting rooms/volunteer resource centre,
• Program/combatives rooms,
• Indoor climbing wall facilities,
• Indoor gymnastics facilities, and
• Leisure ice.
*Timing: 2011
- 78 -
6.8.2.
• 500 seat performing arts venue,
• Social banquet spaces with capacity of at least 500, and
• Arts and cultural amenities including display spaces and program rooms.
*Timing: 2014
• Leisure aquatics components,
• Program aquatics components,
• Fitness/wellness spaces,
• Child-play space,
• Community meeting rooms/volunteer resource centre,
• Program/combatives rooms, and
• Indoor climbing wall facilities.
*Timing: 2016
7.0 Stakeholder Review
A public review open house was convened on Thursday May 7th, 2009 at the TransAlta Tri Leisure
Centre to present, and gather public feedback on, the draft Tri-Municipal Region Recreation and
Culture Indoor Facility Strategy. The open house was hosted between 6pm and 9pm with a
formal presentation at 7:30pm. Attendees were asked to review the information provided and
leave feedback via a feedback form. The review open house was supplemented by the draft
Strategy being posted on each partner municipality website, along with the feedback form,
between May 1 and May 15 (2009).
Approximately 15 people attended the open house; two of these attendees completed the
feedback form at the open house. Eight other feedback forms were submitted through email or
fax. The findings from these ten feedback forms are presented as follows.
Representation from the three municipalities was relatively equitable. Representatives from
Parkland County submitted four feedback forms, while Stony Plain and Spruce Grove residents
were each responsible for the submission of three forms.
When asked “Do you feel comfortable with the process undertaken to complete the background
research and public feedback in developing this Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy?”
the majority (six) of respondents indicated that they were comfortable with the process
- 79 -
undertaken to complete the background research and public feedback in the development of the
draft strategy. Three were unsure indicating they were not fully aware of the process used.
Eight of the ten respondents had some affiliation with a specific volunteer organization or user
group. Some, in fact had affiliations with more than one group. Six sporting groups were
identified as were two cultural groups, and two service / social types of organizations.
Respondents were asked whether they agreed with the indoor recreation and culture facility
priorities that resulted from the public consultation and research conducted. Only three of the
ten respondents agreed while two disagreed. Of the two respondents who disagreed, one felt a
specific recreation facility should have been rated as a higher priority. The other respondent
disagreeing said that the study was really about recreation and had insufficient emphasis on
culture. Most (five) were unsure.
When asked “Do you agree with the next steps associated with the indoor recreation and culture
facility priorities?” the majority (six respondents) agreed with the next steps associated with the
facility priorities. One disagreed saying that the timing for a specific feasibility study (2014) is too
far away, as the facility will be needed before 2014. Four respondents were unsure about the next
steps.
When asked if they agreed with the following statement: “Opportunities for meeting identified
community needs for indoor recreation and culture facilities should be developed through
expanding or enhancing existing facilities prior to developing new facilities.” half (five) of the
respondents did agree that the expansion of enhancement of existing facilities should be
undertaken prior to developing any new facilities. These respondents commented that this
approach is the most responsible, cost effective way to proceed. The other five respondents were
unsure. One commented that it would depend upon overall usage, and existing transportation
and parking.
When asked if they agreed with the following statement: “If new facility development is required,
opportunities to develop large multi-use facilities should take precedence over the development of
smaller stand-alone facilities” over two-thirds (seven of ten) of the respondents did agree that in
the event new facility development is required, opportunities to develop large multi-use facilities
should take precedence over the development of smaller stand-along facilities. They commented
that a multi-use facility would impact the most people and would benefit the organizations in the
facility through exposure to people visiting the facility to participate in other activities. Two
respondents did not agree; one commented that there is already a large facility in the area and
that stand alone facilities are required. One respondent was unsure.
When asked if they agreed with the following statement: “If new facility development is required,
opportunities to develop new facilities should incorporate both recreation and culture
opportunities where possible.” three respondents did agree that with new facility development,
opportunities to incorporate both recreation and culture opportunities should be explored. Two
- 80 -
disagreed saying that the clientele of the two areas are different. Five respondents were unsure.
One respondent said that culture is expensive and impacts fewer people. Another commented
that recreation is a primary need while culture is not. One respondent who was unsure about
incorporating both recreation and culture felt that culture always gets less when competing with
recreation and therefore was unsure about its inclusion with recreation elements. Another
commented that the concept seemed relatively new and more evidence was needed to determine
whether it could actually work. This respondent went on to say that detailed study will need to be
undertaken in some instances to fully understand whether these uses are complimentary.
Finally, some respondents provided comments about the draft Tri-Municipal Recreation and
Culture Indoor Facility Strategy. The comments included:
•
Hopes that the municipalities would take action as the study represents the needs of
stakeholders.
•
Suggestions to incorporate holistic approaches to health in any new facilities.
•
Requests to provide detailed information, including costs, before any new development
occurs.
•
Criticism of the study boundary, suggesting that the boundary used was arbitrary and
excluded many pertinent people.
•
Identification of transportation is a significant barrier to facility usage. A plan to address
this would impact the success of a facility.
•
Inclusion of community halls as assets in this study for recreation and cultural venues.
- 81 -
8.0 Summary
Indoor recreation and culture facilities provide the necessary environments in which individuals
can engage in physical and mental activities. The respective governments within the TriMunicipal Region, comprised of the City of Spruce Grove, Town of Stony Plain and Parkland
County, realizes that these facilities add to the quality of life of residents as well facilitate regional
tourism and other important economic drivers.
Municipalities within the Tri-Municipal Region have a track record of working together on a
number of joint initiatives in municipal service provision. With respect to indoor recreation and
culture facilities, the ownership and operations of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre is a prime
example of this regional collaboration.
The Purpose of this Tri-Municipal Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy is to build upon
the successes of the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre and outline future strategies for the provision of
recreation and culture facilities in the Region for years to come. This Strategy, once adopted by
the three Councils, will form the basis of all future regional level indoor leisure facilities and will
provide specific direction as to when, and how, to conduct further feasibility analysis in line with
priority need and regional planning initiatives.
The Strategy is based upon a needs assessment process which included:
•
a review of regional population demographics,
•
a review of trends in recreation and culture participation,
•
consideration to existing municipal planning documentation and other regional initiatives
already underway,
•
a review of how recreation and culture indoor facilities are provided in comparable Alberta
regions,
•
an analysis of the physical state and use of existing recreation and culture indoor facilities in
the Tri-Municipal Region and, of course,
•
an extensive public consultation process.
This consultative process has been instrumental in developing both future facility priorities and
general philosophies of provision central to municipal mandates. The consultation included:
•
a statistically representative household survey sent to household in each of the three partner
municipalities,
•
a student survey conducted in regional schools,
•
a stakeholder group survey sent to over 270 regional volunteer groups which was
supplemented by 18 individual interviews with stakeholder group representatives,
- 82 -
•
four public input open houses and one public review open house, and
•
an intercept survey conducted at the TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre.
The Strategy is designed to provide future direction for indoor recreation and culture facility
priorities as well as management tools for the operation and planning of new facilities. Both
components are based upon the following Strategic Vision and associated Goals.
Strategic Vision
sources are explored in building, operating and maintaining publicly-funded recreation
- 83 -
Using this Vision and these Goals as a guideline, the Strategy provides regional administrators
and decision makers the following management tools:
•
a transparent and standardized 18-30 month process for recreation and culture indoor facility
development based on sound logic and due diligence,
•
feasibility planning triggers that help decision makers determine whether or not any specific
facility initiative should be further analyzed in terms of market need and affordability,
•
a funding framework outlining how public funds should be levered, if at all, in the provision of
different types of recreation and culture indoor facilities based upon the markets for said
facilities and public accessibility, and;
•
a facility classification to help the region organize and manage existing and new recreation
The Strategy also includes in-depth discussion about the future siting of new or expanded
regional recreation and culture indoor facilities with consideration to when to plan for, and how
to acquire, land sufficient for future facility development. Detailed site requirements are also
presented to provide a basis for site assessment when future sites are analyzed and ultimately
recommended for development. Four potential locations for future facility expansion are
identified as well as direction for the future siting of new facilities on new sites within the region.
Prior to discussing specific priorities for future recreation and culture indoor facility development,
four key considerations are outlined to help guide overall decision making for future recreation
and culture indoor facility development. These four considerations include:
1) Recreation and Culture
Reviewing the merits of promoting and achieving recreation and culture facility and program
integration in all new, or expanded indoor facility projects
2) Spontaneous and Structure Use
Understanding that recreation and culture facilities service two distinct user markets,
scheduled activities and spontaneous activities, and that all new or expanded facility
development need to provide outlets for both types to occur
3) Stand Alone versus a “Multiplex” Approach
Promoting the concept of the “leisure mall”, or including many recreation and culture indoor
facilities at one location, not only to capitalize on operational economies of scale but also to
promote cross marketing of programs and added convenience for the end user.
4) Expansion and Enhancement versus Building New
Realizing that the region has a valuable built infrastructure of recreation and culture indoor
facilities and that in order to sustain existing facility service levels the region must invest in
and protect existing facilities, where possible, prior to building new facilities on new sites.
- 84 -
By incorporating the aforementioned considerations, the Strategy outlines future priorities for
indoor leisure facility development. In total, 27 different facility types have been identified and
measured with the top ten receiving detailed market analysis (present and future) and
recommended options for future spatial components of facilities. The 27 priorities, in rank order,
are as follows:
Regional Indoor Recreation and Culture Facility Priorities
*As Identified Through the Strategy Process
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Facility Component
Fitness/Wellness
Gymnasium
Child-play Space
Leisure Pools
Climbing Wall
Arenas/Ice Surfaces
Track
Program Pools
Library Space
Field House
School Gymnasiums
Art Display Spaces
Museum Spaces
Outdoor Pools
Spectator Ice Arena
Leisure Ice
Curling Rinks
50m Pools
Finally, next steps for the regional provision and development of recreation and culture indoor
facilities in the short- and mid-term have been presented. These next steps include:
- 85 -
•
Fitness/wellness spaces/expansion,
•
Child-play space expansion,
•
•
Additional program/combatives rooms,
•
Art display spaces,
•
Arts and crafts studios,
•
•
•
Retrofits/upgrades suggested by the facility assessment (approximately $435,000).
*Timing: 2009
•
Additional indoor ice facilities (considering spectator arena),
•
•
Child-play space,
•
•
Program/combatives rooms,
•
•
•
Leisure ice.
*Timing: 2011
- 86 -
•
500 seat performing arts venue,
•
Social banquet spaces with capacity of at least 500, and
•
Arts and cultural amenities including display spaces and program rooms.
*Timing: 2014
•
Leisure aquatics components,
•
Program aquatics components,
•
•
Child-play space,
•
Community meeting rooms/volunteer resource centre,
•
Program/combatives rooms, and
•
Indoor climbing wall facilities.
*Timing: 2016
This Strategy has been based upon sound research and thorough public engagement. The
Strategy outlines management tools and priorities for the future provision of regional level
recreation and culture indoor facilities as well as the strategic next steps to help achieve the
strategic Vision and the Goals presented herein. It is now time for municipal decision makers,
regional administrators and recreation and culture indoor facility stakeholders to take this
information, in principle, and allow it to guide future decision making in meeting public demands
for indoor recreation and culture facilities within the Tri-Municipal region.
- 87 -
Appendix: Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy
Appendix
Appendix A: Household Survey Report
Appendix B: Student Survey Report
Appendix C: Stakeholder Group Survey Report
Appendix D: Stakeholder Group Interview Report
Appendix E: Public Input Open House Report
Appendix F: TransAlta Tri Leisure Centre Intercept Survey Report
Appendix G: Facility Usage Analysis Report
Appendix H: Preliminary Facility Massing Models
- 88 -

Recreation and Culture Indoor Facility Strategy

Transcription

Similar documents

Explore summer fun with our river recreation maps.

The MCM Eleganté Hotel! - NM District 5 Little League

Prelude 9x12 HS Cover

JEREBU FINAL BI A4 .ai

Youth Sports Programs

Ski Trip to Mad River Mountain with ODR

Palisades Recreation Center

Proceeds go to support NJROTC scholarships and the Port

behemoth - SurfaceWorks

Program Registration Form - Saddleback Valley Unified School District