No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/10/09 - Agenda Packet - (Spec. Meeting Aquatic, Senior Trans. Mutual inters. btwn CC & PRC) AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL AND THE PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL JOINT MEETING Monday, October 9, 2006 ~ 6:00 p.m. Rancho Cucamonga City Hall ~ Tri Communities Room 10500 Civic Center Drive ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call: Alexander _' Gutierrez_, Michael_, Spagnolo_, Williams_. Carlson _' Dickey _' Karraa _' Oaxaca , Punter . B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council and the Park and Recreation Commission. State law prohibits the Council and Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the agenda. The Council and Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. C. ITEM(~) OF BUSINESS 1. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING A FUTURE POTENTIAL AQUATIC CENTER AT CENTRAL PARK - pg. 1 2. BRIEF UPDATE OF SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY FINDINGS AND PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED SENIOR TRANSPORTATION ACTION PLAN - pg. 2 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING ITEMS OF MUTUAL INTEREST TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION D. ADJOURNMENT /, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 5, 2006, per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. RANCHO CUCAMONGA m---- ~~ _,,",,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,",- """""3';i;'~~~"""'''''''''' ~'~"-"'.';'i'<,i;::9i?J.itu:ii':::'~",'"':;;:,:/;:;"",, ,;;.I0r'::;J':/'" .~:,;;H,F,;:/<;:;:,>:".:.:;'.,N:::}:J COMMUNITY S~RVIC~I\ Staff Report DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 9,2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council Park and Recreation Commission Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director r. . Dave Moore, Community Services Superintendent ~(jj PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING A FUTURE POTENTIAL AQUATIC CENTER AT CENTRAL PARK RECOMMENDATION City staff is recommending that the City Council and Park and Recreation Commission review a presentation on the different designs and programming possibilities of potential Aquatic Centers and a presentation of the Central Park Aquatic Center FeaSibility Study Report followed by discussion. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS This agenda item will consist of two parts. The first part will include a presentation on the various types of designs and programming possibilities of potential Aquatic Centers by consultants, Bob Mueting of RJM Design Group, Inc and Randy Mendioroz of Aquatic Design Group. The second part will involve a presentation of the Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Report that was developed by Randy Mendioroz as part of the Central Park Phase I Project. This study was conducted to familiarize staff, Park and Recreation Commission and the City Council with trends on City Aquatic Centers and cost considerations for future planning. Following the presentation there will be an opportunity for discussion. Attached is a copy of the Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study for your review. Kevin cArdle Community Services Director Attachment: Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study I:COMMSER\ACouncil&8oards\CityCouncil\StaffReports\CentraIParkAquaticCenterFeasibilityStudy.1 00906.doc I RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~~ _ ~_ "'-",Ci/,::;:':%l'Jh: -}t(,p"'0F~.f::<,,({C~~T,-'_'- t",(ffi _ COMMUNITY SERVICES Staff Report DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 9,2006 Mayor and Members of the City Council Park & Recreation Commission Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director (\ Dave Moore, Community Services Superintendent~tl BRIEF OVERVIEW OF SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT STUDY FINDINGS AND PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED SENIOR TRANSPORTATION ACTION PLAN RECOMMENDATION City staff is recommending that the City Council and the Park & Recreation Commission review and approve the attached Senior Transportation Action Plan. In addition, Joan Branin, MBA, PHD, Director of the University of La Verne's Center for Health & Aging who helped author the Senior Transportation Needs Assessment report will be available to answer any questions. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Attached is a Senior Transportation Action Plan that lists those recommendations presented in the Senior Transportation Needs Assessment and provides a proposed means of how those recommendations will be implemented over the next several months. Attachment: Senior Transportation Action Plan ':COMMSERV\Council&Boards\CityCouncil\StaffReports\SeniorTransportationActionPlan.1 00906.doc ~ SENIOR TRANSPORTATION ACTION PLAN The following plan includes all of the recommendations proposed by the consultants who conducted the recent senior transportation survey in addition to other logistical issues related to the selection of a vendor. 1. Staff Update to Citv Council on Current Senior Transportation Proqram a. Staff to provide the City Council an update by memo in September concerning the current senior transportation program and the status of its funding. 2. Park & Recreation Commission Review of Senior Transportation Survey Results a. Staff will provide the Park & Recreation Commission a report on the result of the Senior Transportation survey at their September 21 Commission meeting. 3. Senior Advisory Committee Review of Senior Transportation Survey Results a. Staff will meet with the Senior Advisory Committee (September 25) to discuss the results of the Senior Transportation Survey. 4. Review Senior Transportation Action Plan with City Council and Park & Recreation Commission Joint Meetinq a. Staff and consultants will discuss with the City Council and the Park & Recreation Commission in a joint meeting on October 9 the results of the Senior Transportation Survey and this Action Plan. 5. Develop YMCA Transportation Proqram Proposal a. If approved by City Council, staff will meet with the YMCA in November to discuss refining transportation services to meet the senior needs specified by the recent Senior Transportation Study. This might include regular doctor visits, trips to the grocery stores, pharmacies and possibly trips to visit friends or family. These types of trips would be in addition to the current daily trips to and from the James L. Brulte Senior Center. b. City and YMCA staff will discuss budget restrictions and duration of program (3- 6 years) based upon available county grant funds. c. City and YMCA staff will discuss rider eligibility requirements, pricing, etc. 6. Conduct A Focus Group to Discuss Marketinq Strateqies a. Staff will meet with a focus group in November and review the results of the survey. In addition, staff will obtain their comments or recommendations as to what types of transportation marketing may be more effective. b. The focus group (s) will be facilitated by staff that will direct the discussion on implementation strategies but not attempt to reassess the survey results or develop new interpretations. 1 3 c. Focus group participants will be comprised of seniors who currently use the shared rider bus systems and non-riders. 7. Develop a Transportation Fee Alternative a. In conjunction with developing a funding plan, staff will research alternative funding from November, 2006 to January, 2007 that may be considered to assist the neediest seniors who don't have the financial capability to afford public transportation. Staff will develop criteria to identify what seniors this might include as well as what level of fees may be charged. 8. Submit YMCA Match Proposal to Citv Council a. Staff will propose to the City Council in December that they consider providing a 20% match for a new additional bus to be used for the senior transportation program that YMCA has requested in a current grant request. The grant requires a 20% match by a City partner. Match amount is $12,300 and could be funded through available County grant funding. b. This additional vehicle would enable the City and the YMCA to expand the current program to include trips to grocery stores, pharmacies, doctor appointments and other locations. This additional vehicle enables less use on one of the older vehicles and insures less vehicle downtime due to unexpected repairs. 9. Develop Communitv Collaborations a. Staff will begin meeting with other agencies (Medicare, etc.) in December that own senior buses and vans and discuss the possibility of sharing resources to assist in the implementation of a senior transportation program. b. Staff will also meet with senior assisted living facilities and churches to discuss if there is a means to collaborate using everyone's vans and buses to transport other seniors. c. Staff will begin meeting with the Senior Advisory Committee and the W.I.P. Subcommittee to discuss the development of a senior-buddy ride program. The goal would be to implement such a program in February of 2007. 10. Develop a Strateqic Marketinq Plan for Promotinq Shared Ride and Bus Usaqe a. Staff will meet with other shared-ride agencies such as the YMCA and Omnitrans and discuss some of the survey results and focus group results that may benefit these agencies to promote senior ridership. b. Staff will develop a marketing collaboration between all agencies that provide shared ride services for seniors in Rancho Cucamonga and implement this collaboration by March of 2007. c. Staff will develop a table display or video discussing transportation options for seniors that can be used at special events or at the Senior Center on a regular basis. 2 4: d. Staff will also establish a hotline to answer questions about transportation alternatives until seniors become more familiar with all the available transportation resources. 11. Mount an Imaqe Buildinq Campaiqn a. Staff to begin a marketing campaign that will supplement these shared-ride agencies with our own image building campaign in the Grapevine and Silver Fox beginning in February of 2007. b. Staff will calendar monthly on-site presentations by these agencies at the VIP Club meetings and senior lunches. c. Staff will begin work on the development of a poster campaign to be advertised throughout the Central Park James L. Brulte Senior Center. d. Staff will also advertise these same resources on RCPark.com 12. Implement an Educational Awareness Campaiqn of Transportation Options a. Staff will begin to develop a brochure that describes all available transportation resources available to seniors in Rancho Cucamonga. b. Staff will make this available to seniors at the Senior Center and mail out to those on an established mailing list. c. City staff will begin marketing all senior transportation resources beginning in March of 2007. 13. Develop a Lonq Term Alternative Fundinq Plan a. Staff will begin researching alternative funding sources in April, 2007 for future programs including federal, state, county grants or discretionary funding. b. Staff will also Identify potential funding sources on a quarterly basis and initiate funding requests. c. Staff will update and involve the Senior Advisory Committee on a quarterly basis. 14. Analvsis of the At-Risk Populations a. During 2007, staff will work with the Planning Department to jointly analyze and identify the growth of senior at-risk populations and to identify future transportation resources for those at-risk seniors. 15. Enhance the Perceptions of the Existinq Transportation Svstems a. Staff will work on improving the overall perception of existing public transportation services and set a goal to reduce the fair and poor ratings to less than 10% of the riders. To measure this outcome, staff will conduct surveys maybe once every 6 months beginning in 2008 to determine if existing perceptions is improving. This also reflects on the success of the image building and education campaigns. b. Staff will work with all local transportation service providers to enhance a positive perception of current services by local seniors. 3 5 16. Conduct a Consumer Oriented Assessment a. During 2010, staff or consultants will conduct a review to reassess the older adults' level of use and satisfaction with alternative transportation systems after a successful program to increase ridership and expand senior transportation services. I :COMMSERV\Seniors\SeniorTransportation\Transportation\SenlorTransportationActionPlan.1 009oa.doc 4 ? 0 '" ~ U a ~ . a ci :E N ;; N .... a U ~ C .... a , 0 Z .... a 1i ~ <J) .... a .;, " '" .... a ~ "5 ~ .... a ~ 0 " ~ .... W a Z ~ ~ :J :; w ::;: .... F a '" Z 0. 5 '" c.. .... a Z ~ 0 ~ F ~ :; U .... <( a Z D 0 ~ u. F <( .... f- a a:: c 0 ~ c.. ~ en <0 '" Z a ~ <( u Q) a:: .3 ,I: f- 0; a:: <0 E Q a i= Z , c: 0 W Z to en 0: <0 c: a ,51 n tj c ~ c: <0 0 a '" ... to 0. t: ~ 0 <J) c. '" c: !'? f- c: 0 'c: Q) en <i5 a:: 0 Z w en :> a:: w en ::;: ::;: 0 ~ Ul l<: Ul '. '7 ~ . .. "','" //' "~ '" /'0' ~\ "" /. / ,'n\ j/ / " ' \" // ,'" /" \> \ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SENIOR TRANSPORTATION , NEEDS ASSESSMENT: / Providing Assistance to Older Adults Final Report Joan J. Branin, Ph.D. Director, Center for Health & Aging University of La Verne 1950 3'd Street, La Verne, CA 91750 (909) 593.3511 ext. 4247 Harriet Aronow, Ph.D. University of La Verne 1950 3'd Street, La Verne, CA 91750 (909) 593-3511 ext. 4579 June 2006 ( '~ / / , , ' 'C Acknowledgements The foJ/owing individuals generously assisted with the 1 I J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT 2006 l i I , l , J Consultants Joan J. Branin, Ph.D. Director, Center for Health & Aging University of La Verne, La Verne, CA Harriet U Aronow, Ph.D. University of La Verne, La Verne, CA I i J City of Rancho Cucamonga Kevin McArdle Community Services Director David Moore Community Services Superintendent Ryan Samples Community Services Supervisor June 2006 2 " SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Providing Assistance to Older Adults , Table of Contents " i I. Executive Summary 4 II. Background 15 III. Major Findings 19 A. Nature of the Senior Transportation Needs and Issues 19 A. Characteristics of the Older Adults , B, About Their Driving C, About Their Transportation Needs and Uses D, About Their Transportation Preferences B, Comparison of Drivers and Non-Drivers 33 A. Characteristics of Drivers and Non-Drivers B. About Their Driving C, About Their Transportation Needs and Uses D, About Their Transportation Preferences C. Comparison of the Frail and Non-Frail Older Adults 42 A. Characteristics of the Frail and Non-Frail Older Adults B, About Their Driving C. About Their Transportation Needs and Uses D. About Their Transportation Preferences IV. Recommendations 53 V. Comments 56 Appendix: Cover Letter and Survey 85 3 ~ u 1 " , SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Providing Assistance to Older Adults EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background The General Plan for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, published in October, 2001, states that transportation planning achieves the vision for the City, because it, "supports the mobility needs of our residents and businesses as they avail themselves of community facilities and services" (Page III-56). In January 2006, the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a study of the issues. and transportation needs of its older adults. An understanding of the issues and transportation needs of older adults will enable Rancho Cucamonga to design future transportation programs and services to support and assist older adults in meeting their transportation needs. Approximately 10,000 surveys were mailed to all registered voters in Rancho Cucamonga who were 60 years old or older as of the survey date. The survey tool was prepared by Joan Branin, Ph.D. and Harriet Aronow, Ph.D., Consultants. To ensure anonymity and confidentiality, completed questionnaires were mailed to the Senior Center in a stamped, self-addressed envelope. Two thousand one hundred seventy-two (2,172) surveys were returned for a 22% response rate). In addition, thirty-eight (38) older adults receiving home-bound services were personally interviewed in their homes. In total, 2,210 usable surveys were entered in the analysis of Rancho Cucamonga older adults' transportation needs. The Census of 2000 reported the older adult population (aged 60+) in Rancho Cucamonga as approximately 10,980. The voter registration rate is high in this population and we may expect to have achieved a representative sample. Furthermore, the distribution of ages in the survey response closely resembled the age distribution in the Census. We conclude that the sample is representative of the older adult population of Rancho Cucamonga, and are satisfied that the older population, those 75 years old and older and at higher risk for transportation problems (n = 719), is well represented in the survey results. 4 c reported missing all three activities within the past six months. They tended to be of lower income (47% had incomes below $15,000). ~-! " I Types of Transportation Used. In the past six months, most older adults (83%) used their personal car for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood or were driven by others. Ninety percent or more of the older adults did NOT use public transportation at all. Walking as a mode of transportation was used by only 23% of the older adults. Transportation Needs. Within the past month, 65% of the older adults made ten or more trips within Rancho Cucamonga. Trips outside of the city were less numerous. Within the past month, 40% made ten or more trips outside of Rancho Cucamonga. " '1 I J '\ i I ." Reasons for Trips Within Rancho Cucamonqa. The most frequent reasons for trips within Rancho Cucamonga were to shop for groceries and other things, go to a restaurant, and visit family, friends or meet new people. Fifty-one percent (51 %) made 1-2 trips to the doctor, while 55% made 1-2 trips to the pharmacy. Thirty-three percent of respondents reported making one or more trips to the Senior Center in the past month. The least frequent reasons for trips within the city were to go to a fitness club (87%), to attend a class (84%) or a sporting event (81%), and to go to work (80%) '1 -, I , ..1 " Reasons for Trips Outside Rancho Cucamonqa. The reasons for trips outside of Rancho Cucamonga were similar to those reasons for trips within Rancho Cucamonga but the frequency was less. Within in the past month, the most frequent reasons for trips outside Rancho Cucamonga were to visit family, friends or meet new people, go to a restaurant, shop for groceries, and shop for other things. Fifty-three percent (53%) made 1-2 trips to the doctor; while 29% made 1-2 trips to the pharmacy. The least frequent reasons for trips outside the city were to go to a fitness club (93%), to attend a class (89%), go to a Senior Center (87%), or a sporting event (83%). " i , Time of Day and Week Preferences. Most of the older adults went out into the community to do these activities in the mornings. Fifty percent (50%) of the older adults usually went out in the community in the mornings, while 37% usually went out in the afternoons. Not surprising, only 8% usually went out in the evenings. The majority of respondents went out into the community on both weekdays and weekends. WillinQness to Pay. Most older adults (73%) were willing to pay between $.50 - $1.99 for one-way transportation within Rancho Cucamonga, with just 20% willing to pay between $2.00 and $3.99. More respondents were willing to pay a somewhat larger fare outside of the community. Forty-five percent were willing to pay between $2.00-3.99 for a one-Way trip outside Rancho Cucamonga, with an additional 31 % willing to pay between $.50 -$1.99. 6 1 I 1 i , Transportation Usaqe. Not surprising, most of the older adults used their personal car for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood. -1 l J Transportation Preferences. Use of their personal car was ranked as the most preferred type of transportation (92%). Getting a ride from someone else (52%) and walking (36%) were ranked as the second and third most preferred type of transportation. Riding a bicycle was ranked as the least preferred type of transportation (89%) followed by taking a taxi or cab (87%) and sharing a ride (82%). l i , J '1 J Fixed Route I Schedule or On Demand. A total of 1,829 (83% of the total sample) responded to the question on preferences for fixed route and schedule type (bus) or on-demand types of transportation (taxi, shared ride). "No preference" was the most common response to the question on "fixed route and schedule" vs. "on demand" public transportation system (41 %). Following "no preference" was 35% who preferred "on demand" transportation and 27% who preferred "fixed route and schedule". 1 I J l 'I J Reasons for UsinCl and Not Us'nq a Bus. Affordable fare, convenient location, and reliable service were the three most frequent reasons for using a bus. The three most frequent reasons for NOT using a bus were the total time for the trip is too long, it is too far to go to the bus stop, and the wait is too long. 1 .1 Reasons for UsinCl and Not Usina a Shared Ride. Convenient location, feeling safe, and affordable fare were the three most frequent reasons endorsed for using a shared ride like ACCESS or the YMCA bus. The three most frequent reasons for NOT using a shared ride were the total time for the trip is too long, the wait is too long, and no shared ride is available. 1 J Reasons for UsinCl and Not Usina a Taxi or Cab. Convenient location, reliable service, and protection from the weather were the three most frequent reasons endorsed for using a taxi or cab. The overwhelming reason that older adults did NOT use a taxi or cab was the cost, namely, too expensive. The other two most frequent reasons for NOT using a taxi or cab were the wait is too long and the older adults felt unsafe. ! .J J Reasons for NOT WalkinCl or RidinCl a Bicycle. The three most _ frequent reasons for NOT walking or riding a bicycle were that the older adults have difficulty balancing or walking, not strong enough, and the intersections are too dangerous. I I J .; RatinCls of Transportation Used. There were relatively small numbers of respondents (n = 586 to 884) who rated the various public transportation systems (OMNI bus, ACCESS or YMCA bus shared ride, and taxi or cab). Those who did rate the public transportation systems were not favorable. Forty-eight percent of the respondents rated the OMNI Trans as "fair" or "poor", 43% of respondents 7 rated Shared Rides as "fair" or "poor", and 47% rated the Cabsrraxis as "fair" or "poor. II Satisfaction with Current Transportation System. Seventy-eight percent of respondents reported that they were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their current transportation in the community. Only 6% (n=98) reported that they were either "dissatisfied" or "very dissatisfied". ChanQe in Personal Transportation Needs. In the next year, 22% of respondents saw their personal transportation needs changing, while the large majority foresaw no change. B. Comparison of Drivers and Non-Drivers 1 , Characteristics of Drivers and Non-Drivers. Of the total 2,210 respondents, currently 1,708 (79%) were driving and 442 (21%) were not driving. Non-drivers were more likely to be female (23% of women vs. 14% of men); be less well educated (43% among people with less than high school degree vs. 17% of those with high school degree or higher); have lower incomes (50% of those with incomes less than $15,000); and be older (37% of those aged 75 and older vs. 11 % of those under 75). Health Status. Older adults who drive self-reported better heath, vision, hearing and reaction time than non-drivers. Eighty-three percent of the drivers reported that they were independent and fully mobile, while 70% of the non- drivers reported that they were somewhat restricted in their physical activity or dependent upon others. Non-drivers were more likely to be frail than were drivers. I I Reasons for NOT DrivinQ and Alternatives to Not DrivinQ. No longer comfortable driving, did not like to drive at night. and too much traffic were the. three most frequent reasons endorsed by non-drivers for not driving. The main alternatives to driving one's own car were getting a ride from someone else (41%) and staying at home (31%). Number of Trips. Drivers made more frequent trips within and outside of Rancho Cucamonga than did non-drivers. Seventy-six percent (76%) of the drivers made 10 or more trips within Rancho Cucamonga, compared to 24% of non-drivers. Forty-seven percent (47%) of the drivers made 10 or more trips outside Rancho Cucamonga, compared to just 12% of non-drivers. Time of Dav and Dav of the Week. Drivers and non-drivers were very similar in that they usually go out into the community in the mornings. However, they differ in that drivers (59%) usually go out into the community both on weekdays and weekends, while the non-drivers (55%) usually go out into the community on weekdays. , 8 1 " Willinqness to Pay. The majority of both drivers and non-drivers were willing to pay between $.50-1.99 for a one-way trip within Rancho Cucamonga. Both drivers and non-drivers were willing to pay more for a one-way trip outside Rancho Cucamonga than for a one way trip within Rancho Cucamonga. Forty- seven (47%) percent of the drivers and 41% of the non-drivers were willing to pay between $2.00-3.99 for a one-way trip outside of the community. Missed Activities. Because of transportation problems, non-drivers were more likelito miss activities than drivers. The three most frequently missed activities by non-drivers were religious activities (43%), social activities (41%), and having to cancel a doctor's appointment (38%). More non-drivers than drivers missed medically necessary activities, namely, keeping a doctor's appointments or p.icking up a prescription. One hundred and thirty-eight (38%) of the non-drivers missed or cancelled doctors' appointment, compared to 5% of the drivers. Twenty-eight percent of non-drivers did not pick up a prescription, compared to 6% of the drivers. 1 Transportation Usaqe. In the past month, drivers mostly used their personal car or were driven for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood; non-drivers mainly were driven by others or used their personal car driven by someone else. Non-drivers were eight times more likely to use the bus than drivers. Transportation Preferences. Drivers most preferred to use their own car or be driven by others and least preferred to ride a bicycle or take a taxi. Non- drivers most preferred to get a ride from others or drive a personal car and least preferred ride a bicycle or take the Metrolink. _1 Fixed Route I Schedule or On Demand. Drivers (43%) were more likely to have no preference between a fixed route and schedule and an on-demand public transportation system, while non-drivers (52%) preferred a public transportation system that one calls when they need to use it (on-demand). I I ., , i Ratinqs of Transportation Systems. Drivers and non-drivers were equally likely to be satisfied or dissatisfied with the Bus and Shared Drive transportation systems. Current drivers were slightly more likely to rate cabs/taxis more favorably than were non-drivers. Anticipated Chanqe in Transportation Needs. The majority of both drivers and non-drivers did NOT anticipate a change in their transportation needs in the next year. However, more non-drivers (35%) than drivers (19%) did report anticipating a change in their transportation needs. 9 C. Comparison of Frail, Near Frail, and Non-Frail Older Adults Within the older adults, there were three levels of frailty reported based on the respondents' rating of their lifestyle. The first level is independent, fully mobile (non-frail, n = 1497). The second level is somewhat restricted in physical activity, but able to live on one's own and get out for the basic necessities (near- frail, n = 423), and the third level is dependent upon others for most basic necessities (frail, n = 140). -, , 1 -, , Characteristics of Older Adults by Level of Frailty. Respondents who were near-frail or frail were more likely to be over 75 years of age. Non-frail older adults were more likely to be younger. Those older adults who near-frail or frail were more likely than non-frail respondents to have a household income in the two lowest income categories. Non-frail respondents were more likely to be working full time or part-time. Near- frail and frail older adults were more likely to check that they were disabled. -, " j Health Status. Non-frail respondents reported better heath, vision, hearing and reaction time than near-frail or frail respondents. Vehicle Ownership and DrivinQ. Most non-frail respondents owned a vehicle, possessed a driver's license, and were driving. As frailty increased, ownership and drivership decreased in frequency. Ninety-two percent of non-frail respondents were driving; 60% of near-frail respondents were driving; and only 21 % frail respondents were driving. Transportation Used. As an alternative to the use of their personal car, all three groups were most likely to be driven by someone else than any other type of transportation. Forty-three percent of non-frail respondents, 72% of near- frail respondents, and 82% of frail respondents were driven by someone else. The least frequently used type of transportation was taking a taxi or cab and, for those who are non-frail and near-frail, using a bus. Number of Trips. Non-frail respondents made more frequent trips within Rancho Cucamonga than older adults who are near-frail or frail. Seventy-six percent (76%) of the non-frail respondents reported 10 or more trips, compared to only 43% of near frail and 27% of frail. Non-frail adults made more frequent trips outside of Rancho Cucamonga than did the near-frail or frail. Time of Day and Week Preferences. All three groups of older adults were very similar in that they usually go out into the community in the mornings and, to a lesser extent, in the afternoons. However, they differed in the days of the week that they usually go out into the community. Non-frail respondents were more likely to go out both on weekdays and weekends, while those who are frail reported going out into the community more commonly on weekdays. 10 , , WillinQness to Pay. There were no major differences in willingness to pay for trips within or outside Rancho Cucamonga among the three levels of frailty. ") Missed Activities. In the past six months, the frail and near-frail missed many more activities than non-frail respondents. The three most frequent activities missed by the near-frail were social activities (29%), religious activities (24%), and doctor's appointments (24%). Similarly, frail older adults missed religious aCtivities (46%), social activities (43%), and family activities (41 %) most frequently. Although they were less likely to miss a doctor's appointment or picking up a prescription than other activities, the percentages were still high (34% and 35% respectively). " , i , " i '1 Transportation UsaQe. In the past month, older adults who are independent were more likely to use their personal car or be driven by others for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood. Older adults who were restricted in physical activity were equally as likely to use their personal car as to be driven by others. However, older adults who were dependent upon others were mostly driven by others or use their personal car. Older adults who were dependent upon others were more likely to take the Metrolink than older adults who were independent or restricted in physical activity. '1 " i '-r Transportation Preferences. Older adults who are independent or restricted in physical activity most prefer to use their personal car or be driven by others. Older adults who are dependent upon others most prefer to be driven by others or use their own car. Independent older adults least prefer to take a taxi, while those who are restricted in physical activity or dependent upon others least prefer to ride a bicycle: Public Transportation System Preference. Non-frail older adults were more likely (46%) to state no preference between a public transportation schedule that is a fixed route and schedule and a public transportation system that you call when you need it. However, older adults who are near-frail or frail (51 % and 54% respectively) preferred a public transportation system that one calls when they need to use it. . RatinQs of Types of Transportation. Older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent did not rate bus and shared ride transportation as highly as those who are independent. OMNI Trans was rated "fair" or "poor" by 44% of the non-frail, 51 % of the near-frail, and 69% of the frail respondents. Shared ride system was rated somewhat more positively by frail respondents, with "fair" or "poor" ratings by 40% of non-frail, 54% of near-frail and 57% of frail respondents. 11 Satisfaction with Current Transportation System. Not surprising, non- frail respondents were more likely to be very satisfied with their current transportation system (61 %), than either the near-frail older adults (31 %) or frail adults (14%). On the other hand, the majority of each frailty group was at least satisfied with their current transportation. 1 ! ] Anticipated Chanae in Transportation Needs. Only 16% of non-frail respondents anticipated a change in their transportation needs in the next year, while more than double the percentage of near-frail (37%) and frail (35%) respondents reported anticipating a change. D. Recommendations 1 i I Several observations and recommendations for further investigation and action are presented. Is there a serious and immediate transportation problem? ., I I i No, the survey indicated that the majority of the Rancho Cucamonga residents are satisfied with their current transportation system, namely use of their own personal car or having someone else drive them when they have a transportation need. Very little experience with public transportation exists even though there is a disproportionately high dissatisfaction with public transportation. Much of the dissatisfaction may be based on hearsay rather than actual personal experience. 1. Mount an Imaae Buildina Campaian First and foremost, the City of Rancho Cucamonga needs to mount a campaign to desensitize older adults and address their negative feelings about pUblic and alternative forms of transportation. It is not uncommon for individuals to be negative about the unknown but unless these negative feelings are addressed, any improvements in the transportation systems for seniors may be greeted with similar negative feelings. 2. Conduct Focus Groups Conduct focus groups of older adult users and nonusers of bus and shared ride services. The primary purpose of the focus groups would be to identify what advertising incentives and educational materials and events older adults believe would motivate them to try and use alternative forms of transportation. The secondary purpose of the focus groups wouid be to increase ridership by sparking curiosity and interest. 12 . i i , i i I 4. J 1 "' ! i ! .J . 3. Develop an Educational Awareness Campaicm of Transportation Options An educational awareness campaign should be initiated to disseminate informational brochures to older adults about the existing transportation options and resources for greater mobility for those with more limited access to transportation. Older adults may not be aware of existing transportation resources because there is no imminent need to use them or they may not be utilizing them because they do not know how to access information about available community resources. Many community resources may be underutilized. Develop a StrateQic Marketinq Plan for PromotinQ Shared Ride and Bus UsaQe A strategic marketing plan for the promotion of shared ride and bus usage should be developed outlining how to promote these transportation options directly to older adults. One marketing strategy might be the collaborative development of collateral materials about transportation resources for Rancho Cucamonga residents. Another marketing strategy might be the development of a table display or video discussing transportation options for seniors. A hotline might be developed to answer questions about transportation alternatives until older adults become more familiar with how to access the systems and how to read and understand the schedules and routes. 5. Offer a Transportation Subsidy Offer alternative transportation at the lowest "willingness" to pay levels and subsidize the cost until older adults are sensitized to use the existing transportation and then reassess their willingness to pay at a higher fare. This may be an opportune time to introduce alternative transportation use with the higher costs of fuel--added to the normal costs of repairs and insurance for one's own vehicle. 6. Improve the ExistinQ System. Because the ratings of the existing system are so poor, older adults may be reluctant to try them. The City should establish as a goal to reduce the fair and poor rating to less than 10% of the riders. This will encourage ridership. 7. Analvsis ofthe At-Risk Populations Lack of transportation is an intersection of poverty, age and frailty. The very old, the frail, and the poor are least likely to be driving. While poverty 13 "1 , i 'I .. -, "1 , , , ,I 9. I 'J i J , .J 1 '1 may not increase, old age and frailty will increase in the near term as the population ages in place. Although the numbers are small atthis time, they can be expected to increase with the aging of the population. An analysis of the future growth of the at-risk populations should be undertaken. 8. Develop Community Collaborations Church and social activities may be some of the first activities to go as one ages and becomes frailer. Perhaps enlisting the churches to form volunteer programs to get people to church and other social activities. This will leave the shared bus' focus more on the necessary trips such a doctor's visits. A travel buddy program might be initiated with a friendly travel companion for those who are reluctant to try and use the transportation system. Conduct a Consumer Oriented Assessment In the future, a consumer-oriented assessment should be conducted that includes an assessment of consumer satisfaction with the transportation system and older adults' willingness to pay. The City has just conducted an assessment of senior transportation needs. A logic next step would be to reassess the older adults' level of use and satisfaction with alternative transportation systems after a successful program to increase ridership and expand senior transportation services. 14 SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT: ! , ; Providing Assistance to Older Adults , i i I. Background FINAL REPORT The City of Rancho Cucamonga has proposed to assess the transportation needs of its older residents. This goal is in keeping with the City's General Plan, published in October, 2001, that states that transportation planning achieves the vision for the City because it, "Supports the mobility needs of our residents and businesses as they avail themselves of community facilities and services." (Page III-56) "' . , i The purpose of the transportation needs assessment is to promote a more precise understanding of the number of older adults who require transportation to meet their basic needs now and projections for the future; what types of transportation are preferred; likely ridership; and projected costs of the alternative transportation solutions. , The table below, abstracted from the U.S. Census displays the growth in the older adult population in Rancho Cucamonga between the 1990 and 2000 census. While the total population grew 26% during this time period, the growth in the population aged 60 years and older grew at almost double that rate (47.7%). The older old, those aged 75 and older, increased the most out of all groups (73.3% - 106.3%). This fastest growing age group is the group most likely to need assistance to meet its transportation needs. Older Adult Population in Rancho Cucamonga ~ Total Population 60 and 61 years 62 to 64 years 65 to 69 years 70 to 74 years 75 to 79 years 80 to 84 years 85 years and over Total Aged 60+ 1990 101,409 996 1,314 1,959 1,395 928 511 332 7,435 2000 127,743 1 ,405 1,815 2,519 1,982 1,608 966 685 10,980 Source: u.s. Census (www.census.gov) 15 % Increase 26.0% 41.1% 38.1% 28.6% 42.1% 73.3% 89.0% 106.3% 47.7% In the five years since the 2000 census, projections based on the 10-year growth between the 1990 and 2000 census would estimate the population aged 60+ will have grown by approximately 2,700 persons, plus some people moving into the area to retire or into senior congregate housing opened since the 2000 census. Since the 2000 census, there also will have been a demographic age shift into the older age groups. It is anticipated that there may be as many as 15,000 older adults currently residing in Rancho Cucamonga. , At the 2000 census, the population aged 60+ lived in slightly less than 8,000 households. Approximately 2,000 households included just one person. The demographics of aging suggest that these households will be majority older, widowed, women living alone. Methodology , .J Approximately 10,000 surveys were mailed to all registered voters in Rancho Cucamonga who provided their date of birth and could, therefore, be determined to be 60 years old or older as of the survey date. The survey tool was written by Joan Branin, Ph.D. and Harriet Aronow, Ph.D., Consultants, and printed and mailed through official resources within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. To ensure anonymity and confidentiality, completed questionnaires were mailed to the Senior Center in a stamped, self-addressed envelope. . Two thousand one hundred seventy-two (2,172) were returned and used in this study. : " Non-responders to a mailed survey are likely to include those who are too' frail (or vision impaired) or too busy to complete and reply by mail. This method may result in under-representation on a health and functional continuum those who most need and least need transportation services provided/or supported by the City. In order to pick up older adults who were homebound (and may have been less likely to vote in recent elections), a supplemental subgroup sample of respondents were recruited from two city-sponsored programs (home-delivered meals and LINK, the city's volunteer telephone connection program). This smaller supplemental sample was interviewed in person in their homes. Thirty- eight (38) of the older adults were personally interviewed in their homes. In total, two thousand two hundred ten (2,210) surveys were used in the assessment analysis of Rancho Cucamonga senior transportation needs. In the final analysis, the sample that was included in the survey (by mail or in person) closely resembled the age distribution found in the 2000 Census (see below). It may be concluded that the sample will accurately represent the population. .' 16 Comparison of Census 2000 Age Distribution to Sample Age Groups 60 to 64 years 65 to 74 years 75 to 84 years 85 years and over Census 2000 N % 3,220 29.1 % 4,601 41.5% 2,574 23.2% 685 6.2% Survey Sample N % 590 28.4% 769 37.0% 556 26.8% 163 7.8% Survey Tool - The survey tool was constructed with oversight and input from Dave Moore and Ryan Samples from Community Services, and based on the specific needs of the City. It was designed to take no more than Y, hour to complete (phone, in-person, or self-administered). Topics covered in the survey included: 1 ! ., . How transportation needs are currently being met (including driving status, car ownership) . Primary types of transportation used by residents . Popular destinations . Days and times of need . Community participation (how often older adults get out for various activities -' necessary and discretionary) . Extent of deferred activities such as health appointments or food shopping due to transportation deficits . Reasons for use or non-use of existing public/supported transportation services , I , .) . Preferences for supported transportation (fixed route vs. on demand) . Willingness to pay for transportation . Overall perceived satisfaction with the existing transportation options in Rancho Cucamonga 1 , I I ~J 17 . r ., , I · Any anticipated changes in the next year in the transportation of the older adults residing in Rancho Cucamonga . Basic demographics of the respondents and their self-rated general health, vision and hearing status ') A copy of the Senior Transportation Needs Assessment survey and the cover letter can be found in Appendix A. Detailed findings from the survey follow. , i 1 i .1 I .i "' I I I I .1 .1 18 SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Providing Assistance to Older Adults Major Findings II. Nature of the Transportation Needs and Preferences of the Older Adults Residing in Rancho Cucamonga . 1 I , Part A. Characteristics of the Older Adults Characteristics of the Older Adults. There were 2,210 Rancho Cucamonga adults 60 years of age or older who participated in the Senior Transportation Needs Assessment. Among these older adult respondents, the typical older adult was female, retired, married, and Caucasian between the ages of 60-69 years with a high school degree. They lived with their spouse, relative or friend and had a household income between $15,000-29,999. They had been living in Rancho Cucamonga under 20 years and resided in the 91701 zip code. Table 1. Characteristics of Older Adults Number Percent Gender (n=2,072) Female Male 1,288 784 62% 38% Age (n=2,078) 60-64 years of age 65-69 years of age 70-74 years of age 75-79 years of age 80-84 years of age 85 or older 590 432 337 303 253 163 28% 21% 16% 15% 12% 8% Ethnicity (n=2,023) Caucasian / White African American / Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander Native American Other 1,508 182 209 64 27 33 74% 9% 10% 3% 1% 2% 19 . . , Level of Education (n=2,035) , i Less than high school 168 8% " High school diploma 972 48% Associate degree 360 18% Bachelor's degree 308 15% , Master's degree 174 9% , Doctorate I JD I MD 53 3% '1 Household Income (n=1 ,779) j 0-$14,999 296 17% I $15,000-29,999 560 32% , $30,000-44,999 309 17% I $45,000-59,999 164 9% $60,000-74,999 177 10% '1 $75,000 or more 273 15% i Employment Status (n=2,210) 1 Retired 986 45% , Volunteer regularly during the day 696 31% ~ Work full-time during the day 241 11% '1 Work part-time during the day 156 7% I Disabled 146 7% , " Volunteer regularly during at night 79 4% l Work part-time at night 75 4% I Evening student 61 3% Work full-time at night 0 na I Day time student 0 na ] Marital Status (n=2,078) Married 1,208 58% " Divorced 291 14% Widowed 531 26% 1 Never married 48 2% i , J Living Arrangements (n=2,087) Live alone in their own home 529 25% J Live in their home with a caregiver 44 2% Live in their home with a spouse, 1,375 66% relative or friend .J Live in a senior housing, assisted living 139 7% ,J 20 ., ~ Years Living in Rancho Cucamonga (n=2,116) 0-9 years 626 10-19 years 538 20-29 478 30-39 301 ~~ M 50-59 37 60-69 9 70-79 12 80 or more 1 30% 25% 23% 14% 4% 2% <1% <1% <1% -, 1 -j i ~ Zip Codes (n=2,116) 91701 91729 91730 91737 91739 854 22 662 377 201 40% 1% 31% 18% 10% "' I _J -0 Health Status. The majority of the older adults rated their health as very good or good. Similarly, they rated their vision with the use of corrective eyeglasses and their hearing with the use of hearing aids as very good or good. ., Table 2. Health Status Very Excellent Good Good Fair Poor Health (n=2,065) 15% 34% 29% 19% 3% Vision (n=2,062) 13% 35% 35% 14% 4% Hearing (n=2,031) 15% 33% 29% 18% 4% Reaction time (n=2,035) 17% 37% 30% 12% 4% I --j Lifestyle RatinCl. Seventy-three (73%) described their lifestyle as independent, fully mobile; while 21 % described their lifestyle as one with somewhat restricted physical activity, but able to live on their own and get out for basic necessities. Only 7% were dependent upon others for most basic necessities. Table 3. Lifestyle Rating Independent, fully mobile . Restricted in physical activity Dependent upon others 1,497 423 140 73% 21% 7% . 21 Part B. About Their Driving , , Vehicle Ownership and Driving. There were 2,210 Rancho Cucamonga adults 60 years of age or older who participated in the Senior Transportation Needs Assessment. Among these older adults, 1,858 owned a car, van, or truck. Almost all of those who owned a vehicle had a current, valid driver's license. However, not all currently were driving a vehicle. Of the total, 1,708 (79%) currently were driving. Four hundred forty two (442) older adults reported that they did no.! drive. Table 4. Vehicle Ownership and Driving Number Percent , I ,) Own a vehicle Possession of driver's license Drive a vehicle 1,858 1,852 1,708 85% 85% 79% Reasons for Not DrivinCl. The most common reason for not driving was not liking to drive at night. Other reasons included not liking to drive in the rain, not liking to drive very far and on the freeways, and too much traffic. One hundred-forty three (143) of the older adults no longer felt comfortable driving. Sixteen percent (16%) of the non-drivers no longer had access to a vehicle. Table 5. Reasons for Not Driving Number Percent -' Do not like to drive at night Do not like to drive when it is rainy Do not like to drive very far Do not like to drive on the freeways Too much traffic No longer comfortable driving Don't have access to a vehicle 293 186 183 182 157 143 71 66% 42% 41% 41% 36% 32% 16% -, , Alternatives to DrivinCl. The greatest number of older adults who currently were not driving got a ride from someone else when they needed to go somewhere. Many used a shared ride provided for more than one individual to a destination, usually in a van or small bus such as the ACCESS van or YMCA bus. Very few used public transportation. Unfortunately, fl great number of older adults without transportation stayed at home. 22 Table 6. Alternatives to Driving Number Percent ] . Get a ride from someone else Stay at home Use a shared ride Walk or ride a bicycle Use public transportation 200 135 119 25 25 40% 27% 24% 5% 5% , , I J Part C. About Their Transportation Needs and Uses I I i Number of Trips. Within the past month, 65% or 1,308 older adults made ten or more trips within Rancho Cucamonga. Seventeen percent or 347 older adults made 5-9 trips within Rancho Cucamonga. Eighty-two percent (82%) of the older adults made five or more trips. " , I I i Fewer older adults made trips outside of the city. Within the past month, 40% or 779 older adults made ten or more trips outside of Rancho Cucamonga. Thirty-four percent or 657 older adults made 1-4 trips outside of the city. More of the older adults made 1-4 trips outside than within the city I I j Table 7. Number of Trips None 1-4 trips 5-9 trips 10+ trips J Within Rancho Cucamonga 3% 14% 17% 65% Outside Rancho Cucamonga 8% 34% 18% 40% j Transportation Needs Within Rancho CucamonQa. The transportation needs within Rancho Cucamonga of the older adults varied. The most frequent reasons for trips within Rancho Cucamonga were to shop for groceries and other things, go to a restaurant, and visit family, friends or meet new people. Three or more trips were made by 78% of the older adults for groceries, 59% to shop for other things, 55% to go to a restaurant, and 48% to visit family, friends, or to meet new people. Fifty-one percent (51%) made 1-2 trips to the doctor; while 55% made 1-2 trips to the pharmacy. Sixty-eight percent (68%) did not go to the Senior Center in the past month. Going to a fitness club (87%), to attend a class (84%) or a sporting event (81 %), and to go to work (80%) were the least frequent reasons for trips within the city. 23 Table 8. Transportation Needs Within Rancho Cucamonga Not at all 1-2x 3-4x 5+ Go to a doctor's appointment 27% 51% 16% 6% Go to the pharmacy 18% 55% 19% 7% , Visit family, friends or meet new 24% 27% 22% 26% i i i people Attend a religious service 47% 14% 22% 18% ~, i Go to the Senior Center 68% 18% 8% 7% Attend a class 84% 8% 4% 4% . Participate in volunteer activities 71% 9% 9% 11% Shop for groceries 8% 4% 35% 43% ~ Shop for things other than groceries 10% 31% 31% 28% , ~Go to movie, play or social event 43% 33% 14% 10% ~ Attend a sporting event 81% 9% 5% 5% Go to a restaurant 17% 28% 28% 27% Go to my place of employment 80% 4% 2% 15% Go to a fitness club 87% 4% 3% 6% , i , Transportation Needs Outside Rancho Cucamonaa. The reasons for trips outside of Rancho Cucamonga were similar to those reasons for trips within Rancho Cucamonga but the frequency was less. Within the past month, the most frequent reasons for trips outside Rancho Cucamonga were to visit family, friends or meet new people, go to a restaurant, shop for groceries, and shop for other things. Forty-two percent (42%) of older adults made 3 or more trips to visit family, friends, or to meet new people, 35% to shop for other things, 33% to go to a restaurant, and 33% to shop for groceries. Fifty-three percent (53%) made 1-2 trips to the doctor; while 29% made 1-2 trips to the pharmacy. _: Going to a fitness club (93%), to attend a class (89%), go to the Senior Center (87%), or a sporting event (83%) were the least frequent reasons for trips within the city. 24 Table 9. Transportation Needs Outside Rancho Cucamonga Not at all 1-2x 3-4x 5+ Go to a doctor's appointment 31% 53% 13% 4% Go to the pharmacy 59% 29% ,8% 3% Visit family, friends or meet new 25% 33% ' 23% 19% peo'ple Attend a religious service 66% 12% 12% 10% Go to the Senior Center 87% 7% 4% 2% Attend a class 89% 6% 4% 1% Participate in volunteer activities 77% 11% 7% 5% Shop for groceries 41% 26% 17% 16% Shop for things other than groceries 28% 37% 23% 12% Go to movie, play or social event 59% 27% 11% 3% Attend a sporting event 83% 10% 4% 3% Go to a restaurant 31% 35% 18% 15% Go to my place of employment 79% 3% 3% 15% Go to a fitness club 93% 5% 2% 2% Time of Day, The time of day that the older adults usually went out in the community to do the previously mentioned activities was in the mornings. In fact, 1,017 or 50% of the older adults usually went out in the community in the mornings, while 745 or 37% usually went out in the afternoons. Not surprising, only 8% usually went out in the evenings. Table 10. Time of Day Number Percent Mornings , Afternoons Evenings Both mornings and afternoons Both afternoons and evenings Other 1,017 745 157 74 23 19 50% 37% 8% 4% 1% 1% 25 Davs of the Week. The majority of the older adults went out into the community on both weekdays and weekends. Four times as many older adults went on weekdays as on weekends. Table 11. Days of the Week Number Percent Week days Weekends Both 761 171 1,112 37% 8% 54% Missed Activities. In the past six months, these older adults did report that they missed. cancelled and did not attend or do several types of activities because of problems with transportation. Only 12% and 11 % respectively cancelled / missed a doctor's appointment or did not pick a prescription. Table 12. Missed Activities Number Percent Not attend a social activity 256 15% Did not attend a religious activity 219 13% Canceled or missed doctor's appointment 212 12% Did not shop for groceries 190 11 % Did not pick up a prescription 175 10% Did not attend a family activity 175 10% Willinaness to Pay for One Way Transportation within Rancho Cucamonaa. Most of the older adults (1,236 of the 1,700 respondents) were willing to pay between $.50 - $1.99 for one-way transportation within Rancho Cucamonga. Table 13. Willingness to Pay for One Way Transportation Number Percent $.50 - $1.99 1,236 73% $2.00 - 3.99 345 20% $4.00 - 5.99 83 5% $6.00 - 7.99 13 <1% $8.00 - or more 23 1% 26 Willincmess to Pay for One Way Transportation Outside Rancho CucamonQa. Most of the older adults were willing to pay a little more for transportation outside of the community. Of the 1,657 respondents, forty-five percent were willing to pay between $2.00-3.99 for a one-way trip outside Rancho Cucamonga. Thirty-one percent (31 %) were willing to pay $.50 - $1.99 for one-way transportation within Rancho Cucamonga. Table 14. Willingness to Pay for One Way Transportation Number Percent $.50 - $1.99 518 31% $2.00 - 3.99 748 45% $4.00 - 5.99 267 16% $6.00 - 7.99 68 4% $8.00 - or more 56 3% Types of Transportation Used. In the past month, most older adults used their personal car for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood or were driven by others. Eighty-three percent (83%) used their personal car for trips outside of their neighborhood. Ninety percent or more of the older adults did NOT use public transportation at all. Walking as a mode of transportation was used by 23% of the older adults. Table 15. Types ofTransportation Used Not at all 1-2x 3x Alwavs use Walk 77% 12% 7'% 4% Bicycle 91% 3% 2% 5% Personal car 17% 6% 12% 65% Driven by others 48% 21% 20% 11% Shared ride 90% 6% 3% 2% Taxi or cab 96% 3% <1% 1% Bus 96% 2% 1% 1% Metrolink 94% 5% <1% 1% Part D. About Their Transportation Preferences Most Preferred Type of Transportation. Older adults ranked use of their own personal car as their most preferred type of transportation. Their second and third most preferred type of transportation was getting a ride from someone else (52%) and walking (36%). 27 : Table 16. Most Preferred Type of Transportation Percent , Use own car Get a ride from someone else Walk Use the Metrollnk Share a ride Take a bus Take a taxi or cab Ride a bicycle 92% 52% 36% 20% 18% 18% 13% 11% -I , j -"\ Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Least Preferred Tvpe of Transportation. The older adults ranked riding a bicycle as their least preferred type of transportation. Their second and third least preferred type of transportation were taking a taxi or cab (87%) and sharing a ride (82%). . : Table 17. Least Preferred Type of Transportation "1-.... ; Percenr- .~.... RanK~ -~.__._~.~. Ride a bicycle Take a taxi or cab Share a ride Take a bus Use the Metrollnk Walk Get.a ride from someone else Use own car 89% 87% 82% 82% 80% 64% 48% 8% -. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Public Transportation System Preference. Regarding their preference for a public transportation system that had a fixed route and schedule (like a bus or train) or a public transportation system that require riders to call when they need it (like a taxi cab or ACCESS and the YMCA bus), the older adults had no preference. If they had to indicate a preference, most older adults would prefer to call when they needed to use the transportation system than a transportation system with a fixed route and schedule. . ., Table 18. Public Transportation System Preference Number Fixed route and scheduie Call when needed No preference 433 648 748 28 Percent 24% 35% 41% Reasons for Usina a Bus. Affordable fare, convenient location, and reliable service were the three most frequent reasons for using a bus. The three least frequent reasons for using a bus were friendly driver, not very many packages to carry, and ability to accommodate a person with disability. Table 19. Reasons for Using a Bus Number Percent Affordable fare Convenient location Reliable service Feel safe Physically able to ride a bus Reasonable time for total trip Friendly driver Protection from weather Can accommodate a person with disability Not very many packages to carry 319 280 271 237 221 167 144 140 103 90 14% 13% 12% 11% 10% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% Reasons for NOT Usina a Bus. The three most frequent reasons for NOT using a bus were the total time for the trip is too long, it is too far to go to the bus stop, and the wait is too long. The three least frequent reasons for NOT using a bus were that the area at the bus stop is too busy, they are too ill or frail to travel, and it is too expensive to ride the bus. Table 20. Reasons for NOT Using a Bus Number Percent Total time for trip too long 473 21 % Too far to go to the bus stop 464 21 % Wait is too long 434 20% Too difficult to carry packages on bus 430 20% Does not stop at desired location 421 19% Afraid to use after dark 420 19% No bus available 395 18% No protection from weather 382 17% (sun, rain) at bus stops Feel unsafe 277 13% Lack of reliable service 264 12% Difficult to use due to a disability 219 10% Too expensive 149 7% Too ill or frail to travel 102 5% Area at the bus stop is too busy 83 4% 29 " Reasons for UsinQ a Shared Ride. The three most frequent reasons for using a shared ride like ACCESS or the YMCA bus were convenient location, feeling safe, and affordable fare. The three least frequent reasons for using a shared ride were not very many packages to carry, friendliness of the driver, and reasonable time for total trip. Table 21. Reasons for Using a Shared Ride Number Convenient location Feel safe Affordable fare Reliable service Physically able to ride a bus Can accommodate a person with disability Protection from weather Reasonable time for total trip Friendly driver Not very many to carry . Percent 165 148 145 134 117 103 100 85 82 59 7% 7% 7% 6% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 3% Reasons for NOT UsinQ a Shared Ride. The three most frequent reasons for NOT using a shared ride were the total time for the trip is too long, the wait is too long, and no shared ride is available. The three least frequent reasons for NOT using a shared ride were they are too ill or frail to travel, feel unsafe, and it is too expensive to share a ride. Table 22. Reasons for NOT Using a Shared Ride Number Percent No shared ride available 230 10% Wait is too long 230 10% Total time for trip too long 230 10% Afraid to use after dark 174 8% Too difficult to carry packages on bus 172 8% Does not stop at desired location 160 7% Lack of reliable service 142 6% . Difficult to use due to a disability 136 6% No protection from weather 105 5% (sun, rain) at bus stops Too expensive .102 5% Feeling unsafe 101 5% Too ill or frail to travel 57 3% 30 1 I .I .1 J Reasons for usinQ a taxi or cab. The three most frequent reasons for using a taxi or cab were convenient location, reliable service, and protection from the weather. The three least frequent reasons for using a taxi or cab were not too many packages to carry, affordable fare, and feel safe. J J J ] J ] Table 23. Reasons for Using a Taxi or Cab Number Percent Convenient location Reliable service Protection from weather Physically able to ride a bus Reasonable time for total trip Can accommodate a person with disability Feel safe Affordable fare . Not very many to carry 255 129 83 76 73 67 66 56 44 12% 6% 4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 1 j Reasons for NOT usinQ a taxi or cab The overwhelming reason that older adults did NOT use a taxi or cab was the cost, namely, too expensive. The other two most frequent reasons for NOT using a taxi or cab were the wait is too long and the older adults felt unsafe. The three least frequent reasons for NOT using a taxi or cab were no protection from weather, total time for the trip is too long, and no taxi or cab is available. J ] J J J J J Table 24. Reasons for NOT Using a Taxi or Cab Number Percent Too expensive 658 Wait is too long. 167 Feeling unsafe 139 Difficult to use due to a disability 127 Too ill or frail to travel 126 Afraid to use after dark 111 Too difficult to carry packages on bus 103 No taxi or cab available 96 Total time for trip too. long 88 Lack of reliable service 79 No protection from weather 42 (sun, rain) at bus stops 30% 8% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 2% , I J J 31 l ] ] J -] J l ....J Reasons for NOT Walkinq or Ridinq a Bicvcle. The last mode of transportation used by older adults was walking or riding a bicycle. The three most frequent reasons for NOT walking or riding a bicycle were that the older adults have difficulty balancing or walking, not strong enough, and the intersections are too dangerous. The three least frequent reasons for NOT walking or riding a bicycle were lack of sidewalks, no place to stop in the middle of the street if the light changes red, and the signal lights change too quickly. l Table 25. Reasons for NOT Walking or Riding a Bicycle Number. Percent Have difficulty balancing or walking 367 17% Not strong enough 361 16% Intersections are too dangerous 343 16% Too hard to carry packages 341 15% Concern about weather 294 13% . (too hot, too cold, too damp) Takes too much time 255 12% Lack of benches to rest 254 12% Lack of bicycle paths 232 11% Signal lights change too quickly 214 10% No place to stop in the middle of 200 9% street if the light changes red Lack of sidewalks 185 8% ] ] ] J ].-. . J J Ratings of Transportation System Used. The various transportation systems (OMNI bus, ACCESS or YMCA bus shared ride, and taxi or cab) were rated by the older adults. The majority of the older adults rated the three transportation systems as good to fair. Table 26. Ratings of Transportation System Used Very Excellent Good Good Fair Poor Bus 1% 14% 37% 34% 14% Shared ride 4% 19% 33% 30% 15% Taxi or cab 6% 10% 37% 34% 13% i .J I J J Satisfaction with Current Transportation Svstem. Fifty-one (51%) percent indicated that they are very satisfieq with the type of transportation that they currently used to get around the community; while twenty-six (26%) percent indicated that they were satisfied with the type of transportation that they currently use to get around the community. The remainder (22%) were either dissatisfied, very dissatisfied or neither satisfied or dissatisfied. 32 1 I 1 J Table 27. Satisfaction with Current Transportation System l J Number Very satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied or dissatisfied Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied 773 405 233 60 38 f ] ] J J Percent 51% 27% 15% 4% 3% Change in Personal Transportation Needs. In the next year, only 22% saw their personal transportation needs changing. Characteristics of Drivers and Non-Drivers. Of the total 2,210 respondents, currently 1,708 (79%) were driving and 442 (21 %) were not driving. The typical older adults who drives and those who do NOT drive both . were more likely to be married, Caucasian, women with a high school degree living with their spouse, relative or friend. Moreover,drivers were more likely to be retired, younger (60-74 years of age) and 'with a higher income ($15,000- 44,999). Non drivers were more likely to be somewhat older (65-84 years of age), with a lower household income (under $30,000) and more likely to be involved in volunteer activities (41 %) and disabled (35%). Table 28. Characteristics of Older Adults Drivers and Non-drivers III. Comparison of Drivers and Non-Drivers 1 j 1 -, J J J J J Drivers Gender (2,039) Female Male 59% 41% Age (n = 2,025) <65 years of age 65-74 years of age 75-84 years of age 85 or older 33% 40% 21% 6% I J Ethnicity (n = 1,972) Caucasian / White African American / Black Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander Native American 77% 9% 9% 3% 2% I I i J 33 Non-Drivers 73% 27% 2% 24% 49% 16% 69% 10% 14% 1% 1% l \ J , Level of Education (n = 1,982) Less than high school 6% 18% l High school diploma 46% 52% J Associate degree 18% 16% Bachelor's degree 17% 10% l Master's degree 10% 2% J Doctorate / JD / MD 3% 2% l Household Income (n = 289) J 0-$14,999 10% 40% $15,000-29,999 28% 40% J $30,000-44,999 20% 8% $45,000-59,999 11% 4% $60,000-74,999 12% 10% J $75,000 or more 19% 3% Employment Status ] Work full-time days (n = 241) 99% <1% Work full-time nights (n = 102) 85% 15% Work part-time days (n = 155) 90% 10% l Work part-time nights (n = 71) 79% 21% J Volunteer during the day (n = 674) 82% 18% Volunteer in evenings (n = 79) 67% 33% J Day time student (n = 61) 89% 12% Evening student (n = 51) 80% 20% Retired (n = 973) 75% 25% ] Disabled (n = 138) 65% 35% Marital Status (n = 2,030) ] Married 63% 40% Divorced 15% 11% Widowed 21% 43% J Never married 1% 6% Living Arrangements (n=2,040) ) Live alone in their own home . 27% 18% I Live in their home with a caregiver 1% 6% .J Live in their home with a spouse, 69% 58% J relative or friend Live in a senior housing, assisted living 4% 19% . J Zip Codes (n = 2069) 91701 41% 41% 91729 1% 1% J 91730 30% 36% 91737 19% 14% 91739 10% 20% I J 34 , J 1 I .J Health Status. Older adults who drive self-reported better heath, vision, hearing and reaction time than non-drivers. Eighty-three percent of the drivers reported that they were independent and fully mobile, while 70% of the non- drivers reported that they were somewhat restricted in their physical activity or dependent upon others. Clearly, non-drivers were frailer than drivers. 1 1 J l J ] ] ] ] ] ] '-1 ~ B U IU Table 29. Health Status. Drivers Non-Drivers Health (n = 2, 013) Excellent 19% <1% Very Good 39% 15% Good 28% 33% Fair 12% 43% Poor 2% 9% Vision (n = 2,009) Excellent 15% 3% Very Good 41% 11% Good 33% 41% Fair 10% 30% Poor 1% 15% Hearing (n = 1.980) Excellent 18% 5% Very Good 36% 23% Good 31% 24% Fair 14% 34% Poor 2% 13% Reaction time (n = 1,982) Excellent 21% 5% Very Good 42% 15% Good 30% 30% Fair 7% 34% Poor 1% 16% Table 30. Lifestyle Ratings (n=2,008) Drivers Non "Drivers Independent, fully mobile 83% 30% Somewhat restricted activity 15% 42% Dependent upon others 2% 28% n U 35 ! I U -, \ I . .., , i , .., , , , .J Reasons for Not DrivinQ and Alternatives to Not DrivinQ. The three most frequent reasons by non-drivers for not driving were that they were no longer comfortable driving, they did not like to drive at night, and there was too much traffic.. The main alternatives to driving one's own car were getting a ride from someone else (41%) and staying at home (31%). .., , 1 ..J Table 31. Non-Drivers' Reasons for Not Driving ] Number Percent J J ] Do not like to drive at night No access to vehicle Do not like to drive when it is rainy Do not like to drive very far . Do not like to drive on the freeways Too much traffic No longer comfortable driving 88 62 61 67 72 75 95 20% 14% 14% 15% 16% 17% 21% l J Table 32. Non Drivers' Alternatives to Driving (n = 315) Number Percent "\ I -' Get a ride from someone else Stay at home Use a shared ride Walk or ride a bicycle Use public transportation 130 97 52 15 20 41% 31% 17% 5% 6% J ] I ..J "1 J Number of Trips. Drivers made more frequent trips within and outside of Rancho Cucamonga than did non-drivers. Seventy-six percent (76%) of the drivers made 10 or more trips within Rancho Cucamoriga, while sixty-nine percent (69%) of the non-drivers made 1-9 trips within Rancho Cucamonga. Forty-seven percent (47%) of the drivers made 10 or more trips outside Rancho Cucamonga, while the 58% of the non-drivers made 1-4 trips outside Rancho Cucamonga. Table 33. Number of Trips j Drivers Non Drivers I J Within Rancho Cucamonga (n = 1,953) None 1-4 trips 5-9 trips 10+ trips 2% 8% 14% 76% 7% 38% 31% 24% I J I .J 36 i I -, 1 1 1 1 Outside Rancho Cucamonga (n = 1,895) None 1-4 trips 5-9 trips 10+ trips 6% 28% 18% 47% 16% 58% 14% 12% Time of Dav and Dav of the Week. Drivers and non-drivers were very similar in that they usually go out into the community in the mornings. However, they differ in that drivers (59%) usually go out into the community both on weekdays and weekends, while the non-drivers (55%) usually non-drivers usually go out into the community on weekdays. 1 J 1 1 J Table 34. Time of Day' Drivers (n=1,588) . Non-Drivers . (n=398) 1 I ] J J ] -j Mornings 50% Afternoons 37% Evenings 7% Both mornings and afternoons 4% Both afternoons and evenings 1 % Other <1 % 50% 36% 9% 3% 0% <1% Table 35. Days of the Week Drivers (n=1,592) Non-Drivers (n=402) Weekdays Weekends Both 32% 8% 59% 55% 10% 35% I , J Missed Activities. Because of lack of transportation, non-drivers missed a great many more activities than drivers. The three most frequent activities missed by non-drivers were religious activities (43%), social activities (41 %), and' having to cancel a doctor's appointment (38%). More non-drivers than drivers missed medically necessary activities, namely, keeping a doctor's appointments and picking up a prescription. Non-drivers missed or cancelled doctors' appointment 38% of the time compared to 5% of the time for drivers because of lack of transportation. Non-drivers did not pick up a prescription 28% of the time compared to 6% of the time for drivers because of lack of transportation. I I J , , ! ~ 37 ) i J Table 36. Missed Activities l ! Drivers Not attend a social activity (n = 1,718) 9% Did not attend a religious activity (n = 1,727) 6% Canceled or missed doctor's appointment (n = 1,797) 5% Did not shop for groceries (n = 1,760) 5% Did hot pick up a prescription (n = 1,770) 6% Did not attend a family activity (n = 1,710) 6% 1 1 I -I I Non-Drivers 41% 43% 38% 34% 28% 32% Willinqness to Pay. The majority of both drivers and non-drivers were willing to pay between $.50-1.99 for a one-way trip within Rancho Cucamonga. Both drivers and non-drivers were willing to pay more for a one-way trip outside Rancho Cucamonga than for a one way trip within Rancho Cucamonga. Forty- seven percent (47%) of the drivers and 41 % of the non-drivers were willing to pay between $2.00-3.99 for a one-way trip outside of the community. l ] I Table 37. Willingness to Pay for One Way Transportation Within RC Drivers (n=1 ,301) i I .J $0.50 - 1.99 $2.00 - 3.99 $4.00 - 5.99 $6.00 - 7.99 $8.00 - or more 75% 20% 4% <1% <1% ] ] J OJ Non-Drivers (n=371 ) 66% 21% 9% <1% 3% Table 38. Willingness to Pay for One Way Transportation Outside RC Drivers (n=1,290) $0.50 - 1.99 $2.00 - 3.99 . $4.00 - 5.99 $6.00 - 7.99 $8.00 - or more 31% 47% 16% 4% 3% .1 i :1 38 Non-Drivers (n=343) 31% 41% 18% 4% 6% , -1 I I 1 I, , . i J . I -' -, J ] I ..J I I ..;.J .-) 1 I .J 1 I ..J -I ~I -., 1 .J .-:1 I ...J .1 , e:1 ...J J I .J , I -' I . J Types of Transportation Used. In the past month, drivers mostly used their personal car (89%) or were driven (45%) for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood. Eighty-one percent of the non-drivers were driven by others or used their personal car driven by someone else (47%). Twelve percent of the drivers and 25% of the non-drivers used walking as a means of transportation. Non-drivers were eight times more likely to use the bus than drivers. Table 39. Types of Transportation Used Drivers Non-Drivers Walk Bicycle Personal car Driven by others Shared ride Taxi or cab Bus Metrolink 12% 10% 89% 45% 6% 3% 2% 5% 25% 5% 47% 81% 29% 6% 17% 7% Most Preferred Type of Transportation. Drivers most preferred to use their own car or to get a ride from others. Getting a ride from someone else (90%) was the most frequently used type of transportation by non-drivers. Although they did not drive, non-drivers were next most likely to prefer using their personal car (63%), presumably driven by a spouse, relative or friend, to meet their transportation needs. Table 40. Most Preferred Type of Transportation . Drivers Non-Drivers Use own car (n=1, 758) Get a ride from someone (n=1 ,201) Walk (n=1 ,173) Use the Metrolink (n=1 ,062) Take a bus (n=1.204) Share a ride (n=1 ,083) Take a taxi or cab (n=1 ,240) Ride a bicycle (n=1, 180) 96% 42% 35% 21% 17% 15% 12% 10% 63% 90% 40% 19% 26% 32% 21% 12% 39 'I I I J Least Preferred Type of Transportation. Drivers and non-drivers ranked riding a bicycle as their least preferred type of transportation (90% and 88% respectively). Drivers ranked taking a taxi (88%) and sharing a ride (85%) as their second and third least preferred type of transportation. Non-drivers ranked using the Metrolink (82%) and taking a taxi (79%) as their second and third least preferred type of transportation. 'I I I 1 1 I Table 41. Least Preferred Type of Transportation ] J ] l j Ride a bicycle (n=1, 180) Take a taxi or cab (n=1 ,240) Share a ride (n=1 ,083) Take a bus (n=1.204) Use the Metrolink (n=1 ,062) Walk (n=1, 173) Get a ride from someone else (n=1 ,201) Use own car (n=1, 758) ] I j Drivers 90% (1) 88% (2) 85% (3) 83% (4) 79% (5) 65% (6) 59% (7) ,4% (8) Non-Drivers 88% (1) 79% (3) 68% (5) 74% (4) 82% (2) 60% (6) 10% (8) 37% (7) Public Transportation System Preference. Drivers (43%) were more likely to have no preference between a public transportation schedule that is a fixed route and schedule and a public transportation system that you call when you need it. Fifty-two percent (52%) of the non-drivers preferred a public transportation system that one calls when they need to use it. J J J J ] J Table 42. Public Transportation System Preference Fixed route and schedule Call when needed No preference Drivers (n=1,446) 26% 31% 43% Non-Drivers (n=351 ) 17% 52% 31% RatinQs of Types of Transportation Used. Non-drivers did not rate bus and shared ride transportation as highly as drivers. Sixty-two percent of non- drivers rated bus transportation as good to fair compared to 73% of the drivers. Fifty-six percent of the non-drivers rated the shared ride as good to fair compared to 63% of the drivers. Taxi transportation was rated as good to fair by slightly more non-drivers than drivers 73% compared to 71 % respectively. I , " J I J 40 J 1 I i , -I J Table 43. Ratings of Transportation Used Drivers Non-Drivers Bus (n=761) Excellent 1% 3% Very Good 13% 15% Good 37% 35% Fair 36% 27% Poor 13% 21% Shared ride (n=572) Excellent 3% 7% Very Good 19% .21% Good 34% 24% Fair 29% 32% Poor 15% 16% Taxi or cab (n=833) Excellent 7% 3% Very Good 11% 5% Good 36% 39% Fair 35% 34% Poor 11% 18% 1 1 I J ] l ~ 1 .1 ] ] J J J ] Satisfaction with Current Transportation System. Not surprising, drivers were more satisfied with their current transportation system, Le., the use of their personal car. Non drivers were less satisfied with their current transportation system. Table 44. Satisfaction with Current Transportation System Drivers (n=1,191) Non-Drivers (n=298) I ] I , ~ Very satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied or dissatisfied Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied 58% 25% 13% 2% 2% 24% 34% 26% 11% 6% j iJ Anticipated ChanCle in Transportation Needs. The great majority of the drivers (81%) and non-drivers (65%) did NOT anticipate a change in their transportation needs in the next year. However, more non-drivers (35%) than drivers .(19%) anticipated a change in their transportation needs. I j 41 I I j 1 Table 45. Anticipated Change in Transportation Needs Drivers (n=1,417) Non-Drivers (n=343) 1 ] J J ] J J J :1 ] ] J J I Yes, anticipate a change 19% 35% IV. Comparison of the Frail, Near-Frail and Non-Frail Older Adults Within the older adults, there were three levels of frailty based on the respondents rating of their lifestyle: o independent, fully mobile (non-frail) o somewhat restricted in physical activity, but able to live on one's own and get out for basic necessities (near-frail) o dependent upon others for most basic necessities(frail) Characteristics of Older Adults bv Level of Frailtv. Older adults who are either independent, restricted in physical activity, or dependent upon others were all more likely to be female, married, Caucasian with a high school degree and living with their spouse, relative or friend. Older adults restricted in physical activity (37%) and those who are dependent upon others (54%) were more likely to be between the ages of 75-84 years. Independent older adults were more likely to be younger and less than 65 years of age (74%). The household income of older adults who are independent were distributed across all income categories with the highest percent in the $15,000- 29,999. Those older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent upon others were more Iikeiy to have a household income in the $15,000-44,999 category. Independent older adults were more likely to be working full time or part- time or a daytime student. Older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent upon others were more likely to be disabled or volunteering in the evenings. Table 46. Characteristics of Older Adults by Level of Frailty Indeo Restricted Deo Gender (n=2,026) Female Male 61% 40% 63% 37% 71% 29% I _J 42 I J 1 J 1 ] 1 I J Living Arrangements (n=1 ,989) Live alone in their own home 27% 24% 28% Live in their home with a caregiver <1% 2% 8% Live in their home with a spouse, relative or friend 67% 65% 59% Live in a senior housing, assisted living 6% 9% 5% .1 Zip Codes (n = 2069) i i 91701 41% 39% 35% 91729 1% 1% <1% 91730 30% 32% 46% 91737 18% 19% 11% 91739 10% 10% 7% 1 I ] Health Status. Older adults who are independent reported better heath, vision, hearing and reaction time than older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent. Seventy-one percent (71 %) of the older adults who are independent reported their health status as very good to good. Seventy-four percent (74%) of those restricted in physical activity reported their health status as good to fair similar to that reported by those who are dependent upon others (75%). Seventeen percent (17%) of those who are dependent reported their health status as poor. J Seventy-seven percent (77%) of the aider adults who are independent . reported their vision as very good to good. Seventy-four percent (74%) of those restricted in physical activity reported their vision as good to fair; while 70% of those who are dependent upon others reported their vision as good to fair (70%). Twenty-three percent (23%) of those who are dependent upon others reported their vision as poor. 'I J I J ] J Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the aider adults who are independent reported their hearing as very good to good. Sixty-eight percent (68%) of those restricted in physical activity reported their hearing as good to fair; while 53% of those who are dependent upon others reported their hearing as good to fair. Twenty-three percent (23%) of those who are dependent upon others reported their vision as poor. . I J J Seventy-four (74%) of older adults who are independent reported their reaction time as very good to good. Sixty-seven (67%) percent of those restricted in physical activity reported their reaction time as good to fair while 59% of those who are dependent upon others reported their reaction time as good to fair. Thirty-two percent (32%) of those who are dependent upon others reported their reaction time as poor, I j 44 i J Table 48. Extent of Vehicle Ownership and Driving j J J I J Indeo Restricted Oep (n=1,479) (n=413) (n=140) Own a vehicle 94% 76% 42% Possession of driver's license 94% 73% 36% Orive.a vehicle 92% 60% 21% 45 J ] J ] ] l ..J Reasons for Not Drivina and Alternatives to Not Drivina. The three most frequent reasons reported by older adults who are independent were do not like to drive at night, on the freeways, and when it rains. The three most frequent reasons reported by older adults who are restricted in physical activity were that they do not like to drive at night, do not feel comfortable driving, and do not like to drive on the freeways. The three most frequent reasons reported by older adults who are dependent upon others were that they do not like to drive too far, at night, and do not like to drive on the freeways and in too much traffic. Lack of access to a vehicle was the least frequent reason for not driving mentioned by all levels of frailty. ] J [J [J \-1 o Table 49. Reasons for Not Driving Indep Restricted Dep Do not like to drive at night (n=581) 54% 47% 29% No access to vehicle (n=395) 15% 16% 12% Do not like to drive when it is rainy (n=503) 37% 34% 22% Do not like to drive very far (n=500) 34% 33% 33% Do not like to drive on the freeways (n=490) 39% 36% 24% Too much traffic (n=465) 34% 28% 24% No longer comfortable driving (n=434) 23% 43% 17% Alternatives to Not Drivina There was a dramatic difference in the alternatives to not driving among the three levels of frailty. Those who are independent were more likely to take a shared ride or get a ride from someone else (37% and 32% respectively) as an alternative to driving their personal car. Those who are restricted in physical activity were more likely to get a ride from someone else (52%) as an alternative to driving their personal car. Those who are dependent upon others were more likely to stay at home (51 %) as an alternative to driving their personal car. IJ- I- t Table 50. Non-Drivers' Alternatives to Driving ld U i [J Indep (n=181) Restricted (n=182) Dep (n=97) Get a ride from someone else Stay at home Use a shared ride Walk or ride a bicycle Use public transportation 32% 15% 37% 10% 7% 52% 24% 18% 4% 2% 33% 51% 8% <1% 8% :-i . I u 46 , I ; I U .-' ) l i .J i .1 Number of Trips. Older adults who are independent made more frequent trips within Rancho Cucamonga than older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent upon others did. Seventy-six percent (67%) of the older adults who are independent made 10 or more compared to only 43% of those restricted in physical activity and 27% of those dependent upon others. Those who were restricted in physical activity and dependent upon others made fewer trips. ~ I I J -1 J Older adults who are independent made more frequent trips outside of Rancho Cucamonga than older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent upon others did. Most of them made 1-4 trips outside Rancho Cucamonga. ] J ] , I .~ Table 51. Number of Trips IndeD Restricted OeD Within Rancho Cucamonga (n=1,373) (n=396) (n=124) None 2% 5% 13% 1-4 trips 8% 23% 36% 5-9 trips 13% 29% 24% 10+ trips 76% 43% 27% IndeD Restricted OeD Outside Rancho Cucamonga (n=1,345) (n=391 ) (n=102) None 6% 14% 22% 1-4 trips 26% 54% 44% 5-9 trips 18% 18% 18% 10+ trips 50% 14% 17% '1 J ] ] ] "l I ..J Time of Dav and Dav of the Week. All three groups of older adults were very similar in that they usually go out into the community in the mornings and, to a lesser extent, in the afternoons. However, they differ in the days of the week that they usually go out into the community. Independent older adults and those restricted in physical activity are more likely to go out both on weekdays and weekends, while those who are dependent upon others usually go out into the community on weekdays. J J I I ..J I I ~ I J J 47 1 \ 1 Table 52. Time of Day i Indep Restricted Dep 1 (n=1,400) (n=410) (n=124) J Mornings 49% 55% 48% 1 Afternoons 38% 32% 39% 1 Evenings 7% 9% 8% J Both mornings and afternoons 4% 2% 3% 1 Both afternoons and evenings 1% 2% <1% All three <1% <1% <1% J I Table 53. Days of the Week indep Restricted OeD 1 (n=1,408) (n=407) (n=122) "' Week days 33% 43% 66% Weekends 8% 12% 3% Both 60% 45% 32% 1 Missed Activities. Because of lack of transportation, those older adults who are restricted in physical activity and dependent upon others missed many more activities than those adults who are independent. The three most frequent activities missed by those restricted in physical activity were social activities (29%), religious activities (24%), and canceling a doctor's appointment (24%). Similarly, older adults who are dependent upon others missed religious activities (46%), social activities (43%), and family activities (41 %) most frequentiy. Although they were less likely to miss medically necessary activities, namely, keeping a doctor's appointments and picking up a prescription, than other activities, the percentages were still high (34% and 35% respectively). 1 I I J I I .J "' I J I Table 54. Missed Activities Indep Restricted Dep (n=1,400) (n=410) (n=124) Not attend a social activity (n=1 ,674) .8% 29% 43% Did not attend a religious activity 6% 24% 46% (n=1,685) Canceled or missed doctor's appointment (n=1 ,739) 5% 24% 34% Did not shop for groceries (n=1,709) 5% 20% 35% Did not pick up a prescription (n=1 ,713) 5% 15% 40% Did not attend a family activity (n=1 ,667) 5% 19% 41% I I j j 48 "1 ., i j Willinaness to Pay. The majority of older adults at the three levels of frailty were willing to pay between $.50-1.99 for a one-way trip within Rancho Cucamonga and $.50-3.99 for a one-way trip outside Rancho Cucamonga. I l 1 l ] J ] J J ] Table 55. Willingness to Pay for One Way Transportation Within RC IndeD Restricted DeD (n=1,163) (n=348) (n=120) $0.50 - 1.99 75% 67% 66% $2.00 - 3.99 19% 26% 28% $4.00 - 5.99 4% 5% 3% $6.00 - 7.99 <1% <1% 2% $8.00 - or more 1% 1% 2% Table 56. Willingness to Pay for One Way Transportation Outside RC IndeD Restricted OeD (n=1,133) (n=351 ) (n=105) $0.50 - 1.99 31% 27% 31% $2.00 - 3.99 46% 46% 48% $4.00 - 5.99 16% 17% 17% $6.00 - 7.99 4% 5% <1% $8.00 - or more 3% 5% 4% Tvpes of Transportation Used. In the past month, older adults who are independent were to use their personal car (88%) or be driven by others (44%) for trips outside of their immediate neighborhood. Older adults who are restricted in physical activity were equally as likely to use their personal car as to be driven by others (72%). However, older adults who are dependent upon others were mostly driven by others (82%) or use their personal car (39%). Older adults who are dependent upon others were more likely to take the Metrolink than older adults who are independent or restricted in physical activity. l J J ) I -, Table 57. Types of Transportation Used IndeD Restricted Walk Bicycle Personal car . Driven by others Shared ride Taxi or cab Bus Metrolink 24% 9% 88% 43% 5% 4%. 3% 6% I I j ! i .J 49 24% 10% 72% 72% 19% 3% 3% 4% OeD 14% 6% 39% 82% 20% 6% 17% 11% -, \ ~ I i \ Most Preferred Tvpe of Transportation. As an alternative to the use of their personal car, older adults who are independent or who are restricted in physical activity were most likely to be driven to prefer to use their own car than any other type of transportation (97% and 82% respectively). The most preferred type of transportation used by those who are dependent on others was to be driven by others. - Table 58. Most Preferred Type of Transportation Indeo Restricted Deo Walk (n=1 ,157) Bicycle (n=1, 171) Personal car (n=1,720) Driven by others (n=1, 181) Shared ride (n=1.065) Taxi or cab (n=1 ,208) Bus (n=1,174) Metrolink (n=1 ,050) 40% 14% 97% 43% 16% 13% 19% 23% ~ I .~ .~ .~ .( I 19% 3% 82% 68% 22% 12% .13% 14% 28% <0% 47% 84% 31% 25% 18% 11% Least Preferred Type of Transportation. For all three levels of activity, using a bicycle was rated the least preferred type of transportation. Table 59. Least Preferred Type of Transportation Indep Restricted Dep Walk (n=1, 157) Bicycle (n=1,171) Personal car (n=1,720) Driven by others (n=1 ,720) . Shared ride (n=1.065) Taxi or cab (n=1 ,208) Bus (n=1,174) Metrolink (n=1 ,050) 60% (5) 87% (1) 29% (7) 58% (6) 84% (2) 87% (1) 81% (3) 77% (4) 81% (5) 97% (1) 39% (7) 32% (8) 78% (6) 88% (2) 87% (3) 86% (4) 73% (6) 100% (1) 31% (8) 16% (9) 69% (7) 75% (5) 82%(4) 89% (3) Public Transportation System Preference. Older adults who are independent were more likely to have no preference between a public transportation schedule that is a fixed route and schedule and a public transportation system that you call when you need it. However, older adults who are restricted in physical activity and dependent upon others (51 % and 54% respectively) preferred a public transportation system that one calls when they need to use it. . 50 Table 60. Public Transportation System Preference IndeD Restricted . DeD (n=1,275) (n=358) (n=123) Fixed route and schedule 26% 19% 14% Call when needed 30% 51% 54% No preference 46% 30% 33% RaHnas of Tvpes of Transportation. Oider adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent did not rate bus and shared ride transportation as high as those who are independent. Seventy-seven percent (77%) of those adults who are independent rated the bus as good to fair, 73% rated the taxi or cab as good to fair, and 62% rated the shared ride as good to fair. Sixty-three percent of those adults who are restricted in physical activity rated the bus as. good to fair, 60% rated the taxi or cab as good to fair, and 62% rated the shared ride as good to fair. Seventy percent (70%) of those adults who are dependent rated the shared ride as good to fair, and 96% rated the shared ride as good to fair. The bus was rated most poorly, Sixty-nine percent of those older adults who are dependent upon others rated the bus as fair to poor. Table 61. Ratings of Transportation Used I J Bus (n=761) Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor IndeD Restricted Dep 2% <1% <1% 14% 12% 13% 40% 36% 18% 33% 27% 49% 11% 24% 20% Tvpes of Transportation ., ) Shared ride (n=572) Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor 5% 2% <1% 21% 14% 11% 35% 30% 32% 27% 32% 38% 13% 22% 19% . ~ ) I J Taxi or cab (n=833) Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor .6% 7% <1% 11%- 8% <1% 38%. 35% 40% 35% 30% 53% 10% 20% 7% 51 I j J 1 I J Satisfaction with Current Transportation System. Not surprising, older . adults who are independent were very satisfied with their current transportation . system. Older adults who are restricted in physical activity or dependent upon others rated their current system as very satisfied to satisfied. Fourteen percent of those who are dependent were dissatisfied with their current transportation system. 1 ] 1 .I Table 62. Satisfaction with Current Transportation System l ] ] I J J IndeD Restricted OeD (n=1,030) (n=312) (n=104) . Very satisfied 61% 31% 14% . Satisfied 25% 31% 39% Neither satisfied or dissatisfied 11% 25% 26% Dissatisfied 2% 9% 14% Very dissatisfied 2% 3% 7% Anticipated ChanQe in Transportation Needs. The great majority of the older adults who are independent (84%) did NOT anticipate a change in their transportation needs in the next year. However, slightly more older adults restricted in physical activity (37%) than those who are dependent upon others (35%) anticipated a change in their transportation needs. Table 63. Anticipated Change in Transportation Needs IndeD (n=1,260) Restricted OeD (n=357) (n=1,26) Yes, anticipate a change 16% 37% 34% -, I J J ~ I _I i J I , I I . i , J 52 !. , , i i I l Recomme'ndations l I I .. Several observations and recommendations for further investigation and action are presented. ] ] Is there a serious and immediate transportation problem? '1 J No; the survey indicated that the majority of the Rancho Cucamonga residents are satisfied with their current transportation system, namely use of treir own personal car or having someone else drive them when they have a transportation need. Very little experience with public transportation exists even though there is a disproportionately high dissatisfaction with public transportation. Much of the dissatisfaction may be based on hearsay rather than actual personal experience. ] 1 : Mount a ImaQe BuildinQ CampaiQn -1 .. First and foremost, the City of Rancho Cucamonga needs to mount a campaign to desensitize older adults and address their negative feelings about public and alternative forms of transportation. It is not uncommon for individuals to be negative about the unknown but unless these negative feelings are addressed, any improvements in the transportation systems for seniors may be greeted with similar negative feelings. 'I ,I I J '1 J 2. Conduct Focus Groups :] ] J Conduct focus groups of older adult users and nonusers of bus and shared ride services. The primary purpose of the focus groups would be to identify what advertising incentives and educational materials and events older adults believe would motivate them to try and use alternative forms of transportation. The secondary purpose of the focus groups would be to increase ridership by sparking curiosity and interest. 3. Develop an Educational Awareness CampaiQn of Transportation Options . I ..J An educational awareness campaign should be initiated to disseminate informational brochures to older adults about the existing transportation options and resources for greater mobility for those with more limited access to transportation. Older adults may not be aware of existing transportation resources because there is no imminent need to use them or they may not be utilizing them because they do not know how to I I -' , I i _J 53 i I 1 .i ~ I 01 J ] ] ] ] ] l ._J --1 ..J ,] :j '- IJ" ,. , :J I c.J , I , I i........J I J access information about available community resources. Many community resources may be underutilized. . 4. Develop a Strateaic Marketina Plan for Promotina Shared Ride and Bus Usaae A strategic marketing plan for the promotion of shared ride and bus usage should be developed outlining how to promote these transportation options directly to older adults. One marketing strategy might be the collaborative development of collateral materials about transportation resources for Rancho Cucamonga residents. Another marketing strategy might be the development of a table display or video discussing transportation options for seniors.' A hotline might bedevelopedto answer questions about transportation alternatives until older adults become more familiar with how to access the systems and how to read and understand the schedules and routes. 5. Offer a Transportation Subsidv Offer alternative transportation at the lowest "willingness" to pay levels and subsidize the cost until older adults are sensitized to use the existing transportation and then reassess their willingness to pay at a higher fare. This may be an opportune time to introduce alternative transportation use with the higher costs of fuel--added to the normal costs of repairs and insurance for one's own vehicle. 6. Improve the Existina System. Because the ratings of the existing system are so poor, older adults may be reluctant to try them. The City should establish as a goal to reduce the fair and poor rating to less than 10% of the riders. This will encourage ridership. 7. Analvsis of the At-Risk Populations Lack of transportation is an intersection of poverty, age and frailty. The very old, the frail, and the poor are least likely to be driving. While poverty may not increase, old age and frailty will increase in the near term as the population ages in place. Although the numbers are small at this time, they can be expected to increase with the aging of the population. An analysis of the future growth of the at-risk populations should be undertaken. 54 ., I , .i 1 i .' 1 ~ i i 1.3 i 1 \ ~ r J I] jJ IJ 1 r I r I 1J rJ I T , 8. Develop Community Collaborations Church and social activities may be some of the first activities to go as one ages and becomes frailer. One might enlist the churches to form volunteer programs to get people to church and other social activities. This would leave the shared bus focus more on the necessary trips such a doctor's visits. A travel buddy program might be initiated with a friendly travel companion for those who are reluctant to try and use the transportation system. 9. Conduct a Consumer Oriented Assessment In the future, a consumer-oriented assessment should be conducted that includes an assessment of consumer satisfaction with the transportation system and older adults' willingness to pay. The City has just conducted an assessment of senior transportation needs: A logical next step would be to reassess the older adults' level of use and satisfaction with alternative transportation systems after a successful program to increase ridership and expand senior transportation services. 55 , , i j. 1 1 Comments ..., I J The older adults were asked whether there were any other transportation concerns or issues that the City of Rancho Cucamonga should consider in planning for the future. Here are their comments. I J 1. Have more transportation for seniors, like taxis, and buses. 2. Mass transit to Inland Empire. 3. Need streetlights on Alta Cuesta Drive and night driving is not safe. Also not enough streetlights that are bright enough; and over street sight are difficult to see at night and at dusk. I like the new street signs that are florescent. The work very well. The left turn lane going on to Red Hill is very dangerous- Both east and west cars use the same lane. Very Dangerous. Need sidewalks on Red.Hill, dangerous to walk on the streets. I support more public transportation. More bright streetlights, and safe sidewalks, and for bike lanes. With in increase in traffic we need more public transportation. Thanks for your interest. 4. The intersection of Red Hill Country Club and Foothill Blvd. Is dangerous. 5. Pacific Electric Rail 6. No buses should be allowed north of Baseline except haven for Chaffey College. When they stop they take up an entire lane and create near accidents and traffic issues north of Baseline. They may have 10r 2 passengers but for the most part they are empty. They contribute greatly to noise pollution and in addition the city issues mega bldg. Permits but do not plan the streets accordingly. Traffic congestion is extremely exaggerated when a bus stops and blocks a lane. 7. Just knowing about all the different options is a relief. and that the cost for getting around won't be so expensive. -1 I J ] J ] ] J ] -I -.I 1 "~ I J J J J 56 ! - i .J l 8. Intersection of Baseline and Archibald the light is not long enough to I .) reach the other side. -1 . Please provide a Senior Van Service for Days, Nights, and ~eekends . ] 9. that are affordable. l i 10. Need bus services to serve senior counter, shopping at Baseline, med ., l center, and senior apts. On church, Metrolink, Ontario mills plus good .J interface with bus lines on baseline and foothill. And how are old folks il supposed to cross Milliken where there is no readily accessible 1...J stoplight. Don't forget Metrolink is the door to the outside world for J those without a car. If one doesn't live at Ontario Mills there is no good connection. (see bus #603 route) 0 11. Bus and city transportation service to Ontario Airport and Metrolink. 12. There is no schedule of bus time fable running in our neighborhood. n There should be ol'1e as of necessity. U 13. I am very concerned regarding the consideration of opening a 1/3 mi. r-I stretch of highland in my area. If this happens, my neighborhood would II I' again be difficult to exit from, unsafe, and noisier (we already have a ...J 0 major street and freeway on 2 sides of our neighborhood. I with the city would be more concerned with our safety.) 0 14. In speaking with those seniors that have no family support etc. they find getting to and from doctors appointments difficult. [1 15. Need transportation for shopping and doctor. L.J 16. More buses. [J 17. More expansive service for people who live in condos, for buses or other transportation. IJ 18. Bus stop by central park on Baseline should be covered. Send out information about YMCA and across transportation. U 19. Bus around above 19th street. 20. My wife and I like to walk to the store at Vineyard and Foothill. This is 11 difficult because there aren't sidewalks or walking path between Baker LJ Ave. and Vineyard. I fell once. A path would be great. [I u ! I 57 U I oJ -, i 21. Yes. 22.' Seems that those who need rides should be able to get a share ride (access type) of course it will cost but it is offset by the savings of not maintaining a vehicle for most of the same trips. 23. Wider street on Red Hill. 24. The system in Claremont covering a smaller area than RC seems to be very helpful to many senior citizens without personal cars. 25. Car Pooling. 26. At the present time I have no concerns. However, I appreciate your concern in this matter as I am aware that my present situation could change at anytime and then I could be in need of other forms of transportation in the meantime I pray that God will continue to bless me 'as he has in the past. Note: My friends and I love the activities at the beautiful senior center especially the dancing. Thank You. 27. To have much more rail service similar to the coaster at'Red Line in Sand Diego. If my children would commute to their jobs teaching LA it would be great! A:sp u friends and I would go more places. 28. Mobile home parks need sidewalks and shuttle vans to supermarkets, library, etc. Hilly terrain makes walking very difficult maybe supermarkets should provide transport for elderly or free delivery of groceries. 29. Survey is too long and repetitious. 30. Improving access to Valle Vista Elementary School. Parking on street. 31. Publish routes of bus line in local newspapers increase number of bike paths. 32. Not at this time. 33. And I still drive. Some of the questions were not answerable. 34. Emergency evacuation. 35. "Power Chairs" available to the needy at no or low cost. Almost impossible to get thru Medicare. 36. More public transportation facility reduces the horrible traffic problem. " i , ,J ] ] l J J I I ._J o fl LJ o o ["-J u '-J 1--. u tJ i] LJ , i . i ~ , .OJ : t I c..J ~ ! . , c.-' 58 1 ! i "1 I .J 37. None. Note: Spouses should be included, regardless of age, to all senior activities and events. 38. Dial a ride? 39. A bus suck as the express that leavesfrom Montclair. 40. Help for disabled people regarding transportation. 41. Mare buses. 42. T'raffic signals during non-peak hour signal lights should change by... not by peak hours. Gas is too expensive. 43. Por ahora todavia manejo solo aqui en la ciudad par ahora mi necesidad es saber como trabaja al medicare parque no entiendo y necesito atencion medica. Translation. Currently I can still drive although justaround the city. I am more concerned in knowing how Medicare works, I have a hard time understanding, and I am in need of medical attention. 44. The city of Rancho is the best city in San Bernardino County I admire them and thank all the staff in the city for this progress and any transportation system is good if the people can't drive. 45. None. We have a beautiful city. Our senior center is fabulous. Thank You. 46. I am in a wheel chair and don't give a damn about transportation except for a car, or an ambulance. 47. RC should look into meals on wheels to service the elderly. 48. People of all ages with special needs. 49. Not at the time. 50. Need better traffic enforcement. 51. Bring a bus up or vehicle to a highway strict. 52. I have no transportation needs as of right now; but I can most purely use some help with the heavy work around the house- inside and outside. We appreciate your concern for us. Thank you very much. 1 1 ; 1 J l '1 I J J J J J j J J J 59 . , I ,J ", ! , -I 1 "I J 53. I had a time when I desperately needed your help and you simply were not there. I do hope that when I fall into that hole I pray for 100 percent more compassion available help. 54. No answer 55. More buses, closer bus stops. 56. Do we have transportation for people who can no longer drive? 57. More frequent bus services. 58. Must address the issues of traffic. Smog levels are increasing as well as noise and many irresponsible drivers (too fast, and do not stop at red lights.) . 59. I have a 3-wheel scooter that I use for shopping. Is there transportation that I could use taking it? 60. Traffic congestion storm drains, and flooding during heavy rains. 61. I would appreciate reliable transportation to Ontario Airport and retum. 62. Graffiti and gangs (terrorists) 63. I don't know 64. Not for myself 65. RC always paves roads smoothly, then comes back in a couple of months and digs them up and patches them rough as hell leaves them that way, specially in Etiwanda. RC spends all the bucks in Cucamonga and Alta Loma. Also put a 45 mph speed limit on highland Ave. Between Etiwanda Ave. and Rochester. I've seen some drive 80mph there, since its not posted. 66. Improved bus service regarding frequency. 67. (Spanish) "Ojala pusieran el bus por la calle 4 es muy comodo y barato". Translation: I wish there was a bus service available on 4rth Street. It is very comfortable and affordable. 68. Not at this time. 69. Only when people live at home and have no help from relatives or anyone else would they need this service, or can't drive or have or have '"i ) -, I I l l -I .J J J "J J "I J -' 1 J 1 _J J I ..J I "~ j J 60 I i , ". i 'Y'! I j a caL Your new Center on Baseline is beautiful, I hope to use it some day! RAE Pan Gburn 6250 Kinlock Alta Loma, CA 91737 70. Don't Know 71. It bothers me to constantly see large (standard) size busses empty of riders in the area. It would make sense economically to switch to smaller sized vehicles and increase frequency of availability. From non- rider and only as observer it appears that existing bus service is too. expensive and needs to be reevaluated. Thank You. ' . 72. For those who not drive some type of transportation that could pick up at and drive to DL appts. - Groceries, shopping, etc. With an expense that a senior could afford. Most seniors are not able to stand on the street corners to be picked up. Waiting in all kinds of weather. 73. Getting out of the house. To visit. To just get out of the house. 74. Not sure at this time. 75. Make bus stops close to home and somewhere to sit down to wait for bus or provide transportation for senior and disabled peopie. 76. Not that Ian aware of 77. Yes; service problem is developing in traffic congestion with all the new construction and (illegible) money to the area needs to be addressed. 78. People that once went to old senior center for lunch as parties, no longer drive this far to new center. (Some walk from Barrio) Transportation should be provided that location. 79. Perhaps have a Dial-A Ride program. 80. There are huge buses running all over the area with very few passengers. Small buses make sense. 81. More sidewalks will help. More super market South of Foothill will be a great thing. At this time the nearest super market is over two miles. It is one of the things that concerns me when I no longer can drive and wanting to be independent. l .I -, I I I i J ] J ] ." -1 J J I J .J J .J I J ) .J 61 I J 1 l l ] J 82. Just make sure that bus transportation does not cost too much and that it runs regular- every 20 to 30 minutes and bus stops that are not too far' apart and cover all of Rancho Cucamonga and outlining areas. 83. 'Bus service on Baseline too far to go to 19th on Foothill 84. More bus routes and stops. Shorter distances between bus stops. 85. Now that you have moved north of our area, I'm caught in Clitch (79) nursing for Commodities monthly. My food is later but I' am it will be worked out. I appreciate all you do for home people. Thanks! Forever grateful. Louise Chanbeu 98-7-2499 86. Use busses that fill up. We observe to many empty ones busses. 87. Have more covered benched bus stops. Sidewalks on every street and bicycle lanes on all streets. Center mediums on street of 2 lanes each way. 88. We need busses to come to center Hermosa and streets 8th Humbold, 24, 25, 26 streets. 89. As you grow you will need omnitrans service in those areas where there ] l J l I l .J are none. ] 90. Try running a local city only bus service. 91. Yes a good start with public transportation within the city and surroundin9 communities. "Shuttle" service to major local destinations Le. to grocery stores, shopping centers, schools betweens. (Use other cities as examples.) 92. Not at this time. 93. Add more police-their response is two slow. Traffic enforcement is nearly non-existent. Record #'s of citizens go through stop signs,RED LIGHTS, and generally are speeding. There is barely any police presence here in R.C. We rarely even see police PO units anywhere in our travels in the city. On the other hand, we frequently see fire trucks outside of restaurants where their guys are inside eating. This should NOT be allowed - it looks bad. Most people see this and are afraid to say anything! 1 J ] I , J :1 I I J J I J I I J 62 -, J J 94. In the future I might not be able to drive. 95. Make bus routes - less density of population 96. Roads need to repairing, Church St. Mary need signals between Archibald and Heaven, time allowed to turn least at signal on Foothill to Archibald is way to short at night (evening). Many intersections in neighborhoods in dire need of better lighting especially in West side: older areas are becoming far more dangerous. 97. Thank you and hope you can improve your service. 98. More busses per hour scheduled. More low cost transportation, shared and otherwise, for appointments, shopping, etc, with less wait time. A bit off the subject and needed now; cross walks closer to senior residential buildings, hopefully cutting down on jay walking by slower seniors. I have personally witnessed a senior with a walker, crossing north between Amethyst and Archibald who was knocked down by a speeding car eastbound. 99. How much will this cost in Taxes?? Cuz were on a budget. 100. More consistency on transportation and scheduies printed in grapevine or monthly issue of city highlights. 101. I wish there were a system of bus transportation like the old days in Tennessee, where I could transfer from one to another every 15 minutes or so and get wherever I needed to go. I work in Chino 102. Just want to thank you all for the beautiful Senior Center. I love it; I . used the fitness classes, computer classes. 103. No comments for now that my husband and me still drive. 104. Not for me (at this time) 105. Less traffic on (illegible) make a residential street not a (illegible) fair. 106. Rides to grocery store. Rides to church. Rides to Senior Center. 107. Perhaps better bus arrangements. 108. With having my own car I really haven't concerns at this point. However if I didn't have a car I would have concerns and I'll let you know then. -1 , I ] l -, l ~ 1 ..i ] ] J I ..J J J I , .J J , , I --! 63 , I I ! .., 1 , I -, 109. The need for more efficient traffic signal timing at many intersections and the coordination of adjacent traffic signals for improved flow along corridors such as Foothill blvd. Baseline Ave. Haven Ave., MiUiken Ave. and others. 110. Trees that cover street signs (need pruning), RC drivers drive too fast . everywhere. I love fry. 210 extensions! 111. I have not used any other form of transportation other than the metro train because my automobile is my usual method of transportation. 112. This. is too personal. Quit building homes, apts, condos, we have too many cars on the street no more new shopping centers this street cannot hold all these cars, fix all the roads up first, tell the city the roads suck, they need new ones, no more cars. What does Education and the money you make have to do with transportation needs, if you don't have a masters you can't get on a bus? No more building, no more cars, no more stores, no more people. This form sucks. They dig upthe streets and never come back to report them, pot holes and bumps, Baseline Rd. #1 pot hole. Where is the money going to fix up the city? 113. A transportation system that mimics a person driving a car. Make a call. Get picked up. Takes you where you wish to go. Or schedule the day before. Economical. $2,00 within city. 114. More transportation in the northeast is of this city. Would be nice. And out to Victoria gardens and Ontario mills are such nice. 115. I'm confident that future transportation program will be sufficient to meet. the needs of the senior citizens. I hope the education system is planning for future enrollment groWth. 116. From services from YMCA bus. 117. Don't know 118. I have not yet been dependent on public transportation therefore I cannot express my opinion. 119. Taxes too high! 120. More cops l I I j l i '. -I J ] -'1 -' .~ ] J J J J .J I .J ! 1 I -.,) I J I J 64 ! J 121. Affordable, reliable, domestic, handyman part time help. 122. As population grows services must be made available to accommodate all residents young and old- working or retired-especially for those with low incomes. 123. Drivers running red lights, running too fast in residential areas. (illegible) 124. As the area grows so should you increase more bus stops located in housing areas. 125. Connecting buss from 19th to Victoria Gardens and Ontario Mills. 126. I'm not sure, ask me in 10-15 years. 127. It would be nice to have affordable transportation for the elderly/disabled who find it hard to use public transportation. Before their deaths both my mother (in a wheel chair) and my sister (on oxygen) had to depend on family for all their needs. Public transportation was impossible for them to use and private transport too costly for low-income situation. 128. Sorry I'm not much help. How about Senior Apt. or Community complexes make available transportation for their tenants possibly subsidized by city or county. 129. Yes a bus, the so-called barrio does not have transportation as we would have to walk to arrow, we would \need it between center and Hermosa the streets being 8th Humboldt 24,25, and 26. 130. I don't know enough about his to make any suggestions. I hope that when I can no longer drive it will be available. 131. I am 84 years old and still able to drive my car and I am to keep up my home. If it comes to the point were I would need public transportation I would feel safe in using your buses anytime and any other type of transportation that is available. 132. Overall expansion, growth, and more routes and stops. 133. The city needs to send information on bus routes so that we can take a bus instead of driving. How much does it cost? Do you have the exact change? i ; 1 1 ., 1 ] ] l , J 'I , .J .J "I .J ] I ..,J j I J I __.J I J ! ." 65 ] .J j ] J J J j J 134. More routes needed 135. Don't know 136. Enforcing speed limits and other traffic regulations. 137. I would take advantage of other transportation other then my car if it was convenient and safe especially in Rancho Cucamonga I could safe fuel cost to keep my card up car insurance if I could get my (illegible) down. 138. Stop building is getting too crowded, to many people moving on this city. 139. I am on dialysis and will soon need a cheap method to go to my treatment center close to San Antonio Hospital. 140. As we get older more help will be required for residential areas to do needed shopping, medical and senior activities. 141. Smaller access bus is helpful for seniors. Specially seeing and hearing impaired. That can pick up at assisted living homes. 142. I would appreciate transportation to the grocery store, like Stater Bros. Also to Carenas on Holt near campus. 143. Car- feel our streets have a hard time with all new growth of people. 144. Perhaps more information should be made available about existing alternatives to private transportation. 145. Don't use public transport- drive my own car. Have family close by. There is no bus service where I live north of 210 146. Omni bus stops at entrance of senior center, more lighted areas around the senior center, YMCA bus too time consuming 147. Please more affordable senior housing for people with moderate to far soc income. I J 148. More bus stops 149. I see large Omni bus travel around Alta Loma empty frequently waste of taxpayers' money. Seen this for years. 150. That the time should be not long to wait for a pick up at home. I don't want to wait more than twenty minutes. Sometimes to wait hours. J I I _J 66 ., I ; ) 151. Whenever possible I share the ride. I frequently provide a ride for disable person. Many seniors have no transportation and they don't like to stand at a bus stop for 30 minutes or longer. It can take 2 hours to get across town one way. 152. Need reduce speed on Day Creek Blvd. 50mph too high 153. Keep it up; you're doing a good job. 154. I think you are doing a wonderful job I love it here and at appreciate all the improvements you have made to the city and especially what you have accomplished for senior citizens. 155. Thank you for giving senior citizens a chance to have input. As a driver I look forward to needed street repairs and traffic lights. 156. Curb cutouts at intersections are often steep and narrow along baseline and not smooth surface to street. Check Archibald and Carnelian at Baseline. 157. Affordable transportation for retired disable citizens. 158. I would love to have bus service to Arcadia Methodist even if I had to pay a reasonable fare. 159. Streets in older areas of city need to be improved, (re-graded, paved, carb and gutters) i.e. Red Hill area. Major traffic congestions around schools, particularly High Schools. Drivers taking short cuts to avoid intersection traffic lights i.e. Baseline west bound at Carnelian approx. 2:30- 3 pm from high school students as well as parents turn into States Bros. Center from baseline exit center on to Carnelian to turn north, avoids waiting for signal at Camelian. Similar problem at S.W. corner Baseline Hellman. Solution: Provide a right turn only lane; use law enforcement to curtail described maneuvers. I feel that as areas grow better street design and engineering need to be addressed. Example Church Street Hellman Ave. to Haven Ave. originally built as a two lane residential street needs to be possibly widened to four lanes as is cost of Haven. I feel that street design and flow needs to be closely studied to lessen future transportation problems. '1 I ! 1 J J J l -' 1 J 'I 1 J J ] J I .J j I ., I .J I J I ,J 67 , I i 160. Bike lane paths should be added to all areas of the city. 161. #7 and #8 this survey- do you mean, "pay one wan only, return trip free? Important issue, more seniors alive without transportation. Method of pay weekly or monthly passes. Set routes to senior centers grocery store for one line alternate route to fit individual need. Thank you have many friends who now need your help. 162. Authorize the citizen patrol volunteers to write tickets for whiie parked in handicapped stalls with no sign or license plate. This is a very large problem in RC I'm going to the press if not corrected. 163. More bus stops with shelters. 164. I think the city is doing a fine job for its seniors. 165. Have more police around high schools at beginning and after school (they drive horrible cutting people off etc.) 166. Complete ped+bike path on rail right of way between Baseline + 210 fwy. Hook ups with upland and Fontana. 167. Heavy trucks should not be allowed on the main streets except local delivery purposes only. They cause congestion, safe hazard and tear up our streets. They cause accidents. Our residents pay the taxes for good and safe streets not the truck companies using our streets to get from one freeway to another. 168. Bus stops should have benches, covers and trash containers. 169. Just keeping up with repairs on streets more stop lights, but I don't know what for people keep going after the light turns red. On the whole I like living here. 170. It might be nice if a shuttle could take people from the senior center to Victoria Gardens once or Twice a month. (pick up and deliver). 171. There needs to be more publicity about available transportation. 172. Information on what is available. 173. Finish the west end of the Santa Fe railway bike trail to match what the city of Upland has done. This survey is for both my wife and I. . -, I ,I l , 1 :1 -I J '""" I _J l -, -1 j '1 i .., ..J J 'I -, ] I J l -, J J I .J I , , .J 68 1 ", -' 174. A cross walk should be more convenient for senior citizens especially in the front of the home instead of having to the end of the street to cross the to get to shopping center like grocery stores banks etc. 175. In my present health condition I do not need public transportation. As I age I may have to change my needs. If so I would hope that the system will allow me the convenience I now have. 176. I would use the metro or the bus from time to time if I were certain exactly how to do it: how about some orientation information at the senior center or guided "first rides?" 177. More rest stops with benches and protection from weather. 178. Ask the business to stager their working hours. Some people leave at 4pm 4:15pm, 4:30 pm, 4:45 pm, 5pm, 5:15pm, 5:30pm etc. Then everyone would not be on the heavy roads at 5pm. 179. Make bus travel easier- it is too far to walk a mile to take the bus- the day would be too exhausting. 180. There are many apartments being constructed any chance of more senior citizen complexes being constructed on 55 plus? One level ones versus two stories or tri-Ievel. 181. Would use public transportation if only stops within 1/8 miles from my house. Inexpensive. 182. A bus that handicapped people cim get to and not have to walk too far. 183. Have not had to use them so I'm not aware of what is available. Wish I would be of more assistance to your survey never know when my lifestyle might change. Thank You. 184. Better traffic control becoming critical. 185. Many seniors at senior centers are unable to participate in afternoon or evening groups and classes, as public transportation is limited. I would be nice if the bus on Baseline could depart from the front of the senior center. I wouldn't be much out of the way. It would help because now you have to bike uphill from Baseline. I know I will have made use for transportation in the near future. -1 I .I ] 1 , _i J 1 _J :1 -, , I ~J I I _-1 I J ] 'J I J I I J I I .-! , , i ..J 69 , ~) I I 186. When the time comes that I can no longer drive I'd take a cab or the share a ride program. 187. More regular public transportation. 188. More rest stops with seating and protection from the weather. 189. Reliable bus and Omni trans. 190. More shorter trip buses or similar vehicles to senior center and shopping areas. Distribute those vehicles by demographics and major trip malls. A round robin route to Victoria gardens and Ontario Mills will also accommodate shopping and entertainment needs. 191. I recommend that he city consider encouraging the construction of upscale senior condos close to mass transit and shopping on the part of the high-rise in La Mesa Ca. At 4701 Dale. At some point many of us living on large properties are going to need to down size. I would be wonderful to be able to do that in rancho where we know the city and are close to friends, family, or churches. 192. Do something about congested surface streets. 193. Transportation for senior needs. 194. It would be helpful if Rancho Cucamonga made transportation easier to get and more convenient, especially transportation to the senior center. 195. More frequent mini bus pick up for seniors to doctor's offices and senior center. Picking to get home. Wait time, often too long. 196. To have a senior bus system like the city of Duarte. 197. We need buses that connect with neighborhood to metro hint stations and colleges. 198. Yes you should plan for free transportation for senior citizens in our city. 199. Just more of what you are doing as the city is growing so fast. I love the senior center but sometimes I have to wait at the gym or the computer classes fill up way too soon. 200. Listing bus schedule and prices in phone book. Also routes. Also other transportation like home pick-up might need it someday. 1 I , , ~1 I , " i , I 1 I , .i I ..) '1 I ~) ", ! .J J j ,) ~ 1 I , , ,j j j J J J I J 70 I I J 201. Part B question 8: Both a backbone bus system on high frequency routes and a rapid response access or YMCA bus system to serve more remote and less frequented routes should work. I would use bike routes that did not share ROW with cars. Even with bike lanes you are cou nting disaster on a rear with a bike. 202. Too many people coming in and too many cars per family, roads are too crowded and speeds to fast in neighborhoods. People drive like they're on the freeway everywhere! 203. Roads in Red Hill. 204. Complete the rails to trails bike path. 205. I am very mobil - self-employed. Don't let my answers have an adverse effect on those that are not so fortunate. I am pleased that the city is thinking of the needs of seniors. Most of them have paid their dues and need respect and consideration. 206. How about our own super pumpers to help fight fires? Our own meaning Rancho Cucamonga 207. Access to business that impedes traffic flow. 900 driveways with no rounded curves. Lack of traffic enforced must on the lengths of Carnelian. Racing, but turns out of parking lots. Change Upland far traffic access to the 210 freeway on Carnelian. Trucks going to the colonies use Carnelians rather than the campus mess. 208. More routine schedule to and from Metrolink station for future generations. 209. For the few times I used public transportation I found poor scheduling. 210. Number of bus should be increased and their appearance should be more decent and well protected from wind and sun. Thanks. 211. Yes!! You need to have the street Heelman and Foothill repaved and stop signs repainted in our own neighborhood. Repave the streets don't cater only to the newer parts of Rancho Cuca. Please help our neighborhood with street signs you can't see stop signs. Please help -1 , j I -I J 'j I I -1 _J OJ J , .i ; ,J I J 'I ..J J '} J ~l .J ! -., I J , I J I I , oj 71 "' I ; , -I your taxpayers! P.S. when you redid Hellman south of Foothill you didn't fix the problem you just widened it. 212. Install warning lights at school zones flashing when school is on, speed limits are in effect. Install traffic signals at school crossings. Make it illegal to turn left into or out of a parking lot. 213. Buses that stop closer to rny home and stop more frequently to a wider variety of places. 214. Bus should connect with one another when transferring with one another. 215. Not at this time Celenk Yooee As long as I can drive safely. I will do so - because I love it. Celenk Yooee 216. I am very fortunate to have a car and I am able to drive and I am very independent. <y main concern is so much traffic. 217. It has to be cost-efficient. I see empty busses all the time. Just too much traffic now and too many lights too much congestion on Foothill towards 15 Fwy and Mall and Mills. Too busy on the 15, Milliken, Archibald, Heaven. Time to move out of Rancho. No one wants to use . public transportation unless they really have to. It's an affluent community. Think of yourselves. Senior has a family or a facility to handle. Why do we always have to go overboard like 13 million SR CTR? There was no need to create the Hills for beauty. Hallways to long for SRS Handicapped. It's hidden from street. Parking could have been closer. No one can ever answer Questions. Fix lights signal timing and have SR Center have a van on call. 218. For me, personally, not at this time. 219. Expand YMCA bus service since its already in place. 220. Taxes to high 221. Seniors need transportation in Rancho Cucamonga from their homes to Dr. -drug stores - to shop for food and other thing- hair cuts- church - etc. 222. That there will be very affordable transportation for disabled people. ., -, I , ., I ., I I l J ., I I ., I ~! J , i J J I I , I --' J I ..J , i I --' I i I -,j 72 -J I -, 223. The repaving of streets is important to me. Some streets have been done. WE need more paving done. I also am in favor of more traffic light ticketing cameras. 224. As don't use public transportation at this time I am not aware of any_ 225. Hope they are able to help those who can't get around on their own. 226. Use smaller busses! The bus (line 60) is empty 95% of the time I see it going by. It very under utilized! 227. Device a bus/ride system of small. In-neighborhood, bus or mini vans, that can meander the various streets and neighborhoods, to offer 'at- the-door' pick up and drop off, with reasonable fares and high frequency of rides (i.e. not to long a wait time in between buses. 228. Shuttle buses to and from metro station 229. The new senior center is too far away. Reopen the old senior center. Provide better health care for seniors. Stop allowing the cable TV companies from making their TV rates too expensive. 230. More senior housing. Low to moderate plans. 231. Buses when I attend church, there is no covered seating at the Foothill and Rochester bus stop. Wait for the bus is 45 minutes standing. 232. Having spent 20 years in a city with good public transportation it worry that (illegible) I am able to drive how willi get around R.C. 233. Rides to Senior Center. 234. As of this date I still drive. Thus the public transit situation does not concern me. However I do walk various locations in the city. I walk 4 to 5 miles at a time- what I am concerned with is the lack of sidewalks in some areas, and the bad conditions of the existing ones. 235. They should give more time to seniors who don't drive. Especially to those who call the bus scheduling. 236. Scheduled bus routes from Cherry and Sierra area for not only senior but also teens. 237. I live in an apartment complex. I was told by OMNI the bus would not come in the complex to pick me up. I would have to walk 3 blocks for a 1 i l I -I J I I J I I ..I I 1 ., I j I j .J I , J I .J I I j 73 I , , I .J pick up and no definite time. Will not stand on the street for 45 minutes and wait. What are bus regulations? How do I find out where to call etc, etc? Thanks 238. Some kind of transportation be more available for short distance and also reliable. 239. Access tram = return trip sometimes long. 240. Please make a special sense of the Senior center at Milliken actuate for one can (illegible) the place on Milliken to Baseline and is a potential for accident with the down hill speed. 241. I have applied for a couple of positions with the Senior Center. I have been extremely disappointed at not even getting an interview. The. community is missing out on a resource that would be very valuable for it. 242. Good paved roads, with quick repair if necessary. Also timed stoplights on busy streets so that you don't have to brake for every stoplight, especially during rush hours. Thanks. P.S. I love the city. Wish it wasn't so expensive to live in this part of California. 243. I don't really know because I am still able to drive and be independent. Thank you. 244. Wish some of bus stops closer to my home. 245. I don't know I am new to this part of California I moved here from Hemet CA 246. Community transportation. 247. Not enough handicap parking!!! I.E. Henry's soup plantation - Best Buy - the need is growing but business are not keeping up!! Target. 248. Transportation that accepts electric carts would be nice. 249. Hoping more bus running every 15-minute interval in each direction. 250. Lower speed limits on all city streets. Cut down on traffic. Too crowded. 251. Why is Government involved in personal matters such as this??? Cancel the program; cut down on taxes or increase fire/police budget. 252. Thank you for your concern and care. God bless America! l I ] l I I j I I ] 'J J -' J ] J I ::1 ] ] --" J i I I ~ I J 74 -, J 253. Not that I can think of at this time. Thank you for the opportunity to complete this survey. My parents live in Hemet and senior transportation is horrible for them. Thank you! 254. OMNI and or shared services are sufficient. 255. It's a good idea that the city is planning ahead 256. Have to walk too far from my neighborhood to catch the bus. 257. My eldest daughter usually takes me to my medical appointments but she lives in Orange County. So I need to schedule for when she is. available. 258. I wish there were more ways of getting around. Better transportation. 259. Heavy traffic on the 10 and 15 freeways is troubling but I know the problem is being reviewed 260. Too many cars, to many holes in the streets. 261. No it feels I pay enough in taxes. 262. older residents perhaps a panel needs to help "contour" a do able transportation system. 263. Use smaller busses - Never see them full. 264. Excessive traffic with road conditions off ramps back up on freeway during peak hours. Streets are in poor shape from constant digging and . city does not make contractors patch up streets currently leaving holes and bumps. 265. Affordable transportation to near by grocery stores pharmacies and shopping centers. 266. Yes please arrange portable (illegible) service. 267. I'm not familiar with transportation issues in Rancho Cucamonga. Also I don't use any senior transportation right now. 268. Yes - closer watch on speeders. 269. Volunteers willing to drive seniors to doctor and other medical appointments. 270. I don't know enough about this subject to give an opinion. -; , ; , , .1 1 .I I , -I I .J l , _J -I j 1 j 1 -j :J !] J I i ..J I .J 75 . I I .J "' i I I -1 I J 271. Yes the traffic existing the 15 fwy. north and south at Foothill Blvd and on Foothill is terrible. I avoid that area because of this wont even shop at Victoria Gardens due to traffic. Would rather shop in another area or town. . 272. Safe bus stops with covers and lights and trash can, and time bus arrivals. -, I I I .1 -, I .1 J l .-J 273. (In Spanish) 274. With the aging of the population, it would (ineligible) the city to investigate a Dlal-A-Ride type transportation for the older residents. 275. (ineligible) Lack of driver courtesy. 276. Presently undergoing active material treatment to inspire morbidity. 277. Run a daily bus from Villa Pacifica to the Sr. Center. 278. Schoois have a serious delivery and pick up problem by cars. Parking at schools (ineligible) High or not adequate. Parking on narrow streets should be on one side. At stop signs city should cut all sheets that block vision either right or left. (Ineligible) & 210 on and off ramps need to meet the loaded traffic (Foothill and Baseline off ramp on Hum 15 are a hazard. 279. Not a very meaningful survey. How can you establish needs without trip frequency and origins/destinations being more definitive? 280. (Ineligible) as in some Spanish cities. 281. (Ineligible) still driving. Something to improve with help. 282. (Ineligible) 283. Door to door transportation for seniors unable to drive. 284. When I am unable to drive I would want to be able to phone something like Omnibus to come directly to my house to pick me up. 285. More frequent buses to direct routes. Not all over 203 cities to get to one destination. More lights on Church St. and less stop signs especially at Ramona and Hermosa. ] ] ] ] OJ j J .J 1 ..J J I .J J J 76 i I .' 286. Need better coordination of traffic lights. E.G. Let left turns go to red flashing arrow after a brief green left arrow. E.G. Do not hold straight- through traffic with red light when there is no opposing left turn traffic. 287. Not that I know of. 288. Hope for easy access to bus, etc. if needed. 289. You should look at reducing the speed limit on Day Creek Blvd. 50 MPH is too high and there should be some police presence especially around Victoria Park Lane as vehicles are constantly running red lights and exceeding the speed limit. Many children and pedestrians use the intersection. Someone is going to get hurt. 290. It would be nice to have a (Ineligible) ride to (Ineligible) Apt! Pick up without the long wait, to apt to home like a cab ride. Do to my disabled medical need I can't be out for a long period of time and need 24/7 care giver (Ineligible) 291. Need to make a 2 yr plan and a 5 yr plan - in addition to the 1 yr plan. Senior citizens needs can change immensely because of the ages. Use condensed format for this questionnaire or thinner paper- save money " on postage! 292. While many of us drive (Ineligible) cars. Changes in (Ineligible) change our way of transportation. 293. There are no buses or transportation in my area, yet. 294. At present, I'm lucky, I don't need transportation. I have a son that lives in Upland that is able to get me to my dental and beauty shop appointments. 295. Since I don't use transportation at this time, and I drive my own car, I really don't know. 296. No- Thank you for providing transportation for those that need it- It's nice to know that it is there for me if needed. 297. I hope that bus transport is convenient when needed in the future. ""' I ! "1 ] ] J ] I I :J I J ] J J J I J I _J I , J 77 ~ i i I I ~, ~J 298. I'm spending more time at home as its getting harder to get around. I have to rely on my granddaughter for most of my transportation (Ineligible). My needs have to fit into her schedule. 299. I'm happy living in Rancho Cucamonga. 300. Reliable bus service at close locations to conserve energy. 301. Transportation for medical visits to major facilities around Pasadena and Los Angeles. 302. You seem to have included the most pertinent issues. 303. Independent Rancho Cucamonga Bus only. 304. As the new growth proceeds, speed limits of no more than 38 to 48 mph and enough enforcement. to cover. 45 means 55 on Baseline now - Havens 45 & 50 at 5:30 to 6:00 is insane- 50 on south Millikan after 3:00 p.m., with all the trucks are a suicide mission. People zoom.through parking lots at 35. Built up areas have 1960s speed limits. Have you seen the traffic at Baseline & Hermosa at 5:307 Archibald is a war zone at 19th (at traffic time). 305. All seems well but - I have not had to use bus, taxi, shuttle, access etc. 306. No one as of this time. Some of your questions are repeats. Waste of time and paper. 307. Being either bus access or (Ineligible) vans available in all areas of Rancho Cucamonga. Metrolink to other cities would be wonderful. 308. Again- stop development. Does anyone (ie. Traffic engineers) know how to coordinate controlled intersections. Twenty-three lights from 19th to 60 tINy to Haven. Very rarely can one make it through two of them, consequently. Traffic control in RC is a joke. 309. Don't know about the transportation concerns or issues that the city of Rancho Cucamonga should consider in planning for the future. Hope these answers will help. 310. Would like to see sidewalks on Foothill from Hermosa to ~hopping areas and restaurants like Target and Terra Vista. Also shelters from Sun Wind and Rain at bus stops. -, I I I ! l .I -I ~J l J -, J ~] J I j , I J J ] :J j -' J .J I J ! i -' 78 I 1 1 _..1 311. Fix the roads. 312. Synchronize the signals along Foothill and Baseline. Something about the intersection of Foothill and Redhill Country Club road too many accidents. 313. Affordable to free for seniors (low income) (Ineligible) - need non- sr,noking transportation for every body's heath. 314. I mostly drive my own car now. However, I'm glad you are working on this as I will probably need public transportation in the future or if gas prices keep going up. 315. Does Cucamonga have its own taxi service or is it with Upland, Ontario, etc. only? 316. Currently my husband and I manage quite well for our living and transportation needs. However, being from (Ineligible) does make us aware of needs in the near future. (Ineligible) 317. Vans to Kaiser Medical Center in Rancho and Kaiser Hospital in Fontana. Better bus transportation to Ontario Airport. 318. To have more public transportation handy. 319. As long as I am well, our transportation needs are met with (Ineligible) My wife (Ineligible) 320. I am here only 2 yrs - I live in Alta Loma - I don't know what buses come up here, if any - I would ride buses to visit my friends in Duarte and to go to my doctor appointments etc. 321. I need a motorized wheelchair to go on my own so I won't have to have someone to push me around. I have to wait for someone to come to push me around that - my only need. 322. The time will come when I will be unable to drive my own car. 323. I have many friends who need transportation. I hope they fill out this survey (Ineligible) - I help them alii can. A bench would be good on Carnellion and Wilson for some senior, I've noticed. 324. I have not used public transportation for 30 years. , .. i "'~ .' ~'I , , 'j , ! '-1 I "-..J 'I , ..1 "I I :::.:J , i , i ,-..j ;') U "I . I , I .~ 1'"' , : 1 U n ,J i I , '" I , , ...,...1 , , . I i I.-.J 79 ] J 325. My only concern is the rising speeding issue. Since the freeway off ramps, the speed is increasing with the traffic. 326. Set small, light buses connecting Metrolink and bus transit stations. 327. I would use public and or access if and when it is ever necessary. 328. More senior transportation, ride share programs. 329. For me to want to use public transportation it would need to be frequent enough so I would know there would not be a long visit. It would be very helpful to have set times/days every week to go to specified destinations such as Casteo, Sam's Club, Victoria Gardens, Montclair Plaza, Ontario Mills etc. Thank you! 330. On occasion making doctors appointments in Los Angeles, Westwood, Beverly Hills, Pasadena, and Loma Linda Medical Centers. 331. Too many new apts. - houses. Same old streets. I allow 45 min. to go 12 miles to work. I would take a bus to work and shop if convenient. I work in Chino. 332. I am very concern with the number of unsafe drivers in this community and on our freeways. This craziness is getting worse and worse. I would like to see more police and stiffer fines. It is no longer safe to drive in this community especially if this problem continues to be ignored. 333. I would like to see (Ineligible) bus, just to get around in the Cucamonga area. Like mini bus to the shopping areas for groceries of light shopping. I think it would cut down on so many auto (Ineligible) on the streets. 334. Perhaps there could be other arrangements that may be of help to me for the future. I am open for suggestions. Thank you for your interest in my welfare. 335. Due to 210 fwy most intersections aren't safe because they weren't constructed to handle traffic. 336. Too much traffic. 337. Rate of growth in area. So many streets have gridlock at certain times: ~ i ! '1 I i J 'I , I I .' J 1 I I 1 .J '1 J ) , I .J ) I I ." J I J I I J I , J I -' I I I J 80 1 I 338. It would be nice to have a female driver for a round trip to medical appts. to shopping as a paid companion at a affordable price. 339. I really never see people waiting for a bus. You must have a car. Since the growth of families moving up here. These families must have 1 or 2 more cars especially since the majority must work. 340. Try to make the bus system better. Smaller buses. More frequent buses. Criss-cross grid pattern with one free transfer. Better bus stops- covered. Better sidewalks-(Ineligible) straight, clear. More rideshare information. 341. Extending YMCA bus route to all of RC an Upland. 342. Transportation passes per month-different levels and purposes- European style, a shared expense, and acceptable by all forms of transport. With a cash-surcharge for out of ordinary trips - with a common phone number for access. 343. Not transportation only, but affordable low income rental housing for senior citizens, not one where the rent keeps going up, but to stabilize, seniors are reliable and will pay their rent. Thank you. 344. Improved bus time table- waiting at bus stop-too long - discourages taking bus/public transportation. 345. I do not trust Access since they abandoned me twice. I would like it if the (Ineligible) transportation ran later such as 6:30 p.m. so I could take pilates or yoga. 346. Brighter street lights - many complain "can't see people walking" No more apartments- Too many cars-Too many people not obeying driving rules such as making wide right turns-driving wrong way and too fast at post office. 347. Take free rides. 348. Routes are too far apart. 349. Buses - You should have more stops, too far apart. I'm from New York. Stops were every other block and they were short blocks. 1 'I I ") ] I , ) '1 , ] 'I .J J I I .-:1 J I oj I J , , , I _J I i ,J 81 - 350. Not enough metrolinks to other cities. (Ineligible) When you do get there it is hard to find transport from train to where you want to go! 351. The YMCA (Ineligible) pick up too early for the senior citizen lunch and brings one back too late. 352. I wish there was service to the senior center later in the morning or in the afternoon. I would like a city bus stop at the corner of Carnelian and Lavine. I need transportation to LA County - Drs. Visits, visits to . friends, etc. 353. Bus stops should be well lighted with 24-hour surveillance equipment that is constantly monitored. 354. Better advertisement -Easy access to info of what is available. 355. When using the Access Van they drop you off and they should pick you up and a few times that I was left at the doctor's office and my doctor and staff brought me home. 356. Only the need for a signal at our mobile home park. 357. I heard about transportation for Senior's like Dial-A-Ride. Do we (Ineligible) have here! If so it is convenient for us seniors where we could depend on, in case our car broke down or for trips necessary like going to a doctor and etc. 358. Yes, as I get older. 359. Yes, how about provision for Rancho Transit for seniors and disabled persons? A transit that offers curb-to-curb service where riders share the use of vehicle at an affordable car (like $0.25 per trip). 360. Major traffic congestion inevitable unless new residential construction is limited. 361. More publication of the variety of transportation and I don't (Ineligible) through newspapers. 362. Extend general public transportation to city general. 363. Better bus stop timetable-due too long between bus services at stop- impedes walking. . I ...J ] J I , ::::J J I I ...J J I J I .... 82 , ! -:' l .J 364. More (Ineligible) bus stops closer together so seniors can walk to them. If I could not drive I would have to move from Red Hill area probably. 365. I need to know bus schedules, price, stops, etc. and description of other available transportation with telephone numbers etc. 366. While I don't have the needs now, I can see the need for seniors- now and in the future- for a citywide system that takes into consideration their issues. Thank you for planning for them! 367. Expand bus system 368. Dial A Ride - taxi service was better than access. 369. I hear they - bus in hear take to (Ineligible) to eat lunch. 370. As for my own needs, I don't think there's any need to do that. Thank you. 371. This transportation you are talking about they are nowhere near where I Iive- Almost like we are not part of Rancho Cucamonga 372. Population growing all ages-just try to take care for the influx of new residents. 373. Keep up to date. 374. More fire stations. 375. Should I lose, my ability to drive as I get better I would like to see reliable bus services close to my home or senior bus service on call. 376. Reliable senior bus service or public bus service that (Ineligible) more areas with frequent stops. 377. More Senior Transportation 378. Traffic is terrible. Too many potholes. Also, its good to see sheriffs' cars patrolling. 379. Keep the streets in good condition! 380. Transportation to the senior center that is convenient and fast. 381. How to control traffic blockage at schools when streets are blocked and parents picking up kids e.g. Bluegrass 8t. by Golden School and (Ineligible) at Jr. High; Banyan at Los Osos. 382. More reliable taxi service. '1 i i -1 '1 J l "1 J -J -1 , --i ,J I .J "1 ,.J i ,J I oj J I ~ I .J I .J i i .J 83 1 i J , , -, i 1 .I 383. Not that I think. 384. A bus type limo would be good for people with MS or Fibro who can't be bounced around much-muscle pain or rectal pain 385. The bicycle path that will eventually link Rialto to Claremont is a great idea. When will it be finished? 386. Very poor service from fellow cab company. 387. Senior breaks and bus (Ineligible) pay bus for middle school and high school 388. Our transportation needs will probably change at some point and we'll have to look at our options at that time. 389. Senior Center too far from home- Poor location - Have been there once for identity seminar-beautiful senior center-some questionable persons in charge of activities. Too costly, time and gas! Wish it were closer to center of city -seniors who do not drive miss out completely. 390. Where I now live there is a van being used on a regular basis. However, it only goes within a mile radius and I need to go to Kaiser in Fontana often. It would help so much if there were some type of transportation from here to there and back, which I could depend on at a reasonable cost. 391. Have a designated spot to pick up and leave off people - take public transportation or other public transit service for seniors- make the fare reasonable. 392. I think it is a good thing that our City is trying to help seniors with transportation. I would hope you also consider ways to get them on and off buses etc. Many cars move around but have difficulty stepping on and off a bus. 393. To Mayor Alexander and Staff - We need to plan now, not the future for better and reliable transportation with affordable fees and more comfort seats for all seniors and possible a bathroom for those that can't control their bladder. We are all counting on you and your staff. Thank you and God Bless. l I J J J J J J 1 .I J I J I J 84 -I I " 1 'I i .i -, I i I I -, I I I J l J ] ] -! -.J -' '1 .J .-"1 J J I I c;J :1 .-' I -1 i J I J I J Appendix Cover Letter Senior Transportation Needs Assessment Survey 85 1 I, ..~ I :.1 :1 u i-] ",~ ;1 i ,I ,,__J o r] o. r'] l. [J [-] L_ o ('-') u D D n tJ U U U Mayor WlLLlAM J. ALExANDER Mayor Pro r"" DIANE WIllIAMS Counalm<mbm REx GUTIERREZ L DENNIS MICHAEL SAM SPAGNOLO City Manag<r JACK LAM. AI CP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RANCHO CUCAMONGA January 23, 2006 Re: Senior Transportation Needs Assessment: Providing assistance to older adults. Dear Resident, One of the goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is to provide transportation services that support the mobility needs of its residents as they use community facilities and services. As the City grows and the number of senior citizens increases, the changing transportation needs of older adults needs to be considered in future City planning. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is conducting a study of the transportation issues and needs of adults over 60 years of age living in Rancho Cucamonga. An understanding of the transportation issues and needs of the older adults in our community will better enable Rancho Cucamonga to design adeq~ate transportation choices for its rapidly growing older population. Please complete and return this Senior Transportation Needs Assessment Survey in the enclosed postage paid envelope by Fridav. February 10. 2006. All individual responses are anonymous and will be kept confidential. Results of this Senior Transportation Needs Survey will be presented to the City Council and will be available on the Internet at www.RCoark.com. If you have any questions, please contact Community Services Supervisor Ryan Samples at (909) 477-2780 ext. 8003. If you require assistance in completing the attached survey then please call the James L. Brulte Senior Center at (909) 477-2780 Monday thru Friday, 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. where staff are prepared to assist you. Bilingual staff are also available. Personal bilingue esta disponible tambien. Thank you for your help and advice about your transportation needs. Si~ ~ J{)/ttf,2 William J. Alexander M~~ Rex Gutierrez Council member L~ Diane Williams Mayor Pro Tem ~ Sam Sp Council . ~ L. Dennis Michael Councilmember [I 10500 Civic Center Dr. . P.O. Box 807' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729.0807. Td 909-477.2700' Fax 909-477.2849' www.ci.rancho.cucamonga,ca.w U @ l , i l I l , \ ~ J I. I IJ 1 ( r I] 1 I) t ) ] II r ) -( I I T ( ! The City of Rancho Cucamonga SENIOR TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT We need your help and advice regarding your transportation needs, uses, and preferences. Instructions: Please answer every question by checking the box D. If you are unsure about how to answer, please give the best answer you can. Part A. About Your Drivinq 1. 2. Do you own a car, van, or truck? 0 Yes o No Do you have a current, valid driver's license? 0 Yes Do you currently drive a car, truck, etc.? 0 Yes o No o No 3. 4. If you have a license and currently do NOT drive, what are some of the reasons? (Check all that apply) o No longer comfortable driving o Do not like to drive at night o Do not like to drive when it is rainy o Too much traffic o Do not like to drive on the freeways o Do not like to drive very far o Don't have access to a vehicle o Other (Please list) 5. If you do NOT currently drive, are you MORE likely to: (Check only ONE) o Stay at home o Walk or ride a bicycle o Get a ride from someone else o Use a shared ride (A shared ride is transportation provided for more than one individual to a destination; usually in a van or small bus such as the ACCESS van or YMCA bus) o Use public transportation (bus or Metrolink) page 1 , Part B. About Your Transportation Needs. Use. and Preferences .- 1. In the past month, how many trips have you made? ~ None 1-4 trips 5-9 trips 10+ trips Within Rancho Cucamonga 0 0 0 0 ,- Outside Rancho Cucamonga 0 0 0 0 r 2. In the past month, what were some of your transportation needs within L Rancho Cucamonqa? (Please check the number of times that you needed to r go to each of these places.) ,. Not at all 1-2 times 3 -4 times 5 or more r Go to a doctor's appointment 0 0 0 0 L 0 0 0 0 r Go to the pharmacy , c Visit family, friends or meet new r people 0 0 0 0 L Attend a religious service 0 0 0 0 " Go to the Senior Center 0 0 0 0 '- 0 0 ,.. Attend a class 0 0 i.. Participate in volunteer activities 0 0 0 0 1- Shop for groceries 0 0 0 0 L Shop for things other than groceries 0 0 0 0 ('- , i '- Go to a movie, play or other social event 0 0 0 0 , , l. Attend a sporting event 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 ! Go to a restaurant L Go to my place of employment 0 0 0 0 ,'" Go to a fitness club 0 0 0 0 '- Other (please specify) 0 0 0 0 ~ '- page 2 , i i ,( I [ I 1 I' I J; [ I j 1 I I, I I r i I , I 1 I I I _, 3, In the past month, what were some of your transportation needs outside Rancho Cucamonqa to nearbv communities? (Please check the number of times that you needed to go to each of these places.) Not at all 1-2 times 3 -4 times 5 or more Go to a doctor's appointment Go to the pharmacy Visit family, friends or meet new people o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Attend a religious service 0 Go to the Senior Center 0 Attend a class 0 Participate in volunteer activities 0 Shop for groceries 0 Shop for things other than groceries 0 Go to a movie, play or other social event 0 Attend a sporting event . 0 Go to a restaurant 0 Go to my place of employment 0 Go to a fitness club 0 Other (please specify) 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 4. What time of day do you usually go out in the community to do the activities listed above? (Check only one) o Mornings o Afternoons o Evenings 5. What days of the week do you usually go out in the community to do the activities listed above? o Week days o Weekends o Both page 3 . ,.~ 6. In the past six months, because of a problem with transportation, did you ever: Yes No Cancel or miss a doctor's appointment 0 0 Not pick up a prescription 0 0 Not shop for groceries 0 0 Not attend a family activity 0 0 Not attend a religious activity 0 0 Not attend a social activity 0 0 i I L " I i , c 7. What would you be willing to pay for one way transportation within Rancho Cucamonqa? ' r i , o $.50 - $1.99 o $2.00 - 3.99 ' o $4.00 - 5.99 o $6.00 - 7.99 o $8.00 - or more c , I - r I c 8. What would you be willing to pay for one way transportation outside Rancho Cucamonqa to nearbv communities? ," , , 9. o $.50 - $1.99 o $2.00 - 3.99 o $4.00 - 5.99 o $6.00 - 7.99 o $8.00 or more In the past month, how frequently did you use the following types of transportation for trips outside of your immediate neighborhood? i L r ! i L r' ! ! Not at all 1-2 times 3 or more Alwavs use Walk 0 0 0 0 Bicycle 0 0 0 0 Personal car 0 0 0 0 Driven by others 0 0 0 0 Shared ride (like ACCESS) 0 0 0 0 Taxi or cab 0 0 0 0 Bus 0 0 0 0 Metrolink 0 0 0 0 L f' L { i I - L page 4 , , i c -, " " 10. Below are seven different types of transportation that you can use to travel outside your immediate neighborhood. Place a "1" in front of the type of transportation that you most prefer to use. Place a "2" in front of the type of transportation that you least prefer to use. Use my car Walk Ride a bicycle Get a ride from someone else Take a taxi or cab Share a ride (like ACCESS and the YMCA bus) Take a bus Use the Metrolink 11. Do you prefer a public transportation system that has a fixed route and schedule (like a bus or train) or a transportation system that you call when you need it (like a taxi cab or ACCESS and YMCA bus)? o I prefer a fixed route and schedule o I prefer to call when I need it o I do not have a preference , I l 12. If you DO USE a bus, the reason is: (Check all that apply) o Convenient location of bus stops o Reliable service o Affordable fare o Physically able to ride a bus o Feel safe o Protection from weather (sun, rain) at bus stops o Reasonable time for total trip o Not very many packages to carry o Can accommodate a person with a disability o Friendly driver o Other - page 5 ~, 1 13. If you DO NOT USE a bus, the reason is: (Check all that apply) r I , I r o No bus available o Wait is too long o Feel unsafe o No protection from weather (sun, rain) at bus stops o Afraid to use after dark o Lack of reliable service o Total time for trip too long o Too difficult to carry packages on bus o Too far to go to the bus stop o Area at the bus stop is too busy o Difficult to use due to a disability o Too ill or frail to travel o Too expensive o Does not stop at desired location o Other r I. r i ,. c I i L r l. .r l r , l. r L 14. If you DO USE a shared ride (like ACCESS and YMCA bus), the reason is: (Check all that apply) [ o Convenient location for pickup o Reliable service o Affordable fare o Physically able to use a shared ride o Feel safe o Protected from weather (sun, rain) o Reasonable time for totai trip o Not very much to carry o Can accommodate a person with a disability o Friendly driver o Other L C I I L r I L r I L ~ i '- I i L l page 6 '- 1,- I I I I I , \ i I I, , i I: ! I: I i 1 I I I Ii ! l I ( I' i I , r '15. 16. If you DO NOT USE a shared ride (like ACCESS and YMCA bus), the reason is: (Check all that apply) o No shared ride available o Wait is too long o Feel unsafe o Afraid to use after dark o No protection from weather (sun, rain) at bus stops o Lack of reliable service o Total time for trip too long o Too difficult to carry packages on a shared ride o Difficult to use due to a physical disability o Too ill or frail to travel o Too expensive o Does not stop at desired location o Other (Check all that apply) If you DO USE a taxi or cab, the reason is: o Convenient pickup location o Reliable service o Affordable fare o Physically not able to ride a bus or shared ride o Feel safe o Protected from weather (sun, rain) o Total time for trip o Not very many packages to carry o Can accommodate a person with a disability o Other 17. (Check all that apply) If you DO NOT USE a taxi or cab, the reason is: o No taxi or cab available o Wait is too long o Feel unsafe o Afraid to use after dark o No protection from weather (sun, rain) at bus stops o Lack of reliable service o Total time for trip is too long o Too difficult to carry packages in a taxi or cab o Difficult to use due to a physical disability o Too ill or frail to travel o Too expensive o Other page 7 17. If you DO NOT walk or ride a bicycle, the reason is: (Check all that apply) 18. How would you rate the existing bus transportation system (OMNI Trans)? o Excellent 0 Very Good 0 Good 0 Fair 0 Poor 19. How would you rate the existing shared ride transportation svstem (ACCESS or YMCA Van)? o Excellent o o o o o o o o o o o o Lack of sidewalks Lack of bicycle paths Too hard to carry packages Takes too much time . Intersections are too dangerous Signal lights change too quickly No place to stop in the middle of the street if the light changes red Lack of benches to rest Concern about weather (too hot, too cold, too damp) Not strong enough Have difficulty baiancing or walking Other r ~ I ( r , c~ r o Very Good o Good 0 Fair o Poor c 20. How would you rate the existing taxi or cab transportation system? o Poor c, o Very Good o Good o Fair o Excellent r'. 21. How satisfied are you with the type of transportation that you currently use to get around in the community? o Satisfied 0 Neither satisfied or dissatisfied o Very dissatisfied i~ I o Very satisfied o Dissatisfied " ~ '- 22. In the next year, do you see your personal transportation needs changing? r- DYes o No Please explain how you see your transportation needs changing: L '-~ '-. page 8 '- I 1 I I , I' I , " Part C. About Mv Health 1. In general, how would you rate your health: o Excellent o Very Good o Good 0 Fair o Poor 2. In general, how would you rate your vision (with eyeglasses if you use them): o Excellent 0 Very Good 0 Good 0 Fair 0 Poor 3. In general, how would you rate your hearing (with hearing aid if you wear one): o Excellent 0 Very Good 0 Good 0 Fair 0 Poor 4, In general, how would you rate your reaction time to unexpected events: o Excellent 0 Very Good 0 Good 0 Fair 0 Poor 5. How would you describe your lifestyle? o Independent, fully mobile o Somewhat restricted physical activity, but able to live on my own and get out for basic necessities o Dependent upon others for most basic necessities Part D. About Mvself 1, Sex 0 Female 0 Male 2. Age 0 60-64 years 0 65-69 years 0 70-74 years 0 75-79 years 0 80-84 years 0 85 or older 3. Ethnicity 0 Caucasian / White 0 African American / Black 0 Hispanic 0 Asian / Pacific Islander 0 Native American 0 Other 4. Level of Education Attained: 0 Less than high school 0 High school diploma 0 Associate degree 0 Bachelor's degree 0 Master's degree 0 Doctorate / J D / M 0 5. What is your average household income? o 0-$14,999 o $45000-59,999 o $15,000-29,999 o $60,000-74,999 o $30,000-44,999 o $75,000 or more page 9 < - >' / -"1 \ ('. 6. Employment Status: (Check all that apply) 0 Work full-time: 0 Day time 0 Night time 0 Work part-time: 0 Day time 0 Night time 0 Volunteer regularly: 0 Day time 0 Night time 0 Student: 0 Day time 0 Night time 0 Retired 0 Disabled r r , 7. Marital Status: o Married r ~ , L o Divorced o Widowed o Never married 8. Living Arrangements: o Live alone in my own home o Live in my home with a caregiver o Live in my home with a spouse, relative or friend o Live in senior housing, assisted living, etc. 9. How many years have you lived in the City of Rancho Cucamonga? r ~ , ,. r- L r , _. r> , 10. In what zip code do you live? o 91701 o 91729 o 91730 o 91737 0 91739 r , I L 11. In conclusion, are there any other transportation concerns or issues that the City of Rancho Cucamonga should consider in planning for the future? r - (- L Please return bv Februarv 10. 2006. to: City of Rancho Cucamonga - SENIOR CENTER 11200 Base Line Road > Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 ATTN: TRANSPORTATION NEEDS SURVEY L Thank You for Your Help!! page 10 FEASIBILITY STUDY: CENTRAL PARK AQUATIC CENTER ."",,,.,,,,..,.,,,, """.,,,,,,,.. CE0JTlc.\L .II~. '<lI..~ ~..~ .~IIIJ. 1'..\ R K ~ AQUATI~ r=IR11Y!, '".", 1". Ie I I I I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FEASIBILITY STUDY: CENTRAL PARK AQUATIC CENTER Prepared For: THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA September 2006 Prepared By: ~ . AQUATIC ~DESIGNGROUP 1950 Kellogg Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 760.438.8400 In Association With: LI&tM PUlliZlDn: .1ID UIIRCAPB AJlCalTi:CI'UII&. 31591 Camino Capistrano San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 949.493.2600 . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Description I INTRODUCTION II SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Facility Planning Options.................................................... ...... ..... Market Analysis..... ................................ .................................. ... Projected Attendance................... .................................... .......... .... Financial Analysis...................... ............ .................................. .... III FACILITY PLANNING OPTIONS Recent Trends in Public Sector Aquatics.............................................. Facility Planning Option I........................................................... .... Facility Planning Option 2........................................................... .... Facility Planning Option 3............. .................................................. Facility Planning Option 4............................................................... Capacity Analysis by Option..... ................................. ............... ... .... IV MARKET ANALYSIS Population....................................................................... .......... Incomes................................................................................. ... Age Distribution................................ ............ ........................... ... Competition............................................................................. . V PROJECTED ATTENDANCE Market Penetration................................ ....................... ......... ........ Market Population By Area......................................................... ..... Market Penetration Rates..................................................... .... ....... Projected Attendance............. ...... ............. ..................................... Projected Attendance Patterns..... ......... ............................................ Facility Infrastructure Requirements............................................... ...... Planning Guidelines..... ............................................................ ..... Traditional Monthly and Unit Programs....... ....................................... VI FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Revenue at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities................ ......... ... Projected Revenue- Central Park Aquatic Center.. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. .. . .. . . . . . . .... . . Operating Expenses at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities......... ..... Pal!e I 2 2 2 3 3 5 5 8 9 10 10 II 21 21 21 21 22 27 27 28 28 29 30 30 31 33 38 38 38 39 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section Description VI FINANCIAL ANALYSIS (continued) Projected Operating Expenses- Central Park Aquatic Center. . .. ... . ... . . . .. . ...... Net Income / Loss at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities................ Projected Net Income / Loss- Central Park Aquatic Center. . . . . .. . . . .. . ... . .. .... .. VII CONCLUSION Pal!e 40 40 41 59 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page ii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fil!ure No. 2 3 4 5 LIST OF FIGURES Descriptiou Facility Planning Option I..................................................... Facility Planning Option 2..................................................... Facility Planning Option 3..................................................... Facility Planning Option 4..................................................... Resident Market Area.. ............ ............................................ Pal!e 13 15 17 19 23 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page Hi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES Table Number Description Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate- Facility Planning Option I.... 2 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate- Facility Planning Option 2.. .. 3 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate- Facility Planning Option 3.... 4 Preliminary Construction Cost Estimate- Facility Planning Option 4.... 5 Population by Distance from Rancho Cucamonga.......................... 6 Market Area Per Capita Incomes.............................................. 7 Market Area Age Distribution......................................... ..... ... 8 Market Penetration Rates- Selected Public Sector Aquatic Facilities.... 9 Projected Recreation Attendance- Central Park Aquatic Center. . . . . .. . .. 10 Projected Attendance Pattems- Central Park Aquatic Center.. ...... ..... I I Projected Infrastructure Requirements- Central Park Aquatic Center. . . 12 Revenues at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities................ I3 Projected Revenue, Facility Planning Option I.............. ............... 14 Projected Revenue, Facility Planning Option 2............................. 15 Projected Revenue, Facility Planning Option 3.......................... ... 16 Projected Revenue, Facility Planning Option 4......................... .... 17 Operating Expenses at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities.... 18 Projected Operating Expenses, Facility Planning Option I............... 19 Projected Operating Expenses, Facility Planning Option 2............... Pa!!e 14 16 18 20 24 25 26 34 35 36 37 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Feasibility Study Pageiv Central Park Aquatic Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table Number Description 20 Projected Operating Expenses, Facility Planning Option 3............... 21 Projected Operating Expenses, Facility Planning Option 4............... 22 Net Income / Loss at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities........ 23 Projected Net Income / Loss, Facility Planning Option 1.............. .... 24 Projected Net Income / Loss, Facility Planning Option 2........... ... .... 25 Projected Net Income / Loss, Facility Planning Option 3....... ....... .... 26 Projected Net Income / Loss, Facility Planning Option 4.............. .... 27 Comparison of all Facility Planning Options- Year 1....................... Pal!e 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page v . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES Appendix No. Description ESRI Demographic and Income Profile..................................... 2- I Preliminary Utilities Cost Estimates- Facility Planning Option I......... 2-2 Preliminary Utilities Cost Estimates- Facility Planning Option 2......... 2-3 Preliminary Utilities Cost Estimates- Facility Planning Option 3......... 2-4 Preliminary Utilities Cost Estimates- Facility Planning Option 4...... ... Pal!e Al A2-1 A2-2 A2-3 A2-4 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page vi . . . . . . . . . . '. . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i. I. . . . Section I INTRODUCTION The City of Rancho Cucamonga. California is desirous of developing an aquatic center within Central Park to better serve the community's needs for recreation and competitive-based aquatic programs. 'I'll assist in the planning and development of the facility, the City retained the services of RJM Design Group (RJM), tll head up a design team that was given the assignment of assessing the merits of the various types of facilities and the financial viability of an aquatic center within the community. RJM, in turn, retained the services of Aquatic Design Group (ADG), an aquatic consulling lInn that specializes in the programming, planning, design and engineering of puhlic sector aquatic t'lcilities. This repon, which is presented in seven sectillns. contains the findings of the study performed from March 2005 to Octoher 2005. Following this introduction is a section that summarizes the study's findings. Subsequent sections document recommended facility options, provide an analysis for each of the potential aquatic facility sites under consideration, evaluate the market viability of an aquatic facility within the City of Rancho Cucamllnga, estimate anticipated attendance at such a facility, and project potential revenues, operating expenses and net operating income I loss. This repon was prepared by Me. Randy Mendioroz, Principal and President of Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Assistance was provided by Messrs. Roben Mueting and Larry Moun of RJM Design Group. Celltf:.ll Park Aquatic C~nter t:easihililY Study Pag\;' I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section II SUMMARY OF FINDINGS This section of the report presents a summary of the findings of the feasibility study. More detailed information on process and how conclusions were drawn is available in the body ofthe report. Facility Planning Options For the purposes of this study, four (4) different aquatic concepts, or facility planning options, were analyzed for their appropriateness to serve the needs of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The first option included three (3) swimming pools: an indoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool; an outdoor 25 yard x 50 meter swimming pool; and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements. Approximate development cost for this option is projected at 18.3 million. The second option also contained three (3) swimming pools: an indoor 6 lane x 25 yard swimming pool; an outdoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool; and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements. Approximate development cost for this option is projected at $14.0 million. The third option contained two (2) pools: an outdoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool; and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements. Approximate development cost for this option is projected at $10.4 million. The fourth option included three (3) pools: a 25 yard x 25 meter outdoor swimming pool; a 1,000 foot-long lazy river with offset waterslide receiving area; a 4,000 square foot children's activity pool with zero-depth entry and wet play elements; and four (4) waterslides. Approximate development cost for this option is projected at $13.7 million. Each facility option included allowances for appropriately sized (based upon code requirements) natatorium / bathhouse buildings, site work, parking and related infrastructure. Market Analysis The market for the Central Park Aquatic Center is likely to consist primarily of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and surrounding communities within a 15 mile radius of the proposed Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . project site. An analysis was performed for the resident market within 0-5 miles, 5-10 miles and 10-15 miles of the City. These market areas contained a total of 1,422,409 persons in 2000, and are projected to have approximately 1,582,240 in 2005. Demographic factors studied within each of the market area radii include population, age distribution and per capita incomes. A review was also conducted of market area competition and its potential influence on attendance at the Central Park Aquatic Center. Projected Attendance As discussed in detail within Section V, based on available market support, competitive environment, year-round operation, and the Design Team's knowledge of market penetration at other public sector aquatic facilities, recreation attendance at the Central Park Aquatic Center is projected at 147 thousand in 2007 (the assumed first year of operation of the aquatic facility), increasing to 150 thousand in 2008 and 154 thousand by 2009. Given these levels of projected attendance, and assuming no major expansion projects within the first five years of operation, the recreation components of the aquatic facility should be designed to accommodate 1,452 persons at one time. In addition to recreational use, allowances have been made (where appropriate) for use by local club swim teams, lap swimming, water aerobics, swim lessons, life safety classes, and competitive meets. Financial Analysis Based on projected attendance and estimated per capita patron spending, revenue for Facility Planning Option I is projected at $1.0 million in 2007, $1.1 million in 2008, and $1.2 million in 2009. For Facility Planning Option 2, revenue is projected at $992 thousand in 2007, $1.0 million in 2008, and $1.1 million in 2009. For Facility Planning Option 3, revenue is projected at $904 thousand in 2007, $995 thousand in 2008, and $1.0 million in 2009. For Facility Planning Option 4, revenue is projected at $1.6 million in 2007, $1.7 million in 2008, and $1.8 million in 2009. For Facility Planning Option I, deducting operating expenses yields a projected net operating deficit of $562 thousand in 2007, increasing to $6 I 8 thousand in 2008 and $649 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . thousand in 2009. For Facility Planning Option 2, deducting operating expenses yields a projected net operating deficit of $281 thousand in 2007, increasing to $309 thousand in 2008 and $324 thousand in 2009. For Facility Planning Option 3, deducting operating expenses yields a projected net operating deficit of$176 thousand in 2007, increasing to $193 thousand in 2008 and $203 thousand in 2009. For Facility Planning Option 4, deducting operating expenses yields a projected net operating orofit of $34 thousand in 2007, increasing to $37 thousand in 2008 and $39 thousand in 2009. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . . . Section III FACILITY PLANNING OPTIONS The City of Rancho Cucamonga is considering four options with respect to the proposed aquatic facility. These are: (1) develop a facility which incorporates an indoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool, an outdoor 25 yard x 50 meter swimming pool, and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements; (2) develop a facility which includes an indoor 6 lane x 25 yard swimming pool, an outdoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements; (3) develop a facility incorporating an outdoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool and an outdoor recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements; and (4) develop a facility which features an outdoor 25 yard x 25 meter swimming pool, an outdoor lazy river, an outdoor children's activity pool with zero-depth entry and wet play elements, and an outdoor waterslide receiving pool with four (4) waterslides. The balance of this section discusses the relative merits of the four options. Recent Trends in Public Sector Aquatics Rectilinear-shaped pools designed to support the needs of fitness and competitive swimming programs are commonly seen in public parks across the country. Until the past quarter century, rectilinear pools were the only type of swimming pools developed by municipal park systems. These pools were generally built to strict specifications, most commonly 25 yards in length and six to eight lanes wide. Less common were 50 meter, or Olympic-sized pools. These types of pools are less suitable for recreation use, since the water temperature is controlled for fitness and competitive swimming, making them too cold and too deep for most recreation users. Almost without exception, these "traditional" aquatic facilities operate at a deficit, because they lack the entertainment value needed to support large groups of recreation attendees. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 5 Ii . . . . . . . . . Ij . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /0.''''111'/'- II'",IIII,'""i!'" 11"1< .I.-,-I! , " 'II"II/( 1-.'''',11/\ 'Iil/'I/ , "Ii/""-,,, hHII, \'.l1il1h," ,,_ nlrodue-I,"" .'~111" \\ "I' I'rI\;l:~ ,," ,f'. :0:,'''''''- "~"~, """IJlll \lIccl'Hl It> \""," 1,b. (I:,,;. "', , . 'llllh, I')~", "m'la,'- I",,' "11<'11', \ . ~ ,_ " .n, Ln P d", ~ 1'!,,,,,,,,Ii", ",' (11\ '" Il . pr"'~, 1,,,1";,,' Ul'll"I';trl,lll,' ~,"'" 1 " "llt'm';"l' 11 ,'dh",!_ 10 'I""I<I II - :11,. ~"",'r,,1 file-.I,",.," L "''I IWIl'"I,,,,, I',,~II' he" <,m,," ,1..11:0,.,,,,, \ "I'l',"';-'" , 1'1110'11"""",,1, ,,"~I' , n"Lil1~ '" , ,.,"V "r ,",'Ii\ ily In t 'c'"" "I ~ 1110 I", . . 1'"hI,,- "lilllh~ u :, 1i",,,I, 'cdnt ~:Ol' h,'I\\" , .' "'i"ati,-t:ll'lh"., "IlI'n\';Lt\' ""\-1"1""'" ,,,nlbl\\,I' ,1.1l'1:1I~,' '" I"'" " recul.", ," ,:0'1'",,1, \,,"'(-1" . ,,111."'11,11,-,1,'," '. .,-Imll'" \\11'"" ' Ih,'\\;'"," ";'" . ,I"~, ""h''''.' ' ~, """,'d r"", ",,,,,,,,,., "'c;' '''11 ,'krn~"t1' , ' '''\l' h "1,.1,. '/}"','r. , ""\\.Llc"'[" ,,,,,,,,,,,' . ",'" . ,,,.,, ' ''''''',1 "'Cl'II" ,1",,,,.,,,, ,: "Cl'l _.~ "", \\,;11 ".tll"".," ' . lI"h I ,'lll"UO",,,,'lll I .- "'j,,,'I:.'.Lr1" '.IILC'.IIo,' 11\',1'\- .. ' "_1:0\<," ;",,11""", """j,,, ."1,11.,>:,111"11 ,'\,'ll ,"nlc" ' III,' II,,,I~,,. '''1.l1Ic-rt'.1' ,lll'IIl'"",'11 " h,d"",,,,, ,,,klllll1l1l 11l""",,!'\I' _ ""'l"'-pr,,rll "I i'."LI' I" 1',''-:1'''1';1",,,, ,,'dn, """. " . .ctl""~' , II",' "'1<\,,,d;I,,,,,,1 l,lIndvl _.'i""I",.,."..." .U '''', ;",,1 "1'eT"" ,.c, )\11 "." il,~klld,,1 ' ".( Ilv,,' , ,111,11", I .. I,>I\'-I{,d"'" ' ,< II 'kl!, L1~ II ,,,(h. I , ,,,,,,.1..,,< ,1Ir"d,:i,'1)'1 r'I"-""'" """'''I'c'IIl;',. ;""1,,,,,,,, '" ,lL" :rhlc-I I " " "'r~c' " 1'",,11' (",."",'dlo 1\", """,,'nl ",,,,,"k,-,,!>I ,111"',." 1al1ll1l' "KI<",,'d (',..".,'1',,," -\.j"''',,(e,'''' , 1','""hIl1l',"'I<I\ ,,-':''',, II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11",101""'"11,,,1>1,,-,,'."'" '''''''LI"I.','II'I'',.,. , ,,1\0,<111<'\1.1111, I,"~c'r dl'lll"~,,,]\llI' ',I 111'.", ,',,_] ]. . '" """I'''I'L1lal';'" rlhr'H,~h ':~llllj"''''II,' hl~hc'r In '"d"lllC . ,', "ell .,' "I'I','"I",~ '''.1 """II Ihc'\\"O\"I"<I",hllh""lC';on, "'!>'I<I'/lll,':,:od,'''',,:oII, I,." 1",'lil"h!.' f~\elll"',' (", "Oll\"dlll\,"N' ",'' ." I ,,"cerc';iI,,'''_'''''''''''']], ,- ",,,,,,,,., 'OIII'Il<hll,,' ",,,I /0."""1'/"1"'" II' '.'" ,."""".\<...,,,,11"""1""" In ,,',-,'111 _"',,"'. '",111: :lg,'l<'ll" \\,Ih", Ik ~~"ll' ", ( ,tI'(,HJlI;O h.l1e' ,,,,,,,,"., '-'%'"",.,1 ,'1"'11 ,,,h,d":ICc' l"'"II','1111\","I.II"I...",I"\11 I'T\,-~'alll' "'11I11l I'd,lIc _,','lnt ,1,1".'lI,' (:ocll",," \\'''l'''' 1.'1~" ".l1lll'"IUL\'c'I'""I,.L1'-"'<I"m,,1 ,,11.11\\",,',' Il','I'-"''''11 1'''''1, 11",,'h"l'11 dl,,,'I"I','d ,,,,,I'I'c'l 111"1"":<11,,,,-.\,,,, ' ~ l.irS" "1"'1 ":",,, dc'h,',,, ' \ . 1\.11'1"1,0, ""],,,]. ,'"~ '1". 'i".lIl,'1 I, ] I ' I- , ,_"Ik ,,,"'" 11".n1,,1 ~.Ld""lll""P' "-.,, ] , .,. """'''lll\'i'''''''( , , , ]' 'lTI,T.II I.,1:1h,( "'''"'''''''' ''',,' "", \' "".,-,,11),'''1'''_ ] 1 ,-. .. ,l1" I"" f(I<!"""~ ~""" ( "]','''<ll'''''''' ",' ..,'c',",-I'\I",I,'_I"',,,. . """",,'II]]""l''''''I''''','d-''''I','r:OIII',., ] 111""']''1' 1 "'1"11""',,' ",,_1 . I, ,,','" ;t~" 1"":'" 1,,"l1e''- 111'''1 "'"i''''HI.tl]".h',. "",.I.., ,I'i""'''' 1,,,'t1I1I~' l'll:,'r "' ~.':H.I 1(,,,,, l'he-'l' I'LUILlt<., "II (''1'".,1'\""\",,-.,,,11'"'''' I ,.,,,,;'11", ~1"," I'.,,'" II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ," :~;..., ..1- ~' ~ ~ /"""1'/' /'"hJ" ,\,-,-/",1""1111. 1'11/'''1< (,m.., I."..ili'., I'Lu,,,;,,\: (lpl;.." ]. 2~ \ a,d \ 2~ 'kin 1,,,I.."r 1',,,,1. 2'; '-"nl , ~II \1('(," flllld""rl'....I.."dCI""I.""R""I"'"I;"" 1'....I(lldnl" I, i\:lIrt"II n,\. Ik"~n 1'-,1111 11:" "0'1,'<1 [11"llh.."-,, "~nlli<':"'llllkr"'llrll'n""hll~:111 ill.l,,,,, 1'",,1111,,1 "",.],1 "I"""'k :'''H "",n<l \\,:1\1'1111,' ("1_,..1 R:llld,,, ('''''d''h'I1~'' \c'l'",.,IIt'j.:lv. ()plh'rl IlIll''''I'''t';':,''lIK""""r" 2< qrd \"~ '1\,"," ",,[,",,1,,1' '''It",n;n," 1'",,1. wlnd,c'" '''','n''"11"d,,:~ up 10 ,'i,'1111~12< ,ard '''''II 1.1Il,-,.Ll '"liB ",d[h. ", "dl '" "clcq'We' ,11.,lh\\\ .I','," 1;'rl""tIHn~alld\\:lIt'f"'~k"" 11m 11lH,1 ,',,,,',1 "],,,I"-"'J'nHIl'dat " ""'lllCf 1<''''1'"''''''''' I s_ll" ~~ d~~r,'~' I "11,,',,l1c'lIl I" h"lln "dd,c'" II,,' ",',',j, "I' ,11,1,11,'" :1I,,1 "'"".,, [11 <cd.!II'"" ,,, 111~ Ill':"~'"~ 1'",,[, '" "d'''1llm"daIC tompd;Il\I' "U"ltl"n~, ell\ In~ :II>d ";iI'T 1'"[,, l'r,,~I''''''' 0":' wa"""L1,,1 h,,,,,. 1)['''''" I "J>o Itld",k, :",.1 "lLI,:""1 .'< '-ard , .'0 "\<",'] "-,'''l1Ill1llg 1'",,1, I'l1e ":lIc" "'llIl'a"I"Ic' 1\;111;11111" 1'''''[ ,'",del h" m,""I,,,,,,,,1 all!ll' 7~ ,,, ~,' ,kp,'", I ahrcnhC'1I ,ir:1I lll'hl ""mpd'II\" a"d 1111Il'", L1'~" 1'1\'k,- 111" 1',,,'ll""lli~LL'''li,," ,-""I,} p"rC'IlI1.,II\' ,,,-,',,,,,,,,,,,bll' "II ,"'I"Pd,11\1' Illgh ,,'1,,",1 ",,'ll". "Ii l"''''I','I,ll\l' ,',.rk~:,'I~ """";!!,,,,,\,,"_""',""'-' I"-:I'.o.i,,, ,,,,,!\ 1',,,,,-' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . swimming and water polo events, (including floating cage water polo up to 20 meter x 30 meter course dimensions), and I-meter and 3-meter springboard diving for all of the governing bodies mentioned herein. Eight to nine 50-meter lanes and up to twenty-two (depending on lane width) 25-yard lanes could be designed into this pool. Adding a third 7,500 square foot recreation pool with waterslides, zero-depth entry and wet play elements would provide the entertainment value, shallow water depth and ability to maintain warmer water temperatures preferred by seasonal recreation user groups during the months of May through September. Similar to projects like the Roseville Aquatics Complex and the Folsom Aquatic Center at Lembi Community Park, the introduction of the recreation components would definitely increase the percentage of cost recovery of the facility. Initial capital costs for Facility Planning Option I are projected at approximately $18.3 million. For a detailed breakdown of initial capital costs, refer to Table I. Facility Planning Option 2- 6 Lane x 25 Yard Indoor Pool, 25 Yard x 25 Meter Outdoor Pool and Outdoor Recreation Pool (Refer to Figure 2) To reduce the building infrastructure costs associated with a larger indoor pool, a smaller 6 lane x 25 yard indoor pool which is operated year round has been evaluated. Similar to Option I, this pool could be operated at a warmer water temperature. A 25 yard x 25 meter outdoor pool would address the needs of club teams, and fitness users year round. This pool could accommodate literally all high school swimming, diving and water polo competitions, as well as CIF (California Interscholastic Federation) sanctioned regional meets. Division 2 and lower NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association) competitive swimming meets could also be hosted within this pool configuration as well, since NCAA competitive swimming is primarily a 25 yard affair. Adding a third outdoor recreation pool, which would operate during the traditional May through September recreation season with a user-friendly warmer water temperature would provide a greater Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . amount of flexibility in competitive / recreation programming, allowing the recreation patrons to help offset the operating deficits typically associated with competitive and/or rectilinear swimming pools. Initial capital costs for Facility Planning Option 2 are projected at approximately $14.0 million. For a detailed breakdown of initial capital costs, refer to Table 2. Facility Planning Option 3- 25 Yard x 25 Meter Outdoor Pool and Outdoor Recreation Pool (Refer to Figure 3) For the purposes of providing a value-based planning option, an outdoor-only facility with a 25 yard x 25 meter pool and recreation pool has been considered. Similar to Option 2 minus the indoor pool component, this option is the most capital cost effective, since it reduces required building infrastructure by a significant amount. The 25 yard x 25 meter pool could be operated on a year round basis to meet the needs of competitive, lap and fitness user groups, with the recreation pool operating during the traditional May through September recreation season. Initial capital costs for Facility Planning Option 3 are projected at approximately $10.4 million. For a detailed breakdown of initial capital costs, refer to Table 3. Facility Planning Option 4- 25 Yard x 25 Meter Outdoor Pool, Outdoor Lazy River, Outdoor Children's Activity Pool, and Outdoor Waterslide Receiving Pool with Four Waterslides (Refer to Figure 4) In order to meet (and exceed) anticipated facility infrastructure requirements as discussed in Section V, an outdoor-only facility weighted towards recreation is needed. Option 4 provides for most competitive needs through the inclusion of a 25 yard x 25 meter pool, but also serves the seasonal need for recreation (May through September) to the highest degree possible given site constraints. Initial capital costs for Facility Planning Option 4 are projected at approximately $13.7 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . million. For a detailed breakdown of initial capital costs, refer to Table 4. Capacity Analysis By Option Per Section 3119B.I of Chapter 31 B of the California Building Code (which allows for I bather per 20 square feet of water surface area), the maximum allowable number of patrons for each of the Facility Planning Options is as follows: Facility Planning Option 1 Water Surface Area Bather Load Indoor 25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool 6,150 308 Outdoor 25 Yard x 50 Meter Pool 12,300 615 Outdoor Recreation Pool 7,500 375 Totals, Option 1 25,950 1,298 Facility Planning Option 2 Water Surface Area Bather Load Indoor 6 Lane x 25 Yard Pool 3,475 174 Outdoor 25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool 6,150 308 Outdoor Recreation Pool 7,500 375 Totals, Option 2 17,125 857 Facility Planning Option 3 Water Surface Area Bather Load Outdoor 25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool 6,150 308 Outdoor Recreation Pool 7,500 375 Totals, Option 3 13,650 683 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 11 . . . . Facility Planning Option 4 Water Surface Area Bather Load . Outdoor 25 Yard x 25 Meter Pool 6,150 308 . Outdoor Lazy River 12,000 600 . Outdoor Children's Activity Pool 4,000 200 . Totals, Option 4 25,950 1,]08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . / - , - - - - / ~ /' , / Sf ,. - - / . ~ > " < - , , ~ - - ~ ~ ~ / - , - ~ ,.... :1) / 0 , , - , :;':0 / 0 " 'j ::L.= ~~ <..= ::... u I/~ ~ - - , /, ~. - , :..,:.., , >' " , , , ." E , ~ ~ , / o 7 " , " I' , , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . . . '. . . . '. . '. Table I PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FACILITY PLANNING OPTION I No. Description Qty. Volt Unit Price Total Site: I. General Conditions (5%) 1 LS Allow $726,055 2, Site Preparation and Grading 545,690 SF $2.00 $1,091,380 3. Site Utilities I LS Allow $300,000 4. Parking (438) 169,500 SF $8.00 $1,356,000 5. Parking Lot Entry Drive 49,140 SF $8.00 $393,120 6. Maintenance Access Drive 8,700 SF $8.00 $69,600 7. Hardscapc 11,000 SF $10.00 $110,000 8 Site Lighting 1 LS Allow $125,000 9. Site Fencing 1,100 LS $80.00 $88,000 10. Landscape / Irrigation 60,600 SF $5.00 $303,000 11. Iterim Landscape / Irrigation 140,000 SF $1.00 $140,000 Site Subtotal: $4,702,155 Aquatics: I. 25 Y x 25 M Pool (indoor) 6,150 SF $140.00 $861,000 2. 25 Y x 50 M Pool 12,600 SF $140.00 $1,764,000 3. Recreation Pool 7,500 SF $140.00 $1.050,000 4. Waterslides 2 EA $140,000.00 $280,000 5. Wet Play Elements I LS Allow $125,000 6. Pool Deck 61,000 SF $10.00 $610,000 7. Spectator Seating 2,400 LF $150.00 $360,000 Aquatics Subtotal: $5,050,000 A.-chitecture: I. Entry / Administration 1,200 SF $350.00 $420,000 2. Natatorium I Locker Room 15,000 SF $250.00 $3,750,000 3. Concession 500 SF $350.00 $175,000 4. Pool Equipment I Chemicals 2,000 SF $300.00 $600,000 5. Storage 800 SF $250.00 $200,000 6. Shade Structures 17,500 SF $20.00 $350,000 Architecture Subtotal: $5,495,000 SUBTOT AL- ALL AREAS $]5,247,155 Design Contingency- 20% $3,049,431 GRAND TOTAL $18,296,586 RJM Design Group, Inc. has prepared this estimate of probable constnlction cost on the basis of its best professional judgment and experience with the construction industry. The estimate, however, represents assumptions and opinions of the construction market and contractor's methods of determining actual construction costs. Costs over which RJM Design Group, inc. has no control. If the c1ient(s) wishes greater assurance as to the construction cost, he (they) shall employ an independent cost estimator. A more precise estimate will be completed when more detailed development of plans and thorough site-specific research on a case-by-case basis is performed. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . " / ^ . - . ^ . - 0 " / . ~ / - ;, / . / . " . - . = - - . - . . . . . . . . . . . . , , :: . ~ ;, " '- ., "" - . -" t ,~ '. .c.., ~ 0;' " _ _ , ". , .. . -' 7 :: _ ~_' ~, _', ' E r; c:;~; "- :' ~ ~ , _ ,. = f 7 ~ ~ ~ ~'"~ ~ ~ ~ ~,,~ i,; f ~;, ~ ~ ~ j . ., - - = , , " . -, ~ -" ~ ~ - , ,. - ,- .., , '. . . . ~ - -- c;~,~::;~o:.,,"'..,.~~~_.,..~ :, ' - " ~ -, <, ,~- - - - , " ~ , " ,,, , .-, ( " , , , - , - c E. o ~ ~ ~ 7 z - ~ " ",-' Co Co ~ '" ~ of. ~ - -::rE:; ~ " '. '-' :L = ~~ ~..c - 0 " c ~ " ~ ':: - 0 ':! , 7. ;.., :..J '~ ~ - - " , 2. - , , " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2 PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 2 No. Description Qty. Unit Unit Price Total Site: I. General Conditions (5%) I LS Allow $554,331 2. Site Preparation and Grading 486,000 SF $2.00 $972,000 3. Site Utilities I LS Allow $300,000 4. Parking (285) 110,300 SF $8.00 $882,400 5. Parking Lot Entry Drive 49,140 SF $8.00 $393,120 6. Maintenance Access Drive 8,700 SF $8.00 $69,600 7. Hardscape 10,000 SF $10.00 $100,000 8 Site Lighting I LS Allow $125,000 9. Site Fencing 1,000 LS $80.00 $80,000 10. Landscape I Irrigation 60,600 SF $5.00 $303,000 II. lterim Landscape / Irrigation 354,000 SF $1.00 $354,000 Site Subtotal: $4,133,451 Aquatics: I. 6 Lane x 25 Y Pool (indoor) 3,475 SF $140.00 $486,500 2. 25 Y x 25 M Pool 6,150 SF $140.00 $861,000 3. Recreation Pool 7,500 SF $140.00 $1,050,000 4. Waterslides 2 EA $140,000.00 $280,000 5. Wet Play Elements 1 LS Allow $125,000 6. Pool Deck 39,700 SF $10.00 $397,000 7. Spectator Seating 1,200 LF $150.00 $180,000 Aquatics Subtotal: $3,379,500 Architecture: I. Entry / Administration 1,200 SF $350.00 $420,000 2. Natatorium I Locker Room 10,500 SF $250.00 $2,625,000 3. Concession 500 SF $350.00 $175,000 4. Pool Equinment / Chemicals 1,600 SF $300.00 $480,000 5. Storage 800 SF $250.00 $200,000 6. Shade Structures 11,400 SF $20.00 $228,000 Architecture Subtotal: $4,128,000 SUBTOT AL- ALL AREAS $11,640,951 Design Contingency- 20% $2,328,190 GRAND TOTAL $13,969,141 RJM Design Group, Inc. has prepared this estimate of probable construction cost on the basis of its best professional judgment and experience with the construction industry. The estimate, however, represents assumptions and opinions of the construction market and contractor's methods of detennining actual construction costs. Costs over which RJM Design Group, inc. has no control. If the c1icnt(s) wishes greater assurance as to the construction cost, he (they) shall employ an independent cost estimator. A more precise estimate will be completed when more detailed development of plans and thorough site-specific research on a case-by-case basis is performed. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M <II ... = ~ ~ "0 g 2 c ' :g c: ~ "~ v:~gn 0.-- ~ _ : ~ .u :i: lfj ~E~ ~ "0 " . _U " GM~ . ~ ~ ~ Fe I i ~::",~Ui~~ ~ S_E.g 5-t olS ~_>.";' c ,c". " ~. .z~~IV:'" .. "'~~c 2 - ~_>.~tEC'.6~.~~. - ~ 08~SE."OmE.,~~~E ~.c ~ C 0 ~ ~ e e.~ .;; g- ~ c "0 E t- -ij .S .g ~~ .. .~ooc~~~uPO~Ea~~ M......""#".. _ Q..<:.:.:_Q"O . ~~~~d~~~~ ~~< __ ::!~"C M ~ .... E-< Il. o o z .... z ~ ... Il. ~ .... ... .... U -< ~ r-- " PJ' 0.. ~~, ...... =1:t: c: o '';:: 0- o 0:: w E- Z w U U ~ ~ :::> 5 erE < ~ ::.G :::l o::U ~~ ..J g ~~ E-..... Z 0 wO UU .s a rIl g :E .;;; '" " "" ~ 1J c " U .;.! :;; ~ -t: '" 0.. 1'l ;::; a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 3 PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 3 No. Description Qty. Unit Unit Price Total Site: I. General Conditions (5%) I LS Allow $411,016 2. Site Preparation and Grading 486,000 SF $2.00 $972,000 3. Site Utilities I LS Allow $300,000 4. Parking (228) 88,200 SF $8.00 $705,600 5. Parking Lot Entry Drive 49,140 SF $8.00 $393,120 6. Maintenance Access Drive 8,700 SF $8.00 $69,600 7. Hardscape 10,000 SF $10.00 $100,000 8 Site Lighting I LS Allow $125,000 9. Site Fencing 800 LS $80.00 $64,000 10. Landscape / Irrigation 60,600 SF $5.00 $303,000 II. Itcrim Landscape I Irrigation 218,000 SF $1.00 $218,000 Site Subtotal: $3,661,336 Aquatics: I. 25 Y x 25 M Pool 6,150 SF $140.00 $861,000 2. Recreation Pool 7,500 SF $140.00 $1,050,000 3. Waterslides 2 EA $140,000.00 $280,000 4. Wet Play Elements I LS Allow $125,000 5. Pool Deck 31,700 SF $10.00 $317,000 6. Spectator Seating 1,200 LF $150.00 $180,000 Aquatics Subtotal: $2,813,000 Architecture: I. Entry I Administration 1,200 SF $350.00 $420,000 2. Locker Room 2,000 SF $350.00 $700,000 3. Concession 500 SF $350.00 $175,000 4. Pool Equipment I Chemicals 1,600 SF $300.00 $480,000 5. Storage 800 SF $250.00 $200,000 6. Shade Structures 9,100 SF $20.00 $182,000 Architecture Subtotal: $2,157,000 SUBTOT AL- ALL AREAS $8,631,336 Design Contingency- 20% $1,726,267 GRAND TOTAL $10,357,603 RJM Design Group, Inc. has prepared this estimate of probable construction cost on the basis of its best professional judgment and experience with the construction industry. The estimate, however, represents assumptions and opinions of the construction market and contractor's methods of determining actual construction costs. Costs over which RJM Design Group, inc. has no control. If the client(s) wishes greater assurance as to the construction cost, he (they) shall employ an independent cost estimator. A more precise estimate will be completed when more detailed development of plans and thorough site-specific research on a case~by-case basis is performed. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ~ = Oll ~ .... Z o ... "'" ~ o '" z ... ~ .... ~ ~ ... .... ... U ~ ~ :J E ~ g -.q c u ~ c 2 ~~ ~ c "- ir. ij g _~_ ~' :g :~.~ E ~~::"E-,g; ~ - ~~ ~ < ~ E~ u _ a-:-~ Eo:.c ~ occ-e 2 ~ E E t . -" "- ~ g ~.~ .~.;; ir. ;!'.~ 8~~.~:~t. ~~t.~~~~~i ... J<O:o..;':::iii ~ ~c;J t:f.j~~ T~ U-;;:: c_ d....-c. o .c~ -~cCC"-UEc~c~,g;< Co~a~t"-~~~~~25u,,-c~~. . Z~~~~~~~c~5~~ ..~ ~~~ ~8~~j~~~~~_.~;~=~_ ___ u: ........ "':...r ..... >D I:'"- ...;' N .-, f' ;;t t: ,g - c.. o 0::: UJ E- :z UJ U U ~ ~ :::J 0 O'S <( ~ ~ ::s o:::U o ~'5 ..J t: <( '" o:::e: E- 0 :z ;... t.LJ .-=: UU a, ~ 0.. '" '0 a '" g :0 .;;; '" " ... ~ ~ u u .~ 6- -< ~ 0.. ~ E " u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 4 PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 4 No, Description Qjy, Unit UnltPriC'e Total Site: 1. General Conditions (5%) I LS Allow $542,132 2. Site Preparation and Grading 486,000 SF $2.00 $972,000 3. Site Utilities I LS Allow $300,000 4. Parking (320) 143,190 SF $8.00 $1,145,520 5. Parking Lot Entry Drive 49,140 SF $8.00 $393,120 6. Maintenance Access Drive 8,700 SF $8.00 $69,600 7. Hardscape 10,000 SF $10.00 $100,000 8 Site Lighting I LS Allow $125,000 9. Site Fencing 1,000 LS $80.00 $80,000 10. Landscape / Irrigation 60,600 SF $5.00 $303,000 II. Iterim Landscape / Irrigation 134,000 SF $1.00 $134,000 Site Subtotal: $4,164,372 Aquatics: I. 25 Y x 2S M Pool 6,150 SF $140.00 $861,000 2. Lazy River 12,000 SF $140.00 $1,680,000 3. Chirldren's Activity Pool 4,000 SF $140.00 $560,000 4. Waterslides 4 EA $140,000.00 $560,000 5. Wet Play Elements I LS Allow $125,000 6. Pool Deck 51,400 SF $10.00 $514,000 7. Spectator Seating 1,200 LF $150.00 $180,000 Aquatics Subtotal: $4,480,000 Architecture: I. Entry I Administration 1,200 SF $350.00 $420,000 2. Locker Room 3,000 SF $350.00 $1,050,000 3. Concession 500 SF $350.00 $175,000 4. Pool Equipment / Chemicals 2,000 SF $300.00 $600,000 5. Storage 800 SF $250.00 $200,000 6. Shade Structures 14,770 SF $20.00 $295,400 Architecture Subtotal: $2,740,400 SUBTOT AL- ALL AREAS $11,384,772 Design Contingency- 20% $2,276,954 GRAND TOTAL $13,661,726 RJM Design Group, Inc. has prepared this estimate of probable construction cost on the basis of its best professional judgment and experience with the construction industry. The estimate, however, represents assumptions and opinions of the construction market and contractor's methods of determining actual construction costs. Costs over which RJM Design Group, inc. has no control. If the c1ient(s) wishes greater assurance as to the construction cost, he (they) shall employ an independent cost estimator. A more precise estimate will be completed when more detailed development of plans and thorough site-specific research on a case-by-case basis is performed. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section IV MARKET ANALYSIS Population Table 5 presents a summary of population data for the areas in and around the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Shown are population figures for 2000, with projections for 2005 and 2010. A review of this data for calendar year 2005 indicates that the population within 0-5 miles is approximately 219 thousand. Within a 5-10 mile market radius approximately 561 thousand people reside. For the 10-15 mile market radius, approximately 802 thousand, for a total resident market population of nearly 1.6 million. Refer to Figure 4 for an illustration of each market area radius. Incomes Table 6 presents a summary of per capita incomes by market area radius. Incomes do not correlate with the propensity to attend aquatic facilities. However, income levels can affect the ability to afford admission. It should be noted in Table 6 that per capita incomes in all three market areas are only slightly lower than the national average, suggesting that incomes should not be a factor in aquatics facility planning and operation. Age Distribution A third demographic factor that can impact attendance at an aquatic facility is age distribution. Shown in Table 7 is the age distribution within each of the market areas under consideration. A review of the data illustrates that the percentage of the population under 15 is slightly higher than the national average (approximately 26% of the total). Exit surveys have shown that the highest number of repeat visitations occur within this 5 - 14 year old age demographic, which means that the Central Park Aquatic Center should be able to count on this particular age group for the majority of its potential patrons. The median age within the primary market area is slightly younger (31.0 years, as compared to the national average of 35.7 years), and this should also have a favorable impact on potential attendance, given the propensity for younger persons to visit aquatic facilities. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Competition Within a 15 mile radius, public sector aquatic facilities similar to the one proposed for the City of Rancho Cucamonga are not found. However, there are a number of "traditional" aquatic facilities incorporating primarily rectilinear pools, including: Rancho Cucamonga High School Upland High School Alta Lorna High School Chaffey High School Chaffey College Ontario Bon View Park Ontario Munoz Park Ontario Vineyard Park Ontario Westwind Park Ontario High School Montclair High School Etiwanda High School Los Osos High School Pomona College Redlands Family YMCA Rialto Tom Sawyer Pool La Verne Las Flores Park San Dimas Swim & Racquet Club 25 Yard x 25 Meter Outdoor Pool 6 Lane x 25 Yard Outdoor Pool 6 Lane x 25 Yard Outdoor Pool + Dive Tank 6 Lane x 50 Meter Outdoor Pool 25 Yard x 30 Meter Outdoor Pool 20' x 30' Outdoor Pool 20' x 30' Outdoor Pool 20' x 30' Outdoor Pool 40' x 60' Outdoor Pool 6 Lane x 25 Yard Outdoor Pool (2) - 6 Lane x 25 Yard Outdoor Pool 6 Lane x 25 Yard Outdoor Pool + Dive Tank 25 Yard x 25 Meter Outdoor Pool + Dive Tank 25 Yard x 50 Meter Outdoor Pool 6 Lane x 25 Yard Indoor Pool 8 Lane x 25 Yard Indoor Pool 25 Yard x 40 Meter Outdoor Pool 25 Yard x 25 Meter Outdoor Pool 1,500 SF Instructional Outdoor Pool In addition to those facilities listed above, the Upland Family YMCA is currently planning a new 6 lane x 25 yard indoor pool and a small recreation pool. Central Park Aquatic Center Page 22 Feasibility Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Figure 5 RESIDENT MARKET AREA .1" , ~ ..j....' 39 . ..c;;:::.,'113 ~38~ " C "'t 1,,.J.!"c l)~. ' ,. -' "81 1,. ---i .1,:.-;' / , , fo "90' -"~'>J,;l"'tiJ , ..;..,..n.-~' C". ,,"f,>'. ....."'..-::-.......... Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 23 . . . ]1 ~ ;f ;f -s . " ~ ~ . . ri ri .., N N " Q N . :; " "I OJ) '" " on "" Q ~ .. Q '" " '" C ~ '" 00 on . ... .Q " = ~ '" '" 00 .c E .,.; N 00 on U = .; ;; Z .., . -<t = '"' C Z c ..: II ;f ;f ;f -s . 0 ~ .... N . ~ .. ri ri ri ... = N ~ -<t ~ on . > Q U ..: Q ... ;:l '" U Q ~ ;; " . Q ~ ... .... '" '" 0 .Q N '" '" E .,.; -. .,.; '" =: = - . U z ~ Z . ~ ;; ~I ;f ;f ;f -s ~ '" " .... . ~ ~ M .,.; 0 Q ~ 0 ~ ~ '" . ~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~ Eo-< = U Z ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ .. jl u ... '" ~ '" '" N 00 " Eo-< Q '" " '<> U :; .; .. .. - . 00 ... ... " N '" '" ... Eo-< N '<> 00 '" ~ -<t ~ >> on .... ;:l '" . '" B :c =:I 0' en .. Z -<t g . Eo-< 0 ~ -I ~ ;f ~ c = ;f -s :E ... ~ ~ '" '" .... . Eo-< ~ .. M on Q .;;; ~I- 0 0 -<t -<t l'O ~ '" = . ~ Q " =- ~ - ... .... = ;:l .... ~ ~ =- ~ ~ . .. ~ 0 ... " ~ .., ~ .... '" '<> Q =- Eo-< on .Q .., ..... " Q E " ... Z Q ;; . ... = '" .... ~ Z N '" 00 00 or; U - ~ . ~ ;; ~ C " 00 U 0 ~ -I ;f ;f <Ii . c = ;f -s =- ~ - '" '" '" . :i ~ .. Q 0 ~ !- ~ on 0 0 '" ~'Q .., '" ~ ~ '" . '" =- ~ ~ Q U Q .5 . =: Q ~ ... ~ '" '" " '" ~ Eo-< .Q " E '" N N Q C ,,' " .S: ~ = N .,.; N .... '5 . z '" '" .... ... ~ '" " 0 ". 0 C ~ en " . ~ ~ U ~ .~ .~ ~ "" ~ " . = ~ ~ -'! CD or ~ -'! ~ ~ C2 -< ~ ~ ..: ~ '" en -'" UJ - ~ ~ '" . ~ '" "" ... B B B " ~ -: ~ ~ = '" '" S 0; :;: .. c . I- 0 en " U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 6 MARKET AREA PER CAPITA INCOMES (2000) Per Capita Market Area Incomes Index (I) o to 5 Miles $21,258 0.96 5 to 10 Miles $16,094 0.73 10 to 15 Miles $16,170 0.73 Average U.S. $22,126 1.00 (I) The index number represents a multiple of the average per capita U.S. income. Source: ESRI Business Solutions (2000 U.S. Census) Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 7 MARKET AREA AGE DISTRIBUTION (2000) o to 5 5 to 10 10 to 15 Total A!!e Cate!!orv Miles Miles Miles U.S. Under 5 7.7% 8.9% 8.7% 6.9% 5 to 14 18.4% 19.6% 19.2% 14.4% Subtotal 26.1% 28.5% 27.9% 21.3% 15 to 19 8.3% 8.8% 8.5% 7.2% 20 to 24 6.8% 7.6% 7.5% 6.7% 25 to 34 15.2% 15.1% 15.0% 13.6% 35 to 44 17.8% 15.4% 16.2% 16.3% 45 to 64 13.3% 11.4% 11.5% 22.2% 65 and Over 12.5% 13.2% 13.4% 12.7% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Median Age 31.0 28.5 29.3 35.7 Source: ESR1 Business Solutions, Inc. (2000 U.S. Census) Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section V PROJECTED ATTENDANCE This section of the report presents the Design Team's projections of attendance at the proposed Central Park Aquatic Center. Also included are: projections of recreation design period attendance levels (the anticipated number of patrons within the facility at a specific time period); calculations for entertainment elements and support facilities such as waterslides, wet play structures, buildings and related site work; and an analysis of participation in traditional monthly and unit aquatic programs such as lap swimming, fitness swimming, water aerobics, etc. Market Penetration As a basis for projecting recreation attendance for the Central Park Aquatic Center, the Design Team compiled data regarding market penetration, based upon participation and attendance at existing aquatic facilities that included a significant (at least 50%) recreation component. These are shown in Table 8. The market penetration rates have been compiled based upon exit surveys conducted at comparable public sector aquatic facilities throughout the country. Similar data for California is not currently available. It should be noted that a pattern exists with each facility exhibiting the highest market penetration rate in the closest area and the lowest rate in the area furthest from the facility. The Design Team has assumed this pattern will also occur at the Central Park Aquatic Center within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Based upon anticipated market penetration rates for the Rancho Cucamonga area, Table 9 presents the Design Team's projections of recreation attendance at the aquatic facility for its first five years of operation. It should be noted that for the purposes of this study, the first full year of operation is assumed to be 2007. Table 9 is divided into three parts. The top part of the table presents population figures for all of the market areas discussed in Section IV, the middle part of the table presents the Design Team's estimates of market penetration rates for each market area and the lower part of the table shows the level of attendance projected to be derived from each market area. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Market Population By Area As noted, the top portion of Table 9 presents projections of population for each of the market segments, which the Design Team considers potential sources of recreation attendance for the Central Park Aquatic Center. Population for the three zones of the resident market area is based on the projections contained within Table 5. Market Penetration Rates Since recreation attendance projections in this analysis are derived by applying a "penetration rate" to the individual market areas, it is important to explain the concept of market penetration rate and how such rates are derived. Market penetration rate, or "MPR," can best be expressed by the equation MPR = PR x FV, where PR is participation rate and FV is the frequency of visit. Further defined, PR is the propensity of a certain percentage of the market population to visit a certain type of attraction, and FV the number of times in a year that percentage of the population will actually visit that attraction. For example, a PR of 10 (percentage of population) and an FV of 4 (times visited in a year) yields an MPR of 40. To determine which values should be assigned, it is necessary to understand which factors impact PR and FV. These are discussed, in turn, below. With regard to PR, or participation rate, the dominant factor is breadth of market appeal. Based upon research conducted by the World Waterpark Association (WWA) and the International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions (lAAPA), swimming has the greatest breadth of market appeal of any form of recreation in which Americans regularly participate. On the other hand, skydiving, mountain climbing and bungee jumping rank low on most people's list. Thus, on the basis of breadth of market appeal, swimming would have a high PR, compared to the other activities cited. The second factor impacting the market penetration rate, or MPR, is frequency of visit, or FV. There are two factors that impact FV. The first is the consumer's opportunity. As distance from an attraction increases, MPR decreases. The reason for this is a lower frequency of visit, brought about by decreased opportunity. For example, a person living 50 miles from an Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 28 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . attraction has less opportunity to visit an attraction than another person living one mile away. Another reason for lack of opportunity is lack of time. This is particularly applicable to a tourist market: if a tourist's length of stay in an area is one night, a choice must be made among available options, whereas, such a choice is much less critical if the tourist is staying in the area for several days. Another factor impacting FV is the nature of the entertainment experience. It is a universal axiom that recreation of a "participatory" nature will have a higher FV than one with a "spectative" nature. Thus, consumers might visit a wax museum once but will play golf at every available opportunity. For the Central Park Aquatic Center, the potential exists for substantial repeat visits, given the multitude of activities envisioned and their participatory nature. With regard to the Central Park Aquatic Center, the Design Team is of the opinion that the concept has the potential for relatively broad market appeal among families, teens and pre- teens. On the other hand, the concept is not as likely to appeal to young adults and older adults, without children living at home, and who may have other interests. Utilizing the data cited in Table 8 as a template for projecting MPR rates within geographic market areas, the Design Team (as shown in Table 9) estimates a market penetration rate of 20 percent in the 0 to 5 mile zone. In the 5 to 10 mile zone, an MPR of 10 percent is projected. Finally, market penetration for the 10 to IS mile zone is projected at 5 percent. Projected Attendance The lower part of Table 9 presents the Design Team's projections of recreation attendance at the Central Park Aquatic Center, which is achieved by multiplying the market area population by the corresponding market penetration rate. As shown in the table, total recreation attendance is projected at 146.7 thousand in 2007,150.1 thousand in 2008 and 153.6 thousand in 2009. The increase from year to year is accounted for by population growth within each market area, while the market penetration rate remains constant. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Projected Attendance Patterns The analysis presented in Table 10 has indicated the level of recreation attendance that the Design Team projects the Central Park Aquatic Center to be capable of achieving. However, for the project to be economically feasible, the aquatic facility must have sufficient capacity to accommodate so-called "design period" attendance levels. Design period attendance is best explained by envisioning a snapshot of the aquatic facility with a moderately high patron load. If you could individually count each of the patrons in the photograph, you would have an idea of how many patrons would need to be accommodated within the facility at one time. This analysis is presented in Table II. As shown in the table, annual recreation attendance figures have been carried forward from Table 10. Next, monthly attendance has been estimated to be 40 percent of annual attendance. This estimate is based on the experience of other aquatic facilities but also takes into account the length of the operating season of existing facilities. Next, weekly attendance is calculated by dividing monthly attendance by 4.43, the number of weeks in July and August. Next, the peak day of the week is estimated at 20 percent of the week. Finally, design period attendance, or the peak level of in-grounds attendance (people within the facility at anyone time period) on the peak day of the week is estimated at 50 percent of daily attendance. This factor was derived based on the estimated length of stay at the attraction of 3.0 to 3.5 hours, coupled with typical hourly arrival and departure patterns. As shown, based on these assumptions, the design period recreation attendance level at the Central Park Aquatic Center is projected at approximately 1,324 in 2007, increasing to 1,452 by 2011. Facility Infrastructure Requirements Having established the capacity requirements of the aquatic facility, the next logical step is to derive the level and mix of entertainment elements and support facilities. It should be noted that only Facility Planning Option 4 meets the required entertainment (i.e., waterslides) infrastructure needs as illustrated in Table II. Table II presents projections of facility requirements at the Central Park Aquatic Center. As shown, the aquatic facility's projected peak in-grounds attendance and entertainment capacity requirements are carried forward from Table 10. Next, generic pool and waterslide capacity Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . requirements are derived, based on a ratio of 60:40 for pools and slides, respectively. As shown, applying these ratios to projected entertainment capacity requirements yields pool capacity requirements of approximately 636 persons in 2007, increasing to 697 by 20 II. Required slide capacity is projected at 424 persons in 2007, increasing to 465 by 2011. Both the pool and slide capacities shown in Table 10 are "frozen" capacities, or the level of capacity required at a given point in time, during the aquatic facility's peak periods of attendance. In calculating entertainment facility requirements, the Design Team utilized a factor of 20 square feet per person for pool sizing and 100 persons per hour for waterslides. Based on these factors, the proposed Central Park Aquatic Center will require a minimum of 13,942 square feet of pool area and five waterslides through calendar year 20 II. In addition to the entertainment elements, the proposed aquatic facility will reqUIre certain support facilities. Table II also presents the Design Team's calculations of required infrastructure. The Design Team has identified several types of support facilities that should be included as part of the Central Park Aquatic Center. Many of these items can be added incrementally, as demand dictates. Other elements such as buildings, swimming pools and ride attractions are ordinarily developed in the first phase, but built large enough for future demand. Planning Guidelines While the data presented in Table II is provided for the benefit of the facility designers, there are certain planning guidelines that the Design Team believes should be observed. First, it should be noted that the data presented in Table II are based on projected attendance and capacity requirements. And while capacity is a very important consideration, equally important factors are critical mass and diversity of entertainment experience. Thus, it is possible for an aquatic facility to have sufficient capacity and not have the critical mass or diversity of entertainment experience necessary to be an effective attraction. Critical mass is the scale and mtx of entertainment elements required to create an effective attraction. While critical mass is a subjective concept, it is, nevertheless, real. For example, one waterslide might not be sufficient to generate critical mass; however, several slides Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page3 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . with different types of ride experiences would be. Diversity of entertainment experience is also important. An aquatic facility will have far greater appeal if it offers five or six elements of different types, compared to a single large attraction. For example, a facility with multiple pools and ride attractions designed with different age groups in mind would generate more repeat visits by patrons than a large "one size fits all" pool attraction or ride attraction. In addition to the factors cited above, it is helpful to categorize aquatic facility entertainment components into four groups: pools, waterslides, children's elements and special features. These are discussed, in turn, below. Pools are important to aquatic facilities in that they provide capacity and add to the visitor's length of stay. There are several types of pools, including wave pools, activity pools, so-called "zero depth" pools and lazy rivers (also called continuous or endless rivers). Waterslides add an important entertainment dimension to an aquatic facility. There are a wide variety of slides, including body flumes, inner tube flumes, raft rides, toboggan rides and many more. Waterslides come in a variety of sizes, widths and lengths and offer a variety of entertainment experiences. Children's features include a variety of set pieces and play structures. Every aquatic facility should have some children's features, if it is to be successful. There are a number of vendors that specialize in designing and selling creative elements for children's attractions. These can be combined in a number of ways to create a children's activity pool, spray pool or "wet" playground. Special features include those attractions that appeal largely to a niche market. Examples include the Flow Rider, a synthetic surfing machine and the Master Blaster, a water ride that carries the user upstream as well as downstream. Such special features are generally found in large parks with 10 or more attractions. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 32 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Traditional Monthly and Unit Programs In addition to recreation patrons, the Design Team is recommending that "traditional" monthly and unit programs be factored into the attendance equation for the proposed aquatic facility. Monthly programs include, but are not limited to: . Swim Team Rentals . Lap Swim . Water Aerobics In addition to recreation swimming, unit programs include, but are not limited to: . Swim Lessons . Party Rentals . Life Safety Classes . Regional Meets In an effort to serve the aquatic program needs of the entire community, the Design Team is recommending that the Central Park Aquatic Center incorporate a balance of recreation and competition pool elements, and that in addition to recreation programming, the Community Services staff should aggressively market traditional aquatic program offerings in order to further enhance cost recovery. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 8 MARKET PENETRATION RATES AT SELECTED PUBLIC SECTOR AQUATIC FACILITIES o to 5 5 to 10 10 1015 Miles Miles Miles Surf & Swim Wave Pool 14.0% 6.0% 3.0%. Garland. Texas Bunker Hills Wave Pool 15.0% 9.0% 5.0% Andover, Minnesota Memorial Park Aquatic Center 62.2% 35.9% 33.0% Jefferson City, Missouri North Clackamas Aquatic Park 31.9% 18.8% 3.6% North Clackamas, Oregon Koch Park Aquatic Center 15.3% 3.6% 1.3% florissant, Missouri Central Aquatics Center 22.1% 2.9% 0.4% Hurst, Texas Cedarburg Community Pool 103.3% 3.7% 0.8% Cedarburg, Wisconsin Splash Zone 64.4% 28.1% 20.3% Charleston, South Carolina Crystal Springs Aquatic Center 3].0% ].9% 1.0% East Brunswick. New Jersey Clarksville Aquatic Center 18.3% 2.2% 1.9% Clarksville, Indiana Hyland Hills Water World 52.7% 42.8% 6.8% Federal Heights, Colorado Chesapeake Beach Water Park 92.9% 29.9% 7.4% Chesapeake Beach, Maryland AVERAGES 43.6% 15.4% 7.0% (I) Market penetration rate is a function of participation x frequency of visit. For example, a market penetration rate of 50% might result from 10 percent of the population making 5 visits per year to an attraction. (2) See Appendix Table 1 for data summary regarding these facilities. Note: This data was assembled utilizing information from public sector facilities which conduct exit surveys requesting the zip codes of patrons; the Design Team was unable to secure similar information from public sector facilities within the Slate of California. Source: William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 9 PROJECTED RECREATION ATTENDANCE AT THE CENTRAL PARK AQUATIC CENTER 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Market Area Population o to 5 Miles 230,030 235,551 241,204 246,993 252,921 5 to 10 Miles 587,211 600,716 614,533 628,667 643,126 10 to 15 Miles 839,068 858,367 878,109 898,306 918,967 Penetration Rate o to 5 Miles 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 5 to 10 Miles 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10 to 15 Miles 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% Proiected Attendance o to 5 Miles 46,006 47,110 48,241 49,399 50,584 5 to 10 Miles 58,721 60,072 61,453 62,867 64,313 10 to 15 Miles 41,953 42,918 43,905 44,915 45,948 Total Attendance 146,681 150,100 153,600 157,181 160,845 Source: William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 10 PROJECTED ATTENDANCE PATTERNS (RECREATION USE) AT THE CENTRAL PARK AQUA TIC CENTER 2007 2008 2009 2010 20B Annual Attendance 146,681 150,100 153,600 157,181 160,845 Peak Month's Attendance @40%ofYear 58,672 60,040 61,440 62,872 64,338 Average Weekly Attendance During Peak Month 13,244 13,553 13,869 14,192 14,523 Peak Day's Attendance @ 20% of Week 2,649 2,711 2,774 2,838 2,905 Peak In-Grounds Attendance @ 50% of Day (Design Period) 1,324 1,355 1,387 1,419 1,452 Notes: 1. Refer to Section IV, Projected Attendance Patterns for definitions oftenns above. 2. Recreation use attendance based upon seasonal use from May I to September 30. Source: William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 36 . . . . Table 11 . PROJECTED FACILITY REQUIREMENTS (RECREATION USE) . AT THE CENTRAL PARK AQUA TIC CENTER . 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 . Peak In-Grounds Attendance 1,324 1,355 1,387 1,419 1,452 . Entertainment Capacity Requirements @ 80% of Peak In-Grounds Attendance 1,060 1,084 1,110 1,135 1,162 . Pools . Pool Capacity Requirements @ 60% of Entertainment Capacity 636 651 666 681 697 . Pool Area Required @ 20 Square . Feet Per Unit of Pool Capacity 12,715 13,011 13,314 13,625 13,942 Flumes . Slide Capacity Requirements @ 40% of Entertainment Capacity 424 434 444 454 465 . Flumes Required @ 100 units of . Capacity Per Flume 4 4 4 5 5 . Food & Beverage Facilities Peak Hour Servings @ 30% . of Peak In-Park Attendance 397 407 416 426 436 . Serving Outlets @ 75 Servings Per Hour 5 5 6 6 6 . Lockers One Locker For Every Eight . Persons In-Grounds 166 169 173 177 182 . Shade @ 10 Square Feet of Shade for . Every Person In-Park 13,244 13,553 13,869 14,192 14,523 . Parking One Space For Every Four Persons In-Grounds Plus 25% For Peak Days 414 424 433 444 454 . Acres Required For Parking 4.14 4.24 4.33 4.44 4.54 . . Note: Recreation use attendance based upon seasonal use from May I to September 30. . . Source: William L. Haralson & Associates, Inc. . Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibilily Study Page 37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Section VI FINANCIAL ANALYSIS This section of the report presents an analysis of anticipated financial performance of the Central Park Aquatic Center. Included in this section will be a discussion of program revenue, program operating income, facility operating expenses, net operating income / (loss) and cost recovery. Revenue at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities Table 12 presents an analysis of revenue for six (6) comparable public sector aquatic facilities for the 2004 operating season. The facilities include: . Folsom Aquatic Center, Folsom, California . Galt Aquatic Center, Galt, California . Roseville Aquatics Complex, Roseville, California . San Ramon Olympic Aquatic Center, San Ramon, California . Santa Clarita Sports Complex, Santa Clarita, California . The Wave Family Aquatic Center, Vista, California Revenue categories analyzed included recreation swim, swim lessons, water exercise, school sports rentals, team sports rentals, competitive meets, party rentals, food & beverage and merchandise sales. This data was utilized to compare and contrast with the Design Team's projections of revenue for the Central Park Aquatic Center. Projected Revenue Revenue is a function of two factors: (I) the number of "traditional" monthly and unit program attendees that the facility is capable of generating; and (2) the number of recreation attendees attracted to the facility. For Facility Planning Option I, the aquatic facility's projected revenue is illustrated in Table 13. Revenue from monthly programs is projected at approximately $155 thousand for the first year of operation, whereas revenue from unit programs totals approximately $899 Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 38 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . thousand. Revenue from monthly programs includes sources such as sWim teams, lap sWlmmmg, water aerobics, recreation swim team and senior swim. Revenue from unit programs includes sources such as recreation swim, concessions, party rentals, swim lessons, life safety classes and regional competitive meets. The combined total revenue from all sources is projected at approximately $1.1 million for the first year of operation. Table 14 illustrates sources of revenue for Facility Planning Option 2, which total $992 thousand in the first year of operation. Table 15 projects $904 thousand in total revenue for Facility Planning Option 3. Because of the ability to charge a higher recreation admission price due to increased entertainment capacity, and higher per capita food and beverage spending, Table 16 projects $1.6 million in total revenue for Facility Planning Option 4. Pricing philosophy is an important consideration when projecting revenue. In years past, public sector recreation programs were provided based upon serving unmet needs within the community, and cost recovery was not a significant factor. Public sector aquatic facilities within the Western United States are still being developed and designed to serve unmet needs, but cost recovery is a major factor, and pricing has been adjusted accordingly, with an emphasis on value for recreation dollars spent. The Design Team has recommended pricing levels that are comparable to the price of a bargain matinee at a local movie theater, which in most areas of Southern California ranges from $6 to $8 per person (not including popcorn and soda). If a parent is willing to spend in this price range for two hours of entertainment, four hours (on average) within a public sector aquatic facility is quite a value. This represents a win-win situation for the public agency and the community it serves- the public agency is no longer in the position of providing large subsidies for programs offered, and the community receives good value for recreation dollars spent. Operating Expenses at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities Table 17 presents an analysis of operating expenses for six (6) comparable public sector aquatic facilities for the 2004 operating season. The facilities include: . Folsom Aquatic Center, Folsom, California . Galt Aquatic Center, Galt, California Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibilily Study Page 39 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roseville Aquatics Complex, Roseville, California . San Ramon Olympic Aquatic Center, San Ramon, California . Santa Clarita Sports Complex, Santa Clarita, California . The Wave Family Aquatic Center, Vista, California Expense categories analyzed included labor, benefits, advertising I promotion, insurance, maintenance I repairs, utilities, cost of sales for food & beverage and merchandise, and other miscellaneous expenses. This data was utilized to compare and contrast with the Design Team's projections of operating expenses, beginning with the 2007 operating season with appropriate allowances for escalation in future years. Projected Operating Expenses To provide the City of Rancho Cucamonga with the information necessary to decide between Facility Planning Options, the Design Team projected operating expense for each of the four (4) proposed design concepts for the first year of operation. Utilizing similar expense categories to those provided in Table 17, each expense projection was adjusted to account for projections of utilities expense (refer to Appendix 2 for detail). In addition, labor costs were adjusted to account for variations in staffing requirements for each of the Facility Planning Options, and adjustments were made in several other expense categories to reflect differences due to the scale of the facility. For Facility Planning Option I, the Design Team is projecting approximately $ 1.6 million in operating expenses for the first year of operation, as illustrated in Table 18. Table 19 reflects approximately $1.3 million in operating expenses for Facility Planning Option 2. Approximately $1.1 million in operating expenses is projected for Facility Planning Option 3 as shown in Table 20. Finally, approximately $ 1.5 million in operating expenses is projected for Facility Planning Option 4 per Table 2 I. Net Income I Loss at Comparable Public Sector Aquatic Facilities Similar to the exercise undertaken in Table 17, Table 22 includes a survey of six (6) different public sector aquatic facilities, which indicated whether the facilities were indoor or Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . outdoor, the types of pools at each facility, gross revenues, operating expenses, net operating income / (loss) and cost recovery percentages. The facilities include: . Folsom Aquatic Center, Folsom, California . Galt Aquatic Center, Galt, California . Roseville Aquatics Complex, Roseville, California · San Ramon Olympic Aquatic Center, San Ramon, California . Santa Clarita Sports Complex, Santa Clarita, California . The Wave Family Aquatic Center, Vista, California. Projected Net Income / Loss Subtracting operating expenses from revenue yields net operating income / (loss). By importing the projected first year revenues from Tables 13, 14, 15 and 16, and projected operating expenses from Tables 18, 19, 20 and 21, an analysis of profitability by Facility Planning Option can be provided. The Design Team then projected net income / loss for the first five years of operation utilizing multipliers that accounted for inflation, as well as increased attendance and name recognition due to marketing efforts by management. As has been stated previously, each of the Facility Planning Options are capable of supporting attendance demand. For Facility Planning Option 1, the Design Team is projecting a net operating loss of approximately $562 thousand for calendar year 2007, increasing to $618 thousand in calendar year 2008, and $649 thousand in Calendar year 2009, which results in a average cost recovery of 65.2%. A detailed analysis of revenue, expense, net operating income / (loss) and cost recovery for this option can be found in Table 23. For Facility Planning Option 2, the Design Team is projecting a net operating loss of approximately $280 thousand for calendar year 2007, increasing to $309 thousand in calendar year 2008, and $324 thousand in calendar year 2009, which results in an average cost recovery of 77.9%. Detailed analysis of revenue, expense, net operating income / (loss) and cost recovery for this option can be found in Table 24. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 41 . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . For Facility Planning Option 3, the Design Team is projecting a net operating loss of approximately $176 thousand for calendar year 2007, increasing to $193 thousand in calendar year 2008, and $203 thousand in calendar year 2009, which results in an average cost recovery of 83.7%. Detailed analysis of revenue, expense, net operating income I (loss) and cost recovery for this option can be found in Table 25. For Facility Planning Option 4, the Design Team is projecting a net operating profit of approximately $34 thousand for calendar year 2007, increasing to $37 thousand in calendar year 2008, and $39 thousand in calendar year 2009, which results in an average cost recovery of 102.2%. Detailed analysis of revenue, expense, net operating income I (loss) and cost recovery for this option can be found in Table 26. Finally, Table 27 provides a comparative analysis of all four (4) Facility Planning Options, which illustrates initial construction cost, revenue, expense, net operating income I (loss) and cost recovery. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 42 . . . . . . . . . en . ~ ... '"' ... . ...l ... U . Z < 0 ... en U . < ... '"' ~ < en ~ . " 0' Z < ... . '"' Qii ~ 0 N '"' . .... ~ U .. :c =- ~ " 0 en .. '"' .... U "" ... "" ...l N = . . en ~ ~ =- . ~ ~ Z ...l ~ = . ;> ~ ~ < . =- ~ 0 . U '"' . < . . . . . .. . " II - "I ~ ~ ~ ~ S g ~ ~ ,; ~ . . . 0 . 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 , ~ !:t ~ " " " 0 ~j ii2 , ::::;:>.,g5 . , g.5 ~ ~ 0 . . CJ':;; ><::~.!l II ~ . ~ < . ~:2~'= . , ~": B: . '" Ef ~ ! ~.E >-~..~ " " . "';I: ... ;; " , N. . ~ " - "I ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . i g . 0 0 " . ~ ,; ..; 0 s 0 . N .; ~ ." :; ';' - " '0 ~E .!lJ;! ." , i~ ~ i OJ 5 0..., ~ ~ ~~ ~'::~E' ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ 0 g ~ g ~ 8 0 0 0 . ~~~~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 g oo!! ::; E . ;; i~ ~~ ~ . . 0 . . . - "I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g , i i . " " ~ 0 " " 0 ..; 0 0 0 ~ "i . - " ... 00 'a~ ~ " , E. ~ '. ~ }:..U ~~ . o . II . ~ 8. g ~ . 0 ~ . o. ~ " . 0 0 N "E ~~ ,; ~ ~ ~ ~ ! E. . ~ ;; '0 ;; 00 . o' n . ;; il e; ~ , ~ ~ , , , ~ ~ , b 0 0 0 8 . ~ . ~ ..; " 0 . " N 0 ~ ~.!! " 8 E " ./:;~1 , .t; ~ , .w ~ e ,g ~ II ~ 8 0 I . 0 0 0 ~ . g.~ ]~~~ 0 . . 0 0 0 0 0 ~ <= g ~ ~ , ~ ~ i ' "" ~ ...:;:: ;; ~a: 0 ~ , i ~ , ~ , i , . " ~ . . . c c i ~ ,; N .. 0 c 0 0 . ~ ~'". , ~ .. ,-. ~~ ~.~ ~ II N " . 0 . 0 N . ><-.;" ;; ~!~ , . . . 0 .W '" .; . ~ ~~ . " ;; ;; ~~ . . -J ~ , , ~ &; i i; ~ i; i , ". 0 0 . .. 0 '" '" 0 '" .; ~ 0 ~ ~ '" ,; E-E il] ." , W " ::::;:>-.gli "' .::= ;;". R ., N 0 . . .w "'"OJ'! II . . ! ~ ::, .' '. 0 . . . " ] ~ ~ , . a ~ E' ," ~ . 0; a ~ . ~~ .. N ;; : c' ~ 0 f E 0 ~ , . ~ . 0 i , ~ , .~ ~ i > , , w 0 '" 1 . . c ~ , . " ~' . . 1 'R 0 . < 0 , E , ! f :; ~ . , ~ . ,; ! ] 'i. 0 0 " w " i1 . ~~ <:::s, .. '. 5 ~ ~ ~ , 2<. b:.c ~i' il J!)S SJ!I .- ~ g ~~ ~:2 sf:r ~N ~ ~~ 0" . .8 ~ ~ .:ji~ 2"- t g[~ 1 ~-~ 5 ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~~3 ]!! c"" i:JEE !;l ~'~ -- 02.9 1l @ ~ ~ g l: g.:;:; !!g.g. e~cS lll~! ~ ~,~ e- ~ 8:~.~ ': 0 ~I ~~!~~ ~ ~~S~~ '" .,. " eo '" 0.. ;>, "0 a en of :0 '00 '" " "" " ~ ~ 1i ~ " ~ ~ ~ " E v u ,~ '" " <T <( ~ '" 0.. g C " U , " < , j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 13 PROJECTED REVENUE (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 1 MONTHLY PROGRAMS No. of Months Price Category Patrons Per Year Per Month Extension Swim Team Rentals 100 9 $100.00 $90,000 Lap Swim 100 12 $20.00 $24,000 Water Aerobics 50 12 $50.00 $30,000 Rec. Swim Team 50 6 $25.00 $7,500 Senior Swim 20 12 $15.00 $3,600 Subtotal $155,100 UNIT PROGRAMS Price Category Number Unit Per Unit Extension Recreation Swim 146,681 EA $4.00 $586,722 Concessions, Per Capita 146,681 EA $0.50 $73,340 Party Rentals 120 EA $96.00 $11,520 Swim Lessons 3,500 EA $45.00 $157,500 Life Safety Classes 50 EA $200.00 $10,000 Regional Meets 4 EA $15,000.00 $60,000 Subtotal $899,082 TOTAL ALL REVENUES $1,054,182 Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 14 PROJECTED REVENUE (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 2 MONTHLY PROGRAMS No. of Months Price Category Patrons Per Year Per Month Extension Swim Team Rentals 75 9 $100.00 $67,500 Lap Swim 100 12 $20.00 $24,000 Water Aerobics 50 12 $50.00 $30,000 Rec. Swim Team 50 6 $25.00 $7,500 Senior Swim 20 12 $15.00 $3,600 Suhtotal $132,600 UNIT PROGRAMS Price Category Number Unit Per Unit Extension Recreation Swim 146,681 EA $4.00 $586,722 Concessions, Per Capita 146,681 EA $0.50 $73,340 Party Rentals 120 EA $96.00 $11,520 Swim Lessons 3,500 EA $45.00 $157,500 Life Safety Classes 50 EA $200.00 $10,000 Regional Meets 4 EA $5,000.00 $20,000 Subtotal $859,082 TOTAL ALL REVENUES $991,682 Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 15 PROJECTED REVENUE (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 3 MONTHLY PROGRAMS No. of Months Price Category Patrons Per Year Per Month Extension Lap Swim 100 12 $20.00 $24,000 Water Aerobics 50 12 $50.00 $30,000 Rec. Swim Team 50 6 $25.00 $7,500 Senior Swim 20 12 $15.00 $3,600 Subtotal $65,100 UNIT PROGRAMS Price Category Number Unit Per Unit Extension Recreation Swim 146,681 EA $4.00 $586,722 Concessions, Per Capita 146,681 EA $0.50 $73,340 Party Rentals 120 EA $96.00 $11,520 Swim Lessons 3,500 EA $45.00 $157,500 Life Safety Classes 50 EA $200.00 $10,000 Subtotal $839,082 TOTAL ALL REVENUES $904,182 Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 16 PROJECTED REVENUE (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 4 MONTHLY PROGRAMS No. of Months Price Category Patrons Per Year Per Month Extension Lap Swim 100 12 $20.00 $24,000 Water Aerobics 50 12 $50.00 $30,000 Rec. Swim Team 50 6 $25.00 $7,500 Senior Swim 20 12 $15.00 $3,600 Subtotal $65,100 UNIT PROGRAMS Price Category Number Unit Per Unit Extension Recreation Swim 146,681 EA $8.00 $1,173,444 Concessions, Per Capita 146,681 EA $1.00 $146,681 Party Rentals 120 EA $96.00 $11,520 Swim Lessons 3,500 EA $45.00 $157,500 Life Safety Classes 50 EA $200.00 $10,000 Subtotal $1,499,145 TOTAL ALL REVENUES $1,564,245 Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r- .... '" :c '" ,.. z o '" < w '" Co-' Z .... ,.. ~ w =- o ... <:> <:> N , '" W '" Z W =- ~ W " Z .... ,.. ~ W =- o '" W .... ,.. .... .. .... U < ... U .... ,.. < ;;;> 0' < Cl: o ,.. u w '" u .... .. ~ ;;;> =- W .. ~ ~ < =- ~ o u ,.. < . . W ~ .~ .0 <= ~.a E. .' ., ~;; ~ , , ~~{~ ~..:J i! 5. -Et~~ ",:a;;:_ :::;~..~ 0'. " . " of.! . 0 . " €~ o . .W . . .~ ~ OW . . i i .. oj:; 1! =-:::,;,,::l ~~~~ >< .~ t ;; 1!1!0i;;: ;:;:':~~ ..,..., g.! . . .~ :; .. S .. ~U o " . 0 o E E . . . . . . . ~. ] -g :::<>-,,::1 o~" :: ':: E ~ )."..ii: ;(l.5~~ . ~.! o. w" .~ ~ l~ .. <, ~ i ~a: " t: o"g ~.:o:J:5 s;: ~.8 ~ ><,,;:.. "';;; ,,- i:i ~ ij'= ~ ~~ i~ w., . . :~ .W ~~ ~o ]'::;-1! :::; i e ...,:= ~ ~]~ j~;; - . ""i ~~ . . .W . . < E E , i~ . , " ~ ~ " 1! ;;;:q ~ ~ """..!:! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; ::: i. {:: ., . ~J t . o. , ~ ~ ~ ~ i: ; < < " ::g z '" .. ~ ~ ~ - ~ . . ;; ;;! t. o . ~~ $ ~ r. ~ ~ ,..; II g. ~ ~ g &l ~ i;l .,.~. - ~ . . Q ;: ~ : ;f!.~ ~ ~ ~ 0; ~ II ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ,~. - g -~ E ~: < < z z ~ ~ e; ".; '" '" " . z z g g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 51 a ~ " " . " - ~ " i :;1 ~ : ." ~ :>; ~ ~ ~ . ~ II ~ ~ - " .,. ~ _ '" ~ '" Q g ~ ~ ., ~ '5 ~"';~ii~,~~ -~ '. ;;: ; t . o' , , < z " t; ~ < II !i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ " '0 ;: t . o. ," ..: < <( ~ z z z ~ ..., ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,..; ~ ~ '" ~ N ; ~ " N M o . .... _ ",.... '" E1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . " . . . o . o i o ~ 6. .8 J: ..c <( .t> <( ~ .... <2 -l.3 .. E E ':;; ~ 1 .= 1 ] ~ ell ~ III <( .~ " " . . . . . .5 ] ~ :3 ~ ?:. ~ oC a: . .... ~ , ~ . . . :i ~ ~ ~ ~ o o o ~ ~ ~ < . . o o t ~ t o . ~ ~ ~ o " ~ ~ o . . . o o W ~ ;~ o < . 0.: ... ;:;; ;;;; < , " z " " z z < < z z " . z z t. ~ o . o Z ~ $. ~ . z 0' " . z ..; ~ < - " . . z . : ] ~ ~ ~ o . a ~ , . ~ , o . ~ .; g <. . . , , .; . . a 5 ~ . .. i o . ~ ~ ~ o o o ~ ;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ , o ~ . " ~ , o ~ . o ~ . " < " o " , a ! o > a , E ~ ~ 1 , i il ~ .~ 13 ~ .t8.~ - . < 8~'5 .,z ~ 1- i -0::.:"; :=zz . ~ " . "fi a " j 00 ..,. ~ CO ~ '" -6' a '" g 13 .00 ~ ~ "" ~ ~ E ~ u .~ ;;; " or -<: -'" ~ ~ '" -;; ~ E ~ u . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 18 PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENSES (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 1 Expense Catel!orv Labor % of Total Amount Expenses $650,000 40.2% $260,000 16.1% $50,000 3.1% $35,000 2.2% $150,000 9.3% $436,364 27.0% $15,000 0.9% $1,596,364 98.8% Benefits Advertising / Promotion Insurance Maintenance / Repairs Utilities Other Subtotals Cost of Sales Food & Beverage Merchandise $15,000 $5,000 $20,000 0.9% 0.3% 1.2% Subtotals TOTALS $1,616,364 100.0% Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % of Total Amount EXDenses $550,000 43.2% $220,000 17.3% $50,000 3.9% $25,000 2.0% $100,000 7.9% $292,409 23.0% $15,000 1.2% $1,252,409 98.4% Table 19 PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENSES (YEAR I) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 2 EXDense CatelWrv Labor Benefits Advertising / Promotion Insurance Maintenance / Repairs Utilities Other Subtotals Cost of Sales Food & Beverage Merchandise $15,000 $5,000 $20,000 1.2% 0.4% 1.6% Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Subtotals TOTALS $1,272,409 100.0% Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Page 50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % of Total Amount Expenses $450,000 41. 7% $180,000 16.7% $50,000 4.6% $25,000 2.3% $75,000 6.9% $264,916 24.5% $15,000 1.4% $1,059,916 98.1% Table 20 PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENSES (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 3 Expense Catel!orv Labor Benefits Advertising / Promotion Insurance Maintenance / Repairs Utilities Other Subtotals Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Cost of Sales Food & Beverage Merchandise Subtotals $15,000 $5,000 $20,000 1.4% 0.5% 1.9% 100.0% TOTALS $1,079,916 Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Page 51 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 21 PROJECTED OPERATING EXPENSES (YEAR 1) FACILITY PLANNING OPTION 4 Expense Catel!orv Labor Benefits Advertising I Promotion Insurance Maintenance I Repairs Utilities Other Subtotals % of Total Amount Expenses $550,000 35.9% $220,000 .14.4% $75,000 4.9% $50,000 3.3% $100,000 6.5% $480,442 31.4% $20,000 1.3% $1,495,442 97.7% Cost of Sales Food & Beverage Merchandise $30,000 2.0% $5,000 0.3% $35,000 2.3% $1,530,442 100.0% Subtotals TOTALS Source: Aquatic Design Group, Inc. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 52 . . . . M v; v bll ~ . 0- ~ ~ v v <I v v v 0 0 0 0 0 . c 0 0 0 0 0 0 " "f N N N N C' N . C - . C .. ~ M M M M M M . 0 0 0 0 0 0 U '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N .. ~ . . ~ . ;;: >- . ~~ " "- " " "- "- ~ 'if. N 00 00 ~ ~ > - 00 ~ 00 '" ~ V C :;; M '" M 00 <-' " M ~ V ~ . . '" ~ 00 U . ~ - Eo- ~- '" ~ v;- a: 8 a: - = ~ ~ ~ N 0 0 0 . ...l "C c N V V '" 0 N ~ 8 "" M .; ;; ,..; 05 - ~ 0 v ~ M U '- V N N ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . < o E '" " 8 z " 00 U . 00 - 00 00 00 0 ~ 0 Eo- ~- M = . ~ 00 ~ ~ 0 ~ ...l < '::: ~ 00 v" 0 v . . "" ,.: .; M - ;;l - ~ ~ ~ ;;;; M 00 ~ . . " ~ ~ 0' 8""' ;;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::;; < . 0 ~ >. U 0 "0 N - . ~ 00 M ~ 0 ~ a N z Eo- - , M N ~ 0 00 '" c = ~ v 0 ~ 0 N . .. - u 1; . '" .; ,.: '" ,..; M & '" ~ > ~ 0 ~ 0 N ~ ;Q . '" ~ ~ ~ V N 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ '" z ~ :0 . Eo- - U ";;; Eo- ~ - v ~ ...l ""' . ~ ~ " " " " ~" - . "0 " - " "" ~ ~ " " - t t - " ~ ;;l " ] c !::.'. 5 0 " c 0 ] g ~ 0 ~ c ~ " c "0 " . , '; " 0 , " . 0 " , :1i " > " , ll... ll... 0 :; >- " ~ .g ~ :; ;; ~ e :; >- ~ ~ :; :; ~ i:2:ci:~ ~ 0 .. ~ ~ ~ 0 . c 00 0 ~ 0 ~ " 0 ~ >> i;:; . ~ ~ ;;; N ~ > N ;.: >> ~ .0 ~ N . ~ " ~ < . t:!.:!! ~ - . ~ < "-,, ~ N . M o N - . 0 < .- " ti:j~ Eo- ...l . < 0 0:: " ~~ < ~ ~ < " .. " < 0:: " 0:: ~ ~ " c c . " " c " " " ~ ::I " u - " " v ~ . ~ ::I" . " 0 . ::I . . . ~ . z ~ >- v " >- "''' >- " >- >- " >- ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N < . ll... ::;; ~ - - - 5 5 8 c 0 0 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 ;! " " " " " " . u , .3 "5 "5 "5 "5 "5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Eo- ";: < 0 . 0 " u " .5 ci. . " " , . e = 0 c. - <:> 0 c. "0 E " ~ "C - E 0 0 . "5 .~ v . 0 0 .. .. U E 0 E . " "5 t U . " E -<8 U " v 0 0 E '&<2 -' U .. "5 " t ._ .~ Cl U " E 0 . .~ ~ ~'ii 8.ca .. ." "~ . ".g ~ U iSU ~u , E " E E ,- .; ~ ;; . u ~. . <<8 , . ,- .~ ~ "u c ci "5 E ~ ~ . ~ z <u ~g 0 0 ~:..= " , - E E . > . <T ~ E E ~. Ow .U -< <u .;; 'S: . . " " " . 5l s: "'''' . . ~ "0 " ~ ~ "5 ~ . "" . '0'0 .. 0 0 = c o ~ , ~ 0<:> . . . ~ .- 0 ~ '" "'~ "'''' ~ ~ ~ ~ >--> ~ 0- . " ~ E v u . . . . . . . . ..,. ~ ~ <n ~I ~ N ,...; " N '" ..... bO N '<T, ,...; oti '" . 0-' N "- r- '" QO '" rt 0-, '" fA . ~ ~ fA fA . . ~ ~ ~I 0 M M . N r- on ..... 0, "'- on oti . 00 M iii' '" '<T '" rt 0-, '" fA . fA ~ fA . ~ ~ . ~I ~ 0 = 00 0 ..... . ..... on 0- M oti '" r..:' "" Q\ . '" ,...; '" '<T '" 0 Z rt 00, '" ....l 0 ~ fA ~ . - - fA fA ~ ... Il. . ~ 0 0 ~ '" "0 M U Z ~ ~ B z ~I 0 = en . ..... - 0 0 = . - Z ..... :E- O> ... '" 0 '<T oti ~ ~ Z ~ 00 00 '" ~ . .. < on r- ,...; ... Z ....l ~ r-, '" fA '" Il. " ~ fA fA ~ "- . ~ >- ... ... U - ~ ....l . - ..., U 0 ~ ~ i:l:: < ~I N '<T ..... . . ~ 00 '" QO ..... Il. ~ M ,...; oti '<T' "" N on '" '" . 0, "', on fA ~ ~ fA fA . U ..s . ~ 0: ~ ;:l 0 0 .... . U " Z c: 0/) ~ - >- .in " ~ E . '" i:l:: " " " Z CI u '" ~ c: - .S! .3 . " ... >- - '" 0- ;2 0 oj " >< U ;:l tT ~ <:r -<: . ~ 0/) ~ ~ < ..I< " .s Il. ~ ;:l 0 '" c: " ... " "- . " .... ... '" ~ "i'! ;> " 0 ;:l " 0- ~ 0 E ~ 0 Z U '" " u . . . . . . . '" . ~ ;:,;: '" ~I a, '" .. . v r-- '" II) '=' Ol) "', 0 '" ~ ~ . .f' = 0.. '" r-- 0 .. .. "', '" .., fA . ~ '" '" . . ~I ~ ;:,;: 00 .. '" . '" r-- .. '=' 0 '" "1- ~ ..' '<5 .... . r-- 0 .., r- ~ '" .., '" ~ . '" '" . ~ ;:,;: . ~I '" '" <=> a, '" .. . '=' "1- '" .... ~ '" .... on 0,' .f' r- . '" .. '" .... 0 z ~ .., .., .... 0 ~ '" ~ - .... '" '" . f-< ~ =- ~ 0 . 0 '-' '" ." .. U Z ~ ;:,;: " z ~I 0 <=> </J . .... .... on on <=> . .... z '=' g .. f-< 00 '" 00 ~ :;;; ~ z 0 '" <75 r-- :E .. -< a, a, <=> . f-< Z 0, "1- .., -;;; .... fA ~ =- ~ v Q '" '" ~ ... . ~ ;.. f-< f-< U .... ~ .... . .... ..., u ~ ~ ':!<. -< ~I '" a, r-- . ~ 00 0 .... '=' . =- "', .. r- ~ ~ N = r-- a, r-- 00 . a, "1 .... '" fA ~ "" . t.i .s . ~ ci: ~ ::l 0 0 .... . U 0 Z " OIl - .... ;.. -", v '-' ;: . '" ~ O.l v O.l Z 0 u '" ~ " .... -~ -~ O.l f-< ;;r ;; . 0. ~ 0 "" " K U ::l 0' W 0- -< . ~ OIl ~ ~ -< -'" O.l _5 =- - ~ ::l "" 0 f-< O.l 0.. " ~ '" . O.l .... f-< '" > O.l 0 ::l - O.l 0. ~ 0 ;: c.:: 0 z u '" v U . . . . . . . '<) . ~ if- on ~I 0 00 OC> " 0 7 .... r- Oll N 7 N ....; '" . ,....: 0" .., "- 0- - OC> O. "', N ", . "" "" ~ . . ~I ~ ~ 0- 'D r- '" 00 .... 0 r- 7 7, 0 ....; 0" 00 oC . r- r- 0 OC> O. "l N ", - ~ . "" "" . ~I ~ ~ . '" '" 0 '" 0 r- r- '" '" "'. ....; '" '" 7' r-' N OC> . '" 7 7 0 0 Z 0, N. N ", ...l 0 "" "" ~ - - . 1'"1 Eo-< ll. ~ 0 . 0 '" >> -0 10 U Z ~ ~ B z ~I 00 r- 'FJ N - 0 0 0 0 . - Z r- E " Eo-< 'D '" .... ....; :E 1'"1 Z 7' ,....: '" OC> :E '" ..( 0- 00 '" .r;; . Eo-< Z ...l 0- - - "" '" '" ll. - " ~ "" ~ "" . 1'"1 ... Eo-< Eo-< U - 1'"1 ...l . .... - 0 U ~ ~ i:.:: ..( ~I N '0 .... 0 ... 00 - '" r- . ll. 0- r- ....; 7' 0-;- ori' 0 r- r- OC> 0- 0, - . "" ", "" ~ . oj ..s . 1'"1 0: ~ ;:s 0 2 . u 0 ~ 5b - ... .;;; " '" E . '" i:.:: <l.) " <l.) Z Cl u '" 1'"1 " - u .S! <l.) Eo-< ;;. .C ;;; . p, ;;:i 0 '" " " U ;:s cr' ~ CT ~ . ~ OJ) 1'"1 ~ ..( ~ <l.) .s ll. '" ;:s - 0 Eo-< " "- " " u '" . <l.) .... Eo-< '" .... ;> <l.) 1'"1 0 ;:s - <l.) p, 0 E i:.:: 0 Z U '" " u . . . . . . . r-- . ~ on ~I " 0'> 00 = ... '" .... ,..., N 0/) ,..., O. '" 00 r-: ..... c.. . ,..., 0 0'> V) .... ,..., "" "". fA . '" '" . . ~I 0 N 00 ~ = " V) ,..., "! "". "" 0 =- N . ,..., 0 V) .... ,..., "". "" fA ,..., ,..., . '" '" . . ~I '" N ~ 0 '" .... = N " '" "'" ..... '" "'. r-: '" . '" .... 0 '" ..., 0 ,..., 0 Z "". ". fA ... 0 '" '" - - . ... ~ =- ~ 0 . 0 ;., " ." ~ U Z ~ B N Z - ~I 0'> " ..., = '" . .... Z '" "" 00 N :E- O) ... '" ..... ,..., ..... :;; ~ Z O' '" ...: 0 ~ '" < N "" ..., ,..., . ... Z ... ". "'. fA '" =- ,..., ... Q '" '" ""' . ~ ;.. ... ... U .... ~ ... . .... 0 U ~ < ~I V) N N ~ .... .... 0 = ... N . =- N .... 00 ..... ..,f' 0 .., 0 '" '" ..., ,..., . '" '" fA ,..., <A '" . u .s . ~ r:i: ~ '" 0 0 ... . U 0 Z " OIJ - - 'U; ... " ;.. C . '" ~ " ... " Z CI u '" ~ " - ,~ ,~ . " ... ;;- '" 1i; 0. ~ 0 " >< U '" 0' ~ cr -< . ~ OIJ ~ ~ < "" ~ - " ,5 '" 2 - 0 ... 0; c.. " u ~ . " ... ... '" ... > " ~ 0 '" c " 0. 0 P': 0 Z U if! ... U . . . . . . . 00 . V'> ... Ol) " . 0- . j \0 on N N ~ 0 N ~ ~ 0 ~ r-_ N ~ 00_ N . '1"- 0 '" 0 ;.. \0 \0 '" '" ~ \0_ '" '" fA ~ '" . ~ fA fA ;;. fA 0 . U ~ .... ~ j ~ ~ . E-< < '" N \0 '1" 0 ~ 0 00 ~ '" r--: '" \0 '" r-_ 0 ;.. .-.:- ~- ~ '" on 00 . U , on 0 r- r- - '" '" '" 0_ ~ Z 0 fA fA ~ ~ . '" 0 ~ fA ... fA '" E-< 0 ~ . ..l 0 ~ ~ Co-' j ~ gz :; Z N '" r- . ... ~ 00 0 N '" 0 Z \0_ ~- r- r-: u ~ ",- N 0 r- . Z \0 '" r- OO "'- '" N. N >> ... ..l fA fA -0 l- E-< '" ~ ~ a ... ~ fA CJl . ~ ;.. fA f <ll Z :is - E-< :E " ... . E-< ~ ..l ."; '" ... " u j ~ gz ... Z \0 N ~ N '"' . ~ < 00 00 \0 00 ~ ~ ~ on '" on ~ ..l \0- ~ \O- N \0 '" on ~ \0 . ~ ..l N. 0_ \0_ on - < 00 fA ~ ~ ~ fA fA ;:l fA . Z 0 U ~ z .s . ;;. 0 g: ~ '" ... 0 ~ .... . - < 0 E-< ~ 51 '" :; 0 .;;; . u 0 " u ~ " ~ 0 '" '" ..l 0 '" <:: '" .~ . < u " 0 ~ E-< '" 0. .....l C os >< ~ " - ... ~ "" " cr ... ~ .~ " ;> E . < ~ OJ) S 0 < ... " .s 0 <.> U U U " " ~ <.> ~ 0.; .~ ] <:: e .s <.> . " ~ .... ';; ;> " ~ '" " ~ :5 " 0. " 0 0 <:r ~ 0 Z U en ..: . "'" - " 0- . -;; - E ... u . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . ,. . . . . . . . . . '. .. :. . . :. Section VII CONCLUSION In summary, the Design Team has provided an analysis of facility planning options, the available market within San Bernardino County, projected attendance and anticipated financial performance of an aquatic facility within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The available market from which to draw patrons to the Central Park Aquatic Center consists primarily of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, surrounding communities and unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County within a 15 mile radius of the project site. Demographics within this market area are highly favorable to the development of an aquatic facility . In the Design Team's opmlOn, there are several viable development alternatives, depending upon the City's priorities. Facility Planning Option 2 best meets the current and future needs of the City of Rancho Cucamonga because of the flexibility in aquatic programming, as well as the indoor / outdoor capability associated with this option. However, the costs associated with developing and operating this option (approximately $14.0 million and a first year operating deficit of $281 thousand, respectively) are considerably higher than the more cost effective Facility Planning Option 3 (at $10.4 million to develop and a first year operating deficit of $176 thousand). Facility Planning Option 4 is the best overall financial performer, with an initial capital cost of $13.7 million and a first year operating orofit of $34 thousand. Due to the large building infrastructure costs associated with the development of indoor pools, perhaps a smaller indoor warm water or therapy pool could be provided in lieu of the larger indoor pools currently under consideration. Reducing the initial capital cost for the facility provides greater opportunities for funding of same, and increasing potential cost recovery through the development of more recreation programming (to subsidize the competitive programs) would help insure that the Central Park Aquatic Center would not Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. -. -. -. ". '. burden the City's general fund and/or capital reserves, or require cutting back on other important programs.. Finally, the Design Team would like to thank the following persons, who provided valuable input in the preparation of this Feasibility Study: Mr. Chad Gunter with the City of Folsom, California; Mr. Boyce Jeffries of the City of Galt, California; Ms. Alexa Pritchard of the City of Roseville, California; Mr. Wayne Weber of the City of Santa Clarita, California; and Mr. Kenny Handler of the City of Vista, California. Central Park Aquatic Center Feasibility Study Page 60 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Site Map Baseline Rd AT Milliken Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 " ~ ~ , __c-, ~- , September 16, 2005 ~" "- Wri,ghtWoo'd ',-- --- ) ; , l Latitude: Longitude: 34.1215 -117.5585 ~~ X /. , - '-. , ~/ r '. , /-'l.~-~ ,Y ,->~,_ --'-';) \.~ , . }/~ V ~o!l n Yorb 'Lr"da <:00;5.. ~T"r~ () l i I 'rF ~Ctl_dE ~ : ': , ' --:S. \ '. "--~"'Q...' - J'-~ ,I ; - ~ ca/~nia l _--~ IWiI'ltlf @X__,jJ _____~-_ tr~ --=~ =-"'--~~~ il ':-U!b~l" 'c,-", 9 2005 ESRI GOT,.I , _ - _~i:l_ moos ESRI On-clemand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at www.esribiscom or call 800-795-7483 Page 1 of 1 . . . Demographic and Income Profile . _~'1:f_ . Latitude; 34.1215 Baseline Rd AT Milliken Ave Longitude: -117.5585 . Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Site Type: Donut Donut: 0-5.0 miles Summary 2000 2005 2010 . Population 192,919 219,374 246,155 Households 59,573 66,602 74,062 . Families 46,ns 52,457 58,382 Average Household Size 3.17 3.23 3.27 . Owner Occupied HUs 40,811 46,650 52,241 Renter Occupied HUs 18.762 19,953 21,821 Median Age 31.0 31.7 32.5 . Trends: 2005-2010 Annual Rate Area State National . Population 2.33% 1.33% 1.22% Households 2.15% 1.19% 1.27%. Families 2.16% 1.18% 1.00% . Owner HHs 2.29% 1.61% 1.46% Median Household Income 2.64% 3.53% 3.25%. . 2000 2005 2010 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent . < $15,000 5,037 6.4% 4,520 6.8% 4,276 5.8% $15,000 - $24,999 5,134 8.6% 4,599 6.9% 4,089 5.5% . $25,000 - $34,999 6,032 10.1% 5,356 8.0% 4,780 6.5% $35,000 - $49,999 9,355 15.7% 9,064 13.6% 8,566 11.6% . $50,000 - $74,999 14,310 24.0% 14,694 22.1% 15,075 20.4% $75,000 - $99,999 9,094 15.2% 10,841 16.SOIo 11,570 15.6% . $100,000. $149,999 7,577 12.7% 11,861 17.8% 15,175 20.5% $150,000 - $199,000 1,954 3.3% 3,209 4.8% 5,860 7.9% . $200,000+ 1,145 1.9% 2,456 3.7% 4,668 6.3% Median Household Income $56,487 $65,527 $75,381 . Average Household Income $67,202 $80,214 $95,442 Per Capita Income $21,258 $24,697 $29,058 . 2000 2005 2010 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent . 0-4 14,863 7.7% 17,277 7.9% 19,873 8.1% 5-14 35,478 18.4% 35,995 16.4% 35,826 14.6% 15.19 15,964 8.3% 18,019 8.2% 19,531 7.9% . 20 - 24 13,135 6.8% 16,715 7.6% 18,955 7.70/0 25 - 34 29,275 15.2% 32,213 14.7% 39,008 15.8% . 35 - 44 34,399 17.8% 35,394 16.1% 35,911 14.6% 45 - 54 25,707 13.3% 31,806 14.5% 36,112 14.7% . 55 - 64 12,217 6.3% 17,937 8.2% 24,164 9.8% 65 -74 6,903 3.6% 7,936 3.6% 9,719 3.9% . 75 - 84 3,845 2.0% 4,634 2.1% 5,182 2.1% 65+ 1,137 0.6% 1,445 0.7% 1,870 0.8% . 2000 2005 2010 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent . White Alone 116,969 60.6% 124,932 56.9% 132,057 53.6% Black Alone 16,733 8.7% 18,827 8.6% 20,600 8.4% . American Indian Alone 1,494 0.8% 1,644 0.7% 1,772 0.7% Asian Alone 11,775 6.1% 14,447 6.6% 17,195 7.0% Pacific Islander Alone 600 0.3% 691 0.3% 780 0.3% . Some Other Race Alone 34,739 18.0% 44,781 20.4% 55,809 22.7% Two or More Races 10,609 5.5% 14,051 6.4% 17,942 7.3% . Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 67,392 34.9% 87,155 39.7% 108,942 44.3% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars. . Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census of Population and Housing. ESRllOfecasts for 2005 and 2010. . @2005 ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at www.esribl!lcomorcaIl8DO-795-7483 9/1612005 Page 1 of2 . . . . . . . . . . . II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _.:f..'1:I_ Baseline Rd AT Milliken Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 75K-99K (16.3%) Site Type: Donut Trends 2005-2010 Demographic and Income Profile "E 3.5 <l> 3 e <l> "- 2.5 ~ 2 <l> 1;; 1.5 ee Oi ::> t: t: 0.5 <( 0 Population by Age 16 14 12 ~ 10 8 ll- 6 4 2 0 0-4 5-14 15-19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 2005 Household Income $100K-$149K (17.8%) <$15K (6.8%) $15K-$24K (6.9% Latitude: 34.1215 Longitude: -117.5585 Donut: 0-5.0 miles _ Area _ State Du.s. D 2005 _ 2010 8 + 2005 Population by Race 55 50 45 40 35 30 ffi 25 ~ 20 <l> 15 10 5 o 2005 Percent Hispanic Origin: 39.7% <<nOGS ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at _.esribis.com or ca1lSDO-795-7483 !}/1612005 Page 2 of 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic and Income Profile _~'1;I_ Latitude: 34.1215 Baseline Ad AT Milliken Ave Longitude: -117.5585 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Site Type: Donut Donut: 5.0.10.0 miles Summary 2000 2005 2010 Population 505,249 561,103 624,523 Households 143,313 155,722 171,406 Families 114,267 124.374 136,957 Average Household Size 3.47 3.55 3.59 Owner Occupied HUs 91.550 101,561 111,663 Renter Occupied HUs 51,763 54,161 59.743 Median Age 28.5 28.7 29.3 Trends: 2005-2010 Annual Rate Area State National Population 2.16% 1.33% 1.22% Households 1.94% 1.19% 1.27% Families 1.95% 1.18% 1.00% Owner HHs 1.91% 1.61% 1.46% Median Household Income 2.86% 3.53% 3.25% 2000 2005 2010 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent < $15,000 19,135 13.4% 17,086 11.0% 16,313 9.5% $15,000 - $24.999 17,043 11.9% 15,880 10.2% 14,747 8.6% $25,000 - $34,999 17,975 12.6% 17,068 11.0% 16,085 9.4% $35.000 - $49,999 24,596 17.2% 25,295 16.2% 24,532 14.3% $50,000 - $74,999 31,656 22.1% 32,826 21.1% 35,940 21.0% $75,000 - $99,999 16,352 11.4% 20,400 13.1% 22,742 13.3% $100,000 - $149,999 11,436 8.0% 18,534 11.9"10 25,755 15.0% $150,000 - $199.000 2,744 1.9% 4,585 2.9% 8,211 4.8% $200,000+ 2,265 1.6% 4.045 2.6% 7,079 4.1% Median Household Income $45,171 $51,491 $59,287 Average Household Income $56.122 $66.037 $77,482 Per Capita Income $16,094 $18,544 $21,468 2000 2005 2010 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0-4 45,034 8.9% 51,465 9.2% 58,733 9.4% 5-14 99,098 19.6% 100,588 17.9% 99,621 16.0% 15.19 44,226 8.8% 50,283 9.0% 55,754 8.9% 20 - 24 38,543 7.6% 47,207 8.4% 56,792 9.1% 25 - 34 76,158 15.1% 81,621 14.5% 94,758 15,2% 35 -44 77,704 15.4% 80,344 14.3% 80,724 12.9% 45 - 54 57,561 11.4% 68,361 12.2% 78,487 12.6% 55 - 64 31,291 6.2% 41,297 7.4% 53,736 8.6% 65.74 19,707 3.9% 21,443 3.8% 25,020 4.0% 75 - 84 12,075 2.4% 13,683 2.4% 14,748 2.4% 85+ 3,854 0.8% 4,808 0.9% 6,148 1.0% 2000 2005 2010 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent While Alone 262,483 52.0% 272,893 48.6% 286,888 45.9% Black Alone 42,973 8.5% 45,604 8.1% 47,836 7.7% American Indian Alone 5,346 1.1% 5,607 1.0% 5,852 0.9% Asian Alone 22.802 4.5% 26,161 4.7% 29,776 4.8% Pacific Islander Alone 1,426 0.3% 1,505 0.3% 1,581 0.3% Some Other Race Alone 144,581 28.6% 177,493 31.6% 213,862 34.2% Two or More Races 25,637 5.1% 31,839 5.7% 38,729 6.2% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 263,336 52.1% 321,827 57.4% 386,493 61.9% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000 Census 01 Population and Housing. ESRI forecasts tor 2005 and 2010. 02005 ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at www8sribiscomorca1l80D-795.7483 9/1612005 Pagelof2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _.:f.."1:f_ Demographic and Income Profile Baseline Rd AT Milliken Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 OK-74K (21.1%) E 35 " 3 ~ " C. 2.5 ~ 2 " 1ii 1.5 a: OJ ::l c: c: 0.5 <( 0 I :. 1. 12 I~ 10 :;; B D- . . 2 o Site Type: Donut Trends 2005-2010 Population by Age ().4 latitude: 34,1215 longitude: -117.5585 Donut: 5.0~10.0 miles _ Area _ Stale Du.s. D 2005 _ 2010 + 2005 Household Income 2005 Population by Race On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at www.esribiscom or caIlSOG-795-7483 5.14 15.19 20-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 <<noOS ESAI $100K-$149K (11.9%) $lSG-199K+ (2.9%) S200K+ (2.6%) <S15K (11.0%) c: " ~ " 2005 Percent Hispanic Origin: 57.4% 9/1612005 Page 2 of 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demographic and Income Profile _~"':f_ latitude: 34.1215 Baseline Rd AT Milliken Ave longitude: -117.5585 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Site Type: Donut Donut: 10.0-15.0 miles Summary 2000 200S 2010 Population 724,241 801,763 894,486 Households 204,341 223,569 248,347 Families 159,682 175,011 194,413 Average Household Size 3.41 3.47 3.50 Owner Occupied HUs 131,119 147,231 164,933 Renter Occupied HUs 73,222 76,338 83,414 Median Age 29.3 29.4 29.9 Trends: 2005-2010 Annual Rate Area Stale National Population 2.21% 1.33% 1.22% Households 2.12% 1.19% 1.27% Families 2.12% 1.18% 1.00% Owner HHs 2.3% 1.61% 1.46% Median Household Income 2.98% 3.53% 3.25% 2000 200S 2010 Households by Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent < $15,000 30,084 14.7% 27,196 12.2% 26,271 10.6% $15,000 - $24,999 25,914 12.6% 24,180 10.8% 22,440 9.0% $25,000 - $34,999 25,705 12.5% 24,088 10.8% 23,377 9.4% $35,000 - $49,999 32,931 16.1% 35,066 15.7% 35,191 14.2% $50,000 - $74,999 41,258 20.1% 42,584 19.0% 46,078 18.6% $75,000. $99,999 23,698 11.6%. 28,521 12.8% 31,389 12.6% $100,000 - $149,999 18,271 8.9% 28,704 12.8% 38,261 15.4% $150,000 - $199,000 3,846 1.9% 7,129 3.2% 13,812 5.6% $200,000+ 3,271 1.6% 6,099 2.7% 11,523 4.6% Median Household Income $43,864 $50,562 $58,558 Average Household Income $55,461 $66,329 $78,897 Per Capita Income $16,170 $19,140 $22,548 2000 200S 2010 Population by Age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 0-4 62,651 8.7% 71,585 8.9% 81,751 9.1% 5 -14 139,139 19.2% 141,433 17.6% 140,618 15.7% 15-19 61,308 8.5% 70,270 8.8% 77,945 8.7% 20-24 54,367 7.5% 65,513 8.2% 80,142 9.0% 25 -34 108,578 15.0% 116,202 14.5% 134,175 15.0% 35.44 117,413 16.2% 119,514 14.9% 119,813 13.4% 45.54 83,108 11.5% 100,719 12.6% 116,025 13.0% 55.64 44,693 6.2% 58,036 7.2% 77,247 8.6% 65 - 74 29,179 4.0% 31,440 3.9'% 36,024 4.0% 75 - 84 17,918 2.5% 19,845 2.5% 21,590 2.4% 85+ 5,888 0.8% 7,205 0.9% 9,153 1.0% 2000 200S 2010 Race and Ethnicity Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent White Alone 376,757 52.0% 393,621 49.1% 417,634 46.7% Black Alone 69,195 9.6% 71,243 8.9% 73,750 8.2% American Indian Alone 8,447 1.2% 8,788 1.1% 9,192 1.0% Asian Alone 41,018 5.7% 47,489 5.9% 54,120 6.1% Pacific Islander Alone 2,087 0.3% 2,255 0.3% 2,442 0.3% Some Other Race Alone 191,401 26.4% 234,170 29.2% 283,351 31.7% Two or More Races 35,337 4.9% 44,196 5.5% 53,997 6.0'% Hispanic Origin (Any Race) 355,380 49.1% 433,577 54.1% 523,059 58.5% Data Note: Income is expressed in current dollars. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2000 Census of Population and Housing. ESRI forecasts for 2005 and 2010. 02005 ESAI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at www.esribiscomorcaIl80D-795_7483 9116/2005 Page 1 of2 . . . . & . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _;1..."1:1_ Demographic and Income Profile Baseline Rd AT Milliken Ave Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 SOK-74K (19.0%) Site Type: Donut Trends 2005-2010 C 3.S Q) 3 l,' a> Q. 2.S ~ 2 a> 1ti 1.S CI: Cii ::! C C D.S <( 0 Population by Age 16 ,. 12 I~ 10 l,' 8 .f 6 . 2 0 0-4 5-14 15-19 20-24 25.34 3S-44 45-54 55-64 2005 Household Income latitude: 34.1215 Longitude: -117.5585 Donut: 10.0-15.0 miles _Area _State Du.s. D 2005 _ 2010 2005 Population by Race $100K-S149K (12.8%) $150-199K+ (3.2%) $200K+ (2.7%) c a> l,' a> 02005 ESRI <$15K (12.2%) 2005 Percent Hispanic Origin: 54.1% On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online. Order at wwwesribis.comorcaIlSGO-795-7483 9/1612005 Page 2 of 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - , '" ~ is z r.l ~ ~ ...: "'" o o ~ ~ r.l ... r.l :E on '" ~ ~ ...: > on- "'z ~O 0- 0'" Q~ ZO -" 'Z r.l_ ...z ...:Z ~j ...~ oo> r.l... ...- oo"'" 0- u~ "'r,., r.l 1= - "'" 1= ~ > ~ ...: z - :E :l ~ ~ o V) V) . _M '" OM'" o\lJ)g:: ~ 00 N ...: ;: r.l ... ;: U Z " - oo r.l Q r.. t) .. iU....- ~~t) ~~~ =---.. cr...c:: ..c ";;' .. CI:l _ ...... t:: -- --o..froE ~ iU ,... ::::: 0. ~Cl"""c:lbO < S 8 ~':" iU ::I ::s (\) (]) u S j:; E > ~ .- 'R .2 E 3 .5 c:l 0 ::3 ",:E:E>i- >r.l "'"" -...: "':oo Q~ c.:i ;;- ...: ... oo o u "'" ...: ~ z z ...: V) '" '" OO~("f') ("f')"""\Ci '" V) 00 o:::t~ Vl Nv) fA N fA fA ... oo o u > "'" - ...: Q 0\.00000\ __"":,-,,!'-rl OOo:::t..........M f:A <o::t \0 Vt fA fA fA r.l U - ~ ~ ... - Z ~ ... - Z ~ If)V')OO OOOV) ONM fA fA fA o 00 fA fA ~~~~~ tl~:r:tltl i- r-"":~oo,,,,: o\"1"Nv) o '" I- OON > ~ o " r.l ... ...: u ~ 0'" .- " l- .g ~ 2 tl a '" " '" :::51z 00 I- 00 V)"': N V) ON. ..,; fA fA ~ 'C o :;; u 0"" 0. .- '" u :r:< E .,g .2 .~ .", " ~:E I- r- oO 00 o '" ..,. fA M 00 00 '" - fA oo "'" ...: ... o i- oo Z o - ... ~ :E ~ oo oo -< ~ c d .9 .9 e OJ " ~ 0. " 0 0." o u ~ a ~ c ~2 '"tj .5 ~ E '" " c.", o 0 0.- o g .", .- " -0 ~ C .0 ~ - " ~ 0 0.", u M ~ o v Oll ~ 0.. ~ o OJ ~ " 0. S ~ ~ .;; " " u " C ~ o bll bll " C .", '60 0 '" 00. ~ .","" o t:: r....: ~ '" ~ 2 ~ '" '" ,- ~ ~ 'C> ~ ~ ::c: .0 bb 0. ~ " .", ~ 2 "'0 s::: rJ'J ~ 0 Ctl 8 00 dJ .", . c o @ d ] .~ ~ 00 .S 8 :a .9~~~ IU 0..4:: p-. -,6 0 N A-. '" "''-0 I-; ~ 0 . 8.1-<0- c:l (1) ._ bO >0.01:: Q) rn ..9 '2 ~ 5 ~.~ E ] .::.5 c 00 (oj r:e '" C S N c 0 c Nag-a C ;:l "'0 ::l 0"'0 IU "'0 g. I1.l ~ iU '"tj ~ .D ~ o"ov.o U) 11) bJ) IU ro OJ) Ctl co ~ ~ ~ ~ bO :::3 ~ ::l ~~ bOt; : .g ~ .~ 0,) ..... 1-0 E ".:: u .a v w Cl.l ro..c:::: :::51zu >. :;;; " " ~ .~ '" ~ 02:> ~~ NM-iv-i...o , '" < '6 c v 0. 0. <: .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - , .... :>< Q z fool ~ ~ ..: ...l o o ~ ~ fool ... fool ~ <:> OIl ... ~ ..: ;;.. OIl ....- ~z 00 0- i:lt ...0 :;'" Oz '- foolZ "'Z ~j -~ ~;;.. fool... ...- "':: OU u..: "'~ fool - ... - ...l - ... :;, ;;.. ~ ..: Z - ~ - ...l fool ~ ~ gv:~ VI" M M N - '" M r- .... M ....: N~ r- r- ..: sa fool ... - ~ U Z " - '" fool i:l ^ t> ~~Z' " " " ~~~ =--;-:..., iI;5-:Sc^ --0.. fro E co d..l,.....,:::::: 0.. ~ 0 100-< C'3 bJ) -<EE~';:;' Q) ;:::l ::l III 01) <..> E E E 6 1: ." .R ~ E ::l ..... co 0 ::l "';;;:;;;:>1-< ;;"fool ...l" -..: ":CIl Q:;, cj > ..: ... '" o U ...l ..: :;, Z Z ..: N"<:tOOOl,f') ~O';ooo...... v)OoON \000\\0 \O'O::t~v 0" 0'\" ...... \O~ \0" l,f') liA ''OJ'' r- ...... {;A "" - "" "" ... '" o u ;;.. ...l - ..: Q \Or-QDO\O ~"1;ON.q- r--ooo::i~o::i N......O"'1" &"r Vi!Af;A. "" "" fool U - ~ ~ ... - Z :;, ... z :;, V)QOO oo~"'! ONN "" ,.."" <:> dd "" "" ~~~~~ t:l~~t:lt:l I-< 0000 ~ ...oo\OMVl vOOMN r-r-", N ;;.. ~ o " fool ... ..: u 2 .;: o :<i g.", rJJ 0..'0 0"';:2-< ._ t:l <..> u (;; a ..... ~ .~ ~ .S .~ ~ OJ .a '"d :; :::~z~;;;: '" '" r-: M r- ~ .... .... "" 00 '= o - r- "" CIl ...l ..: ... o ... M ~ o N ~ on ro 0.. rii Z o 1= ~ ~ :;, '" '" ..: e! :l 'i<i ~ " 0. E 2 ~ .;;; " " ~ en " .", <:> "'..,: ]r-: '" ~N ~r-...: ~ '0 ~ ~ bho. ~ " .", 16 2 "0 J;::: rJJ ia 0 co 8 00 0 .", ." S t:: d "'0 'j:; .D 1:1$ .9 C 0 ..:g~_8:a o E lU U ...... ll) ~ ~ (]) o..c;:: 0... .f;OVlP-. E ~"-' 0 0"0 0 . o.~o- Cl;l IU ._ bl) ?; 0.. g .8 ~ ~ .5 -;; ::l ;> Cl3 ;::l.8.!:: .s 2 00 '" '" '" "E V) t:: 0 c Vi 8. g. 8- c ::l "'0 ::l 0"'0 01) "'0 g. Il} ~ (I) "C ~ ..0 ~ o.DtU,D 00 ll) on (\) ~ bO ~ bl) (I) i;l ::l ~ OJ) ::l ~ ;::::l ~ '";j co (; : .~ c; .~ ll) -b !3 8 'E ~ ..... (I) :::~zO >. ;;; " " ~ " <..> " o en " .50 '" ~ " ;. '" "" ~ '" ~ -'" <..> '" .0 ~ " d .g .Q e ~ ~ " 0 fro '-< <..> o ~ ~ " ~2 "'0.5 ~ E M " " .", o :l 0.- :l g .", .- " 0 gj " .0 ~ - " ~ 0 8"" .;!l 0; ~ :l '" 2] -<-< ,....;N~o::iv)...o N ~ '0 o ~ 0- 0. 0<( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - , .... :><: - Q Z ~ "" "" ...: o-l o o "" z o - "" ...: ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ 0- oz QO ",,- :::>"" O~ ~" ""z ...:- ::;z _z ""...: "'o-l ~"" "";.- "''''' 0- U::: ",U ~...: E=\<. - o-l - "" :::> ;.- ~ ...: z - ::; - o-l [:;j "" 000 ~ov-i .-: 0'" V> 'D N 0- ... ...: ~ ~ "" ~ U Z " - '" ~ Q ~ t; ~ ".- ~QJ " " " a~t+=< :s--'-';.:.., g-S.;: l:9 ^ ,;;e-~..s:[ ~ Cl ~ -;; OJ) <S8~':' Il) ::J ;:l Il) 11) U E .5 E 5 ~ "c X ::l E ~~~~~ ;.-~ o-l" -< <", Q:::> o ;;- ...: "" '" o U o-l ...: :::> z z ...: ("0O\O\OVlO\ o::tt-:NO~M ~r-~Ol.tjO r--M"'::t"""::I'"N 0:::1" \0 r-oo 0\ 0\ -n~M~..,f'v)~N~ V1 M f;;A 0 f;;A "" - "" "" '" o U ;.- o-l - ...: Q o::::tNCONM ~\O~<o:t:o::tl..O v;~ NOON ....... \0 M 0 f;;A r.A EA (;A r.A M "" ~ U - ~ "" "" Z :::> "" - z :::> -V>v> o 000 "" "" "" 000 ooov> ONN "" "" "" o-l:r::r: ::;:'_L_l <::::::0.:<< O~~:r:OO E- OO\OC!N -.ic:iooo~ 1.0 M...... r--- o.r:,o::tNM 0. 0. E E :l :l "" "" ;.- ~ o " ~ "" ...: U ,..; oJ ~ ~ 0 ._ 0 UI!l ~ ~~O '0 'U: _ l-o 'C 'C ~ Q) t) ti .8 &.i !U (1) ctl 13:iiliilz .!l '1: o :a U 0-0 0. .- >,u :r:< E .g .::: .~ -0 :l a::;< on - ,..: .., III N ... - "" o .., lfi .... ... "" '" o-l ...: E- O "" 0: E :l 0. ~ .!l ~ o o .0 u; z o - "" "" ::; ;:;, '" '" ...: " .9 ~ " ~ u ~ ~ ~ >, '" -0 02 V> ~ o u -;;;-~ " 0 ~~ ~- " ~ ~" ;::: .9: ,2 e ~ ~ " 0 g.-o '- u o ~ ~ " >''' .a .S o '" V> E .., " ,,-0 o :l 0.- " g -0 .- ~ 0 '" " .0 ~ - " ~ 0 0-0 U .;!l OJ ~ " >, ,,OJ " " << - N '" .... o M " on . 0. oj ~ --=--.8 0. '" E [; >.. ::l P. :;;; 0. E Il) .,..; 0 v ~ :: " 0 .- " .0 '" u ~ " " >, " o Cl3 5'0 bl) -0 " " ~ -0 ..... 11) 0 ~ 0.\0 I-< ~ "'0 ..,; CLl :::s !: r--: ~ 0 ctl ~~~~ '" '" ,,~"'O 7j 0.. 0 ::c '" E ~ 0. .0 " bl) "- C. 11.> "'0 Il.l . "'0 ;::: ~ eo ctl t::::: ..... 00 11) "'0 ~ ~ c c C "'0 'C c<:3 0 C 0 tn ..... 0 ::a ;g e g u - C1J ~ ~ (\) 0. 4:: (l.. .2': 0 VI 0.- &.i :>'4-< 0 \-o..a 0 . 8......0...... ~ g,'o ~ d) 0 ...... ~ ~ .S <<i ::l ;> ctl :l .,g.~ .5 a 00 '" '" '" "E V') c 0 !:l ._ 0 0. 0 ..., 0. ::3 0- C ::l "'0 ::l o "'0 0 "'0 e. a) 00 ll.l ...... CI'l c:o:I tI'l "'0 ro .0 C':l Q) .0 0 ..c en 0 OJ) ll) t'i3 OJ) co bJ) .o~~~ ~;::l CI'l ::l ~c;gbea ::s U ea U ~ 'I:: l-o 's -u.Ev Cl3 11) ctl..e :::iilzu rri..q:..o...o N x '6 c " p. p. -< .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... , .... ;.: - ~ Z r..< ~ 0.. -< ...:I o o ~ ~ -< ;>0 '" .... ... r..< Z -< ...:I 'C .... i:>:Z 00 0- ~E-< zo.. _0 ,'-' r..<Z E-<_ ..:Z ~Z -..: E-<...:I "'0.. r..<;>o E-<E-< "'- 0...:1 U'" "'u r..<": -~ E-< - ...:I - E-< ;:l ;>0 i:>: ..: Z - ~ - ...:I ~ 0.. o on 0 ~Mo.; M '" r- OO "''' or> r- ..: ~ r..< E-< ~ U Z '-' - '" r..< ~ ""' - " .. ~~? Q) t) Q) ~~~ ::l'-''-'^ ~-B-5~^ ,-,o..fro S ~ C5 0 :;; 5}) ~ OI)~ ":EiEi~~ 8 8 E S ~ of! 'S '" .=; 6 ;::l ...... ro 0 ::l CIl~~>E-< ;>or..< ...:1'-' --< -<", ~;:l d > ..: E-< '" o U ...:I ..: ;:l Z Z ..: \0 00 V) 00 0\ ~or;~Q', r---~0\~\Ci NN_I,f')\O f"'-'<::t vr- ......~O\~~N~ ">I" '" '" E-< '" o u ;>0 ...:I - ..: ~ "::t~0\.........0\ a;O\'<::to V...or--:r--:N V} N M f:A f:A '" '" r..< u - i:>: 0.. E-< - Z ;:l E-< - Z ;:l o 00 '" '" tr) V') 0 0 OOC:V1 ONN '" '" '" ~~~~~ c;>~~c;>c;> E-< r;on V:O\ ('f')O\~l"")ci '" r- " " ;>0 i:>: o '-' r..< E-< ..: u ~ c'" ._ c;> I-< .~ ""@ Q) '0 ::l 'Eve; ~Ulz " .1: o :s u 0-0 "- .- ;>, u ~..: 8 .g ::l .~ .- ~ -0 " a~ '" - ..; 0-- " ...:- .... '" '" '" ..; .... '" '" ...:I -< E-< o E-< ~ ~ o v on ~ 0. !! " 1ii ~ " "- Ei B '" Z o - E-< ~ ~ ;:l CIl '" ..: >. :;;; " " ~ .r; 1l " " ~ o 01) 01) " " -0 "50 0 ro 00....: ~ -0' 0) t:::: r-: ~ '" ..c :u N ~ co r-.: " ,,"-< -'" 0 ~ ~ :::c: .D 6h 0.. ~ " -0 ~ ~ '0 c: Vl;::: 0 ro 0...... 000 U"'O " C I-< C d "'0 "j:; 2 t'3 "_9 6..9 ~~rou"5 Vl ..9 tl ~ "':::' C d..l o..~ ~ d.E._::: ONt .,g E ro ;>. C+-; rocua-aoC: ~ g. J:l.. I-< 0...... 0..--'" ro Q)..... OJ) o Q) ;:.. 0.. u C ~ U Q) Vl..9'8 o @ c; 3 Q)'C; CIl t:: ::l 0 ~ 15 ~ ~ 2 ..c 'c;"e;j "'O"e; ro 00 C E :;; ENe 8.. c M Il,) N 0 ::l 0 C "'0 C e- 0... o ::l 0 -' "'0 ::l o.uo."'O~"'O ::l c:: ::l ~ ro ~ "'0 .- "'0 ro .D ro (\) -0 11) ..c l1),..o Vl t:: Vl Q) Ol) ill ro rooo~on ..0 (/)..c ro ;:l ro t; g 0) Vl en 0"'0 OJ) ::l ~ ::l U Vl ~ -;: bOd d ";;j ::l u - u ::l ;>. tl "5 e= "8 ~ ~ ~ a3 E 0 " 0> _ '" ..c: <;>",Zu .....;NM-.i~..o N N " 'iJ c v "- "- <( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -l o o ~ ~ f.<l ... f.<l ~ on '" " '" , '" :>< - Q Z f.<l ~ ~ -< ~ -< ;.- on", "'z ~O 0_ 0... Q~ ...0 ~tl Oz . - f.<lZ ...Z -<-< ~-l -~ ...;,- "'... f.<l_ ...-l ",- OW u-< "'~ f.<l ... - -l - ... ~ ;.- ~ -< z ~ - -l f.<l ~ ~ ~~:3~:?; ..... M ,., lr) 0", \0'" 0-,'" r- M -< ;: f.<l ... ;: U Z tl - '" f.<l Q '"" OJ ~;..:...'Z' o ti Il) a~~ ;::l'-''-'';'':'" g->5;S~;":,,, --o..e-oE ~QO~6t .... bO~ -<SS~.... 8 SSE ~ ~ "2 OR .2 E ;::l .- ('\l 0 ;::l ",::'8::'8>... >-f.<l -ltl --< -<", Q~ d > -< ... '" o U -l -< ~ Z Z -< N'"1"Oo.nOO ~C'!~ooV) 00 000.;0 1:"4000\00\ (-- '"1"" r-- 0\" o:::t ..f'O...ot--N GANOOVl&17 "" "" ... '" o u >- -l - -< Q .....O\r-r---N o.r:N~r-- MOOr-Nt-- o.n-.::tNGA fA f:A N f:A "" f.<l U ;: ~ ... - Z ~ ... - Z ~ lrlQOO OOC:lf'! ONN "" "" "" c: 00 "" "" ~~~~~ Cj~:I:OO ... o\Oo~oo "":oOO-N VlOO__ r"'lMM ;.- ~ o tl f.<l ... -< W .~ .... o :;: " 0"0 0. .- ;>. " :I:-< S .g ;::l .:S! .- .... "'" " c51::'8 ~ C'" ._ 0 .~ ca t U ~ ~ 01.1 ~ :>:iilz on ~ ~ .., M "" '" -l -< ... o ... '" o .,; .... M ...r '" - "" M ... o N ~ on ~ 0. oj .... " 1'! " 0. S .!J rj.j Z o - ... ~ ~ ~ '" '" -< ;;.. :;;; " " ~ .~ 8 " c: ~ o bO bO " c: "'" "6h 0 ~ \D...; o "'C____" ;> c: ,- '" '" ..c: .... N ~ ". ro 'E r- " ,,""" "'" 0 ~ ~ ::r: ..0 50 0- .... ""'" .0 -8 "'0 c:: r.Il;: 0 ro o _ 00 11) U "'0 " e .... c:: d"'O "j:; .8 ro .g 8 .9 ~gs'@u.g Vl ..9 tl ~ ""::< e (1) 0..4:: ~ d .9 .~~ 0 Irl ~ O -<;: ...... p., "= ~ ro ~t..,.; 0 to 0 ;...., -0 0 . ~g.8......o- 0...--- ro cu ._ OJ) o 0 > 0.. u c:: 4.. {) Il) en.8 "a o a (; 9 0,,) ";;: r.Il e ::s 0 > ...... ~ -8 c:: ..c .!:: .5 "" c d 00 ro ro "'0 'c; ro C 8 08"...=0= V) ..., 0 0.. 0 M Il) VI 0.. ::l 0.. ;:: "'0 C ;::l "'0 ::s 8..~ 8,."r:; ~ "'C ::l C ;::l ~ ro ~ "'0 .- '"'0 ro ..0 ro Q) a Il) ..0 11) .0 en c:: r.Il 11) 0.0 01) ro ro OJ) ro 0.0 .0 r.Il ..0 CO r.Il C'3 ...... Q) IU rn ;::l <Il o .g OJ) ;:J <Il ;::l UifJ~c;gb";j ..... or;; ;::l U _ U g ~ E .~ ~ Os ro Q) ~ ll) ~~:>:<iiZO ,....;N~~v)\Ci "! N < '0 c ~ 0- 0- -< . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '" , '" ~ Q z r.l "" ll.. < ...l o o ll.. Z o - E- < r.l ~ U r.l ~ ~ 0'" OZ QO E-- ;,E- O~ ..:." E-Z <- ::;:Z _Z E-< "'...l r.lll.. E-:>- "'E- O- u::l "'u r.l< ~... - ...l - E- ;> :>- ~ < z - ::;: - ...l E:;l ll.. gc:c: <no<n r-: 0'" <n 'D N 0" " < El r.l E- El u z " - '" r.l Q ~ " t2Z-? OJ " OJ a<B~ ;:j -- -- .. C"..s:::::..c::: ';;'.. Vl ...... ....... c::,,-., -o..froE "'''0=0- ~ Cl Cd OJ) <aa~';:; 0.) ::l E 11) ~ g a ._ a 0 't .S >< .2 E ::l .- Cd 0 ::l ",::2::2>E- :>-r.l ...l" -< <", Q;> d > < E- '" o U ...l < ;> z z < MO\O\OV)O'\ vr-NO~M ..q:r--:o\oV)o r- ("")v"<1'"N "<1'" \0 r-oo 0\ 0\ V)t"'.rV~..nN&9 V7 N f:A 0 f.A "" E- '" o u :>- ...l - < Q "" VNOO('..l("") ~\O~'<:t:~>..e: lrl~ NOON \OMOf.A(A (AV')(AM "" >oJ U - ~ ll.. t Z ;> E- - Z ;> _<n<n o cioo "" "" "" ~~~~~~ O~~:r:OO E- _ 00 -.ici 'D .... "1." ~C:N oooo::r"""; r-- N .... 0- "" 6 a ::I ::10-. 0-. :>- ~ o " r.l E- < U ~ u ~ .~ 0 Ual ~ " "'" ,f' ,go u u _ 1-0 'C 'C e ~ t) t) .2 ". 11) (1) Cd ~GlGlz 000 OO~VJ ON~ "" "" "" ~ .;: o :a u 0"0 0- .- >. u :r:< 6 .~ ::l .~ .- ~ "0 ::I ~::2 on - ...: .... on .... " - '" o .... oti '" " '" '" ...l < E- o E- ~ .... o ~ ~ '" ~ 0. rii z o - E- ll.. ::;: ;> '" '" < oj ^a "" '" a ~ . ;:s 0- .Q "" 6 "'" . OJ 11) ti ....... " 0 ~ ~ 0 .- " .c '" u ~ OJ " >. OJ o Cd ;0 bl)"O OJ " ~ "0 .- 11) 0 c:: ~ ~\O ...f- a t 3"'8 r-: '';:: ~ 0 ro '" '" .d ~ "'5]NBN U Cd Cd r-: g ~--~13 Vl 15 c. lU :r: >. Cd S ~ '"' Cd ..c::S bl)- "'0 ..... 0.. 11) "'0 o ti 11) . "'0 t:: lI') en':;: ~ 0 Cd o t,::: ...... 00 Cl) ^ u "'0 --2- ~ c r.n 1-0 c:: = "'C 'C e 0 Cd 0 e 0 ~ ~ rJJ .- 8 :2 (I) - ~ ~ (!) u (1) Vl ..- 11) IJJ to::::" -- S 11) c..4:: ~ c'';::..5oV)~ .g e Cd ~c....., 0 e 2:t5"'C 0,.....; OJ 0 0.. I-. b g. d3 ~ 8.'u gp c....., g 11) rJJ .9 '2 o Cd '";:j 3 Il,) 'C; en e ::l 0 > ...... ~ 2 c:..c.!::.5 "'0 c:: a 00 I;';l ro o ';j c E v)Sl.Iic8.g Ml1)lrl8.=o.. s"'2 g ;:j "'0 ::l o..u 0."'0 ~ "'0 ::l c:: ::S ~ t';I ~ "'0 ...... "'0 Cd ..c Cd IU '0 o:u .0 l1) ..0 rJ'J c:: OZI ll) 00 It) Cd Cd OJ) ~ OJ) .0 en .0 Cd ;:1 Cd rJ'l g IU U'l Vl O"'C bJ) ::l ~ ::I U [J'J ~ ~ Ol.l~ ..... ::l u _ u ~ .~ ~ '5 e ';; aca';:::u-B~ ~~~clJzo c:: 6 ::I 0- ~ ~ ~ o o .c """';NM..,f..n1.Cl N N < 'i'i c ~ "- "- -< . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '" , .... >: - i:l Z "" l'. l'. < ...l o o l'. P<: fol f-< "" ::; OIl .... " i:l P<: < ;;.. OIl", ....Z P<:o 0_ Of-< i:ll'. f-<O ;'" Oz ~Z f-<Z << ::;...l _l'. f-<;;.. "'f-< ""- f-<...l ",- OU U< ",r- "" f-< :3 - f-< ;, ;;.. P<: < Z - ::; - ...l "" P<: l'. o OIl on . _M '" ~r--.~ M~:g 0:' r-- M < - P<: "" f-< t:2 U Z " - '" "" i:l ^ ti ~~Z' '" " '" a~~ ~--;...:..., il ~ .;3 ;g ;...:..., --o..froE " "0 = 5li ~ 0 a- <EE~~ ~ S E S ~ ct "0 .~ ..2 E ::l .- ~ 0 ;::l "'::S::S>f-< ;;"fol ...l" -< <", i:l;, I..'i ;;. < f-< '" o U ...l < ;, Z Z < N~Olr)OO ~f'.!OOOOI.tj 00 000.;0 NOao\OO\ r-"1"~r--O\V~ -.::i 0 ..c; r--~ N f;o'7NOOfoAVt '" '" f-< '" o U ;;.. ...l - < i:l O\r---r--N "'!<"!O\r-...... MOOr---:Nt--- V)"1"NV't f;A Vt N f;A '" "" U t:2 l'. f-< - Z ;, f-< - Z ;, ......V)ooa 0-0001.1') OOONN VtE,AfoAfAVt ~~~~~ c:J~:r:c:Jc:J f-< q~ - 00 on 00 ~MM ;;.. c:r:: o " "" f-< < U ~ >. ,~ ~ v "[) - 1-0 'C e ~ t) .2 " " " :::~Z o~oo ci......N 1l 'C o :;; g", p. .- >. u :r:< E .15 .= .E: '" " a::s '" Q 0; r-- M N .... - '" OIl '" 0; ... '" '" '" ...l < f-< o f-< '" Z o - f-< l'. ::s ;, '" '" < ..... ~ o v .. ~ 0.. " ~ E e: " p. E 1l >. :;;; " " ~ 'a 8 " " e o on on " " '0 ';0 0 e \O-q: Q) "'0__' > ",' " " ..c ~ N ~ ~ r--: " "..... "'" 0 g ~ =c .0 E'nQ.. .1-0 tU "'0 tl 2 '"Cl C C/l t:a 0 ~ 8 00 V '0 ' " 5 a d "2 .~ .o_~ Vl .g 8 :a C/l Ctl QJ () ..9 1-0 rIl " g, <8 ::s .~ 0 V) @:: Ctl ;>"'c..... 0 1-0 .{g 0 . 8.1-0,0- ~ g,'13 ~ Q) C/l .9 '2 e;3~'.E ~ .8.~.~ Ctl 00 c E incoc v;8..g.8. C ;::l "'0 ::l o "'0 ~ "'0 go Q) t';\ l1) "'0 g:j .0 ~ Q) .0 Q) .0 C/l Q) 0I.l Q) ro OJ) Ctl OJJ ~ ~ ~ ~ OJ)::l C/l ;::l ~e;gbe; ~ .g Ctl .~ ~ t) B 5 :::clJzo ~ " d .g ,2 ~ t;; " ~ p. " 0 g.-o ..... u o la ~ " ~2 "'0.5 ~ E M " "", o " p.- " g '" .- '" 15 i(J " .0 ~ ~ '" ~ 0 o '" U .~ "'iJ ~ ,,2;> ~~ ,......;Nr--i~..n>.D "i ..... ~ '6 c " "- "- <<: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... , ..... ><: - Q Z ~ l>. =- ..: ..... o o l>. Z o - ... ..: ~ IX U ~ IX 0.... oz QO ...- ;,'" O~ ~" ...z ..:- ~z _z .....: rJJ..... ~=- ...... rJJ... 0- U= rJJU ~..: E='" - ..... - ... ;, ... IX ..: z - ~ - ..... ~ =- 8~C; ",0'" ,.: 0'" on '" N O' " ..: - IX ~ ... - IX U Z " - rJJ ~ Q ~ " ~;..:..,-=- Cl) Q) Il) ~~~ ::;j-'-"' .. C"..c..c -;;-.. v.I .......""'" s::::::-- -o..froE a100~6E I-; c co-- ..:S"~~ Il,) =' ::s Q) d..l U S S S 1; ~ '8 ';<.2 E ::I ...... c:l 0 :j rJJ~~>'" ...~ ....." -..: ":rJJ Q;, (j > ..: ... rJJ o U ..... ..: ;, z z ..: MO\O'\OV)O'\ v r-:N 0 C"'!r"'l o::rt-o\oV)o r- MVV(".l v '-q,r--oo 0\0\ ")N."f'trlN~ EfiN~O &'7 lA ... rJJ o U ... ..... :< Q lA VNOONM \O~~v<o:t:~ I.f)V NOON ...... \OM 0 VtVt Efi Efi Vt M '" ~ U ;: =- ... - z ~ ... Z ~ - '" '" o cicici lA lA lA ....l::r:::r:::;o....l....l <:s:si>:<< "~~::r:"" ... OO\OON <o::iciooo<o::t '" '" r- v:,o::tN("f') "- "- S S " " =- =- ... IX o " ~ ... ..: U ~ ~ U~ ~ .~.~~ U U _ l-4 '5 '5 e (l) u u ::3 ~22"E :S\.Ll\.LlZ 000 00 0 '" ONN lA '" '" E .;: o :;:: u 0"0 "- .- ;>, u ::r:< E .,g ::s .~ .- ~ "0 " a5::;2 or> ... ...: .... or> ,..; " ... lA 0:> .... or; ..... ... lA rJJ ..... ..: ... o ... N ~ o N o '" " c.. Vi z o - ... =- ~ ~ rJJ rJJ ..: ei --'-z "-,,, s ~ >.. ::s 0. :;;a 0. S ~ t; 2 > 0 ~ ;> 0 ';:j 8 e Q) s::::: >. ~ o '" OJ) OJ)"O " " ~ "0 ..... V 0 ~ ~\O ...: r::: I-< 1-0 "0 " .~ ~]~~ ~ ~ N Q) N U ro...... ~ r..: ~ ~ ~ ~ ';;;' ...::.::: 0: 0 0 ~ ]~~:a "0 l-o 0. 0) "'0 o ~ 2 . "0 C V) Vl ...... e 0 ro ~ ~ ] ~ i .~ 5; {; rfj .9 0 :a CI'.l-Ul1Q~U Il.l 00 ..9 .... C/) ~ Co S " & a:: ..-: a'~'.5oV)~ ..... I-; c:l ~("..,o 0 ro OJ 1-0 "'0 . ~g-8.I-<O- go OJ ~ &'u ~ C+-; is Cl) [J) ..8 '2 o ro ea 3 0 ';; en s::::: ::l 0 > - >. 0 s::::: ..c I-; s:::::: -i3 1:: s::::: 00 .~ ";:j 0';;; c:l c: E V)EV)c8..s::::: r<"l Il,) '-n 0 :J 0 C "'0 C 8- 0.. o::s - "'0 ::s 0.- 8.'0 Il,) "0 ::s g ;::l M ~ M "'0 .- "'0 ro.o ro o:u-v.otU.D en g C/l Q) co 11) c:l ro eJ) ro on .0 Vl .0 (Ij Vl c:l - 0 ll) en ::l U'l 8 ~ g~ ~~ t; 'Vi ~ .2 c:l .2 ~"-~;~~z~ :> ,.!,! '" ..c ;>\.LlZU c: s " 0. ~ E ~ o o ..0 N~..,f"';1..Ci '" N ~ '6 c o 0. 0. 0<( . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - , ~ ,.. ~ .- ~ !'" - ~ - ~ - . . . I . I . I. I. I , . I. ~ '-' ....l o o ~ !:!': f.>l E-< f.>l ~ OIl N " ,. N :.<: Q z f.>l ~ ~ ..: ~ ..: > ;!j"" !:!':z 08 OE-< c::l~ E-<O --c;I Oz , - f.>lZ E-<Z ..:..: ~....l -~ E-<> "'E-< f.>l_ E-<....l ",- OU u": ",r- f.>l E-< - ....l - E-< -- > !:!': ..: Z - ~ - ....l f.>l !:!': ~ oV)~r-v ~ M ~;;;~" ..c 0\ t- '" ..: - !:!': r.l E-< ~ U Z c;I - '" r.l c::l ^ 0) ~^-=- lU ~ Il) ~r2~ ::1--'-";":'" ~..s.s ~ ;..:.. '-'!:l..fro E C';$ IU....... = 0- (l) ~ 1--1 C';$ OJ) -< s E ~':" (l) ::l ;:l lU Q) ~~ .~ g ~ aiE~~~ >r.l ....lc;l -..: ..:'" c::l__ d > ..: E-< '" o U ....l ..: ;:, Z Z ..: ~ "1" 0 lI') 00 \O~ooooV) oci 000\0 NOOO\OO\ r- '<::t" r- O\~ -.:t v"o...or-N' fA N 00 V;) V3- "" "" E-< '" o U > ....l - ..: c::l ......O'\r-r-N ,,"!~o:r-- MOOt-Nr-: ......V)"'1"NV'f V3- V't N V't "" r.l U ~ ~ E-< - Z ;:, E-< - Z -- IF) 0 0 0 ooc:,v: OMf'! "" "" "" o 00 '" '" ~~~~~ O~:r:OO E-< o\Ooo::t:oo ,....;OOO......N onoo_ rr;,MM > !:!': o c;I f.>l E-< ..: U ..g ~ o :a g.", en 0..'0 o"'&''': ._ 0 <.> I-< .g '"@ E '-g (1) U '::j .2 "i:: ~ C1) ~ "'0 ::l ~@Z~~ ~ '" '" t- .., ... N - "" OIl '<> '" ..,. .., "" '" ....l ..: E-< o E-< <i.i z o E:: ~ ~ -- '" '" ..: 00 = d .9: .g e e 8- " 0 god) '- <.> o I; 00 = ;>, " ~ .8 o '" on S '" " ="0 o " ".- " g "0 .- " " i(J = .0 00 - " 00 0 8~ d "c;j " ;>, ="'" = = ..:..: ~ ~ o ~ on ~ 0. oj ~ " ~ ~ " >. ". :;;; S ~ B ~ "; " " <.> " S bh OIl " = .", "51 0 e \0 oq: Q) "'C__" > = ,- '" '" ..s:: kiN ~ -; r-: " " '- -" 0 g ~ ::t .D She.. ~ " .", .0 2 "'tj!:::: <n;;:: 0 C';$ 0","", 00 lU <.> '"d " s::::: C; ~ d ]"g ~ tIl .9 8 :2 ]B~i lI) 0..4:: tl.. _.soV)p.. '" ;>, '- 0 1-0 -t3 0 . 8..1-< 0...... C';$ lU ._ b(l >o.uc 0) ~..9 "2 ~ ::l ~ "s ~ ] .~.~ C';$ ~ c 8 V,coa lrl8.g.8.. s::: ::l "'0 ::l o "t:I ~ "'d go Il) Cl:I cu "'0 ~ .D ~ Il) ,.0 lU ,D U':l lU 00 Il) ro bJ) ro CJ.) ~ ~ ~ ~ OJ) ::l en = ~ d ~t; ;:l u...... u ti 'I: ~ 'E- u " d 11) ~ lU ~@ZO ......;NM~v)"'O .". N ~ '6 c ~ 0- 0- <( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..,. , .... :.< - ~ z fol =- =- < ...l o o =- ... "" - ;;- - "" u < '" Z fol..,. >>::z 50 - - ="" u=- ,0 fol" ""z <- ::;;z -z ""< "'...l fol=- ""... "'"" 0_ U...l ",- I'ilU -< ""~ - ...l - "" ::> ... >>:: < z - ::;; - ...l [:;l =- g~v: o. 0 ..,. o " .".r-- ..,. .... ,-f N < ~ fol "" ~ U Z " - '" fol ~ ""'- " ~;..:..,-=- OJ t) ~ ~~~ ::l -'-".. O"...c:::,..l::l ";;;'.. 00......-0-.. ,-,o..[rOS ~OO:a5E < 8 s ~':" OJ ::I ::l (l..) Q) <..> S .5 s i5 ~ '2 >( .2 E ::l ;,;; ~ .2 ::l ",-"-",,",, ...fol ...l" -< <", ~::> d ;;- < "" '" o U ...l < ::> z z < 1.00\0\0'0:::1"\0 t'fi1.C!V:O~N ",or--oooO r-..: Q',("t')t"-'o:::I"r-'o:::t" N", N -.::::t V o::t..- Nr:o\'...oEAEA V7 EA EA VI "" "" '" o u ... ...l - < ~ \OOOO'\OOVlN V)~ <"!~<<::t \OOM 0 EAN\O\OfA&"':t "" "" "" fol U ~ =- "" Z ::> "" ~ ViViQOO O--ooOVi cddoNN EA Vt EA EA V1 fA ~~~~~~ "~~::c"" f-< a;~I.C!t"-N 0r--__.oo: V)~NO l.O-o::tN ... >>:: o " fol "" < U 0. 0. S S" 0) ::l ~ 'c ~ +-> 0 U rJ'J :2 .!:: g u U CO 8..~ .. .. ~ >. ~ .c co ::c: ....... ...... ..... U I-< .2 .~ ~ E '';:: (l..) ~ ~ ;:; .~ .~ c;~~~]::l :3:.u.uZ",:;E ..,. - ~ r-- o 'Ii r-- '" 00 ..,. <'i OIl .... "" '" ...l < "" o "" M ... o M ~ on ~ "- '" z o - "" =- ::;; ::> '" '" < <Ii ~ AZ 0.:; S 0) ;:>..::l 0... :;;; 0. S 11) .... 11) 0) 00 - ~ 8 'a 8 e Q) c >. ~ o '" OIl OIl"O 0) C ~ "0 ..... OJ 0 ~o.\O I-< ~ "C ~ l1) ;::l C r-..: ?; 0 ~ ~~~~ ce...... ro ,- ~ ~ .... ...:.::: 0:: 0 ~ ~ E ~ ::c: ~ .D;::l6hp. o~~,:-~-g Vi U'J .:: e 0 Cd o lH ..... 00 11) u "C ~ '" ,c '00' S c C "'0 c: C..c t'd 0 C 0 s: ..5 tIl ...... 0 ::c rJl 0 e ~ u llJ rJl _ 0 r.n "<::::" C 6 11) o..d:: ~ c .- ,_=:: 0 Vi Q... 9 ~ ;>, Q... ~ 1u e Cd ~ ~ I-< 0.. o"C >-..""""" lU 0 0.. 1-0 ...... 0.. C:i Cd 8.'0 gp o u;;.. 0 ...... c+-; C 0:0 tI'l.......... C o Cd c; 3 Q) .~ Vl C ;:s 0 > ...... ~ ~ c ..c .!:: .5 "C .5 c 00 Cd ~ Cd C'3 C c ~elf)cg,c M 11) tr) 0 ::l 0 C "'l;j c e- 0.. O::S ... "'0 ::l o..u 8.."'0 ~ '"0 ::l C ;::l ~ Cd M '"0 ...... "'0 Cd ..c ro 0'00.011),.0 Vl C 00 Q.) ~ CIJ Cd ro OJ} Cd I:lD .0 rJ:l ..0 ro ~ Cd ...... llJ 11) rn .... ell o.geo::SVl;:l Uv,~ce~ce _ .00 =' 0 - u ~ >. i) '.5 ~ 's t::ce-;g.311.l q "> - "'"" <c<;>.uzu -;:;: S " 0. ~ B 00 o o .D c .2 :ii 0) ~ <..> ~ NMoo::tlri-..D "f N < '5 ~ ~ 0- 0- <( / i Date: To: October 10, 2006 MEMORANDUM CITY CLERK'S OFFICE From: Mayor and Members of the City Council Chairman and Members of the Park and Recreation Commission Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director ~ Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk Subject: ATTACHED INFORMATION The attached information was referenced by Patricia Carlson at last night's meeting and was given to me to distribute to you. , Page 1 of 1 collisson, .~ From: dan evans [dan_evans@sbess.k12.ca.us] To: Dist-Sups-K12; Dist-Suptssecs-k12 Cc: Subject: SBCSS news release No. 20 Attachmeuts: Seut:Wed 9/27/2006 9:18 AM . CL~ fv-E. Coon- Contact: Phone: Date: Christine McGrew, Dan Evans (909) 386-2413 September 27, 2006 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 0607-020 NEWS RELEASE Parent Symposium on Education Set For Oct. 28 RANCHO CUCAMONGA ( Parents interested in learning more about the education of their children from preschool through high school can attend a symposium on Oct. 28 at Los Osos High School. The registration deadline for the event is Oct. 26, and the cost to attend the symposium is $25, which includes a continental breakfast and lunch. The event will feature two sessions in English and Spanish with 32 workshops and will be held on Oct. 28 from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. Topics of the workshops range from nutrition to literacy and are targeted for parents of students from preschool to those preparing for college. The event is sponsored by Project INSPIRE, the California State PTA and the county offices of education of San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Riverside. Registration can be made online at hJ1R://oms.sbcss.k12,ca.us <hJJp:JLqln,_S:_,_~Qi;::_~s,15t1,-<;;l~S> . For more information, contact Mariaelcna Huizar, coordinator of Project INSPIRE, at the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools office at (909) 386-2696. -- 30-- http://exchangeOllexchangeiioey collisson/lnbox/FW: %20SBCSS%20news%20release%... 9/28/2006 J.SKeuu~W_"""''''''''l!o''''''''''' ''''. "No," I.said, walklng away >rts.kly;/ iTwen'i.y paces lam I stopped, ttned, and wondered what he vas up to. So I walked back and "'""'. George ChristOpher Thomas, 19, told me he was tlshIngfor >eOplewho had come to the ~sAngeles County oMceorthe -egistrar/reOOrderlelerktostart :rusinesses. There are legalre- ::j,u1rements, Thomas said, If you NWit to set up shop in Los An- geles,lnelud1ng t1I1nQ: a ~do1ng business as" fonnand publ1Bh- lnQ:anotlCe ofyourDBAin a newspaper. ~I ean do that for them," the blue-eyed, &8Ildy-ha1I'ed Thomas sald, addlng that he can communicate with cl1ents in ftve languages and set the notice published in the V8Iley Vantage newspaperln Woodland Hills. Five languages? Yes, he said, explain1nlfhoW it came to pass. Thomas was working 88 an aide to Rep. Brad Shennan five years ago when he met aBeverIy H1lls newspaper publiBherwho told h1mh1s pe0- ple skills could earn hlm good money selling legal notices. The pub1isherwas right. At first buslness was great, but tnenseveral compet1torsmoved inon Thomas' territory. That lias led to the occasional nasty battle for ellents on the lawn outside the county omce. He de- cided to get a leg up and protect hls tul'fbylearn1nghoWto at- tract eustomers In many ton- gues. FIrst th1ng Thomas did was drop by a nearby bookstore for phrase books, which he began studying in hl8 spare time on the Job. He also bought a CD-ROM tutortal called "31 Languages of the WOrld. ~ Ifhe'Snot sure about pronunciation, he'll g'o Jnto the county oMce and f1nd an Arme- nian American or Filipino American elerk to practice on. "That's how I've managed to survive out here, - sald Thomas, whO'sgotEngUsh, WeIahand Bwed1sh blood. It's L.A., he said, and the ma: Jortty of people he sees opening buslnesSes through the Van Nuys omce are Latlno or Arme- n1an.HealsoseesalotofFll1pl- nos, Iran1ans and IsraelIS.. . Thomas est1mates that roughly 50 to 70 new DBAs are tlled dally in Van Nuys; not to mention dozens of renewals for existlngbu.sinesSeS. . It'aaslgnofallourlshlng entrepreneurial spirit in LA., es- pecIaIlyslncethere are several . DBA nIlnglocat1ons throughout the county. "It's everybusiness Imagl- nable, "Thomas said. "From pom to churches to everything.- I returned to Van Nuys one day last week to see Thomas, an LA native,in action. Heand two trlendly conipetitors, Julie Hongvarlvatanii (tt'B ThaI) of the Tolucan TImes'and MIke' 8aghian (Jewish, bomlnIran,. ra1aedlnLA)ottheBewrly H1lls Weekly, were in a snit about another competttorwhogets on their nerves at times. -Batan'B Chlld, ~ Baghlan called her, saying she had been messing with the other so11cl- tors'careful]ycrattedturlagree- ments and codes of conduct. She also had Just outnanked him, gmbhlngacl1ent who woJked right past Baghlan whlle he was d1stracted by the Dodg- ~rs plaYOff game on the radio. It does oc.casI.onally get nasty, Thomas agreed. Youcanmake about $50,000 a year at this game (3eeLopez.PageBB] ""ill........., WMO>~'" ~~.~WJ ......".~... -.- -----~-- INSIDE Hollday Closures ..._.__.__...B3 Lottery ___.__.._._._.._...B4 II =~r~~:::-":::~~::=~:'~ I D.C. Man Rises in Al Qaeda 'We need better options to alluw people to gracefully give up their driver's licenses. ' Sandra Rosenbloom, 8 professor at the University of Arizona PbOWJf"lIpmbyALBI:IB!.o,A"lI<luro_ 'I LOVE THIS BUSI' Evelyn Hayes-Nation, 6S, andJooeph Cohen take a demonstration ride on the MTA's Oronge Line through Norlh Holll/1DOod. "I hove no intention of giving up going places now that 1 don't drive, ",he say,,; I They've Got a Ticket t6 Ride I People whose driving days are over are getting special help from transportation agencies. . Perks include workshops, lower fares and expanded services. ByDANWEIKEL n_Sk11fWrlUT Loaded with 40 senior citizens, the ex- press bus traveled from the Jewish FamDy service center in North HoDywood to the nearest subway station and back, part ot a wot1tshop to expla1n bow to use the Los Angeles COunty translt system. The riders, many of whom never bad ridden a city bus, were In their 60s, 70s and aos. Bome wanted to end their long depen- dence on the 8lltomobUe. Others bad lost their driver's licenses or planned to give them up because oflnftrmjtles or tramc ac- ""'..... "I love th1s bus!- said Evelyn Hayes-Na- tion, 65, whose enthusiasm for the Los An- geles CountyMetropolltan Transportation AuthOrlty's demonstration ride was as bright as ber yellow blouse. "I have no in- tention ot gMnQ: up golngpIaces now that I don'tdrtve.- FIgurtng out soutbern cauromia'B pub- lic transit systems Is tough enough for the average commuter. But navtgating the re- gion's complex bus and ran systems can be espec1ally d1ft'Icult for older people. Whlle students in the MTA worttshop have been ponderlIlg how they are going to getaround now that they are getting on in years, a sImllar question bas been trou- bling transit omclals and advocates across the countl':y as baby boomers begin enter- 1ngthe1r60s. Are cash-strapped public transit agen- cies, already struggling to accommodate the elderly, prepared to serve a growing [see Tran.rit, Page B8] 'Azzam the American,' or Adam Gadahn, has moved from translator to propagandist. By Gno KRIKORIAN AND H.G. REZA Timu$tqfJ1I'l1ten Two years ago, no one kne'\1 qultewhat to make of Adam Oa d_ Wb1le many in the U.S.lntelll gence community saw the angr: Muslim convert tram OranS' County as dangerous, plent; of counterterrorism omclal viewed the pudgy 25.year-old a a bIt player on the world stage c J"""""'. Nolonger. Though the young man who has appeared on four AI Qaed: videotapes and now calls b1mseI Azzam the American Is st1ll no deemed part of AI Qaeda's op eratlonal command, recent hl tervlews with counterterrortsn omc1als suggest that OadabJ bas gone from a valuable transla tor to an Invaluable propagaIl dist Cor the lntematlonalterrol lstnetworlt. MIt Is not some masked gu; with a rtne sa,yIng, 'Death t America;. one senior u.s. 1m enforcement oMeial said. "It I an American. And his targe audience Is the U.S.- Oadahn's newfound stature I underscored by a sealed feden Indictment In Los .Angeles thai law enforcement sources say, wi charge hlm witb supporting tel (See Gadahn. Page B14 A First in Study of the Internment By DEBORAH SCHOCH Timu$tqfJWliIer ALTERNATIVE BET OF WHEELS: IsroeIChe8le1",B7,waveshisMetroUner card 4ffer attending an MTA workshop on navigating the Dus and mtlllll'tem.s. Whlle Lane Ryo Hirabayasl W8Il growing up, he heard famll stcirtes or bow his uncle Gordo dened the World War II Interr mentofJapaneseAmerican.s1n case that decades later helpe prompt a hIstorlc congressloru apology. At a UCLA celebration Batw day, Hlrabayasbl took his ow place In Japanese American cu tural history as the first prole! &Or In the nation to bold an aCl: demlc cbaIr dedicated to th study of the internment. "To me, I feel that this Is family obllgatlon,~ the 53-ye8J old anthropologist said. On hand to salute the ne- Aratanl ch81r and Hirabayasl was a large group of promlner. Japanese American scholar: artists and pol1ticai and buS" nessleaders. Bome were former Internee: Some knew Gordon H1n: bayashl, wbo went to prison 1 {See Internment, PageBlS A HIOB PRIORITY: El!enLevineof7'ransUAccm8preparesphotoIDcCJTd8for those attending an MTA wori:8hop on u.rlng publtc trouportotton. L.A. THEN AND NOW Spirited Ghost Town Owners or a mining s1te above the Owens Valley are restorlngit to~arrested decay.",B2 LAW ENFORCEMENT Rescue Dog Practice Teams compete In searching for survivors with their dogs on a man-made debris pile. B3 ONLY IN L.A. Just Awful TV AlocaItelevislonstation's elosed-eaptionlng signs of!' "from awful us. ... MB4 RELIGION Bless the Beasts Ownel'll bring about 70 pets to San Juan capistrano for the an- nual blessing. B6 OBITUARIES Olivia Breitha The writer and activist who ad- vocated for the rights otpeople with leprosy was 90. 812 8 SuNpAY, qCTpBER 8, 2006 IE LOS ANGELES TIMES CALIFOBNlA -low to Travel ~ife's Highway Without a Car 'ransit,jh:ml.Pa.geBl1 'nlor population that often re- J\reS costly spec18lIzed serv- ,,' Over the next quarter or a mtury, the nwnber or people ;re 65 and older wID more than [)uble to 70 million, or 20% or Ie U.S. population. In cali!or- La., the number Is Ilkely to reach million. AbOut one In ftve will e unable to drive. "What are we going to do rhen so many people are retir- 19'r asked _ Anne canby, presi- eot or the Surface Transporta- Ion Policy Project, a think tank 1 Washington, D.C. "Elderly :len live another six years after :Mng up their drtVer's licenses. Vomen live ror 10 years. That is a lig'heno:~ During the White House Con- erence on Aging in December 1005, attendees ranked adequate .ransportation as their thlrd- lighest priority, ahead or SOclal ~ecurtty, Medicare and MedJ- mid "This vote should be a wake- Jp call ror all federa1. state and local omcl8ls,- said Wllllam W. Mlllar,presidentottheAmerIesn Public Transportatlon Assn. .Publlc transportation is a llfe- tlne Cor tens or thousands Or sen- lors.- WIthout ways to get around, national studies show, the health and well-being or senior citizens can decline dramatically It they become removed trom friends, ramlly, cultural events and such vital services as medical care. For such reasons, ~arehers say, some seniors drive longer than they should, presenting safety risks to themselves and others. Fueling the national debate about drtVIng age Iimlts is the current msnsIaugbter trial or GeorgeR Weller, 89, whose auto- mobUe plowed through the santa Monica Fanner's Market ln2003,kIlllnglOpeople. ; "There'salotorevldencethat when you take someone's license away, the downward spiml can occur very quickly,fi said Sandra Rosenbloom, a Untversity ot Ari- zona professor who has studied the tmnsportatlon needs or sen- iors. "We need better options to allow people to gmcetully give up thell" driver's licenses.- Across the country, transit sgenc1es are improving bus and rail service ror senior e1t1zens with boarding ramps, reserved seating tor the disabled,' lower tares, travel escorts and out- reachprogramsl1ke MTA'scIass- ". But bulldlngrIdership among retiring baby boomers could be B. stroggle, transit offtc1sls say. Dozens or studies have shown that older people hold a varle~ ot negative perceptlollll about public transit, many ofthem,tus- """'. TheY often reel buses are dirty, uncomtortable and WlSsfe. Inf'requent service, confusing sehedules and 11mlted routes are also among the problems that ean diSCOurage use ot city and county transportation services. A recent study by AARP Cound that llO% of people older than 65 do not have B. transit stop within a lQ-minute walk or their homes. "It's hard to pull an 6O-year- old lady out or her Lexus and get her to use a bus; said RIchard Sm1th, executive director ot the Partnershlp to Preserve Inde- pendent LlvIng, a social service agency Cor the elderly in River- side County. "We need to break the publ1c perception about mass transit that it is tor the poor and an unattraetlve way to tmveL" What particularly troubles tnmslt planners about current demographle trends is that three out at tour senior c1t1zens in the country will Uve in suburbs or rn. ral areas where there is little or no bus or ran service. In the Bay Area, studies show, the population 65 and older will tncresae 84%, with the greatest growth occurring in suburban counties. Cities with good ran and bus systems - Ban Francisco, Oakland and Berke- ley - will see little,ltany, growth in their senior populations. "This is a natlonallssue," &aid Annette WIlliamS, a San Fran- cisco Metropolitan Transit Agency manager who oversees services Cor the elderly and the disabled. ~The growth In the sen- ior population Is not ooeurrtng where there are transit service.- Transit otnc1als say that pro- vidingserv1ce In the suburbs and seml-nll'8l areas will present tundlng challenges for cash- strapped agencies struggUng to meet current federal mandates. Today, transportation agen- cies are having a hard time pay- Ingtorpsratransitservice, snex- pensive mode or travel for the elderly and disabled required un- der the Americans with Dlsahll. ttiesAct. Paratransit service relies on vans that carry 15 to 20 passen- gers and are equipped with ramps and lifts. Drivers gener- aIJy pick rtders up at their homes. For an extra tee - as much as $2 each way - drivers wlll escort riders trom their door- ways to the vehlele. "It's a good service for me; sa1d Karl Gresowski, 90, ot Santa Ana, a retired Navy commander who is legally blind and uses a 7- tron as a cane. "I can't see well, and the regular bus stops are too tarawayformetowa1kto.~ Transit otrlclals say demands Corparatranslt service are likely , AL6IU.l.o."..,.I..n.... OETTING THERE: Trudy T1uh, left,and Shirley Shustennan checkout a Metro map as they travel by bu&. "Public transportationu a ItfeUne for tens of thousands of senion, "said Wiutam W. Mt1lar, president of the American Public Transportation Asm. Aging population "". _.~,~~ Older Americans are expected to rely more on pubUc transit in the years shead. U.S. Census torecasts show the proportion at CalIfornians over 65 greatly increasing by 2030. IiIiUlle . Female 2000 Census (Inrnlll;on.) 15 12.----~_U------+- 6 3 o 5- 18. 25- 45- 65. 75+ '17 24 44 64 74 ~tI..s.~Bur1=< 2030 projection (Inmilllons) 15----. 12-----.------ 9------ 6. 3. o 5- 18. 25- 45- 65- 75+ 17 24 44 54 74 Loo"opl<.n.... stance, raised the baste one-way parstransit tare 45 cents and re- duced service areas. OCT8s 230vanshandlefewer than 2% of the agency's bus rid- ers but require 13% ot the $2.52. mI1llon annual budget for bus ,.,.-,toe. Every paratransit passenger costs OGI'A about $27 per trip, whlle the one-way tare is $2.25. By compartson, standard bus service costs the agency $2.60 per passenger trip. The one-way tare torsenlors is 50 cents. According to the U.S. Depart- ment at TransportatiOn. re- quests for paratnmstt funds by local agencies are twice as much as the avallableCederal money. '"I! transit s.genctes have to provide new service- tor the eld- erty, Rosenbloom said, ~theywlll have to reduce other servtces. ~ Onewaytomeetfuture~ portation needs might be to combine the advantages or nxed bus routes with the tlexibillty ot paretransttserv1ces. SInce 1995, the Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Comm1ss1on has operated such a service in the VIrgin1a suburbs or Washington, D.C. The system's 3Q.passenger buses can devlate three-fourths or a mile on each slde or their regular routes to pick up and dropon:rIders who reserveserv- ice In advanCe. -The system has good poten- tial for providing serv1ee to an aging population: said Erlc Marx. the transit ageney's direc- tor ofplanntng and operations. Another solution may rest with a growing numberotvolun- teer drtver programs and van servtcesorreredbysoclslservice agencies, churches and commu- nltyorganizations. One or the most successful programs in Southern calU'ornla is admin1Stered by the independ- ent IMng program In RIverside County. Called the TRIP pro- gram. It has about 500 volunteer driver&. who are reimbursed tor mll..... During weekdays and week- ends, senior citlums can ~ the program's coordinators or their drivers to llI1'9J1gefree rldesin and around the county. TRIP serves some of the poorest and hardest.to-reach seniors, including the disabled. Over the IBst 12 years, the pro- gram's clients have increased troml60 to 500 a year. Its budget has grown trom $88,000 to $400,000. One ot the program's. regular riders Is Pearl Hayden-Cronce, - Transit services VarIousreglonaltransit agencies, social service groups, oorrununtty orpnlzations and places ofworshtp provl.de tmnsportatlonrorseniors. For more InCormstlon, contact: Los Angeles County Metropolitan TransporlallonAuthorlty.For Seniors on the Move,l:all (213) 922.2000. The MTA website is www.metro.net. Orange County Transportation Authorily.FortheAccess program. call (B77) 62B-2232. Information is also available on the authority's website at www.octa.net.Click on BusfTrip Planner, then select either Access or Senior Mobility Program. Rlvenlde Transit Apncy. For general information, call (800) BOO-7821.The websiteis www.riversidetransit.com.Click on Transit Links. Details about the TRIP program are available from the Riverside County Office on Aging at(951) 857-3800. Ventura County Transportation Commission. For general information, call (805) 54?-1591 or click on www.goventura.org. 72, of Rubidoux, who gets sround with the help or a blue walker. She has not driven tor more than a decade. "You can go a lot otplaces; it's reliable, and I don't have to wait Cor a bus,- Hayden-cronce ss1d. "I'd have a very hard time wlth- outlt.~ dan.wetkel@lattmea.com to inernasebecau.se some orthe fastest growth in the elderly population is expected wnong those 85 andolder. "The demand tor this type ot service could double as the baby boomers retire,- said Chip Hazen, a paratransit adm1nls- trator tor L.A. County's MTA. "I don't thtnk the money is golngto be there to provide the service. Thatlsmyfear.fi Cost pressures are causing transportation agencies to raise fsres,shiftpsratranslt riders to . regular buses and reduce para- transit service to the min1mum required under federallaw. Last year, the Orange County TransportatlonAuthorIty, for in- It Pays to Learn the Lingoes in This Competitive Business (Lopez,from fuge Bl] It you keep your edge, so the hus- tie never stops. "I'Ve seen about 10 nsttlghts out here over the ~ars. The p0- lice have had to come." ~~al~.~~j_~,d~~_~~ tlt'lcate,orDBA. ~Pam certfficado de naci- miento?- Thomas asked a trio who appeared to be grandma, mom and gnmddaughter. Yes, theyunswered. "It had birth certlt'icatewrlt- ~-- -" ...-.-" ,,.'''----~ -.. me. Which means ~HappyNew Year and MerryChrlstmas,fi In that order, which is how anAr- menian would expect to hear It, according to Thomas. ~It's a tickling phrase, - he ~~,.. ~_._,~,-'_.. ".~+ _.~_.. ~#...~ . /, Should older motorists get behind the wheel? Re "Market Crash Turns Fbem to Driver Tests," Oct. 2 No longer can the people who run AARP be considered to have no ill ef~ fects with their policyrnaking positions. Not to push for mandatory road tests for all licensed drivers based on age is unconscionable. I've been an athlete all my life, still playing a good game of soft- ball at 58. But I would never dream of pitching. One misplaced line dnve to the head or some other body part and you're dead, or you're done for the game or longer. It is the same attitude that muSt be taken with drtving an automo- bile at an advanced age. We must ac- cept it. II I ! I I I I I LARRY DIAZ San Marino As a senior citizen and a driver for 60 years, let me relate to you a few of my observations. The driver I met drivmg eastbound 'on the westbound side of a divided street was a young person. The driver who pulled.out in front afme from a parking lot without looking was a young person. The dnver of a large SUV that ehan'ged lanes three times in one block so he could be first at the red light was a young person. Then there are the ceil- phone moms who just about run over a child in a crosswalk on the way to pick up theirs. ' The older, more experienced drivers were and are better trained and more courteous and respectful of the law. WILMA ROBINSON Manhattan Beach Instead of turning the focus to dnver tests, we need to focus on the, real prob- lem that is causing older adults with impairments to drive: They need trans- portation to get to doctor appoint- ments, the grocery shop or events, It's time we take a hard look at the lack of transportation for older adults in our communities. Unfortunately, senior transportation systems are lacking in most areaS and virtually nonexistent across county lines. The cities of La Verne, San Dimas, Claremont and Po- mona have joined to provide low-cost shared transportation for seniors. More communities need,to help seniors with t:Lansportation. f! I I. 'I I ! I I , I, ii " , i I , CATHERINE BACUS Gerontologist Community Senior Services La Verne