Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-06-23 UPF Agenda & Packet Materials
A.Call to Order - 6:00 PM This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online videoconferencing system. You can join this meeting: Via Video Conference: Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit. Click Join Now to enter the meeting. Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream, channel 190, or attend in- person United States Toll +1 346 248 7799 Access code: 998 3699 7696 B.Disclosures C.Changes to the Agenda D.Public Service Announcements E.Public Comments This is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope of the Urban Parks & Forestry Board. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item but you may only speak once per topic. Please note, the Board cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Board shall speak in a civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please state your name and place of residence in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. General public comments to the Board can be found on their Laserfiche repository page. THE URBAN PARKS & FORESTRY BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA UPF AGENDA Thursday, July 6, 2023 General information about the Urban Parks & Forestry Board can be found in our Laserfiche repository. If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to agenda@bozeman.net or by visiting the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day of the meeting. Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through Video Conference during the appropriate agenda items. As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the City on cable channel 190. For more information please contact Mitch Overton, moverton@bozeman.net 1 F.Action Items F.1 Recommendation to the City Commission of Resolution 5502 Adopting the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan (Continued from June 22, 2023)(Jadin) G.FYI/Discussion H.Adjournment This board generally meets the fourth Thursday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Citizen Advisory Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 406-582-3232 (TDD 406-582- 2301). 2 Memorandum REPORT TO:Urban Parks & Forestry Board FROM:Addi Jadin, Park Planning and Development Manager Mitch Overton, Director of Parks and Recreation SUBJECT:Recommendation to the City Commission of Resolution 5502 Adopting the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan (Continued from June 22, 2023) MEETING DATE:July 6, 2023 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Plan/Report/Study RECOMMENDATION:Recommendation to the City Commission of Resolution 5502 Adopting the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan STRATEGIC PLAN:6.5 Parks, Trails & Open Space: Support the maintenance and expansion of an interconnected system of parks, trails and open spaces. BACKGROUND:BACKGROUND: In early 2021, staff and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB) began the effort to commence the revision of the city's comprehensive plan for parks, recreation and trails. With the creation of the Urban Parks and Forestry Board (UPFB) by the City Commission via Resolution 5328, the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB) was disbanded and UPFB assumed the responsibility to evaluate the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan from drafting through adoption. The existing plan, the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan (PROST), was adopted December 17, 2007. The purpose of the 2021-2022 planning process was to create a new, overarching document that assesses and makes recommendations to provide for sufficient parkland, recreation/aquatics programs, active transportation options and facilities for Bozeman citizens. The plan will also guide the expansion of these essential services as the community grows and changes. The recommendations in the plan are based on an updated review of community needs and priorities and will be used as the basis for revising and creating land use regulations, procedures and criteria for identifying appropriate locations and designs for parks, pathways and related facilities in substantial compliance with the PRAT Plan. While the PRAT Plan was created after robust public engagement, the scope and opportunity for public participation and comment on site-specific development in substantial compliance with the PRAT Plan will be limited only to those 3 impacts or significantly increased impacts that were not previously identified and considered in the adoption, amendment, or update of the PRAT Plan and implementing zoning and subdivision regulations. The plan also makes recommendations regarding the role of the parks, recreation, and active transportation systems in fulfilling the goals of recently adopted and applicable City of Bozeman plans and guiding documents such as the Bozeman Community Plan, Climate Action Plan, the County Triangle Trails Plan, and other professional, industry metrics. Lastly, the plan has recommendations and supporting appendices that will improve the efficacy of the Parks and Recreation Department's tasks including master park plan review, individual park site plan review and recreational programming, cost-recovery and marketing. A Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services for the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan (PRAT Plan) was advertised in March of 2021 and the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Agency Landscape and Planning on July 13, 2021. The First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement was authorized by the City Commission on September 20, 2022 to include city-wide wayfinding for active transportation within the scope of the project. The Second Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement was authorized by the City Commission on May 16, 2023 to allow a revised scope of work to address comments from the Urban Parks and Forestry Board, City Commission and the public that are outside of the initial scope of work but important to the completion of the project and consistent with public engagement thus far. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY: The Public Engagement Plan for the PRAT Plan provided continuous and extensive public notice, review, comment and participation in compliance with the Montana Land Use Planning Act. A variety of methods were used as described in Chapter 2 of the PRAT Plan including online and in-person, formal and informal opportunities for input. Staff and the consultant team attended and planned events in parks, at schools and online to solicit input and gave presentations aimed at audiences of all ages. During the 15-month engagement process, the project team engaged over 900 community members and stakeholders. A statistically valid survey was returned by 401 households exceeding the minimum by over 33%. In addition, the Public Engagement Plan included very specific outreach for groups of people who are systemically marginalized during traditional planning processes; therefore, the plan includes specific direction on eliminating exclusionary practices and reducing barriers to the community health outcomes provided by parks and recreation for people with disabilities, Black, Latino, Indigenous and other people of color. PRAT PLAN DRAFTS AND REVISIONS: 4 The PRAT Plan Work Session Draft was made available to the public via the Engage Bozeman PRAT webpage (engage.bozeman.net/pratplan) on November 23, 2022 with several appendices. On January 12, 2023 the Active Transportation chapter was released along with revised drafts of the Design Manual and the Implementation chapter. Public Comment on prior drafts is now closed. The PRAT Plan Final Draft and Design Manual Final Draft were made available to the public on May 26, 2023. Additional appendices are attached to this agenda item and available via separate links on the Engage Bozeman webpage. The significant changes to the Final Draft made in response to work session comments made by the Advisory Boards, City Commission and the public include the following: Document Simplification and Accessibility Improvements - Format was changed for readability, font and colors were darkened to provide more clarity for people with visual impairments and a full accessibility scan was completed. Clarification and Emphasis of Plan Goals, Actions and Priorities - The PRAT Plan's 5 Goals have been renamed to emphasize and more specifically name the community assets they are aimed at and to include action-oriented language that can be championed over the lifetime of the Plan. A summary of the Goals, Strategies and Actions was added at the beginning of the document and all of the actions were ranked from high to low priority in the Implementation Chapter. Additionally, the high priority investments for facilities and programs that were identified in the statistically valid survey are added into the Implementation Chapter. Additional analysis of Board Member, City Commission and public comments received during the work sessions is attached. Items were incorporated if they align with the public engagement vision and the scope of work as expanded with PSA Amendment 2. Other items that align with public engagement but are outside of a reasonable scope of work adjustment were referred to future City projects or work plan items. ADOPTION: The UPFB will forward their recommendation of the PRAT Plan to the City Commission for final adoption. With the adoption of the PRAT, the City Commission will also be asked to formally adopt the Gallatin County Triangle Trails Plan as described in the Resolution. The Design Manual will be adopted initially by the City Commission with the PRAT Plan and the authority to make amendments is thereafter granted to the City Manager. The Wayfinding Plan will be included as the first amendment to the Design Manual when it is complete. Due to changes to the Montana Land Use Planning Act in Senate Bill 382, the 5 pg. 7 Delete "This means that all precipitation flows away from the city." pg. 31 Change the description of Bozeman's park system as compared to Boulder's pg. 36 Simplify 2 paragraphs describing how recreational programs reflect or do not reflect the age demographics pg. 39 and 26 Math errors related to trail miles pg. 40 Change to statement about east-west corridors Community Development Board (planning commission) will also review the PRAT Plan, an issue plan, for compliance with the Bozeman Community Plan 2022 (land use plan) and forward a recommendation to the City Commission. The Community Development Board hearing will be held in- person on July 3, 2023 at 6:00 pm in the City Hall City Commission Room, 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715 and on an online video conferencing system. The UPFB began their review of the final draft on June 22, 2023 and continued the discussion to July 6, 2023 at 6:00 pm in the City Hall City Commission Room, 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715 and on an online video conferencing system. The following table provides a summary of amendments from the June 22nd meeting: Final adoption of the PRAT Plan by the City Commission is scheduled for July 25, 2023 at 6:00 pm in the City Hall City Commission Room, 121. N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715 and on an online video conferencing system. Please see the official City calendar (https://www.bozeman.net/departments/city-commission/advisory- boards/calendar) to confirm meeting dates and times and to view the agendas. To submit public comment on the PRAT Plan Final Draft, please email agenda@bozeman.net or you may submit oral testimony during public meetings as described in the meeting agendas. RESOLUTION 5502: Resolution 5502 contains key findings related to the adoption of the PRAT Plan by the City Commission. Edits to the Resolution were made since the UPFB meeting on June 22 to clarify how it is compliant with the new Montana Land Use Planning Act. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:N/A 6 ALTERNATIVES:N/A FISCAL EFFECTS:N/A Attachments: PRAT-Plan_Resolution-5502_Revised.docx PRAT-Plan_Resolution-5502_Clean-copy.docx PRAT-Plan_Final-Draft.pdf Appendix_1.1-Survey_Report.pdf Appendix_1.2-Survey_Crosstabs.pdf Appendix_2-Design_Manual.pdf Appendix_3-Public_Engagement_Record.pdf Appendix_4-Marketing_Assessment.pdf Appendix_5-Parks_Inventory.pdf Appendix_6-Recreation_Assessment.pdf Appendix 7_Triangle-Trails-Plan.pdf Work-Session-Analysis,Recommendations,Revisions.pdf Report compiled on: January 19, 2023 7 Version February 2023 RESOLUTION 5502 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ADOPTING THE PARKS, RECREATION AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND REPEALING ALL PRIOR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS FOR PARKS AND RECREATION WHEREAS,the City of Bozeman has had a plan for parks and recreation since 1975; and WHEREAS,the City of Bozeman adopted the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan on December 17, 2007 via Resolution 4087; and WHEREAS, Section 8 of the Montana Land Use Planning Act, M.C.A.allows for the periodic update of the issue plan; and WHEREAS,the City Commission created the Urban Parks and Forestry Board through recreation from drafting through adoption; and WHEREAS,beginning in 2021, the City contracted with Agency Landscape and Planning to assist in collection of data, projection of trends and preparation of the update to the comprehensive plan for parks and recreation; and WHEREAS,beginning in 2021, the City began extensive outreach and communication with the community soliciting input and comment on the update to the parks and recreation plan; and WHEREAS,the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan (PRAT Plan) includes a design manual that is intended to be amended more frequently than the comprehensive plan for parks and recreation in order to advance the ideas of the PRAT Plan and to facilitate the development of parkland within the City; and WHEREAS,the Active Transportation components of the PRAT Plan including text and a map were created to coordinate with the Gallatin County Triangle Trails Plan; and 8 Version February 2023 WHEREAS,the Urban Parks and Forestry Board conducted a public meeting on the draft document on June 22, 2023 and continued the agenda item to a special meeting on July 6, 2023 and provided opportunity for public comment; the Community Development Board held a public hearing on July 3, 2023; and the City Commission held a public hearing on July 25, 2023; and WHEREAS,the Urban Parks and Forestry Board and the Community Development Board have transmitted their recommendation and a draft document to the City Commission through this Resolution; and WHEREAS,the City Commission conducted a public hearing on the draft document on July 25, 2023; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, to wit: Section 1 The City Commission approves Resolution 5133 adopting the attached Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan as the comprehensive plan for parks and recreation including Appendix 7 Gallatin County Triangle Trails Plan. Section 2 The comprehensive plan for parks and recreation adopted by Resolution 4087 is hereby repealed. Section 3 The Design Manual, Appendix 2 of the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan, shall be amended periodically through Administrative Action of the City Manager. Section 4 9 Version February 2023 Having provided extensive and continuous opportunity for notice, review, comment, and participation in the development of this plan, the scope of and opportunity for public participation and comment on site-specific development in substantial compliance with this issue plan must be limited only to those impacts or significantly increased impacts that were not previously identified and considered in the adoption, amendment, or update of the issue plan and implementing regulations. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the _____ day of ___________________, 20____. ___________________________________ CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 10 Version February 2023 RESOLUTION 5502 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ADOPTING THE PARKS, RECREATION AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND REPEALING ALL PRIOR COMPREHENSIVE PLANS FOR PARKS AND RECREATION WHEREAS,the City of Bozeman has had a plan for parks and recreation since 1975; and WHEREAS,the City of Bozeman adopted the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan on December 17, 2007 via Resolution 4087; and WHEREAS, Section 8 of the Montana Land Use Planning Act, M.C.A.allows for the periodic update of the issue plan; and WHEREAS,the City Commission created the Urban Parks and Forestry Board through recreation from drafting through adoption; and WHEREAS,beginning in 2021, the City contracted with Agency Landscape and Planning to assist in collection of data, projection of trends and preparation of the update to the comprehensive plan for parks and recreation; and WHEREAS,beginning in 2021, the City began extensive outreach and communication with the community soliciting input and comment on the update to the parks and recreation plan; and WHEREAS,the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan (PRAT Plan) includes a design manual that is intended to be amended more frequently than the comprehensive plan for parks and recreation in order to advance the ideas of the PRAT Plan and to facilitate the development of parkland within the City; and WHEREAS,the Active Transportation components of the PRAT Plan including text and a map were created to coordinate with the Gallatin County Triangle Trails Plan; and 11 Version February 2023 WHEREAS,the Urban Parks and Forestry Board conducted a public meeting on the draft document on June 22, 2023 and continued the agenda item to a special meeting on July 6, 2023 and provided opportunity for public comment; the Community Development Board held a public hearing on July 3, 2023; and the City Commission held a public hearing on July 25, 2023; and WHEREAS,the Urban Parks and Forestry Board and the Community Development Board have transmitted their recommendation and a draft document to the City Commission through this Resolution; and WHEREAS,the City Commission conducted a public hearing on the draft document on July 25, 2023; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, to wit: Section 1 The City Commission approves Resolution 5133 adopting the attached Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan as the comprehensive plan for parks and recreation including Appendix 7 Gallatin County Triangle Trails Plan. Section 2 The comprehensive plan for parks and recreation adopted by Resolution 4087 is hereby repealed. Section 3 The Design Manual, Appendix 2 of the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan, shall be amended periodically through Administrative Action of the City Manager. Section 4 12 Version February 2023 Having provided extensive and continuous opportunity for notice, review, comment, and participation in the development of this plan, the scope of and opportunity for public participation and comment on site-specific development in substantial compliance with this issue plan must be limited only to those impacts or significantly increased impacts that were not previously identified and considered in the adoption, amendment, or update of the issue plan and implementing regulations. PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the _____ day of ___________________, 20____. ___________________________________ CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 13 City of bozeman 2023 COMPREHENSIVE PARKS, RECREATION, AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Report DRAFT June 2023 14 Acknowledgments Urban Parks and Forestry Board Angie Kociolek, Chair Dan Fenn I-Ho Pomeroy, Commissioner Liaison Alice Stanley Donald Ulrich Reno Walsh Anna Wearn Department of Parks and Recreation Mitch Overton, Director Addi Jadin, Parks Planner and Development Manager Candace Mastel, Transportation Demand Management Coordinator Jamie Saitta, Recreation Program Manager City Commission Cyndy Andrus, Mayor Terry Cunningham, Deputy Mayor I-Ho Pomeroy, Commissioner Jennifer Madgic, Commissioner Christopher Coburn, Commissioner Safe Routes to Parks Liaisons Bri Daniels Luis Islas Mikayla Pitts Agency Landscape + Planning | Sanderson Stewart | Berry Dunn | Alta Planning | Groundprint | ETC Institute 15 Contents plan summary introduction plan process state of the system Bozeman Prat Vision goal 1: welcoming, equitable access goal 2: programs, places, and partnerships goal 3: pedestrian and bicycle facilities goal 4: natural resources goal 5: staff and capacity How do we get there? Implementation Active transportation implementation priorities (investments, programs, actions) Appendices Community Survey, Design manual, engagement, market ing assessment, parks inventory, recreation assessment 04 06 16 24 48 50 68 80 104 112 120 121 123 132 16 plan summary The plan identifes a vision and realistic, actionable goals for the City’s most valued places – its parks, trails, and recreation facilities. # GOALS What the PRAT plan aims to achieve Strategies The methods to make each goal a reality Actions Each Strategy includes a list of actionable items, found in the PRAT Vision Chapter, page 48. See page 50 to learn more about the plan’s 21 Equitable Access actions 1.1 Create a consistent set of basic elements across neighborhoods. 1.2 Maintain the current level of parkland per resident (17 acres per 1000) by growing park acres as the community grows. 1.3 Balance the needs of different park users. 1.4 Support all-season recreation. 1.5 Increase safe evening / night time access at designated facilities with appropriate lighting, management, and programming. 1.6 Design parks that refect their unique neighborhoods and refect the Department’s brand. 1 2 2.1 Invest in distributed community recreation hubs across the City. 2.2 Create program offerings and elements that respond to community needs, especially for underserved demographic groups. 2.3 Craft a formal policy to defne partner and affliate group relationships. 2.4 Clarify the feld reservation and use process. 2.5 Broaden awareness of programs and services. 2.6 Work with regional tourism and economic development organizations to create a tourism strategy that addresses the benefts and impacts of increased tourism on parks, facilities, and events. 2.7 Gather program data and track program participation annually. 2.8 Grow program partnerships in areas that are complementary to Department offerings. See page 68 to learn more about the plan’s 24 Programs, Places, and Partnerships actions Build on Bozeman’s unique strengths while creating WELCOMING, EQUITABLE ACCESS to all spaces and programs. Strengthen PROGRAMS, PLACES, AND PARTNERSHIPS to meet changing community needs. 4 17 5 HOW DO WE GET THERE? Parks Implementation Guidance Active Transportation Implementation Guidance Design and Maintenance Manual 3.1 Invest in a city-wide active transportation network. 3.2 Identify + develop a network of anchor routes that serve as key travel corridors. 3.3 Close existing gaps in the pedestrian + bicycle network. 3.4 Improve east-west connections. 3.5 Improve crossings that act as major barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists. 3.6 Implement a comprehensive wayfnding system. 3.7 Install path improvements along active transportation routes. 3.8 Leverage Bozeman’s linear parks and watercourses as part of the active transportation network. 3.9 Ensure inclusive and equitable access to and within parks. 3.10 Revise the active transportation network classifcations and comprehensive design and maintenance standards. 4.1 Create design standards and management practices appropriate to each landscape type. 4.2 Promote sustainable trail and park use. 4.3 Promote the protection and enhancement of intact, contiguous natural resource areas or sensitive lands. 4.4 Expand nature play and programming. 4.5 Implement low-impact design and management practices in park and facility capital projects. 4.6 Scale Department capacity to provide knowledgeable natural resources evaluation during the planning process for future facilities investments and management of natural areas. 5.1 Attract and retain staff to effectively support the needs of Bozeman’s parks, programs, and trails. 5.2 Continue to refne and communicate the Bozeman Parks and Trails Special District. 5.3 Develop a philosophy and policies for cost recovery and revenue generation. 3 Connect Bozeman’s community with safe and enjoyable PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES. 4 5 Steward and sustain NATURAL RESOURCES across the parks and trails system. Grow STAFF AND CAPACITY to benefit the community. See page 104 to learn more about the plan’s 12 Natural Resources actions See page 112 to learn more about the plan’s 10 Staff and Capacity actions See page 80 to learn more about the plan’s 24 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities actions 18 6 1. introduction in this chapter A unique natural setting a fast-growing micropolitan city history of the park system From prost to prat relationships to past plans previous prost plan transportation planning (TMP) alignment with udc process 19 Nested in the Rocky Mountains of Montana, Bozeman, a city of nearly 50,000 people as of the 2020 Census, is one of the fastest growing micropolitan areas in the country. The city includes a vibrant historic downtown, is home to Montana State University, and serves as a gateway to the wonders of Yellowstone National Park and other natural areas. In addition, the city boasts its own recreational elements, programs, facilities, parks and trails, all of which contribute to the vision embodied by the City’s slogan: “The Most Livable Place”. In fact, its high quality of life, vibrant cultural elements, access to nature, and recreational opportunities attract new residents at a rate that is putting Bozeman on the trajectory of becoming Montana’s third largest city by 2025. A unique natural setting Bozeman is situated within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, which is the largest intact ecosystem in the continental United States. It is at the foothills of many environmentally sensitive areas, with the Bridger Mountains to the northeast and Gallatin National Forest to the south. Primary rivers in the Bozeman area include the Gallatin, Madison, Missouri, Yellowstone and Jefferson. A 90 mile drive southeast of the city center takes one to Yellowstone National Park. Established in 1872 as the country’s frst national park, Yellowstone attracts an average of 4 million visitors annually, many of which use Bozeman as their home base to access the Park. The Park serves as an important sanctuary for the largest concentration of wildlife in the lower 48 states, which includes elk, bison, grizzly bears, and nearly 300 bird species. Directly south of city limits is the 1.8-million acre Gallatin National Forest which is home to federally listed threatened species: the grizzly bear and the Canada Lynx. Bozeman’s location near these ecological sanctuaries cements the importance of local efforts to co-exist with nature. Bozeman is one of the fastest growing cities of its size in the nation. Bozeman is at a unique hydrological setting: the city is situated at the headwaters of the drainage of the Missouri River Basin. This means that all precipitation fows away from the city. Numerous rivers, streams and irrigation canals transverse Bozeman, mostly in a north-south direction. These rivers, creeks and streams host different habitats, scenic views, and a diverse population. Due to their excellent recreational value, these water bodies have greatly infuenced the location of parks, open spaces, and trails. A fast-growing micropolitan city Bozeman is one of the fastest growing cities of its size in the nation: the population has grown by 43% in the past decade. Cities that are experiencing similar trends or challenges as Bozeman, known as “peer cities” include Fort Collins, Missoula, and Helena. In contrast, these cities have grown by 20% or less in the past decade, with the exception of Bend, OR which has grown by 29%. Bozeman and the greater Bozeman area are projected to keep growing at an annual rate of about 3% to reach more than 200,000 people by 2040. According to the 2019 City of Bozeman Community Housing Needs Assessment, as of 2017 27% of owner households were single-occupant, compared to 37% of renters households. A majority (41%) of owned households were 2-persons. There is also a high percentage of roommate occupancy, contribution to a large percentage of over 3-persons households (33% for owners and 29% for renters). Bozeman’s population is young compared to the rest of the state, with the city’s median age at 27.4 years 7 20 Figure 1.1 Rec Mobile Program old, compared to 40.1 years old statewide. Given its younger population, and the presence of Montana State University, most of the population is single with 64% of residents fling as such, almost twice as much as the state’s average. The city is not as diverse as its peer cities used for comparison in this plan, with 92.1% of the population identifying as white. During and following the Covid-19 pandemic, many people relocated to Bozeman from urban areas across the country in search of more space, access to recreation and proximity to nature, making Bozeman an ideal place. While growth is bringing opportunities for investment, its rapid pace puts pressure on the natural system and recreation areas. The timing of this update highlights the need for a proactive planning approach to maintain Bozeman’s high access and use of park spaces and recreation services. History of the park system In May of 1883, the same year Bozeman became an offcial town, the City added a street grid of 52 blocks south and west of city limits. Investors set aside two blocks as a public park. The park was named Cooper Park, after one of the investors, and was a popular spot for picnics in the summer. Other early parks include Southside Park, Lindley Park and Bogert Park, which were added to the park system in the 1920’s. The land of what is now Bogert Park (originally Bogert Grove Park) was originally purchased by the City as a tourist park following its past use as a favorite overnight camping location during community events like the Bozeman Roundup. Following the purchase, the park quickly became a popular spot for locals to picnic and host Boy Scout gatherings. Recreation programs began the same decade when Eva Pack became the City’s frst playground supervisor at Beall Park in 1929. She worked at the park during the summer months and served as 8 21 Athletic Director for Montana State College during the school year. Early recreational programs at Beall park included playgrounds, tennis, picnic grounds, a bandstand for music in the summer and an ice skating rink in the winter. In the 1950’s, the City planned for a park and recreation department with a professional recreation director and a park maintenance crew. The 1958 City Plan listed a variety of seasonal activities, including swimming, baseball, and special activities during summer months, and ice skating, sledding, and dancing in the winter. In the 1960’s, community service groups and the City Recreation Board began promoting the idea of a new indoor-outdoor swimming pool. Support for the idea was plentiful but costs escalated, inhibiting the proposal until a bond passed in 1974. The Bozeman Swim Center opened to the public in 1975. The center closed temporarily in May 2022 to make necessary repairs to the building’s structure. These repairs wrapped up at the end of 2022. As of 2022, the city’s system includes over 1,000 acres of parkland and 79 miles of natural trails. Residents have the option to participate in a vast variety of seasonal recreational programming, including art classes, nature-based activities, athletic offerings, ice skating, sledding, volleyball, and various indoor classes. Figure 1.2 Bird’s eye view of the city of Bozeman, Gallatin County with approximate boundary of its historic core. Figure 1.3 Cooper Park, the City’s frst public park. Figure 1.4 Bogert Park is an early addition to the City’s park system but still serves as a hub today hosting community events. 9 22 Valley Center Ln Baxter Ln Oak St Durston Huffine Ln Planning Area Valley Center Ln Baxter Ln Oak St Durston Huffine Ln From PROST to PRAT Bozeman, like many other peer cities, is grappling with fast population growth, a changing climate with warmer winters and drier summers, and a higher risk of environmental disasters. The City aims to assess and plan to address these issues while recognizing the importance of racial equity, inclusion and environmental sustainability within its parks, trails, and recreation centers and programs. This document is part of its mission to continue its high standard for quality of life through a safe, welcoming and connected parks and trails system. The City’s most current plan is the 2007 Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails (“PROST”) Plan which has guided the creation of numerous trails and has helped elevate the role of parks, recreation programs, and facilities in maintaining the City’s quality of life. However, as Bozeman’s population continues to grow and diversify, the City’s parks and recreational facilities will face more pressure from increased usage. The City and its residents want to ensure that it maintains the quality elements, natural resources, and recreational opportunities that continue to draw people in. Bozeman’s parks, open spaces, and trails are important in realizing this vision. This plan also brings an active transportation emphasis into the world of parks, recreation, and open space, including the full network of trails from gravel paths to on-street bicycle facilities. This shift recognizes the community’s shifting values around transportation and recreation, and the need to create greater connectivity between park assets and places Trails Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Open Space Future Parks 10 23 11 I-9I-900 ee ee Ave vverell Av A Aver Ave ee Aehwh Av Av Av Aveewtthhddoo99trtrousousFF117733RRDowntown MMaaiinn St St Bozeman II-9-900 MSU KaKaggyy B Bllvdvd Rd Rd dd oooo Ln Ln nwnwee e ee SSoereeroltl Av Avououttwwhh Avt Av Av Avrrtthoohddddoo99ttrrCCFF117733ouougghh Rd Rd Growth Boundary N0 0.5 1 mile Figure 1.5 The planning area and its context 24 12 Figure 1.7 Main Street and Downtown Bozeman across the city. In 2012, voters approved a $15 million Trails, Open Space and Parks (TOP) bond program which has so far increased parkland by 145 acres and added 3 miles of trails. Additionally, in 2020, at the outset of the COVID pandemic, residents voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Parks and Trails District to address park and trails maintenance in the City. This document frst aims to understand and inventory the existing system of parks, recreation and active transportation. This assessment informs a set of recommendations to enhance current elements for all Bozeman citizens, as well as guide the future expansion and evolution of the system to meet the needs of a growing and changing community. Note: At the direction of the PROST, Resolution 4784 was created to establish the criteria for evaluation of requests for use of cash in lieu of parkland dedication. Relationships to Other Planning Efforts/Projects Previous PROST Plan Adopted December 17, 2007, the City of Bozeman’s current Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails (“PROST”) Plan provides a framework for integrating existing facilities and programs, while further developing a system of parks, recreation facilities and programs, open spaces, and trails. The plan also helped to establish City policies and infuenced the evaluation of development proposals that impact this system. Finally, it provided a basis for grant application, regulatory requirements, and other funding mechanisms for parkland expansion. Following an assessment of Bozeman’s recreational facilities and trends at the time, the plan identifed What is the Parks and Trails District? In 2020, residents voted to create a parks and trails district. This district provides a dedicated source of funding for maintaining and improving our City’s parks and trails. One of the key components of the District is authorization for the City to annually levy assessments to provide for maintenance of all City- owned or managed parks and trails. This means that every penny that goes into the Parks & Trails District will be spent on parks and trails in the Bozeman community. It also ensures that the these publicly accessible spaces are maintained consistently across the City. 25 2007 2017 PROST Plan Population 2022 ~50,000 people Population 2010 37,280 Transportation Master Plan PRAT Plan! Figure 1.8 Current documents that are informing PRAT Plan. The PROST plan was used by the city starting in 2005 but formally adopted with the 2008 version of the transportation plan. issues and needs for the City of Bozeman’s Recreation Division as (1) increasing the quality and/or quantity of local swimming facilities, (2) enhancing local recreation facilities for youth, (3) developing two new family-oriented leisure aquatic centers, one southwest and one northwest of town, (4) developing a community recreation facility with an indoor- outdoor aquatic component connected to a large community park, (5) offering programs that provide multi-generational recreational activities, fosters healthy family relationships, develops character and team building programs, educates. Through community surveys, the PROST plan identifed trails as the most used recreational facility in the City. The PROST plan was successful in ensuring new private development and city growth contributed to new open space and trail creation. Transportation Master Plan (TMP) Upgrades to the City’s transportation system following the PROST Plan and the community’s increasing interest in transportation-related matters called for a comprehensive transportation master plan to help direct future growth through innovative planning. The Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP) aimed to provide a new examination of multi- modal transportation issues within the Bozeman area and address the present and future needs of the community. Since the release of the document, the City’s paved pathway network has been expanding. However, although the PROST plan also highlighted the importance of a connected trail system, the two documents are not always in sync. The objectives of the PROST plan sometimes differ from the TMP, complicating the implementation of both the TMP and PROST, further exacerbated by the fact that the two documents are funded and managed by two separate departments. 13 26 14 the PROST plan identified trails as the most used recreational facility in the City. Since the release of the TMP, the City’s paved pathway network and on-street bicycle lanes have been expanding. Alignment with UDC Process The Unifed Development Code or UDC is a set of regulations that support public health, safety and general welfare related to physical city growth, use of property and development. Found within Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, the UDC covers a wide range of subdivision and zoning topics such as setbacks, building height, allowed uses, landscaping, affordable housing and parking. Some regulations apply city-wide while others are specifc to different city districts. In terms of parks, the UDC (in compliance with state law) sets the calculations for minimum park area (and/or cash in lieu) requirements for new residential development as well as minimal design requirements such as frontage, irrigation and sidewalks. The UDC also addresses other related factors such as trails and pathways and watercourse setbacks. Rules related to park and facility usage are addressed in a separate chapter (Chapter 26) of the Bozeman Municipal Code. The City is at the beginning stages of a UDC overhaul. Upon completion of the overhaul, it will be important to make changes to refect the vision of the PRAT Plan. See UDC Revision Appendix. 27 Figure 1.9 Bicycle tour through City parks to kick off the PRAT process Figure 1.10 Many residents commute to work by bicycle everyday and share the road with cars. 15 28 16 timeline and milestones engagement approach and outcomes methods and milestones engagement key findings r te chapish tni2. plan process 29 Timeline and milestones The development of the PRAT Plan was a 15-month process, beginning in the Summer of 2021 and concluding in the Winter of 2022. The planning process was framed largely around signifcant engagement efforts to ensure the desires of the community and Department staff were accurately refected in the plan’s recommendations. Plan development was also shepherded by the Urban Parks and Forestry Board (UPFB). The plan process was structured around four phases: Phase 1: Analysis: The frst phase encompassed the discovery and understanding of Bozeman’s unique recreation and parks system, its organization, and its provision of programs. It included a high level review of park types and distribution of parks and Project Schedule 2021 2022 trails across the city, in depth study of historical and ecological systems, a needs assessment, and a statistically valid community survey. Phase 2: Vision & Concepts: During this portion of the project’s development, system-wide concepts and plan themes were developed and tested through public and staff review and comment. Phase 3: Draft Plan: The third phase of the process included establishing guiding goals and objectives, as well as an implementation strategy. A review of trail connectivity, investments and maintenance was also conducted. Phase 4: Final PRAT Plan: The fnal stage of the project included documentation, review, and approvals. This phase resulted in this document and supporting design and maintenance manuals. 1 Understand Analysis + Assessment Engagement Milestone #3 August 23-25 Park Pop-ups 2 3 Begin! Project Startup Engagement Milestone #1 4 Deliver Documentation Vision Craft a Framework JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT Engagement Milestone #2: April 5 and 6 Virtual Public Workshops Figure 2.1 Plan process and schedule. 17 30 18 Engagementapproach and outcomes During the 15-month long planning process, the project team engaged over 900 community members and stakeholders. The City’s parks, facilities, and programs are all beloved, and the master plan process was structured to ensure that all park users and communities were invited and had the chance to weigh in on the future of this important recreational and open space system. Methods and Milestones Much of the plan’s development occurred during uncertainty in the COVID pandemic and encouraged the City to think creatively about meeting residents where they were and through diverse means of communication and engagement. To ensure people felt safe and included in their participation, the plan included both online and in-person engagement methods, like online workshops, pop-up events in parks and events, partnerships with other city initiatives and outreach methods, and both statistically valid and community surveys with opportunities for residents to give feedback on preliminary plan recommendations. 31 In-person Engagement Drop-in at local events: Tabling at existing events like farmers markets and City-sponsored festivals can help to reach residents unaware of the plan process and ask quick questions about needs and aspirations for the future of the park, trail and recreation system. Early on, the City identifed a series of events to participate in and destinations to visit to help build awareness of the plan process and goals and to gather feedback using questions relevant to what was being explored by the process at that time. For events happening in 2021, this meant asking about favorite parks and barriers to access using a map and mad libs exercise, in which residents responded to an incomplete sentence with responses about their recreation experiences. In the Spring of 2022, engagement at existing events focused on resident visions and big ideas for future projects or policies. Ultimately, the PRAT plan was represented at over 20 events throughout the city. Online Engagement Project Web Content: Regular content updates were made to the City’s website, which serves as an increasingly popular resource for information and updates regarding city-led projects. Alongside the City’s project page on the City’s website, the PRAT Plan was the frst comprehensive plan to take advantage of a new digital platform, Engage. Bozeman.net, a Bang the Table platform. The project team shared regular project updates to the PRAT plan and served as a space for online conversations between city staff and residents. This platform was also used to share content online at milestone moments and in between. The site pulled 159 unique visits over the year that the platform was publicly accessible. Social Media: Ahead of major public milestones, the City posted visual graphics and imagery to promote the plan, promote public events, and gather reactions to early ideas on existing City social media platforms. Certain advertisements were translated into Spanish and were also posted on the City’s website, which offers Google Translate services. Statistically Valid Survey: A statistically valid paper survey was mailed to 2,500 residents across the City of Bozeman. This tool provided an important data set that represented a user group with similar demographic characteristics to the City as a whole and offered a balanced resident perspective across the City. Final results were based on 300 total surveys providing a 95% confdence level. The City also made this community survey available online to residents who had not participated in the statistically valid survey. An additional 100 people shared their existing patterns and needs for the City system. 19 32 Community Workshops: Due to ongoing COVID restrictions during the plan’s development, the project team made the decision to hold community workshops online, halfway through the plan process. These workshops included a short presentation and small group conversations that used the Engage Bozeman platform to help facilitate conversations and map or catalog participant ideas. The community workshops were recorded and posted on Engage Bozeman for anyone interested in participating but unable to attend during the early April meetings. At the end of each engagement milestone, engagement feedback was synthesized and shared with them in an easily digestible and clear format that can be shared on multiple digital platforms, both internally and with the broader community. Alignment with Other City Initiatives Safe Routes to Parks: The project team also worked in parallel with the Safe Routes to Parks grant team to ensure the PRAT plan helps to reduce barriers to accessing parks and facilities. This grant was awarded to the Human Resource Development council, District IX (HRDC) in partnership with the Western Transportation Institute (WTI) at Montana State University and the City of Bozeman to create and test a community liaison program to highlight systematically excluded voices. The plan worked alongside three community liaisons who are connected to different underrepresented communities including the BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color), LatinX and Figure 2.2 HRDC Safe Routes to Parks Community liaisons 2200 33 2121 disability communities. The liaisons tested a variety of tools such as targeted surveys, hosting small group conversations, organizing a walk audit, and collecting stories through one-on-one interviews. Staff and Stakeholder Engagement Staff engagement was essential to the success and implementation of the plan. In October, as part of the project’s kick-off, staff and stakeholders participated in a series of topical focus groups to learn about the system through the eyes of staff, partners, and city leaders. These representatives were reengaged as part of the plan vision process in June 2022 and again to help identify implementation priorities in August 2022. Engagement Key Findings Through the engagement process, the plan uncovered that the City’s parks and trails provide an important oasis in the fastest growing city in Montana. Bozeman residents clearly value opportunities to connect with nature and to safely access walking and biking trails. Residents also want their parks and facilities to be inclusive places where they feel welcomed by other park users, staff, and by the design of these places and the programs within them. Residents were also aligned in their desires for special use facilities, more specifcally swimming pools. Though these values are not explicitly contradictory, they span many topics, so the planning process was oriented toward fnding the right balance of investments, whether they be in policy, Department capacity, or capital improvements. The top responses from the public engagement process were related to desires for inclusion, relevant programs and elements, safe access, nature immersion, trail connectivity, special use facilities, and park etiquette. These seven engagement themes provide an important framework for the goals and strategies outlined within this plan. Engagementby numbers (Participation and Methods) 401 78 2 401 community surveys (300 statistically valid) 24 disability community Surveys 12 BIPOC surveys 78 locations mapped 45 ideas shared 1 online implementation poll 4,537 unique site visits 2 online community meetings 15 meetings with city, boards, and councils 24 pop-ups at events and in parks 34 Inclusion Many residents reported feeling uncomfortable or unsafe in their parks. Efforts to enhance physical access, lead program inclusion, and expand park policies will ensure that parks, programs, and trails are welcoming for all Bozeman residents. Relevant Programs and Elements Residents continually noted their love of their park spaces and requested that same level of investment in their programs and events. Safe Access Fast moving and wide roadways that are diffcult to cross, limited universal accessibility between homes and open spaces or buildings, inadequate access to parks and facilities for the disabled community, and diffcult to reach park spaces were all identifed as creating barriers to safely getting to and using parks and participating in recreational opportunities. Nature Immersion Residents enjoy the proximity to nature both within the City and outside its limits. Many residents are also excited for more nature play and educational opportunities. Trail Connectivity Trails not only facilitate connections between natural areas and public lands, but foster community connections as well. Residents and visitors love the existing trail network and are excited for a more connected system of pathways and trails that are connected to beloved parks and important community destinations. Special Use Facilities Swimming pools and aquatics programs were consistently among the top ranked needs by plan participants. The need for more water play and swimming opportunities emerged early on in the process, before the temporary closure of the Bozeman Swim Center. Other desired special use facilities included a nature center and affordable indoor ftness spaces. Engagement feedback themes Figure 2.3 Themes Relevant Programs Inclusion and Elements 22 35 Care Many different audiences use Bozeman parks, and not everyone is thoughtful about the impacts their park use has on the experience of others, the park’s maintenance burden and fnancial cost, and the natural resources and habitat quality. In order for parks and trails to be fully inclusive, the City must ensure that people’s use of parks isn’t entirely shaped by dogs, that park rules are clearly communicated and respected, that habitat isn’t unnecessarily destroyed and that park equipment and facilities aren’t vandalized. Through a community of care, people can protect their investment made via the Parks and Trails District and can begin to yield to others’ needs. Safe Access Nature Immersion Trail Connectivity Special Use Facilities Care 23 36 3. state of the system bozeman outdoors Existing Facilities and Programs Equitable Access to Parks Comparison to Similar Cities bozeman at play Recreation Assessment Distribution of Programs and Activities Similar Providers community survey Evaluating Facility and Amenity Needs Against Demand bozeman ON THE MOVE Existing Active Transportation System in this chapter 24 37 Bozeman’s park system refects its unique development history, natural system infrastructure, and outdoor culture. The recreational facilities, parks, and trails are intertwined into the daily lives and experiences of Bozeman residents and have become a central part of one of the most cherished destination towns in the country. To understand more deeply how this system is structured and how to expand its role equitably across the community, we need to understand what the system includes today and compare that understanding against what we’ve heard from residents. We also need to see how Bozeman’s system compares to other cities to identify where there is an abundance of access and where gaps exist. Finally, we have to look to the future, to anticipate needs not yet identifed and proactively address those trends through the plan. To do this, the PRAT plan evaluated the complexity of the system through three lenses: ◊ Bozeman Outdoors - What is the structure of the physical system and how does it compare to cities with similar populations and growth patterns? ◊ Bozeman at Play - What programs and events does the city lead and what programs are led by other similar organizations? ◊ Bozeman on the Move - What are the connections and gaps in the city’s system of trails, paths, and street network and how can the City work to close gaps in access between parks, homes and other important destinations? Figure 3.1 Recreation programs invite residents of all ages to spend time outside. 25 38 26 895 city-ownedacres of parks 390 open spaceacres 17 acres of parkspace per 1,000 residents 176 miles ofoff-street routes 125+ programs Bozeman Outdoors There are 91 city parks and 24 linear open spaces in the City that range in size and function. Within city parks, there is a total of 895 acres of different kinds of park elements like sports felds and courts, fshing docks, playgrounds, open space, and meandering stream corridors. Since the PROST plan, the system has preserved 17 acres of park space per 1,000 residents. The City’s park system plays host to a variety of fxed and temporary park elements . From ballfelds to wintertime skating rinks, tennis courts to dogs parks, and paved trails to BMX trails, Bozeman’s parks are destinations for everyone. Private 41 acres County 108 acres City 895 acres Park Ownership (Acres) 39 I-9I-900 BBaxaxtterer Ln Ln veve veve r Ar Aveve ve veve e AOaakk St St eeveO swle Alswh Ad Auth Atooh Ad Au99h ArtrootFF117733RRDuDurrssttoonn MMaaiinn St St HuHuffffiinene Ln Ln II-9-900 High Vulnerability RdRdKaKaggyy B Bllvdvd dd oooonn nwnwr Lr Lveve Low Vulnerability veSoeeveve veSowltltttwh Aouth Ath Ah Ad Ad AourCity Boundary oooo9r9trrCtCFF117733ddouougghh Rd Rd Equitable Access to Parks Understanding park needs and equitable distribution of services is multi-layered and includes demographic mapping of ◊population density, ◊car ownership, ◊race, ◊income ◊disability ◊age (particularly among seniors and children under 18). This snapshot of Bozeman’s current population provides a basis for understanding community needs for recreation elements. Demographic ranges have Social Vulnerability Map been combined into a composite geography that reveal places with defned opportunities for city services like parks and recreation programming. In general, areas surrounding MSU and west of 11th Avenue and northeast of Oak Street and 19th Avenue show the highest need for parks and elements based on the demographic composite. The demographic data also establishes the magnitude and composition of population change in Bozeman and highlights segments (youth, the elderly, and people with incomes below the poverty line) that the City should position itself to better serve in the future. A proximity analysis reveals physical community access and gaps to parks and facilities. The analysis evaluates a ten minute walk (half mile) and six minute bicycle ride (one mile) from each park by following the existing road structure and it also takes into account road crossing barriers from the Figure 3.2 Social vulnerability demographic compilation map. Households with the highest vulnerability are the darkest shades on the map. 27 40 Parks Proximity Map N0 0.5 1 mile Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Areas within 10-minute walk Figure 3.3 Proximity analysis of access to parks from a 10 minute walk. -Many of the Spanish speaking people who were interviewed during walk audit outreach identifed Main/Huffne as a major barrier to get to their nearest neighborhood parks - Kirk Park and Bozeman Pond. 28 41 2017 Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. Any walkshed that falls over those signifcant barriers was removed to further indicate where park access is limited, especially for residents with mobility limitations, families, and people without cars. Access to parks is generally strong within the denser areas closest to Bozeman’s Downtown. Still, the mapping within this section only highlights the geographic and quantifable side of the PRAT’s understanding of access. From conversations with various members of the disability community, the Safe Routes program liaisons surfaced that a signifcant number of parks and trails and elements lack access for the disability community and for low income and Latinx communities. The City has gotten ahead of growth by investing in new parks where growth was highest, so neighborhoods with the highest populations have high walkable access to parks. This means that park access is typically high along gridded city streets. Conversely, large areas west, north and south where large subdivisions are being built lack walkable access to community parks and elements or are bisected by fast moving streets like Huffne Lane (Highway 191) and 19th Avenue. Bozeman is growing most rapidly in the areas with the newest parks as a result of land dedication regulations for new developments. Communities north and west of downtown are also increasing in population, and this growth pattern is projected to continue and reinforces the importance of safe access between parks and neighborhoods. Population growth is also occurring outside of downtown near the edges of the city. Comparison to Similar Cities As a city of just over 50,000 people, Bozeman has an abundance of park acreage, but the city’s population and development continues to grow up and out, a phenomenon that has outpaced many other urban areas during the pandemic. Prior to 2020, Bozeman was already growing rapidly, similar to peer communities. Like Bend, Oregon, Fort Collins, Colorado, and Boulder, Colorado which boast substantial outdoor tourism economies - Bozeman appeals to an outdoor culture and is increasingly a destination for people seeking outdoor adventure. The PRAT plan looks to cities of similar size and character to understand how Bozeman’s acreage, average park size, trail miles, and park and facilities elements compare. This assessment incorporated data from both the Trust for Public Land (TPL) and the National Recreation and Parks Association (NRPA) to draw these comparisons. Bozeman was compared to seven other similar cities -Fort Collins, Colorado; Missoula, Montana; Helena, Montana; Corvallis, Oregon; Billings, Montana; Boulder, Colorado; and Bend, Oregon. Not only are these cities generally similar in size, ranging from 28,000 to 170,000 residents, they also have been growing substantially over the last decade. While Bozeman is the second least populous city among this comparison, it is the fastest growing city among those compared. Bozeman also has the third highest number of acres per thousand residents (17 acres), after Bend, Oregon and Missoula, Montana. The majority of Missoula’s overall parkland is also not developed. Only 6 acres per thousand residents is comprised of active park space. 29 42 Population Growth 2010-2020 Corvallis, OR Bend, ORBillings, MT Boulder,CO Fort Collins, CO Bozeman, MT Helena, MT Missoula, MT Peer Department Total Population (2020) Growth 2010-2020 Density Residents/mi2 28,190 +14% 1,724 73,489 +10% 2,671 99,178 +29%2,347 117,116 +12% 2,697 53,293 +43%2,839 169,810 +18% 3,015 4,003 Helena, MT Missoula, MT Bend, OR Billings, MT Bozeman, MT Fort Collins, CO Boulder, CO Corvallis, OR 108,100 59,922 +11% +10% 4,240 SOURCE: NRPA/US CENSUS Figure 3.4 With a population growth of 43% in the past decade (2010-2020) Bozeman has grown faster than peer cities that share similar growth patterns, size, and community appeal. 30 43 31 Where is Bozeman Leading? Through its development code and 2012 TOP Bond, Bozeman has facilitated investment in playgrounds and its trail system, and is working to expand access to a variety of typical park elements across the city. A closer look at Bozeman’s facility and amenity counts against similar cities highlights the importance of those investments - Bozeman has 54 playgrounds, twelve more playgrounds than Bend, Oregon with the second highest number of playgrounds. Bozeman is also well served by pavilions and natural surface trails. Bozeman however also has a defcit of recreation facilities (the City currently has no recreation-focused facility), basketball and tennis courts, sports felds, and water based play (spraygrounds and pools). Bozeman at Play From learning and exploring nature to opportunities for dancing and family cookouts, to spaces for sledding in the winter and public art, Bozeman’s park, recreation and active transportation system has the potential to meet the needs and wishes of every visitor. These places provide vital venues for people to experience togetherness or provide space for refection and alone time, to get exercise, and to learn new skills. The PRAT Plan evaluated what programs exist today and gathered community thoughts and ideas about what experiences they enjoy, would like to see expanded, or would like to introduce. Recreation Assessment As Bozeman grows, changes and new trends in recreation are also evolving and expanding across the country. Understanding both the localized and national changes in demand for recreation and wellness-centered classes and programs can help project future program needs and the spaces that will support them. The community survey helps to defne demand for programs and research into the City’s How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? In Boulder, CO, the Open Space and Mountain Parks Department manages permanently protected land that forms a buffer around the city. In contrast, while Bozeman has great natural areas within town, if better connected, they can serve as an urban oasis and part of an active transportation system. 44 32 How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? In the past year, Boulder, CO has updated and added skate elements to 3 existing City Parks and at their Main Library Boulder, CO also has the most aquatic centers out of all of our peers 1.6 MEDIAN AQUATIC CENTERS 1 3 1 2 1 0 BEND, OR BOULDER, CO CORVALLIS, OR FORT COLLINS, CO MISSOULA, MT BOZEMAN, MT seasonal program guides and participation data as well as staff insights help to provide a framework for the city’s availability and gaps in program access. Mix of Recreation Programs The city provides over 125 different types of classes and events to residents. Many of these programs fall into the category of “core program”, which are categories that help to distinguish what audiences or what topics are covered in the City’s offerings. Bozeman has seven core programs - active aging, adult, aquatics, camps, events, preschool, and school’s out activities. In many departments, core programs are organized by activity type (ftness, nature, sports) and not by age group (preschool, youth, adult). Bozeman uses a combination of both activity type and age group. Like many growing cities, the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department acknowledged a desire to expand offerings that are more inclusive and welcoming to an increasingly diverse population. As the variety of programming increases, re-establishing the core programs by topic or activity will help to clarify what programs are offered publicly, and better identify gaps in program areas internally. The City’s core program areas are described in more detail below. Active Aging Active aging programs are for participants 55 years and older. Nearly all of the classes offered in 2019 were ftness classes including Heart and Sole, Balance & Beyond, Sole Energy, and Stability and Mobility. Adult Adult recreation encompasses most programs that serve participants ages 18 years and older. 45 33 These include avalanche awareness classes and sport leagues such as sand volleyball, ping pong, badminton and pickleball. Aquatics The Department offers a robust swim instruction program for children 6 months through 12 years. For the youngest age group (6 months – 3 years), these classes are parent and child together (Angelfsh). For the next age group (3 & 4 years), Clownfsh is offered. There are several levels of swim instruction for 5 to 12 years olds and also for 6 to 12 years olds depending on ability. These courses are offered at the Bozeman Swim Center year-round and at the Bogert Pool during the summer months. The Department also offers lifeguard courses and a Water Safety Instructor course. Camps The Department provides several camp options for the community broken down into different age groups including 3 – 5 years, 5 – 7 years, 5 – 10 years, 8 – 10 years, and 11 – 14 years. Camps are offered during spring break, winter break, and summer and include opportunities for all interests including art, fshing, sports, and spring break at The Mill just to name a few. Events Several events are offered throughout the year – many which are free and do not require advance registration. These events include Easter Egg Hunt, Gallatin Valley Earth Day Festival, Discovery Walks, Pickin’ in the Park, Fishing Derby, National Trails Day, Youth Triathlon, Sweet Pea Children’s Run, Wellness in the parks, Walk with Ease, Avalanche Awareness, and Active Aging Week. Monster Mash 27.8 16 9.28.6 19.8 MEDIAN How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? Bozeman sits below the median for number of felds: elements typically found in Community Parks FIELDS PER 50K PEOPLE 28.9 28.5 BEND, OR BOULDER, CO CORVALLIS, OR FORT COLLINS, CO MISSOULA, MT BOZEMAN, MT 46 34 8.3 13.9 12 9.5 22.5 17.2 MEDIAN How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? Bozeman sits below the median for number of courts: elements typically found in Neighborhood Parks COURTS PER 50K PEOPLE 37.3 BEND, OR BOULDER, CO CORVALLIS, OR FORT COLLINS, CO MISSOULA, MT BOZEMAN, MT (a Halloween themed event), Breakfast with Santa, and the Father Daughter Dance all require advance registration and target specifc age groups. Preschool Programming for preschoolers is divided up into several different age groups and includes a range of activities, from organized sports to nature play and education for ages two years to four years old. School’s Out Activities School Day off events are offered throughout the school year when school is not in session. Programs are offered for 5 to 10 years and include several opportunities including sports, nature, and science. Youth Youth programming is also divided up into several age groups that range from six years old to early teen programs. Other Services In addition to the core programs and activities, the City manages other types of facilities that provide community leisure opportunities. ◊Bogert Pool is an outdoor facility that has two swimming areas: a 25-yard lap pool (3.5 – 9 feet in depth) and a shallow pool for young children (1 – 3 feet in depth). The lap pool includes a climbing wall, a small slide, and a zip line. The shallow pool includes a small slide. This facility is typically open from mid-June to late-August each summer. ◊The Swim Center is an indoor aquatic facility with a 50-meter, eight lane lap pool 47 35 that is typically open year-round. From mid-August to mid-March, it is divided into a 25-yard pool and a 24-meter pool. ◊The Rec Mobile provides recreation to children ages 2 – 10 years in neighborhood parks throughout the spring and summer. Recreation leaders facilitate play that keeps children outside, active, and engaged with peers. These opportunities are available on Monday and Wednesday evenings at different parks. ◊Several Bozeman facilities are available for rental including Beall Park Recreation Center, Lindley Center, Story Mansion, and Story Mill Community Center. Distribution of Programs and Activities A total of 329 programs were offered by the Department between 2018 and 2019. Understanding how the City’s enrollment-based program offerings are distributed across core program areas helps to identify broader City trends and community needs. The program with the largest quantity of programs offered was aquatics (160), regardless of season. The second largest quantity of programs offered was preschool (43). Excluding events since they generally don’t require registration, the program areas with the lowest quantities are school’s out activities and adult programs, with 8 offerings each. Events (4) include the Easter Egg Hunt, Pickin’ in the Park, Youth Triathlon Camps, Youth Triathlon Race, Sweet Pea Children’s Run, Wellness in the Parks, Walk with East, Avalanche Awareness, and Active Aging Week. How does Bozeman Compare to Peer Cities? Bozeman sits well above the median for number of playgrounds, which are typically found in both Neighborhood and Pocket Parks PLAYGROUNDS PER 50K PEOPLE 54 20.6 14.8 12.2 24 23.3 19.3 23 MEDIAN BEND, OR BOULDER, CO CORVALLIS, OR FORT COLLINS, CO HELENA, MT**FOR 30K PEOPLE MISSOULA, MTBOZEMAN, MT 48 36 top 5 priorities for investment programs recreation facilities natural trails on-street bicycllanes indoor pools outdoor pools shared use paths e aquatics arts + culture winter recreation fitness respectful behavior Evaluating Programs by Age The PRAT plan also evaluated City programs against the current citywide age breakdown. This analysis surfaced that a high percentage of programs, 49%, were designated for early childhood. Of all the age-specifc programming, 91% are designed for youth under the age of 18 years, while youth only represent 22% of the community’s population. A small percentage of programs were offered for adults, ages 18 to 54, who make up 66% of the population. A large percentage (91%) of the Department’s enrollment-based programs are designed for youth, while youth only represents 22% of the community’s population. Adults, ages 20 years and up, make up 78% of the population, while only 9% of programs are designed for adults. For the City’s programming to cater mostly to youth is consistent with most park and recreation agencies’ program offerings across the country. Youth programming not only benefts those enrolled, but caretakers as well. Yet the percentage of youth programming among most agencies usually only represents half to two-thirds of all offerings. The City’s program menu’s age segmentation does not need to mirror the community’s age demographic segmentation in an exact manner; however, an ongoing goal can be to balance the menu toward a refection of the community makeup. Program Enrollment Total enrollment into the Department’s programs was 3,414 in 2019. Aquatics had the highest enrollment with 1,092 participants, followed by preschool at 783, and camps at 661. Figure 5 shows all the programs and the percentage of each of the whole. There are some programs that are offered by other organizations who take their own registration (Skyhawks) and this data is not included in any of these analyses. 49 Aquatics accounted for a third (32%) of the 2018-2019 enrollments, and preschool and camps accounted for approximately one-ffth of the programming each, 21% and 19% respectively. Aquatics accounted for nearly half (48.8%) of the program menu and 32% of all enrollments, which is typical due to the smaller class size and the advertisement of several course sections that can be combined, if needed. For camps and preschool, the percentage of participants is greater than the percentage of courses offered. Similar Providers Bozeman residents enjoy a wide variety of recreation programs offered by a host of different organizations –some of these are nonproft groups and others are private businesses. Many of these are provided space for their activities by the Department. The Department permits space to several affliate groups that provide recreation programs to the community. When discussing the permitting process with staff regarding the local sports programs, understanding of requirements were inconsistent. Future policies should be clarifed for consistent communications between the Department and affliate groups and should consider requiring all affliate groups to: ◊require all coaches to submit to a criminal background check, ◊compare the list of coaches to the state and federal sex offender databases, ◊charge a special feld use fee for nonresident participants ◊track demographics and city-county resident status, scholarships given out and DEI training Fitness programs are often a desire for young adults in communities across the country. Due to the low percentage of programs offered by the Department for adults, ftness opportunities within the community were reviewed. There are several private facilities spread out in the community offering ftness opportunities for Bozeman residents. In addition to the camps offered by the Department, there are dozens and dozens of summer camps available for Bozeman Youth. There are opportunities for children of all interests including art, dance (ballet, hip hop, aerial hammock, and choreography), hiking, camping, rock climbing, STEAM (outdoor science, coding, sports, yoga, drumming, karate, performing arts, horseback riding, farm camp, and more). Community Survey During the winter of 2021, the City released a community survey and received 300 responses. This survey, which is statistically valid and has a confdence level of 95%, highlighted community-wide desires for programs, parks, and park improvements. The survey, which was administered by mail, contained a cover letter, survey document, and instructions for the survey to be taken online. The cover letter included instructions for taking the survey over phone for any residents that preferred to speak a different language in their response. 37 50 Findings The survey surfaced signifcant shifts in park and facility use that could be attributed to the impacts of the pandemic on outdoor and indoor recreation, like recent changes in level of comfort with visiting facilities or taking part in online programs. There were also many unsurprising conclusions, including the fnding that Bozeman residents visited parks much more frequently in the past year than the national average. Ninety-seven percent of Bozeman residents visited parks in their community during 2020-2022 compared to 70% nationally. Using a calculation that combines the importance that residents place on a park, trail and program with the identifcation of unmet need, the survey was able to identify where a community should invest resources to add or increase facilities or programs. The top fve priorities for investment in recreation facilities and elements in Bozeman included natural trails, on-street bicycle lanes, indoor pools, outdoor pools, and shared use paths. The top fve priorities for program investment in Bozeman include aquatics programming, arts and culture, winter recreation, ftness, and etiquette programs for park and trail users, tied with outdoor adventure activities. The community survey also surfaced barriers to park or facility use and program participation. Only 22% of residents participate in programs and events offered by the City, which is below the national average of 32%, however this doesn’t necessarily refect the people who participate in programs within parks managed by user groups. The top reasons for lack of participation are that residents are not aware of the programs offered, have no time to participate, or have little interest in what the City offers. While park participation is at an all time high for residents in Bozeman, barriers still exist. Limited time, lack of relevant elements, maintenance and cleanliness concerns, and limited operating hours were among the top barriers to park visitation. When considering the priorities identifed between facilities and programming together, there is clearly a need to focus future investment on aquatics as well as outdoor education. With indoor and outdoor pools and aquatics being included in the top four for both facilities and programs, fnding spaces for arts and culture and history programming are two additional areas of potential focus. In addition, having a nature center and outdoor education both rating high, this type of programming (and potentially creating a new space) should be a priority as well. Bozeman already provides winter recreation, but additional offerings should be explored. Evaluating Facility and Recreation Component Needs Against Demand The community survey and public engagement process helps to defne priorities for strengthened or new elements from a public needs perspective, while an evaluation of national and similar peers articulates an understanding of demand for elements. By evaluating need and demand in unison, the PRAT plan can best describe where priorities for investment exist. Based on this evaluation, there are clear, aligned priorities for aquatics facilities, a nature center and indoor ftness space. 38 51 39 Bozeman on the Move The 2007 Bozeman PROST Plan established that the local trails are the City’s most utilized recreation facilities. Likewise, the PRAT Plan statistically valid survey revealed this to still be the case in 2022. This is not unique to Bozeman, as throughout the country walking and biking on local trails are low-cost, low- impact recreation and exercise options for people of all ages and abilities. Existing Network As a result of past and current investments in shared use paths, natural-surface trails, and on- street bicycle facilities, the City of Bozeman has established a solid foundation on which to continue to build a robust, city-wide pedestrian and bicycle transportation network. Currently, Bozeman is home to over 39 miles of shared use pathways, 79 miles of natural-surface trails, and 58 miles of on-street bicycle facilities, resulting in an existing active transportation network of approximately 176 miles of off-street routes. Active transportation routes were consistently prioritized as highly valued community elements during public outreach for this plan. Current trails and pathways overwhelmingly received positive responses from the community in terms of quality, and are also rated the top two most important facilities for future needs. Pathways and trails for recreation and transportation are top community priorities identifed in numerous local planning documents including the Bozeman Community Plan and the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan. Trails Health Benefits In 2020 American Trails published a guide highlighting the health benefits of trails: Mental Health Benefits •Spending even 20 minutes outside will have short term effects on the brain to reduce stress. •Countless studies show people self-reporting reduced stress, clearer thought patterns, more optimism, and an overall heightened sense of well- being after being outdoors. •We are now seeing more medical practitioners prescribe time in the outdoors as a way to combat depression, anxiety, and other health related issues. Physical Health Benefits •For every dollar spent on trails, there is a three- dollar savings in health care costs. •More overall physical activity is measured in communities after trails are built. •Cardiovascular benefits are seen across all trail user types. This means healthier hearts, and a reduction in preventable disease for trail users. •Commuting by foot or bicycle gains popularity when trails go into a community. This both reduces traffic and creates a healthier, more physically active community. 52 The current network, however, needs substantial improvement regarding equitable accessibility, range, connectivity, and safety. These key elements were identifed through the survey, public engagement and City staff input. East-West Corridors The trail system relies on the natural network of waterways throughout the valley that allow development of trails to parallel these waterways. As a result, traveling in a north-south direction using off street trails is relatively accessible throughout the City. However, corridors that run east-west are outcompeted by sidewalks and on-street bicycle lanes as the only options for this directional movement. Lack of Connectivity The City has a system of shared use pathways, on- street bicycle facilities and off-street trails, but connectivity between these facilities is often lacking. For many common routes continuity of experience is frequently broken through lack of transitions between existing trails, shared use paths and bicycle lanes. This makes these routes more challenging and less comfortable as users are forced to negotiate wide roadways with high speed traffc. Furthermore, recreational trails in the winter, while still used by residents, can be unsafe or not enjoyable due to a lack of maintenance. what is active transportation? From the Partnership for Active Transportation: “Active transportation is a means of getting around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling. Often called “non-motorized transportation,” we prefer the term “active transportation” since it is a more positive statement that expresses the key connection between healthy, active living and our transportation choices. Communities that prioritize active transportation tend to be healthier [because they enable] residents to be more physically active in their daily routines and [because they have] cleaner air to breathe. Active transportation systems also foster economic health by creating dynamic, connected communities with a high quality of life that catalyzes small business development, increases property values, sparks tourism, and encourages corporate investment that attracts a talented, highly educated workforce.” Source: Partnership for Active Transportation Existing Bicycle Routes Existing Trails Existing Shared Use Paths Roads Open Space City Boundary Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Forest and Woodland Grassland Shrubland + Savannah 40 53 Valley Center Ln I-9 0 e v Ae re AvBaxter Ln wlhFot91Oak St Durston Main St Huffine Ln Kagy Blvd Sourdough Rd Valley CentVVeraa Llllleeny Cy Ceennteter Lr Lnn I-9 0 I-9I-9e00 v Aere AvBaxter LnBBaxaxtterer Ln Ln wlhFot91ee vvee vOak St OOaakk S Stt A Aee ee ee rrvvee A Ae Ave A Av Avwlswlshh Av AvduuFotthdhFo1919otrtro7733RRDurstDDoururnststoonn MMaaiinn S Stt Main St Downtown Bozeman HuffHHineuufff Lnfiinnee Ln Ln II-9-900 Kagy Blvd KaKaggyy B Bllvdvd Rd Rd ddoooonn Sww Lee Love e veeunnrreoe Arott Awldwlhh Av Av Av AvotothddohtrCCFotFo19t19rtu7733gh RdN0 0.25 0.5 1 mile 41 Current Active Transportation Network 54 System Barriers Based on analysis within the Transportation Master Plan of critical safe crossings at high traffc intersections and arterial streets which act as barriers, there are opportunities for future investments in parks and trails to be coordinated with opportunities to make the sidewalks, crossings, and roadways that surround parks and trails safer. The active transportation system relies on on-street bicycle lanes and designated bicycle routes to create a network for bicycles to travel throughout the city. The unprotected bicycle lanes in Bozeman are most commonly used by confdent bicycle riders, as these facilities are separated by traffc with just a painted line and exist within the street. While the network may appear to be robust, bicycle lanes are often viewed as not safe for a majority of users. Where are needs and demands aligned? Demand represents priorities identifed by the Bozeman community in the statistically valid survey and Need represents alignment of elements with peer communities. For example, not many people indicated that sports felds were a priority in Bozeman, though the City has a lot less sport supporting infrastructure than peer communities. Playgrounds were identifed as being important and Bozeman has more than their peers. There is alignment in both demand and need for the following: •Aquatics •Nature center •Indoor ftness 42 55 Barriers: Parks, trails, or facilities No time to visit parks/trails/facilities Parks/trails/facilities do not have elements I want Parks/trails/facilities not well maintained Operating hours are not convenient Not aware of parks/trails/facilities 18% 12%Top barrier to access 9% 7% 5% Figure 3.5 Top fve identifed barriers to parks, trails, or facilities within the Statistically Valid Survey Barriers: Programs Not aware of programs offered Top barrier to participation 45% DEMAND 24% No time to participate in programming 16% Types of programming not interesting/relevant/desired Times when programs offered not convenient 12% Program location/venue not convenient 6% Figure 3.6 Top fve barriers to programs within the statistically valid survey LOW NEED HIGH DEMAND HIGH NEED HIGH DEMAND Playgrounds Trails Aquatics Dog accommodations Nature center Community gardens/ Food Indoor fitness Forest Fields Courts HIGH NEED LOW DEMAND Splash pads LOW NEED LOW DEMAND NEED Figure 3.7 Demand (the y-axis) represents priorities identifed by the Bozeman community in the statistically valid survey and Need (the x-axis) represents alignment of elements with peer communities. 43 56 44 safe routes to parks community engagement The “Safe Routes to Parks Community Survey: Disability Community” and interviews conducted by the Community Liaisons indicated that several respondents were unsatisfed or unsure of support options for programming and events. A lack of access to ASL interpreters in the City of Bozeman was used as one example. Other participants cited inadequate transportation options to programming and events as a barrier. Comments included: “Post that interpreters will be made available upon request.” “He needs an interpreter to be understood. And it is the law.” -Interviewee “If there is a sign with info, you can offer a bar code to scan so the device will link to web pages or audio fles to be able to read it. Also, partnering with organizations like Montana Independent Living Project, Montana Association for the Blind, School for the deaf/blind, VR agencies and senior focused housing to get more folks active and out into the community.” - Survey Respondent - “At the event at Bogert, he would have liked to be able to ask questions. He couldn’t do that without an interpreter.” Interviewee 57 45 “We haven’t had much opportunity yet, but how do the deaf get interpreters so they can get equal access?” -Survey Respondent - “For self and native students, main concern is how do we do this for free” Interviewee during Safe & Welcoming Parks to BIPOC Communities conversation - “At MSU, one thing that has been successful having events that engage in a direct cultural activity; not a lot of visual cues that people of color belong unless there are other people there” Interviewee during Safe & Welcoming Parks to BIPOC Communities conversation community Liaisons Mikayla Pitts Hosted group conversations and conducted surveys to engage BIPOC community Conducted interviews and surveys to engage disability community Hosted front door conversations to hear from Latino community Bri Daniels Luis Islas 58 Parks and Trail Facilities by Type There are eight park types that frame how the City activates, maintains and develops parks. These park types have unique characteristics that balance a variety of elements and demands based on their size, use, and location within the city. Each type is described in more detail on the next few pages. In addition to these seven park types, the PRAT also includes active transportation types. For more information on active transportation elements and types, head to Bozeman on the Move. Linear Parks/ Buffers 64 acres Pocket Parks 2 acres Neighborhood Park 238 acres Community Park 145 acres Special Use Park 200 acres Natural Areas 179 acres Acreage of Park Type Regional Park 54 acres 46 59 Park TypeNumber of ParksTotal AcreageProgram and UseEnvironmental Benef ts Siting/Access Pocket Park 6 2 Provides public space and recreational opportunities to underserved or commercialized areas Allows access to shade + water during hot summers Urban or commercialized areas without access to public open space, accessible by sidewalks, trails, or residential streets Neighborhood Park 47 238 Flexible multi-use spaces (traditional recreation elements, including courts, playgrounds, and felds, informal seasonal recreation, movable furniture, access to electrical/water) More land area for denser canopy + shade, accessibility by interconnected trails create valuable ecological corridors for local wildlife Centrally located within residential service area, easily accessible by way of interconnecting trails, sidewalks, or residential streets, aesthetic qualities, leftover parcels of land that are undesirable for development are also generally undesirable for neighborhood parks and should be avoided. Community Park 7 145 Provides active and passive recreational facilities for all, space for group activities, sitting areas Guided walking trails connect to existing trail network, areas with native plantings, and nature study areas Natural character of site, serviced by arterial and collector streets, community trail system, accessible to parking areas Special Use Park 8 200 Provide for single-purpose recreational uses (such as indoor/outdoor recreational facilities or historic/ cultural sites) Single-use cultural sites advocate for environmental stewardship (arboretums, native plant gardens, sculpture gardens), benefts of turf with droughts, keeping facilities cool Accessibility from arterial/collector streets, recreation need, community interests, and land availability determine location Natural Areas 27 179 Provide for greenway, trails, and nature viewing opportunities Protect natural resource areas such as wetlands, riparian areas, and ponds Lands unsuitable for development, remnant landscapes, parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainageways, riparian areas, wetlands, ponds Natural Areas in Parks ---- Provide for greenway, trails, and nature viewing opportunities Protect natural resource areas such as wetlands, riparian areas, and ponds Lands unsuitable for development, remnant landscapes, parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainageways, riparian areas, wetlands, ponds Linear Parks 22 64 Allow uninterrupted and safe pedestrian and bicycle movement between parks, connect parks, trails, recreational areas, and open spaces into a cohesive system Linear parks and buffers improve stormwater runoff, connect ecological habitat Edges of developments, buffers adjacent to linear features such as water courses or railways, linear parks are often places with signifcant topography, located in foodplains or other locations not suitable for development Regional Park 1 54 Provide park elements and larger recreational facilities for the larger region, special events, concerts, sports tournaments Connect to countywide trail system Sited to be accessible from a multi-county area, serviced by arterial and collector streets and the countywide trail system, accessible to parking areas 47 60 4.bozeman prat vision The Bozeman Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan’s recommendations are formed around fve central goals: Build on Bozeman’s unique strengths while creating 1 WELCOMING, EQUITABLE ACCESS to all spaces and programs Strengthen PROGRAMS, PLACES, AND2 PARTNERSHIPS to meet changing community needs Connect Bozeman’s community with safe and 3 enjoyable PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES Steward and sustain NATURAL RESOURCES across 4 the parks and trails system Grow STAFF AND CAPACITY 5 to beneft the community 48 61 49 These citywide goals were developed through analysis into the existing system today, identifcation of gaps and opportunities for the future, and - most importantly - through community conversations, engagement, and input into the plan. Each goal is supported by a series of recommendations that will help to realize and implement them over time. Community conversations and ideas were distilled into plan themes which drove the outcomes. The PRAT recommendations refect the community’s love for their parks and recreation system, their aspirations and concerns for its future, and the changing social, environmental, and economic context that surrounds the system and future generations who will steward it. in this chapter goal 1: equitable access goal 2: programs, places, partnerships goal 3: pedestrian and bicycle facilities goal 4: natural resources goal 5: staff and capacity 62 Goal 1 Build on Bozeman’s unique strengths while creating WELCOMING, EQUITABLE ACCESS to all spaces and programs. A high priority of the PRAT Plan and the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department is to provide high quality, equitable access to parks, nature, and recreation programs for all city residents - especially as the city grows and changes in the coming years. Through the planning process, both the level of service analysis and feedback from community members pointed to key areas of gaps in access, barriers created by fast-moving roadways, and to the increasing challenges of having more park users occupying the same beloved spaces. Even as population growth is projected to increase signifcantly in the coming years, the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department holds frm in its commitments to work to ensure residents are within a safe ½ mile (or ten minute walk) to a publicly-accessible park, and can access a wide variety of recreation experiences and programs that meet the expectations of Bozeman’s high quality of life. To meet this goal, the plan includes strategies to ◊ensure a baseline of elements across the city, ◊meet targets for expansion as growth occurs, ◊balance park use by increased numbers of people ◊reinforce the diversity of the park system and ◊expand access and usability of the system in all seasons and into the evening. 50 63 Bozeman’s growth as a city has moved from its original development in the 1920s around Downtown and the frst park at Cooper Park outward, with recent development focused in the west, north, and southwest. As the decades have evolved, development patterns have changed and the shape, uses, and character of the parks and open spaces within each neighborhood refects the era within which it developed. This varied character is both a strength and a challenge for the system: the variety lends interest and choice across the city, yet makes equitable access to recreation elements diffcult when the underlying park fabric is so different. Looking forward to increased growth and change, the PRAT plan seeks to leverage the diversity of the system, while ensuring a baseline of elements, access, and equity citywide. In the rectilinear gridded neighborhoods of historic central Bozeman, vehicular transportation did not fully impact the neighborhood pattern leading to more walkable neighborhoods where classic neighborhood and community parks predominate today. There, over ½ of all parks are community serving parks and over ⅓ are neighborhood parks. In the next ring of development, which formed in the middle to later 20th century, Bozeman grew outward from its downtown core and was developed around the rise of the automobile. Here, parks - such as the recent Story Mill Park - perform more multifaceted services drawing community members from both local neighborhoods and driving distances. In this middle era of development, natural areas in parks, linear parks and special use parks are much more common. Finally, modern neighborhoods that developed most recently in Bozeman echo the car-orientation of the latter part of the 20th century. There, destination parks with unique elements, such as Gallatin County Regional Park, can be found alongside more natural areas. 51 64 equitable access Strategies This is a trackable metric equitable access means that Parks and recreation services are accessible to all Bozeman users regardless of age,ability, language, or income. - “N19th is a bike/ped barrier. Need safer crossing for east west shared use paths” - Feedback from April Public Workshop 1.1. Create a consistent set of basic elements across neighborhoods. Elements are assets or features found in Bozeman parks and trails. Examples include play spaces, multipurpose felds, courts, pathways, buildings, and other physical infrastructure to support a positive park experience. The PRAT Plan Design Manual identifes typical park elements that exist within different types of parks. As the city grows and as new park spaces are constructed or existing parks are renovated, the City should use the design manual to ensure that a consistent baseline of elements are provided within each park type. Special parks may have a unique approach; this baseline is meant to serve as a general guide to promote equity and balance. ◊Add park assets that were identifed as in high demand by the community in new and existing spaces. Using community feedback as a guide, add elements to increase access citywide to playgrounds (including universal play spaces), trails, spaces for dogs, community gardens/ food forests, felds, courts, and splash pads. Explore ways to respond to high demand and identifed need for aquatics, indoor ftness, and nature centers, which require more signifcant investment. ◊Create and implement a plan to provide universal access to parks and programs. Parks and recreation services should be made accessible to all Bozeman users regardless of age, ability, or language. The Department can begin with an ADA audit of physical facilities and program access to create an ADA Transition Plan which should include clear phasing over time and identifed funding. Universal access should consider access and cultural appropriateness with special consideration of play spaces, trails (including paved trails), printed and digital materials, wayfnding and signage, and ongoing community engagement and communication. 52 65 “Need parks and outdoors where people can just “exist and be yourself;” as a writer I crave to walk to a park and just write or read” - SRTP Conversation: BIPOC Communities ◊Strategically include and allocate resources for equitable community engagement in parks, recreation plans and capital projects to align with changing community needs and concerns. Bozeman’s recent Strategic Plan resulted in creation and adoption of the Engage Bozeman Community Engagement Initiative in April 2021 which is a guiding framework for how the community can contribute to decision making processes. The PRAT plan incorporated Engaged Bozeman principles and approaches, and was able to use a partnership with the HRDC’s Safe Routes to Parks grant to increase the focus on engagement and outreach to underheard communities to ensure that their voices were heard and incorporated. In particular, the grant included community liaisons to Bozeman’s BIPOC, Latinx, and disability communities. Future engagement should build on the lessons learned from PRAT engagement overall and on the early relationships from this engagement to deepen and extend connections into all communities in Bozeman. Perhaps the most important lesson learned was that additional resources (both funding and time) need to be specifcally added to projects to meaningfully support this type of more diverse engagement. Additional engagement recommendations include: ◊In line with the universal access strategy above, future community engagement should factor in universal access and translation/interpretation. These components should be planned and budgeted for at the start of any project. ◊During future park and recreation planning and improvements, staff should develop engagement processes that match the scale of the improvement and subsequent impact. These plans should coordinate with the City of Bozeman’s community engagement process and early outreach to community organizations, partners, and affected community members. Figure 4.1 (Next page) The Design Manual included in this plan outlines park typologies and typical assets. 53 “Parks build and enhance neighborhood character and community culture” - Partners PRAT Visioning Session 66 park Typologies & Typical assets Pocket Parks Address limited, isolated or unique recreational needs and typically 1 acre or less in size. Neighborhood Parks Recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. Focus is on informal recreation for all age groups and geared towards those living within the service area. Community Parks Focus is on meeting the recreational needs of the entire community. Allow for group activities and offer other recreational opportunities. Arterial access through residential plots Access to shade and planting City Goal of 100% Frontage on Public Roads Connection to sidewalks, community trails and greenways Recreational Facilities Connection to community trail system Native Planting Areas Arterial / Connector Streets + Parking Access Immediate access through sidewalks and residential streets Access to play areas Flexible Multi-Use Open Spaces Central location in residential neighborhoods 54 67 Indoor / Outdoor Recreation Facilities Arterial Road Connections Large Athletic Facilities Specifc Athletic Asset (for example pump track) Special Use Parks A broad range of parks and recreation facilities for single- purpose or specialized use. These could be historic/cultural/social sites, or indoor/outdoor recreation facilities. Natural Areas (including those within parks) Lands set aside for the preservation of natural resources, remnant landscapes, open space, and visual aesthetics or buffering. Linear Parks Linear parks tie park components together to form a cohesive park, trail, recreation, and open space system. Native Plant Gardens Environmental Stewardship Cultural Sites Access to greenways, trails and nature viewing opportunities Protection of natural resource areas Connection to further trail systems Parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation Protection of natural wetland and ponds 55 68 equitable access Strategies This is a trackable metric The City of Bozeman currentlyprovides 17 acres of parkland per1,000 residents If the population grows to 91K by2050 and the City doesn’t not continue to acquire parklandthrough development,park acreage will drop to 9.6 acres per 1000 residents. 1.2. Maintain the current level of parkland per resident (17 acres per 1000) by growing park acres as the community grows. The City of Bozeman currently provides 17 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, not including undeveloped open space, putting Bozeman’s current parks provision in the upper middle of similar peer cities. If the population grows to 91,000 residents by 2050 and the city does not acquire land, this ratio will drop to 9.6 acres per 1000 residents. While Bozeman’s overall park supply does not indicate a shortfall today, staying in balance with future rapid growth will be important since residents have made clear that parks are a core driver of quality of life in the city. ◊Refne and clarify the process of obtaining new parks, facilities and trails from new development through changes to the UDC. The UDC currently requires new residential development to support park system growth through either direct land dedication, a contribution to a fee-in-lieu fund, or a combination of both. This contribution acknowledges that residential development generates a need for additional parkland, facilities and trails; yet, it has not always produced spaces with the right match of elements to community needs or enabled more strategic investment in the system. The plan recommends creating criteria that allow more targeted allocation of resources to meet the specifc needs of a neighborhood and acknowledge the land’s intrinsic value for recreation or environmental contributions. These criteria, if met, could enable the contribution of more well-designed park spaces and more connected trails/pathways between parks. 56 69 ◊Continue to improve coordination with the School District. This is a trackable metric State law and the UDC allow for a subdivider to dedicate a land donation to a school to satisfy park land requirements, subject to the approval of the City Commission and acceptance by the school district. This provision could be explored in more detail to foster increased coordination for mutually benefcial public facilities such as a new aquatics center. Intent Applicability Base 0.03ac/du Calculations Land Dedication Fees in Lieu Combinations Possible New Park Base Requirements Types of Parks Key Design Criteria Types of Pathways Base Requirements Key Design Criteria Pathway Connection $ Toward Improvements Criteria Cash-in-Lieu Critera UDC 38.420 Figure 4.2 UDC process 57 70 equitable access Strategies tourists are increasingly using city parks and trails as Bozeman continues to grow into one of the leading outdoor recreation destinations This is a trackable metric This is a trackable metric ◊Explore the possibility of requiring commercial development to also contribute to parkland. Hotel and motel guests are increasingly using city parks and trails as Bozeman continues to grow into one of the leading outdoor recreation tourist destinations and sports tournament centers. While state law currently prohibits requiring parkland for subdivisions that are all nonresidential, there is the potential to explore commercial linkage for parkland through zoning requirements. Using existing national data to supplement local data can help to effciently create the needed nexus study. This could supplement the cash-in-lieu fund and be used for park and pathway improvements. Staff should monitor discussions at the state level that could open the door for parkland requirements applicable to commercial developments. ◊Invest in acquisition of new pathways, parks and open spaces that: 1) help to close existing 10-minute walk gaps, and 2) overcome extreme physical barriers. For future investments, the Department should use park space & trail gap mapping to prioritize adding land in areas that are experiencing limited public park space today, or reducing barriers, such as rail or busy roads, between existing neighborhoods and parks. ◊Focus increased parks and recreation service in areas of high growth or current park overcrowding. Work with the Community Development Department, during growth policy updates in particular, to align park and recreation investments in areas planned for new housing or increases in density in the future. 58 71 VVaalllleeyy C Cenentterer Ln Ln I-9I-900 BBaxaxtterer Ln Ln ee Avee AvvvO eOaak Sk St et ere rel Ave Ave A Aehh Avtt Aveewlw Av Avhhddoo99ttrrousousFF117733RRDDuurrsstotonn MMaaiin Sn Stt HHuuffffiinnee Ln Ln II-9-900 Kagy Blvd dd Roow LneSS Avenlereou Avouorrttwhdt Avhddoo9trCF173ouougghh R Rdd Kagy Blvd d d Roo Ln e w Ave e noerltht Av Avwthdoo9rtCF1730 0.5 1 mile N Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Areas within 10-minute walk TMP-identifed roadway barriers Park access gaps Figure 3.8 Proximity analysis of access to parks from a 10 minute walk. 59 72 equitable access Strategies This is a trackable metric This is a trackable metric ◊Acquire land to make key trail, path or park connections identifed in the Active Transportation component of the plan (Goal 3) and to better connect people to parks. Collaborate with staff in Transportation and Engineering to expand the continuity of the active transportation network by overcoming existing gaps through acquisition of land, facilitation of safe crossings, and the maintenance of continuity of facility type and level of comfort. 1.3. Balance the needs of different park users. The popularity of many of Bozeman’s parks, open spaces, trails, and recreation centers is both a success and a challenge. Community members reported many issues with overcrowding, user conficts, and balance of different activities. As the City continues to grow, these concerns will only increase without efforts to respond with greater service or programs and policies that reinforce shared spaces. ◊Expand on the local culture of respect for and accessibility to public land to create safe, accessible and well cared for parks and trails. Continue to partner and expand public land and public space ethics that reinforce respect and civic engagement in public spaces. Reinforce the Gallatin Valley Land Trust’s additional educational efforts to support similar outcomes. ◊Make rules and regulations clear and easy to understand. Ensure that all parks, trails, and centers contain clear, direct, non-conficting, and community-minded signage that clarifes rules, regulations, and expectations of behavior for use of facilities. Signage should be communicated in English and Spanish. Chapter 26: Park Regulations, Bozeman Municipal Code should be separately evaluated and updated. 60 73 ◊Partner with volunteers and youth.This is a trackable metric Explore a park ranger volunteer program and junior ranger program to expand monitoring capacity and model “Leave no Trace” and respectful ethics in parks and recreation spaces. ◊Expand dog park spaces, programs, and policies to promote balanced use and enjoyment of park spaces by all. Bozeman is a dog-friendly city, and many residents use the parks and trails system to get outside and recreate with their pets. Today, there are nine city-owned off-leash dog facilities, and dedicated spaces have been created through private development contributions to parks and open space. According to the NRPA, dog park spaces are an important community asset to promote social gathering and well being of pets and owners. Still, community feedback reported that dogs in parks is a large source of conficts and complaints among residents. Future investments should combine design and management strategies with informational programming and policy changes to balance and manage the needs of dog owners and non-dog owners in parks. A few areas for exploration to address this topic directly include: ◊Design and manage future dog park spaces according to best practices and community needs. The National Recreation and Park Association recently published guidelines to inform the design, management, and maintenance of dog park spaces. Their recommendations range from organizing the space for separate users, to elements to include (water, lighting, surface materials) to signage and regulations, and maintenance practices. Dog park locations and design in Bozeman should also consider protection of natural spaces and riparian plantings. Case Study One Montana “Outside Kind” campaign: The primary goal of Outside Kind is to share best practices, principles and tips for enjoying the outdoors in any community. Whether you wish to encourage your friends and family or visiting guests to hike kind, ride kind, fsh kind, etc., Outside Kind is designed to offer users consistent and clear messages around outdoor activities, increase user knowledge, and maintain natural resources. We also encourage users to engage with organizations and communities that provide opportunities for you to enjoy our wild places. 61 74 equitable access Strategies Case Study The City of Austin’s B.A.R.K. program is an example of a new city-initiated dog etiquette program, based on the National Park Service’s Healthy People Healthy Parks Initiative which created a B.A.R.K. program for national sites. Austin’s B.A.R.K program strives to teach dog owners etiquette specifc to visits to public parks with dogs. The program stands for: Bag your pet’s waste; Always leash your pet; Respect wildlife; and Know where you can go. With successful program completion, dogs can also become “BARK Rangers!” ◊Expand programs and activities. Many parks and recreation departments offer a range of courses geared to dogs, including training, owner information, and social activities. Consider broadening into this area through partnerships or expanded programs to support more formal opportunities for dogs and dog owners to socialize and get easy access to instruction. ◊Consider designated off-leash hours. Some communities also include specifc off leash hours in parks, not just designated off-leash areas. These additional off leash hours are designed to avoid times when small children or high volumes of people are likely to use the park space and reduce conficts. Some areas are also closed to dogs during wet or thawing conditions to prevent damage to grass and feld areas. ◊Continue to incentivize low income and affordable housing through changes to the UDC. 1.4. Support all-season recreation. The Bozeman community’s desire to get outdoors and be active is not limited to fair weather days. Instead the city and its parks and recreation spaces and landscapes take on new dimensions and activities during the colder months. Maintaining access to outdoor experiences in the winter can be important to balance Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD), which is a type of depression that is brought on during the fall and winter months. Currently, partners such as the Bridger Ski Foundation program existing park spaces, groom cross-country ski trails. 62 75 ◊Support existing winter activity partners by This is a trackable metric increasing access to complementary indoor space. Indoor spaces support outdoor wintertime activity by providing storage and warming spaces which expand programmatic and concession opportunities. Indoor space also makes participation more viable and accessible for people of all ages and abilities. Bozeman’s larger historic parks, which also are located in the east side of the community with better winter snow access, are often characterized by older park buildings. These buildings abound with charm and authenticity, but are not fully operational to the public. Opening small buildings to community use offers many benefts, but also will require additional resources, in terms of staffng and operational support. Small buildings also do not offer the effciencies of larger centers, but meet more specifc, local needs. The City should explore the costs and benefts of each site and investigate ways to partner and share costs. ◊Conduct a feasibility study of indoor recreation facilities. The Lindley Center is currently being renovated but could be further explored for renovations and improvements that better support year-round public use to expand recreation and programming opportunities at Lindley Park, for skiing and beyond. A feasibility study of the building should frst be undertaken to understand costs associated with physical improvements (weatherizing, insulation, code-compliant updates, access and parking), program and staffng costs, operations and maintenance implications, and community benefts. With a complete picture of needs, opportunities, and constraints, the City can explore potential partnerships or grants to support capital improvements and future operations. Vendors or concession operators can also be additional ways to outsource elements and raise small amounts of revenue; however, the commodifcation of these spaces could displace the individual community users who rent the spaces for public and private events. 63 76 equitable access Strategies This is a trackable metric Figure 4.3 Pedestrian bridges in Bozeman ◊Reduce barriers to participation in wintertime activities. Many wintertime activities entail specialized equipment and require warm weather clothing to be comfortable and safe. The Bridger Ski Foundation’s annual Ski Swap is an example of a community-driven effort to make wintertime recreation equipment available in a more affordable and sustainable way. If a building like Lindley were renovated and made open to the community, a possible vendor or city-led effort could include loaning or renting equipment to encourage new users in addition to the BSF program. ◊Communicate best practices for safety outdoors in the winter. Outdoor winter recreation safety practices are similar, but different, from those in warmer months. While many in Bozeman are well-prepared for outdoor activities, newcomers to winter sports may beneft from safety information and support around hydration, staying warm, and risks to mobility. Informational signage for trails prepared for winter use or other outdoor spaces and the presence of warming huts or access to water can support safe use. ◊Adapt maintenance practices for winter use. As more spaces are made available and adapted to wintertime use, align maintenance practices and resources to additional care needed to maintain paths, parking areas, and access to facilities, parks and open trails. This might include winter maintenance of shared use paths (see Goal 3 for alignment with active transportation recommendations) to allow for more ‘year-round’ commuting, as well as enhanced winter recreation use of trails, like designated/groomed fat bicycle trails or Nordic skiing areas. 64 77 1.5. Increase safe evening / night time access at designated facilities with appropriate lighting, management, and programming. The top barrier to usage of parks, trails, or facilities that Bozemanites identifed in a statistically valid survey was a lack of available time to participate (18%). Survey results also noted that residents say operating hours are not convenient (7% or 4th place ranking). Today, Bozeman Parks and Recreation does not have a fully operational, all day recreation and community center. Instead, a combination of the new Story Mill Community Center, Beall Center, and the Bozeman Swim Center work together to provide distinct services to the community, with the recent addition of the Story Mill taking an important step forward. However, Story Mill’s main offce typically closes by 4:30pm unless a user group has reserved a space (though, as of 2022, Ping Pong is happening in the evenings several nights). Beall Center also closes though is available for community use Friday, Saturday, Sunday. In contrast, Bozeman park policy is to keep parks open until 11:00pm, unless specifed otherwise. In peer communities, recreation and community centers are often open until 8:00pm or 9:00pm most evenings. Evening programming and drop-in hours provide important fexible options for busy Bozeman residents of all ages. In particular, it offers a “third space” for teenagers to be together and socialize, other than home and school. Extended hours are important to capture teens and younger children after school hours and support busy people whose days are occupied with work and other requirements. Extended hours bring with them expanded needs for staff resources to support programming and facility operations. The Department should evaluate demand and access across its facilities, determining where it can begin to pilot extended hours and what it will cost to support this. As planning for the westside recreation and community aquatics facility continues (see Goal 2.1), evening hours should be considered as part of that major, citywide investment. BOZEMAN’S parks, recreation spacesand landscapestake on new dimensions during the winter. Figure 4.4 Cross skiing is a popular outdoor winter activity 65 78 equitable access Strategies 1.6. Design parks that refect their unique neighborhoods and refect the Department’s brand. ◊Use parks to tell stories that engage with arts, culture and local history and refect local identities. Bozeman residents identifed a need and desire for more arts and cultural programming, a request that was a much higher priority for Bozemanites than in other cities. In addition to considering programs, Bozeman’s parks and trails have a chance to engage with art to express community culture, the city and region’s history, industrial relics, local heroes, and unique environmental systems. Approaches to storytelling must refect the diversity of the city and region to celebrate a range of lived experiences as the area becomes increasingly diverse. Signage and interpretive panels can communicate effectively, while murals and other forms of public art are more creative platforms for storytelling. Always plan ahead for needed maintenance practice changes and engage maintenance team members in design decisions for non- standard features and art. Key possibilities for storytelling include: ◊Weave local sports history and heroes into parks, educating the public about important Bozeman fgures such as mountaineers Conrad Anker or Alex Lowe, paleontologist Jack Horner, teacher Frieda Bull, and Sacagawea, the Shoshoni woman who accompanied Lewis and Clark on their westward journey. ◊Amplify hyper-local stories at neighborhood parks, through art, interpretation or naming, in partnership with community processes and Figure 4.5 Multi-modal transportation on trails in the winter include biking, walking, and skiing. 66 79 partners. The PRAT plan engagement included a naming contest for a new park. Carefully consider the common practice of naming parks and other places after people, as the meaning and relevance of these names can change over time. ◊Work with partners to incorporate art into functional park elements when possible, like the existing frog and trout drinking fountains. ◊Draw attention and educate about interesting natural history such as watersheds, creeks, and wetlands as successful programs such as the Gallatin Valley Land Trust’s Discovery Walks have done. ◊Prioritize the hiring of women and minorities in the formal request for proposal process, and in contracting for recreation providers, vendors, and park investment work. ◊Beyond permanent installations, activate spaces and tell stories through festivals and special events. ◊Explore signature play experiences. Creative play experiences are increasingly popular, as evidenced at Story Mill where design of the play structures interpret the landscapes of Montana, from farms and agriculture to rocky terrain and forested wilderness. While it is not practical to have every play structure represent this level of design for maintenance and cost reasons, there is an opportunity for strategic expansion of artful play in other areas of the city as future community parks are developed. These are key opportunities for partners or philanthropic engagement. ◊Celebrate Bozeman’s park bridges. Bozeman’s parks and trails include many unique, architectural pedestrian bridges that go beyond their utilitarian function. The city should build on this pattern and embrace opportunities to continue it in the future. Artful/designed bridges could be mapped to create a Bridge Loop or passport for visitors to explore Bozeman’s parks and trails through a new lens. top barrier to usage of parks, trails, or facilities was a lack of time to participate “To cater to youth and teenagers, transportation infrastructure could be expanded for teen destinations” - Partners PRAT Visioning Session 67 80 Goal 2 Strengthen PROGRAMS, PLACES, AND PARTNERSHIPS to meet changing community needs. Demand for existing and new programs is high, and Bozeman residents are keenly interested in structured programs like classes, sports, bicycle parks, and events and places that allow for unstructured or individual-led recreation. Investments in this range of activities, classes, sports, and events alongside places to enable residents to explore their own creative approaches to ftness and wellness will have a signifcant impact on residents’ lives. Finally, the Safe Routes to Parks Community Survey: Disability Survey and a review of program participation rates all identifed a gap in inclusive or adaptive programs. These programs can build on what the Parks and Recreation Department already offers and be structured around the specifc needs of persons with different physical, visual, or mental abilities. From a youth soccer game to a swimming class, residents’ lives are impacted everyday by their participation in what the City offers. In addition to reaching out for more inclusive program offerings, the PRAT plan also recommends flling in existing programming gaps based on regional and national trends to create a more robust and equitable range of opportunities for residents of all backgrounds and abilities. 68 81 Bozeman residents are aligned in identifcation of their top three program needs: access to aquatics or swimming, arts and culture, and winter recreation. Beyond this consensus, residents identifed needs for over 18 different programs. Given the size of existing facilities, the City’s staffng capacity, and the wide range of recreation needs, the Bozeman Park and Recreation Department today is unable to provide all programs at all locations. By re-purposing the facilities that the City has and partnering to build new spaces that support what the community wants most in places with the lowest access, the Department can make better use of available resources and tailor programming to meet the needs of all residents. The following strategies outline how the City can make use of what it has, expand inclusive programming, and craft a transformative program menu over time. 69 82 programs, places, partnerships Strategies Bozeman has limited indoor space to support indoor programming This is a trackable metric 2.1. Invest in distributed community recreation hubs across the City. Bozeman has limited indoor space to support indoor programming and has less community center and recreational facilities than its peer cities. Still, the City and various partners are actively engaged in conversations to close facility gaps. For example, the City of Bozeman and Belgrade are all working to increase access to aquatics spaces and programs through investments in new swim facilities. ◊ Create an intergenerational, multi-functional center on the west side of the city. The 2012 Feasibility Study, ongoing library and community center project, and ongoing aquatics discussions reinforce the need for a new recreation center and outdoor pool facility. Investments also need to be made in existing facilities, especially the Bozeman Swim Center and Bogert Pool to ensure aquatic facilities are more evenly distributed across the city. ◊ Prioritize future facility or community hub investments in areas with limited park access and places where growth is highest. Coordinate all long-term future community hubs near land within the city designated commercial mixed-use or residential mixed-use as identifed by the City’s future land use map. ◊ Regularly update and expand the City’s park and facility inventory to support community health, wellness, and need across the city. Baseline elements for community hubs like universally accessible and gender neutral restrooms, indoor gathering spaces, outdoor pavilions, water access and aquatics related elements, and trails within parks should be increased in areas of the city with high social vulnerability or in areas projected to grow. 70 83 2.2. Create program offerings and elements that respond to community needs, especially underserved demographic groups. While people across all ages currently participate in recreation programs, anecdotally, community members indicated that currently the Department does the best job providing a range of options for youth activities. Winter recreation, arts and culture, and aquatics or swimming programs were the programs for which the highest number of residents indicated were a priority for future investment. Many of the programs identifed as community priorities have specifc requirements about the types of facilities that can support their function or have limitations on inclusion. The Department should focus on providing program offerings that support a welcoming, inclusive, and accessible environment for all residents. ◊Redefne core program areas to focus on program type rather than age.This is a trackable metric Rather than organize programs by age group, which is how these programs are organized today, Bozeman should consider using activity types to designate core programs, building on the core programs residents identifed as priorities for future investment. The PRAT Plan proposes that the future core programs be organized into nine program areas - arts, athletics, aquatics, camps, ftness, general interest, lifelong learning, nature/outdoor education, and outdoor adventures. Within each program area, the goal would be to provide offerings for all age groups (preschool, youth, teen, adult, active aging). There will still be age-specifc core program areas like camps, which would only include preschool, youth, and teen. Organizing in this fashion will clarify the structure of recreation programming and reinforce how the City is incorporating the needs and desires of residents for structured experiences and activities. 71 84 programs, places, partnerships Strategies the city presently organizes programming by age group This is a trackable metric ◊ Develop a policy for inclusive or adaptive recreation programming. While the Department aims to make all programs inclusive and accommodate participant special needs for accommodations on a case by case basis, the Department needs a formal policy for therapeutic or inclusive programming to communicate how these needs will be met and set expectations regarding program participation with Bozeman residents with intellectual, physical and/or sensory disabilities. In accordance with these efforts, Eagle Mount distributed disability survey to get relevant community feedback. The City needs to continue outreach to get the word out to partner organizations, leaders and individuals with disabilities and their families. ◊ Center park equity. Use lessons from initiatives such as the Prevention Institute’s People, Parks, and Power initiative to ensure that Black, Latino, and Indigenous people beneft from investments in parks and park programming. 2.3. Craft a formal policy to defne partner and affliate group relationships. ◊ Formalize oversight of athletics partners and feld use with public and private sports organizations. Explore an athletic commission to work with the operators of private leagues to coordinate scheduling, sign-ups, marketing, and offcials. ◊ Consider requiring all affliate groups to provide proof of coach criminal background checks, and compare the list of coaches to the state and federal sex offender databases. 72 85 ◊ Partner to expand the mix of Arts and Culture program offerings. Building on a successful partnership with the Bozeman Municipal Band, explore more opportunities for program partnerships or shared use agreements with Bozeman Art Museum, the Emerson, and other cultural organizations to support arts-based education and capacity building. ◊ Expand temporary art exhibitions and permanent public art programs across city parks and facilities. Work with the Gallatin Art Crossing and other organizations focused on community enrichment and wonderment, like Random Acts of Silliness and Mountain Time Arts to foster more engagement with art and exploration throughout the city. 2.4. Clarify the feld reservation and use process. ◊ Create a clear calendar and reservation system for feld reservation needs. ◊ Charge a special feld use fee for nonresident participants. 2.5. Broaden awareness of programs and services. In the statistically-valid community survey, over 90% of respondents rated parks and recreational opportunities in Bozeman as good or excellent. Yet, throughout the planning process, and in that same survey, citizens and stakeholders frequently indicated they were unaware of all of the parks, facilities, and programs that the Park and Recreation Department offers. Just under half of respondents were unaware of or do not take advantage of the City’s programs. This is a trackable metric Case Study BumbleWood Thicket Fairy Village 2022 Located amid the winding, wooded paths of Glen Lake Rotary Park in Bozeman, the 3rd Annual Fairy Village contained all new fairy homes and business establishments created by talented Montana artists. 73 86 programs, places, partnerships Strategies This is a trackable metric “People freaking love the park when it gets fooded for hockey.” - Partners PRAT Visioning ◊ Develop mobile applications for users to fnd system information (e.g., park locations and elements, trails and paths, program information, upcoming events) or to report a problem. People increasingly prefer to access the majority of their information online, rather than through print material. In response, communities across the country are developing mobile applications, or apps, with information and locations of all of the municipality’s parks and facilities and their elements, tied to work cities are already doing to inventory and communicate all that their parks have to offer. It can be a great tool to get the word out to teens and young adults about park-specifc events, share updates about new facilities or programs, and provide a seamless connection to a centralized program registration system. ◊ Continue to review the most effective uses of electronic and social media for marketing and informational purposes. Almost half of Bozeman residents are unaware of the programs the City offers and the printed program guide continues to be the primary source of information about City- led programs. The City of Bozeman social media platforms including, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram collectively have over eleven thousand followers. These platforms could be used to market programs and classes, as well as to broadly share when the Department is hiring and celebrate major events. ◊ Highlight health and wellness benefts of Park and Recreation Department programs in all informational materials. Bozeman Health, Healthy Gallatin, the Billings Clinic and the City-County Health Department, among others, already track localized health information and share health benefts of increased physical activity, thoughtful eating habits, and access to the outdoors. The Department should develop 74 87 75 a relationship with these health-focused partners to communicate the role of parks and recreation on community health online, in social media posts and program guides, and in City facilities. 2.6. Work with regional tourism and economic development organizations to create a tourism strategy that addresses the benefts and impacts of increased tourism on parks, facilities, and events. Over 1.94 million visitors few into Bozeman’s airport and spent a total of $1 billion dollars in Gallatin County in 2021 alone. As the gateway to Yellowstone and Big Sky, the Park and Recreation Department has the opportunity to capitalize on the value and quality of its events and parks to attract visitors to the city, recoup costs, and support economic development. Given the increasing trends in visitor numbers and park uses in and out of Bozeman (including those who are coming through Bozeman to get to other destinations), the City plans to respond to the impacts of increased use on parks and natural areas to preserve environmental health and programmatic opportunities. ◊Work with the City of Bozeman’s Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Bozeman Partnership to strengthen the Park and Recreation Department’s contribution to local and regional marketing efforts. At a minimum, this could include fyers in the tourism offce, at the Bozeman airport, and top ten City park attractions on partner webpages to help strengthen engagement between visitor experiences of the city. ◊Cross-market Park and Recreation Department destinations with other regional attractions to encourage visitors to spend time and money in the city of Bozeman, like the Pathway to the M. The following programs are offered by many agencies across the country, but are programs not currently offered by the Department. ◊Arts ◊Childcare ◊Cooking ◊Dance ◊E-Sports ◊Golf ◊Gymnastics/Tumbling ◊Homeschool ◊Horseback Riding ◊Language Arts ◊Martial arts ◊Music ◊Open Gym ◊Pets ◊Pickleball ◊Preschool ◊Seniors ◊Theatre/Acting ◊Therapeutic Recreation 88 programs, places, partnerships Strategies IN 2021, Over 1.94 million visitors flew into Bozeman’S airport ◊ Advocate for a resort tax. Montana legislation enables local communities to charge a resort tax. The resort tax is a local-option sales tax that provides Montana communities and resort areas a funding source to fnance a variety of services or improvements. The City of Bozeman should continue to push for legislation that would allow it to charge a resort tax. ◊ Consider impact of tourism on facilities and infrastructure. 2.7. Gather program data and track program participation annually. The pandemic has shown just how benefcial parks and recreation programs are to the health and wellness of a community; yet, Parks and Recreation Departments continue to work within increasingly tight budgets and cuts as a “nonessential” community service. Data can help to safeguard against budget cuts. Data-driven decisions are needed to better make the case for the essential contributions of parks, open space and recreation services as well as to ensure that investments are shared equitably across the city and, particularly, to places where investments could have outsized impacts on the long- term physical and mental health of residents. This is a trackable metric ◊ Establish metrics for measurement of departmental goals (i.e., program cancellation rate, program reach, new programs offered, and residency). One method to establish and track progress is to develop a Department-led “business plan” process that establishes priorities and defnes performance metrics as a way to quantify the Department’s success towards program goals. The business plan could be developed as part of recreation staff meetings to brainstorm metrics and connect staff to achieving quantifable goals. 76 89 ◊ Begin Recreation Division quarterly program evaluation process. Using fee to participation data, customer satisfaction surveys, and overall program participation as a guide, meet as a Department quarterly to share updates to program investments, participation rates, and revenues after every program season to refect on the season and prepare for future investments. ◊ Track population changes, community health metrics, and development starts across the city, and use that data to inform decisions about locating recreation programs and events. Work with Gallatin City and Gallatin County Health Department, Bozeman Health, and Billings Clinic to help support their Community Health Needs Assessment process and identify any metrics that help to tie individual and community health outcomes to nutrition programming, physical activity, and outdoor experiences. This is a trackable metric Data can help to safeguard against budget cuts 77 90 programs, places, partnerships Strategies “Organize frequent family, kid runs” -Community member during August Pop -Up Event 2.8. Grow program partnerships in areas that are complementary to Department offerings. ◊Enhance existing local public, private and nonproft partnerships and seek out new ones to fll gaps in service delivery. The City’s Park and Recreation Department operates over 125 programs a year, which is signifcant for a small group and a resident population of over 50,000 people. There are also many private and not-for-proft organizations that provide either similar programs or help to close the gaps on programs the Department cannot operate. As an example, Aquatics are among the most sought after programs for residents of all ages, reaching capacity within hours of opening the registration portal. The YMCA, and other programs and private providers help to alleviate the pressure on Bozeman to provide aquatics programs across the City, especially more recently when an unexpected closure at the Bozeman Swim Center meant that many City-led programs needed to fnd space for aquatic needs. Another possible partner is Big Sky Wind Drinkers, a running club that promotes physical health while bringing people to parks and natural areas around the City. ◊Expand partnerships beyond the Montana Parent Magazine to deploy seasonal program guides. Additional partners could include organizations that serve persons with disabilities, persons who speak a language other than English at home, seniors, teens, and young adult populations. The Department needs to also formalize, and improve, coordination of relationships to best utilize these partnerships. 78 91 ◊ Create partnership, teaming guidelines and policy to defne goals and expectations. The City of Bozeman currently has a wide range of partnerships with various organizations for programming, advocacy, land acquisition, and park improvements. To protect and strengthen these relationships, it is vital that the Department craft formal agreements that better defne common mission, outline expectations, timelines, and specify leadership roles for both the City and the partner organization. Bozeman’s operations, capital investments, and programs are made stronger by successful partnerships with like-minded organizations. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust and their trail acquisition and trail building programs are an example of a mutually benefcial partnership the City of Bozeman wants to continue to enhance and expand. Not all relationships are as successful. Communicating expectations early and clearly around topics that can easily become signifcant challenges if not addressed, like maintenance or operations roles, will help to support the capacity of City staff and optimize existing resources aligned with the core mission of the Department. Partnerships, even strong ones with long standing organizations like the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, beneft from short term agreements that allow both parties to revisit terms every few years to protect the relationship over a sustained period. The PRAT plan proposes that the Department engage all partners in two to fve year agreements with all program, maintenance, and investment partners. The Department’s addition of a Volunteer/Engagement Coordinator position to staff will help coordinate these partnerships and maximize the benefts of such relationships. 79 92 Goal 3 Connect Bozeman’s community with safe and enjoyable PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES. Demand for new facilities to expand the current network of pathways, trails and bicycle facilities is strong and the network will need to keep up with the growing community. Additionally, the need to improve connectivity and reduce barriers within the network must be addressed. This goal is focused on the facilities and policies to connect and grow the recreation and active transportation network of shared use paths, natural trails, on-street bicycle boulevards, and sidewalks. A safer, well-maintained, connected path and trail system provides more residents with the option to walk or bicycle as a primary means of transportation. Whether for work or accessing goods and services, the better the network the more residents will choose active transportation as a less expensive, healthier, and environmentally friendly option over driving a personal vehicle. 80 93 How people move to, from, and within parks is fundamental to building a healthy community, both in terms of providing active options for transportation, but also for providing equitable means for residents to access park facilities and programs. Active communities have improved health, a cleaner environment, and are more sustainable and resilient. To maintain and improve its status as an active transportation community, Bozeman must prioritize the construction and maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Expanding and improving a network of safe, accessible, and effcient paths and trails will make active transportation an even more attractive option for everyday travel by everyone. This plan includes recommended strategies and key actions to create a connected active transportation network that integrates with the parks and recreation facilities. Together with the specifcations outlined in the Design Manual and the implementation recommendations, these strategies outline the actions to build a seamless network for active transportation. 81 94 pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies “A big investment in parks and connecting trails would make the city much more vibrant and livable.” -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment 3.1. Invest in a city-wide active transportation network. Expand the active transportation network to provide both reliable recreation and transportation opportunities throughout the community. In coordination with the county level Triangle Trails Plan, this plan identifes preferred routes that establish network connectivity. Additional neighborhood trails built through the private development process will further enhance connectivity. ◊ Use this plan as a guide for future public infrastructure planning and investment, as well as a resource in the private development process. Proposed facilities identifed in this plan will be incorporated into the City’s GIS mapping and other resources to ensure that the public and development community has access to the proposed network. Proposed pathway alignments shown are a ‘planning level’ representation of intended routes, which provide connections between destination points and desirable pathway experiences for a variety of users. In the fnal implementation of the proposed network, adjustments and modifcations to the alignments shown are expected. Such adjustments may be required to navigate environmental features, meet code requirements, accommodate landowner desires, and complement future development projects. These adjustments should be expected and accommodated, so long as the adjustments do not compromise the original intent to enhance network connectivity. The proposed new routes represent approximately 137 new miles of shared use paths, 36 new miles of connector paths, 107 new miles of neighborhood trails, and nine miles of bicycle boulevards for a total of 289 miles of new pathways. 82 95 83 12’ CLEAR 2’ 10’ 2’ VARIES 10’ PAVED TRAIL TRAIL BUFFER DRIVE LANE BUFFER BUFFER CURB &GUTTER Typologies* Anchor Routes Primary routes linking neighborhoods to parks and commercial areas. They connect to neighborhood trails and connector pathways to provide a unifed network. Bike Boulevard Streets that prioritize pedestrian and bicycle travel by using signage, pavement markings, and lane constrictions to limit vehicle traffc. Connector Path Connect other bike and pedestrian corridors and neighborhood destinations with 6 to 8-foot wide paved or natural surfaces. Neighborhood Trail Four to six foot wide local, natural surface or gravel routes that are typically used for recreation Pathways A term used to collectively refer to all types of active transportation routes. Shared Use Path Ten to twelve foot paved paths that accommodate higher speed travel directly connecting community destinations. Bike Boulevard VARIES SHARED ROAD VARIES SHARED ROAD 5’ LANDSCAPE AREA 5’ LANDSCAPE AREA 5’ SIDEWALK 5’ SIDEWALK 2’ 2’ 6’-8’ TRAIL 10’ CLEAR BUFFER 2’ VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA 2’ 4’-6’ TRAIL VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA BUFFER Connector Path Neighborhood Trail Shared Use Pathway Figure 4.6 Active Transportation facility typologies *New typologies may be introduced through other guiding documents or in code revisions, and the Design Manual will be updated more frequently to incorporate and provide specifcations for new typologies 96 VVaalllleyey C Ceenntteerr L Lnn I-9I-900 BBaxaxtteerr Ln Ln ee Avee Ave vvOak St eOak St e ee rre A Aee Avwl Avel Avhwh Av Avett Avhhddoo99trtrousousFF117733RRDDuurrststoonn MMaaiinn St St HuHuffffiinene Ln Ln Kagy Blvd Kagy Blvd d Rdoonnwe S LeSee ee roe Av Av Av Av Avo Avuuorhoowlrthdttthddhdoo99ttrrCF117733ugughh R Rdd Kagy Blvd Kagy Blvd d Rdoon nw LreolttoowCFII-9-9 00 Proposed AT Network 84 97 I-90I-90 Main StMain St Durston RdDurston Rd Griffin DrGriffin Dr W Tamarack StW Tamarack St 7th Ave7th AveRouse AveRouse Ave 3rd Ave3rd Ave Oak StOak St I-90I-90 Proposed Anchor Routes Proposed Shared Use Paths Proposed Connector Paths Proposed Neighborhood Trails Proposed Bike Boulevards Existing Trails Existing Shared Use Paths City Boundary Growth Boundary Roads Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Future Parks Parks 7th-Front Street Connector Pathway Facilities Figure 4.7 Proposed Active Transportation network with zoom in of 7th-Front St Connector, highlighted in orange. N1 mile0 0.5 85 98 86 pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies This is a trackable metric What is an “Anchor Route”? Visionary Highlyvisible All-ages and abilities Uninterrupted All-season Anchor Routes are Shared Use Paths, with a minimum with of 12-feet, are intended to establish unbroken routes linking neighborhoods to parks and commercial areas. They connect to neighborhood trails and connector pathways to provide a unifed network. ◊Build upon the practices and standards established by this plan by including active transportation within future Transportation Master Plan update. Many facilities included in this plan are also identifed as bicycle and pedestrian facility recommendations in the 2017 Transporation Master Plan (TMP). Providing a comprehensive approach to active transportation, including pathways, trails, and on-street bicycle facilities, within future updates to the TMP will enable the continuation of best practices for an integrated system for transportation and recreation facilities. ◊Annually update the network improvements priorities using the recommendations included in Chapter 6. The list of proposed new routes and connections exceeds the annual investment for active transportation. In order to maintain and grow the network, the City should annually review and dedicate funds to effectively construct the new routes over time and consider requirements in the development code for new developments to infll the system as they currently do for roads. 3.2. Identify and develop a network of anchor routes that serve as key travel corridors. Anchor Routes are the backbone of the active transportation network. Existing pathway corridors, like the Gallagator Trail, as well as new routes are identifed as Anchor Routes. These primary routes will serve as longer-distance, lower-stress, and comfortable anchors for the active transportation network. Anchor routes provide a highly visible system enhanced by the wayfnding plan. These primary routes strive to maximize connectivity between key community locations. The alignments are designated because they provide cohesion within the system (suffcient spacing and connection to the supporting grid) and directness in terms of distance. These routes and improvements will focus on safety, 99 comfort and enjoyment for all ages and abilities. At times, Anchor Routes will be primarily part of a street cross-section that ties together lively civic spaces. At other times, Anchor Routes will fall entirely within a park or a parklike space. ◊ Identify key needs for land acquisition, easements, and coordination opportunities with land development projects to secure Anchor Route corridors. This is a trackable metric This is a trackable metric This is a trackable metric 87 "I would love to ride my bike from Bozeman to Belgrade and Four Corners without traveling along a high vehicle traffc route." -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment Developing a network of anchor routes will require a long- term vision and a comprehensive strategy to aggregate the necessary land or legal access. ◊ Prioritize funding to build, connect, and maintain Anchor Routes. The City should add prioritized shared use path and connector path projects to the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP). Likewise, an annual portion of the City’s street construction budget should be allocated to build shared use paths and critical connector paths. In areas of key park connectivity beneft and where severe barriers exist, cash-in-lieu of parkland money can be used to close gaps. Routes not likely to be completed with adjacent development should be prioritized. ◊ Plan for robust maintenance of Anchor Routes to ensure year-round use and a high level of accessibility. A complete set of maintenance recommendations are provided in the Design Manual. ◊ Design traffc calming measures into the routes, particularly at key destinations to reduce potential conficts. As the network grows and connectivity improves, developing design standards to minimize conficts at key destinations will build a safer network. These include bollards, striping, signage, and designating space for different mode types. 100 Baxter LnBaxter Ln Valley Center LnValley Center Ln I- 9 0 I- 9 0 Oak StOak St DurstonDurston Huffine LnHuffine Ln Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd 19th Ave19th AveFowler AveFowler Ave19th Ave19th AveFowler LnFowler LnCottonw RdCottonw d Proposed AT Network East/West Connector Baxter LnBaxter Ln I-9 0 I-9 0 I-9 0 I-9 0 Oak StOak St DurstonDurston Huffine LnHuffine Ln Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd Main StMain St 7th Ave7th Ave Bridger DrBridger Dr Tschache LnTschache Ln Annie StAnnie St 19th Ave19th AveRouse AveRouse Ave Fowler AveFowler Ave3rd Ave3rd Ave 7th Ave7th Ave 19th Ave19th Ave Fowler LnFowler Ln3rd Ave3rd AveSourdough RdSourdough Rd Figure 4.8 Proposed East-West Connector highlighted in or angeR ddoooo88 101 I- 9 0 I- 9 0 Kagy BlvdKagy Blvd I-90I-90 Main StMain St7th Ave7th AveRouse AveRouse Ave3rd Ave3rd Ave7th Ave7th Ave3rd Ave3rd AveSourdough RdSourdough RdFrontage Pathway Baxter LnBaxter Ln Oak StOak St Ferguson AveFerguson Ave Flanders Mill RdFlanders Mill Rd Valley Center LnValley Center Ln Catamount StCatamount St I-9 0 I-9 0 19th Ave19th Ave Fowler AveFowler Ave I- 9 0 I- 9 0 Fr o n t a g e R d Fr o n t a g e R d Figure 4.9 Proposed Frontage Pathway highlighted in orange 89 102 pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies "Traffc Calming on Babcock is critical as promoting access to Valley West park. Bike lane on Babcock is a step, but decreasing the width of the road and more trees close to the street edge would slow traffc more naturally on this corridor and improve multimodality." -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment This is a trackable metric route, they are designated and designed to give pedestrians and bicycles travel priority by using signs, pavement markings, and obstacles to limit speed and number of vehicles. Bicycle boulevards are a key component of a low-stress active transportation network providing connections throughout the core of the community. ◊ Ensure new private development is required to construct any adjacent active transportation facility identifed in this plan. As Bozeman continues to grow, private development will continue to be the means for building out the active transportation network. Update the UDC to ensure requirements with best practices from other communities adapted for Bozeman. Figure 4.10 Bike boulevard 3.3. Close existing gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle network. This plan identifes areas of Bozeman that lack adequate access to the network and neighborhoods where facilities are isolated due to a lack of connectivity. New shared use paths and connectors are proposed in these areas to close network gaps and increase overall connectivity. ◊ Prioritize construction of network segments to close key connectivity gaps. This plan includes a project prioritization matrix located in the “How Do We Get There” chapter, which suggests a variety of recommended criteria including mobility equity and park accessibility. High priority projects should be added to the City’s CIP or funded with an allocation from the City’s street construction budget. ◊ Establish an inclusive network of bicycle boulevards that provide low-stress connectivity through Bozeman’s core. Bicycle Boulevards are streets with low motorized traffc volume and speeds. More than simply a designated bicycle 90 103 91 Bike BOulevards Bike Boulevards are local streets that prioritize bicyclists, pedestrians, and rollers of all ages and abilities. The goal of a bike boulevard is to increase bike and pedestrian comfort, safety, and accessibility to provide more active transportation opportunities through urban settings. Although some vehicle traffc is still allowed on these boulevards, cars are demoted to secondary users. Creating successful bike boulevards require implementing a variety of strategies including traffc-calming mechanisms, ample signage and pavement markings, and protected crossings. Bike boulevards should include a selection of (but are not limited to) the following design elements: Signs and pavement markings – Essential elements for establishing and differentiating a bike boulevard from a local street. Signage and markings communicate priority for bikers and pedestrians, while limiting through traffc and lowering vehicle speeds. Signage guides users through the active transportation network. Figure 4.11 Sharrow pavement markings Figure 4.12 Wayfnding Signage Figure 4.13 Identifcation Signage 104 92 Vehicle volume management strategies – Established to reduce vehicle through- traffc. Diversions can be either regulatory or physical. Regulatory treatments include signs that post written street restrictions, such as banning turns or entry onto a street during specifc times of day or only allowing pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies Vehicle speed management strategies – Physical improvements to the streets that reduce vehicle speeds to a maximum of 15 to 20 miles per hour. Vertical defections, such as raised speed humps, horizontal defections, such as chicanes, and street narrowing, all create streets designed for slow driving. Figure 4.17 Neighborhood traffc circle Figure 4.14 Chicane Figure 4.15 Speed hump Figure 4.18 Pinch point Figure 4.16 Median island Figure 4.19 Curb bulb outs 105 93 residents to drive on the bike boulevard. Physical treatments are constructed barriers that prevent certain vehicle traffc from entering the bike boulevard. Figure 4.23 Signage/ Partial closure Figure 4.24 Right-in, right-out Figure 4.20 Median diverter Crossings – Protected intersections and crossings allow for continuous and safe travel of bikes and pedestrians along the bike boulevard corridor. Adequate protection at intersections should ensure that intersecting car traffc is highly aware of crossing pedestrians and bicyclists, while establishing a comfortable crossing experience for users. Figure 4.21 Median refuge island and RRFB Figure 4.22 Curb bulb out Figure 4.25 HAWKS crossing 106 94 Figure 4.26 Confict diagram showing that mid-block crossings have fewer conficts with vehicles. Figure 4.27 The Gallagator trail at Graf Street where trail has been cut for road extension. Snow tracks after a few hours of use show that the sign routing users to a crosswalk 160 feet away is not effective. pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies mid-block crossings Mid-block crossings are often needed due to off-street active transportation routes intersecting the street network away from existing street intersections. These are ideal for connecting neighborhood trails to nearby services and the greater active transportation network. An effective mid-block crossing consists of a marked crosswalk, appropriate pavement markings, warning signage, and other treatments to slow or stop traffc such as curb extensions, median refuges, beacons, rectangular rapid fashing beacons (RRFBs), hybrid beacons, and HAWK signals. Designing crossings at mid-block locations depends on an evaluation of motor vehicle traffc volumes, sight distance, pedestrian traffc volumes, land use patterns, vehicle speed, and road type and width. Mid-block crossings provide opportunities to provide convenient and direct connections between pathways. Experience in Bozeman shows that diverting these users to nearby intersections is not effective or practical and will not dissuade many users from crossing at the most obvious location. On collector or arterial streets with center turn lanes, mid-block crossings should be paired with pedestrian refuge islands to shorten the crossing and enable users to focus on crossing one direction at a time. Mid-block crossings vastly simplify the number of potential conficts and decisions that need to be made by both trail users and motorists over intersection locations. 107 3.4. Improve east-west connections. Most of Bozeman’s primary active transportation corridors run north-south, aligning with creeks or other waterways that fow through the area. Thus, there are currently very few continuous path and trail corridors in Bozeman that run east-west resulting in serious connectivity and access issues. ◊Prioritize construction of east- west network facilities. Identifcation of gaps and routes that provide east- and west-running routes should be identifed on an annual basis in order to address this network inadequacy. ◊Improve safety of pedestrian and bicycle crossings for east-west routes. North-south arterial streets act as major barriers to east-west active transportation routes. Therefore, as the recommended east- west routes are implemented, safe crossings must be included. 3.5. Improve crossings that act as major barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists. Addressing network barriers created by Bozeman’s arterial roadways is a priority to ensure that the active transportation system is no longer fragmented by busy streets. Strategies have been established for various safe and intuitive pedestrian and bicycle crossings across large roads, such as 7th Avenue, This is a trackable metric Mid Block Crossing on Oak St (View 1) Mid Block Crossing at Oak & Ferguson (View 2) Figure 4.28 At locations where active transportation facilities cross a major street, a variety of treatments can improve visibility and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians 19th & Lincoln Pedestrian Crossing 95 108 Baxter Ln Oak St Durston Rd Huffine Ln pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies 19th Avenue, Oak Street, and Huffne Lane, which prevent continuous low-stress active transportation connectivity across the city. Critical locations for these crossings were identifed by assessing pedestrian- bicycle-vehicle confict points and desire lines along major arterials. ◊Prioritize improvements to critical safe This is a trackable metric crossing locations. This plan identifes the locations of important crossings that need safety improvements. The goal of these improvements is to increaase connection throughout the city to improve to the entire system. ◊Implement ‘best practice’ safe crossing confgurations and technology. The safest crossing design alternatives will likely not be the least expensive. The critical importance of providing the safest crossings and the long-term health and air quality benefts of increased ridership requires committing the necessary funding. 3.6. Implement a comprehensive wayfnding system. A comprehensive wayfnding system is a mandatory element of Bozeman’s active transportation network. Effective wayfnding signage is a cost-effective way to improve the overall use and accessibility of the system. Comprehensive wayfnding helps people traveling throughout the network and directs them to community destinations. Baxter Ln Oak St Durston Rd Huffine Ln Roads Railroad City Boundary Growth Boundary Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Parks Existing Trails Intersection Crossings Midblock Crossings Figure 4.29 Critical intersection and midb 96 109 N II-9-9 00 CCaattaammouounntt S Stt ee vv A Ahht19t19II-9-900 ee vv A Aeee ee vh Avouseous Av AvRRh Addrd 7t7trd 33MMaaiinn St St II-9-900 WW Ka Kaggyy A Aveve E KE Kaaggy By Bllvvdd ee vv A Ahht19t190 0.5 1 mile d midblock crossings for safe crossing investments. 9 Critical Intersections and Midblock Crossings 7 110 pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies pedestrian + bicycle facilities Figure 4.30 Oak street trail Strategies A coordinated and well-designed wayfnding system improves the coherency of the network and can provide a greater sense of user security and comfort, as users receive confrmation that they are on the correct route and are aware of how far they must travel to reach their destination. ◊Enhance users’ ability to navigate Bozeman’s network and fnd key destinations. The wayfnding system should give clear guidance to users to ensure their experience is safe and that they understand any accessibility considerations related to that particular pathway, crossing, or facility. ◊Provide information such as destinations, direction, distance, and travel time. Detailed and accurate wayfnding information will increase user confdence, improve travel effciency, and ultimately increase overall network utilization. ◊Support and promote Bozeman’s identity. Future wayfnding should reinforce the unique identity of the City in the colors, textures and fonts used in signage. To ensure that the wayfnding identity is communicated comprehensively, implementation of the system should happen within phases over ten years and include parks and buildings that tie into the active transportation system. To ensure cohesiveness of the whole system, existing signage should be considered into decisions of future wayfnding identity as much as possible. ◊Build community voice into the wayfnding strategy process and raise visitor awareness of the overall network. The wayfnding strategy should look back to community feedback to the PRAT Plan related to access and safety in order to ensure increased awareness of the fnal result. 98 111 3.7. Install path improvements along active transportation routes. Certain associated improvements adjacent to pathways are essential for the success of a functional and safe active transportation network. Others are not critical for network function but enhance the user experience, safety, and cleanliness, and are often greatly desired by the community and are particularly necessary when trying to effect mode shift toward bicycling. ◊Commit to installing the recommended This is a trackable metric required improvements. As discussed further in Design Manual, certain supporting facilities like wayfnding and lighting are essential to a highly functioning active transportation network and therefore are mandatory. Lighting should be included in priority transportation routes and be dark-sky compliant. Pathway Improvements Classifcation Shared Use Paths Connector Paths Neighborhood Trails Required Improvements Wayfnding lighting (Dark skies compliant) Benches Bike racks Bike stations Trash Receptacles Wayfnding Bike racks Benches Wayfnding Dog Waste Stations Optional Picnic tables Lighting Lighting Improvements Water fountains Bike stations Water fountains Dog waste stations Water fountains Trash Receptacles Dog Waste Stations Benches 99 112 pedestrian + bicycle facilities “I would like to see the city plan for a connecting network of trails that allow bike and ped access throughout the city, even to Belgrade and Bridger Bowl, etc.” -PRAT Plan Engage Bozeman public comment Strategies ◊Prioritize installation of recommended optional improvements to enhance user experience. Optional mprovements not only improve resident’s experience but encourage higher utilization of the active transportation network. These include strategically located benches, bicycle racks, and water fountains. 3.8. Leverage Bozeman’s linear parks and watercourses as part of the active transportation network. Many of the existing network gaps and new routes identifed in this plan could be implemented by allowing more fexible use of linear parks and watercourse setbacks. Consider updates to the Unifed Development Code, as recommended in the Policy Considerations section, within the “How Do We Get There” chapter. ◊Allow all active transportation typologies to be located within watercourse setbacks. Shared use paths, connector paths, and neighborhood trails should be permitted within Zone 2 of watercourse setbacks regardless of surface types in areas where infll pathways are needed to facilitate connections to a larger trail network, and where lot constraints prevent additional setback. Consider partnering with Montana DNRC to review impacts within the watercourse setback ◊Allow certain active transportation corridors to be designated as linear parks that meet parkland requirements. In many cases corridors that incorporate pathways and adjacent open space should be recognized as both active transportation routes and parkland. 100 113 101 3.9. Ensure inclusive and equitable access to and within parks. To develop an inclusive active transportation network, pathways must be designed and maintained to engage communities of varying incomes, and feel safe and accessible to all age groups, modes of travel, and ability levels. The network should consist of a variety of facility types that promote walking, biking, and micromobility as both recreation activities and transportation options. Finally, the network of shared use and connector paths should meet the minimum standards for accessibility to create a variety of accessible active transportation and recreation opportunities for those with mobility challenges. ◊Develop policies to allow for the use of e-bikes, e-scooters, and similar modes of assisted mobility on active transportation routes. Electric assisted modes of micromobility encourage and allow more people to engage in active transportation. Comprehensive policies that include education and enforcement components can effectively incorporate all modes and minimize user conficts. A comprehensive approach to electric assisted modes should be included within the future updates to the TMP. ◊Develop a toolkit to evaluate and prioritize projects. Use adopted City plans (Strategic Plan, Community Plan, Climate Action Plan, Transportation Master Plan), key network connections, and equitable access goals as prioritization criteria. “Everything that is not a car” that weighs less than 1,000 pounds -Horace Dediu on what constitutes Micromobility what is micromobility? Micromobility is an umbrella term encompassing a variety of small, generally low-speed vehicles and conveyances that can be electric or human-powered and privately owned or part of shared feets. Micromobility devices include most small, predominantly one-person vehicles that operate at low speeds and are not gas-powered. Most micromobility devices ft within a standard bike lane or sidewalk and weigh less than 100 pounds. Although the term applies to everything from skateboards to wheelchairs, the term, coined by Horace Dediu, gained popularity when feets of bikes and scooters fooded city streets in the 2010s, kicking off a revolutionary trend that has altered the way planners and policymakers think about and regulate street space in many cities. When supported by safe and accessible infrastructure, micromobility devices can bridge the gap between public transit options, replace cars for short trips, and complement larger delivery vehicles by providing last-mile services in dense neighborhoods. Shared feets can eliminate the cost of private ownership and the hassle of bringing devices onto public transit while connecting urban residents to their destinations. Source: What Is Micromobility? | Planetizen Planopedia 114 pedestrian + bicycle facilities Strategies 3.10. Revise the active transportation network classifcations and comprehensive design and maintenance standards. Clearly defned typologies for active transportation routes is critical to identifying which facilities best serve which users. The recommended typologies are intended to not only provide common nomenclature for this plan and future plans, but also to establish corresponding design standards. A more comprehensive analysis of these typologies and standards is included in the Design Manual. ◊Redefne and simplify off-street active transportation typologies. This plan recommends a revised structural hierarchy of pathway typologies that loosely mimics Bozeman’s roadway classifcations of arterial, collector, and local streets. The three recommended pathway typologies are shared use paths, connector paths, and neighborhood trails. ◊Create standards for bicycle boulevards. Bicycle boulevards create low-stress routes within existing neighborhoods by increasing awareness and safety of pedestrians and bicycles, by ensuring vehicle speeds are reduced. Major street crossings will have treatments designed to enhance safety and comfort. ◊Establish comprehensive standards and specifcations for construction and maintenance. Standards for the design and construction of all active transportation typologies is critical to successful implementation of the PRAT Plan. Maintenance standards for construction, surface preservation, repairs, safety precautions, and managing adjacent landscaping should be developed for and consistently applied to all network typologies. 102 115 Comparative Typologies Street Network Active Transportation Network Local Neighborhood Collector Connector Arterial Shared Use Urban Route Anchor Route Winter maintenance, like removing snow from shared use paths, is critical to year-round active transportation 103 116 Goal 4 Steward and sustain NATURAL RESOURCES across the parks and trails system. The intersectionality of Bozeman’s natural and human systems continues to shape how the city grows and manages its environmental, social, and economic assets. The City of Bozeman is shaped by thousands of years of human interaction with the land, which has changed more rapidly as white settlers built roads, businesses and houses over the landscape--culverting creeks and covering wetlands. As the city approaches its growth boundary, the balance of agrarian uses and woodland, meadow, and wetland land covers continue to decline at a rapid pace, giving way to more developed places. The City has responded to rapid growth with forward looking policies and investment priorities to ensure that new development is balanced with valuable open spaces both large and small. 104 117 Since the PROST, developments have been required to give neighborhood parks and open space/natural resource areas have been left to HOA management. As part of PRAT plan outreach and the needs related to landscape management, the City is changing policies to include natural areas, which include watercourses, riparian corridors, and wetlands as part of a larger neighborhood park. The PRAT recommends that barriers to achieving this type of park system be removed from the code to embrace a balanced parkland system. The PRAT Plan presents an opportunity to redefne our relationship to our natural systems and to develop approaches for City-owned and managed parks to effectively address climate change and protect our natural places for the use and enjoyment of generations to come. This goal identifes strategies to protect valuable green space balanced with increased development pressures, improve water conservation and air quality, support responsible use of our parks and natural areas, and craft a resilient future. 105 118 natural resources strategies 4.1. Create design standards and management practices appropriate to each landscape type. Environmental standards will provide much needed guardrails for decision making that ensures that the City has the capacity to purchase, improve, and appropriately maintain various park landscapes. ◊Create a landscape design and management best practices toolkit. Pull best practices from past plans and local manuals as a guide, like the 2017 Gallatin Valley Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2018 Climate Vulnerability and Resilience Strategy, and 2020 Bozeman Climate Plan among others. These best practices should include considerations regarding desired outcomes, typical designs, and plant lists. ◊Consider a rating system to set goals and benchmarks and evaluate progress. Rather than starting from scratch, the City can look to existing environmental standards and benchmark systems like The Sustainable SITES Initiative (SITES), which provides a comprehensive framework for designing, developing and managing sustainable and resilient landscapes and other outdoor spaces. This program provides clear guidance for standards and also connects environmental outcomes with community beneft. The standards should also include tools for reduced fre risk, drought management, shade, and food adaptability. ◊Encourage sustainable trail design and maintenance through the PRAT Design and Maintenance Manual. 106 119 4.2. Promote sustainable trail and park use. Parks are ideal places to build awareness of natural systems. This can be accomplished by planting native vegetation, incorporating trails that immerse people in nature while staying on paths, reducing the use of machinery or chemicals in maintenance processes that can impact water and air quality, and communicating the ecosystem service values of natural areas. ◊Use thoughtful trail design that encourages people to stay on the trail, with inviting access points to sit, watch, fsh, and play. ◊Establish an awareness campaign for low impact park and trails use within natural areas. The value of natural areas should be better communicated to enable more stewardship of those places. Well-intentioned visitors should always stay on marked trails to protect wildlife habitats and reduce negative impacts to native vegetation, including ecological degradation from heavy foot traffc off designated paths. Successful awareness campaigns are accessible to young audiences and provide a balance of friendly, clear messaging with facts that reinforce the importance of abiding by park rules. Campaigns that reinforce the relationship between dog owner behavior and intended or unintended outcomes should also be considered. Refer to Strategy 1.3 (Balance the needs of different park users) for more information about programs to support a dog owner and dog etiquette program. 107 120 natural resources strategies This is a trackable metric 4.3. Promote the protection and enhancement of intact, contiguous natural resource areas or sensitive lands. ◊Use the Sensitive Lands Plan and maps to guide future parkland acquisition and developer dedication in accordance with 76-3- 621 Montana Code Annotated. ◊Identify funding mechanisms or partnerships for acquisition of land. The Park and Recreation Department’s mission focuses on recreation experiences for people. While the Department does own many natural areas and works to maintain the land sustainably, the purchase of public lands that limit public access are not aligned with that mission unless well- integrated into the design of the park. In order to maintain the net open land, a portion of cash-in-lieu and other funding should be focused on acquisition. The City should continue to purchase land but also needs to rely on partnerships and other entities to acquire land in fexible and creative ways. 108 121 109 ◊Allow watercourse setbacks, wetlands, and other priority conservation lands and similar acreage to contribute to dedication requirements in new developments if the project also includes community beneft improvements. As of 2022, land dedication in new developments is limited to upland parcels that enable active uses, however these same dedication requirements do not include improvements to the park beyond irrigation infrastructure, sod, and perimeter trees and sidewalks. Incorporating critical habitats, riparian corridors, and wetlands into a portion of the land dedication requirement will enable the City to take on unifed management of sensitive lands and increase the development’s responsibility to improve adjacent areas for more active uses with more elements than previously required. Not only will this change to dedication encourage responsible long-term stewardship by the City, it will also reduce the burden on maintenance staff to mow and irrigate large areas. ◊Require developments to provide a parkland and natural resource analysis to facilitate the connection and continuity of natural resource areas (streams and ditches, foodplains, wetlands, riparian areas, trees and plant species, soils). This is a trackable metric Case Study Boulder Public Library and Boulder Creek Pathway When the Boulder Public Library was moved to its current location along the Boulder Creek Path, improvements were made to the path, adjacent creek and a new nature playground was incorporated into the project, next to the new library site. The balance of active, children- centered uses and protection of an important creek corridor highlighted the City of Boulder’s approach to reinvestment and critical habitat protection. 122 110 natural resources strategies This is a trackable metric 4.4. Expand nature play and programming. Case Study Mount Stirling Alpine Resort Interpretive Trail Victoria, Australia Merit Award 2015 A suite of interpretive elements that highlight local history and resources and presented the information on trail markers that provide visual clarity while blending into the natural environment. Sturdy cypress pine posts are laser-etched with the name of the resort and at eye level, partially encased in three- sided aluminum panels with digital prints applied ◊Find more ways for people and children to interact with wetlands, waterways and forests. The Parks and Recreation Department should develop a metric similar to the “10-minute walk” for unstructured play areas or ”wild” spaces. The City should frame nature play as intergenerational, or as spaces that allow people of all ages to be wild. The park system as a whole should mirror the greater natural context of Bozeman and include “wild” natural plantings, outdoor recreation, and places to pause and enjoy nature for all. 4.5. Implement low-impact design and management practices in park and facility capital projects. In May of 2022, the City Commission enacted permanent watering restrictions to curb irrigation of private lawns and landscape, which often use half of all city water in the summer months and the Parks Division followed suit. The Park Division’s participation in achieving and demonstrating water conservation strategies will make it more diffcult to irrigate parks and felds with large swaths of lawns. It also provides an opportunity for Parks and Recreation to think differently about water use and fnd creative ways to maintain the same high quality spaces while prioritizing water management needs. Best practices are needed to develop specifc design guidelines and management for wetlands, soccer felds, and other park or natural spaces to be improved for sustainability and climate metrics. 123 ◊Create standards for low water or drought tolerant irrigation infrastructure. Prioritize simple irrigation systems over advanced systems to reduce unnecessary water waste. Install fexible irrigation systems that are easy to manage, maintain, and replace if needed. Irrigating planting beds and trees during the vegetation’s establishment period will greatly increase the chances of survival for the planting and the planting’s lifespan. ◊Increase the amount of drought tolerant and native vegetation and trees in the park system. Work with the Montana Master Gardener Program and other like minded organizations to confrm and update plant selection guidance, share low water best practices with city staff, and lead workshops with community members to promote residential drought tolerant landscape. 4.6. Scale Department capacity to provide knowledgeable natural resources evaluation during the planning process for future facilities investments and management of natural areas. ◊Train and hire staff in sustainable land management practices. Consider creating a park ranger program or partnering with an existing city security program to monitor appropriate park and trail use. The program could be expanded to include volunteer programs with residents interested in invasive species management, riparian corridor enhancement, or trail maintenance. It could also include best practices for management of wetlands to support better natural area maintenance and management. This is a trackable metric This is a trackable metric This is a trackable metric 111 124 Goal 5 Grow STAFF AND CAPACITY to benefit the community. To fully care for Bozeman’s parks, trails and facilities and to provide the most inclusive experiences for the community, the City needs to build internal capacity and resources internally. Today, the City is managing increased maintenance of parks alongside the management, activation, and investment in existing and new parks and facilities with a small staff. Increasing staff and City resources can elevate the quality of the City’s operations and ensure that Bozeman’s community has equitable access to high-quality spaces and programs. To start, the City needs to ensure that the capabilities and capacity of its current staff match the department’s needs. 112 125 113 126 This is a trackable metric staff + Capacity Strategies 5.1. Attract and retain staff to effectively support the needs of Bozeman’s parks, programs, and trails. The design and upkeep needs of parks and facilities and the growing variety of programs offered by the Department increasingly require a larger staff. Currently, the Department has 54 full time employees, which is far below staffng numbers of the City’s peer communities. The City needs to increase staff capacity now, while simultaneously looking to the future. As needs and offerings grow, the Department must constantly reassess and adapt its staffng to maintain effciency and meet the community expectations. ◊Create intentional strategy to address hiring gaps directly. Work with the City’s Human Resources Department to actively and effciently recruit qualifed staff to fll open positions. Human Resources has already responded to position gaps with signing bonuses and hourly wage increases, and is positioned to do more to connect Department staffng needs to important programs, like lifeguards and aquatics. The Department will also need to be proactive about on- boarding and training new staff who need to develop the skills necessary to fll the roles they are hired for. A training program can be developed to specifcally address needed skills, and encourage staff growth through the Department. Alongside clear communication and training of roles, the Department should shed any tasks historically given to programming staff, including janitorial or administrative tasks, that are not core to the reason for their hiring. 114 127 ◊Conduct annual staff surveys to assess job satisfaction, staff development, staffng levels, and work environment. Assign a lead investigator within the Department to summarize surveys and share high level takeaways Department-wide. The Department should incorporate those takeaways into future policies and projects to appropriate retain existing staff, and attract future staff. ◊Provide regular training to ensure that existing staff develop the skills to perform their duties and grow within their roles. For example, if the City is accepting more watercourse setbacks as dedicated parkland, the overall maintenance is likely reduced but is much different from mowing turf grass because its management will require different types of equipment and technical skills. ◊Conduct an in-depth operational assessment including a staffng plan to defne roles and responsibilities and to strategically allocate funding. For example, if the City is accepting more watercourse setbacks as dedicated parkland, the overall maintenance is likely reduced but is much different from mowing turf grass because its management will require different types of equipment and technical skills. five ways toimprove hiring process 1.Create and improve job descriptions 2.Communicate with applicants in multiple channels 3.Post job in many databases 4.Center training/ development as part of the job 5.Move quickly to respond to applicants and potential hires 115 128 staff + Capacity Strategies 5.2. Continue to refne and communicate the Bozeman Parks and Trails Special District. In May 2020, the City created the Bozeman Parks and Trails Special District. The purpose of the District is to equitably invest and manage the City’s parkland. One of the key components of the District is the transition of maintenance of parkland from Property Owners Association management to City management to City management. In order for the effective management and maintenance of these spaces, the City now levies assessments that will beneft all City-owned or managed parks and trails. As the City works to transition to this new structure, it is imperative that the City sets expectations with communities through a variety of communication methods. ◊Develop a dashboard to share successes and communicate how resources are being allocated. The online dashboard can live on the Parks and Recreation webpage, and will include updates regarding District implementation and improvements, along with responses to frequently asked questions. Start by comparing costs and benefts of current maintenance district structure against Department desires for building out staff capacity including reduced contract reliance, increased supervision, redundancy with HOA maintenance, etc. Create a ticket system for the Community Enhancement application program and publicly track requests from community members regarding the District program. Using the seeclickfx program as a model, share what parks and open spaces are included within the Maintenance District and include tags in spaces where questions have been asked and responded to. The dashboard could include a Frequently Asked Questions document that is shared with key stakeholders, including property managers, Homeowners associations, developers and residents. 116 129 ◊Undertake a drive time analysis to determine the time maintenance staff spends driving during a typical day. Ensure maintenance district oversight and work to limit the amount of drive time (ideally to no more than an hour daily) to increase productivity and reduce the cost of maintenance and associated expenses such as fuel. Use and communicate the highest standards of maintenance (Per NRPA’s maintenance standards), with the PRAT’s maintenance and design manual as a guide. 5.3. Develop a philosophy and policies for cost recovery and revenue generation. The Department does not currently have a broad-based cost- recovery plan that could be used as a guideline for setting fees and systematic resource allocation; however, there is appetite to adopt a comprehensive cost-recovery philosophy, which can provide guidance for prioritizing core program areas, setting fees and charges, identifying tax subsidy levels, and allocating resources effectively and effciently. “Create an online "suggestion box" for people to pin their ideas or maintenance concerns onto a platform” -Community member feedback during August pop -up event ◊Establish cost recovery targets.This is a trackable metric The Department’s average annual cost recovery, or the calculated percentage of aggregate costs in relation to the revenues generated from programs and services, is 34.6%. As context, the offering of an activity or delivery of a service would achieve 100% cost recovery if the fees charged generated revenue suffcient to cover all associated costs related to the operation of the program. In order to increase the percentage of cost recovery to a new target, the Department should identify a range of cost recovery targets related to individual activity and service categories. Once the range has been established, adjust fees within that service category accordingly and monitor the program or service’s cost recovery annually. 117 130 staff + Capacity Strategies ◊Adjust fees and pricing to balance revenue generation with community accessibility. Departments typically subsidize activities for youth, teens, and seniors more than adult activities. Bozeman should also consider subsidies to programs with higher participation by low-income residents, or scholarships in programs in which affordability or willingness to pay are a barrier for low income families and other underrepresented demographics. ◊Create pricing strategies for different audiences based on a variety of factors that take into account existing fees, affordability, and program attractiveness. The following are common pricing factors the Department should consider when developing an approach to updating fees and charges: ◊Cost to offer the program (limited direct costs only) ◊History of fees charged ◊Perceived ability and willingness to pay ◊Number of participants per class/activity ◊Affordability for target audience ◊Ability to attract participants ◊Set a target for performance measures. Complete cost recovery for the costs to run programs, classes, and events should not drive decision making or changes to fee policies for programs. Instead, the City should set targets for cost recovery by age group and encourage low income households to participate using scholarships or program subsidies. In order to support these subsidies and encourage participation, the plan recommends setting the following targets: between 35% and 50% for both youth and active aging, and between 50% and 100% for adult programs. 118 131 - 119 132 120 5. how do we get there? Parks Implementation Guidance Active Transportation Implementation Guidance Design and maintenance Manual r te chapish tni133 Parks Implementation Guidance Successful implementation of the strategies and projects identifed by the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Plan requires balancing and addressing community aspirations, partner and stakeholder goals, and the Department’s mission and vision. The following build on the strategies and actions identifed in the PRAT plan document and serve as frst steps the Department and the City can take to begin a successful and inclusive implementation process. The PRAT Plan is a Framework The vision, goals, strategies, and recommendations should serve as a framework for decision making. When decisions or responses to the Bozeman community are needed, the plan serves as the reference point for decision making and whether or not new issues or responses to the community are of higher importance than what’s been established as existing direction. Because the plan is an integral tool for the Department, it should also be central to employee onboarding. Track Progress: Publicly release the plan online by placing the plan on the Department’s website and on Engage.Bozeman to track plan implementation progress on these sites. The Department can share updates about recommended implementation progress. Track and share progress with interested partners and community members as well as with key decision makers. At the end of each fscal year, refect on the results of the implementation efforts to-date and include continued community engagement and progress made within each big idea. In addition to yearly reviews, the Department should comprehensively refect on accomplishments to-date and evaluate progress in equitable project completion that achieves the plan’s goals. These comprehensive reviews are an opportunity for Bozeman to refne or change strategies and recommendations to refect changing community needs and recreation trends. In these reports the Department should provide data and metrics to clearly articulate plan developments and explain project benefts in a way various audiences can understand Identify the Plan Champion(s) Identify a primary staff person (or team) to guide various pieces of the plan’s implementation to ensure success. These staff people are responsible for monitoring progress and works with staff to effectively integrate the plan into the department. A strong candidate or team should be knowledgeable of the planning process, design and community engagement values of the recommendations made by the plan. Additional staff members should also lead specifc big ideas. These individuals can manage each recommendation within a big idea to ensure implementation is followed through and communicated with the Plan Champion, project partners, stakeholders and the broader community. 121 134 Commit to Community Goals Engage community members (residents, businesses, Department partners, and non-proft organizations) early and often during the implementation process. A knowledgeable community is the best way to secure support and ensure the project(s) suit the needs of those who will beneft from them. Equity needs to continue to be at the forefront of all conversations and engagement with underresourced communities must also be paramount to the engagement process. The following actions can be used to help get the word out and provide a continuous feedback loop with community members: •Engage the community through maintenance and recreation program staff who interact with the community daily in conversation or through formal feedback methods. Potential Plan Champions •Include a plan progress update in the Urban Parks and Forestry Board agenda to keep staff and stakeholders informed of the plan’s progress. •Guide outreach in an inclusive direction and adapt to changing community desires by using formalized policies for outreach advertising and messaging. •Use strong, clear visuals paired with data and refections on community input to frame the conversation. •Hold meetings at times and both in person and online that make it possible for all members of the community to participate. •Partner with community leaders and project partners to maintain momentum for the plan. •Build from the Safe Routes to Parks liaisons program to address language barriers, communication issues, and cultural barriers. PARTNERS Regular Maintenance and Monitoring Activation and Programming Signifcant Renovations or New Investments Core Implementer Plan Partner Core Implementer Plan Partner Core Implementer Plan Partner Parks/open spaces Parks Property Owners Associations GVLT Recreation Volunteer organizations; Downtown Bozeman Partnership; Western Transportation Institute; Private Recreation Programmers; HRDC; Leagues Parks Planning & Development; Bozeman Planning Division Private Developers, Land Trusts (e.g. Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Trust for Public Land) Trails/AT System Parks and Cemetery Future Trails Staff; Private maintenance crews to offset staff capacity Parks and Forestry Board Recreation Gallatin Valley Land Trust; Western Transportation Institute; Private Recreation Programmers Parks Planning & Development; Bozeman Planning Division Private Developers, Land Trusts (e.g. Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Trust for Public Land) Buildings/ facilities Facilities Management Recreation; Aquatics Bozeman Libraries; Bozeman School District Parks Planning & Development YMCA, Bozeman Libraries; Bozeman School District 122 135 Funding In order to maintain the net open land, focus cash-in- lieu program funds and other funding on acquisition. For the purposes of cash in lieu, a reasonably close proximity shall include parks that are well connected safe and enjoyable pedestrian and bicycle access to the development. Regulations The City of Bozeman enables park acquisition and improvements through the Unifed Development Code. The City should use the design manual and the current geographic distribution and gaps in parks and specifc park types to dictate what types of investments should be made in different parts of the city, either by the city on city-owned or dedicated land or by developers. The following actions are recommended. •UDC revisions are recommended that support an equitable distribution of elements, park types, and facilities, especially in communities of color, low income communities, and in places where there are gaps in safe, walking access. •Collect copies of all adopted individual park plans. •·Continue to require that developers prepare individual park master plans for all newly dedicated parkland. •Revise the Unifed Development Ordinance to support more connected park spaces and Active Transportation investments. •·Allocate funds in the City budget for City staff and/or consultants to prepare individual park master plans for existing parks lacking an adopted plan. •Revise and update existing park plans to refect changing community needs as identifed by this process and community feedback. Active Transportation Implementation Implementation is the primary goal of any community plan. However, there are fundamental questions that must be answered to successfully implement a comprehensive active transportation network connecting Bozeman’s parks and recreation facilities. How will new routes and segments be established? Who pays for construction? How will the routes be maintained? What criteria determine prioritization for investment? The foundation of successful implementation is built upon coordination and cooperation between the City, landowners, developers, non-proft organizations, and Bozeman’s citizens. Coordination beyond Bozeman and its city limits are also critical to ensure the plan’s active transportation efforts align with those in Gallatin County as outlined in the 2020 Triangle Trails Plan. The implementation strategies focus on network construction and route maintenance. As emphasized throughout this plan, properly maintaining existing routes is equally important to constructing new ones. The primary implementation components for both construction and maintenance include: •Methods: Various methods need to be used to construct and maintain Bozeman’s active 123 136 transportation network and associated wayfnding system. • Regulations: City regulations must effciently guide route construction within future subdivisions, private development, public transportation projects, and specifcally wayfnding elements • Policies: City procedures and policies need to align with the goals of establishing and maintaining a robust active transportation network • Standards: Clear standards for route construction and maintenance must be established and coordinated between jurisdictions and partners • Funding: Multiple sources of fnancing for both construction and maintenance must be identifed and leveraged • Prioritization: Strategic criteria need to be utilized to establish annual and long-term priorities for route construction and maintenance • A prioritization matrix has been provided to the City of Bozeman in order to assist in the development of priorities network Construction Active transportation facility construction is needed throughout the community for several key reasons: extending existing routes; closing gaps in the existing network; upgrading an existing segment from one typology to another; and providing entirely new routes. This plan recommends construction projects meeting all four of these needs. Methods A variety of methods will be employed to construct new routes and segments of the active transportation network. Which method for a given construction project will be most appropriate will depend on facility type, location, responsible parties, and funding sources. Anchor Routes and Shared Use Paths Anchor routes and shared use paths are typically, but not always, aligned with street corridors. Therefore, the most logical method for constructing new shared use paths is to incorporate them into street improvement and construction projects. These projects are usually planned and funded by the City of Bozeman or Montana Department of Transportation, but occasionally are part of large private developments. The “Path to the M” is an example of a signifcant shared use path construction project involving multiple government jurisdictions and several non-proft organizations. Connector Paths Connectors can be constructed using the widest range of methods. Often, they need to be constructed with private property owners as required by Bozeman Unifed Development Code. Connector paths and associated wayfnding can be planned and budgeted as a part of street improvement or construction projects. Lastly, non-proft partners may also construction new connectors. Neighborhood Trails Trails are typically constructed in conjunction with private development. Therefore, they are primarily dictated by the Unifed Development Code. 124 137 Regulations The City of Bozeman requires active transportation improvements through the Unifed Development Code, in sections of the code that include transportation pathways and recreation pathways. There are also design and construction standards for some active transportation facilities within the City’s public work standards. The following actions are recommended. •New development, regardless of type, should the required to construct any active transportation facility identifed in this plan. The UDC should be reviewed to ensure to this is clearly required. •Several other UDC revisions are recommended in Item 2 and Item 4 within the UDC appendix. This includes allowing all active transportation facility typologies to be located within watercourse setbacks and allowing certain facility corridors to count towards a project’s parkland requirements. •The City should revise its Transportation and Engineering standards to include all of the active transportation facilities identifed in this plan and the corresponding specifcations. Policies Building the comprehensive active transportation network requires a variety of aligned policies to ensure effcient implementation. A review of existing policies should be completed to ensure they support the recommendations in this plan. The following actions are recommended. •Replace the routes proposed by the PROST Plan with those proposed in the PRAT Plan in the City GIS Community Development and Infrastructure Viewers. •For the PRAT Plan routes added to the City GIS include a data layer like the “View Additional Resources” layer currently available for existing facilities to provide basic specifcations of the proposed routes. •Continue to engage developers and educate them about the PRAT Plan routes, facility classifcations, design standards, and maintenance requirements. Ensure the PRAT Plan is readily available and directly referenced in City entitlement process materials. •Revise policies and procedures to reference the Triangle Trails Plan and the Triangle Transportation Plan. •Develop policies in conjunction with Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade to review proposed network facilities adjacent to jurisdictional boundaries and identify opportunities to partner on the construction of new routes. •The City should include the active transportation component of the PRAT Plan within the scope of establishing a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). 125 138 Funding Financing the construction of a comprehensive active transportation network will require a long-term commitment from the City and its partners. A variety of funding sources will be necessary to implement the route construction proposed in this plan. Different funding mechanisms will apply to each facility typology. Numerous State and Federal grants are available annually to assist with active transportation facility construction. These grant funds are awarded on a competitive basis and demand often exceeds allocation. While grants are not a reliable source of funding, they are worth pursuing. An overview of applicable grants is included below. The purpose of the future Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is to coordinate transportation planning. The MPO may be an option to assist with the planning, coordination, and funding for active transportation route construction. New shared use paths that align with City or State rights-of-way can be designed and constructed as streets and roads are improved or built. Therefore, the funding could come from several sources or a combination thereof including Montana Department of Transportation, City of Bozeman, private developers, and grants. Connector paths are a critical component of a complete active transportation network and can be funded similarly to, and potentially in conjunction with, shared use path projects. The following actions are recommended. •Add prioritized shared use path and connector path projects to the Parks and Trails Capital Improvements Plan and the Transportation, Engineering Capital Improvements Plan and as part of the Cash-in-Lieu program. •Allocate an annual portion of the City’s street construction budget to build shared use paths and critical connector paths •Include Bozeman’s active transportation network and plan into the scope of the future Metropolitan Planning Organization •Identify potential State and Federal grants for proposed shared use and connector path projects on an annual basis. Work with community partners where appropriate. •Coordinate with other jurisdictions and partners to secure matching funds and improve competitiveness of active transportation grant applications. Neighborhood trail construction will likely be incorporated as part of future residential and commercial development projects. These improvements will be completed by the developer as part of a private project’s required infrastructure improvements. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust (GVLT) has partnered with the City to construct numerous neighborhood trails and improve connector trails throughout the community. GVLT will continue to play an important role in the implementation of the PRAT Plan as it relates to trails and outdoor recreation. 126 139 The following actions are recommended. •Continue to ensure that UDC requirements facilitate the construction of neighborhood trails in a way that connects to the larger active transportation network. •Use Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland funds for constructing trails that are part of park and recreation facilities, create key linkages between parks or eliminate signifcant barriers within the overall Active Transportation network. •Continue to partner with GVLT to develop and maintain important neighborhood trails. State and Federal Grants Transportation Alternatives (TA) Set-Aside from the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) The Surface Transportation Block Grant program (STBG) provides fexible funding that may be used by States and municipalities for projects to improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects. The recent Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Law” (BIL), expanded and reformed this critical program which supports smaller biking and walking projects. The act also increased the size of the transportation alternatives funding set aside. Rebuilding American Infrastructure and Sustainability and Equity (RAISE): The RAISE program to help urban and rural communities move forward on projects that modernize roads, bridges, transit, rail, ports, and intermodal transportation and make our transportation systems safer, more accessible, more affordable, and more sustainable. Previously known as BUILD and TIGER discretionary grants, these competition awards support the development of transportation infrastructure. Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) more than doubled the funding the RAISE Program in 2022. Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) This program provides funding to improve transportation facilities that provide access to, are adjacent to, or are located within Federal lands. The Access Program supplements State and local resources for public roads, transit systems, and other transportation facilities, with an emphasis on high- use recreation sites and economic generators. Recreational Trails Program (RTP) This is a fnancial assistance program of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The RTP provides funds to the States for a variety of uses including construction of new recreational trails and acquisition of easements and fee simple title for recreational trail corridors. Utilize Community partners to increase likelihood of grant funding. Montana Trail Stewardship Program This program is administered by Fish, Wildlife, and Parks Department and can be used for the construction and maintenance of natural trails or shared use paths. The maximum award is $75,000 and approximately $1.67 million were dispersed to 127 140 over 30 projects in 2022. Utilize Community partners to increase likely hood of grant funding. This can also fund nordic ski grooming and equipment. Prioritization The PRAT Plan proposes an ambitious slate of new active transportation routes to extend and connect the network. The construction of new segments and routes will take years and considerable funding. Therefore, it is important to develop and utilize a method to prioritize the proposed improvement projects. This plan includes a weighted prioritization matrix template utilizing the criteria listed below. The following actions are recommended. • Develop a methodology for prioritizing potential active transportation network projects based on the following criteria: • Importance of active transportation connection or route as outlined in the PRAT Plan • Importance to the Parks & Recreations Department facilities, operations, and objectives of the PRAT Plan • Importance to the Bozeman Area Transportation Master Plan • Importance to the Bozeman Climate Action Plan • Importance related to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion goals • Opportunity to leverage partnerships and funding sources • Create, and annually revise, a rolling 5-year construction plan similar to the City’s CIP • Add larger high-priority projects into the City’s CIP Network Maintenance Maintaining active transportation routes that are safe and accessible for users of all ages and abilities is a high priority. In addition, adequate maintenance is critical to maximizing year-round utilization. The City needs to establish annual and long- term maintenance plans that includes a deferred maintenance analysis. There are three essential elements to properly maintaining an active transportation network. First, establish minimum standards for maintenance. Next, determine maintenance responsibility for each segment of the network. Lastly, identify the various sources to fnance the necessary maintenance. Methods Developing a comprehensive maintenance strategy will require considering various surface types, locations, responsible parties, and available funding. Anchor Routes and Shared Use Paths Anchor routes and shared use paths located within street rights-of-way are typically maintained by the corresponding jurisdiction. One challenge is achieving consistent maintenance expectations and standards between the City, County, and State. 128 141 Connector Paths responsibilities for maintenance and establishing standards will help ensure the fnancial investment developing a complete network is protected and enhanced in future years. The maintenance of Connectors not only depends on the responsible party but also on the surface type for each route. The following actions are recommended. Neighborhood Trails Despite being smaller, trails require a considerable amount of maintenance depending on location, the quality of construction, and the amount of use. Neighborhood trails are typically maintained by neighborhood associations, HOAs, the City, or GVLT. Regulations The ability of the City to regulate maintenance of active transportation routes is limited. The City should consider ways to require routes owned or managed by private parties to be maintained according to established standards. The following actions are recommended. ◊ Strengthen requirements for residential subdivisions, commercial developments, and other privately held routes to be adequately maintained according to standards adopted by the City. Policies Maintenance of active transportation routes in Bozeman is currently managed through a variety of resources, including private property owners, homeowner associations, community groups, non-proft partners, the City, and the Montana Department of Transportation. Clarifying ◊ Establish a comprehensive maintenance plan that includes minimum standards for upkeep, repairs, and replacement ◊ Conduct a comprehensive deferred maintenance analysis of each route identifying the current condition, upkeep and repair needs, and sections needing to be rebuilt ◊ Establish a maintenance template for the City, property owners, and partners to develop schedule tasks and estimate costs ◊ Review and clarify how the Bozeman Parks and Trails District can support the maintenance of the network ◊ Identify priority routes for winter transportation. These routes will require regular snow removal and other maintenance to create a year-round active transportation network. Standards General maintenance standards for evaluating needs for surface care, repairs, safety precautions, and managing adjacent landscaping should be developed for and consistently applied to all network typologies. In addition to annual and long-term tasks, seasonal maintenance of shared use paths is essential to 129 142 accommodating year-round active transportation. Paved paths must have the snow removed frequently during the winter and be swept of grit and debris each spring. The following actions are recommended. ◊Develop a comprehensive maintenance plan including detailed standards by typology that ensure a high-level of safety, accessibility, and utilization. Below are recommended routine and periodic maintenance tasks based on surface type. Paved Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: ◊Regular sweeping to remove debris, gravel, and other hazardous items ◊Regular snow removal during winter months ◊Inspect and repair pavement surface problems (seal cracks, grind down ridges, cut back tree roots, repair pavement) ◊Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems ◊Treating noxious weeds along corridor ◊Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) ◊Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function Paved Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: ◊Coordinate and schedule pavement overlays as part of adjacent road maintenance ◊Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) ◊Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out- slope for improved drainage ◊Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers ◊Repair or replace wayfnding, stop control signs and other elements ◊Restripe crosswalks and other markers Natural Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: ◊Removing encroaching vegetation from trail tread (grading, chemical treatment) ◊Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems ◊Treating noxious weeds along corridor ◊Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) ◊Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function ◊Flood or rain damage repair: silt clean up, culvert clean out, etc. ◊Bridge/culvert inspection, clearing/repair ◊Map/signage post condition inspection, and vandalism repair 130 143 ◊ Assessing need for sign/map updates or replacement Natural Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: ◊ Yearly trail evaluation to determine the need for minor repairs, identifcation of erosion damage, need for improved drainage ◊ Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) ◊ Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out- slope for improved drainage ◊ Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and markers ◊ Repair or replace wayfnding, stop control signs and other elements ◊ Restripe crosswalks and other markers Funding Like construction, the maintenance of Bozeman’s active transportation is funded by a variety of entities including the City, Montana Department of Transportation, non-proft partners, and private property owners. There are more maintenance needs than committed funding which leads to a backlog of repairs and overall degradation of accessibility and utilization. According to the Rails to Trail Conservancy, annual maintenance costs on average range from $1,000 to $2,000 per trail mile, depending upon the surface. Therefore, average annual funding required to maintain Bozeman’s 178 miles of paths and trails is approximately $267,000. The funding needed to adequately maintain the network will only increase as new extensions and routes are constructed. To meet this fnancial commitment, the City and its partners must proactively account for the necessary funding to execute the annual and long-term maintenance plans and aggressively commit the dollars. The following actions are recommended. Ensure that a signifcant portion of the Parks and Trails District funds are dedicated to path and trail maintenance Allocate an annual portion of the City’s street maintenance budget to repair shared use paths and paved connector paths Include Bozeman’s active transportation network and plan into the future Metropolitan Planning Organization budget Prioritization Addressing the maintenance backlog of existing active transportation network will take years and considerable funding. Therefore, it is important to develop and utilize a method to prioritize the needed upkeep and repair projects. This plan includes a weighted prioritization matrix template utilizing the criteria listed below. The following actions are recommended. Develop a methodology for prioritizing potential maintenance projects based on the following criteria: • Area of deferred maintenance that poses a public safety risk 131 144 •Area of deferred maintenance that restricts equitable access •Area of deferred maintenance that reduces utilization •Highly utilized routes •Ability to partner and/or leverage creative funding opportunities Looking Forward The PRAT plan sets forth an ambitious vision and series of goals for the growth of the system that are driven by community voices. These goals are the product of rigorous community conversations, multiple surveys, in-depth analysis, and stakeholder visioning. Going forward, the City should use the plan as a tool to assist in decision making as it relates to investment strategies and resource allocation to ensure barriers to participation are removed and create a more equitable system. Finally, the PRAT plan should serve as a unifying document that helps align the needs of the community with the priorities and actions of the City in order to continue to grow an inclusive, loved, and connected park system. Amendments to the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan The PRAT Plan should be reviewed and revised as needed every 5 years. Because the PRAT Plan is coordinated with the growth policy, Bozeman Strategic Plan and other city documents, the City’s growth policy, and in light of the time and effort invested in the preparation of this plan,staff should follow the procedures for growth policy amendments and other relevant state laws for revisions. Amendments to Individual Park Master Plans Since adoption of the PROST in 2007, there has been a goal to update park master plans for existing individual parks within the system. With the adoption of the PRAT, this effort should be undertaken on a neighborhood or other sub-area level 132 145 133 to forecast improvement needs for the Department, partners and new developments to implement the recommendations in the PRAT and changing community needs. The individual park master plans should be conceptual in nature and will be used to: ◊implement new design guidelines as identifed in the PRAT Design Manual for the individual park type ◊analyze site-specifc potential and existing conditions ◊forecast what types of improvements are needed in individual parks to improve the balance of offerings across all neighborhoods and to eliminate access barriers. ◊target appropriate grant funds and partners. Using neighborhood-level or other subareas, such as Urban Renewal Districts, as the boundary for these amendments, this type of assessment will not only guide investments in existing parks, it will illustrate needs that parks in new developments can meet. Parks and Recreation staff should work with the Urban Parks and Forestry Board and the City’s Communications and Engagement staff to design appropriate community engagement for the scale and scope of these amendments. Cash-in-lieu of Parkland (CILP) funding can be used for design efforts that result in capital improvements and would be an appropriate source of funding for Park Master Plan Amendments because it would set up future CILP and Improvements-in-Lieu of Parkland (IILP) investments. top 5 priorities for investment programs recreation facilities natural trails on-street bike lanes indoor pools outdoor pools shared use paths aquatics arts + culture winter recreation fitness respectful behavior 146 equitable access The following tables provide a list of all strategies and actions included in the plan. Each action is noted with the level of priority that the community identifed through all forms of feedback in this process. Methods to track progress are included for actions that are measurable and can be integrated with the Department’s ongoing processes and data management. STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD 1.1 Create a consistent set of basic elements across neighborhoods. Add park assets that were identifed as in high demand by the community in new and existing spaces. High The highest demand assets according to the statistically valid community survey include trails, playgrounds, aquatics (splashpads and pools), and indoor ftness Maintain updated inventory of number of assets Create and implement a plan to provide universal access to parks and programs. Medium According to the Safe Routes to Parks Disability Survey, half of respondents with disabilities listed their experiences within parks or getting to parks as being very high or high quality, while half of respondents listed their experiences as being low quality or very low quality. Track progress on addressing identifed universal access projects Strategically include and allocate resources for equitable community engagement in parks, recreation plans and capital projects to align with changing community needs and concerns. High Over 900 people contributed needs and ideas for the future of the system. Track participation of diverse demographics and geographies in planning and design processes 134 147 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD 1.2 Maintain the current level of parkland per resident (17 acres per 1000) by growing park acres as the community grows.* Refne and clarify the process of Low obtaining new parks, facilities This topic did not come up in community and trails from new development conversations. through changes to the UDC. Continue to improve coordination with the School District. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Track increase in percentage of children who live within a 10 minute walk of a playground or park Explore the possibility of requiring commercial development to also contribute to parkland. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Invest in acquisition of new pathways, parks and open spaces that: 1) help to close existing 10-minute walk gaps, and 2) overcome extreme physical barriers. High According to the statstically valid community survey, 65% of residents want the City to purchase land for future park or conservation use. Increase in park acres or trail miles; Decrease in areas of the City that experience access gaps Focus increased parks and recreation service in areas of high growth or current park overcrowding. Low Though park overcrowding did not come up often within community conversations, conversations about conficting uses and audiences did. Resident would like clarity about rules for park use and care of parks among different park users. Increase in park acres and offerings in high growth areas identifed and tracked in the Community Plan Acquire land to make key trail, path or park connections identifed in the Active Transportation component of the plan (Goal 3) and to better connect people to parks. High According to the statistically valid survey, trails are the top priority and an unmet need for residents. Reduction in number of and distance of gaps in active transportation network *Note: the Community Plan currently tracks parkland as a percent of total land area. This is a shift to focus on the ratio in relationship to people, not land, but both could be helpful trackers. 135 148 equitable access STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD 1.3 Balance the needs of different park users. Expand on the local culture of High Conduct annual survey respect for and accessibility to In community workshops and pop-up to gauge perceptions of public land to create safe, accessible conversations, residents requested clarity safety and use in parks and well cared for parks and trails. about rules for park use and care of parks among different park users. and trails; Document reported safety incidents and user conficts Make rules and regulations clear and easy to understand. High In community workshops and pop-up conversations, residents requested clarity about rules for park use and care of parks among different park users. Partner with volunteers and youth. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department to support future funding, stewardship, and programming of parklands and trails. Quantify value for the number of annual volunteer hours; Increase the number of volunteer opportunities Expand dog park spaces, programs, High and policies to promote balanced use In Safe Routes conversations and surveys, and enjoyment of park spaces by all. residents with disabilities and residents of color noted that they often do not feel safe around dogs in parks. 1.4 Support all-season recreation. 136 149 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Support existing winter activity partners by increasing access to complementary indoor space. Low Community support for this strategy was ranked the lower third of all strategies on Engage Bozeman and in summer pop-up engagement. Measure indoor space square footage per resident open year round Conduct a feasibility study of indoor recreation facilities. High In most community engagement conversations, the need for more indoor facilities was identifed as a priority. Reduce barriers to participation in wintertime activities. Low Community support for this strategy was ranked the lower third of all strategies on Engage Bozeman and in summer pop-up engagement. Track demographics and numbers of participants in year round recreation activities Communicate best practices for safety outdoors in the winter. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 137 150 programs, places, partnerships STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Adapt maintenance practices for winter use. High In most community engagement conversations and in conversations with persons with disabilities, wintertime maintenance is very important for safe access. 1.5 Increase safe evening / night time access at designated facilities with appropriate lighting, management, and programming. 1.6 Design parks that refect their unique neighborhoods and refect the Department’s brand. Use parks to tell stories that engage with arts, culture and local history and refect local identities. Low Community support for this strategy was ranked the lower third of all strategies on Engage Bozeman and in summer pop-up engagement. Explore signature play experiences. High In most community engagement conversations, residents shared a desire for special or unique amenities in their parks. Participants often drew comparisons to Story Mill Park. Celebrate Bozeman’s park bridges. Low Community support for this strategy was ranked the lower third of all strategies on Engage Bozeman and in summer pop-up engagement. 2.1 Invest in distributed community recreation hubs across the City. Create an intergenerational, multi- functional center on the west side of the city. High In most community engagement conversations, the need for more indoor facilities was identifed as a priority. Prioritize future facility or community hub investments in areas with limited park access and places where growth is highest. High In most community engagement conversations, the need for more indoor facilities was identifed as a priority. Regularly update and expand the City’s park and facility inventory to support community health, wellness, and need across the city. High In most community engagement conversations, equity and community health were expressed as a goal for participants. Collaborate with Healthy Gallatin and Bozeman Health on tracking active lifestyles and community health outcomes 138 151 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Center park equity. High In most community engagement conversations, equity and community health were expressed as a goal for participants. 2.2 Create program offerings and elements that respond to community needs, especially underserved demographic groups. Redefne core program areas to focus on program type rather than age. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Track percentage of residents who participate in recreation programs Develop a policy for inclusive or adaptive recreation programming. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 2.3 Craft a formal policy to defne partner and affliate group relationships. Formalize oversight of athletics partners and feld use with public and private sports organizations. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. The need for felds was also communicated in the community workshops. Track number of formal partnership agreements Consider requiring all affliate groups to provide proof of coach criminal background checks, and compare the list of coaches to the state and federal sex offender databases. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. Partner to expand the mix of Arts and Culture program offerings. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. Number of arts and culture programs offered Expand temporary art exhibitions and permanent public art programs across city parks and facilities. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. 2.4 Clarify the feld reservation and use process. 139 152 programs, places, partnerships STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Create a clear calendar and reservation system for feld reservation needs. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. Charge a special feld use fee for nonresident participants. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 2.5 Broaden awareness of programs and services. Develop mobile applications for users to fnd system information (e.g., park locations and elements, trails and paths, program information, upcoming events) or to report a problem. Medium Residents expressed interest in more transparent communications with the Department regarding offerings. Continue to review the most effective uses of electronic and social media for marketing and informational purposes. Medium Residents expressed interest in more transparent communications with the Department regarding offerings. Track social media reach and impact; Conduct surveys to track progress on awareness of Department offerings over time. Highlight health and wellness Low benefts of Park and Recreation This topic did not come up in community Department programs in all conversations. informational materials. 2.6 Work with regional tourism and economic development organizations to create a tourism strategy that addresses the benefts and impacts of increased tourism on parks, facilities, and events. Work with the City of Bozeman’s Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Bozeman Partnership to strengthen the Park and Recreation Department’s contribution to local and regional marketing efforts. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 140 153 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Cross-market Park and Recreation Department destinations with other regional attractions to encourage visitors to spend time and money in the city of Bozeman, like the Pathway to the M. Medium Residents expressed interest in more transparent communications with the Department. Advocate for a resort tax. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Consider impact of tourism on facilities and infrastructure. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 2.7 Gather program data and track program participation annually. Establish metrics for measurement of departmental goals (i.e., program cancellation rate, program reach, new programs offered, and residency). Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Develop and track program metrics Begin Recreation Division quarterly program evaluation process. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 141 154 pedestrian + bicycle facilities STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Track population changes, community health metrics, and development starts across the city, and use that data to inform decisions about locating recreation programs and events. Medium Residents expressed interest in more transparent communications with the Department. Collaborate to track broader impact of parks and recreation services on community well being 2.8 Grow program partnerships in areas that are complementary to Department offerings. Enhance existing local public, private and nonproft partnerships and seek out new ones to fll gaps in service delivery. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. Expand partnerships beyond the Montana Parent Magazine to deploy seasonal program guides. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. Create partnership, teaming guidelines and policy to defne goals and expectations. Medium Advocacy groups and non-proft partners shared ideas for more collaboration with the Department. 3.1 Invest in a city-wide active transportation network. Use this plan as a guide for future Low public infrastructure planning and This topic did not come up in community investment, as well as a resource in conversations. the private development process. Build upon the practices and standards established by this plan by including active transportation within future Transportation Master Plan update. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Increase in number of miles of bike boulevards; Decrease in high-stress intersections and street segments Annually update the network improvements using the prioritization recommendations included in the “How Do We Get There” chapter. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 3.2 Identify + develop a network of anchor routes that serve as key travel corridors. 142 155 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Identify key needs for land acquisition, easements, and coordination opportunities with land development projects to secure Anchor Route corridors. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. Track completion of acquisition or capital projects that contribute to Anchor Route system Prioritize funding to build, connect, and maintain Anchor Routes. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. Track annual spending on projects that advance Anchor Routes Plan for robust maintenance of Anchor Routes to ensure year-round use and a high level of accessibility. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Track miles of active transportation network maintained during winter months Design traffc calming measures into the routes, particularly at key destinations to reduce potential conficts. High In community conversations, residents referenced areas where vehicle/pedestrian conficts occurred as priorities for investment. 3.3 Close existing gaps in the pedestrian + bicycle network. Prioritize construction of network segments to close key connectivity gaps. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Measure increase in connected, continuous miles of bicycle facilities Establish an inclusive network of bicycle boulevards that provide low-stress connectivity through Bozeman’s core. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Ensure new private development is required to construct any adjacent active transportation facility identifed in this plan. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 3.4 Improve east-west connections. Prioritize construction of east-west network facilities. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. Improve safety of pedestrian and bicycle crossings for east-west routes. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, unsafe crossings were identifed as barriers to park access. Reduce number of high stress routes and intersections 143 156 pedestrian + bicycle facilities STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD 3.5 Improve crossings that act as major barriers for pedestrians and bicyclists. Prioritize improvements to critical safe crossing locations. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, unsafe crossings were identifed as barriers to park access. Track annual number of projects with components that improve safe crossings Implement ‘best practice’ safe crossing confgurations and technology. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, unsafe crossings were identifed as barriers to park access. 3.6 Implement a comprehensive wayfnding system. Enhance users’ ability to navigate Bozeman’s network and fnd key destinations. Medium Residents noted diffcult fnding their way around the City along trails and pathways in the statistically valid survey. Provide information such as destinations, direction, distance, and travel time. Medium Residents noted diffcult fnding their way around the City along trails and pathways in the statistically valid survey. Support and promote Bozeman’s identity. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Build community voice into the wayfnding strategy process and raise visitor awareness of the overall network. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 3.7 Install path imporovements along active transportation routes. 144 157 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Commit to installing the recommended required improvements. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, unsafe crossings were identifed as barriers to park access. Track number of pathway improvements added to active transportation network Prioritize installation of recommended optional improvements to enhance user experience. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 3.8 Leverage Bozeman’s linear parks and watercourses as part of the active transportation network. Allow all active transportation typologies to be located within watercourse setbacks. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. Allow certain active transportation corridors to be designated as linear parks that meet parkland requirements. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. 3.9 Ensure inclusive and equitable access to and within parks. Develop policies to allow for the use of e-bikes, e-scooters, and similar modes of assisted mobility on active transportation routes. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. 145 158 natural resources STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Develop a toolkit to evaluate and prioritize projects. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 3.10 Revise the active transportation network classifcations and comprehensive design and maintenance standards. Redefne and simplify off-street active transportation typologies. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. Create standards for bicycle boulevards. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. Establish comprehensive standards and specifcations for construction and maintenance. High Across all community conversations, Engage Bozeman, and the statistically valid survey, connectivity was a priority. 4.1 Create design standards and management practices appropriate to each landscape type. Create a landscape design and management best practices toolkit. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Consider a rating system to set goals and benchmarks and evaluate progress. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Encourage sustainable trail design and maintenance through the PRAT Design and Maintenance Manual. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 4.2 Promote sustainable trail and park use. Use thoughtful trail design that encourages people to stay on the trail, with inviting access points to sit, watch, fsh, and play. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Establish an awareness campaign for low impact park and trails use within natural areas. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 4.3 Promote the protection and enhancement of intact, contiguous natural resource areas or sensitive lands. 146 159 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Use the Sensitive Lands Plan and maps to guide future parkland acquisition and developer dedication in accordance with 76-3-621 Montana Code Annotated. Medium This topic was shared in public comment in Urban Parks and Forestry Board meetings. Complete mapping and update annually Identify funding mechanisms or Medium partnerships for acquisition of land. This topic was shared in public comment in Urban Parks and Forestry Board meetings. In the statistically valid survey, a quarter of residents also advocated for funding to support land acquisition of sensitive lands. Allow watercourse setbacks, wetlands, and other priority conservation lands and similar acreage to contribute to dedication requirements in new developments if the project also includes community beneft improvements. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Acres of identifed priority conservation lands accepted through parkland dedication Require developments to provide a parkland and natural resource analysis to facilitate the connection and continuity of natural resource areas (streams and ditches, foodplains, wetlands, riparian areas, trees and plant species, soils). Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 4.4 Expand nature play and programming. Find more ways for people and children to interact with wetlands, waterways and forests. Medium In community workshops and pop-ups, participants asked for more engagement with nature spaces and nature-based programs. Percentage of residents who live within a 10 min walk of a place where they can experience nature via a park, trail or program 147 160 staff + Capacity STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD 4.5 Implement low-impact design and management practices in park and facility capital projects. Create standards for low water or drought tolerant irrigation infrastructure. Medium In community workshops, conversations centered on sustainability within department operations and projects. Reduction of total water use in Department properties (irrigation water use and facility water use) Increase the amount of drought tolerant and native vegetation and trees in the park system. Medium In community workshops, conversations centered on sustainability within department operations and projects. Track increase in tree canopy cover in parks and along trails 4.6 Scale Department capacity to provide knowledgeable natural resources evaluation during the planning process for future facilities investments and management of natural areas. Train and hire staff in sustainable land management practices. Medium Residents expressed interest in more transparent communications with the Department. Reduction of total water and energy use in Department properties and practices 5.1 Attract and retain staff to effectively support the needs of Bozeman’s parks, programs, and trails. Create intentional strategy to address hiring gaps directly. High Residents ranked this strategy as their top strategy within this goal on Engage Bozeman and in popups. Increase in the number of full time and part time Department staff Conduct annual staff surveys to assess job satisfaction, staff development, staffng levels, and work environment. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Increase in staff retention and employee satisfaction 148 161 STRATEGYACTIONS COMMUNITY IDENTIFIED PRIORITY PROGRESS TRACKING METHOD Provide regular training to ensure that existing staff develop the skills to perform their duties and grow within their roles. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Conduct an in-depth operational assessment including a staffng plan to defne roles and responsibilities and to strategically allocate funding. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Growth of funding options and amounts to meet capital and operational needs 5.2 Continue to refne and communicate the Bozeman Parks and Trails Special District. Develop a dashboard to share successes and communicate how resources are being allocated. Medium Residents expressed interest in more transparent communications with the Department. Undertake a drive time analysis to determine the time maintenance staff spends driving during a typical day. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 5.3 Develop a philosophy and policies for cost recovery and revenue generation. Establish cost recovery targets. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Achieve cost recovery in accordance with the City's future policy Adjust fees and pricing to balance revenue generation with community accessibility. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Create pricing strategies for different audiences based on a variety of factors that take into account existing fees, affordability, and program attractiveness. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. Set a target for performance measures. Low This topic did not come up in community conversations. 149 162 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Findings Report Presented to the Bozeman, Montana Parks and Recreation Department March 2022 163 Contents Executive Summary .................................................................... i Section 1: Charts and Graphs .................................................. 1 Section 2: Priority Investment Rating ............................... 42 Section 3: Benchmarking Analysis ..................................... 50 Section 4: Tabular Data ......................................................... 57 Section 5: Survey Instrument ............................................ 109 164 Executive Summary 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page i165 ETC Institute (2022) Page ii 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary Purpose ETC Institute conducted a survey for the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department between January and February of 2022. The purpose of the survey was to help prioritize services and guide the growth of the Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation system and programming for the next 10 years. This is the first survey ETC Institute has conducted for the City of Bozeman. Methodology The six-page survey, cover letter and postage-paid return envelope were mailed to a random sample of households in the City of Bozeman. The cover letter explained the purpose of the survey and encouraged residents to either return their survey by mail or complete the survey online. At the end of the online survey, residents were asked to enter their home address; this was done to ensure that only responses from residents who were part of the random sample were included in the final survey database. Ten days after the surveys were mailed, ETC Institute sent emails to the households that received the survey to encourage participation. The emails contained a link to the online version of the survey to make it easy for residents to complete the survey. The goal was to obtain completed surveys from at least 300 residents. This goal was far exceeded, with a total of 401 residents completing the survey. The overall results for the sample of 401 households have a precision of at least +/-4.9% at the 95% level of confidence. This report contains the following: • Charts showing the overall results of the survey (Section 1) • Priority Investment Rating (PIR) that identifies priorities for facilities & programs (Section 2) • Benchmarking analysis comparing Bozeman’s results to national results (Section 3) • Tabular data showing the overall results for all questions on the survey (Section 4) • A copy of the survey instrument (Section 5) VISITATION AND RATINGS OF PARKS, TRAILS AND FACILITIES Park Visitation: Most (97%) of the households indicated they have visited parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman during a typical year. More than one-third (36%) visit daily, 41% visit weekly, 18% visit monthly, and 6% visit once or twice a year. Ratings of Parks, Trails and Facilities: When respondents who visited parks, trails and recreational facilities in Bozeman were asked to rate the various amenities, 93% who had an opinion rated trails (natural, gravel, or paved) as “excellent” or “good.” Other amenities that were rated as “excellent” or “good” include: park(s) (91%), sidewalks (64%), and paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (63%). Respondents gave the lowest rating to aquatic facility(ies) (29% “excellent” or “good”). 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 166 ETC Institute (2022) Page iii 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary One-fourth (25%) of respondents have visited a park or recreation facility daily over the past five years; 43% have visited weekly, 21% have visited monthly, 10% have visited once or twice a year, and 2% indicated they never visited a park or recreation facility over the past five years. Based on the sum of their top two choices, the biggest barriers to the usage of parks, trails or facilities were: 1) no time to visit parks, trails or facilities, 2) parks, trails and facilities do not have amenities I want, and 3) parks, trails and facilities are not well maintained. When asked about barriers to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities, the top responses were: 1) threat of vehicle collisions/operator behavior, 2) existing bike lanes/paths are in poor condition, and 3) the weather is often inclement. FACILITY NEEDS AND PRIORITIES Facility Needs: Respondents were asked to identify if their household had a need or desire for 28 parks and recreation facilities and rate how well their needs for each were currently being met. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to estimate the number of households in the community that had the greatest “unmet” need for various facilities. The four parks and recreation facilities with the highest percentage of households that indicated a need for the facility were: trails, gravel or natural surface (82%), trails, paved (73%), pavilions and picnic areas (62%), and water access for recreation (59%). When ETC Institute analyzed the needs in the community, these same four facilities had a need that affected more than 12,000 households. ETC Institute estimates a total of 7,615 households in Bozeman that have a need, have unmet needs for outdoor pools. The estimated number of households that have unmet needs for each of the 28 facilities that were assessed is shown on the following page. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 167 ETC Institute (2022) Page iv 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary Facility Importance: In addition to assessing the needs for each facility, ETC Institute also assessed the importance that residents placed on each. Based on the sum of respondents’ top four choices, the most important facilities to residents were: trails, gravel or natural surface (62%), trails, paved (39%), dog parks (23%), and indoor pools (22%). The percentage of residents who selected each facility as one of their top four choices is shown in the chart on the following page. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 168 ETC Institute (2022) Page v 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary Priorities for Facility Investments: The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to provide organizations with an objective tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on parks, trails, recreational facilities, and services. The PIR equally weighs (1) the importance that residents place on facilities and (2) how many residents have unmet needs for the facility. [Details regarding the methodology for this analysis are provided in Section 2 of this report.] Based the Priority Investment Rating (PIR), the following six facilities were rated as high priorities for investment: • Trails, gravel or natural surface (PIR=150) • On-road bike lanes or facilities (PIR=135) • Indoor pools (PIR=134) • Outdoor pools (PIR=134) • Trails, paved (PIR=127) • Nature centers (PIR=105) 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 169 ETC Institute (2022) Page vi 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary The chart below shows the Priority Investment Rating for each of the 28 facilities that were assessed on the survey. RECREATION PROGRAMS AND EVENTS Participation in/Ratings of Bozeman Recreation Programs and Events: Twenty-two percent (22%) of households indicated they participated in recreation programs and events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department prior to March 2020. When respondents were asked to rate the overall quality of programs and events in which they participated, 82% who had an opinion gave ratings of “excellent” or “good.” Based on the sum of their top two choices, the biggest barriers to participation in parks and recreation programming were: 1) not aware of programs offered, 2) no time to participate in programming, and 3) types of programming not interesting, relevant, or desired. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 170 ETC Institute (2022) Page vii 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary PROGRAMMING NEEDS AND PRIORITIES Programming Needs. Respondents were asked to identify if their household had a need for 18 recreation programs and rate how well their needs for each were currently being met. Based on this analysis, ETC Institute was able to estimate the number of households in the community that had “unmet” needs for each program. The four programs with the highest percentage of households that had needs were: winter recreation (57%), arts and culture (54%), aquatics or swimming (51%), and fitness (49%). When ETC Institute analyzed the needs in the community, all four of these programs had a need that affected more than 10,000 households. ETC Institute estimates a total of 8,384 households in Bozeman that have a need, have unmet needs for aquatics or swimming programs. The estimated number of households that have unmet needs for each of the 18 programs that were assessed is shown below. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 171 ETC Institute (2022) Page viii 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary Program Importance. In addition to assessing the needs for each program, ETC Institute also assessed the importance that residents place on each program. Based on the sum of respondents’ top four choices, the most important programs to residents were: aquatics or swimming (36%), winter recreation (36%), arts and culture (33%), and fitness (26%). The percentage of residents who selected each program/activity as one of their top four choices is shown in the chart below. Priorities for Programming Investments. Based on the priority investment rating (PIR), which was described briefly on page v of this Executive Summary and is described in more detail in Section 2 of this report, the following eight programs were rated as “high priorities” for investment: • Aquatics or swimming (PIR=200) • Arts and culture (PIR=175) • Winter recreation (PIR=174) • Fitness (PIR=142) • Etiquette programs for park and trail users (PIR=125) 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 172 ETC Institute (2022) Page ix 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary • Outdoor adventure (PIR=125) • History (PIR=119) • Outdoor education (PIR=107) The chart below shows the Priority Investment Rating (PIR) for each of the 18 programs that were rated. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS When analyzing the facilities and programs offered by the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department, trails, winter recreation, arts and culture, and aquatics or swimming programs were the items for which the highest number of residents had a need. Focusing on these items would provide the greatest benefit for the largest number of residents within the City. Making certain the City’s availability of facilities and programming encompasses the greatest number of households ensures funding is appropriately allocated to give the community the greatest benefit possible. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 173 ETC Institute (2022) Page x 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Executive Summary In order to ensure that Bozeman continues to meet the needs and expectations of the community, ETC Institute recommends that the City sustain and/or improve the performance in areas that were identified as “high priorities” by the Priority Investment Rating (PIR). The facilities and programs with the highest PIR ratings are listed below. Facility Priorities o Trails, gravel or natural surface (PIR=150) o On-road bike lanes or facilities (PIR=135) o Indoor pools (PIR=134) o Outdoor pools (PIR=134) o Trails, paved (PIR=127) o Nature centers (PIR=105) Programming Priorities o Aquatics or swimming (PIR=200) o Arts and culture (PIR=175) o Winter recreation (PIR=174) o Fitness (PIR=142) o Etiquette programs for park and trail users (PIR=125) o Outdoor adventure (PIR=125) o History (PIR=119) o Outdoor education (PIR=107) 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report 174 1 Charts and Graphs: 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 1175 Q1. During a typical year, do you or anyone in your household visit the parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman?97%3%Yes Noby percentage of respondents 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 2176 Q1a. How often do you or others in your household visit a City of Bozeman park, trail, or recreation facility?by percentage of respondents who visited parks, trails, or recreational facilities36%41%18%6%Daily Weekly Monthly Once or twice a year2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 3177 Q1b. Ratings of the Following City of Bozeman Parks, Trail, Recreation, and Active Transportation Facilitiesby percentage of respondents who visited parks (excluding “don’t know”)42%33%12%15%14%17%5%6%50%58%52%48%48%40%28%23%6%7%24%23%29%28%31%22%1%2%12%15%10%15%36%48%Trails (natural, gravel, or paved)Park(s)SidewalksPaved shared‐use bike/pedestrian pathwaysRecreation Facility(ies)Travel by busBiking on the street (e.g., in bike lanes)Aquatic Facility(ies)0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Excellent (5) Good (4) Neutral (3) Below Average/Poor (2/1)2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 4178 Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car?by percentage of respondents (excluding “not provided”) 95%5%Yes No2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 5179 Q3. How Often Residents Have Visited a Park or Recreation Facility Over the Past Five Yearsby percentage of respondents (excluding “don’t know”)25%43%21%10%2%Daily Weekly Monthly Once or twice a year Never2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 6180 18%12%9%7%5%4%4%4%3%3%24%No time to visit parks/trails/facilitiesParks/trails/facilities not well maintainedOperating hours are not convenientNot aware of parks/trails/facilitiesLack of universal accessibilityParks/trails/facilities not conveniently locatedNo interest in visiting parks/trails/facilitiesParks/trails/facilities do not feel safePoor customer service by staffSomething else0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%by percentage of respondents (multiple selections could be made)Q4. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or FacilitiesParks/trails/facilities do not have amenities I want2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 7181 16%11%8%6%4%4%4%3%2%2%19%No time to visit parks/trails/facilitiesParks/trails/facilities not well maintainedOperating hours are not convenientNot aware of parks/trails/facilitiesParks/trails/facilities do not feel safeParks/trails/facilities not conveniently locatedNo interest in visiting parks/trails/facilitiesLack of universal accessibilityPoor customer service by staffSomething else0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%1st Choice 2nd ChoiceQ5. Biggest Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, and Facilitiesby percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top two choices Parks/trails/facilities do not have amenities I want2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 8182 82%73%62%59%57%51%47%46%46%42%42%40%39%38%34%31%28%26%24%23%22%21%20%19%17%17%15%4%Trails, gravel or natural surface Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Pavilions and picnic areasWater access for recreationOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesNature centersDog parksPools, indoorPools, outdoorIce rink (outdoor)Play areas for all ages and abilitiesPlaygrounds and play areasCommunity gardensRecreation or community centersOff‐leash hours in parksIce rink (indoor)Sprayground/splash padTennis courtsFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyDisc golfBasketball courtsLawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Special use biking facilities Pickleball courtsFields, baseball/softballSand volleyball courtSkate parkOther0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Q6[1]. Households That Have a Need or Desire For the Following Facilities/Amenitiesby percentage of respondents (multiple selections could be made)2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 9183 16,77514,99512,70412,15111,64010,5159,5339,4929,3908,6748,6128,2037,9587,8157,0376,3215,6675,2574,9514,6444,4394,2354,1323,7853,4783,4783,109716Trails, gravel or natural surface Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Pavilions and picnic areasWater access for recreationOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesNature centersDog parksPools, indoorPools, outdoorIce rink (outdoor)Play areas for all ages and abilitiesPlaygrounds and play areasCommunity gardensRecreation or community centersOff‐leash hours in parksIce rink (indoor)Sprayground/splash padTennis courtsFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyDisc golfBasketball courtsLawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Special use biking facilities Pickleball courtsFields, baseball/softballSand volleyball courtSkate parkOther0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000Q6[1]. Estimated Number of Households in BozemanThat Have a Need or Desire for Facilities/Amenitiesby number of households based on 20,457 households in the City of Bozeman2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 10184 24.124.741%38%35%39%33%29%40%33%30%22%28%20%20%18%12%23%16%6%21%14%13%16%9%7%6%4%2%36%37%38%34%35%38%25%31%31%37%26%25%24%26%32%20%27%36%19%25%22%17%21%14%13%9%7%17%18%20%20%20%22%22%19%25%23%18%24%26%31%28%28%22%31%19%26%32%17%29%21%21%26%15%5%7%6%6%10%9%8%11%11%14%18%24%19%16%22%23%20%18%16%17%26%42%19%40%43%33%12%30%1%1%1%1%4%2%5%6%4%4%10%9%12%10%6%7%16%9%25%18%7%9%23%17%17%28%64%70%Trails, gravel or natural surface Dog parksFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyPlaygrounds and play areasTrails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Pavilions and picnic areasFields, baseball/softballIce rink (outdoor)Play areas for all ages and abilitiesWater access for recreationIce rink (indoor)Basketball courtsOff‐leash hours in parksRecreation or community centersTennis courtsSpecial use biking facilities Sand volleyball courtSkate parkLawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Nature centersOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesDisc golfCommunity gardensPools, indoorPools, outdoorPickleball courtsSprayground/splash padOther0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% MetQ6[2]. How Well Facilities/Amenities in Bozeman Meet the Needs/Desires of Householdsby percentage of households that have a need for facilities/amenities2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 11185 Q6[3]. Estimated Number of Households in Bozeman Whose Needs/Desires for Facilities/Amenties Are Being Partly Met or Not Met7,6157,6017,4616,4145,5865,1744,9474,9194,4074,3063,9273,8253,4023,2893,1353,0882,9642,8762,5412,4682,4302,3722,2972,0111,8101,3261,214716Pools, outdoorOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesPools, indoorNature centersCommunity gardensSprayground/splash padWater access for recreationTrails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Recreation or community centersPavilions and picnic areasOff‐leash hours in parksTrails, gravel or natural surface Play areas for all ages and abilitiesPickleball courtsDisc golfIce rink (outdoor)Tennis courtsIce rink (indoor)Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Basketball courtsDog parksSpecial use biking facilities Playgrounds and play areasSand volleyball courtSkate parkFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyFields, baseball/softballOther0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,00050% Met 25% Met 0% Metby number of households based on 20,457 households in the City of Bozeman2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 12186 62%39%23%22%22%21%19%14%13%12%11%10%10%9%9%8%7%6%6%6%5%5%4%3%3%2%2%3%Trails, gravel or natural surface Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Dog parksPools, indoorOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesPools, outdoorWater access for recreationCommunity gardensNature centersOff‐leash hours in parksPlay areas for all ages and abilitiesPavilions and picnic areasPlaygrounds and play areasIce rink (outdoor)Disc golfSprayground/splash padRecreation or community centersTennis courtsPickleball courtsSpecial use biking facilities Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyIce rink (indoor)Basketball courtsSkate parkLawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Fields, baseball/softballSand volleyball courtOther0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th ChoiceQ7. Facilities/Amenities That Are Most Important to Householdsby percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top four choices 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 13187 Q7. Did you or anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department before March 2020?by percentage of respondents 22%78%Yes No2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 14188 Q8a. How Residents Rate the Overall Quality of Programs and Events in Which They Participated Before March 2020by percentage of respondents who participated in programs and events34%48%16%2%Excellent Good Fair Poor2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 15189 Q9. Would you or other members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future?by percentage of respondents (excluding “not provided”)21%79%Yes No2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 16190 45%24%16%12%6%3%3%2%2%0%10%Not aware of programs offeredNo time to participate in programmingTimes when programs offered not convenientProgram location/venue not convenientProgram fees are not affordablePoor customer service in past experienceProgram instructors are not goodLack of universal accessibilityLanguage barriers (ESOL)Something else0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%by percentage of respondents (multiple selections could be made)Q10. Barriers to Participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department ProgrammingTypes of programming not interesting/relevant/desired2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 17191 40%23%13%10%4%2%2%1%1%8%Not aware of programs offeredNo time to participate in programmingTimes when programs offered not convenientProgram location/venue not convenientProgram fees are not affordablePoor customer service in past experienceProgram instructors are not goodLack of universal accessibilitySomething else0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%1st Choice 2nd ChoiceQ11. Biggest Barriers to Participation in Parks and Recreation Programming by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top two choices Types of programming not interesting/relevant/desired2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 18192 47%24%21%15%12%11%11%9%8%8%7%5%7%Threat of vehicle collisions/operator behaviorExisting bike lanes/paths in poor conditionThe weather is often inclementNot enough lighting on my routesDestinations are too far awayI have to carry heavy things in my vehicleI don't feel safe when walking or bikingI don't own a bicycleRoute is unclear due to lack of wayfindingI have limited mobilitySomething else0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%by percentage of respondents (multiple selections could be made)Q12. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and FacilitiesDon't have enough time for walking/ biking as a commuting optionTransporting small children/elderly/persons with disabilities2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 19193 Q13. Top Priorities for the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to Allocate Fundingby percentage of respondents (excluding “not provided”)26%11%25%18%20%Develop land with new parks, trails & facilitiesPurchase new land for later park or facility developmentPurchase new land for natural resource conservation Renovate existing facilitiesIncrease routine maintenance of parks, trails & facilities2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 20194 57%54%51%49%47%42%36%35%35%28%27%21%20%17%13%12%10%4%Winter recreationArts and cultureAquatics or swimmingFitnessOutdoor adventureHistory Etiquette programs for park and trail usersSpecial eventsOutdoor educationSports leagues, adultSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Camps and other activities for childrenTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionSports leagues, youthTeen programsChildcare Preschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsOther0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%Q14[1]. Households That Have a Need or Desire For the Following Programsby percentage of respondents (multiple selections could be made)2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 21195 11,68110,96510,45410,1069,6358,5717,3037,2427,2015,7085,6054,2354,1733,4782,5982,3932,046757Winter recreationArts and cultureAquatics or swimmingFitnessOutdoor adventureHistory Etiquette programs for park and trail usersSpecial eventsOutdoor educationSports leagues, adultSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Camps and other activities for childrenTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionSports leagues, youthTeen programsChildcare Preschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsOther0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000Q14[1]. Estimated Number of Households in BozemanThat Have a Need or Desire for Programsby number of households based on 20,457 households in the City of Bozeman2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 22196 24.124.718%15%11%16%8%14%15%14%6%11%3%10%5%3%5%6%2%8%39%36%36%31%38%29%27%22%30%23%23%17%19%18%15%9%10%8%23%29%33%31%31%14%32%28%36%32%31%34%30%23%28%27%17%25%12%13%12%15%17%20%18%29%21%22%27%24%21%35%39%32%37%8%8%9%8%7%23%9%8%8%13%15%15%26%22%14%26%34%58%Sports leagues, youthOutdoor adventureSpecial eventsWinter recreationCamps and other activities for childrenPreschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsFitnessSports leagues, adultArts and cultureHistory Outdoor educationSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Teen programsEtiquette programs for park and trail usersAquatics or swimmingTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionChildcare Other0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% MetQ14[2]. How Well Programs in Bozeman Meet the Needs/Desires of Householdsby percentage of households that have a need for programs2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 23197 Q14[3]. Estimated Number of Households in Bozeman Whose Needs/Desires for Programs Are Being Partly Met or Not Met8,3847,0946,2495,9025,7775,7175,3004,7594,1303,8393,6703,5432,2952,1011,9931,4851,170630Aquatics or swimmingArts and cultureWinter recreationFitnessEtiquette programs for park and trail usersHistory Outdoor educationOutdoor adventureSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Special eventsSports leagues, adultTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionCamps and other activities for childrenChildcare Teen programsSports leagues, youthPreschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsOther0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,00050% Met 25% Met 0% Metby number of households based on 20,457 households in the City of Bozeman2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 24198 36%36%33%26%25%20%18%17%16%14%13%12%9%7%6%5%5%4%Aquatics or swimmingWinter recreationArts and cultureFitnessOutdoor adventureEtiquette programs for park and trail usersHistory Seniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Outdoor educationSpecial eventsSports leagues, adultCamps and other activities for childrenTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionSports leagues, youthChildcare Preschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsTeen programsOther0% 10% 20% 30% 40%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice 4th ChoiceQ15. Programs That Are Most Important to Householdsby percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top four choices 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 25199 Q16. How Often Households Use Each of the Following Systems to Reach City of Bozeman Parks and Facilitiesby percentage of respondents (excluding “not provided”)28%21%10%10%5%0%37%28%29%18%9%0%24%28%39%31%24%2%11%24%23%42%62%98%Use sidewalksUse an automobileUse trails Use paved, shared‐use pathways Bike on the streetTravel by bus0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Several times a day About once a day About once a week Seldom/Never2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 26200 Q17. Level of Comfort With Each of the Following66%67%50%39%20%10%29%28%33%33%27%19%4%4%12%18%33%27%1%2%5%10%21%45%Use paved trailsUse trails Use sidewalksUse paved shared‐used pathwaysTravel by busBike on the street0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Very comfortable (5) Comfortable (4) Neutral (3) Uncomfortable (2/1)by percentage of respondents (excluding “don’t know”)2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 27201 Q18. Support for the City Investing in Each of the Following54%52%36%37%49%39%40%36%35%23%34%28%34%34%22%31%28%30%26%34%9%15%22%20%22%17%15%22%23%26%4%5%7%9%7%13%18%12%15%18%Installing more gravel and natural surface trailsProviding better winter maintenanceEnforcing motor vehicle lawsConstructing bike lanes on new & existing streetsConstructing more paved trails/shared‐use pathways0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Very supportive (5) Supportive (4) Neutral (3) Not supportive (2/1)by percentage of respondents (excluding “don’t know”)Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared‐use pathsConstructing paved, shared‐use pathways next to streetsConstructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streetsInstalling flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocksInstalling adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 28202 Q18. Support for the City Investing in Each of the Following (Cont.)24%29%30%20%15%16%15%12%12%9%32%26%23%30%28%25%24%26%24%11%28%23%25%32%36%41%36%33%33%36%16%23%23%18%21%19%25%30%31%43%Expanding public transitAdding more frequent bus stopsProviding covered bike parking at key destinationsInstalling bike fix‐it stationsProviding lockers and showers at City facilities 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Very supportive (5) Supportive (4) Neutral (3) Not supportive (2/1)by percentage of respondents (excluding “don’t know”)Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular trafficProviding financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling and walking to get to workInstalling wayfinding along bicycle and pedestrian routesInstalling rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walkingGuaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists and pedestrians that use those modes to access work2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 29203 33%33%23%22%22%21%20%14%13%11%Installing more gravel and natural surface trailsConstructing bike lanes on new & existing streetsProviding better winter maintenanceEnforcing motor vehicle lawsConstructing more paved trails/shared‐use pathways0% 10% 20% 30% 40%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd ChoiceQ19. Investments That Households Would Be Most Willing to Fund With Their Tax Dollarsby percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared‐use pathsConstructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streetsInstalling flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocksConstructing paved, shared‐use pathways next to streetsInstalling traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 30204 1%1%10%9%8%4%3%3%2%1%Expanding public transitAdding more frequent bus stopsProviding lockers and showers at City facilities Providing covered bike parking at key destinationsInstalling bike fix‐it stations0%5%10%15%1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd ChoiceQ19. Investments That Households Would Be Most Willing to Fund With Their Tax Dollars (Cont.)by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices Installing adequate lighting on bicycle and pedestrian routesProviding financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling and walking to get to workInstalling rest facilities such as shelters or benches alongbicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walkingInstalling wayfinding along bicycle and pedestrian routesGuaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists and pedestrians that use those modes to access work2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 31205 Q20. Satisfaction With the Overall Value Received from the City of Bozeman Parks Division by percentage of respondents (excluding “not provided”)17%52%22%6%2%Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 32206 Q21. Demographics: Ages of Household Membersby percentage of persons in household5%7%6%4%6%15%18%12%11%10%5%Under 5 years Ages 5‐9 years Ages 10‐14 years Ages 15‐19 yearsAges 20‐24 years Ages 25‐34 years Ages 35‐44 years Ages 45‐54 yearsAges 55‐64 years Ages 65‐74 years Ages 75+2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 33207 Q21a. Demographics: Primary Mode of Accessing School for Household Members Under Age 19by percentage of respondents 12%6%45%5%19%12%School bus Carpool or vanpool Personal motor vehicle Bicycle Walking Not provided2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 34208 Q22. Demographics: Age of Respondentby percentage of respondents 20%19%18%19%22%1%Under 35 years 35‐44 years 45‐54 years 55‐64 years 65+ years Not provided2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 35209 Q23. Demographics: Total Household Incomeby percentage of respondents 10%9%10%11%10%7%7%5%6%9%18%Less than $20K $20K to $34,999 $35K to $49,999 $50K to $64,999$65K to $79,999 $80K to $94,999 $95K to $109,999 $110K to $124,999$125K to $139,999 $140K+Not provided2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 36210 Q24. Demographics: Are you or any members of your household of Hispanic or Latino Heritage?3%96%1%Yes No Not providedby percentage of respondents2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 37211 88%3%1%1%0%1%7%WhiteAsianAmerican Indian or Alaska NativeBlack or African AmericanNative Hawaiian or Other Pacific IslanderOtherNot provided0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%by percentage of respondents (multiple selections could be made)Q25. Demographics: Race/Ethnicity2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 38212 Q26. Demographics: Genderby percentage of respondents44.6%0.2%41.4%0.5%0.5%12.7%Female (cis‐female) Female (trans‐female)Male (cis‐male) Male (trans‐male)Non‐binaryNot provided0.2% 0.5% 0.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 39213 Q27. Demographics: Do you own or rent your home?58%42%Own Rentby percentage of respondents2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 40214 Q28. Demographics: Do you have a disability?8%92%Yes Noby percentage of respondents2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 41215 2 Priority Investment Rating 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 42216 Priority Investment Rating (PIR) Overview The Priority Investment Rating (PIR) was developed by ETC Institute to provide governments with an objective tool for evaluating the priority that should be placed on parks and recreation investments. The Priority Investment Rating was developed by ETC Institute to identify the facilities and programs residents think should receive the highest priority for investment. The Priority Investment Rating reflects the importance residents place on items (sum of top 4 choices) and the unmet needs (needs that are only being partly met or not met) for each facility/program relative to the facility/program that rated the highest overall. Since decisions related to future investments should consider both the level of unmet need and the importance of facilities and programs, the PIR weights each of these components equally. The PIR reflects the sum of the Unmet Needs Rating and the Importance Rating as shown in the equation below: PIR = UNR + IR For example, suppose the Unmet Needs Rating for playgrounds is 26.5 (out of 100) and the Importance Rating for playgrounds is 52 (out of 100), the Priority Investment Rating for playgrounds would be 78.5 (out of 200). How to Analyze the Charts: • High Priority Areas are those with a PIR of at least 100. A rating of 100 or above generally indicates there is a relatively high level of unmet need and residents generally think it is important to fund improvements in these areas. Improvements in this area are likely to have a positive impact on the greatest number of households. • Medium Priority Areas are those with a PIR of 50-99. A rating in this range generally indicates there is a medium to high level of unmet need or a significant percentage of residents generally think it is important to fund improvements in these areas. • Low Priority Areas are those with a PIR below 50. A rating in this range generally indicates there is a relatively low level of unmet need and residents do not think it is important to fund improvements in these areas. Improvements may be warranted if the needs of very specialized populations are being targeted. The following pages show the Unmet Needs Rating, Importance Rating, and Priority Investment Rating for facilities and programs. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 43217 100.099.898.084.273.467.965.064.657.956.551.650.244.743.241.240.638.937.833.432.431.931.130.226.423.817.415.99.4Pools, outdoorOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesPools, indoorNature centersCommunity gardensSprayground/splash padWater access for recreationTrails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Recreation or community centersPavilions and picnic areasOff‐leash hours in parksTrails, gravel or natural surface Play areas for all ages and abilitiesPickleball courtsDisc golfIce rink (outdoor)Tennis courtsIce rink (indoor)Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Basketball courtsDog parksSpecial use biking facilities Playgrounds and play areasSand volleyball courtSkate parkFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyFields, baseball/softballOther0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0Unmet Needs Rating for Facilities/Amenitiesthe rating for the item with the most unmet need=100 the rating of all other items reflects the relative amount of unmet need for each item compared to the item with the most unmet need2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 44218 100.062.737.136.035.533.931.423.320.919.317.216.016.014.713.913.610.79.29.19.18.88.86.85.54.53.73.6Trails, gravel or natural surface Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Dog parksPools, indoorOn‐road bike lanes or facilitiesPools, outdoorWater access for recreationCommunity gardensNature centersOff‐leash hours in parksPlay areas for all ages and abilitiesPavilions and picnic areasPlaygrounds and play areasIce rink (outdoor)Disc golfSprayground/splash padRecreation or community centersTennis courtsPickleball courtsSpecial use biking facilities Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyIce rink (indoor)Basketball courtsSkate parkLawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Fields, baseball/softballSand volleyball court0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0Importance Rating for Facilities/Amenitiesthe rating for the item rated as the most important=100 the rating of all other items reflects the relative level of importance for each item compared to the item rated as the most important2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 45219 Top Priorities for Investment for Facilities/Amenities Based on the Priority Investment Rating150 135 134 134 127 105 97 96 82 73 71 69 69 62 55 55 52 48 47 46 40 39 38 30 29 26 20 15 Trails, gravel or natural surface On‐road bike lanes or facilitiesPools, indoorPools, outdoorTrails, paved (e.g., Path to the M)Nature centersCommunity gardensWater access for recreationSprayground/splash padPavilions and picnic areasOff‐leash hours in parksDog parksRecreation or community centersPlay areas for all ages and abilitiesIce rink (outdoor)Disc golfPickleball courtsTennis courtsIce rink (indoor)Playgrounds and play areasSpecial use biking facilities Basketball courtsLawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong)Sand volleyball courtSkate parkFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyFields, baseball/softballOther0 50 100 150 200 Medium Priority(50‐99)Lower Priority(0‐49)High Priority(100+)2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 46220 100.084.674.570.468.968.263.256.849.345.843.842.327.425.123.817.714.07.5Aquatics or swimmingArts and cultureWinter recreationFitnessEtiquette programs for park and trail usersHistory Outdoor educationOutdoor adventureSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Special eventsSports leagues, adultTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionCamps and other activities for childrenChildcare Teen programsSports leagues, youthPreschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsOther0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0Unmet Needs Rating for Programsthe rating for the item with the most unmet need=100 the rating of all other items reflects the relative amount of unmet need for each item compared to the item with the most unmet need2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 47221 100.099.490.671.268.456.550.447.644.039.136.332.724.718.315.814.414.410.8Aquatics or swimmingWinter recreationArts and cultureFitnessOutdoor adventureEtiquette programs for park and trail usersHistory Seniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Outdoor educationSpecial eventsSports leagues, adultCamps and other activities for childrenTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionSports leagues, youthChildcare Preschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsTeen programsOther0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0Importance Rating for Programsthe rating for the item rated as the most important=100 the rating of all other items reflects the relative level of importance for each item compared to the item rated as the most important2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 48222 Top Priorities for Investment for Programs Based on the Priority Investment Rating200 175 174 142 125 125 119 107 97 85 80 67 60 41 38 36 28 18 Aquatics or swimmingArts and cultureWinter recreationFitnessEtiquette programs for park and trail usersOutdoor adventureHistory Outdoor educationSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Special eventsSports leagues, adultTherapeutic recreation/recreation inclusionCamps and other activities for childrenChildcare Teen programsSports leagues, youthPreschool‐ages 2‐5 yearsOther0 50 100 150 200 Medium Priority(50‐99)Lower Priority(0‐49)High Priority(100+)2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 49223 3 Benchmarking Analysis 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 50224 Benchmarking Analysis Overview Since 1998, ETC Institute has conducted household surveys for needs assessments, feasibility studies, customer satisfaction, fees and charges comparisons, and other parks and recreation issues in more than 400 communities in 49 states across the country. The results of these surveys have provided an unparalleled database of information to compare responses from household residents in client communities to “National Averages” and therefore provide a unique tool to “assist organizations in better decision making.” Communities within the database include a full-range of municipal and county governments, with populations ranging from 20,000 to over 1 million residents. They include communities in warm weather and cold weather climates, mature communities, and some of the fastest growing cities and counties in the country. “National Averages” have been developed for numerous strategically important parks and recreation planning and management issues, including: customer satisfaction and usage of parks and programs; methods for receiving marketing information; reasons that prevent members of households from using parks and recreation facilities more often; priority recreation programs, parks, facilities and trails to improve or develop; priority programming spaces to have in planned community centers and aquatic facilities; potential attendance for planned indoor community centers and outdoor aquatic centers, etc. Results from household responses for the City of Bozeman were compared to National Benchmarks to gain further strategic information. A summary of all comparisons are shown in the graphs on the following pages. Note: The benchmarking data contained in this report is protected intellectual property. Any reproduction of the benchmarking information in this report by persons or organizations not directly affiliated with the City of Bozeman, Montana is not authorized without written consent from ETC Institute. 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 51225 Usage of Parks Bozeman vs. National Averageby percentage of respondents (without “don’t know”)97%70%0%20%40%60%80%100%Bozeman National Average% of residents who have visited parks in their community during the past year2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 52226 Households with Needs for Parks and Recreation FacilitiesBozeman vs. National Averageby percentage of respondents with a need for facilities82%73%62%59%51%47%46%46%40%39%38%31%28%26%24%23%22%19%17%15%50%64%46%28%47%28%37%37%38%29%31%20%24%20%19%13%20%12%17%10%Trails, gravel or natural surface Trails, paved Pavilions and picnic areasWater access for recreationNature centersDog parksPools, indoorPools, outdoorPlaygrounds and play areasCommunity gardensRecreation or community centersIce rink (indoor)Sprayground/splash padTennis courtsFields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockeyDisc golfBasketball courtsPickleball courtsFields, baseball/softballSkate park0%20%40%60%80% 100%Bozeman National Average2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 53227 Reasons Preventing the Use of Parks & Recreation FacilitiesBozeman vs. National Averageby percentage of respondents 18%9%7%5%4%4%3%3%28%9%8%13%4%16%10%4%No time to visit parks/trails/facilitiesParks/trails/facilities not well maintainedOperating hours are not convenientNot aware of parks/trails/facilitiesLack of universal accessibilityNo interest in visiting parks/trails/facilitiesParks/trails/facilities do not feel safePoor customer service by staff0%10%20%30%Bozeman National Average2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 54228 Households with Needs for Recreation ProgramsBozeman vs. National Averageby percentage of respondents with a need for sports programs51%35%35%28%27%21%17%13%10%26%37%29%46%27%18%17%14%13%Aquatics or swimmingSpecial eventsOutdoor educationSports leagues, adultSeniors/Active Aging‐ages 55+Camps and other activities for childrenSports leagues, youthTeen programsPreschool‐ages 2‐5 years0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Bozeman National Average2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 55229 Reasons Preventing the Use of Parks & Recreation ProgramsBozeman vs. National Averageby percentage of respondents 45%16%12%6%3%33%9%16%12%13%Not aware of programs offeredTimes when programs offered not convenientProgram location/venue not convenientProgram fees are not affordable0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Bozeman National AverageTypes of programming not interesting/relevant/desired2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings ReportETC Institute (2022)Page 56230 Tabular Data 4 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 57231 Q1. During a typical year, do you or anyone in your household visit the parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman (e.g., playgrounds, parks, athletic fields, dog parks, community centers, pools, trails or other facilities)? Q1. Does anyone in your household visit City parks, trails & recreational facilities during a typical year Number Percent Yes 389 97.0 % No 12 3.0 % Total 401 100.0 % Q1a. How often do you or others in your household visit a City of Bozeman park, trail, or recreational facility as described in Question 1? Q1a. How often do your household members visit a City park, trail, or recreational facility Number Percent Once or twice a year 23 5.9 % Monthly 69 17.7 % Weekly 158 40.6 % Daily 139 35.7 % Total 389 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 58232 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (N=389) Below Excellent Good Neutral average Poor Don't know Q1b-1. Park(s) 31.4% 54.8% 6.7% 1.5% 0.8% 4.9% Q1b-2. Recreation facility(ies) 9.0% 31.4% 18.5% 4.9% 1.3% 35.0% Q1b-3. Aquatic facility(ies) 3.1% 11.6% 11.1% 15.2% 9.0% 50.1% Q1b-4. Trails (natural, gravel, or paved) 40.9% 48.6% 5.9% 1.3% 0.0% 3.3% Q1b-5. Sidewalks 11.3% 50.6% 23.1% 9.3% 2.6% 3.1% Q1b-6. Paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (typically next to a street) 13.1% 42.4% 20.1% 9.5% 3.3% 11.6% Q1b-7. Biking on the street (e. g., in bike lanes) 4.1% 23.1% 25.7% 18.3% 11.1% 17.7% Q1b-8. Travel by bus 6.7% 16.2% 11.3% 3.3% 2.8% 59.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 59233 WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") (N=389) Below Excellent Good Neutral average Poor Q1b-1. Park(s) 33.0% 57.6% 7.0% 1.6% 0.8% Q1b-2. Recreation facility(ies) 13.8% 48.2% 28.5% 7.5% 2.0% Q1b-3. Aquatic facility(ies) 6.2% 23.2% 22.2% 30.4% 18.0% Q1b-4. Trails (natural, gravel, or paved) 42.3% 50.3% 6.1% 1.3% 0.0% Q1b-5. Sidewalks 11.7% 52.3% 23.9% 9.5% 2.7% Q1b-6. Paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (typically next to a street) 14.8% 48.0% 22.7% 10.8% 3.8% Q1b-7. Biking on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) 5.0% 28.1% 31.3% 22.2% 13.4% Q1b-8. Travel by bus 16.6% 40.1% 28.0% 8.3% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 60234 Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car? Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than a car Number Percent Yes 378 94.3 % No 19 4.7 % Not provided 4 1.0 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car? (without "not provided") Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than a car Number Percent Yes 378 95.2 % No 19 4.8 % Total 397 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 61235 Q3. Over the past five years, how often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility? Q3. How often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility over past five years Number Percent Never 6 1.5 % Once or twice a year 38 9.5 % Monthly 84 20.9 % Weekly 170 42.4 % Daily 99 24.7 % Not provided 4 1.0 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q3. Over the past five years, how often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility? (without "not provided") Q3. How often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility over past five years Number Percent Never 6 1.5 % Once or twice a year 38 9.6 % Monthly 84 21.2 % Weekly 170 42.8 % Daily 99 24.9 % Total 397 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 62236 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities. Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities Number Percent I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 21 5.2 % I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 14 3.5 % I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 72 18.0 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 14 3.5 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 35 8.7 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 13 3.2 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 47 11.7 % Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 26 6.5 % Poor customer service by staff 10 2.5 % Lack of universal accessibility 17 4.2 % Something else 95 23.7 % Total 364 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 63237 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? Q5. Top choice Number Percent I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 11 2.7 % I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 9 2.2 % I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 46 11.5 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 9 2.2 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 15 3.7 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 9 2.2 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 25 6.2 % Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 18 4.5 % Poor customer service by staff 4 1.0 % Lack of universal accessibility 5 1.2 % Something else 58 14.5 % None chosen 192 47.9 % Total 401 100.0 % Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? Q5. 2nd choice Number Percent I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 6 1.5 % I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 2 0.5 % I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 16 4.0 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 6 1.5 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 18 4.5 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 7 1.7 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 21 5.2 % Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 5 1.2 % Poor customer service by staff 5 1.2 % Lack of universal accessibility 5 1.2 % Something else 18 4.5 % None chosen 292 72.8 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 64238 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) Q5. Sum of top 2 choices Number Percent I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 17 4.2 % I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 11 2.7 % I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 62 15.5 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 15 3.7 % Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 33 8.2 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 16 4.0 % Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 46 11.5 % Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 23 5.7 % Poor customer service by staff 9 2.2 % Lack of universal accessibility 10 2.5 % Something else 76 19.0 % None chosen 192 47.9 % Total 510 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 65239 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. (N=401) Yes No Q6-1. Basketball courts 21.7% 78.3% Q6-2. Community gardens 38.9% 61.1% Q6-3. Disc golf 22.7% 77.3% Q6-4. Dog parks 46.6% 53.4% Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball 17.0% 83.0% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/ field hockey 24.2% 75.8% Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) 30.9% 69.1% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) 42.4% 57.6% Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 20.7% 79.3% Q6-10. Nature centers 51.4% 48.6% Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks 34.4% 65.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities 56.9% 43.1% Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas 62.1% 37.9% Q6-14. Pickleball courts 18.5% 81.5% Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities 42.1% 57.9% Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas 40.1% 59.9% Q6-17. Pools, indoor 46.4% 53.6% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor 45.9% 54.1% Q6-19. Recreation or community centers 38.2% 61.8% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court 17.0% 83.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 66240 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. Yes No Q6-21. Skate park 15.2% 84.8% Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 20.2% 79.8% Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad 27.7% 72.3% Q6-24. Tennis courts 25.7% 74.3% Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 82.0% 18.0% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 73.3% 26.7% Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 59.4% 40.6% Q6-28. Other 3.5% 96.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 67241 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." (N=395) 100% met 75% met 50% met 25% met 0% met Q6-1. Basketball courts 19.8% 24.7% 23.5% 23.5% 8.6% Q6-2. Community gardens 9.0% 20.8% 28.5% 18.8% 22.9% Q6-3. Disc golf 15.7% 16.9% 16.9% 41.6% 9.0% Q6-4. Dog parks 37.9% 36.7% 18.1% 6.8% 0.6% Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball 39.7% 25.4% 22.2% 7.9% 4.8% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/ field hockey 34.9% 38.4% 19.8% 5.8% 1.2% Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) 28.1% 26.3% 17.5% 18.4% 9.6% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) 33.1% 31.2% 19.1% 10.8% 5.7% Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 21.3% 18.7% 18.7% 16.0% 25.3% Q6-10. Nature centers 14.1% 24.9% 25.9% 17.3% 17.8% Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks 20.2% 24.0% 25.6% 18.6% 11.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities 12.5% 22.2% 32.4% 26.4% 6.5% Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas 28.6% 37.5% 22.3% 9.4% 2.2% Q6-14. Pickleball courts 4.3% 8.7% 26.1% 33.3% 27.5% Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities 29.5% 30.9% 24.8% 10.7% 4.0% Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas 38.5% 33.6% 20.3% 6.3% 1.4% Q6-17. Pools, indoor 7.3% 14.0% 20.8% 40.4% 17.4% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor 6.3% 12.6% 21.1% 42.9% 17.1% Q6-19. Recreation or community centers 17.9% 25.7% 30.7% 15.7% 10.0% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court 15.6% 26.6% 21.9% 20.3% 15.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 68242 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." 100% met 75% met 50% met 25% met 0% met Q6-21. Skate park 5.5% 36.4% 30.9% 18.2% 9.1% Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e. g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 22.7% 20.0% 28.0% 22.7% 6.7% Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad 1.9% 6.7% 15.4% 11.5% 64.4% Q6-24. Tennis courts 11.7% 31.9% 27.7% 22.3% 6.4% Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 41.4% 35.8% 16.9% 4.6% 1.3% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 32.7% 34.6% 19.5% 9.6% 3.7% Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e. g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 22.4% 37.0% 22.8% 14.2% 3.7% Q6-28. Other 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 30.0% 70.0% Q6-28. Other Q6-28. Other Number Percent Roller rink 2 14.3 % Unimproved trails 1 7.1 % Restrooms 1 7.1 % Dog free parks 1 7.1 % Nordic ski areas 1 7.1 % Handicapped accessibility for parks, pools and playground equipment 1 7.1 % Indoor playground for small children during winter months 1 7.1 % Rest rooms 1 7.1 % Outdoor free workout facility 1 7.1 % Off leash parks 1 7.1 % Crosswalk designation and pedestrian signs near all parks 1 7.1 % Kayaking, fat biking 1 7.1 % Intergenerational recreation facility 1 7.1 % Total 14 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 69243 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q7. Top choice Number Percent Basketball courts 4 1.0 % Community gardens 9 2.2 % Disc golf 25 6.2 % Dog parks 36 9.0 % Fields, baseball/softball 3 0.7 % Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 2 0.5 % Ice rink (indoor) 4 1.0 % Ice rink (outdoor) 3 0.7 % Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 1 0.2 % Nature centers 7 1.7 % Off-leash hours in parks 9 2.2 % On-road bike lanes or facilities 20 5.0 % Pavilions & picnic areas 6 1.5 % Pickleball courts 5 1.2 % Play areas for all ages & abilities 3 0.7 % Playgrounds & play areas 7 1.7 % Pools, indoor 34 8.5 % Pools, outdoor 16 4.0 % Recreation or community centers 4 1.0 % Sand volleyball court 1 0.2 % Skate park 8 2.0 % Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 3 0.7 % Sprayground/splash pad 4 1.0 % Tennis courts 4 1.0 % Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 121 30.2 % Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 22 5.5 % Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 12 3.0 % Other 6 1.5 % None chosen 22 5.5 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 70244 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q7. 2nd choice Number Percent Community gardens 7 1.7 % Disc golf 3 0.7 % Dog parks 30 7.5 % Fields, baseball/softball 1 0.2 % Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 8 2.0 % Ice rink (indoor) 3 0.7 % Ice rink (outdoor) 11 2.7 % Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 3 0.7 % Nature centers 7 1.7 % Off-leash hours in parks 19 4.7 % On-road bike lanes or facilities 22 5.5 % Pavilions & picnic areas 5 1.2 % Pickleball courts 2 0.5 % Play areas for all ages & abilities 12 3.0 % Playgrounds & play areas 12 3.0 % Pools, indoor 18 4.5 % Pools, outdoor 33 8.2 % Recreation or community centers 7 1.7 % Sand volleyball court 2 0.5 % Skate park 2 0.5 % Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 7 1.7 % Sprayground/splash pad 6 1.5 % Tennis courts 4 1.0 % Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 66 16.5 % Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 63 15.7 % Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 18 4.5 % Other 2 0.5 % None chosen 28 7.0 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 71245 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q7. 3rd choice Number Percent Basketball courts 7 1.7 % Community gardens 16 4.0 % Disc golf 2 0.5 % Dog parks 13 3.2 % Fields, baseball/softball 3 0.7 % Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 5 1.2 % Ice rink (indoor) 7 1.7 % Ice rink (outdoor) 9 2.2 % Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 3 0.7 % Nature centers 20 5.0 % Off-leash hours in parks 14 3.5 % On-road bike lanes or facilities 31 7.7 % Pavilions & picnic areas 14 3.5 % Pickleball courts 7 1.7 % Play areas for all ages & abilities 13 3.2 % Playgrounds & play areas 10 2.5 % Pools, indoor 27 6.7 % Pools, outdoor 14 3.5 % Recreation or community centers 7 1.7 % Sand volleyball court 2 0.5 % Skate park 3 0.7 % Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 4 1.0 % Sprayground/splash pad 15 3.7 % Tennis courts 9 2.2 % Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 36 9.0 % Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 36 9.0 % Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 23 5.7 % Other 4 1.0 % None chosen 47 11.7 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 72246 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q7. 4th choice Number Percent Basketball courts 6 1.5 % Community gardens 26 6.5 % Disc golf 5 1.2 % Dog parks 13 3.2 % Fields, baseball/softball 3 0.7 % Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 7 1.7 % Ice rink (indoor) 8 2.0 % Ice rink (outdoor) 14 3.5 % Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 5 1.2 % Nature centers 18 4.5 % Off-leash hours in parks 6 1.5 % On-road bike lanes or facilities 15 3.7 % Pavilions & picnic areas 15 3.7 % Pickleball courts 9 2.2 % Play areas for all ages & abilities 15 3.7 % Playgrounds & play areas 11 2.7 % Pools, indoor 10 2.5 % Pools, outdoor 21 5.2 % Recreation or community centers 9 2.2 % Sand volleyball court 4 1.0 % Skate park 1 0.2 % Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 9 2.2 % Sprayground/splash pad 9 2.2 % Tennis courts 6 1.5 % Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 24 6.0 % Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 34 8.5 % Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 25 6.2 % Other 1 0.2 % None chosen 72 18.0 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 73247 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) Q7. Sum of top 4 choices Number Percent Basketball courts 17 4.2 % Community gardens 58 14.5 % Disc golf 35 8.7 % Dog parks 92 22.9 % Fields, baseball/softball 10 2.5 % Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 22 5.5 % Ice rink (indoor) 22 5.5 % Ice rink (outdoor) 37 9.2 % Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 12 3.0 % Nature centers 52 13.0 % Off-leash hours in parks 48 12.0 % On-road bike lanes or facilities 88 21.9 % Pavilions & picnic areas 40 10.0 % Pickleball courts 23 5.7 % Play areas for all ages & abilities 43 10.7 % Playgrounds & play areas 40 10.0 % Pools, indoor 89 22.2 % Pools, outdoor 84 20.9 % Recreation or community centers 27 6.7 % Sand volleyball court 9 2.2 % Skate park 14 3.5 % Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 23 5.7 % Sprayground/splash pad 34 8.5 % Tennis courts 23 5.7 % Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 247 61.6 % Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 155 38.7 % Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 78 19.5 % Other 13 3.2 % None chosen 22 5.5 % Total 1457 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 74248 Q8. Did you or anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department before March 2020? Q8. Did anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events Number Percent Yes 90 22.4 % No 311 77.6 % Total 401 100.0 % Q8a. How would you rate the overall quality of the programs and events that you and members of your household participated in before March 2020? Q8a. How would you rate overall quality of programs & events your household participated in before March 2020 Number Percent Excellent 31 34.4 % Good 43 47.8 % Fair 14 15.6 % Poor 2 2.2 % Total 90 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 75249 Q9. Would you or members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future? Q9. Would you like Bozeman Parks & Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future Number Percent Yes 73 18.2 % No 280 69.8 % Not provided 48 12.0 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q9. Would you or members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future? (without "not provided") Q9. Would you like Bozeman Parks & Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future Number Percent Yes 73 20.7 % No 280 79.3 % Total 353 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 76250 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming. Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming Number Percent I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 180 44.9 % I do not have the time to participate in programming 97 24.2 % Program fees are not affordable 12 3.0 % Program instructors are not good 8 2.0 % Times when programs are offered are not convenient 47 11.7 % Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 62 15.5 % Poor customer service in past experience 12 3.0 % Lack of universal accessibility 6 1.5 % Language barriers (ESOL) 1 0.2 % Program location or venue is not convenient 24 6.0 % Something else 38 9.5 % Total 487 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 77251 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? Q11. Top choice Number Percent I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 152 37.9 % I do not have the time to participate in programming 47 11.7 % Program fees are not affordable 5 1.2 % Program instructors are not good 1 0.2 % Times when programs are offered are not convenient 22 5.5 % Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 32 8.0 % Poor customer service in past experience 4 1.0 % Lack of universal accessibility 1 0.2 % Program location or venue is not convenient 2 0.5 % Something else 23 5.7 % None chosen 112 27.9 % Total 401 100.0 % Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? Q11. 2nd choice Number Percent I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 9 2.2 % I do not have the time to participate in programming 47 11.7 % Program fees are not affordable 3 0.7 % Program instructors are not good 5 1.2 % Times when programs are offered are not convenient 19 4.7 % Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 20 5.0 % Poor customer service in past experience 2 0.5 % Lack of universal accessibility 2 0.5 % Program location or venue is not convenient 15 3.7 % Something else 11 2.7 % None chosen 268 66.8 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 78252 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) Q11. Sum of top 2 choices Number Percent I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 161 40.1 % I do not have the time to participate in programming 94 23.4 % Program fees are not affordable 8 2.0 % Program instructors are not good 6 1.5 % Times when programs are offered are not convenient 41 10.2 % Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 52 13.0 % Poor customer service in past experience 6 1.5 % Lack of universal accessibility 3 0.7 % Program location or venue is not convenient 17 4.2 % Something else 34 8.5 % None chosen 112 27.9 % Total 534 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 79253 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities Number Percent Threat of vehicle collisions or vehicle operator behavior (e.g., distracted driving, speeding) 189 47.1 % Existing bike lanes or paths are in poor condition 96 23.9 % I don't feel safe when walking or biking (crime/personal safety) 32 8.0 % Transporting small children, elderly, or persons with disabilities 36 9.0 % I don't own a bicycle 30 7.5 % I have to carry heavy things in my vehicle 42 10.5 % Destinations are too far away 46 11.5 % I have limited mobility 21 5.2 % Weather is often inclement 85 21.2 % Not enough lighting on my routes 58 14.5 % Route is unclear due to lack of wayfinding 26 6.5 % I don't have enough time for walking or biking as a commuting option 43 10.7 % Something else 29 7.2 % Total 733 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 80254 Q13. Of the following ways in which The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department could allocate funding, which ONE should be the top priority? Q13. Which following way could City Parks & Recreation Department allocate funding in Number Percent Develop land that has already been purchased with new parks, trails & facilities 98 24.4 % Purchase new land for later park or facility development 42 10.5 % Purchase new land for natural resource conservation 97 24.2 % Renovate existing facilities 69 17.2 % Increase routine maintenance of parks, trails, & facilities 76 19.0 % Not provided 19 4.7 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q13. Of the following ways in which The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department could allocate funding, which ONE should be the top priority? (without "not provided") Q13. Which following way could City Parks & Recreation Department allocate funding in Number Percent Develop land that has already been purchased with new parks, trails & facilities 98 25.7 % Purchase new land for later park or facility development 42 11.0 % Purchase new land for natural resource conservation 97 25.4 % Renovate existing facilities 69 18.1 % Increase routine maintenance of parks, trails, & facilities 76 19.9 % Total 382 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 81255 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. (N=401) Yes No Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming 51.1% 48.9% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 53.6% 46.4% Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 11.7% 88.3% Q14-4. Outdoor education 35.2% 64.8% Q14-5. Fitness 49.4% 50.6% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 41.9% 58.1% Q14-7. Outdoor adventure 47.1% 52.9% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 10.0% 90.0% Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 27.4% 72.6% Q14-10. Special events 35.4% 64.6% Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult 27.9% 72.1% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth 17.0% 83.0% Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children 20.7% 79.3% Q14-14. Teen programs 12.7% 87.3% Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/ recreation inclusion 20.4% 79.6% Q14-16. Winter recreation 57.1% 42.9% Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users 35.7% 64.3% Q14-18. Other 3.7% 96.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 82256 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." (N=374) 100% met 75% met 50% met 25% met 0% met Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming 5.1% 14.7% 27.9% 38.6% 13.7% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 5.8% 29.5% 35.8% 20.5% 8.4% Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 2.4% 9.8% 17.1% 36.6% 34.1% Q14-4. Outdoor education 3.3% 23.1% 31.4% 27.3% 14.9% Q14-5. Fitness 14.5% 27.2% 31.8% 17.9% 8.7% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 10.6% 22.7% 31.9% 22.0% 12.8% Q14-7. Outdoor adventure 14.9% 35.7% 29.2% 12.5% 7.7% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 14.3% 28.6% 14.3% 20.0% 22.9% Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 9.9% 16.5% 34.1% 24.2% 15.4% Q14-10. Special events 11.1% 35.9% 32.5% 12.0% 8.5% Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult 13.9% 21.8% 27.7% 28.7% 7.9% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth 18.0% 39.3% 23.0% 11.5% 8.2% Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children 8.3% 37.5% 30.6% 16.7% 6.9% Q14-14. Teen programs 4.7% 18.6% 30.2% 20.9% 25.6% Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/ recreation inclusion 6.1% 9.1% 27.3% 31.8% 25.8% Q14-16. Winter recreation 16.0% 30.5% 30.5% 15.0% 8.0% Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users 3.2% 17.7% 22.6% 34.7% 21.8% Q14-18. Other 8.3% 8.3% 25.0% 0.0% 58.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 83257 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q15. Top choice Number Percent Aquatics or swimming 88 21.9 % Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 34 8.5 % Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 4 1.0 % Outdoor education 13 3.2 % Fitness 32 8.0 % History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 8 2.0 % Outdoor adventure 35 8.7 % Preschool ages 2-5 2 0.5 % Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 21 5.2 % Special events 7 1.7 % Sports leagues, adult 17 4.2 % Sports leagues, youth 4 1.0 % Camps & other activities for children 13 3.2 % Teen programs 3 0.7 % Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 3 0.7 % Winter recreation 29 7.2 % Etiquette programs for park & trail users 29 7.2 % Other 11 2.7 % None chosen 48 12.0 % Total 401 100.0 % Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q15. 2nd choice Number Percent Aquatics or swimming 24 6.0 % Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 41 10.2 % Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 7 1.7 % Outdoor education 16 4.0 % Fitness 34 8.5 % History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 26 6.5 % Outdoor adventure 22 5.5 % Preschool ages 2-5 6 1.5 % Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 18 4.5 % Special events 22 5.5 % Sports leagues, adult 11 2.7 % Sports leagues, youth 11 2.7 % Camps & other activities for children 17 4.2 % Teen programs 2 0.5 % Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 7 1.7 % Winter recreation 45 11.2 % Etiquette programs for park & trail users 14 3.5 % None chosen 78 19.5 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 84258 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q15. 3rd choice Number Percent Aquatics or swimming 20 5.0 % Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 34 8.5 % Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 8 2.0 % Outdoor education 19 4.7 % Fitness 19 4.7 % History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 23 5.7 % Outdoor adventure 16 4.0 % Preschool ages 2-5 10 2.5 % Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 12 3.0 % Special events 13 3.2 % Sports leagues, adult 16 4.0 % Sports leagues, youth 7 1.7 % Camps & other activities for children 9 2.2 % Teen programs 14 3.5 % Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 12 3.0 % Winter recreation 34 8.5 % Etiquette programs for park & trail users 19 4.7 % Other 4 1.0 % None chosen 112 27.9 % Total 401 100.0 % Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? Q15. 4th choice Number Percent Aquatics or swimming 13 3.2 % Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 22 5.5 % Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 4 1.0 % Outdoor education 16 4.0 % Fitness 18 4.5 % History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 16 4.0 % Outdoor adventure 26 6.5 % Preschool ages 2-5 3 0.7 % Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 18 4.5 % Special events 15 3.7 % Sports leagues, adult 9 2.2 % Sports leagues, youth 5 1.2 % Camps & other activities for children 9 2.2 % Teen programs 2 0.5 % Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 14 3.5 % Winter recreation 36 9.0 % Etiquette programs for park & trail users 20 5.0 % Other 1 0.2 % None chosen 154 38.4 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 85259 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) Q15. Sum of top 4 choices Number Percent Aquatics or swimming 145 36.2 % Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 131 32.7 % Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 23 5.7 % Outdoor education 64 16.0 % Fitness 103 25.7 % History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 73 18.2 % Outdoor adventure 99 24.7 % Preschool ages 2-5 21 5.2 % Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 69 17.2 % Special events 57 14.2 % Sports leagues, adult 53 13.2 % Sports leagues, youth 27 6.7 % Camps & other activities for children 48 12.0 % Teen programs 21 5.2 % Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 36 9.0 % Winter recreation 144 35.9 % Etiquette programs for park & trail users 82 20.4 % Other 16 4.0 % None chosen 48 12.0 % Total 1260 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 86260 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (N=401) About Several About once a Not times a day once a day week Seldom Never provided Q16-1. Use an automobile 20.9% 26.9% 26.9% 20.4% 2.7% 2.0% Q16-2. Use trails (natural, gravel, or paved) 9.2% 28.2% 37.9% 18.5% 3.7% 2.5% Q16-3. Use sidewalks 27.4% 35.4% 23.2% 8.7% 2.0% 3.2% Q16-4. Use paved, shared-use pathways (typically next to a street) 9.2% 17.2% 30.2% 29.9% 10.2% 3.2% Q16-5. Bike on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) 4.7% 9.0% 23.7% 33.4% 26.7% 2.5% Q16-6. Travel by bus 0.2% 0.2% 1.7% 21.7% 72.3% 3.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 87261 WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") (N=401) Several times a About once a About once a day day week Seldom Never Q16-1. Use an automobile 21.4% 27.5% 27.5% 20.9% 2.8% Q16-2. Use trails (natural, gravel, or paved) 9.5% 28.9% 38.9% 18.9% 3.8% Q16-3. Use sidewalks 28.4% 36.6% 24.0% 9.0% 2.1% Q16-4. Use paved, shared-use pathways (typically next to a street) 9.5% 17.8% 31.2% 30.9% 10.6% Q16-5. Bike on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) 4.9% 9.2% 24.3% 34.3% 27.4% Q16-6. Travel by bus 0.3% 0.3% 1.8% 22.5% 75.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 88262 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (N=401) Very Very Uncomfortab- uncomfortab- comfortable Comfortable Neutral le le Don't know Q17-1. Use trails (natural or gravel) 63.3% 26.2% 3.5% 1.0% 0.7% 5.2% Q17-2. Use paved trails 61.1% 26.4% 3.7% 0.7% 0.5% 7.5% Q17-3. Use sidewalks 48.1% 32.4% 11.7% 3.7% 1.2% 2.7% Q17-4. Use paved shared-used pathways 34.7% 29.4% 15.5% 6.0% 3.0% 11.5% Q17-5. Bike on the street (ex. In bike lanes) 8.2% 14.7% 21.2% 19.2% 16.2% 20.4% Q17-6. Travel by bus 7.5% 10.0% 12.5% 4.0% 3.7% 62.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 89263 WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") (N=401) Very Very comfortable Comfortable Neutral Uncomfortable uncomfortable Q17-1. Use trails (natural or gravel) 66.8% 27.6% 3.7% 1.1% 0.8% Q17-2. Use paved trails 66.0% 28.6% 4.0% 0.8% 0.5% Q17-3. Use sidewalks 49.5% 33.3% 12.1% 3.8% 1.3% Q17-4. Use paved shared-used pathways 39.2% 33.2% 17.5% 6.8% 3.4% Q17-5. Bike on the street (ex. In bike lanes) 10.3% 18.5% 26.6% 24.1% 20.4% Q17-6. Travel by bus 19.9% 26.5% 33.1% 10.6% 9.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 90264 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (N=401) Very Not Not at all supportive Supportive Neutral supportive supportive Don't know Q18-1. Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 51.1% 32.2% 8.7% 2.0% 1.5% 4.5% Q18-2. Constructing more paved trails/ shared-use pathways 34.4% 28.9% 20.7% 6.5% 4.7% 4.7% Q18-3. Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 50.1% 26.4% 14.5% 2.5% 2.7% 3.7% Q18-4. Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 33.9% 25.2% 22.2% 7.7% 7.0% 4.0% Q18-5. Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 38.4% 26.7% 14.0% 10.2% 6.5% 4.2% Q18-6. Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 18.0% 26.4% 28.2% 9.0% 7.0% 11.5% Q18-7. Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 14.0% 26.9% 33.7% 11.7% 8.5% 5.2% Q18-8. Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 22.2% 32.4% 24.4% 10.2% 6.7% 4.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 91265 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." Very Not Not at all supportive Supportive Neutral supportive supportive Don't know Q18-9. Providing better winter maintenance 35.2% 33.2% 21.4% 4.7% 2.2% 3.2% Q18-10. Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 8.2% 10.2% 32.9% 21.2% 18.0% 9.5% Q18-11. Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g. , places of work, park facilities) 10.7% 23.9% 30.9% 17.0% 11.0% 6.5% Q18-12. Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 37.2% 29.4% 15.7% 6.7% 6.0% 5.0% Q18-13. Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 34.7% 31.7% 19.2% 4.2% 4.2% 6.0% Q18-14. Installing bike fix-it stations 11.2% 22.4% 30.2% 16.0% 12.5% 7.7% Q18-15. Adding more frequent bus stops 12.2% 19.5% 32.4% 6.7% 8.2% 20.9% Q18-16. Expanding public transit 21.7% 27.9% 25.2% 6.2% 7.7% 11.2% Q18-17. Enforcing motor vehicle laws 46.4% 20.7% 21.2% 4.5% 2.5% 4.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 92266 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." Very Not Not at all supportive Supportive Neutral supportive supportive Don't know Q18-18. Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 11.7% 19.2% 28.4% 8.5% 10.7% 21.4% Q18-19. Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 26.9% 23.9% 20.9% 11.0% 10.0% 7.2% Q18-20. Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 27.2% 20.9% 22.4% 8.0% 13.2% 8.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 93267 WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") (N=401) Not at all Very supportive Supportive Neutral Not supportive supportive Q18-1. Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared- use paths 53.5% 33.7% 9.1% 2.1% 1.6% Q18-2. Constructing more paved trails/ shared-use pathways 36.1% 30.4% 21.7% 6.8% 5.0% Q18-3. Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 52.1% 27.5% 15.0% 2.6% 2.8% Q18-4. Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 35.3% 26.2% 23.1% 8.1% 7.3% Q18-5. Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 40.1% 27.9% 14.6% 10.7% 6.8% Q18-6. Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 20.3% 29.9% 31.8% 10.1% 7.9% Q18-7. Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 14.7% 28.4% 35.5% 12.4% 8.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 94268 WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") Not at all Very supportive Supportive Neutral Not supportive supportive Q18-8. Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 23.1% 33.8% 25.5% 10.6% 7.0% Q18-9. Providing better winter maintenance 36.3% 34.3% 22.2% 4.9% 2.3% Q18-10. Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 9.1% 11.3% 36.4% 23.4% 19.8% Q18-11. Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) 11.5% 25.6% 33.1% 18.1% 11.7% Q18-12. Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 39.1% 31.0% 16.5% 7.1% 6.3% Q18-13. Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 36.9% 33.7% 20.4% 4.5% 4.5% Q18-14. Installing bike fix-it stations 12.2% 24.3% 32.7% 17.3% 13.5% Q18-15. Adding more frequent bus stops 15.5% 24.6% 41.0% 8.5% 10.4% Q18-16. Expanding public transit 24.4% 31.5% 28.4% 7.0% 8.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 95269 WITHOUT “DON’T KNOW” Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") Not at all Very supportive Supportive Neutral Not supportive supportive Q18-17. Enforcing motor vehicle laws 48.7% 21.7% 22.3% 4.7% 2.6% Q18-18. Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 14.9% 24.4% 36.2% 10.8% 13.7% Q18-19. Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 29.0% 25.8% 22.6% 11.8% 10.8% Q18-20. Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 29.6% 22.8% 24.5% 8.7% 14.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 96270 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? Q19. Top choice Number Percent Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 78 19.5 % Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 26 6.5 % Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 64 16.0 % Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 19 4.7 % Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 24 6.0 % Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 1 0.2 % Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 1 0.2 % Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 6 1.5 % Providing better winter maintenance 18 4.5 % Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 2 0.5 % Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) 1 0.2 % Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 37 9.2 % Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 5 1.2 % Adding more frequent bus stops 2 0.5 % Expanding public transit 9 2.2 % Enforcing motor vehicle laws 39 9.7 % Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 2 0.5 % Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 8 2.0 % Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 13 3.2 % None chosen 46 11.5 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 97271 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? Q19. 2nd choice Number Percent Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 27 6.7 % Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 34 8.5 % Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 36 9.0 % Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 16 4.0 % Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 36 9.0 % Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 2 0.5 % Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 8 2.0 % Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 14 3.5 % Providing better winter maintenance 45 11.2 % Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 3 0.7 % Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) 2 0.5 % Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 23 5.7 % Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 24 6.0 % Installing bike fix-it stations 2 0.5 % Adding more frequent bus stops 6 1.5 % Expanding public transit 9 2.2 % Enforcing motor vehicle laws 19 4.7 % Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 2 0.5 % Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 20 5.0 % Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 12 3.0 % None chosen 61 15.2 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 98272 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? Q19. 3rd choice Number Percent Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 26 6.5 % Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 18 4.5 % Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 30 7.5 % Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 21 5.2 % Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 27 6.7 % Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 9 2.2 % Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 5 1.2 % Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 19 4.7 % Providing better winter maintenance 27 6.7 % Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 2 0.5 % Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 32 8.0 % Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 24 6.0 % Installing bike fix-it stations 1 0.2 % Adding more frequent bus stops 9 2.2 % Expanding public transit 15 3.7 % Enforcing motor vehicle laws 26 6.5 % Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 16 4.0 % Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 13 3.2 % None chosen 81 20.2 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 99273 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) Q19. Sum of top 3 choices Number Percent Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 131 32.7 % Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 78 19.5 % Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 130 32.4 % Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 56 14.0 % Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 87 21.7 % Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 12 3.0 % Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 14 3.5 % Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 39 9.7 % Providing better winter maintenance 90 22.4 % Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 7 1.7 % Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) 3 0.7 % Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 92 22.9 % Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 53 13.2 % Installing bike fix-it stations 3 0.7 % Adding more frequent bus stops 17 4.2 % Expanding public transit 33 8.2 % Enforcing motor vehicle laws 84 20.9 % Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 4 1.0 % Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 44 11.0 % Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 38 9.5 % None chosen 46 11.5 % Total 1061 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 100274 Q20. Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "Very Satisfied" and 5 means "Very Dissatisfied," with the overall value your household receives from the City of Bozeman Parks Division. Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks Division Number Percent Very satisfied 67 16.7 % Satisfied 203 50.6 % Neutral 87 21.7 % Dissatisfied 25 6.2 % Very dissatisfied 7 1.7 % Not provided 12 3.0 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q20. Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "Very Satisfied" and 5 means "Very Dissatisfied," with the overall value your household receives from the City of Bozeman Parks Division. (without "not provided") Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks Division Number Percent Very satisfied 67 17.2 % Satisfied 203 52.2 % Neutral 87 22.4 % Dissatisfied 25 6.4 % Very dissatisfied 7 1.8 % Total 389 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 101275 Q21. Including yourself, how many people in your household are... Mean Sum Under age 5 0.1 49 Ages 5-9 0.2 72 Ages 10-14 0.2 67 Ages 15-19 0.1 46 Ages 20-24 0.2 61 Ages 25-34 0.4 158 Ages 35-44 0.5 190 Ages 45-54 0.3 128 Ages 55-64 0.3 110 Ages 65-74 0.3 102 Ages 75-84 0.1 49 Ages 85+ 0.0 8 Q21a. If you have any household members under 19, what is their primary mode of accessing their school if it is not provided at home? Q21a. Primary mode of accessing school for household members under 19 Number Percent School bus 16 12.3 % Carpool or vanpool 8 6.2 % Personal motor vehicle 59 45.4 % Bicycle 6 4.6 % Walking 25 19.2 % Not provided 16 12.3 % Total 130 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q21a. If you have any household members under 19, what is their primary mode of accessing their school if it is not provided at home? (without "not provided") Q21a. Primary mode of accessing school for household members under 19 Number Percent School bus 16 14.0 % Carpool or vanpool 8 7.0 % Personal motor vehicle 59 51.8 % Bicycle 6 5.3 % Walking 25 21.9 % Total 114 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 102276 Q22. Your age: Q22. Your age Number Percent 18-34 80 20.0 % 35-44 78 19.5 % 45-54 73 18.2 % 55-64 76 19.0 % 65+ 88 21.9 % Not provided 6 1.5 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q22. Your age: (without "not provided") Q22. Your age Number Percent 18-34 80 20.3 % 35-44 78 19.7 % 45-54 73 18.5 % 55-64 76 19.2 % 65+ 88 22.3 % Total 395 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 103277 Q23. Which of the following best describes your total annual household income? Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income Number Percent Less than $20K 39 9.7 % $20K-$34,999 36 9.0 % $35K-$49,999 38 9.5 % $50K-$64,999 45 11.2 % $65K-$79,999 39 9.7 % $80K-$94,999 27 6.7 % $95K-$109,999 29 7.2 % $110K-$124,999 20 5.0 % $125K-$139,999 22 5.5 % $140K+ 36 9.0 % Not provided 70 17.5 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q23. Which of the following best describes your total annual household income? (without "not provided") Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income Number Percent Less than $20K 39 11.8 % $20K-$34,999 36 10.9 % $35K-$49,999 38 11.5 % $50K-$64,999 45 13.6 % $65K-$79,999 39 11.8 % $80K-$94,999 27 8.2 % $95K-$109,999 29 8.8 % $110K-$124,999 20 6.0 % $125K-$139,999 22 6.6 % $140K+ 36 10.9 % Total 331 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 104278 Q24. Are you or any members of your household of Hispanic or Latino Heritage? Q24. Are any household members of Hispanic or Latino Heritage Number Percent Yes 14 3.5 % No 384 95.8 % Not provided 3 0.7 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q24. Are you or any members of your household of Hispanic or Latino Heritage? (without "not provided") Q24. Are any household members of Hispanic or Latino Heritage Number Percent Yes 14 3.5 % No 384 96.5 % Total 398 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 105279 Q25. With which racial or ethnic groups do you identify? Q25. With which racial or ethnic groups do you identify Number Percent American Indian or Alaska Native 5 1.2 % Asian 10 2.5 % Black or African American 2 0.5 % Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1 0.2 % White 353 88.0 % Other 4 1.0 % Not provided 26 6.5 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q25. With which racial or ethnic groups do you identify? (without "not provided") Q25. With which racial or ethnic groups do you identify Number Percent American Indian or Alaska Native 5 1.3 % Asian 10 2.7 % Black or African American 2 0.5 % Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 1 0.3 % White 353 94.1 % Other 4 1.1 % Total 375 100.0 % Q25-6. Self-describe your racial or ethnic background: Q25-6. Self-describe your racial or ethnic background Number Percent Mexican 1 25.0 % Immigrant 1 25.0 % More than one 1 25.0 % Hispanic 1 25.0 % Total 4 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 106280 Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Q26. With which genders do you most identify with Number Percent Female (cis-female) 179 44.6 % Female (trans-female) 1 0.2 % Male (cis-male) 166 41.4 % Male (trans-male) 2 0.5 % Non-binary 2 0.5 % Not provided 51 12.7 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? (without "not provided") Q26. With which genders do you most identify with Number Percent Female (cis-female) 179 51.1 % Female (trans-female) 1 0.3 % Male (cis-male) 166 47.4 % Male (trans-male) 2 0.6 % Non-binary 2 0.6 % Total 350 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 107281 Q27. Do you own or rent your home? Q27. Do you own or rent your home Number Percent Own 233 58.1 % Rent 167 41.6 % Not provided 1 0.2 % Total 401 100.0 % WITHOUT “NOT PROVIDED” Q27. Do you own or rent your home? (without "not provided") Q27. Do you own or rent your home Number Percent Own 233 58.3 % Rent 167 41.8 % Total 400 100.0 % Q28. Do you have a disability? Q28. Do you have a disability Number Percent Yes 34 8.5 % No 367 91.5 % Total 401 100.0 % 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 108282 Survey Instrument 5 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Findings Report ETC Institute (2022)Page 109283 Dear City of Bozeman Neighbor: The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department is planning for the next 10 years of Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation (PRAT) and we need your help to develop a roadmap for the future! Si tiene preguntas acerca de la encuesta y no habla inglés, par favor llame al 1-844-811-0411. यिद सव��ण के बारे म� आ प के कोई प्र� ह� और आप अंग्रेजी नहीं बोलते ह�, तो कृ प य ा 866-991-5215. पर कॉल कर� 설문 조사에 대한 질문이 있고 영어를 할 수없는 경우 844-247-8189 로 전화하십시오. 如果您对调查有疑问且不会说英语，请致电 844-872-2562 The Department strives to meet the needs of our community. We want to hear from you to prioritize our services and guide the growth of our system and programming. Your household was one of a limited number selected at random to receive this survey. It is very important that you participate! We appreciate your time. This survey will take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete and each question is important. Please complete and return your confidential survey within the next two weeks. We have selected ETC Institute, an independent consulting company, as our partner to administer this survey. They will compile the data received and present the results to the City. Please return your completed survey in the enclosed postage-paid envelope to: ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061. For more information, please visit engage.bozeman.net and register to follow the PRAT Plan. Please feel free to contact ETC Institute at 913-254-4598 if you have any questions or problems completing your survey. Sincerely, Addi K. Jadin Park Planning and Development Manager 284 ©2022 ETC Institute Page 1 Park and Recreation Survey Let your voice be heard today! This survey will take 10-15 minutes to complete. When you are finished, please return your survey in the enclosed postage-paid, return-reply envelope. We greatly appreciate your time. If you prefer, you can complete the survey online at BozemanParkSurvey.org. 1. During a typical year, do you or anyone in your household visit the parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman (e.g., playgrounds, parks, athletic fields, dog parks, community centers, pools, trails or other facilities)? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No [Skip to Q2.] 1a. How often do you or others in your household visit a City of Bozeman park, trail, or recreational facility as described above? ____(1) Never ____(2) Once or twice a year ____(3) Monthly ____(4) Weekly ____(5) Daily 1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent," and 1 means "Poor." If you have not experienced any of the following items, please select 9 for "Don't Know." Excellent Good Neutral Below Average Poor Don't Know 1. Park(s) 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Recreation Facility(ies) 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Aquatic Facility(ies) 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Trails (natural, gravel, or paved) 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. Sidewalks 5 4 3 2 1 9 6. Paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (typically next to a street) 5 4 3 2 1 9 7. Biking on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) 5 4 3 2 1 9 8. Travel by bus 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No 3. Over the past five years, how often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility? ____(1) Never ____(2) Once or twice a year ____(3) Monthly ____(4) Weekly ____(5) Daily 4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities. [Check all that apply.] ____(01) I am not aware of City of Bozeman parks, trails, and facilities ____(02) I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities ____(03) I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities ____(04) Parks, trails, and facilities are not conveniently located ____(05) Parks, trails, and facilities are not well maintained ____(06) Parks, trails, and facilities do not feel safe ____(07) Parks, trails, and facilities do not have the amenities I want ____(08) Operating hours of parks, trails, and facilities are not convenient ____(09) Poor customer service by staff ____(10) Lack of universal accessibility ____(11) Something else: ______________________________________________________________________ 285 ©2022 ETC Institute Page 2 5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 4, or circle "NONE."] 1st: ____ 2nd: ____ NONE 6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below by circling either "Yes" or "No." If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." For example, if you indicate you use or would like to use paved trails, but there are not any paved trails near your home then your need may only be 25% met or 0% met. Type of Facility/Amenity Do you have a need/desire for this facility/amenity? If "Yes," how well are your needs being met? 100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met 01. Basketball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 02. Community gardens Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 03. Disc golf Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 04. Dog parks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 05. Fields, baseball/softball Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 06. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 07. Ice rink (indoor) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 08. Ice rink (outdoor) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 09. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 10. Nature centers Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 11. Off-leash hours in parks Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 12. On-road bike lanes or facilities Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 13. Pavilions and picnic areas Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 14. Pickleball courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 15. Play areas for all ages and abilities Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 16. Playgrounds and play areas Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 17. Pools, indoor Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 18. Pools, outdoor Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 19. Recreation or community centers Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 20. Sand volleyball court Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 21. Skate park Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 23. Sprayground/splash pad Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 24. Tennis courts Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator trail) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 28. Other: ___________________________________ Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 6, or circle "NONE."] 1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ 4th: ____ NONE 286 ©2022 ETC Institute Page 3 8. Did you or anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department before March 2020? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No [Skip to Q9.] 8a. How would you rate the overall quality of the programs and events that you and members of your household participated in before March 2020? ____(1) Excellent ____(2) Good ____(3) Fair ____(4) Poor 9. Would you or members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No 10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming. [Check all that apply.] ____(01) I am not aware of the programs offered by City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation ____(02) I do not have the time to participate in programming ____(03) Program fees are not affordable ____(04) Program instructors are not good ____(05) The times when programs are offered are not convenient ____(06) The types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired ____(07) Poor customer service in past experience ____(08) Lack of universal accessibility ____(09) Language Barriers (ESOL) ____(10) The program location or venue is not convenient ____(11) Something else: ___________________________________________________________________________ 11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 10, or circle "NONE."] 1st: ____ 2nd: ____ NONE 12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? [Check all that apply.] ____(01) Threat of vehicle collisions or vehicle operator behavior (e.g., distracted driving, speeding) ____(02) Existing bike lanes or paths are in poor condition ____(03) I don't feel safe when walking or biking (crime/personal safety) ____(04) Transporting small children, elderly, or persons with disabilities ____(05) I don't own a bicycle ____(06) I have to carry heavy things in my vehicle ____(07) Destinations are too far away ____(08) I have limited mobility ____(09) The weather is often inclement ____(10) Not enough lighting on my routes ____(11) Route is unclear due to lack of wayfinding ____(12) I don't have enough time for walking or biking as a commuting option ____(13) Something else: __________________________________________________________________________ 13. Of the following ways in which The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department could allocate funding, which ONE should be the top priority? ____(1) DEVELOP land that has already been purchased with new parks, trails and facilities ____(2) PURCHASE new land for later park or facility development ____(3) PURCHASE new land for natural resource conservation ____(4) RENOVATE existing facilities ____(5) INCREASE routine maintenance of parks, trails, and facilities 287 ©2022 ETC Institute Page 4 14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below by circling either "Yes" or "No." If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." For example, if you indicate you use or would like to attend sports leagues, but you are not aware of any open sports leagues near your home then your need may only be 25% met or 0% met. Type of Program/Event Do you have a need/desire for this program? If "Yes," how well are your needs being met? 100% Met 75% Met 50% Met 25% Met 0% Met 01. Aquatics or swimming Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 02. Arts and culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 03. Childcare (e.g., after-school care, date night care) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 04. Outdoor education Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 05. Fitness Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 06. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 07. Outdoor adventure Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 08. Preschool-ages 2-5 years Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 09. Seniors/Active Aging-ages 55+ Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 10. Special events Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 11. Sports leagues, adult Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 12. Sports leagues, youth Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 13. Camps and other activities for children Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 14. Teen programs Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 16. Winter recreation Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 17. Etiquette programs for park and trail users Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 18. Other: __________________________________ Yes No 5 4 3 2 1 15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 14, or circle "NONE."] 1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ 4th: ____ NONE 16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." How often do you... Several Times a Day About Once a Day About Once a Week Seldom Never 1. Use an automobile 5 4 3 2 1 2. Use trails (natural, gravel, or paved) 5 4 3 2 1 3. Use sidewalks 5 4 3 2 1 4. Use paved, shared-use pathways (typically next to a street) 5 4 3 2 1 5. Bike on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) 5 4 3 2 1 6. Travel by bus 5 4 3 2 1 288 ©2022 ETC Institute Page 5 17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable," and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." If you have not experienced any of the following items please select 9 for "Don't Know." How comfortable do you feel when you... Very Comfortable Comfortable Neutral Uncomfortable Very Uncomfortable Don't Know 1. Use trails (natural or gravel) 5 4 3 2 1 9 2. Use paved trails 5 4 3 2 1 9 3. Use sidewalks 5 4 3 2 1 9 4. Use paved shared-used pathways 5 4 3 2 1 9 5. Bike on the street (ex. In bike lanes) 5 4 3 2 1 9 6. Travel by bus 5 4 3 2 1 9 18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive," and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." How supportive would you be of... Very Supportive Supportive Neutral Not Supportive Not at all Supportive Don't Know 01. Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 5 4 3 2 1 9 02. Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 5 4 3 2 1 9 03. Installing more gravel and natural surface trails 5 4 3 2 1 9 04. Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 5 4 3 2 1 9 05. Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 5 4 3 2 1 9 06. Installing wayfinding along bicycle and pedestrian routes 5 4 3 2 1 9 07. Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 5 4 3 2 1 9 08. Installing adequate lighting on bicycle and pedestrian routes 5 4 3 2 1 9 09. Providing better winter maintenance 5 4 3 2 1 9 10. Providing lockers and showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, and places of work) 5 4 3 2 1 9 11. Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) 5 4 3 2 1 9 12. Constructing bike lanes on new and existing streets 5 4 3 2 1 9 13. Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets 5 4 3 2 1 9 14. Installing bike fix-it stations 5 4 3 2 1 9 15. Adding more frequent bus stops 5 4 3 2 1 9 16. Expanding public transit 5 4 3 2 1 9 17. Enforcing motor vehicle laws 5 4 3 2 1 9 18. Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists and pedestrians that use those modes to access work 5 4 3 2 1 9 19. Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 5 4 3 2 1 9 20. Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling and walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 5 4 3 2 1 9 19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? [Write in your answers below using the numbers from the list in Question 18, or circle "NONE."] 1st: ____ 2nd: ____ 3rd: ____ NONE 289 ©2022 ETC Institute Page 6 20. Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "Very Satisfied" and 5 means "Very Dissatisfied," with the overall value your household receives from the City of Bozeman Parks Division. ____(1) Very satisfied ____(2) Satisfied ____(3) Neutral ____(4) Dissatisfied ____(5) Very dissatisfied 21. Including yourself, how many people in your household are... Under age 5: ____ Ages 5-9: ____ Ages 10-14: ____ Ages 15-19: ____ Ages 20-24: ____ Ages 25-34: ____ Ages 35-44: ____ Ages 45-54: ____ Ages 55-64: ____ Ages 65-74: ____ Ages 75-84: ____ Ages 85+: ____ 21a. If you have any household members under 19, what is their primary mode of accessing their school if it is not provided at home? ____(1) School bus ____(2) Public transit (Streamline) ____(3) Carpool or vanpool ____(4) Personal motor vehicle ____(5) Bicycle ____(6) Walking ____(7) Other personal mobility device (wheelchair, scooter, E-device) ____(8) Other: _____________________ 22. Your age: ______ years 23. Which of the following best describes your total annual household income? ____(01) Less than $20,000 ____(02) $20,000 - $34,999 ____(03) $35,000 - $49,999 ____(04) $50,000 - $64,999 ____(05) $65,000 - $79,999 ____(06) $80,000 - $94,999 ____(07) $95,000 - $109,999 ____(08) $110,000 - $124,999 ____(09) $125,000 - $139,999 ____(10) $140,000 or more 24. Are you or any members of your household of Hispanic or Latino Heritage? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No 25. With which racial or ethnic groups do you identify? [Check all that apply.] ____(1) American Indian or Alaska Native ____(2) Asian ____(3) Black or African American ____(4) Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander ____(5) White ____(6) Other: _____________________________________________ 26. With which genders do you most identify with? Transgender (often abbreviated to "trans") is an umbrella term that refers to people whose gender identity, expression, or behavior is different from those typically associated with their assigned sex at birth. Other identities considered to fall under this umbrella can include non-binary, two-spirit, gender fluid, genderqueer, and more. Cisgender (often abbreviated to "cis") is a term that refers to people whose gender identity, expression or behavior is the same as those typically associated with their assigned sex at birth. [Check all that apply.] ____(1) Female (cis-female) ____(2) Female (trans-female) ____(3) Male (cis-male) ____(4) Male (trans-male) ____(5) Non-binary ____(6) Prefer to self-describe: _____________ 27. Do you own or rent your home? ____(1) Own ____(2) Rent 28. Do you have a disability? ____(1) Yes ____(2) No This concludes the survey. Thank you for your time! Please return your completed survey in the enclosed return-reply envelope addressed to: ETC Institute, 725 W. Frontier Circle, Olathe, KS 66061 Your responses will remain completely confidential. The address information printed to the right will ONLY be used to help identify geographic areas with special interests. Thank you. 290 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey Cross-Tabular Data Presented to the Bozeman, Montana Parks and Recreation Department March 2022 291 Contents Cross-Tabular Data by: Household Income ........................ 1 Cross-Tabular Data by: Age and Gender ......................... 83 Cross-Tabular Data by: Household Type ....................... 167 292 Q1. During a typical year, do you or anyone in your household visit the parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman (e.g., playgrounds, parks, athletic fields, dog parks, community centers, pools, trails or other facilities)? N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q1. Does anyone in your household visit City parks, trails & recreational facilities during a typical year Yes 100.0% 91.7% 95.2% 98.5% 95.9% 100.0% 97.0% No 0.0% 8.3% 4.8% 1.5% 4.1% 0.0% 3.0% Q1a. How often do you or others in your household visit a City of Bozeman park, trail, or recreational facility as described in Question 1? N=389 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q1a. How often do your household members visit a City park, trail, or recreational facility Once or twice a year 12.8% 6.1% 6.3% 4.6% 2.1% 0.0% 5.9% Monthly 20.5% 30.3% 25.3% 12.3% 12.8% 19.0% 17.7% Weekly 30.8% 42.4% 38.0% 52.3% 38.3% 36.2% 40.6% Daily 35.9% 21.2% 30.4% 30.8% 46.8% 44.8% 35.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 1293 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q1b-1. Park(s) Excellent 29.7% 22.6% 40.8% 34.9% 34.8% 33.9% 33.0% Good 64.9% 64.5% 53.9% 47.6% 58.7% 57.1% 57.6% Neutral 2.7% 12.9% 3.9% 14.3% 6.5% 7.1% 7.0% Below average 2.7% 0.0% 1.3% 1.6% 0.0% 1.8% 1.6% Poor 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% Q1b-2. Recreation facility(ies) Excellent 16.0% 19.0% 17.0% 16.7% 11.4% 9.1% 13.8% Good 44.0% 47.6% 47.2% 43.8% 48.6% 60.6% 48.2% Neutral 28.0% 33.3% 30.2% 29.2% 20.0% 24.2% 28.5% Below average 12.0% 0.0% 3.8% 10.4% 20.0% 3.0% 7.5% Poor 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 2294 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q1b-3. Aquatic facility(ies) Excellent 6.3% 14.3% 5.0% 2.9% 3.2% 7.4% 6.2% Good 18.8% 35.7% 32.5% 20.0% 35.5% 0.0% 23.2% Neutral 37.5% 35.7% 17.5% 14.3% 29.0% 29.6% 22.2% Below average 25.0% 7.1% 32.5% 34.3% 25.8% 33.3% 30.4% Poor 12.5% 7.1% 12.5% 28.6% 6.5% 29.6% 18.0% Q1b-4. Trails (natural, gravel, or paved) Excellent 43.2% 48.5% 41.0% 41.9% 37.0% 44.6% 42.3% Good 51.4% 36.4% 55.1% 53.2% 56.5% 48.2% 50.3% Neutral 2.7% 12.1% 2.6% 4.8% 6.5% 7.1% 6.1% Below average 2.7% 3.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 3295 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q1b-5. Sidewalks Excellent 10.8% 9.1% 14.3% 12.5% 6.4% 7.3% 11.7% Good 48.6% 60.6% 49.4% 45.3% 61.7% 61.8% 52.3% Neutral 32.4% 21.2% 19.5% 28.1% 21.3% 18.2% 23.9% Below average 8.1% 3.0% 11.7% 14.1% 10.6% 10.9% 9.5% Poor 0.0% 6.1% 5.2% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 2.7% Q1b-6. Paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (typically next to a street) Excellent 8.6% 17.2% 13.0% 20.0% 8.9% 17.3% 14.8% Good 48.6% 44.8% 49.3% 35.0% 64.4% 53.8% 48.0% Neutral 34.3% 17.2% 18.8% 31.7% 13.3% 19.2% 22.7% Below average 8.6% 13.8% 14.5% 8.3% 11.1% 7.7% 10.8% Poor 0.0% 6.9% 4.3% 5.0% 2.2% 1.9% 3.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 4296 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q1b-7. Biking on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) Excellent 3.2% 8.7% 6.2% 7.1% 0.0% 6.1% 5.0% Good 32.3% 26.1% 29.2% 17.9% 27.9% 30.6% 28.1% Neutral 35.5% 34.8% 26.2% 32.1% 32.6% 32.7% 31.3% Below average 16.1% 21.7% 20.0% 28.6% 23.3% 22.4% 22.2% Poor 12.9% 8.7% 18.5% 14.3% 16.3% 8.2% 13.4% Q1b-8. Travel by bus Excellent 5.3% 33.3% 17.6% 20.0% 21.1% 14.3% 16.6% Good 36.8% 26.7% 47.1% 30.0% 36.8% 57.1% 40.1% Neutral 21.1% 33.3% 23.5% 33.3% 31.6% 28.6% 28.0% Below average 10.5% 6.7% 5.9% 13.3% 10.5% 0.0% 8.3% Poor 26.3% 0.0% 5.9% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 5297 Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car? (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than a car Yes 94.7% 91.7% 95.2% 95.5% 95.9% 98.2% 95.2% No 5.3% 8.3% 4.8% 4.5% 4.1% 1.8% 4.8% Q3. Over the past five years, how often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility? (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q3. How often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility over past five years Never 2.7% 2.8% 1.2% 0.0% 2.0% 1.8% 1.5% Once or twice a year 10.8% 11.1% 14.5% 6.1% 4.1% 1.8% 9.6% Monthly 24.3% 27.8% 22.9% 19.7% 14.3% 29.8% 21.2% Weekly 35.1% 50.0% 41.0% 48.5% 49.0% 35.1% 42.8% Daily 27.0% 8.3% 20.5% 25.8% 30.6% 31.6% 24.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 6298 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 5.1% 8.3% 4.8% 6.1% 4.1% 3.4% 5.2% I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 7.7% 5.6% 3.6% 3.0% 2.0% 0.0% 3.5% I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 20.5% 27.8% 18.1% 18.2% 4.1% 20.7% 18.0% Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 2.6% 8.3% 1.2% 6.1% 2.0% 3.4% 3.5% Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 5.1% 8.3% 4.8% 13.6% 10.2% 6.9% 8.7% Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 2.6% 2.8% 3.6% 7.6% 2.0% 1.7% 3.2% Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 10.3% 19.4% 8.4% 18.2% 4.1% 8.6% 11.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 7299 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities (cont.) Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 7.7% 8.3% 3.6% 7.6% 0.0% 6.9% 6.5% Poor customer service by staff 0.0% 0.0% 6.0% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% Lack of universal accessibility 2.6% 5.6% 4.8% 6.1% 4.1% 1.7% 4.2% Something else 17.9% 27.8% 24.1% 21.2% 26.5% 22.4% 23.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 8300 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q5. Sum of top 2 choices I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 0.0% 5.6% 6.0% 6.1% 4.1% 3.4% 4.2% I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 5.1% 8.3% 1.2% 3.0% 2.0% 1.7% 2.7% I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 15.4% 30.6% 12.0% 16.7% 6.1% 15.5% 15.5% Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 2.6% 13.9% 2.4% 1.5% 0.0% 5.2% 3.7% Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 10.3% 8.3% 6.0% 12.1% 8.2% 5.2% 8.2% Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 10.3% 5.6% 4.8% 6.1% 2.0% 1.7% 4.0% Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 10.3% 13.9% 9.6% 19.7% 6.1% 6.9% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 9301 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q5. Sum of top 2 choices (cont.) Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 5.1% 2.8% 2.4% 6.1% 2.0% 6.9% 5.7% Poor customer service by staff 0.0% 0.0% 6.0% 0.0% 2.0% 1.7% 2.2% Lack of universal accessibility 0.0% 5.6% 1.2% 4.5% 4.1% 1.7% 2.5% Something else 12.8% 30.6% 16.9% 19.7% 18.4% 10.3% 19.0% None chosen 53.8% 27.8% 59.0% 36.4% 57.1% 51.7% 47.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 10302 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-1. Basketball courts Yes 15.4% 19.4% 20.5% 22.7% 26.5% 27.6% 21.7% No 84.6% 80.6% 79.5% 77.3% 73.5% 72.4% 78.3% Q6-2. Community gardens Yes 51.3% 38.9% 49.4% 28.8% 32.7% 46.6% 38.9% No 48.7% 61.1% 50.6% 71.2% 67.3% 53.4% 61.1% Q6-3. Disc golf Yes 15.4% 27.8% 27.7% 31.8% 14.3% 20.7% 22.7% No 84.6% 72.2% 72.3% 68.2% 85.7% 79.3% 77.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 11303 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-4. Dog parks Yes 46.2% 58.3% 45.8% 47.0% 44.9% 55.2% 46.6% No 53.8% 41.7% 54.2% 53.0% 55.1% 44.8% 53.4% Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball Yes 10.3% 16.7% 19.3% 21.2% 22.4% 19.0% 17.0% No 89.7% 83.3% 80.7% 78.8% 77.6% 81.0% 83.0% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey Yes 12.8% 19.4% 21.7% 27.3% 38.8% 31.0% 24.2% No 87.2% 80.6% 78.3% 72.7% 61.2% 69.0% 75.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 12304 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) Yes 17.9% 36.1% 33.7% 30.3% 38.8% 39.7% 30.9% No 82.1% 63.9% 66.3% 69.7% 61.2% 60.3% 69.1% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) Yes 33.3% 38.9% 47.0% 43.9% 55.1% 43.1% 42.4% No 66.7% 61.1% 53.0% 56.1% 44.9% 56.9% 57.6% Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) Yes 10.3% 22.2% 22.9% 22.7% 34.7% 19.0% 20.7% No 89.7% 77.8% 77.1% 77.3% 65.3% 81.0% 79.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 13305 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-10. Nature centers Yes 64.1% 58.3% 59.0% 43.9% 46.9% 50.0% 51.4% No 35.9% 41.7% 41.0% 56.1% 53.1% 50.0% 48.6% Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks Yes 38.5% 36.1% 28.9% 36.4% 28.6% 44.8% 34.4% No 61.5% 63.9% 71.1% 63.6% 71.4% 55.2% 65.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities Yes 51.3% 38.9% 65.1% 50.0% 59.2% 65.5% 56.9% No 48.7% 61.1% 34.9% 50.0% 40.8% 34.5% 43.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 14306 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas Yes 69.2% 50.0% 61.4% 62.1% 67.3% 74.1% 62.1% No 30.8% 50.0% 38.6% 37.9% 32.7% 25.9% 37.9% Q6-14. Pickleball courts Yes 0.0% 16.7% 21.7% 18.2% 24.5% 20.7% 18.5% No 100.0% 83.3% 78.3% 81.8% 75.5% 79.3% 81.5% Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities Yes 43.6% 30.6% 51.8% 31.8% 53.1% 51.7% 42.1% No 56.4% 69.4% 48.2% 68.2% 46.9% 48.3% 57.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 15307 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas Yes 38.5% 22.2% 42.2% 37.9% 55.1% 43.1% 40.1% No 61.5% 77.8% 57.8% 62.1% 44.9% 56.9% 59.9% Q6-17. Pools, indoor Yes 41.0% 38.9% 42.2% 45.5% 46.9% 53.4% 46.4% No 59.0% 61.1% 57.8% 54.5% 53.1% 46.6% 53.6% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor Yes 35.9% 30.6% 48.2% 43.9% 55.1% 48.3% 45.9% No 64.1% 69.4% 51.8% 56.1% 44.9% 51.7% 54.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 16308 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-19. Recreation or community centers Yes 51.3% 30.6% 41.0% 40.9% 40.8% 34.5% 38.2% No 48.7% 69.4% 59.0% 59.1% 59.2% 65.5% 61.8% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court Yes 15.4% 16.7% 24.1% 16.7% 14.3% 22.4% 17.0% No 84.6% 83.3% 75.9% 83.3% 85.7% 77.6% 83.0% Q6-21. Skate park Yes 15.4% 22.2% 13.3% 12.1% 18.4% 17.2% 15.2% No 84.6% 77.8% 86.7% 87.9% 81.6% 82.8% 84.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 17309 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) Yes 10.3% 16.7% 27.7% 16.7% 26.5% 24.1% 20.2% No 89.7% 83.3% 72.3% 83.3% 73.5% 75.9% 79.8% Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad Yes 15.4% 22.2% 34.9% 27.3% 38.8% 27.6% 27.7% No 84.6% 77.8% 65.1% 72.7% 61.2% 72.4% 72.3% Q6-24. Tennis courts Yes 17.9% 19.4% 26.5% 28.8% 26.5% 31.0% 25.7% No 82.1% 80.6% 73.5% 71.2% 73.5% 69.0% 74.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 18310 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) Yes 84.6% 80.6% 84.3% 83.3% 77.6% 87.9% 82.0% No 15.4% 19.4% 15.7% 16.7% 22.4% 12.1% 18.0% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) Yes 71.8% 66.7% 77.1% 75.8% 71.4% 75.9% 73.3% No 28.2% 33.3% 22.9% 24.2% 28.6% 24.1% 26.7% Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) Yes 53.8% 58.3% 62.7% 56.1% 63.3% 65.5% 59.4% No 46.2% 41.7% 37.3% 43.9% 36.7% 34.5% 40.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 19311 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-28. Other Yes 2.6% 5.6% 2.4% 4.5% 8.2% 1.7% 3.5% No 97.4% 94.4% 97.6% 95.5% 91.8% 98.3% 96.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 20312 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-1. Basketball courts 100% met 40.0% 14.3% 17.6% 42.9% 18.2% 6.3% 19.8% 75% met 20.0% 42.9% 41.2% 7.1% 18.2% 31.3% 24.7% 50% met 20.0% 14.3% 11.8% 21.4% 27.3% 25.0% 23.5% 25% met 20.0% 28.6% 23.5% 21.4% 36.4% 18.8% 23.5% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 7.1% 0.0% 18.8% 8.6% Q6-2. Community gardens 100% met 5.6% 14.3% 12.8% 11.1% 9.1% 7.4% 9.0% 75% met 22.2% 21.4% 15.4% 22.2% 18.2% 29.6% 20.8% 50% met 11.1% 28.6% 33.3% 38.9% 18.2% 29.6% 28.5% 25% met 33.3% 7.1% 23.1% 5.6% 36.4% 11.1% 18.8% 0% met 27.8% 28.6% 15.4% 22.2% 18.2% 22.2% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 21313 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-3. Disc golf 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 13.6% 15.0% 28.6% 33.3% 15.7% 75% met 0.0% 20.0% 27.3% 15.0% 14.3% 16.7% 16.9% 50% met 16.7% 10.0% 22.7% 20.0% 14.3% 8.3% 16.9% 25% met 66.7% 50.0% 31.8% 50.0% 28.6% 41.7% 41.6% 0% met 16.7% 20.0% 4.5% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0% 9.0% Q6-4. Dog parks 100% met 41.2% 25.0% 37.8% 43.3% 22.2% 36.7% 37.9% 75% met 47.1% 45.0% 35.1% 33.3% 55.6% 40.0% 36.7% 50% met 11.8% 10.0% 24.3% 16.7% 22.2% 16.7% 18.1% 25% met 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 6.7% 0.0% 6.7% 6.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 2.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 22314 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball 100% met 50.0% 33.3% 40.0% 30.8% 40.0% 50.0% 39.7% 75% met 25.0% 33.3% 13.3% 30.8% 50.0% 10.0% 25.4% 50% met 25.0% 33.3% 40.0% 7.7% 10.0% 20.0% 22.2% 25% met 0.0% 0.0% 6.7% 15.4% 0.0% 20.0% 7.9% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0% 4.8% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 100% met 75.0% 0.0% 33.3% 52.9% 25.0% 37.5% 34.9% 75% met 0.0% 28.6% 33.3% 41.2% 50.0% 37.5% 38.4% 50% met 25.0% 57.1% 26.7% 5.9% 18.8% 18.8% 19.8% 25% met 0.0% 14.3% 6.7% 0.0% 6.3% 6.3% 5.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 23315 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) 100% met 57.1% 25.0% 36.0% 15.8% 35.3% 19.0% 28.1% 75% met 0.0% 16.7% 28.0% 36.8% 35.3% 28.6% 26.3% 50% met 28.6% 16.7% 16.0% 15.8% 11.8% 19.0% 17.5% 25% met 0.0% 33.3% 16.0% 21.1% 11.8% 14.3% 18.4% 0% met 14.3% 8.3% 4.0% 10.5% 5.9% 19.0% 9.6% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) 100% met 30.8% 23.1% 42.9% 35.7% 27.3% 29.2% 33.1% 75% met 46.2% 38.5% 22.9% 32.1% 31.8% 25.0% 31.2% 50% met 15.4% 30.8% 20.0% 14.3% 18.2% 25.0% 19.1% 25% met 7.7% 7.7% 8.6% 10.7% 18.2% 12.5% 10.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 5.7% 7.1% 4.5% 8.3% 5.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 24316 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 22.2% 30.8% 25.0% 36.4% 21.3% 75% met 25.0% 12.5% 11.1% 15.4% 41.7% 18.2% 18.7% 50% met 25.0% 37.5% 16.7% 7.7% 8.3% 18.2% 18.7% 25% met 25.0% 12.5% 27.8% 7.7% 16.7% 18.2% 16.0% 0% met 25.0% 37.5% 22.2% 38.5% 8.3% 9.1% 25.3% Q6-10. Nature centers 100% met 13.6% 10.0% 10.6% 33.3% 5.6% 6.9% 14.1% 75% met 22.7% 25.0% 27.7% 29.6% 22.2% 17.2% 24.9% 50% met 31.8% 25.0% 25.5% 11.1% 38.9% 31.0% 25.9% 25% met 18.2% 15.0% 21.3% 7.4% 22.2% 20.7% 17.3% 0% met 13.6% 25.0% 14.9% 18.5% 11.1% 24.1% 17.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 25317 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks 100% met 26.7% 16.7% 21.7% 13.0% 0.0% 20.0% 20.2% 75% met 20.0% 16.7% 30.4% 39.1% 20.0% 20.0% 24.0% 50% met 26.7% 0.0% 17.4% 34.8% 50.0% 20.0% 25.6% 25% met 13.3% 50.0% 21.7% 4.3% 20.0% 24.0% 18.6% 0% met 13.3% 16.7% 8.7% 8.7% 10.0% 16.0% 11.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities 100% met 15.0% 15.4% 13.2% 6.5% 8.0% 16.2% 12.5% 75% met 15.0% 23.1% 24.5% 25.8% 12.0% 21.6% 22.2% 50% met 35.0% 30.8% 26.4% 38.7% 44.0% 35.1% 32.4% 25% met 30.0% 23.1% 28.3% 22.6% 28.0% 24.3% 26.4% 0% met 5.0% 7.7% 7.5% 6.5% 8.0% 2.7% 6.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 26318 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas 100% met 12.5% 17.6% 42.6% 30.8% 23.1% 29.3% 28.6% 75% met 41.7% 29.4% 36.2% 38.5% 42.3% 41.5% 37.5% 50% met 25.0% 41.2% 14.9% 17.9% 26.9% 22.0% 22.3% 25% met 16.7% 5.9% 4.3% 10.3% 7.7% 7.3% 9.4% 0% met 4.2% 5.9% 2.1% 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% Q6-14. Pickleball courts 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 11.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.3% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 17.6% 8.3% 10.0% 0.0% 8.7% 50% met 0.0% 33.3% 17.6% 16.7% 30.0% 63.6% 26.1% 25% met 0.0% 33.3% 23.5% 41.7% 40.0% 27.3% 33.3% 0% met 0.0% 33.3% 29.4% 33.3% 20.0% 9.1% 27.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 27319 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities 100% met 18.8% 9.1% 36.8% 21.1% 33.3% 37.9% 29.5% 75% met 31.3% 18.2% 31.6% 42.1% 23.8% 34.5% 30.9% 50% met 37.5% 45.5% 21.1% 21.1% 23.8% 20.7% 24.8% 25% met 12.5% 18.2% 7.9% 5.3% 19.0% 6.9% 10.7% 0% met 0.0% 9.1% 2.6% 10.5% 0.0% 0.0% 4.0% Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas 100% met 50.0% 12.5% 42.4% 30.4% 40.9% 48.0% 38.5% 75% met 41.7% 25.0% 39.4% 34.8% 22.7% 32.0% 33.6% 50% met 8.3% 50.0% 18.2% 17.4% 27.3% 16.0% 20.3% 25% met 0.0% 12.5% 0.0% 17.4% 9.1% 4.0% 6.3% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 28320 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-17. Pools, indoor 100% met 7.1% 14.3% 8.6% 17.2% 5.0% 0.0% 7.3% 75% met 7.1% 14.3% 28.6% 10.3% 10.0% 12.9% 14.0% 50% met 28.6% 28.6% 22.9% 6.9% 40.0% 12.9% 20.8% 25% met 42.9% 28.6% 25.7% 48.3% 30.0% 45.2% 40.4% 0% met 14.3% 14.3% 14.3% 17.2% 15.0% 29.0% 17.4% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor 100% met 14.3% 0.0% 2.5% 10.7% 4.3% 3.6% 6.3% 75% met 14.3% 18.2% 22.5% 14.3% 17.4% 3.6% 12.6% 50% met 21.4% 18.2% 20.0% 14.3% 17.4% 32.1% 21.1% 25% met 21.4% 45.5% 40.0% 42.9% 52.2% 42.9% 42.9% 0% met 28.6% 18.2% 15.0% 17.9% 8.7% 17.9% 17.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 29321 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-19. Recreation or community centers 100% met 11.1% 9.1% 12.1% 26.9% 20.0% 15.0% 17.9% 75% met 50.0% 27.3% 27.3% 19.2% 13.3% 30.0% 25.7% 50% met 22.2% 18.2% 36.4% 34.6% 46.7% 25.0% 30.7% 25% met 5.6% 18.2% 9.1% 11.5% 20.0% 25.0% 15.7% 0% met 11.1% 27.3% 15.2% 7.7% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court 100% met 40.0% 16.7% 5.0% 36.4% 20.0% 8.3% 15.6% 75% met 20.0% 16.7% 20.0% 18.2% 80.0% 33.3% 26.6% 50% met 0.0% 16.7% 35.0% 9.1% 0.0% 41.7% 21.9% 25% met 20.0% 33.3% 35.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 20.3% 0% met 20.0% 16.7% 5.0% 36.4% 0.0% 8.3% 15.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 30322 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-21. Skate park 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 5.5% 75% met 40.0% 37.5% 40.0% 28.6% 50.0% 30.0% 36.4% 50% met 40.0% 25.0% 30.0% 71.4% 33.3% 20.0% 30.9% 25% met 20.0% 25.0% 20.0% 0.0% 16.7% 20.0% 18.2% 0% met 0.0% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 9.1% Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 100% met 25.0% 20.0% 28.6% 27.3% 0.0% 14.3% 22.7% 75% met 0.0% 20.0% 19.0% 18.2% 36.4% 28.6% 20.0% 50% met 25.0% 20.0% 33.3% 27.3% 27.3% 28.6% 28.0% 25% met 50.0% 20.0% 19.0% 18.2% 18.2% 28.6% 22.7% 0% met 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 9.1% 18.2% 0.0% 6.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 31323 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 75% met 40.0% 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 11.8% 0.0% 6.7% 50% met 0.0% 37.5% 10.7% 17.6% 11.8% 12.5% 15.4% 25% met 20.0% 12.5% 7.1% 5.9% 17.6% 12.5% 11.5% 0% met 40.0% 50.0% 67.9% 76.5% 58.8% 75.0% 64.4% Q6-24. Tennis courts 100% met 16.7% 14.3% 9.5% 27.8% 0.0% 11.8% 11.7% 75% met 33.3% 28.6% 33.3% 27.8% 36.4% 35.3% 31.9% 50% met 16.7% 0.0% 33.3% 16.7% 54.5% 29.4% 27.7% 25% met 33.3% 42.9% 19.0% 16.7% 9.1% 23.5% 22.3% 0% met 0.0% 14.3% 4.8% 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 6.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 32324 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 100% met 34.5% 46.4% 47.0% 38.9% 40.6% 40.0% 41.4% 75% met 34.5% 17.9% 36.4% 42.6% 40.6% 32.0% 35.8% 50% met 27.6% 21.4% 10.6% 14.8% 15.6% 18.0% 16.9% 25% met 3.4% 14.3% 6.1% 1.9% 3.1% 6.0% 4.6% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 4.0% 1.3% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 100% met 23.1% 43.5% 39.3% 36.7% 29.6% 25.6% 32.7% 75% met 38.5% 21.7% 29.5% 36.7% 40.7% 44.2% 34.6% 50% met 23.1% 21.7% 14.8% 12.2% 22.2% 18.6% 19.5% 25% met 15.4% 13.0% 11.5% 6.1% 7.4% 9.3% 9.6% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 8.2% 0.0% 2.3% 3.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 33325 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 100% met 15.8% 10.0% 24.5% 16.7% 29.2% 27.0% 22.4% 75% met 36.8% 45.0% 40.8% 50.0% 16.7% 27.0% 37.0% 50% met 26.3% 25.0% 18.4% 16.7% 33.3% 24.3% 22.8% 25% met 10.5% 5.0% 14.3% 13.9% 20.8% 21.6% 14.2% 0% met 10.5% 15.0% 2.0% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 3.7% Q6-28. Other 25% met 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 0.0% 100.0% 30.0% 0% met 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 100.0% 0.0% 70.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 34326 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q7. Sum of top 4 choices Basketball courts 0.0% 2.8% 1.2% 4.5% 4.1% 6.9% 4.2% Community gardens 28.2% 11.1% 25.3% 4.5% 8.2% 15.5% 14.5% Disc golf 12.8% 13.9% 6.0% 12.1% 6.1% 1.7% 8.7% Dog parks 23.1% 16.7% 16.9% 30.3% 28.6% 27.6% 22.9% Fields, baseball/softball 0.0% 2.8% 2.4% 3.0% 4.1% 1.7% 2.5% Fields, soccer/football/ lacrosse/field hockey 2.6% 0.0% 4.8% 3.0% 10.2% 12.1% 5.5% Ice rink (indoor) 0.0% 8.3% 3.6% 6.1% 10.2% 8.6% 5.5% Ice rink (outdoor) 5.1% 22.2% 7.2% 9.1% 16.3% 5.2% 9.2% Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 0.0% 2.8% 1.2% 7.6% 4.1% 5.2% 3.0% Nature centers 23.1% 22.2% 15.7% 9.1% 10.2% 12.1% 13.0% Off-leash hours in parks 17.9% 11.1% 10.8% 10.6% 8.2% 15.5% 12.0% On-road bike lanes or facilities 20.5% 19.4% 24.1% 18.2% 20.4% 22.4% 21.9% Pavilions & picnic areas 15.4% 11.1% 10.8% 13.6% 8.2% 6.9% 10.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 35327 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q7. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Pickleball courts 2.6% 0.0% 3.6% 6.1% 8.2% 5.2% 5.7% Play areas for all ages & abilities 10.3% 11.1% 10.8% 10.6% 8.2% 15.5% 10.7% Playgrounds & play areas 15.4% 5.6% 14.5% 9.1% 6.1% 12.1% 10.0% Pools, indoor 28.2% 13.9% 16.9% 21.2% 18.4% 25.9% 22.2% Pools, outdoor 15.4% 13.9% 18.1% 24.2% 28.6% 22.4% 20.9% Recreation or community centers 12.8% 5.6% 4.8% 7.6% 8.2% 1.7% 6.7% Sand volleyball court 2.6% 2.8% 3.6% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% Skate park 5.1% 8.3% 2.4% 4.5% 0.0% 3.4% 3.5% Special use biking facilities (e. g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 2.6% 0.0% 8.4% 6.1% 6.1% 8.6% 5.7% Sprayground/splash pad 0.0% 2.8% 9.6% 13.6% 12.2% 10.3% 8.5% Tennis courts 2.6% 5.6% 3.6% 6.1% 4.1% 5.2% 5.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 36328 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q7. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 53.8% 63.9% 65.1% 66.7% 61.2% 70.7% 61.6% Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 41.0% 33.3% 37.3% 45.5% 32.7% 39.7% 38.7% Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 25.6% 16.7% 21.7% 25.8% 22.4% 15.5% 19.5% Other 2.6% 2.8% 3.6% 1.5% 4.1% 1.7% 3.2% None chosen 5.1% 8.3% 6.0% 1.5% 6.1% 0.0% 5.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 37329 Q8. Did you or anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department before March 2020? N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q8. Did anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events Yes 12.8% 11.1% 21.7% 16.7% 34.7% 34.5% 22.4% No 87.2% 88.9% 78.3% 83.3% 65.3% 65.5% 77.6% Q8a. How would you rate the overall quality of the programs and events that you and members of your household participated in before March 2020? N=90 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q8a. How would you rate overall quality of programs & events your household participated in before March 2020 Excellent 20.0% 25.0% 33.3% 45.5% 29.4% 50.0% 34.4% Good 60.0% 75.0% 44.4% 45.5% 47.1% 35.0% 47.8% Fair 20.0% 0.0% 22.2% 9.1% 17.6% 15.0% 15.6% Poor 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 0.0% 2.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 38330 Q9. Would you or members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future? (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q9. Would you like Bozeman Parks & Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future Yes 16.7% 29.4% 18.1% 26.8% 18.2% 18.5% 20.7% No 83.3% 70.6% 81.9% 73.2% 81.8% 81.5% 79.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 39331 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 51.3% 63.9% 41.0% 51.5% 32.7% 41.4% 44.9% I do not have the time to participate in programming 23.1% 30.6% 26.5% 19.7% 18.4% 34.5% 24.2% Program fees are not affordable 7.7% 5.6% 7.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% Program instructors are not good 0.0% 0.0% 4.8% 1.5% 0.0% 1.7% 2.0% Times when programs are offered are not convenient 10.3% 11.1% 12.0% 7.6% 14.3% 15.5% 11.7% Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 25.6% 8.3% 14.5% 22.7% 16.3% 6.9% 15.5% Poor customer service in past experience 0.0% 0.0% 8.4% 1.5% 0.0% 1.7% 3.0% Lack of universal accessibility 0.0% 5.6% 1.2% 1.5% 0.0% 1.7% 1.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 40332 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming (cont.) Language barriers (ESOL) 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% Program location or venue is not convenient 0.0% 2.8% 10.8% 6.1% 6.1% 6.9% 6.0% Something else 5.1% 2.8% 8.4% 3.0% 12.2% 10.3% 9.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 41333 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q11. Sum of top 2 choices I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 43.6% 61.1% 37.3% 47.0% 32.7% 36.2% 40.1% I do not have the time to participate in programming 23.1% 30.6% 24.1% 19.7% 18.4% 34.5% 23.4% Program fees are not affordable 5.1% 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% Program instructors are not good 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 1.5% 0.0% 1.7% 1.5% Times when programs are offered are not convenient 7.7% 11.1% 9.6% 6.1% 10.2% 13.8% 10.2% Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 23.1% 5.6% 14.5% 21.2% 14.3% 3.4% 13.0% Poor customer service in past experience 0.0% 0.0% 4.8% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% Lack of universal accessibility 0.0% 2.8% 1.2% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% Program location or venue is not convenient 0.0% 2.8% 6.0% 3.0% 6.1% 6.9% 4.2% Something else 5.1% 2.8% 8.4% 6.1% 14.3% 3.4% 8.5% None chosen 28.2% 22.2% 25.3% 22.7% 36.7% 27.6% 27.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 42334 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities Threat of vehicle collisions or vehicle operator behavior (e.g. , distracted driving, speeding) 30.8% 47.2% 45.8% 60.6% 42.9% 55.2% 47.1% Existing bike lanes or paths are in poor condition 25.6% 22.2% 25.3% 27.3% 26.5% 20.7% 23.9% I don't feel safe when walking or biking (crime/personal safety) 7.7% 8.3% 7.2% 10.6% 8.2% 6.9% 8.0% Transporting small children, elderly, or persons with disabilities 2.6% 5.6% 10.8% 6.1% 14.3% 12.1% 9.0% I don't own a bicycle 7.7% 19.4% 4.8% 7.6% 6.1% 1.7% 7.5% I have to carry heavy things in my vehicle 7.7% 8.3% 9.6% 10.6% 8.2% 17.2% 10.5% Destinations are too far away 12.8% 19.4% 10.8% 10.6% 8.2% 13.8% 11.5% I have limited mobility 10.3% 5.6% 6.0% 4.5% 4.1% 1.7% 5.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 43335 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities (cont.) Weather is often inclement 17.9% 27.8% 16.9% 15.2% 20.4% 34.5% 21.2% Not enough lighting on my routes 15.4% 16.7% 15.7% 21.2% 14.3% 6.9% 14.5% Route is unclear due to lack of wayfinding 2.6% 2.8% 10.8% 9.1% 0.0% 5.2% 6.5% I don't have enough time for walking or biking as a commuting option 7.7% 19.4% 10.8% 9.1% 18.4% 8.6% 10.7% Something else 12.8% 5.6% 10.8% 4.5% 2.0% 1.7% 7.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 44336 Q13. Of the following ways in which The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department could allocate funding, which ONE should be the top priority? (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q13. Which following way could City Parks & Recreation Department allocate funding in Develop land that has already been purchased with new parks, trails & facilities 28.9% 31.4% 27.3% 21.0% 22.4% 24.6% 25.7% Purchase new land for later park or facility development 7.9% 5.7% 10.4% 12.9% 20.4% 8.8% 11.0% Purchase new land for natural resource conservation 31.6% 20.0% 29.9% 24.2% 22.4% 26.3% 25.4% Renovate existing facilities 13.2% 20.0% 13.0% 22.6% 22.4% 21.1% 18.1% Increase routine maintenance of parks, trails, & facilities 18.4% 22.9% 19.5% 19.4% 12.2% 19.3% 19.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 45337 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming Yes 46.2% 36.1% 53.0% 48.5% 57.1% 55.2% 51.1% No 53.8% 63.9% 47.0% 51.5% 42.9% 44.8% 48.9% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) Yes 59.0% 63.9% 60.2% 53.0% 61.2% 51.7% 53.6% No 41.0% 36.1% 39.8% 47.0% 38.8% 48.3% 46.4% Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) Yes 5.1% 5.6% 9.6% 13.6% 16.3% 19.0% 11.7% No 94.9% 94.4% 90.4% 86.4% 83.7% 81.0% 88.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 46338 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-4. Outdoor education Yes 38.5% 33.3% 42.2% 34.8% 30.6% 39.7% 35.2% No 61.5% 66.7% 57.8% 65.2% 69.4% 60.3% 64.8% Q14-5. Fitness Yes 51.3% 52.8% 53.0% 45.5% 55.1% 48.3% 49.4% No 48.7% 47.2% 47.0% 54.5% 44.9% 51.7% 50.6% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) Yes 41.0% 55.6% 41.0% 47.0% 40.8% 43.1% 41.9% No 59.0% 44.4% 59.0% 53.0% 59.2% 56.9% 58.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 47339 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-7. Outdoor adventure Yes 41.0% 50.0% 48.2% 45.5% 61.2% 56.9% 47.1% No 59.0% 50.0% 51.8% 54.5% 38.8% 43.1% 52.9% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 Yes 2.6% 5.6% 12.0% 6.1% 20.4% 13.8% 10.0% No 97.4% 94.4% 88.0% 93.9% 79.6% 86.2% 90.0% Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ Yes 41.0% 36.1% 36.1% 19.7% 24.5% 15.5% 27.4% No 59.0% 63.9% 63.9% 80.3% 75.5% 84.5% 72.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 48340 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-10. Special events Yes 33.3% 50.0% 36.1% 27.3% 40.8% 36.2% 35.4% No 66.7% 50.0% 63.9% 72.7% 59.2% 63.8% 64.6% Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult Yes 28.2% 30.6% 31.3% 30.3% 30.6% 29.3% 27.9% No 71.8% 69.4% 68.7% 69.7% 69.4% 70.7% 72.1% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth Yes 7.7% 8.3% 18.1% 15.2% 26.5% 20.7% 17.0% No 92.3% 91.7% 81.9% 84.8% 73.5% 79.3% 83.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 49341 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children Yes 5.1% 13.9% 25.3% 21.2% 26.5% 27.6% 20.7% No 94.9% 86.1% 74.7% 78.8% 73.5% 72.4% 79.3% Q14-14. Teen programs Yes 5.1% 8.3% 12.0% 12.1% 20.4% 24.1% 12.7% No 94.9% 91.7% 88.0% 87.9% 79.6% 75.9% 87.3% Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion Yes 33.3% 22.2% 32.5% 16.7% 12.2% 8.6% 20.4% No 66.7% 77.8% 67.5% 83.3% 87.8% 91.4% 79.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 50342 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-16. Winter recreation Yes 59.0% 47.2% 60.2% 57.6% 69.4% 62.1% 57.1% No 41.0% 52.8% 39.8% 42.4% 30.6% 37.9% 42.9% Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users Yes 41.0% 38.9% 34.9% 40.9% 34.7% 31.0% 35.7% No 59.0% 61.1% 65.1% 59.1% 65.3% 69.0% 64.3% Q14-18. Other Yes 5.1% 2.8% 1.2% 6.1% 2.0% 0.0% 3.7% No 94.9% 97.2% 98.8% 93.9% 98.0% 100.0% 96.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 51343 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming 100% met 0.0% 23.1% 2.4% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 75% met 16.7% 23.1% 24.4% 6.3% 15.4% 12.5% 14.7% 50% met 38.9% 30.8% 19.5% 31.3% 38.5% 34.4% 27.9% 25% met 22.2% 15.4% 41.5% 31.3% 34.6% 40.6% 38.6% 0% met 22.2% 7.7% 12.2% 18.8% 11.5% 12.5% 13.7% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 100% met 0.0% 9.5% 8.9% 0.0% 3.8% 7.4% 5.8% 75% met 33.3% 23.8% 35.6% 26.5% 19.2% 40.7% 29.5% 50% met 23.8% 38.1% 33.3% 52.9% 46.2% 14.8% 35.8% 25% met 23.8% 23.8% 20.0% 17.6% 23.1% 25.9% 20.5% 0% met 19.0% 4.8% 2.2% 2.9% 7.7% 11.1% 8.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 52344 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.1% 2.4% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 37.5% 0.0% 9.1% 9.8% 50% met 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.5% 14.3% 27.3% 17.1% 25% met 0.0% 100.0% 28.6% 37.5% 71.4% 27.3% 36.6% 0% met 50.0% 0.0% 71.4% 12.5% 14.3% 27.3% 34.1% Q14-4. Outdoor education 100% met 7.7% 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 0.0% 9.5% 3.3% 75% met 30.8% 10.0% 30.0% 27.3% 16.7% 23.8% 23.1% 50% met 23.1% 40.0% 33.3% 40.9% 25.0% 33.3% 31.4% 25% met 30.8% 40.0% 30.0% 18.2% 50.0% 14.3% 27.3% 0% met 7.7% 10.0% 6.7% 9.1% 8.3% 19.0% 14.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 53345 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-5. Fitness 100% met 22.2% 11.1% 10.0% 15.4% 26.1% 8.0% 14.5% 75% met 11.1% 22.2% 40.0% 26.9% 26.1% 36.0% 27.2% 50% met 33.3% 33.3% 30.0% 42.3% 34.8% 20.0% 31.8% 25% met 16.7% 27.8% 15.0% 7.7% 4.3% 28.0% 17.9% 0% met 16.7% 5.6% 5.0% 7.7% 8.7% 8.0% 8.7% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 100% met 6.7% 0.0% 17.9% 13.3% 12.5% 9.1% 10.6% 75% met 20.0% 27.8% 28.6% 16.7% 18.8% 31.8% 22.7% 50% met 40.0% 22.2% 25.0% 43.3% 31.3% 27.3% 31.9% 25% met 6.7% 44.4% 21.4% 23.3% 31.3% 9.1% 22.0% 0% met 26.7% 5.6% 7.1% 3.3% 6.3% 22.7% 12.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 54346 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-7. Outdoor adventure 100% met 21.4% 18.8% 18.9% 11.1% 12.0% 3.3% 14.9% 75% met 35.7% 37.5% 21.6% 44.4% 44.0% 43.3% 35.7% 50% met 35.7% 18.8% 43.2% 33.3% 20.0% 30.0% 29.2% 25% met 0.0% 18.8% 10.8% 7.4% 20.0% 16.7% 12.5% 0% met 7.1% 6.3% 5.4% 3.7% 4.0% 6.7% 7.7% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 100% met 0.0% 50.0% 10.0% 33.3% 12.5% 12.5% 14.3% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 40.0% 33.3% 25.0% 37.5% 28.6% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 14.3% 25% met 0.0% 50.0% 10.0% 33.3% 12.5% 25.0% 20.0% 0% met 100.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0% 0.0% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 55347 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 100% met 7.1% 22.2% 14.3% 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 9.9% 75% met 14.3% 11.1% 14.3% 0.0% 62.5% 33.3% 16.5% 50% met 21.4% 33.3% 39.3% 50.0% 12.5% 44.4% 34.1% 25% met 35.7% 22.2% 25.0% 16.7% 12.5% 22.2% 24.2% 0% met 21.4% 11.1% 7.1% 16.7% 12.5% 0.0% 15.4% Q14-10. Special events 100% met 10.0% 20.0% 0.0% 18.8% 16.7% 0.0% 11.1% 75% met 40.0% 33.3% 40.0% 25.0% 38.9% 52.6% 35.9% 50% met 20.0% 26.7% 36.0% 37.5% 22.2% 31.6% 32.5% 25% met 20.0% 0.0% 16.0% 12.5% 16.7% 10.5% 12.0% 0% met 10.0% 20.0% 8.0% 6.3% 5.6% 5.3% 8.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 56348 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult 100% met 10.0% 10.0% 13.6% 21.1% 20.0% 6.7% 13.9% 75% met 30.0% 20.0% 13.6% 21.1% 20.0% 40.0% 21.8% 50% met 10.0% 30.0% 18.2% 31.6% 33.3% 40.0% 27.7% 25% met 50.0% 20.0% 54.5% 15.8% 20.0% 13.3% 28.7% 0% met 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 10.5% 6.7% 0.0% 7.9% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth 100% met 33.3% 33.3% 15.4% 30.0% 16.7% 8.3% 18.0% 75% met 66.7% 33.3% 53.8% 30.0% 41.7% 41.7% 39.3% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 30.0% 25.0% 33.3% 23.0% 25% met 0.0% 0.0% 23.1% 10.0% 8.3% 16.7% 11.5% 0% met 0.0% 33.3% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 8.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 57349 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children 100% met 0.0% 40.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 12.5% 8.3% 75% met 100.0% 20.0% 38.9% 46.2% 30.0% 50.0% 37.5% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 44.4% 30.8% 40.0% 18.8% 30.6% 25% met 0.0% 20.0% 5.6% 23.1% 20.0% 18.8% 16.7% 0% met 0.0% 20.0% 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.9% Q14-14. Teen programs 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 15.4% 4.7% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 14.3% 14.3% 50.0% 15.4% 18.6% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 42.9% 28.6% 25.0% 38.5% 30.2% 25% met 50.0% 66.7% 14.3% 42.9% 12.5% 7.7% 20.9% 0% met 50.0% 33.3% 28.6% 14.3% 12.5% 23.1% 25.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 58350 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 100% met 9.1% 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 20.0% 6.1% 75% met 18.2% 0.0% 8.7% 0.0% 0.0% 40.0% 9.1% 50% met 0.0% 33.3% 39.1% 20.0% 60.0% 0.0% 27.3% 25% met 36.4% 50.0% 21.7% 40.0% 40.0% 20.0% 31.8% 0% met 36.4% 16.7% 30.4% 20.0% 0.0% 20.0% 25.8% Q14-16. Winter recreation 100% met 14.3% 26.7% 12.2% 22.2% 16.7% 11.8% 16.0% 75% met 14.3% 20.0% 39.0% 30.6% 26.7% 44.1% 30.5% 50% met 28.6% 46.7% 31.7% 33.3% 30.0% 23.5% 30.5% 25% met 14.3% 0.0% 9.8% 11.1% 20.0% 17.6% 15.0% 0% met 28.6% 6.7% 7.3% 2.8% 6.7% 2.9% 8.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 59351 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users 100% met 0.0% 8.3% 0.0% 7.4% 0.0% 6.3% 3.2% 75% met 21.4% 33.3% 24.0% 18.5% 21.4% 6.3% 17.7% 50% met 28.6% 8.3% 36.0% 25.9% 0.0% 25.0% 22.6% 25% met 35.7% 16.7% 28.0% 37.0% 57.1% 37.5% 34.7% 0% met 14.3% 33.3% 12.0% 11.1% 21.4% 25.0% 21.8% Q14-18. Other 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0% met 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 58.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 60352 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q15. Sum of top 4 choices Aquatics or swimming 30.8% 25.0% 32.5% 27.3% 46.9% 48.3% 36.2% Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 46.2% 41.7% 36.1% 31.8% 38.8% 29.3% 32.7% Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 2.6% 2.8% 8.4% 3.0% 8.2% 6.9% 5.7% Outdoor education 20.5% 11.1% 14.5% 19.7% 16.3% 17.2% 16.0% Fitness 28.2% 25.0% 26.5% 30.3% 28.6% 20.7% 25.7% History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 23.1% 30.6% 20.5% 18.2% 12.2% 17.2% 18.2% Outdoor adventure 23.1% 22.2% 33.7% 27.3% 30.6% 22.4% 24.7% Preschool ages 2-5 2.6% 0.0% 4.8% 1.5% 12.2% 6.9% 5.2% Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 20.5% 22.2% 25.3% 12.1% 14.3% 5.2% 17.2% Special events 10.3% 27.8% 8.4% 13.6% 10.2% 19.0% 14.2% Sports leagues, adult 15.4% 16.7% 13.3% 16.7% 14.3% 12.1% 13.2% Sports leagues, youth 2.6% 2.8% 8.4% 6.1% 10.2% 6.9% 6.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 61353 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q15. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Camps & other activities for children 5.1% 8.3% 16.9% 12.1% 6.1% 15.5% 12.0% Teen programs 0.0% 5.6% 4.8% 6.1% 6.1% 8.6% 5.2% Therapeutic recreation/ recreation inclusion 20.5% 11.1% 14.5% 4.5% 6.1% 3.4% 9.0% Winter recreation 38.5% 33.3% 33.7% 37.9% 34.7% 41.4% 35.9% Etiquette programs for park & trail users 30.8% 27.8% 13.3% 24.2% 20.4% 19.0% 20.4% Other 7.7% 2.8% 0.0% 7.6% 2.0% 0.0% 4.0% None chosen 5.1% 11.1% 13.3% 7.6% 12.2% 10.3% 12.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 62354 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q16-1. Use an automobile Several times a day 15.8% 31.4% 18.1% 26.2% 27.1% 20.7% 21.4% About once a day 36.8% 14.3% 30.1% 30.8% 20.8% 22.4% 27.5% About once a week 18.4% 25.7% 27.7% 26.2% 35.4% 29.3% 27.5% Seldom 23.7% 22.9% 21.7% 13.8% 14.6% 24.1% 20.9% Never 5.3% 5.7% 2.4% 3.1% 2.1% 3.4% 2.8% Q16-2. Use trails (natural, gravel, or paved) Several times a day 7.9% 8.3% 8.5% 7.6% 8.5% 17.2% 9.5% About once a day 28.9% 13.9% 24.4% 31.8% 42.6% 32.8% 28.9% About once a week 23.7% 41.7% 40.2% 45.5% 34.0% 34.5% 38.9% Seldom 34.2% 27.8% 24.4% 12.1% 10.6% 10.3% 18.9% Never 5.3% 8.3% 2.4% 3.0% 4.3% 5.2% 3.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 63355 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q16-3. Use sidewalks Several times a day 35.1% 22.2% 28.0% 27.7% 31.9% 24.6% 28.4% About once a day 35.1% 36.1% 31.7% 43.1% 40.4% 43.9% 36.6% About once a week 16.2% 27.8% 28.0% 24.6% 17.0% 19.3% 24.0% Seldom 13.5% 11.1% 11.0% 4.6% 6.4% 8.8% 9.0% Never 0.0% 2.8% 1.2% 0.0% 4.3% 3.5% 2.1% Q16-4. Use paved, shared-use pathways (typically next to a street) Several times a day 5.4% 13.9% 9.9% 9.1% 17.4% 5.2% 9.5% About once a day 21.6% 13.9% 12.3% 18.2% 21.7% 29.3% 17.8% About once a week 32.4% 16.7% 32.1% 39.4% 21.7% 31.0% 31.2% Seldom 21.6% 33.3% 37.0% 30.3% 30.4% 25.9% 30.9% Never 18.9% 22.2% 8.6% 3.0% 8.7% 8.6% 10.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 64356 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q16-5. Bike on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) Several times a day 7.9% 2.8% 3.7% 3.0% 10.6% 1.7% 4.9% About once a day 7.9% 8.3% 12.2% 10.6% 8.5% 6.9% 9.2% About once a week 15.8% 11.1% 17.1% 30.3% 29.8% 36.2% 24.3% Seldom 36.8% 36.1% 37.8% 34.8% 29.8% 36.2% 34.3% Never 31.6% 41.7% 29.3% 21.2% 21.3% 19.0% 27.4% Q16-6. Travel by bus Several times a day 0.0% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% About once a day 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.0% 0.3% About once a week 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 4.6% 0.0% 3.4% 1.8% Seldom 31.6% 25.0% 24.4% 20.0% 26.7% 22.4% 22.5% Never 68.4% 72.2% 73.2% 75.4% 71.1% 74.1% 75.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 65357 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q17-1. Use trails (natural or gravel) Very comfortable 72.2% 54.5% 69.6% 60.0% 70.8% 77.2% 66.8% Comfortable 22.2% 42.4% 21.5% 33.8% 27.1% 21.1% 27.6% Neutral 2.8% 0.0% 5.1% 4.6% 2.1% 1.8% 3.7% Uncomfortable 2.8% 0.0% 2.5% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 3.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% Q17-2. Use paved trails Very comfortable 72.2% 58.1% 66.7% 58.7% 68.1% 73.7% 66.0% Comfortable 22.2% 41.9% 25.6% 36.5% 25.5% 22.8% 28.6% Neutral 5.6% 0.0% 5.1% 1.6% 6.4% 3.5% 4.0% Uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 3.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 66358 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q17-3. Use sidewalks Very comfortable 57.9% 40.0% 50.0% 42.4% 45.8% 63.8% 49.5% Comfortable 26.3% 31.4% 31.7% 40.9% 41.7% 27.6% 33.3% Neutral 10.5% 25.7% 11.0% 9.1% 8.3% 6.9% 12.1% Uncomfortable 5.3% 2.9% 3.7% 7.6% 4.2% 1.7% 3.8% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 3.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% Q17-4. Use paved shared-used pathways Very comfortable 45.5% 42.9% 36.8% 36.1% 31.3% 44.4% 39.2% Comfortable 36.4% 17.9% 36.8% 36.1% 33.3% 37.0% 33.2% Neutral 15.2% 25.0% 11.8% 14.8% 25.0% 14.8% 17.5% Uncomfortable 0.0% 14.3% 7.9% 11.5% 8.3% 3.7% 6.8% Very uncomfortable 3.0% 0.0% 6.6% 1.6% 2.1% 0.0% 3.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 67359 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q17-5. Bike on the street (ex. In bike lanes) Very comfortable 13.3% 20.0% 4.3% 5.6% 4.9% 18.0% 10.3% Comfortable 23.3% 4.0% 24.3% 13.0% 19.5% 24.0% 18.5% Neutral 20.0% 16.0% 15.7% 38.9% 17.1% 26.0% 26.6% Uncomfortable 26.7% 16.0% 35.7% 20.4% 36.6% 22.0% 24.1% Very uncomfortable 16.7% 44.0% 20.0% 22.2% 22.0% 10.0% 20.4% Q17-6. Travel by bus Very comfortable 15.8% 29.4% 14.3% 16.7% 15.8% 33.3% 19.9% Comfortable 26.3% 11.8% 42.9% 25.0% 26.3% 20.8% 26.5% Neutral 31.6% 35.3% 25.7% 29.2% 36.8% 41.7% 33.1% Uncomfortable 10.5% 11.8% 11.4% 16.7% 10.5% 0.0% 10.6% Very uncomfortable 15.8% 11.8% 5.7% 12.5% 10.5% 4.2% 9.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 68360 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-1. Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths Very supportive 61.1% 50.0% 62.0% 50.0% 50.0% 57.9% 53.5% Supportive 25.0% 40.6% 27.8% 33.3% 37.5% 28.1% 33.7% Neutral 11.1% 6.3% 10.1% 12.1% 10.4% 10.5% 9.1% Not supportive 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 3.5% 2.1% Not at all supportive 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% 1.5% 2.1% 0.0% 1.6% Q18-2. Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways Very supportive 25.7% 40.0% 45.6% 27.0% 34.7% 36.8% 36.1% Supportive 31.4% 31.4% 29.1% 30.2% 36.7% 36.8% 30.4% Neutral 31.4% 20.0% 15.2% 36.5% 16.3% 12.3% 21.7% Not supportive 8.6% 5.7% 5.1% 3.2% 8.2% 10.5% 6.8% Not at all supportive 2.9% 2.9% 5.1% 3.2% 4.1% 3.5% 5.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 69361 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-3. Installing more gravel & natural surface trails Very supportive 48.6% 51.4% 53.2% 43.8% 55.1% 60.3% 52.1% Supportive 25.7% 31.4% 27.8% 39.1% 28.6% 22.4% 27.5% Neutral 22.9% 14.3% 12.7% 14.1% 14.3% 10.3% 15.0% Not supportive 2.9% 0.0% 2.5% 1.6% 2.0% 3.4% 2.6% Not at all supportive 0.0% 2.9% 3.8% 1.6% 0.0% 3.4% 2.8% Q18-4. Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks Very supportive 33.3% 25.7% 32.9% 42.6% 32.7% 36.2% 35.3% Supportive 30.6% 34.3% 26.6% 19.7% 32.7% 22.4% 26.2% Neutral 22.2% 22.9% 27.8% 26.2% 18.4% 25.9% 23.1% Not supportive 11.1% 11.4% 5.1% 8.2% 12.2% 5.2% 8.1% Not at all supportive 2.8% 5.7% 7.6% 3.3% 4.1% 10.3% 7.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 70362 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-5. Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets Very supportive 27.8% 38.2% 44.2% 35.9% 46.9% 46.6% 40.1% Supportive 33.3% 38.2% 24.7% 29.7% 20.4% 25.9% 27.9% Neutral 8.3% 17.6% 14.3% 17.2% 10.2% 17.2% 14.6% Not supportive 16.7% 2.9% 7.8% 9.4% 18.4% 8.6% 10.7% Not at all supportive 13.9% 2.9% 9.1% 7.8% 4.1% 1.7% 6.8% Q18-6. Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes Very supportive 15.2% 23.3% 25.0% 10.3% 28.9% 16.7% 20.3% Supportive 42.4% 36.7% 31.9% 27.6% 28.9% 27.8% 29.9% Neutral 24.2% 33.3% 26.4% 46.6% 24.4% 38.9% 31.8% Not supportive 12.1% 3.3% 11.1% 10.3% 11.1% 7.4% 10.1% Not at all supportive 6.1% 3.3% 5.6% 5.2% 6.7% 9.3% 7.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 71363 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-7. Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking Very supportive 16.7% 27.3% 18.2% 9.7% 12.5% 10.3% 14.7% Supportive 50.0% 30.3% 32.5% 24.2% 29.2% 25.9% 28.4% Neutral 25.0% 21.2% 29.9% 45.2% 37.5% 43.1% 35.5% Not supportive 2.8% 15.2% 10.4% 14.5% 8.3% 10.3% 12.4% Not at all supportive 5.6% 6.1% 9.1% 6.5% 12.5% 10.3% 8.9% Q18-8. Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes Very supportive 27.8% 35.3% 23.1% 14.1% 20.4% 25.0% 23.1% Supportive 33.3% 38.2% 43.6% 28.1% 34.7% 35.7% 33.8% Neutral 22.2% 17.6% 19.2% 45.3% 18.4% 21.4% 25.5% Not supportive 13.9% 2.9% 7.7% 6.3% 12.2% 12.5% 10.6% Not at all supportive 2.8% 5.9% 6.4% 6.3% 14.3% 5.4% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 72364 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-9. Providing better winter maintenance Very supportive 50.0% 48.6% 37.5% 34.9% 28.6% 25.9% 36.3% Supportive 36.8% 25.7% 40.0% 30.2% 40.8% 43.1% 34.3% Neutral 10.5% 17.1% 17.5% 27.0% 20.4% 25.9% 22.2% Not supportive 2.6% 5.7% 3.8% 3.2% 8.2% 5.2% 4.9% Not at all supportive 0.0% 2.9% 1.3% 4.8% 2.0% 0.0% 2.3% Q18-10. Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) Very supportive 16.1% 23.3% 8.1% 3.3% 8.2% 5.5% 9.1% Supportive 9.7% 16.7% 14.9% 11.5% 8.2% 10.9% 11.3% Neutral 35.5% 30.0% 45.9% 37.7% 38.8% 34.5% 36.4% Not supportive 22.6% 16.7% 12.2% 27.9% 24.5% 27.3% 23.4% Not at all supportive 16.1% 13.3% 18.9% 19.7% 20.4% 21.8% 19.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 73365 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-11. Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) Very supportive 15.2% 21.2% 14.3% 4.8% 8.2% 7.1% 11.5% Supportive 24.2% 27.3% 27.3% 27.0% 26.5% 28.6% 25.6% Neutral 42.4% 30.3% 35.1% 34.9% 32.7% 32.1% 33.1% Not supportive 9.1% 6.1% 13.0% 25.4% 20.4% 21.4% 18.1% Not at all supportive 9.1% 15.2% 10.4% 7.9% 12.2% 10.7% 11.7% Q18-12. Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets Very supportive 37.1% 44.1% 38.0% 26.6% 45.8% 40.4% 39.1% Supportive 31.4% 23.5% 39.2% 34.4% 39.6% 26.3% 31.0% Neutral 20.0% 17.6% 11.4% 25.0% 8.3% 19.3% 16.5% Not supportive 8.6% 2.9% 8.9% 9.4% 4.2% 5.3% 7.1% Not at all supportive 2.9% 11.8% 2.5% 4.7% 2.1% 8.8% 6.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 74366 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-13. Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets Very supportive 33.3% 41.2% 36.4% 29.7% 39.6% 42.1% 36.9% Supportive 39.4% 26.5% 35.1% 35.9% 39.6% 36.8% 33.7% Neutral 27.3% 20.6% 23.4% 26.6% 14.6% 15.8% 20.4% Not supportive 0.0% 2.9% 2.6% 3.1% 6.3% 1.8% 4.5% Not at all supportive 0.0% 8.8% 2.6% 4.7% 0.0% 3.5% 4.5% Q18-14. Installing bike fix-it stations Very supportive 18.8% 18.8% 17.6% 9.7% 10.2% 7.0% 12.2% Supportive 25.0% 21.9% 29.7% 17.7% 22.4% 31.6% 24.3% Neutral 40.6% 31.3% 27.0% 35.5% 32.7% 29.8% 32.7% Not supportive 6.3% 9.4% 13.5% 24.2% 24.5% 17.5% 17.3% Not at all supportive 9.4% 18.8% 12.2% 12.9% 10.2% 14.0% 13.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 75367 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-15. Adding more frequent bus stops Very supportive 18.2% 24.1% 19.7% 7.5% 19.0% 12.8% 15.5% Supportive 27.3% 34.5% 24.2% 28.3% 19.0% 25.5% 24.6% Neutral 39.4% 24.1% 42.4% 41.5% 47.6% 42.6% 41.0% Not supportive 15.2% 6.9% 7.6% 7.5% 4.8% 10.6% 8.5% Not at all supportive 0.0% 10.3% 6.1% 15.1% 9.5% 8.5% 10.4% Q18-16. Expanding public transit Very supportive 38.9% 31.3% 26.0% 16.9% 25.5% 18.0% 24.4% Supportive 27.8% 34.4% 37.0% 39.0% 25.5% 32.0% 31.5% Neutral 25.0% 18.8% 26.0% 25.4% 36.2% 32.0% 28.4% Not supportive 8.3% 9.4% 5.5% 6.8% 4.3% 8.0% 7.0% Not at all supportive 0.0% 6.3% 5.5% 11.9% 8.5% 10.0% 8.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 76368 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-17. Enforcing motor vehicle laws Very supportive 37.8% 47.1% 46.8% 53.8% 47.9% 43.6% 48.7% Supportive 21.6% 32.4% 26.0% 16.9% 18.8% 16.4% 21.7% Neutral 29.7% 11.8% 24.7% 23.1% 25.0% 29.1% 22.3% Not supportive 8.1% 5.9% 0.0% 4.6% 2.1% 10.9% 4.7% Not at all supportive 2.7% 2.9% 2.6% 1.5% 6.3% 0.0% 2.6% Q18-18. Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work Very supportive 22.2% 20.7% 17.9% 10.5% 12.8% 20.9% 14.9% Supportive 25.9% 31.0% 22.4% 21.1% 30.8% 20.9% 24.4% Neutral 37.0% 31.0% 37.3% 40.4% 35.9% 27.9% 36.2% Not supportive 11.1% 10.3% 10.4% 14.0% 10.3% 14.0% 10.8% Not at all supportive 3.7% 6.9% 11.9% 14.0% 10.3% 16.3% 13.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 77369 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q18-19. Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic Very supportive 18.8% 35.3% 25.7% 30.2% 29.2% 29.6% 29.0% Supportive 18.8% 20.6% 32.4% 28.6% 25.0% 20.4% 25.8% Neutral 25.0% 26.5% 27.0% 22.2% 25.0% 20.4% 22.6% Not supportive 6.3% 8.8% 5.4% 11.1% 12.5% 20.4% 11.8% Not at all supportive 31.3% 8.8% 9.5% 7.9% 8.3% 9.3% 10.8% Q18-20. Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) Very supportive 33.3% 37.5% 41.1% 22.2% 32.6% 28.6% 29.6% Supportive 24.2% 15.6% 16.4% 33.3% 23.9% 14.3% 22.8% Neutral 24.2% 28.1% 24.7% 27.0% 21.7% 21.4% 24.5% Not supportive 12.1% 3.1% 8.2% 6.3% 4.3% 19.6% 8.7% Not at all supportive 6.1% 15.6% 9.6% 11.1% 17.4% 16.1% 14.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 78370 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q19. Sum of top 3 choices Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 28.2% 25.0% 38.6% 34.8% 28.6% 41.4% 32.7% Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 12.8% 22.2% 19.3% 15.2% 18.4% 24.1% 19.5% Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 28.2% 33.3% 32.5% 30.3% 34.7% 48.3% 32.4% Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 10.3% 13.9% 13.3% 18.2% 10.2% 13.8% 14.0% Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 10.3% 25.0% 26.5% 25.8% 20.4% 22.4% 21.7% Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 2.6% 5.6% 3.6% 4.5% 4.1% 0.0% 3.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 79371 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 12.8% 5.6% 2.4% 1.5% 4.1% 1.7% 3.5% Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 12.8% 16.7% 7.2% 9.1% 12.2% 10.3% 9.7% Providing better winter maintenance 33.3% 27.8% 20.5% 18.2% 24.5% 22.4% 22.4% Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 0.0% 2.8% 2.4% 1.5% 2.0% 1.7% 1.7% Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e. g., places of work, park facilities) 2.6% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 20.5% 22.2% 20.5% 16.7% 26.5% 25.9% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 80372 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Constructing paved, shared- use pathways next to streets 5.1% 0.0% 15.7% 18.2% 10.2% 22.4% 13.2% Installing bike fix-it stations 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 1.5% 2.0% 0.0% 0.7% Adding more frequent bus stops 10.3% 2.8% 6.0% 1.5% 4.1% 3.4% 4.2% Expanding public transit 17.9% 8.3% 6.0% 15.2% 10.2% 5.2% 8.2% Enforcing motor vehicle laws 20.5% 11.1% 15.7% 28.8% 20.4% 19.0% 20.9% Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 2.6% 0.0% 1.2% 1.5% 0.0% 1.7% 1.0% Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 10.3% 11.1% 6.0% 10.6% 14.3% 12.1% 11.0% Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 12.8% 13.9% 14.5% 10.6% 8.2% 8.6% 9.5% None chosen 10.3% 13.9% 13.3% 7.6% 10.2% 1.7% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 81373 Q20. Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "Very Satisfied" and 5 means "Very Dissatisfied," with the overall value your household receives from the City of Bozeman Parks Division. (without "not provided") N=401 Q23. Which following best describes your total annual household income? Total Less than $20K $20K-$34,999 $35K-$64,999 $65K-$94,999 $95K-$124,999 $125K+ Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks Division Very satisfied 7.9% 8.6% 14.8% 15.4% 20.8% 24.6% 17.2% Satisfied 55.3% 57.1% 54.3% 50.8% 56.3% 56.1% 52.2% Neutral 31.6% 25.7% 22.2% 23.1% 18.8% 14.0% 22.4% Dissatisfied 5.3% 2.9% 6.2% 10.8% 4.2% 5.3% 6.4% Very dissatisfied 0.0% 5.7% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 82374 Q1. During a typical year, do you or anyone in your household visit the parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman (e.g., playgrounds, parks, athletic fields, dog parks, community centers, pools, trails or other facilities)? N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q1. Does anyone in your household visit City parks, trails & recreational facilities during a typical year Yes 100.0% 98.7% 98.6% 94.7% 93.2% 96.1% 98.8% 97.0% No 0.0% 1.3% 1.4% 5.3% 6.8% 3.9% 1.2% 3.0% Q1a. How often do you or others in your household visit a City of Bozeman park, trail, or recreational facility as described in Question 1? N=389 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q1a. How often do your household members visit a City park, trail, or recreational facility Once or twice a year 5.0% 2.6% 2.8% 6.9% 11.0% 4.1% 5.5% 5.9% Monthly 20.0% 14.3% 11.1% 12.5% 29.3% 20.3% 15.2% 17.7% Weekly 45.0% 41.6% 40.3% 43.1% 34.1% 37.8% 44.5% 40.6% Daily 30.0% 41.6% 45.8% 37.5% 25.6% 37.8% 34.8% 35.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 83375 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q1b-1. Park(s) Excellent 29.5% 30.7% 38.2% 39.1% 31.1% 37.0% 28.6% 33.0% Good 64.1% 56.0% 48.5% 55.1% 60.8% 52.7% 61.7% 57.6% Neutral 6.4% 8.0% 10.3% 4.3% 5.4% 7.3% 7.8% 7.0% Below average 0.0% 4.0% 1.5% 0.0% 2.7% 1.8% 1.3% 1.6% Poor 0.0% 1.3% 1.5% 1.4% 0.0% 1.2% 0.6% 0.8% Q1b-2. Recreation facility(ies) Excellent 18.8% 13.2% 5.8% 22.2% 9.5% 19.0% 10.2% 13.8% Good 50.0% 41.5% 55.8% 40.7% 57.1% 46.7% 53.7% 48.2% Neutral 25.0% 34.0% 26.9% 29.6% 23.8% 21.9% 31.5% 28.5% Below average 6.3% 9.4% 7.7% 5.6% 9.5% 10.5% 4.6% 7.5% Poor 0.0% 1.9% 3.8% 1.9% 0.0% 1.9% 0.0% 2.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 84376 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q1b-3. Aquatic facility(ies) Excellent 7.1% 6.3% 4.4% 2.8% 11.4% 7.2% 3.7% 6.2% Good 32.1% 16.7% 26.7% 25.0% 17.1% 20.5% 25.6% 23.2% Neutral 28.6% 29.2% 17.8% 16.7% 20.0% 24.1% 25.6% 22.2% Below average 25.0% 27.1% 31.1% 33.3% 37.1% 26.5% 31.7% 30.4% Poor 7.1% 20.8% 20.0% 22.2% 14.3% 21.7% 13.4% 18.0% Q1b-4. Trails (natural, gravel, or paved) Excellent 41.3% 44.0% 50.0% 42.4% 37.7% 45.2% 40.3% 42.3% Good 57.5% 53.3% 45.8% 40.9% 49.4% 48.8% 52.2% 50.3% Neutral 1.3% 2.7% 2.8% 15.2% 9.1% 5.4% 5.7% 6.1% Below average 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 1.5% 3.9% 0.6% 1.9% 1.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 85377 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q1b-5. Sidewalks Excellent 11.4% 14.5% 8.5% 17.6% 7.7% 13.0% 10.2% 11.7% Good 53.2% 51.3% 59.2% 36.8% 60.3% 52.7% 53.5% 52.3% Neutral 25.3% 18.4% 21.1% 32.4% 20.5% 21.3% 26.1% 23.9% Below average 7.6% 13.2% 8.5% 10.3% 9.0% 9.5% 8.9% 9.5% Poor 2.5% 2.6% 2.8% 2.9% 2.6% 3.6% 1.3% 2.7% Q1b-6. Paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (typically next to a street) Excellent 17.6% 16.2% 15.9% 18.0% 7.5% 13.1% 17.1% 14.8% Good 48.5% 45.9% 52.2% 42.6% 47.8% 49.7% 47.9% 48.0% Neutral 22.1% 21.6% 20.3% 16.4% 32.8% 22.2% 22.6% 22.7% Below average 7.4% 12.2% 8.7% 16.4% 10.4% 11.1% 9.6% 10.8% Poor 4.4% 4.1% 2.9% 6.6% 1.5% 3.9% 2.7% 3.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 86378 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q1b-7. Biking on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) Excellent 8.1% 4.2% 7.5% 3.4% 1.8% 3.0% 4.9% 5.0% Good 27.4% 25.4% 34.3% 27.1% 28.6% 29.6% 27.5% 28.1% Neutral 27.4% 32.4% 25.4% 28.8% 39.3% 28.1% 36.6% 31.3% Below average 25.8% 19.7% 22.4% 27.1% 16.1% 23.7% 19.7% 22.2% Poor 11.3% 18.3% 10.4% 13.6% 14.3% 15.6% 11.3% 13.4% Q1b-8. Travel by bus Excellent 16.2% 12.5% 23.1% 17.9% 15.6% 12.9% 20.5% 16.6% Good 27.0% 46.9% 46.2% 35.7% 46.9% 50.0% 34.2% 40.1% Neutral 32.4% 28.1% 19.2% 32.1% 28.1% 21.0% 34.2% 28.0% Below average 8.1% 9.4% 7.7% 10.7% 6.3% 9.7% 5.5% 8.3% Poor 16.2% 3.1% 3.8% 3.6% 3.1% 6.5% 5.5% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 87379 Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car? (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than a car Yes 96.2% 96.2% 98.6% 94.7% 90.8% 93.8% 96.4% 95.2% No 3.8% 3.8% 1.4% 5.3% 9.2% 6.2% 3.6% 4.8% Q3. Over the past five years, how often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility? (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q3. How often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility over past five years Never 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 2.6% 2.3% 0.6% 1.8% 1.5% Once or twice a year 5.1% 7.7% 6.9% 7.9% 18.6% 10.7% 6.1% 9.6% Monthly 31.6% 15.4% 18.1% 17.1% 22.1% 20.8% 23.3% 21.2% Weekly 43.0% 43.6% 45.8% 43.4% 39.5% 39.9% 46.6% 42.8% Daily 19.0% 32.1% 29.2% 28.9% 17.4% 28.1% 22.1% 24.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 88380 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 15.0% 3.8% 4.1% 0.0% 3.4% 3.9% 6.0% 5.2% I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 3.8% 1.3% 1.4% 5.3% 5.7% 2.8% 3.0% 3.5% I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 32.5% 17.9% 20.5% 11.8% 6.8% 17.3% 17.5% 18.0% Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 6.3% 1.3% 4.1% 3.9% 2.3% 3.4% 3.6% 3.5% Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 6.3% 10.3% 9.6% 9.2% 8.0% 7.8% 9.6% 8.7% Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 2.5% 3.8% 4.1% 1.3% 4.5% 4.5% 2.4% 3.2% Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 18.8% 10.3% 8.2% 10.5% 9.1% 7.8% 15.1% 11.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 89381 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities (cont.) Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 6.3% 6.4% 13.7% 2.6% 4.5% 10.1% 3.6% 6.5% Poor customer service by staff 0.0% 5.1% 4.1% 2.6% 1.1% 2.2% 1.2% 2.5% Lack of universal accessibility 5.0% 5.1% 5.5% 2.6% 3.4% 3.9% 3.6% 4.2% Something else 17.5% 23.1% 16.4% 35.5% 27.3% 22.3% 22.9% 23.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 90382 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q5. Sum of top 2 choices I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 10.0% 3.8% 5.5% 0.0% 2.3% 3.9% 4.8% 4.2% I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 0.0% 1.3% 4.1% 5.3% 3.4% 2.2% 3.0% 2.7% I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 32.5% 12.8% 19.2% 10.5% 2.3% 14.5% 15.7% 15.5% Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 6.3% 1.3% 2.7% 5.3% 3.4% 3.9% 3.6% 3.7% Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 6.3% 9.0% 8.2% 9.2% 8.0% 6.7% 10.8% 8.2% Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 3.8% 6.4% 1.4% 2.6% 5.7% 6.7% 2.4% 4.0% Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 20.0% 9.0% 11.0% 9.2% 6.8% 6.1% 13.9% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 91383 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q5. Sum of top 2 choices (cont.) Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 3.8% 9.0% 12.3% 2.6% 2.3% 8.9% 3.6% 5.7% Poor customer service by staff 0.0% 5.1% 2.7% 1.3% 2.3% 1.7% 2.4% 2.2% Lack of universal accessibility 2.5% 2.6% 1.4% 2.6% 3.4% 3.4% 1.2% 2.5% Something else 12.5% 17.9% 12.3% 32.9% 20.5% 16.8% 18.7% 19.0% None chosen 37.5% 50.0% 43.8% 46.1% 60.2% 51.4% 45.8% 47.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 92384 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-1. Basketball courts Yes 25.0% 32.1% 30.1% 14.5% 10.2% 21.8% 22.9% 21.7% No 75.0% 67.9% 69.9% 85.5% 89.8% 78.2% 77.1% 78.3% Q6-2. Community gardens Yes 60.0% 37.2% 39.7% 34.2% 25.0% 47.5% 31.9% 38.9% No 40.0% 62.8% 60.3% 65.8% 75.0% 52.5% 68.1% 61.1% Q6-3. Disc golf Yes 43.8% 20.5% 28.8% 13.2% 9.1% 16.2% 31.3% 22.7% No 56.3% 79.5% 71.2% 86.8% 90.9% 83.8% 68.7% 77.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 93385 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-4. Dog parks Yes 56.3% 43.6% 50.7% 40.8% 40.9% 46.9% 50.0% 46.6% No 43.8% 56.4% 49.3% 59.2% 59.1% 53.1% 50.0% 53.4% Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball Yes 16.3% 21.8% 17.8% 11.8% 18.2% 15.1% 20.5% 17.0% No 83.8% 78.2% 82.2% 88.2% 81.8% 84.9% 79.5% 83.0% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey Yes 33.8% 24.4% 31.5% 15.8% 13.6% 21.8% 27.1% 24.2% No 66.3% 75.6% 68.5% 84.2% 86.4% 78.2% 72.9% 75.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 94386 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) Yes 40.0% 43.6% 30.1% 25.0% 15.9% 35.8% 27.7% 30.9% No 60.0% 56.4% 69.9% 75.0% 84.1% 64.2% 72.3% 69.1% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) Yes 52.5% 57.7% 42.5% 35.5% 23.9% 47.5% 40.4% 42.4% No 47.5% 42.3% 57.5% 64.5% 76.1% 52.5% 59.6% 57.6% Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) Yes 35.0% 21.8% 27.4% 14.5% 8.0% 24.6% 18.7% 20.7% No 65.0% 78.2% 72.6% 85.5% 92.0% 75.4% 81.3% 79.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 95387 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-10. Nature centers Yes 56.3% 44.9% 52.1% 51.3% 52.3% 60.9% 41.0% 51.4% No 43.8% 55.1% 47.9% 48.7% 47.7% 39.1% 59.0% 48.6% Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks Yes 48.8% 39.7% 38.4% 25.0% 19.3% 36.3% 34.9% 34.4% No 51.3% 60.3% 61.6% 75.0% 80.7% 63.7% 65.1% 65.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities Yes 55.0% 56.4% 65.8% 61.8% 46.6% 58.1% 56.6% 56.9% No 45.0% 43.6% 34.2% 38.2% 53.4% 41.9% 43.4% 43.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 96388 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas Yes 57.5% 57.7% 63.0% 68.4% 61.4% 68.2% 57.2% 62.1% No 42.5% 42.3% 37.0% 31.6% 38.6% 31.8% 42.8% 37.9% Q6-14. Pickleball courts Yes 16.3% 10.3% 23.3% 23.7% 18.2% 20.1% 16.9% 18.5% No 83.8% 89.7% 76.7% 76.3% 81.8% 79.9% 83.1% 81.5% Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities Yes 40.0% 50.0% 42.5% 35.5% 43.2% 48.0% 38.0% 42.1% No 60.0% 50.0% 57.5% 64.5% 56.8% 52.0% 62.0% 57.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 97389 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas Yes 36.3% 50.0% 37.0% 36.8% 39.8% 45.8% 33.7% 40.1% No 63.8% 50.0% 63.0% 63.2% 60.2% 54.2% 66.3% 59.9% Q6-17. Pools, indoor Yes 37.5% 55.1% 64.4% 38.2% 37.5% 52.5% 37.3% 46.4% No 62.5% 44.9% 35.6% 61.8% 62.5% 47.5% 62.7% 53.6% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor Yes 33.8% 60.3% 63.0% 43.4% 30.7% 52.0% 37.3% 45.9% No 66.3% 39.7% 37.0% 56.6% 69.3% 48.0% 62.7% 54.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 98390 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-19. Recreation or community centers Yes 38.8% 30.8% 38.4% 42.1% 39.8% 45.8% 28.9% 38.2% No 61.3% 69.2% 61.6% 57.9% 60.2% 54.2% 71.1% 61.8% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court Yes 31.3% 17.9% 16.4% 13.2% 6.8% 16.2% 18.7% 17.0% No 68.8% 82.1% 83.6% 86.8% 93.2% 83.8% 81.3% 83.0% Q6-21. Skate park Yes 22.5% 17.9% 20.5% 9.2% 4.5% 15.1% 12.7% 15.2% No 77.5% 82.1% 79.5% 90.8% 95.5% 84.9% 87.3% 84.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 99391 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) Yes 17.5% 37.2% 30.1% 10.5% 5.7% 17.9% 24.1% 20.2% No 82.5% 62.8% 69.9% 89.5% 94.3% 82.1% 75.9% 79.8% Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad Yes 20.0% 47.4% 35.6% 26.3% 12.5% 34.1% 21.7% 27.7% No 80.0% 52.6% 64.4% 73.7% 87.5% 65.9% 78.3% 72.3% Q6-24. Tennis courts Yes 26.3% 23.1% 32.9% 31.6% 12.5% 26.3% 27.7% 25.7% No 73.8% 76.9% 67.1% 68.4% 87.5% 73.7% 72.3% 74.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 100392 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) Yes 83.8% 78.2% 82.2% 81.6% 84.1% 85.5% 81.3% 82.0% No 16.3% 21.8% 17.8% 18.4% 15.9% 14.5% 18.7% 18.0% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) Yes 76.3% 70.5% 78.1% 68.4% 72.7% 79.3% 73.5% 73.3% No 23.8% 29.5% 21.9% 31.6% 27.3% 20.7% 26.5% 26.7% Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) Yes 73.8% 62.8% 68.5% 50.0% 40.9% 66.5% 53.0% 59.4% No 26.3% 37.2% 31.5% 50.0% 59.1% 33.5% 47.0% 40.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 101393 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-28. Other Yes 5.0% 3.8% 1.4% 7.9% 0.0% 2.8% 3.0% 3.5% No 95.0% 96.2% 98.6% 92.1% 100.0% 97.2% 97.0% 96.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 102394 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-1. Basketball courts 100% met 36.8% 17.4% 18.2% 0.0% 12.5% 27.8% 14.3% 19.8% 75% met 36.8% 13.0% 27.3% 11.1% 37.5% 22.2% 28.6% 24.7% 50% met 10.5% 39.1% 9.1% 22.2% 50.0% 11.1% 40.0% 23.5% 25% met 15.8% 21.7% 27.3% 55.6% 0.0% 33.3% 17.1% 23.5% 0% met 0.0% 8.7% 18.2% 11.1% 0.0% 5.6% 0.0% 8.6% Q6-2. Community gardens 100% met 4.5% 7.7% 6.9% 12.5% 21.1% 8.8% 6.3% 9.0% 75% met 20.5% 15.4% 27.6% 16.7% 21.1% 21.3% 25.0% 20.8% 50% met 29.5% 26.9% 27.6% 16.7% 42.1% 28.8% 31.3% 28.5% 25% met 25.0% 11.5% 13.8% 29.2% 10.5% 21.3% 16.7% 18.8% 0% met 20.5% 38.5% 24.1% 25.0% 5.3% 20.0% 20.8% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 103395 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-3. Disc golf 100% met 11.8% 13.3% 23.8% 10.0% 25.0% 28.6% 7.8% 15.7% 75% met 20.6% 13.3% 9.5% 20.0% 12.5% 17.9% 17.6% 16.9% 50% met 23.5% 13.3% 14.3% 20.0% 0.0% 21.4% 17.6% 16.9% 25% met 44.1% 53.3% 38.1% 20.0% 50.0% 25.0% 49.0% 41.6% 0% met 0.0% 6.7% 14.3% 30.0% 12.5% 7.1% 7.8% 9.0% Q6-4. Dog parks 100% met 41.5% 31.3% 36.1% 34.5% 45.7% 41.0% 41.6% 37.9% 75% met 36.6% 50.0% 44.4% 27.6% 22.9% 37.3% 32.5% 36.7% 50% met 19.5% 9.4% 11.1% 31.0% 22.9% 13.3% 22.1% 18.1% 25% met 2.4% 9.4% 5.6% 6.9% 8.6% 8.4% 2.6% 6.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 104396 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball 100% met 50.0% 40.0% 46.2% 12.5% 40.0% 54.2% 25.0% 39.7% 75% met 25.0% 33.3% 15.4% 12.5% 33.3% 25.0% 31.3% 25.4% 50% met 16.7% 20.0% 7.7% 50.0% 26.7% 16.7% 31.3% 22.2% 25% met 8.3% 6.7% 7.7% 25.0% 0.0% 4.2% 6.3% 7.9% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 23.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 4.8% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 100% met 50.0% 43.8% 27.3% 11.1% 36.4% 41.2% 35.9% 34.9% 75% met 29.2% 37.5% 31.8% 33.3% 54.5% 35.3% 41.0% 38.4% 50% met 16.7% 12.5% 22.7% 55.6% 9.1% 20.6% 20.5% 19.8% 25% met 4.2% 6.3% 13.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 2.6% 5.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 105397 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) 100% met 33.3% 29.0% 28.6% 26.7% 21.4% 23.7% 40.5% 28.1% 75% met 20.0% 22.6% 19.0% 26.7% 50.0% 27.1% 26.2% 26.3% 50% met 13.3% 12.9% 23.8% 26.7% 14.3% 18.6% 9.5% 17.5% 25% met 26.7% 16.1% 23.8% 13.3% 7.1% 25.4% 14.3% 18.4% 0% met 6.7% 19.4% 4.8% 6.7% 7.1% 5.1% 9.5% 9.6% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) 100% met 41.0% 34.9% 30.0% 19.0% 35.0% 32.5% 35.0% 33.1% 75% met 25.6% 27.9% 26.7% 52.4% 35.0% 30.0% 33.3% 31.2% 50% met 20.5% 16.3% 26.7% 9.5% 20.0% 18.8% 18.3% 19.1% 25% met 10.3% 11.6% 10.0% 19.0% 5.0% 13.8% 8.3% 10.8% 0% met 2.6% 9.3% 6.7% 0.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 106398 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 100% met 19.2% 31.3% 20.0% 14.3% 16.7% 19.5% 22.2% 21.3% 75% met 19.2% 18.8% 25.0% 0.0% 16.7% 19.5% 18.5% 18.7% 50% met 11.5% 12.5% 20.0% 28.6% 50.0% 17.1% 25.9% 18.7% 25% met 23.1% 6.3% 15.0% 28.6% 0.0% 14.6% 14.8% 16.0% 0% met 26.9% 31.3% 20.0% 28.6% 16.7% 29.3% 18.5% 25.3% Q6-10. Nature centers 100% met 14.6% 15.6% 13.2% 15.6% 12.5% 17.8% 11.5% 14.1% 75% met 31.7% 21.9% 13.2% 12.5% 40.0% 15.8% 36.1% 24.9% 50% met 22.0% 18.8% 34.2% 25.0% 27.5% 23.8% 29.5% 25.9% 25% met 14.6% 12.5% 23.7% 18.8% 17.5% 21.8% 9.8% 17.3% 0% met 17.1% 31.3% 15.8% 28.1% 2.5% 20.8% 13.1% 17.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 107399 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks 100% met 20.0% 30.0% 18.5% 11.1% 12.5% 26.6% 15.1% 20.2% 75% met 28.6% 6.7% 25.9% 22.2% 43.8% 18.8% 26.4% 24.0% 50% met 28.6% 16.7% 18.5% 50.0% 18.8% 20.3% 34.0% 25.6% 25% met 14.3% 30.0% 22.2% 5.6% 18.8% 21.9% 18.9% 18.6% 0% met 8.6% 16.7% 14.8% 11.1% 6.3% 12.5% 5.7% 11.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities 100% met 15.0% 14.0% 14.9% 9.3% 10.0% 14.9% 8.0% 12.5% 75% met 17.5% 25.6% 21.3% 20.9% 25.0% 19.8% 25.0% 22.2% 50% met 37.5% 30.2% 29.8% 30.2% 32.5% 29.7% 36.4% 32.4% 25% met 25.0% 20.9% 25.5% 34.9% 27.5% 28.7% 25.0% 26.4% 0% met 5.0% 9.3% 8.5% 4.7% 5.0% 6.9% 5.7% 6.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 108400 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas 100% met 28.6% 20.0% 36.4% 25.0% 34.7% 33.9% 24.7% 28.6% 75% met 35.7% 52.5% 31.8% 34.1% 32.7% 31.3% 47.1% 37.5% 50% met 21.4% 17.5% 20.5% 29.5% 24.5% 23.2% 20.0% 22.3% 25% met 14.3% 7.5% 4.5% 9.1% 8.2% 10.7% 5.9% 9.4% 0% met 0.0% 2.5% 6.8% 2.3% 0.0% 0.9% 2.4% 2.2% Q6-14. Pickleball courts 100% met 8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.5% 2.8% 4.2% 4.3% 75% met 8.3% 12.5% 6.3% 0.0% 18.8% 5.6% 8.3% 8.7% 50% met 25.0% 12.5% 25.0% 37.5% 25.0% 30.6% 20.8% 26.1% 25% met 33.3% 37.5% 25.0% 31.3% 43.8% 30.6% 41.7% 33.3% 0% met 25.0% 37.5% 43.8% 31.3% 0.0% 30.6% 25.0% 27.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 109401 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities 100% met 20.0% 40.0% 33.3% 11.1% 34.3% 32.9% 23.6% 29.5% 75% met 30.0% 17.1% 33.3% 33.3% 42.9% 26.6% 40.0% 30.9% 50% met 23.3% 31.4% 16.7% 38.9% 20.0% 20.3% 34.5% 24.8% 25% met 20.0% 8.6% 13.3% 11.1% 2.9% 16.5% 1.8% 10.7% 0% met 6.7% 2.9% 3.3% 5.6% 0.0% 3.8% 0.0% 4.0% Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas 100% met 46.4% 42.9% 44.4% 30.0% 29.0% 41.9% 35.3% 38.5% 75% met 21.4% 31.4% 29.6% 40.0% 41.9% 24.3% 43.1% 33.6% 50% met 17.9% 17.1% 18.5% 25.0% 25.8% 21.6% 19.6% 20.3% 25% met 14.3% 5.7% 3.7% 5.0% 3.2% 10.8% 2.0% 6.3% 0% met 0.0% 2.9% 3.7% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 1.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 110402 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-17. Pools, indoor 100% met 10.7% 2.4% 0.0% 21.4% 9.7% 6.7% 8.2% 7.3% 75% met 14.3% 9.8% 14.9% 3.6% 25.8% 12.4% 16.4% 14.0% 50% met 28.6% 22.0% 17.0% 21.4% 19.4% 21.3% 23.0% 20.8% 25% met 28.6% 48.8% 38.3% 39.3% 41.9% 40.4% 37.7% 40.4% 0% met 17.9% 17.1% 29.8% 14.3% 3.2% 19.1% 14.8% 17.4% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor 100% met 8.0% 4.3% 4.3% 10.0% 8.0% 5.6% 5.1% 6.3% 75% met 16.0% 8.7% 6.5% 13.3% 24.0% 12.4% 13.6% 12.6% 50% met 20.0% 26.1% 21.7% 23.3% 12.0% 18.0% 33.9% 21.1% 25% met 44.0% 41.3% 43.5% 40.0% 44.0% 46.1% 33.9% 42.9% 0% met 12.0% 19.6% 23.9% 13.3% 12.0% 18.0% 13.6% 17.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 111403 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-19. Recreation or community centers 100% met 14.3% 27.3% 14.3% 7.4% 28.1% 16.0% 20.0% 17.9% 75% met 32.1% 22.7% 21.4% 11.1% 34.4% 26.7% 28.9% 25.7% 50% met 25.0% 31.8% 21.4% 48.1% 31.3% 25.3% 42.2% 30.7% 25% met 10.7% 9.1% 32.1% 18.5% 6.3% 20.0% 4.4% 15.7% 0% met 17.9% 9.1% 10.7% 14.8% 0.0% 12.0% 4.4% 10.0% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court 100% met 16.7% 7.7% 18.2% 33.3% 0.0% 22.2% 10.3% 15.6% 75% met 37.5% 23.1% 9.1% 22.2% 33.3% 29.6% 31.0% 26.6% 50% met 12.5% 38.5% 27.3% 0.0% 50.0% 22.2% 24.1% 21.9% 25% met 20.8% 30.8% 18.2% 11.1% 16.7% 14.8% 24.1% 20.3% 0% met 12.5% 0.0% 27.3% 33.3% 0.0% 11.1% 10.3% 15.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 112404 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-21. Skate park 100% met 5.9% 0.0% 6.7% 20.0% 0.0% 4.0% 5.6% 5.5% 75% met 41.2% 36.4% 26.7% 40.0% 25.0% 48.0% 22.2% 36.4% 50% met 23.5% 54.5% 20.0% 0.0% 75.0% 20.0% 50.0% 30.9% 25% met 23.5% 9.1% 26.7% 20.0% 0.0% 28.0% 16.7% 18.2% 0% met 5.9% 0.0% 20.0% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.6% 9.1% Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 100% met 25.0% 20.7% 27.3% 0.0% 20.0% 23.3% 21.1% 22.7% 75% met 8.3% 34.5% 9.1% 0.0% 40.0% 13.3% 28.9% 20.0% 50% met 16.7% 17.2% 36.4% 60.0% 40.0% 33.3% 23.7% 28.0% 25% met 50.0% 20.7% 13.6% 40.0% 0.0% 20.0% 23.7% 22.7% 0% met 0.0% 6.9% 13.6% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 2.6% 6.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 113405 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad 100% met 13.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 1.9% 75% met 26.7% 8.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.0% 8.8% 6.7% 50% met 13.3% 11.4% 15.4% 12.5% 36.4% 12.3% 17.6% 15.4% 25% met 13.3% 11.4% 3.8% 25.0% 9.1% 14.0% 5.9% 11.5% 0% met 33.3% 68.6% 80.8% 62.5% 54.5% 66.7% 61.8% 64.4% Q6-24. Tennis courts 100% met 15.0% 5.9% 4.3% 20.0% 10.0% 16.3% 9.5% 11.7% 75% met 35.0% 41.2% 30.4% 25.0% 30.0% 34.9% 28.6% 31.9% 50% met 25.0% 23.5% 30.4% 20.0% 40.0% 23.3% 33.3% 27.7% 25% met 15.0% 29.4% 26.1% 30.0% 10.0% 18.6% 23.8% 22.3% 0% met 10.0% 0.0% 8.7% 5.0% 10.0% 7.0% 4.8% 6.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 114406 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 100% met 38.1% 43.1% 39.0% 41.1% 44.8% 43.7% 38.8% 41.4% 75% met 41.3% 36.2% 39.0% 30.4% 31.3% 30.3% 42.6% 35.8% 50% met 17.5% 12.1% 15.3% 23.2% 17.9% 20.4% 12.4% 16.9% 25% met 3.2% 6.9% 1.7% 5.4% 6.0% 4.9% 5.4% 4.6% 0% met 0.0% 1.7% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.8% 1.3% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 100% met 35.1% 36.5% 26.8% 30.4% 35.1% 34.8% 28.9% 32.7% 75% met 33.3% 38.5% 39.3% 19.6% 38.6% 27.3% 44.7% 34.6% 50% met 17.5% 11.5% 21.4% 34.8% 15.8% 21.2% 17.5% 19.5% 25% met 10.5% 7.7% 8.9% 13.0% 7.0% 12.1% 7.0% 9.6% 0% met 3.5% 5.8% 3.6% 2.2% 3.5% 4.5% 1.8% 3.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 115407 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 100% met 27.3% 19.6% 16.3% 12.9% 39.4% 19.6% 22.5% 22.4% 75% met 43.6% 37.0% 34.7% 25.8% 36.4% 36.6% 42.5% 37.0% 50% met 16.4% 28.3% 20.4% 38.7% 15.2% 22.3% 21.3% 22.8% 25% met 12.7% 10.9% 22.4% 19.4% 3.0% 17.0% 11.3% 14.2% 0% met 0.0% 4.3% 6.1% 3.2% 6.1% 4.5% 2.5% 3.7% Q6-28. Other 25% met 33.3% 33.3% 0.0% 33.3% 0.0% 50.0% 0.0% 30.0% 0% met 66.7% 66.7% 100.0% 66.7% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0% 70.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 116408 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q7. Sum of top 4 choices Basketball courts 2.5% 6.4% 9.6% 2.6% 1.1% 3.9% 4.8% 4.2% Community gardens 21.3% 15.4% 8.2% 13.2% 14.8% 19.0% 9.6% 14.5% Disc golf 20.0% 6.4% 8.2% 6.6% 3.4% 1.7% 15.1% 8.7% Dog parks 25.0% 19.2% 27.4% 19.7% 21.6% 21.2% 26.5% 22.9% Fields, baseball/softball 2.5% 1.3% 1.4% 2.6% 4.5% 1.7% 3.6% 2.5% Fields, soccer/football/ lacrosse/field hockey 5.0% 5.1% 12.3% 0.0% 5.7% 3.9% 6.6% 5.5% Ice rink (indoor) 8.8% 7.7% 6.8% 5.3% 0.0% 5.0% 7.8% 5.5% Ice rink (outdoor) 12.5% 14.1% 6.8% 7.9% 4.5% 7.8% 11.4% 9.2% Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 7.5% 0.0% 4.1% 1.3% 2.3% 2.2% 4.8% 3.0% Nature centers 10.0% 9.0% 17.8% 13.2% 15.9% 14.5% 10.8% 13.0% Off-leash hours in parks 15.0% 15.4% 16.4% 3.9% 9.1% 11.2% 12.7% 12.0% On-road bike lanes or facilities 16.3% 16.7% 27.4% 30.3% 21.6% 24.6% 22.3% 21.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 117409 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q7. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Pavilions & picnic areas 6.3% 7.7% 6.8% 13.2% 13.6% 11.2% 9.6% 10.0% Pickleball courts 5.0% 1.3% 11.0% 5.3% 5.7% 6.1% 5.4% 5.7% Play areas for all ages & abilities 6.3% 14.1% 9.6% 14.5% 9.1% 11.2% 10.2% 10.7% Playgrounds & play areas 7.5% 17.9% 6.8% 5.3% 12.5% 9.5% 10.8% 10.0% Pools, indoor 13.8% 29.5% 35.6% 15.8% 19.3% 24.6% 16.3% 22.2% Pools, outdoor 10.0% 35.9% 34.2% 21.1% 8.0% 25.1% 15.1% 20.9% Recreation or community centers 7.5% 5.1% 4.1% 7.9% 9.1% 8.4% 4.2% 6.7% Sand volleyball court 5.0% 1.3% 1.4% 2.6% 0.0% 1.1% 2.4% 2.2% Skate park 11.3% 1.3% 4.1% 0.0% 0.0% 2.8% 3.6% 3.5% Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 2.5% 11.5% 9.6% 5.3% 1.1% 5.0% 7.2% 5.7% Sprayground/splash pad 6.3% 16.7% 8.2% 9.2% 3.4% 10.6% 6.6% 8.5% Tennis courts 6.3% 2.6% 6.8% 13.2% 1.1% 6.1% 5.4% 5.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 118410 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q7. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 65.0% 61.5% 50.7% 67.1% 62.5% 64.8% 64.5% 61.6% Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 45.0% 38.5% 23.3% 40.8% 44.3% 37.4% 45.2% 38.7% Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 26.3% 17.9% 15.1% 23.7% 12.5% 21.8% 19.3% 19.5% Other 3.8% 3.8% 2.7% 2.6% 3.4% 1.7% 3.6% 3.2% None chosen 1.3% 1.3% 1.4% 6.6% 14.8% 5.0% 3.0% 5.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 119411 Q8. Did you or anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department before March 2020? N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q8. Did anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events Yes 8.8% 35.9% 28.8% 25.0% 13.6% 26.3% 17.5% 22.4% No 91.3% 64.1% 71.2% 75.0% 86.4% 73.7% 82.5% 77.6% Q8a. How would you rate the overall quality of the programs and events that you and members of your household participated in before March 2020? N=90 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q8a. How would you rate overall quality of programs & events your household participated in before March 2020 Excellent 14.3% 39.3% 42.9% 26.3% 25.0% 36.2% 31.0% 34.4% Good 71.4% 39.3% 38.1% 63.2% 58.3% 44.7% 55.2% 47.8% Fair 14.3% 14.3% 19.0% 10.5% 16.7% 17.0% 10.3% 15.6% Poor 0.0% 7.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1% 3.4% 2.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 120412 Q9. Would you or members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future? (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q9. Would you like Bozeman Parks & Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future Yes 20.8% 15.2% 15.2% 30.3% 20.8% 23.6% 16.8% 20.7% No 79.2% 84.8% 84.8% 69.7% 79.2% 76.4% 83.2% 79.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 121413 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 65.0% 44.9% 42.5% 40.8% 33.0% 42.5% 48.2% 44.9% I do not have the time to participate in programming 41.3% 21.8% 28.8% 18.4% 11.4% 23.5% 24.1% 24.2% Program fees are not affordable 5.0% 1.3% 2.7% 1.3% 4.5% 2.2% 3.6% 3.0% Program instructors are not good 0.0% 5.1% 1.4% 2.6% 1.1% 2.8% 1.2% 2.0% Times when programs are offered are not convenient 11.3% 12.8% 15.1% 11.8% 8.0% 13.4% 9.6% 11.7% Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 12.5% 7.7% 16.4% 17.1% 23.9% 13.4% 19.3% 15.5% Poor customer service in past experience 0.0% 5.1% 5.5% 2.6% 2.3% 2.8% 2.4% 3.0% Lack of universal accessibility 1.3% 1.3% 1.4% 2.6% 1.1% 1.7% 0.6% 1.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 122414 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming (cont.) Language barriers (ESOL) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 0.0% 0.6% 0.2% Program location or venue is not convenient 5.0% 6.4% 8.2% 5.3% 5.7% 3.4% 6.0% 6.0% Something else 2.5% 15.4% 16.4% 9.2% 5.7% 14.0% 3.0% 9.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 123415 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q11. Sum of top 2 choices I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 65.0% 39.7% 35.6% 32.9% 28.4% 38.0% 44.0% 40.1% I do not have the time to participate in programming 37.5% 21.8% 30.1% 17.1% 11.4% 23.5% 24.1% 23.4% Program fees are not affordable 2.5% 2.6% 4.1% 1.3% 0.0% 1.1% 1.8% 2.0% Program instructors are not good 0.0% 3.8% 1.4% 1.3% 1.1% 2.2% 1.2% 1.5% Times when programs are offered are not convenient 8.8% 12.8% 12.3% 9.2% 8.0% 12.3% 7.2% 10.2% Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 7.5% 10.3% 11.0% 14.5% 21.6% 12.3% 15.1% 13.0% Poor customer service in past experience 0.0% 2.6% 1.4% 2.6% 1.1% 1.1% 1.2% 1.5% Lack of universal accessibility 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 1.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 124416 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q11. Sum of top 2 choices (cont.) Program location or venue is not convenient 3.8% 3.8% 4.1% 3.9% 5.7% 2.2% 4.2% 4.2% Something else 2.5% 12.8% 11.0% 11.8% 5.7% 12.3% 3.6% 8.5% None chosen 17.5% 23.1% 26.0% 32.9% 37.5% 27.4% 27.7% 27.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 125417 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities Threat of vehicle collisions or vehicle operator behavior (e.g. , distracted driving, speeding) 41.3% 48.7% 46.6% 55.3% 45.5% 46.4% 50.6% 47.1% Existing bike lanes or paths are in poor condition 20.0% 24.4% 21.9% 28.9% 26.1% 24.6% 25.3% 23.9% I don't feel safe when walking or biking (crime/personal safety) 2.5% 9.0% 8.2% 10.5% 10.2% 6.7% 9.6% 8.0% Transporting small children, elderly, or persons with disabilities 5.0% 20.5% 13.7% 2.6% 4.5% 12.3% 4.8% 9.0% I don't own a bicycle 10.0% 6.4% 1.4% 9.2% 9.1% 7.3% 7.2% 7.5% I have to carry heavy things in my vehicle 21.3% 10.3% 12.3% 3.9% 5.7% 8.4% 12.7% 10.5% Destinations are too far away 16.3% 9.0% 12.3% 9.2% 11.4% 11.2% 12.0% 11.5% I have limited mobility 1.3% 1.3% 2.7% 6.6% 13.6% 6.1% 2.4% 5.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 126418 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities (cont.) Weather is often inclement 20.0% 15.4% 21.9% 19.7% 26.1% 22.3% 19.3% 21.2% Not enough lighting on my routes 20.0% 11.5% 17.8% 11.8% 12.5% 14.0% 14.5% 14.5% Route is unclear due to lack of wayfinding 7.5% 3.8% 9.6% 7.9% 4.5% 3.9% 7.2% 6.5% I don't have enough time for walking or biking as a commuting option 18.8% 9.0% 12.3% 9.2% 5.7% 8.9% 12.7% 10.7% Something else 2.5% 6.4% 6.8% 10.5% 10.2% 5.6% 7.2% 7.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 127419 Q13. Of the following ways in which The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department could allocate funding, which ONE should be the top priority? (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q13. Which following way could City Parks & Recreation Department allocate funding in Develop land that has already been purchased with new parks, trails & facilities 35.1% 23.7% 20.3% 24.7% 24.4% 26.7% 23.9% 25.7% Purchase new land for later park or facility development 7.8% 11.8% 13.0% 11.0% 11.0% 8.7% 15.7% 11.0% Purchase new land for natural resource conservation 33.8% 19.7% 26.1% 26.0% 22.0% 33.7% 20.8% 25.4% Renovate existing facilities 15.6% 23.7% 27.5% 17.8% 8.5% 14.5% 19.5% 18.1% Increase routine maintenance of parks, trails, & facilities 7.8% 21.1% 13.0% 20.5% 34.1% 16.3% 20.1% 19.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 128420 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming Yes 35.0% 69.2% 69.9% 47.4% 37.5% 56.4% 44.0% 51.1% No 65.0% 30.8% 30.1% 52.6% 62.5% 43.6% 56.0% 48.9% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) Yes 52.5% 50.0% 53.4% 57.9% 55.7% 66.5% 42.8% 53.6% No 47.5% 50.0% 46.6% 42.1% 44.3% 33.5% 57.2% 46.4% Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) Yes 12.5% 29.5% 8.2% 7.9% 2.3% 14.0% 11.4% 11.7% No 87.5% 70.5% 91.8% 92.1% 97.7% 86.0% 88.6% 88.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 129421 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-4. Outdoor education Yes 43.8% 43.6% 35.6% 32.9% 21.6% 41.3% 30.7% 35.2% No 56.3% 56.4% 64.4% 67.1% 78.4% 58.7% 69.3% 64.8% Q14-5. Fitness Yes 53.8% 43.6% 45.2% 52.6% 51.1% 57.5% 41.0% 49.4% No 46.3% 56.4% 54.8% 47.4% 48.9% 42.5% 59.0% 50.6% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) Yes 41.3% 39.7% 34.2% 43.4% 47.7% 52.0% 33.1% 41.9% No 58.8% 60.3% 65.8% 56.6% 52.3% 48.0% 66.9% 58.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 130422 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-7. Outdoor adventure Yes 66.3% 57.7% 47.9% 46.1% 20.5% 54.2% 42.2% 47.1% No 33.8% 42.3% 52.1% 53.9% 79.5% 45.8% 57.8% 52.9% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 Yes 13.8% 19.2% 4.1% 5.3% 8.0% 11.2% 9.6% 10.0% No 86.3% 80.8% 95.9% 94.7% 92.0% 88.8% 90.4% 90.0% Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ Yes 3.8% 7.7% 8.2% 44.7% 67.0% 29.1% 24.7% 27.4% No 96.3% 92.3% 91.8% 55.3% 33.0% 70.9% 75.3% 72.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 131423 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-10. Special events Yes 40.0% 34.6% 32.9% 38.2% 30.7% 39.1% 29.5% 35.4% No 60.0% 65.4% 67.1% 61.8% 69.3% 60.9% 70.5% 64.6% Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult Yes 50.0% 28.2% 31.5% 18.4% 13.6% 26.3% 32.5% 27.9% No 50.0% 71.8% 68.5% 81.6% 86.4% 73.7% 67.5% 72.1% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth Yes 11.3% 34.6% 23.3% 7.9% 10.2% 19.0% 16.9% 17.0% No 88.8% 65.4% 76.7% 92.1% 89.8% 81.0% 83.1% 83.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 132424 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children Yes 10.0% 44.9% 23.3% 15.8% 11.4% 21.8% 21.1% 20.7% No 90.0% 55.1% 76.7% 84.2% 88.6% 78.2% 78.9% 79.3% Q14-14. Teen programs Yes 6.3% 19.2% 23.3% 11.8% 5.7% 13.4% 12.7% 12.7% No 93.8% 80.8% 76.7% 88.2% 94.3% 86.6% 87.3% 87.3% Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion Yes 22.5% 26.9% 13.7% 15.8% 22.7% 26.8% 15.1% 20.4% No 77.5% 73.1% 86.3% 84.2% 77.3% 73.2% 84.9% 79.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 133425 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-16. Winter recreation Yes 62.5% 62.8% 57.5% 59.2% 43.2% 57.5% 59.0% 57.1% No 37.5% 37.2% 42.5% 40.8% 56.8% 42.5% 41.0% 42.9% Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users Yes 37.5% 28.2% 27.4% 40.8% 43.2% 39.1% 33.1% 35.7% No 62.5% 71.8% 72.6% 59.2% 56.8% 60.9% 66.9% 64.3% Q14-18. Other Yes 3.8% 1.3% 4.1% 5.3% 4.5% 2.2% 3.6% 3.7% No 96.3% 98.7% 95.9% 94.7% 95.5% 97.8% 96.4% 96.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 134426 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming 100% met 3.8% 1.9% 0.0% 12.1% 12.5% 5.2% 5.6% 5.1% 75% met 19.2% 11.5% 15.7% 9.1% 15.6% 11.5% 18.3% 14.7% 50% met 42.3% 26.9% 25.5% 24.2% 28.1% 26.0% 35.2% 27.9% 25% met 26.9% 48.1% 37.3% 39.4% 34.4% 42.7% 29.6% 38.6% 0% met 7.7% 11.5% 21.6% 15.2% 9.4% 14.6% 11.3% 13.7% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 100% met 7.7% 2.9% 2.8% 2.8% 11.9% 6.7% 4.7% 5.8% 75% met 41.0% 22.9% 27.8% 25.0% 28.6% 24.0% 32.8% 29.5% 50% met 23.1% 34.3% 36.1% 47.2% 38.1% 38.5% 37.5% 35.8% 25% met 23.1% 28.6% 11.1% 22.2% 19.0% 19.2% 23.4% 20.5% 0% met 5.1% 11.4% 22.2% 2.8% 2.4% 11.5% 1.6% 8.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 135427 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 100% met 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.9% 2.4% 75% met 25.0% 9.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 23.5% 9.8% 50% met 12.5% 19.0% 16.7% 20.0% 0.0% 13.6% 17.6% 17.1% 25% met 50.0% 23.8% 33.3% 60.0% 100.0% 40.9% 29.4% 36.6% 0% met 12.5% 42.9% 50.0% 20.0% 0.0% 45.5% 23.5% 34.1% Q14-4. Outdoor education 100% met 3.4% 3.3% 0.0% 5.3% 0.0% 3.1% 4.9% 3.3% 75% met 20.7% 23.3% 30.4% 15.8% 27.8% 23.1% 24.4% 23.1% 50% met 27.6% 30.0% 30.4% 36.8% 33.3% 23.1% 46.3% 31.4% 25% met 37.9% 23.3% 17.4% 26.3% 33.3% 33.8% 17.1% 27.3% 0% met 10.3% 20.0% 21.7% 15.8% 5.6% 16.9% 7.3% 14.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 136428 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-5. Fitness 100% met 21.1% 7.1% 10.0% 20.6% 12.5% 13.0% 19.0% 14.5% 75% met 28.9% 32.1% 23.3% 23.5% 30.0% 20.7% 34.5% 27.2% 50% met 28.9% 32.1% 26.7% 29.4% 35.0% 37.0% 25.9% 31.8% 25% met 13.2% 7.1% 30.0% 20.6% 20.0% 16.3% 17.2% 17.9% 0% met 7.9% 21.4% 10.0% 5.9% 2.5% 13.0% 3.4% 8.7% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 100% met 6.9% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 17.1% 11.7% 4.3% 10.6% 75% met 24.1% 10.7% 19.0% 25.0% 31.4% 20.8% 29.8% 22.7% 50% met 34.5% 21.4% 47.6% 29.2% 28.6% 28.6% 38.3% 31.9% 25% met 27.6% 21.4% 14.3% 33.3% 17.1% 26.0% 17.0% 22.0% 0% met 6.9% 21.4% 19.0% 12.5% 5.7% 13.0% 10.6% 12.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 137429 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-7. Outdoor adventure 100% met 16.7% 19.0% 6.5% 10.7% 25.0% 15.9% 13.3% 14.9% 75% met 41.7% 21.4% 45.2% 39.3% 31.3% 33.0% 41.7% 35.7% 50% met 25.0% 31.0% 22.6% 35.7% 31.3% 29.5% 30.0% 29.2% 25% met 10.4% 19.0% 12.9% 10.7% 6.3% 9.1% 13.3% 12.5% 0% met 6.3% 9.5% 12.9% 3.6% 6.3% 12.5% 1.7% 7.7% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 100% met 22.2% 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 16.7% 11.1% 21.4% 14.3% 75% met 22.2% 35.7% 33.3% 0.0% 33.3% 33.3% 28.6% 28.6% 50% met 22.2% 14.3% 33.3% 0.0% 0.0% 11.1% 14.3% 14.3% 25% met 11.1% 21.4% 0.0% 66.7% 16.7% 22.2% 14.3% 20.0% 0% met 22.2% 14.3% 33.3% 33.3% 33.3% 22.2% 21.4% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 138430 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 14.0% 12.2% 8.6% 9.9% 75% met 50.0% 40.0% 16.7% 11.5% 16.0% 9.8% 25.7% 16.5% 50% met 0.0% 20.0% 33.3% 26.9% 40.0% 39.0% 37.1% 34.1% 25% met 0.0% 40.0% 16.7% 34.6% 20.0% 24.4% 17.1% 24.2% 0% met 50.0% 0.0% 33.3% 19.2% 10.0% 14.6% 11.4% 15.4% Q14-10. Special events 100% met 13.8% 9.1% 9.1% 15.0% 9.5% 12.1% 12.8% 11.1% 75% met 34.5% 27.3% 50.0% 30.0% 42.9% 36.2% 35.9% 35.9% 50% met 27.6% 36.4% 18.2% 35.0% 42.9% 27.6% 38.5% 32.5% 25% met 13.8% 9.1% 9.1% 20.0% 4.8% 13.8% 5.1% 12.0% 0% met 10.3% 18.2% 13.6% 0.0% 0.0% 10.3% 7.7% 8.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 139431 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult 100% met 21.6% 10.5% 9.5% 9.1% 8.3% 11.9% 18.4% 13.9% 75% met 21.6% 31.6% 19.0% 9.1% 25.0% 21.4% 24.5% 21.8% 50% met 21.6% 31.6% 23.8% 36.4% 41.7% 19.0% 32.7% 27.7% 25% met 29.7% 26.3% 33.3% 27.3% 16.7% 35.7% 20.4% 28.7% 0% met 5.4% 0.0% 14.3% 18.2% 8.3% 11.9% 4.1% 7.9% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth 100% met 28.6% 19.2% 5.9% 33.3% 25.0% 19.4% 16.0% 18.0% 75% met 42.9% 46.2% 17.6% 33.3% 62.5% 32.3% 48.0% 39.3% 50% met 0.0% 23.1% 41.2% 0.0% 12.5% 16.1% 32.0% 23.0% 25% met 14.3% 7.7% 17.6% 33.3% 0.0% 19.4% 4.0% 11.5% 0% met 14.3% 3.8% 17.6% 0.0% 0.0% 12.9% 0.0% 8.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 140432 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children 100% met 14.3% 6.3% 6.7% 14.3% 0.0% 8.6% 10.3% 8.3% 75% met 42.9% 43.8% 26.7% 14.3% 50.0% 31.4% 41.4% 37.5% 50% met 14.3% 25.0% 33.3% 57.1% 40.0% 25.7% 34.5% 30.6% 25% met 28.6% 21.9% 6.7% 14.3% 10.0% 22.9% 13.8% 16.7% 0% met 0.0% 3.1% 26.7% 0.0% 0.0% 11.4% 0.0% 6.9% Q14-14. Teen programs 100% met 0.0% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.5% 6.3% 4.7% 75% met 50.0% 23.1% 12.5% 14.3% 20.0% 18.2% 25.0% 18.6% 50% met 0.0% 15.4% 37.5% 28.6% 60.0% 31.8% 31.3% 30.2% 25% met 50.0% 30.8% 18.8% 0.0% 20.0% 18.2% 25.0% 20.9% 0% met 0.0% 15.4% 31.3% 57.1% 0.0% 27.3% 12.5% 25.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 141433 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 100% met 0.0% 12.5% 0.0% 16.7% 5.9% 7.7% 0.0% 6.1% 75% met 12.5% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 17.6% 5.1% 15.8% 9.1% 50% met 12.5% 31.3% 20.0% 33.3% 41.2% 20.5% 42.1% 27.3% 25% met 37.5% 18.8% 30.0% 33.3% 35.3% 33.3% 36.8% 31.8% 0% met 37.5% 37.5% 40.0% 16.7% 0.0% 33.3% 5.3% 25.8% Q14-16. Winter recreation 100% met 13.3% 14.0% 7.9% 30.6% 18.2% 16.3% 15.3% 16.0% 75% met 44.4% 30.2% 36.8% 16.7% 21.2% 31.5% 31.8% 30.5% 50% met 24.4% 30.2% 28.9% 33.3% 39.4% 26.1% 37.6% 30.5% 25% met 4.4% 16.3% 21.1% 16.7% 12.1% 16.3% 10.6% 15.0% 0% met 13.3% 9.3% 5.3% 2.8% 9.1% 9.8% 4.7% 8.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 142434 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users 100% met 7.1% 5.3% 0.0% 4.0% 0.0% 3.2% 4.3% 3.2% 75% met 25.0% 10.5% 27.8% 8.0% 15.6% 17.7% 19.1% 17.7% 50% met 28.6% 21.1% 16.7% 12.0% 31.3% 25.8% 23.4% 22.6% 25% met 25.0% 15.8% 38.9% 56.0% 37.5% 37.1% 34.0% 34.7% 0% met 14.3% 47.4% 16.7% 20.0% 15.6% 16.1% 19.1% 21.8% Q14-18. Other 100% met 0.0% 0.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 33.3% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 8.3% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 33.3% 50.0% 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0% met 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 33.3% 50.0% 25.0% 75.0% 58.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 143435 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q15. Sum of top 4 choices Aquatics or swimming 22.5% 43.6% 61.6% 35.5% 20.5% 43.0% 28.3% 36.2% Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 37.5% 28.2% 30.1% 36.8% 31.8% 39.7% 27.1% 32.7% Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 3.8% 12.8% 6.8% 5.3% 1.1% 8.4% 4.8% 5.7% Outdoor education 25.0% 15.4% 15.1% 11.8% 12.5% 19.0% 14.5% 16.0% Fitness 23.8% 19.2% 23.3% 27.6% 33.0% 25.1% 24.7% 25.7% History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 16.3% 16.7% 15.1% 13.2% 28.4% 22.9% 15.1% 18.2% Outdoor adventure 43.8% 26.9% 23.3% 19.7% 11.4% 24.6% 27.1% 24.7% Preschool ages 2-5 7.5% 7.7% 2.7% 5.3% 3.4% 5.0% 5.4% 5.2% Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 0.0% 1.3% 4.1% 23.7% 52.3% 17.9% 15.7% 17.2% Special events 15.0% 15.4% 13.7% 18.4% 8.0% 16.8% 12.0% 14.2% Sports leagues, adult 28.8% 11.5% 15.1% 5.3% 5.7% 10.6% 16.9% 13.2% Sports leagues, youth 2.5% 19.2% 9.6% 1.3% 2.3% 6.7% 7.2% 6.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 144436 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q15. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Camps & other activities for children 6.3% 29.5% 12.3% 7.9% 4.5% 13.4% 12.7% 12.0% Teen programs 1.3% 9.0% 9.6% 5.3% 2.3% 5.6% 6.0% 5.2% Therapeutic recreation/ recreation inclusion 10.0% 9.0% 5.5% 5.3% 13.6% 11.7% 5.4% 9.0% Winter recreation 48.8% 37.2% 41.1% 36.8% 18.2% 30.2% 41.6% 35.9% Etiquette programs for park & trail users 21.3% 15.4% 13.7% 25.0% 26.1% 20.1% 22.9% 20.4% Other 5.0% 1.3% 6.8% 2.6% 4.5% 3.4% 3.6% 4.0% None chosen 7.5% 9.0% 8.2% 17.1% 17.0% 7.8% 12.7% 12.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 145437 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q16-1. Use an automobile Several times a day 28.8% 27.3% 23.3% 16.4% 12.9% 20.9% 21.5% 21.4% About once a day 28.8% 18.2% 26.0% 28.8% 32.9% 32.2% 20.9% 27.5% About once a week 26.3% 32.5% 27.4% 24.7% 25.9% 23.2% 35.0% 27.5% Seldom 13.8% 20.8% 19.2% 27.4% 24.7% 19.8% 20.9% 20.9% Never 2.5% 1.3% 4.1% 2.7% 3.5% 4.0% 1.8% 2.8% Q16-2. Use trails (natural, gravel, or paved) Several times a day 5.1% 11.5% 12.5% 11.1% 7.1% 10.7% 7.4% 9.5% About once a day 27.8% 28.2% 37.5% 29.2% 24.7% 29.9% 31.9% 28.9% About once a week 41.8% 35.9% 36.1% 43.1% 35.3% 37.3% 38.0% 38.9% Seldom 22.8% 23.1% 9.7% 11.1% 27.1% 18.1% 20.2% 18.9% Never 2.5% 1.3% 4.2% 5.6% 5.9% 4.0% 2.5% 3.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 146438 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q16-3. Use sidewalks Several times a day 32.1% 22.4% 30.1% 38.0% 21.2% 32.4% 25.5% 28.4% About once a day 33.3% 39.5% 39.7% 32.4% 38.8% 38.1% 36.0% 36.6% About once a week 23.1% 27.6% 17.8% 18.3% 29.4% 21.6% 25.5% 24.0% Seldom 11.5% 9.2% 9.6% 8.5% 7.1% 7.4% 9.9% 9.0% Never 0.0% 1.3% 2.7% 2.8% 3.5% 0.6% 3.1% 2.1% Q16-4. Use paved, shared-use pathways (typically next to a street) Several times a day 11.4% 10.5% 9.7% 8.5% 7.1% 9.7% 8.6% 9.5% About once a day 11.4% 22.4% 20.8% 23.9% 11.8% 19.4% 18.5% 17.8% About once a week 31.6% 31.6% 31.9% 25.4% 32.9% 30.3% 32.7% 31.2% Seldom 36.7% 27.6% 30.6% 32.4% 29.4% 28.6% 32.7% 30.9% Never 8.9% 7.9% 6.9% 9.9% 18.8% 12.0% 7.4% 10.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 147439 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q16-5. Bike on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) Several times a day 2.5% 7.7% 4.2% 8.5% 2.3% 5.1% 4.3% 4.9% About once a day 10.1% 6.4% 13.9% 11.3% 4.7% 6.2% 12.3% 9.2% About once a week 17.7% 23.1% 31.9% 33.8% 16.3% 23.7% 25.3% 24.3% Seldom 40.5% 41.0% 33.3% 23.9% 33.7% 34.5% 37.7% 34.3% Never 29.1% 21.8% 16.7% 22.5% 43.0% 30.5% 20.4% 27.4% Q16-6. Travel by bus Several times a day 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 0.3% About once a day 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 0.3% About once a week 1.3% 2.7% 2.8% 1.4% 0.0% 2.8% 0.6% 1.8% Seldom 29.9% 21.3% 16.7% 25.4% 20.9% 20.5% 27.2% 22.5% Never 67.5% 76.0% 80.6% 71.8% 79.1% 76.7% 70.9% 75.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 148440 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q17-1. Use trails (natural or gravel) Very comfortable 57.0% 79.2% 73.2% 65.2% 58.8% 72.4% 62.1% 66.8% Comfortable 41.8% 19.5% 21.1% 26.1% 30.0% 23.0% 32.9% 27.6% Neutral 0.0% 0.0% 4.2% 7.2% 7.5% 4.0% 2.5% 3.7% Uncomfortable 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 2.5% 0.6% 1.2% 1.1% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 1.3% 1.4% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 1.2% 0.8% Q17-2. Use paved trails Very comfortable 58.4% 72.4% 73.9% 67.2% 59.0% 73.1% 60.8% 66.0% Comfortable 39.0% 23.7% 23.2% 23.9% 32.1% 23.4% 32.9% 28.6% Neutral 1.3% 3.9% 1.4% 7.5% 6.4% 2.9% 4.4% 4.0% Uncomfortable 1.3% 0.0% 0.0% 1.5% 1.3% 0.6% 1.3% 0.8% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.6% 0.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 149441 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q17-3. Use sidewalks Very comfortable 41.8% 62.8% 62.0% 47.2% 36.0% 56.2% 44.8% 49.5% Comfortable 38.0% 25.6% 28.2% 30.6% 43.0% 29.2% 38.7% 33.3% Neutral 17.7% 7.7% 7.0% 15.3% 12.8% 11.8% 9.2% 12.1% Uncomfortable 2.5% 2.6% 1.4% 5.6% 7.0% 2.8% 4.9% 3.8% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 1.3% 1.4% 1.4% 1.2% 0.0% 2.5% 1.3% Q17-4. Use paved shared-used pathways Very comfortable 40.0% 51.4% 44.9% 38.5% 20.5% 46.3% 35.1% 39.2% Comfortable 32.9% 31.1% 33.3% 30.8% 37.0% 28.8% 37.0% 33.2% Neutral 17.1% 13.5% 13.0% 23.1% 21.9% 18.1% 16.9% 17.5% Uncomfortable 8.6% 2.7% 5.8% 4.6% 12.3% 5.6% 7.1% 6.8% Very uncomfortable 1.4% 1.4% 2.9% 3.1% 8.2% 1.3% 3.9% 3.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 150442 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q17-5. Bike on the street (ex. In bike lanes) Very comfortable 6.3% 19.7% 13.8% 6.7% 3.6% 8.4% 10.9% 10.3% Comfortable 14.1% 15.5% 29.2% 21.7% 12.5% 18.2% 20.3% 18.5% Neutral 31.3% 26.8% 23.1% 25.0% 26.8% 21.7% 32.6% 26.6% Uncomfortable 29.7% 19.7% 16.9% 26.7% 28.6% 27.3% 21.0% 24.1% Very uncomfortable 18.8% 18.3% 16.9% 20.0% 28.6% 24.5% 15.2% 20.4% Q17-6. Travel by bus Very comfortable 15.0% 15.6% 27.6% 30.8% 13.6% 17.1% 23.8% 19.9% Comfortable 22.5% 37.5% 27.6% 15.4% 27.3% 30.0% 27.0% 26.5% Neutral 32.5% 28.1% 37.9% 38.5% 31.8% 32.9% 31.7% 33.1% Uncomfortable 15.0% 12.5% 0.0% 11.5% 9.1% 10.0% 9.5% 10.6% Very uncomfortable 15.0% 6.3% 6.9% 3.8% 18.2% 10.0% 7.9% 9.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 151443 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-1. Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths Very supportive 44.6% 53.9% 58.9% 58.1% 52.4% 54.0% 57.6% 53.5% Supportive 39.2% 32.9% 31.5% 31.1% 32.9% 35.6% 29.7% 33.7% Neutral 14.9% 10.5% 5.5% 5.4% 9.8% 9.2% 9.5% 9.1% Not supportive 1.4% 1.3% 2.7% 2.7% 2.4% 1.1% 2.5% 2.1% Not at all supportive 0.0% 1.3% 1.4% 2.7% 2.4% 0.0% 0.6% 1.6% Q18-2. Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways Very supportive 33.3% 39.5% 38.9% 34.2% 34.1% 35.3% 39.8% 36.1% Supportive 38.7% 34.2% 37.5% 20.5% 22.0% 37.1% 27.3% 30.4% Neutral 18.7% 14.5% 12.5% 31.5% 30.5% 20.0% 22.4% 21.7% Not supportive 5.3% 7.9% 5.6% 8.2% 7.3% 5.3% 6.2% 6.8% Not at all supportive 4.0% 3.9% 5.6% 5.5% 6.1% 2.4% 4.3% 5.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 152444 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-3. Installing more gravel & natural surface trails Very supportive 54.7% 53.2% 53.4% 52.0% 47.6% 55.2% 52.5% 52.1% Supportive 33.3% 27.3% 28.8% 21.3% 26.8% 29.7% 27.2% 27.5% Neutral 9.3% 16.9% 12.3% 17.3% 18.3% 12.2% 16.0% 15.0% Not supportive 0.0% 2.6% 2.7% 4.0% 3.7% 2.3% 2.5% 2.6% Not at all supportive 2.7% 0.0% 2.7% 5.3% 3.7% 0.6% 1.9% 2.8% Q18-4. Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks Very supportive 32.0% 39.0% 39.7% 37.5% 29.8% 35.7% 36.8% 35.3% Supportive 20.0% 27.3% 27.4% 20.8% 33.3% 28.7% 23.3% 26.2% Neutral 33.3% 19.5% 16.4% 22.2% 25.0% 25.1% 22.1% 23.1% Not supportive 9.3% 5.2% 6.8% 12.5% 7.1% 7.0% 9.8% 8.1% Not at all supportive 5.3% 9.1% 9.6% 6.9% 4.8% 3.5% 8.0% 7.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 153445 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-5. Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets Very supportive 30.7% 41.3% 53.4% 44.6% 31.3% 39.1% 40.9% 40.1% Supportive 36.0% 30.7% 17.8% 27.0% 27.7% 29.0% 27.4% 27.9% Neutral 18.7% 12.0% 9.6% 13.5% 19.3% 15.4% 16.5% 14.6% Not supportive 9.3% 12.0% 12.3% 8.1% 10.8% 10.7% 9.8% 10.7% Not at all supportive 5.3% 4.0% 6.8% 6.8% 10.8% 5.9% 5.5% 6.8% Q18-6. Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes Very supportive 18.1% 22.2% 23.2% 20.0% 17.6% 20.1% 21.2% 20.3% Supportive 31.9% 33.3% 27.5% 28.6% 26.5% 35.2% 25.2% 29.9% Neutral 33.3% 27.8% 30.4% 37.1% 32.4% 30.8% 35.1% 31.8% Not supportive 12.5% 9.7% 7.2% 10.0% 11.8% 8.8% 11.3% 10.1% Not at all supportive 4.2% 6.9% 11.6% 4.3% 11.8% 5.0% 7.3% 7.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 154446 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-7. Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking Very supportive 13.5% 17.3% 11.0% 17.3% 15.2% 15.2% 13.1% 14.7% Supportive 35.1% 17.3% 34.2% 25.3% 30.4% 26.9% 30.6% 28.4% Neutral 27.0% 40.0% 31.5% 37.3% 40.5% 38.6% 35.0% 35.5% Not supportive 14.9% 12.0% 15.1% 10.7% 8.9% 13.5% 11.3% 12.4% Not at all supportive 9.5% 13.3% 8.2% 9.3% 5.1% 5.8% 10.0% 8.9% Q18-8. Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes Very supportive 30.3% 22.1% 28.2% 16.0% 20.7% 22.2% 23.5% 23.1% Supportive 36.8% 36.4% 29.6% 34.7% 31.7% 37.4% 31.5% 33.8% Neutral 21.1% 27.3% 19.7% 24.0% 31.7% 26.9% 27.2% 25.5% Not supportive 5.3% 6.5% 16.9% 17.3% 8.5% 6.4% 13.0% 10.6% Not at all supportive 6.6% 7.8% 5.6% 8.0% 7.3% 7.0% 4.9% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 155447 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-9. Providing better winter maintenance Very supportive 46.1% 34.2% 38.4% 36.8% 27.7% 41.0% 32.3% 36.3% Supportive 30.3% 38.2% 34.2% 27.6% 39.8% 33.5% 37.2% 34.3% Neutral 17.1% 22.4% 15.1% 28.9% 26.5% 20.2% 23.8% 22.2% Not supportive 5.3% 3.9% 8.2% 3.9% 3.6% 4.0% 4.9% 4.9% Not at all supportive 1.3% 1.3% 4.1% 2.6% 2.4% 1.2% 1.8% 2.3% Q18-10. Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) Very supportive 14.1% 9.6% 8.8% 5.8% 7.7% 7.4% 10.3% 9.1% Supportive 12.7% 11.0% 10.3% 15.9% 7.7% 13.0% 9.0% 11.3% Neutral 32.4% 39.7% 36.8% 33.3% 37.2% 41.4% 36.8% 36.4% Not supportive 23.9% 20.5% 26.5% 23.2% 24.4% 19.1% 27.1% 23.4% Not at all supportive 16.9% 19.2% 17.6% 21.7% 23.1% 19.1% 16.8% 19.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 156448 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-11. Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) Very supportive 12.0% 14.5% 12.7% 5.7% 12.7% 10.6% 13.4% 11.5% Supportive 38.7% 25.0% 23.9% 27.1% 12.7% 27.6% 23.6% 25.6% Neutral 25.3% 36.8% 33.8% 30.0% 39.2% 37.1% 33.8% 33.1% Not supportive 14.7% 13.2% 25.4% 20.0% 17.7% 17.6% 17.8% 18.1% Not at all supportive 9.3% 10.5% 4.2% 17.1% 17.7% 7.1% 11.5% 11.7% Q18-12. Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets Very supportive 39.5% 44.7% 40.8% 43.2% 26.3% 43.0% 38.1% 39.1% Supportive 38.2% 27.6% 25.4% 28.4% 36.3% 32.6% 30.0% 31.0% Neutral 11.8% 18.4% 18.3% 16.2% 18.8% 16.3% 17.5% 16.5% Not supportive 3.9% 6.6% 8.5% 5.4% 11.3% 5.8% 8.8% 7.1% Not at all supportive 6.6% 2.6% 7.0% 6.8% 7.5% 2.3% 5.6% 6.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 157449 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-13. Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets Very supportive 40.3% 44.0% 37.0% 37.0% 25.0% 38.7% 38.3% 36.9% Supportive 36.1% 32.0% 37.0% 38.4% 27.5% 33.9% 34.6% 33.7% Neutral 18.1% 17.3% 16.4% 16.4% 33.8% 22.6% 19.1% 20.4% Not supportive 1.4% 2.7% 5.5% 2.7% 8.8% 2.4% 4.9% 4.5% Not at all supportive 4.2% 4.0% 4.1% 5.5% 5.0% 2.4% 3.1% 4.5% Q18-14. Installing bike fix-it stations Very supportive 23.3% 12.0% 13.9% 5.7% 6.6% 12.6% 12.8% 12.2% Supportive 32.9% 20.0% 29.2% 24.3% 14.5% 28.1% 21.2% 24.3% Neutral 21.9% 44.0% 26.4% 37.1% 35.5% 35.3% 32.7% 32.7% Not supportive 11.0% 16.0% 19.4% 17.1% 22.4% 16.2% 18.6% 17.3% Not at all supportive 11.0% 8.0% 11.1% 15.7% 21.1% 7.8% 14.7% 13.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 158450 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-15. Adding more frequent bus stops Very supportive 15.4% 12.5% 19.7% 16.9% 13.8% 18.1% 14.6% 15.5% Supportive 29.2% 25.0% 19.7% 23.7% 24.6% 29.2% 20.0% 24.6% Neutral 38.5% 48.4% 44.3% 40.7% 35.4% 40.3% 42.3% 41.0% Not supportive 10.8% 7.8% 6.6% 5.1% 12.3% 4.9% 13.8% 8.5% Not at all supportive 6.2% 6.3% 9.8% 13.6% 13.8% 7.6% 9.2% 10.4% Q18-16. Expanding public transit Very supportive 26.4% 24.3% 23.5% 27.7% 22.1% 27.9% 20.7% 24.4% Supportive 33.3% 25.7% 32.4% 40.0% 27.3% 33.3% 34.5% 31.5% Neutral 23.6% 35.7% 29.4% 18.5% 33.8% 26.7% 27.6% 28.4% Not supportive 11.1% 8.6% 4.4% 3.1% 7.8% 6.1% 9.0% 7.0% Not at all supportive 5.6% 5.7% 10.3% 10.8% 9.1% 6.1% 8.3% 8.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 159451 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-17. Enforcing motor vehicle laws Very supportive 29.3% 46.7% 47.2% 63.4% 56.5% 54.1% 42.2% 48.7% Supportive 22.7% 21.3% 19.4% 19.7% 23.5% 18.0% 26.7% 21.7% Neutral 33.3% 25.3% 27.8% 11.3% 15.3% 22.1% 23.0% 22.3% Not supportive 10.7% 5.3% 2.8% 2.8% 2.4% 3.5% 5.6% 4.7% Not at all supportive 4.0% 1.3% 2.8% 2.8% 2.4% 2.3% 2.5% 2.6% Q18-18. Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work Very supportive 14.5% 18.0% 15.9% 12.5% 13.0% 15.6% 15.2% 14.9% Supportive 30.6% 26.2% 17.5% 25.0% 24.6% 28.9% 22.5% 24.4% Neutral 32.3% 32.8% 44.4% 37.5% 33.3% 39.3% 34.1% 36.2% Not supportive 11.3% 18.0% 4.8% 7.1% 13.0% 9.6% 13.8% 10.8% Not at all supportive 11.3% 4.9% 17.5% 17.9% 15.9% 6.7% 14.5% 13.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 160452 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q18-19. Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic Very supportive 19.4% 26.4% 32.4% 37.0% 30.0% 34.6% 26.3% 29.0% Supportive 27.8% 26.4% 16.9% 24.7% 32.5% 28.4% 23.1% 25.8% Neutral 20.8% 23.6% 28.2% 21.9% 20.0% 24.7% 22.5% 22.6% Not supportive 12.5% 15.3% 14.1% 9.6% 7.5% 4.3% 16.9% 11.8% Not at all supportive 19.4% 8.3% 8.5% 6.8% 10.0% 8.0% 11.3% 10.8% Q18-20. Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) Very supportive 41.9% 30.7% 28.6% 33.3% 14.3% 33.5% 28.0% 29.6% Supportive 29.7% 21.3% 27.1% 17.4% 19.5% 23.2% 24.2% 22.8% Neutral 14.9% 21.3% 18.6% 26.1% 40.3% 26.8% 22.9% 24.5% Not supportive 4.1% 14.7% 10.0% 7.2% 7.8% 8.5% 8.9% 8.7% Not at all supportive 9.5% 12.0% 15.7% 15.9% 18.2% 7.9% 15.9% 14.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 161453 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q19. Sum of top 3 choices Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 30.0% 35.9% 38.4% 26.3% 33.0% 29.6% 37.3% 32.7% Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 20.0% 24.4% 21.9% 13.2% 17.0% 19.6% 22.9% 19.5% Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 36.3% 37.2% 30.1% 28.9% 29.5% 36.9% 31.9% 32.4% Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 7.5% 14.1% 21.9% 11.8% 15.9% 15.1% 13.3% 14.0% Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 15.0% 21.8% 17.8% 30.3% 25.0% 23.5% 18.1% 21.7% Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 2.5% 2.6% 4.1% 2.6% 3.4% 1.7% 4.2% 3.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 162454 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 1.3% 1.3% 2.7% 5.3% 6.8% 3.4% 2.4% 3.5% Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 17.5% 10.3% 9.6% 0.0% 11.4% 9.5% 10.2% 9.7% Providing better winter maintenance 28.8% 23.1% 23.3% 19.7% 18.2% 25.1% 21.7% 22.4% Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 1.3% 2.6% 1.4% 1.3% 2.3% 2.2% 1.8% 1.7% Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e. g., places of work, park facilities) 1.3% 1.3% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 26.3% 24.4% 27.4% 26.3% 13.6% 25.7% 24.7% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 163455 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Constructing paved, shared- use pathways next to streets 15.0% 15.4% 15.1% 17.1% 4.5% 14.0% 14.5% 13.2% Installing bike fix-it stations 1.3% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 1.1% 0.6% 1.2% 0.7% Adding more frequent bus stops 6.3% 5.1% 5.5% 2.6% 2.3% 3.9% 4.2% 4.2% Expanding public transit 11.3% 5.1% 6.8% 11.8% 6.8% 10.1% 6.0% 8.2% Enforcing motor vehicle laws 8.8% 21.8% 23.3% 22.4% 27.3% 21.8% 19.9% 20.9% Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1% 1.7% 0.6% 1.0% Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 5.0% 11.5% 12.3% 14.5% 11.4% 11.2% 10.8% 11.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 164456 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 23.8% 10.3% 6.8% 3.9% 3.4% 7.8% 12.7% 9.5% None chosen 11.3% 6.4% 5.5% 15.8% 15.9% 8.4% 9.6% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 165457 Q20. Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "Very Satisfied" and 5 means "Very Dissatisfied," with the overall value your household receives from the City of Bozeman Parks Division. (without "not provided") N=401 Q22. Your age Q26. With which genders do you most identify with? Total 18-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ Female (cis-female) Male (cis-male) Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks Division Very satisfied 17.1% 16.9% 12.5% 23.3% 16.1% 19.9% 14.7% 17.2% Satisfied 51.3% 54.5% 61.1% 47.9% 48.3% 50.6% 58.9% 52.2% Neutral 25.0% 19.5% 13.9% 19.2% 31.0% 22.7% 19.6% 22.4% Dissatisfied 5.3% 6.5% 11.1% 6.8% 3.4% 5.7% 6.1% 6.4% Very dissatisfied 1.3% 2.6% 1.4% 2.7% 1.1% 1.1% 0.6% 1.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 166458 Q1. During a typical year, do you or anyone in your household visit the parks, trails and recreational facilities offered within the City of Bozeman (e.g., playgrounds, parks, athletic fields, dog parks, community centers, pools, trails or other facilities)? N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q1. Does anyone in your household visit City parks, trails & recreational facilities during a typical year Yes 100.0% 98.2% 98.6% 92.6% 97.0% No 0.0% 1.8% 1.4% 7.4% 3.0% Q1a. How often do you or others in your household visit a City of Bozeman park, trail, or recreational facility as described in Question 1? N=389 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q1a. How often do your household members visit a City park, trail, or recreational facility Once or twice a year 1.4% 3.6% 5.7% 9.7% 5.9% Monthly 10.8% 20.0% 18.4% 19.5% 17.7% Weekly 43.2% 32.7% 45.4% 37.2% 40.6% Daily 44.6% 43.6% 30.5% 33.6% 35.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 167459 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q1b-1. Park(s) Excellent 44.4% 30.8% 28.4% 34.0% 33.0% Good 50.0% 55.8% 59.0% 60.4% 57.6% Neutral 4.2% 7.7% 11.2% 2.8% 7.0% Below average 0.0% 3.8% 1.5% 1.9% 1.6% Poor 1.4% 1.9% 0.0% 0.9% 0.8% Q1b-2. Recreation facility(ies) Excellent 19.3% 9.8% 7.4% 20.3% 13.8% Good 56.1% 43.9% 48.1% 46.4% 48.2% Neutral 21.1% 31.7% 33.3% 24.6% 28.5% Below average 3.5% 9.8% 9.9% 7.2% 7.5% Poor 0.0% 4.9% 1.2% 1.4% 2.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 168460 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q1b-3. Aquatic facility(ies) Excellent 10.5% 2.4% 6.7% 4.3% 6.2% Good 26.3% 23.8% 17.8% 23.4% 23.2% Neutral 24.6% 14.3% 33.3% 14.9% 22.2% Below average 22.8% 42.9% 24.4% 36.2% 30.4% Poor 15.8% 16.7% 17.8% 21.3% 18.0% Q1b-4. Trails (natural, gravel, or paved) Excellent 49.3% 49.1% 40.6% 38.7% 42.3% Good 46.5% 43.6% 55.8% 47.2% 50.3% Neutral 2.8% 7.3% 2.9% 11.3% 6.1% Below average 1.4% 0.0% 0.7% 2.8% 1.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 169461 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q1b-5. Sidewalks Excellent 15.3% 10.9% 9.4% 13.1% 11.7% Good 54.2% 60.0% 50.7% 48.6% 52.3% Neutral 18.1% 20.0% 25.4% 27.1% 23.9% Below average 12.5% 5.5% 11.6% 7.5% 9.5% Poor 0.0% 3.6% 2.9% 3.7% 2.7% Q1b-6. Paved shared-use bike/pedestrian pathways (typically next to a street) Excellent 25.0% 15.1% 10.5% 13.8% 14.8% Good 44.1% 58.5% 48.4% 43.6% 48.0% Neutral 17.6% 11.3% 25.8% 27.7% 22.7% Below average 8.8% 13.2% 10.5% 11.7% 10.8% Poor 4.4% 1.9% 4.8% 3.2% 3.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 170462 Q1b. Overall, please rate your experience with the following City of Bozeman parks, trails, recreation, and active transportation facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Excellent" and 1 means "Poor." (without "don't know") N=389 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q1b-7. Biking on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) Excellent 7.5% 7.7% 3.4% 3.8% 5.0% Good 29.9% 34.6% 27.6% 25.0% 28.1% Neutral 29.9% 23.1% 28.4% 38.8% 31.3% Below average 20.9% 23.1% 25.0% 18.8% 22.2% Poor 11.9% 11.5% 15.5% 13.8% 13.4% Q1b-8. Travel by bus Excellent 7.1% 26.9% 18.6% 14.3% 16.6% Good 46.4% 42.3% 33.9% 42.9% 40.1% Neutral 42.9% 23.1% 23.7% 28.6% 28.0% Below average 0.0% 7.7% 11.9% 9.5% 8.3% Poor 3.6% 0.0% 11.9% 4.8% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 171463 Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than car? (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q2. Can you reach a park or recreation facility from your home within 10 minutes by means other than a car Yes 97.3% 96.4% 97.2% 90.9% 95.2% No 2.7% 3.6% 2.8% 9.1% 4.8% Q3. Over the past five years, how often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility? (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q3. How often have you typically visited a park or recreation facility over past five years Never 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 3.3% 1.5% Once or twice a year 2.7% 7.3% 8.5% 15.8% 9.6% Monthly 14.9% 18.2% 28.2% 16.7% 21.2% Weekly 54.1% 40.0% 42.3% 38.3% 42.8% Daily 28.4% 34.5% 19.7% 25.8% 24.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 172464 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 4.1% 5.4% 8.4% 2.5% 5.2% I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 2.7% 1.8% 3.5% 4.9% 3.5% I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 13.5% 26.8% 24.5% 8.2% 18.0% Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 1.4% 5.4% 4.9% 2.5% 3.5% Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 9.5% 8.9% 7.7% 9.0% 8.7% Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 2.7% 0.0% 4.9% 2.5% 3.2% Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 8.1% 12.5% 15.4% 8.2% 11.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 173465 Q4. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q4. Which following are the biggest barriers to anyone in your household visiting parks, trails, or facilities (cont.) Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 9.5% 8.9% 7.0% 3.3% 6.5% Poor customer service by staff 4.1% 3.6% 2.1% 1.6% 2.5% Lack of universal accessibility 2.7% 8.9% 4.9% 2.5% 4.2% Something else 13.5% 23.2% 23.8% 31.1% 23.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 174466 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q5. Sum of top 2 choices I am not aware of City parks, trails, & facilities 5.4% 3.6% 6.3% 1.6% 4.2% I do not have any interest in visiting parks, trails, or facilities 1.4% 7.1% 1.4% 3.3% 2.7% I do not have the time to visit parks, trails, or facilities 10.8% 25.0% 22.4% 4.9% 15.5% Parks, trails, & facilities are not conveniently located 4.1% 5.4% 3.5% 3.3% 3.7% Parks, trails, & facilities are not well maintained 8.1% 8.9% 7.7% 7.4% 8.2% Parks, trails, & facilities do not feel safe 4.1% 0.0% 5.6% 3.3% 4.0% Parks, trails, & facilities do not have the amenities I want 8.1% 7.1% 17.5% 7.4% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 175467 Q5. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 4 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q5. Sum of top 2 choices (cont.) Operating hours of parks, trails, & facilities are not convenient 13.5% 8.9% 4.2% 1.6% 5.7% Poor customer service by staff 5.4% 1.8% 1.4% 1.6% 2.2% Lack of universal accessibility 1.4% 5.4% 2.1% 2.5% 2.5% Something else 14.9% 17.9% 17.5% 24.6% 19.0% None chosen 47.3% 41.1% 42.0% 59.0% 47.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 176468 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-1. Basketball courts Yes 32.4% 30.4% 21.0% 13.1% 21.7% No 67.6% 69.6% 79.0% 86.9% 78.3% Q6-2. Community gardens Yes 32.4% 39.3% 51.0% 29.5% 38.9% No 67.6% 60.7% 49.0% 70.5% 61.1% Q6-3. Disc golf Yes 20.3% 19.6% 37.1% 9.0% 22.7% No 79.7% 80.4% 62.9% 91.0% 77.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 177469 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-4. Dog parks Yes 40.5% 41.1% 55.2% 41.8% 46.6% No 59.5% 58.9% 44.8% 58.2% 53.4% Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball Yes 21.6% 19.6% 15.4% 15.6% 17.0% No 78.4% 80.4% 84.6% 84.4% 83.0% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey Yes 35.1% 30.4% 23.1% 13.9% 24.2% No 64.9% 69.6% 76.9% 86.1% 75.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 178470 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) Yes 47.3% 42.9% 30.1% 16.4% 30.9% No 52.7% 57.1% 69.9% 83.6% 69.1% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) Yes 60.8% 57.1% 39.2% 27.0% 42.4% No 39.2% 42.9% 60.8% 73.0% 57.6% Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) Yes 21.6% 37.5% 25.2% 8.2% 20.7% No 78.4% 62.5% 74.8% 91.8% 79.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 179471 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-10. Nature centers Yes 56.8% 46.4% 48.3% 54.1% 51.4% No 43.2% 53.6% 51.7% 45.9% 48.6% Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks Yes 39.2% 25.0% 42.7% 25.4% 34.4% No 60.8% 75.0% 57.3% 74.6% 65.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities Yes 58.1% 62.5% 56.6% 54.1% 56.9% No 41.9% 37.5% 43.4% 45.9% 43.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 180472 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas Yes 74.3% 57.1% 54.5% 63.9% 62.1% No 25.7% 42.9% 45.5% 36.1% 37.9% Q6-14. Pickleball courts Yes 13.5% 19.6% 18.2% 20.5% 18.5% No 86.5% 80.4% 81.8% 79.5% 81.5% Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities Yes 66.2% 46.4% 30.8% 39.3% 42.1% No 33.8% 53.6% 69.2% 60.7% 57.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 181473 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas Yes 78.4% 35.7% 24.5% 36.9% 40.1% No 21.6% 64.3% 75.5% 63.1% 59.9% Q6-17. Pools, indoor Yes 68.9% 64.3% 34.3% 37.7% 46.4% No 31.1% 35.7% 65.7% 62.3% 53.6% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor Yes 77.0% 66.1% 31.5% 33.6% 45.9% No 23.0% 33.9% 68.5% 66.4% 54.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 182474 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-19. Recreation or community centers Yes 39.2% 35.7% 32.9% 44.3% 38.2% No 60.8% 64.3% 67.1% 55.7% 61.8% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court Yes 12.2% 21.4% 24.5% 9.0% 17.0% No 87.8% 78.6% 75.5% 91.0% 83.0% Q6-21. Skate park Yes 14.9% 26.8% 16.8% 7.4% 15.2% No 85.1% 73.2% 83.2% 92.6% 84.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 183475 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) Yes 35.1% 35.7% 18.2% 4.9% 20.2% No 64.9% 64.3% 81.8% 95.1% 79.8% Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad Yes 63.5% 42.9% 12.6% 17.2% 27.7% No 36.5% 57.1% 87.4% 82.8% 72.3% Q6-24. Tennis courts Yes 21.6% 37.5% 25.2% 21.3% 25.7% No 78.4% 62.5% 74.8% 78.7% 74.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 184476 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) Yes 81.1% 82.1% 82.5% 82.8% 82.0% No 18.9% 17.9% 17.5% 17.2% 18.0% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) Yes 73.0% 75.0% 72.7% 73.8% 73.3% No 27.0% 25.0% 27.3% 26.2% 26.7% Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) Yes 68.9% 60.7% 63.6% 46.7% 59.4% No 31.1% 39.3% 36.4% 53.3% 40.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 185477 Q6. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation facilities/amenities listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-28. Other Yes 2.7% 1.8% 4.2% 4.1% 3.5% No 97.3% 98.2% 95.8% 95.9% 96.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 186478 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-1. Basketball courts 100% met 27.3% 17.6% 21.4% 7.1% 19.8% 75% met 22.7% 17.6% 28.6% 28.6% 24.7% 50% met 27.3% 23.5% 14.3% 35.7% 23.5% 25% met 18.2% 23.5% 25.0% 28.6% 23.5% 0% met 4.5% 17.6% 10.7% 0.0% 8.6% Q6-2. Community gardens 100% met 14.3% 4.8% 2.9% 21.2% 9.0% 75% met 33.3% 38.1% 14.7% 15.2% 20.8% 50% met 23.8% 19.0% 29.4% 33.3% 28.5% 25% met 14.3% 19.0% 20.6% 18.2% 18.8% 0% met 14.3% 19.0% 32.4% 12.1% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 187479 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-3. Disc golf 100% met 35.7% 27.3% 9.6% 9.1% 15.7% 75% met 21.4% 9.1% 13.5% 27.3% 16.9% 50% met 7.1% 9.1% 21.2% 18.2% 16.9% 25% met 28.6% 45.5% 48.1% 27.3% 41.6% 0% met 7.1% 9.1% 7.7% 18.2% 9.0% Q6-4. Dog parks 100% met 50.0% 34.8% 33.3% 42.9% 37.9% 75% met 38.5% 47.8% 40.0% 22.4% 36.7% 50% met 7.7% 8.7% 18.7% 28.6% 18.1% 25% met 3.8% 8.7% 6.7% 6.1% 6.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 188480 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-5. Fields, baseball/softball 100% met 71.4% 10.0% 38.1% 33.3% 39.7% 75% met 14.3% 50.0% 19.0% 27.8% 25.4% 50% met 14.3% 10.0% 28.6% 27.8% 22.2% 25% met 0.0% 20.0% 4.8% 11.1% 7.9% 0% met 0.0% 10.0% 9.5% 0.0% 4.8% Q6-6. Fields, soccer/football/lacrosse/field hockey 100% met 50.0% 25.0% 35.7% 28.6% 34.9% 75% met 41.7% 25.0% 32.1% 42.9% 38.4% 50% met 8.3% 31.3% 21.4% 28.6% 19.8% 25% met 0.0% 18.8% 7.1% 0.0% 5.8% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0% 1.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 189481 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-7. Ice rink (indoor) 100% met 36.7% 30.4% 26.8% 16.7% 28.1% 75% met 26.7% 21.7% 19.5% 44.4% 26.3% 50% met 6.7% 21.7% 17.1% 27.8% 17.5% 25% met 20.0% 21.7% 22.0% 5.6% 18.4% 0% met 10.0% 4.3% 14.6% 5.6% 9.6% Q6-8. Ice rink (outdoor) 100% met 50.0% 27.6% 28.3% 24.1% 33.1% 75% met 26.2% 24.1% 28.3% 48.3% 31.2% 50% met 9.5% 31.0% 22.6% 17.2% 19.1% 25% met 9.5% 13.8% 11.3% 10.3% 10.8% 0% met 4.8% 3.4% 9.4% 0.0% 5.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 190482 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-9. Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 100% met 50.0% 10.5% 20.0% 0.0% 21.3% 75% met 14.3% 36.8% 11.4% 14.3% 18.7% 50% met 14.3% 26.3% 11.4% 42.9% 18.7% 25% met 7.1% 5.3% 28.6% 0.0% 16.0% 0% met 14.3% 21.1% 28.6% 42.9% 25.3% Q6-10. Nature centers 100% met 18.9% 8.3% 10.9% 17.2% 14.1% 75% met 21.6% 12.5% 26.6% 27.6% 24.9% 50% met 24.3% 37.5% 25.0% 24.1% 25.9% 25% met 21.6% 29.2% 10.9% 17.2% 17.3% 0% met 13.5% 12.5% 26.6% 13.8% 17.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 191483 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-11. Off-leash hours in parks 100% met 30.8% 35.7% 15.5% 13.8% 20.2% 75% met 15.4% 21.4% 22.4% 34.5% 24.0% 50% met 15.4% 21.4% 24.1% 37.9% 25.6% 25% met 26.9% 0.0% 24.1% 10.3% 18.6% 0% met 11.5% 21.4% 13.8% 3.4% 11.6% Q6-12. On-road bike lanes or facilities 100% met 15.0% 17.6% 12.8% 8.1% 12.5% 75% met 25.0% 23.5% 17.9% 24.2% 22.2% 50% met 40.0% 20.6% 33.3% 32.3% 32.4% 25% met 12.5% 35.3% 26.9% 30.6% 26.4% 0% met 7.5% 2.9% 9.0% 4.8% 6.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 192484 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-13. Pavilions & picnic areas 100% met 36.7% 25.8% 23.9% 30.9% 28.6% 75% met 40.8% 38.7% 33.8% 35.3% 37.5% 50% met 20.4% 25.8% 19.7% 26.5% 22.3% 25% met 2.0% 6.5% 18.3% 5.9% 9.4% 0% met 0.0% 3.2% 4.2% 1.5% 2.2% Q6-14. Pickleball courts 100% met 10.0% 0.0% 4.2% 4.0% 4.3% 75% met 10.0% 0.0% 8.3% 12.0% 8.7% 50% met 20.0% 11.1% 29.2% 32.0% 26.1% 25% met 30.0% 44.4% 29.2% 36.0% 33.3% 0% met 30.0% 44.4% 29.2% 16.0% 27.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 193485 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-15. Play areas for all ages & abilities 100% met 42.2% 26.1% 17.9% 29.3% 29.5% 75% met 31.1% 30.4% 23.1% 39.0% 30.9% 50% met 17.8% 26.1% 33.3% 24.4% 24.8% 25% met 8.9% 17.4% 15.4% 4.9% 10.7% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 10.3% 2.4% 4.0% Q6-16. Playgrounds & play areas 100% met 48.1% 47.4% 34.4% 25.0% 38.5% 75% met 31.5% 31.6% 25.0% 41.7% 33.6% 50% met 13.0% 15.8% 28.1% 27.8% 20.3% 25% met 5.6% 5.3% 9.4% 5.6% 6.3% 0% met 1.9% 0.0% 3.1% 0.0% 1.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 194486 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-17. Pools, indoor 100% met 6.1% 2.9% 6.4% 13.6% 7.3% 75% met 10.2% 20.0% 12.8% 13.6% 14.0% 50% met 26.5% 25.7% 14.9% 18.2% 20.8% 25% met 40.8% 37.1% 34.0% 47.7% 40.4% 0% met 16.3% 14.3% 31.9% 6.8% 17.4% Q6-18. Pools, outdoor 100% met 9.1% 5.4% 2.3% 8.3% 6.3% 75% met 9.1% 13.5% 13.6% 13.9% 12.6% 50% met 32.7% 18.9% 11.4% 19.4% 21.1% 25% met 38.2% 48.6% 38.6% 47.2% 42.9% 0% met 10.9% 13.5% 34.1% 11.1% 17.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 195487 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-19. Recreation or community centers 100% met 26.9% 15.8% 13.6% 18.8% 17.9% 75% met 23.1% 21.1% 22.7% 29.2% 25.7% 50% met 23.1% 31.6% 31.8% 35.4% 30.7% 25% met 19.2% 21.1% 13.6% 12.5% 15.7% 0% met 7.7% 10.5% 18.2% 4.2% 10.0% Q6-20. Sand volleyball court 100% met 11.1% 9.1% 18.8% 18.2% 15.6% 75% met 44.4% 18.2% 21.9% 36.4% 26.6% 50% met 22.2% 9.1% 25.0% 27.3% 21.9% 25% met 22.2% 45.5% 15.6% 9.1% 20.3% 0% met 0.0% 18.2% 18.8% 9.1% 15.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 196488 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-21. Skate park 100% met 0.0% 7.1% 4.5% 12.5% 5.5% 75% met 33.3% 50.0% 31.8% 25.0% 36.4% 50% met 55.6% 14.3% 27.3% 37.5% 30.9% 25% met 0.0% 21.4% 27.3% 12.5% 18.2% 0% met 11.1% 7.1% 9.1% 12.5% 9.1% Q6-22. Special use biking facilities (e.g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 100% met 29.2% 16.7% 19.2% 20.0% 22.7% 75% met 29.2% 22.2% 7.7% 40.0% 20.0% 50% met 16.7% 33.3% 30.8% 40.0% 28.0% 25% met 25.0% 16.7% 30.8% 0.0% 22.7% 0% met 0.0% 11.1% 11.5% 0.0% 6.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 197489 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-23. Sprayground/splash pad 100% met 2.3% 0.0% 5.9% 0.0% 1.9% 75% met 13.6% 4.3% 0.0% 0.0% 6.7% 50% met 11.4% 26.1% 5.9% 21.1% 15.4% 25% met 11.4% 0.0% 23.5% 15.8% 11.5% 0% met 61.4% 69.6% 64.7% 63.2% 64.4% Q6-24. Tennis courts 100% met 14.3% 14.3% 5.9% 18.2% 11.7% 75% met 42.9% 23.8% 38.2% 22.7% 31.9% 50% met 14.3% 38.1% 26.5% 22.7% 27.7% 25% met 14.3% 23.8% 23.5% 27.3% 22.3% 0% met 14.3% 0.0% 5.9% 9.1% 6.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 198490 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-25. Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 100% met 42.1% 46.7% 36.0% 45.1% 41.4% 75% met 42.1% 31.1% 39.6% 28.6% 35.8% 50% met 12.3% 13.3% 17.1% 22.0% 16.9% 25% met 0.0% 8.9% 5.4% 4.4% 4.6% 0% met 3.5% 0.0% 1.8% 0.0% 1.3% Q6-26. Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 100% met 42.0% 29.3% 29.6% 32.5% 32.7% 75% met 36.0% 34.1% 34.7% 32.5% 34.6% 50% met 14.0% 12.2% 22.4% 23.8% 19.5% 25% met 4.0% 19.5% 9.2% 8.8% 9.6% 0% met 4.0% 4.9% 4.1% 2.5% 3.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 199491 Q6. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each facility/amenity of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=395 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q6-27. Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 100% met 29.8% 15.6% 19.8% 26.0% 22.4% 75% met 36.2% 34.4% 38.4% 34.0% 37.0% 50% met 19.1% 21.9% 23.3% 26.0% 22.8% 25% met 14.9% 25.0% 14.0% 8.0% 14.2% 0% met 0.0% 3.1% 4.7% 6.0% 3.7% Q6-28. Other 25% met 50.0% 0.0% 20.0% 50.0% 30.0% 0% met 50.0% 100.0% 80.0% 50.0% 70.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 200492 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q7. Sum of top 4choices Basketball courts 2.7% 16.1% 2.1% 2.5% 4.2% Community gardens 6.8% 12.5% 18.9% 15.6% 14.5% Disc golf 2.7% 5.4% 18.9% 2.5% 8.7% Dog parks 12.2% 21.4% 30.1% 20.5% 22.9% Fields, baseball/softball 0.0% 1.8% 2.1% 4.9% 2.5% Fields, soccer/football/ lacrosse/field hockey 9.5% 10.7% 4.2% 2.5% 5.5% Ice rink (indoor) 6.8% 10.7% 7.0% 0.8% 5.5% Ice rink (outdoor) 13.5% 12.5% 9.1% 4.1% 9.2% Lawn games (e.g., cornhole, ping pong) 1.4% 3.6% 5.6% 0.8% 3.0% Nature centers 8.1% 12.5% 15.4% 13.1% 13.0% Off-leash hours in parks 9.5% 10.7% 17.5% 7.4% 12.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 201493 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q7. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) On-road bike lanes or facilities 16.2% 16.1% 23.8% 27.0% 21.9% Pavilions & picnic areas 6.8% 7.1% 8.4% 13.9% 10.0% Pickleball courts 1.4% 5.4% 7.0% 6.6% 5.7% Play areas for all ages & abilities 21.6% 8.9% 4.9% 11.5% 10.7% Playgrounds & play areas 33.8% 7.1% 2.1% 6.6% 10.0% Pools, indoor 32.4% 33.9% 17.5% 17.2% 22.2% Pools, outdoor 41.9% 39.3% 13.3% 9.0% 20.9% Recreation or community centers 6.8% 0.0% 6.3% 10.7% 6.7% Sand volleyball court 0.0% 3.6% 3.5% 0.8% 2.2% Skate park 2.7% 8.9% 4.9% 0.0% 3.5% Special use biking facilities (e. g., cyclo-cross, BMX, pump tracks) 8.1% 8.9% 7.0% 1.6% 5.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 202494 Q7. Which FOUR facilities/amenities from the list in Question 6 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q7. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Sprayground/splash pad 28.4% 7.1% 2.1% 4.9% 8.5% Tennis courts 5.4% 8.9% 4.9% 5.7% 5.7% Trails, gravel or natural surface (e.g., Gallagator Trail) 62.2% 50.0% 62.9% 65.6% 61.6% Trails, paved (e.g., Path to the M) 23.0% 25.0% 44.8% 47.5% 38.7% Water access for recreation (e.g., fishing access, paddleboarding, tubing) 10.8% 19.6% 24.5% 18.0% 19.5% Other 2.7% 3.6% 4.9% 1.6% 3.2% None chosen 2.7% 0.0% 2.1% 13.1% 5.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 203495 Q8. Did you or anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events offered by the City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department before March 2020? N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q8. Did anyone in your household participate in any preschool, youth, adult, or active aging recreation programs or events Yes 48.6% 37.5% 8.4% 15.6% 22.4% No 51.4% 62.5% 91.6% 84.4% 77.6% Q8a. How would you rate the overall quality of the programs and events that you and members of your household participated in before March 2020? N=90 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q8a. How would you rate overall quality of programs & events your household participated in before March 2020 Excellent 36.1% 42.9% 25.0% 26.3% 34.4% Good 52.8% 28.6% 58.3% 57.9% 47.8% Fair 5.6% 28.6% 16.7% 15.8% 15.6% Poor 5.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 204496 Q9. Would you or members of your household like the Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future? (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q9. Would you like Bozeman Parks & Recreation Department to offer virtual or hybrid programming in the future Yes 17.4% 15.7% 20.8% 24.3% 20.7% No 82.6% 84.3% 79.2% 75.7% 79.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 205497 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 33.8% 33.9% 65.0% 32.8% 44.9% I do not have the time to participate in programming 18.9% 30.4% 32.9% 13.9% 24.2% Program fees are not affordable 2.7% 1.8% 4.2% 2.5% 3.0% Program instructors are not good 2.7% 5.4% 1.4% 0.8% 2.0% Times when programs are offered are not convenient 17.6% 17.9% 7.7% 9.8% 11.7% Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 6.8% 17.9% 13.3% 23.0% 15.5% Poor customer service in past experience 2.7% 5.4% 3.5% 1.6% 3.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 206498 Q10. Please indicate which of the following are the biggest barriers to you or your household's participation in City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department programming (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q10. Which following are the biggest barriers to your household's participation in City Parks & Recreation Department programming (cont.) Lack of universal accessibility 0.0% 1.8% 2.8% 0.8% 1.5% Language barriers (ESOL) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.2% Program location or venue is not convenient 5.4% 7.1% 7.7% 4.1% 6.0% Something else 25.7% 10.7% 2.1% 8.2% 9.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 207499 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q11. Sum of top 2 choices I am not aware of programs offered by City Parks & Recreation 31.1% 30.4% 59.4% 27.9% 40.1% I do not have the time to participate in programming 20.3% 30.4% 30.8% 13.1% 23.4% Program fees are not affordable 4.1% 1.8% 2.8% 0.0% 2.0% Program instructors are not good 1.4% 5.4% 0.7% 0.8% 1.5% Times when programs are offered are not convenient 18.9% 10.7% 7.0% 8.2% 10.2% Types of programming offered is not interesting, relevant, or desired 6.8% 16.1% 10.5% 18.0% 13.0% Poor customer service in past experience 2.7% 0.0% 1.4% 1.6% 1.5% Lack of universal accessibility 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.8% 0.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 208500 Q11. Which TWO of the barriers from the list in Question 10 are the biggest barriers to your household? (top 2) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q11. Sum of top 2 choices (cont.) Program location or venue is not convenient 4.1% 7.1% 4.2% 3.3% 4.2% Something else 18.9% 8.9% 2.1% 9.8% 8.5% None chosen 27.0% 25.0% 21.0% 37.7% 27.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 209501 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities Threat of vehicle collisions or vehicle operator behavior (e.g. distracted driving, speeding) 36.5% 44.6% 50.3% 52.5% 47.1% Existing bike lanes or paths are in poor condition 21.6% 23.2% 27.3% 23.0% 23.9% I don't feel safe when walking or biking (crime/personal safety) 8.1% 5.4% 7.0% 9.8% 8.0% Transporting small children, elderly, or persons with disabilities 29.7% 14.3% 2.1% 2.5% 9.0% I don't own a bicycle 5.4% 5.4% 10.5% 5.7% 7.5% I have to carry heavy things in my vehicle 12.2% 12.5% 14.7% 4.1% 10.5% Destinations are too far away 9.5% 14.3% 14.0% 9.0% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 210502 Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks and facilities? (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q12. What are the barriers for your household to walking or biking for recreation or to access City parks & facilities (cont.) I have limited mobility 1.4% 1.8% 3.5% 10.7% 5.2% Weather is often inclement 17.6% 25.0% 18.2% 24.6% 21.2% Not enough lighting on my routes 10.8% 12.5% 19.6% 12.3% 14.5% Route is unclear due to lack of wayfinding 2.7% 5.4% 8.4% 7.4% 6.5% I don't have enough time for walking or biking as a commuting option 9.5% 16.1% 14.7% 4.9% 10.7% Something else 1.4% 3.6% 9.1% 10.7% 7.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 211503 Q13. Of the following ways in which The City of Bozeman Parks and Recreation Department could allocate funding, which ONE should be the top priority? (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q13. Which following way could City Parks & Recreation Department allocate funding in Develop land that has already been purchased with new parks, trails & facilities 22.9% 23.5% 30.2% 23.1% 25.7% Purchase new land for later park or facility development 15.7% 13.7% 8.6% 9.4% 11.0% Purchase new land for natural resource conservation 17.1% 27.5% 28.8% 25.6% 25.4% Renovate existing facilities 27.1% 25.5% 17.3% 11.1% 18.1% Increase routine maintenance of parks, trails, & facilities 17.1% 9.8% 15.1% 30.8% 19.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 212504 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming Yes 85.1% 73.2% 35.7% 39.3% 51.1% No 14.9% 26.8% 64.3% 60.7% 48.9% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) Yes 48.6% 51.8% 55.2% 55.7% 53.6% No 51.4% 48.2% 44.8% 44.3% 46.4% Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) Yes 36.5% 8.9% 7.0% 4.1% 11.7% No 63.5% 91.1% 93.0% 95.9% 88.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 213505 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-4. Outdoor education Yes 51.4% 35.7% 35.0% 26.2% 35.2% No 48.6% 64.3% 65.0% 73.8% 64.8% Q14-5. Fitness Yes 44.6% 39.3% 47.6% 58.2% 49.4% No 55.4% 60.7% 52.4% 41.8% 50.6% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) Yes 37.8% 33.9% 44.1% 45.1% 41.9% No 62.2% 66.1% 55.9% 54.9% 58.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 214506 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-7. Outdoor adventure Yes 63.5% 48.2% 49.7% 34.4% 47.1% No 36.5% 51.8% 50.3% 65.6% 52.9% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 Yes 35.1% 1.8% 4.2% 5.7% 10.0% No 64.9% 98.2% 95.8% 94.3% 90.0% Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ Yes 14.9% 12.5% 11.2% 60.7% 27.4% No 85.1% 87.5% 88.8% 39.3% 72.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 215507 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-10. Special events Yes 31.1% 33.9% 37.8% 35.2% 35.4% No 68.9% 66.1% 62.2% 64.8% 64.6% Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult Yes 21.6% 32.1% 39.9% 16.4% 27.9% No 78.4% 67.9% 60.1% 83.6% 72.1% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth Yes 43.2% 26.8% 7.0% 9.0% 17.0% No 56.8% 73.2% 93.0% 91.0% 83.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 216508 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children Yes 60.8% 30.4% 6.3% 9.8% 20.7% No 39.2% 69.6% 93.7% 90.2% 79.3% Q14-14. Teen programs Yes 18.9% 41.1% 5.6% 4.9% 12.7% No 81.1% 58.9% 94.4% 95.1% 87.3% Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion Yes 14.9% 19.6% 23.8% 20.5% 20.4% No 85.1% 80.4% 76.2% 79.5% 79.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 217509 Q14. Please indicate if you or any member of your household has a need or desire to use each of the parks and recreation programs listed below. N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-16. Winter recreation Yes 62.2% 53.6% 58.0% 54.1% 57.1% No 37.8% 46.4% 42.0% 45.9% 42.9% Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users Yes 21.6% 28.6% 37.8% 45.9% 35.7% No 78.4% 71.4% 62.2% 54.1% 64.3% Q14-18. Other Yes 0.0% 3.6% 3.5% 6.6% 3.7% No 100.0% 96.4% 96.5% 93.4% 96.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 218510 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-1. Aquatics or swimming 100% met 3.3% 0.0% 4.1% 13.3% 5.1% 75% met 16.4% 20.0% 10.2% 11.1% 14.7% 50% met 26.2% 35.0% 28.6% 24.4% 27.9% 25% met 45.9% 35.0% 32.7% 37.8% 38.6% 0% met 8.2% 10.0% 24.5% 13.3% 13.7% Q14-2. Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 100% met 3.1% 0.0% 7.0% 8.5% 5.8% 75% met 40.6% 20.0% 28.2% 28.8% 29.5% 50% met 21.9% 52.0% 29.6% 44.1% 35.8% 25% met 18.8% 20.0% 23.9% 18.6% 20.5% 0% met 15.6% 8.0% 11.3% 0.0% 8.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 219511 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-3. Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 100% met 4.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.4% 75% met 8.7% 0.0% 22.2% 0.0% 9.8% 50% met 21.7% 0.0% 11.1% 25.0% 17.1% 25% met 30.4% 20.0% 55.6% 50.0% 36.6% 0% met 34.8% 80.0% 11.1% 25.0% 34.1% Q14-4. Outdoor education 100% met 3.0% 5.6% 2.4% 3.7% 3.3% 75% met 30.3% 22.2% 21.4% 18.5% 23.1% 50% met 30.3% 38.9% 23.8% 37.0% 31.4% 25% met 21.2% 22.2% 33.3% 29.6% 27.3% 0% met 15.2% 11.1% 19.0% 11.1% 14.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 220512 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-5. Fitness 100% met 10.7% 20.0% 11.9% 17.7% 14.5% 75% met 35.7% 25.0% 27.1% 25.8% 27.2% 50% met 25.0% 30.0% 27.1% 37.1% 31.8% 25% met 14.3% 20.0% 20.3% 17.7% 17.9% 0% met 14.3% 5.0% 13.6% 1.6% 8.7% Q14-6. History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 100% met 30.4% 6.3% 3.6% 11.4% 10.6% 75% met 17.4% 18.8% 16.4% 34.1% 22.7% 50% met 26.1% 43.8% 27.3% 36.4% 31.9% 25% met 21.7% 18.8% 30.9% 13.6% 22.0% 0% met 4.3% 12.5% 21.8% 4.5% 12.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 221513 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-7. Outdoor adventure 100% met 12.5% 16.7% 13.6% 19.4% 14.9% 75% met 32.5% 33.3% 36.4% 38.9% 35.7% 50% met 25.0% 33.3% 28.8% 30.6% 29.2% 25% met 20.0% 8.3% 13.6% 5.6% 12.5% 0% met 10.0% 8.3% 7.6% 5.6% 7.7% Q14-8. Preschool ages 2-5 100% met 20.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 14.3% 75% met 37.5% 0.0% 0.0% 16.7% 28.6% 50% met 16.7% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 14.3% 25% met 12.5% 0.0% 50.0% 33.3% 20.0% 0% met 12.5% 100.0% 25.0% 50.0% 22.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 222514 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-9. Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 100% met 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.3% 9.9% 75% met 40.0% 16.7% 0.0% 16.1% 16.5% 50% met 30.0% 33.3% 27.3% 37.1% 34.1% 25% met 10.0% 16.7% 36.4% 25.8% 24.2% 0% met 0.0% 33.3% 36.4% 9.7% 15.4% Q14-10. Special events 100% met 10.0% 12.5% 11.1% 12.1% 11.1% 75% met 55.0% 31.3% 31.1% 36.4% 35.9% 50% met 20.0% 43.8% 26.7% 39.4% 32.5% 25% met 10.0% 0.0% 15.6% 12.1% 12.0% 0% met 5.0% 12.5% 15.6% 0.0% 8.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 223515 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-11. Sports leagues, adult 100% met 18.8% 16.7% 14.3% 5.9% 13.9% 75% met 37.5% 5.6% 22.4% 23.5% 21.8% 50% met 18.8% 38.9% 24.5% 35.3% 27.7% 25% met 12.5% 33.3% 34.7% 17.6% 28.7% 0% met 12.5% 5.6% 4.1% 17.6% 7.9% Q14-12. Sports leagues, youth 100% met 17.2% 20.0% 11.1% 25.0% 18.0% 75% met 44.8% 13.3% 55.6% 50.0% 39.3% 50% met 20.7% 46.7% 0.0% 12.5% 23.0% 25% met 10.3% 6.7% 22.2% 12.5% 11.5% 0% met 6.9% 13.3% 11.1% 0.0% 8.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 224516 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-13. Camps & other activities for children 100% met 7.5% 21.4% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 75% met 50.0% 7.1% 28.6% 36.4% 37.5% 50% met 25.0% 28.6% 14.3% 63.6% 30.6% 25% met 12.5% 28.6% 42.9% 0.0% 16.7% 0% met 5.0% 14.3% 14.3% 0.0% 6.9% Q14-14. Teen programs 100% met 16.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.7% 75% met 25.0% 10.5% 33.3% 16.7% 18.6% 50% met 41.7% 31.6% 0.0% 33.3% 30.2% 25% met 16.7% 21.1% 50.0% 0.0% 20.9% 0% met 0.0% 36.8% 16.7% 50.0% 25.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 225517 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-15. Therapeutic recreation/recreation inclusion 100% met 22.2% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 6.1% 75% met 0.0% 22.2% 3.7% 15.0% 9.1% 50% met 44.4% 11.1% 18.5% 40.0% 27.3% 25% met 22.2% 22.2% 37.0% 30.0% 31.8% 0% met 11.1% 44.4% 40.7% 5.0% 25.8% Q14-16. Winter recreation 100% met 19.0% 14.3% 11.6% 21.1% 16.0% 75% met 26.2% 39.3% 37.7% 21.1% 30.5% 50% met 23.8% 32.1% 29.0% 36.8% 30.5% 25% met 23.8% 14.3% 8.7% 14.0% 15.0% 0% met 7.1% 0.0% 13.0% 7.0% 8.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 226518 Q14. If "Yes," please rate how well your needs/desires for each program of this type are being met in the City of Bozeman using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means they are "100% Met" and 1 means "0% Met." N=374 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q14-17. Etiquette programs for park & trail users 100% met 6.7% 0.0% 4.3% 2.1% 3.2% 75% met 33.3% 14.3% 15.2% 14.6% 17.7% 50% met 6.7% 28.6% 21.7% 27.1% 22.6% 25% met 33.3% 35.7% 28.3% 41.7% 34.7% 0% met 20.0% 21.4% 30.4% 14.6% 21.8% Q14-18. Other 100% met 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.3% 75% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 14.3% 8.3% 50% met 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 42.9% 25.0% 0% met 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 42.9% 58.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 227519 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q15. Sum of top 4 choices Aquatics or swimming 64.9% 58.9% 24.5% 22.1% 36.2% Arts & culture (e.g., art classes, musical performances) 21.6% 28.6% 42.0% 31.1% 32.7% Childcare (e.g., after school care, date night care) 14.9% 8.9% 2.1% 3.3% 5.7% Outdoor education 20.3% 8.9% 20.3% 11.5% 16.0% Fitness 12.2% 17.9% 26.6% 35.2% 25.7% History (e.g., historic tours, interpretation) 12.2% 12.5% 22.4% 18.9% 18.2% Outdoor adventure 29.7% 16.1% 33.6% 15.6% 24.7% Preschool ages 2-5 18.9% 0.0% 1.4% 4.1% 5.2% Seniors/active aging ages 55+ 5.4% 8.9% 5.6% 41.8% 17.2% Special events 9.5% 14.3% 17.5% 11.5% 14.2% Sports leagues, adult 5.4% 14.3% 23.1% 5.7% 13.2% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 228520 Q15. Which FOUR programs from the list in Question 14 are MOST IMPORTANT to your household? (top 4) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q15. Sum of top 4 choices (cont.) Sports leagues, youth 21.6% 16.1% 0.7% 0.8% 6.7% Camps & other activities for children 39.2% 17.9% 1.4% 5.7% 12.0% Teen programs 6.8% 21.4% 1.4% 1.6% 5.2% Therapeutic recreation/ recreation inclusion 4.1% 8.9% 10.5% 9.0% 9.0% Winter recreation 36.5% 28.6% 44.8% 28.7% 35.9% Etiquette programs for park & trail users 6.8% 16.1% 22.4% 29.5% 20.4% Other 2.7% 3.6% 4.2% 4.9% 4.0% None chosen 5.4% 7.1% 11.2% 18.9% 12.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 229521 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q16-1. Use an automobile Several times a day 17.6% 33.3% 24.5% 15.4% 21.4% About once a day 25.7% 27.8% 22.4% 34.2% 27.5% About once a week 40.5% 20.4% 27.3% 21.4% 27.5% Seldom 14.9% 18.5% 22.4% 24.8% 20.9% Never 1.4% 0.0% 3.5% 4.3% 2.8% Q16-2. Use trails (natural, gravel, or paved) Several times a day 9.9% 9.1% 10.5% 8.5% 9.5% About once a day 26.8% 36.4% 28.7% 28.2% 28.9% About once a week 42.3% 27.3% 39.2% 40.2% 38.9% Seldom 19.7% 21.8% 18.9% 17.1% 18.9% Never 1.4% 5.5% 2.8% 6.0% 3.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 230522 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q16-3. Use sidewalks Several times a day 31.9% 21.8% 30.7% 27.6% 28.4% About once a day 31.9% 41.8% 35.7% 38.8% 36.6% About once a week 29.2% 14.5% 22.9% 24.1% 24.0% Seldom 5.6% 16.4% 10.7% 6.0% 9.0% Never 1.4% 5.5% 0.0% 3.4% 2.1% Q16-4. Use paved, shared-use pathways (typically next to a street) Several times a day 16.9% 5.5% 10.6% 6.0% 9.5% About once a day 18.3% 18.2% 15.6% 19.8% 17.8% About once a week 29.6% 18.2% 34.0% 32.8% 31.2% Seldom 26.8% 47.3% 31.9% 25.9% 30.9% Never 8.5% 10.9% 7.8% 15.5% 10.6% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 231523 Q16. Frequency of Use for Recreation. For each of the following, please indicate how often you use each of the various systems to reach City of Bozeman parks and facilities using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Several Times a Day," and 1 means "Never." (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q16-5. Bike on the street (e.g., in bike lanes) Several times a day 7.0% 3.6% 5.6% 3.4% 4.9% About once a day 8.5% 1.8% 11.9% 9.4% 9.2% About once a week 32.4% 32.7% 18.9% 22.2% 24.3% Seldom 39.4% 34.5% 35.7% 30.8% 34.3% Never 12.7% 27.3% 28.0% 34.2% 27.4% Q16-6. Travel by bus Several times a day 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% 0.3% About once a day 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% 0.3% About once a week 2.9% 3.7% 1.4% 0.9% 1.8% Seldom 22.9% 18.5% 23.6% 23.1% 22.5% Never 74.3% 77.8% 73.6% 76.1% 75.1% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 232524 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q17-1. Use trails (natural or gravel) Very comfortable 76.7% 61.8% 64.7% 65.1% 66.8% Comfortable 20.5% 38.2% 30.2% 24.8% 27.6% Neutral 2.7% 0.0% 2.9% 6.4% 3.7% Uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 2.8% 1.1% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.9% 0.8% Q17-2. Use paved trails Very comfortable 72.2% 67.9% 61.8% 67.0% 66.0% Comfortable 26.4% 28.3% 32.4% 25.5% 28.6% Neutral 1.4% 3.8% 4.4% 4.7% 4.0% Uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 1.9% 0.8% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.9% 0.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 233525 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q17-3. Use sidewalks Very comfortable 57.5% 58.2% 46.5% 44.8% 49.5% Comfortable 32.9% 34.5% 33.1% 33.6% 33.3% Neutral 9.6% 7.3% 14.1% 12.9% 12.1% Uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 4.9% 6.9% 3.8% Very uncomfortable 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 1.7% 1.3% Q17-4. Use paved shared-used pathways Very comfortable 48.6% 45.3% 40.0% 28.7% 39.2% Comfortable 27.8% 34.0% 33.6% 35.6% 33.2% Neutral 18.1% 15.1% 15.2% 20.8% 17.5% Uncomfortable 4.2% 3.8% 8.8% 7.9% 6.8% Very uncomfortable 1.4% 1.9% 2.4% 6.9% 3.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 234526 Q17. Level of Comfort. For each of the following, please rate your level of comfort using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Comfortable" and 1 means "Very Uncomfortable." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q17-5. Bike on the street (ex. In bike lanes) Very comfortable 13.8% 17.6% 10.2% 3.7% 10.3% Comfortable 21.5% 21.6% 16.1% 18.3% 18.5% Neutral 27.7% 23.5% 25.4% 28.0% 26.6% Uncomfortable 23.1% 19.6% 27.1% 24.4% 24.1% Very uncomfortable 13.8% 17.6% 21.2% 25.6% 20.4% Q17-6. Travel by bus Very comfortable 18.5% 19.2% 22.7% 16.7% 19.9% Comfortable 37.0% 30.8% 22.7% 23.3% 26.5% Neutral 25.9% 38.5% 33.3% 33.3% 33.1% Uncomfortable 7.4% 3.8% 10.6% 16.7% 10.6% Very uncomfortable 11.1% 7.7% 10.6% 10.0% 9.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 235527 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-1. Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths Very supportive 49.3% 55.6% 54.3% 54.3% 53.5% Supportive 38.0% 33.3% 33.3% 31.9% 33.7% Neutral 11.3% 3.7% 10.1% 8.6% 9.1% Not supportive 1.4% 5.6% 1.4% 1.7% 2.1% Not at all supportive 0.0% 1.9% 0.7% 3.4% 1.6% Q18-2. Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways Very supportive 33.8% 33.3% 39.9% 33.9% 36.1% Supportive 46.5% 31.5% 26.1% 26.1% 30.4% Neutral 5.6% 20.4% 21.7% 31.3% 21.7% Not supportive 7.0% 7.4% 7.2% 6.1% 6.8% Not at all supportive 7.0% 7.4% 5.1% 2.6% 5.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 236528 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-3. Installing more gravel & natural surface trails Very supportive 47.9% 55.6% 56.1% 48.3% 52.1% Supportive 34.2% 25.9% 24.5% 28.4% 27.5% Neutral 12.3% 11.1% 16.5% 15.5% 15.0% Not supportive 2.7% 5.6% 0.0% 4.3% 2.6% Not at all supportive 2.7% 1.9% 2.9% 3.4% 2.8% Q18-4. Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks Very supportive 37.0% 35.2% 38.8% 30.4% 35.3% Supportive 21.9% 31.5% 23.7% 29.6% 26.2% Neutral 24.7% 11.1% 25.2% 25.2% 23.1% Not supportive 5.5% 7.4% 7.9% 10.4% 8.1% Not at all supportive 11.0% 14.8% 4.3% 4.3% 7.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 237529 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-5. Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets Very supportive 40.3% 50.0% 42.8% 32.8% 40.1% Supportive 30.6% 18.5% 27.5% 31.0% 27.9% Neutral 13.9% 9.3% 14.5% 17.2% 14.6% Not supportive 11.1% 11.1% 10.1% 10.3% 10.7% Not at all supportive 4.2% 11.1% 5.1% 8.6% 6.8% Q18-6. Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes Very supportive 13.4% 28.8% 24.0% 15.5% 20.3% Supportive 40.3% 25.0% 30.2% 25.2% 29.9% Neutral 28.4% 23.1% 31.8% 38.8% 31.8% Not supportive 7.5% 9.6% 10.1% 12.6% 10.1% Not at all supportive 10.4% 13.5% 3.9% 7.8% 7.9% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 238530 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-7. Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking Very supportive 11.4% 16.7% 17.5% 13.0% 14.7% Supportive 27.1% 25.9% 30.7% 27.8% 28.4% Neutral 32.9% 35.2% 32.1% 40.9% 35.5% Not supportive 14.3% 13.0% 11.7% 11.3% 12.4% Not at all supportive 14.3% 9.3% 8.0% 7.0% 8.9% Q18-8. Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes Very supportive 19.2% 24.5% 31.7% 15.5% 23.1% Supportive 32.9% 30.2% 37.4% 31.9% 33.8% Neutral 32.9% 18.9% 18.0% 31.0% 25.5% Not supportive 9.6% 15.1% 6.5% 14.7% 10.6% Not at all supportive 5.5% 11.3% 6.5% 6.9% 7.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 239531 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-9. Providing better winter maintenance Very supportive 28.2% 35.7% 42.9% 34.2% 36.3% Supportive 45.1% 21.4% 32.9% 34.2% 34.3% Neutral 22.5% 25.0% 18.6% 25.6% 22.2% Not supportive 4.2% 12.5% 4.3% 2.6% 4.9% Not at all supportive 0.0% 5.4% 1.4% 3.4% 2.3% Q18-10. Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) Very supportive 5.6% 11.5% 13.3% 5.6% 9.1% Supportive 14.1% 15.4% 8.6% 11.1% 11.3% Neutral 36.6% 40.4% 32.8% 37.0% 36.4% Not supportive 23.9% 15.4% 26.6% 24.1% 23.4% Not at all supportive 19.7% 17.3% 18.8% 22.2% 19.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 240532 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-11. Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e.g., places of work, park facilities) Very supportive 16.7% 7.5% 12.5% 9.1% 11.5% Supportive 13.9% 30.2% 35.3% 19.1% 25.6% Neutral 37.5% 35.8% 27.9% 34.5% 33.1% Not supportive 19.4% 22.6% 14.0% 20.0% 18.1% Not at all supportive 12.5% 3.8% 10.3% 17.3% 11.7% Q18-12. Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets Very supportive 46.6% 40.7% 38.0% 34.5% 39.1% Supportive 27.4% 25.9% 35.8% 31.0% 31.0% Neutral 11.0% 22.2% 15.3% 19.5% 16.5% Not supportive 8.2% 7.4% 5.1% 8.0% 7.1% Not at all supportive 6.8% 3.7% 5.8% 7.1% 6.3% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 241533 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-13. Constructing paved, shared-use pathways next to streets Very supportive 33.8% 33.3% 44.4% 31.0% 36.9% Supportive 39.4% 35.2% 33.3% 31.0% 33.7% Neutral 15.5% 20.4% 17.8% 26.5% 20.4% Not supportive 4.2% 7.4% 0.7% 7.1% 4.5% Not at all supportive 7.0% 3.7% 3.7% 4.4% 4.5% Q18-14. Installing bike fix-it stations Very supportive 10.1% 11.1% 20.3% 4.5% 12.2% Supportive 30.4% 37.0% 25.6% 12.7% 24.3% Neutral 31.9% 24.1% 30.1% 40.9% 32.7% Not supportive 17.4% 20.4% 11.3% 22.7% 17.3% Not at all supportive 10.1% 7.4% 12.8% 19.1% 13.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 242534 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-15. Adding more frequent bus stops Very supportive 7.1% 27.7% 17.1% 12.8% 15.5% Supportive 16.1% 29.8% 29.9% 20.2% 24.6% Neutral 57.1% 27.7% 36.8% 44.7% 41.0% Not supportive 8.9% 6.4% 8.5% 9.6% 8.5% Not at all supportive 10.7% 8.5% 7.7% 12.8% 10.4% Q18-16. Expanding public transit Very supportive 16.7% 28.8% 28.3% 23.4% 24.4% Supportive 25.8% 38.5% 32.3% 30.8% 31.5% Neutral 40.9% 19.2% 24.4% 29.9% 28.4% Not supportive 7.6% 1.9% 8.7% 7.5% 7.0% Not at all supportive 9.1% 11.5% 6.3% 8.4% 8.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 243535 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-17. Enforcing motor vehicle laws Very supportive 42.9% 50.9% 42.0% 60.0% 48.7% Supportive 25.7% 18.2% 20.3% 21.7% 21.7% Neutral 21.4% 27.3% 29.0% 12.2% 22.3% Not supportive 5.7% 1.8% 6.5% 3.5% 4.7% Not at all supportive 4.3% 1.8% 2.2% 2.6% 2.6% Q18-18. Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work Very supportive 11.9% 24.5% 17.9% 8.8% 14.9% Supportive 35.6% 16.3% 24.1% 23.1% 24.4% Neutral 30.5% 30.6% 37.5% 39.6% 36.2% Not supportive 10.2% 10.2% 9.8% 13.2% 10.8% Not at all supportive 11.9% 18.4% 10.7% 15.4% 13.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 244536 Q18. Importance of Investments. For each item listed below, please rate how supportive you are of the City of Bozeman investing in each of the following items using a scale of 5 to 1, where 5 means "Very Supportive" and 1 means "Not at all Supportive." (without "don't know") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q18-19. Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic Very supportive 28.6% 26.9% 28.0% 32.5% 29.0% Supportive 30.0% 25.0% 19.7% 29.8% 25.8% Neutral 21.4% 23.1% 26.5% 19.3% 22.6% Not supportive 11.4% 15.4% 12.1% 9.6% 11.8% Not at all supportive 8.6% 9.6% 13.6% 8.8% 10.8% Q18-20. Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) Very supportive 31.4% 24.5% 36.4% 23.6% 29.6% Supportive 22.9% 30.2% 25.0% 17.3% 22.8% Neutral 12.9% 24.5% 19.7% 36.4% 24.5% Not supportive 11.4% 5.7% 9.1% 8.2% 8.7% Not at all supportive 21.4% 15.1% 9.8% 14.5% 14.4% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 245537 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q19. Sum of top 3 choices Filling in missing sections of sidewalks or paved separated shared-use paths 31.1% 35.7% 35.0% 28.7% 32.7% Constructing more paved trails/shared-use pathways 17.6% 25.0% 22.4% 13.9% 19.5% Installing more gravel & natural surface trails 29.7% 32.1% 35.7% 30.3% 32.4% Installing flashing crossing devices at intersections or between blocks 17.6% 19.6% 11.9% 12.3% 14.0% Constructing underpasses on high volume or high speed streets 24.3% 21.4% 18.9% 24.6% 21.7% Installing wayfinding along bicycle & pedestrian routes 4.1% 0.0% 2.8% 4.1% 3.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 246538 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Installing rest facilities such as shelters or benches along bicycle or pedestrian routes for bicycling or walking 2.7% 1.8% 3.5% 4.9% 3.5% Installing adequate lighting on bicycle & pedestrian routes 9.5% 7.1% 14.0% 6.6% 9.7% Providing better winter maintenance 20.3% 23.2% 25.9% 19.7% 22.4% Providing lockers & showers at City facilities (e.g., community centers, library, & places of work) 0.0% 3.6% 1.4% 2.5% 1.7% Providing covered bike parking at key destinations (e. g., places of work, park facilities) 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.8% 0.7% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 247539 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Constructing bike lanes on new & existing streets 29.7% 19.6% 27.3% 16.4% 22.9% Constructing paved, shared- use pathways next to streets 20.3% 8.9% 15.4% 8.2% 13.2% Installing bike fix-it stations 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.8% 0.7% Adding more frequent bus stops 0.0% 10.7% 5.6% 2.5% 4.2% Expanding public transit 1.4% 8.9% 11.2% 8.2% 8.2% Enforcing motor vehicle laws 23.0% 16.1% 18.2% 25.4% 20.9% Guaranteed Ride Home program for bicyclists & pedestrians that use those modes to access work 0.0% 1.8% 1.4% 0.8% 1.0% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 248540 Q19. Which THREE investments from the list in Question 18 would you be MOST WILLING to fund with your tax dollars? (top 3) (cont.) N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q19. Sum of top 3 choices (cont.) Installing traffic calming devices to slow down vehicular traffic 17.6% 7.1% 7.7% 12.3% 11.0% Providing financial incentives for using active modes such as bicycling & walking to get to work (e.g., discounts at local businesses, reimbursements) 8.1% 7.1% 15.4% 4.9% 9.5% None chosen 10.8% 8.9% 6.3% 18.0% 11.5% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 249541 Q20. Please rate your satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "Very Satisfied" and 5 means "Very Dissatisfied," with the overall value your household receives from the City of Bozeman Parks Division. (without "not provided") N=401 Household Type Total Households w/ Children Under Age 10 Households w/ Children Ages 10-19 Households w/ Adults Ages 20- 54 and No Children Households w/ Adults Ages 55+ and No Children Q20. Your satisfaction with overall value your household receives from City Parks Division Very satisfied 15.5% 16.1% 14.3% 22.9% 17.2% Satisfied 66.2% 57.1% 52.9% 41.5% 52.2% Neutral 11.3% 14.3% 23.6% 29.7% 22.4% Dissatisfied 5.6% 10.7% 7.1% 4.2% 6.4% Very dissatisfied 1.4% 1.8% 2.1% 1.7% 1.8% 2022 Bozeman Parks and Recreation Survey: Cross-Tabular Data ETC Institute (2022)Page 250542 Design Manual 543 Unifying principles The following principles guide the development and maintenance of City-owned or managed parks with the goal of creating a safe, accessible, sustainable, and long lasting system of parks, trails, and facilities. These principles should be used to ensure the City’s capital improvements and decisions about park and facility maintenance align with the goals and vision laid out by the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan. Ecology & Environment The City should strive to maintain or enhance the ecological function and resiliency of its open space, trail, and recreation assets. Accessibility & Inclusivity City parks, facilities, and trails should strive to exceed requirements for accessibility to engage visitors of differing abilities. Durability & Effciency Materials, furnishings, and landscaping used to construct or improve City assets should be able to withstand frequent and intense use and limited maintenance. Equipment should sourced from sustainable materials and should require typical, easy to access replacement parts. 544 Typical Assets Identifiers 545 System-wide Park Standards The following standards identify important elements and facilities that should be included in the design, construction, and maintenance of parks and open spaces to align with the vision and goals of the PRAT Plan. The standards are broken out into two topics - systemwide requirements, which include investments in physical accessibility, lighting, and landscape elements; and guidance for design and maintenance by park type. As community needs and trends change, this guidance should continue to provide a relevant and consistent framework for the design, renovation of future parks and open spaces. 546 Required Facilities The following amenities and furnishings are important facilities to include in all parks and open spaces to provide clear and cohesive identity, encourage safe access, and enhance park enjoyment. Barrier free/Accessible paths Parks should be made accessible to a wide range of visitors, including persons with varying abilities, and they must connect safely and effciently to surrounding transit stops and neighborhood streets. Accessible routes often result in paved connections, which can increase impervious surfaces, negatively impact stormwater capture, and increase heat island effect. To reduce these negative impacts on accessible paths and parking needs, consider the following: • Use semipermeable or permeable surfaces that meet or exceed ADA/Universal Design requirements. • Share parking with neighboring uses, like schools. • Reduce road and walkway widths to minimum acceptable dimensions. • Reduce the size/width of parking spaces to NACTO minimums and limit the number of parking stalls. • If an entrance or route is not accessible, install signage that indicates the next closest accessible entry. Trees Trees provide shade and reduce the impacts of urban heat island on hot days. Trees also sequester carbon and help to reduce soil erosion through their root systems. Trees contribute to the natural look and feel of urban parks year round. The City should take care to protect existing trees through proactive monitoring and maintenance. New trees should be planted in communities with low tree coverage and to plan for successful succession of the canopy within older parks and open spaces. The City should ensure diverse species selection in parks and city-owned open spaces. The City should also advocate for more street trees at the perimeter of parks and facilities. Milwaukee Path - Missoula cross city trail 547 Signage Clear, consistent, and accessible signage and wayfnding helps to communicate what parks, trails, and facilities have to offer and reinforce the City’s identity and role in maintaining these community spaces. There are many types of signs that should be considered in Bozeman parks and facilities, depending on the park or facility’s use. • Informational signage clearly communicates the City’s relationship in owning or maintaining the park or facility. • Directional signage and wayfnding helps to direct visitors to destinations within parks and facilities, and will set expectations about distances between destinations. • Interpretive signage can be used as an educational feature to describe the park’s historic, cultural, or environmental signifcance. Seating Seating and benches give park users a place to rest, socialize, and enjoy their parks. Benches, picnic tables and other seating should be prioritized along highly traffcked paths and parks, and in natural spaces. Consider age-friendly bench designs that prioritize back support and arm rests as well as benches and picnic tables with adjacent wheelchair spaces. Trash & Recycling Placing trash and recycling receptacles along major network paths helps keep pathways, corridors, and their surroundings clean and more enjoyable for their users. 548 Enhancing Amenities These amenities are not critical for a functional active transportation network but enhance the user experience, safety, and cleanliness, and are often greatly desired by the community. Lighting Pedestrian scaled lighting should be considered at entrances and in parking lots or felds of larger parks, many special use facilities, and other parks used throughout the year. Adequate lighting should also be considered along popular pathways and trails through parks. Pedestrian scaled lighting increases safety for users throughout the year. Shade Structures Shade structures range in size, materiality, cost and purpose. They include arbors, pergolas, gazebos, pavilions, and canvas tensile structures over playgrounds and bleachers at felds. These structures should be used in places where shade trees are limited and where shade trees confict with the particular park use, e.g. playing feld or meadow. Comfort stations/Restrooms In larger parks like regional parks and certain special use facilities, permanent, ADA accessible restrooms should be considered. Comfort stations are appropriate as temporary facilities tied to large events, festivals, or other large gathering. Bike Racks Bike racks provide reliable bike storage options at parks with access to major trails and pathways. As stated in the Active Transportation section, providing ample bike racks reduces potential issues of bikes being locked inappropriately to trees, park furniture, and private property. Bike Repair Stations Bike repair stations can be helpful for bicyclists if they are caught with an unexpected fat tire or need to make an adjustment to their bike during a ride. As noted in the Active Transportation section, bike repair stations should be located along major bike corridors and in major parks that are popular for bike users. Dog Waste Stations Dog stations provide pet waste bags and a trash receptacle for dog owners that use parks. Installing dog stations along popular dog walking areas can be benefcial in maintaining clean parks and trails. Water Fountains Outdoor public water fountains along pathways are often desired by active users. However, upkeep of these amenities is extensive which reduces their practicality in many situations. Providing public water fountains will be deliberate decisions that will hinge on specifc locations and circumstances. Picnic Tables Picnic tables can be appropriate along pathways near community hubs. They provide opportunities for a variety of social activities that can be enjoyed outdoors such as picnics, games, and conversations. Irrigation 549 Design + Maintenance Guidance by Park Type The following principles guide the development and maintenance of City-owned or managed parks with the goal of creating a safe, accessible, sustainable, and long lasting system of parks, trails, and facilities. These principles should be used to ensure the City’s capital improvements and decisions about park and facility maintenance align with the goals and vision laid out by the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan. Pocket Parks Neighborhood Parks Community Parks Special Use Parks Natural Areas Natural Areas within Parks Linear Parks 550 Park Types Special Use Roads Natural Areas Buildings Community City Boundary Neighborhood Railroad Pocket Streams Linear Lakes & Reservoirs 551 Pocket Parks 10 Acres | 20 Parks Relevant Parks Annie St & Cottage Park Ln Baxter Square Black Ave Pocket Park Bosel Park Childrens Memorial Gardens Cotton Park Ln Creekside Park Equestrian Park Farmhouse Ln & Little Cottage Ln Lewis and Bark Dog Park Milkhouse N Pocket Park Milkhouse S Pocket Park North Meadows Park Northeast Neighborhood Park Norton East Ranch Subdivision Park Pinnacle Star Street Sacajawea Park Sanders Park Soroptomist Park Valley Commons Park Valley Meadows Westglen Park Westlake Community Garden Pocket Parks are used to address limited, isolated or unique recreational needs. They are typically 1 acre or less in size and contain amenities such as recreational opportunities for young children with slides, swings, spring toys and the like. They may also function as landscaped public use areas in commercialized parts of town, and serve as a destination within a 5 minute walk of a neighborhood. The service area for a pocket park is a ¼-mile radius around the park in a residential setting. Soroptimist Park Westglen Park 552 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Arterial access through residential plots Access to shade and planting Immediate access through sidewalks and residential streets Access to play areas Program & Use Pocket Parks typically contain amenities such as recreational opportunities for young children with slides, swings, spring toys and the like. Temporary amenities like movable tables and chairs support social activities and gatherings that tie into the daily activities of move active parts of the city. Environmental Benefts Design grading to direct stormwater into planted areas and mitigate the need for regular irrigation. It is important to evaluate the quality of the soils on site in more dense, urban pocket parks to ensure the soil can support increased stormwater volumes. Plant native, hardier plants that can serve as windbreaks that break up wind tunnel effects and to support sensitive low lying plants. Limit paved surfaces and cluster plantings throughout the site to reduce urban heat island effect. Siting & Access Accessibility by way of interconnecting trails, sidewalks, or low-volume residential streets increases use opportunities. Recognizable public access should be provided with at least 50 feet of frontage on a public or approved private street. In terms of size, they are generally between 2,500 square feet and one acre in size. Connections and relationships to the surrounding context are also key to providing an accessible and visually cohesive connection to surrounding buildings, paths, and streets. Connections within and to the park from nearby bike lanes and greenways should be prioritized, especially those that connect into city anchor routes. Curb cuts at street crossings and wayfnding to direct visitors to surrounding amenities, especially downtown, will help orient visitors to various destinations. 553 Neighborhood Parks 223 Acres | 34 Parks Relevant Parks Alder Creek Centennial Park Cooper Park Creekwood Subdivision Park Diamond Park Enterprise Park Flanders Creek Subdivision Park Four Points Minor Subd. Park Gran Cielo Headlands Park HRDC (West Babcock Park) Icon Park Jarrett Park Legends At Bridger Creek Park M Anderson Park Matthew Matsen Park Meadow Creek Park NE Corner & N Laurel Pkwy New Hyalite View Park Sandan Park South University Distict Southside Park The Lakes At Valley West Park Traditions Subdivision Park Valley Unit Park Valley West Park Walton Homestead Park West Winds Park Westbrook Westfeld Park Neighborhood parks are the basic unit of the park system, and serve as the recreational and social focus of the neighborhood. Focus is on informal recreation for all age groups and geared towards those living within the service area. Neighborhood parks should be centrally located within their service area, with access uninterrupted by non-residential roads and other physical barriers. The service area of a neighborhood park has a ¼- to ½-mile radius. Centennial Park Valley West Park 554 Typical Assets and Design Considerations City Goal of 100% Frontage on Public Roads Central location in residential neighborhoods Flexible Multi-Use Open Spaces Connection to sidewalks, community trails and greenways Program & Use Facilities include playgrounds; informal playfelds or open space; basketball, tennis and volleyball courts; ice skating; trails; and picnic and sitting areas. Environmental Benefts Similar to the pocket parks and plazas typology, it is imperative to design grading to direct stormwater into planted areas and mitigate the need for regular irrigation. In these active, neighborhood serving parks, investments in low maintenance plantings and shade trees will support community use on hot days and reduce urban heat island effect from surrounding areas. Siting/Access The site should be accessible from throughout its service area by way of interconnecting trails, sidewalks, or low-volume residential streets. Ease of access and walking distance are critical factors in locating a neighborhood park. A neighborhood park should have a minimum of 50 percent frontage on a public or approved private street. Neighborhood parks are generally 3 to 10 acres in size. Leftover parcels of land that are undesirable for development are also generally undesirable for neighborhood parks and should be avoided. It is more cost-effective to select a site with inherent aesthetic qualities, rather than trying to recreate them through extensive development. Connections and relationships within the neighborhood will help to provide accessible and visually cohesive relationships to surrounding community destinations. Connections within and to the park from nearby bike lanes and greenways should be prioritized, especially those that connect into city anchor routes. Curb cuts at street crossings and wayfnding to direct visitors to surrounding amenities, especially downtown, will help orient visitors to various destinations. 555 Community Parks 199 Acres | 8 Parks Relevant Parks Beall Park Bogert Pond Bozeman Pond Glen Lake Rotary Park Kirk Park Lindley Park Story Mansion Park Story Mill Community Park Community parks are larger in size and serve a broader purpose than neighborhood parks. Their focus is on meeting the recreational needs of the entire community. They allow for group activities and offer other recreational opportunities not feasible – nor perhaps desirable – in a neighborhood park. Story Mill Community Park Bozeman Pond Glen Lake Rotary Park Kirk Park 556 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Recreational Facilities Connection to community trail system Native Planting Areas Arterial / Connector Streets + Parking Access Program & Use Potential recreation facilities include playgrounds; basketball, tennis and volleyball courts; informal ballfelds for youth play; ice skating rinks (temporary); swimming pools or swimming beaches; trails, including cross-country ski trails; individual and group picnic/sitting areas; general open space; unique landscapes and features; nature study areas; and ornamental or native plant gardens. Environmental Benefts Similar to the pocket parks and plazas typology, it is imperative to design grading to direct stormwater into planted areas and mitigate the need for regular irrigation. These larger parks can also direct runoff towards designed bioretention systems (e.g., swales and rain gardens). Wherever possible, these parks should increase planting areas that can capture stormwater and support water conservation measures citywide, through low irrigation, native plantings. Siting/Access Optimally, the site should be between 20 and 50 acres in size; however the actual size should be based on the land area needed to accommodate desired uses. The site should be serviced by arterial and collector streets, as well as the community trail system. Parking lots should be provided as necessary to accommodate user access. The site’s natural character should play a very signifcant role in site selection, with emphasis on sites that preserve unique landscapes within the community and/or provide recreational opportunities not otherwise available. 557 Special Use Parks 201 Acres | 9 Parks Relevant Parks Bozeman Sports Park Bronken Park - Soccer Complex Christie Fields North Grand Field Rose Park Snowfll Softball Complex West Babcock Park Westlake BMX Park The Special Use classifcation covers a broad range of parks and recreation facilities oriented toward single-purpose or specialized use. Special uses generally fall into three categories: •Historic/Cultural/Social Sites – Unique local resources offering historical, educational, and cultural opportunities. Examples include historic downtown areas, performing arts facilities, arboretums, ornamental/native plant gardens, sculpture gardens, indoor theaters, public buildings, and amphitheaters. •Indoor Recreation Facilities – Examples include community centers, senior centers, sports stadiums, community theaters, indoor hockey arenas, and indoor swimming pools. •Outdoor Recreation Facilities – Examples include tennis centers, sports complexes, golf courses, disc golf courses, hockey arenas, BMX parks and skate parks. 558 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Recreational Facilities Indoor / Outdoor Recreation Facilities Native Plant Gardens Environmental Stewardship Cultural Sites Arterial Road Connections Specifc Athletic Asset (for example pump track) Large Athletic Facilities Program & Use Among the most active recreation places within the City’s park system, these parks and facilities support a range of activities and should be designed to address the desires of community members, national and local recreation trends, and the need for fexibility. Opportunities for active recreation should be expanded to support intended audiences as well as their caregivers, spouses, and spectators. To support extended use of the facilities, these places should support the comfort of all visitors through water fountains, bathrooms, shade trees, benches and accommodations for persons who ave physical disabilities or are neurologically diverse. Siting/Access Recreation need, community interests, the type of facility, and land availability are the primary factors infuencing location and size. Special use facilities should be viewed as strategically located community- wide facilities rather than as serving well-defned neighborhoods or areas. The site should be accessible from arterial and collector streets where feasible. 559 Natural Areas (including those within parks) 184 Acres | 27 Areas Relevant Parks with Natural AreasAlder Creek Natural Space Allison Park Bridger Creek Park Bronken Park - Natural Space Burke Park Cattail Lake Subdivision Public Park Flanders Creek Subdivision Park Natural Space Grafs East Park Hauser Park Ice House Park Josephine Park Laurel Glen Park Loyal Gardens Subdivision Park Mcleod Park Meadow Creek Subd Public Park Norton East Ranch Sub Park Natural Space Oak Springs Park Access Corridor Peets Hill Shady Lane Public Park Traditions Subdivision Park Natural Space Tuckerman Park Valley West Park Natural Space West Winds Park Natural Space Willow Park Natural resource areas are lands set aside for the preservation of natural resources, remnant landscapes, open space, and visual aesthetics or buffering. Oftentimes, these areas are contained within existing parks, and require a different management approach from more isolated natural areas. For example, Mcleod Park is a neighborhood park with natural areas that have to be well designed and integrated into the park to work alongside existing recreational uses. There are similar examples in West Winds Park and Bronken Park. These lands typically consist of: •Individual sites exhibiting natural resources; •Lands that are unsuitable for development but offer natural resource potential. Examples include parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation, drainage ways and ravines; and •Protected lands, such as wetlands, riparian areas and ponds. Relevant Standalone Natural Areas Baxter Meadows Natural Space Baxter Square Natural Space Cattail Creek Natural Space Ferguson Meadows Natural Space 560 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Access to greenways, trails and nature viewing opportunities Protection of natural resource areas Program & Use Although natural areas are resource rather than user based, they can provide some recreation opportunities such as trails, and nature viewing and study. They can also function as greenways. Development should be kept to a level that preserves the integrity of the resource. Environmental Benefts Restoration areas should be protected and maintained or expanded. To do this, clear communication and barriers to prevent dumping, walking, or vehicle access to the site should be incorporated into the design of these spaces. Minimize development of hard surfaces, including bike trails and boardwalks, and strategically place them to avoid dissecting, diminishing, or disturbing natural areas within parks. Use the existing types of vegetation community present in natural areas, whether forest, shrubland, meadow, stream, tidal marsh, or wetland to guide the restoration design for adjacent sites and for site expansion within existing parks. These places should include educational information (e.g. signage) that will help visitors understand natural system functions and increase aware of ecosystem benefts. Siting/Access Resource availability and opportunity are the primary factors determining location and size. Typically, when siting a natural area, underutilized areas of parks and areas with vegetation or animal species of concern are ideal places for natural area investment. Access points should be limited and well-signed, and should connect into existing trail networks. 561 Linear Parks 62 Acres | 24 Parks Relevant Parks Babcock Meadows Brookside Park Diamond Estates Public Park Gallagator Linear Park Greenway/Westgate Harvest Creek Langohr Gardens Park North 9th Northern Pacifc Addition To Bozeman Oak Meadows Subdivision Park Sourdough Trail Park Spring Meadows Park Sundance Springs Park The Knolls At Hillcrest Park The Knolls At Hillcrest Park Valley Creek Park Village Downtown Park West Meadows Park Westridge East Park Westridge North Park Westridge South Park Linear parks contain pathways that serve a number of important functions: •They tie park components together to form a cohesive park, trail, recreation, and open space system; •They allow for uninterrupted and safe pedestrian and bicycle movement between parks and throughout the community •They contain clear signage that visually connects park components and trails to better wayfnding •They provide an opportunity for resource-based outdoor recreation. Gallagator Linear Park Harvest Creek Park 562 Typical Assets and Design Considerations Connection to further trail systems Parcels with steep slopes and natural vegetation Protection of natural wetland and ponds Program & Use Linear parks can be developed for a variety of different recreational activities. Most notable are hiking, walking, jogging, bicycling and cross-country skiing. Environmental Benefts Linear parks provide connectivity for healthy plant animal species to travel along habitat “corridors”.To support appropriate plant and animal species along these linear parks, the city should encourage native species to migrate to new areas by recreating the conditions of previously established habitat close to the area where expansion is desired. Since these habitat corridors will also naturally support non- native species expansion, it is important to create barriers for the spread of those species. Many linear parks exist along water courses, which presents an opportunity to sensitively invest in riparian edges. Plantings and naturalized landscapes along the water’s edge will support increased fsh and other amphibious species habitat. Education signage regarding “rewilding” of these riparian edges should also be considered to raise awareness of these investments. Siting/Access Land availability and opportunity are the primary factors determining location. Many linear parks will follow natural features such as watercourses, while others will follow man-made features such as abandoned railways. Linear parks should be at least 25 feet wide for general trail use, with additional width required for parks used for cross-country skiing. In addition to this minimum width, which linear parks can extend beyond, linear parks should also have requirements to provide specifc amenities. 563 Design + Maintenance Guidance For Active Transportation Establishing clear dimensional specifcations and construction standards for each path and trail typology is fundamental to building out a highly functioning active transportation network. Below is a basic summary of the key standards for each network typology. The ‘Implementation’ section below provides a detailed breakdown of the recommended dimensional and construction standards. This section of the Design Manual will identify and describe design and maintenance considerations for the following three Active Transportation route types: System-wide Standards Anchor Routes & Shared Use Paths Bike Boulevards Connector Paths Neighborhood Trails 564 N1 mile0 0.5 Proposed Active Transportation Network Proposed Anchor Route Proposed Shared Use Paths Proposed Commuter Paths Proposed Neighborhood Trails Proposed Bike Boulevards Existing Shared Use Paths Existing Trails City Boundary Growth Boundary Roads Railroad Streams Lakes & Reservoirs Future Parks Parks 565 System-wide AT Standards Standards for the design and construction of all active transportation typologies is critical to successful implementation of the PRAT Plan. The City has existing paved path standards within the Public Work and the PROST Plan contains some standards for natural trails. The existing standards should be reviewed against best practices and guidelines, including guidance by National Association of City Transportation Offcials (NACTO), referenced below, revised to create comprehensive standards for each path and trail type, and collocated within a single source such as the Public Works Standards. The recommended standards for construction are divided into three classes based on location, intended use, and preferred maintenance. As uses or intensity change, a route may be upgraded in classifcation. The standards align with those in the Triangle Trails Plan and refect similar parameters previous outlined in the Bozeman PROST Plan and the Gallatin County Trails Report and Plan. Paths and trails consist of a central walkable/ridable surface, known as a tread. They have a shoulder located on each side. The tread plus the shoulder is known as the clear width. The height above the route with no obstacles like tree branches is known as the clear height. The following standards are applicable to all city path and trail classifcations: •Adequate visibility must be provided for safety. •The minimum acceptable path and trail easement width is 25 feet. •Path and trail entrances will be signed describing the degree of ADA access. •A minimum of 5-foot separation between edge of path to top of slope that is greater than 1V:3H, if not met, a railing must be implemented 566 Required Elements These associated elements, adjacent to physical path networks, are essential for the success of a functional and safe active transportation network. Wayfnding The most critical adjacent network facility is wayfnding. Wayfnding is essential to a robust, highly functioning community active transportation network. A comprehensive wayfnding plan should be adopted and implemented by the City of Bozeman. One, unifed wayfnding plan for the entire City of Bozeman will standardize and integrate consistent signage and information across the entire network to allow for intuitive and streamlined user navigation. Lighting on Shared Use Paths For shared use paths to be viable and reliable transportation and recreation corridors throughout the year, proper lighting must be present on all shared use paths. Adequate lighting increases safety for users and allows the paths to be functional throughout the entire day, including commuting hours, during Montana’s dark winter months. Benches Benches are a highly desired facility in public spaces and in corridors along pathways. They give path users a place to rest, socialize, and enjoy the many beautiful environments Bozeman has to offer. Benches should be prioritized along highly traffcked paths and in natural spaces. Bike Racks Bike racks provide reliable bike storage options at network hubs for commuting and recreational bikers alike to securely leave their bike for period of time. Providing ample bike racks reduces potential issues of bikes being locked inappropriately to trees, park furniture, and private property. Bike Repair Stations Bike repair stations can be helpful for bicyclists if they are caught with an unexpected fat tire or need to make an adjustment to their bike during a ride. Bike repair stations should be located along major bike corridors and at major network intersections. Dog Waste Stations Dog stations provide pet waste bags and a trash receptacle for dog owners that use the network. Installing dog stations along popular dog walking areas can be benefcial in maintaining a clean path and trail environment. Trash & Recycling Placing trash and recycling receptacles along major network paths helps keep pathways, corridors, and their surroundings clean and more enjoyable for their users. Enhancing Elements These amenities are not critical for a functional active transportation network but enhance the user experience, safety, and cleanliness, and are often greatly desired by the community. Lighting on other Facilities As described above, lighting should be required along all shared use paths. However, some connector paths and trails may beneft from lighting installations as well if they are highly traffcked, are used as a frequent commuter route, or need added visibility. The need for lighting on these facilities will be addressed on a situational basis. Water Fountains Outdoor public water fountains along pathways are often desired by active users. However, upkeep of these amenities is extensive which reduces their practicality in many situations. Providing public water fountains will be deliberate decisions that will hinge on specifc locations and circumstances. Picnic Tables Picnic tables can be appropriate along pathways near community hubs. They provide opportunities for a variety of social activities that can be enjoyed outdoors such as picnics, games, and conversations. 567 Anchor Routes & Shared Use Paths These paved pathways connect larger community nodes. They are heavily used with full access and are typically constructed along major transportation corridors but can also be located outside of rights-of-way. These routes are designed to permit two-way traffc using an impervious surface material such as asphalt or concrete. Width and Clearance The preferred tread minimum width is 12 feet wide but can be decreased to 10 feet in interior subdivision settings. All paths should have a 1-foot gravel shoulder and 2-foot minimum total shoulder graded away from tread at a 2% maximum slope. A minimum vertical clearance of 10 feet should be provided. Branches that could reduce clearance when weighted with snow or rain should also be removed. Grade The maximum tread cross slope shall be 2%, sloping one direction, not crowned. The cross slopes on corners and curves shall be towards the inside where drainage permits. The maximum tread cross slope should be 5%, the cross slopes on corners and curves shall be towards the inside where drainage permits. If there is a segment that has a cross slope of more than 5%, the segment should be as short as possible. Maximum grade segments: •8.3% for a maximum of 15.24m (50ft) •10% for a maximum of 9.14m (30ft) •12.5% for a maximum of 3.05m (10ft) Near the top and bottom of the maximum grade segments, the grade should transition to less than 5%. Rest intervals should be provided within 7.6m (25ft) of the max grade segment. There can be no abrupt change in surface level greater than ½ inch. 568 Typical Assets and Design Considerations AREA VARIES VARIES 12’ VARIES WATER LANDSCAPE PATHWAY LANDSCAPE AREA 2’ 10’ 2’ VARIES 10’ PAVED TRAIL TRAIL BUFFER DRIVE LANE 12’ CLEAR Cross Section Concrete - The tread base shall consist of a minimum of 3 inches of crushed gravel compacted to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T99. Concrete shall be a minimum of 6 inches of M4000. Asphalt -Excavate 11.5 inches of material. Install a minimum of 9 inches of crushed gravel compacted to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T99, unless otherwise dictated by sub-soil type materials being compacted to road standard. The overlay shall consist of 2.5 inches of asphalt compacted to 93 percent of maximum density, as determined by ASTMD 2041. Construction seal shall be applied at 0.08 gallon/square yard after installation. BUFFER BUFFER CURB &GUTTER Material To decrease long term maintenance, tread surface must predominately be impervious material such as asphalt, concrete, pavers set on concrete, or wood decking. Porous surfaces (permeable pavers, porous asphalt, porous rubber) should be a priority in sensitive areas. The tread material including any base course will have a total minimum thickness of 6 inches. Wood deck planks must be run perpendicular to the direction of travel and joints must not exceed 36 inches. Planks must be securely fastened so they do not warp. 569 Bike Boulevards Bike boulevards are an integrated part of the street network. Streets designated as bike boulevards should adhere to standards within the Transportation Master Plan and other adopted documents. In addition to those standards, bike boulevards should include at least one element from each of the following categories: Signs and Pavement Markings Identifcation signage Sharrow pavement markings Wayfnding signage Speed management tools: Speed humps, bumps, tables and cushions Chicanes Neighborhood traffc circles Median islands curb bulb outs pinch points Volume management tools: Regulatory signage Partial physical closure Full physical closure Channelized right in/right out Diagonal or median diverter Crossings: Crossing signage Pedestrian signals (Rapid fash beacons, HAWK signals) Median refuge islands curb bulb outs 570 Typical Assets and Design Considerations 5’ 5’ 2’ VARIES VARIES 2’ 5’ 5’ SIDEWALK LANDSCAPE SHARED ROAD SHARED ROAD LANDSCAPE SIDEWALK AREA AREA 571 Connector Paths These paths receive moderate use intended for a variety non-motorized, recreational, and commuter users. These paths connect meaningful destinations, such as neighborhoods, schools, and hubs of commercial activity. Connector paths are constructed with an ADA accessible surface of natural fnes, or pontentially pavement, and are 6 to 8 feet in width. For paved connector paths the Class 1 standards shall be utilized. Even if paved, connector paths are not expected to be maintained during the winter. However, if the route provides important community connections, year round maintenance should be provided. For natural surface connector paths apply the standards below. Width and Clearance Single surfaced tread with a minimum width of six feet. Tread width may be reduced to 36 inches for a maximum distance of 30 feet to pass or preserve signifcant features such as rock formations, important vegetation, or cross watercourses. Signs should be used to warn about such constrictions. The minimum cleared zone will be the tread width plus 2 feet to either side of the tread and 10 feet vertical. In no instance may the overhead clear height be less than 8 feet. Grade A cross-slope of no less than 2 percent and no more than 5 percent to provide for water drainage is allowed. Maximum sustained running grade is 8%. A 10% maximum grade is allowed for a maximum distance of 30 feet, and a 14% maximum grade is allowed when resting intervals are provided every 5 feet. Tread will be raised above the adjacent surfaces and have a 4-inch crown. Where this requirement is not possible the tread will have a 1:20 cross slope and/or side ditches outside the cleared zone. Changes in level: •Should not exceed 51mm (2 in) •May be up to a maximum of 76mm (3 in) in areas where 51mm cannot be attained and the slope of the trail is less than 5% in any direction. •Obstacles over 51mm (2 in) in height should be removed Stream crossings will be over culverts or bridges. Only dips or slot-entrance drainpipe will be used for cross tread water stops for natural surface treads. 572 Typical Assets and Design Considerations 6’-8’ TRAIL 10’ CLEAR 2’ VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA 2’ BUFFER Cross Section The path bed must be excavated 6 inches deep, prior to installation of tread mix. Tread mix shall be installed in two parts. The frst 3-inch lift shall be of ¾ inch Road mix, compacted to 95%, and then 3/8th inch minus gravel (natural fnes) compacted to 95%. If moisture content is not adequate for compaction, water should be added prior to rolling and compacting. Natural fnes used for these paths shall consist of 80 percent sand, 10 percent silt and 10 percent clay. If the natural fnes tread mix does not contain enough clay or soil binder, additional binder must be mixed in. BUFFER Geo-textile material will be placed beneath and gravel or particulate tread material in poorly drained, boggy, or marshy areas, or wet meadows and on any of the following soil types: clays, clayey loams, silts, silty. The preferred material is non-woven needle-punched engineering geo-fabric, but woven is acceptable. Fabric should be selected for use and durability. Material Commuter paths shall be designed for ADA access and year-round maintenance. Those that are not paved will be surfaced with a minimum of wood decking, natural fnes, or with a well maintained compacted crushed gravel. 573 Neighborhood Trails Neighborhood trails are narrower soft surface trails that connect locally to parks and open space These trails receive moderate to low use and are typically 3-5 feet in width. They are either natural trails developed by use over time or constructed with natural fnes. ADA accessibility may be limited as trails typically follow the natural contours, however nearby sidewalk spurs can provide ADA connections to areas along the corridor. Width and Clearance Tread width minimum is three feet. The minimum clear zone will be the tread width horizontally and seven feet vertically. Grade Grades typically follow the natural topography therefore ADA access is extremely limited. Blending the trail into the setting is emphasized in trail routing. Provide positive drainage for the tread utilizing grade dips, cross sloping, and water bars to minimize erosion. Cross Section No trail bed excavation is required except to eliminate extreme cross grades. Material Preparation varies from machine-worked surfaces to those worn only by usage. No surfacing is required except in erosion prone poorly drained, marshy areas, or wet meadows. Wood chip tread materials are acceptable when traffc is limited to pedestrian traffc in sensitive locations such as in wetland nature education areas. 574 Typical Assets and Design Considerations 4’-6’ TRAIL VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA VARIES LANDSCAPE AREA 575 AT Maintenance Maintaining active transportation routes that are safe and accessible for users of all ages and abilities is a high priority. In addition, adequate maintenance is critical to maximizing year-round utilization. The City needs to establish annual and long-term maintenance plans that includes a deferred maintenance analysis. There are three essential elements to properly maintaining an active transportation network. First, establish minimum standards for maintenance. Next, determine maintenance responsibility for each segment of the network. Lastly, identify the various sources to fnance the necessary maintenance. Methods Developing a comprehensive maintenance strategy will require considering various surface types, locations, responsible parties, and available funding. Anchor Routes and Shared Use Paths Share use paths located within street rights-of-way are typically maintained by the corresponding jurisdiction. One challenge is achieving consistent maintenance expectations and standards between the City, County, and State. Connector Paths The maintenance of Connectors not only depends on the responsible party but also on the surface type each route. Neighborhood Trails Despite being smaller, trails require a considerable amount of maintenance depending on location, the quality of construction, and the amount of use. Neighborhood trails are typically maintained by neighborhood associations, HOAs, the City, or GVLT. 576 Regulations The ability of the City to regulate maintenance of active transportation routes is limited. The City should consider ways to require routes owned or managed by private parties to be maintained according to established standards. The following actions are recommended. •Strengthen requirements for residential subdivisions, commercial developments, and other privately held routes to be adequately maintained according to standards adopted by the City. Policies Maintenance of active transportation routes in Bozeman is currently managed through a variety of resources, including private property owners, homeowner associations, community groups, non- proft partners, the City, and the Montana Department of Transportation. Clarifying responsibilities for maintenance and establishing standards will help ensure the fnancial investment developing a complete network is protected and enhanced in future years. The following actions are recommended. •Establish a comprehensive maintenance plan that includes minimum standards for upkeep, repairs, and replacement •Conduct a comprehensive deferred maintenance analysis of each route identifying the current condition, upkeep and repair needs, and sections needing to be rebuilt •Establish a maintenance template for the City, property owners, and partners to develop schedule tasks and estimate costs •Review and clarify how the Bozeman Parks Maintenance District can support the maintenance of the network Maintenance Standards General maintenance standards for evaluating needs for surface care, repairs, safety precautions, and managing adjacent landscaping should be developed for and consistently applied to all network typologies. In addition to annual and long-term tasks, seasonal maintenance of shared use paths is essential to accommodating year-round active transportation. Paved paths must have the snow removed frequently during the winter and be swept of grit and debris each spring. Maintenance Actions The following actions are recommended. •Develop a comprehensive maintenance plan including detailed standards by typology that ensure a high-level of safety, accessibility, and utilization. Below are recommended routine and periodic maintenance tasks based on surface type. Paved Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: •Regular sweeping to remove debris, gravel, and other hazardous items •Regular snow removal during winter months •Inspect and repair pavement surface problems (seal cracks, grind down ridges, cut back tree roots, repair pavement) •Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems •Treating noxious weeds along corridor •Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) •Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function Paved Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: •Coordinate and schedule pavement overlays as part of adjacent road maintenance •Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years)577 •Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out-slope for improved drainage •Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers •Repair or replace wayfnding, stop control signs and other elements •Restripe crosswalks and other markers Natural Surfaces—Routine maintenance activities: •Removing encroaching vegetation from trail tread (grading, chemical treatment) •Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight distance problems •Treating noxious weeds along corridor •Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) •Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function •Flood or rain damage repair: silt clean up, culvert clean out, etc. •Bridge/culvert inspection, clearing and repair •Map/signage post condition inspection, and vandalism repair •Assessing need for sign/map updates or replacement Natural Surfaces—Periodic maintenance activities: •Yearly trail evaluation to determine the need for minor repairs, identifcation of erosion damage, need for improved drainage •Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) •Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out-slope for improved drainage •Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers •Repair or replace wayfnding, stop control signs and other elements •Restripe crosswalks and other markers Funding Like construction, the maintenance of Bozeman’s active transportation is funded by a variety of entities including the City, Montana Department of Transportation, non-proft partners, and private property owners. There are more maintenance needs than committed funding which leads to a backlog of repairs and overall degradation of accessibility and utilization. According to the Rails to Trail Conservancy, annual maintenance costs on average range from $1,000 to $2,000 per trail mile, depending upon the surface. Therefore, average annual funding required to maintain Bozeman’s 178 miles of paths and trails is approximately $267,000. The funding needed to adequately maintain the network will only increase as new extensions and routes are constructed. To meet this fnancial commitment, the City and its partners must proactively account for the necessary funding to execute the annual and long-term maintenance plans and aggressively commit the dollars. The following actions are recommended. •Ensure that a signifcant portion of the Parks and Trails Maintenance District funds are dedicated to path and trail maintenance •Allocate an annual portion of the City’s street maintenance budget to repair shared use paths and paved connector paths •Include Bozeman’s active transportation network and plan into the future Metropolitan Planning Organization budget 578 Prioritization Addressing the maintenance backlog of existing active transportation network will take years and considerable funding. Therefore, it is important to develop and utilize a method to prioritize the needed upkeep and repair projects. This plan includes a weighted prioritization matrix template utilizing the criteria listed below. The following actions are recommended. Develop a methodology for prioritizing potential maintenance projects based on the following criteria: •Area of deferred maintenance that poses a public safety risk •Area of deferred maintenance that restricts equitable access •Area of deferred maintenance that reduces utilization •Highly utilized routes •Ability to partner and/or leverage creative funding opportunities 579 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT APPENDIX 580 Summary of Comments from PRAT Engagement Topic 1 Word Count 1 Topic 2 Word Count 2 Topic 3 Word Count 3 Topic 4 Word Count 4 Topic 5 Word Count 5 Total Count Emerging Themes Access (ADA)98 Affordable 4 Identity 38 Access (time)12 -152 Inclusion Nature 30 Environment 76 Tree 53 Native 15 Habitat 3 177 Nature Immersion Trails 227 Connect 76 Bike 66 --369 Trail Connectivity Indoor 15 Swimming/Aquatics 38 Sports Events 36 Adventure (XC/Disc Golf,etc)20 -109 Special Use Facilities Too many 13 Off leash/unleash 20 Care 26 Etiquette 11 Maintain/clean 45 115 Care Play 29 Winter/Snow 17 New 28 Events/programs 114 Family 4 192 Maintain Relevance Safe 90 Sidewalks 21 Crossings 47 Mobility 76 -234 Safe Access 581 Question Response Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Accessible Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Animal regulations not enforced Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Benches, water for dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Bike lanes are where all the trash is swept Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Close by parks are very packed and busy Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Confusion about crowds parking use Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Connectivity is lacking Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Crowded Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Desperately want another frisbee golf course because Rose Park is probably the highest trafficked park in the summer and we need to spread the crowd out to continue to grow the community. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Disc golf park at Rose Park is being overtaken by dog walkers from new construction. The park is not being maintained. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dog feces all over Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dog poop Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dog poop Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dog poop is everywhere, should fine those that don't pick up after their dogs. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dogs and dog poop everywhere Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Dogs off leash. 582 Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Have to cross busy streets Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Homeless camps Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Homeless in parks Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")I have a nice yard so I relax there and I have some mobility issues. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")I have multiple dogs and off leash is essential to maximum enjoyment. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") I play a lot of Disc golf at Rose Park, I understand that it is a city park but it has a dog/human problem since all the new apartment construction, that is a Disc golf park, not a dog poop/pee park. The grounds are infested with rodents, there are no dog poop bag dispensers, no signage explaining the concerns of flying discs. DO BETTER CITY OF BOZEMAN. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") I would like to see more parks and green space and less trafficked areas p, especially around these parks. Also, it would be great to connect the parks with safe trails and not a high volume of traffic. Also, lowered speed limits to make biking on roads and trails near the roads much safer. Primary focus on walking and biking with a great reduction of motor vehicle traffic. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Interested in volleyball, racquet ball and pickle ball Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Lack of handicapped parking. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Lack of lighting of parks and trails at night , for after work hours use. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Large homeless population in the park Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Limited mobility Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Lindley park needs new equipment and an area for kids 6 to 9 years of age. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Loose dogs on Linear Trail Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")More park benches near the dog pond at regional park Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")More pool hours 583 Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")More restroom , bottom of Peets Hills Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")More squatters & doesn’t seem to be addressed Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") My choices above in Q4 relate to disc golf. Rose park is the only park in Bozeman that offers disc golf, which is not convenient if you do not live close. It is not a well maintained park (its full of gophers, and has only one set of trash cans to use) and is mostly looked after by local volunteers within the disc golf community. The amenities it does not contain are: obstacles for disc golf (such as more trees, uphill/downhill shots), a variety of different golf shots, and more holes (it has 14, and most are very short). Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Need more off leash dog areas Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Not adaptive to wheelchairs on all trails Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Not enough parking, dog poop is a problem Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Not enough parking. Need a true 18 hole disc golf park of proper tournament length. The current disc golf park at Rose Park is best for beginners, too crowded, too many gopher holes that affect safety, and has many decrepit foot bridges over creeks that need immediate repair. A new disc golf park while providing a new venue for experienced players, would also allow for tournaments which add value to the local economy. Look up the Rocky Mountain disc golf championships sponsored by Subaru, held near the Bridger Bowl a few years ago (on youtube). Sadly, that property was sold and the new owners did not wish to continue disc golf. We’ve been lacking a challenging course ever since. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Not enough staffing at Pool Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Not well maintained or clean Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Off leash dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Off leash dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Off leash dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Off leash dogs everywhere 584 Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Open space Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Parking Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Parking availability at some parks Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Parking lots not maintained. Parks are not meeting needs of older adult population Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Parking/crowding, bathrooms, dog waste bins, leash requirements Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Peets Hill/Burke Park have stopped going, too many aggressive dogs, not on leashes. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Pool space is not adequate. And people don’t follow leash laws or clean up after their dogs - it makes it unappealing. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Pool too small and crowded, should expand to the west Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Poor aquatic center and rec center needs to be built. Love trails and use them everyday. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Poor management of aquatics facility. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Poor parking and parks aren’t as easily accessible by bike and foot as they are by car. Roadways to park are dangerous by bike or no connected sidewalks to park. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Restrooms are closed Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Safety of parking lots Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Sidewalks end , not safe walking with kids or pets Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Sidewalks not clear of ice and snow Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Sidewalks not shoveled in winter. Limited public hours at the swim center. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Sidewalks to get to the trails, parks area non-existent or not maintained well (shoveled, esp. In winter) Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Some areas are crowded. Dog Parks. 585 Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Some rude people Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Sometimes it is not plowed well. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Swim center hours, closed on weekends? Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Swim center is taken over by swim teams, pushing out citizens for access Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Swim facilities are in bad shape and major need of updating and expansion!!! Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") The park in our neighborhood on Cascade St. And Mineral Ave. Is completely neglected. Our HOA was maintaining this park, until it was voted for the City of Bozeman to maintain all community park in exchange for a tax increase. As stated before, this park is completely neglected. Our household often frequent the Valley Unit Park. We must cross Yellowstone Ave. To access this park, as do many others in the neighborhood. Vehicles traveling between Durston and Babcock often speed and fail to yield for pedestrians on Yellowstone Ave. And Meagher Ave. The crosswalks need to be better designated with signs, street markings, and perhaps stop signs to yield the flow of traffic to pedestrians trying to access Valley Unit Park. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")The smell of dog poop along the trails is overwhelming Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")There are no trails on which dogs are prohibited. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")There are not enough tennis courts in this town! It’s crazy! Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")There are too many parks. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Time Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Time Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Toilets are often closed or not existent. People then relieve themselves in the shrubs. Even Pocatellow Idaho has heated year round bathrooms in their parks. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too cold! Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") Too many off leash dogs at leash only parks. Too many irresponsible dog owners that don't clean up after dogs at all parks and trails. Snowfall has become a junkyard for broken vehicles. 586 Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too many people and off leash for dogs. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too many people on trails Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too many people, inconsiderate trail users. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too many unleashed dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Traffic( speeding) Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Transportation Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Trash Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Trash Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Unleashed dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Unleashed dogs Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Vagrant population in warmer months, makes my wife not feel safe. Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Way to many dogs off leash Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")We need North/South bike trails connecting Bozeman to Belgrade East of Jackrabbit. 587 Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else") We only have one very small disc golf course. It is constantly busy even middle of the day on weekdays we wait to tee off because there's so many players. With how much space bozeman had and rose being the busiest park on a Costigan basis during the summer should show the city we need mow disc golf but the city just doesn't care that this park is used as much as the regional park. The city barely does anything with Rose Park Disc Golf Course. The mow once a season then disc golfers have to get out there and mow because the city doesn't. Both new apartment buildings on the park walk there dogs and don't pick up after there dogs poop. I usually pick up at least 4-5 bags of dog poop because people in the apartments don't pick up after there dogs. This is crazy we don't have even a 18 hole course. Even Billings has 7 courses with diamond x having 3 in just one property. Helena and Butte both have more courses and better courses than what we have in bozeman. Missoula has 3-4 courses with multiple courses in national forest areas and city parks as well. Why does Bozeman only have one extremely small course with no trees? It seems like the city doesn't care at all about one of the busiest parks in bozeman. This park is used for multiple hours for each person that uses it. Not like other parks people spend 30 minutes in then leave. We need more disc golf in bozeman because rose Park is to busy to play a lot of the times. The doubles league and bag tag league in bozeman do all of the course maintenance other than the one a summer the city mow but we can't do it all. We need help. We need more courses. We need the city to care about this Barriers to Usage of Parks, Trails, or Facilities (answered "Something Else")Weather Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else") Available participant spots are so limited that they fill up within 24 hours, many months in advance. The lack of swim instruction here is worrisome Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Classes being "sold out" quickly Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Classes fill too fast Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Covid Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Covid Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Difficult to get into summer camps Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Few programs for young kids, spots fill up quickly Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Getting kids scheduled before it fills up for the summer camps 588 Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Homeless population Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Hours are not good Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Housebound Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else") I would love more swim services (lessons, recreation, updated facilities) and due to staffing these are just not available. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Kids are older now Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Kids aren't old enough yet Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Kids classes fill up fast Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Lack of competitive opportunities for sport activities Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Lack of staff, canceled classes Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")More enrollment space, stop opening so early for enrollment Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")No access to internet Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")No interest Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Not aware of programs Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Not enough programs like swimming lessons Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else") Not enough programs offered and they get full too quickly to get registered. Plus, they are primarily offered on the east side of the city, and i live on the west side. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Not enough space, they book up Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Poor advertising, not enough classes like swim lessons. They fill-up fast. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Poor lighting 589 Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Programs fill up too fast and it's hard to plan that far in advance. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else") Programs like the children’s sports options allowed too many children to sign up for each session, instructors did not have specialized knowledge of the sport, and with too many kids no one is able to get a quality product… it was just a big play date and my child was uninterested in returning Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Reduced hours at the swim center. Swim facilities not meeting the community’s needs. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Reduction in lap swimming lanes, bulkhead dividing the pool in half of the year Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else") Rose park needs to have dog doo disposal service and signs for owners to pick up after dogs. Needs water and mowing. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Schedule Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")The city does not communicate well what is offered or happening. Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")They fill Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")They fill too fast Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Time Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Too many parks. Money could be better spent elsewhere Barriers to Program Participation (answered "Something Else")Travel out of town. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else") Absence of bike lanes down town. As an avid cyclist new to Montana I can’t believe how little biking infrastructure there is. I was surprise to read there are existing bike lanes! Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Annoying and discourteous bicyclists. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Bike lanes end abruptly. No connections on trails 590 Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Bike lanes need to be swept for debris, can cause injury to bikers. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Bike lanes not connected Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Drivers try to hit bike commuters Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else") Health issues of spouse …limits my time to be away from home for very long amounts of time. I enjoy the trails, gardening and biking in free time…going to learn how to play pickle ball! Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Icy sidewalks Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Icy sidewalks Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Lacing in east west route options out of the roadway for cyclist Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Lack of dog etiquette. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Need more bike lanes Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Need parking lots with easy access(ADA), more benches on paths, wider paths. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Not enough disc golf Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Off leash dogs 591 Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Off leash dogs Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Parked cars block the bike lanes Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Poor city snow removal on streets, hard to walk, etc. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Sidewalks end Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Sidewalks not clear of ice and snow Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Snow Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else") Some places in town have decent bike paths, but as a whole, the streets aren’t set up to be very bike friendly Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too busy Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too crowded, therefore dangerous Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Too many dogs Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else") Trails are uneven some have large gravel They are not smooth I am afraid of injuries to feet or knees Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Trails not connected 592 Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Unleashed dogs that are not kept under control. Barriers to Walking or Biking for Recreation or to Access City Parks and Facilities (answered "Something Else")Update trails/paths Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else") Adequate maintenance and replacement of parkland vegetation to replace damaged land from construction Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Adult education Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Continued XC trail growing, ski Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Disc Golf Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Disc golf for adults and for youth. Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else") Disc golf for all ages! Programs and events would include things like disc golf leagues, tournaments, fundraisers, and skill contests (such as a putting competition). Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else") Disc golf. A class or instruction from local disc golf club, Headwaters Disc Golf Club, on how to play the sport and the rules. Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Dog poop everywhere. Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Dogs not on leash Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Indoor shooting range Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Litter pick up days Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")No mountain bike time share Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Skateparks Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Use for group events (pavilions). Need or desire for additional programs (answered "Something Else")Volunteer opportunity 593 GOAL ACTION Who can help? Enhance Expand Evolve Total Cared For Have funding to pay staff to care for our parks landscaping. Create volunteer groups to help tend gardens. Have more edible community gardens. City staff/ commissionary, Valley of the Flowers Project 1 001 Cared For Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning. Volunteer opportunities awareness, Earth Day cleanup 0 101 Cared For Restore Bozeman Creek to natural open waterway through downtoan with walking path and trees and waterway habitat 0 011 Cared For More Programming for under 5 years, I see very little in the categories for those under 5 "Mommy/Daddy time" classes 0 011 Cared For Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods.1 001 Cared For Parks and rec foundation 1 001 Cared For Have a year-round volunteer program to adress trash and vandalism 1 001 Cared For Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan. 0 000 Cared For Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces. 0 000 Connected Connect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system. Gallatin Valley Land Trust 2 327 Connected Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces. MSU Engineering Capstone Program, GVLT, HRDC 2 327 Connected Make pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer. MSU Transportation Research Dept 3 205 Connected More sidewalks 1 102 Connected Wayfinding (Kagy), especially in neighborhoods, more nature, unclear what parks would be interesting to MSU students, more art and culture/education. A lot of MSU students use campus or go to mountains 1 001 Connected People who work in Big Sky come to walmart to do errands, not clear where public parks are (especially dog park and beach/swimming), need maps and signs 1 001 Connected Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks.1 001 Connected Connect downtown north along where gallg. crosses Main st (wayfinding) - (map)1 001 Grand Total 594 Connected Do a better job of tying trails together! (map) 1 001 Connected increase parkland downtown so events can spill over with green spaces and vice versa DBA, city capital investments 1 Connected lincoln trail easement from water tower (burke park) to MSU - strategic East-West Connector 1 Connected Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street). 1 001 Connected Connect to Sourdough 0 101 Fun Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks. Gallatin Valley Land Trust 1 102 Fun Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman. 1 045 Fun Water park/amusement park 0 022 Fun Playground (cannot use school playground during the day)0 022 Fun More fairs 0 011 Fun Organize frequent family, kid runs 0 011 Fun Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities. 1 001 Fun Programming for teens! Rec sports, pick up games, outdoors 1 001 Fun Aquatic facilities indoor + out for kids and aduts, splash pads, water access 0 202 Fun More swings at Lindley 0 101 Fun Fire Truck playground 0 101 Fun More playgrounds like Dinosaur park 0 101 Fun Bigger parks that you can explore: trees, nature (map)0 000 Fun Pickleball + new pool on West side (map) 0 000 Fun Use school courts publically (map) 0 000 Fun Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents.0 000 Resilient Partner with MSU engineering Capstone Program andersl@montana. edu (Anders Larsson) 0 101 Resilient Create environmental standards for managing natural areas. Bozeman City Council 4 015 Resilient Grow nature play in parks. GLVT 0 202 Resilient Daylight creeks (instead of just waterway setbacks, require actual restoration from developers), celebrate creeks, private ownership of creeks is issue - creeks last reamining in-city habitat for a lot of wildlife GVLT 1 001 Resilient Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island.US. Forest Service 1 315 Resilient Create more community edible gardens, adopt a zero waste resolution, support valley of the Flowers Projects, BYO bag for change Valley of the Flowers Project 1 001 595 Resilient Strategically acquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species.1 304 Resilient stop watering lawns, plant gardens! 1 001 Resilient Make Main st downtown not a through-route for heavy trucks (local delivery only)0 102 Resilient Evolve Mandeville Creek (map) 0 000 Resilient Partnership with save gallatin watershed council 0 000 Resilient community events to talk about resilience in parks Lorea simentanca, rachel hieks 1 Resilient drought tolerant garden space in an existing park Parks, water conservation 1 Resilient Expand nature-based classes and events. 0 000 Safe Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access. Housing + Land Trusts 2 316 Safe Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails. 2 002 Safe Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails.1 001 Safe Bozeman sports park - wife was hit by ball on trail that runs perpendicular to field - can the city put up netting behind goals to protect walkers 1 001 Safe enforce: no loud exhaust systems on loud cars and trucks with altered mufflers 1 001 Safe having bus system be more frequently would help MSU students explore more of BZN (exchange sutdent with no bike or car) 1 001 Safe Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible.1 001 Safe Parks map at every park... "this playground is too busy? Try ____"1 001 Safe Address bike intersections on the bike lane of tamarack and Rouse, 7th and oak, tunnels, bridges 1 001 Safe Make facilities safer 1 001 Safe Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for. 0 000 Safe 19th crossing (map) 0 000 Safe Safety near Bozeman Pond (map) 0 000 Safe Create an online "suggestion box" for people to pin their ideas or maintenance concerns onto a platform 1 Safe Promote helmet safety for motrcycles/bicycles signs/posters 1 Safe ensure a "people presence" in parks to decrease/prevent vandalism as its occuring in rural trailheads. Work together as a community. 1 TOTAL 43 30 19 100 596 SurveyTool: Tool Status Published Visitors 34 Contributors 6 Registered 6 Unverified 0 Anonymous 0 Admin 0 597 SUBMISSIONS 6 Demographics Graphs Below Survey Responses Graph *special characters like '&' will be removed from options Goal #1: ConnectedConnect and experience all that Bozeman has to offer. Connect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system.2.17 Make pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer.2.83 Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces.3 Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks.3.5 Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street).3.5 Goal #2: Fun and InvitingInvest in alignment with changing community needs and trends. Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities.1.5 Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman.2.33 Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks.2.83 Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents.3.33 Goal #3: LovedIncrease organization capacity to benefit the community. Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning.2.17 Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan.2.17 Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods.2.83 Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces.2.83 Goal #4: Safe and AccessibleUnify and provide safe, equitable access to all. Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access.2.33 Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible.2.83 Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails.3.17 598 Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for.3.33 Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails.3.33 Goal #5: ResilientAdapt to changing environmental pressures. Acquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species.1.67 Create environmental standards for managing natural areas.2.83 Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island.2.83 Expand nature-based classes and events.3.17 Grow nature play in parks.4.5 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS of Contributors - Based on Sign-up form responses *special characters like '&' will be removed from options With which racial or ethnic group(s) do you identify? White 6 What year were you born? 1993 2 1961 1 1967 1 1957 1 1974 1 Which quadrant do you live in? Northeast NE 3 Southeast SE 3 Do you have a disability? No 6 With which gender do you identify? Male 3 Female 3 Do you rent or own your primary residence? Rent 2 Own 4 599 Date of contributionGoal #1: ConnectedConnect and experience all that Bozeman has to offer.What other ways should the City be more connected?Goal #2: Fun and InvitingInvest in alignment with changing community needs and trends.Sep 30 22 12:06:04 PMConnect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system., Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street)., Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces., Make pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer., Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks.Trails across town and around the county that are bike, walk, 1 wheel etc friendly and away from the roadways. Promote alternative transportation!Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities., Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman., Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents., Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks.Oct 03 22 12:30:17 PMConnect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system., Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces., Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks., Make pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer., Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street).Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities., Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman., Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents., Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks.Oct 05 22 6:12:54 AMUse linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces., Make pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer., Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street)., Connect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system., Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks.Don't let developers build trails that don't line up or drop off curbs without ramps.Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks., Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities., Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman., Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents.City’s Parks, Recreation and Active Transportation Priorities Dec 3, 2021 to Nov 29, 2022600 Oct 19 22 7:26:24 AMMake pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer., Connect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system., Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks., Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street)., Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces.Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities., Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks., Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents., Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman.Oct 22 22 5:20:16 PMIntroduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks., Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces., Connect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system., Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street)., Make pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer. pedestrian and bike bridges over RR tracksBuild community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman., Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks., Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities., Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents.Nov 28 22 10:28:44 AMMake pedestrian and bike crossings over major roadways and intersections safer., Connect southwest Bozeman to northeast Bozeman using a citywide "super route" trail system., Prioritize safe and welcoming east-west connections along roadways (examples include Koch Street, Cascade Street, and Annie Street)., Introduce more amenities, like lighting, water fountains, and benches to trails and linear parks., Use linear open spaces along waterways to connect the active transportation network into parks and open spaces.adding bike lanes to all major roadways, especially between campus and downtown to give students a better option when going downtown.Expand indoor and outdoor programs for all seasons by renovating and retrofitting existing facilities., Build community facilities to support recreation and aquatics equitably across the city, including a new facility in the west side of Bozeman., Broaden outreach and communications to Bozeman residents., Increase and improve park entrances and trails in parks.601 What other ways should the City adapt to changing trends?Goal #3: LovedIncrease organization capacity to benefit the community.What other resources or tools does the City need to support the community?Goal #4: Safe and AccessibleUnify and provide safe, equitable access to all.Alternative transportationIncrease Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning., Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan., Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods., Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces.Create policies that address alternative transportation and don't wait for other city trends to come here-think ahead and creatively.Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access., Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails., Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible., Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for., Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails.Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan., Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces., Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning., Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods.Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails., Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible., Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access., Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails. , Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for.Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning., Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan., Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces., Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods. Big ideas, big money from those that are here.Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails. , Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for., Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access., Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails., Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible.602 Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods., Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning., Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces., Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan.Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access., Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for., Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible., Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails. , Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails.better enforcement of car traffic at intersectionsCommunicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces., Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods., Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan., Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning.Adjust UDC codes to require a minimum of pocket parks or open space that is cared for by the HOA and or hotel/office building. Change UDC coding for B3 that requires no open space to a zoning that does require pocket outdoor spaces for climate control and mental health. Also deny all cash-in-lieu of parks until the state law changes to reflect current market value.Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails. , Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible., Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails., Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for., Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access.add more trash bins for dog waste on the galligator trail and peets hill. It would be wonderful to have a new outdoor pool. I would love to know that green spaces are being thoughtfully added to each new housing development. COMMUNITY GARDENS. We need more community garden spaces placed throughout the community.Create a strategy for ongoing outreach to ensure community members have a voice in the various projects identified by the PRAT plan., Increase Parks Department staff to fill gaps in programming, maintenance, and park planning., Enhance collaboration with City partners and neighborhoods., Communicate back to residents about how their contributions to the Parks and Trails District are being invested in public open spaces.We all just want to know that with the increase of population the city greenspaces and surrounding area is being protected and added to.Prioritize park land acquisition in low-income neighborhoods and communities with limited park access., Make all park spaces, facilities, and trails universally accessible., Create design and maintenance standards across all parks to ensure they are well designed and well cared for., Create clear and consistent wayfinding in at park entrances, in facilities, and along trails. , Create and communicate park etiquette guidelines to ensure all feel welcomed and safe in parks, facilities and trails.603 What other ways can parks, trails and programs be safer and more accessible?Goal #5: ResilientAdapt to changing environmental pressures.What other resiliency measures should the City undertake to adapt to a changing environment?Which quadrant do you live in?What year were you born?With which racial or ethnic group(s) do you identify?Do you have a disability?Keep trails away from roadwaysAcquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species., Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island., Create environmental standards for managing natural areas., Expand nature-based classes and events., Grow nature play in parks.Ensure affordable housing so that our open spaces are not becoming camp grounds. Southeast (SE) 1967 White NoAcquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species., Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island., Create environmental standards for managing natural areas., Expand nature-based classes and events., Grow nature play in parks.Northeast (NE) 1957 White NoAcquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species., Create environmental standards for managing natural areas., Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island., Expand nature-based classes and events., Grow nature play in parks.Southeast (SE) 1974 White No 604 Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island., Acquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species., Expand nature-based classes and events., Create environmental standards for managing natural areas., Grow nature play in parks.Southeast (SE) 1993 White NoWiden the brush around natural pathways, keep bike lanes off streets- and instead use multi-use pathways.Expand nature-based classes and events., Grow nature play in parks., Create environmental standards for managing natural areas., Acquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species., Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island.Advocate changing the UDC to require developers to design around their existing mature trees and shrubs and disallow lot leveling such as Bridger View which was full of lilacs, flowering crab tree, and spruces, etc. Cutting the trees and leveling the land eliminates large amounts of carbon sequestration and adds Carbon to the atmosphere. Northeast (NE) 1961 White NoI would love to hear that disabled people were asked this question. As I am not disabled I do not know the answer nor do I feel qualified in answering for them.Acquire land that includes critical habitats to protect native and migratory species., Create environmental standards for managing natural areas., Expand nature-based classes and events., Expand tree canopy to reduce the impacts of urban heat island., Grow nature play in parks.Plant native plant species and reduce grass that needs mowing/watering. We live in an area that has limited water supply and seeing grass being watered kills me. I would love to see parks with more native grass species/grass that is drought resistant. Northeast (NE) 1993 White No 605 Please provide a reason and/or examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Very high quality High qualityLow quality Very low quality Open‐Ended ResponseVery high quality High qualityLow qualityVery low quality Open‐Ended ResponseVery high qualityHigh qualityLow qualityVery low qualityHigh qualityI think that the side walls are well maintained and roads are well kept. The only thing that I would like to see in the future is the Main Street to Mountain Trails paved instead of gravel. I think that people don’t use these trails as much because of it. High qualityThere are safe and easy access to most of the parks in Bozeman.High qualityLow qualityReally we just moved here. My son is afraid to ride his bike to parks… too much traffic. High qualityNice parks, but need more swimming opportunities.Low qualityLow qualityToo much emphasis on car infrastructure and not enough on alternative methods of transportation ‐‐ biking, walking, public transport which has resulted in more motor vehicle traffic rather than alleviating it (recognizing there has been a huge influx of people moving here that is also contributing to the problem ‐‐ all the more reason to encourage other forms of transportation). High qualityLow qualityRoads are not conducive to non‐motorized traffic. Rules/laws are poorly enforcedLow qualityI find that parking seems to be the biggest issueLow qualityThere isn’t a lot of inclusion for disabled peopleHigh qualityHigh qualityEasy to access one park, not easy to go between parks on footHigh qualityAccessibleHigh qualityLow qualityBike lanes end abruptly, not enough shared use paths, no physical barrier between bike lanes and traffic. High quality Well maintained and many activitiesPlease rate your experience with the inclusivity of the classes, programs, and events offered through Parks and Recreation of Bozeman?DISABILITY SURVEYPlease rate your experience when it comes to access around getting to and from parks in Bozeman?Please rate your experiences with accessibility within the parks around Bozeman?606 Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please share any other issues or concerns that you have around access or inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.Open‐Ended Response Very satisfied Satisfied DissatisfiedVery dissatisfied Open‐Ended Response Open‐Ended ResponseThey were friendly and welcoming every time I have participated and I have recommended to many of my friends. SatisfiedI think they have done a good job, but to what I have said earlier, I think they should consider making the Main Street to Mountain Trails paved.We haven’t had much opportunity yet, but how do the deaf get interpreters so they can get equal access?SatisfiedStill new at this … moved here 3months agoPlease please please use interpreters for equal access for the deafDissatisfiedSee answer to question #2. There are also little to no bike lanes heading north/south just west of town ‐‐ like along 7th or 19th Avenues and multiuse paths are not conducive to commuting by bike as cyclists on these are lawfully considered the same as pedestrians and need to stop or at least slow down at every crossing. There also does not seem to be any deference given to bicycle riders with bike lanes being shut down for golf tournaments (on Kagy), temporary road signs being placed in the bike lanes and the lanes not being cleared of snow and/or debris on a regular basis (that last goes for bike paths as well).Many law enforcement officers and city officials seem to have little concern for cyclists' safety and the inherent dangers they face when riding on the roads. Police seem more concerned with citing riders for not stopping (and putting a foot down) at stop signs even when the cyclists have made a concerted effort to ensure there was no traffic coming in the other direction. And they don't seem to know the laws or care to enforce them on motorists who blatantly disregard traffic ordinances (such as parking in the bike lanes) putting cyclists at additional risk.DissatisfiedRoads are not conducive to non‐motorized traffic. Rules/laws are poorly enforced. Cross walks are often blocked by vehicles wanting to make a right on red. Bike lanes are poorly thought out.I haven’t participated in any that I know ofDissatisfiedInaccessible buildings that were build before the ADADo not have experience with Parks and Rec events, but appear high qualitySatisfiedMajor roads and lack of sidewalks N/ADissatisfiedBike lanes narrow, need more traffic calming, need to change the way motorists view cyclists, runners, and rollers.Would love to see well developed shared use paths between all the new communities and the downtown. Paths should also push toward Belgrade, Manhattan, Livingston, and Three Forks.What is your level of satisfaction around options for active transportation (cycling, walking, using a mobility assist device) within the City of Bozeman?607 Please share any suggestions that you have to help improve access and inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.Open‐Ended ResponsePost that interpreters will be made available on requestStop trying to increase population without thought to issues.More wide sidewalks and Main Street to Mountains trails between parks608 Please provide a reason and/or examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please rate your experience with the inclusivity of the classes, programs, and events offered through Parks and Recreation of Bozeman?Please rate your experience when it comes to access around getting to and from parks in Bozeman?Please rate your experiences with accessibility within the parks around Bozeman?handcycling the need for wider and paved trailsHigh qualityBozeman is small so it's easy to get around. I'm not sure all parks have handicap parking or wheelchair accessible areas though. High qualityThe dinosaur park near the fire station has good paths. Lindley park also has paths, both are a bit bumpy rough for access.Very high qualityVery low qualityI live more than 1 mile from the nearest bus stop and I don’t drive (I am blind), meaning I have to get rides with other people to go to the parks. If I try to walk, there are too many roads without sidewalks or broken sidewalks or traffic lights that don’t make a alert sound when it is safe to go across.Low qualityThere is no way for a blind person to know where the bathrooms, trail heads, or other features in the parks are located without actually stumbling into them. Updating the online descriptions of each park would be a good start.Very low qualityLow qualityMany times it is 2 fold: knowing where the parks are and ability to get to the parks (Transportation).High qualityI enjoy the bike paths and layout options for parks like Storymill. It has a lot for folks to offer and layed out well.High qualityVery high qualityVery low qualityinaccessibility for wheelchair‐using daughter (mulch & grass are hard to push through, no adaptive equipment)Low quality609 Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please share any other issues or concerns that you have around access or inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.What is your level of satisfaction around options for active transportation (cycling, walking, using a mobility assist device) within the City of Bozeman?the need for longer trails to be able to not be on the roadBozeman is warm and welcomingSatisfiedBozeman is very bike friendly. I've seen the number of bikes increase over the years.More cross walks and accessibility for the blind.I don’t have transportation, so I really can’t test the inclusivity. I would love to have my son in more programs, but I can’t get him there. I also can’t get him to the free lunches during the summer.SatisfiedWithin the city does offer more transportation options, as well as more sidewalk from one place to another.The number and quality of the parks in this area is amazing, and I hope to be able to take more advantage of them one day.I have in the past tried scheduling things for the organization I belong to and struggled with knowing the parks layouts, available of times, and a person to talk to to get information on a timely manor.SatisfiedI am blind, so this question really doesn't apply other than it would be awesome to have more tandem bikes available and folks to help guide. The challenge will be for me accessible controlled intersection to ensure safety is possible.Please make tactile maps of parks and recreational areas and offer braille and audable signs to describe the narative on signs.Dissatisfied610 Please share any suggestions that you have to help improve access and inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.trail that people living out side of the city like 4corners could ride a cycle to bozemanPlease update your website descriptions to give more information about the parks in a written format. Maps are great for people who can see, but not for persons with visual disabilities. I don’t think there really is much you can do about broken sidewalks in the city or the lack of reliable public transportation. Even the traffic lights that don’t have auditory indication for blind pedestrians is out of your Control.If there is a sign with info, you can offer a bar code to scan so the device will link to web pages or audio files to be able to read it. also, partnering with organizations like Montana Independent Living Project, Montana Association for the Blind, School for the deaf/blind, VR agencies and senior focused houseing to get more folks active and out into the community.611 Please provide a reason and/or examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please rate your experience with the inclusivity of the classes, programs, and events offered through Parks and Recreation of Bozeman?Please rate your experience when it comes to access around getting to and from parks in Bozeman?Please rate your experiences with accessibility within the parks around Bozeman?Low qualityGround cover is insufficient for wheelchairs and gait trainersLow qualityGround cover is insufficient for wheelchairs and gait trainersLow qualityHigh qualitySome parks, such as Story Mill, are extremely accessible. Others, like Kirk park are less accessible. High qualityHigh qualityHigh qualityThe parks are very nice.Very low qualityClean safeHigh qualityWe live on the southeast side of town, and appreciate the trail access to parks, library, downtown. High qualityMy special needs daughter is pretty mobile, but I can imagine other people with more physical limitations might have difficulty accessing parks due to mud.High qualityHigh qualityHigh qualityLow qualityAs a wheelchair I have to depend on galavan, my partner, or others as I can’t take a class to learn how to drive and there are not sidewalks that are consistent or trails that are paved.Low qualityStory Mill is the only park I can easily enjoy with my family but I still can’t get close to the play structures or swings to play with my kids.Low quality612 Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please share any other issues or concerns that you have around access or inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.What is your level of satisfaction around options for active transportation (cycling, walking, using a mobility assist device) within the City of Bozeman?We don't feel barriers for participation of ALL users are considered. Bozeman, along with Montana in general, is dated with it's implementation of universal design.SatisfiedAlthough they exist in most main areas, sidewalks and curb cuts should be present everywhere events take place. This is the same for access to events that are not on ground level. Are there ramps available? I would like this to be considered in our planning for the next 10 years.Our parks do not have accessible ground cover or accessible play equipment. It is disappointing to try to recreate and not be included. An accessible swing, at the very least, should be included in all parks. Wood chips and pea gravel are not accessible ground coverings. This lack of access to things others take for granted negatively impacts quality of life. If a piece of equipment or space works for a disabled person, it will work for everyone. Taking this view could positively change our community.I have not accessed any specific classes, programs, or events. But there is not an n/a option available.SatisfiedDissatisfiedMy daughter has an electric trike. The trails are marked no motorized vehicles. It isn’t safe for her to ride the bike lanes that are incorporated into roadwaysMy daughter has autism and I have mobility issues. I’m very worried that bozeman will enforce no electric bikes on the trails. We cannot ride the bike lanes due to safety issues. How is it that my tax dollars mean we should be excluded from trail use because our bikes are electric?My daughter has had great experiences at summer camps, and the library offers good opportunities too.DissatisfiedI wish there was a trail that allowed people to get to Eagle Mount without having to walk/bike on busy Goldenstein! This is especially important for people with special needs, because their judgement isn't as good as typical folks. I want my daughter to be as independent as possible, but for her to get to Eagle Mount on her own is a bit disconcerting. Maybe a trail from Sacajawea to Eagle Mount?SatisfiedTo the best of my knowledge there are not any disability specific classes or programs so I cannot speak to the inclusivity.Very dissatisfiedSidewalks don’t exist, bus stops are not on sidewalks or reachable, galavan has very specific hoursThere are not enough options for wheelchair friendly family activities or trails that are paved that can be easily used613 Please share any suggestions that you have to help improve access and inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.Please include disabled children and adults. Implement universal design and ADA compliant spaces. Disabled people deserve to live lives where they are included.Post “ebikes welcome here†signs on trailsSidewalks everywhere, paved trails, parks are are wheelchair accessible614 Please provide a reason and/or examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please rate your experience with the inclusivity of the classes, programs, and events offered through Parks and Recreation of Bozeman?Please rate your experience when it comes to access around getting to and from parks in Bozeman?Please rate your experiences with accessibility within the parks around Bozeman?Very high qualityI go to the parks in Bozeman parks with friends or on near where I live.Low qualityI said low qualities because even though I can go to the park. Some of my friends that need accessibility aren't able to go and I feel like there should be more accessible parks everywhere are least. There would be more inclusive if there was more parks like that.Low qualityLow quality I feel that at least Cooper park is close to where I liveLow qualityI believe that there should be acessibilty depending on which parks need itVery high qualityHigh qualityHigh qualityLow qualityVery low qualityPublic transportation lacking. Sidewalks blocked, not shoveled.Low quality Trails not kept up‐ big holes, loose dogsLow qualityVery high qualityRememberVery high qualityThankVery high quality389 2110 72 3771 615 Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.Please share any other issues or concerns that you have around access or inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.What is your level of satisfaction around options for active transportation (cycling, walking, using a mobility assist device) within the City of Bozeman?I feel like there are lots of options for accessible programs like Eagle mount and special Olympics but like if I wanted to take gymnastics I wouldn't be able to so I wish there were more things for young adults that we could try either gymnastics or dance or more that are more for both disabilities and without disabilitiesSatisfiedI feel like Bozeman has been ok on this. N/ASatisfiedI have never... in 25 years?.... seen any classes, programs or events specifically welcoming anyone with disabilities? Either there have been none.... or you are not reaching out the right way? We have adopted 4 children with various challenges over the last 30 years... and have lived in Bozeman 29.5 years.DissatisfiedBicycling seems dangerous going into town, at best. And we live out of town.Don't have a way to get to classes or programsVery dissatisfied Sidewalks and trails not kept up.Loose dogs are a huge problem. Lack of trail maintenance makes walking unsafe.WeVery dissatisfied I We11 8 3 616 Please share any suggestions that you have to help improve access and inclusivity to the City of Bozeman's Parks & Recreation services.I think an indoor sensory gym would be so amazing. I have sensory needs my self and I think it would benefit so many others for all agesPatrol parks to keep loose dogs from keeping others from using the parks, check trails in parks and repair them more often, provide more public transportation for people with disabilities‐ Galavan is woefully underfunded and unavailable.Thank everyone617 BIPOC SURVEYWhich race/ethnicity best describes you? (Please choose only one.)Please provide a reason and/or examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.What are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household when visiting parks, trails, or facilities in Bozeman?In your ideal world, what would make your parks and public spaces safer and more welcoming?ygthat you would like to talk about regarding parks, recreation, and active transportation in the Bozeman area?ppjare looking for people who would be willing to share more about your personal experiences in Bozeman. Please let us American Indian or Alaskan NativeAsian / Pacific IslanderBlack or African AmericanHispanic or LatinxMiddle Eastern or North AfricanMultiple ethnicity / Other (please specify)Very high qualityHigh qualityLow qualityVery low quality Open-Ended Response Very safe Safe UnsafeVery unsafe Open-Ended Response Open-Ended Response Open-Ended ResponseOpen-Ended ResponseYes I want to be involved and am willing to be interviewed in-person, virtually or by phone - StoryCorps (publicly viewable database)Yes, I want to be involved and am willing to share photos and written stories - Photovoice (can be done anonymously)No, thank you!Asian / Pacific IslanderLow qualityIntimidated by the upscale, money focus, and cockiness of the outdoor community in Bozeman.SafeTrail etiquette is not the best in Bozeman. Honestly have found other trail users unfriendly. However, other people have experienced differently. DistanceAccessible for all people of all ability levels, better trail etiquette practices, closer trail systemsNAYes I want to be involved and am willing to be interviewed in‐person, virtually or by phone ‐ StoryCorps (publicly viewable database)Yes, I want to be involved and am willing to share photos and written stories ‐ Photovoice (can be done anonymously)Black or African AmericanLow quality Lack of knowledge, cost and accessSafeOn trails ok but I still worry somewhat. Bozeman isn't that diverse.Besides hiking in the summer or spring there isn't much else to do here.I have seen many comments on secret Bozeman that doesn't show Bozeman as inclusive as they like to advertise themselves. I think that's what bothers me the most.Transportation needs to be eexpanded. You really need a car here. In bigger cities the public transportation is better.No, thank you!Black or African AmericanHigh qualityGood quality recreational areas! SafeNever overcrowded and are welcoming inclusive spaces but not always close by walkable Distance and driving Accessibility via walkabilityN/A I feel like this may not apply to me as much as othersYes I want to be involved and am willing to be interviewed in‐person, virtually or by phone ‐ StoryCorps (publicly viewable database)Black or African AmericanVery high qualityVery safeHispanic or LatinxVery high qualityEverything is clean Safe There is not to much crimeWinter times are so long and going out is so cold, they should offer a firepit With a fire pitNoYes I want to be involved and am willing to be interviewed in‐person, virtually or by phone ‐ StoryCorps (publicly viewable database)WhiteVery high quality Accessibility and clean Very safeN/ATime More sponsored activitiesN/aNo, thank you!Black or African AmericanHigh qualityThe trails are very well maintained and outdoors are fun to get intoSafeThere’s still wildlife to worry about but that’s about itJust getting the motivation to get outsideTo know if there’s groups out thereNopeNo, thank you!Black or African AmericanHigh qualityI grew up here and it’s a lot cleaner and the up keep is awesomeSafeNo reason to complain about safety but attitude and prejudices should be checkedNot being stared at like I don’t belong even tho I grew up here I don’t knowNoNo, thank you!High qualityNice experience and it improves my quality of lifeSafe99.99% of experiences are good and the bad ones are just unpleasant, not unsafe.None other than my time, reallyNo, thank you!CaucasianHigh qualitySome parks are a little sketchy to walk through in daylight or night‐ very high homeless populations make it unsafe at timesSafeBeing able to watch my surroundings and look for dangers while also being able to defend myself I needed makes me feel safer in those parks or areas that may be less safeHomeless population approaching or following Regular officer patrolWe need to address how a place where children play like parks is also a place that attracts homeless individuals. This dynamic needs to changeNo, thank you!High qualityI have overall had a great experience with the parks.Safe I haven't had any problems at parks.The location, parks are located in middle‐class areas.The location, basketball courses, and more community events need to be held at parks so that the community can feel welcomed.Community eventsYes I want to be involved and am willing to be interviewed in‐person, virtually or by phone ‐ StoryCorps (publicly viewable database)High qualityMostly just because I go around the times no one is around, so I'm more likely to be safe and not have to engage with others.SafeI would consider it safe since I always go with groups. When not in a group I would answer not safe just because people tend to be more rude when you're alone.Money and transportation are one of the biggest issues of concern.I am unsure how to answer this question.Not at this current moment.No, thank you!High qualitySafeParking and location.No, thank you!Please rate your experience visiting parks, trails, and recreation facilities in Bozeman?How safe and welcome do you feel visiting parks, trails, and recreation facilities and outdoor spaces in Bozeman618 Which race/ethnicity best describes you? (Please choose only one.)Please provide a reason and/or examples for your opinion from the last question.Please provide a reason or two and examples for your opinion from the last question.What are the biggest barriers to you or anyone in your household when visiting parks, trails, or facilities in Bozeman?In your ideal world, what would make your parks and public spaces safer and more welcoming?ygthat you would like to talk about regarding parks, recreation, and active transportation in the Bozeman area?ppjare looking for people who would be willing to share more about your personal experiences in Bozeman. Please let us Please rate your experience visiting parks, trails, and recreation facilities in Bozeman?How safe and welcome do you feel visiting parks, trails, and recreation facilities and outdoor spaces in BozemanHigh quality They are clean, even the bathrooms.Safe Because it's Bozeman!Having more events that are in these spaces to not only introduce people to the space but also encourage a community to meet together. It would be really nice if there was an event just for women or just for bipoc populations.No, thank you!619 April 22 Engage Bozeman WorkshopTitle DescriptionUsertypeWhich quadrant do you live in?What year were you born?With which racial or ethnic group(s) do you identify?Do you have a disability?With which gender do you identify?Parks connector trails that allow enjoyable bike/walking transit throughout BozemanI would like to see the city plan for a connecting network of trails that allow bike and ped access throughout the city, even to Belgrade and Bridger Bowl, etc. Two comparable cities that have implemented this type of trail system are Jackson, WY and Boise, ID. A much larger city with this system is the Atlanta Greenbelt. This type of investment can actually attract businesses, as a surprising number of folks don't want to drive cars and love taking the "greenbelt" or parks connector. A big investment in parks and connecting trails would make the city much more vibrant and liveable. 1 7User Southeast (SE) 1984 White No MaleDisconnected00User I do not live in Bozeman1993 White No FemaleEast-west connections (challenging)10User I do not live in Bozeman1993 White No Femaleslowly getting there!00UserBetter Communication w/ Partnerships 0 1User I do not live in Bozeman1993 White No FemaleDiversity of ParksCan get to different kind of park within 10 min walk 0 2User I do not live in Bozeman1993 White No FemaleSuch great potential! Needs a plan to realize it... 0 0User I do not live in Bozemangood not great10Usernew parks lack identity00User I do not live in Bozemantime money funding - challenges 0 0UserExcellent for children! Great facilities, playgrounds 0 0User I do not live in BozemanLots of growth00User I do not live in BozemanMore walking trails(Some are good today... support expanding!)00UserI do not live in Bozemanneeds an aquatics center00User I do not live in BozemanActive and well-used Well-appreciated 0 2User I do not live in Bozemanmore pickle ball and tennis courts 0 0User I do not live in Bozemanhave good parks, hard to find them! Not all connected01Userticketed for dog park use - think about policies for dogs/park use00UserIdeasVotes VisitorsSign Up form Details620 Title DescriptionUsertypeWhich quadrant do you live in?What year were you born?With which racial or ethnic group(s) do you identify?Do you have a disability?With which gender do you identify?IdeasVotes VisitorsSign Up form Detailsneed more restrooms - winter is when many are outside!01UserStarting to see a difference Benefits of parks and trails district 0 0User I do not live in BozemanIndoor recreational facility01User I do not live in BozemanToo many barriers to basic infrastructure in parks00Userbike racks! need more00Userone incomplete curb cut creates barriers to access for persons with disabilities 0 1Usermore developed trails between parks 0 1User I do not live in Bozemanquality over quantitymost active park is passive - Peets Hill...do not need to overprogram 0 0Userwould love to ride from Bozeman to Belgrade and Four Corners without traveling along a high traffic route13User I do not live in Bozemanfragmented00User White NoFractured yet attractive00User Southeast (SE) 1960 White No Femaleaccess to viewsheds!00User White Nofractured00User White Nooverused and degraded00User White Nopotentially dangerous to wildlife 0 0User White Noimpractical for biking!00User White NoImprove baseball/softball fields 0 0UserMore softball supportOne of the fastest growing sports for women yet we lack adequate support to foster meaningful growth for the young women in the community. We need an indoor facility for ALL sports due to our long winters. But updated fields and support for youth is needed drastically.00UserImprove softball/baseball fields! 0 0UserEast west connectivity00UserBeautiful, varying types & unclear on trail connection00User Southeast (SE) 1979 White No FemaleEastside, connected, dogs00User Southwest (SW) 1987 White No FemaleAmplification of Bozeman natural characteristics00User621 Title DescriptionUsertypeWhich quadrant do you live in?What year were you born?With which racial or ethnic group(s) do you identify?Do you have a disability?With which gender do you identify?IdeasVotes VisitorsSign Up form DetailsLacking diversity, more activities for older kids, indoor aquatic center, tennis, other activities beyond playgrounds. 0 0UserFractured, inequitable, viewshedsParks are currently inequitable for children and different use groups across town - older parks lack attention, maintenance and diversity03User Northeast (NE) 1990 White No Femaleif it wasn't for Private citizens paying for parks w/ private Funds, Bozeman would just be many Police cars circling expensive neighborhoods outdoor sports matter01Userdisconnected missing middleWhen you look at the map you can see the parks on the perimeters but not much connection happening through the middle of town. East west is tough. Getting kids safely to CJMS from east of north 7th is tough. We need some sort of crossing over or under at least one of the RR crossings- if not for cars then for bikes and pedestrians 0 0User Northeast (NE) 1961 White No FemaleNeed expansion/connectivity00User Northeast (NE) 1953 White No MaleParks with fishing pondsIn the ponds cutthroat, brooks, browns, crappie, musky, smallmouth and largemouth bass, bluegill, grayling, whitefish, catfish, cutbows, and perch. 0 0User Southwest (SW) 2003 White No MaleComment response to "Active and well-used"Aligns with values, part of the local lifestyle 0 0User I do not live in BozemanComment response to "need more restrooms - winter is when many are outside!" Peet's Hill works well! 0 0User622 Title Description Trail/Beltway/Loop around the city 00 Better pedestrian crossings Over the street pedestrian bridges over major street corridors 0 0 Protected bike lanes Especially on busier streets, buffered protected bike lanes 0 0 Refridgerated outdoor ice would give us solid 4-5 months of outdoor skating time, used to have almost 6 months previously 00 Expansion of community nordic trails Support from the city for these, Lindley as an example 0 0 Interconnected park system So people can take advantage of all the amenities and facilities without relying on use of the car. Whole system is connected and provides what people need. 0 0 completed and maintained master plans (complete); stuff we do have we do not take care of 0 0 Need an outdoor swimming pool! A place where people learn to swim (splash parks don't do that). Single pool can't address needs of the whole community. Outdoor pools very linked into summer fun! Kids should be able to bike to a pool. 0 1 5-10 minute walk of a trail, that can connect into the trail system 0 0 Continued maintenance improvements Keep up the trajectory on improvement! 0 0 Worry - Time wasted and dreams built - but nothing come out of it sometimes no follow through! 0 0 Inclusive to all Ensure the system is inclusive... all times of day... not just 8-5pm... all ages. 0 1 Dec 3, 2021 to Nov 29, 2022 Ideas Votes Visitors 623 Hire people to do this work - do not rely on partners when the City should be doing the work! City has a chance to take on more responsibility! Community cares about parks, rec, and trails 03 eight to eighty park system - multi- generational/built for all ages 0 1 Embrace community partners Sports people, GVLT, ski groups, Run Dog Run. Listen to community input. Very tied into community.0 0 vision leadership and results 0 0 more off leash areas, or shift in rules/policy 01 pedestrian bridges, connected system - over arterials and collectors 0 0 public plazas/spaces in dense places - require new developments to create public space 0 0 Embrace natural spaces Unprogrammed parks, take advantage of the maintenance district to protect natural resources, manage against heavy use. Think about restoration, people management, weed control. See some glimmers of hope with the district! 0 0 taking care of streams/creeks through the city environmental impact should be an important tenet 0 0 more pathways and greenways - not close to roadways...nice to have a buffer/more enjoyable. Get ahead of future growth! 0 0 Protect existing parks 0 0 trails along waterways00 connected and safe 0 0 safe and connected 0 0 variety of trails 0 0 624 routes and wayfinding 00 safe for wildlife 0 0 connected, conservation 0 0 appealing to teenagers group that parks are not catering to today 01 inviting 00 opportunity for BZN history and natural spaces and education 0 1 more public art 0 0 places for musical performances in parks maybe a sheltered area/band shell for small performances - like Rose Park..little venue with a neighborhood focus! could be multi- use 0 2 diversity equity inclusion 0 0 Baseballl/Softball field improvements NOW! Baseball and softball field improvements are desperately needed. Soccer/Lacrosse have ample field space and a professional turf. Our baseball/softball fields are the laughing stock of the state. 1 0 Wild Life Sanctuary 00 Native Plants and wildflower preserves impossible to maintain with uncontrolled dog use 0 0 separate bike paths make the streets safe for pedestrians, cyclists and pets by slowing traffic and sharing the urban streets better 0 0 Make traffic calming standard let's face it, we all drive too fast through crosswalks, traffic lights etc. Put in traffic calming at crosswalks. 0 0 Playful, community oriented and interconnected 0 0 Weatside, bike trails, neighborhoods 0 0 inclusive play equipment for children with disablities 0 1 625 Comment response to "Trail/Beltway/Loop around the city" Pedestrian/bikeable loop 00 Comment response to "Better pedestrian crossings" Some concerns about trails and bikes connected to the schools. Need to consider location of elementary schools in design of new facilities. 0 0 Comment response to "Expansion of community nordic trails" Expanding into parts of town where there aren't trails, nordic trails don't exist in valley west, typically just in downtown 0 0 Comment response to "Embrace community partners" Plan can show partners where they are uniquely positioned to contribute by understanding what the City's plan is. 0 0 Comment response to "Embrace natural spaces" Hire a natural resources specialist. 0 0 626 Latitude Longitude Address Category 45.690565 -111.02989 511 East Tamarack Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60320 Opportunities More connections to Bozeman Creek and room for it to ebb and flow 45.674388 -111.02845 432 South Church Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60322 Places Anne's favorite place! First step in the trails system. Also Cathy's where she walks everyday. 45.681779 -111.06869 210 North 24th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60323 Barriers / Difficulties Need to add more wayfinding in the system 45.720683 -111.03307 2864 Mcilhattan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60324 Barriers / Difficulties Parking challenges, would be great to subdivide it, but there are chances to expand it since it gets busy! 45.700035 -111.06487 2000 North 19th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60326 Barriers / Difficulties Northern part of 19th! 45.672094 -111.02298 Golf Way, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60327 Opportunities use city resources, such as public restrooms, for winter skiing trails. promote non profits, such as BSF, that create recreational opportunities 45.666321 -111.01781 935 Highland Boulevard, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60328 Places Highland Glen - skiing, biking, hiking 45.68328 -111.03536 322 North Black Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60330 Places So many things to do - meetings, ice skating, walk your dog. Iconic park for the north side. 45.660007 -111.06251 1890 West Kagy Boulevard, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60331 Barriers / Difficulties Giant intersection at Kagy/19th, would be great to ride your bike up and over that intersection 45.701084 -111.02466 702 Bridger Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60334 Barriers / Difficulties Access for non-profit childcare 45.67956 -111.06242 110 North 19th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60335 Barriers / Difficulties Gnarly intersection for bike riding! 45.716068 -111.02989 2710 Mcilhattan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60336 Opportunities The landfill is a great area to create a mountain bike park, expand the adjacent off-leash dog park, and create off-leash dog trails. 45.681224 -111.06591 Kirk Park, N. 20th Ave., Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60337 Places Kirk park should remain a park - worries about its future! 45.665466 -111.0162 1413 Maple Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60338 Opportunities Bridger Ski - partner 45.683458 -111.01446 Interstate 90, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60339 Opportunities opportunity for crossing over I-90, create a loop 45.679358 -111.0636 1921 West Main Street, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60340 Opportunities On high speed roads, need to go beyond bike lanes to more shared use path facilities 45.674313 -111.01768 300 Highland Boulevard, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60341 Barriers / Difficulties Are the public restrooms open during the winter? 45.660697 -111.02742 182 Sq Ft Inside City, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60342 Opportunities GVLT - worked with City to purchase to add to Peets Hill 45.670954 -111.1119 8552 Huffine Lane, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60343 Opportunities opportunity for crossing over Huffine north to south here, for new developments 45.681464 -111.05541 1385 Ruth Thibeault Way, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60344 Opportunities Need a PLAN for connecting bikes into neighborhoods, to schools, connecting to key destinations. Include a wayfinding system 45.696214 -111.09199 1173 Furguson Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60345 Places I go here a lot but very crowded and over used! We need more PUBLIC WORKSHOP: Park System Patterns Marker Details Your Comment 627 45.697368 -111.0904 1987 Vaquero Parkway, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60346 Opportunities love the off leash dog park, BUT, it is too crowded. We need more off leash dog parks, especially on the west side. 45.661035 -111.02757 182 Sq Ft Inside City, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60347 Opportunities GVLT can help with seeking donorships and partnerships to help cities gain access to funding they couldnt get otherwise. Also the sports foundation. Shout out to Ultimate Frisbee at Kirk Park 45.667026 -111.01592 923 Highland Boulevard, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60348 Places We use HG trails a ton in the summer for the youth mtn bike team. There's definitely an opportunity here to add more trails! We'd love to help with this. 45.721102 -111.03358 2864 Mcilhattan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60349 Places Great doggo park 45.681606 -111.06503 Kirk Park, N. 20th Ave., Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60350 Places Real multi-use park - Kirk! Many smll groups using it which is nice, like ultimate frisbee! Hopes it stays green! 45.644453 -111.02901 3701 Stony Brook Lane, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60351 Places Can be hard to find this trail if you don't know it's there. 45.711873 -111.04908 27737 Frontage Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60353 Places Some of the best birding in Bozeman 45.674942 -111.04705 709 West Koch Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60354 Places Park we go to often! 45.679755 -111.09811 74 Hanley Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60355 Places We love the west side neighborhood parks, but would love to see more connection of the parks! 45.660757 -111.10744 5667 Staffanson Road, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60356 Opportunities Harvest Creek and Babcock Meadows - chance to improve connectivity. Way to make prk to park movement happen safely! 45.697218 -111.0919 1173 Furguson Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60357 Barriers / Difficulties great amenity, but overused 45.681344 -111.09918 213 Clifden Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60358 Barriers / Difficulties Would love to have public restrooms 45.673713 -111.10748 4901 Huffine Lane, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60359 Opportunities Babcock Creek comment should go here! 45.673158 -111.02107 Golf Way, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60360 Places ski trails at sunset hills! 45.704174 -111.02007 980 Story Mill Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-60361 Opportunities Opportunity for Holloran/Canyon Gate to provide sizable pocket parks in addition to the connector between Legends park and the light at Bridger Drive 45.676247 -111.03154 Bogert Park, 232 S Church Ave, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60362 Opportunities Given climate change, the City needs to purchase an ice rink refrigeration system to greatly improve and lengthen the outdoor skating season at the Bogert covered ice rink. 45.645653 -111.03206 259 Greenmore Court, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60479 Places Sourdough Trail 45.645387 -111.02686 3567 Sourdough Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60480 Places Make it an attractive place for folks to want to come here and enjoy this space - great example of subdivision relationships. 45.680834 -111.01047 Interstate 90, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60481 Places Path to the M! Matt GVLT 45.682244 -111.01805 Village Downtown Boulevard, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60482 Places Path to the M and Story Mill - could not have happened without the trails and parks fund - did not come from the general fund. 45.701466 -111.02549 702 Bridger Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60483 Places Playgrounds, creeks, connectivity and path to the M trails, open space and parks fund as key for projects like this 628 45.695 -111.09143 Furguson Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60484 Places Lots of bird habitat, wetlands, parks and natural resources. Development review process - great work over the years to create a great network of parks with trails and green space. Preserving some of those wetlands, when it was not desired. 45.683638 -111.11139 5324 Westmorland Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60485 Places Bronken park wetlands, soccer fields 45.680864 -111.09856 Valley West Park, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60486 Places value of linear parks, access to water, wetlands and nature 45.68052 -111.01882 1209 East Main Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60487 Places Fabulous wetlands 45.671074 -111.03283 700 Dell Place, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60488 Places Beautiful corridor that works for commuting as well as pleasure 45.651503 -111.07 360 Enterprise Boulevard, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60489 Places Beautiful ponds, birds and wildlife, sanctuary that people use as a dog park Important to preserve this space as a wetland and habitat, and not as a dog park, protect the wildlife that are here Would be nice to post signage in this area to create awareness 45.699466 -111.05689 1601 East Baxter Lane, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60491 Opportunities Growth is encroaching on this little wetland area. No access. 45.711394 -111.0474 27809 Frontage Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60492 Barriers / Difficulties Trails/wetland areas - could meet parkland requirement, wouldn't have to move them out of town, would go a long ways to contribute to overall connectivity 45.704081 -111.04882 2777 North 7th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60493 Barriers / Difficulties management challenges with folks with dogs - especially in places that are natural resources. 45.706314 -111.02955 1034 Boylan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60494 Barriers / Difficulties Would love to see offroad bike/road connectivity 45.675122 -111.05435 408 South 13th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60495 Barriers / Difficulties Getting from downtown out to NW trails, difficult to get to Rose Park, Regional Park 45.663562 -111.02736 1489 Kenyon Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60496 Barriers / Difficulties Off leash zone at Peets Hill - seen such an increase in the last few years of new residents and people getting out more and adopting dogs. Some places in parks that are overwhelmed by dogs and/or people. Was not desisgned for this amount of use. 45.613137 -111.00105 83 Limestone Meadows Lane, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-60497 Opportunities Is the connection between triple tree and painted hills city? Some great progress has been made in connectivity. 45.664566 -111.02726 1421 Kenyon Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60498 Barriers / Difficulties CITYWIDE - Mountain bikes took off, now have e-bikes and one wheels. Build the perfect park. It is all about who ends up using it. 45.695269 -111.08766 1845 Vaquero Parkway, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60499 Barriers / Difficulties Parks reaching capacity - showing natural resource damage Parks not designed for this amount of use that we're seeing recently E-bikes, motorized scooters, mountain bikes Anderson dog park- well loved and starting to show a lot of wear and overuse Peets Hill as well - 45.644288 -111.03182 244 Greenmore Court, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60500 Barriers / Difficulties Traffic calming on the trail! People racing, high speeds is a challenge 45.67941 -111.02575 712 East Main Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60502 Opportunities Connect this nexus to the depot park, northside trails 45.674256 -111.02853 432 South Church Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60503 Places Peets Hill 629 45.674556 -111.02839 406 South Church Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-60505 Barriers / Difficulties Parks reaching capacity - showing natural resource damage Parks not designed for this amount of use that we're seeing recently E-bikes, motorized scooters, mountain bikes 45.670939 -111.08343 2999 Fowler Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-60507 Barriers / Difficulties create safe way to get to the west side 45.689889 -111.09135 4040 Annie Street, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61079 Opportunities This side of Oak Springs Park is undeveloped and in need of investment. It currently serves as a defacto "dog park" due to it being just a large field with many dog waste stations. This park would provide an excellent opportunity for "yappy hours" or off-leash hours to support the way it is already being used. In addition, adding trees, benches, and other low cost amenities will increase the enjoyment for surrounding residents. 45.69591 -111.09216 1173 Furguson Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61080 Barriers / Difficulties This dog park is an amazing amenity but is over- utilized due to being the only dog park within a half mile of many many homes. Intense erosion in the spring and heavy use has led to it just being a mud/dirt pit with little grass. It needs investment and additional smaller dog parks or off-leash friendly hours parks nearby to lighten the load and allow the landscape to recover. 45.693074 -111.08953 3793 West Oak Street, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61081 Places The shared use path along the north side of Oak is amazing and should ring the whole park to provide safe connectivity to adjacent neighborhoods. 45.720503 -111.0344 2864 Mcilhattan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61082 Barriers / Difficulties This park would greatly benefit from some shade in the summer. It's an amazing space, but also adding a pavilion or covered space would make it much more amazing! 45.696794 -111.01959 L Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61083 Barriers / Difficulties This dog area needs shade and is too small compared to the balance of the park area. I understand protecting wildlife, but there should be another opportunity for people to enjoy recreation with their dogs on this side of town. 45.674073 -111.02848 Peets Hill/Burke Park, 600 S. Church St., Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61695 Barriers / Difficulties Peet's Hill suffers from overuse. Because it is the only dog park on this side of town, it is full of dog feces year round. The wild flowers that used to be famous in this area are dying out, only surviving on slopes where dogs don't run and pee. Bikes, loose dogs and people collide, and dog owners are often irresponsible and allow their dogs to run off leash into the property of the homes along Church and the library land and path. Each of these groups needs to be considered before the hill becomes an unwelcoming place. The smell of feces when the sun comes out is awful. I miss the wild flowers. 45.721042 -111.03307 2864 Mcilhattan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61697 Opportunities This is what a dog park should be. It is big enough to minimize conflicts, open enough to see all around you, and people actually pick up their dogs' messes. Unlike Peet's Hill, which is becoming a traffic jam. 45.674897 -111.03107 418 Bogert Place, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61746 Opportunities I love this park, right off downtown, where the local daycares bring children nearly everyday to play on the playground, where pickup hockey happens all winter, where the city band plays, and where SLAM holds its events. Also soccer groups practice there, there is a fitness group of expectant and post partum mothers every summer, dog training classes take place, college students come and play bocci ball, baseball, frisbee, birthday parties and every kind of celebration occur . It is so well used, and so loved. 45.676037 -111.03067 302 South Church Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-61747 Opportunities The outdoor pool is so wonderful to have. There are swimming lessons for young children, adult lap swimming, family swimming. The mural on the entrance wall to the pool is amazing. This pool is a community treasure. 45.676044 -111.02793 300 South Wallace Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61748 Opportunities The sculpture park is lovely to walk through, and the meditation labyrinth. 630 45.675718 -111.02785 309 South Wallace Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61749 Barriers / Difficulties Back along the watercourse that is shut off, transients often defecate in the stream bed. During the summer, the dogs go done there and roll in it. Also, some of the trees along the library walk could use trimming before they lose branches. 45.663262 -111.03397 210 East Mason Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-61750 Opportunities This is a great little park with a new playground being installed that is just wonderful. It is used all summer for baseball, and the neighborhood families also watch the games and play at the playground. 45.67072 -111.03955 811 South Willson Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61751 Opportunities This little city park is also very busy. Volunteers maintain the flower gardens, and the Friends of the Story Mansion hold outdoor events for families and children, such as Halloween at the Mansion, St. Patrick's Day, Christmas, Teas, and I have really enjoyed going to these events. 45.677569 -111.04172 111 South Grand Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61752 Opportunities The Emerson Lawn will be a wonderful Middle of the City green space. During the summer the music there is great! We need inner city green space as more and more of the downtown becomes developed without trees, setbacks, or places to play. 45.69072 -111.07573 1105 Buckrake Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-61767 Opportunities Nice quiet park. Many new trees planted. Some benches to sit and enjoy would be nice. 45.704921 -111.00431 2285 Boylan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-63228 Opportunities Ice rink 45.693137 -111.06247 1805 West Oak Street, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-65340 Barriers / Difficulties N19th is a bike/ped barrier. Need safer crossing for east-west shared use paths. 45.692883 -111.04616 651 West Oak Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-65341 Barriers / Difficulties N7th is a bike/ped barrier. Need safer crossing for east-west shared use paths. 45.690743 -111.08251 1079 New Holland Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-65342 Opportunities When Fowler Ave is constructed between Oak and Huffine...great opportunity to include shared use paths on both sides of the new street. 45.668311 -111.03551 1032 South Black Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-65343 Opportunities Opportunity to add a dedicated paved bike path (paralleling the natural fines Gallagator Trail) that would connect MSU to downtown. 45.681771 -111.03579 209 North Black Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-65344 Opportunities Opportunity to create a true bike boulevard along Black Ave connecting the Fairgrounds and the Gallagator Trail (at College Ave). This would be an important north-south bike corridor. 45.679118 -111.02573 712 East Main Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-74307 Opportunities Buy this property to enhance park access and keep from developement. Use for connecting the trail (Gallagator)along the creek to this crossing to access Broadway and future trail system to depot, etc. 45.682978 -111.01537 1507 Cedar Street, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-74308 Opportunities Reinforce Rianna pin - extend the trail along the nature preserve on the old RR berm to a bridge crossing 90, that probably was there years ago. Use for access to Story Mill and future trails alone E. Gallatin and nearby foothills 45.690563 -111.00693 Story Hill Trail, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-74309 Opportunities Work with owner for permanent easement to Story Hills Trails and connect them down thru hills to E. Gallatin and to future trail over 90 and to Story Mill Park with trails along E. Gallatin by buying easements. 45.656198 -111.00045 Bozeman Trail Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-74310 Opportunities Buy easement for trail from under Kagy to the County land along subdivision hills to State Land and build new trail to connect to "New Painted Hills Trail" where it is on State Land. Underpass to Painted Hills Trails would improve safety of crossing Kagy and buying small area at this corner would add parking to the small lot with access to subdivision trail west of this corner. 45.666306 -111.05183 The Duck Pond, 11th St, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system-patterns?reporting=true#marker-74882 Places Duck Pond is a staple of the MSU campus and attracts use throughout the year. More traffic calming on 11th could improve its accessibility to the broader community. 45.678436 -111.09807 4281 West Babcock Street, Bozeman, Montana 59718, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-74883 Barriers / Difficulties Traffic Calming on Babcock is critical as promoting access to this park. Bike lane on Babcock is a step, but decreasing the width of the road and more trees close to the street edge would slow traffic more naturally on this corridor and improve multimodality. 631 45.664266 -111.03071 1417 South Church Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-74884 Opportunities Improvement of crossing, connecting the neighborhood west of Church to the Burke Park system. 45.700365 -111.02765 700 East Griffin Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-75561 Opportunities Consider open hours for the gym in the winter for basketball/indoor sports as opportunities for indoor recreation during the colder months in limited. 45.701182 -111.02696 75 Bridger Drive, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-75562 Opportunities An Ice Rink in this grass square would be great to activate Story Mill Park in the winter months. 45.706172 -111.01385 1620 Boylan Road, Bozeman, Montana 59715, United States http://engage.bozeman.net/pratplan/maps/public-workshop-park-system- patterns?reporting=true#marker-75563 Opportunities Pickle Ball/Basketball court - sport amenities are lacking on this end of town. 632 Marketing Assessment Appendix 633 2 Introduction BerryDunn assessed the Parks and Recreation Department (Department) marketing efforts as part of the City of Bozeman’s (City) Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan. For this study, BerryDunn conducted research for the marketing assessment by reviewing information that was provided by the client and that is publicly available. A summary of agency documents and background information resources is as follows: • City and Department websites • Bozeman City and Parks and Recreation budgets • Engage Bozeman • 2020 Communication Plan • 2020 Bozeman as an Inclusive City Report • 2021 Gaps Analysis for Equity Indicators Project • City and Department social media accounts. • Department’s Parks and Recreation Program Guides. In addition, the team created multiple online accounts including the portal to “Engage Bozeman,” Instagram, Facebook and Twitter to understand process, consistency and to follow important projects. A focus group session with key leadership staff was conducted on November 15, 2021 as well. The purpose of the meeting was to determine how the Department is marketing currently, as well as to understand areas of challenge and opportunity. Review of Current Operations The Department implements a hybrid model of marketing and outreach, which is common in the field of parks and recreation. Some functions are centralized in Office of the City Manager in the Administration Division. These include creating and maintaining the City’s brand, color scheme, and related high-level functions. Other functions are decentralized, such as creating presentations, social media posts, printed materials, and other efforts. BerryDunn identified one dedicated full-time equivalent (FTE) for marketing and outreach functions across the City, who is located within the City Manager’s Office. Staff report that one additional FTE (Outreach Coordinator) is planned to be added in the FY23 budget. BerryDunn was made aware that an increased focus on marketing and outreach has occurred in recent years. This includes greater emphasis in the City’s strategic plans, hiring the City’s first Communication and Engagement Manager, and the creation of specific marketing and outreach plans. Through these recent actions, coordination and quality of efforts have been improving. BerryDunn could not identify a specific marketing and outreach budget. Staff report a dedicated budget is challenging to identify due to the hybrid model of these services. Staff estimate $25,000 is budgeted for advertising. The City’s FY22 budget is $158.3 million, and of this amount, $2,322,748 is budgeted for Recreation and $5,167,179 is budgeted for Parks. 634 3 Current marketing activities for the Department focus on use of the website and social media as well as printed materials. Staff implement several outreach-related activities, such as the Department’s Rec Mobile and special events. The City’s vision states “Bozeman remains a safe, inclusive community, fostering civic engagement and creativity, with a thriving diversified economy, a strong environmental ethic, and a high quality of life as our community grows and changes.” Some of the language in this vision highlight the importance of marketing and outreach such as “inclusive community” and “civic engagement.” The City’s Strategic Plan includes vision statements on the following key areas: 1. An Engaged Community 2. An Innovative Economy 3. A Safe, Welcoming Community 4. A Well-Planned City 5. A Creative, Learning Culture 6. A Sustainable Environment 7. A High Performance Organization While all of these areas relate to marketing and outreach, the statement on an engaged community is especially important to consider and review for the marketing assessment. Outreach is identified as 1.1 in the City’s Strategic Plan, with the goal of continuing to strengthen and innovate in how information is delivered to the community and partners. The City developed a 2020 Communications Plan, which was supported by the 2018 Strategic Plan. The plan’s purpose is to serve as a guide and vision for staff for how to best communicate, inform, and engage with the public. Clear goals support the Communication Plan, including: 1. Telling the Story 2. Engagement 3. Celebrating and Enhancing Partnerships 4. Communicating the Strategic Plan 5. Communications Infrastructure as an Agency 6. Communications and Public Engagement as an Integrated City Service Specific objectives and audiences are identified through the City’s Communications Plan. 635 4 Figure X: Graphic From Page 20 of the City of Bozeman 2020 Communications Plan: The City created “Engage Bozeman,” which is a 2021 community engagement initiative. The foundation of this initiative is the Engage Bozeman Plan, which includes guiding principles and goals for community engagement. From the research conducted on these documents and efforts, it is clear that marketing, outreach, communication, and engagement are important to the City of Bozeman. Marketing and Outreach Strengths for the Department The City has prioritized marketing and outreach at an increasing level in the past few years. These efforts have created new tools for the Department to utilize to help advance services. The following strengths were identified: • The City’s Communication Plan, Engage Bozeman, and Strategic Plan are updated resources available for services. These new resources have generated more awareness and attention to the Department, such as Engage Bozeman efforts providing the ability for individuals to receive updates on key endeavors (including the Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan). 636 5 • City staff collaboration is strong, and staff report significant improvement of efforts with the hiring of the Communication and Engagement Manager. • Many staff members in the Department include job functions that relate to marketing, communication, and outreach as part of the hybrid approach of this service. • Many programs, services, and events provided by the Department are outstanding forms of marketing, outreach, communication, and engagement and significantly contribute to the brand of the City. • Department services are identified in many ways for contributing to citywide strategic goals with opportunities for more achievement. Marketing and Outreach Challenges for Parks and Recreation While several new outreach tools, efforts, and resources are available citywide, the Department experiences challenges to provide and connect services to the community in ways that are aligned with the City’s Strategic Plan. Key challenges relate to budget, staffing, and planning. The following challenges were identified: • The budget is low for current needs and is not enough to support growth • There is a lack of a dedicated marketing and outreach FTE for the Department, which results in lack of coordinated efforts and reactive marketing (and less storytelling, engagement, and other priorities consistent with the City’s Communication Plan) • Budget resources are not clear • A marketing plan for the Department does not exist • Program Guide circulation is limited and needs to reach more audiences (e.g., the Program Guide is not mailed directly, and underrepresented populations do not receive quality access to this information). Approximately 76% of park and recreation agencies across the country print a program guide (based upon National Park and Recreation Association’s [NRPA] 2019 Marketing and Communications Report). • The Department’s social media is well-utilized and updated by staff in a timely fashion. BerryDunn identified regular posting of information and promotions with 5,130 followers on the Recreation Facebook page. When compared to NRPA Gold Medal Award Winners for the past 10 years in Class IV population 30,000 to 75,000, the average number of Facebook followers for these park and recreation agencies is 9,687. Based on this benchmark and consideration of Bozeman residents’ high access to the internet, Facebook usage has the opportunity to increase. Reported in the US Census 2019 Quick Facts of Bozeman, 96% of households in the City have a computer, and 89% have access to the internet. Community residents appear to have a high level of access to technology. 637 6 City’s “Moose on the Loose” creative and engaging outreach program Marketing and Outreach Recommendations for the Department 1. Continue to provide training on marketing and outreach-related resources that are available citywide, including any updated or expanded resources (e.g., City Communication Plan, Engage Bozeman, etc.). 2. Develop a centralized budget for marketing and outreach that will support the goals identified in the City’s Strategic Plan, Communications Plan, as well as the Department’s cost-recovery and general marketing needs. Based on the NRPA’s 2019 Communications and Marketing Report: The typical park and recreation agency allocates three percent of its annual operating budget to marketing and communications activities, including all aspects of these activities from printing and design costs to paying for salaries and benefits of any associated employees. Some agencies spend even less of their budgets on these efforts. Twenty-eight percent of survey respondents indicate their agencies designate less than two percent of their annual operating budgets to marketing and communications. Conversely, 17% of park and recreation agencies spend at least 10% of their annual budgets on marketing and communications strategies. Smaller park and recreation agencies tend to dedicate a greater percentage of their annual budgets to marketing activities than do larger ones (although this is, of course, relative as these agencies’ overall budgets are comparatively small). The typical park and recreation agency serving fewer than 20,000 residents and the typical agency with an annual budget under $1 million each spends five percent of their annual budgets on marketing and communications activities. In comparison, the median is three percent for agencies serving every other population cohort. 638 7 Considering the population of Bozeman is 52,619, then the median of 3% of the Department’s budget should be dedicated for this important function. For fiscal year 2022, the combined Department budget is $7,489,927, which means that approximately $224,000 should be allocated for marketing and outreach when considering national best practices. From a staffing perspective, NRPA reports that the typical park and recreation agency has 1.5 FTEs dedicated to marketing and communication activities. Also, more than one in three park and recreation agencies use outside contractors to support marketing and communication efforts. Figures X and Y: Graphics From National Park and Recreation Association’s (NRPA’s) 2019 Communications and Marketing Report: 639 Parks Inventory Appendix 640 Map NumberOwner TypeLocationAcres Park TypeGarbagePlaygroundBathroomsBasketballBeachBenchBike RacksBleachersBouldersBridgesDog StationsDrinking FountainsDugoutFacilityFish DocksGarden PlotsIce SkatingKioskPark SignsTotemsPicnic TablesSkateparkTennis CourtTrail MarkersDog ParksVolleyball CourtsCITY Open SpaceDURHAM AVE0.01000000000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpaceDURHAM AVE & SPRINGBROOK AVE0.36110106000040000000004000 0CITY Open SpaceEQUESTRIAN LN & VAQUERO PKWY & CABALLO AVE0.02000000000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpaceHARMON WY & NEW HOLLAND DR0.03000000000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpaceHUNTERS WY0.02000000000130000000010001 0CITY Open SpaceOAK ST. & HUNTERS WAY0.2 000000000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpacePINNACLE STAR ST4.8 010001000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpaceS 3RD AVE & WAGONWHEEL RD0.95000000000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpaceSPRINGBROOK AVE & HARMON WY0.03000000000000000000000000 0CITY Open SpaceSTORY MILL & BRIDGER DR1.73000001000000000000000002 0CITY Open SpaceWEST GARFIELD ST.0.36000000000000000000000000 012 CITY ParkBEALL PARK2.3 Community Park231101100021010010204000 014 CITY ParkBOGERT PARK7.49 Community Park111109000011020010101010 017 CITY ParkBOZEMAN POND24.17 Community Park9121171011110420021090012150 CITY ParkGLEN LAKE ROTARY PARK83.81 Community Park6010114101911052003046006 165 CITY ParkKIRK PARK12.27 Community Park 1051104140202430000103100 070 CITY ParkLINDLEY PARK14.56 Community Park3000014000230010001220000 0110 CITY ParkSTORY MANSION PARK1.12 Community Park000002000000000000202000 0111 CITY ParkSTORY MILL COMMUNITY PARK53.73 Community Park 13110041001451061000010000107 CITY ParkBABCOCK MEADOWS2.46 Linear Park000000000300000000020002 022 CITY ParkBRIDGER CREEK LINEAR PARK4.86 Linear Park6010014101911052003046006 126 CITY ParkBROOKSIDE PARK0.53 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0143 CITY ParkCOTTONWOOD LINEAR PARK - A0.38 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0143 CITY ParkCOTTONWOOD LINEAR PARK - B0.56 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0143 CITY ParkCOTTONWOOD LINEAR PARK - C0.7 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 085 CITY ParkDEPOT PARK1.1 Linear Park000001000000000000020000 037 CITY ParkDIAMOND ESTATES PUBLIC PARK0.42 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 048 CITY ParkGALLAGATOR LINEAR PARK9.87 Linear Park3000015000230010002251002 055 CITY ParkGREENWAY/WESTGATE4.06 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 066 CITY ParkLANGOHR GARDENS PARK12.29 Linear Park010002001110000001140001 079 CITY ParkMINOR SUBDIVISION 344B/VILLAGE DOWNTOWN2.02 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 082 CITY ParkNORTH 9TH2.32 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0CITY ParkPARKLANDS AT VILLAGE DOWNTOWN0.63 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0106 CITY ParkSOURDOUGH TRAIL PARK4.11 Linear Park000003000100000000000000 0109 CITY ParkSPRING MEADOWS PARK2.1 Linear Park000003000100000000000000 0114 CITY ParkSUNDANCE SPRINGS PARK3.95 Linear Park000003000100000000000000 0116 CITY ParkTHE KNOLLS AT HILLCREST PARK2.86 Linear Park3000014000230010001220000 0123 CITY ParkVALLEY CREEK PARK0.46 Linear Park700000020000720000202000 0128 CITY ParkVILLAGE DOWNTOWN PARK0.77 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0131 CITY ParkWEST MEADOWS PARK0.86 Linear Park000003000100000000000000 0139 CITY ParkWESTRIDGE EAST PARK1.11 Linear Park000001000010000001000001 0140 CITY ParkWESTRIDGE NORTH PARK2.31 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 0141 CITY ParkWESTRIDGE SOUTH PARK1.02 Linear Park000000000000000000000000 057 CITY ParkHARVEST CREEK12.91 Linear Park1101060002110000000024002 090 CITY ParkOAK MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PARK2.73 Linear Park000000000020000000000000 02 CITY ParkALDER CREEK NATURAL SPACE3.28 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000020000000020000 03 CITY ParkALLISON PARK3.08 Natural Areas (in Parks)000001000000000000010000 09 CITY ParkBAXTER MEADOWS NATURAL SPACE1.37 Natural Area000000000100000000000000 011 CITY ParkBAXTER SQUARE NATURAL SPACE0.61 Natural Area000000000000000000000000 024 CITY ParkBRONKEN PARK - NATURAL SPACE21.13 Natural Areas (in Parks)410003000030000000000000 027 CITY ParkBURKE PARK46.8 Natural Areas (in Parks)30000140002300100012200001028 CITY ParkCATTAIL CREEK NATURAL SPACE13.62 Natural Area100004000380000000000000 029 CITY ParkCATTAIL LAKE SUBDIVISION PUBLIC PARK17.98 Natural Areas (in Parks)000006000100001000002000 043 CITY ParkFERGUSON MEADOWS NATURAL SPACE0.45 Natural Area000000000000000000000000 045 CITY ParkFLANDERS CREEK SUBDIVISION PARK NATURAL SPACE0.07 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 052 CITY ParkGRAFS EAST PARK14.02 Natural Areas (in Parks)000001000010000001000001 0 641 58 CITY ParkHAUSER PARK1.71 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000100000000100000 061 CITY ParkICE HOUSE PARK0.64 Natural Areas (in Parks)000002000000000000000000 064 CITY ParkJOSEPHINE PARK4.1 Natural Areas (in Parks)3000014000230010001220000 067 CITY ParkLAUREL GLEN PARK4.11 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 074 CITY ParkMCLEOD PARK9.03 Natural Areas (in Parks)000004000040000002020004 089 CITY ParkNORTON EAST RANCH SUB PARK NATURAL SPACE1.39 Natural Areas (in Parks)2000014000150010000000000 092 CITY ParkOAK SPRINGS PARK ACCESS CORRIDOR0.07 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 093 CITY ParkPEETS HILL0.51 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 0102 CITY ParkSHADY LANE PUBLIC PARK0.55 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 0119 CITY ParkTRADITIONS SUBDIVISION PARK NATURAL SPACE0.62 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 0121 CITY ParkTUCKERMAN PARK10.11 Natural Areas (in Parks)001001000010000001110001 0127 CITY ParkVALLEY WEST PARK NATURAL SPACE2.15 Natural Areas (in Parks)200006100130010000000000 0133 CITY ParkWEST WINDS PARK NATURAL SPACE13.01 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000030000000000000 0142 CITY ParkWILLOW PARK0.35 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 076 CITY ParkMEADOW CREEK SUBD PUBLIC PARK1.41 Natural Areas (in Parks)000000000000000000000000 071 CITY ParkLOYAL GARDENS SUBDIVISION PARK12.11 Natural Areas (in Parks)010002000020000000002000 01 CITY ParkALDER CREEK6.31 Neighborhood Park210005000120000000010000 030 CITY ParkCENTENNIAL PARK2.53 Neighborhood Park1100000000100000002030001 yapp033 CITY ParkCOOPER PARK4.22 Neighborhood Park40000100000310000001060001036 CITY ParkCREEKWOOD SUBDVISION PUBLIC PARK1.83 Neighborhood Park100000000010010000000000 038 CITY ParkDIAMOND PARK10.39 Neighborhood Park210005200040030000000000 040 CITY ParkENTERPRISE PARK8.76 Neighborhood Park100000000110000000000000 044 CITY ParkFLANDERS CREEK SUBDIVISION PARK4.58 Neighborhood Park110002000020000000000000 047 CITY ParkFOUR POINTS MINOR SUBDIVISION PARK5.37 Neighborhood Park000004000020000000000000 053 CITY ParkGRAN CIELO4.26 Neighborhood Park010000000000000000000000 059 CITY ParkHEADLANDS PARK3.16 Neighborhood Park000000000000000000000000 060 CITY ParkHRDC (WEST BABCOCK PARK)2.68 Neighborhood Park000000000000000000000000 062 CITY ParkICON PARK1.6 Neighborhood Park400000000020000000000000 063 CITY ParkJARRETT PARK1.89 Neighborhood Park110004000000010000103000 068 CITY ParkLEGENDS AT BRIDGER CREEK PARK7.49 Neighborhood Park120002000010000000000000 072 CITY ParkM.L. ANDERSON PARK2.64 Neighborhood Park010000000000000000000000 073 CITY ParkMATTHEW MATSEN PARK3.19 Neighborhood Park000106000030000000100000 075 CITY ParkMEADOW CREEK PARK4.13 Neighborhood Park110002000010000000000000 080 CITY ParkNE CORNER ANNIE & N LAUREL PKWY1.18 Neighborhood Park010002000000000000002000 081 CITY ParkNEW HYALITE VIEW PARK43.63 Neighborhood Park110003000000000000010000 091 CITY ParkOAK SPRINGS PARK10.75 Neighborhood Park420009000020010000004000 0100 CITY ParkSANDAN PARK3.15 Neighborhood Park020003000020010000100000 0107 CITY ParkSOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTICT14.42 Neighborhood Park400007000040010000001000 0108 CITY ParkSOUTHSIDE PARK2.49 Neighborhood Park211000000010010010004010 0113 CITY ParkSUNDANCE PUBLIC PARK2.87 Neighborhood Park000000000000000000000000 0117 CITY ParkThe Lakes at Valley West12.13 Neighborhood Park410003000030000000000000 0118 CITY ParkTRADITIONS SUBDIVISION PARK4.04 Neighborhood Park000000000020000000000000 0120 CITY ParkTRADITIONS SUBDIVISION PH 3 PARK3.48 Neighborhood Park000000000000000000000000 0125 CITY ParkVALLEY UNIT PARK8.69 Neighborhood Park110100000330000001103001 0126 CITY ParkVALLEY WEST PARK13.52 Neighborhood Park71000183004100020000003000 0130 CITY ParkWALTON HOMESTEAD PARK1.11 Neighborhood Park210004000010000000002000 0132 CITY ParkWEST WINDS PARK7.11 Neighborhood Park010000000030000000100000 0134 CITY ParkWESTBROOK1.51 Neighborhood Park000000000000000000000000 0135 CITY ParkWESTFIELD PARK4.39 Neighborhood Park010001000200000000101000 08 CITY ParkBAXTER MEADOWS13.26 Neighborhood Park020107000250000000001000 04 CITY ParkANNIE ST & COTTAGE PARK LN0.7 Pocket Park000000000000000000000000 010 CITY ParkBAXTER SQUARE1.05 Pocket Park000000001010000000000000 013 CITY ParkBLACK AVE POCKET PARK0.03 Pocket Park000001000000000000000000 016 CITY ParkBOSEL PARK0.44 Pocket Park100003000010000000000000 023 CITY ParkBRIDGER CREEK POCKET PARK1.72 Pocket Park000000000000000000000000 034 CITY ParkCOTTAGE PARK LN0.41 Pocket Park000000000000000000000000 035 CITY ParkCREEKSIDE PARK0.19 Pocket Park100001000000000000101000 041 CITY ParkEQUESTRIAN PARK0.59 Pocket Park210003000010000000000000 042 CITY ParkFARMHOUSE LN & LITTLE COTTAGE LN0.33 Pocket Park000000000000000000000000 077 CITY ParkMILKHOUSE N POCKET PARK0.12 Pocket Park000004000010000000000000 078 CITY ParkMILKHOUSE S POCKET PARK0.25 Pocket Park010003000010000000000000 084 CITY ParkNORTH MEADOWS PARK1.04 Pocket Park110100000000000000100000 088 CITY ParkNORTON EAST RANCH SUB PARK0.51 Pocket Park110002000010000000002000 099 CITY ParkSACAJAWEA PARK0.32 Pocket Park000001000000000002100000 0 642 101 CITY ParkSANDERS PARK0.59 Pocket Park020001000000000001000000 0105 CITY ParkSOROPTOMIST PARK0.22 Pocket Park100001000011000001004000 086 CITY ParkTRIANGLE PARK0.12 Pocket Park000004001000000000001000 0122 CITY ParkVALLEY COMMONS PARK0.5 Pocket Park000000000000000000000000 0124 CITY ParkVALLEY MEADOWS0.36 Pocket Park000100000000000000000000 0136 CITY ParkWESTGLEN PARK0.75 Pocket Park000000000000000000000000 018 CITY ParkBOZEMAN SPORTS PARK - DEVELOPED20.04 Special-Use Park110002000000010000000000 019 CITY ParkBOZEMAN SPORTS PARK - UNDEVELOPED57.74 Special-Use Park110002000000010000000000 025 CITY ParkBRONKEN PARK - SOCCER COMPLEX17.76 Special-Use Park000000000200000000000000 032 CITY ParkCHRISTIE FIELDS6.54 Special-Use Park711001060001610000102000 083 CITY ParkNORTH GRAND FIELD2.37 Special-Use Park110000000010000000203000 096 CITY ParkROSE PARK20.09 Special-Use Park000000000000000000220001 0103 CITY ParkSNOWFILL37.25 Special-Use Park40100600006000000100000010104 CITY ParkSOFTBALL COMPLEX29.01 Special-Use Park5220001901401020001111001106 CITY ParkWEST BABCOCK PARK5.28 Special-Use Park700000020000720000202000 0137 CITY ParkWESTLAKE BMX PARK4.78 Special-Use Park100000340000000000101000 0157 52 14 10 2 361 15 27 7 69 150 11 34 53 8 87 3 27 43 43 92 1 2 30 7 3Total City-Owned Park Properties: 125903.49Total Trails in Parks + Open Spaces:643 Recreation Assessment Appendix 644 1 Introduction The recreation programs assessment reviews the Department’s recreation program and service offerings through a series of individual analyses. BerryDunn reviewed the results of these analyses from a global perspective. This recreation assessment report offers detailed insight into the Departments’ recreation program offerings, and helps to identify the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for future program direction. This report also assists with identifying program categories, programming gaps, and future program considerations. The reports and data that informed the recreation assessment included the Department’s seasonal program guides, participation data, Department revenue and expenses; and program metric worksheets completed by staff. Internal meetings and interviews with staff also provided insight. Program Menu The program menu consists of the recreational activities for a specific time frame. The 2019 program menu contains the last full data set for one year of programs not impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, and therefore used for the program menu analysis. This section will review the menu’s core program areas, service format, program inventory, program distribution, and age segmentation. Department staff have identified the core programs as active aging, adult, aquatics, camps, events, preschool, and school’s out activities. In many departments, core programs are organized by activity type (fitness, nature, sports) and not by age group (preschool, youth, adult). Bozeman uses a combination of both. As the variety of programming increases, re- establishing the core programs might be helpful. Core Program Areas Active Aging Active aging programs are for participants 55 years and older. Nearly all of the classes offered in 2019 were fitness classes including Fusion 4 Function, Heart and Sole, Balance & Beyond, Sole Energy, and Stability and Mobility. Adult Adult recreation encompasses most programs that serve participants ages 18 years and older. These include Wellness in Story Mansion Park, Walking Book Club, avalanche awareness, and the sports leagues which include indoor and sand volleyball. Aquatics The Department offers a robust swim instruction program for children 6 months through 12 years. For the youngest age group (6 months – 3 years), these classes are parent and child together (Angelfish). For the next age group (3 & 4 years), Clownfish is offered. There are several levels of swim instruction for 5 to 12 years olds and also for 6 to 12 years olds 645 2 depending on ability. These courses are offered at the Bozeman Swim Center year-round and at the Bogert Pool during the summer months. The Department also offers lifeguard courses and a Water Safety Instructor course. Camps The Department provides several camp options for the community broken down into different age groups including 3 – 5 years, 5 – 7 years, 5 – 10 years, 8 – 10 years, and 11 – 14 years. Camps are offered during spring break, winter break, and summer and include opportunities for all interests including art, fishing, sports, and spring break at The Mill just to name a few. Events Several events are offered throughout the year – many which are free and do not require advance registration. These events include Easter Egg Hunt, Gallatin Valley Earth Day Festival, Discovery Walks, Pickin’ in the Park, Fishing Derby, National Trails Day, Youth Triathlon, Sweet Pea Children’s Run, Wellness in the parks, Walk with Ease, Avalanche Awareness, and Active Aging Week. Monster Mash (a Halloween themed event), Breakfast with Santa, and the Father Daughter Dance all require advance registration and target specific age groups. Preschool Programming for preschoolers is divided up into several different age groups including: • 2 – 3 years: soccer and sports sampler • 2 – 4 years: Roots & shoots, art in the park, gone camping, treasure seekers, strider bike classes, and hometown heroes. • 2 – 6 years: Little Explorers programs including meet the Bozeman Bucks, town harvest garden at MSU, Amaltheia Goat Farm, and touch a truck. • 3 – 4 years: T-ball league, soccer, and sports sampler • 3 – 5 years: Nature unleased, harvest party, budding artist, sports sampler, strider bike, and Story Mill sprouts (bugs & slugs and spring fever). • 3 – 13 years: programs for this age group provide an opportunity for parents to have a night off and are offered throughout the school year. • 4 – 5 years: T-ball league • 4 – 6 years: Fun on ice • 4 – 7 years: Chinese, French, and Spanish lessons 646 3 School’s Out Activities School Day off events are offered throughout the school year when school is not in session. Programs are offered for 5 to 10 years and include several opportunities including sports, nature, and science. Youth Youth programming is also divided up into several age groups including: • 6 – 7 years: T-ball league • 6 – 12 years: several levels of ice skating and skate boarding • 7 – 9 years: Fun on ice • 8 – 12 years: Chinese, French, and Spanish instruction • 11 – 14 years: Outdoor adventure club including water sports and mountain biking Potential New Core Program Areas Instead of organizing programs by age group, Bozeman might consider using the type of activity to designate core programs. The following list is suggested for future consideration: • Arts • Athletics • Aquatics • Camps • Fitness • General interest • Lifelong learning • Nature/outdoor education • Outdoor adventures Within each area, the goal would be to provide offerings for all age groups (preschool, youth, teen, adult, seniors). Obviously, some core program areas like camps would only include preschool, youth, and teen. Organizing in this fashion helps to create a well-rounded department that is focusing on all areas of recreation. Other Services In addition to the core programs and activities, the Department manages other types of facilities that provide community leisure opportunities. 647 4 Bogert Pool is an outdoor facility that has two swimming areas: a 25-yard lap pool (3.5 – 9 feet in depth) and a shallow pool for young children (1 – 3 feet in depth). The lap pool includes a climbing wall, a small slide, and a zip line. The shallow pool includes a small slide. This facility is typically open from mid-June to late-August each summer. The Swim Center is an indoor aquatic facility with a 50-meter, eight lane lap pool that is typically open year-round. From mid-August to mid-March, it is divided into a 25-yard pool and a 24- meter pool. The Rec Mobile provides recreation to children ages 5 – 10 years in neighborhood parks throughout the spring and summer. Recreation leaders facilitate play that keeps children outside, active, and engaged with peers. These opportunities are available on Monday and Wednesday evenings at different parks. The Bozeman Farmers Market is available late June through mid-September on Tuesday evenings at Lindley Park. The Market features locally grown produce, food vendors, art, and musical entertainment. Several Bozeman facilities are available for rental including Beall Park Recreation Center, Lindley Center, Story Mansion, and Story Mill Community Center. Program Inventory The following is a list of major program categories that park and recreation agencies throughout the country commonly provide. This list helps to identify if there are any common program areas not offered by an agency. Most agencies offer most programs. In matching the Department’s inventory of programs against the list, most of the program areas, 55% are represented. (Blue text represents programs not offered by the Department). Active Adult Aquatics Arts Before/After school Biking Birthday Party Services Childcare Cooking Dance Day/School break camps E-Sports Early Childhood Environmental/Nature Extreme Sports Fitness General Interest Golf Gymnastics/Tumbling Historical programs Homeschool Horseback Riding Ice Skating/Hockey Language Arts Lifelong Learning Martial arts Music Open Gym Outdoor Adventure Pets Pickleball Preschool Running/Walking Seniors Special/Community Events Specialty Camps Sports Instruction Sports Leagues – Adult Sports Leagues - Youth STEM/STEAM Summer Camp (day-long) Sustainability/Green Teen Tennis Theatre/Acting Therapeutic Recreation Trips Wellness For comparison purposes, the consulting team reviewed the program category percentages against its database of park and recreation agencies nationwide. The comparison agencies’ 648 2 average percentage of program categories was 64.5%, which is slightly higher than the Department’s 55%. The program categories depicted in blue text represent opportunities for program menu expansion if aligned with community need. Program Distribution Understanding how the Department’s enrollment-based program menu is distributed across the core program areas helps to identify the extent of programming within each program area in relation to the whole. A total of 329 programs were offered by the Department in 2018 – 2019. Figure 1 depicts the total of programs offered in 2018 – 2019 according to program area and season. Figure 1: Total Programs Offered in 2018-2019 The program with the largest quantity of programs offered was aquatics (160), regardless of season. The second largest quantity of programs offered was preschool (43). Conversely, the areas with the lowest quantity of programs were events (4) but many events do not require advance registration and are not included in this data. These events include the Easter Egg Hunt, Pickin’ in the Park, Youth Triathlon Camps, Youth Triathlon Race, Sweet Pea Children’s Run, Wellness in the Parks, Walk with East, Avalanche Awareness, and Active Aging Week. There are also programs that are run by outside organizations that take their own registration (Skyhawks) and that data is not included here either. It would be ideal for the Department to include all Bozeman programs and events that require a fee into the registration software in an effort to obtain solid data regarding participation. The distribution of the core program areas in relation to each other is depicted in Figure 2. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 ActiveAging Adult Aquatics Camps Events Preschool School'sOut Youth Total Programs offered in 2018-2019, by Category and Season Winter Spring Summer Fall 649 3 Figure 2: 2018-2019 Program Distribution Age Segmentation The age segment analysis reviews the distribution of the program offerings according to the age segments serviced. For the purposes of this assessment, BerryDunn delineated age categories according to the following age structure: • Early Childhood, ages 0 – 5 years • Youth, ages 6 – 12 years • Teen, ages 13 – 17 years • Adult, ages 18 – 54 years • Active Adults, ages 55+ years • All Ages Aquatics48.8% Preschool13.1% Camps11.3% Active Aging10.7% Youth10.1% Adult2.4%School's Out2.4%Events1.2% Program Distribution 650 4 BerryDunn tallied the number of registration-based program opportunities geared toward age groups for four seasons. If a program section spanned clearly across age categories (e.g., ages 4 – 8 years), BerryDunn counted that section once in early childhood and once in youth. Figure 3 displays the Department’s 2018-2019 program menu’s percentage of programs according to each age segment. Figure 3: Age Segmentation of Enrollment-Based Programs Offered 2018-2019 A high percentage of programs, 49%, were designated for early childhood. Of all the age- specific programming, 91% are designed for youth under the age of 18 years. A small percentage of programs were offered for adults, ages 18 to 54. The age segmentation analysis is one helpful method to review the Department’s programming related to the community demographics. Demographic data can be helpful to consider how programming efforts are aligned with the makeup of the community. The adjacent comparison of the community’s population and enrollment-based program offerings in Figure 4 demonstrates Early Childhood (0-5 years)49% Youth (6-12 years)40% Active Adult (55+ years)8% Teen (13 -17 years)2%Adult (18 -54 years)1%All Ages0% Age Segmentation of Programs Offered 2018-2019 651 5 two key age segments’ relationship between the population percentage and the percentage of programs offered. Figure 4: Population vs. Program Menu A large percentage (91%) of the Department’s enrollment-based programs are designed for youth, while the youth age segment represents 22% of the community’s population. Adults, ages 20 years and up, make up 78% of the population, while 9% of programs are designed for adults. The notion of offering most of the programming for youth is consistent with most park and recreation agencies’ program menus across the country; that said, the percentage of youth programming is more often within the 60 – 75% range. The program menu’s age segmentation does not need to mirror the community’s age demographic segmentation in an exact manner; however, an ongoing goal can be to balance the menu toward a reflection of the community makeup. Program Enrollment Total enrollment into Department’s programs was 3,414 in 2019. Aquatics had the highest enrollment with 1,092 participants, followed by preschool at 783, and camps at 661. Figure 5 shows all the programs and the percentage of each of the whole. There are some programs that are offered by other organizations who take their own registration (Skyhawks) and this data is not included in any of these analyses. 22% of population 91% of programs Youth 78% of population 9% of programs Adult 652 6 Figure 5: Enrollment by Core Program Area for 2018-2019 Aquatics accounted for a third (32%) of the 2018-2019 enrollments, and preschool and camps accounted for approximately one-fifth of the programming each, 21% and 19% respectively. Aquatics accounted for nearly half (48.8%) of the program menu and 32% of all enrollments, which is typical due to the smaller class size and the advertisement of several course sections that can be combined, if needed. For camps and preschool, the percentage of participants is greater than the percentage of courses offered. Figure 6 depicts the courses offered and their respective enrollments as a percentage of the whole. Aquatics32% Preschool21% Camps19% Events9% Youth9% Adult6% School's Out2% Active Aging2% Enrollment by Core Program Area for 2018/2019 653 7 Figure 6: Courses and Participation Life Cycle Analysis The recreation assessment included a life cycle analysis of programs. This type of assessment helps to determine if the Department staff need to develop new and more innovative programs, reposition programs in the decline state, or continue with the current balance of life cycle stages. BerryDunn based this assessment on staff members’ opinions of how their core programs were categorized according to four life cycle stages: introduction, growth, mature, and decline. Table 1 outlines the description of those life cycle stages and the Department’s percentage of programs within each stage. Table 1: Life Cycle Stages Life Cycle Stage Description Department Percentage Introduction Getting a program off the ground, heavy marketing 2% Growth Moderate and interested customer base, high demand, not as intense marketing 60% Mature Steady and reliable performer, but increased competition 38% Decline Decreased registration 0% Figure 7 depicts the percentage of the programs in each life cycle stage. A healthy balance between the stages is optimal, with the bulk of the programs in the growth and mature stages. That is certainly the case in Bozeman with 98% of the programs I the growth and mature stages. 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% Active Aging Adult Aquatics Camps Events Preschool School's Out Youth Bozeman Courses and Participation Participation Courses 654 8 Figure 7: Life Cycle Stages As a normal part of the planning cycle, there should always been programs in the introduction stage that bring new and innovative programming to the menu. In Bozeman, the introduction stage includes 2% of programs. Creating new programming should be a focus for Department programming staff. There will typically also be programs in the decline stage; those programs that should be either repositioned or decommissioned. The Department has no programs in the decline stage. Figure 8 provides a visual presentation of all core programs and their respective spread across life cycle stages. Introduction2% Growth60% Mature38% Decline0% Bozeman Life Cycle of 2018-2019 Programs by Stage 655 9 Figure 8: Life Cycle Distribution of Programs Programming staff should strive to have program areas include courses that fall into all four life cycle stages, with the majority in the growth and mature stages (green and blue in Figure 8). None of the six-core program area include courses in all four of the four life cycle stages. The very small percentage of programs in the introduction stage indicates opportunities to introduce new opportunities across the Department. Other Important Metrics There are additional metrics that are worth tracking when it comes to recreation participation data including cancellation rates, participant residency, and participant reach. Cancellation Rates The difference between the number of courses offered and the number of courses held results in the cancellation rate. A higher rate will generally indicate one of two things: either a) the programming team has been charged with trying new, innovative programs that have not been successful yet; or b) the programs being offered are not meeting the needs of the community. The first scenario requires patience and perseverance to allow time for exploration and to push communication efforts. The second scenario requires research to understand what factors contributed to the program cancellations (e.g., instructor performance, child aged out, or other barriers such as day, time, or transportation). Typically, the target range of a “desirable” cancellation rate is between 10% - 20%, with 12% - 15% being most ideal. Any higher than 20% indicates the staff are doing a great deal of work preparing for and marketing classes that do not run. 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 13 6 1 0 0 2 0 2 0 6 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Preschool Camps Youth Adult Active Adults Aquatics Bozeman 2018-2019 Life Cycle Distribution of Programs Introduction Growth Mature Decline 656 10 The program data provided by the Department included that 60 programs offered in 2018-2019 (18.2%) had either one or two participants’ registered. It is unclear from the data if these programs were combined with others and held or cancelled. There are no programs listed with zero participants which might indicate that these programs were held. Tracking the cancellation rate from year to year and working to reduce the number of programs cancelled is important. For cost recovery purposes, it is also ideal to set a minimum number of participants for each course (based on the fee and anticipated expenses), advertising that in the seasonal program guide, and sticking to it. It is not clear from the data if this is being done by programming staff on a regular basis. Participant Residency A community park and recreation department’s primary market is its residents. Exploring participation data for residency can monitor whether a department is reaching its intended primary market – its residents. It is unclear from the data provided if the Department tracks resident and nonresident participation on an annual basis. This is another important metric to track from year to year. Participant Reach If the Department is interested in understanding where its current participants are coming from and whether they are missing any geographical areas, a heat map can be created. This information can then be compared to population density. This is another data set that is worth creating and monitoring from year to year. 657 11 Similar Providers Bozeman residents enjoy a wide variety of recreation programs offered by a host of different organizations – some of these are nonprofit groups and others are private businesses. Many of these are provided space for their activities by the Department. Affiliates The Department permits space to several affiliate groups that provide recreation programs to the community. When discussing the permitting process with staff regarding the local sports programs, there was some uncertainly regarding the requirements. Future policies should consider requiring all affiliate groups to require all coaches to submit to a criminal background check, comparing the list of coaches to the state and federal sex offender databases, and charging a special field use fee for nonresident participants. Table 2 includes local affiliate groups that the Department provides park and field space to for their programs. Table 2: Bozeman Affiliates Permitting Park and Field Space Group Activity Aray Wellness Coaching Wellness program for women over 50 years Big Sky Volleyball Club Nonprofit providing volleyball for females 9 – 18 years Blitzz RC Recreational Soccer Recreation soccer for children ages 4 – 14 years Bozeman Adult Soccer League Soccer leagues for men (over 24 years) and women (over 18 years) Bozeman Cutthroat Rugby Men’s Rugby Club Bozeman Farmers Market Held in Lindly Park, this event is run by the “Friends of the Park” and supported by many sponsors Bozeman Lacrosse Competitive lacrosse for youth ages 6 – 19 years Bozeman Public Library Offering a variety of programming in Bozeman parks (yoga for adults was the focus in 2021) Bozeman School District The school utilize multiple parks for field days in the spring and fall Bozeman Ultimate Nonprofit promoting ultimate Frisbee with summer and winter leagues and tournaments for adults Bozeman Youth Baseball Recreational and competitive baseball for youth ages 7 – 15 years Bozeman Youth Cycling Nonprofit providing two youth teams: BYC for children in grades 1 – 5 and NICA for children in grades 6 – 12 Bridger Ski Foundation Cross country skiing for youth and adults Camp Agape Summer day camp run by Agape Ministries for children K – 7th grade Bozeman Vikings Dragon Boat Club Coed (canoe) racing club for adults Farm to School A series of programs to connect children (ages 4 – 13 years) with hands-on experience with local food systems 658 12 Gallatin Elite Soccer Club Recreational and competitive youth soccer Gallatin Ice Recreational indoor ice facility that has utilized park space for dry land training Gallatin Valley AYSO Soccer National program dedicated to developing and delivering quality youth soccer programs based on six philosophies Gallatin Valley BMX Nonprofit, volunteer driven motocross track in Bozeman Gallatin Valley Food Bank Provides food to those in need in the Gallatin Valley Gallatin Valley Softball Association Promotes and regulates amateur softball in Gallatin Valley – providing leagues for men’s, women’s, and coed teams Gallatin Valley YMCA Nonprofit offering a wide variety of recreation programs to the community (using parks for the summer programs and flag football league) Girls Fastpitch Softball Nonprofit, volunteer-based organization for girls 6 – 14 years Happy Feet Bozeman Children’s soccer organization for boys & girls ages 2 – 12 years Lion’s Club Football Community service organization providing sight and hearing assistance to the community – one prominent program is tackle football for boys in grades 5 & 6 Little Bellas Mentoring on mountain bikes Lone Mountain Gymnastics & Swim School Provides programs for boys and girls: swimming for those 6 months – 12 years and gymnastics for 1 – 18 years Maschino Fitness Offering Boot Camp classes and camps for youth and adults in Bozeman parks Mommies R Fit Fitness classes for moms interested in getting back into shape post pregnancy Montana Outdoor Science School (MOSS) Educational institution focusing on outdoor education experiences to promote an understanding of nature and science for youth grades K - 8 Muddy Dog Sports Providing cyclocross events for riders 12 years and up This organization also sponsors an annual triathlon in June Our Yoga Holding yoga classes in Bozeman parks Overtime Sports Semi-competitive sports leagues for adults of all abilities (kickball and others) Random Acts of Silliness Theatre and visual arts organization inspiring laughter and play in the Gallatin Valley Rising Starz Sports Academy Baseball and softball programs for youth Support Local Artists and Musicians (SLAM) Nonprofit promoting the arts and art education – hosting events that showcase talent and fund scholarships Sweet Pea Festival Three-day arts festival in August that includes live music, local theatre and dance troupe performances, workshops, family friendly activities, and flower show and arts and crafts vendors Tuesday Night Track Free running club open to the community Verge Theatre Nonprofit theatre organization 659 13 Fitness Fitness programs are often a desire for young adults in communities across the country. Due to the low percentage of programs offered by the Department for adults, fitness opportunities within the community were reviewed. There are several private facilities spread out in the community offering fitness opportunities for Bozeman residents. Table 3 includes a small sampling of the facilities and programs available in Bozeman. Table 3: Private Fitness Opportunities in Bozeman Company Focus Orangetheory Fitness A national organization that focuses on HIIT workouts using a heart rate monitor, going through the five different zones with rowing, cardio, and strength training Access Fitness Equipment and classes, no contract, open 24/7 Fluid Motion Fitness Free weights, weight machines, cardio equipment, open 24/7 Ridge Athletic Clubs Two locations – equipment and a variety of group fitness classes 9Round – Bozeman Kickboxing circuit training True Spirit CrossFit & Yoga Training in the gym, playing in the mountains, and having fun Altitude Athletics Classes, personal training, nutrition Epic Fitness Center Group exercise classes, Olympic weightlifting, indoor cycling, and open gym hours The Mountain Project A gym for people who don’t like gyms – training inside to support outdoor activities with one-on-one coaching, training plans, classes, and personal training Montana State University Youth Summer Camp for K – 6h grades and Sports & Fitness facility with programs, message, intramurals, outdoor programs, and sports clubs The Pitt Training Facility Strength training facility providing classes, coaching, physical therapy, and a recovery lab CrossFit Bozeman Strength and conditioning facility that develops athletes to reach elite levels of fitness Helse Lagree Fitness Studio Small group fitness classes using a Megaformer (core strength, endurance, high intensity, low impact) Forever Strong Studio providing group fitness classes including BODYPUMP, SPRINT, kickboxing, BODY BLAST and yoga blend classes Spire Climbing + Fitness Indoor climbing facility for all ages; a fitness center with free weights, cardio equipment, and a large power rack; and group exercise classes (yoga, core, athletic conditioning, stability) Pure Barre Group classes that focus on low impact, high intensity movements that strengthen and tone Zephyr Cycling Studio Cycling and mat-based classes 660 14 Bozeman Aerial Fitness & Spa Yoga, pole dancing, burlesque, and chair dancing – private parties, too StretchLab Stretch and get stretched Motion Athletics All-start cheerleading and tumbling gym Urban Fitness Personal training, team training, and small group training Way Beyond Fitness Health coaching, cooking classes, personal training Bend Beyond Hot yoga, Pilates, and fitness studio FITFIX Personal Training Personal training focusing on gaining strength, power, pain relief, and freedom of movement Bridger Pilates Private instruction, group mat classes, group equipment classes, and group TRX The Practice Power Yoga Heated power yoga Bozeman Hot Springs Fitness facility offering 12 different pools, a fitness center, and events (typically music concerts for adults) Like Iron Strength & Performance Strength training – personal and group personal training (in- person or online) in a facility available 24/7 Prime Performance and Physio Strength training, Olympic power lifting, youth and team speed and strength classes, and senior fit programs Club Pilates Pilates training in an individual or group format for teens and adults Bozeman Power Yoga Hot Power Yoga studio Ekam Yoga Group yoga instruction offered 7 days/week F45 Training A mix of circuit and HIIT style, 45-minute workouts geared toward everyday movement Your Yoga Sanctuary Yoga instruction (individual or group classes) Peak Bodies Pilates Pilates instruction in individual or group sessions Our Yoga Family A wide variety of yoga classes for parents, kids, and babies Summer Camps In addition to the camps offered by the Department, there are dozens and dozens of summer camps available for Bozeman Youth. Montana Parent has done a great job of summarizing the offerings on their website (https://mtparent.com/bozeman-area-camps). There are opportunities for children of all interests including art, dance (ballet, hip hop, aerial hammock, and choreography), hiking, camping, rock climbing, STEAM (outdoor science, coding, sports, yoga, drumming, karate, performing arts, horseback riding, farm camp, and more. 661 15 Alignment with Community Need ETC conducted a statistically valid survey of the Bozeman community for this project. One of the questions asked about household participation in recreation programs and events offered by the Department – 22% of survey respondents indicated they had participated in a program or event. This is below the national average of 32%. The top reasons for lack of participation in programs included: 1. Not aware of programs offered 2. No time to participate 3. Types of programming not of interest, relevant or desired. ETC has created a priority investment rating (PIR) which combines the importance that residents place on a program with the unmet need. The PIR ratings provide information on where a community should invest resources to add or increase facilities or programs. The top five priorities for investment in recreation facilities and amenities in Bozeman include: • Natural Trails (150) • On-road bike lanes or facilities (135) • Indoor Pool (134) • Outdoor Pool (134) • Paved trails (127) • Nature center (105) The top priorities for program investment in Bozeman include: • Aquatics programming (200) • Arts & Culture (175) • Winter recreation (174) • Fitness (142) • Etiquette programs for park & trail users (125) • Outdoor adventure (125) • History (119) • Outdoor education (107) Combining the priorities for facilities and programming together, there is clearly a need to focus on aquatics as well as outdoor education. With indoor and outdoor pools and aquatics being 662 16 included in the top four for both facilities and programs, aquatic programming and facilities should be a high priority for Bozeman. Finding spaces (possibly through a partner) for arts and culture and history programming are two additional areas of potential focus. In addition, having a nature center and outdoor education both rating high, this type of programming (and potentially creating a new space) should be a priority as well. Bozeman already provides winter recreation, but additional offerings should be explored. 663 17 Recommendations As a result of meetings with staff, the review and analysis of program data, and the statistically valid survey results, the BerryDunn consulting team recommends the following: Program Organization 1. Redefine core program areas to focus on program type rather than age. 2. Expand general program menu to better align with community demographics. 3. Increase programs and services for adult demographic including arts and culture, fitness, adventure, and history. 4. Develop additional programs in Arts, Lifelong Learning, Therapeutic Recreation, Pickleball, and Enrichment. 5. Conduct an in-depth operational assessment including a staffing plan to define roles and responsibilities and to strategically allocate funding. Data Gathering and Tracking 1. Establish metrics for measurement of departmental goals (i.e., program cancellation rate, program reach, new programs offered, and residency). 2. Create performance measurements and a system for consistent tracking. 3. Begin department wide quarterly program evaluation process. Partnerships and Collaborations 1. Enhance existing local public, private and nonprofit partnerships and seek out new ones to fill gaps in service delivery. 2. Create partnership, teaming guidelines and policy to define goals and expectations. 664 ADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTEDADOPTED November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021November 23, 2021 665 2 Acknowledgments This plan was made possible through funding by Gallatin County and the Gallatin Valley Land Trust. Many thanks to all the community members, steering committee, key stakeholders, and staff who contributed to the development of this plan. Steering Committee Bill Cochran Ted Guis Addi Jadin Jason Karp Mark Kehke Scott MacFarlane Garrett McAllister Sean O’Callaghan EJ Porth Mayana Rice Cola Rowley Consultant Team Lead Consultant Public Engagement Assistance Jennifer Boyer 666 3Triangle Trails Plan Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................5About This Plan .........................................................................................................5 Definitions of Terminology .................................................................................8 The Importance of Trails ....................................................................................10 Chapter 2: Proposed Trail System .......................................13 Overview .......................................................................................................................13 Guiding Principles .................................................................................................14 User and Trail Typologies ..................................................................................14 User Typologies .......................................................................................................14 Pedestrians .................................................................................................................15 Bicyclists ......................................................................................................................16 Other User and Mobility Typologies ............................................................17 Trail Typologies ........................................................................................................18 Proposed Network ..................................................................................................21 Chapter 3: Standards & Guidelines .....................................25 Crossings and Roadway Interfaces ............................................................25 At-Grade Crossings ...............................................................................................25 Grade Separated Crossings .............................................................................25 Watercourses and Irrigation Ditch Protection .....................................25 Trailheads ..................................................................................................................26 Trail Amenities .........................................................................................................27 Wayfinding ...............................................................................................................28 Best Practices .........................................................................................................29 Chapter 4: Understanding Current Conditions .......................33 Related Plans ...........................................................................................................33 Existing Land Use ..................................................................................................33 Geography of the Triangle ..............................................................................34 Existing Trail System ...........................................................................................34 Trail Management and Maintenance .......................................................35 Needs and Issues ...................................................................................................35 Chapter 5: Community Engagement....................................37Unique Conditions .................................................................................................37 Building Awareness ..............................................................................................37 Steering Committee Guidance ......................................................................37 Engagement Opportunities ...........................................................................38 Reporting and Publishing ...............................................................................38 Summary ...................................................................................................................38 667 4 Chapter 6: Implementation ................................................41Overview ......................................................................................................................41 Project Coordination ............................................................................................41 Priorities .......................................................................................................................41 Trail Construction..................................................................................................42 Trail Maintenance.................................................................................................46 Appendix A: Useful Resources ............................................50 Appendix B: Summary of Related Plans ...............................52Gallatin County Growth Policy (2021) .........................................................52 Bozeman Community Plan (2020) ..............................................................52 Triangle Community Plan (2020) ..................................................................53 Belgrade Parks and Recreation Master Plan (2020) ........................53 Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (2017) ........................................53 Gallatin County Parks and Trails Comprehensive Plan (2010) ...54 Bozeman PROST Plan (2007) .........................................................................54 Four Corners Community Plan (2006) ......................................................54 Greater Triangle Area Transportation Plan ...........................................55 The Great American Rail Trail Project .......................................................55 Appendix C: Summary of Community Engagement................56 Triangle Trail Vision .............................................................................................56 Accessibility & Comfort ......................................................................................56 Design Standards .................................................................................................57 Trail System Structure ........................................................................................57 Development Funding .......................................................................................58 Maintenance Funding .......................................................................................58 Wayfinding ..............................................................................................................58 Destinations & Routes ........................................................................................59 Safety Issues ............................................................................................................60 Irrigation Ditch Concerns .................................................................................61 General Challenges .............................................................................................62 Focus Group Participants ................................................................................62 Appendix D: Trail Classification and Design Standards ...........65Trail Classification and Design Standards ............................................65 Class I Trail Design Standards .......................................................................65 Class II Trails .............................................................................................................66 Class III Trails ...........................................................................................................68 668 5Triangle Trails Plan Chapter 1: Introduction About This Plan Project Area Gallatin County is one of the fastest growing counties in the western United States. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Gallatin County’s population was 67,831 in 2000, 89,513 in 2010, and 118,960 in 2020, the latest year for which population estimates are available. With an estimated 75% population growth since 2000, Gallatin County is rapidly changing. The Triangle area of Gallatin County, which is generally the area between Bozeman, Four Corners, and Belgrade, is experiencing change as a direct result of this population growth. With its proximity to existing development and availability of public services, the Triangle area is expected to see a continued increase in development as Gallatin County’s population grows. Recognizing its unique place in the County, the Triangle has been subject to several studies and plans over the past decade. Gallatin County, City of Belgrade, and the City of Bozeman all play a role in the development of the area. In 2016, these three jurisdictions created the Planning Coordination Committee (PCC) to focus on issues and opportunities within the Triangle. The PCC was established through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) that outlined the need for coordination and communication between the City of Bozeman, the City of Belgrade, and Gallatin County, to support growth and development patterns as they expand in this area of the Gallatin Valley. The MOA identified issues around infrastructure, public safety, parks and trails, neighborhood design, and other land use concerns that would benefit from cooperative planning. In 2019, the Planning Coordination Committee (PCC) developed the Triangle Community Plan to coordinate land use development patterns, deliver community services and infrastructure, and protect important environmental resources, all in a manner that supports community values and vision while responding to rapid growth pressures. During the process to develop that plan, public comments highlighted the need to develop a coordinated trail plan for the area. The work to develop this Triangle Trails Plan is a direct result of the Triangle Community Plan.Triangle Area 669 6 Plan PurposeThe Triangle Trails Plan will guide the development of non-motorized pedestrian and bicycle recreation and transportation infrastructure in future developments within the Triangle area. The communities of Belgrade and Bozeman have plans for trail connectivity, but the rapidly growing Triangle area of Gallatin County lacks a guiding document to ensure future trail development and connectivity. This plan serves as an extension and complement to the existing Belgrade Parks and Trails Master Plan and the soon-to-be-created and -adopted City of Bozeman Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation Plan (PRAT). Anticipating significant new public and private development in the Triangle Area, this plan creates the vision to ensure that a trail and pathway system for safe recreation and transportation is created over the long term. Developers, landowners, and homeowners will benefit from a clear, predictable, and inspiring vision for a trail, pathway, and linear park system. Project GoalsThe project goals expand upon the purpose of the plan to further clarify the intent and anticipated outcomes of the planning process. The project goals are: • Create a vision for guiding future trail development and connectivity • Identify key corridor and connections within the Triangle area • Provide clear and predictable expectations for developers, landowners, and homeowners for trail and pathway development • Propose implementation strategies to guide Gallatin County, Belgrade, and Bozeman in the completion and maintenance of the proposed trail network PartnersGallatin County and the Gallatin Valley Land Trust are leading this effort with support from the City of Belgrade and the City of Bozeman. 670 7Triangle Trails Plan Plan Vision The plan vision is an expression of the partners and community’s desired future for trails in the Triangle Area. The five themes below capture what community members most value about trails, recreation and their community, and articulate a shared vision of what they want their trail system to become. During the fall of 2020, through a series of stakeholder meetings and a public virtual open house, the following themes emerged to create these vision statements. Connected Network The trail network should connect communities and neighborhoods to places people want to go with continuous routes and convenient connections. This includes destinations such as home, school, employment, shopping, recreation, public services and transit. The existing and proposed multi-use trails should connect seamlessly to the greater transportation and recreational trails networks. Safe and Welcoming Routes should be physically safe and perceived as safe and welcoming by all users. Safe means minimal conflicts with vehicular traffic and easy to navigate routes that are well marked. Inclusive for All Trails should accommodate the non-motorized mobility of residents of all ages and abilities. The network should employ principles of universal design. Consistent Standards The network should use consistent standards that span across jurisdictions. Achievable Implementation The plan should establish clear and economical methods for completing the network to complement adjacent private development. 671 8 Trails enhance public health, environmental sustainability, and our sense of community. Definitions of Terminology Below are definitions of terminology as the words will be used in this plan. These definitions align with those found in state and local laws, widely accepted industry sources and technical manuals associated with trail and transportation systems. ADA: The 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a landmark piece of legislation designed to ensure a more inclusive America, where every person has the right to participate in all aspects of society. One aspect of the legislation is defining accessibility standards for public infrastructure such as sidewalks, crosswalks, and other transportation facilities like trails. The Trail Use Classification and Characteristics standards in Appendix D addresses ADA trail accessibility. Active Transportation: Active transportation is a means of getting around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling. As opposed to ‘non-motorized transportation’ the term ‘active transportation’ expresses the key connection between healthy, active living and our transportation choices. Bicycle: Bicycles are a vehicle propelled primarily by human power on which any person may ride irrespective of the number of wheels, except scooters, wheelchairs, and similar devices. The term includes e-bike. E-Bike: E-bike means an electronically assisted bicycle on which a person may ride that has two tandem wheels and an electric battery capable of propelling the bicycle and an average rider no faster than 20 miles an hour on a level surface. Equestrian: Equestrians are skilled horseback riders. Equestrians generally use soft surface trails for traveling by horseback for the purpose of transportation or leisure. Micromobility: Micromobility describes a category of transportation modes utilizing light weight devices operating at speeds below 15 mph, ideal for short trips. Devices include shared and personal scooters and bicycles (both human-powered and those with electric motors, both docked and dockless), skateboards (both human-powered or with electric motors), and hoverboards (electric powered one or two-wheeled boards like a Segway without a handle). Multimodal Transportation: Multimodal transportation incorporates diverse transportation options, typically including walking, cycling, public transit and automobiles. Multimodal transportation planning accounts for the differing capabilities of various modes, including their availability, speed, density, costs, limitations, land use factors that affect accessibility, and therefore their most appropriate uses. Natural Fines: Natural fines are a finely crushed stone mix that provides a user-friendly trail surface for all types and ages of visitors, including strollers, wheelchairs, and bikes. If built properly natural fines trails can meet the specification for a “firm and stable” surface as defined in current federal guidelines for accessible trails. Trails are an integral part of the Gallatin Valley’s quality of life 672 9Triangle Trails Plan Non-Motorized Transportation: Non-motorized includes any form of transportation that provides personal mobility by methods other than a combustion motor. Pedestrian: A pedestrian is any person on foot or any person in a manually or mechanically propelled wheelchair or other low-powered, mechanically propelled device designed specifically for use by a physically disabled person. Shared Use Paths: Shared use paths are a type of trail designed to be part of the overall transportation system by providing dedicated and separated non-motorized travel routes for a variety of users. Trails: Throughout this plan the terms ‘trail’ and ‘trails’ are used generally to reference any type of trail or path. When referring to a certain type of trail more specific names will be used such as “natural surface trail” or “shared-use path”. Universal Design: Universal design is the design of buildings, products or environments to make them accessible to all people, regardless of age, disability or other factors. Walkable: The term ‘walkable’ refers to streets, trails, and places designed, constructed, or reconstructed to provide safe and comfortable facilities for pedestrians of all ages and abilities. Wayfinding System: A wayfinding system is an integrated collection of user-friendly informational signage that convey consistent accurate information for trail users about navigation, direction, destinations, distances, and etiquette. A comprehensive wayfinding system is an essential element of a community trail network. “Trails have been shown to improve quality of life, promote health, sense of community, and more. When communities invest in trails, they are also building a trail culture. Outdoor recreation opportunities attract new residents, new businesses, and create a sense of pride for the communities that build them. Trails bring people together by building a social infrastructure that bonds its citizens by bringing them outdoors.” -- Why Trails? - American Trails 673 10 The Importance of Trails Community ValuesTrails were consistently prioritized as highly valued community amenities during public outreach for the Triangle Community Plan. As detailed later in this plan, trails for recreation and transportation are top community priorities identified in numerous local planning documents including Envision Gallatin, Belgrade Growth Policy and the Bozeman Community Plan. “Walking is man’s best medicine” – Hippocrates Trails provide people an enjoyable, and healthy way to move throughout our communities. They are important safe routes to and from schools, parks, and playgrounds. Trails build social capital by connecting neighborhoods to one another. They provide efficient connections between commercial districts for work and commerce. Trails increase property values of adjacent homes and businesses. A robust trail system promotes active transportation and delivers the community a triple- bottom line of socio-cultural benefits, public health benefits, and environmental benefits. 674 11Triangle Trails Plan Inclusive and AccessibleTo develop an inclusive trail system that serves the differing needs of trail users, consideration should be given to providing trails that serve various age groups, modes of travel, universal accessibility, and ability levels from beginners to advanced. • Provide a diversity of trails and trail linkages to promote walking, biking, and micromobility as both a recreation activity and a transportation option. • Provide staging and parking areas at neighborhood and regional parks with trail access for all users. • Develop all new Commuter Trails and most Connector Trails to exceed the minimum ADA standards for accessibility to create a variety of exceptional active transportation and recreation opportunities for those with mobility challenges. Healthier LifestylesThe 2007 Bozeman PROST Plan established that the local trails are the City’s most utilized recreation facilities. This is not unique to Bozeman, as throughout the country walking and biking on local trails are low-cost, low-impact recreation and exercise options for people of all ages and abilities. In 2020 American Trails published a guide highlighting the health benefits of trails: Mental Health Benefits of Trails • • Spending even 20 minutes outside will have short term effects on the brain to reduce stress. • • Countless studies show people self-reporting reduced stress, clearer thought patterns, more optimism, and an overall heightened sense of well-being after being outdoors. • • We are now seeing more medical practitioners prescribe time in the outdoors as a way to combat depression, anxiety, and other health related issues. Physical Health Benefits of Trails • • For every dollar spent on trails, there is a three-dollar savings in health care costs. • • More overall physical activity is measured in communities after trails are built. • • Cardiovascular benefits are seen across all trail user types. This means healthier hearts, and a reduction in preventable disease for trail users. • • Commuting by foot or bike gains popularity when trails go into a community. This both reduces traffic and creates a healthier, more physically active community. “Trails, by their very nature, promote social, racial, gender, and economic equity. They are almost always free to use, are available 24/7/365, and provide transportation alternatives no matter what mode of travel you use.” --Trails Move People Coalition 675 12 Transportation ChoicesPeople make transportation choices based on a variety of issues like cost, convenience, environmental impacts, and personal health. Financial considerations include cost of owning (car loan, insurance) and operating (gas, maintenance, parking) a personal vehicle. For some it may be more convenient to drive because of the distance between destinations. While others may find it inconvenient to drive because of traffic. Choosing to commute by walking or bicycling is part of a healthy lifestyle for some. A safe, well-maintained, connected trail system provides more residents with the option to walk or bicycle as a primary means of transportation. Whether for work or accessing goods and services, the better the trail network the more residents will choose active transportation as a less expensive, healthier, and environmentally friendly option over driving a personal vehicle. What is Active Transportation? “Active transportation is a means of getting around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling. Often called “non-motorized transportation,” we prefer the term “active transportation” since it is a more positive statement that expresses the key connection between healthy, active living and our transportation choices. Communities that prioritize active transportation tend to be healthier by enabling residents to be more physically active in their daily routines and by having cleaner air to breathe. Active transportation systems also foster economic health by creating dynamic, connected communities with a high quality of life that catalyzes small business development, increases property values, sparks tourism and encourages corporate investment that attracts a talented, highly educated workforce.” --Partnership for Active Transportation Example of one Bozeman resident’s annual cost savings, CO2 reduction, and health benefits from commuting by walking and biking as calculated by Go Gallatin www.gogallatin.org 676 13Triangle Trails Plan Chapter 2: Proposed Trail System Overview The proposed network outlined in this chapter was developed through input obtained during the virtual open house, meetings with project stakeholders, consideration of previous planning efforts, and the analysis of existing conditions and constraints within the Triangle. The existing land uses will guide how development of the trail network is completed. For properties that are undeveloped and/or used for agricultural purposes, proposed trails will only be developed if the landowner chooses to build those trails. Otherwise, future trails will only be constructed with the development of the private property or as part of public right-of-way projects. This plan is intended to be used for future planning, as well as a resource in the development review process. This plan will guide community decision-makers when properties are proposed for subdivision and development. The plan maps show approximate locations of future trail corridors, based on ideal locations, that will meet the vision of the plan and serve existing and future residents if these properties are developed. However, trail network expansion and connectivity will be prioritized before strictly following the exact trail alignment depicted in this plan. If property owners choose not to develop their land, the trails shown on the maps will not be created unless the property owners voluntarily agree to do so. Future trail corridors are not shown through areas that are already built out. If any of these areas are redeveloped at higher densities, trail connections should be considered. Because future growth patterns cannot be fully anticipated, future trails may need to be constructed in locations other than those shown on the plan maps. Additionally, trails within developments and neighborhoods are not shown on the map but should be included and designed as a best practice for developments. Only connectivity priorities are shown on the map. Trails promote active transportation and healthy lifestyles 677 14 Guiding Principles The overall vision of the Triangle Trail Plan is to develop an integrated, connected trail network and develop implementation strategies to construct and maintain the network. Key components of this visionary trail system include: • Connectivity (between places people want to go) • Safety (decrease conflicts between users and vehicles) • Inclusivity (surfaces, abilities, user groups) • Consistency (in and between jurisdictions) User and Trail Typologies Establishing clearly defined typologies of trail users and trail facilities is critical to identifying which trails best serve the intended uses and users. The typologies established below are intended to not only provide common nomenclature for this and future plans, but also to identify consistent characteristics. Appendix D: Trail Classifications and Design Standards establishes physical specifications for each trail type including width, grade, cross-sections, and materials. User Typologies To strategically plan a trail network, consideration must be given to the types of users based on activity, ability, and mode of mobility. Identifying and understanding the wide- ranging uses, differing abilities, and a variety of modes inform trail location, typology, design standards, associated amenities, and required maintenance. The primary trail users are pedestrians and bicyclists, both groups are categorized and described below in terms of utilitarian, recreational, and family characteristics. Defining attributes common between groups and categories include age, ability, and purpose. People with disabilities are an essential user group that must be considered and accommodated with accessible trail design of commuter trails and most connector trails, maintenance standards, and trail etiquette. To help ensure the safety of the listed user groups, motorized vehicles, including ATVs and snowmobiles, should not be permitted on any of the trails proposed in this plan. Regulation of users will ultimately be the responsibility of the appropriate jurisdiction for which the trail is located. “Shared use paths should be thought of as a system of off-road transportation routes for bicyclists and other users that extends and complements the roadway network. Shared use paths should not be used to preclude on-road bicycle facilities, but rather to supplement a network of on-road bike lanes, bicycle boulevards, and paved shoulders.” --AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities 678 15Triangle Trails Plan Pedestrians Pedestrians are one of the primary users of the trail system. People walk for a variety of reasons which are generally described below. The needs of pedestrians for a safe and welcoming environment must be considered for each of the three trail types. Those needs are better understood by identifying the defining characteristics of the three types of pedestrians. Utilitarian Pedestrians Recreational Pedestrians Family Pedestrians People walk with the purpose of commuting to work or school, traveling for everyday services, or as a primary means of transportation. Often this kind of walking is done using the existing sidewalk system. But given the opportunity, utilitarian pedestrians will utilize connector and commuter trails. Utilitarian pedestrian trips typically involve a single individual and range in length from a quarter mile to two miles. Therefore, it is important that logical connections are made between trail and sidewalk networks to provide efficient and safe travel routes. A comprehensive wayfinding system is essential to communicate distance and directions. Many people use the different trail types for recreational purposes which includes walking for enjoyment and exercise. This type of pedestrian utilizes both the trail and sidewalk networks but likely prefers trails if conveniently located and well maintained. Recreational walking involves single individuals or often pairs of people. Recreational outings vary from a quarter mile to many miles (particularly for exercise). Runners are included in this user typology and they travel at higher speeds and for longer distances than their walking peers. Recreational pedestrians need some comfort amenities, like benches, and benefit from a comprehensive wayfinding system. Families include the widest range of age groups including small children and elderly walkers. Because of this diversity of ages, trails for family- oriented pedestrians should accommodate all ability levels. To be adequately inclusive, the trail system must include properly constructed and maintained connector trails and commuter shared-use paths. Family pedestrian groups usually number between two and six walkers that often move at a slower pace than the other pedestrian types. Trails intended for family pedestrian use should incorporate more amenities such as benches, trash- recycling receptacles, and adjacent places to linger, interact and rest. 679 16 Bicyclists Bicyclists are the other primary user typology frequenting the trail network. The variety of cycling users can be characterized similarly to the pedestrian typologies. People of differing ages and abilities bike on each of the trail types requiring a range of needs to be considered when planning, constructing, and maintaining the trail system. Whereas the speeds at which pedestrians, including runners, is fairly uniform, bicyclists travel on trails at a wide range of speeds from 5 to 20 miles per hour. Utilitarian Bicyclists Recreational Bicyclists Family Bicyclists Many people commuting to work or school, traveling for everyday services, or choosing not to drive prefer the efficiency of biking. Utilitarian trips can be longer and completed more quickly by biking than walking. The increased mobility enjoyed by bicyclists often involves linking the street network and trail system for longer trips sometimes more than five miles. Commuter trails are critical infrastructure for utilitarian bicyclists and require a comprehensive wayfinding system that provides accurate directional and distance information. People bike for recreational enjoyment and exercise on all the trail typologies. Recreational bicyclists often use the street network to access the nearest trails but are less comfortable riding on streets without bike lanes. Recreational bike trips can be a short as half a mile to well over ten miles when for exercise. This group of users often ride in groups of two or more, but do not need many trail amenities other than a comprehensive wayfinding system. Bicycling is a popular family activity on the trail system involving children, parents, and grandparents. Considering the needs of the youngest and oldest bicyclists is essential to an inclusive community trail network. Ability level and group size vary greatly with family bicyclists so properly sized and surfaced connector and commuter trails are essential. These trails must also be supported by amenities including benches, trash- recycling receptacles, and generously sized areas adjacent to the trail where families can rest and socialize without blocking the trail itself. 680 17Triangle Trails Plan Other User and Mobility Typologies Trail users and their travel modes are more diverse than the utilitarian, recreational, and family typologies described above. Below are some additional users and modes that must also be considered. The best way to inclusively manage all these users and modes is by establishing a code of trail etiquette clearly educating, and prominently reminding, all trail users of the rules. Electric Bicyclists Rollers Cross Country Skiers Electric bikes are becoming more common for utilitarian uses. How the trail network accommodates e-bike and mitigates potential user conflicts need to be considered as part of planning, building, and operating a robust trail system. Gallatin County, the City of Belgrade and the City of Bozeman should develop unified standards for the use of e-bikes in order to create consistent expectations and safety through the greater trail network. The trail system is also used by people using inline skates, skateboards, kick scooters, and electric scooters on commuter trails. Paved shared- use paths should be designed, constructed, and maintained to safely accommodate all these modes. People use these other modes on commuter trails for recreational and utilitarian purposes, just like pedestrians and bicyclists. During the winter season, people commonly cross- country ski on neighborhood and connector trails. And like the other user types, cross country skiers range in ages and abilities. Dog Walkers Equestrian Dogs may love trails more than their owners, so their needs and the dynamics they create should be considered when planning and maintaining an inclusive network of community trails. Most notable is the necessity to provide and maintain dog waste stations along all trail types. The number and frequency of dog waste stations are critically important to keeping trails clean for all users. Equestrian and horseback riding have always had a presence in Gallatin County. Equestrian use would be appropriate for neighborhood trails, but not for commuter or connector trails. Subdivisions and neighborhoods that include equestrian facilities as part of their trail development will need to develop strategies for minimizing conflicts between users, appropriate trail maintenance and using signage for clarifying appropriate use of trails. 681 18 Trail Typologies The 2017 Bozeman Transportation Master Plan recognizes two off-street active transportation facility types: shared-use paths and natural surface trails. The more recent Triangle Community Plan identifies three types of trails: The Triangle Trails Plan adopts and perpetuates the three trail typologies from the Triangle Community Plan—neighborhood, connector, and commuter—as described in the following table. To reiterate, trails of all types are off-street transportation facilities and should not preclude on-street bicycle facilities such as bike lanes, bicycle boulevards, and paved roadway shoulders. “Non-motorized transportation systems will be a priority and developed at three levels: neighborhood trails that connect locally to parks and open space; connector trails that connect together meaningful destinations, such as neighborhoods, schools, and hubs of commercial activity; and commuter pathways that connect larger community nodes.” “A variety of trail types are essential to build a comprehensive multi-modal trail network” 682 19Triangle Trails Plan Commuter Trails Connector Trails Neighborhood Trails DescriptionCommuter trails are wide with durable surfaces intended for higher speed travel between community destinations. Commuter trails are categorized as Class I trails that are between 10 and 12 feet wide shared-use path constructed of an impervious surface such as asphalt or concrete. Commuter trails are separated facilities from adjacent streets and roadways. Ideally a network of commuter trails would connect major points of origins, such as subdivisions, with primary destinations, such as commercial districts. Connector trails are generous in size and constructed of natural materials that connect neighborhood destinations such as housing, schools, and commercial hubs. Connectors are classified as Class II trails that are 6-foot wide ADA accessible surfaces of natural fines or compacted crushed gravel. Connector trails provide critical access as network extensions to and from commuter trails. Neighborhood trails are soft surfaced, local paths. These trails are classified as Class III trails that range between 4 and 6 feet wide and may be established over time by repeated use. Neighborhood trails are to be designed and constructed as part of future subdivisions. When possible, they should connect to neighborhood parks and the larger trail system. UsesThis portion of the trail network is intended to facilitate traveling longer distances as efficiently as possible. These multi-use trails are used for both recreation and commuting. These trails provide connections within neighborhoods and connect to parks and nearby community amenities. 683 20 Commuter Trails (cont.) Connect Trails (cont.) Neighborhood Trails (cont.)MaintenanceFor maximum utilization for commuting, shared-use paths need to be plowed in the winter and swept of debris in the spring. Otherwise, maintenance involves periodic asphalt sealing and patching. These trails accommodate heavy bi-directional multi-use in a safe manner. Connectors need annual maintenance involving weeding, tree trimming, raking, and periodic application of additional surface materials. The maintenance is minimal with occasional vegetation trimming.Design Summary*Trail Width: • 10-feet surface with 2-feet shoulders Grade: • Up to 5%, some short sections up to 12.5% Material: • Asphalt or concrete • Porous surfaces used in sensitive areas Trail Width: • 6-8 feet surface with 2-feet clear area Grade: • Up to 5%, some short sections up to 10% Material: • ADA acceptable surface Trail Width: • 4-6 feet surface Grade: • To follow natural topography and provide positive drainage Material: • Natural surfaces *Complete design recommendations are located in Appendix D 684 21Triangle Trails Plan Proposed Network The expansion of the trail network will provide recreation and transportation opportunities throughout the Triangle Area. The proposed network maps identify new Commuter and Connector trails. New neighborhood trails are not shown on the plan maps, as they are intended to be designed and built within future development. Proposed trail alignments shown are a ‘planning level’ representation of intended routes, which provide connections between destination points, and desirable trail experiences for a variety of users. In the final implementation of proposed trails, adjustments and modifications to the alignments shown are expected. Such adjustments may be required to navigate environmental features, avoid wildlife habitat, accommodate landowner desires, jurisdictional requirements, and complement future land development projects. These adjustments should be expected and accommodated, so long as the adjustments do not compromise the original intent of the planning level alignment. Commuter Trails (Class I) Because commuter paths are generally designed for higher speeds and longer travel distances, these routes are generally shown to follow existing and future street corridors. When identifying which corridors were most suitable for commuter paths, emphasis was placed on the following: • Existing multi-use paths • Proximity to community facilities such as schools, parks, and commercial areas The commuter trail network seeks to connect all portions of the Triangle area with the greater Gallatin Valley. Many of the routes shown on the plan maps extend beyond the boundaries of this plan and form the heart of a larger regional trail system. Where there are existing trails along the proposed routes, efforts should be made to improve trails for safety and accessibility as needed. Connector Trails (Class II)Connector trails are both transportation and recreation oriented and should provide connections to schools, neighborhoods, parks, points of interest, and other transportation nodes. These trails are typically natural surface trails and are independent of the road network. They may bisect parks and open space, as well as parallel natural features, such as streams and other watercourses. Connector trails provide an important function within the Triangle. These trails can provide connections throughout the community and where possible, should be separated from the street network. These trails can be located in natural environments, enhancing the community’s desire for livability and promote public health. As development occurs within the Triangle area, connector trails can be designed to limit street crossings, thus reducing conflicts, and increasing safety. Neighborhood Trails (Class III)Neighborhood trails connect community features within neighborhoods, such as nearby open spaces, commercial developments, parks, and schools. Neighborhood trails within future developments are not shown on the proposed trails maps because they should be designed and built as part of the neighborhood infrastructure. The following are key considerations for future neighborhood trails: • Trails should be designed as part of a neighborhood’s transportation system • When combined with parks and open space, trails play a vital role in supporting the recreational needs of a neighborhood • Trail should connect with adjoining neighborhoods, as well as adjacent Commuter and Connector Trails • Trails should be designed to accommodate a variety of users • Consider year-round trail use and plan appropriate maintenance • Provide amenities suitable for the neighborhood and anticipated users 685 22 Proposed Triangle Trails Map 686 23Triangle Trails Plan Proposed and Existing Triangle Trails Commuter Trails 687 24 Existing and Proposed Connector Trails 688 25Triangle Trails Plan Chapter 3: Standards & Guidelines Crossings and Roadway Interfaces The Triangle area includes US Highway 191 (Huffine Lane), State Highway 85 (Jackrabbit Lane), I-90 Frontage Road and other significant arterials roads. These highways carry a significant volume of semi- trucks and passenger vehicles, which makes crossing these roads a challenge. To improve user safety and trail connectivity between communities within the Triangle, at-grade and grade separated crossing improvements need to be considered at trail and arterial intersections. At-Grade Crossings Of the three crossing options, building an at-grade crossing may be the least expensive. As many of the trails in the Triangle area cross arterials and major collectors that carry high volumes of traffic, these crossings may be a cost-effective solution since they can be used at signalized intersections. To maximize the safety of at-grade crossings for trail users, crossings will include clear signage, curb cuts, highly visible crosswalks through the intersection, and minimized sight obstructions. Grade Separated Crossings (Elevated or Underpass) When trails need to cross higher speed roadways, grade separation is required for safety. Trail bridges can be expensive as additional property is needed to build the ramps and meet height requirements. Tunnels and underpasses are additional solutions to safely separate trails from high volume/high speed roadways. The viability of tunnels and underpasses is dependent on the number of underground utilities, the level groundwater in the area, and soil conditions. Several tunnels have been built recently within the Triangle area, including under Huffine Lane at Monforton School Road and under Jackrabbit Lane just north of North Star Lane. Watercourses and Irrigation Ditch Protection Gallatin County, the City of Belgrade and the City of Bozeman all require the protection of watercourse corridors through the provision of setbacks. These setbacks protect bank stabilization, reduce stream sediment and pollution, accommodate habitat conservation, and assist with flood management. While designated setbacks may vary based on the type of stream, water corridor, or wetland, the intent is to protect water quality and other ecological values. The following recommendations should be considered for protection of riparian areas when it is not feasible to meet the setbacks. • Align trails along or near existing human-created edges or natural edges • Consider critical habitat and ensure appropriate buffer and separation. • Provide diverse trail experiences so that trail users are less inclined to create trails of their own. • Ensure that trails do not impede the operation and maintenance of water conveyance facilities. While new buffered trails along ditches are identified as priority routes within this plan, developers should be mindful of the important agricultural use of these conveyance systems in the Triangle Area and beyond. Trails along irrigation ditches should be located outside of the ditch and maintenance easement. Natural buffers of parkland or open space flanking trails along ditches can allow for regular maintenance access and mitigate potential adverse impacts from adjacent development. This approach will address potential safety concerns and reduce conflicts with regular ditch operations and maintenance. Projects that wish to build new trails parallel to ditches should consult with the ditch owners on an appropriate alignment and separation. 689 26 Trailheads Trailheads provide an opportunity to offer amenities, provide wayfinding, and create trail access. The size and type of trailhead depends on location, need and expected user groups. Three levels of trailheads are outlined below, ranging from the smallest with limited amenities to the largest with the most amenities. Small Medium Large Small trailheads can be located at the beginning or connecting point to the trail system. The primary intent of small trailheads are to provide wayfinding and route finding. Recommended Amenities: • Identification Sign • Wayfinding Map or Orientation Exhibit Desired Amenities: • Benches • Trash Receptacle Medium trailheads are to be located at destinations with trail connections. In addition to the wayfinding amenities of small trailheads, these locations should include additional amenities appropriate to the location and anticipated needs of the users. Recommended Amenities: • Identification Sign • Wayfinding Map or Orientation Exhibit • Benches • Trash Receptacle Desired Amenities: • Bike Racks • Dog Waste Stations Large trailheads would be appropriate at parks or other public spaces with trail connections. In addition to the wayfinding amenities of medium trailheads, these locations should include additional amenities appropriate to the location and anticipated needs of the users Recommended Amenities: • Identification Sign • Wayfinding Map or Orientation Exhibit • Benches • Trash Receptacle • Bike Racks • Lighting • Dog Waste Stations Desired Amenities: • Water Fountain • Restrooms • Bike Repair Stations 690 27Triangle Trails Plan Trail Amenities Trails only make one part of a safe, user-friendly active transportation network. The trails and paths must be supported by a strategic mix of amenities. The table below outlines the various trail system amenities noting type, locations, and level of necessity. TYPE LOCATIONS NECESSITY NOTES Bathrooms Parks with trail connections and parking areas Preferred Providing bathrooms protects natural areas and water quality Benches Trail gateways, junctions, areas of interest (overlooks, scenic spots, next to water) Expected Important for families and elderly users Bike racks Parks with trail connections, parking areas Desired Strategically located where multi-use trails originate and end Bike Repair Stations Trail gateways, along long stretches of commuter trails Desired Includes tire pump and essential tools Dog Waste Stations Trailheads, parking areas, trail junctions Expected Helps protect aesthetics and cleanliness of trails Lighting Trailheads, parking areas, high volume trail junctions Preferred Lighting should be dark skies compliant, and installed at key location rather than along entire trails Parking As required with parks and open space Desired All parking areas are at trailheads Trash & Recycling Receptacles Parking areas, high volume trail junctions Expected Greatly reduces littering Water Fountains Parks, parking areas, major trail junctions Desired Fountains should accommodate human and dog use Shade Along trails Expected Align trails with existing trees to provide shade, also incorporate new tree planting for additional shade 691 28 Wayfinding The most important trail amenity is wayfinding. In fact, wayfinding is functionally critical to a robust highly functioning community trail network. Although outside the scope of this plan, a comprehensive wayfinding plan should be developed, adopted and implemented by the City of Bozeman, City of Belgrade, and Gallatin County. One wayfinding plan for the entire Triangle trail system, and those in the greater Bozeman and Belgrade areas, would standardize and integrate consistent signage and information across the entire network. Example of wayfinding on GVLT Main Street to Mountains trail system The benefits to a comprehensive wayfinding system include: • Effectively guides all users from place to place • Simply identifies routes, directions, distances, and destinations. • Improves safety by increasing visibility of trail users to motor vehicles. • Helps reduce false perceptions that there is a lack safety, function, and convenience. • Positively promotes inclusivity for all abilities, age groups, and mobility modes. • Further legitimizes active transportation as a viable alternative to driving. The elements of a comprehensive wayfinding system would include: • Access Elements—monuments, informational kiosks at key locations • Navigation Elements—direction, distance, intersection, and turn signs • Enhancement Elements—pavement and mileage markers • Digital Resource—wayfinding app or website that includes an interactive maps A comprehensive wayfinding system would conform to the Manual of Uniform and Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) where applicable and required such as at trail and road intersections. 692 29Triangle Trails Plan Best Practices There are a variety of resources that begin to establish best practices for trail design and construction standards, operations and maintenance guidelines, and user etiquette and safety rules. Each trail type, from dirt single tracks to paved shared use paths, have unique best practices. A bicyclist demonstrating proper trail etiquette by yielding to a pedestrian Trail Etiquette and SafetyEstablishing clearly articulated rules about how to use the trails system creates a safer and more enjoyable experience for all users. It should not be assumed that everyone is familiar and comfortable using trails, therefore trail etiquette information and signage is an important component of ensuring the trail network is welcoming and inclusive. The same etiquette rules should be applied across the entire Triangle trail system to consistently establish expectations. Trail etiquette signage is an important part of a comprehensive wayfinding system. The other key component of a safe and enjoyable trail system for both people and dogs is clearly established and respected canine etiquette rules which are the ultimately the responsibility of dog owners. Additional guidance on e-bike and e-scooter use will be provided by individual jurisdictions. Gallatin Valley Land Trust Trail Etiquette EVERYONE: • Stay on the trails • Be respectful of wildlife • Respect private property • Be courteous to other trail users • Stay right, except when passing • Keep the trail litter free • Watch for downed and falling trees • Avoid using the trail in wet conditions • Report trail maintenance needs • Volunteer your time • Pick up dog waste left by others • Open to all non-motorized users BICYCLISTS: • Yield the right-of-way to pedestrians • Stay to the right & pass on the left • Pass others with care & give courteous verbal notice • Control your speed & be ready to stop if necessary DOG OWNERS: • Leash dogs except in designated off- leash areas • Keep dogs in sight & under voice control in designated off-leash areas • Pick up after your dog • Avoid encounters with wildlife & livestock 693 30 Trail MaintenanceThe required minimum levels of trail maintenance vary significantly by trail type. For instance, natural surface trails require regrading and erosion control, whereas paved paths necessitate sealing and crack repairs. In addition to the annual and long-term tasks, seasonal maintenance of commuter trails is essential to accommodating year-round active transportation. Paved paths must have the snow removed frequently during the winter and be swept of grit and debris each spring. As an example, the Denver Parks and Recreation Department has a robust trail maintenance program that includes ongoing scheduled tasks and ‘as needed’ work, identified below: • Ongoing scheduled tasks: inspections, sweeping, grading, trash removal, pruning, mowing, signage repair. • As needed work: surface repairs, snow removal, weed control, drainage control, habitat enhancement, mapping updates, education, agency coordination, volunteer recruitment, employee/volunteer training. Beyond establishing minimum maintenance requirements by trail type, it is critical to identify who is responsible for the work, coordinate efforts when possible, and secure funding sources. To ensure the proper maintenance is funded and performed a trail maintenance plan should be developed. The maintenance management system utilized by the US Forest Service provides the framework to plan, prioritize, schedule, and track maintenance work, through the following efforts: • Setting specific maintenance goals and standards for levels of service. • Developing the necessary maintenance programs which will provide those levels of service. • Executing those programs using the most efficient combination of resources. • Controlling and evaluating the effectiveness of the work in relation to the desired level of service. • Furnishing cost data from which budgets can be built. Regular maintenance by volunteers, organizations, and government entities is critical to keep trails safe 694 31Triangle Trails Plan SustainabilityPrinciples of sustainability should be applied to the development of all trail types in the Triangle area. While there are many aspects to sustainability, the National Park Service and US Forest Service define sustainable trail development to include: • Preserves area’s natural or cultural resources • Produces negligible soil loss while allowing native vegetation to inhabit the area • Encourages users to stay on the trail by providing an enjoyable experience • Accommodates existing use while allowing only appropriate future use • Withstands the impacts of normal use & natural elements • Requires little rerouting and minimal long-term maintenance Sustainable trail design and construction minimizes soil disruption, controls erosion, accommodates native vegetation, and minimizes maintenance needs. 695 32 696 33Triangle Trails Plan Chapter 4: Understanding Current Conditions Related Plans Numerous existing county and local plans summarized below recognize the intrinsic values of developing and maintaining a strategic interconnected system of trails throughout Gallatin Valley. A complete review of related plans is provided in Appendix B. The most relevant existing plan is the Triangle Community Plan which includes a policy directive to “support the creation and adoption of a trail plan specifically for the Triangle area that supplements and supports Bozeman, Belgrade, and community partner trail plans”. As recognized in the 2020 Triangle Community Plan, all the major rural and urban community plans (Four Corners Community Plan, Bozeman Community Plan, Gallatin County Growth Policy and Belgrade Growth Policy) establish goals related to trails: • Establish and support plans and policy for parks, trails, and open space systems that integrate with other area planning documents. • Establish open space, parks and trails along the Gallatin River and other waterways. • Provide viable parks and trails, with plans for long-term maintenance. • Provide a diversity of recreational facilities, activities, and parks. Existing Land Use While the land use in the Triangle area is diverse and evolving, it remains predominantly agrarian. The 2020 Triangle Community Plan provides these characterizations of the primary land uses: Agriculture Land Use“Agricultural operations support dairy and beef cattle, hay production, grain crops, local market vegetable produce, and other specialty products.” Commercial Land Use“From industrial warehouses to retail to growing local businesses in technology and recreation, the Four Corners area and nodes along Huffine and Jackrabbit continue to be desired commercial locations and emerging community hubs. In addition, there are commercial gravel mining operations in the north end of the Triangle.” Residential Land Use“Residential developments and larger, multi-phase subdivisions continue to populate the Triangle. The diversity of developments offers different housing options to the market from large country estate lots to multi-family housing.” Most of the existing trail network was constructed in conjunction with land development. Neighborhood trails are typically installed when a new subdivision is built, but these segments are often disconnected from one another and the larger network. More recently, some road construction projects include new trails along the right-of-way but separated from the vehicle lanes. 697 34 Geography of the Triangle The geography of the Triangle is flat with the overall surface gradient of less than 100 feet per mile generally sloping from southeast to northwest. The altitude ranges from about 4,800 feet along Huffine Lane to approximately 4,500 feet near Interstate 90. The primary geographic features are a variety of waterways. Four tributaries of the East Gallatin River—Baxter, Aajker, Hyalite, and Dry Creeks—traverse the Triangle from south to north. Numerous irrigation ditches and intermittent drainage swales crisscross between the creeks providing water to agricultural properties. The near-surface geology of the Triangle is predominantly clay soils and alluvial gravels. Existing Trail System There are approximately 58.29 miles of trails in the Triangle including 38.85 miles of natural surface trails, and 19.44 miles of paved shared use paths. Most of the trail segments are within subdivisions on the eastern side of the Triangle near Bozeman. The longest continuous trail (6.6 miles) is the shared use path along the east side of Jackrabbit Lane between Hulbert Road East and Shedhorn Drive. The longest east-west trail (4.5 miles) is the shared use path along the south side of East Valley Center Road between Valley Center Spur and Jackrabbit Lane. The existing trail network has been built over decades in conjunction with private land development and public road projects. Most trails constructed during the development of residential subdivisions have been on a voluntary basis. Gallatin County, City of Bozeman, and City of Belgrade have differing regulations that determine if trails are a required component of private development projects. Recently a significant mileage of trails has been added to the system as part of municipal, county, and state road construction projects. The Triangle area geography showing prime agriculture land, [source: Envision Gallatin] Existing Trails within the Triangle Area 698 35Triangle Trails Plan Trail Management and Maintenance Trail management and maintenance within the Triangle falls upon many different entities. Most neighborhood trails are maintained by homeowner associations. Trails within the City of Bozeman are maintained as part of the Bozeman Parks Maintenance District. Montana Department of Transportation maintains the paved shared use paths within their right-of- way such as those along East Valley Center Road and Jackrabbit Lane. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust helps with seasonal maintenance on some sections of trail. There is no coordinated management and maintenance plan for the entire network which results in some inconsistencies and inefficiencies. Needs and Issues The purpose of this plan is to identify the challenges of the current trail network and propose solutions. The list below of needs is based upon the public input received during the community engagement process and industry best practices. A complete summary is included in Appendix C. • Develop a comprehensive plan to coordinate both on-going and long-term maintenance. This would include seasonal maintenance (sweeping and snow removal), annual tasks (grading, erosion control, vegetation trimming), and long- term maintenance (repair and resurfacing). • Identify and secure funding for existing trail maintenance and future trail construction. Sources include local support, grant funding, government funding (local, state, and federal). • Establish standard specifications for construction of new trails to be used across the entire Triangle. • Create a comprehensive trail wayfinding system that includes prescribed sign typologies, standardized location specifications, and unified graphics. This system must be uniform along all trails in the Triangle. • Plan and develop a complete trail network to provide transportation and recreation choices across the Triangle. • Identify and connect the gaps between trail segments within the existing network. 699 36 This word cloud captures the key words from public input during the community engagement process in 2020. Existing Commuter Path along Valley Center Road 700 37Triangle Trails Plan Critical public input was gathered during the 2020 community engagement process. Chapter 5: Community Engagement Unique Conditions The Triangle Trails Plan was initiated and completed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This unique circumstance created some challenges and demanded adaptations for public participation. The project designed opportunities for capturing ideas and concerns virtually and used the project website as the hub for all information and engagement (www.triangletrailplan.com). The website tracked over 1,500 engagements during the planning process. Appendix C contains a detailed summary of the public input received. Building Awareness The project built on existing momentum and community engagement from the Triangle Community Plan that was adopted in 2020. The email distribution list developed through that planning process was expanded with additional businesses, homeowners’ associations, community centers and organizations that have a recreation, development or transportation focus. The project also sent letters to all the large landowners in the project area that provided project information and contacts. The project also utilized the reach of list serves, social media and websites of project partners, interested organizations and businesses. The email updates and social media posts alerted residents to new opportunities to participate and provide comment. News releases to local media outlets launched the project. As the project advanced additional news releases, op eds and articles were published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle and Belgrade News. Steering Committee Guidance A highly engaged Steering Committee with representatives from Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Belgrade, Bozeman, and Gallatin County met monthly to provide direction and respond to public input. The Steering Committee also organized three bike tours of the project area. These tours offered intimate experience of current conditions and identified opportunities the plan could highlight. What barriers stop YOU from using trails? 701 38 Engagement Opportunities The website was the central focus for project information and opportunities to respond to polls and surveys. Having a stand-alone website made access easy and convenient. The website also included a sign up for the project mailing list which grew to over 350 contacts. Community members were asked to help the project by providing information on a mapping platform. The community first identified existing trails in the project area, both official and unofficial. This crowd-sourcing provided a realistic base map of trail infrastructure and current travel routes. The second mapping exercise focused on where people would like future trails. Participants were able to map destination locations as well as preferred travel routes. A dozen focus groups with over 50 total participants were organized and conducted over Zoom. These focus groups targeted diverse interests and sought to represent those voices that may not be as likely to participate through the website. Focus group categories included agriculture, recreation, diversity and minority voices, schools, transportation, community development, water resources, developers and real estate, health, and fish and wildlife. A Virtual Open House was hosted on the website in November 2020 and provided an opportunity to comment on a variety of issues from trail design to location to funding and uses. This forum included multiple choice questions, open ended questions, mapping, and visioning opportunities. The input from the Virtual Open House was combined with the focus group and other website surveys to identify the core elements of the plan. A summary of the project’s community engagement is included in Appendix C. Reporting and Publishing Progress reports were provided to local government boards and committees and published on the website. The focus group participants were also asked to review the draft plan and respond to a survey to indicate support and propose friendly amendments. The draft and final plans were presented to the Steering Committee, Gallatin County, and Gallatin Valley Land Trust, and posted on the website with a response sheet to record level of public support and recommended edits for each section of the plan. Summary By compiling and analyzing the feedback from the focus groups and open house, the following themes were identified and guided the development of this plan. Trail System • Connecting communities, neighborhoods, and places • Tiered approach with commuter pathways, connector trails & neighborhood trails • Completing missing segments of trails corridors • Provide for equity and diversity of users with low user conflicts • Create a system that can have year-round use Safety • Create opportunities to have trails separated from traffic • Consider standards for road crossings, adequate sight distance and lighting • Provisions for maintenance must include regular sweeping and snow removal • Create trails that are safe and welcoming to all users, addressing the specific concerns of women and people of color 702 39Triangle Trails Plan Inclusivity • Consistent wayfinding for unity across jurisdictions • Education signs for the types of uses / customs • Maps, distances, and destinations • Multiple languages – inclusion and welcoming • Smart phone application integrated • Benches, water, trash and recycling, interpretation, and toilets Standards • Consistent standards across jurisdictions for trail development • Standard details for different trail types, intersections, and street crossings • Stream and ditch setback standards • Provide consistent wayfinding • Include standards for amenities such as, benches, water, trash and recycling, and toilets • Include standards for landscaping, aesthetics, nature, and gardens Implementation • Plan will establish priorities, recommended policies, and regulations • Trail construction should be integrated with subdivision development • Commuter and connector trails will need to be funded from a variety of sources • Construction and maintenance funding sources should be identified 703 40 704 41Triangle Trails Plan Chapter 6: Implementation Overview This chapter is structured to highlight implementation issues and opportunities that will lead to suc-cessful completion of the Trail Plan. The goal to build an interconnected network of trails and path- ways throughout the Triangle Area is a commendable goal. However, there are fundamental questions that must be answered if the actual attainment of the trail network is to be realized. How will trails be established, who is responsible for prioritization, who pays for construction, and how will the trails be maintained? This chapter contains recommendations that can move the plan from concept through completion. While this plan establishes the vision and provides guidance for trail development, successful implementation necessitates cooperation between Gallatin County, the Cities of Belgrade and Bozeman, private landowners, non-profit partners, and citizens to turn the vision into reality. Project Coordination There is an opportunity in the Triangle area to take steps towards implementing trail segments identified in this plan. Coordination between Gallatin County, the cities of Bozeman and Belgrade, non-profit organizations, and the private development community will be essential to the success of this trail system. Commuter Pathways The Commuter Paths shown on the trail plan maps are located parallel to existing or proposed roads. As the County considers future road improvements, adjacent trail improvements should be incorporated into road improvement plans. Connector Pathways The Connector Paths shown on the proposed trail maps are intended to be developed with future development. These trails will need to be coordinated with private property owners and regulated by development code requirements. Neighborhood Trails Neighborhood Trails will be constructed at the time of subdivision development. Given the likelihood of continued development in the Triangle area, it is important for this plan to address the implementation of this trail type within a framework of opportunistic growth over time rather than according to a log-ical and linear pattern. While neighborhood trails do not have specific alignment requirements on the map, trails are required within subdivisions that make sense for the site plan and create connectivity to outside of the development either to adjacent parcels or existing or proposed commuter pathways. Priorities The implementation strategies focus on trail construction and trail maintenance. As emphasized throughout the Trail Plan, properly maintaining the existing trails within the Triangle area is equally important as constructing new trails and important network connections. The primary implementation components for both trail construction and maintenance include: 705 42 Regulations: County and City regulations needed to guide trail development within future subdivision development and public transportation projects Policies: County and City procedures or policies used to guide decisions and identify implementation priorities Standards: Unified standards for trail construction and maintenance across all jurisdictions Financing: Sources of financing for all types of trail construction and maintenance Priorities: Procedures to establish annual and long-term priorities for maintenance of the trail system and construction of new trail sections Trail Construction Regulations Gallatin County and the Cities of Belgrade and Bozeman implement land use and subdivision reg-ulations that establish private development requirements. While each jurisdiction must imple- ment regulations in accordance with the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act (Title 76, Chapter 3, Montana Code Annotated), variations are permitted and do occur. Therefore, developing con-sistency between jurisdictions to ensure trail implementation is critical to establishing a compre-hensive trail network. Goal: Achieve consistency between municipal and County regulations for development of trails within the Triangle Area The regulations for constructing trails as a part of future subdivisions are contained within the following documents: • Gallatin County enacts trail development through Gallatin County Subdivision Regula-tions Section 6: Design and Improvement Standards, (Subdivision_Regulations) and the Transportation Design and Construction Standards Section 4.4 Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Facilities. (Transportation Design and Construction). These documents outline the requirements for trail development, dedication of easements, and design standards for trail construction. • The City of Bozeman enacts trail development through the Unified Development Code, Section 38.400.110 Transportation Pathways and Section 38.420.110 Recreation Path- ways 706 43Triangle Trails Plan Recommendations: • The City of Belgrade should consider adoption of regulations like Gallatin County Subdivision Regulations 6.E Pedestrian, Bicycle and Trail, and Transit Facilities. • Gallatin County, City of Bozeman, and City of Belgrade should consider adoption of Trail Design Standards and Specifications (Appendix D) to ensure uniformity between trail typologies across the entire Triangle Trails system and beyond. Goal: Ensure public access easements for proposed to future trails In some instances of minor subdivision or commercial subdivisions, development of trails may not be warranted with the development. In those instances, securing easements for future trail corridors should be sought. Recommendation: • Review subdivision and site development regulations to create consistent requirements for trail easements in cases where trail development is not required. Easements should be located to provide connectivity to the larger trail system and comply with applicable regulations. Policies Building the comprehensive trail network requires a variety of policies to ensure trail development continues within the Triangle Area. A review of existing policies should be completed to ensure coordination in the construction process. The following policies should be considered. Coordination: Continuous collaboration between jurisdictions and stakeholders will be required to ensure success of the Trail Plan. Several actions should be undertaken to facilitate this coordination. Goal: Ensure coordinated implementation of the Triangle Trails Plan Recommendations: • Add a staff position within Gallatin County to support the implementation of the plan. The staff would coordinate with developers and homeowners on parkland and trail development and maintenance plans, as well as provide support for grant applications. • Develop policies between Gallatin County, Cities of Belgrade and Bozeman to review proposed trail locations adjacent to jurisdictional boundaries and for Commuter and Connector trails that cross between jurisdictions. • Gallatin County should maintain a coordinated GIS trail data inventory. Include information from field assessments and construction for surface types, width, and other characteristics. • Consider providing Gallatin Valley Land Trust an opportunity to review and comment on proposed trail designs during the subdivision review process. Establish the roles and responsibilities through a Memorandum of Understanding. • Engage developers early and often to educate them about the Trail Plan’s trail classifications, trail connectivity needs, design standards, and maintenance requirements. Ensure the Triangle Trails Plan is provided when starting the development process with Gallatin County. • Coordinate the proposed trails in the Trails Plan with the Triangle Transportation Plan 707 44 and other relevant plans, such as the upcoming City of Bozeman Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation plan (PRAT). Wayfinding: This plan highlights the important ways a coordinated wayfinding system benefits trail users, adjacent property owners, and the community as a whole. Development of a comprehensive wayfinding system should be completed so that wayfinding elements can be incorporated into the design for new trail construction and added to existing trail sections. Several actions should be undertaken to further develop the wayfinding element of the Trail Plan. Goal: Provide comprehensive wayfinding within the Triangle Trails system Recommendations: • Develop a comprehensive wayfinding plan. This should be based on wayfinding elements of the existing trail systems; standards developed by the local jurisdictions, Manual of Uniform and Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, and other stakeholder entities. • Review options for subdivisions to incorporate standardized wayfinding as part of trail development. Trail-Related Improvements: Prioritize improvements to be included with trail development. Providing consistent improvements will create a predictable experience for users, as well as predictable costs for developers. Goal: Develop a list of prioritized amenities for inclusion in trail construction. Recommendations: • Using the list of amenities in the plan, identify priority elements for each trail typology. • Provide information to developers for sources of amenity products. Standards The standards recommended within Appendix D are sourced from local and national standards. As local standards are revised or updates, they should be reviewed with these standards to ensure consistency across jurisdictional lines. Goal: As appropriate, develop a single source for Trail Standards within the Triangle Area Recommendations: • Review existing standards for adequacy and consistency and pursue regulatory and policy updates as needed. Financial Investment Financing the trail network will be a long-term cooperative effort. There will need to be a variety of funding sources, and much of the trail development will depend upon the subdivision development within the Triangle Area. Goal: Identify consistent funding sources for each trail typology Commuter trails general align with major road corridors. As those roads are upgraded or constructed, trail design and construction should be included as part of the road improvement projects. Several actions should be undertaken to facilitate this work. 708 45Triangle Trails Plan Recommendations: • Review existing capital improvements plans and include trail costs as appropriate for scheduled road improvements. • On an annual basis, review and revise the capital budgets to support trail development. There are grants available to assist with trail construction. This type of funding is consistently competitive, and therefore not a reliable source of funding. In order to improve competitiveness, jurisdictions and stakeholders should coordinate funding requests and secure matching funds so as to provide stronger proposals. Recommendations: • Strategically prioritize grants applicable to trail construction. • Identify on a yearly basis applicable grants with trail needs. Grant Source• Purpose Description Surface Transportation Block Grant Pro-gram (STBGP) • Bicycle and pedestrian improvements The Surface Transportation Block Grant pro-gram (STBG) provides flexible funding that may be used by States and localities for pro-jects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance on any Federal-aid highway, bridge and tunnel projects on any public road, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and transit capital projects Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) • Bicycle and pedestrian improvements Funds can be used for construction, plan-ning and design of on and off-road bicycle and pedes trian facilities Rebuilding American Infrastructure and Sustainability and Equity (RAISE)• Transportation infrastructure Previously known as BUILD and TIGER dis-cretionary grants, these competition awards support the development of transportation infrastructure Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP)• Transportation infrastructure The program is designed to provide flexibility for a wide range of transportation projects to access high-use recreation site and economic generators Recreation Trails Program (RTP)• Trail construction The program funds construction of new trails, as well as acquisition of land or easements for the purpose of trail development Neighborhood trail construction will be completed as part of future residential subdivisions. These improvements will be completed by the developer as part of the required infrastructure improvements, as outlined in the applicable subdivision regulations. Priorities Because trail building will be largely dependent upon the development of future subdivisions and private road projects within the Triangle Area, determining future priority trails or connections is difficult. Instead, it will be more helpful to create criteria that can be used annually to determine priority projects. 709 46 Goal: Develop criteria to determine priority trail projects Recommendations: • Develop a methodology for determining projects to be included within a capital improvement plan, grant application, or other funding source • Criteria for determining priorities should include: • Ability to improve trail connectivity • Ability to connect to a large number of people • Ability to connect to a school or park • Ability to reduce or eliminate a significant safety issue • Significant stakeholder interest and funding opportunities Trail Maintenance Building and maintaining trails that are safe for users of all ages and abilities is a high priority. Individual jurisdictions will need to establish annual and long-term maintenance plans based on available funding sources. The plan’s suggested trail maintenance guidelines can help communities identify what activities to incorporate in their maintenance plans. Regulations There are two important elements of trail maintenance: establishing minimum standards for maintenance and establishing responsibility for that maintenance. Regulations adopted by each jurisdictions require a developer or homeowner association to assume responsibility for maintenance public or common improvements. The City of Bozeman is currently implementing the Parks and Trails District to maintain parks and trails within the city. The implementation of this plan should coordinate with that district to ensure consistency within and beyond the Triangle Area. Goal: Create consistent and predicable standards for trail maintenance Recommendations: • Review regulations assigning maintenance responsibility in areas outside of the Bozeman Parks Maintenance District. Policies Maintenance of trails with the Triangle Area is currently managed through a variety of resources, including homeowner associations, local jurisdictions and the Montana Department of Transportation. Standardizing responsibility of maintenance, as well as standards for maintenance will help ensure the financial investment of trail development is protected and enhanced in future years. According to the Rails to Trail Conservancy, annual maintenance costs on average range from $1,000 to $2,000 per trail mile, depending upon the surface. Goal: Create consistent policies for trail maintenance Recommendations: • Review standard maintenance practices and establish minimum standards across all jurisdictions. • Establish a template for maintenance of gravel fines trails. This template would be 710 47Triangle Trails Plan available to developers and homeowner associations to estimate costs and develop a schedule of tasks and inspections. Standards Standards for paved trails and gravel trails will differ in the approach to maintaining the surfaces. General maintenance standards for evaluating needs for repairs, maintaining clearance standards, and treatment for noxious weeds should be consistently applied to all trail types. Consistently removing snow from paved trails will significantly increase winter and shoulder season use. Goal: Establish consistent routine maintenance plans Routine maintenance of paved trails is important for safety and protection of the investment made in the trail network. Paved trails should be maintained to accommodate all users of the fa-cilities to a reasonable level of safety. Common maintenance concerns such as cracks or ridges in pavement, potholes and removal of debris should be addressed on a regular basis. Below is a list of routine maintenance activities for paved trails: • Routine sweeping to remove debris, gravel and other hazardous items • Regular snow removal during winter months • Inspect and repair pavement surface problems. Seal cracks, grind down ridges, cut back tree roots and repair pavement • Coordinate and schedule pavement overlays as part of adjacent road maintenance • Prune adjacent and overhanging vegetation to reduce encroachment or cause sight dis-tance problems • Repair or replace wayfinding, stop control signs and other elements • Restripe crosswalks and other markers Routine maintenance of gravel trails can be defined as maintenance that is needed to keep the trail operating in a safe and usable condition. Below is a list of routine maintenance activities for gravel trails: • Yearly trail evaluation to determine the need for minor repairs, identification of erosion damage, need for improved drainage • Removing encroaching vegetation from trail tread (grading, chemical treatment) • Treating noxious weeds along corridor • Mowing trail edges if applicable (keep vegetation height low along trail) • Clearing drainage features to ensure proper function • Removal of fallen trees, hazardous trees or dangerous limbs • Planting, pruning, and general landscaping • Flood or rain damage repair: silt clean up, culvert clean out, etc. • Trash removal/litter clean-up, routine 711 48 • Bridge/culvert inspection, clearing and repair • Map/signage post condition inspection, and vandalism repair • Assessing need for sign/map updates or replacement Periowdic maintenance activities: • Addition of surfacing material depending on condition (2-3 years) • Re-grading to improve cross-slope or out-slope for improved drainage • Improvement of transitions with sidewalks or streets, restripe crosswalks and other markers Financial Investment Funding of trail maintenance is often not identified when trails are constructed. The result is that maintenance is often deferred, leading to declined trail conditions and costly repairs. A critical component of any trail system is to identify responsibility and funding for maintenance. Similar to trail construction, maintenance responsibilities will differ with each trail typology. Goal: Identify and establish dedicated funding sources for trail maintenance Commuter Trails As with construction, the maintenance of commuter trails should be completed with the adjacent road maintenance. From a budget perspective, commuter trail infrastructure should be no differ-ent from other transportation infrastructure. These trails will be asphalt or concrete surface and should be included in annual road maintenance budgets. Connector TrailsConnector trails will play an important role to link places throughout the Triangle Area. These trails are mostly located off the street grid and outside of the neighborhood trails. Maintenance for these trails will need to be coordinated through different jurisdictions and neighborhoods. Potential funding for maintenance includes: • Future Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Upon certification of the 2020 census, an MPO area will be designated around Bozeman. This purpose of the MPO is to coordi-nate transportation planning. For trails identified as part of the transportation network, the MPO may be the appropriate organization for coordinating maintenance. • Recreational Trails Program (RTP) Grants. This program is one of the few grant programs for trail maintenance. It is a program of the US Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and is administered at the state level. Funds are intend- ed for recreation trails and require a local match. • Montana Stewardship Grants. This program funds new trail construction as well as mainte- nance of existing trails and shared-use paths Neighborhood TrailsAs the City of Bozeman begins to maintain trail improvements through the Parks and Trails main-tenance district, neighborhoods outside of the city should ensure consistent financing for mainte- nance of their trail inventory. Currently, new subdivisions are required to maintain trails by the homeowner association. The association provides maintenance for common elements, including parks, trails and streets. Maintenance varies by subdivision and could be improved with prescrip-tive standards and required maintenance plans. 712 49Triangle Trails Plan Other options for maintenance of subdivision trails: • Rural Special Improvement District. Pursuant to 7-12-2102, MCA, the Board of County Commissioners may order and create RSIDs upon receipt of a petition to create an RSID that contains the consent of all the property owners to be included in the RSID. The pur-pose of the RSID is to assess property owners annually for the costs associated with the proposed maintenance. These districts require administration by the county to provide assessments, maintain expenses and ensure the work is completed. • Funding trail maintenance at a larger scale could be accomplished by a maintenance dis-trict approved by voters. Such a district simplifies the administration of maintenance, can provide coordinated efforts with adjoining jurisdictions, and ensures funding into the fu- ture. Because it must be voter approved, it is not guaranteed. Similar districts include the Bozeman Parks and Trails District, and the Big Sky Trails, Recreation and Parks District. Priorities Priorities for establishing maintenance include the following: • Establish standards and expectations for each trail typology • Create a maintenance plan template for use by developers and homeowner associations to develop annual costs • Identify areas of deferred maintenance as priority areas • Coordinate maintenance between jurisdictions • Consider long term funding sources for a maintenance program as the trail network ex-pands Trails for future generations 713 50 Appendix A: Useful Resources American Trailswww.americantrails.orgAmerican Trails is a national, nonprofit organization working on behalf of all trail interests to create and protect America’s network of interconnected trails. Since 1988, American Trails has been a collective voice for a diverse coalition to enrich the quality of life for all people and the sustainable development of communities promoting the development and enjoyment of diverse, high quality trails. We envision a network of trails within 15 minutes of every home, school, and workplace. Why Trails? 2020 Edition www.americantrails.org/images/documents/Why- Trails.pdf Trail Maintenance Management Systemwww.americantrails.org/resources/maintenance-management-systems-for-trails Maintenance Guide for Greenways and Urban Trails (City of Denver) www.americantrails.org/resources/maintenance-checklist-for-greenways-and- urban-trails Micromobility Devices on Multi-Use Trailshttps://www.americantrails.org/images/documents/RTCMicromobility_Footnotes_ 9.6.19.pdf E-Bikes on the Trail https://www.railstotrails.org/resourcehandler.ashx?id=11762 Gallatin Valley Land Trustwww.gvlt.orgGallatin Valley Land Trust connects people, communities, and open lands through conservation of working farms and ranches, healthy rivers, and wildlife habitat, and the creation of trails in the Montana headwaters of the Missouri and Upper Yellowstone Rivers. Our trail mission is to link Bozeman’s core to public lands throughout the Gallatin Valley. Since 1990 we have collaborated with the City of Bozeman and dozens of public and private organizations to expand the Main Street to the Mountains system to over 80 miles of trails. These trails are used by commuters, runners, bikers, birdwatchers, and stargazers, and help make the Gallatin Valley the best place to live under the Big Sky. Go Gallatinwww.gogallatin.org/Rethink Transportation! Explore your transportation options with GoGallatin trip planner. Find the best routes for walking or biking, view Streamline routes and schedules, and find carpool partners to save money, reduce your carbon footprint, and get moving during your commute. Get started here to discover all the ways you can get to where you need to go! Partnership of Active Transportation www.railstotrails.org/partnership-for-active-transportation/The Partnership for Active Transportation is a unique collaboration of organizations working at the intersection of transportation, public health and community vitality to promote greater investment in creating safe trail, walking and bicycling networks for all, and facilitating greater physical activity through active transportation. 714 51Triangle Trails Plan U.S. Department of Transportationwww.transportation.gov/mission/health/active-transportationTransportation agencies and their partners can create opportunities for people to exercise for recreation and to build physical activity into their daily routine. Agencies can do that by reducing distances between key destinations and providing and improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities. More people might then bicycle or walk to work, shops, and services. Walk Scorewww.walkscore.com/Walk Score’s mission is to promote walkable neighborhoods. Walkable neighborhoods are one of the simplest and best solutions for the environment, our health, and our economy. 715 52 Appendix B: Summary of Related Plans Gallatin County Growth Policy (2021) The Gallatin County Growth Policy is currently being updated and the 2021 working draft, “Envision Gallatin”, recognizes that “the high levels of outdoor recreation and activity by residents and visitors lends itself to the importance of non-motorized infrastructure throughout the County.” The primary proposed recreation goal in the Envision Gallatin draft focuses on the elements of creating a “regional recreation network” including strategic planning of future trails, parks, and open space; establishing trail development standards; and accounting for maintenance responsibilities and costs. Perhaps most importantly the draft growth policy sets the goal to: “Promote design standards and development patterns that connect multimodal facilities, trails, and pathways to recreational open space corridors, parks, community amenities, and other meaningful destinations.” The Triangle Trails Plan provides an opportunity to build off the proposed goals of the County Growth Policy and create a comprehensive vision of a safe, interconnected active transportation network of trails and shared-use paths. Bozeman Community Plan (2020) The 2020 Bozeman Community Plan serves as the City’s statutory growth policy. Several of the adopted goals and objectives related to trails and active transportation are highlighted below: • N-1.8 Install, replace, and maintain missing or damaged sidewalks, trails, and shared use paths. • N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network. • EPO-3.2 Ensure complete streets and identify long-term resources for the maintenance of year-round bike and multi-use paths to improve utilization and reduce annual per capita vehicle miles traveled. • M-1.4 Develop safe, connected, and complementary transportation networks for pedestrians, bicyclists, and users of other personal mobility devices (e-bikes, electric scooters, powered wheelchairs, etc.). • M-1.9 Prioritize and construct key bicycle infrastructure, to include wayfinding signage, connections, and enhancements with emphasis on completing network connectivity. • M-1.14 Identify possible routes for future bicycle and pedestrian beltway/greenway. 716 53Triangle Trails Plan Triangle Community Plan (2020) The Triangle Community Plan is the genesis of this trail plan and contains overarching guidance for a more comprehensive approach to trail planning, construction, and maintenance. One of the formal goals of the Triangle Community Plan is to “support and improve opportunities for trail development and active transportation infrastructure for a variety of uses and users, from avid cyclists to pedestrians, and from children to the elderly”. Other highlights include: • Walkable neighborhoods and trails to local parks or community core areas support the physical, social, and mental health of people in the communities where they live, learn, work and play. • Trail systems strive to provide maximum connectivity and serve different purposes and users. • Non-motorized transportation systems will be a priority and developed at three levels: neighborhood trails, connector trails, and commuter pathways. The policy statement to create this Triangle Trails Plan specifically emphasizes these priorities: • Connecting trails to meaningful destinations, such as parks, schools, residential areas, neighboring city centers, and other community hubs, which supports opportunities for walking, biking, and social interaction. • Improving connections at the ends of trails and connecting into commuter routes/pathways. • Connecting trails as developments are built and integrating smaller parcels into the trail system, as opportunities arise. • Designing and maintaining trails and pathways for winter use. Belgrade Parks and Recreation Master Plan (2020) The Belgrade Parks and Recreation Master Plan recognizes the importance of trails as community amenities that improve the quality of life for residents. The Master Plan references Headwaters Economics research that trails benefit not only residents, but also has value to businesses and property owners. Proposed trail developments include a City Loop shared-use path, linear parks, and a section of the Great American Rail Trail. The Master Plan also identifies wayfinding and public education about trail etiquette and safety as integral components of a successfully trail system. Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (2017) The Bozeman Transportation Master Plan emphasizes active transportation as a critical component of the overall transportation system place it on equal terms with vehicle and transit elements. It is important to note that the project area addressed by the Master Plan extends well beyond the Bozeman city limits and thus overlaps with a significant portion of the Triangle Trails Plan boundary. The Master Plan acknowledges that Bozeman has a long history of promoting and developing active transportation facilities yielding an inventory of 92 miles of natural surface trails and 23 miles of shared-use paths as of 2017. But the Master Plan identifies the opportunity to greatly expand the active transportation network with an additional 126 miles of natural trails and 102 miles of shared use paths. The Bozeman Transportation Master Plan also emphasized the need for better long- and short-term maintenance of the existing and future trail and path network. Long-term maintenance is very dependent on construction materials and methods which vary widely. The Master Plan recommends more frequent sweeping and snow removal to ensure safe, year-round use. 717 54 Gallatin County Parks and Trails Comprehensive Plan (2010) Although never formally adopted, the Gallatin County Parks and Trail Comprehensive Plan represents a foundational element of this Triangle Trails Plan. The Comprehensive Plan established goals and recommended policies to “support economic growth and development through the stimulation of tourism and the provision of quality-of-life amenities”. It recognizes that the planned development of parks and trails can help preserve agricultural land and natural resources in the Gallatin Valley by strategically locating facilities and access where most appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan included a National Park Service Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance report that concluded: “The Belgrade-to-Bozeman/triangle area trail network is a long-term project that will develop incrementally, as a constellation of projects that coalesce into a system over time. The overall vision should be established by the county, given the size of the area under consideration and the long-term nature of the task. Every mechanism available to improve bicycle-pedestrian facilities should be employed. Community trails enthusiasts can assist by advocating for the projects most important to them.” Bozeman PROST Plan (2007) The Bozeman PROST (Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails) Plan is 13 years old and scheduled to be update in 2021. Nonetheless, the PROST Plan provides insights about the importance of active transportation to the Bozeman community and beyond. For instance, the PROST included a robust public survey showing “trails are the most used recreational facility in the City”. The survey established that approximately 70 percent of the respondents selected walking and hiking as their primary recreational activity. Correspondingly, the PROST highlighted the most requested improvement the City’s Parks and Recreation facilities was to better maintain existing trails and expand the network of shared use paths. The PROST analyzed current usage and inventory to project future trail and path mileage: “The City should seek to provide a slightly higher level of service than is currently being provided with 1.5 miles of trail per 1,000 people. Based on this recommended service standard, and the City’s population projections, trails miles per 1,000 people will needed as follows: 2010 – 54 miles; 2015 – 64; 2020 – 104; and 2025 – 133.” Noting that trails and shared-use paths are uniquely popular with all age groups in the community, the PROST recommends that safe trail design, particularly at street intersections, and winter maintenance are paramount. Lastly, the PROST recognized the need to build and better connect the trail and path system to create longer routes for both recreation and transportation use. Four Corners Community Plan (2006) Even 15 years ago, the Four Corners Community Plan supported the development of a more robust and regionally integrated parks, trails, and open space system. Of note is the vision that a comprehensive transportation system should include bicycle and pedestrian facilities that are separated from the road network. 718 55Triangle Trails Plan Concurrent Planning ProcessesTwo important and related transportation planning processes coincided with the drafting and adoption of the Triangle Trails Plan. Just as it is critical that this plan recognize and complement the host of existing area planning documents referenced above, it is vital to coordinate with concurrent planning efforts. Greater Triangle Area Transportation Plan This transportation plan has been initiated by Gallatin County to guide transportation infrastructure investments within the ‘greater triangle area’ that includes Bozeman, Belgrade, Four Corners, and Gallatin Gateway. The plan will identify recommended improvements based on the transportation system needs and forecast development over the next 20 years. “The plan will integrate with the County’s ongoing Triangle Trail Plan for the Bozeman-Belgrade-Four Corners area and build from transportation plans completed for the Greater Bozeman Area and for the City of Bozeman and City of Belgrade. The Greater Triangle Area Transportation Plan will evaluate and address the transportation system needs of all travel modes.” The Greater Triangle Transportation Plan process began in October 2020 and is scheduled to be finalized in December 2021. The Great American Rail Trail Project This visionary Rails-to-Trails Conservancy (RTC) project plans to connect a multiuse trail that stretches more than 3,700 miles between Washington, D.C. and the coast of Washington State traversing twelve states. Large portions of the proposed trail network are old railroads converted to public trails and to date over 2,000 miles of completed trails have been designated as part of the Great American Rail Trail. A group of stakeholders are actively coordinating with each other and the RTC Great American Rail Trail team to identify, design, and fund the construction of the missing sections though Gallatin County and beyond. The engaged stakeholders include local, state, and federal agencies and local active transportation organizations. The proposed trail runs through Gallatin County between Bozeman and Three Forks. The route includes: • Bridger Canyon to Belgrade (M Trail, Oak Street, North 19th, Valley Center) • Belgrade to Central Park (no existing trail or proposed route) • Central Park to Three Forks (proposed along Hwy 205/Frontage Road to join the Headwaters Trail System) 719 56 Appendix C: Summary of Community Engagement Below is a comprehensive summary of the public input received during the community engagement pro-cess. The comments below were captured during the focus group meetings and the virtual open house. Triangle Trail Vision • In 10 years, I hope to describe the trail network as being connected for all users. The measure of success will be seeing a vast variety of ages and abilities using the trail network year-round for a wide range of purposes such as recreating, commuting to work/school and/or running errands, socializing, etc. What still needs to be done is a unified effort across jurisdictions to recognize the need for following current best practices for design, construction, and maintenance as well as dedicating sustainable funding sources appropriated for the completion of a connected trail network (within our lifetimes). • Bike/walk trails that connect the existing Belgrade, Gallatin Gateway and Bozeman trails. I would also like to see an increase in community trails in the Four Corners area, creating access to the river as well as scenic pathways throughout neighborhoods, creating greater connection within the neighborhoods and to trails that connect communities. Ideally, I would like to see a robust trail system that decreases the reliance on vehicle transportation between and within these communities. • Trail system that appeals both to recreation and utility. I would like to have more safe access to run/bike commuting routes. I would love to have more varied trail and connecting options near my home. I would like to see the trails, like road, have both some main arteries that provide a safe transportation corridor as well as side trails that get closer to nature. • I hope to see a quality connected network of trails throughout the triangle. Trails will be well signed, and longer trails or loops will be branded/marketed in an appealing way. Smaller feeder trails will connect throughout the triangle to larger paved trails that enable bike commuting into and out of Bozeman from the more remote reaches of the triangle. Accessibility & Comfort Provide for most accessibility – taking into consideration all abilities and types of users • Consider different abilities and ages • Consider different activities (true single track and family neighborhood trails) – possible parallel trails with different uses. • Consider access / poverty and diversity • Consider winter use – connect to maintained x-country ski trails • If paved, can you have a parallel trail of natural surface for walking/horseback? • Consider future transit and park & ride. • ADA toilet / porta potty • Shelter and resting areas • BIPOC community • POC (i.e., MT Racial Equity Project) and Indigenous groups (i.e.: Indian People’s Network) and center their recommendations in your plans. • Best trails are at least 10 feet wide, are away from roads, use natural landscaping, and consider all types of users in their design. Often there are parallel trails -- one for those on foot and one for those on wheels. 720 57Triangle Trails Plan • Plan ahead for electric bike and small pods used for transportation – make sure separated and wide enough • Ability to connect with nature / natural surroundings Amenities • Benches • Shelter • Water • Restrooms • Garbage and recycling • Wayfinding and interpretative signage • Especially adjacent to community gardens and food forests Design Standards • Create standards that work to reduce user conflicts on the trail. • Different types of trails will provide for different types of uses – walking the dog vs. commuting vs. exercise. • Create standards for trail development and adopt these to ensure connectivity and consistency – same or very close Bozeman, Belgrade and County. • The County transportation standards adopted earlier this year address trails but having a trails plan adopted that shows specific routes and level of development for trails will be another good tool. • Complete streets resolution, but no regulatory teeth – follow complete streets guidelines Trail System Structure Like the tiered approach of neighborhood, connector and commuter trails that are integrated • There is understanding and support that neighborhood trails (local) would have different standards and maintenance than commuter trails • Complete the perimeter (arterials)– separated, paved, maintained pathway along Jackrabbit, Frontage and Huffine. • Create other “spines” (collectors) – that are more enjoyable to travel on, less busy and noisy and can connect different destinations and neighborhoods. • Use transit for major distances and then bike last mile • Need a true transportation network not just trails • Connect to future great American trail (rails to trails) • Network on ½ to ¼ mile grid Broad support for requiring developments to install and connect trail systems at the time of development (concurrency) just like all infrastructure. Need to ensure this is enforced / compliance. • Trails should be embedded in plans, policies, and new developments. Top Rated Trail Connections: • Connection to communities • Connection between neighborhoods, commercial areas, and schools 721 58 • Connections between neighborhoods and public open space (interconnected greenways) • Connect the segments of trails that exist (Costco area and in Triangle) • Connecting trails to commercial areas is an economic boost Development Funding Funding the development of trails – this topic had a variety of ideas from RID to grants to partnerships. 1% for trails, gas tax, federal funds, philanthropy – a variety is important. There were some comments about tax fatigue and the high cost of housing and being sensitive to adding more burden to residents. Take away was use a variety of mechanisms. Funding proportionality is fair. Use public-private partnerships. • Realtors not supportive of new tax • State funds – emphasize front country and daily exercise needs • MT Trail Stewardship • LWCF • Opportunity to pair transit and trails – grants like Smart Growth America • Create district before the land is developed – funding source • How do we pay for roads? – Just add 5 or 10% and cover the trail transportation network. • Double positive of a gas tax of $0.02 – Missoula County example Open House: existing budgets, grants, local option tax, developer pays for development and existing budgets for maintenance Maintenance Funding Funding for maintenance was also important and it was suggested several times to have this in a separate fund from development. A variety of ideas were recommended – RID, using existing transportation maintenance funds, partnerships public-private, adopt a trail (businesses), similar approach to “I Plow Hyalite” initiative. • Pool funding and hire private contractor for winter and summer maintenance. • Use $$ in the county mil for maintenance – at least part of it. • Partner with Streamline on trash and snow removal • Snow removal is an issue for safe routes to school – should not be responsibility of school • Asphalt/concrete – higher capital expense up front, but lower overall maintenance cost. We need an asphalt management approach because these facilities would have a longer life with the right maintenance program. • Clear about who is responsible for maintenance Wayfinding People like the existing wayfinding that is used for GVLT’s Main Street to the Mountains – keep this consistent theme and unify the trail systems in Bozeman, Belgrade and the Triangle this can be a unifying element. 722 59Triangle Trails Plan • How far to? Am I on the right path? • Is the path going to change (paved now but will turn to hard pack soil in 2 miles) • Investigate an app for the trails system • Use wayfinding to share the appropriate uses on that system and how far to popular destinations • Trail etiquette • Clear communication on allowed uses – better information and education • Integrate trails and transit wayfinding on app Destinations & Routes Destinations that were identified: • Schools – new high school, to be built schools (Bozeman is delaying development of the next elementary school, but it should be considered in this plan (west of Gooch Hill Road, south end of Woodland Park development to Elk Lane and west to 191), Cottonwood/Stucky another location, Monforton also looking for properties to expand.) • Community Centers – YMCA • Sports field complex • Work – major employers • Water – Gallatin River Access points or views, Hyalite, other waterways – use terrace / floodplains • Water – canals – Farmers Canal • Commercial nodes (market) • Food and beverage – commercial nodes • Along Blackwood • Connecting Belgrade, Bozeman, Four Corner – perimeter • Focus on connecting existing trails that have gaps • Think about connections beyond Triangle (Rails to Trails) • Can we look for opportunities with MSU ag land? • Gooch Hill area is isolated – needs connections -along Stucky • Fowler – Hyalite • Oak Street, Durston Street, Love Lane • Davis Lane • More Parks between Baxter and Huffine off Durston and Love Lane. County gravel pit in future park? • Four corners to Hot Springs (old RR grade) • Existing trail systems leading to parks and recreational areas and then connecting with trails that generally parallel county roads...Most of the trail system was wide enough to accommodate small groups walking and much of it is paved especially near the parks • Extend Valley Center to Bozeman / to Catamount St. • Quail Run to Monforton School • Separated paths along Fowler, Huffine, and College St. • Heart of Valley dog park • Harper Pucket • Future Destination Park in Triangle? 723 60 • Quiet recreation opportunities – bike to hike. • Bikers – mountain biking and Through bikers • New Billings Clinic • East of 19th and Blackwood – dense development in next 5 years • Airport to Belgrade • Park and ride opportunities / streamline integration • Belgrade area – Thorpe and Amsterdam to Jackrabbit – Gallatin Heights connection • Erwin Bridge Fishing Access • Old railways • Main connector and arterial streets such as Alaska, Oak, Davis, Harper Pucket, Hidden Valley, Love Lane, Durston, Baxter, etc. • Connector trail between the Cimmeron neighborhood and Sundance Trail • Path along 191 to Rainbow School • Connect Elk Grove along Violet Rd • NorthStar subdivision to Monforton School • Trail that dead ends behind Christ the King church, suggest continuing south to Durston to pick up the Fowler trail or Valley West trails. • Forest Park connection • Paved trail through Meadowlark Ranch subdivision. • Cameron Bridge • Pedestrian bridge from Thorpe across I-90, the railroad tracks, and Frontage over to the northwest side of Belgrade • Kagy (beginning at 11th) and going West. Also, on Stucky from 19th W to Cottonwood. Then on Cottonwood to Huffine. • Frank Rd • CJMS to Gallatin High • Durston to Hulbert Safety Issues • Separation away from traffic • Watch busy trucking areas (i.e., gravel pits) • Baxter is scary • Lighting • Visual awareness and space • Welcoming – multi-language wayfinding – all races. • Indigenous land recognition • Safety station? Do you need a friend? – Community care. • Focus on unity and inclusion in design and wayfinding • How do we get across Jackrabbit & Huffine? • Need adopted safety standards • Alaska Road is dangerous • Consider sight line • Some county roads in desperate need of upgrades (for ag and safety) • Need to right size the crossing facility related to motor vehicle infrastructure. Paved separated 724 61Triangle Trails Plan facilities along arterials, appropriately engineered crossings, designing roads for the speeds we want to see to enhance crossing safety, safe interactions between all users. • Snow removal is an issue for safe routes to school • Wider shoulders – avoid steep drop offs • Consider speeds of e-bikes and where they can safely travel • Tunnels and overpasses like Three Forks • Pedestrian lead times and/or pedestrian scrambles at signalized intersections • Reduced car speeds • Gallatin heights and other underpasses for Jackrabbit • Fowler and Huffine intersection is not safe • Crossing over I 90 Irrigation Ditch Concerns • NOT in ditch right of way for maintenance (possible in open space adjacent to right of way) • Ditch easements are not public right of ways • Public access has negative impacts on ditches (yard clippings, dog waste, liability) • Maintaining access to and ease of ditch maintenance, e.g., planting of trees and shrubs, placement of trails • Impacts to or destruction of trails during canal maintenance • Liability insurance - requirements, increased costs • General increased time and management costs to ditches • Signage, EDUCATION, and enforcement - who will be responsible for that? • Impacts to water quality (trash, dog waste, etc.) • Users should pay for access, perhaps via an entity like the city or GVLT - if it’s a desirable amenity, then there should be funding for insurance, maintenance, cleaning, signage, education, enforcement and this responsibility should NOT fall on the ditches. • Big picture, if this is something people want and will pay for, there should be a “ditch trail” manager who is responsible for these things. Build it and then figure out how to manage use/impacts after the fact is not an acceptable approach. • Many of the waterways within the Triangle area are, in fact, irrigation ditches with existing easements on private land for the ditch companies to conduct maintenance and improvements. Ditch companies have huge concerns with people, kids, and dogs along their ditches due to the liability as well as people not respecting the water and its use to those who use it for a livelihood. • Undersized Culverts • I like the idea of the trail being 50’ off the ditch bank and creating corridors. I have no problem with someone planting trees if they have water rights. I think they help protect the ditch bank. Grass growing and encroaching the ditch banks making the ditches smaller I think is a bigger issue. • Not near farming operations – better along roads. • Ensure development will continue the use of the ditch and maintenance - Planning of the subdivision and how it is accommodating the ditch is really important and has long lasting impacts beyond the developer and the future landowners – the ditch may continue on into the future to serve water rights or as irrigation for that subdivision. • Better choice may use the ditch as part of the park land, but you need to ensure that maintenance could still happen – you cannot deny access due to state law – it is a prescriptive easement secured by adverse possession – the ditch is there and that is the easement – period according to state law. There is a secondary easement for maintenance that is in state law that 725 62 allows for access by only the people doing the maintenance. • Legally the easement is not for trails, so it is not legal, and the ditch company does NOT own the land under that easement General Challenges • Roundabouts – how to incorporate bikes and pedestrian crossings SAFETY • Commercial developments are not required to put in trails causing a break • Crossing and curb cuts – need safety striping or lights depending on how busy. • Need a system that can bridge the gaps between developments – temporary easements and buy backs? • Need dedicated funds for maintenance. • Protect Landowners and ditch companies from liability. • Working with MDT regarding easement when they widen roads. • Work with MDT for establishing separated shared use path when possible. • Trash and gravel make trails unappealing – need clean up. • Can trails offer wildlife corridor connections? • Concern about sensitive wildlife areas (wetlands, riparian). • Limit crossings to reduce impact on traffic flow • Snowplows cover pathways • Rivers and streams move over time and are sensitive areas – need a buffer and careful planning • Lack of Connectivity is a barrier • Unsafe crossings • Lack of maintenance • Wayfinding – confusing, not enough • Not maintained – gravel, debris, garbage • Safety – lack of lighting • Roadways difficult to cross • Not enough separation between cars and trails • Link trails and bike lanes • Bike lanes commuter routes, such as Baxter, Oak, and Love. • E-bike speeds Focus Group Participants AgricultureTreimstraMike GafkeCircle 4 Bob & Barb MarxSpanish Peaks Sand and Gravel Sue Duncan/AGAI Nonprofit / AdvocacyMatt Parsons, Gallatin Valley Land Trust Catherine Schmidt, Trust for Public LandsPatrick Rooney, SW Montana Bike Association 726 63Triangle Trails Plan Betty Strook, Gallatin Alliance for PathwaysKevin Belanger, Rails to TrailsGary Hellenga, Big Sky Wind DrinkersLizAnn Kudrna, Bike-Walk Montana, walk audits Randy Carpenter, Future West, Manhattan, and Three Forks Planning Ralph Zimmer, Pedestrian Traffic Safety CommitteeMarilee Brown, Pedestrian Traffic Safety Committee Community OrganizationsChristopher Coburn, Bozeman Health, 5210+ CoalitionLilly Deford, Gallatin Watershed CouncilAli Vasarella, Belgrade Community Coalition Cheryl Bartholomew, Bozeman Age Friendly Community Chair Community MembersAndrew WilliamsonJonathon Stewart Alyssa RossMarianne Amsden Real Estate / Developers Kevin CookKarl CookTom StarnerRob LateinerDon Cape Jr Ellen Beck TransportationDani Hess, City of Bozeman Levi Ewan, Gallatin CountySheila Ludlow, MT Dept. TransportationSteve Klotz, City of BelgradeTaylor Lonsdale, City of Bozeman Gallatin Valley Land TrustEJ Porth, Associate DirectorMatt Parsons, Trails DirectorMatt Marcinek, Community Trails Program Manager MT Fish Wildlife & ParksMichelle McNameeBetsey LaBroad Diversity, Equity, and InclusionPaul Gomez, MSUAja Desmond, Haven and Earthtone HRDC / StreamlineVanessa Palmer, HRDC Program Manager Sunshine Ross, HRDC Transportation Director 727 64 SchoolsJen MacFarlane, Gallatin Health Department Melanie Hoffman, Monforton Parent Matt Madsen, Western Transportation InstituteTodd Swinehart, BSD7 facilities manager Douglas Fischer, Bozeman School BoardDarren Staunch, Montforton Superintendent 728 65Triangle Trails Plan Appendix D: Trail Classification and Design Standards In continuity with the Transportation section of the Triangle Community Plan, the Triangle Trails Plan is divided into three classes trail based use. The classifications are a combination of the City of Bozeman PROST Plan and draft Gallatin County Trails Report and Plan. Trail Classification and Design Standards Trails consist of a central walkable/ridable surface, known as a tread. Trails have a shoulder located on each side. The tread plus the shoulder is known as the clear width. The height above the trail with no obstacles like tree branches is known as the clear height. Trails are classified based on the amount of traffic and type of use. As uses or intensity change, a trail may be upgraded in classification. Class I Trail Design Standards These paved commuter pathways connect larger community nodes trails. They are heavily used with full access and are designed use along major transportation corridors. These trails are designed to permit two-way traffic using an impervious surface material such as asphalt or concrete. Width and Clearance • 12 feet wide • Width can be decreased to 10 feet in interior subdivision settings. • 1’ gravel shoulder, 2’ minimum shoulder graded away from trail (2% max. slope) • A minimum vertical clearance of 10’ should be provided. Branches that could restrict the trail when weighted with snow or rain should also be removed. Grade • The maximum trail cross slope shall be 2%, sloping one direction, not crowned. The cross slopes on corners and curves shall be towards the inside where drainage permits. • The maximum trail cross slope should be 5%, the cross slopes on corners and curves shall be towards the inside where drainage permits. If there is a segment that has a cross slope of more than 5%, the segment should be as short as possible. • Maximum grade segments: • 8.3% for a maximum of 15.24m (50ft) • 10% for a maximum of 9.14m (30ft) • 12.5% for a maximum of 3.05m (10ft) • Near the top and bottom of the maximum grade segments, the grade should transition to less than 5%. Rest intervals should be provided within 7.6m (25ft) of the max grade segment. • There can be no abrupt change in surface level greater than ½ inch. Cross Section • Concrete - The trail base shall consist of a minimum of 3 inches of crushed gravel compacted to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T99. Concrete shall be a minimum of 6 inches of M4000 • Asphalt -Excavate 11.5 inches of material. Install a minimum of 9 inches of crushed gravel compacted to 95 percent of maximum density as determined by AASHTO T99, unless otherwise 729 66 dictated by sub-soil type materials being compacted to road standard. The overlay shall consist of 2.5 inches of asphalt compacted to 93 percent of maximum density, as determined by ASTMD 2041. Construction seal shall be applied at 0.08 gallon/square yard after installation. Material • To decrease long term maintenance, tread surface must predominately be impervious material such as asphalt, concrete, pavers set on concrete, or wood decking • Porous surfaces (permeable pavers, porous asphalt, porous rubber) should be a priority in sensitive areas. • The tread material including any base course will have a total minimum thickness of six inches. • Wood deck planks must be run perpendicular to the direction of travel and joints must not exceed 36 inches. Planks must be securely fastened so they do not warp. Class II Trails These trails receive moderate use intended for multiple non-motorized, recreational and commuter users. These trails connect meaningful destinations, such as neighborhoods, schools, and hubs of commercial activity. Class II trails are constructed of natural fines and are 6 feet in width. Width and Clearance • Single surfaced tread with a minimum width of five or six feet. • Tread width may be reduced to 36 inches for a maximum distance of 30 feet to pass or preserve significant features such as rock formations, important vegetation, etc. • The minimum cleared zone will be tread width plus 2 feet to either side of the tread and 10 feet vertical. In no instance may the overhead clear height be less than 8 feet. Grade • A cross-slope of no less than 2 percent and no more than 5 percent to provide for water drainage is allowed. • Maximum sustained running grade is 5%. A 10% maximum grade is allowed for a maximum distance of 30 feet. • Tread will be raised above adjacent surfaces and have a 1-to-2-inch crown. Where this requirement is not possible, the tread will have a 1 to 20 cross slope and/or side ditches outside the cleared zone. • Stream crossings will be over culverts or bridges. • Only dips or slot-entrance drainpipe will be used for cross tread water stops. Surface MaterialClass II trails or portions of trails designed for ADA access will be surfaced with a minimum of wood decking, natural fines, or with a well maintained compacted crushed gravel meeting specifications in the figure below. 730 67Triangle Trails Plan Percentage by Weight Passing Square Mesh Sieves • A gravel or particulate tread surface will be a minimum of six inches thick. • Wood chips are not an acceptable tread material for Class II trails. • Geo-textile material will be placed beneath the tread material in poorly drained, boggy or marshy areas, or wet meadows and on any of the following soil types: clays, clayey loams, silts, silty loams, or less. Geo-textiles for all Classes of Trails:a. The preferred geo-textile is a continuous filament non-woven needle-punched engineering geo-fabric.b. An acceptable geo-textile is a woven engineering geo-fabric.c. Minimum geo-textile requirements: Cross Section • The trail bed must be excavated 6 inches deep, prior to installation of tread mix. • Tread mix shall be installed in two parts. The first 3-inch lift shall be of ¾ inch Road mix, compacted to 95%, and then 3/8th inch minus gravel (natural fines) compacted to 95%. • (If moisture content is not adequate for compaction, water should be added prior to rolling and compacting). • Natural fines used for these trails shall consist of 80 percent sand, 10 percent silt and 10 percent clay. • If the natural fines tread mix does not contain enough clay or soil binder, additional binder must be mixed in. • Geo-textile material will be placed beneath and gravel or particulate tread material in poorly Passing Crushed Top Surface Crushed Base Course Pit Run Gravel Base Course 3 inch sieve 2 inch sieve 100% 1 inch sieve 100% 1/2 inch sieve 3/8 inch sieve 100% No. 4 sieve 50–80%25–60%No. 10 sieve 35–70% No. 200 sieve 8–15%6–12%10–15% Property Non-woven Woven Mass per unit area (ASTM D-3776)4 oz/sqyd N/A Thickness (ASTM D-1777)60 mils N/A Flow Rate (ASTM D-449)100 gpm/sqft 40 gpm/sqft Puncture Resistance (ASTM D-3787)50 lbs 70 lbs Trapezoid Tear Strength (ASTM D-4533)40 lbs 45 lbs Grab Tensile Elongation (ASTM D-4632)100 lbs @ 60% 140 lbs @ 15% 731 68 drained, boggy or marshy areas, or wet meadows and on any of the following soil types: clays, clayey loams, silts, silty. The preferred material is non-woven needle-punched engineering geo-fabric, but woven is acceptable. Fabric should be selected for use and durability. Width and Clearance • Single surfaced or unsurfaced tread, five-foot minimum width. Tread width may be reduced to 32 inches for a maximum distance of 30 feet to pass or preserve significant features such as rock formations, important vegetation, etc. • The minimum cleared zone will be tread width plus one foot horizontal, and ten feet vertical. Grade • Grades will be 15% or less. Class II trails or portions of trails designed for ADA access will have a maximum sustained running grade of 8% and a 14% maximum grade is allowed when resting intervals are provided every (5 ft), and the maximum cross slope is 5 percent. • Tread will be raised above the adjacent surfaces and have a 4 inch crown. Where this requirement is not possible the tread will have a 1:20 cross slope and/or side ditches outside the cleared zone. • Changes in level: • Should not exceed 51mm (2 in) • May be up to a maximum of 76mm (3 in) in areas where 51mm cannot be attained and the slope of the trail is less than 5% in any direction. • Obstacles over 51mm (2 in) in height should be removed • Stream crossings will be over culverts or bridges. • Only dips, slot-entrance drainpipe, or rubber belting will be used for cross-tread water stops. Class III Trails Class III trails are narrower neighborhood soft surface trails that connect locally to parks and open space These trails receive moderate to low use and are typically 3-5 feet in width. They are either natural trails developed by use over time or constructed with natural fines. ADA accessibility may be limited as trails typically follow the natural contours. Material • Preparation varies from machine-worked surfaces to those worn only by usage • No surfacing is required except in erosion prone poorly drained, boggy or marshy areas, or wet meadows. • Wood chip tread materials are acceptable when traffic is limited to pedestrian traffic in sensitive locations such as in wetland nature education areas. Cross Section • No trail bed excavation is required. Width & Clearance • Tread width minimum is three feet. • The minimum clear zone will be the tread width horizontally and seven feet vertically. Grade • Provide positive drainage for the tread. • Grades typically follow the natural topography • ADA access is extremely limited • Utilize grade dips, cross sloping, and water bars to minimize erosion. 732 69Triangle Trails Plan • Blending the trail into the setting is emphasized in trail routing. • Applicable to all Trail Classifications • Adequate visibility for safety. • The minimum acceptable trail easement width is 25 feet. • Trail entrances will be signed describing the degree of ADA access. • All above items may be modified to meet current ADA specifications. • A minimum of 5-foot separation between edge of path to top of slope that is greater than 1V:3H, if not met, a railing must be implemented. DrainageCulvert • Drainage shall pass under the trail by culvert or chase drain designed for 25-year storm event with no surcharging. • The minimum culvert diameter should be 15” and a flared end section is required. • Culverts should run perpendicular to the trail, sloping drain downslope with a slope of 2-5%. • Culvert should extend 12” beyond edge of trail (up-slope) and 4” into sump. Where no sump is included, culvert should extend 12” beyond trail down- slope. • A minimum of 6” cover should be above the culvert. Ditches • Appropriate crossing treatment for all trails that need to cross ditches. • Need for a no-rise floodplain analysis on jurisdictional waterways. • Shall have a flat bottom of 8” in width and be dug to a minimum depth of 12” within 2’ of the trail tread. • Drainage ditch slope shall be greater than 2% with increasing depth to a point where natural grade allows for discharge. • Where drainage ditches slope at greater than 1’ vertically in 12’ for more than 30’, provide a 6”x6” timber check-dam, across the bottom of the ditch embedded 12” into each side 10’ spacing. • Rock spillways shall be provided with the width or diameter of the drainage structure and 3x that dimension down-slope. Spillway shall drain a minimum 2% slope or conform to the existing slope. Bridges • Bridges should be as wide as the path with an additional (2 ft) buffer on either side. • The height of the bridge is measured from the bridge deck to the bottom of the stream or river. If the deck is more than 30 inches high a protective rail is required. • Rails are to be 42 inches high, with at least one mid rail at 34inches, to be used as a handrail. A protective barrier must be installed along the length of the rail system with either solid paneling or vertical bars. • Spacing between bars shall be no greater than 9 inches or less than 3.5 inches. • If the bridge does not require a rail it must have a 3-inch-high curb on both sides along the entire length of the bridge. • The deck should be constructed of slip-resistant material. • The deck of the bridge shall not exceed a12:1 slope along any part of its length. • The deck and ends of the bridge must have no abrupt change in surface level greater than ½ inch. Cross slope shall not exceed 2 percent. Bridges must be rated for weight load distribution in • All bridges to be installed on public lands must be certified by a licensed civil or structural 733 70 engineer Waterway Setbacks and Vegetative Buffers • Riparian buffers are strips of vegetation along the banks of creeks and streams. They can serve many purposes including: • Protecting stream/creek bank integrity • Providing pollutant removal for runoff and interflow • Supporting necessary wildlife habitat • The proposed setback for streams, ditches, and waterways shall be at least 30-feet as measured from the high-water mark or top of bank, when the high water mark is not distinguishable. • The trail must be designed to limit or discourage foot traffic into the setback. Intersections • Curb cuts shall be provided at all street / trail connections. • Trail widths should be increased at intersections. Signage must be added and in accordance with MUTCD. Right of way must be determined and signed appropriately. • Visible crosswalks across the intersection must be included. Signalized Intersections • Intersections shall be designated with signs in accordance with MUTCD. • Where crossing distances exceed 60ft, a crossing island should be considered. Crossing island width should be 6ft or greater. Truncated domes are required in ramps. • Marked crosswalks shall meet MUTCD standards. Un-Signalized Intersections • All trail crossings shall intersect at a minimum of 60 degrees, preferably 90 degrees. • Intersections shall be designated with signs in accordance with MUTCD. • Special emphasis on crosswalk markings should be used to increase visibility. Crosswalks should be straight and in line with the trail. In street crosswalk signs must be installed at uncontrolled pedestrian crossings, most effective in two-lane, low-speed streets. • RFBs can be used to increase yielding rates at uncontrolled or mid-block crossings. • Curb ramps and detectable warnings should be used to ensure users with vision impairments are aware of the street. • Line of sight should be unobstructed from both a seated and standing position. Longer site distances are required for shared use paths including equestrians and bicyclists. Mid-Block Locations • Mid-block trail crossings shall have a painted pedestrian crossing, with crossing and advanced crossing signs at either end. • Mid-block crossings shall be located outside of the functional area of the nearest intersection. • Mid-block crossing shall not be located within 100 ft from Stop or Yield controlled streets. Crossings shall not be located within 300 ft of non-signalized intersections and 400 ft from signalized intersections. • Curb ramps and detectable warnings should be used to ensure users with vision impairments are aware of the street. • Where a trail crossed an unpaved road or driveway, the road or driveway should be paved at a minimum of 20ft on each side of the crossing. • Raised crosswalks may be utilized to slow traffic speeds, truncated domes are needed at curb lines and visible pavement markings are required on roadway approach slopes. Grade Separated • Sight lines must not be obstructed from both a seated and standing position. 734 71Triangle Trails Plan 735 72 736 Plan Chapter Plan Section Source Revisions Made or Recommendation Goal 1 Strategy 1 add more detail about what it means to create a "baseline of elements across neighborhoods" including definition for what the 'elements' are UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 1 Strategy 1 Share a quadrant by quadrant list of amenities/assets UPFB Available via City GIS Parks Mapper Goal 1 Strategy 1 All about equity - access to these amenities is ALSO SUPER important, having these amenities is one part of this UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 1 Strategy 2 is "maintain" acceptable considering community is growing? maybe say "maintain the level of parkland acres per resident (17 ac per 1000) to grow the system as community grows" UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 1 Strategy 3 include park types drawings too - connect to the design manual UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 2 Look for missing page 65 UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 2 this feels a bit like a kitchen sink of recommendations - maybe separate out strategy into a few strategies, rather than one. Focus one on underserved demog and one on making the operations efficient/well run UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 2 call senior focused programs, "active aging" UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 4 emphasize how people visit the city - those who are coming to city to get through it to other destinations. Need to associate this with the ADAPT section too. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 4 advocate for resort tax! get more out of tourists! UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 4 in intro paragraph - discuss that city plans to respond to increased use on natural areas/parks. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 4 while tourism/ED are seen as a boon, need to consider impact on facilities and infrastructure UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 5 consider how the strategies can include objective metrics UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Strategy 6 Big Sky Wind Drinkers - are important partners to flag on page 72 under Invest; Strategy 2.6 UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 More thought on dogs City Commission Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 2 Former HOA parks now neighborhood parks - repurpose for dogs City Commission dog parks will be included in subarea/quadrant level park master planning efforts along with other recreational facilities Goal 2 Recommendation into UDC, park planning process, standards for dog improvements City Commission Additional language was added to ensure design enhancements are considered and to balance the use of parks between dog owners and those who prefer not to interact with dogs or interact less frequently Goal 3: Connect Strategy 1 how might the sensitive lands protection plan overlap with the PRAT? John: Sensitive Lands Protection plan will not result in a specific designation, but will be a resource for any agency to use for further implementation or action by Cities. UPFB Statements added to encourage parkland acquisition and planning around Sensitive Lands Study Goal 3: Connect Strategy 1 Communication of the green lines (example) and where they came from/what they mean. Connect to community feedback that helped to identify these routes. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW. See background/public engagement chapter Goal 3: Connect Strategy 1 GIS Map of this map for public use to be able to dig into more detail? Follow up question about GIS layered map. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW; however these will not be available until after plan adoption. Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Clarification: The PRAT plan is not the bike/ped plan. Intent is active transportation/multi-modal connections between park assets. Plan edit will recommend a full municipal active transportation plan UPFB Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 3 creating anchor routes - incorp. calming measures into bike paths themselves...especially at key destinations UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 3: Connect Strategy 3 focus feels like it is on bicycles. Minor references to pedestrian use. Proposed SUP - defined as something that is high speed and not supportive of "shared" use UPFB Bicycles and pedestrians are referenced frequently in the document and width recommendations and classificatoins should accommodate different users; sidewalk analysis was outside of the scope of work as emphasis of shift toward bicycles was one of the major themes of the Active Transportation Plan. Goal 3: Connect Strategy 5 Note inclusion of strollers, scooters, people in wheelchairs. How will ebikes be treated? Need to consider treatment across full public realm with engineering / public works too. Mitch: more information coming out of legislature about classification that will impact management. UPFB Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan PRAT Work Session Summary and Analysis of Board, Commission and Public Comment 737 Goal 3: Connect Strategy 5 Q: Will lighting be removed from SUP required improvements? A: SUPs used for longer distances which led to the recommendation of lighting for safety UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 3: Connect Strategy 5 How are Bird bikes used? Tourism or commuting? UPFB Does not align with the public engagement and recommendation is not to incorporate the suggested revisions Goal 3: Connect Strategy 5 Should make clear that the vision is for pedestrians and bicycles to safely travel together on trails. Etiquette will not be enough - address safety of users across the network. Enforceable speed limits on trails? Been discussed, but not yet implemented. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW; safety is emphasized in the intro pages of the Connect Chapter Goal 3: Connect Strategy 6 There were public comments on this. Hope the photo does not represent the vision. Need to respect the watercourse buffers. GWC - noted nuance in issue. UPFB Photo has been removed since initial draft Goal 3: Connect Strategy 6 Consider different materials for paths in watercourses. Add more info about goals of setbacks. More detail speaks to intentions around setback zones. UPFB Does not align with the public engagement and recommendation is not to incorporate the suggested revisions Goal 3: Connect Strategy 10 Q: Where does anchor route fit into typologies? A: Larger arterials that act as the biggest part of the network. Left off of types because it's a primary shared use path (analogous to arterial here) UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 3: Connect Strategy 10 Existing conditions map refers to bike boulev as routes, need to include those routes in proposed maps. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 3: Connect Strategy 10 Revision of "connect" nomenclature. Currently no connection of what or to what...propose "Connect the path and trail system" or Connect and Active Transportation Network...to provide opps to experience all that Bozeman has to offer. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 3: Connect Add note about adding composting on trails City Commission Does not align with the public engagement and maintenance crew has concerns about attracting animals. Recommendation is not to incorporate the suggested revision Goal 3: Connect Separate bike ped plan City Commission Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Goal 3: Connect Regional bike loop system - reference that it be a recommendation City Commission In alignment with public comment regarding high priority for connections between parks Implementation with Wayfinding Plan as the City grows and parkland is increasingly connected via the Active Transportation network. Amendment to Final Draft needed to encourage development of the loop trail in coordination with Gallatin County, Belgrade and GVLT. Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Concern regarding continuous lighting in more natural areas such as parks Transportation Advisory Board All lighting will be required to meet City standards for dark sky compliance and designed on a case-by-case basis Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Will need to ensure winter maintenance of these routes Transportation Advisory Board Language added to Design Manaual Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Would like to see a list of prioritized Anchor Route with prioritized projects Transportation Advisory Board Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Suggest identifying top routes, how much they will the cost and how long will it take to build those out Transportation Advisory Board Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Utilize existing streets with low volume convert to bike/ped facility Transportation Advisory Board Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 2 Anchor Routes should be enjoyable and efficient places you want to travel Transportation Advisory Board Further clarity added Goal 3: Connect Strategy 6 don't over sign trails Transportation Advisory Board Addressed in Wayfinding Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 6 other facilities related to active Transportation (i.e. bike depots) - rules & norms signage route designation Transportation Advisory Board Addressed in Wayfinding Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 6 rules & norms signage route designation Transportation Advisory Board Addressed in Wayfinding Plan Goal 3: Connect Strategy 10 Widths o 6 ft. min for utility, smaller for "nook" or "cutoff" type of trails o Social o Path behind Morningstar an example of too narrow o Accessibility considerations 6' min o 6 ft. too narrow for Anchor - Anchors used by commuters and should accommodate two cyclists passing Transportation Advisory Board See Design Manual Goal 3: Connect Clarify bike boulevards. Are these largely just regular roads with sharrows and other signage? If yes, take one step further to partial or full closure. See the model of the slow streets in San Francisco: roads that allow local slow traffic, but are closed to through traffic 100% of the time or during certain hours or days. What level of volume control and separation we can realistically achieve? Transportation Advisory Board no action taken because text clarifies that bike boulevards are more than sharrows and signage 738 Goal 3: Connect Transitions between facilities and bike/vehicle interactions are not addressed and will be a critical component for making the AT system feel safe and welcoming. Transition spaces include where anchor routes interact with arterials/collectors; where trails/SUPs transition to bike lanes or bike boulevards; where bike lanes cross major arterials or collectors. These transitions should be well-signed and have additional treatments (e.g., green paint in vehicle/bike conflict zones). While individual facilities are described in the Design Manual, the transition between types of facilities is not clear. Transportation Advisory Board Aligns but is outside of the SOW; the design manual will be amended by staff to included further specs Goal 3: Connect Is winter maintenance on non-paved trails possible? Many of these are important for the AT network Transportation Advisory Board Aligns but is outside of the SOW; more statements regarding maintenance added Goal 3: Connect Anchor routes should be designed to feel more natural and less like a mini road, when possible. For example, some recent pathways (e.g., Griffin, Oak) are sterile and less pleasant to use. Shade trees, separation from roadway, and some meandering add to the enjoyment and will likely increase use. Transportation Advisory Board Aligns but is outside of the SOW; Anchor routes have been clarified Goal 3: Connect Forward-looking micromobility goals should be included. While the PRAT acknowledges the need for micromobility policies, it does not set goals for new and expanded micromobility access. Transportation Advisory Board Aligns but is outside of the SOW; to be further elaborated in the Transportation Master Plan Goal 4 look at the vegetation types (added up to 102%) on page 93 UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 1 Would we not change HOA lands to parklands. Then City is responsible for many HOA lands that are now parks. It is a lot for the City to manage, (solution: Need to revisit that discussion from Dec 1. Need to allow riparian area within boundary of park, 2. have parkland value, or 3. has no value (stays as it is within the system/current policy)) UPFB HOA lands are called "open space" in City documents. HOA's previously had maintenance duties within parks but the land has been owned by the City as City Parks. Due to passing of the Parks and Trails District, City now maintains. Further public engagement would be needed to consider aquiring/accepting open space as parkland Goal 4 Strategy 1 PROST to PRAT, is open space lost in that translation? How do we clearly communicate the importance of open space (solution - Balance of ecosystem services against activation) UPFB Easy to accommodate - changed name of "Adapt" section to emphasize natural resources; changing title after all the public engagement may cause confusion Goal 4 Strategy 1 Define SITES UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 2 how does bozeman's challenges around etiquette today differ from historic challenges, and the city compared to other cities. UPFB Aligns but is outside of the SOW Goal 4 Strategy 2 clarify what we mean when we share "refer to strategy 1.3" UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 2 how do we support better natural area management/maintenance? Ex. best practices for HOA management of wetlands UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 2 value of natural areas/benefits of natural areas need to be communicated to enable more stewardship of those places UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 3 first bullet point confusing. Do we want City to acquire land, developers to acquire land, or others to acquire land UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 3 need to clarify 4.3 more - ensure the action communicates that the City should continue to purchase land, but also needs to rely on partnerships and other entities to acquire land. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 3 do not want to put City in a position where they can't have flexibility to get creative with land acquisition UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 3 third bullet - are we suggesting that we take cash in lieu and apply to areas of the city that have limited park land access/critical park lands... UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 3 everyone should have access to a high quality park experience, regardless of access to HOA UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 4 Strategy 3 HOA parks are now "neighborhood parks", accessible to everyone. Not just access. by residents of that community. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 5 Strategy 3 Set target for performance measures - set at 50% for youth, active aging, and 100% for adults...lowered to 40% during the pandemic. Will update that information in working with Berry Dunn. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goal 5 Strategy 3 Important to be clear about the trade off for cost recovery. Not about reaching 100% cost recovery. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goals "Unify" is confusing as a goal. Share what is being unified. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goals Clarify the punchy strategy headings UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goals Clarify actions regarding "who" is responsible for each topic/goal. Inconsistency in the goals, example "connect" and "grow and sustain" UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goals Write out goals in table of contents UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goals Create executive summary of goals and "how to read the report" UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Goals Communicate conflicts/coordination between plans..how do they all work together? All gears that work together, similar to diagram from community plan. UPFB Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Maps The map should be interactive. Add a disclaimer on the map if needed to note that it is generalized and conceptual, and that it is subject to change as priorities are identified and as land uses change occur via annexation or other development. Transportation Advisory Board Aligns but is outside of the SOW; note already included; GIS maps will be available on City mappers upon adoption Maps Routes on the map should include equity considerations. Equity should not only be considered for how active transportation systems are designed and constructed, but also where they are located. Emphasis should be placed on underserved neighborhoods in project prioritization and in creating the map Transportation Advisory Board Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan 739 Maps Routes on the map should be linked with transit. For active transportation to be effective, it should tie into the bus network, especially considering first/last mile connections from transit stops to destinations like businesses and residential neighborhoods. The PRAT should have direct, intentional alignment with Streamline’s strategic plan. Transportation Advisory Board Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Maps Consider describing existing plans/programs/policies and how these will interact with/effect AT plan as well as connection to adjacent neighborhoods/communities Include a list of involved parties and their contribution to plan (who developed plan, what is their role/how to roles interact) Transportation Advisory Board Staff recommends this be incorporated into the next Transportation Master Plan Overall Comments on layout City Commission Layout was simplified Overall Look at redundancies City Commission Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Overall Use compliant colors City Commission Resolved Overall Better referencing system for actions City Commission Resolved Overall This plan does not have a vision statement City Commission Easy to accommodate/aligns with public engagement and other COB plans and is in the current SOW Overall General The current draft of the PRAT Plan is ambiguous about measurable goals, timelines, and project prioritization. To make the plan actionable, we need to be able to translate the highlevel goals into practical next steps. o The PRAT would ideally include an action table that identifies tangible next steps and priority projects. At a minimum, this should include the list policy modifications and “anchor routes” projects. It should include: clear and concise goals, potential community impact and benefits (including equity considerations), responsible parties (e.g., staff departments and partner organizations), proposed timelines, general project cost estimates, potential funding sources. o Current language about project prioritization is confusing. In Chapter 3, Page 82 states that new routes and projects should be updated annually “using the prioritization recommendations” included in Chapter 5. However, Chapter 5 does not include specific recommendations. Pages 119-120 in Chapter 5 identify high-level criteria that could be included in a prioritization method and references a “prioritization matrix template,” but this is not included in the draft. o If project prioritization is not included in the PRAT Plan but is recommended as a next step after the plan, the PRAT should make clear (a) who develops the project prioritization criteria, and (b) who evaluates projects against the criteria. Transportation Advisory Board Prioritization of Investments, Programs and Actions was added to the Implementation Chapter Transportation and Engineering Staff to complete matrix with Transportation Board. Amendment needed to final draft to clarify that the matrix is not included 740