1. Final Presentation of Survey Results December 8, 2014 12/8/20141 The

2. Survey Methodology Extensive community participation for survey approach and questions. Important acknowledgement that this type of survey is not a referendum; rather, it is a planning tool to better understand complex issues Survey used a postcard to invite participation, all households mailed one card with a password. A follow-up postcard was then sent to all non- responding households. Upon request, a paper survey was available as a substitute for the on-line version. Survey was designed to focus on the opinions of the “household” rather than just the individual respondent. Many of the survey questions contained this caveat. Town encouraged participation with email blasts, signs and other outreach. 12/8/20142

3. Overall Response Rates Surveys were mailed to a total of 4,734 households using a mailing list provided by the Town. After accounting for undeliverable cards (221 were returned) the responses rate was 13%, with 575 completed surveys. For the sample size 575 we estimate with 95% confidence that the actual responses are within plus or minus about 4% of the reported response on any given question. The PowerPoint Summary of Results In following slides the question number from the actual survey is presented in the upper right corner of the slides. 12/8/20143

4. 4 Q38-Q45 Respondent Demographics

5. “Meets needs” ratings of current services/facilities Outdoor recreation facilities are rated highest (parks, trails, natural open space) Indoor recreation and indoor aquatic facilities are currently rated insufficient, with over 50% of respondents indicating that their needs are not met 12/8/20145 Q: Considering ALL your nearby options, IN or NEAR Superior, how well do you think the following services and facilities CURRENTLY meet the needs of your household? Q4

6. Top three priorities to add/improve By far, the top priority is indoor recreational facilities (69% of respondents), followed by indoor aquatic facilities (54%) and the library (47%) Outdoor facilities and dog parks are not considered a priority by respondents 12/8/20146 Q: Which three types of facilities should be the HIGHEST PRIORITIES to add or improve IN SUPERIOR in order to better meet the needs of your household? Q5

7. Weighted and unweighted data – by gender The overall unweighted data represents females more heavily, as the proportion of female respondents was 60% Weighted data is representative of the Superior population (48% female, 52% male) 12/8/20147

8. Allocation of funds – by specific facility Respondents allocate the most money to indoor recreation facilities ($28.29 on average), and the least to dog parks ($1.89 on average) 12/8/20148 Q: Using $5 increments or more, if you had $100 to spend on the amenities listed below, how would you allocate these funds? Q35

9. Priority rankings vs. average money allocated Amount of money allocated mirrors the priority hierarchy identified earlier 12/8/20149

10. Allocation of funds – indoor vs. outdoor facilities When given allocation funds of $100, respondents put a larger share (on average $68) towards indoor facilities than outdoor facilities (on average $32) 12/8/201410 Q34

11. Top three indoor facilities to add/expand/improve Approximately one-third (35%) of respondents requested a weight/fitness room, followed by a library facility (30%) and a leisure pool with lap lanes (29%) 4 of the top 5 ranked facilities to improve are recreation-related 12/8/201411 Q12 Additional survey questions asked about the importance of age-specific, community meeting, athletic/dance, and aquatic indoor facilities in further detail.

12. Preferred location for Superior indoor facility About 4 in 10 respondents (42%) have no preference in facility location 17% prefer the Town Center, while 16% prefer the Rock Creek area 12/8/201412 (north of Coalton) (south of Coalton) Q14

13. Use of current library services A strong majority (92%) of respondents are aware of the Louisville partnership 62% indicate that the existing library meets their needs well Over three-quarters (78%) of respondents use the library occasionally/frequently 12/8/201413 Q16, Q17, Q18

14. Potential Superior library facility 12/8/201414 Q20

15. Potential indoor facilities partnership with Louisville A slight majority (53%) of respondents would support a partnership but would like to see expanded facilities in Superior Overall, about three- quarters of respondents approve of a partnership with Louisville 12/8/201415 Q: Would you support a partnership agreement with the City of Louisville, in which residents of Superior and Louisville would have reciprocal access to indoor community/recreational facilities located within each community? Q28

16. Taxes for potential indoor facilities program Less than a quarter (21%) of respondents would not be willing to pay taxes annually for an indoor facilities program 39% would be willing to spend between $1 and $99 annually 41% would pay $100 or more annually in taxes 12/8/201416 Q36

17. Next Steps for Use of Survey Data and Parks and Recreation Planning 12/8/201417 The Final Report on the 2014 research will be edited to address comments and suggestions from tonight. The survey database is an ongoing resource for additional analysis and probing of opinions. Crosstabs and other statistical analyses of the survey findings can be used to probe topics of community interest. Segmentation of the data will be important. The role of the planning process, and ultimately of the advisory boards and Trustees, is to consider the complex and interwoven factors (such as age, presence of children, time in Superior, location of residence, etc.) in determining priorities for capital investments and programs. The 2005 Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master Plan has provided framework, guidance, and direction. Survey results are one tool in the tool box; it is not a vote, but an indicator, and provides a sense of current priority.

18. DISCUSSION AND QUESTIONS 12/8/201418