DPR Sport User Group, Field Allocation Fall 2016

Transcription

1 DPR Sport User Group, Field Allocation Fall

2 Allocation Policy Purpose & Goals Purpose: The sport field allocation policy will provide facility reservations to sport user organizations through an efficient and transparent process. Overall Policy Goal: FACTS; Fair Adaptable Consistent Transparent Sustainable (Leader s Challenge 2016) Policy will incorporate a model that allocates athletic fields based on: Field availability Field conditions Policy will define: Scheduling timelines User needs Sport equitability Transparency Define a Sport User Organization (e.g.; organization that runs sports leagues that includes games over the course of a season) Tiered priority system to determine priority allocation scheduling 2

3 Tiered Priority System A tiered priority system provides DPR a transparent method to reserve space to as many organizations as possible starting with Tier I Tiers were developed through the collaborative Sport User Group process, which determined that the highest priority for field allocation is to non profit organizations that serve Arlington youth. The Sport User Group considered factors such as residency, age served, tax status, organization size, competitive levels, league options, and organizational membership. Ongoing work will continue to further define these tiers Tier I: Arlington Residency, Youth, Non Profit Tier II: Arlington Residency, Adult, Non Profit Tier III: Arlington Residency, For Profit (youth or adult) Tier IV: Other* 3

4 Project Timeline Where have we been? Fall 2016 & Spring 2017 Spring 2016 Spring 2016 Review with Users Spring/Summer 2016 Develop Allocation Model Pilot Allocation Model Summer/Fall 2015 Study As-Is Winter 2016 Verify Findings Draft Recommendations 4

5 Project Timeline, cont. Where are we going? TBD Fall 2016 & Spring 2017 Pilot Allocation Model Winter/Spring 2017 Policy Development Winter/Summer 2017 Review Pilot Feedback TBD Vet Policy to Sports Commission & User Groups Implement Policy 5

6 DPR Allocation Pilot Specifics Review Fall Season 2016; In-season only for current leagues by primary and secondary season Allocation was based on the number of teams from the previous fall season and then updated if necessary DPR did not alter game time, but practices/time may be adjusted Start/end times were consistent across leagues Ideally, leagues were given a cushion to accommodate their teams and weather (not always possible during week) Leagues received blanket permit to manage space within organization 6

7 DPR Pilot: Allocation Fall Pilot Allocation Basis Goal: Description Activities/Week Youth Recreational Primary Season 3 Youth Recreational Secondary Season 2 Youth Competitive * 3 Adult 1 Youth Maximum Time Hours/Activity Under 8 Recreational Teams - Practice 1 Over 8 Recreational Teams/Competitive Teams* Practice 1.5 Game Times Vary by Sport/league *Competitive teams are considered year-round travel programs; programs not wanting the amount of space (i.e.; not wanting practice) did not receive it Primary Season Sports: Soccer, Tackle Football, Flag Football Secondary Season Sports: Baseball, Softball, Ultimate 7

8 Initial User Concerns Field times N. Arlington field space League growth DPR field plans 8

9 Initial User Concerns: Field Times DPR set our policy start times at 5:00* End time was considered 7:00 for non lighted fields and between 10:00-10:45 for lighted fields (15 min. before lights out)* DPR allowed leagues to schedule before and after these times if possible and did not count it toward the allocation DPR could not justify allowing some leagues later start times and not others *Few fields have further time restrictions (e.g.; community fields, high school fields, collegiate fields) 9

10 Initial User Concerns: N. Arlington Field Space Unable to consider allocation based on location/zip code Large parks located in S. Arlington: VA Highlands, Barcroft, Longbridge DPR has about 55% of our fields in N. Arlington Only 12% of N. Arlington Fields have lights Should DPR look into field allocation based on location? 10

11 Initial User Concerns: League Growth Overall growth 10% from in two years Declines in some leagues Increase in field space for those in growing leagues Youth Leagues Fall 2016 FY15 FY16 FY17 % Growth (FY15-17) Youth Baseball (<12) 1,023 1,134 1,066 4% Arlington Senior Babe Ruth % Arlington Girls Softball Association % Arlington Soccer Association 7,847 8,402 8,498 8% Arlington Youth Football Club % Arlington Flag Football ,028 44% YULA % Totals 10,428 11,259 11,471 10% 11

12 Initial User Concerns: DPR Field Plans Construction of Diamond Field facilities at Stratford Park Currently used by YULA & ASA DPR will consider the field a combination field Part of CIP process; DPR will look to reallocate other fields to ease field loss in spring 12

13 DPR Concerns: Allocation shortage Regular unused field space, particularly at lighted facilities League growth Open grass areas not associated with athletic fields 13

14 DPR Concerns: Allocation Shortage Recreational Soccer: Unable to allocate 3 activities per week to recreational soccer despite primary season soccer received an allocation similar to a secondary season ~600 teams in rec. soccer League already putting above maximum teams per field Flag Football Unable to allocate 3 activities per week and received a similar allocation to a secondary season sport (107 teams) Description Activities/Week Youth Recreational Primary Season 3 Youth Recreational Secondary Season 2 Youth Competitive * 3 Adult 1 14

15 Youth Field Allocation Shortage Estimated teams shows delta between expected and planned v. actual Youth Leagues Estimated Teams AGSA Actual Teams Baseball (all leagues) Does not account for density on fields and is based on DPR estimates for teams per field Weekday space remained tight for many leagues YULA AYFC 8 8 Flag Football ASA ASA and DPR Flag both fell short of meeting goal for field allocation for entire week *Allocated all synthetic field and standard is to put more teams per field than DPR calculates 15

16 DPR Concerns: Field Spot Checks, October Optimal maximization of space Scheduling practices and make-ups Public perception 16

17 Fall Pilot Lessons Continue to monitor field usage during the week via Rovers Consider space by location (north & south) review again after spring pilot Try to eliminate open grass areas (not associated with athletic facilties) reservations because of community concerns Use space before adult leagues for youth practices (e.g.; time before adult softball games) Consider trimming allocation to secondary season leagues to accommodate primary season leagues (e.g.; less practice time) 17

18 Spring Pilot Plans Maintain basic policy model for the spring season Primary Season: Rec. Baseball, Softball, Lacrosse, Ultimate, Soccer* Secondary Season: Travel Baseball *Soccer will receive a secondary sport season allocation (2 activities per week in rec levels) On-going work to identify additional places to play Plans to schedule youth practices before adult softball games On-going rover checks to determine field use with notification to leagues when fields are unused 18

19 On-Going Policy Work DPR has engaged the Sports Commission to advise on specific policy issues: Residency Requirements for organizations to meet in the tiered priority system New Sport Process DPR will conduct a spring 2017 pilot after reviewing outcomes from fall 2016 Sport User Groups will be asked for input after next pilot phase DPR will develop policy details to include preseason activities, tournaments/special events, and communication timelines 19

20 Conclusion Questions & Discussion 20