WHISLER WILSON RANCH Monterey, California CAMPING FEASIBILITY REPORT November 2013

Home , Bottchers Gap, Fort Ord, New Brighton State Beach, Point Lobos, Point Lobos Ranch, Ventana Wilderness

Contents

INTRODUCTION...... 1 Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District...... 2 Purpose of the Whisler Wilson Ranch Acquisition...... 5 Site Context...... 5

PHYSICAL ANALYSIS...... 7 Existing Conditions Mapping...... 8 Planning Considerations ...... 22

MARKET ANALYSIS...... 25 Introduction ...... 26 Population Trends ...... 28 School Enrollment Trends ...... 31 Recreational Demand ...... 35 Recreational Supply...... 39

SOCIO-POLITICAL ANALYSIS...... 53 Public Input ...... 54 Socio-Political Context...... 64

FEASIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS...... 71 Recreational Use Spectrum...... 72 Financial Analysis...... 79 Estimated Construction Costs...... 88 Next Steps...... 91

SURVEY RESPONSES...... 93

| iii

1 INTRODUCTION

Project Background • Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District • Purpose of the Whisler Wilson Ranch Acquisition • Site Context

| 1 Context

San Francisco (118 mi)

US Highway 1

Carmel River State Beach Palo Corona Regional Park Whisler Wilson Ranch

Point Lobos Ranch State Park

Palo Corona Regional Park

Whisler Wilson Ranch Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District

California State Park

NORTH

Big Sur (28 mi) 0 Mi 1.5 Mi 3 Mi Exhibit 1A.

2 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Project Background

The Monterey Peninsula Regional Parks District In 1972 the voters of Monterey County approved Measure A, which created the Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District . The district was entrusted to acquire lands for the express purpose of preserving open space and providing passive public access . Since then, the district has successfully protected approximately 12,500 acres of open space while maintaining balanced budgets and minimal overhead . More recently, the district acquired the old Fish Ranch, also known as Palo Corona Ranch, in 2004 . That same year the voters of the district approved a ballot measure creating the Parks, Open Space and Coastal Preservation Benefit Assessment District. The ballot measure assesses each property owner within the district approximately $20 per year to provide additional funding for the district to continue preserving and protecting parks and open space . This annual assessment, which raises approximately $1,000,000 per year, ends in 2019 . The district’s current boundaries cover over 500 square miles and include the seven incorporated cities on the Monterey Peninsula, Carmel Valley, Pebble Beach and the Big Sur Coast . The District is governed by an elected Board of Directors, representing the citizens in each of five wards. Further information can be found on the district’s website: www .mprpd .org

View of Palo Corona Regional Park from overlook

Inspiration Point in Palo Corona Regional Park Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District logo

| 3 Site Location

To Monterey

Carmel River State Beach

US Highway 1

Palo Corona Monestery Regional Park Beach

Point Lobos State Natural Reserve Whisler Wilson Ranch Point Lobos Ranch State Park

Point Lobos Ranch State Park

To Big Sur

Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District California State Park Palo Corona Whisler Wilson Ranch Boundary Regional Park

NORTH

0 Miles .5 Mile 1 Mile Exhibit 1B.

4 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Project Background

Purpose for Whisler Wilson Ranch Acquisition The Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District (MRPRD) and California State Parks (CSP) have made significant strides to preserve undeveloped coastal landscape in Monterey County. Using shared funding from the 1990 State Proposition 117 Habitat Conservation Fund, and other statewide park bond funds, they have acquired two significant coastal properties south of Carmel. CSP acquired the 1300 acre Point Lobos Ranch east of Point Lobos State Reserve and MPRPD purchased the adjacent 4300 acres of Fish Ranch (Palo Corona Ranch) . In 2005 the northern 600-acres of the new Palo Corona Regional Park were opened for limited public pe- destrian use . The limitation on access is a result of only one public entry point directly into the park from State Route 1 just south of the Carmel River Bridge (the Fish Barn entrance) and no established parking other than along the highway . Meanwhile the district has commissioned many studies on all the natural features and resources of the entire 4300-acre park for use in a soon to be drafted General Development Plan for the long term access, use, and management of the park . Since opened, the district has received a steady stream of positive comments on the great trail system and spectacular views had from the 600-acres currently accessible by permit only . At the same time, the district has also received a growing increase in demand for more access; confirming the need to establish expanded parking and accessibility. To help resolve the issues limiting public access to the park, the district approached the Whisler Wilson family with an offer to purchase their 317-acre Ranch (WWR), east of Carmel River State Beach at San Jose Creek Road (at Monastery Beach) . This property was a high priority for conservation acquisition by both the MPRPD and the CSP because of its location, natural resources and ideal accessibility to Point Lobos Ranch and Palo Corona Regional Park lands . In 2012 the district purchased WWR with Coastal Conservancy and Habitat Conservation Fund grant funds for $4,000,000 . The California Coastal Conservancy’s $1 million grant included a condition to ensure that the investment would align with their mission to preserve, protect and restore resources along the California Coast and provide opportunity for increased public access and camping . This feasibility study has been commissioned by the district to meet this grant funding condition by assessing the potential of this property to provide affordable overnight camping to meet the growing demand along the coast, and specifically in the Monterey area. This document is a summary of the findings and provides site assessment and planning, environmental assessment, and market and economic analysis for limited campground facilities at the WWR property .

Site Context: Location and Usage The WWR site is located in an established recreation destination region including the Monterey Peninsula and Big Sur areas . Existing concentrations of day use and camping facilities are found throughout the region . As a result the site may attract recreation users from local communities as well as from non-resident travelers visiting the region and recreating on public lands. While access to the site is near the Pacific Coast, it is not an ocean side area . Thus it will not likely attract casual pass-through visitors unless they seek an upland recreation area or camping alternative to hotel accommodations . Access The site offers access from a primary travel and recreation corridor, Highway 1 . Access into the site, as with most recreation sites, will be limited by parking availability and any identified limitations regarding the access road into the property . Access from State Route 1 (SR1) along San Jose Creek Canyon Road (Road) into the WWR property is through CSP’s Point Lobos Ranch property . This study cannot predict what level of use or development CSP will eventually permit in and on its Point Lobos Ranch property . Therefore, the findings and conclusions are based on development levels on Point Lobos Ranch necessary to support what is feasible on the WWR property .

| 5 Site features WWR is a 317-acre property that was originally owned by the Whisler - Wilson family . It is located a little more than six miles from downtown Monterey . It is east of Highway 1 at Monastery Beach (Carmel River State Beach), which is popular with scuba divers and beach goers . It shares its southern and western boundaries with California State Parks’ Point Lobos Ranch and its northern and eastern boundaries with the district’s 4300-acres Palo Corona Regional Park . The WWR Property is adjacent to, visible from, and provides connectivity to both of these parks . The higher elevations offer breathtaking views of Point Lobos State Reserve, Carmel River State Beach, Jacks Peak County Park, the Santa Cruz, Gabilan and Santa Lucia Mountains, Palo Corona Regional Park, and Garland Ranch Regional Park in Carmel Valley . In addition to the public open space, the property provides a potentially ideal opportunity for establishing the much needed and sough-after expanded public parking and accessibility demanded by the public . 2 Physical Analysis

Existing Conditions • Off Site Assessment • Highway 1 Access and Enhancements • Entry Road • Parking • On Site Assessment • Topography • Soils • Hydrology/Stream Zones • Vegetation Planning Considerations • Developable Land Mapping

| 7 Existing Conditions

Point Lobos Ranch State Park Existing Day-use Entrance

Palo Corona Regional Park

US Highway 1

Midden Field Tight Curve Proposed Parking Lot CPS Residences Whisler Wilson Entrance

Point Lobos Ranch State Park

Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District California State Park Trails Streams Point Lobos Ranch Whisler Wilson Ranch Boundary State Park San Jose Creek crossing

NORTH

0 FT 1300 FT 2600 FT Exhibit 2A.

8 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Existing Conditions

Off Site Assessment Highway 1 Access and Enhancements: Highway 1 is an undivided two-lane State highway with a posted speed of 55 miles per hour (mph) in both directions of travel . The southbound lane has a wide shoulder where beach users park during the day, and where parking is often hap-hazard and crowded . The northbound lane also has a wide shoulder that is used for opportunistic parking with the exception of a portion of the shoulder south of the Road that is posted “no parking . [Reference an appendix map] The Road is an existing dirt road connecting the WWR property with State Route 1 (SR 1) . Observations of existing traffic conditions along SR 1 in the vicinity of the Road do not indicate any obvious capacity issues . However, should the Road become an established public access point for both MPRPD and CSP, it can be expected that Caltrans will require a southbound left turn lane improvement and roadway widening at the intersection to mitigate any potential safety issues . For this report, SR1 improvements at the Road are estimated at $750,000. A full traffic analysis and design plan will be drafted once a preferred use of the WWR property has been identified.

San Jose Creek Canyon Road: Access to WWR is by way of a road easement east from Highway 1 through Point Lobos Ranch State Park for approximately 1 1. miles . The existing dirt road follows San Jose Creek through a beautiful redwood canyon, and opens into a large meadow when it reaches the WWR property . There are road width limitations that will impact the level of use potentially appropriate and feasible onsite . T he existing road is well defined, on fairly level ground and approximately 10-12 ft. wide. It is currently used by CSP staff to access the residences and by MPRPD to access WWR . There is one corner for a short section of the road that limits visibility and is constrained by the San Jose Creek on the north side . From the CSP residences, the access road to WWR narrows and crosses San Jose Creek in three locations . This will require bridge crossings to protect the quality of the streams and make the road all-year navigable without a four wheel drive vehicle . Rock outcroppings, topography, the creek and exiting mature redwood trees will limit the width and method for improving road access to WWR . Fire and emergency access is critical regardless of any type of day or overnight use proposed on the property .

Parking: An open meadow (the “Polo Field”) close to the SR 1 entrance would provide the best opportunity for parking . However, there are environmental limitation which prevents its use for parking . There is a smaller meadow further east and adjacent to existing residences used by CSP. The meadow is relatively flat, open, and provides the best opportunity for developing a parking area to accommodate the types of camping and day uses that may occur on WWR and CSP property . Preliminary studies show that the area is large enough to accommodate up to 60 vehicles . There are no known natural features that would preclude development of this area for public access parking . [Reference an appendix map]

| 9 Existing Conditions

US Highway 1

Proposed Parking Lot CPS Residences

NORTH

0 FT 800 FT 1600 FT Exhibit 2B.1. On Site Assessment Topography The topography of WWR is a significant landscape feature. Visually the undulating hills and steep terrain contribute to the scenic nature of the site. The slope of the land will influence access and the suitability of the overall site for certain uses and plays a critical role in identifying locations best suited to construct buildings and associated site improvements . Generally slopes of 0-10% are preferred for larger structures, entry roads, and parking areas . Slopes from 10-30% are less suitable but can accommodate smaller structures and limited site improvements . Slopes above 30% are subject to unstable conditions; and development on them is discouraged . Building on slopes greater than 30% requires special engineer- ing considerations . Pages 10 and 11 (Exhibit 2B) provides a slope analysis for the WWR site . In summary there are appropriate areas on the property suitable for locating structures and potential campsites that are within the 0- 10% slopes .

Undulating range looking Southeast towards the Meadow

10 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Existing Conditions

Creek Crossing

Existing Cabin

San Jose Creek

Slope Analysis

>30% Slope 21-30% Slope 11-20% Slope 0-10% Slope Trails 20’ Contours

NORTH

0 FT 600 FT 1200 FT Exhibit 2B.2.

| 11 Existing Conditions

Soil Geologic Formations There are a number of geologic formations and landslide deposits depicted on Page 13 (Exhibit 2C) . Por- phyritic granodiorite of Monterey (Kgdm) underlies the north-facing slope of the San Jose Creek canyon and some level areas along the creek . This formation is an igneous rock formed during the Cretaceous period that is found west of the San Andreas fault where granite from the south end of the Sierra range has been transported northward by San Andreas fault movement . The rock is typically light gray and medium grained . This rock formation is subject to landslides as a result of weathering and landslide deposits on this formation have been mapped on the Property . The Monterey Formation (Tm) occurs north of San Jose Creek on the upper slopes and ridgeline . This formation consists of mudstone interbedded with siltstone . The mid-elevation slopes are Marine sandstone (Tts), which are typically dark-yellowish, coarse- to-fine grained sand deposits that can contain shellbeds. The San Jose and Animas Creek channels are mapped as alluvial deposits (Qc and Qal) . These deposits are of variable thickness and composition and are comprised of silt and sand with gravels . The site also supports mapped landslides (Qls) . They are mapped amid the Monterey granodiorite, Monterey Formation and Marine sandstone . (Whisler Wilson Ranch Palo Corona Regional Park, Baseline Assessment and Monitoring Plan, May 2013) Soil Types The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has mapped the soils within the project area . The site includes ten soil types as depicted on Page 14 (Exhibit 2D) . The southern portion of the site is dominated by Junipero-Sur complex (Jc) . This soil is a coarse-loamy material weathered from igneous rock, with slopes of 50-85 percent . The soil is shallow, with only 24-30 inches over the underlying bedrock . Drainage is typically well-drained to excessively-drained . These soils are well suited for the growth of redwood and Douglas fir, which are found onsite. Portions of the north-facing slope as well as south-facing slope above San Jose Creek are mapped as Cieneba fine gravelly sandy loam, 30-75 percent slopes (CcG) . This is a sandy and gravelly material weathered from igneous rock that is somewhat excessively drained . Bedrock can be encountered at 11 inches . This soil type supports maritime chaparral and pockets of redwood forest and oak woodland . The northern portion of the site supports a mosaic of three soil types: Gazos silty loam, 30-50 percent slopes (GfF), Santa Lucia shaley clay loam, 30-50 percent slopes (SfF), and Linne-Shedd silty clay loam, 50-75 percent slopes (LcG2) . These soil types are well-drained residuum weathered from sandstone and shale, with bedrock at 24-30 inches . These soil types support coastal scrub and coyote brush scrub and pockets of grassland . (Whisler Wilson Ranch Palo Corona Re- gional Park, Baseline Assessment and Monitoring Plan, May 2013 and NRCS, 2013) Geology and Soil Site Implications The WWR site consists of a variety of soil types however for the purpose of this feasibility study we are most concerned soil implications where potential permanent site improvements, septic leach fields and structures will be located . This is primarily limited to the meadow area and pockets of land on the ridge- lines . The soils in the meadow area are derived predominantly from alluvial deposits from San Jose Creek with some colluvium soils overlaying the alluvial deposits at the toe of the mountains . They are composed predominantly of sands and gravels and in general have a very high percolation rate . If the percolation rate is too high (greater than a one per inch) the soil may not be acceptable for subsurface disposal of untreated wastewater as it can lead to contamination of stream environments . Subsurface disposal in these soil conditions may be suitable if the wastewater is treated . Based on the geology of the site it is likely that the colluvium based soils closer to the toe of the mountain range will be finer grained deposits and may have slower percolation rates, although these soils are derived from marine sandstones, so they will also likely be prominently sandy soils . It is anticipated that the meadow area would support structures and a septic leach field, however more detailed soil testing should be conducted prior to construction of site improvements .

12 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Existing Conditions

Qal

Qls

Tts Kgdm Tts Qls

Qal Qls Tm

Tts

Tts Qal

San Jose Creek Qc Qls

Qal

Kgdm

Geologic Formations

Qls Kgdm- Porphyritic granodirite of Monterey 89 .81 Acres Qls- Landscape Depositis 74 .44 Acres Tts- Marine sandstone 51 .93 Acres Qal- Alluvial deposits, undifferentiated 22 .81 Acres Tm- Monterey Formation, siliceous 64 .71 Acres Qc- Colluvium 4 .16 Acres

NORTH

0 FT 600 FT 1200 FT Exhibit 2C.

| 13 Existing Conditions

GfE

GfF

GfF SfF CcG SfF

GfF

LcG2

Jc CcG JbG

San Jose Creek

JbG Jc CcG

CcG

Soil Types CcG-fine gravelly sand CfE-silt loam (15-30% slope) CfF-silt loam (30-50% slope) JbG-sandy loam Jc Jc Jc-Sur complex LcG2-silty clay loam (50-75% slope) CcG SfF-silty clay loam (30-50% slope) SoE SoE-coarse sandy loam

NORTH

0 FT 600 FT 1200 FT Exhibit 2D.

14 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Existing Conditions

The presence of shallow groundwater is another issue that cannot be assessed with the information available at this time . Any subsurface disposal system will need to be installed with adequate separation between the bottom of the disposal system and the highest anticipated groundwater . Additional soil testing will be required to fully assess soil and shallow groundwater conditions in the meadow area to determine the suitability of site for a subsurface disposal system .

Hydrology/ Stream Zones There are a number of hydrologic conditions and constraints on the site that will affect the location of facilities and the development of a camping program . These include potable water, access to the property and environmental and ecological impacts to San Jose Creek . The Whistler Ranch property is part of the original Point Lobos Ranch . Historically, the Point Lobos Ranch has relied on ground supplied from shallow wells developed in the alluvial deposits in the San Jose Creek valley . The proposed campground is also located in the San Jose Creek Valley . The aquifer in the San Jose Creek valley consists of alluvial deposits of sand and gravel that vary from 60 to 100 feet in thickness . The alluvial deposits are underlain by the Santa Lucia granite, which is weathered and fractured and relatively low yielding . The uniformly coarse grained nature of the alluvial aquifer yields substantially higher volumes of water . To access the WWR site, there are three locations where San Jose Creek intersects the access road . San Jose Creek is an important stream habitat for the threatened south-central California coast Steelhead Trout . Steelheads spend most of their time in the ocean, but will leave the marine environment to spawn in the freshwater tributaries of their birth . According to NOAA the South-Central Coast Steelhead populations have decreased from 25,000 spawning adults to less than 500- a dramatic shift that has made them a high priority for conservation . A study by the Watershed Institute at California State University Monterey Bay recommends methods to improving Steelhead habitat . This includes groundwater conservation, re- duced sedimentation through road improvements or decommissioning and selective stream channel bar-

Existing San Jose Creek crossing San Jose Creek tributary

| 15 Existing Conditions

San Jose Creek

Hydrology Watershed Boundary Stream or Creek Runnoff Direction 20’ Contour

NORTH

0 FT 600 FT 1200 FT Exhibit 2E.

16 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Existing Conditions

rier removal . The proposed bridges should be designed to minimize impacts to the creek and best management practices during construction and post construction to minimize sediment into the creek will be required The use of groundwater for potable water will not be able to impact Steelhead habitat by reducing stream flow volume.

Vegetation A unique characteristic of Whisler Wilson Ranch is the diversity of plant communities present within a relatively small area. Seven principal vegetation types were observed within the site during field visits conducted in March 2013, plant association mapping by Turf Image, Inc ,. and review of aerial photographs . These types are coast redwood forest, riparian woodland, oak woodland, Monterey pine forest, maritime chaparral, coastal scrub/coyote brush scrub, and grassland . (Whisler Wilson Ranch Palo Corona Regional Park, Baseline Assessment and Monitoring Plan, May 2013) • Coast Redwood Forest - the site supports redwood forests along the San Jose Creek, its tributaries and part of Animas Creek and occupies the north facing slopes south of the creek . The forested areas are dominated by second growth Coast Redwoods (Sequoia sempervirens), but include other tree species and shade-tolerant understory vegetation . • Oak Woodland - pockets of oak woodland are supported primarily on the lower slopes north of San Jose Creek and north-to-west facing slopes above the confluence of Animas and San Jose creeks. The dominant species are coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) and California bay (Umbellularia califor- nica) in some areas . • Monterey Pine Forest - this consists of groves located on the steep slope south of San Jose Creek and on slopes above Animas Creek . The forest is characterized by the native Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) . • Riparian Woodland - this occurs as thickets of willow and dogwood along Animas Creek and as and alder–dogwood understory within the coast redwood forest along San Jose Creek . The dominant species is Arroyo Willow (Salix lasiolepis) • Maritime Chaparral - thrives on the hillsides in the southern portion of the Property and south-facing slopes north of San Jose Creek support maritime chaparral . The dominant species in this area are Golden Chinquapin (Chrysolepis chysophylla), Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), and Brittleleaf Manzanita (Arctostaphylos crustacea, A . tomentosa) although there are other species present . • Coastal Scrub - the northern portion of the site supports a large area of scrub vegetation . Occupying the relatively thin Gazos silty loam and Santa Lucia shaly clay loam soils, and responding to previous land use activities (i e. ,. grazing or land clearing) and possibly old landslides, a mosaic of scrub types have been mapped . All the scrub types support several species of coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis spp) as well as invasive French broom (Genesta monspessulana), Monkey Flower (Mimulus aurantia- cus) and Pacific Poison Oak (Toxicodendron diversilobum).

Grassland

| 17 Existing Conditions

San Jose Creek

Vegetation Coast Redwood Forest Oak Woodland Monterey Pine Forest Riparian Woodland Maritime Chaparral Coastal Scrub Grassland Invasive Plant Species

NORTH

0 FT 600 FT 1200 FT Exhibit 2F.

18 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Existing Conditions

Coast Redwood Forest Riparian Woodland

Oak Woodland Maritime Chaparral

Monterey Pine Forest Coastal Scrub

| 19 Planning Considerations

Prevailing Winds

Meadow

San Jose Creek

Prevailing wind

Scenic View Riparian Woodland Forest vegetation 30’ Stream Buffer Suitable for Camping Slope Constraint Stream or Creek

NORTH

0 FT 600 FT 1200 FT Exhibit 2G.

20 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Planning Considerations

Developable Land Summary The Developable Land Summary map on the page 19 (Exhibit 2G) identifies key physical site constraints as well as significant features. These include slopes that restrict development of campsites, structures or trails and a 30’ offset from San Jose Creek- within which no leach fields are allowed. Buildings and structures are not to be built within 10 feet of the Creek. There are a number of significant views throughout the site however the most notable are highlighted. These and other factors contributed to the identification of several areas within the site that are physically suitable for campground development . The Meadow Although most of the landscape consists of slight to steep hillside, a level clearing exists close to the entrance to the property . This clearing is referred to as the “Meadow” and is considered one of the most suitable locations for any future development that could be proposed onsite . The existing cabin is located in a much smaller clearing across the San Jose Creek to the Southwest of the larger Meadow . The cabin is not built to code, nor is it of historical significance and slated for removal, although architecturally it could provide inspiration for the style of future site improvements . The Overlook Plateau The most dramatic experience of the WWR landscape is at the higher portions of the site where the land flattens out and overlooks the rolling terrain and the coast. These areas are large and wide enough to support a limited number of campsites . These locations are especially desirable because they offer a classic back country quality but would still receive adequate surveillance and appropriate services . Additional Planning Considerations are discussed in the remainder of this chapter .

The Meadow

Overlook Plateau

| 21 Planning Considerations

Circulation The development of the existing road system was somewhat unrestricted over the course of the property’s history . The district desires to re-align the roads to minimize steepness and maximize access to scenic overlooks while reducing erosion and maintenance requirements from increased use . Thorough assessment of these exiting trails and knowledge of the resources available to maintain them has led to a phased decommissioning and realignment plan for the road/trail network . This phased approach will allow the Park District to address the most crucial trail restoration projects first. The preferred trail configuration will take into account the topography to allow for reasonable trail steepness . Views and overlooks will be capitalized upon and accessible via this trail system .

Campground Location The suitability of an area for camping is dependent upon the type of camping proposed- the less intense the use the more remotely campsites can be located . However the meadow area at the entrance to the site is one of the flattest portions of the site and would therefore be suitable for even the most intense camping alternative. More primitive campsites could be located at flat pockets along the trail throughout the site .

Views WWR is prized for being some of the most beautiful and scenic acreage in the area . It is virtually undeveloped with only a small cabin and a system of roads . The undulating hillsides allow for spectacular views to the ocean and across the site towards the greater backcountry of Point Lobos and Palo Corona parks . Existing roads/trails wind through the site connecting vantage points with the areas below . This study identified the most significant views and explored options to maximize their access for visitors.

Trail winds along the nothern hillside Well at existing cabin

22 | Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Feasibility Study | Monterey County Planning Considerations

Potable Water; An aquifer exists in the San Jose Creek valley . In 1987, Stall, Gadner and Dunne Inc (SGD) completed a comprehensive hydrogeological investigation, including completion of monitoring wells, short- and long-term aquifer pump tests, and water level measurements. The results of this study quantified that the aquifer has approximately 500 acre-feet of water in storage and that a safe yield of 100 acre feet of water withdrawn each year would not substantially impact the stream and riparian vegetation on the property . SDG recommended that to support any new development on the ranch a new well could be installed in the vicinity of the upper meadow area, and the well could safely draw 100 gallons per minute pumping 12 hours per day or 72,000 gpd . Based on our initial site visit and review of available information, the site has a substantially higher supply of groundwater to support a moderate campground scheme . The SDG study should be updated if ground water is to be relied upon for any camping developments . Another issue that may need to be addressed is that the alluvial groundwater may also be viewed as surface water underflow, so that the use of the water may need to be permitted under the State Water Resources Control Board’s Division of Water Rights . This should not be a substantial issue given that the property may have pre-1914 water rights and clearly has riparian rights that will allow the use of water for domestic purposes . The easiest and most reliable water will be from the shallow alluvial deposits; however, the use of this groundwater may require the Park District to install a small multi barrier treatment system to comply with the State’s Surface Water Treatment Rules . Developing a deeper well into the granitic basement rock formation under the alluvial aquifer will not likely yield much water .

Septic/ Leach Fields The most cost effective method for handling waste water for camping will be construction a septic and leach field to on site. Soil test pits will be needed to determine the impact the system will have on sediment levels in San Jose Creek since any proposed septic system must be designed to not impact the Creek . The required setback from an onsite septic system from a surface watercourse, such as San Jose Creek is 100 feet . In addition, an onsite wastewater system cannot be located on slopes over 30 percent without additional technical study and approval by the County and State . If the main campground facility is situated in the main meadow area the septic system will need to be setback 100 from San Jose Creek and based on the initial site visit this does not appear to be a significant constraint for the project . Based on the initial site visit the meadow area identified for the proposed campground area has sufficient space and gentle slopes that is suitable for a subsurface disposal system . However, additional soil testing additional soil testing will be needed to verify that soil and groundwater conditions will be suitable for subsurface disposal of wastewater at the site .

Electrical Services Currently there are electrical services to the existing CSP Residences located approximately 7. 5 miles away . Our initial review suggests that extending the service to the meadow area on WWR is feasible and can be done cost effectively using overhead poles . Since the electrical demand for the potential camping alternatives is relatively low, there may be a potential to provide renewable energy such as solar or wind yet this study does not explore these options .

Well at existing cabin

| 23

3 Market and Economic Analysis

Population Trends School Enrollment Trends Recreation Demand Recreation Supply

| 25 Introduction

cess d Ac Day ite U Introduction m se Least Li This section provides a market and economic analysis for WWR . Based on site Intense and environmental constraints, a wide range of potential recreation uses were nar- Development rowed to include those which could potentially be provided at WWR . For instance, RV camping was not analyzed due to the limited access by vehicles to the site . The following analysis, findings and recommendations are designed to determine the project’s market and economic feasibility – either a go or no-go finding – and iden- ccess Da tify estimated economic costs and revenues associated with the range of recreation n A y U pe se O use options at WWR that may be necessary for a sustainable operation .

Overview This section provides an assessment of the project’s market and economic feasibility with the work conducted via completion of the following tasks: Development Alternatives ive Camp For this study we are reviewing a range of develop scenarios for the WWR site . For imit ing Pr each of these alternatives permitting from the MPRPD will be required including possible reservations for cabin and outdoor school alternatives . These alternatives assessed in the report include: • Day Use. This could be either limited access day use requiring a permit (similar to what currently exists for Palo Corona Regional Park’s northern 600-acres), or open access day use (similar to Garland Ranch Regional Park in Carmel Valley) that could include hiking, mountain biking and equestrian use .

ing w/ Limite p d • Tent Camping. Two types of tent camping are considered . Primitive tent camp- am Se C r c vi ti c ing is similar to a back packing experience with designated camp sites with no s e u s R tent pads, no potable water, no toilet, and no open fires. Rustic camping is similar to primitive camping but with limited services that would include tent pads, portable vault toilets, non-potable water, and National Park Service style iron fire-ring and grate. • Convenience camping cabins. Semi-permanent cabins that could include yurts, pre-fabricated cabins, wood-framed cabins, or canvas tent cabins . nience Cam ve pin on g This option would include permanent C • Environmental/outdoor youth camp. structures necessary to conduct a week-long residential science school for local middle-school students . Buildings would include convenience-styled cabins or more traditional bunkhouses, a shower building, a science and activity building, a kitchen/ dining hall, and central campfire circle. Market Analysis A primary issue for project feasibility is market demand for a given set of uses . These demand trends can be impacted by regional population trends, population l/Youth Educ ta ati en on trends among identified user groups, recreation use trends, existing supply of similar m n C o a ir m recreation use areas for each development type, and market demand including cur- v p n E rent seasonality and annual occupancy estimates for existing supply . Most Within the regional supply analysis we have included an assessment of comparable Intense facilities . Comparable information is used to estimate potential use at WWR as well as likely economic considerations . The comparable assessment provides market Development supply and demand information, and entry fees or user costs. We have identified

26 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

facilities within the Monterey County region and focused our research on recreation sites located along or near the coast . Public engagement and socio-political assessment As part of this assessment we conducted public input forums, site tours, as well as a series of one-on-one executive interviews with selected identified stakeholders and comparable facility operators. As part of the public input process we provided a brief questionnaire to allow for candid respondent concerns and opinions about appropriate future uses at the WWR site . Stakeholder interviews were conducted either in person or over the telephone using a discussion guide to ensure that all salient issues were reviewed . We reviewed socio-political factors including the regional economy and the role of recreation, other agencies involved in the WWR site, and pertinent insights from the public engagement process . Concept financial pro forma We utilized the market profile data and the information collected from comparable facilities to develop a range of revenue scenarios for each development alternative . We applied operations and maintenance estimates to these scenarios to identify the range of use and fees for each development concept that may be necessary for economic sustainability .

Research Limitations Because we rely on secondary data sources, the analysis contained in this report approximates potential development at WWR . This includes the listed development scenarios ranging from low development intensity (day use and tent camping) to high development intensity (cabin and outdoor science school) – with associated low to high costs and revenues estimates . Actual use levels will depend on a range of future demand and cost conditions, including but not limited to: • General and school population fluctuations, • School curriculum and funding, • Macro-economic conditions and regional employment, • Competing or complementary facilities which are developed at other regional recreation areas by the public and private sector providers and which can alter the supply . • The selected Whisler Wilson Ranch site management model and marketing approach will have a direct impact on eventual use patterns . Comparable information varied greatly in terms of quantity and specificity. In most cases estimates of visitation were necessary, with several comparable facility managers directing us to the facility internet site for the most recent information . While we did collect budget and cost data from several site operators (primarily from public and not-for-profit operations) some for-profit and private facility managers were reluctant to provide what was viewed as propriety financial or competitive positioning information. The projections included in this section of the report represent the best professional opinion of the consultant and as such are intended to function as a planning tool for Whisler Wilson Ranch stakeholders, decision- makers, land and facility managers, and elected officials.

Market Analysis

For the market analysis we are reviewing uses at WWR that range from the described limited day use alternative to a permanently developed environmental and outdoor education facility . As a result we have included a baseline review of population trends that include school enrollments . In addition, we provide a wide market perspective by looking at recreation trends and a recent survey of statewide attitudes toward outdoor recreation to further investigate demand – with particular attention to those activities that may be made available at WWR. Within this chapter we review the existing recreation supply for each identified

| 27 Market Analysis

WWR alternative category. In order to guide the analysis we have identified four primary geographic market areas including the following: • Monterey County • Adjacent counties (Fresno, San Benito, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo) • San Francisco Bay Area (Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo) • The Central Valley (Merced, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Yolo)

Population Trends Long term population trends are used to identify future market demand for recreation day use and camping facilities in the region and any implied anticipated long term demand by special use groups for facilities like those that may be provided at WWR . Monterey County Providing recreation access for residents of Monterey County will be a primary function of the WWR site . As a result we first review overall population trends for the County to determine long term demand. As indicated in Exhibit 3 1. , population projections for Monterey County are anticipated to be strong and consistent over time with increases from 20 to 30 thousand residents per decade through the projected 2050 timeline, reaching over one-half million residents . These robust numbers indicate continued demand for recreation facilities within the County and imply the need for additional recreation access such as those proposed for WWR . In addition to raw population growth, we consider what is one of the most discussed demographic trends not only across the nation but particularly in California – changing population distribution by ethnicity; especially growth among populations with Hispanic ancestry . Ethnicity is worth reviewing because recreation preferences pertaining to facilities may differ according to ethnic populations . As shown in Exhibit 3 .2, Monterey County currently has the majority of its population (57%) comprised of Hispanic residents . In addition, projections indicate that the Hispanic proportion will reach 71% by the year 2030 with further increases in the share of Hispanic residents anticipated. As a result any identified preferences for recreation on the part of the Hispanic resident population in Monterey County may impact future use at WWR . Geography is also important . The Hispanic population that is driving Monterey County population growth is all occurring in the Salinas Valley and there is a definite dis-connect between that area and the district, especially the coast] With respect to population change by age (see Exhibit 3 .3), all age groups show consistent growth with trends among retirees reflecting the aging baby boom generation. Accordingly, the table shows jumps in population among young retirees in 2020, mature retirees in 2030, and seniors in 2040 . Selected California Markets Since Monterey County functions as visitor destination it is worth reviewing several selected geographic markets within California . While the Monterey region also attracts out-of-state visitors we focused on the immediate impact of pertinent California markets to illustrate the projected influence of population growth. Adjacent counties can have an impact on recreation demand simply because of proximity and depending on volume and growth rates these markets areas can influence long term recreation demand within Monterey County . As shown in Exhibit 3 .5, like Monterey County, the adjacent counties show steady projected growth with combined decadal increases from approximately 150 thousand to 180 thousand residents . Accordingly, the aggregated population among these neighboring counties is projected to be nearly four times larger than the local Monterey County resident base . While adjacent county visitors to Monterey County may stay overnight during their recreation experience these nearby residents are likely to create demand for day trips and associated day use activities .

28 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

3.1 MONTEREY COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTION 2010 TO 2050

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit

3.2 MONTEREY COUNTY POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY ETHNICITY 2010 TO 2030

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit TABLE 2-1: MONTEREY COUNTY POPULATION PROJECTION 3.3 MONTEREY COUNTY POPULATIONBY AGE GROUP PROJECTION 2010 to 2050 BY AGE GROUP 2010 TO 2050

Preschool School College Working Young Mature Seniors Age Age Age Age Retirees Retirees (85 or (0-4 years) (5-17 (18-24 (25-64 (65-74 (75-84 more years) years) years) years) years) years) 2010 32,559 78,547 46,540 213,848 23,174 14,751 6,839 2020 33,803 80,957 46,246 215,800 36,149 15,809 7,344 2030 34,248 87,053 51,214 224,167 41,825 28,106 9,345 2040 34,320 88,641 55,169 242,638 40,545 34,032 17,699 2050 34,754 88,871 55,896 263,144 43,003 33,115 24,115 Source: CaliforniaSource: Department California of Finance,Department Demographics of Finance, Demographics Unit Unit

| 29 Selected California Markets Since Monterey County functions as visitor destination it is worth reviewing several selected geographic markets within California. While the Monterey region also attracts out-of-state visitors we will focus on the immediate impact of pertinent California markets to illustrate the projected influence of population growth. First, immediately adjacent counties can have an impact on recreation demand simply because of proximity; secondly depending on volume and growth rates these markets areas can influence long term recreation demand within Monterey County.

As shown in Figure 2-3, like Monterey County, the adjacent counties show steady projected growth with combined decadal increases from approximately 150 thousand to 180 thousand residents. Accordingly, the aggregated population among these neighboring counties is projected to be nearly four times larger than the local Monterey County resident base. While adjacent county visitors to Monterey County may stay overnight during their recreation experience these nearby residents are likely to create demand for day trips and associated day use activities.

By virtue of their size, populations in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley can have a powerful influence on demand for recreation amenities of all types in Monterey County – particularly during peak visitation periods such as weekends, holidays, and the summer season when these regional visitors are most likely to travel. Overall the trend line for population growth in both the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley shows steady and significant growth. The San Francisco Bay area is projected to add more than 600 thousand residents by 2030, with the Central Valley adding 900 thousand residents in the same time period.

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 7

Market Analysis

By virtue of their size, populations in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley can have a powerful influence on demand for recreation amenities of all types in Monterey County – particularly during peak visitation periods such as weekends, holidays, and the summer season when these regional visitors are most likely to travel . Overall the trend line for population growth in both the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley shows steady and significant growth. The San Francisco Bay area is projected to add more than 600 thousand residents by 2030, with the Central Valley adding 900 thousand residents in the same time period . Population Findings Raw population projections tell a very compelling story to those who provide recreation access in Mon- terey County . The demand is very likely to increase unless either economic conditions impact the ability to travel or supply of additional recreation lands in the wider region dramatically increases . Within Monterey County itself increasing population, especially among those of Hispanic ancestry, will create a need for addition recreation access including the array of alternatives considered for WWR . Another noteworthy projection concerns older residents of Monterey County with the number of retirees increasing with each projected decade . Finally, we may also expect that those living in neighboring counties will affect recreation demand in the Monterey Peninsula region with this nearby population impacting both overnight use such as camping and day use such as hiking . 3.4 ADJACENT COUNTY* POPULATION PROJECTIONS 2010 TO 2050

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit; *Fresno, San Benito, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo 3.5 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA COUNTY* POPULATION PROJECTIONS 2010 TO 2050

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit .*Alameda, Contra Costs, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo

30 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

3.6 CENTRAL VALLEY COUNTY* POPULATION PROJECTIONS 2010 TO 2050

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit .*Merced, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Yolo, Among the larger regional source markets in the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley, raw population volume accompanied by steady and consistent growth projections mean that desirable destinations areas such as Monterey County will see increasing long term demand . And these trends show steady and active growth among the most accessible regional markets for the Monterey Peninsula . In short, there is no reason to doubt that any and all of the considered alternatives at WWR will find a long- term and ready market demand for recreation use .

School Enrollment Trends In addition to general population data we reviewed school enrollment data to specifically address the demand for the outdoor education facility alternative, and to gain insight into potential family and group demand . For science and outdoor education curriculum standards, either the 5th grade or 6th grades are targeted for resident science education camps and schools . In Monterey County the designated grade is the 5th so we used 5th grade enrollment data for all markets . Other trends reviewed show overall student enrollment projections for grades K through 12 . Monterey Enrollment Projected 5th grade enrollments show steadily increasing growth among Monterey County student populations, with 2011-12 fifth grade enrollments at 5,658 then peaking at 6,221 by 2015-16. (See Exhibit 3.5.) 3.7 MONTEREY COUNTY FIFTH GRADE ENROLLMENTS 2011-12 TO 2021-22

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit

| 31 Market Analysis

3.8 MONTEREY COUNTY K-12 ENROLLMENTS 2011-12 TO 2021-22

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit

3.9 ADJACENT COUNTY* FIFTH GRADE ENROLLMENTS 2011-12 TO 2021-22

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit *Fresno, San Benito, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo

Following the peak year, enrollments at the 5th grade level decline somewhat before increasing again in 2020-21. This pattern simply reflects projected growth rates among the population at large including gen- erational birth rates, with the pattern similarly reflected in other identified markets. Overall K-12 enrollments also show steady projected increases, with the 2011-12 enrollments of 72,666 rising to a peak of 76,218 by 2021-22 . These data indicate rising demand for facilities that serve young people and families . (See Exhibit 3 6. ) Long term projections among the general population indicate that these growth patterns among student populations will remain relatively steady over time . Selected California Market Enrollment Among adjacent counties, the 5th grade enrollment projections show similar patterns to those in Monterey County, with enrollments projected to rise in 2016-17 . The 5th grade rise and temporary decrease again remains similar to those shown in other geographic area projections . For K-12 enrollments in adjacent counties show robust and steady growth rising from 2011-12 to 2021-22 indicating strengthening demand for recreation facilities such as those proposed at WWR . See Exhibits 3 .9 and 3 1. 0 . The San Francisco Bay Area by virtue of its aggregate population provides significant numbers for science education and associated youth destination facilities . In fact, many of the researched comparable outdoor education facilities currently market to and rely on student markets from the greater Bay Area . As indicated,

32 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

3.10 ADJACENT COUNTY K-12 ENROLLMENTS 2011-12 TO 2021-22

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit *Fresno, San Benito, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo

3.11 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA COUNTY* FIFTH GRADE ENROLLMENTS 2011-12

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit .*Alameda, Contra Costs, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo

3.12 SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA COUNTY* K-12 ENROLLMENTS 2011-22 TO 2021-2022

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit .*Alameda, Contra Costs, Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo

| 33 Market Analysis

3.13 CENTRAL VALLEY COUNTY* FIFTH GRADE ENROLLMENTS 2011-22 TO 2021-2022

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit .*Merced, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Yolo

3.14 CENTRAL VALLEY K-12 ENROLLMENTS 2011-22 TO 2021-2022

Source: California Department of Finance, Demographics Unit .*Merced, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Yolo

5th grade enrollment projections rise to 66, 082 students in 2016-17 – nearly the total student population in Monterey County – and then decrease by nearly ten thousand students until a slight rebound in 2010-21 . Enrolment projections for all grades K thru 12 show steady increases – though at a rate somewhat slower than other assessed markets and with a slight leveling effect similar to that seen in the Monterey County numbers . Nevertheless, the data show that we cannot understate the sheer number of children, and by association families, that may be seeking recreation alternative recreation opportunities in Monterey County . Enrollment projections for the Central Valley tell a somewhat different story . While the 5th grade enrollment pattern remains, the overall projected K-12 student population increases with strength . First, 5th grade enrollments in the selected Central Valley counties peak in 2016-17 (the same peak year for all markets) . This number then rebounds per the established pattern providing a robust market for science education facilities . (See Exhibit 2 1. 3 ). The K thru 12 patterns in the Central Valley shows increases from enrollments rising with strong ongoing growth rates . (See Exhibit 2 1. 4 ). Since the Central Valley is reportedly a premier market for the Monterey Peninsula, especially during the summer, these numbers show good long term demand growth for group and family recreation opportunities among those arriving form the Central Valley .

34 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

Enrollment Findings Within Monterey County the short term demand for science education for 5th grade students, school group will continue to increase, albeit with a slight short term decline before rising with an overall pattern of steady demand projected thru 2021-22 . Considering the reviewed general population data we can expect demand for youth outdoor education among all school grades to continue to increase consistently over the long term . Similar findings pertain to source markets including those that may arrive from counties adjacent to Monterey County . However, the large source markets of the San Francisco Bay Area and Central Valley regions will continue to grow and provide significant ongoing demand for destinations that provide outdoor recreation and education experiences in Monterey County and the types of public lands provided by the MPRPD at WWR .

Recreation Demand Recreation research has consistently shown that Californians rate outdoor recreation areas, services, and facilities as essential to their quality of life . The most recent survey of attitudes toward recreation conducted by California State Parks (Public Opinions & Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation in California 2009) provides insight into the demand for those activities that may be made available at WWR . The study dem- onstrated both California adult and youth (ages 12-17) participation in, and unmet demand for, a variety of outdoor recreation activities within natural, undeveloped areas as well as those provided by developed nature-oriented parks and recreation areas .

3.15 RECREATION PARTICPATION BY ADULTS FOR ACTIVITIES THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE AT WWR

Source: California State Parks, Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation, Survey 2009

| 35 Market Analysis

3.17 UNMET RECREATION DEMAND BY 3.16 RECREATION PARTICPATION BY ADULTS – WOULD DO MORE IF HISPANIC AND NON-HISPANIC AVAILABLE BY HISPANIC AND NON- ADULTS FOR ACTIVITIES THAT MAY BE HISPANIC ADULTS FOR AVTIVITIES THAT AVAILABLE AT WWR MAY BE AVAILABLE AT WWR

Source: California State Parks, Public Opinions and Attitudes Source: California State Parks, Public Opinions and on Outdoor Recreation, Survey 2009 Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation, Survey 2009

California Adult Activity Participation Rates and Unmet Demand Among the studied outdoor recreation preferences, several high participation outdoor activities were identified that may be made available at Whisler Wilson Ranch. See Exhibit 3.16. Foremost among the outdoor recreation rated by surveyed adults are simple walking (74%), picnicking (67 0. %), day hiking (46 .9%), jogging or running which may include trail running (39 .8%), wildlife viewing and bird watching (45 .9%), and camping in developed sites with facilities (39 0. %) . A second tier of preferred activities includes outdoor photography (33 .3%), bicycling on un-paved trails or mountain biking (15 .9%), backpacking (10 7. %) and horseback riding (7 .8%) . See Exhibit 3 1. 5 . The research revealed some modest differences among Hispanic and non-Hispanic California adults, His- panic adults were more likely to engage in walking for fitness or jogging [don’t want to make presumptions] in their home communities . Conversely, non-Hispanic adults were more likely to engage in viewing nature, mountain biking, and horseback riding . In addition, the California State Parks study listed activities that would have had higher rates of participation if opportunities to participate had been available to respondents – these responses were used to identify latent – or unmet – demand for a range of outdoor recreation uses. In other words, an identified undersupply for these activities is greater than known levels of participation, with an associated need for facilities that support the specific listed activities.

36 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

3.19 UNMET RECREATION DEMAND 3.18 RECREATION PARTICPATION BY BY YOUTH – WOULD DO MORE IF CALIFORNIA YOUTH FOR ACTIVITIES AVAILABLE FOR ACTIVITIES THAT MAY THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE AT WWR BE AVAIABLE AT WWR

Source: California State Parks, Public Opinions and Attitudes Source: California State Parks, Public Opinions and Attitudes on Outdoor Recreation, Survey 2009 on Outdoor Recreation, Survey 2009

Exhibit 3 1. 6 shows activities by Hispanic and Non-Hispanic adult respondents that may be made available at WWR but that are in under supply. Interestingly, there is little significant difference between Hispanic and Non-Hispanic populations when it comes to unmet demand . Leading the list includes several day use activities such as walking for fitness, day hiking and picnicking as a well as overnight camping in developed areas (41 .3% Hispanic; 42 1. % Non-Hispanic) . An additional second tier of activities that may also be featured at WWR is similar to the overall participation rates with high to moderate unmet demand for viewing and bird watching (31 6. % Hispanic; 32 6. % Non-Hispanic), outdoor photography, jogging running, backpacking, mountain biking, backcountry activities, and horseback riding . Finally, while not specifically researched in the CSP survey, convenience cabin camping is, for this study, considered a sub-market in the developed camping category . Interestingly, CSP did conduct a study on this camping option (Alternative Camping at California State Parks, 2011) that indicated robust occupancy rates from 41% to 96% at 9 CSP parks that provide cabins, yurts, or tent cabins . The study also indicated increased shoulder season use, further indicating strong demand for this camping option in California . California Youth Activity Participation Rates and Unmet Demand Among surveyed youth ages 12 to 17, participation rates for many of these same activities that may be made available at WWR are higher than those for adults, and include simple walking or jogging, day hiking (46 .9% adults; 51 1. % youth), and camping (39 0. % adults; 45 1. % youth) . Youth participate to a lesser degree compared to adults when picnicking and nature viewing .

| 37 Market Analysis

3.20 RECREATION PARTICIPATION LOS PADRES NATIONAL FOREST BY AGE GROUP

Source: USDA Forest Service, National Survey on Recreation and the Environment

A second tier of youth outdoor recreation shows robust interest with about one-fifth of California youth saying that they participate in mountain biking and backcountry activities which may include rock climb- ing and bouldering (27 7. % and 24 .4 respectively) . Backpacking (14 .4%) sees less participation that other reviewed activities presumably because access to backcountry camping is not easy for many among California’s youth . See Exhibit 3 1. 8 . As shown in Exhibit 3.19, one of this study’s most interesting findings is the array of outdoor recreation activities that youth say are in undersupply and that they would do more if these activities were made available to them . Nearly one-third to one-half of surveyed California youth would participate more in the types of activities that may be available at WWR . Surprisingly horseback riding receives a high rate of response – perhaps many California kids simply have never had this opportunity and are curious about what it would be like to ride a horse . Closely following horseback riding is back country activities (43 .8%), camping (41 1. %), picnicking, (38 .3%), and backpacking (37 .3%) . A second tier of activities for which there is unmet demand by California youth includes: mountain biking, day hiking, nature viewing, jogging and walking, and outdoor photography . However, we must emphasize that even among this second tier of mentioned activates the latent demand is significant. In fact, for some of these activities which have higher adult participation rates (aforementioned picnicking and outdoor photography among others) it appears that current youth participation is lower simply because of limited access to the activity . Regional Recreation Participation: Los Padres National Forest Among those recreating in the Los Padres National Forest day hiking is the most popular activity with those in the 35 to 54 age group showing the highest rates of participation at 49% [these numbers are in the exhibit]. See Exhibit 3.20. Note that the Los Padres National Forest provides recreation access for urban areas in Southern California, so high participation rates for day hiking are proportionally reflected in the data . Other trail uses include mountain biking and horseback riding, with mountain biking more likely

38 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

to be a chosen activity by younger recreation users . Horseback riding on trails shows a somewhat closer rate of participation by age group . Hunting is a chosen activity by a small percentage of respondents . See Exhibit 3 .20 for the numbers . Developed camping is mentioned by more than one-third of those 16 to 34 years of age (34%) as well as those in the 35 to 54 age group (33 .9%), while the older age group camps at lesser rates (20 1. %) . Primi- tive camping and backpacking are favored by smaller percentages of surveyed recreation users with those in the younger age group more likely to participate in primitive camping while backpacking appeals to the mid-life age group equally. Overall, age is a significant factor in outdoor recreation use with those 55 and over showing the lowest rates of participation . See Exhibit 3 .20 for the numbers . Recreation Demand Findings Among both California adults and youth there is an existing pattern of outdoor recreation use for the types of activities that may be available at WWR . These activities include camping – the principal objective of this feasibility analysis. In particular, while the data may not specifically reflect detailed regional patterns for the reviewed uses, Monterey County reportedly experiences highest demand during the summer season and particularly during summer weekends indicating that meeting demand during this peak season will necessarily be a consideration of recreation demand . Accordingly, we expect that current participation and associated unmet demand will be highest during this time for a full array of uses for both California adults and youth . The data indicates that population and school enrollment growth will be robust for many years to come . California adults and youth are interested in greater access to outdoor activities, and for the full range of activities that may be available at WWR . WWR can provide opportunities for visitors to learn about and enjoy California’s outdoor environment . The implications for each development alternative include the following: Day Use. For both limited and open day use demand trends are strong and are expected to increase over time . Tent Camping . Demand trends for back packing and other primitive camping opportunities remaining positive . Camping at developed campgrounds with amenities shows robust demand . Convenience camping cabins . Cabins are a new niche market not reviewed in participation rate data . As a result we include this alternative as part of the latent demand outlook in the developed camping category . Available CSP research indicates increasing demand for this specific and emergent developed camping option . Environmental/outdoor youth science school . Growing school student populations and associated parent?/youth interest in an array of outdoor activities indicates that there exists positive demand for outdoor education programming .

Recreation Supply This section reviews the existing supply for each of the six types of recreation facilities considered in this feasibility analysis . These include day use activities, overnight camping, and outdoor education resident camps or schools . The following supply review investigates facilities in Monterey County and nearby areas . The inventory was developed via web review as well as through conversations with facility operators . This is primarily a quantitative review of recreation sites to determine relative supply . Each reviewed site may feature unique qualitative characteristics that represent the very diverse array of landscapes available in the Monterey County region; with all of these landscapes collectively providing recreation users with the opportunity to fully experience the region’s outdoors .

| 39

Market Analysis

nd/holiday

Comment

ess, mile long dune trail trails and wildlife viewing Newly opened park features bluff trail 20 miles of trails20 miles 1,534 acres 4,350 acres of trails8.5 miles to upland trails Coast access birding primarily wetland, site17 acre use $10 day $8 weeke $6 weekday, 4,756 aces; Coast access City by managed of1,500 acresMPRPD Marina, lands 367 acres coast 26 acres, access Estuary of ; 5 miles estuary trails 1,700Coast acre access,

and lands to Coastupland access trails river trail Beach and of 1,325 acres coastal lands Coast acc trails with local park Small River Trail Salinas Coast access Coast access at waterline horses wildlife area, with Coast access of trails 1,257 miles 78,000 acres, upland access, site Valley Carmel of 86 miles 7,200 acres, trails n Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Ope Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Open Permit Permit Permit Access

Y Y Y Y Y

Equestrian

Y Y MTB

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Hike Y Y Y Y Y

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Marketand Economic Analysis Big Sur Moss Landing Los Padres NF Moss Landing Salinas Location Big Sur Big Sur Carmel Carmel Carmel Monterey Co. Monterey Salinas Marina Marina Marina Marina Moss Landing Moss Landing DAYUSE TRAILS INTHE MONTEREY COUNTY AREA

-1: -1:

Carmel Monterey Y Y Carmel Y Marina Y

MPRPD MPRPD Marina Y CSP CSP USFS MPRPD Carmel CSP Y Y CSP Y CSP CSP CSP MCP Operator CSP MPRPD MPRPD MCP CSP MPRPD MCP MCP CSP ofCity Marina FWS MPRPD CSP CDFW MCP Co. Monterey Y BLM Marina Y Y Y TABLE2

Site DAY USE TRAILS USE COUNTY MONTEREY THE IN 3.21 AREA DAY Park

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning

-Paddon Wetland Preserve-Paddon Carmel River State Beach State Carmel River Park State Ord Dunes Fort Preserve Dunes Marina Andrew Molera State Park Molera State Andrew Pfeiffer Julia BurnsPark State CreekPreserveMill Redwood Palo Corona Regional PeakPark Jacks County GarrapataPark State Preserve Wetland Pond Frog Antonio Lake San Park County Mt. Toro Beach State Marina Locke Wildlife Refuge River National Salinas Preserve Dues Eolina Area Wildlife State Moss Landing Estuarine Natural Slough Preserve Research Elkhorn Zsmudowski State Beach State Zsmudowski Los Padres National Forest PadresLos National Park Regional Ranch Garland Preserve Natural Lobos State Point RiverBeach State Salinas Oaks ParkRoyal Lands Ord Public Fort Beach State Moss Landing San Lorenzo County Park Lorenzo County San

40 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

Day Use Facilities This development alternative includes a variety of day use activities that primarily focuses on recreation trials for hiking, mountain biking (MTB) and docent led tours may also be available . We include activities associated with trail access such as wild life viewing and photography . For this portion of the assessment two types of day use access area considered: • Permit Day Use . Access by permit only . This may include docent-led hikes and site tours . • Open Day Use . Open public use featuring no restriction to access, with parking availability the only limitation on access . The Monterey region is blessed with a range of day use alternatives, with 27 sites identified in the inventory . Among the reviewed lands only two are restricted to permit use and both of these sites are managed by the MPRPD – Palo Corona Regional Park and Mill Creek Redwood Preserve . The largest tract of public lands available for day use access is Los Padres National Forest and ranges over a wide area from just south of Carmel to south of the Big Sur region . The Los Padres National Forest also provides access into the Ventana Wilderness Area . CSP is a primary land manager for day use public access facilities with 11 recreation access sites in the Monterey County region . The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) provides access at the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve . Additional observations include: • To the extent WWR is managed as a permit only site, MPRPD will be the only operator of this type of access with three sites in the immediate Carmel area . • Many of the selected sites, principally those managed by CSP, feature coastal access with most of these coast trails reported to provide limited length trail systems at beach areas and in wetland sites . • Two sites area co-managed by not-for-profit organizations including Pt. Lobos State Natural Reserve (CSP and the Pt . Lobos Foundation); and Elkhorn Slough Natural Estuarine Research Pre- serve (California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Elkhorn Slough Foundation) . • Hiking is offered at each of the twenty-seven sites in the inventory, with MTB access provided at 5 sites, and equestrian access provided at 8 sites . Note that for equestrian access several beach sites only allow horse riding on the beach itself and provide no associated trail networks . • Fort Ord is the principal destination for MTB activity with this site featured by the Monterey Off-Road Cycling Association (MORCA) chapter of the International Mountain Biking Association . • WWR appears to fit into a mosaic of public lands that represent ecosys- tems from the coastline to uplands environments including lands in the Big Sur region . As such WWR’s role with within the inventory of available day use areas seems to be function- al for recreation access as well as environmental by offering an upland location to complement coast line opportunities . Per the demand/supply equation, the existing day use inventory appears adequate for present-day use; however as reviewed in the context of demand trends the current supply is likely to be inadequate in the future . As a result, any addition to the current supply will help regional public land managers keep up with future recreation growth and demand .

| 41 Market Analysis

Tent Camping Tent camping provides opportunities for those who can hike or bike into the WWR site and who are interested in a traditional backcountry type camping experience with limited associated amenities . At this stage in the feasibility analysis, access for tent camping would be by MPRPD permit . The principal two types for which we gathered a regional supply profile include: • Primitive camping. Hike-in or bike-in camping with no service such as water, tent pads, no open fires allowed . • Rustic camping with services . Also walk-in/bike-in access with limited services that would include designated tent pads, portable vault toilet facility, non-potable water, and in-ground iron fire ring/grate. The reviewed regional rustic tent camping inventory is shown in Exhibits 3 .22 and 3 .23, and includes 166 walk- in or bike-in sites at 5 different facilities including inland-located Lake Nacimieinto County Park and Manresa Upland State Beach . These two parks comprise 60 and 64 sites respectively . The other noteworthy walk-in in site is at Andrew Molera State Park which feature 24 sites located approximately 150 yards from vehicle parking . In these cases the walk-in access is modest requiring a reportedly 20 minute maximum walk from car parking . It is important to note that WRR ranch access would require a 2 mile trek to camp sites . This inventory does not include primitive camping in the Ventana Wilderness and other dispersed areas in the Los Padres National Forest that are typically accessed by those backpacking into remote back country areas . In comparison to wilderness opportunities, WWR would offer what might be called a convenience primitive camping opportunity with the walk-in access modest compared to the traditional back packing experience . Other observations in the inventory data include: • With the exception of the two mentioned large walk-in facilities, rustic walk-in or bike-in camping is limited to 24 units at CSP Andrew Molera State Park, two units at CSP Julia Pfeiffer State Park, four units at CSP New Brighton State Beach, and twelve units at The Los Padres National Forest Bottchers Gap site . • The bulk of camping supply exists in the category of traditional developed RV and car accessible tent camping at 23 facilities including both public and private sector properties . • Walk-in camping facilities that feature primitive camping experiences are Lake Nacimiento (in addition to the predominant car camping), and the USFS at Bottchers Gap campground, and of course the Ventana Wilderness . See Exhibit 3 .23 . • WWR would be the only available walk-in camping facility between the USFS campsites in Big Sur and the CSP beach sites near Santa Cruz . The walk-in (rustic and primitive) camping option at WWR is in effect a hybrid opportunity that offers some characteristics of a primitive camping experience with reason- ably close access to vehicle parking and the visitor services available in Carmel . To fully assess demand for camping opportunities we can include both camping at developed traditional car sites and backpacking sites . For example, latent demand information for both of these camping options is substantial (though more so for sites with developed amenities) . Furthermore, the supply of walk-in or bike-in camping opportunities in the region is modest at best. Accordingly, WWR can fulfill a need within the camping market if either of these alternatives is developed at the site .

42 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Market Analysis

$60.00 $200.00 and up $200.00 and $ /Night 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 104 Cabin ity Report,ity Marketand Economic Analysis

$0.00 $0.00 $25.00 $85.00 $40.00 $22.00 $15.00 $35.00 $35.00 $35.00 $35.00 $35.00 to $50.00 0 5 7 6 9 8 $0.00 8 $0.00 0 $10.00 0 0 0 6 $60.00 to $75.00 50 $200.00 40 $40.00 to $55.00 28 18 44 $35.00 13 $41.00 0 12 $100.00 to $200.00 34 23 49 25 $20.00 99 0 10 $35.00 91 0 218 172 500 $35.00 0 1,738 Tent $ /Night

$5.00 $35.00

0 0 4 $35.00 111 $35.00 to $50.00 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 64 166 0 0 0 0

12 $12.00 0 Walk/bike $ /Night

CAMPINGIN THEMONTEREY COUNTY AREA Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibil Location -2: -2: Big Sur Big Sur Los Padres NF CountyMont. 0 CountyMont. 60 $30.00 Watsonville 232 0 $35.00 0 Los Padres NF Los Padres NF Los Padres NF Aptos Big Sur Big Sur Big Sur Big Sur Los Padres NF Los Padres NF Los Padres NF Los Padres NF Carmel CountyMont. CountyMont. Watsonville Watsonville Big Sur Marina Los Padres NF TABLE2

Operator Operator

Private Private RMRecUSFS, CSP, CampOne USFS USFS USFS MCP MCP Private CSP CSP CSP Private Private USFS USFS CampOneUSFS, CamponeUSFS, Private MCP MCP CSP CSP Private Private Private Private USFS, CampOneUSFS,

Site 3.22 COUNTY MONTEREY THE IN CAMPING AREA

Andrew Molera Walk- Andrew Big Sur Camp and Cabins Pfeiffer Big Sur SP Limekiln SP ResortTreebones ResortFernwood Oaks White CampChina Escondido ParkMemorial Creek Kirk Nacimiento Ponderosa Arroyo Seco Saddle Mountain Campground RA Seca Laguna County Park Antonio Lake San County Park Lake Nacimiento Park Lorenzo County San RV Dunes Marina SBManresa Upland Cruz KOA Santa Sunset SB New Brighton SB TOTAL Bottcher's GapBottcher's Riv eside Camp and Cabins Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning

| 43

Market Analysis

ground.

facilities fields, play, ball and ity Report,ity Marketand Economic Analysis

nager. ball court. -

out, access to Ventana Wilderness.

- ck

Description

lodging, and and lodging, café.

rs, 2 group site 2 group @$125 ea.35 max rs,

. ups, -in 150 yards.-in and grills

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibil CAMPINGIN THEMONTEREY COUNTY AREA , water, tables, facility -3: -3: tables, coast access; includes RV max. ; 1 group site 50 person sites includes coast tables, access; toilets pground; includes RV, flush, showers, store, laundry. TABLE2 Showers, flush, grills, tables, coast access; includes RV sites Primarily developed RV developed Primarily Two campgrounds (82 have sites) or no restroom shower.Twocampgrounds Includes RV, highly developed site; access to nearby state beach Developed campground; includes RV, flush, showers, shooting range, clubhouse. Developed cam Developed grills; group site 50 max. water, tables, RV included, flush, showers, Inland; First come, flush, water, tables, grills, bring wood, beach access 1 wood,walk-in access bring grills, come,mile; beach 150 yards. flush, water, tables, First Developed campground; includes RV, flush, showe tales, grills, water. showers, includes, RV, campground, Developed flush, shop, lodge, gift store, yurts, restaurant, eco-tours. camp resort, Developed music. live restaurantbar, & store, includes campground; showers, RV,Developed flush, nofrom water, bottled ma first toilets, come, site, vault primitive site Inland; grills, tables, firstno water. toilets, come, site, vault primitive Inland; pa come, water, garbage toilets,tables, vault primitive, First grills, Wilderness. to Ventana access water, tables, grills; RV,Includes flush, RV, come, vault includes toilets, no water. tables, First grills, RV, Includes vault Developed campground; includes RV, flush, showers, pool, horseshoe, bb site RV developed with operated, hookPrivately Inland; developed campground, RV included, flush, showers, water, tables, museum, meeting Showers, flush, grills, tables, beach access; walk Showers, flush, grills, First come, primitive, vault toilets, grills, tables, garbage pack-out, garbage toilets,tables, come, vault primitive, Wilderness. grills, First to Ventana no water, access Developed campground; includes RV, flush, showers, store, laundry, store, includes playground. campground; showers, RV,Developed flush, First come, RV included, vault toilets, grills, tables, no water. tables, toilets, come, grills, vault RV included, First d

3.23 COUNTY MONTEREY THE IN CAMPING AREA

Laguna Seca RA Seca Laguna New Brighton Beach SB Marina Dunes RV Dunes Marina Arroyo Seco County Park Lake Nacimiento Cruz KOA Santa Riveside Camp and Cabins Nacimiento Site Molera Walk- Andrew Big Sur Camp and Cabins Pfeiffer Big Sur SP ResortTreebones ResortFernwood Oaks White Escondido Creek Kirk Ponderosa Saddle Mountain Campgroun County Park Antonio Lake San Park Lorenzo County San SB Manresa Upland Sunset SB Limekiln SP GapBottcher's CampChina Memorial ParkMemorial Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning

44 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

Convenience Camping Cabins This includes camping in rustic cabins, yurts, or tent cabins with developed amenities such as restrooms with flush toilets, showers, and potable water. This type of camping typically features semi-permanent structures with cots or bed frames that can be used by campers bringing sleeping bags and other camping supplies . Some of these facilities, especially in the private sector, include electricity, heat and potable water, which refelct amenities expected at motels or hotels . This is an emerging market with several public land management agencies throughout the western United States using this model to increase overall annual occupancy rates and related revenues . Reportedly, occupancies at some signature convenience camping facilities [like …] can approach commercial lodging operations such as hotels and motels, with annual rates at 60% or above . As shown in Exhibit 3 .22, recreation providers in the Monterey County area provide a total of 104 convenience camping cabin units at 4 facilities; where, Big Sur? . All of these providers are private sector operation and no walk-in or bike-in convenience camping facilities where identified during our research. Identified convenience camping examples in California that include tent cabins, yurts, and/or rustic cabins respectively are: Big Basin Redwoods State Park . North of Santa Cruz, this CSP property features 38 tent cabins at $79 per night . Each cabin is constructed of a raised wooden platform and with wooden sides and mesh panels at each end topped by a tent-like upper walls and roof . Each has a maximum occupancy of 4 persons with adjoining tent camping pads at 4 persons per pad . Santa Clara County Parks . Mt . Madonna Park, east of Watsonville, provides 7 yurts as a camping option including 16’ (6 persons), 20’ (8 persons), and 24’ 10 person capacity options . Nightly rates range from $60 to $90 peak season and $55 to $77 off season . Lassen Volcanic National Park . In 2010 the Park Service introduced 20 rustic cabins at the Manzanita Lake area; the cabins are managed by a concessionaire . Cabins include one and two room models at nightly rates of $59 and $84 respectively . According to a 2011 CSP study, Alternative Camping at California State Parks, CSP manages rustic cabin facilities at 6 parks throughout the state with summer season occupancy ranging from 41% to 84% . Other findings from this study which featured a visitor as well as a CSP park manager survey include the following applicable to WWR . • Facilities near population centers and those that provide water features such as beaches or lakes, have the highest occupancy . • A proportion of the population prefers not to use a camp site unless a convenience camping unit is available . As a result this option might attract new outdoor users to the WWR lands . • About 30% of respondents want alternative camping facilities added to the California State Parks indicating robust interest in this camping option . • These facilities attract campers during the shoulder seasons . Among park managers, 72% said that they attract more campers during the off-season because of convenience camping facilities at their parks . Thus MPRPD operations at WWR would likely extend beyond the typical summer season peak .

| 45 Market Analysis

• CSP provides a total of 47 rustic cabins and 38 tent cabins at parks throughout the state system (in addition to 13 cottages and 10 floating campsites). While some county parks and private sector providers have added rustic cabins there remains a limited statewide supply in this emerging market . • The report concludes that there is a need for more alternative camping facilities in California . • CSP has identified several existing park units that are proposed to add convenience camping cabins and support facilities as part of campground conversions (Prairie Creek Redwoods, Patrick Point, Jedediah Smith, and Angel Island) . In addition, several units are adding RV utility hookups as part of campground conversion (Half Moon Bay, Leo Carrillo, and Morro Strand) . These conversion investments range from $100,000 to $750,000 per unit with completion dates in 2014 and 2015 . Findings indicate growing demand and a limited supply of convenience camping cabin opportunities in California, with a few private sector-operated sites in the Monterey County area . This does indicate an opportunity for developing this type of camping option at WWR . If considered, this would make WWR the first Monterey County public park to introduce convenience camping cabins as an overnight accommoda- tion option . In fact, no CSP park currently provides this option anywhere on the Central Coast, though the mentioned campground conversions do include RV utility facilities at Half Moon Bay . There is a relatively limited supply of convenience cabins limited to the private sector and these facilities generally offering more features than a rustic cabin (heat, water, bedding, restaurants on-site, etc ). . WWR would need to assume a role as pioneer in the rustic cabin market – albeit a market with no direct completion at this time but also no successful local models to rely on for determining risk . In addition, most reviewed convenience camping facilities offer direct vehicle access . At best, convenience camping users would be shuttled in along the Road by a concessionaire operator . Since this would be primarily a walk- in or bike-in site in a back country-like setting with no signature water feature, MPRPD must be willing to accept some additional risk with the convenience camping option compared to an established drive-up beach side or lake side facility . Environmental/Outdoor Education Camps/Schools As part of the California education curriculum, hands-on science and environmental education is a core element . To meet the demand for hands on education and outdoor experiences, a network of on-site education resident camps/schools have been established throughout the state . As part of this assessment we have investigated the market for these programs and the potential for WWR to provide a future location for a science education facility . Exhibits 3 .24 and 3 .25 show a list of 13 comparable facilities primarily located either on the central coast or in Northern California . We gathered data about these programs and facilities and conducted interviews with program managers and school administrators in the Monterey County area. Our findings about this market include: • Schools typically host students in the 5th through 8th grades for a variety of science education programming . Programs are held in the Fall and Spring terms of the school years with facilities also hosting summer programs . • Facilities are also often used to host other events including conferences adult education and in some case events such as weddings . These events provide additional income for facility managers . • The bulk of program or facility operators are not-for-profit entities. Howev- er, many of the facilities themselves are owned or operated by associ-

46 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Market Analysis

501 (c) 3 501 (c) 3

y Council PROGRAMS

-Huron Recreation & Parks District Recreation-Huron & Parks

onference Center p Yeager, Coalinga Point Reyes Nat'l Seashore Seashore Nat'l Assn.Point Reyes YMCA & Taylor Family Foundation & TaylorYMCA Family Office County of EdSacramento Office of County Cruz EducationSanta Owned by Kiononia C 501 ( c ) 3 Pines Camp Ocean Bay Monterey CSU Day Adventist Church Seventh ChurchCatholic Boy of America Scouts Ba Monterey Valley Silicon Boy of America Scouts Bay Monterey Council Valley Silicon Exploring New Horizons Outdoor Schools Kern County Superintendent of Schools Cam Park Oro State de Montana Slide Ranch 501 ( c ) 3 501 Ranch Slide ChurchEvangelical San Luis Obispo County Office of Education Operator (Owner) Operator (Owner)

, CA

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Marketand Economic Analysis Livermore, CA Livermore, CA CA Beach, Muir Pollock CA Pines, Park National Pt. Reyes CAWatsonville, San Luis Obispo CACambria, CA Monterey, CAWatsonville, CA Cruz, Santa Big Sur CA Cruz, Santa Loma Mar, CA Valley, CA Scots CABakersfield, CACambria, Morro Bay, CA Location

and

SCIENCEOUTDOOR AND EDUCATION RESIDENT CAMPS/SCHOOLS

r e t -4: -4:

or Education Pines

TABLE2

3.24 COUNTY MONTEREY THE IN CAMPING AREA

Ocean

oyo

ern Environmental Educ. Program (KEEP) ern Environmental Site Arr Camp arroyo.ymcaeastbay.org Slide Ranch slideranch.org Education Park Environmental Sly Center Conference sceo.net/slypark Reyes/Clem C Miller Point ptreyes.org Santa Cruz Outdoor Science School osp.santacruz.k12.ca.us Rancho El Chorro Outdoor School ranchoelchorro.org Camp Ocean Pines campoceanpines.org Lab SEA Camp Bay #1:Academy Monterey Site #2: St. Camp Francis Site campsealab.org Camp Pico Blanco camppicoblanco.org Camp Chesebrough svmbc.org Exploring New Horizons exploringnewhorizons.org Mission Springs Outdo missionsprings.com K Site #1: KEEP Cambria Site #3: KEEP campkeep.org

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 12 10 11 13 8 Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning

| 47

Market Analysis

N/a

5 days 5 days 5 days 5 days 5 days 4 days 5 days 5 Days ------tay 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 S verage A

50 80 40

144 215 250 144 120 130 200 250 - 90 PAOT apacity

N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a N/a 6,000 8,000 8,000 1,800 1,650 4,000 7,000 FACILITIES Annual Visitation S S

) 2 orship w

ng ranges oncession & mtg. hall & mtg. ball & b - ball - ampfire area area ampfire courts, ropes assembly halls assembly , 2 bathhouses

Bed Cabin Staff shooti shooting ranges - Dining/Cafeteria & afeteria, outdoor afeteria, center and chapel c & &

lodge, admin bldg., , pool, c pool,

1 16 utdoor amphitheater utdoor , , organic garden, ropes garden, organic uditorium (250 cap. uditorium

o a

, outdoor amphitheater, , archery archery archery 1 teacher cabin bathhouse 1 teacher cabin lodge, health lodge,dining,

Person Cabins Person - acilities farmhouse, dairy, outbuildings dairy, farmhouse, chapel ersons each, heated dining hall F laying field, pool, v Hall/meeting room, dining, pool room,Hall/meeting dining, 10 staw bale cabins (10 Ea.) cap. bale 10 staw 6 24

10 sleeping trailers, 2 teacher trailers, trailers, 2 teacher trailers, 10 sleeping kitchen, chapel outdoor chapel amphitheater, kitchen, s, dining room, meeting facility dining s, room, meeting Dorms, dining hall, private beach access beach private hall, dining Dorms,

ditorium (150 cap.) Outdoor amphitheater ditorium Group tent camping sites, 8 Cabins w/ 26 beds Bath 8 Cabins 5 dorms, teacher bldg, dining 12 cabins @ 10 p 12 cabins Cabins, dining/cafeteria Cabins, Cabins , bath/shower building (coffee/snacks), p 18 cabins, restroom shower bldg. dining & rec & rec hall restroomdining bldg. shower 18 cabins, restroom shower bldgs., geodesic area bldgs., lawn dome, shower restroom 4 cabins @ cap. 16 each, @ cap. 4 cabins Group campsite Yurt (cap. 40), dome meeting space (cap. 40), campsite Yurt meeting dome Group outdoor amphitheaters (250 & 100 cap.) outdoor amphitheaters c Cabins, lodge indoor & outdoor meeting areas, outdoor & meeting indoor with stage, meadow/sports field Volleyball, bbq area, kitchen, au kitchen, Group tent camping sites,

N/a N/a N/a Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Marketand Economic Analysis cres 13 acres 15 a 13 acres 10 acres 38 Acres 250 acres 380 acres 300 acres 1

Sempervirens ize Nat'l Seashore S at

10 Acres Developed - 8 134 Acres on the Coast 134 Acres Forest Service for Service Access Forest Within Golden Gate NRA Associated with Pt Reyes Associated 17 acres 27 Acres Agreement with with Agreement 27 Acres SCIENCEOUTDOOR AND EDUCATION RESIDENT CAMPS/SCHOOL -5: -5:

San

TABLE2

Pines CAMPING IN THE MONTEREY COUNTY MONTEREY THE IN CAMPING AREA

ite

3.25

Ocean

sebrough

e e

s Valley, CA s Camp Arroyo Livermore, CA Slide Ranch Beach Muir Education Park Environmental Sly and Conference Center Pollock CA Pines, Reyes/Clem Ctr Miller Point Park National Pt. Reyes Santa Cruz Outdoor Science School CA Watsonville, Rancho El Chorro Outdoor School Luis Obispo Camp Ocean Pines CA Cambria, Lab SEA Camp Bay Academy #1: Monterey Site #2: St. Camp Francis Site Camp Pico Blanco Big Sur ChCamp CA Cruz, Santa Exploring New Horizons Loma Mar, CA Mission Springs Outdoor Education Scott Program Edu. Kern Environmental Site #1: KEEP Cambria Site #2: KEEP Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

48 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Market Analysis

ated organizations such as state parks, churches, boarding schools, or youth group such as the Boy Scouts. Several programs are directly operated by County Offices of Education. • Sites are highly developed with cabin or dormitory housing, restroom and shower buildings, dining halls, meeting halls, outdoor amphitheaters, and lawn or play areas . Some included laboratories, playing fields, and even swimming pools. • Most sites are located near or within public recreation lands providing access to natural areas and associated hands-on education experiences . These camps/schools are typically located at signature coastal or mountain settings . • The market is competitive with each facility actively developing its base clientele via web or other marketing . Decisions by program users are can be made at the county, school district, or individual school level . • Site sizes range from 10 to 300 acres with capacities ranging from 50 to 250 persons – including students and instructors . Program stays usually occur during a school week and over a 3 to 5 day period . Annual visitation can range from 1,650 students to as high as 8,000 students . • Monterey County does not have a resident education camp/school facility . County students use a variety of destination schools throughout Northern California . Camp SEA Lab a program of California State University Monterey rents available time from two north Monterey County/Santa Cruz County campuses, with each owned and operated by a religious organization . Current uses at these facilities limit SEA Lab access and program growth . • Attendance at resident science camps can be problematic for some student populations due to time and expense necessary to travel to distant locations . Many schools feature fundraising programs so students can attend these valuable hands-on resident education programs . Not all Monterey County students can attend these programs . Our review of this alternative is driven by the reported ongoing discussions to establish an education camp/school facility in Monterey County . The county location near Northern California cities in the San Francisco Bay area and Central Valley make it an ideal location to attract this market . Furthermore, students within the county must travel elsewhere to access these programs . The only locally operated program is Camp SEA Lab, a signature effort that has grown its program continuously for eleven years . Camp SEA Lab is currently limited by the number of available dates at the two facilities that they rent for these purposes . Overall demand for these types of programs is expected to increase due to student population growth as well as statewide education requirements . WWR provides a flat meadow site that can provide an ideal science school location and is set within a vast natural outdoor environment . The site however, has some limitations with respect to market demand . • WWR does not offer direct access to coastal environments which would be a primary draw for out- of-area students . Camp SEA Lab for example is principally interested in establishing a school on the coast line due to their marine science specialization . • The site size is on the smaller end of the comparable scale and could limit long term development if a facility chose to expand in the future . • Access road would need to be improved to allow busses and other vehicles ready access for student groups and educators . All reviewed comparable facilities offered direct vehicle access . Similar to the convenience camping cabin market, WWR would offer a unique version of the environmental school model . It would most likely be of modest size and compact compared to some competing facilities . This could provide a niche brand but would have to feature a signature program and site design – probably operated by a yet to be determined not-for-profit organization. We assume that MPRPD would not develop or operate an education facility . However, and most importantly, WWR and MPRPD are positioned to be part of the regional conversation about locating a Monterey County education camp/school facility . For example, WWR could provide immediate access in partnership with existing schools outdoor education programs . Market demand and associated supply issues indicate a positive potential for an outdoor school at WWR, with noteworthy constraints that would have to be discussed in-depth by proponents of this alternative .

| 49 Market Analysis

Recreation Supply Findings Overall, the review of recreation demand and associated recreation supply for the considered alternatives at WWR present positive market opportunity, with varying degrees for each . Given current supply, the demand for camping is especially robust, with peak demand on summer holiday weekends . Note that this market demand/supply equation does not include the site development environmental, social and community, impacts or financial operating requirements. Accordingly, the following summarizes the baseline market demand/supply findings for WWR. See Exhibits 3.26 and 3.27. • Limited access day use is well established at MPRPD properties and as such provides a direct model for the community and land managers . There is no indication that there is excess demand for these types of facilities either in the wider region or within the immediate Carmel area . While adding to the MPRPD day use inventory, this option for WWR does not directly address the camping opportunity short fall . This option does provide the lowest user impact option . • Open access day use opportunities are limited in the immediate area . The closest upland recreation access opportunity is provided at Garland Ranch Regional Park in Carmel Valley, about 10-miles away and 8-miles inland . CSP’s Point Lobos Ranch is currently undergoing a general planning process and therefore may eventually add to the existing supply of open access lands if a fee is not charged . Overall, market demand data shows robust regional demand for day use activities . • Primitive camping is primarily provided in the Los Padres National Forest south of the Camel Area, with these sites featuring either short walk-in (1/2 mile or less) to camping facilities or more difficult to access backcountry opportunities in the Ventana Wilderness . The WWR site can provide a hybrid primitive camping experience option with a relatively easy walk-in or bike-in via the existing access road . We anticipate that any primitive camping development will provide parking at or near CSP property with recreation users walking or biking into the WWR site . This condition may provide WWR with a unique position in the regional camping market – a convenient primitive backcountry experience – where access to vehicles and Highway 1 is convenient but still requires some effort to walk-in or bike-in to the site . • Since the rustic camping option provides slightly improved amenities over the primitive option, we anticipate increased demand over the primitive model . Restroom availability remains a primary consideration by rustic camping users . The regional inventory indicates a limited supply for this type of camping experience . This alternative supplements the convenience backcountry option . • Demand for convenience cabin camping is robust throughout California while no public sector opportunities exist in Monterey County . Current privately operated cabin camping opportunities offer extensive amenities including in-cabin utilities and onsite services . No rustic cabins are offered . Accordingly the simple rustic cabin model has yet to be established in Monterey County . However, for WWR, road access for comfort oriented campers may provide a limitation . While reported growing demand indicates an opportunity to target this market, there is additional risk entering the convenience camping market with this access limitation and the lack of a signature natural feature, like a lake or beachfront . • The extensive inventory of regional outdoor science education camps indicates a high demand for these types of facilities that appears to be currently met by a good supply of destinations . However, there is no dedicated outdoor education camp facility located in Monterey County and the current education camp provider, Camp SEA Lab uses rented facilities that are located near or in Santa Cruz County, which limits days of use and constrains program growth . As a result, WWR does provide an opportunity to enter the education science school market with noteworthy limitations . First, these types of facilities are typically highly developed with overnight lodging and support buildings such as dining and meeting halls . Secondly, these facilities typically generate additional revenue by renting to other groups such as adult education, weddings and organization retreats . Market- ing and administrative staff costs also make this an intensive investment . While interest within the Mon- terey County education community is high, MPRPD would need to identify an appropriate investor and operator group to lead, develop, and market this alternative .

50 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

. Limited access day use is well established at MPRPD properties and as such provides a direct model for the community and land managers. There is no indication that there is excess demand for these types of facilities either in the wider region or within the immediate Carmel area. While adding to the MPRPD day use inventory, this option for WWR does not directly address a short fall; it does however, provide the lowest use impact option.

. Open access day use opportunities are limited in the immediate area with accessMarket to Analysis upland recreation opportunities currently provided at Garland Ranch. CSP Point Lobos Ranch upland lands are in the CSP general planning process for Carmel Area State Parks and therefore may add to the existing supply of open access lands. Overall, market demand data shows robust regional demand for day use activities.

TABLE 2-6: MARKET DEMAND AND MARKET SUPPLY SUMMARY 3.26 MARKET DEMAND AND MARKET SUPPLY FOR DAY SUMMARY USE AT WWR FOR DAY USE AT WWR

WWR Comments Alternative Demand Supply Opportunity

Limited Medium Low Limited facilities in this market, with access day both managed by MPRPD make it Use difficult to determine wider regional growth rates and opportunities, but

anticipated demand is positive. Open High Medium Open day use in the immediate area is Day Use currently offered by Garland Ranch with few other nearby opportunities; high demand for these day use activities indicates that WWR can add important inventory to regional day use opportunities.

Feasible Caution/risk factors Not feasible Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

TABLE 2-7: MARKET DEMAND AND MARKET SUPPLY SUMMARY 3.27 MARKET DEMAND AND MARKET FOR OVERNIGHT SUPPLY SUMMARYUSE AT WWR FOR OVERNIGHT USE AT WWR Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 37 WWR Comments Alternativ e Demand Supply Feasibility Few existing facilities in the Monterey County

Primitive tent region; WWR potentially provides a new Medium Low camp alternative that may best be described as convenience backcountry camping. Low supply provides opportunity for WWR to

Rustic provide convenience backcountry camping with High Low tent camp amenities, similar to developed camping, and is likely to generate substantial use. No regional supply within the public sector; Convenience vehicle access somewhat problematic, but High Low cabins market conditions indicate high demand and a significant opportunity to enter this market. No current Monterey County facilities and the Education WWR site has limitations; however modest High Medium Camp/School opportunity exists, albeit reliant on identifying an appropriate investor/operator entity.

Feasible Caution/risk factors Not feasible

| 51

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 39

4 Socio-Political Analysis

Public Input • Public Forum and Stakeholder Interviews • Public Forum and Educator Survey • Written Comments Socio-Political Context • Regional Economy • Adjacent Public Lands • Public Input • Socio-Political Impact

| 53 Socio-Political Analysis

Public Input Public Forum and Stakeholder Interviews The following summarizes comments provided by those attending the public forums as well as interviewed stakeholders . • Recreation users . User groups including but not limited to mountain biking groups, equestrian advocates and day use hikers are interested in obtaining access to WWR . Most prominent among public forum attendees were hikers . In addition, an enthusiastic group of equestrian recreationalists provided input . MPRPD staff also contacted mountain bike groups to ascertain their opinions about WWR . These diverse interests may impact management decisions and conversely those decisions will determine the extent to which community members within these groups can access WWR . These diverse interests indicate the need for continued collaboration and cooperation between MPRPD and CSP . WWR will provide a net addition to the region’s outdoor recreation offerings whether the opportunities include camping or primarily day use activities . • Educators. As part of our public engagement process we gathered the input and insight from area educators including science educators at the Carmel Unified School District who toured the site with the planning team . The education community sees a need for hands on science and outdoor education at day use areas and provided special attention to the need for a Monterey County located science camp facility . WWR can contribute to the community’s education opportunities as a site for a dedicated education camp or as a day use field science destination. In addition to WWR, MPRPD, by the virtue of its other park lands and acquisition legacy, can broaden the discussion into a wider outdoor and science education facility . The Monterey County Office of Education Curriculum Committee also provided input on several issues pertaining to resident science education for Monterey County students . Note that several of these insights mirrored the findings provided in the Market Analysis for education camp market in general . These comments included: a . outdoor hands-on science education at a camp facility fits perfectly with science education curriculum; b . decisions to have students attend a science education camp are made at the school level and involve teachers; c . funding is the primary limitation either due to family and or school budget limitations; d . in Monterey County, depending on the school district, between 50% and 80% of 5th grade student attend science camps, e . resident facilities need lodging, such as cabin, classrooms or labs, dining facilities, teacher and other adult supervision, and emergency and safety procedures, f . low cost transportation . • Environmental advocates . By the simple purchase of WWR for public conservation and use an important example of the coastal environment has been preserved in the public trust . The local environmental community has stressed sustainable recreation use at the WWR site with low impact recreation development emphasized . This may include trail use, education and interpretation, as well as any environmental restoration work needed on the WWR property . Camping remains an option though comments from this community remain cautious about the nature and magnitude of the chosen camping option . This community group leans toward the least possible disturbance to the WWR ecology . • Adjacent residents . These community members, few in number, were very vocal and concerned about possible impacts to their private property and lifestyles . Chief among these concerns was the threat

54 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Socio-Political Analysis

4.1 CURRENT RECREATION ACTIVITY 4.2 RECREATION ACTIVITIES WOULD DO PARTICIPATION FORUM ATTENDEES AT WWR FORUM ATTENDEES AND AND EDUCATORS EDUCATORS

4.3 PRIMARY CURRENT RECREATION 4.4 PRIMARY RECREATION ACTIVITY ACTIVITYFORUM ATTENDEES AND WOULD DO AT WWR FORUM EDUCATORS ATTENDEES AND EDUCATORS

| 55 Socio-Political Analysis

of wild land fire – an issue throughout the western United States. Two residents most adjacent to the WWR site voiced concern about potential noise generated by WWR users at the first public forum. With regards to wild fire threat, MPRPD anticipates very strict fire restrictions for any approved camping use. And while the presence of recreation users may increase the fire threat (more people = higher threat) the presence of users can also provide more eyes-on-the-ground for signs of fire. Camping at the site will have increased ranger patrols to maintain the site and supervise use thus providing more overall oversight of the fire threat. For context, the history of wildfire caused by camp fires is almost non-existent in the record for the hundreds of back country campsites in the adjacent Los Padres National Forest . There is no reason to believe that this statistic will be any different for WWR . While WWR may provide a back country type experience for recreation users the site is not strictly a back country area and thus also provides increased access . Noise impacts for adjacent residents cannot be determined with any precision at this time but we understand why a no-change management policy would be most desirable by those living next to the WWR property . The presence of even small numbers of recreation users would be perceived as a change to the previous ownership situation . However, we anticipate rigorous management by MPRPD and with the emphasis on sustainable environmental policy use will moderate noise impacts . Also note that no motorized recreation uses will be allowed on the WWR public lands . Nevertheless MPRPD may need to monitor impact on adjacent residents . • Comparable facility managers . Interviewed public and private sector area campground managers provided observations about operations directly related to a WWR proposed campground facility . First, overall demand in the Monterey County region is robust from the spring through summer season . This is especially so on summer weekends with holiday weekends providing peak demand . Campgrounds with coastal access either directly located on the coast or with trail access to the coast are in highest demand . The WWR location is appealing since few other camping facilities are available, however the upland location is less desirable than a coast locations . Per the range of camping options considered in this feasibility analysis the convenience camping option holds the greatest appeal for private sector concession operators . Campers are increasingly asking improved amenities such as flush toilets and showers with some wanting facilities that sell short term needs such as water, firewood, food, and suntan lotion among others. As a result camping cabins, yurts, and tent cabins are seeing growing demand . Public sector camping facility managers are increasingly turning to private sector concessionaires to manage and operate facilities during the user season . The reported increased occupancy and extended season provided by enhanced amenities such as cabins or RV utility hookups make these options most attractive to prospective concessionaires as well as public managers interested in maximizing revenues . The limited access condition is seen as the single most important factor that may affect success . Limited access (walk-in or shuttle-in) will reportedly reduce the market with families least likely to choose a limited access camping facility . Note that some of this input was provided by those that have not visited the WWR site, with maps and photographs used to provide context .

Public Forum and Educator Survey Forum participants represent the most interested and vested community voices, with these respondents showing significant concern about impact to the WWR ecosystem and in the case of nearby residents, impacts to their homes and lifestyles . This to be expected for projects of this type, because it represents a preservation opportunity and is located near an existing community . In contrast, the educator group had only introductory information and thus provided comments that might represent general recreation user attitudes with the exception of a specific interest in outdoor education.

56 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Socio-Political Analysis

4.5 FACILTIES WOULD LIKE AT WWR 4.6 RECREATION ALTERNATIVE FORUM ATTENDEES AND EDUCATORS SPECTRUM IMPORTANCE RATING FORUM ATTENDEES AND EDUCATORS

Design Workshop gives site overview Existing conditions maps at the first public forum

| 57 Socio-Political Analysis

In addition to the qualitative insights provided by those participating in the public forums, we provided a survey to allow for every one attending to submit their opinions . In addition, a meeting held by the Mon- terey County Office of Education Curriculum Committee was attended by MPRPD staff who provided the forum survey to that group . Note that this is not a statistically valid survey and does not represent input from the entire community nor from a profile of regional visitors. The following is a graphic presentation of participant qualitative opinions and therefore provides insight into potential wider public opinion and can inform ongoing consideration of the WWR project . The results do show opinions of motivated vested stakeholders who have been following the WWR since the property was acquired by the MPRPD. The survey findings included input from approximately thirty public forum participants and community stakeholders and eight members of the Monterey County Office of Education Curriculum Committee. The results show several interesting patterns that we anticipate could be reflected in a wider statistical sample. • To address the recreation interests of participants we asked about their overall recreation activity preferences . See Exhibit 4 1. . Forum participants were primarily day hiking and nature viewing enthusiasts followed by picnicking and guided tours; and education programs and dog walking . More than one- third mentioned tent camping as an activity and 11% mentioned cabin camping . Educators showed similar patterns for day hiking and a higher rate of participation in nature viewing . In contrast, educators were more likely to mention camping overall including tent camping as well as cabin camping . The forum participants, those most immediately motivated by the WWR project, represent a focused recreation user group with emphasis on day use activities such as hiking and nature viewing . To the extent that educator represent an outside viewpoint camping is a greater part of their current recreation activities . • When asked about what activities they would do at WWR if available, Forum participants were increasingly oriented to day hiking followed by nature viewing . In fact Forum respondents indicated they we less likely to participate in some of their favored recreational pursuits at WWR . Educators re- mained more interested in an array of recreation activities at WWR including a continued high interest in camping and education programming among a range of other uses . See Exhibit 4 .2 . • When asked about their primary current activities the responses are telling . Forum participants are primarily day use and trail oriented while educators have a somewhat wider range of interests with outdoor education programming an important preference . Forum participants show a similar focus with regard to activities they would do at WWR . Interestingly, educators show either a preference of education activities or do not know presumably because they need additional information about the WWR site . See Exhibits 4 .3 and 4 .4 . • As shown in Figure 3-5, when asked about facility development they would like to see at WWR, the contrast between local community stakeholders and the outside educator perspective is striking . In general forum participants prefer a minimum of disturbance to the site with day use trails, simple pit toilets, and picnic tables their preferred improvements . In fact, several responses indicated no improvements were desired at all . In comparison, the educators group listed a full array of facilities that included not only education camp amenities but a full array of improvements for camping related recreation. We should note that the educator responses reflect the reported market trends for camping with an interest in improved and added amenities . • When rating each development alternative forum attendees indicated that day use was the preferred alternative with all three camping options rated lowest . Forum responses did indicate some support for an outdoor education facility . In keeping with the patterns described so far, educators are supportive of the full range of options with an education camp their most highly rated alternative followed by open day use . All three camping options core much a higher average among educators than the Forum group, with limited access day use the lowest rated alternative for educators .

58 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Socio-Political Analysis

Whisler Wilson Ranch Public Forum Survey

Dear Forum Participant,

As part of today’s Public Forum we are conducting a survey to get your opinions and to help us plan for future recreation use at Whisler Wilson Ranch (WWR) . You can help our effort by filling out this brief questionnaire (about 5 minutes) . Your answers on this questionnaire are confidential, and will be used strictly for research purposes.

Thank you for your help, Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District

1 . Have you heard about Whisler Wilson Ranch before this meeting? (Please check one)

Very aware. I know Somewhat aware. I have This is the first time I’ve heard of about the property read, or heard about it it, here to find out more acquisition   

2 . In what recreation activities do you participate? (Please check all that apply)

 Walk/hike  Dog walking  Camping tent  Horse riding  View scenery/nature  Camping cabin  Mountain biking  Running/jogging  Picnicking  Guided tours  Hunting  Education programs  Other:______

3 . Please list the one activity that is most important to you ______

4 . What recreation activities would you do at Whisler Wilson Ranch? (Please check all that apply)

5 . Please list the one activity you would do most often at WWR ______.

Thank you very much for your participation!

Page one of the survey from the first public forum

| 59 Socio-Political Analysis

Whisler Wilson Ranch Public Forum Survey

6 . What recreation facilities would you use at Whisler Wilson Ranch? (Please check all that apply)

 No facilities  Trails  Pit-type toilet  Tent camp pads  Tent platforms  Cabins/yurts/tent cabins  Flush toilets  Showers  Picnic tables  Bunkhouse cabins  Outdoor lecture area  Education camp facility  Other:______

7 . Please list the one facility that you would use most often at WWR______

8 . Thinking about the Recreation Use Spectrum we discussed today, please rate the importance of each . Please( check one response for each type on the spectrum)

Not at All Somewhat Somewhat Very Important Unimportant Neutral Important Important Limited access day use      Open day use      Primitive camp      Rustic camp with services      Convenience camping      Education/youth camp     

9 . When thinking about the Whisler Wilson Ranch site in general, what types of uses and facilities would not be appropriate .( Please also list your reasons why – physical, community, access, parking, traffic, environmental issues, enough elsewhere, etc.)

10 . Please provide any suggestions for the future of recreation at Whisler Wilson Ranch .

Thank you very much for your participation!

Page two of the survey from the first public forum

60 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Socio-Political Analysis

Written Comments Respondents who take the time to write their comments are typically the most involved in the process . When asked about activities that are not appropriate for WWR the gathered written comments thus represent underlying concerns about WWR. Interestingly general comments directly reflected similar concerns. Among forum participants environmental preservation and limited use was a driving issue followed by fire threat . For the few educators that commented outdoor education camp costs were mentioned . Public Input Findings Given the basic information provided to those contacted we ascertained several perceptions of the WWR site and it’s feasibility as a camping area . First, the camping market along the Monterey County coastal areas, especially during the summer season is at capacity – most notably during holiday weekends . Secondly, the WWR site location in the immediate Carmel area provides a unique upland site that is relatively convenience to visitor service in the Carmel area . However, when told about the potential limits to recreation user vehicle road access directly into the WWR site those contacted voiced caution . Private operators in particular felt that limited road access would limit the market – a market increasingly seeking camping convenience and amenities – and thus increases the risk of camping investment at WWR . Among those attending the public forums, many were clear about their attitudes toward a proposed campground development at WWR . The most vocal participants were not convinced that it is a necessary approach and leaned toward the less developed recreation access options . Overall, participants wanted recreation access to be limited to day use and even then many wanted only permitted day use access . Day use proponents were primarily interested in hiking though horseback riding and mountain biking were among the other potential day use activities mentioned . While a proportion of forum participants did see the value in adding camping facilities in most cases the less developed options including primitive and rustic camping were preferred . Primary concerns included environmental preservations, noise, and fire threat. Interestingly, the education camp alternative did generate some emotional recognition that providing an education experience in the WWR back country could be a good thing . Some even thought a dedicated resident education camp was a good approach . Accord- ing to the survey responses the camping cabin option was a low priority for forum participants . Educator input provided a counter point to the forum responses . This outside viewpoint of a site with which most were newly aware indicated a wide range of recreation interests from a range of day use to all the mentioned camping alternatives including convenience cabins . As might be expected this group was enthusiastic about a dedicated outdoor education facility at WWR, though cost to attend was mentioned as a limiter . Public meeting attendees are often the most motivated stakeholders and in many cases they attend out of concern about how a project may impact their particular properties and/or interests . In the case of the WWR Public Forums this was the situation for most of those attending . As a result MPRPD decision makers should take care to consider local community input that may be voiced by this set of motivated stakeholders . However, WWR site decisions must also balance local stakeholder concerns with a different set of preferences that may be provided by a wider range of Monterey County community interests including but not limited to educators and potential visitor service providers . The district recently held an “open house” field trip into the WWR property in October and intends to hold another in the spring of 2014. The comments generated from the first open house and subsequent comments from the spring and an on-line questionnaire will continue to inform the district prior to a final decision. That final decision on WWR uses will be tied to the completion of CSP’s general planning process for the Point Lobos Ranch property where WWR public access and parking is essential .

| 61

Socio-PoliticalWhisler Analysis Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

TABLE4.7 FORUM 3-1: FORUM SURVEY SURVEY – USES – USES NOT NOT APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATE AT AT WWR WWR

Comment Convenience camping doesn't seem to be a convenient location without a paved road in No fires isolated hazardous; no dogs important to protect wildlife & have more opportunities for viewing wildlife No hunting Camp fires, vehicles and horses Over use of site with much structural development or grading; natural setting is most important Motorized recreation Anything that increases the risk of fire No activities that involve fire, fire is a huge hazard here; School groups and/or NGO camps with good supervision by responsible adults is ok. Any development is not appropriate Please keep open space - little disturbance as possible Anything that requires construction and maintenance or that leads to destruction of the environment, too much traffic or ruining of the experience of the quiet beauty of this stunning area. Low impact backpacking could work here. Off leash dogs, fire, intensive use, vehicle access, I think camping would be a wonderful opportunity as long as potential impacts are mitigated Overnight camping, people can be careless start fires my house very close. Also the noise. At the cabin I could hear everything. No horseback riding, dogs off leashes, overnight camping, fire pits Any activities that impacts neighbors, causes or facilitates trespass Toro Park type facilities / grass/ lawns playground structures not in keeping with back to basics and nature to enjoy and observe Access too difficult for any camping that requires vehicles (due to creek crossings); camp walk-ins would be restricted for much of the year. Mountain bikes - only on fire roads. No hunting! Yikes! No "convenience camping" - noise, pollution. Keep single track trails for hikers - bikes and horses lead to erosion. There have been rumors of a zipline being installed at this property, as well as Jacks Peak. This idea is totally outside the emphasis on nature and environmentally consciousness of the Monterey Peninsula. Parking and traffic would be a huge problem. Any type of commercial facility or concession would be wrong environmentally and aesthetically. Keep it natural and primitive. No structured recreation facilities, such as a zipline. These kinds of activities upset the natural environment, cause too much traffic & need for parking lots. Any facilities such as camping, picnic or facilities that require routine vehicle access across State Park lands from Hwy 1, primitive dirt road crosses sensitive habitat, rare plants (Hutchison Delphinal) and listed red legged frog. The WWR was acquired primarily to prevent road construction with 18 turnouts across State Parks lands! Mountain biking, horse riding (bikes are destructive to the environment, horses must be transported), hunting (safety concerns would keep me away completely); guided tours & camping (increase traffic & would require road improvements that would be destructive to the natural beauty of the area). Overly restrictive policy! Why not have one local area open for hiking, dogs, biking, camping. Current areas are very restrictive - open one up for greater use. Separate hiking/dog trails from mt. biking trails. Dogs, for-profit, RVs/car camping.

62 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 48

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market andSocio-Political Economic Analysis Analysis

TABLE4.8 FORUM 3-2: FORUM SURVEY SURVEY – SUGGESTIONS – SUGGESTIONS FOR FOR WWR WWR

Comment Overnight camping for youth organizations with partnering organizations; primitive hike-in only camping by permit; open trail access for hiking, link trails to other systems in area if possible Hiking and maybe bike access if doesn't create the requirement for road maintenance Consider the aging populati1ons when looking at the use of the ranch; ample parking off of hwy. 1 for day use. Environmental science camp - the "1terrarium" -- not only youth - adult and family Build a bikepath 1. Should do final planning effort in concert w/ state parks planning for adjacent lands through which access would be provided to WWR parcel. 2. Property should at least be available for public hiking without controlled entry, such as the future access plan for Palo Corona. Accessibility for people with limited mobility (as well as for able bodies) is needed to allow all to enjoy the trails, let convenience campers go to Ft. Ord where fire is not so scary; make day use open like Garland Ranch, keep as open space day use only and let Pt. Lobos Ranch State Park have camping; Monterey County kids do want to go outdoors - at Pt. Lobos we lead walks from Title 1 schools; kids love it and would love more outdoor ed oportuni1ties. Walking and hiking only It is a sacred Indian place (Rumsien). Permit day use and possible open day use and permit backpacking (no open fires, camp stove only) No bikes No dogs (those uses are available at Garland Ranch and Ft. Ord) no music players. I think the most sensitive resources to consider is the steelhead run on San Jose Creek. Other issues to evaluate are: weed introduction (even though there's already a lot here), SOD spread, unintentional fire erosion, impact on wildlife in an area that has been quite isolated for decades, also consider impact on wildlife corridors and the ability for mountain lions and other to move along creek corridors, also native American sites. You've missed the main demographic that will use this land, maybe holding a meeting at Garland Park that is extensively advertised at all other MPRPD parks at least one month prior. Hold it on a Saturday at 10am and advertise that fresh local food will be there donated by Whole Foods or a local farm or market, etc. Day use only Keep it as natural as possible -- this land is sacred to earlier Indian cultures Trail system that can be used & enjoyed by horses, bikers, bird watchers, flower enthusiasts. Useable parking for cars & horse trailers. Share the trails. Connect trails to Palo Corona - & eventually to Pt. Lobos Ranch. Walking, hiking, bird watching, exposure of nature to school children. Open the trail up San Jose Creek to access the backcountry of Palo Corona. Priority should be given to off road parking & allowing public access without permits. Of course providing trails & trail maintenance is important. WWR completes public ownership of San Jose Creek -- it is very scenic area - quiet peaceful with beautiful native plant fields & slopes - build trail all the way up San Jose Creek, retain area for passive quiet enjoyment of birds and nature! Please keep it as natural as possible. Road improvements will destroy native plants and displace birds (due to lack of plants & increased traffic). Overly restrictive policy! Why not have one local area open for hiking, dogs, biking, camping. Current areas are very restrictive - open one up for greater use. Separate hiking/dog trails from mt. biking trails. Provide low or no cost access. If used as a school camp/science camp area still public use too. Would definitely be used if cost was low or free. We have no $ to use for camps. Also possibilities for day camps. Education youth camp. We would love fully funded science camps or partial support (park staff orientations & state transportation). Our trouble usually involves cost for students to attend (camping fees, camp staff fees, and buses).

| 63 Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 49

Socio-Political Analysis

Socio-Political Context

This section reviews the social, political, and economic conditions that apply to the project and the potential impact of the project on these conditions on neighboring communities . We reviewed the region’s social/economic profile and the impact of tourism and recreation on the regional economy. Next we look at the relationship of the WWR site to other public land managers and public entities in the Carmel area . Findings will summarize the anticipated net changes including enhancement, no-change, or challenge for the wider Monterey County community including stakeholders, adjacent land managers, and residents .

Regional Economy Monterey is a popular vacation destination drawing California locals, national and international visitors each year . The seaside community offers a number of recreational activities . The opportunities presented by it’s coastal access include scuba diving, swimming, boating, kayaking and more . The region offers breathtaking views of scenic coastal cliffs and many hiking trails . The diversity of the marine habitat has established Monterey as a center for marine science and education . The Monterey Bay Aquarium is one of the most notable attractions in the area, as is Cannery Row and Fisherman’s Warf, which feature a number of amazing seafood restaurants . The peninsula also hosts popular annual events including the Monterey Jazz Festival and ATT Golf Tournament . The Monterey County region features an economy comprised of several prominent sectors, with total employment in the agri/farm sector at 62,100 and the non-farm sector employing an additional 126,000 . Within non-farm employment, the leisure and hospitality sector represents the third largest contributor to the Monterey Region (Salinas-Monterey Metropolitan Statistical Area – MSA) employing 22,300 persons . See Exhibit 4-9 . This sector is directly affected by resident and non-resident public use of and access to public recreation lands throughout the region . Those recreating on these lands make expenditures from businesses in the leisure and hospitality sector including but not limited to accommodations, eating and drinking establishments, retail trade, and other services . More importantly, the employment data represent direct leisure and hospitality related employment but does not show this sector’s indirect influence on the regional employment as a whole . Substantial employment in other sectors is indirectly impacted by the Monterey region’s large leisure and hospitality sector . Firms that service accommodations, eating and drinking establishments, and retail trade – such as financial, transportation, and personal services – employ many thousands of workers . As show in Exhibit 4-10, regional employment patterns by season further emphasize the impact of leisure and hospitality though these patterns also include the impact of seasonal agri employment . Taken together the region shows noteworthy seasonal variation with employment highest during the late spring thru fall months and lowest employment levels during the mid-winter . Finally, the impact of visitation to the regional economy measured by visitor spending, employment, and tax receipts is significant. See Exhibit 4-9. As part of the recreation product that provides residents with a high quality of life and attracts visitors to the area, the role of the region’s public recreation lands in the regional economy – such as WWR – cannot be overstated

Adjacent Public Lands WWR site is an integral component in the region’s public recreation land base. Specifically, WWR represents a link between Point Lobos State Natural Reserve, Point Lobos Ranch, and Palo Corona Regional Park . The relationship between CSP and MPRPD is further enhanced by a simple fact – WWR is directly accessed via CSP property while visitors to the WWR site will affect CSP management at these portal lands . Work with CSP will determine the nature and magnitude of paring facilities as well as improve-

64 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

As show in Figure 4-2, regional employment patterns by season further emphasize the impact of leisure and hospitality though these patterns also include the impact of seasonal agricultural employment. Taken together the region shows noteworthy seasonal variation with employment highest during the late spring thru fall months and lowest employment levels during the mid- winter. Finally, the impact of visitation to the regional economy measured by visitor spending, employment, and tax receipts is significant. See Table 4-1. As part of the recreation product that provides residents with a high quality of life and attracts visitors to the area, the role of the region’s public recreation lands in the regional economy – such as WWR – cannot be overstated.

FIGURE 4-2: EMPOYMENT BY MONTH SALINAS MONTEREY MSA, 2012

220,000 215,900 213,400 214,400 210,600 211,700 211,600 210,000 204,900

200,000 195,000 191,700 190,000 182,500 179,700 180,000 177,700

170,000

160,000

150,000

Total Employment

Source: California Employment DevelopmentSocio-Political Department, 2013 Analysis

4.9 NON-FARM EMPLOYMENT DISTRIBUTION 4.11TABLE ECONOMIC 4-1: ECONOMIC IMPACTS IMPACTS OF OF TRAVEL TRAVEL SALINAS MONTEREY MSA, JUNE 2013 MONTEREYMONTEREY COUNTY COUNTY 2011 2011

Impact Amount Travel Spending ($Million) 2,147.7 Earnings ($Million) 912.5 Employment (Jobs) 21,420 Local Tax Receipts ($Million) 53.6 State Tax Receipts ($Million) 89.7 Total Tax Receipts ($Million) 143.3 Source: California Travel and Tourism Commission; Dean Runyan Associates, 2013 Source: California Travel and Tourism Commission; Dean Runyan Associates, 2013 Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 53

Source: California Employment Development Department, 2013 4.10 EMPOYMENT BY MONTH SALINAS MONTEREY MSA, 2012

Source: California Employment Development Department, 2013

| 65 Socio-Political Analysis

ments to the WWR access road . CSP is currently conducting a planning process for their properties in the Carmel area – Carmel Area State Parks General Plan . Agency and public comment to date can provide insight into WWR and its role among these other public lands . Agency Input Records of agency input meetings show two critical comment areas pertaining to WWR . CSP staff see MPRPD and its lands as functionally integrated with CSP lands and therefore suggest ongoing cooperation . • Work with Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District to coordinate recreational uses on the park properties; there may be similar uses, management and issues . • Use a landscape approach to planning and maintain continuity between properties . Agency Suggestions CSP staff see facility improvements and development including some level of interpretive facility or education experience for visitors to the Carmel Area State Parks . These comments indicate an opportunity for joint interpretation for: • Consider building an interpretive center at the lagoon . This is where Carmel River interpretive water tours would potentially end . • Restore the Carmel River State Beach – restoring public access, rebuilding parking, and bathroom . • Whisler’s house at Carmel River State Beach has potential as a visitor/interpretive center • The “dairy house” at Point Lobos Ranch property may have potential as an interpretive center . • Structures in the Odello area (at the Palo Corona Regional Park entrance at SR1) may have potential uses for visitor use and interpretation . Stakeholder Input Similar meetings among stakeholders* provided insight into needs at Carmel area parks . Stakeholder comments reflected discussion about WWR were are focused on: 1) additional camping facilities 2) education and interpretive programs including work with local education districts and a science camp, 3) interconnected facilities such as trail systems, and 4) environmentally sustainable recreation . Stakeholder Suggestions • Need a group camping site – very basic cabins with mess hall; potential uses include family reunions and non-profit groups (like Mendocino Woodlands). • Hudson House – utilize for education, interpretation . • Barns on A .M . Allen Ranch (Point Lobos Ranch property) could be used for education, interpretation . • Interconnected trails . • In depth eco-tourism . • Recreation (low impact) – hiking, biking, connectivity . • Use Pt . Lobos Ranch for low impact recreation . • Provide eco- tourism activities . • Tie in with existing programs like Carmel Unified School District. • Provide interpretive programs around geology, native peoples, and plants . • More interpretive events – San Jose Creek is a potential location .

66 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Socio-Political Analysis

• Native American Demonstration village . • More interpretive opportunities – provide docent-led tours at Carmel River State Beach . • Odello – provide more access for education . • Science camp (beyond Camp SEA Lab) . • More outreach to urban youth . • Education-based interpretation, institutes, science camps, kids camps . • Maintain existing programs . • Facilities to support programs – amphitheater, yurts, serve groups as big as 100-150 . Finally, the planning process for the Carmel Area State Parks General Plan provided an opportunity for interested persons to complete an online public opinion survey . The number of respondents was modest (N=24) and so did not provide a statistically valid representation of the recreating public, however, the results do provide qualitative insight into area parks by those most motivated by their interest in area park lands . See Exhibits 4 1. 2 and 4 1. 3 . These results reflect the stakeholder and agency comments above with opportunities for education and interpretation in need of improvement in the Carmel area . Also note that restroom were mentioned need- ing improvement the most and this is typical of public parks today – users increasingly want cleaner restroom facilities with more amenities . Any camping development at WWR should ensure that restroom facilities are of a very high quality . In addition, parking is mentioned, another improvement that is typically mentioned when reviewing public recreation facility needs . Finally, those participating in the survey rated a list of activities and facilities that they felt were in undersupply in the immediate Carmel area; trail activities, mountain biking, and guided walks or hikes . In addition, the respondents indicated that the Carmel area needed additional overnight camping opportunities . Interestingly, a science camp facility was mentioned in the Camel Area Parks General Plan process as well – both in the stakeholder meetings and on this brief survey .

Public Input Several issues reviewed in the public engagement warrant special mention here . These issues include important user groups, contacted educators, environmental advocates, and community residents most adjacent to the WWR property . In the context of socio-political considerations the following outline how use at WWR may impact the local community: • Recreation users . User groups including mountain biking groups, equestrian advocates, and day use hikers are interested in obtaining access to the WWR lands . Note that WWR will be a non-motorized site with associated user interaction issues likely to be modest with most users accessing WWR for hiking, mountain biking, or by horse . • Educators . Regardless of day use and camping recreation options implemented at WWR, educator comments about the potential to access WWR as an outdoor education venue were unanimously enthusiastic • Environmental advocates . Environmental advocates are supportive of the land acquisition yet caution- ing about environmental sustainability particularly as it relates to public access . • As with any new land use adjacent to a current resident, these community members voiced concern about impacts to their private property and lifestyles, with fire threat the most critical issue.

| 67 Socio-Political Analysis

Socio-Political Impact The following outlines the socio-political effects of camping at WWR for Monterrey County economy, recreation access, environmental protection and conservations, work with other public land managers, and community residents . For each we will describe whether camping at WWR will provide a net enhancement, a no-change condition, or a challenge for policy makers and the community at large . • Regional economy. Net enhancement finding for the regional economy which relies to a significant -ex tent on the recreation and tourism sector . This is especially pertinent to the immediate Carmel area since camping opportunities are limited in this area . As indicated in the market demand assessment, WWR would represent one of the few camping opportunities between camping facilities in the Big Sur are and communities father to the north in the immediate Monterey area . Since camping at WWR will add over- nights stays, associated visitor expenditures will also benefit local businesses. • Recreation Access . Net enhancement for recreation access . The site provides an additional alternative for non-motorized recreation access in the region . In addition to the camping opportunities which are the focus of this report, the WWR site also provides additional day use opportunities for a range of recreation stakeholders and user groups among community residents as well as visiting recreation users . • Environment and conservation . Net enhancement for community conservation and environmental protection . Without acquisition as public access open space the site would have been available for residential property development . Project history also indicates that WWR provides a critical link between existing public space land holdings . Assessed camping options allow community residents and non-local recreation users the opportunity to gain appreciation for the upland ecosystem through longer stays in this back country area . However, note that some in the environmental community may see camping, depending on the level of development, as a challenge condition . Since we anticipate that MPRPD will continue to provide interpretive and education opportunities, any extended stay opportunity will expand user understanding of the fragile upland environment . In addition, interest by organizations such as the Point Lobos Foundation indicates that there is external support to assist MPRPD and CSP enhance environmental sustainability and recreation use .

4.12 PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS RATINGS 4.13 RECREATION OPPORTUNTIES MISSING IN CARMEL AREA STATE PARK THE CARMEL AREACARMEL AREA STATE GENERAL PLAN SURVEY, 2013 PARK GENERAL PLAN SURVEY, 2013

Source: California State Parks, 2013 Source: California State Parks, 2013

68 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Socio-Political Analysis

Since we anticipate that MPRPD will continue to provide interpretive and education opportunities, any extended stay opportunity will expand user understanding of the fragile upland environment . In addition, interest by organizations such as the Point Lobos Foundation indicates that there is external support to assist MPRPD and CSP enhance environmental sustainability and recreation use . • Education. According to contacted regional educators, Monterey County is in need of additional outdoor education opportunities . Whether WWR is developed as purpose built outdoor education destination or as a de facto overnight outdoor education facilities via simple camping options, WWR will provide a net enhancement to the resources educators can use for outdoor science and environmental education programming . Note that interviews with educators in the immediate Carmel area yielded enthusiastic response . • Cooperative Public Lands Management . As outlined in this chapter the WWR property and its position as a link to existing public lands as well as recreation access to the site directly enhances/requires ongoing communication between the MPRPD and CSP . Cooperation between these land managers per public access recreation policy will be necessary and further recreation user perception of seamless recreation opportunities on Monterey region public lands . For this category WWR provides a net enhancement . • Adjacent residents. WWR is a challenge condition for the few adjacent residential neighbors . As reported, adjacent residents were very vocal about their concerns for recreation management at WWR . Overnight camping was especially worrisome for these stakeholders, with fire hazard the stated issue. In addition, some residents reported potential noise impacts– with noise traveling from the WWR site up and across the San Jose Creek canyon to private property located along the upper ridges . Note that the few homeowner comments were focused on recreation use, especially camping, and no discussion addressed impacts from the alternative; additional residential development on the WWR . Depend- ing on the nature and magnitude of that residential development we anticipate that some of these same concerns may have been voiced for a private development option . Nevertheless, MPRPD will need to consider impacts to adjacent residents when drafting and implementing recreation access programs .

| 69

5 Feasibility Recommendations

Recreational Use Spectrum • Limited Access Day Use • Open Access Day Use • Primitive Camping • Rustic Camping with Limited Services • Convenience Camping • Environmental/Youth Education Camp Financial Analysis • Assumptions • Estimated Costs • Estimated Revenues • Financial Analysis Summary Cost Estimates • Day Use Only • Day Use and Overnight Accommodations Next Steps

| 71 Feasibility Recommendations

Recreational Use Spectrum

The following provides a summary of what is allowed for each recreational use scenario analyzed along with concep- tual site plans and images of what these uses may look like once constructed . Limited Access Day Use In this recreational scenario, access to WWR would be limited to a permit system or supervised visits led by docents or MPRPD staff . The format of this access could support educational group programs such as “Let’s Go Outdoors” and others . A permit would be required to access the site . The current situation for the northern 600-acres of Palo Co- rona Regional Park most closely reflects this scenario .

72 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Feasibility Recommendations

Open Access Day Use In this recreational scenario, access to the Whisler property would be during the day, and although a permit may be required, the experience of the site would be less supervised . This would still allow for guided tours, but would increase the number of visitors able to access the park . Anticipated visitor activities include hiking, jogging/running, mountain biking, picnicking, photography and more .

| 73 Feasibility Recommendations

Primitive Camping This is the first recreational scenario that moves beyond day use and accom- modates overnight visitors in the park . Allowing for this extended time within the park will require ranger patrol and presence . This type of camping is minimal- istic in terms of the amenities provided . There will be no potable water or developed tent pads provided and no open fires allowed.

74 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Feasibility Recommendations

Rustic Camping with Limited Services This recreational use allows for more defined camping areas that include developed tent pads, picnic tables, and contained fire pits. A central restroom would be provided that features flush toilets and access to potable water . The closest example of this scenario would be the Los Padres National Forest Botcher’s Gap campsites .

| 75 Feasibility Recommendations

Convenience Camping This scenario introduces semi-permanent pre-fabricated cabins, yurts and or canvas tent cabins to the site . While this is option is the most impactful on the site in terms increased structure, it extends the camping season to year-round and encourages overnight use by an expanded constituency of park visitors . They are also more comfortable and frequently preferred by the elderly and families with young children . In addition to the individual structures, this scenario offers showers, flush toilets, and access to potable water. BBQ and pit fires are allowed .

76 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Feasibility Recommendations

Environmental/Youth Education Camp This option is designed to accommodate a residential science school that could be used by school groups, afterschool groups, leadership programs and more . The natural resources found within Whisler Wilson Ranch provide an ideal platform on which to teach environmental studies and sciences .

| 77 Feasibility Recommendations

78 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Feasibility Recommendations

Financial Analysis The following financial assessment provides an assessment for the financial feasibility of the range of proposed camping alternatives . A feasible or not feasible assessment is provided – including identifying proceed-with-caution qualifiers. Note that this is not a detailed benefit/cost analysis which may be part of formal master planning process, and which would investigate more detailed financial pro forma including future discount analysis to determine present value of future costs . In addition, this analysis focuses on operations and maintenance and does not include an economic break even analysis for initial capital investment. Finally, the financial analysis provided in this chapter is a Concept Pro Forma to be used a feasibility assessment tool for decision makers – any adjustments to assumptions and utilized fee and occupancy structure can significantly alter the resultant findings. At this stage in the analysis, we focus on camping uses at WWR that range from primitive tent camping to a permanently developed environmental and outdoor science education facility . Cost calculations are based on averages derived from raw data and qualitative estimates provided by current campground providers and facility operators, with the providers assured of individual operation profit and loss confiden- tiality . Cost information is also based on MPRPD costs at existing sites . Revenue projections are based on reviewing a range of per site fees, number of camping sites provided, and utilization rates (annual occupancy or days per year of use) . Finally for purposes of discussion we will review the camping options as follows: 1) primitive and rustic; 2) convenience cabins; and 3) education camp .

Assumptions Determining feasibility for a yet to be developed new site requires that we review a series of general operational assumptions that may be applied to all reviewed camping alternatives . Road access . The analysis assumes that access road development will be adequate to provide for user shuttle services, park service vehicles, and security/emergency vehicles . Access road will allow concur- rent walk-in and bike-in use, but will not permit recreation user access directly to camping facilities . Amenities. Amenities will be developed according to the highest standards for each alternative with more developed options such as cabins providing a restroom shower building . Camp host . To limit on-site staff costs we assume the MPRPD will provide a camp host program which typically provides a free seasonal camp site with the host providing supervision of the site and contact- ing MPRPD when District staff or security/emergency services are required . This may include the option to pay a camp host to provide daily restroom and campsite clean-up services . Reservations and use permits . MPRPD will provide a method to take reservations either directly via the district office, through an online system such a Reserve America (used by CSP), or other effective method . Reservation system costs are not included . Activities . The site will provide an array of recreation activities which primarily include a developed trails system with interpretive features as well as opportunities for users to participate in docent led interpretive hikes . Occupancy will reflect regional patterns with summer the primary use season. This pattern should reflect peak occupancy during holidays and weekends, up to 50% summer weekday occupancy and low occupancy during the shoulder seasons .

| 79

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

. Days of use. Tent camp sites typically range from an annualized low of 15% to an average of 22%, extended activity into the shoulder months (Spring and Fall) is 33%.

As indicated in Table 5-1, overall estimated operating costs for the primitive alternative is $9,775, with the somewhat more developed rustic option at $15,075. The rustic option reflects the additional cost of a PTE equivalent for the duration of the season. Without this exception Feasibilityprimary costs Recommendations are utilities, vehicle operations.

TABLE 5-1: ESTIMATED COSTS WWR PRIMITIVE AND RUSTIC 5.1 ESTIMATED COSTS WWR PRIMITIVE AND RUSTIC

UNIT EXPENSE CATEGORY PRICE UNIT No. 3) Primitive 4) Rustic 1 Facilities 1a Supplies/Replace

1b Camp sites $500 ALL 1 $500 $500 1c Restroom/showers $750 ALL 1 $750 $750 1d Accessories (tables, chairs, bunks) $200 ALL 1 $200 $200 SUBTOTAL $1,450 $1,450 2 Staff Operating days per year** 80 80

Operating Hours** 24 DAY 1,920 1,920

2a Camp Host/Caretaker $16,000 EA 1 N/a N/a 2b PTE (@4 hour/day) $15/hr EA 1 N/a $4,800 2c Total Seasonal Wages N/a $4,800 Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis SUBTOTAL $0 $4,800 3 Other Costs 3a Liability Insurance*** $2,000 YR 1 N/a N/a Even thoughUtilities these scenarios represent simple tent camping, annual occupancies must

3bbe adequate Waste robust Pump to generate net income.$3,000 YR 1 $3,000 $3,000 3c Communications (cell/web) $750 YR 1 N/a N/a . 3dIncreasing Propane the number of units increases gross$500 revenues. YR If the MPRPD1 can $500limit $500 3eassociated Electric maintenance costs for a higher number$500 of unitsYR , the resulting1 revenues$500 can $1,000 3fincrease Waterrapidly testing as the operation grows. Note$325 that thereYR will likely be1 some marginal$325 $325 3g Trash pickup removal $2,000 YR 1 $2,000 $2,000 increase in maintenance cost – some operators estimate a $2-5 per unit per day 3h Marketing $1,000 YR 1 $1,000 $1,000 additionalVehicle/transport cost. costs

3 i Fuel & maintenance $1,000 YR 1 $1,000 $1,000 . 3jThe rustic Insurance option , because it offers additional $1,000 camp groundYR amenities1 , can generateN/a N/a higher per day fees and higher gross revenues. There will beSUBTOTAL additional costs$8,325 for the $8,825 expanded amenities but per site maintenance – to be covered by camp host staff and a OPERATION EXPENSES TOTAL $9,775 $15,075 PTE seasonal support staff – should be modest. Source: ChuckSource: Nozicka Chuck NozickaConsulting Consulting

TABLE 5-2: ESTIMATED REVENUES** WWR PRIMITIVE AND RUSTIC CAMPING Estimated Revenues5.2 ESTIMATED COSTS WWR PRIMITIVE AND RUSTIC Revenue projections for theGross primitive andNet rustic alternativesGross are calculatedNet using Gross per unit feesNet foundUnit* at Feeother Daysregional facilitiesRev and applyingRev Days a rangeRev of annualizedRev occupancies Days toRev re ach daysRev of use per year. Gross revenues are generatedPRIMITIVE by CAMP number of sites per unit fees and number of day used per year.15% See Table 5-2. Accordingly 22% the following findings are33% notable: 12 $12 55 $8,000 ($2,000) 80 $11,500 $1,500 120 $17,300 $7,300 . 24 At$12 lower use55 both$15, th800e primitive $5,800 alt ernative80 and$23, the000 rustic $13, alternative000 120 yield$34, marginal700 $24, net700 35 revenues$12 55indicating $23, 000that MPRPD$13,000 would 80 need $33,7to generate00 $23,7 an 00active 120 ongoing $50,600 user $40,base600. RUSTIC CAMP 15% 22% 33% Chuck 12 Nozicka$35 Consulting,55 $23 Tourism,000 and$8, 000Recreation 80 Planning$33,700 $18,7 00 120 $50, 600 $35, 61600 24 $35 55 $46,000 $31,000 80 $67,400 $52,400 120 $69,400 $54,400 35 $35 55 $67,000 $52,000 80 $98,400 $83,400 120 $147,500 $132,500 Source:Source: Chuck C Nozickahuck Nozicka Consulting Consulting; *Unit = Revenue by Vehicle (per site per party); ** Rounded

80 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 62

Feasibility Recommendations

Primitive and Rustic Camping Primitive and rustic camping represents the least intensive onsite development and associated recreation user amenities . These alternatives are both primarily primitive camping facilities with the rustic alternative providing additional site development (tent pad,, non-potable water, and fire pit). Several pertinent assumptions are included in this analysis: • MPRPD will operate these two alternatives • MPRPD staffing, including trails and other maintenance as well as ranger patrols, will be conducted with existing staff so there are few additional staffing costs over current MPRPD operations. • On-site supervision and ongoing maintenance will be conducted by a camp host who will be provided with a seasonal camp site including electric utility hookup (as needed) and for no salary . This is an entirely volunteer position . Estimated Costs Operational costs for the primitive and rustic alternatives are calculated using estimates provided by comparable facilities . We use a single calculated cost as an average . Note that some marginal costs may be slightly higher or lower depending on site utilization but the variation is not assumed to exceed a few percentage points . Cost estimates and include the following categories . • Supplies and replacement . This includes supplies such as toilet paper cleaning supplies and replacing broken fixtures. • Staff . Includes camp hosts, rangers, and maintenance tasks . For the rustic option we have include one part time equivalent (PTE) at 4 hours per day for the duration of the season, this position will relive camp hosts and conduct the additional maintenance for the restroom shower building . • Camp Host costs . These include propane/electric, , required water testing, provided cell service and web connectivity . Trash removal is estimated with a consideration to the additional cost to access the site via a limited access road . We have including a very modest amount of marketing cost for aug- menting the existing MPRPD web site and some limited regional public relations coverage . • Days of use . Tent camp sites typically range from an annualized low of 15% to an average of 22%, extended activity into the shoulder months (Spring and Fall) is 33% . As indicated in Exhibit 5-1, overall estimated operating costs for the primitive alternative is $9,775, with the somewhat more developed rustic option at $15,075. The rustic option reflects the additional cost of a part- time equivalent (PTE) for the duration of the season . Without this exception primary costs are host utilities and vehicle operations . Estimated Revenues Revenue projections for the primitive and rustic alternatives are calculated using per unit fees found at other regional facilities and applying a range of annualized occupancies to reach days of use per year . Gross revenues are generated by number of sites per unit fees and number of day used per year . See Exhibit 5-2 . Accordingly the following findings are notable: • At lower use both the primitive alternative and the rustic alternative yield marginal net revenues indicating that MPRPD would need to generate an active ongoing user base . Even though these scenarios represent simple tent camping, annual occupancies must be adequate robust to generate net income . • Increasing the number of units increases gross revenues . If the MPRPD can limit associated maintenance costs for a higher number of units, the resulting revenues can increase rapidly as the operation grows . Note that there will likely be some marginal increase in maintenance cost – some operators estimate a $2-5 per unit per day additional cost . • The rustic option, because it offers additional camp ground amenities, can generate higher per day fees and higher gross revenues . There will be additional costs for the expanded amenities but per site maintenance – to be covered by camp host staff and a PTE seasonal support staff – should be modest .

| 81

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

. Staff. In this scenario camp hosts receive season salary and benefits as well as support from a PTE staff person.

. Other costs. Marketing costs are higher for this option since maximizing occupancy is a critical consideration for private sector concession operators. In addition, ongoing marketing is part of the concession operation including website and published materials.

As indicated in Table 5-3, overall estimated operating costs for the convenience camping alternative is $45,285. This reflects the additional cost of a seasonal salaried camp host limited seasonal benefits and the PTE equivalent for the duration of the season. With this exception Feasibilityprimary costs Recommendations are utilities, vehicle operations. Note that an extended season and increased volume increases waste pumping and processing as well as trash pickup costs.

TABLE 5-3: ESTIMATED COSTS WWR CONVENIENCE CABINS 5.3 ESTIMATED COSTS WWR CONVENIENCE CABINS UNIT EXPENSE CATEGORY PRICE UNIT No. 5) Cabins 1 Facilities WhislerSupplies/Replace Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

1a Camp sites $750 ALL 1 $750 Restroom/showers $750 ALL 1 $750

Estimated1d RevenuesAccessories (tables, chairs, bunks) $750 ALL 1 $750 Revenue projections for the cabin camping alternative is calculated usingSUBTOTAL per unit fees$2,250 found at other regional2 facilitiesStaff and applying an range of annualized occupancies to reach days of use per year. Note that the average fee may increase with additional amenities that some cabin Operating days per year** 146

facility operators including in-cabin propane heaters and/or linen services such as bedding and Operating Hours** DAY 3,504 towels. For our purposes we are looking at rustic structure24 with no additional amenities other than bunk2a frames,Camp tables, Host/Caretaker chairs and fire rings. See $16,000 table 5-4. AcEAcordingly the 1 following$16,000 findings 2binclude :PTE (@4 hour/day) $15/hr EA 1 $8,760 2e Total Seasonal Wages $20,380

. At2f lower Benefitsuse and numbers of units this option7 .50%can be a marginalEA operation. 1 In$1, fact,200 one interviewed concessionaire indicated that a minimum of 10 cabins should be considered; SUBTOTAL $25,960 another suggested that 30 cabins with high quality amenities would make the WWR a 3 Other Costs signature overnight facility in the region and may be necessary to attract concession operator3a Liability interest. Insurance*** $2,000 YR 1 $2,000 Utilities

Waste Pump $4,500 YR 1 $4,500 . Given the potentially extended season and accompanying annual use revenues rise significantly3c Communications as both numbers (cell/web) of units and occupancy$750 increase.YR 1 $750 3d Propane $500 YR 1 $500 . While3e we haveElectric not considered economic break$500 even the potentialYR for this1 camping$1,000 alternative3f Water indicates testing a reported 5 to 10 year economic$325 breakevenYR for the1 capital$325 investment.3g Trash pickup removal $3,000 YR 1 $3,000 3h Marketing Costs $4,000 YR 1 $4,000 . As noted in the market analysis section, this is an increasingly popular option for Vehicle/transport costs campers and public land managers. Note that for many land managers excess revenue Fuel & maintenance $1,000 YR 1 $1,000 are3k often funneled into a site maintenance account – including concessionaire payment via3m in-kind Insurance services – rather than shifting revenues $1,000 to agencyYR general funds1 with$1,000 this approach ensuring long sustainability of the camping site and facilities.SUBTOTAL Revenues$17,075 accruing to the land manager stay at theOPERATION site. EXPENDITURES TOTAL $45,285 Source: Source:Chuck NozickaChuck Nozicka Consulting Consulting

TABLE 5-4: ESTIMATED REVENUES** Chuck Nozicka Consulting,5.4 ESTIMATED Tourism andREVENUESWWR Recreation CONVENIENCE WWR Planning CONVENIENCE CABINS CABINS 64

Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Unit Fee Days Rev Rev Days Rev Rev Days Rev R ev 25% 40% 60%

6 $60 91 $32,800 ($12,200) 146 $52,600 $7,600 219 $78,800 $33,800 12 $60 91 $65,700 $20,700 146 $105,100 $60,100 219 $157,700 $112,700 24 $60 91 $131,400 $86,400 146 $210,200 $165,200 219 $315,400 $270,400 Source: Chuck NozickaSource: CConsultinghuck Nozicka Consulting; *Unit = Revenue by Vehicle (per site per party); ** Rounded

82 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 65

Feasibility Recommendations

Convenience Cabin Camping The convenience cabin camping option represents a step-up from the simple tent camping alternatives including a larger capital investment by MPRPD . As such, this alternative may require additional marketing and site management expertise . Accordingly, we assume a concession agreement would be executed via proposal process . Per this assumption we have developed estimated costs via conversations and data collected form private sector campground operators that service public land managers . Pertinent assumptions in this analysis include: • Concessions typically will pay camp hosts to ensure professional on-site supervision and provide either cabin with utilities or a RV hookup with utilities for their convenience . In addition, other staff is made available to relieve camp hosts periodically throughout the day and for a day per week . • On-site supervision and ongoing maintenance will conducted by a camp host who will provided with a seasonal salary; additional periodic facility cleaning and maintenance will be provided by support PTE staff . • A concession agreement will be let for an extended period of time – some in the 10-15 year range to allow for the development of the market for this site . • The access road will allow for frequent shuttles that will bring campers to their sites as well as for staff and emergency trips . A staff vehicle will be available at all times with a parking location on the camp ground . Note that we cannot emphasize enough the limitations presented by the limited access issue; concessionaires remain interested but extremely cautious about operating a site with this limitation . • We assume MPRPD and/or CSP rangers will provide site supervision and security . We also assume that rangers will be readily available for emergency calls and other associated on-site conflicts. • Days of use . Reported convenience camping occupancies are substantially higher than those for tent camping and often extend into the shoulder seasons . Estimated Costs Operational costs for the cabin camping alternative are calculated using estimates provided by comparable facilities wither via expense statements or qualitative estimates . As with the tent camping options we apply a single cost calculation as an average . Note that some marginal cost may be slightly higher or lower depending on site utilization but the variation is not assumed to exceed several percentage points . Cost estimates and include the following categories . • Supplies and replacement . This includes supplies such as toilet paper, cleaning supplies, and replacing broken fixtures. Increased supply and replacement costs reflect additional amenities such as bunk framing, tables, and other conveniences that may be included in a rustic cabin facility . • Staff. In this scenario camp hosts receive season salary and benefits as well as support from a PTE staff person . • Other costs . Marketing costs are higher for this option since maximizing occupancy is a critical consideration for private sector concession operators . In addition, ongoing marketing is part of the concession operation including website and published materials . As indicated in Exhibit 5-3, overall estimated operating costs for the convenience camping alternative is $45,285. This reflects the additional cost of a seasonal salaried camp host limited seasonal benefits and the PTE equivalent for the duration of the season . With this exception primary costs are utilities, vehicle operations . Note that an extended season and increased volume increases waste pumping and processing as well as trash pickup costs . Estimated Revenues Revenue projections for the cabin camping alternative is calculated using per unit fees found at other regional facilities and applying an range of annualized occupancies to reach days of use per year . Note that the average fee may increase with additional amenities that some cabin facility operators including in-cab-

| 83

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis Feasibility Recommendations

TABLE 5-5: ESTIMATED COSTS WWR EDUCATION CAMP/SCHOOL 5.5 ESTIMATED COSTS WWR EDUCATION CAMP UNIT 6) Educ. EXPENSE CATEGORY UNIT No. PRICE Camp 1 Facilities Supply/replace/maintenance services

1a Lodging, kitchen, meeting halls $15,000 ALL 1 $15,000 1b Restroom/showers $10,000 ALL 1 $10,000 1c Linens towel $1,000 ALL 1 $1,000 1d Accessories (tables, chairs, bunks) $1,500 ALL 1 $1,500 1e Appliances $1,000 ALL 1 $1,000 1f Misc . tools $500 ALL 1 $500 1g Recreation equipment $1,500 ALL 1 $1,500 SUBTOTAL $30,500 Whisler2 WilsonStaff Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis Operating days per year** 146

Operating Hours** DAY 24 3,504 Estimated 2aRevenues Director, cook, housekeeping $200,000 EA 1 $200,000 Revenue projections2b Seasonfor the staff education (camp staff camphourly) are based $ 25/hr on averageEA per day per 4 student/user$116,800 Administration, professional fees at comparable2c camps. These fees may be higher $ 60,000 or lower dependingEA on 1 amenities$60,000 or special services that servicesmay be offered (meals, tutors, outdoor activity lessons, etc.) and increased 2d Security and safety $ 30,000 EA 1 $30,000 occupancies to reach days of use per year. As shown in Table 5-6, the following findings Total Wages $406,800 include: 2e Benefits 7 .50% EA 1 $30,510

SUBTOTAL $437,310 . At lower use and numbers of attendees this option can be a very costly alternative to 3 Other Costs maintain. Loses without high use can be significant and as a result comparable facilities 3a Liability Insurance*** $30,000 YR 1 $20,000 make a special effort to keep these operations active including the aforementioned 3b Food and beverage $175,000 YR 1 $175,000 additional uses such as meetings, retreats, and weddings. Utilities

3c Waste Pump (main septic) $9,000 YR 1 $9,000 . These revenue numbers do not include grants and other fund-raising. Typically grant 3d Communications (cell(s)/web) $2,400 YR 1 $2,400 funds and bequests from interested community members are required to make these 3e Propane $3,600 YR 1 $3,600 facilities3f economically Electric viable. In addition, ongoing$2,000 fund raisingYR is also1 necessary.$2,000 3g Water testing $2,500 YR 1 $2,500 . This projection3h Wastewater therefore testing does reporting not include a sinking$2,500 fund orYR trust which1 would$2,500 be a very crucial3i hedge against Trash pickup market removal fluctuations such$6,000 as the recentYR recessionary1 period.$6,000 3j Marketing Costs $6,000 YR 1 $6,000 . Given the potentiallyVehicle/transport extended costs season and accompanying annual use revenue rise

significantly3k as Fuel both & maintenance numbers of units and occupancy$4,000 increases.YR 1 $1,000 3l Electric utility cart $1,200 YR 1 $1,000 . Per person3m fees Insurance along with high rates of facility $ 2,000 utilization YRensure the best1 opportunity$2,000 for positive economic operations and at the highest levels provideSUBTOTAL an opportunity $233,000 for economic break even for the initial significantOPERATION capital EXPENDITURES costs. TOTAL $700,810 Source:Source: Chuck Chuck Nozicka Nozicka Consulting Consulting TABLE 5-6: ESTIMATED REVENUES** WWR EDUCATION CAMP SCHOOL 5.6 ESTIMATED REVENUES WWR EDUCATION CAMP Gross Net Gross Net Gross Net Days Fee* Rev Rev Days Fee Rev Rev Days Fee Rev Rev 22% 40% 60% 80.3 Chuck $50 Nozicka$321,200 Consulting, ($378,800) Tourism and146 Recreation $50 Planning$584,000 ($116,000) 219 $50 $876,000 67 $176,000 80.3 $60 $385,400 ($314,600) 146 $60 $700,800 $800 219 $60 $1,051,000 $351,200 80.3 $75 $481,800 ($218,200) 146 $75 $876,000 $176,000 219 $75 $1,314,000 $614,000 Source: Chuck Source:Nozicka Chuck Consulting Nozicka Consulting; *Fee per person; ** Rounded

84 | SUMMARY WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Revenue projections for all alternatives are shown in Table 5-7. For presentation purposes we have coded the outcomes with green for positive financial feasibility; yellow for proceed-with- caution; and red or net loss for not feasible – thus indicating the risk vs. reward factor for each scenario. Within each category we see that those facilities operated with the highest rates of utilization and at the highest fees show potential positive revenues. For alternatives with either very low utilization or low fees such as primitive camping or high levels of operating expenses such as education camps financial risk is higher. In summary each alternative can be revenue positive – and therefore may be financially feasible – but certain conditions must be met.

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 68

Feasibility Recommendations

in propane heaters and/or linen services such as bedding and towels . For our purposes we are looking at rustic structure with no additional amenities other than bunk frames, tables, chairs and fire rings. See Exhibit 5-4. Accordingly the following findings include: • At lower use and numbers of units this option can be a marginal operation . In fact, one interviewed concessionaire indicated that a minimum of 10 cabins should be considered; another suggested that 30 cabins with high quality amenities would make the WWR a signature overnight facility in the region and may be necessary to attract concession operator interest . • Given the potentially extended season and accompanying annual use revenues rise significantly as both numbers of units and occupancy increase . • While we have not considered economic break even the potential for this camping alternative indicates a reported 5 to 10 year economic breakeven for the capital investment . • As noted in the market analysis section, this is an increasingly popular option for campers and public land managers . Note that for many land managers excess revenue are often funneled into a site maintenance account – including concessionaire payment via in-kind services – rather than shifting revenues to agency general funds with this approach ensuring long sustainability of the camping site and facilities . Revenues accruing to the land manager stay at the site .

Resident Education Camp/School The resident purpose-built outdoor and science education camp alterative represents a significant investment and associated operational considerations . This is an option is not to be considered lightly . These facilities typically require extensive capital investment and as per the comparable facility review are comprised of several purpose-built structures as well as necessitating year round permanent staffing. Obser- vations pertinent to the financial analysis: • Competing facilities feature an array of built structures including bunk houses for student lodging, separate teacher quarters, meeting halls and classrooms, laboratories, outdoor amphitheaters and in some case playing fields and swimming pools. Our calculations assume a basin facility with lodging, bath house/shower facility for each gender, meeting/classrooms, and kitchen and dining hall . • Administration and management would be primarily conducted by a facility Executive Director with support staff . Professional services and some building maintenance may be contracted to outside venders . Some additional administrative costs may accrue to an associated school District or property owner such as MPRPD . Estimated Costs Operational costs for the education camp alternative are calculated using estimates provided by comparable facilities wither via expense statements or qualitative estimates. In addition we apply findings from similar studies conducted for a similar proposed outdoor education facility proposed in Napa County . Note that these costs do not reflect additional expenses that may accrue to other non-education uses such as weddings, retreats, or adult workshops . Finally, given the high capital investment costs and ongoing administration and facility maintenance cost, note that site utilization is critical for a successful outdoor and science education facility and thus other non-education activities would be expected . See Exhibit 5-5 . Other cost considerations outlined in analysis for this alternative include: • Building maintenance services are listed with supplies since these tasks are typically contracted services . In addition, supplies assume heavy usage typical of middle school children and year-long utilization. In addition we have included a ball park figure for replacing recreation equipment which in this case may include ocean-oriented gear such as kayaks, wet suits and/or mountain bikes and hiking or equestrian equipment . • Costs do not include laboratory supplies and other associated education materials .

| 85 Feasibility Recommendations

• Staffing includes a full time Executive Director and support staff, we have assumed 4 seasonal staff counselors; however, note that camp groups typically include parent supervisors as well as teachers . We have not included a Development Director cost – fund-raising is a critical activity for these facilities but for the purposes of this assessment we assume the Executive Director would fill that role. • Other costs include very high liability insurance coverage due to the number of children who attend these facilities and the risky nature of outdoor activities. Significant concentrated use also increases all other miscellaneous costs . Not that given the target audience extensive annual water and wastewater treatment testing may be required . Estimated Revenues Revenue projections for the education camp are based on average per day per student/user fees at comparable camps . These fees may be higher or lower depending on amenities or special services that may be offered (meals, tutors, outdoor activity lessons, etc ). and increased occupancies to reach days of use per year. As shown in Exhibit 5-6, the following findings include: • At lower use and numbers of attendees this option can be a very costly alternative to maintain . Loses without high use can be significant and as a result comparable facilities make a special effort to keep these operations active including the aforementioned additional uses such as meetings, retreats, and weddings . • These revenue numbers do not include grants and other fund-raising . Typically grant funds and bequests from interested community members are required to make these facilities economically viable . In addition, ongoing fund raising is also necessary . • This projection therefore does not include a sinking fund or trust which would be a very crucial hedge against market fluctuations such as the recent recessionary period. • Given the potentially extended season and accompanying annual use revenue rise significantly as both numbers of units and occupancy increases . • Per person fees along with high rates of facility utilization ensure the best opportunity for positive economic operations and at the highest levels provide an opportunity for economic break even for the initial significant capital costs.

Summary

Revenue projections for all alternatives are shown in Exhibit 5-7 . For presentation purposes we have coded the outcomes with green for positive financial feasibility; yellow for proceed-with-caution; and red or net loss for not feasible – thus indicating the risk vs . reward factor for each scenario . Within each category we see that those facilities operated with the highest rates of utilization and at the highest fees show potential positive revenues . For alternatives with either very low utilization or low fees such as primitive camping or high levels of operating expenses such as education camps financial risk is higher. In summary each alternative can be revenue positive – and therefore may be financially feasible – but certain conditions must be met . Falling below either annual days of use or fees, or unexpected cost increases can push each camping alternative into a negative revenue situation that would not be sustainable over the long term . Management expertise, marketing, and attractive quality facilities will be necessary for positive financial feasibility.

86 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA

Whisler Wilson Ranch Camping Suitability/Feasibility Report, Market and Economic Analysis

Falling below either annual days of use or fees, or unexpected cost increases can push each camping alternative into a negative revenue situation that would not be sustainable over the long term. Management expertise, marketing, and attractive quality facilities will be necessary for positive financial feasibility. Feasibility Recommendations

TABLE 5-7: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS SUMMARY WWR CAMPING ALTERNATIVES 5.7 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS SUMMARY WWR CAMPING ALTERNATIVES

PRIMITIVE CAMP Units Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev 15% 22% 33% 12 55 $ 12.00 80 $12.00 120 $ 12.00

24 55 $ 12.00 80 $12.00 120 $ 12.00

35 55 $ 12.00 80 $12.00 120 $ 12.00

RUSTIC CAMP Units Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev 15% 22% 33%

12 55 $ 35.00 80 $35.00 120 $ 35.00

24 55 $ 35.00 80 $35.00 120 $ 35.00

35 55 $ 35.00 80 $35.00 120 $ 35.00

CABIN CAMP Units Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev 25% 40% 60%

6 91 $ 60.00 146 $60.00 219 $ 60.00

12 91 $ 60.00 146 $60.00 219 $ 60.00

24 91 $ 60.00 146 $60.00 219 $ 60.00

EDUCATION CAMP PAOT Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev Days/Yr. Fee Rev 22% 40% 60%

80 80.3 $ 50.00 146 $50.00 219 $50.00

80 80.3 $ 60.00 146 $60.00 219 $60.00

80 80.3 $ 75.00 146 $75.00 219 $75.00 Source: Chuck Nozicka Consulting

Profit Break Even +/- $10k Loss

Chuck Nozicka Consulting, Tourism and Recreation Planning 69

| 87 Feasibility Recommendations

Estimated Construction Costs

To understand the total potential costs associated with providing some form of camping at WWR, the cost to improve the property and provide the site furnishing will need to be considered . This information will allow the MPRPD Board to make decisions about whether to move forward with providing public access and overnight accommodations on the WWR property . The following preliminary Opinion of Costs provides a summary of the types of costs associated with constructing improvements on-site and off-site improvements . The estimate has been structured in a way that identifies the level of improvements anticipated to provide day use access . This includes improvements to Highway 1 for access, entrance roads, parking on CSP property, utilities and infrastructure and on site improvements . In order to address the cost for providing overnight facilities, the estimate identifies the cost for each of the proposed camp options from primitive to Education Camp facilities . Note that the utilities and infrastructure costs have been held constant and reflect what will be needed at full build out of camping. Included in the estimate is a contingency and estimated fee for final design and permitting. With this information and the estimated potential revenue provided previously, MPRPD will have enough information to decide how to proceed . The not insignificant cost to construct a viable science camp facility would be the responsibility of MPRPD unless a lease arrangement is secured whereby the facility is owned and operated by a non-profit. There doesn’t appear to be financial resources available from the public educational sector, like the State or County offices of education. Understanding the limited public financing capacity of the district, the real- ity is that any science camp facility would be reliant upon grant funding from public and private sources . Long-term debt financing may be an MPRPD go-it-alone option. Financing this alternative is the greatest limitation/obstacle to its feasibility .

88 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Feasibility Recommendations

Whisler Wilson Ranch

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Feasibility Day Use Only

DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL Notes

Mobilization/Demobilization Mobilization/Demobilization 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Total Mobilization/Demobilization $50,000.00

Off-Site Improvements Includes traffic control, mobilization, clearing etc. Highway 1 Improvements 1.00 LS $500,000.00 $500,000.00 Access Road to Parking 200 LF $50.00 $10,000.00 Decomposed Granite (16 ft wide) Parking Area 13,000 SF $3.00 $39,000.00 60 spaces maximum (gravel) Emergency Access Capability(16 ft wide with turnouts) Access Road to Property 3,500 LF $50.00 $175,000.00

Bridges + Abutments 3 LS $200,000.00 $600,000.00 Emergency Access Capability (16 ft wide x 50 span) Vegetation/ Restoration 25,000 SF $1.50 $37,500.00 Includes Temp irrigation Vehicular Access Gate 1 EA $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Total Off Site Improvements $1,366,500.00

Utilities/ Infrastructure- Day Use Only Electrical/ Telecom Services 1 LS $190,000.00 $190,000.00 Based on full build out Domestic Water 1 LS $285,000.00 $285,000.00 Well- 20,000 gal storage and distribution to vault toilets Septic Tank + Leach fields 1 LS $38,000.00 $38,000.00 40 PAOT Septic Tank 5,000 gal Fire Suppression 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000.00 750 LF 4" Line and 3 Wharf Hydrants Total Utilities/ Infrastructure $543,000.00

Site Improvements- Day Use Only Day Use Trail Construction 0 LF $0.00 $0.00 Assumes work to be done by MPRPD staff Picnic tables 8 EA $600.00 $4,800.00 Wildlife Resistant Trash Enclosures 2 EA $1,400.00 $2,800.00 Water Service Spigot (group area) 1 EA $700.00 $700.00 Group Seating Area 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Primative (logs or similar) Group Fire Pit 1 LS $800.00 $800.00 Vault Toilet (Day Use) 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 (1) Two stall for day use area Pedestal Single Grill 2 EA $430.00 $860.00 One for each site Total General Site $74,960.00

SUB TOTAL $2,034,460.00 20% CONTINGENCY $406,892.00 25% DESIGN / PERMITTING $305,169.00

TOTAL $2,746,521.00

| 89 Feasibility Recommendations

Whisler Wilson Ranch

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Feasibility Day Use and Camping

DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE TOTAL Notes

Mobilization/Demobilization Mobilization/Demobilization 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 Total Mobilization/Demobilization $75,000.00

Off-Site Improvements Highway 1 Improvements 1.00 LS $500,000.00 $500,000.00 Includes traffic control, mobilization, clearing etc. Access Road to Parking 200 LF $50.00 $10,000.00 Decomposed Granite (16 ft wide) Parking Area 13,000 SF $3.00 $39,000.00 60 spaces maximum (gravel) Access Road to Property 3,500 LF $50.00 $175,000.00 Emergency Access Capability(16 ft wide with turnouts) Bridges + Abutments 3 LS $200,000.00 $600,000.00 Emergency Access Capability (16 ft wide x 50 span) Vegetation/ Restoration 25,000 SF $1.50 $37,500.00 Includes Temp irrigation Vehicular Access Gate 1 EA $5,000.00 $5,000.00 Total Off Site Improvements $1,366,500.00

Utilities/ Infrastructure- Overnight Accomodations Electrical/ Telecom Services 1 LS $190,000.00 $190,000.00 Domestic Water 1 LS $285,000.00 $285,000.00 Well- 100,000 gal storage and distribution to buildings Septic Tank + Leach fields 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00 80 PAOT Septic Tank 5,000 gal 750 LF 4" Line and 3 Wharf Hydrants and assumes Fire Suppression 1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00 buildings are sprinkled Total Utilities/ Infrastructure $590,000.00

Site Improvements- Overnight Accomodations Day Use Improvements 1 LS 74,960 $74,960.00 See Day Use Estimate for itemized list Additional Picnic Tables 12 EA $600.00 $7,200.00 Additional Wildlife Resistant Trash Enclosures 6 EA $1,400.00 $8,400.00 Additional Water Service Spigot (group area) 3 EA $700.00 $2,100.00 Approximately 10 Primative Sites and 30 Campground Site Clearance 1 LS $12,000.00 $12,000.00 Sites Vault Toilet (Primative Area) 1 LS $60,000.00 $60,000.00 For primative Camping area Each unit has 3 uni sex stalls and 3 uni sex showers in one Showers/ Restrooms 2 EA $250,000.00 $500,000.00 structure Pedestal Single Grill 20 EA $430.00 $8,600.00 One for each site Cabins 30 EA $40,000.00 $1,200,000.00 Four Person pre cabin Lodge/ Central Building 1 LS $450,000.00 $450,000.00 Dining, office and stoatge space Bunk Cabins 4 EA $180,000.00 $720,000.00 Houses 15 people per cabin Total Alt 1- Cabins and Lodge $1,650,000.00 Total Alt 2- Bunk Cabins and Lodge $1,170,000.00 All Other Overnight Ammenity Total $673,260.00

SUB TOTAL- Alt 1 $4,354,760.00 20% CONTINGENCY $870,952.00 25% DESIGN / PERMITTING $653,214.00

TOTAL - Alt. 1 $5,878,926.00

SUB TOTAL- Alt 2 $3,874,760.00 20% CONTINGENCY $774,952.00 25% DESIGN / PERMITTING $581,214.00

TOTAL - Alt 2 $5,230,926.00

90 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Feasibility Recommendations

Next Steps Implementation/ Permitting: The main issue preventing the public use of WWR currently is the CSP General Plan (GP) update . Since the access road to WWR passes through Point Lobos Ranch State Park, the completion of the GP update will need to be completed before any improvements such as parking, access roads and use by the public can occur . The GP process will include additional public input regarding the use of CSP property and the relationship this will have with WWR . This Feasibility study along with information collected during public outreach will be provided to CSP for use in their outreach requirements . Assuming the final GP update allows for the development of a parking area and entrance road to WWR on CSP property, detailed design for these improvements and others the MPRPD would like to construct on WWR will be required . This will include yet not limited to the following: • Detailed traffic analysis and design for improvements to Highway 1 • Design and permitting of entrance road, parking, bridges and infrastructure improvements • On site test borings for structural stability, ground water depth and available potable water In addition, the Monterey County Resource Management Agency has issued a Combined Development Permit for San Jose Creek Road improvements, including three all-season vehicle bridges that consists of: • A Coastal Development Permit for improvements and modifications to an existing road of approximately 1 .5 miles in length within 100 feet of riparian Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area, including three bridge crossings, six turnouts and grading of approximately 690 cubic yards of fill • A Coastal Development Permit for development on slopes of 30% or more • A Coastal Development Permit for tree removal and development within 750 feet of a known archeo- logical resource . • A permit extension that expires May 25th 2014

Economic Analysis: This study provides a feasible or not feasible market and economic assessment that will allow MPRPD decision makers to either move forward with campground development or to decide against implementing a camping option at WWR . Should the MPRPD move forward with campground development, several next steps are recommended .

| 91 Feasibility Recommendations

Determine a select a preferred camping alternative that may include either a single alternative as described in this report or a blend of the spectrum of development alternatives. This final selected alternative may be described in greater detail with respect to both design and implantation as well as economic detail as part of a site Master Plan . For the preferred development alternative detailed economic analysis may include but is not limited to: • Market penetration assessment to identify approaches that can attain annual use and occupancy goals . • Potential funding sources for capital investment and ongoing dedicated sinking fund for future maintenance and replacement . • Potential operation partners or associated collaborative models for long term management including but not limited to work with existing foundation organization, private concession operator, joint operation agreements with other public land managers, or establishment of a dedicated WWR foundation . • Economic break-even analysis to determine pay-off target years for capital investment that may include necessary seasonal use, occupancy rates, and revenue streams to meet projected targets . • Selected alternative-specific revenue opportunities including but not limited to on-site concession management, unit fees, special permit and group fees, other associated on-site sales and services . • Detailed operation and maintenance costs for selected alternative including materials, repair and replacement, and staffing needs. • Phasing strategies that may allow for short term cost recovery as the site is developed to full build – out for overnight camping and associated day use .

Marketing Plan: As part of the WWR campground master plan we recommend that MPRPD include a detailed marketing plan for the campground business operation . In order to participate successfully in the campground recreation market, this plan will identify standard practices in the regional campground market as well as emerging strategies and practices that may maximize WWR revenues . The plan may include overarching marketing strategies as well as specific advertising, communications, public relations, and sales activities. The plan should also provide a detailed marketing and communication budget necessary for the WWR campground operation to meet financial goals.

View Southeast from highest viewpoint

92 | WHISLER WILSON RANCH CAMPING FEASIBILITY | Monterey, CA Survey Responses

Survey Responses

| 93