charlotte community survey
play

Charlotte Community Survey Council Dinner Briefing April 14, 2014 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Charlotte Community Survey Council Dinner Briefing April 14, 2014 1 Why Survey? To answer 2 questions: How are we doing? How do we know? Based on a simple premise: It is better to know. 2 Outline National Citizen Survey


  1. Charlotte Community Survey Council Dinner Briefing April 14, 2014 1

  2. Why Survey? • To answer 2 questions: – How are we doing? – How do we know? • Based on a simple premise: – It is better to know. 2

  3. Outline • National Citizen Survey • Overview of Survey Results • Benchmarking • “Facets of Community Livability” • Overall Quality of Life • Action Steps 3

  4. National Citizen Survey 4

  5. National Citizen Survey • Administered by the National Research Center, Inc. • Created in 2001 in partnership with ICMA to assess residential satisfaction with community amenities and government service provision • Recent partnership with National League of Cities to provide local governments with a statistically valid sample of what residents thinks about the quality and breadth of services • Provides benchmarking with 378 jurisdictions in 41 states 5

  6. National Citizen Survey City of Charlotte Survey • Random sample of 3,000 households • 400 returned surveys • 14% response rate (+ / - 5% margin of error) • Consistency with other recent City surveys • Did not differentiate services by City / County / Schools for most questions 6

  7. Overview of Survey Results 7

  8. Overall Findings Overall • High Quality of Life Feelings About • People like Charlotte Charlotte • Generally consistent with other cities • Areas for celebration City • Areas for improvement Characteristics • More communication and and Services community engagement • Responses affirm City initiatives underway 8

  9. Overall Feelings about Charlotte Overall Quality of Life Place to retire Cleanliness Overall Appearance Excellent Place to visit Good Fair Poor Place to work Place to raise children Your neighborhood Place to live 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 9

  10. What do people like? Overall Image of Charlotte Natural Environment Built Environment Excellent Ease of Getting Around Good Fair Economic Health Poor Overall Feeling of Safety Sense of Community 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Very Safe Safe-Uptown SW Safe Neither Safe-My Neighborhood SW Unsafe Very Unsafe 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 10

  11. Planting Roots Remain in Charlotte next 5 yrs Very Likely SW Lkely SW Unlikely Very Unlikely Recommend Living in Charlotte 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 11

  12. Services (includes “Don’t Know” responses) Overall Customer Service Overall Quality Fire Garbage Collection Recycling Drinking Water Police Sewer Storm Drainage Traffic Enforcement Animal Control Bus/ Transit Street Repair Code Enforcement Land Use, Planning, Zoning Traffic Signal Timing Street Lighting 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't Know 12

  13. Services (excludes “Don’t Know” responses) Overall Customer Service Overall Quality Fire Garbage Collection Recycling Drinking Water Police Sewer Storm Drainage Traffic Enforcement Animal Control Bus/ Transit Street Repair Code Enforcement Land Use, Planning,… Traffic Signal Timing Street Lighting 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 13 Excellent Good Fair Poor

  14. Government Includes “don’t know” responses Treat People Fairly Value of Services for Taxes Honest Overall Confidence Acting in Best Interest Welcoming Citizen Involvement Overall Direction 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't Know Excludes “don’t know” responses Treat People Fairly Value of Services for Taxes Honest Overall Confidence Acting in Best Interest Welcoming Citizen Involvement Overall Direction 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 14 Excellent Good Fair Poor

  15. Involvement & Communication Read or Watch News Use Charmeck.org Contacted City Use Charlotte.gov Watched Public Meeting Contacted Elected Official Attended Public Meeting 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 15

  16. Familiarity with City Services How familiar are you with: Transportation and Transit Plans Plans for Development and Growth Extremely familiar Economic Development Initiatives Very familiar Somewhat familiar Investments in Infrastructure Not at all familiar Environmental Initiatives Housing & Neighborhood Policies City Budget 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 16

  17. Overall Quality of Government Services Includes “don’t know” responses Federal Government North Carolina Charlotte 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't Know Excludes “don’t know” responses Federal Government North Carolina Charlotte 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 17 Excellent Good Fair Poor

  18. Sustain Our Assets Overall Quality of Life Charlotte as a Place to live 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Excellent Good Fair Poor 18

  19. Benchmark 19

  20. Benchmark Custom Benchmark Comparisons (45 cities with populations 200,000 – 2.5 million) 1 Charlotte received 7 Much Higher Charlotte 123 received 4 ratings Higher Charlotte received 0 Similar ratings Charlotte received ratings Charlotte Lower received ratings Much Lower ratings 20

  21. Benchmark Custom Benchmark Comparison (populations 200,000 – 2.5 million): Much Higher – Higher – Lower – Much Lower Survey Responses Much Higher Higher Lower Much Lower Ease of walking in Work inside boundaries Overall image or N/ A of Charlotte reputation of Charlotte Charlotte Walked or biked instead Overall appearance of Charlotte of driving Stocked supplies in Safety in Charlotte's preparation for an Uptown / commercial emergency area during the day Not experiencing Made Efforts to Conserve Water housing costs stress Economy will have positive impact on income Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Charlotte Volunteered time to some group/ activity in Charlotte 21

  22. Benchmark Cities Benchmark: 45 cities of populations 200,000 – 2.5 million with recent survey results compiled by National Research Center, Inc. Arlington, TX Corpus Christi, Henderson, NV New Orleans, LA San Antonio, TX TX Aurora, CO Denver, CO Honolulu, HI Norfolk, VA San Diego, CA Austin, TX Des Moines, IA Houston, TX North Las Vegas, San Francisco, NV CA Boise, ID Durham, NC Kansas City, MO Oklahoma City, San Jose, CA OK Chandler, AZ El Paso, TX Las Vegas, NV Phoenix, AZ Scottsdale, AZ Charlotte, NC Fayetteville, NC Lincoln, NE Portland, OR Tulsa, OK Chesapeake, VA Fort Worth, TX Madison, WI Reno, NV Virginia Beach, VA Colorado Springs, Fremont, CA Minneapolis, MN Richmond, CA Wichita, KS CO Dallas, TX Gilbert, AZ Modesto, CA Riverside, CA Winston-Salem, NC 22

  23. 8 Facets of Community Livability Built Natural Safety Mobility Environment Environment Recreation Education Community & Economy & Engagement Wellness Enrichment 23

  24. Safety Survey includes questions around:  Feeling of Safety   Police Services   Fire Services   Crime Prevention   Disaster Preparedness  24

  25. Safety Residents Feel Safe Excellent Good Overall Feeling of 64% Feel Safe Fair Safety Poor Don't Know 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 86% Feel Safe in their Neighborhood Neighborhood Very safe Somewhat safe Neither Somewhat unsafe Very unsafe Don't know 82% Feel Safe in Uptown Charlotte Uptown (higher than benchmark) 25 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

  26. Safety Police and Fire Services Receive Favorable Ratings Quality of Fire Services Quality of Police Services Excellent Good Fire Prevention & Education Fair Poor Don't Know Quality of Crime Prevention Animal Control Emergency Preparedness 26 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

  27. Safety Observations • Overall residents feel safe • 94% of respondents say a focus on safety is essential or very important • 81% of respondents and their household members were not a victim of crime • A majority of the residents give Police and Fire services the highest ratings, which is consistent with other surveys and crime assessments • Opportunities exist for residents to learn more about Crime Prevention, Fire Education, and Emergency Preparedness strategies 27

  28. Mobility Survey includes questions around:  Ease of getting places   Availability of paths and walking trails   Traffic flow   Ease of walking and biking   Public transportation   Street repairs & signal timing  28

  29. Mobility Mobility characteristics received mixed ratings; affirm planned City investments Overall ease of getting places you 60% rated favorably usually visit Ease of travel by car Availability of paths and walking trails Excellent lower than benchmark Ease of walking Good Fair Public parking Poor Don't Know Traffic flow on major streets Ease of public transportation Ease of travel by bicycle 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 29

  30. Mobility Mobility services were mostly rated as “Good” or “Fair” Street cleaning Traffic enforcement Street lighting Excellent Good Sidewalk maintenance Fair Poor Traffic signal Don't Know timing Street repair Bus or transit services 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 30

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend