Loading...
Community Preference Survey 2004 Community Preference Survey City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department Final Report Presented by Clearwater Research, Inc. 1845 S. Federal Way Boise, ID 83705 Contact: Gayla Smutny, Ph.D. (208) 376-3376, ext. 426 Fax: (208) 376-2008 E-mail: gsmutny @ cearwater-research.com Date: April 2004 Clearwater Research , Inc . Clearwater i Project: 03-206 AIDS Program Saved: May 7,2004 Document; Final Report(GS) R e s e (j r C h , Inc . Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 4 Background and Study Purpose 4 Scope of Work 4 Method 4 Survey Instrument 4 Sampling 4 Sample Production and Processing 5 Data Collection 5 Response Rates 6 Data Preparation 7 Coding 7 Weighting 7 Data Analysis 8 Findings and Interpretation 9 Demographics 10 Demographics Summary 11 Demographics Used In Subsequent Analysis 11 The Spokane Valley Community 12 Over 8 in 10 Think Spokane Valley is Headed in the Right Direction 12 Demographics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction 12 Economic and Planning Issues of Concern to Respondents 13 City Center 1 Community Identity 14 61% Believe Having a Downtown is Important to the Future of Spokane Valley 14 Demographics and Importance of Having City Center 15 Nearly Three-Quarters Support Spending Public Money to Create a City Center 16 Demographics and Spending Public Money to Create a City Center 16 Over Half Believe University City Area is Best Location for City Center 17 Demographics and Most Ideal Location for City Center 17 Only 26% Believe Spokane Valley Has a Distinct Identity 18 Demographics and Community Identity 18 Descriptions of Spokane Valley's Identity/Uniqueness 19 Majority Believe Having a Community Identity is Important to Future of Spokane Valley 19 Nearly Half Said Community Identity Development Best Accomplished Through Social Changes 20 Demographics and How Best to Develop Community Identity 20 Community Aesthetics 22 Few Dissatisfied with Typical Development Along Major Streets 22 Demographics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets 22 23% Consider Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets a High Priority 23 Demographics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets 23 4 in 10 Consider Making Streets Pedestrian-Friendly a High Priority 24 Demographics and Priority of Making Streets Pedestrian-Friendly 24 Views Regarding Priority of Stronger Sign/Billboard Control Mixed 25 1/3 Had Direct Experience with Spokane Valley Sewer Project 26 Demographics and Reside in Area that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer Project 26 Only 14% Dissatisfied with Reconstructed Streets 27 Nearly Half Support Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential Neighborhoods 28 Public Services 29 85% Rated Police Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent 29 Demographics and Quality of Police Services 29 27%Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Police Services 30 Project: 03-206 AIDS Program Saved: May 7,2004 Clearwater Document: Final Report(GS) R e s e a r c h , Inc . 95% Rated Fire Protection Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent 30 Demographics and Quality of Fire Protection Services 31 62% Would Not Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Fire Protection Services 31 83% Rated Library Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent 32 Demographics and Quality of Library Services 32 42% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Library Services 33 Over Half Rate Street Maintenance as Fair or Poor 34 Nearly 60%Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Street Maintenance 34 Demographics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for Improved Street Maintenance 35 7% Had Interaction with Spokane Valley's Permit Center 35 59% Very Satisfied with Services Received From Permit Center 36 Transportation 37 Vast Majority Commute Less than 30 Minutes One Way 37 Very Few Use Alternative to Driving a Car to Get to Work 37 Over 2/3s Agree that Sprague/Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful Improvement 38 Nearly 1/3 Would Like to See A Portion of Sprague Returned to Two-Way Traffic 39 Demographics and Returning Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic 39 Sprague/Appleway Couplet Has Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic 40 Nearly Half Strongly Support Appleway Being Extended East 40 35% Oppose Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road 41 Demographics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen Road 41 27% Strongly Oppose Development of Light Rail in the Region 42 Demographics and Development of Light Rail in Spokane Region 42 Parks and Recreation 44 80% Gave Positive Ratings of the Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley 44 Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks 44 Two-Thirds Have a Park In or Close to Their Neighborhood 45 Demographics and Park In or Close to Neighborhood 45 14% Believe Building More Parks is a High Priority 46 Demographics and Priority of Building More Parks 46 Park In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Parks 47 27% Rated Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley Very Good or Excellent 47 Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational Facilities 48 59% Have Recreational Facilities In or Close to Their Neighborhood 48 Few Believe Building More Recreational Facilities is a High Priority 49 Demographics and Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities 49 Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities .50 Personal Safety 51 Vast Majority Agree that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live 51 92%Agree Their Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live 51 Demographics and Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live 53 Appendix A: Community Preference Survey 54 Appendix B: Open-ended Responses 76 Project:03-206 AIDS Program II Clearwater Saved: May 7, 2004 Document: Final Report(GS) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Figures Figure 1: Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction (Q026) 12 Figure 2: Importance of Spokane Valley Having a Downtown (0050) 14 Figure 3: Support/Opposition to Spending Public Money to Create a City Center(Q055) 16 Figure 4: Most Ideal Location for Spokane Valley City Center(Q060) 17 Figure 5: Community Identity or Something that Makes Spokane Valley Unique (0065) 18 Figure 6: Importance of Spokane Valley Having Community Identity (Q075) 19 Figure 7: Development of Community Identity Best Accomplished Through Physical or Social Changes (Q080) 20 Figure 8: Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets (Q120) 22 Figure 9: Priority Level: Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets (Q125) 23 Figure 10: Priority Level: Making Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists (Q130) 24 Figure 11: Priority Level: Stronger Controls on Signs and Billboards in Spokane Valley (Q135) 25 Figure 12: Reside in an Area that was Part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project (Q136) 26 Figure 13: Level of Satisfaction with Reconstructed Streets (Q137) 27 Figure 14: Support/Opposition to Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential Neighborhoods (Q140) 28 Figure 15: Quality of Police Services (Q030) 29 Figure 16: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Police Services (Q031) 30 Figure 17: Quality of Fire Protection Services (Q035) 30 Figure 18: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Fire Protection Services (Q036) 31 Figure 19: Quality of Library Services(Q040) 32 Figure 20: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Library Services (Q041) 33 Figure 21: Quality of Street Maintenance (Q045) 34 Figure 22: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Street Maintenance (0046) 34 Figure 23: Experience with Spokane Valley Permit Center in the Last Year(Q047) 35 Figure 24: Satisfaction with Services Received from City of Spokane Valley Permit Center(Q048) 36 Figure 25: Length of Time it Takes to Get from Home to Workplace(Q020) 37 Figure 26: Usual Method of Getting to Work(Q025) 37 Figure 27: Level of Agreement that Sprague/Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful Improvement to Overall Roadway System (Q090) . 38 Figure 28: Return Sprague Avenue, from University Road to Interstate 90, to Two-Way Traffic (Q095) 39 Figure 29: Support/Opposition to Appleway Section of Couplet Being Extended East (Q100) 40 Figure 30: Support/Opposition to Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road (Q101) 41 Figure 31: Support/Opposition to the Development of Light Rail in the Spokane Region (Q105) 42 Figure 32: Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley(Q155) 44 Figure 33: Park In or Close to Neighborhood (Q160) 45 Figure 34: Priority Level: Building More Parks (Q165) 46 Figure 35: Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley (Q170) 47 Figure 36: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood (Q175) 48 Figure 37: Priority Level: Building More Recreational Facilities (0180) 49 Figure 38: Level of Agreement that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live (Q145) 51 Figure 39: Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live(Q150) 51 Project: 03-206 AIDS Program III Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Document: Final Report(GS) R e s e a r c h , Inc , Tables Table 1: Final Dispositions 6 Table 2: Examples of Variable Subscript Labels 7 Table 3: Summary Characteristics of Survey Respondents 10 Table 4: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction 12 Table 5: Important Issues Facing Spokane Valley 13 Table 6: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Importance of Having a City Center 15 Table 7: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Support of Spending Public Money to Create a City Center 16 Table 8: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Most Ideal Location for City Center 17 Table 9: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley Having an Identity 18 Table 10: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and How Best to Develop a Community Identity 20 Table 11: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets 22 Table 12: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets 23 Table 13: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Making Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists 24 Table 14: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Living in an Area that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer Project 26 Table 15: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Police Services 29 Table 16: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Fire Protection Services 31 Table 17: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Library Services. 32 Table 18: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for Improved Street Maintenance 35 Table 19: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Returning Portion of Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic 39 Table 20: Sprague/Appleway Couplet Had Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague Avenue to Two- Way Traffic 40 Table 21: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen Road 41 Table 22: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Development of Light Rail in the Spokane Region 42 Table 23: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks 44 Table 24: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Having a Park in or Close to Neighborhood 45 Table 25: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building More Parks 46 Table 26: Park In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Parks 47 Table 27: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational Facilities 48 Table 28: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities 49 Table 29: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities 50 Table 30: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live 53 Project:03-206 AIDS Program Clearwater IV Document: Final Report(GS) MI Research , Inc . Executive Summary Introduction In the Spring of 2004, Clearwater Research, working closely with the City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, designed and executed a telephone survey with a random sample of 400 Spokane Valley adults. This Community Preference Survey was conducted as part of the City's comprehensive planning process and its major purpose was to gather representative community input on a variety of planning-related issues. Survey data was collected from March 18 to April 7, 2004. The Spokane Valley Community The majority of respondents (83%) indicated they thought Spokane Valley was headed in the right direction. However, respondents did identify a number of important issues facing Spokane Valley. Concerns about the economy and planning-related matters were among the top issues respondents identified as facing the City. City Center I Community Identity City Center. Sixty-two percent of respondents indicated that having a recognizable downtown or city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley. Female respondents, respondents at lower income levels, and respondents residing in one or two person households were most likely to report that having a recognizable downtown was important to the future of Spokane Valley. There was strong support among respondents for spending public money to create a city center. Seventy-four percent of respondents either somewhat or strongly supported Spokane Valley officials using public money to develop a city center. Only 2% strongly opposed the use of public money to create a city center. Over half of respondents (52%) felt the University City area would be the most ideal Spokane Valley location for a city center. Community Identity. Only 26% of respondents thought Spokane Valley had a distinct identity or something that made it unique. Interestingly, almost the same percentage of respondents who said Spokane Valley does not have a community identity (74%) indicated that having a community identity was important to the future of Spokane Valley (76%). While many respondents (47%) felt community identity could be developed through social changes, others believed physical changes (28%) or a combination of both physical and social changes (25%) were the best means for accomplishing the development of community identity. Community Aesthetics The typical pattern of development along the major streets of Spokane Valley did not appear to be of great concern to respondents. Just 22% expressed dissatisfaction with the current type of development along major streets. Further underscoring the general lack of concern about the typical pattern of development along major streets, only 23% Document; 1 Clearwater Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . of respondents indicated adding street trees and landscaping to major streets should be a high priority for City officials. Interestingly, lower income respondents were much more apt than higher income respondents to report that making streets pedestrian-friendly should be a high priority for City officials. Opinions regarding the priority City officials should place on stronger sign and billboard controls were very mixed. However, 67% of respondents indicated that Spokane Valley officials should place a medium or high priority on stronger sign and billboard control and as such, it is probable that the majority of residents would be supportive of stronger billboard control regulations. Respondents' opinions regarding the development of small commercials centers close to residential neighborhoods were also sharply divided. Just under half of respondents (46%) were supportive of developing small commercial centers close to residential neighborhoods. One-third of respondents (33%) resided in an area that had recently been part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project. Among those respondents who had direct experience with the Sewer Project there was substantial satisfaction with the quality of street reconstruction following the Sewer Project. Eighty-one percent were either very or somewhat satisfied with the reconstructed streets. Public Services Underscoring a high level of confidence in the Spokane Valley police force, 85% of respondents indicated that the quality of police services was good, very good, or excellent. Fire protection services and library services were also viewed quite positively by respondents, with 95% and 83%, respectively, rating these services as good, very good, or excellent. The quality of street maintenance in Spokane Valley was not viewed in such a glowing fashion. Fifty-four percent of respondents indicated that street maintenance was fair or poor. However, of those respondents who gave fair or poor ratings, 60% indicated a willingness to pay additional taxes in order to have improved street maintenance. Just 7% of respondents had had experience with the Spokane Valley Permit Center within the last year. Generally speaking, those respondents who did have experience with the Permit Center were very satisfied with the services they received. Transportation Commuting Behavior. Eight percent of respondents reported that their home-to-work commute time was more than 30 minutes. The vast majority of respondents indicated they usually got to work by driving alone. Only 2% of respondents, respectively, said they typically got to work by using public transportation or by carpooling or van pooling. Couplet. Sixty-nine percent of respondents agreed that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet has been a useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane Valley. Just under one-third of respondents (31%) said Sprague should be returned to two-way traffic from University Road to Interstate 90. Not unexpectedly, respondents who Document: 2 Clearwater Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc , indicated the Sprague/Appleway Couplet had been a useful improvement were much less likely to indicate that Sprague, between University and 1-90, should be returned to two-way traffic. Extending the Couplet East to Evergreen Road was supported by a slim 56% majority. Male respondents tended to be more favorably disposed to extending the Couplet East to Evergreen Road as well as to maintaining the Couplet rather than returning it to two-way traffic between University and 1-90. Development of Light Rail. Under half of respondents (48%) indicated they were supportive of the development of light rail in the Spokane region. Female respondents and more highly educated respondents were most likely to support the development of light rail in the region. Parks and Recreation Both parks and recreational facilities were viewed positively by the majority of respondents. Eighty percent and 71% of respondents, respectively, indicated that the quality of parks and recreational facilities was good, very good, or excellent. Sixty-six percent of respondents reported there was a park in or close to their neighborhood while 59% said there were recreational facilities in or close to their neighborhood. Not surprisingly, those respondents who resided close to a park or to recreational facilities were more likely than those not in close proximity to such facilities to indicate the building of parks and recreational facilities should be a low priority for City officials. Personal Safety The overwhelming majority of respondents felts that Spokane Valley was a safe place to live. Further, 95% of respondents said their neighborhood was a safe place to live highlighting a strong sense of personal safety among the majority of respondents. Document: Clearwater 3 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) "14)1Research , Inc . Introduction Background and Study Purpose In the Spring of 2004, the City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department (SVCDD) contracted with Clearwater Research, Inc., to design and implement a community preference survey of Spokane Valley residents. The survey was conducted as part of the City's comprehensive planning and citizen participation process under the Washington State Growth Management Act. The major purpose of the survey was to solicit community input on land use, transportation, and capital facilities issues in order to inform the comprehensive planning process. Scope of Work Clearwater Research, working closely with the SVCDD, designed and implemented a telephone survey with a random sample of 400 Spokane Valley adults in late March and early April of 2004. Method Survey Instrument Clearwater Research collaborated with SVCDD representatives to design the Community Preference Survey questionnaire. The questionnaire covered core demographics as well as several other areas of interest: • Community Development (City Center and Community Identity) • Community Aesthetics • Public Services • Transportation (Couplet and Light Rail Issues plus Commuting Behavior) • Parks and Recreation • Personal Safety Many questionnaire items were derived from similar planning-related studies focused on transportation, land use and community development. Other items were developed and customized exclusively to address issues unique to Spokane Valley. The survey was conducted in English only and the average interview length was thirteen minutes. Sampling Clearwater Research obtained a probability sample of the target population, non- institutionalized adults residing within six Spokane Valley zip codes (99212, 99223, 99206, 99016, 99037, and 99216), using a 2-stage cluster sampling method. At the first stage, a set of households was selected via the telephone numbers randomly selected from the working banks in the zip codes outlined above. At the second stage, one adult 4 Document: Clearwater Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . was selected at random from the set of eligible adults living in the household using the "most recent birthday" method. After introducing the survey to the person who happened to answer the phone call, the interviewer asked for the adult (18 years of age or older) in the household who had had the most recent birthday. This methodology is commonly used for obtaining probability samples for telephone survey projects. The overall sample size of 409 adults achieves a maximum 95% confidence interval of+1- 4.9% for binomial proportions (such as "yes"/"no" items). Sample Production and Processing Clearwater Research used several techniques to design and process the sampled telephone numbers in order to produce the highest quality probability sample and data set in the most cost-efficient manner. The sample design for the Community Preference Survey employed a list-assisted random digit dialing (RDD) sample methodology using a truncated telephone number frame based on working banks. A bank is defined here as a series of 100 telephone numbers specified by a 3-digit area code, a 3-digit exchange, and the first 2 digits of a 4-digit telephone line number, ranging from XXX-XXX-XX00 to XXX-XXX-XX99. A working bank is defined here as a series of 100 telephone numbers from XXX-XXX- XX00 to XXX-XXX-XX99, at least one of which is listed in an up-to-date telephone directory as reaching a household, The remaining banks of telephone numbers—those for which no listed household telephone number can be found—are called zero banks. The sample design did not include zero banks. This represents a slight decrease in sample coverage of households with telephones and thus increases the risk of bias associated with coverage error. However, compared with a full frame design, this design provides a significant increase in sample efficiency, keeping data collection costs manageable. As an additional efficiency measure, Clearwater Research employed a service that marked identifiable business and non-working numbers in the sampled telephone numbers before the data collection began. These records were sequestered during the data collection process and were assigned appropriate final disposition codes at the end of the data collection field period. During the field period, replicates of the sample records not identified as nonresidential were loaded into the Clearwater Research computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) system and distributed to interviewers for calling. A sample record is resolved by calling it until a final disposition code has been assigned or until the maximum number of call attempts has been made during the field period. Data Collection Clearwater Research collected data from March 18 to April 7, 2004. Interviewers were thoroughly briefed prior to data collection, and they rehearsed the questionnaire before conducting actual interviews. Additionally, monitoring staff listened to a sampling of interviews throughout the field period to maintain data quality. Document: 5 Saved: May 7,2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) Re s e a r c h , Inc . Sampled telephone numbers were called according to a schedule designed to minimize bias problems associated with difficult-to-reach respondents. Each sample record was resolved by attempting it a minimum of eight times during the calling period or until a final disposition code (such as "completed interview" or"disconnected/nonworking number") was assigned. The calling hours for the project were primarily weekday evenings and weekends. However, calls were also made during the daytime on weekdays in an attempt to capture potential respondents who could be reached at home during weekday business hours. At the close of the field period, each sampled telephone number was assigned a final disposition that summarizes the separate outcomes of each call attempt for that number. The final dispositions for the Community Preference Survey sample are presented in Table 1. A total of 409 interviews were completed during the field period. Table 1: Final Dispositions CODE DISPOSITION DESCRIPTION RECORDS 1 Completed interview 409 2 Refused interview 617 3 Nonworking number 1132 4 Not a private residence 744 5 No eligible respondent at this number 226 6 Selected respondent not available during the interviewing period 40 7 Language barrier/Respondent unable to communicate 15 8 Interview terminated within questionnaire 56 9 Final technological barrier 10 10 Final busy/Final no answer/Final answering machine 526 Total 3775 Response Rates The response rate measures the relative success with which households sampled for the survey actually participated. For RDD samples, this is typically calculated as the percentage of households, assumed to be reachable via the sampled phone numbers, that completed interviews during the field period. The higher the response rate, the lower the potential will be for nonresponse bias in the data. Clearwater Research typically calculates two widely used response rates developed and popularized by the Council of American Survey Research Organizations, which we refer to as the CASRO response rate and the CASRO Upper Bound response rate. The CASRO rate is a more conservative estimate, while the Upper Bound rate is a commonly used "best case" rate. The CASRO response rate for this project was 31.4%, and the Upper Bound rate was 38.0%. Document; 6 Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc , Data Preparation Survey data were entered and automatically consolidated into a CATI database as the interviews were being conducted. Prior to analysis, Clearwater Research followed a comprehensive routine of data preparation. Data were converted from the CATI database and formatted for review and analysis in SPSS, a statistical analysis software package. Prior to analysis, the original survey variables and response categories were labeled, and additional variables were created for the analysis as needed. In addition, open-ended responses were examined and cleaned for overall comprehension. Finally, the individual cases (interviews) were weighted so the survey results would give the most accurate picture of the adult population in Spokane Valley. Coding Clearwater Research has developed a standard set of procedures to prepare data for review and analysis. First, each variable was provided a unique label matching the CATI question number from the survey instrument. Next, each raw, labeled variable was recoded into a new variable to remove nonresponsive answers (e.g., Don't Know, Refused). These recoded variables were designated using an alphabetical subscript that identifies the resultant measurement scale. A complete listing of these recode subscripts is provided in Table 2. Table 2: Examples of Variable Subscript Labels LABEL MEANING M A variable which has been coded for interval level analysis. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded as system missing (e.g., Q005M). D A variable which has been coded for use as a dichotomous (two-category) variable. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded as system missing (e.g., Q005D). T A variable which has been coded for use as a trichotomous (three-category) variable. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded as system missing (e.g., Q005T). C A scaled or categorical variable which has been recoded into more than three categories. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded as system missing (e.g., Q005C). Weighting Weighting is a simple statistical adjustment (a multiplier) for each survey respondent in the data set. The purpose for weighting is usually to correct for bias in the unweighted survey results that can occur as a result of sample design or variations in patterns of response. The database for the analysis was organized so that each case represented data from a single interview with an adult. The cases were then weighted to account for probabilities of selection that varied from household to household, and nonsampling error that might 7 Document: Clearwater Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . arise from nonresponse and noncoverage of households without telephones. In the first step, a probability-of-selection weighting factor was calculated that included the number of eligible adults in the household and the number of residential telephone lines that served the household. In the second step, a poststratification factor was calculated to bring the proportions of age and sex in the sample in line with those in the population of adults in Spokane Valley. Two weights were produced in these calculations. The first weight is called the relative weight, which sums to the sample size and may be used with standard statistical software (such as SPSS) to calculate point estimates of population characteristics and approximate variance estimates for statistical tests. The second weight is called the expansion weight, which sums to the population size and must be used with specialized statistical software (such as SUDAAN) to calculate exact variance estimates. Eight of the interviews were removed in preparing the survey data set because they lacked information essential for calculating case weights (i.e., age and number of residential phone lines). The weighted data set used for analysis of the survey results contains 401 cases. Data Analysis Clearwater Research used SPSS to analyze the data. The initial analyses involved frequency tables and descriptive statistics (e.g., mean, standard deviation) to examine and characterize the distribution of responses for each variable. These descriptive statistics also guided the subsequent analyses. In the second phase of the analysis patterns of relations between variables to identify meaningful similarities and dissimilarities among the data were examined. Chi-square tests were primarily used to explore differences in response patterns and outcomes across salient demographic variables. Document: Clearwater Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . 8 Findings and Interpretation The results of the analysis are presented in the following order: 1. Demographics 2. The Spokane Valley Community 3. City Center/ Community Identity 4. Community Aesthetics 5. Public Services 6. Transportation (Couplet and Light Rail Issues plus Commuting Behavior) 7. Parks and Recreation 8. Personal Safety On the following pages, charts, tables, and descriptions of survey results include the question numbers for easy reference. For the full text of the questions and response categories for the Community Preference Survey, please refer to Appendix A. Crosstabulations between core demographics (gender, age, education level, income, and household size) and the majority of substantive survey questions were examined during the analysis phase of this project. During the course of the analysis the majority of demographic and substantive survey questions were recoded in a manner that grouped response categories together (e.g., responses of"strongly agree", "somewhat agree" were grouped together and compared to the grouped responses of"strongly disagree" and "somewhat disagree"). This re- coding, or collapsing of response categories, facilitated interpretation of survey findings and in some instances made `n' sizes sufficient to conduct viable statistical analysis. In many instances, crosstabular relationships did not reveal informative patterns. As a result only two types of crosstabular relationships are presented in this report; 1) relationships that were statistically significant based on the chi square statistic, a statistical test of difference; or 2) statistically insignificant relationships that illustrated particularly noteworthy trends. All statistically significant crosstabulations are presented with reference to corresponding chi square statistics and p-values2. 'The results of chi square statistical tests present findings in relation to expected values. These expected values are calculated separately for each test using the frequency distributions of the variables being analyzed. Significant findings for these statistical tests are interpreted in terms of these expected values (i.e., how different the pattern of results is from the pattern we would expect if there was no relation between the variables). 2 The p-value associated with a particular statistical test, indicated by the letter "p," conveys the reliability of a particular finding. A p-value of less than .05. (i.e., p < .05), means that the result was likely to have occurred by random error or chance just 5 in 100 times. A p-value of less than .01. (i.e., p < .01), means that the result was likely to have occurred by random error or Document: 9 Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Demographics The following section describes the demographics of the survey respondents. Table 3: Summary Characteristics of Survey Respondents % OF RESPONDENTS GENDER (Q200) Male 43.4% Female 56.6% AGE (Q185) Mean age in years 49.2 INCOME (Q215) Less than $20,000 10.2% $20,000 to$34,999 22.5% $35,000 to$49,999 22.2% $50,000 to$74,999 20.2% $75,000 or more 24.8% EDUCATION LEVEL (Q195) Less than high school 3.5% High school graduate/GED 20.9% Some college but less than 4 years/technical school 35.9% 4-year college graduate or more 39.7% EMPLOYMENT STATUS (Q015) Employed for wages 53.5% Self-employed 10.5% Out of work 2.8% Homemaker 6.0% Student 2.0% Unable to work 2.5% Retired 22.8% HOUSEHOLD SIZE (Q205) 1 person 22.2% 2 person 34.7% 3 person 17.7% 4 person 13.5% 5 or more person 11.9% OWN/ RENT/ LEASE PLACE OF RESIDENCE (Q005) Own 73.9% Rent or lease 23.9% Other 2.2% HOUSING UNIT LIVED IN (Q010) Single family detached 81.0% Duplex 4.4% Apartment 10.8% Townhouse or condominium 1.1% Manufactured home 2.2% Other 1.0% chance just 1 in 100 times. A p-value of less than .001. (i.e., p < .001), means that the result was likely to have occurred by random error or chance just 1 in 10Clearwater 0 00 times. Document: 7,2004 Project; Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Demographics Summary The sample, while not split evenly along gender lines, was comprised of a substantial proportion of men (43%). The average age of sampled respondents was 49 years and ranged from 18 to 99. Both income and education level were fairly evenly distributed among survey respondents. While a large proportion of survey respondents was employed for wages or self-employed (64%), a substantial portion of the remaining respondents were retired (23%). One and two person households comprised 57% of the sample. The majority of respondents (74%) owned their place or residence and 19% of respondents lived in a housing unit other than a single-family detached home. Demographics Used In Subsequent Analysis In the subsequent analysis described in the sections below, the following demographic variables are crosstabulated with substantive survey questions: • Gender (male, female) • Age (recoded into three groups: 18 to 44, 45 to 59, and 60 to 99) • Educational Level (recoded into three groups: high school or less, some college, and four or more years of college) • Income (recoded into three groups: less then $35,000, $35,000 to less than $75,000, and $75,000 or more) • Household Size (recoded into two groups: 1 and 2 person households and 3 or more person households) Document: Clearwater 11 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) MResearch , Inc . The Spokane Valley Community General questions about the direction Spokane Valley is headed and issues facing the City are covered in this segment of the analysis. Over 8 in 10 Think Spokane Valley is Headed in the Right Direction Figure 1: Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction (Q026) ❑No n:316 ■Yes 83% 17')/ • The majority of survey respondents appeared optimistic about the direction Spokane Valley is headed. Only 17% of respondents indicated they thought Spokane Valley was not headed in the right direction. Demographics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction Table 4: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SPOKANE VALLEY HEADED IN RIGHT DIRECTION NO YES STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 22.5% 77.5% Female 12.8% 87.2% INCOME Less than $35,000 16.9% 83,1% $35,000 to less than $75,000 6.7% 93.3% $75,000 or more 26.7% 73.3% • Female respondents were more likely than their male counterparts to report that Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction (Pearson chi square = 5.1; p < .05). 12 Document: Cl ea water Saved: May 7, 2004 44I Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . • Respondents in highest income category were less likely than those in the low and middle income categories to indicate that Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction (Pearson chi square = 14.7; p < .001). • Across income categories the majority of respondents reported that Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction. However, it appears that respondents making between $35,000 and $75,000 are the most convinced that Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction. Economic and Planning Issues of Concern to Respondents Table 5: Im•ortant Issues Facin• S•okane Valle Q027: In your opinion, what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley? Category Percent Economy (Overall economic growth) 14.6% Traffic/roads 12.9% Jobs (Unemployment) 10.4% Taxes 6.9% Controlling/managing growth 5.3% Education (Level of funding) 4.5% Police services/safety 3.9% Budget 3.7% Central city government/planning 3.1% Developing city center/downtown 2.6% Environment (Degradation/aquifer protection) 2.0% Other 16.0% Don't know 13.9% Refused .3% Total 100.0% • Respondents were asked to name the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley. A list of potential response categories (important issues) was not read to respondents. Rather respondents self-identified a single issue they felt was the most important issue facing Spokane Valley. • Economic issues were clearly of concern to many respondents. The economy/ overall economic growth and jobs / unemployment were, combined, named by one- quarter (25%) of respondents. • Urban planning-related issues (traffic / roads and controlling / managing growth) were also named by many respondents indicating that developing a comprehensive plan for Spokane Valley is likely very timely. Document: Clearwater 13 Saved: May 7,2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) MIResearch , Inc . City Center! Community Identity This section of the analysis focuses on questions that examined a variety of land use and community development issues including the importance of Spokane Valley having a recognizable "city center" and a distinct "community identity". Results from questions centered on options for changing the appearance of both new and existing development in Spokane Valley are also presented in this section. 61% Believe Having a Downtown is Important to the Future of Spokane Valley Figure 2: Importance of Spokane Valley Having a Downtown (Q050) 100% ■n=335 80% 60% 350/ 40% 26110 17°I° 20% ° ° 0% Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very unimportant unimportant important important • Respondents were asked how important it was to the future of Spokane Valley to have an area of the City that is recognized as a city center or downtown. • Thirty percent of respondents indicated it was unimportant (very or somewhat) to the future of Spokane Valley to have an area of the City recognizable as a downtown. ▪ in contrast, 26% of respondents thought it was very important to the future of Spokane Valley to have recognizable downtown and another 35% indicated in was somewhat important for Spokane Valley to have a downtown. 14 Document: Clearwater Saved; May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Demographics and Importance of Having City Center Table 6: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Importance of Having a City Center INDEPENDENT VARIABLE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A CITY CENTER UNIMPORTANT OR IMPORTANT NEUTRAL STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 43.6% 56.4% Female 33.8% 66.2% INCOME Less than $35,000 23.8% 76.2% $35,000 to less than $75,000 39.3% 60.7% $75,000 or more 46.4% 53.6% HOUSEHOLD SIZE 1 and 2 person households 31.8% 68.2% 3 or more person households 43.6% 56.4% • Male respondents were less likely than female respondents to indicate that having a recognizable city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley (Pearson chi square = 4.0; p < .05). • Seventy-six percent of respondents in the lowest income category said it was important to the future of Spokane Valley to have a city center as compared to 54% of respondents in the highest income category (Pearson chi square = 11.9; p < .01). Not surprisingly given their likely childless living circumstances, respondents living in 1 or 2 person households were more likely than those living in larger households to indicate that having a city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley (Pearson chi square = 5.7; p < .05) Document: 15 7,2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Nearly Three-Quarters Support Spending Public Money to Create a City Center Figure 3: Support/Opposition to Spending Public Money to Create a City Center (Q055) 100% ■nr.241 80% 60% 44% 40% 31% 20% o 2% o 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly oppose oppose support support • Respondents were asked how supportive they would be of Spokane Valley officials spending public money to promote the creation of a city center. • Three-quarters of respondents (75%) indicated they were either somewhat or strongly supportive of Spokane Valley officials spending public money to create a city center. • There was minimal opposition among survey participants to the spending of public money to create a city center. Just 2% of respondents were strongly opposed, and 10% somewhat opposed, to the spending of public money to create a city center. Demographics and Spending Public Money to Create a City Center Table 7: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Support of Spending Public Money to Create a City Center INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SUPPORT/OPPOSE SPENDING PUBLIC MONEY TO CREATE CITY CENTER OPPOSE SUPPORT OR NEUTRAL STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 32.7% 67.3% Female 20.1% 79.7% Document: C Y learwate 16 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . • Given the fact that females were more inclined than males to indicate having a city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley, it is not unexpected that females were more likely than their male counterparts to support the spending of public money to create a city center (Pearson chi square = 4.9, p < .05). Over Half Believe University City Area is Best Location for City Center Figure 4: Most Ideal Location for Spokane Valley City Center (Q060) Other 5% ■ n=233 Everygreen and Sprague 12,10 Pines and Sprague 15% Mirabeau Point 18% University City area 52% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% • Fifty-two percent of respondents indicated that the University City area would be the most ideal location for a city center. • Although respondents did indicate that other areas of Spokane Valley would be the most ideal location for a city center, opinions were fragmented with no one area clearly emerging as a second most ideal location as compared to University City. Demographics and Most Ideal Location for City Center Table 8: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Most Ideal Location for City Center INDEPENDENT VARIABLE MOST IDEAL LOCATION FOR CITY CENTER UNIVERSITY CITY OTHER LOCATION STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION LEVEL High School or less 38.5% 61.5% Some college (1 to 3 years) 66.7% 33.3% 4 or more years of college 46.4% 53.6% STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT AGE 18 to 44 44.5% 55.5% 45 to 59 55.6% 44.4% 60 or older 63.5% 36.5% Document: Clear water 17 May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . • Respondents with some college education were more likely than their counterparts at other education levels, in particular those with no college education, to report that the University City area would be the most ideal location for a city center (Pearson chi square = 13.0; p < .001). • Although the relationship between age and ideal center city location was not statistically significant, it did reveal an interesting pattern. Older respondents were substantially more likely than younger respondents to indicate University City was the most ideal location for a city center. Only 26% Believe Spokane Valley Has a Distinct Identity Figure 5: Community Identity or Something that Makes Spokane Valley Unique (Q065) ■No irn373 ❑Yes 26% 74% ■ Nearly three-quarters of respondents (74%) reported that Spokane Valley does not have a community identity or something that makes it unique. Demographics and Community Identity Table 9: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley Having an Identity INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DOES SPOKANE VALLEY HAVE IDENTITY OR SOMETHING THAT MAKES IT UNIQUE? NO YES STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 76.9% 21.1% Female 68.9% 31.1% Document: 18 Saved; May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project; Final Report(gs) 11111 R e s e a r c It , Inc . • Female respondents were slightly more likely than male respondents to indicate that Spokane Valley has an identity of something that makes it unique (Pearson chi square = 4.8; p < .05). Descriptions of Spokane Valley's Identity/Uniqueness • Respondents who indicated that Spokane Valley did have an identity or something that makes in unique (Q065) were asked to describe the City's identity or uniqueness (Q070). • Although respondents gave a variety of descriptions of Spokane Valley's identity / uniqueness, several similar themes emerged. Five reoccurring descriptions were: o Friendly, wholesome, good place to raise a family o Mirabeau Point/Park, Centennial Trail o Parks and open space, tress and physical beauty o Small town or rural atmosphere o Everything needed is close by/convenient Majority Believe Having a Community Identity is Important to Future of Spokane Valley Figure 6: Importance of Spokane Valley Having Community Identity (Q075) 100% 111496 80% 60% 41% 35% 40% 20% 0 0 0% Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very unimportant unimportant Important Important Nearly the same percentages of respondents who indicated Spokane Valley does not have an identity or something that makes it unique (74%) reported that having a community identity was very or somewhat important to the future of Spokane Valley (76%). • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and the importance of Spokane Valley having a community identity. Document: Clearwater 19 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Nearly Half Said Community Identity Development Best Accomplished Through Social Changes Figure 7: Development of Community Identity Best Accomplished Through Physical or Social Changes (Q080) 100ti%0 p ■n=289 80010 60% 40% 28% 20% lea Physical changes Social changes Both Important • Although nearly half of respondents (47%) felt that the development of a community identity could best be accomplished through social changes, another 28% indicated physical changes would be the best way to develop a community identity. • Further, one-quarter of respondents (25%) felt physical and social changes were equally important to the development of a community identity. ■ Taken together, these findings underscore mixed opinions regarding the best way to develop a community identity and highlight potential support for implementing both physical and social changes in the process of developing a community identity. Demographics and How Best to Develop Community Identity Table 10: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and How Best to Develop a Community Identity INDEPENDENT VARIABLE BEST WAY TO DEVELOP COMMUNITY IDENTITY PHYSICAL SOCIAL BOTH EQUALLY CHANGES CHANGES IMPORTANT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INCOME Less than $35,000 29.3% 51.2% 19.5% $35,000 to less than $75,000 20,7% 51.4% 27.9% $75,000 or more 36.8% 33.8% 29.4% Document: 20 Saved: May 7,2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . • Although the relationship between income and how best to develop a community identity was not statistically significant, it did highlight an interesting pattern of results. Respondents at the highest income level were more likely to indicate that community identity could best be accomplished through physical changes. Higher income respondents (those making more than $35,000 per year) were also more likely than their lower income peers to report that physical and social change were both equally important to the development of a community identity. Saved: a Clearwater 21 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Community Aesthetics This portion of the analysis is concentrated on questions that examine satisfaction with current development practices as well as questions that explore potential support for planning initiatives focused largely on community aesthetics. Few Dissatisfied with Typical Development Along Major Streets Figure 8: Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets (Q120) 100% ■n=397 80% 60% 48% 40% 17% 18% 20°x° °o 13% 0% Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very dissatified dissatisfied satisfied satisfied • Just 22% of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the typical pattern of development along the major streets of Spokane Valley. Demographics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets Table 11: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SATISFACTION WITH TYPCIAL PATTERN OF DEVELOPMETN ALONG MAJOR STREETS DISSATISFIED OR SATISFIED NEURAL STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AGE 18to44 47.1% 52.9% 45 to 59 31.8% 68.2% 60 or older 32.5% 67.5% Document: 011Clearwater 22 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . • Although younger respondents did not express overwhelming dissatisfaction with the typical pattern of development along major streets, they were less likely than older respondents to report that the typical development was satisfactory to them (Pearson chi square = 9.2; p < .01). 23% Consider Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets a High Priority Figure 9: Priority Level: Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets (Q125) 100% U n=400 80% 60% 41% 36°/D 40%%D 23% D 20 ID 0% Low priority Medium priority High priority • It appears that adding street trees and landscaping to major streets is viewed as a relatively low priority among many respondents (41%). However, another 59% of respondents indicated that the addition of street trees and landscaping should be a medium or high priority for city officials. Demographics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets Table 12: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets INDEPENDENT VARIABLE ADDING STREET TREES AND LANDSCAPING TO MAJOR STREETS LOW MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION LEVEL High school or less 50.0% 30.4% 19.6% Some college (1 to 3 years) 43.6% 37.1% 19.3% 4 or more years of college 33.1% 37.6% 29,3% Document: Clearwater 23 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . • Respondents at higher education levels were more inclined than those with a high school education or less to consider adding trees and landscaping to major streets a medium or high priority for Spokane Valley officials (Pearson chi square = 9.9; p < .05). 4 in 10 Consider Making Streets Pedestrian-Friendly a High Priority Figure 10: Priority Level: Making Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists (Q130) 100% ■ n=399 80% 60% 34% 44% 40% 22% 20% o I ' 1 ■ 0!0 Low priority Medium priority High priority ■ Highlighting likely concern over the safety of major streets in Spokane Valley, 78% of respondents said making streets friendly for pedestrians and bicyclists should be either a high or medium priority for City officials. Demographics and Priority of Making Streets Pedestrian-Friendly Table 13: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Making Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists INDEPENDENT VARIABLE MAKING STREET FRIENDLY FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS LOW MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INCOME Less than $35,000 16.8 26.2% 57.0% $35,000 to less than $75,000 21.3 38.0% 40.7% $75,000 or more 26.8 36.1% 37.1% • Respondents at the lowest income level were substantially more likely, in particular when compared to those at the highest income level, to indicate making major streets pedestrian-friendly should be a high priority for Spokane Valley officials Document: learwater 24 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , 111 c . (Pearson chi square = 10.6; p < .05). This finding may be related to lower income individuals in Spokane Valley having more, and likely unfavorable experience, with walking or riding a bicycle on major streets. Views Regarding Priority of Stronger Sign/Billboard Control Mixed Figure 11: Priority Level: Stronger Controls on Signs and Billboards in Spokane Valley (Q135) 100°/0 ■ n=398 80% 60% 40°/0 33% 34°/° 33%rillemommii 20% oI 1 1 Q/° Low priority Medium priority High priority • The pattern of responses to Q135 suggests that respondents were sharply divided regarding the priority city officials should place on tighter sign and billboard control. However, with over two-thirds of respondents (67%) indicating that Spokane Valley officials should place a medium or high priority on stronger sign and billboard control, it is likely that majority of residents would be supportive of stronger billboard control regulations. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and the priority city officials should place on stronger sign and billboard control. Document: Clearwater 25 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Re s e a r c /i , Inc . 1/3 Had Direct Experience with Spokane Valley Sewer Project Figure 12: Reside in an Area that was Part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project (Q136) ■No n=362 Yes 67% 33% • One-third of survey respondents reported they lived in an area that had recently been part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project. Demographics and Reside in Area that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer Project Table 14: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Living in an Area that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer Project INDEPENDENT VARIABLE RESIDE IN AREA THAT WAS RECENTLY PART OF SPOKANE VALLEY SEWER PROJECT NO YES STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AGE 18 to 44 75.3% 24.7% 45 to 59 61.2% 38.8% 60 or older 56.4% 43.6% • Older respondents were more likely than younger respondents to live in an area that has recently been part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project. (Pearson chi square = 11.2; p < .01). Document; Clearwater 26 Saved; May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Only 14% Dissatisfied with Reconstructed Streets Figure 13: Level of Satisfaction with Reconstructed Streets (Q137) 100% - ■n=118 80% 60% 48% 40% 33% 20% - 7% 7% 5% Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very dissatified dissatisfied satisfied satisfied • Respondents who reported they lived in an area that had recently been part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project were asked how satisfied or dissatisfied they were with the reconstructed streets once the Sewer Project was completed. • Eighty-one percent of survey respondents said they were satisfied (either very or somewhat) with the reconstructed streets, ■ Further, nearly 50% reported they were very satisfied with the reconstructed streets indicating substantial satisfaction with the quality of street reconstruction coinciding with the Spokane Valley Sewer Project. • This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis. Clearwater 27 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Nearly Half Support Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential Neighborhoods Figure 14: Support/Opposition to Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential Neighborhoods (Q140) 100% ■n=396 $0% 60% 40% 31% 21% 22% 15% 20% 0 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly oppose oppose support support • Although 46% of respondents reported they were either very or somewhat supportive of the development of small commercial centers close to residential neighborhoods in Spokane Valley, many other respondents were neutral or opposed to this idea. • If Spokane Valley officials decide to pursue the development of small commercials centers close to residential neighborhoods it might be useful to educate the general Spokane Valley population about the benefits of such development in order to prevent concern and build support for this initiative. Document: 28 Clearwater Saved; May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Public Services In this segment of the analysis results of questions that asked respondents to rate the quality of various public services are presented. 85% Rated Police Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent Figure 15: Quality of Police Services (Q030) 100% ■n=334 80% 60% 39% 40% 31% ZO°%® 15% 2% Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent • Eighty-five percent of respondents reported that police services were good, very good, or excellent highlighting a generally high level of confidence in the Spokane Valley police force. Demographics and Quality of Police Services Table 15: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Police Services INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF POLICE SERVICES POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 20.4% 42.6% 37.0% Female 11.0% 35.8% 53.2% • Female respondents were substantially more likely than their male counterparts to rate the quality of police services in Spokane Valley as very good or excellent (Pearson chi square = 10.5; p < .01). Document: Clearwater 29 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . 27% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Police Services Figure 16: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Police Services (Q031) No 751 El Yes 73°l0 27% • Respondents who indicated police services were fair or poor were asked if they would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved police services in Spokane Valley. ■ Just over one-quarter of the respondents (27%) who gave lackluster ratings of the quality of police services said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for improved police services. • This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis. 95% Rated Fire Protection Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent Figure 17: Quality of Fire Protection Services (Q035) 100% 80% III n=341 60% 40% 32% 33% 30% 20% 1% 40 0% Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent Document: 30 Saved: May 7,2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) Research_ , Inc , • The overwhelming majority of respondents were positive about the quality of fire protection services. Only 5% of respondents rated the quality of fire protection services fair or poor. Demographics and Quality of Fire Protection Services Table 16: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Fire Protection Services INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES POOR, FAIR, OR VERY GOOD EXCELLENT GOOD STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AGE 18 to 44 42.7% 36.8% 20.5% 45 to 59 32.6% 30.2% 37.2% 60 or older 31.0% 26.8% 42.3% • Respondents in the oldest age group were more inclined than those in the two younger age groups to rate the quality of fire protection services as excellent (Pearson chi square = 15.3; p < .01). 62% Would Not Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Fire Protection Services Figure 18: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Fire Protection Services (Q036) U No n=16 U Yes 62% 38% ■ Respondents who indicated fire protection services were fair or poor were asked if they would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved fire protection services in Spokane Valley. Document Clearwater Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report Os) R e s e a r c h , Inc . • Only 38% of respondents who gave negative ratings of the quality of fire protection services said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for improved fire protection services. • This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis. 83% Rated Library Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent Figure 19: Quality of Library Services (Q040) 100°/0 ■li=333 80% 60% 38% 40% 23% 22% 20% 50/0 0% Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent • The majority of respondents viewed library services in a positive light with 83% of respondents reporting that library services were either good, very good, or excellent. • Seventeen percent of respondents rated the quality of library services in a more negative manner (i.e., ratings of poor or fair). Demographics and Quality of Library Services Table 17: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Library Services INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF LIBARY SERVICES POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 23,6% 35.7% 40.8% Female 11.4% 39.8% 48.9% Document: Clearwater Saved w 32 Saved: May 7, 2004 IY Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc , • Similar to the pattern of responses for quality of police services, female respondents were more likely than male respondents to rate the quality of library services in Spokane Valley as very good or excellent (Pearson chi square = 8.8; p < .05). 42% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Library Services Figure 20: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Library Services (Q041) No 57 n: Li Yes 58% 42% • Respondents who indicated library services were fair or poor were asked if they would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved library services in Spokane Valley. • Close to half of the respondents (42%) who rated the quality of library services as fair or poor said they would be willing to pay additional taxes to have improved library services. • This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis. Document: Clearwater 33 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report Os) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Over Half Rate Street Maintenance as Fair or Poor Figure 21: Quality of Street Maintenance (Q045) 100% ■n=390 80% - 60% 40% 0 28% 33% 25% 20% 0 n / 2% 0% Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent • Fifty-three percent of respondents said street maintenance in Spokane Valley was just fair or poor. • Only 14% of respondents indicated that street maintenance was very good or excellent. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and quality of street maintenance. Nearly 60% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Street Maintenance Figure 22: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Street Maintenance (Q046) Q No in=197 •Yes 57% 43% 11 1 Document: 34 Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) Re s e a r c h , Inc . • Respondents who indicated street maintenance was fair or poor were asked if they would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved street maintenance in Spokane Valley. • Fifty-seven percent said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for improved street maintenance. This finding highlights substantial support for enhanced street maintenance services, Demographics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for Improved Street Maintenance Table 18: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for Improved Street Maintenance INDEPENDENT VARIABLE WILLING TO PAY ADDITIONAL TAXES FOR IMPROVED STREET MAINTENANCE NO YES STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 49.5% 50,5% Female 36.6% 63.4% • Although the relationship between gender and willingness to pay additional taxes for improved street maintenance was not statistically significant, it did reveal an interesting pattern. Female respondents were more likely than their male peers to indicate they would be willing to pay more taxes in order to have improved street maintenance in Spokane Valley. 7% Had Interaction with Spokane Valley's Permit Center Figure 23: Experience with Spokane Valley Permit Center in the Last Year (Q047) ■No P397 El Yes 93% 7% Document; 35 Clearwater Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . • Seven percent of respondents (n=29) reported that they had experience with the City of Spokane Valley's permit center within the last year. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and experience with the City's permit center within the last year. 59% Very Satisfied with Services Received From Permit Center Figure 24: Satisfaction with Services Received from City of Spokane Valley Permit Center (Q048) 100% ■n=28 80% 59% 60% 40% 20% lo�a 10% 11% 13% 0% Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very dissatisfied dissatisfied satisfied satisfied • Respondents who indicated they had received services from the City's permit center were asked how they would rate their level of satisfaction with the services they received from the permit center. • Nearly three-quarters of respondents (72%) indicated they were very or somewhat satisfied with the services they received from City's permit center. • Although a few respondents (17%) expressed dissatisfaction with the services they received from the City's permit center, the overall pattern of responses indicates that the City's permit center provided helpful assistance to the majority of respondents seeking permit services. Document: Clearwater 36 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Transportation In this portion of the analysis results of several diverse transportation-related questions are presented. Vast Majority Commute Less than 30 Minutes One Way Figure 25: Length of Time it Takes to Get from Home to Workplace (Q020) 100% ■n=269 80% 60% iii50% 42% 40% 20% 0 1% 0% Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 More than an minutes and 30 minutes to hour minutes an hour • Ninety-two percent of respondents reported that their home-to-work commute time was 30 minutes or less. ■ There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and home-to-work commute time. Very Few Use Alternative to Driving a Car to Get to Work Figure 26: Usual Method of Getting to Work (Q025) Bicycle 11% • _- ■n=276 Car or van pool 2% Walk 3% CarlOrive 88% Public 270 transportatlonlbus 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 37 Document: Clearwater Saved: May 7, 20014 Project: Final Report(gs) MIResearch , Inc . • Nearly 9 in 10 respondents (88%) said they usually got to work by driving. Just 2%, respectively, reported they usually got to work by using public transportation or by utilizing a carpool or van pool. • This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because insufficient variation in responses did not allow for viable statistical analysis. Over 213s Agree that Sprague/Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful Improvement Figure 27: Level of Agreement that Sprague/Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful Improvement to Overall Roadway System (Q090) 100% ■n=393 80% 60% 44% 40% 25% 20% 0 0 U 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly disagree disagree agree agree • Over two-thirds of respondents (69%) somewhat or strongly agreed that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet had been a useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane Valley. • However, 23% somewhat or strongly disagreed that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet has been an improvement, underscoring that support of the Couplet is not universal among Spokane Valley residents. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and level of agreement that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet was a useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane Valley. Document: Clearwater 38 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Nearly 1/3 Would Like to See A Portion of Sprague Returned to Two-Way Traffic Figure 28: Return Sprague Avenue, from University Road to Interstate 90, to Two- Way Traffic (Q095) ■No n=378 Yes 69% 31% • While over two-thirds of respondents (69%) did not think Sprague Avenue, between University Road and Interstate 90, should be returned to two-way traffic, another 31% said Sprague should be returned to two-way traffic. Demographics and Returning Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic Table 19: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Returning Portion of Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic INDEPENDENT VARIABLE RETURN SPRAGUE TO TWO-WAY TRAFFIC BETWEEN UNIVERSITY AND 1-90 NO YES STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 74.6% 25.4% Female 63.8% 36.2% • Female respondents were more likely than males to indicate they would like to see Sprague Avenue returned to two-way traffic between University and Interstate 90 (Pearson chi square = 5.1; p < .05). Document: Clearwater 39 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Sprague/Appleway Couplet Has Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic Table 20: Sprague/Appleway Couplet Had Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic INDEPENDENT VARIABLE RETURN SPRAGUE TO TWO-WAY TRAFFIC BETWEEN UNIVERSITY AND 1-90 NO YES STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT COUPLET HAS BEEN USEFUL IMPROVEMENT Disagree or neutral 19.3% 80.7% Agree 89.7% 10.3% • Not surprisingly, those respondents who reported that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet had been a useful improvement to the roadway system in Spokane Valley were much less likely to indicate that Sprague, between Univesisty and 1-90, should be returned to two-way traffic (Pearson chi square = 178.5; p C .001). Nearly Half Strongly Support Appleway Being Extended East Figure 29: Support/Opposition to Appleway Section of Couplet Being Extended East (Q1 00) 100% ■n=393 80% 60% 49% 40% - 21% 20% 0 0 0 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly oppose oppose support support • Seventy percent of respondents indicated they were strongly or somewhat supportive of extending the Appleway section of the couple east past University Road. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and support/opposition to extending the Appleway section of couplet east past University. Document: 40 Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) MI R e s e a r c h , Inc . 35% Oppose Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road Figure 30: Support/Opposition to Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road (Q101) 100% 80% II n=393] 60% 40% 340/0 �y 21% 14% 22% 20% ° 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly oppose oppose support support ■ Although 56% of respondents indicated they were strongly or somewhat supportive of the couplet being extended east to Evergreen Raod, another 35% were either strongly or somewhat opposed to this proposition. Demographics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen Road Table 21: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen Road INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SUPPORT/OPPOSE EXTENDING COUPLET EAST TO EVERGREEN ROAD OPPOSE OR NEUTRAL SUPPORT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 37.6% 62.4% Female 49.3% 50.7% Generally speaking, male respondents appear to be more favorably disposed than females toward the couplet. In this instance male respondents were more likely than their female counterparts to indicate support for extending the couplet east to Evergreen Road (Pearson chi square = 5.4; p < .05). Document: Clearwater 41 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . 27% Strongly Oppose Development of Light Rail in the Region Figure 31: Support/Opposition to the Development of Light Rail in the Spokane Region (Q105) 100% 80% ■n=394 60% 40% 27% 14°l0 25% 237o 20% ° 0% - Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly oppose oppose support support • There was not overwhelming support for the development of light rail in the Spokane region among survey respondents. Forty-eight percent respondents said they were strongly or somewhat supportive of the development of light rail in the region. The remaining 52% were either opposed to light rail development or neutral toward the proposal. Demographics and Development of Light Rail in Spokane Region Table 22: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Development of Light Rail in the Spokane Region INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SUPPORT/OPPOSE DEVELOPMENT OF LIGHT RAIL IN THE SPOKANE REGION STRONGLY SOMEWHAT SUPPORT OPPOSE OPPOSE OR NEUTRAL STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 38.1% 21.7% 40.2% Female 17.6% 27,8% 54.6% EDUCATION LEVEL High School or less 38.4% 21.2% 40,4% Some college (1 to 3 years) 23.2% 30.4% 46.4% 4 or more years of college 24.4% 22.4% 53.2% • Female respondents were more likely than male respondents to support the development of light rail in the Spokane region (Pearson chi square = 20.9; p < .001). Document: Clearwater 42 Saved; May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . • More highly educated respondents were more likely to support the development of light rail in the Spokane region than their counterparts with less formal education (Pearson chi square = 10.5; p < .05). Document: Clearwater 43 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Parks and Recreation This segment of the analysis focuses on the quality of parks and recreational facilities in Spokane Valley as well as on the priority respondents place on building more parks and recreational facilities. 80% Gave Positive Ratings of the Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley Figure 32: Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley (0155) 100% ■n=369 80% 60% 40% 34% 35% 15% 20% 11% 5% 0% Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent ■ Eighty percent of respondents reported that the quality of parks in Spokane Valley was either good, very good, or excellent. While this finding is very positive, 20% of respondents said the quality of parks was only fair or poor indicating room for improving perceptions of Spokane Valley parks among some residents. Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks Table 23: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF PARKS POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AGE 18 to 44 23.8% 37.8% 38.3% 45 to 59 20.6% 34.3% 45.1% 60 or older 9.3% 25.3% 65.3% INCOME Less than $35,000 12,1% 39.4% 48.4% $35,000 to less than $75,000 25.2% 27.3% 47.6% $75,000 or more 22.0% 39.6% 38.5% Document: 44 learwater Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . ■ Respondents 60 years of age and older were substantially more likely than their younger counterparts to rate the quality of parks in Spokane Valley as very good or excellent (Pearson chi square = 16.7; p < .01). • Respondents at the two lower income levels were more likely than those in the highest income category to rate the quality of parks in Spokane Valley as very good or excellent (Pearson chi square = 9.9; p < .05). Two-Thirds Have a Park In or Close to Their Neighborhood Figure 33: Park In or Close to Neighborhood (Q160) 0 No n=386 ■Yes 66% 34% • Many respondents (66%) reported there was a park either in, or close to, their neighborhood. Demographics and Park In or Close to Neighborhood Table 24: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Having a Park in or Close to Neighborhood INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PARK IN OR CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD NO YES STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION LEVEL High School or less 26.5% 73.5% Some college (1 to 3 years) 28.4% 71.6% 4 or more years of college 43.1% 56.9% • Respondents at the highest education level (4 or more years of college) were less likely than those with less formal education to indicate they have a park in or close to their neighborhood (Pearson chi square = 10.1; p < .01). 45 Document Clearwater Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . 14% Believe Building More Parks is a High Priority Figure 34: Priority Level: Building More Parks (Q165) 100% I n=400 80% 60% 44°I° ° 42l° 40% o I I 14% 20 to o I O to Low priority Medium priority High priority ■ The majority of respondents (86%) indicated building more parks should be a low or medium priority for City officials. Demographics and Priority of Building More Parks Table 25: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building More Parks INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE PARKS LOW MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION LEVEL High school or less 43.0% 49.0% 8.0% Some college(1 to 3 years) 50.4% 38.8% 10.8% 4 or more years of college 37.3% 41.8% 20.9% • Not unexpected, given their indication that there were not parks in or close to their neighborhoods (Q160 —Table 24), respondents in highest education category were more likely than those with less formal education to indicate building more parks should be a high priority for Spokane Valley officials (Pearson chi square = 13.1; p < .05). Document: Clearwater 46 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Park In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Parks Table 26: Park In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Parks INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE PARKS LOW MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT PARK IN OR CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD No 35.9% 50.0% 14.1% Yes 46.6% 39.0% 14.5% • Although the relationship between having a park in or close to your neighborhood and priority of building more parks was not statistically significant, it did expose a pattern the would logically be expected. • Respondents who already have a park in close proximity to their neighborhood were more likely to indicate building more parks should be a low priority. Conversely, respondents who said they did not have a park close to their neighborhood were more likely to indicate building more parks should be a medium priority for City officials, 27% Rated Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley Very Good or Excellent Figure 35: Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley (Q170) 100% - ■n=371] 80% 60% 44% 40% 24% 21% 20% o 5/o 6% 0% Poor Fair Good Very good Excellent • Many respondents (44%) said recreational facilities in Spokane Valley were "good". However, a fairly substantial percentage of respondents (29%) said the quality of recreational facilities was just fair or poor, highlighting a potential need to improve actual recreational facilities and/or to improve perceptions of recreational facilities. Document: Clearwater 47 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational Facilities Table 27: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational Facilities INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR EXCELLENT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AGE 18 to 44 24.4% 45.1% 30.6% 45 to 59 39.6% 34.7% 25.7% 60 or older 25.0% 52.6% 22.4% • Respondents between the ages of 45 and 59 were, comparatively, the harshest critics of Spokane Valley recreational facilities. Forty percent of respondents in this age group rated the quality of recreational facilities as fair or poor (Pearson chi square = 10.7; p < .05). 59% Have Recreational Facilities In or Close to Their Neighborhood Figure 36: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood (Q175) 0 No n=384 ■Yes 59% D 41 /o ��# • Recreational facility coverage appears to be relatively strong in Spokane Valley. Nearly 6 in 10 respondents (59%) reported there were recreational facilities either in, or close to, their neighborhood. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and having recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood. Document: Clearwater 48 Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Few Believe Building More Recreational Facilities is a High Priority Figure 37: Priority Level: Building More Recreational Facilities (Q180) 100% 80% II n 396 60% 450/0 43/0 0 40°/0 o t 20/0 0 o I 0/a Low priority Medium priority High priority • Twelve percent of respondents indicated that building more recreational facilities should be a high priority for City officials. The remaining 88% of respondents were nearly evenly split between believing building more recreational facilities was a low priority (45%) or a medium priority (43%). Demographics and Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities Table 28: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES LOW MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 52.1% 38.9% 8.9% Female 38.5% 47.3% 14.1% • Female respondents were more inclined than their male peers to indicate the building of recreational facilities should be a medium or high priority for Spokane Valley officials (Pearson chi square = 7.9; p < .05). . Document: Clearwater 49 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc , Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities Table 29: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE RECREATIONAL FACILITIES LOW MEDIUM HIGH PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN OR CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD No 39.0% 46.8% 14.3% Yes 50.2% 40.0% 9.8% • Very similar to the pattern of responses for parks, the relationship between having recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood and priority of building more recreational facilities while not statistically significant still revealed an expected pattern. • Not surprisingly, respondents who resided close to recreational facilities were more likely to indicate building more recreational facilities should be a low priority. However, respondents who did not live close to recreational facilities were comparatively more inclined to indicate building more recreational facilities should be a medium or high priority for City officials. Document: Clearwater 50 Saved: May 7,2004 Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . Personal Safety Two questions about perceived safety of Spokane Valley and Spokane Valley neighborhoods are the focus on this final component of the analysis. Vast Majority Agree that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live Figure 38: Level of Agreement that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live (Q145) 100% ■n=398] 80% 60% 49% 40% 38% 20% 2% 5% 6% 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly disagree disagree agree agree ▪ Seven percent of respondents disagreed when asked if they felt Spokane Valley was a safe place to live. Indeed, the overwhelming majority of respondents either strongly or somewhat agreed that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live. • There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic characteristics and level of agreement that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live. 92% Agree Their Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live Figure 39: Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live (Q150) 100% ■n=393 80% 64% 60% 40% 38% 20% 1% 4% 3% 0% Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly disagree disagree agree agree Document: 51 Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: Final Report(gs) Research , Inc . • These findings point to Spokane Valley residents having a strong sense of being safe within their neighborhoods as nearly all respondents (92%) either strongly or somewhat agreed that their neighborhood was a safe place to live, Document: 52 Clearwater Saved: May 7, 2004 Project: Final Report(gs) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Demographics and Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live Table 30: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live INDEPENDENT VARIABLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS A SAFE PLACE TO LIVE ALL BUT STRONGLY STRONGLY AGREE AGREE STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT INCOME Less than $35,000 52.8% 47.2% $35,000 to less than $75,000 53.3% 46.7% $75,000 or more 29.9% 70.1% STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT GENDER Male 51.0% 49.0% Female 41.6% 58.4% • Respondents making more than $75,000 per year were substantially more likely than their counterparts with smaller annual incomes to strongly agree that their neighborhood is a safe place to live (Pearson chi square = 15.3; p < .001). • Although the relationship between gender and level of agreement that your neighborhood is a safe place to live was not statistically significant, it is interesting to note that female respondents appeared to feel slightly more secure regarding the safety of their neighborhoods than did male respondents. Document: Clearwater 53 Saved; May 7, 2004 Project; Final Report Os) R e s e a r c h , Inc . Appendix A: Community Preference Survey INTROQ — EVERYONE GETS Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME> and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley. We are gathering information about people's attitudes toward Spokane Valley in order to guide future decisions and plans for the area. This is an important research project, and we would appreciate your participation. Let me just check to be sure I have dialed the right number. Did I reach <PHONE NUMBER? 01. NO ANSWER 15. LANGUAGE BARRIER 02. BUSY 23. DISCONNECTED/ NONWORKING 03. ANSWERING MACHINE 25. NOT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE 04. TECH BARRIER 26. NO ADULTS AT THIS NUMBER 27. UNAVAIL. DUR. INT. PER. 06. FAX/ MODEM 34. FINAL REF.NON-SEL/HANGUP 10. COMMUNICATION BARRIER 41. YES (SKIP ADLTRESP) 14. FAST BUSY/ NOISE/ DEAD AIR 42. NO (SKIP WRONGNUM) ANSMACH — GET IF INTROQ = 03 MESSAGE LEFT ON FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH ANSWERING MACHINE Hi, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME>, and I'm calling about a research study being conducted by Clearwater Research. I'll call back soon and tell you a little more about the study. Thank you very much. Good-bye. MESSAGE LEFT ON SECOND ENCOUNTER WITH ANSWERING MACHINE Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME>, calling from Clearwater Research on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley. I'm not selling anything. We are conducting an important research project that will be used to guide future plans for Spokane Valley. We would like to include every household that we call because it is very important to the success of the project. We will try back soon. Or if you would like to schedule a convenient time to speak with us, please call us toll-free at 1-800-727-5016 and select option "1". When you call, please mention that your survey ID number is <CATI STUDY NUMBER>-<CATI RECORD NUMBER>. We look forward to talking with you. Thank you very much. Goodbye. 1. LEFT FIRST MESSAGE 2. LEFT SECOND MESSAGE 3. ALREADY LEFT TWO MESSAGES 4. MACHINE FULL / NOT WORKING 54 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7,2004 Project: CCDC Urb an Housing Clearwater Research , Inc , ADLTRESP — GET IF INTROQ = 41 May I please speak with an adult who is age 18 or older? 1. YES - SPEAKING WITH ADULT (GO TO PRIVRES) 2. YES - ADULT IS COMING TO THE PHONE (GO TO PRIVRES) 3. NO (GO TO AVAIL) AVAIL — GET IF ADLTRESP = 3 When would be the best time to reach an adult age 18 or older? 1. SET CALLBACK TIME 7. I DO NOT KNOW f I DO NOT UNDERSTAND (SET CALL BACK 48 HRS) (NOTE: IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT KNOW OR DECLINES TO SAY WHEN, SET CALL BACK FOR 48 HOURS) PRIVRES — EVERYONE GETS [PROGRAMMING NOTE: only show INTRO if ADLTRESP 2] Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAMES and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley. We are gathering information about people's attitudes toward Spokane Valley in order to guide future decisions and plans for the area. This is an important research project, and we would appreciate your participation. Is this a private residence? 1. YES (GO TO LOCATEI) 2. NO (GO TO NONRES) NONRES -- ONLY GET IF PRIVRES = 2 Thank you very much, but we are only interviewing private residences. (DISP 25) WRONGNUM — ONLY GET IF INTROQ = 42 Thank you very much. I seem to have dialed the wrong number. It's possible that your number may be called at a later time. (DISP 23 after 2nd instance) 55 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7,2004 rb Clearwater Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc , LOCATEI — EVERYONE GETS What is your home zip code? (home zip code) 88888 DON'T HAVE AN ADDRESS (GO TO NONRES) 99999 DON'T KNOW/REFUSED (GO TO NONRES) CONTINUE IF ZIP = 99212, 99223, 99206, 99016, 99037, 99216. OTHER ZIPS = NONRES. NONRES —ONLY GET IF LOCATE 1 = 88888 OR 99999 OR LOCATE2 = 2 I'm sorry, but for this study for are only interviewing residences within specific areas. Thank you very much for your time. (D1SP 24) ADULTS We need to randomly select one adult who lives in your household to be interviewed. I would like to speak to the adult who lives in this household who has had the most recent birthday. Would that be you? 1. YES (GO TO SECTION 1) 2. NO (GO TO GETADULT) GETADULT –ONLY GET IF ADULTS = 1 May 1 speak with [HIM OR HER]? 1. YES, ADULT COMING TO THE PHONE 2. NO, GO TO THE NEXT SCREEN, PRESS CTRL END AND SCHEDULE A CALL- BACK 56 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: Urban CCDC Urban ©using Research , Inc . YOURTHE1 - ONLY GET IF GETADULT = 1 Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAMES and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley. We are gathering information about people's attitudes toward Spokane Valley in order to guide future decisions and plans for the area. Taking part in this survey is up to you, and you don't have to answer any question you don't want to. The interview takes about 10 minutes, but it could be a few minutes shorter or longer depending on your answers. Are you willing to help us with this survey? 1. PERSON INTERESTED (CONTINUE) 2. TERMINATE (DISP 12) Section 1 First I'd like to ask you some questions about your current living and work situation. Q005— EVERYONE GETS Do you currently own, rent, or lease your place of residence? 1. OWN 2. RENT OR LEASE 3. LIVE AT HOME WITH PARENTS 4. OTHER (SPECIFY) 7, DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q010 — EVERYONE GETS In what type of housing unit do you currently live? Do you live in a ... 1. Single family detached home 2. Duplex 3. Apartment 4. Townhouse or condominium; or 5. Manufactured home 6. OTHER (SPECIFY) 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 57 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: 2004 r May 7, Ub Clearwater Projecct: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q015 — EVERYONE GETS Are you currently: 11. Employed for wages 12. Self-employed 13. Out of work for more than 1 year 14. Out of work for less than 1 year 15. Homemaker 16. Student 17. Retired 18. Unable to work 77. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 99. REFUSED OF Q015 > 12, SKIP TO SECTION 2) Q020 —ONLY GET IF Q015 < 13 How long does it take you to get from home to your workplace? 1. Less than 15 minutes 2. Between 15 and 30 minutes 3. Between 30 minutes to an hour 4. More than an hour 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q025 —ONLY GET IF Q015 < 13 How do you usually get to work? 1. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION f BUS 2. CAR 1 DRIVE 3. WALK 4. CAR OR VAN POOL 5. BICYCLE 6. OTHER (SPECIFY) 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Questionnaire: Final Report 58 Saved: May 7, 2004 C ear r ter Project; CCDC Urban Housing (, TY(� G Research , Inc . SECTION 2 I am now going to ask you a set of questions about Spokane Valley. Q026 — EVERYRON GETS In general terms, do you think Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q027— EVERYONE GETS In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley today? INTERVIEWER: CODE OPEN-ENDED RESPONSE. IF MORE THAN ONE, PROBE FOR ONE CATEGORY. IF ANSWER CATEGORY IS NOT ON LIST OR RESPONDENT WILL NOT CHOOSE ONE, USE "OTHER" AND SPECIFY CATEGORY/CATEGORIES. 1. EDUCATION (LEVEL OF FUNDING) 2. JOBS (UNEMPLOYMENT) 3. ECONOMY (OVERALL ECONOMIC GROWTH) 4. ENVIRONMENT (DEGRADATION/AQUIFER PROTECTION) 5. OTHER (SPECIFY) 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 59 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban May 7, Clearwater er Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q030 — EVERYONE GETS PUBLIC SERVIICES How would you rate the following services provided by the City of Spokane Valley? Would you say police services are: 1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Fair, or 5. Poor 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q031 — ONLY GET IF Q030 = 4 OR 5 Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved police services in Spokane Valley? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 0035 — EVERYONE GETS Would you say fire protection services are: 1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Fair, or 5. Poor 7. DON'T KNOW I NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 60 Questionnaire: Final Report Sawed: May 7, Urban Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q036 — ONLY GET IF Q035 = 4 OR 5 Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved fire protection services in Spokane Valley? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q040— EVERYONE GETS Would you say library services are: 1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Fair, or 5. Poor 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q041 --ONLY GET IF Q040 = 4 OR 5 Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved library services in Spokane Valley? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 61 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban w 4 lear t Project: CCDC an Housing Clearwater Research , Inc . Q046— EVERYONE GETS Would you say street maintenance is: 1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Fair, or 5. Poor 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q046 -- ONLY GET IFQ045 = 4OR5 Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have street maintenance in Spokane Valley improved? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q047 — EVERYONE GETS In past year, have you had any interaction with the City of Spokane Valley's permit center? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9, REFUSED 62 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7,U Clearwater Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q048 — ONLY GET IF Q047 = 1 How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the services you received from the City's permit center? Would you say you were... 1. Very satisfied 2. Somewhat satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Somewhat dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied 7. DON'T KNOW! NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q050— EVERYONE GETS CITY CENTER How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having an area of the City that is recognized as a "city center" or"downtown"? Would you say..., 1. Very important 2. Somewhat important 3. Neither important nor unimportant 4. Somewhat unimportant 5. Very unimportant 7. DON'T KNOW f NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q055 —GET IF Q050 = 1 OR 2 How supportive would you be of Spokane Valley officials strategically spending public money to promote the creation of a city center that would have a mix of restaurants, retail, and public buildings like city hall? Would you say you... 1. Strongly support 2. Somewhat support 3. Neither support nor oppose 4. Somewhat oppose 5. Strongly oppose 7. DON'T KNOW! NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 63 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, 4 Clearwater Project: Urban CCDC Urbb ►'Y an Hauling Research , Inc . Q060 — GET IF Q050 = 1 OR 2 Which of the following areas of Spokane Valley would be the most ideal location for a city center? 1. University City area 2. Mirabeau Point area (MIRABEAU = MIRA — BOO) 3. Pines and Sprague 4. Evergreen and Sprague 5. OTHER (SPECIFY) 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q065 — EVERYONE GETS CITY IDENTITY In your opinion, does Spokane Valley have an identity or something that makes it unique? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q070 -- GET IF 0065 =1 How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness? ENTER RESPONSE Q075 — EVERYONE GETS How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having a "community identity"? Would you say.... 1. Very important 2. Somewhat important 3. Neither important nor unimportant 4. Somewhat unimportant 5. Very unimportant 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 64 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Project: CCDC Urt,an Housing Research , Inc . Q080 — GET IF Q075 = 1 OR 2 Would development of a "community identity" best be accomplished through physical changes or through social changes. Examples of physical changes include things like the development of a city center or the building of gateways at the major points of entry into the city. An example of a social change would be more community events like Valleyfest. 1. PHYSICAL CHANGES 2. SOCIAL CHANGES 3. PHYSICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES EQUALLY IMPORTANT 7. DON'T KNOW I NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q090 — EVERYONE GETS TRANSPORTATION (COUPLET AND LIGHT RAIL) Do you agree or disagree that the Sprague/Appleway couplet has been a useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane valley? Would you say you... 1. Strongly agree 2. Somewhat agree 3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Somewhat disagree 5. Strongly disagree 7. DON'T KNOW I NOT SURE 9. REFUSED IF NECESSARY: THE SPRAGUE/APPLEWAY COUPLET CONSISTS OF TWO PARALLEL ONE- WAY STREETS, SPRAGUE AVENUE WEST BOUND AND APPLEWAY BOULEVARD EAST BOUND. IT IS APPROXIMATELY 2 112 MILES LONG AND IS LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF THE CITY. THE SEPARATION BETWEEN SPRAGUE AND APPLEWAY VARIES BETWEEN ONE AND TWO BLOCKS. PRIOR TO THE COUPLET, THE MAIN THOROUGHFARE THROUGH SPOKANE VALLEY WAS SPRAGUE AVENUE. Q095 — EVERYONE GETS Would you like to see Sprague Avenue, from University Road to Interstate 90, returned to two-way traffic? 1. YES 2. NO 65 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q100 — EVERYONE GETS How supportive would you be of the Appleway section of the couplet being extended east past University Road? Would you say you... 1. Strongly support 2. Somewhat support 3. Neither support nor oppose 4. Somewhat oppose 5. Strongly oppose 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q101— EVERYONE GETS How supportive would you be of the couplet being extended east to Evergreen Road?. This would result in Sprague changing to a one way east of University. Would you say you... 1. Strongly support 2. Somewhat support 3. Neither support nor oppose 4. Somewhat oppose 5. Strongly oppose 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 66 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research. , Inc . Q105 — EVERYONE GETS The Spokane Transit Authority is currently studying the viability of building a light rail system from downtown Spokane to University City in Spokane Valley. Recognizing that taxpayers in the Spokane region would likely pay some portion of the cost of the system, how supportive would you be of the development of light rail in the region? Would you say you... 1. Strongly support 2. Somewhat support 3. Neither support nor oppose 4. Somewhat oppose 5. Strongly oppose 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q120 — EVERYONE GETS AESTHETICS Now think about the general character of the development along the major streets of Spokane Valley, such as Sprague Avenue, Pines Road, and Sullivan Road. What is your level of satisfaction with the typical pattern of development along the major streets? Would you say you are.... 1. Very satisfied 2. Somewhat satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4, Somewhat dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q125 — EVERYONE GETS RANDOMIZE Q125 THRU Q135 Next I will be asking your opinion about options for changing the appearance of both existing and new development in Spokane Valley. Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost, would you consider each of the following a high, medium, or low priority for city officials. 67 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban � ����Pr oject; CGE3C Urban Housing ch , Inc . Do you consider adding street trees and landscaping to major streets in Spokane Valley a high, medium, or low priority for city officials. 1. HIGH PRIORITY 2. MEDIUM PRIORITY 3. LOW PRIORITY 7. DON'T KNOW I NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q130 — EVERYONE GETS RANDOMIZE Q125 THRU Q135 Do you consider making the major streets friendly for pedestrians and bicyclists by adding things like sidewalks, benches, and bike paths a high, medium, or low priority for city officials. 1. HIGH PRIORITY 2. MEDIUM PRIORITY 3. LOW PRIORITY 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q135— EVERYONE GETS RANDOMIZE Q125 THRU Q135 Do you consider stronger controls on signs and billboards in Spokane Valley a high, medium, or low priority for city officials. 1. HIGH PRIORITY 2. MEDIUM PRIORITY 3. LOW PRIORITY 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q136 -- EVERYONE GETS Do you live in an area that was recently part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 68 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Project: CCDC Urban Housing Clearwater Research , Inc . IF NECESSARY: THE MAJOR GOAL OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY SEWER PROJECT IS TO PROTECT THE AQUIFER FROM WHICH SPOKANE VALLEY GETS ITS DRINKING WATER. THE PROJECT INVOLVES INSTALLING NEW SEWER LINES BENEATH STREETS. Q137 — ONLY GET IF Q136 = 1 Once the Sewer Project was completed in your area, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the reconstructed streets? Were you... 1. Very satisfied 2. Somewhat satisfied 3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4. Somewhat dissatisfied 5. Very dissatisfied 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q140 — EVERYONE GETS NEIGHBORHOOD/ COMMUNITY CENTERS For the next question, please think of small scale commercial centers as areas that might have a restaurant, a day care center, and a small market or convenience store clustered together. Examples of these types of small commercial centers in Spokane Valley would be the area of 32nd and SR27 and the area of University and 16th Avenue. How supportive would you be of the development of small scale commercial centers closer to residential neighborhoods in Spokane Valley? Would you say you would... 1, Strongly support 2. Somewhat support 3. Neither support nor oppose 4. Somewhat oppose 5. Strongly oppose 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 69 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban May 7, Clearwater Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q145 — EVERYONE GETS PERSONAL SAFETY Do you agree or disagree that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live. Would you say you.... 1. Strongly agree 2. Somewhat agree 3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Somewhat disagree 5. Strongly disagree 7. DON'T KNOW I NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q150— EVERYONE GETS Do you agree or disagree that your neighborhood is a safe place to live. Would you say you.... 1. Strongly agree 2. Somewhat agree 3. Neither agree nor disagree 4. Somewhat disagree 5. Strongly disagree 7, DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q155 — EVERYONE GETS PARKS AND RECREATION Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of parks in Spokane Valley? Would you say they are.... 1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Fair, or 5. Poor 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 70 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Clearwater Project: Urban CCDC Urban Housing P1 Research , Inc . Q160 — EVERYONE GETS Is there a park in or close to your neighborhood? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q165— EVERYONE GETS Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost, do you consider building more parks in the area a high, medium, or low priority for city officials? 1. HIGH PRIORITY 2. MEDIUM PRIORITY 3. LOW PRIORITY 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q170 — EVERYONE GETS Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of recreational facilities such as swimming pools, community centers, senior centers, and exercise opportunities in Spokane Valley? Would you say recreational facilities are.... 1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Fair, or 5. Poor 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 71 Questionnaire: Final Report Paved: May 7, 2004 Clearwater Project: CCflC Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q175 — EVERYONE GETS Are there recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood? 1. YES 2. NO 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q180 — EVERYONE GETS Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost, do you consider building more recreational facilities in the area a high, medium, or low priority for city officials? 1. HIGH PRIORITY 2. MEDIUM PRIORITY 3. LOW PRIORITY 7. DON'T KNOW I NOT SURE 9. REFUSED SECTION 3 Demographics We're almost done now. I just have a few background questions that will be used for statistical purposes only. Q185— EVERYONE GETS What is your age? Enter age 777. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 999. REFUSED 72 Questionnaire: Final Report Paved: May 7, Urban Project: CCDC Urban Housing ((�� G Research , Inc . Q190 — ONLY GET IF Q185 = 777 OR 999 I understand this is a sensitive question. Would you be willing to tell me which of the following categories best describes your age range? [READ CHOICES] 1. Under 30 2. 30 to 44 3. 45to64 4. 65 or older 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 0195 — EVERYONE GETS What is the highest grade or year of school you completed? [INTERVEWER NOTE: READ ONLY IF NECESSARY] 1. Never attended school or only attended kindergarten 2. Grades 1 through 8 (elementary) 3. Grades 9 through 11 (some high school) 4. Grade 12 or GED (high school graduate) 5. College 1 year to 3 years (some college or technical school) 6. College 4 years or more (college graduate) 7. DON'T KNOW/ NOT SURE 9. REFUSED Q200 — EVERYONE GETS INTERVIEWER: CODE SEX OF RESPONDENT. IF NECESSARY, ASK: This may sound silly but I have to ask for research purposes: are you male or female? 1. MALE 2. FEMALE 7. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9. REFUSED 73 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban a Clearwater Project: CCDC Ur Housing Research , Inc . Q205 How many people, including yourself, live in your household? (NUMBER OF PEOPLE) Q210 How many adults, including yourself, live in your household? (NUMBER OF PEOPLE) Q215 e EVERYONE GETS Is your annual household income from all sources less than $25,000? [INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF RESPONDENT REFUSES AT ANY INCOME LEVEL, CODE REFUSED] 04 Less than $25,000 If "no," ask 05; if"yes," ask 03 03 Less than $20,000 If "no," code 04; if"yes," ask 02 02 Less than $15,000 If "no," code 03; if"yes," ask 01 01 Less than $10,000 If "no," code 02 05 Less than $35,000 If"no," ask 06 06 Less than $50,000 If"no," ask 07 07 Less than $75,000 If"no," code 08 08 $75,000 or more 77 DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 99 REFUSED Q220 -- EVERYONE GETS How many months or years have you lived in Spokane Valley? 01-99 Years 01-12 Months - Enter YEARS and then MONTHS (YYMM) 7777. DON'T KNOW 1 NOT SURE 9999. REFUSED 74 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban er May 7, Clearwater Project: CCDC Urban Housing IY G Research , Inc . Q225 EVERYONE GETS Not including cell phones or numbers that are only used by a computer or fax machine, how many telephone numbers ring in your household? 1. 1 2. 2 3. 3 4. 4 5. 5 6. 6 OR MORE 7. DON'T KNOW/NOT SURE 9. REFUSED GOODBYE Those are all my questions. Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this survey. END CALL AS COMPLETED INTERVIEW 75 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Clearwater Project: CCDC an Housing Clearwater Research , Inc . Appendix B: Open-ended Responses Q005: Do you currently own, rent, or lease your place of residence? Buying Purchasing Buying Living with mother Rent to own. House-sitting for grandparents (do not have own residence) Live with parents Live with mother Looking to buy a house Own trailer, rent the s•ace Q010: In w hat type of housing unit do you currently live? Separate homes in one house _ Retirement community - House Q025: How do you usually get to work? Work at home - I haul a tractor--big truck, 2 ton. Drive and then fly. - Home office I work in my home Work from home Work from home. Work from home. Bus and car Work from home. Sometimes drive, and sometimes ride the bus, I alternate. Work from home. Work from home. Work at home. 76 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Clearwater �rer Project: CCDC Urban Housing �l (, Research , Inc . Q27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley oday? _ Codes Description 10 Centralized government/planning 11 Controlling/managing growth 12 Developing city center/downtown 13 Polices services/safety 14 Taxes/tax base 15 Traffic/roads 16 Transportation 17 Crime drugs 18 Sewer/sanitation 19 Budget/spending 20 Other Code Response 10 Being a new city determining the plan and putting the plan into practice 10 Central order. 10 City government 10 Get away from county influence 10 Getting everything together to really have a city. 10 Getting government figured out, leadership, 10 Getting the city started like repairs and with the government of the city. 10 Government 10 Government power. 10 Government, needs to stay small and true to its constituents. 10 Leadership 10 Organization 10 Planning commission 10 Planning in general. 10 The city needs to be more centralized. 10 The city's legal system 10 The managing, the governing of it. 10 Unity 11 Controlling growth 11 Growing too fast 11 Growth 11 Growth 11 Growth 11 Growth 11 Growth and development 77 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Ur Clearwater Projecct; CCDC Urbaa n Housing Research , Inc . 027: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley today? 11 Growth management _ 11 Growth management housing and development 11 Growth, city planning 11 Growth, the city is growing too fast. 11 Growth. 11 I would like to see university city to beg in growing again. 11 Land development 11 Limiting or controlling_growth. 11 Maintaining good school system 11 Manage growth 11 Over development 11 Overcrowding 11 Overpopulation 11 Population, overall growth They won't get a good return on city provided services due to sprawl and they are 11 inexperienced 11 Too much growth 11 Urban growth 12 Central area 12 City center 12 City center 12 City core needs to be developed to promote economic prosperity 12 Creating city atmosphere 12 Development of a city center 12 Downtown, city center. 12 Location of city center 12 Maintaining a viable town center of some kind. 12 Revitalizing the downtown core area- u city. 12 There is no downtown and no structure. I think the name sucks too. 12 They need a downtown. 13 Adequate protection by police and fire keeping property taxes down 13 _ Law enforcement 13 More funding for police, fire, better hospital 13 Not being able to get a hold of the police department. 13 Police 13 Police and fire 13 Police department 13 Police force is a little overzealous. 78 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved:May 7, Urban Clearwater later Project:CCDC Urban Housing (, IY Research , Inc . 027: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley oday? 13 Police force. 13 Police services 13 Protection, police and fire. Roads 13 Safety _ 13 Safety in the neighborhoods. 13 Safety of the people. 13 Security 13 Spending too much on the police force. 13 [they need to get the police issue dealt with. An unrealistic estimate of the amount of tax revenue available for spending, it was 14 seriously underestimated. City income, I don't know why they left Spokane. I see no difference except that 14 taxes will go up. - 14 Increase taxes, Keeping taxes lower and bringing more business into the community to support 14 employment-- quality jobs 14 More taxes, and misspending. 14 Moved out on their own too soon, no tax base Organized because they were worried about being taken over by Spokane city and because of that it forced them to make a decision to join and now they can't be annexed and the tax base isn't large enough to support the loss they took by 14 separating from the county 14 Proper use of tax revenues. 14 Property taxes. 14 'Tax base. 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes ------�------ 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes 14 Taxes _ 14 Taxes 79 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban May 7, Clearwater Projecct: CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . Q27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley today? 14 axes for income. 14 axes risin• 14 axes. 14 hey promised no new taxes 15 ppleway and Sprague two way 15 i ppleway couplet 15 ppleway/Sprague couplet 15 Better streets 15 Construction, mainly the freeways. 15 Couplet issue, Sprague 15 Extend Appleway 15 I don't want them to remodel the couplets. 15 I think its traffic. 15 Improve street system 15 Overdevelo•ment of roads. 15 Potholes 15 Road and traffic situation. 15 Road conditions 15 Road construction on 190. 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads 15 Roads and bridges. 15 Roads and traffic 15 Roads are terrible and need to be repaired 15 Roads especially the freeway. 15 Roads. 15 Roads. 15 Sera+ue Appleway couplet 15 Sprague Appleway couplet 15 Sprague avenue couplet. 15 S•ra•ue Avenue. 80 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Project: CCDC Urbaa n Housing Research , Inc , 27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley oday? 15 Sprague couplet 15 Street direction 15 Streets 15 The couplet 15 The couplet--streets in general. 15 The roads. 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic 15 Traffic and crime 15 Traffic and roads 15 Traffic congestion 15 Traffic congestion 15 Traffic congestion. 15 Traffic flow. 15 Traffic, 15 Traffic. 16 Adequate public transportation 16 Public transportation 16 Spokane valley not paying taxes for bus systems 16 Transportation 16 Transportation. 16 Transportation. 16 Transportation. 16 Transportation-traffic and road development 17 Alcohol and drug abuse, family deterioration. 17 Crime 17 Crime and drugs 17 Crime and taxes 17 Crime, 17 Drug problem 17 Meth, all the drugs. 18 Product and waste management 81 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban May 7, earwa¢er Project; CCDC Urban Housing ,f 4 Research , Inc . x+27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley oday? 18 Sanitation 18 Sewage 18 Sewer system 18 Sewer system 18 Waste treatment. 19 A balanced positive budget without over taxation. 19 Budget 19 Budget 19 Cost to run the new government. 19 Deficit Figure out how they are going to provide all the services with less money like they 19 said they would. Finances, to keep finances on track to avoid having to increase taxes and still 19 accomplish or meet the goals the city sets for itself. 19 Financing the new city. 19 Fiscal responsibility don't spend it if you don't have it 19 Funds 19 Having enough money to provide services without raising taxes. - 19 _ How much it's going to cost, new council and all. 19 How to deal with their financial business. 19 Money issues, financial problems 19 Money, their budget. 19 To get more bang for the buck. Affordability of retired people. Are they going to be able to afford living in the 20 Spokane Valley? 20 Beautification 20 Coalescing the entire county of Spokane under one government and the side effect would eliminate all city governments 20 Continuation of services prior to corporations, basically are we going to get what we got before we became a city in concern to property taxes? 20 _ 'Creating its own identity 20 tCuitural diversity. 20 Doesn't think it should be a separate entity 20 Empty buildings and how to use them. 20 Establishing its identity as unique from shopping malls 20 Expanding business or bringing business to the area. 20 Filling the vacant buildings. 82 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban 'learwatei Urb Project; CCDC an>Lousing Research , Inc . Q27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley today? 0 Getting the gutters turned correctly on Sprague so that when you are riding your bike there you don't fall in and get hurt. They go with the traffic and they are spaced just enough so your tires go in and there is no other place to ride. 0 Health care 0 Homeless 0 Housing and developing the valley 0 Housing and grandfathering. 0 I just was totally against the incorporation. 0 1 think we shouldn't even have Spokane valley 0 I'd like to see them get a different name. r 0 Image - - 0 Maintenance of assets 0 Make itself known as a city. _ 0 More information for residents 20 Name 20 Noise from trains 20 Places having junkie cars out front of their place of residence. 20 Playgrounds for the children. 20 Retail 20 Safety at schools 20 School violence 0 Separating Spokane valley from Spokane. 90 Services. 0 Stupid by leaving Spokane 0 he businesses that are closing. 0 he fact that it isn't closer to my house 0 he political stand for people's rights here in the valley. 0 hey spent too much to build a school. I didn't want the new city in the first place. I'm really irritated with the school district. 0 hether it should exist. 0 I by don't we have a real name? Snowplowing--mine wasn't plowed at all this 'winter. 0 Youth/kids. 0 Zoning 0 Zoning 0 Zoning r0 Zoning 83 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Project:CCDC Urban Housing Research , Inc . *060: Which of the following areas of Spokane Valley would be the most "deal location for a city center? Anywhere Argon and Sprague _By I.90 and Sullivan - - Close to mall there is a park called Mirabeau Park. Closer to town _ Downtown Downtown Spokane _ I think it should be centrally located. Liberty Lake Right in the middle _- Sprague and University place - Sullivan & Sprague University and Sprague Valley Couplet Where the valley mall is. *070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness? ill A nice average place to live. Beauty. — - Being separate - By how friendly the people are that live here, and they're housing, the attitude that people have for other people that come from out of state. Centennial Trail, and a sense of community. Centrally located Clean nice living. Everything is so close. For me personally it's Mirabeau Point Forced in under the City of Spokane. It came about because of the bickering within the city. Friendly Friendly, open-minded people. Good Good. Great place to live Has a lot of shopping. Has about everything you need, as far as products, services, and recreation. History, it's a conservative community. - Homes etc. are nicer. I like the Centennial Trail and Dishman Hills Reserve Park. 84 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban May 7, Urb 2004 Clearwater Project: CCDC an Housing Research , Inc . Q070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness? I like the parks. They're making the parks look better to enhance the look of Spokane alley. I think that the fact that it's new. Also it's pretty with the trees and everything. I think the people and the whole town. I think the valley has a wholesomeness; I see it as being very friendly, neighborly. I think they improving. They're doing a lot of things to improve. I wouldn't call it unique, I don't know what you'd call it. In the valley It's very quiet, peaceful, maintained and controlled so that you do not have to suffer the drug use and stuff downtown. It has a lot of nice stores, and services. It has a mall. It has it's own identity but I don't know how strong it would be. It is a good place to raise a family. It is a nice area to live in. It is more suburban-like. It was originally a city, and should remain so. It's "the valley" It's a beautiful spot with good weather and it's productive. It's a brand new city with a clean slate, not restricted by regulations of the past. It's a little more rural. _ It's a nice area, not in the city. _ It's a small-town atmosphere. It's different, it's Spokane valley instead of Spokane, and the atmosphere is different. It's flat It's in the valley It's in the valley Its just a neat place to live It's just a valley. You just have to say you live in a valley and people know where it is. It's like small town living. It's not clustered, it's accessible. Beauty, trees everywhere. It's more county living. It's rural and urban together It's the fact that it is the valley. I identify it as the valley area between the downtown Spokane city and the Idaho lakes. Low Crime. Much safer than downtown. With the mall it has everything you need. Don't like to travel from downtown and I like to stay here for all my needs. Just the fact that they broke away from Spokane. Larger city with small town attitude Less traffic, Centennial Trail through the valley. Location, and it is more in touch with community. Mirabeau Point 85 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: Urban ]e a er May 7, 2004 Carw Project: CCDC Housing ` IY Research , Inc . *070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness? Mirabeau Park area, the river. Mirabeau Point and the Centennial Trail and the valley man. - - - Mirabeau Point and the valley mall. Mixed use of agriculture, commercial and residential. More open, more spread out, more non-city feel More room for families in living areas. Not Spokane. Open space for businesses and homes - Parks and Centennial Trail. Particularly friendly people Personal use of Mirabeau Point. Pretty good of everything. Quality of life is better. _- Reasonable city government _ Resources we have have not been used as they should. Rural -- — - Safe, open, Schools are better more family-oriented. _ Schools, housing development mostly new, mall, river Simple country living. Small town feel Spacious suburbia. _ Spacious, a little upscale, almost everything you need is here in the valley. Spaulding's wrecking yard Spokane valley Spokane valley is trying to become a better place. Spokane valley mall makes it unique. - - Spokane valley mall. Still fairly rural Still living in the country but being in a city Suburban The businesses — The Centennial Trail The community and the things you do in the community. The community is a good place to raise kids. The ease and ability to get around The extension of Spokane. It's not as busy as Spokane. The location. The mall. The mall. The people. 86 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, 217 4 �eai "a er, Project: CCDC Urban Housing C Researcyr�1 h , Inc . Q070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness? The river The serenity of it the neighborhood concept is stronger there than other Maces. The valley — The valley mall The valley mall. The views and prettiness of some of the areas of Spokane valley --not real congested and a lot of trees They don't want to be Spokane. They have lots of churches and a nice mall. They should keep the name and not change it. Very pleasant and helpful to deal with, easier to deal with than Spokane. Very polite, willing to help, but the work sucks Very secure and safe then most areas We are in the outer areas of the county not right downtown. We have all walks, rural, city, and no reasons to leave the valley. We're new, we're growing, and we're getting better. When they were first coming out with it- something caught my eye in the newspaper meth [chef] valley. It was talking about all the meth amphetamines that they were manufacturing, it's not a positive thing, it definitely is a big problem. You can be in the country and then just a few minutes away from better things You don't have to go anywhere else. Everything I need is rig_ht here. You're close to nature and hiking trails and stuff. 87 Questionnaire: Final Report Saved: May 7, Urban Clearwater Project: CCDC Urban Housing Research. , Inc .