My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2018-09-24 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2010-2019
>
2018
>
AgdaPkt 2018-09-24 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2018 5:18:32 PM
Creation date
9/20/2018 5:27:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
9/24/2018
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
448
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
III COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY <br />Survey Data and Outreach Analysis <br />Overall, the majority of comments shared at the event were congruent with the City-wide Survey <br />results as well as the survey results from the immediate neighbors. There were over four <br />hundred (4004) residents that partidpated in the City-wide survey while the Business Survey <br />yielded a low participant response with a total of eleven (11). The data was captured in the form <br />of graphs that inform the recommendations in this report. In addition, three -hundred and <br />seventeen (317) surveys were sent to immediate neighbors that surround the proposed park <br />locations. The Neighbor Survey yielded twenty-six (26) online participants, and of the total <br />mailed, twenty-two (22) were received as follows: <br />830 Main Street - 8198 <br />950 Main Street - 2103 <br />1090 Main Street - 5161 <br />• 99 Mapie Street - 6/75 <br />The data from the immediate neighbors and businesses was fairly small and preferences are <br />difficult to assess with low participation, particularly because answers for some questions were <br />not provided. <br />Amenities & Programming <br />However, for certain questions. the neighbor survey data results also indicated the preference <br />for amenities that paralleled the responses from the City-wide Survey, specifically the desire for <br />a park space that contains trees and provides shade. In fact, the results for both sets of data <br />had similar top and bottom amenities as such: <br />CITY WIDE SURVEY <br />IMMEDIATE NEIGHBOR SURVEY <br />Too 5 Amenities; <br />Ton 5 Amenities: <br />1. Trees/51hade <br />1. <br />Trees/Shade <br />2. Softscape (grassy/planted areas) <br />2. <br />Benches with armrests <br />3. Covered spots for working <br />3. <br />Covered spots for working <br />4. Play equipment for kids <br />4. <br />Tables & chairs <br />S. Drinking fountains <br />5. <br />Play equipment for kids tied <br />with Softscape <br />Bottom 5 Amenities: <br />1. Plugs for Phones and Laptops <br />Bottom 5 Amenities: <br />2. Swings for Adults <br />1. <br />Plugs For Phones and Laptops <br />3. Retail/Pop-Up <br />2. <br />Swings For Adults <br />4. Morning Yoga/Tai Chi <br />3. <br />Retail/Pop-Up <br />5. Open WiEi <br />4. <br />Interactive Art <br />5, <br />Morning Yoga/Tal Chi <br />ExftM 3.• Comparedve Liar of Preferred Amenities and Least DasiredAmenkies <br />These ranked surveys of amenities found a strong community preference for Trees/Shade <br />which corresponds strongly with the other top-rated amenities such as grassylplanted areas, <br />benches with armrests and covered spots for working, and with site furniture like tables and <br />chairs and drinking fountains. And although playground for kids rated slightly higher in the City- <br />wide Survey than the Neighbor Survey, this feature was important to both. <br />APPENDIX <br />;I Rank the fctle ni; pm ffl.sl perk "m1i" ye wed kke mw it a 1,num <br />neWeta perk. <br />f�r /'' . <br />0 e% <br />� <br />Exhibil 4: Graph showing Gil) -wide Survey Ranked Ameaifias by Most desired to Least ❑e&red <br />The results from the open-ended questions asking participants to freely write in their preferred <br />amenities, pertained to park programming and a mix of active and passive activities. Gardens, <br />community gardens specifically, was the most desired by participants closely followed by public <br />restrooms. The active recreation suggestions included children play areas, all -age play areas <br />such as outdoor recreation, bike amenities and pump track, skate parks, ping gong tables, a <br />rock wail, exercise equipment and others. The passive recreation suggestions included walking <br />paths, leisure and seating areas, beverageldining experiences such as picnic areas or outdoor <br />cafes, separated dog Friendly amenities, and social gathering spaces that may potentially host <br />performances or a Farmers Market. <br />Fallowing park programming, most participants were Interested in landscaped elements, noting <br />a desire for shade, trees, and generally soft-scaped (as opposed to hard, paved areas) <br />landscapes. in fact, similar to the feedback at the Pop -Up Park, participants indicated they did <br />not necessarily desire a second community square, like Courthouse Square which is heavily <br />programmed. <br />Regarding the feeling and use of the space, and indicative of the general population and <br />congruent with the community engagement during presentations and the event, when results <br />from the surveys were combined and categorized into more general active and passive, <br />amenities that support passive programming surpassed active programming. Specifically, fifty- <br />five percent (52%) to eighteen percent (17%) while two percent (2%) indicated the preference <br />for parking, one percent (1 %) for events, and twenty-four percent (22%) indicated a preference <br />for a family -focused programming and amenities. Survey participants overwhelmingly desired <br />leisure space, specifically noting areas to reiax, read, hang out with friends, go for a walk, and <br />even enjoy lunch or a cup of coffee. There was also support for these spaces to be family - <br />friendly with play areas for children and pets, as well as areas to picnic. <br />24 SEPTEMBER 2018 93 <br />tQ <br />(D <br />CD <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.