Edmonton (Alta. ) - 1984 - Southeast district survey of residents_basic results tables (1984-12)

Southeast District Survey of Residents

BASIC RESULTS TABLES DECEMBER 1984

el THE C ITT OF e n.

lun

PLANNING

PREFACE During the months of August and September, 1984, 706 residents of Southeast Edmonton participated in a city-wide telephone survey conducted by the Planning Department.

The following report provides the detailed responses to the questionnaire. Results tabulated on a neighbourhood basis are available in a separate report from the Planning Department.

Residents from every Southeast Edmonton neighbourhood participated in our survey, with balanced representation from older neighbourhoods (those built prior to 1951), mature suburbs (those built between 1951 and 1971) and new suburban neighbourhoods (Mill Woods, built after 1971.) Please refer to Map 1 for neighbourhoods covered by the survey.

Survey Reliability and Level of Accuracy The survey sample was designed to provide reliable results for the three neighbourhood groups. At the neighbourhood group level, the responses to most questions are within 5% of the responses that would be obtained if individuals from all the households had been surveyed. District level information is even more reliable.

The survey respondents were representative of the overall District population in terms of their age, with 49% between 20 and 39 years, 32% between 40 and 64, and 12% over 65 years. Seventy-two percent of the respondents were homeowners and 27% were renters.

For further information on the survey results, including detailed breakdowns by neighbourhood and selected cross tabulations of results, please contact Geoff Bocian (428-8438) or Cathy Raftis (428-8801), Southeast District planning team.

211.111//.11 L‘711rrele SOUTHEAST DISTRICT

MAP 1

IMMISIN•

AREAS COVERED IN SURVEY

.91121 1LVNIN No

OLDER NEIGHBOURHOODS

[]MATURE SUBURBS ElNEW SUBURBS

Illustrated Portion

h:tu Eastgate Business Pork 4'

?SOUTH ANNEXATION I AREA

:

Lambton Industrial —

Girard Industrial I r Davies Industrial (East) I „„.

;

- Weir —Industrial Southeast (Annexed) Industrial — TPI S2 II 22 WAS( ,

'•0(‘ Rosedale Industrial Imam _

\ Coronet , Industr ia I F= Papaschase Industrial -

Maple Ridge

INDUSTRIAL AREA TP SI 11.24 0.411.

TP 52 PI 22 II O.

1,52 It23 POP

EAST ANNEXATION AREA

,

• Strathcona' Industrial . Park iv.4rneos • 11:"'

:1

TI SI 11_22 22•15.

Meadows N'HD 4 Meadows N'HO 9

Edmonton Research and Development Park

It

CONTENTS PAGE

TABLE

1

Total Responses

1

2

Identification of neighbourhood name by respondents

1

3

Spending on City Services

2

4

Satisfaction with Public Services in neighbourhood

3

5

Satisfaction with parks in neighbourhood (number, size, location)

4

6

Satisfaction with recreational facilities in district

5

7

Priorities for landscaping and street improvement programs

6

8

Frequency of travel by bus or LRT; reasons for use and satisfaction

7

9

Length of time willing to wait for a transfer

9

10

Identification of traffic problems on respondents' local street

9

11

Priorities for suggested roadway projects

10

12

Satisfaction with the time it takes to drive downtown

11

13

Type of housing lived in by respondents

12

14

Housing tenure (own/rent)

12

15

Concern about neighbourhood crime

13

16

Assessment of amount of crime in neighbourhood

13

17

Type of crime of greatest concern in area

14

18

Neighbourhood rating (satisfaction)

14

19

Community League importance to respondents and their involvement

15

20

Neighbourhood sense of community (community spirit)

15

21

Urgent neighbourhood issues or problems

16

22

Identification of area where largest non-food shopping dollar purchases are made

17

23

Assessment of resident support for changes to homes in their neighbourhood

18

24

Assessment of residents' feelings on whether they have influence in local planning and development decisions

18

Support for various types of residential redevelopment in Older Neighbourhoods and Mature Suburbs

19

Support for local school closures in Older Neighbourhoods and Mature Suburbs

19

27

Satisfaction with the physical layout of neighbourhood in the New Suburbs

20

28

Assessment of features contributing to the special identity of a neighbourhood (New Suburbs only)

21

Preferences for design improvements for new neighbourhoods before City approval (New Suburbs only)

22

25 26

29

TABLE

PAGE

30

Concerns about the local street numbering system in the New Suburbs

23

31

Preferred type of residential development for Mill Woods Town Centre and Tawa sites

23

32

Number of people in household by age groups; age of respondents

24

33

Child care for the household; type of service used; satisfaction with service

25

34

Number of respondents having additional (final) comments on the survey

26

1

1.

TOTAL RESPONSES SUB-AREAS

MALE

Older

105 (14.9)

134 (19)

3 (0.4)

242 (34.3)

Mature

93 (13.2)

140 (19.8)

2 (0.3)

235 (33.3)

New

TOTAL

2.

FEMALE

99

129

(14.0)

(18.3)

297

403

(42.1)

(57.1)

UNSURE

TOTAL

229 (32.4)

1

(0.1)

6

706

(0.8)

(100)

IDENTIFICATION OF NEIGHBOURHOOD NAME BY RESPONDENTS CATEGORY

NUMBER

PERCENT

None Given

26

3.7

Same Name

503

71.2

ASP/Subdivision Name

78

11.0

Community League Name

17

2.4

Other Name Given

82

11.6

TOTAL

706

100

2

3.

SPENDING ON CITY SERVICES SERVICE

INCREASE

MAINTAIN

Transit

171 (24.2)

428 (60.6)

55 (7.8)

50 (7.1)

Fire Protection

160 (22.7)

498 (70.5)

19 (2.7)

29 (4.1)

64 (9.1)

612 (86.7)

18 (2.5)

8 (1.1)

4 (0.6)

Provision of Parks (No Response = 1 (0.1%))

221 (31.3)

426 (60.3)

24 (3.4)

33 (4.7)

1 (0.1)

Police Protection

286 (40.5)

398 (56.4)

8 (1.1)

11 (1.6)

3 (0.4)

Social Services

256 (36.3)

277 (39.2)

27 (3.8)

139 (19.7)

7 (1.0)

Road Maintenance (Missing Values = 1 (0.1%))

356 (50.4)

323 (45.8)

18 (2.5)

4 (0.6)

4 (0.6)

Road Construction (22 (3.1%) No Response; 1 (0.1%) Missing Value)

144 (20.4)

407 (57.6)

69 (9.8)

57 (8.1%)

6 (0.8)

Snow Removal (1 (0.1%) No Response; 1 (0.1%) Missing Value)

299 (42.4)

368 (52.1)

19 (2.7)

16 (2.3)

2 (0.3)

Library Services (2(0.3%) No Response; 1 (0.1%) Missina Value)

89 (12.6)

544 (77.1)

16 (2.3)

53 (7.5)

1 (0.1)

Bylaw Enforcement (1 (0.1%) No Resnonse; 1 (0.1%) Missing Value)

217 (30.7)

400 (56.7)

43 (6.1)

41 (5.8)

3 (0.4)

General Trends

320.6 (29.15%)

663.2 (60.3%)

44.7 (4.06%)

62.6 (5.7%)

24.6 (2.2%)

Garbage Collection

With regard to services:

DECREASE

NO OPINION OTHER

- 5 (0.7%) had no resmonse, - 241 (34.1%) had further comments, - 458 (64.9%) had no further comments, - 2 (0.3%) didn't know if they had further comments.

2 (0.3)

3

4.

SATISFACTION WITH PUBLIC SERVICES IN NEIGHBOURHOOD ANSWER

NUMBER

PERCENT

Yes

569

80.6

No

125

17.7

11

1.6

1

0.1

No Opinion Missing Value

TOTALS

706

100.0

OF THOSE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE PUBLIC SERVICES IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD, THE FOLLOWING SERVICES WERE IDENTIFIED TO BE INADEQUATE: SERVICE

RESPONSE

NO RESPONSE

MISSING VALUE

Public Transit

58 (46.4)

65 (52.0)

2 (1.6)

Recreational Facilities

25 (20.0)

98 (78.4)

2 (1.6)

Schools

32 (25.6)

91 (72.8)

2 (1.6)

Stores

123 (98.4)

2 (1.6)

Health Facilities

123 (98.4)

2 (1.6)

Library

123 (98.4)

2 (1.6)

Post Office

123 (98.4)

2 (1.6)

Other

22 (17.6)

101 (80.8)

2 (1.6)

Others

5 (4.0)

118 (94.4)

2 (1.6)

4

5.

SATISFACTION WITH PARKS IN NEIGHBOURHOOD

(A)

NUMBER: CATEGORY Too Many

PERCENT

17

2.4

Too Few

160

22.7

OK Number

501

71.0

No Opinion

21

3.0

No Response

6

0.8

Missina Value

1

0.1

TOTAL

(B)

NUMBER

706

100.0

NUMBER

PERCENT

SIZE: CATEGORY Too Large

23

3.3

Too Small

82

11.6

Right Size

547

77.5

53

7.5

No Response Missing Value

TOTAL

1

706

0.1

100.0

5

(C)

LOCATION: CATEGORY

PERCENT

NUMBER

Too Centrally Located

17

2.4

Too Scattered or Inaccessible

40

5.7

46

6.5

3

0.4

Poorly Laid Out in Terms of Security

.

Too Centrally Located and Too Scattered/Inaccessible

0.3

Too Centrally Located and Insecure 5

0.7

492

69.7

Other

59

8.4

No Opinion

29

4.1

No Response

12

1.7

Too Scattered and Insecure OK

Missing Value

TOTAL

6.

0.1

1

100.0

706

SATISFACTION WITH RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN DISTRICT (THEIR PART OF THE CITY):

FACILITY

VERY SATISFIED

SOMEWHAT SATISFIED

SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED

VERY DISSATISFIED

NO OPINION

MISSING NO RESPONSE VALUE

2 (0.3)

Indoor Swimming Pools

291 (41.2)

286 (40.5)

52 (7.4)

24 (3.4)

' 51 (7.2)

Arenas

187 (26.5)

285 (40.4)

85 (12.0)

36 (5.1)

108 (15.3)

3 (0.4)

2 (0.3)

Major Sportsfields

153 (21.7)

301 (42.6)

93 (13.2)

46 (6.5)

110 (15.6)

1 (0.1)

2 (0.3)

River Valley & Ravine Access

,263 (37.3)

187 (26.5)

96 (13.6)

57 (8.1)

100 (14.2)

1 (0.1)

2 (0.3)

7.

PRIORITIES FOR LANDSCAPING AND STREET IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS:

LOCATION

HIGH PRIORITY

MEDIUM LOW NO NO NO MISSING PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY OPINION RESPONSE VALUES

TOTAL

SUBGROUPS

Downtown

269 (38.1)

183 (25.9)

123 (17.4)

97 (13.7)

28 (4.0)

3 (0.4)

3 (0.4)

706 (100.0)

All

Argyll Road

92 (19.3)

145 (30.4)

107 (22.4)

91 (19.1)

38 (8.0)

2 (0.4)

2 (0.4)

477 (100.0)

0&M

Whyte Avenue

151 (31.7)

167 (35.0)

58 (12.2)

71 (14.9)

26 (5.5)

2 (0.4)

2 (0.4)

477 (100.0)

0&M

Mill Woods Park and Golf Course

115 (50.2)

64 (27.9)

33 (14.4)

7 (3.1)

10 (4.4)

Highway 2

125 (54.6)

54 (23.6)

24 (10.5)

20 (8.7)

4 (1.7)

2 (0.9)

Bonnie Doon Shopping Centre Area

126 (17.8)

260 (36.8)

143 (20.3)

151 (21.4)

22 (3.1)

2 (0.3)

229 (100.0)

NOTE: Of the 706 completed responses: 244 (34.5%) Named another area for landscaping and street upgrading.

460 (65.2%) Did not name another area for landscaping and street upgrading.

2 ( 0.3%) Missina Values.

229 (100.0) 2 (0.3)

706 (100.0)

ALL

7

8.

FREQUENCY OF TRAVEL BY BUS OR LRT: CATEGORY

NUMBER

Not At All

429

60.8

Less than four times week

137

19.4

More than four times per week

136

19.3

4

0.6

706

100.0

Missing Values

TOTAL

B.

PERCENT

FOR THOSE WHO USE THE TRANSIT "LESS THAN FOUR TIMES PER WEEK" OR "NOT AT ALL", THE REASONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: (TOTAL = 566 RESPONSES) CATEGORY

RESPONSE

NO RESPONSE

MISSING VALUE

Don't Know Why, I Just Don't

11 (1.9)

552 (97.5)

3 (0.5)

Takes Too Long

By Bus

32 (5.7)

531 (93.8)

3 (0.5)

Service Not Frequent Enough

15 (2.7)

548 (96.8)

3 (0.5)

I Take My Car

452 (79.9)

111 (19.6)

3 (0.5)

Fares Too Expensive

10 (1.8)

553 (97.7)

3 (0.5)

Other

155 (27.3)

408 (72.1)

3 (0.5)

8

C.

FOR THOSE WITH "OTHER" REASONS FOR NOT USING TRANSIT, THE FOLLOWING APPLIES: (155 RESPONSES) OTHER

PERCENT

Descriptive Response

93

16.4

Major Events Only

37

6.5

Doesn't Serve Destination

16

2.8

9

1.6

155

27.3

Too Many Transfers

TOTAL

D.

NUMBER

FOR THOSE 136 WHO USE TRANSIT "MORE THAN FOUR TIMES PER WEEK", THE SATISFACTION LEVEL WITH THE SERVICE IN THEIR AREA IS: CATEGORY

NUMBER

PERCENT

Very Satisfied

60

44.1

Somewhat Satisfied

39

28.7

Somewhat Dissatisfied

23

16.9

Very Dissatisfied

14

10.3

136

100.0

TOTAL

9

9.

LENGTH OF TIME WILLING TO WAIT FOR A TRANSFER:

CATEGORY No Response

9

1.3

0-3 Minutes

11

1.6

4-6 Minutes

98

13.9

7-10 Minutes

202

28.6

11 + Minutes

325

46.0

Transfer Not Applicable

24

3.4

Transfer Not Acceptable

6

0.8

27

3.8

4

0.6

706

100.0

No Opinion Missing Values

TOTAL

10.

PERCENT

NUMBER

IDENTIFICATION OF TRAFFIC PROBLEMS ON RESPONDENTS' LOCAL STREET:

NO OPINION

MISSING VALUES

TYPE OF PROBLEM

YES

NO

Traffic Shortcutting

125 (17.7)

572 (81.0)

5 (0.7)

4 (0.6)

Too Much Traffic

145 (20.5)

555 (78.6)

2 (0.3)

4 (0.6)

Ignore Stop/Yield Sions

215 (30.5)

481 (68.1)

6 (0.8)

4 (0.6)

On Street Parking

164 (23.2)

537 (76.1)

1 (0.1)

4 (0.6)

Other

223 (31.6)

477 (67.6)

1 (0.1)

5 (0.7)

11. PRIORITIES FOR SUGGESTED ROADWAY PROJECTS:

LOCATION

HIGH PRIORITY

MEDIUM LOW NO NO NO MISSING PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY OPINION RESPONSE VALUES

TOTAL

SUBGROUPS

Ring Road

451 (63.9)

125 (17.7)

55 (7.8)

38 (5.4)

33 (4.7)

1 (0.1)

3 (0.4)

706 (100.0)

All

Eliminate Bonnie Doon Circle

130 (27.3)

92 (19.3)

89 (18.7)

141 (29.6)

22 (4.6)

1 (0.2)

2 (0.4)

477 (100.0)

O&M

Improve 99 Street

169 (35.4)

136 (28.5)

52 (10.9)

68 (14.3)

49 (10.3)

1 (0.2)

2 (0.4)

477 (100.0)

O&M

Ellerslie Road

116 (50.7)

56 (24.5)

34 (14.8)

12 (5.2)

10 (4.4)

1 (0.4)

229.

(100.0)

NOTE: Of the 706 completed responses: 272 (38.5) had another area/roadway named for improvement 431 (61.1) did not have any further suggestions for roadway improvements 3 ( 0.4) missing values.

12.

A.

SATISFACTION WITH THE TIME IT TAKES TO DRIVE DOWNTOWN FROM HOME:

CATEGORY

NUMBER

PERCENT

B. RESPONDENTS SPECIFICALLY DISSATISFIED WITH:

CATEGORY

RESPONSE

NO RESPONSE

Excess Traffic/ Congestion

11 (26.8)

30 (73.2)

64.0

Bottleneck on Route

11 (26.8)

30 (73.2)

163

23.1

Intersection Hazard

-

41 (100.0)

Somewhat DisSatisfied

29

4.1

Poor Road Conditions

Very Dissatisfied

12

1.7

Other

No Opinion

42

5.9

3

0.4

706

100.0

5

0.7

Very Satisfied

452

Somewhat Satisfied

No Response

Missing Values

TOTAL

2 (4.9)

39 (95.1)

22 (53.6)

19 (46.3)

12

13.

TYPE OF HOUSING LIVED IN BY RESPONDENTS:

NUMBER

PERCENT

551

78.0

Semi-Detached/Duplex

37

5.2

Row Housing/Town Housing

49

6.9

Walk Up Apartment

40

5.7

High-Rise Apartment

5

0.7

Suite in a House

3

0.4

18

2.5

3

0.4

TYPE Single Detached

Other Missing Values

TOTAL

14.

706

100.0

NUMBER

PERCENT

HOUSING TENURE (OWN/RENT):

CATEGORY Owner

509

72.1

Renter

187

26.5

Other

7

1.0

Missing Values

3

0.4

706

100.0

TOTAL

13

15.

CONCERN ABOUT NEIGHBOURHOOD CRIME: CATEGORY

PERCENT

Yes

386

54.8

No

313

44.4

Missing Values

3

0.4

No Opinion

3

0.4

705

100.0

TOTAL

16.

NUMBER

ASSESSMENT OF AMOUNT OF CRIME IN NEIGHBOURHOOD: CATEGORY

NUMBER

PERCENT

No Response

30

4.2

High

56

7.9

Medium

154

21.8

Low

405

57.4

None At All

33

4.7

No Opinion

25

3.5

3

0.4

706

100.0

Missing Values

TOTAL

14

17,

TYPE OF CRIME OF GREATEST CONCERN IN AREA: (607 = total)

THEFT/ BREAK -IN

CATEGORY

SEX-RELATED CRIMES

VANDALISM/ DAMAGE

ASSAULT

OTHER

Response

278 (45.8)

104 (17.1)

27 (4.4)

10 (1.6)

79 (13.0)

No Response

100 (16.5)

274 (45.1)

351 (57.8)

368 (60.6)

299 (49.3)

Missing Values

229 (37.7)

229 (37.7)

229 (37.7)

229 (37.7)

229 (37.7)

607 (100.0)

607 (100.0)

607 (100.0)

607 (100.0)

607 (100.0)

TOTAL

18. NEIGHBOURHOOD RATING (SATISFACTION):

CATEGORY

NUMBER

PERCENT

Excellent

283

40.1

Good

351

49.7

Fair

62

8.8

Poor

7

1.0

Missing Values

3

0.4

706

100.0

TOTAL

15

19. COMMUNITY LEAGUE IMPORTANCE TO RESPONDENTS AND THEIR INVOLVEMENT:

CATEGORY

COMMUNITY LEAGUE IMPORTANT

No Response

CONTRIBUTE CONTRIBUTE MONEY/ TIME FUND RAISING

1 (0.1)

2 (0.3)

2 (0.3)

Yes

298 (42.2)

422 (59.8)

458 (64.9)

No

394 (55.8)

263 (37.3)

227 (32.2)

No Opinion

10 (1.4)

16 (2.3)

16 (2.3)

Missinn Values

3 (0.4)

3 (0.4)

3 (0.4)

706 (100.0)

706 (100.0)

706 (100.0)

TOTAL

20. NEIGHBOURHOOD SENSE OF COMMUNITY: (COMMUNITY SPIRIT) CATEGORY No Response

NUMBER 1

(Total = 706)

PERCENT 0.1

Definitely Sense of Community

148

21.0

Probably Sense of Community

207

29.3

Everyone Goes Own Way

286

40.5

Definitely Goes Own Way

21

3.0

No Opinion

38

5.4

5

0.7

Missino Values

16

21. URGENT NEIGHBOURHOOD ISSUES OR PROBLEMS:

A.

CATEGORY

PERCENT

Yes

160

22.7

No

535

75.8

No Opinion

7

1.0

Missing Values

4

0.6

706

100.0

TOTAL

B.

NUMBER

OF THE 160 "YES" RESPONSES, THE URGENT PROBLEMS OR ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED/CLASSIFIED TO BE:

ISSUE/PROBLEM

RESPONSE

NO RESPONSE

Traffic

28 (17.5)

132 (82.5)

Crime

14 (8.7)

146 (91.2)

19 (11.9)

141 (88.1)

No Community Feeling

2 (1.2)

158 (98.7)

Run Down Appearance

3 (1.9)

157 (98.1)

Bus Kids Out of Neighbourhood

4 (2.5)

156 (97.5)

Poorly Maintained Vacant Lots

11 (6.9)

149 (93.1)

98 (61.2)

62 (38.7)

Basement Flooding

Other

17

22. IDENTIFICATION OF AREA WHERE LARGEST NON FOOD DOLLAR PURCHASES ARE MADE:

PERCENT

LOCATION

NUMBER

Bonnie Doon

277

39.2

Downtown

85

12.0

Southgate Mall

80

11.3

Heritage Mall

75

10.6

Capilano Mall

57

8.1

Millbourne Shopping Centre

38

5.4

No One Particular Area

34

4.8

West Edmonton Mall

19

2.7

Other

19

2.7

Kingsway Garden Mall

5

0.7

I Don't Know

4

0.6

Northwood/Northgate

3

0.4

Outside the City

2

0.3

Whyte Avenue/ Old Strathcona

1

0.1

Southpark Village

1

0.1

Stony Plain Strip

1

0.1

Argyll Road Co-op

1

0.1

Missing Values

4

0.6

706

100.0

TOTAL

18

23.

24.

ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENT SUPPORT FOR CHANGES TO HOMES IN THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD:

NO OPINION

MISSING VALUES

TOTAL

CATEGORY

YES

NO

Small Officesin-the-home

513 (72.7)

167 (23.7)

17 (2.4)

9 (1.3)

706 (100.0)

Addition to Home (Older neighbourhoods and Mature Suburbs only)

433 (90.8)

33 (6.9)

6 (1.3)

5 (1.0)

477 (100.0)

Basement Suites

399 (56.5)

276 (39.1)

23 (3.3)

8 (1.1)

706 (100.0)

ASSESSMENT OF RESIDENTS FEELINGS ON WHETHER THEY HAVE INFLUENCE IN LOCAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DECISIONS:

CATEGORY YES

MISSING NO NO NO OPINION RESPONSE VALUES TOTAL

Feel Have Influence

155 (22.0)

519 (73.5)

26 (3.7)

Want More Influence

440 (62.3)

237 (33.6)

24 (3.4)

Support Community League Involvement

600 (85.0)

72 (10.2)

29 (4.1)

1 (0.1)

_

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

19

25. SUPPORT FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT IN OLDER NEIGHBOURHOODS AND MATURE SUBURBS: NO RESPONSE YES

TYPE

YESNO MISSING NO CONDITIONS OPINION VALUE TOTAL

Duplexes

1 (0.2)

177 (37.1)

257 (53.9)

18 (3.8)

20 (4.2)

4 (0.8)

477 (100.0)

Three Plexes/ Four Plexes

1 (0.2)

102 (21.4)

344 (72.1)

7 (1.5)

19 (4.0)

4 (0.8)

477 (100.0)

Town Housing/ Row Housing

2 (0.4)

66 (13.8)

379 (79.5)

8 (1.7)

18 (3.8)

3 (0.8)

477 (100.0)

26. SUPPORT FOR LOCAL SCHOOL CLOSURES IN OLDER NEIGHBOURHOODS AND MATURE SUBURBS:

CATEGORY

NUMBER

PERCENT

Yes

288

60.4

No

150

31.4

34

7.1

5

1.0

477

100.0

No Opinion Missing Values

TOTAL

27. SATISFACTION WITH THE PHYSICAL LAYOUT OF NEIGHBOURHOOD IN THE NEW SUBURBS:

CATEGORY

NO RESPONSE

VERY SATISFIED

SOMEWHAT SATISFIED

VERY DISSATISFIED

SOMEWHAT DISSATISFIED

NO OPINION

MISSING VALUES

TOTAL

Housing Mix

1 (0.4)

57 (24.9)

114 (49.8)

36 (15.7)

17 (7.4)

2 (0.9)

2 (0.9)

229 (100 -)

Location of Public Housing

1 (0.4)

44 (19.2)

122 (53.3)

32 (14.0)

9 (3.9)

19 (8.3)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

Roadway Design

1 (0.4)

61 (26.6)

110 (48.0)

41 (17.9)

14 (6.1)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

Clustering of School/Commercial

1 (0.4)

66 (28.8)

118 (51.5)

24 (10.5)

12 (5.2)

6 (2.6)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

Transmission Lines/ Pipeline Locations

3 (1.3)

44 (19.2)

116 (50.7)

17 (7.4)

8 (3.5)

38 (16.6)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

54 (23.6)

8 (3.5)

4 (1.7)

10 (4.4)

7 (3.1)

140 (61.1)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

Other Features (No --,- 4 (1.7%))

21

28. ASSESSMENT OF FEATURES CONTRIBUTING TO THE SPECIAL IDENTITY OF A NEIGHBOURHOOD (NEW SUBURBS ONLY): NO CATEGORY RESPONSE

YES

NO

NO OPINION

MISSING VALUES

TOTAL

Named Instead of Numbered Streets

1 (0.4)

103 (45.0)

17 (51.1)

5 (2.2)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

Architectural Control

1 (0.4)

152 (66.4)

68 (29.7)

5 (2.2)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

174 (76.0)

47 (20.5)

5 (2.2)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

175 (76.4)

49 (21.4)

2 (0.9)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

59 (25.8)

142 (62.0)

10 (4.4)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

Street & Lot Layout Neighbourhood Name/Gateway Signs Other Features

-

15 (6.6)

29. PREFERENCES FOR DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS TO NEW NEIGHBOURHOODS BEFORE CITY APPROVAL:

HIGH A. CATEGORY PRIORITY

MEDIUM PRIORITY

LOW PRIORITY

UNNECESSARY

NO OPINION

MISSING VALUES

SUBTOTAL GROUP

Design Around Natural Features

175 (76.4)

42 (18.3)

5 (2.2)

5 (2.2)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.)

NEW

Planting Trees on Streets/Sidewalks

158 (69.0)

47 (20.5)

13 (5.7)

9 (3.9)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

NEW

B. WHEN RESPONDENTS WERE ASKED IF THEY HAD ANY FURTHER SUGGESTIONS FOR DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS TO BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY BEFORE APPROVING NEW SUBDIVISIONS, THE ANSWER WAS: CATEGORY No Response Yes No Missing Values

TOTAL

NUMBER

PERCENT

3

(1.3)

91

(39.7)

133

(58.1)

2

(0.9)

229

(100.0)

23

30. CONCERNS ABOUT LOCAL STREET NUMBERING SYSTEM IN THE NEW SUBURBS:

NUMBER

CATEGORY Yes No

PERCENT

78

(34.1)

148

(64.6)

No Opinion

1

(0.4)

Missing Values

2

(0.9)

229

(100.0)

TOTAL

31. PREFERRED TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR MILL WOODS TOWN CENTRE AND TAWA SITES:

CATEGORY

Low-Rise Multiple Family Housing Medium-Rise Apartments High-Rise Apartments Other

NO RESPONSE

YES

NO

NO OPINION

MISSING VALUES

TOTAL

114 (49.8)

98 (42.8)

14 (6.1)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

70 (30.6)

145 (63.3)

12 (5.2)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

1 (0.4)

31 (13.5)

186 (81.2)

9 (3.9)

2 (0.9)

229 (100.0)

137 (59.8)

77 (33.6)

12 (5.2)

3 (1.3)

229 (100.0)

1 (0.4)

-

24

32.

NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN HOUSEHOLD BY AGE GROUPS:

AGE GROUP

MISSING VALUES

NONE

ONE

0-4

565 (80.0)

100 (14.2)

34 (4.8)

2 (0.3)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

5-12

568 (80.5)

81 (11.5)

47 (6.7)

5 (0.7)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

13-19

549 (77.8)

98 (13.9)

34 (4.8)

19 (2.7)

1 (0.1)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

20-39

249 (35.3)

150 (21.2)

268 (38.0)

28 (4.0)

6 (0.8)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

40-64

387 (54.8)

135 (19.1)

174 (24.6)

3 (0.4)

2 (0.3)

5 (0.7)

706 (100.0)

65+

586 (83.0)

74 (10.5)

40 (5.7)

1 (0.1)

5 (0 .7 )

706 (100.0)

TWO

THREE

FOUR

TOTAL

B. THEREFORE, THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE BY AGE GROUPS IN THE HOUSEHOLDS SURVEYED IS: 0-4 5-12 13-19 20-39 40-64 65+ TOTAL

174 190 227 794 500 158 2,043

C. AND THE AGE OF THE RESPONDENTS IS AS FOLLOWS: AGE GROUP No Response

NUMBER 1

PERCENT 0.1

13-19

39

5.5

20-39

347

49.2

40-64

228

32.3

85

12.0

6

0.8

706

100.0

65+ Missing Values

TOTAL

25

33.

CHILD CARE FOR THE HOUSEHOLD:

A.

CATEGORY

NUMBER

No Response

3

Daily

35

15.4

Part of the Week

13

5.7

Occasionally

52

22.8

118

51.8

7

3.1

228

100.0

Never Missing Values

TOTAL B.

PERCENT

OF THOSE 48 RESPONDENTS WHO USE CHILD CARE SERVICES ON A "DAILY" OR FOR "PART OF THE WEEK BASIS", THE TYPE OF SERVICES USED INCLUDE:

SERVICE

NO RESPONSE

YES

NO

TOTAL

Subsidized NonProfit Centre

1 (2.1)

9 (18.8)

38 (79.2)

48 (100.0)

Private Centre

1 (2.1)

9 (18.8)

38 (79.2)

48 (100.0)

Baby-Sitter in the Home

1 (2.1)

15 (31.3)

32 (66.7)

48 (100.0)

Live-In BabySitter/Nanny

1 (2.1)

1 (2.1)

46 (95.8)

48 (100.0)

Private Home

1 (2.1)

13 (27.1)

34 (70.8)

48 (100.0)

After-School Care Program

1 (2.1)

47 (97.9)

48 (100.0)

43 (89.6)

48 (100.0)

Other

5 (10.4)

26

C.

OF THOSE 48 RESPONDENTS WHO USE CHILD CARE SERVICES, THEIR SATISFACTION RATINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS:

CATEGORY No Response Very Satisfied

NUMBER 1

PERCENT 2.1

38

79.2

Somewhat Satisfied

5

10.4

Somewhat Dissatisfied

2

4.2

Very Dissatisfied

1

2.1

Missina Values

1

2.1

TOTAL

48

(100.0)

34. NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS HAVING ADDITIONAL (FINAL) COMMENTS ON THE SURVEY: FINAL COMMENTS:

CATEGORY

NUMBER

No Response

539

76.3

Response

161

22.8

6

0.8

Missing Values

TOTAL

706

PERCENT

(100.0)

.