|
|
|
|
Phoenix General Plan
As the new millennium dawns, the City of Phoenix
is preparing to update its General Plan as a planning and development
guide for city officials, civic leaders and residents during the
next twenty plus years. The City of Phoenix commissioned this research
to develop an understanding of resident interest in, reaction to
and priorities toward issues of urban services and growth.
The results found in this report are based on a sample of 2,044
Phoenix residents. The research was conducted by phone during the
months of December 1999 and January 2000. The average length of
interview was just over 20 minutes.
1. Most Valued Attributes
A portion of respondents was asked to specify what they valued
most about the Metropolitan Phoenix area as a place to
live and work. Despite being asked not to comment on attributes
that cannot be affected by the government, more than one of
five (22%) mentioned the weather as the thing they value
most about the area.
Accessibility to needs (20%), job opportunities (13%) and
a variety of entertainment options (11%) were also well
mentioned.
Hispanic respondents were more likely than the average respondent
to mention job opportunities (29%), a laid back lifestyle (10%)
and reduced violence (6%). Conversely, Hispanic participants
were less likely than the overall sample to mention the weather
(9%), accessibility to needs (10%), entertainment options (1%)
and the environment (2%).
Implications
The Valley's weather is appreciated by both visitors and residents.
The weather can be a strong positive element for any marketing
campaign for Phoenix, regardless of the target market.
The Phoenix area generally offers a friendly, safe, laid-back
environment for Hispanics to seek employment. It is not surprising
the Hispanic population in Phoenix is growing at a fast pace.
Expect this population to grow at an even greater rate in the
future.
2. Least Liked Attribute
When a portion of respondents was asked what they least liked
about living in the Metropolitan Phoenix area, more than
one of three mentioned the traffic (37%). Nearly one of five
respondents cited air pollution, smog and/or dust (19%).
The area's growth/sprawl (14%), crime and drugs (13%) and
a perception of poor mass transit (13%) were also mentioned
often.
Implications
The issues that top this list are all considered problems by
a large and significant portion of the population. Certainly
issues relating to traffic and/or transit are most prominent,
but concerns about pollution, managed growth and crime and drugs
are of critical importance to major segments of the City's residents.
These issues should be among the top of agenda items when The
General Plan is developed.
3. Perception that Phoenix is a Good Place to Live
All 2,044 respondents were asked questions about living in
the City of Phoenix (as opposed to the metropolitan area). Phoenix
residents are generally happy with Phoenix as a place
to live. Nine of ten (91%) agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement, "Overall, Phoenix is a good place to live."
Agreement was high among all analyzed subgroups.
Implications
Residents recognize there are plusses and minuses to living
in Phoenix, but most see their residential "balance sheet"
flowing with black ink (in the positive). City leaders need
to remind and urge their constituents to back organized efforts
that maintain and protect the factors that make
living in Phoenix worthwhile. Residents may not inherently understand
the cost of such maintenance, let alone improving quality of
life.
4. Things Most Liked About Living in Phoenix
All respondents were asked to specify the one thing they most
like about living in the City of Phoenix. Approximately one
of three say the weather (34%). (Those who mentioned the weather
were probed to think of things other than weather, family or
friends.)
Accessibility to needs, such as shopping and dining (18%),
the availability of entertainment and cultural activities (13%)
and employment opportunities (9%) were the next most mentioned
responses.
Implications
Interest in and availability of a wide variety of shopping
and entertainment venues are good news for both consumers and
retailers. A diverse population actively seeking shopping and
entertainment choices provides a myriad of opportunities for
creative business enterprises.
5. Things Most Disliked About Living in Phoenix
Respondents were then asked to specify the things they least
liked about living in Phoenix. One of three respondents cited
traffic issues (34%), and about one of six mentioned
air pollution (17%). Crime and drugs (13%), growth/sprawl
(11%) and poor mass transit (9%) were all mentioned by a
significant portion of participants.
Implications
Solutions to problems must be logical and realistic and also
appear that way to residents. Despite wanting relief from traffic
problems, Phoenix residents have a history of voting down projects
that are poorly defined, seem to assist a limited portion of
the population or do not generate a sense of high feasibility
for success.
Respondents were read a list of 25 ways tax money could be spent
over the next twenty years and asked to specify how important
it was for each item to receive funding.
Reducing air pollution (86%), increasing crime reduction efforts
(82%), conserving the water supply (79%) and protecting residents
from hazardous materials and contaminants (75%) were each considered
very important by at least three of four respondents. Fifteen
of the twenty-five subjects were each considered very important
by at least half of the sample. The issues of attracting more
tourists (21%) and conventions (27%) received the least support.
It is important to note ratings for desert preserves and city
parks may not be fully representative of how strongly residents
feel about the importance of these land uses. This research was
conducted very shortly after the citizens of Phoenix passed a
proposition calling for the purchase of state trust lands for
the Sonoran Desert open space and the development of regional
and neighborhood parks to enhance community safety and recreation
(Proposition 101, passed in September 1999).
Implications
The issues which respondents previously stated they felt were
negatives to living in Phoenix top this list (freeway development
is a county/state issue and thus is not addressed). This list
appears to accurately reflect the priorities of Phoenix residents.
1. Most Important Thing City of Phoenix Can Improve
When respondents were asked what they considered the one most
important thing the City of Phoenix can do to improve the quality
of life for residents, increasing crime reduction efforts
(17%) and reducing air pollution (15%) were the two most
frequent responses.
Five of next nine most voiced comments dealt with transportation
issues: add light rail (8%), expand bus service (5%),
improve mass transit (4%), widen major streets (3%) and improve
traffic flow (3%). Other responses of three percent or more
included: rehabilitate depressed neighborhoods (4%), stop growth/urban
sprawl (4%), increase employment opportunities (3%) and improve
schools (3%).
Implications
Again, issues of traffic and transit, pollution and crime are
voiced most often by residents as the primary factors that need
to be addressed to maintain (or improve) the quality of life
in Phoenix.
2. Suggestions Relating to Specific Changes
After giving their opinion of what they considered the most
important thing the City of Phoenix can do to improve their
quality of life, respondents were asked what they would suggest
about implementing that improvement. Nearly half of the respondents
who most wanted to have crime reduction effort increased suggested
the city needs to improve or expand law enforcement 47%).
Many felt there should be more strict laws for criminal
activity (18%).
Respondents who most wanted a reduction in air pollution suggested
lowering emissions through carpooling, alternative fueling
or stricter testing (51%), improving/expanding the transit system
(20%) and developing a light rail system (18%).
Implications
Residents know what they do not like about the City and have
some general ideas about how to make improvements. City leaders
need to formulate solutions that meet the hopes and expectations
of citizens in a palatable and realistic manner.
3. Perceptions of Importance of Potential Improvements to
Sky Harbor Airport
A sub-sample of respondents were read a list of five factors
that could improve Sky Harbor Airport and asked their perception
of the importance of each item. Seven of ten (71%) felt that
direct access to the airport for public transit was very
important; more than 9 of 10 (94%) considered it at least somewhat
important. Half or nearly half felt more short term parking
(50%) and maintaining a competitive advantage (45%) were very
important. About a third considered using more land for buffer
zones (36%) and expanding the airport (32%) to be very important.
Implications
Residents showed concern for convenience for themselves and
their visitors in their strong support for public transit access
to the airport.
Though support for airport expansion and buffer zones is lower
than that for access and parking, residents may not fully understand
these issues. Phoenix is a major hub for air traffic and the
public needs to be educated about significant increases in flight
activity expected in the future.
4. Perception of Importance of Potential Improvements to City
Parks
A randomly selected portion of respondents was read a list
of ten ways in which city parks could be improved and asked
to rate their perception of the need for each improvement. Night
time security lighting (72%), restrooms (64%), increased accessibility
for persons with disabilities (61%), children's play equipment
(59%) and walking/biking paths (52%) were each considered
very important by more than half the respondents.
Implications
All improvements were considered at least somewhat important
by two-thirds or more of the sample. Residents value and want
parks. This, then, is a priority list. Safety and basic comforts
are considered to be of greatest importance.
While importance is rated highly, it is important to note ratings
for city parks may still be understated. This research was conducted
very shortly after the citizens of Phoenix passed a proposition
calling for the development of regional and neighborhood parks
to enhance community safety and recreation (Proposition 101,
passed in September 1999).
5. Perceptions/Use of Preserves
A randomly selected portion of respondents was asked if they
use any preserve or open space in the city of Phoenix. Nearly
two of five (37%) said they did make use of such areas.
Respondents who said they did use preserves or open spaces
within the City of Phoenix were read a list of ten ways such
areas could be improved and asked their perception of the need
for each improvement. Maintaining the natural landscape
was considered very important by seven of ten respondents (70%).
Also considered very important by more than half of those sampled
were picnic areas with shade (58%), trails for hiking, jogging
or biking (57%) and park rangers for security (55%).
Implications
Once again, respondents are saying the quality of life is here,
please maintain it (preserve the natural landscape). Also, each
improvement was considered at least somewhat important by most
respondents. None of the issues are regarded as poor ideas,
they are simply measured against overall priorities.
It is important to note ratings for desert preserves may not
be fully representative of how strongly residents feel about
the importance of these lands. This research was conducted very
shortly after the citizens of Phoenix passed a proposition calling
for the purchase of state trust lands for the Sonoran Desert
open space (Proposition 101, passed in September 1999).
1. Main Reasons for Location of Home
All respondents were asked to give their three main reasons
for why they chose to live where they do in Phoenix. The three
most mentioned reasons were each voiced by about one of five
respondents: family (20%), proximity to work (20%) and the
low cost of living (19%). One of six respondents said they
liked the look of the neighborhood (17%) and a like percentage
simply stated they liked the weather where they live (17%).
Implications
The high percentage of comments regarding a desire to be close
to one's place of work is probably due to the frustration with
traffic and transportation issues seen in other responses.
A large portion of respondents said "family" was
a factor in their choice of home location. This may spell an
opportunity to promote Phoenix as one's hometown (not just someplace
to which they have moved).
2. One Thing City Could Do to Improve Neighborhood
Each respondent was asked to specify the one thing the city
could do to improve their neighborhood. A wide range of responses
was given, headed by more police patrols/quicker response
times (11%) and reducing/slowing neighborhood traffic (10%).
Implications
These issues are symptomatic of urban growth and increased
population density. As the city population continues to expand,
there will be increasing need for protecting the public and
enforcing traffic laws.
3. Perception of Factors to Improve Neighborhood
All respondents were read a list of nine ways neighborhoods
could be improved and asked their perception of the importance
of each improvement. About two of three said reducing dust
and odors was very important (66%). Other issues considered
very important by more than half of the sample include increasing
the privacy of yards from shops and freeways (54%), work places
within a few miles of home (52%), reducing cut-through traffic
(51%) and developing land toward the center of the city before
land near the edge of the city (51%).
Implications
All of the nine factors were felt to be at least somewhat important
by more than half the sample. Further, eight of the nine were
supported (strongly or somewhat) by three-quarters or more of
the sample. This is another listing of priorities.
Solutions to one problem, freeways and other major traffic
arteries, impact another problem - dust and odors.
4. Incentives for Developing Vacant Land
Respondents were asked how they felt about the city giving
incentives to developers for building on vacant land. Approximately
one of three said they were very favorable to this idea; three
of four stated they were at least somewhat favorable.
Implications
While the majority seem to favor the idea of incentives to
develop vacant land, support is not as strong as for other ideas
measured in this study. It is unclear what issues might trigger
"somewhat favorable" reactions from residents. For
example, issues such as traffic, privacy and a perception of
inappropriate land use could be among those causing less than
strong support.
5. Importance of Additional City Services/Amenities
Some randomly selected respondents were told the city is considering
locating city services such as police, building safety, water,
parks and recreation programs and other departments in neighborhoods.
Participants were then asked how important they thought it was
the city do this in their neighborhood. Nearly half felt it
was very important (48%) and about five of six thought it was
at least somewhat important (84%).
These respondents were also asked about adding community meeting
rooms for nonprofit groups and neighborhood associations to
use. Three of ten participants (30%) felt it was a very important
measure for the city to consider. More than three of four thought
the idea was at least somewhat important (77%).
Implications
These ideas are valued in greater proportion by major subgroups
of citizens, such as lower income residents, minorities and
women. Perhaps the City should place pilot projects with these
services in areas of the city with high concentrations of citizens
most favorable to them to test and refine the elements of these
services.
6. Ideas to Make Community Safer
A random sample of respondents were asked what they thought
the police department could do to make their community a safer
place to live. The primary responses given centered on police
being more visible, available and in contact with the community.
Implications
Many residents appear to feel there may not be a sufficient
level of police patrols/ officers in their neighborhood.
1. Commuting Time to Work
Respondents who commute were asked how long it takes them to
travel to work as well as how long they were willing to take
to travel to work. The median time respondents are willing
to travel is 30 minutes, while the current median time is
20 minutes.
Most (62%) said they were willing to travel at least 20 minutes
before they would consider changing jobs or moving. However,
more than half (56%) currently travel less than twenty minutes.
Only four percent said they spend more than 45 minutes getting
to work.
Implications
Respondents indicate a willingness, and perhaps a knowing resignation,
to accept longer travel times than they currently have.
2. Likelihood to Consider Mass Transit
Respondents who work outside their home were asked how likely
they would be to take mass transit to work if parking were a
minimum of 25 dollars a month and a transit ticket were given
to them for free. Nearly half (46%) said they would be very
likely to use mass transit in such a case and about three of
five (61%) said they would be at least somewhat likely to consider
mass transit as an option for getting to and from work.
Implications
The high level of positive reaction toward using mass transit
is surprising. It may be that respondents are assuming transit
options and schedules will improve and expand at the same time.
3. Likelihood to Consider Car Pooling
Respondents who work outside their home were asked how likely
they would be to form or join a car pool to work if parking
were a minimum of 25 dollars a month and a car pool parking
space were provided for free. About two of five (41%) said they
would be very likely to become involved in a car pool given
this scenario, and about three of five (60%) said they would
be at least somewhat likely to consider car pooling if parking
at work cost a significant amount.
Implications
These are strong positive figures. However, actual involvement
will probably be less due to problems relating to development
and coordination of carpooling programs. The city and major
employers must work to design incentives/rewards that encourage
(and retain) high levels of participation.
1. General Attitude Toward Future Growth
A randomly selected sample of respondents were asked if they
felt the continued growth of the city would bring more benefits
or problems. Approximately three of five (59%) questioned said
they felt continued growth would bring more problems,
three of ten (31%) envisioned more benefits and one of ten (10%)
was not sure what the future would hold with a continued growth.
Implications
Residents are more likely to be concerned with problems of
growth than they are interested in the benefits. Good solutions
to transportation problems, air pollution, and crime might generate
more enthusiasm for growth.
2. Location of New Landfill
A portion of respondents were randomly selected and asked about
their preference for the site of a new solid waste landfill.
These respondents were told a site within the city would cost
less and offer lower fees, but would bring the landfill closer
to neighborhoods. Higher costs and fees would occur if the landfill
were away from neighborhoods and outside of the city limits.
Three of four (75%) said they felt the landfill should be
located outside of the city limits even if they had to pay higher
fees. About one of six (17%) said they would prefer to have
the landfill located within the city, allowing for lower fees.
Implications
Support for the landfill to be located away from neighborhoods
is dominant in virtually all parts of the City.
3. Allocation of Housing Resources
Randomly selected respondents were read a list of five ways
housing resources may be allocated and asked their perception
of the importance of each type of allocation.
Each type of resource allocation was considered very important
by more than half the sample, and three were considered very
important by at least seven of ten respondents - housing
assistance for special needs groups (73%), stop housing discrimination
(73%) and increase home ownership opportunities (70%).
Implications
Each of these allocations is considered at least somewhat important
by nine of ten respondents. Generally, residents appear to consider
all these issues to be basic rights.
4. New Development Fees
Respondents were randomly selected and asked if the city should
continue to charge development fees to cover the cost to build
facilities that serve new developments. More than two of three
(69%) felt such fees should continue to be imposed.
Implications
The majority of respondents want new developments to pay their
own way, and thus do not want to share in the costs for facilities
that will serve these new developments.
5. Taxes for New Development
Two of three (67%) randomly selected respondents feel additional
taxes and fees for building facilities needed to serve new developments
should be limited to those benefiting from the facilities and
not imposed on all residents.
Implications
Unless it can be shown that these facilities will benefit more
than a limited population (e.g. a housing subdivision) the percentage
favoring imposition of fees/taxes on all citizens will be low.
Last modified on
01/03/2008 15:12:15
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Related
Links |
 |
|
