Albemarle County 2004 Citizen Survey

Albemarle County 2004 Citizen Survey

Albemarle County 2004 Citizen Survey

October 6, 2004

2

Center for Survey ResearchUniversity of VirginiaCenter for Survey ResearchUniversity of Virginia

AuthorsAuthors

Thomas M. GuterbockDirector

Anna MacIntoshResearch Analyst

Katherine DraughonResearch Consultant

3


Survey GoalsSurvey Goals Determine residents’ opinions about quality

of life in Albemarle County Assess residents’ satisfaction with County’s

efforts to achieve its Strategic Planning goals Determine residents’ level of satisfaction with

County services Measure opinion about the way in which the

County is managing growth Measure change on key indicators

4


Survey FeaturesSurvey Features N of 707

Margin of error +/- 3.7%

Some questions comparable to 1994 and 2002 surveys

Field Period: June 2004

5


More FeaturesMore Features

RDD (random digit dialing) Respondent selection within household Balanced cross-section of County

population, with post-weighting of sample CATI (computer-assisted telephone

interviewing) Solid interviewer training

6

Quality of Life in Albemarle

Quality of Life Rating“Rate Albemarle as a place to live”

0.6%

0.1%

0.6%

0.9%

5.5%

4.8%

16.6%

36.1%

19.1%

15.7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Qu

alit

y o

f L

ife

Rat

ing

Percent of Respondents

8


On a 10-point Scale…On a 10-point Scale… The mean rating is 7.96

Seventy-one percent gave the county an “8” or better

Sixteen percent gave the county a “10”

Twelve percent rated the county “6” or lower

Quality of LifeQuality of Life

7.92 8.10 7.96

12345678910

1994 2002 2004

Survey Year

Qu

ali

ty o

f L

ife R

ati

ng

Not significantly different from 1994 or 2002

10


High Ratings Come From…High Ratings Come From… Women Those residents who have lived in Albemarle

longer and older residents Homemakers, students, or retired residents Those residents with high incomes Homeowners and those who live in single family

homes Those who reported themselves as living “out in

the country” and those living in the rural areas in the southern & western parts of the County

11

Satisfaction with Efforts to Achieve Strategic Plan Goals

12


Questions drawn from County’s

four strategic directions:

Questions drawn from County’s

four strategic directions: providing high quality educational

opportunities for Albemarle County citizens of all ages;

protecting the County’s natural, scenic, and historic resources;

enhancing the quality of life for all Albemarle County citizens; and

providing effective and efficient County services to the public in a courteous and equitable manner.

13


Most satisfied with…Most satisfied with… Efforts to make the County a safe and

healthy community (94%)

Efforts to create learning opportunities for all ages (93%)

Efforts to provide effective, responsive, and courteous service to customers (90.8%)

14


Least Satisfied with…Least Satisfied with… Efforts to promote the development of

affordable places to live (48.1%)

Efforts to protect and preserve the County’s rural character (67.6%)

Efforts to provide needed infrastructure (68.6%)

. . . See page 18 of report for full list.

15

Views of Government Spending

What Should Albemarle Do About

Taxes and Services?

What Should Albemarle Do About

Taxes and Services?

Satisfaction With Value for Tax Dollar

Satisfaction With Value for Tax Dollar

Percent satisfied: 80.4%

Very Satisfied26.7%

Somewhat Satisfied53.7%

Somewhat Dissatisfied

12.6%

Very Dissatisfied

7.0%

18

Satisfaction With Services

Overall Satisfaction with County Services


Very Satisfied35.2%



6.0%

Very Dissatisfied

3.4%

Percent Satisfied: 90.6%

Overall SatisfactionOverall Satisfaction

Not significantly different from 2002 Significantly greater than 1994

84.3%92.8% 90.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1994 2002 2004

Per

cen

t S

ati

sfie

d

21


Of the 27 Satisfaction Items

in the Survey…

Of the 27 Satisfaction Items

in the Survey…

22 had satisfaction levels of 60% or better

16 items had satisfaction levels of 75% or better

22


Satisfaction was highest for…Satisfaction was highest for…

Fire protection 95.9% Library services 95.0% Emergency rescue services 94.3% Safety in business areas 92.6% Police protection 92.4%

23


Satisfaction was lowest for…Satisfaction was lowest for…

Ease of getting around by public transportation 45.8%

Level of recycling services 54.2% Safety for walkers and bicyclists

55.3% Efforts to manage growth 56.4% Supporting adequate housing 56.5%

24


Satisfaction with Quality of Education

Satisfaction with Quality of Education

85% in 2004

Not significantly different from 2002

92.2% of those with children in schools were satisfied

25


In General…In General…

Residents were most satisfied with public safety items.

Items related to growth management had lower satisfaction ratings.

26


Changes from 2002Changes from 2002

No significant increases

Significant decreases in 9 items

27


What Went Down…What Went Down… Efforts to manage growth Ease of getting around by car Ease of getting around by public

transportation Efforts to protect natural resources

and the environment Efforts to preserve open space Safety for walkers and bicyclists

28


And Also Down…And Also Down…

Keeping citizens informed about programs and services

Emergency rescue services Efforts to support adequate housing

29

Satisfaction with Contact with the County

30


Contact with CountyContact with County During the past 12 months, 45.7% of

respondents contacted the County government

Most frequently contacted departments were:

• Finance • Police• Building Code/Zoning Services

31


Satisfaction with ContactSatisfaction with Contact

81.5% were satisfied with the helpfulness of County employees

84.9% agreed that the length of time that they had to wait for service was within reason

83.5% were satisfied overall with their experience contacting the County.

32

Planning and Growth

Support for Development AreasSupport for Development Areas

Strongly Favor40.5%

Somewhat Favor29.4%

Somewhat Opposed15.8%

Strongly Opposed14.3%

Percent Favoring: 69.9%

Support for Development Areas


78.7%

69.9%

21.3%

30.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2002 2004

Favor

Oppose


by type of Area

75.4%

65.8%61.4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Rural Urban-ring Growth

Percent Approving

36


How Can we Attract People to Live in Urban Areas?


We asked: “Please tell me how important each

service is for attracting people to live in the urban areas rather than the rural areas within the County.” Very important Somewhat important Not very important

37




Most important: Public utilities Faster emergency response

times A variety of housing types

38




Least important: Having a mix of commercial,

residential, and/or office uses Having bikeways Having neighborhood or corner stores

Substantial variation by subgroup

39


Shopping Outside of CountyShopping Outside of County

Almost half (46.5%) had traveled outside of Albemarle County for the primary purpose of shopping in the past month.

Most Frequently Visited Destinations:Richmond AreaStaunton/Waynesboro Northern Virginia

Most Frequently Purchased Items:ClothingGroceriesHousewares

40

Summary

41


The Survey Said…The Survey Said… Residents are very satisfied with the

quality of life in Albemarle County Ratings of most County services

remain high There are some significant decreases

from the 2002 survey, especially in growth-related service areas

Residents are concerned about issues related to growth and development



Very Satisfied35.2%



6.0%

Very Dissatisfied

3.4%

Percent Satisfied: 90.6%

Albemarle County2004

Citizen Survey

Albemarle County2004

Citizen Survey

October 6, 2004

44


For further information please contact:

Thomas M. [email protected]

www.virginia.edu/surveys

Documents

Albemarle County 2004 Citizen Survey