City of Charlottesville
Neighborhood Planning
Needs Survey
December 4, 2006
Authors
Thomas M. Guterbock
Director
Michael A. Aquino
Research Analyst
Special thanks to:
Jim Tolbert, Director of
Neighborhood Development
Services
Gary O’Connell, City Manager
Robin A. Bebel
Assistant Director
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
2
Survey Goals

Determine residents’ opinions about quality of life in the
City of Charlottesville

Compare ratings with the 2000 survey

Compare ratings among the five neighborhood sectors:
 North, East, South, South-Central, and West

Evaluate the importance of a number of City goals

Determine residents’ level of satisfaction with City services
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
3
Survey Features

n of 1,111

Margin of error +/- 3.0%

Many questions comparable to 2000 survey

Field Period: February - March, 2006
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
4
More Features

Listed telephone numbers

Respondent selection within household

Post-weighting of sample (US Census data)

CATI (Computer-Assisted Telephone
Interviewing)

Solid interviewer training
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
5
The Five Sectors
NORTH
Barracks/Rugby/Kellytown/Greenleaf
Greenbrier
WEST
Fry’s Spring
Jefferson Park Avenue
Lewis Mountain
Venable
10th and Page/WCEH
Meadows
EAST
Rose Hill
Locust Grove
Martha Jefferson
North Downtown
Starr Hill
Woolen Mills
SOUTHCENTRAL
Fifeville
Johnson Village
Ridge Street
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
SOUTH
Belmont
6
Topic Overview

Quality of Life in Charlottesville

Strategic Goals

Services

Neighborhood Improvements

Housing Issues

Safety & Crime

Cooperation of Charlottesville & Albemarle County
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
7
Quality of Life in
Charlottesville
Charlottesville as a Place to Live

On a 10-point Scale…

Sixty-four percent gave the city an “8” or better

Fourteen percent gave the city a “10”

Mean rating for 2006: 7.72
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
9
Rating Charlottesville
Over the Years
10
9
Mean Rating
8
7.19
7.56
7.89
7.72*
On a ten-point scale…
 Charlottesville received an
overall mean score of 7.72
7
6
 This rating is statistically
different from the rating
received in 2000, but higher
than ratings received in earlier
years
5
4
3
2
1
1975
1993
2000
Year
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
2006
10
Rating Charlottesville
Now and Five Years Ago
Five Years Ago
Now
10
9
Only respondents living
in the City of
Charlottesville for five
years or more are
analyzed in this graph.
8
7.69
8.04
7.78
7.81
7
Mean Rating

6
5
4
3
2
1
2000
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
2006
Year
11
Neighborhood
as a Place to Live
2000
2006
7.47
7.45
Overall Hood
North
8.01
7.89
East
8.11
8.10
On a ten-point scale…
• Citizens in the East and North
sectors of Charlottesville rate their
neighborhood significantly higher
than those living in the South,
South-Central, and West
neighborhood sectors.
7.27
7.43
South
6.64
6.36
South-Central
7.34
7.32
West
1
2
3
4
5
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
6
7
8
9
10
12
Strategic Goals
Importance Ratings

On a three-point scale…

Respondents rated each goal as “very
important,” “somewhat important,” or “not that
important”

The following slides show the percentage of
respondents rating each goal as “very
important”
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
14
Top Five Most Important Goals…

Quality of Education
85.2%

Housing more Affordable
84.4%

Expanding Affordable Health Care
75.1%

Preserving Nat. Resources / Space
72.1%

Neighborhoods and Streets Safer
71.7%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
15
Goals Thought Less Important…

Convenient Access to Services from City
37.7%

Concentrating Future Growth of UVa
41.5%

Promoting Economic Growth through
Selected Commercial Areas
43.6%
Continued Support for Cultural and
Entertainment opportunities
49.2%
Emphasizing Prevention and
Self-Sufficiency Programs for Adults
50.9%


Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
16
Goals that Increased in Importance
(2006 versus 2000)

More Affordable Housing
(+ 10.0%)

Controlling Rate of Growth in Area
(+ 8.0%)

Providing better Public Transportation
(+ 7.9%)
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
17
Goals that Decreased in Importance
(2006 versus 2000)

Expanding/Improving Affordable Child Care
(- 10.4%)

Emphasizing Prevention / Self-Sufficiency
Programs for Adults
(- 9.7%)

More Convenient to Access Services through City
(- 9.2%)

Making Neighborhoods / Streets Safer
(- 8.6%)

Continued Support for cultural and
Entertainment Opportunities
(- 7.6%)
Expanding Services for Elderly
(- 6.6%)

Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
18
Satisfaction With Services
Overall Satisfaction with
City Services
Very
Dissatisfied,
4.3%
Somewhat
Dissatisfied,
8.4%
Somewhat
Satisfied,
64.8%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
Very
Satisfied,
22.5%
Percent Satisfied: 87.3%
20
Overall Satisfaction
with the City in Providing Services
2000
2006
22.5%
Very
Satisfied
31.2%
On a four-point scale…
64.8%
Somew hat
Satisfied
8.4%
Somew hat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
 Services received an overall
mean score of 3.06
58.9%
 This rating is statistically
lower than the rating received
in 2000 (3.19)
8.0%
4.3%
1.9%
0%
20%
40%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
60%
80%
100%
21
Of the 17 Service Items
in the Survey…

12 items had satisfaction levels of 60% or better

5 items had satisfaction levels of 75% or better

The following ratings show percentage of
respondents who were “satisfied”
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
22
The Top Five Service Items…
HIGHEST SATISFACTION FOR:

Police Protection
89.8%

Open Green Spaces and Parks
86.0%

Repairing / Maintaining Streets and Roads
80.6%

Controlling Litter / Weeds on City Streets
78.8%

Garbage / Waste Collection
77.0%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
23
The Bottom Five Service Items…
LOWEST SATISFACTION FOR:

Reducing Traffic Congestion / Noise

Promoting Adequate Housing Opportunities 48.3%

Reducing Drugs among Youth
49.6%

Promoting Higher Paid Employment
52.1%

Reducing Drugs among Adults
57.6%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
43.1%
24
What’s UP since 2000?
RESPONDENTS ARE MORE SATISFIED WITH:

Police Protection
(+ 10.7%)

Reducing Drugs among Adults
(+ 8.8%)

Reducing Drugs among Youth
(+ 6.5%)
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
25
What’s DOWN since 2000?
RESPONDENTS ARE LESS SATISFIED WITH:

Adequate Housing Opportunities

Higher Paid Employment Opportunities (- 5.0%)

Providing Services, Overall
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
(- 15.5%)
(- 2.8%)
26
Services and Taxes

“Considering all of
the City
government’s
services on the one
hand and taxes on the
other, which of the
following comes
closest to your
view?”
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
Increase
services and
taxes, 18.6%
Keep
services and
taxes same,
51.3%
Some other
change,
14.3%
Decrease
services and
taxes, 15.9%
27
Neighborhood
Improvements
Of the Neighborhood Items…

There was little change in importance ratings when
compared to the 2000 survey

However, neighborhood improvement items vary in
importance when compared across the five neighborhood
sectors

The following slides show percentages of respondents
rating each neighborhood improvement items as “very
important”
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
29
Most Important Neighborhood
Improvement Items …
IMPORTANCE WAS HIGHEST FOR:

Increasing Home Ownership
45.8%

More Maintenance of Rental Properties
43.6%

More Effective Traffic and Parking Controls 42.3%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
30
Less Important Neighborhood
Improvement Items …
IMPORTANCE WAS LOWEST FOR:

Improve Quality of Housing in Neighborhood 33.3%

More Visually Attractive Neighborhood
34.2%

More Unified and Organized Neighborhood
to Solve Problems
34.7%
More Maintenance of Streets, Sidewalks,
Gutters, Curbs, Gutters, Alleyways
38.2%

Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
31
Neighborhood Improvement
Items by Sector

In general, South and South-Central sectors tended to rate
neighborhood improvements items higher in importance

South, South-Central and West sectors rated improvements in rental
properties as very important

For “quality of housing,” South and South-Central rate
improvements higher in importance

South and South-Central also found creation of a more unified and
organized neighborhood to be of high importance

All five sectors ranked an increase in home ownership among
residents as very important
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
32
Neighborhood Association
Participation
Yes, participate,
28.3%
Do not know of,
do not
participate,
31.5%
Know of, but do
not participate,
40.2%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
33
Housing Issues
Top Housing Issues
PERCENT AGREEING:

Cost of Buying Home Too High
90.1%

Neighborhood is Clean / Maintained
88.6%

Easy to Walk in Neighborhood
84.0%

Houses Well Maintained
83.7%

Satisfactory Bus Service in
Neighborhood
74.0%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
35
Housing Issues Since 2000?
MORE RESPONDENTS AGREE THAT:
 Cost of Buying Home Too High

Cost of Rent Too High
(+ 24.8%)
(+ 14.2%)
WHILE LESS RESPONDENTS AGREE THAT:
 Easy to Walk in Neighborhood
(- 5.9%)

Satisfactory Bus Service in
Neighborhood
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
(- 3.4%)
36
Of the Housing Issues…

Most respondents (90.1%) agreed that the cost of buying a
home in the neighborhood is too high


Similarly, 72.1% agreed that the cost of rent in the
neighborhood is too high


A major increase from 2000 (65.3%)
A major increase from 2000 (57.9%)
Additionally most respondents agreed that their
neighborhood…



Is overall clean and well maintained
Is easy to walk around
Houses are well maintained
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
37
Safety & Crime
Top Safety Items
PERCENT FEELING SAFE IN:

Downtown Mall DAY TIME
98.8%

Business Areas DAY TIME
97.9%

Neighborhood DAY TIME

West Main Street DAY TIME
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
97.6%
95.0%
39
Lower Safety Items
PERCENT FEELING SAFE IN:

West Main Street AFTER DARK
57.8%

Business Areas AFTER DARK
77.8%

Downtown Mall AFTER DARK
77.9%

Neighborhood AFTER DARK
80.4%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
40
Safety in Areas of the City
Daytime
100%
97.9%
Nighttime
98.8%
95.0%
90%
Percent Feeling Safe
80%
77.8%
77.9%
70%
57.8%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Business Areas
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
West Main Street
Downtown Mall
41
Perceptions of Safety Since 2000

In DAYTIME, residents are feeling safer
 On the downtown mall
(+ 2.1%)
 In the West Main Street area
(+ 2.1%)

AFTER DARK, residents are feeling safer
 On the downtown mall
(+ 15.0%)
 In the West Main Street area
(+ 11.5%)
 In business areas of the city
(+ 9.5%)
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
42
Neighborhood Safety by Sector
Daytime
100%
100.0%
98.8%
90.0%
90%
Nighttime
96.6%
97.5%
94.2%
89.2%
80.4%
Percent Feeling Safe
80%
73.7%
70%
65.3%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
North
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
East
South
South-Central
West
43
Importance of Crime as a Problem
Varies by Neighborhood
Percent Indicating
Area
Most
Important
One of
the
More
Important
Not
that
Important
North
8.8
29.6
61.6
East
3.4
16.1
80.5
South
12.4
44.7
42.9
South-Central
15.8
40.7
43.4
West
8.4
38.7
52.9
Overall
9.2
33.5
57.3
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
44
Cooperation of
Charlottesville and
Albemarle County
Coop Issues

Generally, all five sectors are in favor of the city and
county working together to plan for the whole community

And, all five sectors favor more joint programs and
services that would serve the entire area

There is support for joint fire fighting services and for a
merge of parks and recreation systems into an area-wide
system

Support begins to diminish for a joint police department,
schools, and government
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
46
Most Favored Coop Items
PERCENT FAVORING:



City & County work closer in planning
for whole community
93.9%
City & County should set up more joint
programs and services
93.1%
City & County should provide joint fire
fighting services
83.4%
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
47
Less Favored Coop Items
PERCENT FAVORING:
City & County consolidate into a single,
unified government
48.5%

City & County schools should merge
50.8%

City & County police should merge
52.9%

Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
48
Summary
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
Highlights of the Results

“Quality of Life” rating is down slightly since 2000,
but remains above earlier levels

“Education” remains number one goal

Need for more Affordable Housing has increased
greatly

87.3% satisfied with City Services overall

Down slightly from 2000
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
50
More Highlights . . .

Striking improvements in perceptions of Safety
since 2000

City sectors vary in concerns and needed
improvements

City and County cooperation is favored by most
residents
Center for Survey Research
University of Virginia
51
For further information please contact:
Thomas M. Guterbock
Director
434-243-5223
TomG@virginia.edu
www.virginia.edu/surveys
City of Charlottesville
Neighborhood Planning
Needs Survey
December 4, 2006