Loading...
CC SR 20170307 06 - Civic Center SurveyRANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 03/07/2017 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to 1) receive and file a report on the completed Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Master Plan resident mail survey and the upcoming public outreach process; and 2) to call for candidates to serve on a Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Advisory Committee. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Receive and file report on completed Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Master Plan resident mail survey and upcoming public outreach process. (2) Call for candidates to serve on a Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Citizen's Advisory Committee. FISCAL IMPACT: The FY16-17 budget included the allocation of $250,000 for the Civic Center Master Plan Project. Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: None Account Number(s): 330-3036-461-73-00 ORIGINATED BY: Matt Waters, Recreation & Parks Senior Administrative Analyst REVIEWED BY: Gabriella Yap, Deputy City Manager APPROVED BY: Doug Willmore, City Manager f l -i ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Master Plan Survey (page A-1) BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: The City of Rancho Palos Verdes completed an update of its Parks Master Plan in 2015. One of the Master Plan recommendations was to develop a Master Plan for the Point Vicente Park/Civic Center. The City Council approved a Point Vicente Park Civic Center Master Plan survey on November 15, 2016. The survey was intended to elicit feedback on potential elements that could be included on the City Hall site from a wide range of residents. The central focus of the Master Plan process will always be on developing elements for Rancho Palos Verdes residents' use only, and not on any elements that have or act as a regional draw. This survey was an initial step in a lengthy process that will include multiple public workshops, City Council meetings, extensive public outreach and 1 discussion, and, if approved, the involvement of a Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Subcommittee. The survey questions were closely modeled on questions that were prepared in 2003 by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates, a professional public survey firm, as part of an outreach effort by the Open Space Planning and Recreation & Parks Task Force. The recently -completed Civic Center survey was much narrower in scope, focusing on levels of support from residents regarding various potential components for a Civic Center complex. Respondents could also write down additional comments, suggestions or opinions they have regarding the current or future use and development of the Civic Center. They could also identify additional Civic Center components that were not included in the survey. A total of 13,595 surveys were mailed out to all RPV residences in late December 2016. Of these, 2,295 completed surveys were returned to the City. This 17% return rate is well above industry standards for a direct-mail campaign. The original deadline of January 13, 2017, was extended to February 10, 2017, to allow for greater response and to accommodate a number of residents who reported that they had either not received surveys or had misplaced them. All surveys were individually numbered to ensure that responses were limited to one per residence. The survey was mailed by the USPS bulk mail service, and unfortunately, a small number of residents reported that they didn't received a survey. Approximately 80 surveys were distributed in response to requests from residents who apparently did not receive the survey. No surveys were mailed to any residences outside of Rancho Palos Verdes. The survey was heavily marketed to City residents via social media, listsery messages, City Manager announcements, banners and other means in order to maximize the input. For transparency, the surveys have been scanned and posted on the City's Civic Center website at http://www.rpvca.gov/1009/Civic-Center-Master-Plan. Analysis of Survey Responses The survey consisted of four parts: One question asking if respondents favored or opposed developing a civic center site. A scale of 1-4 was used with 1 being strongly oppose and 4 being strongly favor. Respondents could also choose zero for no opinion or decline to state. ➢ 21 questions about individual potential Civic Center elements on a 1-5 scale, with 1 indicating lowest level of support and 5 indicating highest level of support with an additional zero (0) option for no opinion. Open-ended short answer sections asking for a) additional ideas or uses that the respondent supported; b) comments regarding the current or future use of Point Vicente Park/Civic Center; and c) ways the City could better service the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes in general. 2 Optional demographic section asking for gender of respondent, age range of household members, address, email, and how long respondents have lived in the City. Favor or Oppose the Civic Center site development: The following chart shows the number of respondents who picked Option 1 (strongly oppose), 2 (somewhat oppose), 3 (somewhat favor), 4 (strongly favor) and 0 (decline to state/no opinion) Favor or Oppose Redeveloping the Civic Center Site 900 800 700 600 500 420 400 313 300 200 100 0 0 - Decline to 1 - Strongly State/No Oppose Opinion 613 174 775 2 - Somewhat 3 - Somewhat 4 - Strongly Oppose Favor Favor Of those who had an opinion, the results were 74% in favor of and 26% opposed to redeveloping the Civic Center Site. Favor vs. Oppose Redeveloping the Civic Center Site 775,41% 313,17% 174,9% 613,33% ■ 1 - Strongly Oppose 2 - Somewhat Oppose ■ 3 - Somewhat Favor ■ 4 - Strongly Favor 3 Individual Elements The following charts indicate responses to the twenty-one potential elements, based on both total and average scores. For the Average score, those who expressed No Opinion on an element were not counted in order to avoid skewing a score downward. 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Average Score for Elements (excludes those with No Opinion) v 5) O_ The following proposed elements had the highest levels of support, receiving an average score above 3 (out of a possible score of 5) in order of highest score to lowest: 1. Improving existing amenities such as picnic tables, benches & trash/recycling containers. 2. Establishing more formal trailheads (with parking) to allow for access to the Preserve and to relieve pressure on neighborhoods located near other trailheads 3. Including an on-site first responder/public safety presence, including fire, police, ambulance, and an emergency operations center. 4. Creating a village green with gardens and walkways. 5. Installing shade structures 6. Building a public community center. The following proposed elements received the lowest levels of support, receiving an average score below 2, in the order of lowest first: 1. Building a skate park. 2. Building a sand volleyball court. 11 3. Building a baseball diamond. The remaining elements fell in the middle range with scores between 2 and 3. Since average scores are sometimes more susceptible to skewing, Staff also reviewed the total scores. The total scores of various elements ranked similarly to the rankings for average scores. The main difference was that the village green option ranked third while the on-site first responder ranked fourth when looking at highest total score. Every other element ranked the same. Comments and Demographic Information Demographic information and comments were optional areas for residents to fill out. Many declined to provide the demographic information for their household, but of those that responded, the following age groups were reported: Far and above, the 50-59 year olds were the most widely represented in the survey, followed by 70-79 year olds. The least represented were the 30-39 year olds, followed by the 18-29 year olds. Staff is still in the process of analyzing the written comments provided by the survey respondents, and will note additional ideas or suggestions, as well as group recurring themes or concerns into categories. For instance, in a number of surveys, residents appeared to be confusing Upper Point Vicente with Lower Point Vicente and expressed concerns about changing Point Vicente Interpretive Center. Staff will bring forth this analysis at a future date. In addition, Staff will be closely reviewing the responses to how we could better service the residents and begin implementing suggestions that are feasible. Formation of a Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Advisory Committee The potential scope and community importance of the Civic Center Master Plan merits the formation of a citizen's advisory committee. The guidance, advice, and expertise of a cross-section of informed and motivated residents would be of great value as this process moves forward. Advisory committee members would play a vital role in the remainder of the public outreach process, financial analysis, layout/boundary concerns, conceptual designs, and other issues. Staff is recommending the standard approach to advisory committee formation, to include a call for candidates, interviews with City Council, and selection by City Council vote. �� Under 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80 18 and Above Sum 690 487 194 500 1101 653 823 578 Far and above, the 50-59 year olds were the most widely represented in the survey, followed by 70-79 year olds. The least represented were the 30-39 year olds, followed by the 18-29 year olds. Staff is still in the process of analyzing the written comments provided by the survey respondents, and will note additional ideas or suggestions, as well as group recurring themes or concerns into categories. For instance, in a number of surveys, residents appeared to be confusing Upper Point Vicente with Lower Point Vicente and expressed concerns about changing Point Vicente Interpretive Center. Staff will bring forth this analysis at a future date. In addition, Staff will be closely reviewing the responses to how we could better service the residents and begin implementing suggestions that are feasible. Formation of a Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Advisory Committee The potential scope and community importance of the Civic Center Master Plan merits the formation of a citizen's advisory committee. The guidance, advice, and expertise of a cross-section of informed and motivated residents would be of great value as this process moves forward. Advisory committee members would play a vital role in the remainder of the public outreach process, financial analysis, layout/boundary concerns, conceptual designs, and other issues. Staff is recommending the standard approach to advisory committee formation, to include a call for candidates, interviews with City Council, and selection by City Council vote. �� UDcomina Public Outreach Process The results of the survey and the accompanying analysis will be included in two planned public workshops. Attendees will have an opportunity to hear a presentation from Staff, ask questions about the potential elements, and offer their thoughts and opinions on the elements and possible uses for the site. All feedback from the public workshops, along with the survey analysis, meetings with interested parties, and direct correspondence from the general public will be presented at a future City Council meeting. Staff continues to implement a multi -tiered, outreach process to ensure that City residents have a wide range of opportunities to both become informed and educated about this process, while also having a chance to actively participate if they so choose. Below is a list of the public outreach components: • Multiple public workshops throughout Master Plan process • Listsery messages • Weekly Administrative Report updates • Banners posted at designated City locations • Press releases and news coverage • Updates on dedicated Civic Center Master Plan webpage • HOA notifications • Notification of residents adjacent to Civic Center • Notification on selected social media sites such as Nextdoor • City Newsletter articles • Distribution of flyers throughout community • Mayoral announcements • RPVty • Emails and phone calls received from public ALTERNATIVES: In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for the City Council's consideration: 1. Do not form a Point Vicente Park/Civic Center Advisory Committee. 2. Provide direction to Staff regarding the survey results and upcoming public outreach effort. Al • Civic Center Master Plan Survey Iq Dear Rancho Palos Verdes Resident: Thank you for taking the time to complete this important community survey. The City of Rancho Palos Verdes completed an update of its Parks Master Plan in 2015. Among the recommendations approved by the City Council was to develop a site-specific Master Plan for Point Vicente Park/Civic Center at 30940 Hawthorne Blvd., where Rancho Palos Verdes City Hall is located. In addition, a 2013 engineering report concluded that current City Hall structures are in generally poor condition and would require a significant overhaul to bring them up to code. The City is seeking community input regarding the types of elements residents would like to see considered in a redeveloped Civic Center site. Some elements in the survey below may already exist at the Civic Center site, and are included to gauge whether these elements or uses are still desired. The focus will always be on developing elements for RPV residents' use. This survey is an early step in a process, which will likely include multiple public workshops, City Council meetings, and significant public outreach and discussion. We appreciate your contribution and input at this early stage regarding what you feel would best serve the community. For more information about the Civic Center Master Plan project, please visit http://www.rpvca.gov/218/Civic-Center-Master-Plan or call 310-377-0360. This web page will continue to be updated throughout the process. A self-addressed, stamped envelope has been included for your convenience. Please return your completed survey to the City, postmarked no later than January 17, 2017. Developing a civic, recreational and cultural center at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center has been a lingering community issue for many years. In general, would you say that you favor or oppose redeveloping the civic center site, located at 30940 Hawthorne Blvd.? Please circle your answer. Strongly oppose 1 Somewhat oppose 2 Somewhat favor 3 Strongly favor 4 Decline to State/No Opinion 0 2. A number of ideas have been brought up over the years regarding possible uses at Point Vicente Park/Civic Center. Please circle your level of support for each possible use on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being lowest level of support and 5 being highest level of support. You can also circle 0 for "no opinion." a. Including an on-site first responder/public safety presence, including fire, police, ambulance, and an emergency operations center. Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 A- 1 17 C. 0 e. f. 0 IF k. Building a multiple sport gymnasium with basketball and volleyball courts Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building an outdoor swimming pool Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building an indoor swimming pool Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building a band shell or amphitheater with lawn seating Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building a multi-purpose playing field for soccer, lacrosse, etc. Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building a baseball diamond Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building tennis court(s) Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building a sand volleyball court Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Building an outdoor basketball court Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Creating a village green with gardens and walkways Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 Providing a permanent dog park Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 m. Building a children's playground Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 n. Building a public community center Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 o. Improving existing amenities such as picnic tables, benches & trash/recycling containers Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 p. Installing shade structures Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 q. Building a skate park Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 A- 2 r. Building a multi -table picnic pavilion available for residents' families or group gatherings Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 S. Building a public plaza for city and community gatherings. Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 t. Establishing more formal trailheads (with parking) to allow for access to the Preserve and to relieve pressure on neighborhoods located near other trailheads Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 u. Including a heliport for public safety helicopter access Lowest Support Highest Support No Opinion 1 2 3 4 5 0 3. Please write down any additional ideas or uses that you support for the Point Vicente Park/Civic Center site in the space provided below. 4. Please write down any comments you have regarding the current or future use of Point Vicente Park/Civic Center in the space provided below. 5. Please write down any ways the City could better service the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes. A- 3 The following section is for statistical purposes only. (Optional) Gender of person completing survey: Check the appropriate box Female -------------- ❑ Male ------------------ ❑ Decline to State ----------------- Age range of household members: Check the number of household members in your residence within the age categories below. Under 18 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-69 60-69 70-79 80 and Above Decline to State RPV Street Address: Zip Code: 1 u 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More LJ 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ 1 ❑ 2. ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ Four or More ❑ About how long have you lived in City of Rancho Palos Verdes? Check appropriate answer. Less than two years i_l More than two but less than six years F I More than six but less than ten years ❑ More than ten years ❑ Don't know/decline to answer ❑ E -Mail Listserv: Enter your email here if you wish to sign up for Civic Center Listsery notifications: Thank you again for your help and civic involvement. Please return this survey in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope. Surveys must be postmarked by January 17, 2017 Please contact the City at 310-377-0360 or email mattes rpvca.gov if you have any questions.