HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.B. Presentation Regarding Parks Survey
~.B.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
From: Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director
Meeting Date: June 10, 2003
Subject: Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment (Survey) Recommendation
INTRODUCTION
The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and Survey Task Force are recommending
that the City conduct an internet-based Parks and Recreation needs assessment
(survey) as a collaborative effort with Scott County.
BACKGROUND
In March, City Council considered a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board to utilize the services of Ingraham and Associates to conduct a written
survey of 2000 households at a cost of $8,120, and to establish a citizen task force to
assist in this process. At that time, Council authorized the concept of a needs
assessment and directed the Advisory Board to establish a task force, but requested that
the Task Force and Advisory Board work together to better define the information the
survey would obtain, as well as the methodology.
Through a combination of newspaper advertising, invitations mailed directly to 37
residents, and personal contacts, 14 residents volunteered for the Task Force and
attended some or all of the meetings, with a core group of eight to ten attending
regularly. The Advisory Board held a Task Force kick-off meeting on April 28th, and the
Task Force has met every two weeks since then.
During these meetings, the Task Force discussed types of surveys, methodology, survey
categories, and specific questions. The Task Force initially recommended to the
Advisory Board a combination written/internet survey to all households in the City
(approximately 9,000) using Scott County at a cost of approximately $23,000
(Attachment A). The Advisory Board had considerable discussion regarding this
recommendation at their May 2th meeting. On Monday, June 2nd, the Advisory Board
met in joint session with the Task Force, and the two groups came to consensus on an
electronic version at lower cost.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Survey Methodology
The Survey Task Force and Advisory Board are recommending that the City Council
authorize a collaborative project with Scott County to conduct an internet-based survey.
As you will recall, Scott County Commissioner Hennen contacted me after the March 4th
City Council meeting with information that Scott County may be able to assist the City
with a survey. Since that time, I have been working with John Mulcahy at Scott County to
learn more about this.
Scott County recently acquired software to do internet-based surveys. The software has
a very user-friendly interface that leads respondents through a series of questions. The
software allows respondents to stop the survey and pick up at a later time, or go back
and change answers. It also allows for "open-ended" questions. Finally, and most
importantly, the results are tabulated instantaneously - there is no need for human
interaction to enter data. This is a significant time saver. If approved by Council, Scott
County staff would help develop and review questions, develop and host the online
survey, conduct a pre-test of the survey, monitor the survey during the survey period,
and present the results. The City would be responsible for notifying the selected
respondents, and most of the development of the questions.
As proposed by the Survey Task Force and Advisory Board, invitations to participate in
the survey would be mailed to all City households (approximately 9,000), instead of a
random sample. The Task Force felt strongly that each household should have an
opportunity to respond to the survey. In order to eliminate multiple responses and from
one household and ensure reliable data, the information mailed to all households would
include a unique code that would permit each household to complete the survey once.
Although the City has a database of single family, duplex, and town home residents, we
are still researching how to obtain apartment unit addresses. (Public Utilities is a
potential source; however, staff at Public Utilities has indicated that they may not be able
to provide us with this information due to data privacy requirements.)
The Advisory Board and Task Force had considerable discussion about the limitations of
doing an online survey, especially for those individuals that do not have internet access.
However, it was apparent that a mailed survey to all residents wasn't financially feasible,
given the estimated costs of approximately $23,000. Based on information from a
previous Scott County survey completed in 2001, at least 70% of City residents have
access to the internet either at home or work. In order to accommodate those that don't
have internet access, we would suggest that we set up kiosks at the Community Center
and possibly City Hall, and notify households of these options. (The library may be
another option, although I understand there may be some issues with it being closed for
an extended period of time as part of the move to the new building.)
Finally, the Task Force discussed non-english speaking households. I understand that
Scott County staff is working to implement a "multi-lingual" component in the survey
software, which would automatically translate the survey into a number of different
languages. If this works out, we would include abbreviated information in the mailing in
alternative languages.
Types of Information Obtained from the Survey
The Survey Task Force felt that the previous survey conducted in 1998 (Attachment B)
would be a good starting point. The following are general "categories" of questions to be
considered:
1. Community Center
a. What Community Center amenities do you currently use?
b. Do you currently use services outside the city?
i. Where do you go now?
ii. Would you use these services here if we had them?
c. List of various possible amenities and level of interest.
d. Value of possible amenities - how much would you pay for the construction for
each?
e. How much would you pay to use certain amenities/facility?
2. Bike and Walking Trails
a. Quality/Cleanliness.
b. Need/Use.
c. Pedestrian Bridge Connections.
3. Recreation Programs
a. Quality and Value.
b. Other sports not being provided
c. Other activities not being provided.
4. Parks, Open Space, and Natural Resources
a. Thoughts about acquisition of parkland/open space for future needs and/or
preservation.
b. Development of existing undeveloped parkland.
5. Other
a. Quality of maintenance for different services.
b. What level of property tax increase would you support, if any? (Also show how
property tax level would decrease as City grows.)
I anticipate having a draft of the questions available for your June 10th meeting. The task
force will review the draft at their June 16th meeting, and the Advisory Board at their
June 23rd meeting. If approved as proposed, I hope to have the final set of questions and
survey timeline available for the July 15t City Council meeting.
BUDGET IMPACT
Preliminary cost estimates for the internet-based survey are $5,000-$7,000, which
includes postage for the initial mailing, a follow-up reminder post card, Scott County staff
time for developing and hosting the online survey, and tabulating and reporting the
results. In addition, Scott County would provide the City with a complete set of the
survey data for future use.
In the initial proposal presented in May, I suggested funding the survey from a number of
sources:
. 2002 Recreation Fund Balance
. Natural Resources Professional Services (for the park and trail planning information)
. Park Reserve
Since the survey recommendation has been revised to internet-only, the Advisory Board
asked that I approach the Telecommunications Commission to see if they would
financially support a portion of this project. At their June 4th meeting, the
Telecommunications Commission moved support of the electronic component of the
survey. However, due to the timing of the request, they didn't have budget numbers
available and have directed staff to determine if funding in the range of $1 ,000-$2,000 is
feasible. They will reconsider the request at their July 2nd meeting. Therefore, I would
propose funding as follows:
. Telecommunications (if approved) $1,000-$2,000
. Natural Resources Professional Services $2,000
. 2002 Recreation Fund Balance Remaining Amount
REQUESTED ACTION
City Council is asked to consider the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board and Survey Task Force, and move the following:
1. Authorize staff to enter into agreement with Scott County to conduct an internet-
based Parks and Recreation survey of all households in the City, not to exceed
$7,000.
2. Authorize funding from the Telecommunications fund in the amount to be
recommended by the Telecommunications Commission on July 2nd, $2,000 from the
Natural Resources professional services budget, and the remainder from the
Recreation Fund fund balance.
M~~~~
Facilities and Recreation Director
A
,
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEMORANDUM
To: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
From: Mark Themig, Facilities and Recreation Director
Meeting Date: May 27, 2003
Subject: Survey Task Force
As you know, the Survey Task Force has met two times since the kick-off meeting with
the Advisory Board on April 28th. During that time, the Task Force has discussed survey
methods and types of questions. At this time, the Task Force is submitting
recommendations to the Advisory Board on these two issues.
Methodology
The Task Force is recommending several key items:
1. That the survey be a written survey, with an option to complete the survey online if
possible.
2. That the survey be mailed to every household in the City.
3. That we utilize either Scott County or some other provider to administer the survey.
As you know, cost estimates that the Advisory Board reviewed previously were based on
a random sample (Attachment A). A majority of the survey task force members felt that
we needed to survey all residents in order to provide everyone the opportunity to
comment. The following is an estimate of what the cost would be to survey 9,000
households in the City using Scott County. (Hopefully, by Tuesday's meeting I will have
at least one or two estimates from other firms to compare.)
Costs Estimates for Surve to All Shako ee Households 9,000
Assistance with developing survey questions and written survey instrument $575
(15 hours
Online surve develo ment 15 hours $575
Outsource printing, data verification, scanning, and database delivery for $5,440
written surve , based on 6,000 households.
Outsourcing for 3 additional pages of survey, plus 3,000 additional
households not included in estimate.
Initial mailin osta e 9,000 households $.37
Return mailing (2,000 @ $.47 each piece + $150 permit + $475 accounting
fee
Data Anal sis 5 hours $200
Findin s Presentations (4 Hours $150
Total Estimate $21,835
As you can see, this estimate is considerably more than previous estimates for a random
sample. The Advisory Board will need to discuss.
Survey Focus Areas
The Survey Task Force felt that the previous survey conducted in 1998 (Attachment B)
would be a good starting point, with the following "categories" of questions added:
1. Community Center
a. What Community Center amenities do you currently use?
b. Do you currently use services outside the city?
i. Where do you go now?
ii. Would you use these services here if we had them?
c. List of various possible amenities and level of interest.
d. Value of possible amenities (How much would you pay for the construction for
each?).
e. How much would you pay to use certain amenities/facility?
2. Bike and Walking Trails
a. Quality/Cleanliness.
b. Need/Use.
c. Pedestrian Bridge Connections.
3. Recreation Programs
a. Quality and Value.
b. Other Sports?
c. Other Activities?
4. Land Acquisition
a. Thoughts about acquisition of parkland for future needs.
b. Development of existing undeveloped parkland.
5. Other
a. Quality of maintenance for different services.
b. What level of property tax increase would you support, if any? (Also show how
property tax level would decrease as City grows.)
The Task Force will review sample questions at their June 2 meeting, and will make a
formal recommendation to the Advisory Board. However, any direction you could provide
now would be helpful.
REQUESTED ACTION
The Advisory Board is asked to discuss the two recommendations from the Task Force,
and provide further direction to staff or the Task Force, or make a recommendation to
City Council.
o tion 1: Written/Mail Surve
Item
Survey Instrument Design
Administration of Survey
Tabulation, Coding, and Statistical Analysis
Reports and Presentations
Each Additional Question on Instrument
Other Assumes 400 completed surveys.
Total to Conduct Comparable 20
Question Surve $15,042 $10,100 $8,120 $12,100* $30,600
II Items included in total cost comparison. *Also submitted costs for a larger mail survey in the proposal.
CJ Olson Market Research raham & Associates
nfa
Administration of Survey nfa
Tabulation, Coding, and Statistical Analysis nfa
Reports and Presentations nfa
Each Additional Question on Instrument nfa 180 300
Other (Assumes 400 completed) nfa
Total to Conduct Comparable 20
Question Surve $27,330 $11,500 nfa $15,000* $33,100
II Items included in total cost comparison. *Submitted price on a telephone survey, but recommends a written survey. 17
/ B
November 16, 1998
SHAKOPEE
Dear Shakopee Resident:
As a resident of Shakopee your opinion is important to us; The City of Shakopee recently
established a citizen task force to review the need for improvements to existing parks,.trails
and recreation facilities and to respond to new growth and community needs. The task force
is also evaluating how the city should pay for the park improvements, including the possibility
of a future bond referendum.
You are among a select group of Shakopee residents who have been chosen at random to
advise the task force by completing the enclosed questionnaire. The questionnaire will help
us to understand what improvements you would like to see, where you would like to see the
changes, and whether or not you are willing to help support the improvements through
approval of a future bond referendum.
The City of Shakopee is dedicated to its residents and dedicated to the idea of providing
outstanding parks and recreation facilities. The City is continually working to maintain and
improve all their parks and recreation facilities, and is now looking to you for your input.
Please complete this questionnaire to the best of your knowledge, fold it with the "business
reply mail" postage-paid label on the outside, and return it to us by November 30, 1998. We
will use the results ofthe survey to make planning decisions. Once again, your input is
. crucial to this process. If you have any questions concerning this surveyor the park and
recreation program in general, please call the Parks andRecreation Department at (612) 445-
8244. Thank you for your continued support.
Sincerely,
c:;k~ -g~A<~ /d~ Chili
Mayor Jon Brekke
Parks and Recreat'
~~
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
COMMUNITY PRIDE SlNCE 1857
129 Holmes Street South. Shakopee, Minnesota. 55379-13~1 . 612-445-3650 . FAX 612-445-6718
CITY OF SHAKOPEE ~i
COMMUNITY SURVEY ~,;,/~ ~
1 .:}1t.t~
~;~~~?;~
~~
-,..~
RESUL TS . ~ =;"~
~ ~
~. :~
~~.~
=~~
.- --
@ ~~~~.
----~
~~~ .,.;:-f'""~~ .
December 15, 1998 Summary: A total of 4. In which activities have you or members
509 surveys were returned for a response rate of of your household participated within the
32%. This is an excellent response and indicates past three years? Please check all that apply.
a high level of interest in the issues. The numeric
results are shown below. A detailed analysis and 0 Playgrounds 0 Ice 0 Walking 0 Organized
recommendations will follow. (247) skating! IHiking outdoor sports
hockey (356) (i.e. softball,
(121) football, baseball,
1. How often do members of your household soccer)
visit the parks or public recreation facilities (175)
in Shakopee? 0 Picnicking 0 Jogging! 0 Golf 0 Infonnal sports
(229) Running (148) (i.e. playing catch,
0 At least once 0 1-3 times 0 Several times 0 Never (98) "pick up n sports
a week a month a year games, Frisbee)
(26%) (24%) (37%) (12%) (145)
0 Swimming 0 Bicycling 0 Inline 0 Indoor court
2. Overall!, how would you rate the park and (201) (269) skating sports (i.e.
recreation facilities in Shakopee? (114) basketball,
volleyball)
(125)
0 Very 0 Good 0 Average 0 Poor 0 Very 0 Cross 0 Visit 0 Tennis 0 Outdoor court
good poor country nature (55) sports (i.e.
(12%) (48%) (33%) (5%) (2%) skiing areas basketball,
(40) (156) volleyball)
3. Which Shakopee park and recreation (85)
facilities do you and your family use? 0 Bird 0 Other.
watching
0 Neighborllood parks (i.e. DeelView, 0 Shakopee Community (81)
Hiawatha, Holmes, Killamey, Center (Ice rink, walking & 5. What type of outdoor park or recreation
Meadows, Prairie Bend, RivelView, running track, gymnasiums,
Stans and Timber Trails) and meeting rooms) facility do you feel is lacking in Shakopee?
(185) (220)
\ 0 Baseballl 0 Picnic 0 Natural 0 Interpretive!
0 Community parks (Muenchow, 0 Bike and walk trails
Uons, Tahpah, O'Oom, Memorial, (285) softball shelters areas historic areas
Huber, and Scenic Heights) fields (78) (123) (27)
(286) (30)
0 Outdoor municipal swimming pool 0 Children's 0 Park 0 River boat 0 Bandshell
(158) play areas landscaping dock (125)
(74) (58) (94)
0 Soccer 0 Bicycle! 0 Mini-golf 0 Other (please
0 Other: fields walking (94) list)
(61) trails
(125)
6. in which additional activities or facilities 8. If Shakopee develops a plan to improve
within the Shakopee Community Center existing parks and create new park and
would you and/or members of your family be recreation facilities based on this survey,
interested? Please check all that apply. would you vote for a future bond referendum
(a temporary increase in property taxes) to
0 Child care 0 Fitness 0 A second 0 Indoor help pay for the improvements?
(69) center indoor ice swimming
(186) rink pool 0 Yes 0 No If no, go to question 10
(50) (235) (63%) (36%)
0 Indoor play 0 Racquetball 0 Senior 0 Basketball
equipment (62) center (53) 9. How much would you be willing to see
(74) (78) your annual property taxes increase to sup-
0 Volleyball 0 Auditorium 0 Indoor 0 Indoor golf port the park and recreation improvements?
(42) (54) tennis practice
(37) (8S) 0 $20Iyr. 0 $40/yr. 0 $60/yr. 0 $80/yr.
0 Art exhibit 0 Aerobics 0 Indoor 0 Teen (127) (106) (34) (28)
(57) (88) soccer center
(23) (115)
0 Other:
7. Which of the following improvementsl
additions to the Shakopee park and
recreation system would you be willing to
support? -
,i
i
.:~ 4i'~
Great support Marginal No support 1
support f
1 . .
;
0 46% 0 32% 0 22% Additions to and extension of i ?
" ...-~~.
bike/walk trails ~
:...,,* - ~'..."~
Improvements to existing , .~ ", ";:;:1"1:;
0 28% 0 44% 0 27% ' r" ......--.-. 'jO
i ~l: "- ----- ~ .
: --J r ~...--..- .
neighborhood parks ~ ....r.""'l......" ~.c- --
i ': ~ =
~. ---;,
0 27% 0 49% 0 23% Improvements to existing
community parks 10. _ Based on the map above, in which
0 20% 0 34% 0 46% Acquisition of land for new neighborhood do you reside?
community athletic parks
35% Acquisition of land for new 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6
0 27% 0 37% 0 (13%) (27%) (22%) (17%) (17%) (4%)
passive use community parks
and natural areas
0 44% 0 27% 0 28% Additions to the Shakopee
Community Center * (such as 11. How many people in these age categories
the uses listed in question 6) live in your household?
0 19% 0 48% 0 33% A senior citizen center Please fill in number of people in each age category
0 29% 0 38% 0 33% A riverfront park (Huber Park) _0-5 years _6-11 years _12-19 years _20-29 years
0 29% 0 37% 0 34% A lake side park (O'Dawd Park) _30-39 years _ 40-49 years _50-59 years _60+ years