My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2016 07 12
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Study Sessions
>
2016 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Agenda and Packet 2016 07 12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:55:07 AM
Creation date
7/5/2016 11:34:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Original Hardcopy Storage
6C6
Supplemental fields
Test
SSAGPKT 2016 07 12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
161
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City of Louisville Citizen Survey <br /> June 2016 <br /> Executive Summary <br /> Survey Background and Methods <br /> The Louisville Citizen Survey gives residents the opportunity to rate their satisfaction with the quality of life in <br /> the city, the community's amenities and satisfaction with local government. The survey gathers community- <br /> wide feedback on what is working well and what is not and helps map out residents' priorities for community <br /> planning and resource allocation. It serves as a consumer report card for Louisville; providing a check-in with <br /> residents to make sure the City policies and services are on course. This is the fourth time National Research <br /> Center, Inc. (NRC) conducted the Louisville Citizen Survey and the seventh iteration in a series of citizen <br /> survey projects completed by the City of Louisville since 1990. <br /> The Louisville Citizen Survey was administered by mail to 2,000 randomly selected households within the <br /> city. Of those households receiving the survey, 790 residents responded to the mailed questionnaire, giving a <br /> high response rate of 40%. The margin of error is plus or minus three percentage points around any given <br /> percentage for all survey respondents. Survey results were weighted so that the characteristics of gender, age, <br /> tenure (rent versus own), housing unit type (attached versus detached) and Council Ward are represented in <br /> proportions reflective of the entire city. <br /> Comparisons are made between 2016 responses and those from prior years, when possible. Louisville's <br /> results also are compared to those of other jurisdictions around the nation as well as to those of other Front <br /> Range jurisdictions. These comparisons were made possible through NRC's national benchmark database. <br /> This database contains resident perspectives gathered in citizen surveys from approximately 500 jurisdictions. <br /> Key Findings <br /> Louisville residents continue to enjoy a high quality of life. <br /> • Almost all respondents felt that the overall quality of life in Louisville was excellent or good (97%), <br /> which was similar to previous years. Compared to other jurisdictions across the nation and in <br /> Colorado's Front Range, Louisville's overall quality of life ratings were much higher than both <br /> benchmarks. <br /> • Over 9 in 10 participants gave high marks to Louisville as a place to live and to raise children and <br /> three-quarters or more rated the community as a place to retire and to work as excellent or good. <br /> Evaluations of Louisville as place to retire decreased from 2012 to 2016, while all other ratings <br /> remained stable over time. <br /> • Ratings for aspects of quality of life were much higher in Louisville than in national and Front Range <br /> comparison communities. <br /> • Regarding community characteristics of Louisville, at least 9 in 10 respondents rated the overall image <br /> or reputation of Louisville, ease of walking, quality of overall natural environment and Louisville's <br /> overall appearance as excellent or good. Additionally, 8 in 10 highly rated opportunities to participate <br /> in special events, ease of bike travel, the sense of community, recreational opportunities, opportunities <br /> to participate in community matters and ease of car travel in the city. N <br /> cc <br /> • While most evaluations of characteristics of the community remained stable from 2012 to 2016, <br /> several changes were observed. Lower ratings were given in 2016 compared to 2012 to recreational <br /> opportunities, ease of car travel, openness and acceptance of the community, traffic flow on major <br /> streets, ease of bus travel, variety of housing options and availability of affordable quality housing. <br /> Opportunities to participate in community matters increased from 2012 to 2016. <br /> ° <br /> Report of Results <br /> 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.