Most people who responded to a survey about the proposed concept plan for the South Hill joint-use school had a “moderate to low” level of concern with the plan, results show.
Wallace Insights, V3 Companies and Strategic Prairie Region Alliance (SPRA) conducted an online survey from April 15 to May 6 that asked residents in the Westheath area for their feedback about the plan. Five-hundred people were invited to participate, with 160 residents doing so.
The fact that many people responded is considered a “very satisfactory response rate” for a questionnaire asking about a new local school, the document explained.
After reviewing respondents’ answers, Wallace Insights produced a report for city administration in August and then provided an updated report in October. Administration then presented that report during the recent November city council meeting.
This article looks at the survey’s results.
Changes to plan
Based on comments received, the project’s design team made some changes to the concept plan. This included:
• Adding crosswalks and pedestrian-activated lights at two points on Wellington Drive
• Adding the desired park development options such as sports courts and splash pads
• Enhancing roadway safety elements
Level of concern
The first question asked respondents what level of concern they had with the proposed concept plan on a scale of zero to 100, with zero being no concern and 100 being high concern.
The result from 142 respondents was an average of 49.9 out of 100. This demonstrated a “moderate to low” level of concern with the plan, the document said.
Respondents also provided answers with their concerns about the concept plan not addressing certain issues, what they disliked, and other comments. The three main concerns were traffic, green space and parking; some also disliked the one townhouse site, the provided green space, traffic and the school’s location.
Park development
Of 139 people who responded to a question about what they wanted to see in the green space, the main answers included unstructured play options, a water park and walking paths. Specifically, respondents wanted to see basketball courts, swings, a splash park, walking paths and a hockey rink.
Safety
One question asked respondents what changes they would make to the concept plan to make the development safer. Of 96 people who answered, the results indicated that safety is linked to transportation-related infrastructure.
Specifically, this included pedestrian-activated lights, more off-street parking, location of the townhouses, sidewalks, and crosswalks.
Attractiveness
Another question asked what changes residents would make to ensure the development is more attractive. Of the 99 responses, most answers centred around landscaping elements. This included using trees for wind protection and attractiveness, walking paths, and park elements such as benches.
Residential development
Ninety-four responses were received to a question that asked about the types of residential lots being offered.
“Many of the responses took aim at the one townhouse site and associate it with low-income households. Other comments were about the size of the lots being too small and ‘cramming’ people in,” the summary document said.
Pedestrians and cycling
The survey asked respondents how well the plan considered pedestrians and cyclists in the neighbourhood design, with a score of 1 being not adequately considered and 100 being well considered. Of the 141 responses, the average score was 50.9 out of 100.
“It is hard to interpret such a wide variance in opinion. Suffice to say, the concept will continue to regard cycling and pedestrian infrastructure as important and will be highlighted within the recommended concept plan,” said the summary document.
Other comments
Eight-six people responded to a question that asked them for comments about the proposed concept plan. The document indicated that comments ranged from excitement about the plan to opposition to the plan and school.
The document added that many felt the need to “get on with it (the project)” and thought the process was taking too long, while others thought traffic congestion would be a concern. However, there was enough variance in the comments that the design team could not discern a single theme or direction.
