In early and mid August, project team members conducted as survey at the Kroc Center (plus at a Teacher Appreciation event in Keizer) to ask people how they currently travel to the Kroc Center, to look at the six initial concepts for improving access to the Kroc Center and pick up to three they liked best, and give other information. 134 surveys were completed. The full survey results is posted (see materials for SAC Meeting #3) will be posted soon, but some of the key findings are as follows:
High Public Support - There was almost universal support for a project to address the need for better access to the Kroc Center. 111 persons answered that they supported the construction a new bridge or path; zero persons answered that they didn't support it. Ten (10) persons checked that they were undecided.
Bus Service - Question 5 asking if more frequent/convenient bus service would be desirable had some limited appeal, with about 30% saying they would use the bus if it was more frequent/convenient.
Concept Preference - People were asked to pick up to 3 concepts they liked best. Concept H had the highest appeal, but many persons looking at the map and talking with us envisioned concept H as both a bike path and the Salem Industrial Drive roadway extension (for vehicles), and therefore some evaluated it as both a way to get to the Kroc Center by car and/or by biking and walking.
After H, the other concepts had about equal appeal when looked at individually (see results for question 6).
Using a New Facility - On question 7 ("would you use it a new facility if it was built?"),
o 48% said they would use the new concept it was if constructed;
o 19% said they wouldn't use it, and
o 32% said they didn't know or gave no answer.
Given that over 90% of people surveyed said they came by car, it is interesting to see so many people that said they would use it to walk or bike.
53% of those living 5 miles or less from the Kroc Center said they would use the new facility, versus 38% of those living greater than 5 miles.
Important Characteristics of New Facility - For question 8 on most important characteristics:
o 89 persons checked "Personal safety and security",
o 78 persons checked "Connection to the larger bicycle/pedestrian system",
o 21 persons checked "Cost".
(Note: cost information was not available at the time of the survey, but concepts were verbally described to some persons as "lower cost" or "higher cost".)
High Public Support - There was almost universal support for a project to address the need for better access to the Kroc Center. 111 persons answered that they supported the construction a new bridge or path; zero persons answered that they didn't support it. Ten (10) persons checked that they were undecided.
Bus Service - Question 5 asking if more frequent/convenient bus service would be desirable had some limited appeal, with about 30% saying they would use the bus if it was more frequent/convenient.
Concept Preference - People were asked to pick up to 3 concepts they liked best. Concept H had the highest appeal, but many persons looking at the map and talking with us envisioned concept H as both a bike path and the Salem Industrial Drive roadway extension (for vehicles), and therefore some evaluated it as both a way to get to the Kroc Center by car and/or by biking and walking.
After H, the other concepts had about equal appeal when looked at individually (see results for question 6).
Using a New Facility - On question 7 ("would you use it a new facility if it was built?"),
o 48% said they would use the new concept it was if constructed;
o 19% said they wouldn't use it, and
o 32% said they didn't know or gave no answer.
Given that over 90% of people surveyed said they came by car, it is interesting to see so many people that said they would use it to walk or bike.
53% of those living 5 miles or less from the Kroc Center said they would use the new facility, versus 38% of those living greater than 5 miles.
Important Characteristics of New Facility - For question 8 on most important characteristics:
o 89 persons checked "Personal safety and security",
o 78 persons checked "Connection to the larger bicycle/pedestrian system",
o 21 persons checked "Cost".
(Note: cost information was not available at the time of the survey, but concepts were verbally described to some persons as "lower cost" or "higher cost".)