Tabulation of Hillsdale Park Survey question:       (July 10, 1999)

What developments or improvements would you like to see in Hillsdale Park?
Please rate all your choices - from 1 (most desirable) through 5 (least desirable).

___Treed rest areas
___Picnic area
___Special plantings to attract wildlife
___Children's play area
___Fenced area for dog owners off-leash play area
___Community garden
___Sports court - basketball, etc.
___Rollerblading paths
___Bike trail
___Walking trails
___Off leash dog walking trails
___Drinking Fountain
___Permanent Restrooms
___Multi-use Sports Fields - soccer, lacrosse, rugby
___Softball Fields
___Better access to the park  ( Pedestrian, -Vehicular, -Bicycle,  Other)
___No development or improvements
___Other

The red indicates parts of the question that appeared in The Southwest Connection insert but not in the SWNI newsletter.



Respondents answered according to several different interpretations of the question.

A:  Some (42) rated each (or most) of the items on a 1 - 5 scale (although a few expanded the scale, perhaps 1 - 8 or 1 - 10; one used a 6 and a 7 to express extreme displeasure).

B:  Some (32) simply checked each item to indicate an interest in it, or expressed a "No," or "NO!"  Sometimes it wasn't clear whether a check meant approval or disapproval.

C:  Some (24) selected five items and ranked them 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 (and sometimes went a little further).  We can't simply add these into category A because the unchecked items need to represent a high number in that category.  Entering them into the calculation would value them at 0 which represents a very favorable preference, while they should actually be something like a 5. However, a 5 is innapropriate because the respondent appears usually to be expressing apathy, not opposition.  So these have to be tabulated separately.


Tabulaltion of A, B, and C

A: (N=42) Here are histograms of the responses arranged in order of descending preference (simple average, and given in the chart title).  Each red asterisk (*) indicates one especially strong comment.
 

Some charts show a well-defined two-peak response, indicating possible controversy.  Actually, I suspect that only the dog-related items indicate strong controversy.  The "no development" item shows a peak favoring development, but that opinion is not nearly as strong as the numerous expressions of "It's perfect the way it is; leave it alone" which dominated a large fraction of the responses.  Many (most?) of the responses favoring development are from people who indicated little familiarity or interest in the park.  On the other hand, a few expressed that the park is of little interest to them because it has so little development.

A significant fraction of responses indicated strong anti-dog feelings, and the pro-dog responses were often equally strong.  (However, the negative responses to the "fenced dog area" question were sometimes negative on the "fence" part, while very positive on the "dog" part.  Much of the current park use is for off-leash dog play.)  One person suggested a dog-off-leash time rather than area.



B: (N=32)
yes no yes no
Walking trails
Wildlife plants
Tree/rest area
Picnic Area
Drink. Fount.
No develop.
Better access
Child. play area
Restrooms
13
9
10
8
10
11
9
9
10
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
2
2
Comm.Garden
Off leash dog
Bike trail
Fenced dog
Sports court
Sports field
Softball field
Rollerblade tr
4
3
2
6
0
*
*
1
2
3
3
4
3
*
*
3
* too few responses (wasn't on both forms)

C: (N=24)
1 2 3 4 5
Walking trails
Wildlife plants
Tree/rest area
Picnic Area
Drink. Fount.
No development
Better access
Children's play area
Restrooms
Comm.Garden
Off leash dog trail
Bike trail
Fenced dog area
Sports court
Sports field
Softball field
Rollerblade trail
5
2
1
3
1
3
2
3
0
0
3
0
1
1
 

0

2
3
3
3
2
1
1
2
2
0
1
0
1
0
 

1

2
1
5
7
1
0
0
1
3
0
1
2
1
0
 

0

2
2
0
2
5
2
1
0
1
4
0
0
0
1
 

3

5
1
1
0
3*
0
1*
3
2
1
2*
0
1*
1
 

1

*One strongly worded comment


___Other

Comments submitted under "Other":

A gate through the chain link fence west of the baseball diamonds at Robert Gray School
Lights in the park
"Area for kids to use sleds when it snows"
A trash can
"Save the apple trees." (2 people)
Historical labels (on trees)
Running track for Rbt Gray
Posts to keep vehicles out  (Two posts have since been emplaced.)
Tennis court (2 people suggested)
Play area for kids that are older
Running track around park, such as in upper Dunniway Park
Noise barrier (noise from Beaverton-Hillsdale Hwy)
Landscaping for park
Frisbee golf course, and...
...summer concert series on grassy slopes
"Some control of wild vines and blackberry growth"
"Please no dogs!"
"Off leash dog walking trails"
"Off leash hours, not areas."
"No paved areas"
"Keep development minimal."  (several versions of this)
"One unique natural space in this ever growing neighborhood isn't asking too much."
 

Phil Pennington
July 10, 1999
E-mail