memorial coliseum and rose quarter - presentation - 03.18.10

8/9/2019 Memorial Coliseum and Rose Quarter - Presentation - 03.18.10

1/24


2/24

A PUBLIC PERC EPTION SU RVEY

B Y

DELTA FORCE:

D A N I E L G R E E N , N A T A L I E L I E B L I C K , I A N R U D E R & S H E I L A V I N E Y A R D

The Future of the Memorial Coliseum

and the Rose Quarter


3/24

Agenda

Executive Summary

Problem Statement

Methodology and Procedures

Findings

Limitations

Implications Additional Graphs


4/24

Executive Summary

4-1 ratio cared about MC & RQs futures

However, responses show indecisiveness and conflict

Respondents conflicted on MCs historical

significance and how future plans should be paid for


5/24


6/24

Methodology and Procedures

20 question instrument

Survey limited to Portland residents

Variety of questions

Open-Ended Unforced Likert Scale

Ranking

Demographic

Variety of data collection methods Online Instrument

Face-toFace (F2F) interviews


7/24

Methodology and Procedures cont.

ZoomerangAllows 100 responses

Randomizes ranking questions

Tracks URLs

Blocks repeat ISP addresses Email distribution

15 friends and family each Created several degrees of separation

Online Response Over 200 responses

Over were not part of the initial email distribution

50% of online instruments were invalid


8/24

Methodology and Procedures cont.

Face-to-Face 75 physical instruments each

Shot-Gun Method

Data Collection Locations Portland Saturday Market

Memorial Coliseum/Rose Quarter

Pioneer Place

Portland State University

PCC-Rock Creek

Raleigh Hills Shopping Center

Data Collection Randomization


9/24

Findings

The majority of respondents care about the future ofthe Memorial Coliseum and the Rose Quarter.

4.9%

9.3%

23.8%

36.7%

25.2%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Winter 2010

"I Care About The Future Of The MC/RQ."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree

Neither Agree Nor Disagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


10/24

Findings cont.

Males and respondents with a 4-year or Masters degree caredslightly more than other respondents.

4.5% 5.2%5.7%

10.1%

34.1%

19.5%

29.5%

39.7%

26.1% 25.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

HS/GED/Trade 4-Year Degree/Masters

"I Care About The Future Of The MC/RQ."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


11/24

Findings cont.

Again, males and respondents with higher educationdegrees were more likely to follow the publicdiscussion of the redevelopment than otherrespondents.

21.3%

16.1%

22.6%

18.1%

23.2%

16.1%

26.5%

29.5%

6.5%

20.2%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

Female Male

"I Have Followed Public/MediaDiscussion Of The MC/RQ."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree

Neither Agree NorDisagree

Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


12/24

Findings cont.

Overall, respondents doubted the architecturalsignificance of the Memorial Coliseum.

17.0%

25.2%

30.1%

19.2%

8.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

Winter 2010

"I Believe The MC Is Architecturally Significant."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


13/24

Findings cont.

Interestingly, those respondents who had lesseducation believed the Memorial Coliseum to bemore historically significant than those with a highereducation. Findings were similar for architectural significance.

6.8%

13.9%

20.5%

26.2%28.4%27.7%27.3%

20.6%

17.0%

11.6%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%


"I Believe The MC Is Historically Significant."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


14/24

Findings cont.

The majority of respondents believed the MemorialColiseum should not be on the National Register ofHistoric Places.

24.1% 23.3%

36.4%

8.8%7.4%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Winter 2010

"I Believe The MC Should Be On The NationalRegister Of Historic Places."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


15/24

Findings cont.

Those with a higher education also disagreed that theMemorial Coliseum should be on the NHRP,continuing with the trend of doubting the historicalsignificance.

14.8%

27.7%26.1%22.1%

47.7%

33.0%

2.3%

10.1%9.1%7.1%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%


"I Believe The MC Should Be On The National Register OfHistoric Places."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


16/24

Findings cont.

While most respondents remained between neutral andnegative on the subject of razing the Memorial Coliseum,those with a lesser education stood out in their oppositionto a proposed demolition.

43.2%

18.4%

14.8% 14.6%

25.0%

35.6%

10.2%

18.4%

6.8%

13.1%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%


"I Believe The MC Should Be Demolished."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


17/24

Findings cont.

Respondents found the City of Portlands leadership lessthan helpful in resolving the redevelopment of theMemorial Coliseum and the Rose Quarter.

14.5%

22.2%

50.1%

11.2%

1.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Winter 2010

"I Believe The City's Leadership Has Been Helpful."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


18/24

Findings cont.

Respondents had salient, if contradictory, comments aboutfunding for the proposed redevelopment.

A majority, about 60%, said that they would be willing to payincreased taxes for redevelopment.

19.2%20.3% 19.7%

24.7%

16.2%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Winter 2010

"I Would Be Willing To Pay $5 - $10 A Year InTaxes."

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


19/24

Findings cont.

Conversely, respondents answered that they would preferany redevelopment efforts rely on private funding.

2.5%

14.2%

32.9%

24.9% 25.5%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

Winter 2010

"I Believe Any Redevelopment Plans Should RelyOn Private Funding"

Strongly Disagree

Somewhat Disagree


Somewhat Agree

Strongly Agree


20/24

Findings cont.

When questioned about specific redevelopment plans, noneof the proposals seemed to stand out except for the leastfavored option, which was to leave the Memorial Coliseumas it is presently.

3.8

3.5

3.3

4.0

3.7

2.7

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

Winter 2010

Preferences on Proposals

Sports Complex

Entertainment Complex/"JumpTown"

Multicultural Center

Community Sports Center

Minor League Baseball Stadium

Leave As Is


21/24

Findings cont.

When questioned about important elements of theMemorial Coliseum redevelopment, like the proposals, onlythe least favored stood apart from the rest: the aesthetics.

3.1

3.3

3.2

3.0

2.4

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

Winter 2010

Important Redevelopment Issues

Cost To Taxpayers

Recreation Opportunities

Commercial/EmploymentOpportunities

Community Integration

Aesthetics


22/24

Limitations

Coverage Error Online Access

Sampling Error Online Access

Measurement Error Likert Questions

F2F Interviews

Location and Salience Location and Subject Knowledge

Self-Selection

Limited Randomness


23/24

Implications

Regarding the MC & RQ Portlanders dont know what they want but they arent happy

with the status quo

The city needs to work harder to educate the public about theoptions for the MC & RQ

Regarding how the survey was administered

Our shotgun approach failed Online surveying can be useful


24/24

Thank You

Questions?

memorial coliseum and rose quarter - presentation - 03.18.10

Documents