2019 Annual Community Survey results are out
The Annual Community Survey (ACS) is Council’s only fully representative survey conducted in the City, and the results of this survey are a genuine reflection of our community’s opinion.
The survey has been undertaken for seven consecutive years, providing strong trend data used to continuously improve our services for the community.
In 2017 Council resolved (C11072, 14/3/17) to undertake the trend data surveys on a biennial basis; taking advantage of the alternate year surveys to explore community opinion on planning, policy and projects through - a 'strategic' survey.
The 2019 ACS (Strategic) surveyed the community to gather data on strategic projects such as the Civic Centre Masterplan, the Environment Strategy, Wheel Park consultation, the Regal Theatre, corporate image and finance.
In accordance with Council resolution C11072, the 2019 Annual Community Survey (Strategic) included questions from Elected Members:
- Support for the development of a wheel park.
- Suitability of 40km/h speed zones for residential roads.
- Additional bike lane infrastructure in the City of Burnside.
Support for the development of a wheel park
The response to the support for a wheel park was consistent with data gathered from the 2019 Representative Survey and the results of the 2019 community engagement. 55 per cent support the development of a wheel park and of these 75 per cent would still support it if it was in their own street or the nearest reserve. Of the 55 per cent, 74 per cent still support it even when advised of estimated costs.
23 per cent somewhat, or strongly, oppose the development of a wheel park and 23 per cent were neutral.
40 km/h speed zones for residential roads
The community were asked: Would you like to see 40km/h speed zones for any residential roads in City of Burnside? In which suburbs would you like to see 40km/h speed limits?
2 in 3 residents (69 per cent) did not want to have limits of 40km/h in residential roads around the City of Burnside. Desire for 40km/h roads generally increased with age, with higher interest from those 75 years and above.
Of the 1 in 3 (31 percent) who did support a 40 km/h limit, 34 per cent mentioned that all suburbs should have a 40 km/h speed limit and there was a relatively even spread for support across each Ward (20 – 29 per cent).
Additional bike lane infrastructure
1 in 2 residents (52 per cent) desire additional bike lane infrastructure. Residents of Burnside as well as Rose Park & Toorak Gardens were the most interested in additional infrastructure, with Beaumont and Kensington Gardens & Magill residents least interested.
Of the 52 per cent that desire more bike infrastructure, 47 per cent asked for more bike lanes with support for bike lanes separated by median strip/island, the second most popular suggestion at 26 per cent.
Safety of the area is by far the most important aspect of the City to residents rated by 84 per cent of the community. This was followed by the friendliness of the community and visual aspects such as maintained streetscapes, open spaces and lots of trees and animals. The lowest rated item of importance was the cultural diversity of the population, followed by character and heritage of the area.
On priorities for service delivery by Council, 83 per cent of our community feel that initiatives for reducing waste to landfill are important. This was the highest ranked item of importance as a priority, followed by tree planting programs and investment in recreation programs and facilities.
61 per cent said stronger support for local business should be a priority for improvement in the Council area. The 39 per cent who did not select support for business said that business is already strong in the area and 1 in 3 did not feel this should be a Council priority.
Support for economic development and business appears to be relatively high amongst the community, with at least 6 in 10 feeling it should be a priority and more than 7 in 10 happy for some level of support to be provided by Council. Opposition only arises when funding is occurring from rates. When asked if they would support funding business development initiatives through rates 38 per cent of the community said they would support this however 35 per cent were opposed (21 per cent strongly opposed). If positioned appropriately, or if costs are minimal, there is likely to be higher community support for funding economic development activities through rates.
Looking at future trends of strategic importance, waste management was considered the most important issue followed by supporting the ageing population, young persons and families. Residents appear to be generally interested in ways that Council can support residents, more so than larger community issues such as housing density, climate change and population growth. Residents were least concerned over share businesses. Younger residents were more concerned about climate change and share businesses, as well as improved services for young people. Support for the aging population was generally highest from older age cohorts, while those in family years were more likely to feel that services for families, housing density and population growth were important considerations.
Residents did not place as high importance on smart city involvement as the social support items above. However, they had generally good endorsement, with 2 in 3 rating it as important and very important.
As part of research collection for the future sports and recreation strategy, a question was included in this survey on active living. 58 per cent of residents had no suggestions for ways in which Council could assist with their activity levels. Most commonly mentioned suggestions were for footpath improvements that would reduce tripping hazards and make the paths more suitable for small wheeled items. Residents who had requests were also interested to see additional amenities and improvements to parks as well as community exercise programs that would be inclusive of different age groups (particularly older residents).
To raise awareness of the Planning and Development Code changes, the community were asked if they were aware of the proposed changes; what were their sentiments about the changes; and would they participate in consultation. 22 per cent residents were aware of the changes to the code going through State Government; 2 in 5 residents surveyed reported that they were neutral regarding the proposed changes to the planning and development plans; only 4 per cent of residents surveyed had taken part in the consultation process with an additional 7 per cent planning to and 18 per cent intending. 7 in 10 residents were not interested in taking part in government consultation.