KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallory Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae Strategic planning /direction 3 3 3
4 3.3 Innovative responses to changing conditions 3 3 3 4 3.3 Efficient use of resources 3 3 4 3.3 Council communication 3 4 4 4 3.8 Tenant relations 2 3 4 3.0 Marketing/advertising
Facility upkeep and appearance Noise abatement programs 333 3 333 23 2 3 3.0 2.2 3.0 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae Strategic planning /direction 4 3 4
3 3 4 3.5 Innovative responses to changing conditions 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.6 Efficient use of resources 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3.3 Special events 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.0 Conference centre operation 3 3
4 3 4 3 4 3.4 Marketing/advertising 3 3 3 3 4 2 3.0 Performing arts programs 3 3 4 4 3 3.4 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallory Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae Strategic planning I direction 4 4
4 2 4 4 3.7 Innovative responses to changing conditions 3 3 4 4 4 3.6 Efficient use of resources 4 3 4 3 4 3 3.5 Park maintenance 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3.6 Median landscapinglmaintenance 4 3
4 3 4 3 4 3.6 Recreation facilities 3 4 3 2 2 2.8 Recreationlathletic programs Senior citizen programs Youth programs 344 33 344 3 444 344 3.2 3.8 4.0 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S
OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Wavs Wheeler Averaqe Strategic planning /direction 4 3 4
3 4 4 3.7 Innovative responses to changing conditions 4 3 4 3 4 4 3.7 Efficient use of resources 4 3 4 3 4 4 3.7 Street /storm drainage maintenance 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.7 Traffic signalization
4 4 3 2 4 2 1 2.9 Animal control 4 2 3 3 4 2 4 3.1 Garbage /brush collection 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.0 Recycling programs Water/wastewater line maintenance 44 34 44 3 44 44 44 3.7 4.0 Completed
by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1,2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae Strategic planning /direction 3 3 4
4 4 3.6 Innovative responses to changing conditions 3 3 4 4 3 3.4 Efficient use of resources 3 3 4 3 4 4 3.5 Building code inspection/enforcement 3 4 4 3 4 4 3.7 Public health code inspection/enforce
ment 3 3 4 3 4 4 3.5 Sign code inspection/enforcement 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 3.4 Landscaping code inspection/enforcement 3 4 4 3 4 3 4 3.6 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY,
JUNE 1,2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae Strategic planning I direction 4 4
4 4 4 4.0 Innovative responses to changing conditions 4 3 4 4 4 3.8 Efficient use of resources 4 3 4 3 4 4 3.7 Fire suppression 4 3 4 4 3 4 3.7 Fire prevention· residential 4 4 4 4 3
4 3.8 Fire prevention· businesses Emergency medical services (ambulance) 44 44 44 3 44 34 44 3.8 3.9 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1,2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Wavs Wheeler Averaqe Strategic planning I direction 4 3
4 4 4 3.8 Innovative responses to changing conditions 4 3 4 4 4 3.8 Efficient use of resources 4 3 4 3 4 4 3.7 Police patrol -response time 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3.9 Police patrol -visibility
4 4 4 3 4 2 3 3.4 Crime investigations 4 3 4 4 3 4 3.7 Crime prevention -residential 3 3 3 4 3 4 3.3 Crime prevention -businesses 3 3 3 4 3 4 3.3 Traffic law enforcement 3 3 3 3 4 3
4 3.3 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallory Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaoe .vJ.·i·;·;····· Strategic planning
I direction 4 3 4 3 I 3.5 Innovative responses to changing conditions 4 3 4 3 3 I 3.4 Efficient use of resources , 4 3 4 3 3 3.4 Web page 3 3 2 3 4 3.0 Use of Internet for conducting
city business 3 3 3 3 4 3.2 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1,2001
KEY Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae Financial reporting I communications
4 4 4 3 4 4 2 3.6 Treasury functions (i.e. cash investments) 3 3 4 3 4 4 4 3.6 City billing and collections 4 4 4 4 4 4 4.0 Acquisition of goods and services 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3.6 Upkeep
of city vehicles and buildings 4 3 4 4 3 4 3.7 Adjudication of traffic offenses 3 4 4 4 3.8 Employee relations Employee compensation and benefits Employee training 444 334 444 333 444
333 444 3.6 3.6 3.7 Completed by: _ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1,2001
I (;) e.C fzr 􀁾􀀭􀁴􀁶􀁾 V KEY jCCf\' 􀁾􀁨􀁬􀀬􀀬􀁜 􀁾 Blank -No Opinion 3 -Satisfied 1 -Very Dissatisfied 4 -Very Satisfied kQ.I+h 2 -Dissatisfied Barrett Klein Mallory Silver Turner
Ways Wheeler Averaae Strategic planning /direction 3 4 4 3 4 4 3.7 Innovative responses to changing conditions 3 3 4 3 4 4 3.5 Efficient use of resources 3 3 4 4 3 4 3.5 Public relations/communicatio
ns 3 3 4 3 3 3 2 3.0 Response to citizen problems/inquiries 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3.3 Policy implementation 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3.9 Economic development/business retention 3 3 3 2 3 2 1 2.4 Service
level measurement and reporting 3 3 4 4 3 3.4 Completed by: _ !J r;: fA.) Fr 􀀨􀁾􀀮􀀭􀀮 /( 􀁃􀀨􀀷􀀨􀁥􀀮􀁾 C77rtzfZVj" DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2001
KEY 1 -Strongly disagree 4 -Slightly agree 2 • Slightly disagree 5 -Strongly agree 3 -Neither agree nor disagree Barrett Klein Mallorv Silver Turner Ways Wheeler Averaae When developing
the long-term financial plan, 􀁾 emphasis should be on maintaining or lowering I 3 I 5 I 4 I 5 I 4 I 5 I 4.4 the existing property tax rate. To balance the budget, more attention should
be given to reducing expenditures rather than I 5 I 4 I 4 I 4 r 5 I 4 I 3 I 4.1 increasing tax rates or fees for services. The level of service to citizens should be the most important
consideration when evaluating I 5 I 4 I 5 r 4 I 4 I 4 I 5 I 4.4 the budget. When possible, users of city services should pay fees for the cost of the service rather than I 5 I 3 r 3
I 4 I 4 I 3 I 5 I 3.9 subsidize the service with general tax revenue. The Town's organization is operating properly. I 4 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 4 I 5 I 4.7 The Town staff pursues innovative
solutions to urban challenges. I 4 I 5 I 5 I 3 I 5 I 4 I 5 I 4.4 Privatization of city services should be pursued when appropriate to expand service levels I 5 I 5 I 4 r 3 I 5 I 3 I
5 I 4.3 and/or reduce the cost of service. The Town's compensation/benefit plans should be adequate to hire and retain employees who I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 , 5 I 5 I 5 I 5.0 meet the expectations
of the community. Increases in employee salaries should be based primarily on merit or performance. I 5 I 4 I 5 I 4-I 5 I 4 I 5 I 4.6 Economic development efforts are important to the
Town's continued success. I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 3 I 4.7 I am generally satisfied with the value of services provided by the Town. I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5 I 5.0 Completed by:
_ DUE TO CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE BY FRIDAY, JUNE 1,2001
TOWN OF ADDISON MAY 2001 COUNCIL SURVEY ACCOMPANYING COMMENTS Page 1 of 5 General government: Strategic planning /direction • Someone knows but I am uncertain Council has consciously
studied. • Not sure I have sufficient info. to have an opinion. Efficient use of resources • As efficient as we want them to be. • Can't be too careful. Public relations/communications
• Unfilled position & expectations. • We're good but might could do more to exploit our uniqueness. Economic development/business retention • What economic development activities do
we really have? • We need to work as a team to do better. • Concerned about our losses of major retail & restaurants. • 2+ -No conscious effort that I can determine. • Can there ever
be enough? • Not awe of any specific plans to broaden our economic base beyond restaurants. Service level measurement and reporting • Do we have measurement standards? • Not aware of
any measurements except compared to budget. Financial reporting/communications • (Rated a 2) Could be a '4' but budget intentions and foresight have not been well executed at the council
level. The Finance depart. = 4++++ • KISS. City billing and collections • (Rated 4) But always look for ways to improve. Upkeep of city vehicles and buildings • Seems alright -no inspection
made. • Nice. That's part of who we are. • Some concern with the length of time to repair compared to last year. Adjudication of traffic offenses • With a caveat. I don't hear much complaining
so I assume its going well. • (Rated 4) As far as I know. • Insufficient information to rate.
TOWN OF ADDISON MAY 2001 COUNCIL SURVEY ACCOMPANYING COMMENTS Page 2 of 5 Employee relations • Appears to be remarkable. Information technology: Strategic planning I direction • None
involving Council that I know of • (Rated no opinion) I guess so. • Do not have sufficient information to have an opinion. Web page • We are lagging here. • I know this is a challenge
but I also know you're working on it. • Needs updating on a continual basis. Use of Internet for conducting city business • Improvement needed. • Would like to be able to download ordinances.
Public safety -police: Strategic planning I direction • Our police are so well thought of that they are a part of who we are. Perhaps we could exploit that a little: PR goal. • Insufficient
information to respond. Police patrol -visibility • See very litt/e residential patrolling in Midway Meadows /Les Lacs area. Main business streets only. Crime prevention • Don't have
any facts -I'm sure there might be some challenges -everything can't be perfect. Traffic law enforcement • Need better way to stop red light runners. • Sure would like to see more enforcement
of the red light running. Wish the Legislature had passed the legislation. Public safety -fire: Strategic planning I direction • Insufficient information to respond.
TOWN OF ADDISON MAY 2001 COUNCIL SURVEY ACCOMPANYING COMMENTS Page 3 of 5 Emergency medical services • The very best -Thanks! • Getting to be part of that Addison image thing. Development
services: Strategic planning /direction • Insufficient information to respond. Building code inspection/enforcement • We give in too easily. • (All code enforcement) Do we have enough
personnel to cover all this enforcement? Sign code inspection/enforcement • Good strong code slowly being eroded. Public works: Strategic planning /direction • Insufficient information
to respond. Efficient use of resources • (Rated 4) Can't be too careful. Traffic signalization • The fact we haven't timed the lights on Belt Line in many years is criminal. • On the
right track. • Some intersections could be better timed. Animal control • Too many animals running loose. • Dogs off leashes. People not picking up after dogs. Garbage/brush collection
• 4+++ Wow!!! • The best. • Has become part of who we are. Recycling programs • The best.
TOWN OF ADDISON MAY 2001 COUNCIL SURVEY ACCOMPANYING COMMENTS Page 4 of 5 Parks and leisure services: Strategic planning /direction • Insufficient information to respond. Parks maintenance
• Some areas (parts of parks) need closer supervision. Recreation facilities • Just at the Athletic Club; getting away from us. • Not sure if complaints about AAC are legit. Senior citizen
programs • Bravo! (Pacesetters) Visitor services: Strategic planning /direction • This department would be so subject to trends, whimsy & constantly changing market that I don't know
how to evaluate it. The minute something is successful, its probably time to reevaluate it. Special events • Keep up excellent work. Marketing/advertising • Hope to have a coordinated
program someday soon. Performing arts programs • What programs? Airport I aviation: Strategic planning /direction • What plans? We need SOP (standard operating procedures) on user communications.
• Too soon to tell how new management will perform. • This issue is of huge importance -I'm not comfortable yet with the track record of our new team. However things are much improved
from the previous situation. • (No opinion on al/items) I'm in a wait and see mode. • Insufficient info. to respond. Innovative responses to changing conditions • Reaction not action.
• Too early to evaluate.
TOWN OF ADDISON MAY 2001 COUNCIL SURVEY ACCOMPANYING COMMENTS Page 5 of 5 Efficient use of resources • ??? • Too early to evaluate. Council communications • Other than monthly reports
or letters, all communications are after the fact. Tenant relations • Starting off poor. Lack of procedures in writing. Marketing/advertising • ??? • Nothing to base an opinion on. Facility
upkeep and appearance • Needs improvement. Noise abatement programs • Following others. Lead • Guess the current program is working but have nothing to substantiate the comment. Policy
issues: When developing the long-term financial plan, emphasis should be on maintaining or lowering the existing property tax rate. • Must balance needs with tax rates. Increases in
employee salaries should be based primarily on merit or performance. • Base salaries should be competitive with other employers but performance should also be considered. • As long as
we are competitive in the market.
,.:.', 2001 CITIZEN SURVEY Prepared for: Town of Addison By: D'Arlene Ver Duin Paul Ruggiere T.S. Sunil James Glass Survey Research Center University of North Texas October 16, 2001
"J -􀁾
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY•...•••••.•••.•..•.•.••••.••.••.•.•••.•••••.•.•...•.•.•.••.••.•.•..••••...•.••••••••.•••••••••.•..••••••.•.•••.•••.......•.• vi I. INTRODUCTION 1 II.
METHODOLOGY••••..••..•••.•.••.•.••...••.•.•.•••••••..••...•.•.•.•..•••.••....•...••.•••••.••••..••.••••••••••••.••••••••.•.•...••.•.•..•..••.• 2 A. SAMPLE 2 B. QUESTIONNAIRE 2 C. DATA
COLLECTION 2 D. ANALYSIS AND REPORTING 3 III. SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS .••••••••.•.••.•••..•••.•.•...••........•..•..•••..••••.•.•••••••.••••.••••••...•.•.•••..•••..•.•...••..••..• 4 IV.
SERVICES 6 A. STREETS : 7 B. LIBRARy 11 C. PARKS 13 D. CONFERENCE CENTRE AND WATERToWER THEATRE 22 E. RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS 28 F. WASTE MANAGEMENT 41 G. EMERGENCY SERVICES 49 H. CODE
ENFORCEMENT 52 I. ANIMAL CONTROL 54 J. NEED FOR IMPROVEMENT IN SERViCES 55 VI. TOWN ADMINISTRATION •.•.•.•.•••••.....•..•.••..•...•...•.....•........•..•.•..•.•....••••...•••..••••••.•.••.•••••.•..•.
.•.....•..•..•. 59 VII. CITIZEN INFORMATION 63 A. NEWS SOURCES 63 B. CABLE TELEVISION 74 VIII. LIVING IN ADDISON 76 A. SPECIAL EVENTS · 76 B. DART 81 C. ADDISON AIRPORT 83 D. POSTAL
SERVICE 84 E. QUALITY OF LIFE 85 IX. CONCLUSIONS.•.•..••.•••••.•.•.•.••••••.••.•••••••••••..•••••••.•.•..••.•....•...••..•••••.••.•••••••.••.••••••••••••..••.•.•.••••.•.•.•••.•••• 88
APPENDIX: SURVEY INSTRUMENT••••.••.•.••••••.•..•••.••....•.••••....•...••..••••••••.••.•••••••...•••••••••••..•.•.••.•••••.••••.••• 89 j
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 5A Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure
17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Condition of Road Surface 7 Town Sweeps the Streets
Often Enough 8 Adequacy of Street Lighting in Neighborhood 9 Maintenance of Street Medians, Islands, and Rights-of-Way 10 Library Use in the Past Year 11 Usage of Dallas or Farmer's
Branch Libraries in the Past Year 12 Use of Parks , , 13 Use of Conference Centre 22 Ratings of Conference Centre 24 Attended WaterTower Theatre Performance 25 Ratings of WaterTower
Theatre ; 27 Member of Addison Athletic Club 28 Use of Addison Athletic Club 30 Athletic Club Should Be Open to Business Community 31 Ratings of Fitness Equipment 33 Used Tennis Facilities
at the Addison Athletic Club in Past Year 35 Frequency of Tennis Facilities Usage at the Addison Athletic Club in Past Year 36 Used the Trinity Christian Athletic Center 37 Ratings of
Recreational Programs 39 Ratings of Building Maintenance 40 Missed Garbage Pick-Ups in Last Twelve Months 41 Satisfaction with Special Pick-Up 42 Ratings of Garbage Collection Days 44
Participation in Recycling Program 45 Ratings of Recycling Program 47 Ratings of Recycling Collection Days 48 Addison Police Service Compared to Other Communities 49 Addison Fire Services
Compared to Other Communities 50 Ratings of Zoning Ordinance 52 Ratings of Sign Regulation 53 Ratings of Animal Control 54 SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas ii
Figure 29 Figure 30 Figure 31 Figure 32 Figure 33 Figure 34 Figure 35 Figure 36 Figure 37 Figure 38 Figure 39 Figure 40 Figure 41 Figure 42 Ratings of Town Management 62 Get Enough Information
about Addison 63 Source of News about Addison 64 Have Personal Computer at Home 66 Aware of Addison Web Site 68 Visited Addison Web Site 70 Attended a Town Meeting in Past Year 72 Experienced
Problem with Cable Reception in Past 6 Months 74 Attended an Addison Special Event 76 Usage of DART Bus in the Past 6 Months 81 Usage of DART Trolley in the Past 6 Months 82 Airport
Noise 83 Postal Service Compared to-Other Communities 84-Ratings of Addison as a Place to Live 85 SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas iii
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table
20 Table 21 Table 22 Table 23 Table 24 Table 25 Table 26 Table 27 Table 28 Table 29 Table 30 Table 31 Sample Characteristics 4 Sample Characteristics (continued) , 5 Condition of Road
Surface by Year 7 Town Sweeps the Streets Often Enough by year 8 Adequacy of Street Lighting in Your Neighborhood by Year 9 Maintenance of Street Medians, Islands, and Rights-of-Way
by year 10 Library Use by Year. 11 Use of Addison Parks by year 14 Used Athletic Club by Selected Demographics 16 Used Les Lacs Park by Selected Demographics 17 Used Quorum Park by Selected
Demographics 18 Used Midway Meadows Easement Park by Selected Demographics 19 Used White Rock Jogging Trail by Selected Demographics 20 Evaluation of Addison Parks by year 21 Used Conference
Centre by Selected Demographics 23 Ratings of Conference Centre by Year 24 Attended WaterTower Theatre by Selected Demographics 26 􀁗􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁲􀁔􀁯􀁾􀁥􀁲 Ratings by year 27 Member of Athletic
Club by Selected Demographics 29 Use of Addison Athletic Club by Year 30 Athletic Club Should Be Open to Business Community by Year 31 Athletic Club Should be Open to Business Community
by Selected Demographics 32 Used Athletic Club Fitness Equipment by Selected Demographics 34 Participated in Recreation Programs by Selected Demographics 38 Ratings of Recreational Programs
by Year. 39 Ratings of Building Maintenance by Year 40 Missed Garbage Pick-Ups by year : 41 Satisfaction with Special Pick-Up by Year 􀁾 42 Called for Special Pick-Up by Selected Demographics
43 Recycling Program in Neighborhood by Selected Demographics 46 Ratings of Recycling Program by Year 47 Survey Research Center, University of Norlh Texas iv
Table 32 Addison Police Service by Year. 49 Table 33 Ratings for Addison Fire Service by Year 50 Table 34 Ratings of Ambulance Service by year 51 Table 35 Ratings of Zoning Ordinance
by year 52 Table 36 Ratings of Sign Regulation by Year 53 Table 37 Ratings of Animal Control by year 54 Table 38A Citizen Ratings of Selected Services 55 Table 38B Citizen Ratings of
Selected Services 􀁾 57 Table 39 Contact with Town Officials by Year 59 Table 40 Contact with Town Officials by Selected Demographics 60 Table 41 Person Contacted 61 Table 42 Results
of Contact with the Town by Year 61 Table 43 Ratings of Town Management by year 62 Table 44 Get Enough Information about Addison by year 63 Table 45 Source of News about Addison by Year
64 Table 46 Source of News about Addison by Selected Demographics 65 Table 47 Home Personal Computer by Selected Demographics 67 Table 48 Aware of Addison Web Site by Selected Demographics
69 Table 49 Visited Addison's Web Site by Selected Demographics 71 Table 50 Attended a Town Meeting in Past Year by Year 72 Table 51 Attended a Town Meeting in Past Year by Selected
Demographics 73 Table 52 Experienced Problem with Cable Reception in Past 6 Months by Year 74 Table 53 Attendance at Special Events by year 76 Table 54 Attended Kaboom Town by Selected
Demographics 78 Table 55 Attended Oktoberfest by Selected Demographics 79 Table 56 Attended Holiday Open House by Selected Demographics 80 Table 57 Usage of DART Bus in the Past 6 Months
by Year. 81 Table 58 Airport Noise by Year 83 Table 59 Postal Service Compared to Other Communities by Year 84 Table 60 Ratings of Addison as a Place to Live by Year 85 Table 61 Reasons
Why Respondents Would Consider Leaving Addison by Year 86 Table 62 Plan to Remain in Addison by Selected Demographics 87 􀁓􀁵􀁲􀁶􀁾􀁹 Research Center, University of North Texas v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the months of August and September, 2001, a citizen survey was administered by the Survey Research Center (SRC) of the University of North Texas for the Town
of Addison. The survey is the seventh multiservice citizen survey conducted for the town. The information identifies the extent of municipal facility use, citizen perceptions regarding
various aspects of town performance, and the degree of citizen satisfaction, or dissatisfactjon, with town services and life in Addison. r To meet the objective of a sample where homeowners
comprised approximately 50 percent of the respondents, as directed by the town staff, a stratified random sample was selected as the most appropriate design for the study. Two separate
samples were then drawn: one of apartment renters and the other of homeowners. To obtain a representative sample of all adult residents in the town, realizing that the percentage of
homeowners in the sample exceeds their percentage in the actual population, 370 completed interviews were needed. A total of 402 useable interviews was obtained. . The survey instrument
was designed after consultation with the town manager and several staff members. The instrument used incorporated many of the questions·used in previous projects so that comparisons
of the results of the seven surveys could be made. All interviewing was conducted by trained interviewers from SRC's telephone bank in Denton, Texas. An experienced telephone supervisor
was on duty at all times to supervise the administration of the sample, monitor for quality control, and handle any other problems. SRC uses the Sawtooth Windows Computer Assisted Telephone
Interviewing (WinCATI) system on IBM personal computers for all telephone surveys. WinCATI is an interactive computing system that allows on-line interviewing and continual data entry
for each respondent. The results of the 2001 Addison Citizen Survey once again indicate a high overall level of general citizen satisfaction with municipal services. There is not one
municipal municipal service, town activity, or current issue that appears to emerge as a serious problem or concern. Also noteworthy are the very small percentages found at the lower
end of the various rating scales used. Furthermore, when asked to rate the need for improvement regarding 11 city services, less than 5 percent of the respondents stated that any service
needed "much improvement." Addison citizens have positive perceptions of town services and administration. Ratings of town management in particular remain at a high level. For the third
survey year in a row, "excellent" ratings of town management (53.2 percent) were higher than "good" ratings (43.7 percent) for a combined excellent/good rating of 96.9 percent. Nearly
100 percent rated Addison as an excellent (79.1 percent) or good (20.4 percent) place to live. Several services appear to have shown increased usage or awareness in this year's survey.
For example, 95.4 percent of the respondents with a recycling program in their neighborhood reported that they participated in the program compared to 85 percent in 1999. Awareness of
Addison's web site also appears to have increased from 37.8 percent of the respondents in 1999 to 51.0 percent of the respondents in 2001. The percentage of residents attending Kaboom
Town also appeared to be higher in 2001 (75.3 percent) than in 1999 (57.5 percent). The percentage of respondents who had visited the Conference Centre (38.0 percent) appears to have
steadily increased since 1992. Overall, findings from the 2001 Addison citizen survey show that residents have very favorable ratings of Addison as a place to live and appear to be quite
supportive of the town and the direction being pursued by the council and staff. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas vi
I. INTRODUCTION In the summer of 2001, a citizen survey was designed and administered by the Survey Research Center (SRC) of the University of North Texas for the Town of Addison. The
2001 Addison Citizen Survey is the seventh multiservice citizen survey conducted for the town. The survey was designed to provide the City Council and staff with information that is
representative of attitudes of the citizens of Addison. The objectives of the survey were to: • Identify the extent of municipal facility use; • Measure various aspects of town performance
including the degree of citizen satisfaction, or dissatisfaction, with town services; • Assess the quality of life in Addison. The analysis of the responses and differences among the
respondents' replies should help to identify those areas where expectations are not being met or where dissatisfaction has been expressed either by the citizenry in general or by identifiable
segments of the population. The report is divided into eight major sections: introduction, methodology, sample characteristics, services, town administration, citizen information, living
in Addison, and conclusions. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 1
II. METHODOLOGY A. Sample The primary objective in drawing the sample was to equally represent homeowners and apartment renters. Using a listing of up-to-date phone numbers through the
sampling company Genesys, a sample of apartment renters and a sample of homeowners were drawn. Respondents were asked to name the type of housing unit in which they lived and how long
they had lived in Addison. Respondents who lived in Addison less than 3 months were removed from the sample. B. Questionnaire The survey instrument was designed after consultation with
the town manager and several staff members. The instrument incorporated many of the questions used in previous surveys so that comparisons could be made between years. The survey instrument
is presented in the Appendix. C. Data Collection All interviewing was conducted from SRC's telephone bank in Denton, Texas. An experienced telephone supervisor was on duty at all times
to supervise the administration of the sample, monitor for quality control, and handle any other contingencies. Shifts of interviewers were utilized Sunday through Friday evenings and
Monday through Saturday afternoons. All telephone numbers in the sample were tried a maximum of five times, using a rotating schedule of call-backs to ensure that a number was tried
at different times. Training consisted of three basic elements. First, interviewers were informed about details of the survey. Such items as the reasons for doing the survey, the concept
of a random sample, and the administration of the survey were discussed. Second, telephone interviewing methods were presented. The interviewer's attitude, methods of conducting an interview,
interviewing problems, and standard procedures were covered. Finally, the trainees were familiarized with the questionnaire. Each question was discussed, and the specific instructions
on the questionnaire were explained. The interviewers were provided with written material on the interviewing process, and they were instructed to conduct several practice interviews.
SRC SRC uses the Sawtooth Windows Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (WinCATI) system on IBM personal computers for all telephone surveys. WinCATI is an interactive computing system
that allows on-line interviewing and continual data entry for each respondent.The survey questionnaire is programmed into the system; interviewers then read each question as it appears on a computer monitor and directly enter the respondent's answer into the computerized
data base. The software automatically takes the interviewer through any skip or branching patterns in the instrument, eliminates incorrect response codes, eliminates the need for separate
data entry, and allows for frequent tabulation of data as the survey proceeds. The need for editing of surveys as they are completed is minimized by the use of WinCATI. The software
eliminates response codes that are not in the appropriate field for individual questions. Despite the reduced probability for error, printouts of survey responses were reviewed to ensure
that additional editing was not necessary. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 2
Interviews were collected between August 23 and September 5, 2001. A total of 402 useable interviews was obtained. In a purely random sample, 402 interviews would yield a margin of error
of ±4.9 percent. D. Analysis and Reporting Using the latest state-of-the-art statistical software (SPSS Windows 10.0), the raw data file was analyzed. Frequency distributions for each
survey question and demographic characteristic were developed. Cross-tabulations of each question by selected demographic characteristics (age, length of residence, ownerlrenter status)
were then calculated. The data are presented in tabular form with some descriptive comments and only preliminary interpretation and evaluation. The objectives are to secure overall citizen
perceptions and to identify particular concerns for detailed evaluation by town officials. The analysis of the data involved two steps. First, the observed frequencies or percentages
for each question were calculated. These frequencies are displayed in the report as the percent responding "yes" or "no" or "excellent," "good," "fair," or "poor" to a question. Upon
completion of the first step, each question was then cross-tabulated with the following nine descriptive characteristics: • Owner-renter status • Length of residence • Type of housing
• Age • Gender • Employment status • Education • Annual income • Families with children The nine characteristics comprise a set of independent variables that could help to explain variations
among the responses of the residents. Several of the characteristics proved useful in selected instances. Survey Research Center, University ofNorlh Texas 3
III. SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICSTable 1 Sample Characteristics Percentage Responding Home ownership Own (n=201) 50.0 Rent (n=201) 50.0 Age18-25 (n=34) 8.6 26-35 (n=11 0) 27.7 36-45 (n=81)
20.4 46-60 (n=11 0) 27.7 61-70 (n=36) 9.1 71 and over (n=26) 6.5 Gender Female (n=209) 52.0 Male (n=193) 48.0 Length of residence 3 to 12 months (n=47) 11.7 1 to 5 years (n=225) 56.0
6 to 10 years (n=86) 21.4 More than 10 years (n=44) 10.9 Education High school graduate (n=40) 10.0 Some college (n=91) 22.8 College graduate (n=159) 39.8 Graduate school (n=11 0) 27.5
• As shown in Table 2A, the sample was divided between respondents who own their home (50.0 percent) and those that rent their home (50.0 percent). Fifty-six percent of the sample have
lived in Addison for 1 to 5 years. Thirty-two percent have made Addison their home for more than 6 years. • Fifty-seven percent of the sample was under 46 years of age. Slightly more
than half was female (52.0 percent). . • Two-thirds of the sample were college graduates or had graduate school experience (67.3 percent). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth
Texas 4
Table 2 Sample Characteristics (continued) Percentage Responding Employment status Full-time (n=2e9) 67.4 Part-time (n=31) 7.8 Unemployed (n=19) 4.8 Retired (n=49) 12.3 Student (n=9)
2.3 Homemaker (n=22) 5.5 Income $10,001 to $25,000 (n=13) 3.6 $25,001 to $50,000 (n=80) 22.3 $50,001 to $75,000 (n=77) 21.5 $75,001 to $100,000 (n=59) 16.5 Over $100,000 (n=129) 36.0
Family with children Children under 6 (n=33) 8.3 Children 6 to 12 (n=18) 4.5 Children 13 to 18 (n=13) 3.3 Type of housing Single family (n=196) 48.8 Duplex (n=18) 4.5 Apartment (n=171)
42.5 Other (n=17) 4.2 Residence zipcode 75001 (n=383) 97.5 75240 (n=10) 2.5 • Full-time employment was reported by 67.4 percent of the sample. Eight percent were employed part-time.
• Over one-third of the respondents (36.0 percent) reported an annual income of over $100,000. There were no respondents who earned $10,000 or less per year. • A majority of respondents
did not have children under age 18. Eight percent of the sample had children under the age of 6. Smaller percentages had children ages 6 to 12 (4.5 percent) or ages 13 to 18 (3.3 percent).
• A greater percentage of respondents lived in single family homes (48.8 percent) than in apartments (42.5 percent), duplexes (4.5 percent), or other type of housing (4.2 percent). •
Nearly the entire sample lived in the 75001 zipcode area (97.5 percent). Less than three percent lived in the 75240 zipcode area. Since respondents could respond yes to any of the child
age questions, percentages do not add to 100. SUNey Research Center, University ofNorlh Texas 5
IV. SERVICES The majority of survey questions concerned services provided by the town. This section of the report presents responses to the service questions. Included are the following
services or service concerns: • Streets • Library • Parks • Conference Centre and WaterTower Theatre • Recreational Programs • Waste Management • Emergency Services • Code Enforcement
• Animal Control • Need for Improvement in Services Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 6
A. Streets Figure 1 Condition of Road Surface (n=402) 100% 80% 60% 50.7% 40% 20% 0% Excellent Good Fair 1.2% Poor Table 3 Condition of Road Surface by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent
41.3 44.6 47.3 44.3 45.0 Good 50.7 45.9 45.6 50.3 50.0 Fair 6.7 8.7 5.1 5.5 4.5 Poor 1.2 0.7 2.0 0.0 0.5 • As shown in Figure 1 and Table 3, the percentage of respondents rating streets
surface as "excellent" remains large in 2001 (41.3 percent), and a significant majority of respondents (92.0 percent) rated Addison's streets as "excellent" to "good." • A much larger
percentage of homeowners (48.8 percent) than apartment renters (33.8 percent) rated the streets as "excellent." Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 7
Figure 2 Town Sweeps the Streets Often Enough (n=386) Yes 97.7% No 2.3% Table 4 Town Sweeps the Streets Often Enough by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Yes 97.7 94.8 94.3 90.6 94.6 No
2.3 5.2 5.7 9.4 5.4 • Respondents were asked if the town swept the streets often enough, and a very large majority of the respondents (97.7 percent) responded positively (see Figure
2 and Table 4). SUNey Research Center, University of North Texas 8
Figure 3 Adequacy of Street Lighting in Neighborhood (n=399) Adequate 86.2% Inadequate 13.8% Table 5 Adequacy of Street Lighting in Your Neighborhood by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992
Adequate 86.2 80.6 83.1 77.2 71.4 Inadequate 13.8 19.4 16.9 22.8 28.6 • Next, respondents were asked whether the street lighting in their neighborhood was adequate or inadequate. A large
majority of respondents (86.2 percent) indicated that street lighting was adequate (see Figure 3 and Table 5). • "Adequate" ratings were more frequent among renters (89.5 percent) and
less frequent among homeowners (82.9 percent). A greater percentage of male respondents (93.8 percent) rated street lighting as adequate than female respondents (79.1 percent). Survey
Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 9
Figure 4 Maintenance of Street Medians,lslands, and Rights-of-Way (n=402) Well maintained 75.1% Adequately maintained 22.9% Not well maintained 2.0% Table 6 Maintenance of Street Medians,
Islands, and Rights-of-Way by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Well maintained 75.1 76.8 83.3 78.6 77.1 Adequately maintained 22.9 21.7 15.2 19.4 21.8 Not well maintained 2.0 1.5 1.5 2.0
1.1 • The final questions about streets concerned the maintenance at street medians, islands, and rights-at-way. As Figure 4 and Table 6 show, a large percentage at respondents (75.1
percent) indicated that medians, islands, and rights-at-way were "well maintained," and 22.9 percent thought they were "adequately maintained." SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth
Texas 10
B.Library Figure 5 Library Use in the Past Year (n=399) 100% 80% 67.6% 60% 40% 20% 0% Weekly Once a month Every several months Table 7 Library Use by Year Never 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992
Weekly 6.8 11.5 10.7 7.9 5.5 Once a month 11.8 8.0 12.2 10.0 8.5 Every several months 13.8 13.8 15.4 16.1 15.7 Never 67.6 66.8 61.7 66.0 70.3 • Respondents were asked how often in the
past year they used the Farmer's Branch or Dallas Public Libraries. As Figure 5 and Table 7 indicate, a large majority (67.6 percent) said that they had not used the library in the past
year. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 11
Figure 5A Usage of Dallas or Farmer's Branch Libraries in the Past Year (n=128) 100% 80% 68.0% 60% 40% 20% 0%4'--Farmer's Branch Library Dallas Library Use equally • Respondents who
said they had used the Farmer's Branch and Dallas libraries in the past year were asked which one they used most. Sixty-eight percent of those respondents used the Farmer's Branch library,
25.0 percent used the Dallas library, and 7.0 percent used both equally (see Figure 5A).Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 12
c. Parks Figure 6 Use of Parks Athletic Club Park Les Lacs Quorum Park North Addison Park Midway Meadows White Rock Jogging Trail Town Park Celestial Park Bosque Park Dome Park Esplanade
Park 52.2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% • Respondents were asked to indicate which parks they had used in the last 12 months (see Figure 6 and Table 8). Over one-half of the respondents reported
using the Athletic Club Park (52.2 percent) and one-third reported using Les Lacks Park (38.8 percent). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 13
Table 8 Use of Addison Parks by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Athletic Club Park 52.2 49.1 n.a. n.a. n.a. Les Lacs 38.8 31.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. Quorum Park 21.5 17.6 18.9 22.6 23.2 North
Addison Park 20.2 18.3 n.a. n.a. n.a. Midway Meadows 19.4 21.1 15.7 21.8 25.0 White Rock Jogging Trail 19.3 19.4 17.0 27.7 32.5 Town Park 16.5 15.1 13.4 20.7 12.3 Celestial Park 16.4
12.6 9.3 20.8 24.1 Bosque Park 15.2 4.8 n.a. n.a. n.a. Dome Park 11.8 12.1 8.3 13.9 15.3 Esplanade Park 8.6 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. • Just over half of the respondents reported using Athletic
Club Park in the last 12 months. The likelihood of using Athletic Club Park was greater among respondents with longer periods of residence, higher educational levels, higher incomes,
families with children, and single family and duplex housing (see Table 9). • Les Lacs Parks, used by 38.8 percent of the respondents, was more likely to be used by homeowners and female
respondents (see Table 10). As respondents' length of residence, education, and income increased, the percentage of respondents using Les Lacs Park also increased. Usage varied by age,
employment status, and type of housing. • Quorum Park had been used by 21.5 percent of the respondents. As shown in Table 11, respondents living in apartments were the most common users
of Quorum Park. The percentages indicating usage varied with employment status and generally decreased with age. • North Addison Park was used by 20.2 percent of the respondents. North
Addison Park was more likely to be used by homemakers (42.9 percent) than full-time (21.0 percent), retired (18.4 percent), part-time (13.3 percent), unemployed (5.3 percent), or student
respondents (0.0 percent). • Midway Meadows Easement Park was used by 19.4 percent of the respondents. The percentage of respondents who used this park increased with length of residence
and income. The percentages varied by age, employment status, and type of housing (see Table 12). • White Rock Jogging Trail was used by 19.3 percent of the respondents. The percentages
of respondents using the jogging trail was higher among respondents age 35 or younger, and those who were living in apartments or duplexes (see Table 13). • Town Park was used by 16.5
percent of the respondents. Town Park was more likely to be used by respondents with children (29.6 percent) than by respondents without children (11.8 percent). • Celestia I Park was
used by 16.4 percent of the respondents. Usage tripled over 1999 (4.8 percent). There were no statistically significant differences among respondents regarding usage of this park. Survey
Research Center, University of North Texas 14
• Fifteen percent had used Bosque Park. The largest percentage of respondents who used Bosque Park were 26 to 35 years old (24.1 percent), compared to other age groups: 18 to 25 (18.2
percent), 36 to 45 (11.5 percent), 46 to 60 (14.2 percent), 61 to 70 (5.9 percent), and 71 and older (4.0 percent). Apartment dwellers (26.6 percent) were more likely to use Bosque Park
than those who lived in other type housing (11.8 percent), single family homes (6.5 percent), and duplexes (0.0 percent). • Twelve percent had used Dome Park. Use of Dome Park increased
as the length of residence increased (ranging from 2.9 percent of those with 3 to 12 month length of residence to 15.0 percent of those with more than 10 years of residence). This park
was also more likely to be used by homeowners (18.3 percent) than renters (6.5 percent). • One park added to the survey this year, Esplanade Park, was used by 8.6 percent of the respondents.
Thirteen percent of male respondents reported using Esplanade Park compared to 4.6 percent percent of female respondents. SUNey Research Center, University of North Texas 15
Table 9 Used Athletic Club by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Length of residence 3 to 12 months 27.7 1 to 5 years 50.5 6 to 10 years 69.4 More than 10 years 53.7 Education
High school graduate 38.5 Some college 44.9 College graduate 52.5 Graduate school 62.6 Income $10,001 to $25,000 16.7 $25,001 to $50,000 33.8 $50,001 to $75,000 47.4 $75,001 to $100,000
52.5 Over $100,000 68.0 Family with children Yes 69.1 No 49.4 Type of housing Single family 69.6 Duplex 70.6 Apartment 31.2 Other 47.1 Survey Research Center, University of North Texas
16
Table 10 Used Les Lacs Park by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Length of residence 3 to 12 months 17.0 1 to 5 years 32.3 6 to 10 years 61.9 More than 10 years 51.2 Age18-25
11.8 26-35 22.9 36-45 50.0 46-60 48.1 61-70 61.1 71 and over 32.0 Gender Female 45.6 . Male 31.4 Education High school graduate 32.5 Some college 29.2 College graduate 37.2 Graduate
school 51.8 Employment status Full-time 35.0 Part-time 53.3 Unemployed 31.6 Retired 45.8 Student 22.2 Homemaker 63.6 Income $10,001 to $25,000 8.3 $25,001 to $50,000 20.3 $50,001 to
$75,000 28.9 $75,001 to $100,000 34.5 Over $100,000 57.0 Type of housing Single family 65.6 Duplex 47.1 Apartment 9.4 Other 23.5 Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 17
Table 11 Used Quorum Park by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Age18-25 26.5 26-35 32.4 36-45 17.5 46-60 17.8 61-70 11.1 71 and over 8.0 Employment status Full-time 24.3
Part-time 13.3 Unemployed 31.6 Retired 6.1 Student 22.2 Homemaker 27.3 Type of housing Single family 12.6 Duplex 17.6 Apartment 33.5 Other 5.9 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth
Texas 18
Table 12 Used Midway Meadows Easement Park by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Length of residence 3 to 12 months 13.0 1 to 5 years 16.4 6 to 10 years 22.8 More than 10
years 35.9 Age18-25 0.0 26-35 16.2 36-45 23.4 46-60 18.2 61-70 20.6 71 and over 45.8 Education High school graduate 16.7 Some college 17.2 College graduate 14.1 Graduate school 29.1
Employment status Full-time 15.9 Part-time 28.6 Unemployed 21.1 Retired 27.7 Student 0.0 Homemaker 36.8 Type of housing Single family 30.3 Duplex 26.7 Apartment 8.4 Other 5.9 Survey
Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 19
Table 13 Used White Rock Jogging Trail by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Age18-25 26.5 26-35 32.1 36-45 12.3 46-60 12.5 61-70 19.4 71 and over 8.0 Type of housing Single
family 14.3 Duplex 29.4 Apartment 25.1 Other 5.9 Survey Research Center, University ofNorlh Texas 20
Table 14 Evaluation of Addison Parks by Year Evaluation area 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Well kept? 99.3 98.2 95.5 97.0 99.9 Enough parks? 93.8 94.8 88.6 84.7 90.4 Outdoor opportunities
87.9 93.0 90.4 87.9 86.0 • Respondents who had used an Addison park were asked questions about park maintenance, the number of parks, and the outdoor opportunities provided by the parks
(see Table 14). • Looking at the responses as a whole, there appears to be a high level of satisfaction with the town's parks. Virtually all of the respondents (99.3 percent) said the
parks were well maintained and provided appropriate outdoor opportunities (87.9 percent). Ninety-four percent reported that there were a sufficient number of parks in the town. • Fewer
renters (83.9 percent) said that the parks provided outdoor opportunities that interested them than homeowners (91.5 percent). A greater percentage of respondents who lived in single
family homes (92.2 percent) said that parks provided opportunities compared to those who lived in apartments (84.5 percent), other housing (77.8 percent), or duplexes (75.0 percent).
Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 21
D. Conference Centre and WaterTower Theatre Figure 7 Use of Conference Centre (n=168) Yes 41.8% No 58.2% • Respondents were asked whether they had visited the Conference Centre in the
past year (see Figure 7). Forty-two percent of the respondents in the past year had visited the Centre. This percentage represents a steady increase since 1992: 38.0 percent in 1999,
29.0 percent in 1997, 27.8 percent in 1995, and 23.0 percent in 1992. • Usage of the Conference Centre was more common among homeowners, retired respondents, and female respondents (see
Table 15). Usage also generally increased with length of residence, age, and income. The percentages varied with education, employment status, and type of housing. Survey Research Center,
University ofNorth Texas 22
Table 15 Used Conference Centre by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 56.2 Rent 27.4 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 21.3 1 to 5 years 33.3 6 to 10
years 68.6 More than 10 years 54.5 Age18-25 20.6 26-35 29.1 36-45 42.0 46-60 51.8 61-70 58.3 71 and over 53.8 Gender Female 46.9 Male 36.3 Education High school graduate 22.5 Some college
42.9 College graduate 39.0 Graduate school 51.8 Employment status Full-time 36.8 Part-time 48.4 Unemployed 36.8 Retired 63.3 Student 33.3 Homemaker 50.0 Income $10,001 to $25,000 23.1
$25,001 to $50,000 25.0 $50,001 to $75,000 36.4 $75,001 to $100,000 45.8 Over $100,000 50.4 Type of housing Single family 55.1 Duplex 38.9 Apartment 27.5 Other 35.3 Survey Research Center,
University of North Texas 23
Figure 8 Ratings of Conference Centre (n=167) 100% 80% 60% 49.7% 40% 20% 0% Excellent Good Fair 0.0% Poor Table 16 Ratings of Conference Centre by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent
46.7 50.7 46.2 45.0 41.9 Good 49.7 42.6 51.3 45.9 . 50.0 Fair 3.6 6.1 2.6 7.3 5.8 Poor 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.8 2.3 • Forty-seven percent of the respondents who visited the Conference Centre
rated it as "excellent" and 49.7 percent rated the Centre as "good" for a combined excellent/good rating of 96.4 percent (see Figure 8 and Table 16). Survey Research Center, University
ofNorth Texas 24
Figure 9 Attended WaterTower Theatre Performance (n=401) Yes 25.7% No 74.3% • Twenty-six percent of the respondents reported that they had attended a WaterTower Theatre performance (see
Figure 9). This finding represents a gradual increase since 1992: 21.4 percent in 1999, 18.0 percent in 1997, 18.8 percent in 1995, and 13.6 percent in 1992. • Attendance at the WaterTower
Theatre generally increased with age, and varied by length of residence and employment status (see Table 17). Homeowners (31.3 percent) were more likely to visit the Theatre than renters
(20.0 percent). Survey Research Center, University of Norlh Texas 25
Table 17 Attended WaterTower Theatre by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 31.3 Rent 20.0 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 8.7 1 to 5 years 21.8 6 to
10 years 41.9 More than 10 years 31.8 Age18-25 11.8 26-35 21.1 36-45 21.0 46-60 30.0 61-70 36.1 71 and over 46.2 Employment status Full-time 23.9 Part-time 35.5 Unemployed 21.1 Retired
42.9 Student 0.0 Homemaker 13.6 Survey Research Center, University ofNorlh Texas 26
Figure 10 Ratings of WaterTower Theatre (n=103) ·100% 80% 60% 54.4% 40% 20% 0% Excellent Good Fair 1.0% Poor Table 18 WaterTower Ratings by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent 54.4
54.3 50.0 37.0 41.9 Good 37.9 45.7 47.2 53.4 50.0 Fair 6.8 0.0 2.8 5.5 5.8 Poor 1.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 2.3 • Fifty-four percent of the respondents who visited the WaterTower Theatre rated it
as "excellent," and 37.9 percent rated the Theatre as "good" for a combined excellent/good rating of 92.3 percent (see Figure 10 and Table 18). . Survey Research Center, University ofNorth
Texas 27
E. Recreational Programs Figure 11 Member of Addison Athletic Club (n=401) Yes 69.8% No 30.2% • As shown in Figure 11, membership in the Addison Athletic Club was reported by a majority
of respondents (69.8 percent). This finding compares to 71.6 percent in 1999. • Club membership was more common among homeowners, respondents who lived in single family homes, and female
respondents (see Table 19). Membership generally increased with length of residence, age, and income, and varied with employment status. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas
28
Table 19 Member of Athletic Club by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes I Home ownership Own 92.0 Rent 47.5 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 42.6 1 to 5 years 64.3 6 to
10 years 91.9 More than 10 years 84.1 Age18-25 50.0 26-35 55.5 36-45 65.4 46-60 85.5 61-70 86.1 71 and over 80.0 Gender Female 76.0 Male 63.2 Employment status Full-time 63.6 Part-time
83.9 Unemployed 78.9 Retired 87.8 Student 22.2 I Homemaker 100.0 Income $10,001 to $25,000 53.8 $25,001 to $50,000 52.5 $50,001 to $75,000 64.9 $75,001 to $100,000 71.2 Over $100,000
81.4 Type of housing Single family 91.3 Duplex 83.3 Apartment, 42.9 Other 76.5 Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 29
Figure 12 Use of Addison Athletic Club (n=279) 41.2% Daily Weekly Monthly Less than monthly Never Table 20 Use of Addison Athletic Club by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 Daily 9.3 12.6 8.1
7.7 Weekly 41.2 40.7 44.9 37.7 Monthly 31.5 32.6 31.1 37.3 Less than monthly 12.2 n.a. n.a. n.a. Never 5.7 14.0 15.9 17.3 • As displayed in Figure 12 and Table 20, the largest portion
of Athletic Club members (41.2 percent) use the club weekly and 31.5 percent use it monthly. These findings are similar to previous years. . Survey Research Center, University ofNorth
Texas 30
Figure 13 Athletic Club Should Be bpen to Business Community (n=262) Yes 18.7% No 81.3% Table 21 Athletic Club Should Be Open to Business Community by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Yes
18.7 18.1 20.1 18.7 23.3 No 81.3 81.9 79.9 81.3 76.7 • As shown in Figure 13, 18.7 percent of the Athletic Club members indicated that the club should be open to members of the business
community compared to 18.1 percent in 1999, 20.1 percent in 1997, 18.7 percent in 1995, and 23.3 percent in 1992 (see Table 21). • Responses differed by several demographic characteristics
(see Table 22). The opinion that the Athletic Club should be open to the business community was more common among renters and decreased as age and income increased. The percentages varied
with length of residence. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 31
Table 22 Athletic Club Should be Open to Business Community by Selected DemographicsPercentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 10.2 Rent 36.0 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 11.8
1 to 5 years 26.3 6 to 10 years 9.1 More than 10 years 14.3 Age18-25 37.5 26-35 35.7 36-45 13.7 46-60 11.5 61-70 17.9 71 and over 4.8 Income $10,001 to $25,000 71.4 $25,001 to $50,000
18.4 $50,001 to $75,000 28.9 $75,001 to $100,000 28.6 Over $100,000 11.0 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 32
Figure 14 Ratings of Fitness Equipment (n=100) 100% 80% 60% 47.0% 40% 20% 0% 0.0% Poor • Seventy-seven percent of the respondents who have used recreational programs have used the Athletic
Club's equipment. As shown in Table 23, female respondents and homeowners were more likely to report using the equipment. Usage varied with education. • As shown in Figure 14, 43.0 percent
rated the equipment as "excellent" and 47.0 percent rated the equipment as "good" for an excellent/good rating of 90.0 percent. Ten percent rated the equipment as "fair." Survey Research
Center, University ofNorth Texas 33
Table 23 Used Athletic Club Fitness Equipment by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 89.0 Rent 57.1 Gender Female 84.3 Male 68.9 Education . High school
graduate 54.5 Some college 86.2 College graduate 69.2 Graduate school 86.8 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 34
Figure 15 Used Tennis Facilities at the Addison Athletic Club in Past Year (n=131) Yes 16.8% No 83.2% • As shown in Figure 15, usage of the tennis facilities at the Addison Athletic
Club was reported by 16.8 percent of respondents. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 35
Figure 16 Frequency of Tennis Facilities Usage at the Addison Athletic Club in Past Year· (n=20) 60% 50% 40% 30.0% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2+ times per week Weekly Several times per Once per
month Several times per month year • As displayed in Figure 16, the largest portion of Athletic Club members (30.0 percent) used the tennis facilities several times per year and 25.0
percent used tennis facilities monthly. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 36
Figure 17 Used the Trinity Christian Athletic Center (n=130) Yes 13.8% No 86.2% • Users of recreational programs were asked if they had used the Trinity Christian Athletic Center in
the last twelve months. As shown in Figure 17, 13.8 percent of the respondents reported that they did. This finding compares to 15.6 percent in 1999. • Respondents with children (39.1
percent) were more likely to have used the Trinity Christian Athletic Center than respondents without children (8.4 percent). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 37
• Thirty-three percent of the respondents said that either they or a member of their family had participated in a town recreation program during the past year compared to 28.0 percent
of the respondents in 1999, 27.0 percent in 1997, and 32.0 percent in 1995. • As shown in Table 24, rates of participation were higher among homeowners, respondents who lived in single
family homes, and families with children under 6 years of age. Participation varied with employment status and generally increased with length of residence. Table 24 Participated in
Recreation Programs by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 42.1 Rent 24.4 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 6.4 1 to 5 years 33.0 6 to 10 years 44.6 More
than 10 years 40.5 Employment status Full-time 28.7 Part-time 51.6 Unemployed 36.8 Retired 39.6 Student 0.0 Homemaker 57.1 Family with children Children under 6 57.7 Children 6 to 12
43.8 Children 13 to 18 15.4 Type of housing Single family 41.4 Duplex 33.3 Apartment 24.0 Other 31.3 Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 38
60% 47.7% Figure 18 Ratings oJ Recreational Programs (n=130) 48.5% 40% 20% 0% Excellent Good Fair 0.8% Poor Table 25 Ratings of Recreational Programs by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992
Excellent 47.7 53.2 52.7 37.5 32.6 Good 48.5 45.9 44.5 58.6 54.7 Fair 3.1 0.9 1.8 3.9 11.6 Poor 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.2 • Those who did participate were asked to rate the quality of the
town's recreational programs (see Figure 18 and Table 25). Participants rated the town's recreational programs quite favorable, with 47.7 percent responding "excellent" and 48.5 percent
"good." Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 39
Figure 19 Ratings of Building Maintenance (n=371) 100% 80.1% Well maintained Adequately maintained 0.5% Not well maintained Table 26 Ratings of Building Maintenance by Year 2001 1999
1997 1995 1992 Well maintained 80.1 72.9 81.0 78.9 77.8 Adequately maintained 19.4 25.3 16.9 20.6 22.2 Not well maintained 0.5 1.9 2.1 0.5 0.0 • The final question concerning parks asked
respondents about building maintenance. As may be seen in Figure 19, virtually all of the respondents believe that bUildings are eitherwell (80.1 percent) or adequately (19.4 percent) maintained. These ratings are generally consistent with those of previous years (see Table 26). Survey Research Center, University of
North Texas 40
F. Waste Management Figure 20 Missed Garbage Pick-Ups in Last Twelve Months (n=194) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0.5% 1.0% Never missed 1-2 Times 3-4 Times 5 or More Table 27 Missed Garbage
Pick-Ups by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Never missed 87.6 88;8 69.8 88.4 92.8 Missed 1-2 times 10.8 8.4 22.4 7.3 5.2 Missed 3-4 times 0.5 1.9 2.4 2.0 1.4 Missed 5 or more times 1.0
0.9 5.4 2.3 0.6 • Homeowners were asked if collectors ever missed picking up their trash in the past 12 months. As Figure 18 shows, 87.6 percent of respondents reported that garbage
pick-ups .were never missed. Eleven percent reported that trash pick-up was missed 1-2 times, and 1.5 percent reported that trash pick-up was missed 3 or more times. These findings are
similar to 1999 (see Table 27). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 41
Figure 19 Satisfaction with Special Pick-Up (n=97) 100% 89.7% 80% 60% 40% 20% O%-t""--Very satisfied Satisfied Not satisfied Table 28 Satisfaction with Special Pick-Up by Year 2001 1999
1997 1995 1992 Very satisfied 89.7 96.7 88.9 89.2 81.1 Satisfied 9.3 3.3 7,4 7.7 16.8 Not satisfied 1.0 0.0 3.7 3.1 2.1 • Respondents were asked whether within the past year they had
called Addison's Street Department for collection of brush, tree limbs, or any other large item and 27.3 percent of the respondents reported that they had made such a request. As shown
in Figure 19, 99.0 . percent of the respondents reported that they were either very satisfied (89.7 percent) or satisfied (9.3 percent). • As shown in Table 29, the percentages of respondents
who called for a special pick-up generally increased with age, income, and length of residence. Female respondents and homeowners were more likely to have called than male respondents
or renters. The percentages varied by type of housing, education, and employment status. SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 42
Table 29 Called for Special Pick-Up by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 45.2 Rent 4.2 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 9.1 1 to 5 years 17.0 6 to
10 years 47.1 More than 10 years 40.5 Age18-25 0.0 26-35 11.2 36-45 17.9 46-60 35.2 61-70 54.3 71 and over 56.0 Gender Female 33.0 Male 16.7 Education High school graduate 22.5 Some
college 29.2 College graduate 18.3 Graduate school 32.4 Employment status Full-time 18.7 Part-time 24.1 Unemployed 16.7 Retired 56.5 Student 11.1 Homemaker 50.0 Income $10,001 to $25,000
0.0 $25,001 to $50,000 15.4 $50,001 to $75,000 18.7 $75,001 to $100,000 21.4 Over $100,000 34.6 Type of housing Single family 46.9 Duplex 22.2 Apartment 1.9 Other 0.0 Survey Research
Center, University ofNorth Texas 43
Figure 20 Ratings of Garbage Collection Days (n=214) 100% 80% 65.7% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0.9% Excellent Good Fair Poor • Respondents living in houses and duplexes were asked to rate the overall
impact of garbage collection days of Monday and Thursday on their household waste disposal (see Figure 20). Sixty-seven percent of the respondents rated the collection as "excellent"
and 31.0 percent rated the collection as "good" for a combined excellent/good rating of 96.7 percent. • Ratings in 2001 were similar to ratings in 1999: 66.7 percent excellent, 31.5
percent good, 1.4 percent fair, and 0.5 percent poor. SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 44
Figure 21 Participation in Recycling Program (n=194) Yes 95.4% No 4.6% • Of the 194 respondents with a recycling program in their neighborhood, 95.4 percent reported that they participated
in the program (see Figure 21). This is up from 85 percent in 1999. • As shown in Table 30, the percentages of respondents with a recycling program in their neighborhood increased with
age and income. Eighty-seven percent of homeowners had a program compared to 18.3 percent of renters. Respondents in single family homes and duplexes were also more likely to report
a recycling program than those living in other types of housing. Female respondents were more likely to report having a recycling program than male respondents. Survey Research Center,
University ofNorth Texas 45
Table 30 Recycling Program in Neighborhood by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home·ownership Own 86.7 Rent 18.3 Age18-25 11.1 26-35 33.0 36-45 53.5 46-60 69.3 61-70 78.1
71 and over 88.5 Gender Female 61.1 Male 46.7 Income $10,001 to $25,000 18.2 $25,001 to $50,000 29.4 $50,001 to $75.000 42.0 $75,001 to $100,000 54.5 Over $100,000 73.0 Type of housing
Single family 88.5 Duplex 83.3 Apartment 10.1 Other 17.6 SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 46
Figure 22 Ratings of Recycling Program (n=190) 100% 80% 61.1% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0.5% Poor Table 31 Ratings of Recycling Program by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 Excellent 61.1 48.9 59.8 49.1
Good 33.2 44.1 35.7 41.6 Fair 5.3 6.5 2.5 6.2 Poor 0.5 0.5 2.0 3.1 • Respondents' ratings of the recycling program are presented in Figure 22 and Table 31. Ninety-four percent of the
respondents rated the program as "excellent" (61.1 percent) or "good" (33.2 percent). • Fifty-four percent of the homeowners rated the program as "excellent" compared to 31.0 percent
of the renters. Fifty-seven percent of the female respondents rated the recycling as "excellent" compared to 36.6 percent of the male respondents. Survey Research Center, University
of North Texas 47
Figure 23 Ratings of Recycling Collection Days (n=193) 100% 80% 63.2% 60% 40% 20% 0% 1.0% Excellent Good Fair Poor • Respondents were also asked to rate the overall impact of the re9ycling
collection day (Monday) on their household waste disposal (see Figure 23). Sixty-three percent of the respondents rated the impact as "excellent" and 33.2 percent rated it as "good"
for a combined excellent/good rating of 96.4 percent. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 48
G. Emergency Services Figure 24 Addison Police Service Compared to Other Communities (n=364) 100% 83.8% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%--1'--Better Same Table 32 Addison Police Service by Year Worse
2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Better 83.8 81.9 87.3 83.1 85.2 Same 15.4 17.4 12.5 16.4 14.0 Worse 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.8 • As shown in Figure 24, when asked to rate police services compared
to other cities, 83.8 percent of the respondents reported the service was better. These ratings have been consistently favorable over time (see Table 32). • Eight percent of the respondents
reported that they had been a crime victim or witness to a crime. Of those, 93.3 percent indicated that they reported the crime to the police. Eighteen percent of respondents who reported
they had been a crime victim or witness had a high school education compared to 8.8 percent of those with some college, 6.4 percent of graduate school education, and 5.0 percent of college
graduates. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 49
Figure 25 Addison Fire Services Compared to Other Communities (n=39) 100% 79.5% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%-1'--Better Same 0.0% Worse Table 33 Ratings for Addison Fire Service by Year 2001 1999
1997 1995 1992 Better 79.5 72.5 65.9 66.7 66.9 Same ·20.5 25.0 34.1 33.0 32.7 Worse 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.3 0.4 • Thirteen percent of the respondents reported that they had used fire department
services in cities other than Addison. Homeowners (17.0 percent) were more likely to report they had· used fire services in another city compared to renters (8.0 percent). Twenty-two
percent of respondents who lived in duplexes had used fire services in another city compared to 16.4 percent of those who lived in single family homes, 8.2 percent in apartments, and
0.0 percent in other dwellings. • Respondents who had .used fire department services in other cities were asked if they thought fire services in Addison were better, the same or worse
(see Figure 25 and Table 33). Eighty percent of the respondents who had used other services thought that Addison's fire services were "better," and 20.5 percent thought they were the
"same." Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 50
Table 34 Ratings of Ambulance Service by Year (n=29) 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent 86.2 78.1 80.0 84.0 64.7 Good 13.8 21.9 16.0 16.0 23.5 Fair 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 5.9 Poor 0.0 0.0 0.0
0.0 5.9 • Only 7.2 percent of the respondents reported having called for an ambulance during the past year. Of those calling for an ambulance, 86.2 percent rated the ambulance service
as "excellent" and 13.8 percent rated it as "good" (see Table 34). . • Fifteen percent of respondents with children had called an ambulance during the past year compared to 6.1. percent
of respondents without children. The percentages of respondents who called an ambulance generally increased with length of residence: 3 to 12 months (0.0 percent); 1 to 5 years (6.7
percent); 6 to 10 years (5.8 percent); more than 10 years (20.5 percent). Swvey Research Center, University of North Texas 51
H. Code Enforcement Figure 26 Ratings of Zoning Ordinance (n=366) 100% 80% 60% 51.4% 40% 20% Excellent Fair Table 35 Ratings of Zoning Ordinance by Year 1.4% Poor 2001 1999 1997 1995
1992 Excellent 39.1 35.8 35.9 29.1 29.9 Good 51.4 51.3 50.8 52.4 50.7 Fair 8.2 10.0 11.2 14.7 15.5 Poor 1.4 2.9 2.1 3.9 3.8 • Respondents were asked to rate Addison's zoning efforts.
As indicated in Figure 26 and Table 35, a majority of respondents (51.4 percent) rated zoning as "good" and 39.1 percent of the respondents rated zoning as "excellent." • Homeowners
had higher "excellent" ratings (48.6 percent) than renters (29.3 percent). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 52
Figure 27 Ratings of Sign Regulation (n=394) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Excellent Good Fair 1.0% Poor Table 36 Ratings of Sign Regulation by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent 44.7
41.8 42.3 38.6 44.5 Good 47.0 48.2 50.5 50.4 44.0 Fair 7.4 8.2 6.3 9.5 9.9 Poor 1.0 1.8 1.0 1.5 1.6 • Respondents were asked to rate sign regulation (see Figure 27 and Table 36). The
largest percentage (47.0 percent) thought the town's regulation of signs was "good," followed by 44.7 percent who thought regulation was "excellent." Survey Research Center, University
of North Texas 53
I. Animal Control Figure 28 Ratings of Animal Control (n=333) 100% 80% 60% 50.5% 40% 20% 0% Excellent Good Fair Poor Table 37 Ratings of Animal Control by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992
Excellent 37.5 36.5 42.2 -29.8 30.3 Good 50.5 49.0 36.7 46.5 50.5 Fair 9.0 11.0 12.7 16.7 12.5 Poor 3.0 3.6 8.4 7.0 6.4 • Thirty-eight percent of the respondents rated the animal control
program as "excellent," and 50.5 percent rated the service as "good," for a combined positive rating of 88.0 percent (see Figure 28 and Table 37). Survey Research Center, University
of Norlh Texas 54
J. Need for Improvement in Services Table 38A Citizen Ratings of Selected Services Service Much Some No Library Services 2001 (n=326) 4.6 12.6 82.8 1999 (n=334) 11.4 18.3 70.4 1997 (n=296)
8.8 19.3 72.0 1995 (n=317) 13.9 19.6 66.6 1992 (n=262) . 7.3 19.8 72.9 Street Maintenance 2001 (n=399) 2.5 23.8 73.7 1999 (n=399) 2.0 31.8 66.2 1997 (n=406) 3.0 24.4 72.7 1995 (n=393)
3.3 32.3 64.4 1992 (n=371) 1.6 25.9 72.5 Garbage Collection 2001 (n=378) 0.5 18.3 81.2 1999 (n=369) 3.3 20.9 75.9 1997 (n=374) 3.5 19.5 77.0 1995 (n=359) 1.7 20.9 77.4 1992 (n=333) 1.5
12.6 85.9 Recreation Services 2001 (n=369) 3.3 18.2 78.6 1999 (n=374) 2.4 19.3 78.3 1997 (n-367) 1.4 15.0 83.7 1995 (n=358) 2.5 22.6 74.9 1992 (n=336) . 2.7 19.0 78.3 Code Enforcement
2001 (n=344) 2.0 15.7 82.3 1999 (n=358) 3.1 18.2 78.8 1997 (n=361) 2.5 13.6 83.9 1995 (n=340) 5.3 20.6 74.1 1992 (n=285) 3.9 14.0 82.2 • In the first question, all respondents were asked
whether "much," "some," or "no improvement" was needed for each of 11 services. These questions were asked of all respondents regardless of whether they had used a service. The second
question asked respondents to indicate what the needed improvement was for each service identified as needing "much improvement." Library Services • As shown in Table 38A, 4.6 percent
of the respondents said the library needed much improvement, and 12.6 percent said the library needed some improvement. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 55
• Respondents with children (10.2 percent) were more likely to report that the library services needed much improvement compared to respondents without children (3.6 percent). A greater
percentage of renters (7.3 percent) reported "much improvement" than homeowners (1.9 percent). • The most common reason for "much improvement" was that Addison "needed its own library."
Street Maintenance • Twenty-four percent of the respondents said that street maintenance needed some improvement, and 2.5 percent reported street maintenance needed much improvement.
• The most common reasons given for "much improvement" was for the improvement of potholes. Garbage Collection • Eighteen percent of the respondents said that garbage collection needs
some improvement, and 0.5 percent reported it needs much improvement. • The most common reason given for "much improvement" was to pick up trash more often. Recreation Services '. Eighteen
percent of the respondents said that recreation services need some improvement, and 3.3 percent reported that recreation services need much improvement. • The most common reason given
for "much improvement" is that there needs to be more children's play areas and family activities. . Code Enforcement • Sixteen percent of the respondents said that code enforcement
needs some improvement, and 2.0 percent reported code enforcement needs much improvement. • The most common reason given for "much improvement" is that dog leash laws need to be enforced.
Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 56
Table 388 Citizen Ratings of Selected Services Service Much Some No Water Services 2001 (n=393) 2.8 11.7 85.5 1999 (n=387) 3.6 14.7 81.7 1997 (n=391) 3.3 11.8 84.9 1995 (n=373) 3.8 13.9
82.3 1992 (n=340) 3.2 6.5 90.3' Parks 2001 (n=368) 4.1 16.3 79.6 1999 (n=373) 2.1 17.4 80.4 1997 (n=351) 1.4 14.5 84.0 1995 (n=357) 3.6 23.2 73.1 1992 (n=327) 2.8 17.4 79.8 Landscaping
2001 (n=400) 2.3 16.0 81.8 1999 (n=398) 2.8 19.3 77.9 1997 (n=405) 2.0 13.8 84.2 1995 (n=392) 1.5 18.4 80.1 1992 (n=374) 1.1 12.0 86.9 Police Protection 2001 (n=383) 2.6 7.3 90.1 1999
(n=389) 2.1 12.9 85.1 1997 (n=397) 0.8 9.1 90.2 1995 (n=387) 1.6 9.8 88.6 1992 (n=360) 0.8 11.9 87.2 Fire Protection 2001 (n=367) 0.8 4.6 94.6 1999 (n=381) 1.0 10.0 '89.0 1997 (n=375)
0.5 4.8 94.7 1995 (n=357) 1.1 8.7 90.2 1992 (n=318) 0.3 8.5 91.2 Ambulance Services 2001 (n=325) 0.3 4.6 95.1 1999 (n=352) 0.6 8.5 90.9 1997 (n=331) 0.3 4.2 95.5 1995 (n=317) 0.9 6.6
92.4 1992 (n=239) 0.4 6.7 92.9 Water Service • Twelve percent of the respondents said that water service needs some improvement, and 2.8 percent reported water service needs much improvement
(see Table 38B). • The most common reason given for "much improvement" was the taste of the water. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 57
Parks • Sixteen percent of the respondents reported that parks need some improvement, and 4.1 percent reported parks need much improvement • Several reasons related to dogs were listed
including dog waste clean-up and leash law enforcement. Other reasons included more trees, expanded facilities and amenities. Landscaping • Sixteen percent of the respondents said that
landscaping needs some improvement, and 2.3 percent reported that landscaping needs much improvement. • The most common reason given for "much improvement" was that more landscaping
and maintenance was needed. Police Protection • Seven percent of the respondents indicated that police protection needs some improvement, and 2.6 percent reported that police protection
needs much improvement. A greater percentage of renters (4.2 percent) reported that police protection needs much improvement than homeowners (1.0 percent). • "More patrolling" was given
as a reason for police services needing much improvement. Fire Protection • Five percent of the respondents indicated that 'fire protection needs some improvement, and 0.8 percent reported
fire protection needs much improvement. Ambulance Service • Five percent of the respondents indicated that ambulance service needs some improvement and 0.3 percent reported ambulance
service needs much improvement. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 58
VI. TOWN ADMINISTRATION Table 39 Contact with Town Officials by Year Had Contact 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Yes 31.1 34.8 22.0 42.0 43.0 No 68.9 65.3 78.0 58.0 57.0 • Thirty-one percent
of the respondents had contact with town officials in the last year (see Table 39). • As shown in Table 40, respondents who were homeowners, female, retired, or lived in a duplex or
single family home were most likely to contact town officials. The likelihood of contacting town officials also increased with age, income, and length of residence. Survey Research Center,
University ofNorth Texas 59
Table 40 Contact with Town Officials by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 44.9 Rent 17.4 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 14.9 1 to 5 years 28.1 6
to 10 years 45.9 More than 10 years 34.9 Age18-25 17.6 26-35 21.1 36-45 30.0 46-60 36.7 61-70 44.4 71 and over 50.0 Gender Female 36.4 Male 25.4 Employment status Full-time ·26.9 Part-time
35.5 Unemployed 31.6 Retired 50.0 Student 11.1 Homemaker 38.1 Income $10,001 to $25,000 15.4 $25,001 to $50,000 15.0 $50,001 to $75,000 27.6 $75,001 to $100,000 33.9 Over $100,000 39.4
Type of housing Single family 46.4 Duplex 52.9 Apartment 14.0 Other 5.9 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 60
Table 41 Person Contacted (n=119) Person Contacted Percentage Responding City Manager 18.5 Parks and Recreation 17.6 Police 12.6 Mayor or Council 11.8 Water Department 10.9 Garbage Collection
6.7 Planning and Zoning 3.4 Inspections 3.4 Animal Control 2.5 Tax Office 2.5 Fire 1.7 Street maintenance 1.7 Other . 6.7 Table 42 Results of Contact with the Town by Year Percent Responding
Yes 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Satisfied with contact 83.6 86.1 79.8 84.5 79.7 Person contacted courteous 96.7 95.6 96.6 91.6 89.4 • As shown in Table 41, the town manager's office was
the most common town contact (18.5 percent) followed by parks and recreation (17.6 percent), the police department (12.6 percent), mayor or town council (11.8 percent), and water department
(10.9 percent). • Those who contacted the town were then asked whether the results of the contact were satisfactory, and if the individuals contacted were courteous and helpful (see
Table 42). The majority of respondents (83.6 percent) were satisfied with the results of their contact. A large majority (96.7 percent) thought the person or persons they dealt with
were courteous and helpful. These findings appear to be consistent with those of previous years. • A larger percentage of respondents without children (86.0 percent) were satisfied with
the results of their contact than respondents with children (66.7 percent). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 61
Figure 29 Ratings of Town Management (n=391) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 53.2% Excellent Good Fair 0.8% Poor Table 43 Ratings of Town Management by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent
53.2 54.0 53.0 41.2 32.0 Good 43.7 41.7 44.4 52.6 54.9 Fair 2.3 3.8 2.0 3.9 10.0. Poor 0.8 0.5 0.5 2.3 3.1 • Respondents were asked to rate how well Addison was managed (see Figure 49
and Table 43). This year as in 1999, the percentage of "excellent" ratings were the largest portion of the responses (53.2 percent). Forty-four percent of the respondents rated town
management as good. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 62
VII. CITIZEN INFORMATION A. News Sources Figure 30 Get Enough Information about Addison (n=394) Yes 78.7% No 21.3% Table 44 Get Enough Information about Addison by Year 2001 1999 1997
1995 Yes 78.7 78.5 78.2 67.6 No 21.3 21.5 21.8 32.4 • Respondents were asked if they thought they got enough information about issues and problems facing the town. As shown in Figure
30 and Table 44,78.7 percent said they received enough information. • A higher percentage of retired respondents (93.8 percent) reported that they received enough information about the
town compared to part-time (80.6 percent), full-time (79.5 percent), unemployed (63.2 percent), homemaker (57.1 percent), and student (55.6 percent) respondents. The percentages also
increased with age. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 63
Figure 31 Source of News about Addison (n=392) 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 46.0% Inside Addison Accolade Dallas Morning Northwest Morning News News None Table 45 Source of News about
Addison by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 Inside Addison 46.0 52.9 48.4 34.9 Accolade 26.9 23.8 27.0 19.1 Dallas Morning News 17.6 9.9 13.2 19.1 Northwest Morning News 2.6 8.9 7.0 22.2 None
6.9 4.6 4.2 4.7 • To ascertain where Addison residents obtained most of their information about the town, respondents were read a list of sources and asked to name the one that provided
them the most Addison news. As Figure 31 indicates, 46.0 percent of the respondents named Inside Addison, followed by the Accolade (26.9 percent), Dallas Morning News (17.6 percent),
and the Northwest Morning News (2.6 percent). Inside Addison and the Accolade had both gained popularity as primary sources of information since 1995 (see Table 45). • As shown in Table
46, readership varied by gender, home ownership, and length of residence. While both female (47.0 percent) and male respondents (45.0 percent) read Inside Addison in fairly equal percentages,
female respondents were more likely to read the Accolade (31.2 percent) and less likely to read the Dallas Morning News (12.4 percent). . Male respondents were more likely to read the
Dallas Morning News (23.3 percent) and less Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 64
likely to read the Accolade (22.2 percent). Fifty percent of renters reported reading the Inside Addison newsletter compared to 42.3 percent of homeowners. Residents of 1 to 5 years
were more likely to read the Inside Addison newsletter. • Respondents were asked if Inside Addison was useful in providing information about Addison, and 89.1 percent of the respondents
said that the newsletter was useful. Table 46 Source of News about Addison by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Inside Dallas Northwest Accolade None Addison Morning Morning
of these Newsletter News News Home ownership Own 42.3 14.9 5.2 34.5 3.1 Rent 49.7 20.3 0.0 19.3 10.7 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 37.8 35.6 0.0 15.6 11.1 1 to 5 years 51.1 16.0
0.5 26.5 5.9 6 to 10 years 42.2 10.8 8.4 32.5 6.0 More than 10 years 36.4 20.5 4.5 29.5 9.1 Gender Female ·47.0 12.4 4.0 31.2 5.4 Male 45.0 23.3 1.1 22.2 8.5 Survey Research Center,
University of North Texas 65
Figure 32 Have Personal Computer at Home (n=402) Yes 86.1% No 13.9% • When asked if they had a personal computer at home, 86.1 percent of the respondents reported that they did have
a home computer (see Figure 32). • As shown in Table 47, respondents more likely to have a home computer include families with children and those living in single family homes. Percentages
varied with age and generally increased with education and income. • Of the group with a home computer, 95.4 percent also had Internet access. Of all respondents in the sample, 82.1
percent had Internet access. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 66
Table 47 Home Personal Computer by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Age18-25 85.3 26-35 86.4 36-45 92.6 46-60 90.9 61-70 72.2 71 and over 65.4 Education High school graduate
67.5 Some college 84.6 College graduate 88.1 Graduate school 91.8 Income $10,001 to $25,000 61.5 $25,001 to $50,000 72.5 $50,001 to $75,000 88.3 $75,001 to $100,000 96.6 Over $100,000
91.5 Family with children Yes 94.5 No 84.7 Type of housing Single family 91.3 Duplex 77.8 Apartment 81.3 Other 82.4 SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 67
Yes 51.0% Figure 33 Aware of Addison Web Site (n=402) No 49.0% • When asked if they were aware of Addison's web site, 51.0 percent of the respondents reported that they were aware (see
Figure 33). This was an increase from 1999 when 37.8 percent of the respondents reported that they were aware of Addison's web site. • As shown in Table 48, awareness of Addison's web
site generally increased with income and varied by type of housing. Fifty-eight percent of homeowners were aware of the site compared to 44.3 percent of renters. Survey Research Center,
University of North Texas 68
Table 48 Aware of Addison Web Site by Selected Demographics Percentage , Responding I Yes Home ownership Own 57.7 Rent 44.3 Income $10,001 to $25,000 15.4 $25,001 to $50,000 42.5 $50,001
to $75,000 53.2 $75,001 to $100,000 71.2 Over $100,000 52.7 Type of housing Single family 58.2 Duplex 61.1 Apartment 42.7 Other 41.2 Survey Research Center, University of North Texas
69
Yes 62.9% Figure 34 Visited Addison Web Site (n=205) No 37.1% • Respondents who were aware of Addison's web site were asked if they had ever visited the web site. As shown in Figure
34, 62.9 percent of respondents who were aware of the web site visited the web site. • As shown in Table 49, visiting the web site was more common among male respondents and renters,
and decreased with age. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 70
Table 49 Visited Addison's Web Site by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 55.2 Rent 73.0 Age18-25 78.6 26-35 86.4 36A5 63.4 46-60 50.9 61-70 44.4 71 and
over 26.7 Gender Female 56.9 Male 69.8 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 71
Figure 35 Attended a Town Meeting in Past Year (n=402) Yes 14;4% No 85.6% Table 50 Attended a Town Meeting in Past Year by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 Yes 14.4 10.2 12.5 20.0 No 85.6 89.8
87.5 80.0 -• Survey respondents were asked whether they had attended a town meeting in the past year, and 14.4 percent reported that they had attended (see Figure 35 and Table 50). •
The percentages of respondents who had attended a town meeting generally increased by age and length of residence, and varied type of housing (see Table 51). A greater percentage of
homeowners (25.9 percent) said they had been to a town meeting than renters (3.0 percent). • Ninety-eight percent of respondents who had attended a town meeting indicated that the town
meetings are a good method for the town to gain citizen input. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 72
Table 51 Attended a Town Meeting in Past Year by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 25.9 Rent 3.0 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 0.0 1 to 5 years
9.8 6 to 10 years 32.6 More than 10 years 18.2 Age18-25 2.9 26-35 4.5 36-45 8.6 46-60 21.8 61-70 36.1 71 and over 26.9 Type of housing Single family 26.0 Duplex 5.6 Apartment 2.3 Other
11.8 Survey Research Center, University ofNorlh Texas 73
B. Cable Television Figure 36 Experienced Problem with Cable Reception in Past 6 Months (n=271) 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% No problems 1-2 times 3-5 times 5 or more times Table 52 Experienced
Problem with Cable Reception in Past 6 Months by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 No problems 50.6 22.1 35.4 37.5 1-2 times 12.9 16.2 19.2 24.0 3-5 times 13.7 22.5 15.5 23.6 5 or more times
22.9 39.1 29.9 15.0 • Respondents were asked whether they had cable television in their homes, and 68.7 percent said they did have cable service. The percentages of respondents who had
cable service generally increased with age, ranging from 52.9 percent of respondents ages 18 to 25 to 88.5 percent of those age 71 or older. • AT&T Cable supplied service to 75.5 percent
of the subscribers, and Charter Communications supplied 13.2 percent. Eleven percent subscribed to neither service. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 74
• Respondents who had cable service were asked if they had experienced any service or reception problems in the past six months (see Figure 36). The number of people reporting reception
problems appears to have decreased since 1999 (see Table 52). • When asked if they were generally satisfied with the cable service being offered in Addison, 76.5 percent reported they
were satisfied (compared to 45.7 percent in 1999, 52.6 percent in 1997,72.2 percent in 1995, and 75.8 percent in 1992). Male respondents (68.2 percent) were less likely to say they were
satisfied with their cable service than female respondents (84.2 percent). • There were no statistically significant differences between the two cable companies in terms of customer
satisfaction or service problems. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 75
VIII. LIVING IN ADDISON A. Special Events Figure 37 Attended an Addison Special Event Kaboom Town Taste of Addison Oktoberfest Addison/UNT Jazz Fest Shakespeare Festival Holiday Open
House SpikeFest Run for the Children at Oktoberfest 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% • Respondents were asked whether they attended any of the eight town-sponsored special events listed (see
Figure 37 and Table 53). Several of the events were attended by a majority of the respondents. The percentage of respondents attending any of these events generally increased as the
respondents' income increased. Table 53 Attendance at Special Events by Year Event 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Kaboom Town 75.3 57.5 51.8 54.1 57.1 Taste of Addison 67.7 57.6 57.5 52.2
n.a. Oktoberfest 58.1 56.8 57.1 65.0 65.3 Addison/UNT Jazz Fest 19.0 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Shakespeare Festival 18.2 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Holiday Open House 17.5 20.8 n.a. n.a. n.a. SpikeFest
10.5 8.7 10.1 7.7 n.a. Run for the Children at Oktoberfest 7.5 5.2 n.a. n.a. n.a. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 76
• Kaboom Town was the event attended by the highest percentage of respondents with 75.3 percent reporting attendance. Attendance was higher in 2001 than in any previous year. As shown
in Table 54, attendance varied by age and type of housing. Eighty-three percent of homeowners reported they attended Kaboom Town compared to 67.6 percent of renters. The pe'rcentages
generally increased with length of residence. • Taste of Addison was next with 67.7 percent of respondents attending. There were no significant differences among respondents who attended
this event. • Oktoberfest was next with 58.1 percent of respondents reporting attendance. As shown in Table 55, attendance was most common among respondents with children under 12, homeowners,
and those who lived in single family homes and duplexes. Attendance varied by age and generally increased with length of residence. • The Addison/UNT Jazz Fest was attended by 19.0 percent
of respondents. The percentages of respondents who attended varied by education: high school graduate (12.5 percent), some college (26.4 percent), college graduates (11.3 percent}, and
graduate school/degree (25.7 percent). • Eighteen percent of respondents attended the Shakespeare Festival (18.2 percent). There were no statistically significant differences among respondents
who attended this festival. • Holiday Open House was attended by 17.5 percent of the respondents. Attendance generally increased with age and length of residence (see Table 56). Attendance
was higher among homeowners, female respondents, respondents living in single family homes, and retired respondents and part-time workers. • Nine percent of the respondents attended
SpikeFest. Attendance was higher among male respondents (12.1 percent) than female respondents (5.5 percent). • Run for the Children at Oktoberfest was attended by 5.2 percent of the
respondents. Respondents with children were more likely to attend the run (13.7 percent) than respondents without children (3.4 percent). • As a follow-up to the events attendance question,
respondents were asked whether it was beneficial for the town to sponsor such special events, and 98.0 percent responded "yes." This compares to 96.5 percent in 1999,96.3 percent in
1997, 97.4 percent in 1995, and 95.6 percent in 1992. Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 77
Table 54 Attended Kaboom Town by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 83.0 Rent 67.7 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 55.3 1 to 5 years 73.7 6 to 10 years
88.4 More than 10 years 79.5 Age18-25 41.2 26-35 75.5 36-45 82.7 46-60 80.0 61-70 82.9 71 and over 69.2 Income $10,001 to $25,000 53.8 $25,001 to $50,000 53.8 $50,001 to $75,000 79.2
$75,001 to $100,000 84.7 Over $100,000 85.3 Type of housing Single family 85.1 Duplex 72.2 Apartment 65.5 Other 64.7 Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 78
Table 55 Attended Oktoberfest by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 64.5 Rent 51.7 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 34.0 1 to 5 years 56.0 6to 10 years
71.8 More than 10 years 68.2 Age18-25 41.2 26-35 64.5 36-45 48.8 46-60 65.5 61-70 58.3 ·71 and over 53.8 Income $10,001 to $25,000 30.8 $25,001 to $50,000 38.8 $50,001 to $75,000 62.3
$75,001 to $100,000 66.1 Over $100,000 67.2 Family with children Children under 6 61.5 Children 6 to 12 62.5 Children 13 to 18 23.1 Type of housing Single family. 62.6 Duplex 77.8 Apartment
51.5 Other 52.9 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 79
Table 56 Attended Holiday Open House by Selected Demographics . Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 26.5 Rent 8.5 Length of residence 3 to 12 months 2.1 1 to 5 years 8.9 6 to
10 years 36.0 More than 10 years 40.9 Age18-25 8.8 26-35 5.5 36-45 16.3 I 46-60 19.1 61-70 41.7 71 and over 34.6 Gender Female 23.1 Male 11.5 Employment status Full-time 12.6 Part-time
35.5 Unemployed 11.1 Retired 38.8 Student 11.1 Homemaker 9.1 Type of housing Single family 26.7 Duplex 11.1 Apartment 8.2 Other 11.8 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas
80
B. DART Figure 38 Usage of DART Bus in the Past 6 Months (n=400) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 3.5% Weekly 1.5% Monthly 2 to 3 Months 88.2% Never Table 57 Usage of DART Bus in the Past 6 Months
by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 Weekly 3.5 3.5 2.2 2.5 Monthly 1.5 2.0 1.5 2.0 Once every 2 to 3 months 6.8 8.0 6.6 3.6 Never 88.2 86.5 89.7 91.9 • Respondents were also asked about the
frequency of their use of Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) buses (see Figure 38). Addison residents' bus use has remained generally consistent since 1995 (see Table 57). • Female respondents
(91.3 percent) were more likely to report that they had not ridden the bus than male respondents (84.9 percent). Renters (7.0 percent) were more likely than homeowners (0.0 percent)
to ride the bus on a weekly basis. SUNey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 81
Figure 39 Usage of DART Trolley in the Past 6 Months (n=401) 20% 40% 80% 0.7% 0.5% 1.5% 1.2% 􀁯􀀥􀀭􀀡􀀲􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀻􀁪􀁪􀁟􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁉􀀡􀁾􀀺􀀺􀁉􀁉􀁉􀁟􀁾􀀺􀀻􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀺􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀺􀀽􀁊
100% .60% Weekly Monthly 2 to 3 Months Only once Never • Respondents were also asked about the frequency of their use of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Trolley (see Figure 39).
Ninety-six percent of respondents had never used the troiley. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 82
C. Addison Airport Figure 40 Airport Noise (n=309) 100% 76.9% 80% 60% 40% 20% O%-f'--Not a problem Moderate problem Table 58 Airport Noise by Year Significant problem 2001 1999 1997
1995 Not a problem 76.9 74.1 86.0 77.2 Moderate problem 18.7 21.4 10.5 16.7 Significant problem 4.5 4.5 3.4 6.1 • Respondents were asked whether they considered the Addison Airport to
be an important or unimportant asset to the town. A significant majority (87.0 percent) responded that the airport was an important asset. This finding has remained generally consistent
since 1997. • The percentage of respondents with a response of "important asset" was higher among homeowners (90.3 percent) than renters (83.7 percent) and varied by type of housing
(single family-92.4 percent; apartment-83.2 percent; other-78.6 percent; duplex-70.6 percent). • A subsequent question asked whether noise from the airport was a significant problem,
a moderate problem, or not a problem to residents (see Figure 40 and Table 58). A large majority (76.9 percent) indicated that airport noise was "not a problem." Survey Research Center,
University ofNorth Texas 83
D. Posta.1 Service Figure 41 Postal Service Compared to Other Communities (n=391 ) 100% 80% 68.5% 60% 40% 20% 􀁏􀀥􀁾􀁟Better Same Worse Table 59 Postal Service Compared to Other Communities
by Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 Better 24.3 22.2 12.1 11.3 Same 68.5 63.1 73.6 69.6 Worse 7.2 14.7 14.4 19.1 • Respondents were asked to compare postal service in Addison to delivery in
other communities. As Figure 41 indicates, the majority of respondents (68.5 percent) thought postal service was the same in Addison as it was elsewhere, 7.2 percent thought it was worse,
and 24.3 percent thought it was better. These percentages appear to have improved since 1997 (see Table 59). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 84
E. Quality of Life Figure 42 Ratings of Addison as a Place to Live (n=402) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0.5% 0.0% Excellent Good Fair Poor Table 60 Ratings of Addison as a Place to Live by
Year 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Excellent 79.1 78.6 79.3 72.7 76.3 Good 20.4 19.2 20.0 25.6 22.4 Fair 0.5 2.2 0.5 1.5 1.1 Poor 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 • Respondents were asked how they rated
Addison as a place to live. As is evident in Figure 42, and as might be expected 'from the positive responses to previous questions, respondents appear to be very satisfied with Addison
as a place to live. • A large majority (79.1 percent) rated Addison as an "excellent" place to live, followed by 20.4 percent who rated the town as "good." As Table 60 shows, Addison's
quality of life ratings have remained consistently high over the survey years. Homeowners had more favorable ratings than renters. Eighty-nine percent of the homeowners rated the quality
of life as "excellent," 9.7 percent as "good," and 1.0 percent as "fair." Sixty-nine percent of of the renters rated the quality of life as "excellent," 28.3 percent as "good," and 2.9
percent as "fair." Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 85
Table 61 Reasons Why Respondents Would Consider Leaving Addison by Year (n=92) Reason 2001 1999 1997 1995 1992 Cost/selection of housing 32.6 42.0 32.9 20.4 11.0 Job relocation 17.7
14.8 21.5 26.5 15.8 Closer to family 9.8 n.a. 6.3 n.a. n.a. Access to public schools 9.5 2.5 2.6 4.1 6.6 Moving out of state 􀀷􀁾􀀶 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Retirement 6.5 6.2 n.a. n.a. n.a.
Closer to job 4.3 1.2 7.5 2.0 n.a. High cost of living/taxes 3.3 n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Move to smaller town 1.1 14.8 10.1 2.0 n.a. Congestion n.a. 9.9 2.6 6.1 n.a. Other 7.6 8.6 16.5 n.a.
n.a. • As a follow-up, respondents were asked if they planned to remain in Addison, and 80.7 percent responded "yes" (compared to 82.5 percent in 1999,84.1 percent in 1997, and 86.4
percent in 1995). • A higher percentage of homeowners (89.0 percent) compared to renters (72.3 percent) said they would remain in Addison. The percentages increased with age and varied
by type of housing and employment status (see Table 62). • As shown in Table 61, of those who thought thought they might leave, the most-mentioned reasons were the cost/selection of
housing (32.6 percent), job relocation (17.7 percent), and to move closer to family (9.8 percent). Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 86
Table 62 Plan to Remain in Addison by Selected Demographics Percentage Responding Yes Home ownership Own 89.0 Rent 72.3 Age18-25 64.5 26-35 70.2 36-45 80.0 46-60 89.4 61-70 88.6 71 and
over 100.0 Employment status Full-time 80.2 Part-time 71.4 Unemployed 82.4 Retired 95.7 Student 66.7 Homemaker 68.2 Type of housing Single family 88.2 Duplex 100.0 Apartment 71.1 Other
70.6 Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 87
IX. CONCLUSIONS The results of the 2001 Addison Citizen Survey once again indicate a high overall level of general citizen satisfaction with municipal services. There is not one municipal
service, town activity, or current issue that appears to emerge as a serious problem or concern. Also noteworthy are the very small percentages found at the lower end of the various
rating scales used. Furthermore, when asked to rate the need for improvement regarding 11 city services, less than 5 percent of the respondents stated that any service needed "much improvement."
Addison citizens have positive perceptions of town services and administration. Ratings of town management in particular remain at a high level. For the third survey year in a row, "excellent"
ratings of town management (53.2 percent) were higher than "good" ratings (43.7 percent) for a combined excellent/good rating of 96.9 percent. Nearly 100 percent rated Addison as an
excellent (79.1 percent) or good (20.4 percent) place to live. Several services appear to have shown increased usage or awareness in this year's survey. For example, 95.4 percent of
the respondents with a recycling program in their neighborhood reported that they participated in the program compared to 85 percent in 1999. Awareness of Addison's web site also appears
to have increased from 37.8 percent of the respondents in 1999 to 51.0 percent of the respondents in 2001. The percentage of residents attending Kaboom Town also appeared to be higher
in 2001 (75.3 percent) than in 1999 (57.5 percent). The percentage of respondents who had visited the Conference Centre (38.0 percent) appears to have steadily increased since 1992.
Overall, findings from the 2001 Addison citizen survey show that residents have very favorable ratings of Addison as a place to live and appear to be quite supportive of the town and
the direction being pursued by the council and staff. Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 88
APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 89
ADDISON CITIZEN SURVEY 2001 Hello, my name is . The Town of Addison is conducting a sUNey of its citizens and I would like to talk with any female/male age 18 or older. (TO RESPONDENT)
The Town is conducting a sUNey to determine how citizens rate Town seNices and to discover citizen attitudes on certain major issues facing the Town. I want to stress that this sUNey
is being conducted by the Town of Addison and not by a candidate for political office. The questions that I want to ask you will take only a few minutes and your answers will be useful
to the Town staff and council as they develop the budget for next year. All of your answers will be kept confidential. 1. First, how long have you lived in Addison? (DO NOT READ RESPONSES
WHEN ALL IN CAPS) 1. Less than 3 months (TERMINATE INTERVIEW) 2. No longer live in Addison (TERMINATE INTERVIEW) 3. 3 to 12 months (ASK Q1A) 4. 1-5 years (ASK Q1A) 5. 6-10 years (ASK
Q1A) 6. More than 10 years (ASK Q1A) 9. No response/Don't know NRlDK (ASK Q1A) 1A. Do you own your your home or do you rent? 1. Own 2. Rent 9. NRlDK 2. I would like to ask you a question
about streets in the Town. How would you rate the condition of street and road surfaces in Addison? Would you rate them as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Fair
4. Poor 9. NRlDK 3. Does the Town sweep the streets often enough? 1. Yes 2. NO 9. NRlDK 4. Is the street lighting in your neighborhood adequate or inadequate? 1. Adequate 2. Inadequate
9. NRlDK 5. The Town of Addison buys library cards for its residents so that they can use the Farmers Branch or Dallas Public Library. How many times in the past year have you or members
of your family used the Farmers Branch or Dallas Library? Was the library used weekly, at least once a month, once every several months, or never? 1. Weekly (ASK Q5a) 3. Every several
months (ASK Q5a) 2. Once a month (ASK Q5a) 4. Never (SKIP TO Q6) 9. NRlDK 5a. Which of the two libraries, Farmer's Branch or Dallas, were used most often, or were they both used about
equally? 1. Farmer's Branch 2. Dallas 3. Equally 4. NRlDK SUNey Research Center, University of North Texas 90
6. Please tell me whether you or a member of your family have used any of the following parks in the past year. (IF YES TO ANY ASK Q6a. IF NO TO ALL, SKIP TO Q7) YES NO NRJDK a. Town
Park 1 2 9 b. Midway Meadows/Easement Park 1 2 9 c. Dome Park 1 2 9 d. Celestial Park 1 2 9 e. White Rock Jogging Trail 1 2 9 f. Quorum Park 1 2 9 g. Bosque Park 1 2 9 h. North Addison
Park 1 2 9 i. Les Lacs (pronounced: La Locks)) 1 2 9 j. Athletic Club Park 1 2 9 k. Esplanade Park 1 2 9 6A. Regarding the parks in Addison: YES NO NRJDK a. Are they well kept? 1 2 9
b. Are there enough .parks 1 2 9 c. Do the parks provide the outdoor opportunities you are interested in? 1 2 9 7. Have you had an opportunity to attend an event in the Addison Conference
Center? 1. Yes (ASK Q7a) 2. No (SKIP TO Q8) 9. NRJDK 9. NRJDK 3. Fair 4. Poor 7A. Would you rate your overall experience at the Conference Center as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1.
Excellent 2. Good 8. Have you or a member of your family attended a performance at the WaterTower Theatre in the past year? 1. Yes (ASK Q8A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q9) 9. NRlDK 8A. How would
you rate your overall experience at the WaterTower Theatre? Would you rate your experience as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 3. Fair 2. Good 4. Poor 9. NRJDK 9. Are you
a member of the Addison Athletic Club? 1. Yes (ASK Q9A-B) 2. No (SKIP TO Q10) 9. NRlDK 9A. How often do you go to the Athletic Club -Daily, several times a week, monthly, or never? 1.
Daily 2. Weekly 3. Monthly 4. Never 9. NRlDK 98. Currently the Athletic Club is only open to people who live in Addison. Do you think the club should be open to members of the Addison
business community also? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRJDK Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 91
10. Have you or a member of your family participated in any of the 􀁔􀁯􀁷􀁮􀁾􀁳 recreational programs during the past year? 1. Yes (ASK Q1OA-C) 2. No (SKIP TO Q11) 10A. How would you
rate the Town's recreational programs? Would you rate them as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 3. Fair 2. Good 4. Poor 9. NRJOK 108. Have you used the fitness equipment at
the Athletic Club? 1. Yes (ASKQ10B1) 2. No (SKIPTOQ10C) 10B1. How would you rate the quality of the fitness equipment? 1. Excellent 3. Fair 2. Good 4. Poor 9. NRiOK 10C. Have you or
a member of your family used the Trinity Christian Athletic Center in the past 12 months? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRJOK 100. Have you used the tennis facilities at the Athletic Club in the past
year? 1. Yes (ASK Q1001) 2. No (SKIP TO 011) 1001. How often have you used the tennis facilities in the past year? 1. 2-3 times per week or more 2. once per week 3. several times per
monthly 4. about once a month 5. several times in the past year 11. Now I would like to ask you about building maintenance. Do you think that Town buildings are well maintained, adequately
maintained, or not well maintained? 1. Well maintained 3. Not well maintained 2. Adequately maintained 9. NRJOK 12. How would you rate the Town's maintenance of street medians, islands
and rights-of-way? Are medians, islands, and right-of-ways well maintained, adequately maintained, or not well maintained? 1. Well maintained 3. Not well maintained 2. Adequately maintained
9. NRJOK 12A. In the past 12 months, did collectors ever miss picking up your trash on the scheduled pick-up days? IF YES ASK: About how many times did this happen? 1. No, never missed
3. Yes, 3-4 times 2. Yes, 1-2 times 4. Yes,S or more 9. NRJOK 128. The Town garbage collection days are Monday and Thursday. How would you rate the overall impact of garbage collection
days on your household waste disposal? , 1. Excellent 3. Fair 2. Good 4. Poor 9. NRiOK Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 92
9. NRlDK 3. Fair 4. Poor 12C. (ASK ONLY OF NON-RENTERS) Town recycling pick up is Monday. How would you rate the. overall impact of the recycling collection days on your household waste
disposal? 1. Excellent 2. Good 13. The Town has a private company picking up trash, but Addison's Street Department responds to individual requests for collection of brush, tree limbs,
and other large items. In the past 12 months have you called the Town for a special pickup? 1. Yes (ASK Q13A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q14) 9. NRlDK 13A. Were you very satisfied, satisfied, or
not satisfied with the service the Town provided in response to your pickup request? . 1. Very satisfied 2. Satisfied 3. Not satisfied 9. NRlDK 14. Is there a recycling program operating
in your neighborhood? 1. Yes (ASK Q14A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q15) 9. NRlDK 14A. Do you participate in the recycling program? 1. Yes . 2. No 9. NRlDK 148. Would you rate the recycling program
as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 3. Fair 2. Good 4. Poor 9. NRlDK 15. Now please think about emergency services in Addison. Compared to police services in other communities,
do you think Addison has better, about the same, or worse police service? 1. Better 2. Same 3. Worse 9. NRlDK 16. Have you or has anyone in your household been a crime victim or a witness
to any criminal activity that occurred in the Town of Addison within the past 12 months? 1. Yes (ASKQ16A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q17) 9. NRlDK 16A. Was the crime or the witnessed criminal activity
reported to the police? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRlDK 17. Have you ever had to use fire service in a community other than Addison? 1. Yes (ASK Q17A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q18) 9. NRlDK 17A. Do you
think Addison has better, about the same, or worse fire service? 1. Better 2. Same 3. Worse 9. NRlDK 18. Have you or anyone in your household called for a Addison ambulance during the
past 12 months? 1. Yes (ASKQ18A) 2. No(SKIPTOQ19) 9. NRlDK 18A. How would you rate the ambulance service? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 3. Fair 2.
Good Good 4. Poor 9. NRlDK Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 93
19. The Town of Addison regulates land use through zoning ordinances. Would you rate Addison's zoning as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Fair 4. Poor 9. NRlDK
20. Addison also regulates the size, location, and visual characteristics of signs. Would you rate the Town's regulation of signs as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 2. Good
3. Fair 4. Poor 9. NRlDK 21. We have talked about a number of Town services so far. Now I am going to mention some of those services again. After I mention each service please tell me
whether that service needs much, some, or no improvement. Garbage Collection Street Maintenance Library Services Parks Recreational Services Police Protection Fire Protection Ambulance
Service Code Enforcement Landscaping Water Service Much 11111111111 Some 22222222 222 No 333333 333 33 NRlDK 999 999999 99 9. NRlDK 22. INTERVIEWER: FOR EACH SERVICE WHERE MUCH IMPROVEMENT
IS NEEDED ASK: You mentioned that needs improvement? Can you tell me what needs improving? Service (list): 1. _ 2. _ 3. _ 4. ---------------(Continue on back if necessary) 23. How would
you rate Addison's animal control program? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Fair 4. Poor 9. NRlDK 24. Generally, how do you rate Addison as
a place to live. Is it excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Fair 4. Poor 9. NRlDK 25. Do you have cable television in your home? 1. YES (ASK Q25A, B, and C) 2. NO
(SKIP TO Q26) 25A. Is your cable service provided by Charter Communication or AT&T Cable (formerly TCI Cable)? 1. Charter 2. AT&T 9. NRlDK 25B. Within the past 6 months have you experienced
problems with cable service or reception: 1. 1-2 times 2. 3-5 times 3. 5 or more 4. No Prob 9. NRlDK Survey Research Center, University of North Texas 94
25C. Are you generally satisfied with the cable lV service presently being provided in the Town? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRlDK 26. Now I would like to ask you about contacts you have had with
Town officials. Have you or a member of your household contacted the Town of Addison about a complaint, request for service, or for information in the past 12 months? 1. Yes (ASK 026
A,B, and C) 2. No (SKIP TO 027) 9. NRlDK 26A. Who in the Town did you contact, what person or office? 1. City Manager 7. Police 2. Mayor Or Council 8. Fire 3. Water Department ·10. Parks
And Recreation 4. Tax Office 11. Other, :--_ 5. Planning/Zoning 99. NRlDK 6. Inspections 26B. Were you generally satisfied with the results you got or not? 1. Satisfied 2. Not Satisfied
9. NRlDK 26C. Were the people you contacted courteous and helpful when you called, or not? 1. Yes, helpful 2. No, not helpful 9. NRlDK 27. Generally, how would you rate the way the Town
of Addison is managed? Would you rate the way Addison is managed as excellent, good, fair, or poor? 1. Excellent 2. Good 3. Fair 4. Poor 9. NRlDK 28. Do you think you get enough information
about the issues and problems facing the Town and its citizens? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRlDK 29. Is Addison's residents' newsletter, Inside Addison useful to you in providing information about
Addison? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRlDK 30. Do you get most of your news about Addison from the Inside Addison Newsletter, the Dallas Morning News, the Northwest Morning News, or the Accolade?
1.lnside Addison Newsletter 3. Northwest Morning News 2. Dallas Morning News 4. Accolade 5. None of these 9. NRlDK 31. Are you aware that the Town of Addison has created a Web site on
the Internet (www.cLaddison.tx.us)? 1. Yes (ASK 031A) 2. No (SKIP TO 032) 9. NRlDK 31A. Have you or a member of your household visited Addison's web site? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRlDK 32. Is
the Addison Airport an important or unimportant asset to the Town? 1. Important asset 2. Unimportant asset 9. NRlDK SUNey Research Center, University of North Texas 95
a. Taste of Addison b. Kaboom Town (July 3rd) c. Octoberfest d. Run for the Children at Octoberfest e. Spike Fest f. Holiday Open House g. Town of Addison/UNT Jazz Fest h. Shakespeare
Festival 33. Is airport noise a significant problem, a problem, or not a problem at your home? 1. Significant Problem 2. Problem 3. Not a Problem 9. NRJDK 34. Compared to postal delivery
in other communities, do you think Addison has better, about the same, or worse postal delivery? 1. Better 2. About the same 3. Worse 9. NRJDK 35. Have you attended any of the following
special events that Addison sponsors? YES NO NRJDK 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 129 36. Do you think it is beneficial for the Town and its citizens for Addison to sponsor such special
events? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRlDK 37. How often in the past six months have you ridden a Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) bus? Have you ridden a DART bus once a week, once every 2-3 weeks,
once a month, once every 2-3 months, or have you never ridden? 1. Weekly 3. Once every 2-3 months months 2. Monthly 4. Never 9. NRJDK 38. The DART Trolley serves Addison Circle, Addison
hotels, and the Galleria. How often in the past six months have you ridden the DART Trolley? Have you ridden the Trolley once or more a week, once every two or three weeks, once a month,
once every 2-3 months, or have you never ridden the Trolley? 1. Weekly 3. Once every 2-3 months 2. Monthly 4. Never 9. NRJDK 39. Have you attended a Town meeting in the past year? (REFERENCE
IS TO A MEETING IN ADDISON) 1. Yes (ASK Q39A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q40) 9. NRJDK 39A. Do you think Town meetings are a good way for the Town to obtain citizen input? 1. Yes 2. No 9. NRJDK
40. Do you have a personal computer at home? 1. Yes (ASK Q40A) 2. No (SKIP TO Q41) 9. NRJDK 40A. Do you have Internet access at home? 1. Yes (ASKQ40A) 2. No(SKIPTOQ41) 9. NRJDK Survey
Research Center, University of North Texas 96
41. Please tell me if you have any children living at home in the following age groups. , YES NO NRlDK Less than Syears old 1 2 9 6-12 years old 1 2 9 13-18 years old 1 2 9 42. Now for
the last few questions, Iwould like to ask you several things about yourself so that we can develop a general profile of our sample. First of all, how old are you? (INTERVIEWER: CODE
RESPONSE INTO CORRECT CATEGORY) 1. 18-25 4. 46-60 2. 26-35 5. 61-70 3. 36-45 6. 71 and over 9. NRlDK 43. Are you employed fulltime; part-time. presently unemployed, retired, or are you
a student, or homemaker? 1. Fulltime 3. Unemployed 5. Student 2. Part-time 4. Retired 6. Homemaker 9. NRlDK 44. How many years of education have you completed? 1. 8 or less 5. 16, college
grad 2.9-11. some high school 6.17 or more, grad school/degree 3.12, high school grad 9. NRlDK 4.13-15, some college 45. I am going to read several different income categories. Without
telling me your exact income, into which category did your total household income for the past year fall? 1. under $10,000 3.25,001-50,000 5.75,001-100,000 2. 10,001-25,000 4.50,001-75,000
6. over 100,000 9. DKlNR 46. Looking ahead for the next several years, do you plan on remaining in Addison? 1. Yes (SKIP TO Q47) 2. No (ASK Q46A) 9. NRlDK 46A. What is the primary reason
causing you to consider leaving Addison? 1. Cost of housing· 2. Access to public schools 3. Job relocation 4. Move to smaller town 5. Congestion 6. Closer to job 7. Other, _ 9. NRlDK
Thank you very much for your time and cooperation. We believe that this project will help Town officials provide better services to all citizens. 47. INTERVIEWER: RECORD GENDER OF RESPONDENT
1. Female 2. Male9. NRlDK Survey Research Center, University ofNorth Texas 97