Overall appearance of the City (NCS)

Charlottesville Strategic Plan
Overall appearance of Charlottesville rated as “excellent” or “good”
Use regions/landmarks to skip ahead to chart.

Chart

Long description.

No description available.

Structure.

Chart type: column chart.
column series with 3 columns.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying categories.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying values.

Chart graphic.

ChartCreated with Highcharts 5.0.12Chart context menu201220142016
Description

The City of Charlottesville is one of many jurisdictions in the U.S. to participate in the National Citizen Survey (NCS) bi-annually. In 2016, questionnaires were mailed to a random sample of 1,800 Charlottesville households, asking for feedback on the quality and usefulness of city services. There were 368 completed surveys returned, and the full results are posted here.

Great communities are partnerships of the government, private sector, community-based organizations and residents, all geographically connected. The NCS captures residents’ opinions within the three pillars of a community (Community Characteristics, Governance and Participation) across eight central facets of community (Safety, Mobility, Natural Environment, Built Environment, Economy, Recreation and Wellness, Education and Enrichment and Community Engagement).


Analysis

Ratings in Natural Environment were strong: all aspects in this facet received positive ratings from about three-quarters or more of survey participants. Ratings for aspects of Mobility tended to be more mixed: while about two-thirds of residents gave excellent or good ratings to the availability of paths and walking trails and ease of walking in the City, only about 1 in 4 gave high marks to public parking and traffic flow. Travel by car in Charlottesville, public parking and traffic flow all received ratings that were lower than ratings seen in comparison communities. Within the facet of Built Environment, ratings also varied considerably from a high of 80% excellent or good for public places where people like to spend time (which was higher than the national benchmark), to a low of 27% excellent or good for the availability of affordable quality housing (which was lower than the benchmark).