Hot Springs Downtown Development and Redevelopment Action Plan Appendice

250 Pages·2015·12.4 MB·English

by  Brock Naylor

Appendix A

Stakeholder

Engagement
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
Public Forum: ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Visual Preference Survey ...................................................................................................................... 6
Newspaper Headlines from the Future – Key Findings............................................................................... 12
Hot Springs or Not Springs Results ............................................................................................................. 13
Individual Exercise – Common Themes ...................................................................................................... 14
Interviews ................................................................................................................................................... 15
Public Open House ...................................................................................................................................... 15
Open Ended Responses............................................................................................................................... 16
Parking/Transportation/Complete Streets ............................................................................................. 16
Sidewalk Cafés ........................................................................................................................................ 17
Landscaping............................................................................................................................................. 17
Surrounding Neighborhoods ................................................................................................................... 17
Retail ....................................................................................................................................................... 17
Downtown ............................................................................................................................................... 17
Historic Preservation ............................................................................................................................... 17
Full Tally Count ............................................................................................................................................ 18
Steering Committee: ............................................................................................................................... 19
Stakeholders (Focus Group and Interview Participants): ....................................................................... 19
Neighborhood Representatives: ............................................................................................................. 21
Partner Organizations: ............................................................................................................................ 21

P a ge | 3
This page intentionally left blank
4 | P a g e
Public Forum:
The Project Team conducted a Community Public Forum through which all Hot Springs residents could
express their opinions on various components affecting downtown Hot Springs, including aesthetics,
features, and community goals. More than 85 community members attended and participated in the
event. At the forum, participants were presented with several discussion topics and activities designed to
elicit opinions for enhancing economic development in the community. TPMA facilitated a Visual
Preference Survey in which each participant rated images on a -5 to +5 scale to convey preferences on
aesthetics and quality of place. In another activity, public forum contributors had a chance to write their
own newspaper headlines from the future. Participants acted as editors of the Sentinel-Record, projecting
their ideas for how the newspaper headlines would read in the year 2025 on such topics as “Downtown
News,” “Real Estate,” “Dining and Entertainment,” “Recreation and Sports,” “Living,” “Opinion,”
“Education,” and “Economy.” This exercise was designed to showcase the community’s downtown
redevelopment vision and outline realistic economic development goals for future implementation. TPMA
also conducted an exercise called “Hot Springs or Not Springs.” The Project Team posted pictures of
various Hot Springs assets to determine whether the community thinks they are valuable features (“Hot”
Springs) or not (“Not” Springs). Finally, the Project Team directed an individual exercise through which
participants could answer a questionnaire with such questions as “What do you like most about living in
Hot Springs” and “If you had a magic wand and could change one thing, what would it be?” The results of
the Community Public Forum are included below.

P a ge | 5
Visual Preference Survey
# Image Score Comments

+ Likes the modern
styling, lighting

- Boring, flat, shiny,
#1 1.25 sterile

+ Historic with
modern, open
space; graphic
pattern is attention
#2 1.47 grabbing
- Diminishes the
stature of humanity

+ Can walk by the
water, grass;
calming effect;
residential next to
#3 2.27 water
- Looks unnatural,
manufactured;
uninteresting

6 | P a g e
# Image Score Comments

+ Like the old with
new
+ No trees; looks
desolate; doesn’t
#4 2.08 blend well

+ Space can be used
for many events
- Bricks could be
made of more
#5 3.39 natural substance

+ Perfect location of
seating next to water,
in the shade, lots of
foliage
#6 3.72

+ Likes the defined
bike lane and has
bike signals
+ Too commercialized;
#7 -2.14 for cars, not for
people

P a ge | 7
# Image Score Comments

+ When lit, is
interesting
- Unfriendly, not
organic
#8 -0.14

+ Everyone liked this
one; represents
people living
downtown
#9 3.15 - Dark inside

+ Modern sculpture in
a historic place; sun
and shadows
changing the visual
#10 1.58 appearance
constantly
- Big, obtrusive

+ Inviting,
aesthetically
pleasing; form
doesn’t detract from
#11 2.30 physical
environment;
separate areas for
walkers and cyclists

8 | P a g e
# Image Score Comments

+ Lots of people, fun;
represents small
business
- Too much
#12 0.72 congestion

+ Likes the
contemporary
design
- Doesn’t mesh; sticks
#13 0.65 out like a sore
thumb

- Boring, no view;
looks “affordable”
#14 -1.10

+ Outdoor
entertainment looks
fun; can bring dog
with
#15 3.34

P a ge | 9
# Image Score Comments

+ Lights are not
intrusive or harm
the integrity of the
building
#16 1.16

+ Represents festivals,
greenway; has
enough space to
accommodate
#17 0.76 people

+ Creative, pretty
- No light; buildings
are close together
#18 2.11

10 | P a g e