Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Some Thoughts, With Figures and Some Survey Results

Might the "focus groups" Mr. Bisno claims to have used to help him create his current plans for Ponte Vista at San Pedro, been wrong with their knowledge of our community?

Could the "supporters" who want separate Senior Housing at the development, have misconceived the number of folks who really want that type of housing built?

If the facts, figures, and survey results differ so much from what is currently planned for the development, who got it wrong, and/or why is the proposed development so far off from what is actually present in our community?

I do not know the factual answers to these questions, but I do have figures and survey results that seem to clearly show that the current proposal for Ponte Vista at San Pedro does not fit into the stream of figures and the actual sentiment of the community, if you believe the results of the recent survey.

As to the demographics used in the Draft Environmental Impact Report and those found in the Census of the United States of America, for 2000, there are marked differences which will be included in this post.

As for the survey results, they were collected from a recent telephone survey paid for by Mr. Bisno's organization. Whether you believe them or not, is purely up to you.

Here are some figures collected from Census 2000 and The Draft Environmental Report, presented to the public on November 2, 2006.

Population Data
[from 2000 Census]

Demographic Area, # or Households, Average # of Persons per Household

Zip Code 90731, 21,344, 2.63
Zip Code 90732, 8,794, 2.39
Zip Code 90274, 9,366, 2.66
Zip Code 90275, 15,304, 2.66
Zip Code 90710, 8,284, 2.96
Zip Code 90717, 8,402, 2.49
Zip Code 90744, 13,966, 3.8

Total Households, 85,460, Average, 2.82

Ponte Vista [from DEIR], 2,300, Average, 1.88
Unrestricted Units, 2.0
Senior Units, 1.5

Ponte Vista drew its estimates for its project from census material for buildings containing more than 50 units. However, the data reveals that those buildings are almost entirely studio, one or two bedrooms units. If three and four bedroom units are included in the calculations, then average household size rises dramatically. Also, the average household size (2000 Census) for 55 years and older in new, attached construction in the City of Los Angeles is 2.48 persons per unit.

Median Income
[from 2000 census]

Demographic Area, Median Household Income

Zip Code 90731, $ 35,910
Zip Code 90732, $ 63,614
Zip Code 90274, $117,979
Zip Code 90275, $ 95,643
Zip Code 90710, $ 42,999
Zip Code 90717, $ 42,182
Zip Code 90744, $ 30,259

Average Median Household Income, $ 54,685

Ponte Vista estimate of average income per
household for project [from Ponte Vista DEIR], $144,000

School Age Population
[from 2000 Census]

Demographic Area, Households in Zip Code, Nbr in Age Group 5-19, Nbr Per Household

Zip Code 90731, 21,344, 12432, .605,

Zip Code 90732, 8,794, 3519, .40

Zip Code 90274, 9,366, 5013, .535

Zip Code 90275, 15,304, 8179, .534

Zip Code 90710, 8,284, 5633, .679

Zip Code 90717, 8,402, 4130, .491

Zip Code 90744, 13,966, 15323, 1.097

Totals, 85,460, 54729, .640

Ponte Vista Student
Generation Numbers, 2,300, 199, .115
[from DEIR]

A telephone survey was conducted and the results published on March 8, 2007.
This post will not dispute any results of the survey. I feel the survey is what it is and interpreting the full results are up to the reader of this blog. The complete survey can be found within the posts of this blog.

I will accept that, after the project was described to respondants of the survey, 63% of them favored the project, according to the way the project was described by the poll taker. I must be noted that there were factual errors in the description of the project, according to the main pollster and Mr. Bisno, himself. Be that as it may, I will continue to agree that 63% of the respondants favor the project, and the rest of the numbers are, seemingly, just as accurate.

When is comes down to what the respondants gave for reasons for supporting the project, 41% of them listed "The area needs more housing for middle/low income families." If this is correct, then the figures for income tend to illustrate that housing at Ponte Vista, as currently planned, would not fit into that category of housing that the higest percentage for reasons for supporting the project, actually has.

Mr. Bisno and probably his "focus groups" want a separate section for seniors, 55-years of age or greater. According to the survey results, only 16% of the folks gave "It offers affordable housing for seniors", as a reason to support the project. The figure in between the two percentages listed is that 17% of those surveyed gave "It benefits the whole community" as a reason to support the project.

According to the results of the survey and the number of residents of our community actually aged 19-years old or younger, it appears that some folks working to develop the current plans for Ponte Vista may have gotten their concepts wrong.

Another fact about the reasons for supporting the current project, appear to be that the same percentage of respondants who favor "It offers affordable housing for seniors" is equal to "Don't know" for reasons for supporting the project. 16% want "affordable housing for seniors", and 16% "Don't know" what their reasons are for supporting the project.

When Mr. Bisno claims he wants to provide housing for "middle income workers" and "workforce housing", he may have hit on what the majority of folks in our community really want. It seems to be inconsistant with the current pricing prospects for units at Ponte Vista which may be in the $712,500.00 median price range, to be affordable to the majority of folks in our community who want new housing.

Perhaps Mr. Bisno, myself, and many others have gotten it wrong that our community wants separate housing for seniors in our area. The survey results seem to indicate that we are in the same league with community members who don't know what they want at Ponte Vista, and both groups are vastly outnumbered by those who want middle/low income units.

When all the facts from the census are posted, concerning age groups within the zip codes included in this post, facts will be presented to show there are move residents 19-years of age or younger than there are older folks in our community. This was a surprising find for me and others. Many of us thought that San Pedro was an aging community. To the contrary, San Pedro is one of the areas where there are more children living there than senior citizens. Those numbers were presented at the last Community Advisory Committee meeting and I don't have a paper copy yet showing those numbers.

Who got the concepts of the current project wrong? Or, did they get it wrong at all? Who were the members of the "focus groups" Mr. Bisno claims he used to create the project that is included in the Draft EIR? If Mr. Bisno paid folks to come up with a project that our community really would like to see, should he ask for his money back because the project is so far off of what the survey results suggests the community is really looking for?

Why are so many prominent folks in our community striving so hard for a Senior Housing section of the project, when it seems so few of us really want such a section?

Even I continue to consider a separate Senior Housing section as a compromise for Ponte Vista.

In fairness to the respondants and the rest of the community, it should be noted that R1 remaining at Ponte Vista would vastly impact the 41% of the survey group that gave the reason, "The area needs more housing for middle/low income families". R1 would probably create a wonderful place for upper-middle income folks to find a brand new home in San Pedro, but "low income" wage earners would have to look elsewhere for a home UNLESS Mr. Bisno applies for and received a density bonus for offering homes for lower income families at Ponte Vista. If he did that, the number of homes within an R1 community there would jump from up to 429 units to up to 536 houses at Ponte Vista.

Finally, it seems to me that somebody, or sombodies, got it wrong when they plannes Ponte Vista. Maybe it was intentional, maybe not. But clearly, according to the demographics and along with the survey results, the current Ponte Vista at San Pedro plans do not fit into what the community really wants or needs, for that matter, I feel.

No comments: