Survey Shows Pasadenans Are Pro-Growth but Picky

Despite attempts by residents’ groups to slow the pace of development, a recent survey found that 64% of those polled have a “generally good” feeling about development in the city.

Although many of the 621 residents polled favor development in general, they are selective about the type and degree of development they prefer.

Less than 10% favored rapid development of apartments, condominiums, new shopping centers and retail stores. But almost 40% thought the city should go full steam ahead in rehabilitating existing buildings and creating housing for seniors.

On the question of trash disposal, the survey showed that participants are at odds with residents of many other San Gabriel Valley cities. Fifty-three percent favored waste-to-energy plants, which have been kept out of the valley by a cadre of angry residents from numerous cities.

In a related question, 54% said they favored mandatory recycling, in which householders would be required to separate newspapers, cans and bottles from other trash. Only two cities in the San Gabriel Valley, Claremont and Duarte, have been able to persuade their residents to take part in voluntary recycling programs.

The questions on development and trash disposal were among those the participants were asked in January and February. Questioning for the $35,000 survey was done in the residents’ homes by Delphi Industries of San Diego.

Of the 621 participants, 58.6% were Anglo, 18.7% were black, 15.1% were Latino, 3.2% were Asian, 1.9% were Armenian, and 2.4% were of other races or ethnic groups.

Just over 30% of the participants lived in apartments or condominiums; almost 70% were homeowners. More than 55% had lived in Pasadena for 10 years or more, and about 25% had lived in the city for five years or less. About 43% were age 45 or older. Just under 90% had at least a high school degree.

As for income, 12.4% earned $15,000 or less a year, about 42% earned between $15,000 and $50,000, 16.4% earned more than $50,000 and 20.8% refused to divulge their income.

Mayor John Crowley said the city periodically commissions such surveys to give the board a sense of how the public views various issues.

City Director William Paparian said that if the statistics are valid, the survey can be of great value to the city.

“It shows the city’s commitment to communication as a two-way street,” he said. “City Hall is attempting to listen to the citizens saying what they want in the city.”

A majority of those polled favored expanding the use of the Rose Bowl and changing from a part-time to a full-time mayor, while more than half opposed the use of a controversial photo radar device to deter speeding.

Slightly under 12% said Pasadena is “just about the very best place” to live today; 60% rated it “better than most places;” 4.3% rated it “just about the very worst place” to live, and most of the other participants said it was the same as other places or not as good. About half said it was a better place than most to raise children. Convenience, peacefulness and beauty were cited among the things people liked best about living in Pasadena.

When asked to pinpoint Pasadena’s No. 1 problem, 13.5% cited crime, 8.1% drugs, 8.1% traffic and 7.2% overdevelopment, while the other responses were scattered among everything from overpopulation to schools.

For years, neighbors of the Rose Bowl have fought attempts to increase the number and types of events held in the stadium because of noise and traffic.

The fact that a large majority of those surveyed thought the Rose Bowl should be used more did not surprise Mayor Crowley, who represents the area where the 103,000-seat stadium is located.

“If the survey had asked residents about increasing the frequency of large events with (the resulting) traffic and related problems, the answer would have been different,” he said.

“Smaller events, such as the flea markets, don’t create the traffic and noise. It is the large events that last late at night that cause the problem.”

Crowley was referring primarily to concerts, but Paparian, who supports more use of the Rose Bowl, said the city should study the potential for gaining revenue from such events.

“I don’t want rock concerts every weekend, but if we had Bruce Springsteen, for example, on a Sunday afternoon rather than a Friday night, just one concert could generate as much as $400,000 in net income to the city,” he said.

Because of widespread complaints by neighbors, the board has been approving or refusing permission to use the Rose Bowl on a case-by-case basis. Seeking to set some standards, the board established the Arroyo Seco Policy Task Force to recommend guidelines for use of the Rose Bowl.

The recommendations will be discussed by the board at its meeting March 28.

The survey also asked residents if they wanted a full-time, paid mayor rather than rotating the job among the directors. Seventy-four percent said they would prefer a full-time mayor.

The idea was discussed at one time but rejected after voters were asked in an advisory measure in November, 1986, if they wanted to retain the council-city manager form of government, said Shirley Mauller, vice chairman of the Charter Study Committee. She said that since most voters wanted to retain the current system, the question of a full-time mayor was not pursued.

Director William Thomson said he doesn’t think people are unhappy with the current form of government.

Crowley said the term “full-time” is misleading. Under the current system, he said, he would fall into a “part-time” category, but he actually puts in more than 40 hours a week on the job.

“Full-time means the person can’t have another profession, and I would rather have citizen (part-time) mayors,” he said.