EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: CORDILLERA RANCH SURVEY

The survey was conducted using questions designed for grouping in sections with related inquiries. The findings provided a quantitative mean allowing the following observations to be made.

Summary: The information derived from this survey reveals that those living in Cordillera Ranch feel it is a safe community with only minor security issues. They did, however, indicate a desire for a better method of gate/entry access. Responses indicate a need and interest in state of the art integrated systems employing smart cards and CCTV. Those responding also supported the use of CCTV cameras. Of those completing the survey, more than 50% favored some type of POA dues increase to pay for the additional measures.

Section One (Property Access): The indication derived from this section reveals those answering the survey believe gate access is the greatest issue and needs to be addressed and improved. Those answering the survey believe the system of gate staff authorizing entry for guests is sufficient, the security gate is manned a sufficient number of hours and the gate staff project an image of control. When asked in a different way, unauthorized solicitors being a problem were considered negligible, as were non-family members possessing gate clickers.
Conclusion: Based on all questions in this section, respondents favored smart tag readers CCTV, and better gates.

Section Two (Other Safety Concerns): The highest mean for this section reiterated the conclusion in section one. Those answering indicated they had no objection to the use of smart tag type stickers on their vehicles. A strong response revealed the Cordillera staff added a sense of safety. Asked a different way, perception of unprofessional behavior by gate staff was negligible and other residents were not found to create a safety or privacy invasion.
Conclusion: Based on all questions in this section, those answering the survey indicated a general satisfaction with the level of security at Cordillera Ranch. However, a type of smart tag and increase in gate access convenience was demonstrated.

Section Three (Adding Improvements): Reflects the respondents desire to see some action to improve the systems currently in place. The indication derived from this information reveals those responding favor a closer identification and control of those entering the community, along with modernization of the gate entry systems.
Conclusion: The comments supports the desire to have provided a better system of entering the community and documentation of non-PO’s allowed to enter.

Section Four (Supporting POA Increase): This section centered around the amount of money the person responding to the inquiry would be willing to spend (increasing their POA dues) to provide for additional security measures. The scale included $0-$500 with the greatest response favoring an increase of $100 (41). The next highest response was for no increase (37) followed by “other”/written in response (26). The mean for this section (61.5) indicated favoring an increase in dues.
Conclusion: A slight majority of those few who responded to this sectiion favored some type of increase in POA dues to support increased security.

Section Five (Comments): This section was categorized similarly to those in the first four sections to provide a method of evaluation.

A) Gates/Physical Equipment: Of the 43 comments related to this section, only two did not complain about the current gates. One of the remaining two indicated they do not currently live at Cordillera while the other indicated a need for increased quality, but not at the expense of the POA. The mean for this section revealed 35.5 % of those responding cared enough about this topic to provide comments.

Conclusion: The comments in this section support the numerical evaluations in the previous sections that favor a new gate/entry system.

B) General Security: Of the 23 comments in this section, the majority (6) believed more/better security guards were needed, (4) felt insecure regarding all of the construction workers in the neighborhood and only (2) indicated they believed security was appropriate. The mean for this section revealed 19.5 % of those responding cared enough about this topic to provide comments.
Conclusion: The comments in this section generally support the feeling of a lack of appropriate security.

C) Gate Security: This section invoked the greatest comments with 87 responses. Of these, 47 dealt specifically with the desire to have a better gate system. There were 9 responses that requested smart card type identification. The mean for this section revealed 72 % of those responding cared enough about this topic to provide comments.
Conclusion: The comments in this section support the installation of a better entry system at the gates. Many of the comments also spoke to the issue of inadequate guards and/or not having guards for enough hours throughout the day.

D) Living Environment: This section elicited 9 comments. There were 3 related to dog issues, 2 regarding motorcycles/golf carts and 2 related to unmanned gates. The mean for this section revealed 8 % of those responding cared enough about this topic to provide comments.
Conclusion: Based on the number of comments and the type, those responding had no real security issues to relate.

E) Traffic: This section dealt with 39 responses and 18 of these specifically indicated speeding was an issue. The remaining survey answers dealt with road conditions due to construction vehicles, not having appropriate bike/golf paths and related safety concerns. The mean for this section revealed 32.5 % of those responding cared enough about this topic to provide comments.
Conclusion: The responses from this section indicate speeding is an issue to those responding.

Note: The Conclusion statements in Section Two, Section Four, and Section Five B, might seem to indicate some contradiction in the consensus of the PO’s with respect to their belief regarding the level or quality of security. However, these statements do correctly reflect their comments in response to the focus of the three individual sections. Also there is a difference in the numbers of responses to the different sections that weights the value of the responses. Also, the value of the more specific narrative responses compared to the numerical responses is a subjective consideration. We believe that, taken as a whole, this summary fairly reveals the issues that the PO’s consider important and which they wish to see proposals of actions and costs to address them.