On July 8, Chris Herrington, Chief of the county's Department of Public Works and Environmental Services (DPWES), responded to the request from Terry Maynard, Reston 20/20, for an explanation of how the presentation provided by the Reston Community Center's (RCC's) consultant could be considered a "feasibility study." Below is his reply and a brief rejoinder from Terry Maynard.
From: Herrington, Christopher S <christopher.herrington@fairfaxcounty.gov>
I do appreciate your general definition of a feasibility study, but our utilization of the term is dependent on the defined scope of the specific study in question. Thus, for my department a feasibility study may only assess feasibility regarding specific constraints or objectives and not all aspects of feasibility. I reviewed this project with our Department of Public Works and Environmental Services team. The scope of the Reston Arts Center Feasibility Study was to evaluate the potential use of the Boston Properties' Block J site as a 60,000 square foot art center with these specific study goals:
- To evaluate community needs and requirements through a series of focused community outreach meetings for the potential use of the Block J site as an arts center.
- To initiate preliminary art center programming, conceptual design, and approximate cost estimates based on expressed community needs.
- To provide the study findings to assist in the determination of arts center proffer viability prior to the proffer option deadline of July 27, 2022.
I find that our feasibility study is consistent with that scope, and that the feasibility study findings align with community needs expressed in a 2018/2019 arts market study and needs analysis, as well as a 2019 community survey. The study findings have been shared with Supervisor Alcorn, County leadership, and Reston Community Center leadership, for their use in determining the next steps for future development of the Block J site.
As you requested, we will make the feasibility study findings available in a printable format in the coming weeks for use in further community discussions. I've asked our team to notify you when it is ready.
Sincerely,
Christopher Herrington, Director
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- The
UVa study sent its questionnaire to 5,500 Reston households, fewer than
1/5 of Reston's 26,000-plus households. In turn, it received responses
from fewer than 20% of the 5,500 households it queried. In short, the
survey represented the views of fewer than 8% of Reston's households.
Among the 3500-plus households that did not respond to the survey, my
supposition would be that they did not believe an arts center was either
a "need" or potentially even a desirable amenity. Most probably threw
away the survey because of a lack of interest in either/both
completing the survey or having an arts center. I certainly wouldn't
presume they believe an arts center is a "need," statistically or
otherwise.
- The subsequent
SurveyMonkey survey you mention had only 267 respondents, less than 1/2
percent of Reston's population. Moreover, as anyone who has used
SurveyMonkey knows, SurveyMonkey actually states its results are often
not scientifically valid. And the question structure in the survey was
dubious. For a population Reston's size (Is that the market?),
the survey needed nearly 400 responses to achieve a limited +/-5%
statistical validity. These results shouldn't be used to justify a
major initiative.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are welcome and encouraged as long as they are relevant, constructive, and decent.