OCP Community Survey Results

OCP Community Survey Results

The District of Mission is preparing an update to its Official Community Plan.

This community survey was undertaken as one tool for obtaining the interests and preferences of residents. The self-selecting community survey was available online and through hard copy, and it was completed by 480 respondents, with an additional 181 respondents answering some of the questions.

Download the Mission Community Survey Results

The following are the highlights of the responses to the survey:

  • A significant number of respondents had lived in Mission for a long time (38% for over 20 years).
  • Respondents reflected a good mix of age groups with the most between 36 and 50 (36%).
  • There was a fairly even split between respondents with and without children living at home.
  • Most respondents (84%) owned their residence, and most lived in single family detached housing (82%).
  • A large proportion of respondents (66%) planned to be living in Mission in ten years; only 6% said they planned to move elsewhere.
  • If they are still living in Mission in ten years, 85% would prefer to live in single family detached housing. About 10% of respondents over 65 indicated that they would prefer to live in an apartment or condominium in the future.
  • When asked what their main reason for moving from Mission would be, of those who did give a reason for leaving, most said for employment (30%).
    The portion of respondents working in Mission was 40%. About 60% said they would prefer to work in the District.
  • The main strengths indicated were natural areas, trails and the small town feel of Mission. Other items for which strengths outweighed challenges included great place for families; arts, culture and heritage; housing affordability; and agricultural land.
  • The key challenges selected were downtown Mission, employment opportunities and the waterfront. Other items for which challenges outweighed strengths included transit; industrial land; safety and security; image, identity and pride; shopping/commercial areas; diversity of housing; community services such as food bank and emergency shelters; community services such as spaces for youth, families, and seniors; and walkability.
  • The phrases that most reflected respondents’ vision for the future of mission were “safety” (89%),
    “diverse recreation opportunities” (88%), and “healthy lifestyle” (88%). The phrase that respondents thought least reflected their vision for Mission’s future was compact neighbourhoods” (40% negative).
  • The top priorities for the OCP selected in order of importance by the most respondents were “managing new development to increase environmental protection and parks/recreation amenities; increasing employment opportunities, including home-based and high-tech businesses; and improving transportation opportunities such as walking, cycling and transit.
  • Encouraging more compact development was selected by the fewest respondents as a priority. Providing a walkable vibrant downtown was the most popular first choice, selected by 24% of respondents, but overall it was selected as a priority by the second lowest number of respondents.
  • The most preferred option for how development should be accommodated was to develop multi-family housing along the waterfront; the second choice was multi-family housing downtown.
    A large majority chose increased densities downtown and in other core destinations to help in supporting more/better transit, trails and bike routes (68%) over retaining current density and service levels.
  • The largest group of respondents indicated that they thought new public buildings, infrastructure and institutional buildings should be funded by attracting more commercial uses to Mission (81%). Expanding commercial and industrial land areas were supported by 48% and 46% of respondents, respectively. The least popular method for financing new public buildings was by increasing taxes (20%).

1 Comment

  1. Mission needs more industrial opportunities. It has the river, the Highway, and the railroad connections, so multiple transportation routes are available for access.

    The area alongside the river is becoming unsuitable for agriculture because of poor drainage and rising water levels as global warming increases. This also makes housing along the river a gamble. But the land can be built up with fill for development and industrial purposes.

    I lived beside the Fraser during the 1948 flood and saw the power of that river. We watched the river slowly rise and overcome the dikes until we were flooded out. We moved our dairy cows to the hill and our neighbours spared extra housing for our families. The force of the river was relentless, sweeping anything not firmly attached away.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *