Laserfiche WebLink
i ... .- n. . > .. „ yz-._.... - ..:.-___' _ -: .:= :. .- : <br />I .. _ ... ..._ . . . . _. t <br />Answers tended to be fractionalized, <br />focus of concern. <br />providing hints of no major <br />Development along Highway 10: <br />The disposition of the lands along the Highway 10 corridor <br />Ihas been an issue fa ing the community for some time. To measure <br />the extent of consensus among Mounds View residents, interviewees <br />were asked: <br />Of the follor+ing types of development, <br />rrhich ONE aould yo nnst favor along <br />he 1-ligh+ay 10 corridor betaeen County <br />Road I and Spring Lake Park? <br />Although retail shopping was the narrow plurality choice, the <br />almost even distribution of answers suggests no consensus is <br />present: <br />RESIDENTIAL ...............................19% <br />RETAIL SHOPPING ...........................23% <br />OFFICE BUILDINGS ..........................17'1. <br />INDUSiRIAL.....>..o .....................:.lb% <br />ALL EQUALLY (VOL) .........................18% <br />DDN'T CARE fVOL).....,..e..ee ..............2'1. <br />DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.......e....e..........oe5% <br />Each choice, though, did have groups which ba ked it more <br />Strongly. 18-z4 year olds opted for residential development, <br />while renters supported shopping establishments. Office <br />buildings was favored by residents planning to stay b-10 years, <br />35-44 year olds, and professional/technical households. The <br />support for industrial development was scattered across th city, <br />i while over 55 year DiljS and retirees supported any type of <br />construction. In sum, the City might wish to consider mixed <br />purposes for the site, or just proceed in the absence of a firm <br />1 <br />preference by the voterso <br />59