Laserfiche WebLink
i_ __ r. <br />r, ., <br />y_ .. , . :: _-_ r- __ _ ,__ _ :._ : . . -- ... _ - - _. <br />i , : .._._.- --- , _ . . <br />I DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH <br />The views of Mounds View resXdents on economic <br />development <br />issues facing the city were examined through a series of <br />questions. Three general areas were assessed: preferred <br />development, dilapidation, and retail shopping behavior. <br />Although no majority consensus emerged, there is a clear <br />tilt toward the attraction of job-producing industries. <br />Preferred Development: <br />Interviewees were as4<ed <br />If the Ciity aere to attract ore devel- <br />oP ent, what kind r+ould you prefer it <br />to Ibe2 <br />Industrial, followed by residential, were the most frequent <br />responses: <br />DON'T KNOWeoe°oo..°mee,,.o.o....oee.e..... <br />17% <br />SHDPS..,........o..o ............. <br />o...... <br />ro.13'/, <br />RESIDENTIAL ...............e............... <br />18'/. <br />OFFICE....................e............... <br />13'/. <br />INDUSTRIAL......e...........••••••-••••••. <br />26Y. <br />NDNE......a ................................ <br />3Y. <br />RECREAYIONAL ............................... <br />3% <br />OTHERo.amo ................................. <br />3% <br />Several groups of citizens tended to cluster behind various <br />alternatives: <br />Shopping facilities were important to 2-5 year residents. <br />Commercial was a favorite of 50,000-60,000 yearly income <br />households. <br />Industrial development was more welcomed by 30,000-40,000 <br />yearly income households. <br />1 The concern for residential development reinforces earlier <br />responses about the need for more "up-scale" housing within the <br />57