Laserfiche WebLink
w_ _. <br />L-. a "'.«_v'>._ _l ._t•---.. ._ <br />3:..._:::. ..F_ r. _- ._-'1_ _F-..'_•_;'c.._.'_.S:a.i ' __'..—s'c e'€. _ s= <br />Over 30 year residents <br />Over 55 year olds <br />I <br />Retirees <br />10,000-20,000 yearly income hauseholds <br />I <br />As long as the project would require no ta.x increase to fund <br />development of the course, the size of the audience in Mounds <br />View suggests that the undertaking would prove viable. <br />F Wetlands Preservatione <br />1 The disposition of the wetlands in Mounds View was discussed <br />l through the query: <br />Should the city attespt to preserve <br />weilarnds in Maunds Vie+ or should it <br />encourage developwent on those lands? <br />IA solid majority favored preserving the areas: <br />PRESERVEoe...........o ....................70% <br />ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT .....................12% <br />BOTH (VOL) ................................10% <br />DON'T KNOW/REFUSED .........................9% <br />j Higher support for preservation was found among: . <br />Planning to stay for at least ten years <br />Owner/Manager households <br />Over 50,000 yearly income households <br />Dual income households <br />IDevelopment was selected more frequently by: <br />Planning to stay b-10 years <br />A balanced approach was the choice of 21-30 year residents. <br />Of course, to preserve the wetlands would require the City <br />of Mounds View acquiring theme To investigate if sentiment <br />changed when a tax increase to pay for the acquisitions was <br />factored in, respondents favoring preservation were askeda <br />Would you favor or oppos a property <br />tax increase to per it the city to <br />purchase the wetlands for preservation?