My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1998 Residential Survey
Roseville
>
Studies, Task Forces, Special Committees, Reports
>
Surveys
>
1998 Residential Survey
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 12:33:44 PM
Creation date
5/23/2012 3:29:10 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
481
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
, .., <br />�i?1'1G�l��I�� : <br />: � ` ' <br />�����1'1�S<. , <br />There were seven key findings from this analysis ��•hich bear repcatinb: <br />Roseville residents awarded their quality of life the highest ratings of a surveyed <br />community within the Metropolitan Area. In fact, "eacellenf' ratings — the top categon� <br />— had improved by eleven percent since the 1990 study. <br />2. I�igh value aspects of the community included the parks and recreation system, citv <br />services, and the educational system. <br />3. Problems facing the community tended to revoive around development and re- <br />development -- the rate of development and traffic congestion. Crime, particularl}� <br />juvenile delinquency, dnigs, and burglary, constituted a second level of concerns. <br />4. City services were exceptionally well-regarded. And, tied to a somewhat benign tar <br />climate, residents strongly preferred to pay somewhat more in order to r►�aintain and <br />judiciousiy expand or improve city services. But, there was also support for a greater use <br />of user fees in certain areas, such as recreational programs and facilities. Widcspread <br />support was also noted for taking action to restore and/or maintain the qualit� of <br />neighborhood housing. <br />5. Both the Mayor and City Council and the City Staff were given solid positive ratings. <br />Residents agreed ivith the direction of the community and eontacts with the City clearly <br />generated a reservair of goodw•ill. <br />6. Sugport for a�ommunity Center was moderately positiv� and in many ways unchanged <br />from t�e results of the 1990 study. However, the acceptable level of taxation may not <br />equate with the full-service facility which many residents envisioned. <br />7. Communications by the Gity with its citizenry was excellent. The reach and respect of <br />both the city newsletter and the local newspaper were soiid. Cable television provided a <br />good augmentation to the print media, while co:nputer processes may be a further future <br />enhancesnent to b� considered. <br />The City of Roseville is clearly onc the most successf�►l communities in the Metropolitan Area. <br />Admittedly, there are still many issues facing it, particularly with respect to "graceful <br />development." But, at a time when evaluations of many institutions are tending Yo become more <br />and more negative, Roseville is exceptionally well-regarded by virtually all of its residents. <br />� <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.