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
IMPROVE BUS S[:RVICE <br />SCATTERE:D RESPONSES . . . . . <br />Four percent each suggcsted "lower taYes" and "more parks. <br />. . . � °/a <br />....... ?% <br />"Slower development" was aesired by city residents for over twenty years and owners nf homes <br />valued at over $ I 50,400.00. "Mare parks" was suggested by city residenis for six to twenty years <br />and Precincts Four, Five, Six and Seven residents. "Improve city government" was hopec� for by <br />college graduates and Precincts One, Two and Three residents. <br />Quality Aspects of the Ci <br />Responderits were initialIy asked: <br />When you think about this community, tivhat cnmes <br />to mind, ifanything, as heing "high yuality?" <br />Twenty-six percent cited the "parks and recre�.tianal offerings:" <br />N� ANSWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3% <br />EDUCATION ..................................... 18% <br />CITY SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16°r� <br />PARKS & RECREATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26% <br />SHOPPING ............... ...... ........... 12% <br />I.,nCATION ....................................... 10% <br />NICE NEIGHBORHO�US . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 % <br />PEOPLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . 3% <br />Eiglzte�n percent pointed to the "educational opportunities available9" while sixte�n percent <br />suggested "city services." 1�welve percent mentioned "shopping," and eleven percent pc�inted to <br />"nice neighborhoods," while ten percent liked the city's "location." <br />"Parks and recreational opportunities" was mentioncd by Precincts One, Two and Three <br />residents, wnile "education" was cited by liouseholds eontaining children and over $50,000 <br />annual income households. "Shopping" was suggested hy city residen#s for f ve years or less, <br />renters, Under $SO,OQO annuai income households and Precincts Eight, Nine and Ten residents. <br />"Nice neighborhoods" was offered by househoids containing seniors, empty nesters and ovec <br />sixty-five year olds. "Location" was reported by non-coliege graduates, men and Precincts Eight, <br />Nine and Ten residents. <br />Respondents were next asked about "low quality" aspects of tk�e city: <br />And, when yau think about this community, what <br />comes to mind, if�anything, as being "low qualiry?" <br />A very solid thirty-two percent responded therc was "nothing" thcy considered to be "low <br />quality" about the City of Roseville: <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.