Survey Results

I.                  PERCEIVED PROBLEMS

The first set of questions in the survey dealt with perceived problems in ForestHome Township. Twenty-three questions focused on the general issues of lakes; township image; roads and traffic congestion; economic factors; housing; and growth issues.

A. LAKES

Access to lakes and shorelines is generally not perceived to be a problem by nearly two-thirds of the respondents. There is less of a distinction regarding over crowding of boats and lake shore development.

 

These responses need to be examined more closely because there are significant differences in the responses to these questions depending on whether the property owner are riparian or non-riparian; or year-round or seasonal residents.

 

1.      Lake Access

§         Riparian Vs. Non-Riparian Property Owners
There is a major difference of opinion as to whether there is a lack of access to lakes. Only 11% of riparian property owners see lack of lake access as a problem while 62% of non-riparian property owners do. Conversely, 82% of riparian property owners say lake access is not a problem for township residents while nearly 26% of non-riparian property owners say it is not a problem. More non-riparian property owners are undecided on this issue.

§         Residency of Land Owners
A comparison of responses to this question was made between year-round residents and seasonal residents. There is also a substantial difference of opinion among these two groups.  while nearly 40% of property owners responding to this question are seasonal residents, nearly three-fourths of that group (161) said lack of lake access is not a problem. Only 18% of seasonal residents see a problem with lack of lake access.

 

This opinion differs sharply from the views held by year-round residents who are more evenly split on the question. Over a third (116) of year­round residents indicated that they think there is a problem. Over half

 

 

 

1

(170) do not see a problem, however, there is a larger number of year-round residents who are undecided about this issue than seasonal residents.

 

2. Overcrowding of Boats

Generally, there appears to be a high degree of agreement among groups within the total population on the question of overcrowding of boats on inland lakes. Approximately 45% of property owners see boat density as a problem while an additional 20% are more uncertain.

3. Intensity of Lake Shore Development

There is general agreement among groups on the question of whether or not there is excessive lake shore development. Nearly 60% of property owners see it as a problem while an additional 17% are uncertain. Only 25% of property owners clearly see intensity of lake shore development as not a problem. There is a high confidence level that this question would be consistently answered with similar results.

B. IMAGE

1. Prevalence of junk

Over half the property owners see the prevalence of junk as a problem while 29% do not. Riparian property owners and retirees are less tolerant of junk than other groups. These may be the same people. Approximately 60% of riparian property owners and retirees see junk as a problem. Less than half of non- riparian land owners and employed people see junk as a problem.

 

There is a fairly consistent view among year round residents and seasonal residents on this question with over half seeing junk as a problem and another 16% uncertain.

 

2. Billboards and Roadside Image

These issues are less clear-cut. Only 25% of property owners think billboards are a problem. However, deteriorating roadside image may be cause for concern. Over 60% of respondents either think there is a problem or are undecided.

 

C. TRANSPORTATION

This issue was generally not seen as a problem. Traffic congestion is not seen as a significant problem. Road disrepair garnered the most dissatisfaction with over 45% of property owners agreeing that roads are a problem. Over 60% either see roads as a problem or are undecided.

 

 

2

D. ECONOMIC

·        Lack of Job Opportunities

There is a general agreement among groups, though not a majority agree, that lack of job opportunities; lack of skilled job availability; and seasonal employment are problems. Lack of an industrial park in the township is not perceived to be a problem, although, over 30% are undecided on this question.

 

Riparian property owners and seasonal residents are less aware of lack of job opportunities in the area. Nearly 60% of non-riparian property owners and over half of year-round residents see the lack of well-paying jobs as a problem.

 

A side-note to the jobs question is the finding that self-employed respondents tend to be more optimistic relative to job availability than employed property owners. Even among the self-employed group, however, over 40% are concerned over lack of job opportunities while nearly 40% were undecided.

E. HOUSING

1. Restrictive Zoning

There appears to be general agreement among all groups that residential zoning is not too restrictive. Almost two-thirds of property owners say that residential zoning is not too restrictive, while only 13% say it is. Except for the employed group there is a high correlation among groups. The employed group is more uncertain of the question than all other groupings.

 

The table below summarizes the results by various cross-tabulations.

Residential Zoning Too Restrictive

	A Problem	Undecided	Not a Problem
Groups	%	%	%
Riparian Prop. Owners	13.0	20.5	66.5
Non-Riparian Prop. Owners	14.3	24.9	60.8
Yr-Round Residents	15.1	18.3	66.3
Seasonal Residents	10.1	26.2	63.6
Employed	13.5	28.8	57.7
Self Employed	15.1	17.9	67.0
Retired	12.9	18.7	68.1

Table l

2. Affordable and Elderly Housing

Lack of elderly housing is seen as a problem by over a third of property owners, although, lack of affordable housing or multiple family housing in general are not seen as problems.

 

Over half the respondents over 80 years old feel elderly housing is a problem. There is not clear agreement on this issue among property owners who responded. A lot of uncertainty appears to be in evidence.

 

Lack of affordable housing is seen as more of a problem among non-riparian property owners and year-round residents, although, seasonal residents' response indicates that a large number are also uncertain on this question.

F. GROWTH

This set of questions dealt with loss of farmland, loss of rural character, suburban sprawl, strip development, and rapid growth. Generally there seems to be widespread agreement among groups on these issues.

 

1. Farmland Loss

There is high correlation in this question between riparian and non-riparian property owners with nearly 45% of both groups viewing loss of farmland as a problem. Thirty percent of both groups do not see it as a problem. Approximately 25% of both groups are somewhat undecided. The response to this question is also consistent among year round residents and seasonal residents.

4

2. Rural Character

This issue is less clear-cut than loss of farmland, possibly because the term is not easily defined in peoples' minds. Two-thirds of property owners however, either see loss of rural character as a problem or are undecided about the issue. Seasonal residents tend to see this issue as more of a problem than year-round residents.

 

3. Commercial Strip Development

Results are similar to concerns over loss of farmland with a fair amount of uncertainty evident.

 

4. Rapid Growth

There is a fairly high level of agreement that rapid growth is either a problem or potential problem. Slightly more than one-third of respondents feel that rapid growth is not a problem. These opinions are consistent when comparisons are made between riparian and non-riparian property owners, and between employed and retired property owners.

II. METHOD OF GROWTH PREFERRED

A question was asked whether property owners preferred encouragement of growth; limited, controlled growth; no growth; or to let growth take its own course. The responses to the growth question are summarized in the table below.

 

Method of Growth Preferred

Groups	Growth Encouraged %	Limited, Controlled %	No Growth %	Take Own Course %
Year-round Residents	9.2	57.7	8.9	24.1
Seasonal Residents	2.7	64.3	14.0	19.0
Riparian Property Owners	3.7	64.2	12.4	19.7
Non-Riparian Property Owners	10.3	56.7	6.7	26.3
Employed	6.8	65.0	10.9	17.3
Self Employed	6.7	49.0	13.5	30.8
Retired	5.9	63.1	8.6	22.4
Voters	8.3	59.4	8.9	23.3
Non-Voters	4.1	63.5	13.1	19.2
Total of all Property Owners	6.5	61.2	10.5	21.8

Table 2

Year-round, non-riparian and self-employed property owners appear to be most willing to let growth take its own course, however, there yet remains a clear preference among all groups that the township continue its policy of controlling growth through various growth management tools at its disposal. (Assuming that zoning in Forest Home Township represents "policy").

III. MOBILE HOMES ISSUES

 

Mobile Homes is a controversial issue. It appears relatively safe to conclude that mobile homes are not favored by township residents. There is little support across all groups for increasing the amount of land made available for mobile homes.

 

·         Land Allocation

Non-riparian property owners are significantly more supportive of mobile home housing with nearly 40% of the group indicating they prefer about the same amount of land allocated for mobile homes. They are also the least likely group to indicate that less land should be allocated for mobile homes (49%) contrasting with riparian property owners, 74% of whom said that less land should be allocated.

 

·         Preferred Location

Most property owners prefer mobile homes be located either in parks or in designated districts. Riparian property owners indicate a strong preference for parks while non-riparian property owners are more diverse in their opinions on this issue.

 

This question generated many comments most of which are not favorable to mobile homes. There is significant recognition in the comments that mobile homes provide a more economical housing alternative and there are a few comments indicating that property owners should have the choice with varying requirements for safety and appearance.

 

 

Table 3 below summarizes the various responses by different groups. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

Mobile Homes

Table 3

IV. LAND ALLOCATION

 

A survey question dealt with property owners' opinions about allocating more land for various uses: residential, commercial, industrial, resource development and recreational.

 

Based on written comments, there appears to be some misunderstanding of the term "allocate". The term appears to be perceived by some as a threat to property owners' ability to make private ownership decisions. The term is interpreted by one respondent as being, "Socialist in political philosophy."

 

One respondent said he did not wish to tell other property owners how to utilize their land, and then adds, "of course, there should be some controls so that the individual's use of his/her land does not adversely affect his neighbor." That comment captures the difficulty in officials' dilemma in trying to lawfully balance individual ownership rights with broader public interest.

A. RESIDENTIAL

Mobile homes issues have been discussed in section UL Property owners

generally agree that there is adequate allocation of land for duplexes,

apartments or condominium units, and seasonal or vacation homes. They feel

that the same amount of land or less land should be allocated for those types of

residential uses.

 

Over 60% of property owners said that current levels of allocation for single family homes is adequate. Over 50% said the same for senior housing, however, over 40% see a need for more senior housing.

 

Table 4 summarizes the senior housing question by residency and riparian vs. non-riparian groups.

 

Land Allocation - Senior Housing

Groups	More Land	Same Amount	Less Land
	%	%	%
Year-Round Residents	48.6	45.6	5.8
Seasonal Residents	32.3	58.2	9.5
All Residents	42.0	50.9	7.1
Riparian Prop. Owners	33.0	58.2	8.8
Non-Riparian Prop Owners	56.9	38.9	4.2
All Prop. Owners	42.1	50.9	7.0

Table 4

B. COMMERCIAL

There is little support for allocating more land to commercial uses. More than two-thirds of property owners said that current allocations of land to overnight lodging establishments and office and service uses are about right. There appears to be general agreement that less land should be allocated to highway strip commercial, discount and outlet malls, or large regional shopping centers. Thus, it might be concluded that property owners in Forest Home Township don't appear to value these commercial uses of land.

Sixty percent of property owners indicate that present allocation of land for small shopping centers is about right or perhaps more land should be allocated for small shopping centers, (about right, 47%; more land, 13%).

 

Highway strip commercial development is a challenging land use growth issue since expanded economic activity is generally desirable. Often, however, unforeseen problems result such as traffic volume, traffic safety, billboards, signs, lack of public utilities and conflicting land use activities, for example. This can be recognized on some scale in the immediate area. Forest Home Township property owners have indicated a level of concern relative to highway strip commercial development which is the most evident commercial land use in this area.

C. INDUSTRIAL

There appears to be clear consensus that heavy manufacturing is not desired in the township. Similarly, there appears to be little support for more land to be allocated for storage and wholesale facilities.

 

Most support (23%) was evident for allocating more land to light industrial uses, while nearly 60% of respondents feel current levels are about right. There is significantly more support for expanding land allocations for light industry among year-round residents and non-riparian property owners.

 

Table 5 below summarizes the difference by grouping property owners into different categories.

Land Allocation - Light Industrial

Groups	More Land - %	Same Amount - %	Less Land - %
Yr-Round Residents Seasonal Residents All Residents	26.5 16.7 23.3	56.9 62.8 58.0	16.6 20.5 18.7
Riparian Prop Owners Non-Riparian Prop Owners All Residents	20.1 28.3 23.2	60.5 53.9 57.9	19.5 17.8 18.8
Employed Self Employed Retired All Employ. Categories, except unemployed	26.6 18.3 22.0 23.2	54.6 59.6 60.4 58.1	18.8 22.1 17.6 18.7

 

D. RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

The greatest support by property owners surfaced for allocating more land to park lands and forest lands. There is two-thirds agreement that commercial agriculture is at about the right level, although, a fairly significant percentage (47%) feel that more land should be allocated for open space. Studies have shown that people often value ag land for its open space value and the rural character it provides -- not necessarily because commercial agriculture is valued as an economic activity. It is possible that this is the situation among Forest Home Township property owners.

 

Table 6 below summarizes the opinions of landowners regarding land allocation for park lands.

 

Land Allocation - Park lands

Groups	More Land - %	Same Amount - %	Less Land - %
Yr-Round Residents Seasonal Residents All Residents	48.6 55.8</