Following is a summary of results from a questionnaire given to participants in the first round of Indianapolis Insight Town Hall Meetings. After the conclusion of the Town Hall Meetings the questionnaire received wider distribution through the Indianapolis Insight webpage (www.indygov.org/indianapolisinsight), suburban newspapers, and various meetings and classes. The results listed below are from the Town Hall meetings.
1. If you were designing your ideal CITY, what would you definitely include? (Respondents could offer up to ten responses. They were given a list of 35 items to choose from and were also given the option to develop their own responses.) The top 11 responses were:
| Good schools (50 responses) |
| Convenient mass transit (44) |
| Variety of parks and open spaces (40) |
| Clean air (29) |
| Strong economy (28) |
| Vital downtown (28) |
| Variety of cultural activities (26) |
| Clean groundwater for safe drinking water (25) |
| Infrastructure that anticipates future growth (25) |
| Open space within the city (24) |
| Respect for historic structures and neighborhoods (23) |
2. If you were designing your ideal NEIGHBORHOOD, what would you definitely include? (Respondents could make up to ten responses. They were given a list of 21 items to choose from and were also given the option to come up with their own responses.) The top 7 responses were:
| Sidewalks within the neighborhood (51 responses) |
| Mature trees (39) |
| Parks within walking distance (37) |
| Proximity to schools (36) |
| Convenience shopping within walking distance (32) |
| Open space (30) |
| Strong community organization/activities (30) |
3. Think about your ideal neighborhood. For each of the following pairs, circle the point of the scale that most closely represents your ideal.
| Separation of housing types. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Mix of housing types. |
| (responses) | (8) | (17) | (17) | (29) | |
| Similarly valued properties. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Mix of property values. |
| (responses) | (14) | (18) | (24) | (16) | |
| A variety of shopping within walking distance | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | No commercial uses near housing. |
| (responses) | (25) | (19) | (17) | (11) | |
| A variety of street and walking connections to adjacent neighborhoods | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | No connections to adjacent neighborhoods. |
| (responses) | (49) | (15) | (5) | (4) | |
| Remoteness from neighbors | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Closeness to neighbors. |
| (responses) | (7) | (16) | (30) | (19) | |
| Neighbors are much the same as yourself. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Many neighbors are different than yourself. |
| (responses) | (9) | (25) | (19) | (19) | |
4. In late 1999, representatives from 28 local organizations with a stake in city development convened to discuss issues of city growth. This group, entitled the Growth Advisory Committee, developed two objective statements. They are:
Objective 1: We should strive to achieve a balance of land uses throughout the various parts of the county and the region. Balanced land use is important not only for tax base equity, but also for livable communities where people can live, shop, recreate and earn a living throughout the different phases of their lives.
Objective 2: New developments should be such that they retain their value over the long haul. Well-planned, well-built and well-maintained communities should retain their value and should not be a drain on society and government resources.
How strongly do you agree or disagree with these objectives:
Objective 1.
| Strongly agree (43) |
| Agree (21) |
| Disagree (3) |
| Strongly disagree (2) |
Objective 2.
| Strongly agree (53) |
| Agree (19 ) |
| Disagree (1) |
| Strongly disagree (1) |