New Search
2 <br /> TABLE OF CONTENTS <br /> EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 <br /> Purpose of Study 8 <br /> Methodology 8 <br /> Quotas Observed 8 <br /> Response Rate 9 <br /> Tests for Differences Between Proportions 9 <br /> Notes on Chi Square 9 <br /> Bound on Error — Weighted Data 10 <br /> Bound on Error — Unweighted Data 11 <br /> Differences Between Percentage Points 12 <br /> ANALYSIS OF DATA 13 <br /> Awareness of the Proposed Project 14 <br /> Sources of Information 15 <br /> Initial Support of the Proposal 16 <br /> Effect of Various Factors 17 <br /> UGB Would be Expanded 18 <br /> Ridgeline Trail Would Move Outside UGB 19 <br /> Forest and Stream Headwaters Would be Protected 20 <br /> No Net Change 21 <br /> 207 Acres for $1 Million 22 <br /> City Budget is $1 Million 23 <br /> Condemnation ofProperty 24 <br /> Condemnation Would Cost More 25 <br /> Development on Agricultural Land 26 <br /> Developer Wants to Develop Entire Parcel 27 <br /> Only Developed Land Would Be Annexed 28 <br /> 900 Homes and 10 Acres Commercial 29 <br /> Community Involvement 30 <br /> Progressive Design Methods 31 <br /> City Services are in Place 32 <br /> Traffic Would Increase 33 <br /> Street System Could Handle Traffic 34 <br /> Class Size Would Increase 35 <br /> Least Parks Per Person in Santa Clara 36 <br /> No Other Parcels Available 37 <br /> Support Changing the UGB? 38 <br /> Importance of Factors 39 <br /> Final Support of Project 40 <br /> Reasons for Opposition 41 <br /> DATA TABLES 23 <br /> QUESTIONNAIRE INSTRUMENT <br /> Advanced Marketing Research, Inc <br />