Respondents report that the most appropriate use for
this site, if acquired as openspace, would be to use it as a wildlife
preserve with hiking paths. The longitudinal
analysis of residence time found a correlation between increased
residence time and increased valuation.
| 2. How
familiar are you with this site? |
|
8
|
Not familiar |
|
| 17
|
Somewhat
familiar |
| 16
|
Very familiar
|
|
| 3. Do
you spend time here? |
|
|
11
|
Yes |
|
| 30 |
No |
|
| 4. Do
you drive past this site often? |
|
24
|
Yes
|
|
| 17
|
No |
|
| 5. Listed
below are two statements about this site. Next to each statement
are five numbers representing different levels of agreement or
disagreement. Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with
the statements. |
|
- If I moved
away from Charlestown, I would miss this site.
|
| |
5 |
Strongly
disagree |
|
12 |
Disagree |
|
14 |
Neutral |
|
4 |
Agree |
|
5 |
Strongly
Agree |
|
|
| |
3 |
Strongly
disagree |
|
8 |
Disagree |
|
15 |
Neutral |
|
6 |
Agree |
|
7 |
Strongly
Agree |
|
7. Compared with
other sites in Charlestown, how important is it to have this
land protected as open space?
|
|
Not
important at all
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
Very
important
|
|
1
|
0
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
4
|
5
|
2
|
5
|
12
|
|
| 8.
Please indicate how much you would either support or oppose efforts
to use this site as a: |
|
Strongly
Oppose
|
Oppose
|
Neutral
|
Support
|
Strongly
Support
|
|
| ball
field |
10
|
4
|
10
|
12
|
3
|
| swimming
area-if possible |
9
|
7
|
9
|
10
|
0
|
| hunting/fishing
area |
7
|
4
|
10
|
14
|
2
|
| wildlife
preserve with hiking paths |
5
|
2
|
3
|
12
|
16
|
| wildlife
preserve where people are not allowed |
5
|
10
|
6
|
7
|
7
|
| setting/picnic
area |
9
|
2
|
10
|
15
|
3
|
| camping
area |
12
|
6
|
6
|
11
|
3
|
| |
|
6. What changes,
if any, would you make to improve this landscape?
- As a Soil Scientist during my work years, a site like this
frighten me. Society, unfortunately, has to deal with the
impact of poor land management. This I believe is one that
falls in the category. Too costly to change or repair, I suspect.
- Clean up and change to openspace with trails. This would
make a nice canoe/camping area.
- I worry that this site is not completely clean from the
nuclear accident. I've read that there is a load of radioactivity
that is slowly working downstream. What is the status of this
is?
- This might be a good site for any recreation type activities
provided it was safe for human activity
- Finish cleanup, public access and trails for hiking
- The cleanup was completed years ago and the area tested
and deemed safe for the public. This would make a nice addition
to Charlestown's Park Department.
- None, This site is nearly perfect. This is a 1000 acre site
and the photos you've used are not at all representative of
the site. Survey takers who do not know this site may judge
it by the pictures which make it look like a gravel pit.
- This site could be suitable for some well planned industrial
park type of development, as something has to be made available
so this type of development is not so piecemeal, could be
landscaped to keep the eyesore level to a minimum, and would
develop a business tax base.
- I worked at UNC in the early 80s. I was one of the last
two Nuclear Security Guards as the building was being shut
down. This is a large open site with excellent State Maintained
Road access. Site is suitable for small Local airport.
- This is a toxic site! We should be more concerned with the
quality of groundwater in half the town because of United
Nuclear's location!
- I would want to know that it is safe for certain activities
before making a decision.
- Clean it up
|
