2 based businesses; restaurant with no drive-through; tiered retirement community.  A
tiered retirement community, agriculturally oriented businesses, and a bakery were those
businesses receiving the highest percentages. 10. Less than 1% of participants were in favor of seeing development on lands used for
farming.  There was little support (generally less than 10%) for developing other open
space lands except for residential uses.  27.8% of respondents indicated that they would
be interested in seeing residential development on other open space lands.  For
commercial, office, and retail uses, the majority of people felt that these activities should
occur near existing commercial uses.  About 20% were not interested in seeing any new
commercial development.  In addition to use of other open space lands for residential
development, 28% of respondents said they were interested in seeing that occur in or near
the hamlets of Fly Creek, Oaksville, and Toddsville.  About 23% were not in favor of any
new residential development.  Almost 40% were not interested in any new tourism uses.  
For about 23%, the Village of Cooperstown was the favored location, followed by in or
near the hamlets.  A variety of specific uses were offered as desirable.   11. 54.4% said that it was “very important” to have reasonable commercial design
guidelines to improve the appearance of new commercial development.  About 30% said
it was “important”.  Taking these two categories together, 84% felt commercial design
standards were needed.  12.6% said that it was not important. 12.  The support for weekly rentals was mixed.  About 46% said they had some level of
support for it while 45% said that they had some level of opposition to it.  24.3% said that
they strongly opposed allowance of weekly rentals. 13. When asked to evaluate the level of need for various types of residential
development, participants indicated that there was the most need for senior
housing/assisted living and subdivisions designed to protect open space.  A minor need
was indicated for apartment buildings, by about 35% of respondents.  Condominiums,
duplex residences, group homes, hamlet style neighborhoods, mobile home parks, mobile
homes on individual lots, and subsidized housing were felt to be “ok as is”.  For those
categories, more people felt that mobile homes (in parks or on individual lots) are “OK as
is” than the other categories.  There were mixed feelings about one in-law/rental
apartment, residential development in new hamlets, and residential development in or
near existing hamlets.  For these uses, equal numbers of people said that there is a minor
need as “OK as is”. 14. About 32% were “very concerned” about water quantity and 38% were “very
concerned” about water quality.  However, 37% were “not concerned” about water
quantity while 26% were not concerned about water quality.  29% and 33% were
“concerned” about quantity and quality, respectively.  This question indicates that there is
some level of concern related to water. 15.  Participants were asked to define rural character in Otsego.  The attached sheet
outlines the full range of those responses. However, the most common responses were: