Laserfiche WebLink
i~ <br />~- <br />Between 1970-90, the percent of multifamily housing units <br />(two or more units per structure) dropped in the County and <br />_e~~ Mayfield, but rose in the Corridor. The Village's percent <br />(18.9) was much smaller than in the County or Corridor. A <br />-- comparison of the 190 distribution of housing units by <br />structural type follows. <br />-. ~ <br />HOUSING UNITS PERCENT <br />PER STRUCTURE COUNTY CORRIDOR HAYFIELD <br />1-Unit Detached 57.9 68.6 78.5 <br />~' 1-Unit Attached 5.6 2.6 2.9 <br />i 2-4 Units 14.2 0.'8 1.7 <br />~' S-9 Units 4.6 3.7 15.6 <br />Over 9 Units 17.7 24.3 1.3 <br />S Totals 100.0 100.0 100.0 <br />The preceding characteristics are used to weigh the Study <br />Area's residential development opportunities in Chapter IV. <br />Per Capita Nonresidential Value: This value in constant <br />- dollars, which includes all apartment, business, industrial and <br />public utility property, increased by an estimated 10.4 in <br />Cuyahoga County between 1970-90. Values in the Corridor and <br />L especially Mayfield rose over 20 times as rapidly. In fact, in <br />terms of business and industrial development, the Village <br />probably ranks 5among the County's ten most prosperous <br />communities today. <br />Opportunities for further nonresidential development in the <br />Study Area are considered in Chapter IV. <br />METHODOLOGY: Having placed Mayfield in regional perspective, <br />' the development characteristics of the Village and Study Area <br />are described in Chapter II. Chapters III and IV examine the <br />Study Area's development potentials and opportunities, <br />respectively. Based on these analyses, a Study Area Land Use <br />Plan was prepared for review by the community. The recommended <br />:, Plan is presented in Chapter V. <br /> <br />3 <br />y <br />