|
 |
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total Number of participants: 49/ Total “voting” population (n): 45. Of the participants, including public officials, 8 identified themselves as “rural” residents. The remaining participants were from the urban portions of Montgomery County. Open House: Members of the Board of Supervisors, Planning Commission, Planning Consultants, and Planning Department were available to answer questions from public participants. Maps providing geographic information on the distribution of public facilities were available, as were maps covering a variety of other comprehensive planning related subjects. The Open House started at 6:00 and ended with the start of the presentation by Herd Planning & Design, Ltd. at 7:00. Food and beverages were provided by the Planning Department. The students from Diane Zahm’s Urban Planning and Practice course helped with the setup and take down, as well as participating in the actual meeting, and were a welcome addition to the proceedings. Presentation See attached for summary of Herd and Gavrilovic’s comments. Copies of their full reports are available on the Plans, Reports, and Studies: Comprehensive Planning Consultants page. Public Input Milton Herd provided a list of questions to generate public comment during the public input portion of the meeting. The questions were organized under three primary topics: community facilities, economic development, and water and sewer. Community Facilities Question #1: What public services do you feel are necessary in your community? Response:
Comments: While there is a distinction between those public facilities which are necessary and those which are desirable, there is a fair amount of overlap between the two. One participant noted that some items on the list were necessities in some areas of the county, but not in other areas or in all areas, specifically rural areas. Some problems inherent in some parts of the county are not problems or do not effect other areas. The question of the definition of “adequate public facilities” was raised, especially in terms of public water and road conditions. One participant noted that the subdivisions, Blacksburg Country Club, wanted to be hooked to public water rather than remaining on private wells or private systems. Finally, on the subject of roads, a number of participants commented on the condition of the rural roads in the County, most specifically the narrow conditions. Others remarked on the rates of speed in the roads and the problem of roads being washed out. A number of participants commented on the need to look at the existing town plans (Blacksburg and Christiansburg) and compare them with the County’s plan. Question #2: What public services do you feel are desirable in your community? Response:
Some of the subjects raised in the discussion of desirable public facilities were beyond the scope of the question (i.e. protecting natural resources), however they will be added to the list of concerns during the discussion of environmental issues later in the process. One of the consultants asked whether Montgomery County had an office on aging following the adult daycare suggestion. Question #3: What distance should the public facilities, identified by the
group, be from your house? (n=45)
Question #4: Are there any public facilities or services you do not want
near your home?
This question generated a number of different comments and observations, including the existence of generational split in terms of the placement and immediacy of facilities. Younger participants were more likely to want recreational facilities and open space opportunities placed closer (5 minute walk or drive from home) than were older participants. The same was true with schools. Younger participants were more likely to want schools placed within a 5 minute walk or drive of home. The older participants were more likely to want such facilities place within a fifteen minute drive. The difference in generation response could reflect usage patterns: the younger participants are more likely to use either the educational or recreational facilities, and would, therefore, prefer to have them in closer proximity. It should be noted that the total number of participants responding to the location facility reflects, in general, the support for that type of facility. For example, while 39 participants voted on the placement of schools and 42 responded to the open space/recreational facilities questions, only 32 responded to the placement of libraries and only 28 responded to the proximity of bike lanes. Question #5: Which facilities and services are you most willing to fund through local taxes? (choose top 3; n=45) 
Question #6: What types of facilities would you prefer not to spend local
taxes on? (Top 3, n=45) Comments (Questions 5 & 6)
Economic Development Question #8: What type of economic activities are compatible with Montgomery County’s character and quality of life? Responses:
Question #9: What kinds of jobs are most needed in the County? Responses:
Question #10: Which existing businesses/industries do you feel are most important to keep in Montgomery County? Responses:
Question #11: Where should new businesses/industries located in your community? in the county? Should industries be located primarily in industrial parks? Responses:
Comments (Questions #8-11) While most of the participants felt than any business that brings in more jobs or people would be good, others felt that the increase in businesses and residents will only increase traffic, which is not needed. Water & Sewer Question #12: Based on your experience in Montgomery County, what are the major sewer and water issues of concern to you? Responses:
Comments: Participants were especially concerned with issues surrounding capacity and potential water sources, providing mechanisms to alleviate pressures on both the County and on developers by allowing developers to recover costs (“People who use it should pay for it.”). Closing Comments: Nearly everything discussed would be best located in the more urban areas, like Blacksburg. There seems to be some concern with people who move from urban areas to rural areas but continue to expect a similar level of service. Board of Supervisor members felt there needed to be greater public participation in the process.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||
| ||
| ||