Plumas Gp 2 22 10 Previous Results
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Plumas Gp 2 22 10 Previous Results

on

  • 337 views

General Plan Previous Work

General Plan Previous Work

Statistics

Views

Total Views
337
Views on SlideShare
337
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Plumas Gp 2 22 10 Previous Results Plumas Gp 2 22 10 Previous Results Presentation Transcript

  • Plumas County General Plan Update Workshop Series II February 22-24, 2010
  • Past Community Efforts
    • Existing Plumas County General Plan
    • Vision 2020 results
    • Plumas County Survey
    • General Plan Visioning Workshops
    • Report to Board of Supervisors
  • Vision 2020
    • Conducted in 2001/2002
    • Vision 2020 was a community-based initiative involving Plumas County citizens in a grass-roots effort to form a vision of what Plumas County could be in the year 2020. The project was designed to develop a clear vision, a series of goals, expectations and actions which decision- makers, community groups and individuals can follow, and use to measure success and results.
    • 30 meetings
    • 1000 surveys
    • www.countyofplumas.com/publichealth/vision2020/plumas_vision_2020_report.htm
  • Vision 2020
    • Seven topic areas with specific goals and objectives:
    • Arts, Culture and Heritage
    • • Business, Economy and Tourism
    • • Communication and Technology
    • • Health and Safety
    • • Land Use
    • • Recreation
    • • Youth
  • Plumas County Survey – October 2006
    • Mailed to 24,000 property owners, households and box holders
    • 2,320 respondents
    • 10% return rate
    • available for review at www.countyofplumas.com/planning/general_plan/Gen_Results.pdf
  • Key Survey Statistics
    • 1291 primary residences vs. 994 secondary residences
    • 2113 own vs. 139 rent
    • median respondent age 52
  • Key Survey Findings
    • 89% of respondents rated “quality of life” excellent or good
    • Top four reasons to live here are
      • 75% rural atmosphere
      • 66% outdoor amenities
      • 41% retirement
      • 21.5 % family connections
  • Key Survey Findings
    • Bottom four reasons to live here are
      • 5 % cost of living
      • 6 % economic opportunities
      • 8 % housing prices
      • 18 % job
    • 17 % of respondents consider moving away
  • Key Survey Findings
    • When asked to identify important issues
      • 97.5 % said preserving open space and agricultural lands
      • 97 % said managing growth
      • 95 % said retaining distinctive and unique towns/communities
      • 95 % said retaining/creating jobs
      • 94 % said promoting energy conservation
      • 91 % said developing pubic recreation facilities
  • Key Survey Findings
    • 64 % of respondents think housing availability is adequate or somewhat adequate
    • Average full time residents leave the county 2.3 times per month to shop
    • Respondents split 50/50 on whether increased residential development is beneficial
  • Plumas County General Plan Visioning Workshops—January to May 2007
    • 3 sets of five workshops
    • 400 attendees
    • Workshop I focused on GP processes and housing policy
    • Workshop II focused on agriculture, natural resources, open space and timber policies
    • Workshop III focused on circulation, economic development and infrastructure
  • Plumas County General Plan Visioning Workshops—January to May 2007
    • Results delivered to Board of Supervisors
    • July 2007
    • Memo available at www.countyofplumas.com/planning/general_plan/SBC_Memo.pdf
  • Key Findings
    • continue General Plan update process
    • encourage high level of public participation
    • focus on a “defensible” process
    • include agriculture and water elements
    • focus economic development on natural resources and business retention
    • encourage “town centered development”
    • prefer incentives over regulation