In the fall of
2012, the Cavendish Planning Commission conducted a survey to determine the
sentiments of Cavendish property owners and residents on a variety of planning
related issues. Survey results
were available as a hand out at Town meeting and during voting the following
day. They are also available on-line. Below is a summary of findings.
One hundred
and eighty (180) surveys were completed with 65% (117) being full time
residents, 14% (25) part time residents and 21% (38) being non-resident
property owners.
In summarizing
the data, please note that percentages have been rounded to whole numbers. Also
note that not everyone completed all questions, and some questions allowed for
more than one answer.
While a rating
of “fine” was given for most municipal and volunteer services, those with the
highest approval ratings included Cavendish Fletcher Library (95%), Town Office
(94%) and Proctorsville Fire Dept (93%). Those areas were improvement was
thought to be needed by at least 30% or more of respondents included: Recycling
(58%); Solid Waste Disposal (34%) Law Enforcement (33%) and Ambulance/EMS
(30%). It should be noted that the last service most likely reflects concern
with the emergency medical services (EMS) portion as both volunteer fire
departments received good approval ratings.
In terms of
recycling, 73% of the respondents said more recycling opportunities were
needed, 14% were not in favor of more recycling and 13% had no opinion. It is
important to note that due to changes in Vermont legislation, mandating
recycling, zero sort will soon be available in Cavendish and costs for this
program have been included in the Selectmen’s budget for the coming year.
Continuing with
environmental issues, when asked about town ordinances to regulate various
options, 51% of respondents thought they were needed for cellular communication
towers; 49% for wind turbines; 46% for outdoor wood burning furnace; 45% for
bio mass installations; 31% for geothermal installations; and 30% for solar PV.
Eighty eight
(88) percent of respondents thought the town/school should pursue energy
conservation grants, while 6% said no and 7% had no opinion. In terms of a sign
ordinance, 46% of respondents indicated that the town should adopt one, while
32% said no and 22% had no opinion.
Protecting
Cavendish’s rural character and quiet areas, as well as scenic roads and views
were thought to be important for 95% of respondents. Having a town website was
thought to be needed by 91% and 76% wants the town to be made more attractive
to families with school age children. Note that the town office does have a
website http://cavendishvt.org.
In terms of land
conservation.82% thought the Town should work with landowners and land trusts
to conserve land, while 10% were not in favor and 8% had no opinion. When asked
what people would like to see conserved, in order of ranking, the following
were selected Forest and Woods (81%), scenic views and roads (81%), River
corridor (75%); agriculture (74%); recreational (66%); wetlands (56%);
ridgelines (55%).
As far as the economy,
80% of respondents would like to see a stronger local economy that provides
more jobs in town. Twelve percent had no opinion on this question and 8% voted
no. Voting was along similar lines for whether Cavendish should have more
businesses (78% yes, 12% no, and 9% no opinion). Those who thought more
business was needed in Cavendish were asked to identify the types they would
like to see. In priority order, these were identified as follows: Retail (65%);
Restaurants (63%); Light industry or manufacturing (63%); service (57%),
home-based (57%) and forest products (45%).
As roads are a
major concern, particularly in winter, two questions on the survey addressed
how well the roads are maintained. To the question of town roads, 79% thought
they were maintained adequately, while 14% responded no and 7% had no opinion.
As far as the state roads of Routes 103 and 131, 87% thought they were
adequately maintained, while 8% said no and 5% had no opinion.
Long discussed
in town, a bike path between the villages was thought to be an important asset
by 62% of the respondents; 23% said it wasn’t and 15% had no opinion.
Even though
speeding has been a topic at a number of select board meetings, only 42% of
respondents thought this was an issue. For those concerned about speeding, Main
Street in Cavendish village was identified as a high-speed area by 70%. With
regard to Depot Street in Proctorsville, which has been on the agenda for a
number of Select board meetings, 38 of 68 respondent (56%) said speeding was an
issue there, while 12 (18%) said no and 18 (26%) had no opinion.
Questions about
housing showed that the majority of respondents preferred single-family homes
on individual lots (90% said they were in favor or strongly in favor). The type
of housing least desirable was group homes (58% voted against or strongly
against); Section 8 and low-income
housing (56%); and mobile homes on individual lots (50%). As far as affordable
housing in Cavendish, 45% respondents had no opinion, while 33% thought there
was a need for it and 22% said there wasn’t a need. In terms of whether
Cavendish should investigate simple subdivision process, 36% of respondents
said no, 36% had no opinion and 28% voted yes.
It appears that
many are not aware of the Town’s dog ordinance. When asked how they felt about
it, 47% said they didn’t know about it; 29% thought it was fine the way it is ,
18% thought more dog owners should know about it; 13% called for better
enforcement and 7% selected “should be more strict.”
When asked “how
do you get your information,” the three most popular methods were as follows:
local newspaper (75%); on-line (Cavendish Update e-mail and blog 74%) and word
of mouth (60%). Not included in the survey was the Cavendish VT Facebook page,
which averages 1,000 distinct users each week.
No comments:
Post a Comment