/ :Prepared for Leelanau County Planning Department and Leelanau County Board fo Commissioners/prepared by Anderson, Niebuhr, and Associates, Inc. Anderson, Niebuhr, and Associates, Inc. St. Paul, Mn.:The Associates,1990. Regional planning Michigan Leelanau County. Land use Michigan Leelanau County. Population Michigan Leelanau County. Population Michigan Leelanau County. A[SURVEY OF LOCAL OFFICIALS CONCERNING ISSUES RELATING TO LONG-RANGE. PLANNING IN LEELANAU COUNTY Growth Management Plan Working Paper #3 b cV Prepared By Prepared for Anderson, Niebuhr, and Associates, Inc. Leelanau County Planning Department 1885 University Ave. and St. Paul, IVIN 55104 Leelanau County Board of Commissioners (612) 645-5577 June 25, 1990 #0 J a '0 This Document is Printed on Recycled Paper A(SURVEY OF LOCAL OFFICIALS CONCERNING ISSUES RELATING TO LONG-RANGE PLANNING IN LEE4qLANAU COUNTY Growth Management Plan Working Paper #3 Prepared for: Leelanau County Planning Department and Board of Commissioners @qo q@ \q4i Preapred by: Andemon, Nql0qebuhr & Associates, Inc. 1885 University Avenue St. Paul, IVIN 55104 (612) 645-4qS8qS4qW June.1990 LEELANAU COUNTY Summary of Results for the Survey of Local Officials TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Results of Descriptive Statistics .................................................................. 1 Figures 1 - 10 ................................................................................................. 5 Tables I - 7 ................................................................................................... 10 Suggestions Regarding Improving the Quality of Ufe in Leelanau County ...................................................................................... 20 Residents' Opinions Regarding What Most Threatens the Quality of 1-ife in Leelanau County ........................................................... 24 11. Results of Comparative Analyses ............................................................... 27 APPENDIX: Survey Questionnaire LEELANAU COUNTY OF SUMMARY OF RESULTS FOR THE SURVEY OF LOCAL OFFICIALS In conjunction with the survey of residents conducted by the County of Leelanau, a survey of local officials was also conducted, using the same questionnaire. A total of 118 officials responded to the survey of local officials in Leelanau County. Presented in this report are summaries of the descriptive results for the local official survey and results of statistically significant analyses comparing responses of local officials with responses of County residents. A copy of the questionnaire used in the survey of local officials may be found in the Appendix. 1. Results of Descriptive Statistics The descriptive results of the survey of local officials are summarized below. This information is also illustrated in Figures 1 through 12 and Tables 1 through 7. A majority of the local officials are over 40 years of age (71 %), have lived in Leelanau County for over 20 years (57%), and live on a farm or in a rural area (56%). Nearly one-half of the officials (47%) are college graduates, and nearly all (97%) indicated they own their home. The majority (65%) do not own lakeshore property, and nearly three quarter (72%) are employed in Leelanau County. (Figures 1 through 8) One-half of the local officials indicated they believe the Townships and Villages should be responsible for enforcement of development controls. (Figure 9) Approximately two-thirds of the officials (64%) prefer to restrict the population of Leelanau County to under 50,000 residents. (Figure 10) 2 The actions local officials feel are most important for Leelanau County to take are: coordinating planning efforts between County, Township and Village governments, maintaining agricultural production in Leelanau County, and developing one or two industrial parks for light industry. The actions that county officials tend to feel are the least important are supporting creation of a qnew townn instead of more suburban development in the southeastern part of Leelanau County and encouraging the development of more resorts, such as The Homestead or Sugar Loaf. (Table 1) The actions that local officials tended to feel should be taken even if it raises their taxes are: installing an effective emergency radio communications system for requesting medical, police, or fire services; operation of a County-wide program to collect and recycle materials such as newspaper, glass, and cans; establishing stricter sanitary codes related to sewage disposal, including individual septic tanks; sponsorship of more recreation and youth programs for children; and encouraging the County Road Commission to develop more bicycle paths. Approximately one-half to nearly two-thirds of the local officials indicated they feel the following actions should be taken if they do not raise their taxes: encouraging the development of affordable single family housing; encouraging the development of affordable apartment buildings, condominiums, or other multi-family housing; taking steps to improve the quality of Leelanau County's inland lake fisheries; initiating a County effort to monitor water quality; and initiating a policy to promote the preservation of open space. Over one-third of the local officials feel Leelanau County should not build a new "central corridor" highway between Traverse City and Suttons Bay and should not build more public recreation facilities such as swimming pools, recreation centers, or ballfields. (Table 2) 3 Local officials expressed the greatest satisfaction with the following aspects of Leelanau County: the fire protection provided, the recreational opportunities available for people in their household, the health care services provided, the police protection provided, the quality of the roads in Leelanau County, and the enforcement of local zoning ordinances. The greatest dissatisfaction was expressed regarding the number of year-round jobs available for County residents, the types of jobs available for County residents, the capacity of the roads in Leelanau County for handling traffic and the availability of housing they can afford. (Table 3) Local officials have had the least experience with the County Board and the County Building Inspections Department. The majority of local officials who have received information or-services from the County Officials specified in Table 413 indicated these officials have been very or somewhat helpful. Over one-third of the local officials (38%) indicated the County Board has not been helpful in providing them with information or services. (rabies 4A and 413) A majority of local officials (64%) indicated they receive very much of their news and information from the Leelanau Enterprise. The information source used least often by local officials is radio. (Table 5) Nearly two-thirds of the local officials (62%) feel the level of property tax in Leelanau County is a maior problem. Other issues that local officials tend to feel are major or minor problems in the County are: pollution of ground water, the rapid rate of population growth, pollution of surface water, the increasing number of tourists who visit Leelanau County, traffic congestion, and the development in southeastern Leelanau County. A majority of local officials feel that access to emergency services and lack of affordable recreation opportunities for Leelanau County residents are not problema, (Table 6) Local officials tend to strongly favor or favor increased development in Leelanau County if this development meant: a few more jobs, many more jobs, a little more tourism, or a little less land for agriculture. Local officials indicated they would gpgose or strongly oppose increased development if the following consequences were to occur: much more water or air pollution, much less land for agriculture, a little more water or air pollution, fewer opportunities to view the scenic features of Leelanau County, or much more tourism. (Table 7) 5 FIGURE 1 Age of Respondents Percent LN = 1j.4 Age 30 years or younger 2 31 to 40 years 27 41 to 50 years 29 51 to 64 years 27 65 years or older 15 100 Average age is 50 years; median is 47 years, and mode is 45 years; ages range from 23 to 80 years. FIGURE 2 Highest Level of Education Completed by Survey Respondents Percent Level of Education LN = 115) Attended elementary school 0 Attended high school 3 Graduated from high school or received GED 29 Attended a four-year, two-year, or technical college 20 Graduated from a four-year, two-year, or technical college 29 Attended graduate school or received graduate degree 18 Refused 1 100 6 FIGURE 3 Respondents' Household Income Before Taxes Percent Income ALI = IM Less than $10,000 2 $10,000 but less than $25,000 25 $25,000 but less than $40,000 36 $40,000 but less than $55,000 16 $55,000 but less than $70,000 7 $70,000 but less than $90,000 6 $90,000 or more 5 Refused 3 100 FIGURE 4 Number of Years Respondents Have Been Residents of Leelanau County Percent Number of Years LN = 11 5j Less than 5 years 3 5 to 10 years 9 11 to 15 years 12 16 to 20 years 19 Over 20 years -57 100 Average number of years is 32; median is 28; mode is 20; number of years ranges from 3 to 70 years. 7 FIGURE 5 Current Area of Residence in Leelanau County Percent Area of Residence LN = 11 A farm 17 A rural area, but not a farm 39 A town or village 42 A city 2 100 FIGURE 6 Home Ownership Percent Ownership (N = 11% Ownhome 97 Rent home 3 100 FIGURE 7 Lakeshore Property Ownership Percent Proge2qf2qt Ownershqi4qg q(N = 116q) Owns lakeshore property 35 Does not own l2qakeshore property 65 100 FIGURE 8 County of Employment or Employment Status Percent Counq!qy or Status 0qLN = 118) Leelanau 72 Grand Traverse q1q1 Retired 3 Not employed q1 Glen Arbor I Does not apply q1 No response given q11 100 9 FIGURE 9 Responses of Local Officials Concerning Who Should Be Responsible for Enforcement of Development Controls Percent Besgonse LN = 11M The County 36 The Townships and Villages 50 Both the County and the Townships and Villages 9 Don't know 2 No preference 3 100 FIGURE 10 Responses of Local Officials Concerning Their Choice for Changes in Current Zoning Regulations Designed to Limit Population Growth Percent Besl2onse Option LN = 118) Keep the current zoning regulations which would permit the population to increase to 300,000 residents 8 Change the zoning regulations to permit the population to increase to 50,000 to 100,000 residents 15 Change the zoning regulations to permit the population to increase to 25,000 but less than 50,000 residents 41 Change the zoning regulations to permit the population to increase between the current population level but less than 25,000 residents 23 No preference 4 Don'tknow 100 TABLE 1 Responses of Local Officials Concerning the Importance of Selected Actions Which Leelanau County Could Take Response Very Somewhat Not Don't Important Important Important Know TOTAL Selected Action % % % % % No. Maintain agricultural production In Leelanau County 71 26 3 0 100 116 Stimulate the development of more businesses related to tourism In Leelanau County 24 38 37 1 100 117 Encourage the development of more resorts, such as The Homestead or Sugar Loaf 13 32 53 2 100 117 Plan for the development of more commercially operated harbors for recreational boating 28 39 33 0 100 117 Develop one or two Industrial parks for light industry 54 35 11 0 100 116 Prevent development at the west end of the proposed Traverse City beltline highway (intersection of Gray Road and M-72 In Elmwood Township) 27 26 27 20 100 116 (cont.) TABLE I (cont.) Responses of Local Officials Concerning the Importance of Selected Actions Which Leelanau County Could Take Response Very Somewhat Not Don't Important Important Important Know TOTAL Selected Action % % % % % No. Coordinate planning efforts between County, Township, and Village governments 83 16 1 0 100 117 Restrict development of small residential lots to only those areas supplied with sewer and water utility services 27 29 38 6 100 116 Support creation of a "now town" Instead of more suburban development in the southeastern part of Leelanau County 9 21 53 17 100 118 Mir TABLE2 Responses of Local Officials Concerning Whether Selected Actions Should be Taken In Leelanau County Response Yes, only if it Yes, even if it does not raise Don't raises my taxes my taxes No Know TOTAL Selected Action % % % % % No. Encourage the development of affordable single family housing 17 62 18 3 100 116 Encourage the development of - affordable apartment buildings, condominiums, or other multi-family housing 15 55 28 2 100 116 Build public recreation facilities, such as swimming pools, recreation centers, or ballfields 31 32 36 1 100 117 Sponsor more recreation and youth programs for children 44 38 15 3 100 118 Encourage the County Road Commission to develop more bicycle paths 44 29 25 2 100 118 Establish more open space areas for the public, such as County parks 31 42 25 2 100 117 Increase the number of public access points to lakes 30 35 31 4 100 118 (cont.) TABLE 2 (cont.) Responses of Local Officials Concerning whether Selected Actions Should be Taken In Leelanau County Response Yes, only if it Yes, even if it does not raise Don't raises my taxes my taxes No Know TOTAL Selected Action % % % % % No. Establish stricter sanitary codes related to sewage disposal, including individual septic tanks 44 38 12 6 100 118 Take steps to improve the quality of Leelanau County's Inland lake fisheries 27 52 14 7 100 118 Initiate a policy to promote the preservation of open space 31 47 14 8 100 118 Build a new 'central corridor" highway between Traverse City and Suttons Bay 28 24 39 9 100 117 Install an effective emergency radio communications system for requesting medical, police, or fire services 58 35 6 1 100 118 Initiate a County effort to monitor water quality 37 48 9 6 100 118 Operate a County-wide program to collect and recycle materials such as newspaper, glass, and cans 47 46 6 1 100 118 M M M M M M M M M M M M M 4r TTALE 3 Responses of Local Officials Concerning Satisfaction with Selected Services Provided In Leelanau County Response Does not Very Very apply/Have Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied not used TOTAL Selected Service % % % % % % No. The availability of housing they can afford 10 42 25 8 15 100 118 The number of year-round jobs available for County residents 3 21 44 28 4 100 117 The types of jobs available for County residents 3 25 43 25 4 100 117 The police protection provided 17 70 10 3 0 100 118 The fire protection provided 46 47 3 0 4 100 117 The health care services available 24 60 13 1 2 100 118 The recreational opportunities available for people in their household 33 58 6 2 1 100 118 The quality of the roads in Leelanau County 20 52 20 8 0 100 118 The capacity of the roads in Leelanau County for handling traffic 10 47 31 11 1 100 118 The enforcement of local zoning ordinances 7 66 18 9 0 100 118 TABLE4A Responses of Local Officials Concerning the Helpfulness of Selected County Officials Response Very Somewhat Not Have Not Helpful Helpful Helpful Used TOTAL Selected County Officials % % % % % No. The County Board 11 33 27 29 100 117 County administrative offices, such as the County Clerk, Treasurer, or Register of Deeds 64 29 2 5 100 117 County Planning Commission 38 37 8 17 100 117 County Building Inspections Department 33 37 10 20 100 117 County Road Commission 39 33 10 18 100 115 Ln TABLE413 Responses of Local Officials Concerning the Helpfulness of Selected County Officials (Based on Responses of Local Officials Who Have Experience with These Officials) Response Very Somewhat Not Helpful Helpful Helpful TOTAL Selected County Officials % % % % No. The County Board 16 46 38 100 83 County administrative offices, such as the County Clerk, Treasurer, or Register of Deeds 67 31 2 100 ill County Planning Commission 47 44 9 100 97 County Building Inspections Department 41 46 13 100 94 County Road Commission 47 40 13 100 95 TABLE5 Responses of Local Officials Concerning How Much of Their Information About What Happens In Leelanau County They Receive from Selected Sources Response Very Only a Much Some Little None TOTAL Selected Source % % % % % No. Traverse City Record Eagle 20 52 21 7 100 116 Leelanau Enterprise 64 27 6 3 100 118 Television 9 55 28 8 100 116 Radio 7 35 36 22 100 117 W TABLE 6 Responses of Local Officials Concerning the Extent to Which Selected Issues Are Problems In Leelanau County Response Yes, a Major Yes, a Minor No Don't Problem Problem Problem Know TOTAL Selected Issue % % % % % No. Access to emergency medical services 6 30 58 6 100 118 Pollution of ground water 36 41 13 10 100 118 Pollution of surface water 32 48 11 9 100 117 The increasing number of tourists who visit Leelanau County 31 33 36 0 100 118 Traffic congestion 30 53 17 0 100 118 Lack of affordable recreation opportunities for Leelanau County residents 9 40 51 0 100 116 The level of property tax 62 30 7 1 100 118 The development In southeastern Leelanau County 26 38 20 16 100 118 The rapid rate of population growth In the County 34 42 21 3 100 118 co TABLE7 Responses of Local Officials Concerning Their Views About Possible Consequences If Increased Development Were to Occur In Leelanau County Response Strongly Strongly Don't Favor Favor Oppose Oppose Know TOTAL Possible Consequence % % % % % % No. Much more water or air pollution 0 .2 39 58 1 100 118 A little more water or air pollution 2 14 45 39 0 100 118 Much less land for agriculture 2 9 46 41 2 100 118 A little less land for agriculture 6 36 37 15 6 100 117 Much more tourism 5 27 39 26 3 100 117 A little more tourism 12 56 19 12 1 100 118 Many more jobs 37 41 16 4 2 100 117 A few more jobs 33 .52 9 4 2 100 115 Fewer opportunities to view the scenic features of Leelanau County 2 7 39 43 9 100 113 IIIIIIIIN AL 20 Local officials were asked to indicate if they had any suggestions regarding how the quality of life in, Leelanau County could be improved. Responses to this question are reported below. FIGURE 11 Suggestions Given By Local Officials Concerning How the Quality of Life in Leelanau County Could Be Improved* Number of Respondents LN = 11M Development Issues (28) More positive and controlled development 3 Keep the small town atmosphere by holding down development 2 Support small and clean industry 2 Encourage family farm operations 2 Stop the M-72 commercial sprawl 2 Keep an agricultural community or discourage industry 1 Hold down the population 1 Keep out low cost developers of small houses and condos 1 Develop mufti-family housing to conserve property - 1, Develop well-planned bedroom communities near Traverse City 1 Encouraging tourism isn't the answer; this only helps a few businesses or establishments 1 Control the size of buildings that are within 200 feet of lakes and the bay 1 Waterfront houses built at least 75 feet back from the shoreline I Restrict property divisions to 10 acres per family 1 Realize that commerce is not the "be all"and end all" 1 More beautification to entrances to villages and parks 1 21 No commercial food chains or fast food places 1 Developers have to be more responsible to the community 1 The EDC should make life easier for the businesses that already operate in the County 1 Too much concern with farming 1 Maintain a balance between agriculture and tourism 1 There should be public purchase of waterfront and agricultural property to prevent developers and downstate seasonal residents from taking it 1 Environmental Issues (25) Maintain the quality of the environment 3 Make recycling a priority; have a mandatory recycling program 3 Restrict or regulate septic systems 2 Add ordinances to keep roadsides free of litter 2 Control junkyards and landfills, including allowing only residents to use landfills 2 Work to solve pollution problems, including curbing agricultural poisons 2 Preserve what exists now 2 Reduce pollution of lakes in the County 1 Umit businesses that have a negative impact of the environment 1 Stop filling the wetlands I Sewers are needed in each town 1 Incineration of waste materials 1 There should be sewers around all lakes 1 Inspect septic systems and wells at the time property is sold 1 Better preservation of necessary agricultural land 1 Control and. coordinate growth, but within our natural resources 1 22 Government Issues (25) Improvements in zoning, including stronger zoning controls, better coordination between the County and Townships regarding zoning, and reducing restrictions for businesses 10 Reduce government control or regulation 3 Better law enforcement 2 Improvements in government, including improving the helpfulness of County officials 2 Better and more effective planning for the future 2 Improving the effectiveness of the County Board 1 Centralized planning and zoning at the County level 1 Control County spending 1 Eliminate unnecessary positions in the courthouse 1 Fewer studies and more common sense on the part of the commission with regard to spending 1 Keep a watchful eye on the National Park Service 1 Highwayliraffic Issues (8) Improve and repair the roads 4 Realize that we have an adequate highway network 2 Improve signs so tourists know where they are going 1 Need for a better mass transit system I Recreation-related issues (7) Put in more and wider bicycle paths 3 Maintain public recreation opportunities I More tourist and public activities 1 More public parks along the lakeshore I Establish a County-owned golf course 1 23 JobIssues (7) Provide more jobs, including more good jobs 7 Taxissues (7) Tax reduction, including lower property taxes and stabilizing taxes 6 Tax boaters and use the money to enforce boating laws 1 Communi1y Service Issues (4) Provide services for senior citizens such as building senior citizens centers 1 More low income housing is needed 1 Improve fire protection 1 Open schools to communities 1 Otherlssues (12) Betterschooling 2 A radio system 1 Clean up the swimmers' itch in the lakes 1 Continue your concern for "backhomem residents 1 Encourage resort owners to offer County residents reduced rates for using resort services 1 Tourists should help support our schools and maintain our roads 1 Restrict nighttime lighting I Deal with the trespassing problem 1 Two high schools are. needed in the County 1 Identify clearly what we value 1 We need more balance in household incomes 1 No response given 46 *More than one suggestion could be mentioned per respondent. 24 Local officials were also asked to consider what most threatens the quality of life in Leelanau County. These results are summarized in Figure 12. FIGURE 12 Responses of Local Officials Concerning What Most Threatens the Ouality of Life in Leelanau County* Number of Respondents LN = 118) Environmental Issues (46) Pollution, including water pollution 15 Problems with sewage, including lack of public sewage systems, lack of septic system control, and improper disposal of wastes 10 Harm to the ecosystem, including shrinking of open spaces and erosion of the natural habitat due to development 7 Water contamination, including misuse of water and pollution with agricultural chemicals 6 Need for more recycling or mandatory recycling 4 Overuse or misuse of land 1 Junkyards and other eyesores 1 Overuse of landfills I Gypsy moth invasion I Development Issues (26) Overdevblopment, including encouraging industrial development, large scale development, too much resort development, too much tourist development, overbuilding of lakeshores, and overcommercialization 11 Residents who are anti-development 3 Congestion in waterfront areas and on lakes 2 Nonresidents and seasonal residents trying to control development 2 25 The development along M-22 2 The development of a central corridor highway 2 Outside developers 1 Lack of an area where a dense level of housing could be developed 1 Lack of industry 1 Development of multi-housing units on small pieces of land 1 Economic Issues (24) Job problems, including lack of jobs, low wages, lack of high-paying jobs 11 High taxes, including property taxes 9 Property inflation 2 Poor or unbalanced economy 1 Efforts to increase job opportunities 1 Government/Planning Issues (20) Zoning, including lack of uniform zoning and regulations 6 Lack of planning or centralized planning, inconsistency in planning, and enforcement 6 The National Park Service or park systems 3 Governing bodies not joining together to improve the County 2 County spending 1 Government take over of land 1 Weak County leadership or politicians 1 Population Issues (17) Overpopulation, congestion, or growth 17 Tourism ISeasonal Resident Issues (15) The increasing number of tourists and seasonal residents 10 Increased prices during tourist season 2 26 Encouragement of more tourism 1 Negative attitude toward summer people 1 The one-day tourists I Agricultural Issues (3) Decrease in'agricultural production or potential I Lack of agricultural policies 1 Depressed agricultural prices 1 Otherissues (19) Traffic problems, including heavy traffic and safety 6 Drugs, drinking, or increases in liquor licenses 2 Lack of patrol cars 1 Poor schools 1 Greed or greedy people 1 Rich people who do not contribute to local emergency services 1 There is nothing for young people to stay for 1 Human ignorance 1 Downstate people with their ideas 1 Trying to make Leelanau County a playground 1 The emphasis that what is good for business is good for the County I Trespassing problems Trying to take care of minority requests No response given 23 *More than one response could be given per respondent. 27 11. Results of Comparative Analyses Additional statistical analyses were conducted to determine whether significant statistical differences in responses to the survey exist between local officials and County residents. Responses of local officials and residents were compared for the following questions: importance of selected actions (Question #1), actions that Leelanau County could take (Questions #2 and #3), opinions regarding enforcement of development controls (Question #4) satisfaction with selected aspects of Leelanau County (Question #5), helpfulness of selected County Officials (Question #6), amount of information obtained from selected sources (Question #7), problems in Leelanau County (Question #8), opinions regarding the consequences of increased development in the County (Question #9), and opinions regarding changes in zoning to limit population growth (Question #10). Significant findings from these additional analyses are presented below. Local officials are significantly more likely to feel the following actions are YM or somewhat iml2ortant, while residents are more likely to feel these actions are not important: stimulating the development of more businesses related to tourism, encouraging the development of more resorts, planning for the development of more commercially operated boat harbors, development of one or two industrial parks for light industry, and coordinating planning efforts between County, Township, and Village governments. Local officials are more likely to indicate that preventing development at the west end of the proposed Traverse City beltline highway is somewhat important and residents are more likely to indicate they do not know if this is important. A summary of these differences is shown in Figure 13. 28 FIGURE 13 Significant Findings Regarding the Importance of Selected Actions Leelanau County Could Take . Local Officials Residents (N 118) (N 322) Very Not Very Not Important Important Important Important Selected Action % % % % Stimulate the development of more businesses related to tourism 24 37 15 52 Encourage development of more resorts 13 54 9 73 Plan for development of more commercially operated boat harbors 27 33 18 45 Develop one or two industrial parks for light industry 54 11 31 36 Coordinate planning efforts between County, Township, and Village governments 83 1 71 6 Local offigials are significantly more likely than residents to indicate that the following actions should be taken in Leelanau County even if it raises their taxes: encourage the development of affordable apartment buildings, condominiums, or other multi-family housing, increasing the number of public access points to lakes, and building of a new ncentral corridor" highway between Traverse City and Suttons Bay (Figure 14). 29 FIGURE 14 Significant Findings Regarding Whether Selected Actions Should Be Taken In Leelanau County Local Officials Residents (N 118) (N 322) Yes, with Yes, with Increase No Increase No Selected Action % % % % Encourage development of affordable multi-family housing 15 29 8 56 Increase the number of public access points tolakes 31 33 17 53 Build a new 'central corridorw highway between Traverse City and Suttons Bay 31 43 15 56 Local officials (50%) are significantly more likely than residents (38%) to indicate that the Townships and Villages should be respon sible for enforcement of development controls in Leelanau County. Regarding satisfaction with selected services provided in Leelanau County, local officials are significantly more likely than residents to indicate they are dissatisfied with the following: the number of year-round jobs available for County residents, the types of jobs available for County residents, the quality of the roads in Leelanau County, and the capacity of the roads in the County for handling traffic (Figure 15). 30 FIGURE 15 Significant Findings Regarding Satisfaction with Selected Services Provided in Leelanau County Local Officials Residents (N 118) (N 322) Satisfied Dissatis. Satisfied Dissatis. Selected Service % % % % The number of year-round jobs available for County residents 24 72 31 41 The types of jobs available for County residents 27 69 27 44 The quality of the roads in Leelanau County 72 28 85 15 The capacity of the roads to handle traffic 57 43 76- 24 Local officials are significantly more likely than residents to indicate that the County officials asked about in the questionnaire are yM or somewhat helpful. In contrast, residents are more likely to indicate they have not received information or se rvices from these officials (Figure 16). 31 FIGURE 16 Significant Findings Regarding Helpfulness of Selected County Officials In Providing Information or Services Local Officials Residents (N 118) (N 322) Very/ Very/ Somewhat Have Somewhat Have Helpful Not Used Helpful Not Used Selected Counly Officials % % % % The County Board 44 29 29 58 County administrative offices, such as the County Clerk, Treasurer or Register of Deeds 93 5 74 23 County Planning Commission 75 17 29 59 County Building Inspections Department 70 20 51 41 County Road Commission 72 18 58 37 Regarding sources of information about what happens in Leelanau County, residents (19%) are significantly more likely than local officials (7%) to indicate they do not receive information from the Traverse City Record Eagle. Residents (19%) are also significantly more likely than local officials (9%) to indicate they receive "ve!y much" information from television. Local officials are significantly more likely than residents to indicate that pollution of surface water is a MWor or minor 12roblem in Leelanau County. Residents are more likely than local officials to indicate they do not know if this is a problem as shown in Figure 17. 32 FIGURE 17 Significant Findings Regarding Whether Selected Issues Are Problems in Leelanau County Local Officials Residents (N = 118) (N = 322) Major/Minor Don't Major/Minor Don't Problem Know Problem Know Selected Issue % % % % Pollution of surface water 80 9 66 17 Local officials are significantly more likely than residents to indicate they strongly favo or favor increased development in *Leelanau County if this development meant the following: a little less land for agriculture, much more tourism, a little more tourism, many more jobs, and a few more jobs (Figure 18). 33 FIGURE IS Significant Findings Regarding Views About Possible Consequences of Increased Development In Leelanau County Local Officials Residents (N 118) (N 322) Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Consgguence % % % % A little less land for agriculture 45 55 29 71 Much more tourism 33 67 22 78 A little more tourism 68 32 46 54 Many more jobs 79 21 67 33 A few more jobs 87 13 -R 23 @p APPENDIX Survey Questionnaire 10 LEELANAU COUNTY SURVEY OF RESIDENTS 1. How important do you feel it is for the County of Leelanau to do the following: (Please circle one response for each item) Very Somewhat Not Don't Important Important Important Know a. Maintain agricultural production in Leelanau County? V1 51 N1 DK b. Stimulate the development of more businesses related to tourism in Leelanau County? V1 Sl NI DK c. Encourage the development of more resorts, such as The Homestead or Sugar Loaf? V1 Sl NI DK d. Plan for the development of more commercially operated harbors for recreational boating? V1 Sl NI DK e. Develop one or two industrial parks for light industry? V1 Sl NI DK f. Prevent development at the west end of the proposed Traverse City belfline highway (intersection of Gray Road, and M-72 in Elmwood Township)? V1 Sl NI DK g. Coordinate planning efforts between County, Township, and Village governments? V1 Sl NI DK h. Restrict development of small residential lots to only those areas supplied with sewer and water utility services? V1 S1 NI DK i. Support creation of a new town instead of more suburban development in the southeastern part of Leelanau County? V1 sl N1 DK 2. Do you believe the County of Leelanau should do the following with regard to local residents: (Please circle one response for each item) Yes, only if it Yes, even if it does not raise Don't raises my taxes my taxes No Know a. Encourage the development of affordable @ family housing? YE YO N DK b. Encourage the development of affordable apartment buildings, condominiums, or other multi-family housing? YE YO N DK c. Build public recreation facilities, such as swimming pools, recreation centers, or ballfields? YE YO N DK d. Sponsor more recreation and youth programs for children? YE YO N DK e. Encourage the County Road Commission to develop more bicycle paths? YE YO N DK f. Establish more open space areas for the public, such as County parks? YE YO N DK g. Increase the number of public access points to lakes? YE YO N DK h. Establish stricter sanitary codes related to sewage disposal, including individual septic tanks? YE YO N DK i. Take steps to improve the quality of Leelanau County's inland lake fisheries? YE YO N DK j. Initiate a policy to promote the preservation of open space? YE YO N DK 3. Do you believe the following actions should be-taken in Leelanau County: (Please circle one response for each item) Yes, only if it Yes, even if it, does not raise Don't raises my taxes my taxes No Know a. Build a new "central corridor" highway between Traverse City and Suttons Bay? YE YO N DK b. Install an effective emergency radio communications system for requesting medical, police, or fire services? YE YO N DK c. Initiate a County effort to monitor water quality? YE YO N DK d. Operate a County-wide program to collect and recycle materials such as newspaper, glass, and cans? YE YO N DK 4. Which one of the following do you believe should be responsible for enforcement of development controls in Leelin--a-u County? (Check one) a. The Townships and Villages b. The County c. No preference d. Don't know e. Other (Please specify: 5. How satisfied are you with the following in Leelanau County: (Please circle one response for each item) Does not Very Very apply/Have Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Dissatisfied not used a. The availability of housing you can afford? VS S D VD NA b. The number of year-round jobs available for County residents? VS S D VD NA C. The types of jobs available for County residents? VS S D VD NA d. The police protection provided? VS S D VD NA e. The fire protection provided? VS S D VD NA f. The health care services available? VS S D VD NA g. The recreational opportunities available for people in your household? VS S D VD NA h. The quality of the roads in Leelanau County? VS S D VD NA i. The capacity of the roads in Leelanau County for handling traffic? VS S D VD NA, j. The enforcement of local zoning ordinances? VS S D VD NA 6. How helpful are the following in providing you with information or services: (Please circle one response for each item) Very Somewhat Not Have Not Helpful Helpful Helpful Used a. The County Board? VIA SH NH NU b. County administrative offices, such as the County Clerk, Treasurer, or Register of Deeds? VH SH NH NU c. County Planning Commission? VH SH NH NU d. County Building Inspections Department? VH SH NH- NU e. County Road Commission? VH SH NH NU 7. How much of your information about what happens in Leelanau County do you get from the following sources: (Please circle one response for each item) Very Only a Much Some Little None a. Traverse City Record Eagle? VM S L N b. Leelanau Enterprise? VM S L N c. Television? VM S L N d. Rad io? VM S L N 8. Do you feel the following are problems in Leelanau County: (Please circle one respon se for each item) Yes, a Major Yes, a Minor No Don't Problem Problem Problem Know a. Access to emergency medical services? MAJ MIN N DK b. Pollution of ground water? MAJ MIN N DK c. Pollution of surface water? MAJ MIN N DK d. The increasing number of tourists who visit Leelanau County? MAJ MIN N DK e. Traffic congestion? MAJ MIN N DK f. Lack of affordable recreation opportunities for Leelanau County residents? MAJ MIN N DK g. The level of property tax? MAJ MIN N DK h. The development in southeastern Leelanau County? MAJ MIN @N DK i. The rapid rate of population growth in the County? MAJ MIN N DK 9. How would you feel about increased, development in Leelanau County if this development meant: (Please circle one response for each item) Strongly Strongly Don't Favor Favor Oppose Oppose Know a. Much more water or air pollution? SF F 0 so DK b. A little more water or air pollution? SF F 0 so DK c. Much less land for agriculture? SF F 0 so DK d. A little less land for agriculture? SF F 0 so DK e. Much more tourism? SF F 0 so DK f. A little more tourism? -SF F 0 so DK g. Many more jobs? SF F 0 so DK h. A few more jobs? SF F 0 so DK i. Fewer opportunities to view the scenic features of Leelanau County? SF F 0 so DK 10. Current local zoning regulations would permit the population of Leelanau County to increase to 300,000 residents. The current population is between 15,200 and 18,500 residents. Based on this information, which one of the following do you believe Leelanau County should choose: (Check one) a. Keep the current zoning regulations which would permit the population to increase to 300,000 residents. b. Change the zoning regulations to permit the population to increase to 50,000 to 100,000 residents. c. Change the zoning regulations to permit the population to increase to 25,000 but less than 50,000 residents. d. Change the zoning regulations to permit the population to increase between the current population level but less than 25,000 residents. e. No preference f. Don't know 11. What other suggestions do you have regarding how the quality of life in Leelanau County could be improved? 12. What do you believe most threatens the quality of life in Leelanau County? 13. How many years have you been a year-round or seasonal resident of Leelanau County? years 14. Which of the following best describes the area where you currently live in Leelanau County? (Check only one) a. On a farm b. Rural area, but not a farm c. A town or village d. A city 15. Do you currently own or rent your home in Leelanau County? a. Own your home b. Rent your home 16. Do you own lakeshore property in Leelanau County? a. Yes b. No 17. If you are currently employed, in what county do you work? County 18. What is your age? years 19. Are you: a. Female b. Male 20. Please indicate the highes level of education you have completed: (Check one) a. Attended elementary school b. Attended high school c. Graduated from high school or received GED d. Attended a four-year, two-year, or technical college e. Graduated from a four-year, two-year, or technical college f. Attended graduate school or received graduate degree 21. What was your total household income in 1989 before taxes? (Check one) a. Less than $10,000 b. $10,000 but less than $25,000 c. $25,000 but less than $40,000 d. $40,000 but less than $55,000 e. $55,000 but less than $70,000 f. $70,000 but less than $90,000 g. $90,000 or more THANK YOU! Please return to: Anderson, Niebuhr & Associates, Inc. 1885 University Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 1-800-678-5577 NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY I 3 6668 14111899 4 10 G, *I