Appendix

Salisbury 2000 Strategic Growth Plan
Questionnaire Results
May 16,1988

A. Introduction

The following is an analysis of the statistical results of the Questionnaire developed for the Strategic Growth Plan 2000 for the City of Salisbury. The intent of the questionnaire, as well as the analysis, is to provide additional input to the formulation of policy statements. Most important to interpreting the survey is, therefore, the level of consensus and degree of support that each statement received. For each policy category, an attempt has been made to suggest the overall thrust of the statistical results, with an eye toward formulating consistent policy statements.

B. Methodology

Questionnaires were mailed to 1,500 households selected at random from the water and sewer customer mailing list maintained by the City of Salisbury. A cover letter from the Chairman of the Strategic Growth Task Force accompanied each questionnaire. A pre-addressed, stamped envelope was also enclosed. 359 completed questionnaires were received by the cut off date in April for a return rate of nearly 24%. The following is a brief summation of the results, organized by policy category.

C. Summary of Results

1. Economic Development

• A diversified local economy is favored, with particular emphasis on Salisbury's role as a major historic and tourism center.
• Least favored would be Salisbury as a bedroom community and as a major government center.

2. Transportation

• There is broad support for improving existing streets and traffic management functions, as opposed to building new highways.
• Building a beltway around the City is generally favored, as is expanding the airport.
• Encouraging more bikeways and Pedestrian ways received general support, as did the provision of better public transit services.

3. Water and Sewer Service

• Extending water and sewer services to a pre-planned "urban service area drew the most support, followed closely by the extension of services on a case by case basis.
• Extending services throughout the whole County drew mixed opinions, but with more people against than in favor.

4. Industrial Development

• Strong support was expressed for recruiting only clean industries, and for promoting the cultural as aspects of the area as a recruiting asset.
• Giving tax breaks and incentives to new industry drew moderate support, as did tougher enforcement of environmental regulations.
• Requiring industries to locate in industrial parks drew mixed reviews, but there was general support for setting aside land for future industry.
• New industry recruitment is strongly supported, but only on a selective basis.

5. Commercial Development

• Strongest support came for increased buffering and landscaping requirements for commercial development.
• There was general agreement that encroachment of commercial development into residential neighborhoods continues to be a problem, and that a market study should be required to prove the need for a commercial rezoning.
• More people viewed strip development as a problem than not.
• Three times as many people thought driveways onto thoroughfares needed to be fewer and farther between than those who didn't.
• Opinions about placing commercial development in planned shopping centers were mixed, but with more support for than against.
• There was general agreement that most new commercial developments offer plenty of parking.

6. Office and Institutional

• About two-thirds of all respondents felt that office and institutional development should be allowed to locate anywhere other than in a residential area.
• About 50% thought it was a good idea to use 0 & I development as a buffer between residential and heavy commercial development and between residential development and major thoroughfares.
• Most people favored encouraging office and institutional development to locate downtown.

7. Residential Development

• Support was overwhelming for protecting existing neighborhoods.
• Elderly housing, middle income housing, and single family housing were most favored to meet Salisbury's housing needs.
• The need for more mobile homes drew heavy opposition.
• Moderate support was expressed for more low income housing, and more downtown living.
• Support for multi-family housing and public housing was mixed, with approximate equal distribution for and against.

8. Agricultural Preservation

• Support was quite heavy in favor of using zoning, and tax and other incentives to discourage the development of viable farmland.
• The majority of respondents continue to see a rural life-style as realistic in the Salisbury area.

9. Open Space and Recreation

• Support was very strong for the provision of permanent greenways along area creeks and streams. The need for neighborhood parks drew the next highest level of support, followed closely by the need for more new major parks.
• Few people agreed that Salisbury has plenty of parks and open space.

10. Historic Preservation

• While 70% of all respondents agreed that historic preservation has improved the value of property in the City's historic districts, only 37% agreed that historic controls should be expanded over more parts of the City.
• People were unsure as to whether Salisbury's historic controls need to be relaxed. Nearly 40% of all respondents were either neutral or said they didn't know.
• Most people (58%) felt that saving historic buildings is worth the effort.
• Many people were unsure about the need for more public art in outdoor places with 45% choosing either "neutral" or "don't know".

11. Community Appearance

• Support was overwhelmingly in favor of beautifying City entrances.
• Opinions were mixed regarding signage controls, with slightly more people disagreeing with the statement that Salisbury's signage controls are too restrictive.
• Items receiving moderate but not consistent support include: requiring new buildings to conform with Salisbury's existing architectural character and moving overhead wires underground.
• People were about evenly split on whether the City's landscaping and buffering requirements for new development were adequate. Most (57%) were either neutral or didn't know.

12. Environmental Quality

• Concern for environmental quality was very strong in virtually every area. Strongest support came for a trash recycling Program, keeping development out of floodprone areas and keeping hazardous waste out of the community.
• Issues also receiving strong support included improving sewage treatment establishing a new landfill, stricter enforcement of environmental regulations, recruiting only clean industries, and better controlling stormwater runoff.

13. Downtown/Central City

• Strongest support came for: saving downtown buildings, making the downtown a priority for public improvements, and continuing revitalization efforts.
• Respondents were about evenly split on whether the downtown parking problem is perceived or real.
• More residential living downtown received moderate support.
• The relaxation of development standards downtown was not supported.

14. Planning Coordination

• While improved City/County planning coordination was supported on virtually every front, items receiving the most attention included: water and sewer services, land use and zoning controls, economic development, and strategic action planning.
• Items also receiving significant but slightly less support included public transit services, low cost housing, historic tourism promotion. and transportation improvements.
• Promotion of the arts also received majority support but to a lesser degree than the other items.

15. Growth Rate

• Only 5% of survey respondents felt that Salisbury's growth rate over the last 10 years had been too fast. A majority (57%) thought it had been too slow while about a third (36%) thought it had been just about right.

16. Miscellaneous

• Two thirds of all respondents had lived in the Salisbury area for more than 20 years.
• 61% of the respondents were over 50 years of age, and of those, about half were over 65.
• Over 90% of all respondents had a least a high school diploma. 45% had a college degree.
• Over 90% were homeowners.
• Regarding race, 90% were white. 8% black.
• One fifth of the respondents had single person households; about two fifths were two person households. About one fourth had four or more people in their household.
• Regarding household income, 40% had incomes in excess of $40,000; only 23% had household incomes of less than $20,000.

D. General Observation and Conclusion

The results of the questionnaire generally confirm the attitudes and issues expressed by planning area residents at the first two public forums held for the Strategic Growth Plan. These results should be further used as a measuring stick to help monitor the scope and degree of emphasis given to the various policy statements as they are developed.

Go back to Table of Contents