A sizable group of Grand County residents showed up to participate last week in a “visioning” session for the update to the Grand County general plan.

The workshop, held at the Grand Center, was designed to develop an overall community vision for Grand County’s future that will help planners create goals and strategies for the plan update, according to Gabe Preston, a managing partner of RPI Consulting, the contractor hired to update the county’s general plan.

A draft vision statement, based on last week’s workshop, is now being prepared for review by the public at a meeting to be held on July 22, Preston said.

The draft statement will be posted at www.grandcountyutah.net/planning.htm by July 19 to give residents time to review it before the meeting, Preston said.

Once the community approves the final vision statement, it will be used as a framework to produce a comprehensive plan, followed by a “future land use plan,” Preston said.

Participants at the July 7 meeting were divided into groups of about eight, and worked together to identify a list of concerns about the community, a list of things people treasure and do not want changed, and a list of things they do want changed. The completed lists were read aloud to the other participants by a spokesperson for each table.

A member of the consulting team compiled a summary list for each of the three issues, and Preston said the lists will be used to define a vision for the future that includes all items on the summary list. Preston’s team will develop goals and strategies that address all the items people listed, based on the overall vision for the future, he said.

The master list of concerns included such issues as a balanced, sustainable, diverse economy; climate and environment; land use, growth and density; and education.

Prominent on the list of treasures were quality of life, a “small-town” feel, water and air quality, open space, cultural and environmental amenities, good schools, and low taxes.

The list of desired changes included more bike and pedestrian paths, more recreational facilities, zoning enforcement, more renewable energy, better education, economic diversification, and creating a county sustainability office.

The terms “diversity” and “sustainability” appeared on several of the lists.

Regarding public lands, which contain many of the treasures that people want to save, the plan will propose specific partnerships for specific goals, Preston said.

He had told participants at the beginning of the workshop that the plan will mainly focus on the unincorporated areas of the county because that is where the county can actually do, or control, future development. He said the project will go beyond the borders of private lands to include public lands and cities via “partnerships.”

“Public lands are going to be part of this,” Preston said in a follow-up interview. “We want to create clear policy direction on partnerships.” That policy will include why partnerships are needed, how to set them up, and how they can work, Preston said.

“Each partnership requires a tremendous amount of effort,” and the county will bear the burden of making sure they are productive, Preston said. This means the county must prioritize those that “are worthwhile,” he said.

Preston estimated attendance at the workshop at 106 people. Both the Grand County and the Moab city councils were well represented, as were both planning commissions, he said.

Based on response by the participants, Preston estimated that about one-third of them live in Moab, and about half in the unincorporated county. About eight people raised their hands when he asked how many live in Thompson Springs. Fewer than eight responded that they were Castle Valley residents.

There was a “remarkable diversity” of ages among the attendees, Preston said, noting that young people often do not show up for this type of workshop.