Planning Commissioners Journal

Individual Article Downloads From Our Fall Issue Now Available

Subscribe to the Planning Commissioners Journal, and start with our Fall issue. Order online, or call our office: 802-864-9083. Note: government orders can call and request to be invoiced. OR order a print copy of the issue for $17.75 -- delivered by first-class mail OR download a copy of this issue for $16.75 (or $75.00 for license to print up to 20 copies) OR download individual articles from our Fall issue -- click on article titles below, and then use the download article button
Contents of our Fall 2009 issue
	Zoning for Religious Institutions by Eric Damian Kelly, Esq., FAICP The impact of zoning regulations on religious institutions is a complex and evolving area of law. A primer on key issues citizen and professional planners should be familiar with.
Planning for Public Transportation in Rural Communities by Hannah Twaddell There's a strong need for public transportation in rural communities -- with benefits both for individuals and local economies.
	Stand by Your Plan by Jim Segedy, FAICP, and Lisa Hollingsworth-Segedy, AICP Ten tips to help you better prepare and implement your community's long-range plan.
The Role for Planning in Sustainable Communities by Elaine Cogan Communities throughout the country are see growing interest in sustainable development. Some ideas on how to take sustainability into account.
	Where's Art in Planning? (free download; use link to download article as pdf file) by Ric Stephens It's rare that art is considered relevant to planning -- and that's unfortunate.
Considering the Regional Impacts of Local Actions by C. Gregory Dale, FAICP Do we have an ethical responsibility to take into account the regional impacts of local land use decisions?
	CircleTheUSA Three reports from PCJ Editor Wayne Senville's travels: -- are Cleveland, Ohio, planners' new strategies for the reuse of vacant land realistic? -- how a Detroit, Michigan, suburb is seeking to reshape its future. -- why regional planners in northwest Indiana are focusing on 46 miles of lakeshore.

Recent Back Issues:	Special Focus Issues:
Summer 2009: Libraries at the Heart of Our Communities | Learn to Speak So People Will Listen | Are We There Yet? | Circle the USA Reports | and more	Winter 2006: Bright Ideas: 21 creative planning-related ideas & programs you should know about
Spring 2009: Getting the Density You Want | Growing Safer: Improving Roadways for Everyone | Dialing for Citizens | Learning to Enjoy Your Service on the Commission | and more	Fall 2005: This Land Is Your Land: on "takings" and property rights, and how planners can respond
Winter 2009: Managing Stormwater Runoff: A Green Infrastructure Approach | Taking Low Impact Development from Research to Regulations | The ABC's of Transit-Oriented Development | and more	Fall 2004: Back to School for Planners: on the impacts of school location, and the relationship between planning and school boards
Fall 2008: Pattern Books: A Planning Tool | GIS & Planning | Where Do We Want to Go? | and more	Spring 2004: Sphere of Influence: water and its impacts
Summer 2008: Greenways | Developing at the Edge | An Introduction to Charrettes | and more	Fall 2003: Planning for Historic Preservation: an introduction to historic preservation planning
Spring 2008: Car Sharing | Revisiting Ex Parte Contacts | Chairing the Commission | and more	Winter 2002: Opening the Door: planning for affordable housing
Winter 2008: Downtown Futures: continuing a series of reports from planners across the U.S., focusing on downtown issues	Spring 2000: The Promise of America: an historical look at 10 successes & 10 failures that having affected America's cities

Art & Soul in Planning

The Orton Family Foundation has done some terrific work in Vermont, Colorado, Maine, and other parts of the country in engaging citizens in local planning. A recent project of theirs in the small town of Starksboro, Vermont, is especially interesting as it uses storytelling and art as key elements in the planning process. Take a look at this short video. For more on the Starksboro project.

For more on the importance of the arts to local planning, see Ric Stephens' short article, "Where's Art in Planning" (free pdf download) from the Fall 2009 issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal.

Take a look also at our new Resource page on Art in Planning. It's a work in progress, and we'd welcome your suggestions for additional links or resources to cite.

Positive Media Relations Need Special Effort

Tip 13 of 25
Elaine Cogan

view all Tips posted to date

As a public official, never consider the media friends who will do favors that are not in their self-interest. They have no obligation to provide free coverage for your agency. Most media are businesses whose owners expect to make a profit. Even the public or nonprofit media pick and choose the subjects they believe interest their audiences. With these caveats, the media serve as important conduits to your constituencies, and you can work together by recognizing their similarities as well as important differences.

Print -- your daily or weekly newspaper -- can cover stories in more depth than the other media. Know their  deadlines and give them as much notice as possible. If the reporter cannot stay for an entire meeting, arrange to phone her or the editor as soon as the meeting is over and/or the decision is made. You might ask them to delay the report of the meeting so that the complete story can be written the next day, but they probably will not agree for fear of being scooped by the other media.

Television cameras can be obtrusive especially when doing close-ups, but news crews can be asked politely to film from an angle that does not obstruct the public’s view. 

Offer to brief the assigned print or television reporter before the meeting and give them a written outline of the issues under discussion. Whenever you are interviewed for TV, talk in short, succinct sentences and be prepared for a very short segment to appear on the broadcast, regardless of the amount of time they filmed.

Radio listeners are most likely doing something else while listening. To communicate well over this medium, speak clearly in a friendly, informal voice. Local call-in talk shows are a good vehicle for two-way communication with the public though a clever host will try to boost listenership and ratings by challenging you with controversial ideas or statements. Be prepared by ascertaining the format and the style before you go on the air.

There will be times when no matter how hard you have tried, a misleading or damaging story will appear in print or be broadcast. Do not be swayed by your first frustrated or angry emotions. If other colleagues, staff, or friends do not think any harm was done, ignore it.

However, if you and others believe you have cause to complain, assess the situation. Was the entire treatment of the issue untrue? Or were the facts correct, but the emphasis skewed? Were comments misquoted? Does the story unfairly damage your reputation or that of the agency? If any or all of the above is true, contact the reporter first and, only if necessary, the editor or station manager. If you discuss the issue without rancor, they may be receptive to printing a retraction, a guest editorial or letter, or giving you rebuttal time on the air.

Above all, do not burn any bridges with the media. Over time, and with effort, you can build and nurture relationships that benefit all.

Editor's note: for another article on how planning commissioners can best deal with the media, see David Essex's "Think Like a Reporter" (available to order & download).

We're pleased to be posting over the next half-year, on a weekly basis every Wednesday, PCJ columnist Elaine Cogan's 25 tips for planning commissioners from her excellent Now That You're on Board Publication.

We hope this will provide a convenient opportunity for planning commissioners and other "citizen planners" to benefit from Cogan's years' of experience in working with communities. The complete attractively-designed, spiral-bound, Now That You're on Board publication is also available for purchase and delivery by mail.

How to Work Effectively With Elected Officials

Tip 12 of 25
from Elaine Cogan

view all Tips posted to date

When was the last time the planning board spent weeks or months on an important issue, only to have your decision overturned by your elected city council or commission?

If this happens often, you should ask yourselves what steps you can take to make sure this is a rarity and that planning commission policies and decisions usually are supported by your elected body. It may be very interesting to sit in on your governing body’s meeting when an appeal of one of your decisions is being considered. You may not enjoy hearing people disagree with your well-reasoned approach, but the experience should reveal other points of view you may need to consider in the future.

If the content or form of the planning commission’s findings often are set aside or ignored, you may be able to find simple changes that will make them more acceptable; if the findings are okay but the governing body disagrees with your conclusions, revisit the issue with one or more officials or staff to find out why you are out of step. This knowledge may help you craft a winning strategy the next time.

Be acquainted with the political platforms of the members of the governing body. Did someone campaign for office and win by promising to end all planning in your community? Are some members strongly pro or anti-growth? That type of information are clues to how individuals may respond to  specific planning  issues. Even in the face of tacit opposition, you  should not give up. You and the other commissioners should arrange a visit to explain your positions and the positive results of good planning on your community -- and also listen attentively to the elected official's contrary ideas.

In such relationships, do not ask  planning department staff to convey your message. It is most effectively conveyed, and received, if you do it yourselves. Politely but firmly insist that you speak to the appropriate elected official, not to staff.

Another relationship-building activity is to invite elected officials to a retreat or informal workshop  where you try to reach consensus on a common vision, goals, objectives, and planning agenda. Even if the best you can do is agree to disagree, you will have heard each other and begun to form relationships that will be useful in the future.

Most importantly, strive to be open and cordial in all your relationships. Remember, you will have to work together tomorrow ... and tomorrow. Your community deserves no less.

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville: we're pleased to be posting over the next half-year, on a weekly basis every Wednesday, PCJ columnist Elaine Cogan's 25 tips for planning commissioners from her excellent Now That You're on Board Publication.

We hope this will provide a convenient opportunity for planning commissioners and other "citizen planners" to benefit from Cogan's years' of experience in working with communities. The complete attractively-designed, spiral-bound, Now That You're on Board publication is also available for purchase and delivery by mail.

Does Planning History Matter to You?

Note from Planning Comm'rs Journal Editor Wayne Senville: Many planners -- both professional and citizen -- love history. That's not surprising given the long time periods we're often dealing with in planning for our cities and towns. In this month's special we offer you two terrific & attractively formatted pdf downloads from noted planning historian Laurence C. Gerckens, FAICP (48 pages total). The first is his publication (now out of print) the Planning ABC's, in which Gerckens takes you through a range of planning issues, from an historical -- and alphabetical -- perspective: automobiles, budget, comp plan, design, ecology, farmland, growth management, historic preservation, inclusionary ... water, x-rated uses, youth, & zoning.

The other download is of a special 20 page issue Gerckens' prepared for us called The Promise of America. Gerckens explains why 10 key successes & 10 key failures have had a profound impact on the development of American cities. I think you'll both enjoy and learn from these two well-written publications -- and they're available to download for just $10.50, a savings of over 50%. For more on each publication, click on the cover images. But to obtain the discount $10.50 price, you must order using the button below (note: no additional subscriber discounts on our monthly specials).

Be a Partner With Your Schools

Tip 11 of 25
from Elaine Cogan

view all Tips posted to date

In too many communities, planning stops at the school door. At the same time that boards of education are dealing with the challenges of overcrowded schools in one area and others that are under-utilized, planners are choosing housing policies that affect the demographics of these same schools. This behavior is encouraged when their governing bodies and sources of revenue are separate.

While such divisions of responsibility may have made sense in the past, this is less defensible in today’s era of growing needs, finite resources, and a demanding citizenry. Enlightened planning commissioners should take the responsibility of bridging that divide without dividing the community.

Has your planning board ever met formally or informally with the school board? Do your planners work with school staff on issues that concern you both? Do you have early notice of plans for new schools or playgrounds? Do you inform them of prospective zoning changes that  affect the schools? If school officials need a zoning or comprehensive plan change, do they involve you in the pre-proposal stage? What community needs could be satisfied by joint planning?

Consider transportation. What can you do to help make schools easier to access by foot or bike? Will the next new school be built in an area that is accessible for children walking or bicycling? Can school parking lots be used by neighborhood businesses when schools are closed?

Consider sharing. Few communities have enough libraries, parks, and places for community meetings and cultural events. Schools have many of these, often closed to the general public.  Joint planning and/or co-ownership can benefit all.

Your planning board is the ideal body to initiate dialogue with school officials. Show them your plans in process and invite their comments. Ask them about their short and long-range facility and property needs. Talk about common issues and concerns and how they can be solved in a cooperative, cost-effective fashion. After laying the groundwork, agree on a project on which you can act jointly and direct your staffs to do everything possible to make it a success.

The most effective planning boards continually demonstrate their understanding that the community is served best if its individual components work as an interdependent whole rather than a series of unrelated parts. By becoming partners with the schools you will demonstrate your commitment to serving the community, not enhancing your individual fiefdoms. All will benefit.

For more on the relationship between schools and planning, see the articles in our Fall 2004 special focus issue.

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville: we're pleased to be posting over the next half-year, on a weekly basis every Wednesday, PCJ columnist Elaine Cogan's 25 tips for planning commissioners from her excellent Now That You're on Board Publication.

We hope this will provide a convenient opportunity for planning commissioners and other "citizen planners" to benefit from Cogan's years' of experience in working with communities. The complete attractively-designed, spiral-bound, Now That You're on Board publication is also available for purchase and delivery by mail.

Planning Is Not Just for Adults

Tip 10 of 25
from Elaine Cogan

view all Tips posted to date

What do kids know about planning? Not much, if you use jargon such as zoning, setbacks and conditional use. What can they contribute to planning in your community? Plenty! But only if you give them opportunities to express themselves in their own language and in their own way. Terminology familiar to professional and lay planners is sure to turn them off. But talk about putting a large retail store across from their favorite park, whether to build a skateboard facility near the high school or put speed bumps downtown, and you will get their attention.

With a little care, you also can find rewarding ways to involve young people in the big picture --envisioning the future.

Have a contest, but keep it simple and uncomplicated. Ask children of all ages, “what do you want our community to be like when you grow up?” Encourage poems, essays, plays and stories, models and posters, and you will be surprised and delighted at their imaginative and creative responses.

Seek media, business, and other sponsors. Local newspapers and television stations generally cooperate in highlighting good news about young people, and businesses like to have their names linked with such good works. Two high school visionaries in a project I managed recently wrote a rap song about the future and received front page coverage in the local press. They also were invited to sing at a luncheon of a civic club and on a local radio station. Their peers loved it, though most adults had difficulty understanding the words.

Involve the principals and the teachers in all the schools ... public and private, as well as those involved in home schooling. Make the planning staff and commission members available to speak in classrooms, taking care to put the planning issues you are dealing with in terms of real situations young people face. Inspire the youth and you will inspire their parents.

Make it easy to participate. Have no rules except age limits. Supply sufficient application forms to all schools and community centers and make them available on the Internet.

Encourage all to participate. The contributions of grade schoolers will necessarily be less sophisticated than those of middle and high schoolers, but the depth of the ideas of all ages will surprise you. Make special efforts to involve young people in minority communities.

Give all participants recognition. Buttons or caps are as welcome as expensive prizes and can be paid for by business sponsors. The best recognition is to display the results prominently where people congregate. The local library, city hall, shopping mall ... each community has its own center of activity. Announce they will be shown at your next community meeting and you will attract a cadre of  parents and grandparents who go wherever their children’s creations are  posted.

Most importantly, after the young people have had their say, make sure their comments are considered when the planning decisions are made. Given opportunities to express themselves in their own special ways, young people’s wisdom and insights not only can add to the quality and fabric of your community but be a training lesson for future leaders.

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville: we're pleased to be posting over the next half-year, on a weekly basis every Wednesday, PCJ columnist Elaine Cogan's 25 tips for planning commissioners from her excellent Now That You're on Board Publication.

We hope this will provide a convenient opportunity for planning commissioners and other "citizen planners" to benefit from Cogan's years' of experience in working with communities. The complete attractively-designed, spiral-bound, Now That You're on Board publication is also available for purchase and delivery by mail.

The Importance of Reaching Out

Tip 8 of 25
from Elaine Cogan

view all Tips posted to date

Does anyone on your planning staff or board speak or understand Russian? Laotian? Spanish? How well do you communicate with the non-English speaking members of your community? How good is your pipeline to their concerns and viewpoints?

If you are not already actively doing so, consider extending your reach to the citizens of your community for whom English is not their first language. Just because they do not attend planning hearings or meetings that are natural to you and others in the majority community, it is folly to believe they do not care, especially if they live in areas affected by your decisions.

Reaching out takes time and special effort. For example, before considering sensitive land use changes in an area where there has been little or no response to your familiar ways of communicating with citizens, do not give up. Contact church leaders, social workers, school principals, local business owners, and community leaders. Tell them you sincerely want to get a sense of the attitudes of the residents toward  planning issues likely to be controversial or important to them.

Be prepared to be surprised and hear about concerns you may not have thought of. Pledge to take these into consideration when you deal with  specific issues and give them feedback that shows you have listened, even if you feel you have to make an decision that may appear adverse to their interests.

Non-English speaking people may come from cultures less familiar with and even suspicious of the democratic give-and-take we take for granted. By expecting more absolutes from government, they may think it is useless or even dangerous to express a contrary opinion. It takes patience to help them overcome these perceptions.

In a recent planning project, we were having no success reaching Spanish-speaking people through regular means. After talking with community leaders, we found that this closely knit community was not comfortable going outside their neighborhood for public meetings. Instead, it was suggested we come to their church after religious services. Enlisting the help of their pastor and a translator, we held a very successful meeting, and heard concerns we never would have anticipated, at 11:30 Sunday morning.

Other outreach efforts should include placing notices in community newspapers and translating information about meetings and proposed planning actions into their common  language. Employ local translators whenever possible.

You make important planning decisions that affect those who speak English -- and those who do not. By doing everything you can to mitigate the negative effects of cultural and language barriers, you will enrich your community and truly be able to say that you plan for all.

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville: we're pleased to be posting over the next half-year, on a weekly basis every Wednesday, PCJ columnist Elaine Cogan's 25 tips for planning commissioners from her excellent Now That You're on Board Publication.

We hope this will provide a convenient opportunity for planning commissioners and other "citizen planners" to benefit from Cogan's years' of experience in working with communities. The complete attractively-designed, spiral-bound, Now That You're on Board publication is also available for purchase and delivery by mail.

Different Ways to Gauge Public Opinion

Tip 5 of 25
from Elaine Cogan

view all Tips posted to date

How do you and the other planning commissioners keep your figurative fingers on the pulse of your community? There are many ways to ascertain public attitudes. Choose those that best suit your local planning issues and take the results seriously. Surveys, questionnaires, and other techniques are described below.

Scientific survey. This is generally the most reliable opinion research tool -- and the most costly. They are usually conducted by phone calls to a statistically valid sample of the population. As the client, you should keep close control over the content of the questions to  make sure they cover the issues you want to query. It is often helpful, at an additional fee, to poll a subset of the population such as low-income residents or people from a specific geographical area.

Written questionnaires. These can be duplicated and distributed broadly, with minimal cost. The questions should be unambiguous and factual, neutrally worded, and relatively easy to answer. As the respondents are self-selected, it is important to find a way, such as asking for zip codes, to recognize whether one group is overrepresented in the replies.

Focus groups. Facilitated discussions usually involve no more than 10 or 12 participants, chosen to represent specific segments of the population. The validity of the results is dependent to a great extent on how accurately their opinions reflect those they represent. The skill of the discussion leader in soliciting information from a roomful of strangers is very important.

On-the-street interviews. Paying interviewers or soliciting volunteers to query people on the street, in malls, or at supermarkets is a marginally useful technique. The questions must necessarily be brief and require simple answers, and many people are too busy or suspicious to stop and talk. The primary value of this technique is less in the results and more in spreading the word that the planning board is genuinely interested in public opinion.

Internet dialogue. Electronic town halls sponsored by local governments are becoming increasingly popular, and can provide a vehicle for obtaining feedback on various planning issues. Structure the conversation by providing a written questionnaire and keeping a tally of the answers, but also encourage an exchange of opinions. Though this technique allows you to answer questions from a variety of people and thus exhibit an openness to new ideas, it is important to guard against becoming defensive or belligerent.

Presentations and feedback. Whenever commission members and staff give speeches or presentations to community groups, include a time for questions. Have a staff person or volunteer keep a summary of audience comments and review them afterward as still another way to test public opinion.

Letters to the editor. Though only the most motivated people usually take the time to write, and they may be zealots or advocates for one point of view, this is yet another window into how people feel about an issue. No single technique is sufficient in giving you and the commission a thorough understanding of public opinion on planning issues. It is best to use as many as you can, tailoring them to your situation and budget.

Note from Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville: we're pleased to be posting over the next half-year, on a weekly basis every Wednesday, PCJ columnist Elaine Cogan's 25 tips for planning commissioners from her excellent Now That You're on Board Publication.

We hope this will provide a convenient opportunity for planning commissioners and other "citizen planners" to benefit from Cogan's years' of experience in working with communities. The complete attractively-designed, spiral-bound, Now That You're on Board publication is also available for purchase and delivery by mail.

The Ethics of Being Good Community Neighbors

From Planning Commissioners Journal Editor Wayne Senville:

As some of you know, over the years we've regularly emailed out first drafts of articles scheduled for publication in the Planning Comm'rs Journal to individuals who have signed up on our Web site to receive them. We've received very helpful feedback and comments on virtually all articles we've sent out.

For this article, we're also posting the draft here. If you have a comment, question, or any other feedback you'd be willing to share, either use the Comment area at the end of the article (if you don't see an area for Comments, you should see a link that will get you there) -- or email your feedback to us at: pcjoffice@gmail.com. We would especially welcome hearing how (if at all) your community takes into account both regional concerns and those of your neighboring cities or towns.

DRAFT ARTICLE -- copyright Planning Commissioners Journal; please contact us before distributing this draft article.

The Ethics of Being Good Community Neighbors
by C. Gregory Dale, FAICP

Suppose your community is updating its comprehensive plan. Your planning commission is being diligent in considering a wide range of issues and elements, including land use, housing, natural resources, transportation and others. As part of the planning process, you expected to hear from a diverse group of local citizens, but you are surprised to hear from individuals and organizations from outside your community. These include environmental groups urging you to consider certain water management policies, transportation groups urging you to plan for regional transit, and regional housing advocates calling for your community to develop more affordable housing.

How do you weigh these more “global” demands relative to internal planning issues? More to the point, what are the ethical considerations, if any, of whether your plans are consistent with regional goals?

Planners have long recognized that communities should be planned within the context of the regions in which they are located, not as isolated islands. This is an easy concept in theory, but what does it mean for planning commissions? This column explores the ethical dimensions involved in considering the impacts of your decisions as planning commissioners on adjacent communities or the larger region.

When you were appointed to your planning commission, you were charged with a planning leadership role for your community and given certain decision-making responsibilities related to particular development proposals. Most of those responsibilities relate to what happens within the boundaries of your community. Yet, your community exists within a larger regional context, usually with other communities either adjacent or nearby. Clearly many decisions that you make have implications for that larger region and nearby communities. 

There are several dimensions of this regional context consideration.

First, your community is part of numerous systems that extend well beyond its boundaries:

-- Perhaps the most obvious of these are the natural environmental systems. Natural resources know no jurisdictional boundaries. Water networks and systems, wildlife corridors, biological networks, and air transcend all man-made boundaries or jurisdictions. Your decision about storm water runoff policies and regulations, encroachment of development into sensitive stream corridors, protection of tree cover, and others have an impact on those regional systems that extend far outside of your borders.

-- Transportation is another classic example of a system that transcends local boundaries. Your decisions about individual developments or transportation improvements have a ripple effect outside your community.

-- Natural resources and transportation are both examples of physical planning issues that transcend borders. An interesting variation on that theme is regional housing, specifically related to housing affordability. Many planners argue that affordable housing is a regional issue, and that individual communities should consider their housing markets and policies within the context of the regional housing market.

Second, your community makes decisions about individual developments that may have a direct and tangible land use impact on adjacent or nearby communities. This is particularly true for those that are either of such a size and magnitude that they impact areas outside the community, or those that are proposed to be located at or near your border. For example, a large retail facility is likely to generate traffic and other impacts on adjacent communities, particularly if it is located near your jurisdictional borders. 

What then are the ethical considerations associated with these types of issues?

The American Planning Association’s “Ethical Principles in Planning,” published in 1992, provides guidelines for ethical conduct by both professional and citizen planners. It does not directly address this issue -- there is nothing in the guidelines that directly addresses regional or extra-territorial impact considerations. So, are you out of the woods? Not so fast. The guidelines do provide some indirect guidance, and like many ethical considerations, a good bit of balancing and common sense comes into play. So, let us drill down deeper. 

First, the guidelines provide that the planning process must “serve the public interest” -- a very broad, and very vague guideline. The obvious question then is how does one define the public interest? Is it the interest of our community, or is it the interest of the broader region?

The APA “Ethical Principles in Planning” goes on to set out some more specific considerations involved in serving the public interest. Two of these are of particular interest. One provides for the need to protect the “integrity of the natural environment.” No one can reasonably argue that the environment can be adequately protected without consideration of systems that go beyond jurisdictional boundaries.

Another guideline encourages special attention to the “interrelatedness of decisions and the long-range consequences of present actions.” Clearly the decisions of one community are interrelated to the decisions of other communities.

These statements are not directly on point, but they do imply the need to think about broader systems and the way in which your decisions are related to each other.

Virtually all professional planners would agree that communities should consider both regional impacts and immediate impacts on adjacent communities when making decisions. We understand that it is hard enough to worry about keeping our own house in order, let alone think about the global impacts of our decisions. However, planning commissions are uniquely positioned to provide leadership and advice to elected officials that go beyond the parochial interest of a particular community and at least consider the impacts of our decisions outside our communities.

Is there clear ethical direction from the American Planning Association’s “Ethical Principles in Planning” on this issue? No. However, the point is not to dissect the guidelines to find an “out” to keep you from thinking beyond your community. The APA ethical guidelines note that these ethical principles derive in part from “the general values of society.” Being a good neighbor is certainly a general value of society and could easily be applied to the community and regional planning context.

The guidelines also note that these ethical judgments require a “conscientious balancing, based on the facts and context of a particular situation and on the entire set of ethical principles.” It is your job as a planning commission to balance your local concerns with regional concerns in a conscientious manner.

About the Author:

C. Gregory Dale, FAICP is a Principal with the planning and zoning firm of McBride Dale Clarion in Cincinnati, Ohio. Dale is one of the co-authors of the Citizen's Guide to Planning published by the American Planning Association. He manages planning projects and conducts training for planning officials throughout the country. He is a frequent speaker at planning and zoning workshops throughout the country. He can be reached at gdale@mcbridedale.com.

Over the years, the Planning Commissioners Journal has published numerous articles on ethical issues, many written by Greg Dale. The articles are available either to order & download individually, or as a printed collection. For details, see Taking a Closer Look: Ethics & the Planning Commission.

Reports from Leg 2 of "Circle The USA"

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

I'm back from the second segment of my planned "Circle the USA" travels, covering Detroit; Troy and Flint, Michigan; and Elkhart County and northwestern Indiana.

 

I've filed the following reports. Take a look, and sign up for our Circle the USA blog feed and/or email updates.

 

-- When Rouge Turned Green

-- Preservation or Demolition?

-- Campus Martius Park in Downtown Detroit

-- A Suburb Plans for Change

-- Not Giving Up on Flint, I

-- Not Giving Up on Flint, II

-- Good or Bad Signs in Indiana?

-- A Main Street Succeeds in Tough Times

-- Planning for 46 Miles of Lakeshore

My next segment will include several days in the Chicago area, followed by stops in Kankakee County, Illinois; Dubuque, Iowa; and southern Wisconsin.

 

Again, check out our Circle the USA web site where announcements and reports will be posted.

How Do We Get There?

What's the recipe for successful implementation of your community's plan? That's the focus of this installment of the Segedys' series on preparing the comprehensive plan. How Do We Get There? by Jim Segedy and Lisa Hollingsworth-Segedy From the Spring 2009 issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal. Available to order & immediately download. Use icon button at end of excerpt below. Do you subscribe to the Planning Commissioners Journal? If so, we would be pleased to email you a complimentary .pdf of this article. Just email us at: pcjoffice@gmail.com (include the article title in your email). You may need to wait a bit if you email us when our office is closed. Not a subscriber? Consider starting with our Spring issue. Order online or phone us at: 802.864.9083 (Monday-Friday, 10am to 3pm Eastern).

Read excerpt from article: This concluding article in the series will answer the final question we originally posed: "How do we get there?" In other words, what's the recipe for successful plan implementation. We'll draw on our experience to try to provide you some key ingredients. 1. Prioritize! How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. Establish priorities for your plan's goals. Consider using a 1-5 scale for importance, visibility, "do-ability," budget availability, and other criteria. This will cut down on the inertia that can result from the task of plan implementation appearing to be so large that no one knows where to start. We like putting a space for this prioritization right in the plan itself. We have found that a good role for the planning commission is to facilitate the setting of priorities with input from municipal departments and the public. You can do this through questionnaires or preference surveys, followed by a workshop that allows face-to-face interaction. This process allows for open discussion of priorities and any obstacles to an item's implementation. Not only will you gain the perspectives of all parties affected by the plan, but you will also build public support and a sense of ownership of the plan that will carry through to elected officials as they set the budget and allocate resources. 2. Have a specific action plan. ... For each goal, your action plan should specify the steps that will be taken, in what order, by whom, and with what resources. Make the steps small and measurable. You can present these steps in either a list or a table, but make sure to link each item in the action plan to the specific plan goal it is meant to address. We like to include check boxes for each step, so that when they're complete, they can be marked off. ... ... article continues with: 3. Provide for local "adoption" of projects; 4. Find those early success projects and use them to build momentum; 5. Celebrate success; and 6. Have an annual review of the status of your plan's implementation. The full article can be ordered & downloaded. Click this icon for details. Other articles in this series by the Segedys: How Do We Get There? PCJ #74, Spring 2009 Community Self-Assessment: A Way of Looking at the Whole Picture PCJ #73, Winter 2009 Where Do We Want to Go? PCJ #72, Fall 2008 This Plan's for You PCJ #71, Summer 2008

Zoning Wars

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

There's an interesting article posted online by Michael Saint, titled Carl Von Clausewitz, An historical yet timely perspective on "Zoning Wars."

Saint is founder, CEO, and chairman of The Saint Consulting Group, which provides consulting services related to land use politics. With Saint's permission, I'm reposting some brief excerpts from his article:

"When Prussian solider and writer Carl Von Clausewitz wrote his classic book, "On War" in the 1830's, his words were directed at the philosophy, strategy and tactics of successful ground wars in Nineteenth Century Europe. But his ideas are equally relevant to real estate zoning battles in 21st Century America. Twenty years ago, most commercial and residential real estate projects were easily approved at the municipal or county level. Development was seen as beneficial -- a sign of progress and growth, a source of new jobs and tax revenue for the community, a wellspring of new opportunity for the business community, and an example of accomplishment that local politicians could cite as a reason for re-election. All that has changed. Today from small towns in the Midwest, to suburbs on both coasts, to cities in the South, citizens are organizing to oppose all kinds of new projects: big box category killers (Wal-Mart, Home Depot), shopping malls, power plants, cellular phone towers, residential subdivisions, apartment complexes, affordable housing, office buildings, industrial parks and even churches, schools and playgrounds. ... To be successful, the modern real estate developer must assume every proposal will be opposed and that every project will require a campaign using the kind of battle strategy and analysis that Von Clausewitz brought to the battlefield two centuries ago. COMMIT ENOUGH RESOURCES ... Real estate developers must commit sufficient resources to defeat the opposition, or face wasted opportunities, contentious hearings, long delays, and ultimate defeat. Few contests are won cheaply these days. GET GOOD INFORMATION ... These days, devising a successful strategy requires polling, detailed political research, and analysis to identify likely opponents and tactics to neutralize or marginalize them; to identify potential supporters and methods of motivating them; ... BUILD A CROWD ... Neutralizing the crowd, so that public officials can safely vote in favor requires the developer to produce as big a crowd at the hearing as the opponents do -- not an easy task in a NIMBY world. ...

Personally, I've seen all of the factors Saint mentions come into play during the ten years I've served as a member of the Burlington, Vermont, Planning Commission. While NIBMYism can be a motivating force, I've also seen neighbors and neighborhood groups -- not just developers -- need to heed Saint's advice: marshall their forces, do "opposition" research, and turn out their supporters in large numbers. In some places, it's the developers who seem to have the inside edge.

One problem underlying all this is that land use hearings typically follow the adversarial model used in our legal system. Too rarely are consensus building techniques employed. In part, I believe that's because planning departments simply don't have the financial resources to provide for this. As a result, many times planning commissions or zoning boards have to leave it to the proponents and opponents of a project to come in with their own experts, and argue their case.

Planning commissioners and zoning board members, like judges, are often left in the position of having to evaluate often conflicting testimony. Sometimes staff can allocate the time to provide independent information and analysis, but many times not.

I'd be interested to hear your comments. How do controversial land use applications play out in your city? Are there better ways of doing business?

p.s., we've run a couple of articles related to the above. One is on the use of land use mediation. The other focuses on the growing use of charrettes -- a useful (but sometimes expensive) approach to resolving issues without needing to go to war.

Dialing for Citizens

You've worked hard to organize a community visioning initiative. There's just one problem: how do you get citizens to participate? How do you persuade a cross-section of your community to attend vision meetings and share their ideas about the future? Pick up the phone, recommends civic consultant Otis White. Dialing for Citizens by Otis White From the Spring 2009 issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal. Available to order & immediately download. Use icon button at end of excerpt below. Do you subscribe to the Planning Commissioners Journal? If so, we would be pleased to email you a complimentary .pdf of this article. Just email us at: pcjoffice@gmail.com (include the article title in your email). You may need to wait a bit if you email us when our office is closed. Not a subscriber? Consider starting with our Spring issue. Order online or phone us at: 802.864.9083 (Monday-Friday, 10am to 3pm Eastern).

Read excerpt from start of article: You've worked hard to organize a community visioning initiative. You've raised the money. You've thought through how citizens will participate, how their ideas will be incorporated in the plan, how the plan will be compiled and presented. You've even considered how to bring along community leaders, like city council members and business leaders, so they embrace the final product. There's just one problem: how do you get citizens to participate? How do you persuade a cross-section of your community to attend vision meetings and share their ideas about the future? This is critical because, in my experience, visioning efforts don't succeed on the quality of the plans they produce. They succeed because citizens recognize these plans as -- reflections of their ideas and ambitions -- and support them. And for that to happen, you need the citizens to … well, show up and participate. I've worked on a number of community visioning initiatives and, along the way, tried many ways of coaxing citizens out of their homes and into meetings, from publicity efforts to working with civic groups and neighborhood associations. We've built web sites, cranked out press releases, placed flyers in public libraries, advertised with online groups, mounted speakers' bureaus, and conducted e-mail blitzes. We even persuaded one business to donate time on its outdoor marquee signs to promote meetings. Most of these things work to some degree. My advice is to do them all. But the single most effective way we've found of convincing citizens to turn off the television and spend a winter evening talking about their community's future is with phone trees. That's right. The old, reliable form of communications: one person calling another. Make no mistake. Phone trees are demanding. We spend twice as much time organizing them as we do on all other communications efforts combined, including building web sites. If other ways of involving citizens worked as well, we'd hang up on the phone trees in an instant. But they don't. ... Otis White continues by describing the steps needed to organize an effective phone tree, and some things to watch out for. The full article can be ordered & downloaded. Click this icon for details.

Back from first leg of "Circle the USA"

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

Just returned from a fascinating week on the road -- the first segment of my planned "Circle the USA" travels. I've filed the following reports, with three more still to post. Take a look, and sign up for Circle the USA blog feed and/or email updates.

 

-- Main Street Mill: "The Perfect Trifecta"

-- "A Harbor You Can Sail Into"

-- Wrestling a Yankee

-- Downtown Housing -Minus Parking +Plus Commercial

-- A "Utility Player" Among Planners

-- The Two Faces of Cooperstown

-- Who's Planning?

-- For the Love of Steam

-- Leadership for Diversity

-- Punching Through the Walls

-- Where America's Oil Industry Was Born

-- College & Community

-- Gateway Art

My next two segments will cover Cleveland to Chicago (primarily through southern Michigan and northern Indiana), and then Chicago to Seattle. Again, check out our Circle the USA web site where announcements will be posted.

Contentious, Non-Productive, Public Hearings

Request for your help:

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

I am preparing an article for the Planning Commissioners Journal focusing on the situation described below. I would welcome feedback on ways of improving on the following all-too-common scenario.

Contentious, non-productive public hearings:

Many planning commissioners, at least occasionally, have had the experience of arriving at a public hearing to find a large crowd of citizens angry about a proposed development in their neighborhood. Often the hearing begins with a lengthy presentation by the applicant's architects, engineers, planners, and (sometimes) lawyers explaining the merits of their project and why it must be approved -- followed by a line of residents coming to the microphone to highlight a lengthy list of problems with the project. And often, the temperature in the meeting room feels like it's rising.

Planning commissioners often feel thrust into the middle of controversial projects. Yes, it is their job to decide (or recommend) on the application, but they may ask themselves why many issues between the developer and neighborhood haven't been resolved in advance. At some public hearings, planning commissioners may wish they could call a time out and get the two sides to sit down and work out some of the issues.

Looking for your feedback on the following:

1. are there pre-hearing approaches your community takes to identify projects likely to be controversial, and then seek to resolve some of the contentious developer/community issues?

I'm interested in hearing about approaches ranging from: neighborhood association review; other forms of informal dialogue and meetings; sketch plan review; community-developer advance agreements; the use of staff comments & recommendations; and anything else that has worked to resolve (or reduce) disputed issues in advance of the required public hearing.

Also, are there methods (or criteria) you use in advance to identify projects likely to be controversial? Or do you just know?

2. more productive hearings --

-- are there approaches you've used to design more productive public hearings?
-- are there alternatives to the familiar sequence of staff overview; developer project presentation; public testimony; commissioner question period?
-- do you require the developer to make available models of the project or other visuals?
-- how do you most effectively allow for both public and planning commissioner input?
-- do you ever table projects (in effect, calling a time out) and then set up an informal process for resolving certain issues?

The best way you can provide feedback is by using the Cyburbia online bulletin board system. If you're not familiar with Cyburbia -- the best place to seek answers to planning-related questions on the Web -- here's your chance to get familiar with it, while helping me out with this upcoming Planning Commissioners Journal article.

Cyburbia is fairly easy to use. But you'll need to register (it's free) in order to post a reply to my questions (or to any material posted in Cyburbia's forums).

To view the "thread" containing my questions (the same ones as posted above) AND replies already posted -- AND then for you to add your own reply, go to:
http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=34921  -- you'll need to scroll down a bit once on the Cyburbia page to view the thread.

Here's a composite screenshot of part what you'll see. If you click on the image you'll go to the actual page (again, you'll need to scroll down the page).

Remember, you'll be prompted to register for Cyburbia first, if you haven't already done so. (You'll notice that most individuals who use Cyburbia select screen names for their postings, so you don't have to reveal your name when you post a comment on Cyburbia).

However, if you prefer to provide your feedback to my questions by email privately to me, feel free to do so: editor@plannersweb.com

Thanks for your help -- you'll be assisting in making this a better article!

Saving Fenway Park

From PCJ General Manager Betsey Krumholz:

Being from Vermont you'll have to excuse our personal interest in the Boston Red Sox. But we think you'll find the following Red Sox story worth hearing about -- especially in light of the article on charrettes just published in our Summer issue:

“For ten days [in August 2000], an air of controlled chaos characterized Room L308 in the Library Building at Simmons College in Boston. Chalkboards were crammed full of random, late-night-inspired ideas written in a vaguely decipherable scrawl. Reference books, rolls of trace paper, markers, and miscellaneous drafting tools piled high on a ragtag collection of worktables. Clumps of wires and cords stretched across the room to power laptop computers, CAD stations, printers and copiers. Empty Coke bottles unceremoniously scattered the floor. Amongst it all, clusters of casually dressed professionals and curious visitors feverishly debated the intricacies of traffic counts, aisle widths, and historic preservation standards above the combined din of ringing cell phones and a borrowed boom box pumping out strains of Elvis Costello and the Attractions.”

-- From Design Symposium A Rousing Success! Summary Report by Jeffrey Harris of Save Fenway Park.

Charrettes gather professionals, community leaders, and passionate citizens under one roof for one purpose. When done properly they harness imagination, balanced by fact and reason, and the results can be surprising. While many charrettes are organized by planning officials or development interests, this is the story of how community advocates used the charrette process to reframe one very important development discussion, and challenged public officials to see things differently.

From the earliest whispers that the Boston Red Sox were planning to build a new ballpark, the Save Fenway Park (SFP) volunteers understood clearly the threat to the historic park.

The Red Sox organization had a comprehensive vision which included not only a brand new facility, but the major redevelopment of the surrounding neighborhood. With support from the Mayor’s Office (and a big advertising budget) it appeared that the deal was done, and Fenway Park would become yet another piece of Red Sox history.

But the SFP team was not out yet. The Fenway Community Development Corporation (FCDC) had been working for several years on its “Urban Village Plan” which envisioned new affordable housing and a more attractive environment for retail and other commercial uses along an under-developed section of the main thoroughfare through the neighborhood. The location and footprint of the beloved Fenway Park, and its associated uses, loomed large in this planning.

Both SFP and the FCDC were frustrated with the “public” planning process charted by the Boston Redevelopment Authority (and the Red Sox organization) as the city deliberated the re-zoning of the neighborhood to accommodate the demands of the team. The neighborhood groups felt that the process was geared only toward the development of a new stadium, and had not sufficiently considered the possibility that keeping the existing stadium could, in fact, be a better option.

Let There Be Lights

From PCJ General Manager Betsey Krumholz:

How do we quantify community benefit versus neighborhood detriment? What do we gain and what do we give up? Who decides? and, Who wins and who loses?

Craig Failor, a planner for the Village of Oak Park, Illinois, has a real challenge before his board, and he graciously took some time to outline his community’s complicated and, apparently divisive, predicament.

The Village of Oak Park has a strong architectural legacy. Frank Lloyd Wright is a prominent figure in its history (his own home was built there in 1889) and the Village has taken great pains to preserve the homes and institutions associated with this distinct style. Oak Park (pop. 50,824) has committed enormous resources planning for its present and future, and is a proud, vibrant, and thriving entity.

But there is trouble in Oak Park -- and it begins with a project planned for the historic high school, which is bordered by a residential neighborhood. See photo below from Wikipedia.

The project calls for installing stadium lights in order to extend the hours during which teams can practice and play games.

The school’s administration, athletes, and others in the community argue that the lighted field space is needed to provide for games and adequate practice time for the myriad of boys and girls spring and fall sports teams. See Let There Be Lights!

But some in the neighborhood counter that further intrusion into the quiet of their evenings along with new Friday night football asks too much. See Village Board meeting minutes.

The following comments from WednesdayJournalOnline give a sense of how difficult this has been in Oak Park.

Back on the Planning Commission

From PCJ Editor Wayne Senville:

"Have you lost your mind?" was one reaction. But more generally, I've gotten positive feedback to my recent appointment to the Burlington (Vermont) Planning Commission.

In some ways you could call it a re-appointment, since I served on the Commission from 1990-1999. But, do the arithmetic, I've been off the Commission for nine long years. What will it be like to be back on after so many years off?

I've certainly kept involved with local issues over the years, and have regularly attended my "neighborhood planning assembly" (NPA) monthly meetings, as well as many city council meetings, and even a few planning commission meetings.

But I missed being on top of things, and felt that with my experience I could again contribute to the city I live in (and love) by serving on the commission.

For some reason, our city council agreed ... and I'm back on.

I sat in on a planning commission meeting last week to get myself back up to speed (my four-year term starts on July 1st). It was likely the last time I'd be there as a member of the public for some time.

Sitting there and listening to the discussion felt like being in a time machine.

The Next Generation of Your Planning Commission

From: Wayne Senville, Editor, PCJ, editor@plannersweb.com

I asked Kit Hodge, who is CEO of the Neighbors Project, if she'd be willing to write an article for the Planning Commissioners Journal, sharing her thoughts on ways in which local planning commissions can seek out younger members -- in particular, younger "Generation Xers" (born 1965-1980) and older "Millenials" (1981-1999). The Neighbors Project focuses on creative ways of involving people in their 20s and 30s in the civic life of their neighborhoods and cities.

We're reprinting below Kit's article, from our just-published Spring '08 issue. Consider posting your thoughts or feedback after you read her short article. What works best for involving younger generations in local planning? And do younger commissioners bring different "generational" perspectives?