[Vision2020] Wheaton Story in paper

[mark seman]

C,
I mostly totally agree with you.  Moscow does need to place a priority on
"planning."  This could be done within the Community Development
Dept.(rather than thru a new dept.), but only if emphasis is placed on the
effort.  I my mind, Community Development implies Planning - not that it
does happen, but it is an implied part of the process.  I think most
communities are way behind in their efforts to plan.  Growth has occurred
for decades without any comprehensive understanding of what the results were
going to be.  Now communities really need to look at what has happened, what
will happen, and decide how to make both worlds mesh into a better, wholly
connected community.

I would love to see a more holistic approach to community development.  One
of my frustrations, professionally & personally, is knowing that the reason
we have the past development that we do, is based on the regulations that
"contol" growth.  If community growth is a direct result of the "rules of
play", why not change them to give citizens the results they want?  Most
people would agree that this is a no-brainer.  But just like any other law
on the books, there are those that will try to subvert the intention and new
rules are too cumbersome.  I think the better solution would be to minimize
worded regulation and shift towards an interactive community one.  This
would allow citizen input to help specific projects as well as the larger
community to develop more "organically," based on thoughtful concepts of
desired resultants.

One problem with this approach is that it forces developers to cater more to
the populace's wishes.  I think conceptually it would result in better
development, but there is less incentive for developer involvement.  Who
wants to put their own money where they have less control over it.  To
counter that, there would need to be public incentives included within the
process to help assure the investors of appropriate occupancy rates (or
sales.)  If citizens want control over their domain, they need to help level
the risk by becoming involved.

I could see this whole process shifting towards a community cooperative
model, where citizens develop the concept, present it to the community for
financial (or other) investment to implement the project.  If there is not
enough interest, then maybe the project didn't meet a real & current
community need.  I see no truly viable way for positive community
development to happen without community input.  It's obvious current
processes do not work and there needs to be change, but will it happen
collectively?

We''ll have to wait and see what we can do individually, ...stay tuned.

Mark


mark r. seman, architect
       v=928.925.7617
       f=928.776.9107

  -----Original Message-----
  Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 1:19 PM
  To: mark seman
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Wheaton Story in paper


  Planning?? Moscow doesn't have a department of planning. It's name is
Community DEVELOPMENT. I've always maintained that what Moscow has always
needed is a Planning department. Seems all that happens here is patchwork.
No REAL planning involved. One example is the fact that i walk all over
moscow, enjoy the few places there are "walkable links" between
neighborhoods. There are fewer and fewer being made in new developments. No
one is asking for development plans to include such links now.


  On Apr 5, 2007, at 2:19 AM, mark seman wrote:


    Moscow,
    I'm saddened to hear that Jon was removed from Moscow's BOA. I have
great respect for his thoughtfulness with decisions. While on the BOA with
Jon, I had my frustrations with policy, and I could sense some of his
frustration with how statutes do not = justice. Anyone grasping Zoning and
development regulation well enough will understand where they fail and need
improvement. It's difficult to be in a position, having your hands tied by
governing policy, knowing that better policy or better citizen communication
would lead to better community. Often, seeing where failings exist doesn't
happen until a real-life situation arises that exposes it. There's no
quick-change-to-policy to accomodate a just solution. Jon was a thoughtful
member of the BOA and his departure will be felt, because of the knowledge
he brought into the process. Someone else will take his place, but I doubt
that person will have the level of understanding that Jon did, until they
have sat on the BOA for many years to come.
    Joel was also an asset for the City of Moscow. He spent a lot of time
wth the City and his institutional knowledge leaves with him. Joel grew into
his position, from before Dale's leaving and afterwards. A city planner's
role is a tough one to be in. You're hardly ever given the resources to
truly plan for the community's future, rather you are being reactive to what
developers bring. The limitations of established Zoning & Comprehensive
Plans are your planning tools. One's standards & guidebook for community
development ... not a shed-full, nor very sharp tools. The best that can
come from Joel's departure is him being able to move-on professionally &
personally to another level. I hope he finds something that suits him well.
    I don't know what Nancy's role has been in these two changes for Moscow,
but it will be interesting to see what the future brings, if for no other
reason than Moscow has lost a significant and worthy part of its past.
    Mark
    <baU-orange.JPG>

    mark r. seman, architect
    v=928.925.7617
    f=928.776.9107

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070406/c88e558e/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 13679 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070406/c88e558e/attachment-0001.jpe