JM Goldson community preservation + planning blog

The public comment phase

By Jennifer M. Goldson, AICP, Owner

In Della Rucker’s post “What can Planners do to Help the Economy,” she recommends planner’s view their role as the “best teachers” to ensure meaningful public engagement:

Model your public participation after the best teachers. Don’t just lecture or allow others to lecture. Don’t do the minimum necessary to get by. Give the process structure so that people stay on track and so that you hear from everyone, and engage them in the search for solutions, rather than presenting them a grand vision and waiting for them to applaud or throw tomatoes.

When we ask for public comments on a draft plan we are never certain what public reaction to the plan will be, but we are pretty sure nobody will throw tomatoes because the plan is created in collaboration with the citizens, town boards, and town staff. Through community workshops and facilitated engagement, we provide the information citizens need to think through the issues and the structure they need to search for solutions together including interactive exercises and digital group polling.

With the release of two draft plans in April, I am in great anticipation of citizen reaction and feedback. Bridgewater’s Housing Production Plan and Stoughton’s Community Preservation Plan are the products of engaged town committees, staff, and citizens and based on best practices and community values.

For example, Bridgewater’s Housing Production Plan recommends developing affordable housing downtown in multi-family and multi-use buildings as well as through adaptive reuse of historic buildings based directly on community workshop feedback. These goals will require various zoning amendments based on a shared vision for new development downtown. Below is a sketch we’ve included in the draft plan to help citizen’s envision new development that is designed with the intent of improving and revitalizing downtown.

In Stoughton, citizen feedback guided the Community Preservation Plan recommend protection of privately owned open space, preserving historic town-owned resources, creating well-planned public recreation opportunities on town-owned land, and creating affordable housing through adaptive reuse of historic mills to help revitalize downtown.

As an aside – you may have noticed that both plans have similarities in that they recognize affordable housing as an opportunity for smart growth, historic preservation, and downtown revitalization.

The full draft plans can be accessed through the links provided above. As we await public comments on these plans we’d also be interested in your thoughts about them! You can always reach me at jennifer@jmgoldson.com.

What, pray tell, is a planner?

By Lisa Bassett, Community Preservation Planner, JM Goldson

“So what does a planner do, exactly?” is a question I hear a lot when I tell people my job title. It’s a good question– an important question. Communities reap the benefits of thoughtful planning and carry the burden of poor planning, often without most residents realizing the role planning has played on how their community looks and functions.

The use of land is largely governed by environmental characteristics and historical development patterns combined with local investment policies/priorities and land use regulations. One of a planner’s primary roles is to inform policy-makers so that policies and regulations influencing land use, infrastructure investment, historic preservation, economic development, affordable housing, and environmental protection are based on best practices and work to achieve community goals. Another primary role for a modern-day planner is to ensure that the planning process does not happen in a vacuum – it requires diligent and open community engagement …. and every project is unique, based upon the community’s existing resources and goals.

Take the work we are currently doing in the Town of Bridgewater, MA. We just submitted a Slums and Blight inventory to the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), with significant help from a team of hardworking and talented volunteer residents. The overall purpose of this detailed inventory and report was to help the Town qualify for an award of federal Community Development Funds for a comprehensive downtown master plan and, ultimately, for making substantial physical improvements downtown.

We are also working with a task force in Bridgewater on a re-use study for the Keith Homestead, an historic house on a large plot of land abutting the banks of Lake Nippenicket. Thanks to the Town’s use of Community Preservation Act funds to acquire the house and surrounding land in combination with funds from the Commonwealth’s Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the surrounding land is protected from development and the house will be preserved. This project would not have been possible without the help and guidance of the Wildlands Trust for Southeastern MA and The Nature Conservancy in addition to DFG. To assist the Task Force I have been soliciting re-use ideas which will be discussed at the next task force meeting where we will facilitate discussion groups with citizens.

We also just completed a draft Community Preservation Plan for the Town of Stoughton, MA. Through this plan, the Stoughton Community Preservation Committee (CPC), identified the Town’s community preservation resources and engaged citizens to develop goals and priorities for the use of Community Preservation Act funds in the community. The plan will be released in the next few weeks for additional citizen feedback prior to adoption by the CPC.

The scope of the work I’m involved with as a community preservation planner at JM Goldson is broad, involving a variety of aspects of community preservation and planning – not just research and analysis but also community engagement and participation. So, in a nutshell, that’s what a community preservation planner is. Now, it’s time to get back to work on Bridgewater’s Housing Production Plan . . .

Bridgewater Housing Production Plan Workshop

By Jennifer M. Goldson, AICP, Owner, JM Goldson

This week JM Goldson ran a planning workshop, sponsored by the Bridgewater Housing Partnership, to generate goals and strategies to incorporate in Bridgewater’s Housing Production Plan. The 47 workshop participants learned about their regional and local housing needs, participated in an digital group polling exercise, and brainstormed goals and strategies in small interactive discussion groups.

A popular part of our workshops is always the digital group polling. The polling is great fun and we learn a lot about the participants – who they are and what their perspective is. Some facts we learned about pariticpants from the polling:

81% of the participants were over the age of 45 years
26% had never come to an official meeting in town before the workshop!
About 1 out of every 3 workshop participants were within the low-income range (for a household of 4)

We also learned that 70% of the participants were not opposed to affordable housing but were concerned about the impact of new development on the community. Only 11% were opposed to affordable housing in concept and 19% considered themselves avid supporters. See the full summary of the digital group polling results: Bridgewater Workshop 012512 group polling results.

During the interactive group discussion portion of the workshop, small groups discussed their thoughts in response to four questions. Some of the themes we gleaned from the sample group presentations included a great concern for preserving community character and a preference to create low and mixed-income housing through reuse of existing buildings (e.g., old factory buildings, vacant/foreclosed homes, and surplus town buildings). The groups discussed the pros and cons of inclusionary zoning, infill bylaws, 40R, as well as smart growth principles to utilize redevelopment sites in and around downtown.

Using the results of the workshop and the housing needs assessment, JM Goldson will work with the Housing Partnership to draft the goals and implementation strategies for the Housing Production Plan over the next few months. The draft Plan, which includes a detailed housing needs assessment can be downloaded here: DRAFT BRIDGEWATER HOUSING PRODUCTION PLAN – CHAPTER 1: HOUSING NEEDS.

Context matters: challenging the American dream

By Lisa Bassett, Community Preservation Planner, JM Goldson

On Wednesday, the Urban Land Institute (ULI) released a new report as described in the article “Demographic Changes Mean Dramatic Shifts in Demand for California Housing . . .” The report examines housing needs, supply and demand, and future trends through the lens of younger generations– namely, Generation X and Generation Y– and posits that housing demand between today and 2035 is going to change dramatically. This particular study, The New California Dream: How Demographic and Economic Changes May Shape the Housing Market, was written by an urban planner named Arthur C. Nelson, a ULI member and director of the Metropolitan Research Center at the University of Utah. The research is focused specifically on California, but according to ULI Chief Executive Officer Patrick Phillips, has implications nationwide.

The report essentially challenges the antiquated ideology of the American Dream: a big house on a large plot of land with a 2-car garage in the suburbs. It claims the existing supply of conventional subdivision lots exceeds current demand, and will continue to do for at least the next 23 years, even if no new supply is created during that time. It also predicts that increased demand for multi-family housing, as well as townhomes, duplexes, three-plexes and four-plexes on small lots will dominate the housing markets of California’s four largest Metropolitan Planning Organizations. This demand will be driven, according to the findings of this report, largely by the desires of Generation X, born between 1965 and 1978, and Generation Y, born between 1979 and 1996, both of whom are likely to be living in smaller housing than baby boomers. At least half of the demand will be for locations near transit.

I felt compelled to write about this report, admittedly without having read it all yet, because of its publicized findings, and more specifically, how its findings are being advertised. Phillips is quoted in this article for saying that “Generation Y, in particular, will have an outsize influence on consumer demand. It is the largest demographic group this country has ever seen, and their preferences will influence every aspect of American society. Quality of life is a paramount concern to much of this generation, and they will be drawn to places that offer the best work-life balance.”

This quotation made me pause and think, as a community preservation planner with JM Goldson, and also as a member of Generation Y, that even though the statement above is a dauntingly overzealous generalization, it is important to note. At the very fundamental level of planning, we must know WHO we are planning for, and for WHAT purpose. Context matters, and just as the times change, social norms evolve, and we as a society must adapt. I hope similar research is conducted in all US states, if for no other reason than to gain perspective about current housing needs in the context of today’s market. I believe that doing the work that California has done now in each state can only improve our planning efforts moving forward.

Free dinner and the appearance of exclusivity

Community Planning Workshop held in Stoughton, MA on 11/28/11

I wish I could lay claim to the idea, but I can’t. When I first began planning the community planning workshop with the Stoughton Community Preservation Committee (CPC), I did suggest to offer food as a way to encourage participation. But, the idea that really boosted participation in the workshop was something else – something the CPC members thought of – and it worked.

Communities often struggle to drum up interest in planning – it’s tough to get people to come out at night to proactively plan (it’s much easier to get people out to object to a controversial project!). I’ve written a few other posts on ways to increase public input and participation at CPC events, but this idea was new.

Although it’s based on the concept of exclusion, in an counter-intuitive way it actually INCREASES participation! OK, so here’s the idea – it’s really quite simple – announce a cap on the number of attendees who can participate in the workshop.

Of course, it’s important to point out that the meeting is an open public meeting where anyone can come to observe and offer comments during the public hearing, however the number of participants that can be accommodated in the workshop discussion groups actually is finite primarily due to room capacity and number of table facilitators.

Now, we don’t really want to exclude anyone who is interested in participating! Our main objective in establishing the cap is to INCREASE participation – there is a certain psychological tendency to desire something more when it is limited. The key is to set the cap high enough that it can easily accommodate every person who is likely to express interest.

In Stoughton we set a cap of 70 participants for the workshop and allowed pre-registration to reserve a seat at the workshop. The result: we had 54 participants! This is a terrific turnout for a community preservation workshop! Link to Stoughton CPA workshop flyer to see how we announced the cap.

The workshop generated many thoughtful community preservation project ideas that we are combing through at JM Goldson and will present to the CPC next week. The workshop also gave the CPC members and workshop participants a community-building forum to share ideas and knowledge. Everyone also seemed to enjoy the hot buffet dinner provided by the Sons of Italy, which was a great way to begin the evening (and, as it turns out, get people to show up early.).

Green community project – seeing the forest

As I work to complete a 14-month effort for Bridgewater, MA to become a Green Community, I am reminded of the expression “can’t see the forest for the trees.” After months of focusing on the many details of this work with the amazing team of volunteers from the Town’s Energy Committee (particularly the chair person!), I was reminded yesterday that it is actually quite exciting that Bridgewater is on the verge of becoming a Green Community after all this effort.

Some “Green Community” milestones already accomplished in just the past few months that Bridgewater deserves recognition for:

Adopted the Town’s first Fuel-Efficient Vehicle Policy
Adopted the Stretch Energy Code (one of the first 100 communities in MA to adopt)
Completed a detailed and thorough energy use baseline documenting all municipal consumption of energy in the past 3 years

The details of complicated projects can often obscure the big picture. Thanks to Seth Pickering at DOER, I was reminded just what an accomplishment Bridgewater is about to achieve to be one among only 75 communities in the state so far to achieve this designation. The official designation will be determined after the Nov 18 deadline. I have no doubt that Bridgewater will succeed and become eligible for significant levels of grant funding for energy improvements to municipal properties.

I’ll leave you with an Taoist expression as an alternative to the forest/trees expression:

We may see the tip of a hair while failing to hear a peal of thunder, or hear the melody of a song while failing to see a mountain. Why? A small fixation of attention results in a large measure of heedlessness.

What mountains are you failing to see?

Walking

In light of many looming deadlines, I have just a quick thought to share here today. Inspired by a recent visit to Fruitlands Museum to learn about Alcott’s utopian experiment, I cracked open my copy of Thoreau’s essay “Walking” and was struck by the opening lines:

I wish to speak a word for Nature, for absolute freedom and wildness, as contrasted with a freedom and culture merely civil – to regard man as an inhabitant, or a part and parcel of Nature, rather than a member of society. I wish to make an extreme statement, if so I may make an emphatic one, for there are enough champions of civilization: the minister and the school committee and every one of you will take care of that.

My take-away from these lines is less focused on his point about people’s inherent right for freedom and wildness, which is perhaps HIS main point, but more on his claim that there were “enough champions of civilization.” I infer that he felt there were not enough champions of Nature (with Thoreau’s capital “N”).

Although his essay was published almost 150 years ago, I see parallels in current open space conservation efforts – our society’s current-day efforts to protect and preserve Nature – which seem to be so often up against champions of expanding civilization’s footprint at the expense of Nature.

I am clearly taking liberties here with Thoreau’s intentions in this essay and I do not wish to obscure his intent but only to inject the thoughts of my own mind as triggered by his words. After 150 years, his words still inspire. Thank you, Thoreau.

Economic benefits at the community scale

It all boils down to economic development. I never call the work JM Goldson does “economic development.” I call it historic preservation, affordable housing planning, open space planning, even land use planning, but not planning for economic development. Yet, this work all deals with preserving and enhancing the character of communities and, in doing so, we can create a “wise economy” for the community.

The term “wise economy” is used by Della Rucker, principal of the Wise Economy Workshop, to describe “. . . an economy that makes the right decisions not just for today, but for the future” (Rucker’s blog post, 11/16/09). Here is a snippet of her wise words about what makes a wise economy:

Looks constantly for new opportunities — and particularly seeks the unexpected ones.

Embraces its differentiators and values its assets, understanding that differentiation leads to value and away from the chase to the bottom, and that liabilities turn into assets depending on how you look at them.

Begins with the end firmly in mind, and sticks to a shared plan of action.

Understands that the life of a community is a marathon, not a sprint (but celebrates winning the stages as well).

So, how does historic preservation, open space planning, and affordable housing planning fit into creating a wise economy? Both historic and open space resources are clearly the very type of differentiators that Rucker speaks of – your community’s assets are the things that make your community unique. Recognizing these assets and preserving them are steps one and two. Figuring out how to utilize that uniqueness is the next step – what is your plan of action and how does it enhance local economy?

Providing affordable housing in your community is economic development in a different way than historic preservation and open space planning. Much has been written about the direct link between the availability of affordable workforce housing and the growth of the local economy. The Massachusetts Foundation for Growth blog has much written on this subject: more housing creates opportunity for more job growth. In the Summer 2011 issue of the Planning Commissioners Journal, Rebecca Cohen and Keith Wardrip detail the non-social benefits of affordable housing in the article “The Economic and Fiscal Benefits of Affordable Housing.” Cohen and Wardrip state that ”From an employer’s perspective, a lack of affordable housing can put a local economy at a competitive disadvantage.” So, in addition to looking at the need for more affordable housing from the perspective of social need, we should also be looking from the perspective of economic need. If we did this, analysis of housing need in our housing production plans, for example, would change and the way we advocate for housing in our communities would also change.

And then there is the idea of creative placemaking as a framework for economic development. . . but maybe I’ll get to that in a future post.

The lost art of democratic debate

If you haven’t watched Michael Sandel’s series on Justice, I suggest you check out “The Lost Art of Democratic Debate.” Professor Sandel, Harvard University, uses examples with flutes, golf, and same sex marriage to present his compelling thesis:

A better way to mutual respect is to engage directly with the moral convictions citizens bring to public life rather than to require that people leave their deepest moral convictions outside politics before they enter. That is the way to begin to restore the art of democratic argument.”

In community forums (just as at family cookouts!) it is common to steer clear of the heart of a contentious matter – whether discussing protection of open space, creation of publicly-subsidized affordable housing, or whether or not to serve a vegetarian option. This is where community planners can help.

Planners, as facilitators of public discussion and debate, are in a critical position to help citizens communicate the essence of their convictions – to steer the discussion directly into the heart of the matter. In fact, I would argue that we aren’t doing our job if we avoid this.

To use Professor Sandel’s words – ask what is the essential purpose of the social institution and what qualities are worthy of honor and recognition. He gives us much to reflect on in order to become more effective instruments for facilitating meaningful community dialogue that results in just public decisions.

An Open Space Theme

In the past few days three writings have converged in my mind on the theme of open space and its importance in our well-being, our history, and enlivening urban spaces.

In Richard Louv’s 2005 book “Last Child in the Woods” he argues for the importance of regularly experiencing nature in childhood (and beyond) and coined the term “nature-deficit disorder”. He writes:

A widening circle of researchers believes that the loss of natural habitat, or the disconnection from nature even when it is available, has enormous implications for human health and child development. They say the quality of exposure to nature affects our health at an almost cellular level. (page 43, 2008 edition)

The Planning Magazine July 2011 article “An Urban Treasure Hunt” by Tony Hiss includes his description of visiting New York City’s oldest tree – a 450-year old tulip poplar tree – located in what sounds like an urban wild along the Long Island Expressway. As Hiss describes, a NYC Parks Department plaque describes the tree as “The Alley Pond Giant” – “perhaps the last witness to the entire span of the City’s history.” Hiss also observes that the tree does not just have a link to the past but also a link the future:

The tree also has, just as forcefully, a sense of continuation and steady purpose.

If we don’t get in its way, the unparalleled arc of the giant poplar’s endurance will probably soar through another century or more. . . Alley Pond Park is home to a kind of two-way time beacon, one that shows us where we’ve come from and at the same time reminds us that we have a companion that can see us through the many uncertainties of the decades ahead.

A July 5th post on The Dirt, “Landscape Architects Take the Lead in Remaking Cities” describes the importance of the landscape architect’s perspective to projects reclaiming abandoned urban spaces with a very interesting example of an old Steel Yard in Providence, RI (which also has historic significance – it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places). The post supports an argument put forth by Robert Campbell, architecture critic for The Boston Globe, and others that landscape architects – perhaps more-so than architects and planners -can transform forgotten places into new outdoor public landscapes.

JM Goldson community preservation + planning blog

Pages

Categories

Archives