The Mayor is fond of saying, "This is not the Mont Belvieu of ten years ago. Things are different now."
He generally says this in reference to when something tries to come across our desks here at City Hall that maybe would have been winked at before but are now prohibited or strictly regulated. Metal buildings along Eagle Drive, for example. We have new standards in place that strictly regulate the architecture and uses of buildings on Eagle Drive. If you are unfamiliar with the changes I invite you to email me for a copy of the new zoning ordinance or come by and we can talk about it. Most of you are not as interested in the actual ordinance itself (that's more for developers) but all of us have a stake in the result.
I am not ignorant of the great things Mont Belvieu has been able to accomplish - everything from great education systems to the development of the industrial complex on the Hill. But with growth comes pressure to develop in ways that are both difficult and unforeseen. Careful planning and regulation can help aleviate some of the pressure and channel it into appropriate avenues.
In my line of work, there is much of a partnership that develops between land developers, real estate folks, and the City that is requisite to the smooth operation of the City's functions. As these relationships are developed, trust is formed and ideas are formulated. I am able to inform the developers about what is required by the City and developers work within established guidelines to ensure that the City's needs and goals are being met. It's a careful dance, one in which attention must be paid to the details of what is going on in order to ensure compliance and not stifle creativity.
Perhaps the reason more of you don't come to City Council meetings is that you trust us all so much that you are willing to allow us to handle it. If things were going poorly, I am sure we'd hear from you all. On the other hand, Even if things are going well, we need to hear from you occasionally so we know how to improve. It is foolish to assume that we have all the answers, in spite of our education, training, and professional experience. No one of us is as smart as all of us.
Another reason is that perhaps you all think this stuff is boring. I can understand that. If it were not so, there would be no need for me to get paid to be here and handle all of this stuff. Personally, I don't think it's boring - but then, I have always been a little bit boring myself... :-)
I would love to hear from you all. Keep the comments/interest coming! It's what gets me out of bed in the morning and motivates me to keep writing here.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The shape of things to come...
I think it could go without saying that planners are concerned with the future of our communities. Whether a planner is a land developer, transportation planner, environmental land planner, regional MPO planner, or local government planner (like me!), we are concerned about the physical environment (roads, buildings, etc). We have an interest in smaller scale things (the number of bricks on a given building's facade) and on larger scale things (how the construction of the Three Rivers Gorge Dam in China affects the ability of our City to obtain concrete and steel to build our water tower - a thought I have actually perused).
In this month's copy of Planning, the professional journal for planners, there is an article about urban design. It is an excerpt from a book written by Emily Talen, a professor at Arizona State University. She writes that there are many things that a planner must be concerned about, but what makes a "planner" unique in the process is our ability to reach out to people and build relationships that are inclusive and diverse.
A community is not the buildings, roads, parks, etc, that make up the physical environment. I have written about how the built environment affects our psyche - we are affected by buildings we have only ever driven past, which weigh in our consciousness like clouds in the sky. But our communities, as I say, are NOT these things. Or rather, they are not composed solely of these things. A community is inherently more complex than the built environment - or even the affect of the built environment.
In the largest, most inclusive sense, a community is like a large web of interactions. Yes, the built environment plays an important role in all of this. But that's only a small portion of the web. What about the natural environment? The social environment? What about the transportation network? Commercial, retail, and industrial areas? Employment opportunities? Schools? Religion? And yes, even though the discussion of it may be taboo, what about interracial interactions? Do we afford people the opportunity to interact with one another on a meaningful basis? Do we provide appropriate spaces AND the impetus for gathering and social interaction?
Ms. Talen explains that there are five basic principles that urban design should rest on:
1. Sustainability. How are we ensuring that our design will be able to remain? Is there an appropriate mix of people, spaces, uses, ideas?
2. Incrementalism. This means that the city is built up slowly, over generations. The long term view is required for a good community to develop. Slow, methodical, and visionary approaches to planning and community development are what is most needed. Anything else looses the feel so desired and required by successful communities.
3. Social context. Careful attention should be taken to ensure that economic concerns do not override the need for people to have meaningful interactions in public spaces.
4. Policy and program. Having a clear vision informs the regulations required to get to the fruition of that vision.
5. Layers. Any successful design centers around viable options and alternatives. This becomes especially important as we plan for the very long term (10-20 years or more). These alternatives can become enmeshed into the fabric of the community, making something that is inherently stronger and more resilient than a top-down approach.
This was an interesting article. I think that planners and community leaders can often neglect things like social context and environmental justice. People, after all, make up our community. It's the people who live here that I serve and must consider as I work.
In this month's copy of Planning, the professional journal for planners, there is an article about urban design. It is an excerpt from a book written by Emily Talen, a professor at Arizona State University. She writes that there are many things that a planner must be concerned about, but what makes a "planner" unique in the process is our ability to reach out to people and build relationships that are inclusive and diverse.
A community is not the buildings, roads, parks, etc, that make up the physical environment. I have written about how the built environment affects our psyche - we are affected by buildings we have only ever driven past, which weigh in our consciousness like clouds in the sky. But our communities, as I say, are NOT these things. Or rather, they are not composed solely of these things. A community is inherently more complex than the built environment - or even the affect of the built environment.
In the largest, most inclusive sense, a community is like a large web of interactions. Yes, the built environment plays an important role in all of this. But that's only a small portion of the web. What about the natural environment? The social environment? What about the transportation network? Commercial, retail, and industrial areas? Employment opportunities? Schools? Religion? And yes, even though the discussion of it may be taboo, what about interracial interactions? Do we afford people the opportunity to interact with one another on a meaningful basis? Do we provide appropriate spaces AND the impetus for gathering and social interaction?
Ms. Talen explains that there are five basic principles that urban design should rest on:
1. Sustainability. How are we ensuring that our design will be able to remain? Is there an appropriate mix of people, spaces, uses, ideas?
2. Incrementalism. This means that the city is built up slowly, over generations. The long term view is required for a good community to develop. Slow, methodical, and visionary approaches to planning and community development are what is most needed. Anything else looses the feel so desired and required by successful communities.
3. Social context. Careful attention should be taken to ensure that economic concerns do not override the need for people to have meaningful interactions in public spaces.
4. Policy and program. Having a clear vision informs the regulations required to get to the fruition of that vision.
5. Layers. Any successful design centers around viable options and alternatives. This becomes especially important as we plan for the very long term (10-20 years or more). These alternatives can become enmeshed into the fabric of the community, making something that is inherently stronger and more resilient than a top-down approach.
This was an interesting article. I think that planners and community leaders can often neglect things like social context and environmental justice. People, after all, make up our community. It's the people who live here that I serve and must consider as I work.
Subscribe to:
Comments
(
Atom
)
