Annual Conference Draws Nearly 200 Planners
By Stacey S. Rothfuss, AICP
Rosslyn, Virginia was the setting for this year’s Annual VAPA conference in March. Once again, the conference offered mobile workshops, interactive forums and a variety of workshops. It drew approximately 170 participants and 80 presenters from all across the state, and even a few from our neighboring states to the north and south.
Jay Fisette, Chairman of the Arlington County Board of Supervisors, kicked things off with a warm welcome and opening remarks, and encouraged conference participants to get out on foot to have a look around Arlington County. He began his brief remarks by indicating that he and his colleagues on the Board of Supervisors have realized how fundamentally important Planning is, and were honored that Rosslyn was selected as the latest venue for the state Planning conference. He offered a few comments on Smart Growth, most notably the idea that “Smart Growth” does not necessarily mean “No Growth,” and asked all planners to consider a few thoughts during our daily practice:
Learn from mistakes. Learn to protect the natural environment and create a sense of place.
Plan. If you plan, you understand the fundamental value of development.
Work with transportation planners, not in isolation. The connection between land use and transportation and land use is fundamental.
Educate elected officials. Work with advocates in your respective communities.
Jay has been a resident of Arlington County since 1983. He was elected to the Board in November, 1997 and assumed the responsibilities of Chairman in January, 2001.
"Seize the day for smart growth!” That was the theme of the conference keynote address, delivered by Angela Harper, FAICP. Opportunity knocked on Saturday, March 24, 2001 when Angela was asked to fill in as the keynote speaker at the last minute. A seasoned participant on both the state and national Planning scene, it’s no wonder Angela gladly accepted the task and was able to prepare an impassioned speech.
Gleaning from her over 20 years of professional Planning experience, Angela imparted to the participants that we are at a time in history when Planning is finally being talked about and acknowledged by others besides ourselves. Smart Growth, in particular, is now being embraced by such diverse groups as the home builders, realtors, environmentalists, and the American Farmland Trust, just to name a few, and they are publishing documents that discuss from their own perspectives the implications of such practices on development. Earlier this year, the APA conference in New Orleans held several workshops centering on Smart Growth. The Arlington County Board of Supervisors is educating itself on Smart Growth principles and recognizing the great importance that Planning plays in shaping our communities.
Angela encouraged planners to “seize the day to educate and promote Planning and Smart Growth. Don’t plan on an island.” She concluded her speech by leaving the very important vision of reaching out to others to help make our communities better. Imagine sitting around a table are: a Sierra Club member, an elected official, a planner, a realtor, an environmentalist, and a student. Imagine one ball of yarn being passed between the people in the group to solicit information in order to reach consensus on the future design and functionality of a community. Once all the information has been gathered you will have created a beautiful spider’s web symbolic of the importance that many diverse groups, many that you may not often believe can shape the dynamic of a community, can truly complement the work of planners.
Angela is also featured in this issue of Pioneers in Virginia Planning.
(Top of Page)
Conference Forum Focuses on New Approaches to Curbing Sprawl
By John Dahlgren, Newsbrief Staff
Rob Puentes, of The Brookings Institute, Stewart Schwartz, of The Coalition for Smarter Growth, Maggie Stehman, of Fairfax County Planning and Zoning, and Larkin Dudley and Diane Zahm both from Virginia Tech, lead one of the Interactive Forums on Sprawl.
Puentes discussed Growth at the Ballot Box: Electing the Shape of Communities in November 2000, a discussion paper he co-authored for the Brookings Institute. In the paper he detailed the numerous growth measures that were on the ballot box in all 50 states. There were 553 growth-related state and local ballot measures. Of these 553 measures, 399 were passed, although a passing vote does not necessarily mean citizens supported “smart growth” ideas and policies. The most popular measures were ones that were designed to preserve open space or build and maintain parks and recreation facilities—nearly 80% of these measures passed. Of the measures that dealt specifically with managed growth, 73% were in suburban localities. Conversely, the measures that dealt with economic development were concentrated in the central cities. The underlying theme was that citizens are moving to the ballot box to try and manage growth issues although not all agree on how growth issues can or should be managed. Schwartz talked about his organization and how that organization defines “smart growth”. Among those ideas he talked about are: mixed land uses, walkable, close-knit neighborhoods, farmland preservation, transit options, and micro-design of architectural details. He, and his organization, favor the “new urbanist” approach to planning. Dudley and Zahm gave a demonstration of the Kettering Model for citizen participation with sprawl as the topic. They used the book A Nice Place to Live; Creating Communities; Fighting Sprawl put out as part of the National Issues Forum (NIF) by the group Public Agenda. NIF issue books use research on the public's concerns to identify three or four options or approaches to an issue (there are never just two polar alternatives). Presenting issues in this way invites citizens to confront the conflicts among different options and avoids the usual debates in which people lash out with simplistic arguments. The three options in this book include:
-
Fulfill the Suburban American Dream. This choice is set in the suburbs and shows the suburbs as disappearing due to sprawl. This choice says we must stop using public money to promote sprawl and use those funds to strengthen and improve the existing suburbs.
-
Strengthen Cities, Stop Sprawl at its Source. This choice says we should stop out-migration from cities by improving city services and making cities safer and more comfortable for the residents.
-
Free Americans to Choose Lifestyles. This choice says that we should roll-back overly stringent regulations and give Americans the right to build and live where ever they want.
Forum participants then discussed the options, commenting on the positive and negative aspects of the choices. Both the book and the forum were very effective in opening up dialogue between disparate groups, giving planners one more tool to use in opening up effective communication with the general public and getting a sense of what the community wants.
(Top of Page)
Criteria Developed for Chapter’s Take on Positions Regarding Proposed Legislation
By David Kovacs, AICP, Director of Legislation and Policy
As reported in the last issue of Newsbrief, the VAPA Executive and Legislative Committees met in January to establish positions on several pieces of legislation that were before the 2001 General Assembly. As part of the meeting, the group identified some standards and criteria that should be considered in order to establish a Chapter position on any proposed State legislation related to planning. Those guidelines were reviewed at a worksession during the VAPA Conference and some changes were recommended. The Board is now considering this matter and will have a policy statement before them at their annual meeting in June. As Chapter members, you are asked to review these policies and provide your comments to [email protected] or give me a call at (804) 786-1518:
-
Any new enabling legislation should be made available to all localities and not be restricted or defined by size, geographic location, or rate of growth.
-
All enabling legislation should be permissive and not mandatory.
-
If legislation is proposed to be mandatory, then assurance must be provided so that it does not fall into a “one size fits all” situation.
-
Any new enabling legislation that allows for the use of tools such as impact fees and adequate public facilities programs shall require, as prerequisite to enactment of a local ordinance, the gathering and analysis of appropriate data, the creation of local goals, objectives and policies, and the description of an implementing strategy. In addition, these policies should form the basis for an amendment to a locality’s comprehensive plan.
-
The local enacting ordinance and program must be consistent with a locality’s comprehensive plan.
-
Enabling legislation that allows the use of tools, such as an impact fee, should allow them to be applied at the time of actual impact, i.e. prior to the issuance of building permits, with the local prerogative to limit their imposition to earlier stages of project review and approval such as at the time of plan of development review, subdivision, or zoning.
-
Proposed legislation shall be examined for unintended impacts or implications (e.g. establishing a standard that might be less stringent than one already being practiced by localities).
(Top of Page)
PIONEERS IN VIRGINIA PLANNING
Feature: Angela N. Harper, FAICP
By Jeryl Rose Phillips
Virginia planners were proud to have three of their own inducted into the inaugural class of AICP Fellows at the National Planning Conference in Seattle in April 2000. One of those was Angela N. Harper, a long-time participant and leader on both the state and national planning association scene. Many consider her to be a “cheerleader” for the planning profession, exhibiting inexhaustible energy and unwaivering enthusiasm, and receiving deserved recognition for her many years of hard work and volunteerism.
Angela received a B.A. in 1968 from Memphis State University with a major in Political Science and a minor in Sociology and Speech. After working for the Nashville/Davidson County Planning Department in 1968, Angela decided to attend the University of Virginia to obtain a Masters of Planning and Urban Design. She did her summer internship at the Central Virginia Planning District Commission in Lynchburg in the summer of 1970. Thereafter, she began her professional planning career as a Planner II for Henrico County in 1971 and has enjoyed a remarkable 30-year stay there ever since, climbing through the ranks of Principal Planner and Assistant Planning Director to become Director of Planning in 1990. Today, she is the Deputy County Manager for Special Services, a position for which she was selected by the County Manager in 1997. She considers retired Henrico County Manager and former Planning Director, William “Bill” LaVecchia, who hired her originally, to be her mentor (see March/April 2001 Newsbrief feature, “Pioneers in Virginia Planning”).
After 29 years with Henrico County, her personal efforts as a Planner in four increasingly responsible positions and three years as a Deputy Manager are evident by the quality of life, managed growth, decreasing tax rate, and triple AAA bond rating that the County has. She was responsible for the County’s very first Major Thoroughfare Plan and the Strategic Plan.
Angela has given many years of involvement to VAPA. She was elected Chapter President in 1984-1986. During her term of office, she established strong student involvement in the Chapter at the state’s three accredited planning schools. She also initiated “Planning in Virginia” magazine to communicate with General Assembly, key corporate officials, members, students and the public, and supported the creation of the Planning Commissioner’s Institute through the Virginia Tech Extension Service, which is still going strong today thanks to the hard work of Michael Chandler. Angela also served as Chapter Secretary and was on various Chapter Committees. She has also been a member of the Virginia Citizen’s Planning Association (VCPA) since 1972, and has been an instructor for the Certified Planning Commissioners Program since 1988.
While she has focused her work experience in one location, Angela has accomplished numerous major changes in the American Planning Association and American Institute of Certified Planners through her exceptional abilities to chair committees, motivate members to accomplish assigned tasks in less time than expected, detail workable recommendations, and successfully promote the changes necessary. Angela became a member of AICP in 1980 and served on its Ethics Committee from 1989 to 1992. Other AICP involvement has included working with the Student Awards Committee, Chairman of the AICP 20/20 Visioning Task Force, and the Membership Committee, whereon she suggested the use of the Honorary AICP designation for non-planners, which was subsequently awarded to “planning greats” Jane Jacobs and Ian McHarg at the 1999 National Conference. Most recently, Angela was the AICP Candidate for President Elect for the 2000 election.
On the national level, Angela has also been involved on many fronts over the years. In 1990, she was elected to the 13-member APA Board of Directors as an At-Large Board Member, where she served until 1994. While on the Board, she served as Chairman of the Ethical Awareness Committee, worked with the Performance Committee focusing on student relations and Student Planning Organizations, served on the Agenda for America’s Communities Committee, and was the National Planning Awards Committee Chairman. Prior to this as Chapter President, she served on the Chapter President’s Council (CPC) Executive Committee from 1985-1989, where she was appointed Chairman of the Task Force on Service Delivery to Chapters and Liaison to the AICP Commission. In the past four years, she has added service to the National Association of Counties (NACO) serving on the Sustainability Leadership Team and now serving as the Chairman of the Smart Growth Subcommittee.
Recognizing her commitment to Planning education, Angela has been asked to sit on the APA Planning Accreditation Board for several universities as a Site Visitor, including University of District of Columbia, University of Texas-Arlington, Morgan State University-Baltimore, University of New Mexico-Albuquerque and University of Rhode Island. This commitment has also resulted in her presenting numerous ethics workshops nationwide, teaching an APA Planning Commissioner audio course and the Virginia certification course, and presenting AICP audio exam preparation training. Angela has also authored several publications and articles. Most recently, she wrote Chapter 15, “Tooling Up for Effective Planning” for Planners on Planning.
Deservedly, Angela has been the recipient of numerous awards, including several Awards of Excellence from NACO for “The Strategic Plan for Henrico County,” “Highland Springs Revitalization Planning Process,” and “Policies and Procedures Manual.” The Henrico County Manager recognized her with an “Extraordinary Performance Bonus” in for her work as the Coordinator for the “2000 Major Thoroughfare Plan” and for the “Strategic Plan.” She was also nominated by the County Manager for “Leadership Metro Richmond” and was selected to participate in its ten-month training program for community leaders in 1988. Her recent selection as the Local Official of the Year by the National Association of Home Builders is also recognition of some of her work.
In her “spare time” and prior to moving to Fredericksburg with her husband in 2000, Angela was involved in many community activities in the Richmond area. She was a Girl Scout and a Brownie Leader. She served on the Parent Awareness Committee for The Collegiate Schools, and on Godwin High School’s PTA Hospitality Committee and Cheerleader Moms. She also serves on the long range planning committee for her church, and has served on the Board of Directors for the Henrico Federal Credit Union.
Author’s Note: I first met Angela in 1990 while serving on the Chapter Board as the Student Representative and she was the Past President. She was quick to embrace me as a Planning student from her alma mater, and her enthusiasm for my chosen profession was contagious and unforgettable. We have maintained a relationship ever since, and it is an honor to work with her as a colleague here in Virginia. She is a true role model for women in our profession and for professional women, in general.
(Top of Page)
Citizen Member Education, A Must!
By Ron Swart
This article was reprinted with permission from the Indiana Planning Association newsletter, “Scanning Planning.”
Most citizen members of Planning Commissions are intelligent citizens who are outstanding in the community. However, it’s a shame that more instruction isn’t given to them when they’re appointed. When I was a new member of the County Planning Commission, I was introduced to the zoning laws only by my persistence of asking questions, and taking it upon myself to read the zoning ordinance and ask questions when something was unclear. When a new citizen member is appointed to the Planning Commission or the Board of Zoning Appeals, staff should take it upon themselves to help make that member become a valuable asset. Several hours, and days, are spent writing zoning codes, and reviewing plats and specifications, yet all are worthless if your members are unfamiliar with the codes. As a citizen member, nothing more would have been welcome than to have an orientation class reviewing my new responsibilities by the staff. As it was, I found a caring staff member who put up with my phone calls and questions. Although it wasn’t considered part of her job, it should be part of someone’s. New citizen members are just that – “citizens.” We are not educated in codes, setbacks, sidewalk requirements, parking requirements or zoning uses. Doesn’t it make as much sense to educate the citizen member as it does to having a zoning code in the first place?
Editor’s Note: The Virginia Tech Extension Service runs the Certified Planning Commissioner’s Program for citizen planners in Virginia and most localities send their new citizen board members to this program for orientation. Check the Newsbrief calendar for the next session. The Extension Service also provides other educational opportunities for planning commissioners and other board members upon request. Contact Mike Chandler at 540-231-9406 for more info.
(Top of Page)
Making Goals A Reality
By Tisha Weichmann, VAPA Central Director
In the early Fall of 1997, I first met Martha Droge on an inner tube trip along the Rivanna River near Charlottesville, Virginia. The low water level moved the tubes at a leisurely pace which allowed the UVA graduate planning students to get better acquainted. Martha and I, both in our mid-thirties, considered ourselves to be among the elders of this particular group that day. We quickly learned from each other that we had a lot in common, including long term professional careers. Our paths to the University of Virginia began with our desire to obtain Master’s degrees in Planning. Later, we both decided a Certificate in Historic Preservation could be achieved as well. Before making the big decision to return to school, Martha was with the State Department stationed in Rome, living in a spacious stately penthouse on some famous square and her work took her around the world. She made a life changing decision to leave her job, return stateside and begin training for a new career in Planning. For those who know Martha, once she sets a goal for herself, she quickly develops a plan to make it happen and that is where acquiring a Masters in Planning at UVA came into play.
We discussed our plans as to what we wanted to accomplish in returning to school and how we proposed to finance this academic adventure. Going full tilt into the program, we took heavy course loads while working part-time. Martha decided to apply for a Masters in Landscape Architecture, in addition to her Master’s in Planning and Certificate in Historic Preservation, which would require an additional two years of study. Admittance to the Landscape Architecture program was only the beginning of a long road ahead for someone who came into the program with loads of talent but limited field experience. As I began my Ph.D. coursework in Richmond at VCU even before graduation ceremonies for my Masters in Planning and Historic Preservation Certificate at UVA, Martha and I were still racing the same two year time clock that we had set for ourselves. During this time, Martha has spent a semester abroad and has demonstrated beyond a doubt the versatility and cross-interdisciplinary skills and training promoted by the programs at the University of Virginia’s School of Architecture. Her hard work and dedication to this commitment has been recognized by all three programs, including her recent “outstanding student” nomination and award at the VAPA Conference. According to A. Bruce Dotson, chair of the Department of Urban and Environmental Planning at UVA, “ Martha is the type of student who could easily be mistaken for faculty. In fact, she has taught a course, Basic Graphics, designed to enhance the graphics communication skills of planners who tend to be strong in policy but not necessarily strong in design. She has been a student leader who has contributed not only her ideas but also her enthusiasm for service.” She plans to begin her new career in the Washington D.C. area. Way to go Martha for making your goals a reality– well done!
(Top of Page)
VAPA Awards Presented At Annual Conference
Professional Planning Project Category
The Distinguished Award went to EDAW for “Memorials and Museums Master Plan.” This Plan builds upon historic plans for the National Capital area by introducing new elements that strengthen Washington DC’s symbolic and monumental character. Responding creatively to the projected overbuilding of the National Mall and the critical need for new commemorative areas, the Plan preserves much of the historic open space within the monumental core and identifies desirable and appropriate sites elsewhere in the city and surrounding areas. The Plan also recommends specific implementation measures to greatly improve the placement, approval, and construction of future commemorative works in the Washington metropolitan area.
Currently in the public review stage, the Plan is a significant undertaking, as indicated by the wide-ranging and overwhelmingly positive comments received on the Draft Plan. The Plan is the product of federal agencies, a team of consultants, panels of nationally recognized urban planners and designers, and numerous civic groups. It has a pedigree that dates back 200 years to the original plans for the city. As such, it serves as a manual and “blueprint” for memorial development in the nation’s capital and surrounding areas throughout the next century.
For more information about this award please contact: EDAW, Inc., Alan Harwood, 601 Prince Street, Alexandria, VA 22314, (703) 836-1414.
The Meritorious Award went to Albemarle County’s “Neighborhood Model.” In 1996, as part of the County’s update of its Land Use Plan, citizen groups in Albemarle County brought their concerns about sprawl to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Members of the development community were pressing the Board to expand the boundaries of the County’s designated Development Areas to provide additional area for growth. Residents and interest groups alike wanted to arrest sprawl and find ways to improve the quality of life in the Development Areas. The County Board appointed a 23-member steering committee to conduct the “infill” study. The steering committee helped to select a consultant, Torti-Gallas/CHK to help develop the plan. Torti-Gallas/CHK was an urban design firm that worked largely with private land developers on New Urbanist style projects.
When adopted, the Model will provide direction for new land development. It will show how master planning will help lay out a context for the new development. It will provide a “recipe book” of design solutions to some of the County’s challenges for more urban development such as “how to build on steep slopes” and “what should a streetscape look like in a residential area vs. a commercial area”. It makes specific recommendations for integrating affordable housing into neighborhoods. It will be the basis for ordinance revisions. And it will be the basis for broad policy changes, especially as they relate to parks and recreation, schools, and VDOT.
For more information about this award please contact: Albemarle County Department of Planning & Community Development, Elaine K. Echols, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902, (804) 296-5823 ext 3252.
The Honorable Mention Award went to “Star Fort: Management and Interpretation Plan,” a comprehensive strategy for rehabilitating a Civil War-era fortification in Frederick County, Virginia. The Frederick County Department of Planning directed OCULUS to prepare the plan in July of 1999. Approximately one year later the plan was complete and ready to be used to educate interested groups and individuals about the potential of the fortification to become an interpretive historical site within a proposed coordinated network of Civil War sites located throughout Frederick County and the Shenandoah Valley. The plan is a thorough and innovative approach for future planning, preservation, and management of the Star Fort site.
The Frederick County Board of Supervisors adopted the “Star Fort: Management and Interpretation Plan” on November 8, 2000. The plan was adopted as part of the “Civil War Battlefield Network Plan,” which was adopted by Frederick County on July 9, 1996. The “Civil War Battlefield Network Plan” is the most aggressive and comprehensive historical preservation strategy in the Shenandoah Valley. “Star Fort: Management and Interpretation Plan” is an integral component of this plan. It represents the collective efforts of government officials, citizens, and interested individuals to follow through with a previously developed plan. Furthermore, the plan is an excellent example of a rehabilitation strategy for an individual site, and could be used as an example for other counties to follow in the region.
For more information about this award please contact: Mr. Evan A. Wyatt, Frederick County Planning Department, 107 North Kent Street, Winchester, VA 22601, (540) 665-5651.
Citizen Planning Project Category
The Distinguished Award went to “Imagine Rockbridge Visioning Project.” This project was inspired by a community visioning workshop initiated by the Rockbridge County Director of Planning and sponsored by the Rockbridge Area Conservation Council, area Chambers of Commerce, the County, the Cities of Lexington and Buena Vista, the Alliance for Community Education, and the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program. Subsequently, a citizens group formed a steering committee to plan a visioning project. Its mission was to develop a vision of what citizens want the community to be like in the future and to develop strategies to implement that vision.
Thirty-four community meetings were held across the area to obtain citizen input into the visioning process. Citizens were asked to identify strengths and weaknesses of the area, features they would like to protect and what they would like the area to be like in the year 2020, with 3,400 citizen comments obtained. Comments from the brainstorming sessions were organized into eleven categories and displayed at the vision fair. Citizens attending the fair chose comments to be included in the project and "sacred places" they would like to see preserved. Vision fair votes were tallied and divided into nine issue groups: Health, Elder & Child Care; Land Use; Business & Economy; Education; People & the Community; Government & Services; History; Recreation; Environment & Quality of Life. These groups analyzed the data and developed vision statements and action plans to achieve the visions.
For more information about this project please contact: Ms. Patricia Tichenor, 1997 Timber Ridge Road, Buna Vista, VA 24416, (540) 261-9528.
Journalism Category
The Distinguished Award went to The Richmond Times-Dispatch for a new series during the last year focusing on the subject of sprawl. Entitled “Grappling with Growth,” the series has thus far produced almost 50 articles, including major pieces on such subjects as:
-
the nature of sprawl;
-
rates of development in Virginia;
-
the value of planning tools;
-
the impacts of sprawl on our environment;
-
sprawl and the Chesapeake Bay;
-
the relationship between transportation improvements and sprawl;
-
the costs of sprawl; and,
-
Smart Growth.
This series has stimulated interest and debate on this important planning concern, and has done much to educate the public on the issues related to it. Because of these facts, “Grappling with Growth” is deserving of VAPA 2001 Journalism Award.
For more information about this project please contact: Rex Springston, Richmond Times Dispatch, 300 E. Franklin Street, Richmond, VA 23219, (804) 649-6453
Student Planning Project Category
The Distinguished Award went to Jennifer Esway Smith of Virginia Commonwealth University for “The Environmental Element of the Town of Port Royal Comprehensive Plan.” This was developed to meet the requirements of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act. Port Royal is a small town on the Rappahannock River that time and a bridge has passed by. This document was completed as a Studio II or capstone project by Jennifer as part of her Master of Urban and Regional Planning degree from Virginia Commonwealth University. This environmental element covers the following topics:
-
existing land use and development trends;
-
environment, natural resources, and physical constraints to development;
-
potential and existing sources of pollution;
-
stormwater management;
-
potable water supply;
-
shoreline erosion;
-
public and private access to waterfront areas; and,
-
opportunities for redevelopment and infill development.
For more information about this project please contact: Jennifer Esway Smith, VCU – Department of Urban Studies & Planning, 812 W. Franklin Street, Richmond, VA 23284-2489, (804) 828-2489.
The Meritorious Award went to Sarah Bowers, Robert Brown, Jennifer Craig and Hillary Zahm of the University of Virginia – Northern Virginia for “Extending Rail Through Tyson’s to Dulles and Beyond: A Consensus Building Approach.” State and local officials in northern Virginia, represented by the Dulles Corridor Task Force, have recently proposed an extension of the Washington, D.C. Metrorail system along the Dulles Corridor. It will also provide public transportation to Tyson’s Corner, Virginia, a key economic center for Northern Virginia. With little information about proposed station locations, affected business and residential property owners have expressed concerns over the project and would like to be included in the decision-making process. Many of those directly impacted by the proposal have suggested that a public forum should be created to include and involve them in the planning process. Our team recommends a consensus-building approach to encourage consensus building among the stakeholders and others affected by the rail extension, consisting of a series of structured public meetings that involve the major stakeholders or their representatives in a setting that allows for an easy and open exchange of ideas, suggestions, and information. The goal is to achieve consensus among the stakeholders and make recommendations toward bettering service to the public and improving operations. This proposal has not been reviewed or adopted by WAMATA or either of the counties involved in the project. However, we believe that if this approach were initiated, it would provide greater opportunities for public participation, while respecting and adhering to the project's time constraints.
For more information about this project please contact: Sarah Bowers, Robert Brown, Jennifer Craig, or Hillary Zahm, 7164 Game Lord Drive, Springfield, VA 22153, (703) 569-3296.
(Top of Page)
2000 Membership Survey Has Low Response Rate
By Newsbrief Staff
Membership Director, Robert Stout, has tallied the results of the Membership Survey, which was distributed to the VAPA membership last fall. Disappointingly, out of approximately 1,150 members, there were only 38 responses (3.3%), and out of those, not all questions were answered. The Board intended to use the survey to help guide various aspects of Chapter programming; however, the low response rate did not provide any clear indication of future direction. Nonetheless, the responses received are appreciated and interesting. The following is a summary of the survey results (Note – these results were shared with the Board during the winter and some program changes have already occurred):
EXISTING SERVICES
Conferences. Most strongly or somewhat agree that the annual VAPA conference is within their budget and strongly agree that it is worthwhile. Most somewhat agree that there are enough sessions to keep the conference interesting and they attend because of the opportunities to participate in sessions related to their primary work area, to socialize with other planners, and to network and discuss planning issues with others.
Topics Wanted at Future Conferences: Top responses included zoning issues, statewide topics, grants/aid/other funding sources, environmental issues, regional topics, national topics, landscape planning, education/training opportunities, economic development, historic preservation, current projects, downtown redevelopment, and transportation planning. Other responses included pedestrian environment, smart growth, development management topics, educational topics for elected officials, public sector and private sector, refresher courses, and improving effectiveness of planning departments and how departments use integrated Microsoft applications to assist their work.
Improvements to Future Conferences: Respondents stated they wanted reevaluation of the cost of the conference in order to make it more affordable to public sector planners who do not have workplace support, and to consider having a reduced rate for early registration, as well as the possibility of holding more than one conference per year in more attractive locations, with more frequency in Northern Virginia. Others want to see a wider selection of sessions in larger rooms, and to offer the same session at alternate times. Some want free socials with beer and munchies instead of a formal dinner. Those involved with academics would prefer that the date not conflict with the end of the semester. Re-instituting joint conferences with the Capital Area, Maryland and North Carolina Chapters was also suggested.
Newsbrief. The majority of respondents somewhat agreed that Newsbrief contains timely and relevant planning issues; it contains timely information on Chapter events; and, it provides important information on professional issues. Most keep and refer to back issues and prefer that it continue to be issued on a bi-monthly basis. A majority of respondents indicated that they would prefer to receive the newsletter electronically, while most others preferred to receive hard copy. Suggestions for improving the publication included: surveys, statistics and summaries of Virginia-wide practices; adding a focus on legislative issues; providing a flyer listing upcoming events, jobs, etc. for months it is not published; case studies of community planning success stories; more visually appealing layout; more Section news and events; less subjective editorializing; articles on technology and GIS applications for planning; more on Virginia zoning cases; and, more articles in general.
Website. Almost all of the respondents had visited the Chapter’s website, with a mixed response on how frequently they actually use it. Most found the site to be comprehensive and useful, easy to navigate and user-friendly. The following recommendations were made for improvement: create an easy way to search for members and their disciplines; make links to various planning department websites; create the capability to download online documents; create better job listing for State planning positions by providing application tips and resources for applying for those positions; have planning discipline forums (e.g. transportation planning, environmental planning, etc.) and discussion groups; update it more frequently; provide more information about projects in different jurisdictions; and, control graphics to permit faster downloads.
Listserve. Responses were almost evenly split between those who have and have not used the Chapter listserve. Those that have find it to be a useful tool to get feedback from other professionals. Recommendations included: access should be available only to Chapter members; development of a reference system for past postings; use of digest feature to only receive one message per week; summaries should be prepared for various issues; and, chatting should be done off-line.
Section Events. A larger number of respondents stated that the Sections do not meet frequently enough and that they attend events because they are relevant and interesting, but several did not find the Section events to be relevant or interesting. Notification of upcoming events is desired by most. Recommendations for improvement included: Section leadership improvement for those Sections that are inactive; there should be elections to prevent one person from being Director for life (note-the Chapter Bylaws require elections); need notification of Section events, such as a mailing list; luncheon meetings are too crammed to cover topics and activities; there should be more evening meetings and events; distance is a big issue; boundary changes should be considered; meeting locations should be rotated to encourage participation; should get together to discuss local case studies; provide more focus on professional development and training; provide topics related to the private sector membership, including private sector presentations; more social activities such as holiday parties, etc.
FUTURE SERVICES
Chapter Mission Statement. Most somewhat agree that the statement still reflects the goals of the Chapter, that Chapter actions and direction coincide with the goals of the statement, and that the Chapter provides quality services to members, and that it provides education and training for sound planning practices. Areas where there was neither agreement or disagreement on service provision were expansion of relationships with other organizations impacting planning in Virginia and improvement of legislation and regulations under which planning operates in Virginia. Recommendations for improving the Chapter’s mission statement included: removing references to opportunities and challenges; address the top three problems that our Chapter will remedy; needs to be simplified; there are additional issues that VAPA could be involved in e.g. encouraging smart growth, transportation planning; historic preservation, etc.; the statement sounds impressive but yet we are still not recognized as professionals by other professionals, elected officials or the general public to help us achieve our mission; statement should be more progressive and advocate better planning throughout the Commonwealth as a state-wide activity; and, statement should include reference to sustainable planning.
Chapter Legislative Program. Most respondents were aware of the Chapter’s legislative and policy activity and somewhat agree that such activity is at an acceptable level. Most strongly agree that VAPA needs to be more visible in this regard and needs to provide the planning leadership for the Commonwealth. Most somewhat agree that it is time to hire a legislative and policy director. Recommendations for program changes include: need a different approach and need to strategize; need to be careful about lobbying status to make sure that we are representing the desires of the membership and not represent personal issues; we need to be assertive by providing information to the decision makers versus making the decisions; need to make every effort to organize in order to avoid the void of authority given to locality by the General Assembly; need more timely information on bills before the General Assembly; need to have a more active presence with the Growth Management Coalition and to provide expert assistance to that group; need to hire a legislative and policy director; and, need to discuss how a public employee can play a meaningful role in influencing public policy.
General Comments/Recommendations for the VAPA Board. Things to be proud of include: teaming up with Capital Area Chapter on some events; more presence in Northern Virginia with respect to growth issues; quality and improvement of conferences; improved newsletter; improved website; the listserve; and, involvement in and having a legislative position. Mistakes VAPA has made include: lack of communication with members; lack of continuing education policy; lack of correspondence with the public/elected officials; poor attendance at annual Legislative Meeting. Opportunities missed include: speaking out against sprawl in Virginia; not enough effort in lobbying the General Assembly; leadership on public policies; getting new members involved; exposure of planning profession in local and national media; and, participation in and impact on growth debate. Responses listed for why other professionals are not joining VAPA include: lack of services being provided; lack of benefits vs. costs; knowledge that people do not have to join APA to become Chapter members; lack of continuing education opportunities; lack of networking opportunities; lack support by employers to offset membership costs; not enough effort lobbying General Assembly; too active legislative – General Assembly should be ignored; lack of local/Section meetings. Additional services members would like include: improved communication links; more Section activities; more effort in lobbying the General Assembly; a full-time legislative director; on-line listing of current membership roster, contact info and work disciplines; more social events; more effort to involve state and federal planners; continuing education for planners that have been in profession for more than 10 years; more involvement with other professional organizations; and, a full-time VAPA staff person. The majority of respondents did state, however, that the Chapter is providing adequate services for the dues paid.
Recommendations from the membership are always welcomed and should be referred to Robert Stout, Membership Services Director, at 804-550-9211 or [email protected].
(Top of Page)
APA Names New Executive Director
Chicago, Ill. –– W. Paul Farmer, AICP, Executive Director of the Eugene, Oregon, Department of Planning and Development, has been named the new Executive Director of the American Planning Association (APA). Former APA Executive Director Frank So, FAICP, retired March 30, ending a 33-year career with the organization and its forerunner, the American Society of Planning Officials. "Paul has a strong background in both city planning and management," said APA President Bruce McClendon, FAICP. "His experience in the planning profession and leadership skills will serve APA well as our members help find solutions to the breadth of land-use issues facing the country, from using smart growth planning concepts for preventing urban sprawl and reducing traffic congestion to revitalizing downtowns and other areas in economic decline."
Before being hired to lead Eugene's Planning and Development Department in February 1999, Farmer was Director of the Minneapolis Department of City Planning from 1994 to 1998. During his tenure, he worked with the Minneapolis planning commission to rebuild the city's planning department and make innovative changes. Many of those changes became sources of presentations Farmer has made at various national conferences. Prior to working in Minneapolis, Farmer was Pittsburgh's deputy planning director from 1980 to 1994. During this time he worked on a broad spectrum of planning topics, including affordable housing, transportation issues, historic preservation, economic development, downtown revitalization, and zoning codes. He also has taught planning at several universities.
"I am not only greatly honored to be chosen as Frank So's successor," Farmer said, "but I also feel very lucky because I think this will be a very enjoyable job to have. I am excited about the opportunities APA and AICP have to grow and to help our members influence, guide, and shape America's communities at a time when public awareness about growth and development issues has never been higher," he said.
Farmer grew up in Shreveport, LA, during the 1950s. He was in high school when he met Arch Winter, now a Fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners, who had developed a master plan for metropolitan Shreveport. Winter encouraged Farmer to study architecture or engineering and then urban planning at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y. He did just that, earning a bachelor's degree in architecture from Rice University in 1967 and a master's degree in city and regional planning from Cornell in 1971.
Among his many honors and awards, Farmer received a Design Excellence Award from the National Endowment for the Arts in 1980 and a research award from Progressive Architecture in 1983. He also was a Hayden Fellow in Architecture and a Baker Distinguished Student Fellow at Rice University and a Richard King Mellon Fellow at Cornell. A long-time member of APA, Farmer has been involved in the organization and its predecessor groups, the American Society of Planning Officials and the American Institute of Planners, more than 30 years. In the late 1960s, he co-founded and served as the first president of the National Association of Student Planners. Since then, he has served on various committees and in several leadership roles, including president of the Wisconsin Chapter of APA from 1978-80 and chair of the APA Chapter Presidents' Council from 1979-81. He also served on the APA Board of Directors between 1979 and 1981, and in 2000 was named chair of the City Planning and Management Division.
(Top of Page)
|
Newsbrief