funding and constructing many public facilities, and
regulatory approaches that allow negotiated flexibili-
ty in meeting certain standards and requirements.
Nowadays, cities and towns are built by a union of
public and private efforts that demands a collabora-
tive approach to decision making.
Nevertheless (or perhaps, as a result), securing
public approvals of proposed policies and projects
is much more complicated than in the past, and
interrelationships between the public and private
sectors are increasingly challenging. Land use,
planning, and development issues have become
more complex. The parties
involved are not easily
identified and may stretch
across a wide spectrum
of community interests.
Public decisions on de-
velopment proposals now
often entail lengthy nego-
tiations, difficult choices
about community benefits
and costs, and delicate
weighing of off-setting effects.
Decisions these days are sel-
dom made by a close network
of community leaders acting
for the general public. Community officials and
residents no longer automatically view develop-
ment as beneficial, although individual property
rights continue to be jealously guarded. State
agencies and city councils often work at cross
purposes—states promoting private property
rights with city councils seeking greater regulation.
In addition, public regulations have become
more detailed, complex, and all-encompassing.
Guiding documents such as comprehensive plans
often are presented in hundreds of pages, and zon-
ing ordinances specify elaborate rules for features
such as landscaping, signs, parking, and communi-
cation towers in addition to permitted land uses.
Developers are frequently confronted with requests
for design changes and additional project features
that may add to development costs and require
detailed studies of potential effects on a project’s
marketability and its financial foundation.
Projects have grown in complexity as well, by
mixing a variety of uses, experimenting with new
site and building designs, revamping historic build-
ings, and finding ways to retain wetlands and other
environmental features within developed areas. As
market demands for the products of development
have expanded and diffused into dozens of niche
markets, developers have
innovated and expanded
the variety of building
forms and settings they
plan to construct.
Much of this flexibility
comes as a direct response
to the principles of smart
growth, a concept strongly
supported by professional
and special interest groups
but, not surprisingly, less
well known by the general
public. Smart growth prin-
ciples are much in the news
for those in the know, calling for more attention to
developing compact, mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly,
architecturally distinctive communities that offer
transportation choices and conserve open space—
a major challenge to past practices of community
development, but one that appears to take advantage
of changing demographic trends across the nation.
In theory, who could object to such enlightened
views of community building and growth? These
concepts are increasingly viewed by players on the
inside as beneficial goals for future development,
applicable in newly developing areas as well as
existing cities and towns. Advocacy groups have
sprung up across the nation and in many commu-
5
THE NEED FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
public pperception
of ddevelopers iis
decidedly mmore
unfavorable
than iin tthe ppast.
Today,
<< Chapter >> Home
| TOC