Buzz in the Air

While on vacation in the Canadian Rockies, and having a little time to actually catch up on things aside from lipstick and pigs and illegitimate Republicans, I came out of the cocoon of my summer and realized there is a lot going on around the world when it comes to land use. In Canada, I marveled at observing similar land use innovations to those that are happening south of the border on our side of things. For a portion of my trip, I was in Calgary, which isn't exactly a hotbed of excitement. However, seeing light rail trains criss-cross through the city warmed my heart. Strolling through a pedestrian mall in the middle of downtown, I could see the machinery of thought the city fathers and mothers undertook to keep this part of their metropolis vital. Not that the city requires any assistance. It seemed on nearly every corner new projects, both commercial and residential, were reaching towards the sky. A few burgeoning, hipster neighborhoods sprinkled at the downtown fringe also reminded me of home in Brooklyn. And as my wife and I made our trek out of town to the mountains, the suburban edges exposed age-old issues when it comes to addressing the growth needs of a community.

But it wasn't just my travels through Alberta that caught my attention. I actually had a bit of time to read and catch up. The Globe and Mail, a wonderful national newspaper in Canada, ran a story while I was up north about congestion pricing schemes being discussed in the urban areas of Canada. A periodical I picked up at the local health food store called The Earth Island Journal was exploring familiar, but interesting territory when it comes to congestion pricing, as well as the latest from Curitiba, Brazil, where the almost futuristic vision of the city's leaders brought the most comprehensive urban bus system, it seems in the world, to its citizenry in the mid-1960's. Even the Calgary Herald, in running a special edition on the paper's 125th anniversary, couldn't help but explore the issues involved with suburban sprawl on the city's edges, as well as the opportunities in rehabilitating the inner suburbs to support the region's massive growth. This expansion appears to be driven by the largesse dropped in the laps of oil companies, who seem to drive the area's economy.

Back in the States, I discovered a fabulous series that has been running in the Chicago Tribune on the inner workings of the land use process in the Second City. Sure, a lot of the focus is on muckraking, and finding the inherent conflicts, as well as outright graft, going on in the various nooks of the city. But such a window into a seemingly foreign world, when you don't practice there on a day-to-day basis, can be extremely illuminating. And in these highly political times, isn't it intriguing that the words green and Arnold Schwarzenegger can be used in the same sentence? In California, the Governator will most likely receive a bill working its way through the legislature that would bring state comprehensive planning to the land of sprawl. According to one account, the plan will integrate regional planning, transportation fund allocation and affordable housing needs into land use decision making. Whether Ah-nold will be signing the measure is unclear. Either way, it's a huge step that may become another step in the direction towards sound land use policy in a place where the land use culture has often devolved into pure wild west show.

The flurry of activity doesn't end there. As they say, wait -- there's more! On the foreclosure front, some municipalities such as Boston, Minneapolis and San Diego are getting into the flipping business. These regions are buying, with help from private investors, foreclosed homes, refurbishing them, and selling them off in an effort to hold onto communities devastated by the disaster that doesn't seem to want to go away anytime soon. In less grim news, and harkening back to my walks through Calgary, it seems streetcars are making a comeback. After the auto industry pushed the streetcar out of existence in the 1940's and 1950's, leading to tracks being ripped up in favor of smoother urban streets for cars, the pendulum has swung back. Places like Cincinnati are jumping on the bandwagon led by other locales like Denver, Houston, Salt Lake City and Charlotte. People see the results in such towns as Portland, Oregon, and realize that public transportation isn't necessarily a dirty word. Of course, the usual critics out there point to the fact that such plans are essentially publicly-funded subsidies for the downtown core. This analysis carefully dodges the speeding streetcar carrying the obvious retort -- that's the point. Streetcar systems are part of strategies from public policymakers seeking to reinvest in central cities, reversing the subsidies funneled to the urban fringe that produced the current land use, energy and environmental predicament we find ourselves.

How about the stories that seem to be on the edge of the land use radar, but certainly fall under the umbrella of trends to follow. Take for example in Los Angeles, where the City Council has decided to use typical land use mechanisms to respond to a clear issue affecting many poorer neighborhoods around the country. The proposed measure would impose a moratorium on all fast food restaurants in South Central Los Angeles, one of the less affluent areas within the metropolis. Of course, the restaurant lobby is up in arms, as well as observers who believe that the government is going too far to help regulate healthier lifestyles. But the entire zoning framework is used to delineate where certain uses should be placed. This appears to be another such example. In addition, it has been a chronic issue that poorer neighborhoods are woefully underrepresented when it comes to purveyors of healthier food options, and even a seemingly axiomatic supermarket. In any event, it is a different way to use the power to zone to accomplish public policy goals.

And, from the annals of the more things change . . . it's certainly nice to see that things stay rosy in certain necks of the woods, even when things seem so gloomy in general. Take my hometown of Brooklyn, where the big box (in more ways than one) furniture retailer Ikea has moved to once dormant Red Hook, the naysayers have actually embraced the typically controversial type of development. It sure helps when Ikea offers water taxi and shuttle bus service from other parts of the city, and installs a pretty waterfront esplanade. Linked up with its affordable yet stylish furnishing options, and cheap hot dogs at its cafe, Ikea has brought a winning combination to Brooklyn. Out in the desert in Arizona, more good vibes are coming from Kingman, which is benefiting from the overflow from bloated Las Vegas. Not just the home to the closest Cracker Barrel restaurant to Los Angeles, new housing developments may bring upwards of 80,000 new homes to the now-quiet burg by 2040. With a new bridge over the Colorado into Nevada, that means more opportunity and access to the giant to the north. Of course just because it's slightly to the south doesn't mean there's necessarily more water (which the developers' hydrologists believe there is). But who needs to sweat details when the future looks bright? And down in the Everglades, plans continue to be pursued to preserve the fast-disappearing ecosystem. Florida has agreed to purchase 187,000 acres from United States Sugar to help recreate the historic flow of water from Lake Okeechobee down through the Everglades. Of course, the plan is a little more complicated than this, in that the purchased property would be used in a later swap with another sugar company, Florida Crystals, for the land the state really needs to carry out its vision. Either way, it is part of a continuing push to return an important region in the state's past to an integral part of its future. And this is really what land use is about -- how to adjust and project for the future. That's what keeps the buzz ongoing, no matter what time of year it may be.

A Modest Proposal

The dog days of summer are upon us, and in this month when many boards decide to forego meeting, or at the very least, scale back their hearings, it seems like a fitting time to step back from the day-to-day routine, and take a long view of the state of affairs. Recently, I've been running into situations where the matters to which I'm tending remind me that when I was practicing back in New Jersey, the procedure of obtaining land use approvals seemed to make more sense than they do over here in the Empire State. Sure, it's not like things are that much greener on the other side of the Hudson River (even though New Jersey is the Garden State), but in New Jersey there is much more uniformity across jurisdictions thanks to a statewide Municipal Land Use Law. I look at the current way of doing business in New York, where the way things are done vary widely from Town to Town, Village to Village, and I wonder if things could be done a little more consistently.

One of the hallmarks of the federal system the United States lives under is that from state to state, and even municipality to municipality, everyone can experiment with different approaches and ways of getting things done. However, here in New York, it sometimes baffles me why you just have to know "how things are done" in each municipality to have any intelligent method to proceed with applications. For instance, one particular Town on Long Island requires everything to route through its Planning Department. From there, if necessary (for variance or special permit relief, for instance), matters are referred to the Town's Board of Zoning Appeals, with a quick stop over in the Building Department for a denial of a building permit application. It sometimes is the case that variances must be reviewed by the Town Board, instead of the Board of Zoning Appeals, depending on the Town's discretion. If you earn an approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals and/or Town Board, the matter gets sent back to the Planning Department for final review, and perhaps, an appearance before the Planning Board. After you sort out any other administrative approvals, like Fire Safety Division sign-off, then you may return to the Building Department for your building permit to complete the process.

Contrast this with another large Town in Long Island, which first requires a building permit denial, followed by an appearance before the Board of Appeals (not Board of Zoning Appeals, or even Zoning Board of Appeals) if special permit or variance relief is required, a return trip to the Building Department to go through a multi-month process to obtain site plan approval (amounting to sign-offs from a number of Town and County departments), and then finally, building permit approval from the same Building Department, which runs the show (as opposed to the Planning Department in the other unnamed Town). When you start talking about the Villages, then the procedures vary even wider from one another.

If you're still with me, or even if you're not, I think it's clear that things just get plain muddy in these parts. Is it so difficult to maybe come to some agreement as to a general method that must be followed? As another example, I am involved in a matter where not even the Town officials can decide, without research conducted by the Town Attorney, which procedure, and which boards, will be applicable. Isn't there a better way? Referring back to my days in New Jersey, I compare things between the two states, and I see certain choices from which New York could benefit. I must admit, I am not as well versed on the procedures which govern things across the other states, but it seems that these sorts of issues come up from time to time wherever you are. So in response to my recent musings, I offer the following top ten list of procedural improvements from which we in New York (and no doubt elsewhere) could benefit. So here it goes:

10. Hire an attorney for each board, and have that attorney at every hearing.

This seems obvious, but, especially in smaller villages, it is not always the case that an attorney representing the board's interest will be in attendance at hearings. This leaves boards, particularly inexperienced ones, unable to conduct their hearings without this vital resource.

9. Have the professionals attend every board hearing.

The same would seem to apply to board engineers and planners, along with any other professionals who assist boards.

8. Create a system of ancillary jurisdiction to prevent “board hopping”.

This would be a wonderful thing to avoid situations as described above, where the list of boards and stops at various departments seem to never end.

7. Make boards vote in public at meetings.

This is an unusual characteristic I've noticed with many boards in New York. After concluding a hearing, a board will advise an applicant that they will essentially get the decision "in the mail." Shouldn't this most important part of any hearing be conducted at the hearing?

6. Require more specific resolutions of approval.

Some boards don't see fit to draft formal resolutions specific to each application. In an effort to create more complete municipal records, and as a way to protect boards in the case of any potential challenges to their decisions, it would seem like boards would find this procedural piece quite important.

5. Reduce the power of civic associations. Obviously you cannot limit their
right to participate, but boards should not allow these organizations to hold
applications hostage.

The public should always have a right to be heard. However, should civic associations be making decisions for boards? Sometimes, unfortunately, this appears to occur. The applicant has the right to be heard as well, in a timely fashion. Any attempts by civic associations to stall the process should not be tolerated. A hearing is for the benefit of all sides to voice their positions. By allowing civic associations to effectively "kill" applications before the applicant has the chance to present his/her case effectively defeats the whole purpose of discussing land use decisions in a public forum.

4. Require the Mayor and a municipal legislator to sit on the planning board.

This suggestion would seem to keep elected officials deeply involved in the land use process, and ensure that the general performance of a board can be a part of the political process come election day.

3. Draft better ordinances.

This one is a constant theme, no matter which side of the Hudson River you find yourself, as quality drafting must be present for municipalities to have strong bases upon which to base their land use decisions.

2. Incorporate stronger planning principles into municipal codes.

Planning seems to get lost in certain municipalities. I'm talking long-term review of goals of a municipality, taking into account all of the available planning concepts and applying them to the needs of the area. So often it seems the minutiae of applications gets in the way of the big picture, and the benefits an application can bring to a site and surroundings in need of redevelopment are too easily forgotten. It's unfortunate that these considerations often get lost in the specifics of a matter.

And, of course:

1. Require uniformity from Town to Town, Village to Village.

Just some simple thoughts to think about, as we struggle with better ways to do things. It doesn't seem like much to at least consider, particularly as we find ourselves navigating through processes that, at times, seem endless and arbitrary. The land use process should be about openness, clarity, consistency and expediency. It would seem that that is not too much to ask of the machinery we have in place to abide by these simple rules.

I'm In Control Here

Back in 1981, when President Reagan was getting patched up after John Hinckley's assassination attempt, Secretary of State Alexander Haig stepped to the presidential podium, and declared to the world, "I'm in control here," despite the fact there were a few other people in front of him for the head honcho seat. Unlike the matter of presidential succession, the world of land use doesn't always have a directive such as the U.S. Constitution to guide the process. Varying actors assume control of the proceedings at any given time. In this week where talk of democracy gets sprinkled in amongst the fireworks and cookouts, it seems fitting to ask who really is at the wheel of the land use world.

Recent fights across the globe indicate that in many cases, the answer depends on who wins the battle. For instance, in the southwest province of Murcia, Spain, water is becoming scarce. Sure, climate change is causing the slow desertification of the landscape. However, disastrous policies of encouraging water-thirsty resort communities with swimming pools and golf courses, along with farming practices which have shifted to more water-intensive crops in the region, have contributed to the problem. As a result, developers and residents are pitted against the farmers, in a battle over an increasingly disappearing resource. In the middle are the water managers, like one in Fortuna who laments, "I come under a lot of pressure to release water, from farmers and also from developers. They can complain as much as they want, but if there's no more water, there's no more water." Time will tell who controls the H2O in southern Spain.

Other battles over control have popped up in places like Chicago, where an unwritten "aldermanic prerogative" rule has been challenged in the case of a proposed children's museum. Typically, the local city council member, or alderman, must rubber stamp a development proposal in his or her ward for the project to move forward to the Council's Zoning Committee. In the museum's case, Mayor Richard Daley overrode the local alderman's objection, and pushed the project through. Predictably, the courts will ultimately decide who's in control. Another challenge to recognized authority recently flared up on the east end of Long Island, where State Senator Kenneth P. LaValle tried to wrestle development approval authority over a 3,000 acre plot formerly occupied by the defense contractor Grumman from the Town of Riverhead. The Town for now retains control over state environmental review powers, which otherwise would have ceded to the regional Pine Barrens Commission under LaValle's plan. No doubt this fight will continue. And in Juneau, Alaska, plans are being finalized to build the first road that would allow the rest of North America to access the state capital by land. Environmentalists and many city residents oppose the plan, and are also using the courts to be the ultimate arbiter of whether Juneau becomes open to us outsiders.

When things do get decided, who ultimately has the control sometimes ends up in the hands of unseen forces, like the all-powerful market. For instance, the spike in fuel costs has prompted an upswing in people traveling by public transportation. People are questioning life out on the urban fringes in an effort to save costs, with some news accounts asking whether we are observing the "unfolding demise of suburbia," and other accounts claiming that those left on the edges may be caught in a "nightmare." Foreclosures have devastated whole towns, including such California central valley burgs as Merced, where one real estate agent explains, "We're experiencing a tsunami of bank-owned properties." In Chicago, the Spire, the tallest residential structure in the world, is moving forward with market support. According to a recent report, and in response to naysayers, the developer of the 2,000 foot tall structure, scheduled to be completed in 2012, has said that it has already sold 30% of its proposed units in four months time. In Los Angeles, aided by the adoption of a city ordinance permitting them, small lot projects, where multiple tiny, single family homes are built on single lots, with easement agreements taking care of the common areas, are proliferating. With a little bit of a push, the market appears to have taken care of the rest. In the neighboring city of Inglewood, developers are deciding to breath life into the municipality's moribund downtown with new retail and mixed-use projects being proposed. As one of the developers says, "It's not something that's done overnight, but we certainly feel we are a catalyst." And let's not forget the value of the vote, a most democratic affair, where California voters approved an anti-Kelo hammer against eminent domain of owner-occupied residences for private projects. Let the people rule, these examples suggest.

But then again, the iron fist from above often asserts its power. Take for instance the case of the Golden State of California, where its water shortage has prompted a firm response from water authorities and other governmental entities who are beginning to deny development applications because the state's water capacity simply cannot support the new proposals. These authorities are invoking a state law that requires a 20-year supply of water to be present for the development to take place. As one developer has noted, "I think this is a warning for everyone." Not even movie stars are immune from the iron fist of government. Robert DeNiro, actor and real estate developer, faced criticism recently for a top-floor penthouse he tried to tack on to a new hotel in an historic district. The New York City Landmarks Commission will rule on the matter shortly. DeNiro only offered, "You know, it's a process."

Although, governmental power sometimes breeds malcontent amongst the populace. On the other side of the globe, in Dakar, Senegal, questions have been raised where massive development is taking place in the city's core with the aid of investors from Dubai. Amidst the seeming riches, the lower classes have been shut out of the benefits, even though the government has allocated significant resources to these ventures. The government, led by President Abdoulaye Wade, has brought the appearance of prosperity to the metropolis, but not necessarily the reality. Although he guided the construction boom with the hand of government behind him, it may ultimately be used against him as he seeks to groom his son to fill his seat. As one disgruntled street merchant notes, "We can't eat roads. We can't afford to sleep in five-star hotels. So for whom is all this? Not for the ordinary Senegalese man."

In another wrinkle to the "iron fist", governments often come into conflict with each other, particularly when there's a chance to point blame away from themselves. For instance, U.S. Mayors recently appeared before Congress to beg for help to upgrade strained infrastructure systems, from roads to water systems. That day the Senate committee offered a bill that would create a National Infrastructure Bank to allow for the issuance of $60 billion in bonds. Even the national government may not be able to handle the $1.6 trillion task ahead of the country to achieve a "properly functional level" for its transportation and other critical lifelines. But the problem has fallen on the national government from the localities below. In this case, no one really wants to take the reins of control.

I suppose the reason that this issue came to the forefront for me was that I recently served on a jury. Although I was just an alternate, I sat through the whole trial. During it, the judge continually reminded us that we were the ultimate arbiters of fact in the case, which is true. As I mention in my explanation for this forum, the land use process is in many ways the most democratic of activities, as everyone can participate. In that blurb, I reference one's participation on a jury. After my experiences in sitting in that box judging a fellow citizen's actions, nothing has changed my thoughts on land use. The sheer messiness of the process, just like a trial, makes everyone's opinion count. However, where the two worlds differ is that in the case of a courtroom, everyone's looking to the jury for an answer. In a room holding a land use discussion, sometimes it's not clear who in fact is in control.

Shrinkage

In these times where those infernal oil companies are siphoning off our incomes, and the creeping dread of the "r" word, it seems everything has a theme of contraction wherever one turns. Whatever it is I think I see, becomes a Tootsie Roll pop that gets smaller and smaller by each lick of the wise old owl. Putting that mixing of advertising jingles aside, it does seem things keep getting smaller, literally. For instance, the geographer for the New York City Department of City Planning has revealed the staggering news that the mighty metropolis is actually 17 square miles smaller than what was widely believed. Instead of a robust 322 square miles, the city limits only include a paltry 304.8 square miles. Of course, my home borough of Brooklyn took the brunt of the shrinkage, accounting for 10 of the 17-square-mile loss. The geographer, Michael S. Miller, claims the loss is only based on more exact measurements performed since the last time an assessment was made. However, maybe it is simply a sign of the times, with geography falling into line with this age of shrinkage.

Another story from the annuls of land use further support the view that things keep getting smaller -- like the number of homeowners that can hold onto their castles these days. According to one report, three percent of once-occupied homes now stand vacant across the country. The horrendous foreclosure meltdown has resulted in a huge stock of abandoned homes that cannot be filled, which has been chronicled in this blog previously. As a way to combat this problem, mortgage companies are hiring contractors to look after these structures to ensure that the companies' investments do not fall into disrepair, or worse, suffer from vandalism. For instance, in Jacksonville, Florida, these contractors have benefited from the misery of others, billing mortgage companies as much as $5,000 every two weeks to perform their duties. When one side shrinks, the other grows larger.

Another arena facing the prospect of shrinkage is the stock of structures that have been deemed "historic" by some, but just plain old by others. The National Trust for Historic Preservation, a watchdog group for such concerns, has released its annual list of most endangered historic places. Intended to raise the awareness for these sites before they are lost forever, the organization tries its best to prevent another slice of the built environment from shrinking into oblivion. Included among this year's list is the Statler Hilton Hotel in Dallas, Texas, the first glass and steel hotel built in America. Also cited is the Lower East Side of New York City, which is slowly succumbing to the massive gentrification that continues to engulf the tenements of early 20th century immigrant experience. In addition, the Sumner School of Topeka, Kansas, made the cut, which was the genesis for the groundbreaking Brown v. Board of Education case that rejected the era of "separate but equal". Sure, some old buildings have to go. But maybe some are worth saving.

Even Wal-Mart has shrunk away from its grand expansion plans that seem to go on unabated. On the South Side of Chicago, the retail juggernaut has decided to retreat from its attempts to locate its second store within the city's limits. Facing city opposition in light of mighty Mayor Daley's mistake in vetoing a big box ordinance that attempted to impose minimum wage requirements on such stores in 2006, Wal-Mart decided to retreat to the suburbs, and focus their attention on the fringes. Mayor Daley is also in the midst of trying to bring the 2016 Olympics to his city, and does not want to again raise the ire of the union interests who opposed him on the prior fight. Although Wal-Mart has not succeeded in cracking Northern urban markets, we shouldn't cry too much for them. Aside from the Plan B approach in Chicago, in a one step back means two steps forward approach, Wal-Mart is setting its sights abroad, where such nations as Brazil are welcoming the retailer with open arms.

And along with shrinkage, the steadiness of certain land use stalwarts has felt the wobbly uncertainty of the times. Portland, Oregon, a place I've glowed about in previous entries, is facing a challenge to its progressive outlook on the way people live amongst each other and how the city chooses to grow. The ugly word of gentrification has led to an open debate on whether the needs of those in need are adequately being met by the green-leaning vision of the community. In a metropolitan area that is only 7 percent African-American, the city is using its Office of Neighborhood Involvement to conduct the Restorative Listening Project, a plan to listen to the concerns of minority residents in communities that are being overrun by white people. As one Native American participant notes, "That's been our history. . . . They take all you've got. They take your land. Now they want your stories." The shrinking world around the long-term residents has bred resentment, particularly where their shifting neighborhood will never be what it once was. More complex still is the fact that things have improved for the better in the community, but arguably not for those who were subjected to the bad times.

In this era of shrinkage, there is still the push to grow. As first referenced in "Clean Slate," my March 22, 2007, entry in this space, a deal has been struck between environmental groups and the developer of the massive Tejon Ranch tract north of Los Angeles. In exchange for a massive development project to encompass 30,000 acres, the owner of the tract has agreed to set aside 240,000 acres to continue as a wilderness area free from disturbance. In a way, it is a plan for growth agreeable to this era of shrinkage. Ninety percent of the parcel will be conserved. In some ways, maybe shrinkage isn't all that bad.

Are They Nuts?

As a former West Coaster, I like to look in that direction every so often to catch up on the happenings in my former stomping grounds. Aside from the dismal results from this network television season that is coming to a close, there is some other signs of change that have the potential to rock the Los Angeles Basin to its core with greater force than an 8.0 earthquake. The thing that jostled my own equilibrium was a recent plan advocated by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa that sought to convert two of the city's massive Westside east-west boulevards, Olympic and Pico, to one-way thoroughfares stretching from downtown to the beaches of Santa Monica. A Superior Court judge has temporarily stalled the scheme designed to alleviate traffic congestion in the hopelessly clogged area, forcing the city to perform an impact study before moving forward with the plan. The thought can be characterized as either revolutionary or just plain nutty. Either way, it seems to ignore the elephant on the roadways that costs in the neighborhood of $4 per gallon, and rising.

Another off-kilter story from the leftist coast comes from a hotbed of conservatism that Richard Nixon could have loved, and did. In the Orange County community of San Clemente, which is halfway between LA and San Diego, grassroots political activism fueled by NIMBYist tendencies have brought to life the denizens of the place that the disgraced president once called home. A growing contingent of residents in this built-out 'burb have been standing up to recent attempts to squeeze a bit more value into the limited space left to develop. One plan would have brought a new residential subdivision to 9 holes of the Pacific Golf and Country Club, who would have still had 18 left after the construction. However, buttressed by the ability to send the matter to voters that the "activists" won by having a City ordinance adopted declaring it so, the plan failed public muster. The biggest fallout came at the golf club, where ten members who were opposed to the plan were summarily expelled. Is it a democratic groundswell, or a movement by a few, strong voices? Either way, in this neck of the land, it appears that developers have met their match in their golfing buddies. To call the protesters "activists" puts an interesting spin on things, just as the recent "protesters" who occupied Honolulu's Iolani Palace did, seeking to highlight the group's desire to restore the monarchic ways of the government that once ruled the islands. At least they have an elected leader.

Nonetheless, just down the road from San Clemente, in Irvine, a swath of 40,000 acres surrounded by the sprawl of Orange County has recently been designated as the first California Natural Landmark, a ceremonial title that state officials, including Governor Schwarzenegger, hope will lead to stronger protections for the tract. Perhaps the folks over in San Clemente may see a cause more worthy than the preservation of nine precious holes of golf. Other less fortunate areas are contending with far worse fallout from the lack of open space. Back up in LA, the City Board of Education approved a plan to construct a new elementary school campus, in particularly its fields, on a site contaminated with toxic substances, and already next to a middle school too small for the numbers of students it teaches. "This is by no means an easy decision. . . We have looked for every piece of land, and in this mid-Wilshire area . . . density is a challenge," voiced the Board's president. Are they nuts, or just plain desperate?

Admittedly, there are some other strange proposals happening around the country that begs for a question in the neighborhood of: How crazy are our elected officials? Take for example the happenings in South Florida, where plans are afoot to construct a massive reservoir the size of Manhattan Island to save the natural water flow in the beloved Everglades region. Part of a larger plan to both re-supply the historic flow of water to the wetland region, and provide a flood protection measure for the development that has taken the place of most of the swamp that once covered South Florida, the reservoir is designed to preserve, as best is still possible, the gloriousness of the area before it is lost forever. Will it work? Time will tell.

On the other end of the spectrum, leave it to fabulous Las Vegas, Nevada, where instead of seeking to redevelop its decaying downtown area, has instead decided to acquire a 60-acre tract next door, and build a new one. The ironically-named Union Park area will be developed with a number of Las Vegas style projects, including a Frank Gehry designed Alzheimer's research facility, a performing arts center, and associated casino and residential development. Sure, it took five years to acquire the property, and the economic problems of today may slow things down, but eventually, as everything in Las Vegas seems, it appears inevitable that the ambitious plan spearheaded by Mayor Oscar Goodman will come to be. Not even robust and bloated LA is immune to the economic vagaries of the times, and its mammoth Grand Avenue project has hit a rough patch in obtaining the necessary funding.

On a different scale, in Camden, New Jersey, more modest goals prevail, in that the city's planning board is reviewing an application for a new Hilton Garden Inn, that may signal a turn in fortunes for the long-beleaguered city across the Delaware River from Philadelphia. A new hotel has not been built in the city for about seventy years. Although there are recently-added attractions including an aquarium and a minor league baseball stadium, Camden still faces the problems of attracting attention, and money, that it has confronted for decades. Its proximity to its larger neighbor in Pennsylvania may be Camden's best asset, as it may be able to cater to the overflow in people and tourists that flock to the City of Brotherly Love. For the moment, the prospects remain guarded, and less fabulous, than Vegas.

And with all this nuttiness going on, who can forget the constant thoughts in all our minds (except for those fortunate enough not to ever require a car), the daily reminders of how much driving actually costs - not just the gas our vehicles suck dry. Based partly on New York City's failure to adopt congestion pricing, Los Angeles has been offered $213 million to create its own version of congestion pricing to help alleviate its clogged "freeways." In Chicago, which may also receive a portion of New York's lost booty, is also proposing installing bus-only lanes on its major highways into the central city for express lines, and increasing the costs of parking meters downtown. Is Mayor Daley concerned what the effects may be on commuters who drive? "No, no, no." Okay. Back in New York, the city has refocused on its biking commuters, proposing massive improvements to bicycle lanes, racks and helmet programs. One percent of commuters in the city do so via the two-wheeled method. That number is expected to grow as the price at the pump continues to climb.

In the end, looking at the state of things, there are a lot of plans out there that seem kind of nuts -- and not just those in the greater Los Angeles area. But these are nutty times, and only increasing in nuttiness by the day. At the bottom of it all, at least we are still trying to make things better, and adapt to the increasingly evolving world we live in. When we stop trying, that's when we should be really concerned.

I Need To See It

First off, yes, it's been quiet from this end of the blogosphere lately, but honestly, I've been looking around and seeing things come to fruition that we've already covered. Lately I've been thinking a bit about the act of seeing, and how it's such a big part of what land use is all about. Watching the Pope, or B-16 as he's affectionately called in certain circles, it's clear how much it means to show up in person, giving the audience something to study up close and personal, and gives the stamp of legitimacy, removing the specter of the unknown. Glowing tributes to the man filled the airwaves, as we Americans have finally gotten a gander at the "new guy." In the realm of land use, as with most things, people are going to be quite suspicious of new things until they see precisely what is being proposed. Pretty color renderings, and even fancy computer-driven three-dimensional worlds are employed during land use hearings to attempt to replicate precisely what everyone can expect once something is built. But nothing can replace seeing the reality of things.

Take for instance the drastic actions happening in Youngstown, Ohio, which has been suffering the almost cliched path of urban decay over the course of the last four decades. Now facing the foreclosure crisis, the city is left with trying to improve what its remaining residents have to see everyday. Instead of staring at decaying buildings on near-abandoned blocks, Youngstown officials have decided to raze these areas and replace the broken areas with wide open green spaces. Affectionately called "shrinkage," harkening back to one of those famous "Seinfeld" situations, the plan is to contract, attempting to hold onto the portion of Youngstown that is still alive. Will it work? Well, why not try. It sure beats prior plans to bring in growth, like a proposed blimp factory, or a defense facility promised by then-President Clinton. Only time will tell whether Youngstown will see success.

A recent evaluation of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg proclaimed that despite his failure to bring congestion pricing to the Big Apple, which proceeds ahead with the pace of a double-decker bus barreling through Piccadilly Circus in London, he has reshaped the look of the city through 76 crafty rezoning initiatives throughout the city, including one that runs down the 4th Avenue corridor outside by Brooklyn door. As one NYU professor chronicles, noting how Bloomberg's plan has brought taxpaying types to once-decrepit areas, "Places like Red Hook that were once a no-man's land are hipster havens, and Brooklyn is now a center for culture and art for the whole country. . . . Whoever thought people would want to live on the Gowanus [Expressway, or is it Canal?]". Whichever one it is, putting aside the grand redevelopment projects to produce enormous towers in Manhattan, the rest of the city has benefited from a little TLC from the Mayor, which everyone can see.

And then, from the big picture there are also the smaller picture tidbits that depict the importance of seeing when it comes to the built environment. A critical component in any homeowner's seeing is an unobstructed view of the sun, in some fashion, from his or her residence. In aptly named Sunnyvale, California, a battle raged in connection with a state law that permits homeowners to require neighbors to cut down trees that block their solar panels, regardless of when the trees were planted. In Sunnyvale, a recent court action highlights the conflict that can result from this law, particularly where the combatants don't particularly care for one another. The accused owners of a few redwoods were convicted in criminal court, and required to prune the offending trees. And with that, the victor in the battle was able to see again.

No matter big or small is absent from this art of seeing. When you think about it, most land use regulations are subject to this standard, even if veiled in such objective measures as setbacks, height restrictions and lot coverage dictates. It all comes down to how it looks. No matter what the new thing may be, beware of the eyes that are watching you, every step of the way.

It's The End of the World . . . Again

With word that plans have been scrapped to construct a new Madison Square Garden, threatening the grand vision to bring the old Penn Station back to life in midtown Manhattan, it seems glum times continue to abound across New York City. All of the flashy projects meant to put a new glossy finish on the metropolis have run into road blocks on their long paths to fruition. In my neck of the woods over in Brooklyn, the Atlantic Yards project will be slowed a bit in the wake of touch economic times. Bret Ratner, the impresario behind it all, still plans to bring his New Jersey Nets to a new 18,000 seat arena which will be started by the end of the year. However, "Miss Brooklyn," the commercial centerpiece, and three residential towers have been put on hold until the market recovers from the current climate. Stop everything, because a large-scale real estate project may take longer than anticipated! One commentator has gone so far as to fret over how master architect Frank Gehry's grand vision will be ruined by the setback, and the quandary Mr. Gehry finds himself in deciding whether to walk away from the project.

Even on the heels of an announcement that initial plans have been brokered to proceed with an immense project to add a mix of commercial and residential towers over the rail yards at the western end of midtown Manhattan, the doomsday predictions prevail. Where will the financing come from? How can the developer, Tishman Speyer Properties, hope to get it done? "We face significant short-term economic challenges. . . . But this country and this city are extremely resilient," noted Rob Speyer, the head of the development outfit. Even Mr. Ratner can see the bigger picture. "Good things sometimes take a long time." People often have a hard time grasping development that occurs over the course of decades, which often leads to many of the planning issues America faces -- after the fact. But it is shocking how the public discourse often can't see beyond the short term issues flooding the headlines.

Even the bigwigs at the top of the area's transportation framework appear to have been shouldered with concerns over short-term decisions to wait out the current quagmire. More likely, they are seizing on the opportunity to use it as an excuse. Not too surprisingly, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or the MTA, decided recently to forego $30 million in planned service improvements due to worsening finances, even though it has been buoyed by recent toll and fare increases. Three weeks earlier, the MTA had made the promises for the improvements. With a track record of pulling these sorts of shenanigans, it seems the MTA is simply trying to bury their own inefficiencies in the economic difficulties of others. With a sigh, the leader of the public transit advocacy group in the city lamented, "They obviously couldn't deliver on the promises they made at the time the fare went up, and that's unfortunate, and it will make people very skeptical about future announcements."

Like the transit advocate, I just can't get too excited that things have grown more difficult to get things done. In the land use arena, it seems like nothing is ever easy, no matter how big or small the project may be. Therefore, when there is talk that the whole world is crumbling around us, I usually can shoulder the news quite well. Take John H. Mollenkopf, a professor at the City University Graduate Center. "None of this is new, he said. Battery Park City took forever to come into being. So did the revitalization of Times Square. There are phases to development in New York, Professor Mollenkopf said." All said very well. My new hero. So let's all relax, keep working on what we can, and hope things will turn around sooner than later, because they will. It's just a matter of when. Recently, the process began to designate 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza, a skyscraper in lower Manhattan, as a local landmark. That took time, too. It got built, and is happily occupied. The world will end at some point, but not over the length of time it takes to get something built.