Thursday, June 08, 2006

Developing a new way...Part II

So, I had a post about this story -- a proposal to divide the county into 10 planning districts -- almost ready to go...but then, I had to leave for band practice. No problem. I'll come home, read through it once more and hit "Publish Post."

Er, no.

For starters, the writing was pretty bad, which by my standards is saying something. But on top of that, I was writing having only read what was in the newspaper, a superficial description of what I'm sure is a technical proposal. As was the case with the independent zoning officer story, I don't feel I can offer any real analysis of a policy by reading only one article -- not very bloggy of me, I know.

However, since arriving home I've learned more about the proposal, and therefore, I think it especially wise to leave in draft my poorly written, ill-informed diatribe. I should be able to have something of decent quality written by tomorrow, but for now, how about a quick summary of this vague proposal I've said so little about. From The Sun:

Instead of the council considering land use changes countywide once each decade, the plan would have planners divide the land into large sections, giving citizens more opportunity to be involved in changes proposed in their area.

Ken Ulman, Guy Guzzone and Calvin Ball said their plan also would provide for possible mediation of neighborhood zoning disputes, require larger notification signs and more convenient informational meetings about proposed land use changes.

"In April of last year, both Guy and I drafted a document that basically laid this out," Ulman said. "We thought to do the entire county once every 10 years was not practical anymore and didn't give the community the voice needed."

Examining a smaller area would give planners and citizens a better chance to incorporate infrastructure plans into whatever changes are proposed, Ulman said.
HoCoBlog has a post on the topic here. I was a little touchy about some of his assertions related to Town Center in the comments section. I can be defensive sometimes -- now that's very bloggy of me.


Anonymous said...

Wow. How can you post anything since the proposal doesn't seem to be available for review? It seems only the press received the info. Now, that's a little odd?!

Anonymous said...

It's not odd if politics is driving the ship and not good government. Where is the public process?

Anonymous said...

Regarding Town Center, the Baltimore Examiner says, according to the consulting firm doing an ongoing traffic study, existing roads won't support the traffic resulting from the increased development. The consultants further recommend considering a downtown development plan that includes less office space development (than the 5.2 million square feet proposed previously).

Just one more reason to get serious about a modern public transit system getting to Columbia.

Besides, gas isn't getting any cheaper.