Redistricting questions

Don’t believe everything you read in the Northfield News, especially not headlines like Redistrict? Council wants to eliminate wards.

The goal is balanced, accessible representation for the residents of Northfield.  Dividing the city into geographic wards is one way to try to meet that goal, but not the only way.

The big advantage of the ward system is giving designated representation to each quadrant of the city by a resident of that ward.  Ward residents know who to call if they have a problem.  2nd Ward residents have needed help with or had questions about street lights, snow-plowing (not this year, obviously), beavers, parks, mowing (or rather non-mowing of vacant lots), trees, city maintenance, and traffic near the soccer fields at Spring Creek Park.  In turn, I keep closer track of what happens in the 2nd Ward and if ward-specific issues show up on the agenda – street projects are the most obvious – I have a special interest in making the best choice for the ward as well as knowing more about my home territory.  Erica Zweifel has consistently advocated for her 3rd Ward constituents in the siting of the Safety Center, improving pedestrian and bicycle connectivity across Highway 3, and working with St. Olaf College.

But, consider some other factors:

Geography is often not relevant: most issues are not specific to one ward and it is difficult to identify a ward-specific perspective. This was one of 4th Ward Councilor Patrick Ganey’s reasons for raising the question.

No geographic division will cut cleanly: Neighborhoods cut across ward boundaries and there are multiple neighborhoods within each ward. As well, some constituencies are better defined than others.  Would it make more sense to assign Council members to represent the colleges, retirement communities, non-English speaking residents, or any other identifiable group?

Some Council members are more responsive than others; wards with conscientious representatives get much better representation and conscientious reps get more work.  Prior to the last election, I got a significant number of calls from two other wards because their own ward representative could not be reached.

Council members tend to have particular issues they care about, know about, and work to advance; we could each represent areas of government rather than areas of town.  Have a land use problem?  Call me.

The school board elects at-large representatives with the top vote-getters from the pool being elected (4 seats open, for example, then the top 4 win).  If the Council adopted this system, we might imagine it could broaden the candidate pool – if there are openings on the Council, a candidate would not have to wait for the right ward opening, two strong candidates who live in the same area might both be elected, candidates might find it less daunting to run as part of a group knowing they didn’t have to get the most votes.   On the flip side, campaigning only in one ward might seem simpler than a city-wide effort.

In practice, some of my time goes to ward-related constituent service while more of it goes to general city business like tax levies, policy-making, etc.  For the city business part, wards are less important.  But, when calls to city hall can’t get streetlights fixed or residents have questions about city issues and services that’s when having ward representatives or some other easy way to know who to call is crucial.  Wards, whatever their shortcomings, make it easy: if you know where you live, you can figure out your ward representative.

The decennial redistricting is at least an opportunity to ask if we can do a better job of representing Northfield residents than the current system and, if we think we’ve found a better system, then we need to ask voters if they agree.  It’s a discussion, not a decision at this point.

The Cost and/or value of sidewalks

Maple Street project map

Last week, I went to the first neighborhood meeting for the Maple Street reconstruction project.

One planned addition for this street is adding sidewalk on the east side of 44′ wide collector street with existing sidewalk on the west side.  So far in my Northfield experience, sidewalks – new sidewalks where none had existed before, that is – always generate opposition and Maple Street is no exception.

Here are the biggest objections plus the existing policy infrastructure of the City:

Property value: Sidewalks will lower property values.  For a particular home in Northfield, it’s difficult to say whether adding a sidewalk raises or lowers property value without a comparison of similar homes with and without sidewalks.  However, realtors are reporting higher prices and preference for neighborhoods with high walkability – sidewalks, places to walk to, proximity to stores, schools and other services.  In addition to Complete Streets advocates, powerful lobbying groups like AARP are advocating for neighborhoods with better pedestrian and transit opportunities.  There’s no readily available evidence to show sidewalks lower property values, except when they’re in poor condition.

Cost: New sidewalks are too expensive.  On the individual plus side, Northfield does not assess property owners for sidewalks.  On the collective downside, the cost of new sidewalks is spread across the entire tax base of the city.  Policy-wise, I think this means the City believes the sidewalk network benefits the entire community, not just the property over which they run.  As a dollar amount, sidewalks add to the cost.  However, if the citywide goal is a comprehensive sidewalk network, this is the least expensive way to do it.

Usefulness: No one will use it (because: they walk in the street anyway, there’s a sidewalk on the other side, there aren’t sidewalks on connecting streets). Obviously, neither I nor the folks on Maple can know what will happen on a future improvement since it’s not there yet.  There is a sidewalk on the west side, but there is also a sidewalk on the east side further south and I look at the addition of sidewalk as completing an unfinished project to link Jefferson Parkway (and soccer fields, walking trails, playground) more completely.

There are not sidewalks on connecting streets yet.  Certainly Woodley Street is the most critical street on which to add sidewalks to connect to Maple and when that segment is set to be reconstructed, I am sure sidewalks will be a major topic (we try to add sidewalks when reconstructing streets to decrease the overall cost). Retrofitting sidewalks is an incremental process – right now, the opportunity is Maple Street (and our other 2012 projects on Linden/Lockwood, Roosevelt Drive and 8th Street).

Neighborhood character: Adding a sidewalk will change/ruin the neighborhood.  There are several issues which surface here: loss of trees, loss of green yard space, or just that the look will be different.  Certainly the sidewalk is a change, however, it may not be a bad one.  The city is really trying to find ways to save mature trees and increase the number of trees overall, but, yes, trees may be removed for both the street reconstruction and a few more for the sidewalk.  The yard space is city-owned right of way, so there’d be the loss of use of it, but no loss of property (private landscaping in the right of way may be destroyed).  Perhaps, a sidewalk will be a place kids will play, families will meet, and more kids will walk to school.  But, yes, a sidewalk will change the neighborhood.

Safety: Most sidewalk opponents considered the west side sidewalk sufficient for safety (traffic speed was the big safety issue- and it is a big one).  For me, however, it’s a big consideration.  There’s a lot of research to show that pedestrians are safer on sidewalks.  With Sibley School in the middle of this stretch of street, there are elementary school kids walking to school from all directions including through Sibley Swale park which empties onto Maple almost at the school with no sidewalk or obvious place to cross to the other side.  Starting in January, Northfield Transit begins its route deviation system which will run south to north on Maple Street so people will board (and wait) on the no-sidewalk side.

Established city policy and practice: Northfield has developed policies to support connectivity, foster streets as places for people to meet and interact, increase pedestrian access, and pedestrian safety.  Northfield’s Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan lay the policy groundwork for a multi-modal transportation network with high quality, pedestrian friendly streets.  The addition of the sidewalk on Maple Street is called for by the Safe Routes to School study completed in 2009.  The Land Development Code calls for sidewalks on both sides of collector streets (of which Maple is one).   We’re planning for a Complete Streets policy to ensure streets are safe and accessible for all.  Maple Street is an opportunity to continue implementing this vision and eliminate a gap in our sidewalk network.

Happy 85th Birthday, Zoning

Let's see, we'll put the single family homes over here away from the commercial districts

The Urban Land Institute has reminded us that zoning law turns 85 this year; the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of local zoning law in 1926 with Euclid v. Ambler Realty.   Envision Minnesota juxtaposed Zoning at 85 with We need more zoning and asks “More zoning or no zoning?” but they got the question wrong since both articles favor more land use planning, but less emphasis on traditional zoning (no matter what the titles may read).

Zoning is an extremely blunt instrument – Euclidian zoning the bluntest of all since it does not attempt to regulate the relationship of buildings to one another and doesn’t usually reflect much in the way of community character or encourage innovation, but is primarily a government tool to prevent nuisances.  Form-based codes are slightly sharper by planning and regulating the physical shape and the relationships among buildings and to the street.

But the articles above (and many others) are starting to get beyond zoning and city planning to placemaking, a multi-faceted approach to the planning, design and management of public spaces.

But placemaking is not like more zoning or more top-down city planning.  We don’t need more zoning-like regulations, we need fewer.  Rather placemaking is bottom-up, grass-roots community building with an emphasis on improving the spaces we all share, like streets, parks, and public places.  Government’s role is to enable private groups to shape the vision and do the work.

If placemaking becomes the new model for development, will zoning live to be 100?

 

 

 

Social media, blogs and city government

How and whether city government should use the internet to do business seems to come around every year – this year, Patch has a story by Anna Schier – I’m quoted since I’m (still) the only Northfield Council blogger.  Last year about this time, it was Griff Wigley’s webinar on the topic and a Northfield News story.  My previous posts pretty much cover what I think – search this blog for “social media.”

Northfield has spent 2011 upgrading its technology infrastructure and updating the website is planned for 2012.  I’d like to think 2012 will also be when the City starts using technology to increase accessibility, transparency and accountability in local government.  If there are particular kinds of information or access you’d like to see Northfield offer, let me know.

 

The new (context) sensitive MNDOT

The Great MNDOT

This week, I attended a workshop on Context Sensitive Solutions led by MNDOT.   Since when is MNDOT sensitive to anything, let alone the community context in which the road lies?  How many times have we heard “You just can’t work with MNDOT” in response to questions about whether something related to a state highway or state aid road might be changed?  Have we ever heard anything different from city staff?  MNDOT, indeed, has seemed rather like the Wizard of Oz – pay no attention to that man behind the curtain who controls everything, explains nothing, and cannot be challenged.

The perceived insensitivity and unchallengeability of MNDOT (and other engineer/planner types) to context, sensitivity, and (developing rather than imposing) solutions has bugged me for a long time.  Finally, I’ve had the opportunity to pull aside the curtain and peek inside MNDOT and engineer culture.  As an elected official, I was not the primary audience for this event (although the flyer for the workshop indicated “local government” should attend).  Rather, it was continuing education for transportation planners, mostly MNDOT engineers from around the state and that’s what made it so illuminating.

The overarching theme was shifting transportation planning culture at MNDOT from imposing a fixed technical solution to having planner develop context sensitive solutions using the CSS

collaborative, interdisciplinary approach that involves all stakeholders in providing a transportation facility that fits its setting. It is an approach that leads to preserving and enhancing scenic, aesthetic, historic, community, and environmental resources, while improving or maintaining safety, mobility, and infrastructure conditions.

To me, coming from Northfield’s Planning Commission and trying to work towards smart growth and complete streets in Northfield, the CSS approach is common sense.  To have MNDOT working toward implementing CSS in their projects is to feel like we’ve all gained a powerful ally.

What missed the Minibus Appropriations Bill?

Missing the minibus

Our leaders in Washington have managed to pass an appropriations bill – not an omnibus, but a minibus, bill appropriating funds for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Agriculture, Commerce/Justice/Science (CJS), and Transportation/Housing and Urban Development (THUD).

“THUD” – an inauspicious acronym if ever there was one – appropriates $55.6 billion dollars.  However, the bill cuts (11% this year following cuts in prior years) community development block grants (the CDBG program benefits Northfield’s HRA) and the Sustainable Communities Initiative which is HUD’s portion of the two year old Partnership for Sustainable Communities which brings together HUD, EPA, and the DOT was eliminated completely.  On the other hand, funding for the TIGER grants – was maintained at $500 million, so some federal dollars will be directed toward transportation grants projects with emphasis on sustainability, multi-modal transportation, etc.(Northfield has just applied for TIGER funding for building a pedestrian/bicycle route under TH3).

The Partnership for Sustainable Communities recognizes that community development is not limited to a single agency or department.  Building strong, sustainable communities requires attention to economic development, housing, transportation, energy,  simultaneously.  Like developing high density housing near transit hubs.  Or building streets which work for pedestrians and cyclists to reduce transportation costs and improve air quality.  Or encouraging denser land use to reduce both transportation costs and infrastructure costs.

THUD.

Budget Season 2011, part 2

If you want all the details about the proposed levies, see the previous post.  If you want to read the latest Northfield budget documents, see the City website here.

I have two questions:

Are tax dollars are being spent efficiently and effectively?  We don’t ask you to pay taxes, we demand that you do, so elected officials better be sure we know where the money goes, whether city operations are as productive and economical as possible, and that we spend wisely for the long term.  City staff are diligent about answering this question as they cut costs, streamline services, and adapt the budget to the shrinking tax base, unpredictable state aid, and increasing needs.   I give Northfield a B (I’m a tough grader – I went to college when a C was an average grade).

How are tax dollars being used to implement the policy decisions made by the Council?  Hmmm.  I don’t know.  I could give Northfield an F, but I think I am still optimistic enough to assign an Incomplete to this question.

In my budget utopia, the Comprehensive Plan would be the foundation of the budget with programs evaluated for their consistency with the Comp Plan and new initiatives derived from the Plan.  After that, the other policies of the city (we’re part of the GreenStep Cities program, for example, and have a Comprehensive Economic Development Plan) would be used to guide spending.

Regular readers know that I think the vision and policies of the Comp Plan provide a framework for more compact, denser development which will be more cost effective in the long term (see, e.g. my post on an economically healthy Northfield, and follow up to a Strong Towns presentation).  Because I think the fiscal health of Northfield as well as its sense of place, natural environment, and quality of life all can benefit from attention to the Comp Plan, I am frustrated by my own inability to help turn the budget conversation around to address the long term, more taxpayers per acre, less car-dependent vision.  I give myself a D+ for this quarter.

Curbside Chat Companion booklet

Curb on which to chat

Earlier I attempted to live blog one of Strong Towns’ Curbside Chats, but now you can read Strong Towns’ companion booklet to their Chats and find out more about the cost of our development patterns.  Full disclosure: I’m a minor (very minor) financial contributor to Strong Towns and I helped edit the booklet (because I try to support what I see as good ideas in whatever way I can).