Mayor to announce new task force on development

[pmcalk]

Via the TulsaWorld:

Mayor Kathy Taylor on Monday will announce the creation of a task force to provide recommendations on how the city can improve its development process.

Taylor said that the task force's charge will be to come up with ways the city can educate citizens about the development process and improve communication between the city, developers and residents.

"What's the best way to educate and communicate with us so you (concerned residents) have the ability to either take part in the process, or you're encouraged to be a developer in our community, because we want both," Taylor said.

The creation of the task force comes amid a storm of controversy and criticism over how recent development projects have been handled by the city.




http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090302_298_0_MayorK861122

[sgrizzle]

Like the downtown task force, I'll decide whether I am excited or not once I see the results.

[PonderInc]

I hope they will come up with some practical solutions to help make it easier for citizens to understand what's going on and how to have a voice.  

Does anyone have good examples of how this is done in other cities?

One of the problems we have in Tulsa is that everything's reactive.  Someone applies for a PUD that's totally out of context with a neighborhood, but the neighborhood doesn't have any formal guidelines or protections, and the Comp Plan's totally out of date...so the neighbors have to jump into action to "oppose" the proposal. (Even if neighborhood plans exist, they get blown off by the TMAPC etc.  They're just "guidelines" so they don't matter!)

It seems that it would be much better if neighborhoods plans "had teeth."  So people would be comfortable that new development would "fit" with their plans/goals/vision for the area.

Also, I wonder if there's a way to create an online method for keeping people informed about what's going on.  Some way to say: "I'm interested in the following areas of town."  And then, you would automatically get updated whenever new proposals are submitted within those areas of interest?

The main problem seems to be that by the time the PUD application comes across the table, the developer has already made decisions about how the project will be (without input from neighbors).  So neighborhood plans (created with citizen input) should come first, and development proposals should be held to those plans.

This would take a lot more involvement from the Planning Department.  More staff, more money to do it right.  They're understaffed already, and we'd be asking them to do even more.  Everything comes down to money.

[Neptune]

quote:"What's the best way to educate and communicate with us so you (concerned residents) have the ability to either take part in the process, or you're encouraged to be a developer in our community, because we want both," Taylor said.

A "help desk" type system, where people can have their questions answered by the city's legal department.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by Neptune

quote:"What's the best way to educate and communicate with us so you (concerned residents) have the ability to either take part in the process, or you're encouraged to be a developer in our community, because we want both," Taylor said.

A "help desk" type system, where people can have their questions answered by the city's legal department.

As long as they're not like the 'help desk' I have at my work, which is typically known as the 'helpless desk'....

[AVERAGE JOE]

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

I hope they will come up with some practical solutions to help make it easier for citizens to understand what's going on and how to have a voice.  

Does anyone have good examples of how this is done in other cities?

Other cities have a zoning code that works. Good developments happen by right under straight zoning. It's not necessary to create a PUD for damn near every building that pops up on the landscape. Citizens "fight" once for a good zoning code so they don't have to "fight" every PUD every month of every year.

[Limabean]

The task force may determine INCOG is one of the problems.

Let's not renew any contracts until we dtermine what the problems are.

How will the findings of this task force coincide with the findings of PlaniTulsa?

[PonderInc]

quote:Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

I hope they will come up with some practical solutions to help make it easier for citizens to understand what's going on and how to have a voice.  

Does anyone have good examples of how this is done in other cities?

Other cities have a zoning code that works. Good developments happen by right under straight zoning. It's not necessary to create a PUD for damn near every building that pops up on the landscape. Citizens "fight" once for a good zoning code so they don't have to "fight" every PUD every month of every year.

This is a good point.  The current zoning code seems to be "one size fits all."  And b/c it's "use based" it has balkanized the city into zones (separating commercial from residential, for example).  It also tends to impose south Tulsa parking "minimums" on historically dense, walkable parts of town.

But even if you can actually "fix" the zoning code, it needs to be easier for normal people to understand.  (The current code is like a sleep aid for lawyers...)  

And there should be better efforts by the local government to reach out to the public.  I think the recent zoning proposal related to Community Gardens is a great example of Incog reaching out with informative public meetings (held after business hours), taking public input, and modifying the proposal based on that input.

What if all TMAPC and BOA meetings were held at night?

[Neptune]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by Neptune

A "help desk" type system, where people can have their questions answered by the city's legal department.

As long as they're not like the 'help desk' I have at my work, which is typically known as the 'helpless desk'....

My feeling about wide-spread public awareness is that it doesn't really exist, and for the most part, can't exist.  Most people don't care about zoning or really anything about their city, until it ticks em off.  There isn't wide-spread participation at City Council meetings, people don't watch TGOV, people don't really even vote much in city elections.  It's almost impossible to substantially change that for the positive.

What can be done, however, is some entity could be available to spread the correct information when people decide to be aware of their city.  Typically, people become aware when it all hits the proverbial fan.  It's probably important that the correct information be readily accessible and easily understandable, whether people believe it or not.

[Double A]

Meaningless, hollow, election year, pandering.

[PonderInc]

Do you have anything constructive to add?

[sgrizzle]

Do you have anything constructive to add?

He may not, but that is one thing to factor in. Anything that happens in 2009 both by people in office and directed at people in office is that everyone is going to try and pump up their side since it's an election year.

I personally don't think it applies in this case, but it is something to be aware of.

[Limabean]

Here are the people on the "Task Force to Review and Recommend Revamped Process for Education and Communication Regarding City Land Use Processes".

The list and job descriptions appear as sent by the Mayor's office:


Bruce Bolzle, commercial builder
Lauren Brookey, Director of Marketing and Communications for Tulsa Community College
Julie Hall, neighborhod leader
Dr. Suliman Hawamdeh, Chair of the IT Department at OU-Tulsa
Paul Kane, Presdient of the Homebuilders Association
Bill Leighty, TMAPC, residential realtor
Nancy Siegel, General Counsel- Office of the Mayor

Two concerns that immediately jump out at me are:
1. The task force title doesn't say anything about actually changing the process itself just how citizens are notified or communicated to.
2. There is no equal representation of small land use issues. Will the task force only address large land use issues; i.e. PUD's, encroachment and commercial development? If there is ANY discussion about small lot development in our neighborhoods who will speak? Paul Kane and Bill Leighty ?

[PonderInc]

I went to the first meeting of this task force.  I felt that they genuinely want to solve some problems that have been creating friction between neighborhoods and developers for years.  Councilor Christiansen was there, and he also seemed genuine in his desire to improve this process.

Here's the PowerPoint presentation that Jack Page (Paige?) gave:
http://www.cityoftulsa.org/OurCity/Business/PermitsLicensing/documents/Zoningchangesmar112009.pdf

One of the main points was the need for more clear communication of proposed zoning changes or PUDS.  Require proposals to be in plain English (laymen's terms).  Require 3-D renderings in addition to conceptual drawings (to help people visualize it better).  Make information easily accessible via the Internet (with a user-friendly interface).  Consider increasing the amount of notice given for PUD proposals.

Several people indicated that public meetings should be held in the evenings, to allow more community input.  (ie: TMAPC, BOA, etc.) (The TMAPC is considering this, so let them know you support the idea.)

They talked about issues that often cause controversy, such as building heights that don't take into consideration changes in ground elevation.  (In some cases, the building height is approved, but the developer then raises the ground elevation by 8-10 feet, which changes the perspective from adjacent properties.)

They also discussed "visual screening" and how this means different things to different people.  Does it mean a fence?  A wall?  Landscaping?  Berms?  Wouldn't better options increase neighbor satisfaction with adjacent developments?

Also, the impact of lighting on the surrounding properties should be minimized.  (Patric, did you hear that?  Perhaps now would be a good time to talk to some folks on this task force.)

There was also a discussion of whether PUD's should ever "expire."  There have been cases where a PUD is approved, but nothing is built for years.  In the meantime, demographics change, neighborhoods change, people's desires/priorities change, etc.  Then, out of the blue, a development appears that is not longer appropriate for the surroundings...b/c it was approved long ago, and nobody has a say.

One suggestion was to require platting at the time of the PUD approval.  (Wayne Alberty explained this, but I still don't totallly understand what this means.)

Another concern was the issue of PUDs being approved, where developers then get several "minor amendments" that cumulatively, change the entire proposal... but they get approved over time and under the radar...essentially w/o neighbors' knowledge.

The next meeting will be on March 27 at 4:00 at City Hall.  The one following that will be in the evening.  These meetings are open to the public.

The above summary is from memory.  I'll check my notes later and see if I missed anything.

[RipTout]

Platting at the same time the PUD is filed would fall under "taxation". The value for tax purposes would increase whereas under just a PUD the property tax would be based on the underlying zoning and use.

Careful with JP's CYA process. The debacle at 81st and Mingo can be placed on everyone from the broker, buyer, developer, BOA, and mainly COTPW.