Cumberland BC: The Cumberlander Articles Section
Uncategorized · 20th May 2007
Editor
Addressing the citizens of Cumberland, John Evans makes the following declaration on the Trilogy At Cumberland website:
“We believe that our proposed development demonstrates the most up-to-date practises in community planning, infrastructure development, social and economic sustainability, and environmental stewardship. As the citizens of Cumberland become more familiar with the ideas proposed in the Master Plan, we trust that they will recognize and embrace the contribution to the community that “Smart Growth” planning principles and responsible development bestows.”
- John Evans, President, Trilogy Group of Companies.
Speaking only for myself, I affirm to Mr. Evans that I do recognize and embrace the contribution to the community that “Smart Growth” planning principles and responsible development bestows. I recognize and embrace some of what the Trilogy Master Plan proposes as being representative of Smart Growth but I am not convinced that the process employed by Trilogy to present that Plan to our community has been so smart.
Why am I not convinced? Because when I read the following introduction to the Smart Growth BC Policy on Early and Ongoing Community Engagement I cannot reconcile it with my perception of a high level of community dissatisfaction with Trilogy's approach.
Introduction
A fundamental tenet of smart growth is that citizens and stakeholders are assets to be engaged in planning for the future of their communities.
Citizens are the best experts about the places they live and how those places might best grow and progress. Their informed participation can vastly improve development processes, and ultimately, the communities in which we work, learn, and live.
Therefore, a true smart growth vision must be established through meaningful engagement of the people who will feel the long-term social, environmental, and economic implications. Every community that strives for smart growth needs to have a community vision that has been developed through a high quality process of citizen engagement. Furthermore, efforts towards smart growth must also provide for ongoing engagement in a meaningful way.
In many communities, rhetoric about smart growth has not led to real change in the fundamental assumptions about the value of citizens. Participation is treated as a mere legislated requirement. Dysfunctional processes are used repeatedly, and the smart growth label is applied to projects or plans that were not created with high quality community engagement. As a result, citizens are fighting back: twenty hour public hearings and court challenges of land use decisions are becoming ever more common.
Fortunately, enlightened local governments and developers are embracing the idea that citizens are assets. This policy outlines the tangible benefits for citizens, local government, and the development community when good faith partnerships are a central part of land development.
I encourage all Cumberlanders to step forth here and now to express what they feel about this important issue. Simply click on the WRITE A COMMENT button at the bottom of this article, enter your thoughts and click ADD IT. Your comments will appear shortly.
“We believe that our proposed development demonstrates the most up-to-date practises in community planning, infrastructure development, social and economic sustainability, and environmental stewardship. As the citizens of Cumberland become more familiar with the ideas proposed in the Master Plan, we trust that they will recognize and embrace the contribution to the community that “Smart Growth” planning principles and responsible development bestows.”
- John Evans, President, Trilogy Group of Companies.
Speaking only for myself, I affirm to Mr. Evans that I do recognize and embrace the contribution to the community that “Smart Growth” planning principles and responsible development bestows. I recognize and embrace some of what the Trilogy Master Plan proposes as being representative of Smart Growth but I am not convinced that the process employed by Trilogy to present that Plan to our community has been so smart.
Why am I not convinced? Because when I read the following introduction to the Smart Growth BC Policy on Early and Ongoing Community Engagement I cannot reconcile it with my perception of a high level of community dissatisfaction with Trilogy's approach.
Introduction
A fundamental tenet of smart growth is that citizens and stakeholders are assets to be engaged in planning for the future of their communities.
Citizens are the best experts about the places they live and how those places might best grow and progress. Their informed participation can vastly improve development processes, and ultimately, the communities in which we work, learn, and live.
Therefore, a true smart growth vision must be established through meaningful engagement of the people who will feel the long-term social, environmental, and economic implications. Every community that strives for smart growth needs to have a community vision that has been developed through a high quality process of citizen engagement. Furthermore, efforts towards smart growth must also provide for ongoing engagement in a meaningful way.
In many communities, rhetoric about smart growth has not led to real change in the fundamental assumptions about the value of citizens. Participation is treated as a mere legislated requirement. Dysfunctional processes are used repeatedly, and the smart growth label is applied to projects or plans that were not created with high quality community engagement. As a result, citizens are fighting back: twenty hour public hearings and court challenges of land use decisions are becoming ever more common.
Fortunately, enlightened local governments and developers are embracing the idea that citizens are assets. This policy outlines the tangible benefits for citizens, local government, and the development community when good faith partnerships are a central part of land development.
I encourage all Cumberlanders to step forth here and now to express what they feel about this important issue. Simply click on the WRITE A COMMENT button at the bottom of this article, enter your thoughts and click ADD IT. Your comments will appear shortly.
Write A Comment (Below)
Smart Growth
Comment by Kate Greening on 28th May 2007
Smart growth is the basis of our OCP even since Council amended the plan. At the very first meeting in March 2006, Trilogy commented on how hard we had all worked on our OCP and then stated that they were there to tell us how Trilogy was going to change the OCP. At no time has Trilogy actually asked the people "What did you mean by this? or what do you want to see here?"
Instead, we learn that their idea of "listening to the land" is merely listening to the real estate trends for the use that will create the most dollars.
Our whole planning department doesn't believe in smart growth. The planning is done from the planner's point of view with no input from the citizens. An example would be the Design Guidelines for Lot 4 at the interchange. The new town centre no sign guidelines, exemption from the sign bylaws of Cumberland.
Where is the ongoing discussions with the citizens as required by Smart Growth...in my opinion what we are seeing is the same old Dumb growth.
Smart growth is the basis of our OCP even since Council amended the plan. At the very first meeting in March 2006, Trilogy commented on how hard we had all worked on our OCP and then stated that they were there to tell us how Trilogy was going to change the OCP. At no time has Trilogy actually asked the people "What did you mean by this? or what do you want to see here?"
Instead, we learn that their idea of "listening to the land" is merely listening to the real estate trends for the use that will create the most dollars.
Our whole planning department doesn't believe in smart growth. The planning is done from the planner's point of view with no input from the citizens. An example would be the Design Guidelines for Lot 4 at the interchange. The new town centre no sign guidelines, exemption from the sign bylaws of Cumberland.
Where is the ongoing discussions with the citizens as required by Smart Growth...in my opinion what we are seeing is the same old Dumb growth.
Smart Growth
Comment by Ron Hansen on 24th May 2007
I have read the SG website. I know who some of the academics are that support SG and they are knowledgeable people. However the money behind SG seems to come from the big developers who build the 500 unit developments, which may follow the SG precepts. I think John Evans is coming to us after we have already seen his dismissal of the OCP, and his behind the scenes negotiations with some of the council and the mayor.
I have read the SG website. I know who some of the academics are that support SG and they are knowledgeable people. However the money behind SG seems to come from the big developers who build the 500 unit developments, which may follow the SG precepts. I think John Evans is coming to us after we have already seen his dismissal of the OCP, and his behind the scenes negotiations with some of the council and the mayor.
The Big Debate
Comment by Teresa Wild on 20th May 2007
I am repeating myself, but reiteration is perhaps needed....
We are asking for the developer to follow the OCP. The developer says they are listening to the citizens of Cumberland. Why, then, is the developer going right ahead with their plans and ignoring our protests? This is NOT taking the citizens' concerns seriously. Listening is one step, hearing is another, and then true communication will inevitabley ensue.
The OCP is a result of a long process of a consolidation of values, much work on the part of a majority of Cumberlanders, with the purpose of dealing with developers as they appear. The first time a serious proposal is made, the OCP is put aside. It strikes me as a tragic waste of time if our OCP is ignored. What was the purpose of making one in the first place?
The powers that be may well argue that our OCP is not being ignored, and that the process of ammendment is a part of the dialogue required as developers present their ideas. But my perception is that as soon as there is a point of contention, the benefit of doubt is always allowed to the developer, with the citizens feeling short-changed. True dialogue involves both parties. True compromise means that each party keeps an open mind and a willingness to be flexible.
We are considering our options with Trilogy, and feel that they are telling us that when we see their plan in its entirety, we will come around, because it's SMART, implying that we need to be educated to know what is good for us.
We are saying we (the citizens) know what's good for us, and Trilogy needs to hear US. They (the developers) are the strangers at our doorstep, and they are the ones who need to be educated about the process of engagement, according to Smart Growth BC Principles.
I am repeating myself, but reiteration is perhaps needed....
We are asking for the developer to follow the OCP. The developer says they are listening to the citizens of Cumberland. Why, then, is the developer going right ahead with their plans and ignoring our protests? This is NOT taking the citizens' concerns seriously. Listening is one step, hearing is another, and then true communication will inevitabley ensue.
The OCP is a result of a long process of a consolidation of values, much work on the part of a majority of Cumberlanders, with the purpose of dealing with developers as they appear. The first time a serious proposal is made, the OCP is put aside. It strikes me as a tragic waste of time if our OCP is ignored. What was the purpose of making one in the first place?
The powers that be may well argue that our OCP is not being ignored, and that the process of ammendment is a part of the dialogue required as developers present their ideas. But my perception is that as soon as there is a point of contention, the benefit of doubt is always allowed to the developer, with the citizens feeling short-changed. True dialogue involves both parties. True compromise means that each party keeps an open mind and a willingness to be flexible.
We are considering our options with Trilogy, and feel that they are telling us that when we see their plan in its entirety, we will come around, because it's SMART, implying that we need to be educated to know what is good for us.
We are saying we (the citizens) know what's good for us, and Trilogy needs to hear US. They (the developers) are the strangers at our doorstep, and they are the ones who need to be educated about the process of engagement, according to Smart Growth BC Principles.