|
You're receiving this newsletter because you are an interested party of the Northeast Georgia Regional Commission Having trouble reading this email? View it on your browser. Not interested anymore? Unsubscribe Instantly. |
|
|
In this issue
Forward this email
Unsubscribe
Contact Us
|
Dear subscriber, 
Northeast Georgia RC Embarks on Development of Regional Plan 2035
The Regional Commission last developed a Regional Plan in 2004. Since then, the region has experienced significant growth; endured a three-year drought; identified a need for water conservation, new water storage facilities, and greater protection of water resources; embarked on examples of Smart Growth; began evaluating and planning for transportation choices . . .the list goes on. While individually, cities and counties throughout our region are undertaking some good planning, it is our combined efforts toward regional planning that will offer the best opportunity to sustain Northeast Georgia. Regional Plan 2035 will consist of two phases. The first is development of a comprehensive Regional Resource Plan for protection and management of designated Regionally Important Resources (RIR). The Resource Plan will include a map of designated RIRs, best practices for development occurring near a designated RIR, and general policies and protection measures that may be used by local government in making decisions that affect the management of RIRs. The second phase is development of a Regional Assessment, Stakeholder Involvement Program, and Regional Agenda that will comprise the“comprehensive plan” for the region. This is a two-year initiative that began in September 2009. The Georgia Department of Community Affairs established rules and procedures for Regionally Important Resources that include identification of RIRs, development of a plan for protection and management of these resources, and review of activities potentially impacting these resources. The rules and procedures require: ● An enhanced focus on protection and management of important natural and cultural resources throughout the state; ● Careful consideration of, and planning for, impacts of new development on these important resources; and ● Improved local, regional and state level coordination in protecting and managing the important resources. Work began on the new regional plan with the solicitation of nominations for Regionally Important Resources. A RIR is a natural or heritage resource that is of sufficient size or importance to warrant special consideration by the local government having jurisdiction over the resource. Local governments, individuals, and organizations submitted 37 nominations for resources in Northeast Georgia. Nominated resources were evaluated by the RC’s Planning Advisory Committee against criteria adopted by the RC Council; the Committee will recommend 25 of them to the Council for designation. In addition to the nominated resources, the state vital areas as defined by the RIR Rules and Procedures will be included as designated RIRs. The list of recommended resources and a map of those resources and state vital areas are available on our web site. Following designation by the RC Council, Planning Division staff will develop a comprehensive Regional Resources Plan for protection and management of RIRs. The Plan will include a map of designated RIRs, best practices, and general policies and protection measures that can be implemented by local government to protect designated resources. To further the intent of designating these resources, the RC will evaluate Developments of Regional Impact located within one mile of a designated RIR against the Plan’s best practices. The Regional Resource Plan will be incorporated into the subsequent development of the Regional Plan that will begin in September 2010. In anticipation of developing our Regional Plan 2035, we’ve added a new page to our website to keep you updated on regional planning efforts, documents, and meetings. If you have questions concerning RIRs, please contact Lee Carmon, AICP, at lcarmon@negrc.org. Back to top^
Comprehensive Planning 101
Let’s assume a difficult decision-making process is facing your community’s leadership and residents. For example, an out-of-town developer has purchased a sizeable tract in the heart of prime agricultural territory with the intention of creating a mixed-use “village” of shops, offices, residences, and even civic facilities. Since your community regulates development through a zoning code, the developer has requested a rezoning from Agriculture to Planned Unit Development. Citizens have come out of the woodwork in favor of and in opposition to the proposal. Farmers and environmental groups have banded together to sway elected officials against granting the rezoning, while the chamber of commerce and a regional organization of realtors have put together a PR campaign aimed at garnering support for the project. Smelling blood, local media have chronicled the proposal’s evolution since its inception, and have not spared elected officials much dignity in the process. Wanting to increase property tax collections without raising millage rates and knowing that the PUD process requires government approval at several stages, the elected officials vote to grant the rezoning, 5-2. However, as the project moves from site plan to permitting, staff realizes that the community’s water, sewerage, transportation, and recreation infrastructure cannot sustain the impacts of this development at this particular location. Partly thanks to seeing their names dragged through the mud in the editorial pages, elected officials begin to realize that the decision to grant a rezoning might have been made hastily and erroneously. Following the advice of its attorney, the local government decides that its only option is to uphold the rezoning and provide infrastructure to the development site, at its own cost. The community is now stuck with a project that the majority of its elected officials once favored but now opposes, a loss of agricultural identity, and a costly bill for extending water and sewer lines and increasing road capacity. If only the community had some sort of policy guidelines to assist them in making a decision with such wide-ranging implications… Actually, it does – per Georgia law, every community in the state must develop and adopt a comprehensive plan, or its status as a “Qualified Local Government” will be revoked by the Georgia Department of Community Affairs. In short, the comprehensive plan provides a blueprint for the community’s future, grounded in both analysis of technical data and a strong public involvement process. Essential components include the Community Assessment, a close look at issues and opportunities now and in the future, existing development patterns, and projected growth; the Community Participation Program, an outline of public involvement strategies; and the Community Agenda, a compendium of planning guidelines, both physical- and policy-oriented. The comprehensive plan is an organized, far-reaching, and official document that allows communities to make informed decisions over the long term with a very limited investment in preparation (approximately six to eight months). So let’s back up to near the beginning of this saga, when a proposal has been filed to replace a large swatch of farmland with a densely-built development, and the community’s leaders must decide whether to grant a rezoning. Had staff or elected officials realized the comprehensive plan was patiently awaiting consultation, constructed and adopted for just these purposes, the community could have saved considerable time, money, and unease. In this case, and in many others, the comprehensive plan’s Community Agenda features a number of plainly prescribed tools to preserve farmland while focusing development in or immediately adjacent to areas with adequate infrastructure. These include the Future Development Map, which, with the associated Defining Narrative, presents a physical plan for directing growth to appropriate areas while protecting natural and cultural resources; a list of Policies to address identified Issues and Opportunities, which in this case focus on sense of place and resource degradation; and the Short Term Work Program, which points to discrete and achievable means to implementing the plan’s goals in its first five years, such as partnering with land trusts to preserve open space, developing a farmland protection ordinance, and promoting connectivity between and within developments by situating them closely and creating “complete streets” that safely and pleasantly convey all types of users. Had the community taken the small amount of time required to review its comprehensive plan, it is reasonable to suggest that these components, which are not at all atypical of adopted plans throughout Northeast Georgia, would have lead them to a different conclusion. In fact, this Community Agenda, like many others, encourages in theory the type of development proposed by the project sponsor – compact, mixed, and walkable – but advises against allowing it in areas ill-suited for density. In other words, the community had already prepared, after close scrutiny of available data and significant public input, a template for decision-making that would have afforded leadership the chance to issue a tenable, learned, and relatively easy rejection of the request to rezone. The Community Agenda also would have enabled elected officials and staff to suggest other sites in the area more appropriately suited to the kind of project proposed by the developer, so as not to lose out on the chance for quality growth.
Internet-based Mapping or GIS?In the past several years, online-mapping options have increased in number and ease of operation, providing the user with free, readily-available tools for diverse purposes. However, even when paired together, these services do not constitute a replacement for geographic information systems (GIS) at the local government level. Let’s take a look at the functionality of what’s available online compared to what your community can do with its own GIS or an external GIS provider. Here are some commonly used online applications for mapping: ● Google Maps offers one of the most popular internet mapping tools. You can search for addresses and businesses, get driving directions, and view aerial photography. Or, use Street View to gain the same vantage point of a featured area that anyone on the ground would have. If you are a serious geography buff, download and install Google Earth and have fun with satellite imagery, user photos, or do-it-yourself tours of virtually any place you can imagine! ● Bing Maps is Microsoft’s competing map service to Google Maps; the two applications function in very similar ways. You can search for addresses and businesses, get driving directions, and – different from Google Maps – use “Bird’s Eye” aerial oblique imagery (available for many areas of the US) to achieve much greater clarity than traditional satellite views. ● Other options along these lines include MapQuest and Yahoo! Maps. ● Moving in a different direction, many local governments offer on-line parcel mapping, which allows virtually anyone to access the community’s property ownership and tax data. The most widely used of these services in Georgia counties is operated by Q-Public. These are highly specialized services for searching public records, but also score well in usability and functionality, even for inexperienced users. Although these internet-based mapping services are highly useful for basic queries, they cannot compete with the broad range of features offered by a geographic information system assembled and operated by qualified professionals. In fact, all of the qualities of a free mapping system rely on data created, edited, and maintained within a GIS program (often, these data actually originated in city and county GIS departments). Local governments have increasingly embraced easy and popular online GIS setups that allow the public to access all kinds of available data. The City of Covington and Newton County offer this type of program through their shared Web Mapping Application. The Northeast Georgia Regional Commission also provides online-mapping services - this site requires Microsoft Internet Explorer. Just click on the tab for one of the featured communities to begin exploring; you do not need to log in to use the mapping applications. We can load all of your GIS layers for anyone to view data and print maps, all through remote internet access. The RC’s online-mapping service has many benefits. First, it is an easy way for your government’s many departments to have easy and universal access to the same data for planning, zoning, tax assessment, enforcement, E-911, parks and recreation, and public utilities assistance. Citizens can directly access the data through their web browsers, thus improving customer service and freeing support staff for other responsibilities. RC online-mapping services are available to all member governments for a reasonable monthly subscription fee. The Northeast Georgia Regional Commission’s GIS staff members assist communities with data development, online mapping, and other services. For more information, please contact staff.
Planning for an Entrepreneurial Environment
Economic development and jobs are on the mind of just about everyone today, as Georgia and the U.S. slowly work their way out of the current recession. Traditional measures have become riskier; spending scarce monetary and staff resources on recruiting companies from outside the community means having to compete with cities and counties from all over the country, and there can only be so many winners. Many cities, towns, and rural communities in Georgia have realized that their economic success is reliant on the cultivation of small and local businesses. The concept of “growing one’s own” in this manner is also referred to as economic gardening, and is based on the creation of an entrepreneur-friendly environment within the community. According to the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, Georgia ranked highest in the U.S. for entrepreneurial activity between 1996 and 2008 1. While this study ended before the state felt the pangs of the current recession, that enterprising spirit is a crucial element to harness in any successful economic development strategy. One of the first steps in encouraging entrepreneurship is to determine the types of small businesses that will thrive within your community. During the comprehensive planning process, communities attempt to answer the following questions: What are our assets? Who lives here? What are their skills? What resources, facilities, or amenities do we offer? What is the overall vision for our community’s future? What kind of development do we want, and where? Consider reaching out to young residents, who are often not included in civic matters, during the planning process. A glance at U.S. Census data may show that the 18 to 24-year-old population has been declining in your community, as it is projected to do in many small towns and cities throughout the country. However, as high school and college students are recognizing the challenges they will face in finding a job after graduation, many are seeking opportunities for creating their own businesses . The energy and creativity of entrepreneurs of this age have the potential to enhance your community’s economic health. Engaging young people in planning for the future may empower them to start a business venture closer to home if they see that their needs are taken into consideration during the decision-making process. At the same time, funneling the education and experience of the growing 55+ population into the planning process will increase the likelihood that these residents will remain in the community, perhaps to begin a second or third career themselves. Another type of plan to help promote entrepreneurship is a capital improvement program (CIP). This document is typically developed as an implementation measure of the comprehensive plan, and can support small business growth through the selection and timing of capital projects that can have a significant influence on the “quality-of-life” in your community. While quality-of-life is difficult to measure and varies between jurisdictions, the right combination of factors will help create an entrepreneur-friendly atmosphere. Perhaps start-up business owners could use public meeting space or have access to the internet in the new civic building or library addition, for example. According to the U.S. Small Business Association, home-based businesses make up roughly half of all businesses in the country 2. Does your zoning ordinance allow for home-based businesses in residential areas outright, or is a special permit required? How does it define home occupation? Are certain occupations prohibited? The answers to these questions may determine whether or not certain businesses can begin or thrive in your community. Zoning is also a consideration in the development of community gardens, which in some areas are being started by various groups to grow fruits and vegetables for themselves and for the development of a local food business. Would-be food entrepreneurs that lack space or tools to develop their own gardens benefit from pooled community resources, turning a community garden into a sort of outdoor small business incubator. Partnerships with local institutions, such as schools and senior centers for use of spare kitchen space could enable these individuals to process those fruits and vegetables into value-added products for sale. Provision of space for community gardens may be on either public or private property; these areas can be identified in your community’s comprehensive plan, and subsequently in your zoning ordinance, as was done in the late 1980s in Boston. This is just a handful of examples in which planning can influence the entrepreneurial opportunities in your community. The Northeast Georgia Regional Commission’s Planning Division regularly assists communities in developing planning projects on a variety of issues. For more information, please contact staff. 1 Fairlie, Robert (April 2009). “Kauffman Index of Entrepreneurial Activity: 1996-2008.” Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. 2 Beale, Henry B. R. (2004). “Home-Based Business and Government Regulation.” Prepared for the United States Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy. Back to top^
Events: April – July 2010April 14, 2010 April 15, 2010 April 18-24, 2010 April 24-27, 2010 April 27-30, 2010 May 2010 May 12, 2010 May 14, 2010 May 17-21, 2010 May 20-21, 2010 June 26-29, 2010 July 21-23, 2010 Back to top^ |
|||
|
||||
