|
| Conflict: |
Neighbors
vs. planning board about traffic from proposed project |
| Solution: |
Relationships
improved. Roads narrowed. Density reduced. Walkways and park
added. |
| Abstract: |
In
Byram the collaborative planning team revised a conventional
twelve lot subdivision to include a walkway that made a loop
through the project connecting two adjacent neighborhoods.
They also created a totlot park near a small hemlock grove
and rock outcrop that was to be blasted away for the new road.
They recommended that the new road be narrower and follow
the existing contours of the land so that the hemlock grove
would be spared and become part of the park. |
| Testimonials: |
| “They
had been battling for almost 2 years. There was a developer,
two sets of neighbors and the planning board. Everybody
was pretty frustrated. When we started this process,
no one was really talking to each other or knowing what
to do. The big issue was that no one was talking to
anybody!. I mean feelings were that hurt! The planning
board was in the hot seat. We said, ‘Well, it’s
our community; what if we do it this way!’ We met
at one of the neighbors’ houses with neighbors
from both sides of the development and the developer.
In six months it was resolved! We relocated buildings
and put in lots of walking paths and greenspace. It's
going to enhance the whole community; it's going to
be a really pretty development, and it's going to work!"
|
| Audrey
O’Connell, collaborative planning participant |
| |
| “We
had been locked in a difficult, disjointed situation
with alot of misunderstanding. With this process we
found ourselves sitting in someone’s dining room
discussing the issues calmly. It was a whole other ballpark!
In a private setting with a relaxed atmosphere, they
can see who you are, you see who your neighbors are,
and you address each others concerns. It’s much
easier and much more fruitful. Now we are on excellent
terms. There is faith and trust on both sides. The greatest
thing is when you sit down with the neighbors you get
a feeling about those people who will be participating
in the process at a public meeting. For us, we actually
saved some money because of what they wanted to see
developed there. We don’t have to do the wider
roads mandated by the municipality. We have smaller
roads and a little park and sidewalks. They came up
with some good suggestions that are saleable items.
So, we learned alot, and we benefited.” |
| Dennis
McConnell, Developer and attorney |
| |
| "The
best thing about this collaborative planning process
is that it asked us to play a real role in the development
of our community. We shared the table and spoke freely
with the developer and local officials. We made ourselves
a powerful part of the process so we had a real chance
to help design good development. People share very similar
ideas about what a community should be. This was our
best chance to achieve it - and we did!" |
| Margaret
McGarrity, Environmental Commission Chairperson |
| |
| |
|
|
|
