The Northfield Planning Commission is undertaking a monumental task: we’re FINALLY moving ahead with revising Northfield’s antiquated Land Development Regulations (zoning ordinances).
Northfield likes to think of itself as a progressive community, but its zoning ordinances are stuck in the 1960s. In addition to just being bad, they aren’t congruent with the city’s
Comprehensive Plan (an overly wordy and pedantic document which contains some really, really good ideas).
The Planning Commission and the City Council have had their hands tied on land use for a very long time. Case in point – when we have to review a “preliminary plat” for proposed division and use of a land parcel for residential development, it’s generally something that will end up looking like a bunch of beige and taupe "snout houses" (thanks to Chip Cuccio on the “Development in Northfield” discussion on the Issues list). Then the Planning Commission gets the blame, which, I suppose, is fair. BUT… the fault is really in the zoning ordinances, because that’s exactly the kind of development the ordinances don’t simply allow, they foster. How this happens, and the importance of urban design, is a whole ‘nother thing and I won’t tackle it now. Suffice it to say that we may not like or want another faux-chateau beige subdivision, but if the laws on the books say “yes, you can,” then we aren’t in a position to legally say “no, you can’t.”
When you have to go by the book but don’t like the results, then the only option is to rewrite the book. That’s my #1 priority on the Planning Commission. But before we have someone go over the ordinances with a fine-tooth comb and bring them into conformance with the Comp Plan, we have to be sure that the Comp Plan is current and clearly says what we mean, so the Planning Commission is in the process of editing and distilling the Comp Plan into a more user-friendly document. The current Plan was written right after the Target issue, when a lot of civic-minded people were very polarized, and much of the Comp Plan’s language reflects the fallout from that, and the desire for a big civic group hug. At the Planning Commission’s meeting this week, there appeared to be consensus that what we’ll be doing will be along the lines of condensing and streamlining, but not substantially changing the content.
If I get enough feedback and requests, I may even post the revisions-in-process so that anyone can take a crack at them before the Planning Commission makes recommendations to the City Council.
Comments
As a newer commissioner or the Planning Board, I hope to make a difference by bring clarity to our message.
Tracy, I respect your courage in trying to inform the citizens of Northfield as to the ongoing processes of government. It is sort of like the making of sausage and, sadly, most people shreak and run away. The results of the ongoing efforts of the various city boards and administration is; however, what we, the citizens of Northfield, have to abide.
To the citizens of Northfield, I ask of you to at least pay attention to what is going on in our community. It is your community as much as it is our community. As a member of the Planning Board, I will talk with many people outside the council chambers and, more importantly, listen.
Northfield has a great heritage. It is the job of entire community to protect Northfield's heritage, strengthen Northfield's advantage as a leadership community and lead us into the future.
Bill Gordon
1800 Maple Street
Northfield
My hat goes off to anyone willing to donate their time, talent, and energy to something like this. I appreciate the effort to change and streamline this process. But are we sure the majority of the people here dont want "another faux-chateau beige subdivision"? Apple Valley seems to be full of them, and I dont hear them complaining. At the end of the day, will we just be substituting the preferences of a few people for the preferences of a few other people? What criteria will be used to determine what's acceptable and what isnt? Will the opinions of a cross section of citizens be polled, or is it up to them to come forward or not be heard? Will the new standards ensure that new divisions will be built only by people with a lot of money building houses for other people with a lot of money? Is there a danger in this process that Northfield will be a contrast between Knob Hill and dogtown, with very little in between? As usual, I'm pretty good with questions but not so good with answers. HOpefully, people will chime in on what they want to see this community become (cue here Lennon's "Imagine").
Tracy, welcome to my world! Tracy and I go way back, we were both part of the crew that founded NCO (see: northfield.org) for example. My experience with Tracy was that if she was new to something (like founding a non-profit), she dug in, learned how, and then made it happen. I am excited to hear that she is now part of the Northfield Planning Commission. As Chair of the Dundas Planning Commission, I am planning to work with the Northfield Planning Commission to make this area jointly friendly to the developments we would like. I think the alternative is that the developers find and use loopholes in the Comp Plans and associated ordinances of each to leverage the other. The old way was to let the developers use differences to drive us to the bottom, like a pride of lions working a herd of zebra, preying on the weak. Now, working together, perhaps we can instead join our developers in a race to the top! Dundas is pretty far along in its Comp Plan revision process, in fact, what I hope is the final public hearing is this Thursday, 18 May 2006, at 7PM. We are working hard to make sure that the macro level design is trail friendly (bikes, walkers, horses), environmentally friendly (e.g., non-point emissions handled at the source rather than being dumped into storm sewers), and small-town friendly (no snout-houses here either). Although some recent developments may seem "Apple Valley suburb, plan 9", rest assured that the planning commission is firmly behind plans to prevent future plats from following that design philosophy. The trick, as Tracy pointed out, is to ensure that Plans and associated Codes prevent the "uglies". Loosely written codes mean that we often face a chorus (usually off-key and pretty ugly) of developers' lawyers singing those ol' "you never SAID we couldn't do THAT, so we wanna we wanna" blues. And if the two municipalities have strongly dissimilar codes, developers will find those differences and use them to drag the whole process down to the bottom. Tracy, I see in your writings that you have no intention of letting that happen on your watch, so, welcome to the world of planning!