EDITORIAL NOTE

This Fall newsletter addresses the theme of how the studio system of professional training has been used for community service, outreach, and technical assistance to neighborhoods, public agencies and clients. Ron Turner, AICP was responsible for developing this theme and soliciting articles to provide a comprehensive discussion of this topic.

Suggested themes for upcoming newsletters include:

• Historic preservation as economic development: how does the popularity of heritage tourism spark preservation?
• Economics of land development: how can cities or stakeholders encourage development?
• How well is the GMA serving us? What will the results of the Buildable Lands Inventory indicate? How does the GMA affect housing affordability?
• Watershed Planning: How can public agencies partner to develop policies and programs to foster sustainable stormwater practices?

If you are working with a program or project that supports any of the above topics, we would love to hear from you and include your article in an upcoming newsletter. Also, we welcome suggestions for additional newsletter topics.

LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT

October 9, 2006
Puget Sound Section, Washington Chapter
American Planning Association

Greetings:

This letter will be a brief one, to update status of several events, particularly the Legal Conference and the Holiday Party.

At the outset, let me thank you for all your kind thoughts and courtesy and the flowers from the APA Chapter, related to my family loss two weeks ago. Steve Speidel, Vice President for RW Thorpe Associates, also lost a family member the same week. What we sometimes forget to say is "thank you" for what you do, the professionalism you bring and the friendships we share. So Thank You!

On a business note, the Annual Holiday Party is scheduled for Thursday December 7th at the World Trade Center (Pier 56). Hiller West, President Elect, is coordinating the efforts, and it looks like it will be bigger and better than past events. Please plan on attending and celebrating. Congratulations on everyone's hard work for the year!

The second major item is the Law Conference, scheduled for Tuesday, March 6, at the Meydenbauer Conference Center. I am happy to announce that Attorney General Rob McKenna will be our Keynote Speaker, and he possibly will assist with one of the sessions before or after lunch. We have a variety of different topics as follow-ups to this fall's election - critical areas, taking issues, and other topics we have had in the past. If you have a particular subject you want to see emphasized, please contact any one of your Board members, as there will be a discussion at our meeting this month, and in November, to firm up the schedule.

My final thought is related to Initiative 933. I trust that several of you saw my article on Takings, whole and partial. This is a topic that I think will be with us for some time. Let me say that reviewing the Initiative, it is, as we all who have read it understand, poorly crafted, unclear, and very poor legislation. I have heard this from industry members from real estate, building, and other entities who realize that the legislation as proposed is clearly flawed.

I, for one, was not upset or concerned about this being an election on this matter. I am a firm believer in letting people vote on issues. It provides policy direction for planners and elected officials. I trust that people will take the time to become informed, and Intitiative 933 will be defeated.

In closing, let us examine why this Initiative has had so much interest in Oregon and Washington. We, as planners who help draft regulations, should be mindful that 933 is an indicator of people's perception about land use regulation. The cause is some of the regulations, and clearly, in some cases land use regulations may be at the "tipping point" of significant impact on buildable lands, affordable housing, and the ability of communities to grow, i.e. to balance all the goals of the Growth Management Act, not just a few. I would suggest to you that when the City of Kent spends 2 years attempting to develop Critical Areas Regulations, only to be sued by the Department of Ecology, and the City of Tacoma follows Kent's adoption process, itself being challenged by state agencies and special interest groups, that the reaction is one that is fueling the 933 issue. So my observation is that we need to work to ensure 933 does not pass, however, we need to also address the fairness of land use regulations that have caused the initiative to be before us - we can seek more balanced regulations.

Let's celebrate No on 933 on December 7th!

Respectfully,

Robert W. Thorpe, AICP
President

STUDIO SYSTEM OF PROFESSIONAL TRAINING

Studio System of Professional Training
By Ron Turner, AICP and Hilda Blanco M.C.R.P., Ph.D., Chair of the Department of Urban Design and Planning, University of Washington

The Studio

Most professionals in the design and planning professions have been trained in the studio system. Students are assigned "real" problems and work individually, or in teams, to prepare solutions. These solutions are evaluated by faculty who interact with each student during the development of analyses and designs responding to the problem. The traditional studio tries to simulate practice while permitting time for exploration and training similar to clinical environments found in medicine and law. In most cases the faculty acts as the surrogate for the "client" during the process even when the problems are based on actual situations. However, this typical format does not always fit well with preparation for practitioners in planning where structuring and informing the "process" can dominate the professional's effort. This is particularly true in contemporary work that is frequently "value based", bottom up, rather then technical and top down. Therefore the issue facing faculty instructing in the planning curriculum is how, in addition to training in rigorous technical analysis, to engage the students in a situation that involves a "client" in a continuing relationship rather than limiting the "client" to a peripheral role. This also avoids the issue of "exploitation" of "client" groups where they provide the problem and then are detached from the solution. In response to this academic objective, contemporary studios are frequently formatted to have continual interaction with the client group. The students will assess the situation, develop a scope of work, establish a process, define outputs and prepare a product that has utility, not only for training, but useful to the client in carrying forward their program. This format creates a contract between the client and the student and changes the character of the studio from exclusively a learning situation to a form of quasi- professional public service. Studio teachers have found that this type of engagement engenders an energy and focus by the students because it makes them responsible for a socially useful product that will be relied upon by community or institutional client. The effort becomes less abstract and is focused on the interactions between the role of the consultant, technical studies, and political and social processes. The experience accelerates the transformation from student to practitioner. There are, of course, significant limitations to this format since the world outside academia doesn't operate on a quarter or semester basis and the students' products frequently need revision, refinement or must be restructured to be useful to the "client". This is especially pertinent where is no institutional continuity to manage or adapt the plan. More about this later.

Examples at UW

We have included a few examples to illustrate studios that fit the template that combine educational and service to the public at the University of Washington's Department of Urban Design and Planning. Over the past five years, the Department has developed a model for conducting planning studios which involves sponsorship of the studios by real clients. Communities in need of planning assistance from the Department provide partial funding for the cost of the studio. This ensures that the client is closely involved throughout the studio work from setting the scope with students to providing ongoing input. It also ensures that the studio work is used by the client. This has been a successful model generating six awards for the Department's studios and practicum this past year. The South Lake Union Studio conducted during Winter/Spring of 2005 obtained a 2006 WA Chapter APA award. In this studio, the client was the City of Seattle's Department of Planning and Development which sought assistance in revising the 1998 neighborhood plan for the area, in particular to provide a broad array of development alternatives for South Lake Union which the city would further examine. The students analyzed issues such as community identity, connectivity, green development, housing, streetscape, and held an open house on their findings. The report itself became a toolbox for DPD staff to engage the community in the official revision of the neighborhood plan. See webpage for studio report: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Planning/ South_Lake_Union/UWStudioReport/default.asp

The Palmer, Alaska studio, "Pioneering Palmer's Future" won the 2006 National AICP Award for Outstanding Student Project for application of the planning process. The studio had several distinctive features. Although the project was conducted in a distance mode (Palmer is a rural town in Alaska, and the students carried out much of the work in Seattle), it was a model of strong participatory processes. The project was initiated with 10 days of site work in this small rural town of about 5,500 people, in which 20 students and 3 faculty conducted surveys, interviews, and 20 meetings held with individual stakeholder groups, as well as a community open house. Ongoing communication with key staff led to the refinement of plan strategies. At the end of the project, students provided final presentations to the Planning Commission, the City Council, and to the full community. The project benefited from an interdisciplinary team of urban planning and landscape architecture faculty and students, who were able to bring their respective skills and knowledge to bear on growth management issues. The project focused not only on traditional regulatory tools, such as zoning, but also more innovative tools, such as business improvement districts, interlocal agreements and land trusts, and developed specific action steps for the community to implement its plans. The project has great potential for applicability in other locations. Although Palmer is quite a unique town in Alaska, the issues confronting it, as a historic town surrounded by farms and experiencing strong development pressures, are common to many towns throughout the US. The effectiveness of the studio project is already evident. As a result of the plan, a group of property owners formed a Business Improvement District. The City itself, building on the work of the studio, developed a draft comprehensive plan which incorporated many of the studio recommendations (http://www.cityofpalmer.org). By utilizing the studio report, the consultants who prepared the City's Comp Plan update were able to do so with cost savings to the City. By the end of the studio, the City Attorney was implementing one of the report's recommendation, by drafting a bond issue to provide seed money for the formation of a land trust to deal with the issue of farmland conversion. As importantly, the strong outreach to the farming community conducted by the students engaged the previously alienated farmers, so that by the end of the process, farmers were attending meetings and volunteering for developing the land trust. These studio experiences although challenging for both faculty and students provide a real-life experience working with local officials and communities with multiple interests. Students are able to apply the analytic skills they learn in other courses to planning challenges with great relevance to their client communities. They are able to interact with officials and community members throughout the studio, and they also are able to see the palpable outcome of their work, as it is incorporated in official planning documents, and projects.

Looking at the future

The examples of the studio projects described above illustrate how an intense student learning experience can successfully serve the public and stimulate significant benefits to the subject communities. The two major limitations are also apparent: namely money and time frame. Many communities, neighborhood associations, non-profits and small business groups are not yet able to support a planning effort since one of the primary functions of the studio process is to develop their capacity to plan and fund their operations. The other constraint is based on the academic quarter or semester system where the project is essentially deemed complete when the students move on. The client must then find another consultant or agency to refine and carry on the effort unless the University or an individual faculty member continues the project under contract. It is not difficult for well established communities or agencies to accomplish but can be quite hard for groups that are new and have limited continuity and financial capacity.

The traditional response to the issue of cost is to organize community planning studios as part of the required curriculum and cover faculty and project expenses within normal departmental budgets. Funds can also be obtained from public agencies, communities or institutions where the studio content has clear community value beyond that of training and professional development (see the note below for clarification of the difference between fees and external support). The issue of academic time frame constraints is sometimes more difficult since it can requires a stable, funded, permanent unit that can enlist the participation of students and faculty in a continuous process of academic training and community service. One possible alternative is to expand the role and funding of the Northwest Center for Livable Communities that already exists at the University to include responsibility for the activities listed above. Under any circumstance, the problem of how to expand the training of planning students by engaging them in the process of community service requires continuing attention by the profession and schools. We have an answer - we just have to make it work effectively.

Note: Student fees were first attached to required courses, not just studios, in all the degree programs of the College of Architecture and Urban Planning in Fall Quarter of 2002. The fees cover a variety of college services such as extraordinary building access and dedicated studio space, computer/IT infrastructure and support staff, orientation programs. When cities sponsor studios, they are providing funds that the Department can use to enhance the studio experience, in some cases by incorporating a professional in the instructional team for the studio, or by providing funds for the preparation and printing of studio documents. The funds generated by fees and the funds generated by sponsors of studios are used for different purposes.

FALL '06 BROWN BAG SERIES

Announcing the Puget Sound Section APA Fall '06 Brown Bag Series of Continuing Education

Come to the FREE session you need to do your job better! APA-subsidized lunches, only $2! RSVP to Steve Ladd, ladds@ci.bonney-lake.wa.us, or (253) 447-4350.

BROWN BAG SERIES RECAPS

Recaps of the Summer 2006 Brown Bags
By Brown Bag Coordinator Steve Ladd except as noted

Vision 2020+20
8/2/06

Questions billed in the event description didn't have answers. But the audience seemed satisfied with the lofty scope as described by Mike Lonergan, Kimberly Freeman, Karen Wolfe, and especially Norman Abbott: to establish a common vision for the region will add 1.6 million people. The elaborate consensus-building machine is inching toward a preferred alternative that will likely be a hybrid of the "Metropolitan Cities" (the most densely focused) and "Larger Cities" (second most densely focused) alternatives. These alternatives show where the new development will occur, and depict various type of centers and "regional geographies." Whether these are descriptive, predictive, or normative is not entirely clear. The Multi-County Planning Policies will also be updated.

Wisdom from the Mountaintop
8/9/06

Bob Cornish, Ken Dueker, Art Grey, and Roberta Lewandowski of the WA Chapter APA Senior Action Committee (with assists from Ed Davis and Ron McConnell) swapped tales of the old days. They gave a flavor of what planning what like in the fifties through seventies, a simpler though not necessarily better time. Plans were big and bold, but weren't necessarily implemented. Some professionals were social planners, some were male chauvinists. There were relatively few planners, but they had more freedom and fun! Our speakers lamented a seeming loss of idealism among planners, a failure to claim the public's attention (Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth ignores land use), and a fracturing of the profession into specialties. Why isn't there a land use / environmental advisor in the governor's office? WE ARE PLANNERS!

The Power of SEPA
8/16/06

Marvin Vialle, retired DOE, expounded upon SEPA's Fundamentals, Fallacies, Flexibility, Flaws, and Filosophy (thank you for the belabored alliteration, Marvin). SEPA is a powerful and flexible tool for protecting the environment, but as practiced it entails a lot of wasted effort, such as standardized agency comment letters, information-less checklists, and EISs with too much description.

Mike Paine of Bellevue thinks SEPA should only be a safety net for gaps in our protective regulations. SEPA should be integrated into long-range planning and permit processes. Notices of application should double as SEPA notices (the Optional DNS process). Legislation is needed to eliminate pointless SEPA effort. Another problem is coordinating with Public Works on what determines a complete application.

Jack Pace of Tukwila puts a single planner in charge of all aspects of a (typically commercial or industrial) permit process to make sure SEPA is integrated. Tukwila uses Planned Action EISs and development agreements, especially in redevelopment areas. These expedite subsequent permitting and help developers get quicker financing. Tukwila also minimizes peer review of scientific studies (wetlands, geo-tech, etc.) by using a list of consultants that supposedly don't need it. Application forms are designed for efficient use by applicant and lead planner. Jack thinks agencies should expedite the threshold determination (or avoid it altogether through Planned Actions), then use concurrency review, critical area codes, etc., to enforce the proper decision. SEPA isn't meant to provide the main forum for a project's substantive review. SEPA mitigation conditions are over-used. Jack feels that the "permit consultant" trend is a sign of system failure. It shouldn't be that hard!

In short, our newer environmental regulations have changed the face of SEPA, but it remains a vital tool.

The Future of Mobile Home Parks
8/23/06

Michael Luis of the Housing Partnership pondered the economic oddities of mobile home parks (MHPs). They provide cheap housing yet they are cash cows and are found even in up-scale communities such as Juanita Beach. Some owner/renters keep their homes nice, but the more MHs are remodeled the harder they are to move if the park closes. Overall, MHs tend to devalue over time. Since the MH pads are designed for specific sizes of units, the MHP owners are often on the look-out for new renters that happen to have that size of home to move in. Local government policy toward possible MHP closures tends to be reactive. They are either good or bad depending on one's sympathies.

Judith Stoloff of Snohomish County said that, though no new MHPs are being built, hundreds still exist in our region, especially along old Highway 99. Currently 22 MHPs are in the process of closing. A MHP often flips to another use when the owner decides to get out of the business and the next generation doesn't want to manage it. If the tenants lobby well they may get the zoning changed so the land can't be used for any other purpose, but that devalues the land. Zoning is a weak protection tool because the park owners are also organized, and the MHP is often on land which the community wants for another purpose. Sometimes that alternative purpose is higher density housing that is better suited for public housing subsidy than the MHP itself. (MHP densities are 6-15 units per acre.) When the end of a MHP approaches the decline can be long and sordid, as maintenance ceases altogether and social problems worsen. When the MHP finally closes, CTED has a relocation assistance program but not much funding.

Initiative 933 (the proposed takings law) and APA's response
8/30/06

In November voters will decide on the Property Fairness Initiative, mandating compensation whenever regulations reduce property values, retroactively to 1995 and maybe before, depending on ambiguities in the text. Joe Tovar of the City of Shoreline and WA Chapter APA President Steve Butler said APA is working with a coalition of other groups to defeat I-933. See http://www.noon933.org/. The "No on I-933" campaign is concentrating on three fatal flaws:

1) it will lead to irresponsible development, thereby decreasing property values,

2) it will cost the taxpayers $3.5 to $4.5 billion dollars over the next 10 years ($2,400 to $3,000 per household), and

3) it will trigger a plague of legal problems due to its abominable wording.

The "No on I-933" coalition will roll out radio, TV, and newspaper ads in October. Planners are advised to campaign against I-933 BUT on their own time with their own resources and not on a government computer. Effective devises include writing letters to the editor and having your city council hold a public hearing on I-933. The more voters know the more likely they will vote against. If it passes planners will have to start administering the "pay or waive" process on December 7, 2006!