Online Stakeholder Engagement Update

One of the components of the community engagement strategy for this project is this blog site.  The blog has also been used as an innovative structure for the project itself; changing how information is gathered and presented; how stakeholders and staff can monitor the project; and, providing information on the blog to improve project accountability to readers.

 

This blog site has been providing up-to-date information relating to the project as would be found in a typical “file”. However it is made available to stakeholders 24 hrs a day, independent of their location, and also includes ways of tracking, researching and commenting on information not available with traditional methods. The City has also included online surveys, multi-media video reports, and video presentations on the blog as ways of improving communication throughout the Project. 

At the conclusion of the initial analysis phase of the Project City staff developed a second blog that detailed the findings (www.cohdelayered.blogspot.com). This second blog was designed as a companion site to the first and has been equally successful in improving information transfer to stakeholders. The effectiveness of these approaches is significant when compared to historic experiences with standard public participation methods within Oak Harbor and other municipalities. 

The following statistics illustrate the success of these innovations in terms of public participation and improving access to project information.

 

COHSUBDIVISION.BLOGSPOT.COM 

• Blog Launch Date: February 18, 2008 
  
• Visits total: 1,032 
  
• Visits Washington: 566 
  
• Visits Regional: 277 
  
• Visits Local: 202 
  
• Returning Local Visits: 127 
  
• Length of Visit Average: 2:32 
  
• Length of Visit Average Local: 3:41 
  
• Local Returning Visitors 
  
• Average Length of Visit: 4:51 
  

COHDELAYERED.BLOGSPOT.COM 

• Blog Launch Date: April 23, 2008 
  
• Visits Total: 237 
  
• Visits Washington: 158 
  
• Visits Regional: 108 
  
• Visits Local: 96 
  
• Returning Local Visits: 76 
  
• Length of Visit Average: 2:48 
  
• Length of Visit Average Local: 3:47 
  
• Local Returning Visitors 
  
• Average Length of Visit: 3:15 
  

ONLINE VIDEOS

a) Subdiviion Intro, 

Length 0:34, 105 views; 

b) Subdivision Public Engagement, 

Length 2:40, 90 views; 

c) Subdivision Park Board Meeting March 10, 

Length 2:29, 95 views; 

d) Robert Voigt's Delayering Presentation to the Planning Commission, 

Length 22:15, 46 views; and, 

e) Subdivision Project Update, 

Length 17:41, 16 views. 

Total video views 352; with a potential total viewing time of 1941 min. or just over 32 hours.

The Status Report includes outlines of the stakeholder engagement results. 

Update on Community Engagement

As part of the Subdivision Code Update Project the City decided to conduct the public participation component in a manner that expanded the scope of community engagement while also exhibiting the kind of innovation, commitment to community participation, and creativity, desired of the end product.  

In addition to online tools, such as this blog, adaptations to standard “open house” meetings have been made to provide meaningful face-to-face interaction with stakeholders that is more suited to contemporary lifestyles. Staff scheduled roundtable meetings and conducted a number of weekly public coffeehouse meetings that allowed people to communicate with staff in less formal and time consuming ways. The results of these efforts have been positive. 

The use of innovative communication methods has not been at the sacrifice of traditional methods of public participation. Standard approaches have also been used such as: Planning Commission meetings; City Council Standing Committee Meetings; Parks Board meetings; and mailed surveys. 

Over 250 Personal letters were sent to people that have previously participated in City planning initiatives within the past 2 years, and to persons within the Development Industry that have had applications within the city within recent history. These letters invited the participation of these stakeholders and actively engaged citizens at the beginning of the project, and also informed them of the opportunity to participate and monitor the project through the blog. 

The Status Report details the results of all the engagement efforts for this Project.

Results of Stakeholder Engagement

The online survey for this project has been closed. The Survey began on October 25th, and has been running since.

Although the blog for the Subdivision Code Update has been a very successful component of the stakeholder engagement process for this project (as detailed in the Status Report), this online survey has been less successful in generating input, receiving only two responses. A recent post described the characteristics of the online tools used for this project.

Coffeehouse Discussions Close

I enjoyed the opportunity to speak with community members at the coffeehouse sessions over the past weeks. With each conversation I learned something that will help me with developing the revised Subdivision Code.
As the Project is moving into another phase I will no longer be holding coffeehouse meetings. I thank those people that came out to provide or get information on the Project, and the manager and staff at the Starbucks (Harbor Station) 32650 SR 20 that provided the venue.

Short Plat Rules to Support Infill

Short plats (those subdivisions with nine or less lots) can assist with infill development to meet the requirements of the GMA for example in terms of density; reduced sprawl; and housing options.

However, the existing Code requirements (such as building streets and lot configuration, etcetera) are difficult to meet in these smaller developments, and therefore discourage this kind of infill.

Staff will be amending the Code to remove the obstacles, while still maintaining regulations that provide for fitting infill development patterns.

Fences

The concerns about fences along some of the major corridors in the city were raised early on in the project. The primary issue is how these fences, combined with landscape buffers impact the sense of place along the street when they vary greatly in terms of maintenance and location along the street.

Fencing is not addressed in the Subdivision Code; however, the PRD Code does require that fence design be defined.

Because of their close relationship, this issue will be addressed by the Code amendments focused on the concerns about landscape buffers.

Streetscape Characteristics - "Cute Streets"

The phrase "cute streets" was first brought up during an early Planning Commission meeting, referring to pleasant residential streetscapes. These streetscapes were described as being superior and creating more livable neighborhoods. This shorthand phrase refers to streets in residential neighborhoods that have a number of common favorable characteristics, in terms of there built form and design, for example:

• trees along the street;
• sidewalks;
• buildings that "address" the street with their windows and entrances;
• narrower drive and parking lanes;
• building facades that are not dominated by garages;
• landscaping along the street; and,
• access to parks, trails and/or open space from the street.

The same sentiment has been echoed to me a number of times during this project, by both the general public (at coffeehouse, and Rotary meetings); as well as, meetings with those involved in the business of developing residential neighborhoods (Realtors, and developers).

The Code changes resulting from the 10 areas of direction will combine to help the community achieve more livable "cute streets" with future subdivisions.

Landscape Buffers & Tracts

The Subdivision Code requires specific landscape buffers along some of the major streets in Oak Harbor. The purpose is defined in the Code:

"to minimize the impact of the arterial on the adjacent land uses and is not to allow access to individual parcels".

The aesthetic design of these landscaped areas has a significant impact on one's experience driving or walking through our community. The Code allows for a variety of design options; which has resulted in less than favorable continuity or quality of these corridors. The public, Planning Commission, Staff and City Council have dealt with these issues repeatedly.

As per item 1 on the list of recommended direction, staff will be refining the buffer/corridor design regulations to provide:

• more continuity (while maintaining some flexibility for site differences);
• better quality aesthetics;
• better maintenance regulations; and,
• a healthier urban forest.

Subdivision Entrance Designs

Early on in this Project the members of the Planning Commission expressed interest in developing design parameters for subdivision entrance features. Some of the concern was to ensure that these features are well maintained and fitting with adjacent buffer/landscape areas. These entrance features can act as reference points, or gateways into a new neighborhood/subdivision; and help define a sense of place for the area.

Over the past few years these features have become more prominent, and larger in scale. This may be due to changing aesthetic trends and larger development size. Staff are not aware of any instance of concern for these features in terms of negative impacts.

The location of any such feature must not conflict with sight lines for roadways and is regulated through the application review phase by engineering standards for road safety. Additionally, the maintenance of these features are the responsibility of the respective homeowners' associations. In fact the maintenance of all commonly owned property/tracks in new subdivisions are typically the responsibility of the homeowners' associations; and these requirements can be found on the recorded subdivision plats.

Staff will review the maintenance, buffer, and landscape requirements defined in the code to ensure there are no conflicts. This will fit within the ten areas of direction defined at the conclusion of the first phase analysis for this project.

Survey

Those of you that live within Oak Harbor will be receiving a short survey regarding the policy direction developed to this point of the project. These surveys will be sent through the mail over the next two months as part of your utility bills. Please take the time to respond and return your surveys.

I will also be posting a copy of the survey online and invite anyone viewing the blog to provide their input as well. We welcome input from all.

However, of course the findings from the surveys returned by the residents of Oak Harbor will be weighted differently than those gathered online.

Community Ideas

The next series of posts will focus on the items listed in the two virtual flip charts on this blog.

The charts were designed to track ideas and concepts raised during the project, provide accountability, and a form of action research whereby the stakeholders’ involvement directs the focus of the project more so than in “standard” planning processes.

This is done by using the charts to;
1) document concepts raised by participants;
2) present a reference list to guide project direction; and finally,
3) provide a way of assessing progress by comparing the stakeholders’ ideas with the actions taken during the project.