0378/Lr^ Carolina Vol. 16, No. 1 Planning Spring 1990 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill http://www.archive.org/details/carolinaplanning161univ Carolina Planning A Student-Run Publication of the University of North Carolina Volume 16 Department of City and Regional Planning Number 1 Spring 1990 Forum An Interview with Harvey Gantt Trina Gauld Dale McKeel Perspectives Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos Lanier Blum 8 Fear and Loathing in the Planning Profession: Charles G. Pattison 12 Ten Comments on the Political Factor The Politics of Design Norma DeCamp Burns 17 Cary's Response to Rapid Growth: Robert C. Hinshaw 21 Reflections Upon Twenty Years of Change Articles The Politics of Planning a Growth Management John M. DeGrove 26 System: The Key Ingredients for Success Local Dispute Settlement Centers: Andy Sachs 35 Helping Planners to Build Consensus The Politics of Planning: Bill Holman 40 Where is North Carolina Heading? Planners as Leaders Mary Joan Manley Pugh 48 The Durham Cooperative Planning Initiative Robert G. Paterson 54 With Commentary by A. Paul Norby Recent Cases of the Progressive City Pierre Clavel 64 A Real Massachusetts Miracle: Monte Franke 68 Local Affordable Housing Partnerships A Paradigm for Affordable Housing Through Equity Runyon Colie Woods 73 Sharing and the Use of Accrued-Interest Mortgage Notes Dennis Eisen Department Faculty and Student Research 76 News Book Review City: Rediscovering the Center by William Whyte Robert E. Ansley 80 ® Printed on Recycled Paper Carolina Planning Trina Gauld Staff Editor Associate Editor L. Dale McKeel Associate Editor Sara J. Hendricks Business Assistant Julia Vant-Hull Photograph and Illustration Credits (author name in italics): Blum: Helga Pratsch (p. 9). Pattison: illustration by authcr(p. 15). Bums: photographs by author. Hinshaw: photographs by author. DeGrove: Florida Department of Commerce (p. 28); Anne Nelson, 1000 Friends of Florida (p. 30). Sachs: Bob Cross, Newsand Observer Publishing Co. (p. 37). Holman: Jim Page, N.C Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (p. 41); Bud Davis (p. 42); Clay Nolen, N.C. Dept. of Natural and Economic Resources (p. 45). Pugh: N.C. Dept. of Environment, Health and Natural Resources (p. 50); Jim Davis, N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources (pp. 52 and 53). Paterson: News and Observer Publishing Co. (p. 59). Franke: Jeff Thiebauth (p. 71). EisenfWoods: Colie Development Co. (p. 74, top); BRW, Inc., Design and Construction (p. 74, bottom). Ansley: Victor Junco, The Orlando Sentinel (p. 80). Cover photography by Dale McKeel. Zoning notice courtesy of the city of Columbia, S.C. Carolina Planning wishes to thank Ray Burby, Pat Coke, Asta Cooper, Bruce Egan, and the Center for Urban and Regional Studies. Planners by profession are inextricably linked to the political process. But how can practicing planners effectively Editor's manage the vagaries of that process and the at-times differing agenda of the elected body? In this issue Carolina Planning takes a broad look at politics and planning and the role of the planner. Note We begin with an interview of Harvey Gantl, 1990 Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate. A politician- planner-architect, Gantt suggests that "Planners need to remain objective in a highly charged political environment." Lanier Blum "questions the goal of being objective," in our Perspectives section, and argues that "ambivalence about the proper professional role of the planner diminishes power." According to Blum, vision is an indispensable form of leadership; and planners help create and develop a community's vision. Robert C. Hinshaw emphasizes that breadth of vision, as well as a generalist background, are the hallmarks of planners in this age of specialization. Mary Joan Manley Pugh, former assistant secretary of the N.C. Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, asserts that planners are less effective if they are not leaders. She defines leadership in the profession and provides a simple methodology for activating latent leadership qualities in planners. Moreover, Charles G. Pattison believes that planners are ineffective if they do not integrate planning and the political process. John M. DeGrove illustrates the importance of integrating politics and planning in his article entitled "The Politics of Planning a Growth Managment System." Bipartisan political support, strong gubernatorial leadership, sustained citizen support, and new governance arrangements are among the key ingredients for a successful growth management system. Robert G. Paterson describes an example of new governance arrangements at the regional and local level in his article on the merger of the Durham City and County planning departments. Paul Norby, planning director of the new Durham City-County Planning Department, comments on the successes and failures of the process selected for merging the planning functions. The underlying themes of this issue stress the necessity for leadership ability and effective communication skills in the planning profession. Andy Sachs, coordinatorof the Public Disputes Program at the Orange County Dispute Settlement Center, provides guidelines on how planners and planning departments can sharpen their conflict resolution skills and develop an effective consensus-building capacity. Bill Holman charges environmentalists and planners to "forge coalitions" to lobby the NC General Assembly to pass more statewide planninglegislation. Also, Norma Burns emphasizes the importance of consensus-building among elected officialsand members of the design and development community. Picking up on the theme of "progressiveness" established in the interview with Gantt, Pierre Clavel defines a "progressive" city and provides a useful frame of reference for this much-used term. Clavel, like Gantt, describes the importance of bringing "profoundly opposing forces together to the bargaining table." Communication, leadership, and negotiating skills are indispensable if a planner is toeffectively implement plans and solutions in a political system. We hope these articles are provocative and instructive; we welcome your comments and suggestions. Trina Gauld Carolina Planning welcomes comments and suggestions on the articles published. We are currently accepting articles for our Spring 1991 issue. For more information about submissions, address correspondence to: Carolina Planning, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box # 3140, New East Building, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3140. CarolinaPlanningis published biannually by students in the Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with the assistance of funds from the John A. Parker Trust Fund, Department of City and Regional Planning. Subscriptions to Carolina Planning are available at an annual rate of $10.00, or $18.00 for two years. <D 1990 Department of City and Regional Planning Spring 1990, Vol. 16, No. 1 Forum An Interview with Harvey Gantt TVina Gauld Dale McKeel Harvey Gantt, 1990 Democratic candidatefor the U.S. Senate andformer Charlotte mayor, earned a master's degreein cityplanningfrom M.I. T. and was a lecturer in the UNC-ChapelHill Department ofCity and Regional Planning in the early 1970s. Carolina Planning conducted thefollowing interview in late 1989, justprior to Mr. Gantt's announcement that he would be a candidate for the U.S. Senate. Q: You once described yourself as "progressive-thinking." in planning school, rather than draw colored maps and do What does that mean to you ? pretty pictures, I was quite substantially involved in hous- ing issues, and gained a comprehensive understanding of A: For me, that means always trying to improve on some- how cities really work, as opposed to how to plan them. I thing that's there. Always looking forward, always looking learned that if you understand how they work, and the at conditions, because conditions are always changing. Not causal relationships at work, you could better plan for the becoming locked. It means remaining creative; always future. asking questions. To strive to improve, whether it's policy making or the policy of this [architectural] firm. Not trying Q: In 1973 you chaired an American Institute ofArchitects to conserve things if they don't work as well. We are task force on planning and development in Charlotte, which conserving always, and we try to protect that, but there are concluded that the "publicposture was reactive, notproactive, no sacred cows. It is always constantly evaluating yourself in terms of shaping development," and "that Charlotte's because you change everyday and because conditions are developers wield more clout in the city planningprocess than changing. That's what I'm talking about in terms of pro- the city planners do. " Do you feel that this situation has gressive. changed? Why or why not? Q: How didyourplanning degree enhance your work as an A: This was done almost fresh out of planning school, a architect? year or so later. We wanted to talk about the planning process in Charlotte, and the fact that we don't do much A: The training architects get, though it is changing quite planning at all. We architects don't want to do much a bit, can be pretty narrow. I'm currently doing a visiting planning. Many were asking, "Why do you want to study it, lectureship at the University of Michigan College of Archi- and why do you want to look at it?" Architects as profes- tecture and Planning. It's interesting to see the kinds of sionals were discovering how unprepared we were, and yet factors students now are taking into account when design- we ought to be the logical ones to sort of guide the whole ing a project. building process as it occurs. There was so much difference in my education 25 years I think there has been a lot ofchange in Charlotte. We do ago. The plans I prepared then showed how wide the street a lot of things differently than we did back in 1973. I think was, how hilly the land was, where the housing project was the quality of the planning is much better.