Post by strikeslip on Jul 23, 2010 23:13:15 GMT -5
Hi Folks -- Sorry I've been away for awhile.
I promoted the Utica Master Plan on my blog for a long time. I though the mayor was correct that Utica needs a new Master Plan. . . . I still feel this way.
However, after a year of having been one of the more active participants involved with the steering committee (don't ask how I managed to get on it), I've come to the conclusion that the Master Plan and the process we went through was nothing more than an elaborate dog-and-pony show that will ensure that the same forces which have driven Utica into the ground for at least the past 15 years (but probably longer) remain in control.
I'm sure that most, but not all, of my fellow steering committee members will disagree with me, because they will see things that they have proposed placed into print. However, the proof is in the pudding. If you read the plan carefully, especially if you compare it to the 1950 plan, you will see that it is really no plan at all, just a hodge podge of ideas thrown together, with some striking proposals (like the Harbor Point ball park) added in. . . . in effect, buying support from committee members by having some of their ideas adopted.
My viewpoint, of course, is skewed by my past experiences, so here's a bit of background. At one point in my life, it was my job to conduct public hearings on environmental issues. . . Many hearing were small but sometimes I'd have 1,000 people in a room . . . I was often amazed by what seemingly ordinary people knew, and learned to respect what they had to say. Whether the powers that be liked it or not, I reported to them what the people told me. Sometimes I got criticized for putting things into my reports that reflected adversely on my employer, but I did it anyway because that was what I was hired to do. I really tried to listen and report accurately. I've been on the other side of the table as a private citizen, . . . . . My first experience with a "discussion/consensus" process was when consolidation of Utica's neighborhood schools was under consideration. It really did not matter that people were against it. After going through it I concluded that the neighborhood meeting process was merely to make it appear the the public's views were being taken into account. More recently I was involved in New Hartford's GEIS process where the public at a workshop was asked to group around maps and mark areas of "environmental concern" . . . When I tried to pin down the consultants as to what information they were looking for, I got gobbledygook as responses. . . . but when someone piped up "I'd like to see a hiking trail here ... " the consults got excited because that was what they were looking for (which just so happened to be what certain town leaders were looking for.)
As far as the Utica Master Plan goes, all I can say is that my subcommittee (which I headed) made some very specific proposals, only to find them deleted but replaced with others that we had not even discussed (like the Harbor Point ball fields, the Greenman Estates Business Park, and a median down Genesee St with a traffic circle at Oriskany blvd).
A theme of our discussions was to improve access to all parts of the city. If access to city parcels was improved, it would make them more amenable to development or redevelopment. We wanted the long-desired connections between Mohawk Street and Leland Avenue, and Culver Ave and Herkimer Road (both of which were in the 1950 master plan (so they were not hare-brained ideas) to give a better tie in between N Utica and the rest of the city, and to give both areas additional connections to undeveloped lands along the river). We wanted Washington Street at Harbor Point connnected to Washington St downtown to give not only a second way of accessing Harbor Point from Utica, but to give a Visual tie in to downtown (because it would be a straight line) and make the harbor seem part of downtown. The extended Washington Street would also improve access to the now-cleared Washington Courts site. We wanted Baggs Square recreated when the N Genny Bridge reaches the end of its useful life (about 2020) -- reconnecting Whitesboro St. to Main, and ending the status of Union Station being on a dead end. We wanted Whitesboro St by the Aud reconnected to Whitesboro Street at Varick to restore that street's function as a distributor street and, hopefully, bring life back to Columbia Square. Of course, we wanted some type of Boulevard to replace the N-S Arterial . . . something that would improve the street connections between the east and west sides, but also improve traffic and safety for all the regional traffic that uses the corridor. We also proposed parallel routes to take some of the traffic off the NS arterial -- such as extending York St to Oriskany Blvd at Barnes ave (which not only would give a parallel route, but would improve access to the CNY Psych site on which we proposed co-location of a business park to restore jobs to that particular neighborhood that suffered when the state downsized; it also would give waterfront access to west utica via barnes ave). We had REASONS for all these proposals . . . they ALL were rejected for reasons that did not make any sense, expense being one of them. Interestingly, the plan proposes a connection between Seneca St. and Washington St at the Harbor (which would not give the visual tie in to Downtown). Funny, expense was not seen as a problem there.
Instead of working with us to bring our ideas forward in a workable manner, we encountered resistance from the city planner and the consultants.
Another theme we had was that Utica residents support the regional infrastructure financially, but don't get value in return. This is especially true in the water and sewer systems. But for the population base in Utica, the suburbs probably could not afford these amenities. We wanted the Master Plan to explain the situation, to educate Utica leaders that they need to advocate on behalf of Utica residents when the costs of "regional" projects are being imposed. This got rejected and MORE REGIONALIZATION is being proposed. Perhaps this should be no surprise because our engineering consultant, Shumaker Engineering, is also Oneida County's engineering consultant on bringing the Sewer District into compliance with the Consent Order. In addition, our Public Relations consultant, Paige Marketing, does public relations for both the Water Authority and the Sewer District. Their jobs become easier if Utica residents can be tapped for money for suburban expansions.
The subcommittee proposals were never made available via the UMP website for public reaction and imput. The various subcommittees never even had a chance to review and comment upon each other's proposals even though there was considerable overlap. Requests to put this information out on the website were ignored. When it was alleged that most of the members of my subcommittee approved of the final draft that left out our proposals (I only heard from one person who disagreed with what we had recommended after he failed to attend our meetings or respond to the 4 iterations of our proposals that he was sent), a request by another member that everyone be sent copies of the responses was at first agreed to, but then ignored.
Anyway, this has been bothering me for several weeks. You now have an insider's peak on the Master Plan's "Process." Maybe I'll get some sleep tonight.
I promoted the Utica Master Plan on my blog for a long time. I though the mayor was correct that Utica needs a new Master Plan. . . . I still feel this way.
However, after a year of having been one of the more active participants involved with the steering committee (don't ask how I managed to get on it), I've come to the conclusion that the Master Plan and the process we went through was nothing more than an elaborate dog-and-pony show that will ensure that the same forces which have driven Utica into the ground for at least the past 15 years (but probably longer) remain in control.
I'm sure that most, but not all, of my fellow steering committee members will disagree with me, because they will see things that they have proposed placed into print. However, the proof is in the pudding. If you read the plan carefully, especially if you compare it to the 1950 plan, you will see that it is really no plan at all, just a hodge podge of ideas thrown together, with some striking proposals (like the Harbor Point ball park) added in. . . . in effect, buying support from committee members by having some of their ideas adopted.
My viewpoint, of course, is skewed by my past experiences, so here's a bit of background. At one point in my life, it was my job to conduct public hearings on environmental issues. . . Many hearing were small but sometimes I'd have 1,000 people in a room . . . I was often amazed by what seemingly ordinary people knew, and learned to respect what they had to say. Whether the powers that be liked it or not, I reported to them what the people told me. Sometimes I got criticized for putting things into my reports that reflected adversely on my employer, but I did it anyway because that was what I was hired to do. I really tried to listen and report accurately. I've been on the other side of the table as a private citizen, . . . . . My first experience with a "discussion/consensus" process was when consolidation of Utica's neighborhood schools was under consideration. It really did not matter that people were against it. After going through it I concluded that the neighborhood meeting process was merely to make it appear the the public's views were being taken into account. More recently I was involved in New Hartford's GEIS process where the public at a workshop was asked to group around maps and mark areas of "environmental concern" . . . When I tried to pin down the consultants as to what information they were looking for, I got gobbledygook as responses. . . . but when someone piped up "I'd like to see a hiking trail here ... " the consults got excited because that was what they were looking for (which just so happened to be what certain town leaders were looking for.)
As far as the Utica Master Plan goes, all I can say is that my subcommittee (which I headed) made some very specific proposals, only to find them deleted but replaced with others that we had not even discussed (like the Harbor Point ball fields, the Greenman Estates Business Park, and a median down Genesee St with a traffic circle at Oriskany blvd).
A theme of our discussions was to improve access to all parts of the city. If access to city parcels was improved, it would make them more amenable to development or redevelopment. We wanted the long-desired connections between Mohawk Street and Leland Avenue, and Culver Ave and Herkimer Road (both of which were in the 1950 master plan (so they were not hare-brained ideas) to give a better tie in between N Utica and the rest of the city, and to give both areas additional connections to undeveloped lands along the river). We wanted Washington Street at Harbor Point connnected to Washington St downtown to give not only a second way of accessing Harbor Point from Utica, but to give a Visual tie in to downtown (because it would be a straight line) and make the harbor seem part of downtown. The extended Washington Street would also improve access to the now-cleared Washington Courts site. We wanted Baggs Square recreated when the N Genny Bridge reaches the end of its useful life (about 2020) -- reconnecting Whitesboro St. to Main, and ending the status of Union Station being on a dead end. We wanted Whitesboro St by the Aud reconnected to Whitesboro Street at Varick to restore that street's function as a distributor street and, hopefully, bring life back to Columbia Square. Of course, we wanted some type of Boulevard to replace the N-S Arterial . . . something that would improve the street connections between the east and west sides, but also improve traffic and safety for all the regional traffic that uses the corridor. We also proposed parallel routes to take some of the traffic off the NS arterial -- such as extending York St to Oriskany Blvd at Barnes ave (which not only would give a parallel route, but would improve access to the CNY Psych site on which we proposed co-location of a business park to restore jobs to that particular neighborhood that suffered when the state downsized; it also would give waterfront access to west utica via barnes ave). We had REASONS for all these proposals . . . they ALL were rejected for reasons that did not make any sense, expense being one of them. Interestingly, the plan proposes a connection between Seneca St. and Washington St at the Harbor (which would not give the visual tie in to Downtown). Funny, expense was not seen as a problem there.
Instead of working with us to bring our ideas forward in a workable manner, we encountered resistance from the city planner and the consultants.
Another theme we had was that Utica residents support the regional infrastructure financially, but don't get value in return. This is especially true in the water and sewer systems. But for the population base in Utica, the suburbs probably could not afford these amenities. We wanted the Master Plan to explain the situation, to educate Utica leaders that they need to advocate on behalf of Utica residents when the costs of "regional" projects are being imposed. This got rejected and MORE REGIONALIZATION is being proposed. Perhaps this should be no surprise because our engineering consultant, Shumaker Engineering, is also Oneida County's engineering consultant on bringing the Sewer District into compliance with the Consent Order. In addition, our Public Relations consultant, Paige Marketing, does public relations for both the Water Authority and the Sewer District. Their jobs become easier if Utica residents can be tapped for money for suburban expansions.
The subcommittee proposals were never made available via the UMP website for public reaction and imput. The various subcommittees never even had a chance to review and comment upon each other's proposals even though there was considerable overlap. Requests to put this information out on the website were ignored. When it was alleged that most of the members of my subcommittee approved of the final draft that left out our proposals (I only heard from one person who disagreed with what we had recommended after he failed to attend our meetings or respond to the 4 iterations of our proposals that he was sent), a request by another member that everyone be sent copies of the responses was at first agreed to, but then ignored.
Anyway, this has been bothering me for several weeks. You now have an insider's peak on the Master Plan's "Process." Maybe I'll get some sleep tonight.
