If the development process is broken, how can it be fixed?

About a month ago, I had no idea what I was getting myself into when Sarah and I went to our editor, Scott Swafford, with the idea for a series on growth and development in Columbia. Now, with the last article done, I know. It is a complex concept full of intricacies, and there are way more than two sides to this story. It was full of hours of interviews and a constant questioning of how a process cannot work – in some way – for everyone involved.

After doing this series I am left with one impression: the development process in Columbia is broken. It sounds harsh and judgmental to say that about a city I have grown up in and grown to love. However, I feel, it is the truth. The process is not working for anyone.City Council listens to hours of public hearings and debates about tiny details while also trying to answer the bigger question of how the particular development up for debate fits into the larger fabric of Columbia. The Planning and Zoning Commission does much the same thing, and members frustrated that ordinances are out of date and no longer match what the community needs.

Developers feel decisions are inconsistent; if they meet the rules and uphold the ordinances as they stand, they argue, they should be able to break ground and build. Neighborhoods lack the resources and knowledge to fully participate. Often the only way they are effective in brokering deals with developers is by using past experience or drawing on the expertise of someone in their neighborhood who just happened to be an ex-city attorney, a former councilman, or a past planning commissioner.

In my mind there are many questions, but one of them comes from my background as a Columbia resident: How does this town, with it’s quaint charms and college-town feel, grow into the city it is quickly becoming? When my family first moved here I remember my dad saying Columbia would soon reach 100,000 people and that after that point growth skyrockets. I go to college here knowing that when I return after I graduate this will not be the Columbia I remember in some ways.

We are growing quickly. Not so long ago there wasn’t much to look at when driving down Range Line Street past Big Bear Boulevard. Now there’s a crazy looking Sonic and fast-food restaurants galore, subdivisions and a bank every 20 feet (practically). And that’s only one side of town.

What many stakeholders brought up is that there is no comprehensive plan to guide Columbia’s growth. Stabs have been taken at a plan. There’s the Metro 2020 plan, but many agree its elements are applied only when it seems convenient. There is a call for a real plan with teeth, one that states goals for the city’s growth as a whole.

Columbia has taken steps toward the creation of that plan. The visioning process and talk about revitalizing and retaining the uniqueness of downtown are among them. So is the call from stakeholders across the board for a comprehensive plan.

On the whole, it might solve a lot of problems. A comprehensive plan for exactly what kind of city residents want this to be would inform the process of changing ordinances, if still deemed necessary. Better ordinances and a uniformly applied plan would put an end to the developer’s problems of inconsistencies in votes for or against their plans. More involvement by neighbors could end feelings of isolation or helplessness.

At the very least, most seem to think it wouldn’t hurt to pursue this avenue.

But here’s my two cents. What may be more important than a plan is simply a conversation about a plan. Or a conversation about frustrations felt on all sides. Or a conversation about better communication between developers and neighbors. What’s important is that there is talk from multiple viewpoints that could lead to  understanding and consensus. Getting the wheels going and changing the process so  it better meets the needs of Columbia may be as simple as talking to each other.