The role of public engagement in real estate development of all kinds is in the midst of a revolution. Demographic, political, legal and sociological trends all indicate an increase in communities’ sense of entitlement and activism. For this reason, architects, developers, community governments, renewable energy providers and others who are driving change must adopt a new way of approaching the community.
We have been tracking public attitudes over time and have found that just in the past four years public resistance and activism is up 25% from 1 out of 5 Americans surveyed in 2004 to 1 our of 4 in 2008 who actively fought a local development projects. The public is also losing faith in their local government, with 72% giving an average rating of C+ for their handling of development issues. 87% say that they would vote for a candidate based on their stance towards development. And finally, 74% oppose any kind of new development in their community, up over 10% from just a few years ago.
In the past, a developer could work with their architects and local government agencies to develop a plan followed by a token “public engagement” session in which the plan was presented to the community. Today’s projects are facing greater public scrutiny and require public involvement from the very beginning of the project and more sophisticated tools and methods are required to ensure that the process is transparent to all participants, that it is inclusive of all stakeholders, and that the community is adequately educated about the issues and trade-offs involved. Some examples of old school thinking we have encountered that went awry, in which developers followed the best practices of the 1990’s but encountered today’s public resistance, include Boulder’s Washington School and Jefferson County Community College in Colorado. In both of these cases, delays of months or even years resulted and hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional costs due to the delays.
Amidst these changes, there is an opportunity for architects. Architecture firms that “get it” and can provide implementable projects will have a competitive advantage over those who work under yesterday’s assumptions. Clients are looking for consultants who can not only design their projects, but who can get them built. According to the National Institute of Building Sciences, delays can add 2% per month to the final cost of a home. Projects such as the Atlantic Yards Barclay Stadium project in Brooklyn face a potential loss of $400 million in naming rights and millions more in tax free financing if construction does not begin by December 31 of 2009. In the case of Barclay Stadium there are at least three separate organized neighborhood groups fighting the project with demonstrations and lawsuits. What do you think it is worth to developer Bruce Ratner to solve these problems? What would it have been worth to him to have had the public engaged from the very outset of the project rather than at the twelfth hour?
No comments:
Post a Comment