Most of us have seen the traditional colored map.  For a growing city, a land use plan is usually the means by which future residential, commercial, and industrial areas are located so that utility and road construction can be coordinated.  Future park and school sites are identified, etc. 

For an older city like Binghamton, this type of plan is typically used to lay the groundwork for smaller area plans such as downtown revitalization, neighborhood improvement plans, or corridor plans (for main thoroughfares, riverfront development, or other linear features). 

Land Use Plans are intended to lay out the broad goals for future development of the city as a whole, and provide a vision for the future that will guide city policy for years to come. Perhaps the most important of these policies is the zoning ordinance. Most states have a legal requirement that zoning ordinances are to be based on a long-range comprehensive land use plan.

The firm of Saratoga Associates, from Saratoga, New York, was selected for the job. One of the first steps in the process was the selection of a Citizens' Advisory Committee, made up of persons appointed by the Mayor and each of the City Council members.  The West Side was well represented and at least three or four of the committee members were WSNA members as well. Public meetings were held at Horace Mann, Thomas Jefferson, and other City schools that fall and were attended by many of you.  The plan moved forward until time for final submittal of the document, when there appeared to be snags, and things moved very slowly.  The Draft Final Report was presented to and approved by the committee early in 2002.  Some of the main recommendations included:

• Reduce the number of residential zones from five to three (R-1, R-2, and R-3) and eliminate the use of commercial overlay zones as part of a comprehensive revision of the zoning ordinance. 
• Develop policies to protect single-family neighborhoods in all sections of the city from encroachment by incompatible types of use. In the West Side neighborhood this is primarily caused by conversion of single-family homes to rooming houses (or "group quarters") accommodating large groups of students.  On the East Side, this is principally due to expanding commercial uses, and in other areas, problems are caused by groups of transient non-students living in single-family dwellings.
• Encourage historic preservation efforts in both residential and commercial areas of the city. The consultants noted that the city has a very affordable housing stock with architectural merit. 
• To improve the appearance of the streetscape, and to better separate incompatible land uses, the plan recommends the use of design guidelines and/or development standards. These can be used in both residential and commercial districts, and typically include such things as requirements for landscaped buffers between residential areas and, say, grocery store parking lots, and locating parking lots in a way that is compatible with the existing development pattern.  Guidelines can also call for height, bulk, and materials that are compatible with the surrounding buildings. 
• Downtown revitalization efforts should be encouraged, and some entity should be found to take charge or take responsibility for coordinating the many issues, policies, and projects that affect the downtown.   Expansion of an existing governmental body, or a private non-profit body were suggested.  The Main Street program operated by the National Trust for Historic Preservation was cited as a good example of such an entity. It is essential that those most directly affected - merchants and developers - be involved and committed to the program.
• The plan also included generalized mini-development plans for all of the identified neighborhoods in the City.  These included such things as a conceptual plan for the Anitec site in the First Ward, street closures along Upper Court Street, and improvements to Cherie Lindsey Park and the K-Mart Plaza on the East Side.

The presentation was not well received.  In the comment period that followed, no Council members expressed approval of the plan's recommendations.  Several members commented on the cost of the study, and the fact that they had personally learned nothing new from the report.  Some criticized it for being too general in nature, while others criticized the report for being too specific.  Council appeared to be dissatisfied with the general and vague nature of some of the plan's recommendations, particularly some of the actions that were proposed to implement the plan. 

There was very little discussion of what is probably the most important element of the plan, which is the expression of a general, comprehensive vision of Binghamton’s future, as developed by the Consultants through the public meetings, the Advisory Committee process, and consultation with city staff.

The basic premise of the plan as it was presented is that the City of Binghamton has the potential to be a thriving, attractive, desirable place to live, and that the enhancement of quality of life amenities are vital to the City’s success in attracting and retaining high skilled workers and growing businesses. Most of the recommendations were geared toward incrementally improving Binghamton’s neighborhoods, including the downtown neighborhood. 

Although redevelopment of under utilized industrial sites throughout the city was recommended in general, the presentation did not make specific, detailed proposals for use.  Comments made by Council members during the discussion included the following:

• Some members questioned why more specific economic development activities had not been proposed, and why those that were proposed would be more successful than previous efforts.
• Some members expressed the opinion that it is futile to attempt to preserve high quality single-family neighborhoods when most people who can afford to want to live in the suburbs. 
• There were concerns that the cost of neighborhood revitalization (infrastructure improvements and housing rehabilitation programs) is beyond the City's ability to pay.
• At least one Council member said that perhaps the most desirable course of action for the City would be to base the local economy on providing housing and other services to University students.

It is important that we follow the progress of the approval process.  We need to be aware of what revisions are made to the plan, and whether they serve to strengthen the "neighborhood friendly" vision of Binghamton's future that its expresses. 

At your earliest opportunity, please talk to your councilperson or other civic minded people you may happen to know, about their long-term aspirations for the city and express your own.  We may assume that those who place less importance on the preservation and revitalization of our historic in-town neighborhoods will also be making their voices heard.  This type of discussion about long-term, general issues provides a great opportunity for those on different sides of many current issues to agree on an overall vision for the future of our City that can serve as the basis for resolution of current conflicts. 

City of Binghamton Comprehensive Plan (PDF document, 163 pages, 28 MB)
 

PDF Information To open PDF files you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader installed on your computer. It is available for free from Adobe.com.