Every successful project starts with good planning. When you take a vacation, you plan by doing research to decide where you want to go, how you’re going to get there, where you’ll stay and how much it will cost.
A business person needs a solid business plan to get a loan from a bank. A teacher prepares a detailed lesson plan before standing in front of a class. A state making a multi-billion dollar investment … oops. That’s where we are right now.
So far the debates about the Salt Lake Inland Port (SLIP) have mostly been about political issues. As important as these are, they have distracted us from another, more basic question: What exactly are we talking about here? We’re all operating in a near-total information vacuum, including the legislators who created the port. That’s no way to run an airline, or a state.
Almost all land developments begin with a thorough planning study. Developers don’t start a project by pitching to investors and writing contracts. First they get as much information as they can about the proposed site, the market and construction costs to decide objectively if they can create a project that works physically and financially. Utah needs to do act like an intelligent developer and do its due diligence before plunging into such an enormous project.
Major planning firms all over the country have a great deal of experience carrying out such studies. Naturally every project is unique, but planners have established methods for deciding what the issues are in each case, what information is needed and how to analyze this information to yield useful results.
But a professional planning process does more than gather and analyze information. It builds consensus by actively engaging every group affected by the plan: local communities and governments, businesses and industries, environmental organizations, and yes, state legislators. Creating this engagement is an integral part of any current planning process.
For a politically charged project like the port, the planning firm’s objectivity and neutrality is essential. Everyone, regardless of their viewpoint, must be able to agree that the information they provide is the best available. Discussions can then proceed based on an agreed-upon body of facts.
What would a plan for the port look like? The process starts by studying existing conditions. This includes initial talks with all affected groups as mentioned above. The planners will then decide what critical issues are raised by the port and gather the necessary data to determine what the likely impacts of the port will be in these areas. In the case of the SLIP these will include: (a) economic benefits such as income and jobs; (b) environmental impacts of the port’s operations and materials it handles, including air and water quality, wetlands and wildlife; (c) effects of the proximity of the port on property values and quality of life in nearby communities; and (d) additional demands the port will place on infrastructure such as roads, water and power with the scope and cost of any necessary upgrades.
After presenting their results and receiving feedback from the public, the planners will offer a set of alternatives or scenarios. Each will include a land use (zoning) plan and the layout of the port’s roads and open spaces.
Planning is about trade-offs. Some alternatives will provide tremendous benefits but be more costly. Others will cost less but compromise on some goals. In the end it will be up to the entire community to decide how to proceed. It will still be messy, but at least the discussions will be based on good information.
David Scheer
David R. Scheer is an urban planner and architect practicing in Salt Lake City.