Arbor Update

On a quick read through the plan, I don’t see a whole lot that’s striking – that probably means they’ve done a good job of capturing the ideas that have been bouncing around for the last 4 years.

One notable exception is exploring a transfer of development rights mechanism to incentivize the protection of significant structures that aren’t part of a historic district and/or compensate owners of properties that are designated and protected as historic – I think that’s one of the few ideas in the plan I’d consider “adventurous” at this point, and I definitely agree with the idea.

Another interesting bit is the language used – while I find the plan too passive in places, with lots of “explore”, “encourage”, “assess”, and so forth, the non-motorized transportation recommendations involve very clear action verbs – “establish”, “address”, “provide”, etc.

Finally, I note that the plan doesn’t provide much (any) guidance for implementation priorities – it enumerates a number of desirable actions, but doesn’t identify any low-hanging fruit or highly urgent steps. While implementation is largely a matter of opportunity, and priority continually changing with circumstances, a plan will usually spend some time identifying the near-term, low-cost recommendations for some quick progress.