Description
Perhaps the most nebulous of all the processes, community strategic visioning is defined very differently by each community or organization undertaking it. Visioning processes are usually long-term efforts to picture or define the future of the community decades ahead, and are often completed in conjunction with master planning processes. Components of a vision often include goals for population growth and development; targeted land uses in different parts of a community; ways to attract diversity; differentiation of wanted and unwanted growth and development; and new ideas for community services, institutions, or identity. Visioning processes are often initiated and run by local governments, and may include a mix of community meetings, surveys, charettes, review of plans and vision statements, and other events.
Steps
Steps vary significantly project-to-project, but a typical process would include public announcements to initiate the idea, a committee to design and run the visioning process, a series of meetings or surveys to gain feedback from the community, drafting of a vision statement or plan, review of the plan by the community, and finally multiple stages of revision, further review, and discussions about how to proceed. Stages may be facilitated by professional consultants, and the process may include other events such as community festivals or creative arts-based and participatory tools (see Tools).
“The Oregon Model” for visioning was developed by Steven Ames, one of the top planners and consultants in the community visioning field. He builds a visioning process around four key questions/steps:
- Where are we now? (assessment, values)
- Where are we going? (trends analysis)
- Where do we want to be? (visioning)
- How do we get there? (action planning)
A fifth step typically follows the visioning process
- Are we getting there? (measuring progress)
Pros and Cons
Since they are so diverse in form and scope, the pros and cons of visioning processes are mostly linked to specific projects. In general, however, these processes succeed at getting communities to think farther ahead than most planning requires, and often at bringing the community together for discussion and consideration of its strengths and needs. Visioning processes are least successful when there is no clear outcome, no specific means of implementation, or little thought surrounding the definition of a vision or community. It can be difficult to achieve consensus on a vision, as on community plans, and the product may not represent the community’s values if the process is not carefully planned and executed.
Examples
- Burnsville, MN is currently undergoing a visioning project, Burnsville for the 21st Century, which includes committees and work on city services, youth, transportation, environment, and safety, among others. http://www.ci.burnsville.mn.us/government/visioning.htm
- Miller County, GA initiated a project in 1997 with a public meeting, and continued by writing a vision statement and appointing an Executive Committee to implement. Miller County’s process follows the MAPP (Mobilizing for Action through Planning and Partnerships) model, which is also used in numerous other communities. http://mapp.naccho.org/MappModel.asp
- enVision Manistee County utilized visioning as a primary way of identifying character and incorporating it into planning decisions. The project was tailored to Manistee County, but based on the “Oregon Model.” (see Case Studies)
- The EPA’s Green Communities Program has adapted Ames’ four-step process to focus on sustainability. The program site contains resources and examples for communities across the country.