i used to be part of a group in seattle called action:better city...we liked to consider ourselves urban activists. we all had "day jobs".

we created films to describe the urban condition and call attention to the importance of sustainable communities and vibrant town centers.

i'm no longer part of the group but think the work they do is quite well intentioned.

www.actionbettercity.org

Each of our city's neighborhoods has the opportunity to put together neighborhood plans which are used as reference in consideration of any future land use, zoning, and residential and commercial development decisions. It's really the only official voice each neighborhood has in dealing with development issues - short of showing up and yelling at meetings.

Each neighborhood (as its plan is funded - ours is this year) puts together a task force of people who will manage the process. I've been the chair of our task force over the last year or so - getting us on the radar of Metro Planning and Zoning, getting us funded (matching grant - we do the rest), and getting things underway. I may be about to pass the baton.

This was a great way to get involved in some aspect of future construction in the neighborhood I care about, and I didn't have to work on a Preservation Commission and enforce color selections and window sash profiles...

I am on my Town's Planning Commision in the Philly burbs, more for experience than anything, altho our recommendations to the Boro council on zoning changes are considered. The town is basically built out, so we see infill projects, parking and building height issues. I think as a board we have improved the projects that have come before us, normally by making them more pedestrian oriented. (our constant mantra is "this is a town, people WALK!"
Also recently I am filling in for a guy on the Historic Architecture Review Board, he's in China for a few months. That's fun, as in funny, because some members obsess over silly things like shutters and aluminum clad windows. Its more important to me to be contextural, not so much accurately historic, so I have in my short time there opened a few minds I think as I have spoken mine freely. One building I saw was CRAP, and members were freaking out over the light divisions in the windows. The other architect (and chair) on the board finally said so, and the look of the muntin brigade was collectively puzzled. I won't even tell the story where an "applicant" (its so comically beraucratic!), came in with a hansome, contextural, but somewhat modernist design, and I could feel the temperature of the room drop, and the scribble of pens on paper as the design was presented. And I have only been two two meetings!

I've been to so many of those meetings - on both sides of the table. I can just picture it. Too funny. They're the same everywhere.

Jb, been there also. I was Chair of a historical city's Architectural Review Board until I moved out of town. We really had to work hard getting guidelines written that dealt with the facts of historical preservation, tying closely to Federal Standards and guideline.

Otherwise, muntin and wood window brigade!... That which is easily seen and understood.... I remember a meeting regarding a new city park where one of my board members tried to get into the social implications of the man's name and heritage which the city chose to name the park. Yikes! I had to shut that down quick before we made the papers.

It was a great experience for the most part and I am glad I served. It is a good thing to get into the community in anyway you are comfortable and help!