image



Development on St. Simons Island

Lessons for Coastal Georgia
Vision and Commitment Essential to Realizing Higher Expectations


At a talk in February on Jekyll Island, a speaker from The Conservation Fund made a statement that should become the doctrine of every elected official: "The biggest deterrent to better community planning is low expectations." He went on to explain that unless community leaders and decision-makers have a clear vision of the kind of community they want, the distinctive character of their community will be lost to the sprawling, shoddy appearance of Anywhere, USA, meant more for cars than humans ­ dominated by uniform commercial franchise architecture, oversized signs and glaring lights competing for consumer attention, cookie-cutter suburbs, dangerous traffic-congested roads, with precious few places designed for appealing pedestrian uses and conducive to fulfilling social interactions.

On St. Simons Island, in the past decade we have already seen a disturbing shift to the mind-numbing features of Anywhere, USA, made at the expense of the community's charming scale and unique relationship with the natural environment. Residents have witnessed the cumulative results of elected officials making decisions, many in the name of economic advancement, while ironically using obsolete standards that actually work against long-term economic prospects by gradually destroying community character. Our island's quaint vernacular building designs and live-oak trees are being replaced with vast, minimally landscaped parking lots and massive structures that look more like fortresses than human habitats. At what tragic point will this trend permanently alter the area's reputation and quality of life? Are the alleged short-term profits worth the ultimate long-term losses?

These are tough questions, but fortunately growth does not have to result in the loss of the qualities we love most about our community. Locally, decisions supporting unpopular outcomes of growth have been typically justified on the basis of Œhighest and best use' of land by property owners and developers ­ and with the underlying threat that elected officials will be taken to court if they oppose projects being promoted. Yet, in other communities across the country, where criteria are more selective and a clear understanding of the public interest is reflected in the vision of decision-makers, effectively enforced land-use controls, open-space planning, and design standards have successfully protected local character, natural resources, and historic features.

To make this happen here we need to reassess what is in the best interest of landowners, businesses and the general public, then get officials to make a serious commitment to adopt specific standards protecting shared interests. Needed revisions include updating the comprehensive plan and improving controls to support the chief goals of preserving community character and environmental quality.

If more selective, publicly endorsed development criteria are consistently enforced, those who deviate from them will be at legal risk, not planning commissioners and elected officials who wish to make good decisions on behalf of the community. Conversely, the more our officials continue to condone unwise growth by straying from adopted community plans and erratically using weak, outmoded controls, the more we encourage legal threats by applicants when additional variances are denied.

For us to succeed in making better decisions safeguarding the welfare of this and future generations, we need to re-evaluate our priorities and the alternatives available for achieving them. The more we consider it, the more we will realize that both individual and community interests deserve new standards of higher expectations. The question remains if we can redefine self-interest soon enough.

[Note: The above text was prepared by David Kyler, the Center's executive director, as commentary on local growth issues for a forum hosted by The Brunswick News. To date, the piece appeared in Golden Isles Weekend, but has not been printed in The Brunswick News.]
^ Top