nnn

Sustainable Mountain Communities Conference Notes
Banff, Alberta
June 14-18, 2003
In Attendance: Larry Jorgenson
Jim Darwiche
John Carney

Banff Facts:

Founded in 1885, Banff National Park is the first Park in Canada, and the third in the world, following Yellowstone and Royal Park in Australia. Drawn by spectacular scenery and exceptional recreational opportunities, 4.2 million people now visit Banff on an annual basis. The development of the town of Banff and the growth of western Canada were linked to the completion of the Canadian Pacific Railroad in 1884, which brought early tourists and settlers from the East into the heart of the wild Canadian Rockies. To serve these first visitors the Railroad constructed a series of luxury hotels in beautiful places served by the railroad. Banff Springs Hotel is one of the finest of these on a dramatic site overlooking the Bow River, Mount Rundle, and the Canadian Rockies. The Park's original mission was focused on attracting tourists but has evolved more recently to emphasize "the maintenance of ecological integrity".

Banff Townsite was incorporated in 1990 after having existed for many years as the gateway to the National Park and its largest town. At incorporation the boundaries were established to ensure that the town did not "sprawl" into the park. This constitutionally created Urban Growth Boundary permanently limits its size to 4.87 square kilometers (1.3 square miles), which has forced the town to develop in a compact manner. In 1998 the Banff Community Plan was approved that capped the amount of commercial growth at 3.89 million square feet, including office, hotel, and retail. At that time there were approximately 350,000sf remaining to be developed. The town also set a 1.5% annual growth cap, leading to 50,000sf per year of new development. Proposals are submitted to the town and are chosen in a process that includes merits of the proposal. At this rate, Banff will achieve full build-out by 2006. A maximum population was also set at 10,000 residents where there are currently about 7,700.

The downtown character is established by three-story zoning along Banff Avenue, the main street, where the newer developments tend to be taller and denser than the old ones. The Banff Springs Hotel is about a quarter mile from the downtown across the Bow River, and rises to a height of eleven stories in a grand chateau style of architecture. Its new additions have been scrupulously consistent with the older portions of the hotel built in 1888. In spite of spires and rooftops reaching over 100' in height, the hotel seems dwarfed by the mountains that surround it.

Concerns of the town's leadership echo many of those we feel here in Teton County: community character, growth, loss of homegrown "mom-and-pop" businesses, affordable housing, living with wildlife. In a local publication, "Rocky Mountain Outlook", one issue had the following headlines: "Banff Strives to Keep Small Town Feel", "Valley Struggling to Offer Affordable Housing", as well as stories about a recently constructed wildlife crossing that came in under budget, and one about controlling multi-national corporations coming into town. Several of the articles had been inspired by the conference we were attending and included interviews with some of the presenters.

The conference was held at the Banff Centre, an impressive campus of buildings including lodging for guests and students, classrooms, theatres, and dining facilities. It felt more like a university campus than a conference center , and some of the accommodations were more dorm than hotel. Nevertheless, this spectacular setting only minutes by path from downtown, was an inspiring model for what I think we should be developing here in Teton County-a world class set of facilities combining the arts, culture, and international politics in a think tank setting. In conversations with some of the Town Council we learned that the facility does not make money and its shortfall is subsidized by the Provincial Government. They agreed, however, that the Centre is a great economic generator for the Town, and attracts people from all over the world.

Other downtown facts that will be of interest to our compatriots on the Town Council as they prepare to pass the Downtown Redevelopment District:
· Banff is at the confluence of three drainages at an elevation of 4,500 feet.
· 61% of the population is between 21 and 44 years old. They have an annual operating budget of $19 million Canadian dollars.
· Banff contains 51 hotels, 255 retail stores, 120 restaurants and bars. The bumper sticker asks: "Who needs the mountains when you can shop?"
· 2.6 F.A.R. max density
· No transfer of development rights is allowed
· Banff Avenue R.O.W. is approximately 98'. Secondary street R.O.W.s are more like 60'.
· Block dimensions: 606' by 276 (130' to 16' alley plus 130'= 276')
· Wide sidewalks in streetscape plan done by Design Workshop are approximately 22' without parking and 14' with parking.
· Some residential streets along hillside (Grizzly Street) were 22'of pavement with 4' gravel shoulders for parking, no curb and gutter, no sidewalks. Most town residential streets had curb and gutter, parking both sides.
· All areas of town I observed had alleys, many with garages on them. (photo)
· Downtown Banff managed to fight sprawl by locating a 15,000sf supermarket on Bear Street, the equivalent of Pearl Avenue, with three floors of apartments above it.
· Right next door to the Market is a parking structure (or Parkade, as the Canadians call them), with three levels above grade of free parking and one level below of paid parking, primarily for business owners not having onsite parking.

The Conference:

We arrived late for the Plenary Session but in time to hear about something called The Natural Step Framework (TNS) that addresses the need for a systematic framework to understand and address sustainability. It is built on a planning procedure called "backcasting" (as opposed to forecasting, I guess), in which a successful planning outcome is imagined and the effort is focused on what we need to do today to get to that outcome. With TNS, the goal is to "backcast" from basic principles of sustainability, which they defined as being:
· Based on a scientifically agreed upon view of the world
· Sufficient to cover all aspects of the sustainability concept
· Necessary to achieve sustainability
· Concrete enough to guide action and serve as directional aids in problem analysis and solutions
· Mutually exclusive and thorough in order to understand and analyze the issues.

While it seemed that this framework makes sense, I was frustrated that no one really defined "Sustainability" in any rigorous way. Other futurists such as architect William McDonough have moved beyond the concept of sustainability to a completely different paradigm for the future. McDonough and others believe that Sustainability focuses on slowing the rate at which we are degrading our planet rather than finding ways to make the impact of humans a positive thing. He celebrates abundance, fecundity, and the idea that in nature growth is good.

To help focus and clarify the issue I looked up several definitions of "Sustainability" and include them here:

Sustainability is a noun referring to a state or condition that can be maintained over an indefinite period of time. The verb sustain is rich with meaning and in various contexts can connote to keep up or keep going; to endure without giving way; to support, hold, or bear up; to provide for; to supply with necessities of life; to uphold as valid, just, or correct (Webster's 1996). These shades of meaning enrich the concept of sustainability, although in speaking of sustainable technologies, sustainable lifestyles, or sustainable development, the dominant meaning is that these practices can be continued on an indefinite basis. - Columbia University's Biosphere 2 Center

"Sustainability is to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." -- United Nations World Commission On Environment and Development, Our Common Future, 1987

"Development which improves people's quality of life, within the carrying capacity of the Earth's life support systems." -- United Nations Environment Program

Vision
"Our vision is of a life-sustaining earth. A sustainable United States (Jackson Hole) will have a growing economy that provides equitable opportunities for satisfying livelihoods and a safe, healthy, high quality of life for current and future generations. Our nation (County) will protect its environment, its natural resource base, and the function and viability of natural systems on which all life depends." -- The President's Council on Sustainable Development, 1996

I. Managing Growth and Development: The Concepts

Three speakers addressed growth in mountain communities, in scenarios that all sounded suspiciously familiar.

Sherry Dorward, Milestones in the Search for Sustainable Mountain Communities
· Sherry, a landscape architect based in Vail, decried the lack of "community" in places like Vail, and the loss of families to more "family-friendly" places, which, in the case of Vail, are further down valley. A popular bumper sticker reads: "Too many snowbirds, not enough freezer space". Or "For a small Town there sure are a lot of Assholes!"
· People are nostalgic for the sense of community found in a small town, but they are getting what Hal Clifford, author of "Downhill Slide" refers to as the "new ski village", a formula repeated in many ski towns by Intrawest, the largest owner of ski resorts in the world.
· These standardized visitor-driven designs offer adventure without risk, in towns whose core is what they call "entertainment retail".

Lawrence Moss, The impact of amenity migrants on growth and sustainability
· Laurie Moss, who consults from his home base in Santa Fe on strategic planning , spoke about the driving forces of cultural and economic change in the west, using the term "amenity migrant" to describe most of the people who are continuing to move to beautiful mountain resorts. He also identified the "economic migrants" that tend to follow the amenity migrants to build their houses and service their growing communities.
· The impact of amenity migrants is greater than that of tourists, as these people tend to use a disproportionate share of resources-more land, bigger houses, etc. Typical land-use policies in the west ratify and encourage growth, while communities struggle to meet the impacts of that growth with declining budgets.
· Amenity Migrants tend to be conservation minded and value the natural resources "in situ" rather than extracted as a commodity (mining and logging industries). This often puts them at odds with local businesses and economic development of traditional industries.
· Culture itself has become a commodity (idea of the Old West, Native American, Arts, Music, etc.)
· Factors that will lead to more growth: greater mobility, more disposable wealth, increased access to information through communication technology. In addition, more and more people are realizing the value of connecting with nature, enjoying leisure time in beautiful places
· Moss believes we must take an ecological, regional approach to solving the problems of growth. We must shift social norms to place higher value on community needs, to be less materialistic. "Be satisfied with enough".

Timothy Duane, Managing Growth in the Sierra Nevada
· Tim is an author and professor of environmental design at U.C. Berkeley who used two case studies in two different counties in the Sierra Nevada to explore nature, culture, and conflict in the changing West. The two His area of study has doubled in population between 1970 and 1990, with predictions over the next twenty years to quadruple.
· The Sierra Nevada, like the Rockies, has its share of characters and local color. Tim's favorite example was an old-timer who both a veterinarian and a taxidermist, whose slogan on the sign over his establishment boasted: "either way you'll get your dog back".
· The planning processes for two communities had totally different outcomes, one successful the other not. In the unsuccessful model they had "great science" in combination with "bad politics". In the successful model they had "bad science' but "good politics
· Both communities had a conservative political outlook, elections tended to be close, the extractive industries had great influence, and the economic prospects were similar.
· In Placer Legacy, the successful process, the base of support was broad with conservationists and business people backing the same vision. They understood that the end result would be some form of regulation, but accepted it. They had an experienced planning director who had a network of social relationships, and their electeds were better at selling the vision.
· In the Natural Heritage 2020 process, the planning director was new, and they focused very strongly on the "science", the mapping, the inventories, etc. But people didn't relate to that as a "common language". The good science only seemed to increase polarization and helped to mobilize the opposition. Two electeds were voted out in the process.
· Lessons learned:
· Programs must be tailored to fit the community
· Broad, anthropocentric goals attract broader support than bio-diversity goals
· Mischaracterization of ideas, issues must be responded to.
· Good science is not enough, because even science reflects values.
· Land-use regulation will mobilize political opposition.
· Incentives for participation must be strong, e.g. Endangered Species Act enforcement
· Goal should be good science and good politics
· In order for the process to be successful we must find the nexus between natural resource planning and community and social issues.
· To that end the Packard Foundation gave a grant to train people to bridge the gap between natural resource and social issues. (I think Teton County should look into grants from the Packard Foundation. I have some connections there.)
· Nurture future leaders!
· General comments:
· Put your community goals on the table. Get agreement on a 20 year vision.
· Do a Randall Arendt visualization by putting red dots on all the zoned building sites on a county map.
· Map where development can go once you have protected all that is important.
· Use Growth Management Plan to help streamline "use by right" applications i.e. make permitted stuff easy, make bigger, more significant projects much harder.
· Use incentives such as LEEDs to give higher density to susutainable projects.
· Make a statement-stay in and become a part of your community. Don't move!

II. Managing Growth and Development: The Community Experience

Margrit Steuri, The Grindelwald Experience
· Margrit is a native of Grindelwald, Switzerland and a member of the town council. Grindelwald is a very old farming village and a relatively new resort whose main attractions are skiing and mountain climbing, being near the famous Eiger. The town is blessed with equally strong summer and winter seasons.
· Grundelwald, with a population of 4,000, prepared its first masterplan in 1404, and established the first building regulations in 1897. So you might say they have a long-term vision.
· In 1968, faced with the pressures of growth, Grundelwald revised their town plan and instituted a Planned Building Zone in 1975. Their goal was to maintain the town as a place for its residents. To that end they decided to encourage farming and started to sell products locally.
· They improved the tourist infrastructure in harmony with nature and became a UNESCO World Heritage site.
· They have 2,700 hotel rooms and accommodate a million overnight visits per year. They have approximately 1,000 guest workers to serve the tourists.

Julie Ann Woods Lessons and Challenges from Aspen
· Julie Ann is the Community Development Director for Aspen who has been through a consolidation of town and county planning and an undoing of that consolidation. She feels quite strongly that the merger was ultimately not a good idea, even though town and county continue to share offices. Her advice is to use some form of Intergovermental Agreement (IGA) to require the Town and County to work together.
· Aspen has been under a growth management plan since 1977, which most agree has been effective but has some unintended consequences.
· Aspen has been very good at leveraging their growth to create public benefit. Public funds are building a new skate park, Recreation Center with indoor pool, playgrounds, etc.
· Aspen has a major transit component, having the second largest transit system in Colorado (after Denver), and a combination of paid parking and a major public parking facility. This allows them to force people to leave their cars behind. Downtown developments have no parking requirement.
· They allowed 4-story buildings in the 70's which was followed by a backlash of public opinion against that kind of density.
· They then implemented a Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) that allows no more than 2% growth per year. Their population has been capped at 30,000 residents. Since 1997 only two applications have been made, one approved, none built. (The requirements are too onerous).
· All development is required to mitigate its growth, period, or it doesn't get approved.
· Aspen has created 1,700 units of deed-restricted housing since the program began. They are now focused on subsidizing local-serving businesses, allowing them low rents, certain financial breaks. (Do we need to consider this?)
· The Aspen Area Community Plan now encourages development to grow up, not out. The new height limit is 40' with an F.A.R. of 2.0. Julie Ann believes that we must convince people that density is in fact good, a hard sell in Aspen as it is in Jackson.
· Lesson: link growth management with overall community goals. Don't' be afraid to adjust the regulations when they are not working!

Randall McKay Growth Management: the Banff Experience
· Randall is the Manager of Planning and Development for Banff. The contents of his talk are included in my earlier description of Banff.

III. Preventing Resource Waste and Pollution:

Julie Dickinson, Zero Waste, an Achievable Goal for Sustainable Mountain Communities
· Julie Dickinson is the manager of the Zero Waste New Zealand Trust, a non-profit that provides grants , technical support, and encouragement to a national network of organization s committed to the Zero Waste vision.
· Dedicated to the concept that "waste equals food", Julie's group is committed to a vision of eliminating all waste.
· Humans are the only creature on earth that produces waste, and the way the current system works, our entire industrial output creates massive waste.
· We need to start treating waste as the social problem that it is, requiring a paradigm shift to solve it.
· The entire supply chain from design through manufacture of goods needs to be re-evealuated, to embrace the notion that waste does in fact equal food.
· Believe in the four "L's": Local, low-cost, low-tech, low-impact.
· A local landfill using Zero Waste practices saved thousands of dollars per year and created numerous jobs for people working in the landfill, sorting re-usable stuff, doing compost, etc. Adopting Zero Waste unleashes community creativity, and feels good to do.

Donald Friend, Water Quality as Input to Development Policy
· Donald is a professor of Geography at University of Minnesota and works with Mark Williams at University of Colorado consulting on water quality issues is the Colorado Rockies.
· Water quality is one of the best diagnostic indicators of ecological sustainability, and is something few people are against.
· Water quality issues can be the driver to help change social behavior. Learn to "Reduce…Reuse…Recycle".
· Telluride electeds wanted to limit growth above 11,000 feet in elevation, but the lawyers said that would be "arbitrary and capricious". So they used water quality measures as a legal basis to defend against legal challenges, and it has held up.

IV. Sustainable Tourism: The Community Experience

Shannon Gordon, Environmental Sustainability in Whistler
· Shannon is the Sustainability coordinator for the town of Whistler, British Columbia.
· Whistler's mission is not small or humble, but rather to be "the premier mountain resort in the world". They realize that a sound environmental strategy is key to that goal, one that has local stewardship, global and regional responsibility, and takes into account future generations.
· They have followed The Natural Step Process in establishing their sustainability vision and goals.
· They assembled a group of early adopters who agreed to: a common language, internal support networks, internal baseline audit, community support network, a sustainability symposium, and a community "launch" (unveiling of the plan).
· They funded a significant community outreach process to help educate the residents.
· Since starting this process they have seen the following changes:
· An 800% increase in transit ridership
· Electric bikes for town business.
· Pesticide-free parks
· Recycling, green building initiatives, use of geothermal heating, LEED certification of public buildings
· Affordable housing
· A Re-Use-It center for recycling of materials that nets $10k profit per month.
· Their new motto is: "Whistler, it's our future"

Myles Rademan, The Olympic Experience
· Myles is the public affairs director of Park City, Utah, and had a busy time planning for the Winter Olympics held there last year. He talked about Park City's history as a mining town, and its transition over the last 40 years into a ski and resort town, with all the predictable problems the change has caused.
· The Resort Life Cycle is: Welcome, Development, Resentment, Confrontation, Destruction.
· In a true community, issues become less important than people and relationships
· He recognizes that resorts are basically in the "life-style industry", and that means maintaining the wilderness that is part of that experience. He also agrees that the so-called "menopause mansions" will continue to be the driving force of growth in Mountain Communities.
· There are 78 million baby boomers who will be getting their AARP cards over the next decade, so lots more retirement age people still out there.
· We suffer from Urban Denial-not willing to accept that our little Western towns have become quite urban, with high land values, high rents, and all the services of larger cities.
· He closed the conference with an appeal for "enoughness", being satisfied with less. When is enough enough?

V. Conclusions:

While the conference may not have defined sustainability, it got a lot of good ideas aired and gave us all a sense that our problems are not unique, There are a range of solutions and ideas out there to help deal with our collective future.

Jackson's Hole was well represented with three commissioners, the head of the Chamber of Commerce, and the Community Planning Director of the Alliance. Both Margie Lynch and Steve Duerr gave dynamic presentations about Jackson and contributed to the success of the conference. I felt like we were among the more advanced communities in getting out ahead of our problems, and dealing with important issues of sustainability. But there is so much further to go, and that's what conferences like this are supposed to do-inspire you to action in pursuit of a clearly articulated vision. Let's work together to make it happen!

Notes by John Carney, 7 July 2003