American Planning Association, Florida Chapter



Download 88.57 Kb.
Sana23.06.2017
Hajmi88.57 Kb.
2017 Project Awards Program

American Planning Association, Florida Chapter

APA Florida is pleased to announce the opening of its 2017 Project Awards Program application cycle. This program provides APA Florida the opportunity to recognize outstanding planning projects in the State of Florida at its annual conference. The program provides APA Florida members with the chance to see and learn about development, conservation, government, or environmental projects, where planning has had a positive impact on the outcome. The Project Awards Committee will be looking for innovativeness and quality, and the potential for use in other areas.


This year, APA Florida is pleased to announce the addition of the Innovations in Planning for All Ages Award, sponsored by AARP Florida. This award highlights successful projects, programs or campaigns designated for the 50+ population and which contribute to making a community more age-friendly.

Awards of Excellence and Merit

Eligible planning projects are those completed within the last two years in Florida. An awards application should be in electronic format on a CD and include a copy of the planning document and a completed application form. The APA Florida Chapter Office must receive an award application by Monday, May 15, 2017. (Student Project Award applications are due by May 15 as well.) Incomplete applications or those not received in the APA Florida Chapter office by the deadline will not be considered. Space permitting, award recipients may have the opportunity to display their projects at the APA Florida Annual Conference in Daytona Beach, September 5-8, 2017. The award recipients will be notified by early July of their selection. Those selected for an Award of Excellence will be requested to provide a short video for the awards ceremony. The Awards of Excellence and Awards of Merit will be presented to the recipients at the opening morning session, Wednesday, Sept. 6, 2017.


Nominations will be evaluated for the award category in which they are submitted. However, the Awards Committee may upon majority vote, move a nomination to a different category, if appropriate. Generally, only one Award of Excellence and one Award of Merit are granted per category each year. If the Awards Committee finds that none of the nominations in a particular category meets the desirable standards, they may opt not to grant an award in that category for that year. The jurors make the distinction between Awards of Excellence and Awards of Merit based on several factors including scoring, innovation, superior quality, transferability, and other factors.
Projects must fall under one of the following seven categories:


  1. Planning Project Award for a specific physical planning project of unusually high merit that is in the process of being constructed or has been constructed within the last two years. The project should demonstrate “on-the-ground” results that are supported by documentable physical or social change.

Examples include streetscape plans; public space plans; hospital, college or other campus plan.




  1. Comprehensive Plan Award for a comprehensive plan, or individual element, of unusually high merit completed and adopted by the public agency within the last two years for, by, or within a jurisdiction with the most recent BEBR official population estimate of 50,000 or more (Large Jurisdiction) or of less than 50,000 (Small Jurisdiction).




  1. Best Practices Award for a specific planning tool, practice, program, project, or process that is a significant advancement to specific elements of planning. This category emphasizes results and demonstrates how innovative and state-of-the-art planning methods and practices helped to implement a plan. Nominations may include such things as ordinances, regulations, legislation, adopted policy and codes, tax policies or initiatives, growth management or design guidelines, transferable development rights program, land acquisition efforts, public/private partnerships, applications of technology, handbooks, or efforts to foster greater participation in community planning.

Examples include regulations and codes, tax policies or initiatives, growth management or design guidelines, transferable development rights programs, land acquisition efforts, public-private partnerships, applications of technology, handbooks, or efforts that foster greater participation in community planning.




  1. Grassroots Initiative Award for an initiative that illustrates how a community utilized the planning process to address a need that extends beyond the traditional scope of planning. Emphasis is placed on the success of planning in new or different settings. Nominated projects should expand public understanding of the planning process. This could include such efforts as community policing or drug prevention, neighborhood outreach initiatives, programs designed for special populations, public art or cultural efforts, community festivals, environmental or conservation initiatives, summer recreational initiatives for children, or focused tourism ventures.




  1. Neighborhood Planning Award for a neighborhood plan, program, design, or related effort that demonstrates innovative planning principles and measures that creates sustainable neighborhoods that have lasting value.




  1. Innovation in Planning for All Ages Award for a project, program or campaign that emphasizes innovative planning in meeting the needs of the 50+ population and demonstrates how communities can become more age-friendly. Nominations may include such things as affordable housing options for older residents or home modification resources, service delivery programs to help older residents age in the setting of their choice, pedestrian infrastructure, innovative transportation programs which increase senior mobility, projects fostering intergenerational and multi-cultural connection and socialization, project design that promote wellness and active aging. This award is sponsored by AARP Florida.




  1. Outstanding Student Project Award to recognize outstanding class projects or papers by a student or group of students in accredited planning programs in Florida that contribute to advances in the field of planning. While it is appropriate to submit a project or paper on which a faculty member(s) has given guidance, the submission should be primarily the work of the students.



General Submission Information
A Complete Award Package, submitted in electronic format on a CD to the APA Florida Chapter Office, must include the Following Documents:


  1. The planning document or project.




  1. Completed Annual Project Awards Application including:




  1. A brief description of the project, including the setting, time frame, significance to the planning field, innovations in theory, methodology and/or practice and other unique aspects to the application. (Max. 500 words)



  2. A project summary to be used for the award handout at the annual conference. (Max. 100 words)




  1. A brief discussion demonstrating how the project meets the following criteria (Max. 200 words each criterion):

Originality and Innovation – How does the entry present a visionary approach or innovative concept to address needs? How does the use of the planning process in this context broadened accepted planning principles within the context of the situation?

Quality – How does the project represent excellence of thought, analysis, writing, and graphics, regardless of budgetary limitations? How were available resources used in a thoughtful and ethical process?
Transferability – How does the project have potential application for others and how does use of the entry’s components and methodology would further the cause of good planning?
Comprehensiveness – How have planning principles been observed, especially in consideration of the entry’s effects on other public objectives?

Implementation(This is not a criterion for the Outstanding Student Project Award) What steps were taken to build momentum and public support for following and implementing the project?
Engagement - How were various public interests involved and what was the extent of that involvement? How does the project demonstrate a strong effort to solicit input from those who historically have been left out of the planning process? How were those affected brought into the planning process? How did the project obtain public and private support?

Role of Planners – What was the role, significance and participation of planners? Was there a connection between the effort’s success and increased awareness in the community of planners and planning?

Effectiveness – How did the project address the need or problem that prompted its initiation? How have the results made a difference in the lives of people affected? What level of effectiveness has the project had over time?
Education - (This is a criterion for only the Grassroots Initiative Award) How has the project encouraged community leaders to revise their opinions about the varied uses and broad applications of the planning process? What influence has the project had on public awareness beyond those immediately affected? What connection is there between the effort's success and increased awareness in the community of planners and planning?


Age Friendliness – (This is a criterion for only the Innovations in Planning for All Ages Award)
How has the project or program helped the local community become more age-friendly, specifically with respect to the 50+ population? What influence has the project had on public awareness on the importance of including age-friendly considerations in planning decisions? What tangible impacts has the project or program had within the community in terms of being able to age in place? What connection is there between the effort's success and increased awareness in the community of barriers with respect to this issue?


  1. Five (5) digital graphics or images (jpg format, color, 300 dpi minimum) which are copyright-free that illustrate the planning area or project that is being submitted. Submit only graphics or images that are not copyrighted and which may be reproduced by APA Florida without a fee, charge, or copyright infringement.

Images should provide context and show the award nomination’s positive or intended results.

  • Images should supplement what exists in the written summary and criteria sections.

  • Each image is limited to a maximum 1 megabyte (1 MB).

  • Each image must include a photo caption. Captions must be no more than 25 words each.

  • Photo collages, videos or PowerPoint presentations are not acceptable.




  1. Up to five (5) one-page Letters of Support or Testimonials are encouraged, but not required in support of the application. Letter(s) should offer support for the value of the nominated effort. Letters may not be written by the nominator of the submission or by the nominated project author, client or group.




  1. Name, address, daytime telephone, and email numbers of the person(s) to contact regarding the application, project author(s), and project client.




  1. Application fee: $50 for APA Florida member/$75 Non-member, payable to APA Florida and mailed to the Florida Chapter at 2017 Delta Boulevard, Suite 201, Tallahassee, FL 32303. Please notate the project name on the check.

A complete award package must be received by the APA Florida Chapter Office at the above address no later than 5:00 p.m., Monday, May 15, 2017 (no exceptions). (Student Project Award applications are also due by 5:00 p.m., May 15, 2017.) Please direct any questions about the awards program to Alex Magee at 850-201-3272 or fapa@floridaplanning.org.







American Planning Association

Florida Chapter
Annual Project Awards Application
It is imperative that all of the following information be provided in full. Incomplete applications will not be accepted. Submit only one (1) project for one (1) award category per application. Please direct any questions about the awards program to Alex Magee at 850-201-3272 or fapa@floridaplanning.org
Mail complete award application entries including electronic versions of all materials and a check for the application fee payable to APA Florida Chapter. Please assure that the project name is on the check. Entries must be received by the Chapter Office, 2017 Delta Boulevard, Suite 201, Tallahassee, Florida 32303 by 5:00 PM, Monday, May 15, 2017 – no exceptions. (Student Project Award applications are due by 5:00 p.m., Monday, May 15, 2017.) Materials received after this date will not be accepted and will not be returned.
Applicant Information

The Applicant will be considered the primary contact to the Chapter for all decisions made on this application and will work with APA Florida staff to obtain additional information and materials.




Name

Merry Lovern

Organization

City of Apopka

Title

Executive Assistant to Mayor Joseph E. Kilsheimer

Address

120 E. Main Street

City, State. Zip

Apopka, Florida

Phone / E-mail

407.703.1601

mlovern@apopka.net

I certify that the submitted work was done by the parties credited in this Awards Application Form, and that the work meets the appropriate nomination submittal requirements listed herein.

Applicant’s Signature ­_____________________________________
Project Information

Project Name

Grow Apopka: 2025 Vision

Author(s)

Apopka Residents with Assistance from Keith and Schnars, PA

Award Category

Planning Project Award

Neighborhood Planning Award

(circle one)

Comprehensive Plan Award (Large Jurisdiction)

Best Practices Award




Comprehensive Plan Award (Small Jurisdiction)

Innovations in Planning for All Ages Award




Grassroots Initiative Award

Outstanding Student Project Award

An electronic copy of the planning document or project must accompany this application.


Brief Description

Describe the setting, time frame, significance to the planning field, innovations in theory, methodology and/or practice and other unique aspects to the application. (Max. 500 words)




Grow Apopka: Visioning 2025 (Grow Apopka) is a sterling example of how using planning techniques such as small area needs assessments and demand projections; Capital Improvements Plan expanded beyond the traditional areas of infrastructure to support development and meet level of service standards; community outreach, citizen participation, and consensus-building models designed to identify and address holistically residents’ needs rather than conform to statutory meeting notice requirements; and information sharing that employs electronic and social media, graphics, and renderings can allow a community to create a vision that respects traditions while embracing a dynamic future.
Grow Apopka examined existing but isolatedly-implemented plans, including but not limited to the Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Regulations, Community Redevelopment Plan, Annual Budget, Recreation Master Plan, and economic development guidelines. Grow Apopka also analyzed socio-economic data, researched attitudinal priorities of residents, aggressively and continuously marketed to residents using existing channels where they live, socialize, worship, and volunteer.
Grow Apopka created the means for a historic, rural, agricultural economy community to assess and chart its transition to a bedroom-room community. From 1990 to 2015, population tripled from approximately 15,000 to 45,000. Apopka is the second largest city in Orange County, and 90% of residents commute outside of the city to employment.
In March 2015, Mayor Joseph E. Kilsheimer was elected based on support of his campaign slogan: “Let’s Grow Apopka the Right Way.” Prior to the visioning process, the City’s land development regulations were last updated in 1992; a Community Redevelopment Agency was created in 1993 but did not implement programs; antiquated systems and processes limited planning, programming and funding of services. Concomitantly, increased development demands were fueled by large amounts of available land, abundant water resources, Metro Orlando marketplace’s vitality, and the completion of the Wekiva Parkway in 2021.
Mayor Kilsheimer and the Council empowered residents to develop a vision plan, commencing in July 2015. The process was designed by the City and Keith and Schnars (KS) and implemented by a seven-person resident Steering Committee. Grow Apopka allowed the City to redress and replace static programs and process while preparing for the demands of new development. Grow Apopka allowed the City to take stock of what residents wanted.
The City learned people moved to Apopka for its small-time charm, but wanted to enhance local employment opportunities; increase the amount and range of retail, social, and recreational venues and activities; and provide more neighborhood and city-wide infrastructure such as sidewalks, bicycle facilities, lighting, and transit-supportive amenities.
Grow Apopka achieved consensus among disparate needs of a diverse population. Through a series of facilitated meetings and workshops, residents, the Steering Committee, and City Council articulated and prioritized their needs and implementation strategies for success. Grow Apopka linked needs and implementation strategies to the budgetary process to determine the best use of available City revenue in partnership with the private-sector and other governmental agencies. Finally, Grow Apopka has not become a shelf-filling prophecy, but a roadmap to successfully meeting the needs of Apopka’s residents.


Project Summary

To be used for the award handout at the annual conference. (Max. 100 words)




Grow Apopka: Vision 2025 (Grow Apopka) is the voice residents, representing their consensus on how their community should grow and develop. Grow Apopka empowered those who live and work in the community to share what is important to them about Apopka: What makes the community special? What can be done better? What should the future look like?
Representatives from the City; the Steering Committee; business owners; residents; civic, institutional, faith-based, and non-profit organizations; and other interested parties joined together and dedicated many hours of hard work in the development of the resulting vision plan.


Originality and Innovation

How does the entry present a visionary approach or innovative concept to address needs? How does the use of the planning process in this context broaden accepted planning principles within the context of the situation? (Max. 200 words)








Quality

How does the project represent excellence of thought, analysis, writing, and graphics, regardless of budgetary limitations? How were available resources used in a thoughtful and ethical process? (Max. 200 words)




The Plan should drive other community-wide planning efforts as an umbrella strategy, and emphasizes results with accountability by including performance measures with progress reports at least twice a year. The Plan is based on a combination of an assessment of the most pressing challenges and opportunities, professional experience and judgment, research of prior planning efforts, and detailed input from the Council and Senior Staff. The Plan contains 33 strategies with an initial estimated cost of $79 million. Time-lines for execution and completion of the individual strategies have been established, along with the entity responsible for implementation. Measuring success is important; therefore, 21 performance measures are also included. While the City’s Budget and 5-year Capital Improvements Plan ultimately determine fund-able projects and achievable deadlines, this Plan is intended to become part of the FY 2017 Budget to guide future city planning efforts and prioritize corresponding budget decisions. The Plan’s value will be enhanced if all agenda items coming before the Council are scored for relative compliance with the Plan, thus enabling the City to remain focused on its mutually agreed upon strategic goals. Recommended annual Plan updates will allow for unforeseen dynamics and ever changing priorities.



Transferability

How does the project have potential application for others and how does use of the entry’s components and methodology would further the cause of good planning? (Max. 200 words)





The relevant question is not simply what shall we do tomorrow, but rather what shall we do today to get ready for tomorrow.” - Peter Drucker
Visioning is about the future. It is an opportunity for us to decide how we want to look and function in the years to come. Section 163.3168(2), Florida Statutes, states: “local governments are encouraged to apply innovative planning tools, including, but not limited to, visioning, sector planning, and rural land stewardship area designations to address future new development areas, urban service area designations, urban growth boundaries, and mixed-use, high-density development in urban areas.”
The core components of Grow Apopka can be replicated. The hallmarks are:


  • Aggressive and continuous public outreach, partnering with existing community organizations and using retail-level techniques at the places where residents gather, social, volunteer as well using tradition, electronic, and social media.

  • Socio-economic demographics by InfoGraphics that enhances residents’ knowledge and understanding of their community.

  • Multiple opportunities for citizen input.

  • Crafting implementation strategies that are measurable, are assigned to a lead Department, have commencement dates and duration, and estimated costs.

  • Provide opportunities to build and achieve consensus such as the American Assembly process used as the final step before Council adoption.

Where Are We Now?

Where Are Going?

Where Do We Want to Be?

How Do We Get There?


Comprehensiveness

How have planning principles been observed, especially in consideration of the entry’s effects on other public objectives? (Max. 200 words)




The Plan should drive other community-wide planning efforts as an umbrella strategy, and emphasizes results with accountability by including performance measures with progress reports at least twice a year. The Plan is based on a combination of an assessment of the most pressing challenges and opportunities, professional experience and judgment, research of prior planning efforts, and detailed input from the Council and Senior Staff.
The Plan contains 33 strategies with an initial estimated cost of $79 million. Time-lines for execution and completion of the individual strategies have been established, along with the entity responsible for implementation. Measuring success is important; therefore, 21 performance measures are also included. While the City’s Budget and 5-year Capital Improvements Plan ultimately determine fund-able projects and achievable deadlines, this Plan is intended to become part of the FY 2017 Budget to guide future city planning efforts and prioritize corresponding budget decisions.
The Plan’s value will be enhanced if all agenda items coming before the Council are scored for relative compliance with the Plan, thus enabling the City to remain focused on its mutually agreed upon strategic goals. Recommended annual Plan updates will allow for unforeseen dynamics and ever changing priorities.



Implementation (This is not a criterion for the Outstanding Student Project Award)

What steps were taken to build momentum and public support for following and implementing the project? (Max. 200 words)



As noted before KS meet with various community-based organizations to discuss the visioning process, including how, why, when, and where to participate. KS also used these organizations and their existing communication systems (such as newsletters, NextDoor, emails) to provide updates on the visioning process.


KS also joined Mayor Kilsheimer on his weekly radio program to discuss, conducted weekly interviews for local newspapers (Apopka Chief and The Planter), regularly updated the dedicated project website social media accounts, attended monthly Food Truck Thursdays, football games, and other community events. Members of the Steering Committee also conducted outreach while participating in varied community activities.
All community meetings, workshops, forums, listening sessions were held in the evenings or weekends to increase participation. In addition, local restaurants donated catering for meetings.


Engagement

How various public interests involved and what were was the extent of that involvement? How does the project demonstrate a strong effort to solicit input from those who historically have been left out of the planning process? How were those affected brought into the planning process? How did the project obtain public and private support? (Max. 200 words)



Outreach and residents’ input were integral. The Project Boundary included the city and portions of unincorporated Orange County located within the Joint Service Agreement area (JSA). The JSA was included because the City provides water, sewer, and solid waste services and may annex any part of the JSA, with consent of Orange County, until the year 2025.


The Boundary was divided into four quadrants, and a community meeting was held in each. This allowed residents to address neighborhood-level and citywide needs. KS deployed its Mobile Information Station to four locations where residents gather on weekends to provide information on the visioning process. KS staff meet in-person with community-based groups such as the Chamber of Commerce, Foliage Sertoma Club, Rotary Club, Women’s Club, Big Potato Foundation, Farm Workers Association, Historical Society, Homeowners Associations, Hope Community Center, Ministerial Alliance, and Veterans of Foreign Wars.
Outreach also included dedicated website (http://apopka.encorvus.com/), survey, workshops, business community meeting, meeting conducted in Spanish for Hispanic and Latino residents, meeting in South Apopka, the historic African-American neighborhood.
All told, the survey responses exceeded 1,200; over 400 attended forums and listening sessions; approximately 150 people visited the MIS; and there were over 9,700 visits to the project website.



Role of Planners

What was the role, significance and participation of planners? Was there a connection between the effort’s success and increased awareness in the community of planners and planning? (Max. 200 words)




The vision process was developed by city staff, including representatives of Planning Department, and KS, which offers multi-disciplinary expertise in the fields of engineering, land surveying, landscape architecture, planning, public outreach, and environmental sciences.
During the visioning process, residents were asked to provide input on following key questions:

  1. Where Are We Now

  2. Where Are We Going?

  3. Where Do We Want to Be?

  4. How Do We Get There?

To assist residents, KS researched and analyzed socio-economic data such as land use allocations population growth trends, population demographics, crime statistics, employment, educational attainment, household income, and property values. This information was compiled and presented at the quadrant and city-wide levels.


At the series of community meetings and workshops and via the dedicated website, residents were presented this data through a series of InfoGraphics. The significance of the data as part of the planning and visioning process was detailed and reinforced as a basis for residents to provide informed input.
Additionally, City Planning staff and KS worked directly with residents to increase their understanding of integrating their needs and implementation strategies into Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Regulations, and Capital Improvement Planning.
Expanding existing and creating new economic opportunities was a nearly universal need for residents. Outside out-of-date information on three different websites, Apopka did not have economic development program. Through the visioning process, residents recommended numerous strategies to coordinate short- and long-term planning with economic development.
Grow Apopka resulted in residents increasing their understanding of the City’s planning processes and functions.




Effectiveness

How did the project address the need or problem that prompted its initiation? How have the results made a difference in the lives of people affected? What level of effectiveness has the project had over time? (Max. 200 words)



Grow Apopka has not become a shelf-filling prophecy, but a roadmap to successfully meeting the needs of Apopka’s residents. Accomplished include:




  1. Family-based activities at the City’s Amphitheater. These include the Fourth of July Fireworks at the Amphitheater, Sprit of Apopka Gospel Fest, Symphony Under the Stars featuring the Orlando Philharmonic Orchestra, and Family Movie Night.

  2. Master Plan for Kitt-Land Park, Edwards Field, and the Fran Carlton Center, including an aquatic facility, splash pad, and skate park. Request for proposals for splash pad in June 2017.

  3. Community center at Alonzo Williams Park in South Apopka. The new building will double size of the existing facility to 5,500 square feet, and feature large meeting area, offices, activity rooms, and afterschool programs. Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program awarded in November 2016.

  4. Fire Station Number 5 in the North Quadrant, the highest growth area.

  5. Updating the Land Development Code, scheduled to be completed in March 2018.

  6. Improved Wi-Fi services at all parks.

  7. Constructing the Sixth Street Promenade.

  8. Revised Community Redevelopment Agency Plan.

  9. Private developer to create Apopka Town Center.

  10. Economic development activities assigned to Community Development.




Education (This is a criterion for only the Grassroots Initiative Award)

How has the project encouraged community leaders to revise their opinions about the varied uses and broad applications of the planning process? What influence has the project had on public awareness beyond those immediately affected? What connection is there between the effort's success and increased awareness in the community of planners and planning? (Max. 200 words)







Age-Friendliness (This is a criterion for only the Innovations in Planning for All Ages)

How has the project or programed help the local community become more age-friendly, specifically with respect to the 50+ population? What influence has the project had on public awareness on the importance of including age-friendly considerations in planning decisions? What tangible impacts has the project or program had within the community in terms of being able to age in place? What connection is there between the effort's success and increased awareness in the community of barriers with respect to this issue? (Max. 400 words)











Do'stlaringiz bilan baham:


Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©hozir.org 2017
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling

    Bosh sahifa