Loading...
PC 08-19-92 Meeting AgendaFILE COPY AGENDA FREDERICK COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Old Frederick County Courthouse Winchester, Virginia AUGUST 19, 1992 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER TAB 1) Bimonthly Report...........................................A 2) Committee Reports .......................................... B 3) Citizen Comments .......................................... C 4) Subdivision application #006-92 of Deer Run at Sherando for twenty five patio homes on 55.43 acres. This property is located north and adjacent to State Rt. 277, east of Stephens City, in the Opequon District. (Mr. Miller) .............................................. D 5) Discussion with Mrs. Pat Bransher, Delco Development Property Manager, regarding establishing a Food Lion Grocery Store in the former Dart Drug. (Mr. Wyatt) ............................. E 6) Resolution re: signalized traffic light at Sherando High School. (Mr. Wyatt)................................................F 7) General discussion regarding the effectiveness of our public participation program. (Mr. Watkins) ............................................. G 8) Other (no attachment) ........................................................ H M E M O R A N D U M TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Robert W. Watkins, Secretary SUBJECT: Bimonthly Report DATE: August 11, 1992 (1) Rezonings Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Twin Lakes 4/04/90 (Shaw) (RA to B2/RP) John & Jane McAllister 7/09/92 (Opeq) (RP to B2) (2) Rezonings Approved: (dates are BOS meeting dates) None (3) Rezonings Denied: (dates are_BOS meeting dates) None (4) Conditional Use Permits Pending: dates are submittal dates John Merrill 05/06/92 Gain Off premise sign Joan & Kristi Riggleman05/29/92 Gain Bridal Consultant Charles & Faye Grady 06/25/92 Opeq Dog Kennel Lewis Boyer, II 07/08/92 Shaw Landscaping Business Diane McMillian 08/06/92 Opeq Stencil Sales & Service (5) Conditional Use Permits Approved: dates are approval dates None (6) Site Plans Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Wheatlands Wastewater Fac. 9/12/89 Opeq trmt.facil Grace Brethren Church 6/08/90 Shaw church Flex Tech 10/25/90 Ston Lgt. Industrial Hampton Chase 12/18/90 Ston S.F. & T.H. 2 Lake Centre 05/15/91 Shaw Red Star Express Lines 05/24/91 Ston Winchester Airport 03/02/92 Shaw Freeton 04/27/92 Opeq Greenwood Bapt. Church 05/07/92 Shaw Signal Station 06/25/92 BkCk Winchester Church of God 07/29/92 BkCk Townhouses Whse. Addition Increased safety zone/road relocation Townhouses Church & Parish Car wash addition Church (7) Site Plans Approved: (dates are approval dates_l None (8) Subdivisions Pending: (dates are submittal dates Deer Run @ Sherando 07/17/92 Opequon (9) Subdivisions Pending Final Admin. A roval: (PIC aRRroval dates Abrams Point, Phase I Frederick Woods Hampton Chase Lake Centre Fredericktowne Est. (sections 5, 6 and 7) Coventry Courts Senseny Glen Freeton Battlefield Partnership Fairfax Drive Ext. 6/13/90 5/16/90 02/27/91 06/19/91 10/16/91 Shawnee Opequon Stonewall Shawnee Opequon 12/04/91 Shawnee 12/04/91 Shawnee 05/20/92 O p e. q u o n 05/20/92 Back Creek 08/05/92 Opequon (10) PMDP Pending: (dates are submittal dates) Preston Place 08/10/92 Shawnee (11) FMDP Pending Administrative Approval: (dates are BOS approval dates Battlefield Partnership 04/08/92 Back Creek Hampton Chase (revised) 05/27/92 Stonewall reeton Vw� V8 'F / mac. Opequon. (12) FMDP Administ. Approved (dates are admin. approval dates) None 3 (13) Board of Zoning Appeals Applications Pendin submit. dates Wm. H. Pfahl 07/06/92 Opeq H. Bruce Edens 07/17/92 Ston Rbt. & Tamara Symons 07/24/92 Shaw Rbt. & Sherrill Price 07/24/92 Opeq (14) BZA Applications Approved• (approval dates) None (15) BZA Applications Denied• None Adm. Appeal 7.5' Sign Setback 18' Garage 5' Addition (16) PLANS RECD. FOR REVIEW FROM CITY OF WINCHESTER None P/C Review Date: 8/19/92 SUBDIVISION APPLICATION #006-92 DEER RUN AT SHERANDO 25 Lots on 55.43 Acres LOCATION: North and adjacent to State Route 277, east of Stephens City and east of State Route 641 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Opequon PROPERTY ID NUMBER:. 86000OA0001020 PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned R -P (Residential Performance) and B-2 (Business General) - land use - vacant and residential ADJOINING PROPERTY ZONING & PRESENT USE: Zoned RA (Rural Areas), R -P (Residential Performance), B-2 (Business General) - land use - vacant, residential and commercial PROPOSED USE: 25 Patio homes REVIEW EVALUATIONS: Virginia Dent. of Transportation: Plans have been forwarded to our District Office in Staunton for review. once we are in receipt of any comments we will forward them to you. Fire Marshal: Please post temporary street signs and lot numbers during construction. Burning of construction debris on site is prohibited. Access for emergency vehicles must be maintained at all times during construction. Ins ections De artment: Building shall comply with the VA Uniform Statewide Building Code and Section 309, Use Group R (Residential) of the BOCA National Building Code/1990. Sanitation Authority: First review - 19 items - correct and resubmit. 2 Health Department: The Health Department is unaware of any reason for objection to the project subject to the comments by the Department of Health Office of Water Programs. See attached letter from Harold T. Eberly, District Engineer, dated June 29, 1992. County Engineer: See attached letter from Harvey E. Strawsnyder, Director of Engineering and Inspections, dated June 25, 1992. Parks & Recreation: Plan appears to meet open space and recreational unit requirements. Absorbent material must be used under playground equipment. All public facilities must meet Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. Frederick Co. Public Schools: See attached letter from Thomas Sullivan, Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent, dated June 2, 1992. Planning & Zoning: The developer of this property has selected the zero lot line (ZLL) option for this patio home development. The development, as depicted, is in conformance with the zoning and subdivision ordinances. There are several review agency comments that need to be addressed. The tot lot that is off site to the west would seem to be out of place. The reason for this is that little use is anticipated from residents of these patio homes and the lot can be used by the single family residents to the northwest when this property develops. Sidewalk access will eventually exist along Jefferson Court and extending those walks to provide walking access to the tot lots at this time appears to be the best short term solution. The street names depicted in the plan are not correct in one instance (should be Jefferson Court vice Jefferson Village Court), and the other one (Deer Run Lane) has been used at another County location. Since site plans are not required for these homes, it is important to highlight some requirements as listed in the zoning ordinance. One bedroom patio homes must have a minimum patio area of 700 square feet and the patio must be enclosed by an opaque wall or fence of five to six feet in height. A minimum of two off street parking spaces must be provided for each residence. A statement will need to be included on the plats that establishes a maintenance easement on adjoining lots next to the building. Windows are prohibited on the ZLL side. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR 8/19/92 PC MTG.: Approval with the requirement that all review agency comments be complied with prior to final plat approval. This office has reviewed the Village at Sherando development site plan you forwarded. Based on our review, please be advised that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority has sufficient water and sewer capacity available to serve the proposed development and that plans and specifications for the proposed water and sewer facilities should be submitted to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority for review and approval under the Authority's local review program. Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me HTE/bt cc VDH - Richmond Central EGEt r Q 49-7 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA ROBERT B. STROUBFM.O. COMMISSIONER Department of Health ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING FIELD OFFICE Office of Water Programs 129SOLRHRANDOLPHSTREET LE)ONGTON, VIRGINIA 24450-2328 PHONE (/03)463-7136 MEMORANDUM FAX (703)463-3892 DATE: June 29, 1992 TO: Jim Webb, Environmental Health Specialist Frederick County Health Department FROM: Harold T. Eberly, District EngineerN% Office of Water Programs Lexington Field Office SUBJECT: Frederick County - Water - Frederick County Sanitation Authority (General) Frederick County - Sewerage - Frederick County Sanitation Authority (Stephens Run) This office has reviewed the Village at Sherando development site plan you forwarded. Based on our review, please be advised that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority has sufficient water and sewer capacity available to serve the proposed development and that plans and specifications for the proposed water and sewer facilities should be submitted to the Frederick County Sanitation Authority for review and approval under the Authority's local review program. Should you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me HTE/bt cc VDH - Richmond Central EGEt r Q FREDERICK COUNTY ENGINEER 9 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET, 2ND FLOOR WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA 22601 (703) 665-5643 SUBDIVISION DATE: June 25, 1992 PROJECT: Village at Sherando Patio.Homes East of Stephens City Frederick County, Virginia DESIGNER: Ron Mislowsky G. W. Clifford & Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 2104 Winchester, Virginia 22601 COMMENTS 1. Provide a method of dispersing flows from outfall of 1511 RCP. These flows will be released on a relatively steep slope which could result in erosion. A portion of this erosion could occur on neighboring property in Fredericktowne Estates. The proposed EC -1 -will probably not be sufficient based on my observations of similar occurrences in Jefferson Village. I suggest a grouted rip - rap designed to disperse the flows to a manageable velocity which will not cause erosion. 2. A detailed stormwater plan is not required for this project. However, any additional development in this area will require a stormwater management study to minimize the impact on Wrights Run. 3. Except for the EC -1 shown at the outfall of the 15" RCP the erosion and sediment control plan is approved as submitted.. Harney E Strawsnyder, J . , P W. Director of Engineers g aad Inspectio s17 D Frederick County Public Schools 1415_ -Amherst Street - Post Office Box 3508 Winchester, Virginia 22601-2708 Telephone: (703) 662-3888 — FAX (703) 722-2788 Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent June 2, 1992 G.W. Clifford & Associates 200 North Cameron Street Winchester, VA 22601 Attention: Ron Mislowsky Dear Ron: I am in receipt of you request for comments concerning the Village at Sherando (formerly Evans/Synder) at the following location: north and adjacent to Street Route 277, east of Stephens City and approximately 1750' east of Street Route 641. Approximately 1.75 miles east of I-81 and identified at tax parcel 86-A-102. It is our understanding that the proposed use of this property is for the construction of 25 patio homes as indicated in the plans. We feel that this proposal will have an impact on current and future school facilities. We recommend that these concerns be addressed during the approval process. Please feel free to contact me at your earliest convenience if you should require any additional information. Sincerely, C=4 Tho as Sullivan Administrative Assistant to the Superintendent lul IT Nam ..j 4 ��J[ Date:16 July 1992 V L7 0 YE !' D �W APPLICATION AND CHECKLIST SUBDIVISION FREDERICK COUNTY VIRGINIA Application #:- DCX, Fee Paid c/ Applicant/Agent: QEJP Corp. /G.W.Clifford &,Associates Address: 322 Burnt Factory Road Stephenson, Va 22656 Telephone: 1703) 662-4121 Owners name: JEJP Corp. Address: 322 Burnt Factory Road Stephenson, Va 22656 Telephone: 703) 662-4121 Phone: (703) 893-7500 Please list names of all owners, principals, and/or majority stockholders: John & Jane McAllister Contact person: Rom Mislowsky Phone: 703 667-2139 Name of Subdivision: Deer Run @ Sherando Number of Lots: 25 Total Acreage: 55.4293 Ac. Property Location: North & Adjacent to St. Rte 277 east of Stephens City and 1750 ± east of St. Rte. 641. Approx. 1.75 Miles east of I-81. (Give State Rt.#, distance and direction from intersection) Magisterial District: Opeauon Tax ID Number: 86-A-102 Property zoning and present use: RP/B-2 Vacant & Residential Adjoining property zoning and use: RA (Vacant). RP Residential & B-2 Pro osed Ca itol Properties Shogoing Center Has a master Development Plan been submitted for this project? Yes X No If yes, has the final MDP been approved by the Board of Supervisors? Yes X No What was the MDP title? The Village @ Sherando Does the plat contain any changes from the approved MDP? Yes No X If yes, specify what changes. Minimum Lot Size (smallest lot): 3834 sf Number and types of housing units in this development: Number 25 Types Patio Homes I COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM TO: Frederick County Planning Commission FROM: Evan A. Wyatt, PIanner II RE: Delco Plaza Food Lion DATE: August 4, 1992 Pat Bransher, Delco Development Property Manager, has requested time to address the Planning .Commission during the August 19, 1992 meeting. Mrs. Bransher is working with representatives from Food Lion to utilize a portion of the old Dart Drug building in Delco Plaza. Mr. Bruce Edens of Greenway Engineering has prepared a plan indicating the existing situation at this location (dashed lines), as well as a planned reduction in the floor area to accommodate Food Lion (solid lines). Greenway Engineering will submit a detailed site plan for review by all county agencies at a later date. The purpose of this discussion is to inform the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors of plans to revitalize this shopping center. Staff asks that the Planning Commission allow administrative approval authority once all site plan requirements have been met. THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS 9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 COUNTY of FREDERICK Department of Planning and Development 703/665-5651 FAX 703/678-0682 MEMORANDUM f TO: Frederick County Planning Commission c �J 5 � FROM: Robert Watkins, Director O1� SUBJECT: Discussion on Public Participation e - DATE: August 5, 1992 Occasionally, we will Commission meetings. participation program. � J� �9 be including time for some general discussions in the Planni g 1'.1 I believe that we need to discuss the effectiveness of our public I believe that Frederick County has been effective in bringing plans and programs to the public for their comment and review in recent years. However, I don't believe that this is necessarily enough. It may not be enough to bring planning projects to the public in a completed or partially completed form. More people need to be involved in the initial process of learning what the important issues are. They need to be involved in the process of determining objectives, setting strategies and designing solutions. Most importantly, people need to be involved so that they can become better educated about the issues and implications of the positions they take. If we bring full blown policies to people without giving them the opportunity to learn about the issues and implications we are bound to get responses with a relatively narrow focus. I believe that more people need to be given the opportunity to have issues explained to them and to become involved in well organized group discussions. There are a number of participation tools being used around the nation. Attached are materials describing some methods being used. One problem associated with all public participation methods is the demands they can place on staff and Planning Commission time. Nevertheless, I believe that we need to continue to examine our public participation methods. RWW/slk attachment THE COURTHOUSE COMMONS 9 N. Loudoun Street - P.O. Box 601 - Winchester, Virginia - 22601 jqD Zoe&f, Specializing in Conflict Resolution through community involvement, participatory problem -solving and consensus -building. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION: DESIGNING SOLUTIONS THAT REFLECT THE COMMUNITY CITIZEN PARTICIPATION INFORMATION PACKET CONTENTS: l.Objectives, Assumptions, and a Definition of Citizen Participation 2. Strategy for Effective Citizen Participation 3. Eight Practical Methods for Community Involvement Programs 4. A Problem Solving Method for Small Group Discussions 5. Brainstorm: A Group Creativity Method 6. Interactive Workshop Format Diagram PaL,e 1-2 3 4-12 13 14 15 APPLEBY INC., DECEMBER 1991 c/o Michael D. Appleby, Ph.D. • 1533 Clay Street • Blacksburg, VA 24060. 703 / 951-8031 OBJECTIVES, AqqTTM1PT10?vS-N OF COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Over the years an interactive approach to the design and implementation of community involvement has been used with considerable success. This approach is based on the definition, objectives and assumptions presented here. I. Definition of Community involvement In a particular public decision-making process, a community involvement effort can be defined as: "A con inuing, dynamic process of w -wav communication hetween the publicn lic aen ie r decision mak r ring which Choices are n inu ll made and thgfig-id f choice is narrowed—until a final Eofution/121anZl2rograrn is arrive " II. Obiectives Qf Community Involvement 1. To inform and educate the public regarding the problems and choices and their associated impacts and opportunities. 2. To identify and document the needs, values, and goals of various affected portions of a community. 3. To fully inform decision -makers of the impacts, values, etc. associated with a proposed public action. 4. To incorporate community needs, goals, and opinions into a planning and decision-making process. 5. To identify conflict and provide a process by which it can be resolved. 6. To achieve substantial community agreement that is flexible, fair' desirable and politically feasible. III. to Communitv involvement 1. Technicians or planners know their technology people know their own values, attitudes, preference and goals. 2. There is no single set of values in most communities. 3. Public decisions affect different people in different ways. 4. Public priorities can change with new information or changed situations. =1- COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT OBJECTIVES AND ASSUMPTIONS, PAGE 2 IV. What Does It Mean To BeInvolved The type and extent of involvement of citizens can vary from situation to situation. An individual's involvement can include any or all of the following: 1. Receive information 2. Give information 3. Participate in making choices of alternative proposals (although often not the final choice_) 4. Support or oppose the final choice m� by those with the ultimate decision-making responsibility. APPLEBY INC., DECEMBER 1991 -2- STRATEGY FOR EF=FECTIVE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ANALYZE THE PROJECT OR PROGRAM LLLJJJ FOR IMPORTANT STEPS & DECISIONS • Review the planning or design process • Determine critical points for public interaction DEVELOP A COMMUNITY PROFILE AND DESCRIPTION OF ISSUES AND CONCERNS • Develop profile of all affected/ interested communities • Describe major and minor issues and concerns CLARIFY INFORMATION NEEDS • For affected/ interested communities and groups • For project or program staff SELECT APPROPRIATE COMMUNICATION AND INVOLVEMENT METHODS • Methods for providing information to the public • Methods for gathering information from the public • Interactive communication methods DETERMINE A PROCESS FOR DOCUMENTING AND USING PUBLIC INPUT • Clarify the role of public input at each phase of planning and decision-making • Determine method for reporting public input to planners and decision -makers OUTLINE A COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM WITH THE STAFF AND DECISION -MAKERS • Methods, Activities and Tasks • Schedule • Budget • Staff roles and responsibilities • Evaluation procedures 7� TONER b ASSOCIATES. INC. 8 PRACTICAL METHODS FOR COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS 1 PUBLIC MEETINGS & WORKSHOPS 2 CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEES 3 SURVEYS 4 PERSONAL INTERVIEWS 5 SPECIAL PURPOSE MEETINGS 6 MASS MEDIA 7 DIRECT MAIL 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS Developed by Toner & Associates, Inc. , Seattle 1 PUBLIC MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS PROBLEMS Participants may not represent all points of view. Limited time to share complicated and lengthy issues. Some citizens do not have time or inclina- tion to attend meetings. May be dominated by vocal minority, or public officials or leaders. Polarity can be increased. NOTES: OPPORTUNITIES Provides an interpersonal forum for two-way exchange of information. Can diffuse conflict caused by lack of information and opportunity for expression. Can provide documentation of citizens" values, attitudes and opinions, individually and in groups. Provides the agency an opportunity to get to know a community and vice - versa. Can be useful at any step in the planning process. Provides an opportunity for participa- tion to all citizens a CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEES PROBLEMS Does not necessarily represent the community. May become biased towards agency. Difficult to sustain participation. Limited participation for public. May advocate certain solutions rather than communication process. May be viewed by public as hindering ier than helping communication. May demand decision-making powers. NOTES: OPPORTUNITIES Can legitimize planning process. Can provide valuable information about affected communities. Can help identify critical issues, new alternatives, potential conflict and opportunities for solutions for study team. Can help develop and test "communi- cation content" such as survey questions, workshop presentations, discussion questions, newsletters. Can help encourage wider participation from public and give study visibility. 3 SURVEYS PROBLEMS Can be easily biased and misused. Require a great deal of expertise. May be regarded with some skepticism by the public and challenged as "invalid. " Is not a visible communication forum to general public. NOTES: OPPORTUNITIES Can provide information that can not be gained in any other way. Can obtain a true rdpresentative sample of public opinions and attitudes. Can provide a base of information to compare with public meetings results. Can be used to help inform the public about themselves. Can provide opportunity for in-depth probing of citizens' attitudes and opinions on a one-to-one basis. 4 PERSONAL INTERVIEWS PROBLEMS Public may be skeptical about list of people interviewed. May not be a visible form of communica- tion to general public. NOTES: 2 O P PORTUNI TIES Provides an informal opportunity for in-depth communication on a one-to- one basis. Viewed by community leaders and officials as an opportunity for expressing leadership to agency. May reduce conflict between agency and community leaders by opening up personal communications. 5 SPECIAL PURPOSE MEETINGS & WORKSHOPS PROBLEMS Gaining participation of critical parties. NOTES: OPPORTUNITIES Provides a forum to resolve conflict and give special attention to specific issues for specific groups such as: Public Officials Community Leaders Special Interest Groups Agencies and Institutions Neighborhood Groups Administrators Study Team Members 6 MASS MEDIA PROBLEMS Newspaper circulation or T. V. and radio audience varies from place to place and may have substantial limitations. News stories are brief and editied by media people, not the agency. Meeting announcements may be read by very limited numbers of people. Each agency must compete for time and attention. Provides only one-way communication. NOTES: 101— OPPORTUNITIES Many people rely on T.V. and news- paper for much of their information. More emphasis on public service and information problems. Is a fast way to provide information. 7 DIRECT MAIL PROBLEMS May be overlooked by citizens as "junk mail" or simply not read. Provides only one-way communication unless it contains mail -back question- naire. NOTES: OPPORTUNITIES Can be targeted to exact population that agency wishes to inform. Can be personal and gain attention. Can contain brief or in-depth infor- mation on an issue. Agency has editorial control and can insure information is factual and unbiased. 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS PROBLEMS Often come too late in the decision- making process. Citizens may feel major decisions have already been made. Formality imposes an authoritarian atmosphere. An individual may have to wait hours to speak. Lack of opportunity for interaction and in-depth discussion of critical issues. NOTES: 2 Iwo OPPORTUNITIES Provides a final opportunity to express opinion. Comments are documented usually for a verbatim transcript or record. A PROBLEM -SOLVING PROCESS FOR SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS Everyone has been involved at some time in a meeting or group discussion that was rambling, confusing or dominated by a few aggressive individuals. Many meetings can end with a feeling among the participants that there was a lot of talking but little produced. The group brainstorm process has been used productively for small group discussions in a variety of task -oriented situations. It can be used for public meetings and workshops, advisory groups and task forces, and staff meetings or conferences. This process helps a group focus creatively on a problem and discourages domination by a few group members. The goal of a small group discussion using the brainstorm process can be to. -Identify and clarify problems, issues and needs; -Suggest solutions to problems and needs; -Establish group priorities; -Determine goals and objectives. -Reviewproposals, group experience, etc. The process is not used to make final decisions, but rather to offer some intensive and creative group thinking that may lead to solutions or action steps to a particular problem or need. The brainstorm process involves the following five steps: -PRESENT THE BRAINSTORM QUESTION for discussion -BRAINSTORM a list of ideas, solutions, suggestions in response; -DISCUSS AND CLARIFY the brainstorm list; -RANK the brainstorm list to identify the items with the most group support; -RECORD AND REPORT the top ranked items for further consideration. The group should have one person act a REQORDER. This person records the ideas generated from the group in a highly visible manner by using a blackboard, easel or large sheet of paper. In this way, the group can constantly see the list of ideas they are building and use this list to stimulate discussion. If the list is recorded on large sheets of paper, the sheets can be taped to a wall during the discussion whey they can be reviewed by the whole group. The purpose of brainstorming is to get out everyone's ideas on paper before the group moves to discussion or debate. In this way, the discussion does not get stuck on one idea before all ideas have been suggested. The rules of brainstorming are: -GET ALL IDEAS OUT AND RECORD IN LARGE LETTERS SO ALL CAN SEE -DO NOT DISCUSS OR COMMENT UNTIL ALL IDEAS ARE OUT -WORK VERY QUICKLY -REPETITION IS OK (IT CAN BE SORTED OUT DURING DISCUSSION) REVISED FROM THE ORIGINAL BY THE TONER ASSOCIATES, SEATTLE WASHINGTON 1977 .13- BRAINSTORM: A GROUP CREA'i IVITY METHOD! STEPS: 1 -BRAINSTORM: RESPOND TO THE QUESTION, LIST IDEAS 2. DISCUSSION: 3. RANK: 4. REPORT: SO ALL CAN SEE. SORT THE RESPONSES, INFORMATION. SHOW GROUP SUPPORT RESPONSES. SHARE GROUP RESULTS GROUP. CLARIFY, SHARE FOR RANKED WITH TOTAL NOTE: RULES ARE KEY - DON'T DISCUSS WHILE BRAINSTORMING, SEPARATE CREATIVITY FROM JUDGEMENT! FORMULATE THE BRAINSTORM QUESTION WITH CARE. TEST IT AHEAD, IF YOU CAN, TO BE SURE THAT THE RESPONSES IT PRODUCES ARE THE ONES YOU WANT. FUNCTIONS: *GET IDEAS (LOTS!) ON ANY SUBJECT! * SET GOALS, DEFINE PROBLEMS, MAKE PLANS, REVIEW PLANS * CREATE AGENDAS * GET PEOPLE INVOLVED AND COMMITTED TO THE RESULTS. VARIATIONS: *REVIEW BRAINSTORM• AN EVALUATION TOOL THAT USES THE REGULAR BRAINSTORM FORMAT BUT ASKS EVALUATION QUESTIONS ON THE POSITIVES -"GOING WELL, OR STRENGTHS," AND THE NEGATIVES -"NOT GOING WELL", AND "WEAKNESS NEEDING CHANGE" OF PLANS, PROJECTS, GROUP EXPERIENCE, WORKSHOPS OR ANYTHING PRODUCED BY ONE GROUP AND REVEIEWED BY ANOTHER GROUP. *NOMINAL TECHNIQUE• CREATIVITY METHOD WHERE IDEA GENERATION IS DONE IN SILENCE WITH INDIVIDUAL LISTING THEIR RESPONSES ON A FORM AND GROUP LISTING OF RESPONSES BY GOING AROUND THE GROUP. GOOD WHERE BALANCED - PARTICIPATION IS DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE. ` LOGISTICS: * PARTICIPANTS IDEAL GROUP SIZE IS 5-7 MEMBERS FOR BEST PARTICIPATION AND CREATIVITY. BEST FOR BRAINSTORMING AND OTHER PARTICIPATORY METHODS. SUBDIVIDE LARGE GROUPS. * SUPPORT MATERIALS• EASELS, LARGE PAPER SO RESPONSES CAN BE MADE VISIBLE, DISCUSSION GUIDES TO EXPLAIN THE PROCESS IN A STEP BY STEP FASHION. TABLES FOR PEOPLE TO SIT AT, MARKERS, TAPE ETC. *MEETING AND WALL SPACE• SMALL GROUPS REQUIRE ROOMS WITH ADEQUATE TABLES AND WALL SPACE TO PUT THE BRAINSTORM SHEETS UPON. EACH MEETING NEEDS CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF SPACING OF GROUPS AND ACCESS TO WALL SPACE IN THE ROOM. -14- APPLEBY INC., NOVEMBER 1991 C C ED :EN WORKSHOP WALL GRAPHICS SLIDE / OVERHEAD PROJECTOR x X X SPEAKER WALL GRAPHICS CITIZEN DISCUSSION GROUPS .fi J. P MEETING HALL / SCHOOL CAFETERIA COFFEE f - f _ f t f f GREETERS 00 U Agency Stal I Participants PRO$ LENTS OPPORTUNITIES Gaining participation of representative people. Provides a forum to resolve conflict. Time consuming for public. Requires staft time. Gives special attention to specific issues. Makes it diffi- cult for a few vocal participants to dominate. Must be carefully designed to assure that the process is Improvesthe knowledge of participants_ not co-opted by the agency in charge. Can be used easily and effectively in combination with other techniques. .' • j 15