Laserfiche WebLink
May 3, 1995 <br />To: Growth Advisory Group <br />From: Environmental Advisory Group _ <br />Subj: Mid -term forum, your questionnaire, and which way from here? <br />Page 4 <br />We believe that the following approach might have merit in deciding how growth <br />of our City affects the average resident. As a starting point, assume conditions as <br />they exist today. Then ask the question: "Would increasing the population level be <br />a plus or a minus, so far as the average resident is concerned ?" In one column list <br />factors that should be considered (such as life style, taxes, transportation and <br />roads, open space and wildlife, crime, schools, etc). In a second column score the <br />degree to which, in your unbiased opinion, the average citizen would be harmed or <br />benefited using this rating system: 1) major benefit; 2) Minor benefit; 3) Little or no <br />effect; 4) Minor harm; 5) Major harm. <br />This analysis should indicate whether population growth—all things considered— <br />is desirable or undesirable so far as the average resident is concerned. If costs <br />(monetary and otherwise) exceed benefits, then the obvious direction to take is <br />away from population growth to the extent possible. <br />Another way to look at the problem is to look backwards and ask the question, <br />"Am I better off today than I was ten years ago when the population was half as <br />large," using the same items and rating system. <br />Our dream of the future is for sustainability; i.e. no net loss of the desirable <br />features of our environment. We hope that is your goal, too. Details on how to ' <br />accomplish this need to be worked out, but we think we can see a cost - effective <br />way of doing so. But the key is population growth, and whether the City is ready <br />and willing to make commitments to the future that will make sustainability more <br />than just a dream. We will consider the points raised in your questionnaire more <br />carefully as we proceed, and would welcome, closer communication with your <br />group. <br />Environmental Board Comprehensive Plan Comments, Appendix 5, page 4 of 4 <br />