CIVIC ENGAGEMENT IN SAN JOSE
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages To Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Robust civic engagement that connects with vulnerable communities is imperative as cities grow, gentrify and change. Currently, Google is planning a major new development at San Jose Diridon Station. The “Downtown West” Project is undergoing heavy review and scrutiny.
Background:
All development projects undergo a series of steps to receive approval for their plan, including approval for the type of land uses (residential, commercial, retail etc), and ensuring that the development application meets all city requirements for such things as open space/parks, transportation, utilities and infrastructure, etc. This is called the entitlement process. Cities also require a level of public notification as part of the entitlement process.
As our guest speaker mentioned, Google purchased land from the City of San Jose in December of 2018. The agreement with the City includes the requirement to develop a Community Benefit package. For San Jose, the ability to add jobs to the city but also add affordable housing are key goals.
The Google project, called Downtown West Mixed-Use Plan is currently in review. As part of their process, Google and the City have conducted community outreach around the plan.
Assignment:
Review of the Station Area Advisory Group (SAAG) community engagement process.
Resources – The following are some of the City’s resources for community engagement for this project. Copy/click the links to explore project websites and resources:
1. This is the City’s project overview site for the Downtown West: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/planning-building-code-enforcement/planning-division/projects-of-high-interest/google-project
2. https://www.diridonsj.org/diridon-station-area-plan-google-project – peruse this website to get a sense of the Diridon Station Area
3. https://www.diridonsj.org/saag – this website houses the SAAG so peruse this site to understand the SAAG process and role in the review of the Google project. If you are interested, you can skim meeting presentation and/or summaries or check out materials from some of the SAAG meetings – I would suggest the August 22, 2019 meeting.
4. https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showdocument?id=47681 – presentation to the community by Google
5. https://realestate.withgoogle.com/sanjose/updates/ – Google’s website about the Downtown West project
6. This is the link to the 2018 Civic Engagement Report that reflects community engagement leading up to the approval of the City’s agreement o sell land to Google. Read Chapters 1 and 2, and skim the rest
Discussion:
1. Provide your own opinion/reaction to the community engagement tools and what you reviewed – how effective? Pros and cons? Is it easy to understand and navigate?
2. Thinking about Week 3 and Gentrification/Displacement, what would be your top concerns for this planned development?
3. Considering the readings and lesson this week, what engagement tools would you suggest to increase the overall effectiveness of the outreach for this project? (reading is listed below, here is the link: https://www.vitalsource.com/) The book is called “The City Reader”
Page 279-292 “A Ladder of Citizen Participation” by Arstein
Page 467-480 “Planning in the Face of Conflict” by Forester
Page 481-491 “Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning” Davidoff
Page 558-662 “What is Placemaking?” Project for Public Spaces
4. Based on what you reviewed, do you think this process is inclusive? Comprehensive? or does it raise questions or concerns for you?
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. The can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!