Mark Alan Hughes | TWILIGHT ZONING

LAST WEDNESDAY night, another developer was running another neighborhood gantlet in order to build a project in this town: the proposed 47-story Barnes Tower at 22nd and Spring Garden.

I couldn't make the meeting (my basketball team weathered a close loss in the 15-and-under league at Palumbo Rec Center - I blame the coaching), but our sister paper ran a long account full of juicy quotes.

First up, naturally, was state Sen. Vincent J. Fumo. He was quoted as saying, "This community has enough funds to litigate this for the next 20 years."

Here's the first of the evening's knee-jerk (never a more apt phrase) reactions: Mr. Fumo's position is the bluster of a rich guy who gets what he wants by buying it.

He's like the man who has more money than he ever expected but still finds himself a couple of inches and several IQ points short of what he wants.

The second reaction, and the opposite in many ways, came from Councilman Darrell L. Clarke. He was quoted as saying, "This process was flawed - you should have called me."

This quote candidly illustrates a core problem with our development politics.

Let's be clear: The flaw in the process is not that the developers didn't call the district councilman - the flaw is that because they didn't call, they're now in for a world of trouble.

Mr. Clarke's position is the anger of a power guy who gets what he wants by entitlement. He's like the chief who gets mad when the villagers stop giving fruit baskets to his brother the spiritual healer and instead start going to the Red Cross tent for polio shots.

Councilman Clarke and Sen. Fumo may be trying to help, but they're both wrong.

Too little deference toward City Council is not the problem - and a fat fee for a friendly law firm is not the solution. In fact, our goal should be to make these kinds of counterpunchers irrelevant to life in the city.

After years of special services and tax abatements and improving statistics on crime and taxes and the streetscape, Center City is booming. It's a long boom that appears to mix both speculation and fundamentals, both rent-seeking and quality-of-life.

But despite the healthy vigor of the past few years, too much of the "process" remains mired in the victim mentality of the past.

I don't blame the 500 people who reportedly showed up at the meeting Wednesday for their panic and suspicion: Their leaders feed it. But civic energy deserves a better agenda.

The problem is not that the developers of the Barnes Tower were able to get zoning approval "over-the-counter" - in other words, permission to build something as of right and without further zoning approval.

That's exactly the process we want. Someone should be able to buy land knowing exactly what ownership entitles them to.

If neighbors don't like what can be built as of right, they should change the zoning code - not abandon the idea that zoning defines uses that don't require special permission.

There are plenty of sites with the same zoning as the Barnes Tower site (R-15), and this issue will continue to arise if we don't slay the real dragon:

We need a modern zoning code and a comprehensive plan for growth in Center City.

Neighborhood agreements can be valuable instruments for both developers and surrounding residents.

But the most reliable way to deal with issues like parking, height, curb cuts, shadows and everything else is with enforceable rules that govern all development - not with deals reached on individual cases.