If you could start over and redesign your neighborhood, what would you include? Sidewalks and interconnecting streets for ease of travel? Lush landscaping, parks, shopping within walking distance? Or would you leave it as it is — home.

While it may not be possible to start over completely, residents, including landowners and renters, business owners and employees, or stakeholders, were asked Monday night what the strengths and weaknesses are in the West 30s neighborhood of Covington.

In a show of one of the area’s key weaknesses, very few people attended. Councilwoman Frances Dunn attributed the low turnout to a general of apathy in the area, along with the relatively short notice given for the meeting.

Those in attendance expressed frustration about the meeting process. “We are always going to meetings and nothing ever comes of it,” said one resident.

Phil Walker and Ralph Moore of the Walker Collaborative, the planning group conducting the plan, said that the eight-month-long process will be kept as short as possible in order to keep momentum, a momentum not totally visible yet in the area.

Normally, their planning process calls for meetings until a final visible project to start the implementation of the plan. However, in order to create interest, a visible project may be developed quickly.

One suggestion to gain visibility and interest in the community is the development of a logo to be placed on signs throughout the area. This could be accompanied by a garden or landscaping project at a highly visible corner.

During the evening, those present participated in a discussion of strengths and weaknesses in the traditionally black neighborhood.

The number of strengths and weaknesses were about even, with some things, such as the location of the parish jail in the neighborhood, counting as both. A weakness, because of the type of facility, but the jail could also be strength because of the number of jobs it provides to the area.

Strengths included the location of three parks, including the municipal pool; recreation facilities; main corridors such as Columbia Street, Tyler, and Collins Boulevard; a historic downtown; the family orientation of the neighborhood with multiple generations living near each other; its central location in the city, within walking distance of churches, schools, etc.; nearby facilities such as the LSU Ag Center, the National Guard Armory and the fairgrounds; schools; opportunity for development in the area; churches; post office; diversity of business and light industry; technical schools; adult education and GED facilities; after school programs; and a pride in the community, although no one can see it.

Weaknesses seen in the area by participants included: lack of transportation if you don’t have a car; no community center; housing condition, affordability and availability; lack of trust cross culturally and with leaders with no common unity; crime, mainly drugs; lack of code enforcement; low levels of ownership of property; litter; apathy; no gym facility; blight; drug dealing; poverty; lack of public awareness of challenges that face residents in the area; lack of jobs; low wages; lack of accessibility; lack of affordable child care; lack of health facilities such as clinics; high dropout rate; and a feeling that the area’s youth are off the radar.

Walker suggested that one area of the neighborhood should be targeted to build upon. Select a street and then work from there. He said this has created success in other communities.

Some of the communities that people have visited that they liked and would perhaps get ideas from include the night basketball program for youth in Hammond that keeps young people occupied, off the street, and involved.

Some residents expressed interest in a sort of new urbanism plan similar to that in a neighborhood in Lafayette where people live and work within walking distance.

Walker and Moore explained that to create a Smart Growth neighborhood, everything should be interconnected. Instead of having cul-de-sacs and strip malls, the city should plan on a grid pattern. Make the area designed for pedestrians. Have a variety of housing in the area to appeal to people throughout their lives: apartments, single family dwellings then smaller houses when people retire.

Some of the other ideas that residents would like to see are to keep the architectural integrity of historic buildings and make them distinctive; don’t use cookie cutter plans; keep open spaces; don’t tear down buildings just to tear them down, fix what is there, if possible. Also include other modes of transportation such as mini-buses, put in bike paths and sidewalks, and keep development in the area fair to all residents with clear regulations and planning codes.

Most of all, in planning a neighborhood for the future, community input is the most important factor. This is what civic and neighborhood leaders will b e trying to do in the next few weeks — getting neighbors involved to rebuild the neighborhood to meet present needs and wishes, and to be able to grow for the future.

The Monday night meeting followed three community meetings held Saturday at neighborhood churches to introduce the program to the community.