Fort Lewis' urban planners plan to transform the post from a concrete jungle of sprawled buildings to a leafy collection of smaller communities.

The post's long-term master plan, which was unveiled Tuesday, organizes the installation into 13 neighborhoods, each anchored by a mixed-use area. In the works are widening of sidewalks, on-street parking, street cafes and restaurants. Some of the post's historic buildings, many dating back to World War II, will renovated.

"I think it's really important to have that sense of community, especially during that time of war," garrison commander Col. Cynthia Murphy said. "When you have that sense of community, you know your neighbors and care about your neighbors. You don't have that isolated feeling you have when you just drive from place to place."

A major goal of the design is to reduce commuting; planners hope to group barracks, dining facilities, motor pools, administrative buildings and training areas close enough to encourage soldiers to walk to work.

"It's the new, old trend," said Tom Tolman of the Fort Lewis public works department's planning division. " It's returning to the principles we used when we built Fort Lewis – the ability to walk and drive and bike. Now it's all about driving everywhere."

Planners are touting the post's ecofriendly design: The reduction of car commuting, addition of more trees and adoption of sustainable construction standards could reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 18 million pounds per year, Tolman said.

=> Read more!

Here are a few aerial plans for how neighborhoods will look under Fort Lewis' master plan. Click on each to see the hi-rez version.

Our state leaders used to harumph about the Washington National Guard being commandeered by the feds. Gov. Chris Gregoire especially didn't like Bush Administration plans three years ago to federalize the National Guard for natural or man-made disasters.

"As commander in chief of the Washington National Guard, I will not stand quietly while the federal government tries to strip my ability to command the National Guard to protect the citizens of Washington," Gregoire wrote in a 2006 News Tribune opinion piece.

She hasn't made such noises when the Guard is called up to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan. We didn't hear a peep before the 81st Brigade deployed to Iraq from our back yard last fall. She and other politicians just want to make sure citizen-soldiers are properly equipped.

Down south in Oregon, however, the chorus of naysayers is picking up. A couple of legislators -- one a Democrat, one a Republican -- are leading the charge on House Bill 2556, which makes explicit the governor's power to ensure the Guard is only used in the presence of a "valid Congressional enactment consistent with the Constitution of the United States of America."

"The Oregon National Guard should not be treated like the private army of any U.S. president," said one of the sponsors, said Rep. Dennis Richardson, R-Central Point.

A new state law, it it comes, would be too late to block 2,600 Oregon National Guardsmen from heading to Iraq by way of Georgia. They were mobilized in early May.

According to a national campaign to bring Guard units home from overseas (or keep them home), a dozen other state legislatures are considering similar legislation. They include Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

The group claims that grassroots campaigns have been launched in other states, including Washington. (We haven't heard of a movement in the Evergreen State, and of course our Legislature is done for the year.)

What do you think? Does a law like this make sense in Washington? Do you think the Guard has been overextended here?