What is it with Planning Commissions?

I can feel your pain.

Some guys wait around for years for a chance to move into the position of power then try to force their specific line of thinking onto everyone else. Others sort of fall into it while they are still totally wet behind the ears but have specific skills that suggest to others that their input would be beneficial. What we want to work with are those who have enough experience to understand that we are there to help the process, not shove something down their collective throats. Occasionally we end up working for jerks who really do want to demand things that are unreasonable. That is a tough situation when we allow ourselves to get in that position.

Simple really. Egocentric Cranial Rectitus.

They are like amoeba's in that they just breed within themselves to perpetuate the good of other amoeba's. Prolly kinda' handy really? Why can't us surveyors do that? 😉

I've run into the same thing here in Maine -- I tell the developer (my client) "If you fought this you would likely win" & am usually told "We just want to get this through. Let's just do what they want."

But I'm also a long-time member of my own town's Planning Board and we pride ourselves on telling applicants "It doesn't matter whether we like it or not -- if you meet the standards in the ordinance we have to sign off on it." But then we're all long past 25.

We also have had the same problems in Horry County SC. What I have found to be helpful is that we as surveyors stay ahead of the game. I know we have made sure we are part of the decision process. We are now having bimonthly meetings to update our planning laws to reflect what our diverse county needs. We also are making it more up to date. As the technology changes, so should the planning department. It's not good if we have all of this high tech equipment and the process to turn in plans or review time is outdated. Just remember you get more done with sugar and not fire water. Best of luck.

All of you people that favor establishing planning commissions in the first place should have to revise every plat 18 times because they don't like the font.

Its a world wide phenomena - aberration.

I deal with about 6 Planning Authorities all working from the same rule book.
I was told today 'their (Planners) role was to assess applications in light of those rules/ codes etc'.
When asked why something is okay in one municipality but not or extremely reliant on expensive suitably qualified people in an adjoining municipality it was obviously down to individual preferences, mind sets etc.

Someone is teaching/ mentoring these younger planners and it perhaps needs addressing to those responsible in that area.

I have seen some Planners that are brilliant. Practical and yet firm with their views, but open to listen and see things from another perspective and often adapt their thinking.
Others unable to hold a conversation yet alone a debate about pros and cons and incapable or unwilling to think or allow themselves the privilege to think outside their comfort box.

They also (here) operate beyond their sphere of influence and like mentioned in these posts, ask for things that are unnecessary or unneeded yet alone plain unable to be accomplished within the legalities of title matters and yet are unwavering in their defense, which is no defense, except they are armed with the authority to sign off plans for others to get new titles.

I often wonder if Planners (not all) enjoy their sense of Power and Authority and usurp their real role in society.
I believe there are some in that role.

How one overcomes that I do not know.

Try to change through those in Government is difficult. Any redress (attempt) is answered by a public servant often placed in a role to be the Governments whipping boy/ girl. I was a public servant for 25 years so got to know 'the system' and still rub shoulders with (frustrated) public servants, some who can only sit back and be thankful for a job whilst doing what their boss says.

A big broom!!
A mindset change- definitely.

Doesn't help those currently struggling with such issues.

My town don't have no Planning Commission and that's O.K. with me cause I like having the pig farm next door on my neighbor's 1/2 acre lot, and the motorcycle repair shop across the street don't bother me at all even when they have to test them engines in the middle of the night. I know those boys need to stay up late to get everything done.
Heck, if I complained about every little thing like that, before you know it, they'd try to stop me from hauling another trailer onto my own damn lot.
Nah, we don't need a buncha rules around here, not to my way of thinking.

Dirty Dang Don

I'm about as big an opponent of planning commissions as you will ever find. However, once a specific geographic area has decided to institute such foolishness, then the goal should be to weaken them in every way possible. Eliminating them entirely is extremely difficult. Confusing them to the point of neutering them is about the best one can do. Those who have willingly clustered themselves into dense populations deserve what they ask for. The problem is that those who grow accustomed to such outside control tend to want to foist it onto everyone else in the universe no matter how silly.

A perfect example of this was found in a comic just yesterday. An old cowboy is miles from anywhere, but sitting in a ramshackle outhouse taking care of business with his horse tied off to the door. The comic shows him being disrupted by a fellow holding the door ajar and wearing a uniform with the words "County Sanitarian" on his back. The cowboy's comment is, "What do you mean I have to have a permit first?

Meanwhile, there is a major flap underway at the moment involving a planning commission in a town of roughly 10,000 population that is home to a two-year college. The little town got into the "junior" college business way back in the 1930's. By the 1970's they had taken over what had once been a junior high school building about three blocks from the center of the business district, immediately next to an area of majestic old homes built by the shining stars that brought the city to life 125 years ago. By the mid-1980's enrollment had shot through the roof compared to previous history. Instead of moving to the edge of the city or a bit outside, the decision was made to maintain the status quo. Slowly, they have attempted to build a campus with nowhere to grow. The current flap involves a secret deal made by the college with an out-of-state developer to construct a multi-story 144-unit apartment complex in the heart of the area renowned for the majestic old homes. The houses to be torn down only provide space for the apartment complex. So where are 288 vehicles going to be parked? Apparently, that little detail was ignored during the blissful, secret negotiations. Letters to the editor of the local paper get more entertaining each day as everyone with any kind of special interest want to get their own message out. Of course, leading opponents of the plan have invested heavily over the years in providing rental housing and related services to those nearly 300 students. That's a huge deal in a town of this size.

It only gets worser every year...sigh.

In 1938 the zoning regs were, maybe, about 10 pages, today the zoning regulations are several hundred pages.

I hope you're not talking about the Borough of State College Planning Commission. They would never do such a thing! If it is, I work here and maybe can help them speed it up for you.

Residing in one of the fastest growth areas in the US, I have seen the necessity of planning and zoning. The population here has rose from 68K to 250K in the last 50 years or less and mostly in the unincorporated areas. So lots of S/d and commercial development. There are planning and zoning departments, planning and zoning commission (political office) and then the council that can override the previous on land issues. It is a process. The department gets you to the commission and then the commission turns it over to the council. Recommendations, for and against, begin at every step. Public review and hearing at the commission step help protect property owners. Nothing is done behind closed doors…you would think but developers and home builders yield a big stick and they hire the most connected and astute attorneys to hold their hand thought the process. The area is largely a conservative populace with conservative political representation who are of the anti-regulation ilk.
Interesting case now that has formed strange coalitions is a plan by an oil company and large private land owner to drill ( frack) in a mostly undeveloped area where a new HS was recently built. It seems that zoning laws haven’t addressed fracking. Another is for a development of a super duper Wal-Mart on a two lane country type road that is in an area of private home estates and older subdivisions. It would be located one interstate exit (4 miles) from the other super-duper Wal-Mart and a few miles from a recently built mammoth Sam’s club. People are organizing to protect their property values from the development.
There are a lot of hurdles to jump over to develop here and you better have your ducks lined so to speak. I haven’t mentioned the COE wetland approvals and other governmental approvals.
Watch out, if you want to develop in a history district. it is getting to be almost impossible. Recently, a $7 million project in our little city has hit a wall cause of actions by the historic district commission and neighbors.
Despite all the growth, quality of life is considered exceptional in regards to business growth, education facilities, recreation and leisure and a low crime rate. One big problem is traffic.But it is the state who has been two steps behind on that issue.

> We are at the mercy of such reviewers. Most times it's either do what they want or they won't sign off. Would be nice if we had more representation from our state boards or state societies.

Considering how much interaction those of us who work in land development related surveying have with planning departments I'd love to see our profession be proactive to take more ownership of it.

The reason there are so many landscape architects involved in planning is that at most colleges landscape architecture and planning are in the same department. Most of the LA's I work with either minored in planning or were dual majors, so planning is seen as part and parcel of their profession. For example at the University of Florida Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Construction Management, and Urban and Regional Planning are all in the College of Design, Construction and Planning, while Geomatics majors are in the School of Forest Research. So all these other design professionals start of their education and careers by seeing surveyors as a profession outside the field of design and development.

Maryland's "four year" degree program is actually a 2+2; AAS in surveying technology at a community college then transfer to the geography program at Towson University. I'd love to see this model with the last two years in planning, or develop 4+1 programs combining a BS in surveying with a masters in planning. For the type of work a lot of us do, this is would be a great fit. Maybe split tracks at surveying schools with different upper level specializations: survey engineering, planning, etc.

Take a look sometime at the upper level electives in architecture or engineering or planning and you'll see classes in Project Management, Trends in Professional Practice, Managing the Land Development Project, Negotiating the Permitting Process, etc. The reason other professions have so much influence in the development process it that they've made a conscious effort to train themselves to take the influence. The only thing stopping surveyors from doing the same thing is surveyors.

:good:
I was thinking the same thing but couldn't offer to help. It's every man for himself when you're up against the authorities.

Some areas, like the one I live in, want a bedroom community. They don't want businesses. They also tax the pants off the residents. The old school of thinking has or should have gone by the way.

The things they want to do or not do are based on ideas brought about by influential people who are gone. When the mill closes and your population goes from 75,000 to 17,000, you have to rethink your game plan. Lots of housing (in ruin) and no people to live in it.

Ah the joys of living in a dead steel town situate in a flood plain.
Home sweet home.

> Some areas, like the one I live in, want a bedroom community.

Y'all just a suburb of Windber these days?

:good: :good:

What you have stated is very true here in LA,
One can graduate with a degree in Landscape Architecture from LSU and be on the fast track to become a certified planner.
I know a few. If they tack on a masters degree in BA, they can be real dangerous.

I recall NJ makes it possible for surveyors to jump into being a certified planner.

Of course, surveyors in Canada and UK wear both hats. But I think that surveyors here would shun such responsibility.

We recently had 3 meetings for a preliminary to reconfigure 3 lots, modify a waived culdesac (not constructed as it is immediately adjacent to another culdesac) and provide an easier means for a fire truck to navigate the area.

The preliminary plan was sent to police, fire, conservation, health, zoning, historical and all abutters. One of whom spoke against the fire access.

The plan was treated as a definitive and the staff report listed all of the deficiencies as if it were a definitive plan. It exceeded the plan requirements for a preliminary.

Given these hurdles, there is no way to provide an accurate estimate. Start writing checks and stop when you quit or get approval...

PS. the Planner is plan illiterate. It's sadly comical.

The biggest issue I have with Planning Commissions is that they rarely understand the principles of the applications they review.

Several years ago, I submitted a Lot Line Adjustment to the County Planning Department. It was a simple adjustment of three existing parcels into 3 other proposed parcels. It was all agricultural land. The owner wanted to bring 2 of the lots to the minimum allowed acreage (20 acres by the zoning) and but the bulk into a much larger lot (200+ acres).

So I did the research, got his deeds, chain of title, did some field work, all the necessary and normal things. I put together an application and submitted it to the Planning Desk.

I got a call 3 weeks later and the planner told me I couldn't do the LLA because in California a LLA is limited to a maximum of 4 lots and the owner had 5 lots.

Disregarding the fact that it took them 3 weeks to come to this conclusion (my guess is that the right hand was looking for the left during that time), they were looking at the number of assessed parcels versus the number of legal parcels. A portion of the land was subject to an easement for a levee and so it got assessed differently. The result was 5 Assessor's parcels. But when you look at the vesting deeds, there were three parcels.

The planner insisted that there were 5 parcels, though. So I double checked my documents to make sure I wasn't a complete idiot. Then I went to pay the planner a visit. I met with him and asked how he came up with 5 parcels instead of 3. He showed me his GIS interface and said, "See, here are the 5 parcels."

I smiled and said, "Oh, I see. Those are assessment parcels, not legal parcels."

He said, "No. Right here, I click on 'legal parcel' it shows these as separate legal parcels."

I smiled again and said, "Well, I'm not sure why it would do that because I have right here in this folder copies of the vesting deeds for this land and it clearly shows three legal parcels." And I handed him copies of the deeds.

He looked at them and said, "Well, I can have our real estate guys look at these and see what it says."

I told him he could have those copies and if he could get that handled I'd appreciate it because my client was anxious to get the process underway.

Another 3 weeks goes by and I finally called in to ask. The planner said, "Oh, I was going to email you today." (sure he was) "These legal descriptions are complex. But we're still seeing 5 parcels."

I told him, "Yes, they are somewhat complex descriptions, but since I am a licensed land surveyor, I deal with legal descriptions of great complexity on a regular basis."

I suggested that he go across the hallway from the Planning Department and talk to someone in the Survey Department and have them help. He said he'd look into it more and get back to me.

I didn't let 3 more weeks go by. I called a week later. His position was that there were still 5 parcels of land and that the owner would have to merge some of them to get the total count down to 4 or 3 before they could approve the LLA.

At that point, I asked for him to set up an appointment for me to come in and discuss this with him and anyone else that had some information on the topic. A week later, I arrived at the Planning Department and met with that planner, his immediate boss, a person from their GIS department, and the real estate person that had "reviewed" the deeds.

I sat down and started by saying, "Okay, so clearly I'm mistaken and there are 5 parcels here. You all have told me this many times and I must have just made an error. What I'd like to have is the information that you have that shows that there are 5 legal parcels. I've researched the deeds and maps available, but clearly there must be additional documents that your department has that I don't have. Can you provide those to me so that I can use them to correctly identify my error and get this process moving forward?"

They all stared at me, uncertain of what to say. The planner said that they were just "uncertain" of the number of parcels. The real estate person reiterated things about the legal descriptions being "complex" and no one had an answer for me. So, I then pulled out a large scale plot of the property that I had and a copy of the vesting deeds and I then said, "Okay, well then here's why I believe there to be 3 legal parcels" and proceeded to trace each of the legal descriptions in a bright red line on the plot I had in front of me.

At the end of the meeting, I had an approval of my LLA application in my hand. I think that they all felt a bit foolish too. I kind of felt bad because I didn't want to call anyone stupid. I just wanted them to understand that they wasted a great deal of time for my client that could have been avoided if they understood what they were reviewing better.

Okay, that was a long rant.

I'm considering refusing any resubdivions or boundary line adjustment projects in the future for all of the reasons stated in this thread.?ÿ ?ÿI'm my area it has become such an arduous task dealing with planning and the 15 other departments that review and sign of on my plats.?ÿ I have 2 resubs in different localities that have been going on for a year since first submittal.?ÿ Partly due to covid but also the because of the ever changing county requirements.?ÿ I can draw a resub plat and have it approved and recorded.?ÿ And a month later do another resub in the same subdivision exactly as the one prior and the reviewers will come up with all kinds of new comments or notes that are required.

My biggest pet peeve is when let's say environmental engineering reviews my plat and makes comments regarding zoning or platting requirements especially when the comment is not correct or relevant.?ÿ Or when some third rate gis reviewer comments that my North arrow is to large.

It's not just planning either.?ÿ A building permit plat for a single family dwelling now is basically a site plan, showing LOD areas, LOC, impervious areas, topo with proposed grading, silt fence, construction entrance, culvert pipes, oh and the proposed dwelling with dimensions.

Common sense has long been forgotten and bureaucracy and CYA has taken hold.

@holy-cow

Your singing to the choir. Our new Planning Chief is a prior Assistant County Attorney. We went around and around over 0.2 acre. She couldn't grasp how much that actually was. We have a young guy who is the Examining Land Surveyor. Now there's a boy out in the ozone. Don't get me started.