Transcript U.S. Constitution Quiz

Planning
Bob Botsch
Copyright 2012
Ambivalence in culture wrt planning
and why planning by government is
controversial
• Planning pits community well-being and
values against individual property rights
• When government enforces plans,
resentment taps general distrust of
government, part of our national and
southern culture
• E.g., building codes
Why local government lost power
after the American Revolution
•
•
•
Direct grants of power to local
government from the King were
dissolved by revolution
States took over as new “king” (“Dillon’s
rule”—the state is legal king over local
governments
More emphasis on individual rights,
including property rights, than on local
government powers
Three movements circa 1900 to
improve quality of life in cities
• Public Health: clean water, sewers, and
ventilation to fight disease
• City Beautiful: parks, open spaces, zoos
to enhance quality of life
• Municipal Improvement Movement: a
cheaper way of enhancing quality of life—
regulations and zoning rather than buying
land (Aiken Co Land Trust)
• All three still exist in various forms
Five Characteristics of Planning
1. Continuous process
2. Feedback -- so that plans are constantly
updated
3. Future oriented with realistic goals
(hopefully)
4. Set sequence of steps to organize
decision making
5. Relies on consensus to help achieve
goals
Five factors that affect the legal
framework of planning
1. Federalism—affected by both state/nat law
2. Separation of powers—all branches affect
3. Fragmentation—different kinds of local
governments including “private govts”
4. Constitutional restrictions—e.g. “takings”
clause in 5th amendment
5. Public control over private property—”police
powers” over health, safety, nuisances
Why planning is political and roles
planner/actors play in process
•
•
When government makes policy that affects
private property and businesses, groups will try
to influence that policy—politics!
Alternative roles/styles of planners
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Neutral technicians—lay out facts, seek balance
Advocates—take position, seek facts to support
Brokers—bring sides together, art of possible
Entrepreneurs—creative ways to reach goals
Mobilizers—seek out groups for support
Change agents—most radical, have agenda
How federal government promoted
planning in states in 1960s
• Through grants, e.g. Urban Renewal,
highway beautification, Community
Development, War on Poverty programs
• These grants encouraged planning aimed
at a wide range of social ills
Contemporary issues that
encourage planning
• Congestion and sprawl
• Environmental concerns, like energy
usage and preserving green space to
combat global warming
• Energy independence as a national goal
Focus of most state level planning
in SC during 1900s
• For about 75-80 years, restrict
development so that dominant industries
(textiles that need cheap labor) not
challenged
• Since then, promote economic
development, the new “king” in the state
Local comprehensive planning in
mid 1900s and today
• More widespread today, all local
governments involved
• Much greater public participation
mandated by guidelines in federal grants
• Covers a wider range of elements today,
including social and economic aspects of
community life as well as buildings
Five phases of the planning
process
1. Research—collect/analyze info about
community
2. Clarification of community goals—
surveys and meetings
3. Plan formulation and review
4. Implementation
5. Review and revision as put in place an
evaluated—provides feedback for 5 year
reviews
Three Basic Components of all
Comprehensive Plans
• Inventory of existing conditions—where we
are wrt; population, economy, culture,
housing, land use, natural resources, and
community facilities
• Statement of needs and goals—major
issues that need action, based on surveys,
citizen public meetings
• Implementation strategies and timeframes
Alternative tools to implement
comprehensive plans
• Zoning
• Land development regulations (PUD’s)
• Historic/architectural controls (Historic
Aiken)
• Environmental regulations
• Official map—what government wants in
the future along with locations of roads,
parks, open space
History of public involvement in
planning
• Began with 1909 plan in Chicago pushed by
elite citizens wanting expenditures to create
parks, etc
• During LBJ years, grants required maximum
feasible citizen participation
• 1970s local activist groups began to pressure
officials to consider impacts
• Today have citizen advisory groups, surveys,
informational meetings—officials know plans will
not work w/o citizen support
Birth and Changing Roles of COG’s
(10 in SC—LSCOG here)
• Regional problems cross over existing city and
county lines—need regional approach
• COG’s born out of federal grants in 1960s that
required they be created
• Did regional planning associated with grants
• Today act as forum, some planning, provide
services/assistance to local govts, collect and
share data, administer state/fed grants, and
promote economic development for area
Growth Management and its
associated conflicts
• Managing growth so as to preserve open space
and walkability and environment, balancing
growth with quality of life factors and preserving
communities while providing affordable housing
and limiting congestion, making sure
infrastructure exists before development is
allowed
• Causes limits on property use—inevitable
conflict, e.g. the “Town and Country” plan in
Richland County
“Sustainability’ in modern planning
• Many meanings relating to the well-being
of community
• American Planning Association
characteristics
– Minimum impact on natural resources
– Equity across generations
– Satisfying basic human needs
– Living within natural capacity of environment
Smart Growth and its objectives
Can be seen as: The environmental
movement meets growth planning
– Minimal reliance on cars, more walkways &
bikeways
– Mixed use of land—housing near recreation,
schools, and basic services
– Increasing housing density with shared
greenspace
– Smaller building “footprints”
– Reuse of older buildings and factories
– Maximize open space and wetlands
Impact fees and South Carolina
• Up-front tax paid on new development to pay
cost of infrastructure, including even schools—
idea is that growth should pay for itself, not be
paid for by older residents
• Reality is that local governments lose money on
almost all housing developments
• 1999 law that allows impact fees are so
restrictive that they are rarely used—measure of
power of real estate/development/construction
interests
“New Urbanism” and how
reflected in some SC cities
• Beaufort SC claims to have created the
model others have followed
• Mixed use areas with small footprints
where people can walk (sidewalks) to get
all services
• Downtown Aiken is attempting this if you
look at how it has developed
“Property Rights Movement”
• Counter movement to smartgrowth and land use
planning
• Idea captured in Lucas v. SC Coastal Council—
successful claim based on “takings clause” in 5th
Amendment because it took away ALL value
• Goal is to minimize government regulation of
property usage by owners, including even
zoning that may reduce market value of land
• The debate over the proper balance will go on